Here MUS takes communities as entry point of water services. It holistically considers their multiple water uses (domestic, irrigation, animal watering, tree-growing, fisheries, enterprises, ceremonies, environment) from multiple water sources (rain, surface water, groundwater, wetlands) at multiple sites (homesteads, fields, open access). This integrated water resource management at the local level is (potentially) considerably more cost-effective and sustainable than single-use water services.
{| border="1" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" align="center"
|-
! width="50%" style="background:#efefef;" | Advantages
! style="background:#f0f8ff;" | Disadvantages
|-
| valign="top" | - Gender-friendly, because the needs of both men and women are considered.<br>
- Enhancing willingness and ability to pay, which helps financing of public schemes and upscaling of self-financed schemes.<br>
- Improving water productivity through “more use per drop.”<br>
- Increasing ownership by building upon local integrated water arrangements.<br>
- Anticipating all uses, avoiding damage, conflicts, or scheme abandonment.<br>
- Addressing water-quality needs for all risks and all water uses, also beyond public schemes.<br>
- Allowing for transparent, equitable and environmentally sustainable sharing of scarce water and financial resources, and protecting people’s domestic and productive basic needs.<br>
| valign="top" | - Most water sector projects are not organised to include multiple use, so planning is "new territory" for some. <br>
- Sometimes when multiple use ideas are outside of the original water project plan, they are prevented, declared "illegal" with fines.<br>
- Clarity and intent of water uses that apply to all necessary uses need to be planned early and clearly.
|}
==What does a multiple-use water service look like?==
