groundwater management gw advisory team mate sustainable ... › sites › default › files ›...
TRANSCRIPT
Sustainable Groundwater ManagementConcepts & Tools
Briefing Note Series Note 6*
1
Authors: Héctor Garduño, Frank van Steenbergen & Stephen Foster
1
Stakeholder Participation in Groundwater Managementenabling and nurturing engagement
2010(Revised from 2002 version*)
Why should stakeholders participate in groundwater management?
● Groundwater stakeholders are those who have an important interest in the resources of a specified aquifer. This may be because they use groundwater, or because they practice activities that could cause or prevent groundwater pollution, or because they are concerned with groundwater resource and environmental management (Table 1). Since in many instances surface water should be managed conjunctively with groundwater for irrigation or municipal and industrial wastewater may pose a threat to groundwater quality, stakeholders should also (where appropriate) include representatives of surface water irrigators and/or municipal authorities and industrial organizations. The potential range of stake-holders is large and their active participation should contribute to the sustainability of groundwater resources and related economic activity.
* beyond local water resource, land planning and environmental protection agencies ** although stakeholder participation is relevant to urban groundwater management and pollution control it is not considered further in this paper, since it follows a completely different dynamic being dominated by utility and municipal policy issues *** usually represented by some form of NGO and/or local authority
Table 1: Potential range of interests and activities of groundwater stakeholders*
SECTOR
Rural
Urban**
Industry & Mining
Tourism
Environment***
WATER-USE ClASSES
domestic water supplysubsistence agriculturecommercial irrigationlivestock rearing
water utilitiesprivate supply
self-supplied companies
hotels and campsites
river/wetland ecosystemscoastal lagoons
POllUTing PROCESSES
household waste disposalintensive cropping wastewater irrigationfarmyard drainage
urban wastewater disposal/reusemunicipal landfills
drainage/wastewater discharge solid waste disposalchemical/oil storage facilities
wastewater dischargesolid waste disposal
OTHER CATEgORiES
drilling contractors
surface irrigation providers
drainage & flood management authorities
sand & gravel mining operators
land use planning authorities
watershed management
educational establishments
professional associations
journalists/mass media
GW MATEBriefing Note Series
Briefing Note SeriesBriefing Note Series
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
2
GW MATEBriefing Note Series
Briefing Note SeriesBriefing Note Series
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
● Groundwater resource use and subsurface pollution pressure are influenced by ‘external drivers’ – such as macro-level social, economic and environmental planning, urbanization and land-use changes, agricultural policies (including fertilizer and pesticide subsidies, guarantee prices for certain crops, etc), highly-subsidized or flat-rate electrical energy tariffs for waterwell pumping, general subsidies on waterwell construction, support to watershed conservation and recharge enhancement, and the promotion of improved irrigation technology. All of these factors can affect the physical sustainability and chemical quality of the groundwater resource.
● Stakeholder participation in some form or other is essential because it :● disseminates understanding of issues that can be the impetus for up-scaling of good practices in the
sustainable use of groundwater – management decisions taken unilaterally by a regulatory agency without social consensus being often impossible to implement
● enables essential management activities (such as monitoring, inspection and charge collection) to be carried out more effectively through cooperative efforts and shared burdens
● mobilizes user self-regulatory capacity within an appropriate context – if there are many users and/or limited institutional capacity groundwater management would otherwise be impossible
● counteracts corruption in groundwater management, whether it arises in government or amongst stakeholder themselves
● facilitates the coordination of decisions relating to groundwater, land-use and waste management and generally reduces cross-sector contradictions.
● Groundwater management decisions taken with participation of stakeholders should bring :● social benefits – because they promote equity amongst users and avoid groundwater access being
dominated by a few ● economic benefits - because they encourage balance with long-term potential of the resource, avoid
resource collapse and optimize pumping costs● technical benefits – because they usually lead to better estimates of water abstraction and more
precise understanding of the groundwater balance● management benefits – because they trigger local stakeholders initiatives to implement demand
and supply measures and reduce the cost of regulation. Additionally, and very importantly, participatory management of highly-stressed aquifers should help
take otherwise unpopular decisions where (at least in the short run) benefits to a number of stakeholder groups are decreased because they agree to change groundwater consumption patterns in the long-term communal interest.
What are the institutional mechanisms for stakeholder participation in groundwater management?
● The participation of stakeholders can take many forms. At its most basic level it can occur even without formal organization – and there are several examples of groundwater being managed at local level by strong community values and norms without groundwater user associations or the initiative of a water resource regulatory agency. Stakeholder participation in groundwater management can take place at various territorial levels – ranging from individual waterwells to an aquifer system and even to the river basin or national level – and should be encouraged at all levels since it can make an important contri-bution to groundwater conservation, management and protection.
● The most basic criterion for stakeholder participation is the acceptance of specified values and norms for groundwater abstraction and use – which can be effective in bringing community use of ground-water in line with resource availability and achieving shared understanding of resource limitations. Specific examples include community bans on specified high water-consumption crops or certain types of waterwell, and changes in cropping pattern. In more complex situations (for example extensive aquifers or intensive competitive use), such norms will not suffice and more formal organization will be needed to facilitate and sustain groundwater management.
● Local organization of water users have existed since time immemorial in some countries – distributing groundwater from wells or springs to their members for irrigation, and collecting operational charges and settling water disputes in accordance with customary rules. Such groups are here called water-user associations (WUAs). Often the remit of WUAs is limited to operation and maintenance of the irrigation water supply and distribution systems, and only weakly linked with the management and protection of the resource. It is important to broaden their agenda (or to create special organizations)to address groundwater resource management and protection with recognized legal rights and duties, and to vest them with judicial personality, so as to facilitate their work and enable contractual relations with local water and land regulatory agencies.
