karnataka vision draft position paper on irrigation

27
Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation January 2008

Upload: others

Post on 24-Apr-2022

4 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Karnataka VisionDraft Position paper on IrrigationJanuary 2008

Page 2: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Agenda/Contents

IntroductionStatus Report on Irrigation in KarnatakaRole of GovernmentKey issues and challenges facing the Irrigation sector

Page 3: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Section One

IntroductionStatus Report on Irrigation in KarnatakaRole of GovernmentKey issues and challenges facing the Irrigation sector

Page 4: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 4Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

Background to the assignment

• Preparation of a Vision for the Karnataka in light of its current status• Study to facilitate objective sectoral allocations in the eleventh plan

keeping in view the change in GoI priorities and priorities of the state• Project started in September 2007• Analysis of the following Ten sectors

1. Healthcare2. Education – a) School & b) Higher3. Social Sector – Woman & Child; SC/ ST/ OBC/ Minorities etc. 4. Agriculture and Allied Services 5. Rural Development 6. Irrigation & Flood Control 7. Industry – Minerals, Construction & Manufacturing8. Urban Development 9. Transport and Infrastructure10.Energy

Page 5: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 5Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

KD 3: Macroeconomic Profile & Comparative Analysis

KD 4: Position Papers for various sectors

Agriculture

Industry & M

inerals

Irrigation

Transport &

Infrastructure

Energy

Healthcare

School Education

Social Sector

KD 2: Perspectives, Dimensions and Strategies Paper

KD 5 & 6: Enabling Strategy Paper

KD 7: Draft VisionKD 7: Draft Vision

Rural D

evelopment

Urban D

evelopment

Cross-Cutting Themes; Development Models and Case Studies

Sectors

KD 1: Inception Presentation

Higher Education

Assignment deliverables

Page 6: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 6Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

Methodology & consultations

• Both primary and secondary sources

• Primary: Interviews and focus group discussions

• Secondary: Primarily GoK publications & documents, KDR, KHDR

• Framework: Growth Diagnostic Framework used by ADB to analyse the key binding constraints

We are grateful to the following people • Mr. Chiranjeev Singh• MK Kamble, Secretary, WRD• Mr. KV Sarvesh, Add Dir, DoA• Mr. Udayashankar, Dy Secy, WRD• Mr. Parashurama, Dy Secy, WRD• Mr. Govindaraja, Dy Secy, WRD• Dr. TN Venugopal, JD, DoM&G• Prof. TN Prakash, UAS, Bangalore

Page 7: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Section Two

IntroductionStatus Report on Irrigation in KarnatakaRole of GovernmentKey issues and challenges facing the Irrigation sector

Page 8: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 8Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

Status Report on Karnataka’s Irrigation Sector

Surface Water• Krishna and Cauvery River basins account for 92% of ultimate utilisable freshwater resources• 80% of the water from west flowing rivers cannot be harnessed• Of the total allocation to irrigation, 43% utilisation has been achieved

Ground Water• Net annual GW availability 15.3 HAM• Existing stage of development (avg extraction) is 70%• Net GW available for future irrigation purposes is 6.47 HAM

734.511179.471268.302852(697.70)

42(481.77)

1001690Total

0.88102.43103.3193

(3.77)

2

(34.75)

6103Other basins

9.0413.3322.3722

(9.91)

-

(6.23)

122Godavari

239.77168.85408.62421

(91.38)

12

(217.27)

24409Cauvery

484.82259.18734.001326

(35.66)

28

(223.52)

681156KrishnaTMC NewOngoingComplete

Projects – in numbers and in TMC

% of total

Ultimate utilisableRiver Basin

TMCTMCTMC

Utilisation to be committed

Utilisation achieved

Allocation

Source: Water Resources Department and Department of Agriculture, GoK

Page 9: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 9Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

Status Report on Karnataka’s Irrigation Sector Ultimate Irrigation Potential

• 64% of geographic area cultivable • Net sown area is 122 lakh Ha• Ultimate irrigation potential is only 61

lakh Ha

⇒ Karnataka’s UIP covers only 52% of GSA and is the lowest among states after MH with 40%

⇒ 48% of the cultivable land will continue to be rain-fed

State-wise total geographic, cultivable area & ultimate irrigation potential

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

MH

AP

GJ

KN

TN

KR

lakh Ha

UIP Cultivable Geo area

Source: Central Water Commission and Indiastat

Page 10: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 10Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

Status Report on Karnataka’s Irrigation SectorProgress in potential creation• Irrigation potential created as of 2005-

