Groundwater Management GW Advisory Team MATE Sustainable ... › sites › default › files › resources › files › GW… · Sustainable Groundwater Management Concepts & Tools

Sustainable Groundwater ManagementConcepts & Tools

Briefing Note Series Note 6*

1

Authors: Héctor Garduño, Frank van Steenbergen & Stephen Foster

1

Stakeholder Participation in Groundwater Managementenabling and nurturing engagement

2010(Revised from 2002 version*)

Why should stakeholders participate in groundwater management?

● Groundwater stakeholders are those who have an important interest in the resources of a specified aquifer. This may be because they use groundwater, or because they practice activities that could cause or prevent groundwater pollution, or because they are concerned with groundwater resource and environmental management (Table 1). Since in many instances surface water should be managed conjunctively with groundwater for irrigation or municipal and industrial wastewater may pose a threat to groundwater quality, stakeholders should also (where appropriate) include representatives of surface water irrigators and/or municipal authorities and industrial organizations. The potential range of stake-holders is large and their active participation should contribute to the sustainability of groundwater resources and related economic activity.

* beyond local water resource, land planning and environmental protection agencies ** although stakeholder participation is relevant to urban groundwater management and pollution control it is not considered further in this paper, since it follows a completely different dynamic being dominated by utility and municipal policy issues *** usually represented by some form of NGO and/or local authority

Table 1: Potential range of interests and activities of groundwater stakeholders*

SECTOR

Rural

Urban**

Industry & Mining

Tourism

Environment***

WATER-USE ClASSES

domestic water supplysubsistence agriculturecommercial irrigationlivestock rearing

water utilitiesprivate supply

self-supplied companies

hotels and campsites

river/wetland ecosystemscoastal lagoons

POllUTing PROCESSES

household waste disposalintensive cropping wastewater irrigationfarmyard drainage

urban wastewater disposal/reusemunicipal landfills

drainage/wastewater discharge solid waste disposalchemical/oil storage facilities

wastewater dischargesolid waste disposal

OTHER CATEgORiES

drilling contractors

surface irrigation providers

drainage & flood management authorities

sand & gravel mining operators

land use planning authorities

watershed management

educational establishments

professional associations

journalists/mass media

GW MATEBriefing Note Series

Briefing Note SeriesBriefing Note Series

Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team


2





● Groundwater resource use and subsurface pollution pressure are influenced by ‘external drivers’ – such as macro-level social, economic and environmental planning, urbanization and land-use changes, agricultural policies (including fertilizer and pesticide subsidies, guarantee prices for certain crops, etc), highly-subsidized or flat-rate electrical energy tariffs for waterwell pumping, general subsidies on waterwell construction, support to watershed conservation and recharge enhancement, and the promotion of improved irrigation technology. All of these factors can affect the physical sustainability and chemical quality of the groundwater resource.

● Stakeholder participation in some form or other is essential because it :● disseminates understanding of issues that can be the impetus for up-scaling of good practices in the

sustainable use of groundwater – management decisions taken unilaterally by a regulatory agency without social consensus being often impossible to implement

● enables essential management activities (such as monitoring, inspection and charge collection) to be carried out more effectively through cooperative efforts and shared burdens

● mobilizes user self-regulatory capacity within an appropriate context – if there are many users and/or limited institutional capacity groundwater management would otherwise be impossible

● counteracts corruption in groundwater management, whether it arises in government or amongst stakeholder themselves

● facilitates the coordination of decisions relating to groundwater, land-use and waste management and generally reduces cross-sector contradictions.

● Groundwater management decisions taken with participation of stakeholders should bring :● social benefits – because they promote equity amongst users and avoid groundwater access being

dominated by a few ● economic benefits - because they encourage balance with long-term potential of the resource, avoid

resource collapse and optimize pumping costs● technical benefits – because they usually lead to better estimates of water abstraction and more

precise understanding of the groundwater balance● management benefits – because they trigger local stakeholders initiatives to implement demand

and supply measures and reduce the cost of regulation. Additionally, and very importantly, participatory management of highly-stressed aquifers should help

take otherwise unpopular decisions where (at least in the short run) benefits to a number of stakeholder groups are decreased because they agree to change groundwater consumption patterns in the long-term communal interest.

What are the institutional mechanisms for stakeholder participation in groundwater management?

● The participation of stakeholders can take many forms. At its most basic level it can occur even without formal organization – and there are several examples of groundwater being managed at local level by strong community values and norms without groundwater user associations or the initiative of a water resource regulatory agency. Stakeholder participation in groundwater management can take place at various territorial levels – ranging from individual waterwells to an aquifer system and even to the river basin or national level – and should be encouraged at all levels since it can make an important contri-bution to groundwater conservation, management and protection.

● The most basic criterion for stakeholder participation is the acceptance of specified values and norms for groundwater abstraction and use – which can be effective in bringing community use of ground-water in line with resource availability and achieving shared understanding of resource limitations. Specific examples include community bans on specified high water-consumption crops or certain types of waterwell, and changes in cropping pattern. In more complex situations (for example extensive aquifers or intensive competitive use), such norms will not suffice and more formal organization will be needed to facilitate and sustain groundwater management.

● Local organization of water users have existed since time immemorial in some countries – distributing groundwater from wells or springs to their members for irrigation, and collecting operational charges and settling water disputes in accordance with customary rules. Such groups are here called water-user associations (WUAs). Often the remit of WUAs is limited to operation and maintenance of the irrigation water supply and distribution systems, and only weakly linked with the management and protection of the resource. It is important to broaden their agenda (or to create special organizations)to address groundwater resource management and protection with recognized legal rights and duties, and to vest them with judicial personality, so as to facilitate their work and enable contractual relations with local water and land regulatory agencies.

