Recommendations · Dust mulching and/or organic mulching Compartmental bunding: 0-0.5% slope no bunding, 0.5 to 1% slope 6x6 m, 1-2% slope 4.5x4.5m, 2-3% slope 3x3m If infiltration

8.1 Summary of main recommendations

Analysis of information from the study mandals and subsequent discussions at thedistrict and state levels with senior government officers, line department specialists,senior researchers, NGO staff and APRLP staff led to the identification of six mainrecommendations. These are summarised below and discussed in greater detail insubsequent sub-sections.

Recommendation 1. Projects involving watershed development-typeactivities should promote a wider range of options/interventions and,in particular, options/interventions aimed at: protecting drinking watersupplies, improving the access of poor households to water for productivepurposes and reducing the impacts of droughts on rural livelihoods.

Recommendation 2. Projects involving watershed development-typeactivities should target and match interventions to the specific physical,social and institutional settings.

8 Recommendations

80

adopt and build capacity at all levels in adaptiveand integrated water resources managementprinciples and methodologies.5

8.2 Recommendation 1 –Wider range of options

Although the study findings suggest a rathergloomy state of affairs in terms of the currentand future status of water resources in the studymandals, one positive conclusion is that there area large number of water management optionsthat could be promoted by APRLP. These aresummarised in Tables 13-19. All these optionshave the potential to increase the productivity ofwater use and/or to improve equitable access towater resources. However, matching of optionsto particular physical, social and institutionalsettings is crucial. As part of this targetingprocess, particular consideration should be givento the trade-offs associated with each option orsequence of options.

5 GWP (2000) provides a good description of theprinciples of integrated water resources management.

Options Specific details Potential trade-offs

Increasing the . Selection of appropriate crops Drainage and, hence,productive use . Use of good genetic material groundwater recharge mayof water . Seed priming be reduced as a result of

. Good crop nutrition increased vegetative cover

. Good weed and pest control and healthier deeper-

. Minimising post-harvest losses rooting crops

. Intercropping systems

. Making use of specialist advice

Reducing soil . Planting early in Kharifevaporation . Maintaining crop cover and/or

mulches during rainy periods. Managing crops and cropping

systems in response to specificweather patterns (see Figure 47)

In-situ soil and moisture . In-field soil moisture techniquesconservation matched to the different soil type,

slope and other factors(see Figures 48 and 49)

Table 13. Rainfed arable cropping options

Recommendation 3. Village-level water-related participatory planning should takeplace within a wider district planningframework.

Recommendation 4. There should be amuch greater emphasis on waterresource management and a shift ofemphasis from supply to demandmanagement of water resources.

Recommendation 5. As part of a largerprogramme of making better use of water-related information in decision-makingprocesses at all levels, GIS-linkedparticipatory assessments should becomepart of routine M&E of rural water supplyand sanitation programmes.

Recommendation 6. A major effort isneeded to update and improve the qualityof the water-related information that isbeing used to underpin water-relateddecision making at all levels. Effort shouldalso be directed towards makinginformation more accessible to potentialusers, particularly at the district level.

The recommendations listed above shouldbe viewed within the overall recommendationthat the APRLP and similar programmes should

81

Table 14. Rainfed non-arable options


Making more · Alternative land use systems Changing land use andproductive use of · Dryland horticulture management of common-water on CPR lands · Silvo-pastoral systems pool resources may result

· Income generation, in distinct winners andparticularly, during droughts losers. The rights offrom timber and non-timber existing usersforest products (e.g. livestock owners, gatherers

of fuelwood) may not becatered for in newmanagement arrangements.In some cases, soil andwater conservationmeasures and improvedvegetative cover mayreduce recharge and runoffto tanks

Improved management · Joint forest managementof CPR land · Community grazing schemes

· Community fuelwood schemes

Making more · Planting of grassesproductive use of and fodder legumeswater on privately- · Application of fertilisersowned non-arable · Establishment of energy coppicesland · Dryland horticulture