06 was 32.9 lakh Ha• Percentage of NIA to NSA stands at

24% in 2005-06, much lower than national average of 40%

⇒ 76% of cropped area currently continues to be rain-fed

• Map depicts spread of irrigationPercentage of NIA to NSA (average of 2001-02 to 2003-04)

40%50%

40%30%

24%17% 16%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%

AllIndia

TN AP GJ KN KR MH

Source: Central Water Commission

Page 11: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 11Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

Status Report on Karnataka’s Irrigation SectorTrends in IrrigationBetween 1960-61 to 2005-06• Ground Water: Increased 10 times (1.35 lakh ha to

13.52 lakh ha)- Close to 45% of NIA through pvt. Sourcing- Environmental concerns due to lack of regulation

• 107 watersheds have reached exploitation levels above 70%

• In 80 water sheds, exploitation > 100%• Canal: increased by 4 times (2.41 lakh ha to 10.66

lakh ha)- 64 taluks / 17 districts benefiting 26% of NSA- Cropping intensity at 1.17 is low- Commensurate investment in on-farm works

lacking• Tank: declined by 43% (3.44 lakh ha to 1.76 lakh ha)

- 30-50% of storage capacity lost to siltation- User participation lacking

⇒ The main source of irrigation in the state in Minor Ground Water

0%20%40%60%80%

100%

1960-61 1970-71 1980-81 1990-91 2000-01 2005-06

Canals Tanks Wells Others

Source: Directorate of Economics & Statistics, GoK

Percentage share of each type of irrigation

LIS4%

Tanks6%

Wells13%

Other9%

Tube/Bore Wells

32%

Canals36%

Percentage of NIA by source (2004-05)

Page 12: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 12Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

Status Report on Karnataka’s Irrigation SectorTrends in irrigation - comparing with other states

Source: Indiastat

Andhra Pradesh

010002000300040005000

1995-96 1999-00 2003-04

Gujarat

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

1995-96 1999-00 2003-04

Karnataka

0500

10001500200025003000

1995-96 1999-00 2003-04

Tamil Nadu

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

1995-96 1999-00 2003-04

Canals OthersTubewells BorewellsTanks

All comparable states have followed similar trends • Canal irrigated area has either declined or increased marginally• Dependence on minor ground water irrigation has increased• Significant shift away from tanks in southern states

Page 13: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Section Three

IntroductionStatus Report on Irrigation in KarnatakaRole of GovernmentKey issues and challenges facing the Irrigation sector

Page 14: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 14Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

Sectoral spending on major sector across plans

Source: Department of Planning and Statistics

1.2

1.1

0.8

1.9

1.6

1.8

3.8

1.9

7.9

2.5

2.5

2.9

3.0

3.1

4.2

6.7

7.3

16.9

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Agriculture & Allied activities

Rural Development

Urban Development

Water supply & Sanitation

Other Social Services

Education

Energy

Transport

Irrigation & Flood Control

Rs Thousand crores

10th plan expenditure

9th plan expenditure

Irrigation accounts for the largest share of plan expenditure across sectors

Page 15: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 15Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

Focus areas of Public Expenditure

• Total investment in irrigation since commencement of plans amounts to Rs.32,546 Cr

• Major and medium irrigation has been the priority area- 94% of public investment since

1991

During the Tenth Plan, • Estimated government spending per

agricultural holding (from surface water) was Rs. 95,809*

• Estimated government spending per Ha of Irrigated land (from surface water) was Rs. 1,08,704**

37 30 34 139 188 582 8404068

8946

16862

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Plans

Rs C

rore

Plan-wise expenditure on major and medium irrigation (Rs. crore)

*Note: The graph does not include the expenditures under the annual plans

Tenth PlanCADA

1%

Major &

medium

92%

minor7%

Ninth Plan

Major and

Medium

90%

CADA2%Minor

8%

* (10th plan expd)/(agri holdings x %irrigated x % of NIA from SW)** (10th plan expd)/(NIA x % of NIA from Surface Water)

Percentage of plan expenditure per sub-sector

Source: Planning and Statistics Department, GoK

Page 16: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 16Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

Achievement

• Physical achievement has lagged behind while financial performance has exceeded planned targets

• Major & Medium (90% & 92% of total expenditure) shows huge gap between financial and physical progress

• Raju & Amarnath: Almost all non-plan capital expenditure on economic services is on the irrigation sector

9th Plan

36%

79%

85%

78%

164%

96%

104%

84%

0% 50% 100% 150% 200%

10th Plan

47%

132%

27%

74%

117%

153%

96%

103%

0%50%100%150%200%

Major and Medium

Minor

CADA

FC

Physical Financial

Source: Planning, Statistics and Science and Technology Department, GoK

Plan-wise Financial and Physical performance in irrigation in Karnataka

Page 17: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Section Four

IntroductionStatus Report on Irrigation in KarnatakaRole of GovernmentKey issues and challenges facing the Irrigation sector

