• No results found

Water as a common resource - Whose responsibility? : A Study on the Efficiency of Community Involvement in Water Management in India

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Water as a common resource - Whose responsibility? : A Study on the Efficiency of Community Involvement in Water Management in India"

Copied!
32
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

Water as a common resource - Whose responsibility?

A Study on the Efficiency of Community Involvement in Water

Management in India

Johanna Rönneke

Degree project work in Environmental Science

Level: Bachelor of Science

(2)

Degree project works made at the University of Kalmar, School of Pure and Applied Natural Sciences, can be ordered from: www.hik.se/student

or

University of Kalmar

School of Pure and Applied Natural Sciences SE-391 82 KALMAR

SWEDEN

Phone + 46 480-44 62 00 Fax + 46 480-44 73 05 e-mail: info@nv.hik.se

Supervisor: Ph D, Marianne Henningsson

Examiner: Professor, Bo Wiman

This is a degree project work and the student is responsible for the results and discussions in the report.

(3)

Sammanfattning

Syftet med studien var att utvärdera inverkan av lokalt engagemang på hanteringen av

bevattningsdammar i Arkavathis avrinningsområde i Karnataka, södra Indien. Vattenhanteringen analyserades från ett social/miljömässigt perspektiv med betoning på roller och uppfattat ansvar hos intressenter på bynivå. Inverkan av lokalt engagemang undersöktes genom att jämföra två byar som båda genomgått samma Världsbankssponsrade program för att återställa vattenreservoarer

traditionellt använda för att upprätthålla landsbygdsbefolkningens livsföring. I en av byarna fanns ett motstånd mot programmets implementering av dammreparationen, i den andra byn fanns inget lokalt engagemang.

En mindre fältstudie utfördes genom besök i byarna, där kvalitativa intervjuer hölls med intressenter av tre åldersgrupper, för att analysera tidsmässiga förändringar i kunskap och attityd. Observationer och fotodokumentationer gjordes också av studieområdena. Några informella intervjuer hölls också med medlemmar av en extern NGO och med lokalbor i byarna. Den insamlade datamängden analyserades genom jämförelser av resultaten mellan de två byarna, åldersgrupperna samt kön.

Det fanns tydliga skillnader i medvetenhet och ansvarskänsla, men inte kunskap, mellan de två byarna. I byn med ett lokalt motstånd mot de statligt utförda reparationerna av vattenreservoaren, visade sig engagemanget vara till viss fördel för det lokala samhället. Tvärtemot riktlinjerna för statens vattenhushållningsstrategi inkluderade implementationen inte lokala intressenters

medverkan, vattenreservoarerna var heller inte återställda. Bybor ansåg generellt att hanteringen av vattenreservoarerna var externa myndigheters ansvar. Det fanns inga tydliga skillnader mellan åldersgrupper eller mellan män och kvinnor, dock en trend som tydde på en lägre kunskaps- och medvetandenivå hos kvinnor. Avsaknad av verkningsfulla institutioner för vattenhushållning på alla nivåer såväl som svårigheter att upprätthålla ett effektivt ledarskap på bynivå för ett lokalt

engagemang är faktorer som orsakar en betydande klyfta mellan planering och implementering.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of community involvement on management of water tanks in the Arkavathi sub-basin in the state of Karnataka, South India. Water management was analysed from a socio-environmental perspective, with emphasis on village-level stakeholders’ roles and perceived responsibility. The efficiency of community participation was investigated by comparing two villages having undergone the same World Bank launched program to restore water bodies traditionally used to sustain the livelihood of the rural population. In one village there was a resistance towards how the implementation of the tank rejuvenation project had been performed, in the other there was no local involvement.

A minor field study was conducted by visiting the two villages. Qualitative interviews were held with village-level stakeholders of three age groups, to analyse changes over time in knowledge and attitudes. Additionally, ocular observation and photo documentation were made of the study areas. Some informal interviews were carried out with members of an external non-governmental

organisation and locals in the study villages. The collected data were analysed by comparing the results for the two villages, as well as the results of the different age groups and genders.

There were significant differences in awareness and sense of responsibility, but not knowledge, between the two villages. In the village with a community involvement resisting the governmental scheme for tank renovation, this involvement had proved to be of some advantage to the local community. Contrary to the guidelines, the governmental implementation of the water management

(4)

strategy did not include local stakeholders’ participation, nor were the tanks restored. Overall, the villagers considered the tank management to be the responsibility of external authorities. There were generally no significant differences between the age groups or men and women, though there were indications of a lower level of knowledge and awareness in women. Absence of effective institutions for water management on all levels as well as difficulties in mainatining efficient village level leadership for community participation are factors causing a major gap between planning and implementation.

Keywords

Water resource management, community participation, tank rejuvenation, sustainable development, Green Revolution

Abbreviations

DoMI - Department of Minor Irrigation GWP - Global Water Partnership

ICWE - International Conference on Water and the Environment IWRM - Integrated water resource management

MDG - Millennium Development Goals MoWR - Ministry of Water Resources NGO - Non Governmental Organzations

NPRRR - National Project for Repair, Renovation and Restoration of Water Bodies directly linked to Agriculture

PRI - Panchayat Raj Institution PWD - Public Works Department UN - United Nations

UNCED - United Nations Conference on Environment and Development WB - World Bank

WRM - Water resource management WUA - Water Users Association

Acknowledgment

SIDA, whos’ finances made this study possible.

Marianne Lindström, supervisor, for support throughout the process.

Bharti Patel, director of Svaraj organisation, for taking me on as an intern with the organisation and helping me with the guidelines of my study.

L. C. Nagaraj and Raja Rajeshwari, research officers at Svaraj head office, for sharing with me their great knowledge of water management in South India and helping me actualize the field study in the best possible way.

Mary Sujatha, Matthew, Mohan, Sunil, John and all the other helpful staff at Svaraj head office. Translators in field - Nayak, Subashimi and Rashmi.

(5)

Table of contents

1. INTRODUCTION...5

1.1 Water - a resource in need of sustainable management...5

1.2 The aim of the study...5

2. BACKGROUND - Policies on water issues globally...5

2.1 Millenium Development Goals and how they relate to water...5

2.2 Water management concepts...5

2.2.1 IWRM - a new approach to sustainable water management?...6

2.2.2 The World Bank water management strategy...6

3. Water management in South India - History, policies and measures...7

3.1 IWRM from a traditional perspective...7

3.2 Traditional tank management by local communities...7

3.3 Impacts of the Green Revolution...8

3.4 India’s national plan for restoring deteriorated water bodies...8

3.5 Rejuvenation of irrigation tanks i the State of Karnataka...9

4. THEORIES...11

4.1 Four solution types to the tragedy-of-the-commons situation...11

4.2 Priorities and responsibility...11

4.2.1 Priorities...11

4.2.2 Responsibility...11

4.3 Hypothesis and possible outcome...12

5. METHODS...12

5.1 General design of the study...12

5.2 The area of the field study...13

5.3 Respondents...13

5.4 Material...13

5.5 Procedure...13

6. BIASES...14

7. RESULTS...15

7.1 Comparing the villages - community awareness...15

7.2 Comparing the villages - changing agricultural scenario...17

7.3 Comparing the villages - knowledge of the N.P.R.R.R. approach...19

7.4 Comparing age groups...20

7.5 Comparing men and women...21

7.6 Group discussions...21

7.7 Tank observations...21

8. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS...23

8.1 The N.P.R.R.R. approach...23

8.2 Agricultural scenario...23

8.3 Community awareness...24

8.4 Group discussions, age groups and gender...25

(6)

1. Introduction

1.1 Water – a resource in need of sustainable management

Water maintains healthy natural ecosystems and is a key driver in social and economic

development. Access to water is crucial for food production, clean water enables good sanitation and hygiene which prevents diseases and improves living standards (UN-Water, 2008).

