Transcript Slide 1

Conceptualizing Integrated Water
Resources Management From
Community WASH Facility Design:
Lessons Learned from Haiti
John A Akudago, Clifford Toussaint &
Jean Anthony Jean
June 30, 2014
Presentation Content
 A brief background of Haiti and Samaritan’s Purse activities





in the country
What were the challenges on the ground?
How did Samaritan’s Purse try to address the WASH
needs?
How are WASH and IWRM related?
Integrated community WASH facility design
Results, usage and lessons learned
2
Haiti
 On January 12, 2010 Haiti awoke to 7.0 magnitude
earthquake.
 It was estimated that about 230,000 people died and
1,000,000 people rendered homeless.
 On October 15, 2010, Cholera struck Haiti which left tens of
thousands of people (about 8,556) dead.
 In both disasters, access to potable water supply, hygiene
and sanitation needs were very high.
3
Samaritan’s Purse
 A US based international non-denominational Christian
relief organization with affiliate offices in Canada,
Australia, UK and Germany.
 Deployed disaster response teams to both disasters.
 Responded to spiritual, WASH, shelter, food and medical
needs.
4
WASH Challenges in Haiti:
Technical and Management
Access to potable water supply was <65%
Access to proper sanitation facilities was <20%
Of the few handpumps, many were broken down
Water quality was a challenge due to poor environmental
sanitation.
 Sense of community ownership of WASH facilities was nonexistent




A community hand dug well
Poor sanitation (choked water ways)
5
WASH Challenges in Haiti: Culture
 Cultural belief that flowing water is clean
 One water source for multiple uses (e.g. drinking, laundry,
irrigation, animal watering, block moulding)
Using a water source to meet
community needs and uses.
Water may be polluted for
downstream users
6
Freshwater Availability in Haiti
 Fresh water availability and usage: Haiti yearly fresh
water is 12,600 Mm3/year
Data source: Pan-American Health Organization/World
Health Organization, Agenda 21, May 1996, P.83
7
Access to Water and Sanitation Facilities
 There are many possible
sources of water (spring,
boreholes and surface water)
but access to potable water
was still limited due to poor
environmental sanitation, low
infrastructural development
and sustainable facility
management.
 Sanitation coverage was bad
and had been reported to
have fallen from 19% in 1990
to 17% in 2008.
Comparison between access to WASH
before and after earthquake disaster.
Source: WHO/UNICEF JMP (2014) report
8
WASH Programming
 As we reflected on long term interventions in Haiti, we thought
of this:
Water supply
source
Drink, wash,
animal watering
bathing, etc.
Where does the
waste water go?
Contamination
and outbreak of
disease?
What happens
to other users
down stream?
Flows into the
soil and water
ways
How can we
improve water
quality for the
downstream?
Collective
actioneducation and
technology
9
WASH & IWRM
 Use: WASH is a user of water and land resources whereas
IWRM includes resources conservation.
 Scale: WASH focuses on small community scale while
IWRM is on a larger scale (e.g. basin wide)
 Coordination & management: WASH uses individual
community committees to manage the point source while
IWRM requires coordination of committees from various
communities, local and national government, and other
stakeholders.
 Impact: WASH shows short and long term results and
impacts, and IWRM shows long term impacts.
10
WASH & IWRM
 Political influence: Most developing countries
governments pay more attention to WASH than IWRM.
They have national policies and institutions to promote
access to and sustainable management of WASH facilities.
 Community understanding and participation: Many
communities have more understanding on WASH issues
than the concept of IWRM. Communities are more likely to
protect their local water and land resources than spending
their time and energy to protect basin wide resources.
11
WASH-IWRM Intersection
 From the model where does WASH intersect IWRM?
WASH-Using
water, land and
information to
improve health
& reduce poverty
IWRM- Using
collective action to
improve equity,
use and
management of
land & water
resources
Sustainability
Quality improvement
Quantity improvement
Less Conflict
Health and nutrition
improvement
12
SP WASH Facility Design
 Local government authorities buy in
 Community selection
 General meeting to kick off project idea
 Community mobilization and acceptability of the concept
13
WASH Facility Design-Technical
 16 communities were selected and designed to have
handpump well, laundry pad, bath house, latrine and waste
water treatment chamber (from laundry pad and bath house).
 The waste water treatment chamber had grease trap,
gravel/sand media to trap solids and precipitates before
entering the ground through the soak pit.
Bath
house
Laundry Pad
Well
Bath house
Waste treatment chamber
14
Results
 Wells installed and fitted with handpumps: 22
 Bath houses and laundry pads were constructed: 22 each
 Number of WASH committees trained: 22
 140 household latrines constructed.
 Laundry pad is less used compared to the other facilities:
Design did not reflect the community’s culture of ladies
doing laundry in groups as well as area for drying the
clothes.
15
Lessons Learned
 Political: We organized two workshops for the Mayors and
Kazeks in the Cabaret and Leogane areas respectively. All
government and local government officials agreed that the
integrated way of water resources development and
management was great idea and gave their blessings.
Within a week, a Kazek reported that he had started
installing bath houses along the irrigation canals in his local
area to reduce water pollution for down stream users.
16
Lessons Learned (cont.)
 Community Selection: Beneficiary communities were
selected based on Kazeks and Mayor offices’
recommendation. Unfortunately, there was no transmission
of message from the government officials to the
communities. This really affected the communities’
understanding of the concept.
 Cultural and Spiritual Beliefs: Water resources are
usually tied to spirits in Haiti. Vodoo/traditional priests
contributed negatively to the success of the project.
Lessons Learned (cont.)
 Project Duration: The project duration was too short to
be able to measure the impact on water resources
management.
 Sharing: Project design should have been shared with the
WASH Cluster and Direction Nationale de l’ Eau Potable et
de l’Assainissement (DINEPA) during the design stage.
Lessons Learned - IWRM
 WASH-IWRM Relationship: Though the project was
designed as a wash project, it has also introduced the
concept of IWRM in the communities. Relief to
development is a good time to promote integrated water
resources development and management.
 Understanding of Concept: To facilitate community
understanding and effectiveness of water resources
protection, project communities should have been in one
location (region or communities along a particular basin or
water way).
19
Lessons Learned - IWRM
 Messaging: Haiti is rich in fresh water resources with only
10% of the water being used for various purposes.
Educating communities on water availability did not have
much impact but the message of water quality and its
related diseases actually attracted attention.
 Community action: Some communities have started to
adhere to the water contamination message-Change burial
sites from water ways, and protect water quality for
downstream users.
20
Thank you for
your attention!
Questions?
21