Case Study Burkina Faso Fraiture Et Al 2013 (1)

7/21/2019 Case Study Burkina Faso Fraiture Et Al 2013 (1)

1/10

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached

copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research

and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution

and sharing with colleagues.

Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or

licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third partywebsites are prohibited.

In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the

article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or

institutional repository. Authors requiring further information

regarding Elseviers archiving and manuscript policies are

encouraged to visit:

http://www.elsevier.com/authorsrights
http://www.elsevier.com/authorsrightshttp://www.elsevier.com/authorsrights


2/10

Author's personal copy

Agricultural Water Management 131 (2014) 212220

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Agricultural Water Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/ locate /agwat

Pirates or pioneers? Unplanned irrigation around small reservoirsin Burkina Faso

Charlotte de Fraiture a,, Gael Ndanga Kouali b, Hilmy Sally b, Priva Kabre c

a UNESCO-IHE, Delft, The Netherlandsb International WaterManagement Institute (IWMI), Ouagadougou, BurkinaFasoc2iE, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:

Available online 29 July 2013

Keywords:

Individual irrigationSmall private irrigationCommon resource management

a b s t r a c t

Small reservoirs in Burkina Faso are constructed for many purposes such as domestic water uses, livestockwatering and irrigated rice production downstream ofthe dam. Increasingly farmers use individuallyowned motorized pumps to draw water directly from the reservoir and irrigate vegetables upstream ofthe dam. This practice, while tolerated, is unauthorized and referred to as irrigation pirate in French.Upstream vegetable cultivation is successful because it is more profitable than downstream rice cultiva-tion. Often, the unofficial irrigated area around the reservoir is much larger than the official commandarea below the dam. However, in the absence ofan overarching authority to manage the water source,this may lead to conflicts and resource degradation. We take the example ofthe Korsimoro reservoir inBurkina Faso to illustrate the positive and negative impacts ofspontaneous individual irrigation aroundcommunally managed water bodies.

2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Small reservoirs capturing local runoff play a significant role inrural livelihoods and agricultural production. Wisser et al. (2010)estimate that water stored in small reservoirs around the globecould increase global cereal production by 35% through supple-mental irrigation. In India there are some 208,000 small reservoirs(called tanks) irrigating 2.3 million ha (Palanisami et al., 2010).In South India where geology is less favorable for groundwaterstorage, groundwater abstraction is costly and rivers are seasonal,irrigation from small reservoirs produces 4.2 million tons of rice.In Sri Lanka tank irrigation is the predominant form of irrigation,with theoldest reservoirdating back more than onethousandyears

(Sakthivadivel et al., 1997). In Zimbabwe,Zambia andMozambiquethere are more than 9000, 2000 and 600 small reservoirs respec-tively (AgWater Solutions, 2011). In Burkina Faso there are morethan 1300 small reservoirs (Cecchi et al., 2009; Leemhuis et al.,2009) and at least 900 in Ghana (Annor et al., 2009; Venot andCecchi, 2011).

In villages without easy access to other water sources, smallreservoirs play a vital role in supplying water formany uses such asdomestic purposes, bathing, washing, watering cattle and cottageindustries, such as brick making (Faulkner et al., 2008;Boeleeet al.,2009; Lautze et al., 2008). More recently, governments and donors

Corresponding author. Tel.: +31 15 215 17 34.E-mail address: [email protected] (C. de Fraiture).

in West Africa have been promoting small reservoirs to enhanceirrigatedcerealproduction downstream fromthe reservoirs(Venotet al., 2012; Venot and Krishnan, 2011). Small reservoirs supportmany water uses including crop production, livestock watering,fisheries, domestic and small business water use, and handicraftactivities and thus are vital assets in peoples livelihood. Gov-ernments, donors, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) andcommunities have made (and are still making) significant invest-ments in small reservoirs (AgWater Solutions, 2011).

However, the investments in small reservoirs have been ques-tioned by some for their high costs, low performance, low levelsof community participation, and the collective action required tooperate and maintain irrigation infrastructure. Tank irrigation in

India has been in decline fordecades. The area irrigateddeclined by32%between2001and2008due tolack of technicalskills,excessivesedimentation due to catchment degradation, and difficulties inmobilizing sufficient resources for maintenance (Palanisami et al.,2010). The performance of irrigated areas below small reservoirs inWest Africa is mixed (Birner et al., 2010; Mdemu et al., 2009; Venotet al., 2011). Problems with communal management and mobi-lization of village resources for the maintenance and operation arecommon (Birner et al., 2010; Sally et al., 2011).

The irrigation potential of small reservoirs is underutilized,despite substantial investments in infrastructure and in the train-ing of water user associations by governments and donors. Forexample, between 2003 and 2007, IFAD invested some $26millionin rehabilitation and provision of irrigation infrastructure belowsmall dams in Ghana, with disappointing results (Johnston and

0378-3774/$ see front matter 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2013.07.001


3/10


C. de Fraiture et al. / AgriculturalWater Management131 (2014) 212220 213

McCartney, 2010). The Ministry of Agriculture and Water in Burk-ina Faso (2006) estimates that of the 32,000ha developed, only20,000ha are actually used (MAHRH, 2006). In addition to tech-nical difficulties and poor construction quality, problems relate tothe management of common property (Birner et al., 2010; Sallyet al., 2011).

