Emerging relevance of participatory irrigation management
Amitava Basu | Tuesday, 29 July 2008
PREDOMINANTLY, irrigation management has been in the public sector domain. In most underdeveloped and developing countries, top-down policy is followed in formulating schemes, and, this age-old policy of top-down approach has failed to deliver goods and services to the beneficiaries at desired level. Besides, in many of the countries, several ministries, divisions of ministries as well as a large number of government institutions are involved in irrigation, directly or indirectly. For example, seven major national level departments deal with irrigation in Bangladesh and three ministries; several national and provincial agencies are involved in Sri Lanka.
Government-run systems are chronically short of maintenance funds leading to deteriorating systems, inadequate water availability at the lowest outlets, inequitable distribution of water, poor drainage, lack of measuring devices and control structures. Besides, there is absence of incentives for saving water. However, in particular irrigation systems, some problems may be more critical than others.
Participatory irrigation management: A key recommendation of the Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 was that water management should be decentralised and farmers should play a more important role in the management of water. This phenomenon became known as Irrigation Management Transfer (IMT), which is subsequently referred to as Participatory Irrigation Management (PIM).
IMT or PIM entails the partial or complete transfer of irrigation management rights and responsibilities for an irrigation (sub) system from government to farmer organisations, water user associations (WUAs), other non-governmental agencies or local government agencies. The growing interest in IMT stemmed in part from the assumed efficiency and productivity gains due to farmer participation and decentralised management of irrigation systems. It was also assumed that the transfer of management responsibility to local organisations would improve the accountability of the irrigation service to farmers, improve the cost effectiveness of service provision, motivate farmers to invest more in maintaining irrigation systems and, ultimately, make irrigation systems and irrigated agriculture more sustainable. In addition, shortfalls in government funds to finance the recurring costs of irrigation and the inability to recover costs from farmers further encouraged many developing countries to adopt IMT reform programmes.
Much of the emphasis is focused on participation in operation and maintenance (O&M), and particularly in the recovery of O&M service fees on behalf of the irrigation agency. While this aspect of participation is of significant importance, there are many ways by which participation can be incorporated in other aspects of irrigation management. These include: (1) participation in irrigation project identification, planning, and design; (2) participation in system layout and construction; and (3) participation in project monitoring and evaluation. In short, any aspect of irrigation management can have a participatory dimension.
In other words, PIM implies that the irrigation users have total control and responsibility over the operations and maintenance of part or all of the irrigation system. It may be underlined that PIM is quite different from "privatisation" in that it implies transferring management not to a third party "owner" who would purchase the irrigation system from the government and then hire out irrigation services to farmers. Rather, the concept is more akin to an employee owned business that gives equal shares.
Trends in participatory irrigation management: There is a growing concern on the need for PIM. This is due to many reasons. Most important ones are as follows: a) as new constructions involve heavy investments, and in the context of budgetary difficulties, the inefficiencies in existing systems need to be rectified; b) it has been evident that there is scope for improving management efficiency in existing systems; c) countries and/or irrigation systems which have adopted PIM have already demonstrated encouraging results; and d) donor pressures.
According to the level of "userisation" in the irrigation sector, a discernible trend is emerging across the globe. The United States, France, and Japan constitute the upper end of the PIM graph. Irrigation users have largely replaced the state in managing the irrigation sector in these countries although the government retains regulatory functions. At the lower end of the scale, where the state continues to dominate most aspects of irrigation are countries like Morocco, India, Pakistan, etc.
Bangladesh and PIM: Bangladesh is predominantly an agrarian society. Nearly 75 per cent of the population is directly or indirectly dependent on agriculture. Agriculture is still the main user of water and its share in water demand would further increase concurrently with efforts to attain food security through increased food grain production. Improvements in Bangladesh's irrigation sector could be used to further improve agricultural production and reduce poverty.
