Nile Basin Development Challenge - GOV.UK...Pamela Pali October 2011 Outline • Introduction •...
Transcript of Nile Basin Development Challenge - GOV.UK...Pamela Pali October 2011 Outline • Introduction •...
Nile Basin Development Challenge
Nile BDC Knowledge Attitudes and Practices (KAP): Baseline 2011
Pamela Pali October 2011
Outline • Introduction
• KAP survey
• Methodology • Results
• Conclusions
Introduction • KAP responds to N2 & N3 - RWM strategies,
targeting and scaling out. • Project deliverables: identification of biophysical
conditions affecting the suitability of RMS • Need to identify the RMS that work best for in
which parts of Ethiopian highlands given soil topography rainfall levels
• Bring together a range of relevant stakeholders assess the interventions that currently exist to determine the targeted methods to be applied
• Stakeholder workshop to assess the baseline knowledge and data input and the training needs assessment
Knowledge Attitude and Practice A study of Ethiopian RMS partners conducted to collect information on what is currently known, believed and done in relation to existing targeting approaches
Objective of the KAP survey • To assess the levels of understanding and
application of land use, hydrology and agricultural planning tools
• To establish the status of the knowledge and skills of GIS tools and its applications
Methodology • Structured questionnaires –
– developed by members of N3 – Background of the respondent – Use of GIS, access to data bases and related aspects – Use and application of DSS – Self assessment of knowledge on different aspects – Attitudes
• Data entry & analysis: Excel 2007 Pivot tables.
• N participants – 7 : Land use & Hydrological models – 13: GIS self assessment Knowledge
• N partners: 11 partner Institutions
GIS USE IN LAND USE, HYDROLOGY & LUP
Partner Position Held n
Bahir Dar University 1
Addis Ababa University Chair: Hydrology and Water Resource Management
1
Amhara Regional Agricultural Research Institute(ARARI )
Researcher Junior Researcher
2
Sustainable Land Use forum (SLUF) Program Manager 1
Catholic Relief Services (CRS) 1
Haramaya University Project coordinator 1
RWM & GIS Use
012345678
Rese
arch
in R
WM
Indi
cato
rs i
n RW
M
Tech
nica
l Exp
ertis
e in
HM
Use
of H
M
Indi
cato
rs f
or E
I of R
WM
Expo
sure
to
DSS
Expo
sure
to
SA a
nd IA
USe
GIS
GIS
lega
l lic
ense
GIS
with
out
licen
se
Geo
-ref
eren
cing
Acc
ess
to G
IS d
ata
Acc
ess
to m
eteo
data
set
Acc
ess
to h
ydro
logi
cal d
atas
et
Rain Water management Geographical Information Systems Access to data
Num
ber
of R
espo
nden
ts
Yes No
PARTNER RWM RESEARCH
HM USED DSS USED
ARARI Soil water mgt USLE, RUSLE AGNP, SWAT
DSSAT APSIM, SDS
CRS Multiple uses of water
- -
Haramaya RWH Storage
- -
Addis ababa university
- HEC, HBV Smart models
Hydrological DSS
Bahir Dar university
- SWAT HEC – HMS WEAP
-
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Geog
raph
ical
Info
rmat
ion
Syst
ems
Suita
bilit
y an
d Re
com
men
datio
ndo
mai
n m
aps
Part
icip
ator
y M
appi
ng
Inve
ntor
y of
Res
ourc
es
Impa
ct a
sses
smen
t
Deci
sion
Supp
ort S
yste
ms
Scen
ario
Ana
lysis
Trad
e-of
f Ana
lysis
Hydr
olog
ical
Mod
els
Rain
Wat
er M
anag
emen
t
Econ
omic
Val
uatio
n of
env
ironm
enta
lRe
sour
ces
Cost
and
Ben
efit
anal
ysis
ofin
terv
entio
n
Usefulness of Tools Practices & Methods Very useful Somewhat Useful Don't Know/NA
Attitude Statement Partner Strongly agree
Agree No Opinion
Disagree
Policy makers should participate in process of building decision support system
4 2 1 Haramaya University
0
Innovation Platform should help local stakeholders and communicates to participate in design interventions
6 0 0 1 ARARI
Improving rainwater productivity can allow improving food security & livelihoods
