African Technology Policy Studies Network

Science, Technology, Water
and Environment in Africa

Report of the 2004 ATPS Annual Workshop andConference held on November 29 - December 3, 2004

ADDIS ABABAETHIOPIALIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ACTS
ATPS
DFID
DSS
EIIPD
EPA
HADAD
IDRC
ILRI
MDGs
NBI
NEPAD
NGO
R&D
SADC
SME
SWCMTs
SWMT
TRIPS
UN
UNECA
UNESCOUNCTAD
UNU/INTECH
WCMT
WDDs
WTO

African Centre for Technology Studies
African Technology Policy Studies Network
Department for International Development
Decision Support Systems
Ethiopian International Institute for Peace and Development
Environmetal Protection Authority
Horn of Africa Democracy and Development
International Development Research Centre
International Livestock Research InstituteMillenium Development Goals
Nile Basin Initiative
New Partnership for Africa’s Development
Non-Governmental Organization
Research and Development
Southern African Development Community
Small and Medium Enterprises
Sustainable Water Catchment Management Technologies
Sustainable Water Management Technologies
Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
United Nations
United Nations Economic Commission Africa
United National Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
United Nations Centre for Trade and Development
United Nations University Institute for New Technology
Water Catchment Management Technologies
Water Development Domains
World Trade Organization

A report of the 2004 Annual Workshop of the African Technology Policy Studies Network held at
ILRI Campus, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, from November 29 to December 3, 2004.

© 2005 African Technology Policy Studies Network (ATPS)

PUBLISHED BY ATPS COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT

Printed by Newtec Concepts
P.O. Box 14180 00800 Westlands
Nairobi, Kenya
Tel: 4449849; Fax: 4450399
Email: Newtech@mitsuminet.com

ISBN: 9966-916-22-9

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 regionalsecretariat in Nairobi, the network operates through national chapters in 23 countries, with an
expansion plan to cover 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), Technopolicy Briefs and Workshop
Reports.
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.

For more information on 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.
Email: info@atpsnet.org
Tel: +254-20-2714092/168/498 Fax: +254-20-2714028
Website: http://www.atpsnet.org

TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Abbreviations
Organization of Conference and Workshop

1

Background to ATPS’ Mandate and Collaboration

3

Conference and Workshop Opening Ceremony

5

Conference Plenary Presentations

9

Panel Discussion on Science, Technology and Water Environment in Africa

23

Closure of Conference on Science, Technology, Water and Environmentin Africa

26

The ATPS Workshop on Science, Technology, Water and Environment in Africa

27

The ATPS Annual General Meeting

30

Appendices(i)
Workshop Programme(ii)
List of Participants

321.0 ORGANIZATION OF CONFERENCE AND
WORKSHOP
VENUE, DATE OF CONFERENCE AND WORKSHOPThe 2004 Annual Conference and Workshop of an autonomous African Technology Policy Studies
Network (ATPS) was held at the ILRI Campus in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, from November 29 to
December 3, 2004.

SUPPORT FOR THE CONFERENCE AND WORKSHOPThe 2004 Conference and Workshop was organized by ATPS and hosted by the Ethiopian International
Institute for Peace and Development (EIIPD).

THEME OF CONFERENCE AND WORKSHOPThe theme of 2004 ATPS Conference and Workshop was “Science, Technology, Water andEnvironment in Africa”.

OBJECTIVES OF THE CONFERENCE AND WORKSHOPThe objectives of the conference and workshop were:
1. To create a forum for science and technology policy scholars to interact and share ideas
and knowledge with policy-makers and water administrators;
2. To provide conceptual and practical underpinnings to understanding water and environmental
management with respect to behavioral change, resource-use and conflict, and how new
knowledge can improve the situation;
3. To get a sense of the overall knowledge gaps in the sub-sector and how research andtraining can be used to address these gaps;
4. To share and learn how lessons from other regions of the world can be adapted in Africa;
5. To review funding proposals by researchers in the field of technology policy, water andenvironment;
6. To conduct an Annual General Meeting for ATPS.

1

Expected Outputs
The expected outputs of the conference were:
1. An elaborate communiqué and plan of action;
2. Improved understanding of water-related issues among S&T policy scholars andpolicymakers in Africa;
3. Stronger partnership between researchers and policy-makers and administrators;
4. Edited conference proceedings with practical recommendations; and5. An enriched ATPS program on water and environment.

22.0 Background to ATPS’ Mandate and Collaboration
ATPS’ programmatic focus is motivated by its mission to support research in science and technology,
building capacity for research and policy analysis, and dissemination. However, in the current phase,the key concern of ATPS has been closing the loop through generation of new knowledge, outreach, knowledge brokerage, dissemination and advocacy in key thematic areas, This concern derived
from both the evolution of Africa’s development challenges as articulated in the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs), the resolutions of the World Summit on Sustainable Development(2000), the NEPAD framework and the belief that bridging the knowledge and technological gap
between Africa and the rest of the world is key to Africa’s global inclusion and prosperity. Similar
concerns drive the program and agenda of EIIPD, and hence the auspicious collaboration.
One approach to meeting these development goals involves the use of science and technology
to improve water and environmental management. This is particularly important because it hasserious implications on food security, environmental health and common pool resource-use to resolve
conflicts in Africa, all of which are prerequisite for growth and poverty reduction. Additional impetus
for this has come from the Third World Water Forum in Kyoto (2003), the African Ministerial
Council on water and from concerns expressed by senior policy-makers and development partners
on the critical importance of improving water and environmental management in Africa.
The governance of science and technology is a critical area often ignored in the search for
new knowledge in Africa. The assumption that new technology and new organizational forms willappear at the right time, at the right price and as preferred by stakeholders, may be misleading. In
reality, market and institutional failure, inappropriate pricing, lack of knowledge, asymmetric information
and risks affect the adoption of cost-effective technologies that are environmentally friendly.
Innovative science and technology policies are required to promote the generation, adoption,
adaptation and use of environmentally friendly technologies that conserve water and improve economic
activities that affect the quality of water catchments. In fact, Agenda 21 (1992 Earth Summit, Riode Janiero) stated explicitly that innovative technologies, including indigenous technologies, will beneeded to fully utilize the limited water resources and to avert water pollution.

THE ATPS PROGRAM ON WATER AND ENVIRONMENTThe ATPS program on water and environment is designed to utilize the Network’s areas of expertise
which are knowledge exchange, knowledge brokerage and advocacy. Emphasis is placed on
knowledge sharing at various levels primarily through:1. Joint research, training activities and deliberative workshops between African researchers,
relevant government institutions and responsible water management authorities andinternational researchers and institutions involved in sustainable water catchments
management.
3

2. Stakeholder and public participation events to share knowledge among researchers,
government agencies and the public to encourage ownership of technology policies that
result from the research and participatory exercises.
The main objective of the program is to enhance the generation, use and communication of knowledge
in driving environmentally sustainable use of water resources in Africa. Pursuant to the main objective,
ATPS brokers and enhances the use of knowledge from partners both in and outside Africa to meet
Africa’s and NEPAD’s goals, and Millennium Development Goal 7 in pursuance of environmental
sustainability and sustainable peace and security in the region.
The specific objectives are:i.
To improve water management and conservation for poverty reduction;ii.
To enhance the capability of the water and sanitation governance and delivery institutions
in meeting their service delivery objectives in selected key countries;iii.
To induce attitudinal and behavioral changes with respect to sustainable water andenvironmental management at various levels;iv.
To harmonize national and regional water Acts and environmental Acts and policies toavert potential cross-border conflicts;v.
To enhance knowledge exchange and collaboration between the different water
stakeholders in Africa; andvi. To generate new knowledge and build capacity for efficient water management.
Exploring new technologies to manage non-point pollution from agricultural-production processes
such as livestock to leather, horticulture, fishing and wood products, among others, are central to
ATPS’ Program on Water and Environment. It will also be necessary to examine the institutionalarrangements set up to manage the water-environment nexus, the learning process in these institutions,and the role of ICTs in improving their effectiveness and delivery of services to the poor. An interesting
and unique dimension to this work will be an examination of whether greater openness or democratic
space affects the ability of African farmers, workers and civil society to influence the managementof water and the environment, and hence the technology deployed in the process, and how the
adoption or lack of adoption of simple water technologies by the farmers affects their capacity to, inturn, influence the democratic process.

4

3.0 CONFERENCE AND WORKSHOP OPENING
CEREMONYWELCOME ADDRESS BY THE NATIONAL CO-ORDINATOR, ETPSADr Dejene Aredo, the National Co-ordinator of ATPS Ethiopia Chapter welcomed guests andparticipants to the talks, saying the conference was unique in its attempt to bridge the gap between
technology and natural resources. The conference would be followed by capacity building efforts
that would contribute to Africa’s development. The scientists and scholars, he said, would enrich thedeliberations and thus motive young and upcoming scholars to find solutions to Africa’s water
management problems. He thanked members of his association and EIIPD for contributing enormously
to the hosting of the conference. He also praised ILRI for support.

REMARKS BY THE ATPS EXECUTIVE DIRECTORDr Osita Ogbu, the Executive Director, ATPS, told the gathering the bane of Africa’s developmental
crisis is knowledge dependence. Africa’s inability to act decisively led to pervasive poverty. Yet, thecontinent enjoyed a wealth of intellectual capital. African governments, he said, often lacked the will
to deploy the intellectual capital of her people, and African intellectuals themselves are quick tooverlook local problems. Many engage in knowledge generation that boosts their credentials
internationally in response to an intellectual tradition that rewards conformity with the Western notions
and knowledge standards. This worsens Africa’s crisis as Africa’s problems are tackled with ideas
from Western capitals in the name of global knowledge. Dr Ogbu stressed that knowledge transfer
could only be effective with the guidance of local intellectuals who must repackage knowledge tosuit the socio-cultural environment.
He urged African experts working in the field of water and the environment to take charge whenworking with international partners to avert “a catastrophe” on the continent. The speaker concededthat science and technology advances local knowledge, improves capacity and enhances learningand called on Africans to address the knowledge-water-environment nexus as a way of addressing
poverty on the continent. To succeed, a holistic approach to poverty reduction must be taken,
situating water and environment management in the context of livelihood, economic, political andsocial security.
Dr Ogbu argued that in view of the cross-boundary nature of the issues, knowledge generationand transfer must also have a regional dimension using existing institutions to harmonize understanding
and perspectives essential for mutual co-existence and peace. Knowledge transfer exercises targetedat both national and regional institutions will enhance capacity to learn and adapt to changes.
He thanked the management and staff of EIIPD for supporting ATPS in the organization of theconference and the Ethiopian people for warmly receiving the guests and participants.
5

REMARKS BY THE CHAIRMAN, ATPS
Professor Norah Olembo, the Chairman, ATPS, underlined the importance of the conference, notingthat water is key to life. Despite this realization, she pointed out, water resources in Africa werebeing recklessly destroyed, she said, predicting that the next wars would be fought over water
because a major share of the continent’s water resources are in a few large basins such as theCongo, Niger, Nile and Zambezi.
The 47 countries comprising sub-Saharan Africa depend more on their natural resource base for
economic and social needs than any other region in the world. Two-thirds of sub-Saharan Africa’s
people live in rural areas and rely on agriculture and other natural resources for income. However,
the environmental resource base is rapidly shrinking as a result of water pollution, deforestation, lossof soil fertility and a dramatic decline in bio-diversity in the region.
In Africa, long-term poverty reduction and sustainable economic growth are being undermined by
the increasing scarcity of freshwater, the over-exploitation of coastal ecosystems and fisheries, theloss of forest cover, and loss of biological diversity. Other consequences are loss of genetic species
and long-term changes in the earth’s climate. Prof Olembo called on Africans to demand that theirgovernments address the problems of environmental degradation and depletion of water resources
as the leaders are already sensitized well enough.
Although the water sector requires significant attention because it is closely related to theenvironment and natural resource base, institutional, economic, legal capacities, and most importantly,
the governance of science and technology of most governments in the region, remain ill equipped andunder-funded to deal with environmental problems.
While strategies have been drawn, policies formulated and constraints identified on water
management, more effort needs to be put on co-ordination. International and inter-sectoral approaches
that recognize inter-linkages between nations, and between such sectors as land and water, agriculture
and water, technology and water, health and water, gender and water need to be consolidated.
No single mechanism or fragmented approach will be enough. Policy packages using a mutually
reinforcing matrix of institutional and policy reform and legal and economic management instruments
are required. She stressed ATPS’ commitment through its programme on water and environment tobridge the knowledge and technological gap between Africa and the rest of the world by “closing theloop through generation and advocacy in key outreach, knowledge brokerage, dissemination andadvocacy in key thematic areas”.

