Immediate Impacts of Irrigation Schemes (Case Study of Charbagh, Sekhra and Junali Koch in Swat and Chitral districts)

By

M&E Section

(Draft)

109

Street 2B Defence Officers Colony Khyber

Road Peshawar www.srsp.org.pk

List of Acronyms

PEACE – Programme for Economic Advancement and Community Empowerment

SRSP – Sarhad Rural Support Program

PCNA – Post Crisis Need Assessment

KP – Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

CPI – Community Physical Infrastructure

DWSS – Drinking water supply and Sanitations Schemes

M&E – Monitoring and Evaluation

COs – Community Organizations

GDP – Gross domestic project

CCB – Citizen Community Boards

MCO – Men Community Organizations

Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................1

INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................3

Aims and Objectives of the Study.....................................................................................................4

METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY ...........................................................................................................5

FINDINGS OF THE STUDY ............................................................................................................6

Household Composition in the Research Area ........................................................................6

Tenurial Status of the Respondents .........................................................................................7

Average Farm Size in the Research Area ...............................................................................7

Association of the Respondents with COs and CCBS.............................................................8

Importance of Community Organizations for Non CO Members .............................................8

Location of Farm .......................................................................................................................9

IMPACT OF IRRIGATION SCHEMES .......................................................................................... 10

RELEVANCE .......................................................................................................................... 10

Farmers Problems before Flood 2010 ................................................................................... 10

Quantity of Water Available for Irrigation ............................................................................... 11

Problems of Farmer after Flood 2010 before SRSP Scheme ............................................... 11

Extend of Damage .................................................................................................................. 12

Quantity of Water for Irrigation ............................................................................................... 14

Performance of the Channels and Satisfaction Level of Communities ................................. 15

IMPACTS OF THE IRRIGATIONS SCHEMES...................................................................... 16

Change in Cropping Pattern ................................................................................................... 16

Pattern of Irrigation ................................................................................................................. 16

Cost of Production, Farm Income and Value of Land ............................................................ 17

Changes with respect to Farmers Workload .......................................................................... 18

IMPACT ON WOMEN AND CHILDREN ................................................................................ 19

FOOD SECURITY .................................................................................................................. 20

IMPACT ON LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION............................................................................. 21

IMPACT ON LIVELIHOOD ..................................................................................................... 21

Impact of Irrigation Channels on Local Enterprises ............................................................... 22

SUSTAINABILITY OF THE IRRIGATION SCHEME .................................................................... 24

Participation in Scheme Identification........................................................................................ 24

1

Executive Summary

Immediate Impacts of Irrigation Schemes, case study of Charbagh, Sakhra and Junali Koch is

an internal evaluation study about infrastructure component of PEACE project conducted during

January 2015.

Sarhad Rural Support Program (SRSP) and European Union have collaborated to implement a

multi sectoral four year (October 1, 2012 to September 30, 2016) Programme for Economic

Advancement and Community Empowerment (PEACE) for the socio-economic development of

Malakand division. Apart from other components, under community infrastructure and basic

social services, SRSP has initiated 403 schemes of which 248 have been handed over to

communities after completion.

SRSP M&E section conducted number of studies to report on output indicators of the project.

Specifically this study was designed to see the impact of rehabilitated flood1 hit irrigation

channels in enhancing productivity, increasing farm income and improving livelihoods, lowering

the heavy work load and resolving water conflicts of farmers.

Three irrigation channels including Charbagh, Sakhra and Junali Koch were selected out of total

23 on the basis of their early completions dates providing enough time for impacts. Considering

the statistical significance 50 percent of direct and equal number of indirect beneficiaries, a total

of 90 respondents 30 from each irrigation channels were interviewed.

General characteristics of the respondents in this study tell about household composition,

tenurial status and problems of farmer together with before and after scenarios. Densely

populated houses with an average of 7.8 as compared to 6.8 people on single unit on national

have been reported showing 84 percent owner of their land with average farm size of 10.8 kanal

followed by 10 percent tenants with average farm size of 13.2 kanal and 4 percent owner/tenant

having 13.8 kanal of farm size. Problems of the farmers before flood 2010, includes 75 percent

saying lack of inadequate water for irrigation together with lack of farm to market road, low

production, lack of quality seeds, access to modern machinery and lack of awareness about

modern technologies. Other problems included are heavy work load with turns of water

spending nights and conflicts over the water.

1 Flood 2010 caused heavy damage to infrastructures including roads, bridges, water supply and irrigation facilities

in Malakand division.

2

Results of the study shows that highly effective schemes verified by over 90 percent of

respondents the channels to be fully functional, having no risk of closure, according to the

needs of the communities, having no issues ensuring irrigation water increased from 3.81 to 8

cusecs in Charbagh, 0.75 to 3 in Sakhra and 0.56 to 1.3 in Junali Koch Chitral have been

implemented by SRSP PEACE project.

