Evolution of Rainwater Management in Africa: From ‘Incentivized’ to Demand- driven Rainwater Management Programs in Ethiopia Douglas J Merrey Natural Resources Policy and Institutions Specialist Fearrington Village, North Carolina Presented at 3 rd International Forum on Water and Food Tshwane, South Africa November 14-17 2011
13
Embed
Evolution of Rainwater Management in Africa: From ‘Incentivized’ to Demand-driven rainwater Management Programs in Ethiopia
Presented by Douglas J Merrey (Natural Resources Policy and Institutions Specialist) at the International Forum on Water and Food (IFWF), South Africa, 14-17 November 2011.
The International Forum on Water and Food (IFWF) is the premier gathering of water and food scientists working on improving water management for agricultural production in developing countries.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Evolution of Rainwater Management in Africa: From ‘Incentivized’ to Demand-
driven Rainwater Management Programs in Ethiopia
Douglas J MerreyNatural Resources Policy and Institutions Specialist
Fearrington Village, North Carolina
Presented at 3rd International Forum on Water and FoodTshwane, South AfricaNovember 14-17 2011
What We Did & How
Purpose synthesize existing knowledge, lessons, gaps in RWM as foundation for NBDC projects
Review of policy & project documents, research, etc.
Discussions and interviews with researchers, policy makers
Link long-term applied research programs to implementation programs
Investments in land Management: “Sustainable Land Management” (SLM)
Highland agriculture is (still) largely low-input low-output rain fed mixed livestock-crop systems
Diagnosis of main cause of famines in 70s-80s – land degradation Large research programs—
mostly biophysical and narrow economic studies until recently
Large SLM investment programs
Continuing perception: soil erosion, nutrient mining, deforestation as dire existential threat
SLM Policies and Implementation Strategies: Coercion during the 1980s into 1990s
Implementation driven from the topCoercion to meet quotas-use of forced laborFood for Work (FfW) programs Thousands of km stone & soil bunds constructed
Food aid saved lives, but much SLM investment questionable Inappropriate technologies, unused structures, destruction Continuing negative perceptions by many rural people
Coercion continued in early years of new government
From Coercion to Consultation
FfW was & remains main implementing strategy Early phases based on standardized technology packages,
top-down, coercive, little systematic planning or local participation in decisions
No community ownership
1987-2002: gradual shift in implementation strategy More community-driven, better targeting, emphasis
shifted from promoting technology to capacity building & income generation (“food for assets”)
More positive evaluations
Current Programs
Applying new implementation guidelines
More community capacity building, income generation through homestead production, expanded packages of interventions
More flexible, experiential learning, gender sensitivity in principle
Situation Today
But: evidence pressures continue locally; use of quotas continues; FfW raises questions on ownership of infrastructure; high staff turnover & frequent institutional re-structuring“Participatory”, but still pushing “best practice” packages, Gap between higher level policy intentions and field reality
Recommendations Made to Ethiopian Policy Makers – Relevant Across Africa
From “participation”/consultation, to community responsibility, empowerment Strengthen partnerships of farmers, extension agents,
researchers, other stakeholders Promote community responsibility and collective action
to solve their own problems Reform performance evaluation of officials from
achievements based on targets to assessments & incentives based on clients’ (farmers”) feedback
Even de-centralized government cannot manage small watersheds or small water structures – it requires strong community-watershed institutional arrangements
11
Recommendations (2)
Replace ‘packages’ [“best practices”] with a menu of possible interventions and let clients “mix and match” & adapt according to their needsStrengthen national research system in natural resources management research through an innovation system paradigm