Chp 8 Rainwater Harvesting for Irrigation in India

7/28/2019 Chp 8 Rainwater Harvesting for Irrigation in India

1/16

IntroductionRapid expansion of groundwater use in India in thelast three decades has resulted in a steep decline in thegroundwater table in vast areas of the country. Tis hasled to drying up of a huge number of wells, low wellproductivity, rapid rise in well and pumping depths,deteriorating groundwater quality, and also salinity

ingressin many areas, see discussion in Chapter 7 of thisReport. Shallow wells are running dry and the depthof tube wells is increasing every year. Some estimatesindicate that the withdrawal rate of groundwater inIndia is twice the recharge rate (International WaterManagement Institute 2002).

In response to this situation, rainwater harvestingoffers a critical and promising solution to replenishand recharge the groundwater (in areas where geologicconditions are conducive). In a typical setting, muchof the rainwater is lost to surface flows. Rainwater har-vesting for agriculture generally involves the creation ofstructures such as check dams, ponds, and percolationtanks to slow the flow of water, and to collect and holdlimited quantities at a planned set of places along theflow path. Te primary objective is to increase the per-

R H I I

P, A, P

V P. Gh Vh Bh

8

colation of the rainwater into the ground to rechargethe groundwater table. Tis leads to a rise in the watertable levels, increased supply of water in wells, and alonger period of availability of water. In this chapter,we outline the case for small decentralized water har-vesting structures and institutions in contrast with the

conventional, centralized river basin wide planning anddevelopment model of water resource management.We review policy initiatives on watershed development(WSD). We also present the results of a survey whererespondents were beneficiaries of check dams in theSaurashtra region of Gujarat and draw policy implica-tions from the same.

BackgroundWhat is the amount of water available through rainwa-ter in India annually? Te normal annual rainfall pre-cipitation in the country is estimated to be 400 millionhectare-metres (Mha-m) of water (Majumdar 2002)(see Figure 8.1). Out of this, 115 Mha-m enters surfaceflows, 215 Mha-m enters the ground, and 70 Mha-mis lost to evaporation. Only 25 Mha-m is finally used

Te authors are grateful to Suresh Sharma and Ashutosh Roy (Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad) for their contribu-tions to parts of this research.


2/16

Rainwater Harvesting for Irrigation in India 119

through surface irrigation which constitutes a mere 6per cent of the total water available through rain andfrom flows from outside the country (20 Mha-m).Te figure also indicates that out of the 215 Mha-minfiltrating into the soil, only 13 Mha-m is utilized

for groundwater irrigation and other uses. Tis againconstitutes a mere 6 per cent of the annual precipita-tion infiltrating into the soil, indicating the substantialpotential for rainwater harvesting.

Annual Precipitation (400 Mha-m)

215 Mha-m 70 Mha-m 115 Mha-m

Infiltrationinto soil

(215 Mha-m)

Evaporation(140 Mha-m)

Surface flow(180 Mha-m)

65 Mha-m

165 Mha-m 50 Mha-m 5 Mha-m

Flow fromoutside the

country(20 Mha-m)

Seepage fromirrigation

system

(12 Mha-m)

45 Mha-m

Soil water(172 Mha-m)

Groundwater(67 Mha-m)

Storage inreservoirsand tanks

(15 Mha-m)

Groundwatercontribution to

soil water(7 Mha-m)

15 Mha-m 10 Mha-m

Crop use(107 Mha-m)

Irrigation(25 Mha-m)

Lost to sea andadjoining countries

(145 Mha-m)

Rising ground-water table(2 Mha-m)

Various usesincluding irrigation

(13 Mha-m)

By crop(55 Mha-m)

(On increase)

By vegetation and forest(55 Mha-m)

(On increase)

5 Mha-m

River andstream flow

(165 Mha-m)

Transpiration(110 Mha-m)(On increase)

Figure 8.1 Water Resource Wealth of India

Source: Majumdar (2002).


3/16

120 India Infrastructure Report 2011

One of the reasons for the poor utilization of rain-water in India is the high concentration of rainfallover a few months. As able 8.1 shows, about 74 per

cent of the rainfall is received during the south-westmonsoon period of June to September. Even this doesnot fully reveal the concentration of big spells of rains.As a result, the soil saturates, and much of the waterflows away if no structures are made to check this flow.Te uneven distribution also creates a situation of longdry periods when cropping is diffi cult if water is notretained or made available in some other way.

Besides this, the distribution of rainfall is also geo-graphically highly uneven (see able 8.2). Only 8 percent of the country receives very high/assured rainfallof above 2000 mm, and another 20 per cent receives

high rainfall of 1150 to 2000 mm. Te rest of the coun-try, that is, 72 per cent, is in the low, dry, or mediumrainfall range of less than 1150 mm, with 30 per centarea particularly dry at below 750 mm. Tus, in vastareas, unless wells are present, groundwater is not avail-able with adequate rainwater recharge. In the absenceof a proper surface irrigation scheme, crop produc-tion becomes diffi cult. Athavale (2003) indicates thatabout 50 per cent of irrigation water, 85 per cent ofthe drinking water, and about 33 per cent of the do-mestic water in cities comes from tapping of ground-water through dug wells or tube wells. By 20089,groundwater accounted for about 61 per cent of the

irrigated area in the country (Ministry of Agriculture2010).

Table 8.2 Distribution of Area by Annual Rainfallin India

Rainfall classification Amount Approx.

of rainfall percentage of (mm) area receiving

rainfall

Low/Dry Less than 750 30.0

Medium 750 to 1150 42.0

High 1150 to 2000 20.0

Very high/Assured Above 2000 8.0

otal 100.0

Source: Meteorological Department of India, Pune, cited inFertilizer Association of India (2007).

