Upload
duane
View
29
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
MUS Network Meeting 22-23 November 2010 The Hague. MASSMUS Guidelines for Assessing MUS in Irrigation Systems Daniel Renault Senior Officer Land and Water Division FAO. The MASSCOTE Guidelines Family for Auditing Irrigation Management: - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
MASSMUS Guidelines for
Assessing MUS in Irrigation Systems
Daniel Renault Senior Officer
Land and Water Division FAO
MUS Network Meeting 22-23 November 2010 The Hague
The MASSCOTE Guidelines Family for Auditing Irrigation Management:•MASSCOTE Mapping System and Service for Canal Operation Technique.
MASSLIS for Lift Irrigation SystemMASSPRES for Pressurized systems (under development).
MASSMUS for Multiple Uses of Water !!
1> MUS is not marginal this is the norm SUS are marginal !! [FAO survey of 30 systems only 2 are Single uses]
Major Advances for MUS (last 3 years)
2> MUS is better understood within the IWRM framework principles and concepts.
3> MUS is better conceptualized !!
Household
CommunitySystem
Dom MUS
Increase the pipe
Com MUS
ProvisionRegulatingSupportingCultural
Irrigation MUS
Multiply the pipes
Managing flows & streams
DomesticGardenlivestockEnterpriseEcosystem
MASSMUS Guidelines
The guidelines = RAPMUS-Sheet ; FAO IDP Report ; Set of lectures.
Document completed. Available as pdf. to be published early 2011.
Applications: Naryanpur India – Vietnam BHH – China Shanxi FID
Next: Western Delta Krishna India - China South.
(1) RAP
(2) CAPACITY & SENSITIVITY
(3) PERTURBATIONS
(4) WATER SHARES and BENEFITS
(5) COST of OPERATION(6) USERS & SERVICE TO USERS
(7) MANAGEMENT UNITS
(8) DEMAND for OPERATION
(9) OPERATION IMPROVEMENTS/UNITS
(10) INTEGRATING SOM OPTIONS
(11) PLAN FOR MODERNIZATION and MONITORING & EVALUATION
(0) WATER SERVICES
VISION OF THE IRRIGATION SYSTEMAND FUTURE SCENARIO BUILDING
Conceptualization of MUS in large irrigation systems
Irrigated agriculture supply water to the natural ecosystems: irrigation practice provides/supports ecosystems services
Productive-plus = ecosystem services provider
Provisioning of services Supporting Services
Domestic waterFood and fiber (irrigation)Water for cattle TransportationHydropowerEnvironmental flowsFuel (natural vegetation)Biochemicals and natural
medicines Raw materials for construction
Groundwater rechargeSupport to fishing Support to natural ecosystems and wildlife
(biodiversity) Soil formation Soil conservation
Regulating Services Cultural services
Sanitation and wastewater treatment
Flood protection Cooling effect on habitatsErosion control
Social functions linked to the infrastructure and management
Recreation and TourismCultural heritage values and landscape (ex.
terrace system)
Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) Grid to group ecosystem services
MUS ? in large irrigation systems
Service Providers
Direct Service
Service Receivers
Service Providers
Service Beneficiaries
ECO-SYSTEM
Service Ecosystem Services
Direct path
Indirect path
Provisional services
All types of services Service domain considered
• Command area considered from a bio-physical perspective as an agro-ecosystem providing critical ecosystem services to people
• A dynamic organic relationship between provider and users of services.
• In short a business service model intervening on a large ecosystem serving multiple uses
Defining services in practice ? Domestic
from WHO and UNICEF (Howard and Bartram, 2003) assessment in which they estimated that “one-sixth of humanity (1.1 billion people) lacked access to any form of improved water supply within 1 kilometre of their home”.
Type of improved and unimproved water supply according to the JMP.
Improved Water supply Unimproved water supply
Piped into dwelling, plot or yardPublic tap/standpipeTube well/boreholeProtected dug wellProtected springRainwater collection
Unprotected dug wellUnprotected springCart with small tank/drumTanker truckSurface water (river, dam, lake, pond, stream, canal, irrigation canal)Bottled water
STEP 1 RAP First question: Degree of MUS ?
One answer is number of MUS reported• Irrigation
• Flood control
• Drainage
• Domestic
• Environment
• Industry
• Recreational
• ....
India Karnataka: domestic uses
India Karnataka: animals and laundry
Urban uses of irrigation water
Urban parks in Taiyuan city
Urban wetlands in Taiyuan city
Indicator value
Management attitude
0 Ignoring or denying MUS and/or its magnitude
1 Blind eye on MUS practice by users
2 Positive marginal practices to support MUS
3 Integration of other services concerns into the operation
4 Integration of Multiple Uses Services into the management and governance.
Second question: integration of MUS in management?
Degree & Integration of MUS
0 .0
0 .5
1 .0
1 .5
2 .0
2 .5
3 .0
3 .5
4 .0
4 .5
0 .0 1 . 0 2 .0 3 . 0 4 .0 5 . 0 6 .0 7 .0 8 .0
D e g re e o f M U S
Inte
gra
tio
n o
f M
US
in
Mg
t
Jiamakou
Doukkala
Badra
Zanghe Canal St Julien
Gondorinala
Benniethora
Kirindi Oya IS
Ghotki
20 systems studied
STEP 2 CAPACITY & SENSIVITY
Problems for providing the SERVICES
Service? Raw water ? physical Access?Distance to water?
