Social regulations in water management - a Case for transformation of livelihoods Shaik Anwar 1 and D.P. Balaram 2 Abstract:

Transcription

1 Social regulations in water management - a Case for transformation of livelihoods Shaik Anwar 1 and D.P. Balaram 2 Abstract: Ground water has reached such alarming proportions, in semi arid and arid regions despite huge investments in Watershed Development Programmes by the State and Central Governments and the international donor community. One of the stated aims of these programmes is to mitigate drought and ensure water availability throughout the year. But the ground water is extracted from deeper levels as a coping up mechanism in drought periods. Increases in the area under irrigation have often been achieved through a dramatic increase in the number of wells, accompanied by a decreasing area irrigated per well. The trend of chasing ground water table without proper management systems ruined hundreds of the farming community. M.C. Tanda is a case where community took the control of managing ground water that led to a complete transformation of the livelihood profiles of the households. Almost all the 112 households in the Tanda used to primarily depend on seasonal migration to far away towns. At present only three families depend primarily on wage labour for their living and none of the households migrate in distress. This case study attempts to understand the process of this transformation. Introduction While water shortage and drought are caused by a combination of factors, including meteorological ones, one of the main reasons for the current crisis is the lack of control of water use. In Andhra Pradesh, Government watershed Management initiatives have mostly focused on increasing and / or re-distributing water supply through water harvesting structures. Less thought and effort has been put into addressing water utilisation, with a focus on equitable and sustainable sharing of water between different user groups and uses. A research (Batchelor et al. 2002) has shown that the losers as a result of inappropriate water harvesting structures could be the poor who use water for domestic and other non-irrigation purposes, such as livestock rearing, fishing, or washing. The existing focus on irrigation has often led to a neglect of other water uses, including domestic water supplies and environmental sanitation. 1 Shaik Anwar is with Centre for World Soilidarity (CWS), , street No.1, Tarnaka, Secunderabad , A.P E Mail: nrm@cwsy.org 2 D.P Balram heads an NGOs, Janajagruti, tanakallu, Kadiri, Anatapur district, A.P. E Mail: jj_kdr@rediffmail.com 1

2 When looking at irrigation alone, it becomes clear that increases in the area under irrigation have often been achieved through a dramatic increase in the number of wells, accompanied by a decreasing area irrigated per well. This means that some farmers are spending huge resources on digging wells and installing pumps without receiving adequate returns. The famous "chasing of the water table" phenomenon is widely observed. In this chase, the private investments of the poor people to access water have ruined their economy because wells dry up and they have ended up in debt traps. Agriculture is a closed option for them as they do not have the capacity to invest in a new bore well; neither is water available. In order to mitigate this problem, a new law (APWALTA) 3 to limit the drilling of bore wells and to ensure a minimum distance between wells has recently been legislated, but is not being implemented. In most parts of the state there are far more wells than required to pump the available groundwater by a small section of the society. Only when local people come together, discuss the problems, and plan strategies to manage water (both conservation and utilisation), it is possible to decide collectively to limit the amount of water they pump from the existing wells, and to share the available water resources equitably between all households. The unsustainable over-utilisation of groundwater and the monopolisation of water resources by a few farmers need to be reduced. Alarming trends on irrigated area: The gross irrigated area in India in was 28 million ha and in it moved up by 76 million ha with a sharp Compounded Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 2.2%. (Christopher Scott et al 2003). It is evident from the data that the tanks recoded a reduced growth rate by 1.1% whereas much of the growth is accounted by ground water. percentage change in area irrigated by source( ) canals Tanks Tube wells other wells other sources CAGR 3Andhra Pradesh Water Land, and Trees Act (APWALTA) - Govt. of A.P introduced the Act in 2002 to promote water conservation and Tree cover and regulate the exploitation and use of ground water and surface water for protection and conservation of water resources, Land and environment and matters, connected therewith or incidental thereto and later the act amended in

