for crop production in 11 systems. In other systems, conjunctive use of surface water and groundwater is common; this is especially so in the selected systems in South Asia.
The study used both secondary data and field-level primary data and information, and employed qualitative and quantitative approaches to analyses. Secondary data were obtained from a variety of sources including government publications, donor reports, other published and unpublished sources. However, the primary data collected from the field provided a major source of analyses for the country studies. IWMI in collaboration with national partners developed a variety of tools for primary data and information collection, such as field-level focus group discussions, participatory rapid appraisals and household-level questionnaire surveys. For household-level surveys, consistent procedures were adopted for developing a sampling framework and for sample selection across selected systems in six countries. For each irrigation system, samples were drawn using a multistage stratified-cluster sampling method. In the first stage, each selected system was purposively divided into three strata, e.g., head, middle and tail parts. The stratification helped in classifying a system into smaller areas that are homogenous in terms of cropping patterns, access to water and irrigation infrastructure. In stage two, each of the strata was divided into a number of clusters (in irrigated and rain-fed areas, a distributary canal and a village, respectively, was defined as a cluster). One to two representative clusters were selected along each of three reaches at head, middle and tail of a system. Stratified-cluster sampling helped in obtaining smaller but more representative samples and facilitated implementation of surveys over wider geographical areas. In stage three, a sample of households was selected from each cluster. At this stage, a complete sampling frame, i.e., a list of all households
• Improve Rate-Setting and Fee-Collection Mechanisms—Despite reforms intended to increase farmers’ involvement in irrigation systems, water charges are still fixed and collected by the government. Even in AP, where provision has been made to revise water rates periodically, procedures have not been clearly defined. Equitable rate setting could have significant pro-poor benefits. Clearly defining procedures would help address this. Fee-collection mechanisms also need to be improved, as collection rates are very poor. The fact that funds, when collected, are being misappropriated also urgently requires action. To encourage users to pay, the service delivered needs to be improved and the charges applied made more transparent. Key problems include a lack of clear-cut water-delivery schedules, the fact that the volumes of water used are not measured, and the fact that water allocation plans are not drawn up before each agricultural season. • Build the Management Capacity of System Officials—Irrigation officials and farmers need to be trained, to help them address and implement the various aspects of irrigation-sector reforms. These groups also need to be taught to work together efficiently. However, mechanisms for this are lacking. Appropriate policy support should therefore be provided, to help build capacity and improve the operation of institutions, and ensure devolution of power from irrigation departments to WUAs, DCs and establishing effective project committees.
The G-K project was conceived in the early fifties and it was the first major step in the country to provide flood control facilities and supplementary irrigation to the traditional paddy varieties grown in the area. Built on the river Ganges it is the largest lift-cum gravity irrigation project in Bangladesh. The construction work of the project was started in 1955/56. The first and second phases of the project were completed in 1969 and 1984, respectively. Initial plan was to build a pumping plant consisting of three large pumps, each having a capacity of 36.8 cumec. But as the major pump house construction was delayed, a supplementary pumping plant consisting of 12 pumps each having a capacity of 3.54 cumec was constructed and limited irrigation was started in 1962 with these 12 pumps. The construction of the main pumping plant was completed in 1969. In addition to the pump houses, physical work of the project included approximately 1600 km of canals to distribute water through 2,184 hydraulic structures to the field outlets. Water is distributed through three main canals, more than 49 secondary canals and 444 tertiary canals. Although the entire command area of 125,000 ha can be brought under irrigation during the Kharif–II season (Monsoon), only 25,000 ha is presently irrigated during the dry season (Kharif-I). The farmers of the project area are now eager to grow irrigated HYV paddy both in Rabi and Kharif-I seasons. But due to shortage of water in the Ganges river and very low water level in the intake channel, all the main pumps cannot be operated. The system is shut down from November to March for annual maintenance. Presently farmers are installing shallow tube-wells for irrigation during the dry months, and switching to surface water as and when it is made available. In many places, there are occasional tubewell irrigation practices.