Te situation of acute drops in the water tables ishighlighted by able 8.3. Water table falls of over fourmetres per year are seen in a large number of districts.Te situation seems to be particularly acute in the statesof Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Maharashtra,Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, and amil Nadu wheresharp drops are common. Tere appears to be a wide-spread need to explore the possibilities of rainwaterharvesting to alleviate the decline in water tables.

As pointed out in Chapter 7, Groundwater Ir-rigation in India: Growth, Challenges, and Risks inthis Report, the level of groundwater development is

already as high as 141 per cent in Punjab, 111 per centin Rajasthan, and 105 per cent in Haryana. Tis isfollowed by amil Nadu at 81 per cent, Gujarat at 70per cent, and Uttar Pradesh/Uttarakhand at 65 per cent.Further, these figures hide the highly skewed intra-statedistribution.

Importance of Rainwater HarvestingVerma et al. (2008) indicate that decentralized smallwater harvesting structures present a major alternativeto the conventional river basin water resource devel-opment models. An excellent example is the decen-tralized, large-scale, check dam rainwater harvestingmovement in Saurashtra, Gujarat. Tis is also broughtout by studies conducted by the Central Soil and WaterConservation Research and raining Institute, Dehra-dun (reported by Khurana 2003).Te studies show aclear relationship between the size of catchment andamount of run-off that can be captured. Increasing

Table 8.1 Distribution of Annual Rainfall bySeasons in India

Rainfall Duration Approx.percentage of

annual rainfall

Pre-monsoon MarchMay 10.4

South-west monsoon JuneSeptember 73.7

Post-monsoon OctoberDecember 13.3

Winter or north-eastmonsoon JanuaryFebruary 2.6

otal Annual 100.0

Source: Meteorological Department of India, Pune, cited inFertilizer Association of India (2007).


4/16


the size of the catchment from 1 hectare (ha) to about

2 ha reduces the water yield per hectare by as muchas 20 per cent. Tus, in a drought prone area wherewater is scarce, 10 tiny dams with a catchment of 1ha each will collect more water than one larger damwith a catchment of 10 ha. Khurana (2003) indicatesthat the drought proofing benefits from small rainwaterharvesting structures can very effectively distribute theavailable water when there is no drought or a limiteddrought. Moench and Kumar (1993) say that smallerstructures help in conditions of high inter-year rainfallvariability and low reliability.

Rockstrom et al. (2009) discuss that rainwater har-

vesting structures can be very useful for semi-arid anddry, sub-humid regions especially as water scarcity iscaused by extreme variability of rainfall rather than theamount of rainfall. Under such conditions, with highrainfall intensities, few rain events, and poor spatial andtemporal distribution of rainfall, even if total rainfallis adequate, water losses are very high, thus leading

to scarcity. Given that the frequency of dry spells and

droughts is expected to increase with climate change(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007),they suggest rainwater harvesting structures as extreme-ly important for mitigating the impact on agricultureand increasing agricultural productivity. Rockstromet al. (2009) argue for the need to downscale waterresource management from the river basin scale to thecatchment scale (about 1000 km3). Indicating theseimportant benefits, Oweis (1997) finds that bridgingcritical dry spells through supplemental irrigation ofabout 50 to 200 mm through groundwater and rain-water harvesting can stabilize yields in dry, sub-humid

regions; and up to 400 per cent increase in yields havebeen reported in the arid regions of Syria.Kateja (2003) discusses the importance of ground-

water in arid states such as Rajasthan and the need fordifferent techniques of groundwater recharge. Seventyper cent of the population in Rajasthan depends ongroundwater for drinking and irrigation purposes and

Table 8.3 Observed Annual Fall in Water able Levels, District Frequency, May 1999 to May 2001

States May 1999 to May 2000 May 2000 to May 2001

Fall in water table level

2 to 4 metres More than 4 metres 2 to 4 metres More than 4 metres

Number of Districts

Andhra Pradesh 8 6 5 3

Maharashtra 11 6 12 3

Madhya Pradesh 3 2 23 11

Rajasthan All except 5 14 NA NA

Punjab 2 1 6 0

Haryana 3 2 3 1

Uttar Pradesh 6 4 11 6

Bihar 4 NA NA

West Bengal 3 2 NA NA

Orissa 2 1 NA NA

Assam 4 5 1

Gujarat All except 4 9 NA NA

Karnataka 8 3 4 2

amil Nadu 13 6 16 10

Source: Ministry of Water Resources (2001).Note: NAdata not available.


5/16


the scanty rainfall cannot recharge the groundwaterwithout the adoption of water harvesting techniques.Te techniques may include recharge structures such

as Talabs, Nadi, Tanka, Bawari, Jhalara, and Khadinto suit the local geological and climate conditions.Groundwater extraction is also leading to significantwater quality problems and health hazards and over16,000 habitations (that is, about 13 per cent of thetotal habitations in the state) may be fluoride affected.

With respect to the usefulness of tanks for collectingrainwater and recharging groundwater, Shah and Raju(2001)who studied the socio-ecology of tanks andwater harvesting in Rajasthanreport that there aremultiple benefits from tanks. anks lead to substantialrainwater harvesting at the local level, and the associ-

ated distribution system leads to water availability inlarge areas and to larger numbers of farmers. A signifi-cant benefit of percolation of rainwater is groundwaterrecharge and higher water table in the area. Otherbenefits include low cost flow irrigation, reductionin intensity of flash floods, concentration of silt andminerals to fertilize the soil in the command area, andreduction in soil erosion.

