With this blog, I would like to share a few short reflections from my experiences overseeing and supervising drilling activities over the past ten years, both from the contractor’s and the INGO/client’s perspectives.
Figure 1: Ayebale Ared on the field (Welthungerhilfe)
From the drilling contractor’s side – overseeing drilling operations
I was fortunate to work with a drilling firm that prioritized quality, accountability, and training. The work culture encouraged flexibility, allowing us to try out different drilling methodologies. One of the most valuable aspects was the emphasis on real-time logging and decision-making based on live site observations. As the overseer of the drilling operations, I had to be physically present in the field, equipped with a laptop, drilling logs, a handheld GPS, a tape measure, a V-notch Weir, a dip meter, an E.C & a pH meter, and a camera, to support real time supervision and technical decisions as drilling progressed.
There was no remote oversight; everything was site-based and collaborative. Communication within the team was strong both for daily updates and for collectively addressing any issues that had financial or technical implications.
At the time, our machinery could not compete for larger contracts, particularly those requiring the drilling of production boreholes with casing diameters larger than 5″ internal diameter (ID). While we successfully drilled several open-hole design boreholes, which are suitable for handpumps these cannot be upgraded to accommodate technologies such as solar-powered water systems (SPWS) due to initial design constraints.
Figure 3 (above) Water Sampling during borehole development showing decreasing turbidity (Source: Ayebale Ared)
From the Client’s Side (INGO) – supervising drilling
Switching to the client’s side offered me the opportunity to work with a range of drilling firms year after year. By then, I had completed the Rural Water Supply Network (RWSN) Professional Drilling and Borehole Management course (2019), and I was actively applying the knowledge in the field. I have worked with drillers with different equipment, resulting in more efficient drilling, constructing cased, rather than open holes. I also have had the chance to mentor and train new supervisors in professional supervision practices, proper borehole logging, and how to make sound real-time decisions at the site.
However, not all experiences have been positive
Remote, or part time supervision is common with a bigger percentage of the drilling firms I have worked with, often resulting in decisions made by drillers to minimize cost rather than address real-time field conditions which are not supervised in the field by the client. Some drilling firms opt for untrained, inexpensive overseers, which undermines the quality of work. As an example, many have no idea what real time logging is but just write a number of pipes and send short video clips to their bosses in office who make remote decisions. This usually becomes a challenge with the client’s supervisor ends up being painted bad as “a bad guy”. Without a qualified client supervisor on-site, the narrative of events can shift dramatically. I’ve observed poor siting practices, with boreholes positioned near anthills or trees leading to complex drilling challenges and post-installation issues such as silting, root intrusion, and compromised water quality. This has been subsequently verified through borehole video inspections and microbial tests. Additionally, poor gravel packing techniques have led to bridging, and inadequate borehole development has left screens poorly cleaned and functioning below standard.
These reflections underline the critical importance of professional supervision, well-trained personnel, good oversight by the drilling contractor, and appropriate on-site decision-making throughout the drilling process.
I hope these insights are helpful as we continue to improve and uphold quality in our water supply interventions.
Ayebale Ared has over 10 years of experience in the water sector, specializing in WASH programs, borehole drilling, and rehabilitation in Uganda. He has worked on both the contractor and client sides, gaining a well-rounded perspective on best and worst drilling supervision experiences and practices
In her January 2025 blog – the first in a 24-part series, of which this is the sixth – Kerstin recalled looking out from Kaproron’s cliffs on the slopes of Mt. Elgon, across the dry plains of Karamoja, and reflecting on the derogatory language so often used to describe these pastoralists in Uganda’s extreme north-east.
What I hadn’t recognised until reading her blog was that, while she was looking north, we were often passing Mt. Elgon on our way to Kampala from our home in Moroto. At that time I was working with the Karamoja Agro-Pastoral Development Project (KADP) under the Lutheran World Federation (LWF). LWF had established its base in Moroto in the early 1980s, responding to the humanitarian crisis that followed 1979-80 when cattle raiding, livestock disease, and general instability had pushed the region to the brink of famine.
By the time I joined LWF in Moroto in the mid-1990s, their emergency response had evolved into a more integrated development program, with components on water development, agriculture, women’s empowerment, and peacebuilding.
At the heart of the water programme was Tom O., a quiet, gifted engineer from West Nile. Tom and his team brought more than groundwater to the surface – they established trust through the hundreds of boreholes that they drilled from Kaabong in the north to Namalu in the south. During a 2024 return to Karamoja, I met a pump mechanic trained by Tom nearly 30 years ago, who proudly showed me still-functioning boreholes drilled by Tom and his team that he’d maintained over the years.
There are however inevitable catches.
On that same 2024 visit, in the very next village from the pump mechanic’s home, we encountered a very different scenario: a cluster of seven failed boreholes. The Tufts University team I was working with was initially sceptical – seven? really? – until the story emerged: a well-connected sub-county official had repeatedly redirected drilling rigs toward his land, each time hoping the new rig would succeed where others had failed. He, of course, hadn’t shared the stories of those previous failures.