Undoubtedly, water development has been a key to raising the living standards and it needs to be extended to one-fifth of the humanity who have largely missed-out on its benefits. However, in doing so for economic growth, food sufficiency and material wellbeing, we will have to respect the Mother Nature’s limits. The policies, laws and practices that shape water use today rarely promote the three basic tenets of sustainable water resource use, namely, efficiency, equity and ecological integrity. Taking heed of water’s limits together with land, and learning to live within them, amounts to a major transformation in our relationship to fresh water. Doing more with less is the first easiest step along the path towards sustainable water development. By using water more efficiently, we in effect create a new source of supply. Each liter conserved can help meet new water demands. With technologies and methods available today farmers could cut their water needs by 10-50 percent, industries by 40-90 percent and cities by a third with no sacrifice of economic output or quality of life. Recognizing ourselves as part of the life-support network we depend on, and learning to live within water’s limits are integral aspects of creating a society that is sustainable in all respects. Measures to conserve water and use it more efficiently are now the most economically and environmentally sound water supply option available for much of the world. The full resource value of water—economic, social, cultural and environmental, should be recognized in irrigation water management. The small and marginal farmers are the worst sufferers of the ill management of water leading to scarcity and inequality. In order to address equity issues, pricing mechanism such as rebates for better and efficient water use and subsidies targeted to benefit the poor farmers are required to be adopted. If availability of irrigation water was not ensured at reasonable rates as per crop requirement, technological transformation appear to be a costly proposition and yield instability in crop production would increase. Besides, sources of irrigation water, if not planned scientifically, completed in time, managed technically and utilized effectively would generate several problems such as uneven distribution of water in the case of canals among head reaches and tail enders, waterlogging, salinity and alkalinity, cultivation of high water-consuming crops at the cost of low water- demanding crops, ecological distortion and generation of environmental imbalances. Moreover, if access to irrigation water was confined to a group of farmers due to geographical, social, economic and/or political factors, inequalities in agrarian structure would get widened.
These three strategies were implemented consistently until rice self-sufficiency was achieved in 1984. However, the GOI spent a lot of money to implement this policy. From 1969 to 1984, more or less US$ 2.5 million had already been spent by the GOI in water the sector development (see annex 2). A large part of this amount was a loan from both multilateral and bilateral donors. In the mid-1960s, high-yielding varieties of the green revolution contributed substantially to increasing rice production in the country The HYRV was grown in Indonesia for the first time in 1969 with a total area of 482,000 hectares. 23 This was started little bit late compared to other Asian countries, India initiated to plant the HYRV in 1966, Bangladesh in 1967, Pakistan in 1968, Malaysia in 1966 and Philippines in 1966, respectively. 24 The planted area then increased fast in line with the increasing rate of irrigated land area until rice self- sufficiency was attained in 1984. Following the achievement of self-sufficiency in rice, this policy was not consistently followed any more. Provision of the subsidy policy was withdrawn gradually in the mid- 1980s. Now, this policy is no longer implemented.
