Reviving, Replenishing INDIA and Rejuvenating Anaikoiltcdc2.undp.org/GSSDAcademy/SIE/Docs/Vol14/1INDIA.pdfGENERAL INFORMATION Country: India State: Tamil Nadu District: Nagapattinam

GENERAL INFORMATION

� Country: India

� State: Tamil Nadu

� District: Nagapattinam

� Block: Sembaranar Koil

� Village: Anaikoil

� Communities: Muthaliyar, Padaiyachi, Parayar, Pillai and the Muslim communities

� Number of Beneficiaries: 169 (5 farm pond owner self-helpgroups (124 persons) and 4 landless labourer self-help groups (45 persons))

� Workshop Section: InfrastructureCapacity-building

� Implementing Institution: Sustainable Agriculture andEnvironmental Voluntary Action (SEVA)

� Head: Mr. P. Vivekanandan, Executive Director

� Details of Institution: Address: Head Office: No. 45 TPM Nagar, Virattipathu, Madurai –625 010, Tamil Nadu, India; Field Office: Thirukadayur, 3/183Perumal Koil Street, Thirukadayur, Nagapattinam District – 609 311,Tamil Nadu, India

Tel.: (+91) 452-2380082

E-mail: [email protected]

1 Reviving, Replenishingand RejuvenatingAnaikoil: The Rehabilitation of the Tsunami-affectedAnaikoil Village through the IntegratedDevelopment Programme

INDIA

26 VOLUME 14: EXAMPLES OF COMMUNITY-BASED APPROACHES TO RECOVERY FROM NATURAL DISASTERS: POST-TSUNAMI EXPERIENCES

� Implementation Period: October2006 to September 2007

� Budget: $35,000. Co-financing ofapproximately $3,335 from theDevelopment of Humane ActionFoundation for desilting work inSulagumooku channel in Anaikoil.

SUMMARY

Under this project, SustainableAgriculture and Environmental VoluntaryAction (SEVA) worked towards the reha-bilitation of Anaikoil, a village inNagapattinam District. The projectaimed at desilting and constructing farmponds, which are traditional waterrecharging systems in the village. Thedesilting was to be done by manuallabourers in the village who had lost theiremployment after the tsunami. Thiswould ensure that more ponds weredesilted than had been planned. As of thetime of writing of the case study report,65 of the 72 ponds had been desilted. Ahundred acres of land that had been sali-nated by the tsunami were to bereclaimed through organic farming meth-ods, and the farmers were being trainedin the use of these traditional technolo-gies, which had mostly been lost.

In addition to these activities, theissue of lack of fodder for the large cattlepopulation led to the initiation of a fodder propagation unit in the village.The unit was to be started on village-owned land, with the involvement ofsome interested farmers. In addition, toimprove the overall status of livestockand cattle in Anaikoil and seven other

villages of the Maneckapangu panchayat,a veterinary clinic would be set up inAnaikoil. The land for the fodder propa-gation unit and the clinic had to beapproved by the gram panchayat (villagecouncil).

Another activity undertaken was thedesilting of the Sulagumooku channel,which brings water from theMahimalayaru River. This channel hadnot been desilted for 20 years. This proj-ect was financed by the Development ofHumane Action Foundation.

BACKGROUNDAND JU S T I F I C AT I ON

Anaikoil is a tsunami-affected agriculturalvillage that belongs to Maneckapangupanchayat in Nagapattinam District inIndia. The village, which covers 436acres, has a population of 1,033 (521males and 512 females). The farmersdepend mainly on the cultivation ofgroundnuts for their livelihood and mostof the farmers have their own land foragriculture. Among the 169 beneficiariesof the project, 45 farmers are landlesswhile the remaining 124 own land forgroundnut cultivation.

As the farmers’ cultivation fields areadjacent to the seashore, there are prob-lems relating to the availability of freshwater for irrigation. To resolve this prob-lem, the villagers had developed a uniquesystem for harvesting and storing waterfor their farming purposes. These tradi-tional water storage structures are farm

Reviving, Replenishing and Rejuvenating Anaikoil: India 27

ponds, which are man-made ponds ofvarying size – small, medium or large –that can retain water for irrigation pur-poses (figs. 1a and 1b). Traditionally,these structures had been dug by the villagers for the past 30 years (fig. 2).

