25-05-2018

1

Training for Asian Young Professionals on

Performance Assessment of Irrigation Systems

( 9th to 13th April 2018 in Beijing, China)

Performance assessment of irrigation and drainage systems -

Rapid Appraisal Procedure By

M G Shivakumar Chief Engineer

VJNL, UBP Zone, ChitradurgaWater Resources Department , Karnataka, India

Modernization to improve performance

• Irrigation performance often lower than

expected and improvements are critically

needed.

• Modernization a continuing process that aims to

bring about improvements.

Management and operation: more complex more demanding !!

…... An urgent need to tackle complexity

⚫service to users more diversified

⚫Water management more demanding

⚫Cost effective Management

Modernization

FAO 1997 Definition of Modernization:

a process of technical and managerial upgrading

(as opposed to mere rehabilitation) of irrigation

schemes with the objective to improve resource

utilization (labor, water, economics,

environmental) and water delivery service to

farms.

25-05-2018

2

Service Oriented Management [SOM]

= 3 basic flows

WATER - INFORMATION – MONEY

Service

Provider produces

SERVICE delivers to Fournit à

USER

Measures Charges

Controls the offer Contrôle l’offre

Adjusts the

demand

Remunerates

➔to produce a service to users through specific interventions on the surface infrastructure

➔must be integrated in a context of conjunctive use of water and multiple uses of water

Irrigation System Operation

“... although a certain degree of coordination between operations and maintenance is important to the smooth functioning of each, .... distinctions between the two must be made” Taylor and Wickham , 1976

• Operation to deliver the service to users

• Maintenance to maintain the physical capacity

Why Operation and not O&M ?

STORAGE

CONVEYANCE

DIVERSION

DISTRIBUTION

CONTROL

MEASUREMENT

SAFETY

TRANSMISSION

Infrastructure: Specific functions

25-05-2018

3

• An irrigation system is not a spatial homogeneous body. Heterogeneity of “context-service-physical capacity” is the norm not the exception!

• Managing with the same process-targets-service -inputs is not thus sound!

• Heterogeneity is even further increasing with service oriented management (more diversified)!

Spatial heterogeneity !!

-To what level should we disaggregate the service

and management?

-Where should we split the management/operation?

-What is a good compromise between efficiency of

organization and management (unity) and serving

numerous end users with adapted services

(multiplicity) ?

Dilemma ?

A command area of 30.000 ha is likely to be

composed of :

1 Main canal

10 Secondary Canals (3000ha)

50 Tertiary Canals (600ha)

1000 Quaternary Canals (30 ha)

30000 farmers (1ha)

How many units should we consider for

compromising between efficiency and adapted

services ?

This is what FAO attempts to respond

from its experiences in Asia on

Modernization of Canal Operation

through the methodology

MApping System & Services

for Canal Operation TEchniques

MASSCOTE

25-05-2018

4

MASSCOTE

Mascot: A person, animal, or object believed to bring good luck,

especially one kept as the symbol of an organization such as a

sports team. (Mascot came into English as a borrowing of the

French word mascotte, meaning “mascot, charm.”) The

American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth

Edition. 2000

MApping System & Services

for Canal Operation TEchniques

MASSCOTE Assumptions

• Focus on Canal Operation BUT Scope on Management: Canal Operation produces the service – Canal examination is critical for the appraisal (canal don’t lie)

• Service Oriented Management: the service to users is the central and only goal of MOM.

• Heterogeneity of service: based on the physical constraints, opportunities, demand for service, willingness to pay, ……

• Cost effectiveness: modernization means for each users the right service at the right cost.