The last decades have seen an increased use of water globally. Diminishing water supplies are apportioned between ever-increasing demands; demographic and climate changes increase the stress on water resources even further. The excessive use is depleting ground water and is leading to an alarming water scarcity, mainly in developing countries, where poor and marginalized groups of people are the most affected (UN-Water, 2008)

1.2 The aim of the study

The objectives of the study were to analyse the water management situation from a

socio-environmental perspective, evaluate the efficiency of an implemented tank rejuvenation program, evaluate the impact of community participation on the effectiveness of water management and highlight the village-level stakeholders’ perspectives on their roles and responsibilities for a shared water resource. Three key questions have emerged from these objectives:

1. How efficient is the implemented water management strategy in relation to the role of the community?

2. How do village level stakeholders conceive their own as well as other actors’ responsibility in local water governance?

3. How important do the actors involved consider commitment in water related issues? The first question evaluates the course of action for water management. The following two

questions deal with stakeholders attitudes, but also with their level of knowledge and awareness of water management.

2. Background - Policies on water issues globally

2.1 Millenium Development Goals and how they relate to water

Established by the United Nations (UN) in 2000, the eight Millenium Development Goals (MDG’s) serve as a blueprint to combat poverty, hunger and disease and to ensure environmental

sustainability. The MDG’s are targeted to be achieved in 2015 and are agreed to by all the UN member countries and the world’s leading development institutions (UN, www.un.org, 090414). Several of the MDG’s, such as ending poverty and hunger, promoting child and maternal health and environmental sustainability, are directly water-related. In order to meet these goals, a more holistic approach to water management is essential, since the traditional, fragmented approach is no longer viable. It is recognized that different countries will need different sets of actions suited to their particular needs. The solutions on water management must be tailor-made and each country will have to set up its own plan, with aid from and under supervision of supporting agencies (UN-Water, 2008).

2.2 Water management concepts

To achieve the MDG targets, the world’s leading global institutions have come up with strategies to address the vast range of problems related to water management, of which the most influential are brought up in the following two sections.

(7)

2.2.1 IWRM - a new approach to sustainable water management?

Water management deals with issues of population growth, scarcity caused by climate change disrupting annual rainfall frequency, corruption, inequitable distribution between different social groups, conflicts regarding cross-border sharing of water resources, ineffective irrigation methods, waste due to poor infrastructure, pollution from discharge of industrial effluents and lack of legal frameworks. To face these challenges of contemporary water management, targets are not only needed at a global level. Action has to be taken at national, regional and community levels (UN-Water, 2006).

Integrated water resource management (IWRM) is becoming a widely used strategy with a holistic approach to water management. The concept was adapted by the UN in 1992 and has been internationally accepted as the way forward for an efficient, equitable and sustainable development and management of the world’s limited water resources, and for dealing with competing demands (UN-Water, 2008).

IWRM is defined as “a process that promotes the coordinated development and management of water, land and related resources, in order to maximize the resultant economic and social welfare in an equitable manner without compromising the sustainability of important ecosystems”(Global Water Partnership (GWP), www.gwptoolbox.org, (accessed 060409).

The concept of IWRM was first established on the International Conference on Water and the Environment (ICWE) in Dublin 1992, held prior to the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) later that year. Recommendations for action on local, national, regional and international level were set out, based on four principles:

1) water is a finite and vulnerable resource,

2) water should be managed with a participatory approach, 3) women play a key role in water management,

4) water should be managed considering both its’ social and economic values.

In addition, IWRM should be seen as a process to achieve three strategic objectives: efficiency, equity and environmental sustainability. IWRM includes several stages, where countries adapt the concept into their national action plan for local implementation. Continuous monitoring and evaluation of the progress should thereafter be carried out, to maintain and improve the process (GWP, www.gwptoolbox.org, 060409).

2.2.2 The World Bank water management strategy

The World Bank’s (WB) overall objective is to alleviate poverty by supporting countries in their efforts to promote equitable, efficient and sustainable development. Water resource management (WRM) should be economically viable, environmentally sustainable, and socially equitable. The policy of WRM builds on the treatment of water as an economic good, combined with decentralized management and fuller participation by stakeholders. This approach is consistent with the Dublin Principles from ICWE and with Agenda 21 from the UNCED in 1992 (WB, 1993).

The WB strives to achieve its objectives through economic and sector work, lending, technical assistance and participation in international initiatives (WB, 1993).

To achieve decentralization in WRM, greater involvement of the private sector, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and community organisations such as water user associations (WUAs) is encouraged. The WB promotes the participation of concerned people including poor, indigenous people, women and disadvanteged groups in the water related projects it supports (WB, 1993). To reduce proverty, resources within local communities can be mobilized where public finance is scarce. Efforts should be made to establish the service levels actually wanted by the poor. Research and experience suggest that the poor are willing to pay for reliable service. Cross-subsidizing by the better off can be used with budgetary transfers to subsidize connections (WB, 1993).

(8)

WB-supported operations should have a focus on environmental protection. The WB recognises the linkage between ground and surface water management in river basins and supports restoration and preservation of groundwater quality and preservation of groundwater recharge areas (WB, 1993).

The WB supports upgrading skills in project countries where WRM issues are significant. When designing country programs, the WB requires an environmental assessment of the entire river system for significant water-related projects, together with a full consultation with affected people and local organisation (WB, 1993).

The WB will aid implementation with the preparation of guidelines and capacity building to improve WRM. Pilot projects will be used to implement decentralization aspects (WB, 1993). Efficient WRM needs appropriate legal, regulatory and administrative frameworks, provided by the public sector. Institutional reforms should integrate traditional norms and practices within the new structures (WB, 1993).