After the tsunami disaster, seven village farm ponds were affected by salinization. Most of the farmers’ landwas inundated with salt water, and thefarmers lost that year’s crops. In this situation, with almost no income, theannual activity of desilting their farmponds was an expense that they could notincur and the ponds were left withoutdesilting. Most of them had almost driedup after two years.

Many of the farmers in all the villagesin the panchayat were given dairy cattleor livestock after the tsunami, but thisincrease was not supplemented by anincrease in grazing land.

The veterinary clinic for these villages was seven kilometres away,which meant that a sick animal had towalk this distance before being treatedsince there was no other way of trans-porting it. The setting up of a clinic in thearea would mean respite not only for theeight villages in the panchayat but alsofor the other surrounding villages in nearby taluks.

OBJECT IVES

The project aimed to rejuvenate the village of Anaikoil through an integrateddevelopment programme involving thedesilting and construction of farm ponds,which are traditional water rechargingsystems in the village, and the setting upof a fodder propagation unit and a veteri-nary clinic.

Figure 1a A pond under construction.

Figure 1b The pond after construction.

Mariappan, an 87-year-old farmerfrom the village,said that when he was 18 years

old, the place had been a forest. During that time, they started cutting the trees and they began cultivation.Then they dug ponds for irrigation andthey maintain them throughout the year.

Figure 2 Mariappanin his field.


ACT IV I T I ES , ACH IEVEMENTS

AND IMPACT

ACT IV I T I ES AND THE PROCESS

Creation of Farmer Self-help Groups

Sustainable Agriculture andEnvironmental Voluntary Action (SEVA)organized the 124 farmers into five self-help groups (SHGs). It also beganthe creation of SHGs for the landlesslabourers and, at the time of writing, ithad created four SHGs (not as a part of this project but as an offshoot of it).The creation of SHGs was done aftermeetings with the community and thepanchayat.

Construction and Desilting of FarmPonds (Rainwater Harvesting andWater Recharging Units)

The meetings with the community andthe panchayat led to the discussion onthe selection of beneficiaries for the project since all the farmers were interestedin reviving their ponds.

When SEVA suggested that only 40 ponds could be desilted through theproject, there was dissension among thefarmers because 40 was a small numbercompared to the actual number of pondsthat were affected in the village. The survey conducted by a village committeecomprising SEVA coordinators, farmersand panchayat representatives had revealed72 farm ponds in need of desilting.

The farmers, however, agreed to payone third of the total labour cost, whichenabled SEVA to increase the number of

ponds that it would cover under the project. The desilting was undertakenwith the help of manual labourers from thevillage, thereby also providing employ-ment to landless labourers. At the time ofwriting, 65 ponds had been desilted (fig.3) and the process was still ongoing.

Ashumathi is a 75-year-old farmer whohad his pond revived (fig. 3). Last year hewas able to produce only 120 kg ofgroundnuts because the pond had not beendesilted. This year he is expecting a yieldof 400 kg because the pond was desiltedbefore the monsoon, which ensured himmore storage capacity in the pond.

ÒThis is the first time all the ponds are going to be desilted after manyyears. Now we are very confident of being able to raise crops for three seasons. I have planted casurinaand now am able to water my plantsregularly. Before the desiltationprocess, I was afraid to plant thesetrees. Now I am confident that I willget the yield within three years.”

– Mr. Ramaswami, a 45-year-old farmer

from the village of Anaikoil.

ÒThese ponds really serve us forgroundnut cultivation, bathing, andsometimes we tried fish cultivationalso. If we can get some fish, we maytry that on a sustained basis becauseinland fishes are so tasty.”

– Mr. Murugappa, a 60-year-old farmer

from the village of Anaikoil.


Mr. Rengaraju and Mr. Jeyaraman arealso farmers whose ponds were desilted.The outcomes of this activity at the timeof writing were as follows.

Figure 3 Ashumathi next to his pond, withthe groundnut crop in the background.

Before Desilting After Desilting

Casuarinas planted Year of planting: Year of planting: 1998 2005Survival: 66% Survival: 75%

Harvest 15 tonnes in 2004 20 tonnes in 2009

Gross income 35,000 rupees 50,000 rupees

Net income 19,000 rupees 26,000 rupees

Table 2 Outcome of desilting for Mr. Jeyaraman.

