Harvested rainwater is an alternative source of water in arid and semi-arid regions (ASARs) around the world. Many researchers have developed and applied various methodologies and criteria to identify suitable sites and techniques for rainwater harvesting (RWH). Determining the best method or guidelines for site selection, however, is difficult. The main objective of this study was to define a general method for selecting suitable RWH sites in ASARs by assembling an inventory of the main methods and criteria developed during the last three decades. We categorised and compared four main methodologies of site selection from 48 studies published in scientific journals, reports of international organisations, or sources of information obtained from practitioners. We then identified three main sets of criteria for selecting RWH locations and the main characteristics of the most common RWH techniques used in ASARs. The methods were diverse, ranging from those based only on biophysical criteria to more integrated approaches including socio-economic criteria, especially after 2000. The most important criteria for the selection of suitable sites for RWH were slope, land use/cover, soil type, rainfall, distance to settlements/streams, and cost. The success rate of RWH projects tended to increase when these criteria were considered, but an objective evaluation of these selection methods is still lacking. Most studies now select RHW sites using geographic information systems in combination with hydrological models and multi-criteria analysis

Arid and semi-arid regions around the world face water scarcity problems due to lack of precipitation and unpredictable rainfall patterns. For thousands of years, rainwater harvesting (RWH) techniques have been applied to cope with water scarcity. Researchers have used many different methodologies for determining suitable sites and techniques for RWH. However, limited attention has been given to the evaluation of RWH structure performance. The aim of this research was to design a scientifically-based, generally applicable methodology to better evaluate the performance of existing RWH techniques in (semi-) arid regions. The methodology integrates engineering, biophysical and socio-economic criteria using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) supported by the Geographic Information System (GIS). Jessour/Tabias are the most traditional RWH techniques in the Oum Zessar watershed in south-eastern Tunisia, which were used to test this evaluation tool. Fifty-eight RWH locations (14 jessr and 44 tabia) in three main sub-catchments of the watershed were assessed and evaluated. Based on the criteria selected, more than 95% of the assessed sites received low or moderate suitability scores, with only two sites receiving high suitability scores. This integrated methodology, which is highly flexible, saves time and costs, is easy to adapt to different regions and can support designers and decision makers aiming to improve the performance of existing and new RWH sites.

In many arid countries, runoff water-harvesting systems support the livelihood of the rural population. Little is known, however, about the effect of these systems on the water balance components of arid watersheds. The objective of this study was to adapt and evaluate the GIS-based watershed model SWAT (Soil Water Assessment Tool) for simulating the main hydrologic processes in arid environments. The model was applied to the 270-km² watershed of wadi Koutine in southeast Tunisia, which receives about 200 mm annual rain. The main adjustment for adapting the model to this dry Mediterranean environment was the inclusion of water-harvesting systems, which capture and use surface runoff for crop production in upstream subbasins, and a modification of the crop growth processes. The adjusted version of the model was named SWAT-WH. Model evaluation was performed based on 38 runoff events recorded at the Koutine station between 1973 and 1985. The model predicted that the average annual watershed rainfall of the 12-year evaluation period (209 mm) was split into ET (72%), groundwater recharge (22%) and outflow (6%). The evaluation coefficients for calibration and validation were, respectively, R² (coefficient of determination) 0.77 and 0.44; E (Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient) 0.73 and 0.43; and MAE (Mean Absolute Error) 2.6 mm and 3.0 mm, indicating that the model could reproduce the observed events reasonably well. However, the runoff record was dominated by two extreme events, which had a strong effect on the evaluation criteria. Discrepancies remained mainly due to uncertainties in the observed daily rainfall and runoff data. Recommendations for future research include the installation of additional rainfall and runoff gauges with continuous data logging and the collection of more field data to represent the soils and land use. In addition, crop growth and yield monitoring is needed for a proper evaluation of crop production, to allow an economic assessment of the different water uses in the watershed.