KEYNOTE ADDRESS BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, EPA
The keynote address was delivered by Dr. Tewolde Gebre-Egziabiher, the General Directorof the Ethiopian Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) who also officially opened themeeting on behalf of Ethiopia’s Minister for Water Resources, H.E. Mr Shiferan Jarso.
In a paper titled “Genetic Engineering, Bio-diversity and Africa,” the speaker discussed the elementsthat make genetic engin eering appealing, particularly the imperatives of survival and reproduction
for humans. He further raised the common reactions elicited by arguments on the potential ofgenetic engineering – including the awkward issues relating to the possibility of self-engineering as
solutions to the poverty and death risks that men face today. Dr. Tewolde also discussed in significant
detail the likely impacts of genetic engineering and observed as follows:
1. Research and development in modern biotechnology is associated with risks to health and tobio-diversity and the environment. Negative impacts may take decades or longer to be
noticed.
2. Socio-economic impacts are, on the whole, long term, and predictions on the likely impactsof the young modern biotechnology necessarily lack empirical data. Some impacts, however,6

can be felt in a few years. It has, for example, been reported that the introduction of GE
crops into Argentina has pushed many smaller farmers out of agriculture altogether.
3. Research and development and modern biotechnology and bio-safety are not highly
equipment-intensive. Thus modern biotechnology need not be very expensive. But it requires
large numbers of well-trained scientists. As such, it is within easy reach of developing
countries which have low capacity for capital-intensive innovations.
4. Developing countries have not taken seriously the training of bio-technologists and biosafety experts.
5. Venture capital needed for research and development in modern biotechnology and in biosafety, though not enormous, takes a long time before yielding returns. In developing countries,
only public (government) funding can be expected to be available for it; the small private
businesses are unlikely to make such long term investment.
6. The initial promoters of modern biotechnology in industrialized countries were public(government) institutions and small-scale enterprises.
7. In the industrialized countries, governments have been withdrawing from R&D in modern
biotechnology and leaving it to the private sector. Oversight over the safe applications ofbiotechnology has been weakened now that governments leave biotechnology to the private
sector.
8. The seed and chemical industries of developing countries have recently tended more andmore towards being controlled by transnational corporations. To globalize this, patents andpatent-like breeders’ rights are being universalized through the Agreement on Trade-related
Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) of the World Trade Organization (WTO).
Implementing TRIPs is expensive. Worse still, it means that developments in biotechnology
in developing countries will also be controlled by the corporations that have already patented
the promoters, terminators, vectors, constructs and even many of the genes used in genetic
engineering R&D.
9. Biotechnology R&D has mostly focused on producing specified commodities, especiallydrugs for industry and for the health service through transgenic crops or even animals or
through bioreactors, which use enzymes, tissue culture or transgenic microorganisms.
10. Some of the transgenic plants have been given the capacity to grow outside the environmental
settings of their non-transgenic counterparts. When transgenic crops are produced outside
the normal latitudinal environmental ranges of the species and exports are affected, thefarmers in their areas of origin in developing countries may reduce, or even stop, cultivating
the crops. This would result in severe genetic erosion. Besides, with the loss of their livelihood,these farmers will have no choice but to search for alternative incomes. This usually ends
up in deforestation, over-fishing, over-hunting, and other types of destruction of bio-diversity
and the environment.
11. Through the introduction of specific traits, any organism can be engineered to yield any
biochemical products. The inevitable result would be globally scattered, living factories
impossible to switch off. Through enzyme technology, many products can be changed toother products. This makes plants, animals, and microorganisms in the bioreactor
interchangeable as commodities. This will blur the boundary between agriculture and industry,
between the farm and the factory. As interchangeability of sectors and products increases,
there could be an excessive presence of some chemicals and shortage of others in thebiosphere. This could usher in a new form of pollution. It could, in particular, seriously
disturb the balance of microorganisms in the environment and thus the whole of the biosphere.
Coupled with the increasing human population and the transformation of a substantial
component of the world’s biomass into human biomass, the consequences could be disastrous
for all life. How should we apply the Precautionary Principle?
12. This blurring of differences among commodities means a possible loss of market for traditional
agricultural products, especially from the developing countries.

713. On the other hand, it gives developing countries, which have low labour costs, an advantage
in producing in their farms as commodities, products which are now being made throughcomplex chemical processes in capital-intensive factories in industrialized countries.
14. In industrialized countries, seed, chemical, and biotechnology companies have been merging
or are being bought out and transnational corporations tend to have activities in all threesectors. In both developing and industrialized countries, transnational corporations, to the
exclusion of both governments and national entrepreneurs, are controlling whole systems
starting from the laboratory and leading to the retail floor. The impact is greater on developing
countries. Neither national, nor international law seems willing or able to develop antitrust
capacity to break up these trans-sectoral chain monopolies.
15. Attempts at correcting human genetic defects through genetic engineering (gene therapy)
are increasing. This raises many questions on ethics and the future of human evolutionary
trends. Can humanity really direct its own evolution?
16. Attempts at influencing the population dynamics of wild species are taking place. The
ecological impacts, especially of transgenic long-lived trees, may take centuries to show.
What should be our strategies of applying the Precautionary Principle? Or, should we giveup the Principle?
Dr Tewolde also attempted to answer the question whether or not products of genetic engineering
are safe to use. He tended to conclude that they are not, going by the processes followed in genetic
engineering and the nature of those behind the activity. The speaker also contested the commonlyheld belief that genetic engineering produces more food, arguing that the assertion had not been
proved. He blamed poverty and poor crop yields on unjust local and global governance, saying
failure to adopt genetic engineering technologies had nothing to do with the problems. He quoted
Martin Khor who estimated the flow of financial resources from the poor to the industrializedcountries to be $ 619.2 billion in 1992. In the same year, Agenda 21 estimated that developing
countries needed an annual development aid of $125 billion, i.e. less than one quarter of whatflowed away from them.
If they had cut themselves off from the industrialized countries, the speaker argued, theywould have been developing four times faster than Agenda 21 envisaged. They did not. In any case,they could not, and they should not. Said Dr Towolde: “The Earth belongs to us all, and making it
more just is what is appropriate, not splitting it. The aid that Agenda 21 envisaged did not come tothe developing countries. But, the money that flows away from them has continued to grow in thename of free trade. In current free trade, it is not the traders that are free to transact the trade; it is
the abstraction called transaction that is free to land on them and force the money and the goods outof them.”
Further, he said the mechanism for effecting free trade that directly affects genetic
engineering and food production is the rule of patenting made compulsory by the Agreement on
Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) of the World Trade Organization(WTO). Together, developing countries have only 0.2percent of the world’s patents. Even theseinclude patents protected in them by companies of the industrialized world. Africa has even fewer
patents, amounting to a mere 0.02percent of the world total. Patenting living things, their parts orcomponents is, in fact, detrimental to developing countries since it leads to the direct control of theiragriculture by locally insensitive transnational.

Issues Arising from the Keynote Address
1. Dr Osita Ogbu underscored the need to discuss genetic engineering more seriously than
was happening in Africa. He pledged that ATPS would keep the debate on genetic engineering
alive in order to raise and discuss the pertinent issues clouding it more exhaustively. He
called for ways of indigenizing knowledge to make it relevant to African situations, arguingthat knowledge, unlike information, could not be bought. He further underscored the8importance of understanding the culture and values of African peoples as a prerequisite torooting development on the continent.
2. A Ghananian participant pointed out that the keynote was pessimistic on the ability of genetic
engineering to help solve Africa’s problems. He argued, however, that genetic engineering
could alleviate poverty if the continent’s governments understood the role of GE and involved
the private sector in it in the same way governments in the developed countries had done.
3. Chris Squire of Sierra Leone wondered from what point Africa would begin the fight thatwould make genetic engineering useful to the continent’s development considering the region
has just emerged from the slave trade.
4. Dr Kevin Urama from the United Kingdom conceded that genetic engineering tended to bea contributor to Africa’s pervasive poverty. He tickled participants by suggesting that genetic
engineering be carried out on human thinking to end the kind of problems currently facing
Africa.

Dr Tewolde’s Response to Issues Raised
Dr Tewolde said in response that the starting point in making genetic engineering useful would be to
make African governments listen to their own scientists and experts. This should be done with aview to promoting the African interest in much the same way developed countries have put theirown interest to the fore when discussing or adapting genetic engineering technologies. However,more fundamental questions arose on how to deal with issues already in the ambit of an international
regime. Some countries, he pointed out, were already contesting against WTO maneuvers that stifle
trade from the poorer world.
On the issue of engineering human beings, the speaker called on participants to keep a “respectabledistance. No, I would not want ourselves to modify ourselves.”

94.0 CONFERENCE PLENARY PRESENTATIONS
1.

KINFE ABRAHAMIMBALANCE IN WATER ALLOCATION, STABILITY AND COLLABORATION WITHINTHE NILE BASIN
The paper was presented by Professor Kinfe Abraham, the President of the Ethiopian International
Institute for Peace and Development (EIIPD) and the Horn of Africa Democracy and Development(HADAD) international lobby. He traced the imbalances in allocation and use of water resourcesamong the Nile basin’s riparian countries – Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi,
the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan and Egypt and demonstrated the disproportionate allocation
and use of the Nile resources by Sudan and Egypt and the almost insignificant exploitation of theresources by the Upper Nile riparian countries whose use of the river was confined mainly to hydroelectric generation. The speaker showed that Egypt had made greater use of the river than all otherriparian countries combined in spite of the fact that 86 percent of the Nile waters originated from
Ethiopia and the remaining percentage from the Upper riparian countries. Egypt’s and Sudan’s
dominance in allocation and use of the Nile resources, he pointed out, is traceable to treaties
spearheaded by Britain during the colonial era. The treaties excluded other countries despite thefact that they too would have benefited from the resources.
He traced the extent of exploitation of the Nile resources in each country, submitting that
failure to reach an amicable solution to the use of the Nile by all riparian countries would lead toconflict between the main beneficiaries and the countries that had been left out. Efforts at resolving
the potential conflict and possibly war over the Nile should be geared towards drafting an accord on
allocation and use of the river predicated on international principles, the needs of the riparians and asense of collaboration and mutual understanding.
Prof. Kinfe pointed out that at present, the hurdles to a negotiated agreement on the allocationof the waters of the Nile revolve around:
1. The mood of distrust and suspicion surrounding the allocation and use of the Nile.
2. The historical inability of Ethiopia and the Sudan to make credible commitments to Egypt
due to their past domestic situations.
3. Sudan’s problems of the recent past which deprived it of a competitive edge in negotiations.
4. Egypt’s reluctance to make concessions without the assurance that such concessions areworth the domestic political price. These problems have prevented it from halting its desert
reclamation program.
5. The capitalization of Egypt on its military power.
6. The lack of qualified hydrological experts in the upstream countries with knowledge and thetechnical knowhow relating to the Nile which are valuable for negotiations.
107. Lack of database on the above and fear of being outmanoeuvered by the Egyptian team ofnegotiators which include knowledgeable engineers and diplomats
8. Lack of dialogue among all riparian countries.
9. The adverse effect of propaganda on the mood of negotiations and
10. The conflict of interest stemming from other sub-regional issues and interests.
The presenter offered the following measures to offer a long-term solution to the Nile impasse:
1. Breaking the silence over the Nile by confronting the issue candidly, openly and with adesire to find a solution that takes stock of the needs and anxieties of all concerned. The
magic words in such deliberations would be mutual trust, concern and transparency andexperts would provide many insightful clues on how the issues of equity and efficient utilization
should be addressed.
2. Availing water to countries that do not get any.
3. Considering equity in the distribution of the resources of the Nile. This should be augmented
by other water management efforts endorsed by all riparian countries
4. Looking afresh at how a new Nile accord should look like. For instance, according to Dale
Wittington, John Waterbury and Elizabeth McClelland, the future accord should be predicatedon “expanding the usable yields, encouraging interdependencies and allocations of waterrights.” This should also include, “provisions for apportionment of water, especially in timesof scarcity and the establishment of principles to guide this.” The authors further argue,“Nile water management is not strictly a zero-sum game.”
5. Making efforts to increase the long-term yield of the Nile and drafting an agreement toensure that such possibilities are fully exploited. The most promising possibility is theconstruction of the Blue Nile Reservoirs in Ethiopia. The cooperative venture should bebased on comparative advantages of benefits to all riparian countries. For instance, one of
the numerous advantages of such reservoirs is that they would enable over-year storage tobe shifted from the Aswan High Dam Reservoir so that evaporation losses are significantly
reduced. In the upper Blue Nile region, evaporation rates are approximately 50 percent of
those in the Sudan and Egypt. Reductions in evaporation loss would be realized both throughlower evaporation rates and lower surface-to-volume ratios in the canyon sites of the Blue
Nile Reservoirs.
The presenter further made proposals on the tone and spirit of a Nile accord, suggesting it should:
1. Recognize the characteristics of the Nile issue as part of the socio-political, cultural andemotional history of Egypt, Ethiopia and the Sudan;
2. Raise awareness of the Nile as the basis of the physical survival of Egypt;
3. Take cognizance of the Nile as the central symbol of Egypt’s national cohesion, particularly
in times of conflict;
4. Realize the fact that the Nile is the key pillar of Egypt’s foreign policy;
5. Appreciate the positive achievements and measures taken by Egypt to improve the total
water resources of the basin;
6. Free the Nile from becoming a hostage of short-term government policies and politics;
7. Create appreciation of the real issues at stake. This includes realizing that the bones ofcontention reside in the Egyptian assertion of “historical right” and Ethiopia’s demand for‘equity’;
8. Recognize that neither the claim of historical rights nor arithmetic justice alone can be agood basis for compromise;
9. Seek a middle ground. From Ethiopia’s point of view, the rationale for this is that ‘bad justiceis better than no justice’;
10. Recognize that environmental depletion in Ethiopia implies a reduction in the volume of Nilewater. This will affect the proportion of water reaching Egypt;1111. Raise the awareness of all riparian states that too much ‘short-termism’ does not augur wellfor future collaboration. In fact, excessive short-termism could have dire future consequences;
12. Persuade international financial institutions to have a long-haul perspective which encourages
investment in the environment, irrigation as well as soil and water conservation projects.
Fortunately, this has already begun via the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI);
13. Convince financial institutions that loans destined for investment in less vital sectors in theriparian countries are counter-productive for all involved;
14. Jointly explore and identify mutually beneficial projects. This may include the production ofhydro-power which is of great significance to meet the rising energy demands of all riparianstates;
15. Make serious efforts to sensitize the riparian countries about the risks of unilateral action by
any one of them;
16. Make attempts not to Middle-Easternize the Nile;
17. Consider the food security challenges of the different countries and look at the comparativeadvantages of each country for food production in the context of a basin-wide food security
arrangement;
18. Realize that the Nile is an intensely emotional issue for Egypt, the Sudan, Ethiopia and theother riparian countries, though in varying degrees;
19. Make attempts to deal with the Nile with less passion and more rationality and balance;
20. Analyze the Nile issue and arrive at an honest recognition of the sticking points via theestablishment of a regime of ownership, user rights and the balance between need anddistributional justice;
21. Recognize that a prolonged impasse over the Nile is counter-productive to all riparian states.
In this context, one should be aware of the fact that ’a problem postponed is not a problem
solved’;22. Understand that in the long run the status quo is not tenable;
23. Realize that the Nile requires a sober recognition of the value of the peace dividends thatcan be derived from an early agreement by way of opening avenues of constructive
cooperation;
24. Pursue the motto ‘if you want to prevent war strengthen peace’;25. Recognize that the Nile is a case of latent conflict and not an active one. Thus, there is a
reward to the foresight of making all attempts to prevent its escalation to an open conflict;and
26. Show all concerned that a protracted conflict over the Nile will only prove the medical
dictum, “The operation was successful but the patient died.” This also implies that themeans do not always justify the end.
Issues Arising From the Presentation
1.
Comments from the Discussant
The paper’s discussant was Prof M. C. Madukwe who pointed out that the paper had clearly shown
86 percent of the Nile waters come from Ethiopia, which hardly benefits from the river’s enormous
resources. The paper also showed there were blatant imbalances in allocation and use of the Nileby, to a large extent Egypt, and to a lesser extent, Sudan, at the expense of other Nile riparian
countries. He noted treaties enacted by Britain in the colonial era had put the upper Nile riparian
countries in a disadvantage and pointed out that the paper had identified such issues as population
size and growth as important bases for addressing the imbalance. The paper had also strongly called
for a new agreement and a partnership on the sharing of the Nile resources in order to end themonopoly of the use of the Nile by the lower Nile riparian countries. He observed that Prof. Kinfe
had underscored the use of diplomacy, consultation and collaboration in order to avoid unilateral
action by any country. The speaker, the discussant said, had further maintained that any conflict on

12the ownership of the Nile would adversely affect the environment whose consequences would be
reduced rainfall, among others. He noted the speaker had advocated a peaceful resolution of theconflict.
2.

