Groundwater Sustainability Infrastructure Index (GSII): a measure of sustainability in groundwater management

Transcription

1 Groundwater Sustainability Infrastructure Index (GSII): a measure of sustainability in groundwater management Project Inception Workshop Comparative research of groundwater management in the coastal areas in Southeast Asia UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education, Delft, The Netherlands 3-7 December, Dr. Sangam Shrestha and 2 Dr. Vishnu Pandey 1 Asst. Professor, Asian Institute of Technology (AIT), Thailand 2 Researcher, University of Yamanashi, Japan Presentation Outline 1. Context 2. Issues 3. Objectives 4. Study area 5. Conceptual framework 6. Results and discussion 7. Summary and conclusions

2 1. Context Groundwater: a major source of water supply in many cities Extraction > Recharge water level ( ), well yield ( ), land subsidence, salinity intrusions, etc. Sustainable groundwater management? One of the strategies Strengthening GW sustainability infrastructures 2. Issues What does GW sustainability infrastructures mean? need a definition/scope Sustainability is a perspective, how to quantify? need a generic framework and INDEX Sustainability refer to time, long-term commitment, how to evaluate? calculation of index over space and time scale

3 3. Objectives to develop a conceptual framework for evaluating groundwater sustainability infrastructures to illustrate the framework with a case study in Kathmandu Valley, Nepal 4. Study Area (1) China NEPAL Bhutan Watershed area: 664km 2 (GW basin: 327km 2 ) Rainfall ~1755mm/yr, T max /T min =29.1 C/2.2 C India Bangladesh Underground: Shallow aquifer, Aquitard, Deep aquifer Population (2011 estimate): ~2.5*10 6, 84.3% in urban areas Recharge is only 44.5% of GW extraction and 6.4% of rainfall amount within rechargeable areas Srilanka

4 4. Study area (2) Management Intervention?? Fig. Stages of groundwater development in Kathmandu Valley aquifer and corresponding impacts 5. Conceptual framework (1) Indicator-based Conceptual Framework Index (1), components (5), indicators (15) Calculates Groundwater Sustainability Infrastructure Index The infrastructures refer to: Knowledge practice and institutional responsibility; Knowledge, practice, and institutional responsibility; whose adequate strengthening may help to achieve sustainability in groundwater management.

5 Fig. Five dimensions of sustainability and groundwater sustainability infrastructures. 5. Conceptual framework (2) Index Component 1. Groundwater monitoring (GwM) ility SII) tainabi dex (GS er Sust ure Ind ndwate structu Groun Infras 2. Knowledge generation and dissemination (KgD) 3. Groundwater management plans/ programmes (GmP) 4Public 4. participation (PuP) 5. Institutional responsibility (InR)

6 5. Conceptual framework (2) Index Component Indicator 1. Groundwater 1.1. Groundwater level monitoring (GwM) 1.2. Groundwater extraction 1.3. Groundwater quality 1.4. Land subsidence lity SII) ainabi dex (GS er Susta ure Ind ndwate structu Groun Infras 2. Knowledge 2.1. State of GW knowledge generation generation and 2.2. Data/knowledge compilation, storage & dissemination (KgD) mgmt Provision for knowldege integration & dissemination 3. Groundwater 3.1. Progress in implementing the GmP management plans/ 3.2. Progress towards developing GmP (if programmes (GmP) GmP is not yet available) 4. Public 4.1 Public awareness ess about GW situation participation (PuP) 4.2. PuP in GW mgmt.-related activities 4.3 Practice/mechanism of PuP 5. Institutional 5.1. Availability of authority for GW mgmt. responsibility (InR) 5.2. Legal framework and control mechanism 5.3. Institutional capacity 5. Conceptual framework (2) Index Component Indicator Rating (score) 1. Groundwater 1.1. Groundwater level monitoring (GwM) 1.2. Groundwater extraction 1.3. Groundwater quality 1.4. Land subsidence ility SII) tainabi dex (GS er Sust ure Ind ndwate structu Groun Infras 2. Knowledge 2.1. State of GW knowledge generation generation and 2.2. Data/knowledge compilation, storage & dissemination (KgD) mgmt Provision for knowldege integration & dissemination 3. Groundwater 3.1. Progress in implementing the GmP management plans/ 3.2. Progress towards developing GmP (if programmes (GmP) GmP is not yet available) 4Public Public awareness about GW situation participation (PuP) 4.2. PuP in GW mgmt.-related activities 4.3 Practice/mechanism of PuP 5. Institutional 5.1. Availability of authority for GW mgmt. responsibility (InR) 5.2. Legal framework and control mechanism 5.3. Institutional capacity very poor (0.00), 00) poor (0.25), acceptable (0.50), good (0.75), excellent (1.0)