STEP 3 Perturbations
WBC shares per service: Water, Benefit & Cost
100 %
Share of water used
Share of benefits generated
Share of cost of MOM
STEP 4 Sizing MUS: Water & benefit shares
• WATER ACCOUNTING
• VALUING WATER
Water shares
• Quantum of use, especially consumptive use• Quality dimension• Energy dimension• Partitioning of non process–use: ex.
evaporation from same water body vs tourism, environment, fisheries, flood protection.
• Function/service with no consumption (e.g drainage, flood protection)
Characteristic of the Use
Definition Example of such use
Consumptive Water leave the system (hydrological cycle) and return to atmosphere
Irrigated crops Homestead garden Perennial natural vegetation
Non-consumptive
Water is not consumed (diverted and used returned after use.
Hydro-powerDomestic water (recycled)Animals
Depletive Water is depleted from the natural resources
Diversion schemes Groundwater Pumping
Non depletive Water is used on its site without any diversion
Recreational use in aquasystems
Landscape tourism
Process Water is needed by the associated producing process.
Crop growthhydro-power
Non process Water consumed is not part of the process, but rather a side effect
Fisheries and evaporation from water bodies
Tourism, recreational value
Beneficial Positive externalities Groundwater recharge
Non beneficial No added value.Negative externalities
Pollution from agriculture areas.
Irrigation water use partition
Power Plants , 0.0, 0%Small Industry and Business , 2.0, 1%
Large Industry, 16.8, 11%
Groundwater recharge, 56.0, 37%
Flood protection services , 1.0, 1%
Parks, recreational areas and urban ecosystems, 5.0,
3%
Irrigation at field level , 71.2, 47%
Ex. FENHE irrigation district Shanxi Province: water balance
Share of benefits
• Definition of benefits of water service ?
• Usually benefits = Monetary (gross production) for agriculture ! or any productive activity as electricity, fishery, etc...
• Domestic ?? Households served for domestic,
• Environment ???
• Jobs for small business,
Critical Issues ?
• References: building up a database !
• Methodology: MASSMUS rapid appraisal for mapping benefits
• Testing the Valuing methods for in depth MUS studies ?
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Sh
are
of
Valu
e/B
en
efi
tsCrops Animals
Domestic & Industry (incl tourism) Fish
Homestead garden & natural vegetation Drainage, Flood control, transport, environment
Power
Partition of Fees paid to FID
Irrigation at field level , 17.8108, 31%
Power Plants , 0, 0%
Large Industry, 30.24, 54%
Small Industry and Business , 1.2, 2%
Parks, recreational areas and urban ecosystems, 7.5,
13%
Flood protection services , 0, 0%
Groundwater recharge, 0, 0%
Ex. FENHE irrigation district Shanxhi Province: Benefits
REFERENCES ? VALUE ($) = 22.5 A^0.36 [A= size in m2]
y = 22.513x-0.6416
R2 = 0.6454
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
Size of homestead garden m2
Va
lue
in $
pe
r m
2 p
er
yea
r
After Renwick et al , 2007
Use/function Estimator of Benefit
Delivery to farms Crop yields Gross production $/ha irrigated Gross production $/m3
Domestic water Cost paid by service users Estimated cost of an alternative solution Number of capita served
Drinking water for cattle Value of annual animal productsNumber of households
Homestead garden Value generated by the garden
Support/recharge to natural surface streams (surface and groundwater) & environment
Industry and Hydropower Economical value generated, employment
Tourism, fishing, recreation, wild animals & natural parks
Economical value generated, employment
Control of vector-born diseases in waterbodies
Flood control Population and assets protected
Control of drainage return flow
Transport Quantum transported Economical value, employment
STEP 5 Share of COST of MOM
• Specific cost to produce the service.
• Deliveries, water level, access to water, ensuring a specific function, etc...
Share of COST of MOM
Specific costs to produce each service.
• Services: Water Deliveries - Support to raw water surface – Groundwater recharge – Control of water
• Investment – Operation – Maintenance
Comparative advantage of MUS
• Water multi-use: “More DGs per drop”. BUT re-use of water drops is no exclusivity of MUS therefore the specificity of MUS needs to be well documented.
• Cost-efficiency: “MUS better than Σ SUS” numerous services to a greater number of users with the same infrastructure more cost-effective than achieving the same with single use systems.
• Provision of extra services: ecosystems services provided by MUS systems for which little or no alternatives exist
• Externalities: “MUS = positive externalities” YES BUT we should not forget the negative ones !!
STEPS 6 Users and Services to Users
What Services & what Operation
•Supply water to a delivery point
•Control water presence in water stream and bodies
•Control water level in water bodies
•Control water recharge in surface and groundwater systems
•Maintain water quality in natural streams
•Maintain the capacity for storing water and control floods
Service? Raw water ? physical Access?Distance to water?
Access
Accessible canal/ drainage/river
Permanent surface water body
Groundwater access
DISTANCE
3 km Main Canal Secondary Canals
Tertiary Canal
Drainage
Example of zoning around the canal infrastructure for Shahapur Canal – Right blue Main and secondary canals – Left red with tertiary canals considered – Drainage network.
STEP 7 MANAGEMENT
• Institutional Organization
• Spatial organisation
STEP 8 DEMAND for OPERATION
STEP 9 IMPROVEMENT
STEP 10 INTEGRATING SOM & MUS