 Namaste and welcome back to the video course on Watershed Management. Today, we will start a new module, module number 5. So, the module title is Socioeconomic Aspects of Watershed Management. In this module, we will discuss social aspects of watershed management, community participation, private sector participation, institutional issues, socio-economic aspects, integrated developments, water legislation and implementation and some case studies. So, in today's lecture, lecture number 19, we will discuss mainly social and community aspects of watershed management. So, the topics covered in today's lecture include social aspects of watershed management, community participation, community based watershed management and institutional issues. Some of the key weights for today's lecture include social aspects, community participation and institutional issues. So, as we discussed earlier, so watershed management means, so we are say dealing with various aspects of the total aspects within the watershed including all resources, including say natural resource like a land, water, then minerals and then agricultural aspects. So, in all these things, so the human beings are very much involved, the people staying in that area is very much involved. So, that way, so watershed management is always a social issue. So, that way, when we discuss about the watershed management, say when we discuss what was, what were we were doing last, say few decodes, again a few decodes back and now presently what we are doing. Let us have a look into past and past traditional and current development approaches. So, what are the changes? So, these what was happened last that your 40 years, say for example, if you take various aspects like a development elements, traditional approach what was happening and current approach how it is. So, the purpose of watershed management, so now earlier it was say single purpose, either like soil conservation or just water harvesting or water management, but now the current approach will be, it is the approach is multiple as we discussed earlier. So, like social aspects will be there, so social purpose will be there, then economical purpose will be there, then environmental purpose will be there and of course, say soil and water conservation also will be there. And then new assessments and planning is concerned, say earlier say either states or central governments, the government level staff used to dictate terms that we will do this at particular location or particular watershed is concerned. But now say the recent change or the current approach is, so community or community based approach or community helps to identify the gap and select the priorities. So, that means say various issues what were the necessity of the community living in that particular watershed, so accordingly the various schemes are undertaken. And then earlier times the strategy is concerned, so the strategy was to increase production and conservation. So, like increase the agricultural production and then water conservation or soil conservation, but now the current approach what we can see is with the emphasis on livelihoods, poverty and sustainability. So, that is the current approach as far as watershed management is concerned. And then the approach is concerned say traditional approach was it was very much centralized top down planning with little input from community. So, the community were absolutely not involved in earlier traditional approach. So, from the top officials or the officials used to say decide what to do, where to do, how to do and all the design. But now the current approach is say we are looking for participatory approach that means according to the needs, according to the community participation, according to the people requirement only now we are going for watershed management. So, accordingly the community based focused like say to the women and poor communities are also involved nowadays as far as watershed management is concerned. And then as far as institutional aspects are concerned say the traditional approach was mainly from governments and the donor agencies say for example, if say like World Bank or Asian Development Bank or whichever who are the donor and then the states central or the district level government of authorities used to decide what to do, how to do and where to do as far as watershed management plans are concerned. But now the trend is say the generally most of the watershed management plans are developed and then implemented by non-government organizations, NGOs and then community based organizations and private and of course, with the government institutions involvement is always there. So, that was the that is the change what has happened or the current approach is like this. And then working size is concerned say the traditional approach say we used to go for large scale areas or like river basins or large scale area we used to deal in traditional approach. But now the current approach we look into small scale or small watershed or some watershed level and various schemes we are trying to implement as far as watershed management is concerned. And then as far as output is concerned the say always earlier traditional approach was to meet certain targets like this much water should be available or say the agriculture output to be improved in terms of quantities. So, that was the traditional approach. But current approach is say we are mainly say concentrating on sustainable developments, sustainability issues, qualitative aspects and then social achievements I mean total development of the area or total development of the watershed. So, that way only we are concentrating as far as the current approach in watershed management is concerned. So, that way we can see that this social aspects have become very very important in any of the watershed management plans. So, we have to see the needs of the people and then we have to take their say opinion in what way we have to do the planning and what way we have to implement. So, that the plans will be sustained and then also we will take the helps of the communities like a public participation in various implementation stages either in terms of monetary terms or as labor terms or whatever way possible implementation and maintenance. So, that the projects are very well sustained. So, that way the social aspect is very important say in all the watershed management plans either formulated by standard government, state governments or the even the panjaita level. So, that way now the trend has