OstromandGardner(1993)provide several successfulexamplesof self-organization in which irrigation systems have avoided thepitfallsofcommonpropertymanagement.Thistendstooccurwhencertain conditions are met (Ostrom, 1990; Agrawal, 2001). Collec-tive resource boundaries anduser rights need to be clearly defined;the external environment needs to be favorable; user groups mustbe more or less homogeneous (or at least willing to cooperate);and local institutional arrangements often informal facilitatecollective action (Meinzen-Dick et al., 2002). To enhance collec-tive action and resource mobilization for the management of smallreservoirs, some governments and donors call for the formation orstrengthening of water user associations (Palanisami et al., 2008,2010;Anbumozhietal.,2001;Birneretal.,2010 ).Somedonorsevenregard the presence of well-functioning water user associations

or similar structures as a prerequisite to further interventions(IFAD, 2009). However, Venot et al. (2012) warn that top-downapproaches to WUA formation are not always appropriate. A uni-form approach disregards many formal and informal institutionsand local collective action initiatives which already are involved inthe governance of small reservoirs.1 Further, water user associa-tions often focus primarily on management of water for irrigation,such that other water users including fishermen and cattle herdersare under-represented or not represented at all.

Some observers question the common notion that small reser-voirs are under-performing. Actual performance measures arenarrowly defined in terms of area under irrigation, crop pro-duction, and crop water productivity. Multiple benefits, such aslivestock watering, domestic uses, small enterprises and ground-water recharge account for an additional 12% of the value of benefits derived from water stored in small reservoirs (Palanisamiet al., 2011). Venot et al. (2012) find that extension workers whobase their judgment on the state of the infrastructure, agriculturaloutputs, and functionality of the officially recognized water userassociation,ratetheperformanceofreservoirsmuchlowerthanvil-lagers who consider many benefits and social values when makingtheir judgment.

In this paper we argue that debates about investments in smallreservoirs should account forthe growing trend of irrigation devel-opment upstream of the dams. Increasingly, farmers use small mostly individually owned motorized pumps to draw waterdirectly from reservoirs and irrigate vegetables upstream of thedam (Ki et al., 2010; Ndanga-Kouali, 2011; Payen and Gillet, 2007).This highly profitable activity is spreading, particularly in Burkina

Faso. Often, the area under irrigated vegetables upstream is sev-eral times larger than the area under rice downstream (Sally et al.,2011). Overall, this trend has a positive impact on the local econ-omy and boosts the costbenefit ratios of otherwise low yieldingirrigation investments in small reservoirs.

Irrigation on the banks of small reservoirs in Burkina Faso is nota new phenomenon. Already in the early 1990s Abernethy (1994)reported vegetable cultivation around several reservoirs. Recently,however, the scale of this activity has expanded rapidly, with theimport of affordable and portable motorpumps from China andIndia. Government subsidies and development projects also havespurred the recent increase in private irrigation upstream of smallreservoirs. No statistics exist regarding upstream use of reservoirs,

1 Cleaver (2000) coined the term institutional bricolage.

but based on field observations and Google Earth imagery, we esti-mate that most of the small reservoirs in Burkina Faso supportirrigationupstreamof the dam.In 2005about 170,000smallholdersproduced $32 million worth of vegetables on 8900ha of irrigatedland(DSA,2005).Anestimated94%oftheproducewas soldonlocalmarkets. It is likely that most of these vegetables were irrigated

informally from reservoirs, as official irrigation schemes are dedi-cated to rice, and irrigation from rivers and lakes is not common inBurkina Faso.

The uncontrolled proliferation of small pumps for vegetablecultivation upstream of reservoirs can lead to environmental prob-lems such as over-abstraction, resource degradation and pollutionfrom agricultural chemicals. Also, it is a source of conflict betweencompeting groups of water users around the reservoir, such ashouseholds, fishermen, rice farmers and pastoralists (Sally et al.,2011; Ndanga-Kouali, 2010). We chose the Korsimoro site as anillustration of a small reservoir that is relied on by many com-peting users, and where the informal area irrigated by pumpingdirectly from the reservoir is 8 times larger than the official com-mand area irrigated by canals downstream of the dam. Sally et al.

(2011) and Mvondo-Ayissi(2010) describeotherreservoirsinBurk-ina Faso where similar trends are observed. Field observations andscrutiny of Google Earth imagery provide evidence that these arenot isolated cases.

We examine the positive and negative impacts of small, pri-vateirrigationupstreamoftheKorsimororeservoirandwe describethe ensuing dilemmas for water management and governance. Onone hand, this private irrigation adds substantial value to the ben-efits derived from water stored in small reservoirs and needs to beincorporated in performance measures. It also provides examplesof the farmer-led emergence of institutions for the managementof irrigation infrastructure and distribution of water. On the otherhand, it adds to difficulties related to communally managed waterresources and conflicts over water resources.

