Survey of Indigenous Water
Management and Coping
Mechanisms in Africa: Implications for Knowledge
and Technology Policy

Femi Olokesusi

ATPS SPECIAL PAPER SERIES No. 25

Published by the African Technology Policy Studies Network, P.O. Box 10081, 00100
General Post Office, Nairobi, Kenya.

© 2006 African Technology Policy Studies Network (ATPS)

PUBLISHED BY ATPS COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENTABOUT THE AFRICAN TECHNOLOGY POLICY STUDIES NETWORKThe African Technology Policy Studies Network (ATPS) is a multi-disciplinary network of researchers,
policy makers, actors in the private sector and other end users interested in generating, promoting
and strengthening innovative science and technology policies in Africa. With a regional secretariat in
Nairobi, the network operates through national chapters in 23 countries, with an expansion plan tocover the entire sub-Saharan Africa.
One of the objectives of the network is to disseminate research results to policy makers, legislators,
the organized private sector, civil society, mass media and farmers’ groups through publications,dialogue and advocacy. Among its range of publications are the Working Paper Series (WPS),
Research Paper Series (RPS), Special Paper Series (SPS) and the Technopolicy Briefs.
Papers published under the ATPS Special Paper Series are those commissioned as concept
papers, think pieces, leading conference papers and keynote addresses. In keeping with
our knowledge brokerage function, ATPS publishes, with permission of the author(s) or
journal editors, papers (published or unpublished) produced by distinguished academics/
researchers for a different purpose but judged by ATPS to be of excellent quality. Thesepapers address significant policy questions relevant to the work of ATPS and/or support
the Southern voice or an African perspective. We also consider theoretical papers that
advance our knowledge of science and technology policy issues.
ATPS is supported by a growing number of donors including the International Development ResearchCentre (IDRC), the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Rockefeller Foundation, the World Bank,
the OPEC Fund, Ford Foundation, Coca-Cola Eastern Africa, the African Development Bank, InfoDev,
and the Royal Dutch Government.

Table of Contents

1

Introduction

1

2

Definitions of Water Resources Management and Indigenous Knowledge
Systems
2.1 Water Resource Management
2.2 Indigenous Knowledge Systems

3

3

3
3

Survey of the Application of Indigenous Knowledge to Water Resources
Management
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Water Management for Agricultural Purposes
3.3 Water Management for Non-Agricultural Purposes
3.4 Water Purification and Protection

5
5
5
12
13

4

Evolution of the Indigenous Water Management and Coping Mechanisms

15

5

Environmental Implications of Indigenous Water Management and17

6

Possible and Probable Ethno-religious and Spiritual Forces Driving
the Water Management and Coping Mechanisms

20

Strategies for Integrating new Knowledge with Indigenous Water
Management and Coping Mechanisms

22

8Conclusion

25

9References

26

7

1.

Introduction

Water is the most fundamental and indispensable of natural resources and is an element of life andhuman quality of life. Water constitutes about 70% of the human body, by weight and several bodyfunctions depend on this resource. It is no wonder then that much of the history of mankind is caught
up in the struggle for and use of water. Not only does every living thing require water to sustain life, it
is man’s efforts to improve his quality of life (Olokesusi, 1987; 1990).
In addition to rainfall and huge groundwater resources, Africa is blessed with both freshwater andsalt water sources. The freshwater bodies include large rivers such as the Nile (the world’s longest
river), the Congo (which discharges over 41,700 tonnes of water per second into the Atlantic Ocean),the Mano, Niger, Volta, Zambezi and the Orange; she also has a number of large lakes which
includes Lakes Victoria, Tangayika, Malawi and Chad etc. The saltwater bodies include the Indian
Ocean and the Red Sea to the east and the Atlantic to the west. The Mediterranean in the north, andboth the Indian Ocean and the Atlantic in the south, surround Africa.
Despite the impressive water resource endowments, Africa lags behind other continents in per caput
access to safe water, volume of irrigation water, and food security and tops the league of poor
countries. Some of the answers to this lamentable situation could be found in the rising population
which in year 2000 stood at 784.4 million, but projected to rise to about 1.1 billion in 2015 (UNHabitat, 2003); massive degradation of the natural resource base (water, soils and vegetation),increasing rainfall variability, recurrent droughts, and low level of science and technologicaldevelopment.
This paper attempts to unravel this complex and bewildering situation by resting on the premise
that, before colonization, people in African kingdoms and empires, had deep traditional knowledgeof science and technology which was employed in many facets of life like food production, soil andwater management, textiles, craft, iron and stone works and jewelry, etc. In spite of this enviable past,
why has the continent been unable to unlock her wealth, especially in the realm of sustainable water
resources development and management? What were the indigenous water management andcoping mechanisms? What factors account for the stunted growth of indigenous water management
techniques? How can these challenges be met adequately using the instrumentality of new knowledge
to integrate western science and technology with traditional African science and technology?

1

2

ATPS SPECIAL PAPER SERIES NO. 25

The objective of this paper is to appraise the indigenous water management and coping
mechanisms in Africa, so as to, provide opportunities for improving the environmentally beneficial
techniques and sustain them for present and future generations. In this context, the specific objectivesof the paper are to:• define the concepts of water resources management and indigenous knowledge systems;• provide documentary evidence of indigenous water management techniques and theunderlying rationale;• discuss the evolution of the water management techniques;• discuss the environmental implications of the water management and coping mechanisms;• identify the possible and probable ethno-religious and spiritual forces driving the water
management and coping mechanisms; and• enumerate the appropriate strategies for integrating new knowledge with documented
indigenous water management and coping mechanisms for sustainable development.

2.

Definitions of Water Resources Management
and Indigenous Knowledge Systems

2.1

Water Resource Management

Water resources management is essentially the modification of the hydrological cycle for socioeconomic development. It involves not only the beneficial use of water resources but also theprevention, avoidance or minimization of the effects of water excess (flood) or deficiency (drought)(Douglas, 1973; Ayoade, 1975). Consequently, the major elements of water resources management
include water supply for domestic, municipal and industrial uses, agriculture, hydro-electric power,
navigation improvement, drainage and flood control, outdoor recreation, fish and wildlife conservation.
This paper focuses more on the application of indigenous knowledge systems for water management
mainly for agriculture, domestic, drainage and flood control and conservation purposes.

2.2

Indigenous Knowledge Systems

In order to understand the concept of indigenous knowledge, it is important to start from the conceptof knowledge. The latter refers to the “know-how” and “do-how”. Knowledge includes formal andinformal, modern and traditional “know-how” and “do-how”. Given the simple definition of knowledge
above, one can now proceed to clarify what really indigenous knowledge is.
Indigenous knowledge (IK), or indigenous technical knowledge (ITK) systems are facts to those who
see them as ways of knowing or looking at the world. Some aspects of indigenous knowledge arefacts as western scientists know and define fact. Some of it is belief as philosophers and theologians
define belief. And a lot of it is folk wisdom or common sense. Indigenous knowledge systems arelearned ways of knowing and looking at the world. They have evolved from very many years ofexperience and trial and error problem solving by groups of people working to meet the challenges
they face in their local environments, drawing upon the resources they have at hand.
Indigenous knowledge systems or indigenous technical knowledge systems have been defined invarious ways by a number of researchers over the years. For instance, Warren and Cashman (1988)
characterize IK systems as the sum of experience and knowledge for a given group that forms thebasis for decision making with regard to familiar and unfamiliar problems and challenges. Similarly,
Altieri (1988) characterize such knowledge as accumulated knowledge, skills and technology of thelocal people derived from the direct interaction of humans and the environment. IKS consist of
integrated systems of production and consumption with the following key components: organizedtechnical knowledge, social institutions, decision making, and management of diverse natural
resources, technology, and skilled labour. Some IKS are responding creatively to challenges through3