● In some cases WUAs relate to both surface water and groundwater sources, and here the specific rights and duties of groundwater users must be clearly defined. In the case of small aquifers irrigators may join to form groundwater user groups (GWUGs) and village water-supply councils (VWSCs) often play a key role for drinking water-supply protection (and in some cases sanitation) in rural areas, and their roles can be extended to manage demand and enhance supply. In the case of small aquifers and/or situations with weak government institutional capacity, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) can be of great help for promoting stakeholder participation and groundwater management, but they need to be supported or overviewed by the local water resources agency.

● In the case of larger high-yielding aquifers, which often include more diverse interests but smaller

numbers of individual users, higher-level stakeholder participation through an aquifer management organization (AMOR) is required. This type of organization needs to be established more widely as the institutional mechanism for stakeholder participation in groundwater management at aquifer level – and should include all local WUAs, GWGs and VWSCs, and other main categories of stakeholder (Table 1). AMORs should also include representatives of national and/or local groundwater resource agencies and of the corresponding local government authority, and in some circumstances can (and should) be formed at the initiative of the water administration, especially when zones with critical groundwater status are declared.

● Regardless of the size of the aquifer, stakeholder participation needs to be defined around coherent groundwater bodies. The delineation of appropriate boundaries for the establishment of a ground-water body (resource management area) for an AMOR (Figure 1), and even for simpler forms of organization in smaller aquifers, is particularly critical. This will not always be straightforward, especially for large aquifer systems with low hydraulic gradients, and sub-division into groundwater bodies will need to be done as logically as possible. When the so-defined groundwater body is part of a large aquifer system, it is important to establish institutional mechanisms to integrate groundwater management and stakeholder participation at the system level. Since most shallower aquifer systems

3





4

are interconnected with surface water systems, AMORs should be represented in river basin agencies – something that at present hardly ever occurs. Moreover, representatives of the various main categories of groundwater stakeholder should also be called upon to comment on high-level policy decisions at national water commission level – in Figure 2 the various possible levels of representation and degrees of interaction, which will vary somewhat according to the specific case, are shown schematically.

● All stakeholders for a given groundwater body need to be identified, and provision made to ensure their fair representation in the institutional mechanism defined for aquifer management – difficulties can arise where there are large numbers of individual stakeholders with the solution being some form of federation. Some consideration needs to be given to the position of those that do not (yet) use groundwater. It will often not be socially and practically possible to exclude current non-users from using groundwater in the future, and management arrangements that define the rules of access for new users are required.

● Participatory groundwater management does not generally happen spontaneously. The exception occurs where historic events have underscored the importance of groundwater and charismatic local leadership has arisen to address the issue. In other situations the process is likely to be considerably longer and the set-up costs higher, since there may be no acute awareness of the threats to the ground-water and many unconnected users.

Which groundwater management functions can be performed by stakeholders?

● There are many ways in which stakeholders can participate in the management of groundwater resources and aquifer systems – approaches will vary according to both to the specific interests of the stakeholders and the nature of customary rules and rights for water and land in the area concerned.

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

� � � � � � � � � �

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

Figure 1: Hydrogeological basis and administrative approach to delineation of groundwater bodies





5

● In principle it has to be in the interest of groundwater users that the resource base is conserved. Moreover, the limits set to groundwater use under resource management plans do not necessarily imply that economic benefits are jeopardized. There is often scope for increasing productivity of ground-water use to compensate for less being abstracted – by using appropriate soil moisture management, improved crop selection and irrigation techniques, that lead to real water-resource saving. The imple-mentation of such measures, however, needs to be triggered by stakeholder participation in ground-water management, and there may even be scope for successful community action on aquifer recharge enhancement. The benefits of participatory groundwater management will be less, and the process more painful, where over-abstraction is really acute and a choice has to be made between radical reduction of irrigated areas or progressive time-limited resource depletion.

● The functions that can be performed in groundwater management are summarized in Table 2. Some measures are relatively easy to implement (maintaining distance between waterwells or bans on certain type of crop). Other measures require more coordination, management and even enforcement – and will be easier to implement if AMORs, GWUGs, WUAs (and local NGOs acting on their behalf ) are recognized and supported by the local groundwater agency. It should also be acknowledged that users must adapt their communal behavior to meet certain agreed groundwater resource criteria.

Figure 2: Desirable institutional interaction in participatory groundwater resource management

from full to selected representation depending on specific case

from periodic interaction to occasional dialogue depending on specific case

routes of support to facilitate participatory management

GROUNDWATER-USER

GROUPS (GWUGs)

VILLAGE WATER SUPPLY

COUNCILS (VWSCs)

INDIVIDUAL USERS

ENVIRONMENTAL NGOs

WATER USER

ASSOCIATIONS (WUAs)

AQUIFER MANAGEMENT

ORGANIZATION (AMOR)

NON-GOVERNMENT

ORGANIZATIONS (NGOs)

LOCAL WATER

RESOURCES AGENCY

NATIONAL WATER

COMMISSION/RIVER

BASIN AUTHORITY

(RBA)

This scheme summarizes a typical arrangement, but many variants are possible depending on the geographic scale of the aquifer and the territorial level of local government agencies.





6

How can participatory groundwater management be enabled and nurtured?