7 5. Conceptual framework (3) Index Component Indicator Description Rating (score) 1. Groundwater monitoring 1.1. Groundwater level 1.2. Groundwater extraction The strenght of this component is reflected by availability of monitoring networks, their Very poor (0.00), poor (0.25), acceptable (0.50), good (0.75), (GwM) 1.3. Groundwater quality 1.4. Land subsidence spatial and temporal coverage, governments' excellent (1.0) commitment and continuous funding for monitoring activities 2. Knowledge 2.1. State of knowledge generation (Geometry and The strength of this component is reflected Very poor (0.00), poor (0.25), generation and hydrogeologic characteristics of hydrogeologic by the level of knowledge generation about acceptable (0.50), good (0.75), Gr roundwate er sustaina ability infr rastructur re index dissemination (KgD) units, recharge characteristics and amount, continuously updated groundwater model, current status of groundwater environment, future status of groundwater environment, etc) 2.2. Data and knowledge compilation, storage and management (groundwater extraction, level, quality, well statistics; land subsidence, hydrogeology, current and future status of groundwater environment etc.) 2.3. Provision for knowldege integration and dissemination 3.1. Availability and degree of implementation of plans/programmes 3.2. Progress towards developing management 3. Groundwater management plans/programmes (GmP) plans (if the plan is not yet developed) 4. Public participation (PuP) 5. Institutional responsibility (InR) 4.1 Public awareness about groundwater situation 4.2. Public participation in groundwater management-related activities 4.3 Practice/mechanism of public praticipation 5.1. Authority for groundwater management 5.2. Legal framework and control mechanism 5.3. Institutional capacity current and future status of groundwater environment; and their collection, integration, management, and dissemination aspects The strength of this component is reflected progress in implementation of plans (if plan is available) and by evaluation of ongoing attempts to develop such plans (if plans are not yet available) The strength of this component is reflected by awareness, participation interest, practice and mechanism of public participation in groundwater management activities The strength is reflected by availability of separate authority, legal framework and control mechanism, and institutional capacity in groundwater management excellent (1.0) Very poor (0.00), poor (0.25), acceptable (0.50), good (0.75), excellent (1.0) Very poor (0.00), poor (0.25), acceptable (0.50), good (0.75), excellent (1.0) Very poor (0.00), poor (0.25), acceptable (0.50), good (0.75), excellent (1.0) 5. Conceptual framework (4) Indicator selection Computation of indicator values and normalization : through a qualitative expert rating approach during the groundwater expert meeting (4 5 July, 2010) in Kathmandu, Nepal. The situation of each indicator in terms of achievement of groundwater sustainability was classified into four classes in a scale of 0 1: very poor (0.00), poor (0.25), acceptable (0.50), good (0.75) and excellent (1.0).

8 5. Conceptual framework (4) Weighting As primary objective of this paper was to introduce the framework, equal weights were assigned to the indicators of each components and components of the GSII. Aggregation 6. Results and discussion (1) S.N. Indicator Component Name Score Name Score Index 1.1 Groundwater level Groundwater extraction Groundwater quality Land subsidence 0.00 Continuous record (WL & quality) from 1999, 50 monitoring wells BUT spatial & temporal coverage, poor data quality, inadequacy in storage and dissemination, frequency of missing-data???? GW extraction: exact no. are unknown, partial data of 1999/2000 only, no continuous monitoring Land subsidence: no monitoring Groundwater monitoring (GwM) 0.25