4

ATPS SPECIAL PAPER SERIES NO. 25

local adaptation, experimentation, and innovation under diverse and heterogeneous conditions.
Successful adaptations are preserved and passed on from generation to generation, through oral
and/or experimental means. Thus, indigenous knowledge is dynamic (Titilola, 1990; Olokesusi,2004).
Indigenous knowledge applied to environmental conservation has been described by the Canadianbased Dene Cultural Institute as traditional environmental knowledge (TEK) and is defined as a bodyof knowledge and beliefs transmitted through oral tradition and first-hand observation. It includes asystem of classification, a set of empirical observations about the local environment, and a system ofself-management that governs resource use.
Ecological aspects are closely tied to social and spiritual aspects of the knowledge system. The
quantity and quality of TEK varies among community members, depending on gender, age, social
status, intellectual capability and profession (hunter, spiritual leader, healer, etc). With its roots firmly
in the past, TEK is both cumulative and dynamic, building on the experience of earlier generations
and adapting to the new technological and socio-economic changes of the present.
Whereas research on IKS gained prominence in the search for enhanced food security andenvironmental conservation, it is now well documented that this knowledge system was and is still in
use in many aspects of human endeavor covering soap making, food processing, medicine, wood
carving, textiles and construction among others. The focus of this paper is on the water resourcesmanagement component of TEK within ITK systems.

3.

Survey of the Application of Indigenous
Knowledge to Water Resources Management

3.1.

Introduction

According to the theory of evolution, man, through the Darwinian postulation of “natural selection,
had battled many odds, obstacles and catastrophes, and survived them”. The theory’s so-called“survival of the fittest” has endowed Homosapiens with the socio-cultural, cognitive, physical andphysiological prowess to survive. It is this struggle for survival that spurred Africans to devise several
water management techniques in order to cope with their peculiar circumstances.
Some of the existing literature indicate that the first anatomically modern human emerged in thesouthern part of the African continent. The first groups of Africans hunted diverse wildlife, andlearned the use of fire for vegetation control. There is ample evidence that about 9,000 years ago,sorghum, millet, rice, yam, oil palm, as well as cattle were domesticated in the area between the
Sahara desert and the equator (Haverkort et al, 2002).
Traditionally, water is managed for two major purposes, namely agriculture and domestic
consumption, although this distinction is blurred sometimes. Sources of such waters vary fromdirect rainfall to waters from runoffs, rivers, streams, creek flows and seepage. Underground water
resources are also harnessed. The water so collected has been used to meet domestic needs inaddition to requirements for watering livestock, for runoff farming and irrigation. Available literature
reveal that more innovative indigenous water management techniques have been developed in the
climatically dry areas and in mountainous regions of Africa.

3.2.

Water Management for Agricultural Purposes

For agricultural purposes, traditional African farmers have devised techniques such as terrace
building, pitting systems, drainage ditches and small earth dams in valley floors to conserve soil andwater. Virtually all the on-farm water management techniques are typical examples of low external
inputs combined with the use of locally available resources. While water is being retained, some of
the techniques also provide effective check against soil erosion and loss of soil fertility.
In reality therefore, such techniques conserve both soil and water resources for agricultural production
and to prevent soil degradation. Johda (1990) refers to these techniques as “ethno-engineering”.
These techniques involve the collection and concentration of water run-off and rainwater for enhanced
and more reliable plant production (Reij et al 1988). In wetter regions, these techniques are usually

5

ATPS SPECIAL PAPER SERIES NO. 25

6combined with other techniques such as crop rotation, shifting cultivation, crop mixture, manure
application and the protection of nitrogen-fixing plants.
The ingenuity of the African farmer could be gleaned from the realization that different water
management techniques are used depending on the amount of rainfall. According to Reij (1990),
farmers in Tunisia have developed the tabias and jassours for harvesting floodwater within a streambed
in a region with a mere 100 to 200 millimetres (mm) annual rainfall. On the other hand, where therainfall rises to 400mm/year in the same country, farmers have developed the mesket and mankee.
Under the same rainfall regime in Eastern Sudan, the teras system has merged. Teras is used todescribe the earthen bund which surrounds three sides of each cultivated plot and impounds runoff
from the plains. Based on their empirical research in the Kassala border area of East Sudan Van Dijk
and Ahmed (1993), describes the teras technique of water harvesting as widespread and offers good
opportunities for run-off manipulation and moisure storage. (Tables 1 and 2) and (Plate 1). In thosecountries where the rainfall is 500mm or more, emphasis is placed more on techniques for in-situ
moisture conservation. Agro-forestry practices as hinted above are used appropriately in this situation.

Plate 1:Bunds and Spillways for Cropped Areas Receiving Runoff from External Catchments in
Tropics Forming Contour Ridges
Source: Barrow (1983); Critchley (1984)

7

A SURVEY OF INDIGENOUS WATER MANAGEMENT AND COPING MECHANISMS IN AFRICA

Table 1: Ethno-Engineering Techniques in some African Countries’ Farming Systems
Ethnic GroupCountry*

Malinke (1)(Baule (2)Kita (3)Dogon (4)
Bobo (5)Gurensi (6)Nunuma (7)Manprusi (8)Losso (9)Kabre (10)Mandara (11)SenegalGuineaIvory Coast
Mali
Dahomey
Dahomey
Dahomey
Dahomey
Ghana
Togoland
TogolandNigeria

Kamuku (12),Kanuri (13),Chamba (14)Average
Altitude(Feet)*

AverageRainfall(inches)Population
denswity
inhabit per
sq mile1,600-3,000
1,600
1,600-3,300
2,000
1,600
1,600-3,300
1,600-3,300
1,600-3,300
1,600-2,600
2,600-3,000
1,600

39
47-55
39
31
31
31
31
31
39-79
59
31

26
51
26
51-12951-12951-12951-12951-129129-258568
129-181b

X

Nigeria

1,600-3,300

31129-258

1,600-3,300

31129-258

X
X

Sokoto (17), Kano (18) Nigeria

1,600-3,300

31-39

310-516

Cameroons

2,600-5,000

31-39

129-258

Bana (25),Adamawa (26)Kuru (27), Bari (28)
Konso (29)
Tigre (30)

Cameroons
Sudan
Ethiopia
Ethiopia

5,000-6,600
1,600-3,300
5,000
5,000-6,600

31-59
29-55
39-47
24-39

258-387
77-129490
258-387

Kipsigi (31),Kikuyu (32),
Nandi (33), Suk (34),Keyu (35)

X
X

e

X
X
X
X

X

Main Cropf

Millet, rice, maizeYams, banana, taro
MilletMillet, yams, banana
Millet, yams, banana
Millet, yams, banana
Millet, yams, banana
Millet, yams, banana
Millet, ground nut, yam
Millet, yams, rice
Millet, beans

Millet, yams, banana
X

X

X

X

X

MilletX

Millet, g/nut, cassava

X

Millet, yams, banana

X

X
X
X

X

X

X

Kenya

5,000-6,600

55-71

129-387

X

X

Rundi (36)
Rwanda (37)
Kiga (38)Matengo (39),
Makonde (40Kinga (41)

BurundiRwandaUganda5,000-6,600
5,000-6,600
5,000-6,600

39-55
39-55
31-59

258-387387-516
129-258

X
X
X

X
X
X

Tanzania
Tanzania

3,300-5,000
1,600-5,000

39-47
39-55

77-25851-258X
X

Sandawa (42),
Iraque (43);Fipa (44); Turu (45);gogo (46)

Tanzania

2,600-5,000

31-47

26-258

Mbugu (47), Shambala(48), Pare (49),
Meru (50), Teita (51)
Tanzania

5,000-6,600

59-79

129-258

X

X

Wakara (52)

4,000

63

542

X

X

Tanzania

d

X
X
X
X
X
X

Bauchi (15), Berrm (16) Nigeria
Batta (19), Mundang(20), Mandji (21),Bamum (22),Dama (23),Musgu (24)cX

Millet, beans, earth pea
MilletMillet, cotton, maize

Millet, maize, cassava
Millet, banana, yams
Banana, millet, yams
Millet, banana, beans

X

X

Maize, millet, cassava
Maize, millet

X

Millet, maize, beans

Millet, maize, beans
X

X

Millet, cassava, rice

*The old names for Cote D’Ivoire and Benin have been retained in the references just as they are
A. See BRIGGS, G.W.G., 1941, P.8; BUCHANAN, K.M./PUGH, J.C., 1955, P.110; GOUROU, P., 1951, P.239 a.
1961, P.84; HUPPERTZ, J., 1951, P.36; JENSEN, E., 1936, P.576; JONES, G.L. 1943, P.161; KULS, W., 1958;
LEMBEZAT, B., 1950, P.101; MURDOCK, G.P., 1959; NADEL, S.F., 1947, P.527; NIVEN, C.R.., 1935, P.54;
NOWACK, E., 1954, P.6; PROTHEOR, E.M., 1957, P.72; SPENCER, J.E./HALE, G.A. 1961, P.1; WHITE, S., 1944,
P.130.
b Terracingc Irrigation farming d Manuring
e Stablingf Leading crops and important mixed crops
Source: After C. Reij (1990); CIRAN (2004)

Central

South
Southwest

Southwest

North

S. Antao Island

Djenne-Sofara
Anti-Atlas
Mountains
Ader Doutchi
MaggiaBurkina Faso

Burkina Faso
Burkina Faso

Burkina Faso

Cameroon

Cape Verde

Mali
MoroccoEast
Shukriya, etc

Djebel Marra
Uluguru

mountains
Oluddai

Medenine

SousseChad Basin,rural Kano

Sudan

Sudan
Tanzania

Chad

Tunisia

Tunisia
Nigeria

400-1200(in uplands)

800-11001000

700-800
1000-1100

400-700

Rainfall (mm)Shuwa, Kanuri,
Hausa

Fur
LuguruHedwenda,

Somali

Hausa

200-300
390-970480-1900

100-200

250-650

600-1000
1500

225-400

150-300

300-500

Bambara/Sourhai 400?
100-250

20 ethnic
groupsDagari

Kassena
Bifirfor

Mossi

Ethnic Group?
50(1991)
200(1991)

15-25

5-6

20-37 (1976)
100

?

?

20-30
?

>100

80-25035-8080-10035

Population
Density
Persons/km 2

Sorghum/millet

Sorghum, millet
BarleySugarcane, maize,
sweet potatoes,
pigeon peas

Sorghum, peanuts

Sorghum, millet

Sorghum, millet
Sorghum, millet,
maize

Sorghum, millet

Major Crops

Various earth-bunding systems with
upslope wingwalls, in drier regionswith catchment area (water harvetsting)
Earth dams (tabias/jessours)
Fruit trees, lentils,
within streambeds
beans
Earth bunds (meskat system)
Olive trees
Earth bunds, hafirs and water
Millet, sorghum,
spreading techniques. As above.
beans, onions

Sticks and stone bunding on fields
and in gullies
Earth bunds with upslope
Sorghum/cowpeas
wingwalls (caug) and earth bunds
dividing plots of land into a grid
(gawan)Earth bunds (straight) with upslope Sorghum
wingwalls (tear), and water
spreading techniques)
Bench terraces
Millet/sorghum
Ladder terraces

Bench terraces (rainfed, irrigatedcontour stone walls (murets),
flooewater control dams, riverbank protection walls (bardos)
Pitting systems
Terraces, stone banks and smallstone walls
Stone lines planting pits (tassa)

Stone lines, stone terraces,
planting pits (zay)Stone lines
Stone bunds on slopes; networkof earth bandsa and drainage
channels in lowlands
Contour stone bunds on slopes
drainage channels
Bench terraces (0,5-3m high),stone bunds

Indigenous SWC Techniques

Source: After C. Reij (1990); NEST (1991); Olokesusi, et al (1992); CIRAN (2003)

Miraan Region

Somalia

Sierra Leone

Niger

RegionCountry

Table 2: Additional Examples of Ethno-Engineering (SWC) Techniques for Crop Production in Africa

Cel Amami (1983)
Olokesusi et al (1992)
NEST (1991)

Bonvallot (1986)

Sommerhalter (1986)

Critchley, et al (1990
Randall (1963),
Ibrahim(1988)
Miehe (1986)
Temple (1972)

Critchley, et al(1990)

Reij, Martin(1984, 1990)
Millington (1984)

Ayers (1989)
Kutsch (1982)

Mallaire (1972), Boulet(1975), Boutrais (1987)
Riddell&Campbell, 198
Maagsma (1990),
Kloosterber andEppink (1989)

Pradeau (1975)

Savonnet (1958)
Reij (1983)?
Savonnet (1976)

Information Sources

8
ATPS SPECIAL PAPER SERIES NO. 25

A SURVEY OF INDIGENOUS WATER MANAGEMENT AND COPING MECHANISMS IN AFRICA

9

Similarly in Mali, the Dogon ethnic group usually builds small earth ridges around some sorghum or
millet stands. Such ridges which are often 20 to 30cm tall possess a rectangular or a beehive shape;
and are known to conserve the drops of rain falling within them.
Stone lines (gandari) have traditionally been used in the Ader Doutchi Maggia area of Niger Republic
to conserve water and trap sand blown by the wind. This region has an annual rainfall of 250 to
450mm, and is situated on a plateau with fertile valleys and barren plateaus. The stones are laid out
in straight lines (grid pattern), following the natural contour line. Once laid out, the stones are covered
with sandy-clay soils known locally as fako, stalks of cereal and manure are strewn on the land to trap
sand. Land areas treated in this way, would regain their fertility within 5 to 6 years.
The Mossi farmers of Burkina Faso have practised terracing farming for centuries. For this purpose,bunds made of stones are placed on cultivated land to build up terraces which retain water and soil
moisture. The stone bunds are built up over the years, reaching about one meter height, especiallyduring the off-farm season (dry season). The semi-permeable bunds allow for gradual seeping ofwater and prevent the run-off caused by the scarce but very intensive rains, thereby mitigating the riskof both crop failure and soil erosion (Plates 2, 3 and 4).
The Matengo people in the Mbinga district of Ruvuma region in Tanzania, live in very well disserted
highlands and valley where the elevation ranges from 1,400 to above 2,000m. Due to this difficult
terrain, the people use a technique known in Kiswahili as ngoro or Matengo pit system to growmaize, beans, wheat, sweet potatoes, and in some areas tobacco on rotational basis, where theslopes are quite steep. The ngoro involves digging of hundred of pits on the farm and spreading theearth over the grass. The depths of the pits ranges between 0.3m and 1.0m depending on the soil
type and presence of stones which makes the task more arduous. Interestingly, the Matengo womenare much more involved than men in pit construction (Rutatora, 1997).
In Nigeria, the Mapan and Chingwan ethnic groups in the Wokkos district of Pankshin in Plateau
state, also practise terracing in a very rugged high altitude location. The crops grown are maize,sorghum, archa, banana and mango. During our interview, it turned out that these people migrated
from Borno state in the north-eastern part of Nigeria. According to them, their fore-fathers werecompelled to use this type of farming system in an attempt to cope with the challenges posed by theirenvironment.
In the dry lands of the continent where there is serious patchiness in rainfall, run-off farming has been
complemented with other strategies. The coping mechanism involves livestock, migrant labour,
choice of crop varieties, grain storage, and food trading. Thus, quick-maturing varieties of millet
provide some insurance against the rains, finishing early.

ATPS SPECIAL PAPER SERIES NO. 25

10

Plate 2: Terraces with Stone Bunds or Walls Used on Steep Slopes in Morocco diagram (a) the
terraces receive water from an external catchment; the iompediment wall reduce the speed of runoff
and spreads it whilst holding back debris; in diagram (b) contour ridges a stone bunds are combined
within one system. N.B. The gradients are exaggerated.
Source: Kusch (1982)

A SURVEY OF INDIGENOUS WATER MANAGEMENT AND COPING MECHANISMS IN AFRICA

11

Plate 4: Plan (a) and Perspective View (b) of a Somali ‘hafir’ (or ‘balli’) with Access to the Stored
Water via a well. Hafirs of this sort are strongly fenced to prevent animals getting to the Water andTreading Down the Banks.
Source: Pacey and Cullis (1986)

ATPS SPECIAL PAPER SERIES NO. 25

12

Also in Southern Nigeria, the creeping gourd or pumkin, small vegetables, yams or raised moundswith the climbing stems trailing along poles, occasional stands of maize and cassava added later
during the cultivation cycle, are all grown together as a mixed cropping system. This is a close
representation of the natural ecosystem and implies the substitution of required domesticated plant
species for the wild ones destroyed during the process of clearance (Harris, 1969; Agboola, 1973).
The flow of energy or matter through the original system is therefore little disturbed, and net productivity
rates are maintained at an almost constant level. This technique also checks soil erosion because
the ground is very well covered during the wet season when run off is most intense Contour farmingis also practised to check soil erosion (Richards, 1985; Agabi, et al, 1995).
In the wetlands of the Niger Delta region of Nigeria, water management takes another dimension
due to swampy and flooded conditions. Some of the indigenous coping mechanisms for managing
soil and water are regular dredging of the drainage system, placing several loads of oyster shells(obtained from the sea), on the land, planting and erection of mangrove trees and planks with a viewto enhancing the firmness of the soil. Also, in this part of Nigeria, one particular type of hard soil
locally known as chikoko is used for bunding so that the soil could be cropped (NEST, 1991; Olokesusi,
et al, 1992).
Traditional irrigation farming system based on surface waters, actually originated from Africa. Almost
all the traditional and modern irrigation technologies are based on the Shaduf or Shadouf system
which originated around River Nile in Egypt many centuries ago. Typically, it consists of a long,tapering, nearly horizontal pole mounted like a seesaw. A skin or bucket is hung on a rope from thelong end, and a counterweight is hung on the short end. The operator pulls down on a rope attachedto the long end to fill the bucket and allows the counterweight to raise the bucket. To raise water tohigher levels, a series of shadufs are sometimes mounted one above the other (New Encyclopedia
Britannica Macropaedia, Vol. IX, 1994). This technology has been modified in different parts of thecontinent to suit socio-cultural and environmental peculiarities.
Under this system, in Nigeria, a stream or river is ponded using earthen bunds and sometimes byadding of stones. The water so collected becomes a reservoir, for inundation, for farming purposes.
There is usually provision of cluices in the bunds allowing ponded water to be released to the farm
plots. Usually, arable crops particularly vegetables and cereals thrive well under this farming system.

3.3

Water Management for Non-Agricultural Purposes

In most African countries, surface water bodies are regarded as common property resources. All
community members are entitled to equal rights and access and use of the water. The water could
be used for many purposes – drinking, laundry, livestock, cooking and irrigation farming. Rainwatercollection (harvesting) is extensively practised for the purposes of domestic consumption. However,part of the harvested water is used to provide water for backyard gardens (farms), and domestic
livestock. The two major techniques of water harvesting are micro-catchments and roof collection.

A SURVEY OF INDIGENOUS WATER MANAGEMENT AND COPING MECHANISMS IN AFRICA

13

3.3.1 Micro-Catchment Collection
In most arid and semi-arid areas of the continent where pastoralism is the primary means of livelihood,the indigenous techniques of harnessing rainwater are by means of excavated cisterns, hafirs, small
dams and natural water holes. The latter is more common in the wetter parts of the south of the
Sahara desert, although some excavations are done for this purpose. In parts of Nigeria, Ethiopia,
Kenya and Western Sudan, hafirs are used for rainwater collection. Contour bunding is also built
during the short dry season to contain water flows (Plates 5 and 6).
In these areas, hafirs are typically located on land with very gentle slopes where no well-defineddrainage channels or sites for small dams exist. Consequently, a hafir would be created by excavation
while the spoils are used to construct a bund around, its perimeter. The capacity of a hafir may be as
little as 1,500m3 as in the Ogaden region, of Ethiopian, 9,000m3 in Botswana; or as much as
200,000m3 in Sudan (Pacey and Cullis, 1986). On the other hand, small ditches could be constructedat the edge of paved land near homes in order to channel rainwater to underground cisterns.
3.3.2 Roof Collection Techniques
Until the advent of western containers such as plastics and metal, Africans typically collected rainwaterfrom roof-tops with the aid of calabashes and earthen pots. These objects are merely placed below
the roof eaves and the water drops into them. Another traditional collection technique involved theconstruction of sliced bamboo gutters along the roof eaves, through which the water flows into
calabashes and earthen pots. The water would then be taken into homes and other areas for
consumption purposes.
In Botswana, rainwater collection in excavated “tanks” was very common in the past. Such “tanks”
were constructed by excavating soil which is later used in supporting the top of the tank. The
excavations were unlined, hence were only feasible on clay soils. Nonetheless, they retained water
during the short period in every year when the rural dwellers were living on their lands. This coping
mechanism indicates that the seasonal availability of rainwater was well matched to a specific need
(Gibber, 1969). In many instances, the “tank” and related ground surface catchments are neither
covered nor fenced, thus predisposing the water to contamination by livestock or germs.

3.4

Water Purification and Protection

In several parts of Africa, water meant for drinking is subjected to one form of treatment or theother. Whenever surface water has been collected, it is allowed to stand for some hours before it
is decanted into earthen pots for storage. The precipitated materials are discarded.

14

ATPS SPECIAL PAPER SERIES NO. 25

Water hygiene is a top priority in most households. For example in many African societies thehousehold prohibits anybody from using his/her own cup (calabash usually) to get water from thecommunal water pot. Rather, there is a container (a calabash in southern Nigeria) fastened to thepot, which all members of the household are expected to use for collecting water into their own
containers for drinking.
Earthen pots are often buried in compounds rather than inside rooms in the hot arid and semi-arid
areas so that the water temperature could be moderated. In the wetter parts such as parts ofYorubaland in south-west Nigeria, such earthen pots are placed inside the home for the same
purpose. Locally processed shea-butter is placed at the bottom of pots before water collected fromroof-tops, streams or rivers is poured into them. Again, the rationale is to ensure that the waterremains cool even when the outside temperature rises.
In rural Ibadan in the south-western part of Nigeria, Adenopus breviflorus or tagiri (inYoruba) is
usually placed beside the household earthen pot in the dry season so as to wade off evil spirits and“germs” causing measles. The Uhabiri Ossah clan of Igbo stock in Umuahia area, south-eastern
Nigeria, attempts to improve the taste of water for human consumption by exposing the earthen
water pot to the hot smoke of Uhokiriho seeds. For this purpose, the seeds are thrown into burning
fuel wood in the traditional cooking stove, while the water pot is placed on top.
It is instructive to note that African pastoralists were quite aware that livestock posed someenvironmental health hazards to them. Sandford (1983) notes that in those areas where traditional
hafirs and cisterns were most highly developed, drinking troughs and other arrangements for
distributing water to livestock were carefully planned. In addition, ground rules for maintenance anduse of these water sources were very well enforced. It was usual to have guards posted at hafirs
which are sometimes also fenced. As earlier noted, there is still the possibility of infections beingtransmitted in the course of these processes.

4.