changed. So, now let us look into various social aspects of watershed management. So, as I mentioned earlier the main objective of any watershed management plan is social achievements and well-being of the inhabitants, but in a sustainable way. So, that the flora and fauna or the ecology is not affected. So, that is the main objective as far as any watershed management plan is concerned. So, watershed management generally consists of those coordinated human activities aimed at controlling enhancing or restoring watershed functions. As we have already seen in some of the previous lectures various functions, watershed functions or various hydrological processes we are considering in the watershed development plans or watershed management issues. So, that way we are trying to say have a coordinated human activities in controlling or enhancing or restoring. Then say most of the time we are looking for community based watershed management approach to water resource protection. So, that say all the people within the watersheds are getting the benefits. So, like individuals groups and institutions with a stake in management outcomes often called stakeholders, which we already discussed we have we had a long discussion about stakeholders participation in watershed management. So, all the stakeholders are trying to participate in planning stage or to identify the issues and then address the local issues that affect or are affected by the watershed functions. So, that way the development of the watershed management plans, the implementation of the watershed management plans and then the maintenance of that particular implemented plans. So, that way all the aspects of the watershed management plans include the social aspects or the either individual level, group level or the community level. So, that way the social aspects are concerned to watershed management and its contribution towards optimal utilization of natural resource thereby approving greater and sustainable benefits to man-gain. So, as I mentioned sustainability is a main issue in most of the watershed management plans. So, that way the sustainability we can achieve through the consideration of these social aspects and we can go for we can achieve the social upliftments of all the communities who are residing within that watershed including the ecological issues. So, that way say when we discuss about the watershed management plans. So, as we discussed earlier watershed management are the process of say it is the process of implementing land use practices and watershed management practices to protect and improve the quality of water and other natural resources within a watershed by managing the use of those lands and water resources in a comprehensive manner. So, as we discussed in the previous lectures this is not only water or lands, but we are considering all the aspects all the watershed functions what is there within that watershed. So, that way when we look into watershed management watershed management we have to look into various relationships between the people nature, lands and water. So, this is very important we have to see all the relationships between the people nature, lands and water. So, that way the aim of the watershed management is to bring about a balance between the natural resources on one hand and the society on the other. So, the society plays a major role it is not like earlier times some of the officials or the government are detecting this dam should be considered this location or these kinds of activities these kinds of conservation activities should be done at particular location. But now we have as far as watershed management plans are concerned we are looking for the say what are the society needs or what are the people needs. So, all the social aspects we are considering as far as the watershed management plans are concerned. So, social aspects when we consider. So, the sustainable development is the main issue. So, sustainable development of an area or a watershed then we have to see the economical aspects or economical prosperity of the society then the environmental issues or ecological issues and then of course, various political issues also may come within that watershed as far as the sustainable developments are concerned. So, that way the social aspects are very important as far as the sustainable developments of the particular area or particular watershed which we consider. So, that way to achieve the sustainability the socially acceptable economically and technically viable projects we have to see the multiple multidisciplinary approach. So, that social institution involvement of stakeholders with a holistic approach and then we have to see that capacity building for the various communities takes place with good science and smart planning. So, here the key words are it is a sustainable development as far as social aspects are concerned then we are going for holistic approach and then of the watershed management plan should be supported by with the good science and smart planning. So, that way we have to consider the various aspects of aspects as far as social issues and sustainable developments of the watershed. So, now when we look into social aspects of watershed developments say the question come why social aspects are important in ecosystem management. So, as we have seen the watershed management is concerned it is the interaction between the people nature and various resources within that area. So, then the question comes say as far as social aspects are concerned say of course, the question is related to the ecosystem management. So, principles of ecosystem management include statements about how humans and human values are integral ecosystem components suggesting that people cannot be separated from the nature. So, people is people of that particular area particular watershed are integral part of the nature. So, humans are fundamental influences on ecological patterns and processes and are in in 10 affected by them. So, there is always interaction between the humans the ecology and the nature. So, that way we cannot separate one from another. So, that way the social aspects are very important as far as watershed development is concerned. So, regardless of the role of scientific knowledge human values play a dominant role in ecosystem management goals. So, as you can see in this figure. So, if this represent this circle represent the ecology and if this is the economy and then society is coming together. So, that you can see that as far as ecology or