Water Management in India:

Options for Change

Dr Martin Burton

Outline of presentation

• Background to the presentation

• Overview of water resources in India

• Options for change. Three levels:

i. Water resources

ii. Main system

iii. On-farm

• Conclusions and recommendations

Background to the presentation

• World Bank study in 1998:

– Identified areas of concern and proposed action

– Established Water Sector Restructuring Projects in

Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu,

Andhra Pradesh

• World Bank SDWUAs study 2009/2010:

– Identified problems with:

• participatory programmes

• main system management

• water resources management

• National Water Resources Framework Study 2011

– Funded by International Finance Corporation, on behalf of the

National Planning Commission

– Assisting in preparation proposals for the 12th 5-Year Plan

• WB missions to Madhya Pradesh, Odisha (2010, 2011)

The situation in India

• Agriculture - 28% of GDP, 67% of employment

• Irrigation - higher incomes, more secure livelihoods, reduces poverty

• Irrigated area totals 90 million ha - surface water 39%, groundwater 47%, other sources 14%

• Growing demands for domestic and industrial water supply

• Increasing water scarcity - 9 out of 20 river basins deemed to be water scarce (< 1000 m3 per capita per year)

• Groundwater table declining in many states

• Gross irrigated area not rising despite continued investment

• Actual irrigated area not matching developed area

• Poor performance of I&D schemes

• Condition of I&D systems deteriorating, area reducing

• Conflicts over water increasing

• WUAs established but not performing

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Wit

hd

raw

al (

cub

ic k

ilom

etre

s p

er

year

)

Year

Agricultural use Industrial use Municipal use

Growth in water withdrawals worldwide,

1900-2000

Source: IWMI, 2006, after Shiklomanov, 2000

Water and food scarcity in India

Source: Amarasinghe et al, 2004

Key data for selected states (2001 data)

State Total

land

area

(mha)

Gross

cultivated

area

(mha)

Total

ultimate

irrig.

potential

(mha)

Created

irrig.

potential

(mha)

Utilized

irrig.

potential

(mha)

Ult.IP/

Pot. GC

(Col.4/

Col.3)

Total

Utililzed/

Total

created

(Col. 6/

Col.5)

Remain-

ing to

develop

(Col.5 –

Col.4)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

AP 27.51 12.76 11.26 6.69 6.09 88% 91% 41%

Bihar 9.42 7.9 10.89 7.64 5.61 138% 73% 30%

Gujarat 19.6 10.73 6.1 4.25 3.73 57% 88% 30%

H’yana 4.42 6.32 4.51 3.83 3.48 71% 91% 15%

M’shtra 30.77 22.38 8.95 6.55 4.96 40% 76% 27%

Punjab 5.04 7.99 5.97 6.00 5.88 75% 98% 0%

Raj’than 34.22 20.8 5.13 5.33 4.9 25% 92% 0%

TN 13.01 6.23 5.53 3.7 3.69 89% 100% 33%

UP 24.09 25.82 29.64 32.39 25.68 >100% 79% 0%

W. B’gal 8.88 9.78 6.92 5.78 4.86 71% 84% 27%

Source: Planning Commission and Central Water Commission, GoI

Population growth, GDP and foodgrain

production, 1950/51-2010/11

Source: Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner, India, Government of

India, Ministry of Home Affairs, 2011

Phases of river basin development

Renewable water

resource

Potentially

available water

resource

Water resource

depleted or used

Utilisation Development Allocation

Wate

r re

so

urc

e v

olu

me

TIME

Limited

control Full control

Restoration

Available

water

resource

Phase

Level of

control

Over-abstraction of

groundwater

Source: Modified from Molden et al, 2001

Changing options for decision making

Time

Management decisions at

different phases of

development

Empower Manage demand Enforce Legislate Construct

Areas for action:

•Institutional reform in the water sector

•Engagement with stakeholders

•Re-education of water professionals

•Education of politicians and planners

•Knowledge management and dissemination

•Improved efficiency and productivity of water

•Demand management, reduction in water use

•Water trading

Threats and opportunities:

•Reducing reserve for development

•Increased risk from droughts

•Climate change

•Management options constrained

•Involvement of stakeholders

•Need for information dissemination

}

Performance gap in irrigated agriculture

Time

Perf

orm

an

ce

Possible causes of the performance gap:

•Poor maintenance

•Unreliable, inadequate and untimely irrigation

supplies w.r.t. crop water demands

•Inadequate agricultural extension

•Poor seeds

•Low input levels

•Etc.