3. Water management in South India - history, policies and measures

3.1 IWRM from a traditional perspective

In rural India, small and single-village based water bodies have historically been significant life supporting systems. The topography of the landscape provides a suitable base for these simple but efficient rainwater harvesting structures, that were developed with indigenous technical skills of local craftsmen. The varitey of social, ecological and economic functions included:

-providing irrigation with high water use efficiency and productivity of irrigated land,

-recharging of groundwater which in turn sustains irrigation wells,

-serving as both flood moderators and drought mitigators,

-controlling mining of groundwater and sustaining life supporting systems,

-sustaining the livelihood of marginal communities in terms of inland pisciculture, cultivation of millets and legumes and providing grazing land and drinking water for livestock,

-domestic use of humans and as key source for drinking water in many difficult rural environments, -lending social space for local management and thereby nurturing grassroot and participative democracy,

-integrating with the local culture and providing a base for local religious activities.

The integrated management of these water bodies ensured protection and maintained equilibrium of the ecosystem and as common resources, they served as the centre of social and religious life in the villages (Ramappa, 2002).

3.2 Traditional tank management by local communities

The building of water tanks throughout India can be traced as far back as to the 10th century. In the pre-British age of India, the kings had these water bodies built, along with local communities, to enhance the production of agricultural goods (Nagaraj & Rajeshwari, 090413).

Tanks were managed by heterogeneous communities consisting of fishermen, potterers, farmers and other groups depending on the biodiversity of the village water body. A waterman from the marginal section played a key role in the distribution of water. His role was to ensure equitable distribution of water resources, as well as to decide on crop patterns in the shared cropping system of the command area and the catchment area. Depending on the amount of monsoon rain harvested, crops with adequate water demands were cultivated. The waterman was given land in the catchment area near the sluice gate and in the beginning and far end of the command area, to ensure equal distribution of water all over the command area. Silt with a high humus content and clay was

(9)

collected from the tank to fertilize and bind the soil together, which benefited the cultivated land and maintained the tank. People not being allowed to cut trees growing near the streams prevented evaporation and protected the biodiversity. These cultural norms and taboos on how to manage tanks were built into the system, resulting in all users benefiting from the tank facilities and ensuring equity and ecological sustainability in the use of the village’s common water resource (Nagaraj & Rajeshwari, 090413).

3.3 Impacts of the Green Revolution

In 1962, a uniform irrigation act was created and tanks were taken over from the communities by the Government of Karnataka and brought under the Public Works Department (PWD), in order to promote an agricultural reform with a market-based approach. Because the tank management was taken over by the State, villagers were distanced from their water supplies. This was the beginning of alienation of the community from the tank ecosystem (L.C. Nagaraj & Raja Rajeshwari,

090413).

When the controversial Green Revolution took place in 1965, the rural population was initially suspicious of the new methods of agriculture. Still, the introduction of chemical fertilizers and pesticides soon replaced traditional polycultures with monocultures. The holistic, integrated and self-sustaining approach of traditional agriculture was replaced by a market approach with focus on the immediate benefits of cash-crops with larger, multiple annual yields. In favour of new

techniques, the traditional ways of utilizing surface water were abandoned (L.C. Nagaraj & Raja Rajeshwari, 090413). Farmers’ interest in water bodies declined when widespread electrification and technical pumps made irrigation wells increasingly attractive (Ramappa, 2002). Bore wells were drilled to meet the increased demands of water for irrigation, which led to the rapid depletion of ground water supplies (L.C. Nagaraj & Raja Rajeshwari, 090413). The introduction of non-indigenous, highly water-demanding species like commercially grown Eucalyptus, regarded as a principal malefactor for the lowering of ground water tables (Calder, 2005), has caused the biodiversity supported by the traditional tank systems to collapse. Regular use of chemical

fertilizers and pesticides along with flood irrigation has led to soil contamination and a loss of soil nutrients (L.C. Nagaraj & Raja Rajeshwari, 090413), as well as salination and erosion (Barlow & Clarke, 2003).

3.4 India’s national plan for restoring deteriorated water bodies

Through the ages, Indian agriculture has been sustained by natural and man-made water bodies. Many of them have been abandoned and are in critical need of repairs. Today, two-thirds of

irrigated agriculture in India are covered by these water bodies. Reasons for deterioration of minor irrigation systems are silting which causes loss of storage, damage to various structures due to poor maintenance and management, encroachment and inadequate surplus flows. Water bodies serve the interest of local communities and it is necessary to restore the storage capacity of these structures with the purpose of recovering their lost irrigation potential (MoWR, 2005).

The National Project for Repair, Renovation and Restoration of Water Bodies directly linked to Agriculture (NPRRR) was developed by the Government of India, Ministry of Water Resources (MoWR), and implemented by the State Government. The scheme was conducted with some financial assistance from the State, but was mainly centrally funded by loans from the WB and should therefore be implemented according to its policy (MoWR, 2005).

The objectives of the scheme were to restore and augment storage capacities of water bodies and to recover and extend their lost irrigation potential. The water bodies taken up for restoration had a command area of 40-2000 hectares. The project was launched in 2005 as a pilot scheme in one or two districts of some Indian states and completed within a period of approximately two years. Once

(10)

completed and validated, the National Water Resources Development Project is to be launched on a much larger scale and spread to be completed in 7 to 10 years (MoWR, 2005).

When selecting the districts priority was given to arid, semi-arid and drought-prone areas, as well as remote, poor and tribal-dominated areas. The respective states were supposed to make the prioritization of water bodies considering background, present status, reasons for deterioration, social/economic situation and future plan (MoWR, 2005).

All issues on implementation, management, supervision and effectiveness, including post project sustainability, were decided by a District Level Implementation Committee (DLIC). The DLIC included representatives from WUA’s, NGO’s, Gram & Taluk Panchayats (Indian village/district level authorities), Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (SC/ST) and the landless. As well as interacting with the state and the Indian Government when required, the committee meant to provide a platform for active community participation in all parts of the projects. The revived facility should eventually be handed over to community organizations for operation, monitoring and maintenance. For progressive monitoring and evaluation of the revived water bodies at the local-district-state-central level, it is crucial that a graded and bottom-up approach is established to take the scheme forward with improved efficiency (MoWR, 2005).

3.5 Rejuvenation of irrigation tanks in the State of Karnataka

The climate in Karnataka is hot and semi-arid with two monsoon periods each year, the major one occurring between June and August, when 80 % of the annual rainfall of approximate 600-1000 mm takes place. The region experiences water scarcity for most of the year and relies heavily on the monsoon rains to fill up rivers, sub-basins and tanks for their water supply (Davis & Nagaraj, 2006).

There are approximately 33 000 medium and big tanks in Karnataka, most built by common people and kings’ workmen. Tanks with a command area of over 40 ha are managed under the Department of Minor Irrigation (DoMI). The stress of the DoMI is on construction and repairs, but inadequate staff employment and insufficient fundings complicate efficient operation and

maintenance of tanks (Ramappa, 2002).

In 2004, the Government of India made a decision to transfer all tanks to communities in a phased manner. In Karnataka, the WB-sponsored NPRRR program covers 2000 tanks in 34 districts . A sustainable tank management system is initiated by abolishing the top-down approach. The program will increase participation of all stakeholders and resort to an integrated planning and management, considering the tank in its’ totality. Empowering the local communities to generate their own resources for tank management and development of qualitative leadership at community level is believed to take long-term continuing engagement and networking (Ramappa, 2002).

