-
Asia Pacific Water Forum (APWF)R i l W t K l d H b f G d t M
tRegional Water KnowledgeHub for Groundwater Management
Launch Meeting- Bringing Groundwater Agenda on the Surface
Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)2 3 J
2011
Rural Groundwater Management2 - 3 June 2011
Rural Groundwater Management – approaches & issues
E i f C it b d GWExperiences from Community based GW management
in Andhra Pradesh, Indiamanagement in Andhra Pradesh, India
Dr. P.S. RaoAdvisor to PS -WRD
Department of Water Resources Government of Karnataka
IndiaGovernment of Karnataka, India
A i P ifi W t F (APWF)Asia Pacific Water Forum (APWF)Regional
Water KnowledgeHub for Groundwater
Management
Launch MeetingBringing Groundwater Agenda on the Surface-
Bringing Groundwater Agenda on the Surface
Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)2 - 3 June
20112 3 June 2011
-
Rural Groundwater Management g– approaches & issues
Experiences from Community based GW t i A dh P d h I
dimanagement in Andhra Pradesh, India
Dr P S RaoDr. P.S. RaoAdvisor to PS -WRD
Department of Water Resources Government of Karnataka
IndiaGovernment of Karnataka, India
Why Groundwater is important?Why Groundwater is important?
• Increasing dependence of rural areas on• Increasing dependence
of rural areas on groundwater
• 65% irrigated area under groundwater• 85% Rural Water Supply
dependent on GW• 85% Rural Water Supply dependent on GW • More than
20 million wells existing now g• Large irrigation projects failing
to add any
additional command area or productionadditional command area or
production• New irrigated areas being possible only by g g p y
y
GW structures
-
GW Success in Gujarat State in IndiaGW Success in Gujarat State
in India
• 10% agriculture growth rate (from 2001–07) in• 10% agriculture
growth rate (from 2001 07) in Gujarat possible only due to GW
management
• Large dams – 38 BCM – 0 65 mln Ha• Large dams – 38 BCM – 0.65
mln Ha• GW wells – 11.5 BCM – 2.75 mln Ha
W t d ti it• Water productivity –– per 1 BCM canal water – USD
30 mln (INR 144 crores);
P 1 BCM G d t USD 200 l (INR 884– Per 1 BCM Groundwater – USD
200 mln (INR 884 crores)
• 35 lakh Ha new irrigated area in Gujarat (last 10 yrs)• 35
lakh Ha new irrigated area in Gujarat (last 10 yrs) is from GW
• Key is decentralized water harvesting & farm power• Key is
decentralized water harvesting & farm power supply reforms
» (source. Tushar Shal, et all. Dec. 2009, EPW)( , , )
Minor Irrigation Census in IndiaMinor Irrigation Census in
India
• The area under groundwater irrigation• The area under
groundwater irrigation increased by around 89% in the last decade,
in
kKarnataka state• Whereas SW irrigation increased by 11%Whereas
SW irrigation increased by 11%• The contribution to state GDP in
agriculture
i i l f GW i i isector is mainly from GW irrigation• New
Groundwater Act (2010) in KarnatakaNew Groundwater Act (2010) in
Karnataka
– (source. Report on MI census. Mar. 2011, Govt. of
Karnataka)
-
The ChallengesThe Challenges• Increasing groundwater pollution g
g p
– Flouride, Arsenic, Agric. Pesticides, Industrial
WastesPesticides, Industrial Wastes (heavy metals), nitrates,
FeacalD l ti d t l l• Depleting groundwater levels
• Futile investments in failed bore wells by farmers
• Ever increasing debt traps for• Ever increasing debt traps for
farmers (informal credit) leading
i i & i idto migration & suicides• Impact on women in
societyp y
The ChallengesThe Challenges• Increasing investments by
individual farmers• Increasing investments by individual
farmers
(private)I A dh P d h i I di b d USD 10– In Andhra Pradesh state
in India by now around USD 10 billion investments estimated in dry
regions
• Farmer’s in-access to scientific information and data
• GW policies or acts in every state are impractical to
implement (so only notional)to implement (so only notional)
• Emphasis on management is yet to be recognized
-
How these are addressed so far?• Technical solutions very sound
but did not y
reduce the problem
• Knowledge about the extent and intensity of the pollution,
available
L i l ti il bl• Legislations available
• Top down approach (Bureaucratic)• Top down approach
(Bureaucratic)
The Conventional Approachpp• Controlling (denying) access g ( y
g)
• Regulating/legislating
• Providing technical advise/extension
• designing projects/schemes for recharge, watershed – Supply
side focus
T d h (B ti )• Top down approach (Bureaucratic)
• Make easy choices• Make easy choices
-
The Alternate Approachpp• Free access • Stakeholder Institution
Building• Provide Knowledge and Skills• Manage water use Improve
