TECHNICAL SUSTAINABILITY OF RURAL WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS IN CASE OF DEBERE ELIAS WOREDA

MSc THESIS

WUBAMILAK ALEHEGN DESSALEGN

ADVISOR: Dr. Ing. KINFE KASSA

CO-ADVISOR: Mr. BESHAH MOGESSE (MSc.)

May, 2015

Arba Minch, Ethiopia

TECHNICAL SUSTAINABILITY OF RURAL WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS IN CASE OF DEBERE ELIAS WOREDA

WUBAMILAK ALEHEGN DESSALEGN

ADVISOR: Dr. Ing. KINFE KASSA

CO-ADVISOR: Mr. BESHAH MOGESSE (MSc.)

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE

DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLIES,

INSTITUTE OFTECHNOLOGY, SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES

ARBA MINCH A UNIVERSITYIN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE

DEGREE OFMASTER OF SCIENCE IN HYDROLOGY

May, 2015

Arba Minch, Ethiopia

II

Declaration

I declare that the work in this dissertation was carried out in accordance with the requirements of the University’s Regulations and Code of Practice for Taught Postgraduate Programmers and that it has not been submitted for any other academic award. Except where indicated by specific reference in the text, this work is my own work. Work done in collaboration with, or with the assistance of others, is indicated as such. We have identified all material in this dissertation which is not our own work through appropriate referencing and acknowledgement.

Any views expressed in the dissertation are those of the author and in no way represent those of the University of Arba Minch.

The dissertation has not been presented to any other University for examination either in the Ethiopia or overseas.

Name:

Signature:

Date:

i

Approval Page

This thesis entitled with “Technical Sustainability of Rural Water Supply Projects in Case of Debere Elias Woreda” has been approved by the following examiners in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Hydrology. SUBMITTED BY:

Wubamilak Alehegn Name Signature Date

APPROVED BY:

Dr.Ing. Knfie Kassa

Supervisor Signature Date

Mr. Bashah Mogesse (MSc.)

Co-Supervisor Signature Date

External Examiner Signature Date

Internal Examiner Signature Date

Chairman Signature Date

Department Head Signature Date

Coordinator Signature Date

SGS Signature Date

ii

Certification

This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Technical Sustainability of Rural Water Supply Projects in Eastern Gojjam Zone in Case Of Debere Elias Woreda” submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master’s with specialization in Hydrology, the Graduate Program of the Department of Water Resource and Irrigation Engineering, and has been carried out by wubamilak Alehegn Id. No RMSc./238/05, under our supervision. Therefore we recommend that the student has fulfilled the requirements and hence here by can submit the thesis to the department for defense.

Name of Principal advisor Signature Date

Name of co-advisor Signature Date

iii

Acknowledgements

Above all, I thank my GOD for giving strength and help me throughout my lifetime. Next, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my advisor Dr.Ing.Kinfe Kassa and Mr. Beshah Mogesse for their valuable comment, encouragement and advice.

Special thanks goes to my husband, Ato Zemed Gedfaw, without his support, none of this would have been possible and I would not be who I am today. Besides, I would like to thank my mother and sisters, Abesha Beyne and Bezuayhu Feten or their support in my study.

I would like to acknowledge the Ministry of Water Irrigation and Energy for giving me the opportunity to attend the program and financial support.

Last but not least, I would like to thank Ato Asheber Meseker, Arba Minch university postgraduate students and the woreda water resource development office staff members for their wholehearted cooperation during data collection.

iv

Table of content

Title page

Declaration ...... i

Approval Page ...... ii

Certification ...... iii

Acknowledgements ...... iv

Table of content ...... v

List of Table ...... viii

List of Figure...... ix

Abbreviations and Acronyms ...... x

Abstract ...... xi

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1

1.1. Background of the Study ...... 1

1.2. Statement of the problem ...... 2

1.3. Research questions ...... 2

1.4. Objectives of the study...... 2

1.4.1. General objective ...... 2

1.4.2. Specific objectives ...... 3

1.5. Significance of the study ...... 3

1.6. Scope of the study ...... 4

2. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ...... 5

2.1. Sustainability of Water Supply Projects ...... 5

2.2 Technical Sustainability of Water Supply Schemes ...... 6

2.2.1. The technical Sustainability of hand-dug well technology ...... 7

v

2.2.2. The technical Sustainability of spring technology ...... 14

2.3. Management of hand dug well and spring technology ...... 19

2.4. Social sustainability of hand dug well and spring technology ...... 23

2.4.1. Belief and vision or false and unrealistic expectations ...... 23

2.5. Overview of schemes in the study Woreda ...... 24

3. METHODS OF RESEARCH ...... 30

3.1. Description of The Study Area ...... 30

3.2. Methods of the study ...... 31

3.2.1. Sampling ...... 31

3.2.2. Primary Data Collection ...... 31

3.2.3. Secondary Data ...... 32

3.4. Method of data analysis ...... 32

4. RESULT AND DISCUSSION ...... 33

4.1. General ...... 33

4.2. Statues of the Society ...... 33

4.2.1. Educational Level of the Respondents ...... 33

4.3. Water supply ...... 34

4.3.1. Water supply sources ...... 34

4.3.2. Water Collection ...... 35

4.4. Common Aspects for Debre Elias Woreda Rural Water Supply ...... 38

4.4.1. Technical Aspects ...... 38

4.4.2. Social Aspect ...... 45

4.4.3. Management Aspect...... 45

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ...... 49

vi

5.1. Conclusion ...... 49

5.2. Recommendations ...... 51

REFERENCES ...... 52

APPENDIX I ...... 56

APPENDICES II ...... 61

vii

List of Table

Table 2. 1 Statues of the water schemes (HDW-Hand Dug Well, Spring Development) ...... 25 Table 2. 2 Overview of schemes in the study Woreda ...... 25 Table 4. 1 Respondents for source of water use ...... 35 Table 4. 2 Users perception on water quality ...... 43

viii

List of Figure

Figure 2.1 Draw-Down Effect (IRC, 1987) ...... 9 Figure 2.2 Elements of a Hand-dug Well (watt and wood,2001 ...... 9 Figure 2.3 Highly Permeable Aquifer (Watt & Wood, 2001) ...... 10 Figure 2.4 Less Permeable Aquifer (will.Hart,2003) ...... 11 Figure 2.5 The well is located within the water bearing stratum (will.Hart,2003) ...... 11 Figure 2.6 Location of a Well (will. Hart, 2003) ...... 13 Figure 2.7 Spring Box with Permeable Bottom (USAID, 1982) ...... 16 Figure 2.8 Construct a Spring Structure (Will. Hart 2003)...... 17 Figure 3. 1 Map of the Study Area ...... 30 Figure 4.1 Educational Status of the Society ...... 34 Figure 4.2 Responsibility of Water Collection in the Household ...... 35 Figure 4.3 Water Collecting Materials...... 36 Figure 4.4 Calculated Traveling Time to the Water Point by the Users at Debre Elias Woreda . 38 Figure 4.5 Response of Respondents towards Common Factors for Rural Water Supply Problems in Debre Elias Woreda ...... 40 Figure 4.6 Factors for Poor Water Quality at the Woreda Level ...... 42 Figure 4.7 Non-Functional Hand-dug well Functional Spring ...... 44

ix

Abbreviations and Acronyms

COWASH Community Led Accelerated Wash CSA Central Statistical Authority DFID Department for International Development EC Ethiopian Calendar EFY Ethiopian Fiscal Year EHP Ethiopian Health Program HDW Hand Dug Well HH House Holed IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre KII Key-Informants Interview LPS Litter Per Second M.a.s.l Mean above Sea Level MDGs Millennium Development Goals MOWRE Ministry of Water Resources and Energy NGO Nongovernmental organization O&M Operation and Maintenance RWB Regional Water Bureau RWSS Rural water supply and sanitation USAID U.S. Agency for International Development UNDP United Nations Development Program UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund WASHCO Water, Sanitation & Hygiene Committee WHO World Health Organization WRC Water Recourse commission WSSP Water Supply and Sanitation Program WSS Water Supply System WWO Woreda Water Office WWT Woreda Water Team

x

Abstract

The main objective of this study was to assess the problem of sustainability of rural water supply projects by focusing on technical, management and social aspects of the Deber Elias woreda. The study was concerned on investigating the gaps between the pre and post project conditions that are necessary for the sustainability of rural water supply service delivery.

The study was carried out in four Kebeles of Deber Elias woreda. Seventy six water supply schemes were visited and survey was conducted on the water user of the Woreda. Out of this, 59 of the schemes were functional where as 17 were malfunctioned. The selection of the samples was based on simple stratified random sampling techniques of the total Kebeles. Therefore, among 32% of the Kebeles considered for the study, the two most common types of water supply schemes in rural part of the woreda were hand dug wells and spring development. Water supply service delivery in the sample projects was inadequate due to poor construction (31.6%), insufficient water quantity (13.8%), source of non-reliability (19.7%), lack of maintenance and spare parts (29.7%), lack of trained person (5.2%), attitudinal problem and other (19.7%).

The per capita consumption of water in the Woreda is 10.25liters which is not sufficient and is below the standard amount. An average time spent to fetch water in a single trip is almost one hour also including the long queuing is above the standard time. This show how the community is seriously suffering from shortages of developed water points in the study area. The survey results about (56.8%) of the respondents are illiterate, (33.9%) of the households can read and write, (6.6%) of the households did not attended formal education, the rest (2.6%) attended school after grade ten. Based on the findings, The literacy level in the Woreda is low. This could be one of the main reason for poor management of rural water supply schemes.

The quality of drinking water has polluted due to lack of fence (43%), wastewater from bathing and washing clothes (31%), groundwater contamination with toilet pit (12%), turbidity (6%), stagnant water (5%), and the rest (3%) taste and odor problems. The consequence of this is due to lack of maintenance. Therefore, proper construction, regular maintenance and control, working together with stockholders and creating awareness used as solution to mitigate the problem and sustainable use of water resources.

xi

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background of the Study

The country’s water supply sub-sector is characterized by poor performance due to a number of reasons, including non-sustainability and unreliability of water supply services (MoWRD, 2006). To solve these problems, the current Government of Ethiopia issued the National Water Resources Management Policy in 1999 (MoWRD, 1999) and the Water Sector Strategy in 2001 (MoWRD, 2001). Both in the Policy and regulation strive to increase and sustain the water supply services in rural and urban areas. However, reports show that only 67% of the rural water supply schemes in Ethiopia estimated to be functional at any time (MoWRD, 2007) and 61% of the population has access to Potable water.

Despite these problems, the Government of Ethiopia has launched Water Supply and Sanitation Universal Access Program (UAP) to improve the water supply coverage of the country to the target of 100%. Due to this fact the Amehara Regional State also working hard to achieve its part, the targets are to provide 15 Liters per capita per day in a radius of 1.5 km rural dwelling (MoWRD, 2006) (which is,3 years before the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)time frame). In this regard, the UAP emphasizes on groundwater development for drinking water supply in rural areas where there is no springs (MoWRD, 2006).

However, failure of water points to provide lasting access to improved water is a waste of financial and human resources. Repeated rehabilitation competes for limited resources with the need to provide improved access for people who do not have it. Non-sustained water points deprive people of intended health and livelihood benefits, and jeopardizes the potential for achieving the MDG target for (and ultimately universal access too) improved water (Israel & Awdenegest, 2012). Hence, assessing rural water supply schemes and the nature of drinking water source problems at sub regional scale is important.

Sustainability means that water continues to be available for the period for which it was design in the same quantity and at the same quality as it was designed (Endalkachew, 2005).

There are two important phases of sustainability: the initial and ongoing phases. The initial phase is the establishment of the service, from the recognition that a service is need, through the articulation of a demand, the planning of the service, the design and construction of the physical infrastructure, the establishment of the institutional framework, and the initial commissioning.

1

The ongoing (continuation) phase is the rest of the services life including operating the service to the satisfaction of the consumers, collecting revenue, maintenance of infrastructure, administration, and all of the other day-to-day activities.

1.2. Statement of the problem

The concept of community-managed water supplies grew from the first International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation decade of the 1980s. During the decade, water points were installed, but governments lacked the human capacity and financial resource to manage and maintain them (Schouten, 2006). Whilst organizations have defined community management with different degrees of participation and involvement of community members.

Several state administrative agencies have regulations that pertain to the location of private water wells. The fact that these regulations are promulgated by more than one agency has created confusion in the past. Major reasons for non-functioning water points are lack of major and minor repairs, shortage of water at sources during dry seasons and abandoning of schemes due to poor water quality. In addition, problems associated with improper design specifications also have great impact. Besides these, in some areas it is not possible to dig wells as there is no water at shallow depth, and the geological formations are difficult to excavate by human labor. The other major problem with regard to study in the sector is lack of registered data. The availability of data indicates how much the existing schemes are functional and enables to know what should follow next. Hence, it helps in sustainable provision of safe water to the inhabitants.

1.3. Research questions

 How is the performance of rural water supply schemes?  Which kinds of water related problems are found in the study area in relation to water supply?  Does pre and post project conditions area free of sustainability problems?  What are prominent factors that cause non-functionality to water supply schemes? Are water shortages and spare parts among them?