Concentrating rainfall · Directing runoff to arablewhere it can be used areas and/or to tanksproductively · In-situ soil moisture

conservation (see Figure 49)

Reducing soil · Maintaining cover withevaporation vegetation with high economic,

social environmental value· Concentrating rainfall

wherever soil evaporationlosses can be minimised(e.g. near useful vegetation)

82

Figure 47. Cropping systems for improved rain water management

83

Cropping system for improved rain water management

“Normal”rains

Delayed onsetof monsoon

Early withdrawalof monsoon

Black soil Red soil Black soil Red soilBlack and

red soil

Shallow Medium Deep Shallow DeepShallow

and deepAll

depths

Shallow DeepMedium

. Bajra,sesamemouthbeanand spreadinggroundnut

. Spreadinggroundnut +red gram

. Rabi.sorghum,sunflower,safflower,bengalgramand coriander

. Safflower +bengalgramjowar +bengalgram

. Greengramfollowed byjowar,sunflower orbengalgram

. Seteriafollowed bysunflower

. Groundnutfollowed byhorsegram

. Redgram,castor

. Groundnut +redgram,sorghum +redgram,ragi + redgram,ragi + dolichos,cowpea +castor

. Jowar,bajra, ragi,groundnut,sunflowerfollowed bycowpea,horsegram oronion, maizefollowed byhorsegram

. Avoid cashcrop and sownormal rabicrop

. Sow spreadinggroundnutand relayjowar

. Groundnut,hybrid bajra,sunflower +seteria,redgram,cowpea,horsegram

. Sow improvedjowar varietyupto 10 October,local jowarupto 30 Octoberand after 30October jowarfor fodder

. After 15 Julyany crop butgroundnut(eg bajra,sunflower orredgram aspure standor ragicombinedwith theabove)

. Ratoon cerealcrops ifpossible

. Uprootsensitivecropcomponentsin mixed orintercroppingsystems

. Reduce plantpopulation byremovingalternate orevery thirdrow in caseof determinatecrops

. Supplementalirrigation iffeasible

84

Figure 48. Soil and water conservation measures

Figure 49. In-situ soil and moisture conservation

Soil and water conservation measures ( rainfall < 600mm)

Black Soils Red Soils

Shallow ShallowMedium Deep Deep

Contourbunds withopen ends orwaste weirs

10m widecontourborders


Zinggterraces withraised wasteweirs

Levelling oflower 30% ofslope

Gradedbunds, cont.borders;Zinggterracesdependingupon intakerates

10m widelevelledcontourborders


Dead furrowswidth:40-60 cmdepth: 15 cm

If WHneeded,gradedbunds

Deadfurrowswidth:40-60 cmdepth: 15 cm

In-situ soil moisture conservation ( Inter-terraced areas)

Shallow Medium Deep DeepMediumShallow

Red Soil Black Soil

Formation of contour borders

Summer deep ploughing Deep tillage

Soil crusting controlled by periodic tillage or byincreasing organic matter

Set-row system. Crop rows in same position each yearto improve soil organic matter

Dead furrows every 2-3m planted with intercrops.

Application of P fertiliser

Ridge and furrow system

Dust mulching and/or organic mulching

Compartmental bunding: 0-0.5% slope no bunding,0.5 to 1% slope 6x6 m, 1-2% slope 4.5x4.5m, 2-3% slope3x3m

If infiltration rates are high, tied ridges up until sowing.Width 0.45m, spacing 1-2m

Broad bed 1.5x1.5m and furrow 0.45m up until harvest

Rubble bunds on contour for slopes >0.5%. 0.3m high,0.5m base width and 0.3m vertical interval

Dust or organicsurface mulch

Surface and vertical organicmulches

Dead furrows every 2-4mplanted with intercrops

Figure 50. Treatment of non-arable lands

Treatment of non-arable lands ( rainfall < 600mm)

Construct a trapezoidal diversion drain with 0.2-0.5% bed slope large enough todivert runoff from upstream area. Spoil on downstream side of drain. Runoffdiverted to recharge pond and used to establish a community irrigation scheme