Evolution of the Indigenous Water Management
and Coping Mechanisms

From the above expose and other literature sources, it is obvious that indigenous knowledge systems
have existed for centuries in Africa. However, the colonial past has somehow retarded the growthand further development of IKS and the capacity of Africans to solve their problems using locallydeveloped technologies. We note with regret that there is paucity of empirical research anddocumentation of IKS in several African countries. This neglect has therefore created knowledge
gaps on a spatio-temporal scale (See Table 3, and also, Pacey and Cullis, 1986:127). The implicationof this critical gap is the difficulty in tracking in a systematic way, the development and improvementof any particular technique or coping mechanism over a long period of time. That is, the outcomesof deductive reasoning based on systematic longitudinal studies are very few.
Perhaps it is the necessity to close this gap that galvanized some researchers in the 1980s to takemuch more proactive interests in ITK systems all over the world (Warren and Cashman, 1988).
These efforts led to the establishment of more than thirty indigenous knowledge resource centersaround the world. Some of these centers are based in Africa e.g. Kenya Resource Centre for
Indigenous Knowledge (KERIK) and African Resource Centre for Indigenous Knowledge (in NISER,
Ibadan, Nigeria).
Table 3: Some Gaps in the Documentation of Indigenous Knowledge in Water Resource
Management
Country

Indigenous Ethno
engineering Techniques

Tanzania (Ukara Island)
Mandara Mountains inNorthern Cameroon
Doutchi Maggia in Niger
Mali

Stone lines & pitting system

Researchers & Period
Follow up Researchersof First Documentation
and Period
Lundwig (1968)?
Studies done in 1965 – 1966. Boutrais (1987)
Hallaire 1971; Boulet, (1975),
Boutrais (1973)
Delwanle (1973) mentioned “Discovered” by Critchley et al,
it in passing.
(1990)
Gallais and Sidikou, (1978), Kassogue and Pansioen (1990).
; Kings (1988).

The Dogan ethnic group’s
unique system for rice andonion production
Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco Indigenous Irrigation Terraces Heusch (1985) estimates that
irrigation terraces cover some2 million hectares yet cost-benefit
data for traditional irrigation terraces
are lacking
Source: After C. Reij (1990)

15

?

16

ATPS SPECIAL PAPER SERIES NO. 25

In spite of the above handicap, some of the water management and coping mechanisms highlighted
in Section 3 above have undergone one form of evolution or the other. This is because indigenous
knowledge systems are rooted in the past, cumulative and dynamic.
Omwenga (1984), note that in the Kissii area of Kenya, some households have metal gutters along
the roof eaves which channel water into 200 litre oil drums, buckets, pots and pans, whereas thatchedand timber materials were prevalent in the past. Since the 1970s when the effects of soil erosion
became quite perceptible in south-eastern Nigeria, local welders (metal work artisans) have replaced
the bamboo roof cutters with metal variants in addition to metal tanks of different sizes. Metal
downpipes are placed either along the wall or hung on the roof gutter to channel water into the tanks
which could either be buried or placed on the ground.
Also in Kenya, the Ghala tank evolved from the traditional granary basket or Ghala and it is plasteredinside and outside with cement and sand mixture. Relatedly, the Dogon people of Mali have modified
the adobe (mud-walled) grain bins into water tanks by the addition of wire reinforcement and aplastered cement lining (Watt, 1978). In many countries, some development partners havecollaborated with local stakeholders to improve on the indigenous techniques. Keller (1982), identifies
three of such:1)
unreinforced cement mortar jar;
2)plastered Ghala basket;
3)
ferrocement tank (see also Maddocks, 1973; UNICEF, 1982, 1984).
Finally, the principles of alley crop farming technique modernized and popularized in Africa by theInternational Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) in Ibadan, Nigeria are rooted in traditional agroforestry practices such as Taungya and shamba as described by Agboola (1975); and UNEP (1982).

5.

Environmental Implications of Indigenous
Water Management and Coping Mechanisms

As earlier pointed out, some of the “ethno-engineering” and water harvesting techniques have multipurpose functions – water retention, flood and soil erosion control, enhancement of soil fertility andwatershed management. Our finding in this context is that some of the techniques have proved theirworth. An example is the Matengo pit system in Tanzania which soil erosion control capability has
been shown to be better than conventional conservation practices, even on sites with differing
degrees of slope (see Table 4). In addition, Rutatora et al (1995) and Schmied (1989) have confirmedthat crop yields under this ngoro system were higher than those produced under different farming
systems, such as flat and ridge cultivation. This system has also been proved to have made it
possible for the Matengo people to produce adequate food crops in the mountainous area and also
control soil erosion (Pike, 1938; Stenhouse, 1944).

Table 4: Effect of Conservation Practices and Slope on Seasonal Soil Loss in Tanzania
SiteA
Slope 8.9o
B
Slope 20.5oConservation Practice
Bare
Ridge
Matengo pit
Bare
Ridge
Matengo pit

Soil Loss (metric tons/ha)
39.0
7.3
2.4
55.7
14.3
5.8

Source: Miombo Woodland Agro-Ecological Research Project Report (1995:35) Report, No. 1, Tanzania.

17

18

ATPS SPECIAL PAPER SERIES NO. 25

The harvesting of rainwater from roofs maximizes the efficiency of run-off collection. This is because
the characteristic pattern is the scattering of small rainwater catchments, each serving an individual
farm, homestead or hamlet. Hence, we refer to this as an extensive form of development, unlike theintensive large-scale irrigation projects. The former type of development is much moreenvironmentally friendly because it offers very good technical advantage in terms of the conservationof the scarce water resources. Moreover, the technique fits quite well into the settlement pattern.
Rainwater harvesting promotes flood and erosion control, groundwater recharge, and reduced
silting at major rivers and streams. Similarly, run-off farming offers these same environmental benefits.
In the Ader Doutchi Maggia region, Niger Republic, the stone lines (gandari) have been usedsuccessfully for the rehabilitation of barren degraded lands and it is being replicated elsewhere(Reij, 1990). In Kenya, the “hoop” micro-catchments have restored degraded lands without negative
effects. Once the perennial grasses begin to flourish within the hoops and spread beyond them, thegrass itself binds the soil together and run-off is effectively retained.
Traditional rainfed irrigation systems have proven to be more profitable than modern large-scale
irrigation systems in Africa. In Chad, the World Bank (1989), for example, carried out a financial andeconomic rate of return (ERR) analysis for arable crop production. The study indicated the cultivationof rice, wheat and sorghum was most economically viable under the traditional rainfed irrigation
system. Four models were examined:
1)
Water control based only on pumping with a diesel engine;2)
Controlled flooding based on gravity, permitting partial water control;
3)Improved rainfed agriculture based on bottomland cultivation; and4)
Traditional rainfed irrigation, which accounts for 90% of rice production in Chad.
The relatively greater profitability of the improved, traditional polders is confirmed by the economic
analysis which showed that cereal cultivation, particularly wheat and sorghum, had an acceptable
ERR for the traditional polder whereas it was negative for the modern polder (World Bank, 1989:25).
The report went on to say that stakeholders (excluding the farmers) tended to assume that farmers
were interested in irrigated agriculture and failed to develop an understanding of how irrigation fits
into the farmers’ economic strategy. It was concluded that cultivation of traditional cereals on the
traditional polders is economically viable, whereas this is not the case for the modern polders.
Government and donors need to seriously re-examine the decision to invest heavily in modern
polders on Lake Chad which are extremely costly in terms of both investment and operating costs(World Bank, 1989:28).
From the foregoing, a major positive impact of these water management and coping mechanisms
is improved agricultural production, which enhances poverty reduction. Ready access to water also
contributes to reliving both time and constraints which are both critical in rural communities. To
some extent there would be improvements in personal and environmental hygiene. Thesedevelopments also widen livelihood options. The implication of all these is environmental
improvement due to the recursive relationship between poverty and environmental degradation.