2. Study site anddata

The Korsimoro reservoir is located 70km northeast of Oua-gadougou, the capital of Burkina Faso, along the main road to Kaya.The reservoir wasbuilt in 1984 andequippedwith irrigation infras-tructure in 1987 (Ndanga-Kouali,2011). With an estimatedvolumeof 4.7 million m3, the reservoir is used intensively for many pur-poses such as washing, bathing, fisheries, livestock watering, brickmaking and 32ha of irrigated rice cultivation (BRL, 2001). The areaunder vegetable cultivation upstream of the reservoir is estimatedat 230 ha (Fig. 1). The Korsimoro village, with some 14,000 res-idents, is situated a few km from the dam. Market access is goodandpublicservicessuchasagriculturalextensionservices,telecom,

hospitals and schools are well represented.We obtained our data through process documentation and

structured questionnaires among 126 farmers involved in ricecultivation, irrigation of vegetables, fishing, livestock and otheractivities around the Korsimoro reservoir, implemented dur-ing three months of research at the field site. We conductedsemi-structured interviews with office bearers from farmers orga-nizations, local government and other relevant institutions. Wemeasured the efficiency of several pumps in farmers fields, andwe developed maps using Google Earth, GPS measurements in thefield, and verification by key informants among farmer groups andpump owners. At the end of the fieldwork we shared our resultswith those interviewed in a village meeting attended by 23 menand 8 women. Feedback from attendees was used to verifyfindings

and refine our observations. Further, we vetted our findings in ameeting at the Department of Irrigation at the national level. Sec-ondary data were obtained from project reports available from the


4/10


214 C. de Fraiture et al./ AgriculturalWaterManagement131 (2014) 212220

Fig. 1. Google Earth image of theirrigated areas upstream and downstream of theKorsimoro reservoir in Burkina Faso during the dryseasonJanuaryApril 2011.

Ministry, the minutes of village and WUA meetings, and financialaccounts from farmers groups and unions.

3. Water users and uses

The primary water user groups of the Korsimoro reservoir, inorder of the number of people involved, are: (1) vegetable farmersupstream, (2) rice farmers downstream, (3) pastoralists wateringtheir cattle, and (4) fishermen.

3.1. Vegetable farmers, producer groups and the union

Using GIS, field observations and questionnaires we estimatethat during the dry season from October 2010 till April 2011 about1000farmersaround the Korsimororeservoircultivatedvegetables(primarily onions) on 230ha, with an average cropping intensity of133%. There are two crop cycles during the dry season (October toDecember and January to April), but only one-third of the farmersgrowtwovegetablecropsperseason.Anestimated69009500tonsof onions2 were produced in 2010/2011, for which 2.4 million m3

of water were pumped from the reservoir. Consumptive water useis estimated at 1.5 million m3 (Kabre, 2011; Ndanga-Kouali, 2011).The total value of the production is estimated at $2.5$3.0 millionper year. Published statistics are not available, butaccording to keyinformants, vegetable production in the area has been increasing

in recent years.Water is pumped directly from the reservoir or from trenches

connected to the reservoir that were dug by farmers to extend thereach of their pumps. Watering by hand using buckets occurs on avery small scale, as nearlyall water is obtained using motor pumps.Two types of pumps dominate: small portable 23 hp pumps run-ning on petrol or kerosene (brand Koshin or Robin, original orChinese counterfeit) which are used by individual farmers, andheavy 510hp diesel pumps of Indian origin (brand Rhino or Kir-loskar) which are typically shared by a group of farmers. With theavailability of relatively cheap lightweight pumps imported fromChina, individual use is increasing. However, the number of farm-ers sharing a pump outnumbers the individual users by a factor

2 Based on yields of 2535tons of onions per ha; average onion price of 150 CFAper kg;and exchange rate of 475 CFA per US dollar.

Table 1

Characteristics of vegetable farmers organized in producer groups and individualpump users around theKorsimoro reservoir, Burkina Faso.

Farmers sharinga pumpa

Individualpump ownersb

N= 84 N= 41

Area irrigated average (m2) 2305 5350Area irrigated median (m2) 750 1805Area irrigated SD (m2) 4552 8550Average age 39 31Number of children 5.1 2.5Formal education 57% 84%

From outside villagec

13% 9%Based on farmer surveys around the Korsimoro Reservoir during fieldwork in thedry season from January to April 2011

a These are farmers organized in a group who share a motorized pump. In totalwe counted 43 groups with 1870 registered members, though notall are active.

b These arefarmers owninga small motorizedpump forindividual use. We iden-tified 67 individual pump users.

c These are individuals who migrate to the Korsimoro area during the dry sea-son specifically to engage in vegetable cultivation around the reservoir. They areconsidered as outsiders by villagers living in Korsimoro.

of 10. We counted 67 small portable pumps (individual use) and43 heavy diesel pumps (shared use), most of which are privatelyowned and financed by individual farmers. Individual pump usersare generally younger, better educated, and cultivate a larger area

than farmers whoshare a pump(Table 1), though land distributionis skewed with the largest 10% of the farmers cultivating 45% of thearea.