Successful irrigation channels in the research area have resulted to change the farm income,

cost of production, value of land, and cropping pattern in the research area. Data shows that on

per kanal basis cost of production increased from Rs. 4119 to Rs.19110 farm income Rs.53984

to Rs. 146866 and value of land Rs. 53984 to 3362016. Also in the entire research area, 41

percent of the respondents have changed their cropping pattern for Rabbi or winter crops and

36 percent for Kharif or summer crops.

Technological and mechanized improvements in the irrigation system introduced by SRSP has

resulted lower down the workload of farmers, improved their health by discontinuing the long

wait for their turn and working during night. This situation has resulted increased the free time of

farmer which is now used for businesses, domestic work, gardening, study and social activities.

Apart from direct benefits to farmers rehabilitation of irrigation scheme also indirectly impacted

women and children by improving social cohesion, awareness, health conditions, empowerment

and work load.

Strong evidence of subsistence level farming towards more commercialized has been noticed

with increased number of livestock, more quantity of milk and fodder production. 83 percent of

the respondents who were used to be subsistence level have decreased to 59 percent, 13

percent partial commercial have increased to 16 percent and 3 percent commercial farmers

have increased to 26 percent in the entire research area. Moreover income at hand has

improved shock bearing capacity of 57 percent of the respondents.

Impact of irrigation channels strengthening and creating of new enterprises have been minimal

reporting by 80 percent of the respondents but with that increased in labor wages and off farm

activities have been verified by 79 and 72 percent of the respondents

Sustainability can be ensured with participation of stakeholders in identification, selection and

implementation. Contribution in kind and cash also create ownership in scheme. Verified by 85

percent of the respondents SRSP applied democratic method by involving all beneficiaries

irrespective of their association with CO in CO. This has resulted 74 percent of the respondents

to say that the scheme has no problem, 98 percent of the respondents visited the site when the

scheme were under construction, 92 percent have participated in meeting and cash contribution

only 28 percent have made that for the construction of the scheme.

3

INTRODUCTION

Poor people have tremendous potentials to make significant changes in their own lives if they

are provided with required support in the farm of capital, technology and skill. Based on the

belief, Sarhad Rural Support Program (SRSP), a non government humanitarian organization,

facilitates communities to create downwardly accountable institutions with capacity to undertake

development initiatives. Since its inception SRSP has been able to support development of

over 33,100 community based organizations covering over 5.8 million population across Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa and Tribal Areas. SRSP has worked with various national and international

donors and implemented numerous projects about social mobilization, micro finance, education,

capacity building, natural resource management, and enterprise and value chain development.

Under partnership for Malakand, Sarhad Rural Support Program and European Union have

collaborated to implement a multi sectoral four year (October 1, 2012 to September 30, 2016)

Programme for Economic Advancement and Community Empowerment (PEACE) for the socio-

economic development of Malakand division. The programme is conceptualized and developed

on comprehensive Malakand Strategy and Post Crisis Need Assessment (PCNA) elaborating

priorities of the Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for rebuilding Malakand Division and

helping its people to resume social and economic recovery through set of integrated initiatives.

The PEACE is designed to contribute to “reduce the negative impact of economic deprivation,

poverty and social inequality in areas affected by security crisis and natural disasters and to turn

this into opportunities to build and empower resilient communities that participate actively in

development activities”. The specific objective of the programme is ‘to revitalize rural economy

and promote renewable energy to enhance social cohesion and opportunities for sustainable

livelihoods in Malakand Division of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province’. The Programme comprises

five components with well defined results of:

1. Establishment and strengthening of an inclusive and representative system of

community mobilization for social and economic development federating villages at the

level of Union Councils;

2. Electrification for rural households through setting up of community managed micro

hydro power generating systems;

3. Improvement of Community Infrastructure (CPI) and Basic Social Services;

4

4. Self-confidence of women and their ability to independently participate in social and

economic activities enhanced; and

5. Growth of economic activities

Community Infrastructure and Basic Social Services

Since October 2012 SRSP PEACE project, under improvement of community infrastructure and

basic social services components, has initiated 403 schemes of different nature across the

program area. 248 by 403 schemes have been completed and handed over to communities

while 155 schemes are under construction phase.

Table 1 Status of Community Infrastructure Schemes in PEACE Project

Project Type Completed Under Construction Grand Total

DWSS 72 56 128

Irrigation 17 6 23

Road 18 20 38

Govt. Facility 87 31 118

Protection Work 6 2 8

Street pavement & Sanitation 33 13 46

Bridge 14 25 39

Others 1 2 3

Grand Total 248 155 403 Source: Progress report PEACE Project

Out of 403 initiated schemes, 128 are drinking water, 118 are government facilities, 46 are

street pavement, 39 are bridges and 23 are irrigation schemes along with others.