Mr. Rengaraju

• Land area: 1 ha • Crop: Groundnut

Before Desilting After Desilting

Cropped area 0.62 ha 1 ha

Irrigation Once in 3 days Once in 3 days

Yield 1,200 kg 1,920 kg

Profit 15,000 rupees 35,000 rupees

Cropping intensity 162% 300% (2 crops/year) (3 crops/year)

Table 1 Outcome of desilting for Mr. Rengaraju.

Mr. Jeyaraman

• Land area : 0.3 ha ( 0.75 acre) • Farm forestry model

Reclamation of Agricultural Landthrough Organic Farming Methods

One hundred acres were selected forreclamation through an organic method.While the “cattle penni” method wouldhave been ideal, it calls for a herd (most-ly indigenous breeds) to stay on the landfor three nights. The herd’s faecal matterand urine act as a natural desalinatingagent in the fields. Owing to the lack ofindigenous cattle breeds in the village,however, another method using an herbalnutrient called panchagavya was adopted.

To encourage the use of herbal pesti-cides and organic methods to reclaim theland, SEVA conducted a demonstrationby various farmers. These methods hadbeen successfully adopted by farmers ear-lier in Erode District in Tamil Nadu. Mr.Chellamuthu, a marginal farmer and pro-ducer of panchagavya from Erode,described to the farmers in Anaikoil thebenefits of the product and carried out ademonstration for them. In addition, hedemonstrated the production and use ofherbal pesticides.


Veterinary Clinic and FodderPropagation Unit

SEVA held meetings with the panchayatand the community with regard to theselection of land in the village for a veteri-nary clinic and a fodder propagation unitto address the gap in needed grazing land.

Three village meetings were organ-ized to pass the resolution by the pan-chayat on handing over three acres ofcommunity land. Then an estimate and aproposed plan were worked out. At thetime of writing, they were waiting for aresolution to be passed by the panchayatduring a meeting of the gram sabha. Aroller-compacted concrete veterinaryclinic was to be constructed in a 30 x 20sq ft plinth area on the proposed land.The land was also to be used for the fod-der propagation unit.

SEVA encouraged the people ofAnaikoil to obtain fodder from the nearbyvillage of Maneckapangu (fig. 4), whereSEVA had already established one fodderpropagation unit and the villagers couldbuy the fodder for the reasonable price of

Panchagavya

Panchagavya is a herbal plant nutrient that can also be used as a fertilizer and a pesticide.

Ingredients: cow dung, 5 kg; cow urine, 5 kg; cow milk, 2 litres; cow curd, 2 litres; castor seeds, 1 kg;bajra flour, 0.25 kg; aloe vera; 500 g; jaggery, 1 kg.

Method of preparation: Grind one kilogram of castor seeds. In a drum, mix five kilograms of cowdung with the ground castor seeds. Cover this mixture with gunny cloth and spray water over it. Afterthree days, add 500 grams of crushed aloe vera, the cow urine, cow milk, cow curd, bajra flour andpowdered jaggery. Stir the contents clockwise and anticlockwise for two minutes daily. After 18 days,this organic liquid manure is ready for spraying. Dissolve 300 ml of the solution with 10 litres of waterand spray onto all crops. For an acre, three litres are required.

Figure 4 A fodder propagation unit inManeckapangu.

ÒIt is very difficult to maintain cattlewith the existing grazing fields in thevillage. The only solution is developingan FPU [fodder propagation unit] with-in the community.”

– Dr. Parthasarathi, retired professor,

Veterinary Science University, with regard

to the availability of fodder in the village.

A survey of the livestock populationand sample testing of pregnancy, dis-ease incidence, growth rate of animals,fodder availability for animals andbreeding facilities was recently under-taken with Dr. Parthasarathi.


two rupees per kilogram. In addition, somefarmers agreed to grow fodder crops.Fodder sorghum, an evolved variety, wasselected for this purpose because it is nutri-tious and easy to grow in the fields.

ACHIEVEMENTS

The farmers paid one third of the cost todesilt and construct the ponds in the vil-lage, which resulted in an allowance toundertake work on more ponds duringthe project.

In addition to addressing the problemwith the ponds, this project created com-munity resources that had not been creat-ed by the local government; moreover,the possibility of their being created inthe near future had been minimal. Theproject led to organizing the farmers intostrong units that are working towards thedevelopment of the village and that willsimultaneously benefit from the endeavour.

The project also created 2,170 manuallabour days.

The involvement of landless labour-ers in the desilting brought them tempo-rary respite and is being taken further bySEVA through their formation into self-help groups.