Current performance

Achievable performance

level

Performance

Gap

Performance measures:

• Crop area

• Crop yield

• Crop quality

• Total crop production

• Income from agricultural enterprises

Irrigation development 1960-2007

Trends of public expenditure in major and medium irrigation

and net irrigated area under different sources in India

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Exp

en

ditu

re

(billio

n U

S$

, in

20

00

pri

ce

s)

0

6

12

18

24

30

36

42

Ne

t ir

rig

ate

d a

rea

(mill

ion

ha

)

Expenditure Tanks Canals Groundwater

Source: Shah, 2009

Part I -

Water resources management

reform

Current issues in WRM

• Historically water resources development has been

carried out by the Irrigation Department

• Irrigation has dominated the WR development agenda

• ID not equipped for WRM - wrong focus, few WRM

staff, etc.

• No holistic view - Different agencies have different

responsibilities for elements of WRM

• Industrial and domestic demands increasing but

allocations controlled by another user – the ID

• How to “cut the cake” – river basin or State?

• Little, if any, regard for the environment

Action Plan

• Form State Water Council

• Separate the Irrigation Department into three branches:

– Water Resources Branch (WRB)

– Irrigation Services Branch (ISB)

– Irrigation Development Branch (IDB)

• Recruit and train WRB personnel

• Form River Basin Councils and prepare river basin plans

• Prepare the State Water Resources Management Plan (SWRMP)

• Prepare, consult and enact the draft Water Resources Act

• Form the Water Resources Department

• Implement river basin plans

• Implement State WRMP and river basin plans

• Strengthen water resources management in universities and

training establishments

State Government

Industry

Revenue

Agricultural

Department

Rural Development

Irrigation

Department

Municipal

Administration

Environment

Dam Safety

Committee

Basin Water

Councils

(BWC)

State Water Council

(SWC)

State Water Administration

(SWA)

Basin Water

Administration

(BWA)

Water Users Water Users

Water Users Water Users

Water Users Water Users

Representation by

regional bodies of

State and other

organisations

Energy Department

Water

resources

systems

Irrigation

and drainage

systems

Local State

Administration

Bodies

Expert Panel on

Climate Change

Groundwater

Department

SWC members

Environment

NGOs NGOs

NGOs

Committees and

Expert Panels

Possible organizational structure for WRM

Water Use Register

Wastewater Discharge

Register

Hydraulic Infrastructure Register:

•Dams/Reservoirs

•Irrigation systems

•Drainage systems

•Water supply

•Flood protection

Registers

Water Resources Protection

measures for:

• Human health and safety

• Livestock watering

• Groundwater

• Surface water

• Aquatic environment

Protection from:

• Droughts

• Flooding

• Pollution

• Erosion

• Low flows

• Over-abstraction

Protection

measures

Land Use Cadastre

State Water Resources

Monitoring System

State Water Cadastre

Water Use and

Wastewater Licences;

Water Supply Contracts

State Flood and

Drought Information

and Warning System

Information

Systems

State Water Resources

Management Strategy

Basin Plans

Basin Plans

Basin Plans

River Basin Plans

Plans

Annual Water Supply

Agreements

Extraction discharge

Authorization/Licence:

•Surface

•Groundwater

Gravel extraction

Authorization/Licence

Wastewater Discharge

Authorization/ Licence

Permissions/

Authorisation

State Water Resources Administration

functions

Head of State Water

Administration

Office of the

SWC

Secretariat

Deputy Head

(Water Resources

Management)

