Presentation by Douglas J. Merrey and Tadele Gebreselassie, focuses on lessons learned over the past 35 years in water and land management in Ethiopia. A number of recommendations are also made

1. ETHIOPIAN WATER AND LAND MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS OVER 35 YEARS: LESSONS LEARNED AND TO BE LEARNED Douglas J. Merrey and Tadele Gebreselassie Consultants to the Challenge Program on Water and Food Nile Basin Development Challenge: Program Launch Workshop 29 September 2010 1

2. Overview of presentation What we did, how we did it, sources Some major observations emerging from the study Major conclusions of the study—research and implementation Recommendations for implementation programs Recommendations for research Conclusion Study has synthesized existing knowledge, made detailed recommendations for implementation, future research, and for the CPWF program 2

3. Concepts “Rainwater Management” (RWM) – CPWF broad definition, includes soil & water conservation (SWC), rainwater harvesting, conservation farming, micro-irrigation Management of water for crops, livestock, agro-forestry “Sustainable Land (& Water) Management” (SLWM): “every land-use decision is a water-decision” [Bossio et al] “Landscape approach to RWM” = Integrated Watershed Management (IWM) “Water Productivity” (WP) – Kg or $ produced per unit of water consumed “Livestock Water Productivity” (LWP) “Innovation Systems” -- Linking multiple stakeholders in process of research & development & uptake of new ideas [value chain platforms] 3

4. What we did, how we did it, sources Purpose to synthesize in a systematic way, existing knowledge, lessons, gaps as foundation for NBDC projects Study is based on review of policy & project documents, research as reported in Ph.D. theses, journal articles, workshop papers, etc Database of nearly 400 references Discussions and interviews with researchers, policy makers at early phase Developed detailed data tables on policies, programs, interventions, inventory of organizations, & annotated reference list [Vol. 2] 4

5. Organization of main report Scene setting, focusing on Abay River Basin Historical perspective – evolution of institutions, policies, programs, strategies, outcomes of interventions Examined major research & implementation programs Assessment of experiences with selected interventions largely based on research Experiences with targeting (agro-ecological zones, development domains, gender, etc) Derived key lessons on what works; key knowledge gaps Implementation recommendations: Ideas for strengthening current programs Research recommendations: towards a new paradigm of RWM research & development 5

6. observations emerging from the study-Institutions Tremendous progress in human resources development, re-orientation of government from centralized authoritarian implementation to decentralized service-provision. Problems continue: overlapping mandates & communication-coordination issues; lack of systematic M&E & use in management; disruptive re-organizations; de facto continuation of command & control through top-down quotas, etc Need to build more effective collective action capacity on watersheds & aquifers, building on indigenous institutions where feasible Need for nested watershed & basin institutional arrangements for effective integrated management Can be informal arrangements for many purposes 6

7. observations emerging from the study-Policies Over past 10-15 years, increasingly detailed & coherent policy framework developed for agriculture, water, natural resources, poverty reduction, climate change adaptation, etc. Recently: “National SLM Framework” to guide SLM planning & investments in coherent way to address linkages of poverty and land degradation Influence of TerrAfrica, CAADP on program design Shift conservation to livelihood improvement focus CPWF’s NBDC program can directly support this Issues: Insufficient attention to integrating water with land management Need for “green water” policy integrated with SLM & “blue” water resources policy 7

8. observations emerging from the study- Implementation programs MERET current name long-running SWC program with WFP support, combining support to food-insecure people with promoting rural infrastructure including SWC Changed over time based on lessons Evolution from “coerced” to “bribed” participation: Food for Work (FfW), Cash for Work (CfW) Developed participatory methodologies now used in newer programs, especially “Community-Based Participatory Watershed Development” Guidelines Added income-generation to meet households’ short-term needs – important innovation Strong influence on Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP) & new SLM Program Bilateral regional programs (AMAREW, SARDP, GTZ, etc) – also sources of lessons & capacity building 8