Kishore et al. (2005) find that even when the rainfallshows no decline, there are growing scarcities at manylocations, as use is increasingly exceeding the avail-ability. Tey say that the only recourse in such loca-tions is to close the demandsupply gap by conserving

water through rainwater harvesting. Tis may includebuilding a core wall on the upstream side of pondsto prevent them from pulling out groundwater fromupstream lands.

ilala and Shiyani (2005) undertook a study ofthe impact of water harvesting structures on the Raj

Samadhiyala village of Saurashtra near Rajkot. Tis isa highly admired rainwater harvesting experiment andthe study sought to evaluate the impacts through a

comparison of beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries (seeable 8.4). Te authors found that the water harvest-ing structures had a substantial positive impact onthe cropping patterns of farmers (for example, couldgrow vegetables in summer), crop yields (42 per cent ,45 per cent, and 31 per cent increase for groundnut,cotton and wheat, respectively comparing benefi-ciary and non-beneficiary farmers) and farmer incomes(76 per cent, 95 per cent, and 77 per cent higherfarm business income for beneficiaries vis--vis non-beneficiaries in these crops). Tey also report benefitsof higher water use effi ciency, reduction in cost of pro-

duction, and higher labour productivity.Sikarwar et al. (2005), evaluated the impact of5 small check dams and 5 marginal check damsconstructed in Saurashtra, Gujarat in the LadudiWatershed between 2002 and 2004 by the GujaratState Land Development Corporation (GSLDC). Teyfound that the total hours of irrigation from the wellsincreased by 32 per cent and that there was a rise of6 to 7 metres in the water table depth observed in thewells. Tere was also improvement in the croppingpattern, net revenues, as well as the socio-economicstatus of farmers as a result of the check dams.

Te National Water Policy 2002 recommends the

development of water harvesting systems to increase theutilizable water resources. In line with this, the enthFive Year Plan set targets and budgets for artificialrecharge of groundwater and rainwater harvesting(see able 8.5).

Table 8.4 Yield and Returns per Hectare of Different Crops

Items Unit Groundnut Cotton Wheat

Beni- Non- per cent Beni- Non- per cent Beni- Non- per centficiaries beni- change ficiaries beni- change ficiaries beni- change

ficiaries ficiaries ficiaries

Yield Q 21.01 14.75 42.44 14.50 10.03 44.56 33.97 25.91 31.11

Gross Return Rs 28610 20370 40.45 28086 19318 45.38 27642 21097 31.02

Farm Business Income Rs 12810 7248 76.74 8335 4267 95.33 16138 11242 43.55

Source: ilala and Shiyani (2005).


6/16


Table 8.5 argets and Budget for Recharge Structures Under the Scheme Artificial Recharge ofGroundwater and Rainwater Harvesting of the enth Plan

States/UTs Number of recharge structures Cost (Rs in Lakh)

Andhra Pradesh 185 1350

Bihar & Jharkhand 205 750

Chhattisgarh 104 500

Delhi 235 300

Goa 30 150

Gujarat 240 1350

Haryana 260 350

Himachal Pradesh 64 350

Jammu & Kashmir 40 350

Karnataka 373 1350

Kerala 95 350

Madhya Pradesh 232 1100

Maharashtra 212 1100

North-Eastern States 165 600

Orissa 100 800

Punjab 425 500

Rajasthan 196 1350

Sikkim 170 150amil Nadu 184 1350

Uttar Pradesh & Uttaranchal 770 1500

West Bengal 236 900

Andaman & Nicobar Islands 77 100

Chandigarh 100 100

Lakshadweep 100 100

Dadra & Nagar Haveli 140 100

Daman & Diu 110 100

Puducherry 38 100

Eastern Coastal States 1 200

Western Coastal States 1 200

India 5088 17500

Source: Ministry of Water Resources (2002).


7/16


WSD ProgrammesA major national initiative in India in which rainwaterharvesting is a significant component is the WSD pro-gramme, taken up under different schemes/programmesof the Government of India and the state governments(See able 8.6). Raising productivity and incomes inrain-fed areas is a major challenge in India and a keyto achieving this is to improve the use of natural re-sourcesparticularly land and water which are majorconstraints in these areas. Since about 5060 per cent ofthe countrys population depends directly or indirectlyon agriculture for income and livelihood (including themajority of the poor), and poverty is particularly acutein the rain-fed areas, WSD programmes are given hugeimportance. Tey are seen as a significant measure for

mitigating drought impact and reducing the vulner-ability of the large poor populations in dry regions.

For WSD programmes, scientists and engineers havedeveloped a variety of technologies which offer solutionsto diffi cult watershed conditions. Te solutions includeinterventions ranging from simple check dams to largepercolation and irrigation tanks, from vegetative barriersto contour bunds, and changes in agricultural practicesfor example, in-situ soil and moisture conservation,agro-forestry, pasture development, horticulture, andsilvipasture. A hierarchy of institutional arrangementsof the government and other agencies undertakes theplanning and implementation of WSD. An example ofan institutional arrangement is shown in Figure 8.2. Awatershed is considered a geo-hydrological unit or anarea that drains to a common point. Practical defini-tions have varied over the years but for governmentprojects and budgeting purposes, a watershed has beentypically identified as an area of approximate 500 ha ina village. Tis is being expanded in the recent years.

Te history and concept of WSD in India can betraced back to the Famine Commission of 1880 inBritish India which first indicated its importance. It wasidentified again in 1928 by the Royal Commission ofAgriculture. After independence, Government of India-

supported WSD programmes started during the 1950s.Te first step towards a systematic effort to tackle theproblem of drought and desertification through WSDwas the establishment of a special centre at Jodhpur in1952 with the major focus of carrying out research oncore needs of desert area development. In 1959, theentire responsibility for research on dry land/desert

areas was entrusted to the above centre which was thendesignated the Central Arid Zone Research Institute(CAZRI). Te first large-scale government supportedwatershed programme was launched in 19623; amajor purpose was to check siltation of multi-purpose

reservoirs through soil conservation works in thecatchments of river valley projects.