● Community engagement in participatory groundwater management only exceptionally comes about spontaneously, and in general will need to be enabled and nurtured by the appropriate offices of government (or NGOs supported and overviewed by government). Essential facets of such nurturing are : • facilitation of interaction amongst the full range of stakeholders • dissemination of a broad understanding of the groundwater resource situation • promotion of measures to improve the groundwater resource balance (if necessary), through

reduced consumptive use and groundwater recharge enhancement • provision of a conducive legal and institutional framework • setting realistic management targets and monitoring progress.

Table 2: Summary of functions commonly performed by stakeholders in participatory schemes of groundwater management

lEVEl AT WHiCH FUnCTiOn PERFORMED

FUnCTiOnS MinOR AQUiFERS MAJOR AQUiFERS VWSC/ NGO LAU WUA AMOR RBA GWUG

administer/participate in local allocation/ ● + s ● X access to groundwater groundwater monitoring ● +❋ s ● X ❋

engage in preparation/implementation ● +❋ s ● ❋ s ❋ of groundwater management plans

facilitate shared access and use of ● + s s ● X ● ❋groundwater facilities

promote/undertake demand reduction measures ● +❋ s s ● X ❋ s engage in recharge and retention measures ● +❋ s ● X ❋ s

mobilize additional sources of water ● ❋ s s ● X ● X ❋ s

make/participate in binding rules ● + s s ● X ● X ❋on water use

implement groundwater protection measures ● +❋ ● X ❋ ● X ❋

settle groundwater resource disputes ● + s ● X ❋ ● X ❋

negotiate and interact with other policy actors ● ❋ ● X ❋ ● X ❋

VWSC = Village Water Supply Council; GWUG = Groundwater User Group; NGO = Non-Governmental Organisation; LUA = Local Authority; WUA = Water User Association; AMOR = Aquifer Management Organization; RBA = River Basin (or National) Authority/Committee

● main implementer + based on local community organization/rules s supports X requires juridical personality to be conferred on corresponding organization/association ❋ requires formalization of relationship with a local water resources regulatory agency





7





Tab

le 3

: H

ydro

geo

log

ic a

nd s

oci

oec

ono

mic

fra

mew

ork

of

sele

cted

pilo

t g

roun

dw

ater

man

agem

ent

area

s

AR

GE

NT

INA

Men

doza

-Car

riza

l A

quif

er

(GW

-MA

TE

CP

6)

BR

ASI

L

Inte

rsta

te A

podi

Aqu

ifer

s (G

W-M

AT

E C

P16

)

CH

INA

Nor

th C

hina

Pla

in

(GW

-MA

TE

CP

8)

MO

RO

CC

OSo

uss-

Cho

utka

Aqu

ifer

s

YE

ME

ND

ham

ar,

Had

ram

outh

&

Tai

z A

quif

ers

IND

IAA

ndhr

a P

rade

sh S

tate

(GW

-MA

TE

CP

19)

IND

IAM

ahar

asht

ra S

tate

(GW

-MA

TE

CP

22)

ME

XIC

OSa

nto

Dom

ingo

Aqu

ifer

,B

aja

Cal

ifor

nia

Sur

ME

XIC

OSa

n L

uis

Pot

osí

Aqu

ifer

ME

XIC

O*

Sila

o-R

omit

a A

quif

er,

Gua

naju

ato

(GW

-MA

TE

CP

10)

SP

EC

iFiC

gR

OU

nD

WA

TE

R b

OD

y C

HA

RA

CT

ER

iST

iCS

expo

rt w

ine,

fru

it &

gar

lic p

rodu

ctio

n

com

mer

cial

tro

pica

l fru

it p

rodu

ctio

n

regu

larl

y ir

riga

ted

win

ter-

whe

at a

nd

occa

sion

ally

-irr

igat

ed s

umm

er m

aize

expo

rt c

itru

s &

veg

etab

le p

rodu

ctio

n,

som

e pu

blic

wat

er-s

uppl

y

mai

nly

smal

l-sc

ale

irri

gate

d ag

ricu

lture

subs

iste

nce

irri

gate

d ag

ricu

lture

&

rur

al w

ater

-sup

ply

1,00

0 ha

irr

igat

ed la

nd a

nddr

inki

ng w

ater

for

100

0 po

pula

tion

com

mer

cial

irri

gate

d cr

oppi

ng

mai

nly

publ

ic w

ater

-sup

ply

& s

ome

ir

riga

tion

alfa

lfa-f

ed li

vest

ock

and

publ

ic

wat

er-

supp

ly

incr

easi

ng s

alin

ity

from

impe

ded

drai

nage

& h

ydro

carb

on p

ollu

tion

fr

om o

il re

finer

y in

tens

ive

abst

ract

ion

low

ers

wat

er-t

able

su

bsta

ntia

lly in

ext

ende

d dr

ough

t

falli

ng g

roun

dwat

er le

vels

and

ris

k of

sa

line

up-c

onin

g an

d la

nd s

ubsi

denc

e

inte

nse

over

expl

oita

tion

- re

duci

ng

irri

gate

d ar

ea o

nly

solu

tion

inte

nse

over

expl

oita

tion

– ‘o

rder

ly

aqui

fer

depl

etio

n’ o

nly

solu

tion

seve

re a

quife

r de

plet

ion,

som

e up

-con

ing

of h

igh

fluor

ide

grou

ndw

ater

aqui

fer

depl

etio

n an

d w

ater

wel

l yi

eld

failu

re

acut

e w

ater

-tab

le d

raw

dow

n &

sa

line

intr

usio

n

inte

nsiv

e ab

stra

ctio

n ca

used

land

su

bsid

ence

and

up-

coni

ng o

f hi

gh

fluor

ide

grou

ndw

ater

inte

nse

over

expl

oita

tion

- r

educ

tion

of

irri

gate

d ar

ea n

eces

sary

to

prot

ect

publ

ic w

ater

-sup

ply

maj

or a

lluvi

al d

epos

its

cons

olid

ated

se

dim

enta

ry f

orm

atio

ns

vast

allu

vial

dep

osit

s

inte

r-m

onta

ne v

alle

y de

posi

ts

min

or a

lluvi

al d

epos

its

wea

ther

ed h

ardr

ock

crys

talli

ne b

asem

ent

wea

ther

ed h

ardr

ock

(pla

teau

bas

alts

)