A SURVEY OF INDIGENOUS WATER MANAGEMENT AND COPING MECHANISMS IN AFRICA

19

However, there are still some problems. For instance, until the introduction of modern roofing materials
like tiles and metal, African homes were roofed with thatched materials. Water harvested from suchroofs were deemed clean and uncontaminated. This may not be scientifically correct. Also, therising level of air pollution and dangerous microbes in Africa makes this coping mechanism suspectfor drinking water.
Novieku (1980), contends that in West Africa, there appears to be no strong objection on grounds oftaste to rain water consumption. In Botswana, the converse was the situation. Some adverse
environmental effects of some of these techniques have been observed in certain parts of thecontinent. Excavated water storage “tanks” and hand dug wells for example have all contributed to
the lowering of water tables. In small hafirs, livestock often gain access to the water by wading in at
the inflow side thus contributing to soil erosion and rapid silting.
Although hand dug wells, cisterns and hafirs allow water to percolate down into the soil and eventually
recharge the groundwater table, Pacey and Cullis (1986), note that in north-east Kenya, one major
outcome of hafirs or hafir-dams constructed after 1969 was that majority had silted up by 1979. Thisdevelopment has also been observed in Nigeria (NEST, 1991).
While the entire community is involved in one way or the other in the conservation and maintenanceof water quality, its open access nature and absence of property rights have been a source ofconcern. The community leader(s) represent the institutional authorities under a non-market
framework for water management. Researchers like Hardin (1968) have argued that under thisframework, each individual may try to appropriate more and more water thus leading to over
exploitation and environmental degradation. This is what Hardin refers to as “tragedy of the commons”.
The perceived weakness of this formulation led to the development of the so-called Prisoner’s
Dilemma game (Sengupta, 1991). Much as this concern is genuine, we are constrained to reiterate
the fact that in traditional African societies, norms and ground rules are usually followed and respected.

6.

Possible and Probable Ethno-religious andSpiritual Forces driving the Water Management
and Coping Mechanisms

For most rural dwellers, the spiritual, religious and cultural aspects are quite important dimensionsof their livelihood and coping mechanisms, giving meaning, direction and identity to their lives.
Consequently, researchers in the field of IKS now widely acknowledge that this knowledge is holistic.
It cannot be compartmentalized and cannot be divorced or separated from the people who hold it. It
is in fact rooted in the spiritual health, culture and language of the people. This knowledge is a wayof life and comes from the spirit so as to serve (Haverkort et al, 2002).
In several African rural communities, the spiritual dimension of land tenure as well as soil and water
conservation has been documented even if scantly. Traditional functionaries such as the earth
priests, the spirit media and rainmakers, who are normally consulted for land and water management
issues exist in many of such communities.
The Shona ethnic group in Zimbabwe, the traditional people in Northern Ghana, both the Yorubas
and Igbos in Nigeria believe that the spiritual world (Gods, spirits, ancestors), the human world(including spiritual and political leaders), and the natural world (sacred groves, ritual crops andanimals, food items and permanent crops) are interrelated (Haverkort et al 2002; NEST, 1991). For
this reason, land, water, animals and plants are not only a factor of production with economic
importance, they have their place within the sanctity of nature. Consequently, certain places are set
aside and or used as locations for rituals, and sacrifices. Typical examples include sacred groves,shrines, mountains and rivers (Osunade, 1988; Millar, 1999; Gonese; 1999; Wahab, 2004).
Among the Yoruba of south-western Nigeria, for example, forest land was regularly set aside forvarious purposes; as hunting forests, religious groves, isolation or quarantine forests, and to serve as
the abode of fairies and spirits. Various categories of such forests have been described by ageographer as follows: Igbo ode (hunting forest). These are lands located at some distance awayfrom settlements that are mainly devoted to game. Usually igbo egan (High forest) or abandoned
secondary forest when put to use for game – hunting activities is called igbo ode. The lands varyfrom place to place, depending on the occupation of farmers in the area. Wild and dangerous
animals inhabit some of these forest lands such that the lands are named accordingly, e.g. Igbo erin
(Elephant forest), igbo efon (Buffalo forest). Only brave hunters dare use such specialized forests forfear of attack from dangerous animals. Igbo oro (Religious groves) are places set aside for religious
worship of many of the elements of the physical environment. They are not extensive (usually lessthan a quarter of a hectare) and the uncultivated forests are located on the borders of settlements

20

A SURVEY OF INDIGENOUS WATER MANAGEMENT AND COPING MECHANISMS IN AFRICA

21

and in as many separate locations as there are families of the deities. The groves are quite distinct
from the neighbouring lands that are either under cultivation, recently left to fallow, or planted withtree crops. Only foot paths, which are usually unkempt, lead into the groves. They are called various
names, depending on the deities and the location in Yoruba land. The names include: Igbo ale,Igbo egungun, and igbo awo.
Igbo-Egbee (religious groves): These are reserved forests for the burial of deceased pregnant
women, people struck by lightening, victims of smallpox and people whose deaths are consideredabnormal or mysterious. Such lands, isolated further away from settlements, were never put undercultivation in the past when diseases were rampant and sudden deaths were attributed to the angerof the gods. The lands are also referred to as the land of sorrows. Another name given to such lands
is igbo iwin (abode of fairies and spirits). These are lands believed to be inhabited by fairies andfearful spirits.
The lands are designated as belonging to the gods, so-called, because of the belief that the forest
and the earth are infested with queer supernatural creatures vividly portrayed in a Yoruba novel withthe setting and name, Igbo Olodumare (Gods’ forest). The lands have rugged topography and areusually thickly forested and located far away from human settlements and could be highly inaccessible.
Only brave hunters dare enter such lands for hunting purposes. The lands are naturally unattainable
for cultivation because of their rough terrain and, as such, they are still preserved in several placeseven today (Osunade, 1988; 1991).

7.

Strategies for Integrating New Knowledge with
Indigenous Water Management and Coping
Mechanisms

The foregoing discussion confirms that African IKS have been employed in diverse ways for water
resources management under very excruciating and challenging circumstances. Although somesuccess stories have been recorded the short and medium term scenarios remain grim. Out of the
55 countries in the world with domestic water use below 50 liters per person per day (the minimum
required set by the World Health Organization), 35 are in Africa. About 50% of all Africans suffer fromone of six main water-related diseases. Only about 4% of the continent’s total annual renewable
water resources is used for agriculture, industry and domestic purposes (Mutume, 2004).
Inadequacy of funds and technology was identified as the key stumbling block to solving the continent’s
water supply and sanitation problems at a Pan-African Conference on Water in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
in December, 2003 (Mutume, 2004). This is therefore a clarion call for the integration of new
knowledge with IKS in order to salvage the situation.
Although IKS differ from western, science-based knowledge systems, they have many aspects tocomplement science. IKS are basically local in their factual information, while science must as ofnecessity carry out new studies to gain the same information that already exists in IKS. Westernscience is regarded as having a short-term information base that it can use, whereas its indigenous
counterpart has the benefit of been able to draw on a very long-term information base. Nonetheless,the two systems are based on human observation of natural events.
Integration of the two knowledge systems could be achieved if the following proposals are considered:
The small scale, private management and adaptive capacity of these water resources management
techniques, make these technologies replicable in other parts of sub-Saharan Africa as the casemay be. With a view to gaining new insights into these technologies, the trajectory for intervention
should be within the context of farmer analysis, choice and experiment. This is because the adoptersof these technologies use a phased approach following seasonal or environmental characteristics.
Consequently, knowledge and improvement of any of these technologies should begin with adequate
understanding of the community’s social and economic relations, leadership, cultural and religious
aspects and the different interests. The sustainability of water management system depends on thesustainability of community management systems or institutions. Technical options should be seen
as part of a management solution, not as goals themselves. Technical improvements can howeveralso support management solutions (Lemmerink, et al, 1999).