efficiency increase• Manage water use -Improve efficiency,
increase
water productivity-without negative economic impacts – Demand
side focus
• Bottom up approach (Stake holder driven)• Bottom up approach
(Stake holder driven) -Change the way we think about
groundwater
• Make Difficult choices
Community Based GW mgmty g
ANDHRA PRADESH FARMERS MANAGED GROUNDWATER SYSTEMS PROJECT
(APFAMGS project)
Government of Netherlands fundedFAO of UN managedFAO of UN
managed
Implemented by network of 9 NGOs & 63 Farmers societies63
Farmers societies
-
The Idea• Users should be encouraged to monitor and g
manage their own groundwater system• Blending of science and
indigenous wisdom• Blending of science and indigenous wisdom
is possible• Introduction of simple tools and skills would
enable users to manage their groundwaterenable users to manage
their groundwater systems
Location63 delineated Hydrological Units, covering about
633covering about 633 habitations, in seven d hdrought-prone
districts of the State of Andhra Pradesh in S th I diSouthern
India
-
Key Strategies• Participatory Hydrological Monitoring (PHM)
y g
• Demystifying science for the benefit of farmers• Farmer Water
Schools (FWS) – community capacityFarmer Water Schools (FWS)
community capacity
building • Crop Water B dgeting (CWB) farm le el decision• Crop
Water Budgeting (CWB) – farm level decision
making• Reducing the water demand for crops• Linkage building:
farmers-scientist and farmer-g g
government• Building gender-balanced community based
institutionsBuilding gender balanced community based
institutions
around groundwater management
PHM• Participatory Hydrological Monitoring or p y y g g
PHM refers to a set of activities carried out to k t k f th h i
h d l i lkeep track of the changes in a hydrological unit by the
users themselves with little input y pfrom outsiders
-
PHM
1 Staff training/1. Staff training/ orientation
2. Reconnaissance/ meeting with themeeting with the opinion
leaders
3. Delineation of the Hydrological UnitHydrological Unit
4. Resource Inventoryy5. Base Document
PHM
6. Site identification: RG6. Site identification: RG stations
and observation wellswells
7. Social feasibility study8. Procurement of
equipment/materialequipment/material9. Establishing RG
Stations
d Ob ti lland Observation wells10. Supply of equipment to pp y q
p
the community
-
PHM11. Farmer training: PHM11. Farmer training: PHM
Module 112 F d t ll ti /12. Farmer data collection/
handholding13. Farmer training: PHM
Module 2Module 214. Farmer data recording/
h dh ldihandholding 15. Erection of Display p y
boards/data display
Demystifying sciencey y g• Rural Folk-loreRural Folk lore•
Audios• Newsletter• Exposure Visits• Exposure Visits•
Scientist-Farmer
meeting• Farmer ExhibitionFarmer Exhibition• Clay/Wooden models•
Working models• Banners/Posters• Banners/Posters
-
Hydrologic cycle
HU area calculation Crop Water requirement
Tools developed by farmersBorewell dischargeTools developed by
farmersgmeasurement Pumping wells In a basin Recharge Rate
Hydrologic Basin
Land Use PatternAnnual Water Balance
Farmer Water School (FWS)( )• Lasts a full hydrological yeary g
y• 25 and 30 farmer participants• Once every 15/20 days• Primary
learning material: HU• Primary learning material: HU
& farmer field• Sessions at farmer plots• Small groups of
five to• Small groups of five to
maximize participation• Experiential, and participatory
methodsmethods
-
FWS• Hydro-ecosystem analysis,
special topic, and group dynamics activityy y
• Compare farmer and experimental plotsexperimental plots
• Several additional field studies depending on local field
problemsp
• Ballot Box Exercise: Pre- and post testpost-test
• Field Day: share learning and results of their studies
Crop Water Budgetingp g g• A set of activities carried
out to compare estimated groundwater balancegroundwater balance
available for Rabi season with farmer crop plans in awith farmer
crop plans, in a Hydrological Unit
• Estimations are based on: – Farmer collected data – GEC of GoI
norms– ANGRAU norms
-
Pre-CWB Workshop Activitiesp• Computation of hydrological p y
g
data• Resource Inventory UpdatingResource Inventory Updating•
Crop Plan meetings
ki i h h C• Working with the CWB Package
• CWB Workshop Planning Sessions
• Material preparation• Invitations (all the• Invitations (all
the
groundwater users in the HU)
Pre-CWB Workshop Activitiesp• Farmer Crop PlanFarmer Crop
Plan
– Well-wise, farmer-wise record kept– Data updated through
group
exercises
• Crop-Water RequirementArial extent of each crop computed–
Arial extent of each crop computed
– Standards of the ANGRAU
