MASSMUS Guidelines for

Assessing MUS in Irrigation Systems

Daniel Renault Senior Officer

Land and Water Division FAO

MUS Network Meeting 22-23 November 2010 The Hague

The MASSCOTE Guidelines Family for Auditing Irrigation Management:•MASSCOTE Mapping System and Service for Canal Operation Technique.

MASSLIS for Lift Irrigation SystemMASSPRES for Pressurized systems (under development).

MASSMUS for Multiple Uses of Water !!

1> MUS is not marginal this is the norm SUS are marginal !! [FAO survey of 30 systems only 2 are Single uses]

Major Advances for MUS (last 3 years)

2> MUS is better understood within the IWRM framework principles and concepts.

3> MUS is better conceptualized !!

Household

CommunitySystem

Dom MUS

Increase the pipe

Com MUS

ProvisionRegulatingSupportingCultural

Irrigation MUS

Multiply the pipes

Managing flows & streams

DomesticGardenlivestockEnterpriseEcosystem

MASSMUS Guidelines

The guidelines = RAPMUS-Sheet ; FAO IDP Report ; Set of lectures.

Document completed. Available as pdf. to be published early 2011.

Applications: Naryanpur India – Vietnam BHH – China Shanxi FID

Next: Western Delta Krishna India - China South.

(1) RAP

(2) CAPACITY & SENSITIVITY

(3) PERTURBATIONS

(4) WATER SHARES and BENEFITS

(5) COST of OPERATION(6) USERS & SERVICE TO USERS

(7) MANAGEMENT UNITS

(8) DEMAND for OPERATION

(9) OPERATION IMPROVEMENTS/UNITS

(10) INTEGRATING SOM OPTIONS

(11) PLAN FOR MODERNIZATION and MONITORING & EVALUATION

(0) WATER SERVICES

VISION OF THE IRRIGATION SYSTEMAND FUTURE SCENARIO BUILDING

Conceptualization of MUS in large irrigation systems

Irrigated agriculture supply water to the natural ecosystems: irrigation practice provides/supports ecosystems services

Productive-plus = ecosystem services provider

Provisioning of services Supporting Services

Domestic waterFood and fiber (irrigation)Water for cattle TransportationHydropowerEnvironmental flowsFuel (natural vegetation)Biochemicals and natural

medicines Raw materials for construction

Groundwater rechargeSupport to fishing Support to natural ecosystems and wildlife

(biodiversity) Soil formation Soil conservation

Regulating Services Cultural services

Sanitation and wastewater treatment

Flood protection Cooling effect on habitatsErosion control

Social functions linked to the infrastructure and management

Recreation and TourismCultural heritage values and landscape (ex.

terrace system)

Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) Grid to group ecosystem services

MUS ? in large irrigation systems

Service Providers

Direct Service

Service Receivers

Service Providers

Service Beneficiaries

ECO-SYSTEM

Service Ecosystem Services

Direct path

Indirect path

Provisional services

All types of services Service domain considered

• Command area considered from a bio-physical perspective as an agro-ecosystem providing critical ecosystem services to people

• A dynamic organic relationship between provider and users of services.

• In short a business service model intervening on a large ecosystem serving multiple uses

Defining services in practice ? Domestic

from WHO and UNICEF (Howard and Bartram, 2003) assessment in which they estimated that “one-sixth of humanity (1.1 billion people) lacked access to any form of improved water supply within 1 kilometre of their home”.

Type of improved and unimproved water supply according to the JMP.

Improved Water supply Unimproved water supply

Piped into dwelling, plot or yardPublic tap/standpipeTube well/boreholeProtected dug wellProtected springRainwater collection

Unprotected dug wellUnprotected springCart with small tank/drumTanker truckSurface water (river, dam, lake, pond, stream, canal, irrigation canal)Bottled water

STEP 1 RAP First question: Degree of MUS ?

One answer is number of MUS reported• Irrigation

• Flood control

• Drainage

• Domestic

• Environment

• Industry

• Recreational

• ....

India Karnataka: domestic uses

India Karnataka: animals and laundry

Urban uses of irrigation water

Urban parks in Taiyuan city

Urban wetlands in Taiyuan city

Indicator value

Management attitude

0 Ignoring or denying MUS and/or its magnitude

1 Blind eye on MUS practice by users

2 Positive marginal practices to support MUS

3 Integration of other services concerns into the operation

4 Integration of Multiple Uses Services into the management and governance.

Second question: integration of MUS in management?

Degree & Integration of MUS

0 .0

0 .5

1 .0

1 .5

2 .0

2 .5

3 .0

3 .5

4 .0

4 .5

0 .0 1 . 0 2 .0 3 . 0 4 .0 5 . 0 6 .0 7 .0 8 .0

D e g re e o f M U S

Inte

gra

tio

n o

f M

US

in

Mg

t

Jiamakou

Doukkala

Badra

Zanghe Canal St Julien

Gondorinala

Benniethora

Kirindi Oya IS

Ghotki

20 systems studied

STEP 2 CAPACITY & SENSIVITY

Problems for providing the SERVICES

Service? Raw water ? physical Access?Distance to water?