Pump owners rent the land around the reservoir for the equiv-alent of $175$350 per ha per crop cycle. The landowners use theland during the rainy season to cultivate rainfed cereals and rentit out during the dry season. All vegetable farmers cultivate cashcrops for the local and regionalmarket,and mostof themlivein thearea. Some of the vegetable farmers also have land in the rice areadownstream; but increasingly people from outside the area cometo Korsimorojust forthe dryseason to earn additional incomefromhorticulture.

3.1.1. Producer groups

Farmers who own one or more large diesel pumps typicallycannot cultivate the entire irrigable area due to limited labor avail-ability. To rent out the excess capacity of their pump they form a


5/10



Table 2

Summary of financial account information from producer groups involved in irri-gated farming upstream of the Korsimoro reservoir in Burkina Faso, 2011.

Producer groups (N=12)a Womengroup(N= 1)a

Number of group members 60 (35) 70Total area irrigated (ha) 3.86 (3.47) 2.80Rent forland and irrigation

services charged to groupmembers in USD/ha

1265 (440) 526

Total revenue from rent in USD 5512 (5957) 1474Total running costsb in USD 1346 (835) 758Net income generated from rent

(total) in USD4166 (5265) 716

Net incomefrom rent (per ha) inUSD/ha

870 (473) 256

Source: groupledgers and accounts, available with bureau members,accessed dur-ing fieldwork JanuaryApril 2011.Figures in brackets arestandard deviations.

a Out of the 43 user groups we could locate 12 with consistent and accessibleaccounts. We identified2 womengroupsof which1 hadcomplete written accounts.

b Running costsincludefuel,pump repair andmaintenanceand, whereapplicable,

salaries of a pump operator and/orwatchman.

producer group as follows. The pump owner leases 23 ha of landadjacent to the reservoir from a landowner. He cultivates part ofthe land, depending on the availability of family or hired labor, andsublets the remainder, in plots of 150300 m2 for a price rangingfrom $520 to $1680 per ha to individual smallholders without apump. The rental price includes land rent and all irrigation relatedcosts (i.e., fuel, pump maintenance, and in some cases, the salary ofa pump operator and watchman to keep the cattle out). The pumpownerorapumpoperatorwhoishiredforthispurposeoperatesthe pump, irrigates all land within the reach of the pump, includingthe plots that are rented out to small farmers, and ensures that allcrops are watered adequately.

The pump owner buys fuel in bulk at the beginning of the sea-son (200300L of diesel per ha per crop cycle, depending on theefficiency of the pump and water distribution) and makes surethe pump is in running condition. The revenue he receives fromthe sublet is generally more than sufficient to cover all irrigationrelated costs,including those of hisown fields.The variationin landrental price is partly due to differences in pump running costs, butis largely explained by social ties. Farmers coming from the districtpay a substantially lower rent than outsiders. Occasionally pumpowners charge women groups a lower rent for social reasons.

The pump owner and farmers who rent land and pumpingservices can form an officially registered producer group (groupe-ment in French). The prerequisite for registration at the districtcouncil (prfecture in French) is the approval of the agricultural

extension worker and the formation of a bureau consisting of8 persons (i.e. president, vice-president, treasurer, vice-treasurer,secretary, vice secretary, informant secretary, vice informant sec-retary) and at least 7 members. To maintain control over pumpmanagement and the finances, typically the farmer who owns thepump forms the group and serves as the president. The other posi-tions in the bureau are typically filled by his family members orclose friends. Membership is open to anyone who is interested inrenting irrigated land. When a group member leaves and irrigatedland becomes available, new candidates can easily be found byword of mouth because demand for irrigated land is larger thansupply.

We counted 43registered producer groupswithmorethan 1870members, though not all groups are active (Table 2).

According to the regulations of registered groups, all membersare equal, and any surplus income is to be shared among all groupmembers. However, we did not find evidence that this is indeed

happening. Infact,mostpumpowners tend torun thegroupementas a family business. Financial records of groups generally showa substantial surplus (Table 2). There are exceptions, though. Forexample, one womens group with 70 members pays a low rate forirrigation services because thepumpowneris willing to foregopartof his profit, to support the local womens group (third column in

Table 2).

3.1.2. Group members

Smallholders whorent land andirrigation services from a pumpowner cultivate small areas (1501000 m2). Profits generally aregood.Aplotof1000m2 yielded$650onaverageinthedryseasonof20102011 (Table 3 first column), but returns can vary due to mar-ket gluts and pest and diseases, and sometimes farmers run a loss.Lack of labor and finances to pay initial costs (such as seeds, fertil-izer,pesticidesandirrigation)arethelargestobstaclestoincreasingthe area of individual vegetable plots.

The second column in Table 3 illustrates the case of a pumpowner and president of a producer group. As explained above, therevenue he receives from renting out the excess capacity of his

pump by subletting part of hisland,coverstotal irrigation expenses(pump, petrol, land rent). Hence his irrigation expenses are zero.Vegetable prices are high in the beginning of the dry season

(November/December) and decline toward the end (April). Farm-ers who manage to plant early can obtain a premium price (thirdcolumn in Table3). However, most smallholdersare unableto plantearly because they depend on the sale of their rainfed cereal crops(sorghum, maize harvested in October/November) for the revenueneeded to purchase inputs for dry season vegetable cultivation.Also, many farmers with limited family labor are still busy har-vesting the rainfed crop, and cannot afford to pay for hired labor tostart the vegetable crop.

