1.
Water and Collective Action
Scaling Up Experiential Learning Tools for
Sustainable Water Governance in India
Annual Workshop, Horsley Hills, AP
October 17-20, 2022
Ruth Meinzen-Dick

2.
Water as Commons
Water as commons:
 One person’s use reduces availability for others
 Low excludability, boundaries difficult to establish
 Fugitive resource—hard to see where it goes
Further challenges of groundwater:
 Low visibility
 Lack of understanding of resource dynamics
 Difficult to identify aquifer boundaries, esp.
in hard rock
 “Traditional knowledge” insufficient with
rapidly developing pumping technology
 State regulation not enough
Need for collective action to manage the resource

3.
 High investments on improving surface water supply,
but many communities fail to sustain the benefits over
time.
 Water easily depletes if there is no effective
coordination among users to ensure provision and
regulate withdrawals.
 Blueprint rules introduced in a top-down manner have
not made much impact.
 Research & practice demonstrates that self-governance
by communities can be very effective for sustainable
management of water and other shared natural
resources. But examples of such efforts are limited and
diffused.
What are the innovations we need to bring about to improve water management?

4.
Community water management
 Technical tools to improve understanding of water resources, but
what motivation to use them?
 Community water management programs often not sustained
 Social innovations
 From “teaching” to “social learning”

5.
Experiential Learning
 Can games be used to strengthen collective resource
management?
• Offer safe environment to experience
shared challenge
• Simulate several seasons in short time
• Encourage discussion of situation
• Try different institutional
arrangements
(Rules)
• Shape “mental models” and
understanding of relationships
(biophysical and social)
Requires understanding of behavior

6.
Groundwater games in Ethiopia
 Adapted from “our” games
o 7 rounds no communication
o 7 rounds communication
o 7 rounds optional group sets monitoring, sanctioning rules
 Outcomes
o Optional rule selection rounds were useful
o Immediate and sustained learning effects (after 6 months)
o Better appreciation and understanding of groundwater as common
pool resource
o Little “spread effect” beyond those who played game
o Little change in rules: More intervention and time needed for
community-level collective action Men’s and women’s group playing the game, March 2021
Photo credit: Fekadu Gelaw
 Post-game community debriefing discussion is crucial for community-wide learning and spillover effects
 Calls for repeated games with more community members
 Important to provide accurate info on local water-saving vs water intensive crops
o Literal vs illustrative learning implications

7.
Post game player reflections
*Village
community has no
water rules;
people don’t think
they should have
rules
“I learned that
groundwater has limits
and thus, to use water
for generations we
have to start to use
water wisely .
Otherwise it can be
exhausted”
Female, East Meskan*
“I learned that we
have to use the
groundwater
equitably and fairly.
There should be rules
that govern the use of
groundwater”
Male, Mekicho*
“Before the game I
didn't think that
groundwater can get
lower and lower by
our crop choices in
irrigation. But after
the game I have a lot
of information about
how to save and use
our groundwater.”
Female, Googeiti 1*
*Village community
has no water rules;
people don’t think
they should have
rules
*Village
community
already has some
rules
Game fun? relatable? Educational?
99% 97% 100%
“I suggest that this
game shall be
exercised by many
farmers to let them
have a good
knowledge like us.
So I recommend the
game to include as
many farmers as
possible”
Female, East Meskan*
*Village
community
already has
some water rules