Improving the performance of

public irrigation in South Asia

Thierry Facon, FAO Aditi Mukherji, IWMI

• India

– Protective irrigation

– Low duties: 0.35 l/s/ha

– Warabundi

– Shejpahi

– Block

– Structured design

Public irrigation in South Asia in short

• Pakistan

– Indus system

– Protective irrigation

– Low duties

– Warabundi

– Salinization

– Waterlogging

-Impact on food security, poverty alleviation and economic

growth

-Equity not achieved, reliability dubious, flexibility very low

-Stagnation/decline

-Low flowrates and poor service push farmers to groundwater

which has allowed intensification

Structured design

Proportional flow division

• Can you grow

cash crops?

• Can you adopt

water saving

technologies?

Multifunctionality

• Multiple Uses of Water is a common practice !

• On a subset of 30 systems only 2 appear as single use !

• Actual water productivity much higher than WP(crop) !

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Kim D

ong B

HH Viet

nam

Luon

g tai B

HH Viet

nam

Shaha

pur K

arnat

aka In

dia

KOIS

P S

ri Lan

ka

Zanghe

china

Sh

are

of

esti

mat

ed b

enef

its

Power

Drainage, Flood control,

transport, environment

Homestead garden & natural

vegetation

Fish

Domestic & Industry (incl

tourism)

Animals

Crops

Poor water delivery service at all levels

Poor service levels

Overestimated by

management

(chaos <1)

• A

Applying modern water control concepts helps

especially at main canal levels

Improving the main canals assists in

improving service down to the farm

• Well-run management outfits help

• Budgets help but are not sufficient

Lessons & Issues in short (3)

Multivariable analysis performed to explain L&W Productivity

Model [Log WP] = 3.3-0.642*Log duty -0.287*LogCA

-0.463*ETo-0.238 *Rain

[ 70 % of variability explained]

Duty = Irrigation depth

CA= Command area

Most variability explained by duty !

Land Productivity: No significant model !

Log WP = 3.3-0.642*Log duty -0.287*Log CA-0.463*ETo-0.238 *Rain

-1.8

-1.6

-1.4

-1.2

-1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

-1.8 -1.6 -1.4 -1.2 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2

Log Water Productivity

MO

DE

L =

f(l

og

Du

ty,

log

CA

, E

To

, R

ain

)

Significant correlation between

Types of systems for SERVICES & L&W PRODUCTIVITY

Lessons learnt

Group High High 1965 $/ha 0.18 $/m3

[High service at MC-SC and High at field]

Group Medium Low 1200 $/ha 0.10 $/m3

Group Low Low 924 $/ha 0.073 $/m3

Actual Water Service individual unit

AWDS = f[ Employees, MCI, Size of WUA]

explain 45 % of the variability

Employees

1.51.00.50.0-0.5-1.0-1.5

Actu

al W

DS

to

in

div

idu

al o

wn

ersh

ip u

nit

s

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0

-0.5

-1.0

-1.5

Partial Regression Plot

Dependent Variable: Actual WDS to individual ownership units

Size of WUA hectares

2500020000150001000050000-5000

Actu

al W

DS

to

in

div

idu

al o

wn

ersh

ip u

nit

s

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0

-0.5

-1.0

-1.5

Partial Regression Plot

Dependent Variable: Actual WDS to individual ownership units

Main Canal Indicator

1.51.00.50.0-0.5-1.0

Ac

tua

l W

DS

to

in

div

idu

al o

wn

ers

hip

un

its

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0

-0.5

-1.0

-1.5

Partial Regression Plot

Dependent Variable: Actual WDS to individual ownership units

WUA’s strength & Services • Strength of water

users associations

plays very little role in

improving service to

farmers, productivity

and upper level service

Employee & Services

y = 0.5755x + 0.7342

R2 = 0.3165

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

Employee

Actu

al W

DS

to

in

div

idu

al o

wn

ers

hip

un

its

y = 0.5839x + 1.1763

R2 = 0.2369

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

EMPLOYEE

MC

-SC

Se

rvic

es

Having modern employee management (incentives,

empowerment, supervision, capacity building) is useful

Note: the less the employees per ha the better for service

Canal lining

No influence on

performance

% Unlined & Services most dowsntream

y = -0.0036x + 1.747

R2 = 0.0437

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0

productivity and cc lining

y = -0.0013x + 0.2515

R2 = 0.06

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0

% unlined

$/m

3

THE PROBLEM OF CANAL LINING

• Canal lining is a very expensive element in canal construction. Cost of

lining typically represents about 40% of total cost.