22

A SURVEY OF INDIGENOUS WATER MANAGEMENT AND COPING MECHANISMS IN AFRICA

23

Experimenting communities should share results with neighbours, pass on management advice,
etc. for the purposes of diffusion. An important component is the mobilization of the networks developedfor information dissemination of such community experiments, while emphasizing the basic ideas
and principles underlying these experiments. Following this, the new “water management solutions”
could be tested in another community and insights on how to experiment, for example, testing
innovative concepts, capacity building and institutional frameworks.
As part of the advocacy process, “study tours” and extensive utilization of Information, Education andCommunities (IEC) materials should be used. Exchange visits between communities and water
management committees would go a long way in fostering understanding and management
capacities.
Appropriate efforts should be made to evaluate the tested indigenous water problem-solving strategies(i.e. the experiments) with the community in order to systematize the process and results and also
ensure the sustainability of the process within the community.
Integration of the two knowledge systems must fully recognize and respect the intellectual andtraditional resource rights of the people. Whenever possible such rights should be documented andpatented with the appropriate authorities.
Also, the following could facilitate the integration of IKS with science and technology in Africa:• Development of a symbiotic relationship by joining the advantages of IKS and westernknowledge systems.
• Stakeholders in the two knowledge systems should create partnership throughcomplementary action plans, participatory action research (PAR), joint ventures, capacity
building and maintenance and co-management approaches.
• PAR would improve the overall project success if local and “western” experts are involvedin the entire project cycle. Studies of the two systems on similar sets of water resource
management problems could be initiated and pursued to their logical conclusion fromwhich deductive reasoning would be used to identify what works and what does not
work.
• The principle of co-management should guide water resource development andmanagement. The “top-down” governance of science and technology should yield tothis reality. This implies that local beneficiaries and “outside experts” work together
giving equal weight to both knowledge types. This approach would yield more positive
outcomes if the process of project development and acquisition of traditional knowledge
are carried out in a participatory manner, rather than through consultation.
• Western science stakeholders should endeavor to establish the veracity of informationfrom IKS stakeholders by assessing the credibility of the sources of information. Membersof the community would serve as a source of credentials.

ATPS SPECIAL PAPER SERIES NO. 25

24

•

•

•

Trust is very critical to the process of knowledge integration. Stakeholders should
recognize the spiritual elements integrated into the IKS, and mutually accept that both
systems are desirable and useful in designing effective strategies to solve the continent’s
water resource problems.
Upscaling of specific IKS could be achieved if there is greater attention to and structuringof the methodological approaches. For example, it should be possible to develop
indigenous research methodologies which include cultural protocols, values andbehaviours as an integral part of these methodologies. As part of the transparent research
design, full disclosure of the methodologies and results should be ensured.
Documentation of the entire process would be done for replication in the future.
For projects the economic dimensions of the approaches should be determined as partof the project appraisal process. This would serve as a guide to the efficiency of thesystems and eventual decision-making.

8.

Conclusion

This paper sets out with an appraisal of the indigenous water management and coping mechanisms
in Africa with a view to improving them, through their integration with new scientific and technologicalknowledge systems. We identified different water management techniques for agricultural anddomestic uses as well as ecological restitution. Such coping mechanisms depend on the people’s
spatial location, socio-cultural attributes and primary means of livelihood.
The major conclusion of this paper is that given the enormity of the water supply problem and foodinsecurity situation, the existing IKS are incapable of meeting the challenges, hence the acutenecessity for integration with new knowledge. If the proposals contained in the preceding sections
are adapted/adopted, there is no doubt that some reasonable progress would be made. ATPS
should as a matter of priority design execute a regional study or set of studies on the theme of thispaper in order to fill some of the gaps and throw some light on the process of integration. Finally, we
recognize the critical nature of water policies and institutional arrangements. Consequently, deliberate
efforts should be made to ensure that the knowledge integration process would include improvements
in policies and institutional arrangements.

25

References
Agabi, J.A.; S.O. Abang and A.I. Animashaun (1994). Nigerian Macmillan Nigeria Publishers, Lagos.
Agboola, S.A. (1973). “Farm Systems are Resources in Nigeria”. In: J.O. Adejuwon (ed), University of
Ife Press, Ile-Ife.
Allteri, Miguel A. (1988). “Why Study Traditional Agriculture?”. In: Ecology of Agricultural Sysystems,
edited by C.R. Carroll, et al, Macmillan, New York.
Ashby, Jacqueline A. (1988). “Small Farmers Participation in the Design of Technology”, Paper
presented at the Conference on Indigenous Knowledge Systems, Academy for Educational
Development, Washington, D.C.
Ayoade, J.O. (1975). “On Water Resources Development in Nigeria”. Nigerian Journal of Economic
and Social Studies, Vol. 17(1): 35-48.
Chambers, R. (1980). “The Rural Farmer is a Professional”. CERES 13(2), 1923.
Chambers, R.A. Pecey and Lori Ann Thrupp (eds), (1989). Farmer First: Farmer Innovation andAgricultural Innocation. Intermediate Technology Publisher, London.
Dene Cultural Institute cited in Emergy, Alan A. (2000). Integrating Indigenous Knowledge in Project
Planning and Implementation. ILO, World Bank and CIDA, Ottawa.
Douglas, I. (1973). “Water Resources”. In: Dawson, J.A. and Doorknkamp, J.C. (eds), Evaluating the
Human Environment. Arnold, London.
Emery, Alan R. (2002). Integrating Indigenous Knowledge in Project Planning and Implementation.
ILO/World Bank/CIDA, Ottawa.
Gibberd, V. (1969). ‘Summary of Research and Development at Radisele’. Appendix 2 in: The
Introduction of Rainwater Catchment Tanks and Micro-Irrigation to Botswana, ITDG, London.
Guggenheim, H. and Fanate, R. (1976). ‘Share Technology: A Project for Water Storage and Irrgationin Dogan Villages’. African Environment, 2, Supplement. Occasional Paper No. 76-1.
Hall, N. (1982). ‘Water Collection from Thatch’. Waterlines, 1(i), Intermediate Technology
Publications, London.
Hardin, Garrett (1968). “The Tragedy of the Commons”. Science No. 162, December.
Haverkort, Bertus; David Millar and Cosmas Gonese (2002). “Knowledge and Belief Systems in SubSaharan Africa”. In: Bertus Haverkort, Katrien Van’t Hooft and Voim Hiemstra (eds) Ancient Roots,
New Shoots: Endogenous Development in Practice. Zed Books, London, pp.137-169.
ICHS (1972). ‘Agricultural Use of Floods in Africa’. Liaison Bulletin of the Inter-African Committee for
Hydraulic Studies. (CIEH), Ouagadougou), No. 10, August, pp.13-17.
Johda, N.S. (1990). “Mountain Agriculture: The Search for Sustainability”. Journal for Farming Systems
Research Extension. Vol. 1(1): 55-75.