Arkavathi River, with a catchment area of 4351 km², is a tributary to the great Cauverty River, running through the southern Indian states of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu (Davis, 2006). The undulating topography in the Arkavathi sub-basin makes a suitable environment for cascading tank systems (Fig. 1).

(11)

Figure 1. The Arkavathi sub-basin with cascading tank system mapped out.

Source: http://www.svaraj.in/html/publications/pdf/sharing_of_water_casestudy.pdf

(accessed 090414, 16:49)

Water flows from the source of the river through semi-natural water harvesting structures, creating an integrated system where each tank is affected by upstream activities and has an impact on downstream water quality and quantity. Feeder canals direct water flow to the tanks (Fig. 2) and surplus weirs drain the excess water to downstream tanks (Fig. 3) (Raja Rajeshwari, 090408).

Figure 3. Surplus weir of tank where overflow is allowed.

Source: Johanna Rönneke

Figure 2. Feeder canal leading water to the tank.

Source: Johanna Rönneke

Over the past 10-15 years, the Arkavathi sub-basin has been subject to rapid urbanisation and socio-economic transition. This has greatly affected the use and demand of water, resulting in conflict and competition over the diminishing resources. Today, bore wells are drilled down to 350 meters to find water (Davis & Nagaraj, 2006).

(12)

4. Theories

4.1 Four solution types to the tragedy-of-the-commons situation

The tragedy-of-the-commons process is a process that lies behind many of the world’s resource problems, such as pollution and population problems. These problems include air and water pollution, loss of biodiversity, depletion of natural resources etc.

In a “tragedy-of-the-commons situation”, the overuse of a natural resource by each of many individuals who have unrestricted access to a resource, leads to the destruction of that resource and to a disaster for all (Hardin, 1968).

However, the tragedy-of-the-commons process is a problem with several solutions. The basic problem is: How can behavior of individual group members that in some ways threatens the welfare of the group be discouraged? And how can behavior that is prosocial, or beneficial to the welfare of the group, be encouraged (Gardner & Stern, 2002)?

According to Ophuls (1973, 1977), empowerment by coordinating individual behavior for the common good is possible through a few basic methods:

1) the use of governmental laws, regulations and incentives to encourage prosocial behavior 2) programs of education, which attempt to encourage prosocial behavior by giving people information and trying to change their attitudes

3) the encouragement of prosocial behavior via certain informal (non-governmental) social processes that operate in small social groups and communities

4) the use of moral, religious and/or ethical appeals to encourage prosocial behavior

This study will mainly focus on the 3rd solution type, although the other solution types will be taken into account since none of the approaches is likely to prevent tragedies of the commons effectively by itself.

4.2 Priorities and responsibility

Different stakeholder groups differ in their opinins on what is important and their attitudes towards issues of priority and responsibility. It affects their disposition towards participation in actions to bring about changes.

4.2.1 Priorities

Global environmental issues seem to be regarded as more serious than environmental problems at regional and local levels (Dunlap et al, 1993; Uzzell, 2000, in Lindström & Küller, 2006).

Alternatively, global environmental problems may be percieved as vague, which can cause people to feel worry (Lindström & Küller, 2006). Additionally, different interests in society and the great complexity of environmental problems could cause differences in opinions between different stakeholder groups (Lindström & Küller, 2006).

4.2.2 Responsibility

People may feel social responsibility, i.e. responsibility for their own actions; for the consequences of those actions and also for other people (Bierhoff & Auhagen, 2001). Alternatively, because of lack of control and lack of forseeable consequences of their actions, people might deny

responsibility (Montada, 2001). By imputing responsibility to others, people may also try to reduce their own responsibility. The first and most general condition of responsibility is casual power; i.e. acting has an impact on the world, such acting is under a person’s control and the person can to some extent forsee its consequences (Jonas, 1984). People who have direct or delegated power over the environment will be held responsible to a higher degree than those with less influence

(13)

for solving environmental problems on a global scale. National governments and international agencies are ascribed increased responsibility, as well as the local community. The perceived individual responsibility is greatest on the neighbourhood level and decreases as the area becomes more remote. People see themselves and then the environmental groups and the local community as responsible for addressing environmental problems at the local level (Uzzell, 2000, in Lindström & Küller, 2006). People feel morally rather than conventionally responsible for the environment (Kaiser & Shimoda, 1999, in Lindström & Küller, 2006). Environmental knowledge and values together with feelings of responsibility explain almost half of the variance of ecological behaviour intention, which inturn predicts general ecological behaviour (Kaiser et al, 1999).

Focus of the study will be to identifyvillage-level stakeholders’priorities and perceived responsibilities of water management.

4.3 Hypothesis and possible outcome of the study

Based on background studies of information and theories, the following conclusions are expected to be drawn from the collected data:

Whether based on resistance or cooperation, community participation leads to a more integrated management of shared water resources. Local involvement promotes sustainable management of shared water resources and is socially, economically and ecologically beneficial for the community and the environment.

Significant differences in attitudes toward priorities and responsibility as well as significant differences in knowledge and awareness, between the two villages. These differences will be to the advantage of the Aredeshanahalli village (the village actively resisting the way tank rejuvenation was implemented), because of the community involvement.

Significant changes in knowledge and awareness are also expected between different age groups. Based on the theories used, the water management should be of higher priority in the village of Aredeshanahalli (the village with a community involvement), as well as the percieved responsibility for managing local water resources. Levels of knowledge and awareness concerning water related issues should also be generally higher in Aredeshanahalli (this village).

There are likely to be contradicting views between village-level stakeholders and guidelines of external actors on how the water management should be implemented. Finally, there are expected to be differences between the implementation policies and the actual ways implementations have been carried out locally.

5. Methods

5.1 General design of the study

The field study was conducted as a comparative study of two villages, similar in size and social structure and living under the same general conditions, such as climate, access to water, land use etc.

With the background of IWRM, the WB policy for WRM, NPRRR guidelines for rejuvenation of water bodies, traditional ways of managing shared water resources and the above theories, the topic of water management was evaluated from a socio-environmental perspective.

The objective of the study was to analyse the effectiveness of the implemented strategy, by comparing the water management situation in the two villages with the WB guidelines applied on the NPRRR. The tank rejuvenation project was also investigated by looking at the role of the community and the impact on the community in the villages of Aredeshanahalli and Melekote,

(14)

Arkavathi sub basin, state of Karnataka, South India. Different age groups were compared to analyse temporal changes in knowledge, awareness and attitudes.

5.2 The area of the field study

The selection of the villages was based on information about their similar number of households, sizes of command and catchment areas, land use and social structures (Appendix II). The villages are situated in the same sub basin (Arkavathi) and have submitted to the same program for restoring their irrigation tanks (Svaraj, SDT Files).

