Improving the performance of public irrigation in South Asia Thierry Facon, FAO Aditi Mukherji, IWMI
Jun 27, 2015
Improving the performance of
public irrigation in South Asia
Thierry Facon, FAO Aditi Mukherji, IWMI
• India
– Protective irrigation
– Low duties: 0.35 l/s/ha
– Warabundi
– Shejpahi
– Block
– Structured design
Public irrigation in South Asia in short
• Pakistan
– Indus system
– Protective irrigation
– Low duties
– Warabundi
– Salinization
– Waterlogging
-Impact on food security, poverty alleviation and economic
growth
-Equity not achieved, reliability dubious, flexibility very low
-Stagnation/decline
-Low flowrates and poor service push farmers to groundwater
which has allowed intensification
Structured design
Proportional flow division
• Can you grow
cash crops?
• Can you adopt
water saving
technologies?
Multifunctionality
• Multiple Uses of Water is a common practice !
• On a subset of 30 systems only 2 appear as single use !
• Actual water productivity much higher than WP(crop) !
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Kim D
ong B
HH Viet
nam
Luon
g tai B
HH Viet
nam
Shaha
pur K
arnat
aka In
dia
KOIS
P S
ri Lan
ka
Zanghe
china
Sh
are
of
esti
mat
ed b
enef
its
Power
Drainage, Flood control,
transport, environment
Homestead garden & natural
vegetation
Fish
Domestic & Industry (incl
tourism)
Animals
Crops
Poor water delivery service at all levels
Poor service levels
Overestimated by
management
(chaos <1)
• A
Applying modern water control concepts helps
especially at main canal levels
Improving the main canals assists in
improving service down to the farm
• Well-run management outfits help
• Budgets help but are not sufficient
Lessons & Issues in short (3)
Multivariable analysis performed to explain L&W Productivity
Model [Log WP] = 3.3-0.642*Log duty -0.287*LogCA
-0.463*ETo-0.238 *Rain
[ 70 % of variability explained]
Duty = Irrigation depth
CA= Command area
Most variability explained by duty !
Land Productivity: No significant model !
Log WP = 3.3-0.642*Log duty -0.287*Log CA-0.463*ETo-0.238 *Rain
-1.8
-1.6
-1.4
-1.2
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
-1.8 -1.6 -1.4 -1.2 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2
Log Water Productivity
MO
DE
L =
f(l
og
Du
ty,
log
CA
, E
To
, R
ain
)
Significant correlation between
Types of systems for SERVICES & L&W PRODUCTIVITY
Lessons learnt
Group High High 1965 $/ha 0.18 $/m3
[High service at MC-SC and High at field]
Group Medium Low 1200 $/ha 0.10 $/m3
Group Low Low 924 $/ha 0.073 $/m3
Actual Water Service individual unit
AWDS = f[ Employees, MCI, Size of WUA]
explain 45 % of the variability
Employees
1.51.00.50.0-0.5-1.0-1.5
Actu
al W
DS
to
in
div
idu
al o
wn
ersh
ip u
nit
s
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5
Partial Regression Plot
Dependent Variable: Actual WDS to individual ownership units
Size of WUA hectares
2500020000150001000050000-5000
Actu
al W
DS
to
in
div
idu
al o
wn
ersh
ip u
nit
s
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5
Partial Regression Plot
Dependent Variable: Actual WDS to individual ownership units
Main Canal Indicator
1.51.00.50.0-0.5-1.0
Ac
tua
l W
DS
to
in
div
idu
al o
wn
ers
hip
un
its
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5
Partial Regression Plot
Dependent Variable: Actual WDS to individual ownership units
WUA’s strength & Services • Strength of water
users associations
plays very little role in
improving service to
farmers, productivity
and upper level service
Employee & Services
y = 0.5755x + 0.7342
R2 = 0.3165
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Employee
Actu
al W
DS
to
in
div
idu
al o
wn
ers
hip
un
its
y = 0.5839x + 1.1763
R2 = 0.2369
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
EMPLOYEE
MC
-SC
Se
rvic
es
Having modern employee management (incentives,
empowerment, supervision, capacity building) is useful
Note: the less the employees per ha the better for service
Canal lining
No influence on
performance
% Unlined & Services most dowsntream
y = -0.0036x + 1.747
R2 = 0.0437
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
productivity and cc lining
y = -0.0013x + 0.2515
R2 = 0.06
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
% unlined
$/m
3
THE PROBLEM OF CANAL LINING
• Canal lining is a very expensive element in canal construction. Cost of
lining typically represents about 40% of total cost.
