afd-development-contexts/notes/uganda/2208161616_literature-water.md
2022-08-17 13:38:35 +02:00

6.1 KiB

[ ] Naiga2015

  • looks at effects of major policy shift from supply-driven to demand-driven approach in rural water provision (in 1990)
    • results:
      • rural safe water coverage improved slightly
      • operation and maintenance of water sources pose great challenge, impeding long-term access to safe water
      • abrupt and top-down imposed policy created competing signals from old and new policies
        • lead to uncertainty and ambiguity about responsibilities, rules, incentives
      • challenge is not only water provision approach but provision of consistent multi-actor and -level governance structure tying to past institutions and providing long-term motivation for local water users to contribute to water provision
    • Isingiro results:
      • Uganda: access to improved water source 44% (1990), 60% (2004), 66% (2010)
      • Uganda: urban household travels 0.2km, rural 0.8km to source (avg waiting time half an hour)
      • Isingiro: average distance to source 1.5km
      • Isingiro: only 53% of water sources surveyed were functional
        • 24% partly functional (low/intermittent yield)
        • 18% non-functional
        • blocked drainage channels for some of them leading to possible contamination
    • qualitative:
      • water generally responsibility of women
      • cost of user fees prohibite for some to participate
      • technology and ability to repair were expensive and usually far away (spare parts, resulted in delayed repairs)

[ ] Cooper2016

  • looks at vulnerability of rural farmers to climate events
  • results:
    • wealthier farmers perceive drought as highest risk, poorer farmers extreme heavy rainfall
    • generally implemented many anticipatory and livelihood coping responses (54.7%), like food storage, livestock maintenance, planting drought-resistant varieties
      • some responses (45.4%) specific to individual climatic events
      • had no response to cope with rainfall variability
    • environmental degradation additional driver of vulnerability: soil infertility, pests, diseases; economic instability
    • farmers with more land, education, access to gov extension, non-farm livelihood, larger households, older age more capacity to buffer shock (through increased assets and entitlements)
    • inequality arises due to different abilities to be resilient toward climatic shock events

[x] Mulogo2018

  • looks at access to water, sanitation, hygiene at health care facilities
    • 2010, Isingiro had 28% access to safe water
    • main supply technologies are public stand posts, protected spring technology, deep boreholes
    • rain harvesting tanks, gravity flow schemes, in some cases groundwater-based pubped piped water supply system present
  • results:
    • of 282 health care facilities, 94% had improved sources (but some no improved source, some no source on the premises)

[ ] Naiga2018 - community-based water management

  • looks at relevant design principles in creating successful collective self-managed water management institutions, at Isingiro vs Sheema district
  • results:
    • difference in water infrastructure management effectiveness primarily down to existence/absence of organizational characteristics prescribed in design principles
    • Isingiro: absence of conditions prescribed by design principles due confronted with lack of sufficient self-governance arrangements:
      • unclear social boundaries
      • missing collective-choice arrangements
      • lack of sanctions or conflict resolution mechanisms
    • Isingiro: should be regarded as 'vicious circle of institutional failures'

[ ] Twongyirwe2019 - Perceived Food insecurity

  • looks at perception of drought and food insecurity in Isingiro district
    • questionnaire for farmers in Isingiro district whose livelihood is predominantly dependent on crop production
  • results:
    • 68.6% of HHs perceive food insecurity as problem
      • those not seeing it as problem had higher off-farm incomes and larger farm sizes
      • 'implies productive assets (e.g. land) can be easily translated into productive activies for higher income [...] while off-farm income could provide more choices in terms of food access' [9]
    • access to credit for crops increased food security status awareness
      • more likely to use credit as buffer against food insecurity
    • drought widely perceived as problem contributing to food insecurity (95.6%)
      • HHs believe most at-risk of drought-induced food insecurity
    • 13% reported to be 'doing nothing' to respond to drought effects

[ ] Nagasha2019 - effect of droughts on gender roles

  • looks at effect of climate change (more sever droughts) on gender roles around Lake Mburo National Park (Isingiro, Kiruhura districts)
  • results:
    • men and women's gender roles altered during extreme dryness
    • men played roles sequentially focusing on one single reproductive role
    • women played roles simultaneously
      • often forced to engage children in work activities to balance own workload
      • Isingiro: female children more engaged with chores than male children
    • in Kiruhura district migration in search of water & pasture livestick, further distorting roles
    • Isingiro: men became more actively engaged in firewood collection (62.8%) and fetching water (45.9%)
    • women's exclusion from land ownership brings them further in state of dependence, thus more vulnerable to climate change effects

[ ] Sempewo2021

  • looks at changes in water suuply use (quantity) in Ugandan HHs (due to COVID-19)
    • most HHs had increase in water quantity usage
    • associated HH characteristics age, sex, education, main occupation of HH head, household size, region of residence
    • results can be used for equitable water supply during emergencies

[x] Atamanov2022 - see poverty for main part

  • water access
    • general access to improved drinking water 87% urban, 74% rural (19/20); with only small amounts of inequality (75/74 rural poor/nonpoor; 76/90 poor/nonpoor)
    • but very little access to improved sanitation 39% urban, 25% urban; 19% rural poor, 29% nonpoor; 22% urban poor, 43% urban nonpoor (19/20)