epresent a firm attempt to preserve grazing l<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> to mitigate <strong>the</strong> use <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> water points as a means<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> territorial encroachment between clans.Despite <strong>the</strong>se positive developments, c<strong>on</strong>sidering <strong>the</strong> impact <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> water points <strong>on</strong> mobility <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong>rangel<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> health/c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong> is by no means <strong>the</strong> norm. Activities likely to promote <strong>the</strong> sedentarizati<strong>on</strong><str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> pastoralists through water development c<strong>on</strong>tinue to be observed in Ethiopia. In Oromia regi<strong>on</strong>, inDaro Lebu woreda al<strong>on</strong>e, 15 additi<strong>on</strong>al boreholes (generally associated with promoting settlement)have been c<strong>on</strong>structed since 2005 from an existing 14; over a <strong>on</strong>e hundred per cent increase (based<strong>on</strong> a comprehensive survey c<strong>on</strong>ducted by <strong>the</strong> Internati<strong>on</strong>al Rescue Committee) (Figure 7).Figure 7: Boreholes c<strong>on</strong>structed in Daro Lebu woreda since 2005, provided by <strong>the</strong> Internati<strong>on</strong>alRescue Committee based <strong>on</strong> an in-house 2009 surveyBut nowhere is this currently more evident than in <strong>the</strong> Borana z<strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Oromia Regi<strong>on</strong>. The Oromiaregi<strong>on</strong>al government, as part <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> its Growth Corridors Plan, (The Oromia Development CorridorsApproach Strategic Plan, 2008: 12) is c<strong>on</strong>structing 2000km <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> pipeline to transport water from deepboreholes to support multiple l<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> uses (pastoral, agricultural, etc.) across <strong>the</strong> z<strong>on</strong>e. Theprogramme’s L<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> Use Plans delineate different livelihood z<strong>on</strong>es in <strong>the</strong> regi<strong>on</strong>, setting aside z<strong>on</strong>esfor livestock producti<strong>on</strong>, irrigati<strong>on</strong> development <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> settlement. Private l<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> tenure will bepromoted (l<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> is to be held by ei<strong>the</strong>r individuals or groups) in line with <strong>the</strong> l<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> uses identified in<strong>the</strong> program’s L<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> Use Plans.The water pipeline <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> eventual hardened boundaries between l<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> use areas, in t<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>em with <strong>the</strong>encouragement <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> private l<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>holding, will certainly c<strong>on</strong>tribute to curtailed mobility. The regi<strong>on</strong>algovernment’s rati<strong>on</strong>ale is that <strong>the</strong> extent <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> poverty am<strong>on</strong>g pastoralists <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>the</strong> increasing difficulties<strong>the</strong>y face in terms <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> being able to practice <strong>the</strong>ir mobile livelihoods has rendered sedentarizati<strong>on</strong> <strong>the</strong><strong>on</strong>ly feasible development opti<strong>on</strong> in <strong>the</strong> l<strong>on</strong>g term. It also argues that tapping into groundwatersupply is <strong>the</strong> <strong>on</strong>ly sustainable means <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> effectively addressing water shortage issues. However, it isforeseen that sedentarizati<strong>on</strong> may represent a potential sticking point in terms <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> acceptance <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>buy-in at community level indicating that <strong>the</strong> noti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> settlement as <strong>the</strong> <strong>on</strong>ly soluti<strong>on</strong> to challengesfacing pastoralists may not be shared by all. The Deputy General Manager <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>the</strong> Oromia WaterWorks Design <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> Supervisi<strong>on</strong> Enterprise anticipates potential resistance at ground level toprivatizing l<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> tenure in <strong>the</strong> rangel<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>s, requiring “extensive awareness raising”. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, <strong>the</strong>L<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> Use Guided Valley Development Program document (2009) recognizes that <strong>the</strong> risks74
