See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/334031571

Water allocation assessment in semi-arid region under data scarce conditions: a

study of Kano basin

Article · May 2019

CITATIONS READS

0 54

5 authors, including:

Mahadi Lawan Yakubu Amina Sallau Aliyu

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia 2 PUBLICATIONS 2 CITATIONS
8 PUBLICATIONS 14 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Ali Sani Maihula

Kano University of Science & Technology
5 PUBLICATIONS 3 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

pollutants transport in arid environment View project

Assessment of Dam Storage Capacities View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ali Sani Maihula on 26 June 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Journal of Latest Transactions in Engineering And Science (IJLTES)

Water allocation assessment in semi-arid

region under data scarce conditions: a study
of Kano basin
Muhammad Tajuri Ahmad1, Mahadi Lawan Yakubu2 , Najiyu Abubakar3 , Amina
Sallau Aliyu4 , Ali Sani Maihula5
1,2,3,4,5
Department of Civil Engineering
Kano University of Science and Technology, Wudil, Kano, Nigeria

Abstract- Growing population and demand for food and competition between different water users increase pressure on
water resources especially in semi-arid of developing countries like Northern Nigeria. In addition, water resources
management is complicated due to global warming and other regional economic and environmental problems. Improving
how water is allocated to urban and agricultural schemes is considered a vital issue for addressing the pressure on water
resources. This paper explores the use of Monte Carlo simulation in water management and its possible application in
water allocation problem in Kano basin, which in turn can provide a sound basis for water (re)allocating policies.
Streamflow allocations in each period to KCWS and KRIP was established. This is an on-going research, further work
will constitute generating probability values using central limit theorem which is going to be used in the model using
spreadsheet or MATLAB consider each of the allocations as random variables for KRIP and KCWS respectively.
Keywords –Water allocation, Monte Carlo, Kano River basin, water resources management, semi-arid regions

I. INTRODUCTION
In most developing sub-Sahara African countries, including Nigeria, the intensifying effect of population growth,
economic development and climate change contributes to the increasing pressure on the already threatened and
scarce water resources exacerbating the already tenuous problem of inter-sectoral water competition. These factors
limit the availability of water for food production and threaten food security in many developing countries (FAO
2017) and contribute to absolute water scarcity which affects the majority of the population. Furthermore, climate
change impact affects the availability and quality of both surface and groundwater, and affect agricultural
production and associated ecosystems (Faramarzi et al., 2013; Hall et al., 2017; IPCC, 2014; Kifle Arsiso et al.,
2017; Niang et al., 2014). Improving water allocation to urban and agricultural schemes through is considered a vital
issue for addressing the pressure on water resources.
Allocation of water resources in river basins is one of the critical issues. Water allocation should consider three key
principles: equity, efficiency and sustainability (Haie and Keller, 2014; UNESCAP, 2000 cited in Wang et al. 2008).
Thus, an integrated analysis at the watershed-scale would be valuable, where individual water related sectors
(stakeholders), such as agricultural, municipal, and industrial water supply are brought together in a framework
(Bangash et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2008). Water allocation is based on some factors ranging from historical,
institutional, legal, political and social conditions (Bangash et al., 2012). Disagreements arise many times due to
different competing water users for a limited resource, for sustainability this can be solve through reforming
institutions and methodologies responsible for water allocation particularly in places with water shortages.
Stakeholders play significant role in reallocating water properly based water rights, through water market or
regulated water transfers (Wang et al., 2008). For effective water resources management of a river basin, methods of
modelling and analysis for assessing the capability of the system are crucial (Wurbs, 2005). Bangash et al., 2012
state that ‘[……..]Integrated strategic scale resource management models should be capable of reproducing the
physical behaviour of the system, with a realistic representation of the different surface and groundwater resources,
including their interaction, and the spatial and temporal variability of resource availability’.
Many mathematical models have been developed in order to assess water resources management especially water
allocation. Most of the water allocation simulation models are based on mass balance principles and use a network
linear program with user-defined priorities to allocate resources in a river system like MODSIM-DSS (Fredericks et
al., 1998), MIKEBASIN (DHI, 2006), WEAP (Yates et al., 2005; McCartney and Arranz, 2007), WRAP (Wurbs,
2015), HEBRM-MOPEC (Britz et al., 2013) and REALM (Perera et al., 2005).
Wurbs (2005) develop and use a generalised modelling system called Water Rights Analysis Package (WRAP) that
asses the availability and reliability of water resources in the State of Texas. Reservoir/river system management and
water allocation are simulated using past hydrological data. One of the advantage of WRAP is that it simulates