Hills (betta)(slope >10 %)

Mounds (Dibbe)(slope 5-10 %)

Wastelands(slope 0-5 %)

Gully lands(halla)

Exclude biotic influences (e.g. cattle) by establishing a social fence

Construct adiversion bund.0.4-0.6m2 x- section.Vegetativeprotection required

Easen the sideslopes and plantwith trees

Construct smallearthern bundsacross the gully1m wide and 0.15mhigh

10-20m intervalplant bundswith suitablevegetation

Silvi-pastoralsystems

Contour trenchesor crescent shapedpits 4-10m spacing

Plant trees in pitsor trenches andsuitable grasses inbetween pits ortrenches

Apply 20-25 kgDAP/ha

Gradonis 5-10mwide depending onthe slope

Beds of Gradonisplanted withappropriategrasses and treesplanted on thebenches

Apply 20-25 kgDAP/ha

Contour trenches0.5x0.5x4m in size.Trenches at 10mhorizontal intervalplanted with treesat 1m interval

Catch pits betweentrenches.0.5x0.5x0.5m insize. Trees plantedin pits

Seed rest of areawith harmatafodder legumes etc

Apply 20 kg DAP/ha

Threshing redgram in Kocheruvu, Dhone

85


Increasing useful · Select high value crops Although farmers may increaseoutput per unit · Crop varieties responsive the efficiency or productivity ofof water to irrigation irrigation water use per unit(more crop per drop) · Select good genetic material area this does not necessarily

· Good pest and weed control mean that they will reduce· Good nutrition their total irrigation water use.· Minimise post-harvest losses In some cases this might· Minimise water lost during happen but, for many

land preparation farmers, it is water that is· Minimise risks of soil limiting rather than land.

salination These farmers are likely to useany surplus water resulting fromefficiency gains to increase theirgross irrigated area. Hence,overall improvements in wateravailability or equity, resultingfrom increased water useproductivity or efficiency may benegligible or non-existent

More effective use of · Plant early in Kharifrainfall · Good irrigation scheduling

Better in-field · Land levelling in surfacedistribution of water irrigated areas

· Adopt sprinkler ordrip irrigation

Localised irrigation · Use drip, pitcher or subsurfacepipe irrigation or similarwhere appropriate

Reduce conveyance · More reliable electricitylosses supplies making it possible

to pump water direct to fieldsinstead of into storage tanks

· Line channels and storage tanks

Reduce need for · More reliable electricity“insurance” irrigation supplies

· Community-management ofgroundwater

Reduction in · Localised irrigationsoil evaporation · Select crops, crop varieties

and cropping systems thatshade the ground effectively

· Use mulches where appropriate

Establishment of · Sharing of wells and pumps Increased irrigation,community irrigation is quite common amongst for whatever purpose,schemes members of the same family may exacerbate groundwater

· A number of farmers using the depletion and competitionsame well but with their own for water between domesticpumps is also possible and agricultural water users

· Many different “share cropping”arrangements are also possible

Table 15. Irrigated land options

86

Table 16. Management of groundwater resources

6 A collector well is a shallow hand-dug wellof large diameter with horizontal boreholesdrilled radially from the base to a distance ofapproximately 30m, typically in four directions


Community Findings and recommendations There is a risk that communitymanagement of the DFID-supported management of groundwater willof groundwater COMMAN Project (Community lead to exclusion of some social

Management of Groundwater groups.Resources in Rural India)can be found via:www.bgs.ac.uk/hydrogeology/comman/home.html