• Before making such a large investment, there must be a clear idea of the
benefits to be obtained
• Seepage losses typically represent 10 to 40 percent of diverted water
• The reduction of seepage losses is often assumed to be constant for the
expected life of the lining to have a chance of achieving a favorable
economic return
• Most favored by agencies
• There is now strong evidence that hard
surface linings deteriorate within a few
years until seepage losses return to that
for an unlined canal
Questions related to decision-
making
• What is the reality do we want to
improve?
• Water scarcity: what does it mean?
• How are decisions made?
• What are our objectives?
Virtual water reality
Virtual water reality …
THE TAIL-ENDER PROBLEM?
Upper reach of a field channel near Mudhol
Ghataprabha LBMC
Officially a dry crop system
THE TAIL-ENDER PROBLEM?
End of the same field channel
Ghataprabha LBMC
RID
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
Lam
Pao,
Thaila
nd
Dez,
Iran
Guila
n,
Iran
Seyhan,
Turk
ey
Maja
lgaon,
India
Dantiw
ada,
India
Bhakra
, In
dia
Muda,
Mala
ysia
Kem
ubu,
Mala
ysia
Beni A
mir,
Moro
cco
Off
ice d
u N
iger,
Mali
Rio
Yaqui A
lto,
DR
Coello
, C
olo
mbia
Sald
aña,
Colo
mbia
Cupatitz
io,
Mexic
o
Rio
Mayo,
Mexic
o
Cam
Sun,
Vie
tnam
IWM
I3. O
utp
ut
pe
r u
nit
irr
ig. s
up
ply
($
/cu
. m
.)
.
ch112
GLBC = US$0.23/m3
No sugarcane
Groundwater pumped from within CA (left) to outside the CA (right)
Ghataprabha LBMC
Sanctioned areas
Sanctioned supply
• Head of WUCS
Wrong hydraulics: they receive much
more than they should
Ghataprabha LBMC
West Krishna Delta
Uncertainty on basic
performance indicators
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
La
m P
ao
, Th
aila
nd
De
z, Ir
an
Gu
ilan
, Ira
n
Se
yh
an
, Tu
rk
ey
Ma
jalg
ao
n, In
dia
Da
ntiw
ad
a, In
dia
Bh
ak
ra
, Ind
ia
Mu
da
, Ma
lay
sia
Ke
mu
bu
, Ma
lay
sia
Be
ni A
mir
, Mo
ro
cc
o
Offic
e d
u N
ige
r, M
ali
Rio
Ya
qu
i Alto
, DR
Co
ello
, Co
lom
bia
Sa
lda
ña
, Co
lom
bia
Cu
pa
titzio
, Me
xic
o
Rio
Ma
yo
, Me
xic
o
Ca
m S
un
, Vie
tna
m
IT
RC
10
.
An
nu
al
P
ro
je
ct
I
rr
ig
at
io
n
Ef
fi
ci
en
cy
.
ch125
How can you evaluate an objective to
improve efficiency by 20% if the
confidence interval is +/- 30%
Virtual reality 1: pretend that it
does not exist
Types of problems with virtual reality:
• Policy: maybe what we see outside the window is good but are the
bad aspects? What can be made more sustainable and how to fix it?
• We ignore problems: because infrastructure exists does not mean it is
alright and that the only problem is governance or management
• We invent problems that don’t exist to justify a favored solution
• We ignore opportunities:
• WUAs focused on canal management- can we reduce their
pumping costs?
• Multiple Use Systems: more MDGs per drop, more $/m3
Improving productivity or
efficiency?
“As irrigation is inefficient (30% of the water
diverted reaches the plant), we can reduce the
waste and losses and reallocate this to other
users by increasing irrigation efficiency”
Physical water scarcity
• Basin closure
• What is recoverable is recovered
Irrigation efficiency
• Confusion between field/system efficiency and
basin efficiency is common and underpins
many policies and investments
• Field efficiency and more efficient
technologies can be very good (energy, water
quality, sometimes in-stream flow, reducing
drainage, money, labor, etc.)