coas

tal f

orm

atio

n

inte

r-m

onta

ne v

alle

y-fi

ll

inte

r-m

onta

ne v

alle

y-fi

ll

pied

mon

t se

dim

ents

kars

tic

limes

tone

+ w

eakl

y ce

men

ted

sand

ston

e

Gua

ntao

Cou

nty

grou

ndw

ater

ar

ea o

f al

luvi

al s

ands

sequ

ence

of

unco

nsol

idat

ed

sedi

men

ts

mul

ti-l

ayer

ed t

hin

sedi

men

ts

belo

w ‘w

adis

’

mul

tipl

e sm

all w

eath

ered

gr

anit

ic f

orm

atio

ns

wea

ther

ed b

asal

ts u

nder

Hiv

re

Baz

aar

villa

ge

loca

l san

d +

grav

el d

epos

its

laye

red

aqui

fer

sepa

rate

d by

fi

ne le

ns

thic

k se

quen

ce o

f vo

lcan

ic &

la

cust

rine

allu

vial

sed

imen

ts

user

pro

file

and

so

cio

eco

nom

ic s

itua

tio

ng

roun

dw

ater

reso

urce

issu

es

gE

nE

RA

lA

QU

iFE

RT

yP

OlO

gy

CO

Un

TR

yA

qui

fer

* w

ide

rang

e of

exa

mpl

es in

sim

ilar

hydr

ogeo

logi

cal s

ettin

g in

Gua

naju

ato

Stat

e, w

hich

incl

udes

ext

rem

e ca

se o

f La

guna

Sec

a A

quife

r w

here

inte

nse

over

expl

oita

tion

now

mea

ns o

nly

man

agem

ent p

ossib

ility

is ‘o

rder

ly d

eple

tion

to a

situ

atio

n le

avin

g m

inor

gro

undw

ater

res

ourc

e av

aila

bilit

y fo

r lim

ited

drin

king

wat

er-s

uppl

y'

hyd

rog

eolo

gic

alse

ttin

g

8





Tab

le 4

: S

umm

ary

of

pro

s an

d c

ont

ras

of

stak

eho

lder

par

tici

pat

ion

and

use

r co

mm

unit

y ac

tio

n in

gro

und

wat

er r

eso

urce

s m

anag

emen

t fo

r th

e ra

nge

of

gW

-MA

TE

-sup

po

rted

pilo

t p

roje

cts

AR

GE

NT

INA

Car

riza

l A

quif

er –

Men

doz

a

BR

ASI

LA

pod

i A

quif

ers

– C

eara

(C

E)

& R

io G

ran

de

do

Nor

te (

RN

) In

ters

tate

CH

INA

Nor

th C

hin

a P

lain

–

Gu

anta

o C

oun

ty

IND

IAW

eath

ered

Gra

nit

ic

Bas

emen

t –

An

dh

ra P

rad

esh

IND

IAW

eath

ered

Dec

can

Bas

alts

–

Mah

aras

htr

a

AC

HiE

VE

ME

nT

S O

F

STA

KE

HO

lD

ER

PA

RT

iCiP

AT

iOn

D

GI

(sta

te w

ater

res

ourc

e re

gula

tion

/ hy

drau

lic in

fras

truc

ture

age

ncy)

has

goo

d re

cord

s of

/ re

lati

ons

wit

h gr

ound

wat

er

user

s (a

nd in

form

atio

n on

the

ir u

se)

and

has

prom

oted

irri

gati

on W

UA

s (i

nspe

ccio

nes

de c

auce

) an

d w

orke

d cl

osel

y w

ith

maj

or w

ater

use

r/po

llute

r (R

EPS

OL-

YPF

)

ra

pid

deve

lopm

ent

of g

roun

dwat

er

inte

nsiv

e us

e fo

r ex

port

tro

pica

l fru

it

prod

ucti

on a

nd f

allin

g w

ater

-tab

le

in e

xtre

me

drou

ght

led

to f

ull u

ser

colla

bora

tion

wit

h SE

MA

RH

-RN

in

par

t of

aqu

ifer

and

conc

ern

abou

t tr

ansb

ound

ary

inte

rfer

ence

stro

ng s

tate

/loc

al g

over

nmen

t ag

enci

es

and

villa

ge a

dmin

istr

atio

n ca

pabl

e of

pr

omot

ing

real

gro

undw

ater

res

ourc

e sa

ving

s th

roug

h ch

ange

s in

irri

gati

on

prac

tice

com

mun

iy-b

ased

gro

undw

ater

m

anag

emen

t (C

BG

WM

) pi

onee

rs w

ith

gove

rnm

ent/

dono

r pr

ojec

ts in

volv

ing

NG

Os

to p

rovi

de ‘g

roun

dwat

er r

esou

rce

educ

atio

n’ t

o th

ousa

nds

of f

arm

ers

sinc

e 19

93 H

ivre

Baz

aar

villa

ge f

ine

ex

ampl

e of

CB

GW

M b

y ef

fect

ive

coun

cil

(Gra

m S

abha

), le

d by

cha

rism

atic

cou

ncil

lead

er (

Sarp

anch

) –

who

is n

ow a

ppoi

nted

by

Sta

te G

over

nmen

t as

am

bass

ador

to

repl

icat

e ef

fort

s

CO

Un

TR

y

(AQ

UiF

ER

/gW

bO

Dy

)