• Projection of water requirement for Rabifor Rabi
• Projection of groundwater requirement for Rabi
-
CWB Workshopp• Conducted at HU Level• Anchor and Presenters•
Large banners, clay/wooden models, posters, flexi-Large banners,
clay/wooden models, posters, flexi
boards• Sequence of presentations:• Sequence of
presentations:
– Groundwater Recharge (June-September)G d f ( S b )–
Groundwater Draft (June-September)
– Groundwater Balance, end of September– Farmer Crop Plan for
Rabi– Projected Water requirement for Rabi crops– Comparison of
demand-supply (deficit or surplus)– Comparison with situation in
preceding CWB workshops
• Brainstorming: Probable changes in crop-plan• Scheduling of
habitation level follow up meetings
Pictures - CWB WorkshopPictures CWB Workshop
-
Post-CWB Workshop Activitiesp• Habitation level sharing of
CWBW
resultsresults• Creating platform for decision making• Listing
of agreed changes • Encouraging women participationg g p p• Crop
Adoption Survey (CAS)• Analysis of changes in cropping• Analysis of
changes in cropping,
irrigation, etc.C i f d b l• Computation of groundwater balance,
based on CAS
• Comparison of CAS data of the present year with that of
previous year
Reducing water demandReducing water demand• CWB and later
GMC
meetings used as platform to trigger discussion on demandtrigger
discussion on demand and availability
• Introducing water saving techniques/methodsq
• Introducing water saving d idevices
• Long-term experiments as part of FWS
-
Linkage buildingge bu d g• For post-intervention
sustainability• Between CBOs and theBetween CBOs and the
Government for accessing programsprograms
• Between CBOs and the scientific community to forge partnership
for mutual benefitpartnership for mutual benefit
• Raising resources for O ti d M i t fOperation and Maintenance
of community assets
Community based institutionsCo u y b sed s u o s• Farmer
VolunteersFarmer Volunteers• Groundwater
Monitoring Committee Habitation– Habitation
• Hydrological Unit y gNetwork – HU
• District Level Network• State Level Network• State Level
Network
-
Institutional FrameworkInstitutional FrameworkGROUNDWATER
MONITORING/MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE CONCEPT
GRAMA SABHAProgressive farmer
SHG leaderOpinion leader Rythu mitra Landless water user
GP members
GMC GMCGroundwater Monitoring Committee at Habitation
BUA leader
(50% Women)
HU level GMC network (HUN) 50% women HUNHUN
1W+1M1W
+1M1W+1M
( )
NGO level GMC network NGO level GMC network(50% women)
NGO level GMC network
1W+1M 1W+1M1W+1M
District/Basin level GMC Network at Gundlakamma
(DLN) 50% women
3W+3M
1W+1M1W+1M
State/Nodal level network(Steering Committee 50% )
(DLN) 50% women
3W+3M
(Steering Committee – 50% women)
Results of the Approach-1pp• Hydrological Monitoring
Networks
t bli h destablished– 190 rain gauge stations
1948 b i ll f i l l– 1948 observation wells for measuring water
levels– 890 observation wells for measuring water levels and
dischargedischarge– 90 observation wells for measuring daily
water levels– 60 Stream Gauge Stations for measuring daily
run-off60 Stream Gauge Stations for measuring daily run-off
from 63 HUs• Farmers trained in groundwater managementFarmers
trained in groundwater management
tasks– 4436 farmers in data collection– 4436 farmers in data
collection– 3163 farmers in data recording and display– 1192
farmers in book keeping1192 farmers in book keeping– 1866 farmers
in Crop Water Budgeting
-
Results of the Approach-2pp
• Hydrological Information shared openly• Hydrological
Information shared openly through:
l l d di l b d– 580 water level data display boards– 589 rain
fall data display boardsp y– 123 HU information display boards
Trained farmers cond cted Crop Water• Trained farmers conducted
Crop Water Budgeting exercise with all groundwater users (about
half a million) in 63 HUs
• Farmers identified 47 over exploited aquiferFarmers identified
47 over exploited aquifer zones
Results of the Approach-3pp
• Extensive debate on groundwater levels quantities &•
Extensive debate on groundwater levels, quantities & crop-water
relationship by farmers in various fora
• Farmers changed pump placement based on hydrological data,
cutting the costs on electricity bill y g g yand motor repairs
• Farmers reprimanded more water using farmers• Farmers
reprimanded more water using farmers• Bore well drilling holidays
in villages• Crop diversity from 7 to 16 crops• Reduction of paddy
cultivation in around 6000 acres• Reduction of paddy cultivation in
around 6000 acres
-
Results of the Approach-4pp