During the Second and Tird Five Year Plans,the problems of drought-affected areas were mainlysought to be solved by launching Dry Farming Proj-ects, which were initially taken up in a few areas andemphasized moisture and water conservation measures.Te Fourth Plan continued to place major emphasison dryland farming technology, and for this purpose,the All India Coordinated Research Project for Dry-land Agriculture was started, later based at the CentralResearch Institute for Dryland Agriculture (CRIDA).

Under its aegis, 24 pilot projects were started to serve astraining-cum-demonstration centres for application oftechnology relating to soil management, water harvest-ing, improved agronomic practices, drought resistantcrops, and more.

Te origin of the Drought Prone Areas Programme(DPAP) can be traced to the Rural Works Programme

Figure 8.2 An Example of the Institutional Arrangementfor Water Development

Source: Authors own.Note: DWMADistrict Water Management Agency; DRDADistrict Rural Development Agency; MDMulti Disciplinaryeam; PIAProgram Implementation Agency; SHGSelf-help group; VOVillage Organization; WCWatershedCommittee; WUGWater User Group; WDWatershedDevelopment eam.

DWMA DRDA

PIAWDT

WUG WUG WUG WUG

SHG SHG SHG SHG

MDT

WCVO


8/16


launched in 19701 with the objective of creatingassets designed to reduce the severity of drought in theaffected areas. Te programme spelt out a long-term

strategy in the context of the conditions and potentialsof identified drought prone districts. In all, 54 districtsas well as parts of 18 other districts contiguous tothem were identified in the country as drought-pronefor purposes of the programme (See able 8.7). Teprogramme grew to cover 12 per cent of the countryspopulation and nearly one-fifth of the area. Labour-intensive activities such as medium and minor irriga-tion projects, road construction, soil conservation, andafforestation projects were taken up under the pro-gramme. Te success of these activities prompted thegovernment to take up a mega sized project named the

Drought Prone Areas Programme in 19723, with theprincipal objective of mitigating the impact of droughtsin vulnerable areas.

In the Fifth Five Year Plan, the DPAP adopted thestrategy and approach of integrated area developmentlaid down by the ask Force constituted by the PlanningCommission. On the suggestion of the National Com-mission on Agriculture, 1974, a specific programmewas initiated in 19778 for hot desert areas, consistingmainly of afforestation and livestock developmenttheDesert Development Programme (DDP) (See able8.8). Te DPAP and DDP were reviewed periodicallyby the Ministry of Rural Development, which recom-

mended modifications in the nature and coverage ofthese programmes from time to time. Te major em-phasis was on productive agriculture, dryland as well as

irrigated, and vegetation cover. In 1980, the Ministryof Agriculture also started a new scheme called the In-tegrated Watershed Management in the Catchments of

Flood Prone Rivers (FPR).Te DPAP was withdrawn from areas covered under

DDP as both programmes had similar objectives. Temain thrust of DPAP/DDP was on activities relating tosoil conservation, land shaping and development, waterresource conservation and development, afforestation,and pasture development.

With experience gained from the different approach-es, the concept of integrated WSD was first formalizedin the early 1990s, and in 1990, the National WatershedProject for Rain-fed Areas (NWDPRA) was launchedin 99 selected watersheds to enhance crop productiv-

ity in arable rain-fed areas. By 1994, it covered 2554micro watersheds. In 1993, the Government of Indiaconstituted a technical committee headed by C.H.Hanumantha Rao to review these programmes. Tecommittee indicated that:

the programmes have been implemented in a fragmented man-

ner by different departments through rigid guidelines without

any well-designed plans prepared on watershed basis by involv-

ing the inhabitants. In many areas the achievements have been

dismal. Ecological degradation has been proceeding unabated

in many of these areas with reduced forest cover, reducing water

table and a shortage of drinking water, fuel and fodder (Ministry

of Rural Development 1994 and 2006.)

Te Committee, therefore, proposed a revamp ofthe strategy of implementation of these programmes,drawing upon the the outstanding successes of some

Table 8.6 Number of WSD Projects, Area Covered, and Funds Released under Different WSDProgrammes in India, 19956 to 20078

Name of programme Number of projects Area covered Total funds released by thesanctioned in lakh ha central government (Rs Million)

DPAP 27,439 130.20 28,378(60.9) (41.2) (36.7)

DDP 15,746 78.73 21,032(34.9) (24.9) (27.2)

IWDP 1877 107.00 27,976(33.9) (33.9) (36.1)

otal 45,062 322.93 77,386(100.0) (100.0) (100.0)

Source: Ministry of Rural Development (2010).Note: Figures in parenthesis are percentages.


9/16


ongoing watershed projects. It recommended thatsanctioning of works should be on the basis of actionplans prepared on a watershed basis instead of a fixed

amount being allocated per block as was the practiceat the time. It called for the introduction of participa-tory modes of implementation, through involvementof beneficiaries of the programme and non-governmentorganizations (NGOs). Based on its recommendationsa new set of guidelines was formulated and came intoeffect from 1 April 1995 and applied to all the water-shed projects of the Ministry of Rural Development.At the time, the Department of Land Resources of theMinistry of Rural Development administered threearea-based watershed programmes for development ofdry, rain-fed wastelands and degraded lands namely

DPAP, DDP, and Integrated Wastelands DevelopmentProgramme (IWDP). Te Common Guidelines of1994 were revised by the Ministry of Rural Develop-ment in 2001 and then again modified and reissued asGuidelines for Hariyali in April 2003.