Aims and Objectives of the Study

After two years of PEACE project initiation, it is pertinent to provide outcome based evidences

against the progress and for that reason SRSP M&E section has designed number of studies to

see the immediate impacts of the infrastructures schemes implemented under PEACE project.

This particular study has been designed to see the impact of irrigation channels.

Main objective of the study is to assess immediate impact of irrigation channels with specific

focus on:

1. Effectiveness of the irrigations channels in addressing problem of the farmer

2. Enhancing productivity, increasing farm income and improving livelihoods of beneficiary

small farmers

3. Impact of scheme in lowering the heavy workload of farmer and conflicts over water for

irrigations

4. To recommend the contributions of the scheme for future policy and planning

5

METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

SRSP PEACE project has so far implemented 248 infrastructure schemes of different nature

including 23 irrigation channels. M&E section in SRSP has designed number of impact studies

to cover the whole infrastructure component but this study specifically focuses on impact of

irrigation channels implemented under the project. Out of 23 total irrigation schemes, 3 channels

including Charbagh, Sakhera and Junali Koch were selected on the basis of their early

completions dates providing water for irrigation at least for two cropping season giving enough

time for impact evaluation.

Table 2 Detail of Irrigation Scheme SRSP PEACE Project

District Irrigation Schemes

Grand Total Completed Under Construction

Buner 2 - 2

Chitral 4 - 4

Dir Lower 3 5 8

Dir Upper 1 1 2

Malakand 5 - 5

Swat 2 - 2

Grand Total 17 6 23

A representative sample of 3 schemes selected having with household and financial layout as

under.

Table 2 Irrigation Schemes, Costs and Household beneficiates

S.No District Name of Scheme Total costs (Rs. Millions) Households

1 Swat Sekhra Irrigation Channel 3.3 70

2 Swat Charbagh Irrigation channel 4.1 912

3 Chitral Junali Koch Irrigation Scheme 6.9 345

Total 3 14.3 1327

There are two types of the beneficiaries for each scheme i.e. direct members of the

implementing community organizations and non member water users. Considering both the

categories of beneficiaries and keeping statistical significance in view, 30 respondents from

each scheme have been interviewed i.e. almost of 50 percent of direct beneficiaries and equal

number of non members beneficiaries.

6

FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

Main findings of the study consist of characteristics of the respondents and impacts of irrigation

schemes.

CHARACTERISTICS OF RESPONDENTS

Sarhad Rural Support Programme is working in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) and Federally

Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan with vision to create a society, where poverty is reduced

and sustainable means of livelihood are ensured. SRSP wanted to achieve this by building a

social capital through mobilizing communities for poverty reduction. SRSP pays maximum

attention to focus on poor and marginalized segment of society to address poverty at gross root

level. Incidence of poverty among the respondents of the study may depends whether the

respondents are direct members of the Community Organizations (COs) more likely belonging

to poor families or non CO member water users most likely depicting the general trend in that

society.

Respondents of the study are the beneficiaries of the three irrigation channels selected for this

study and include both members from CO and non member water beneficiaries. Characteristics

of the respondents includes household composition, tenurial status, average farm size, detail

about CO and Non CO members and their association with COs.

Household Composition in the Research Area

The type and number of people who occupy a household are referred to as its composition. This

may be a two-parent family, a group of adults sharing accommodation, or a person living alone.

In Pakistan, brick masonry single storey houses with joint and extended family living

arrangements are common in rural areas.

Composition of household in the research area shows that on average 7.8 people are living on

single house basis which shows increasing trend of 7.1 in Junali Koch, 7.6 in Sekhra and 8.9 in

Charbagh.

Table 4 Average No of Household member in the Research Area

Channels Adults Children

Total Male Female Male Female

Junali Koch 2.5 2.8 02 1.6 7.1

Sakhra 03 2.6 2.3 02 7.6

Charbagh 3.6 3.3 2.4 2.3 8.9

Average 3.1 2.9 2.2 1.9 7.8

7

When we compare the results of this study with household composition at national level i.e. 6.8

people living on single family basis (government of Pakistan 2012- 2013)2 , it turns out to be

greater than our national figures which may implies that SRSP focus poor segment of society

where houses are overcrowded.

Tenurial Status of the Respondents

Land tenure means the rights of farmers with respect to land to determine who can use the land

for how long and under what conditions. In Pakistan on a very broad basis, land is owned by the

three categories of farmers i.e. the owners who own the land, the tenants who do not have their

own land rather they rent land for cultivation and the owner cum tenants who have their own

land but they also rent extra land for cultivation.

Data on tenurial status of the respondents shows that 84 percent of the respondents are owner

followed by 10 percent tenants and 4 percent owner/tenant respectively.