1.4. Objectives of the study 1.4.1. General objective

The main objective of this study is to assess the problem of sustainability of rural water supply projects by focusing on technical, social and management aspects and to provide alternative solutions to bridge the gaps in the sector. 2

1.4.2. Specific objectives

 To evaluate the performance of rural water supply schemes.  To identify the main problems related to technical sustainability issue  To identify pre and post project conditions those are necessary for the sustainability of rural water supply systems.  To identify the problems of back stoppers

1.5. Significance of the study

In country wide 81 million people of Ethiopia lowest rates of access to water supply, sanitation, and hygiene despite abundant surface and groundwater resources.

According to the government in (2005), 40% of the population had access to safe water; however, according to the World Health Organization (WHO) and local non-governmental organizations, the figure was closer to 22%. The WHO estimated that only 13% of the population had access to sanitation. Ethiopia’s Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) for improved water and sanitation access are 70% and 56 % respectively. To reach the MDG targets, the government will need to help ensure local water supply and sanitation (WSS) service providers continue to develop their capacity to manage operations. The government will also need to encourage consumer advocacy and hygiene awareness. (USAID, 1982,)

Since 1999, the Government of Ethiopia (GOE) has formulated a Water Resources Management Policy, Water Sector Strategies, Water Sector Development Program, Water Supply and Sanitation Master Plan, and also articulated a National Water Supply and Sanitation Program through a participatory process involving the key stakeholders. However, rural water supply and sanitation coverage, at 24% and 8%, respectively, is low.

Therefore the efforts by the national and regional governments are encouraging. However the coverage of water supply increasing through time non-functionality is causing several problems to sector. It is currently estimated that 35% of all rural water systems in sub- Saharan Africa are not functioning Recent figures from individual African countries indicate operational failure rates of between 30% and 60%.Many of the reasons for low levels of sustainability are related to community issues, such as limited demand, lack of affordability or acceptability among communities, perceived lack of ownership, limited community education, and limited sustainability of community management structures Unless sustainability levels can be vastly improved, the Millennium Development Goal target to

3 halve the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe water by the year 2015 will not be achieved (Harvey, P., & Reed, R. (2004)).

This non-functionality are technical, financial, management and social aspects since the decade of drinking water supply and sanitation (1980-1990) the attention given to community management is getting increases.

Hereby this study is significance to WHO in different ways. Since the primary attention of WHO is to create a healthy community all over the world, the study is intended on identifying problems on back stoppers, technical and management issues, and last community managed water supply schemes are to create ownership sprit on rural water supply projects

Therefore, this research is significance in that it is assess the problem of sustainability of rural water supply projects by focusing on technical, managemental and social aspects of the Deber Elias woreda in order to fill the gap between the post project conditions that are necessary for the sustainability of rural water supply systems. Therefore water users, water resources experts, policy makers and other concerned bodies can easily know how they manage easily and maintain sustainability of water supply schemes.

1.6. Scope of the study

The scope of rural water supply project sustainability evaluation is very wide and encompasses various inter-sector issues. However, this study focuses on the technical, management, and social aspects in particular.

4

2. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1. Sustainability of Water Supply Projects

According to a report of (USAID, 2009) more than one billion people do not have access to safe drinking water and over 2.5 billion people have inadequate sanitation. In Africa around 300 million people do not have access of safe drinking water and 313 million have no access to sanitation. That means Africa has the lowest total water supply coverage of the other continents in the world (ADF, 2005). Water is life and especially potable water is essential for life and health. So, access to drinking water, improves overall socio-economic and environmental existence (Gebrehiwot, 2006).

ADF 2005 report shows that about 33% of rural water supply projects in Ethiopia are non- functional due to lack of funds for operation and maintenance, inadequate community mobilization and commitment, less community participation in decision-making as well as lack of spare parts supplies.

Involvement of the communities is crucial for the sustainability of rural water supply systems. Women are responsible for fetching water by carrying a clay pot or jar, and traveling long distances. To make the matter worse, the rural part of Ethiopian topography has rugged terrain and the water points are far especially during the dry season as a result women move up and down by carrying water (Admassu et.al, 2002). About three hours are being lost per day per household fetching water (UNICEF, 1999). Sometimes women prefer fetching water from unprotected sources regardless of water quality. The reason for this is either protected schemes are far or they are not able to pay water free (Admassu et.al, 2002).

Sustainability is a highly topical issue in the Rural Water Supply (RWS) sector and is one of the top concerns in development efforts more broadly. The concept of maintaining a service or benefit over time is not new, and sustaining the results of any effort or investment has been the focus of attention in a wide variety of disciplines over many years. Indeed, there seem to be as many definitions of sustainability as there are organizations, which are involved with the term (Sugden, 2003).

As a concept, sustainability is relatively straightforward and a number of simple definitions for sustainable development have developed by different organizations. Three aspects emerge as common elements in the definition of sustainability, namely: the limits of available

5 resources; the interdependence of human activities, both in the present and future generations; and, issues of equity in distribution of a good or benefit (Zemenu, 2012).

2.2 Technical Sustainability of Water Supply Schemes

Components of the technical category include technology choice and community acceptance, construction quality and spare parts. As part of a demand-driven approach to enhance community ownership of installed water services, Whittington et al ( 2008) identified the need to involve households in the choice of technology thus ensuring engineering designs were responsive to local needs.

Researchers have identified system design and construction quality as the most influential technical factors for sustainability. As for institutional aspects, water committee operation and maintenance of the system and money collection are the vital institutional determinants for system sustainability Socio-economic factors like income level, willingness of the users to allocate time, availability of adequate fund and labor are equally important and vital sustainability issues to maintain the system functioning.

Sustainability has several dimensions. Katz and Sara (1997), divided sustainability under three components. These are technical aspects, institutional aspects and social aspects. Apart from this, many other researchers have described sustainability of WSS projects taking five dimensions into account, namely institutional, social, technical, environmental and financial or economic (Abrams et al.,1998; WELL, 1998).

Harvey and Reed, (2004) have identified eight sustainability factors. These are policy context, institutional arrangements, technology, natural environment, community and social aspects, financing and cost recovery, maintenance, training and capacity building.

Giné and Pérez-Foguet, (2008) have added managerial dimension also in the sustainability loop and claimed that institutional, social, technical, environmental, financial and managerial factors are interrelated.

Types of Technology: Problems that often beset committee management systems include lack of spare parts; faults in design; poor construction quality; and technology that the community simply cannot afford. Implementing the “right” technology is a central challenge in scaling up of service provision where there is the danger of simply scaling up the same problems. The more complex the technology, the greater the demands on the scaling up process in terms of capacity building, establishment of viable tariff mechanisms and supply chains for spare parts, amongst other issues. All of these must be considered against the 6 context of the particular country or district in question and the capacity of the institutions and CM structures to manage and maintain the technology over the long-term (Harold, 2004).

Availability of Spare Parts: The availability of spare parts is a critical factor to keep the system infrastructure working properly. An adequate Supply of spare part chains are now recognized as one of the key determinants of sustainability (Davis and Liyer, 2002), especially where the technology provided is imported, which has often been the case with large-scale hand pump programs in Africa, for example. The majority of recent World Bank proposal documents focus attention on the creation and support of spare part outlet chains, normally based on private sector providers, precisely to fill this perceived weakness. Linked to the issue of spare parts, is the question of sector standardization, which is part of the broader policy environment (Davis and Liyer, 2002).

The technical sustainability of water supply schemes for this study deal on hand dug well and spring as follows:

2.2.1. The technical Sustainability of hand-dug well technology

The fundamental principle of any water supply system is to gather water in a location from which either been collected by the consumers or transported to a point of use. In the case of water supply systems with a distribution network, water is first stored at central storage tanks before being released into the distribution system. This system may bring water directly to households or to public standpipes. The purpose of the well is to provide a safe and reliable means of accessing the water in the aquifer. To make the construction of a hand-dug well viable, water in sufficient quantities must be found at a depth which will allow safe excavation and economically feasible exploitation of the water resource (this will depend, of course, on a range of specific local conditions), but at a depth which does not allow easy pollution of the groundwater in the aquifer. The quantity of water made available by a well will depend on the soil type at the particular location and should be influenced by the diameter of the hole made to extract the water and by the depth of penetration into the water- bearing stratum (Watt and Wood 2001).

A. Soil conditions

Groundwater is normally found occupying the spaces between the particles of an aquifer. The type of material, which constitutes the aquifer, is important in that, while some soil types retain water quite well, the relative size of the pores between the soil particles may not be

7 conducive to allowing the water to flow along the aquifer an important consideration in the recharge of water points. Strata which have large pores will allow water to flow more freely, and as a result, layers of sand and gravel tend to provide good locations for wells and boreholes. The limiting factor is, of course, that the bulk of the excavation must take place in the material that allows work by hand. As a result, hand-dug wells are normally located where there are unconfined aquifers in alluvial deposits or in the weathered zone above a consolidated or crystalline basement rock. Hand-dug wells are usually constructed in unconfined aquifers (Watt & Wood, 2001).

B. Well diameter

For a given thickness and type of aquifer, and considering equal depths of penetration, a larger diameter hole will expose a greater area for filtration, and therefore give a faster recharge, than a smaller hole (Watt & Wood, 2001).

C. Depth of well in aquifer

For a given aquifer, the yield of a well is proportional to the square of the depth of penetration into the aquifer. This is illustrated by the draw-down (lowering of the water table3)effect as shown in Figure 2.1

Water flows into the well through the porous areas of the intake until water levels inside and outside the well are equal. When water is extracted by pumping or by bucket, the water level inside the well drops relative to the water level in the aquifer, causing a pressure difference. This results in an inward flow of water through the intake pores. The amount of drawdown depends on the yield of the aquifer, the rate of removal of water from the well and the depth into the aquifer at which water is being extracted. This principle is especially important in tube wells, but will also apply to hand-dug wells constructed in weak aquifers, or in strata, which do not allow a free flow of water (IRC, 1987).

8

Figure 2.1 Draw-Down Effect (IRC, 1987) D. Elements of a hand dug well

The basic elements of a hand-dug well are illustrated in Figure 2.2 below. The three main elements are wellhead, intake and well shaft

Figure 2.2 Elements of a Hand-dug Well (watt and wood,2001) Well Head: The design of the wellhead will vary with local conditions and with the type of water extraction system to be used. It is important that the wellhead been constructed in such a way as to contribute. The drawdown effect Principles of hand-dug wells to the overall hygiene and cleanliness of the water point. This will normally involve an impervious apron around the well, with a method of removing spilt water from around the well, to a soak pit or to a planted area (Watt & Wood, 2001).

Well Shaft: This is the section of the well between the head and the intake. As with all elements of the well lining, it must be constructed of a strong, durable material, which easily

9 is kept clean and which will not in itself constitute a health hazard. Well shafts are normally circular in shape. There are two important considerations. Firstly, the size of the shaft must be sufficient to allow excavation work to continue within it. The minimum space for one person to work is 80cm. For two people, this should be 1.2m. Secondly, the initial diameter of a well shaft should allow for possible future deepening of the well (Watt & Wood, 2001).

Intake: This is the part of the well, which is in contact with the aquifer. The walls of the intake are constructed in such a way as to allow water to pass from the aquifer into the well, thus creating a storage area, which can be accessed by bucket or pump, while at the same time ensuring that this part of the well does not cave in.

Local conditions and experience will indicate the best strategy to adopt, but the following points may act as general guidelines (Watt& Wood, 2001).

1. For a highly permeable aquifer, with water travelling at a high velocity through it, allow infiltration only though a filter layer placed on the bottom of the well.

Figure 2.3 Highly Permeable Aquifer (Watt & Wood, 2001) 2. For a less permeable aquifer (water travelling at a lower velocity), allowing infiltration through the sides of the well only is a better option.

10

Figure 2.4 Less Permeable Aquifer (will.Hart,2003) 3. In each of the above cases, the bottom of the well is located still within the water bearing stratum. When the well can be extended down to an impermeable layer, it is not necessary to put either a plug or a filter layer at the bottom, and infiltration takes place only at the part of the well which is in contact with the aquifer.

Figure 2.5 The Well is Located within the Water Bearing Stratum (will.Hart,2003) E. Guidelines for hand dug well

Internationally accepted guidelines for the location of a water point may be summarized under two sets of criteria, one general and one relating to the proximity of other structures or facilities, as follows (Filetcher, 1986).

The proposed water point or source should:

a. Be above the flood level of any nearby river or lake;

11

b. Be in a location, which allows the free access of all users all year round. This refers to physical access (i.e. that the pathway is passable) but also to legal access. A right of way must exist to the well. c. (Ideally) be within the specified distance from the intended users; d. Be in an area, which will allow the rapid dispersal of split water; e. Be in a location where the level of the water table is at a depth of at least 2m all year round. f. Not be located in any other area liable to seasonal flooding; g. Not be located in any area where pesticides or fertilizers are spread on crops; h. Not be in an area liable to erosion; i. Not be in an area where the fluctuating fresh water tables are influenced by a saltwater table; j. Not be in an area where the sinking of a well will pierce the saltwater table; k. Not be below, in terms of the direction of groundwater flow, any source of pollution such as a pit latrine, abattoir, dumping site, fertilizer or pesticide store etc.