the nature or the watershed and then economical improvement the upliftment or economical economy issues. So, obviously, there is always interaction between the society or the human residing that particular area. So, that way we cannot separate the social issues or social aspects as far as watershed management is concerned. So, now when we look into the social aspects of watershed development. So, we have to see in say when we are implementing certain projects or certain management plans as far as the particular watershed is concerned. So, we have to see the economical aspects. So, how much costs are involved and then what will be the benefits. So, that way most of the time to understand how the system is or how the watershed is working or how the system is behaving. We have to go for a cost benefits analysis and then say most of the time the community or the people how to share the cost since they are the main beneficiaries as far as the plans which we are implementing within the consent watershed even though there will be supports from the government or NGOs or other agencies. So, within this perspective say the watershed projects often distribute cost and benefits unevenly with the cost levied upstream typically among poorer users and the benefits hogged by residents in the residing and downstream usually the rich farmers. So, this is always happening since within a watershed especially in larger watersheds. So, upstream areas large number of say watershed management plans are implemented and the costs are levied upon the poor people staying in that area, but the benefits will be mainly repaid by the rich people may be on the downstream side of the watershed. So, individual must derive private tangible benefits from the watershed activities such as rising agricultural productivity, augmenting income, meeting, food security and controlling the land degradation. So, that way we have to consider a holistic approach. It is not only the people stay believing on the downstream end of the watershed, but upstream people also should get all the benefits from the various watershed activities like increase in production in agriculture, then say availability of water, meeting the food security, then employment generation and then ecological balance etcetera. So, then that way we are in as far as social aspects are concerned we always expect that private benefits must substantially exceed the expected private cost. So, if the people are spending money in as far as the various watershed schemes are concerned the benefits should be substantially achieved. Then appropriate arrangements be made to convert as much of collective benefits into tangible private benefits. So, say the collective benefits say as far as the total system is concerned that will be significant, but that also we have to see that private benefits also is tangible, otherwise people will not get motivated to do various watershed management plans. So, then we have to say deal in such a way that development needs developing need based the institutional arrangements. So, when the areas concerned it is not only simply implementing some projects or watershed management plans and we have to develop appropriate institutions like water user groups or say forest user groups or the income sharing groups for that particular watershed. So, if you check into many of the successful watershed management plans or for watershed successful projects we can see that wherever say such groups like your water user groups or forest management group or say income distribution groups and they are working together there only this most of the projects were successful. So, that way the it is not simply say developing some schemes and implementing it, but we have to we should have an institutional arrangements within that particular area. So, that the various issues related to like income generation then water usage or forest management or the various gracing for say the cattle all those issues can be sorted out. So, institutional development is also very important as far as the watershed development plans are concerned. So, that way we can see that when we have to say develop such schemes like water user groups or watershed development groups. So, we have to get all the people together and then we have to take their opinion and then implement the projects and then maintain it. So, that way the community participation is very important in most of the watershed management plans. So, the proponents of community based watershed management maintain that involving local stakeholders results in more locally relevant solutions that take into account each community is a unique social economic and environmental conditions and values. So, that way very important. So, as far as a particular watershed is concerned say whatever projects we are implementing it should be community based projects or community participation is very essential. So, according to the needs of the community we have to frame the projects and then implement it. So, that way as we discussed earlier stakeholders participation is thought to create a sense of local ownership of identified problems and then solutions then ensuring long term support for resulting management plans. So, we can see that say for example, if you are going to develop a check dam for a particular watershed. So, say once that check dam is constructed. So, it needs a lot of repair works and maintenance. So, this is only possible if the stakeholders are participating in its planning and then implementation and then maintenance. So, that the system is sustainable. So, that way as you can see here in this photograph say the those who are implementing agency the implementing agencies or the people who are organizing this they have to take the opinion of the people or community participation is very essential in any of the watershed management plans. So, when we discuss about the community based watershed management let us look into what are the important characteristics as far as the community based watershed management plans are concerned. So, we can see that there are changing say roles and relationships. So, as we have seen in the first slides say from the traditional approach now the current approach is say we have to say see the various needs of the people, various social issues, the community aspects all those things we have to consider. So, that way the important characteristics of community based watershed management is say there are changing roles and then the relationships are changing. So, that