Water Policy Briefs

Based on research presented in “Institutional Alternatives in African Smallholder Irrigation: :Lessons from International Experience with Irrigation Management Transfer (IWMI Research Report 60)” by Tushaar Shah, Barbara van Koppen, Marna de Lange, Madar Samad, and Douglas Merrey. An international review of IMT experiences shows that for transfer to work, the irrigation system must be central to a wealth-creating agriculture within which IMT makes good economic sense to farmers. This is not the case in a majority of Africa’s smallholder schemes. Making IMT work in this context means addressing a number of challenges: smallholder dependency resulting from years of state intervention in farm operations and management, farmers’ inability to depend on irrigated agriculture as their primary income source, insecure land tenure arrangements, and lack of access to credit and input and output markets Current IMT strategies which focus on investments in capacity-building and infrastructure rehabilitation alone are destined to fail. For IMT to succeed, it must be accompanied by interventions that extend beyond the irrigation sector to significantly enhance African smallholder productivity and incomes. Potential avenues for accomplishing this include strengthening access to markets and credit, promoting high-value crops, improving systems for extension and technical support, making investments in smallholder technologies, clarifying land tenure arrangements, encouraging the development of farm equity schemes, and providing necessary supports through farmers’ associations.

Electricity subsidies for farmers are an expensive legacy of past development policies. The result is overuse of both energy and water in groundwater-irrigated agriculture—threatening the financial viability of the power sector and the future of the groundwater resource itself, along with the livelihoods of the millions who depend on it. The most popular solution is the metered tariff, promoted by international donors and many of India’s state governments. But metering is the ideal solution only if the cost of metering and billing 14 million scattered, small users in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh is ignored. Easier, more feasible and more beneficial in the short run in many parts of South Asia would be the use of a rational flat tariff, which avoids the transaction costs and strong farmer opposition associated with metering. The flat-tariff option has been ignored because, in its current incarnation, it has proved a complete failure. However, combined with intelligent power supply rationing, it is a logical, viable alternative which could cut wasteful groundwater use by 12-18 km3 per year in Western and Peninsular India alone. The approach would involve (1) gradually raising tariffs to cut power utility losses; (2) supplying farms with fewer hours of power per year, but ensuring a quality power supply during periods of moisture stress; and (3) metering at the feeder level to measure and monitor farm power use, to allow good management.

Based on research presented in the book “Water Productivity in Agriculture : Limits and Opportunities for Improvement” by J.W. Kijne, R. Barker and D. Molden. If current trends continue, the water crisis—which is already beginning to rear its head in many countries through depleted groundwater aquifers, dried-up rivers and wetlands, and frequent water shortages—will indeed become a global problem. A recent study by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) projects that if present trends continue, by 2025 competition from growing cities and industry worldwide will limit the amount of water available for irrigation, causing annual global losses of 350 million metric tons of food production - slightly more than the entire current U.S. grain crop. The environment will also sustain further damage, as water from this already thirsty sector is diverted to agriculture, households and industry. If levels of investment in sustainable water policy and management decrease over the next 20 years, the result will be major declines in food production and skyrocketing food prices. research done over the past decade shows that by improving the productivity of water on irrigated and rain-fed lands, we can have enough water for cities, industry and nature. But this requires a commitment to institutional and management reforms, and substantial investment in crop research, technology, and infrastructure.

Approaching the rehabilitation of the 50-100 year-old irrigation tanks—spread across Rajasthan, South Bihar, Madya Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, and other South Asian locations such as Sri Lanka—solely from an irrigation perspective, runs the risk of depriving communities of valuable socio-ecological services and functions that these structures provide today. These tanks may have become ‘inefficient’ in their original function of providing flow irrigation, but as they have degraded over time, they have evolved into valuable systems that support people’s livelihoods in a number of ways. In addition to storing water for crop irrigation, tanks provide services such as recharge of groundwater used by adjacent communities, fertile silted soil that allows cultivation of additional crops, fishing and aquaculture, water for raising livestock, and sand and soil used by small industries.

Based on research presented in “Urban-Wastewater Reuse for Crop Production in the Water-Short Guanajuato River Basin Mexico (IWMI) Research Report 41) by C. Scott, J.A. Zarazua and G. Levine; “Urban Wastewater: AValuable Resource for Agriculture: A Case Study from Haroonabad, Pakistan (IWMI Research Report 63)” by W. van der Hoek, M. Ul Hassan, J. Ensink, S. Feenstra, L. Rachid-Sally, S. Munir, R. Aslam, N. Ali, R. Hussain and Y. Matsuno: and “Use of Untreated Wastewater in Peri-Urban Agriculture in Pakistan: Risks and Opportunities (IWMI Research Report 64)” by K Ensink, W. van der Hoek, Y. Matsuno, S. Munir and R. Aslam.; In urban and peri-urban zones in developing countries, poor farmers commonly use nutrient-rich sewage and wastewater to irrigate high-value crops. In many places, this untreated wastewater is their only source of irrigation water—so their livelihoods depend on it. But, as well as bringing benefits, the unregulated use of wastewater also poses risks to human health and the environment. The prevailing “scientific” approach to wastewater irrigation advocates treatment before use and the implementation of strict regulations. But many developing countries can’t afford to build treatment facilities and do not have the resources to enforce regulations. There are other options, as IWMI research in Mexico and Pakistan demonstrates. Well-crafted policies on wastewater use have the potential to improve the incomes of poor urban and peri-urban farmers and reduce pollution of lakes, streams and aquifers. Continuing to turn a blind eye to wastewater use can result in higher incidences of disease among farmers and consumers and in irreversible degradation of the environment. Policymakers need to develop comprehensive strategies for managing wastewater tailored to local socioeconomic and environmental conditions and for analysis of the short- and long-term risks and benefits of all available options.