publ

ic-p

riva

te p

artn

ersh

ip h

as a

lrea

dy

mob

ilize

d U

S$ 1

8+ m

illio

n fo

r co

ntro

l of

hydr

ocar

bon

pollu

tion

ris

k an

d m

itig

ated

pr

oble

ms

of m

ost-

affe

cted

gro

undw

ater

us

ers;

gen

eral

ban

on

new

wat

erw

ells

has

be

en s

usta

ined

and

new

reg

ulat

ions

hav

e pl

ugge

d le

gal l

ooph

ole

allo

win

g tr

ansf

er

of u

se r

ight

s of

sal

inse

d w

ells

RN

use

r co

llabo

rati

on i

n w

ater

wel

l use

w

ater

-lev

el m

onit

orin

g, p

rom

oted

fo

rmat

ion

RN

/CE

sha

red

aqui

fer

man

agem

ent

wor

king

gro

up, m

ajor

SR

H-

CO

GE

RH

-CE

eff

ort

wat

erw

ell i

nven

tory

/ da

ta c

olle

ctio

n, m

obili

sati

on m

ajor

AN

A

(fed

eral

gov

t) r

esou

rces

stu

dy

villa

ge-l

evel

WU

As

enc

oura

ged

farm

ers

to c

olla

bora

te i

n ra

nge

of e

ngin

eeri

ng,

agro

nom

ic a

nd m

anag

emen

t m

easu

res

to

save

gro

undw

ater

, whi

ch i

s vi

ewed

as

a ‘so

cial

ass

et’

grou

ndw

ater

sus

tain

abili

ty a

nd

prod

ucti

vity

im

prov

ed t

hrou

gh n

ew

crop

ping

pat

tern

s/pr

acti

ces;

ben

efit

s fr

om s

ome

non-

intr

usiv

e go

vern

men

t fa

cilit

atio

n w

ith

prom

otio

n of

irr

igat

ion

tech

nolo

gy/w

ater

shed

con

serv

atio

n

only

dug

wel

ls p

erm

itte

d fo

r ir

riga

tion

, ba

n on

live

stoc

k-gr

azin

g an

d su

gar-

cane

/ ba

nana

cul

tiva

tion

, suc

cess

ful s

oil

cons

erva

tion

/ re

char

ge

enha

ncem

ent

prog

ram

me,

gw

l-ba

sed

crop

ping

pla

ns –

tr

ansi

tion

to

drou

ght-

resi

lient

eco

nom

y

ME

CH

An

iSM

/FO

CU

S O

F

STA

KE

HO

lD

ER

PA

RT

iCiP

AT

iOn

grou

ndw

ater

irri

gato

rs r

eluc

tant

to

join

W

UA

s (d

omin

ated

by

cana

l-w

ater

use

rs)

ther

eby

impe

ding

str

uctu

red

cons

ulta

tion

an

d pr

omot

ion

of c

onju

ncti

ve u

se

; som

e fa

lsel

y be

lieve

pet

role

um

indu

stry

con

tam

inat

ion

(not

irri

gati

on

wat

er m

anag

emen

t) is

mai

n ca

use

of

grou

ndw

ater

sal

inis

atio

n

decr

easi

ng g

roun

dwat

er u

ser

conc

ern

follo

win

g se

quen

ce o

f w

et y

ears

, bo

th

CE

& R

N p

ublic

adm

inis

trat

ion

still

not

pr

oact

ive

in r

egul

ariz

ing

and

insp

ecti

ng

all m

ajor

gro

undw

ater

use

rs, a

nd

inst

itut

ions

req

uire

fur

ther

str

engt

heni

ng

and

dece

ntra

lizat

ion

espe

cial

ly in

RN

still

que

stio

nabl

e w

heth

er f

arm

ers

have

re

duce

d no

n-be

nefic

ial g

roun

dwat

er

loss

es a

nd a

ccep

t re

allo

cati

on t

o ur

ban/

indu

stri

al u

se (

orig

inal

inte

ntio

n) -

latt

er

inte

rest

not

rep

rese

nted

in W

UA

s

requ

ires

fur

ther

gov

ernm

ent

ince

ntiv

es t

o ec

onom

ise

on e

lect

rica

l ene

rgy

use

and

impr

ove

agri

cultu

ral p

rocu

rem

ent

plus

a

stro

nger

sta

te g

roun

dwat

er a

genc

y to

m

onit

or C

BG

WM

pro

gres

s an

d aq

uife

r be

havi

or so

me

ques

tion

abo

ut s

usta

inab

ility

sho

uld

lead

ersh

ip c

hang

e an

d ab

out

repl

icab

ility

si

nce

alth

ough

a lo

w-r

ainf

all d

roug

ht-

pron

e ar

ea h

as r

elat

ivel

y-fa

vour

able

co

ndit

ions

for

gro

undw

ater

rec

harg

e en

hanc

emen

t

liM

iTA

TiO

nS

OF

g

W M

An

Ag

EM

En

T A

CT

iOn





Tab

le 4

: C

onti

nu

ed

AR

GE

NT

INA

Car

riza

l A

quif

er –

Men

doz

a

BR

ASI

LA

pod

i A

quif

ers

– C

eara

(C

E)

