FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY - World Bank Documents

Document of

The World Bank

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Report No. 16231

IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT

INDIA

NATIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT(Credit 1770-IN)

JANUARY 10, 1997

Agriculture and Water Operations DivisionCountry Department IISouth Asia Region

This document has a restricted distribution and mav be used by recipients only in the performance oftheir official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World bank authorization.

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

Currency Unit = Indian Rupees (Rs.)Rs. 13.0( = US$1.00 (Appraisal: 1987)Rs. 19.64 = US$1.00 (Intervening years: 1987-94)Rs. 31.65 - US$I .00 (Completion vear: 1995)

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

I meter (m) = 3 28 feet (ft)I kilometcr (kin) 0.62 miles (rni)

I hectare (ha) = 2 47 acres (ac)I million cubic meters (Mm3) = 804 acre-feet (ac-ft)

I cubic foot per second (cfs or cuscc) 0.0283 cubic meters per second (m3/s)I kilogram (kg) 2.2 pounds (lb)I mctric ton (t) 2.205 pounds (lb)

I thousand million cubic feet (TMC) = 28.317 million cubic meters (Mm3)

FISCAL YEAR OF THE BORROWER

Apnl I to March 31

PRINCIPAL ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

CCA Cultivable Command AreaDCA Development Credit AgreementERR Economic Rate of ReturnGOI Government of IndiaICR Implementation Completion ReportID Irrigation DepartmentIIMI International Irrigation Management InstituteIMTI Irrigation Management Training InstituteISTF Institutional Strengthening and Training FundM&E Monitoring and EvaluationMOWR Ministry of Water ResourcesNWMP National Water Management ProjectO&M Operation and MaintenancePIM Participatory Irrigation ManagementRDS Rajolibunda Diversion SchemeSAR Staff Appraisal ReportVVS Vani Vilas SagarWMC Water Management CellWRCP Water Resources Consolidation Projects

Vicc President D. Joseph Wood

Director : R. Drysdalc

Division Chief/Manager S. Barghouti

Staff Mcmber : K. Oblitas. Senior Economist

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY


INDIA


Table of Contents

P R E F A C E .............................................................. i

EVALUATION SUMMARY ............................................................. ii

PART I: PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ASSESSMENT ....................................... 1

A. Project Objectives IB. Achievement of Project Objectives 3C. Implementation Record and Major Factors Affecting the Project .6D. Project Sustainability 8E. Bank Performance .8F. Borrower Performance .10G. Assessment of Outcome .14H. Future Operation .14I. Key Lessons Learned .14

PART II: STATISTICAL TABLES ............................................................. 17

Table 1. Summary of Assessments ........................................................... 17Table 2. Related Bank Loans/Credits ....................................................... 19Table 3. Project Timetable ............................................................. 19Table 4. Loan/Credit Disbursements: Cumulative Estimated and Actual ... 20Table 5. Key Indicators for Project Implementation .................................. 20Table 6. Key Indicators for Project Operation .......................................... 21Table 7a. Training and Studies - Andhra Pradesh ......... ...... ....... 21Table 7b. Training and Studies - Karnataka ............................................... 22Table 7c. Training and Studies - Kerala ..................................................... 25Table 7d. Training and Studies - Madhya Pradesh ..................................... 25Table 7e. Training and Studies - Tamil Nadu ............................................. 26Table 8A. Project Costs ..... ................. .......... ............. 28Table 8B. Project Financing ............................................................. 28Table 9. Economic Costs and Benefits .................................................... 29Table 10. Status of Legal Covenants ......................................................... 30Table 11. Compliance with Operational Manual Statements ...................... 33Table 12. Bank Resources: Staff Inputs ..................................................... 33Table 13. Bank Resources: Missions ......................................................... 34

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of theirofficial duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed wiLhout World Bank authorization.

APPENDICES

IA Aide Memoire ................................................... 361B Supplementary Mission - Aide-Memoire ................................................... 552 Economic and Financial Analysis ................................................... 603 Observations of Ministry of Water Resources on the Draft ICR ................ 1934 Excerpts-MOWR's Completion Report Lessons Drawn from NWMP I .... 202

i


INDIA


Preface

1. This is the Implementation Completion Report (ICR) for the National WaterManagement Project (NWMP) in India for which Credit 1770-IN in the amount ofSDR93.2 million (US$114 million equivalent) was approved on March 24, 1987 anddeclared effective on August 10, 1987.

2. The Credit was closed on March 31, 1995, one year behind schedule. Finaldisbursement took place on June 20, 1995 and the Credit was fully disbursed.

3. This report was prepared by an FAO/CP mission which visited India in February-March 1995 and October-November 1995. It was finalized by Mr. Keith Oblitas and Ms.Teresita Estoque, Agriculture and Water Operations, Country Department II, South AsiaRegional Office, and reviewed by Shawki Barghouti, Division Chief, and Ms. KazukoUchimura, Project Adviser, SA2DR. Preparation of the ICR was initiated during theBank's final supervision mission in February-March 1995. It is based on a review of theStaff Appraisal Report and legal documents, supervision reports and project files, as wellas field investigations and discussions with the Bank staff and officials of the IrrigationDepartments of the ten States participating in the project. The mission also visited selectedsub-projects in six States (Andhra Pradesh, Haryana, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradeshand Tamil Nadu) and held discussions with project officers and participating farmers

4. The Borrower's comments on the ICR's February/March 1995 Mission's AideMemoire and on the draft ICR are in Appendix 3 to this report. A Project CompletionReport, prepared by the Ministry of Water Resources, is available in the Asia InformationCenter.

ii


INDIA


Evaluation Summary

Introduction

Agriculture continues to be the dominant sector of the Indian economy, contributingabout 36 percent of the GNP and directly employing over 70 percent of the total labour force.Foodgrain production accelerated substantially during the 1960s with the advent of the greenrevolution and the introduction of high-yielding varieties of wheat and rice. The development ofirrigation has been a major factor in improving agricultural performance. Irrigation has contributeddirectly by increasing the area cropped, reducing crop losses due to deficient rainfall, and byencouraging diversified cropping and the use of high-yielding varieties of seeds and other improvedinputs. Despite the undoubted achievement of irrigation development, yields in many irrigated areashave been and continue to be well below potential because irrigation supplies are unreliable; in addition,the distribution of water is often inequitable, leading to overuse in some areas and shortages elsewhere.These problems have resulted from inadequacies in both the management of irrigation schemes and thephysical infrastructure. The National Water Management Project (NWMP) was, therefore, formulatedmainly to improve the perforrnance of existing irrigation systems.

Project Objectives

The purpose of the project was to increase agricultural productivity and farm incomesthrough the provision of a more reliable, predictable and equitable irrigation service. To achieve theseobjectives and facilitate extension of similar activities throughout the country, the project wasformulated to help participating States and GOI to develop an institutional capacity to plan, implementand monitor improved O&M practices and to provide for low-cost infrastructural improvementsdesigned to support an improved operational plan for selected schemes. In each scheme, the mostappropriate technique of water supply was to be adopted. The most important element in schemeimprovement was to be the preparation of an operational plan. On the basis of water availability,system characteristics, and agricultural options, the plan was expected to define how the system wouldbe operated with respect to the timings and quantities of water deliveries and the responsibilities ofthose involved.

iii

The principal components of the main part of the project (improved water management)were: (a) Scheme Investments required to implement the operational plan - these included repairs andrenovations to existing structures; provision of new control structures; field channels and drains;measuring devices; and investments in upgraded O&M facilities and equipment (including housing forstaff and transport); and communications equipment, as required to execute the operational plan; (b)Engineering and Administration required to supervise the effective implementation of the schemeinvestments; (c) Incremental Recurrent O&M Expenditures to support the improved operational planand maintain it after the completion of the scheme investments; (d) Institutional Strengthening of theState Irrigation Departments, with particular emphasis on helping them to develop O&M planning andsupport units in the States and strengthening of the Water Management Cell (WMC) of the Ministryof Water Resources (MOWR) of the Government of India (GOI) so that it could provide policydirection, act as a catalyst for extending the approach across State boundaries and administer andcoordinate the NWMP as a whole; (e) Training Programs for technical and orientation training forscheme staff and farmers, State O&M staff and officers of the WMC and study tours within India andlimited overseas visits along with support for the infrastructure development of the IrrigationManagement Training Institute (IMTI) in Tamil Nadu; and (f) Special Studies and Programs tostrengthen specific aspects of water management (e.g. monitoring and evaluation, computerapplications, communications, dam safety etc.). The project also supported two other componentsrelated to the general objectives of improved water management in India - (a) The MaharashtraInduction Training Program designed to support initial vocational training for engineers recruited tothe Maharashtra Irrigation Department; and (b) An Institutional Strengthening and Training Fund(ISTF) to be managed and implemented by GOI and state agencies.

Loan Covenants. Special loan covenants that were expected to promote achievement ofproject objectives and sustained operation were: (a) select, plan, design and seek approval of eachscheme to be implemented to the satisfaction of IDA; (b) under TOR satisfactory to IDA carry outdetailed review of O&M of NWMP schemes and prepare an action plan for improving O&M in thescheme and the State and implement the plan; (c) prepare a monitoring and evaluation program andimplement it. Each scheme under implementation has been approved by IDA. O&M review has beencarried out in some States but no action plan has been prepared. M&E units have been set up asplanned, but operationally have not generated the required data for assessment of project benefits andto correct shortcomings in operation.

Evaluation of Project Objectives. The project concept of instituting water managementas a significant input into India's Irrigated Agriculture Sector was sound, relevant, appropriate and inline with the GOI's National Water Policy. Water management has been the focus in several otherprojects financed by IDA in the water sector in recent years. The Staff Appraisal Report (SAR) wasclear in defining the project objectives and in setting out the implementation measures to be adopted forachieving these objectives. The implementation period of seven years was appropriate and the projectcomponents included for financing were in conformity with the project objectives. However, there wasinadequate appreciation of the need to strengthen the state irrigation departments and to involvefarmers in scheme designs, operations, maintenance, and cost recovery.

iv

Agro-climatic and socio-economic conditions in India vary widely depending upongeographic location and irrigation systems have evolved reflecting this diversity. Major types ofirrigation systems found in India (Localization, Warabundi, Shejpali) have been discussed in the SAR.The three original participating States in this project were from the south - Andhra Pradesh, Kamataka,and Tamil Nadu where localization, a demand-based system is practised. In retrospect, sufficientattention was not given at appraisal to the socio-economic aspects of converting from a demand-basedsystem to a supply-based system. The structured system which was developed under the project toensure equity in distribution of water supply to the beneficiary farmers located in various parts of thecommand can be considered to be an innovative idea that could be and should be improved upon infollow-up projects.

SAR was unrealistic to expect that in the preparation of operational plans, paddy growingareas could be reduced and substituted by irrigated dry crops covering a larger area of the command.For instance, in the operational plan presented for the Rajolibunda Diversion Scheme in AndhraPradesh, it was proposed to preclude paddy in middle and lower reaches in kharif and throughout thecommand in rabi by introducing systematic intermittent irrigation. Farmers obtained a court injunctionagainst this proposal. A major deficiency in project concept was its failure to specify how farmerswould be involved in the design and implementation. Even though mention is made in the SAR aboutfarmer participation, no workable solution was given as to how this was to be achieved.

Implementation Experience and Results

The project was approved in March 1987 and started off very slowly in the three originalparticipating States. The Induction Training Program in Maharashtra started at the same time as well.At appraisal, the project was expected to cover about 580,000 ha. During implementation, a number ofadditional schemes were included and the number of participating States increased from three to nine.The additional States were: Bihar, Gujarat, Haryana, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, and UttarPradesh. The total number of schemes, including those covered at appraisal, was 96 covering acommand area of about 2.18 million ha. Bridge financing was provided for lining main canal and watercourses in Haryana for a period of two years to allow that State to continue work on these aspects untilthe approval of the Haryana Water Resources Consolidation Project in 1994. At Credit Closure(March 31, 1995) it is estimated that about 32 schemes covering a command area of 337,331 ha wouldbe completed. The remaining 64 schemes are in varying degrees of completion. The actual benefitingarea is far less than the command area covered. For instance, in the schemes visited and included in theeconomic re-evaluation, the actual benefiting area is estimated to be 56,913 ha as compared to theirtotal command area of 241,576 ha included under the project. The ERRs computed for nine schemesare: Thandava -3 percent; Malampuzha 9 percent; Ratapani -16 percent; Thambaraparani 4 percent;RDS -6 percent; Vani Vilas Sagar 9 percent; Sathanur 6 percent; Peechi -6 percent; and Haryana 17percent. These values are fairly sensitive to the benefits and less sensitive to the costs.

v

Project Sustainability. The ERRs are rather low to be consistent with sustainedeconomic performance. The operational plans prepared for each scheme should be monitored andmodified as required to ensure beneficiary acceptance of such plans. This would contribute to a largemeasure in increasing the benefits of the scheme. Adequate funds must be provided by the Stategovernments to the implementing agencies to maintain the schemes in good condition and operatethem. Parts of the irrigation schemes may have to be handed over to the farmers for operation andmaintenance. Water users' associations would have to be created as a first step. In addition, an O&Mculture has to be inculcated in the operating level staff of the irrigation departments, as well asappropriate modifications in institutional structure to enable sustainable O&M capabilities.

Actual Cost, Financing and Implementation Timetable. The project costs includingphysical and price contingencies were estimated to be US$157.0 million (Rs.2,041.1 million). An IDAcredit of SDR93.2 million (US$114.0 million equivalent) was to finance about 73 percent of the totalcosts and the remaining expenditures were to be mnet from the development budgets of the participatingStates. At Credit closure, the actual project expenditure in Rupee terms was Rs.5041.1 millionrepresenting a cost overrun of 148 percent in nominal rupee terns. Expenditure in US$ terms wasUS$176.1 million representing a cost overrun of 11 percent. Out of this arnount, US$ 125.7 millionwas disbursed by IDA. The Credit was fully disbursed and the final disbursement was made on June20, 1995. The appraisal schedule of a seven-year implementation period was extended by one year.The exact number of schemes, as well as detailed costs, were not exactly known at the time ofappraisal except for the three schemes - Vani Vilas Sagar, Sathanur and RDS. Comparison of"actuals" with appraisal estimates are therefore not very meaningful. Individual scheme costs andtimetables have therefore to be analyzed.

Key Factors Relating to Achievement of Project Objectives. The most importantdeficiencies which hampered project implementation can be classified into:

a) Factors not generaly subject to Government control. This included lack ofacceptance by beneficiaries of changes in cropping patterns. Achievement ofproject objective of increasing irrigated areas by using lower water consumingcrops has been hampered by this.

b) Factors generally subject to Government control. These included delays intimely release of annual funds for the execution of project works, frequentturnover of key professional staff of the implementing agencies and the limiteduse of training modules prepared by the Indo-Dutch team. These hadsubstantially affected implementation performance in some participating Statesand contributed to the lack of understanding of the basic concepts of the NWMPby the operating level professional staff of the implementing agencies.

c) Factors generaly subject to implementing agency control. These includedinsufficient diagnostic work to identify system constraints and to prioritize

vi

expenditures and ineffective monitoring and evaluation of scheme performance.This has resulted in inappropriate and impractical solutions being implemented toachieve better water use efficiency in the schemes. In addition, monitoring andevaluation units set up in the different Irrigation Departments have, in general,been ineffective in collecting data required for the evaluation of agriculturalbenefits and scheme performance in a systematic manner. A pervasive majorfactor affecting the project was its top-down approach and lack of consultationwith farmers.

Performance of Bank and Borrower. The performance of the Bank and the Borrowerhas been mixed. The project involved implementing sound new concepts which required adequate andeffective supervision and guidance to be provided by the Bank. During project preparation prior to andin the early stages immediately following appraisal, such supervision and guidance were indeedprovided by the Bank. However, beyond FY89, the supervision by the Bank was inadequate andineffective. The Borrower did not follow the detailed guidelines provided in the SAR and in manualsprepared later by the Bank in the preparation of additional schemes. Schemes were prepared withoutadequate diagnosis of the physical infrastructure, seasonal operational plans and prioritization ofinvestments. In many instances appropriate construction schedules were not prepared with the resultabout two-thirds of the schemes have not been completed. The performance of the completed schemesis less than satisfactory. In FY89 this was the only project in the agricultural sector in India without anydisbursement at all. At this stage, both the Bank and the Borrower were anxious to increasedisbursements which appears to have become the over-riding factor. As a result, quality of workssuffered. A number of new schemes were initiated covering an area of about 2.18 million ha and thisnumber was quoted in all the reports giving a misleading impression of excellent project performance.At the end of the project, work had been completed covering only about 15% of this area.

Project Outcome Assessment. The project outcome is rated as unsatisfactory since ithas achieved only partial progress in physical targets (32 schemes covering 337,331 ha completed outof 96 schemes cleared for implementation covering 2.18 million ha and compared to appraisal target ofabout 500,000 ha) and in the completed schemes, the provision of reliable, predictable and equitablesupply has not been achieved as expected at appraisal.

Summary of Findings, Future Operations and Key Lessons Learned

Findings. Incremental irrigated area fell short of appraisal estimates, reducing incrementalagricultural production to much lower than that estimated at appraisal. The ERRs are therefore lowerand below opportunity cost of capital except in Haryana. The reasons for the low rates of return are:(a) lower than assumed incremental benefiting areas in each scheme; (b) lower increases in croppingintensity; (c) excessive cost overrun per ha in real terms; and (d) in some cases non-adoption of cropsother than paddy which was assumed at appraisal. It is possible to improve the economic performanceof other non-completed schemes through changes in operational plans and relatedrehabilitation/modernization works. A limited awareness has been created in the decision-making levels

vii

of the State governments for the need for better water management in existing projects thus exploitingthe already created potential to the fullest. The borrower had conducted several short-term trainingcourses and had undertaken a number of studies but there was little impact of these on project designor implementation.

Plans for Future Operation. The following actions would be required to ensurecompletion of remaining schemes and their smooth operation: (a) revision of operational plans takinginto account realistic agricultural data on cropping pattern and operational hydrology; (b) completionof ongoing schemes based on proper diagnostic analysis of infrastructure improvements required toexecute the operational plan mentioned above on the basis of an appropriate prioritised investmentprogram for the implementation of which continued financial assistance possibly under a follow-upphase would be necessary under stringent and well-defined institutional improvements, (c) training of1ID staff, relevant agricultural department staff and farmers in the operation of the schemes; (d) trainingof scheme managers including inculcation in O&M culture; and (e) provision of adequate funds forsustained O&M taking into account farmer turnover concept; (f) revision of approach to includefarmers in assessment of needs, planning, design, construction, O&M, and cost recovery; and (g)institutional modifications and strengthening at the level of irrigation departments to createorganizational capabilities in water management and farmer organization. GOI has advised thePlanning Commission to release adequate funds to the concerned State Governments to complete theongoing schemes. There would still be a need for external assistance to complete the schemes andconsolidate the gains from this valuable program.

Lessons for Future Projects in the Sub-sector. The main lessons learned from thisproject implementation can be grouped under Concept, Design, Implementation, and Follow-up, asfollows:

Concept

a) Extensive equitable irrigation and self-financing irrigation schemes are twoobjectives which may not be necessarily compatible. Equity should therefore beachieved through the introduction of volumetric water supply, within thelimitations of water availability and the effective recovery of appropriate watercharges, rather than through the delivery of the same amount of water per unit ofarea to each farmer;

b) Projects of this type which involve not only technical changes to the status quo,but also have significant social aspects, require a high level of farmer participationin irrigation management (P1M) to be successful. Introduction of such conceptswill require, in turn, the use of more advanced technologies in irrigationmanagement which are currently available in India and abroad. These wouldinclude provision of improved structured system to allow flexible water

viii

distribution to water user associations, and, as needed, canal automation forcontrolling main canal flows.

c) Improving the productivity of irrigation systems linked with farmer participationrequires strengthening of the capabilities of the irrigation departments and someinstitutional restructuring to provide emphasis and staff resources to theseactivities.

In the Water Resources Consolidation Projects (WRCPs) (which are the new generation irrigationprojects supported by the Bank), a major thrust is on improving the productivity of irrigation systemsthrough modernization linked with farmer involvement. The "systems improvement and farmerturnover" components of the WRCPs integrally link farmer organization, operations andmaintenance, and cost recovery with the engineering improvements. Additionally, each project hasinvolved an institutional reorganization and subsequent strengthening program to build up thecapabilities of the irrigation departments in scheme modernization, water management, andfarmerorganization. Volumetric supplies are also being attempted by water users associations and thisexperiment should be carefully monitored and nurtured Canal automation is being experimented inTungabadra and Majalgaon commands.

Design

a) A baseline survey of the condition of the system infrastructure and croppingpractices is a prerequisite to prepare a detailed scheme report forrehabilitation/modernization.

b) Detailed diagnostic work would be undertaken and realistic alternate scenariosshould be explored in computer simulation models taking into account farmercrop preferences in preparing operational plans. These plans should be preparedwith the assistance of specialists in operational hydrology (water availability andwater balance studies under the revised scenarios), irrigation agronomy who arefamiliar with the local conditions, sociologists, representatives of the farmingcommunity, and irrigation engineers. The operational plans should be flexible tohandle vagaries of nature and forces of the market place (for instance, if a sugarmill is located near a scheme, water-savings cannot be achieved by switching to aless water consuming crop -- innovative irrigation technology has to be adoptedwith required capital investments).

c) An irrigation system should be considered as a whole water management unit.Works should not be carried out in individual distributaries without any possibilityof water management in the system in its totality.

Ix

Implementation

a) Prioritization of expenditures necessary for implementing the selected operationalplan should be prepared, together with detailed construction sequences, whichtake into account the financial capability of the implementing agency, canal closureperiods, and number of days available to carry out the civil works in each year.

b) Quality of construction in small and scattered works requires particular attention.High quality technical assistance and third party supervision should be consideredin future project.

c) Priority should be given to training a maximum number of professional staff of theimplementing agencies in water management principles, and some of thepromising staff should be trained intensively in computer and remote sensingtechnology to be water managers. Turnover rate of key senior-level staff must bemninimized in projects involving new concepts. Otherwise, the benefits of trainingand efficiency in implementation are lost.

Follow-up

a) Simple key parameters should be established for monitoring and evaluating theperformance and impact of water management from scheme start-up. Aneffective monitoring and evaluation unit should be created in each participatingState with a multi-disciplinary core team. Monitoring the impact of schemeinterventions on agricultural production should be carried out continuouslystarting from the baseline survey and using the same parameters so thatoperational plans can be modified if required and also a final evaluation of thescheme performance would be feasible.

b) O&M of the scheme should be jointly carried out by department officers andfarmer beneficiaries. Adequate funds should be made available for such O&M.

1


INDIA

NATIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT (NWMP)(Credit 1770-IN)

PART I: PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ASSESSMENT

A. PROJECT OBJECTIVES

1. The purpose of the project was to increase agricultural productivity and farm incomesthrough a more reliable, predictable and equitable irrigation service. To achieve these objectives andfacilitate extension of similar activities throughout the country, the project was formulated to helpparticipating States and the Government of India (GOI) to develop an institutional capacity to plan,implement and monitor improved operation and maintenance (O&M) practices and to provide for low-cost infrastructural improvements designed to support an improved operational plan for selectedschemes. In each scheme, the most appropriate technique of water supply was to be adopted. The mostimportant element in scheme improvement was to be the preparation of an operational plan. On thebasis of water availability, system characteristics, and agricultural options, the plan was expected todefine how the system would be operated with respect to the timings and quantities of water deliveriesand the responsibilities of those involved.

2. The principal components of the main part of the project (improved water management)were: (a) Scheme Investments required to implement the operational plan - these included repairs andrenovations to existing structures; provision of new control structures; field channels and drains;measuring devices; and investments in upgraded O&M facilities and equipment (including housing forstaff and transport); and communications equipment, as required, to execute the operational plan; (b)Engineering and Administration required to supervise the effective implementation of the schemeinvestments; (c) Incremental Recurrent O&M Expenditures to support the improved operational planand maintain it after the completion of the scheme investments; (d) Institutional Strengthening of theState Irrigation Departments, with particular emphasis on helping them to develop O&M planning andsupport units in the States. In addition, the Water Management Cell (WMC) of the Ministry of WaterResources (MOWR) was to be strengthened so that it could provide policy direction, act as a catalystfor extending the approach across State boundaries and administer and coordinate the NWMP as awhole; (e) Training Programs for technical and orientation training for scheme staff and farmers, StateO&M staff, and officers of the WMC, and study tours within India, and limited overseas visits, alongwith support for the infrastructure development of the Irrigation Management Training Institute(IMTI) in Tamil Nadu; and (f) Special Studies and Programs to strengthen specific aspects of watermanagement (e.g. monitoring and evaluation, computer applications, communications, dam safetyetc.). The project also supported two other components related to the general objectives of improvedwater management in India - (a) The Maharashtra Induction Training Program designed to supportinitial vocational training for engineers recruited to the Maharashtra Irrigation Department; and (b) AnInstitutional Strengthening and Training Fund (ISTF) to be managed and implemented by GOI andstate agencies.

2

3. The project was to be implemented over a seven-year period and the project costsincluding physical and price contingencies were estimated to be US$157.0 million (Rs.2,041.1 million)at 1986 prices. An TDA Credit of SDR93.2 million (US$114.0 million equivalent) was to finance about73 percent of total project cost and the remaining expenditures were to be met from the developmentbudgets of participating States.

4. Special legal covenants that were expected to promote achievement of project objectivesand sustained operation were: (i) select, plan, design and seek approval of each scheme to beimplemented to the satisfaction of IDA; (ii) under TOR satisfactory to IDA carry out detailed review ofO&M of NWMP schemes and prepare an action plan for improving O&M in the scheme and the Stateand implement the plan; and (iii) prepare a monitoring and evaluation program and implement it. Theschemes were selected, planned, designed and submitted to IDA after clearance by GOI. However, thequality of scheme preparations varies and their selection was not subjected to detailed technical scrutinyby IDA. O&M review has been carried out in some States but no action plan for improvement has beenprepared. M&E units have been set up as required but operationally have not generated the requireddata for assessment of project benefits and to correct shortcomings in project operation. In effect,while there was compliance with special legal covenants, the requisite follow-up was inadequate andtherefore the intended objectives for their compliance were not achieved.

5. The project concept of instituting water management as a significant input into India'sIrrigated Agriculture Sector was sound, relevant and appropriate and in line with the GOI's NationalWater Policy. Water management has been the focus in several other projects financed by IDA in thewater sector in recent years. The Staff Appraisal Report (SAR) was clear in defining the projectobjectives and in setting out the implementation measures to be adopted for achieving these objectives.The implementation period of seven years was appropriate and the project components included forfinancing were in general realistic.

6. Agro-climatic and socio-economic conditions in India vary widely depending upongeographic location, and irrigation systems have evolved reflecting this diversity. Major types ofirrigation systems found in India (Localization, Warabundi, Shejpali) have been discussed in the SAR.The three original participating States in this project were in the south - Andhra Pradesh, Kamataka,and Tamil Nadu - where localization, a demand-based system, is practiced. In retrospect, sufficientattention was not given at appraisal to the socio-economic aspects of converting from a demand-basedsystem to a supply-based system. The structured irrigation system which was developed under thisproject to ensure equity in distribution of water supply to the beneficiary farmers located in variousparts of the command can be considered to be an innovative idea which can be further improved infollow-up projects. However, where field to field irrigation is practiced (as in most paddy irrigation inthe southern states) this system may not be best suited (para 42 below refers).

7. The SAR was unrealistic to expect that in the preparation of operational plans, paddygrowing areas could be reduced and substituted by irrigated dry crops covering a larger area of thecommand. For instance, in the operational plan presented for the Rajolibunda Diversion Scheme (RDS)in Andhra Pradesh, it was proposed to preclude paddy in middle and lower reaches in kharif and

3

throughout the command in rabi by introducing systematic intermittent irrigation. Farmers obtained acourt injunction against this proposal.

8. The project could be considered as a pilot in setting up water management strategies andin improving the performance of inigation systems throughout India. The project was initiallyconcentrated in three southern states with a provision for expansion to other States if found to beattractive. The concept of reliable, equitable and predictable water supply has attracted the attention ofthe Irrigation Departments (IDs) of other States which applied later to participate in the project. Hence,the project can be considered to have had a positive impact on the evolution of sectoral policy ofimproved water management.

9. The concepts and the implementation procedures were not complex from an engineeringviewpoint although they called for strengthening the institutions involved in irrigation management.The setting up of a Water Management Cell and the provision of the ISTF has helped in theimplementation of the project. However, at state irrigation department levels, water management cells,if created, were "add-ons" to existing institutional structures, and did not fundamentally improve thecapabilities of the departments in water management. Also, the complexities of water management in alarge community of farmers was not dealt with adequately during the appraisal of the project. A majordeficiency in project concept was its failure to include farmers in the discussion of how they would beinvolved in the design and implementation. It is stated in the SAR that once an operational plan hasbeen established, a program must be prepared to implement the plan which should cover farmerconsultation and involvement in approval and implementation. However no workable solution wasgiven as to how such involvement of farmers is to be obtained. The major risks associated with theproject were related to the sustainability of the operational programs to be supported. The risk that theproject might be unable to sustain programs involving changes in water allocation to farmers, in theface of vested interests and other pressures that affect some scheme operations was recognized atappraisal. Such risks still exist but with more substantive participation of farmers in the preparation,implementation and operation of schemes, coupled with turnover of parts of the system, these could bemtinimized in follow-up projects.

B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PROJECT OBJECTIVES

10. Overall Achievement. The project was approved in March 1987 1 and the Credit becameeffective in August 1987. Originally three States were to participate in the project: Andhra Pradesh,Kamataka and Tamil Nadu. A total of sixteen schemes had been identified covering a cultivableconmmand area (CCA) of about 460,076 ha. Breakdown by States is provided in Appendix 3. Inaddition, anticipating that more schemes would be added in the three participating States and that otherStates might be interested in participating in such a project, an allowance was made to cover anadditional CCA of about 123,029 ha. The Induction Training Program in Maharashtra started at thesame time as well. During the implementation of the project, several additional schemes were includedand the number of participating States increased from three to nine. The additional States were Bihar,Gujarat, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, and Uttar Pradesh. The total number of schemes cleared forimplementation increased from sixteen, identified at appraisal, to 96 covering a command area of 2.18

1 Board approval date was March 24, 1987 and the Agreement was signed on May 12, 1987

4

million ha. In addition, bridge financing was provided for lining of main canal and water courses inHaryana for a period of two years to allow that State to continue work on these aspects until theapproval of the Haryana Water Resources Consolidation Project in 1994. In Haryana, projectinvestments were mainly utilized for lining of main canals and watercourses. No operational plans wereprepared and no new devices were installed. Thus, in the strictest terms, it can be said that NWMPprinciples were not followed. It would have been appropriate to have amnended the Development CreditAgreement (DCA) prior to proceeding with bridge financing. The original Credit closing date of March31, 1994 was extended by one year to March 31, 1995 at which time the Credit was expected to becompletely disbursed. At the time of Credit closure, it is estimated that about 32 schemes covering aCCA of about 337,131 ha have been completed, about 15 percent of projected command. Some ofthese schemes are classified as completed by the various State implementing agencies althoughanticipated physical works have not yet been completed. Details of schemes initiated under the project,their command areas and their completion status are given in Appendix 3. The primary projectobjective of providing a reliable, predictable and equitable water supply is reported to have beenachieved in some of the completed schemes. An independent review of two projects (Sathanur in TamilNadu and Bhadra in Karnataka) carried out by the International Irrigation Management Institute (IMI)indicates that this objective has been achieved primarily along the main canal and in some of thedistributaries. In some of the other schemes investigated some of the tail-end farmers have receivedwater as a result of project interventions.

11. Objectives of Sector Policies. The project has created a limited awareness in thedecision-making levels of the various participating States for the need for better water management inexisting projects thus exploiting the already created potential to the fullest. This awareness has to betranslated into concrete action in the future. In this project only limited success has been achieved sofar.

12. Institutional Development Objectives. Clear understanding of the concept of watermanagement and inculcation of O&M culture in the lower ranking engineers of the IrrigationDepartments of the various States have, in general, not been achieved. Staff were not clear about theobjectives of the project suggesting that a longer period is required to reap the benefits of institutionaldevelopment. This is in part due to the high turnover rate of staff and those that were trained in theearly periods of the project were no longer associated with the project. Moreover, the objectives andconcepts which are very valid, have yet to be reflected in the regular work program of the IrrigationDepartments as a whole. In this connection, it should be noted that the project's institutionalarrangements were not conducive to capacity building in the Irrigation Department as a whole. Unlikethe new generation of water resources consolidation projects each involving significant institutionalreorganization and strengthening, under NWMP various implementation cells were created within thedepartment which were appendages rather than integral to the operational functions of the parentdepartment. The Irrigation Departments could have absorbed the NWMP concepts in their regularprogram as well, at least in the areas of preparation of operational plans, ensuring efficient delivery ofwater. On a more positive note, in Maharashtra, despite initial difficulties in getting started with thenecessary experts, the induction training programn is reported to have performed well based oninformation provided by the Water and Land Management Institute which conducted the program inassociation with the Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, and it may be advisable to explore thepossibility of extending such programs to other States.

5

13. Economic Rates of Return (ERR). The re-estimated ERRs for the 9 schemes evaluatedat completion consist of two sets - the first set reflecting those calculated at appraisal, and the secondset reflecting the others. The current economic rates of return re-estimated at completion for the firstset are 9 percent for Vani Vilas Sagar (VVS), 6 percent for Sathanur, and -6 percent for RDS,compared to 45 percent, 43 percent and 29 percent, respectively estimated at appraisal. No economicrates of return were calculated for the others at scheme preparation. The recalculated ERRs for theseschemes at completion are: -6 percent (Peechi), 17 percent (Haryana), 4 percent (Thambaraparani), 9percent (Malampuzha), -3 percent (Thandava) and -16 percent (Ratapani). The recalculated ERRs arebased on actual costs incurred up to the Credit closing date plus costs to complete remaining worksuntil the end of FY96, and the actual and projected stream of agricultural benefits. Underlyingassumptions about costs and benefits and other information supporting the analysis are shown in Table9 of Part II and Appendix 2. The implementation difficulties as evidenced by excessive cost overrunsper ha of benefiting area, sharply reduced benefiting area, and funding constraints for maintenance areconsistent with diminished project performance. Consequently, the reduction in ERR estimates is notunexpected despite positive impact on high-value cash crops such as coconut and improved crop yieldson benefiting area.

14. There are various factors which have contributed to the significantly lower as well asnegative ERRs. These include a markedly reduced benefiting area at scheme completion compared toappraisal projections, excessive cost per ha in real terms ranging from Rs.23,655/ha (Haryana) toRs. 104,020/ha (Peechi) and less than anticipated changes in cropping patterns than was foreseen atappraisal or scheme preparation.

15. Sensitivity Analysis. The potential economic benefits are not being fully achieved in mostof the schemes. The three factors which have influenced ERRs are: (a) sharp variations in incrementalbenefiting area; (b) changes in O&M funding; and (c) the inability of state Irrigation Departments tooperate, monitor and manage the different schemes satisfactorily. The sensitivity analysis indicates thatan increase in benefiting area by 50 percent will raise ERR for VVS to 12 percent; a reduction in 50percent in O&M funding (by assuming that future benefits would be reduced by 50 percent) wouldlower the ERR for Sathanur to about -4 percent, and the improved operation and management wouldraise ERR of Peechi to nearly -4 percent, assuming that the ineffective operation of the IrrigationDepartment would depress project benefits by 20 percent.

16. Farm Incomes. As at appraisal, farm incomes at completion were ascertained, based onrepresentative farm models. According to appraisal estimates, farm income should have increased onaverage throughout the command area of the schemes by 31 percent to 66 percent. Farm incomes inthe three schemes evaluated at appraisal (VVS, Sathanur and RDS) have achieved lower rates ofgrowth - 8 percent, 31 percent and 20 percent, compared to appraisal estimates of 30 percent, 31percent and 66 percent, respectively. Increases in farm incomes in the nine schemes at completion as adirect result of the project have ranged from 8 percent to 89 percent. The highest of 50 percent and 89

6

percent are in the tail end reaches of the Malampuzha and Thandava Schemes which were essentiallyrainfed prior to NWMP.' Details are given in Appendix 2.

C. IMPLEMENTATION RECORD AND MAJOR FACTORS AFFECTING THEPROJECT

17. Implementation Record. The implementation record is mixed. While only 32 out of the96 schemes initiated under the project have been completed, a limited awareness for watermanagement and improving irrigation efficiencies has been created in the implementing agencies ofsome States. However, the management systems required to ensure sustainable operation of completedschemes admittedly requiring a longer time horizon is not in place yet. It is not clear whether the Stategovernments with unfinished schemes would have the financial resources and institutional capacity tocomplete the schemes and generate benefits as anticipated at appraisal.

18. Factors Not Generally Subject to Government Control. This included lack ofacceptance by beneficiaries of changes in cropping patterns. The assumption that farmers could beinduced to change from paddy (for which their land had been localized earlier) to irrigated dry cropswas unrealistic and, in the case of Andhra Pradesh, the farmers of the RDS scheme went to court andobtained an injunction against the Government. In Thandava, the revised cropping pattem has neverbeen put into practice. In Karnataka, coconut in VVS and paddy areas in the Bhadra scheme haveincreased. In Tamil Nadu, groundnut area has increased at the expense of paddy, millets andsugarcane. Achievement of project objective of increasing irrigated areas by using lower waterconsumption crops has occurred only to a limited extent.