associated with <strong>the</strong> program include a lack <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> full community participati<strong>on</strong>, c<strong>on</strong>flict <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> interest in <strong>the</strong>proposed project areas, <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> lack <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> support by stakeholders.At <strong>the</strong> same time, <strong>the</strong> Oromia Growth Corridors Plan is also <strong>the</strong> first purely government ledprogram which openly states that most l<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> in Borana z<strong>on</strong>e should be maintained as rangel<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>should not be c<strong>on</strong>verted for agricultural producti<strong>on</strong>. It also recognizes that an integrateddevelopment approach which addresses o<strong>the</strong>r crucial development needs such as access to markets<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> health facilities, am<strong>on</strong>g o<strong>the</strong>r services, are indispensable if livelihoods are to be protected <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>improved.4.2.2 Approaches to water development <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> community engagementAs highlighted in Secti<strong>on</strong> 3, different actors employindependent approaches to water development <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>community engagement, with little interacti<strong>on</strong> orharm<strong>on</strong>izati<strong>on</strong> between <strong>the</strong>m. Approaches rangefrom technocratic, with generic methods <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>promoting participati<strong>on</strong> (<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ten symbolic), to highlyparticipatory approaches specific to particularlocalities <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> socio-political settings. There is morefocus am<strong>on</strong>g d<strong>on</strong>ors, development organizati<strong>on</strong>s<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> some government programs such as <strong>the</strong> PCDPto rehabilitate existing water points as a costeffective means <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> availing water, <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> also as a wayto avoid disrupting mobility patterns <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>disagreement over new water points. However, <strong>the</strong>majority <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> practiti<strong>on</strong>ers remain focused <strong>on</strong> puttingin place physical infrastructure with little attenti<strong>on</strong>to planning, effective management, operati<strong>on</strong>, <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>sustainability, partially pushed by c<strong>on</strong>siderablepressure to meet targets. This lack <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> coherence inapproach is recognized by all actors as animpediment to sustainable development in <strong>the</strong>rangel<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>s. Highlighted is an example related tocommunity c<strong>on</strong>tributi<strong>on</strong>s (Box 13).Box 13: Same locati<strong>on</strong>, differentapproachesEven though <strong>the</strong>re are synergies between <strong>the</strong>government’s PCDP <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> PSNP programs (whichoverlap in 9 woredas across <strong>the</strong> regi<strong>on</strong>s), <strong>the</strong>reremain fundamental differences in approach tocommunity engagement. The PSNP pays cash forwork <strong>on</strong> public works c<strong>on</strong>structi<strong>on</strong> while <strong>the</strong>PCDP insists <strong>on</strong> a m<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>atory 5% cashc<strong>on</strong>tributi<strong>on</strong> from communities for allinfrastructure developments.Am<strong>on</strong>g NGOs, it has been observed thatcompetiti<strong>on</strong> over d<strong>on</strong>or funds, competiti<strong>on</strong> overcommunity attenti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>the</strong> limited number <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>available technical government experts in areaspopulated by multiple NGOs, in additi<strong>on</strong> to weakgovernment oversight all pose a challenge tost<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>ardizing what <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> how much communitiesc<strong>on</strong>tribute to water interventi<strong>on</strong>s. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore,it is difficult to dem<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> community c<strong>on</strong>tributi<strong>on</strong>sbey<strong>on</strong>d <strong>the</strong> maximum expected by establishedprograms (Behnke et al, 2008). Thus in areaswhere cash for work is <strong>the</strong> comm<strong>on</strong> practice,expecting communities to c<strong>on</strong>tribute m<strong>on</strong>etarilybecomes extremely challenging.However, partnerships <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> dialogue betweendifferent stakeholders are beginning to emerge, indicating cross-fertilizati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> ideas <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> approachesbetween actors. In SNNPR, <strong>the</strong> head <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>the</strong> water bureau menti<strong>on</strong>ed that positive resp<strong>on</strong>ses to <strong>the</strong>PCDP’s participatory approach have been observed at grassroots level, <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> mainstream technicalexperts in government are beginning to learn from <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> adopt elements <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> this approach. It is alsoeasy for <strong>the</strong> water bureau to access <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> learn from <strong>the</strong> PCDP, as PCDP project pers<strong>on</strong>nel atregi<strong>on</strong>al level are housed in <strong>the</strong> same complex as <strong>the</strong> water bureau. The PCDP itself, with fundsfrom <strong>the</strong> Japan Development Fund, is now working with eleven NGOs to roll out its approach <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>activities (Belayhun Hailu 56 , pers<strong>on</strong>al communicati<strong>on</strong>).The PSNP is also actively promoting partnerships with NGOs to address capacity shortages withingovernment <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> promote knowledge sharing. There is also dialogue between <strong>the</strong> PSNP <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> PCDPto ir<strong>on</strong> out differences in approaches to community c<strong>on</strong>tributi<strong>on</strong>s (Belayhun Hailu, pers<strong>on</strong>alcommunicati<strong>on</strong>). Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore at regi<strong>on</strong>al level, <strong>the</strong> Oromia Growth Corridors Plan invites NGOs<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> d<strong>on</strong>ors to participate in <strong>the</strong> implementati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>the</strong> initiative, <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> regi<strong>on</strong>al implementers are56 Senior Officer - <str<strong>on</strong>g>Knowledge</str<strong>on</strong>g> Management <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> Participatory Learning, PCDP.75
- Page 1 and 2:
Synthesis
- Page 4 and 5:
TABLE OF CONTENTSLIST OF ACRONYMS..
- Page 6 and 7:
ACKNOWLEDGMENTSI would like to exte
- Page 8 and 9:
LIST OF ACRONYMSACDI/VOCAACFAFDCDDC
- Page 10 and 11:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARYWater development
- Page 12 and 13:
understanding <str
- Page 14 and 15:
Agreed upon guidelines for water de
- Page 16 and 17:
• Make better use of</str
- Page 18 and 19:
to inform their own work an
- Page 20 and 21:
Within pastoral areas, it is recogn
- Page 23 and 24: Section 2. Overview of</str
- Page 25 and 26: Dohrn, 2006). Spatially variable ra
- Page 27 and 28: The following broad overview touche
- Page 29 and 30: In areas of adequa
- Page 31 and 32: observed response was for individua
- Page 33 and 34: Specific to water development, seve
- Page 35 and 36: Section 3. Water development todayT
- Page 37 and 38: Eliciting payments for water from l
- Page 39 and 40: ureaus 25 . The ministry’s interv
- Page 41 and 42: National policy paints a conflictin
- Page 43 and 44: will be given to pastoralists to en
- Page 45 and 46: Water supplyGovernance and<
- Page 47 and 48: vulnerable to conversion for other
- Page 49 and 50: • Agro-pastoralists’ priorities
- Page 51 and 52: Although the WSDP principles are se
- Page 53 and 54: The Universal Access ProgramThe Uni
- Page 55 and 56: • Help ensure that public works d
- Page 57 and 58: However, the development model for
- Page 59 and 60: Figure 4: Proposed pilot la
- Page 61 and 62: Many international and</str
- Page 63 and 64: Furthermore, attention is given to
- Page 65 and 66: CARE International, under the GWI,
- Page 67: and traditional me
- Page 70 and 71: • Understand exi
- Page 72 and 73: 4.2 Key observations in the water d
- Page 76 and 77: learning from NGO experiences in Bo
- Page 78 and 79: However, there are currently no spe
- Page 80 and 81: 4.3 Conclusion, ways forward <stron
- Page 82 and 83: In sum, pastoralism as a livelihood
- Page 84 and 85: • Water interventions selected sh
- Page 86 and 87: • Promote effective participation
- Page 88 and 89: Gebre-Mariam, A. (1982). Organizati
- Page 90: Schimann P. and Ph