way as written here as local communities participate more actively in watershed management roles and relationships of resource managers. So, those who give money for these kinds of schemes like resource managers and stakeholders will change and community based watershed management recognizes that all stakeholders have a critical role to play in the management planning process. So, from the planning itself to implementation and maintenance the stakeholders have a critical role it is not only the donors who give the money or not only the government agencies, but local people should have good say in the development plans and then implementation. So, that the whole system perspective changes. So, the watershed management is not now a single strategy, but as we discussed it is a general approach to water resource protection that recognizes the interconnected of all the physical and biological components of the landscape including the human communities. So, that way we have to consider the various issues as far as the watershed management plans are concerned. And further so as I mentioned the whole system perspectives say the perspective changes. So, it is a holistic system we have to consider I mean as a whole system. So, the community based approach considers not only the physical characteristics of a watershed, but it also takes into account social and economic factors associated with watershed issues. The goal of community based watershed management is to protect and restore watershed functions while considering the variety of social and economic benefits of those functions. So, that way we have to see that various watershed functions are considered in an appropriate way and then the system is considered in a holistic way. So, that is another important characteristics as far as community based watershed management is concerned. Then also we have to integrate the scientific information and societal values. So, it is not only the technological aspects as far as watershed management is concerned, we have to see the societal needs also as far as the watershed management plans are concerned. So, that way watershed management decisions should be based on sound scientific information both in terms of identifying problems and selecting options for addressing those problems, but by considering the societal values. So, that is very important. So, whatever the traditions are there for the particular local communities, we have to see that their traditions are kept or the various values are kept the societal needs are kept within the plans or societal values are kept. So, these are all very important now within the changed perspective of the watershed management. So, now as we discuss the already the management style change. So, that means we have to adapt to the new style by considering the community involved and community participation, societal needs etcetera. So, the adaptive management styles in that we have to address the environmental, social and economic issues at the watershed scale. So, these issues are very complex and often high level of uncertainty regarding the outcomes of management decisions will be there. So, that way we have to study various plans and then only we have to go for implementations and then we have to see maybe the benefit cost analysis and then also say each problem we can have various scenarios or various ways we can approach those problems. So, we have to see that in a holistic way by considering the community perspectives or the societal needs, how we can do that. So, that way we have to deal with the watershed management plans. So, now let us look into what are the important challenges associated with the community based watershed management. So, we can see that now say compared to earlier times now various we have number of challenges as far as the community based watershed management is concerned. So, now watersheds may cover thousands of acres of public and privately owned lands. So, developing a basic understanding of how human activities affect watershed function is a major questions or a major undertaking. So, you can see that village level or a watershed level or a particular river basin level, you can see that there will be public lands owned by governments then private lands all those things will be there. So, the system is so complex. So, whatever the plans which we want to implement even though in public lands it may be somewhat easier, but private lands the stakeholders should agree for that. So, otherwise the scheme which we are developing cannot work. So, that way it is a big challenge to consider all the stakeholders including the government and all the agencies come together. So, that is a major challenge as far as community based watershed management is concerned. And then most of the time some key stakeholders may lack the interest, time, motivation, skills or resources to participate effectively throughout the management planning process. So, as I mentioned some of the areas will be belong to particular private owners. So, if you want to implement certain schemes like water harvesting or any of the schemes in their lands then they should get motivated and then they should be ready to implement it. So, that way it is a major challenge. And then another major challenge is resource management professionals may be reluctant to give up their role as experts. So, you can see that in now within the changing scenarios as we discussed in the first slide. So, now the resource managers, rollers are also changing. So, they may be thinking always they are the experts, but the reality is that we have to consider the community views. So, that way it is a challenge to share authority with the lay persons regarding resource management issues. So, you can see that when we are taking the opinion of different people, especially local people. So, they may have different opinions since their needs will be different, their perspective will be different. So, the resource managers or the experts may think always on their own terms or their own way. So, that may not be always appropriate. So, that is another major challenge as far as the community based watershed management plans are concerned. And then also there will be conflicts between stakeholders or management goals and the means to accomplishing these goals are inevitable and resource management professionals are often ill prepared to facilitate constructive dialogue to resolve these conflicts. So, when we discuss about the community based watershed management, there will be always