19. Factors Generally Subject to Government Control. These included delays in timelyrelease of annual funds for the execution of project works, frequent turnover of key professional staffof the implementing agencies and the limited use of training modules prepared by the Indo-Dutch team.These had substantially affected implementation performance in some participating States andcontributed to the lack of understanding of the basic concepts of the NWM\P by the operating levelprofessional staff of the implementing agencies. Funding constraints are reflected in the non-completion of any scheme in Andhra Pradesh and partial completion (10 percent) in Bihar and UttarPradesh. In Tamil Nadu, thirteen Chief Engineers headed the NWMP operation over the seven-yearperiod whilst in Andhra Pradesh thirteen executive engineers and five superintending engineers handledthe RDS project alone over the seven-year period. Such frequent changes in staff are not desirable,particularly in a project introducing new concepts in engineering (structured network) and watermanagement. Dutch technical assistance was provided to prepare training modules on the concept,design and implementation of the NWMP schemes. The use of the modules prepared by this Indo-

I Borrower concurs that the project schemes have been able to raise the productivity of land therebyincreasing the income of farmers in the command area (refer Appendix 3, para 3.9). The Borrower also states thatthe lower rates of return are due to (a) reduction in benefited areas; (b) increase in cost of rehabilitation; and (c)less than anticipated changes in cropping patterns. This situation arose because of the fact that the rehabilitationand modernization works were scattered and started at a later date, and therefore some of the important works werestill incomplete by the closing date. The farmers were also unwilling to change the cropping pattern as planned inthe SAR. Moreover, there is considerable time-lag between the scheme completion and accrual of the full benefits(Appendix 3, para 3.5).

7

Dutch team varied amongst the participating States. Engineers from Madhya Pradesh Water and LandManagement Institute were aware of the significance of these modules. Wider use of these modulescould have been made by other State govemments.

20. Factors Generally Subject to Implementing Agency Control. These includedinsufficient diagnostic work to identify system constraints and to prioritize expenditures and ineffectivemonitoring and evaluation of scheme performance. In FY88, Bank/FAOCP missions assisted the threeoriginal States in the preparation of detailed scheme reports. Beyond that time the implementingagencies were to prepare scheme summaries using their funds and then get them cleared by WMC.Once the summaries were cleared, the implementing agencies were allowed to use project funds toprepare detailed scheme reports with the assistance of consultants, if required. But the quality ofscheme reports prepared after the involvement of Bank/FAOCP has not been good. In the preparationof revised operating plans, actual cropping pattem data could have been collected from the agriculturedepartment. This has resulted in inappropriate and impractical solutions being implemented to achievebetter water use efficiency in the schemes. Monitoring and evaluation units were to be created in theimplementing agencies and evaluate the impact of the projects on the agricultural production in thecommands of the rehabilitated schemes. This aspect has not been taken up seriously in any of theschemes. Even though such M&E units have been created in various implementing agencies, they havenot been effective in collecting baseline and follow-up data relevant for the evaluation of agriculturalbenefits and scheme performance. Another major factor affecting the project was its top-downapproach and the lack of consultation with farmers.

21. Implementation Delays. A number of schemes which were expected to be completedover a period of four years have not been completed even after seven years. In many of the schemes,construction schedules did not take into account canal closure and heavy rainfall seasons properlywhich led to implementation delays. In Andhra Pradesh, engineers' estimates for construction werequite low leading to poor response from contractors to tender or delay in processing of tenders.

22. Actual Project Cost. The actual project expenditure is given in Table 8A of Part II. Inrupee terms, the total cost would be Rs.5061.3 million in current prices representing a 148 percent costoverrun in nominal rupee terms. Similarly, the total expenditure in US dollars up to Credit closing dateis estimated to be US$176.1 million representing a cost overrun of 11 percent. The smaller costoverrun in US$ terms is due to the exchange rate movement of the rupee against US$. However, theexact number of schemes as well as detailed costs were not known exactly at the time of appraisal(except the three schemes evaluated at appraisal). Comparison of actuals with appraisal estimates forthe whole project are therefore not very meaningful.

23. Project Financing. The IDA Credit is fully disbursed (SDR93.2 million). Theremaining expenditure has been met by the various State Governments involved and the GOI.Details are given in Table 8B of Part II.

8

D. PROJECT SUSTAINABILITY

24. Project sustainability hinges primarily on adequate provision of maintenance funds,increased involvement of farmers in O&M and cost recovery, inculcation of O&M culture to theIrrigation Department staff to carry out the O&M activities, and enhancement of institutionalcapabilities for O&M.. Availability of funds alone is not a guarantee for sustained project operation.Planning for O&M has to be given priority and until this is achieved, project sustainability cannot beensured. Based on past experience, it would seem unlikely that adequate finds would be spared formaintenance. Even in places where adequate maintenance funds have been released by the StateGovemments, the maintenance of structures constructed under NWMP was unsatisfactory. If theoperational plans devised under the project are not kept up, it would lead to the deterioration of thesystems as well.

25. As costs for O&M increase and the State governments find it difficult to meet these costs,it is necessary to tum over parts of the system to the beneficiaries in addition to increasing the watercharges and improving collection rates. Since farmers have not been involved in the preparation andexecution of the schemes under this project, it is necessary to take urgent steps to include them in theoperational phase. Water Users Associations at different levels in the system would have to be createdas a first step.

E. BANK PERFORMANCE

26. Identification and Preparation. The project was identified around 1985 and preparedover a two-year period by the Bank/FAO CP with the assistance of national consultants and staff of theIrrigation Departments of the participating States. A number of missions were mounted to preparedetailed studies for three schemes: one each in the three participating States. The defect in identificationand preparation which continued through appraisal was the skill mix of the teams which comprisedmainly of irrigation engineers, economists and system analysts. There was limited agricultural specialistinput in identification, preparation and appraisal. At the time of project preparation and appraisal,beneficiary participation was just beginning to receive attention, however no sociological input wasprovided either. This might have led to the suggestions for changes in cropping patterns (replacinghigh water consuming paddy crop with less water consuming crop to increase area irrigated) whichwere subsequently rejected by the farmers (para 36 and 39). Barring these two drawbacks, theengineering aspects of the three schemes were well prepared. Operational hydrological analyses werecarried out through simple simulation models which were appropriate. At appraisal, even thoughtwelve schemes had been identified for inclusion in the project, only three had been prepared in detail.In the internal memoranda discussing the Yellow Cover Report, it was observed that an unusually highBank/FAOCP input will be required in the post-appraisal/early-project implementation period. Thisturned out to be true and the Bank/FAOCP did provide the requisite input. However, a similar amountof input required for the other 77 schemes cleared through the implementation period was notpractical.

9

27. Design. The Bank engineers, in association with resident mission staff, prepared thestructured network concept which can be considered innovative despite some of its constraints. Thissystem delivers water below the structured level proportional to the area served. To respond to thisoperation, it is necessary to take account of other related factors such as soil moisture holding capacityand variability in the irrigability of lands and associated crops best suited for these lands.

28. Institutional Development Aspects. Even though the project aimed at establishing agood O&M mechanism in the Irrigation Departments, such institutional developments are yet to takeplace. The Bank apparently did not pay enough attention to the institutional development aspects.Funds provided for this purpose were not fully utilized and in the last six months before Credit closurewere transferred to cover expenditures on works.

29. Farmer Organization Aspects. The appraisal's focus on engineering also resulted inlittle attention to the role of farmers in the project. At that time, the benefits of farmer involvement inirrigation were not widely appreciated in Asia, but in retrospect, this was a major missed opportunity.

30. Environment and Social Aspects. The project did not involve any direct environmentalconcerns and it did not involve any persons or families being displaced.

31. Supervision. Supervision by the Bank was inadequate and ineffective. In the early yearsof project implementation when only the three original States were involved, a considerable number ofstaff weeks were spent on supervision. Of course, during this time the Bank was also assisting the Stateimplementing agencies in the preparation of detailed feasibility studies for other schemes. At the time ofappraisal, only three schemes had been studied in detail: Sathanur in Tamil Nadu, Vani Vilas Sagar inKarnataka and Rajolibunda Diversion Scheme in Andhra Pradesh. From FY87 to FY89, a total of387.2 staff weeks were spent for preparation assistance and supervision whereas for the remaining fiveyears only 233.5 staff weeks were spent in reviewing new schemes to be included under the project andsupervising ongoing schemes. Given this constraint, alternate arrangements should have been made toscrutinize the schemes properly. The Bank should share some of the responsibility for the poorpreparation of the schemes which has led to their poor performance. The supervision missions did notprovide adequate guidance to the State implementing agencies regarding the principles and objectivesof the NWMP. Instances like in Rajolibunda Diversion Scheme where rehabilitation/modernizationwork has been carried out in seven out of 47 distributaries in a scattered manner, Ratapani wherenothing has been done to arrest the 20 percent leakage observed in the first 800 m but unnecessaryproportional modules have been built (Appendix 3 refers) could have been avoided through effectivesupervision. As the number of schemes under implementation increased, the Bank did not equip itselfwith appropriate supervision mechanisms. Up to and including FY89, only seventeen schemes wereeither under preparation or implementation whereas beyond that period another 79 schemes werereviewed and cleared out of which 68 schemes have been under implementation. Yearwisebreakdown of schemes under implementation is given in Appendix 3. Poor diagnostics and non-prioritization of physical investments could have been avoided if the number of schemes had been keptto a manageable level.

10

32. Eleven supervision mission reports were prepared. In order to cover the large number ofStates, supervision work was carried out over a four to six-month period and covered in a singlereport. Supervision effort was also divided amongst Bank staff . It is therefore somewhat surprisingthat such anomalies in implementation were not spotted and corrected.

33. In the early years of the project, implementation rate was slow and correspondinglydisbursements were low. This was the only project in the agriculture and irrigation sector not toregister any disbursement at all in entire FY89. In the first three years of the project implementation,progress was very slow which was understandable since new concepts were being introduced to theIrrigation Departments' staff and several new engineering designs had to be prepared using scientifichydraulic engineering principles involving the mechanics of flows. At the end of March 1990, less thanhalf of the predicted disbursements had materialized. Both the Bank and GOI were anxious to increasedisbursements and this appears to have become the overriding concern and additional schemes in thethree original and another six States were approved. Even though it is clearly specified in SAR para3.33 that no new schemes would be started after June 1990, about seventy schemes were cleared forimplementation after this date although it was evident that they would not be completed before theoriginal Credit closing date of 31 March 1994. The total estimated cost of the schemes cleared by GOIand approved by the Bank was also far in excess of the funding available under the project (Appendix 3refers). It appears from Bank documents that as early as 1989, when the project performance wasbehind schedule and the impact of the project could not have been evaluated, plans were under way fora follow-up project and these additional schemes were cleared assuming that there would be continuedfinancing of the schemes under such a follow-up phase.' At the same time, other internalcommunication indicates that there was considerable concern about non-collection of reliable data onthe project's impact on agricultural production. Monitoring and evaluation component was notsupervised and guided properly in spite of such observations.

F. BORROWER PERFORMANCE

34. Scheme Preparation. The strengthening of the Water Management Cell (WMC) in theMOWYR has been accomplished well and it has been staffed as per SAR requirements except for thepost of agronomist. The WMC has been responsible for clearing scheme summaries first and then thedetailed scheme reports for further clearance by the Bank. The WMC achieved this through anappraisal committee consisting of senior experts from other relevant agencies of the GOI and chairedby the Additional Secretary of the MOWR. As the number of schemes under implementation increased,the WMC did not have adequate technical lower-level staff to independently check the various schemedesigns presented. Accordingly, scheme reports which were not up to SAR standards were cleared forimplementation. Alternate checking mechanisms such as the regional offices of the Central WaterCommission may have to be investigated for future follow-up projects. The WMC had, unlike the Stateimplementing agencies, continuity of senior staff In fact, the commissioner's post was occupied by thesame person until September 1994.

I Borrower states in para 3.2 (iii) of their comments (Appendix 3) that .... an impression crept in that thesecond phase of the NWMP would follow concurrently without any transition period between the two phases."And that .... "GOI/WB cleared several projects for implementation even at a later date fully realising that theywould not be completed before the closing date of the project."

I1

35. Scheme preparations are not of a high standard. Design and conceptual weaknesses wereevident in some of the schemes visited by the mission. In Tainil Nadu, the designer has taken advantageof existing drainage courses in sub-catchments to convey irrigation flows to tanks but in designingcontrol structures for flow division the natural run-off and floods usually handled by such courses havebeen ignored. As a result, water has backed up on farmers' fields (inadequacy of the structures) and theannoyed farmers have destroyed the flow division structures. No attempt has been made to review thesituation and rebuild the structures. In Andhra Pradesh, small structures built on black cotton soils havefailed due to the swelling and shrinking forces. While larger structures have been constructed withappropriate intermediate layers of cohesive non-swelling soils, the same attention has not been given tosmaller structures such as proportionate dividers at field outlet levels. Cement plasters have beendirectly applied to random rubble masonry without any bonding layer resulting in failure of the plasters.Pointing would have been more appropriate in these cases. The quality of construction in small andscattered structures requires particular attention in future projects. In the Ratapani scheme in MadhyaPradesh, no work has been carried out in the first 800 m of the main canal where (on the day of thernission's visit) 30 percent water losses by leakage was measured, but money has been spent furtherdownstream with no significant benefits. Reduction of leakage losses in this section would haveprovided better water control and significant additional benefits. The performance of the Vani VilasSagar scheme in Karnataka is directly related to the inflows into the reservoir which are inadequate (thereservoir has not filled in recent years). A comprehensive water balance analysis of the total systemshould have been carried out and operational plans devised accordingly. The performance of theSathanur scheme in Tamil Nadu is also dependent on reservoir inflows. The scheme experiencedsuccessive drought years and in 1991, no releases were made to irrigation command or the systemtanks. Still about 30 percent of the land was irrigated which indicates the extent of groundwater usagein the command. Recently several discharge measuring structures have been completed. However,improvements have not been carried out in several distributaries which has led to the malfunctioning ofoutlets. At Peechi in Kerala, the problem is abundant growth of weeds and bushes in the canals, andcanal banks restricting access to the system. A priority investment should have been the purchase ofbush, weed and sediment clearing machinery which would have enabled water to reach the farthestpoints of the command. If the basic concept provided in the SAR of analyzing the performance of thescheme, identifying the constraints, and then adopting appropriate solutions to implement anoperational plan had been followed, the maintenance constraint would have been identified as the majorproblem in water management in this scheme.

36. In resectioning canals, a standard theoretical approach has been taken which is leading toO&M problems. Manning "n" value of 0.025 applicable to straight earth channel in good condition hasbeen used in designs together with trapezoidal sections which the O&M staff are unable to maintain.Instead, it would have been preferable to adopt natural regime sections (in unlined canals) with morerealistic values for the roughness coefficients with appropriate backwater computations in the design. Itwas observed that the field staff were unable to push required discharges after a year of completingsome of the resectioning because even a shift in "n" value to 0.030 (due to inadequate maintenance)results in a 20 percent reduction in the carrying capacity of the channel. Bed slopes are, by necessity,quite small due to topographic constraints. It was found that proper maintenance of the canals tomaintain design bed slopes is critical for the success of the proportional outlets which are based onhydraulics of flow and maintaining predetermined energy gradients in the channels. In most of the

12

schemes visited (except Thandava in Andhra Pradesh) field-level staff were not quite conversant withthe hydraulic principles of NWMP and the importance of proper maintenance in achieving these.

37. Involvement of agricultural department staff and farmers in the preparation of seasonaloperational plans was, at best, minimal. Actual prevailing cropping patterns vary considerably fromthose in the design records. These have evolved over the years and to some extent are contributing tothe inequitable and often inefficient irrigation service. It would probably not be feasible to provideadequate and equitable supplies to the entire command in some of the schemes which are water-shortdue to these cropping patterns. However, simulations could have been carried out using these actualcropping patterns, coupled with direct farmer consultation (para 26 and 39), in order to determinelogical alternatives to improve water management. Instead, it appears that theoretical patterns wereused in the analysis and the alternatives recommended have turned out to be impractical.

38. Implementation. The implementation performance varies from State to State. The sizeof the schemes rehabilitated range from medium to large. Kerala, which joined the project later (in1990) appears to have performed well. In Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, reports prepared by IIMIindicated that some progress has been achieved in pushing water further down the main canal anddistributaries. Since all proportional outlets have not yet been constructed, equitable distribution hasnot yet been achieved in its entirety. In most of the 32 schemes, according to the reports prepared bythe State Irrigation Departments, cropped areas have increased, cropping patterns have changed andtotal production has increased. Of particular relevance is how much of the reported improvements isdirectly attributable to the project interventions and how much is due to other factors such as increasedgroundwater use, improved agricultural practices, etc. It was found that in limited areas wherereliability of water supply has been assured, use of inputs has gone up and hybrid varieties are replacinglocal varieties. On the whole, NWMP has somewhat improved the situation, but the original projectdevelopment objectives have not been achieved. In Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh,there is an overall appreciation for water management at higher levels of Government.

39. Water Management. During field visits it was observed that the concept of watermanagement has not been clearly understood by most of the operating level engineers of the IrrigationDepartments. The idea was to prepare seasonal operational plans based on actual and realistic croppingpatterns for good management of available scarce water resource and then to determine theinterventions required to improve the physical infrastructure to carry out such plans. Obviously,deferred maintenance would be part of such interventions but only to the extent required to manage thewater resource of each scheme. However, it was found that deferred maintenance had become theprime objective during project implementation. This is evident from the fact that in some schemes,structures have been renovated, resectioning of canals have been carried out, and new structures havebeen built in a scattered manner, which will not assist in any rational water management. For instance,in Rajolibunda Diversion Scheme, seven out of 47 distributaries have been repaired but not in anycontiguous unit. As a result, in most schemes actual benefiting areas would be much smaller than theCultivable Command Area (CCA). Similarly, the quality improvement in irrigation service delivered tothe farmers would be minimal.

13

40. Beneficiary Involvement. Farmers were not consulted in any systematic manner (asrequired in the SAR through scheme-level committees, etc.) in preparing alternative operational plans,including changes in cropping patterns, although such plans were to define the rules for theirimplementation and iiiclude structural modifications at the outlet and distributary levels necessary toachieve a more reliable, predictable and equitable irrigation service directly affecting the farmers.

41. Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) of key paramneters (physical progress as comparedto targets, in cropping patterns, cropped areas, productivity and production data at various locations ina scheme command) has not been carried out in a systematic -manner and such information was notreadily available even in those schemes where M&E units were functional. Measuring devices(provided for in the SAR) have not been constructed in most of the schemes visited and where theyhave been constructed, they are either inoperational or readings are not being taken and analyzed toevaluate the efficiency and adequacy of the operational plan in achieving improved water management.1

Remote sensing methods were employed in selected schemes to determine the effectiveness of theproject interventions. However, sufficient attention was not paid to ground truthing and in determiningwhether improvements identified by remotely sensed data were in fact due to project interventions ordue to other factors. For instance, in RDS where project work was undertaken in only seven out of the47, the remote sensing unit reported increases in area irrigated throughout the command and attributedit to NWMP interventions. In fact there were such increase in irrigated area during the monitored year,but it was due to other factors. In spite of these oversights, the use of remote sensing from satelliteimagery should be encouraged in other projects both during preparation and appraisal and later duringand after implementation. Excellent facility exists for this purpose in India.

42. Training and Institutional Strengthening, both at the national and at the State levelwas a key element to project success and this has been stressed very clearly in the SAR. Even though anumber of studies were undertaken and short-term training courses both in India and abroad have beencarried out there was little impact on scheme designs, preparation of operational plans andimplementation. This aspect has not been given the importance it deserves during implementation andthe Bank supervision missions failed to follow up the implementation of this most essential component.In fact, the funds provided for this purpose were not fully utilized and in the last six months weretransferred to cover expenditures of works. The net result is that after eight years of projectimplementation, only a limited awareness has been created within the IDs on the importance of watermanagement. In retrospect, better results could have been achieved in converting ID engineers fromconstruction people to water managers despite longer term requirement for management changes, ifsufficient attention had been paid to this component

43. The structured network system which was developed in the early years of projectimplementation was not tested in a pilot project in humid rice-growing areas of eastern and southernIndia. The application of this system in paddy growing areas where field to field irrigation is practicedshould be evaluated further. It is difficult to reach a firm conclusion based on practical experience at

Borrower concurs with the ICR observation "....regarding the absence of proper measuring devices andother necessary infrastructure.... However, data on physical progress of works, financial expenditure, cropped area,reservoir levels, gauge, and discharge of important canals etc. were maintained by the project authorities right fromthe beginning and were reviewed from time to time." Refer para 3.8 Appendix 3.

14

this stage since even in the completed schemes of this type, operations have not yet been carried out.The limitation of the structured system in such an environment is that water is delivered at the outletproportional to the area served, but farmers in the first fields continue to take a larger share beforesending it to the next field and so on. In addition, the system does not have the flexibility toconjunctively use rainfall in a localized area. An improved structured system l is currently underpreparation and will be applied in other Bank-supported projects.

G. ASSESSMENT OF OUTCOME

44. The project outcome is rated unsatisfactory. At the time of appraisal, only a limitednumber of schemes had been prepared in detail and subsequent scheme preparations were to be vettedby WMC and cleared by an appraisal committee. Provisions were made under the project tostrengthen the WMC and, in fact, additional staff in different disciplines were recruited with theexception of an irrigation agronomist. However, the WMC did not have adequate technical supportstaff to analyze in detail the various scheme reports prepared by the States. Only 32 out of the 96schemes initiated under the project have been completed at Credit closure. The detailed schemereports cleared for implementation were deficient in two major aspects contributing to poorperformance: (i) proper diagnostic of irrigation infrastructure was not carried out and prioritization ofinvestments was not made; and (ii) outdated agricultural data on crops and cropping patterns wereused in the preparation of the operational plans resulting in impractical water management solutions.The result is that NWMP objectives of equitable, predictable and reliable irrigation supplies to all farmsin a scheme command have not been achieved in most of the completed schemes and incrementalbenefiting areas have remained well below 50 percent of expectations in most schemes.

H. FUTURE, OPERATION

45. The following actions would be required to ensure completion of remaining schemes andtheir smooth operation: (a) revision of operational plans, in consultation with fanners, taking intoaccount realistic agricultural data on cropping pattern and operational hydrology; (b) completion ofongoing schemes based on proper diagnostic analysis of infrastructure improvements required toexecute the operational plan mentioned above on the basis of an appropriate prioritized investmentprogram for the implementation of which continued financial assistance from the Bank possibly under afollow-up phase would be necessary under stringent institutional obligations; (c) training of ID staff,relevant agricultural department staff and farmers in the operation of the schemes; (d) training ofscheme managers including inculcation in O&M culture; and (e) provision of adequate funds forsustained O&M taking into account farmer takeover concept. During the wrap-up meeting with theICR mission and in a subsequent letter, GOI has indicated that they have advised the PlanningCommission to release adequate funds to the concemed State Governments to complete the ongoingschemes. There would still be a need for external assistance to complete the schemes and consolidatethe gains from this valuable program.

Improved Structured System in India by J.-P. Baudelaire, Principal Irrigation Engineer, SA2NA refers

15

1. KEY LESSONS LEARNED

46. The main lessons learned from this project implementation can be grouped under Concept,Design, Implementation, and Follow-up, as follows:

Concept

a) Extensive equitable irrigation and self-financing irrigation schemes are two objectives which maynot be necessarily compatible. Equity should therefore be achieved through the introduction ofvolumetric water supply, within the limitations of water availability and the effective recovery ofappropriate water charges, rather than through the delivery of the same amount of water per unit ofarea to each farmer;

b) Projects of this type which involve not only technical changes to the status quo, but also havesignificant social aspects, require a high level of farmer participation in irrigation management(PIM) to be successful. Introduction of such concepts will require, in turn, the use of moreadvanced technologies in irrigation management which are currently available in India and abroad.These would include provision of improved structured system to allow flexible water distributionto water user associations, and, as needed, canal automation for controlling main canal flows.

c) Improving the productivity of irrigation systems linked with farmer participation requiresstrengthening of the capabilities of the irrigation departments and some institutional restructuring toprovide emphasis and staff resources to these activities.

In the Water Resources Consolidation Projects (WRCPs) (which are the new generation irrigationprojects supported hy the Bank), a major thrust is on improving the productivity of irrigation systemsthrough modernization linked with farmer involvement. The "systems improvement and farmerturnover" components of the WRCPs integrally link farmer organization, operations andmaintenance, and cost recovery with the engineering improvements. Additionally, each project hasinvolved an institutional reorganization and subsequent strengthening program to build up thecapabilities of the irrigation departments in scheme modernization, water management, andfarmerorganization. Volumetric supplies are also being attempted by water users associations and thisexperiment should be carefully monitored and nurtured. Canal automation is being experimented inTungabadra and Majalgaon commands.

Design

a) A baseline survey of the condition of the system infrastructure and cropping practices is aprerequisite to prepare a detailed scheme report for rehabilitation/modernization.

b) Detailed diagnostic work would be undertaken and realistic alternate scenarios should be exploredin computer simulation models taking into account farmer crop preferences in preparingoperational plans. These plans should be prepared with the assistance of specialists in operationalhydrology (water availability and water balance studies under the revised scenarios), irrigationagronomy who are familiar with the local conditions, sociologists, representatives of the farrning

16

community, and irrigation engineers. The operational plans should be flexible to handle vagaries ofnature and forces of the market place (for instance, if a sugar mill is located near a scheme, water-savings cannot be achieved by switching to a less water consuming crop -- innovative irrigationtechnology has to be adopted with required capital investments).

c) An irrigation system should be considered as a whole water management unit. Works should notbe carried out in individual distributaries without any possibility of water management in the systemin its totality.

Implementation

a) Prioritization of expenditures necessary for implementing the selected operational plan should beprepared, together with detailed construction sequences, which take into account the financialcapability of the implementing agency, canal closure periods, and number of days available to carryout the civil works in each year.

b) Quality of construction in small and scattered works requires particular attention. High qualitytechnical assistance and third party supervision should be considered in future project.

c) Priority should be given to training a maximum number of professional staff of the implementingagencies in water management principles, and some of the promising staff should be trainedintensively in computer and remote sensing technology to be water managers. Turnover rate ofkey senior-level staff must be minimized in projects involving new concepts. Otherwise, thebenefits of training and efficiency in implementation are lost.

Follow-up

a) Simple key parameters should be established for monitoring and evaluating the performance andimpact of water management from scheme start-up. An effective monitoring and evaluation unitshould be created in each participating State with a multi-disciplinary core team. Monitoring theimpact of scheme interventions on agricultural production should be carried out continuouslystarting from the baseline survey and using the same parameters so that operational plans can bemodified if required and also a final evaluation of the scheme performance would be feasible.

b) O&M of the scheme should be jointly carried out by department officers and farmer beneficiaries.Adequate funds should be made available for such O&M.

17

PART II. STATISTICAL TABLES

Table 1: Summary of Assessments

A. Achievement of obiectives Substantial Partial Nealigible Not Applicable(/) (,/) (/)

Macro policies l O O EII

Sector policies E l1 El O

Financial objectives ED El L Institutional development El El ElPhysical objectives El El ElPoverty reduction El E0 E3 FoGender issues El El E E]

Other social objectives El El El FEEnvironmental objectives El El [I E

Public sector management El El El WiPrivate sector development El El El Oi

Other (specify) 1/ [E El

B. Proiect sustainabiliry Likely Unlikely Uncertain(/) (.f (/)

HighlvC. Bank performance satisfactory Satisfactory Deficient

GO (V) V)Identification l E lPreparation assistance En ElAppraisal El1 E

Supervision EE W i

1/ Structured systems and satellite remote sensing applications,

18

HighlvD. Borrower performance satisfactory Satisfactory Deficient

(.T (1) (e)Preparation L J E

Implementation F F g

Covenant compliance D Ei

Operation (if applicable) l E E

Highlv High&vE. Assessment of outcome satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactorv unsatisfactory

C: El E

19

Table 2: Related Bank Loans/Credits

Loan/credit title Purpose Year of approval Status

Preceding operations

1. UP Second Public Construct improved 1983 Closed. PCR issued 1992Tubewell Project public tubewell systems,(Cr. 1332-IN) modernize existingUS$101 million standard tubewells and

connect to exclusive 11KV feeder lines ofexisting standard tubewellsystems.

Following operations

1. Bihar Plateau Help GOB efforts to 1992 On-going.Development Project increase rural incomes(Cr.2439-IN) and reduce the incidence

of poverty in the plateauarea of Bihar.

2. A.P. Cyclone Reconstruction and 1990 Closed. ICR issued 1995.Emergency Recon- rehabilitation ofstruction Project infrastructure damaged by(APCERP) the cyclone of May 1990.(Cr.2179-IN) andLn.3260-IN)

Table 3: Project Timetable

Steps in project cycle | Date planned [ Date actual/l l latest estimate

Identification (Executive Project Summary) over a 2 year period 1984-1986

Preparation November 1985First IDA mission

Appraisal May 1986

Negotiations January 19-23, 1987

Letter of development policy (if applicable) n.a. n.a.

Board presentation March 24, 1987

Signing - May 12, 1987

Effectiveness June 15, 1987 August 10, 1987

First tranche release (if applicable) n.a. n.a.

Midterm review (if applicable) n.a. n.a.

Second (and third) tranche release (if applicable) n.a. n.a.

Project completion March 31, 1994 March 31, 1995

Credit closing March 31, 1994 March 31, 1995

20

Table 4: Loan/Credit Disbursements: Cumulative Estimated and Actual(US$ million)

FY87 FY88 FY89 FY90 FY91 FY92 FY93 FY94 FY95

Appraisal estimate 1.0 11.20 27.00 47.40 71.10 91.40 106.1 114.0 114.00

Actual - 8.43 8.43 15.66 26.13 37.94 67.5 106.9 129.97I

Actual as % of 0 75 47 33 37 42 64 94 110estimate

Date of final June 20, 1995disbursement

' Represents depreciation of US dollar against SDR. A total of SDR93.2 million was disbursed, whichis equivalent to US$129.97 million. The higher US$ value than at appraisal reflects the exchange ratemovements of the US$ vis-a-vis the SDR.

Table 5: Key Indicators for Project Implementation

A number of schemes covering a total of 2.18 million ha have been initiated in a numberof States compared to the twelve schemes identified at appraisal covering 459,976 ha andunidentified schemes covering an area of about 123,029 ha. State-wise details are given inAppendix 3.

21

Table 6: Key Indicators for Project Operation

(NOT IDENTIFIED AT APPRAISAL)

Table 7a: Training and Studies - Andhra Pradesh

Si. Name of Sub- Name of Study Status of Study Main Findings of the StudyNo. Scheme

I 2 3(a) 3(b) 4

1. Rajolibanda Monitoring & Evaluation Completed. Analysis of satellite data covering kharif season ofDiversion Scheme of RDS Command Area 1991 and 1992 and rabi seasons of 92-92, 92-93,(RDS) by NRSA 93-94 indicate significant increase in irrigated area

even exceeding the service area. Water in bothkharif and rabi seasons is now reaching even the tailend of most distributaries, with substantial irrigatedareas in this part of command area. Irrigation can befurther extended to larger than recommendedirrigated area under paddy crop. The condition ofpaddy under NWMP is showing improvements inboth kharif and rabi seasons. Similar improvementsin the condition of semi-dry crops is noticed duringthe rabi season. While more equitable condition inpaddy is noticed across distributaries during thekharif season, the condition of semi-dry cropsdecreases towards the tail end distributaries. The gapin head reaches and tail reach is more in semi-drycrops than paddy. Focus should be on equitablewater supply across the command area (ExecutiveSummary is appended).

2. NWMP Phase I Evaluation Study of On- Draft report is The report is under scrutiny.Going Sub-Projects of received.NWMP Phase I

22

Table 7b: Training and Studies - Karnataka

STUDIES

.... Technical Assistance/Studies Under N WMP .

SI. Name of Sub-Schemes Main Findings for the StudyNo. Name of Study Status of Study

(1) 1 (2) (3a) (3b) (4)

r, Tungabhadra Sub-Project Modification of canal Study completed. Modified As per the study, the canalDistributary No. 76 of section and distributary design suggested. section is modified toTBLBC No. 76 accommodate required flow of

8.50 n3/sec.

2. Bhadra and Tungabhadra Studies of structures Study completed. Modified An operational plan dividing theSub-Project irrigation networks structures suggested. distributary into two reaches is

recommended to be adopted.Accordingly structures havebeen modified.

3. Bhadra Sub-Project Monitoring of irrigation Study completed for rabi of Interim report was fumished forwater management in 93-94. 1993-94. Rabi season finalBhadra command area report is awaited from NRSA.taken through satellite RSA

TRAINING

|SI. |Course Title|No.|-l

Training During the Year 1990-19911"

1. 2nd Training course on "Monitoring of Irrigation System" for Engineers of Irrigation Projects.

2. Training Course on "Water & Land Management Practices under New Operational Plan forDharma Scheme" for Sowdies and Work-Inspectors at Hangal.

3. One day for farmers training course on 'Water & Land Management Practices underOperational Plan for Dharma Scheme" for farmers at Hangal.

4. One day for farmers training course on "Water & Land Management Practices under NewOperational Plan for Dharma Scheme" for farmers at Hangal.

5. One day for farmers training course on "Water & Land Management Practices under NewOperational Plan for Dharma Scheme" for farmers at Hangal.

6. 2nd training course on Evaluation Performance of Irrigation Systems for Engineers of IrrigationSchemes at Hangal.

7. 2nd training course on "Main Canal Operation" for Engineers at Dharwad.

8. Training course on "Water & Land Management Technology under New Operational Plan" forWI & Sowdies of Marconahalli command area at Marconahalli.

9. One day farmers training course on "Water & Land Management Practices under NewOperational Plan for farmers at Marconahalli.

10. One day farmers training course on "Water & Land Management Practices under NewOperational Plan for farmers at Marconahalli.

23

TRAINING

Si. Course TitleNo.I

11. One day farmers training course on "Water & Land Management Practices under NewOperational Plan" for farmers at Marconahalli.

12. 7th short duration training course on "Planning & Design of New Operational Plans" forengineers at Dharwad.

13. Training course on "Water & Land Management Practices under New Operational Plan" for WI& Sowdies for Chandramapalli command at Chandramapalli.

14. One day farmers training course on "Water & Land Management Practices under NewOperational Plan" for Chandramapalli for command at Chandramapalli.

15. One day farmners training course on "Water & Land Management Practices under NewOperational Plan" for Chandramapalli command area at Chandramapalli.

16. One day farmers training course on "Water & Land Management Practices under NewOperational Plan" for Chandramapalli command area at Chandramapalli.

Training During the Year 1991-922/

1. One day refresher course for field level functionaries of Bhadra and Vanivilas Sagar Projects.

2. - do -

3. - do -

4. - do -

5. Field Level Functionaries training course of Work-Inspectors and Sowdies of Areshankar andRamanahalli Projects under NWMP at Bijapur from 25 to 27 February 1992.

6. One day farmers training course for Areshankar Project under NWMP at Jeeralbhavi on 28-2-1992.

7. Field Level Functionaries training course of Work-Inspectors and Sowdies of TungabhadraProject at Munirabad under NWMP from 3 to 5 March 1992.

Training During the Year 1992-933'

1. Training course on "New Operation Plans and their implementation" for Engineers of NWMPSchemes.

2. Training course on "Water & Land Management Techniques under NWMP of Kanva &Maidala Schemes for Field Level Functionaries.

3. Training course on "Monitoring of Implementation of NOP of NWMP schemes" for Engineersof NWMP Schemes.

4. Training course on "Evaluation of performance of NWMP Schemes" for Engineers of NWMPSchemes.

5. Training course on "Water & Land Management Techniques under NWMP Schemes" for FieldLevel Functionaries.

6. Training course on "Main Canal Operation Unit (MCOU) of NWMP Schemes" for Engineersof NWMP Schemes.

7. Training course on "Engineering Design of Canal and Structures of NWMP Schemes" forEngineers of NWMP Schemes.

24

TRAINING

Si. jCourse TitleNo.|

8. Training course on "Water and Land Management Techniques under NWMP Schemes" forField Level Functionaries of NWMP Schemes.

Training During the Year 1993-9441

1. "Water & Land Management Techniques under NWMP Scheme" for Field Level Functionariesof Dharma Naregal Channels and Madag Masur NWMP Schemes.

2. "New Operation Plans and their Implementation" for Engineers of NWMP Schemes.

3. "Water and Land Management Techniques under NWMP Schemes for Field LevelFunctionaries of Chandramapalli Project.

4. "Monitoring of Implementation of NOP of NWMP Schemes" for Engineers of NWMPSchemes.

5. "Evaluation of Performance of NWMP Scheme" for Engineers of NWMP Schemes.

6. "Water and Land Management Techniques under NWMP Schemes" for Field LevelFunctionaries.

7. "Main Canal Operation Unit (MCOU) of NWMP Scheme" for Engineers of NWMP Schemes.

8. "Engineering Design of NWMP Scheme Works" for Engineers of NWMP Schemes.

9. "New Operation Plans and Improved Water Management Practices" for Agricultural Personnelof NWMP Schemes.

" Number of persons required to be trained under NWMP: 970Number of persons actually trained: 673

2 Number of persons required to be trained under NWMP: 913Number of persons actually trained: 377

31 Number of persons required to be trained under NWMP: 264Number of persons actually trained: 166

4/ Number of persons required to be trained under NWMP: 174Number of persons actually trained: 280

25Table 7c: Training and Studies - Kerala

Si. Name of Sub- No. of Persons No. of Persons ActuaBy Remarks (Main itemsNo. Schemes under Required To Be Trained Under NWMP covered under training etc.

NWMP Trained may be indicated)

(1) (2) (3a) (3b) (4)

1. Malampuzha 466 257 Management Improvements________________ Training was impaned.

2. Mangalam 72 43

3. Pothundy 78 49

4. Peechi 232 127

5. Vazhani 82 53

Table 7d: Training and Studies - Madhya Pradesh

TRAINING

. Training Details in India/Abroad Name of Name of Persons to be No. of Persons ActuaUy Remarks (Main items

SI. No. Sub-Schemes under Trained Trained under NVWM covered on Training etc.