In addition, the minimum distances, in any other direction, to such sources of pollution, are given figure 2.6.If these guidelines cannot be fulfilled, either by choosing an already appropriate site or by making the necessary adjustments (for example, by the closing down of a communal or private dumping ground or of a pit latrine), then another site should be chosen. In the case where a dump, pit latrine or pesticide/fertilizer store is to be relocated to make way for a water point, sufficient time must be allowed for the existing pollutants to dissipate in the ground, before beginning to use the water for human consumption. The water quality should be tested to ensure that all pollutants have been dispersed. In certain specific circumstances, the distance from a pit latrine reduced, but if there is any uncertainty about fulfilling these conditions, it inadvisable to comply with the 30m criterion given above. Where pit latrines are in use, the bottom of the latrine pit should be normally no less than 1m above the top of the aquifer. In all cases, the local community must be fully involved in the decision about the location of water points (Will Hart ,2003).

12

Figure 2.6 Location of a Well (will. Hart, 2003) F. Lining options

The purpose of the lining is to ensure that the well retains its excavated shape, allowing access to the water in the aquifer, while at the same time helping to prevent contamination of the aquifer. The most common types of lining are summarized below (Filetcher, 1986).

1. Unreinforced Precast Concrete: Using specially made formwork, concrete are cast in rings with an internal diameter of 1.2-1.3m and a thickness of 7.5-10cm. The height of the rings can vary from 50cm to 1m.

2. Reinforced Precast Concrete: As above, concrete are cast in special formwork, but using steel reinforcement and with a reduced thickness (5-7.5cm), depending on whether the ring is to be transported over long distances or rough terrain.

3. Reinforced Cast In-situ Concrete: Using one leaf of formwork, concrete is placed directly against the walls of the excavated well.

4. Cast In-situ Mass Concrete: As above, but with thicker walls to compensate for the lack of reinforcement.

5. Brick or Masonry Lining: Brick and masonry linings are also used, but the porosity of the materials in question impairs their suitability for this particular application. Any gaps

13 between the pit wall and the lining should be filled with a plaster mix to develop some small degree of impermeability in the important top section of the well. The inside of the lining should also be plastered for at least the top 3meters. This work, as well as the initial placing of the bricks or masonry, will necessitate the suspension of workers within the well shaft, or the erection of awkward temporary platforms in the pit. In addition, it may be necessary to clean weeds from the joints of the brickwork on a regular basis. Because of these hygiene, construction and maintenance factors, this method of lining is discouraged.

6. Other Lining Types: This manual concentrates on the construction of wells for the provision of drinking water, and as a result deals with lining methods, which are long lasting and easy to keep clean. In emergency situations, or where the water is not intended for human consumption, other lining materials can be used. These include timber and bamboo, as well as corrugated iron or fiberglass.

G. Well apron

If the area around a well is allowed to become dirty, and waste and stagnant water is allowed to accumulate, it will become a source of infection for the users. Standing in bare feet in stagnant water or mud is a serious health risk in the tropics, and the open water provides an ideal breeding ground for mosquitoes and other disease carriers. The shape of the apron is not as important as the capacity to drain water away from the well as quickly as possible and ensure its dispersal in a hygienic manner. When reinforced cast in-situ concrete is used, reinforcement bars are left protruding, around the circumference of the shaft, for 1m above the top of the well lining. These bars are then bent over and incorporated into the apron. While certain procedures advice waiting at least six months to allow this to happen, especially if the apron is to be constructed in mass concrete, this need must be balanced against health considerations relating to the state of the area around the wellhead. Local experience will again dictate the best approach (Gibson & Stinger, 1969).

2.2.2. The technical Sustainability of spring technology

Springs: Springs are points where water from an underground source is able to seep to the surface. Flows are typically less than two LPS, but some can be quite substantial. The flow of a spring is governed by several factors: watershed collection area, percolation rate of water through the ground, thickness of ground above the aquifer (i.e overburden), and the storage capacity of the soil. Springs are seasonally variable, tending to lag behind the seasonal

14 rainfall patterns (i.e. springs can give normal flows well into the dry season before tapering off, and may not resume full flow until after the rainy season is well under way). Investigation around the source will reveal the type of spring it is. Figure 2-1 shows the typical geology of a spring, showing the different levels of ground water during the dry and rainy seasons (Jo and Christine, 2002).

I. Basic Design Features of a Spring Box

Although there are many different designs for spring boxes, they all share common features. Primarily, a spring box is a watertight collecting box constructed of concrete, clay, or brick with one permeable side. The idea behind the spring box is to isolate spring water from surface contaminants such as rainwater or surface runoff. All spring boxes should be designed with a heavy removable cover in order to prevent contamination from rainwater while providing access for disinfection and maintenance (Morgan, 1990).

Spring box design should include overflow pipes that are screened for mosquito and small animal control. It is also important to provide some measure of erosion prevention at the overflow pipe. Deep-rooted trees and plants should be avoided as their root systems could damage protective structures and reduce spring flow (Will. Hart 2003).

There are two basic spring box designs that could be modified to meet local conditions and requirements. The first design is a spring box with a single permeable side for hillside collection, and the second design has a pervious bottom for collecting water flowing from a single opening on level ground (Figure 2.7).The outlet pipe should be at least 100 mm above the bottom of the box. It is up to the designer and the community to decide what will work best depending on local conditions. For instance, if the spring is located at a higher elevation than the distribution area and the distance is not too great, it may be preferable to design a spring box that is large enough to act as a storage structure with sufficient capacity to supply the entire community. This would eliminate the need to construct additional water storage tanks. If the source has high sediment loads, it is also possible to design a spring box with a built-in sedimentation tank (Will. Hart, 2003).

15

Figure 2.7 Spring Box with Permeable Bottom (USAID, 1982) One thing to remember in designing a spring box is that the overflow pipe should not be higher than the natural elevation of the spring. If subjected to back pressure from the stored spring water in the box, it is possible for a spring to divert its flow elsewhere. In a seep collection system, perforated collection pipes are laid in a "Y" shape perpendicular to the seep flow in order to collect and concentrate water, which is then diverted to a spring box. In addition, collection pipes often clog with soil and rocks, making water collection less efficient and requiring more frequent and intensive maintenance (WHO, 1979).

II. Construct a spring

A spring box (spring protection only) is very easy and cheap to build. It can be adapted to different water sources by altering the design slightly. First, you must clean the filter from any loose material (sticks, stones, garbage, etc) and dig out the mud so there is enough space. Then place one or more fibrocement tanks in the hole. The tanks have boreholes through which water flows in. Around the tank, build a filter of arranged large stones. This space is then filled with water and it serves as an additional reservoir. Then attach the guide pipe to the tank, into which the pump will later be placed (Will.Hart 2003).

On top of the large stones, place a layer of small stones, and then gravel. Then the surface must be flattened and a polyethylene film (nylon, oilcloth) arranged on it. On top of this, refill the hole with earth. The earth should be made wet so it becomes compact and stable. These earths must be covered with another waterproof layer, such as cement. The surface

16 should be slightly sloped, to avoid stagnant waters. To prevent stones turning loose, spread an additional cement layer, mainly around the pump, so no infiltration fissures may appear. For an additional platform for the pump, an old tire may be used. Finally introduce the pump into the guide pipe.

Figure 2.8 Construct a Spring Structure (Will. Hart 2003). If the spring is larger, an arch can protect it over the spring eye (where the water first comes out). Instead of the fibrocement tank, build a cavern with stones or with bricks. Usually, an arched board is used, on which stones are arranged. With this mold, you move forward line by line along the board. When the stones of each segment have been arranged, a cement mortar is spread in the space between stones or bricks, to fix the arch or vault. In addition, for areas of water scarcity, any unused overflow water can be captured and stored in a pond or tank with impermeable lining to be used for irrigation purposes as and when needed.

III. Spring development procedures

A. Concentrated springs

A concentrated spring typically occurs when groundwater emerges from one defined discharge in the earth’s surface. Concentrated springs are visible and are often found along hillsides where groundwater is forced through openings in fractured bedrock. This type of spring is relatively easy to develop and is usually less contaminated than other types of springs.

Steps for Developing a Concentrated Spring

Excavate the land upslope from the spring discharge until three feet of water is flowing.

Install a rock bed to form an interception reservoir.

Build a collecting wall of concrete or plastic down slope from the spring discharge.

17

Install a pipe low in the collecting wall to direct the water from the interception reservoir to a concrete or plastic spring box. (Note: problems with spring flow can occur if water is permitted to back up behind the wall.)

Remove potential sources of contamination and divert surface water away from the spring box or collection area. Alternative types of interception reservoirs and collecting walls can be constructed springs in lowland areas some concentrated springs emerge in valleys or lowland areas. A spring that forms in a low area may be very difficult to safeguard from bacterial contamination since surface water will tend to flow toward these valleys. For this reason, it is critical water collected from these areas is regularly tested and, if necessary, receives disinfection treatment. To develop a lowland spring, follow the steps described above for the development of a concentrated spring, but a collecting wall may not be needed (Will. Hart,2003).

B. Seepage spring

Seepage springs occur when shallow groundwater oozes or “seeps” from the ground over a large area and has no defined discharge point. This type of spring usually occurs when a layer of impervious soil redirects groundwater to the surface. Seepage springs can be difficult to develop. They are also highly susceptible to contamination from surface sources and they need to be monitored before development to ensure that they will provide a dependable source of water during the entire year. Flow is often lower from seepage springs, making them less dependable.

Steps for Developing a Seepage Spring

Dig test holes upslope from the seep until you locate the point where the impervious layer is 3 feet underground.

Create a trench approximately 18 to 24 inches wide across the slope. Trench should be extended 6 inches into the impervious layer (below the water-bearing layer) and should extend 4 to 6 feet beyond the seepage area. Install 4 inches of collection tile and surround the tile with gravel.

Installation of a collecting wall should help prevent water from escaping the collection tile. This collecting wall should be constructed of 4 to 6 inches of concrete.

Collection tile should be connected to 4-inch pipe that leads to the spring box. Box inlet must be below the elevation of the collector tile.

18

Remove potential sources of contamination and divert surface water away from spring box or collection area.

C. Spring box consideration

A spring box is a watertight structure built around a spring to isolate it from contaminated surface runoff. It is critical that this box be built properly to ensure that surface water, insects, or small animals cannot enter the structure. It is important to keep surface water away from the spring box, and animals should be fenced out of the spring’s drainage area. All activities should be kept to at least 100 feet from the spring box (will.Hart,2003).Size of the spring box depends on the amount of storage required. The box should be at least 4meter deep and should extend at least 1 meter above the ground. Most spring boxes are made of concrete.

A properly constructed spring box should have a watertight cover that fits like a shoebox lid. This will prevent insects, animals, and surface water from entering the spring.

Create both an overflow pipe and an outlet pipe. Drain installation will allow the box to be cleaned periodically.

2.3. Management of hand dug well and spring technology

A. Institutional Support

Another very important factor is the provision of follow up support to rural communities in the long term. This is increasingly recognized as a critical factor in sustainability, as evidenced by the importance it is accorded in many recent World Bank project proposals and in several recent publications by sector organizations such as the EHP (Lockwood, 2002) and the IRC (Schouten and Moriarty, 2003).

B. External Support

Lockwood (2002) and Schouten et al (2003). both identified external support as a key determinant factor for sustainability of RWSS. They pointed out that external support should focus on technical assistance, training, monitoring and information collection, coordination, and facilitation.

These documents, it is argued that the majority of rural communities cannot expect to manage on their own indefinitely. In order to guarantee the sustainability of RWSS projects and the associated benefits, it is necessary to provide support and guidance that addresses a range of issues. As (Lockwood, 2002) pointed out, there are four main functions provided by such support mechanisms above, and beyond technical support for the operation and maintenance

19 of physical infrastructure. These are technical assistance, coordination and facilitation, monitoring and information collection and training.

Fencing

In addition to constructing an apron, it is a good idea to erect a fence around a water point. This can be done immediately after the construction of the well is finished, and should enclose an area roughly 10m by 10m around the well. The fencing can be made of suitable local materials such as bamboo. However, care must be taken that, after the initial construction with such materials, it will be possible (both financially and in terms of management) to arrange the periodic replacement which will be necessary. It may be better in the long term to opt for a more permanent type of fencing with wood, steel or wire. Even in these cases, some maintenance will be necessary. Problems of replacement and repair can be avoided altogether, and a more environmentally friendly solution applied, by using a living hedge as fencing. Whatever type of fencing is used, it is important that access by the well users is guaranteed (Getenet, 2001).

For spring a fence should be constructed 10m above spring eye and around the water collection area to keep out animals. A cut-off drain 10m above the spring eye will reduce possible contaminated runoff from reaching the spring eye. Planting trees near the spring will protect it even more, prevent erosion, and make it a more pleasant place to collect water (Will.Hart,2003).

D. Structural maintenance

I. Cracks in the apron

Even seemingly, harmless surface cracks in the apron should be dealt with as quickly as possible; to lessen the dangers of allowing dirty water from the surface to infiltrate back into the well. In repairing a crack, it is not enough merely to fill in the gap in the surface. Any loose concrete must be chipped away, and the crack thoroughly cleaned before it is filled with concrete in a 1:3 (cement sand) mix. Care must be taken in analyzing the source of a crack. If it is due to normal wear and tear on the apron, the type of repair outlined above will suffice. However, the appearance of a crack may also be due to differential settlement in the underlying soil (if, for example, the apron was constructed without allowing enough time for the soil disturbed by the construction process to settle once more) or to erosion and undercutting of the apron. In these cases, the problem is more serious, and a complete reconstruction of the apron may have to be considered (Will.Hart,2003).