Comments from participantsi.
A participant said Egypt’s unilateral decision to use the Nile to irrigate the Sinai smackedof arrogance and that it displayed a lack of respect for other riparian countries. He
proposed the invocation of an economic principle where Egypt pays for what Ethiopia
loses, considering the latter contributes 86 percent of the volume of the Nile. “ There
should be compensation for what we are losing”.
ii.
A participant cautioned against banking on “collaboration”, arguing it had led countries
such as Ethiopia nowhere. He submitted that the term was a diplomatic nicety used to
pay lip service to the potential conflict surrounding the Nile resources.
iii.
(Another participant wondered what harm dams build in Egypt caused to the upper Nileriparian countries.
iv.
Yet another participant sought to know what incentives were being offered to Egypt toagree to discussions on an equitable distribution of the Nile resources.
v.
A participant submitted that all indications were that no meaningful discussions hadtaken place between Egypt and other Nile water stakeholders. He proposed involvementof the African Union or the International Court of Justice.
vi. Still a contributor sought to know how Ethiopia and other upper Nile riparian communities
were obliged to honor treaties that were signed without their involvement or approval.

3.

Responses from the Presenteri.
The speaker stressed the importance of pricing water in the world, especially in areas
where water had become scarce. A critical point to consider at all times, he said, is thecentrality of livelihoods. Once the issue of livelihoods is addressed, exportation of thecommodity may be considered. The more scarce the water, he said, the higher its
value.
ii.
The Camp David Accord had led to the development of the Sinai desert as a way ofcreating an economic buffer that would stem the war in the Middle East, he said.
iii.
The waters of the Nile should be apportioned with justice, he further said. Diplomacy isthe certain course for a win-win situation.
iv.
There is anxiety, often unfounded, that if water is harnessed at the source of the riverthe volume going down may be reduced. Apportionment agreements would dispel suchanxieties and lead to improved use of the resources, he submitted.
v.
The incentive to Egypt to agree to discussions on the sharing of the Nile water resources
with other riparian countries, he said, would be apportionment.
vi. The United Nations, he said, is working on conventions that would support protection ofwater resources and the environmentvii. Previous Egyptian governments have been unwilling to discuss the equitable sharing of
the resources of the Nile. The critical challenge has been to change the mindset ofpeople and governments to see that an amicable solution to the latent conflict would
benefit all.

viii. There is an urgent need to demystify the problem of the Nile by bringing it to the tablefor discussion and resolution, he said. Diplomacy, he submitted, is the way out.

13

2.

KRISHA PRASAD AND SELESHI B. AWULACHEWMANAGING CONFLICTING PRIORITIES THROUGH COLLABORATIVE DECISIONMAKING FOR INTEGRATED RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT: APPROACHES AND
CHALLENGES
This paper was prepared by Krisha Prasad and Seleshi B.Awulachew of the International Water
Management Institute and sought to address the principles and methodologies to be used for integrated
river basin management. The paper offered a methodological approach for integrated river basin
management for Africa, drawing on lessons and experiences from the Olifants River Basin in South
Africa. They said in the last decade the management of water resource development in Africa had
tended to focus on meeting human needs, distribution equity, sustainable use of water, facilitatingsocial and economic development and protecting ecology and biodiversity. The focus also was on
preventing pollution and environmental degradation, meeting international obligations on water sharing,enhancing safety of water infrastructure, managing water crises and institutional development of
stakeholders, among other concerns.
The central concern, they said, has been maximizing economic and social development
through improved management of water resources, without compromising the sustainability of vital
ecosystems. The presenters observed that any water management activity has major social,
development, ecological, biodiversity, environmental and economic impacts on other directly or
indirectly related activities – and a holistic approach must, therefore, be taken on resource.
To address the challenges, water resource managers use computer-based tools, including
databases and geographical information systems and simulation modeling technologies. There arealso decision support systems (DSS) to support decision-making in complex situations. The DSSs
are useful in integrating state information on water at all times, in processing of information showing,for example, the principles governing water behavior, and evaluating plans on water management.
The presenters gave six types of DSSs in water resource management: watershed models, surface
water quantity models, surface water quality models, ground water models, economic models, andsocial models.
Use of DSS for integrated water resource management, it was pointed out, is common insuccessfully managed water basins in the world such as the Murray-Darling river basin in Indonesia,
and the Colorado river basin in the United States. The system was being given attention in South
Africa, Botswana, Tanzania, Kenya and the Nile Basin countries.
The presenters noted that several decision support systems developed in Africa and elsewhere
had failed to address the social-economic effects of water management efforts. To address theshortcomings the Olifants River Basin, South Africa developed a methodology for improved decisionmaking in the context of IWRM, which seeks to identify the best water management alternatives
against the country’s socio-economic objectives.

3.

KEVIN C.URAMA

UNDERSTANDING THE WILLINGNESS AND ABILITY TO ADOPT SWCMTS: THE
ROLE OF ECONOMICS, ETHICS AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGYDr Kevin Urama, a research fellow at the Macaulay Institute in Aberdeen, UK, delivered thepresentation. He examined what drives the public to adopt sustainable water catchment management
technologies, looked at the views of economists on drivers of behavior, and the emerging views fromenvironmental ethics. The presenter also discussed the views of social psychology on drivers of
behavior and attempted to offer an integrated value-mapping model as the way forward. The speakersubmitted that humans adopt what they value and value what they adopt because they are rational
beings. People seek gains and avoid losses, a streak that is fundamental in human behavior.
14

Dr Urama raised the issue of value of catchment, saying the value of its services falls into infinite
total value, arguing, therefore, that adoption of sustainable water catchment management technologies
may not be defined by economic preferences. The speaker concluded that human valuation of biodiversity is significantly influenced by factors including formal education, environmental ethics,
attitudes, social norms, and perceived behavior control factors. He offered an integrated modelallowing inclusion of wider perspectives to environmental choices. Behavior adoption is also influenced
by education, age, income and gender.
Issues Emerging from the Presentation
1.

2.

3.

4.

A participant said water resources are scarce, a development that had given rise to the Addis
Ababa conference. He pointed out that the presenter sounded negative about using economic
measures to gauge the value of water and wondered how else its worth would be established.
The contributor argued that since 86 percent of the Nile’s waters comes from Ethiopia it
should be necessary to set aside land in the lower Nile and use money generated from theland to compensate the country of the water’s origin. However, if water was given a zero
value it would be difficult to compute the amount of compensation to e demanded.
The presenter said even in situations where one was able to come up with a monetarytag
to the value of water such value was always an underestimate for it was difficult to ever give
water its real value. Economic measures work only to a given limit, he said. He further said it
would be difficult to deal with the power factor. Assessing Egypt’s behaviour in relation to theneed to equitably apportion Nile resources purely in terms of power relations would give thewrong assessment, he submitted.
Dr Osita Ogbu cautioned conference participants against focusing primarily on the Nile andthe river’s riparian countries, but conceded allocation and use of the basin’s resources could
be used as a model that would inform similar problems elsewhere on the continent. He
stressed that economics alone would not give answers to the problems of water management.
There is a need to examine the social, economic and cultural dimensions pertaining to water
management.

CHRIS HUGGINSWATER MANAGEMENT AND CONFLICT IN AFRICA: THE ROLE OF KNOWLEDGE
AND TECHNOLOGY
Chris Huggins, a research fellow at the African Centre for Technology Studies (ACTS) based in
Nairobi, Kenya, presented the paper. He traced the discourse on “water wars” from one foughtsome four-and-half thousand years ago in Mesopotamia (now Southern Iraq) over disputed watersupplies and indicated the focus of attention in more recent years in the Middle East, particularly in
relation to Israel and her neighbors. Of 17 basins identified as being at risk of “political stresses”
over water resources, eight are African, including Lake Chad, Incomati, Kunene, Limpopo, Okavango,
Senegal and the Zambezi basins. The Nile is considered a major “political stress” and efforts toaddress the issue are underway through the Nile Basin Initiative.
He also examined the characteristics of water as a resource, noting its importance inagriculture, transport, in disposing off waste products, in lubricating the wheels of industry as well as
in forming district or international borders.
Owing to its mobility, water is also used for generation of power. However, water is prone
to unavailability for diverse reasons, to fluctuations in its levels, and to divergent uses. A major
characteristic is that of scarcity.
15

The presenter further examined at length the typology of‘ conflicts, some being violent andothers non-violent. Water conflicts tend to be non-violent, which leads to the underestimation of
their impact, especially on people and their livelihoods. Water conflicts may be seen according to thedifferent uses of the water, the geographical location of the water mass, the actors involved andthe inter-generational aspect that exists when environmentally unsustainable activities prevent
future generations from using natural resources.
Mr Huggins further presented a number of case studies, examining first, the interstatewater conflicts in Africa, the state-community conflicts, with examples from Tanzania, and theinter-community conflicts, with a case also from Tanzania at Arusha. He also looked at knowledge,
technology and institutions and their role in water management, looking first at the legal and normative
frameworks governing water management. In this regard, water is viewed as an economic goodthat must be given true economic value. This argument could also lead to the levying of fees fromwater that could be used in protection of the environment. In this realm, the right to water is also
discussed.
An aspect that is often raised with regard to water conflicts is technological adaptation,suggesting that water scarcity and attendant risks of conflict can be mitigated if relevant institutions
have sufficient capacity for ‘adaptation’ or ‘innovation’.
The presenter concluded that while shared water resources are associated with a higher
risk of some kind of international conflict, much of the popular discourse is influenced by sabrerattling and unsanctioned threats.
Further, he argues that Africa is at a higher risk of international conflict over water thanother areas. In addition, he stresses that shared water resources may offer important opportunities
for international co-operation, and that at the local level violent conflicts over water and waterrelated conflicts are fairly common.
Issues Arising from the Presentation
A Kenyan participant clarified that in his country the government had embraced ‘commercialization’of water rather than ‘privatization’ of it. Commercialization, he explained, meant making water
available to people at a price.
A contributor wondered who really should be in charge of water in any country given its
multifaceted nature and use. He said governments were often not seen to intervene in finding
solutions to water problems because such issues often cut across all sectors of society.
A participant noted that water had also been viewed as a social good in which case, he said,
privatizing it would lead to conflicts.
Response from the Presenter
1.
The solution to water problems lies in negotiations in which all stakeholders are enjoined.
2.
People ought to be cautious about solutions to problems offered by donors – as they could leadto throwing away the baby and the birth water.
3.
Water systems should be sustainable in order to make water free.

16

5.

PEDEN, A. FREEMAN, A. ASTALKE, A. NOTENBAERT AND D. SHEIKHINVESTING IN WATER TO SUPPORT LIVESTOCK SECTOR GROWTH IN SUBSAHARAN AFRICA
Dr D. Peden of the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) delivered the presentation. It
was prepared in collaboration with the International Water Management Institute and the Challenge
Program on Water and Food. The presenter examined the reasons for investing in water for livestockand the principles governing such investments. He identified areas fertile for investment in water
for livestock, looked at investment options and the technology, and policy lessons to be learned.
The speaker pointed out that few irrigation schemes planned for livestock despite the factthat agricultural water attracts animals. There also is a commonly held belief that overgrazing is themain cause of land degradation in Africa and elsewhere. He cited examples from Ethiopia showing
there was a 45 percent soil loss on the 13 percent annual cropland and a 21 percent soil loss on 51
percent of grazing land. The reasons to invest in water for livestock, he said, include helping achieve
the Millennium Development Goals by 2015, safeguarding assets such as livestock, enabling
improvement of nutrition for physical and mental growth and expanding urban markets for highvalue animal products. The reasons for investing in water for livestock also include protecting water
resources through better husbandry, supporting animal power, increasing water productivity andreducing potential for conflict.
The principles for investing in livestock sector growth include promotion of benefits such as
milk, meat, wealth, power and cultural values. They also include consideration of spatial variability
such as pastoral, mixed crop-livestock, urban, rain-fed and irrigated production systems.
Another principle is the promotion of animal management to reduce degradation of waterand land. There is also the increase in livestock, water productivity, and the integration of theassessment of demographic and market trends, production systems and available water to determine
where best interventions can be made.
The policy options raised include encouraging collective and joint management of water andgrazing resources, and developing institutions that accept the legitimacy of livestock production.
Options also include water pricing and managing demand, zoning for animal keeping and market
development.
The speaker identified the lessons learned as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Opportunities are lost because of lack of integration of livestock into water planningand development.
Investing in water for livestock reduces poverty and overcomes vulnerability of thepoor.
There is a need for a multi-sectoral and regional approach, for a balanced mix of
supply and demand management, for effective use of technology and knowledge, for
inclusion of communities and all stakeholders and for gender and ethnic equity.
Setting priorities that do not necessarily respond to increasing meat consumption to
the level of Western diets.
Increases in water productivity is possible.