Finance and

Accounts Unit

Human

Resources

Unit

Information

Systems Unit Water

Resources

Planning Unit

Water

Resources

Management

Unit

Basin Water Administration

(Water Resources Management)

•Water Resources Planning

•Water Resources Management

•Water Permissions

•Water Resources Regulation

Water

Permissions

Unit

Deputy Head

(SWC Secretariat)

Legal

Unit

Water

Resources

Regulation Unit

Possible SWA structure

Madhya Pradesh (sub-) river basins Sindh Sub-Basin

Tons Sub-Basin

Part II -

Main system management -

Reform of the Irrigation

Department

Irrigation and Drainage systems management, operation and maintenance

Problem tree – Part I (System focussed)

Poor levels of

service to

water users

Service

Delivery

Silt entry

into canal

systems.

Lack of

adequate

maintenance

Large

maintenance

requirement in

many systems

Maintenance

(Main System)

Low crop yields, various causes:

•Poor crop husbandry

•Irregular/uncertain water supply

•Lack of inputs (seed, fertiliser,

pesticide, etc.)

•Low level of technology at farm/field

level

Small plot

sizes , plot

location

Cropping pattern

restricted due to pattern

of main system water

supply

Low

levels of

fee

collection

Outdated fee

collection

systems -over-

staffed,

inefficient,

costly

Inadequate

funds for

system MOM

Finance

ID has little

concept of

service

delivery ethos.

Little modern

technology used

in MOM of I&D

systems at

Divisional level.

Protective irrigation

cannot work if the

management system is

not there to enforce it.

The ID can no longer

enforce the cropping

pattern as it has done

in the past

Operation

(Main System)

Political

interference in

water resources

and irrigation

Pressure on

land and

water

resources

No water

rights – No

guaranteed

water supply

Excessive

development

of

groundwater

Water

Resources

Part II

Water charge

not related to

service

provided

Allocated

MOM funds

do not match

identified

needs

Oudated repair

and maintenance

(R&M) norms

ID not adapting to

changed dynamics –

from top-down to

bottom-up customer

focus

Lack of, or one-sided,

service provision

contracts

System not

designed for

full cropping

Inadequate

liaison between

ID and farmers

Development and use of groundwater:

• Lack of conjunctive use with surface

water

•GW levels falling

•Unreliable power supply for pumping

Inadequate

management,

control and

regulation of

WR use and

development

On-Farm

Continued

from Part I

Irrigation and Drainage systems management, operation and maintenance

- Problem Tree : Part II (ID focussed)

Little clear vision

coming from

within the ID for

modernisation

Blind spots on

points and form of

interventions to

improve

performance.

Too much

focus on

construction –

drives staffing

with civil

engineers

Rapid

turnover of

staff in ID in

key positions

Poor human resource

management of

WALMIs. Outdated

policies and procedures

Lack of funds

for WALMIs

Poorly performing

WALMIs

Low or no

expectations for

training and for

WALMIs

Failure to implement

the original WALMI

concept

Time-based ,

rather than merit-

based promotion

system in the ID

Inadequate , outdated HR

management in the ID.

Relatively poor performance of

the human resources

No cadre for non-civil

engineers in key

professional positions in

the ID. Out of step with

modern needs

Inadequate

training of ID

professional

staff.

Few specialist

courses for education

of irrigation

engineers.

Management Management

Policy

Management

Processes/

Procedures

HRM Education

and Training

ID staff positions

open to political

interference

Little innovation or innovative

thinking in the ID

Few universities

focussing on

irrigation as a

specialist discipline

Lack of

expectations for

performance. Lack

of standards and

measurement of

performance.

Top down

attitude to

farmers

Inadequate and

outdated

office/support

facilities

(computers,etc)

Inadequate

working

relations

with water

users

Issues

• Service Delivery

– Top-down

• Operation (Main system)

– Supply-orientated, relatively operation rules, limited measurement

• Maintenance (Main system)

– Outdated R&M norms and procedures

– Inadequate funds

• Finance

– Water charges a tax, not a service fee. Not linked to needs.

