| Abstract | The irrigation sector in Nepal has been receiving an increasing share of finance
resources, yet its overall performance reportedly is unsatisfactory. There are many reasons,
among them inadequate system design, inefficient management, insufficient operation and
maintenance budget, and lack of farmers' participation in irrigation development and
management. Focusing on the major concerns of efficiency and equity, this study analyzes
the agronomic, economic, financial, social, managerial and environmental effects of two
irrigation systems and their non-irrigated surroundings, including as well such indicators of
performance like stability, equitability and sustainability.
Two medium-scale irrigation systems located in a river valley were studied, one old
established farmer managed system (FMS) and one newly implemented government agency
managed irrigation system (GMS). To compare the situations in valley and ridge lands,
farms on the ridge were included to address existing and prospective effects of irrigation on
marginal agricultural lands.
Productivity and cropping intensity of irrigated areas are higher than those of
unirrigated and ridge areas, as are human and animal labor use. Alternative approaches to
determining the affordability to pay for irrigation services show that farmers in both
irrigation systems could afford to pay the 0 & M cost. However, farmers are not in a
position to pay the total cost of both capital investment and 0 & M. As for the equity issue,
there is a clear distinction in crop production between abundant and scarce water supply.
Paddy production under abundant supply of water results in equal productivity on "head
reach" and "tail end" farmland. The situation, however, is different for wheat production
under scarce supply of water, with distinct variations among sections inside the GMS.
Between large and small farms, the latter are more efficient in producing higher yields.
Stability in yields, an important dimension of agricultural sustainability, is proven by reduced
variability of crop yields. Regarding irrigation management, in both systems the allocation
of water to farm canals and fields has no specific basis. Water is distributed to the fields on
a continuous flow basis during water abundance periods. In the GMS, during water scarcity,
water is distributed on a rotational basis. Farmers are participating in the cleaning and
maintenance of irrigation systems, which is mostly voluntary since no penalty is meted out
to those who do not participate. Satisfaction with the existing water management system is
greater in the GMS than FMS, based on criteria including water and fertilizer availability,
participation in system activities and location of farmland along side a canal. A soil fertility
analysis shows that less nutrients are applied to the soil than are extracted by crops. "Soil
mining" has been going on which, unless redressed, will cause crop yields to stagnate or even
decline. The carrying capacity to sustain human and livestock populations shows that the
average farmers, even in the irrigated areas, are not in a position to meet the calorie
equivalent requirement needed per household through their crop production. Likewise, there
is a deficit in livestock feed stuff.
The findings show that there is substantial scope for improvement in the performance
of irrigation systems, first, and for related agricultural development in a sustainable manner,
as a result. The causes of irrigation problems are financial, ago-ecological, managerial and
organizational. Irrigation services do not need to be paid for exclusively in cash. Mechanisms
should be considered where some or all of the farmers' allotment can be paid in the form
of labor contribution. The agro-ecological implications include the use of improved varieties,
diversification and high-value crops. In addition, soil fertility must be maintained
irrespective of the area being irrigated or not. WUAs should be formed so that farmers
could assume a significant managerial role, not only in an advisory capacity but shouldering
full responsibility for 0 & M functions at large.
Sustaining rural development through irrigation in the hills is, thus, feasible by
sustaining the irrigation system as such and dealing with the issues of cost recovery, equity,
stability of production and enhancement of organizational capacity. This, in turn, will help
to sustain the agricultural system of an area through the efficient use of irrigation water. |