● In some cases WUAs relate to both surface water and groundwater sources, and here the specific rights and duties of groundwater users must be clearly defined. In the case of small aquifers irrigators may join to form groundwater user groups (GWUGs) and village water-supply councils (VWSCs) often play a key role for drinking water-supply protection (and in some cases sanitation) in rural areas, and their roles can be extended to manage demand and enhance supply. In the case of small aquifers and/or situations with weak government institutional capacity, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) can be of great help for promoting stakeholder participation and groundwater management, but they need to be supported or overviewed by the local water resources agency.
● In the case of larger high-yielding aquifers, which often include more diverse interests but smaller
numbers of individual users, higher-level stakeholder participation through an aquifer management organization (AMOR) is required. This type of organization needs to be established more widely as the institutional mechanism for stakeholder participation in groundwater management at aquifer level – and should include all local WUAs, GWGs and VWSCs, and other main categories of stakeholder (Table 1). AMORs should also include representatives of national and/or local groundwater resource agencies and of the corresponding local government authority, and in some circumstances can (and should) be formed at the initiative of the water administration, especially when zones with critical groundwater status are declared.
● Regardless of the size of the aquifer, stakeholder participation needs to be defined around coherent groundwater bodies. The delineation of appropriate boundaries for the establishment of a ground-water body (resource management area) for an AMOR (Figure 1), and even for simpler forms of organization in smaller aquifers, is particularly critical. This will not always be straightforward, especially for large aquifer systems with low hydraulic gradients, and sub-division into groundwater bodies will need to be done as logically as possible. When the so-defined groundwater body is part of a large aquifer system, it is important to establish institutional mechanisms to integrate groundwater management and stakeholder participation at the system level. Since most shallower aquifer systems
3
GW MATEBriefing Note Series
Briefing Note SeriesBriefing Note Series
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
4
are interconnected with surface water systems, AMORs should be represented in river basin agencies – something that at present hardly ever occurs. Moreover, representatives of the various main categories of groundwater stakeholder should also be called upon to comment on high-level policy decisions at national water commission level – in Figure 2 the various possible levels of representation and degrees of interaction, which will vary somewhat according to the specific case, are shown schematically.
● All stakeholders for a given groundwater body need to be identified, and provision made to ensure their fair representation in the institutional mechanism defined for aquifer management – difficulties can arise where there are large numbers of individual stakeholders with the solution being some form of federation. Some consideration needs to be given to the position of those that do not (yet) use groundwater. It will often not be socially and practically possible to exclude current non-users from using groundwater in the future, and management arrangements that define the rules of access for new users are required.
● Participatory groundwater management does not generally happen spontaneously. The exception occurs where historic events have underscored the importance of groundwater and charismatic local leadership has arisen to address the issue. In other situations the process is likely to be considerably longer and the set-up costs higher, since there may be no acute awareness of the threats to the ground-water and many unconnected users.
Which groundwater management functions can be performed by stakeholders?
● There are many ways in which stakeholders can participate in the management of groundwater resources and aquifer systems – approaches will vary according to both to the specific interests of the stakeholders and the nature of customary rules and rights for water and land in the area concerned.
��������������������������
��������������������� ���
������� ������������� ��
����������
��� �������������������
�����������������������������������������������������
����������������������������������������������������������������������
� � � � � � � � � �
� ����
��� ����������������������������������
��
��
��
��
��
�
��
��
��
��
��
��
��
��
��
�
���
�������������
Figure 1: Hydrogeological basis and administrative approach to delineation of groundwater bodies
GW MATEBriefing Note Series
Briefing Note SeriesBriefing Note Series
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
5
● In principle it has to be in the interest of groundwater users that the resource base is conserved. Moreover, the limits set to groundwater use under resource management plans do not necessarily imply that economic benefits are jeopardized. There is often scope for increasing productivity of ground-water use to compensate for less being abstracted – by using appropriate soil moisture management, improved crop selection and irrigation techniques, that lead to real water-resource saving. The imple-mentation of such measures, however, needs to be triggered by stakeholder participation in ground-water management, and there may even be scope for successful community action on aquifer recharge enhancement. The benefits of participatory groundwater management will be less, and the process more painful, where over-abstraction is really acute and a choice has to be made between radical reduction of irrigated areas or progressive time-limited resource depletion.
● The functions that can be performed in groundwater management are summarized in Table 2. Some measures are relatively easy to implement (maintaining distance between waterwells or bans on certain type of crop). Other measures require more coordination, management and even enforcement – and will be easier to implement if AMORs, GWUGs, WUAs (and local NGOs acting on their behalf ) are recognized and supported by the local groundwater agency. It should also be acknowledged that users must adapt their communal behavior to meet certain agreed groundwater resource criteria.
Figure 2: Desirable institutional interaction in participatory groundwater resource management
from full to selected representation depending on specific case
from periodic interaction to occasional dialogue depending on specific case
routes of support to facilitate participatory management
GROUNDWATER-USER
GROUPS (GWUGs)
VILLAGE WATER SUPPLY
COUNCILS (VWSCs)
INDIVIDUAL USERS
ENVIRONMENTAL NGOs
WATER USER
ASSOCIATIONS (WUAs)
AQUIFER MANAGEMENT
ORGANIZATION (AMOR)
NON-GOVERNMENT
ORGANIZATIONS (NGOs)
LOCAL WATER
RESOURCES AGENCY
NATIONAL WATER
COMMISSION/RIVER
BASIN AUTHORITY
(RBA)
This scheme summarizes a typical arrangement, but many variants are possible depending on the geographic scale of the aquifer and the territorial level of local government agencies.