Farmers Officers Farmers Officers may be indicated)

FARMERS TRAINING1. Billa project, Shahagarh. 60 20 75 19 Farmers participation and

Distt. Sagar Institutional organisation fordevelopment of WUOs

2. Tawa project 60 20 98 41 -do -Powerkhed, H'bad

3. Wainganga project 60 20 77 55 - do -Kewalari, Distt. Seoni

4. Chandrakesar project 60 20 97 23 - do -Dewas

5. Harsi project Chinnor, 60 20 84 32 - do -Gwalior

6. SAS, Sachi, Distt. Raisen,Vidisha

7. Avadha Tank Sheopurkala, 60 20 69 16 - do -Morena

STUDIES

Si. Name of Sub-Schemes Name of Study Status Study Main Findings forNo. the Study

1. Bama Project Development of WOUs with To be started in Can be given altera ultimate aim to turnover the January 1995. completion study.system to WUOs

2. SAS Project (Haliali) - Proposal is - do - - do - - do -under consideration

26

Table 7e: Training and Studies - Tamil Nadu

TRAINING

.... Training Details in India/Abroad ....Si. Name of Sub-No. Schemes under No. of Persons No. of Persons Remarks (Main items covered under

NWMP Required to be Actually Trained training etc. may be indicated)

Trained under NWMP

&& S. &&

1. Sathanur 120 + 750 = 870 82 + 448 = 530 Officials include officers from PublicWorks Department, AgricultureEngineering Department and are trained

2. Kodayar 124 + 1250 = 1374 102 + 2223 = 2325 for:

1) new operational plans3. Thambaraparaniand 125 + 1100 = 1225 101 + 11150 = 112514. Chirtar 2) their implementadon adopting modem

techniques for optimisation of water5. Amaravathy 120 + 500 = 620 104 + 333 = 437 use;

3) to create an awareness among farmers6. Cumbam Valley of their responsibilities in7. Marudhanadhi and 120 + 150 = 270 71 + 2010 = 2081 implementing various activities under8. Manjalar the new operation plans successfulty;

9. Sethiathope and 143 + 1250 = 1393 135 + 489 = 624 4) micro computer applications.10. Tholudur

&& = No. of departmental staff.** = No. of users/farmers.IMTI: Irrigation Management Training Institute at Tiruchirapalli.

STUDIES

Si. . . . Technical Association/Studies under NWM,MPNo. Name of Sub-Schemes Main Findings of the

Name of Study Status of Study Study

I 1. Sathanur Feasibility survey for Studies completed. Finalising a design for2. Kodayar establishing VHF dependable, reliable and3. Thambraparani communications system for economical statewide4. Amaravathy National Water Management message. Data transmission5. Sethiathope Project Schemes facility by establishing VHF

communication for NWMPl ________________________ sub-projects.

l 11 1. Thambraparani Computer Aided Simulation Studies completed. Developing a computerstudies for Thambraparani based simulation model forsystem Thambraparani basin with

sufficient detauils to studythe major operations forwater management and toprepare revised rules ofregulation and also forproviding implementtionprogramme for real time

l________________________ operation.

27

STUDIES

Si. ... Technical Association/Studies under NWMPNo. Name of Sub-Schemes Main Findings of the

Name of Study Status of Study Study

III I. Sathanur Probable maximum flood Studies completed. To design a dependable and2. Thambraparani (PMF) studies for 11 dams reliable maximum flood for3. Kodayar in Tambraparani, Kodayar, eleven dams in Ponniar,4. Amaravathy Sathanur & Amaravathy Thambraparani, Kodayar

systems. Conducted under and Amaravathy systems.Dam safety cell

IV 1. Sathanur Pilot study on inventorying Studies completed. Identifying the major crops2. Thambraparani and monitoring Irrigated in the command areas and

Agriculture in estimating the cropped area.Thambraparani and SathanurCommand Area

V 1. Tholudur Computer Aided Rainfall Studies completed. The arrived rainfallanalysis in the Command probabilities will be helpfularea of Wellington Reservoir to plan irrigation releasesof Vellar Basin for the command area of

reservoir.

VI I. Sathanur Computer Aided Studies completed. To study in detail theHydrological study on Ponnaiyar Basin and tocharacteristics of inflows evolve the scientific reasoninto Sathanur Reservoir for the decline of inflows in

to Sathanur Reservoir in thepast years. The impact ofrainfall pattem in the pastfive years is also found outand to prepare the softwarepackage on the aboveaspects.

28

Table 8A: Project Costs

Appraisal Estimate Actual" Estimate

Item

Rs US$ Rs US$

................................ m illion

INVESTMENT COSTS

- Scheme Investments 958.6 73.7 4,648.2 158.2

- Engineering & Administration 86.3 6.6 2/ 2/

- Institutional Strengthening 111.3 8.5 357.2 15.7

- Training 32.7 2.5 31 3/

- Special Studies and Programmes 34.5 2.7 31 31

- Maharashtra Induction Training 33.6 2.6 39.8 1.6

- Institutional Support & Training Fund 130.0 10.0 16.1 0.6

Total Investment Costs 1,387.0 106.6 5,061.3 176.1

RECURRENT COSTS

- Incremental O&M 109.5 8.5 31 31

Total Baseline Costs 1,496.5 115.1 5,061.3 176.1

Physical Contingencies 125.1 9.6 |

Price Contingencies 419.5 32.3 |

TOTAL PROJECT COSTS 2,041.1 157.0 5,061.3 176.1

The exact number of schemes as well as detailed costs were not known at the time of appraisal, exceptfor the three schemes - Sathanar, Vani Vilas Sagar and RDS. Comparison of actuals with appraisalestimates for the project as a whole are therefore not meaningful.

2/ Disaggregated data are not available; state-wise expenditures include engineering and administrationand O&M along with Scheme Investments.

3/ In the absence of disaggregated data, actuals for training, studies and support are shown withininstitutional strengthening.

Table 8B: Project Financing

Source Appraisal Estimate Actual/Latest Estimate(US$ M) (US$ M)

IDA 114.0 130.0

GOI 43.0 46.0

TOTAL 157.0 176.0

29

Table 9: Economic Costs and Benefits

._____ ____ _ Appraisal Estimate ICR Estimate

Culturable Command Area Under Rehabilitation (ha) 583,105 2,180,000

Increased Production (tons/year)- Three schemes combined (SAR)

- Paddy - 7,700 - 1,650- Groundnuts + 19,980 + 4,510- Sorghum + 2,870- Millet + 6,220 - 2,900- Sugarcane + 20,510 - 38,240- Cotton + 1,980 + 30- Coconut + 2,660 + 1,220

Increased Farm Income (per ha)RDS 3,260 3,534Vani Vilas Sagar 5,220 2,790Sathanur 1,720 4,848Thandava 3,412Malampuzha 8,885Ratapani 2,665Thambaraparani 5,034Peechi 732Haryana 3,705

Net present value (Rs M)RDS + 108 - 28.8Vani Vilas Sagar + 74 - 13.7Sathanur + 78 -13.8Thandava - 28.0Malampuzha - 7.0Ratapani - 7.0Thambaraparani - 49.0Peechi - 25.5Haryana 322.0

Economic Rates of Return (%)- RDS 29 - 6- Vani Vilas Sagar 45 9- Sathanur 43 6- Thanadava - 3- Malampuzha + 9- Ratapani - 16- Thambaraparani + 4- Peechi - 6- Haryana + 17

Underlying AssumptionsProject life 25 years 25 yearsStandard Conversion Factor 0.80 0.90Construction Conversion Factor 0.75 0.90Unskilled labour valued at: two-thirds 0.90Financial wage rate (Rs/man-day) 10.0 27-85

30

Table 10: Status of Legal CovenantsIndia

National Water Management Project

Original RevisedCovenant Present fulfilment fulfilment Description of

Agreement Section type status date date covenant Comments

3.01a,PA I C ll 11 Maintain separaterecords andaccounts.

3.01b,PA 1 CP ll ll Furnish to IDAcertified accounts asaudited no later than6 months after theend of each fiscalyear.

3.02,PA I CP 11 ll Maintain accounts ofexpenditures forwhich withdrawalsare to be on basis ofSOEs; retain at least1 year after audit allrecords for suchexpenditures; andinclude in auditedaccounts certificationthat SOEs can berelied upon tosupport withdrawals.

3.03,PA 11 NC 11 ll Provide adequate O&M fundsbudget for O&M of being providedeach sub-project. by the States are

inadequate.

SCH2,03,PA 10 C ll 11 Select, plan, designand seek approval ofeach scheme tosatisfaction of IDA.

SCH2,04,PA 5 CP 11 11 Establish andmaintain PPM andO&M Cells pursuantto satisfactoryprogram.

SCH2,05,PA 5 NC 11 11 For each scheme,establish aCommittee one yearprior to completinginvestment andthereafter maintainit.

SC1H2,06a,PA 9 CP ll lI Under TOR satis- Study carriedfactory to IDA, carry out in a fewout detailed O&M participatingReview of NWMP States.schemes.

31



SCH2,06b,PA 9 NC 12/31/91 11 Review results of Review reportsstudies with IDA. yet to be

received fromthe States.

SCH2,06c,PA 10 NC 12/31/92 11 Prepare an Action Depended onPlan for improving compliance ofO&M in the State, SCH2,06b.then implement thePlan.

SCH2,07,PA 9 CP 12/31/87 11 Prepare M&EProgram and there-after implement saidprogram.

SCH2,08,PA 9 CD 06/30/88 11 Furnish progressreports within 3months of end ofreporting period(Apr.-Sept. & Oct.-March: the firstreport due 6/30/88).

SCH2,09,PA 10 CP 12/31/87 11 Prepare Training Training hasProgram and there- been carried outafter implement said in most of theprogram. States.

SCH2,10,PA 11 CD 11 11 Furnish to IDA byend-November(beginning 11/30/87)proposed ftnancialrequirements forfollowing fiscal year.

SCH2,11,PA 5 CP 12/31/87 11 Establish a Dam DSP esta-Safety Panel with blished in mostTOR satisfactory to of the States.IDA and promptlycarry out any neededrepair work.

G014.01a,DCA I C 11 /1 GOI to maintainrecords and accountsadequate to reflectresources andexpenditures for PartA(iii) of the project.

GO14.01b,DCA I CD 11 11 Have the records andaccounts audited foreach FY byindependent auditorsacceptable to theAssociation andfurnish to theAssociation.

32



G014.03,DCA 1 CP ll ll GOI shall have thespecial account foreach FY audited andfurnish to theAssociation not laterthan 6 months afterthe end of each yearreport of such audit.

2,06,PA,MAH 5 C 12/31/87 11 Establish state levelcommittee to coor-dinate Maharashtracomponent.

3.01a,PA,MAH I C ll ll Maintain records andaccounts adequate toreflect resources &expenditures inrespect of Part B ofthe project ofdepartments oragencies responsiblefor Part B.

3.Olb,PA,MAH I C ll ll Have records forPart B of the projectaudited and furnishAudit Report to theAssociation not laterthan 9 months afterend of such year.

3.02,PA,MAH 1 C ll ll For withdrawals onSOEs, maintainseparate records andaccounts and ensurethat these areincluded in theannual audit underSection 3.01.

Status: Covenant Type:C - Complied with 1 - Accounts/auditCD - Compliance after delay 2 - Financial performanceCP - Complied with partially 3 - Flow and utilization of project fundsNC - Not complied with 4 - Counterpart fundingNYD - Not yet due 5 - Management aspects of the projectSOON - Compliance expected in reasonably short time 6 - Environmental covenants

7 - Involuntary resettlement8 - Indigenous people9 - Monitoring, review and reporting10 - Implementation11 - Resource allocation12 - Regulatory/Institutional action13 - Other

33

Table 11: Compliance with Operational Manual Statements

Statement number and title Describe and comment on lack of compliance

1. OMS 2.25 Cost Recovery Policy The OMS emphasizes the importance of recovering thefull cost of operation and maintenance of irrigationschemes with a reasonable proportion of investmentcosts, subject to repayment capacity of the beneficiaries.None of the participating States are in compliance.

Table 12: Bank Resources: Staff Inputs

Planned Revised ActualStage of

project cycle _

Weeks US$ Weeks US$ Weeks US$000

Through Appraisal n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 154.4 305.2

Appraisal-Board n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 164.9 297.4

Board-Effectiveness n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 5.5 11.5

Supervision n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 495.9 623.9

Completion n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 40.0 14.4

TOTAL 860.7 1,252.4

Table 13: Bank Resources: Missions

Types ofPerformance rating Problems

Number Specialized Implementation Development CLC PMP FAStage of Month/ of Days in staff skills status objectives

project cycle year persons field represented

Through appraisalAppraisal through Numerous missions were mounted by Bank/FAO CP together with National Consultants, amounting to a large number of man-monthsBoard approval to assist the States to prepare the project. This assistance continued in the early years of the project implementation period.

Board Approval througheffectiveness

Supervision I June-July 1987 2 7 E,IE 2 2 2 2Supervision 2 May 1988 3 - IE(3) 2 2 2 2Supervision 3 March 1989 12 at different IE(7),E,Ag(2),SA,PE 2 2 2 2

times over a periodof six months

Supervision 4 August 1989 4 Series of IE(2),E,SA 2 2 2 2 2missions

between May 8and June 28

Supervision 5 December 89 to July 6 IE(4),E,SA 2 2 2 2 21990

Supervision 6 June 1990 6 IE(4),E,SA 2 2 2 2 2December 1990 8 IE(3),E,FA.Ag(2),PE 2 2 2 f' 2 2

Supervision 7 September 1991 3 IE,E 2 2 2 2 2Supervision 8 Jan. to Jun/July 92 3 IE,E 2 2 2 2 3

Supervision 9 Jan. to June 1993 3 (issued Oct. 93) IE,E 2 1 23 (issued Jul. 93) IE,E 2 2 2 2 3

Supervision 10 Dec. 93 - June 94 2 IE(2),E S S 1 _ 2(issued July 94)

Supervision 11 July 94 to March 95 1 IE(2)ICR Mission I Feb-Mar 95 3 21 IE,E,Ag l

ICR Supplementary Nov 95 3 21 IE.E,AgMission

35

CLC - Compliance with Legal Covenants.

PMP - Project Management Performance.

FA - Fund Availability. FA(2) Moderate problems of availability of funds.FA(3) Major problems of availability of funds, which are being addressedadequately.

IE - Irrigation Engineer; E - Economist; SA - Systems Analyst.FA - Financial Analyst; Ag - Agriculturalist; PE - Procurement Engineer.

Status 3 in Tamil Nadu for Audits and Andhra Pradesh for Overall Status.

Missions were undertaken at different periods to different States and a summary supervision reporthas been prepared.

36

IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETE REPORT

INDIA


Appendix lA

Aide Memoire

A. Introduction

1. An FAO/CP mission" visited India between 18 February and 20 March 1995to review the implementation performance of the National Water Management Project(NWMP) and to collect relevant information and data to prepare the ImplementationCompletion Report (ICR). As required by Bank regulations, the FAO/CP missioncoincided with the last supervision mission for the project carried out by Mr.N.K.Bandyopadhyay"' from the World Bank Resident Mission in New Delhi (SA2NA).Mr. B.Foley"' (Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Specialist) participated in theFAO/CP mission under separate Terms of Reference to evaluate the O&M capabilitiesof the various State Irrigation Departments (IDs) and to identify the requirements forsetting up O&M units (as appropriate) and strengthening existing units in a possiblefollow-up project.

2. After initial meetings in New Delhi with the officers of the Water ManagementCell (WMC) of the Ministry of Water Resources (MOWR) of the Government of India(GOI), the mission undertook field visits to selected subprojects in four States (TamilNadu, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh)'. ,fn Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradeshand Madhya Pradesh the mission held wrap-up meetings chaired by the Secretary of theID of each State. In Andhra Pradesh, the mission also visited the National RemoteSensing Agency (NRSA) at Hyderabad and held detailed discussions about theapplications of satellite remote sensing technology in irrigation water management withthe scientists of the Water Resources Group led by Dr.Thiruvengadachari. On returningto New Delhi, the mission met with the officers of the Irrigation departments of Bihar,Gujarat, Haryana, Karnataka, Orissa and Uttar Pradesh at the World Bank ResidentMission Office. The Director of the Water and Land Management Institute (WALMI)of Maharashtra briefed the mission on the implementation progress of the MaharashtraInduction Training Program financed under NWMP in that State. In New Delhi, .themission also actively participated in the workshop organized to discuss the findings-ofthe independent evaluation studies of two of the subprojects covered under NWMP(Sathanur subproject in Tamil Nadu and Bhadra subproject in Kamataka). The evaluationstudies were carried out by the International Irrigation Management Institute (IIMI)headquartered in Colombo. The workshop was attended by representatives from the

"Messrs.S.Rajagopal (Water Resources Specialist, Mission Leader), Mr. W.l.Sorrenson (Economist, TCII) andMr. S.B.Hukkeri (Agronomist, National Consultant).21Task Manager." Mr.Foley was financed by the Govemment of Australia and was recruited by SA2AG.

Mr. Mathur, Senior Joint Commissioner, WMC (MOWR) accompanied the mission during its field visits to TamilNadu and Kerala. Mr. Parashar, Commissioner, WMC (MOWR) participated in the wrap-up meeting held inHyderabad covering the Andhra Pradesh component.

37

Irrigation Departments of the States participating in NWMP, MOWR,GOI and the WorldBank Resident Mission.

3. The mission wishes to thank all concerned staff of the Irrigation Departmentsof the States visited and the WMC of MOWR for the assistance and hospitality extendedto the mission members.

B. Project Objectives

4. The purpose of the project was to increase agricultural productivity and farmincomes through a more reliable, predictable and equitable irrigation service. To achievethese objectives and facilitate extension of similar activities throughout the country, theproject was formulated to help participating States and GOI to develop an institutionalcapacity to plan, irnplement and monitor improved O&M practices and to provide forlow-cost infrastructural improvements designed to support an improved operational planfor selected schemes. In each scheme, the most appropriate technique of water supplywas to be adopted. The most important element in scheme improvement was to be thepreparation of an operational plan. On the basis of water availability, systemcharacteristics, and agricultural options, the plan was expected to define how the systemwould be operated with respect to the timings and quantities of water deliveries and theresponsibilities of those involved.

C. Project Components

51. The principal components of the main part of the project (improved watermanagement) were: (a) Scheme Investments required to implement the operational plan -these included repairs and renovations to existing structures; provision of new controlstructures; field chanmels and drains; measuring devices; and investments in upgradedO&M facilities and equipment (including housing for staff and transport); andcommrunications equipment, as required to execute the operational plan; (b) Engineeringand Administration required to supervise the effective implementation of the schemeinvestments; (c) Incremental Recurrent O&M Expenditures to support the improvedoperational plan and maintain it after the completion of the scheme investments; -(d)Institutional Strengthening of the State IDs, with particular emphasis on helping them todevelop O&M planning and support units in the States. In addition, the WMC of MOWRwas to be strengthened so that it could provide policy direction, act as a catalyst forextending the approach across State boundaries and administer and coordinate theNWMP as a whole. In each instance, the project provided for staffing costs, buildings,equipment, vehicles and associated recurrent costs; (e) Training Programs for technicaland orientation training for scheme staff and farmners, State O&M staff and officers ofthe WMC and study tours within India and limited overseas visits along with supportfor the infrastructure development of the Irrigation Management Training Institute (IMTI)in Tamil Nadu; (f) Special Studies and Programs to strengthen specific aspects of watermanagement (e.g., monitoring and evaluation, computer applications, communications,dam safety etc.). The project also supported two other components related to the generalobjectives of improved water management in India - (a) The Maharashtra InductionTraining Program designed to support initial vocational training for engineers recruited

38

to the Maharashtra ID; and (b) An Instirutional Strengthening and Training Fund (ISTF)to be managed and implemented by GOI and state agencies.

D. Project Costs and Financing

6. The project costs including physical and price contingencies were estimated tobe US$157.0 million (Rs2,041.1 million)". An IDA Credit of SDR93.2 million(US$114.0 million equivalent) was to finance about 73% of total project costl and theremaining expenditures were to be met from the development budgets of participatingstates. The project was to be implemented over a seven year period.

E. Evaluation of Project Objectives

7. The project concept of instituting water management as a significant input intoIndia's Irrigated Agriculture Sector was most appropriate and in full agreement with theGOI's National Water Policy. Water management has been the focus in several otherprojects financed by IDA in the water sector in recent years. The Staff Appraisal Report(SAR) was clear in defining the project objectives and in settina out the implementationmeasures to be adopted for achieving these objectives. The implementation period ofseven years was appropriate and the project components included for financing were ingeneral realistic.

8. Agroclimatic and socio-economic conditions in India vary widely dependingupon geographic location and irrigation systems have evolved reflecting this diversity.Major types of irrigation systems found in India (localization, warabundi, shejpali) havebeen discussed in the SAR. However, the bias shown in the SAR towards the warabundisystem was, in the mission's opinion, unrealistic. Distinction should have been madebetween the productive irrigation systems (found in the southern States) and the protectiveirrigation systems (found in the north and northwest). The three original participatingStates in this project were from the south - Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, and Tamnil Nadu.The structured irrigation system which evolved in the early years of projectimplementation has apparently experienced difficulties in these states (para 22 refers).

9. SAR was also unrealistic to expect that in the preparation of operational plans,paddy growing areas could be reduced and substituted by irrigated dry crops coveringa larger area of the command. For instance, in the operational plan presented for theRajolibunda Diversion Scheme in Andhra Pradesh, it was proposed to preclude paddyin middle and lower reaches in khaMif and throughout the conmmand in rabi byintroducing systematic intermnittent irrigation.

E. Irnplementation Performance

"Cost estimates were based on price levels at the end of 1986 and included about USS9.1 million as foreign exchangecost (6% of the total project cost).vEquivalent to about 70% of the water management components and 100% of the special training and technicalassistance activities.

39

10. The project was approved in May 1987 and started off very slowly in the threeoriginal participating States. The Induction Training Program in Maharashtra started atthe same time as well. At the time of appraisal, the project was expected to cover about580,000 ha. During the implementation of the project several additional schemes wereincluded and the number of participating States increased from three to nine". Inaddition bridge financing was provided for lining of main canal and water courses inHaryana for a period of two years to allow that State to continue work on these aspectsuntil the approval of the Haryana Water Resources Consolidation Project in 1994. Theoriginal Credit closing date of March 31, 1994 was extended by one year to March 31,1995 at which time the Credit was expected to be completely disbursed. At the time ofCredit closure, it is estimated that about 35 schemes covering a command area of about345,676 ha would be completed. Since most of these 35 schemes are just gettingcompleted, it is difficult to evaluate their impact on agricultural production and incomeprecisely.

11. ;I appears that the Maharashtra Induction Training Program was well designedand a number of engineers have been given intensive training in hydraulics, hydrologyand irrigation related subjects.

12. The implementation perfoimance varies from State to State. The sizes of theschemes rehabilitated range from medium to large. Kerala, which joined the NWMPlater (in 1990) appears to have perforrned well. In Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, reportsprepared by IIMI indicated that some progress has been achieved in pushing waterfurther down the main canal and distributaries. Since all proportional outlets have notyet been constructed, equitable distribution has not been achieved in its entirety. In mostof the 35 schemes, according to the reports prepared by the State irrigation departments,cropped areas have increased, cropping patterns have changed and total production hasincreased. The mission has collected data from the aaricultural departments and fromits own farmer interviews in the schemes visited. These would be compared with the dataprovided in the reports mentioned above and the impact on agricultural production andon farmers' incomes in these schemes would be evaluated further in the ICR. Ofparticular relevance is how much of the reported imnprovements is directly attributableto the project interventions and how much is due to other factors such as increasedgroundwater use, improved agricultural practices, etc. The mission has found that inlimited areas where reliability of water supply has been assured, use of inputs has goneup and hybrid varieties are replacing local varieties. On the whole, NWMP hassomewhat improved the situation, but the project development objectives have not beenachieved. In Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, there is an overallappreciation for water management at higher levels of Government.

13. It appears, however, that the concept of water management has not been clearlyunderstood by the operating level engineers of the IDs. The idea was to prepare seasonaloperational plans for good management of available scarce water resource and then todetermine the interventions required to improve the physical infrastructure to carry outsuch plans. Obviously, deferred maintenance would be part of such interventions but

"The additional States were Bihar, Gujarat, Kerala, Mvladhya Pradesh, Orissa, and Uttar Pradesh. The total numberof schemes including those included at appraisal was 96 covering a command area of 2.13 million ha.

40

only to the extent required to manage the water resource of each scheme. But, themission found that deferred maintenance has become the prime objective under theproject during implementation. This is evident from the fact that in the schemes visitedby the mission structures have been renovated, resectionina of canals have been carriedout and new structures have been built in a scattered manner, which will not assist in anyrational water management. For instance, in Rajolibunda Diversion Scheme (para. 9),seven out of 47 distributaries have been repaired but not in any contiguous unit. As aresult in most schemes actual benefitting areas would be much smaller than theCulturable Command Area (CCA). Similarly, the quality improvement in irrigationservice delivered to the farmers would be minimal.

14. Design and conceptual weaknesses were observed in some of the schemesvisited by the mission. In Tamil Nadu, the designer has taken advantage of existingdrainage courses in sub-catchments to convey irrigation flows to tanks but in designingcontrol structures for flow division the natural run-off and floods usually handled by suchcourses appear to have been ignored. As a result water has backed up on farmers' fields(inadequacy of the structures) and the annoyed farmers have destroyed the flow divisionstructures. No attempt has been made to review the situation and rebuild the structures.In Andhra Pradesh, small structures built on black cotton soils have failed due to theswelling and shrinking forces. While larger structures have been constructed withappropriate intermediate layers of Cohesive Non-Swelling soils, the same attention hasnot been given to smaller structures such as proportionate dividers at field outlet levels.Cement plasters have been directly applied to random rubble masonry without anybonding layer resulting in failure of the plasters. Pointing would have been moreappropriate in these cases. In the Ratapani scheme in Madhya Pradesh, no work has beencarried out in the first 800 m of the main canal where (on the day of the mission's visit)30% water losses by leakage was measured, but money has been spent furtherdownstream with no significant benefits. Reduction of leakage losses in this sectionwould have provided better water control and perhaps, significant additional benefits.

15. In resectioning canals a standard theoretical approach has been taken which isleading to, in the mission's opinion, O&M problems. Manning "n" value of 0.025applicable to straight earth channel in good condition has been used in designs togetherwith trapezoidal sections which the O&M staff are unable to maintain. Instead, it wouldhave been preferable to adopt natural regime sections (in unlined canals) with morerealistic values for the roughness coefficients with appropriate backwater computationsin the design. The mission observed that the field staff were unable to push requireddischarges after a year of completing some of the resectioning because even a shift in"n" value to 0.030 (due to inadequate maintenance) results in a 20% reduction in thecarrying capacity of the channel. Bed slopes are by necessity quite small due totopographic constraints. The mission found that proper maintenance of the canals tomaintain design bed slopes is critical for the success of the proportional outlets which arebased on hydraulics of flow and maintaining predetermined energy gradients in thechannels. In most of the schemes visited (except Thandava in Andhra Pradesh) itappeared that field-level staff were not fully conversant with the hydraulic principles ofNWMP and the importance of proper maintenance in achieving these.

16. Involvement of agricultural department staff and farmers in the preparation ofseasonal operational plans was, at best, minimal. Actual prevailing cropping patterns

41

vary considerably from those in the design records. These have evolved over the yearsand to some extent are contributing to the inequitable and often inefficient irrigationservice. It would probably not be feasible to provide adequate and equitable supplies tothe entire command in some of the schemes which are water-short due to these croppingpatterns. However, simulations could have been carried out using these actual croppingpatterns in order to determine logical alternatives to improve water management. Instead,it appears that theoretical patterns were used in the analysis and the alternativesreconmmended appear to have tumed out to be less than satisfactory.

17. Farmers do not appear to have been consulted in any systematic manner (asrequired in the SAR through scheme-level committees, etc.) in preparing alternativeoperational plans although such plans were to define the rules for their implementationand include structural modifications at the outlet and distributary levels necessary toachieve a more reliable, predictable and equitable irrigation service.

18. Monitoring and evaluation of key parameters" has not been carried out in asystematic manner and such information was not readily available even in those schemeswhere M&E units were functional. Measurina devices (provided for in the SAR) havenot been constructed in most of the schemes visited and where they have beenconstructed, they are either inoperational or readings are not being taken and analysedto evaluate the efficiency and adequacy of the operational plan in achieving improvedwater management.

F. Factors Affecting Implementation Performance

19. At the time of appraisal, only a limited number of schemes had been preparedin detail and subsequent scheme preparations were to be vetted by WMC of MOWR andcleared by an appraisal committee chaired by the Additional Secretary, MOWR.Provisions were made under the project to strengthen the WMC and in fact additionalstaff in different disciplines were recruited with the exception of an irrigationagronomist2". However, the WMC did not have adequate technical support staff toanalyse in detail the various scheme reports prepared by the States. In the mission'sopinion the scheme reports were deficient in two major aspects contributing to poorperformance: (i) proper diagnostic of irrigation infrastructure was not carried out aridprioritization of investments was not made; and (ii) outdated agricultural data on cropsand cropping patterns were used in the preparation of the operational plans resulting inless than optimal water mangement solutions.

20. The original project scope was to cover a limited number of schemes in thethree participating States and to carry out pilot schemes in other interested States. It wasstipulated in the SAR that no new schemes would be started after June 1, 1990(paragraph 3.33 refers). In the first three years of the project implementation, progresswas very slow which was understandable since new concepts were beina introduced tothe ID staff and several new engineering designs had to be prepared using scientific

"Physical progress as compared to targets, crops, cropped areas, productivity and production data at variouslocations in a scheme command.'This post was never filled and was subsequently cancelled.

42

hydraulic engineering principles involving the mechanics of flows. At the end of March1990 less than half of the predicted disbursements had materialised. It appears that at thispoint, the focus on the development objectives was lost. Both the Bank and GOI wereanxious to increase disbursements and this appears to have become the overridifigconcern and additional schemes in the three original and another six States wereapproved beyond the date specified in the SAR". In fact all new schemes wereapproved only beyond this cut-off date although it was evident that they would not becompleted before the original Credit closing date of 31 March 1994. The total estimatedcost of the schemes cleared by GOI and approved by the Bank was also far in excess ofthe funding available under the project2". As the number of schemes to be cleared wasquite substantial, the WMC was not. in a position to evaluate these aspects in detail, norwas the Bank's supervision mechanism adequate to effectively cover the large numberof schemes. Poor diagnostics and non-prioritization of investments in physicalinfrastructure could have been avoided if the number of schemes had been kept to amanageable level.

21. Training and Institutional Strengthening both at the GOI level and at the levelof the participating States was a key element to project success and this was stressed veryclearly in the SAR. This aspect appears to have been ignored and the Bank supervisionmissions did not also follow up the imnplementation of this most important component.In fact, the funds provided for this purpose were not utilised and in the last six monthswere transferred to the Works category to cover expenditures. The net result is that aftereight years of project implementation, only a limited awareness has been created withinthe IDs on the importance of water management. In retrospect, the mission is of theopinion that better results could have been achieved in converting ID engineers fromconstruction people to water managers if sufficient attention had been paid to thiscomponent.

22. The structured network system which evolved in the early years of projectimplementation as a result of the bias shown in the SAR towards the warabundi system,was not tested in a pilot project. The mission agronomist is sceptical about the successof such systems particularly where field-to-field irrigation is practiced in paddy growingareas. However, it is difficult to reach a firn conclusion based on practical experienceat this stage since even in the so-called completed schemes of this type, operations havenot yet been carried out.

G. Project Sustainability

23. Project sustainability depends on inculcating O&M culture to the irrigationdepartment staff besides providing adequate funds to carry out the O&M activities.Availability of funds alone is not a guarantee for sustained project operation. Planningfor O&M has to be given priority and until this is achieved, project sustainability cannotbe ensured. The mission noted that even in places where adequate maintenance funds

"Table I page 10 refersJ It appears that these additional schemes were cleared assuming that there would be continued financing of theschemes under a follow-up phase.

43

have been released by the State Governments, the maintenance of structures constructedunder NWMP was unsatisfactory. If the operational plans devised under the project arenot kept up, it would lead to the deterioration of the systems as well.

24. As costs for O&M increase, it is necessary to turn over parts of the system tothe beneficiaries. Since farmers have not been involved in the preparation and executionof the schemes under this project, it is necessary to take urgent steps to include them inthe operational phase. Water Users Associations at different levels in the system wouldhave to be created as a first step.

H. Future Operation / Action Plan

25. The following actions would be required to ensure completion of remainingschemes and their smooth operation: (i) revision of operational plans taking into accountrealistic agricultural data on cropping pattern and operational hydrology; (ii) completionof ongoing schemes based on proper diagnostic analysis of infrastructure improvementsrequired to execute the operational plan mentioned above on the basis of an appropriateprioritised investment program for the irnplementation of which continued financialassistance from the Bank possibly under a follow-up phase would be necessary ; (iii)training of ID staff, relevant agricultural department staff and farmers in the operationof the schemes; (iv) training of scheme managers including inculcation in O&M culture;and (v) provision of adequate funds for sustained O&M taking into account farmertakeover concept. In addition, it would seem appropriate to provide required technicaland financial assistance to the States for preparing a limited number of schemes forinclusion under a possible follow-up project.

I. Lessons Learned

26. The main lessons learnt from this project implementation are

- A baseline survey of tih& condition of the system infrastructure andcropping practices is a must to prepare a scheme sunmmary (rapid ruralappraisal would be required).

- Detailed diagnostic work should be undertaken and realistic alternatescenarios should be explored in computer simulation models taking intoaccount farmer crop preferences in preparing operational plans.These plans should be prepared with the assistance of specialists inoperational hydrology (water availability and water balance studies underthe revised scenarios) and input from a specialist in irrigation agronomywho is familiar with the local conditions. The operational plans shouldbe flexible to handle vagaries of nature and forces of the market place.

- Prioritization of expenditures necessary for implementing the selectedoperational plan should be prepared, together with detailed constructionsequences, which take into account the financial capability of theimplementing agency, canal closure periods and number of days availableto carry out the civil works in each year.

44

While a ceiling on the expenditure to be incurred is desirable to avoidtoo much money being spent on one scheme, it is necessary to reviewthis concept. The clearing agencies should ensure that the ceiling amountdoes not become an impediment to execute even priority works and is notused by those preparing scheme reports as a target amount to be spent.

Simple key parameters should be established for monitoring andevaluating a scheme from scheme start-up. A monitoring and evaluationunit should be created in each State with a multidisciplinary core teamprior to credit effectiveness of any follow-up project.

An O&M agency should be established at the State and scheme level (seeseparate report of B. Foley).

An irrigation system should be considered as a whole water managementunit. Schemes should not be carried out in individual distributarieswithout any possibility of water management in the system in its totality.

Priority should be given to training a maximum number of ID staff inwater management principles and some of the promising people shouldbe trained intensively in computer and remote sensing technology to bewater managers.

Bank-supported projects in India should introduce advanced technologiesin irrigation management currently available and adopt them indemonstration schemes.

J. Follow-up

27. Relevant parts of a draft ICR would be prepared and transmitted to the Bankafter internal reviews by mid-MIay 1995.

45

Table 1. Scheme Initiation Schedule

1987 1988 1989 1990 [ 1991 1992 [ 1993 1994

Tamil Nadu 3 1 2 2 I 1 1(10 subprojects)

Kerala 1 4(5 subprojects) _

Karnataka 9 1 7 2 11(30 subprojects)

Andhra Pradesh I 1 5 3(10 subprojects)

Madhya Pradesh 2 12 4(19 subprojects)

Orissa 8(8 subprojects)

Gujarat 2 2(2 subprojects)

Uttar Pradesh 10(10 subprojects)

Bihar 2(2 subprojects)

MaharashtraInduction TrainingProgram

HaryanaBridge Financingc

Total 10 5 1 17 4 30 28(96 subprojects) _ _ ] _ _

46

Attachment I

Observations of MOWR on the Draft Comments of ICR MIissionAide-Memoire of ICR Mission onNWMP-I

l. The draft aide-memoire The appraisal of this project wvas carriedsubmitted by the ICR Mission, after their out with detailed investigation of threemonth long stay in India, during Feb- schemes. Given the large number ofMarch, 1995 deals primarily with their schemes under execution, it was decided tofindings on the performance of four visit and collect relevant information fromNWVMP sub-projects visited by them selected schemes. The mission excludedduring the above period. Even though the schemes already under evaluation by IIMIMission had detailed discussions with the since their results could be usedfor ICRproject authorities from States other than work as well. The discussions wvith IDwhere the Mission made personal visit, the officers held at NAew Delhi revealed thataide-memoire does not touch upon the the schemes in their State were just gettingoutcome of such discussions. This may started Hence they were not discussed inhave to be added in the aide-memorre. the Aide-M1emoire. However, information

collectedfrom these officers will bereported in detail in the ICR.

2. It would have been moreappropriate to have the comrments of theconcerned State Governments of thefindings of the ICR iMission as brought outin their aide-memoire. However, sincereferring the matter to the StateGovernments would have taken more timeand as the World Bank have requested fora quick look at the draft before it isfinalised by the ICR Mission, only broadobservations of the MOWR are beingcommunicated in the following paragraphs.

47

3. Ninety-eight sub-projects were The information given in paragraph 10 ofundertaken under the NWMIP programme the RAAMI regarding scheme completions. isin 11 participating States. Of these, 44 based on data collected from all the IDs.sub-projects are either completed or are in The mission has kept the Hat-yana schemea very advance stage of completion. In as Bridge Financing scheme. This isview of the fact that in the initial 3-4 years shown in Table 1 of the RAAMf. The ICRof NWMP not much progress could be mission is encouraged to learn that GOImade under the project, completion of has requested the Planning Commission toalmost half of the schemes undertaken for provide adequate funds for the timelyimplementation can be considered as a completion of unfinished schemes.good achievement. The remainingschemes are also in various stages ofimplementation and the Government ofIndia has advised the PlanningCommission to provide adequate funds tothe State Governments so that theremaining works are completed early.