Tenurial Status of Respondents in the Research Area

Average Farm Size in the Research Area

Agriculture is dominant sector of Pakistan’s economy by contributing 21.4 percent to GDP and

employing 45 percent of the country’s labour force3 (Government of Pakistan 2012-13).

Data in the table shows that average farm size in the research areas is 11.2 Kanal (0.0013

hectare) which is 14.1 Kanal at Charbagh, followed by 11.9 Sakhra and 11.8 in Junali Koch

respectively.

Further analysis of the data shows that average farm size for owner, owner/tenant and tenants

are 10.8 Kanal followed by 13.8 and 13.2 respectively.

2 2012-13 Pakistan Demographic and Health Survey 3 Economic Survey of Pakistan 2012-13

Owner Owner/Tenant Tenants

Series1 84 4 11

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

8

Table 5 Farm Area in Kanal in the Research Area (Average in Kanal)

Channels Owned Rented Total

Charbagh 14.1 0.0 14.1

Junali Koch 11.4 6.0 11.8

Sakhra 11.9 0.0 11.9

Grand Total 11.1 4.0 11.2

Association of the Respondents with COs and CCBS

Community organizations (COs) are corner stone of SRSP’s approach for poverty reduction.

COs are formed, nurtured and linked with government line departments before awarding them

any infrastructure scheme. Representation of entire village is ensured in COs (30 members) to

facilitate smooth functioning of the organization and promote unity and internal harmony.

The study was focused on users of the irrigation channels irrespective of their association with

SRSP or any other organizations and in this way respondents are exptected to be member of

the COs or may not have any relationship with COs.

SRSP has a bottom up approach to community development. At the lowest level SRSP

facilitates to form separate community organizations of both men and women and in some

areas mix COs having membership of both men and women are also formed. In the coming

table it shows that 62 percents of the respondents are members of the community organizations

while 38 percent are non members. Among the CO members 43 percent belongs to men

community organizations followed by 18 percent male members of the mix community

organizations and 1 percent CCBs.

Table 6 Association of Beneficiaries with Community Organizations

Channels

CO Members Non Member Total

MCO Mix COs CCB Total

Charbagh 8

1 9 21 30

Junali Koch 13 16

29 1 30

Sakhra 18

18 12 30

Total 39 16 1 56 34 90

Percentage 43 18 1 62 38 100

Importance of Community Organizations for Non CO Members

Community organizations have played a vital role in rehabilitation of flood hit irrigation channels

in the research area, which benefited both members of the CO as well as non member

9

beneficiaries of the channels. When non members respondents of the research were asked

having knowledge about COs and their willingness for membership, it came out that 85 percent

of the respondents are aware of COs and 82 of them are wished to get membership in the COs.

Table 7 Knowledge of Non Members about CO and Willingness for Membership

Channels Knowledge about CO

Willingness for CO Membership Grand Total

No Yes Yes No

Charbagh 5 15 14 1 20

Junali Koch 1 1 2

Sakhra 13 13 13

Total 5 29 28 1 34

Percentage 15 85 82 3 100

The discussion above lead us to say that SRSP established COs have placed great influence

on lives of the villagers and for that reason majority wish to be member to take part in the

development of the area.

Location of Farm

Common wisdom about irrigation channel shows that farmers near the head of the channel

receive more water with fewer issues and contrary to this tail enders receive less water and face

more issues. This aspects also impacts on productivity and farm income.

Data in the table below shows that 49 percent of the respondents have their farms in the middle

of the command area, followed by 30 percent near the head of the channel and 19 percent at

the tail ends.

Table 8 Location of Farm under the Channel

Location of Farm Charbagh Junali Koch Sakhra Total %

Middle of the Channel 19 19 6 44 49

Mix 2

2 2

Near the Head 1 11 15 27 30

Tail Ender 8

9 17 19

Grand Total 30 30 30 90 100

In order to get true picture about the impact of the irrigation channel it was important to select

respondents on equal proportions. Further analysis of the data shows that on average farmers

are 1.7, 1.4 and 1.3 kilometer away from the head of the channel in Charbagh, Sakhera and

Chitral.

10

IMPACT EVALUATION OF IRRIGATION SCHEMES

Impact evaluation normally establishes whether the intervention had a welfare effect on

individuals, households, and communities, and whether this effect can be attributed to the

concerned intervention or not. Towards this end, key evaluation questions for this study were to

evaluate the irrigation channels for relevance, effectiveness, impact and sustainability. Impact

has been investigated in detail including farm productivity, farm income and impact on

livelihoods, women, children and local businesses.

RELEVANCE

For this study responsiveness of SRSP facilitation towards the needs of the respondents

investigated for two phases i.e. situation before flood 2010, when old irrigation scheme was

intact and situation after flood 2010, when the scheme was destroyed. This enabled us compare

the results with the situation when the irrigation channels have been rehabilitated by SRSP i.e.

amount of water available now can be compared with both situations.