conflicts will be taking place between the stakeholders or between the community with whom the resource managers or the the implementers the agencies have to say collaborate or come together. So, that is another change the another challenge. So, which we have to deal the various conflicts between the stakeholders and say as far as the resource managers are concerned they have to achieve certain goals, but the stakeholders or the community is concerned their needs will be different. So, lot of conflicts will be there. So, to sort out these conflicts that is another major challenge. And then community based approaches require time and resources to generate interest and to build relationships between stakeholders. So, when we are going to implement certain projects or certain schemes in a particular watershed there should be good relationship between the stakeholders or between the people and those who are going to to implement or the resource managers or resource people. So, that when say time is required and even the local language should be known local culture should be known those who are going to implement this scheme the the various schemes. So, that way and this is these things are also major challenges as far as community based watershed management is concerned. And then funding agencies and stakeholders may grow impatient with a lack of observable outcomes. So, this is another issue. So, those who are funding say like if you consider World Bank or the Asian Development Bank or other agencies who are funding various projects. So, they want to see the outcome on a time based manner, but when we are when we have to take the opinions of the communities or the local people stakeholders and then we have to take their views in planning and management and implementation. So, then of course, there will be say it will be taking more time and then the funding agencies say may become impatient since there are no observable outcomes. So, these are all some of the important issues which we have to consider when we deal with community based watershed management. So, now as I mentioned say last few decades there is a change in paradigms. So, say the total system is changing as far as watershed management is concerned. So, earlier it was a traditional system say top to bottom or the government brings certain projects and try to implement, but now the system is totally changing. Most of the time now we are looking for community based system with the community participation and the stakeholders participation. So, that way so if you look into rural development or the watershed development or the past 20 years we can see that there are markable changes or shifts from the intervention based method to an approach promoting rural peoples involvement in their own development. So, that more attention should be paid to the peoples requirements problems on the ground could be better understood and groups conscientious could be help to improve their situation. So, that way the social aspects the societal needs or the community participation are considered. So, there is a paradigm change say within the last 2-3 decades. So, like say if earlier it was direct intervention method now it is participatory methods. So, like a technology based approach was there earlier, but now the most of the watershed management plans are multi-faceted approach. Then say earlier there was we used to have preparation of directive and now it is not the directives from the higher officials or officials, but all players are there as far as the schemes are consensed. Then transmission of directives saying it was simply by order by sending a paper this is what is going to be done like that, but now the system is changing we have to listen to local people say we have to see their opinion. And then say subsidy allocation say that was generally used by the district level state level or standard level governments, but now say we have to look into appropriate solutions. And then earlier direct intervention method we used to conduct the conduct of management staff that means particular staff will be there to conduct their various projects as far as watershed management is consensed, but now in the participatory methods we are looking for an environment of the local participants. So, local participants have a good say in the development plans and then the implementation and the maintenance. So, that way so the public participation we have to ensure in all the watershed management plans so that we can achieve sustainability, equity and participation. So, these are the three basic elements in the participatory watershed management. So, sustainability, equity and participation. So, we have to see that this is the plans which we are implementing are ecologically or environmentally sustainable. Then equity should be there whatever say it is not only the downstream rich farmers are getting the benefits, but it should be equitable distribution of the income generated within the watershed. Then say all the people should participate in various aspects of the projects or the plans. So, the sustainability involves conservation and enhancement of the primary productivity of the ecosystem and the main components of which are land, water and biomass. So, we have to see the sustainability issues of land, water and biomass. And as far as equity is concerned we have to see that equity has to be seen in terms of creating an equitable access to livelihood resources say for the watershed community. So, people should all the people should get a job income generation then sufficient sufficiency in water availability and then also say then the needs of the their cattle or needs of the agriculture needs all this should be met. Then as far as participatory watershed management is concerned attempts are there to ensure sustainability of the ecological, economic and society social change exchanges taking place in the watershed territory. So, this is what we are looking for. So, that way the participatory watershed management includes natural resource exchange which is the conventional watershed management and the participatory watershed management additionally considers the various economical aspects, political aspects and the cultural exchanges. So, that way we have to see the holistic system within the watershed including the economic achievements then the political issues and then the various traditions and cultural activities of the people. So, that way now the we are we have to implement the participatory watershed management