• Before making such a large investment, there must be a clear idea of the

benefits to be obtained

• Seepage losses typically represent 10 to 40 percent of diverted water

• The reduction of seepage losses is often assumed to be constant for the

expected life of the lining to have a chance of achieving a favorable

economic return

• Most favored by agencies

• There is now strong evidence that hard

surface linings deteriorate within a few

years until seepage losses return to that

for an unlined canal

Questions related to decision-

making

• What is the reality do we want to

improve?

• Water scarcity: what does it mean?

• How are decisions made?

• What are our objectives?

Virtual water reality

Virtual water reality …

THE TAIL-ENDER PROBLEM?

Upper reach of a field channel near Mudhol

Ghataprabha LBMC

Officially a dry crop system

THE TAIL-ENDER PROBLEM?

End of the same field channel

Ghataprabha LBMC

RID

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

0.50

Lam

Pao,

Thaila

nd

Dez,

Iran

Guila

n,

Iran

Seyhan,

Turk

ey

Maja

lgaon,

India

Dantiw

ada,

India

Bhakra

, In

dia

Muda,

Mala

ysia

Kem

ubu,

Mala

ysia

Beni A

mir,

Moro

cco

Off

ice d

u N

iger,

Mali

Rio

Yaqui A

lto,

DR

Coello

, C

olo

mbia

Sald

aña,

Colo

mbia

Cupatitz

io,

Mexic

o

Rio

Mayo,

Mexic

o

Cam

Sun,

Vie

tnam

IWM

I3. O

utp

ut

pe

r u

nit

irr

ig. s

up

ply

($

/cu

. m

.)

.

ch112

GLBC = US$0.23/m3

No sugarcane

Groundwater pumped from within CA (left) to outside the CA (right)

Ghataprabha LBMC

Sanctioned areas

Sanctioned supply

• Head of WUCS

Wrong hydraulics: they receive much

more than they should

Ghataprabha LBMC

West Krishna Delta

Uncertainty on basic

performance indicators

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

La

m P

ao

, Th

aila

nd

De

z, Ir

an

Gu

ilan

, Ira

n

Se

yh

an

, Tu

rk

ey

Ma

jalg

ao

n, In

dia

Da

ntiw

ad

a, In

dia

Bh

ak

ra

, Ind

ia

Mu

da

, Ma

lay

sia

Ke

mu

bu

, Ma

lay

sia

Be

ni A

mir

, Mo

ro

cc

o

Offic

e d

u N

ige

r, M

ali

Rio

Ya

qu

i Alto

, DR

Co

ello

, Co

lom

bia

Sa

lda

ña

, Co

lom

bia

Cu

pa

titzio

, Me

xic

o

Rio

Ma

yo

, Me

xic

o

Ca

m S

un

, Vie

tna

m

IT

RC

10

.

An

nu

al

P

ro

je

ct

I

rr

ig

at

io

n

Ef

fi

ci

en

cy

.

ch125

How can you evaluate an objective to

improve efficiency by 20% if the

confidence interval is +/- 30%

Virtual reality 1: pretend that it

does not exist

Types of problems with virtual reality:

• Policy: maybe what we see outside the window is good but are the

bad aspects? What can be made more sustainable and how to fix it?

• We ignore problems: because infrastructure exists does not mean it is

alright and that the only problem is governance or management

• We invent problems that don’t exist to justify a favored solution

• We ignore opportunities:

• WUAs focused on canal management- can we reduce their

pumping costs?

• Multiple Use Systems: more MDGs per drop, more $/m3

Improving productivity or

efficiency?

“As irrigation is inefficient (30% of the water

diverted reaches the plant), we can reduce the

waste and losses and reallocate this to other

users by increasing irrigation efficiency”

Physical water scarcity

• Basin closure

• What is recoverable is recovered

Irrigation efficiency

• Confusion between field/system efficiency and

basin efficiency is common and underpins

many policies and investments

• Field efficiency and more efficient

technologies can be very good (energy, water

quality, sometimes in-stream flow, reducing

drainage, money, labor, etc.)