Issues Raised by the Paper’s Discussant
The discussant, Professor Zacharia Matsela, observed that the paper was well thought out, and had
examined the myths, reasons and principles relating to investments in water for livestock. He
commended the identification in the paper of 15 livestock water development domains (WDDs)
saying they provided challenges for Sub-Saharan states, especially in water harvesting, pathways
out of poverty and policy options.
17Prof. Matsela called for a thorough examination of what ‘investing’ in water for livestock
actually means and involves. He also called for a study into the implications of the concerns andissues raised in the paper, particularly in relation to the water development domains, to communityowned and managed land and utilization common in many parts of Africa.
Issues Arising from the Presentation
Dr Kevin Urama from Aberdeen, UK, commended ILRI’s programme which, he said, was set tocreate an integrated livestock development system. “Your findings point to this trend. This is great.”
He noted the presenter recommended collaboration with communities to ensure ILRI programmes
were successful.
He urged ATPS to come up with a study that would integrate ethics, cultural values andcommunity norms and relate them to sustainable livestock management practices.
The participant said the presenter’s indicators on the amounts of water for livestock were
quantitative and urged him to develop qualitative models as well. Quantitative indicators would leadto poor livestock health, Dr Urama argued.
A Nigerian participant said a tendency to keep livestock in African urban areas had arisen
and sought to know how the matter should be addressed.
Professor Oliver Saasa said a lot more attention should have been given to resources required
to develop water systems. The role of the private sector, NGOs, governments and big enterpriseshould have been addressed. Information, generation and dissemination are crucial to the success ofthe envisaged water development systems, he said, but sought to know at what level ATPS would
step in to facilitate dissemination.
A participant from Tanzania asked whether there were indigenous innovations that could be
integrated with the modern ones for improved water production and management.
Prof Lynn Mytelka said modern technology involved building reservoirs that were very
costly. She sought to know how such costs would compare with those of indigenous technologies.
Responses from the Presenter
1.

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

The study by ILRI focused on the Nile Basin and international water management. ILRI had
become involved rather late; while $30 billion was being injected in agricultural water annually
no money was earmarked for livestock water.
In livestock management one must consider the best places to feed animals and the best at
which to give water.
ILRI is keen to collaborate with scientists at the conference in order to share knowledge andexperiences.
Water quality is important and cannot be downplayed. Water pollution, for example, should beviewed as degradation.
Land tenure is an emotive and controversial issue. However, its concern is leading people andgovernments to seek solutions.
The keeping of large animals in urban areas is an issue related to pollution. It also has otherdimensions: In most of Africa large animals are taken care of by young boys.

18

6.

YACOB ARSANOSTRATEGIES FOR CO-OPERATION IN THE NILE BAIN: SECURITY,ENVIRONMENTAL, ECONOMIC AND INSTITUTIONAL APPROACHES
Yacob Arsano of Addis Ababa University delivered the paper. He said the Nile water system
consists of numerous tributaries and headwater lakes. In addition, there are 10 riparian countries
sharing the Nile, 86 percent of whose water originates from Ethiopia while 14 percent originatesfrom the Equatorial lakes region. The speaker said unlike the Danube, Rhine, Senegal or Niger river
basins, the Nile basin has no regulatory or institutional mechanisms, neither does it have “ mutuallyacceptable” water utilization and management practices. Efforts to enhance co-operation on the
sharing the of the Nile resources or to reach an amicable agreement on the use and management of
the river’s resources are hampered by unilateral positions and selfish national interests.
He contended that “anarchic” approaches have in the past been followed on the sharing of
the lake. This has tended to aggravate the unregulated completion and interstate rivalry between
upstream and downstream nations. The presenter strongly argued that a lasting solution to thesharing of the Nile basin could only be reached if cooperation was sought on the basis of common
security, environmental, economic and institutional concerns. Mutual security, he argued, should beseen as a function of gain that is in the national interest. Negotiations would lead riparian communities
from a sense of insecurity and formal agreements and institutional mechanisms would lead to longterm security for all parties involved.
He said the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) would likely lead to co-operation which, in turn,would foster common security. The current effort is, however, hampered by the low level of economic
development and lack of institutional capacity to carry the process forward in the riparian states aswell as the use of contested agreements in d efence of the national interests of individual countries.
The speaker observed the realization among the riparian states that environmental security
would not be achieved through military action. Such security can only be achieved through thecollaborative efforts of states by sharing. Efficient utilization of water resources that decreases
evaporation prevents erosion and minimizes flood occurrences, silt accumulation and soil stalinization
should be the guiding criterion.
He said at the regional level, the riparian states will have to address the issue of efficient water
development, as economic use of water at the national level would benefit the entire region. The
speaker, however, decried the fact that an economic-oriented approach was not being followed.
He stressed that legal and institutional frameworks were crucial to regulating use of theshared water, arguing that the existing agreements should be negotiated to establish the basis for cooperation.
Discussion of the Presentation
The discussant of the paper was Dr Joseph Obua, the National Co-ordinator, ATPS Uganda Chapter.
He said the paper tended to discuss water purely as resource without placing it in the context of theenvironment. He also was critical of the presenter’s optimism on the security approach to sharing
the Nile resources, arguing that stakeholder states had unclear policies on the sharing of the resources.
In addition, there is blatant unsustainable use of the Nile basin resources as well as the existence of
weak sharing governments. The discussant pointed out a contradiction in the speaker’s assertion
that conflicts would arise from the sharing of the Nile resources and that cooperation too would beachieved. He argued the paper should have focused on the challenges posed by the river withrespect to the sharing of its basins resources.
The strategies that can effectively be used to manage the rivers resources should also havegiven greater attention, as should have been the work being carried out by the Inter-University
Council of East Africa. Such focus, he argued, would have shown the way forward.
19

He further faulted the presenter on the economic approach, saying he had not shown how
such a strategy would enhance regional co-operation. The presenter had also not shown any practicalinstitutional strategies but had plenty of details on regulatory mechanisms. He submitted that a
primary strategy should ensure there is adequate information flow on the Nile, its environment andnatural resources as well clear networking and advocacy on the river.
Comments from Dr Arsano
The presenter agreed with most of the issues raised by the discussant.

7.

KEVIN C. URAMASUSTAINABLE WATER CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGIES: WHY SHOULDWE CARE?
The paper was presented by Dr Kevin C. Urama of the Macaulay Institute, Craigiebukler, Aberdeen,
UK. He examined the need for sustainable water catchment management technologies (SWCMTs)
in Africa, focusing on the role of water bodies and the land devoted to use and the sustainability ofsocio-ecology systems. The presenter looked at the complex images between water ecosystems,socio-ecological systems and human well being using examples from Africa and elsewhere, arguingthat a holistic and integrated approach to sustainable management of water catchments is a necessary
condition for poverty alleviation in Africa.
The presenter noted that water catchments are sources of marketable commodities including
food, medicine, hydropower, industrial goods, and aesthetic non-market goods and services, including
environmental modulation and other ecosystem functions: they also have existence and intrinsic
values. He said sustainable water catchment management is particularly relevant in Africa becauseof its serious implications for food security and human environmental health. He stressed that theability of African countries to mitigate the effects of the increasing pressures on water resourcesfrom population growth, agricultural intensification and urbanization, and the emerging global climatechange depends on how well Africa’s river basins are managed.
He strongly argued that the development of sustainable water catchment management
technologies is a perquisite to growth and poverty reduction in Africa. Global threats, such as climatechange and associated impacts are predicted to worsen the already declining state of Africa’s
social, economic and biophysical resources. The levels of poverty, population and urban growth
rates in Africa indicate that Africa is more vulnerable to the emerging global threats than any othercontinent. The increasing food insecurity, droughts, and diseases show that Africa needs a sustainableapproach to the management of her natural resources, particularly water bodies.
The presenter argued for the need to adopt an integrated approach to WCMT development,
to public participation, information sharing and capacity building, and to considerations for costeffectiveness of available alternatives as a first step towards SWMT development on the continent.
He said piecemeal and sectoral approaches to water catchment would fail.
Discussion of the Presentation
The paper’s discussant was Ms Bitrina Diyamett, the National Coordinator, ATPS Tanzania. Taking
a programmatic approach to the issues raised, the discussant said the paper ought to have examinedwater catchment management technologies that had worked for Africa, clearly showing why andhow. She stressed that this would be an important step in making the continent move forward, andunderscored the need for research into such technologies if information and literature on them arelacking.
20

Ms Diyamett further said the paper should have addressed the issues of vertical andhorizontal technology transfer. She said vertical transfer involved local sectors but the paper failed
to address the matter exhaustively. She further faulted the presenter on the way technology isadopted, saying technology develops as it is adapted and adopted, a link the presenter did not clearlyshow.
Issues Emerging from the Presentation
1. The chairman of ATPS, Professor Norah Olembo, expressed support for Dr Urama’s holistic
approach to water catchment management technologies. She also called for efficiency inwater management, arguing that Africa needs to develop its own technologies and to keep
improving them. Development, she stressed, is the product of innovation, not holding on to
old and moribund technologies.
2. A participant disagreed with the presenter’s pejorative reference to technological “copying”
as a “malpractice” contending that literature is replete with examples of countries thatlearnt from others but still developed their own technological capabilities. The participant
argued that in technological development “copying” and “pasting” would greatly improve
technological capacities.
3. Another participant agreed that “copying” can help boost local technologies. He underscoredthe need for Africa to start off with what is available locally before moving on to adopt
foreign technologies that may be out of step with local conditions. “Copying” is important,
he stressed, as long as it is not done for the sake of doing it. “Copying” is legitimate, heargued, as long as it did not lead to re-inventing the wheel. He also faulted African leaders
for failure to assess science and technological capacities in their countries.
4. A participant argued that adoption of new technologies goes hand-in-hand with thedevelopment of indigenous technologies.
5. Dr Urama, the presenter, clarified that he was not opposed to “copying” of technologies.
Rather, he was against copying and pasting” as that tended to supplant foreign technologies
to new environments where they did not fit the conditions. “Learning and improving
knowledge,” Urama said, “is part of technology development.”
6. Dr Urama further said Africa needs to accommodate and make use of what she has–sincethat is already available and belongs to the continent. Efficacy and sustainability must be
priority issues because ignoring them would lead to degradation of the environment.
7. Mr Chris Squire the National Coordinator, ATPS Sierra Leone, said Dr Urama’s integrated
approach to sustainable water catchment management technologies must be taken seriously
if Africa is to develop. “Is anyone listening to you, Urama?” he posed.
8. A participant called for a way forward, considering that the presenter had laid the factsbare.
9. Dr Osita Ogbu, the Executive Director of ATPS, observed the danger posed by developed
countries where patenting was often done after a minor improvement to an already existingor developed product. Such patenting was done in the context of property rights, thus
disqualifying many from using, enjoying or developing a product or an innovation that wastraditionally their own. He conceded, however, that there is need to augment local knowledge
with new foreign knowledge for technological improvement.
10. A participant cautioned the conference to be clear whether they viewed water as a sourceor as a renewable source. Dr Urama, in response, said whether water is seen as a renewable
or as a non-renewable source depends on the way one looks at it.

21

8.

FRANS HUIBERSWASTE WATER AND IRRIGATED AGRICULTURE: LESSONS, KNOWLEDGE
TRANSFER AND POSSIBLE APPLICATIONS FOR AFRICA
This paper was delivered by Frans Huibers, Associate Professor, Health and Environment Irrigationand Water Engineering Group, Wageningen University, The Netherlands. The speaker defined sewage
as the wastewater generated by a community. The main pollutants to water, he said, include suspended
solids, soluble organic compounds, pathogens and nutrients. In wastewater treatment the preliminary
process involves elimination of coarse materials and sand as well as screening the water whereas
the secondary process involves elimination of suspended solids and floatation and settling of thewater. The speaker cited cases of wastewater treatment in Colombia, Palestine and Jordan. Tertiary
treatment of wastewater is concerned with elimination of pathogens and nutrients; chemical,
photochemical and biological action – for purposes of protecting public health and water bodies andproduce reusable efficient. He conceded, however, that tertiary treatment was not affordable inmost countries.
The presenter said wastewater had become increasingly important to irrigation as it was
reliable. Further nutrients in wastewater could often replace chemical fertilizers. Irrigation with
wastewater could also be an excellent treatment system, he said, adding many poor farmers were
benefiting from wastewater. The typical issues to deal with in waste water irrigation include designingchoices in sanitation and treatment, resolving the mismatch between supply and demand for water;
the employment of different irrigation, water and nutrient management technologies; and different
ways of crop handling. The issues also include dealing with such economic aspects as equity costs,
benefits and efficiency.
The two basic lessons learnt are that illegal and unguided or unplanned use of wastewateris carried out in many parts of the world and that wastewater production from urban areas will
double, possibly triple, in most cities of the world in the next 20-25 years. Food requirements will
also go up.
The other lessons learnt are that wastewater irrigation has great potential, that to achieve
results a system of different disciplines is required and adequate nutrient management is necessary.
In addition, it is important to use proper irrigation techniques, to strike a balance between the objectives,
costs and risks. Information must also be available to all stakeholders.
Issues Arising from the Presentation
Participants raised a number of issues, among them a concern that the paper had not addressed thehazards associated with use of wastewater or the stigma arising from its use. Concern also wasraised on whether farmers really knew the benefits of using wastewater. Health concerns related tothe use of wastewater were also raised. In Ghana, for example, it was reported wastewater flowedfrom a hospital to a river and farmers downstream used the water on their farms, thus posing
serious health risks. Participants also called for the setting up of a reliable data based on wastewaterand its management.
Prof Huibers, in response to some of the concerns raised said it had become practice inurban areas to grow vegetables using wastewater. Pathogens were often outside of the crop, he
explained, thus allowing washing of such vegetables to stem any health risks. But he stressedindustrial and hospital waste should not be used. He acknowledged that the use of wastewater
carried a stigma, a problem that was likely to persist, as people generally preferred using clean,fresh water.
Prof Norah Olembo underscored the need to study traditional water management systems
and technologies in a significant number of African countries and to use such technologies as thebasis for Africa’s development of her wastewater management systems.
22

9.