20

II. Security of inspection cover

Whatever the material of which it is made, the inspection cover must be kept in place at all times during the normal use of the well. This is important from the point of view of hygiene and in situations where water vending is practiced. Metal inspection covers must be painted in lead-free paint and regularly inspected to ensure that they are not rusting and contributing to the contamination of the well. If the inspection cover is made of concrete, the mortar which keeps it in place must be checked regularly, and any cracks repaired as soon as possible. A covered well which loses its inspection cover contributes very little of use to the health profile of a community (Will.Hart,2003).

III. Infiltration of sand

If the excavation of the well concluded without reaching an impermeable layer, there is the danger of the well filling up with sand from the bottom. This can be treated by placing the bottom slabs already mentioned.

IV. Collapse of the well

One instance in which collapse of a well may occur is in an area where ground conditions are hostile to concrete (for example, in soils with a low pH or excessive carbon dioxide). If this is known at the construction stage, the lining rings made using sulphate resisting cement, but this may not always be readily available. When a collapse of this nature occurs, it can be because the aggressive element in the soil has broken down the weakest part of the shaft, namely the filter rings. This can be avoided by casting in holes to an otherwise solid ring and not using the filter layer. These holes then fulfill the function of the filtering layer. Wire mesh fixed across the opening to stop the hole becoming clogged up.

V. Measures against erosion

As with cracks in the apron, this is often a situation, which is not treated until it is too late. Heavy rains can produce fast-flowing floodwaters that can quickly promote erosion when passing around the well apron, often undercutting the foundations. Care should be taken in the sitting of the well and the area surrounding the apron should be checked frequently to ensure that flood waters could be rapidly dispersed without threatening the integrity of the apron. The apron should have deep foundations and should not protrude too much above the surrounding ground and act as a dam when heavy rains fall. Earth packed in around the apron should slope gently away from the well, and the soil in this area should be checked regularly during the rainy season (Gibson & Stinger, 1969). 21

Maintenance for spring: Spring boxes need to be monitored to ensure that the spring continues to provide safe water. Silt, leaves, dead animals and other things can collect in the pipes and spring box and block the pipes or contaminate the water. Putting a wire screen on the pipe leading into the spring box will prevent unsafe things from entering pipes. Cleaning the screen every now and again will ensure a steady flow of water (will.Hart,2003).

E .Public stand post

The layout of the scheme and the sitting of the stand posts is one of the most important aspects in the design of a public stand post water supply system .In general, stand post should be located as near to as many houses as possible, easily accessible to all users, But protected from contamination sources. A stand post consists of platform with a drainage facility a supporting structure for the pipe and taps, a stand for buckets, the services pipes with valves and meter (optional). Alternatively, the platform may slope in wards; the wastewater is then collected in a gutter underneath the taps and is discharged in to the drain. If possible, the wastewater should be put to some use, for instance; irrigation and cattle watering. It also been led through an open channel to a watercourse (WHO, 1979).

The slope of both platform and drainage channels should be in range of 1:50(2%) to 1:20 (5%). the minimum dimension of the gutter is 0.2m wide and 0.05m deep at the beginning of the drain. The supporting structure and the attachment of the taps should be solidly constructed

.The best way to protect the pipe is encase it a brick or concrete column of at least 0.3m square. To protect the taps, the supporting structure should extend 0.1m above them. Underneath the taps, a raised stand can be constructed to support buckets and containers whilst being filled. The height of the stand, and of the taps themselves, is determined by the size of the container used, the manner carrying them, and the question of whether children as well as adults will fetch water, the distance between the tap and the top of the container should be less than 0.5min order to reduce spillage of water. The stand post should be surrounded by a wall or fence with a locking gate for protection during unsupervised houses.

The maximum number of users per stand post: It is advisable to limit the number of users per stand post to 100-250. In no cases should this number exceed 500. The number of users per taps should preferably be in the range of 25-125. This criterion is directly related to the maximum discharge capacity of the taps and to the water collection patter during peak hour (WHO, 1979).

22

2.4. Social sustainability of hand dug well and spring technology

2.4.1. Belief and vision or false and unrealistic expectations

It is easy to set benchmarks and proclaim what should been done. There are numerous “butts1”1to the targets of scaling up community management of rural water supply. In addition, there is not an easy answer to each of these “butts”. However, it should be accepted that scaling up at this moment in time still largely is about advocacy, about beliefs and about efforts to bundle people’s energy and strengths. However, indeed but, the question to the how to must be addressed. How to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, how to achieve the Iguaçu Action Plan, if implementing projects and creating islands of success is not good enough? How to scale up community-management of rural water supply? This question puzzles many sector experts and scaling up is taken up by different organization in the water sector (Ton, Patrick, & Leonie, 2003).

Users Satisfaction and Willingness to Sustain the System

Demand-responsiveness at the household level is a determinant of overall sustainability primarily due to its role in increasing consumer satisfaction and willingness to sustain the system. Consumers are more likely to be satisfied with results such as quantity of water, color and test of water, distance and waiting time to fetch water when they initiate the project, are involved in decision-making, and are informed about their responsibilities in terms of costs and operation and maintenance. It is expected that under such circumstances, users express a higher sense of ownership, greater confidence in their ability to maintain the water system, a better understanding of how the tariff is used, and a willingness to pay for improvements (Zemenu, 2012).

The central role that women pay in the collection, management and use of water, as well as with the general sanitation of the household is well documented (Fong et al, 2003). Furthermore, there is ample evidence to indicate that a more active involvement of women can optimize the results and impacts of RWSS projects (Mukherjee and van Wijk, 2003; DFID, 1998). Therefore, it is not surprising that the continued involvement of women, after project implementation has been completed, is identified as one important determinant of sustainability. Similarly, an adequate degree of social cohesion within a community is now

Butts1,awallbehind which targetscanbesafelylowered,scored,andraisedduringfiringpractice.theendorextremityofanything,especiallythethicker,lar ger,or blunt endconsideredasabottom,base,support,orhandle,asofalog,fishingrod,orpistol.

23 considered as a fundamental factor in sustainability. The collective willingness to maintain a water supply system, is a reflection of social cohesion, and is dependent on the concept of community identity (Cater et al, 1999).

Cost Sharing and Cost Recovery

The issues of cost sharing and cost recovery are crucial in the process of enabling the community to manage their systems after completion. It must, however, be clear that does not imply total financial responsibility of the community. It does mean that some contribution from users is needed to establish commitment, which through time should increase to reach the intended level of making the developed systems sustainable (Sebsibe Alemneh, 2002).

The provision of an improved water supply is neither cost free nor sustainable unless the costs are recovered. These costs comprise operation costs, repair and maintenance costs and replacement or rehabilitation costs (Briscoe and de Ferranti, 1988). World Bank evaluation report states that sustainability can only be ensured if tariffs generate enough resources to operate the system, finance the expansion of the service to new customers and ultimately replace the infrastructure after its useful life (Paraguay ICR, 1999).

The success of cost recovery efforts, as a key post-project determinant of sustainability, should influenced by the extent to which individuals and committees are supported, re- trained, and guided in relation to tariff structures and broader financial management. If such (external) guidance is absent, then it is likely that the success of cost recovery efforts will slowly diminish over time (Misgina, 2006).

2.5. Overview of schemes in the study Woreda

As referred in Table 2.1, there are about 213 communal use hand dug wells a n d p i p e d s p r i n g in the study Woreda. Out of 213 hand-dug wells and springs169 are functional and 44 are non-functional .All hand-dug wells are lined with concrete. The depth and the diameter of each specific well are not known. But the depth of hand dug well in this woreda, is estimated to, ranges from 5m to 20m. In addition, diameter of wells also ranges from 150cm to 180cm as referred in the woreda document.

24

Table 2. 1 Statues of the water schemes (HDW-Hand Dug Well, Spring Development)

S.No Type of Construction No of Beneficiaries at the Current Beneficiaries Remark current status structure year schemes design time

M F T M F T Functional Non- functional

1 HDW 1992 20 80 70 150 120 105 225 12 8

2 HDW 1998 19 97 103 200 97 94 191 13 6

3 HDW 1999 16 103 73 176 125 130 255 13 3

4 HDW 2000 15 121 110 231 139 130 269 11 4

5 HDW 2001 16 101 68 169 90 90 180 14 2

6 HDW 2002 26 112 84 196 140 110 250 19 7

7 HDW 2003 18 102 62 164 116 84 200 16 2

8 HDW 2004 15 137 113 250 164 136 300 12 3

9 HDW 2005 29 112 100 212 82 85 167 24 5

10 HDW 2006 36 86 59 145 65 55 120 32 4

11 SPD 2004 3 150 150 300 209 241 450 3 -

Total 213 1121 992 2193 1347 1260 2427 169 44

The users use the water point unwisely, this results the surrounding of the schemes muddy, unhealthy and unpleasant place. Standing water around pumps will result mosquito breeding, attract flies and animals. To some extent negating many of the benefits that improved water supply could provide. In addition to this, the standing water usually gets back in to the well. Particularly if the pump plinth is cracked, pollution of the water source is greatly enhanced.

On average, the existing pumps mostly Afridev hand pump require repair once in every 6-12 months. Attention is required to the plunger, foot valve, bushes or adapter unions. On project, assistance together with one or two labor from the village can attend to repairs without the use of the heavy vehicles (woreda water office manual,2001). Table 2.2 Overview of schemes in the study Woreda

Major Example Cause Remedial measures problems 1. number of Source of water -Water point constructed within 1.5km Management households is far from the radius problem using a single village water points inappropriate site -assigning qualified supervisors

25

Major Example Cause Remedial measures problems selection -seriously explored by water supplying -unusual agencies vibration and -location of a water points set noise of pump appropriated distance authorized No fence, no -scheme should be fenced entry of guard -Scheme attendant and water committee children and should be select from the community and animals should receive relevant trainings. no drainage -low community -divert properly runoff from the facilities participation surrounding farmland -contamination -Protection of ground water source of ground water deserves urgent attention -recognize that proper provision for wastewater disposal is necessary when any piped system is to be constructed Operation -Follow-up -Regular monitoring and preventive and support maintenance program should be arranged maintenance -Water in order to improve functioning of the committee have pumps not yet received -simple breakdowns are report early, by any training on monitoring team and subsequent repair operation and done disastrous, failure will not be occur maintenance due -Community participation should not only to this lack of be limited to labor and cash contribution awareness and knowledge -no operation and maintenance manual Occurrence -all rubbish and -Clear all rubbish and silt from the bottom of water silt from the of the well and to plug it with concrete or borne bottom of the gravel, desirable to reinstall lining diseases well -application of disinfections is required -Water -Low Water -avoid low assessment of groundwater resource and quality resource potential and depth to baseline -lack of chlorine groundwater are not well identified survey or disinfections -Muddy, unhealthy and unpleasant place. -low assessment

26

Major Example Cause Remedial measures problems of groundwater resource potential and depth to groundwater are not well identified. 2.Social Lack of -due to low -Creating awareness and encouraging problem awareness awareness users to take and lack supervision and responsibilities of schemes motivations training of users -Long queue -well dose not -The Woreda Water Office should and long deliver enough conduct frequent situation analysis, and walking water quickly should identify areas requiring training distances and support -User should be instructed to not stand on the headwall and manhole -avoid inappropriate site selection Shortage of -Increase number -avoid low assessment of groundwater water of users resource potential and depth to groundwater are not well identified -Increase number of water schemes Disagreement Lack of -We must aware community or villages of awareness before constructed the water point community -Belief and -the perception -creation of awareness about the schemes vision or of the by giving some trainings false and community is not unrealistic that much expectations advanced about the such like services 3. Technical Poor -no drainage -provision of drainage apron to divert problem construction facilities water away from the wellhead area quality -Apron -ground the well top is graded to ensure distortions and safe removal of spillage water away from cracking the shaft -Landslide -space has to be filled with gravel -the manhole of -except for the top 3 meters that should be the well is not plugged with puddle clay before the

27

Major Example Cause Remedial measures problems properly sealed wellhead is constructed -old excavation -consider the gap between the caisson and had certainly parts of the shaft wall irregular shape better with cement grout or sealed with -breakdown of puddle clay headwall and -An apron should be constructed around drainage apron the raised top of the lining -polluted surface -lining being built up on a concert-cutting water from ring, space has to be filled with gravel and seeping in to the used mortared well -Concrete apron constructed on the -leakages in the ground surface all around the well distribution -piped water supply continuous technical system and non-technical support -Pipe trenches -an impervious apron 2meters wide, were shallowly sloping away from the shaft in all or poorly dug directions has to be provided. -low assessment of groundwater resource potential and depth to groundwater are not well identified frequent -unwise use of -water committee should be select from scheme the schemes community and should receive relevant failure training and aware the water use -Regular monitoring and preventive maintenance program should be arranged in order to improve functioning of the pumps Spare part -seal, valves, -changing old pump unites taps, facets and -sufficient supply of spare part for the elbows of the owner or merchants water point is -It is needed to assign local people for broken such tasks checking and repairing taps, -no access to tracing and repairing leakage pipes tools, spare parts -storage tank is made of steel

28

Major Example Cause Remedial measures problems Operation -lack of -the water committee, responsible for the and performance overall management of the water supply maintenance -long age scheme in their respective communities services -Community members should truly -Pipe lying is not participate and decide on site selection, properly done technology selection and the design of the -Lack of sealed technology well (absence of -receive upgrade and enhance technical join two things) and capacity building trainings Quantity of Depth of wells -Use of mortared solid clay water not may not be -extract any sand sufficient sufficient -unsuitability of site or clogging of the -decrease in the well intake by incursion deposit capacity of a well small diameter the well in the conventional manner like pipe leading to expensive lining of shaft the surface

29

3. METHODS OF RESEARCH

3.1. Description of The Study Area

Debre Elias woreda is one of the 17 woreda of the East Gojjam Zone of Amhara Region it, is located the elevation between 1500 to 2150m.a.s.l. It total area is 112,762.83 hectares. As it can be observed from Figure 3.1, the woreda shares boundaries with the south and west by the Abay River which separates it from the Oromia Region, on the northwest by the west Gojjam Zone, on the north by Machakel, and on the east by Gozamn. This woreda has a total population of 91,412, of whom 40,720 are men and 50,692 women; 81,211 for rural and 10,201are urban inhabitants. The area receives the mean annual precipitation of 1307 mm and mean monthly temperature in the area ranges between 14 0c and18 0c Ground water from shallow aquifers is the main source of drinking water supply in the district (woreda agricultural office).

