MUS, Livelihoods & Growth?

1. MUS, Livelihoods & Growth? Tom Slaymaker (ODI) MUS Meeting, Delft Feb 12-13th, 2007

2. Outline • RiPPLE conceptual development (Theme 3 focus on WSS livelihoods & growth) • Wider thinking on ‘pro-poor growth’ (beyond growth plus welfare) • Positioning water sector debates (livelihood promotion or livelihood protection?) • Emerging issues in Ethiopia context (food security-MUS-growth linkages) • Water livelihood and growth impacts (indicators

3. RiPPLE • RiPPLE conceptual framework comprises two overlapping focus areas: - Money into water (effective finance and delivery of WSS services) - Water into money (impact of WSS services on livelihoods & growth) • Theme 3 focus: - How to improve livelihood & growth impacts of WSS services? • Thematic development (ongoing): - Background/concept paper - Scoping studies in 3 regions - Annotated bibliography etc  Long term action research

4. WSS-growth linkages 1 • Responding to the Pro-Poor Growth Agenda • What does pro-poor growth mean? • Twin goals of growth & poverty reduction • Factors determining growth • Sources of growth & markets (agric, non-agric) • Enabling environment & strategic investments • (Re)distribution of benefits • Ways in which poor people participate & benefit • Market access and asset inequality  WSS/MUS as constraint/catalyst to PPG?

5. WSS-growth linkages 2 • Linking livelihood protection and livelihood promotion • Risk & (chronic) vulnerability impact on growth prospects • Growth plus welfare is not enough • Reduce or mitigate livelihood risk • Mainstreaming risk reduction in sector strategies • Targeted support for vulnerable groups • Innovative forms of social protection Towards water sector investment which not only protects basic needs but also promotes growth?

6. Positioning Sector Debates

7. Emerging issues in Ethiopia Our aim is to support implementers to develop WSS interventions which help protect poor households against livelihood shocks and promote food security and productivity. Emerging sub-themes/hypotheses • Food Security – access to WSS is a key determinant of the success and impact of food security interventions • Multiple Use Services – systems which provide for livestock and micro irrigation in addition to WSS are more cost effective and sustainable • Growth – equitable access to WSS assets enables more poor hh to benefit from market opportunities

8. Question Sets 1. WSS-Food Security • What are the benefits of water interventions in different locations? • How do these translate into food & income at household level? • What are the limiting factors (water sector and beyond)? 2. Multiple Use Services • How can designing for multiple use create new livelihood opportunities? • What are the costs & benefits associated with multiple use systems (finance & management capacity)? • How to achieve an appropriate balance between quality & quantity? 3. WSS-Growth • What is the micro level relationship between increased household consumption and improved water access? • What is the impact of wider trends in water security for efforts to improve access to WSS? (links to mapping and planning) • Is there a correlation between macro level trends in WSS access and patterns of poverty reduction +/or growth?

9. What to measure? • Impact assessments typically focus on economic rates of return. Studies show high rates of return to WSS but this is not particularly helpful in terms of prioritising allocation of limited resources at a local level e.g. UAP for education, health & WSS but no capital budget. • Attribution of specific impacts on livelihoods and growth is difficult and frequently depends on complimentary measures in other sectors e.g. the value of additional labour at hh level depends on education levels. Returns to micro irrigation depend on access to other inputs including agric extension & credit facilities and access to output markets. • Growth is basically a function of increased consumption (food, non-food) at household level but poverty impact needs to be understood in terms of asset creation/protection and overall reduction in vulnerability e.g. number of months per year dependent on food aid. • Equity & distribution of benefits? Who benefits from time and energy savings? Whose nutrition improves? Who controls hh expenditure/investment? What is increased income spent on? • Don’t forget negative impacts e.g. widening inequalities through loss of assets/opportunities mediated through social exclusion and adverse incorporation. Winners and losers from any given project, programme or policy.

10. Impact indicators

11. Method/approach • Long-term action research • HH surveys monitoring changes linked to specific interventions or initiatives • HH food & income, scheme design & management • (x villages, x woredas, x regions) • Short duration case studies on water-livelihood-growth linkages • Micro/meso level (primary & secondary data) • Water quality, technology, gender, finance, drought, access to markets, migration • Macro aspects (secondary data) • Correlations, causality, trends, transitions

12. Big Policy Qs? • Public investment priorities - what is the relative importance of water access vis-à-vis other forms of asset inequality (education, health) in terms of poverty reduction and growth? • Inter-sectoral linkages - beyond universal access targets what are the implications for targeting & sequencing investment across different sectors? • Market-based approaches - how to support development of markets and demand responsive institutional frameworks