26

A SURVEY OF INDIGENOUS WATER MANAGEMENT AND COPING MECHANISMS IN AFRICA

27

Kellter, K. (1982). Rainwater Harvesting for Domestic Supply in Development Countries: A Draft
Literature Review. US Agency for International Development, Office of Health, Washington, D.C.
WASH Working Paper No. 20.
Lammerink, Marc P.; Eveline Bolt; Dick de Jong and Ton Schouten (1999), “Strengthening Water
Management”. Community Water Management Participatory Learning and Action Notes,
International Institute for Environment and Development, London, pp.21-28.
Maddocks, D. (1973). Report on Rainwater Catchment Project, Jamaica. London. Overseas
Development Administration.
Maikano, G. and Nyberg, L. (1980). ‘Rainwater Catchment in Botswana. In Rural Water Supply in
Developing Countries (Proceedings of a Workshop in Zomba, Malawi). Ottawa, International
Development Research Centre, Document 167e.
Morten, Gerald G. (1988). Traditional Agriculture in South-East Asia: A Human Ecology Approach,Westview Press, Boulder.
Matume, Gumisai (2004). “Rough Road to Sustainable Development”. Africa Renewal. July pp.1920.
Millar, D. (1994). “Experimenting Farmers in Northern Ghana”. In: Beyond Farmer
First.
Norman, David W. (1977). “Economic Rationality of Traditional Hausa Dry Land Farmers in the
North of Nigeria”. In: Traditions and Dynamics in Small-Farm Agriculture: Economic Studies in
Asia, Africa and Latin America. Robert J. Stevens (ed), Iowa State University Press, Ames.
Novieku, E. (1980). Rainfall Harvesting Techniques in Ghana. Water Resources Research Unit,
Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, Accra.
Olokesusi, Femi (2004). “Indigenous Knowledge Research Development in Post-Harvest
Management of Root and Tuber Crops”. Paper presented at the International Seminar on
Indigenous Knowledge dind Post-Harvest Handling of Root and Tuber Crops organized byNISPRI, Ilorin and IFAD, Rome, held in Ilorin, 23-25 August, 2004.
______________, (1987). “Water Supply: Possible Constraints on Socio-Economic Development
in Oyo State of Nigeria” AQUA, Vol. 5, 268-273.
_______________, (1990). “An Assessment of the Water Supply Situation in ECOWAS Countries
and the Policy Implications”. J. Water SRT-Aqua, Vol. 39 (3): 152-160.
Olokesusi, Femi; V.A. Adeyeye and Niyi Gbadegesin (1992). “The Impact of River Bank Erosion
Control Strategies on Agriculture in Rivers State of Nigeria”. Research Report submitted to theSocial Science Counci-0l of New York, USA.
Omwenga, J.M. (1984). ‘Rainwater Harvesting for Domestic Water Supply in Kisii, Kenya, Thesis:
Tempere University of Technology.
Osunade, M.A.A. (1991), “Forest Reservation as a Traditional Practice”, cited in Nigerian
Environmental Study/Action Team (NEST), Nigeria’s Threatened Environment, NEST, Ibadan.
Osunade, M.A.A. (1988). “Nomenclature and Classification of Traditional Landuse Types in SouthWestern Nigeria”, Savanna 9.
Pacey, Arnold and Adrian Cullis (1986). Rainwater Harvesting. Intermediate Technology Publications,London.

28

ATPS SPECIAL PAPER SERIES NO. 25

Pike, A.H. (1938). “Soil Conservation amongst the Matengo Tribe”. Tanganyika Notes and Records
6:79-81.
Reij, C.; P. Mulder and L. Bogemann (1988). Water Harvesting for Plant Production. World Bank
Technical Paper, No. 91, The World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Reij, Chris (1990). “Indigenous Soil and Water Conservation Practices in Africa”. Paper presented at
the Workshop on Conservation in Africa: Indigenous Knowledge and Government Strategies,
organized by the Social Science Council of New York, held in Harare, Zimbabwe, 21- 27
December, 1990.
Rutatora, D.F.’ J. Rugambisa, D.; Mwaseba and A.Z. Mattee (1995). “Socio-Economic Issues Revolving
around Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Sustainable Development in the Miombo Woodlandsof Mbinga District, Tanzania: A Preliminary Report”. Faculty of Agriculture, Morogor, Sokoine
University of Agriculture,d Tanzania.
Schmied, D. (1980). Subsistence Cultivation, Market Production and Agricultural Development inRuvuma Region, Southern Tanzania University Pres,, Bayreuth.
Scoones, I. and J. Thompson (eds). Intermediate Technology Publications, London.
Sengupta, Nirmal (1991). Managing Common Property: Irrigation in India and the Philippines. Sage
Publications, New Delhi.
Stenhouse, A.S. (1944). “Agricultured in the Mattento Highlands”. The East African Agricultural Journal,
10:22-24.
Sugimura, K. and D.F. Rutator (1997). The Socio-cultural and Economic Dynamics of the Matengo
Community in Mbinga District, Tanzania. A Preliminary Report of the Miombo Woodland
Agroecological Research Project. Faculty of Agriculture, Sokoine University of Agricultured,
Motogoro, Tanzania.
Titilola, Oguntunji S. (1990), The Economics of Incorporating Indigenous Knowledge Systems into
Agricultural Development: A Model and Analytical Framework.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), (1982), Environmental Guidelines for Watershed
Development, UNEP, Nairobi.
UNICEF (1982). “From Kenya - How to Make Plastered Basket Tanks for Storing Water”. Appropriate
Technology, 8(4), pp.7-8.

A SURVEY OF INDIGENOUS WATER MANAGEMENT AND COPING MECHANISMS IN AFRICA

29

Prof Femi Olokesusi is the Director, Physical Development Department, Nigerian Institute of Socialand Economic Research (NISER), Ibadan. He is also the Associate National Coordinator of the
ATPS Nigerian Chapter

Other Publications in the ATPS Special Paper SeriesSpecial Paper Series 1
Globalization and Technology: Africa’s Participation and Perspectives: Concept Paper and Research Agenda by
Melvin Ayogu &Osita Ogbu
Special Paper Series 2
Globalization, Markets for Technology and the Relevance of Innovation Policies in Developing Economies by Sunil
Mani
Special Paper Series 3
Biotechnology in sub-Saharan Africa: Towards a Policy Research Agenda by John Mugabe
Special Paper Series 4
The Impact of Globalization in sub-Saharan Africa Countries by Mwindaace N. Siamwiza
Special Paper Series 5
A Blueprint for Developing National ICT Policy in Africa by Clement Dzidonu
Special Paper Series 6
Impact of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) on Technology Transfer in Africa by Moses M. Ikiara
Special Paper Series 7
Pursuing Technology Policy Research in sub-Saharan Africa: Reflections on the Dimensions, Applications and
Implications of a Methodological Framework by M.H. Khalil-Timamy
Special Paper Series 8
African Response to the Information Communication Technology Revolution by G. Olalere Ajayi
Special Paper Series 9
Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs): Poverty Alleviation and Universal Access Policies by Andrew
Dymond & Sonja Oestmann
Special Paper Series 10
ICT Human Resource Development in Africa: Challenges, Strategies and Options by T.M. Waema
Special Paper Series 11
Applications of ICTs in Africa: Development of Knowledge Workers in Centres of Learning by John Muraguri
Waibochi
Special Paper Series 12
State of Science and Technology Capacity in sub-Saharan Africa by Khalil-Timamy
Special Paper Series 13
Strengthening National Information and Cmmunication Technology Policy in Africa: Governance, Equity andInstitutional Issues by Melvin Ayogu

Special Paper Series 14
A Science Agenda from An Afrian Perspective by Turner T. Isoun
Special Paper Series 15
International Trends in Modern Bio-technology: Entry by and Implications for African Countries by John Mugabe
Special Paper Series 16
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), technology Transfer and Poverty Alleviation: Africa’s Hopes and Dilemma by
Moses Ikiara
Special Paper Series 17
Global Governance of Technology and Africa’s Global Inclusion by Banji Oyeyinka
Special Paper Series 18
Science and Technology and Poverty Reduction Strategy in Sub-Saharan Africa byO. Akin Adubifa
Special Paper Series 19
An Assessment of Science and Technology Capacity Building in sub-Saharan Africa byO. Akin Adubifa
Special Paper Series 20
Network as Determinants of Manufacturing SME Cluster Growth in Nigeria Networking Technical Change andIndustrialization: The Case of Small and Medium Firm in Nigeria by Banji Oyelaran-Oyeyinka
Special Paper Series 21
Technology Transfer in a Globalizing World: Many Promises, Lack of Responsibility, and Challenges for Africa by
M.H. Khalil Timamy
Special Paper Series 22
Integrated Value Mapping for Sustainable River Basin Management by Kevin UramaSpecial Paper Series 23
Wastewater and Irrigated Agriculture Lessons Learned and Possible Applications in Africa by Frans Huibers, Lucas
Seghezzo and Adriaan Mels

For more information on this series and ATPS Contact:

The Executive Director
The African Technology Policy Studies Network
3rd Floor, The Chancery, Valley Road
P.O. Box 10081 00100 General Post Office
Nairobi, Kenya
Tel: +254-020-2714092/168/498
Fax: +254-020-2714028
Email: info@atpsnet.org
Website: http://www.atpsnet.org