(GIS version 9.1) Figure 3.1 Map of the Study Area There are 15 Kebeles in the woreda. From these three Kebeles are under township administration, while the rest 12 Kebeles are rural. In this study four Kebeles considered: Gebetsawit, Guay, yekegat, and Yeguarat. The water supply systems include springs, gravity

30 piped distribution systems, hand-dug well fitted with hand pump (afridve). People also use rivers and streams nearby for irrigation, cattle watering, washing clothes and bathing.

3.2. Methods of the study 3.2.1. Sampling

The employed different stages in the sampling procedures to determine sample Kebeles, number of hand dug wells and springs, and households.

In this study four Kebeles were selected depending on agro ecology conditions of the woreda and distributions of water points because woreda agro-ecology conditions has Woyna-dega (mid altitude) 48.1% and kola(low altitude) 31.9% and the distribution of water points not fair then by first write alphabetical order then by simple stratified random sampling techniques randomly, 32% of the available functional and non-functional water points composed of springs and hand dug wells fitted with hand pump was selected as a sample of the study.

The sample Kebeles respondents were selected based on proportional allocation method, and purposively sampling techniques the reason for selecting for the sake of managing time and material resources. The size of the households sample were also concerned, five households were selected from each of the Kebeles in each of the functional and non-functional water points.

According to Woreda water resources developments Office, the total numbers of rural water supply schemes by the end of 2006 were 213. Out of the total 169 are functional and the rest 44 are non-functional. Out of these 76 are located in the sample Kebeles (36 in Ykegate, 24 in Guay, 10 in Gebestawite, and 6 in Yguarate). Out of the total sample Kebeles 59 are functional and the rest 17 are non-functional.

3.2.2. Primary Data Collection

The primary data were collected by using household survey, semi structural questionnaire (include both close three parts and 32 questionnaires, and open ended 2 parts and 22 questionnaires) three focus group discussion, transect walk (to observe the status of the water supply system) and key informant interview (see appendix I).

Household Survey: To generate information at household level data, closed and open ended questionnaires and interviews were conducted. The variables include rural water supply,

31 communities’ participation in the provision and managements systems, the role of water committees, factors affecting the sustainability of rural water supply schemes associated uses and wrong use of the schemes as well as problems related to technical issues. In this study380, households were taken as a sample for interview and focused group discussion.

Key-informants interview (KII): are used to collect background information about the status of rural water supply, status of communities’ participation, in operation, maintenances, management aspect and sustainability of the water supply schemes. The conducted interviews with the selected individuals, who were believed to have good information about the area and that of the subject matter such as artisans’, Kebeles administration officials as well as Woreda water resource office experts and Zonal water office professionals, were also performed. Thoroughly 10 artisans’, four Kebeles administrators, five woreda water office worker, 28 Kebeles water team and the rest 333 was water users were interviewed.

Focus Group Discussion (FGD): in this study three focus group discussions with water committee members, WWO(woreda water office) workers and artesian, and Keble administration officials in the selected sample Kebeles were used. For each group discussions, five to seven members had been identified to participate in the four selected Kebeles. Different checklists were also used for each focused group discussions.

Observation: In addition to the above tools, observation of the physically existing water schemes, their state of development, and distances of water sources were done from the dwelling places, the functional sustainability of the schemes and matched it with the checklists to assess the reliability of the data collected.

3.2.3. Secondary Data

Secondary data collections are other main tools for research work, for which the used journal, weekly and monthly report from woreda water resource development office, operation and maintenance manual. Socio-economic conditions of the study area were obtained from zonal water development offices.

3.4. Method of data analysis

Descriptive statistics based on percentages and correlation were used to analyze the data. Qualitative data collected from users, technical staff members, and water committees using structured questionnaire interviews and discussions was entered and analyzed with Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS version 20).

32

4. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

4.1. General

The objective of this study was to assess the water supply situation in Debre Elias woreda, in order to identify technical, social and management sustainability of rural water supply problems in the woreda. In this chapter the results of the water supply schemes problems in the woreda discussed. First, the background information about schemes on their location, population served on the schemes, status of schemes etc. Based on the findings of the survey, remedial measures are proposed to improve the water supply problems. Finally, brief discussion on qualitative data analysis, are presented.

4.2. Statues of the Society

Understanding the socio-economic and demographic background information about sample populations is very important to know their characteristics. As the sample taken i.e. 380 people from the users or beneficiary from this samples, 124 (32.63%) are males and 256 (67.37%) females. Out of these (67.3%) are farmers, (12.9%) artisan, 18.7% civil servants and (1.1%) were others. The sample considers from functional and non-functional water points. With this regard to age composition, 133 (35%) recline in the age category of less than 25, 125 (32.9%) in the group of 25-40 years, 81(21.3%) of the respondents in 41-60 years, and 14 (10.8%) in the 61-72 year. Based on this information the respondents are taken as representatives. For one thing, the majority of the samples are women who feel the pain of absence of water. On the other hand, the majority above 25 years old, who can describe what, is going on their society’s intermesh of water supply development and management. An average of family size in the area is five per household.

4.2.1. Educational Level of the Respondents

Education is an instrument for socio-economic development of a nation. It is a basic parameter for any development activity particularly water supply programs. This is because literate citizen can’t be better participants and involve in projects targeted to water supply and management. Knowledge and technology transfer are also easier in a community that constitutes educated peoples. Educated individual demand for better services and toward improvement of their living condition.

33

250 216 200 Frequenc y Percent 150 129

100 56.8 50 33.9 25 6.6 10 2.6 0 Illiterate Read and write Between grade 5 to Above grade 10 10

Figure 4.1 Educational Status of the society The survey results in figure 4.1 about (56.8%) of the respondents are illiterate meaning that they did not attend formal education. Out of this group, (33.9%) of the households can read and write by attending informal education program. The remaining (6.6%) have obtained their knowledge from formal education, and (2.6%) attended school after grade ten. Based on the findings, conclude that the literacy level in the rural setting to the Woreda is very low. This is turn could be one main reason for poor management of rural water supply schemes. 4.3. Water supply

4.3.1. Water supply sources Provision about potable water is necessary to access safe and adequate quality of drinking water for the people within a reasonable distance. Assessing the current situation of rural water supply helps to know the current supply level, identifying factors against the water availability to beneficiaries and to set directions aimed at adequate water supply to the target community on a sustainable basis. Accordingly, data on water supply projects` inventory, alternative water supply sources are used as different purposes. Based on the information gathered, users move distances to fetch water and waste time for collecting water. In the study woreda, there are several sources of water, such as protected and unprotected hand dug wells and spring.

From the respondent about 44.7% are using traditional water sources as primary sources of drinking water. The reason for this pointed out that inadequacy water schemes, even it is present, frequent interruption of the developed water supply schemes additionally the water point far from their home i.e. distances from their villages.

34

Even there are developed water supply schemes in the sample villages such as Woyerema, Guta, Jalo and Debelmelke, most of the residents use unprotected water sources. Because most of the water supply schemes are non-function due to frequent breakdowns and extended time of maintenances. Table 4.1. Respondents for source of water use

Water resource type Frequency

Hand dug well and Spring 210

traditional water sources 170

Total 380

4.3.2. Water Collection

On the study area for water collecting purpose is dominantly left for adult women and girls above 15years i.e 47.1% and 35% respectively are responsible for fetching water in the households. (see Appendix II Table 1).

50.00% 47.10% 45.00%

40.00% Adult woman 35% 35.00% Girls above 15 years 30.00% All family 25.00% Boys above 15 years 20.00% Children under 15 years

15.00% 11.80% Adult man 10.00%

5.00% 2.40% 2.40% 1.30% 0.00% Figure 4.2 Responsibility of Water Collection in the Household As indicated in the figure above adult men, (1.3%) are less responsible for fetching water. The descriptive results indicate that females especially adult women and girls above 15 years are loaded on this task.

In additions to this, the capacity of the container used to fetch in the single round is presented below.

35

80.00% 72.10% 70.00%

60.00% metal barrel

50.00% bucket 40.00%

30.00% 26.10% clay pot

20.00% jar 10.00% 1.10% 0.80% 0.00% metal barrel bucket clay pot jar

Figure 4.3 Water Collecting Materials As indicated on the figure above (72.1%) of the respondents’ used jars having size of 25, 20 10 litter for fetching. On the other hand (0.8%) of users used bucket. This indicates jar takes place the leading position for fetching water (see Appendix II Table 4).

Moreover (37%) of the respondents have stated that the amount of water they used for domestic purpose such as household cooking, drinking, sanitation and others constitutes i.e. 26-60 litter (58.4%) followed by 61-80 litter per day (20%), less than 25litter per day (13.7%), 81-100 litter per day, (7.9%) per day per household.

Among the water users, water from the developed and protected source is basically used for drinking and cooking. Animal watering, personal hygiene and cloth washing has performed at the traditional source. The average household water use in the visited Kebeles is 26-60 liters/day/ household. Generally, considering a household size of five, per capita consumption was 8–10 liters. This is by half less than World Health Organization (WHO) standard of 20 liters per person per day.

Based on the above finding, the per capita consumption of water has developed as follows:

“The mean holding capacity of the container used to fetch in a single round trip in day divided by the mean of surveyed household family sizes.”

=51.27 =10.25liters per 5 person per day (see appendix II Table 3).

36

The per capita consumption of water is 10.25liters,which is significantly different from world health organization (WHO) and ministry of water irrigation and energy (MOWIE) guideline values of 15 liters per person per day and accessible with a range 1.5km is for the rural dwelling place (WHO, 2003). Unfortunately, the current level of per capital water consumption is not sufficient and is below the adequate level. This show how the community is seriously suffering from shortages of developed water points in the study area.

Further analysis in Appendix II Table 5 show that correlation between family size and their water consumption is positively correlated and it is significant. As the family size increase, the amount of water consumption per person increase. The analysis also the educational status of the household and their water consumption per day is significantly correlated as positive for schemes. This indicated that the educational status have an impact on amount of water consumption.

3.70%

≤ 0.5 km 24% 0.5km to1km

45% 1km to 1.5km 27.30% 1.5km to 2km

Figure 4.4 Calculated Traveling Distance of the Users to Water Points The survey respondents in the study area most of the time they fetch water every day except in Saturday, Sunday and other common religious holiday. As to the frequency of water collection per day, (5.33%) of the respondents have been collecting water for more than three time a day, (36.67%) three times day, (41.33%) two times daily and the remaining (16.67%) only once every day.

37

60.00% 48.90% 50.00%

40.00% ≤30 minute

31 to 60 minute 30.00% 23.90% 24.20% 1 hour to 1:30 hour 20.00% ≥1:30 hour 10.00% 2.90% 0.00% ≤30 minute 31 to 60 1 hour to 1:30 ≥1:30 hour minute hour

Figure 4.4 Calculated Traveling Time to the Water Point by the Users at Debre Elias Woreda As interviewed that the problem queuing and waiting was more serious than that of the distance. From this, the mean time taken to fetch water from their water point is 54minutes and 1.7 km walking distance from a dwelling place. The guideline value recommended by WHO and MOWIE for urban and rural which is set adequate water supply accessible with arrange of 0.5 km to 1.5 km and 15 to 30 minutes of fetching time from a dwelling places. Therefore, the water accessibility according to distance and time to fetch water is not satisfy their demand.

4.4. Common Aspects for Debre Elias Woreda Rural Water Supply

4.4.1. Technical Aspects

Technical issues are related to the design and construction quality of schemes, technical skills needed for operation and maintenance, selection of appropriate technology, availability and accessibility, high elevation and affordability of spare parts etc. Poor construction quality or the uses of low-grade materials lead to the failure of the water system before and after the end of its designed life span. Similarly, design flows including shallow well or spring developments, and overestimates or insufficient discharge (low yield) caused a system to fail from the outset.

