building institutions for groundwater governance in andhra pradesh, india
TRANSCRIPT
Building Institutions for Groundwater Governance in Andhra Pradesh, India
Ruth Meinzen-Dick1, Rahul Chaturvedi2, Laia Domenech1, Rucha Ghate,3 Marco Janssen,4 Nathan Rollins4
1 International Food Policy Research Institute2 Foundation for Ecological Security
3 ICIMOD4 Arizona State University
Funded by CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems
Stimulating self-governance• Anecdotes that playing field experiments and
debriefing with community lead to changes in governance.
• With IFPRI and Indian NGOs study in 29 villages in Andhra Pradesh.
• Groundwater games (ongoing measurement ground water levels).
• We don’t say what to do.
2
Foundation for Ecological Security• Works with more than
8000 villages.• Provide guidance on
restoration of commons.• Communities are
effective in solving their own problems.
• Challenges due to external forces (mining, modernity)
3
Groundwater Use in India• Groundwater in India accounts for more than:– 60% of irrigated agriculture, 80% of drinking water
(World Bank, 2010)
• Increased GW Use, aquifers overdrafted• Challenging resource dilemma– Hidden from view
• Responses– Watershed recharge– Reduce GW use
• Community crop budgets
Instruments of the Project
• Groundwater CPR Game
• Community-wide Debriefing Meeting
• Household Survey
• Village Attributes Form
Treatments• 2 Treatments (20 villages)– Treatment 1 (10 villages)
• Participants receive cash payment based on performance in experiment (Avg payment around 1 day’s wages)
– Treatment 2 (10 villages)• Participants do not receive cash payments• A flat-fee payment is made to the village (via watershed
committee)
– Control Group (9 villages)• Household & Village Attributes Surveys only
– In each treatment village, 1 group with women, 1 with men
Groundwater CPR Game
Group of 5 Participants2 games of 10 rounds (“years”) Each game begins with 50 units of
groundwater availableEach round, participants choose crop:◦ A: Lower Income, Lower Water-Demand◦ B: Higher Income, Higher Water-Demand
Groundwater recharge 5 units after each roundFirst game no communication; Second game with
communication
Community Debriefing
Full village invited
Basics of game described
Share general game results◦ No specifics about individuals
Engage community in discussions about◦ How this relates to own experiences and challenges farming◦ Lessons and insights the participants gained from the
experience◦ Possible solutions
Results statistical analysis
• Significant effects:– Years in the program of NGO (-), Education (-),
Collective action (-), Area owned (-), Irrigator (+)
• Insignificant effects:– Flat fee, Communication, Sex, Age, Caste
• Return visits:– 1.5 years after experiments return visits were
performed.– Measurements of mental models, interviews and
surveys, ground water measurements.
12
Preliminary Insights return visits
• Part of Participants indicated to look at monetary outcomes.
• Difficulty to measure impact
• Examples of changes in strategies.
• People start putting groundwater issues on the agenda.
Co-developing new versions of game
• Co-developing new versions of game:– Quality of drinking water
– Including rainfall variability
• Scaling up use of games as participatory tool
• Other games (forestry, rangelands)
Discussion
• Games lead to vivid experience of collective action challenges.
• Neutral place to discuss collective action problems.
• Challenge mental models
• Resource for practitioners (protocols, tutorial; www.gamesforsustainability.org)