This kind of manipulation would, one hopes, be harder to pull off today. Uganda’s district-level computing and data capacity has grown exponentially, so in theory at least planners and engineers have ready access to every dataset they might need: hydrogeology, settlement patterns, borehole histories, yields, maintenance logs. In theory. In practice of course, data often exist in silos, are scattered, outdated, or sitting unread on a hard drive few can access and even fewer think of updating.
But I think more troubling than the data challenges is a conceptual one – especially in how water development is approached in pastoralist regions like Karamoja, where people move with their livestock. The prevailing logic goes something like this: pastoralists are but one of several vulnerable groups, and so with other vulnerable groups they should share water points. In principle, this sounds inclusive. In practice, it’s exclusion by dilution. Why? Because these pastoralists move. Their seasonal mobility means they’re often absent when decisions about ‘shared’ water points are made and, over time, these absences become a disadvantage. Eventually, ‘shared’ water becomes ‘our’ water, typically, more sedentary households who then transform the surrounding rangelands into fields, settlements, and year-round grazing areas that do far more damage than drought ever could.
And just like that, pastoralists are pushed out – not by an explicit exclusion policy, but by land use practices. Not by violence, but by the quiet erosion of access.
The apparent absence of people or livestock from a landscape is not a void to be filled. It’s a pastoral system at rest – regenerating, recovering, and waiting for the seasonal return of the pastoralists it supports.
If we want water development to work for pastoralists, it must not only support access during seasons of use but also prevent access during seasons of rest. That may sound counterintuitive – even paradoxical – but that’s exactly the point. If then you’re a water engineer, planner or policymaker, please don’t misread seasonal rangeland emptiness as under-utilisation – or worse, as opportunity. It’s not. It’s someone else’s functional rangeland – resting for now.
As the 2026 International Year of Rangelands and Pastoralists approaches, those of us working in water resource development would do well to shift not just our technologies, but also our thinking. Sometimes, the most responsible form of water development is not to drill at all.
by Dr Kerstin Danert (1), Dr Klas Sandström(2), Dr Aida Bargués Tobella (3), Dr Malin Lundberg Ingemarsson (4), Chris Magero (5) and Adrian Cullis (6)
In support of the International Year of Rangelands and Pastoralists (IYRP 2026) this is the fifth blog on Pastoralists and Water published through RWSN. We are going to provide you with a brief introduction to green water – a subject that is important when considering rangelands, pastoralism and pastoralists in many parts of the world (some may even argue everywhere). Before we move on, in case you have missed any of the other blogs on this topic, you can reach them here.
Some of us were given an opportunity to reflect and write on green water as members of the team preparing the 2023 Somalia Economic Update, entitled ‘Integrating Climate Change with Somalia’s Development: The Case for Water’ while others are researching this topic. In this blog, we don’t intend to summarise the report, which is in the public domain, but rather we want to help you understand, and perhaps think more about green water.
So, let’s get started – what on earth is green water? And why is it important? Ok, we shall get there via the term blue water.
Blue water
For many of us working on water supplies, water services, or irrigation, we make a living through the provision, or advice in relation to blue water. Blue water refers to the water that you see in rivers, lakes and dams, or that is abstracted from aquifers (groundwater). Blue water is what you see being used in irrigated agriculture or what livestock and humans drink. Generally, small amounts of blue water are required for Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) needs and to water livestock. In contrast, irrigated agriculture (as well as some industry) uses larger quantities of blue water. Further, downstream users often benefit from upstream (blue water) runoff – which is not always aligned with the interests of the upstream communities!
Greenwater
In contrast, green water is water in soil. It accumulates there from rainfall (or other forms of precipitation) and subsequent infiltration. You can feel (and see) green water in how it makes soil damp or wet. Green water will either evaporate, be consumed by plants through the process of transpiration, or may percolate to recharge groundwater. Green water is what rainfed agriculture and rainfed ecosystems rely on. Pastoralists raise domesticated grazing animals – cattle, camelids, equines, sheep, goats, yaks, reindeer, pigs and even a variety of poultry (chickens, ducks and others). Rangeland vegetation, including grass, forbes, trees and shrubs, which are essential for this pastoral livestock all depend on green water.
Whether we are already familiar with the terms blue and green water or not, these definitions may not sound particularly exciting, but let’s continue. They link to a key aspect of many water scarce areas of the globe and how food and water security can improve.
Healthy soils: The key to green water replenishment
Water at the soil surface enters through a process called infiltration. Healthy soils have good physical, chemical and biological properties and therefore can absorb more water: they have what is known as a higher infiltration capacity.
In contrast, soil degradation results in surface compaction, crusting and sealing, which means less water can enter the soil, leading instead to surface runoff and an increased potential for erosion. This can also lead to agricultural, pastoral or ecological droughts: a deficiency of soil water that is not necessarily linked to a deficiency of rainfall (meteorological drought) but mostly to a poor soil health and infiltration capacity also known as hydrological functioning. It rains, but much of this rain never becomes essential green water.