In this study area poor site selection (such as, located near high potential source of pollution, high elevation, uncertainty of site, inconvenient, etc) were the main problem.

During field observation (67%) wells of the study woreda has built with no protective features. The presence of silt and sand in high concentrations can be a major problem in 38 certain instance due to erosion of the bottom or receiving runoff from the land. Sediment in the water should wear down moving parts of the pump. There are three routs by which, the water in well contaminated through the wellhead, through the lining, and through the water entering the intake. There were also poor design and construction problems, sand intrusion (turbidity and taste, seasonal variation of supply, the number of storks to get water is very much, unusual vibration and noise of pump, distortion and crack of platform, absence of protection work, apron and drainage facilities and flooding. were major design and construction problems in Debre Elias Woreda.

On the other hand the study area (22.3%) of total water points are non-functional due to fixing leaking spring boxes, tapping, and pipes, could not be done and also minor repairs, including fixing loosen bolt, greasing the pump because the water community lacked tools, skills, or funds. Several facilities abandoned due to unanticipated failure that required major repairs and rehabilitation.

The technical problems noticed in the sample Kebeles are also significant in causing scheme failure. These were operation and maintenance, construction and design respectively put in the order of causing considerable failure. All water supply infrastructures need sort of preventive, routine and emergency maintenance and repair like any other engineering structures. Poor construction reflected in the form of absence of apron, drainage facilities, insufficient spring protection and use poor quality construction materials also significantly contribute to failure. Design takes almost a small proportion of technical problems. Avoiding over estimation of yield and inconveniency could solve this problem.

The problems with the users’ payments are related to the users’ willingness to pay, but also to the capacity of the committee to manage the finances. This capacity is again dependent on the follow-up support they get and the lack of motivation for the committee members. In summary, it can be divided in to: money collection and spare parts availability.

39

5.20% low construction quality

spare part 13.80% 31.60% believe during site selection

shortage of water 19.70% lack of performance

29.70%

Figure 4.5 Response of Respondents towards Common Factors for Rural Water Supply Problems in Debre Elias Woreda Sustainability of water supply schemes is affected by several problems. Most of the water supply schemes were poorly constructed due to water committee have not yet received any training on operation and maintenance due to this lack of awareness and knowledge, poor supervision, in appropriate site selection, and late budget release and availability. This was evidenced by the discussions with water committee members stating that the woreda water resource office seldom visited water supply points.

The above figure indicates that 31.6% of respondents are low construction quality, 29.7% of respondents are spare part problem,19.7% of respondents are believe during site selection problem, 13.8% of the respondents shortage of water and the rest 5.2% of respondents are lack of performance problems. Due to the fact that maximum percentage of respondents indicates non-functional problems of water points. So a poorly constructed scheme is more likely to become unsustainable of water points.(see Appendix II Table 2)

A. Follow-up support

The waters schemes (like hand dug well, deep wells, shallow wells and springs) in Ethiopia are mostly supported by governmental and non-governmental organizations, but these schemes are not sustainable. Due to the following problems:-Lockwood (2002) and Schouten et al. (2003)

40

 Before and after the construction there is no watershed management around the schemes this leads on the upper catchment there is erosion, degradation, deforestation and pollutions, since brings water pollution and drying up.  There is no monitoring, community cooperation, spare parts provision, technical training and training on managerial and administrative skills of water committees.  The governmental and non-governmental organizations and other supportive organizations are not follow up the schemes after they end up their constructions  There is no fences most of the schemes B. Reliability

Domestic water supply in the study area is highly affected by many factors. These factors generally classified in to population, climate, socioeconomic conditions, water pricing practices, and water conservation and alternative supply sources. These factors can vary in degree of influence within the study area.

From the above factors very important factor is climate factor (Temperature and precipitation) seasonal variations most especially during dry seasons. In all the visited Kebeles, WWTs specified that the majority of springs and HDWs either decrease their yield to the minimum, or (some) dry up, and beneficiaries divert to traditional sources for water use. Daily reliability of water supply schemes is also assessed under this research. A lot of beneficiaries are the basic reason (other than geology) for daily unreliability of water supply schemes. For example, keeping geographical factors constant, the percentage increase of unreliability in Guay Kebeles associated with higher number of beneficiaries. Furthermore when the water supply schemes constructed, not digging of the well until sufficient water is also main factor .The beneficiaries’ that use the water supply schemes do not give attention for keeping and managing the spare parts of the scheme. Spare parts of the schemes are not available for customers in order to ripple the damaged parts.

C. Local contractors or artisans

In the woreda total number of artisans’ are only 30. These artisans trained for the installation, construction and maintenance of water supply schemes. They had been training for two months (in both educational process i.e. theory and practice) but after completion only seven artisans’ are certified and have license. Due to this reason there is shortage of artisans’(Woreda Water Office (WWO).

41

According to local artisans and WWO, 2004 E.C, artisan payment has been reduced almost up to a half. Because they are not working schemes in properly is the reason behind their payment cuts. Before the payment cut, artisans were paid based on the task done. Artisans mainly perform masonry works; supervision of users digging wells, installing hand pumps and other technical labor. But according to COWASH Sustainability of water services implemented using community-managed project approach in East Gojjam zone officials.

D. Water Quality

Factors affecting water quality at source distance of contaminating sources such as, pit latrines, absence of fence, stagnant water, turbidity, close bathing and washing, and test and odor to water points has been an important indicator in indicating the possible source of bacterial contamination of groundwater (see figure 2.6). In most cases, it is advisable to construct latrine at a minimum radius of 30m down-slope of the water point. In this study, (12%) of the water points were found in less than 30 m radius to latrines, may be risk of fecal contamination. potential health hazard, numerically (31.6%) of the respondents confirm this is due to low construction quality as shown figure 4.6. This is because studies have identified pit latrines as sources of bacteria to groundwater (Dereje,A. (2007)). On the other hand, in (31%) of the water points people were observed bathing and washing clothes near or around the water points.

5% 3% 6% absence of fencing

12% 43% closer washing and bathing

pit latrines

31% turbidity

stagnante of water

tast and odor

Figure 4.6 Factors for Poor Water Quality at the Woreda Level However, it was only in (5%) of the water points that stagnant water was observed. Forty three percent of the water points are not fenced at all, which could have prevented animals from reaching the water points and might reduce the possibility of contamination of the water

42 points by animals. Additionally, none of the water points had guards. In addition, only one of the on-spot springs that the spring box dose not covered well. Seasonal variations of water quality especially turbidity is common when the groundwater table is relatively close to the surface. In the study, users in 6% of the water points reported that the water at the water points becomes turbid after heavy rain indicating easy infiltration of runoff to the groundwater and increased risk of groundwater contamination. Similar result was also report in Guinea-Bissau (Bordalo and Savva-Bordalo, 2007). Users in (3%) of the water points complained that the water had taste and odor problems.

Respondents were asked to report their satisfaction with the availability and quality of water from their principal source of drinking water. Unfortunately, the survey did not include the collection of water samples to directly determine water availability and quality. Our analysis is thus dependent on respondents’ own assessment of the adequacy and quality of the sources they use. Experiences of respondents with respect to water quality show considerable variation across the sample. The main causes of dissatisfaction include bad water color and presence of suspended materials, water shortage, bad odor, construction quality. Due to this reason, the schemes show crack immediately and dirty materials enter to the water. The consequence of this condition leads to not used even after maintenance. Table 4. 2. Users Perception on Water Quality

Respondents water quality Frequency Percent Very good 2 0.5 Good 160 42 Fair 151 40

Not satisfactory 67 17.5 Total 380 100.0 E. Spare Parts supply

FGD member expressed their views as, “When our scheme breaks down and need repairs and maintenances that require spare parts, have to walk many kilometers on foot to the Woreda or else the peoples fetch water from traditional sources because.” Most of the time water committees’ do not get proper spare parts, tools, for maintenance in sustainable way. Specifically, focus group discussion with water committees in Guay, and Yguarat Kebeles revealed that most of the time the water committees bought spare parts from the market but they did not match with sizes main parts of the schemes. This and other problem has created 43 another unnecessary cost throughout the time. They asserted that the woreda water office should extend to the villagers for supports such technical issues. During filed observation looking to the pipeline facets in Guay Kebeles spring development in that water supply schemes are functional even though lack of local technicians, with necessary spare part and hand tools (Photo 4.1).

Figure 4.7 Non-functional Hand-dug Well and Functional Spring Absence of spare parts and tools for community is also an important factor that contributes to the non-sustainability of rural water supply schemes, Because, the implication is a negative impact on sustainability of community water supply schemes. With regard to this (Komives et, al.2006) stated that without a reliable supply of spare parts and some qualified persons to repair and maintain the water supply, schemes will not be sustainable.

In the four case studies of Kebeles, there is problem related to spare parts. Spare parts are not easily available. Another factor is the participation of the community, during the implementation and later on. Case studies mention a lack of partici pation as a cause for a lower sustainability. Some communities were never convinced of the desirability of new water sources and they did not have a say in decision-making.

Many research findings (such as, Selamawit Assefa 2007, Yitayh Leul, 2011) show that large proportions of RWSS are non-functional at any time owing to the inaccessibility of proper tool kits and spare parts. The enquiries with the water committee members confirmed the above results by saying that the spare parts are by no means accessible to the community. In addition to this concerning the participants of the committee mentioned the problems affordability of spare parts because of lack of regular payments of water charges by most of the villagers.

44

4.4.2. Social Aspect

Other aspects of sustainability of rural water supply systems depends on the willingness of users to provide the necessary time, money and labor to keep the system functioning. This willingness affected by cultural, political (community by-law that means regulation made by local society to lead legally and solve their problems related to the water use), socio- economic aspect such as willingness of villagers to work together, consumers satisfaction with the services.

Community participation in order to increase the chances of the water supply system to meet the needs of users, community participation should begin as early as possible in the project development. In fact, community participation should begin as soon as a community has requested a water supply facility. Thereafter, community members should be directly involved from planning the new scheme and deciding how it can be run, and by so doing, the prospects of it success are improved.

Community participation sustained when there is a system for organizing community. Community organization therefore entails that a community has the institutional capacity to manage create the community by law to lead the beneficiaries the development and operation of the water supply facility, if it is to be sustainable.

Lack of support and supervision from the woreda water offices, the involvements and financial contributions of communities for operation and maintenances are the major problems throughout pre and post implementation of water points. As per data collected from survey households, only 41% of the community participate in the construction of the water points, while 26.9% of the households use one water point where creates larger pressures on the scheme and 32.1% of the responses mentioned the lack of finance for operation and maintenances.

4.4.3. Management Aspect

A. Water Quantity

Major problems associated with quantity of drinking water are too many users, seasonality and the scheme does not deliver enough water quickly. I realize that there should be a permanent solution for this problem. It is not possible to judge the adequacy of the rural water supply scheme due to lack of information on the yield of specific scheme. In most of the cases, the real number of users per pump or spring development is not known. In addition,

45 the number of users at rainy seasons and dry season are different. Domestic uses of water include drinking, cooking, bathing, clothes washing, and plate washing. Water that is suitable for drinking is also used for cooking. In all the hand dug wells and piped supply spring users reported obtaining their drinking water from a well, and for bathing, clothes washing and animal watering reported using different water source like, rivers, ponds and unimproved spring source.

Generally the water supply schemes are not properly managed to increase their quantity because the users do not fetch in a proper way. Most of the fetching materials such as Jar and Clay pot are narrow to enter discharged water. Children below 15 years old are not give care for the water wastage.

B. water charges and willingness to pay

The findings of this research have indicated that the average monthly contribution per HH (under both functional and non-functional water points) is 2 ETB. Though most of the time the guards are not paid for their service an average of 50 ETB per month is paid for the scheme caretaker/guard in some cases. In general, the total 59 to 73 ETB is retained per scheme for future maintenance, which would not be enough to cover if actual replacement and maintenance costs are examined.

The most often mentioned problems are related to the users’ payments. Within community, management, users expected to collect money, at least for the regular maintenance. Yet, in all case studies, there is a problem with respect to payments. The contributions are not enough to pay for the operation and maintenance. Case studies mention more specific the inability of committees to raise and manage the money, the misappropriation of funds and a lack of willingness to pay.

In addition, 81% of water committees’ respondents cited that the community had the final decision in water tariff establishment. The remaining 18.9% did not remember how the tariff was established or did not respond to the question. In one community the tariff was set at 1-2 ETB per month, an amount that the respondent admitted “everyone here can pay.” But most of users did not want to pay additional money for maintenance and operation . Adjustments are often made for the poorest households to facilitate payment. Finally, it was very common for widows and elderly to be exempted from collection lists and hence discounted in the delinquency payments. Therefore, the level of delinquency or non-payment of tariffs is assumed to represent willingness to pay.

46

C . Community Participation

Eighty three percent of spring development communities are involved in construction, by providing building materials (bricks, stones, sand, and water) and voluntary labor. In the rest of the tasks such as, payment for artisans, even if limited supply of spare parts, etc performed by the water agencies. In the study Woreda, there is less feeling of ownership and responsibility among users to carry operation and maintenance. This may be due to lack of awareness among the people about the importance of community participation. Lack of community participation, is one of the main reasons towards low performance of the scheme, leading to excessive expenditure and low cost recovery.