3 One can draw as many inferences as possible against bore wells and on its impact on small and marginal farmers, but people do need water. The dependency of rural population of India on ground water is more than 85% and it contributes to 54%of irrigation (Iyer, 2003). Moreover, the investment to tap ground water is basically derived from individual farmers where as in other cases these were mostly public investments. One of the reasons identified for the spree of farmers that committed suicide 4 in A.P (several local reports and studies) is due to futile investments made on drilling bore wells, and these were continuously failed due over exploitation of ground water table. 9 bore wells drilled in a compact area of less than one Ac in Madirepalli village of Anantapur district. 6 out of 9 bore wells failed There are hardly any systems available on how to manage ground water. When drought prone regions face continuous droughts, the impact is harsh. To manage the drought, the easiest way is to drill bore well into deeper levels. This trend ruined hundreds of the farming community. The challenge remains before all of us is how to draw a balance between demand and supply with adequate ground water buffer and to do so what preparations and regulations are required at community level. M.C. Thanda shows a way forward: M.C. Thanda is in Kadiri Mandal of Anantapur district covered under kothakunta watershed. It is an independent initiative under the Rayalaseema Watershed Development Program 5 and facilitated by Janajagruti, an NGO based at Kadiri in Anantapur district of Andhra Pradesh. The district receives lowest rainfall in the state and second lowest in the country with an average rainfall of 550mm per year. This region is frequently subjected to droughts. Table 1: Population Status Total Families Total Population SC ST BC OC Total SC ST BC OC Total schedule tribes (called Lambadas). Kothakunta watershed covers 670 acres of land covering five hamlets. It has 112 households of which 80% are 4 in Anantapur district alone the number of farmers committed suicide is more than 200 in RWDP is being supported by a consortium of donors: Christian Aid, BFW and ASW. Oxfam also part of the consortium in Phase 1 3

4 Table 2: Resource Distribution: S. No. Land Particulars(in acres*) ST BC OC TOTAL 1. Landless < to to to Total About 54% and 88% of the total households own less than 3 and 5 acres land respectively. More than 80% of the households used to migrate seasonally before the program. Most of the 670 acres of watershed area was degraded. The present case study explores the process in MogaliChetla Tanda, the main hamlet. Watershed Development: Watershed development work started with organising the community. The process of facilitation was empowering with a special focus on women. Under the program 29 Ac of fallow lands in the watershed were reclaimed except a patch of saline land (3 acres). With a combination of farmers own technical knowledge and experience and with external advice, entire 670 acres land was treated starting at the ridge. Earthen and stone bunds were constructed in the farm lands and rock fill dams and gully checks in the drainage courses. Apart from restoring the breached water harvesting structures, 8 new structures were constructed. It is very important to recharge the ground water before planning for any usage system. For each water Harvesting Structure a user group was formed. User groups played an active role in participatory design of the structures. An initial plan was developed by people and later the plan was verified by socio technical experts. The user groups were also active in resolving internal conflicts and also in taking up the responsibility of management of Water harvesting Structure. In many marginal lands clearance of stones and boulders increased net cultivable area substantially. The project also provided for application of tank silt and farmyard manure for restoring the productivity of the degraded lands. The project invested Rs.2810/- per acre for such comprehensive treatment. The range of investments was arrived at in a participatory method and enough flexibility was allowed for different activities. People established their stakes by contributing 50% of the cost of structures in private land and 25% in common property resources. The expenditure details of the activities (in private lands and common lands) is presented in the Appendix. User rights on Common Lands to women groups: The program kept women at the centre of decision making. Special efforts were made to build their leadership and to ensure their representation in all committees. The needs of single women were identified and addressed. Thrift and credit groups were formed and their participation and stake in all the initiatives was clearly established. With facilitation from Janajagruti, the women groups started protecting 210 acres of common property land after necessary land treatment. Clear norms were established for protection and a person was appointed for watch and ward. With proper lobbying, the community could also manage usufruct rights from the government revenue office. The regeneration was fast and more than 30 tree species grew up. Fodder is harvested regularly from this land. 4