Volume 6 Issue 4 May 2019 021 ISSN:2321-0605

 International Journal of Latest Transactions in Engineering And Science (IJLTES)

management of the water resources of a river basin or multiple-basin region under a ‘’priority-based’’ water
allocation system as well as evaluating water availability for new and existing requirements. The model can be use
in any river/reservoir/use system, with input files being developed for the particular river basin of concern.
However, the model will best be use when there are sufficient data.
In order to achieve sustainable water resources management in a data scarce low-flow river watershed, Bangash et
al. (2012) investigate the use of hydrological modelling software for efficient use and allocation of water to different
sectors in order to propose tools that could be used to support decision-making complying with European Union
Water Framework Directive (EUWFD). Bangash et al. (2012) describe MIKE BASIN as a mathematical
representation of the river basin, including the configuration of the main rivers and their tributaries, the hydrology of
the basin in space and time, and existing as well as potential major water use schemes and their various demands for
water. It portrays a better model to be use in this study. MIKE BASIN is an integrated water resource management
and planning computer model that integrates GIS with water resource modelling (DHI, 2006). However, there are
certain limitations such as the inability to simulate erosion and sediment transport and the model comes as a
commercial package. Doulgeris et al. (2015) analysed the effect of water deficit on crop yield and net profit for
some periods in the irrigation module of the MIKE BASIN model. Chang et al. (2016) proposed intelligent water
resources allocation strategies for multiple users through hybrid artificial intelligence techniques implemented for
reservoir operation optimization and water shortage rate estimation. In another effort, Wang et al. (2008) developed
Cooperative Water Allocation Model (CWAM) and applied it on the South Saskatchewan River Basin. It comprises
of initial water rights allocation and subsequent reallocation based on economic net benefits.
Britz et al. (2013) propose a new solution format for Hydro-economic river basin models (HERBM) based on
Multiple Optimization Problems with Equilibrium Constants (MOPEC) that allows solving simultaneously problems
involving numerous water users that maximize each an independent objective function (further called ‘independent
optimization’ IO) while their resource use is still interrelated. The location of a firm in the water distribution
network can be seen as one example of asymmetric access to resources (Britz et al., 2007). In addition, Hassanzadeh
et al. (2014) developed an integrated water resources management model for Saskatchewan called SWAMP1.0 that
includes irrigation demand, and economic evaluation sub-models, and has the capability to investigate alternative
environmental flow conditions that can be used in practice by decision makers.
In the Nigerian context, Barbier (2003) modelled the economic and hydrological impacts of upstream water
diversion on downstream floodplain activities of the Hadejia-Jama’are River Basin, northern Nigeria. Ezenwaji et al.
(2014) employed the linear programming modelling technique to optimise the allocation of water produced daily by
the State Water Corporation and supplied to the four sectors of the town. This paper explores the use of Monte Carlo
simulation in water management and its possible application in water allocation problem in Kano River basin, which
in turn can provide a sound basis for water (re)allocating policies.

II. METHODOLOGY
2.1 Description of the study area and key issues
The Kano river basin is located in northern part of Nigeria (Figure 1). It is a sub-catchment of the Hadejia River
which eventually terminates in Lake Chad, an important transboundary basin in West Africa shared with
Chad, Cameroon, Niger, and Nigeria. Kano River is being drained by Rivers Kano and Challawa, and their
tributaries – Watari, ‘Yarkuto, Tatsawarki, and Salanta (Bichi and Anyata, 1999). A brief description of the study
area and key issues is presented below.