3.1.3. Union of vegetable producer groups

The primary advantage of officially registering as a group is thepossibility to qualify for individual and group loans at commercialbanks and to become a member of the umbrella organization ofvegetable farmers, the Union Dpartementaledes Groupements deProducteurs Maraichers de Korsimoro (UDGPM-K). Most, but notall, groups are registered at the district council, or have becomemembers of the Union.

Prompted by extension workers of the Ministry of Agriculture,in 2004, ten registered groups of vegetable farmers came togetherto form a Union. The Union is registered at the district counciland has a board of 10 officials (president, vice-president, 2 trea-surers, 4 secretaries and two members) and represents 31 activeproducer groups. The Union charges a one-time group member-ship fee of $5 and requires an annual contribution of $10 and a150kg bag of onions. Before being registered or accepted by the

Union, candidate groups must be debt-free of any bank credit andhave virtuous behavior. Being part of the Union has several advan-tages: theUnion buys fertilizer in bulk andresells it to itsmembers.The Union provides its members a guarantee for loans at the localbank that can be paid back after the harvest. Government Agenciesand NGOs include the Union in their training programs, and theUnion receives ad hoc support by donors and international NGOs.Forexample,USADF,anAmericanNGOfinancedtheconstructionofa storage place for onions. However, because of the Unions limitedcapacity, their services do not reach all beneficiaries. In particular,those who are located close to the Union bureau members benefitmost.

3.2. Rice farmers and rice cooperative

TheKorsimoro irrigation schemesupports32 ha of rice. The lackof suitable land downstream from the reservoir limits the further


6/10



Table 3

Estimated costs and benefits of irrigated vegetable cultivation above theKorsimoro reservoirin Burkina Faso forindividual farmers in thedry season of 2011 in US dollars.

Costs per 1000m2 Typical smallirrigator (renter)

Pump owner group chairman

Irrigator (renter),early harvest

Rent of irrigated land 168 0 161Land preparation 11 17 7Seeds 70 19 63Fertilizer 166 77 175Pesticides 2 1 2Labor 0 0 4

Total variable costs 418 114 411RevenueOnion production (in bags of 165 kg) 24 14 17Price of one bag of onion (dollar/bag) 44 45 116Price of onion per kg (dollar/kg) 0.27 0.27 0.70

Total revenue 1061 634 1968Profit for 0.1 ha 643 500 1557Profit per hectare 6430 5000 15,570

The first column provides an illustration of a typical average smallholder farmer who rents 1000m2 of irrigated land from a pump owner for onion cultivation, sowing inDecember.The secondcolumn represents a pump owner andpresident of a producer group.Land andirrigation costs arepaid from therentpaymentsfrom group members.He cultivates a larger area but less intensively (lowerfertilizer application and yields). The third column in thetable shows a farmerwho harvested his onions in Decemberand obtained a price three times higherthana fewmonths later in theseason. Becausehe harvests early in theseason he partlyrelies onhiredlabor. Based on farmersurveys

around theKorsimoroReservoir during fieldwork in thedry season from January to April 2011.

expansion of the rice area. Currently there are 169 local farm fami-lies and 7 womens groups owning rice plots of 0.16ha each. Somefarmers choose not to cultivate their plots, as they prefer to rentthem out for $32 or two bags of rice per season. A water fee of$4.70per plot per season is levied by the cooperative of rice farmers. Atthe beginning of the season, each rice farmer is supposed to con-tribute to maintenance work or pay a fine of $1.25, but lately thisrule has not been enforced and maintenance of canals has becomelong overdue.Steelgateshavedisappearedand canallining is in badshape.Despite itspoorphysicalstate, thesystem is used intensivelyto produce two rice crops per year. Recently, farmers have begunusing the command area to produce vegetables in the dry season,

sometimes by pumping water directly from the canals or reservoir.However, the area under vegetable cultivation is (still) very lim-ited. In 20102011 the observed rice cropping intensity was 194%and average yields ranged from 4.5 to 5.5tons/ha per crop cycle.The total rice harvest is estimated at 280340tons, valued at US$134,400US $153,600 per year (2 crop cycles).

Table 4 illustrates the revenues and expenses of rice farmers.The farmers in the first and third columns are members of the ricecooperative and own one plot of 0.16ha each. The farmer repre-sented in the second column leases the land. One crop cycle ofpaddyearnsabout$150$200on0.16haofland.Ahandfuloffarm-ers grow paddy for the seeds. This is a profitable activity, earningthree times more than paddy (Table 3, third column) but requires

higher investments and more knowledge that are needed for ricecultivation.

3.2.1. Rice cooperative

A Cooperative of Rice Producers was formed directly after thecommand area downstream was brought into use in 1988. Thecooperative is headed by a bureau of 7 office-bearers. Membershipis compulsory for rice producing farmers and women groups. Atthe beginning of the growing season, the rice cooperative acquiresa loan from the local bank of about $10,000 to buy fertilizer in bulk.The cooperative receives the fertilizer at a subsidized rate from theMinistry of Agriculture and distributes it to interested members.