In the village of Aredeshanalli, there is a resistance towards the way the restoration of the local water tank has been carried out by the government. In the village of Melekote, there is no

community participation in the rejuvenation and management of the local water tank (Nagaraj & Rajeshwari, 090406).

5.3 Respondents

Village-level stakeholders were selected based on facts of number of households in the villages and, in the case of Aredeshanahalli, on the ratio of stakeholders represented in the WUA. The

respondants were categorized into different groups of water users (mainly farmers), as well as gender and different age groups (20-40, 40-60 and above 60 years of age) for analysis of possible temporal changes in knowledge and awareness.

In case interviews got cancelled or declined, literature studies substitute interviews with representatives of certain stakeholder groups.

Almost all respondents worked with agriculture, though with various additional incomes. People in Melekote owned 2-4 acres of land, in Aredeshanahalli people owned 5-10 acres. All respondents belonged to the same caste - Vokaliga - which is a farmers’ caste and all the respondents were natives of their villages, or had moved there through marriage.

Men generally had a higher education than women, younger respondants generally had a higher education than older.

Only men were represented in the group discussions in both villages. Though some women were present, they did not participate in the actual discussions.

There was no migration to or from Melekote, though people, especially younger villagers, commuted to day jobs outside of the village. In Aredeshanahalli, there was some migration to the village, because of it’s location nearby industrial areas where people come to work.

5.2 Material

An interview schedule, which facilitates creating a quantitative profile of the opinins of the

respondents (Ruane, 2006) was worked out and used for both villages. The questions were divided into three main sections - ”community awareness”, ”the changing agricultural scenario” and ”knowledge of the NPRRR (WB) approach” - dealing with different aspects of the respondents’ percieved awareness, knowledge and attitude towards community involvement, water management and the role of external actors (Appendix I). Interviews in the villages were conducted with the aid of three different interpreters. A dictaphone was used to record some of the interviews.

5.4 Procedure

Using a combination of structured and semi-structured interviewing techniques (Ruane, 2006), interviews were carried out with village-level groups of stakeholders such as elders, men, women, youths, farmers, local grassroots organizations, etc by visiting the villages of Aredeshanahalli and Melekote, where they live and work.

(15)

Some interviews were also held with external actors, such as local government representatives and non village-level NGO’s. Informal interviews were held with the staff at the NGO’s Svaraj head office in Bangalore and with locals in the study villages.

Before they were asked if they agreed to participate, all the respondants were given brief outlines of the study and told that they would be handled anonymously in the analysis of the answers. Further, they were asked if they agreed to the use of a dictaphone to record the interviews. Interviews were carried out with individual respondents by visiting their houses. The villagers were eager to participate and the answering frequency turned out 100 %. Semi-structured interviews were held with individual respondents to get an overview of the stakeholders’ attitudes and values. Individual interviews are effective in creating trust between the interviewer and the respondent. Focus group discussions were held because of their time efficiency, but also due to their socially dynamic nature. The discussions were held in public places such as the village temple or a scool yard and attracted a lot of curious villagers. The method emphasises the respondents’ opinions and valuable testimonies are often given by people partaking in this kind of technique (Ruane, 2006). Focus groups can give a lot of information in a short time, but the presence of other respondents may hold some partakers back from expressing divergent opinions.

In each village, 3-4 people out of each age group, which also were represented by the different stakeholders, were interviewed. Both men and women of all age groups and stakeholder groups were interviewed. 3 focus group discussions with groups of 6-12 male participants were held in each village. Altogether 3 focus group discussions and 23 individual interviews were held with approximately 60 respondents.

Ocular observations were made in and around the villages of Aredeshanahalli and Melekote, to investigate the structures and current states of the tanks. Observations were also made of the command areas and some of the catchment areas. Additionally, photo documentation of the tanks, command areas, upstream catchment areas, etc. were made.

The results from the two villages were compared and similarities and differences analysed. Due to the short number of respondants and cultural biases preventing a scientifically correct selection of participants, individual interviews were analysed qualitatively. The explorative nature of the study and the diversity of the answers given also favoured a qualitative rather than

quantitative analysis. Some analyses were also made by comparing different age groups and comparing men with women. A separate analysis was made of the group discussions.

6. Biases

The tank rejuvenation project was carried out considering remote, poor and tribal-dominated areas. Still, the villages where restorations took place must all have had adequate infrastructure, which secludes the most remote areas.

Annual variation in the climate was taken into account. When analysing observations and documentations of the villages and surrounding areas, consideration was given to seasonal biases. When visiting the study area one month before the monsoon reaches South India, temperatures are high, the land is dusty and water bodies that will fill up during the monsoon are completely dry. Cultural biases are very likely to affect the results, although measures have been taken to mitigate cross-cultural impacts on the study. Respondents misinterpretations of the questions as well as my misunderstanding of their answers were reduced by keeping the phrasing of the questions as simple as possible.

(16)

Different translators on the different sites constitute another bias. Using the same translator for both villages, the interview guide would not have been interpreted by more than one person, limiting the variety of lingual, cultural, personal and scientific misunderstandings that could occur. When conducting the study, many of the individual interviews were interferred with by other villagers who also wanted to give their opinion. Opinions were often given by the villagers as being objective facts, though they could as well be subjective views. Questions were answered by

respondents sometimes as individuals, sometimes as if representing the whole village or their whole family. This was taken into consideration when analysing the answers, by giving the analysis a qualitative approach.

Time is another factor that affected the results of the study. Having only a limited period of time to conduct the field work puts pressure on the interviewer to gather as much information as possible on a tight schedule. Ideally, time spent integrating into the villages should have been much longer. Becoming more familiar with the respondents and the study area would have provided a deeper insight into the culture and the complexity of the society in which context lies the understanding of community involvement.

Some, or many, of the underlying factors promoting or obstructing community involvement do not lie within my field of knowledge, nor within the scope of this study, and therefore pass unnoticed.

7. Results

Note that the number of answers in the tables do not equal the number of people partaking in the study, since respondents often had more than one answer to a question.

7.1 Comparing the villages - community awareness

Both villages regarded the tank as important for agriculture (Table 1), but in Melekote the villagers emphasised that the tank was presently not in use because of water scarcity.

Table 1. Answers to the question ”In what way is the tank important to you?”. N = number of answers from

each village.

Question 1 Melekote Aredeshanahalli Recharge groundwater 3 2 Drinking and grazing of livestock 2 1 For agriculture, but only if there is water 9 12 Keeps climate stable 0 1 Not important when empty 0 1

In Melekote, the Gram Panchayat was mainly held responsible for the tank, while in

Aradeshanahalli, the answers were more diverse (Table 2), the tank committee of the village was held responsible by about 1/3 of the villagers, as many did not know who was responsible for the tank.

(17)

Table 2. Answers to the question ”Who is responsible for the water tank?”. N = number of answers from

each village.

