Minor Irrigation & Command Area Development 3(2+1)

LESSON 29. Participatory Irrigation Management (Pim)

29.1 OBJECTIVES OF PIM 

The main objectives of PIM are: 

1. To create a sense of ownership of water resources and the irrigation system among the users, so as to promote economy in water use and preservation of the system.

2. To improve service deliveries through better operation and maintenance.

3. To achieve optimum utilization of available resources through sophisticated deliveries, precisely as per crop needs.

4.  To achieve equity in water distribution.

5. To increase production per unit of water, where water is scarce and to increase production per unit of land where water is adequate.

6. To make best use of natural precipitation and ground water in conjunction with flow irrigation for increasing irrigation and cropping intensity.

7. To facilitate the users to have a choice of crops, cropping sequence, timing of water supply, period of supply and also frequency of supply, depending on soils, climate and other infrastructure facilities available in the commands such as roads, markets cold storages, etc., so as to maximize the incomes and returns.

8. To encourage collective and community responsibility on the farmers to collect water charges and payment to Irrigation Agency.

9. To create healthy atmosphere between the Irrigation Agency personnel and the users.

29.2 NECESSITY OF PIM

It is imperative to increase the agricultural production to keep pace with the requirement of increasing human as well as bovine population.  Irrigation being lifeline of agriculture, its development and meticulous management is the necessity of the day.  Since farmers are the real stakeholders, they have to come forward to actively participate in the management of the irrigation systems. O&M cost of the irrigation systems is much higher than the recoverable irrigation charges as per present rates in almost all the States.  Even these low rates are not being recovered in full.  Often the cost of recovery of water charges by Government is more than the amount recovered.  This is causing severe budget constraints to Government and consequently O&M could not be properly carried out resulting in system deficiency and unreliability of irrigation water to farmers.  The Water Users’ Associations could play this role in a better way. 

Besides, there are other compulsions like non availability of water when it is needed, taking immediate problems like leakages, adopting flexibility in water distribution and taking many more initiatives by farmers’ group to make their farm economy a sustainable proposition, PIM appears extremely necessary and worthwhile. 

29.3 PROVISIONS IN PIM ACTS 

Recognizing the need for sound legal framework for PIM in the country, the Ministry brought out a model act to be adopted by the State Legislatures for enacting new irrigation acts/amending the existing irrigation acts for facilitating PIM. The legal framework provides for creation of farmers organisations at different levels of irrigation system as under: 

1. Water Users’ Association (WUA):  will have a delineated command area on a hydraulic basis, which shall be administratively viable.  Generally a WUA would cover a group of outlets or a minor.

2. Distributary Committee: will comprise of 5 or more WUAs.  All the presidents of WUAs will comprise general body of the distributary committee.

3. Project Committee:  will be an apex committee of an irrigation system and presidents of the Distributary committees in the project area shall constitute general body of this committee.

The Associations at different levels are expected to be actively involved in   (i) maintenance of irrigation system in their area of operation; (ii) distribution of irrigation water to the beneficiary farmers as per the warabandi schedule; (iii) assisting the irrigation department in the preparation of water demand and collection of water charges; (iv) resolve disputes among the members and WUA and  (v) monitoring flow of water in the irrigation system etc. 

29.4 STATUS OF ENACTMENT OF LEGISLATION FOR PIM  

As a result of various conferences/ seminars organised by the Ministry, there has been an increased consciousness in States about the need for actively involving farmers in management of irrigation system. Accordingly some States have already taken steps for providing necessary legal back up for implementation of PIM Programme in their States. Details are given below:

Sl. No.	Name of State	Position of issue / amendment of Irrigation Act
1.	Andhra Pradesh	Enacted “Andhra Pradesh Farmers’ Management of Irrigation Systems Act, March, 1997”
2.	Goa	Enacted “Goa Command Area Development Act 1997 (Goa Act 27 of 1997)”
3.	Karnataka	Promulgated an Ordinance on 7th June 2000 for amendment of the existing Karnataka Irrigation Act 1957.
4.	Madhya Pradesh	Enacted “Madhya Pradesh Sinchai Prabandhan Me Krishkon Ki Bhagidari Adhiniyam, 1999” during September 1999.
5.	Orissa	Enacted “The Orissa Pani Panchayat Act, 2002”.
6.	Rajasthan	Passed the “Rajasthan Sinchai Pranali Ke Prabandh Me Krishkon Ki Sahabhagita Adhiniyam, 2000”.
7.	Tamil Nadu	Enacted the “Tamil Nadu Farmers’ Management of Irrigation Systems Act, 2000”.
8.	Kerala	Enacted “The Kerala Irrigation and Water Conservation Act 2003”.
9.	Bihar	“The Bihar Irrigation, Flood Management and Drainage Rules, 2003” under the Bihar irrigation Act, 1997
10.	Maharashtra	Maharashtra Management of Irrigation Systems by Farmers Act 2005 (Maharashtra Act No.XXIII of 2005).