5 With land treatment, water harvesting structures, and protection of Common Land in the upper reaches, the ground water levels increased significantly. The 11 defunct open wells rejuvenated. With availability of grazing land, fodder and biomass, livestock population doubled from 980 (in 1995) to 1824 (in 2000). The revenue forest lands are fast regenerating, providing fodder, timber, fire wood, minor fruits etc. Accessing Regenerated Water: Water balance study conducted by AFPRO laid the ground for accessing ground water. The community considered the option to revive the defunct open wells. The investment required to revive was estimated both at people s level and with help from AFPRO. It was realised that going for new wells would be more feasible than reviving the defunct wells in several aspects. The condition of the wells was almost levelled to ground with collapsed walls and revetment.. At this stage of the programme, in the third year, Janajagruti could successfully negotiate with AP Wells to drill eleven bore wells. Elaborate discussions and technical surveys followed the proposal to identify appropriate sites. Issues like ensuring equal spread of the benefits, establishing appropriate norms for sustainability etc., were the major points of discussion. The borewells were energised with the help of Irrigation Development Corporation. After long debates within the community, a uniform distribution of these borewell points across the watershed was agreed upon. A study by AFPRO confirmed that there is still a ground water buffer of 30 per cent even after extraction of water through the bore wells i.e. the extraction was within the renewable ranges. With these norms all the households in the watershed could get irrigation to at least a part of their land holding (0.5 acres to 3 acres) except 3 households. Thus, the community could tap most of the water regenerated by their own efforts sustainably. Each bore well costs about one lakh rupees including the cost of energisation. Farmer s contribution was 15 to 20% of the total. Key Process steps followed on Ground water management: Stock taking of water resources: A stock taking exercise of water resources was carried out on the availability of water and use mechanisms. The ground water buffers were estimated before and after drilling bore wells. Members of watershed committee, User Groups, SHGs, are involved in the process in addition to sharing the outcome with all community members. Prioritisation of water usage: The present practices and issues in management of drinking water, irrigation water and other purposes in different periods of the year are debated. It was resolved to give priority for drinking water for both humans as well cattle. Community takes care of managing hand pumps. Rain gauge is installed to assess the quantum of rainfall. Crops and Cropping Pattern: The distinction and choice between water conserving crops and water intensive crops, is made consciously at village level. Cropping pattern is not just an individual choice but on the basis of water availability in the region. Paddy and sugarcane crops are banned. In addition, food crops are encouraged,even in small patch of their land, to ensure food security at family level. Participatory ground water monitoring: Hydrological monitoring techniques are developed at community level. Community members through water level Indicators take the readings of the groundwater and the level is displayed in a common place of the village. This data-base was helpful for rational decision-making. It helped to determine the cropping pattern, water prioritisation and water use mechanisms. 5

6 Social Regulations at different levels: Community members have arrived at the following regulations. However these regulations are formed at different stages and varied with resources and institutions. The key features are; Regulations on accessed water: No individual bore wells but Group bore wells: 6 to 7 farmers together drilled a borewell that irrigate around 10 acres under each bore For every 10 borewells one transformer is installed No new borewells to be dug Maintenance is a collective responsibility of the group. Agreement on stamp paper; A lawyer has explained the details of the agreement Members can t sell their lands without the permission of others in the group Water has to be shared equally among the members of the group Rice and Sugarcane should not be grown Only half the acreage of kharif is permitted to be irrigated in the Rabi season for growing food crops. Borewell Committee enforced aregulation of 200 mts distance between borewells Even if any farmer does not use water, she/he has to share the cost of electricity and repairs equally (this forces them to use water) Regulations on Crops: Depending on the rainfall, crops to be grown Since paddy and sugarcane consume more water, cultivating them is banned in the village. Ceiling on extent of irrigation: Only 50% of the extent irrigated in kharif is allowed to be sown in Rabi Regulations at Institutional level: Watershed committee has 13 members and the decisions are binding on the village. Women have equal status in terms of membership, Conducive atmosphere to be created for women for active participation, decision-making, skill generation etc. In all works, equal wages to be paid to men and women. Priority for drinking water and fodder for animal in all village activities Regulations to manage Common lands and village assets: 210 acres of village common land to be protected through social fencing User right should be with women group No member is allowed to take axe and cut the trees Women groups decide the time to harvest bodha(thatch) grass 7 Water bodies newly constructed are village assets. For each body, a user group formed that takes responsibility of managing it. Groundwater is the village asset. Community regularly monitors the ground water level and display the levels in a public place. 6

7 Change in livelihoods The borewells with appropriate management systems changed the livelihood profile of the village. In M.C. Tanda and Ramlanaik tanda (Table 4) presents the distribution of area under borewell irrigation) 86 households out of 89 could access borewell irrigation in some patch of their lands. Thus, the benefits of irrigation spread widely across most of the families. Table 3: Coverage of households under bore well irrigation in M.C. Thanda & Ramlanaik Thanda. S.No. Range of Irrigated Area (acres) No.of Households in No. of Households in Rabi Kharif Rabi crops with irrigation were grown in about 210 acres (Graph). At an average of 50person days Landuse pattern in KK thanda employment per acre of crop area, nearly days of dependable employment is being generated during Rabi season (major migrating season) within the village. This 300 amounts to nearly 100 days employment per 250 No of acres household per Rabi season. These wage incomes during lean season is a major factor in the transformation of the village. This has tremendous impact on migration. No household 0 is now going out for distress migration as Rainfed Irrigated Status Fallow compared to almost 85% of households migrating seasonally earlier. Even during the continuous drought years of 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003 a minimum of 125 acres of land was cultivated with protective irrigation while the neighbouring villages could not grow any crop. Men and women get equal wages not only in the project work, but also, in the regular agricultural labor activities.. With assured fodder and water, the livestock population got more than doubled in 7 years time. Livestock population increased from 980 n 1995 to 2093 in The major shift is in the population of small ruminants. The reason for this is the process of incremental development, where people can afford to invest and are prepared to take risk on this. Contrary to the understanding that goats destroy the vegetation, the population increased by 250%, and without any halt in the growth of vegetation. The water needs of the village are well recognised and no household travels more than 100 metres to fetch water. The maintenance of all the pumps is undertaken by the community members. As the irrigation is wide spread across the households, the yield levels of food crops also stabilised ensuring food security to majority of households.. Food security was ensured even during periods of drought, as limited protective irrigation was available to most of the households in the village. Of the total 86 households 7