• Users=payers=decision makers: Users are the clients, the beneficiaries, the payers and the decision makers

• Professionalism !!! : MOM is complex and needs skilled professionals

One goal of MASSCOTE ➔ identify the units and technical

options for improved Operations

Unit = Homogeneous for

Capacity/Sensitivity/vulnerability

Perturbation

Network/Water

Service

Demand for service/operation

Cost of operation

Practical considerations ➔ cost effective compromise

between hydraulic/operation constraints and diversified services

(4) WATER ACCOUNTING

(1) RAP

(2) CAPACITY &

SENSITIVITY

(3) PERTURBATIONS

(6) SERVICE

TO USERS

(5) COST of OPERATION

(8) MANAGEMENT UNITS

(10) INTEGRATING &

CONSOLIDATING (9) OPERATION

IMPROVEMENTS PLAN FOR

MODERNIZATION

MONITORING &

EVALUATION

(7) DEMAND for OPERATION

VISION

25-05-2018

5

Modernization Project

MASSCOTERAP

Embedded nature of the RAP and MASSCOTE

RAP and MASSCOTE-Features

➢Embedded nature of the RAP and MASSCOTE within a modernization project .

➢ Time frames • RAP = week;• MASSCOTE = month;• Modernization project = year.

➢Revolving nature of MASSCOTE.

➢Overall objective is modernization of Management.

• MASSCOTE evolves from canal operation tomanagement options (institutional partitioning, organization, and SOM).

What is RAP?

RAPID

–A few days to 2 weeks

APPRAISAL

– combination of data from office and field

– technical, managerial, socio-economic and institutional: hardware and software

PROCEDURE

– holistic overview of performance

– Systematic and standardized

Rationale behind RAP

• Key performance indicators from RAP help

to organize perceptions and facts, and

facilitate informed decisions regarding:

–Potential for water conservation

–Specific weaknesses in project operation,

management, resources, and hardware

–Specific modernization actions to improve

project performance

25-05-2018

6

Objectives of RAP

• Provide a basis for making specific

recommendations for modernization

and improvement of water delivery

service

• Provide a baseline for comparison of

future performance after

modernization

• Benchmarking for comparison against

other irrigation projects

Conceptual Framework

• the irrigation systems operate under a set

of physical and institutional constraints

and with a certain resource base.

• the systems are analyzed as a series of

management levels, each level providing

water delivery service through the

system’s internal management and control

processes to the next lower level, from the

bulk water supply to the main canals

down to the individual farm or field

RAP Methodology

• The process examines external inputs such

as water supplies, and outputs such as

water destinations (ET, surface runoff,

etc.).

• It provides a systematic examination of

the hardware and processes used to

convey and distribute water internally to

all levels within the project (from the

source to the fields).

RAP Outputs

• External indicators

– Examine inputs and outputs of the whole project

• Internal indicators

– Examine processes and hardware within the

project

• IPTRID Benchmark indicators

– Mostly external indicators

• WB Technical indicators

25-05-2018

7

External Indicators

• Ratios or percentages comparing project

inputs and outputs to describe

performance, for example:

Water Required

Total Water Available

External Indicators

• Expressions of forms of efficiencies related

to budgets, water, yields, etc. for example

Crop Yield

Irrigation Water Delivered to the Fields

External Indicators

Do not provide insight in how to improve

performance

Internal Indicators

• Identify key factors related to water

control throughout a project.

• Define level of water delivery service

provided to users.

• Examine specific hardware and

management techniques and processes

used in the control and distribution of

water.

25-05-2018

8

Key findings TLBC

• Upstream of MC and SC intense rice production with high yields

• Water duty is low (460 mm per ha irrigated)

• Upstream reaches are taking more than their shares of water ➔ HIGH INEQUITY

• Cropping intensity is low (91%)

• System is physically in good shape

• Measurements not reliable ➔ Inaccuracies

• Water depth not controlled ➔ supply to tail enders is erratic

MULTIPLE USERS OF WATER➢ Water is being used for Drinking and domestic purposes

➢ Hydro power generation

➢ Considerable water is used for fisheries development

➢ Water is being used for recreation purpose

Key Findings High Efficiency-No lossesRDS (tail end) runs dry after 1 ½ months

25-05-2018

9

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

7-1-13 8-1-13 9-1-13 10-1-13 11-1-13 12-1-13 1-1-14 2-1-14 3-1-14 4-1-14 5-1-14

TLBC - Main Sluice flow (cusec - white) & Water level

at M104 (feet -brown)