River basin closure processes
• overbuilding of river basins
• overallocation of entitlements
• overdraft of reservoirs and aquifers
• double squeeze of agricultural water use, due
to declining water availability and quality and
rising urban and environmental needs
Virtual reality 2: “problems are serious but we can
easily save much and/or get additional water”
• Some water can be saved but not as much as is
claimed
• When agricultural water management is moderately
good, things tend to a zero sum game
• Increasing efficiency, more efficient technologies (and
thus water rights and water pricing) often leads to
increased water consumption (ET)
• Problems are becoming wicked
Irrigation agencies
• Development ethos
• Bureaucratic top-down management
• Accountability, clientelism
• Rigidity and path dependency:
– How things are seen
– Education
– Management style and incentives
– Standard designs
– Consulting firms
– Vested interests
South Asia
• Many trends favor atomistic/informal except energy
prices
• The groundwater crisis and energy prices may generate
a pressure to improve public irrigation
• Need to manage atomistic irrigation within large scale
canal commands
=> Incentives for large-scale effects of individual behavior may be
needed in addition to interventions on the surface side
South Asia
A BIG STRATEGIC CHOICE TO MAKE:
ignore or acknowledge atomistic irrigation and groundwater issues
AFFECTS ALL FORMS OF IRRIGATION AND LARGE SCALE
WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
• Existing large-scale to mimic atomistic irrigation
Modernization:
From supply-driven to service-oriented
management
Service:
• Equity
• Reliability
• Flexibility
– Rate
– Duration
– Frequency
• Adequacy
• Lift/ pressure
Service => Operation
strategy/flow control system =>
Infrastructure design and
management needs
Working out evolution paths
• Unbundling
– Different levels, each providing service to the lower level
(this may include recharge)
– At each level:
• Service transactions: water, information, money
• Nature of operator
• Conveyance technology: canal/pipe
• Seepage or no seepage
• Surface/pressure
• Interface: extend or separate management:
» Buffer reservoir or pond/tank
» Pumping
Working out evolution paths
• Major decisions:
• Radical or progressive improvement
– Service to farmers and other uses and users
– Service/technology to farmers
– If competition from atomistic or unsustainable atomistic
• Match/mimic
• Conjunctive management
– Energy an increasing factor => surface or lower lift or water
conservation
– How many levels of operators (not PIM committees)
– Costs: Financial or investment strategies at each level
– Final delivery point
Improving the decision making process
• Exit the virtual reality
• Water auditing and accounting
• Strategic planning
• Capacity building
• Institutions
• Policy
• Governance
• Monitoring of investments and results
Policy
• Acknowledge the nature of the water economy
• Monitoring of investments and results
• Plan B, second-best and lateral options
• Policy/politicians: the art of the possible
• Change the practice on the ground to improve
conditions for feasibility or acceptability of new
policies: build a constituency for change
• Focus on important details
Institutions
• Beyond classical IMT/PIM
• Not just PPP
• Improve service to water user federations/associations
• Many institutional innovations in both informal economies
and formal economies
• MASSCOTE, large powerful professional farmer-owned
organizations managing (not necessarily themselves) canal
supply, rainfall and groundwater
• How to combine service orientation and regulation of
atomistic irrigation?
Governance
• Can one separate evolution of governance from the
political system?
• From representative democracy to monitory
democracy : a lot of action and political innovation in
the water area (because water is important), e.g.
yellow score cards, mass social movements
(John Keane, Life and death of democracy)
CONCLUSIONS
• Existing large scale systems need to transform
• Towards a fluid logic of complementarily, combination and
convergence between public, small scale and atomistic
irrigation
• There are some good ideas and strategies, inspiring
examples, tools/knowledge
ONE ISSUE
• Will the present crises and challenges in cluding
food crisis, economic crisis, energy crisis, climate
change … will be met by more of the same supply-
driven top-down responses or by a wholesale
change of management of the sector and innovation?
=> Strategies to bring about this change?
=> What/who can serve as catalysts?
Combine elements from all 5 strategies for
improving the performance of irrigation
1. Modernise yesteryears’ schemes for tomorrow’s
needs
2. Go with the flow by supporting farmers’ initiatives
3. Look beyond conventional PIM/IMT recipes
4. Build for the future: Expand capacity and
knowledge
5. Look beyond irrigation: Invest outside the water
sector
Revitalizing Asia’s irrigation