irrigation reforms in asia: a systematic review of 108 case studies of imt/pim

Water for a food-secure world

Aditi Mukherji, Blanka Fuleki, Tushaar Shah, Diana Suhardiman, Mark Giordano and Parakrama

Weligamage

Irrigation reforms in Asia: A systematic review of 108 case studies of IMT/PIM

Presented at IFAD Rome

18th April 2011

Water for a food-secure worldWater for a food-secure world

Background

• What is PIM and IMT?

• Starting in mid 1960s, reforms peaked in 1990s

• More than 57 countries have embarked on some kind of irrigation reform involving IMT/PIM

• Yet, comprehensive review of impact of IMT/PIM is scanty– Vermillion 1997 and FAO 2007

• Our review of 108 documented cases makes it the most comprehensive review


Rational for a systematic review• Many governments and donors support IMT/PIM as

an article of faith

• Our job is to provide evidence for the same

• What is a systematic review? It is a summary of what works, where and for whom. A

systematic review differs from a literature review in that it tends to be more evidence oriented and create a uniform template against which all evidence can be measured and compared. This uniform template, often called the review protocol, is publicly available and therefore can be replicated by other researchers in future.


Research questions• How well have the impacts and outcomes of IMT/PIM in Asia

been documented so far and what have we learnt from those studies?

• How can we evaluate the impact and outcomes of IMT/PIM and differentiate the successful cases from ‘not so successful’ ones?

• What are the conditions under which successful WUAs in public irrigation systems are found? Are those conditions replicable?

• How well grounded are the conceptual underpinnings surrounding the IMT/PIM discourse?

• What are the ways forward?


6 Step Research Method


Indicators of successName of the indicator Scoring system

Outcome indicatorsIrrigation service fee collection rate 1= if it has gone up

0= no change or declinedFinancial viability of WUA 1= if it has improved

0= no change or deterioratedFunctional condition of infrastructure 1= if it has improved

0= no change or deteriorationEquitable distribution of water 1= if it has gone up

0= no change or declinedReliability and adequacy in water distribution 1= if it has gone up

0= no change or declinedPopular awareness and participation in WUA activities

1= if it has gone up0= no change or declined

Reduction in frequency of disputes 1= Yes0= No or got worse

Impact indicatorsCrop related impacts (production, yields, cropping pattern, cropped area)

1= If any one of these registered an increased after transfer0= Otherwise

Livelihoods and household parameters (income, wage, employment, poverty reduction, reduction in forced migration)

1 = if any of these have gone up after transfer0=Otherwise


Distribution and location of cases


Methodological critique of cases

Very few studies that combine before after

and with-without

1/3rd of them are short term assessments


Distribution of success/failure as per CSS

Region Success Failure

S Asia 18 20

E Asia 7 2

SE Asia 12 24

C Asia 4 14


Finding patterns in success: Success by type

Lift and pump

schemes succeed

marginally more


Success by size of system

Schemes serving lesser

number of farmers succeed

marginally more

Small schemes succeed

marginally more


Success by complexity

Simple schemes succeed

marginally more


Success by crops grown

Non-paddy systems succeed

significantly more than

paddy systems


Rehabilitated systems fare better than non-rehabilitated ones


Cases where full O&M is transferred fare better


PIM, when implemented on ground by government staff are more likely to fail


Multivariate analysis: Logit regression

coefficient std. error t-ratio slope

Constant -2.83790 1.63066 -1.740

STORAGE 0.118054 1.33783 0.08824 0.0292580

SIZE 0.359527 0.757043 0.4749 0.0888251

CROP 1.69093 0.885667 1.909** 0.388653

NEWREHAB 0.233163 0.965311 0.2415 0.0581703

IMPLMNT 2.01105 0.846505 2.376* 0.457774

LVLTR 0.0510247 0.776525 0.06571 0.0126965

ELECT 0.147760 0.783830 0.1885 0.0366978

Correctly predicts 76.1% of the cases


A conceptual fault in IMT/PIM policy?• One to one correlation and regressions have shown that there is almost no

pattern in success that may be replicated across locations

• Is this a problem of poor implementation or is there a conceptual fault with the entire paradigm?