FEMI OLOKESUSIA SURVEY OF INDIGENOUS WATER MANAGEMENT AND COPINGMECHANISMS IN AFRICA: IMPLICATIONS FOR KNOWLEDGE ANDTECHNOLOGY POLICY
The paper was delivered by Professor Femi Olokesusi, the Associate National Coordinator, ATPS
Nigeria. He said despite its endowment with impressive water resources, Africa lags behind othercontinents in people’s access to water. The reasons for this range from a rising population, massive
environmental degradation, lack of adequate rainfall, recurrent droughts and low scientific andtechnological development. He observed that traditionally water has been managed for agriculture
and domestic consumption and that on the continent innovative indigenous water management
techniques have been developed more in the drier as well as in the mountainous regions. For
agriculture, traditional African farmers have, over time, devised such techniques as terrace building,fitting systems, drainage ditches and small earth dams. Such techniques are generally cheap andlargely depend on local materials.
The presenter discussed various water management and coping techniques in different
African countries including Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso, Tanzania and Egypt. The presenter also
discussed strategies for integrating new knowledge water management and coping mechanisms.
The first step would be the development of a symbiotic relationship that builds synergy between
indigenous and Western knowledge. Second, stakeholders in the two knowledge systems should
create partnerships through joint actions, participatory research, joint ventures and capacity building
and co-management approaches. Further, Western science stakeholders should establish the veracityof indigenous knowledge from local stakeholders using the local community. In addition, trust should
be built recognizing the importance and legitimacy of both Western and indigenous knowledge andrecognizing that both systems are desirable in designing effective strategies to solve the continents
water resource problems, the presenter also underlined the need to respect the intellectual andtraditional resource rights of the people.
Issues Emerging from the Presentation
Participants raised a number of issues on the presentation, one being that the servicing of indigenous
knowledge appeared to be lacking. Also raised was a concern that Africa must re-orient its attitudeand begin to appreciate and develop products indigenous to the continent,
Professor Oliver Saasa decried the fact that experts in Africa tended to talk to themselves,
an indication of their “academic arrogance.” He stressed the need to talk to the grassroots, contendingthat if that did not happen experts might later discover they were the hindrance to the continent’s
development.
Borrowing from the European Union, Dr Urama said scientists are in water technology inany part of Europe. Similarly, Kenyan scientists could work in Nigeria and vice versa in order topromote integration. “We must learn how to do knowledge sharing,” he declared.
Prof Olokesusi, in response, said indigenous knowledge is dynamic but there is a tendency
to view it as static. He also sought not to emphasize the role of colonialism in the destruction ofindigenous knowledge and technologies, saying the destruction was total and cut across all facts ofhuman life. “It is not just in technology where destruction occurred…We cannot communicate
because of language barriers as a result of colonization.”23

5.0 Panel Discussion on Science, Technology,
Water and Environment in Africa
Close to the end of the conference, a panel discussion on science, technology, water and environmentin Africa was held, comprising policy-makers, and water administrators from selected Africancountries and key resource people. Prof Oliver Saasa, a member of the ATPS Board, moderated
the discussion. The countries on the panel were Kenya, Ethiopia, Lesotho, Nigeria and Cote d’
Ivoire. The moderator recapped the highlights of the conference, pointing out that the aim was tofind out how water resources in Africa should be managed by examining the current status andcharting out the way forward.
Prof Saasa underscored the centrality of a hospitable environment for good water
management practices in Africa. “You cannot talk meaningfully about development in the absenceof security,” he stressed. The panel discussion, he pointed out, was to act as a gauge to show theconference organizers and experts whether learning from one another had taken place, whether
what was being done was useful, whether policy-makers were receptive to the conference ideas,
and whether experts and policy-makers were committed to putting in practice what had been agreed
upon.
The moderator emphasized that any action in respect of water resource management isinterdisciplinary. The contributions from the different countries were as follows:
Kenya
Kenya’s panelist said his country had riveted concentration on poverty alleviation, fighting ignorance
and disease, among other problems. He said Kenya does not enjoy adequate water but the commodity
was often viewed as an infinite resource. The water management and monitoring systems in the
country are weak, a reflection perhaps of the weak financial support. The government, however,
had recently woken up to the need to regulate water and develop a water policy. The need forregulation had led to the enactment of Water Act 2002 as an enabling organ.
The panelist reported that a Water Appeals Board had been set up outside the ambit of theminister to arbitrate water conflicts.
Ethiopia
Ethiopia’s panelist informed the conference that his country has a water policy. The government
deals with rural and urban water supply. Rural water is used primarily for purposes of irrigation
while urban water is for domestic use. Three rivers, apart from Nile, are important.
The Omo, he pointed out, starts from Ethiopia and ends up in the Indian Ocean. Ethiopia is
keen to use it but that could affect the Lake Turkana community. He sought ATPS assistance on thematter. A second river passes through Somalia which is using the water even without a formal
agreement from the states through which the river traverses. The Juba also goes into Kenya and24then Somalia but the three countries through which the river flows have no agreements on the
sharing of its resources. The panelist called on ATPS to conduct research on the three rivers with aview to advising the relevant governments on the use and sharing of the resources of the rivers.
Ethiopia and Somalia have fought in the past and for this reason an amicable solution to the sharingof their water resources should be sought.
LesothoLesotho’s representative came from the Ministry of Natural Resources and was involved in water
policy and management for the country. In Lesotho, the water policy issues include supply,
management and regulation. It was reported that Lesotho’s Hydro Electric Project is a major
stakeholder in water resource management. Lesotho exports large quantities of water from thecountry’s highlands to South Africa.
The majority of the people live in the lowlands, however, and they too need water. The needto develop an infrastructure that can take water to all who need it is a real one and a major concern
for the government. Government policy on water guides regulation and distribution besides access.
Sustainability of the environment, however, is a major problem for Lesotho because whilewater is a readily available resource in the highlands, pollution is a great concern. Dealing withwater is a big challenge for the country. The River Basin Commission takes most responsibility forwater resource management, guided by SADDC.
Nigeria
A number of structures are responsible for water issues in Nigeria. The Federal Ministry of Water
Resources takes part of the responsibility, including construction of dams and boreholes. Constructionof boreholes is, indeed, a priority for the government. There is also a waterbus that is responsible for
distribution of the commodity and for ensuring that it is safe. It was reported that Nigeria has a welldefined system for collection of water bills, used for maintenance of water systems.
The government is also fighting against pollution. The severity of this problem, particularly
in Lagos calls for greater attention. The county also has collaborative policies with neighbors, a good
example being links with the Chad Basin Authority.
Cote d’Ivoire
The panelist said there are five main actors in the field of water resource management in his
country. The government is first and the main actor. There is also the Centre for Water and theEnvironment. A third is the Centre for Anti-pollution. There also are training institutions, and finally,
universities. The conference also heard that a number of private organizations are involved in water
distribution. There also are individual water suppliers. Participants also learnt that problems of water
management and distribution remain as the structures are weak and thus perform poorly. The
panelist called on ATPS to support the country in setting up sound water resource management
prorammes – in view of the fact that Cote d’Ivoire is an agricultural country whose reliance onwater is central to its development. There is also need to clean up forests – an area the panelist
called ATPS to step in.

Areas of Concern
The moderator asked panelists to point out areas they thought the conference had not addressed
well enough.
Kenya
The panelist expressed the view that water catchment and protection and water treatment problems
had not been covered adequately.
25

Ethiopia
The panelist said small-scale irrigation should have been addressed. Biodiversity of the rivers andsmall water bodies required greater coverage and attention
Lesotho
The panelist said water catchment management should have been given greater attention in theconference.
Nigeria
The panelist said making wastewater work for African countries is of paramount importance andneeded better treatment.
Cote d’Ivoire
The panelist faulted the conference and experts on what he viewed as their failure to demonstrate
any traditional technologies that people from other African countries could adopt.

26

6.0 C l o s u r e o f C o n f e r e n c e o n S c i e n c e ,Technology, Water and Environment in Africa
THE WAY FORWARD
Professor M.C. Madukwe made the conference concluding remarks, and noted as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Sound water resource management is key to the realization of the United Nations
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).
For knowledge to be sustainable it must be contextualized – a lesson that had emerged
clearly from the conference.
Democratic and diplomatic solutions should be sought in Africa to alleviate situations
that could degenerate to wars for water.
Integrated water resource management approaches to water problems are central toeffective and sustainable water preservation and management.

Comments on the Way Forward
Dr Osita Ogbu, the Executive Director, ATPS, said his network would, in future, redouble efforts tobring to such conferences as many policy-makers as possible to ensure decisions made were
implemented. He said at times there were perceptions that experts tended to talk to each other. He
defended the hosting of such conferences, saying tremendous learning always took place. “A
conference like this can be regarded as training for trainers. Let’s not slight the meetings. We
learn.”
In future more interaction with policy-makers would be sought, he said, to add value to theconference. Dr Ogbu paid special tribute to the government of The Netherlands for financially
supporting the mounting of the conference and workshop. He also lauded ILRI Ethiopia for playing
host to the conference and workshop and especially in playing the role of partner in the execution of
the meeting.
The chairman of ATPS, Professor Norah Olembo, commended participants for “capturing
the gist of the presentations,” saying the range and variety of the contributions was wide and thus
informative and knowledge yielding. The theme of the conference was timely, Prof Olembo noted,
saying it demonstrated ATPS’ sensibility to development issues in Africa. Expounding on thecomplexity of water resource management problems on the continent, the chairman said whenever
there was more water it led to flooding and death and whenever there was inadequate water it led
to drought. She said she had personally paid a lot of attention to the issues raised, and observed thatmost concerns required policy thinking. “This has been time well spent,” declared the chair. “It is
now upon us to do something in the area of water.”
She commended ATPS Ethiopia Chapter and ILRI Ethiopia for their role in organizing theconference and workshop.
27

7.0 The ATPS Workshop on Science, Technology,
Water and Environment in Africa
REVIEW OF RESEARCH PROPOSALSOn Wednesday December 1, 2004 participants went into workshop groups to listen to presenters of
research proposals sent to ATPS, review the proposal, guide researchers and recommend those that
could be funded. The proposals fell into four main categories as follows:
Group A. Water and Environment Proposals from Francophone Africa.
Group B: Water Quality and the Environment.
Group C: Water Policy and Institutional Management.
Group D: Rainwater Harvesting and Technology Transfer.
Group A was chaired by Professor Lynn Mytelka and the resource persons were Dr Roch Mongbo,
Dr Benoit Kabore and Dr Sidiki Dembele
Group B was chaired by Professor Norah Olembo, with Dr Kevin Urama as a resource person.
Group C was chaired by Professor Oliver Saasa, with Dr Joseph Obua as a resource person.
Group D was chaired by Dr Osita Ogbu and the resource persons were Mr Chris Squire and Prince
R. J. Ihenacho.
The proposals were as follows:
Group A – Water and Environment Proposals from Francophone Africa
1. La Problematic de la Gestion de la Mangrove en Cote d’Ivoire: Le Cas d’Assinie- Mafia
by Mlle Maiga Mariame, Mme Djedji Catherine, Mr Anon N’Guessan.
2. Developpment d’un Procede e Zone Humide Simulee Plante avec Amaranthatceae,
Cappaidaceae, Tiliaceae pour le Traitement des Eauz Usees Domestiques by Dr Lacina
Coulibaly
3. Towards Effective and Sustainable Water Management Policy in Cameroon by Dr Ngwa
Alfred, Dr Jane-F Akoachee, Dr Bunah Violet and Dr Ndeso Atanga
4. Gestion Integree des Ressources eau du Bassin Versant du Bandama Cote d’Ivoire by
ATPS Cote d Ivoire Team.
GROUP B – Water Quality and the Environment
1. Impact of Water Catchments Degradation in Urban areas of Tanzania by Dr Neema
Ngware, Mr Riziki Shemdoe, Ms Bitrina Diyamett et al.
28

2. Distribution and Bio-Availability Assessment of Heavy Metals in Sediments from Lake
Naivasha, Kenya by Dr M. C. Moturi and Mr F. L. Polong.
3. Reducing Water Pollution in Lesotho by Deepa Pollanikkatil Sajith.
4. Mining Effects on Water Quality and Yield of River Nyamwamba, Western Uganda byAbraham R. Mwesigye and Kaye Emmanuel.
GROUP C – Water Policy and Institutional Management
1. Using Information and Communication Technologies to Improve the Management andSustainability of the Densu River by Kwasi M. Setsoafia.
2. Assessment of Rural Supply Management in Ibarapa Area of Oyo State, Nigeria, by ProfA. S. Gbadegesin.
3. Policy Gap Analysis: The Case of Community Water and Sanitation in Ghana by Rose
Mamaa Entsua Meansah and Charlotte Engmann.
4. Access to Fisheries and Issues of Sustainability and Collective Action in Ethiopia: The
Case of Lake Tana by Dejene Aredo and Sewmehon Demissie.
5. The Role of Institutions in Water Management in Nigeria by Prof Michael Madukwe, et al.
GROUP D – Rainwater Harvesting and Technology Transfer
1. Comparative Performances & Environmental Impacts of different Water Harvesting
Technologies in Ethiopia by Yusuf Kedir, Yilma Seleshi and Dejene Aredo.
2. Socio-Economic Factors Influencing Rainwater Harvesting in Chingale Extension
Planning Area in Malawi by Dr Julius Mangisoni.
3. Ability and Willingness to Adopt Ecological Sanitation as a Water and Environmental
Conservation Technology: The Case for Peri-urban Communities in Kampala by James
Kakooza and Dave Khayangayanga.
4. Small Scale Rainwater Harvesting for Combating Water Deprivation in orphaned
Households in a peri-urban Area of Lilongwe city, Central Malawi, by Henry Raphael
Mloza-Banda.
5. Understanding Gender Roles in Technological Innovations and Practices for Integrated
Water Resource Management in Rural Settlements. A Case of Usambara Highlands,
Tanzania, by Riziki S.Shemdoe and Rukia Kitula.

