have low irrigation service charges disadvantaged the poor ?

7/31/2019 Have Low Irrigation Service Charges Disadvantaged the Poor ?

1/23


2/23

Have Low Irrigation ServiceHave Low Irrigation Service

Charges DisadvantagedCharges Disadvantaged

the Poor ?the Poor ?

Intizar Hussain

[email protected]@cgiar.orgSenior Economist,Senior Economist,

International Water Management Institute (IWMI)International Water Management Institute (IWMI)

Colombo, Sri LankaColombo, Sri Lanka

The views expressed in this paper are the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views orpolicies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), or its Board of Directors or the governments they represent.ADB makes no representation concerning and does not guarantee the source, originality, accuracy,completeness or reliability of any statement, information, data, finding, interpretation, advice, opinion, orview presented.


3/23

Poverty Incidence in Irrigated and Un-irrigated Settings

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Country

PovertyInci

dence(%

)

Irrigated Un-irrigated

Access to irrigation water is a significantAccess to irrigation water is a significantdeterminant of poverty alleviationdeterminant of poverty alleviation


4/23

Reasons supportingReasons supportingpropositionproposition

Estimates of Income Poverty across Systems

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

WID-

NP

LID-

HP

QID-NP

PID-HP

NamDua

ng

KDS

NamThachH

an

NS

LC

G

-K

Kalibawang

10

-R

Glap

an

9

-R

13

-R

Kakow

al

KlambuKiri

Krogowan

Pha

lia

14

-R

Pab

na

Ha

rsi

Lalian

Khikhi

Hakra-4

Ha

lali

Kha

dir

Systems

IncomePoverty(%


5/23

AntiAnti--poverty impacts of irrigation varypoverty impacts of irrigation vary

across and within systems and depend on:across and within systems and depend on:

Irrigation infrastructure condition/management

Water allocation/distribution policies, procedures and practices Production technology, cropping patterns, crop diversification;

Support measures, e.g., input and output marketing, information

(In) equity in land distribution


6/23

Institutional arrangements Implementation effectiveness Service delivery

Incentives, water rights, regulations

and

Availability of funding Spending mechanisms

Key Determinants of IrrigationKey Determinants of IrrigationPerformancePerformance


7/23

Irrigation Charge (US$/ha) and Collection rate in Selected Systems

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

9-R

Lalian

10-R

Khikhi

14-R

Harsi

NSLC

13-R

Glapan

Kal

ibawang

LID-HP

Nam

Nam

Thach

System

Irrigation

Charge

(US$/ha)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Collection

rate(%

)

Irrigation Charge (US$/ha)

Collection Rate (%)


8/23

Affordability and willingness to pay;

Positive externalities of irrigation impacts;

Political sensitivity;

Irrigation water viewed as a public good.

Low Irrigation ChargesLow Irrigation Charges

Justifications often OfferedJustifications often Offered


9/23

When irrigation charge is low:

Revenues and funds available are low;

Maintenance is neglected, infrastructure condition deteriorates,overall availability and access to water is reduced;

Little or no incentive to deliver high quality services;

Users paying low charges feel they have little entitlement;

Accountability linkages.

How Low Irrigation Charges areHow Low Irrigation Charges are

Disadvantageous to the PoorDisadvantageous to the Poor


10/23

When irrigation charge is low: No incentives for users to use water efficiently;

Overall availability and access to water is reduced; Non-poor, the powerful and those having locational

advantage grab more than their due share;

Applied uniformly to all socio-economic groupsworsens income and resource disparity.

