Multiple use pumps in Bangladesh bring income and access benefits

Deep tubewells designed for multiple-use water services by the Rural Development Academy (RDA) in three villages in Bogra, north-west Bangladesh, do meet needs of users for irrigation and household water better than conventional domestic handpumps and low-lift diesel irrigation pumps, as the users overwhelmingly indicated to academic researchers recently. The benefits identified by the users include improved productivity and incomes, lower irrigation costs, easier access to domestic water and water that is iron free.

The authors were not able to reach a final conclusion from an academic perspective whether the RDA MUS does actually meet the users' needs for water better than their previous single-use systems, because there was insufficient comparative information. As there was insufficient information in some areas, no overall conclusion could be reached. Hence the title of their paper in the Waterlines theme issue, January 2010: “Multiple-use water supply systems: do the claims stack up? Evidence from Bangladesh” pp 52-72.

This is the clear message coming out of an investigation of a multiple-use water supply system (MUS) in Bangladesh. It set out to test the claims by the Multiple Use Services (CPWF-MUS) project of the Challenge Program on Water and Food of the International Water Management Institute, IRC and other partners. These include: increased potential to reduce poverty improved health, enhanced cost recovery and a sense of ownership leading to improved sustainability, and increased gender equity.

It ran in eight countries from 2004-2009.

Triggered by 2004 and 2006 publications by IWMI and IRC

Triggered by 2004 and 2006 MUS publications by IWMI and IRC Maarten Fontein from Medair and Cranfied University lecturers James Webster and Paul Trawick developed a water needs framework. Mr. M.A. Matin, Director of the Rural Development Academy provided assistance with the interviews of 84 water users from three villages during June–July 2007. “From the analysis it is apparent that most of the water users’ needs are indeed better addressed by the RDA MUS than the previous water supply systems, with some exceptions relating to timing’, they write. The systems are also reasonably resilient and easy to repair.

Bangladesh and the MUS model

The MUS model investigated was developed by the RDA, an organization that seeks to implement Government of Bangladesh (GoB) policy through research, action research, training and consultancy in rural development. The RDA model is ‘multiple-use by design’ and features a deep tubewell (DTW) which supplies a ground-level irrigation tank from where water is distributed to agricultural land via concrete pipelines or to an overhead tank for domestic water supply.

Domestic water is distributed to household taps via a PVC pipe network and there is the option of installing arsenic (As) and iron (Fe) removal plant where necessary. Low-cost DTW technologies are employed, including manual drilling techniques and local materials and components. The formation of owners’ groups is an essential part of the model and these are required to invest 10 per cent of the capital costs as a down payment and repay the entire capital costs over ten years. The owners’ groups recover capital costs, pay for operating expenses and take a marginal profit by charging the users for water. They have autonomy in setting tariffs. Staff and management training is provided by the RDA.

‘Water lords’

Once the RDA MUS are installed the strings of power are held by the chairman and owners. This is remarkably reminiscent of a World Bank DTW project in Bangladesh in the 1970s, where virtually all the DTWs were monopolized by the wealthy (Hartmann and Boyce, 1983). Again the wealthy and influential are in control. As it is unacceptable for low-lift diesel irrigation pump owners to hire out their machines within the command of another irrigation scheme, those whose land falls within the RDA MUS command are forced to subscribe to it.

So these men of ‘land, authority and influence’ who have become owners of the RDA MUS are able to extend their powers to include village water provision. The term ‘water lord’ was voiced by several informants. Although social factors exert some control over the owners’ groups, the lack of representation, minimal participation and absence of regulation means the interests of the users are not protected.

The authors also identified some problems on affordability and software and institutional issues, which the MUS alliance needs to address if the potential benefits of the RDA MUS and scaling up are to be fully realized.

Not affordable for communities in ten years

The systems are not affordable for the communities over a ten-year timeframe, so the anticipated potential for the financial benefits of the MUS to aid cost recovery has not been realized. Furthermore, the poor have less access to a RDA MUS household supply as for many ‘workers’ the tariffs are unaffordable, although for others this is a matter of perception and priorities. This contrasts strongly with almost universal ownership of hand tubewells (HTW).

Not adequately addressing software and institutional issues

The RDA MUS does not adequately address the software and institutional aspects of water needs. The problems discussed potentially undermine the effectiveness, sustainability and equity of water supply because the interests of the users are not protected, leaving them vulnerable to powerful owners who control the water supply but lack skills, training and supervision.

In summary, though the RDA MUS is appreciated by the users and has brought them real benefits, meeting many aspects of their water needs more effectively, there are problems with the model that leave the users vulnerable, the owners struggling with capital repayments and many of the ‘worker’ socio-economic group unable to access the benefits of a household connection.