STEP 3 Perturbations

WBC shares per service: Water, Benefit & Cost

100 %

Share of water used

Share of benefits generated

Share of cost of MOM

STEP 4 Sizing MUS: Water & benefit shares

• WATER ACCOUNTING

• VALUING WATER

Water shares

• Quantum of use, especially consumptive use• Quality dimension• Energy dimension• Partitioning of non process–use: ex.

evaporation from same water body vs tourism, environment, fisheries, flood protection.

• Function/service with no consumption (e.g drainage, flood protection)

Characteristic of the Use

Definition Example of such use

Consumptive Water leave the system (hydrological cycle) and return to atmosphere

Irrigated crops Homestead garden Perennial natural vegetation

Non-consumptive

Water is not consumed (diverted and used returned after use.

Hydro-powerDomestic water (recycled)Animals

Depletive Water is depleted from the natural resources

Diversion schemes Groundwater Pumping

Non depletive Water is used on its site without any diversion

Recreational use in aquasystems

Landscape tourism

Process Water is needed by the associated producing process.

Crop growthhydro-power

Non process Water consumed is not part of the process, but rather a side effect

Fisheries and evaporation from water bodies

Tourism, recreational value

Beneficial Positive externalities Groundwater recharge

Non beneficial No added value.Negative externalities

Pollution from agriculture areas.

Irrigation water use partition

Power Plants , 0.0, 0%Small Industry and Business , 2.0, 1%

Large Industry, 16.8, 11%

Groundwater recharge, 56.0, 37%

Flood protection services , 1.0, 1%

Parks, recreational areas and urban ecosystems, 5.0,

3%

Irrigation at field level , 71.2, 47%

Ex. FENHE irrigation district Shanxi Province: water balance

Share of benefits

• Definition of benefits of water service ?

• Usually benefits = Monetary (gross production) for agriculture ! or any productive activity as electricity, fishery, etc...

• Domestic ?? Households served for domestic,

• Environment ???

• Jobs for small business,

Critical Issues ?

• References: building up a database !

• Methodology: MASSMUS rapid appraisal for mapping benefits

• Testing the Valuing methods for in depth MUS studies ?

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Sh

are

of

Valu

e/B

en

efi

tsCrops Animals

Domestic & Industry (incl tourism) Fish

Homestead garden & natural vegetation Drainage, Flood control, transport, environment

Power

Partition of Fees paid to FID

Irrigation at field level , 17.8108, 31%

Power Plants , 0, 0%

Large Industry, 30.24, 54%

Small Industry and Business , 1.2, 2%

Parks, recreational areas and urban ecosystems, 7.5,

13%

Flood protection services , 0, 0%

Groundwater recharge, 0, 0%

Ex. FENHE irrigation district Shanxhi Province: Benefits

REFERENCES ? VALUE ($) = 22.5 A^0.36 [A= size in m2]

y = 22.513x-0.6416

R2 = 0.6454

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

0 2000 4000 6000 8000

Size of homestead garden m2

Va

lue

in $

pe

r m

2 p

er

yea

r

After Renwick et al , 2007

Use/function Estimator of Benefit

Delivery to farms Crop yields Gross production $/ha irrigated Gross production $/m3

Domestic water Cost paid by service users Estimated cost of an alternative solution Number of capita served

Drinking water for cattle Value of annual animal productsNumber of households

Homestead garden Value generated by the garden

Support/recharge to natural surface streams (surface and groundwater) & environment

Industry and Hydropower Economical value generated, employment

Tourism, fishing, recreation, wild animals & natural parks

Economical value generated, employment

Control of vector-born diseases in waterbodies

Flood control Population and assets protected

Control of drainage return flow

Transport Quantum transported Economical value, employment

STEP 5 Share of COST of MOM

• Specific cost to produce the service.

• Deliveries, water level, access to water, ensuring a specific function, etc...

Share of COST of MOM

Specific costs to produce each service.

• Services: Water Deliveries - Support to raw water surface – Groundwater recharge – Control of water

• Investment – Operation – Maintenance

Comparative advantage of MUS

• Water multi-use: “More DGs per drop”. BUT re-use of water drops is no exclusivity of MUS therefore the specificity of MUS needs to be well documented.

• Cost-efficiency: “MUS better than Σ SUS” numerous services to a greater number of users with the same infrastructure more cost-effective than achieving the same with single use systems.

• Provision of extra services: ecosystems services provided by MUS systems for which little or no alternatives exist

• Externalities: “MUS = positive externalities” YES BUT we should not forget the negative ones !!

STEPS 6 Users and Services to Users

What Services & what Operation

•Supply water to a delivery point

•Control water presence in water stream and bodies

•Control water level in water bodies

•Control water recharge in surface and groundwater systems

•Maintain water quality in natural streams

•Maintain the capacity for storing water and control floods

Service? Raw water ? physical Access?Distance to water?

Access

Accessible canal/ drainage/river

Permanent surface water body

Groundwater access

DISTANCE

3 km Main Canal Secondary Canals

Tertiary Canal

Drainage

Example of zoning around the canal infrastructure for Shahapur Canal – Right blue Main and secondary canals – Left red with tertiary canals considered – Drainage network.

STEP 7 MANAGEMENT

• Institutional Organization

• Spatial organisation

STEP 8 DEMAND for OPERATION

STEP 9 IMPROVEMENT

STEP 10 INTEGRATING SOM & MUS