Synthesis of Existing Knowledge and Experience on the Provision of ...

Section 4. Lessons learned <strong>and</strong> ways forward4.1 Lessons learnedTable 6 presents ‘good’ <strong>and</strong> ‘poor’ practice as identified by practitioners interviewed in Addis Ababa<strong>and</strong> in the regions (SNNPR, Somali <strong>and</strong> Afar). This table highlights common responses from over 40interviews with water development practitioners including government, NGOs/developmentorganizations, as well as donors, researchers, experts in pastoral development <strong>and</strong> pastoralassociations. Poor practice generally refers to practices/approaches seen to be problematic, whilegood practice refers to those observed to work within the pastoral context. Having said this, verylittle has been done in the way <strong>of</strong> assessing the impacts <strong>of</strong> water development on livelihoods. Theseassessments would better help practitioners make informed choices regarding ‘best’ approaches todeveloping water in the rangel<strong>and</strong>s vis-à-vis poverty reduction <strong>and</strong> increasing livelihood resilience 50 .Table 6: ‘Good’ <strong>and</strong> ‘bad’ practice as identified by the water development community <strong>of</strong> practice inEthiopiaGood practice• Underst<strong>and</strong> the broader natural resourcebase <strong>and</strong> grazing patterns before planning<strong>and</strong> constructing water points - i.e. makingwater development part <strong>and</strong> parcel <strong>of</strong>natural resource management recognizingthat water affects the way broader naturalresources are used <strong>and</strong> managed.• Underst<strong>and</strong> local contexts <strong>and</strong> dynamics,including social, political <strong>and</strong> culturalaspects in a given location.• Identify existing water points <strong>and</strong> exploreoptions for rehabilitation (improve onwhat is already there).• Couple water development with otherpastoral development interventions (e.g.access to markets, veterinary health,rangel<strong>and</strong> rehabilitation)Poor practice• Establishing water points withoutunderst<strong>and</strong>ing the local context (social,political, cultural, <strong>and</strong> economic)• Constructing water points with littleknowledge <strong>of</strong> other natural resources inthe area <strong>and</strong> how people use theseresources; i.e. without contextualizingwater within the broader l<strong>and</strong>scape.• Heavy emphasis on construction withinsufficient attention to planning,management, operation, maintenance.Implementation by external agents withlittle on the ground consultation <strong>and</strong>involvement.• Promote meaningful engagement withwater users in the planning <strong>and</strong>implementation phase <strong>of</strong> any interventions<strong>and</strong> promote the use <strong>of</strong>participatory/consultative methods.50 Most projects currently focus on reporting outputs at the expense <strong>of</strong> quality or effectiveness. For example,a report which states that ’10 wells were improved’ does not say anything about accessibility, availability,affordability, quality <strong>and</strong> acceptance – the five st<strong>and</strong>ard indicators <strong>of</strong> service provision (Ministry <strong>of</strong> Agriculture<strong>and</strong> Rural Development, 2008: 14)51 The government’s PCDP for example requires community contribution <strong>of</strong> 15 per cent, 5 per cent <strong>of</strong> whichis expected in cash.52 This fits with the government’s short-term strategy <strong>of</strong> supporting mobile pastoral livelihoods.69