SYNTHESIS NOTE FOR THEME 4: Modernization Of Irrigation Infrastructure And Management Systems

Theme coordinator: Thierry Facon,Water Management Officer, FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific

Interventions relevant to various aspects of this theme started on the very first day of the EMC and continued into the last week. The synthesis is organized following the issues laid out in the introductory note and new sections to capture issues that arose from the EMC. Judgments and conclusions are those of this coordinator.

TECHNOLOGY, INSTITUTIONS AND MANAGEMENT

Interactions between institutional, managerial and physical structures were hotly debated. The prevailing view that, in irrigation management, there are no technical problems, only institutional and financial problems, is challenged. Whether institutions determine the technology or vice-versa, technical aspects deserve more attention: technical complexity does entail specific management requirements, but this should not be an excuse for agencies to oppose transfer. Governance must not be confused with implementation of service functions. IMT allows users to control technology and service providers. For some, to improve performance, one must focus on management processes, irrespective of the institutional setup. Others argue that many problems are due to faulty design and operational procedures, which must be corrected. Physical features may limit the scope of water sector reform and IMT through lack of control and reliability to guarantee water allocations, poor performance or interfaces between levels that don't allow service agreements to be established, or may not allow volumetric charges.

ACTUAL IRRIGATION AND WATER MANAGEMENT

Conjunctive use is an emerging issue which must be researched and addressed by IMT, for technical, equity and sustainability reasons. The different water supply functions provided by irrigation schemes should be reflected in the management institutions. Drainage and recirculation should also be managed. The performance or condition of many systems is a serious constraint to the desirability of transfer for users or sustainability if the level of agricultural performance cannot generate sufficient revenues to pay the expected contributions to O&M. An appraisal of performance and reasons for poor performance should be conducted at the time of transfer. Future requirements of water resources management, water scarcity, environment and agriculture will call for radical changes in management and technology as well as service requirements, which must be anticipated by IMT. Farmers will be able to pay for this transformation without assistance from governments.

DESIGN AND PLANNING OF WORKS FOR IMT

The majority opinion is that works should be planned and implemented after transfer to secure participation in the design, planning and as feasible implementation process of infrastructure works and to ensure that infrastructure and operations adapt to users and not the other way round. The incremental or progressive improvement or upgrading strategy was also strongly supported, although examples of sudden change of technology at transfer or to support transfer were also reported. The objective of technology design should be to provide infrastructure that enables provision of an agreed level of service. This includes enabling implementation of particular distribution schedules as required by users for their agricultural operations. The necessity to first improve main and secondary canal infrastructure to enable improvements at lower levels and the principle of decentralized planning of works are in apparent contradiction. But these can be reconciled through the idea that what client WUAs need to concentrate on is to express their needed service from upper levels and to define how they will provide the irrigation service at those levels at which they provide the services directly. Government agencies or professional contractors may provide services at higher hydraulic levels, such as main canals and headworks.

This general service orientation will often require a departure from established standard design procedures, as well as major retraining of engineers and managers. Some doubt that users (especially small WUAs) can on their own identify the best options and strategies for improving service and performance, including envisioning future requirements. The necessity of providing WUAs with competent advisory and consulting services is highlighted. For larger systems, improvements in operations and infrastructure can be incremental but should be well thought-out and planned at the system level with an idea of future performance objectives. The planning of works and trade-offs between upgrading works, repairs, and maintenance will depend on the time horizon of the water users, which is conditioned by legal and institutional aspects (property and water rights, land tenure, crop prices, economic aspirations).

A clear policy on financing of upgrading and O&M that is based on realistic assessments of public and users' capacities to contribute must be declared as a condition for sound decisions by users. The problem is not subsidies per se but smart subsidies that provide the right incentives and signals to WUAs, irrigation service providers and users. Economic and financial factors are paramount in decisions about investment in infrastructure and management upgrading. They should correspond to a level of service that users want and agree to pay for. Classical appraisal tools may be biased toward low initial and high O&M costs and may have to be reviewed. Rapid appraisal, asset management, participatory planning and design processes are methods that have been applied in the field and are available for adoption elsewhere.

REHABILITATION VS. MODERNIZATION

Most commentators agreed that rehabilitation, understood as reconstructing infrastructure as it was originally, is NOT a desirable option. The reasons to support this view are varied. Improvements in infrastructure must be geared towards progressively and constantly adapting the systems to changes in demand. IMT is diversely viewed as the foundation for modernization of the sector or as one amongst the various components of modernization of the sector. However, IMT programs, in practice, are still often just a part of major rehabilitation projects. Further research on the relations between technical and institutional aspects of IMT seems to be required.

MANAGEMENT OF IRRIGATION SYSTEMS

Improvement of management processes is a critical area of IMT, which may be facilitated by IT tools and strategic planning. One should distinguished between self-governed schemes where professional staff are employed and those where all services are provided by users. Size is an important factor. Larger schemes benefit from economies of scale and can employ professional staff and generate resources for upgrading. How to avoid that smaller schemes are trapped into low performance and poverty should be an important area of research How to ensure that users retain control over professional managers or that the institutions remain representative of all users will be an important issue for larger schemes. Size is not the only factor: opportunity costs of labour and off-farm income generating opportunities may cause users to switch to professional management of systems or changes in technology. For traditional systems, institutions that can use the social capital embodied in traditional structures, while also performing necessary functions required by changing social and economic environments, would be advantageous.

OPERATION VS. MAINTENANCE

Mobilizing sufficient resources from users for O&M of the systems is typically one main objective of IMT. It is also one of the main problem areas, as under-funding of maintenance by users is sometimes reported after transfer. WUAs in large systems sometimes have difficulties managing large or sophisticated equipment, while smaller systems lack economies of scale to afford such equipment. If insufficient budgets are a reason for poor O&M and performance, then the claim cannot be made that IMT will lead to both improved and cheaper O&M. Monitoring of performance of WUAs in maintenance, through auditing and assessment of assets, will be required after IMT. A common focus on maintenance has probably led to neglecting issues related to operation of irrigation systems. Participation of users in decisions about system operations and water scheduling should be one of the main features of IMT. But this participation will be very limited in scope if there is only partial transfer or if IMT does not transfer governance over the entire system, as a single unit of management.

GENDER

Gender issues should not be limited to establishing quotas or representation in water users' institutions: there are important implications in design, choice of technology, operations and consideration of the multiple uses of the systems. IMT should reflect the progressive feminization of agriculture in many regions.

Contact: imt-moderator@fao.org