Te watershed programme has become the cen-trepiece of rural development in India. Te Ministryof Environment and Forests and bilateral fundingagencies are involved in implementation of watershedprojects in India. Te new initiative of the Departmentof Land Resources called Hariyali had the objectiveof empoweringPanchayati RajInstitutions (PRIs) bothfinancially and administratively in the implementation

of WSD Programmes. Under this initiative, all newarea development programmes under IWDP, DPAP,and DDP were to be implemented through the PRIsin accordance with the guidelines for Hariyali from 1April 2003. In November 2006, an apex body calledthe National Rain-fed Area Authority (NRAA) wasset up. It brought out new Common Guidelines forWatershed Development Projects in 2008 in order tohave a unified approach by all ministries, leading tothe Integrated Watershed Management Programme(IWMP). Tese guidelines are now applicable to allWSD projects of all departments/ministries of the

Government of India concerned with WSD projects.Rainwater Harvesting: InstitutionalEffectiveness in GujaratCommunity based rainwater harvesting is perhapsmore important today than ever before. An outstandinggrassroots level initiative for rainwater harvesting is

Table 8.7 Area reated Under DPAP

Year Area treated inlakh hectares

19956 5.95

19967 5.50

19978 4.54

19989 3.65

19992000 3.66

20001 7.50

20012 5.44

20023 6.56

20034 7.35

20045 7.49

20056 8.10

otal 65.74

Source: Ministry of Rural Development (2010).

Table 8.8 Area reated Under DDP Sinceits Inception

Year Area treated inlakh hectares

From inception till 31 March 1995 5.1519956 2.02

19967 1.31

19978 1.40

19989 1.60

19992000 2.00

20001 3.41

20012 3.56

20023 4.39

20034 4.72

20045 4.89

20056 6.01

otal 40.46

Source: Ministry of Rural Development (2010).


10/16


seen in the check dam movement in the dry Saurashtraregion of Gujarat state. Tis was a grassroots levelmovement that witnessed the formation of hundreds

of village level institutions for organizing rainwaterharvesting through planning, funding, and constructionof a series of check dams as well as other rainwaterharvesting structures in and around each village (seeGandhi and Sharma 2009). Te purpose was to collectand hold rainwater for a short time and recharge theunderground aquifers, thereby bringing water to theopen wells, most of which had run dry. From the late1990s, such institutions have been formed in hundredsof villages in the region and the movement is reportedto have had a significant impact on water availabilityand agricultural incomes.

Check dams are small low barriers built across thepathways of rainwater surface flows. Te pathwayscould be natural or manmade, small or large, and mayinclude gullies, old village roads, streams, and shallowrivers. In the rainy season, the check dams help retainsurface water overflows so that water percolates andrecharges the water table below (Gandhi and Sharma2009). A series of check dams is usually planned along awater flow path so that water overflowing one structureis captured by the next, and so on. In this manner, thebenefits of groundwater recharge are spread over a largearea and potentially impact a large number of wells.Check dams do not require much technical know-how

to construct and the capital investment is generallymodest. Construction is often labour intensive whichfacilitates participation by most of the villagers. Teinvolvement of the local people in planning and imple-mentation, through these institutions, is reported tobe crucial in making these interventions possible andsuccessful.

Te rainwater harvesting movement in the Saurash-tra area of Gujarat was inspired primarily by the successin a village called Raj Samadhiyala near Rajkot. Com-mencing initially as a local initiative, the check damconcept and development has benefited substantially

from private voluntary support organized through sev-eral organizations such as the Jal Dhara rust. Te rustpooled funds from expatriate village residents who hadmigrated to the city of Surat, and done well in diamondcutting businesses and who were willing to offer help/philanthropy to their community of origin. Te rustnot only helped organize funds but also supported the

initiative with technical know-how and, in some cases,earth-moving equipment. Te movement also ben-efited from active government support. During the year

2000, the Government of Gujarat launched the SardarPatel Participatory Water Conservation Programme toaid in the construction of check dams. As part of thisprogramme a scheme was devised whereby 60 per centof the cost of a check dam would be met by the stateon the proviso that villagers contributed the remaining40 per cent, primarily in the form of labour. However,the village institutions eager for speedy implementa-tion before the rainy season often did not always waitfor government paperwork clearance and went aheadthrough their own contributions and those sourcedfrom private/trust sources; the government funds often

followed. According to some reports, 15,000 checkdams had been constructed in the state by year 2002(Times of India 2002), and according to governmentstatistics given in able 8.9, over 90,000 check damshad been completed by 2007 (Government of Gujarat2007).

Of 5600 villages in Saurashtra, 3000 have small andmedium check dams while there are 300 large checkdams in the region (DNA Newspaper2008). Te out-come has been profound as evidenced by this commentfrom Maldebhai Bodar, a farmer from Sevantara villagewith 35 check dams: Earlier it was very diffi cult gettingwater for even one crop in a year. Now we have three

crops (Ibid.).Te research described below has examined the per-

formance of a sample of village institutions which wereorganized for rainwater harvesting work and whichwere critical to its successful implementation. Teexamination uses the framework of features based onnew institutional economics and management theoriesof governance developed in Gandhi et al. (2009).

S R Pfi

A Study of Rainwater Harvesting in Gujarat

Seven village rainwater harvesting institutions wereselected from three districts in the Saurashtra region ofGujarat, namely Amreli, Bhavnagar, and Rajkot. A totalsample of 100 beneficiaries affi liated with check daminstitutions was surveyed. Te study used both institu-tional questionnaires and household questionnaires tocollect information (Gandhi and Sharma 2009).


11/16


Te educational profile of respondents (see able8.10) shows that education was limited: 93 per centof households had some education, but very few hadeducation beyond the 9th grade, and none had col-lege education. Te only source of irrigation for thehouseholds was open wells and reliance on the waterinstitution for water access was reported as very high,

with 81 per cent indicating it as substantial and 19 percent as very substantial.