Farmers Problems before Flood 2010

Common understanding tells us that before flood 2010 farmers were using their existing

facilities for irrigation. Together with water issues, what other problems farming community were

facing before was important to know so that can be compared with new situation when their

channels have been rehabilitated. It may be likely that situation is improved or it is also likely

situation has been worse than before. Knowing the exact situation will help to gauge the

expected change.

With their old irrigation channel intact, data shows that 75 percent of the respondents reported

lack of inadequate water for irrigation. Other problems which have been highlighted are lack of

farm to market road, low production, lack of quality seeds, access to modern machinery and

lack of awareness about modern technologies.

11

In the above charts lack of water for irrigation when further investigated form the respondents, it

showed that they had turns of water, had to spend nights for watering their fields and they also

reported to have conflicts with each other over the water.

Quantity of Water Available for Irrigation

Inadequate water for irrigation as highlighted by the respondent, the quantity of available water

with old irrigation schemes was very important to determine so that it can be compared with the

new situation when irrigation scheme has been rehabilitated. Available water for irrigation was

3.81 cusecs4 in Charbagh, 0.75 cusec in Sakhra and 0.56 cusecs in Junali Koch.

Problems of Farmer after Flood 2010 before SRSP Scheme

In Charbagh, Junali Koch and Sakhra SRSP interventions were started after flood 2010. When

the irrigation channels were destroyed by the flood agriculture of the area affected enormously

with no water for irrigation which resulted low production, heavy work load of farmers, limited

land under cultivation and increased rate of water conflicts. Data shows that water for irrigation

has been highlighted as major issue for both Rabi and Kharif seasons.

4 Field realities shows that use of cusecs for discharge of water was un known for the respondents and instead prevailing method measuring the depth of water in inches observed common. So data were gathered in inches

which have been converted to cusecs

No, 22 No, 23 No, 24 No, 23 No, 23 No, 24

Yes, 68 Yes, 67 Yes, 66 Yes, 67 Yes, 67 Yes, 66

Lack of

Inadequate

Water for

Irrigation

Farm to Market

Roads

Low Production Lack of Quality

Seeds

Access to

Modern

Machinery

Lack of

Awareness

Farmer’s Problems Before Flood 2010

12

Extend of Damage

When it was asked about the magnitude of the damage caused by the flood 2010, 70 percent of

the respondents saying that whole channel was damaged and 30 percent saying channels to be

partially damaged.

Losses of the farmer can be estimated with the duration how long the channels were not

repaired after flood 2010. Data shows that channels were not repaired for 21 months nearly two

year i.e. four cropping seasons. One can easily understand the problem of the subsistence level

farmers in the research area. Channel rehabilitation could also have been extended if SRSP

had not been approached by the communities and the matters were left for government support

and in that case conditions of the farmer have been worsening substantially.

Bar charts of Sakhra and Charbagh show more alarming situation where the channels were not

repaired for 35 and 31 months respectively.

Whole Channel Was Damaged

70%Partially Damaged

30%

Other30%

31

19

35

21

Charbagh

Junali Koch

Sakhra

Grand Total

How long the Channel was not repaired

Months

13

Figures about alternatives sources of irrigation during time of no water in the channel have been

reported by 55 percent depending on rain water, followed by 18 percent depending on channel

of upper village and 15 percent depending on tube well.

This has been the situation SRSP may have approached for facilitation by the communities and

SRSP being a non government organization could have started its facilitation with prompt action

to retrieve farming community from dismal situation.

As per the need of the community explained in the above paragraph, what SRSP designed for

them has been narrated in the coming section of the study.

14

EFFECTIVENESS

In this section data has been gathered about the extent of SRSP facilitation being sufficient to

fulfill needs of the communities which has been highlighted in the previous sections.

Quantity of Water for Irrigation

Quantity of water available for irrigation has been investigated in three scenarios i.e. with old

irrigation channel, when the irrigation channels were destroyed and when rehabilitated again by

SRSP.

Before flood 2010 the amount of water in the old irrigation channels was 3.81, 0.75 and 0.56

cusecs in Charbagh, Junali Koch and Sakhra. With this condition the channels were destroyed

and situation remained for almost 2 years i.e. two 4 cropping seasons when SRSP was called

for facilitation.

After SRSP facilitation the irrigation water increased from 3.81 to 8 in Charbagh, 0.75 to 3 in

Sakhra and 0.56 to 1.3 cusecs in Junali Koch Chitral. Value of SRSP facilitation increases when

we compare the situation with flood hit situation when the irrigation water in the channel was

unavailable for almost two years.