Improving groundwater · Ideally in areas in which it has Improving groundwater rechargerecharge highest social, economic and in one part of the watershed may

environmental value be at the expense of existing· Range of water harvesting users elsewhere

techniques can be used

Demand management · Different options are listedin Section 8.5

Promote use of shallow · Reduces energy required for Initially groups of farmers willwells for irrigation and pumping have to reduce groundwaterdeep wells for RWSS · Helps re-establish a groundwater extraction until the shallowparticularly in peri-urban buffer that can meet domestic aquifer is replenished. Once it isareas water needs during dry seasons replenished, they can return to

and periods of drought extracting groundwater at rates· Farmers who adopt measures that are equivalent to annual

to improve groundwater recharge recharge. The transition costs ofare more likely to see benefits as this approach would be high asrecharge of shallow aquifers tends in many areas farmers wouldto be relatively localised when have to switch from usingcompared to recharge of deep borewells to wide diameter wellsaquifers or collector wells6. Note that

this approach will only besuccessful if carried out inconjunction with some level ofdemand management

87


Village-level · Needed to ensure that attention Local-level ownership of planningparticipatory is given to the many surface processes may be reduced.planning within water resource management Additional work for district-levela District Planning issues that are not addressed line department staffFramework during local-level participatory

planning. See Section 8.4

Re-establishing · Fix gates in drainage-line structures In most cases, this option willinflows to tanks and leave these open result in distinct winners and

except during early and losers. Increasing tank flowsmid-monsoon. significantly can only be achieved

· Instead of surface structures at the expense of current waterwith high crest heights, users in the tank catchmentlow check dams using loose areasboulders or subsurface“dyke” barriers

· Re-establish shallow aquifers andthereby improve base flows

· Renovation and clearing of existingfeeder and diversion channelsto improve runoff to the tank

· Remove some gully-control structuresor reduce their crest heights

· Fill in old brick pits

Establish or · Based on affinity groups that There is a risk that changing andre-establish represent the multiple uses of tanks introducing tank managementtank management · Groups should be linked to procedures will lead to exclusionsystems Panchayati Raj institutions of some social groups

Repair tank sluices · Should be carried out with Seepage losses may be anand bunds community involvement / important source of recharge

supervision downstream of the tank

Reduce evaporation · Reduces the surface area Deepening tanks may reduce thelosses by deepening to volume ratio fodder and forage value of thetanks or ponds · Increases the storage capacity areas on which grasses grow as

the tank water recedes. Thisoption may also impact on theenvironmental and biodiversityvalue of tanks and the areassurrounding tanks

Reduce siltation · In-field soil and water conservation Less silt available to farmersof tanks measures that traditionally use silt as a

· Gully control structures means of improving soil fertilityof their fields

Pisciculture · Increase number of water bodiesused for pisciculture

· Establish local management groups

Table 17. Management of surface water resources

88


Use waste-water · Drain runoff of acceptable Reduced groundwaterfor productive quality to areas where it can be rechargepurposes used for fodder or horticulture

· Minimise health risks· Establish user groups

Increased · Direct good quality runoff from There is a risk that pollutedgroundwater roads, open areas, rock water will also enter the soakrecharge outcrops, roofs etc. into soak pits resulting in pollution of

pits aquifers

Harvesting of · Good quality runoff from Reduced groundwater rechargewater into cisterns roads, open areas, rock

outcrops, roofs etc. can be pipedinto private or community-ownedcisterns. This is a good option inareas with polluted groundwateror rapid groundwater recession

· Water can be used for domestic orproductive purposes

Minimising risk of · This includes safe handling of Additional costs may beground and surface agro-chemicals and industrial incurred by small and largewater pollution effluents industries

· Treatment and disposal of sewage

Establishment of · Using harvested or piped-watercommunity or nutrition supplies, allotment-typegardens gardens can provide landless

families with a source of vegetablesfor home consumption or sale

O&M of environmental · Action by community groups Less silt available tosanitation systems or the panchayats farmers that traditionally use

· Improves the urban and silt as a means of improvingperi-urban environment soil fertility of their fieldsand reduces health risks

Flood control · Maintenance of drains androutine clearance of rubbish fromstreams flowing through urbanareas

· Construction of bunds to protecthousing at high risk of flooding

Table 18. Management of water resources in urban and peri-urban areas

89


Improve quality · Identification of waterof drinking water point with levels of F,

