Transcript This is where the title of the presentation goes

Costs and benefits
of multiple use
water services: a
case from Ethiopia
5th WWF, Istanbul
March 2009
Introduction
• RiPPLE is research program funded
DFID. It consorium of ODI. IRC, CDS,
HCS, WAE
• ECC-SDCOH is the key development
partners in Ethiopia involved in a
multiple use water service
development among diverse
programs.
Background
• Interventions were focusing to addressing single
use of water
• No adequate consideration to sectoral
integration of water with NR, agriculture,
livestock, infrastructure, market etc
• Lack of evidence on the costs and benefit as well
as the livelihood impact of the single vs multiple
uses
Objective: To provide a better insight in the costs
and benefits of going up the water service ladder
in the developed water schemes in Ethiopia
Multiple
use water
services
Multiple use
water services
Domestic
water services
Single
use water
services
Initial
situation
No formal
water services
Ido Jalala
Spring with discharge of 0.4 l/s
70 households
Irrigation
water services
No formal
water
services
Ifa Daba
Spring with discharge of 1.4 l/s
121 households
Cont…
Input
Output
Costs related to
hard- and
software
Water services:
Water quality,
Water quantity,
Reliability,
Accessibility
Costs taken into account
• Capital investment costs in
assets (CapIn), from the
implemented and from the
community
• Operating and minor
maintenance expenditure (Opex)
• Support costs (SupCo)
Not considered:
•“Impact costs”
Impact
water use
Benefits
Benefits taken into account
• Health benefits
• Time saving benefits
• Irrigation benefits
• (livestock benefits)
Costs
8000
7000
6000
5000
Costs
(Birr/ year)
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
No water
services
Water
supply
services
Mus
No water
services
Ido Jalala
Total SupCo
249
Total Opex
Irrigation
services
Mus
Ifa Daba
318
408
249
340
408
463
559
0
543
643
Total community contribution
0
244.80
278.46
0.00
538.17
565.32
Total CapIn HCS
0
4381
5316
0
4892
5865
Costs per capita
25
20
15
Costs
(birr / capita / year)
10
5
0
SupCo
0.71
Water
supply
services
Ido Jalala
0.91
Opex
0.00
1.32
1.60
0.00
0.90
1.06
Community contribution CapIn
0.00
0.70
0.80
0.00
0.89
0.93
Total CapIn HCS
0.00
12.52
15.19
0.00
8.09
9.69
No water
services
No water
services
Irrigation
services
1.17
0.41
Ifa Daba
0.56
0.67
Mus
Mus
Results: benefits
300000
250000
200000
Benefits
(Birr/year)
150000
100000
50000
0
0
Water
supply
services
Ido Jalala
43035
105325
0
No water
services
Total time saving benefits
Total irrigation benefits
Total health benefits
No water
services
Irrigation
services
43035
0
Ifa Daba
39188
74390
65828
86893
110843
146867
146867
28700
28700
0
0
49610
Mus
Mus
Benefits per capita
1000
900
800
700
600
Benefits
500
(Birr / cap / year)
400
300
200
100
0
0
Water supply
services
Ido Jalala
123
Irrigation benefits
301
188
248
183
243
243
Health benefits
0.00
82
82
0.00
0.00
82
Time saving benefits
No water
services
Mus
No water
services
123
0
Irrigation
services
Ifa Daba
65
Mus
123
B/C ratios
Ido Jalala
Domestic
water
supply
services
B/C
Additional B/C
25
Towards
water
supply
services
6
Ifa Daba
Multiple
use
services
Irrigation
services
Multiple
use
services
24
29
36
Towards MUS
Towards
irrigation
services
Towards MUS
8
12
22
Conclusions
• Introducing single use water services can have
impact on the multiple uses of water
• Limited water availability at the source means
that different water uses might compete with
each other
• Integrated water service delivery for multiple
uses is key
• Multiple use services seem to be more cost
effective than single use systems (in case of
spring systems)
• In case of spring systems, the benefits of going
from irrigation services to multiple use services,
are high compared to the costs
Acknowledgements:
• RiPPLE MUS research team: Zemede
Abebe, Marieke Adank, Belayneh
Belete, Samuel Chaka, Adissu
Delelenge, Martine Jeths, Jaleta
Gebru, Zelalem Lema and Demeksa
Tamiru.
• Thanks you!