There is a considerable debate over the precise area under forests in Pakistan (UNCED 1992). The problem stems from the definition of legal areas of forestland as an indication of forest cover, irrespective of the actual measure of tree cover and its condition. Areas usually described, as ‘forest areas’ are the lands that are under the administrative control of provincial Forest Department (FD). But areas officially designated as forests may be devoid of trees, while substantial tree cover may be found in localities other than the ones classified so. Different government departments have been publishing different forest statistics since 1947. In the recent past, data of land use including forest areas has been reported by the Forestry Sector Master Plan (FSMP) Project in 1993, with the help of satellite imagery covering entire Pakistan. According to the FSMP of 1993, Pakistan had 4.2 million hectares covered by forests and trees, which was equivalent to 4.8 percent of the total land area. However, according to the more recently released FAO State of Forest 2001, total forest area of Pakistan (sum of natural forests plus forest plantation) was reported to decrease from 2.75 million hectares in 1990 to 2.36 million hectares in 2000. Thus, there is an annual change of 0.39 million hectares (-1.5% per annum rate of deforestation) in forest cover over the last decade (FAO 2001). FAO’s statistics also challenge the credibility of the Government of Pakistan (GoP)’s claim that the forests have been increased from 3.46 million hectares in 1990 to 3.66 million hectares in 1999 (GoP 2001). Asian Development Bank (ADB) also claims that forest cover in Pakistan has been dropped from 3.6 percent of the total land in 1990 to 3.2 percent of the total land in 1999 (ADB 2001). Therefore, for the purpose of academic debate, we would take FAO’s statistics as reference for this paper. Forests in Pakistan have four important functions including protection of natural environment, regulation of atmospheric conditions, production of goods, and contribution towards a sustainable livelihood of people who are directly or indirectly dependent on them (forests) through agriculture, animal husbandry and logging. In this context, we have to maintain a balance between sustainable production and sustainable consumption of the forests. However, we are unable to strike the right balance. Also, forest depletion has emerged as one of the most serious environmental issues for Pakistan, which is accompanied with many other environmental effects such as landslide, soil erosion, floods, soil degradation and displacement of people.
The Tenth Five-year Plan Approach Paper (2002-07) identifies “water” as a critical input in raising agriculture output and removing poverty. While the paper laments that the public investment in irrigation has fallen significantly over successive plan periods, it exhorts that there is considerable scope for improving the efficiency of the existing irrigation infrastructure, through better and more participative management practices. The Approach Paper makes significant pronouncements regarding user charges that has bearing on the irrigation sector and other public services and utilities. It says, “A good deal of public sector investment is in the provision of public services. The pattern and condition of the provision of such infrastructure services has been done in such a way that the public has got used to not paying economic charges for these services. This includes key services such as power, water supply, irrigation and transport among others. It is primarily the absence of appropriate pricing of public services and the lack of will to collect the levied charges that has caused the large fiscal imbalance that afflicts the country”. The Paper takes on the fallacy of subsidizing the services in the name of the poor by saying. “The argument for not charging appropriate user charges has essentially been based on equity considerations. It is argued that the poor are not able to pay adequately for these essential public services. This argument ignores the fact that it is the better-off sections of the society that consume most such services and therefore benefit from these services. In fact, if the better-offs are made to pay, it would then become possible to provide essential services to reach the poor.” The Planning Commission wields informal influence by reflecting the latest thinking on various issues irrespective of whether anyone acknowledges and follows them in the short run. It influences the direction of national thinking and in determining policy environment in the medium and long term. However, the Planning Commission exhortations are gradually losing their significance ,and it is the independent ministries that determine the specific sectoral policy, thrust areas and specific scheme-wise resource allocations. Its influence over the states is even more dilute.
A key element to any examination of poverty is the definition of poverty chosen for analysis. This study had previously decided to focus on income-defined poverty for this analysis. This is because increased income can increase access to many resources that are considered elements of poverty in other decisions. Additionally, irrigation is primarily an input into a productive economic activity. It was still felt worthwhile to do a preliminary investigation of the importance of this factor. Three definitions of poverty (income, expenditure, and self-perception) were examined for correlation. The three definitions were closely correlated indicating that an income only approach to devising interventions may miss important factors. However, in examining the correlations with different irrigation performance variables, it was found that income demonstrated the expected correlations. Therefore, irrigation interventions are an appropriate focus if raising incomes is the primary goal. Analysis showed that farmers react in a rational way to irrigation and irrigation infrastructure. When infrastructure is present then farmers will typically plant paddy, a water-intensive crop. This occurs regardless of the performance history. Therefore, if irrigation infrastructure is present, it is quite important to make sure it performs adequately to help ensure successful farmer crops. Where irrigation infrastructure is not in place, then farmers plant less-water-intensive crops. An important point from the analysis is the need to increase crop diversification in irrigated areas. This is a good opportunity to help increase the productivity of farmers. Another important point is to improve performance in existing irrigated areas to help ensure farmers’ crops. Finally, expanding irrigation to nonirrigated areas will increase the options farmers have in their cropping decisions.