Quantity of Irrigation Water in cusecs before & after

About SRSP intervention further when it was asked that whether these interventions have been

according to community needs or not it has been categorically conveyed that the intervention

are 100 percent according to the needs of the farmers. Further it has been elaborated that

farming community have adequate water during Rabi and Kharif seasons.

Before, 3.81

Before, 0.75

Before, 0.56

Now, 8

Now, 3

Now, 1.3

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00

Charbagh

Sakhra

Junali Koch

15

SRSP introduces participatory method for need identification and prioritization and in that

process every segment of society get equal chance to include their view point for scheme

identification, prioritization and selection. When it was asked that how different segment of

society were taken into scheme selection process it revealed that CO and Non CO members

jointly have finalized the scheme through democratic process reported by 90 percent of the

respondents.

Performance of the Channels and Satisfaction Level of Communities

Community satisfaction refers to people’s subjective evaluation of the intervention as measured

by how well it meets their needs and for this purpose high level of satisfaction is very important

for the success and sustainability of any intervention.

Whether the communities are satisfied with the performance of the scheme or not, the survey

result shows 94 percent agreements the respondents to be satisfied against 6 percent to be not

satisfied. Satisfaction level further elaborated with three cross questions, is the scheme fully

functional at present, safe and free from any kind of rick of closure and is there any issue now

and during the construction. It has been reported saying by 100 percent of the respondents the

scheme to be functional at present followed by of the 92 percent reporting no issue with scheme

and the scheme is safe from any risk of closure by 83 percent.

Satisfaction level of Communities

Yes, 100

Yes, 83

Yes, 8

Yes, 94

No, 0

No, 17

No, 92

No, 6

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Is the scheme fully functional at present

Is the scheme safe and free from any risk of

closure

Were there any issues faced during construction

Are you satisfied with the performance of the

CPI

16

IMPACT OF IRRIGATION SCHEMES

With old irrigation schemes, it was pointed out by the respondents that water for irrigation was

major issue which hinders both productivity and return on investments. SRSP interventions in

rehabilitation of the flood hit irrigation channels resulted increased water than prior irrigation

facilities. Such increase may also result changes with respect to agricultural practices like

cropping pattern, change in yield and farm income, input costs, assets value, enterprise creation

etc.

In this section the impact of the irrigation schemes have been reported in detail with evidence

from the respondents.

Change in Cropping Pattern

Change in cropping pattern has been investigated separately for Kharif and Rabbi Crops. It is

observed that considerable changes have been reported both for Kharif and Rabbi Crops. The

graph shows that 41 percent of the farmers have changed their cropping patter for Rabbi

Season while 36 percent for Kharif season against 59 and 64 percent reported to be persistent

to their existing cropping pattern.

For rabbi crops the farmers have included fodder, forest plants, wheat, barley and pulses in

their cropping pattern while for Kharif season they have included apricot, barley, orchard, bitter

guard, maize, onion, peas, wheat, persimmon, peach, rice and strawberry.

Change in Cropping Pattern (Kharif and Rabbi Crops)

Pattern of Irrigation

To see changes with respect to irrigation, numbers of irrigated plots before and after the

scheme have been calculated. Bar graph shows that number of plots after irrigation channel has

been increased to 200 from 96 and in the same way non irrigated plots have been decreased to

Chaged, 36

Chaged, 41

No Change, 64

No Change, 59

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Kharif

Rabbi

17

only 16 plots from 116. Same pattern has been shown for number of irrigate and non irrigation

plots if seen for channels on individuals basis i.e. Charbagh, Junali Koch and Sakhera.

Cost of Production, Farm Income and Value of Land

Impact of irrigation schemes with respect to cost of production5, farm income and value of land

were also investigated during the survey.

Cost of production may include detail costs estimates about land, labor and capital but in this

study only costs of pesticides and fertilizer have been investigated as these are the items which

farmer purchases from the market rest is mostly acquired internally. Bar chart about cost of

production shows significant change has been occurred in before and after scenarios i.e. Rs.

4119 before has now been increased to 19110.

Farm income refers to profits and losses incurred through the operation of a farm and here in

this study the term has been used for gross total income on farm gate basis which has been

increased from Rs. 53984 to Rs. 146866.

Land is typically the most important asset owned by rural households in Pakistan. Additionally,

land ownership is highly valued for social and cultural reasons. In Pakistan lands are not

designated and it depends on the sweet will of the owner how to use that land. Data in the bar

chart shows that value of one kanal land has been increased from Rs. 402125 to Rs. 964693.

Changes with respect to increased land values cannot be attributed solely to the rehabilitation of

irrigation channels rather it depends on other external factors. The matter together with increase

in population has resulted agricultural lands to be used for residential purposes which has

increased the value of land enormously in Pakistan on general basis.