TDS etc. above permissiblelimits

· Identification of alternativesources of water

· Household water treatment

Source protection · Increasing recharge near Reduced watermeasures to domestic groundwater availability for

sources and controls on agricultureextraction for other uses

· Minimising pollution riskto water sources

· Establishment of ground orsurface water reserves(or buffers) that are sufficientto meet domestic water needsduring dry seasons and periodsof drought

Community management of · Collective responsibilityground and surface water and management of waterresources resources developed ideally in

conjunction with the panchayats· Establishment and management

of a basic human needs reserve· Enforcement of legislation

relating to spacing betweendomestic and agricultural wells

District Planning Frameworks · Regional planning and regulation Less water availableused to ensure that surface water upstreamresources of any given villageor town are not captured byupstream users

Table 19. Protection of domestic water supplies

90

8.3 Recommendation 2 –Targeting of options

In general, watershed development-type programmes do not try to targetactivities to appropriate physical, socialand institutional settings nor do theyattempt to regulate the number or scaleof interventions (e.g. the number ofcheck dams along a particular drainageline). The current tendency is to use a“one-size fits all” approach and to workunder the assumption that waterharvesting technologies are totally benign.The underlying logic is that evenintensive use of water harvestingtechnologies will not result in unintendednegative impacts. In contrast, resultspresented in this report show that themajority of water-related interventionspromoted by watershed development-type programmes have potential negativetrade-offs associated with them. Theresults also show that the scale of thesenegative trade-offs is, in many cases,directly related to the density of theinterventions and the scale of theadditional storage capacity that is created.

Better targeting of interventions canbe achieved by using decision trees thatutilise a combination of physical, social,economic and institutional data in thedecision-making process. This approachcan be used by NGO staff as part of aparticipatory planning process or it canbe used by line department staff at thedistrict level as part of a process thatinvolves stakeholder representation.Although potentially time consuming,using decision trees can become simpleand rapid, once data are readily available(e.g. once a water audit has beencompleted and a GIS database created).Also the approach can easily beincorporated into a more general MISsystem. Figure 51 is an example of adecision tree that uses numerical,physical, social and institutional datacollected by the Water Audit to identifyvillages in Kalyandurg in which “peri-urban” irrigation with waste waters ispotentially a good option.

91

Figure 51. Example of decision tree that uses physical, social and institutional data

Use of waste water for community basedperi-urban horticulture, fodder production etc.

Earmark funds and proceed with detailedvillage-level participatory planning

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

No

Sources of waste water in sufficient volume andof an acceptable quality to permit waste water irrigation ?

Land available (either public or private) to which wastewaters can be safely channeled that is suitable for horticulture or

fodder production ?

High QPA score for Panchayat responsiveness towater issues OR for community action to solve water

related problems ?

High QPA score for participation by thepoor in community decision making ?

Waste waterirrigation is notan option in this

village

Capacity building(second batch

attention)