HIGH INEQUITY along TLBCPOOR SERVICE to TAIL ENDERS

Output per unit service area (constantUS$/ha)

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

Ko

up

ing

pu

oy

(Cam

bo

dia

)

Jiam

ako

u (

Ch

ina)

San

gan

he

(Ch

ina)

Zh

ang

he

(Ch

ina)

Ben

nit

ora

(In

dia

Kar

nat

aka)

Bh

adra

(In

dia

Kar

nat

aka)

Gan

do

ri N

ala

(In

dia

Kar

nat

aka)

Gh

atap

rab

ha

LB

C (

Ind

ia

Hem

avat

hi (

Ind

ia K

arn

atak

a)

Jau

np

ur

(In

dia

UP

)

Wes

t K

rish

na

(In

dia

AP

)

Lak

Bo

k (I

nd

on

esia

)

Lo

do

yo (

Ind

on

esia

)

Nam

Ho

um

(L

aos)

MA

DA

(M

alay

sia)

Do

ukk

ala

OR

MV

D (

Mo

rocc

co)

Su

nsa

ri M

ora

ng

I.S

. (N

epal

)

Nar

ayan

i I.S

. (N

epal

)

Mah

akal

i I.S

. (N

epal

)

Jam

rao

(P

akis

tan

Sin

dh

)

Akr

amW

ah (

Pak

ista

n S

ind

h)

Gh

otk

i (P

akis

tan

Sin

dh

)

Fu

lleli-

Gu

ni (

Pak

ista

n S

ind

h)

MA

RIIS

(P

hili

pp

ines

)

Nam

Oo

n (

Th

aila

nd

)

Cau

So

n-C

am S

on

(V

iet

Nam

)

Dau

Tie

ng

(V

iet

Nam

)

Lo

ng

Hai

(V

iet

Nam

)

US

$

Example = RAP External indic.

US$( year 2000)/ha

GLBC-EXTERNAL INDICATORKey findings• GLBC is a very productive system, conjunctive use and recirculation system dominated by sugarcane• 60 to 70% farmers have pumps• Inequity is not related only to canal water delivery but lack of access to groundwater• When compared to other

systems, GLBC ranks high for the value per ha (1844 $/ha) or 0.23 $/m3 of water

• Without these two features or if the farmers would have followed the official cropping pattern, then the value would have been very low

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

Lam

Pao, T

haila

nd

Dez,

Ira

n

Guila

n, Ir

an

Seyh

an, T

urk

ey

Maja

lgaon, In

dia

Dantiw

ada, In

dia

Bhakr

a, In

dia

Muda, M

ala

ysia

Kem

ubu, M

ala

ysia

Beni A

mir, M

oro

cco

Offic

e d

u N

iger,

Mali

Rio

Yaqui A

lto, D

R

Coello

, C

olo

mbia

Sald

aña, C

olo

mbia

Cupatit

zio, M

exi

co

Rio

Mayo

, M

exi

co

Cam

Sun, V

ietn

am

IWM

I1. O

utp

ut

pe

r c

rop

pe

d a

rea

($

/ha

) .

ch110

BHADRA = US$ 1700 /ha

• Key findings

• A very productive surface system with

abundant water in wet season (Canal+Rainfall+Runoff)

• Inequity in dry season (tail-enders problems)