& R

io G

ran

de

do

Nor

te (

RN

) In

ters

tate

CH

INA

Nor

th C

hin

a P

lain

–

Gu

anta

o C

oun

ty

IND

IAW

eath

ered

Gra

nit

ic

Bas

emen

t –

An

dh

ra P

rad

esh

IND

IAW

eath

ered

Dec

can

Bas

alts

–

Mah

aras

htr

a

grou

ndw

ater

irri

gato

rs r

eluc

tant

to

join

W

UA

s (d

omin

ated

by

cana

l-w

ater

use

rs)

ther

eby

impe

ding

str

uctu

red

cons

ulta

tion

an

d pr

omot

ion

of c

onju

ncti

ve u

se

; som

e fa

lsel

y be

lieve

pet

role

um

indu

stry

con

tam

inat

ion

(not

irri

gati

on

wat

er m

anag

emen

t) is

mai

n ca

use

of

grou

ndw

ater

sal

inis

atio

n

decr

easi

ng g

roun

dwat

er u

ser

conc

ern

follo

win

g se

quen

ce o

f w

et y

ears

, bo

th

CE

& R

N p

ublic

adm

inis

trat

ion

still

not

pr

oact

ive

in r

egul

ariz

ing

and

insp

ecti

ng

all m

ajor

gro

undw

ater

use

rs, a

nd

inst

itut

ions

req

uire

fur

ther

str

engt

heni

ng

and

dece

ntra

lizat

ion

espe

cial

ly in

RN

still

que

stio

nabl

e w

heth

er f

arm

ers

have

re

duce

d no

n-be

nefic

ial g

roun

dwat

er

loss

es a

nd a

ccep

t re

allo

cati

on t

o ur

ban/

indu

stri

al u

se (

orig

inal

inte

ntio

n) -

latt

er

inte

rest

not

rep

rese

nted

in W

UA

s

requ

ires

fur

ther

gov

ernm

ent

ince

ntiv

es t

o ec

onom

ise

on e

lect

rica

l ene

rgy

use

and

impr

ove

agri

cultu

ral p

rocu

rem

ent

plus

a

stro

nger

sta

te g

roun

dwat

er a

genc

y to

m

onit

or C

BG

WM

pro

gres

s an

d aq

uife

r be

havi

or so

me

ques

tion

abo

ut s

usta

inab

ility

sho

uld

lead

ersh

ip c

hang

e an

d ab

out

repl

icab

ility

si

nce

alth

ough

a lo

w-r

ainf

all d

roug

ht-

pron

e ar

ea h

as r

elat

ivel

y-fa

vour

able

co

ndit

ions

for

gro

undw

ater

rec

harg

e en

hanc

emen

t

ME

XIC

OSa

nto

Dom

ingo

Aqu

ifer

–B

aja

Cal

ifor

nia

ME

XIC

OSa

n L

uis

Pot

osi

Val

ley

Aqu

ifer

ME

XIC

OSi

lao-

Rom

ita

Aqu

ifer

–G

uan

aju

ato

MO

RO

CC

OSo

uss

-Ch

outk

a A

quif

ers

YE

ME

ND

ham

ar,

Had

hra

mou

t &

Tai

z A

quif

ers

AC

HiE

VE

ME

nT

S O

F

STA

KE

HO

lD

ER

PA

RT

iCiP

AT

iOn

CO

TA

S fo

rmed

, but

fol

low

ing

unen

forc

eabl

e fe

dera

l reg

ulat

ions

, lar

ger

farm

ers

boug

ht-o

ut s

mal

l far

mer

s an

d in

vest

ed in

mod

erni

zing

irri

gati

on

tech

nolo

gy C

OT

AS

form

ed b

y pr

ivat

e us

ers,

m

unic

ipal

wat

er-s

uppl

y ut

ility

and

sta

te

gove

rnm

ent

– la

tter

con

stru

ctin

g su

rfac

e w

ater

dam

/res

ervo

ir t

o re

duce

gro

undw

ater

de

pend

ency

sinc

e 19

98 s

tate

gov

t. ha

s st

rong

ly

supp

orte

d cr

oss-

sect

or g

roun

dwat

er

man

agem

ent

asso

ciat

ions

(C

OT

AS)

and

pr

omot

ed a

quife

r m

anag

emen

t ac

tion

s vi

a th

is r

oute

basi

n w

ater

res

ourc

es a

genc

y ha

s st

rate

gy

to s

top

furt

her

exte

nsio

n of

irri

gate

d ar

eas,

impr

ove

irri

gati

on e

ffic

ienc

y/w

ater

pr

oduc

tivi

ty a

nd s

ubse

quen

tly n

egot

iate

re

duct

ions

in g

roun

dwat

er ir

riga

ted

area

stre

ngth

enin

g ca

paci

ty o

f lo

cal

com

mun

itie

s fo

r gr

ound

wat

er u

se

plan

ning

/mon

itor

ing

sim

ulta

neou

sly

wit

h pr

ovis

ion

of im

prov

ed ir

riga

tion

te

chno

logy

and

aqu

ifer

rech

arge

en

hanc

emen

t

CO

Un

TR

y

(AQ

UiF

ER

/gW

bO

Dy

)