How Low Irrigation Charges areHow Low Irrigation Charges are

Disadvantageous to the PoorDisadvantageous to the Poor


11/23

Low Performance = High PovertyLow Performance = High Poverty

Figure Productivity/ ha, Poverty (%) and Irr igation Charge (US$/ha)

0

200

400

600

800

10001200

1400

1600

0.010.020.030.040.0

50.060.070.080.090.0

GVP ($/ha) HC (%) Ir r igat ion Charge (US$/ha)


12/23

Infrastructure Condition and itsInfrastructure Condition and itsMaintenance MattersMaintenance Matters


13/23

Investments in Infrastructure May Be IneffectiveInvestments in Infrastructure May Be Ineffective

Conveyance losses across improved and un-improved Watercourses

-0.100

0.000

0.100

0.200

0.300

0.400

0.500

0.600

0.700

24400

-L

67500

-R

68798

-R

77650

-L

31000

-L

33610

-L

125392

-R

203000

-R

9580

-L

9700

-R

20830

-R

28288

-R

29500

-TL

8780

-R

9900

-R

23001

-LII

17017

-L

18040

-R

18060

-R

21642

-R

81090

-L

86090

-L

97539

-L

132416

-R

132416

-R

Watercourse # (un-improved)

Conve

yanceLossesper100

0ft(cuses)

24000

-L

24400

-L

68798

-R

77129

-R

31000

-L

12506

1-L

14600

-L

20049

-L

22500

-R

23000

-L

I

23000

-LII

27940

-R

81090

-L

86090

-L

94996

-L

12991

5-

L

Watercourse # (improved)

CL per 1000ft (Cusec)CL per 1000

ft (cus) Imp


14/23

Water Allocation /Distribution andWater Allocation /Distribution andService Delivery MattersService Delivery Matters


15/23

Access to Water, and Crop productivity (kgs/ha)

0

500

1000

15002000

2500

3000

35004000

4500

Head Middle Tail

Location

W

ater(m

cube)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

Prod

uctivity

(kg

s/ha)

Canal water

Total water

Productivity


16/23

Poverty Impacts of IrrigationPoverty Impacts of Irrigationin Punjab, Pakistanin Punjab, Pakistan

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

Head Middle Tail

PovertyGap


17/23

Irrigation Charge for Various Land Sizes and for PoorIrrigation Charge for Various Land Sizes and for Poor

and Nonand Non--Poor Farmers, Punjab, PakistanPoor Farmers, Punjab, Pakistan

Annual irrigation cost for variousland size categories

4995

4477

39803594

3146

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000


18/23

Irrigation Charge inIrrigation Charge in HakraHakra -- 44-- R, PunjabR, Punjab

1 6 1

1 7 51 8 2

1 9 5 1 9 9

0

5 0

1 0 0

1 5 0

2 0 0

2 5 0

1 9 9 7 1 9 9 8 1 9 9 9 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 2

Rs

./ha


19/23

Improvements on crop areas and equity inImprovements on crop areas and equity inwater distributionwater distribution -- ((HakraHakra-- 4R)4R)

26079

25614 25575

27115 27115

24500

25000

25500

26000

26500

27000

27500

1997 1998 1999 2001 2002

Hectares

1.8

1.23

2

2.5

1.09

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

10-R Kakowal Lalian Khadir Hakra-4


20/23

ConclusionsConclusions

Low irrigation charges and inefficient collection lead to poor

performance; Need to base irrigation service charge on commercial

principles, Need for institutional arrangements for irrigation management

to be made more: decentralized, participatory, and financially

autonomous; incentive oriented for efficient collection and spending

of revenues Service providers to meet certain standards.


21/23

Key MessagesKey Messages

Irrigation water is a divide between povertyIrrigation water is a divide between poverty

and prosperityand prosperity

Where water is cheap, production is low andWhere water is cheap, production is low and

the poor are rarely reached.the poor are rarely reached.


22/23

Alternate Policy Options

Option -2 would result in annual redistribution of Rs 736 million

Option - 3 would result in annual redistribution of Rs 1362 million

7615

8043

9341

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

70008000

9000

10000

Opt-1 Opt-2 Opt-3

Policy Options

Rs.million


23/23

Thank youThank you

[email protected]@cgiar.org

have low irrigation service charges disadvantaged the poor ?

Documents