• Operational problems mainly along secondary canals

• Potential for savings in wet season and carry over for dry season

25-05-2018

10

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

0.50

Lam

Pao, T

haila

nd

Dez,

Ira

n

Guila

n, Ir

an

Seyh

an, T

urk

ey

Maja

lgaon, In

dia

Dantiw

ada, In

dia

Bhakr

a, In

dia

Muda, M

ala

ysia

Kem

ubu, M

ala

ysia

Beni A

mir, M

oro

cco

Offic

e d

u N

iger,

Mali

Rio

Yaqui A

lto, D

R

Coello

, C

olo

mbia

Sald

aña, C

olo

mbia

Cupatit

zio, M

exi

co

Rio

Mayo

, M

exi

co

Cam

Sun, V

ietn

am

IWM

I3. O

utp

ut

pe

r u

nit

irr

ig. s

up

ply

($

/cu

. m

.) .

ch112

BHADRA = US$ 0.1265/m3

Internal indicators

•For services and Canals, indicatorsvaries from HIGH (upstreamreaches) to LOW at tail end

•The values are averaged for the Command Area

Service by main canal

Actual StatedActual Water Delivery Service by

Main Canal to the Second

Level Canals 1.4 3.0

Flexibility 0 2

Reliability 2 3

Equity 2 4

Control of flow rates to the

submain as stated 2.5 3

Service to individual units

Actual StatedWater Delivery Service to

Individual Ownership Units

(e.g., field or farm) 0.6 2

Measurement of volumes 0 0

Flexibility 1 2

Reliability 1 2

Apparent equity. 0 3

25-05-2018

11

Service by SC-Dys-Field

MC to

Dys

Dys

to SDy

Sdy to

Field

Actual Water Delivery

Service 1.4 0.8 0.6

Flexibility 0 0.5 0

Reliability 2 2 1

Equity 2 0 1

Control of flow rates to the

submain as stated 2.5 1 0

Social order

Social "Order" in the Canal System

operated by paid employees 1.0Degree to which deliveries are NOT taken

when not allowed, or at flow rates greater

than allowed 1.3Noticeable non-existence of unauthorized

turnouts from canals. 0.7

Lack of vandalism of structures. 0.7

Service to farmers (canal)

Actual Water Delivery Service

to Individual Ownership

Units (e.g., field or farm)

A

2.3

B

0.9

C

1.3

Measurement of volumes 0.0 0.0 0.0

Flexibility 2.0 1.0 2.0

Reliability 1.7 1.0 1.5

Apparent equity. 3.5 1.0 1.0

Actual and Stated Water Delivery Service to Individual Ownership Units

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

MA

DA

KE

RIA

N K

UM

P

Pen

an

g

Mu

da*

Kem

ub

u*

Lam

pao

*

Nam

Oo

n

Lo

do

yo

Lak

Bo

k

MA

RIIS

**

Dau

Tie

ng

Cau

-So

n, C

am

-So

n

West K

rish

na A

ud

hra

Pra

desh

Maja

lgao

n*

Dan

tiwad

a*

Bh

ak

ra*

SM

IP

Nara

yan

i

Ak

ram

Wah

Fu

leli-G

un

i

Gh

otk

i

Dez*

Gu

ilan

*

Ben

l Am

ir*

Offic

e d

u N

iger*

Rio

Yaq

ul*

Co

ello

*

Sald

an

a*

Cu

patitz

io*

Rio

May

o*

Seh

an

*

Project

I-1 (Actual)

I-2 (Stated)