m

ore

than

60%

red

ucti

on i

n gr

ound

wat

er

abst

ract

ion

duri

ng 1

995-

2006

, g

roun

dwat

er a

bstr

acti

on m

eter

ing

inst

alle

d an

d m

aint

aine

d w

ith

mon

itor

ing

of g

roun

dwat

er le

vels

/qua

lity

– fu

ll ag

reem

ent

on f

utur

e gr

ound

wat

er a

nd s

oil

cons

erva

tion

mea

sure

s

good

coo

pera

tion

wit

h fu

ll w

ater

wel

l in

vent

ory,

use

rs d

irec

tory

and

wel

l m

eter

ing;

par

tici

pato

ry d

raft

ing

of

regu

lati

ons

to s

tabi

lise

aqui

fer

and

rese

rve

deep

goo

d-qu

alit

y gr

ound

wat

er

for

pota

ble

supp

lies

CO

TA

S ha

ve r

aise

d aw

aren

ess

lead

ing

to

wat

ersh

ed c

onse

rvat

ion

prog

ram

mes

, nu

mer

ical

aqu

ifer

mod

els

have

bee

n pr

epar

ed b

y C

EA

G (

stat

e w

ater

age

ncy)

an

d fe

dera

lly a

quif

er s

tabi

lizat

ion

plan

s

elab

orat

ed

aqu

ifer

num

eric

al m

odel

use

d to

inf

orm

st

akeh

olde

rs a

nd

reac

h m

anag

emen

t ag

reem

ent

(Con

trat

de

Nap

pe)

reac

hed,

w

hich

inc

lude

s su

bsid

ized

dri

p ir

riga

tion

, re

ques

ts d

eman

d co

nstr

aint

s an

d ac

cept

s re

gula

tory

pro

visi

ons

WU

As

esta

blis

hed

and

have

led

to

chan

ge t

o le

ss w

ater

-con

sum

ing

crop

s (i

ncl.

redu

ctio

n of

qat

) an

d so

me

real

gr

ound

wat

er r

esou

rce

savi

ngs

ME

CH

An

iSM

/FO

CU

S O

F

STA

KE

HO

lD

ER

PA

RT

iCiP

AT

iOn

conc

ern

abou

t so

cioe

cono

mic

co

nseq

uenc

es o

f di

spla

cem

ent

of s

mal

ler

farm

ers

conc

ern

that

fed

eral

-lev

el m

ay n

ot

endo

rse

and

finan

cial

ly s

uppo

rt a

quife

r st

abili

zati

on p

lan

wat

erw

ell d

rilli

ng b

ans

inef

fect

ive

due

to

poor

enf

orce

men

t an

d C

OT

AS

not

able

to

mob

ilise

eff

ecti

ve a

ctio

n to

red

uce

net

abst

ract

ion

and

stab

ilise

aqu

ifer

wat

er-

leve

ls;

inad

equa

te d

evol

utio

n of

res

ourc

e ad

min

fro

m f

eder

al-l

evel

to

stat

e an

d C

OT

AS

nego

tiat

ed n

on-b

indi

ng a

ppro

ache

s fa

vour

ed o

ver

agre

ed r

educ

tion

of

irri

gate

d ar

ea –

thu

s re

sulta

nt ‘r

eal g

roun

dwat

er

savi

ngs’

ques

tion

able

and

fur

ther

co

mpl

icat

ed b

y di

sput

e ov

er n

umer

ical

m

odel

par

amet

ers

grou

ndw

ater

rec

harg

e an

d st

orag

e st

ill

very

lim

ited

and

que

stio

nabl

e w

heth

er

agri

cultu

ral p

rodu

ctio

n su

ffic

ient

to

pay

back

loan

s fo

r im

prov

ed ir

riga

tion

te

chno

logy

– a

nd s

till

lack

of

tran

spar

ency

ab

out

reso

urce

sta

tus

liM

iTA

TiO

nS

OF

g

W M

An

Ag

EM

En

T A

CT

iOn

9

10





● It is helpful to those promoting participatory groundwater management to learn from recent experience in this area. In its 10 years operational experience in the developing nation context worldwide, GW•MATE has been able to assess and contribute to a number of cases whose achievements and difficulties provide useful lessons – Table 3 provides a summary of the main hydrogeologic and socio-economic conditions in the corresponding areas from which stem the following observations : • hydrogeologic conditions – in relatively small aquifers with non-complex hydrogeology and

reliable annual recharge it requires less effort to achieve effective participatory groundwater management than in large aquifers with less clearly-defined groundwater bodies

• groundwater user profiles – heterogeneous user groups and absentee stakeholders make it more difficult for participatory management than do socially more homogeneous user groups

• resource issues – participatory management is easier if there is scope for restoring a reasonable groundwater resource balance without seriously impacting existing livelihoods (although this may not always be possible).

In Table 4 the focus, achievements and limitations of participatory management are summarized for the same aquifers and areas introduced in Table 3 – from this the wide range and varying success of participatory management experienced will be evident.

● To promote stakeholder engagement in groundwater resource management it is often necessary to broadcast the importance of these resources and their vulnerability to depletion and degradation – a task that needs to be facilitated by government often through the mobilization of NGOs. The initial approach is normally to present, using local communication channels and the mass media, the current status of groundwater (availability and quality) together with predictions of the consequences of not taking some form of management action. Where groundwater users have already been involved themselves with hydrological monitoring communication will be easier.