River basin closure processes

• overbuilding of river basins

• overallocation of entitlements

• overdraft of reservoirs and aquifers

• double squeeze of agricultural water use, due

to declining water availability and quality and

rising urban and environmental needs

Virtual reality 2: “problems are serious but we can

easily save much and/or get additional water”

• Some water can be saved but not as much as is

claimed

• When agricultural water management is moderately

good, things tend to a zero sum game

• Increasing efficiency, more efficient technologies (and

thus water rights and water pricing) often leads to

increased water consumption (ET)

• Problems are becoming wicked

Irrigation agencies

• Development ethos

• Bureaucratic top-down management

• Accountability, clientelism

• Rigidity and path dependency:

– How things are seen

– Education

– Management style and incentives

– Standard designs

– Consulting firms

– Vested interests

South Asia

• Many trends favor atomistic/informal except energy

prices

• The groundwater crisis and energy prices may generate

a pressure to improve public irrigation

• Need to manage atomistic irrigation within large scale

canal commands

=> Incentives for large-scale effects of individual behavior may be

needed in addition to interventions on the surface side

South Asia

A BIG STRATEGIC CHOICE TO MAKE:

ignore or acknowledge atomistic irrigation and groundwater issues

AFFECTS ALL FORMS OF IRRIGATION AND LARGE SCALE

WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

• Existing large-scale to mimic atomistic irrigation

Modernization:

From supply-driven to service-oriented

management

Service:

• Equity

• Reliability

• Flexibility

– Rate

– Duration

– Frequency

• Adequacy

• Lift/ pressure

Service => Operation

strategy/flow control system =>

Infrastructure design and

management needs

Working out evolution paths

• Unbundling

– Different levels, each providing service to the lower level

(this may include recharge)

– At each level:

• Service transactions: water, information, money

• Nature of operator

• Conveyance technology: canal/pipe

• Seepage or no seepage

• Surface/pressure

• Interface: extend or separate management:

» Buffer reservoir or pond/tank

» Pumping

Working out evolution paths

• Major decisions:

• Radical or progressive improvement

– Service to farmers and other uses and users

– Service/technology to farmers

– If competition from atomistic or unsustainable atomistic

• Match/mimic

• Conjunctive management

– Energy an increasing factor => surface or lower lift or water

conservation

– How many levels of operators (not PIM committees)

– Costs: Financial or investment strategies at each level

– Final delivery point

Improving the decision making process

• Exit the virtual reality

• Water auditing and accounting

• Strategic planning

• Capacity building

• Institutions

• Policy

• Governance

• Monitoring of investments and results

Policy

• Acknowledge the nature of the water economy

• Monitoring of investments and results

• Plan B, second-best and lateral options

• Policy/politicians: the art of the possible

• Change the practice on the ground to improve

conditions for feasibility or acceptability of new

policies: build a constituency for change

• Focus on important details

Institutions

• Beyond classical IMT/PIM

• Not just PPP

• Improve service to water user federations/associations

• Many institutional innovations in both informal economies

and formal economies

• MASSCOTE, large powerful professional farmer-owned

organizations managing (not necessarily themselves) canal

supply, rainfall and groundwater

• How to combine service orientation and regulation of

atomistic irrigation?

Governance

• Can one separate evolution of governance from the

political system?

• From representative democracy to monitory

democracy : a lot of action and political innovation in

the water area (because water is important), e.g.

yellow score cards, mass social movements

(John Keane, Life and death of democracy)

CONCLUSIONS

• Existing large scale systems need to transform

• Towards a fluid logic of complementarily, combination and

convergence between public, small scale and atomistic

irrigation

• There are some good ideas and strategies, inspiring

examples, tools/knowledge

ONE ISSUE

• Will the present crises and challenges in cluding

food crisis, economic crisis, energy crisis, climate

change … will be met by more of the same supply-

driven top-down responses or by a wholesale

change of management of the sector and innovation?

=> Strategies to bring about this change?

=> What/who can serve as catalysts?

Combine elements from all 5 strategies for

improving the performance of irrigation

1. Modernise yesteryears’ schemes for tomorrow’s

needs

2. Go with the flow by supporting farmers’ initiatives

3. Look beyond conventional PIM/IMT recipes

4. Build for the future: Expand capacity and

knowledge

5. Look beyond irrigation: Invest outside the water

sector

Revitalizing Asia’s irrigation