ex. GLBC India

25-05-2018

12

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

MA

DA

KE

RIA

N K

UM

P

Pen

an

g

Mu

da*

Kem

ub

u*

Lam

pao

*

Nam

Oo

n

Lo

doy

o

Lak

Bo

k

MA

RIIS

**

Dau

Tie

ng

Cau

-So

n, C

am

-So

n

West K

rish

na A

ud

hra

Pra

desh

Maja

lgao

n*

Dan

tiwad

a*

Bhak

ra*

SM

IP

Nara

yan

i

Ak

ram

Wah

Fu

leli-G

un

i

Gh

otk

i

Dez*

Gu

ilan

*

Ben

l Am

ir*

Offic

e d

u N

iger*

Rio

Yaq

ul*

Coello

*

Sald

an

a*

Cup

atitz

io*

Rio

May

o*

Seh

an

*

I-26: Budgets

I-27: Employees

I-28: Water User Associations

BHADRA

RAP EXCEL Workbook

•A spreadsheet where key data for RAP are entered

•Spreadsheet automatically calculates external and internal indicators

Worksheets Within the EXCEL File

1. Input – Year 8. Main Canal

9. Second Level Canals

10. Third Level Canals

4. External Indicators 11. Final Deliveries

5. Project Office Questions 12. Internal Indicators

6. Project Employees 13. Benchmark Indicators

7. WUA 14. WB Tech. Indicators

RAP Field Work

•Three days of field study

•Split in several groups

• Ask questions to management in the office

• Ask questions to operators in the field

• Ask questions to WUAs

• Ask questions to farmers

• Observe and critically examine things

25-05-2018

13

Discuss in the field with operators and farmers

Office and Field Discussions

Discuss the scheme and performance in the office

RAP Field Work RAP Field Work

Observe the state of the canals and structures from Head Works to field level

Observations and Discussion

Head Works

RAP Field Work

Observations on canals and structures

Primary Canals

RAP Field Work

25-05-2018

14

Observations on canals and structures

Secondary Canals

Discuss operations of cross regulator and inlet

RAP Field Work

Field level observations

Interview with farmer responsible for water distribution

Field Canals and Final Delivery Level

RAP Field Work

Back in Classroom

Do the ratings for the indicators and fill in the spreadsheets

Back in Classroom

Prepare a proposal for improvement and modernization of the Scheme

25-05-2018

15

Back in Classroom

Present the group’s proposal to the other groups

Sheet 5: Project Office Questions

- General project conditions

- Water supply location

- Ownership of land and water

- Currency

- Budgets

- Project operation, as described by office staff

- Stated water delivery service at various levels in the system.

Sheet 6: Project Employees

•Requests information regarding:•employee training•motivation•dismissal •work descriptions

Sheet 7: WUA

•Questions in the Project Office and interviews with WUAs on:

- Size of WUAs- Strength of organization- Functions- Budgets- Water charges

25-05-2018

16

Sheet 8: Main Canal

• Data for the Main Canal, including:

- Control of flows - Operation rules

- General canal characteristics - Turnouts

- Cross regulators - Communications

- General conditions - Regulating reservoirs

- The level of service provided to

the next lower level

Sheets 9 & 10: Second and Third Level Canals

• Sheet 9: Second Level Canals• Same as Main Canal

• Sheet 10: Third Level Canals• Same as Second Level Canals

Sheet 11: Final Deliveries:

• Information regarding the level of water delivery service to individual ownership units, and at the last point of operation by paid employees.

Sheet 12: Internal Indicators

•Summarizes internal indicators calculated in the previous worksheets

• Input regarding a few extra indicators

•Weighted category indicators are computed for groups of sub-indicators.

25-05-2018

17

Sheet 13: Benchmark Indicators

• Specific data items and benchmark values that have been developed by IPTRID in 2000 for the International Benchmarking Programme (WB, FAO, IWMI, IPTRID, ITRC…)

Sheet 14: WB Tech. Indicators

•Selected indicators … nothing new compared with external and internal indicators … but useful if you are with a World Bank project

REFERENCES• Rapid Appraisal Process (RAP) and Benchmarking Explanation and Tools

http://www.fao.org/3/a-aq443e.pdf

• Rapid Appraisal Process (RAP) Excel spreadsheet

• http://www.itrc.org/reports/rapidappraisal/rapandbenchmarkingblank041803.xls

• Modernizing irrigation management – the MASSCOTE approach

http://www.fao.org/3/a-a1114e.pdf

THANK YOU