9 6. Results and discussion (1) Current state of knowledge generation Knowledge/Information Source Geometry of hydrogeologic units Metcalf & Eddy (2000); this study Hydrogeology (Hydraulic Binnie & Partners (1973; 1988); JICA (1990); Metcalf & Eddy conductivity/transmissivity, (2000); KC (2003); this study. storage coefficient, groundwater storage volume) Groundwater extraction database Metcalf & Eddy (2000), Acres International (2004). Groundwater levels GWRDP/DoI, Kathmandu, Nepal. Water quality g p gjica, 1990; Khadka, 1993; Jha et al., 1997; Kharel et al., 1998; ENPHO, 1999; Karmacharya Knowledge and generation Pariyar, 1999; and Metcalf & 0.33 Eddy, 2000; Khatiwada dissemination et al., 2002; Acres (KgD) International, 2004; ENPHO, 2005; 0.00 Gurung et al., 2007; Chapagain et al., 2009a;b; etc. Recharge to aquifer Binnie & Partners (1988), JICA (1990), Gautam & Rao (1991). Current status of groundwater This study. environment (Drivers, Pressures, State, Impacts, and Responses) Groundwater model JICA (1990); Acres International (2004). But continuously updated groundwater model is not available Vulnerability of shallow aquifer to Pathak et al. (2009) pollution Surface & groundwater interaction - Ft Future status tt of groundwater under Study on progress by Pandey et al. climatic and non-climatic change GIS data: surface topography, land NGIIP cover, river networks etc. 2.1 State of GW knowledge generation Data/knowledge compilation, storage & 0.25 management 2.3 Provision for knowldege integration and dissemination Results and discussion (1) Progress in implementation of GmP Progress towards developing GmP (if GmP 0.25 is not yet available) Groundwater management plans/programmes (GmP) No such plans are available, BUT progress towards developing groundwater management plans/programmes is underway

10 6. Results and discussion (1) Public are aware about problems related to GW depletion; but not aware about which area is better for GW use/development? Some NGOs has started stakeholders meetings, awareness raising programs (through students) etc; but are in initial stage and needs institutional leadership! Public awareness about GW situation PuP in GW mgmt.-related activities Practice/mechanism of PuP 0.00 Public participation (PuP) Results and discussion (1) Existing institutional arrangement Government Agency Groundwater related tasks Ministry of Water Resources (MoWR)/Dep. of Irrigation Groundwater Resources Development Board Oversees policy related to groundwater (GWRDB) Groundwater Resources Development Project irrigation Implementing body of GWRDB (GWRDP) Ministry of Physical Planning & Works (MoPPW) Nepal Water Supply Corporation (NWSC) Drinking water supply (surface & groundwater) in urban centers. Department of Water Supply & Sewerage (DWSS) Drinking water supply (surface & groundwater) in areas outside the coverage of NWSC. Ministry of Industry & Commerce (MoIC) Department of Geology & Mines (DoGM) Geological survey and databases Ministry of Population & Environment (MoPE) Groundwater quality protection Ministry of Science & Technology (MoST) Department Availability of Hydrology of Authority &M Meteorology for GW mgmt. (DHM) Collection Cll & storage of climate data Institutional responsibility 5.2 Water Legal & Energy framework Commission and control Secretariat mechanism (WECS) 0.00 Apex body for water resources 0.25 policy & (InR) 5.3 Institutional capacity 0.25 planning

11 6. Results and discussion (1) S.N. Indicator Component Name Score Name Score Index 1.1 Groundwater level Groundwater extraction 0.25 Groundwater monitoring 1.3 Groundwater quality 0.25 (GwM) Land subsidence State of GW knowledge generation Data/knowledge compilation, storage & 0.25 Knowledge generation and management dissemination (KgD) 2.3 Provision for knowldege integration and dissemination Progress in implementation of GmP 0.00 Groundwater management 3.2 Progress towards developing GmP (if GmP plans/programmes (GmP) is not yet available) 4.1 Public awareness about GW situation PuP in GW mgmt.-related activities 0.25 Public participation (PuP) Practice/mechanism of PuP Availability of Authority for GW mgmt Legal framework and control mechanism Institutional capacity 0.25 Institutional responsibility (InR) 0.25 Fig. The GSII parameter values in Kathmandu Valley

12 7. Summary and conclusions (1) Developed an index- GSII -as a tool to measure GW sustainability. Evaluation of state of groundwater sustainability infrastructures in Kathmandu Valley shows: Situation of the infrastructures is relatively poor Coverage of monitoring is inadequate and data quality, storage and dissemination i aspects are poor in practice Aquifers are being mined faster than being recharged, no GW mgmt. plans, and stakeholders participation Knowledge generation is relatively good, albeit, highly scattered, non-coordinated and inaccessible from a single window (e.g., office or library or information center) 7. Summary and conclusions (2) overall GSI is relatively poor (GSI index =0.24). On a relative scale, the situation ti of knowledge generation is better (score =0.33) and that of GW mgmt. plans is the worst (score =0.13). Adequate attentions are required to boost the GSI and subsequently achieve the goal of sustainable GW mgmt. Recommendations to assume institutional responsibility in GW mgmt., to facilitate access to available knowledgebase, to encourage participation of CBOs or local government bodies (wards) to prepare and update inventory of wells, water levels and extraction

13