48

4. The Ministry of Water This comment has been taken into accountResources have separately forwarded to the in paragraph 12 of RA1. The concept partWorld Bank a copy of the Completion has been discussed at length during theReport prepared by the Government of wrap-up meetings held in Tamil Nadu,India on the NWMP, which deals at length Andhra Pradesh, MlGadhya Pradesh andwith various aspects of the programmes New Delhi. This aspect wvould be discussedimplementation, including the performance further in the ICR. The mission disagreesof individual states on the various with GOI comment on this subject.components of the projects. It would beseen that water management andmaintenance have appreciably improved inthe schemes completed under NWMP.The schemes which have already beencompleted or are nearing completion haveshown increase in productivity rangingbetween 15% and 67% per hectare of land,through the additional irrigated area andby better water use efficiency. The, projectinterventions have also created conditionsfor equitable distribution of irrigationwater. The tail commands of completedNWMP schemes have started gettingirrigation water, some for the first timeafter the inception. It is not clear whatmade the ICR team to infer that "theconcept of water management has not beenin general clearly understood by ID staff'.In fact the above improved situation hasbeen possible only because the concernedirrigation staff followed the principles ofNWMP (para F, sub-para 2).

49

5. The schemes included in the The concept of the project and itsNWMP programme definitely lacked understanding by various officers of the -

maintenance in the past. To bring the implementing agencies including the WMCcanal network to proper shape was, have been discussed at length. Thistherefore, one of the important features of comment itself reflects the situation. Thisthe infrastructural intervention proposed in aspect has been discussed clearly inthe project implementation. Unless the paragraph 13 of the RAM.canals were made capable of runningadequate waters, as provided in the initialdesigns, it was not possible to ensurefeeding to the tail reaches, as alsodistributing the irrigation water reliablyand equitably to the beneficiaries.Comments of the Mission that "deferredmaintenance had become the primeobjective under the project duringimplementation" is, therefore, not anaccurate reflection of the performance(para F, sub-para 2).

6. It is not clear how without The sentence referred to in the commentproper investigations by a competent has been deleted from the RAM Thereconstruction engineer, the Mission have were two engineers with constructiondrawn conclusions adversely on the quality experience who accompanied the mission.of construction. Moreover, merely by However, paragraph 14 of the RAM haspaying a short visit to one project in been revised suitably.Andhra Pradesh and one in MadhyaPradesh, the mission has expressed theview that the "cement content of plastersin Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradeshappears to be quite low". Similarly,quality of construction in some of theschemes in Tamil Nadu has been stated tobe poor. It would have been moreappropriate if such comments on thequality of construction were made afterproper investigations by a constructionspecialist (para F, sub-para 3).

50

7. Likewise, without going The mission disagrees with thisthrough the detailed designs of the observation. There was plenty ofstructures, the Mission has drawn opportunity for Tamil iVadui officers toconclusions with regards to flaws in their bring oiut the designs and discuss them.designs (para F, sub-para 3). Such deficiencies wvere noted by the ICR

mission leader during his involvement inthe preparation and appraisal of the TamiliVadu WRCP.

8. Instead of banking on the The mission has collected detailed schemestatements of the field level staff, who are reports from the schemes visited and thein most of the cases not fully conversant values for the parameters were taken fromwith the parameters adopted in the designs these reports.of the structures, it would have been moreappropriate if the Mission had discussedsuch aspects with the responsible technicalexperts associated with the design ofstructures (para F, sub-para 4).

51

9. The project authorities Refernce should be made to SARformulated revised operational plans in paragraph 3.03 page 14 line 6: andmost of the completed or nearly completed would provide for selected schemes forschemes and water delivery practice had low-cost infrastructural improvementsaccordingly commenced under NWNIP. designed to support an improvedHowever, the progress in adoption of the operational plan: Also paragraph 3.08 ofoperational plans and the riules had not the SAR refers.been studies. In most of the cases theoperational plans were either notional orstill in draft stage to be provided by theState Governments. It is to be appreciatedthat the full tempo of the NWMP wasattained only in the fourth year of theproject. In most of the schemes whichhave been completed or are nearingcompletion the operational plan as per theconcept of NWMP could be applied onlyafter the various structural interventi.nswere completed. During their field visit tothe Thambraparni Project in Tamil Naduthe Mission was shown by the projectauthorities the operational plans followedby them, both before the commencementof the NWIvIP programme and thatadopted during the implementation stage.It, therefore, does not seem to be correctto cormment that no operational plans werebeing prepared. It was explained by theproject authorities to the ICR team duringtheir field visits to Kerala and Tamil Naduthat farmers were associated by themwhile finalising the irrigation schemesbefore commencement of every irrigationseason. Agriculture and revenueauthorities were also invited in themeetings held for the purpose. Theoperation of the irrigation systems weremade strictly as per the schedules finalisedunder such meetings. (para F, sub-para 6).

52

10. The land holdings in India are This is not what is stated in the aide-in general very small with the result that memoire. Reference should be made tonumber of beneficiaries under each paragraph 17 of the R4A.irrigation system is very large. It istherefore, not physically possible to dealwith individual farmers with regards torunning of the irrigation systems.Likewise, it is not possible for the projectauthorities to inform individual farmers ofthe structural modifications carried out bythem in the conveyance system. It isgenerally considered adequate to bring thechanges carried out by them to the noticeof the farmers representatives in themeetings held with them from time to time(para F, sub-para 7).

11. More than eighty-five percent This aspect will be discussed further in theof the funds provided under the NWMP ICR.had been for structural interventions. Itwas considered necessary to bring thesystems to their design conditions first, sothat the concepts provided under theNWMP could be made workable. It is,therefore, not justified to say that majorstress of the project was on construction ofstructures and not on management of thesystem (para F, sub-para 10).

12. The Water Management Cell, This aspect will be furher explored in thein the Union Ministry of Water Resources, ICR with relevant supportingthough in itself has been a small unit, but documentation.it has all round technical support fromother specialised organisations like CWC,ICAR, Ministry of Agriculture, PlanningCommission etc. Even in the ProjectAppraisal Committee high levelrepresentatives from the concernedspecialist organisations participate. It is,therefore, not correct to say that WMC didnot have technical support staff.Moreover, all the schemes cleared by theGOI were also examined by the WorldBank before they could be taken up forimplementation (para G, sub-para 3).

53

13. For implementation of the Reference to thinly spreading resources isvarious sub-projects undertaken under the not with reference to the fund constraint.NWMP programme, initially the funds Paragraph 20 of the RAM refers.were provided by the concerned StateGovernments out of their own State plans.Only after the works were executed,requests were made by them forreimbursement. At no point of timethroughout the duration of the NWMIPprogramme, fund constraints wereexperienced by any of the projectauthorities. The observations of the ICRMission that the programme sufferedbecause a very large number of projectswere undertaken under the programnmewhich resulted in thinly spreading of theresources is, therefore, not correct (para G,sub-para 2).

14. The remarks of the ICR Mission findings will be presented withMission with regard to the execution of supporting documentation in the ICR.the NWM`P programmes are contrary to Reports of supervision missions will bethe findings of the supervisory Missions of critically reviewed under the categorythe World Bank which visited the various "Bank Performance".projects from time to time during the lifeof the NWMP programme. Each of thescheme had adequate engineering andsupporting staff provided by the StateIrrigation Department. At no point of timethe implementation of the NWMPprogramme suffered on account ofshortage of manpower. Theimplementation of the schemes were alsocarried out in accordance with a wellplanned schedule (para G, sub-para 3).

54

15. The available technology with Discussions were held wvith NRSA asthe National Remote Sensing Agency reported in paragraph 2 of the RAM. In(NRSA) is still not capable of undertaking fact the ICR mission would recommend -

the detailed monitoring as is required in increased use of satellite imagery but withthe NWMIP. The development of cloud good ground truthing in any possiblepenetration technology by NRSA is still in follow-up project right from the start.the infancy stage and they are not able to There are other international agenciesmonitor at present the coverage under with expertise in this area who couldkharif crops, which is predominantly a collaborate wvith NVRSA water resourcesmonsoon period crop. A good amount of group.benefits under the NWMP project are,therefore, left unmonitored in using theremote sensing technique. Moreover, withthe available capability they are able toidentify the Rabi crops only in threecategories, namely (i) paddy, (ii)sugarcane, and (iii) other crops. Break upof crop area under crops other than paddyand sugarcane is still not possible. lDue tothis deficiency, gross value of produce ofdifferent crops cannot be correctly workedout. The available technology with NRSAis also not capable of interpretingaccurately the degraded lands like areaunder waterlogging, salinity etc. Due tothe above reasons, only limited use ofremote sensing technology was made formonitoring purposes (para G, sub-para 3).

55Implementation Completion Report

India

National Water Management Project(Credit 1770-IN)

Appendix LB

Supplementary Mission Aide Memoire

A. Introduction

1. During February and March 1995, an FAO/CP mission was mounted to preparethe Implementation Completion Report (ICR) for the above-captioned project. The draft ICRwas presented to the World Bank in June. The project had been consistently rated as havingperformed well by the Bank supervision missions. The ICR mission's findings werecontradictory to these ratings. Lively discussions followed the submission of the draft ICR.Though the Bank reviewers agreed, in general. with the findings of the ICR mission, someconcerns were raised, regarding the lack of information and economic analysis to comparethe performance of the three schemes upon which project appraisal was based (RDS,Sathanur and VVS). The Bank, GOI and CP agreed that a Supplementary mission should bemounted to: (i) visit and collect information for economic and other analysis for the SARschemes not visited earlier and to evaluate their performance; (ii) visit one more scheme inagreement with the Water Management Cell (WMC) of the Ministry of Water Resources(MOWR) to enlarge the sample size; (iii) visit Haryana to assess the implementation ofNWMP principles for this component which represented about 25% of NWMP expenditures;and (iv) confirm or amend the earlier ICR mission findings as required.

2. In accordance with the above, an FAO/CP mission visited India between30 October and 22 November 1995 to undertake the necessary follow-up activities to updateand finalize the draft ICR prepared in June 1995. After initial discussions with Messrs.Ridley Nelson (Chief, SA2NA), J.P. Baudelaire (Principal Engineer, SA2NA) and P.C.Mathur (Commissioner, WMC, MOWR, GOI), the mission undertook field visits to VaniVilas Sagar scheme in Tamil Nadu and Peechi scheme in Kerala selected by the WMC. Inaddition, the mission visited Haryana to determine to what extent the activities undertakenin this State, involving significant expenditures, followed NWMP principles. In each of thesefour States, the mission held wrap-up meetings chaired by the Secretary of the IrrigationDepartment of each State.

3. The mission wishes to thank all concerned staff of the Irrigation Departments ofthe States visited and the WMC of MOWR for the assistance and hospitality extended to themission.

4. This aide-memoire supplements the earlier one presented in final form in April1995, a copy of which is enclosed for ready reference.

B. Mission Findings

5. The findings and conclusions of the earlier ICR mission were confirmed duringthe present mission. Data collected in respect of the four schemes will be used in updatingand finalizing the ICR including the required additional economic and financial analysis. Thespecific findings related to the individual schemes are given below.

56

INDIA: National Water Management Project (Cr. 1770-IN)Implementation Completion Report Supplementary Mission

Appendix IBSupplementary Mission - Aide-Memoire

6. Vani Vilas Sagar Scheme (CCA 12,250 ha). At appraisal, it was expected thatthe project works comprising rehabilitation of canals and structures, provision of new controlstructures and field channels/drains in the extended command and lining of vulnerablereaches of the main and distributary canals would lead to improvements in water useefficiency, increase in high-value garden crops, mainly coconuts and assurance of rabicropping. In this scheme, construction consisted of installing proportional outlets, duckbillweirs and tail clusters with limited lining of main canals (LBC, RBC and HLBC). Theconstruction work is, in general, good. Mission observed breakage of some of the outlets bybeneficiaries. Unfortunately, re-sectioning of distributaries which is necessary to maintain thefull supply depths (which, in turn, are necessary for the proper functioning of the APMs) hasnot been carried out. The performance of the VVS scheme is directly related to the inflowsinto the reservoir which are inadequate (the reservoir has not filled in recent years). Themission was advised that minor irrigation works are being constructed in the catchment ofthe reservoir resulting in further reduction of inflows. A comprehensive water balanceanalysis of the total system should be carried out and operational plans should be revisedaccordingly. At the same time, the adjoining non-project area has also experienced expansionof coconut plantings at a higher rate than anticipated at appraisal. In addition, due toinadequate storage in the reservoir, khariff irrigation has not been provided in recent years.As a result, the net benefits are likely to be much lower than levels projected at appraisal.The water balance study is, therefore, essential in determining a sustainable operation for thescheme. Sustainability also depends on adequate maintenance funds being provided to thescheme operators. At the present time the funds provided are inadequate. They only justabout cover establishment charges with minimal amounts left over for scheduled maintenance.The operation of the scheme with NWMP principles requires more intensive training for theengineers and the operating level staff of the Irrigation Department.

7. Sathanur Scheme (CCA 18,210 ha). Several measures (improved systemcontrol, rehabilitation of canals, tanks and structures, modification of canal capacities,extension of the distribution system as required and provision of direct supply to the tanks)were planned at appraisal to improve water use efficiency and planting of ID crops in boththe LBC and RBC. At the time of appraisal, LBC was localized for paddy. A number ofproportional outlets, duckbill weirs and by-pass channels to existing system tanks have beenconstructed. Works have been carried out mainly in the LBC system. The duckbill weirs areas expected, serving their purpose by maintaining water levels in the main canals. Theconstruction quality appears to be good. In Sathanur, as in VWS, improvements have notbeen carried out in the distributaries and this has led to the malfunctioning of the outlets.Farmers interviewed by the mission complained that water levels are fluctuating and notbeing maintained properly during the rotation cycle resulting in variable discharges at theoutlets. They acknowledged damaging these outlets due to this. Operational level staff of theWater Resources Organization of GOTN should be given proper training in the operation ofthese structured networks. Additional work on the distributaries is necessary if these outletsare to perform as designed. It may be advisable to construct a full hydraulic model using the

57INDIA: National Water Management Project (Cr. 1770-IN)Implementation Completion Report Supplementary Mission

Appendix lBSupplementarv Mission - Aide-Memoire

Froude Number criterion at Sathanur as a training tool to show the operational staff and thefarmers how the system is supposed to work. The performance of Sathanur scheme is alsodependant on reservoir inflows. The scheme experienced successive drought years and in1991, no releases were made to irrigation command or the system tanks. Still about 30% ofthe land was irrigated which indicates the extent of groundwater usage in the command. Thiswould be taken into account in analyzing the impact of the scheme investments. Several flowmeasurement structures have been established but no measurements have been taken so far.It is recommended that attention be paid to this important aspect which would enable theoperators of the scheme to maximize the water use. The scheme did not experience a declinein paddy area as expected at appraisal while the output of groundnuts has also fallen shortof appraisal expectations. Sugarcane production has also not reached appraisal projections.

8. Peechi Scheme (CCA 16,000 ha). The physical investments included selectivelining, repairs to head regulators, replacement of damaged pipes, sluicegates and provisionof measuring flumes. In this scheme, all the outlets have been modified to act as proportionaloutlets and gates have been installed as well to operate on a fully-open or fully-closedposition as required. The construction quality is good. Some measuring flumes have beenconstructed but in most of them no measurements are being taken. Where measurements arebeing made, rating curves have not been established. The project engineers informed themission that after completing the structured outlets, they were able to push the irrigationflows further downstream in each distributary. They have not been able to do this in thecurrent year. The problem in Peechi is the abundant growth of weeds and bushes in thecanals, and canal banks restricting access to the system. In addition irrigation is not welldeveloped because of the high rainfall (annual rain around 3,000 mm). Labour is expensiveand maintenance funds are inadequate to clear the weeds and bushes as often as required. Infact, at Peechi, priority investment should have been the purchase of bush, weed andsediment clearing machinery which would enable water to reach the farthest portions of thecommand. If the basic concept provided in the SAR, of analyzing the performance of thescheme, identifying the constraints and then adopting appropriate solutions to implement anoperational plan had been followed, the maintenance constraint would have been identifiedas the major problem in water management in this scheme. At the time of scheme preparationand clearance, it was anticipated that with the physical improvements in the infrastructure,full irrigation would be provided to the second and third paddy crop. This has not beenachieved. Throughout the State, the paddy area has been declining due to high cost of inputs,particularly labour and better profitability of cash crops, such as coconut, banana and rubber.Because of these changes, the incremental benefits would tend to be smaller thanexpectations, i.e. even without the project, increased cash cropping would have continued.

9. Haryana (CCA 1,184,500 ha). Bridge financing was provided to Haryana tocontinue work on the Bhakra and Yamuna Canal Systems as a follow-up to the Haryana IIproject financed by the Bank until the WRCP project came on line. Project investments weremainly utilized for lining of main canals and watercourses. No operational plans were

58

INDIA: National Water Management Project (Cr. 1770-IN)Implementation Completion Report Supplementary Mission


prepared since the rotational system was already in place. No new devices were installed.Thus in the strictest terms, it can be said that NWMP principles were not followed. It wouldhave been appropriate to have amended the DCA prior to proceeding with bridge financing.However, due to lining, some water savings can be expected. Due to the scarcity ofmeasurements, it is possible to derive benefits based on theoretical savings. On this basis,there should be an increase of 38,200 ha in area supplied. There is no change in croppingpattern but increased cropping intensity is a major benefit from lining of canals andwatercourses. The quality of lining work is good.

C. Impact Evaluation

10. A comparative statement of appraisal estimates and final costs are given in thetable below:

Appraisal Actual Up 95Scheme Estimate Expenditure Cost to Complete Final Cost Cost Overrun

(Rs million) (Rs million) (Rs million) (Rs million) (Underrun)

Vani Vilas Sagar 30.0 52.9 1.4 54.3 81%(Kamataka)

Sathanur 46.8 61.9 4.5 66.1 42%(Taniil Nadu)

Peechi 25.5 42.0 0 42.0 65%(Kerala) I

Haryana 1,220 1' 949.4 0 949.4 (12%)

' Original estimate of Rsl.743 million over dte entire command of 184,600 ha revised to Rsl,220 millionto keep expenditre within budget ceiling.

11. Schemes had varying cost overturns with Vani Vilas Sagar at 81%, followed byPeechi (6.5%), and Sathanur (42%). However, Haryana had a cost underrun of 12%. Interms of physical achievement, average lining cost has gone up by 25 % (from Rs 16 per sq. ft.to RsI9.8 per sq.ft.). Cost overrun was caused mainly by price escalation and partly byquantity changes. The relative share of these two elements will be elaborated in the ICR.

12. At this stage, it is evident from available data, supplemented by interviews withfarmers, that the actual incremental benefits are much lower than projected at appraisal andscheme preparation. Overall changes in area benefitted, cropping intensity, crop yields anddiversification into high-value crops with supporting data collected by the mission will bereviewed and the effect of these changes will be assessed and the results will be presentedin the ICR. Preliminary indications are that with the cost overrun, implementation delays andreduced benefits, the ERRs will be substantially lower than those projected at appraisal.

59INDIA: National Water Management Project (Cr. 1770-IN)Implementation Completion Report Supplementary Mission


D. Follow-Up

13. The draft ICR prepared in June 1995, will be updated and finalized taking intoaccount the comments received from various reviewers and the findings of the supplementarymission and transmitted to the Bank by end-December 1995.

60


INDIA


APPENDIX 2

ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

A. INTRODUCTION

General

1. The NWMP was a multi-state project with different interventions of widely varyingimpact. Project benefits were expected to arise from management changes, which were assumed toinvolve "little economic cost." Accordingly, the upper limit for scheme investments was set atRs2,500/ha, in order that the approach could be replicated and that attention would be concentrated onthe highest priority investments. The primary achievement was expected to be the establishment of asystematic and replicable approach to improving the utilization of previously created assets. It was alsoforeseen that relatively minor increases in agricultural value added would more than justify the directcosts involved and result in a high rate of return. Some conceptual issues relevant to the project meritattention in carrying out re-evaluation at project completion.

2. Future Without-Project. There could be some doubt about the level of incrementalagricultural benefits which would have occurred on the assumption that, without project, canals andwatercourses would have been neglected - resulting in a falling level of production. The pertinentquestion to ask to clarify the without-project situation is whether 0 & M works would not eventuallybe implemented in the place of NWMP if the project were not implemented. The related question iswhether 0 & M works with state funds are a genuine alternative to the NWMP. Past records,however, show that funds were allocated for emergency repairs and works, although state budgets forregular 0 & M absorbed staff salaries to a large extent. This is evidenced by the structures which havenot gone out of use and the vocally active farmers demanding corrective action which would preventtotal breakdown of the system. It is therefore assumed, conservatively, that without-project productionwill not fall materially.

3. Cost Data. The nominal cost figures of the selected schemes have little relation to the realcosts because of adding rupees of quite different purchasing power. To make cost figures morerepresentative of the real resources being used in the schemes, each year's rupee cost was convertedinto rupees of a constant value before summing them. A Wholesale Price Index (WPI) has beenchosen to adjust all rupee costs to the input purchasing power of rupees in FY95.

61

INDIA: National Water Management ProjectImplementation Completion Report

Appendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis

4. Accrual of Benefits. Foregone benefits on land converted to other crops have beenadjusted to derive the incremental net benefits. A one-year time lag is assumed for the accrual ofbenefits as the farmers receiving water anew or a larger supply than before need time to take manysteps towards a more effective use of water for irrigated farming.

5. Comparison of 'Actuals' with Appraisal Estimates. The exact number of schemes aswell as detailed costs were not known exactly at the time of appraisal, except for the three schemes -Vani Vilas Sagar, Sathanur and Rajolibanda. Comparison of actuals with appraisal estimates for theproject as a whole are therefore not very meaningful.

6. The evaluation of investments shows that none of the scheme interventions, except inHaryana, were able to generate an acceptable rate of return. The calculation does not however includebenefits from the utility to households of drinking water, reduction in travel time from head to tail andsaving of land width after lining of canals. These have not been quantified for analysis in the absence ofreliable monitoring data. The principal factors contributing to the diminished economic performancewere much reduced agricultural benefits from a far less benefiting area than was projected at appraisal,excessive cost overruns and the less than anticipated changes in cropping patterns (which at appraisalwere expected towards irrigated dry crops requiring less water), than was foreseen at appraisal.

7. This appendix details the economic and financial re-evaluation of NWMP carried out bythe ICR mission. It compares the analysis and results of the re-evaluation to the ex-ante economic andfinancial assessments of NWMP detailed in the SAR.

8. The economic analysis in the SAR was based on detailed analysis of 3 schemes viz.Rajolibanda Diversion Scheme (RDS) in Andhra Pradesh, Vani Vilas Sagar Scheme in Karnataka andthe Sathanur Scheme in Tamil Nadu. Project costs were extrapolated to involve some 625,000hectares. In the SAR an upper limit on scheme investments was set of Rs2,500/ha (1986 pricesinclusive of physical contingencies).

9. The ICR mission visited 9 schemes, viz. the Thambaraparani and Sathanur Schemes inTamil Nadu, the Malampuzha and Peechi Schemes in Kerala, the RDS and Thandava Schemes inAndhra Pradesh, the Ratapani Scheme in Madhya Pradesh, the Vani Vilas Sagar Scheme in Karnatakaand the Haryana Scheme. Of the 9 schemes visited by the ICR mission, only Vani Vilas Sagar,Sathanur and the RDS Schemes were analyzed in detail in the SAR. Only a small portion of theproposed physical works of the RDS scheme had been completed by March 19951/, and farmers havetaken court action in protest of the Irrigation Department's proposed changes in cropping patterns. Theeconomic re-evaluation reported in this appendix is based on the 9 schemes visited by the ICR mission.

Assumptions and Results of the SAR Economic Analysis

10. The major assumptions of the SAR economic analysis were:

I/ Out of 47 distributaries only 7 have been completed up to March 1995.

62



(a) economic prices of the tradable crops (rice, cotton, sugarcane, copra andgroundnuts) and fertilizers were derived from World Bank commodity priceprojections;

(b) prices of non-traded crops and inputs were derived from prevailing and projecteddomestic market prices and converted to economic prices by applying a StandardConversion Factor of 0.8;

(c) hired farm labour was shadow priced at 0.67 of the market rate;

(d) a specific conversion factor of 0.75 was applied to the civil works;

(e) investment costs were assumed to occur in the first 3 years phased at the ratio of20:50:30;

(f) except for the Vani Vilas Sagar scheme, increases in agricultural output due tochanging cropping patterns, irrigation intensities and yields would increase infour equal steps from years 2 to 5;

(g) the cost and benefit streams were discounted over 25 years and the opportunitycost of capital was taken to be 12%;

(h) the total command area of each scheme was assumed to benefit from the project.

11. ERRs were calculated for the three schemes analyzed in detail. In addition an ERR wascalculated for the three schemes taken together. Results are tabulated below:

ERRRDS Scheme 29%Vani Vilas Sagar Scheme 45%Sathanur Scheme 43%Three Schemes (combined) 37%

12. It was concluded in the SAR that high economic returns could be expected even with the"limited agricultural impact assumed in the analysis." The SAR recognized that the major risks ofNWMP would relate to the sustainability of the operational plans to be supported, in the "face ofvested interests and the many other factors that affect scheme operations. "

13. It was concluded from sensitivity analysis of variations in crop yields and increases inirrigated areas, that although high economic returns could be expected even with the "limited"agricultural impact assumed under the project, small changes in the assumptions would significantly

63



affect the outcome. By contrast changes in project costs and agricultural prices, were anticipated tohave a much smaller impact on the predicted economic outcome.

Assumptions and Results of the ICR Economic Re-evaluation

14. The basic assumptions of the re-evaluation are:

(a) Following appraisal methodology the project has been re-evaluated over 25years.

(b) The re-evaluation of each scheme has been carried out in early 1995 constantprices. Historical investment and O&M costs for each scheme evaluated havebeen inflated to 1995 prices by applying the National Wholesale Price Index(WPI) - see Table 1.

(c) Project investment and O&M costs have been restated in economic terms byapplying the Standard Conversion Factor (SCF) of 0.9 in the absence ofdisaggregated cost data.

(d) Water charges have been excluded from the economic re-evaluation (as they aretransfer charges).

(e) Border prices have been used for the tradable commodities - rice, groundnuts,wheat, sorghum, soybean, cotton, sugarcane, copra, urea, DAP and MOP, basedon World Bank forecasts dated 11 January 1995 for the year 2000 - refer toTable 2.

(f) For the non-traded farm commodities and inputs, including hired labour, thecurrent (early 1995) financial prices at each scheme location have been convertedto economic prices by applying the SCF of 0.9.

(g) As in the SAR the opportunity cost of capital is assumed to be 12%.

(h) Like the SAR, benefits of the project have been quantified in terms of increasedagricultural production attributable to the scheme interventions. In contrast tothe SAR (see para 10, point (h)) only the areas which have actually benefitedfrom the NWMP works have been included in the economic re-evaluation.

15. Full details of the ICR economic re-evaluation for each of the 9 schemes analyzed by thernission are presented in Section D. A summary of the results is set out below:

64



ERR

RDS -6%Vani Vilas Sagar 9%Sathanur 6%Thambaraparani Scheme 4%Malampuzha Scheme 9%Thandava Scheme -3%Ratapani Scheme -16%Peechi -6%Haryana 17%

16. The results of the economic re-evaluation should be considered indicative and notdefinitive for the following reasons:

(a) NWMP works on the 9 schemes re-evaluated have only just been completed.With more time operational plans may be finer-tuned so that the areas benefitingfrom the NWMP works may possibly increase, although in the opinion of themission this is an unlikely scenario;

(b) only 9 schemes, out of a total of 35 schemes, which will be completed inNWMP, were re-evaluated. It could be argued that the schemes re-evaluated arenot representative of the completed schemes. Whilst this is a valid criticism,three of these schemes were, however, chosen by the IDs concerned. It is morethan likely therefore that the schemes re-evaluated are representative of the moresuccessful schemes included in NWMP. It should also be pointed out that theremaining schemes which were started under NWMP will in all probability takelonger to complete than those which have been included in the re-evaluation, andit is possible that they may never be completed, due to a shortage of funds.Therefore, the economic rates of return from these schemes will most likely belower than those that have been calculated by the ICR mission in the economicre-evaluation;

(c) the agricultural impact of the project at the scheme level has not been closelymonitored (refer para 22) necessitating basing the re-evaluation on data andinformation collected by the mission during the field visits.1'

In the mission's opinion, the data collected were of a reasonably high standard and acceptable for re-estimating the ERR of the schemes evaluated.

65



B. AGRICULTUJRAL PRODUCTION IMPACT

17. According to the SAR the project would increase agricultural output primarily throughmore effective use of canal supplies. Changes in the timing of irrigation, methods of water delivery,efficiency of water use, and the effectiveness of agricultural support services would result in modifiedcropping patterns, increased irrigation intensity, and higher crop yields and value added. It wasrecognized in the SAR that the relative importance and effect of the different interventions would varywidely in the schemes that would eventually be included in the project.

18. The three schemes evaluated in detail in the SAR were used "to illustrate the likelyagricultural production impact". The SAR states that the project was expected to have the followingimpacts:

(a) a decline in paddy and sugarcane;

(b) a marked increase in the output of oilseeds and pulses;

(c) a limited impact, either positive or negative, on the output of coarse grains;

(d) a positive and substantial impact on high-value cash crops such as cotton andcoconut.

19. In the SAR changes in cropping patterns and crop yields were applied to the wholecommand area of each scheme. The validity of this assumption must be questioned in view of the factthat not all areas within a scheme conmnand could benefit from the NWMP works, since generallyadequate irrigation water is supplied throughout the head and middle reaches of irrigation canalschemes; also, it is well known in India that farmers do not readily change their cropping patterns,especially substituting paddy for less water demanding ID crops"' . Despite the fa,t that crop yieldincreases that were anticipated as a result of NWMP were regarded in the SAR as "modest", the cropyield increases assumed in the SAR (over the entire command areas), were optimistic ranging from anaverage 15%, 19% and 32% for the Vani Vilas Sagar, Sathanur and RDS schemes respectively.

20. Based on the assumption that the three schemes analyzed in detail would berepresentative of the NWMP as a whole, the following agricultural impact was estimated in the SAR:

1/ In schemes (RDS, Thandava, Malampuzha, Ratapani and Thambaraparani) visited by the mission, farmersrepeatedly said that their first choice of crop to be grown was paddy. The two most important explanativereasons for this behaviour are: their desire to satisfy basic family food requirements first and foremost overand above their desire to earn money from the sale of surplus production; the ease of marketing surplus ricecompared to other crops.

66



3 Schemes NWMP in Total(67,000 ha) (625,000 ha)

(tons) (tons)

Paddy -7,700 -725,000Groundnuts +19,980 +186,400Sorghum +2,870 +26,800Millet +6,220 +58,000Sugarcane +20,510 +191,300Cotton +1,980 +18,500Coconut (copra equiv) +2,660 +24,700

21. In the SAR it was predicted that, through the introduction of "improved irrigation plans"the distribution of water to farmers was expected to change, leading to the volume of water deliveredto the head-reaches decreasing and that to the tail-end increasing. Furthermore, in the SAR it waspredicted that cropping pattems would change significantly with ID crops substituting for paddy.

22. Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) of the schemes visited by the mission has not beensufficiently comprehensive to permit an accurate assessment of the impact on cropping pattems andcrop yields of NWMP. Therefore the mission has had to rely on information supplied by IrrigationDepartment (ID) field staff on the areas within the commands of the schemes which have benefitedfrom the NWMP works. Complementary to this, the mission interviewed farmers in the scheme areasin the tail, middle and head reaches, to establish what changes have occurred, and are likely to occur,pre-NWMP, during NWMP and post-NWMP, with respect to cropping pattems, farming practices,and crop yields. Data on crop areas and yields (the latter from crop cutting trials within the schemecommands) were collected and discussions were held with Agriculture Department field staff" .

23. Assessments of the agricultural impact of NWMP were made by the mission based oninformation collected from the field visits. Due consideration was also taken of data presented by IDsin their ICRs, as well as the monitoring data provided by the National Remote Sensing Agency(NRSA) I/.

24. Despite difficulties encountered by the mission in obtaining accurate field data on cropareas and yields, and the adequacy of irrigation supply throughout scheme commands, it is nevertheless

1/ Agriculture Department field staff accompanied the mission in the field.2/ NRSA have monitored 4 NWMP schemes, viz. Malampuzha, RDS, Sathanur and Bhadra. Interpretation of

data from the satellite monitoring of these schemes is limited by the following: commonly occurring cloudcover which inhibits the reliability of data interpretation; data analysis of an insufficient time period (atleast 5 years are needed) prior to the initiation of NWMP to establish a meaningful pre-NWMP crop areaand crop yield base; the lack of rigorous "ground truthing" which is required to reliably correlate satellitedata with field level crop yield data, assess the significance of sources of water other than surfaceirrigation water (viz, groundwater and rainwater) on crop growth, and allow for the impacts of thepolicing of water delivery on crop growth; inability to differentiate between crops other than paddy andsugarcane.

67



very clear that the agricultural impacts of NWMP predicted by the SAR have not eventuated in theschemes visited by the mission. It is obvious that IDs have spent most, if not all of their time onconstruction activities, and insufficient emphasis has been allocated to the main project objective ofimproved water management. Very limited interaction between ID staff and farmers has occurred.The main repercussion of this is that new operational plans devised by the IDs have not been acceptedunanimously by farmers. The main reason for non-acceptance of the new operational plans is thatfarmers place an overwhelrming priority on the growing of paddy.

25. NWMP appears to have had a limited impact on cropping patterns in most of theschemes. The impact of the project in all of the schemes visited by the mission has been limited tocertain tailend reaches where water was previously not reaching, or it was reaching but not in sufficientquantity to permit crops to be fully irrigated, so that partial irrigation only was being achieved.

26. No impact of the project was observed in terms of farmer (and ID field staff)consciousness of improved water management. Wasting of water particularly in head reachescontinues. Very little if any shift has occurred in the schemes visited from high water demanding cropsto lower water demanding more profitable crops, due to the project interventions.

27. Tabulated below are the areas which are benefiting from NWMP in each of the schemesvisited by the mission. These areas are compared to the originally planned areas. With the exception ofKerala, the other states visited by the mission have considered the total scheme command areas ashaving benefited from the NWMP works, which is not consistent with field observations.

68

INDIA: National Water Managenent ProjectImplementation Completion Report


Scheme Areas Benefiting from NWMP (Hectares)

Scheme Mission findings Originally Planned Area

RDS 1,400 35,410

Vani Vilas Sagar 580 12,250

Sathanur 2,490a' 17,490

Thambaraparani 9,540 45,282

Malampuzha:Tailend 1,108 20,553Middle 1,890

Thandava 1,040 20,828

Ratapani 350 1,655

Peechi 380 16,000

Haryana 38,165 72,108

" Conversion to groundnut from paddy (853 ha), sugarcane (478 ha) and millet (1,159 ha).

28. The impact of NWMP on agricultural production in the 9 schemes analyzed by themission is tabulated below. Paddy accounts for significant share of incremental production attributableto NWMP. This is in marked contrast to the agricultural impact predicted on the SAR (para 18) thatpaddy production would decrease and other crops, particularly groundnuts and sugarcane, wouldmarkedly increase.

69

INDIA: National Water Management ProjectImplementation Com,pletion Report

.\Appndix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis

Scheme/Crop Incremental Production (tons)

RDSPaddy +910Groundnuts +120Sunflower +80Cotton +30

Vani Vilas SagarCoconut (copra) +1,220Groundnuts -1,160

SathanurPaddy -2,560Sugarcane -38,240Mllet -2,900Groundnuts +5,550

ThambaraparaniPaddy +4,540

MalampuzhaPaddy +4,090

ThandavaPaddy +1,090Groundnuts +190Sesame -50

RatapaniWheat +120Gram +40Lentil -20

PeechiPaddy +1,050

HaryanaWheat +31,600Paddy +12,470Cotton +9,770

70



C. FARM INCOMES

SAR Assessment of Farm Income Impacts

29. Representative farm models were compiled for the 3 schemes analyzed in detail in theSAR. The results are summarized below:

Increases in Farm Income Estimated in the SAR

Scheme Increase in Net Farm Income

RDS 66%

Vani Vilas Sagar 30%

Sathanur 31%

30. Farm net incomes (inclusive of the return to family labour) were estimated in the SAR toincrease on average throughout the whole command areas of the schemes by 30% to 66%.

ICR Re-evaluation of Farm Incomes

31. In the re-evaluation at completion, representative farm models were prepared for thebenefiting areas of each of the 9 schemes visited by the ICR mission. The analysis is elaborated indetail in Section D and the results are summarized below. It must be stressed that these changes infarm incomes refer to fanns in the limited benefiting areas only of the schemes, and not to theall of the farms in the total command areas of the schemes, which the SAR farm incomeestimates applied to. Comparison with SAR estimates is therefore not very meaningful.

NET FARM INCOME (Rs/ha - 1995 prices, per benefiting hectare)

Scheme Without Project With Project % Increase

RDS 18,020 21,554 20%

Vani Vilas Sagar 32,940 35,730 8%

Sathanur 15,597 20,445 31%

71



Without Project With Project % Increase

Thambaraparani SchemeManimathur Command 11,683 13,248 13%Drainage Zone 14,545 16,752 15%Thambaraparani Command 16,746 18,008 8%

Malampuzha SchemeTailend 14,179 21,241 50%Middle Reach 21,682 23,505 8%

Thandava SchemeTailend 3,822 7,234 89%

Ratapani SchemeTailend 6,111 7,791 28%Middle Reach 8,142 9,127 12%

Peechi 8,020 8,752 9%

Haryana 12,550 16,255 30%

32. It is seen that none of the appraised schemes (Vani Vilas Sagar, Sathanur andRajolibanda) were able to generate as high rate of income growth as expected at appraisal. Increases infarm income have ranged between 8% and 89%/o. The highest of 50% and 89% are in the tailendbenefiting areas of the Malamapuzha and Thandava schemes respectively which were essentiallyrainfed prior to NWMP. In the Thambaraparani and Ratapani schemes NWMP has resulted in a morereliable irrigation supply which has led to:

(a) a changed cropping pattern (generally a more intensive use of high waterdemanding crops - normally paddy) and higher crop yields; or

(b) higher crop yields without any impact on cropping patterns.