5 This includes costs of fertil izers and pesticides

0 50 100 150 200

Irrigated

Non Irrigated

Irrigated

Non Irrigated

No

of

plo

ts

Be

fore

No

of

plo

ts

Aft

er

96

116

200

16

18

Cost of Production, Income and Value of Land

Changes with respect to Farmers Workload

Work load of the farmers with old and new irrigation systems have been investigated around

three parameters i.e. faced heavy work load, human health problems and long wait for their

turns using the old and new irrigation systems. Data shows that with new irrigation system work

load, health problems and waiting for turn have been decreased considerably from 88 to 54

percent showing -38 percent decrease for work load, 83 to 44 showing -47 percent decrease for

human health problems and 58 to 29 percent showing -50 percent decrease in long wait for their

turns.

Changes in Farmers work load and Human Health

After

Before

After

Before

After

Before

Pe

rk k

an

al

Val

ue

of

Lan

dFa

rm In

com

e

Co

st o

f

Pro

du

ctio

n

964693

402125

146866

53984

19110

4119

Before, 88Before, 83

Before, 58After, 54After, 44

After, 29

% decrease, -38% decrease, -47 %decrease, -50-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Faced Heavy Workload Faced Human Health Problem Long Wait for Your Turn

19

As it is evident for the above graph that former work load have been decreased due to the

rehabilitation of the channels which ensure adequate water for them on their convenient time.

Farmers have now saved time to use that in other income generating or social activities.

Analysis of the information further shows that farmer have used extra time for businesses,

domestic work, gardening, giving time to kids, farm labor work, taking care of cattle, study and

participating in social activities.

IMPACT ON WOMEN AND CHILDREN

It believed that heaviest burdens of poor infrastructure fall on the shoulders of women and girls

due to gender inequalities prevailing in our societies. Infrastructure development if not gender-

neutral may affects development patterns and outcomes, economic opportunities, and

resource allocations in ways that are often markedly different for men and for women.

Essentially, this is because men and women have different roles and responsibilities that

requires combining supply-side issues of technical design specifications with demand-side

dimensions of who uses infrastructure, for what purposes, and with what impacts on individuals,

households, and communities.

Impact of the irrigation scheme on women and children has been investigated in this study and

it shows positive trend for social cohesion, awareness, health conditions, empowerment and

work load both for women and children.

Impact on Women and Children

0 20 40 60 80 100

Workload on Women

Workload on Children

Empowerment of Women

Empowerment of Children

Improved health conditions-of Women

Improved health conditions of Children

Increased awareness of Women

Increased awareness of Children

Social cohesion of women

Social cohesion of children

No, 41

No, 47

No, 31

No, 30

No, 31

No, 29

No, 28

No, 26

No, 24

No, 33

Yes, 59

Yes, 53

Yes, 69

Yes, 70

Yes, 69

Yes, 71

Yes, 72

Yes, 74

Yes, 76

Yes, 67

20

FOOD SECURITY

Food security aspect has been covered by asking about change in purpose of farming with old

and new irrigation system. Based on basic purpose, farming community can be divided into

three categories, one those whose basic purpose is to feed themselves, two feed themselves as

well as sell the extra produce and three whose basic purpose of farming is to sell the produce.

The first category is called subsistence level farmers, second partially commercial and third one

commercial farmer.

Below bar chart shows that prior the rehabilitation of irrigation channels 83 percent of the

respondents were subsistence level which decreased to 59 percent in after scenario, partial

commercial farmers were 13 percent which increased to 16 percent and commercial farmers

were 3 percent which increased to 26 percent.

The above discussion lead us to say that rehabilitation of irrigation channels have great impact

on farming community by commercializing their farms as the percentages of both partial

commercial and commercial farmers have been increased to a great extent.

Change with respect to Basic Purpose of farming with new irrigation

Further from pervious section of the study, if we consider the farm sizes of owner, owner/tenant

and tenants i.e. 10.8, 13.8 and 13.2 kanal, that intrigue us to think about the entrepreneurial

characteristics of the respondents to be at high level using such small portion of land for

commercial purposes and getting good returns.

Before, 3

Before, 13

Before, 83

After, 26

After, 16

After, 59

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Commerical

Partial Commerical

Subsistance Level

21

IMPACT ON LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION

Livestock production is vital for small farmers. Animals are source of food, income, employment

and foreign exchange. For low income producers, livestock can serve as a store of wealth;

provide draught power and organic fertilizer for crop production and a means of transport.

During the survey 75 percent of the respondents reported that their live stocks have been

affected in many ways i.e. decrease in number of livestock, milk productivity and fodder

production.

Below graph shows that number of live stock, milk production and fodder production decreased

when the channels were destroyed by the flood 2010. The situation again improved with

rehabilitation of the irrigation channels.

