Presented by P.T. Masuku, T.E. Simalenga, J. Jiyane and A. Senzanje at the International Forum on Water and Food (IFWF), South Africa, 14-17 November 2011. The International Forum on Water and Food (IFWF) is the premier gathering of water and food scientists working on improving water management for agricultural production in developing countries.

1. P. T. Masuku
T. E. Simalenga
J. Jiyane
A. Senzanje
3rd International Forum on Water and Food
November 15, 2011

2. Study background
 Rural water supply by low cost, simple technologies
 Multiple use of water infrastructure - means for improving livelihoods of
rural communities
 Water supply systems dysfunctional within short period; poor performance
in newly constructed SWI
 Ensuring conservation of quantity and quality requires optimal
infrastructure performance
2

3. Objectives
Main objective: To evaluate performance of small-scale water
infrastructure (SWI) for multiple-use in Insiza District
Specific objectives:
1. To review the current water management practices at district and
community levels
2. To assess performance using four indicators: availability, condition,
continuity and capacity indices
3. To investigate socioeconomic factors that have most significant effect on
performance of SWI
4. To identify, quantify and compare the benefits obtained from SWI
3

4. Focus
 SWI: technical hardware that is available, used and managed by rural
communities in capturing and collecting water for multiple water needs
within their communal areas (Senzanje et al., 2011)
 Wells, boreholes, windmills, small dams
 main water supply system for rural communities
Windmill pump
small dam
deep well
borehole
4
Small-scale irrig scheme

5. (1) Current practices in water supply
 Collaborative engagement of Government and NGOs in rural water supply
activities: DDF, RDC, AGRITEX, NGOs
 Ward level: trained pump mechanic responsible for repairing pumps and
keeps maintenance records
 Community level: WPC ) responsible for minor functional maintenance,
with pump minder - each water point has caretaker responsible for
continuous monitoring
 63 % of water points in with no WPCs nor pump minders; evidenced by
state of SWI
5

6. (2)Performance
availability capacity continuity condition overall performance  Availability
0.90
 0.44 < Iav < 0. 65
0.80
 Capacity
0.70  0.2 < Icap < 0.38
 Continuity
Performance ratio
0.60
0.50  0.45 < Icont < 0.72
0.40  Condition
 0.24 < Icond < 0.81
0.30
 Overall
0.20
performance
0.10
 0.43 < I < 0.65
0.00
ward 1 ward 2 ward 17 ward 19
Ward 6

7. (3) Factors affecting performance
 Availability
 Water quality
 Increased number of people per SWI
 Capacity
 Limited potential storage
 Walking distance
• Continuity
 Alternative water source(s)
 Households socioeconomic status
• Condition
 Alternative water source
 Type of SWI
 NGO intervention
• Overall performance
 Capacity
7
 Condition

8. (4) Importance of SWI to communities
(3) Importance of SWI to communities
• Water for domestic, agriculture and livestock
• Improved livelihoods and secondary benefits
• Extent and type of use for different types of SWI for different communities
depending on:
 livelihood activities
 availability of SWI type per ward
 water point density
 availability of alternative water source (s)
8
 ease of operation

9. Conclusions
1) Management structures in place at district level – implementation at
community level
2) Overall performance of SWI in Insiza District is poor. Major contribution
from water quality and capacity
3) Factors with significant effects on SWI performance :
 lack of appropriate management structures and financial arrangements
for SWI maintenance at community level
 availability of other livelihood activities
 availability of alternative water source(s)
4) Importance of SWI dependent on the type and number of benefits
derived from water use
9

10. How to ensure policy implementation at community level?
How to ensure sustainability after intervention?
Thank you
10