Question 2 Melekote Aredeshanahalli

D.o.M.I. 1 0 Gram Panchayat 7 1 Taluk Panchayat 1 0 All villagers 3 1 Selected villagers (tank committee) 0 4

Villagers and govt. 0 1

The Govt. 0 1

Don’t know 0 5

Most villagers in Aredeshanahalli were not involved, mainly stating the reason that they were not part of the tank committee. In Melekote there was no involvement and the main reason given was that the tank management is the responsibility of the government. Most villagers in Melekote wanted to get involved in the planning and management, though some did not consider the tank to be their responsibility at all. Of those not involved in tank management in Aredeshanahalli, only half wanted to get involved, reasons for not wanting to get involved were lack of education and old age. In Melekote, the respondents were equally positive towards tank management by the state, the community or a combination. In Aredeshanahalli, community management was prefered by a majority of the villagers (Table 3).

Table 3. Answers to the question ”By whom should the tank be managed?”. N = number of respondents and

answers from each village.

Question 5&6 Melekote Aredeshanahalli Pro State management 3 1 Pro Community management 3 10 Combination 4 2

On being asked about upstream activities, some villagers in Melekote regarded the tank as a separate unit, though most described a system of tanks connected by water flow, when there is water. Many villagers also mentioned small dams constructed upstream that had a negative impact on the water quantity reaching the tank. Most villagers considered there being no impact from upstream activities because of the lack of water disconnecting the tanks.

In Aredeshanahalli, most villagers did not mention any present upstream activities. Industrial effluents from a nearby textile industry had a negative effect on their water quality and crops, until a few years ago when the villagers united and got the factory closed. Some of the villagers considered the effluents only having had a bad impact on the land but no effect on the water.

Both villages had knowledge on how their water use could affect downstream users. In Melekote, most villagers stressed that there was no impact because there was no water but several respondents considered groundwater extraction upstream to have a negative effect on the quantity of water downstream. In Aredeshanahalli, all respondents were aware of how they could regulate the water flow from their tank to the next.

The majority of the villagers in Melekote could think of sustainability without there being any water in the tank (Table 4). In Aredeshanahalli, the villagers had different suggestions for

(18)

sustainable water use, for instance giving priority to groundwater recharge, improving storage efficiency by regular desilting, growing less water demanding crops and taking preventative measures for water wastage (Table 4).

Table 4. Answers to the question ”What does sustainable water use mean to you?”. N = number of answers

from each village.

Question 11 Melekote Aredeshanahalli Improve storage efficiency 1 2 Can’t think of sustainability without water 9 0 Use water in tank for groundwater recharge 0 3 Desilting makes efficient water storage 0 1 Requires support from external source 0 2 Store water in the tank 0 3

Grow crops that require less water

0 3

Prevent wastage 0 2

When asked about the future water situation, the prime answer for both villages was severe water scarcity. The respondents of both villages wanted the past back, with enough water for all, good crops and healthy people. There were about as many different answers as respondents on how to make this happen. In Melekote, the villagers themselves or the government were considered responsible for making their dreams come true, but also Nature. In Aredeshanahalli, God was mainly considered responsible, as well as villagers and the government.

7.2 Comparing the villages - changing agricultural scenario

The primary function of the tank area in Melekote was for drinking and grazing of animals, while the respondents in Aredeshanahalli considered irrigation from agriculture to be the main use of the tank when it contains water (Table 5). Other functions given were for agriculture in Melekote and for domestic use and animals in Aredeshanahalli (Table 6).

Table 5. Answers to the question ”What is the main use of the tank today?”. N = number of answers from

each village.

Question 17a Melekote Aredeshanahalli Recharge of groundwater 2 0 Drinking and grazing of animals 8 0 No rain, no use (last 10 years) 2 2

(19)

Silt when tank is dry 1 1 Pisciculture 1 0 Agriculture (irrigation), if water 0 9 Clay mining 0 1

Table 6. Answers to the question ”Does/could it have any other functions?”. N = number of answers from

each village.

Question 17b&c Melekote Aredeshanahalli Agricultural use, if rain 8 3 Groundwater recharge 1 1 No other functions 1 3 Domestic use 0 5 For animals 0 7

Sugarcane and rice were listed as the two most common crops grown in the past in both of the villages. In Melekote, ragi (a millet) was also common. According to villagers in both Melekote and Aredeshanahalli, there was a change in land use 10-15 years ago and ragi is the most common crop grown today, along with vegetables in Melekote and Eucalyptus in Aredeshanahalli.

Most people in both villages were not happy with their income from agriculture. In Melekote, this was due to water scarcity and in Aredeshanahalli due to small yields. Respondents from both

villages also mentioned high labour costs as being a reason for their miscontent. The most common additional income for both villages was keeping cows for milk. People also went to work outside the villages. Respondents in Aredeshanahalli listed more options for other sources of income than agriculture than respondents in Melekote.

Channel irrigation from bore wells was the most common irrigation type in Aredeshanahalli, channel irrigation with water from the tank was also common. The main reason for using these methods was sufficiency and tradition. In Melekote, most respondents grew rainfed crops, the reason being that most of the villagers did not have bore wells or the bore wells had dried up. Drip irrigation was mentioned as another option by most respondents in Aredeshanahalli, but obstacles for converting to this type of irrigation were not growing suitable crops, lack of knowledge of how to use the method and an electricity curfew daytime that prevented the use of pumps to extract water from the bore wells.

The majority of respondants in both villages used pesticides and chemical fertilizers, unless they grew Eucalyptus. On asking about the effects of the chemicals, respondants from Melekote listed decrease in quality and health hazards as negative effects, as well as soil degradation (Table 7). Villagers in Melekote generally considered chemicals compulsory; without them, they risked loosing their yields. In Aredeshanahalli, the most common opinion amongst the villagers was that the chemicals only had positive effects, though some respondents mentioned soil degradation and health hazards as negative effects (Table 7).

Table 7. Answers to the question ”Have you seen any effects from the use of pesticides/chemical

fertilizers?”. N = number of answers from each village.

(20)

Loss of soil fertility

1 3

Soil erosion 1 1

Decrease in yields long term (only short term benefits) 1 2 No chemicals - no yields 3 0 Only positive effects 1 5 Health hazard 3 0 Negative effects on taste and quality 5 0 Good effect on quantity 3 0

Good yields but negative effects on health

0 3

7.3 Comparing the villages - knowledge of the NPRRR approach

The majority of the respondents in Melekote considered the Gram Panchayat responsible for the management of the tank. In Aredeshanahalli, the answers of who was responsible for tank

management were equally distributed between not knowing at all, the tank committee and the Gram Panchayat.