Table 2 Impact on Livestock Production

IMPACT ON LIVELIHOOD

Livelihood assets can includes natural resources, technologies, skills, knowledge and capacity,

health, access to education, sources of credit and networks of social support. The extent of

access to these assets is strongly influenced by their vulnerability context, shocks and

seasonality. Access is also influenced by the prevailing social, institutional and political

environment, which affects the ways in which people combine and use their assets to achieve

their goals.

Theory shows livelihood to be a complex issue suggesting that can be assessed thoroughly with

a separate study, however in this study efforts have been made to record responses from the

community about changes with respect to livelihoods parameters and it shows that 62 percent

of the respondents agreeing on changes with respect to livelihoods with 57 percent saying

shock bearing capacity to be improved with 54 percent saying resilience to be improved.

85

5 8

8286

4 6

8488

210

80

0

20

40

60

80

100

Decreased Increased Decreased Increased

Before After

No Livestock

Milk Production

Fodder Production

22

Changes in Livelihood Assets with New Irrigation System

Impact of Irrigation Channels on Local Enterprises

Local economies play a very important role for economic development of any country by

reflecting their local skills, traditions, and landscapes they add specialties to the businesses

rather than simply selling commodities at poor prices.

Like mega developmental projects small infrastructure scheme do have impact on local

economies by creating opportunities for small businesses and employing the unemployed

population. Local businesses in the research area included small grocery shops, farms and

orchards, vegetable production and livestock rearing.

Impact of irrigation channels on local enterprises was seen by recording the respondent’s point

of view about creating new and strengthening existing enterprises, increase in labor wages and

increase in off farm activities.

Bar chart shows that labor wages and off farm activities have been increased by the

rehabilitation of irrigation channels which has been verified by 79 and 72 percent of the

respondents. On the other hand the impact of irrigation channels on strengthening and creating

of new enterprises have been minimal verifying by vast majority of the respondents i.e. 80 and

74 respectively.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Changes occurd

with respect ot

livelihood

Shock improved Resilience Improved

Yes, 62 Yes, 57Yes, 54

No, 38No, 43 No, 46

23

Irrigation Channels and Income Generation

Yes, 20

Yes, 26

Yes, 72

Yes, 79

No, 80

No, 74

No, 28

No, 21

Creation of new enterprises

Existing enterprises setrenthened

Off farm labor activities increased

Labor wage increased

24

SUSTAINABILITY OF THE IRRIGATION SCHEME

Strong and sustainable irrigation system needs more than cement and physical structures, a

strong organization is also necessary to assure that the system can remain functional. It is

evident that sustainability depends on how the scheme was identified, designed, being

implemented and maintained. Community’s commitment and ownerships plays an important

role in sustainability and getting maximum benefit from the scheme. Participatory approaches

have been acknowledged across the world to ensure sustainability of any interventions and in

this section of the information about participation and related sustainability has been gathered.

Participation in Scheme Identification

Data in the chart shows that 85 percent of the respondents saying CO, Non CO members along

with SRSP have identified the scheme, 12 percent saying SRSP and CO management have

identified the scheme while only 3 percent of the respondents recorded that women and

Children were also included in the identification of the scheme.

Participation of Communities Scheme identification

Problem in Irrigation Scheme

Graph shows problems in Charbagh, Junali Koch and Sakhera irrigation schemes. On overall

basis 74 percent of the respondents say that the scheme has no problem while 24 percent

recorded that the scheme have problems of different nature. Individually Charbagh and Sakhera

seems to be more successful schemes than Junali Koch. In Sakhra 3 out of 33 percent are

mentioning about problems in the scheme, in Charbagh 2 out of 33 and in Junali Koch 20 out of

33 are mentioning about problems in the scheme.

CO, Non CO members and

SRSP

85%

women and children

3%

SRSP and CO management

only

12%

25

Problem in Irrigation Scheme s

Further analysis regarding the 24 percent of the respondents who associate problem with the

scheme, shows that 10 percent saying the scheme is prone to hazards, 8 percent saying about

leaking and 5 percent say that the scheme deposited silt and debris. Further, which portion of

the channel has the problem i.e. with SRSP rehabilitated portion or other than that, only 11

percent responded there is problem other than the SRSP rehabilitated parts of the channel.

Contribution in the Scheme

The degree of contribution ensures quality and ownership in the scheme which further certain

sustainability in the long run. In the bar chart below contribution has been elaborated asking

about site visiting, cash contribution and participating in meeting. Among the three 98 percent of

the respondents have visited the site when the scheme were under construction followed by 92

percent have participated in meeting and about cash contribution only 28 percent have made

that for the construction of the scheme.

Farmers Contribution in the Scheme

25

75

3

30

20

13

31

2

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

To

tal

Ch

arb

ag

h

Jun

ali

Ko

cha

Sakh

ra

92

28

98

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

In Meeting

Participation

In cash

Contribution

Site Visiting

during

Construction