However, a relatively higher farm income in absolute figures in Vani Vilas Sagar reflect the prevalenceof high-value coconuts.

72



D. ECONOMIC RE-EVALUATION

33. The benefits and costs assessed for 9 of the schemes visited by the ICR mission, aredetailed next. The parity prices used in the re-evaluation of the tradeable commodities are given inTable 2. In Tables 3-8 the financial investment and O&M expenditures (in current Rupees) are given.These 12-monthly expenditure figures were inflated to 1995 prices using the National Wholesale PriceIndex (WPI). The WPI series used is given in Table 1.

RDS Scheme

34. Benefits. No reliable data are available on areas which have benefited from the project.The mission has estimated that some 1,400 ha (about 4% of the command), may be benefiting fromadditional water. From ID records there has been no marked change in cropping patterns followingNWMP.

35. The economic benefit and cost flows of the RDS scheme economic re-evaluation aregiven in Table 3, and the phasing-in of the benefiting areas are shown in Table 9. The croppingpatterns and crop budgets derived to assess the agricultural benefits are presented in Tables 11 and 12and Tables 13-21 respectively. The annual net production benefits with- and without-project areshown in Table 3. The without-project O&M costs are considered as a benefit (saved cost) in theanalysis, since the full O&M costs during and after project implementation have been treated as a cost.

36. Costs. The project economic investment costs used in the re-evaluation are given in Table3 and are based on the actual expenditure incurred during implementation of the works in financialyears 1988/89 to 1995/96. The financial costs have been converted to economic costs by applying theSCF of 0.9 and inflating the costs to 1995 prices using the WPI. O&M costs (expressed in 1995economic prices) incurred from 1988/89 to 1994/95 and in subsequent years are shown in Table 3.These costs were based on the Government of Andhra Pradesh O&M data which indicates that in 1995prices approximately Rsl 00/ha was spent on O&M prior to NWMP, compared to Rsl 75/ha at present.

37. Economic Analysis Results. Discounting the net benefit stream (see Table 3) at 12% theNPV is calculated at minus Rs28.843 million and the ERR is minus 6%.

38. Farm Income Results. Farm models were prepared for two distributaries which havebeen included in NWMP. Distributary 16a is considered as representative of the kharif distributaries,and Distributary 24 representative of the rabi distributaries. Per hectare gross income, costs ofpurchased inputs and net farm income for Distributaries 16a and 24 are presented in Tables 22 and 23respectively. The results of the farm model analysis are summarized below:

73



FARM MODEL WITHOUT-PROJECT WITH-PROJECT %NET INCOME NET INCOME CHANGE(Rs/ha) (Rs/ha)

Distributary 16a 9,679 11,351 17%

Distributary 24 8,341 10,203 22%

Net incomes are assessed to have increased by 17% in Distributary 16a and 22% in Distributary 24.

Vani Vilas Sagar Scheme

39. Investment and 0 & M Costs. At appraisal, the physical works included rehabilitationof canals and structures, provision of new control structures and field channels! drains in the extendedcommand, and lining of vulnerable reaches of the main and distributary canals. The completion ofthese works was expected to result in improvements in water use efficiency, increase in high valuegarden crops, mainly coconut, and assurance of rabi cropping. At project closure, constructionconsisted of installation of proportional outlets, duckbill weirs and tail clusters with limited lining ofmain canals - left bank, right bank and high level left bank. Investment costs in financial termsamounted to Rs54.23 million (comprising Rs52.88 million up to March 31, 1995, and Rsl.35 millioncosts to complete), compared to the appraisal estimate of Rs3O.00 million, giving a cost overrun ofabout 81% in nominal terms or 25% in real terms. The cost per hectare (coconuts) has gone up by547% from RslO,OOO/ha (appraisal) to Rs64,655/ha (Credit closure) in real terms.

40. Incremental 0 & M costs consist of actual expenditure claimed from the Bank fromFY93 to FY95 (100% reimbursement) and 2% of investment costs (at Rsl.085 million) thereafter.

41. Economic Benefits. Following appraisal methodology, only incremental agriculturalproduction benefits have been quantified for economic analysis. At appraisal, the incremental areaassumed to benefit is taken at 3,000 ha for coconuts, compared to a much reduced area (580 ha) atscheme completion. Production benefits from annual crops are projected to accrue with a one-yeartime lag from the completion of works each year while benefits from new planting (coconut) areexpected to begin six years from the date of planting. The cropping pattems and crop budgets requiredto estimate agricultural benefits are presented in Tables 24-27 The foregone benefits on land convertedto coconut with-project have been adjusted to derive the incremental net benefits. The annual netincremental benefit is given in Table 28.

42. Economic Costs. Historical investment and 0 & M costs have been inflated to 1995prices by applying the wholesale price indices (WPI). These costs, including labour, have been restatedin border terms by using the standard conversion factor (SCF) of 0.9. The economic costs thus derivedare shown in Table 4.

74



43. Economic Analysis. The economic analysis has been carried out in 1995 constant prices.Financial prices and economic values of crops and inputs are presented in Tables 2 and 26. Futureprices are based on World Bank Primary Commodity Forecasts dated February 1995. Based on theabove assumptions, the cropping pattems and per ha crop yield assumptions shown in Tables 24-27and a 25-year period of analysis, the current estimate of ERR for the scheme is 90/o, 36% lower thanthe appraisal estimate. At completion, a smaller area of 580 ha has actually benefited from projectworks, compared to 3,000 ha projected at appraisal, taking only coconut as the benefiting crop. It wasassumed that this area of 580 ha is 50% of the increase while the other 50% is irrigated bygroundwater, irrespective of project investment. The foregone benefits from this conversion tococonut from annual crops have been adjusted to derive increased incremental benefits as shown inTable 28. The major factors, which contributed to lower ERR include excessive cost overruns per haand lower production benefits from a much reduced incremental benefiting area (580 ha) compared toappraisal estimate (3,000 ha), which are not fully offset by better prices for scheme production, mainlycopra. A sensitivity analysis shows that a 50% increase in area irrigated will bring the ERR to 12%,while a reduction in costs by 50% will raise the ERR to nearly 15%.

44. Farm Incomes. At appraisal, a representative farm model (farm size of 3 ha) had beenused to estimate the project impact on farm incomes at the then prevailing financial prices which wereused to value outputs and inputs. The results showed an incremental income of Rs5,220, compared toRs8,385 generated at scheme completion (see Table 29).

Farm Income(Farm size - 3 ha)

Without Project With Project(Rs) (Rs)

Gross value of production 113,407 121,665

Production cost including water charges 14,593 14.466

Net return 98,814 107,199Incremental = Rs8,385

45. The increase in net farm incomes over appraisal estimates is largely explained by thehigher prices of copra.

75



Sathanur Scheme

46. Investment and 0 & M Costs. Several measures were planned at appraisal to improvewater use efficiency and planting of irrigated dry (ID) crops in both the left and right bank canals. Atproject closure, a number of proportional outlets, duckbill weirs and by-pass channels to existingsystem tanks had been constructed. Works have been carried out mainly in the LBC system, whichwas localized for paddy at appraisal. The resulting expenditures in financial terms amounted to Rs68.5million (comprising expenditures of Rs6l.9 million up to March 31, 1995, plus costs to complete ofRs6.571 million), compared to the appraisal estimate of Rs46.8 million, giving a cost overrun of 46%in nominal terms or a cost underrun of 90/0 in real terms.

47. Incremental 0 & M costs consist of actual expenditure claimed from the Bank (100%reimbursement) from FY92 to FY95 and 2% of investment costs (at Rsl .37 million) thereafter.

48. Economic Analysis. At appraisal it was expected that a rainfed dry cropped area of9,777 ha would be converted into irrigated dry crops. At scheme completion, a much smaller area(2,490 ha) had been converted to groundnuts from paddy (853 ha), sugarcane (478 ha) and millet(1,159 ha). The foregone benefits on land converted to groundnuts with-project have been adjusted toderive incremental net benefits, as shown in Table 30. It is assumed that about 50% of total area of1,368 ha irrigated by groundwater wells would be from well recharged by canal supplies with-project.

49. Historical investment and incremental 0 & M costs have been inflated to 1995 pricesusing WPI. These costs including labour have been restated in border terms by applying the SCF of0.9. The economic costs derived in this manner are given in Table 5.

50. Economic Analysis. The economic analysis has been carried out in 1995 constant prices.Financial prices and economic values of crops and inputs are shown in Tables 2 and 31. Future pricesare based on World Bank Primary Commodity Forecasts dated February 1995. Based on the aboveassumptions, the cropping patterns and per hectare crop yield assumptions shown in Tables 32 and 33and a 25-year period of analysis, the current estimate of ERR for the scheme is 6% compared to theappraisal projection of 43%. A sensitivity analysis shows that decreasing costs by 50% will improvethe ERR to about 21% while improving benefits by 50% will push up the ERR to 14%.

76



51. Farm Incomes. The result showed an incremental income of Rs4,848 (based on farmsize of 1.5 ha) compared to Rs1,720 at appraisal (see Table 34).

Farm Income(Farm size - 1.5 ha)



Production cost including water charges 11.211 12.786

Net return 15,597 20,445Incremental = Rs4,848

Thambaraparani Scheme

52. Benefits. The mission, in consultation with ID field staff, established that there are threediscrete areas benefiting from the NWMP works carried out to date:

(i) 740 ha in the Manimuthar command where, because of a more assured andtimely supply of irrigation water, the area of the pishanam paddy has increasedby approximately 67 ha and the average crop yield has increased about 10%from 4,500 to 5,000 kg/ha.

(ii) 4,000 ha has benefited from improved drainage works carried out as part ofNWMP. Over this area the pishanam paddy yields have increased on average15% from 3,500 to 4,000 kg/ha.

(iii) 4,800 ha of the Thambaraparani command. Although no change has occurred incropping patterns throughout this area attributable to the NWMP works, paddyyields for both the pishanam and kar crops have increased approximately 5%.

53. The economic benefit and cost flows of the Thambaraparani economic re-evaluation aregiven in Table 6 and the phasing-in of the areas benefiting from the project are shown in Table 10. Thecropping patterns and crop budgets derived to assess the agricultural benefits are presented in Tables35-37 and Tables 38-51 respectively.

54. The agricultural benefits have been phased directly in relation to the expenditure profileachieved during implementation. The annual net production benefits with- and without-project areshown in Table 52. The without-project O&M costs, which are based on the 1988/89 actual O&Mcosts, are treated in the analysis as a benefit (see Table 52).

77



55. Costs. The project economic investment costs used in the re-evaluation are given in Table52 and are based on the actual expenditure incurred during implementation of the works in financialyears 1988/89 to 1994/95. The financial costs have been converted to economic costs by applying theIndia SCF of 0.9 and inflating the costs to 1995 prices using the WPI (Table 1). O&M costs(expressed in 1995 economic prices) incurred from 1988/89 to 1994/95 are shown in Table 52.

56. Economic Analysis Results. Discounting the net benefit stream (see Table 52) at 12%the Net Present Value (NPV) is calculated at minus Rs48.658 million and the Economic Rate ofRetum (ERR) is 4%.

57. Farm Income Results. Three farm models representative of the areas benefiting from theNWMP works are shown in Tables 53, 54 and 55, where the per hectare gross income, costs ofpurchased inputs and net farm income are presented. The crop budgets used to prepare the farmmodels, calculated in constant 1995 financial prices are detailed in Tables 53, 54 and 55. The results ofthe farm model analysis are summarized below:


Manimuthar Command 11,683 13,248 13%

Drainage Affected Area 14,545 16,752 15%

Thambaraparani Command 16,746 18,008 8%

58. Net incomes are assessed to have increased by 13% and 8% in two of the benefiting areas(Manimuthar and Thambaraparani commands respectively) and 15% in the zone that is affected bypoor drainage.

59. Retums to family labour were also calculated and results are tabulated below:

FARM MODEL WITHOUT-PROJECT WITH-PROJECT %LABOUR RETURN LABOUR RETURN CHANGE(Rs/day) (Rs/day)

Manimuthar Command 328 361 10%

Drainage Affected Area 306 353 15%

Thambaraparani Command 294 316 7%

78



60. Retums to family labour are calculated to have increased 10% and 7% respectively in theManimuthar and Thambaraparani Commands, and 15% in the improved drainage zone.

Malampuzha Scheme

61. Benefits. In the Malampuzha scheme, irrigation is provided for the second crop of paddywhile the first paddy crop is rainfed. In consultation with ID field staff, the mission established that1,108 hectares have benefited in tailend portions of the project, and a further 1,890 hectares in themiddle reaches. The tailend areas were rainfed prior to NWMP and are now irrigated. Average yieldshave increased from about 1,800 kg/ha to 4,300 kg/ha. The middle reach areas were partially irrigatedprior to NWMP and are now receiving adequate irrigation water. Average yields have increased from3,800 kg/ha to 4,500 kg/ha.

62. The economic benefit and cost flows of the Malampuzha economic re-evaluation aregiven in Table 56 and the phasing-in of the areas benefiting from the project are shown in Table 57.The cropping patterns and crop budgets derived to assess the agricultural benefits are presented inTables 58 and 59 and Tables 60-65 respectively.

63. From interviews with local farmers and Agriculture Department field staff, it was assumedthat tailend farmers change from rainfed to irrigated farming practices over a three year period afterreceiving irrigation water. In the analysis it was assumed that middle reach farmers would respondimmediately to fully irrigated practices following the arrival of additional water. The annual netproduction benefits with- and without-project are shown in Table 56. The without-project O&M costs,which are based on the 1990/91 actual O&M costs, are considered as a benefit (saved cost) in theanalysis and are shown in Table 56.

64. Costs. The project economic investment costs used in the re-evaluation are given in Table56 and are based on the actual expenditure incurred during implementation of the works in financialyears 1990/91 to 1994/95. The financial costs have been converted to economic costs by applying theIndia SCF of 0.9 and inflating the costs to 1995 prices using the WPI (Table 1). O&M costs(expressed in 1995 economic prices) incurred from 1990/91 to 1994/95 are shown in Table 56.

65. Economic Analysis Results. Discounting the net benefit stream at 12% the NPV iscalculated at minus Rs6.779 million and the ERR is 9%.

66. Farm Income Results. Two farm models were prepared representative of the tailend andmiddle reach benefiting areas of the scheme (see Tables 58 and 59). Per hectare gross income, costs ofpurchased inputs and net farm income are presented. The crop budgets used to prepare the farmmodels, calculated in constant 1995 financial prices, are detailed in Tables 60-62. The results of thefarm model analysis are summarized below:

79




Tailend 14,179 21,241 50%

Middle Reaches 21,682 23,505 8%

67. Net incomes are assessed to have increased by 50% in the tailend areas row filly irrigatedhaving previously grown rainfed paddy only, and 8% in the middle reach areas which have been fMllyirrigated following NWMP.

68. Returns to family labour were also calculated and results are tabulated below:


Tailend Benefiting Areas 284 386 36%

Middle Reach Benefiting 394 427 8%

69. Returns to family labour are calculated to have increased by 36% and 8% on the tailendand middle reach benefiting farms respectively.

Thandava Scheme

70. Benefits. According to ID field staff an additional 1,040 ha in tailend reaches are nowreceiving adequate irrigation water, when previously most of these areas were rainfed. There has notbeen any marked change in cropping patterns following NWMP, except that sesame grown underrainfed conditions has been replaced by more profitable ID crops where water has been assured. Theareas of paddy which were previously grown under rainfed conditions are now irrigated in the tailendbenefiting areas.

71. The economic benefit and cost flows of the Thandava scheme economic re-evaluation aregiven in Table 66 and the phasing-in of the areas benefiting from the project are shown in Table 67.

80



The cropping pattems and crop budgets derived to assess the agricultural benefits are presented inTables 68 and 69 and Tables 70-73 respectively. In the analysis it is assumed, based on discussionsheld with farmers, that benefits have been realized immediately additional water has been supplied. Theannual net production benefits with- and without-project are shown in Table 66. The without-projectO&M costs, which are based on the 1988/89 actual O&M costs, are considered as a benefit (savedcost) in the analysis since the fulil O&M costs during project implementation have been treated as acost.

72. Costs. The project economic investment costs used in the re-evaluation are given inTable 66 and are based on the actual expenditure incurred during implementation of the works infinancial years 1988/89 to 1995/96. The financial costs have been converted to econornic costs byapplying the India SCF of 0.9 and inflating the costs to 1995 prices using the WPI (Table 1). O&Mcosts (expressed in 1995 economic prices) incurred from 1988/89 to 1994/95 and in subsequent yearsare shown in Table 66. These costs were based on the Government of Andhra Pradesh O&M datawhich indicates that in 1995 prices approximately RslOO/ha was spent on O&M prior to NWMP,compared to RsI75/ha at present.

73. Economic Analysis Results. Discounting the net benefit stream at 12% the NPV iscalculated at minus Rs28.43 million and the ERR is minus 3%.

74. Farm Income Results. A farm model was prepared to represent the tailend benefitingareas of the scheme (see Tables 74 and 75). Per hectare gross income, costs of purchased inputs andnet farm income are presented. The crop budgets used to prepare the farm model, calculated inconstant 1995 financial prices are detailed in Tables 76-79. The results of the farm model analysis aresummarized below:


Tailend 3,822 7,234 89%

Net incomes are assessed to have increased by 8 9%/o in the tailend NWMVIP works benefiting areas.


FARM MODEL WITHOUT-PROJECT WITH-PROJECT %RETURN LABOUR RETURN CHANGE(Rs/day) (Rs/day)

Tailend 233 249 7%

81



76. Family labour input is assessed to have increased from 66 man-days to 84 man-days, anincrease of 27% on the tailend benefiting farms, while returns to family labour are calculated to haveincreased 7%.

Ratapani Scheme

77. Benefits. In consultation with ID field staff the mission established that 160 hectares havebenefited at the tailend of scheme main canal, and 190 hectares in the middle reaches. The tailendbenefiting areas were receiving only one watering in the rabi prior to NWMP and are now receivingtwo waterings. Farmers have continued to plant drought tolerant local varieties of wheat in theseareas. The middle reach areas are now receiving adequate irrigation water and farmers are plantingHYV of wheat where they were previously planting local wheat varieties.

78. The economnic benefit and cost flows of the Ratapani scheme economic re-evaluation aregiven in Table 80 and the phasing-in of the areas benefiting from the project are shown in Table 81.The cropping patterns and crop budgets derived to assess the agricultural benefits are presented inTables 82 and 83 and Tables 84-87 respectively. The analysis assumes, based on mission discussionswith farners, that benefits have been realized immediately additional water has been supplied. Theannual net production benefits with- and without-project are shown in Table 80. The without-projectO&M costs, which are based on the 1991/92 actual O&M costs, are considered as a benefit (savedcost) in the analysis since the full O&M costs during project implementation have been treated as acost.

79. Costs. The project economic investment costs used in the re-evaluation are given in Table11 and are based on the actual expenditure incurred during implementation of the works in financialyears 1991/92 to 1994/95. The financial costs have been converted to economic costs by applying theIndia SCF of 0.9 and inflating the costs to 1995 prices using the WPI (Table 1). O&M costs (based ondata provided by the Government of Madhya Pradesh and transformed into 1995 economic prices)incurred from 1991/92 to 1994/95 and in subsequent years are shown in Table 80.

80. Economic Analysis Results. Discounting the net benefit stream at 12% the NPV iscalculated at minus Rs6.79 million and the ERR is minus 16%. Should the remaining 180 hectares atthe tailend also receive an additional irrigation, assuming the same investment costs, the ERR increasesto 12%.

81. Farm Income Results. Two farm models were prepared representative of the tailend andmiddle reach benefiting areas of the scheme (see Tables 82 and 83). Per hectare gross income, costs ofpurchased inputs and net farm income are presented. The crop budgets used to prepare the farmmodels, calculated in constant 1995 financial prices, are detailed in Tables 88-91. The results of thefarm model analysis are summarized below:

82




Tailend 6,111 7,791 28%

Middle Reaches 8,142 9,127 12%

82. Net incomes are assessed to have increased by 28% in the tailend areas and 12% in themiddle reach areas benefiting from NWMP works.



Tailend Benefiting Areas 226 279 24%

Middle Reach Benefiting 275 296 8%

84. Returns to family labour are calculated to have increased by 24% and 8% on the tailendand middle reach benefiting farms respectively.

Peechi Scheme

85. Investment and 0 & M Costs. The physical investments at appraisal, included selectivelining, repairs to head regulators, replacement of damaged pipes, sluice gates and provision ofmeasuring flumes. At project closure, outlets in the scheme have been modified to act as proportionaloutlets and gates have been installed as well to operate on a fully-opened or fuilly-closed position, asrequired. These works required a total expenditure of Rs42.03 million, compared to an estimate ofRs54.34 million made at scheme preparation, giving a cost underrun of 23% in nominal terms or 33%in real terms. The cost per hectare has, however, gone up by 140% from Rs43,370/ha (schemepreparation) to Rsl 04,020/ha (Credit closure) in real terms.

86. The incremental 0 & M costs consist of actual expenditure claimed from the Bank (100%reimbursement) and 2% of investment costs thereafter.

87. Economic Benefits. Only agricultural production benefits have been quantified foreconomic analysis. At appraisal, the incremental benefiting area was assumed at 1,253 ha, comparedwith a much reduced area of 350 ha at scheme completion. The foregone benefits on 350 ha converted

83



to irrigated second crop of paddy are assumed negligible as no crop could be grown without irrigation.Production benefits from annual crops are projected to accrue with a one-year time lag fromcompletion of works each year. The cropping pattems and crop budgets required to estirnateagricultural benefits are presented in Tables 92 and 93. The annual net incremental benefit is given inTable 94.

88. Economic Costs. Historical investment and incremental 0 & M costs have been inflatedto 1995 prices by applying WPI. The resulting costs, including labour, have been restated in borderterms by using an SCF of 0.9. The economic costs derived in this way are shown in Table 7.

89. Economic Analysis. The economic analysis has been carried out in 1995 constant prices.Financial prices and economic values of crops and inputs are presented in Tables 2 and 94. Futureprices are based on World Bank Primary Commodity Forecasts dated February 1995. Based on theabove assumptions, the cropping patterns and per hectare crop yield assumptions shown in Tables 88and 89 and a 25-year period of analysis, the current estimate of ERR for the scheme is -6% (see Table95). The negative ERR is attributed to a substantially reduced benefiting area, 350 ha compared with1,253 ha at scheme preparation and excessive real cost overrun per ha. No ERR was calculated atscheme preparation. A sensitivity analysis shows that a 50% increase in area irrigated with jack up theERR to only -1%, while a 50% reduction in costs will raise the ERR to 2%.

90. Farm Incomes. ICR estimates an incremental farm income of about Rs450/ha based onan average farm size of 0.25 ha (Table 96) as follows:

Farm Income(Farm size - 0.25 ha)



Production cost including water charges 4 755 5,021

Net return 2,005 2,188Incremental Rsl 13/0.25 ha or Rs450/ha

84



Haryana Scheme

91. Investment and 0 & M Costs. Project investments were mainly utilized for the liningof main canals and watercourses. These works were a continuation of the lining financed under theHaryana Irrigation II Project. The resulting expenditures in financial terms amounted to Rs949.41million, 22% lower than the revised estimates at scheme preparation. The original estimate of Rs1,743million was revised to Rs1,220 million to keep expenditure within a budget ceiling. The cost underrunin nominal terms was 22% and in real terms 26%. The cost per hectare has, however, gone up by 14%from Rsl6,920/ha (scheme preparation) to Rs23,655/ha (Credit closure) in real terms.

92. Incremental 0 & M costs were estimated at 2% of total investment in lining ofwatercourses at completion, which is about Rs5.29 million, assumed to occur from FY96 onwards, asindicated in Table 8. It is assumed that no incremental maintenance cost on canals would be incurred asmaintenance costs on lined canals would not differ materially from those on unlined canals whenmaintenance is adequate and regular.

93. Economic Analysis. The economic analysis has been carried out in 1995 constant prices.Financial prices and economic values of crops and inputs are shown in Tables 2 and 97. Future pricesare based on World Bank Commodity Forecasts dated February 1995. Historical investment costshave been inflated to 1995 prices using WPI. The resulting costs, including labour, have been restatedin border terms by applying an SCF of 0.9. The economic costs derived in this manner are shown inTable 8.

94. The lining of watercourses generates savings in water which is available only to farmerswithin the command of the outlet. In the case of canal lining, such savings become available for useanywhere in the system. Both these savings will allow irrigation to cover an increased area. Crop yieldincreases are likely due to larger depth of application to the crops. There is not enough data todisaggregate these effects. Increased area has therefore been evaluated, albeit conservatively, as theprincipal impact of the project. It is difficult to isolate the direct impact accurately because of a numberof parameters involved - rainfall, river flows, cropping pattern and farmers' choice in allocation ofwater. Moreover, lack of measurements under the project allows only theoretical savings to beconsidered.

95. On this basis, there should be an increase of 38,165 ha (11,350 ha saved by watercoursesand 26,815 ha saved by canals) in the area supplied. There has been no change in cropping pattern butincreased cropping intensity is a major benefit from the lining of canals and watercourses. Overallbenefits have been adjusted for reduced output from the adjacent areas using wells which will not berecharged by seepage from the canals, after lining.

96. Based on the above assumptions, the cropping patterns and per hectare crop yieldassumptions shown in Tables 98 and 99, and a 25-year period of analysis, the current estimate of ERRis 17% (see Table 100). A sensitivity analysis was done in view of the fact that the actual increase inirrigated area ascribed to the project cannot be accurately known. The results show that a 20%

85



decrease in area irrigated will bring the ERR down to 13%, still an attractive investment, while anincrease in costs by 20% will lower the ERR to 14%.

97. Farm Incomes. No estimate was made at scheme preparation. ICR estimates anincremental farm income of about Rs14,800 based on a representative farm model (farm size - 4 ha)(see Table 101):

Farm Income(Farm size - 4 ha)

Without Project With Project

(Rs) (Rs)


Production cost including water charges 42.141 56,330

Net return 50,209 65,020

Incremental = Rs14,81 1

86



Table 1. Exchange Rates and Wholesale Price Indices (WPI) Used

Financial Year Project Exchange Rate WPI (81/82=100) Inflator

1986/87 12.79 132.7 2.07

1987/88 12.97 143.6 1.91

1988/89 14.48 154.3 1.78

1989/90 16.66 165.7 1.66

1990/91 17.95 182.7 1.50

1991/92 24.52 207.8 1.32

1992/93 26.41 228.7 1.20

1993/94 31.36 247.8 1.11

1994/95 31.65 274.5 1.00

Source: World Bank - India Country Economic Memorandum, May 95.

INDIA - Natonal Water Management Project I - ICRAppendx2 :Economic and Financial Analysis

TatUe 2: DertvatlonofParltyPrices

PAFI TY (1) 1 DI DI'][' [E] [E] VI] DI 0] [1UNITS RCE G NUTS WHEAT SORGHUM SOYBEAN COTTON(5) SUGAF COPRA UREA DAP MOP

CANEPROJECTED WORLD MARKET PRICE (YEAR 2oo)

In i99o constant dollars (2) US$1MT 271.00 568.00 162.00 96.00 233.00 1500.00 242.00 420.00 142.00 162.00 104.00

Adjfactor to 1995 dolars 3) 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.06 1.08

In constant 1995 dollars US$/MT 292.68 635.04 174.96 103.68 251.64 1620.00 261.36 454.00 153.36 174.96 112.32

QUALITY ADJUSTMENT % 80.00 100.00 80.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 97.00 95.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

WOFLD MARKET EQUIVALENT US$/MT 234.14 635.04 139.97 93.31 226.48 1458.00 253.52 431.00 153.36 174.96 112.32

International shippng USt/MT 50.00 100.00 60.00 60.00 70,00 -250.00 -70.00 120.00 50.00 50.00 50.00

CIF INDIAN PORT US$/MT 284.14 735.04 199.97 153.31 296.48 1208.00 183.52 551.00 203.36 224.96 162.32

EXCHANGE RATE (4) PS/USI 31.85 31.85 31.85 31.85 31.85 31.85 31.85 31.85 31.85 31.85 31.85

CIF INDIAN PORT Rs/MT 9049.99 23411.02 6368.98 4882.99 9442.76 38474.80 5845.09 17550.00 6477.02 7164.98 5169.89

Port charges Rs/MT 226.25 585.28 159.22 122.07 236.07 -961.87 -146.13 400.00 161.93 179.12 129.25 0

Internal transport Ps/Mr 150.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 -40.00 -20.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00

Internalhandling Rs/MF 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 -200.00 -150.00 100.00 120.00 120.00 120.00

PROCESSEDVALUE Rs/MT 9546.24 24316.30 6848.21 5325.06 9998.83 37272.93 5528.96 18250.00 6958.94 7664.10 5619.14

Processingrato % 6200 3500 9000 90.00 90.00 3500 10.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

Processing costs Rs/MT -150.00 -200.00 -150.00 -150.00 -150.00 -500.00 -150.00 -100.00 0.00 0.00 0.0D

Value of cotton seed Rs/MT 2500.00

WHOLESALE VALUE Rs/MT 5768.67 8310.70 6013.38 4642.56 8848.95 15045.53 402.90 18150.00 6958.94 7664.10 5619.14

Local marketingflransport Rs/MT -200.00 -200.00 -200.00 -200.00 -200.00 -300.00 -60.00 250.00 200.00 200.00 200.00

FARMGATE PRICE Rs/MT 5568.67 8110.70 5813.38 4442.56 8648.95 14745.53 342.90 17900.00 7158.94 7864.10 5819.14

ECONOMIC FARMGATE PRICE Rs/KG 5.57 8.11 5.81 4.44 8.65 14.75 0.34 17.90 7.16 7.86 5.82

FINANCIAL FARMGATE PRCE (Andca Pradesh) Rs/KG 3.80 8.50 4.50 3.0D 9.00 2(100 0.55 30.00 ) 3.00 8.40 3.80

(1) Parity: V] Import (E] Export(2) World Barnk pice forecasts dated February 1995 for the year 2000a Inflated by MLA Index (average Ibr 1994 and 1995 bEkse 1990)(4) Based on World Bark Office Memorandum dated 11 January 1995 re Exchange Pates and Price ContIngencIes for Pro ject Analysis In Indba verage value for 1994 and 1995)(5) Wholesale value refers to seed cotton6 Price at KarnaiatQ.

File: PARITY.WK3

INDIA: Natbnal WaterManagement Pmject I - ICRAppendix 2: EaDnomic and FnancialAnalysis

ROS Sub-pojoect

Table 3: Economic Costs and Benefits (FRs million, 1995 Dontint pices)

YEAR 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 t1 12

PROJECT COSTS

Investment Costs (1) 0.020 2.130 3.632 3.950 11.739 12.053 39.142

WitM-pmjectO&M Costs (2) 3.187 3.585 3.984 4.382 4.780 5.179 5.577 5.577 5.577 5.577 5.577

TOTAL COSTS 3.207 5.715 7.615 8.332 16.520 17.231 44.719 5.577 5.577 5.577 5.577

PROJECT BENEFITS

Without-project Net Pioducton Benefits 0.036 0.541 1.403 2.340 5.126 7.986 17.274 17.274 17.274 17.274

With-pmject Net Productin Benefits 0.045 0.686 1.780 2.969 6.503 10.131 21.914 21.914 21.914 21.914

Incremental Net Benefits 0.010 0.145 0.377 0.629 1.377 2.145 4.639 4.639 4.639 4.639

Without-piojectOiM (Saved) Costs (3) 3.187 3.187 3.187 3.187 3.187 3.187 3.187 3.187 3.187 3.187 3.187 00

TOTAL BENEFITS 3.187 3.196 3.332 3.564 3.815 4.564 5.332 7.826 7.826 7.826 7.826

NET BENEFITS -0.020 -2.519 -4.283 -4.769 -12.704 -12.668 -39.387 2.249 2.249 2.249 2.249

NPV (12%, 25 years) - 28.843

ERR (25 years) - 6.21 %

NOTES:(1) Taken hom GOA P actual expenditure records. Financial costs have been converted ID economic costs multiplying by the SCF of 0.9.(2) Assu med b be Rs175Aha CCA (35.410 ha) hom 1994/95 increased linerally from Rs100ha from commencment of tlhe sch eme works. Economic costs have been estimated by applyng the SCF of 0.9(3) Taken at RslOOAiaof CCA (35,410 ha), and oDnverted in lo economic terms by rumltiplying by the SCF of 0.9.

File: RDSEA.WK3

INDIA: National Water Management Project (Cr.1770-IN)Imptementation Completion Report

Appendix 2: Economic and Financiat Analysis

Table 4. Financial and Economic Costs - Vani Vilas Sagar Scheme(Rs mittion)

FY87 FY88 FY89 FY90 FY91 FY92 FY93 FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97 onwards

Financial

- Investment costs 0.194 2.061 6.638 9.023 6.284 12.766 4.660 7.277 3.973 1.350 -

- In FY95 prices" 0.402 3.937 11.816 14.978 9.426 16.851 5.592 8.077 3.973 1.350 -CO- Incrementat 0 & M - - - - - 0.405 0.123 0.391 1.085

31.0853o

- In FY95 prices" - - - - - 0.486 0.137 0.391 1.0853' 1.085 '

Economic

- Investment costs 2' 0.362 3.543 10.634 13.480 8.483 15.166 5.033 7.269 3.576 1.215 -

Incremental 0 & M2/ - - - - - - 0.437 0.123 0.352 0.976 0.976

Using inflators shown in Table 1.2 Adjusted by using SCF of 0.9.3 Assumed at 2X of totat investment costs after compLetion of works.

INDIA: National Water Management Project (Cr.1770-IN)IrWpLementation Completion Report

Appendix 2: Economic and FinanciaL Analysis

Table 5. Financial and Economic Costs - Sathanur Scheme(Rs million)

FY87 FY88 FY89 FY90 FY91 FY92 FY93 FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97 orwards

Financial

- Investment costs - 0.750 2.163 7.169 12.324 13.436 8.160 1.871 16.053 6.5711 -

- In FY95 prices2' - 1.433 3.850 11.901 18.486 17.736 9.792 2.077 16.053 6.571 - 0

- Incremental 0 & M -- - - 0.301 0.285 0.497 1.368 1 .3703 1.37031

- In FY95 prices2' - - - - 0.397 0.342 0.552 1.368 1.3703' 1.3703

Economic

- Investment costs4' 1.290 3.465 10.711 16.637 15.962 8.813 1.869 14.448 5.914 -

- IncrementaL 0 & M4 - - - - 0.357 0.308 0.497 1.231 1.233 1.233

' IncLudes Rs2.071 million for terminated works to be carried out.Using inftators shown in Table 1.

3, Assumed at 2% of total investment costs after compLetion of works.V Adjusted by using SCF of 0.9.

91



Table 6. Annual Scheme Investment and O&M Expenditures(Current Rupees Million)

SCHEME 1986/87 1987/188 1988/89 1989/90 1990/91 1991/92 1992/93 1993/94 19949

THAMA8ARAPARANIInvestment 0.745 6 539 23.132 27.413 46.893 15.872 66.619O&M 6.925 8.612 9.717 13.082 12.751 19.500 21.000

MALAMPUZHAInvestment 1761 6.867 20.368 29.386 21.584OSM 2.100(1) 6.500(1)

THANtAVAInvestment 0.030 1 200 4.130 11.250 15.600 19.600 14.S440&M (2) (2X3)

RATAPANIInvestment 0.980 1.920 3.100 9.500OSM 0.520 0.800

NOTES:(1) 1994 prices.(2) In 1995 prces OCM expenditure was RslO0/ha in 188/89 and Rs175Sha in 1994/95.(3) Anticipated NVvMP investment expenditure in 1995/96 = Rs3 856 million.

INDIA: National Water Management Project (Cr.1770-IN)Implenentation Completion Report

Appendix 2: Economic and Financial Anatysis

Table 7. Financial and Economic Costs - Peechi Scheme(Rs miLLion)

FY87 FY88 FY89 FY90 FY91 FY92 FY93 FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97 orwards

Financial

- Investment costs - - - - 0.005 16.065 25.957

- In FY95 prices" - - - - - - 0.006 17.832 25.957 - -

- IncrementaL 0 L M - - - - - 0.841" 0.8412/

- In FY95 prices - - - - - - - 0.8412 0.8412/

Economic

Investment costs 3. - - - - - 0.005 16.049 23.361 - -

- IncrementaL 0 & M 3/ - - - 0.757 0.757

"' Using inflators shown in TabLe 1.2/ Assumed at 2% of total investment costs after compLetion of works.3 Adjusted by using SCF of 0.9.

INDIA: National Water Management Project (Cr.1770-IN)Impiementation Comptetion Report


Table 8. Financial and Economic Costs - Haryana Scheme(Rs million)

FY87 FY88 FY89 | FY90 FY91 FY92 FY93 FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97 onwards

Financial

- Investment costs - - - - - 386.708 510.148 52.553 - -

- In FY95 prices' - 464.050 566.269 52.553 -

- Incremental 0 & M - - - - - - - - - 5.88 5.88

- In FY95 prices" - - - - - - - - - 5.88 5.88

Economic

- Investment costs3

- - - - - 417.645 509.642 47.298 - -

- Incremental 0 & M3' - - - 5.29 5.29

Using inflators shown in TabLe 1.Assumed at 2X of total investment costs on lining of watercourses after completion of works.

3i Adjusted by using SCF of 0.9.