GW MATEBriefing Note Series
Briefing Note SeriesBriefing Note Series
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
6
How can participatory groundwater management be enabled and nurtured?
● Community engagement in participatory groundwater management only exceptionally comes about spontaneously, and in general will need to be enabled and nurtured by the appropriate offices of government (or NGOs supported and overviewed by government). Essential facets of such nurturing are : • facilitation of interaction amongst the full range of stakeholders • dissemination of a broad understanding of the groundwater resource situation • promotion of measures to improve the groundwater resource balance (if necessary), through
reduced consumptive use and groundwater recharge enhancement • provision of a conducive legal and institutional framework • setting realistic management targets and monitoring progress.
Table 2: Summary of functions commonly performed by stakeholders in participatory schemes of groundwater management
lEVEl AT WHiCH FUnCTiOn PERFORMED
FUnCTiOnS MinOR AQUiFERS MAJOR AQUiFERS VWSC/ NGO LAU WUA AMOR RBA GWUG
administer/participate in local allocation/ ● + s ● X access to groundwater groundwater monitoring ● +❋ s ● X ❋
engage in preparation/implementation ● +❋ s ● ❋ s ❋ of groundwater management plans
facilitate shared access and use of ● + s s ● X ● ❋groundwater facilities
promote/undertake demand reduction measures ● +❋ s s ● X ❋ s engage in recharge and retention measures ● +❋ s ● X ❋ s
mobilize additional sources of water ● ❋ s s ● X ● X ❋ s
make/participate in binding rules ● + s s ● X ● X ❋on water use
implement groundwater protection measures ● +❋ ● X ❋ ● X ❋
settle groundwater resource disputes ● + s ● X ❋ ● X ❋
negotiate and interact with other policy actors ● ❋ ● X ❋ ● X ❋
VWSC = Village Water Supply Council; GWUG = Groundwater User Group; NGO = Non-Governmental Organisation; LUA = Local Authority; WUA = Water User Association; AMOR = Aquifer Management Organization; RBA = River Basin (or National) Authority/Committee
● main implementer + based on local community organization/rules s supports X requires juridical personality to be conferred on corresponding organization/association ❋ requires formalization of relationship with a local water resources regulatory agency
GW MATEBriefing Note Series
Briefing Note SeriesBriefing Note Series
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
7
GW MATEBriefing Note Series
Briefing Note SeriesBriefing Note Series
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
Tab
le 3
: H
ydro
geo
log
ic a
nd s
oci
oec
ono
mic
fra
mew
ork
of
sele
cted
pilo
t g
roun
dw
ater
man
agem
ent
area
s
AR
GE
NT
INA
Men
doza
-Car
riza
l A
quif
er
(GW
-MA
TE
CP
6)
BR
ASI
L
Inte
rsta
te A
podi
Aqu
ifer
s (G
W-M
AT
E C
P16
)
CH
INA
Nor
th C
hina
Pla
in
(GW
-MA
TE
CP
8)
MO
RO
CC
OSo
uss-
Cho
utka
Aqu
ifer
s
YE
ME
ND
ham
ar,
Had
ram
outh
&
Tai
z A
quif
ers
IND
IAA
ndhr
a P
rade
sh S
tate
(GW
-MA
TE
CP
19)
IND
IAM
ahar
asht
ra S
tate
(GW
-MA
TE
CP
22)
ME
XIC
OSa
nto
Dom
ingo
Aqu
ifer
,B
aja
Cal
ifor
nia
Sur
ME
XIC
OSa
n L
uis
Pot
osí
Aqu
ifer
ME
XIC
O*
Sila
o-R
omit
a A
quif
er,
Gua
naju
ato
(GW
-MA
TE
CP
10)
SP
EC
iFiC
gR
OU
nD
WA
TE
R b
OD
y C
HA
RA
CT
ER
iST
iCS
expo
rt w
ine,
fru
it &
gar
lic p
rodu
ctio
n
com
mer
cial
tro
pica
l fru
it p
rodu
ctio
n
regu
larl
y ir
riga
ted
win
ter-
whe
at a
nd
occa
sion
ally
-irr
igat
ed s
umm
er m
aize
expo
rt c
itru
s &
veg
etab
le p
rodu
ctio
n,
som
e pu
blic
wat
er-s
uppl
y
mai
nly
smal
l-sc
ale
irri
gate
d ag
ricu
lture
subs
iste
nce
irri
gate
d ag
ricu
lture
&
rur
al w
ater
-sup
ply
1,00
0 ha
irr
igat
ed la
nd a
nddr
inki
ng w
ater
for
100
0 po
pula
tion
com
mer
cial
irri
gate