9. observations emerging from the study-Implementation Programs Lessons & Observations Early (1970s-1980s) highly coercive, based on standardized packages, no regard for peoples’ views Evolution to participatory community-driven approach at policy level, & increasing reality locally Recently: shift to systematic approach to targeting small watersheds in larger planning context, & enhancing farmers’ incomes But: researchers continue to find some evidence of coercion locally; use of quotas continues; FfW raises questions on ownership of infrastructure; high staff turnover & institutional re-structuring “Participatory” “community-driven” positive, but still pushing “best practice” packages, not partnerships with farmer communities to engage them in a creative innovation process to assist them to solve their problems. 9

10. observations emerging from the study-Research programs Compared to most countries, Ethiopia has had numerous research programs, some long-term Ethiopian Highlands Reclamation Study (EHRS-FAO & MoA) Soil Conservation Research Program (SCRP-Berne & MoA) & successors CGIAR programs; Nile Basin Initiative; European & USA university collaborations; national system research programs Large body of research findings & opportunities for Ethiopian capacity building Evolution from technical to socio-economic to integrated research Have had substantial but unsubstantiated influence on policies (no evaluations) Research results are often mutually contradictory making generalization difficult 10

11. observations emerging from the study-Selected Research results Strong bias towards land management (i.e., reversing degradation) Neglect of improving productivity of water in agriculture – though land management is a means to improve WP Failure to recognize and build on farmers’ knowledge and indigenous practices Farmer scepticism about introduced packages often well-founded; dis-adoption often for good reasons Awareness, knowledge not sufficient condition for adoption Farmer risk aversion in context of binding consumption, finance constraints 11

12. observations emerging from the study-Selected Research results Reviewed evidence on RWH ponds, shallow wells, terraces & bunds [fanyajuu, stone & soil bunds, ditches]; conservation agriculture practices; livestock water productivity; agro forestry from WP perspective; collective management of common lands No time to present specific results; generally mixed, often contradictory even from same sites Ponds, shallow wells—high potential but often not achieved: serious implementation problems; targeting; unanticipated impacts; lack of extension advice, market access, water lifting technologies Shallow wells perform better but aquifer depletion threat 12

13. Left to right top then bottom: RWH pond Shallow well Fanyajuu Planting pits 13

14. Terraces Plowing stony field 14

15. observations emerging from the study-Selected Research results Bunds & terraces Many negative findings especially fanyajuu – being promoted in places not appropriate (e.g., high rain) Generally more positive results in low-rainfall areas Top-down implementation; often perceived by farmers as more harmful than useful Need for stronger policy framework supporting implementation strategies with positive incentives to adopt & sustain interventions Conservation agriculture [e.g., low tillage] Positive research cases but insufficient farmer-based experience Managing livestock for water productivity Promising research results but no cases of intervention experiences as yet 15

16. observations emerging from the study-Selected Research results Agro forestry Clear benefits of many practices but little knowledge from WP perspective Collective action for managing common land Critical resource: grazing, fodder, fuel, construction, watersheds Long tradition of community management though weakened in many communities now Mixed experiences e.g., with “Area Enclosures” Need for stronger policy framework & technical support to assist communities to adapt to new needs 16

17. Are they water productive? Household agro forestry 17

18. observations emerging from the study--Targeting SLM programs historically targeted food-insecure (“low potential”) areas New SLM program targets places with high potential returns, e.g., high potential areas under threat of degradation Gender equity –major policy emphasis, and much progress at macro-level Very little research on RWM & gender—needs strong focus in NBDC program Very little research on RWM impacts on poverty Agro-ecological (AE) zones AE zones used in planning, but miss dimensions like market access, availability of “blue” water Development domains combine AE zones, market access & population density Some potential for targeting RWM interventions, but these too fail to capture the heterogeneity at local areas May not help in targeting watersheds under threat or with high potential returns 18

19. observations emerging from the study-Research results: Conclusions No credible systematic comparative research evaluating outcomes & impacts of SWC-RWM interventions & interactions among them Such a study could clarify what works, under what conditions, who actually benefits, and why Most research examines outcomes of specific interventions; no “systems perspective” Need paradigm shift to agro-ecological system optimization  justification for integrated landscape approach of CPWF, in an innovation system framework 19