Food self-sufficiency is of prime importance to Bangladesh. The introduction of high yielding variety (HYV) rice and the expansion of irrigation have both contributed to increased food production over the past decades. A major strategy to increase foodgrain production would be through the expansion of irrigation coverage in terms of installed capacity, improvement in capacity utilisation, and further increases in cropping intensity. Irrigation, therefore, is expected to contribute heavily to a surge in water demand in the future years.
Water management cannot be carried out effectively if the local stakeholders are not involved in the process. Their active involvement is needed at all stages of the project cycle starting from identification to O&M of water resource schemes. The Government of Bangladesh (GoB) has issued the " Guidelines for Participatory Water Management", which has been prepared within the framework of the National Water Policy. These guidelines indicate how the local stakeholders, representatives of the local government organisations, private sector and the public sector agencies would work together for participatory water management in Bangladesh.
PIM was begun in 1995, with the introduction of a three-tier management structure for irrigation systems. This involved creating tertiary-level Water Management Groups (WMGs), each consisting of nine members-three from each of three farm-size categories: 'large', 'medium' and 'small'); secondary level Water Management Associations (WMAs) consisting of 10-15 WMGs); and a Water Management Federation (WMF) at the highest level of a system.
According to a study of Asian Productivity Organisation (APO), the process used in setting up the WMGs in Bangladesh involved targets and strict deadlines with little attention to capacity-building work on the ground. For example, in the Pabna system, very few of the 365 WMGs formed have been registered with the government. WMGs have improved maintenance and water distribution in the system, but only in some areas. However, these groups neither assess nor collect irrigation charges, or dictate how the revenues are to be spent. Bangladesh Water Development Board (BWDB), a government agency, is still performing these functions. Because user groups have not yet taken on this role, as originally envisioned, collection rates remain very low. User groups are willing and able to take responsibility for managing the systems, provided they are handed over in good working order, and that they receive legal and technical support, and are allowed to assess and collect charges.
In sum, under the looming threat of food insecurity, countries of the developing world, whose economies are predominantly agro-based, require to operate their irrigation systems efficiently, effectively and economically to support and enhance agricultural production and accelerate economic growth. It is therefore important for these countries to seriously consider, carefully plan and urgently initiate transfer of irrigation management to the water users. This would help to improve irrigated agriculture and, in turn, facilitate reduction of poverty, which is a major development goal.
Government-run systems are chronically short of maintenance funds leading to deteriorating systems, inadequate water availability at the lowest outlets, inequitable distribution of water, poor drainage, lack of measuring devices and control structures. Besides, there is absence of incentives for saving water. However, in particular irrigation systems, some problems may be more critical than others.
Participatory irrigation management: A key recommendation of the Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 was that water management should be decentralised and farmers should play a more important role in the management of water. This phenomenon became known as Irrigation Management Transfer (IMT), which is subsequently referred to as Participatory Irrigation Management (PIM).
IMT or PIM entails the partial or complete transfer of irrigation management rights and responsibilities for an irrigation (sub) system from government to farmer organisations, water user associations (WUAs), other non-governmental agencies or local government agencies. The growing interest in IMT stemmed in part from the assumed efficiency and productivity gains due to farmer participation and decentralised management of irrigation systems. It was also assumed that the transfer of management responsibility to local organisations would improve the accountability of the irrigation service to farmers, improve the cost effectiveness of service provision, motivate farmers to invest more in maintaining irrigation systems and, ultimately, make irrigation systems and irrigated agriculture more sustainable. In addition, shortfalls in government funds to finance the recurring costs of irrigation and the inability to recover costs from farmers further encouraged many developing countries to adopt IMT reform programmes.
Much of the emphasis is focused on participation in operation and maintenance (O&M), and particularly in the recovery of O&M service fees on behalf of the irrigation agency. While this aspect of participation is of significant importance, there are many ways by which participation can be incorporated in other aspects of irrigation management. These include: (1) participation in irrigation project identification, planning, and design; (2) participation in system layout and construction; and (3) participation in project monitoring and evaluation. In short, any aspect of irrigation management can have a participatory dimension.