G

Te data in able 8.11 show that the Chairman, Man-aging Committee, and the Secretary are reported to beactive by about half the respondents and very active by

Table 8.9 Number of Check Dams Constructed inVarious Districts in Gujarat, June 2007

District Number of check dams

1 Ahmedabad 629

2 Amreli 4822

3 Anand/Kheda 367

4 Banaskantha 2766

5 Bharuch 685

6 Bhavnagar 7290

7 Dahod 5468

8 Dang 1678

9 Gandhinagar 328

10 Jamnagar 787111 Junagadh 5080

12 Kuchchh 5804

13 Mehsana 832

14 Narmada 1302

15 Navsari 1234

16 Panchmahal 7856

17 Patan 1587

18 Porbandar 902

19 Rajkot 14192

20 Sabarkantha 8228

21 Surat 2174

22 Surendranagar 2493

23 Vadodara 2684

24 Valsad 4477

otal 90648

Source: Government of Gujarat (2007).

Table 8.10 Respondent Profile

Education

Education Per cent

Illiterate 7

Std14 36

Std59 51

Std1012 6

Below graduation 0

Graduation 0

Above graduation 0

otal 100

Sources of irrigation

Sources Per cent

River 0

Open well 100

ube well 0

Canal 0

ank 0

Lift from tank 0

otal 100

Reliance on the institution

Reliance Per cent

Very substantial 19

Substantial 81

Some 0

Very little 0

None 0

otal 100

Source: Gandhi and Sharma (2009).


12/16


the other half, indicating some variation. Governmentoffi cials are also indicated as having an active part inthe institutional arrangements. Te local government,

including the panchayat and sarpanch, shows activeinvolvement but not as much as some others.

Table 8.11 Role in Running the Institutions

Role of: Very Active Passive Noneactive

1. Chairman 48 52 0 0

2. Managing committee 53 46 0 1

3. Members 7 8 85 0

4. Secretary 48 52 0 0

5. Government offi cials 38 62 0 0

6. Panchayat 14 86 0 0

7. Sarpanch 7 93 0 0

8. Other local institutions 0 0 0 100


M I P

Te overall performance rating for check dam institu-tions is reported in able 8.12. About 56 per cent ofthe respondents considered the institution to be verysuccessful whereas 44 per cent considered it to be suc-cessful. Tus, the satisfaction with the institution and

its results seems very high.

Table 8.12 Performance of the Institution

Performance Rating No. of farmers

Very successful 4 56Successful 3 44

Satisfactory 2 0

Poor 1 0

otal 100


able 8.13 presents results on the broader perceivedimpacts of the institution, including the effects onequity. Te data indicate that the institution was per-ceived as having facilitated empowerment and a sense

of ownership among the farmers. Moreover, activeinvolvement of all classes was reported. Te institu-tion was also perceived as having a substantial positiveimpact on the whole village, including small/marginalfarmers and labourers. Even the impact on the environ-ment was reported to be positive, presumably becauselocal groundwater recharge was conceptualized as ben-efiting the environment.

M A

Te OBI regression model is used and the caveats ofpotential multicollinearity apply. Te results on overallinstitutional performance are given in able 8.14. Te

model indicates that if the objectives are clear to the

Table 8.13 Impact of the Institution on the Village, Different Communities, and the Environment

Highly positive Positive No impact Negative Highly negative

Empowerment of farmers to manage irrigation 42 58 0 0 0

Beginning of a sense of ownership by farmers 61 39 0 0 0

Active involvement of all classes 30 70 0 0 0

Impact on:

Village as a whole 91 9 0 0 0

Women 71 29 0 0 0

Large/medium farmers 61 38 1 0 0

Small/marginal farmers 67 33 0 0 0

Labour/wage earners 25 74 0 0 1

Environment and natural resources 83 17 0 0 0


13/16


members, management has sound expertise, and man-agement has the authority to adapt the rules and sys-tems, institutional performance is better. In addition,

superior performance is promoted when the institutionuses its powers to bring about compliance. Where thegovernment has played an active part in the derivationof rules there would appear to be better performance.In addition, good interaction between the membersand capable leadership to facilitate interaction helpedimprove the performance. Tus, many factors are as-sociated with good performance, particularly objectivesbeing clear to members, managements expertise, man-agement adapting the rules, and compliance.

Conclusions and Policy

ImplicationsExtraction of groundwater has resulted in large declinesin the groundwater tables in many areas of the country.Tis has resulted in low productivity of wells, deteriora-tion of groundwater quality, and intrusion of sea waterin coastal areas. In response to this, rainwater harvest-ing offers a very promising solution. Estimates indicatethat there is a huge potential and only about 6 per centof the available surface and groundwater is being used.Most of the rainwater which falls, is lost to surface flows.

Rainwater harvesting for agriculture generally involvescreation of structures such as check-dams, ponds, andpercolation tanks at a planned set of places along the

flow path. Tis increases the percolation of the waterinto the ground and recharges the groundwater table.It increases the supply of water in the wells and theduration of availability.

Decentralized small harvesting structures presenta major alternative to conventional river basin waterresource development. Decentralized water harvestingcan capture five times more water. Te drought proof-ing benefits from small rainwater harvesting structurescan be well distributed especially when the drought islimited and not severe. Rainwater harvesting can bevery useful in semi-arid and dry sub-humid regions

where the problem is not the amount of rain but theextreme variability. Given that with climate change thefrequency of dry spells and droughts are expected toincrease, rainwater harvesting can be extremely impor-tant to mitigate the impact on agriculture and increaseagricultural productivity. Bridging critical dry spells byirrigation through rainwater harvesting can stabiliseand increase yields.