Figure 1 Kano River basin showing the main water users (KRIP and KCWS)

Volume 6 Issue 4 May 2019 022 ISSN:2321-0605

 International Journal of Latest Transactions in Engineering And Science (IJLTES)

The climate is semi-arid. The precipitation exhibits large spatial and temporal variability. The mean annual
precipitation is about 898 mm, and maximum and minimum values are 1872 mm and 419.6 mm respectively.
Temporal trends show that most of the total precipitation falls within the five months (May-September) with August
having the highest amount, whereas November-March form the dry periods (Mohammed et al., 2015). Evaporation
demand is generally higher than precipitation. The mean annual temperature ranges from 26°C to 32°C, with the
high diurnal temperature ranges of 13.1°C and relative humidity of 17%-90%. Temperatures are highest in the late
dry season in April and May with mean daily minimum temperatures of 24°C and an average daily maximum of
38°C. The coldest month is January with mean daily minimum temperatures of 13°C and an average daily maximum
of 30°C. Evaporation is in the range of 3,500 mm to 4,500 mm per year.
Kano River basin supports an estimated population of over 3 million people, most of whom rely directly on this
water for their domestic supplies and livelihoods through irrigated farming, fishing, and livestock herding,
transportation and industrial activities. The Kano River is regulated by Tiga dam (the largest dam in the basin),
having a designed storage capacity of about 1,429 Mm³ (and live storage capacity of about 1,283 Mm³), is a multi-
purpose dam aimed for providing irrigation water to about 22,000 hectares (ha) in the Kano River Irrigation Project
(KRIP) besides the other objectives of Kano City Water Supply (KCWS) and other downstream users. Tiga dam
serves the KRIP via the Ruwan Kanya Reservoir downstream of the main canal from Tiga Dam and provides raw
water for Kano City. Rainfall is the primary source of aquifer recharge, i.e., the groundwater is recharged mainly
from the runoff water contributed by the river. There is, however, very little information on the extent of
groundwater recharge and the area covered.

2.2. Data collection

The water systems under analysis comprised of subsystems that serve the purposes of agricultural, environmental
and urban water supply. Basic data collected include hydrological and hydraulic data, existing water allocation
practices and water demand, uses and consumption patterns. Data was collected from previous project documents,
published peer-reviewed papers, interviews with stakeholders, plausible reasoning and calculations. The data for
KCWS (both raw and treated water) for 2014 to 2016 was obtained from planning, research and statistics division of
Kano state water board (KNSWB). CROPWAT 8.0 was used to estimate the crop water requirement of KRIP and
instream flows requirement was assumed. Below are some of the data shown in Table 1.
Table 1 Dry season low in Kano River basin
Flow Q (Mm3/s)
Total releases from Tiga reservoir 835.70
Irrigation water requirement in KRIP 206
Kano city water demand 108
In-stream water requirement for Kano River 50

2.3 Monte Carlo Simulation

Monte Carlo simulation was used in this paper. Consider the water allocation problem in Kano River basin
involving two principal water users; KCWS and KRIP, each of which receives a benefit, Bi(xit), from the amount of
water, xit, allocated to it in each period t. The flows, Qit, at each diversion site i are the random flows Qt less the
upstream withdrawals, if any. This situation is shown in Figure 4 for Kano River basin. Monte Carlo simulation can
be used to find the probability distribution of the benefits to each user associated with the user’s allocation policy.

Volume 6 Issue 4 May 2019 023 ISSN:2321-0605

 International Journal of Latest Transactions in Engineering And Science (IJLTES)

Qt X1t

Q1t

Q2t

X2t

Figure 2 Streamflow allocations in each period t result in benefits, Bi(xit), to each firm i

Suppose the policy is to keep the first 50 units of flow in the stream, to allocate the next 75 units to KNSWB for
treatment and distribution to KCWS, and the next 50 units to KRIP. The remaining flow is to be allocated to each of
the two users equally up to the limits desired by each user, namely 110 and 210 respectively. Any excess flow will
remain in the stream up to the limit of 250 units. Thereafter, the remaining flow to allocate to the users equally.
A simulation model can be created. In each of a series of discrete time periods t, the flows Qt are drawn from a
probability distribution. Once this flow is determined, each successive allocation, xit, is computed. Once an
allocation is made it is subtracted from the streamflow and the next allocation is made on the basis of that reduced
streamflow, in accordance with the allocation policy defined above (its graphical representation is presented in the
results section). After numerous time steps, the probability distributions of the allocations to each of the users can be
defined. Figure 5 shows a flow chart for this simulation model. Having defined the probability distribution of the
allocations, based on the allocation policy, one can consider each of the allocations as random variables, X1 and X2
for KRIP and KCWS respectively.