Erosion in West Pokot, Kenya (Source: Aida Bargués-Tobella)
However, agricultural, pastoral and ecological drought can actually be arrested and reversed through sustainable rangeland management and restoration. In other words, the replenishment of green water can be enhanced through practices that improve soil structure and through vegetative and structural measures that collect surface runoff and enable it to infiltrate. Half moons and a wide range of other rainwater harvesting structures are examples. More soil water supports plant growth, which in turn improves soil structure, enhances infiltration rates and results in improved hydrological functioning.
Half moons in Turkana, Kenya (Source: Aida Bargués-Tobella)
What about evaporation?
As we learned in the water cycle, water moves from the atmosphere to the ground, from mountains to the sea, across land, along rivers, underground and through pipes. These are flows that we can observe or measure.
Transpiration and evaporation return some precipitation to the atmosphere. Transpiration is linked to plant growth, but evaporation, which is vast and invisible arguably remains largely overlooked and is poorly managed. Locally, transpiration contributes to the production of food, fuel, and fodder. In contrast, evaporation does not contribute locally, bit will rather condense and become rainfall (or snow, hail, sleet or fog) elsewhere. Evaporation is very important, because on a farmer’s field or in a small catchment, much of the rainfall that reaches the ground can evaporate.
Reducing evaporation and harnessing more rainfall for productive transpiration may not be easy, but well-established knowledge about it does exist. Effective land management will capture rainwater, promote infiltration, reduce evaporation, thus providing more green water, which still returns to the atmosphere as plant transpiration. That lead us to our next point.
Rangeland management – the key to more water for food, fuel, fodder and services
Rangeland management controls two critical hydrological processes – infiltration and evaporation. It also controls the extent that rainfall is converted into green water and hence is available for transpiration (i.e. for food, fuel and fodder).
When landscapes and watersheds are better managed, they more effectively catch rainfall, reduce and control runoff, and enable water to infiltrate the soil. This enables soil to absorb more rainfall and increase levels of green water, contributing to the productivity of grasses, shrubs, trees and crops and reducing evaporation. More green water can support more livestock, crops and forests with reduced ecological damage, ultimately contributing to healthier communities and stronger local economies.
Why does green water matter for blue water?
Better rangeland management, including using rainfall in upstream areas and promoting rainfed agriculture (including pastoral livestock), generates and harnesses more green water. This can enable savings to be made on blue water, whichcan therefore be used more productively for domestic use, watering livestock and even for high-value (export) crops.
A planetary boundary for freshwater that includes green water Let’s put green water in a larger context. In 2009, Johan Rockström and Stockholm Resilience Centre published the Planetary Boundaries (PBs) concept, presenting a set of nine planetary boundaries which are essential for present and future humanity to develop and thrive. One of the original boundaries is “freshwater use”. In 2022, they published a study on a planetary boundary for green water in which they explain how green water links the freshwater boundary to other planetary boundaries such as land use, biodiversity and climate. Based on global changes to soil moisture, the study concludes that the green water planetary boundary has already been transgressed – highlighting the urgency in giving more attention to this aspect within the hydrological cycle.
The earlier mentioned 2023 Somalia Economic Update report is not only relevant for Somalia, but for other dryland countries whose economic and human well-being depends on how their water resources are managed. We argue that a critical entry point in such contexts is recognising the role of evaporation—the often overlooked, invisible flow of water, which could be better harnessed to support food and water security, and which is closely linked to both green and blue water resources. What do you think
Let us stop here for now. We hope that some of you may share your thoughts, and we look forward to hearing your reflections as this blog series on pastoralists and water continues.
Ask for Water Ltd, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
Independent Consultant, Sweden
AGROTECNIO-CERCA Center, Lleida, Spain
Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI), Stockholm, Sweden
By Jackson Wachira, Masresha Taye, Hussein Wario and Nancy Balfour
“In this fourth blog in the series, I hand over to Jackson Wachira, Masreesha Taya, Hussein Wario and Nancy Balfour who have a thought-provoking blog for us concerning water supplies in the Horn of Africa. It begs us to ask whether the findings from this research in Ethiopia and Kenya could change perceptions about how water development is affecting pastoralist communities?” Dr Kerstin Danert
This blog was originally published by Supporting Pastoralism and Agriculture in Recurrent and Protracted Crises (SPARC) on this webpage in August 2024.
In recent years, parts of the Horn of Africa have seen large investments in the water, sanitation and hygiene sector, or ‘WASH’ as a way to build resilience to droughts. In Kenya alone, investments by civil society organisations increased by over 200% between 2017 and 2019, with a significant proportion focusing on drylands.
WASH investments come in many forms and shapes. They include the drilling of new boreholes and rehabilitation of old ones, installation of diesel and solar power systems, water resource management, water trucking, improved sanitation and ‘capacity building’.
For many development actors, the premise is that WASH investments such as these enhance the resilience of dryland communities against shocks, including climate-induced shocks such as drought.
But are investments in new water supplies in the drylands a solution, or part of the problem?