Te National Water Policy and the enth Five YearPlan set targets and budgets for artificial recharge

Table 8.14 OBI Regression: Dependent VariableOverall Performance/Success

Parameter Estimate t value Approx Pr > |t|

Intercept 4.68 1.04 0.3001

Managing committee active 0.08 0.44 0.6598

Secretary active 0.22 1.07 0.2831

Management has the expertise 0.20*** 2.72 0.0066

Government helped determine the rules 1.06*** 4.24


14/16


of groundwater and rainwater harvesting. Besides,rainwater harvesting is pursued in India through WSDprogramme of the Government of India and the state

governments. Since poverty is particularly acute inthe rain-fed areas, WSD programmes are given hugesupport by the government, and are looked upon formitigating drought impact and reducing vulnerabilityof the large poor populations in the dry regions. Underthe DPAP, DDP, and IWDP watershed developmentprogrammes of the government, huge funds of overRs 77300 million have been released, and an areaof 32.29 million hectares has been treated between19956 and 20078.

A huge grassroots initiative on rainwater harvestinghas taken place in the Saurashtra region of Gujarat and

has received substantial support from the state govern-ment. Te movement works through the formation oflocal village institutions for organizing the planning,finance, and implementation of village-wide rainwaterharvesting through construction of check dams andother water conservation structures. It is reported thatsince the late 1990s, over 90,000 such structures havebeen created in the state and evidence indicates thatthese initiatives have had a huge impact on water avail-ability and agricultural incomes. Study and multivariateanalysis of the performance of these rainwater harvest-ing institutions indicates that success is determined bya number of factors including appropriate scale, clarity

of objectives, good interaction, management havingexpertise, adaptiveness, and compliance.

Tere is an urgent need for strong policies andprogrammes to promote rainwater harvesting in India.Tese should target areas that are water scarce, those thathave become highly dependent on groundwater, andwhere rapid declines in groundwater levels are takingplace. Substantial funding is required for the creationof rainwater harvesting structures and given the costsand externalities involved, it calls for public support.However, it is very important that this is accompanied

by the development/creation of appropriate institu-tional structures for planning and implementation.Experience indicates that given the substantial varia-

tion in the geologic, hydrological, and social settings,bringing together the formal/scientific with the localand informal is a major challenge and clearly requires aparticipative approach for success. Conditions of insti-tutional success such as clear objectives, good interac-tion, adaptiveness, appropriate scale, and complianceneed to be addressed by the policies and programmesto ensure good performance. Te activities need tobe preceded by area based planning and formulationof regular action plans. Te check dam movement inGujarat shows that community involvement in rain-water harvesting projects and activities is extremely

important for success. It also shows that creatingeffective village institutions with active participationcan go a long way in improving results. Te potentialfor raising donation support and other funding is alsodemonstrated in such an approach.

Other experiences indicate that to improve theimpact of rainwater harvesting, it is necessary to gobeyond natural resource management to add pro-ductivity enhancement activities. Tese may includemeasures to improve water use effi ciency such as dripand sprinkler irrigation, and promotion of appropriatecrops, varieties, and modern inputs to enhance physicalproductivity and economic returns. Further, to extend

the benefits to landless and weaker sections in rain-fedareas, it is important to include an enterprise promo-tion component. Tis would assist in the developmentof small business enterprises of these people with theinvolvement of women and SHGs. Tis would help thelandless and weaker sections to capture some benefitsfrom the rise in incomes and demand of the farmingcommunity. Rainwater harvesting and WSD undertak-en with such a comprehensive policy approach wouldlead to more inclusive and sustainable water resourcedevelopment and management in water scarce areas.

References

Agarwal, Anil (2001), Drought: ry Capturing the Rain,Briefing Paper prepared for Members of Parliament.

Athavale, R.N. (2003), Water Harvesting and Sustainable

Supply in India, Environment Development Series, Centrefor Environment Education, Rawat Publications, Jaipurand New Delhi.


15/16


Central Ground Water Board [CGWB] (2006), DynamicGround Water Resources of India, (as on March 2004),Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India,

Faridabad.Crase, Lin and Vasant P. Gandhi (2009), Reforming Institu-

tions in Water Resource Management: Policy and Perfor-mance for Sustainable Development, Earthscan, London.

Department of Land Resources (1994), Report of the TechnicalCommittee on Drought prone Areas Programme and DesertDevelopment Programme, (Hanumantha Rao CommitteeReport), April Department of Land Resources, Ministryof Rural Development, Government of India.

(2006), Report of the Technical Committee on Water-shed Programmes in India, (From Hariyali to Neeranchal),Department of Land Resources, Ministry of RuralDevelopment, Government of India, January.

DNA Newspaper (2008), Water Returns to Saurashtra

Farmers, 8 November 2008, Ahmedabad, available athttp://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_water-returns-to-saurashtra-farmers-follow_1204607 last accessed on28 September 2011.

Fertilizer Association of India (2007), Fertilizer Statistics200607, Te Fertilizer Association of India, NewDelhi.

Gandhi, Vasant P. and N.V. Namboodiri (2002), Invest-ment and Institutions for Water Management in IndiasAgriculture: Profile and Behaviour, in D. Brennan (ed.)Water Policy Reform: Lessons from Asia and Australia,Australian Centre for International Agricultural Re-search (ACIAR), Canberra

(2009), Water Resource Development and Insti-tutions in India: Overview and Profile, in Lin Craseand Vasant P. Gandhi (eds)Reforming Institutions inWater Resource Management: Policy and Performance forSustainable Development, Earthscan, London.

Gandhi, Vasant, Lin Crase, and Ashutosh Roy (2009),Institutional Analysis of the Performance of WaterInstitutions in Tree Major States of India in Lin Craseand Vasant P. Gandhi (eds), Reforming Institutions inWater Resource Management: Policy and Performance forSustainable Development, Earthscan, London.