1. Increased dependence on groundwater2. Large gap between potential created and potential utilised3. Poor financial health4. Large number of on-going projects

Page 18: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Framework for analysis

Increase crop yieldsthrough

sustainable use of water resources

Quantum of water supply

Quality ofwater supply

Create potential

Utilise potential created

Efficiency in water usage

Financial healthof sector

Efficient management of sector

Completion of Ongoing projects

New projects

Complete CADA works

Modern methods of irrigation

Water conservation measures

Regulation of usage and cropping pattern

Groundwater recharge

Revival of tanks

Recharge measures

Define property rights and Regulate water draft

Revision of water rates

Improve collectionefficiency

Rationalise Administrative costs

Water user participation

Integrated approach To water resources

Repair and maintenance

Increase crop yieldsthrough

sustainable use of water resources

Quantum of water supply

Quality ofwater supply

Create potential

Utilise potential created

Efficiency in water usage

Financial healthof sector

Efficient management of sector

Completion of Ongoing projects

New projects

Complete CADA works

Modern methods of irrigation

Water conservation measures

Regulation of usage and cropping pattern

Groundwater recharge

Revival of tanks

Recharge measures

Define property rights and Regulate water draft

Revision of water rates

Improve collectionefficiency

Rationalise Administrative costs

Water user participation

Integrated approach To water resources

Repair and maintenance

The main challenge facing the state in irrigation is the efficient management and usage of its water resources to ensure timely and reliable availability of adequate quantity of water in order to increase crop yields, while ensuring sustainability of the source.

Page 19: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 19Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

Key Issue 1: Increased dependence on groundwater

• The share of GW in NIA grown alarmingly from 15% in 1960-61 to 45% in 2005-06

• GW draft exceeds 100% in 80 watersheds and 90% in 10 watersheds

• GEM-97 estimates, b/w 1992 and 2004,- Total replenishable water resources

fallen: 1.63 lakh HAM to 1.53 lakh HAM - Draft from wells increased 2.5 times - GW balance available for future

development has fallen by 33% from 9.7 lakh HAM to 6.5 lakh HAM

- Deterioration of water quality⇒ Declining GW table requires deeper wells

and use of pump-sets meaning additional burden on farmers, infrastructure and state govt.

Source: Directorate of Economics & Statistics, GoK

Page 20: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 20Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

Key Issue 1: Increased dependence on groundwater

Main reasons • Indiscriminate drilling of bore-wells and

over draft of GW - Lack of regulation regarding GW

draft and critical distance b/w wells- Three fold increase in bore-well

irrigated area driven by • Financial assistance from FIs

during 70s• Quick returns on investment • Availability and awareness of

bore-well technology• increase of pump-sets from 2.07

lakh to 13.9 lakh b/w 1983-2006• Free / subsidised power

• Rapid urbanisation and change in land use pattern

• Decline in usage of tanks, which are an important source of GW recharge

Source: Department of Mines & Geology

Page 21: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 21Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

Key Issue 2: Large gap between potential created and potential utilisedEmphasis has been on creating potential; and not on increasing utilisation of already created potential• Major and medium

- Progress under CADA slow due to low funding; CAD constitutes only 1% of plan expenditure on irrigation

- In 10 programmes currently under CADWM, 25% area still to be covered

- Aging assets and poor maintenance leading to decreasing utilisation

• Minor- Tanks: Rate of utilisation=29%; 30 to

50% Siltation; KCBTMP to revive 2005 tanks since 2002; Only 4% tanks handed over

- Failure or drying up of existing wells

Planning10%

Post-implementation

23%

Handed over4%

Implementation

60%

Pre-planning

3%

Planning10%

Post-implementation

23%

Handed over4%

Implementation

60%

Pre-planning

3%

Status of tanks under KCBTMP

1%2%

% of total

0.8%14213710th Plan1%1011209th Plan

% of total Plan Exp.Plan Outlay

Plan outlay and expenditure on CADA (Rs Crore)

Source: Planning and statistics department

Source: Annual Report, Water Resources Department (Minor)

Page 22: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 22Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

Key Issue 3: Poor financial health of sector

• The current water rates are highly subsidised and fail to reflect the true cost of water supply

• Karnataka has one of the lowest ranges of water rates among comparable states

This has led to three problems:

a) Poor financial recoveries• Direct cost recoveries from irrigation

schemes has been abysmally low• Cost of water = Rs.2600-4800/Ha• O&M costs = Rs.500-600/Ha⇒ For all crops besides sugarcane, current

rates do not even cover O&M expenses, let alone full recovery

⇒ With a recovery rate of 3% to total working expenses, collections fall far short of requirement