As per (Aschalew, 2009) the local community has an important role to play in a rural water- supply program. For the purpose of the water projects, the community considered to comprised of (1) the local government or Kebeles administrators, (2) leading or elderly citizens, (3) the religious leaders, and (4) individuals. The local government may be elective or appointive but, in any case, it has jurisdiction over the matters, which affect the community. The task of obtaining the necessary local co-operation and participation in the development of the project was assigned to an interested and responsible official, preferably the engineer in charge of the .program. The extent of material support must always soberly judged and evaluated. The important thing at the beginning is to get the official consent and co-operation of the community concerned. Most of the citizens are not be members of the local administration; but, at the same time, it brings even more influence to bear on the success of the proposed water-supply programmer than does the official administration. Community leaders were brought into the planning of water supply schemes and support water supply projects. Religious leaders in many communities are highly important since they are acceptable by the community and appreciate the value of such a project, and give vital support.

In community participation, communities take part in role in its own affairs by sharing and implementing political and economic power in developing projects. The motive of community participation in water supply schemes are to share certain proportion of project cost, increase project effectiveness and efficiency and increase community empowerment along with women’s role in a community.

47

Therefore, there has to be some motivating factors to anchor community together for common participation to feel the sense of equity and ownership feeling. Every member in the community has to be benefitted with the local water supply systems.

The various population components of the community (i.e. government leaders, community leaders, religious leaders, and the public) did not have the same perceptions and attitudes to some extent: certain groups or individuals were seeking personal advantage, but the majority were influenced on the basis of one or another aspect of the scheme, full community support were the result in which the fact is the desired objective.

48

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1. Conclusion

Major problem with regard to studying on water supply schemes in the area is lack of well- documented data. Like data , how many users in one hand dug well, how much the existing schemes are functional, what is the cause of service breakdowns (such as, less capacity of ground water yield because they have not more mechanical and biological soil water conservation to recharge the ground water, lack of knowledge about how to use the water supply scheme wisely and properly, etc.), how much the yield of hand dug well before construction and enables to know what should follow next. Hence, it helps in the sustainable provision of safe water to the inhabitants. The way of operation and maintenance is also one major problem in water supply sectors in the area during FGD in WWO workers. On the other cases, absence of follow up supports such as, needed for monitoring, community cooperation, spare parts provision, technical training and training in managerial and administrative skills of water committees are considered to be the major problems in the study area.

Another malfunction of the water scheme is the lack of the operation and maintenances. This problem starts from the woreda expertise because the woreda expertise is very few in number to manage or follow up all Kebeles during the construction. As a result the artesian and even the beneficiary community work improperly so it has less capacity and life time of the scheme very shortly. In addition, beneficiaries have poor skill to operate and maintain the systems due to the absence of relevant training and technical support by experts at Kebeles level, in accessibility and un affordability of tools, spare parts (such as, seal, pipe, sanction pump, etc.).

One further factor identified in the study area was contribution of cash and labor pre and post construction. In areas where the contribution of cash and labor were high, the sustainability was better, but after construction the water points the user did not bear the responsibility to sustain the schemes.

Beside lack of adequate training and follow up from the office, lack of power to enforce rules of the water committees, absences of working manuals are identified as major problems that causes the communities not to manage their schemes properly.

The task of collecting and transporting water is mainly assigned to women, as they are the prime water users at household level. They spend most of their time fetching water from

49 unsafe sources and bear a higher risk of being exposed to water borne diseases. This being the case, their participation in the planning and implement the water supply project is very limited due to multiple responsibilities at the household level.

On the other hand, problems associated with improper design, specifications and site selection have great impact during document observation. Besides these, in some areas it is not possible to dig wells as there is no water near the surface, and the ground is too hard. Water supply schemes visited in Guay, Chago, Gente, Degeba, and Wamet kebels are all prone to drought because of this reason Deber Elias woreda have low water supply services.

In the study area large number of households are using on single scheme due to scattered settlement, and unsuitable topography of the area. The average frequency of water collection was two times per day with the average per capita water consumption of 10 liter. Moreover, average time spent to fetch water in a single trip is 54.74 minutes also including the long queuing. According to the national standard at least 15 liter of water per person per day and accessible with the range of 0.5 km to 1.5 km should be provided. However, majority of the communities’ especially adult women and girls above 15 years fetch water from the water points by going 1-1.5 km distances from there the dwelling places. The amount of the water they supplied is below the national recommended quantity.

This study revealed that traditional sources are the main sources of drinking water due to service breakdowns of the protected schemes. Newly developed water supply schemes are providing services with frequent interruptions that clearly show the poor functioning of water supply schemes that in turn affect the sustainability.

Technical issues relating to the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the rural water supply system are the most determinant of water supply sustainability. Because water system sustainability depends on a number of factors, which vary between community and type of scheme, therefore, measuring sustainability is a difficult task.

50

5.2. Recommendations

Strengthening community participation and capacity building of the community to manage water supply schemes is essential. Water supply schemes should be more sustainable if users themselves manage their system, because communities are closer to the schemes than external agencies and to take ownership and responsibility of managing the water supply schemes. Therefore, Woreda Office Water Resources Development should create conducive environment and capacity building for rural water supply management local institution (water committee) through legalizing the water committees, clearly defining their right and responsibilities, providing adequate working manual, incentives for water committee member like as refresher training, experiences sharing, practical training on, technical and financial.

Water supplying agencies should ensure that women should actively involved in all phases of the project planning, designing, managing and selecting water committees’ member who have capacity and skill to manage and administer the schemes. Moreover, the Woreda Water Office should conduct frequent situation analysis, and should identify areas requiring training and support.

To upgrade and enhance technical and capacity building trainings of WaSHCOs and local contractors (artisans) is important, because some artisans lack sufficient knowledge in construction and maintenance and ask other artisans for assistance and giving trainings to WaSHCOs to learn how to preserve environmental sustainability, like flooding prevention.

The woreda water resources offices or any other organization that participated in the supplying activity should include in their project plan to provide communities with enough spare parts at the time of installation particularly easily brittle (breakable), like valves, facets, elbows, could give some time for the communities to fully get prepared themselves for longer responsibility.

Poor construction quality and inappropriate site selection is threat for sustainable rural water supply in the study area; hence, improving construction quality should be seriously explored by water supplying agencies. In these sense selections appropriate designs, appropriate technology, quality of building and construction material employing competent contractors, assigning qualified supervisors helps to minimize the problems.

The government should not only depend on capital resources from NGO, community participation and other organizations in building the capacity of the water sector at woreda level.

51

REFERENCES

Abrams, L., Palmer, I., & Hart, T. (1998). Sustainability Management Guidelines. Pretoria: Department of Water Affairs and Forestry.

ADF. (African Development Fund)(2005) Rural Water Supply and Sanitation.

Admassu, M., Abera K., & Msganaw, F.(2002). Sustainability of Drinking Water Supply Projects. 221-229.

Aschalew, D. (2009). Determinants Of Houshold Participaion In Water Source Managment. Achefer,Amehara Region,Ethiopia: World Bank..

Briscoe, J. D, De. Ferranti.(1988). Water For Rural Communities:Helping People Help Themselves. Washington DC: World Bank.

Carter, R.. C., Tyrrel, S. F., & Howsam, P. Impact and sustainability of community water supply and sanitation programes in developing countries. Journal of the Chartered Institute of Water and Environmental Management.

Davis, J., & Liyer, P. (2002). Taking sustainabile rural water supply system services to scale:A Disussion Paper. Washington DC: Bank of Netherlands Water Partnership Energy and ater Department. World Bank.

Dereje, A. (2007). Assessment of Rural Water Supply Schemes Sustainability .The case of

Bambasi Woreda of Benishangul Gumuz Region ,MA Thesis Addis Ababa

University. Addis Ababa ,Ethiopia: unpublished.

DFID. (1998). Better Water Services in Developing Countries:Public-private Partnership; the Way Ahead London.

Endalkachew, D. S. (2005). Sustainability of Water Supply Schemes(The Case of Kamashi Zone of Benishangul Gumuz Regional State). 1.

Filetcher. (1986). Rural Water Supply and Sanitation., Huntington: Robbert E.Kiege puplishing company.

Fong, M., Wakeman, W., & Bhushan, A. (2003). Toolkit on Gender in Water and Sanitation. World Bank,2003:http://www.worldbank.org/gender/resources/checklist.htm).

52

Gebre, A. T. (1997). Water Supply _Ethiopia;an Introduction to Environmental Health Practice,AAU Press. Addis Ababa,1977.

Gebrehiwot, M. (2006). An assessment of challenges of sustainable rural water supply: The case of Ofla woreda in Tigray Region. MSc thesis,School of graduate studies, regional and local development study,Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Getenet, Kebed. (2001). Hand pumps installation, operation and maintenance Manual.

Gibson, Synger. (1969). small wells manual.

Giné, R., & Pérez-Foguet, A. (2008). Sustainability assessment of national rural water supply program in Tanzania.

Gow, D. J, & Franken. Hoff. (1994, may 17_20). <> paper presented at workshop on participatory development.

Harold, Lockwood. (2004, march). Scaling Up Community. 42.

Harold, Llockwood., Alex, Bakalian., & Wendy, Wakeman. assessing sustainability in ruralwater supply: the role of follow-upsupport to communities.

Harvey, Peter., & Reed, R. (2004). Rural water supply in Africa: Building blocks for hand- pump sustainability. Water, engineering and development center, Loughborough University, UK.

Inventory. (2005). Inventory of water supply schemes and data base management.

IRC. (1988). Hand Pump,Issues and Concepts in rural water supply programs,Technical Paper series 25,IRC,The Hague.

IRC, (1999). Community Water Management:PLA Note No.39 International Water and Sanitation Center, The Hague.

Israel, D. H., & Awdenegest, M. (2012). Assessing water quality of rural water supply schemes as a measure of service delivery sustainability:Acase study of wondogenet district, southern Ethiopia. 230.

Jo. Smet., & Christine. W. (2002). small community water supplies. Technical paper series 40.

53

Komives., T. R., Tuffor. B., Jeuland. M., lorbi, & Whittngton. D. (2006). Post Construction Support Activities and sustainability of Rural Water Supply Project in Ghana.

Lockwood, H. (2002). Institutional Support Mechanisms for Community managed Rural Water Supply &Sanitation Systems in Latin America: Environmenal Health Projct .U.S. Agency for Intrnational Development. Washington,DC 20523.

Misgina. (2006). AnAssessment of Challenges of Sustainabie Rural Water Supply.

MOWR. (2001). Ethiopian Water Sector Strategy.The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Ministry of Water Resources .

MoWRD. (2007). (Ministry of Water Resources Development) (2007). Water sector development program (WSDP) reports, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

MoWRD. (2001). ((Ministry of Water Resources Development) (2001). Ethiopian water sector strategy. MoWRD, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

MoWRD. (1999). (Ministry of Water Resources Development) (1999). Ethiopian Water Resources Management Policy. MoWRD, Addis Ababa,Ethiopia. .

Mukherjee, N., & Van Wijk C. (2003). Sustainability Planning and Monitoring in Community Water Supply and Sanitation Program IRC2003.

Sara, J., & Katz, T. (1998) “Making Rural Water SupplySustainable: Reporton the Impact of Project Rules”, World Bank,

Savva, B. (2007). Sustainability of Community Managed Rural drinking water supply.

Schouten, T.(2006). Scaling Up Community Management of Rural Water Supply. WELL resources, Water, Engineering and Development Centre (WEDC).

Schouten, T., & Moriarty, P. (2003, August). “From System toService” -draft The Hague.

Sebsibe, A. (2002). Guidelines on sustainable Community management and financing of rural water Supply and sanitation. COWDO, Addis Ababa,.

Staff, WASH. Project., & ARD, Jonathan. Hoclgkin. (1994). the sustainability of donor- assisted rural water swply projects. Washington, DC: Bureau for Global Programs, Field Support, and ResearchOfice of Health, Population, and NutritionU.S. Agency for International Development .

54

Sugden, S. (2003.). “Indicatorsforthe Water Sector:examplesfrom Malawi”,WaterAid Fieldwork Report,March .

Ton, S., Patrick, M., & Leonie, P. (2003). Scaling up community management. Netherlands.

USAID. (1982). Ethiopia water and sanitation profile.

USAID. (1999). Water Hand Book: Water, Environment and Sanitation Technical. Guidelines Series - No. 2.

Watt, S.,B, & Wood., W.,E. (2001). Hand Dug Wells and Their Construction

Will, Hart, (2003). Protective structures for springs: Spring Box Design, Construction..

water police international. http://www.theaterpage.com/sustainability.him.

Whittington, D; Davis, J., Prokopy, L; Komives, K;. (2009). How well is the demand-driven, community management model for rural water supply systems doing? Evidence from Bolivia, Peru and Ghana. Water Policy, 11(6), 696-718. http://dx.doi.org/10.2166/wp.2009.310 .

WHO. (1979). Public Stand post Water supply, a design manual,.

World Bank(1992). Village Infrastructure Projct for Java Staff Appraisal Report Country Department East Asia and Pacific Region The World Bank. Washington.