Gandhi, Vasant and Suresh Sharma (2009), Te Perfor-mance of Rain-water Harvesting Institutions in India:Empirical Study, in Lin Crase and Vasant P. Gandhi

(eds) Reforming Institutions in Water Resource Manage-ment: Policy and Performance for Sustainable Develop-ment, Earthscan, London.

Government of Gujarat (2007), Details of CheckdamsCompleted in Gujarat State, Gujarat, Narmada WaterResources, Water Supply and Kalpsar Department,

Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar, available athttp://guj-nwrws.gujarat.gov.in/ pdf/checkdam_01.pdf

International Water Management Institute [IWMI] (2002),

Socio-ecology of Groundwater in India, Water PolicyBriefing, IWMI-ata Water Policy Program, IWMI.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] (2007),Climate Change 2007, Fourth Assessment Report, Cam-bridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

Kateja, Alpana (2003), Groundwater Recharge: Need of theDay, in Kanchan Chopra, C.H. Hanumantha Rao, andRamprasad Sengupta(eds) Water Resources, SustainableLivelihoods and Eco-System Services, Concept PublishingCompany, New Delhi, pp. 194203.

Kerr, J., G. Pangare, and V.L. Pangare (2002), Watershed De-velopment Projects in India: An Evaluation, InternationalFood Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington,DC.

Khurana, Indira (2003), Water Scarcity? ry Capturingthe Rain in Kamta Prasad (ed.) Water Resources andSustainable Development, Shipra Publications, Delhi,pp. 13747.

Kishore, Ravi, D.K. Singh, R.M. Singh, R. Singh, andD.M. Bhandarkar (2005), Restructuring of WaterHarvesting Ponds and Ground Water Recharge, inN.C. Patel, R. Subbaiah, P.M. Chauhan, K.C. Patel,and J.N. Nandasana(eds) Sustainable Management of Water Resources, Himanshu Publications, Udaipur,pp. 20814.

Majumdar, Dilip Kumar (2002), Irrigation Water Manage-ment: Principles and Practice, Prentice-Hall of India Pvt.

Ltd, New Delhi.Ministry of Agriculture (2010), Agricultural Statistics at aGlance 2010, Directorate of Economics and Statistics,Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, NewDelhi.

Ministry of Water Resources (2001), State-wise Water FallStatistics, Government of India, New Delhi.

(2002), Xth Plan Documents for Water Resources,Government of India, New Delhi.

Ministry of Rural Development (1994), Report of the Techni-cal Committee on Drought Prone Areas Programme andDesert Development Programme, (Hanumantha RaoCommittee Report), Department of Land Resources,Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India,

New Delhi. (2006), Report of the Technical Committee on Water-

shed Programmes in India(From Hariyali to Neeranchal),(Parthasarathy Committee Report), Department ofLand Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Gov-ernment of India, New Delhi.


16/16


(2010),Annual Report 200910, Ministry of RuralDevelopment, Government of India, New Delhi.

Moench, Marcus (2003), Groundwater and Food Security

in India, in Kamta Prasad (ed.) Water Resources andSustainable Development: Challenges of 21st Century,Shipra Publications, Delhi, pp. 14867.

Moench, M. and M.D. Kumar (1993), Local Water Manage-ment Initiatives: NGO activities in Gujarat, VIKSAPacific Institute Monograph, VIKSA, Ahmedabad.

Oweis, . (1997), Supplemental Irrigation: A HighlyEffi cient Water Use Practice, International Centre forAgriculture Research in the Dry Areas, Aleppo, Syria.

Rockstrom, Johan, Louise Karlberg, Suhas P. Wani,Jennie Barron, Nuhu Hatibu, Teib Oweis, AdrianaBruggeman, Jalali Farahani, and Zhu Qiang (2009),Managing Water in Rainfed Agriculture: Te Needfor a Paradigm Shift, Agriculture Water Management,

Vol. 97, pp. 54350, available at http://dspace.icrisat.ac.in/bitstream/10731/ 2920/1/AgrWatManag97_4_543-550_2010.pdf journal published by Elsevier BVand journal home page at: http://www.elsevier.ocm/locate/agwat)

Shah, ushaar and K.V. Raju (2001), RethinkingRehabilitation: Socio-Ecology of anks and WaterHarvesting in Rajasthan, North West India, CAPRiWorking Paper No. 18, CGIAR System-wide Projecton Collective Action and Property Rights. International

Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), WashingtonDC.

Shah, A. Who Benefits from Participatory Watershed Devel-

opment? Lessons from Gujarat, India, Gatekeeper series,No.97, International Institute for Economic Develop-ment (IIED), London.

Sikarwar, R.S., H.D. Rank, and R. Subbaiah (2005), ImpactAssessment of Water Harvesting Structures in LadudiWatershed, in N.C. Patel, R. Subbaiah, P.M. Chauhan,K.C. Patel, and J.N. Nandasana (eds) SustainableManagement of Water Resources, Himanshu Publications,Udaipur.

ilala, Hiren and R.L. Shiyani (2005), Economic Impactof Water Harvesting Structures on Farmers of NorthSaurashtra Agro-Climatic Zone, in N.C. Patel,R. Subbaiah, P.M. Chauhan, K.C. Patel, and J.N.Nandasana (eds) Sustainable Management of Water

Resources, Himanshu Publications, Udaipur.Times of India(2002), Big Increase in Water able Due to

15000 Check-Dams, 8 February 2002, Ahmedabad.Verma, S., P. Van Der Zaag, and S. Uhlenbrook (2008),

Small Reservoirs, Big Impacts? Exploring AlternateModels of River Basin Development, Draft Paper fordiscussion presented at the 2nd International Forumon Water and Food, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, November1014, 2008.

Chp 8 Rainwater Harvesting for Irrigation in India

Documents

Transcript of Chp 8 Rainwater Harvesting for Irrigation in India