Driven largely by financial pressures, many governments are transferring full or partial management responsibility for irrigation systems from government agencies to farmers organized into Water User Associations (WUAs). In most cases, improving the situation of poor farmers has been a secondary aim of this reform. But there is increasing evidence that Irrigation Management Transfer (IMT) can actually negatively impact the situation of poor farmers—and, in extreme cases, can even cause the collapse of irrigation schemes. New research assessed two different IMT programs: The Gujarat Participatory Irrigation Management (PIM) program, one of the first IMT programs in India, and the Andhra Pradesh Farmers’ Management of Irrigation Systems (APFMIS) program, which with its sweeping reforms has served as an example worldwide. This research suggests that even if the IMT process contains all the right ingredients on paper—such as strong voting rights for farmers, irrespective of farm size—poor farmers are less informed on the whole about their rights and so tend to lose out on many of the potential benefits of IMT. The study showed that in both Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh poor farmers tended to participate more in the repair and rehabilitation work, while the larger farmers were more involved in the decision-making process—dominating the meetings and committees (see fig.1). To make IMT more pro-poor, and to ensure the viability of WUAs, which depend heavily on the labor contribution of small farmers, policy makers should take steps to ensure that poor farmers participate equally in decision-making processes. These steps include raising awareness and access to information, and making the election of WUA committees (which favor the village elite) more competitive and transparent. Monitoring participation in WUA activities and decision making against a reliable, and easily available indicator of poverty—farm size—is a key in evaluating equity trends over time.

Societies need forward-thinking knowledge institutions in the water sector to help them deal with the opportunities and crises that will arise in the future. India has some leading, high-performance knowledge institutions. But it also has many more that no longer deliver high-value thinking, insights or perspectives. Can these under-achieving institutions be transformed? How can the government, NGOs and international organizations design, build and maintain successful, highpotential institutions? Practical answers have been found in a recent review of 30 diverse Indian institutions. The review—part of an effort to improve institution-building in the water sector—found many traits that set the “winning” institutions apart from the poor performers. First, it is the quality of an institution’s design and launch that determines its ability to lead and to be recognized as a leader in the future. Second, good operative practices—with regard to human resources, fund-raising policy, management style and core products and services—ensure an environment where innovative thinkers can excel. The research argues that a) both these aspects are vital if an institute with high potential is to flourish and b) capital investment is necessary—but not sufficient—to achieve success. Finally, the study recommends a complete relaunch of under-achieving institutions, with new NGO staff and a fresh mandate.

Many people still believe that India’s irrigation water mainly comes from canal irrigation systems. While this may have been true in the past, recent research shows that groundwater irrigation has overtaken surface-water irrigation as the main supplier of water for India’s crops. Groundwater now sustains almost 60% of the country’s irrigated area. Even more importantly, groundwater now contributes more to agricultural wealth creation than any other irrigation source (see Fig. 1). groundwater use has increased largely because it is a democratic resource,’ available to any farmer who has access to a pump. Accessibility has led to widespread exploitation of the resource, by farmers grateful for a reliable irrigation-water source. In turn, this has led to high levels of groundwater use being associated with high population density. But it is a myth that groundwater use is high only where supplies are high. Such findings are worrying, because the consequences of overexploitation of this precious and productive resource can be catastrophic. The research highlighted in this briefing identifies four stages of groundwater development. To avert potential disaster and maximize benefits of groundwater as a force for poverty reduction, new policies are needed at each of these four stages. It is crucial that policymakers intervene at these critical stages to manage both the supply and demand aspects of groundwater use. Urgent priorities are areas with low supplies of renewable groundwater but alarmingly high groundwater use, such as Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Andra Pradesh, Karnataka, Punjab and Haryana.

The problems that river basin institutions in the developed world successfully address—such as pollution, sediment buildup in rivers and the degradation of wetlands—are not the top priorities for Indian policy makers and people. The items that do top Indian agendas—providing access to water for drinking and growing food, eradicating poverty, and stopping groundwater overexploitation—are either unresolved in the developed world or have become irrelevant due to economic development. This does not mean that India and other developing countries cannot learn valuable lessons from models for Integrated River Basin Management. Loosely structured River Basin Organizations, such as Southeast Asia’s Mekong Commission, can contribute to basin welfare by serving as a coordinating mechanism. They can facilitate dialogue and negotiation on resource allocation among organized stakeholders and representative bodies (such as national or state governments sharing a river basin). But River Basin Organizations by themselves cannot be expected to address the more fundamental issues that water sectors in India must contend with.

The State government has a vital role to play in developing groundwater resources to help improve the lot of the poorest people in eastern Indiaapos;s rural communities. Many States have tried to achieve this over the past 50 years through centrally planned public tube-well programs. Recently published research says that most of these efforts have failed to bring irrigation or improved livelihoods to the poor.; This research shows how policy makers can have a significant positive impact on poverty reduction by removing pump subsidies and opening pump markets to international competition. Subsidies and import restrictions have kept pump prices in India artificially inflated, by more than 35-45%, over those of neighbouring Pakistan and Bangladesh.; If a apos;shock therapyapos; approach of removing restrictions is too drastic or politically difficult, the next best option is to use market mechanisms to manage pump subsidy and loan programs for the poor. A good example of this approach is the jointly managed subsidy programs that have helped usher in eastern Indiaapos;s belated Green Revolution. Here local pump dealers are active participants in the management of pump subsidy programs, alongside government and nationalized banks. The examples of eastern Uttar Pradesh and north Bihar provide working models of such approaches.

Based on research presented in the technical paper “Artificial recharging of groundwater: An experiment in the Madhya Ganga Canal Project, India, by R. Sakthivadivel and A. S. Chawala