d cr
oppi
ng
mai
nly
publ
ic w
ater
-sup
ply
& s
ome
ir
riga
tion
alfa
lfa-f
ed li
vest
ock
and
publ
ic
wat
er-
supp
ly
incr
easi
ng s
alin
ity
from
impe
ded
drai
nage
& h
ydro
carb
on p
ollu
tion
fr
om o
il re
finer
y in
tens
ive
abst
ract
ion
low
ers
wat
er-t
able
su
bsta
ntia
lly in
ext
ende
d dr
ough
t
falli
ng g
roun
dwat
er le
vels
and
ris
k of
sa
line
up-c
onin
g an
d la
nd s
ubsi
denc
e
inte
nse
over
expl
oita
tion
- re
duci
ng
irri
gate
d ar
ea o
nly
solu
tion
inte
nse
over
expl
oita
tion
– ‘o
rder
ly
aqui
fer
depl
etio
n’ o
nly
solu
tion
seve
re a
quife
r de
plet
ion,
som
e up
-con
ing
of h
igh
fluor
ide
grou
ndw
ater
aqui
fer
depl
etio
n an
d w
ater
wel
l yi
eld
failu
re
acut
e w
ater
-tab
le d
raw
dow
n &
sa
line
intr
usio
n
inte
nsiv
e ab
stra
ctio
n ca
used
land
su
bsid
ence
and
up-
coni
ng o
f hi
gh
fluor
ide
grou
ndw
ater
inte
nse
over
expl
oita
tion
- r
educ
tion
of
irri
gate
d ar
ea n
eces
sary
to
prot
ect
publ
ic w
ater
-sup
ply
maj
or a
lluvi
al d
epos
its
cons
olid
ated
se
dim
enta
ry f
orm
atio
ns
vast
allu
vial
dep
osit
s
inte
r-m
onta
ne v
alle
y de
posi
ts
min
or a
lluvi
al d
epos
its
wea
ther
ed h
ardr
ock
crys
talli
ne b
asem
ent
wea
ther
ed h
ardr
ock
(pla
teau
bas
alts
)
coas
tal f
orm
atio
n
inte
r-m
onta
ne v
alle
y-fi
ll
inte
r-m
onta
ne v
alle
y-fi
ll
pied
mon
t se
dim
ents
kars
tic
limes
tone
+ w
eakl
y ce
men
ted
sand
ston
e
Gua
ntao
Cou
nty
grou
ndw
ater
ar
ea o
f al
luvi
al s
ands
sequ
ence
of
unco
nsol
idat
ed
sedi
men
ts
mul
ti-l
ayer
ed t
hin
sedi
men
ts
belo
w ‘w
adis
’
mul
tipl
e sm
all w
eath
ered
gr
anit
ic f
orm
atio
ns
wea
ther
ed b
asal
ts u
nder
Hiv
re
Baz
aar
villa
ge
loca
l san
d +
grav
el d
epos
its
laye
red
aqui
fer
sepa
rate
d by
fi
ne le
ns
thic
k se
quen
ce o
f vo
lcan
ic &
la
cust
rine
allu
vial
sed
imen
ts
user
pro
file
and
so
cio
eco
nom
ic s
itua
tio
ng
roun
dw
ater
reso
urce
issu
es
gE
nE
RA
lA
QU
iFE
RT
yP
OlO
gy
CO
Un
TR
yA
qui
fer
* w
ide
rang
e of
exa
mpl
es in
sim
ilar
hydr
ogeo
logi
cal s
ettin
g in
Gua
naju
ato
Stat
e, w
hich
incl
udes
ext
rem
e ca
se o
f La
guna
Sec
a A
quife
r w
here
inte
nse
over
expl
oita
tion
now
mea
ns o
nly
man
agem
ent p
ossib
ility
is ‘o
rder
ly d
eple
tion
to a
situ
atio
n le
avin
g m
inor
gro
undw
ater
res
ourc
e av
aila
bilit
y fo
r lim
ited
drin
king
wat
er-s
uppl
y'
hyd
rog
eolo
gic
alse
ttin
g
8
GW MATEBriefing Note Series
Briefing Note SeriesBriefing Note Series
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
Tab
le 4
: S
umm
ary
of
pro
s an
d c
ont
ras
of
stak
eho
lder
par
tici
pat
ion
and
use
r co
mm
unit
y ac
tio
n in
gro
und
wat
er r
eso
urce
s m
anag
emen
t fo
r th
e ra
nge
of
gW
-MA
TE
-sup
po
rted
pilo
t p
roje
cts
AR
GE
NT
INA
Car
riza
l A
quif
er –
Men
doz
a
BR
ASI
LA
pod
i A
quif
ers
– C
eara
(C
E)
& R
io G
ran
de
do
Nor
te (
RN
) In
ters
tate
CH
INA
Nor
th C
hin
a P
lain
–
Gu
anta
o C
oun
ty
IND
IAW
eath
ered
Gra
nit
ic
Bas
emen
t –
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
IND
IAW
eath
ered
Dec
can
Bas
alts
–
Mah
aras
htr
a
AC
HiE
VE
ME
nT
S O
F
STA
KE
HO
lD
ER
PA
RT
iCiP
AT
iOn
D
GI
(sta
te w
ater
res
ourc
e re
gula
tion
/ hy
drau
lic in
fras
truc
ture
age
ncy)
has
goo
d re
cord
s of
/ re
lati
ons
wit
h gr
ound
wat
er
user
s (a
nd in
form
atio
n on
the
ir u
se)
and
has
prom
oted
irri
gati
on W
UA
s (i
nspe
ccio
nes
de c
auce
) an
d w
orke
d cl
osel
y w
ith
maj
or w
ater
use
r/po
llute
r (R
EPS
OL-
YPF
)
ra
pid
deve
lopm
ent
of g
roun
dwat
er
inte
nsiv
e us
e fo
r ex
port
tro
pica
l fru
it
prod
ucti
on a
nd f
allin
g w
ater
-tab
le
in e
xtre
me
drou
ght
led
to f
ull u
ser
colla
bora
tion
wit
h SE
MA
RH
-RN
in
par
t of
aqu
ifer
and
conc
ern
abou
t tr
ansb
ound
ary
inte
rfer
ence
stro
ng s
tate
/loc
al g
over
nmen
t ag
enci
es
and
villa