Following the harvest, farmers payback the cooperative the equiv-alent of the fertilizer market price plus interest in bags of rice. Thecooperative retains the difference and can make a profit of about$45 per 50kg bag of fertilizer. Consequently, those members whocan afford to pay cash at the beginning of the growing season pre-ferbuying fertilizer on the open market to avoid interest payments.Thecooperativepaysalowerpriceforricethanontheopenmarket.Farmers who do not need the money immediately after the grow-ing season, or do not have loans to repay, prefer to sell their rice onthe open market.

Table 5 summarizes the earnings from irrigated agricultureusing water from the Korsimoro reservoir for different actorsand activities during the dry season in the official and unofficial

Table 4

Estimated costs and benefits of rice farmers with irrigated land downstream from theKorsimoro reservoir (Burkina Faso) in the dryseasonof 2011 in US dollars.

Costs (dollar per plot of 0.16 ha one crop cycle) Typical ricefarmer

Renter ofpaddy land

Farmer ofrice seeds

Rent of land 0 31.6 0Water fees 4.7 4.7 4.7Labor, land preparation 10.5 10.5 10.5Seeds 1.6 1.6 15.8Fertilizer 42.1 44.7 44.7Pesticides 1.1 0.0 1.1Total costs 60 97 81

RevenueValue of rice produce (dollar/0.16 ha) 284 256 682Profit (dollar/0.16 ha) 214 158 601Profit (dollar/ha) 1338 988 3756

Rice farmers dependon exchange oflaborduring busytimes, such as harvest, transplanting andweeding.Sometimes payments aremadein bagsof rice.The production costsexclude labor, due to the difficulty of pricing these exchanges. Based on farmer surveys around the KorsimoroReservoir during fieldwork in thedry season from January toApril 2011.


7/10



Table 5

Comparison of typical profits by differentactors in irrigatedagriculture upstream anddownstream of theKorsimoro reservoir(Burkina Faso) in thedry seasonof 2011 in USdollars.

Profit per farmer(USD/dry season)

Profit per hectare(USD/dry season)

Remarks

Owner of land along reservoir banks Depends onlandholding size

Up to 350 Rents out land during the dry season and uses it for rainfedcereals in thewet season. Guaranteed rent income, noeffort, risk free

Pump owner president of groupement 3850 1370 Assumption: owns one pumps, rents 3 ha of which hecultivates 0.3ha: rent income+ onion sales = 2350 +1500

Smallholder renting irrigated l and (vegetabl es) (1) 225290 (1) 50006500 (1) Rents 3 p lots of 150 m2, harvest in March(2) 675 (2) 15,550 (2) Rents 3 plots of 150 m2, harvest in December

Rice farmer owning irrigated plot downstream 200600 13403760 One plot of 0.16 ha; profit during dry season; excludes theharvest during therainy season

Rice producer farming on rented land 150 990 One plot of 0.16 ha; profit during dry season; excludes theharvest during therainy season

Based on farmersurveys around theKorsimoroReservoir during fieldwork in the dryseasonfrom January to April 2011.

irrigated areas. An owner of land adjacent to the reservoir can earn$350perhectarebyrentingouthislandtopumpownersduringthedryseason.Theownerofaheavydieselpumprentsmuchlandashispump can irrigate andcultivates as much as his familylaborallows.

He sublets the remainder of his irrigated land to smallholder farm-ers without a pump. He earns an average of $870 per ha from rentand $500 per ha from vegetable cultivation. Smallholders whorentirrigated land during the dry season earn on average $640. Prof-itability can triple if they are able to harvest early in the season,when prices are still high. Lastly, rice farmers downstream fromthe dam can earn $150$200 from their field of 0.16ha, but theycan earn triple that amount if produce paddy for seeds.

3.3. Other users: fishermen, pastoralists, brick makers

Duringourstudy,wecounted29fishermenmakingalivingfromthereservoir,butthisislikelyanunderestimate.Allfishermenmustobtain an annual, renewable permit for $16 from the Ministry ofAgriculture, but the nearest office is more than one hours driveand government officials rarely come to the site to check. Thus,many residents fish without a permit. At the insistence of the agri-cultural extension worker, the fishermen organized themselves inan officially registered group in 2004, the same year in which theUnion of Vegetable Farmers was established. The group charges a

nominal membership fee of $2 per year, but the group has beeninactive in recent years and fees have not been collected.

Several thousand cattle are watered at the Korsimoro reservoir.Pastoralists belong to 49 different groups, organized in a Union of

Livestock Farmers, again at the insistence of the agricultural exten-sionworkerin2004,butthegroupsandunionareinactive.Nearthereservoir bed, a few farmers engage in brick making. Their numberis small and they have limited impact on water use, though theiractivities may be the cause of local erosion.

4. Discussion

The Korsimoro reservoir is intensively used and generatesconsiderablevalue from land andwaterresources in ways notorig-inally foreseen. A comparison of main uses is given in Table 6 andexplained below.

