View
2.309
Download
3
Category
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Working Group 2
Citation preview
Decentralized Rainwater Harvesting Structures in India: Relevance for ACP Countries
Ravinder P.S. Malik Meredith GiordanoVivek Sharma
Location and Context
Dewas District, Madhya Pradesh, India
Water tables declined >200 ft. No surface water. No groundwater. Tube wells fail to yield water.
Annual rainfall - 1000 mm
Cultivation restricted to wet season
Farmer incomes fell steeply
Water important binding constraint
Remedy and Action: An Idea can change life
Rainfall only option for augmenting water availability
Problems with communal water management
District administration introduced decentralized rainwater harvesting structures
Rule of thumb: Allocate 1/10 to 1/15 land
In 4 years farmers built more than 4000 structures
Outcomes and Impacts - 1
Wet and dry season farming (soy/wheat/gram)
Cropping intensity increased 122% to 195%
Water and fodder available for livestock
Increased incomes from crops and livestock
Cost savings: electricity and irrigation
Outcomes and Impacts - 2Greater investments in agriculture, aquaculture,
livestock, education, housing, and transportation
No conflicts over water/infrastructure sharing
Positive externalities: groundwater recharge, increased flora/fauna
Benefit/Cost Ratio
• Cost of construction: 1 acre X 7 feet deep = USD 6100
• The benefit–cost ratio, excluding external benefits, between 1.5 to 1.9
• Farmers recover initial investment in ~ 3 years
Scaling up: Opportunities and Constraints
Opportunities: High awareness and interest Available technical knowledge Developed output markets
Constraints: Access to finance for investment
Government subsidies available, but with limitations
Relevance for ACP Countries
• Intervention easily replicable
• Access to technical knowhow and construction equipment
• Alternative to communal structures
• Financing likely a major constraint
• Adapt model (with/without government subsidies)
• Crop output markets need strengthening
Recommended