The decrease in land area approvedby the village panchayat for the veteri-nary clinic and fodder propagation unitwas a concern because it reduced the areafor fodder cultivation. However, somefarmers agreed to grow the fodder cropon their land.

STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES

The project was well integrated andlooked into the needs of the communityas well as the aspect of sustainability andthe environment. Ownership was nottaken away from the community; rather,the community became interested in tak-ing things a step further to improve thequality of life in the village.

One possible weakness of the projectwas the lack of a detailed needs assess-ment in terms of the ponds in order toidentify who would need the desiltingand construction.

PRO J E C T P L ANN I NGAND DE S I GN

THE PROCESS

Maneckapangu is a panchayat inNagapattinam District. All eight of thevillages – five of which are agriculturaland three of which are fishing – wereaffected by the tsunami. Since one of thecoordinators from SEVA is a resident ofthe village of Naduvalur, which is sixkilometres from Maneckapangu, he wasaware of the devastation caused by thetsunami in these villages. No organiza-tion was working with the agriculturalvillages in this panchayat.

SEVA had been working in the agricul-tural villages since after the tsunami. Forthis project, it focused on restoration offarmer livelihoods in the village of Anaikoil.


An initial meeting with the communityand the panchayat led to a basic assess-ment of the needs of the people. Based onthe results of the assessment, the projectwas proposed.

A more detailed survey was carriedout after project approval. In order toorganize the community farmers, eightself-help groups (SHGs) were formed,each with between 12 and 18 members,and monthly meetings were held to takedecisions with regard to the project.Subsequent meetings with the panchayatled to the identification of village land onwhich to build a veterinary clinic and afodder propagation unit.

REPRESENTAT IVENESS

The farming community constituted themajority in the village. The landlesslabourers and the panchayat were alsoincluded in the decisions. The villagemeetings were conducted in the presenceof the entire community. This projecttackled only some of the issues, but othermatters relevant to the rest of the commu-nity were also discussed such as what theneeds of the landless labourers and womenin the community were. The landlesslabourers also benefited from the project.

Local Institution-building

SEVA started five farmer SHGs and fourlandless labourer SHGs, which havebrought people together in the village. Atthe time of writing, it was working oncontinuous training programmes for bothgroups. With respect to the landlesslabourers, SEVA was going to be working

towards ensuring a strong livelihoodoption for them.

Community Involvement

The community had been involvedbefore the conception of the project andhas been consulted at all points. Thefarmers have been cooperative and flexi-ble throughout the project. They are theimplementers, with SEVA playing a facil-itating role.

PLANS FOR SUSTA INAB I L I T Y

The project is not a stopgap measure.The process of desilting has traditionallybeen done by the farmers but owing tolack of income in the prior two years, thefarmers had been unable to desilt theponds. The veterinary clinic and the fod-der propagation unit are aimed at long-term improvements in the villages. Thenext step is to work towards improvingthe situation of the landless labourers.

EVALUAT ION

Monthly meetings of the SHGs havebeen attended by the coordinators. Atthese meetings, issues that need to beaddressed by the community and SEVAhave been discussed.

PARTN E R SH I P S

IMPLEMENT ING INST I TUT IONS

SEVA is a Madurai-based NGO workingin the field of agriculture, environmentand rural development. Registered as a


voluntary organization, it started in 1992.For the last 15 years, SEVA has beenengaged in the documentation of indige-nous knowledge in agriculture, animalhusbandry and natural resource manage-ment through project implementation,workshops, training and the publicationof newsletters.

ROLE OF GOVERNMENT

In a project where community resourcesare to be developed, the local govern-ment plays an essential role. Panchayatapproval was needed for the fodder prop-agation unit and the veterinary clinic andthe panchayat has been involvedthroughout the entire process, even inthe construction of the farm ponds.

CHA L L ENG E SAND CONS T R A I N T S

The shift from a figure of 40 ponds to beconstructed and desilted to 72 ponds(post-survey) was something that SEVAhad not envisaged, but the increase wasmade possible owing to the contributionfrom the farmers.

SEVA used a more humanisticapproach to convince the farmers thatthe construction and desilting should bedone by manual labour rather thanmachines. This required many meetingsand was a challenge that was overcomeby convincing the farmers that thelabourers would be efficient and that thiswould result in an income-earning oppor-tunity for the landless labourers.