projects. Finally, say as we discussed the community participation is very essential. So, we have to see how how much the community can get involved within the from the beginning itself and then throughout the implementation and the maintenance of the the system considered. So, in real terms community participation means it can be voluntary sharing by users group their time energy and money on programs and adopt the recommended measures and practices on a sustained basis. So, as far as community participation is concerned it can be in terms of their their efforts or their time and energy and there or they can also contribute in terms of money to to start the projects and then implement the projects. And that way the people participation is critical for the success of the watershed program because the sum of individual choices has collective consequences on management of natural resources. So, that way we have to see the community participation. So, in community participation people act collectively and influence the outcomes. So, the people are coming together either say at the part at the planning stage itself and then in terms of say either voluntary say labor or say their time energy and money is concerned. So, for success of this type of participation generally three aspects are critical. Number one is the ability of members to participate as a community or to have a collective voice. Then second one is decision made jointly by the community and implementing organizations and then communities bearing a share of course. So, that way when we are looking to various schemes say say we can see that whether the donors or the government say maybe 70 percent their resources are coming from the government or other agencies then 30 percent can be taken by the local people who are getting the benefits or 50 50. So, like that the according to the the the economic capacity of the people or according to the availability of resources we can have plans for the particular watershed. So, finally, we can see that the public participation is very important. So, some of the conditions for facilitating people participation include making people aware about potentials benefits of collective action in conserving and managing natural resources. So, we can see that say as far as watershed is concerned it is a large area. So, instead of one person doing a particular thing, but if the people can collectively come together. So, that like if you are constructing a check dam or if you are going for water harvesting measures if the things are done collectively then there will be in say the output will be much much better. So, the potential benefits will be much better and then demand driven activities in the watershed program. So, what are what are the important needs of the people. So, accordingly we can have the plans made. So, what is urgent need first first one what is needed then second one like that we can put the plans. Then, empowering people in planning implementing and managing the watershed programs then sufficient private economic benefits to create incentives for participation. So, the people say they will see that what are the benefits coming to them. So, individually also or individual family wise also. So, that way only then the people will be motivated to actively participate. So, that way we have to see. So, that way collective action can be defined as the pursuit of a goal or a set of goals by more than one actor. So, it is not only say individual system, but a collective system or collective the community participation and the donors and the various government agencies all of them should come together. So, finally, but what is happening should be empowering the community. So, when people are empowered to take decisions and execute the activities they own the program. So, they have the feeling of yes this project is my project or our project. So, that way when they have the ownership feeling. So, they will do the best thing for that project and then they will try to maintain it also properly. So, they run the watershed activities according to the local social and cultural system. So, that way the system will be maintained on for long time and the system the total benefits will be much much better say compared to the earlier traditional based system. So, that way when we look into various say watershed management development plans say for example, India's Consent. So, as far as public participation or community participation we can see that say 40 years back in 1970s. So, as I mentioned earlier it was traditional systems where the government agencies implement certain projects say the officials comes and then they make the plans and then they implement and then they leave it for the community. So, that way the mainly the water conservation or soil conservation that were that were the major objectives in 1970s. So, that way we can see that many of these projects if we assess we can see that they were not so successful. Then 1980s socio-economic aspects also came into picture. So, that way with water conservation the social aspects economic aspects also were considered. So, that way we can see that some improvement in project success. Then in 1990s socio-economic water conservation and then also people participation also started. So, many of the successful projects we can see that what were implemented in 1990s with the people participation community involvement they were very successful. And now say in 2000s or the last few years we can see that even government agencies are themselves say stipulating that public participation is very essential and community involvement should be there. So, public participation planning in planning and design and implementation and the maintenance. So, that way we can see that when we analyze many of these projects. So, these projects are all in success. So, since the particular communities were very much involved in the schemes. So, now say as I mentioned when the particular watershed management plans are undertaken and then implementation starts. So, we have to develop a particular say suitable institutional mechanism for the say development plans, implementation and maintenance. So, institutional development is also very important. So, nowadays most of the NGOs or government agencies are also looking into these aspects. So, institutional development or institutional building. So, the role of institution is to develop rules for planning and managing watershed activities sharing costs and benefits and then also many times there will