• Farmers reduced groundwater draft in 36 over• Farmers reduced
groundwater draft in 36 over exploited aquifer zones through:–
Switching to low water consuming crops
Practicing water efficient irrigation practices– Practicing
water efficient irrigation practices– Use of water saving devices–
Organic farming
Results of the Approach-5esu s o e pp o c 5
8000000
100000002006/07-2007/08
2007/08-2008/09
2000000
4000000
6000000
-4000000
-2000000
0
Dra
ft i
n c
u.m
-8000000
-6000000
D
-14000000
-12000000
-10000000
-20000000
-18000000
-16000000
-22000000 HU Name
-
Results of the Approach-6pp
• Gender balanceRG station Volunteers
Gender balance• Groundwater Management
C itt f d
55%45%
Committees formed:– 559 at habitation level
GMC-Leadership
Male Female
– 63 at Hydrological Unit level (Registered)
p
60%40%
OB well Volunteers
46% 54%FWS Graduates
Male Female
39% 61%
Male Female Male Female
Unforeseen Benefits• Farmers used hydrological data to lobby
with the
Government• Farmers benefited indirectly through linkage
building y g g g
activity in terms of – Seed and other agricultural inputsSeed
and other agricultural inputs– Subsidy on water saving devices
• Farmers share hydrological data freely with several• Farmers
share hydrological data freely with several government departments
for scientific interpretationsHUN i d (US$ 3 000)th h d t l t• HUNs
raised money (US$ 3,000)through data sales to:– The World Bank
Study Team– National Geophysical Research Institute– Australian
Council of International Agricultural Research
-
Relevance of this initiativeRelevance of this initiative• Puts
scientific knowledge in user’s hand• Puts scientific knowledge in
user s hand• Makes best use of traditional knowledgeg• Micro-level
analysis of hydrological system• Farmers collect, collate and
interpret data
F t k d i i f• Farmers take decisions for • demand side
managementdemand side management• Artificial groundwater
recharge
• Users come together as a functional groupF i l li k i h l i•
Functional linkages with relevant agencies
Response from External Environment
• Nominated for the Japan
p
pWater Prize in the World Water Forum IV at MexicoWater Forum IV
at Mexico
• The World Bank carried out i d d t E l tian independent
Evaluation
of the initiative • The initiative featured in the
World Development ReportWorld Development Report • The Economist
covered as a
i l i l i M 2010special article in May 2010
-
Response from External Environment• International Training
on
Demand Side Management
p
Demand Side Management of Groundwater conducted for Officers
from 14for Officers from 14 countries
• Officers/farmers from five• Officers/farmers from five State
Governments (AP, Orissa MaharashtraOrissa, Maharashtra, Tamilnadu
& Rajasthan) trainedtrained
• Exposure trip organized for the Hon’ble Speaker of the
Rajasthan Assembly and 14 MLAs
Replicability• Similar aquifer settings
p yq g
• Where farmers feel the need for groundwater
managementmanagement
• Willing local leadership• Support of the Government/Donor• The
approach can also be adapted in large aquifer• The approach can
also be adapted in large aquifer
systems with needed changes (scientific and i i i
l)institutional)
• Concepts that are relevant anywhere: HU, PHM, p y , ,CWB, FWS
and methods of rural communication
-
A recent positive fallout• Government of Andhra Pradesh (India)
drafted
p( )
new Groundwater law drawing experiences on this initiative
(consultations still ongoing)this initiative (consultations still
ongoing)– empower local bodies for groundwater governance
G l f ili idi h i l– Government role as a facilitator providing
technical, financial and legal support
– Groundwater Councils at the State, District, Sub-division and
Gram Panchayat (GP) levelsy ( )
– Funds allocation to various level bodiesPlanning Commission
GoI incl ding this• Planning Commission, GoI including this
approach in next 5 year plan
Women powered professionalismWomen powered professionalism
-
Acknowledgements• Farmers of Andhra Pradesh who patiently
gp y
experimented with us evolving over a period of 8 to 10 years
& turned into hydrogeologists8 to 10 years & turned into
hydrogeologists
• Government of Andhra Pradesh agencies at di i & ill h l
ldistrict & village panchayat level
• Dr Samala V Govardhan Das who hasDr. Samala V. Govardhan Das
who has conceptualized this idea and partnered all through along
with other colleaguesthrough along with other colleagues
• Ir. Paul ter Weel (GoN) & Dr. Daniel Gustafson ( )(FAO)
who gave a fillip to this novel initiative
ThankThankUUUU
For further details, visit htt // fhttp://www.apfamgs.org
Email: [email protected]