20. recommendations for implementation programs Move from “participation”/consultation to community responsibility, empowerment through demand-based programs Strengthen partnerships of farmers, DAs, researchers, other stakeholders Transform performance evaluation of officials from achievements based on targets to assessments & incentives based on clients’ (farmers”) feedback Promote community responsibility and collective action to solve their own problems Even de-centralized government cannot manage small watersheds – it requires strong community-driven institutional arrangements 20

21. recommendations for implementation programs Complete process of moving from reversing degradation as a goal to sustainably improving productivity and livelihoods through integrated SLWM/RWM programs From a negative to a positive goal IWM or landscape approach requires integration of a diverse set of interventions, tailored to specific needs Replace ‘packages’ [“best practices”] with a menu of possible interventions and let clients “mix and match” & adapt according to their needs Strengthen national research system in natural resources management research through an innovation system paradigm  To link research to stakeholders, consumers 21

22. Gaps in knowledge What are potential and means to improve productivity of water used by crops, livestock, agro forests; social & economic outcomes? How to improve LWP is in its infancy; relative advantages small vs large livestock from WP perspective How to optimize productivity & sustainability of investments (e.g., RW ponds, shallow wells, etc)? What is nature of interactions & synergies among RWM technologies & practices? Local cultural, social, institutional dynamics & their impacts on actual government program implementation Need to scale up RWM research based on a new paradigm 22

23. recommendations for future research topics Basic in-depth interdisciplinary study of watershed dynamics over time Test & adapt planning & monitoring tools that can be used with stakeholders Studies of alternative institutional arrangements for managing watersheds & river basins E.g., promoting bottom-up processes Systematic in-depth authoritative comparative study of implementation strategies, impacts, outcomes, effectiveness of SLM-RWM programs Definitive & authoritative comparative assessment of poverty outcomes, returns on investments, sustainability of alternative RWM technologies & practices Systematic assessment of potential future market for low-cost water management technologies Study of effectiveness of NGO programs in SLM-RWM Study of effectiveness and benefits of national & international research programs 23

24. Recommendations for NBDC research program Include multiple stakeholders in a wider innovation system/platform Encourage active involvement in entire research process of wide range of stakeholders Farmer-driven participatory innovation development Build on recent experiences to engage farmers as active partners, co-equal sources of ideas Site selection based on farmer interest & demand Focus on increasing the capacity of the entire watershed system to produce a range of benefits over time Implicit in planned “landscape approach” but may require new institutional arrangements 24

25. Recommendations for NBDC research program In-depth analysis of local social & economic dynamics, power relations, institutions Productivity, equity, sustainability ultimately a function of institutional effectiveness Serious gap in knowledge making it impossible to identify and promote institutional & implementation innovations Currently targeting women, poor households is ineffective— need strong focus on RWM innovations that benefit women and other poor households 25

26. Recommendations for NBDC research program Test & assess institutional & implementation innovations Identify ways to strengthen collective management of common property resources building on indigenous arrangements & introducing innovations To achieve this encourage local creative institutional innovation processes (“bricolage”), not impose designs Identify & test potential institutional innovations for downstream beneficiaries to share costs as well as benefits of SLWM E.g. Payment for environmental services (PES) Identify & test risk-reducing institutional innovations E.g., weather index & indemnity insurance linked to adoption of RWM-SLM practices 26

27. Conclusion: key messages-1 Ethiopia & partners have invested more in sustainable land & water management than any other Africa country (probably 3rd rank behind China, India) Programs have learned lessons from experiences and modified strategies over time, becoming more participatory, based on integrated watershed management perspective, with more focus on improving farmer livelihoods as well as reversing land degradation New Sustainable Land Management Program and growing interest in water management offer opportunity to further improve implementation of programs 27

28. Conclusion: key messages-2 Launch of CPWF Nile Basin Development Challenge Program unique opportunity for building on past experience to create a new paradigm of sustainable land & water management in support of programs Progressed from coercion to consultation to participation. Now, Ethiopia should go further to community-driven research-based programs Critical importance of working with communities to test and promote institutional and technological innovations on watersheds Importance of strengthening policy support for sustainable demand-driven research-based rainwater management programs 28

29. 29 THANK YOU!