– Low recovery rates

– Outdated fee assessment and recovery procedures

• Human resources management, education and training

– Outdated HR management processes and procedures – esp. for WALMIs

• Management policy, processes and procedures

– Focused on construction rather than water management

– Employs mainly civil engineers

– Lack of focus on individual system performance

– Outdated systems, processes and procedures

Action Plan – ID Reform • Change from construction to management focus

• Restructure the whole organisation, separate construction and

management, operation and maintenance (MOM)

• Employ new multi-disciplinary staff, not just civil engineers

• Radically change the human resources management

• Change staff attitudes – service delivery, farmers as clients, etc.

• Promote able and motivated younger staff to senior positions

• Modernize management systems (RS,GIS, MIS, etc.)

• Use asset management planning

• Focus on service delivery and partnership with water users

• Introduce performance-based management systems

• Support water users associations and farmer participation

• Free up cropping patterns to match farmer demands

• Modernise system management – conjunctive use, etc.

• Consider public-private partnership for system management

S

C

Payment

Service

S - Specification

C - Conditions

Service

Agreement

Service Provider Water User

Service delivery relationships

Source: Huppert and Urban, 1992

WA

Payment

Service

WA – Water Act

Service

Provider (District ID)

Water User

Revenue

Department

Service

Provider (Head Office)

Transfer

Budget

WA

WA

WA

Budget

request

Individual

assessment Notification of

payment

required

Current payment and service delivery

arrangements

Use of remote sensing for scheme

performance assessment

Relative water supply (supply/demand)

Crop water deficit (mm/month)

Performance assessment of Nizamsagar

Command Area, AP

Water delivered per unit area

0.000

0.200

0.400

0.600

0.800

1.000

1.200

1.400

1.600

1.800

Mur

ray I

rriga

tion

G-MW

Woo

rinen Eto

n

Loga

n

Bundab

erg

Dawso

n

G-MW

Pyra

mid-B

oort

Winn

aleah

G-MW

She

ppar

ton

G-MW

Roc

hest

er

G-MW

Tor

rumba

rry

Condam

ine

G-MW

Nya

h

Sunra

ysia

Centr

al Ir

rig. (

SA)

Ord R

iver

Dept

h d

eliv

ere

d (m)

Benchmarking system performance –

Australia

Performance management

- Saving lost production

Pro

du

cti

vit

y

Time

Growth

following

rehabilitation

Period of

decline,

followed by

rehabilitation

Growth

following

construction of

new scheme

Period of

stability, growth

and adequate

levels of

maintenance

Return

to

rainfed

Rainfed

Growth over time if

system is adequately

maintained

Rehabilitation

project

Lost production due to

deterioration of the system

1

2 1 – Early rehabilitation

2 – Late rehabilitation

Period of lost

production

Management effort required for different

irrigation practices

Time

Man

ag

em

en

t eff

ort

Simple flood irrigation:

•Construct channels

•Flood land

Supply orientated management:

•Fix cropping at design stage

•Enforce designed cropping pattern

•Control by level, maintain FSL in

main canals

Modern management:

•Agree cropping pattern with water

users at start of season based on

available water supply

•Schedule to match demands

•Measure and monitor allocations

•Assess performance

Additional effort

required to move

from one level to

the next

Part III –

Reform at the on-farm level

On-farm issues

– Large number of small landholdings

– Inadequately organised water distribution

– Low crop yields

– Low water use productivity

– Little or no planning for conjunctive use of surface and groundwater

– Insufficient uptake of modern technologies

WUA issues

– Leadership – Presidential rather than Chairman. No role for

Management Committee

– Role of Competent Authority (e.g. ID Engineer as Secretary)

– Limited guidance, support and training provided by government

– Governance structure - need to separate governance and

management

– Not able to set and collect own service fees.

– No WUA staff – who manages the water distribution?

– Elections for all WUA Management Committee every 5 years

– Size of WUAs an issue : 200-300ha too small, viable size1,200-

1,500 ha.