Zemenu, A. (2012, january). Assessment of challenges ofsustainable rural watersupply: quarit woreda, amhara region.

55

APPENDIX I

Questionnaires Used for the Researches part A. Beneficiary Assessment Tool

The main objective of this questionnaire is to assess the problem of sustainability of rural water supply projects by focusing on technical aspects in order to fill the gap between the post project conditions that are necessary for the sustainability of rural water supply systems. The other objectives are to gather information about the technical factors, social factors, management factors, health factors, and the like. Your information helps me to find the causes for the non-functionality of rural water supply points. So, please tell me the real information if possible.

Thank you for your cooperation!!

Location of the study areas

Woreda

Keble

Gots

Date

Part I. Household survey Questionnaire

Marital status Married Unmarried divorced widowed

Household’s head

Gender Male Female

Age range of the respondent

15-30 years 31-45 years 46- 60 years >60 years

Number of family

Family size Male Female Total Remark

Educational status of the respondent

Illiterate Mesert timhret Religious Elementary (1- 6)

56

Junior (7- 8) High school (9-10 grades Above 12

Main occupation of the respondent

Part II. General description of the study area

What are the sources of water supply before constructed this water supply system?

Hand dug well Spring Borehole Shallow well

Other (specify)

Why these water supply are selected and what about the other type

Based on the sources of water

Based on the location (lack of infrastructure, topographic feature, etc…)

Based on the society (religions, culture etc…)

Economic

Other

Source of project initiative

Governmental organization non-governmental organization community private

What was the community role at the time of planning, design and construction of the water System?

How the water supply constructed

By participation of the community

Alone the constructed body/bodies

Others

Estimated walking distance

Less than 100m 200m 500m 1km More than 1km

What are the differences from the previous water supply

Are you satisfied with the distance from previous source? Yes No

What are the controlling method for the water supply

57

Local community Governmental organization non-governmental organization private

What are the method to fetch the water to their home?

Donkey

By themselves

Other

House hold members mainly who transport water

Mother Children father all Other (specify)

Water containers

Jar Bucket Metal barrel "Insera" Other (specify)

How many community uses from this sources?

Do you get water for all 24 hour of the day? Yes No

Is water available yed.ar round? Yes No

If No? do you have other option to meet your water requirements? List source type?

What are the additional purpose of this project how to maintain the water supply scheme when it break

Governmental organization nongovernmental organization community private

Do you pay for the water?

Yes No

If Yes how much you pay per year

Is there a water system operator?

Yes No

What step do you follow at emergency break down?

If yes, are these employees paid?

If yes, how much is it?

58

Can you suggest some ways to improve the scheme

What additional resource do you need to keep the system running and looking like it should?

Part III. Questionnaires about water born disease

What do you think about the taste, odor, and color?

Very good Good Fair Not good No

When the water supply treated? After what?

Three months six months nine months twelve months

What type of water borne disease appeared in your community?

What are the solution take by the community illumination of this water born disease?

What are the solution take by the government illumination of this water born disease?

Part B. For the official

The following questionnaire is part of a research work, which is being conducted to know the technical sustainability of rural water supply project in the Amhara regional state case study, in Debere Elias woreda. Answer to the questionnaire will be used as a part of the efforts to find a solution to a technical problem of scheme. You are kindly asked to fill the questionnaire as truly as you can and your answer will be taken in confident.

Woreda Date

Place Keble

Part 1.general discussion on the water resource project

What was the initial type of water supply in the study area

Source of project initiative

Why this type of water supply selected in this area

What was the community participation on the planning, site selection (permitted the lands which were constructed the water supply project and construction?

Did you utilize local materials? No Yes

What are they

Preparation of input materials?

59

What type of problem did you face at the time of planning, design in put preparation & construction?

Planning

Design

Input preparation

Construction

How many people are beneficiary from this project?

Are any programs currently emplaced to give support on operation and maintenance?

Yes No

If No, who is responsible to carry it

What are the controlling and monitoring method of the water supply

When the system breakdown how many days take to repair on average?

What additional resource do you need to keep the system running and looking like it should?

Part2. Technical Assessment of the water supply system

Did you conduct detail hydro geological investigation study? And what was that?

Did you properly collect and analyze the obtained data and information? No yes

Did you apply appropriate design technique? No yes

Did you construct appropriate based on the design? No yes

How much is the estimated water consumption? (Lt/day/capita)

This capacity was based on the design? No yes

Why

How many times has the system failed within a year?

What are the technical problems often from initial till now?

Please suggest any improvement to be done for technical sustainability

What is your career objective as a woreda water bureau?

60

APPENDICES II

Supplementary Tables

Table 1: Fetching Water In The Household Kebeles Cross Tabulation Kebeles Total Gebsawi Guay Yeguarat Yekega t t

Count 30a 36b 7b 106a 179 % within fetching water Adult 16.8% 20.1% 3.9% 59.2% 100.0% in the household woman % within Kebeles 60.0% 30.0% 23.3% 58.9% 47.1% % of Total 7.9% 9.5% 1.8% 27.9% 47.1%

Count 20a 62a 19a 32b 133 % within fetching water Girls 15.0% 46.6% 14.3% 24.1% 100.0% (above 15 in the household years ) % within Kebeles 40.0% 51.7% 63.3% 17.8% 35.0% % of Total 5.3% 16.3% 5.0% 8.4% 35.0%

Count 0a 17b 1a, b 27b 45 % within fetching water 0.0% 37.8% 2.2% 60.0% 100.0% fetchi All in the household ng % within Kebeles 0.0% 14.2% 3.3% 15.0% 11.8% water % of Total 0.0% 4.5% 0.3% 7.1% 11.8% in the Count 0a 3a 1a 5a 9 house Boys ( % within fetching water 0.0% 33.3% 11.1% 55.6% 100.0% hold above 15 in the household years) % within Kebeles 0.0% 2.5% 3.3% 2.8% 2.4% % of Total 0.0% 0.8% 0.3% 1.3% 2.4%

Count 0a 2a 1a 6a 9 Child % within fetching water 0.0% 22.2% 11.1% 66.7% 100.0% (under15 in the household years) % within Kebeles 0.0% 1.7% 3.3% 3.3% 2.4% % of Total 0.0% 0.5% 0.3% 1.6% 2.4%

Count 0a 0a 1a 4a 5 % within fetching water 0.0% 0.0% 20.0% 80.0% 100.0% Adult man in the household % within Kebeles 0.0% 0.0% 3.3% 2.2% 1.3% % of Total 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 1.1% 1.3% Count 50 120 30 180 380 % within fetching water Total 13.2% 31.6% 7.9% 47.4% 100.0% in the household % within Kebeles 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

61

% of Total 13.2% 31.6% 7.9% 47.4% 100.0% Each subscript letter denotes a subset of Kebeles categories whose column proportions do not differ significantly from each other at the 0.05 level.

Table 2: Kebeles Problems of non-functionality Cross tabulation Problems of non-functionality Total spear low believe lack of shortag parts construct during performa e of ion site nce and water quality selection others Count 12 16 15 5 2 50

Ge % within Kebeles 24.0% 32.0% 30.0% 10.0% 4.0% 100.0% bsa % within Problems of 10.6% 13.3% 20.0% 25.0% 3.8% 13.2% wit non-functionality % of Total 3.2% 4.2% 3.9% 1.3% 0.5% 13.2% Count 15 40 15 10 40 120 % within Kebeles 12.5% 33.3% 12.5% 8.3% 33.3% 100.0% Gu % within Problems of ay 13.3% 33.3% 20.0% 50.0% 76.9% 31.6% non-functionality

Kebe % of Total 3.9% 10.5% 3.9% 2.6% 10.5% 31.6% les Count 15 10 0 5 0 30 ye % within Kebeles 50.0% 33.3% 0.0% 16.7% 0.0% 100.0% gu % within Problems of ara 13.3% 8.3% 0.0% 25.0% 0.0% 7.9% t non-functionality % of Total 3.9% 2.6% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 7.9% Count 71 54 45 0 10 180

Ye % within Kebeles 39.4% 30.0% 25.0% 0.0% 5.6% 100.0% ke % within Problems of 62.8% 45.0% 60.0% 0.0% 19.2% 47.4% gat non-functionality % of Total 18.7% 14.2% 11.8% 0.0% 2.6% 47.4% Count 113 120 75 20 52 380 % within Kebeles 29.7% 31.6% 19.7% 5.3% 13.7% 100.0% Total % within Problems of 100.0 100.0 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% non-functionality % %

62

% of Total 29.7% 31.6% 19.7% 5.2% 13.8% 100.0%

Table 3: Descriptive Statistics

N Range Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Variance Kurtosis Deviation Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error Error amount of water 380 85 15 100 51.23 1.038 20.241 409.706 -.739 .250 /day/litter Elevation 380 462 2109 2571 2176.18 2.660 51.848 2688.251 42.284 .250 year of 380 14 1992 2006 2000.84 .193 3.764 14.170 .348 .250 construction number of 380 6600 50 6650 249.48 38.134 743.374 552605.110 70.638 .250 user distance to fetching 380 14.90 .10 15.00 1.6780 .05510 1.07401 1.154 124.021 .250 water family size 380 8 1 9 4.68 .116 2.256 5.090 -.825 .250 tariff/month 380 1 1 2 1.19 .020 .392 .154 .534 .250 educational 380 3 1 4 1.55 .038 .734 .538 1.562 .250 status Age 380 57 15 72 35.77 .801 15.605 243.516 -.549 .250 Valid N 380 (list wise)

63

Table 4: water container to fetching water Kebeles Cross tabulation Kebeles Total Gebsawit Guay yeguarat Yekegat

Count 14a 33a 9a 43a 99 % within water Clay container to fetching 14.1% 33.3% 9.1% 43.4% 100.0% pot water (insera) % within Kebeles 28.0% 27.5% 30.0% 23.9% 26.1% % of Total 3.7% 8.7% 2.4% 11.3% 26.1%

Count 36a 87a 20a 131a 274 % within water container to fetching 13.1% 31.8% 7.3% 47.8% 100.0% jar water water % within Kebeles 72.0% 72.5% 66.7% 72.8% 72.1% container % of Total 9.5% 22.9% 5.3% 34.5% 72.1% to Count 0 0 1 3 4 fetching a a a a % within water water metal container to fetching 0.0% 0.0% 25.0% 75.0% 100.0% barrel water % within Kebeles 0.0% 0.0% 3.3% 1.7% 1.1% % of Total 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 0.8% 1.1%

Count 0a 0a 0a 3a 3 % within water container to fetching 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100.0% bucket water % within Kebeles 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.7% 0.8% % of Total 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 0.8% Count 50 120 30 180 380 % within water container to fetching 13.2% 31.6% 7.9% 47.4% 100.0% Total water % within Kebeles 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 13.2% 31.6% 7.9% 47.4% 100.0% Each subscript letter denotes a subset of Kebeles categories whose column proportions do not differ significantly from each other at the 0.05 level.

64

Table 5: Correlations

-

non ality to to size user water water water family qu of water in al status fetching distance container Problems Problems education amount of number of time spent Pearson 1 .035 -.035 -.018 .011 .065 -.021 .002 .068 .085 Correlation family size Sig. (2-tailed) .491 .500 .721 .828 .203 .676 .969 .186 .100 N 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 Pearson .035 1 .066 .129* -.057 .117* .060 .049 .135** .105* amount of Correlation water Sig. (2-tailed) .491 .201 .012 .268 .022 .239 .344 .008 .040 /day/litter N 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 Pearson - water -.035 .066 1 .055 .109* .058 -.083 .021 -.048 Correlation .168** container to fetching Sig. (2-tailed) .500 .201 .282 .034 .256 .106 .001 .679 .353 water N 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 Pearson -.018 .129* .055 1 .320** -.033 -.087 -.055 -.024 .019 fetching Correlation water in the Sig. (2-tailed) .721 .012 .282 .000 .518 .089 .283 .635 .719 household N 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 Pearson .011 -.057 .109* .320** 1 -.024 -.001 .080 -.063 -.015 Correlation water quality Sig. (2-tailed) .828 .268 .034 .000 .639 .984 .119 .221 .766 N 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 Pearson .065 .117* .058 -.033 -.024 1 .083 .003 -.055 .065 distance to Correlation fetching Sig. (2-tailed) .203 .022 .256 .518 .639 .105 .958 .286 .205 water N 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 Pearson -.021 .060 -.083 -.087 -.001 .083 1 .120* .083 .071 time spent Correlation to fetching Sig. (2-tailed) .676 .239 .106 .089 .984 .105 .019 .107 .169 water N 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 number of Pearson - .002 .049 -.055 .080 .003 .120* 1 .061 -.039 user Correlation .168**

65

Sig. (2-tailed) .969 .344 .001 .283 .119 .958 .019 .237 .446 N 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 Pearson .068 .135** .021 -.024 -.063 -.055 .083 .061 1 .027 Correlation educational status Sig. (2-tailed) .186 .008 .679 .635 .221 .286 .107 .237 .596 N 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 Pearson .085 .105* -.048 .019 -.015 .065 .071 -.039 .027 1 Problems of Correlation non- Sig. (2-tailed) .100 .040 .353 .719 .766 .205 .169 .446 .596 functionality N 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

66