ge a
dmin
istr
atio
n ca
pabl
e of
pr
omot
ing
real
gro
undw
ater
res
ourc
e sa
ving
s th
roug
h ch
ange
s in
irri
gati
on
prac
tice
com
mun
iy-b
ased
gro
undw
ater
m
anag
emen
t (C
BG
WM
) pi
onee
rs w
ith
gove
rnm
ent/
dono
r pr
ojec
ts in
volv
ing
NG
Os
to p
rovi
de ‘g
roun
dwat
er r
esou
rce
educ
atio
n’ t
o th
ousa
nds
of f
arm
ers
sinc
e 19
93 H
ivre
Baz
aar
villa
ge f
ine
ex
ampl
e of
CB
GW
M b
y ef
fect
ive
coun
cil
(Gra
m S
abha
), le
d by
cha
rism
atic
cou
ncil
lead
er (
Sarp
anch
) –
who
is n
ow a
ppoi
nted
by
Sta
te G
over
nmen
t as
am
bass
ador
to
repl
icat
e ef
fort
s
CO
Un
TR
y
(AQ
UiF
ER
/gW
bO
Dy
)
publ
ic-p
riva
te p
artn
ersh
ip h
as a
lrea
dy
mob
ilize
d U
S$ 1
8+ m
illio
n fo
r co
ntro
l of
hydr
ocar
bon
pollu
tion
ris
k an
d m
itig
ated
pr
oble
ms
of m
ost-
affe
cted
gro
undw
ater
us
ers;
gen
eral
ban
on
new
wat
erw
ells
has
be
en s
usta
ined
and
new
reg
ulat
ions
hav
e pl
ugge
d le
gal l
ooph
ole
allo
win
g tr
ansf
er
of u
se r
ight
s of
sal
inse
d w
ells
RN
use
r co
llabo
rati
on i
n w
ater
wel
l use
w
ater
-lev
el m
onit
orin
g, p
rom
oted
fo
rmat
ion
RN
/CE
sha
red
aqui
fer
man
agem
ent
wor
king
gro
up, m
ajor
SR
H-
CO
GE
RH
-CE
eff
ort
wat
erw
ell i
nven
tory
/ da
ta c
olle
ctio
n, m
obili
sati
on m
ajor
AN
A
(fed
eral
gov
t) r
esou
rces
stu
dy
villa
ge-l
evel
WU
As
enc
oura
ged
farm
ers
to c
olla
bora
te i
n ra
nge
of e
ngin
eeri
ng,
agro
nom
ic a
nd m
anag
emen
t m
easu
res
to
save
gro
undw
ater
, whi
ch i
s vi
ewed
as
a ‘so
cial
ass
et’
grou
ndw
ater
sus
tain
abili
ty a
nd
prod
ucti
vity
im
prov
ed t
hrou
gh n
ew
crop
ping
pat
tern
s/pr
acti
ces;
ben
efit
s fr
om s
ome
non-
intr
usiv
e go
vern
men
t fa
cilit
atio
n w
ith
prom
otio
n of
irr
igat
ion
tech
nolo
gy/w
ater
shed
con
serv
atio
n
only
dug
wel
ls p
erm
itte
d fo
r ir
riga
tion
, ba
n on
live
stoc
k-gr
azin
g an
d su
gar-
cane
/ ba
nana
cul
tiva
tion
, suc
cess
ful s
oil
cons
erva
tion
/ re
char
ge
enha
ncem
ent
prog
ram
me,
gw
l-ba
sed
crop
ping
pla
ns –
tr
ansi
tion
to
drou
ght-
resi
lient
eco
nom
y
ME
CH
An
iSM
/FO
CU
S O
F
STA
KE
HO
lD
ER
PA
RT
iCiP
AT
iOn
grou
ndw
ater
irri
gato
rs r
eluc
tant
to
join
W
UA
s (d
omin
ated
by
cana
l-w
ater
use
rs)
ther
eby
impe
ding
str
uctu
red
cons
ulta
tion
an
d pr
omot
ion
of c
onju
ncti
ve u
se
; som
e fa
lsel
y be
lieve
pet
role
um
indu
stry
con
tam
inat
ion
(not
irri
gati
on
wat
er m
anag
emen
t) is
mai
n ca
use
of
grou
ndw
ater
sal
inis
atio
n
decr
easi
ng g
roun
dwat
er u
ser
conc
ern
follo
win
g se
quen
ce o
f w
et y
ears
, bo
th
CE
& R
N p
ublic
adm
inis
trat
ion
still
not
pr
oact
ive
in r
egul
ariz
ing
and
insp
ecti
ng
all m
ajor
gro
undw
ater
use
rs, a
nd
inst
itut
ions
req
uire
fur
ther
str
engt
heni
ng
and
dece
ntra
lizat
ion
espe
cial
ly in
RN
still
que
stio
nabl
e w
heth
er f
arm
ers
have
re
duce
d no
n-be
nefic
ial g
roun
dwat
er
loss
es a
nd a
ccep
t re
allo
cati
on t
o ur
ban/
indu
stri
al u
se (
orig
inal
inte
ntio
n) -
latt
er
inte
rest
not
rep
rese
nted
in W
UA
s
requ
ires
fur
ther
gov
ernm
ent
ince
ntiv
es t
o ec
onom
ise
on e
lect
rica
l ene
rgy
use
and
impr
ove
agri
cultu
ral p
rocu
rem
ent
plus
a
stro
nger
sta
te g
roun
dwat
er a
genc
y to
m
onit
or C
BG
WM
pro
gres
s an
d aq
uife
r be
havi
or so
me
ques
tion
abo
ut s
usta
inab
ility
sho
uld
lead
ersh
ip c
hang
e an
d ab
out
repl
icab
ility
si
nce
alth
ough
a lo
w-r
ainf
all d
roug
ht-
pron
e ar
ea h
as r
elat
ivel
y-fa
vour
able
co
ndit
ions
for
gro
undw
ater
rec
harg
e en
hanc
emen
t
liM
iTA
TiO
nS
OF
g
W M
An
Ag
EM
En
T A
CT
iOn
GW MATEBriefing Note Series
Briefing Note SeriesBriefing Note Series
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
Tab
le 4
: C
onti
nu
ed
AR
GE
NT
INA
Car
riza
l A
quif
er –
Men
doz
a
BR
ASI
LA
pod
i A
quif
ers
– C
eara
(C
