Relevance: GS-2: Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors and issues arising out of their design and implementation.

Key Phrases: Participatory irrigation management, Community-based natural resource management, National Water Policy 2002, Water Users’ Associations, Pani Panchayat, UP-PIM Act, 2009, water availability, Operation and maintenance quality, Financial resource mobilisation.

Why in News?

• A survey of Water Users’ Associations in Uttar Pradesh indicates that equitable distribution of water is still a distant reality.

Context:

• Water is an indispensable factor of production in agriculture. Participatory irrigation management (PIM), adhering to the rules and norms of community-based natural resource management, gained salience by receiving thrust in the National Water Policy 2002. The PIM Act aims to monitor the equitable distribution of water resources between beneficiary farmers through Water Users’ Associations (WUAs).
• WUAs, as a user-based participatory group of farmers, are responsible for water distribution and conflict management. Some 84,779 WUAs are operational in several States, and the performance of WUAs is skewed across States. For example, the performance of the 802 WUAs in the Uttar Pradesh, one of the largest States contributing to agricultural production, appears to be dismal.
• Parameters like adequacy, equity, utility, cropping intensity, productivity, sustainability, and farmers’ satisfaction were used to assess the performance of WUAs. Primary data from the seven irrigation divisions of Uttar Pradesh, where WUAs have been in existence since 2010–11, were collected.
• The term participatory irrigation management (PIM) refers to the participation of irrigation users, i.e., farmers, in the management of irrigation systems not merely at the tertiary level of management but spanning the entire system. Participation should not be construed as consultation alone. The concept of PIM refers to management by irrigation users at all levels of the system and in all aspects of management.
• It is done by creating local water regulatory bodies like Pani Panchayat or Water Users’ Associations (WUAs).

Objectives of PIM:

• 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.
• To make best use of natural precipitation and ground water in conjunction with flow irrigation for increasing irrigation and cropping intensity.
• 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.
• To encourage collective and community responsibility on the farmers to collect water charges and payment to irrigation agency
• To create healthy atmosphere between the irrigation agency personnel and the users.
• To improve service deliveries through better operation and maintenance.
• To achieve optimum utilization of available resources through sophisticated deliveries, precisely as per crop needs.
• To achieve equity in water distribution.

How Effective are Participatory Irrigation Management and Water Users’ Associations?

• Findings of the Survey:
  • First, most WUAs surveyed meet regularly, maintain their internal records and hold timely elections for WUA executives, which indicate a positive stroke of governance of such WUAs
  • Second, while more than 79 per cent of member-farmers located at the head reach confirmed the increase in canal water availability post the formation of WUAs, only about 38 per cent of the farmers at the tail reach indicated an increase. However, equitable distribution of water remains a distant reality. About 41 per cent of farmers located at the tail reach of the canal agreed that water distribution is more equitable than earlier, compared to 63 per cent and 81 per cent of farmers situated in the middle reach and head reach, respectively. Unauthorised use of water and canal offences are also reported.
  • Third, about 23 per cent of WUA respondents indicated satisfaction in drawing the support of the irrigation department, while about 42 per cent were dissatisfied as they could not get support.
  • Fourth, there is a provision of a definite financial grant to functional WUAs in the UP-PIM Act, 2009. However, WUAs do not get any funding from the department for operations and maintenance. What they receive is merely a temporary departmental fund on an ad-hoc basis for desilting canals. There is no flexibility given to the WUA management committee for fund utilisation. This defeats the very purpose of the participatory approach to managing water resources. WUAs do not collect membership fees to manage their administrative and conveyance expenses. This has raised concerns about the sustainability of such WUAs.
  • Fifth, beneficiary farmers predominantly grow wheat and paddy crops. They agreed that there has been no significant change in cropping patterns over the last few years. WUAs have not been very active in motivating farmers to adopt crop diversification for more profitable or less water-guzzling crops.
  • Sixth, the prioritised factors based on farmers’ responses include:
    • Increased water availability at farm level post the formation of WUAs.
    • Operation and maintenance quality.
    • Tail reach water availability.
    • Financial resource mobilisation.
    • Leadership quality.
    • Equitable distribution of water after the formation of WUAs.
    • Orderly meeting.
    • Prevention of unauthorised use of water.

Way Forward:

• The irrigation department concerned should make a provision of utilising physical, technical and financial resources for the operation and maintenance of WUAs. Devolution of powers to performing WUAs and corpus management through their self-governance are critical to sustain the management of common property resources.
• Canal offences, acting as a major disincentive to rule-abiding farmers, should be prevented through peer pressure, negotiation and sanctions.
• Grant, incentives to users and adequate infrastructure such as office space can have crucial implications for institutional efficiency, transparency and sustainability.
• The overall performance of older WUAs, which started functioning about 10 years ago, has been better than the newer ones established in 2019–20. In other words, WUAs require a stipulated period to realise their full potential as functional, user-based and participatory institutions.

Source: The Hindu BL

Mains Question:

Q. Discuss the participatory irrigation management? How effective has been the participatory irrigation management in last 30 years? Critically Analyse.