Ongoing SPARC* research in Marsabit, Northern Kenya and the Somali region of Ethiopia unpacks some nuances around water development. Interviewing community members, resource managers, elders, and both governmental and non-governmental individuals who are actively engaged in water development led us to striking findings. While the establishment of new water supplies has generally enhanced people’s access to water, overall these new investments have eroded – rather than enhanced – the resilience of pastoral communities.
Camels drinking from a trough. Credit: Masresha Taye.
Settlement and depleting resources
First, water supply systems, including deep boreholes, have led to increased settlement in areas which pastoralists traditionally reserve for dry-season grazing. Discussions with communities revealed that, while new water supplies have enhanced access to water, particularly for women and children who are designated water collectors for the family, they have also attracted other communities who frequently access these resources. Overuse of these crucial ‘fallback’ grazing areas – which pastoralists reserve for livestock in non-rainy seasons – has led to overgrazing, increasing pastoralists’ exposure to drought. Settlement has also affected the pasture reserves and seed banks around villages where water supplies are installed.
Moreover, the frequent movement of large numbers of livestock has created tension and multiple incidents of conflict between host and incoming communities. Local communities view water points as vulnerable targets for livestock raids, which heightens their sense of insecurity.
In many cases, communities shared with us that they had not been adequately consulted about the new water sources, and their unpopularity has led to backlash. In one area, due to the absence of community consultation, a civil society organisation was prevented from installing power to a borehole by the community who thought doing so would open up the area to new settlements. We also observed cases of water sources being destroyed by local communities, who feared such developments would attract outsiders to come and settle.
Overlapping water management regimes
Secondly, water developers’ failure to adequately integrate traditional water management structures undermines the success of projects.
Among Kenyan Borana communities, for instance, there is a person responsible for managing community water resources in ways that ensure cleanliness and fair access to all community members, including those migrating from other regions. This person, known as the aba erega, still helps manage water supplies today, but they have been overshadowed by newer Water Management Committees, which have become a key condition for partners investing in new water supplies.
The role of the Water Management Committee includes collecting fees that ostensibly go into repairing and maintaining new water supplies. However, most of the water supplies we visited were described by communities as highly unreliable, often breaking down a few months after they have been installed. The result has been widespread contestation among water users, who blame committee members for embezzling community funds while overseeing water systems that do not serve them when they need them most. Due to the high unreliability of many water systems in these areas, communities revert to walking long distances to access water, heavily impacting human and animal health, particularly during drought. By contrast, traditional water supplies run by indigenous water management appear to be much more reliable.
Poor quality
The third key issue which SPARC research uncovered is the poor quality of most of the new water supplies. In many areas, communities stated that they experience severe diarrhoea and stomach pains when they consume water from some boreholes because of high salinity, which affects both the people and the livestock that rely on them. The result is that water sources are often not used. In Ethiopia’s Somali region, for example, the government has developed deep boreholes in areas previously devoid of water supplies – but after initial enthusiasm, pastoralists have switched to traditional water sources due to health concerns.
The issue with salinity is recognised by government water offices, and some actors have attempted to address this challenge by installing desalination plants. However, possibly due to their complex nature, the desalination plans are not operating effectively, with one community contending that their plant worked well for a short time, before starting to discharge water that was even more saline.
Reimagining water resilience in the drylands
The provision of clean water for people and livestock is critical for the resilience of dryland communities. Yet the current approach of free-for-all investment focused only on the number of new water supplies and number of people reached often serves to undermine, rather than enhance, pastoralists’ resilience to shocks.
What does effective pastoralist water development look like? Our research suggests some ways forward. Efforts should be made to adequately integrate traditional governance mechanisms in the management of water supplies; failure to do so enhances social fragmentation and conflict. And urgent action needs to be taken to desalinate the toxic water that communities in these regions continue to consume every day, and improve desalination technologies so they are easier for communities to repair themselves.
Perhaps most importantly, development actors must acknowledge that mobile pastoralism remains the key adaptation strategy for pastoralist communities in the Horn of Africa. Water development projects must take the threats of settlement around water sources, and its attendant problems, seriously if they want to contribute to building resilience in the drylands.
The research for was carried out under SPARC-funded programme carried out by the Centre for Research and Development in Drylands (CRDD) and Masresha Taye (independent researcher) in collaboration with the Centre for Humanitarian Change. Findings from the research will be published in a Technical Report and Policy Brief on SPARC website in May 2025. A photo essay on the same is available here. A video presentation of the findings was recorded at World Water Week 2024 and available here
Dr Kerstin Danert [1] with Dr Maryam Niamir-Fuller [2]
In support of the International Year of Rangelands and Pastoralists (IYRP2026) and linkages with water in particular, this is my third in a series of blogs. Here, I start to draw out my highlights from the 2022 webinar on Pastoralists and Water, hosted by RWSN. If you want an introduction to pastoralists, check out my second blog.
In contrast to some of the derogatory comments about pastoralists that I heard in my early working life (see Blog 1), pastoralism is not actually an outmoded way of living from the past at all! In fact, there are strong arguments that it is the solution for a sustainable future. Can this really be true, I ask myself?