E)
& R
io G
ran
de
do
Nor
te (
RN
) In
ters
tate
CH
INA
Nor
th C
hin
a P
lain
–
Gu
anta
o C
oun
ty
IND
IAW
eath
ered
Gra
nit
ic
Bas
emen
t –
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
IND
IAW
eath
ered
Dec
can
Bas
alts
–
Mah
aras
htr
a
grou
ndw
ater
irri
gato
rs r
eluc
tant
to
join
W
UA
s (d
omin
ated
by
cana
l-w
ater
use
rs)
ther
eby
impe
ding
str
uctu
red
cons
ulta
tion
an
d pr
omot
ion
of c
onju
ncti
ve u
se
; som
e fa
lsel
y be
lieve
pet
role
um
indu
stry
con
tam
inat
ion
(not
irri
gati
on
wat
er m
anag
emen
t) is
mai
n ca
use
of
grou
ndw
ater
sal
inis
atio
n
decr
easi
ng g
roun
dwat
er u
ser
conc
ern
follo
win
g se
quen
ce o
f w
et y
ears
, bo
th
CE
& R
N p
ublic
adm
inis
trat
ion
still
not
pr
oact
ive
in r
egul
ariz
ing
and
insp
ecti
ng
all m
ajor
gro
undw
ater
use
rs, a
nd
inst
itut
ions
req
uire
fur
ther
str
engt
heni
ng
and
dece
ntra
lizat
ion
espe
cial
ly in
RN
still
que
stio
nabl
e w
heth
er f
arm
ers
have
re
duce
d no
n-be
nefic
ial g
roun
dwat
er
loss
es a
nd a
ccep
t re
allo
cati
on t
o ur
ban/
indu
stri
al u
se (
orig
inal
inte
ntio
n) -
latt
er
inte
rest
not
rep
rese
nted
in W
UA
s
requ
ires
fur
ther
gov
ernm
ent
ince
ntiv
es t
o ec
onom
ise
on e
lect
rica
l ene
rgy
use
and
impr
ove
agri
cultu
ral p
rocu
rem
ent
plus
a
stro
nger
sta
te g
roun
dwat
er a
genc
y to
m
onit
or C
BG
WM
pro
gres
s an
d aq
uife
r be
havi
or so
me
ques
tion
abo
ut s
usta
inab
ility
sho
uld
lead
ersh
ip c
hang
e an
d ab
out
repl
icab
ility
si
nce
alth
ough
a lo
w-r
ainf
all d
roug
ht-
pron
e ar
ea h
as r
elat
ivel
y-fa
vour
able
co
ndit
ions
for
gro
undw
ater
rec
harg
e en
hanc
emen
t
ME
XIC
OSa
nto
Dom
ingo
Aqu
ifer
–B
aja
Cal
ifor
nia
ME
XIC
OSa
n L
uis
Pot
osi
Val
ley
Aqu
ifer
ME
XIC
OSi
lao-
Rom
ita
Aqu
ifer
–G
uan
aju
ato
MO
RO
CC
OSo
uss
-Ch
outk
a A
quif
ers
YE
ME
ND
ham
ar,
Had
hra
mou
t &
Tai
z A
quif
ers
AC
HiE
VE
ME
nT
S O
F
STA
KE
HO
lD
ER
PA
RT
iCiP
AT
iOn
CO
TA
S fo
rmed
, but
fol
low
ing
unen
forc
eabl
e fe
dera
l reg
ulat
ions
, lar
ger
farm
ers
boug
ht-o
ut s
mal
l far
mer
s an
d in
vest
ed in
mod
erni
zing
irri
gati
on
tech
nolo
gy C
OT
AS
form
ed b
y pr
ivat
e us
ers,
m
unic
ipal
wat
er-s
uppl
y ut
ility
and
sta
te
gove
rnm
ent
– la
tter
con
stru
ctin
g su
rfac
e w
ater
dam
/res
ervo
ir t
o re
duce
gro
undw
ater
de
pend
ency
sinc
e 19
98 s
tate
gov
t. ha
s st
rong
ly
supp
orte
d cr
oss-
sect
or g
roun
dwat
er
man
agem
ent
asso
ciat
ions
(C
OT
AS)
and
pr
omot
ed a
quife
r m
anag
emen
t ac
tion
s vi
a th
is r
oute
basi
n w
ater
res
ourc
es a
genc
y ha
s st
rate
gy
to s
top
furt
her
exte
nsio
n of
irri
gate
d ar
eas,
impr
ove
irri
gati
on e
ffic
ienc
y/w
ater
pr
oduc
tivi
ty a
nd s
ubse
quen
tly n
egot
iate
re
duct
ions
in g
roun
dwat
er ir
riga
ted
area
stre
ngth
enin
g ca
paci
ty o
f lo
cal
com
mun
itie
s fo
r gr
ound
wat
er u
se
plan
ning
/mon
itor
ing
sim
ulta
neou
sly
wit
h pr
ovis
ion
of im
prov
ed ir
riga
tion
te
chno
logy
and
aqu
ifer
rech
arge
en
hanc
emen
t
CO
Un
TR
y
(AQ
UiF
ER
/gW
bO
Dy
)
m
ore
than
60%
red
ucti
on i
n gr
ound
wat
er
abst
ract
ion
duri
ng 1
995-
2006
, g
roun
dwat
er a
bstr
acti
on m
eter
ing
inst
alle
d an
d m
aint
aine
d w
ith
mon
itor
ing
of g
roun
dwat
er le
vels
/qua
lity
– fu
ll ag
reem
ent
on f
utur
e gr
ound
wat
er a
nd s
oil
cons
erva
tion
mea
sure
s
good
coo
pera
tion
wit
h fu
ll w
ater
wel
l in
vent
ory,
use
rs d
irec
tory
and
wel
l m
eter
ing;
par
tici
pato
ry d
raft
ing
of
regu
lati
ons
to s
tabi
lise
aqui
fer
and
rese
rve
deep
goo
d-qu
alit
y gr
ound
wat
er
for
pota
ble
supp
lies
CO
TA
S ha
ve r
aise
d aw
aren
ess
lead
ing
to
wat
ersh
ed c
onse
rvat
ion
prog
ram
mes
, nu
mer
ical
aqu
ifer
mod
els
have
bee
n pr
epar
ed b
y C
EA
G (
stat
e w
ater
age
ncy)
an
d fe
dera
lly a
quif
er s
tabi
lizat
ion
plan