6 1 0 0
Intervention should be targeted to specific contexts thereby taking into account local values, agro-ecologies and Production systems
7 0 0 0
Longer term impacts should be taken into account when planning rainwater management interventions
5 1 0 1 ARARI
Up and down stream impacts should be taken into account when planning rain water management interventions
7 0 0 0
Section Summary
• GIS is widely used and reported to be useful but GIS data is accessed by half the respondents
• Meteodata set and hydrological data set are more accessible than GIS data
• More respondents use ArcView with a licence but half use it without a license
• Half the respondents do not use indicators to assess the economic impact of RWM
• 3 partners of six were able to state the actual models that they use and fewer partners use scenario analysis and impact assessment models
• Participatory mapping and rain water management methods are found to be useful by all respondents while trade off analysis was found to be useful by only half the respondents
GIS KAP BASELINE SURVEY
Partner Position Held n Adet Agricultural Research Centre (AARC)
RWM researcher 2
Ethiopian Rain water Harvesting Association (ERHA)
Project officer and Acting Executive Director 1
Gonder Agricultural Research Centre (GARC)
Researcher, Junior Forestry Researcher II, 3
Sekota DARC S &W research directorate coordinator, Agricultural Water Management Researcher
3
Sirinka agricultural Research Centre (SARC)
Junior Researcher II, 2
Training
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
SARC AARC GARC Sekota DARC ERHA
Organizations
Number reporting GIS training
0123456789
Vect
or fo
rmat
impo
rtin
g Ba
sed
on X
Y lo
catio
ns
Geo-
refe
renc
ing
Editi
ng
Rast
er fo
rmat
Geo-
data
base
Som
e ba
sics o
n da
ta b
ase
conc
epts
Coor
dina
te C
hang
e (P
roje
ctio
ns),…
GPS
Digi
tizin
g
Scan
ning
Vect
or O
verla
y
Data
base
Que
ry
Rast
er c
alcu
latio
ns
Digi
tal t
erra
in m
odel
ing
Spat
ial j
oint
s
Conn
ectin
g fe
atur
es to
att
ribut
e o…
Net
wor
k an
alys
is
Mul
tiple
crit
eria
Ana
lysis
Prox
imity
ana
lysis
Inte
rpol
atio
n
Stat
istic
al A
naly
sis
Data Compilation and Storage Data Capture Data Analysis
Aspects of training reported
Partners self assessment of knowledge & skills in GIS
9 6 6
13
44
22
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Very good Good Average Not good Poor Did notanswer
Rating
Perc
enta
ge
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Very good Good Average Not good Poor No Response
Data Capture (%)
GPS Digitizing Scanning
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Very good Good Average Not good Poor No Response
Data Compilation & Storage (%)
Geo-referencing Editing vector formatRaster format Geo-database Coordinate Change
01020304050607080
Sym
boliz
atio
n
Map
Lay
out
Expo
rtin
g an
d Pr
intin
g
Data
base
Que
ry
Net
wor
k an
alys
is
Vect
or o
verla
y
Rast
er C
alcu
latio
ns
Digi
tal t
erra
in m
odel
ing
Prox
imity
ana
lysis
Inte
rpol
atio
n
Stat
istic
al A
naly
sis
Mul
tiple
crit
eria
ana
lysis
Data Analysis (%)
Very good Good Average Not good Poor No Response
Summary • Majority (90%) received GIS training • Most (72%) received training on GPS, geo
referencing, importing based on XY locations BUT NONE on scanning, multi criteria analysis, proximity analysis, interpolation and statistical analysis
• Respondents had more capacity on data compilation and storage but less on data capture and analysis
• Partners self assessment of knowledge and skills was rated on average as poor by 57% of the respondents
Conclusions
• Need for more GIS training in addition to previous training – Need for a basic GIS practical training
• Poor knowledge and skill about data analysis – Need for a more advanced training