Asking how the tanks were kept in good condition gave as many different answers as there were respondents. In both Melekote and Aredeshanahalli, the answers were related to regular

maintenance such as desilting and mending leakages, but also to reduce encroachment of the tank area. In Melekote, the general opinion was that the tank needed maintenance every year, when there is water, less often if the tank was dry. In Aredeshanahalli, equally many respondents were of the opinion that the tank needed continuous maintenance, as no maintenance at all or reparation only when there was damage. No water was regarded the most usual problem in Melekote (Table 8). Half of the respondents in Aredeshanahalli stated there were no problems or no usual maintenance, the others mentioned desilting, repairing leakages, overflow and no water as causes for maintaining the tank’s condition (Table 8).

Table 8. Answers to the question ”What is usually the problem or cause of tank maintenance?”.

N = number of answers from each village.

Question 27b&c Melekote Aredeshanahalli

No water 5 2

Desilting 2 2

Not enough silt 1

Repair leakages in wall 1 2 Reduced water flow to tank because of Eucaluptus grown in cathcment area 1 0 Overflow, when enough water 0 2

(21)

No ususal problem or maintenance

0 7

Don’t know 1 1

The Gram Panchayat was held responsible for taking action to keep the tank in good condition according to the respondents Melekote. In Aredeshanahalli, about half of the respondents

considered the tank committee responsible, the other half regarded the responsibility to be with the Gram Panchayat.

In Aredeshanahalli, most of the respondents were aware of a local group - the tank committee - for water related issues. The group was generally considered to represent the whole village. There were various answers on the frequency of the group meetings, from ”very often”, to ”only when there is a problem”. According to the respondents, the group discussed tank management, issues related to the government’s restoration of the tank and how the scheme could be useful to the village. In Melekote, the resondents gave various reasons for there being no group for discussing water related issues, such as lack of strong leadership, concern and unity among the villagers.

The majority of the respondents in both villages said they were not given any information on water management. Some information had been provided from NGOs, the government or agricultural universities, though not on a regular basis. The information was said to be on water efficiency methods, for instance what crops to grow depending on water supply. The respondants of both villages considered information to be required. In Melekote, the villagers wanted information on how to use water efficiently and to become empowered. In Aredeshanahalli, the villagers required information on agriculture in general and on water efficiency methods such as rainwater harvesting. A few respondents from each village also mentioned that there is traditional knowledge to make use of among the villagers.

7.4 Comparing age groups

In Melekote, elders were less positive towards community management of the tank than the younger age groups. In Aredeshanahalli, suggestions for sustainable water use were evenly distributed between all age groups. All age groups of both villages predicted severe shortage of water and wanted the past back, when asked of future perspectives. There were various suggestions for how to make the future into what they wanted by all age groups in both villages. In Melekote, respondents between 20-60 held the government as well as themselves responsible for making change, elders mainly held Nature responsible, but also the government. In Aredeshanahalli, resondents of all age groups held God as mainly responsible for their dreams to be realized.

Elders in the villages who were asked how the tank used to be managed in the past told about how water was distributed evenly by a waterman, that the villagers took part in tank management and that there used to be plenty of water and good crops. In Melekote, some of the younger respondents who were also given this question thought that the tank had always been managed by the

government. Alienation from the traditional ways of water management was mainly caused by water scarcity according to most respondents in both villages. In Melekote, some elders also considered the change of the village water supply coming from a common resource to people getting individual bore wells contributed to the alienation of traditional water management. Tank management being transferred from the villagers to the government was also considered an

alienating factor by the elders. Elders in Aredeshanahalli mentioned external sources of income as a factor creating less concern for management of the tank. In both villages, several of the younger respondents did not state agriculture as their prime source of income. Respondents of all age groups in both villages used pesticides and chemical fertilizers. Respondents between 40-60 in Melekote

(22)

and elders in Aredeshanahalli had the most detailed knowledge on negative effects of these chemicals.

Elders in both villages had more knowledge on how to maintain the tank regularily than younger respondents, who did not consider the tank to need continuous maintenance as often, or at all. In Melekote, the older age groups stated no water in the tank as the main problem, while younger respondents mentioned Eucalyptus grown in the catchment area as a cause for reduced water flow to the tank.

7.5 Comparing men and women

No differences were found between the genders on asking about community awareness in

Melekote, nor when asking questions on the changing agricultural scenario, apart from men having more detailed knowledge about the negative effects of using pesticides and chemical fertilizers. Women had slightly less knowledge than men about regular tank maintenance and all women denied having been given any information on water management.

In Aredeshanahalli, more women than men could not give an answer to who was responsible for the water tank, nor were they as involved in the management or as aware of the existence of a local tank committee. They also had slightly less knowledge of how the tank was managed traditionally or what alienated the villagers from this way of management. Men knew more about the obstacles for converting to drip irrigation than women. Knowledge of negative effects form pesticides and chemical fertilizers were evenly distributed between gender. Women believed to a slightly higher extent than men the tank did not need maintenance at all, while men had more opinions on how to keep the tank in a good condition.

7.6 Group discussions

By comparing the answers from the individual interviews with the answers from the group

discussions, the conclusion can be drawn that the group discussions reflect the general opinions of the villages to a very high extent. The groups in Melekote differed from the general opinion of individual interviewees in that they did not want to get involved in the management of the tanks, they did not consider it to be their responsibility.

7.7 Tank observations

Ocular observation of the two tanks showed randomly scattered patches where desiltation had been carried out. Only a very small percentage of each of the tank areas had been desilted (Fig. 4).

Figure 4. Desilted area of Aredeshanahalli

tank in the upper left corner of the photo. Source: Johanna Rönneke

(23)

Because of the time of year, both tanks were completely dry (Fig. 5). Most of the initial tank areas were encroached by grazing activities or trees being planted as a part of another government

project, other cultivation and sand or clay mining, partly very close to the wall which threatened its stability. In Aredeshanahalli, industrial solid waste had been dumped inside the tank. Both tanks’ sluice gates were in need of repair. In Aredeshanahalli, there were some large cracks in the wall (Fig. 6) threatening the structure to break from the impact of enough water, which would flood the command area and nearby village.

Figure 6. Large crack in the bound of the

Aredeshanahalli tank. Source: Johanna Rönneke

Figure 5. Dry tank bed in Melekote.

Source: Johanna Rönneke

In both villages, the command as well as catchment areas were dominated by Eucalyptus (Fig. 7). Some land was irrigated by bore wells and pumps, more so in Aredeshanahalli than in Melekote, where most of the land not covered with Eucalyptus was used only for dryland crops.

Figure 7. Eucalyptus cultivation.

(24)

8. Discussion and conclusions

8.1 The NPRRR approach

This section will give an answer to how efficient the implemented water strategy has been in relation to the role of the community, as well as in relation to the guidelines.