Provision by the panchayat of a for-mal letter of approval to begin construc-tion of the veterinary clinic and the startof the fodder propagation unit had beendelayed as of the time of writing due tothe change of the panchayat President.With regard to land, there was a decreasefrom five to three acres owing to somedissension in the panchayat about thedecision taken. The panchayat changedafter the initial meetings and the newpanchayat President and other memberswere in favour of constructing the veteri-nary clinic in Maneckapangu rather thanin Anaikoil. SEVA, however, convincedthem that this would not be a possibilitysince there was not enough land availablein Maneckapangu and the project wasspecific to Anaikoil. Moreover, theorganization shared with the panchayatthat the veterinary clinic would not besolely for Anaikoil.

L E S SON S L EA RN ED

• The use of manual labour does notmean reduced efficiency. In fact, inthis case, if machines had been used,the ponds would still have had to beshaped (steps) by manual labour.This would eventually haveincreased the cost of each pond.The cost of the machines wouldhave been covered by the budget of3,000 rupees for a small pond butthe cost of the labour after the pondhad been dug would have been 110rupees per day per labourer and aminimum of a week and at least five


men would have been required.

• A survey would ensure that all thepotential beneficiaries would becovered by the project.

• Integrated planning helps tostrengthen a project.

• The community should take anactive role in any programme since it benefits from the pro-gramme and has the local ownership of the ponds.

• Groups are an ideal way to balanceany issues that might occur whendealing with individual members.

• The NGO needs to facilitate thejudicious use of water between themembers and levy payments for theuse of the water so that the repairscan be made.

• It is important to make people awareof the benefits of farm ponds overand above the fact that they can beused for irrigation. In this case, thefact that these farm ponds also actas groundwater recharging units andreduce the salinity of the water wassomething about which the farmerswere not aware.

REP L I C A B I L I T Y

SUGGESTED STEPSFOR REPL ICAT ION

1.Get to know the communitythrough meetings, assessments and planning with the people.

2. Conduct a survey of the village

to assess how many ponds needdesilting. The desilting should be done using manual labour asthis would provide employment to other landless labourers in the village and reduce the cost of digging the pond as well as desilting and widening it.

3.Obtain formal approval of the use of village land. Ensuring thatthe government body is in fullcooperation with the projectwould help smooth its progress.

4. Create groups or self-help groupssince this will facilitate assessmentof the problems even though thebeneficiaries are initially individuals.

5. Create credit ties and initiate savings among the farmers.

6. Ensure that the planning is integrated.

FUTUR E P L AN S

• Integrate present agricultural practices with related areas such aslivestock, fodder cultivation andraising cattle and link this with theother members and other NGOs.

• Develop the ideas and provide training for an integrated farmingsystems approach and organic farming techniques.

• Provide training in veterinary herbal healing methods.

• Provide the farmers with sprinklersystems and oil engines throughself-help groups.


• Start income-generation programmes for landless and small farmers.

P U B L I C AT I O N SA N D R E F E R E N C E S

Progress Report of Rehabilitation ofTsunami-affected Anaikoil Villagethrough Integrated Development Work Programme for Anaikoil Village,Sembaranar Koil Block in NagapattinamDistrict, Tamil Nadu, to SSGF,December 2006-March 2007. Submitted by SEVA.

Progress Report of Rehabilitation ofTsunami-affected Anaikoil Village

through Integrated Development WorkProgramme for Anaikoil Village,Sembaranar Koil Block in NagapattinamDistrict, Tamil Nadu, to SSGF, April2007-June 2007. Submitted by SEVA.

SEVA, Annual Report 2006.

Contacts:

Case Study Documented by:Vishnu PrasadE-mail: [email protected]

Keren NazarethE-mail: [email protected]

Project Contact: Mr. C. BalasubramaniyanE-mail: [email protected]

Figure 5 SEVA integrated approach to rehabilitation in the village of Anaikoil.

Integrated development

Ponds Land Organic methods Cattle nutrition and health

Desilting ReclamationFodder propagation

unit

Better irrigation

Veterinary clinic

Better yield

Improved quality of life

Employment for landless labourers

Higher incomeHigher productivity


Documents

Reviving, Replenishing INDIA and Rejuvenating Anaikoiltcdc2.undp.org/GSSDAcademy/SIE/Docs/Vol14/1INDIA.pdfGENERAL INFORMATION Country: India State: Tamil Nadu District: Nagapattinam