• Unlike FAO (2007) and others, we do not attribute this to implementation failure but to a conceptual failure which is manifest in several IMT policy paradoxes

– It is assumed that high-performance WUAs can be developed by an unreformed, inefficient, and often corrupt agency.

– In many cases farmers did not have a choice about whether or not they were interested in IMT, despite the fact that the policy supposedly promotes increased farmer decision-making in irrigation management.

– For many farmers, participation became the goal rather than the means of IMT, in spite of the fact that farmers are interested in receiving adequate and reliable supplies of water in order to increase yields and are not interested in participation for the sake of it.


Courtesy: Randolph Barker


Rise of atomistic irrigation and its implications for PIM/IMT


Rise of the atomistic irrigation in South Asia..Net irrigated area under surface irrigation (000’ha)

Net irrigated area served by groundwater (000’ ha)

1993-4 2000-1

% change

1993-4 2000-1

% change

Andhra Pradesh 2523 2269 -10.1 1678 1829 +9

Bihar & Jharkhand 1762 986.8 -44.0 2029 2111.5 +40.7

MP & Chattisgarh 2140 1279.1 -40.2 1535 2300.9 +49.9

Punjab 1283.4 1168.7 -8.9 2622 2438 -7.1

Rajasthan 1815 1439 -20.7 2702 3450 +27.7

UP & Uttaranchal 3837 2106.6 -45.1 5630 8493 + 50.8

Pakistan Punjab 4240 3740 -11.8 8760 10340 +18

Sind 2300 1960 -14.8 140 200 +42.9

Bangladesh 537 480 -10.7 2124 3462 +63

All areas 22709 17215 -24.2 28437 35762 +25.8

This calls for entirely different paradigm of water management

Whither PIM/IMT?

Contours of irrigation is fast changing


Socio-technical Preconditions that support Surface Irrigation

1. Nature of the state1.1 Local authority structures :1.2 State interest in irrigation: 1.3 Ease of Forced Labor:

2. Nature of Agrarian society2.1 Irrigated cropping pattern2.2 Ease of exit from farming2.3 Agrarian institutions

3. Demographics3.1 Population pressure on farm land

4.State of irrigation technology4.1 Availability and Affordability of water lifting and transport

Future of surface irrigation?

FAVORABLECONTINGENCIES

STRONGREVENUE/LEVYHIGH

HOMOGENEOUSLOWFEUDAL/STATIST

LOW

LOW

BRIGHT

South Asia

WeakWelfareImpossible

Diverse;HighEgalitarian

Very high; intensification and diversification.

High

BLEAK

PIM/IMT will be difficult to sustain becausesurface irrigation as a technology of water

mobilization andapplication is being crowded out by

atomistic irrigation.Strategy? Reinvent surface systems to support

atomistic irrigation


Socio-technical Preconditions that support Surface Irrigation

1. Nature of the state1.1 Local authority structures :1.2 State interest in irrigation: 1.3 Ease of Forced Labor:

2. Nature of Agrarian society 2.1 Irrigated cropping pattern2.2 Ease of exit from farming2.3 Agrarian institutions

3. Demographics3.1 Population pressure on farm land

4.State of irrigation technology4.1 Availability and Affordability of water lifting and transport

Future of surface irrigation?

CONTINGENCIES

STRONGREVENUE/LEVYHIGH

MONO CROPPINGLOWFEUDAL/STATIST

LOW

LOW

CENTRAL ASIA

STRONGWelfare +Taxes+ Exports? ???

COTTON/WHEAT;HIGH taxes;LOW?STATIST?

lOW;

LOW?

GOOD

Best bet for farmer-participatoryirrigation management. Larger farms,

better levy crop prices and‘right’ capitalization will

promote PIM.


Some of the arguments in this section are developed in

this book..


What then are the ways forward?• More, rather than less government intervention in poorer

and rice based irrigation economies. Train and re-orient irrigation bureaucracies towards service orientation.

• Encourage irrigation entrepreneurship (or franchisee for distribution, PPP) model in reasonably dynamic economies. Here again, re-orientation of irrigation bureaucracy is critical.

• Learn from farmer’s initiatives and incorporate them in design of new irrigation systems.

• Learn from outside the irrigation sector. For example, electricity sector reforms in India.


Thank You

[email protected]

irrigation reforms in asia: a systematic review of 108 case studies of imt/pim

Technology