Pakistan’s agriculture depends mainly on irrigation, as the annual precipitation in major areas of the country does not exceed 10 inches with heavy concentration in the monsoonal months of July-August. Realizing the significance of irrigation water, Pakistan has built a huge irrigation system comprising 3 earth-fill dams for storage of water, 19 barrages, 12 link canals, 43 irrigation canals extending over a length of 58,500 km and nearly 100,000 watercourses with a total length of 1,621,000 km (Gill 1996). In addition, more than 530,000 tube wells are also currently pumping groundwater for irrigation. In spite of all this, the available water supplies fall much short of Pakistan’s crop-water requirements. According to the required delta of water only about 75 percent is available from various sources of irrigation and the situation is likely to worsen by 2010 when Pakistan will be able to meet only 55 percent of its requirements (WAPDA 1997). This state of affairs has tended to constrain Pakistan in terms of scarcity of water, inability to expand the irrigation frontier, low agricultural production high unemployment rates and endemic rural poverty. If the situation is allowed to persist indefinitely, Pakistan will soon be caught up in a grave economic crisis. To overcome these problems, Pakistan must either increase the available supply of irrigation water or raise its use efficiency. While there is large scope for the latter, little can be accomplished through the former option. This is because sustainable use of water is governed by the fact that withdrawal of water from reservoirs, barrages or other sources cannot be achieved faster than it is replenished through the natural hydrological cycle (Bhatti et al. 1997).
Precise irrigation may not be as important to smallholders as it is to farmers in the developed world. This depends on how much precision is lost and it may well be that low-cost systems, although not perfect, are far better at applying water than the other methods used by farmers. The farmer’s ability to manage the irrigation application properly is more important than worrying about some of the system’s technical shortcomings. The concept of precision agriculture first emerged in the United States in the early 1980s. In 1985, researchers at the University of Minnesota varied lime inputs in crop fields. It was also at this time that the practice of grid sampling appeared (applying a fixed grid of one sample per hectare). Towards the end of the 1980s, this technique was used to derive the first input recommendation maps for fertilizers and pH corrections. The use of yield sensors developed from new technologies, combined with the advent of GPS receivers, has been gaining ground ever since. Today, such systems cover several hectares in the region. In the American Midwest (US), it is associated not with sustainable agriculture but with mainstream farmers who are trying to maximize profits by spending money only in areas that require fertilizer. This practice allows the farmer to vary the rate of fertilizer across the field according to the need identified by GPS guided Grid or Zone Sampling. Fertilizer that would have been spread in areas that don't need it can be placed in areas that do, thereby optimizing its use. Maintaining the homogeneity of soil nitrogen (N) and plant vigor across agricultural fields is a major concern for farmers and agricultural scheme planners, particularly fields that are irrigated through pressurized systems, such as center pivots  .
Further, there are very few crops where detailed information is available regarding production responses to variable inputs throughout the growing season. Hence, the major stumbling block to the introduction of effective prescription irrigation systems is the necessary understanding of the crop production systems and the ability to identify the interactions between the various crop inputs, productivity gains and operating constraints/costs. The relatively recent development of crop simulation models for the grain, cotton (eg. Hearn, 1994) and sugar (Keating et al., 1999) sectors provide the first steps towards a framework which may enable the identification of optimal strategies. These models are currently being used to identify fertiliser and irrigation requirements at the "strategic" decision level. They are also currently being used to quantify the effect of various irrigation scheduling strategies including the potential for deficit irrigation and partial root-zone drying during less sensitive periods of crop growth. However, stripped down versions of these and other models could also be used as part of the real-time decision support systems required for tactical prescription irrigation by incorporation into controllers on irrigation application systems.
