Your search found 3 records
1 Agide, Z.; Haileslassie, Amare; Sally, H.; Erkossa, Teklu; Schmitter, Petra; Langan, Simon; Hoekstra, D. 2016. Analysis of water delivery performance of smallholder irrigation schemes in Ethiopia: diversity and lessons across schemes, typologies and reaches. Nairobi, Kenya: International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI). 38p. (Livestock and Irrigation Value Chains for Ethiopian Smallholders (LIVES) Working Paper 15)
Irrigation schemes ; Irrigation systems ; Irrigated land ; Smallholders ; Performance evaluation ; Performance indexes ; Water supply ; Water delivery ; Water distribution ; Water levels ; Water demand ; Sustainability ; Equity ; Cropping systems / Ethiopia
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H047586)
(1.36 MB)
2 Haileslassie, Amare; Hagos, Fitsum; Agide, Z.; Tesema, E.; Hoekstra, D.; Langan, Simon. 2016. Institutions for irrigation water management in Ethiopia: assessing diversity and service delivery. Nairobi, Kenya: Livestock Research Institute (ILRI). 31p. (Livestock and Irrigation Value Chains for Ethiopian Smallholders (LIVES) Working Paper 17)
Irrigation management ; Irrigation schemes ; Irrigation systems ; Water management ; Performance evaluation ; Institutions ; Equity ; Water distribution ; Water governance ; Water users ; Water user associations ; Water supply ; Irrigation water ; Financial situation ; Organization ; Sustainable agriculture ; Sedimentation ; Women's participation / Ethiopia
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: IWMI Record No: H047677)
https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/76127/LIVES_wp_17.pdf?sequence=1
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H047677.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H047677.pdf
(2.44 MB)
Irrigation systems cannot ensure the equitable distribution of water among users and sustainable operation and maintenance of the schemes without capable irrigation institutions. In Ethiopia, traditional institutions have emerged with the expansion of traditional irrigation schemes and most of them were established and operated on the initiative of the farmers. These often have very limited financial and technical capacities. Current trends show that developing infrastructure is the major concern in irrigation development efforts. However, managing the schemes is largely overlooked, particularly for externally initiated irrigation schemes. Operation and maintenance of the irrigation schemes, particularly those at tertiary levels, are commonly not well set and often neglected or left to farmers without building their capacities. The overarching objectives of the study were to: i) assess the nature and diversity of irrigation institutions in the study schemes; ii) evaluate existing institutions service delivery with respect to selected attributes and draw useful lessons; and iii) identify appropriate interventions. This study focused on 10 irrigation schemes located in four regional states of Ethiopia (Tigray, Amhara, Oromia and SNNP). Various approaches were used to generate data required for this study, such as household interview, transect walk and systematic observation, focus group discussion, key informant interviews and the review of existing literature. We clustered the study schemes as modern, semi-modern and traditional, using selected criteria (operation and maintenance service delivery, managing financial service delivery, level of inequity) to generate empirical evidence for evaluation of their performances. The results found two forms of irrigation institutions: irrigation water users associations (IWUA) and irrigation cooperatives or water committee. More than 30% of the irrigation schemes considered in the study, regardless of their typology, had no institution. Membership in the irrigation institution for traditional schemes was 100%, while the average membership both in modern and semi-modern schemes was about 70% of the respondents. This contrasts with the new proclamation in Ethiopia on IWUA which suggest mandatory membership for any water user in a scheme. Without exception bylaws were either not detailed enough to address scheme specific problems or not recorded at all. Ambiguity associated with these, and probably presence of non-member water users, deterred the decision-making processes and the enforcement of rules and regulations for water use, thus create opportunities for free riders. This also explains the reason for occasional conflict between irrigators and the inequity of water distribution within scheme. In many cases, irrigation institutions service delivery limited to operational management and other services, such as financial management, were not common even at those schemes where irrigation fee exists. Problems associated with a lack of empirical evidence as to what to pay for and how much to pay and the application of flat rate-regardless of the amount of irrigation water used, which is not measured—and crop types grown as currently practised will not act as an incentive for prudent water use. Establishing the amount and types of irrigation water fees will be an important step to finance irrigation schemes. Understanding this diversity and these gaps and tailoring actions to local conditions is vital efforts to improve the service delivery of irrigation institutions in Ethiopia. Secondly, the service required for the sustainable management of irrigation schemes and mechanisms to operate them needs to be standardized.
3 Haileslassie, Amare; Agide, Z.; Erkossa, Teklu; Hoekstra, D.; Schmitter, Petra. 2016. On-farm smallholder irrigation performance in Ethiopia: from water use efficiency to equity and sustainability. Nairobi, Kenya: International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI). 33p. (Livestock and Irrigation Value Chains for Ethiopian Smallholders (LIVES) Working Paper 19)
Irrigation schemes ; Irrigation water ; Irrigated farming ; Water productivity ; Water supply ; Water use efficiency ; Smallholders ; Equity ; Sustainability ; Land productivity ; Crop production ; Vegetables ; Cereals ; Maize ; Performance indexes / Ethiopia
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H047710)
https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/77017/LIVES_wp_19.pdf?sequence=1
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H047710.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H047710.pdf
(811 KB)
The performance of smallholder irrigation schemes are challenged by several factors: among which water insecurity and low land and water productivity are the main ones. This paper evaluates the on-farm management of nine smallholder irrigation schemes from four regional states in Ethiopia. The schemes are diverse in several aspects and we clustered them into three typologies: Modern, semi-modern and traditional. Indicators such as land productivity (LP), crop water productivity (CWP) were used in evaluating performances. Data input to the target indicators was collected through household survey, field observation, measurements (canal water flow monitoring), literature review and focus group discussion (FGD). The result illustrates apparent variability of LP among schemes; scheme typology and reaches. The lowest value of LP was estimated for the traditional schemes and inter-scheme variation was also notable. For example for onion, the value for LP ranged between 7.13 and 14.55 tonnes/ha. For tomato the range was even wider: 0.9–10.29 tonnes/ha. Meki scheme showed the highest land productivity for onion and tomato with the magnitude of 14.55 and 10.29 tonnes/ha respectively. For irrigated cereals (maize and wheat) LP values showed a similar trend as for vegetables. For example the LP value for maize range between 0.65 and 3.92 tonnes/ha and for wheat the range was narrower (0.6 and 1.56 tonnes/ha). Generally these values are less than the values reported as sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) regional average suggesting the need to address yield limiting factors in smallholder schemes in Ethiopia. Water productivity by water supplied at field levels (WPf) for cereals was generally on the lower side; it is somewhat on the higher side for vegetables compared to observations from SSA. Schemes and reaches with higher land productivity do not necessarily shows higher WPf. Modern schemes and head irrigators have usually higher land productivity but low water productivity. The opposite holds true for the traditional irrigation and tail irrigators. The traditional schemes and tail irrigator normally suffer from water shortage and most often practicing forced deficit irrigation and also select crops with low water requirement. Hence they save water while trying to minimize impact on the yield through crop selection. Implicitly future direction of improving smallholder irrigation need to acknowledge this reality and put efforts to save water on head irrigators and increase land productivity under traditional and tail irrigators and promote sustainability and equitable share of water in smallholder irrigation. Probably alternatives such as valuation of water and a consumption-based water charge need to be taken into account in efforts to discourage over irrigation and enhance equitable water management by smallholders. It is also important to note that smallholder water management decisions are complex and so are the values for their performance indicators. Therefore, any development efforts dealing with smallholder irrigation need to disentangle and understand this diversity and ensure interventions are context specific.
Powered by DB/Text WebPublisher, from