s
elab
orat
ed
aqu
ifer
num
eric
al m
odel
use
d to
inf
orm
st
akeh
olde
rs a
nd
reac
h m
anag
emen
t ag
reem
ent
(Con
trat
de
Nap
pe)
reac
hed,
w
hich
inc
lude
s su
bsid
ized
dri
p ir
riga
tion
, re
ques
ts d
eman
d co
nstr
aint
s an
d ac
cept
s re
gula
tory
pro
visi
ons
WU
As
esta
blis
hed
and
have
led
to
chan
ge t
o le
ss w
ater
-con
sum
ing
crop
s (i
ncl.
redu
ctio
n of
qat
) an
d so
me
real
gr
ound
wat
er r
esou
rce
savi
ngs
ME
CH
An
iSM
/FO
CU
S O
F
STA
KE
HO
lD
ER
PA
RT
iCiP
AT
iOn
conc
ern
abou
t so
cioe
cono
mic
co
nseq
uenc
es o
f di
spla
cem
ent
of s
mal
ler
farm
ers
conc
ern
that
fed
eral
-lev
el m
ay n
ot
endo
rse
and
finan
cial
ly s
uppo
rt a
quife
r st
abili
zati
on p
lan
wat
erw
ell d
rilli
ng b
ans
inef
fect
ive
due
to
poor
enf
orce
men
t an
d C
OT
AS
not
able
to
mob
ilise
eff
ecti
ve a
ctio
n to
red
uce
net
abst
ract
ion
and
stab
ilise
aqu
ifer
wat
er-
leve
ls;
inad
equa
te d
evol
utio
n of
res
ourc
e ad
min
fro
m f
eder
al-l
evel
to
stat
e an
d C
OT
AS
nego
tiat
ed n
on-b
indi
ng a
ppro
ache
s fa
vour
ed o
ver
agre
ed r
educ
tion
of
irri
gate
d ar
ea –
thu
s re
sulta
nt ‘r
eal g
roun
dwat
er
savi
ngs’
ques
tion
able
and
fur
ther
co
mpl
icat
ed b
y di
sput
e ov
er n
umer
ical
m
odel
par
amet
ers
grou
ndw
ater
rec
harg
e an
d st
orag
e st
ill
very
lim
ited
and
que
stio
nabl
e w
heth
er
agri
cultu
ral p
rodu
ctio
n su
ffic
ient
to
pay
back
loan
s fo
r im
prov
ed ir
riga
tion
te
chno
logy
– a
nd s
till
lack
of
tran
spar
ency
ab
out
reso
urce
sta
tus
liM
iTA
TiO
nS
OF
g
W M
An
Ag
EM
En
T A
CT
iOn
9
10
GW MATEBriefing Note Series
Briefing Note SeriesBriefing Note Series
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
● It is helpful to those promoting participatory groundwater management to learn from recent experience in this area. In its 10 years operational experience in the developing nation context worldwide, GW•MATE has been able to assess and contribute to a number of cases whose achievements and difficulties provide useful lessons – Table 3 provides a summary of the main hydrogeologic and socio-economic conditions in the corresponding areas from which stem the following observations : • hydrogeologic conditions – in relatively small aquifers with non-complex hydrogeology and
reliable annual recharge it requires less effort to achieve effective participatory groundwater management than in large aquifers with less clearly-defined groundwater bodies
• groundwater user profiles – heterogeneous user groups and absentee stakeholders make it more difficult for participatory management than do socially more homogeneous user groups
• resource issues – participatory management is easier if there is scope for restoring a reasonable groundwater resource balance without seriously impacting existing livelihoods (although this may not always be possible).
In Table 4 the focus, achievements and limitations of participatory management are summarized for the same aquifers and areas introduced in Table 3 – from this the wide range and varying success of participatory management experienced will be evident.
● To promote stakeholder engagement in groundwater resource management it is often necessary to broadcast the importance of these resources and their vulnerability to depletion and degradation – a task that needs to be facilitated by government often through the mobilization of NGOs. The initial approach is normally to present, using local communication channels and the mass media, the current status of groundwater (availability and quality) together with predictions of the consequences of not taking some form of management action. Where groundwater users have already been involved themselves with hydrological monitoring communication will be easier.