 

Gujarat had experimented with the idea of farmers’ co-operative movement in irrigation management and had also a PIM Resolution during the year 1995 based on experiences from its pilot projects. The State-wise details of WUAs formed are given in the Table below:

TABLE 29.1 State-wise Number of WUAs Formed and Irrigated Area covered upto 2011

Sl. No.	Name of State	Number of WUAs formed	Area covered (‘000 ha)
1.	Andhra Pradesh	10790	4800.00
2.	Arunachal Pradesh	2	1.47
3.	Assam	37	24.09
4.	Bihar	37	105.80
5.	Chattisgarh	945	N.A.
6.	Goa	42	5.00
7.	Gujarat	576	96.68
8.	Haryana	2800	200.00
9.	Himachal Pradesh	875	35.00
10.	J&K	1	1.00
11.	Karnataka	2279	1052.41
12.	Kerala	3930	148.48
13.	Madhya Pradesh	1470	1501.45
14.	Maharashtra	1299	444.00
15.	Manipur	62	49.27
16.	Meghalaya	99	N.A.
17.	Nagaland	25	N.A.
18.	Orissa	11020	907.00
19.	Punjab	957	116.95
20.	Rajasthan	506	219.65
21.	Tamil Nadu	7725	474.28
22.	Uttar Pradesh	24	10.55
23.	West Bengal	10000	37.00
	Total	55501	10,230.08 say, 10.23 M ha

 Ref: http://planningcommission.nic.in/plans/planrel/fiveyr/11th/11_v3/11v3_ch2.pdf -Table 2.13

In case of Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Orissa, a number of associations have been formed under the new Act.  However, in case of West Bengal associations have been formed at Minor Irrigation Level under RIDF and in other States the associations are formed under Societies Registration Acts / Co-operative Acts which have no specific role of Irrigation Departments defined.

29.4 CONSTRAINTS IN IMPLEMENTATION OF PIM (ISSUES) 

There are a number of constraints in making the PIM sustainable in the long run.  Some of these are:

(i)  Lack of legal back up and policy changes: In many States, there is no or very little legal back up and lack of policy decision at the Government level to take up PIM, which is a big impediment in implementation of PIM.  

(ii)  System deficiency:  In older projects, there are many problems like deterioration of old control and measuring structures, leakages and seepage at various places, erosion of banks and beds, siltation and weed infestation.  These are serious problems, hindering farmers to take over the system management on technical and financial considerations. 

(iii)  Uncertainty of water availability:  This is another important aspect, as farmers will understandably be reluctant to take on the responsibility for managing the system unless deliveries of water are made reliable, flexible, practical and responsive to need. The engineers on their part may not be confident about ensuring supply of the requisite quantity of water to the WUAs, as would be obligatory in terms of the MOU signed between Irrigation Agency and WUA.  

Further, the farmers who have their holdings at the head of the canal tend to appropriate more water than required, whereas the farmers at the tail end often fail to get their apportioned share of water.  Head-enders, therefore, have vested interest in continuing the existing arrangements.  The tail-enders may not be keen to form WUAs as water supply in such areas remains inadequate and erratic and they remain apprehensive that the situation will not be materially altered if an association is formed.  These differences in perceptions and conflicts of interests inhibit the coming together of head end and tail end farmers.  

(iv) Fear of financial viability:  Maintenance and operation of the system demands huge finances.  Farmers have got the apprehension that in absence of surety of finance, it would be difficult for them to fulfill the requirement of funds for operation and maintenance.  They feel that when Government is not able to handle the system with huge money available with them, how farmers would be able to do justice? 

(v)  Lack of technical knowledge: Apart from the financial uncertainty, lack of technical input is one of the inhibiting factors to take over the system.   

(vi) Lack of leadership: On account of limited exposure of the farmers to the rest of the world and PIM in particular, potent leadership is lacking, rather on account of limiting knowledge. At times so called local leaders give the negative or unclear version before other farmers which further create misunderstanding among the farmers bringing them sometimes into a fix. 

(vii)  Lack of publicity and training: Seeing is believing; and knowledge brings confidence in people.  This aspect is lacking and there is a constraint to adoption of PIM. 

(viii)  Demographic diversity: Due to variation in economic, ethnic, education levels etc. diversity of farmers, PIM is taking much time in this country.  To handle this aspect deep study, analysis and solution need be found out. 

(ix)  Mega irrigation projects: World scenario gives an indication that there are smaller projects in the countries of the world, where irrigation project transfer has taken care for PIM.  In India, there are huge projects having very large distribution system and culturable command area sometimes more than 20 lakh hectares.  Larger the project, complex would be its maintenance, operation and management aspects and so the formation and functioning of farmers associations for different necessary activities.  

(x)  WUAs v/s Panchayats: In many of the areas, where WUAs have been formed, there is a clash of interest among Panchayats and WUAs on who is to own the system, particularly when watershed schemes are being handed over to the Panchayats.