● But this is generally not enough, and education (as distinct from awareness) programmes will need to be developed and promoted at various levels – focusing on the remedial action to be taken and on how to sustain such action institutionally. It will be useful to map the existing local communication network, identifying ‘message senders’ and ‘message receivers’.

● When developing the preferred role of the local government water resources agency in participatory groundwater management it is advisable to adopt the following criteria :• make complex groundwater situations understandable by providing clear information on the

hydrological balance of the groundwater body concerned (wherever possible using modern software with user-friendly visual interfaces to share understanding of system behavior under different management scenarios) and engaging stakeholders in aquifer monitoring – stakeholders will usually then be willing to consider management interventions and to accept advice on whether their own ideas are technically and economically sound

• empower stakeholder organizations and avoid patronising (‘officials know best’) postures, since it must be accepted that stakeholders have to be the main actors in the participatory management process with government assisting them in identifying strategic issues and implementable solutions

• ensure all stakeholders are properly represented irrespective of their individual weight in terms of land tenure and water rights or their economic and political influence

• establish sound, implementable and socially-acceptable resource allocations so that the interests of stakeholders are reasonably protected with third party and environmental concerns also being

11





taken into account, but retaining sufficient flexibility to allow for a component of reallocation to more socially, economically or environmentally beneficial uses or in the light of revised resource evaluations as a result, for example, of climate change

• promote improvements in groundwater use efficiency by providing guidelines on measures that will maintain income levels whilst reducing water consumption – including ‘real resource saving’ measures, alternative cropping patterns, improved soil moisture management, etc

• combine participatory management with investment in recharge enhancement since if groundwater users themselves engage in augmenting resources their sense of ownership of the resources will also be enhanced.

● While conflict amongst groundwater users is generally best settled by the parties themselves, situations may arise in which conflicting parties prefer to have an external body (such as a government agency or high-profile NGO) promoting settlement (so that they do not have to confront each other directly).

● Where excessive groundwater abstraction from an aquifer drives a number of farmers out of agriculture because of the escalating cost of access to groundwater and/or its diminishing supply, wealthier farmers usually consolidate their agricultural production resulting in migration of displaced farmers to neigh-boring urban areas – the public administration concerned with groundwater resources must anticipate such phenomena and decide how it can best act in the broader public interest.

● In most developing nations public information offices deal with narrowly-focused communication programmes, implemented through the national media without systematic assessment of impact. This approach is not well-suited to the technical complexity of groundwater resource management nor to the social aspects of stakeholder participation. A more appropriate approach to communication would need to be compatible with existing networks within which local groundwater agencies work. The stakeholder focus should be on building capacity to access, use and generate information – thus in groups with different capacities traditional community outlets, the mass-media and modern infor-mation channels all need to be considered.

Further ReadingBurke J & Moench M 2000 Groundwater and Society : Resources, Tensions and Opportunities : Themes in

Groundwater Management for the 21st Century. United Nations Department of Economic & Social Affairs, New York, USA.

Foster S, Chilton J, Moench M, Cardy F & Schiffler M 2000 Groundwater in Rural Development : Facing the Challenges of Supply and Resource Sustainability. World Bank Technical Paper 463, Washington DC, USA.

Foster S, Garduño H & Kemper K 2004 Mexico : The ‘COTAS’— Progress with Stakeholder Participation in Groundwater Management in Guanajuato. World Bank GW•MATE Case Profile Collection 10, Washington DC, USA.

12

Foster S, Limaye S, Mandavkar Y, & Msangi S 2009 : A Hydrogeologic and Socioeconomic Evaluation of Community–Based Groundwater Resource Management — the Case of Hivre Bazaar in Maharashtra, India. World Bank GW-MATE Case Profile Collection 22, Washington DC, USA.

Garduño H, Foster S, Raj P & Van Steenbergen F 2009 — Addressing Groundwater Depletion through Community–Based Management Actions in the Weathered Granitic Basement Aquifer of Drought–Prone Andhra Pradesh, India. World Bank GW-MATE Case Profile Collection 19, Washington DC, USA.

Lopez-Gunn, E & Martinez-Cortina I 2006 Is self-regulation a myth ? – case study on Spanish groundwater users associations and the role of higher-level authorities. Hydrogeology Journal 14 : 340-349.

The Communication Initiative Network 2009 Where communication and media are central to social and economic development. [http://www.comminit.com]

Van Steenbergen F & Shah T 2003 Rules Rather than Rights : Self Regulation in Intensively Used Groundwater Systems (in) E Custodio & M R Llamas ‘Intensive Use of Groundwater: Challenges and Opportunities’ Balkema, Dordrecht.

Van Steenbergen F 2006 Promoting participatory groundwater management. Hydrogeology Journal 14 : 380-391.





Publication Arrangements

The GW•MATE Briefing Note Series is published by the World Bank, Washington D.C., USA. It is also available in electronic form on the World Bank water resources website (www.worldbank.org/gwmate)

and the Global Water Partnership website (www.gwpforum.org).

The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this document are entirely those of the authors and should not be attributed in any manner to the World Bank, to its affiliated organizations, or to members of its Board of Executive Directors, or the countries they represent.

Funding Support

GW•MATE (Groundwater Management Advisory Team) is financed by the World Bank's Water Partnership Program (WPP) multi-donor trust fund provided by the British, Danish & Dutch governments and by supplementary support from the UK Department for International Development (DfID).

Documents

Groundwater Management GW Advisory Team MATE Sustainable ... › sites › default › files › resources › files › GW… · Sustainable Groundwater Management Concepts & Tools