be disputes between the stakeholders. So, dispute resolution also. So, this is the way say to deal with all these issues we have to develop a suitable institution within the watershed like it can be watershed users group or water users group or forest management group various institutions we have to build. So, that way nowadays NGOs and various government agencies are taking care of these kinds of institutional issues also. So, the institution building process involves generation of self-renewing capability in the organization and also ability to align missions and goals with the emerging changes in the environment without losing basic ethics and spirits. So, that way we have to plan to develop the institutional mechanism within the watershed and then most of the time we have to see that there is a democratically elected bodies are there with for the management of the various resources within the watershed and then there should be also elections or that kind of process should be also take should take place. So, that way we have to develop the institutional institution for that particular watershed. So, some of the key factors that facilitate development of socially institutions in the context of watershed. So, first one is capacity building then second one is an assured flow of funds to the projects then cost sharing has to be real. So, if a suitable institutional mechanism has been developed for the particular watershed area. So, that institutional mechanism can look into capacity building. So, how to say generate funds or how to implement particular projects then also the particular institution mechanism can look into generate funds and then the how we can share the course and then also how the benefits can be shared. So, all those issues we can look into once suitable institutional mechanism mechanisms have been developed for that particular watershed. So, the institutional issues like a contribution of voluntary labour does not necessarily create a feeling of ownership of the assets created for land and water development. So, if a suitable institutional mechanisms are not developed. So, simply ask the people to give their labour or give their the money that may not work. So, strongly dedicated and committed leaderships are required for the particular watershed to implement the suitable projects. Then a shared perception of benefits by all group members should be there. So, as I mentioned a democratically elected members who are controlling say either annual basis or 3 years terms or 5 years terms. So, that way it will be possible. So, some of the important factors that impute the process of institution building in the watershed programs include unreasonable quotas and targets. So, we have to see that only reasonably we have to put our targets and lack of self relays. So, most of the time the consent agencies have to give training in development such institutions and then maintaining then lack of transparency. So, as you can see that most of time correction is a major issues since say the money is not utilized properly and then all those issues have to be seen carefully. So, that way suitable institutional mechanisms is required and then failure to mobilize local resources. So, if locally based groups are not formed then local resources also cannot be mobilized. So, that way institutional development is very much essential and that way we have to see the institutional issues. So, that way when we look into the community based or social issues aspects of watershed management. So, from the planning stage we start and then say till the implementation stage it should go. So, the natural resource or the particular resources within the watershed. So, including the natural resource mapping either using the modern techniques or through surveys we have to get the help of the local people. Then the social mapping also we have to see the social pattern within the watershed and this also we need the community participation and then all these things we can do through village volunteers or if you form the institutional mechanism for the watershed we can use their help and then we can call the meeting of either the users group or the people within the watershed. So, participatory appraisal can be done and then we can prioritize various schemes, various options within the consent of the people and then say the implementation stage itself you can see that people say local people can give their helps in terms of labor or money and then the projects can be implemented and then further say it can be maintained. So, that way we have to develop the system. Let us go through a case study. So, case study is Sukho Manjiri watershed model which was developed in 1970s and 80s in Haryana. So, from the mid 1970s onwards government of India Haryana Forest Department and central soil and water conservation research and training institutes with the support from donors like a Ford Foundation were involved in undertaking soil and water conservation activities in Sukho Manjiri village in Haryana. So, initially as you can see that the traditional systems were there. So, check dams were constructed to arrest the movement of silt from the catchment areas and then the water availability is increased. So, however, say you can see that due to the lack of community participation and the people involvement. So, when villagers disturb the check dams and then continue to open grace cattle in forest areas. So, that way the project was not successful what was done in 1970s. So, then the implementers of the various agencies came together and then they initiated dialogue with the local communities. So, that way a comprehensive dialogue was initiated with the people. So, discussions revealed that inadequate irrigation facilities caused further scarcity in that region and then resulting in villages would choosing for open grazing. So, that were the major issues as far as the watershed is concerned. So, that way simply construction of a of check dams were not working for the area. So, that way then the various agencies sat together with the local people and then further constructed two more earthen check dams and further in 1978 and further two more in subsequent years. But then their total approach changed it was not simply for water conservation or soil conservation, but as you can see that the various usage groups were formed for the particular watershed. So, say with respect to availability of water from the earthen dams. So, the according to the needs of the people say the water were distributed