In fact, it starts to make sense when you realise that pastoralists specialise in making use of highly variable environments to produce food. By moving with their livestock, they manage continuously changing opportunities for grazing in their landscape. You can learn more in this film, which I find fascinating. It turned some of my perceptions on their head.
In the 2022 RWSN Webinar, Maryam Niamir-Fuller, then vice chair of the International Support Group for the IYRP2026, explained that “rangelands” is a term used for grasslands, shrublands, woodlands, tundra as well as cold or hot deserts that are grazed by domesticated or wild animals. I was surprised to learn that it is estimated that rangelands actually cover 54% of the earth’s land surface. It makes me wonder why I have heard so little about them? And further, rangelands exist beyond drylands. As Maryam gives you a taste for in her picture gallery (Figure 1), there is much diversity in rangelands.
Figure 1 Picture gallery of rangelands (prepared by IYRP2026 Global Alliance)
It perturbed me to learn from Maryam that, although rangelands cover more than half of the earth’s land mass, they are the least known and valued ecosystem in the world. What also seems not to be widely known is that an estimated one billion people directly benefit from or have their livelihoods linked to rangelands. Further, another two million people benefit along the value chain, including processing products, gathering pharmaceuticals and making medicines.
There are other nuggets of information that I would like to share with you. For example:
that pastoral milk and meat are very important sources of vital proteins that are not found in plants
that pastoral livestock has high genetic diversity – in stark contrast to livestock on monocultural farming and industrial systems
rangelands are extremely important for Planet Earth’s biodiversity
Maryam also explained that, while evidence is still emerging, research is showing that a well-managed pastoral system can be net carbon neutral or can ever sequester (store) carbon. That is something else that I would like to know more about on this journey. In summary, it seems that a lot is going on in rangelands, but this is not well known.
Let me move on to pastoral mobility (pun intended). As I mentioned above, this is not outmoded at all, despite prevailing attitudes. In the 2022 RWSN webinar, Maryam lucidly explained that mobility is a key factor in the stewardship of these ecosystems. Pastoralists have adapted to and managed natural variability through mobility of their animals.
According to many studies, and as presented by Maryam Niamir-Fuller, one of the main reasons for rangeland degradation is because not all pastoralists are able to exercise their required mobility. Traditional movement routes have been blocked, and some rangelands have been converted to be used for cropping. The result is that animals are being confined into smaller and smaller spaces. Scientists are learning that the more the livestock keep moving, the less the degradation and the better are the chances for maintaining healthy rangelands.
Figure 2 The provisional 12 themes of the International Year of Rangelands and Pastoralism
These issues and others are recognised through the 12 themes of the International Year of Rangelands and Pastoralists (IYRP2026). The issue of water (and my own specialism) is directly included in two themes of the IYRP:
Theme 3 looks at access to services and resources for pastoralists – advocating for safe and accessible water for pastoralists and their animals.
Theme 6 looks at water in the context of soils and land management – including waste management, the impact of droughts, aquifer recharge and watershed management.
However, water can be linked to all of the 12 themes of the IYRP – something that will be explored in the build-up to and during IYRP2026. The IYRP sets out to value the contribution of rangelands and pastoralists, break myths and influence informed, science-based policies throughout the world.
If you would like to find out more about IYRP2026, or even join the global or regional support groups or thematic working groups, check out this website or contact iyrp2026@gmail.com
IYRP LDN Working Group (2024) “Global Actions for Sustainable Rangelands and Pastoralism to achieve Land Degradation Neutrality: A Science-to-Policy Review with recommendations for the UNCCD Conference of Parties”. https://iyrp.info/
[1] Director, Ask for Water Ltd, Edinburgh, Scotland
[2] Senior Advisor to IYRP2026 Global Alliance, based in USA
Dr Kerstin Danert, Ask for Water Ltd, Edinburgh, Scotland
In my first blog, I explained my discomfort around the stigma and attitudes towards pastoralists that I came across in my early working life, alongside my complete lack of understanding of how pastoralists function. With this (second) blog, let me try and share something of what I learned about pastoralism through reading and learning from the people I met through online communities since 2020 including that of IYRP2026 Global Alliance and the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO).
Pastoralism is an economic activity and a cultural identity. Pastoralists make a living by raising livestock or semi-domesticated animals on rangelands (a term which I shall come back to). In fact, “pastoralist” is really an umbrella terms covering many groups, as illustrated by the word cloud below (and this one is only in English!)
Figure (above): Terms for pastoralists (in English) (Link)
In keeping with the diversity of names and contexts in which they live, pastoralists keep different kinds of livestock species on native and semi-native rangelands, including cows, buffalos, yaks, llamas, sheep, camels, goats, reindeer, horses and donkeys and even grazing ducks. I understand that pastoralism means that animals are herded, moved or rotated from grazing point to another grazing point at least some of the time, rather than being constantly penned or left by themselves. In short, the livestock move around, but the people may or may not move.