Gated check dam under construction near Battuvani Palli, Kalyandurg

92

ID code Village NamePanchayat

response to WSS Problems

Community participation in solving RWSS

problems

Participation by poor in community

decision making

Participation by women in

community decision making

Strong panchayats and/or community

action

Strong participation by

the poorBoth tests

1 Hulikal 25 75 100 100 0 1 02 Vitlampalli 15 70 75 75 0 0 03 Mallikarjunapall 60 70 90 90 0 0 04 Chapiri 80 0 80 80 0 0 05 Madhireddipalli 25 80 100 100 0 1 06 Chapirithanda 0 100 100 100 1 1 17 Mudigal 80 0 85 75 0 0 08 Borampalli 100 80 90 50 1 0 09 Golla 100 0 100 75 1 1 110 Seebai 100 100 100 35 1 1 111 Pathacheruvu 100 0 60 0 0 0 012 Manirevu 0 75 75 0 0 0 013 Obulapuram 80 50 100 0 0 1 014 Nusikattala 50 100 100 0 1 1 115 Kondapuram 0 0 75 0 0 0 016 Kondapurampalli 15 75 80 75 0 0 017 Nusikottalathand 80 0 100 75 0 1 018 Thimmasamudram 0 0 100 0 0 1 019 Mangalakunta 50 0 100 0 0 1 020 Kadadarkunta 50 0 0 0 0 0 021 Balavenkatapuram 20 0 0 0 0 0 022 Pinjirikottala 50 90 100 50 0 1 023 Muddinayanampall 50 0 100 0 0 1 024 Venkatampalli 90 25 100 0 0 1 025 PTRPalli 20 15 65 0 0 0 026 Mouthikapuram 95 90 100 50 0 1 027 Kaparalapalli 0 65 100 35 0 1 028 PTRDiguvaThanda 20 75 80 0 0 0 029 PTREguvaThanda 60 100 100 0 1 1 130 Varli 90 100 100 25 1 1 131 Kodipalli 0 80 100 0 0 1 032 Mallipalli 25 100 100 75 1 1 133 Thimmaganipalli 100 85 75 35 0 0 034 Battuvanipalli 25 100 75 0 1 0 035 Ontimidi 25 50 75 35 1 0 036 Kurakulathata 100 85 100 30 0 1 037 Devadulakonda 50 100 100 0 1 1 138 Dodagatta 100 25 25 25 0 0 039 GubanaPalli 90 30 65 10 0 0 040 Garudapuram 40 50 100 75 1 1 1

Figure 52. Example of decision-support Excel work sheet.

Figure 53. Example villages targeted using the decision tree presented in Figure 51

93

Box 19. Issues not normally addressedin village-level participatory planning

These include:. Inter-village equity and/or upstream-

downstream equity;

. Rural-urban equity and anticipatedincreases in demand for water inurban and peri-urban areas and byindustrial users;

. Inter-generational equity andconsequences arising fromdemographic change and increaseddemand for water per household;

. Protection of biodiversity and rarehabitats in a given micro-watershed;

. Protection of surface and groundwaterfrom pollution whether this bedomestic, agricultural or industrial;

. Flood protection. Poorly-rehabilitatedtanks can pose a threat tocommunities living downstream.

The method that is recommended is modelledon the approach to water resource planning andmanagement that is currently being pioneered inSouth Africa. This recommendation may seem tomany like a retrograde return to top-down masterplanning; however, it is clear from this study thatwater resource planning and management isneeded urgently at levels above the village if manylarge scale equity and sustainability challenges areto be addressed.

The example decision tree presented in Figure51 has four tests. The first two tests requirephysical data relating to water quality, volumesof waste water, availability of land and thetechnical feasibility of channelling water to thisland. The third test requires data relating to thefunctionality of institutions in the village andwhether or not these institutions have a historyof being effective in tackling water-relatedchallenges. The fourth final test requiresinformation on whether poor social groups areinvolved in decision-making. The assumptionbehind this final test is that irrigation ofhorticulture or fodder using waste water is anactivity that could provide landless groups withaccess to irrigated land.

This type of decision tree is only feasiblebecause of the ordinal scoring system used duringthe Water Audit’s participatory assessment in allthe villages in Dhone and Kalyandurg. Or putanother way, such decision trees when developedas Excel-driven methodologies, willnot fit well with the qualitative informationthat is normally collected during participatoryassessments. Figure 52 is an example of anExcel work sheet which shows the villages fromKalyandurg that passed all the tests. In theory, asthis selection process has not involved village-levelparticipation, the next steps for the APRLPshould be to earmark funds and proceed withdetailed village-level participatory discussionsand, if there is strong local interestin this option, proceed with planning andimplementation. Figure 53 presents these“selected” Kalyandurg villages as a GIS layout.

Additional prototype decision trees for bettertargeting of interventions have been developedand it is strongly recommended that these bedeveloped further. It is also recommended thatthis approach be field tested by the APRLP and,if appropriate, combined into the MIS that theAPRLP is also developing and piloting.