Resources such as properly maintained local water bodies are crucial in contributing to the

empowerment of poor and marginalized people and for enabling self-sustainability by securing food for rural communities, but lack of efficient legislative or physical institutional structures centrally as well as locally prevents environmentally, socially and democratically sustainable management. Only a half-hearted try seem to have been made by the government to restore the tanks physically. No attempt at all appears to have been made by external actors to engage local stakeholders in the tank management, contrary to the guidelines of the WB and hence th NPRRR scheme (WB, 1993; MoWR, 2005). The villagers have not been involved, nor are they aware that they are supposed to have been. The only involvement of local stakeholders is induced not by the government but by villagers themselves, resisting the government’s way of implementing the restoration of the tank. Community participation as a way of enhancing tank management has in practice been given little consideration, though it is a vital perspective for a sustainable maintenance of village-level water bodies. Out of all respondents, only one knew of the D.o.M.I., the department actually responsible for tank management (MoWR, 2005). The absence of community involvement and the general lack of knowledge among local stakeholders about who is responsible for the tank management indicate that several of the solution types to the-tragedy-of-the-commons problem, such as education

programs and informal social processes (Ophuls 1973, 1977) are needed to change the situation. The rejuvenation of the tank area by the government’s NPRRR program seems to consist of desiltation of non-systematically chosen patches covering only very small parts of the tank areas. The tanks are in fact hardly restored at all. Management of the tanks, and hence responsibility, taken over by the goverment to promote the Green revolution in the 60s alienated villagers from their common water supplies (L.C. Nagaraj & Raja Rajeshwari, 090413) and local stakeholders are now prevented by law from taking action or even benefiting from the resource. Without any chance of involvement, how are they supposed to feel responsibility?

The emphasis of tank rejuvenation has largely been on technical measures, but to restore the water bodies for sustainable long term use, an integrated, holistic approach is necessary, where aspects of changing current land use patterns as well as involving local stakeholders have to be taken into account.

Since the NPRRR pilot project seems to have failed in all its objectives, it should contrary to what is indicated in the guidelines not be launched on a larger scale.

8.2 Agricultural scenario

Agriculture has always been the backbone of rural India. With population increasing, climate change affecting rainfall and unsustainable use of water resources, the country does not look towards a bright future. Who will feed 1,2 billion people with a severe water shortage preventing the land from being cultivated?

Traditional commercial crops such as sugarcane and rice were abandoned 10-15 years back and replaced by crops such as Eucalyptus, a non-indigenous species that is highly water demanding and depletes water levels faster than they are recharged by annual rainfall (Calder, 2005). Still,

Eucalyptus is being grown extensively throughout both tanks’ command and catchment areas, due to its low maintenance need, but also because it dries out the surrounding land and makes it

unsuitable for cultivation of any other crops. Even farmers who know this is unsustainable consider themselves to have little choice but to keep growing Eucalyptus, not to jeopardize already

(25)

insufficient incomes. Rapid depletion of groundwater resources has to be dealt with urgently and as Eucalyptus seem to be one of the main factors causing the problem, measures have to be focused on changing current land use pattern, by methods of the four solution types according to Ophuls (1973, 1977).

Indigenous ragi is a traditional staple food and apparently the only crop that is so adjusted to its environment that it can be grown completely organically. Sustainable agriculture should include indigenous species since they have had time to adapt to the environment and hence need least boosting or treatment when cultivated. Less water demanding species should also be getting priority. Because of the impact on groundwater levels, integrated management of local water resources needs to take land use patterns into consideration.

8.3 Community awareness

This section will answer the key questions on how village level stakeholders conceive their own as well as other actors’ responsibility in local water governance and how important the actors involved consider commitment in water related issues.

Especially in Melekote, there are several external factors obstructing a sustainable community involvement; water scarcity, governmental rules preventing community from benefiting from the resource and exit options - people make a living outside the community and are not solely dependent on agriculture. Internal factors preventing community involvement include a lack of unity and responsibility, a sense of disempowerment, no strong leadership at village level and a lack of knowledge and awareness of long-term environmental consequences of actions for depleting/ polluting local water resources. The concept of sustainability was generally not integrated in the mentality of the villagers. To feel responsible for their own actions, the villagers need to understand the consequenses of those actions (Montada, 2001, in Lindström & Küller, 2006). As long as they do not, there will be no sustainability concept. The people in Melekote do not feel empowered, nor do they have much knowledge on the tank management by external actors. Not feeling influencial makes them hold external actors responsible (Kvassman, 1999, in Lindström & Küller, 2006) and prevents them from taking action. The level of awareness has to be raised considerably in Melekote, since it is more difficult to induce processes within a community when there is no awareness to create the will to act.

Water stopped being a common resource and became private property when farmers converted to irrigation with groundwater from bore wells instead of surface water from the tank (Ramappa, 2002). This probably had a negative effect on the community sense for having a common cause and for the unity of the village. The use of groundwater rather than surface water also means that out of sight, the consequenses of excessive water use are not obvious until the resource is threatened by total depletion. According to theories of priorities and responsibility (Lindström and Küller, 2006) the complexity of an environmental problem such as the depletion of water resources can cause differences in opinions between different stakeholder groups. This, in turn, can prevent the stakeholders from coming together to take the actions necessary to solve the problem.

A factor contributing to successful community involvement in the village of Aredeshanahalli was people coming together to fight for a common cause when their groundwater got polluted by industrial effluents. This added to a sense of unity and made some people step forward to take on the leadership. Being successful in stopping the discharge, the community got stronger, which is likely to have facilitated taking action against the government’s scheme for rejuvenating the local water body. In Aredeshanahalli, there is a working model for engaging community members. Key persons who were dedicated and eager to learn were selected and got education and information on water management, tank management etc, to work as role models for the rest of the village. The fact that the villagers in Aredeshanahalli generally owned more land and were better off than the

Figure

Figure 1. The Arkavathi sub-basin with cascading tank system mapped out.
Table 1. Answers to the question ”In what way is the tank important to you?”. N = number of answers from
Table 2. Answers to the question ”Who is responsible for the water tank?”. N = number of answers from
Table 4. Answers to the question ”What does sustainable water use mean to you?”. N = number of answers
+5

References

Related documents

För att uppskatta den totala effekten av reformerna måste dock hänsyn tas till såväl samt- liga priseffekter som sammansättningseffekter, till följd av ökad försäljningsandel

Av tabellen framgår att det behövs utförlig information om de projekt som genomförs vid instituten. Då Tillväxtanalys ska föreslå en metod som kan visa hur institutens verksamhet

Generella styrmedel kan ha varit mindre verksamma än man har trott De generella styrmedlen, till skillnad från de specifika styrmedlen, har kommit att användas i större

In this section it has been considered different flow rates for the cold water, maintaining all the other parameters as in the original industrial case and parallel heat

Note: the number of pluses is a qualitative description to depict the comparative benefits between upstream-downstream systems.. A framework for the implementation of water

As the trend towards increased accountability has required organizations to publicly display results, some public agencies produce “report cards” as a tool for

This thesis will attempt to explore the role of environmental cooperation in facilitating the peace process between the conflicting parties to the non-environmentally

Environmental Economics Unit, Department of Economics, Göteborg University, P.O. These methods were administered to a random sample of 1500 households living in metropolitan