And now to rangelands. These are essentially the places where livestock graze and pastoralists live. Rangelands are areas where the indigenous vegetation is predominantly grasses, grass-like plants, forbs (was a new word for me) or shrubs that are grazed and browsed (which means livestock, such as camels eating shrubs and trees). Rangelands provide a natural ecosystem for raising grazing livestock and wildlife. In my next blog I will talk more about the extent of rangelands, and how they are being destroyed by conversion to cropland, which I suspect, will come as a surprise to you. But as a spoiler, rangelands cover at least 54% of the world’s land mass, and pastoralism exists in two thirds of the countries in the world!
I mentioned cultural identity, and have learned that the term ethnic pastoralist can refer to people who come from ethnic groups that traditionally practised pastoralism but whose livelihoods are no longer derived from grazing livestock.The woman I got to know in Kampala (see Blog 1) may be among them, and I now realised that I should have asked her much more…
Pastoralists have different degrees of mobility, and can be sedentary. As an economic activity, pastoralism is an animal production system that is able to create livelihoods in highly variable environments. This point is key, and will remain a theme throughout my series of blogs. Mobile pastoral systems take advantage of environmental variability by managing grazing itineraries to improve livestock productivity as well as deal with pests and diseases and to avoid conflicts.
Further, pastoralism is a fundamental part of the global food system. One of the things that has struck me most, is that pastoralists actually produce food in the world’s harshest environments – in land that may have poor water supply or soil quality, face extreme temperatures, have steep slopes and or be remote. And it gets even more interesting when one realises that, by moving from one place to another, animals fertilise the soil with their dung and scatter seeds with their regular grazing and trampling. This has the effect of enhancing biodiversity and maintaining landscapes. I want to understand more here!
And I am coming to realise that, despite the global significance of pastoralism and rangelands, pastoralists are under-recognised and undervalued. As I mentioned in my first blog, they can also be stigmatised.
It seems that pastoralism is largely misunderstood, with pastoralists traditionally suffering from marginalisation and exclusion from dialogue. Pastoralists have been deeply affected by sedentary societies with poor understanding of the pastoral livelihood system have imposed alien social and governance schemes including attempts to settle pastoralists and create barriers to herd mobility or pastoralists’ access to public services. This is yet another area to learn more about. As with other marginalised groups, it is the voices of pastoralist communities themselves that need to be heard at local, national and international levels.
With more pastoralists gaining voice, and with a better understanding of pastoralism by those living with, studying and working with pastoralist communities, recognition of the value of pastoralism as well as the value of herd mobility is growing. But there is much to learn!
African Union (2010) Policy Framework for Pastoralism in Africa: Securing, Protecting and Improving the Lives, Livelihoods and Rights of Pastoralist Communities. Department of Rural Economy and Agriculture, African Union, Addis Ababa.
CELEP and VSF (2020) For an International Year of Rangelands and Pastoralism [Online], Coalition of European Lobbies for Eastern African Pastoralism and Vétérinaires Sans Frontières (accessed 5 October 2020)
Jenet A. Buono N, Di Lello S, Gomarasca M, Heine C, Mason S, Nori M, Saavedra R, Van Troos K (2016) The path to greener pastures: Pastoralism, the backbone of the world’s drylands. Technical Report. Vétérinaires Sans Frontières International (VSF-International). Brussels, Belgium, Available at https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.11042.22725
Republic of Kenya (2012) Releasing Our Full Potential. Sessional Paper No. 8, National Policy for the Sustainable Development of Northern Kenya and other Arid Lands, Ministry of State for Development of Northern Kenya and Other Arid Lands, Nairobi.
Dr Kerstin Danert, Ask for Water Ltd, Edinburgh, Scotland
High-quality infrastructure design and construction is not the only important concern in relation to rural water supply services, but provides a solid basis. Poor quality infrastructure jeopardises everything that follows – including it the maintenance, and management of the service, and even being able to collect user fees.
There are many reasons why infrastructure ends up not meeting the standards needed. And for the last two decades, the Rural Supply Network (RWSN) has emphasised ensuring that boreholes are properly drilled and completed – with a range of guidance and training materials now widely available – and (I am pleased to know) used!
However, we were mainly writing (or making short films) for people that are implementing projects. With the most recent publication we are addressing a different audience – FUNDERS OF WATER SUPPLY INFRASTRUCTURE. You may ask yourself why?
Unfortunately, not all funding agencies have the policies in place, nor the checks and balances that consistently foster high-quality infrastructure – whether initial construction and installation, or rehabilitation. And to make matters worse, well-intentioned policies can actually have negative unintended consequences. Low-per capita investment costs are a case in point – they can be set too low.
At the end of 2024, RWSN published the WASH Funders Infrastructure Checklists: Boreholes and Handpumps. They start off by recognising that when it comes to infrastructure quality, a number of things can go wrong. Grantees may simply not have the procedures in place, or the capacity to consistently ensure quality or they may not follow suitable contracting procedures. National standards may be lacking, or grantees may cut corners in order to meet Funder requests for an (unrealistic) low budget or fast schedules.