INDIA: National Water Management Project I - ICRAppendix z: Economic and F lnanuaA Anatysis

RDS Sub-project

Table 9: RDS Sub-project Benefitting heas (Hectares)

YEAR 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10. 25

KharlfT Distributary Tailend (epresented by DIstributary 16&)- Incremenbl area benefittng 1 21 35 38 113 116 377 'I-accumulatedtoblarea benefitting 1 22 57 95 208 324 701 700 700 4>

Babi Distribuiry Tailend (represented by Distributary 24)- incremental arem benefitting 1 21 35 38 113 116 377-accumulatedtoblarea beneftting 1 22 57 95 208 324 701 700 700

NOTES:1. This sub-project has notbeeneffectively monitored Theareas tht wil beneft from 995/96wereassessed by the missionat 4% of the toal command area (1,416 ha). Theareas beneftting inany particubr year during

the project ImplementaBon priod have been calculated In drect proportlon to the Investment costs ti the preceding year.

a itisassumedtriatlarmerswll benefitrromtneadditionalwatersupplyimmediately.

File: RDSEA.WK3

INDIA: Nabonal Water WMnagement Project I - ICRAppenOx)2: Economicanc Flnancial AnalysIs

Thambaraparani Sub-project

Table lo: Thambaraparani Sub- p-olect Beneriting Areas

YEAR 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 .25

Manimuthar Command- incremental area benefltfng 4 36 116 121 185 58 221- accumulated total area benefitting 4 40 156 277 461 519 740 740 740

Thambaraparani Draiage AffectedArea U- tncrenentat area benetAtUn 23 192 626 653 999 3t4 At92- accumulated total area benefitting 23 216 842 1495 2494 2808 4000 4000 4000

Thambaraparani Command- mcremental area benentting 28 231 751 784 1199 377 1431- accumulated total area benemitbng 28 259 1010 1794 2993 3369 4800 4800 4800

NOTES:

1. This sub-project rias not been effectively monKtaed. The areas thatwill benefitfrom 19956 were assessed bythe mission together vrth the ield staff. The areas benelltting In any particular year ouring theproject Implementation period have been calculated relaive to the Investment costs In the preceding year.

2. It Is assumed that farmers wIl benefit from the adoDtional anrcYa more timely water supply. or Improved Orainage condiibons Im medately.

File: THAMBAEA.WK3

INDIA: National Water Management Project I - ICRAppendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis

RDS Sub- project

Table 11: 1 Hectare Farm Model - Distributary 16a

CROP 1 HECTAFE FARM MODELWITHOUT PROJECT WITH PROJECT

AREAKharif

- paddy 1.00 1.00

Rabi (well irrgation)- groundnut 0.20 0.20 xo- sunflower 0.15 0.15 o

GROSS INCOME 24388 30503

COST OF PURCHASED INPUTS (1) 9439 11810

NET INCOME 14949 18693

NOTES:(1) Includes cost of family labour

File: RDSEA.WK3

INDIA: National Water Management Project I - ICRAppendx 2: Economic and Financial Analysis

RDS Sub- project

Table 12: 1 Hectare Farm Model - Distributary 24

CROP 1 FE CTAFE FARM MODELWITHOUT PROJECT WITH PROJECT

AREAKharit

- paddy 0.25 0.25- sesame 0.20 0.20- sorghum 0.20 0.20- sunflower 0.20 0.20

Rabi- paddy 0.25 0.25- groundnut 0.50 0.50- cotton 0.10 0.10- sunflower 0.15 0.15


COST OF PURCHA£D INPUTS (1) 10006 12064


NOIES:(1) Includes cost of family labour

File: FIDA.WK3

INDIA: National Water Management Project I - ICR

Appendix 2: Economic and Financial AnalysisRDS Sub-project

Table 13: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Paddy - Kharif

Items Unit Adequate Irrigation Inadequate Irrigation

Quantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value

(Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs)

A. Gross Value of ProductionYield kg 4600 5.57 25622 3700 5.57 20609

Byproduct kg 5520 0.27 1490 4625 0.27 1249

Gross Return Rs 27112 21858

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 1080.00 1080 1 900.00 900

Nursery ha 0.1 3150.00 315 0.1 3150.00 315 <,

Seed kg 75 5.40 405 75 5.40 405 m

Sowing/Transplanting ha 1 747.00 747 1 747.00 747

Manure t 6 198.00 1188 4 198.00 792

Fertilizer - Urea kg 150 7.16 1074 150 7.16 1074

- DAP kg 200 7.86 1572 100 7.86 786

- MOP kg 0 5.82 0 0 5.82 0

- Lime kg 0 4.50 0 0 4.50 0

Pesticides - Chemicals ha 1 1080.00 1080 1 810.00 810

- Sprayer ha 3 9.00 27 2 9.00 18

Weeding ha 1 810.00 810 1 675.00 675

Family Labour m-d 25 27.00 675 22 27.00 594

lHarvesting/Threshing ha 1 765 765 1 630 630

Total Direct Costs 9738 7746

C. Net Return (A-B) 17374 14112

File: RDSEA.WK3


RDS Sub-project

Table 14: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Paddy - Rabi

Items Unit Adequate Irrigation Inadequate Irrigation

Quantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value

(Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs)

A. Gross Value of ProductionYield kg 3500 5.57 19495 2800 5.57 15596

Byproduct kg 4200 0.27 1134 3500 0.27 945

Gross Return Rs 20629 16541

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 1080.00 1080 1 900.00 900

Nursery ha 0.1 2700.00 270 0.1 2700.00 270

Seed kg 75 5.40 405 75 5.40 405 1o

Sowing/Transplanting ha 1 720.00 720 1 675.00 675

Manure t 6 198.00 1188 4 198.00 792

Fertilizer - Urea kg 150 7.16 1074 150 7.16 1074

- DAP kg 200 7.86 1572 100 7.86 786

- MOP kg 0 5.82 0 0 5.82 0

- Lime kg 0 4.50 0 0 4.50 0

Pesticides - Chemicals ha 1 810.00 810 1 630.00 630

- Sprayer ha 2 9.00 18 2 9.00 18

Weeding ha 1 810.00 810 1 675.00 675

Family Labour m-d 25 27.00 675 22 27.00 594

Harvesting/Threshing ha 1 765 765 1 630 630

Total Direct Costs 9387 7449

C. Net Return (A-B) 11242 9092

File: RDSEA.WK3


RDS Sub-project

Table 15: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Groundnut - Rabi

Items Unit Adequate Irrigation Inadequate IrrigatonQuantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value

(Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs)A. Gross Value of Production

Yield kg 1050 8.11 8516 800 8.11 6488Byproduct ha 1 2025.00 2025 1 1440.00 1440Gross Return Rs 10541 7928

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 337.50 338 1 337.50 338Nursery haSeed kg 80 12.15 972 80 12.15 972Sowing bullock pair 2.5 76.50 191 2.5 76.50 191Manure t 4 198.00 792 2 198.00 396Fertilizer - Urea kg 50 7.16 358 50 7.16 358

- DAP kg 100 7.86 786 75 7.86 590- MOP kg 0 5.82 0 0 5.82 0- Lime kg 80 4.50 360 50 4.50 225

Pesticides - Chemicals litre 2.5 270.00 675 2 270.00 540- Sprayer + labour per spray 2 90.00 180 2 90.00 180

Weeding ha 1 495.00 495 1 405.00 405Family Labour m-d 25 27.00 675 22 27.00 594Harvesting/Threshing ha 1 405.00 405 1 360.00 360Total Direct Costs 6227 5148

C. Net Return (A -B) 4314 2780

File: RDSEA.WK3


RDS Sub-project

Table 16: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Sunflower - Rabi

Items Unit Adequate Irrigation Inadequate IrrigationQuantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value


Yield kg 950 9.00 8550 700 9.00 6300Byproduct kgGross Return Rs 8550 6300

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 315.00 315 1 315.00 315Nursery ha 0

Seed kg 7.5 45.00 338 7.5 45.00 338Sowing ha 1 180.00 180 1 180.00 180Manure t 5 198.00 990 3 198.00 594Fertilizer - Urea kg 150 7.16 1074 100 7.16 716


Pesticides - Chemicals litre 0 270.00 0 0 270.00 0- Sprayer + labour per spray 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0

Weeding ha 1 450.00 450 1 450.00 450Family Labour m-d 25 27.00 675 22 27.00 594Harvesting/Threshing ha 1 504.00 504 1 450,00 450Total Direct Costs 5508 4423


File: RDSEA.WK3


RDS Sub-project

Table 17: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Sunflower - Kharif

Items Unit Adequate Irrigation RainfedQuantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value


Yield kg 900 9.00 8100 700 9.00 6300Byproduct kgGross Return Rs 8100 6300

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 337.50 338 1 315.00 315Nursery haSeed kg 7.5 45.00 338 7.5 45.00 338 NSowing ha 1 180.00 180 1 180.00 180Manure t 5 198.00 990 3 198.00 594Fertilizer - Urea kg 100 0.00 0 50 0.00 0


Pesticides - Chemicals litre 0 270.00 0 0 270.00 0- Sprayer + labour per spray 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0

Weeding ha 1 450.00 450 1 360.00 360Family Labour m-d 25 27.00 675 22 27.00 594Harvesting/Threshing ha 1 504.00 504 1 450.00 450Total Direct Costs 3474 2831


File: RDSEA.WK3

INDIA. National Water Management Project I - ICRAppendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis

RDS Sub-project

Table 18: Economic Crop Bidget (per hectare) - Cotton - Biseasonal

Items Unit Adequate Irrigation Inadequate Irrigation RainfedQuantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value

(Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (As)A. Gross Value of Production

Yield kg 1500 14.75 22125 1100 14.75 16225 500 14.75 7375Byproduct kgGross Retum Rs 22125 16225 7375

B. Cost of Farm hIputsLand Preparation ha 1 1080.00 1080 1 1080.00 1080 1 720.00 720Nursely haSeed kg 3.75 180.00 675 3.75 180.00 675 8 81.00 648Sowing ha 1 675.00 675 1 675.00 675 1 202.50 203Manure t 10 198.00 1980 5 198.00 990 0 198.00 0Fertilizer - Urea kg 150 7.16 1074 100 7.16 716 50 7.16 358

- DAP kg 100 7.86 786 50 7.86 393 50 7.86 393- MOP kg 50 5.82 291 50 5.82 291 0 5.82 0 5- Lime kg 0 4.50 0 0 4.50 0 0 4.50 0

Pesticides - Chemicals ha 1 6750.00 6750 1 6300.00 6300 1 2700.00 2700- Sprayer per spray 5 9.00 45 4 9.00 36 2 9.00 18

Weeding ha 0 450.00 0 0 360.00 0 0 360.00 0Family Labour m-d 55 27.00 1485 48 27.00 1296 30 27.00 810Harvesting/rhreshing ha 1 504.00 504 1 450.00 450 1 450.00 450Total Direct Costs 15345 12902 6300

C. Net Retum (A-B) 6780 3323 1076

Fie: RDSEA.WK3

INDIA: National Water Management Project I - ICRAppendix 2: Economic and Fhiancial Analysis

RDS Sub-project

Table 19 Economic Crop Bidget (perhectare) - Groundnut - Kharif


(Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs)A. Gross Valu e of ProductionYield kg 900 8.11 7299 650 8.11 5272 450 8.11 3650Byproduct ha 1 1800.00 1800 1 1350.00 1350 1 900.00 900Gross Retum Rs 9099 6622 4550

B. Cost of Farm inputsLand Preparation ha 1 337.50 338 1 337.50 338 1 315.00 315Nursely haSeed kg 80 1215 972 80 1Z15 972 60 1215 729Sowing bullock pair 2.5 7650 191 2.5 76.50 191 2 76.50 153Manure t 4 198.00 792 2 198.00 396 2 198.00 396Fertlizer - Urea kg 50 7.16 358 50 7.16 358 50 7.16 358- DAP kg 100 7.86 786 75 7.86 590 50 7.86 393-MOP kg 0 5.82 0 0 5.82 0 0 5.82 0 0-Uime kg 50 4.50 225 50 4.50 225 0 4.50 0Pesticides - Chemicals litre 2.5 270.00 675 2 270.00 540 1 270.00 270- Sprayer +labour per spray 2 90.00 180 2 90.00 180 1 45.00 45Weeding ha 1 495.00 495 1 450.00 450 1 360.00 360Famly Labour m-d 25 27.00 675 22 27.00 594 12 27.00 324Harvesting/rhreshing ha 1 405.00 405 1 360.00 360 1 360.00 360Total Direct Costs 6092 5193 3703

C. Net Retum (A-B) 3007 1428 847

Fie: RDSEA.WK3


RDS Sub-project

Table 20: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Sorghum - Khaif

Items Unit RainfedQuantity Unit Price Value

(Rs) (Rs)A. Gross Value of Production

Yield kg 1200 5.81 6972Byproduct kg 1500 0.32 473Gross Return Rs 7445

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 405.00 405 °Nursery haSeed kg 7.5 9.00 68Sowing ha 1 225.00 225Manure t 2 198.00 396Fertilizer - Urea kg 50 7.16 358

- DAP kg 25 7.86 197- MOP kg 25 5.82 146- Lime kg 0 4.50 0

Pesticides - Chemicals litre 0 270.00 0- Sprayer + labour per spray 0 0.00 0

Weeding w-d 15 22.50 338Family Labour m-d 15 27.00 405Harvesting/Threshing m-d 15 27.00 405Total Direct Costs 2941

C. Net Return (A- B) 4504

File: RDSEA.WK3


RDS Sub-project

Table 21: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Sesame - Khaff



Yield kg 450 9.00 4050Byproduct kgGross Return Rs 4050

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 225.00 225Nursery haSeed kg 6 10.80 65Sowing ha 1 180.00 180Manure t 2 198.00 396Fertilizer - Urea kg 25 7.16 179


Pesticides - Chemicals litre 1 135.00 135- Sprayer per spray 1 9.00 9

Weeding ha 1 162.00 162Family Labour m-d 14 27.00 378Harvesting/Threshing ha 1 360.00 360Total Direct Costs 2627

C. Net Return (A-B) 1423

File: RDSEA.WK3


RDS Sub- project

Table 22: 1 Hectare Farm Model - Distributary 24

CROP 1 FE CTARE FARM MODELWITHOUT PROJECT WITH PROJECT

AREAKharif

- paddy 0.25 0.25- sesame 0.20 0.20- sorghum 0.20 0.20- sunflower 0.20 0.20

Rabi- paddy 0.25 0.25- groundnut 0.50 0.50- cotton 0.10 0.10- sunflower 0.15 0.15





File: RDSFA.WK3


RDS Sub- project

Table 23: 1 Hectare Farm Model - Distributary 16a

CROP 1 -E CTARE FARM MODELWITHOUT PROJECT WITH PROJECT

AREAKharif

- paddy 1.00 1.00

Rabi (well irrigation)- groundnut 0.20 0.20- sunflower 0.15 0.15

oo




NOIES:(1) Includes cost of family labour

File: RDSFA.WK3

INDIA: National Water Management Project (Cr.1770-IN)Implementation Completion Report


Table 24. Cropped Area. Yield and Production used for Analysis" - Vani Vilas Sagar Scheme

Future without Project Future with Project

Item Cropped Area Yield Production Cropped Area Yield Production

(ha) (ton/ha) (ton) (ha) (ton/ha) (ton)

Kharif

- Groundnut 2,160 1.0 2,160 1,000 1.0 1,000

- Millet 100 1.75 175 100 1.75 175

- Sunflower 200 0.9 180 200 0.9 180

Sub-total 2,460 1,300

Rabi

- Paddy 550 3.0 1,650 550 3.0 1,650

- Groundnut 2,450 1.5 3,675 2,450 1.5 3,675

- Sunflower 1.050 1.3 1,365 1,050 1.3 1,365

Sub-total 4.050 4.050

Perennials

- Coconuts (copra) 5,29021 2.1 11,109 6,450 2.1 13,545

TotaL Cropped Area 11,8003' 11,8003'

Net Cultivated Area 12,250 10,250

Cropping Intensity (X) 96 96

Assumed that the project impact would only be an increased coconut area, as explained in para 41 of this appendix. Cropped areas are based on 1994/95 recordsprovided by the scheme office and no further increase in coconut area is assumed.

2/ Estimated based on annual rate of increase of coconut area in non-project area of Hiriyu Tank over the past nine yeas (1986/87 to 1994/95).V With the rehabilitation of the sugar mill (at appraisal it was recommended that the mill should be closed down), some farmers started new planting of cane which

was limited to a small area (225 ha). As this is not a direct result of the project it is therefore not included for the purpose of the analysis.4/ Assumed kharif irrigated groundnuts during immature period.

INOIA: National Water Management Project (Cr.1770-IN)ImpLementation Comptetion Report


Table 25. Coconut Crop Budgets" - Vani Vilas Sagar Scheme

Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12onvwards

Yield- Nuts/tree - - - 5 25 40 60 70 80 85- Copra (kg)/tree

2' - - - - - 1 5 8 12 14 16 17

Revenue per Tree (Rs)

- Copra at Rs3O/kg - - - - - 30 150 240 360 420 480 510- Leaves at RsO.6/leaf - - - - - 6 6 6 6 6 6 6- Husks at RsO.25/nut - - - - 1 6 10 15 18 20 21- Shells at RsO.10/nut - - - - - - 3 4 6 7 8 9Sub-Total - - - - - 37 165 260 387 451 514 546 o

Cost per Tree (Rs)

- Fertilizer 0.8 2.0 5.0 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.8 7.9 8.0- Pesticides 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5- Compost 1.4 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.5- PLanting materiaL 6.0 - - - - - - -- Labour 12.5 8.0 9.0 10.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 19.0 20.0

Sub-Total 22.0 13.5 18.1 21.6 24.4 25.7 27.1 28.4 29.8 31.3 33.7 35.0

Net Revenue

- Rs per tree -22.0 -13.5 -18.1 -21.6 -24.4 11.3 137.9 231.6 357.2 419.7 480.3 511.0- Rs per ha3' -2,750 -1,688 -2,263 -2,700 -3,050 1,413 17,238 28,950 44,650 52,463 60,038 63,875

Intercropping"- Net Revenue (Rs/ha) 7,980 7,980 7,581 6,384 5,586 3,990 - - - - - -

Total Revenue (Rs/ha) 5.230 6.292 5.318 3.684 2,536 5.403 17.238 28.950 44.650 52,463 60.038 63,875Revenue at Economic Prices- Coconuts -2,550 -1,663 -2,388 -2,913 -3,238 -263 9,238 16,438 26,013 30,700 35,275 37,563- Intercropping 4

/ 3,166 3,166 3,008 2,533 2,216 1,583 - - - - - -Total (Rs/ha) 616 1.503 620 -380 -1.022 -1,320 9.238 16,438 26.013 30.700 35.275 37.563

1 Based on re-estimated data provided by M & E unit of Karnataka Irrigation Department.2/ At 200 g/nut.3/ At 125 trees per ha.4 Assumed kharif irrigated groundnuts during immature period.

INDIA: National Water Management Project (Cr.1770-lN)Im,lementation Completion Report


Table 26. Crop Yield and Input Requirement (per ha) used for Analysis - Vani Vilas Sagar Scheme

Fertilizer

Crop Yield Seed Pesticides Miscellaneous Labour Bullocks

N P K

(ton/ha) . . . . . .(kg/ha). . . . . . (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) (Man-day) (Pair-day)

Future with and Future without Project1'

Groundnut- Kharif 1.0 20 35 30 127 151 115 130 23

- Rabi 1.5 27 45 37 127 227 172 157 23

Millet - Kharif 1.75 30 20 - 50 180 150 70 18

Sunflower- Kharif 0.9 40 45 15 100 150 75 18

- Rabi 1.3 45 50 - 15 120 172 90 18

Paddy - Rabi 3.0 80 35 20 50 300 268 203 26

Cocoruts2/

V See footnote 1 of Table 24 of this appendix.

2/ See Table 25 of this appendix.



Table 27. Crop Budget (per ha) used for Analysis - Vani Vilas Sagar Scheme

Gross Return Financial Cost of Inputs Net Return

Crop Fertilizer

Product By-product Total Other Labour"' Bullocks Total Financial Economic

N P K

. ........................ . ... . (Rs/ha) .

Future with and withoutProject"'

Groundnut- Kharif 12,000 1,200 13.200 148 315 200 490 2,457 1,610 5,220 7,980

- Rabi 18,000 1,800 19.800 200 405 247 643 2,967 1,610 6.072 13,728

Millet - Kharif 7,000 700 7,700 222 180 - 580 1,323 1,260 3,565 4,135

Sunflower- Kharif 9,000 - 9,000 296 405 - 277 1,418 1,260 3,656 5,344

- Rabi 13,000 - 13,000 333 450 - 319 1,701 1,260 4,063 8,937

Paddy - Rabi 16,980 1,698 18.678 591 315 133 968 3,837 1,820 7,664 11,015 -

Coconuts3'

See footnote 1 of Table 24 of this appendix.

21 Excluding family labour; assumed 70% of total labour requirements.

' See Table 25 of this appendix.


Appendix 2: Economic and Financiat AnaLysis

Table 28. Economic Costs and Benefits - Vani Vilas Sagar Scheme(Rs miLtion)

Item FY87 | FY88 FY89 FY90 FY91 FY92 FY93 FY94 FY95 FY96Scheme Costs

- Investment cost' 0.362 3.543 10.634 13.480 8.483 15.166 5.033 7.269 3.576 1.215- Incremental 0 & K costs - - - - - - 0.437 0.123 0.352 0.976

Total Costs 0.362 3.543 10.634 13.480 8.483 15.166 5.470 7.392 3.928 2.191Scheme Benefits

Incrementat net benefits2/ - (0.185) (0.306) (0.490) (0.745) (1.051) (1.376) (0.935) 0.027 1.869- Net benefits (0.362) (3.728) (10.940) (13.970) (9.228) (16.217) (6.846) (8.327) (3.901) (0.322)Item FY97 FY98 FY99 FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005 FY2006-14Scheme Costs

- Investment cost1'

Incrementat l & N costs 0.976 0.976 0.976 0.976 0.976 0.976 0.976 0.976 0.976 0.976Total Costs 0.976 0.976 0.976 0.976 0.976 0.976 0.976 0.976 0.976 0.976

Scheme Benefits

- Incrementat net benefits2' 3.986 6.498 8.749 12.047 14.866 16.919 18.451 19.288 19.786 19.952- Net benefits 3.010 5.522 7.773 11.071 13.890 15.943 17.475 18.312 18.810 18.976NPV at 12% -Rs13.7 miltion

ERR (25 years) 8.6%

See Table 4.Incremental net benefits at full devetopment are distributed between years in the proportion of investment costs, with a time Lag of one year.

114

INDIA: National Water Management Project (Cr. 1770-IN)Implementation Completion Report


Table 29. Farm Incomes - Vani Vilas Sagar Scheme

1. Size of Farm Model: 3 ha

2. Cropping Pattern:

Crops Without Project With Project

....... . .(ha) .

Kharif- Groundnut 0.55 0.40- Millet 0.02 0.02- Sunflower 0.03 0.03

Rabi- Paddy 0.10 0.10- Groundnut 0.60 0.60- Sunflower 0.25 0.25

Coconut 1.30 1.45

2.85 2.85

Cropping intensity (%) 96% 96%

3. Farm Incomes:


........ .........

Gross Value of Production 113,407 121,665Production Cost 14.164 14,037Water charges" 429 429

Net Return 98,814 107,199

Incremental: Rs8,385

" Based on the following rates:- Groundnut, sunflower and coconut: RsI47/ha- Paddy Rs245/ha- Millet Rs86/ha.

INDIA: National Water Management Project (Cr.1770-IN)Imptementation CompLetion Report

Appendix 2: Economic and FinanciaL AnaLysis

Table 30. Economic Costs and Benefits - Sathanur Scheme(Rs miIIion)

FY88 FY89 FY90 FY91 FY92 FY93 FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97-2017

Scheme Costs

- Investment cost 1.290 3.465 10.711 16.637 15.962 8.813 1.869 14.448 5.914 -

- Incremental 0 & M costs - - - - 0.357 0.308 0.497 1.231 1.233 1.233

Total Costs 1.290 3.465 10.711 16.637 16.319 9.121 2.366 15.679 7.147 1.233

Scheme Benefits

- Incremental net benefit - 0.120 1.470 3.045 4.560 5.392 5.572 6.937 7.500 7.500

Net Benefit (1.290) (3.345) (9.241) (13.592) (11.759) (3.729) 3.206 (8.742) 0.353 6.267

NPV at 12% -Rs13.8 million

ERR (25 years) 6%

INDIA: Nationat Water Management Project (Cr.1770-1U)Implementation Coaptetion Report


Table 31. Crop Yield and Input Requirement (per ha)1' used for Analysis -Sathanur Scheme

FertilizerCrop Yield Seed Pesticides Miscellaneous Labour Bullocks"'

N P K

(ton/ha) . . . . . . .(kg/ha). . . . . . . (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) (Man-day) (Pair-day)

Future with and without Project2'

Kharif - Paddy 2.75 80.0 34.0 21.0 50 1,035 362 150 20.0- Groundnut 1.63 22.5 45.0 34.0 220 290 217 65 15.0- Millet 2.20 38.0 19.0 9.5 50 197 197 60 12.5

Rabi 3.00 85.0 37.0 23.0 50 1,087 393 155 20.0- Paddy 1.75 25.0 50.0 37.0 225 311 228 70 15.0- Groundnut 2.50 50.0 25.0 12.5 50 259 217 65 12.5- Millet

Biseasonal- Sugarcane 80.0 125.0 60.0 30.0 3 ton 1,449 414 275 30.0

Based on SAR, pesticides and miscellaneous costs were updated to FY95 prices.

21 See footnote I of Table 32 of this appendix.

INDIA: National Water Management Project (Cr.1770-IN)ImpLementation Completion Report

Appendix 2: Economic and Financial AnaLysis

Table 32. Cropped Area, Yield and Production used for Analysis" (Left Bank Canal Command Area - 9,707 ha) - Sathanur Scheme

Future without Project Future with ProjectItem __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____F_I__ ___ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __I_ __ _ _ _ _

Cropped Area Yield Production Cropped Area Yield Production


Kharif

- Paddy 350 2.75 963 350 2.75 963

- Groundnut 128 1.63 209 128 1.63 209

- Millet 650 2.20 1,430 650 2.20 1,430

Sub-total 1.128 1,128

Rabi

- Paddy 2,838 3.00 8,514 1,985 3.00 5,955

- Groundnut 3,437 1.75 6,015 7,295 1.75 12,766

- Millet 1.554 2.50 3,885 395 2.50 988

Sub-total 7,829 9,675

Biseasonal

- Sugarcane 629 80.00 50,320 151 80.00 12,080

TotaL Cropped Area 9,586 10,954

Net Cultivated Area 9,707 9,707

Cropping Intensity (%) 99 113

Assumed that the project impact would be an increased Rabi-groundnut area (partial shift from Rabi-paddy, Rabi-millet and sugarcane) as explained in para 48of this appendix. Kharif cropped area is based on a three-year average (1991/92 to 1993/4) and assumed no change between "with" and "without" project, asthere is no suppty of canal irrigation water during kharif. Rabi cropped area is an average of 1979/80, 1981/82 and 1983/84 for "without" project and an averageof 1991/92 to 1993/94 for "with" project. These years were chosen as they had a more or less simitar leveL of rabi water diversion.

21 Based on SAR with project yield.

INDIA: National Water Management Project (Cr1770-IN)Implementation Compnetion Report

Appendix 2. Economic and Financial Analysis

Table 33. Crop Budget (per ha) used for Analysis - Sathanur Scheme


Crop FertilizerProduct By-product" Total Other Labour" Bullocks Total Financial Economic

N P K

. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Rs/ha) . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

Future with and without -Project

3

Kharif- Paddy 11,083 1,053 12,136 602 646 164 1,647 3,675 1,400 8,134 4,002 7 576- Groundnut 19,234 1,923 21.157 169 855 265 3,367 1,593 1,050 7.299 13,858 7,460- Millet 8,800 704 9,504 286 361 74 644 1,470 875 3,710 5,794 4,494

Rabi- Paddy 12,090 1,149 13,239 639 703 179 1,730 3,798 1,400 8.449 4,790 8,744- Groundnut 20,650 2,069 22.715 188 289 289 3,464 1,715 1,050 7.656 15,059 8,166- MilLet 10,000 850 10,850 376 98 98 726 1,593 875 4.143 6,707 5,169

BiseasonalSugarcane 48,000 - 48.000 940 1,140 234 3,813 6,738 2,100 14,965 3,035 10,481

Assumed at 9.5% (paddy), 10% (groundwater) and 8.5% (millet) of gross value of respective products as applied to SAR.

2/ Excluding family labour; assumed 70% of total Labour requirements.

3' See footnote 1 of Table 32 of this appendix.

119



Table 34. Farm Incomes - Sathanur Scheme

1. Size of Farm Model: 1.5 ha



....... . .(ha) .

Kharif- Paddy 0.05 0.05

- Groundnut 0.02 0.02- Millet 0.10 0.10

Rabi- Paddy 0.45 0.30- Groundnut 0.50 1.13- Millet 0.25 0.06

Sugarcane 0.10 0.02

1.47 1.68


3. Farm Incomes:


.. ....... (R*s).


Net Return 15,597 20,445

Incremental: Rs4,848

" Based on Rsl25/ha for paddy and Rs63/ha for non-paddy crops.

120



Table 35: 1 Hectare Farm Model - Manimuthar Command

CROP 1 HECTARE FARM MODELWITHOUT PROJECT WITH PROJECT

AREAPishanam paddy

- irrigated 0.54 0.63- rainfed 0.36 0.27

Kar paddy (1)- irrigated 0.18 0.20

Banana - irrigated 0.10 0.10

GROSS INCOME 23059.08 25225.17

COST OF PURCHASED INPUTS 11375.78 11977.29

NET INCOME (2) 11683.31 13247.88

RETURN TO FAMILY LABOUR (Rs/m-d) 328 361

TOTAL LABOU R INP UT (m -d/ha) 128 133

NOTES:(1) Assumes a kar crop of paddy is grown about once every three years.(2) Excludes cost of family labour

File: THAMBAFA.WK3

121



Table 36: 1 Hectare Farm Model - Thambaraparani Command - Drainage Affected Area


AREAPishanam paddy

- irrigated/adequate drainage 1.00- irrigated/drainage impediment 1.00

Kar paddy- irrigated 0.50 0.50

Pulses - residual moisture 0.30 0.30

GROSS INCOME (Rs/ha) 26532.75 29161.50

COST OF PURCHASED INPUTS (Rs/ha) 11987.50 12410.00

NET INCOME (Rs/ha) (1) 14545.25 16751.50


TOTAL LABOUR INPUT (m-d/ha) 151 154

NOTES:(1) Excludes cost of family labour

File: THAMBAFA.WK3

122



Table 37: 1 Hectare Farm Model - Thambaraparani Command


AREAPishanam paddy

- irrigated 1.00 1.00Kar paddy

- irrigated 0.65 0.65Pulses - residual moisture 0.30 0.30


COST OF PURCHASED INPUTS (Rs/ha) 16148.50 16411.50

NET INCOME (Rs/ha) (1) 16745.83 18007.50


TOTAL LABOUR INPUT(m-d/ha) 180 182

NOTES:(1) Excludes cost of family labour

File: THAMBAFA.WK3

123

INDIA National Water Management Project I - ICRAppendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis


Table 38: Financial Crop Budget (per hectare) - Kar Paddy - Manimuthar Command

Items Unit IrrigatedQuantity Unit Price Value

(Rs) (Rs)A Gross Value of Production

Yield kg 5500 3.75 20625Byproduct kg 6600 0.38 2508Gross Retun Rs 23133

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparaton ha 1 1200.00 1200Nursery 0.1 3500.00 350Seed kg 75 6.00 450Transplanting ha 1 1150.00 1150ManLre t 6 120.00 720Ferilizer - Urea kg 200 3.45 690


Pesticides - Chemicals ha 1 300.00 300- Sprayer ha 1 10.00 10

Weeding ha 1 750.00 750Water Charges ha 1 125.00 125Malnt field channels ha 1 12.5 13Harvesting/Threshing ha 1 3400 3400Total Drect Costs 10135

C. Net Retun (A-B) 12998Family LaboLr m-d 30Retum to Family Labour RsIm-d 433

D. LabourHred labour m-d 25

w-d 90

Total labour (1) m-d 109

(1) Family labourplus hred labour expressed in man-days (m-d) assuming 1 woman day (w-cO is equivalentto 0.6 man-day.

File: THAMBAFA.WK3



Table 39: Financial Crop Budget (per hectare) - Pishanam Paddy - Manimulhar Command

Items Unit With Project - Irrigated Without Project - Irrigated RainfedQuantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value

(Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Fs)A. Gross Value of Production

Yield kg 5000 3.75 18750 4500 3.75 16875 3500 3.75 13125Byproduct kg 6000 0.38 2280 5400 0.38 2052 4200 0.38 1596Gross Return Rs 21030 18927 14721

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 1200.00 1200 1 1000.00 1000 1 1000.00 1000Nursery 0.1 3500.00 350 0.1 3900.00 390 0.1 3500.00 350Seed kg 75 6.00 450 75 6.00 450 75 6.00 450Transplantng ha 1 1150.00 1150 1 1050.00 1050 1 1150.00 1150Manure t 6 120.00 720 5 120.00 600 2 120.00 240Fertilizer - Urea kg 200 3.45 690 200 3.45 690 100 3.45 345

- DAP kg 100 7.90 790 100 7.90 790 50 7.90 395- MOP kg 50 3.75 188 50 3.75 188 25 3.75 94- Lime kg 0 1.50 0 0 1.50 0 0 1.50 0

Pesticides - Chemicals ha 1 300.00 300 1 300.00 300 1 300.00 300- Sprayer ha I 10.00 10 1 10.00 10 1 10.00 10

Weeding ha 1 750.00 750 1 750.00 750 1 650.00 650Water Charges ha 1 125.00 125 1 125.00 125 0 125.00 0Malnt.fieldchannels ha 1 12.5 13 1 12.5 13 0 12.5 0HarvestngflTreshing ha 1 3400 3400 1 3400 3400 1 3000 3000Total Direct Costs 10135 9755 7984

C. Net Return (A-B) 10895 9172 6737Family Labour m-d 30 30 25Return to Family Labour Rs/m-d 363 306 269

D. LabourHired labour m-d 25 25 15

w-d 90 90 70

Totallabour(1) m-d 109 109 82

(1) Family laboLr plus hired labour expressed In man-days (m-d) assuming 1 woman day (w-d) Is equivalent to 0.6 man-day.

File: THAMBAFA.WK3

INDIA: NaUional Water Management Project I - ICRAppendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis

Thambaraparanl Sub- project

Table 40: Financial Crop Budget (per hectare) - Kar Paddy - Thambaraparani Command

Items Unit With Project Without ProjectQLantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Valiue


Yield kg 5000 3.75 18750 4750 3.75 17813Byproduct kg 6000 0.38 2280 5700 0.38 2166Gross Return Rs 21030 19979

B. Cost of Farm InpLtsLand Preparation ha 1 1200.00 1200 1 1200.00 1200NuLsery 0.1 3500.00 350 0.1 3500.00 350Seed kg 75 6.00 450 75 6.00 450Transpiarting ha 1 - 1100.00 1100 1 1100.00 1100Manure t 6 120.00 720 5 120.00 600Fertilizer - Urea kg 200 3.45 690 200 3.45 690


Pesticides - Chemicals ha 1 300.00 300 1 300.00 300- Sprayer ha 1 10.00 10 1 10.00 10

Weeding ha 1 700.00 700 1 600.00 600Water Charges ha 1 125.00 125 1 125.00 125Malnt field channels ha 1 12.5 13 1 12.5 13Harvesting/Threshing ha 1 3125 3125 1 3125 3125Total Direct Costs 9760 9540

C. Net Return (A-B) 11270 10439Family Laboux m-d 30 30Retuxn to Family Labour Rs/m-d 376 348

D. LaboutHled labour m-d 25 25

w-d 85 82

Total abour (1) m-d 106 104

) Family labour plus hired labour expressed In man- days (m-d) assuming 1 woman day (w-d) Is equlvalert to 0.6 man-day.

File: THAMBAFAWK3


Thambaraparani Sub- project

Table 41: Financial Crop Budget (per hectare) - Pishanam Paddy - Thambaraparani Command

Items Unit With Project Without ProjectQuantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value



B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 1200.00 1200 1 1200.00 1200Nursery 0.1 3500.00 350 0.1 3500.00 350Seed kg 75 6.00 450 75 6.00 450Transplanting ha 1 1100.00 1100 1 1100.00 1100Manure t 6 120.00 720 5 120.00 600FerTiizer - Urea kg 200 3.45 690 200 3.45 690

- DAP kg 100 7.90 790 100 7.90 790-MOP kg 50 3.75 188 50 3.75 188- Lime kg 0 1.50 0 0 1.50 0

PesUcides - Chemicals ha 1 300.00 300 1 300.00 300- Sprayer ha 1 10.00 10 1 10.00 10

Weeding ha 1 700.00 700 1 700.00 700Water Charges ha 1 125.00 125 1 125.00 125Maint. field channels ha 1 12.5 13 1 12.5 13Harvesting[Threshing ha 1 3125 3125 1 3125 3125Total Direct Costs 9760 9640

C. Net Return (A-B) 9167 8446Family Labour m-d 30 30Rettin to Family Labour RsIm-d 306 282

8D. Labour

Hired labour m-d 25 25w-d 85 83

Total labour (1) m-d 106 105

(1) Family laboL, plus hired labour expressed in man-days (m-d) assuming 1 woman day (w-d) is equivalent to 0.6 man-day.

File: THAMBAFA.WK3



Table 42: Financial Crop Budget (per hectare) - Pishanam Paddy - Drainage Affected Area - Thambaraparani Command




B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 1000.00 1000 1 1000.00 1000Nursery 0.1 3500.00 350 0.1 3500.00 350Seed kg 75 6.00 450 75 6.00 450Transplanting ha 1 1050.00 1050 1 1050.00 1050Manure t 4 120.00 480 3 120.00 360Fertilizer - Urea kg 100 3.45 345 100 3.45 345



Weeding ha 1 600.00 600 1 500.00 500Water Charges ha 1 125.00 125 1 125.00 125Maint. field channels ha 1 105 105 1 12.5 13Harvesting/rhreshing ha 1 1875 1875 1 1875 1875Total Direct Costs 7223 6910

C. Net Return (A- B) 9602 7811Family Labour m-d 25 25Return to Family Labour Rs/m-d 384 312

D. LabourHired labour m-d 20 20

w-d 80 78


(1) Family labour plus hired labour expressed In man-days (m-d) assuming 1 woman day (w-d) Is equivalent to 0.6 man-day.