37.05Fodder crops

86.50Jowar, maize, bajra, ragi and semi-dry crops; Pulses, Tobacco and others

148.25Cotton, Horticulture crops, Wheat, Groundnut, Sunflower

247.10Paddy

988.45Sugarcane

Water rates(Rs/Ha)

Crop

Source: Department of Minor irrigation, 2001

Water rates on crop-area basis (2001)

0.4261556148-1235AP

3.02278463-62TN

3.071303050238-6297MH

37-99

37-988

70-2750

Range of water rates

-33442KR

3.22532014KN

-3464768GJ

Recovery rateslate 90s

Gross receipts (Rs/Ha)

Working Expense (Rs/Ha)

StateState-wise financials of Multipurpose River Valley Projects

Source: Central Water Commission

Page 23: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 23Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

Key Issue 3: Poor financial health of sector

b) Salary expense significant• Delays in project completion have led

to escalating costs• However, salary is main components

of O&M• Insufficient funds left for physical

maintenance

c) Inefficiency in water usage• Excessive usage in command areas

- Water logging and salination- Inequity in distribution- Inappropriate irrigation practices

72286425

44203713

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

Major and Medium Minor

Rev Exp Salaries

Share of salaries in revenue expenditure

55%

17% 12.50%6% 9%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%

TB

Cau

very

Bha

dra

UK

P

M&

G

Levels of soil degradation in command areas

Source: CADA, MysoreSource: KV Raju & Amarnath HK; Irrigation subsidies in Karnataka

Page 24: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 24Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

Key Issue 4: Large number of on-going projects

• Planned 115 projects -> completed so far 42

• The state has 23 major and 29 medium ongoing projects which has have a planned potential of 23.06 lakh Ha and 1.14 lakh Ha respectively

• Inordinate delays in project completion

• Costs per Ha has gone up from Rs.7,930/Ha to Rs.4,10,546/Ha b/w the first and tenth plan*

4015463.881558010th3063552.928945.579th

2064871.974067.88th

559741.5839.617th

298411.95581.96th

106421.77188.365th

631820.221394th

19101.7833.993rd

21931.3629.822nd

79300.4737.271st

Cost per Ha (Rs/Ha)

Potential created

(lakh Ha)

Expenditure (Rs. Crore)

Plan

Source: Water Resources Department* Does not take not account the inflationary effect

Page 25: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 25Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

Key Issue: Large number of on-going projects

016825701979Varahi2302602182004Ramthala Lift22068595951998Singatlur21024482761993Bhima Lift20415821241992Dudhganga1908056416441991Upper Tunga18

13192813421991Markendeya172151883551983Yagachi16023083501979K.R.S.Modn.15

28323263521979D.D.Urs Canal1407516911131973Hipparagi13

18202673151973Bennithora1212417891811161972Ghataprabha-III1122294304801970Karanja10

1995U.K.P. Stage-II9 519622847394801969U.K.P. Stage-I844553894121969Harangi7199284186626351968Hemavathy61982208029341960Malaprabha570815375105001959TB RB HLC4419446210491959Kabini3106106274711947Bhadra (+ Modn.)224424429412671945TB LBC + Modn.1

Potential created up to 12/05

Planned potentialExp. Up to 12/05Est. costsYr of

commencementProject

Status of ongoing projects (Major) (Cost in Rs. Cr) (Potential in Lakh Ha)

Page 26: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

Slide 26Irrigation in KarnatakaPricewaterhouseCoopers

January 2008

Key Issue: Large number of on-going projects

• Some projects have been ongoing since the second plan period

• Project execution and CADA works not simultaneous

• Cumulative expenditure to far exceed the original estimated costs e.g., some projects, like Malaprabha(1960) and Harangi (1969), the cumulative expenditure is almost over 40 times the original costs.

• Large carry-over of incomplete projects have resulted in locking up capital and land without commensurate returns

• Reasons cited for delays- inadequate funds due to thin spread of funds over many projects,- revision in the estimated costs- change in scope of works - unforeseen bottlenecks involving other agencies- land acquisition, forest

clearance, delays in securing sanctions, inter-state water disputes - opposition by the Project Affected Persons (PAPs) etc.

Page 27: Karnataka Vision Draft Position paper on Irrigation

© 2008 PricewaterhouseCoopers. All rights reserved. “PricewaterhouseCoopers” refers to the network of member firms of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited, each of which is a separate and independent legal entity. *connectedthinking is a trademark of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (US).

PwC

Thank you!