The informal vegetable cultivators upstream of the dam are byfar the most numerous and they withdraw the most water, irrigat-ing 230 ha, as compared to the 32ha of rice in the official commandarea. More than 1000 vegetable producers are using at least 110large and small pumps to withdraw water directly from the reser-voir. Irrigated vegetable cultivation is three times more profitableper ha than the conventional rice irrigation downstream. Revenue

Table 6

Overview of water users around theKorsimoro reservoir in Burkina Faso.

Vegetables upstream,pumping directly fromreservoir

Rice downstream, withgravity canals fromreservoir

Cattle watering Fisheries

Organization High degree of

self-organization guided bymarket transactionsbetween land owners,pump owners, and lessees.Active groups and Union.

Communally managed

through Rice FarmersCooperative. Farmers facedifficulties in mobilizingresources for maintenanceof irrigation infrastructure.

Low degreeof

organization. Individualactivity. Common interestgroups and Union exist butinactive.

Low degreeof

organization. Individualactivity. Common interestgroups exist but inactive.

Number of beneficiaries More than 1000 176 A few dozen At least 29 (probably more)Area under cultivation 2321.33 = 308 ha 321.94 = 62 ha NA NATotal annual water w ithdrawn 2.7 million m3 0.82millionm3 Negligible NoneTotal value of produce $2.5$3.0 million $0.134$0.154 million Not known Not knownValue generatedper unit of

withdrawn water$0.93$1.11 perm 3 $0.16$0.19 per m3 NA NA

Rules and regulations Cultivation not allowedwithin 100m butcommonly violated

Water fee and contributionto maintenance; notenforced

None Fishermen need permitfrom Ministry ofAgriculture but notenforced

Issues with pirates upstream NA Increased waterabstraction upstream could

lead to water shortage forrice in dry season

Vegetable fields aroundreservoir block passage of

cattle

Polluted runoff fromvegetable fields may affect

water quality andfish stock

Based on farmersurveys around theKorsimoroReservoir during fieldwork in the dryseasonfrom January to April 2011.


8/10



per unit of water withdrawn from the reservoir is 5 times higher.3

The unofficial irrigated area along the reservoir banks is 7 timeslarger than the official command area downstream. There is strongdemand for land around the reservoir that is suitable for cultiva-tion, and the area is still expanding. Korsimoro is now known asa hub for onion cultivation in the region. At harvest time, traders

come from as far away as neighboring Ghana to purchase onions inbulk.Farmers operate under different rental arrangements of land

and pumping equipment. Initiated by farmers themselves, thesearrangements work well and smallholders who cannot afford theirown pump have access to irrigation. Rules are clear, leadershipis well-established, and although some members complain abouthigh costs, conflicts over pump operation and maintenance withina group arerare. Investments in infrastructure are modest. A motorpump that can irrigate 2 to 3 ha is available for $500$700, includ-ing pipes and accessories. Operation costs are $250$350 per haper crop cycle (mainly for fuel), and maintenance of pumps andpipes is straightforward. By contrast, the construction and mainte-nance of canals, outlets and a protection dike downstream of small

reservoirs is costly. Investment costs of $10,000$20,000per ha arenot uncommon, while higher costs also are observed (Venot et al.,2012). Water user associations of communal irrigation systemsoften face difficulties mobilizing sufficient resources to properlymaintain the irrigation infrastructure, and rehabilitations are fre-quent.

However, rice farmers downstream of the dam raised severalconcerns regarding the unchecked growth in the number of veg-etable farmers pumping from the reservoirs. First, they fear thatwater shortages might occur toward the end of the dry season. In2009, water in the reservoir was barely sufficient for the rice cropduring the dry season and rice farmers needed pumps to accesswater in the dead storage of the reservoir. Second, vegetable farm-ers do not pay water fees and do not contribute to maintenance ofthe system (in particular the dam). Third, vegetable farmers with-draw water without seeking permission, while rice farmers feelthey have priority water rights. Burkinabe law stipulates that usersneedtoobtainapermitforwithdrawingwater.Yet,vegetablefarm-ers pump water without seeking permission from the governmentor from established water users. Consequently, their practices arereferred to as illicit or irrigation pirate in French.

Fishermen have expressed concerns regarding agriculturalchemicals from vegetable fields accumulating in the reservoir.While water quality data in Korsimoro reservoir are lacking, fish-ermen claim that fish stock have been adversely affected. Fieldobservations confirm the large amounts of fertilizer and pesticidesused in vegetable cultivation, their improper use, and poor agro-nomic practices, likely leading to polluted runoff. Pollution fromhorticulture exceeds acceptable levels in other comparable reser-

voirs (Hyrks and Pernholm, 2007).Pastoralists have expressed concern regarding the proliferation

of vegetablefieldsaround thereservoir, because thefields block thepassage of cattle to water, particularly in the dry season. Accord-ing to government regulations, cultivation is not allowed within100 m of reservoir banks. However, our GIS analysis shows thatat least 10ha of vegetables are in this buffer zone (Kabre, 2011),suggesting that the government does not enforce the regulation.Fishermen and pastoralists are insufficiently organizedand lackthepower needed to enforce any measures to reduce these problems.