● But this is generally not enough, and education (as distinct from awareness) programmes will need to be developed and promoted at various levels – focusing on the remedial action to be taken and on how to sustain such action institutionally. It will be useful to map the existing local communication network, identifying ‘message senders’ and ‘message receivers’.
● When developing the preferred role of the local government water resources agency in participatory groundwater management it is advisable to adopt the following criteria :• make complex groundwater situations understandable by providing clear information on the
hydrological balance of the groundwater body concerned (wherever possible using modern software with user-friendly visual interfaces to share understanding of system behavior under different management scenarios) and engaging stakeholders in aquifer monitoring – stakeholders will usually then be willing to consider management interventions and to accept advice on whether their own ideas are technically and economically sound
• empower stakeholder organizations and avoid patronising (‘officials know best’) postures, since it must be accepted that stakeholders have to be the main actors in the participatory management process with government assisting them in identifying strategic issues and implementable solutions
• ensure all stakeholders are properly represented irrespective of their individual weight in terms of land tenure and water rights or their economic and political influence
• establish sound, implementable and socially-acceptable resource allocations so that the interests of stakeholders are reasonably protected with third party and environmental concerns also being
11
GW MATEBriefing Note Series
Briefing Note SeriesBriefing Note Series
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
taken into account, but retaining sufficient flexibility to allow for a component of reallocation to more socially, economically or environmentally beneficial uses or in the light of revised resource evaluations as a result, for example, of climate change
• promote improvements in groundwater use efficiency by providing guidelines on measures that will maintain income levels whilst reducing water consumption – including ‘real resource saving’ measures, alternative cropping patterns, improved soil moisture management, etc
• combine participatory management with investment in recharge enhancement since if groundwater users themselves engage in augmenting resources their sense of ownership of the resources will also be enhanced.
● While conflict amongst groundwater users is generally best settled by the parties themselves, situations may arise in which conflicting parties prefer to have an external body (such as a government agency or high-profile NGO) promoting settlement (so that they do not have to confront each other directly).
● Where excessive groundwater abstraction from an aquifer drives a number of farmers out of agriculture because of the escalating cost of access to groundwater and/or its diminishing supply, wealthier farmers usually consolidate their agricultural production resulting in migration of displaced farmers to neigh-boring urban areas – the public administration concerned with groundwater resources must anticipate such phenomena and decide how it can best act in the broader public interest.
● In most developing nations public information offices deal with narrowly-focused communication programmes, implemented through the national media without systematic assessment of impact. This approach is not well-suited to the technical complexity of groundwater resource management nor to the social aspects of stakeholder participation. A more appropriate approach to communication would need to be compatible with existing networks within which local groundwater agencies work. The stakeholder focus should be on building capacity to access, use and generate information – thus in groups with different capacities traditional community outlets, the mass-media and modern infor-mation channels all need to be considered.
Further ReadingBurke J & Moench M 2000 Groundwater and Society : Resources, Tensions and Opportunities : Themes in
Groundwater Management for the 21st Century. United Nations Department of Economic & Social Affairs, New York, USA.
Foster S, Chilton J, Moench M, Cardy F & Schiffler M 2000 Groundwater in Rural Development : Facing the Challenges of Supply and Resource Sustainability. World Bank Technical Paper 463, Washington DC, USA.
Foster S, Garduño H & Kemper K 2004 Mexico : The ‘COTAS’— Progress with Stakeholder Participation in Groundwater Management in Guanajuato. World Bank GW•MATE Case Profile Collection 10, Washington DC, USA.
12
Foster S, Limaye S, Mandavkar Y, & Msangi S 2009 : A Hydrogeologic and Socioeconomic Evaluation of Community–Based Groundwater Resource Management — the Case of Hivre Bazaar in Maharashtra, India. World Bank GW-MATE Case Profile Collection 22, Washington DC, USA.
Garduño H, Foster S, Raj P & Van Steenbergen F 2009 — Addressing Groundwater Depletion through Community–Based Management Actions in the Weathered Granitic Basement Aquifer of Drought–Prone Andhra Pradesh, India. World Bank GW-MATE Case Profile Collection 19, Washington DC, USA.
Lopez-Gunn, E & Martinez-Cortina I 2006 Is self-regulation a myth ? – case study on Spanish groundwater users associations and the role of higher-level authorities. Hydrogeology Journal 14 : 340-349.
The Communication Initiative Network 2009 Where communication and media are central to social and economic development. [http://www.comminit.com]
Van Steenbergen F & Shah T 2003 Rules Rather than Rights : Self Regulation in Intensively Used Groundwater Systems (in) E Custodio & M R Llamas ‘Intensive Use of Groundwater: Challenges and Opportunities’ Balkema, Dordrecht.
Van Steenbergen F 2006 Promoting participatory groundwater management. Hydrogeology Journal 14 : 380-391.
GW MATEBriefing Note Series
Briefing Note SeriesBriefing Note Series
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
Groundwater ManagementAdvisory Team
Publication Arrangements
The GW•MATE Briefing Note Series is published by the World Bank, Washington D.C., USA. It is also available in electronic form on the World Bank water resources website (www.worldbank.org/gwmate)
and the Global Water Partnership website (www.gwpforum.org).
The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this document are entirely those of the authors and should not be attributed in any manner to the World Bank, to its affiliated organizations, or to members of its Board of Executive Directors, or the countries they represent.
Funding Support
GW•MATE (Groundwater Management Advisory Team) is financed by the World Bank's Water Partnership Program (WPP) multi-donor trust fund provided by the British, Danish & Dutch governments and by supplementary support from the UK Department for International Development (DfID).