Participatory Irrigation Management (PIM) in Andhra Pradesh - An overview - Paper presented at the National Seminar on Water and Culture (2007)

This paper describes a PIM initiative undertaken by the Government of  Andhra Pradesh. The need for PIM in Andhra Pradesh, was felt because farmers, especially those in the lower reaches of the command area of the project, suffer from inadequate and unreliable supplies.

In Andhra Pradesh, the the irrigation potential is 4.8 M Ha, however the actual irrigated area  is about 2.8 to 3.2 M Ha,  or approximately 60 per cent of the potential created. The major reason for this is the lack of maintenance of irrigation facilities, management and operation of these facilities by the irrigation department and mismatch of objectives between the farmers and irrigation department.

In 1997, the Government of Andhra Pradesh took a policy decision to involve farmers, through PIM, in an attempt to improve irrigation utilization. There was need to build institutional frameworks and an enabling environment for such a scheme. This was attempted through the creation of Water User Associations (WUAs) , by holding training workshops and conferences in all districts of the state and by developing a legal framework which was the Andhra Pradesh Farmers Irrigation (APFMIS) Act, 1997.

The main features of the Act include - creation of farmers’ organizations in all irrigation projects of the State, giving water rights to them, making irrigation department (ID) staff accountable to them etc.

The construction and maintenance of the WUAs is described. The WUAs have a management committee to look after the day-to-day functioning . There would be a president and the number of members in the committee would range from 4 to 10. Elections in these WUAs was held in June 1997. The government tried to foster unanimity in the elections by announcing incentive amount of Rs. 50000/- for each WUA, if it was formed unanimously. The committee was elected for a period of 5 years.

Prior to the next elections, there was a district-wise round of feedback. Some key points that came out from the feedback were that:

• the tenure of the President was too long
• in the absence of a President, no decisions were being taken
  
• there was a time lag to the election of the next President, and
  
• cases of corruption coming up.
  

These and other suggestions were taken on-board by the Government prior to the next elections.

The authors also highlight the financial support given by the Government to the WUAs, and the introduction of transparency and social audits for the WUA. The election process for the second term of the WUAs is explained. There was a delimitation exercise prior to the second election to redraw boundaries of the WUA. The election schedule was broken down into those for Minor Irrigation
projects and for Medium and Major projects. The election schedule for President and Vice President of WUAs and the schedule for Chairman & Vice-Chairman of Project Committee are explained.

The authors at the end, point out that a periodic evaluation has been planned to judge the  impact and the process of implementation of this programme.

This paper was presented at the National Seminar on Water and Culture organised by Kannada University and Sahayoga in 2007.

Download the paper here: