1. Rethinking vulnerability to water scarcity in the sub
humid environment: the example of the Water
Vulnerability Index in Oke-Ogun region, Nigeria
Grace Oloukoi1, Urmilla Bob2 and Funsho Afolabi3
1
Lead City University, Ibadan, Nigeria
2
University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville, South Africa
3
University of Ado-Ekiti, Ado-Ekiti, Nigeria
Economic assessment of desertification, sustainable land
management and resilience of arid, semi-arid and dry sub-
humid areas 9-12 April 2013 - Bonn, Germany
1

2. Background
Climate change impacts water systems with its variability and
vulnerability
Water supply shortages impact livelihoods in the sub-Sahara
Africa in particular where most population are already
vulnerable to other climate stress (Adger, 2006; Boko,et al. 2007).
Usage of indicators and index to analyse vulnerability trends at
regional and national levels, (e g. Water poverty index, climate
vulnerability index, human development index) is ideal to
communicate dimensions of water scarcity with significance
for policy at macro levels (Adejuwon, 2008; Sullivan, 2001; Sullivan et al. 2002; Sullivan and Meigh, 2005)
 Research Question: What is the spatial trends and dimension of water scarcity at
micro levels (community, neighbourhoods and households) when components of
Water Vulnerability Index are summed up?
2

3. Study objectives
 To present Water Vulnerability Index (WVI) as aggregate of
social and biophysical factors (access, resource, capacity,
environment and use) that contribute to micro spatial
vulnerability as relates to water shortages in local
communities of Oke-Ogun region, Nigeria.
Justification:
 Needs to incorporate all factors that may be affected or
influence local adaptation to water scarcity in communities
that are not connected with water infrastructure systems.
3

4. Located within the Nigerian savannah
Methods:
 Annual mean rainfall ranges
1. The study area between 1600 mm and 1200 mm;
mean temperature is 29oC
Double peak rainfall periods with
interlude of a little dryness in June,
July, August (JJA)
The main source of water is well
which serves 64.6% households of the
population.
Livelihoods activities of the people
are agro-based such as farming,
forestry and charcoal production
Fig 1: Oke-Ogun region, Nigeria
Water stress as a result of population
pressure, lack of water infrastructure.
4

5. Methods contd: Data sources and analysis
Household survey: of 397 respondents which were selected through a
multistage systematic sampling technique
 Three local communities (i.e. Iseyin, Okehoand Shaki) of Oke-Ogun.
Participating households were selected from informal formal
neighbourhoods.
Derivative equation for Water Vulnerability Index:
5

6. WVI Components: Resources (R), Access (A), Capacity (C),
Use (U), and Environment (E).
 The analysis is based on the “acceptable or desirable”
responses from frequency. Values represent the percentiles of the
frequency (f/100) of each sub components which were derived
from the variables in the questionnaire.
 Each of the components is first standardized so that it falls in
the range 0 to 100.
 The highest value, 100, is taken to be the best situation (or the
lowest possible level of water poverty), while 0 is the worst.
6

7. Results
 It is observed that type of
neighbourhood has a significant
contribution to the vulnerability of the
selected communities
the spatial dimension of teh WVI
shows that communities and
neighbourhoods with access to other
social services indicate a more
resilience capacity for water
vulnerability
Localities with other environmental
and social stressors have lover WVI,
indicating higher vulnerability and
need critical policy intervention
Fig 2: Water Vulnerability Index (CVI) in the selected
communities based on equality of ranking
the highest WVI value indicates that the area is less
7

8. Result contd...  Component with less
contribution value are use and
access
The dominant components with
the highest contribution are in
this order: environment,
resource, and capacity
 Water access and use are the
critical contributors to WVI
(quantity LPCPD, quality,
distance of water points to
residence )
Fig 3: Contributions of WVI sub-components values
for the case study communities Higher value indicates less
contribution to vulnerability index
8

9. Implications of the results
 1. From scientific perspective (needs, opportunities ...)
Water vulnerability is not directly as a result of physical absence of water
resource and other environmental capitals but that of inability of the
communities to translate the available water resources into real access and
use. Needs to identify local water resources and to strengthen adaptive
capacity .
 From an implementation’s perspective (resilience, SLM):
Provision of mini water schemes aiming at improving water access and water
use of the population in the informal neighbourhoods who are already more
vulnerable to water scarcity and at higher risks of other socio-environmental
stressors is critical. Investment to improve water access will reduce the
vulnerability risks.
 From a policy’s perspective
Downscaling national water policy in order to integrate local specifications
and water stress dimensions.
9

10. Conclusion
Population vulnerability in relation to water supply
shortages varies in relation to localities: depending on
demographic composition, access to water, capacity to
cope and other socio-economic and biophysical factors.
In the context of the changing climate and
desertification in the sub humid environment in Nigeria,
addressing social deprivations and other environmental
stressors of local communities to improve water access
and use therefore, is a key determinant in reducing
water-related vulnerability.
10

11. Acknowledgement
This study is part of a project on coping strategies with water
variability in Oyo North region, Nigeria. The project was carried
out under the START - African Climate Change Fellowship
Programme (ACCFP), funded by the IDRC and DFID.
Thank you for your attention!
11