8.4 Recommendation 3 –Village-level participatoryplanning within a wider DistrictPlanning Framework (DPF)

The aim of proposed District PlanningFrameworks is to ensure that water-relatedplanning and regulation issues not covered invillage-level planning (see Box 19) receiveattention when decisions are being made on theallocation of funds at the district and state levels.

Figure 54 is the proposed process by which aDPF would be developed. It is recommendedthat, at least initially, outputs from the DPFwould be consistent with norms, estimates ofstage of development and limits of acceptablechange that, in theory, are currently used fordecision-making at the district level. Once a limitof acceptable change has been set for, say, surfacewater resource development in an area, this figurecan be used in a computerised system to map outareas in which certain activities (e.g. additionalconstruction of check dams) would bepermissible as part of government-fundedprogrammes. It is envisaged also that DPFs couldbe used pro-actively in identifying and managingreserves of ground and surface water resourcesthat would meet basic human needs during

94

95

Figure 54. Proposed process for developing a waterrelated District Planning Framework

periods of drought. Finally, it is recommendedthat DPFs be used to identify and setmanagement guidelines for protecting rare andimportant aquatic eco-systems.

8.5 Recommendation 4 –Shift from supply to demandmanagement of water resources

Demand management seeks to maximise theservices provided by a given volume of watermainly by curbing non-essential or low value usesthrough price or non-price measures. Althoughdemand management actions are clearly not to bepreferred to supply-side actions in every case, it isapparent that they need to be given moreattention than is currently the case. The results

of the Water Audit show clearly thatthe emphasis of the APRLP and similarprogrammes should be on resource managementas opposed to resource development oraugmentation. Although demand management ofwater resources has a vitally important role toplay in the future in semi-arid areas of AndhraPradesh, it is not going to be a panacea, nor willit provide an instant solution to current andfuture challenges. If demand management is to bepolitically acceptable and receive public support,its introduction needs to be handled sensitivelyand be associated with appropriate publicawareness raising campaigns. Additionallydemand management has many potentialunintended consequences some of which couldimpact severely on poorer social groupings.

OBJECTIVE SETTINGSpecific planning and

management objectivesIDENTIFYING UNITSDelineating appropriate

physical and administrativemanagement units

M&EIdentify indicators andassociated locations,

determine limits ofacceptable change andmanagement responses

ASSESSMENTof current status of

water courses, aquifersand tanks; uses of water,

nature or problems

IMPLEMENTATIONof measures to protect drinking

water and to allocate/controlwater use for other purposes.

Management of surfacewater, groundwater,

infrastructure etc

DECISION MAKINGby authorities at

appropriate levels, withappropriate stakeholder

representation andconsultation

VISIONINGof options and

scenarios to addressproblems

D I S T R I C TP L A N N I N G

F R A M E W O R K

It is fundamentally important that policies anda legislative environment are created that provideincentives for more productive use of water byindividual users and disincentives for practicesthat are wasteful or lead to environmentaldegradation. Recent and current state-levelpolicies (e.g. grants for well construction,subsidised electricity for pumping irrigationwater, support prices for paddy) have theunintended consequence of encouraginginefficient and inequitable use of water.Watershed development propaganda, in the formof wall paintings, street plays and exhortationsfrom NGO staff and many newspaper articleshave also created the mindset that waterharvesting as part of watershed development canresult in almost limitless augmentation of waterresources in semi-arid areas. Changing thismindset will be not be an easy task.

Demand managementobjectives

. Mixture of short and longterm priorities

. Equitable developmentand sustainability

. Meets targets

. equity issueseg. upstream/downstream

. improved wateravailabilty andenvironmentalsanitation

. improved localeconomy

. collective benefit

. reduce conflict

. individual benefit,use of water when needed

. multiple goods andservices

Demand managementactions

. Legislation, institutional andpolicy development (includingmacro economic instruments)