TRAINING WORKSHOPA writing skills improvement workshop was conducted for participants by Mr Magayu K. Magayu,
a lecturer in journalism at the University of Nairobi. In a paper titled “Publishing Research Work:The Dos and Don’ts” the resource person took participants through the most common mistakes
found in documents and research work intended for publication. The problems include spelling
mistakes, use of titles and designations, use of punctuation marks, poor and cluttered writing as well
as formatting and packaging material for publication. The paper also dealt with the proper ways of
doing citations, and the use of tables and figures to illustrate or support arguments. He also
demonstrated problems relating to poor grammar and took participants through a list of “wasteful”
words, clearly showing the alternatives. He also took participants through a list of words and terms
that are often used wrongly and demonstrated their correct use and context.
As in such other workshops held elsewhere in such places as Abuja, Harare, Nairobi andMaseru, the participants called on ATPS to support additional research and publication of the paper
to benefit the science and technology fraternity in Africa.

29

UNESCO PRESENTATION ON SMALL-SCALE ENTERPRISESDr Peggy Oti-Boateng from the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Ghana
made a presentation on Technology Issues for Activities Financed by Micro Finance Institutions andsought comments from participants on how to improve the UNESCO funded initiative. She alsopresented a framework to be used in assessing the impact of policy on technological capability ofsmall-scale enterprises. On ways to improve the initiative participants proposed as follows:I.
That there is need to look at the literature in the 1970s and the 1980s that would
help conceptualize the effort in four broad ways: infoware, organware, humanware
and technoware.
2.
That focus has now shifted from what researchers need to know to what they needto do – and this must be taken into consideration in the initiative.
3.
It is important to establish for certain the kinds of technology that would move theproject forward. It was noted that a lot of micro finance institutions are able to buy
such technologies as a pump but they may know very little about the gadget.
4.
For success, every effort must be made to ensure micro finance institutions clearly
understand the problems of micro enterprises – as this is the only way towards
sustainability of the project.
5.
Innovation is critical in the assessment of small-scale enterprises.
6.
Sector participation would tend to be tricky and one must therefore prepare for it.
Agriculture, for example, is a composite undertaking.
7.
Whenever there is government micro enterprise policy it should be used to influence
support and development of small-scale enterprises.
8.
Even as the project considers and attracts micro financing, it is important to remember
capability can be available without the financing. The two should not be divorced
from each other.
9.
It is important to sensitize micro finance institutions to support small-scale enterprises.
10.
For success, it is important to find out who finances SMEs and what the indicatorsof performance are.

EDUCATIONAL VISIT TO ILRI’S DEBRE ZEIT RESEARCH STATION
Conference and workshop participants made an educational tour of ILRI’s Debre Zeit Research
Station where they were received by Dr A. Emmanuel. The host gave a historical background to thestation and explained its mandate and activities, among them carrying out research in livestock, andpromoting technologies in livestock production and promotion. The station, established in 1975, also
carries out research on livestock feeds. The guests had an opportunity to see the different animals
used for research activities at the station, the growing and preparation of different animal feeds andthe making of animal products, including butter and ghee.
The host explained the station encouraged joint training ventures and the sharing of experienceswith other research organizations in Africa as long as the activities are mutually beneficial.
The research institute changed its name to ILRI in 1998 and joined Nairobi’s ILRI as asister organization mandated to carry out research in livestock development while the Kenyanbased institute carries out research on livestock diseases. The station has offices in Latin Americaand Asia for purposes of collaboration, although its main activities and partners are in Africa.
The host explained that some of the livestock developed at the station are taken to other parts ofAfrica and to other parts of the world as well.

30

8.0 The ATPS Annual General Meeting
The African Technology Policy Studies Network (ATPS) held its 2004 Annual General Meeting at
ILRI’s Zebre Zeit Research Station, some 50 kilometres east of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

REMARKS BY THE ATPS CHAIRMAN
Prof Norah Orembo, the Chairman of ATPS, paid special tribute to the Ethiopian chapter for its rolein hosting the 2004 conference and workshop. She exhorted participants and other chapters toemulate the spirit of hard work and commitment demonstrated by Ethiopia in the mounting of the
Network’s meeting and noted as follows:
1. Resources for organizing and mounting the conference and workshop were scarce by becauseof devotion and a sense of selflessness on the part of the organizers and hosts the meeting hadturned out to be a major success.
2. The quality of papers and presentations was high, the variety wide, the content rich and themood of the meeting serious. She called on all stakeholders to maintain that standard, noting,“We all certainly have something to take back home.”
3. Research proposals were of a much higher quality and were stronger in content, and brighter instyle and packaging.
4. Owing to the scarcity in funding, not all research proposals could be supported financially, asetback that she regretted.
5. The ATPS fraternity and stakeholders had come of age and had clearly demonstrated ownershipof the Network. Coted’Ivoire, the youngest entrant into the fraternity, had come with a “bang”
and had probably overtaken most of the older members.
6. The centrality of ATPS’ work can clearly be seen from the impact it was making across theentire continent in the realm of science and technology policy and in advising governments,
NGOs, donors and stakeholders in key areas relating to development, decision-making,international negotiations and globalization. This has made ATPS a major player in strategic
development matters on the continent.
7. The lean ATPS Secretariat headed by Dr Osita Ogbu had made tremendous achievements in
the realization of the Network’s mandate despite major financial constraints.
8. ILRI was a wonderful host in Addis Ababa. The institute had offered a most hospitable facility
for the conference and workshop and also given participants an opportunity to learn about thegreat work they do for Africa

31

REMARKS BY THE ATPS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
The Executive Director of ATPS, Dr Osita Ogbu, made the following remarks:
1. ATPS had been granted international status by the Kenya government concluding a lengthy
process. The status exempts ATPS from paying taxes, allows the Network to hire expatriates if
needed, and affords the organization immunity to raise any issues in its mandate.
2. The Network was collaborating with NEPAD, UNESCO, the African Development Bank,
among other organizations. He explained that NEPAD recognizes ATPS as a science andtechnology research organization and the two are doing some activities together. ATPS isdealing with UNESCO at two levels: In Nairobi and in Paris. The African Development Bank
had offered financial support to the Network.
3. ATPS chapters should strive to establish contacts and develop partnerships at the national levelin order to strengthen the Network. Lesotho, he said, had clearly shown that partnership andsupport could be garnered at the national level.
Nigeria’s ATPS chapter had also established a strong partnership with that country’s Raw
Materials Research Council through a memorandum of understanding. The council had offered
ATPS tremendous support. Ghana and Uganda have also shown that partnership at the local
level is possible. In Sierra Leone, the chapter co-ordinator had received financial support fromthe World Bank.
4. ATPS had experienced financial setbacks that had serious ramifications on theirprograms owing to a shift in donor priorities. As a result, there was a major shortfall in funds
intended to support research work. In the past, traditional ATPS supporters, including the Dutch,
did not give conditions on what its funds should support as long as it was in the Networks’mandate. ATPS, however, had persuaded the Dutch to support work on water and the environment,a development that had led to the hosting of the Addis Ababa conference and workshop. As aresult of the conditions, therefore, ATPS could not raise enough money to fund an estimated 19
research proposals for the year 2004 as originally planned.
5. ATPS was talking to DFID, Australian Aid and to Saric, among other development
partners with a view to soliciting support from them.
6. The International Development Research Centre’s (IDRC) funding to ATPS has no conditions.
A good part of it, therefore, is used to meeting the Network’s administrative costs.

VENUE FOR THE 2005 CONFERENCE AND WORKSHOP
It was agreed that the venue for the next ATPS Annual Conference and Workshop would be Freetown,
Sierra Leone.

32

APPENDIX 1: WORKSHOP PROGRAMMEPLENARY SESSION
ATPS/EIIPD CONFERENCE AND WORKSHOPSCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, WATER AND ENVIRONMENT IN A FRICA

Monday, 29 November 2004
Venue: Lalibella Hall, Sheraton Addis
Opening Session
Chair: Prof. Kinfe Abraham, President of Ethiopian International Institute for Peace and Development(EIIPD)
09:00 - 10:30

Brief welcome remarks from Dr. Dejene Aredo, National Coordinator, ETPSA
Brief remarks from Dr. Osita Ogbu, Executive Director, ATPS
Brief remarks from Prof. Norah Olembo, Chair, ATPS Board
Keynote Speaker: “Genetic Engineering, Biodiversity and Africa”
Dr. Tewolde Gebre-Egziabiher, General Director, Ethiopian Environmental
Protection Authority (EPA)
Official Opening: H.E. Mr. Shiferaw Jarso, Minister of Water Resources, Ethiopia

10:30 - 11:00

TEA/COFFEE BREAK

Session I
Chair: Mr. Dessalegn Mesfin, Deputy General Director, Ethiopian Environmental Protection Authority
11:00 - 11:30“Water Allocation, Stability and Collaboration within the Nile Basin” by Prof. Kinfe
Abraham, President of Ethiopian International Institute for Peace and Development(EIIPD)

11:30 - 12:00“Managing Conflicting Priorities through collaborative decision-making forintegrated river basin management: Approaches and Challenges” by Krishna
Prasad & Seleshi Bekele, International Water Management Institute (IWMI), Addis
Ababa
Discussant: Prof. M. C. Madukwe, National Coordinator, ATPS Nigeria

12:00 - 13:00

Open Discussions

13:00 - 14:15

LUNCH (at the ILRI Campus)

Session II: Venue: Main Auditorium, ILRI – Addis Campus
Chair: Professor Lynn Mytelka, Director, United Nations University/ Institute for New Technologies(UNU/INTECH), The Netherlands
14:15 – 14:30
Welcome Address by Dr. Shirley Tarawali, Director, People Livestock andEnvironment, ILRI
14:30 - 15:00“Understanding Public Attitude, Values and Behaviour towards Adoption of Sustainable
Water Catchments Management Technologies: The role of economics, ethic and social
psychology” by Dr. Kevin Urama, Research Fellow, The Macaulay Institute, Aberdeen.
UK
Discussant: Dr. Roch Mongbo, National Coordinator, ATPS Benin33

15:00 - 15:30

Open discussion

15:30 - 16:00“Water Access, Conflict and Knowledge: Lessons from the Horn of Africa and theGreat Lakes” by Chris Huggins, Research Fellow, African Centre for Technology
Studies (ACTS)
Discussant: Dr. Julius Mangisoni, National Coordinator, ATPS Malawi

16:00 - 16:30

Open discussion

16:30 - 17:30

Tea/Coffee break and Marketplace/Exhibition and Networking

18:00 - 20:30

Cocktail Reception at Sheraton Addis Ababa hosted by EIIPDPLENARY SESSION
CONT’D

ATPS/EIIPD CONFERENCE AND WORKSHOPSCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, WATER AND ENVIRONMENT IN A FRICA

Tuesday, 30 November 2004
Session III: Venue: Main Auditorium, ILRI – Addis Campus
Chair: Dr. Alex Tindimubona, Senior Scientific Affairs Officer, UNECA, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
08:30 - 09:00“Investing in Sustainable Water Development for Livestock Sector in Africa: S&T
PolicyImplications” Dr. Don Peden, Leader, Sustaining Water and Nutrition Productivity, ILRI Addis Ababa
Discussant: Prof. Zacharia Matsela, National Coordinator, ATPS-Lesotho
09:00 - 09:30

Open discussion

09:30 - 10:00“Stategic Cooperation in the Nile Basin; Security, Environmental, Economic andInstitutional Issues” by Dr. Yacob Arsano, Addis Ababa University
Discussant: Dr. Joseph Obua, National Coordinator, ATPS Uganda

10:00 - 10:30

Open discussion

10:30 - 11:00

TEA/COFFEE BREAK

Session IV
Chair: Mr. Firku Dessalegn, Minister of State for the Ministry of Capacity Building, Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia
11:00 - 11:30“Sustainable Water Catchment Management Technologies: Why should we care?”by Dr. Kevin Urama, Research Fellow, The Macaulay Institute, Aberdeen. UK

11:30 - 12:00“Waste Water and Irrigated Agriculture: Lessons, knowledge transfer and possible
applications in Africa” by Frans Huibers, Associate Professor, Health and Environment
Irrigation and Water Engineering Group, Wageningen University, The Netherlands
Discussant: Ms. Bitrina Diyamett, National Coordinator, ATPS-Tanzania

12:00 - 13:00

Open Discussions

13:00 - 14:00

LUNCH

34

Session V
Chair: Dr. Osita Ogbu, Executive Director, ATPS
14:00 - 1420

“Nile Basin Capacity Building Network – Challenges and Achievements” by Dr.
Shreif Mohamedy, Deputy Manager, Nile Basin Capacity Building Network

14:20 - 15:00“A Survey of Indigenous Water Management and Coping Mechanisms in Africa:
Implications for knowledge and technology policy” by Prof. Femi Olokesusi,
Nigerian Institute for Social and Economic Research (NISER), Nigeria
Discussant: Mr. Benson Zwizwai, Deputy Director, IDS-Zimbabwe and National
Coordinator, ATPS-Zimbabwe Chapter

15:00 - 15:40

Open Discussions

15:40 - 16:20

Panel Discussion
Moderator: Prof. Oliver Saasa, ATPS Board Member
Panelists: Policymakers/Water Administrators from selected African Countries and
Key Resource People

16:20 - 16:50

Tea/Coffee break

16:50 - 17:20

Panel Discussion (cont’d)

17:20 - 17:40

Summary and the Way Forward
Summary by: Prof. M. C. Madukwe. Dr. Kevin Urama, Ms. Bitrina Diyamett and Dr. Arsene

Kouadio.