Figure 3 Monte Carlo simulation to determine probability distributions of allocations to each of three water users, as
illustrated in Loucks and van Beek (2005). The dashed lines represent information (data) flows

Volume 6 Issue 4 May 2019 024 ISSN:2321-0605

 International Journal of Latest Transactions in Engineering And Science (IJLTES)

III. RESULTS

A simulation model was created. The initial flow was assumed from no flow (i.e Qt = 0) to the maximum inflow to
Tiga dam (850 Mm3) at 50 incrementally. Each successive allocation, xit, was computed by subtracting from the
streamflow and the next allocation was made on the basis of that reduced streamflow, in accordance with the
allocation policy defined for Kano River basin. Table 2 gives Streamflow allocations in each period to KCWS and
KRIP.

Table 2 Streamflow allocations in each period, t, to each user in Kano River basin
QKR1t XKRIPt QKR2t XKNSWBt Ft
0 0 0 0 0
50 0 50 0 50
100 0 100 50 50
150 0 150 100 50
200 40 160 110 50
250 90 160 110 50
300 140 160 110 50
350 190 160 110 50
400 210 190 110 80
450 210 240 110 130
500 210 290 110 180
550 210 340 110 230
600 225 375 125 250
650 250 400 150 250
700 275 425 175 250
750 300 450 200 250
800 325 475 225 250
850 350 500 250 250

Figure 4 Water allocation policy for KRIP based on the flow at its diversion site.
This policy applies for each period t

Volume 6 Issue 4 May 2019 025 ISSN:2321-0605

 International Journal of Latest Transactions in Engineering And Science (IJLTES)

Figure 5 Water allocation policy for KCWS based on the flow at its diversion site. This policy applies for each
period t

Figure 6 Streamflow downstream of site 2 given the streamflow Q2t at site 2 before the diversion. This applies for
each period t

The plots in Figures 4, 5 and 6 illustrate this policy. Each allocation plot reflects the priorities given to the two users
and the users further downstream.

IV. CONCLUSION

This paper illustrates the application of Monte Carlo simulation model in Kano River basin and has shown a
promising results in that it’s capable to simulate under data scarce conditions. The water allocation policy was
modelled and now we are in the process of generating probability values using central limit theorem which is going
to be used in the model using spreadsheet. Presently, a spread sheet was developed until 20 number for yearly,
weekly and daily flows. Future work will constitutes defining the probability distribution of the allocations, based on
the allocation policy, consider each of the allocations as random variables, X1 and X2 for KRIP and KCWS
respectively.

Volume 6 Issue 4 May 2019 026 ISSN:2321-0605

 International Journal of Latest Transactions in Engineering And Science (IJLTES)