File: THAMBAFA.WK3


Thambaraparanl Sub- project

Table 43: Financial Crop Budget (per hectare) - Banana - Manimuthar Command

Items Unit Adequate IrrigationQuantity Unit Price Value

(Rs) (Rs)A. Gross Value of ProducUon

Yield bunches 1500 22.50 33750Byproduct kgGross Return Rs 33750

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation m-d 60 35.00 2100NurserySeed (suckers) no. 2500 1.00 2500Planting m-d 10 35.00 350Manure (olilcake) kg 375 7.15 2681Fertilizer - Urea kg 50 3.45 173



Weeding m-d 30 35.00 1050Bunch supports no. 400 6 2400Water Charges ha 1 125.00 125Maint. field channels ha 1 12.5 13Harvesting bunch 1500 0.5 750Total Direct Costs 14096

C. Net Retum (A-B) 19654Family Labour m-d 50Retuxn to Family Labour Rs/m-d 393

D. LabourHired labour m-d 150

w-d 0


(1) Family labour plus hired labour expressed in man-days (m-d) assuming 1 woman day (w-d) is equivalent to 0.6 man-day.

File: THAMBAFA.WK3



Table 44: FInancial Crop Budget (per hectare) - Summer Pulses (Residual Moisture) - Thambaraparani Command

Items Unit Before Project After ProjectQuantty Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value



B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 500.00 500 1 500.00 500NurserySeed kg 35 15.00 525 35 15.00 525Manure kg 0 7.15 0 0 7.15 0Fertilizer - Urea kg 0 3.45 0 0 3.45 0

- DAP kg 0 7.90 0 0 7.90 0-MOP kg 0 3.75 0 0 3.75 0-Lime kg 0 1.50 0 0 1.50 0

Pestcides - Chemicals ha 0 375.00 0 0 375.00 0- Sprayer ha 0 10.00 0 0 10.00 0

Weeding ha 0 300.00 0 0 300.00 0Water Charges ha 0 125.00 0 0 125.00 0Malnt. field channels ha 0 12.5 0 0 12.5 0Harvesting ha 0 35 0 0 35 0Total Direct Costs 1025 1025

C. Net Retum (A-B) 5050 5050Family Labour m-d 25 25Retin to Family Labour Rs/m-d 202 202


w-d 0 0


(1) Family labou plus hired labour expressed In man-days (m-d) assuming 1 woman day (w-d) Is equivalent to 0.6 man-day.

File: THAMBAFA.WK3



Table 45: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Kar Paddy - Manimuthar Command





- DAP kg 100 7.86 786 100 7.86 786- MOP kg 50 5.82 291 50 5.82 291- Lim e kg 0 1.35 0 0 1.35 0


Weeding ha 1 675.00 675 1 675.00 675Family labour m-d 30 31.50 945 30 31.50 945Maint. field channels ha 1 11.25 11 1 11.25 11Harvesting/Threshing ha 1 3060 3060 1 3060 3060Total Direct Costs 10962 10962

C. Net Return (A-B) 21930 21930

File: THAMBAEA.WK3



Table 46: Economic Crop Bfidget (per hectare) - Pishanam Paddy - Manimuthar Command

Items Unit With Project - Irrigated Without Project - Irrigated Rainted

Quantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value

(Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs)

A. Gross Value of ProductionYield kg 5000 5.57 27850 4500 5.57 25065 3500 5.82 20370

Byproduct kg 6000 0.34 2052 5400 0.34 1847 4200 0.34 1436

Gross Return Rs 29902 26912 21806

B. Cost ot Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 1080.00 1080 1 1080.00 1080 1 900.00 900

Nursery 0.1 3150.00 315 0.1 3150.00 315 0.1 3150.00 315

Seed kg 75 5.40 405 75 5.40 405 75 5.40 405

Transplanting ha 1 1035.00 1035 1 1035.00 1035 1 1035.00 1035

Manure t 6 108.00 648 5 108.00 540 2 108.00 216

Fertlizer - Urea kg 200 7.16 1432 200 7.16 1432 100 0.00 0

- DAP kg 100 7.86 786 100 7.86 786 50 0.00 0

- MOP kg 50 5.82 291 50 5.82 291 25 0.00 0

-Lime kg 0 1.35 0 0 1.35 0 0 1.35 0

Pesticides - Chemicals ha 1 270.00 270 1 270.00 270 1 270.00 270

- Sprayer ha 1 9.00 9 1 9.00 9 1 9.00 9

Weeding ha 1 675.00 675 1 675.00 675 1 585.00 585

Family labour m-d 30 31.50 945 30 31.50 945 25 31.50 788

Maint. field channels ha 1 11.25 11 1 11.25 11 0 11.25 0

Harvesting/Th reshing ha 1 3060 3060 1 3060 3060 1 2700 2700

Total Direct Costs 10962 10854 7223

C. Net Returm (A-B) 18940 16058 14584

Fle: THAMBAEA.WK3

INDIA: Nabonal Water Management Project I - ICRAppendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis


Table 47: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Kar Paddy - Thambaraparani Command




B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 1080.00 1080 1 1080.00 1080Nursery 0.1 3150.00 315 0.1 3150.00 315Seed kg 75 5.40 405 75 5.40 405 ,Transplanting ha 1 990.00 990 1 990.00 990Manure t 6 108.00 648 5 108.00 540Fertilizer - Urea kg 200 7.16 1432 200 7.16 1432

-DAP kg 100 7.86 786 100 7.86 786- MOP kg 50 5.82 291 50 5.82 291-Lime kg 0 1.35 0 0 1.35 0

Pestcides - Chemicals ha 1 270.00 270 1 270.00 270- Sprayer ha 1 9.00 9 1 9.00 9

Weeding ha 1 630.00 630 1 630.00 630Family labour m-d 30 31.50 945 30 31.50 945Maint. field channels ha 1 11.25 11 1 11.25 11Harvesting/Threshing ha 1 2812.50 2813 1 2812.50 2813Total Direct Costs 10625 10517

C. Net Return (A- B) 19277 17890

File: THAMBAEA.WK3



Table 48: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Pishanam Paddy - Thambaraparani Command




B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 1080.00 1080 1 1080.00 1080Nursery 0.1 3150.00 315 0.1 3150.00 315 L

Seed kg 75 5.40 405 75 5.40 405Transplanting ha 1 990.00 990 1 990.00 990Manure t 6 108.00 648 5 108.00 540Fertilizer - Urea kg 200 7.16 1432 200 7.16 1432




C. Net Return (A-B) 16287 15199

File: THAMBAEA.WK3



Table 49: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Pishanam Paddy - Drainage Affected Area - Thambaraparani Command




B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 900.00 900 1 900.00 900Nursery 0.1 3150.00 315 0.1 3150.00 315Seed kg 75 5.40 405 75 5.40 405 4Transplanting ha 1 945.00 945 1 945.00 945Manure t 4 108.00 432 3 108.00 324Fertilizer - Urea kg 100 7.16 716 100 7.16 716




C. Net Return (A-1B) 16181 13382

File: THAMBAEA.WK3

INDIA: Natloial Water rVWnagemert Prolect I - ICRAppendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis

Thambaraparart Sub-project

Table S0: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Banana - Manimuthar Command



Yield bunches 1500 20.25 30375Byproduct kgGross Return Rs 30375

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation m-d 60 31.50 1890Nursery

2 no. 2500 0.90 2250Planting m-d 10 31.50 315 LManure (oilcake) kg 375 6.44 2413Fertilizer - Urea kg 50 7.16 358

-DAP kg 100 7.86 786- MOP kg 200 5.82 1164- Lime kg 0 1.35 0


Weeding m-d 30 31.50 945Bunch supports no. 400 5.4 2160Family labour m-d 50 31.50 1575Maint. field channels ha 1 11.25 11Harvesting bunch 1500 0.45 675Total Direct Costs 14916

C. Net Retuin (A-B) 15459

File: THAMBAEAWK3



Table 51: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Summer Pulses (Residual Moisture) - Thambaraparani Command

Items Unit Without Project With ProjectQuantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value

(Rs) (Rs) (Rls) (Rs)A. Gross Value of Production

Yield kg 500 10.80 5400 500 10.80 5400Byproduct kg 250 0.27 68 250 0.27 68Gross Retum Rs 5468 5468

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 500.00 500 1 500.00 500NurserySeed kg 35 13.50 473 35 13.50 473Manure kg 0 7.16 0 0 7.16 0 wFertilizer - Urea kg 0 7.86 0 0 7.86 0 '

-DAP kg 0 5.82 0 0 5.82 0- MOP kg 0 3.75 0 0 3.75 0- Lime kg 0 1.50 0 0 1.50 0


Weeding ha 0 300.00 0 0 300.00 0Family labour m-d 25 31.50 788 25 31.50 788Maint. field channels ha 0 12.5 0 0 12.5 0Harvesting ha 0 35 0 0 35 0Total Drect Costs 1760 1760


File: THAMBAEA.WK3

NDLk NolanSWaiMulu0tlgomnngPolet I - ICRAppuux2: Eto Ic udFkimrcnId myI

Tr,eftma4po1v an-pmgst

Tas 652 tncc k C.o, flbDodu Fi. .Io 1995l eniwopito)

YEAR 1 2 3 4 5 5 7 5 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 16 11 it 1S 20 21 22 23 24 25

PROJBCT COSTS

hwoo.CoCm (1) 47 7000 $2.0 314707 02177 10773 02200

W"tl-pmjclOUCmM(2) 16 4 124 13.92 1o60 01 I4 o 7..00 0 -1o0 I00 0 0000 10s000I.-00s--0 I.0 10 1.- 10- 1S00 1o 120oo 10 10

TOTALCOSTS 2000 2. 720 0722 * 1200 0702 4 o 26 02 39 0ow 1-0 low low low low 100 0o00 Is 0 1 0 100 -. 0 0ow low00 low 1-0 1oe0

PRt.T BENEBfS

WtoiU-pjoINtN PmUt Bmds I2 1000 27 -04 0oso 1.2 1 1702 2 070 202 72 202 -- 0 20007 2020 20 . 22 I0226 2 22670 20267 242670 222070 2202ft7

Wtt-pAojNctNePmdxionB.du 7007 1-4.2 02*0 00007 1.76 7 ? 1775 261644 23704 227044 2I7n42.. 227044 so 072 2 201644 227244 2074.24 2 227244 2 44 07 o i

ttlemwntlNat Bnds 010 I 00 02 0.2 16662 17010 24000 22-0 000 2 0002 22*02 24000 24002 20 00 226 0 204-0 20002 20000 2042 24 223 002 24002 2000

Wtt.A-pjoCtMO&M(SwW) Co.s1(3) II 06 Il 0 1122 . 11022 11202 1124 2 11642 11002 l002 1-7 10 002 11622 11692 11062 1102 1,122 1 1-2 11202 11692 11602 11662 14202 1100*.

TOTALBENEFITS 1162 1 720 1200. 10 44*7 27104 2.7.02 06003 220 00 43220 02662 40 0 00622 2-0 0 20020 224 02 2 634 06204 4 3 0223 2462 00222

NETBrENE4 S 0000 -1247 -4 .20-2220-34240 -2 727 -7110 -2 I 20 7 17 602 17 740 172 7703 170 74 772 0 7 720 177X6 17 04 17 030 7703 7 12 17200 1760 77636 1700

WPV 1216S 2Y---)

EPIR t25 lyo) * 6 6S

NOTES(1AiktS eqOPdlJe epiwod0 ii 1I95pic.cowold 40 .cu -nly Asi%l

96uo luoJldoo by Sflat 0 5

(2(Acu2101A cotlbtloeioKd 1ttU/Wl_193/93, 1903494 and liONlllwoboam amitd Isdnis nod1 aonpro taud 1906tv9-9092 torntnccoalhose born osimatdly 2g4paugt7 SCP dODSS D1 stoeul hnlootioos(3) OIIBSI stoSCU2 i owlccchyd Dcomc psn byoqo igfl SCP?d 09S

Mli THAb6AEkY*(3

138



Table 53: 1 Hectare Farm Model - Manimutar Command


ARFEAPishanam paddy

- irrigated 0.54 0.63- rainfed 0.36 0.27


Banana - irrigated 0.10 0.10


COST OF FARM INPUTS (As/ha) (1) 11926.19 12540.33

NET INCOME (Rs/ha) 19414.58 21801.60


File: THAMBAEA.WK3

139

INDIA: National Water Management Project - ICRAppendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis


Table 54: 1 Hectare Farm Model - Thambaraparani Command - Drainage Affected Area


AREAPishanam paddy

- irrigated/adequate drainage 1.00- irrigated/drainage impediment 1.00


Pulses - residual moisture 0.30 0.30


COST OF FARM INPUTS (Rs/ha) (1) 13335.63 13580.88

NET INCOME (Rs/ha) 23439.48 26931.98


File: THAMBAEA.WK3

140



Table 55: 1 Hectare Farm Model - Thambaraparani Command


AREAPishanam paddy

- irrigated 1.00 1.00Kar paddy

- irrigated 0.65 0.65Pulses - residual moisture 0.30 0.30


COST OF FARM INPUTS (Rs/ha) (1) 17922.70 18058.84

NET INCOME (Rs/ha) 28011.38 29929.51


File: THAMBAEA.WK3

N INISSalWSllurnoPi cz I -CRI 2: Emvivienrc ilAm"iMelanVia &lbh-pvnt

T*le 66. ccommc COS d Beld pf olI 1996 cofltpico)

Y61R 1 2 3 4 6 6 1 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 1S 16 17 16 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

PAOE,W OOSTS

hbMIMOoCoCl (1) a.. 6.46 23.097 00-40 20660

W6-pjcJtoLMCWS (2) 000 3 3. 4102 a160 6201 6201 60 63 *701 6 $201 201 .01 6200 621 620 01 6201 6. 601 0s.20 6I 0 620

TOTAL COSTS 0.000 0.000 0 000 6 . 27000 000 06.700 6200 6 01 6 201 6.201 6.20 6000 6 201 *.00 * 201 6 001 6 201 on20, 201 6"20 6.20 * 600

PROJECTBBIEFIS

Wtoxx-pojctNerPdxlac Bndus I.1. 12 7- 266. - 0.027 0600 61 010 -. 41 6064 6 601 64 61 60641 641 601 60 61 460144641 6041 636-1 60601 60641 6641

AlpmjtNoo Pc*dtni.dw as6 16623 01 647 0446 41 770 60 79617 1667 76601 -1617 761.7 76.417 76.617 76-67 1611 71667 70601 7167 79617 1007 67Im?

WclelOfnelNSBOkdf o0.0 0.00 2000 0.000 I041 310 610 60 606 1221 16776 16776 0s61 1I7." 16770 16s716 16.776 61.76. 16 6716 1I6776 1677$ 10176 16716 01.76

AtOoI-P.9 1c0 O&M (Sr ad) Co (2) 2.003 2000 20 00 2200 200 2 00 2 003 2 00 2 002 3 2 00 2 00 2002 2204 2 00 2004 23 0004 2 200 2 20 20 0 3

TOTALBEINIETS oooo 0000 0000 2.00 300 016 6 11466 ., 17 7 10620 17176 11177 117 17776 17776 17776 1177 116 1176 17 776 1 777 6 1777776 117 17 7716 17176

NErBB S0EF.S00 0000 0 00 -4.60 -6060 -22.041 -. 7. -16 0 6246 6024 2 1161 6 116 76 1 1676 11 67 11 616 1116 1161611676 11676 110 11 67 11616 11 676 1161 11 676

NPV (12%,26yeu) -6776

52 (2lye) -42 X

(1)E6p6fdu6zo besadonleb 6, KdsICR. 1H94tISowoub d 9awd0e0,l0tc0 rtef 1994pka sldIanSlFbSl116ostill(2)BmId GO, ,caa. Fcnltcoaho.oboefcno.dm eo os 0o 0 mAp yUby tie WFot 0S

Fik. MALAMEAfl3

INDIA: Nabonal Water Managemert Project I - ICRApperndix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis

Maiampuzha Sub-project

Table 57: Malampuzha Sub-project Benefiting Areas (Hectares)

YEAR 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11. 25

Tailend 73 222 443 591 665 886 1108 1108

Middle Reaches 125 378 756 1007 1134 1512 1890 1890

NOTES:1. It assimed that the areas that benefit are realized over a 5 year period (years 5 to 9), following a linear trernd.2. It is assumed that tailend farmers will change from rainfed to adeqately irigated paddy over a three year period, so that full benefits are not reached until the third year after the delivery of water.3. It is assumned that middle reach farmers will respond immediately to extra water sipply. Therefore benefits are based on these areas moving from inadequate to adequate irrigation as soon as addidonal water is delivered to them.

File: MALAMEA.WK3

143


Malampuzha Sub-project

Table 58: 1 Hectare Farm Model - Tailend

CROP 1 HECTARE FARM MODEL (1)WITHOUT PROJECT WITH PROJECT

AREAFirst Paddy Crop

- rainfed 1.00 1.00

Second Paddy Crop- adequate irrigation- inadequate irrigation 1.00- rainfed 1.00

GROSS INCOME 30640.00 40520.00


NET INCOME (2) 14179.40 21240.60



NOTES:(1) Farm model includes only irrigated areas. Farmers typically also have upland

rainfed areas which have been excluded from the farm model(2) Excludes cost of family labour

File: MALAMFA.WK3

144



Table 59: 1 Hectare Farm Model - Middle Reach

CROP 1 HECTARE FARM MODEL (1)WITHOUT PROJECT WITH PROJECT

AREAFirst Paddy Crop

- rainfed 1.00 1.00

Second Paddy Crop- adequate irrigation- inadequate irrigation 1.00- rainfed 1.00

GROSS INCOME 41040.00 44680.00


NET INCOME (2) 21682.40 23505.00



NOTES:(1) Farm model includes only irrigated areas. Farmers typically also have upland

rainfed areas which have been excluded from the farm model(2) Excludes cost of family labour

File: MALAMFA.WK3


145 kf&Iampuzha Sub-project

Table 60: Financial Crop Budget (oar hectare) - First Crop Paddy



Yield kg 3800 5.00 19000Byproduct kg 4560 0.50 2280Gross Retun Rs 21280

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 1100.00 1100Nursery 0.1 4000.00 400Seed kg 75 6.00 450Transplanting ha 1 1400.00 1400Manue t 5 250.00 1250Fertilizer - Urea kg 150 3.40 510



Weeding ha 1 900.00 900Water Charges ha 1 33.00 33HarvestingfThreshing ha 1 .1 7 of paddy 3230Total Drect Costs 10443

C. Net Retum (A-B) 10837Family Labour m-d 25Retum lo Family Labour Rs/m-d 433

D. LabourHired labour m-d 25

w-d 85


(1) Family labourplus hired labour expressed in man-days (m-d) assuming woman day (w-d) is equivalenttoO.6 man-day.

File: MALAMFA.WK3



Table 61: Financial Crop Budget (per hectare) - Second Crop Paddy - Tailend

Items Unit Adequate Irrigation Inadequate Irrigation RainfedQuantity Unit Pfice Value Quantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value

(Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs)A. Giross Value of Production


B. Cost of Farm InputsLandPreparation ha 1 1100.00 1100 1 1100.00 1100 1 1100.00 1100Nursery 0.1 4000.00 400 0.1 4000.00 400 0.1 4000.00 400Seed kg 75 6.00 450 75 6.00 450 75 6.00 450Transplantng ha 1 140000 1400 1 1200.00 1200 1 1100.00 1100Manure t 5 250.00 1250 3 250.00 750 0 250.00 0Fertlizer - Urea kg 150 3.40 510 100 3.40 340 100 3.40 340

- DAP kg 100 6.20 620 75 6.20 465 50 6.20 310- MOP kg 50 3.80 190 25 3.80 95 0 3.80 0- Lime kg 0 1.50 0 0 1.50 0 0 1.50 0 ON

Pestcides - Chemicals ha 1 350.00 350 1 300.00 300 1 200.00 200- Sprayer ha 1 10.00 10 1 10.00 10 1 10.00 10

Weeding ha 1 900.00 900 1 800.00 800 1 700.00 700Water Charges ha 1 33.00 33 1 33.00 33 1 0.00 0Harvestng/Threshing ha 1 .17of paddy 3362.6 1 .17Of paddy 2893.4 1 .17of paddy 1407.6Total Direct Costs 10576 8836 6018

C. Net Return (A-B) 11784 10404 3342Family Labour m-d 30 30 25Return to Family Labour Rs/m-d 393 347 134


w-d 85 75 50

Total labour (1) m-d 106 95 70


File: MALAMFA.WK3



Table 62: Financial Crop Budget (per hectare) - Second Crop Paddy - Middle Reach

Items Unit Adequate Irrgation Inadequate IrrigationQuantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value






Weeding ha 1 900.00 900 1 800.00 800Water Charges ha 1 33.00 33 1 33.00 33Harvesting/Threshing ha 1 .17 of paddy 3519 1 .17 of paddy 2971.6Total Direct Costs 10732 8915

C. Net Return (A-B) 12668 10845Family Labour m-d 30 30Return to Family Labour Rs/m-d 422 362


w-d 85 75



File: MALAMFA.WK3


M alampuzha Sub- project

Table 63: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - First Crop Paddy




B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 990.00 990Nursery 0.1 3600.00 360Seed kg 75 5.40 405 XTransplanting ha 1 1260.00 1260Manure t 5 225.00 1125Fertilizer - Urea kg 150 3.60 540



Weeding ha 1 810.00 810Family labour m-d 25 40.50 1013Harvesting/Threshing ha 1 .17 of paddy 3598.22Total Direct Costs 11455


File: MALAMEA.WK3



Table 64: Economic Crop Bu dget (per hectare) - Second Crop Paddy - Talend


(Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs)A. Gross Value of Production


B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 990.00 990 1 990.00 990 1 990.00 990Nursery 0.1 3600.00 360 0.1 3600.00 360 0.1 3600.00 360Seed kg 75 5.40 405 75 5.40 405 75 5.40 405Transplanting ha 1 1260.00 1260 1 1080.00 1080 1 990.00 990Manure t 5 225.00 1125 3 225.00 675 0 225.00 0Fertlizer - Urea kg 150 3.60 540 100 3.60 360 100 3.60 360

- DAP kg 100 8.40 840 75 8.40 630 50 8.40 420-MOP kg 50 3.80 190 25 3.80 95 0 3.80 0- Lime kg 0 1.35 0 0 1.35 0 0 1.35 0 o

Pesticides - Chemicals ha 1 315.00 315 1 270.00 270 1 180.00 180- Sprayer ha 1 9.00 9 1 9.00 9 1 9.00 9

Weeding ha 1 810.00 810 1 720.00 720 1 630.00 630Familylabour ha 30 40.50 1215 30 40.50 1215 25 40.50 1013Harvesting/rhreshing ha 1 .17 of paddy 4071.67 1 .17of paddy 3503.53 1 .17 of paddy 1704.42Total Direct Costs 12131 10313 7061

C. Net Returm (A-B) 14142 12294 3937

Fie: MALAMEA.WK3



Table 65: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Second Crop Paddy - Middle Reach




B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 990.00 990 1 990.00 990Nursery 0.1 3600.00 360 0.1 3600.00 360Seed kg 75 5.40 405 75 5.40 405 C

Transplanting ha 1 1260.00 1260 1 1080.00 1080Manure t 5 225.00 1125 3 225.00 675Fertilizer - Urea kg 150 3.60 540 100 3.60 360



Weeding ha 1 810.00 810 1 720.00 720Family labour m-d 30 40.50 1215 30 40.50 1215Harvesting/Threshing ha 1 .17 of paddy 4261.05 1 .17 of paddy 3598.22Total Direct Costs 12320 10407

C. Net Return (A-B) 15175 12811

File: MALAMEA.WK3

WNDLA w g np ~ tI - ISR

Thendno &h-pgqot

TWOs 66 onocO,t woS Bondo fo aikn, 1395,oo.t4p.)s)

YP9R 1 2 3 4 6 6 7 8 9 1B 11 12 13 14 1S 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

PFR.ECT COSTS

hm"mCoa(1) 004 .702 -o 4 142716 4730 2003 74494 44704

Wti-pptOLMCo.s%(2) 400 . I... 2.027 240 2044 0433 0002 0424 t43004044 02 404 4442 2442 040 .40 0 2 3032 3442 30 2403 0042 0002 34

TOTALCOSTS 4 0 37 7.00 "00 30* 400 0 233 1703 6003 0-32 3402 3442 0402 0402 3432 3442 3442 4342 4-3 33 44 2 2042 3.033 4412 3442 A432

PFlOECTBENBFITS

W9tn-pojt Ng Pdxtn B,d o0002 0o4 0.200 0.70, 1 21 1 914 3462 4 74 2 04- 2.47 2 71 27 2471 2371 2-7 2414 2 474 2471 2I4I 2371 2474 247

W".p otNdP"dxlnBr.ds 0.000s 040 0.70 2.04 0794 0932 7.00 7346 7409 7.339 7449 7030 742 7.330 701 79 730 7330 7.339 7I.. 7490 7000 74349t64c400ll4MNSBatIs .0043 3420 0404 4.420 2404 4740 0014 0000i 4000 4909429900004060 000 4949 0090^ 0000 460 4000 4090 00003e 040 4990W mtU-p tcOaM(Sodi)C.1(3) 1460 44669 I4.9 14100 459 44 4.000 I400 I4000 4609 40 I100 40 4040 404 400 40 4010 1000 4566.

TOTALBE4EflTS 4009 4.96 4072 2049 29 403 0 0027 0200 0029 0320 4020 0 21 0 20- 042 6 420 9422 20 - 0420 6020 0423404 004 906 64 20

NETSBENFIfS -0000 1.07 -027 -14 204 -47.327 -10 002 -42207 -0604 2004 2 93 203 2200 20 04 2 904 2 20 0 20 0 20 0 2 093 2994 2 004 40 2940 2 93

NPv (12%, 26 yews) -2 434

56 (2S yeui) -442 %

NOTES:(1)F.n COAP 40:oJsof eued t.1dul41cto4d (epqasndn 1935 pots by v qpp re hd.24P1pka atmnrd.phaoo opandoutm% 1S39/S6 E - .l$cdaedoweroeby%fpqlnghe 3CFol C0521FDmGOAP smimrt dOf M 1sqoo ,mov3 (to edd 1199p9e1 n b (We4tit196 1 oa S doI eO 0 0O U pe Econ3mic tomu d ved by eppWgC Sf f9 9F mIo 1 OAPIn lCaf.UdOUM pnAEAW.3unodh 1 3YS1(e7p(.rdinl p.cabyqepWVt,* .Wl}Ec wcosdt.,,dby"rSCFd0O9S

hi,l THANDAEA.WK3

INDIA: Nadonal Water Management Project - ICRAppendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis

Thandava Sub-project

Table 67: Thandava Sub-project Benefiting Areas (Hectares)

YEAR 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10. 25

Tailend- incremental area benefitdng 1 25 79 190 236 275 189 46- accumulated total area benefitdng 1 26 105 295 530 805 994 1040 1040

NOTES:1. This subproject has not been effectively monitored. The areas that will benefit from 1 995/96 were assessed by the mission together with the field staff. The areas benefitting in any particular year

during the project implementation period have been calculated reladve to the investment costs in the preceding year.2. It is assumed that farmers wif benefit from the additional water supply immediately.

File: THANDAEA.WK3

153


Thandava Sub- project



AREAPaddy 0.65 0.65Groundnut 0.20 0.20Sugar Cane 0.15 0.15



NET INCOME (1) 10900 10900

NOTES:(1) Includes cost offamily labour

File: THANDAEA.WK3

154





AREAPaddy 0.40 0.40Groundnut 0.40 0.50Sesame 0.10Sugar Cane 0.10 0.10





File: THAN DAEA.WK3

INDIA: National Water Management Project I - ICRAppendix 2: Economic and Fuiancial Analysis


Table 70: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Paddy - Kharif

Items Uni Adequate Irrigation Inadequate Irrigation RainfedQuantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value

(Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs)A. Gross Vdu e of ProductionYield kg 4500 5.57 25065 3500 5.57 19495 1875 5.57 10444Byproduct kg 5400 0.27 1458 4200 0.27 1134 2250 0.27 608Gross Return Rs 26523 20629 11051

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 1125.00 1125 1 1125.00 1125 1 900.00 900Nursery ha 0.1 3150.00 315 0.1 3150.00 315 0.1 2700.00 270Seed kg 75 5.40 405 75 5.40 405 75 5.40 405Sowing/Transplanting ha 1 765.00 765 1 765.00 765 1 765.00 765Manure t 10 144.00 1440 5 144.00 720 2 144.00 288Fertlizer- Urea kg 150 7.16 1074 100 7.16 716 75 7.16 537- DAP kg 100 7.86 786 75 7.86 590 50 7.86 393- MOP kg 0 5.82 0 0 5.82 0 0 5.82 0

- Lime kg 0 1.35 0 0 1.35 0 0 1.35 0Pesticides - Chemicals ha 3 810.00 2430 2 540.00 1080 1 270.00 270- Sprayer day 3 9.00 27 2 9.00 18 1 9.00 9Weeding ha 1 810.00 810 1 675.00 675 1 540.00 540Family Labour m-d 30 27.00 810 25 27.00 675 20 27.00 540Harvesting/Threshing ha 1 765 765 1 675 675 1 585 585Total Direct Costs 10752 7759 5502

C. Net Retum (A-B) 15771 12871 5549

Fie: THANDAEA.WK3



Table 71: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Groundnut - Kharif



Yield kg 850 8.11 6894 600 8.11 4866Byproduct ha 1 1620.00 1620 1 1260.00 1260Gross Return Rs 8514 6126

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 315.00 315 1 315.00 315Nursery haSeed kg 150 16.20 2430 125 16.20 2025 0

Sowing Bullock/day 2.5 76.50 191 2.5 76.50 191Manure t 5 144.00 720 3 144.00 432Fertilizer - Urea kg 50 7.16 358 100 7.16 716


Pesticides - Chemicals litre 2.5 270.00 675 2 270.00 540- Sprayer day 1 9.00 9 1 9.00 9

Weeding ha 1 720.00 720 1 675.00 675Family Labour m-d 22 27.00 594 18 27.00 486Harvesting/Threshing ha 1 765 765 1 675 675Total Direct Costs 7653 6744

C. Net Return (A-B) 860 - 618

File: THANDAEA.WK3



Table 72: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Sesame - Kharif

Items Unit RainfedQuanlty Unit Price Value


Yield kg 450 9.00 4050Byproduct haGross Return Rs 4050

B. Cost of Farm Inputs u

Land Preparation ha 1 225.00 225Nursery haSeed kg 6 10.80 65Sowing ha 1 180.00 180Manure t 2 144.00 288Fertilizer - Urea kg 25 7.16 179

- DAP kg 50 7.86 393-MOP kg 25 5.82 146- Lime kg 0 1.80 0

Peslcides - Chemicals litre 1 135.00 135- Sprayer day I 9.00 9

Weeding ha 1 162.00 162Family Labour m-d 24 27.00 648HarvesUng/Threshing ha 1 765 765Total Direct Costs 3194


File: THANDAEA.WK3



Table 73: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Sugar Cane - Perennial

Items Unit Adequate IrrigatonQuantty Unit Price Value



B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 1350.00 1350 0Nursery haSeed kg 1 2700.00 2700Sowing ha 1 1080.00 1080Manure t 10 144.00 1440Fertilizer - Urea kg 400 7.16 2864


Pestcides - Chemicals ha 1 450.00 450- Sprayer day 1 9.00 9

Weeding m-d 60 27.00 1620Family Labour m-d 60 27.00 1620Harvestng/Threshing m-d 50 27.00 1350Total DirectCosts 17219


File: THANDAEA.WK3

159



Table 74 :1 Hectare Farm Model - Midde Reach


AREAPaddy 0.65 0.65Groundnut 0.20 0.20SugarCane 0.15 0.15






NOTES:(1) Excludes cost of famiy labour

File: THANDAFA.WK3

160





AREAPaddy 0.40 0.40Groundnut 0.40 0.50Sesame 0.10SugarCane 0.10 0.10





TOTAL LABOUR INPUT (m -c/ha) 66 84

NOTES:(1) Exdudes cost of family labour

File: THAN DAFA.WK3

INDiA: National Water Management Project I - ICRAppendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis

Thandava Su b-project

Table 76: Financial Crop Budget (per hectare) - Paddy - Kharif


(Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs)A. Gross Valu e of Production

Yield kg 4500 4.00 18000 3500 4.00 14000 1875 4.00 7500Byproduct kg 5400 0.30 1620 4200 0.30 1260 2250 0.30 675Gross Retum Rs 19620 15260 8175

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 1250.00 1250 1 1250.00 1250 1 1000.00 1000Nursery ha 0.1 3500.00 350 0.1 3500.00 350 0.1 3000.00 300Seed kg 75 6.00 450 75 6.00 450 75 6.00 450Sowing/Transplanting ha 1 850.00 850 1 850.00 850 1 850.00 850Manure t 10 160.00 1600 5 160.00 800 2 160.00 320Fertlizer - Urea kg 150 2.96 444 100 2.96 296 75 2.96 222

-DAP kg 100 8.50 850 75 8.50 638 50 8.50 425-MOP kg 0 3.82 0 0 3.82 0 0 3.82 0- Lime kg 0 2.00 0 0 2.00 0 0 1.50 0

Pesticides - Chemicals ha 3 900.00 2700 2 600.00 1200 1 300.00 300- Sprayer day 3 10.00 30 2 10.00 20 1 10.00 10

Weeding ha 1 900.00 900 1 750.00 750 1 600.00 600Water Charges ha 1 200.00 200 1 200.00 200 0 200.00 0Harvesting/rhreshing ha 1 850 850 1 750 750 1 650 650Total Direct Costs 10474 7554 5127

C. Net Returm (A-B) 9146 7707 3048Famly Labour m-d 30 25 20Return to Famly Labour Rs/m-d 305 308 152

D. LabourHired Labour m-d 25 20 20

w-d 80 70 50

Total Labour (1) 103 87 70

(1) Famly labour plus hired labour expressed in man-days (m-d) assumimg 1 women day (w-d) Is equivalent to 0.6 m-d

Fls: THANDAFA.WK3



Table 77: Financial Crop Budget (per hectare) - Groundnut - Kharif

Items Unit Adequate Irrigaton Inadequate IrrigationQuantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value


Yield kg 850 11.00 9350 600 11.00 6600Byproduct ha 1 1800.00 1800 1 1400.00 1400GrossReturn Rs 11150 8000

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparabon ha 1 350.00 350 1 350.00 350Nursery haSeed kg 150 18.00 2700 125 18.00 2250Sowing Bullock/day 2.5 85.00 213 2.5 85.00 213Manure t 5 160.00 800 3 160.00 480Fertilizer - Urea kg 50 2.96 148 100 2.96 296


Pesticides - Chemicals litre 2.5 300.00 750 2 300.00 600- Sprayer day 1 10.00 10 1 10.00 10

Weeding ha 1 800.00 800 1 750.00 750Water Charges ha 1 37.00 37 1 37.00 37Harvesting/Threshing ha 1 850 850 1 750 750Total Direct Costs 7608 6473

C. Net Return (A-B) 3543 1527Family Labour m-d 22 18Return to Famity Labour Rs/m-d 161 85

D. LabourHired Labour m-d 15 12

w-d 20 15

Total Labour (1) 49 39

(1) Family labour plus hired labour expressed in man-days (m-d) assumimg 1 women day (w-d) is equivalent to 0.6 m-d

File: THANDAFA.WK3


Than dava Sub- project

Table 78: Financial Crop Budget (per hectare) - Sesame - Kharif






Pesticides- Chemicals litre 1 150.00 150- Sprayer day 1 10.00 10

Weeding ha 1 180.00 180Water Charges ha 0 37.00 0Harvesting/Threshing ha 1 850 850Total Direct Costs 2627

C. Net Return (A-B) 1874Family Labour m-d 24Return to Family Labour Rs/m-d 78

D. LabourHired Labour m-d 10

w-d 16

Total Labour (1) 44

(1) Family labour plus hired labour expressed in man-days (m-d) assumimg I women day (w-d) is equrvalent to 0.6 m-d

File: THANDAFA.WK3



Table 79: Financial Crop Budget (per hectare) - Sugar Cane - Perennial






Pesticides - Chemicals ha 1 500.00 500- Sprayer day 1 10.00 10

Weeding m-d 60 30.00 1800Water Charges ha 1 200.00 200Harvesting/Threshing m-d 50 30.00 1500Total Direct Costs 14958

C. Net Return (A-B) 18042Family Labour m-d 60Return to Family Labour Rs/m-d 301

D. LabourHired Labour m-d 120

w-d

Total Labour (1) 180

(1) Family labour plus hired labour expressed in man-days (m-d) assumimg 1 women day (w-d) is equivalent to 0.6 m-d

File: THANDAFA.WK3

NDL4ANadWon slMmsgemrnPoijct& I - ICRApffsx2: tlome *sdFkvmidk,lA

Reapothi Sb-psojct

TtIsMW toonm nn .ntB.sdu fhotll 1 99S5ssowupiou)

YEAA 1 2 3 4 6 6 t a 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 2S

PROECT COSTS

hnrtmtrniCotb (1) 1 -4 2I'77 4 50- 44

W ts-9 .WOLM Cnb (1) 04* 0*5* 4*42 2*42 0*44 0442 0*42 0424 4*42 0*42 0442 0*42 0444 0*42 4522 0442 0442 04M 0.42 0.542 0$42

TOTALCOSTS 5.755 2474 0-07 *900 0522 0*24 054 0*-2 0*42 0542 04 42 0242 04 0.2 4.2 042 0*42 04 052 02 0 042 0*42

PRPCECT EBNFrITS

WIroA-pmj8s NdeP8dx1t, s 5*,.48 245 07 I1 545 25 4454 0*54 2*53 4403 34$53 3*03 3653 3463 3.53 35* 3-4I 34.. 35 4I.

