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