less vegetated, warmer, and drier side of land-type dis- continuities, due to convergence produced by ‘‘vegeta- tion’’ breezes (Wang et al. 2009; Garcia-Carreras et al. 2010; Knox et al. 2011). The low-level temperature gradients between irrigated land and desert are likely to be even larger than in moister regions, but it is possible that our results differ because strong daytime dry con- vection associated with high surface heating mixes out any land-surface-induced breezes, reducing the impor- tance of LST gradients. For example, dry convection has been shown to suppress the monsoon flow in Africa (Parker et al. 2005) and prevent the propagation of the ‘‘Atlantic inflow’’ sea breeze into the Sahara during the day (Grams et al. 2010). This is consistent with aircraft observations showing dry convective updrafts of up to 10 m s 21 in the Sahara (Garcia-Carreras et al. 2015), while horizontal flows associated with an LST anomaly of 5 K would be no more than 3 m s 21 (Dixon et al. 2013). From a 1D perspective there can be either a wet-soil or dry-soil advantage to cloud formation, depending on the initial profile (Findell and Eltahir 2003). Drier soils lead to a deeper boundary layer, while a wetter surface lowers the lifting condensation level, both effects that could promote cloud formation. In the dry extreme there must be a wet advantage, as some moisture is re- quired for clouds to form, but even without reaching this
One of the most visible determinants of poverty is hunger and malnutrition. The development profession continues to argue over the causation – whether hunger causes poverty or vice versa – but hunger as a measure of poverty is widely established. Most poverty lines have an explicit or implicit food component. The evidence for nutritional poverty traps, where workers are too malnourished to work hard enough to feed themselves and their families, has strong historical roots (Fogel 1991, 1994; Bliss and Stern 1978; Strauss 1986; Strauss and Thomas 1998). But simple energy shortages cannot account for very much of the chronic poverty observed over the past several decades because the cost of raw calories, in the form of staple foods, has fallen too sharply relative to wages for unskilled labor (Johnson 1997; Fox 2002). If inadequate food intake is the primary cause of poverty, the solution would be in sight (and food aid could be an important part of the answer). If, however, poverty is the main cause of inadequate food intake, hunger will be much harder to end. In most countries, the domestic agricultural sector is likely to play a key role in ending hunger (and the ready availability of food aid may well be part of the problem).
A recurring theme in the case studies (Appendix 1) is the overriding importance of risk and vulnerability to the rural poor, especially shocks induced by natural causes, such as drought, and those caused by price volatility. The poor are especially vulnerable to shocks, which often have long-term effects on their welfare (Carter et al. 2004). In Asia these risks have been sharply reduced by a combination of enormous investment in irrigation and other infrastructure, effective but increasingly costly and unsustainable insulation of producers and consumers from price shocks, and by a growing range of safety nets (for example, food for work programs in India). In Africa, both producers and consumers in many countries remain highly vulnerable to shocks. Increased investment in infrastructure (including irrigation) will reduce the problem over the longer term, but in the short to medium term, there is scope to manage these risks by investing in financial innovations such as warehouse receipt systems, novel insurance schemes such as weather-index based systems, and social safety nets such as vouchers for inputs, all of which are being extensively piloted.
166. Both India and China have recently taken more supportive positions toward organic agriculture. In fact, a number of Asian governments are increasingly recognizing their nations' potential for organic agriculture and supporting some modest investments in the field. For governments, investment in organic agriculture implies a number of tangible benefits ranging from simple economic benefits to those mentioned in Section IV, which are more difficult to quantify. For example, the yield stability and diversification demonstrated in organic systems is likely to improve both nutrition and food security, especially in rural areas, thereby reducing government expenditures in stock retention and policies to encourage increased production. In a separate calculation, each farmer that fully adopts organic principles produces a crop without synthetic fertilizer, which in the case of some countries (e.g. India) means a direct cost savings that can amount to hundreds or thousands of dollars per farmer each year in subsidies, which government does not have to expend. For example, the current Indian fertilizer subsidy of USD 98 per hectare could be also paid to organic farmers but in a different manner (i.e. certification, promotion, tax relief, direct credit, organic extension services, organic research fund, etc.). Since the subsidies are typically paid directly to fertilizer companies, they would be the only ones to be disappointed. Similarly, government support for organic agriculture would reduce the use of usually imported synthetic agrochemicals such as pesticides and herbicides, and thereby reduce the outflow of foreign exchange. In these ways, and others, the public sector's support for organic agriculture can help to transform marginal rural denizens that are currently perceived as either vulnerable or as a burden into one of the country's contributing assets.