We have developed a series of four checklists – each providing guidance for WASH funders, whether financing direct implementation or systems strengthening activities. We have tried to make the checklists accessible even for those without a detailed knowledge of groundwater, drilling or handpumps. Each checklist is intended to help funders to reflect on their policies and procedures and/or those followed by the respective grantees.
Please take a look – and do get back to us through ask@ask-for-water.ch with comments feedback. We would like to keep improving this guidance in the future!
The WASH Funders Checklists were developed under the RWSN Initiative Stop the Rot.
Dr Kerstin Danert, Ask for Water Ltd, Edinburgh, Scotland
It was in 1998 when I started to work and then live in Uganda that I first really started to hear the term “Pastoralist”. That was in relation to the Karamojong (also spelt or Karimojong) – a group of people living in the semi-arid environments of north-eastern Uganda. At the time, although my knowledge of pastoralism was extremely poor, I was not fully comfortable with some of the derogatory language used about these people. However, it was hard to counteract the stereotyping and stigma that I was hearing. My efforts in relation to rural water supply had started, and continued to be with communities that were fairly, or very well settled; and if they moved in large numbers, this was primarily to flee widespread conflict and danger or settle back home again.
In my decade as a resident of the ‘Pearl of Africa’, it was largely considered too dangerous to travel through the districts of (now) Kaabong, Kotido, Moroto, Nakapiripiri, Napak and Amudet where the Karamojong and neighbouring agro-pastoral groups including the Pokot, Jie and Labwor lived. Cattle raiding (with use of firearms) and conflicts were frequent and could be deadly. On the other hand, I heard stories of Italian priests who lived among the Karamojong, plus stories of a few others. And occasionally my friends and colleagues would relate tales of some adventurous travel, or of tourists that flew up to Kidepo National Park. I never met a single Karamojong back then.
When I started to work in Kaproron, on the lush northern slopes of the extinct volcano of Mount Elgon, and staying in the residence of the local priest, I was able to look over the cliff edge onto the plains where the Karamojong lived. It was here in Kaproron that I heard stories from my colleagues and their families of their land that had been abandoned when the conflict was particularly bad. I learned a bit more about cattle raiding, but all in all, the Karamojong remained a mystery for me.
Photo (above): A view northwards from Kaproron (Source: Kerstin Danert, 2005)
In the subsequent years, other pastoral groups have fleeted in and out of my circle of attention, including the Maasai with their beautiful blankets, the Fulani with their marvellous hats and the Tuareg wearing exquisite blue. While curiosity was certainly there, my knowledge remained superficial.
It was in 2014, when working in Chad, that my path physically intersected with pastoralists. I was simply in awe as I watched what I later learned was a transhumant family travelling southwards. Asking questions, I was struck by similar, and familiar derogatory language as it was explained that for their entire lives these people travel south and then north again with the movement of the rains. I do not wish to repeat in detail some of the things that I heard. Once again though, I had no interaction with these transhumant people themselves, and was simply left with an uncomfortable feeling – one that I now recognise as my own inner reaction when I am faced with hearing stigma towards others and am at a loss for a response.
Photo (above): Transhumance in Chad (Soure: Kerstin Danert, 2014)
The discomfort I felt in Uganda, Chad and other places when listening to people talk about pastoralists never really left me. Thus, in 2020, while supporting UNICEF in preparing their Guidance Note on Leaving No One Behind in WASH, I decided to find out more about this group of people and include them in the publication. This turned out to be the start of a journey – a journey that continues. By this time, I had finally knowingly interacted with one single person from Karamoja: a woman police officer working in Kampala. She described the beauty of her home, how she travels back frequently, and how she loves to look at the stars when there. She told me that the conflicts have also eased over the years. I understand that following disarmament in 2001-2008 there was a period of stability, which was disrupted following rearmament in 2019 that degenerated into commercial raiding and involved the army, politicians and business people. You can read more here. Conflict continues with another round of disarmament underway.
In 2022 the United Nations General Assembly proclaimed that 2026 will be the International Year of Rangelands and Pastoralists (IYRP). You can learn more here in this lovely short animated film. I have to say that the openness of the international communities that concern themselves with the IYRP, and their eagerness to share has been a warm welcome for me into this new world. When I first contacted one of those communities – FAO’s online community on pastoralism – and asked the very naïve question on how to define pastoralism, I was blown away by the many helpful responses from the community. Thank goodness, for I was lost as I tried to understand more in preparing the aforementioned guidance note!
And so, in support of IYRP 2026 and particularly with a view to the linkages with water, this is my first in a series of blogs on pastoralists and water. You are most welcome to join me as I share my own journey of discovery.
The UN WWDR 2026 shall serve as a vital resource, illustrating how global trends and phenomena are reshaping gender dynamics in societies around the world. The interplay between conflict, migration, and gender equity in WASH reveals stark realities. In regions afflicted by conflict and instability, women’s safety and access to essential services are severely compromised.
The plight of women in conflict zones is further exacerbated by migration. Women and girls face an increased risk of sexual and gender-based violence during conflicts. Yet, amid these challenges, women remain indispensable agents of change—actively participating in peace-building, conflict resolution, and post-conflict reconstruction. This resilience highlights the need to recognize and harness women’s potential for positive transformation in their communities.