for either family basis within the watershed and then. So, that say the increase in fodder production from private lands and public lands took place and then various committees were formed for including the forest management, grazing and water sharing and the benefit sharing. So, that way reduction in grazing of livestock in state forest happens then increase in production of cattle dam used as cooking fuel. So, it is not only water issues, but energy needs also were taken care and then reduction in browsing of saplings in forest area that were also so after all the schemes were implemented with the community participation and reduction fuel would collection due to usage of cattle for cooking fuel. And finally, what was observed say in 1980s regeneration of forest catchment took place and say the total resources were shared by the people and then various usage group were formed and benefits also were shared by the people. So, some of the important features of this case study is the institutional contracts that characterized formation of community organizations were formed. So, water user associations I mentioned were constituted for the watershed then landless households were given a share of water from dams and attempts were made to institute a system of tradable water shares to so that a landless household could sell their shares of water to other households. So, that way they can also end some money. So, then profits from the sale of water from dams and then production of fiber and fodder grasses could be used for community development activities. So, it is say by all these activities the funds generated were used for construction of village roads, repair of school buildings or a construction of rest areas for laborers. So, all those issues all the social issues were dealt appropriately with the community participation. So, that way these studies conducted in 1990s showed that finally, the efforts were successful it was become a successful watershed management plan. So, the case study shows that the forest department has to facilitate annual election of the managing committee. So, water user groups and membership issues were tackled especially in cases where not all members in a village could benefit from water supply from dams. At least a third of positions in the managing committee are to be reserved for women. Every woman in the household was ended till to membership and distinct from a membership of the male head of household in the general body of the Heal Resource Management Societies. Then profits from this the sale of water from earthen dams constructed in areas under joint marine forest where to be shared between the Haryana forest departments and the Heal Resource Management Societies. So, that way the economical capability of the people and the community have been improved and then the project has become a total success. So, some of the important outcome from the this study the dams provided supplemental irrigation to weed crops and thus helped to increase agricultural productivity in the Rabi season. Then further production of weed straw increase farmers disposable income by enabling them to reduce their fodder grass purchase purchases from external sources. The improved supply of weed straws fodder also led to an increase in cattle dam which was used as a cooking fuel and thus lessened the pressure on the state forest for fuel goods. And then success with the participative watershed management led the forest department to expand the mandate of the joint forest management program as such in Shivalik Hills and the K-Study area. So, some of the important lessons learned from this K-Study's involved watershed management is more than just the cost benefit analysis of investments. The main distinction between watershed development and the other traditional developmental programs is that the former is essentially a community based one and raising awareness of the people rolling the watershed approach and strengthening the capabilities of local organizations and decentralization of decision making by all players concerns including those outside of watershed areas and promoting dialogue partnership and alliances among players so the total involvement of the community. So, that way this K-Study we can analyze the community based developments on watershed management plans are very important for the success of the plans. So, some of the important references used in today's lecture are given here and before closing the some of the tutorial questions how community participation can be used to make appropriate watershed management plans and implementations discuss the possible levels of community participation watershed management plans how the watershed usage group can be can help in overall sustainment development and management of watershed. So, these questions you can answer by going through today's lecture and some few self-evaluation questions differentiate between past traditional and current watershed development approach plans discuss social aspects of watershed management within the perspectives of sustainable developments what are the important characteristics of community based watershed management differentiate between direct intervention methods and participatory methods in watershed management and further few assignment questions illustrates important social aspects in watershed management how community participation can help in better watershed development plans and implementations what are the challenges associated with community based watershed management illustrates watershed development outlook in India for the last five decades and its success what are the important institution issues in watershed management. So, most of these questions you can easily answer by going through the lecture and as a final the unsolved problem study the various social issues in your watershed area develop an appropriate plan the social issues such as poverty lack of employment lack of education to children in your study area study how the community participation can help better watershed management in your study area develop appropriate plans for community involvement in sustainable developments and watershed management study the role of watershed users group in your study area. So, this you can easily chalk out by going through some of the literature and today's lectures. So, with this today's lecture is over. So, we will discuss further the socio economical aspects as far as social issues of watershed management plans in the next lecture. Thank you.