17:40 - 18:00

Closing Remarks from Dr. Osita Ogbu, Executive Director, ATPS
Closing Remarks from Prof. Norah Olembo, Chair, ATPS Board
Closing Remarks from Mr. Shiferaw Jarso, Minister of Water Resources,

Ethiopia GROUP SESSIONS

ATPS/EIIPD CONFERENCE AND WORKSHOPSCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, WATER AND ENVIRONMENT IN A FRICA

Wednesday, 1 December 2004
GROUP A - Water and Environment Proposals from Francophone
AfricaVenue tba
Chair: Prof. Lynn Mytelka
Resource Persons: Dr. Roch Mongbo, Dr. Benoit Kaboré, Dr. Sidiki Démbélé
08:30 – 09:15

La Problématique de la Gestion de la Mangrove en Côte d’Ivoire: Le Cas d’AssinieMafia by Mlle Maiga Mariame ; Mme Djédji Cathérine ; Mr. Anon N’Guessan

09:15 – 10:00

Développement d’un Procédé e Zone Humide Simulée Planté avec Amaranthaceae,
Capparidaceae, Tiliaceae pour le Traitement des Eaux Usées Domestiques by Dr.
Lacina Coulibaly

10:00 – 10:45

Toward Effective and Sustainable Water Management Policy in Cameroon by Dr.
Ngwa Alfred; Dr. Jane-F Akoachere; Dr. Bumah Violet and Dr. Ndeso Atanga

10:45 – 11:15

TEA/COFFEE BREAK

11:15 – 12:00

Gestion Intégrée des Ressources en eau du Bassin Versant du Bandama Cote d’Ivoire
by ATPS Cote d’Ivoire Team35

12:00 – 12:45[No Paper Assigned]

12:45 – 14:00

LUNCH BREAK

AFTERNOON FREEGROUP B - Water, Quality and the Environment
Venue tba
Chair: Prof. Norah Olembo, Chair, ATPS Board
Resource Persons: Dr. Kevin Urama
08:30 – 09:15

Impact of Water Catchments Degradation in Water Provision in Urban areas of
Tanzania by Dr.
Neema Ngware, Mr. Riziki Shemdoe, Ms. Bitrina Diyamett et al
09:15 – 10:00

Distribution and Bio-Availability Assessment of Heavy Metals in Sediments from
Lake Naivasha, Kenya by Dr. M. C. Moturi and Mr. F. L. Polong

10:00 – 10:45

Reducing Water Pollution in Lesotho by Deepa Pullanikkatil Sajith

10:45 – 11:15

TEA/COFFEE BREAK

11:15 – 12:00

Mining Effects on Water Quality and Yield of River Nyamwamba, Western Uganda byAbraham R. Mwesigye and Kaye Emmanuel

12:00 – 12:45[No Paper Assigned]

12:45 – 14:00

LUNCH BREAKGROUP SESSIONSCONT’D
ATPS/EIIPD CONFERENCE AND WORKSHOPSCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, WATER AND ENVIRONMENT IN A FRICA

Wednesday, 1 December 2004
GROUP C - Water, Policy and Institutional Management
Venue tba
Chair: Prof. Oliver Saasa, ATPS Board Member
Resource Persons: Dr. Joseph Obua
08:30 – 09:15

Using Information and Communication Technologies to Improve the Management
and Sustainability of the Densu River by Kwasi M. Setsoafia

09:15 – 10:00

Assessment of Rural Water Supply Management in Ibarapa Area of Oyo State ,Nigeria by Prof. A. S. Gbadegesin

10:00 – 10:45

Policy Gap Analysis: The Case of Community Water and Sanitation in Ghana by Rose
Mamaa Entsua-Mensah and Charlotte Engmann

10:45 – 11:15

TEA/COFFEE BREAK

11:15 – 12:00

Access to Fisheries and Issues of Sustainability and Collective Action in Ethiopia:
The Case of Lake Tana by Dejene Aredo and Sewmehon Demissie36

12:00 – 12:45

The Role of Institutions in Water Management in Nigeria by Prof. Michael Madukwe,
et al

12:45 – 14:00

LUNCH BREAK

AFTERNOON FREEGROUP D – Rainwater Harvesting and Technology Transfer
Venue tba
Chair: Dr. Osita Ogbu, Executive Director, ATPS
Resource Persons: Mr. Chris Squire, Prince R. I. Ihenacho
08:30 – 09:15

Comparative Performances & Environmental Impacts of Different Water Harvesting
Technologies in Ethiopia by Yusuf Kedir, Yilma Seleshi and Dejene Aredo

09:15 – 10:00

Socio-Economic Factors Influencing Rainwater Harvesting in Chingale Extension
Planning Area in Malawi by Dr. Julius Mangisoni

10:00 – 10:45

Ability and Willingness to Adopt Ecological Sanitation as a Water and Environmental
Conservation Technology: The Case for Peri-urban Communities in Kampala by James
Kakooza and Dave Khayangayanga

10:45 – 11:15

TEA/COFFEE BREAK

11:15 – 12:00

Small Scale Rainwater Harvesting for Combating Water Deprivation in Orphaned
Households in a Peri-urban area of Lilongwe City, central Malawi by Henry Raphael
Mloza-Banda

12:00 – 12:45

Understanding Gender roles in Technological Innovations and Practices for
Integrated Water Resource Management in Rural Settlements: A Case of Usambara
Highlands, Tanzania by Riziki S. Shemdow and Rukia Kitula

13:00 - 14:00

LUNCH BREAKOTHER SESSIONS
ATPS/EIIPD CONFERENCE AND WORKSHOPSCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, WATER AND ENVIRONMENT IIN A FRICA

Wednesday, 1 December 2004 (Afternoon Session)
Venue Main Auditorium, ILRI
Chair: TBA
Resource Persons: Dr. Kevin Urama, Prof. M. C. Madukwe, Mr. Magayu K. Magayu

14:00 - 15:30

Training Workshop

15:30 - 16:00

TEA/COFFEE BREAK

16:00 - 17:00

Training Workshop

37

APPENDIX 2: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
BENIN

6.
Mlle Maïga Mariame,
Sociologue-Rurale-Consultante
Université Cocody - Abidjan
IREEP
05 B. P. 1677 Abidjan 05
Cote d’Ivoire
Tel: 05-66—12-41
Email: mammaiga@yahoo.fr

1.
Dr. Roch L. Mongbo
Agronome, Socio Anthropologue
DESA/FSA
Université d’Abomey-Calavi
02 B. P. 778 Gbegamey
Cotonou, Bénin RepublicTél: (229) 30 4139/50 0158/ 96 6446
Fax: 229-360124
Email: rmongbo@intnet.bj

7.
Dr. Coulibaly Lacina
Université d’Abobo-Adjamé (U.A.A.)
UFR-Sciences et Gestion de l’Environnement
02 BP 801 Abidjan 02
Tel : 225-07-49-71-53
Email: lacina91@hotmail.com

BURKINA FASO
2.
Dr. Benoit Kabore
Université de Ouagadougou
01 BP 4487
Ouagadougou 01
Tel: 226 812008/380715
Email: kaboben@hotmail.com

8.
Mr. Kouame Yao Benoit
C/o Dr Arsène Konan Kouadio
Chief of Division
Research in Economics
Centre Ivoirien de Recherches
Economiques et Sociales (CIRES)
Cocody, Boulevard Latrille08 BP. 1295 ABIDJAN 08
Côte d’ivoire
Tel.: (225) 22 444 363 / 22448942
Email: kwagny@caramail.com

CAMEROON
3.
Mr. Sylvester Ndeso Atanga
Lecturer, Epidemology & Public HealthFaculty of Health Sciences
University of Buea
P.O. Box 63
South West Province
Republic of Cameroon
Telefax: +237 761 5755/9841433
Email: ndemasa2001@yahoo.com

E THIOPIA
9.
Mr. Kahssaye Kebede
Co-ordinator, SSI,
Ethiopia
P.O Box 2485
Tel: 091649045
Fax 525588
Email:Info@subsaharanOnformer.com

4.
Dr. Alfred Ngwa
c/o Dr. Sylvester Ndeso Atanga
Lecturer, Epidemology & Public HealthFaculty of Health Sciences
University of Buea
P.O. Box 63
South West Province
Republic of Cameroon
Tel: +237 332 22 72
Fax: 237 769 89 75

10.
Dr. Girma Taddese
Researcher
ILRI
P. O. Box 5689
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-463215
Fax: 251-1-461252
Email: g.taddesse@cgiar.org

COTE D’IVORE
5.
Dr. Arsène Konan Kouadio
Chief of Division
Research in Economics
Centre Ivoirien de Recherches
Economiques et Sociales (CIRES)
Cocody, Boulevard Latrille08 BP. 1295 ABIDJAN 08
Côte d’ivoire
Tel.: (225) 22 444 363 / 22448942
Fax: 22522440829
Email: arsenekk@yahoo.fr

11.
Workneh Negatu
Associate Professor
IDR/Addis Ababa University
P. O. Box 1176
Addis Ababa
Email: wnegatu@idr.aau.edu.et

38

12.
Dr. Tibbo Markos
Researcher
ILRI
P. O. Box 5689
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-463215
Fax: 251-1-461252
Email: m.tibbo@cgiar.org

Tel: 517345
Fax: 514550
Email: eyobjobt@yahoo.com
19.
Endalaman BayouStudent
Addis Ababa University
P. O. Box 1176
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-222269
Email: endalamanb@yahoo.com

13.
Mulugeta Teshome
Administrative & Social Affairs Team HeadSecretariat of House of People’s Representative
P. O. Box 80001
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-241000
Fax: 251-1-241004
Email: mulugetatesh@yahoo.com

20.
Ato Abraham Gebeyehu
Senior Officer
Development Bank of Ethiopia
P. O. Box 1900
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-9-666908/251-1-511188/314
Fax: 251-1- 511606
Email: abrehg@yahoo.com

14.
Dr. Alex Tindimubona
Senior Scientific Affairs Officer
UNECA
P. O. Box 3005
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-443540
Fax: 251-514416
Email: atindimubona@uneca.org

21.
Dr. Azage Tegegne
Animal Scientist
International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI)
P. O. Box 5689
Addis Ababa Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-463215
Fax: 251-1-461252
Email: a.tegegne@cgiar.org

15.
Ato Astatke Bayou
Agricultural Economist
Ministry of Finance
P. O. Box 1037
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-226659/533168

22.
Ato Birru DoriHead, Webbased Products,
International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI)
P. O. Box 5689
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-463215
Email: b.dorri@cgiar.org

16.
Dr. Bayou Techane
Assistant Professor
Addis Ababa University
P. O. Box 385
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-9-225075
Fax: 251-1-239480
Email: bayou_medi@yahoo.com

23.
Abebe Mekariaw
Department Head,
Ethiopian Science and Technology Communication
P. O. Box 2490
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-534947
Fax: 251-1-524400
Email: abebe-mekariaw@yahoo.com

17.
Dr. Don Peden
Senior Scientist
International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI)
P. O. Box 5689
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-460275
Fax: 251-1-461252
Email: d.peden@cgiar.org

24.
Tadesse Analeno
Deputy Head HRD
P.O Box 18529
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-531955
Fax: 251-1-533389
E-mail: eiipd@telecom.net.et18.
Eyob Tekaliga
3rd Secretary
MoFA
P. O. Box 391
Ethiopia

25.
Dessalegke Mef
Deputy Director General
Environmental Protection Authority (EPA)39

P. O. Box 32297
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-464607
Email: epo_ddg@telecom.net.et

Tel: 251-8-200899
Fax: 251-8-204279
Email: sewmehon@yahoo.co.uk
33.
Dr. Stephen Maxwell Donkor
Senior Regional Advisor
UNECA
P. O. Box 3001
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-443422
Fax: 251-1-514416
Email: donkor@un.org

26.
Demlew Aweke
Meteorologist
NMSA
P. O. Box 1090
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-615779
Fax: 625292/517066
27.
E. V. Jagannathan
Senior Water Resources Engineer
World Bank
P. O. Box 5515
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-176064
Email: ejagannatahn@worldbank.org

34.
Ato Girma Yoseph
Head, Agricultural and Environmental Protection
Department
Ethiopian Science and Technology Commission
P. O. Box 2490
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-534944
Fax: 251-1-524400
Email: estcagri@yahoo.com

28.
Fikadu Regaw
Journalist (Senior Reporter)
Media and Communications Center
P. O. Box 7023
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-42-15-19/40-76-13
Fax: 251-1-42-15-17
Email: fikaduregaw@yahoo.com

35.
Zerihum Woldu
Professor
Addis Ababa University
P. O. Box 3434
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-9-407255
Fax: 251-1-552350
Email: zerihunw@bio.aau.edu.et29.
Argaw Ashine
Environment Project Co-ordinator
PANOS-Ethiopia
P. O. BNox 17684
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-09-245528
Fax: 251-1-666361
Email: a_argaw@hotmail.com

36.
Yusuf Kedir
Researcher
EARO
P. O. Box 436 (Nazareth)
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-9-628489
Email: yuskedd@freemail.et30.
Gebremedhin Belay
Deputy Commissioner
Ethiopian Tourism Commission
P. O. Box 2183
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-516839

37.
Tassew Bekele
Consultant
P. O. Box 32629
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-9-627770
Email: Tassew@telecom.net.et31.
Gemechu Geleta
Project Coordinator
Ethiopian ICT Development Authority
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-537412
Email: gemechu_geletan@yahoo.com

38.
Dr. Tawfik Abdullahi
ParliamentarianTel: 251-09-200334
Fax: 251-1-721053
Email: pcclub@telecom.net.et32.
Sewmehon Demissie
Assistant Researcher
AMRS B/par Fisheries Research Center
P. O. Box 794
Ethiopia40