there are many case studies on urban agriculture [ 6 – 9 ], comparison across and extrapolation from such studies is dif ﬁcult due to differences in metrics and methods. An ana- lysis by Zezza et al [ 10 ] of the Rural Income Generating Activities (RIGA) database provides some initial insight into the scale of this practice developed using a consistent meth- odology. This study found that, in ﬁfteen developing coun- tries, ten to seventy percent of urban households participated in agricultural activities, with households in the poorest quintile disproportionately represented amongst those parti- cipants 5 . Extrapolation of this analysis suggests a median of 266 million urban households (207, 349 CI 90 ) engaged in crop production in developing countries [ 2 ]. Another approach estimates the land area that would be required to meet urban vegetable demand through urban agriculture [ 11 ]. Meeting this demand would require about one third of the global urban area, albeit with substantial differences between regions, depending on population density.
We note that AquaCrop has inherent limitations, including for instance the neglect of lateral water flows in the field, the inability to simulate the effects of nutrient limitation, fertil- izer application, the effect of organic mulching on the organic content of the soil and decomposition of organic materials, interception losses from sprinklers and the inability to de- fine the depth at which subsurface drip irrigation takes place. These limitations put a disclaimer on the results of our study, but we believe that the results of this study can provide a useful reference for similar future studies with other models. We see the need for further validation of our model results with field experiments, but this is costly and will generally need to focus on varying just a few management practices under a limited number of cases. In our model experimental set-up, we varied a large number of variables (irrigation tech- niques, strategies, mulching practices, environments, soils, crops, dry versus wet years) in all possible combinations, which is impossible in a field experiment.
Recently, Irrigatedagriculture and the use of water resources in agriculture are facing challenges of sustainable development. Because of the challenges, attention about sustainability development has now centred on developing agricultural technologies and practices that can improve productivity for farmers and at the same time does not cause any undue harm to the environment. Apart from water resources management and irrigatedagriculture, sustainable development concept is applied in other fields worldwide. In this study we borrowed the definition of Tilman, Cassman, Matson, Naylor, & Polasky (2002) who defined sustainable agriculture as “practices that meet current and future societal needs for food and fibre, for ecosystem services, and for healthy lives, and that do so by maximizing the net benefit to society when all costs and benefits of the practices are considered”.
and rainfed systems. The total sample comprised 397 households practicing purely rainfed agriculture and 627 households (382 modern and 245 traditional) practicing irrigatedagriculture. These households operate a total of 4,953 plots (a household operates five plots on average). The data collected include demographics, asset holdings, access to services, plot level production and sale and input use data (distinguished between irrigated and rainfed agriculture), constraints to agricultural production and household perceptions about the impact of irrigation on poverty, environment and health, and other household and site specific data. The data were collected for the 2005/2006 cropping season. All data were collected in local areal units (in timad) and local currency (in Ethiopian Birr (ETB)) and converted into hectares (4 timad ≈ 1 ha) and US$ (US$1 ≈ ETB 8.67). We used part of this comprehensive dataset for the analysis here. Summaries of data used and their source are given in Table 5 below.
This activity is of critical importance in terms of our research objectives. It involves recording the way in which the interventions are carried out: planned, coordinated and implemented, so that the research implications of this work can be better understood and analyzed. Details of how this activity should be implemented needs to be discussed further with the field staff and an accepted procedure will be decided. In the preliminary study conducted on the Hakra 6-R Distributary in the each field team member generated written material related to field interviews and observations, and finally compiled this information into watercourse reports. In this instance, as an alternative way of documenting the processes, daily events and observations can be recorded by field staff in their field note books, and a monthly report can be compiled collectively by the team. All important items of observations and the essence of all field interviews are included in these monthly reports. Guidelines will be issued to field staff on the methods to be used in this process documentation.