Migration and its intersection and climate change also alters traditional gender roles and expectations, as families adapt to new environments; it presents opportunities for economic independence and education, empowering them to challenge restrictive gender norms. Still Migrant women often encounter exploitation, discrimination, and limited access to resources, underscoring the urgent need to address these barriers.
Corruption emerges as another formidable barrier to WASH and gender equity. It restricts women’s access to essential services and undermines their participation in leadership and decision-making processes, as demonstrated in weaponisation of water. U.N. Women has called for urgent action to protect Sudanese women and girls, emphasizing the need for accountability in addressing high levels of sexual violence and exploitation. “We cannot let Sudan become a forgotten crisis,” asserts U.N. Women’s Addou, highlighting the critical necessity for action in conflict-affected regions.
On my blog on Diversity in Water sector leadership I emphasise the concerning underrepresentation of women. A World Bank report highlights that less than 18% of the workforce in water utilities are women and that two-thirds of sanitation leaders are white according to a FLUSH LLC publication that I co-authored. This systemic inequity reflects deeper societal structures, suggesting that without diverse leadership, the water sector risks stagnation and failure in meeting SDG6 targets.
“Gender equality is a fundamental human right and an obvious question of equity and fairness. But it is also a necessary foundation for sustainable development and a peaceful, prosperous world.” – Beate Trankmann, UNDP Resident Representative
However, the intersection of WASH reveals profound challenges that hinder the potential of women and girls in achieving equitable and sustainable development, within the realms of WASH. Cecilia Sharp, UNICEF Director of WASH and CEED, explains this by informing that “unsafe water, toilets, and handwashing at home robs girls of their potential, compromises their well-being, and perpetuates cycles of poverty.” She added, “responding to girls’ needs in the design and implementation of WASH programmes is critical to reaching universal access to WASH and achieving gender equality and empowerment.”
Since the emergence of gendered thinking in WASH in 1970s, the dialogue surrounding gender equity has evolved including a dedicated SDG 5 that envisions a world where gender equality is achieved and all women and girls are empowered. It targets the eradication of discrimination and violence against women, child marriage and female genital mutilation, and the recognition of unpaid care work. Furthermore, it emphasizes the necessity for women’s participation in decision-making and access to sexual and reproductive health services.
Water Scarcity and Gender Inequality: Exploring the Hidden Costs of a Thirsty World
The intersection of WASH and gender unveils unique challenges that disproportionately burden women and girls. As demonstrated on Graph 2 below, Research reveals that when water sources are not easily accessible, women and girls aged 15 and older assume the primary responsibility for water collection in 70% of households—an alarming statistic that starkly contrasts with the 30% of households where men share this burden. This reality not only highlights the entrenched gender roles but also raises critical questions about the time and energy expended by women and girls, which could otherwise be invested in education, employment, or health.
This multifaceted vulnerability contributes to a staggering increase in mortality rates among women and girls.
Brightening the Horizon: Positive Trends in Gender Recognition in WASH Initiatives
“In the landscape of gender recognition, a nuanced narrative unfolds—one that, while acknowledging persistent challenges, also celebrates the transformative strides women are making within the water sector.”
The forthcoming UN WWDR 2026 stands as a beacon of hope, poised to spotlight the remarkable achievements of women in this vital field. By illuminating their contributions and sharing success stories, the report shall aim not just to honour past accomplishments but to ignite inspiration in future generations of women aspiring to carve out their own paths in WASH careers. This acknowledgment is not merely celebratory; it is a critical step toward fostering gender equity in a sector that has historically marginalized female voices.
Senegal, for instance, has shown remarkable strides between 2015 and 2020, as highlighted in the 2022 SDG Gender Index by Equal Measures 2030. They improved on undernourishment (SDG2) and drinking water (SDG6). The Senegalese government, since adopting the Beijing Declaration, has actively championed gender equality. The introduction of a parity law for elected institutions in 2010 has positioned Senegal as a global leader, boasting one of the highest proportions of women parliamentarians in West Africa. This progressive move places Senegal fourth in Africa concerning gender parity in its legislative assembly. Complementing these efforts, the government has ratified several international conventions to bolster women’s rights and developed a National Strategy for Gender Equity (SNEEG 2016-2026), to ensure equitable participation of both genders in decision-making and access to resources.
Such positive trends in gender recognition in WASH, have spilled into the political arena particularly women’s activism; Hon. Anne Désirée Ouloto—dubbed ‘Maman Bulldozer’ lead transformative efforts in WASH initiatives in Côte d’Ivoire. Presiding over a monumental US$1.2 billion investment in sanitation and drainage in Greater Abidjan, her work exemplifies the profound impact of female leadership in WASH sector.
Moreover, Women are not just participating but breaking barriers, challenging norms and stepping into leadership roles, shaping policies, and driving change by making their voice heard. Indonesia’s Retno Marsudi, who serves as the first UN Special Envoy on Water, exemplifies the vital role women play in global discourse on water issues.
Rural Water Supply Network - blog 