8 in the villages, 72 have come out of poverty trap, as they no longer depended on wage income at any point of year for their food. These households have an average irrigated area of about one acre (during Rabi). 11 households, even though primarily depend on agriculture (this shift has taken place), they may need to partly depend on wage income at times in a year. Of the total, only 3 households depend primarily on wage labour but due to special circumstances. Success Factors: The following appear to be the factors contributing to the achievements in MC Tanda in Kothakunta watershed: MC Tanda is a typical Lambada hamlet with homogenous tribal community, with large area under commons and degraded agricultural land. Almost all the households have some land with varying quality. Incremental development planning with emphasis on process and ownership. People s contribution and ownership of the program is high. There is also flexibility in the investments and is on the basis of the needs of a particular land. To arrive at balanced water supply and demand mechanisms, the community needs training, exposure visits, and a continuous dialogue. In other words a standing conflict resolution mechanism at community level has developed. Central focus on building watershed institutions and its capacities, with norms of equity and gender sensitivity. Janajagruti s leadership and investments on building capacities of the facilitating team. The institutional capacities in the village are reflected in regenerating 210 acres of common land and getting the usufruct rights Comprehensive treatment land, drainage lines, water harvesting structures, composting, common property resources etc. and integrating livestock interventions. Above all, borewells to access regenerated water resources with norms that ensure equity and sustainability. People s ownership to learn new skills such as Groundwater level measurement. Unity in terms of enforcing the social regulations at different levels. Watershed works have brought large area into cultivation and also, improved productivity and stability of these lands substantially. Access to investments on bore wells is crucial turning factor in terms of poverty alleviation. As these borewell investment has come at one time covering the whole village with clear norms and conditionality, there was a possibility for negotiating spread and equity in accessing ground water. References: C.H.Hanumantha Rao, S.Mahendra Dev (2003) Andhra Pradesh Development- Economic Reforms and Challenges Ahead Iyer, Ramaswamy R. (2003) Water Perspectives, Issues, Concerns Christopher Scott, Narayana Peesapaty, Jean-Christophe Marechal Water Balance Tools (Water Summit 2003) Charles Batchelor, Rama Mohan Rao, A.J. James Water Resources Audit Srinivas Mudrakartha, Status and Policy Framework of Groundwater in India Anwar et.al. (2004) Social Regulations in Water Management An Action Research Initiative Ranidra et. al.(2002) Natural Resource Development and Management for Enhancement of Livelihoods of the Poor in Andhra Pradesh for Society for Elimination of Rural Poverty 8

9 Appendix Table: details of the work carried out Sl.No. Particulars Completed Units Cost NGO Peoples Contribution I) PPR (Private Property Resources) 1) Earthen Bunds Ac ) Waste Weirs 309 (Nos.) ) Stone Bunds 94 AC ) Bush Clearance 48 AC ) Strengthening of Earthen Bunds AC ) Strengthening of Old Earthen 152 AC Bunds 7) Strengthening of Stone Bunds 28 AC ) Strengthening of old stone bunds 54 AC ) Repairing of Old Gully Checks 23 Nos ) Construction of Gully Checks 1890 (Nos.) ) Horticulture 32 AC ) Fallow Land Development 17 AC ) Fodder Seed 2 No ) Drinking water pond for cattle 1 No ) SHG Support 5 Groups ) Milch Animals 13 Nos ) Seed Bank Sub Total: II) Community & Organisation Development 1) Training & Meetings ) SWC ) Common Lands ) Peoples Institutions 7 days ) Exposure Visits ) Cultural Training Programs ) Rainfall Measurement ) Centrifugal Pump ) Support for Landless and Single Women Group 10) IPM & NPM ) Medicinal Plants Identification Training Sub Total III) CPR ( Common Property Resources) 1) Common Revenue Land 210 AC ) Gully Checks 154 (Nos) ) Gully Checks New Area 105 (Nos) ) Seed dibbling and Plantation 210 AC ) Contribution for Watch & Ward 210 AC ) Nursery ) Water Harvesting Structures Sub Total Total 9