. Programme development/targets

. M & E

. Development/updating districtplanning frameworks

. Within programme targeting ofinvestments

. Authorisation eg. borewells

. M & E

. Public awareness andexhortation

. M & E including communitypolicing

. Better management of CPRs

. Tradable water rights and watermarkets

. Watershed/affinity groupsmanaging tanks/groundwater

. Decision making including levelsof abstraction/cropping patterns

. M & E

. Social pressure

. Agreeing to and following rules

. More efficient and productivewater use

. Re-use of waste waters

Figure 55. Demand managementoptions and objectives

S TA T E

D I S T R I C T / M A N D A L

V I L L A G E

G R O U P

I N D I V I D U A L

96

8.7 Recommendation 6 –Reassessment of “official”water-related statistics

The survey work carried out primarily bygovernment departments to groundtruthsecondary data has shown large discrepanciesbetween “official” water-related statistics and thereality observed in the study mandals. The“official” statistics that showed the largest andmost important discrepancies included: wellnumbers, land areas under irrigation and numbersof domestic water points not meeting RajivGandhi National Drinking Water Mission norms.Since well number and irrigated area statistics areused for estimating stage of groundwaterdevelopment, this is currently grosslyunderestimated. The discrepancies relating todomestic water supplies, if they are representativeof the region, put in question the state levelstatistics. More recent information gathered onfluoride levels by the WHiRL project casts somedoubt over official statistics relating to theincidence of fluoride in domestic water supplies.Many of the statistics listed in this report are usedto underpin policies and inform decisions thatinvolve disbursement of huge amounts ofexpenditure, for example, decisions relating to:watershed development-type work, groundwaterdevelopment, NABARD loans, power sectorreform, protection of rural water supplies, riverbasin management, inter-basin transfers, tankrehabilitation and irrigation development.Findings from the Audit have also shown thatsome of the beliefs that also underpin the manyprogrammes (e.g. annual runoff is 30-40% ofannual rainfall) need to be re-evaluated. Hence itis strongly recommended that further checks onrelevant official statistics be carried out.

In discussions with line department and NGOstaff, the accessibility of information wasfrequently cited as being a problem. Although, inmany cases, relevant staff know that the water-related information they need is being collected orheld by a particular department, it is not alwaysreadily accessible in a format that makes itimmediately useful. It is therefore recommendedthat consideration be given to creating systemsthat improve both the quality and accessibility ofwater-related information. Given the importanceof water resource management in AndhraPradesh, it is also recommended thatconsideration be given to setting up a unit thathas specific responsibility for the management ofwater-related information.

To date, much of the debate in AndhraPradesh has centred on only two demandmanagement options, namely, introduction ofirrigated-dryland crops (i.e. crops with anassumed higher water use productivity thanpaddy rice and sugar cane) and increasedelectricity tarifs for pumping groundwater forirrigation. However, as Figure 55 shows there aremany other demand management options thatcould be considered. Figure 55 also illustratesthat demand management actions and objectivesvary with scale.

8.6 Recommendation 5 –Use of GIS-linked participatoryassessments as part of the M&Eof rural water supplyprogrammes

Participatory assessments carried out as part ofthe Water Audit revealed a major disparitybetween official statistics and the users’ view ofthe status of domestic water supplies. One reasonfor this disparity is the strong emphasis of currentrural water supply M&E on the functioning ofinfrastructure and the meeting of supply norms(i.e. 40 lpcd). Many of the other potentialproblems faced by users are ignored by existingM&E systems. However, these additionalproblems can be considered and appropriate stepscould be taken if routine M&E and responsesystems take users’ views into account.

With regard to routine M&E, theparticipatory assessment methodology usedduring the Water Audit does not have many ofthe constraints of participatory rural appraisal-type methodologies. In particular, it is rapid(a small team takes one day per village) and itproduces numerical data that can be stored andanalysed with relative ease and presented intables, GIS layouts or other formats that are easyto assimilate and act upon by decision makers.

97

Documents

Recommendations · Dust mulching and/or organic mulching Compartmental bunding: 0-0.5% slope no bunding, 0.5 to 1% slope 6x6 m, 1-2% slope 4.5x4.5m, 2-3% slope 3x3m If infiltration