V. REFERENCES

[1] Bangash, R.F., Passuello, A., Hammond, M., Schuhmacher, M., 2012. Water allocation assessment in low flow river under data scarce
conditions: A study of hydrological simulation in Mediterranean basin. Sci. Total Environ. 440, 60–71.
[Link]
[2] Bichi, M.H., Anyata, B.U., 1999. Industrial waste pollution in the Kano river basin. Environ. Manag. Heal. 10, 112–116.
[Link]
[3] Britz, W., Ferris, M., Kuhn, A., 2013. Modelling water allocating institutions based on Multiple Optimization Problems with Equilibrium
Constraints. Environmental Modelling and Software, 46, 196–207
[4] Chang F, Wang Y, Tsai W. 2016 Modelling intelligent water resources allocation for multi-users. Water Resour Manage .DOI
10.1007/s11269-016-1229-6
[5] Chiroma, M.J., Kazaure, Y.D., Karaye, Y.B., Gashua A.J., 2005. Water management issues in the Hadejia-Jama’are-Komadugu-Yobe
Basin: DFID-JWL and stakeholders experience in information sharing, reaching consensus and physical interventions. London (UK): DFID
[6] DHI. Water and environment. 2006. MIKE BASIN user’s manual. A tool for river planning and management. Horsholm, Denmark: Danish
Hydraulic Institute
[7] Doulgeris C, Georgiou P, Papadimos D, Papamichail D (2015) Water allocation under deficit irrigation using MIKE BASIN model for the
mitigation of climate change. Irrig Sci 33, 469–482. DOI 10.1007/s00271-015-0482-4
[8] Ezenwaji EE, Anyadike RNC, Igu NI (2014) Optimal allocation of public water supply to the urban sectors of Enugu, Nigeria: a linear
programming approach. Appl Water Sci 4, 73–78. DOI 10.1007/s13201-013-0131-0
[9] Faramarzi, M., Abbaspour, K.C., Ashraf Vaghefi, S., Farzaneh, M.R., Zehnder, A.J.B., Srinivasan, R., Yang, H., 2013. Modeling impacts of
climate change on freshwater availability in Africa. J. Hydrol. 480, 85–101. [Link]
[10] Fischer, G., Tubiello, F.N., van Velthuizen, H., Wiberg, D.A., 2007. Climate change impacts on irrigation water requirements: Effects of
mitigation, 1990-2080. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 74, 1083–1107. [Link]
[11] Fredericks JW, Labadie JW, Altenhofen JM. Decision support system for conjunctive stream-aquifer management. J Water Res Pl-Asce
1998; 124:69–78
[12] Hall, C., Dawson, T.P., Macdiarmid, J.I., Matthews, R.B., Smith, P., 2017. The impact of population growth and climate change on food
security in Africa: looking ahead to 2050. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 15, 124–135. [Link]
[13] IPCC, 2014. Summary for Policymakers, Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. [Link]
[14] Kifle Arsiso, B., Mengistu Tsidu, G., Stoffberg, G.H., Tadesse, T., 2017. Climate change and population growth impacts on surface water
supply and demand of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Clim. Risk Manag. 18, 21–33. [Link]
[15] Letcher, R.A., Croke B.F.W., Jakeman A.J., 2007. Integrated assessment modelling for water resource allocation and management: A
generalized conceptual framework. Environmental Modelling & Software, 22, 733-742
[16] Loucks, D.P., van Beek, E., 2005. Water Resources Systems Planning and Management: An Introduction to methods, models and
applications. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, Paris, France and Delft, Netherlands
[17] McCartney MP, Arranz R. Evaluation of historic, current and future water demand in the Olifants River Catchment, South Africa. Colombo,
Sri Lanka 2007: International Water Management Institute. [Link] Research Report 118).
[18] Mohammed, M., Abdulhamid, A., Badamasi, M., Ahmed, M., 2015. Rainfall Dynamics and Climate Change in Kano, Nigeria. J. Sci. Res.
Reports 7, 386–395. [Link]
[19] Niang, I., Ruppel, O.C., Abdrabo, M.A., Essel, A., Lennard, C., Padgham, J., Urquhart, P., 2014. Africa. Clim. Chang. 2014 Impacts,
Adapt. Vulnerability - Contrib. Work. Gr. II to Fifth Assess. Rep. Intergov. Panel Clim. Chang. 1199–1265.
[Link]
[20] Perera BJC, James B, Kularathna MDU. Computer software tool REALM for sustainable water allocation and management. J Environ
Manage 2005; 77:291–300.
[21] UN-Water, 2012. WWDR4: Managing Water under Uncertainty and Risk, the United Nations World Water Development Report 4.
[22] United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, P.D., 2017. World Population Prospects The 2017 Revision Key Findings and
Advance Tables. World Popul. Prospect. 2017 1–46. [Link]
[23] Wang, L., Fang, L., Hipel, K.W., 2008. Basin-wide cooperative water resources allocation. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 190, 798–817.
[Link]
[24] World Bank, 2017. A Wake Up Call: Nigeria Water Supply, Sanitation, and Hygiene Poverty Diagnostic. WASH Poverty Diagnostic,
World Bank. World Bank, Washington, DC.
[25] Wurbs, R.A., 2005. Modelling river/reservoir system management, water allocation, and supply reliability. Journal of Hydrology 300, 100–
113
[26] Yates D, Sieber J, Purkey D, and Huber-Lee A.WEAP21— a demand-, priority and preference driven water planning model: part 1, model
characteristics. Water Int 2005;30: 487–500.

Volume 6 Issue 4 May 2019 027 ISSN:2321-0605

View publication stats