Lastly, while the users of Korsimoro reservoir have accessto relatively abundant water and the reservoir capacity appears

3 Value of production divided by withdrawals for rice: $134,000 to154,000/0.82 millionm 3 = $0.160.19 per m3. For vegetables $2.53million/2.7millionm 3 = $0.921.11/m3.

sufficient to support the area cultivated, this situation maychangein the near future. With the combined result of increased landunder irrigation and reservoir sedimentation, signs of over-use andconflicts are emerging. The vegetable growers at the far upstreamend of the reservoir are starting to feel the impacts of increasedpumping. Towardthe end of dryseason, small pumps are no longer

adequate to draw water from quickly receding water levels. Inother reservoirs in Burkina Faso, water shortages and conflictsbetweenupstreamanddownstreamusersarealreadycommonandsometimes turn violent (Ndanga-Kouali, 2010; Sally et al., 2011).

Several existing organizations are tasked with bringing togetherwater users at the level of individual reservoirs or watersheds, todiscuss and resolve water conflicts. One such entity is the ComitLocal de lEau (CLE) or Local Water Committee. In 2003 the gov-ernment of Burkina Faso mandated establishment of CLEs as partof the Action Plan of Integrated Water Resources Management(Plan dAction pour la Gestion Intgre des Ressources en Eau(PAGIRE in French). The CLEs are intended to serve as platforms forconsultation, mobilization and promotion, rather than a decision-making body with enforcement prerogatives (Sally et al., 2011;

Roncolietal.,2009).TheCLEofKorsimoro,createdin2006,includesrepresentatives of the rice cooperative, vegetable farmers union,fishermen and cattle farmers, as well as local chiefs, members ofthe district council, traditional chiefs and other office bearers. TheCLE is ideally situated to address water issues around the reser-voir, as objectives include bringing together the diverse group ofwater users to discuss and exchange water distribution and man-agement issues, as advocated by the PAGIRE. However, lacking aclearmandate,leadershipandresources,theCLEhasbeendormant.Its bureau has yet to meet for the first time since its inception fiveyears ago.

The rice farmers are not able (and in some cases not willing) toregulate thepumpingupstream. Therice cooperative sees itsrole inthecommercial aspects of rice (bulk purchase of inputs, marketing)and does not interfere in water management outside the rice com-mand area. Further, some leading members of the rice cooperativealso cultivate vegetables upstream. Similarly, some active mem-bers of the vegetablefarmersunion have land in therice commandarea. Given the weakness of the rice cooperative and intertwinedpersonal interests, rice farmers feel they have nochoicebutto toler-ate the unauthorized pumping upstream. Consequently, those whopump water from reservoirs do so without asking permission orpaying a fee, often at the expense of established water users. With-out a mechanism to prevent new entrants and regulate water useandpollution, it is likelythat conflicts over wateraround reservoirswill aggravate. Without rules or regulations or protection of wateruse rights, those with the largest pumps will gain at the expenseof fishermen, people downstream, those with smaller pumps, andthe environment.

5. Concluding remarks

Irrigationdirectlyfromsmallreservoirsforvegetablecultivationduring the dry season is increasing. It adds substantial economicvalue to the use of the reservoir water. It is small-scale, private,self-fundedand guided by market transactions involving landown-ers, pump owners, and lessees. Our analysis provides evidence ofa high level of self-organization among those involved. Its sponta-neous nature and strong economic drivers raise several pertinentquestions that remain unanswered. The questions address policypertinent topics, such as the nature of public and donor-driveninvestments in irrigation projects in developing countries, and

the potential gains from supporting small-scale, private irrigationactivities. When the goal of irrigation projects is to enhance small-holder access to water for productive uses, it seems wise to take


9/10


10/10



Sally, H., Lvite, H., Cour, J ., 2011. Local water management of small reservoirs:lessonsfromtwocasestudiesinBurkinaFaso.WaterAlternatives4(3),365382.

Venot, J., de Fraiture, C., Nti Acheampong, E., 2012. Revisiting Dominant Notions: aReview Costs, Performance and Institutions of Small Reservoirs in sub-SaharanAfrica, IWMI Research Report 145. International Water Management Institute,Colombo, Sri Lanka.

Venot, J.P., Andreini, M., Pinkstaff, C.B., 2011. The political economy of waterresources development: the case of small reservoirs in Ghana. Water Alterna-

tives 4 (3), 399423.

Venot, J.P., Cecchi, P., 2011. Valeurs dusage ou performances techniques: com-ment apprcier le rle des petits barrages en Afrique subsaharienne? CahiersAgricultures 20 (12), 112117.

Venot, J.P., Krishnan, J., 2011. Discursive framing: debates over small reservoirs intherural South. Water Alternatives 4 (3), 316324.

Wisser, D., Frolking, S., Douglas, E.M., Fekete, B.M., Schumann, A.H., Vrsmarty,C.J., 2010. Thesignificance of local water resources captured in small reservoirsfor crop production a global-scale analysis. Journal of Hydrology 384 (34),

264275.

Documents

Case Study Burkina Faso Fraiture Et Al 2013 (1)