Rai Rajesh Kumar, Neupane Kaustuv Raj, Bajracharya Roshan Man, Dahal Ngamindra, Shrestha Suchita, Devkota Kamal
South Asian Network for Development and Environmental Economics (SANDEE-ICIMOD), Lalitpur, Nepal.
Southasia Institute of Advanced Studies, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Heliyon. 2019 May 8;5(5):e01668. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01668. eCollection 2019 May.
This study analyses costs and benefits of the selected climate adaptive and equitable water management practices and strategies (CAEWMPS) in Dhulikhel Municipality and Dharan Sub-metropolitan city of Nepal. The CAEWMPS adopted the construction of water recharge pit at household level in Dharan and recharge ponds at community level in Dhulikhel. The results of household survey reveal that households have employed different coping strategies including minimizing consumption, purchasing from market, harvesting rain water and installing equipment for storing and pumping in both cities. In Dhulikhel, a significant number of households (18.56%) minimize consumption during the dry season but this is not the case in Dharan. Rather, around one-fifth (19.27%) of the households harvest rainwater in Dharan. In addition, households are forced to give-up their regular activities in order to implement coping strategies such as household chores, leisure time, meeting and gardening. The average estimated annual coping cost in Dharan (USD 87.5) is eight times higher than in Dhulikhel (USD 11.05); however, per unit coping cost is nearly equal in both the cities. In terms of benefit-cost ration, the community level recharge ponds in Dhulikhel (5.15) were found to be cost effective compared to the household level recharge pits of Dharan (1.72). These results provide policy makers with a comparative basis for adopting appropriate strategies to tackle problems related to water shortage under city-specific contexts.
本研究分析了尼泊尔杜利凯尔市和达兰次都市选定的气候适应性和公平水管理实践与策略(CAEWMPS)的成本和效益。CAEWMPS在达兰采用了家庭层面的集水坑建设,在杜利凯尔采用了社区层面的回灌池塘建设。家庭调查结果显示,两个城市的家庭都采用了不同的应对策略,包括减少用水、从市场购买、收集雨水以及安装储存和抽水设备。在杜利凯尔,相当一部分家庭(18.56%)在旱季减少用水,但在达兰并非如此。相反,达兰约五分之一(19.27%)的家庭收集雨水。此外,为了实施诸如家务、休闲时间、聚会和园艺等应对策略,家庭被迫放弃日常活动。达兰的平均估计年度应对成本(87.5美元)比杜利凯尔(11.05美元)高出八倍;然而,两个城市的单位应对成本几乎相等。就效益成本比而言,杜利凯尔社区层面的回灌池塘(5.15)被发现比达兰家庭层面的集水坑(1.72)更具成本效益。这些结果为政策制定者在特定城市背景下采取适当策略解决缺水问题提供了比较依据。