– “Flowback” system excessively bureaucratic, ID retains full control

of funds

– ID control maintenance work process

– No offices, equipment or transport.

– No water rights or water entitlement

On-farm Action Plan

Action Plan:

– Restructure current CAD&WM programme

– Review, discuss and redraft PIM Act

– Prepare draft Charter for issuing to WUAs

– Establish WUA Regulatory Authority

– Strengthen WALMIs – build capacity in IMT and water management

– Establish and train WUA Support Units at Circle/Divisional level

– Form and train WUA support team at Sub-Divisional level

– Awareness raising and training within ID

On-farm Action Plan

Action Plan (cont.):

– Research and develop water management approaches for different

types and sizes of irrigation scheme, incorporating conjunctive use

of surface and ground water. Prepare training material.

– Run awareness raising and re-engagement workshops for WUAs

– Individual WUAs discuss and agree their Charter. Change WUA

management processes to match. Incorporate rules for water

allocation and management during water short years.

– Establish chak-based representative system. Train representatives.

– Establish revised budgeting, fee setting and collection procedures

based on asset management planning.

– Plan, design and implement on-farm works (measuring structures,

field channels, lining,, etc.).

– Develop procedures to measure performance and progress.

On-farm Action Plan Dharoi Irrigation Scheme, Gujarat

On-farm Action Plan

Odisha Community Tank

Management Project

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 2 5 8 11 14 17 20 23 26 29 2 5 8 11 14 17 20 23 26 29

July August September October

Rai

nfa

ll (m

m)

Wat

er

leve

l/d

ep

th (m

m)

Paddy field water level profile Kharif season, July-October, 2006

Irrigation Rainfall Crop water demand Water balance Spill

Tank Management Game

Water harvesting in tank command area,

Kharif season

Conclusions

• Water scarcity is already, or is becoming, a key issue

in many states in India

• Better understanding required of water management,

from the river basin down to the field level

• New approaches are required to address this growing

water crisis, including reforms at the on-farm, main

system, river basin and policy level

• New approaches require technical innovations and

institutional change and support.

• Change is required, “business as usual” is not an

option.

Thank you

References

Bos, M.G, M.A. Burton and D. Molden. 2005. Irrigation and Drainage Performance Assessment: Practical Guidelines. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK.

Burton, Martin. Irrigation management: Principles and practices. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK.

Burton, Martin, Laurence Smith and Julienne Roux. 2007. Toolkit for monitoring and evaluation of agricultural water management projects. Agricultural and Rural Development Division (ARD), World Bank, Washington (forthcoming).

IWMI. 2007. Water for food, water for life. A comprehensive assessment of water management in agriculture. Earthscan, London and International Water Management Institute, Colombo.

Martin A. Burton, Rahul Sen, Simon Gordon-Walker, Anand Jalakam, and Arunabha Ghosh

(2011) National Water Resources Framework Study: Research Report Submitted to the Planning

Commission for the 12th Five Year Plan, September, New Delhi: Council on Energy,

Environment and Water and 2030 Water Resources Group, pp. i-584.http://ceew.in/pdf/CEEW-

WRG12Sep11.pdf

Martin A. Burton, Rahul Sen, Simon Gordon-Walker, and Arunabha Ghosh (2011) National

Water Resources Framework Study: Roadmaps for Reforms, October, New Delhi: Council on

Energy, Environment and Water and 2030 Water Resources Group, pp. i-

68. http://ceew.in/pdf/CEEW-WRG10Oct11.pdf

References

World Bank. 1998. India – Water resources management sector review: Report on the irrigation sector. Report No. 18416 IN, World Bank, Washington D.C.

World Bank. 2005. India’s water economy: Bracing for a turbulent future. Report No. 34750-IN, World Bank, Washington D.C.

WRG. 2009. Charting our water future: Economic frameworks to inform decision-making. 2030 Water Resources Group, International Finance Corporation, Washington D.C. Available at www.mckinsey.com/water