39.
Teferi Repassa
Associate Professor
Kotebe College of Teacher Education
P. O. Box 31248
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-452868
Fax: 251-1-600922

46.
Beyosen Getahed
E.N.A
Tel : 251-1-565221
47.
Abebaw Kassahan
Team Leader
Ethiopian Science and tech Comm.
P.O Box 2490
Ethiopia
Tel : 251-1- 511344
Fax : 251-1-524400
Email : abebawk@yahoo.com

40.
Tewolde Berhan Gebre Egziabher
Environmental Protection Authority
P. O. Box 12760
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-464606
Fax: 251-1-464882
Email: esid@telecom.net.et48.
Abdurahaman Ame
Researcher
DPMF
Ethiopia
Tel : 251-9-770860
P.O Box 5527
Email : aame@unga.org

41.
Tilahun Hordafa
Associate Researcher
Ethiopian Agricultural Research Organization
P. O. Box 2003 A. A
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-2-112186
Email: tilahun-hordofa@yahoo.com

49.
Asfaw Yimegnuhel
A/Manager
ILRI
P.O Box 5689
Ethiopia
Tel : 251-9-230109 / 619363
Fax : 251-1-338755
Email: a.yimegnuhel@cgiar.org

42.
Wakshum Wakwaya
General Manager
Biftu Dinsho
P. O. Box 12674
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Tel: 09202844
Fax: 527555

50.
Girme Haile
Assistant Resident Representative
UNDP
P.O Box 5580
Ethiopia
Tel : 251-1-515177
Fax : 251-1-515147
Email :girme.hailu@undp.org

43.
Workneh Ayalew
Research Officer
ILRI
P. O. Box 5689
Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-463215
Email: w.ayalew@cgiar.org

51.
Yemene Telefe
ReporterEthiopian Herald
Tel : 251-1-156755

44.
Yacob Arsano, PhD
Associate Professor
Addis Ababa University
P. O. Box 31375
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Tel: 251-1-293057
Fax: 251-1-552350
Email: yacob@psir.aau.edu.et45.
Girmay G/Kidan
Liaision officer
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Tel : 251092320
Fax : 251-1-533398
Website : www.eiipd.org

Ethiopian International Institute for Peace andDevelopment (EIIPD)
P. O. Box 18529
Tel: 251-1-531955
Fax: 251-1-533398
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Email: eiipd@telecom.net.et52.
Prof. Kinfe Abraham
Executive Director
EIIPD

41

53.
Getahan Abebe
Research, PR, Deputy Head
EIIPD

54.
Ato Hailemelekot Asfaw
Researcher, EIIPD
Email: hailemelekot2003@yahoo.com

63.
Dr. Rose Mamaa Entsua-Mensah
ATPS Ghana Chapter
STEPRI/ C.S.I.R.
P. O. Box CT 519
Accra, Ghana
Tel: 233-21-773856 Or 779401
Fax: 233-21-773068
Email: stepri@africaonline.com.gh

55.
Ato Girmay Gebrekidan
Liaison Officer, EIIPD
Tel: 251-09-682320
Fax: 533398
Website: www.eiipd.org

64.
Dr. Peggy Oti-Boateng
Director
University of Science and Technology
Kumasi, Ghana
Tel: 233 51 60296/7
Fax: 233 51 60137
Email: potiboat@yahoo.com

56.
Dawit Tefera
Librarian, EIIPD
Email: dawit_tefera@yahoo.com
57.
W/o Almoz Fesseho
Assistant Administrator
EIIPD
Email: eiipd@telecom.net.et

KENYA
65.
Mr. Magayu K. Magayu
Lecturer
University of Nairobi
P. O. Box 30197
Nairobi, Kenya
Tel : 254-721-233245
Fax :254-20-229168
Email : magayu@uonbi@ac.ke

58.
Ato Wondwosen Michago
Assistant Researcher, EIIPD
Tel: 251-9-733564
Email: wondpr@yahoo.com
59.
Patrick Gilkes
Advisor, EIIPD
Email: patrickgilkes@homechoice.co.uk

66.
Dr. M. C. Z. Moturi
Kenya Industrial Research and Development
Institute (KIRDI)
P. O. Box 30650-00100
Nairobi
Tel:254-20-609498/609440
Fax:254-20-5557738
Email: zuriels@yahoo.com

E GYPT60.
Dr. Sherif Mohamady El-Sayed
Deputy Manager
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network (NBCBN)
69th El-Manshia St – Fisal Street – GRA
Egypt
Tel: 202-2183450
Fax: 202-2183450
Email: s.el-sayed@nbcbn.com
Website: www.nbcbn.com

67.
Mr. Washington Okeyo
Consultant ICT Management
P.O. Box 20530, 00200
Nairobi, Kenya
Tel: 254 20 2729624
Cell: 0733-606219/0721666040
e-mail: washokeyo@yahoo.co.uk

GHANA
61.
Dr. George Owusu Essegbey
Senior Scientific Secretary
STEPRI/C.S.I.R.
P.O. Box CT 519,
Accra, Ghana
Tel: +233 21 773856
Fax: +233 21 773068
Email: goessegbey@hotmail.com

68.
Mr. Anthony M. K. Gachanja
Deputy Director
Kenya Water Institute
P. O. Box 60013
Nairobi, Kenya
Tel: 254-20-607425/33/43
Fax: 254-20-606718/606356
Email: kewi@insightkenya.com

62.
Mr. Kwasi M. Setsoafia
Head, Management Information System
Center for Scientific and International Research(CSIR)-AFFS
P. O. Box M 32
Accra, Ghana
Telephone: 233-27-742-9609
Fax: 233-21-779809
Email : msetsoafia@yahoo.com
42

LESOTHONIGERIA

69.
Prof. Zacharia A. Matsela
Retired Professor of Education
National University of Lesotho
P.O. Roma 180
LesothoTel: +266 340601
Fax: +266 340000
Email: care of Limakatso Ranko
fzamatsela@ilesotho.com

75.
Prof. Michael C. Madukwe
Professor, Department of Agricultural Extension
University of Nigeria
Nsukka, Enugu State
Nigeria
Tel: +234 42 771019
Fax: +234 42 771500
Email: natps@hyperia.com or
madukwe@hyperia.com

70.
Ms. Deepa Pullanikkatil
Civil Engineer
Lerotholi Polytechnic
P. O. Box 1519
LesothoTel: 266 63072665
Email: deepa_pullani@rediffmail.com

76.
Prof. A.S. Gbadegesin
Professor,
Department of Geography
Faculty of Social Sciences
University of Ibadan
Ibadan, Nigeria.
E-mail: adeniyig@yahoo.com
Telephone: (234)0802-387976
Email : adeniyig@yahoo.com

71.
Limpho Motanya
Deputy Director
Department of Water Affairs
P. O. Box 772
KINGDOM OF LESOTHO
Tel: 266 22312383/77 or 22317516
Fax: 266 22310437
Email: dwa@ilesotho.com

77.
Dr. Abel Babalola Ogunwale
Department of Agricultural Economics And
Extension
Faculty of Agricultural Sciences
Ladoke Akintola University Of Technology
P.M.B. 4000, OGBOMOSO, OYO STATE, NIGERIA
E-mail – abelogun@yahoo.com
Telephone – 2340803 5087445

MALI
72.
Dr. Sidiki Gabriel Dembélé
Agrochimie/Agroforesterie et Fertilité des sols
Bureau Ouest-Africain d’Appui Organisational etde Technologies Appropiées
B.P. E 3730, Bamako, Mali
Tél. : (223) 226 2559
Fax : 223 2262504
Email : sidikigabriel@hotmail.com

78.
Mr. Umar Aliyu
Raw Materials Research and Development Council(RMRDC)
Plot 427, Aguiyi-Ironsi Street
Maitama District
PMB 232, Garki
Abuja, Nigeria
Tel: 08033492842
Email: umlab@hotmail.com

MALAWI73.
Dr. Julius Mangisoni
Associate Professor of Agricultural Economics
University of Malawi,Malawi
P.O Box 219,Lilongwe
Tel (265) 277434/419
FaxL265) 277443
Email:jmangiosoni@yahoo.co.uk;mang@sdnp.org.mw

79.
Mr. Raymond Ihenacho
Raw Materials Research and Development Council(RMRDC)
Plot 427, Aguiyi-Ironsi Street
Maitama District
PMB 232, Garki
Abuja, Nigeria
Tel: 234-9-4137423
Fax: 234-9-4136034
Email: raynekky@yahoo.com

74.
Dr. Henry Mloza-Banda
Associate Professor of Academy
P. O. Box 219, Lilongwe
MalawiTel: 265-1-277-443
Fax: 265-1-277-364
Email: hrmlozabanda@sdnp.org.mw

SIERRA LEONE

4380.
Mr. Chris Squire
Head, Dept of Mechanical Engineering
University of Sierra Leone
c/o Computech, 22 Pultney St.
P.O. Box 603
Freetown, Sierra Leone
Tel: +232 22 227831

Fax: +232 22 227453
Email: chris@sierratel.sl

86.
Abraham R. Mwesigye
Lecturer, Faculty of Forestry and Nature
Conservation,
Makerere University
P. O Box 7062 Kampala, Uganda
Tel: 256-75-948377
Fax : 256-41-533574
mwesigye@forest.mak.ac.ug

81.
Mr. Mohamed A. Jalloh
Director,
NCTVA
P. O. Box 135, Tower Hill
Freetown, Sierra Leone
Tel : 232-22-221695
Fax : 232-22-221952
E-mail: nctva@sierratel.sl
kortorma@yahoo.fr
Website: www.nctva.org

87.
Mr. Charles Mulagwe
Engineer/Business Consultant
P.O.Box 1823
Plot 10 Lumumba Avenue
Kampala, Uganda
Tel: (256-41)273088
Cell:256-77 401769
E-mail: cmulagwe2001@yahoo.com
Fax: (256-41) 346118

TANZANIA
82.
Mrs. Bitrina D. Diyamett
Senior Scientific Officer
Tanzania Council for Science and Technology
P.O. Box 32183
Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
Tel: +007 222 700745
Fax: +007 222 775313
Email: bitrind@yahoo.com

ZIMBABWE88.
Mr. Benson Zwizwai
Deputy Director
Institute of Development Studies
P. O. Box 880
Harare, Zimbabwe
Tel: +263 4 333341/3
Fax: +263 4 333345
Email: bmzwizwai@science.uz.ac.zw

83.
Riziki S. Shemdoe (MSc)
Institute of Human Settlements Studies
University College of Land and Architectural
StudiesP. O. Box 35124
Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
Tel : 255 748295385
Fax : 255 22 2775448
Email : rizikis@yahoo.com
Website : www.uuas.ac.tz

BOARD M EMBERS
89.
Prof. Lynn K. Mytelka
Director
United Nations University/Institute of New
Technologies
Keizer Karelplein 19
6211 TC Maastricht
The Netherlands
Tel: 31433506300
Fax: 31433506399
Email: mytelka@intech.unu.edu

UGANDA84.
Dr. Joseph Obua
Faculty of Forestry & Nature Conservation
Makerere University
P.O. Box 7062
Kampala, Uganda
Tel: +256 41 543 647
Fax: +256 41 533 574
Email: obua@forest.mak.ac.ug

90.
Prof. Oliver Saasa
Research Professor
Institute of Economic and Social Research
P. O. Box 30900
Lusaka, Zambia
Tel: 260-1-295514
Fax: 260-1-295514
Email: oliver-saasa@premier-consult.com

85.
Dave Khayangayanga
C/o Kakooza James
Principal Investigator
Department of science and technical education
Makerere University
P.O BOX 937,
Kampala, Uganda
Tel: 256-77-489262
Fax : 256-41-530412
Email : dkhayangayanga@yahoo.co.uk

91.
Prof. Norah K. Olembo
Executive Director
African Biotechnology Stakeholders Forum(ABSF)
Tel:254-20-444 4558
Fax:254-20-444 8762
Email: absf@absfafrica.org
noraholembo@yahoo.com
44

92.
Prof. Joseph Massaquoi
Senior Programme Specialist
UNESCO Nairobi Office
P. O. Box 30592
NairobiKenya
Tel: 254-20-622619/20

97.
Dr. Osita Ogbu
Executive Director
Email: oogbu@atpsnet.org
98.
Sheila Maina
Research and Training Manager
Email: smaina@atpsnet.org
99.
Lily Aduke
Communications and Outreach Officer
Email: laduke@atpsnet.org

RESOURCE PERSONS
93.
Dr. Kevin C. Urama
Post-Doctoral Researcher
The Macaulay Institute
Craigiebuckler, Aberdeen
AB15 8QH, Scotland
United Kingdom
Tel: 44 122 4743912
Fax: 44 1224 743912
Email: k.urama@macaulay.ac.uk

100.
Caroline Thuku
Senior Secretary
Email: cthuku@atpsnet.org
101.
Carolyn Ochieng
Secretary Administrative Assistant
Email: cochieng@atpsnet.org

94.
Dr. Frans Huibers
Associate Professor
Wageningen University
P. O. Box Nieuwe Kanaal
6709 PA Wageningen
The Netherlands
Tel: 31-317-484267
Fax: 31-317-484759
Email: frans.huibers@wur.nl
Website: www.dow.wan.nl/iwe
95.
Chris Huggins
Research Fellow
African Center for Technology Studies (ACTS)
P. O. Box 45917,00100
Nairobi, Kenya
Tel: 254-02-524710
Fax: 514-02-52001
Email: chuggins@icraf.exch.cgiar.org
96.
PACT Ethiopia
P.O. Box 13180
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Tel: 61-48-00 Fax: 61-00-88
pact.eth.@telecom.net.et

SECRETARIAT
African Technology Policy Studies Network
3rd Floor, The Chancery, Valley Road
P.O. Box 10081-00100
Nairobi, Kenya
Tel: +254 20 271 4092/168/498
Fax: +254 20 271 4028
Email: info@atpsnet.org
Website: www.atpsnet.org

45