In other words, PIM implies that the irrigation users have total control and responsibility over the operations and maintenance of part or all of the irrigation system. It may be underlined that PIM is quite different from "privatisation" in that it implies transferring management not to a third party "owner" who would purchase the irrigation system from the government and then hire out irrigation services to farmers. Rather, the concept is more akin to an employee owned business that gives equal shares.
Trends in participatory irrigation management: There is a growing concern on the need for PIM. This is due to many reasons. Most important ones are as follows: a) as new constructions involve heavy investments, and in the context of budgetary difficulties, the inefficiencies in existing systems need to be rectified; b) it has been evident that there is scope for improving management efficiency in existing systems; c) countries and/or irrigation systems which have adopted PIM have already demonstrated encouraging results; and d) donor pressures.
According to the level of "userisation" in the irrigation sector, a discernible trend is emerging across the globe. The United States, France, and Japan constitute the upper end of the PIM graph. Irrigation users have largely replaced the state in managing the irrigation sector in these countries although the government retains regulatory functions. At the lower end of the scale, where the state continues to dominate most aspects of irrigation are countries like Morocco, India, Pakistan, etc.
Bangladesh and PIM: Bangladesh is predominantly an agrarian society. Nearly 75 per cent of the population is directly or indirectly dependent on agriculture. Agriculture is still the main user of water and its share in water demand would further increase concurrently with efforts to attain food security through increased food grain production. Improvements in Bangladesh's irrigation sector could be used to further improve agricultural production and reduce poverty.
Food self-sufficiency is of prime importance to Bangladesh. The introduction of high yielding variety (HYV) rice and the expansion of irrigation have both contributed to increased food production over the past decades. A major strategy to increase foodgrain production would be through the expansion of irrigation coverage in terms of installed capacity, improvement in capacity utilisation, and further increases in cropping intensity. Irrigation, therefore, is expected to contribute heavily to a surge in water demand in the future years.
Water management cannot be carried out effectively if the local stakeholders are not involved in the process. Their active involvement is needed at all stages of the project cycle starting from identification to O&M of water resource schemes. The Government of Bangladesh (GoB) has issued the " Guidelines for Participatory Water Management", which has been prepared within the framework of the National Water Policy. These guidelines indicate how the local stakeholders, representatives of the local government organisations, private sector and the public sector agencies would work together for participatory water management in Bangladesh.
PIM was begun in 1995, with the introduction of a three-tier management structure for irrigation systems. This involved creating tertiary-level Water Management Groups (WMGs), each consisting of nine members-three from each of three farm-size categories: 'large', 'medium' and 'small'); secondary level Water Management Associations (WMAs) consisting of 10-15 WMGs); and a Water Management Federation (WMF) at the highest level of a system.
According to a study of Asian Productivity Organisation (APO), the process used in setting up the WMGs in Bangladesh involved targets and strict deadlines with little attention to capacity-building work on the ground. For example, in the Pabna system, very few of the 365 WMGs formed have been registered with the government. WMGs have improved maintenance and water distribution in the system, but only in some areas. However, these groups neither assess nor collect irrigation charges, or dictate how the revenues are to be spent. Bangladesh Water Development Board (BWDB), a government agency, is still performing these functions. Because user groups have not yet taken on this role, as originally envisioned, collection rates remain very low. User groups are willing and able to take responsibility for managing the systems, provided they are handed over in good working order, and that they receive legal and technical support, and are allowed to assess and collect charges.
In sum, under the looming threat of food insecurity, countries of the developing world, whose economies are predominantly agro-based, require to operate their irrigation systems efficiently, effectively and economically to support and enhance agricultural production and accelerate economic growth. It is therefore important for these countries to seriously consider, carefully plan and urgently initiate transfer of irrigation management to the water users. This would help to improve irrigated agriculture and, in turn, facilitate reduction of poverty, which is a major development goal.