VA,-pcjcsNR tNaPrdx 5BsdV 032 0554 5720 4070 0070 4050 4070 4070 4070 4070 4.070 4.070 0070 4070 4070 40700 074 4050 *070 *070

MCI.uts.sSNstsE*s* 0000 0042 00*5 $107 0457 0417 0455 0417 0417 0417 0.457 0.417 0417 $411 0457 0057 0457 0457 0417 4057 *257

Wtn4-pjt5O&M (Sw-d)C.J (1) 044* 0*45 0544 050* 0.644 0544 0*4* 054* 0 0545 0.54* 0..654* 0.64* 0.0 0*0* 04* 0.4 04 0*44 0*44 0*04

TOTALBENFBfTS 0.4 45* 044 0728 o.9 00*4 o4 o."4 o 0.4 0904 O.9* .0.90 4.404 0I 09 0.904 0.*40 0454 o04 4n 0 H-'

NET BNEFITS - 440 -2.252 -0455 5545 0.22 0422 0522 0.422 0524 05224 0.522 0.522 0.524 0.522 0544 0522 0542 0524 0524 024 0522

NPV (12%, 25 yeo) -6 7

UP (2Sy yew -'.55%

(1 jBmtl m GC*sP 5ec0c5& Fh1nfft trme0 w endm 0t0000 qt s mOghe SSFolS 9

Fi3. PATAPEA %93

167INDIA: National Water Management Project I - ICR

Appendix 2: Economic and Financial AnalysisRatapani Sub-project


CROP I HECTARE FARM MODELWITHOUT PROJECT WITH PROJECT

AREAKharif

- soybeans - rainfed 0.60 0.60

Rabi- HYV wheat - adequate irrigation 0.20 0.80- local wheat - presowing + 1 irrigation 0.60- gram - adequate irrigation 0.20- gram - inadequate irrigation 0.20


COST OF PURCHASED INPUTS 6556 7367

NETINCOME(1) 8142 9127


TOTAL LABOUR INPUT (m -d/ha) 59 62

NOTES:(1) Exdudes cost of family labour

File: RATAPFA.WK3

168INDIA: National Water Management Project I - ICR

Appendix 2: Economic and Financial AnalysisRatapani Sub-project



AREAKh arif

- soybeans - rainfed 0.60 0.60

Rabi- local wheat - presowing + 1 irrigation 0.70- loca wheat - presowing irrigation only 0.70- gram - inadequate irrigation 0.30- gram - residual moisture 0.10- lentil - inadequate irrigation- lentil - residual moisture 0.20


COST OF PURCHASED INPUTS 5451 6227

NET INCOME (1) 6111 7791



NOTES:(1) Excludes cost of famly labour

169


Ralapani Sub-prolect

Table84: Economic Crop Budget (erhectare) - Soybean - Kharif

Items Unit RainiedQuantty Unit Price Value



B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 810.00 810Nursery 0Seed kg 50 10.80 540Transplanting ha 1 270.00 270Manue t 0 135.00 0Fetilizer - Urea kg 100 7.16 716

- DAP kg 50 7.86 393- MOP kg 20 5.82 116- Ume kg 0 1.35 0

Pestcldes - Chemicals ha 1 180.00 180- Sprayer ha 1 9.00 9

Weeding ha 1 270.00 270Family labour m-d 25 27.00 675Harvesting/Threshing ha 1 324 324Total Drect Costs 4303


File: RATAPEA.WK3


Ratapani Sub-project

Table 86: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Gram - Rabi

Items Unit Adequate lrrigaton Inadequate Irrigation Residual MoistureQuantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value

(Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (As) (Rs)A. Gross Value of Production

Yield kg 1000 7,74 7740 800 7.74 6192 500 7.74 3870Byproduct kg 500 0.32 158 400 0.32 126 250 0.32 79Gross Return Rs 7898 6318 3949

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 810.00 810 1 720.00 720 1 630.00 630NurserySeed kg 50 10.80 540 50 10.80 540 40 10.80 432Sowing ha 1 315,00 315 1 315.00 315 1 315.00 315Manure 1 3 135.00 405 2 135.00 270 0 135.00 0Fertilizer - Urea kg 30 7.16 215 25 7.16 179 20 7.16 143

- DAP kg 60 7.86 472 50 7.86 393 50 7.86 393- MOP kg 30 5.82 175 25 5.82 146 0 5.82 0- Lime kg 0 1.35 0 0 1.35 0 0 1.35 0

Pesticides - ChemicaJs ha 1 225.00 225 1 225.00 225 1 90.00 90- Sprayer ha 1 9.00 9 1 9.00 9 1 9.00 9

Weeding w-d 10 22.50 225 10 22.50 225 7 22.50 158Family Labour m-d 15 27.00 405 15 27.00 405 12 27.00 324Harvesting/Threshing w-d 12 22.50 270 12 22.50 270 10 22.50 225Total Direct Costs 4065 3697 2719

C. Net Return (A-B) 3833 2622 1230



Table 87: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) - Lentil - Rabi

Items Unit Inadequate Irrigation Residual MoistureQuantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value



B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 720.00 720 1 630.00 630 9NurserySeed kg 50 10.80 540 40 10.80 432Sowing ha 1 315.00 315 1 315.00 315Manure t 2 135.00 270 0 135.00 0Fertilizer - Urea kg 25 7.16 179 20 7.16 143



Weeding w-d 10 22.50 225 7 22.50 158Famly Labour m-d 15 27.00 405 12 27.00 324Harvesting/Threshing w-d 12 22.50 270 10 22.50 225Total Direct Costs 3697 2719

C. Net Return (A- B) 2084 1410

File: RATAPEA.WK3

INDIA: National Water Management Project I - ICRAppendix 2: Economic end Financial Analysis


Table 88: Financial Crop Budget (per hectare) - Soybean - Kharif

Items Unit RaitedQuantity Unit Price Value



B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 900.00 900Nursery 0Seed kg 50 12.00 600Transplanting ha 1 300.00 300Manure t 0 150.00 0Fertilizer - Urea kg 100 3.32 332



Weeding ha 1 300.00 300Water Charges ha 0Harvesting/rhreshing ha 1 360 360Total Direct Costs 3509

C. Net Return (A-B) 5641Family Labour m-d 25Returm to Family Labour Rs/m - d 226

D. LabourHiredlabour m-d 0

w-d 24

Totel labour (1) m-d 39

(1) Famly iabour plus hired labour expressed in man-days (m-d) assuming 1 woman day (w-d) is equivalent to 0.6 man-day.

Fie: RATAPFA.WK3



Table 89: Financial Crop Budget (per hectare) - Wheat - Rabi

Items Unit HYV - Presowing + 3 irrigations Local Variety - Presowing + 1 irrigaton Local Variety - Presowing irrigation onlyQuantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value

(Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs)A. Gross Value of Production

Yield kg 2500 4.50 11250 1750 4.50 7875 1400 4.50 6300Byproduct kg 3000 0.25 750 2188 0.25 547 1750 0.25 438Gross Retum Rs 12000 8422 6738

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 900.00 900 1 800.00 800 1 800.00 800NurserySeed kg 150 5.50 825 100 4.50 450 75 4.50 338Sowing ha 1 500.00 500 1 500.00 500 1 500.00 500Manure t 5 150.00 750 3 150.00 450 2 150.00 300Fertilizer - Urea kg 100 3.32 332 80 3.32 266 50 3.32 166

- DAP kg 100 8.60 860 50 8.60 430 50 8.60 430- MOP kg 30 3.84 115 25 3.84 96 20 3.84 77-Lime kg 0 1.50 0 0 1.50 0 0 1.50 0 4

Pesticides - Chemicals ha- Sprayer ha

Weeding w-d 15 25.00 375 12 25.00 300 10 25.00 250Water Charges ha 1 62.00 62 1 62.00 62 1 62.00 62Harvesting m-d 16 30 480 14 30 420 12 30 360Threshing ha 1 500 500 1 450 450 1 400 400Total Direct Costs 5699 4224 3682

C. Net Return (A-B) 6301 4198 3055Famly Labour m-d 16 14 12Retum to Family Labour Rs/m-d 394 300 255

D. LabourHiredlabour m-d 16 14 12

w-d 15 12 10


(1) Famlylabour plushired labour expressedin man-days (m-d) assuming I woman day (w-d) is equivalent to 0.6 man-day.

Fie: RATAPFA.WK3

INDIA: National Water Management Project I - ICRAppendix 2: Economic and Fhiancial Analysis


Table 90: Fhiancid Crop Budget (per hectare) - Gram - Rabi

Items Unit Adequate Irrigation Inadequate Irrigation Residual MoistureQuantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value

(Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs)A. Gross Value of ProductionYield kg 1000 8.60 8600 800 8.60 6880 500 8.60 4300Byproduct kg 500 0.35 175 400 0.35 140 250 0.35 88Gross Return Rs 8775 7020 4388

B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 900.00 900 1 800.00 800 1 700.00 700NurserySeed kg 50 12.00 600 50 12.00 600 40 12.00 480Sowing ha 1 350.00 350 1 350.00 350 1 350.00 350Manure t 3 150.00 450 2 150.00 300 0 150.00 0Fertiizer - Urea kg 30 3.32 100 25 3.32 83 20 3.32 66

- DAP kg 60 8.60 516 50 8.60 430 50 8.60 430 '- MOP kg 30 3.84 115 25 3.84 96 0 3.84 0 u- Lime kg 0 1.50 0 0 1.50 0 0 1.50 0Pesticides - Chemicals ha 1 250.00 250 1 250.00 250 1 100.00 100

- Sprayer ha 1 10.00 10 1 10.00 10 1 10.00 10Weeding w-d 10 25.00 250 10 25.00 250 7 25.00 175Water Charges ha 1 42.00 42 1 42.00 42 0 42.00 0Harvesting/Threshing w-d 12 25 300 12 25 300 10 25 250Total Direct Costs 3883 3511 2561

C. Net Returm (A-B) 4892 3509 1826Famly Labour m-d 15 15 12Retum to Famdy Labour Rs/m-d 326 234 152


w-d 22 22 17


(1) Famly labour plus hired labour expressed in man-days (m-d) assuming 1 woman day (w-d) is equivalent to 0.6 man -day.

File: RATAPFA.WK3



Table 91: Financial Crop Budget (per hectare) - Lenti - Rabi

Items Unit Inadequate Irrigation Residual MoistureQuantity Unit Price Value Quantity Unit Price Value

(Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs)A. GrossVelue otProduction


B. Cost of Farm InputsLand Preparation ha 1 800.00 800 1 700.00 700NurserySeed kg 50 12.00 600 40 12.00 480Sowing ha 1 350.00 350 1 350.00 350Manure t 2 150.00 300 0 150.00 0Fertlizer - Urea kg 25 3.32 83 20 3.32 66

- DAP kg 50 8.60 430 50 8.60 430- MOP kg 25 3.84 96 0 3.84 0 -.1

- Lime kg 0 1.50 0 0 1.50 0Pesticides - Chemicals ha 1 250.00 250 1 100.00 100

- Sprayer ha 1 10.00 10 1 10.00 10Weeding w-d 10 25.00 250 7 25.00 175Water Charges ha 1 42.00 42 0 42.00 0Harvesting/rhreshing w-d 12 25 300 10 25 250Total Direct Costs 3511 2561

C. Net Retum (A-B) 2912 2026Famiy Labour m-d 15 12Returm to Family Labour Rs/m-d 194 169


w-d 22 17


(1) Famly labour plus hired labour expressed in man-days (m-d) assuming 1 woman day (w-d) is equivalent to 0.6 man-day.

Fie: RATAPFA.WK3

INDIA: NationaL Water Management Project (Cr.1770-IN)Implementation Conpletion Report


Table 92. Cropped Area, Yield and Production used for Analysis - Peechi Scheme

Item Future without Project Future with Project

Cropped Area Yield Production Cropped Area Yield Production


1st Paddy (rainfed) 7,184 2.5 17,960 7,184 2.5 17,960 s

2nd Paddy (irrigated) i 5,931 3.0 17,793 6,281 3.0" 18,843

Total Cropped Area 13.115 13,465

Net Cultivated Area2' 7,184 7,184

Cropping Intensity (X) 182 187

Cropped area based on ICR of Kerala Irrigation Department.

2 Excluding kate area (8,816 ha). There has been no change in annual irrigated area in the Kole area according to the ICR of Kerala Irrigation Department.

3 Assumed constant yieLd of 3.0 ton/ha in the existing irrigated area and this Level of yield is projected to be achieved by the incremental aea of 350 ha.

INDIA: National Water Management Project (Cr.1770-IN)Imptementation CompLetion Report


Table 93. Crop Budget (per ha) used for Analysis - Peechi Scheme


Crop FertilizerProduct By-product Total I I Other Labour2' Power Tiller Total Financial Economic

.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Rs/ha). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

Future without Project co

- 1st Paddy 12,570 1,275 14.025 548 270 63 800 6,545 2,000 10.226 3,799 2,699

- 2nd Paddy 15,300 1,530 16.830 626 333 139 890 7,140 2,000 11,128 5,702 4,536

Future with Project

1st Paddy 12,750 1,275 14,025 548 270 63 800 6,545 2,000 10.226 3,799 2,699

- 2nd Paddy 15,300 1,530 16.830 626 333 139 890 7,140 2,000 11.128 5,702 4,536

'/ Assumed at 10X of gross value of product.

2/ Excluding family Labour; assumed at 70X of total Labour requirement.

INDIA: National Uater Management Project (Cr.1770-IN)Implementation Completion Report


Table 94. Crop Yield and Input Requirement (per ha) used for Analysis - Peechi Scheme

l | ~~~~~FertilizerlllllCrop | Yield Seed Pesticides Miscellaneous Labour Power Tiller"

N P KI

(ton/ha) . . . . . . .(kg/ha). . . . . . . (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) (Man-day) (Rs/ha)

Future without Project

1st Paddy2/ 2.5 70 30 10 300 300 200 110 2,000

- 2nd Paddy 3.0 80 37 22 300 370 220 120 2,000

Future with Project

- 1st Paddy2 2.5 70 30 10 300 300 200 110 2,000

- 2nd Paddy 3.0 80 37 22 300 370 220 120 2,000

" Including cost of buLtocks (Rs500/ha) for final tand preparation.

2/ Rainfed paddy.

INDIA: Nationat Uater Management Project (Cr.1770-IU)Imlementation Ccmpletion Report

Appendix 2: Economic and Financial Anatysis

Table 95. Economic Costs and Benefits - Peechi Scheme(Rs mitlion)

Year FY93 FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97-2017

Scheme Costs

- Investment cost"/ 0.005 16.049 23.361 - -

- Incrementat 0 & N costsu - - 0.757 0.757

Total Costs 0.005 16.049 23.361 0.757 0.757

Scheme Benefits o

- Incrementat net benefit" - - 0.607 1.587

Net Benefits (0.005) (16.049) (23.361) (0.150) 0.830

NPV at 12X -Rs25.5 million

ERR (25 years) -5.9X

I See Table 7.

vIncremental benefits at full deveLopment are shared between years in the proportion of investment costs, with a time lag of one year.

181



Table 96. Farm Incomes - Peechi Scheme

1. Size of Farm Model: 0.25 ha



....... .(ha) .

1st paddy 0.25 0.252nd paddy 0.20 0.22

0.45 0.47


3. Farm Incomes:


.. ....... (Rs).


Net Return 2,074 2,188

Incremental: Rs114

" At the rate of Rs33/ha/crop.



Table 97. Crop Yield and Input Requirement (per ha) used for Analysis" - Haryana Scheme

Crop FertilizerCrop Yield N | P Seed Pesticides Manure Labour Bullocks2l

NPK

(ton/ha) . . . . . . .(kg/ha). . . . . . . (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) (Man-day) (Pair-day)

Cotton 1.2 45 20 0 231 1,241 20 105 22 oo

Paddy 3.5 75 30 30 343 580 290 125 24

Wheat 2.3 65 25 10 652 251 157 78 22

Based on PCR of Haryana Irrigation 11 (Credit 1319-IN, 1994) and mission's interviews with project farmers.

Z1 AssLined that land preparation, threshing etc., are done by animals, although tractors and mechanical threshers ae also used.



Table 98. Cropped Area. Yield and Production used for Analysis - Haryana Scheme

Item Future without Project Future with Project

Cropped Area Yield | Production Cropped Area Yield Production


Cotton 4,071 1.2 4,885 12,213 1.2 14,656 co

Paddy 1,781 3.5 6,233 5,343 3.5 18,700

Wheat 6,869 2.3 15,799 20,609 2.3 47,400

Total Cropped Area 12,7211/ 38,1652/

Assuined one-third of potential irrigated area created (38,165 ha), would be irrigated without project due to availability of groundwater exploitation, based onmission's interviews with selected farmers.

2/ PotentiaL irrigated area estimated based on theoretical savings in seepage Losses due to lining of canals and watercourses under the project. For analysispurposes, cotton, paddy and wheat, the three main crops in Haryana, were chosen.

INDIA: National Water Management Project (Cr.1770-IN)Implementation CompLetion Report


Table 99. Crop Budget (per ha) used for Analysis - Haryana Scheme

Crop Gross Financial Cost of Inputs Net ReturnCrop Gross .

Return Fertilizer

Other Labour" Power Tiller Total Financial Economic

_______ ~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~N [P [K

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Rs/ha) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Cotton 24,000 352 180 - 1,492 3,381 1,892 7.297 16,703 9,435

Paddy 13,300 587 270 190 1,213 4,025 2,064 8,349 4,951 9,658

Wheat 10,350 509 225 63 1,060 2,511 1,892 6,260 4,090 6,169

1' ExcLuding family Labour; assumed at 70% of totaL Labour requirement.



Table 100. Economic Costs and Benefits - Haryana Scheme(Rs million)

Year l FY93 FY94 FY95 | FY96 FY97-2017

Scheme Costs

- Investment cost"' 417.645 509.642 47.298 - -

- Incremental 0 & M costs' - - - 5.29 5.29

Total Costs 417.645 509.642 47.298 5.29 5.29

Scheme Benefits |0

- Incremental net benefit2 - 24.95 114.44 189.32 196.00

Net Benefits (417h645) (509.642) 67.24 184.03 190.71

NPV at 12% Rs322.0 million

ERR (25 years) 17. 1%

1' See Table B.21 Incremental benefits at full development are shared between years in the proportion of investment costs, with a time lag of one year for potentially new irrigated

area of 11,350 ha irrigated with savings in watercourse seepage losses, and a time lag of two years for 26,815 ha irrigated with savings in seepage lossesfrom the canals.

186



Table 101. Farm Incomes - Haryana Scheme

1. Size of Farm Model: 4 ha



....... (ha) .

Cotton 2.0 2.5Paddy 1.0 1.5Wheat 3.0 4.0

6.0 8.0


3. Farm Incomes:


........ .(Rs).


Net Return 50,209 65,020

Incremental: Rsl4,811

" At the rate of Rsl2/000m2.

187

m'aB 1e 1 n NationalWater Management Project Subproject Initiation Schedule (Page 1

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994

TAMIL NADU ( 10 subprojects) 3 1 2 2 1 1Sathanur X0oooooooa_Kodayar X)ooooooo CThambaraparani a oc(xxxx_Amaravathy X'ooOooCumbum Valley _0 ooXXX ____

Marudhanadhi __ __ )0cXooo _

Setiathope aoooooOX _Tholudur _ )OOOOoCooo(Chittar _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _Manjalar __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _

KERALA ( 5 subprojects) 1 4Malampuzha _____axxxo

Mangalam ._ _xxxx___

Pothundi _xxxoooxxxPeechi ________

Vazhani )XXXXX ____

KARNATAKA (30 subprojects 9 1 7 _ 2 11Maidala XXooooooo__Naregal Tank XXooooo ___

Areshankar OVOOOXX)= _Ramanahalli )oooooCooXo

Bhadra xooooooox_Vanivilas sagar )oooooooo__Shanthisagar Xooooooooo:Haganbommanahalli )Ooooooc IKanakanala ____ ooooo( .TBLBC Distributary # 54 xzoooocx _

BagewadiDistributary _ xoooooxxTBRHLC Distributary # 7 __ ooooooOChandrampalli XKOOoooooo . .Dha rna xxoooccxx Kanva ooooooo _

Marconahalli XXoooooo_Tunga Anicut _____ __ _xxx,

Anjanapur _oXXxoooooo

Ambligola _ Xmoooooooc _TBRHLC Distributary # 12 _oKX,oocx .TBRHLC Distributary # 13 ____oooooo_

TBRHLC Distributary # 14 XXXXXX_ XoTBRHLC Distributary # 15 XXXOOOOXXXTBLBC Distributary # 31 t_ _ _00oooo xTBLBC Distributary # 55 x,oooooox.TBLBC Distributary # 76 xooooooooox TBLBC Distributary # 85 _ _ z)oovoooooo .TBLBC Distributary # 89 ___ ,oooooooo.xTBLBC Distributary # 98 _XzOOOOOCX_

Gondi Anicut __._.____ _______.

ANDHRA PRADESH (10 subprojects 1 1 5 3Rajolibunda Diversion Scheme .OOo ._. -K.C.Canal .____ _ X.X O __ .Thandava xOOcJOOOOO( __ ..Mu si . x)OOOOOO.Dindi _ xxoooooxBhairavanXthippa __ _oooooox _ ..Upper Pennar __x_______.TBP LLC __ _ _x I_ xoooc_Mylavaram _______ X _Nizamsagar _ _=_____ ___

188

TahA-e n2

(sage 2)1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994

MADHYA PRADESH (19 subprojects 2 12 4Sakalda xxooooooxGagan zooooooocxSegwal _ oooxoooxSonkh edi xooooooRatapani _xooooo.

Chandrakeshar ) 0oooooooocParonch )00(oooooooMola x0oooooooo_Sukta xoxoooxsOOChillar xxooooooo __

Kethan xooooooooxxBarna 0ooooooo0 IHalali _xoooooooo

Aoda _)0_00oooc(

Bila oooooooxxKharung )00000000XCGangulpara )0 0()ooooooSaroda _ oooooooocTawa _ ooooooooo

ORISSA ( 8 subprojects) 8Hi raku d 0ooooooo0Mahanadi Delta Stage I )000oo0ooo0Mahanadi Delta Stage II oOooocxSalandi _____ oooooRushikulya x_OoooooooxDeriang xxoooooooSalia T= - IOOcl Dhanei _)0_00___ I____( I I

GUWARAT (2 subprojects) 2Dharoi (LBC) ______ __TI__I_ oooooooooMeshwo |____ __T_i__ooooooxo

UTTAR PRADESH (10 subprojects) ___ ___ ___ 10Absara Distributory 00000 o 0 CxD.B.Feeder )oooooooo0Hardoi Branch Km 21.60 to Km 85.00 _oX)oooooo(

Shahjahanpur Branch Head to Km 29.90 )ooooooxo0Shahabad Distributory System )oooooo00Hardoi Branch Km 85.00 to Km 158.80and Lucknow Branch Head to Km 60.80 )0__ _ _ _ _00(

Sandila Branch and Lucknow Branchfrom Km 60.80 to Km 115.60 xoooooooxHardoi Branch Km 158.80 to Tail andAsiwan Branch xooooooooxPurwa Branch and Unnao Branch x)000oooxLucknow Branch Km 115.60 toKm 188.60 _oooooooox

BIHAR ( 2 subprojects) 2Hatua xocooDoooDumraon xxxosooooX

MAHARASHTRAInduction Training Program

HARYANABridge Financing

Total ( 96 subprojects) 10 5 | 171 4 30 281

189

,a3le 10. National Water Management Project Subproject Command Areas (ha) Covered (Page 1)

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994

TAMIL NADU ( 10 subprojects) 3 1 2 2 1 1Sathanux 18210 Kodayar 36836Thambaraparani 45282Amaravathy 22384Cumbum Valley 8099Marudhanadhi 2665Setiathope 19466Tholudu- 14915Chittar 9644Manjalar 2169

Sub-Total 100328 22384 27565 17580 9644 21691 179670

KERALA (5 subprojects) I 1 4Malmpuzha 20553Mangalam 3440Pothundi 4685Peechl _ 7184Vazhani 4313

Sub-Total 20553 1_9_622 40175

KAFNATAKA (30 subprojects) 9 1 7 2 11Maldala 472Naregal Tank 650Areshankar 1234Ramanahalli 1944Bhadra 92360VanMlas saga, 12250Shanthisagar 2819Hagaribommanahalli 3465Kanakanala 2149TBLBC Distribulary # 54 _ 39761BagewadiDistibutary 16285TBRFLC Disiributary #7 17683Chandrampalli 5223 .Oharma 7692Kanva 2576Marconahalli 5942 .. .Tunga Anicut . 9319,AnjanapLr 6736Ambligola 3203TBRI-LC Distibutary #12 3600TBRI-LC Distributary # 13 10269TBER-LC Distributary # 14 14157TBRHLC Distributay # 15 6915TBLBC DIstribulary # 31 17728TBLBC Distributary # 55 7128TBLBC Distribulary # 76 . 28930TBLBC Distributary # 85 11349TBLBC Dlstributary # 89 ____= 15342TBLBC Distibutary # 98 13521Gondi Anicut 4600

Sub-Total 129871 472 89282 12138 133539 365302

ANDHRA PRADESH (10 subprojects) 1 1 5 3 . .Ralolibunda Diversion Scheme 35410K.C.Canal 31378Thandava 20828MusI 13360Dindi 5062Bhairavanithippa 4860Lpper Pennar 3947 ._ .TBP LLC 13306Mylavaram 30352Nizamsagar 93622

Sub-Total 20828 35410 57581 138306 1 252125

190

cTh11 0 e O?

(Page 2)1987 1988 1989 19901 1991 1992 1993 1994

MADHYA PRADESH (19 subproiects) 2 12 4 1Sakaldb 1700Gagan 1000Segwal 1 200Sorkhedi 1330Ratapani 1655Chandrakeshar 40001Paronch 2145 _Mola 2400SLkla 14200Chillar 3500Kethan 3000Barna 58000Hbala i 27924Aoda 8900Bilb 12267Kharung _ 56000Gangulpara 3110Saroda 6400

Tawa 41000

Sub-Total 85924 53297 104110 6400 249731

ORISSA (8 subprojects) 8Hirakud 24125Mahanadi Delta Stage I 10222Mahanadi Delta Stage II 31980Sabndi 10000Rushkulya _ 12609

Derjng 5951

Salia 8445

3hanei 3831

Sub-Total 107163 107163

GUJARAT (2 subprojects) _ 2Dharoi (LBC) 12980leshwo 6880

Sub-Total 19860 19860

UTTAR PRADESH ( 10 subprojects) 10Absara Distributory 17000

D.B.Feeder 6000Hardoi Branch Km 21.60 to Km 85.00 15500Shahjahanpur Branch Head to Km 29.9C 37400Shahabad Distributory System 42000Hardoi Branch Km 85.W to Km 158.80and Luckncw Branch Head to Km 60,80 141000Sandila Branch and Lucknow Branchfrom Km 60.30 to Km 115.60 136000Hardoi Branch Km 158.80 to Tail andAsiwan Branch 166000Purwa Branch and Unnao Branch 132000Lucknow Branch Km 115.60 to _Km 188.60 105000

Sub-Total 797900 797900

BIHAR (2 subprojects) 2Hatua 107508Dumracn 59130

Sub-Total 166638 166638

MAHARASHTRA

Inducton Training Program

HARYANABridge Financing _

Total (96 subprojects) 10 5 1 17 4 30 28 1 2178564

191

riLI e7~ -5 Natioral Water kanagement Project Subproject Original Cost Estimates (Page 1)(Rs. Million)

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994

TAMILNADU (10 subprojects) 3 1 2 2 1 1Sathanur 46.80Kodayar 86.59Thambaraparani 97.69Amaravathy 35.02Cumbum Valley 13.13Maudhanadhi * 9.78Setiathope * 71.40Tholudt.r _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __54.70

Chittr * 35.36Manialar * 8.34

Sub-Total 231.08 35.02 84.53 64.48 35.36 8.34 458.80

KERALA (5 subprojects) 1 4MaSmpuzha _ 79.79Nangalam 17.40Pothundi 23.60Peechl 54.34Vazhani 15.60

Sub-To1al _ _ 79.79 110.94 190.73

KAFNATAKA (30 subprojects) 9 1 7 2 119aidaba 1.73Naregal Tank 1.47Aresharkar 2.64 .Ramanahalli 4.29 _ _Bhadrta 146.30Vanivilas sagar 30.00Shanthisagar 7.90Hagaribommanahalll 6.95Kanakanala 5.37TBLBC Di stributary # 54 48.50,BagewadiDistibutary 15.87 _TBRHLC Distributary #7 24.42Chancrmpalli 10.60Dharma 14.00 T IKanva 4.86 _Marconahalli 7.65 .Tunga Anicut 29.70Anjanapur 12.40Ambligola 6.25TBRf-LC Oistributtary 12 8.38TBRHLC Distributary # 13 _ 23.75TBRH-LC Distnbutary # 14 _ 32.73TBRH-LC Distibutary # 15 15.94,TBLBC Distributary # 31 -- _ _ 40.37TBLBC Distibutary # 55 16.40TBLBC Distributary # 76 66.84TBLBC Distibutary # 85 26.18TBLBC Distibutary # 89 35.52TBLBC Distributary # 98 29.93Gondi Anicut 14.40

Sub-Toaal 221.81 1.73 119.76 37.60 310.44_ 691.34

ANDHRA PRADESH (10 subprojects) 1 1 5, 3Rajolibunda Dlversion Scheme 61.40K.C.Canal . 95.00Thandava 51.10MusI 33.40Dindi 16.40Bhairavanithippa 12.15Lpper Pennar- 9.90TBP LLC _. 33.27Mylavaram 75.59Nizamsagar 230.50

Sub-Total 51.10 61.40 147.44 358.77 618.70

192

,abl]e 104

(Page 2)1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994

MACHYA PRADESH (19 subprojects) 2 12 4 1Saalkda 6.24Gagan 5.07Segwal 4.04Sornkhedi 3.57Ratapani 6.74Chancrakeshar . 20.16Paronch _ _ 9.45MAola 10.50Sukta 40.45Chillar 15.80Kelhan _ _ _ _ __ _ __8.95 _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Bama 177.20 8.95Halaii 83.77Aoda 22.04Biia 59.20Kharung 177.60Gangulpara 16.12S raoda _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 21.26Tawa _ _ ___ __ 133,001_ _ _

Sub-Total = 260.97 192.05 346.88 21.26 821.16

CRISSA (8 subprojects) EHirakud 84.42Mahanadi Delta Stage i _ 30.70Mahanadi Delta Stage II 103.60Salandi j .______33.00Rushkulya 37.80Derjang 17.90 _______9

Salia 25.40Dhanei 11.50

Sub-Total 344.32 344.3

CLIIARAT (2 subprolects) 2Dharol (LBC) 31.30Meshwo 15.37

Sub-Total 46.67 46.67

UTTAR PRADESH (10 subprojects) 1c Absara Dsiributory 40.60D.B.Feeder 56.39Fardoi Branch Km 21.60 to Km 85.00 84.90Shahjahanpur Branch Head tl Km 29.9C 41.52Shahabad Dis#rlbutory System 52.35Harcol Branch Km 85.00 to Km 158.80and Lucknow Branch Head to Km 60.80 24.93Sandila Branch and Lucknow Branchfrom Km 60.80 to Km 115.60 33.64Hardo Branch Km 158.80 to Tail and _Aslwan Branch _ 43.20Purwa Branch and Unnao Branch 66.00Lucknow Branch Km 115.60 to _ _Km 188.60 47.70

Sub-Total 491.23 491.23

BIHAR (2 subprojects) 2Hatua 267.15Oumraon 152.43

Sub-Total 419.581 419.58

MAAHARASHTRAInductin Training Program 40.26

HARYANABEidge Firnncing 1742.60

Total (98 subprojects) IO.00 5.00 1 17 4 30 28 1 4082.53

Total Cost of SubprolectsCommitted (Rs Million) 272.91 294.21 35.02 891.36 325.45 2821.63 1203.56 21.26 4082.53

Rupee - USS Exchange 12.96 13.92 16.23 17.50 22.74 25.92 30.49 31.37

Toll Cost of Subprojects _Committed (US$ Million) 21.06 21.14 2.16 50.93 14.31 108.86 39.47 0.68 258.61

193


INDIA


Appendix 3

Observations of Ministry of Water Resources on the Draft ImplementationCompletion Report Prepared by FAO/CP on National Water Management Project

(Credit 1770-IN)

1. PROJECT OBJECTIVES

1.1 The National Water Management Project (NWMP) was formulated on pilot basisto improve the performance of existing irrigation systems. Initially, at the appraisal stage,three southern States of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu were selected whohad more or less the same rules, procedures and practices for project planning, designconstruction and operation. The prevailing deficiencies in system management resulting inunreliable, unpredictable and inequitable water deliveries at the designated outlets in theseStates were attributed to inadequacies of physical systems to implement the operationalplan, lack of farmers' participation in canal management and lack of adequate funds forsystem maintenance. The concepts underlying the NWMP were based on the variousconclusions drawn from experiences in these States.

1.2 The purpose of the project was to increase productivity and farm incomes inexisting irrigation schemes through a more reliable, predictable and equitable irrigationservice. To achieve these objectives and facilitate extension of similar activitiesthroughout the country, the project was to help participating States and Government ofIndia to develop an institutional capacity to plan, implement and monitor improved O&Mpractices and to provide for selected schemes for low-cost infrastructural improvementsdesigned to support an improved operational plan. In each case, the most appropriatetechnique of water supply was to be adopted (SAR para 3.03 refers).

2. PROJECT DESIGN

2.1 The major component of the project was the improved water management. Itenvisaged provisions for scheme investments, engineering and administration, incrementalrecurrent O&M expenditures, institutional strengthening, training programmes, specialstudies and programmes. The scheme investments was the principal component. It was toprovide for scheme minimal but essential investments required to implement theoperational plan. These were to include repairs and renovations to the water conveyancesystem including existing structures; provision of new control structures, measuringdevices and investments in upgraded O&M facilities and equipment, including housing for

194

staff and transport and communication equipment as required to execute the operationalplan. The investment was limited to Rs.2500 per hectare at 1986-87 price level forimprovement of infrastructure required for implementation of improved operational plan.

2.2 The strategy for each scheme under NWMP was to be derived from the objectiveswhich could be accomplished with the known constraints reflecting understanding of howthe system evolved in its present form and how dces it operate. However, soiutions wererequired to be responsive to the established socio-economic environment and evolvingagricultural conditions. The main thrust of NWMP was on converting the systems fromdemand-based to supply based and thus delivering of allotted water at different outletsaccording to a pre-determined and agreed schedule. This was to be made possiblethrough infrastructural improvements in the conveyance system.

2.3. The project also supported two other components related to the general objectivesof improved water management in India namely (a) Maharashtra Induction TrainingProgramme (MITP) designed to support initial vocational training for engineers recruitedto the Maharashtra Irrigation Department; and (b) an Institutional Strengthening andTraining Fund (ISTF) to plan, implement and monitor the irrigation schemes underNWMP.

3. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AND ASSESSMENT OUTCOME

3.1 Immediately after closing of the project in March, 1995, Ministry of WaterResources (MOWR) had prepared the Completion Report (CR) on NWMP a copy ofwhich was forwarded to the World Bank. The Report deals at length with various aspectsof the project implementation, including the performance of individual states. It highlightsthe performance of each of the components of the project with special focus on overallperformance, implementation and operation experiences and the lessons learnt that wouldbe relevant for the future. In the light of the findings of the MOWR's elaborated in theCompletion Report the following observations are made on the final draft of theImplementation Completion Report prepared by FAO/CP Mission on NWMP.

3.2. The FAO/CP Mission has rated the project outcome as unsatisfactory merely basedon partial progress in terms of physical progress. It is true that a large number of schemesagainst those envisaged at appraisal were cleared for implementation under NWMP. Atotal of 96 schemes covering a CCA of 2.18 million hectares (mha) were initiated underthe project. In addition, bridge finance was provided for lining of main canal and watercourses in Haryana for a period of two years to allow that State to continue work on theseaspects until the approval of the Haryana Water Resources Consolidation Project (WIRCP)in 1994. Out of the above schemes, only 32 schemes covering a CCA of 0.34 mha againstthe appraisal target of about 0.50 mha could be completed at credit closure. Thefollowing reasons could be attributed to it:-

(i) In addition to the 16 schemes identified in original three Statesviz. Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu covering a CCA

195

of 0.45 mha at appraisal, an allowance was made in the SARto cover an additional CCA of 0.12 mha in schemes to beidentified later. This provided a leaverage for inclusion of moreschemes/States under the NWMP.

(ii) The value of the credit assistance of SDRs 93.2 million availableunder the project was equivalent to US $ 114 million or IndianRs. 1482 million at 1986-87 price level. Due to exchange ratefluctuations, the current value of the credit assistance stoodenhanced to be estimated at US $ 127.27 million (i.e. equivalentto Indian Rs.3500 million. This enabled GOI to accommodatethe pressing demands for covering additional participating statesand inclusion of more schemes from participating States.

(iii) During the project implementation, an impression crept in thatthe second phase of NWMP would follow concurrently withoutany transition period between the two phases. To capitalise onthis situation to sustain the tempo built up at the later years of theproject due to development of institutional capability at State level,GOI/WB cleared several projects for implementation even at a laterdate fully realising that they would not be completed before theclosing date of the project. It was presumed that these schemeswould continue to receive funds under the follow-up phase. It maybe added that much before the closing of the NWMP, the World BankMission during their visit to India in March 1994, held identificationdiscussions with MOWVR on follow-up phase of NWM1P. During thediscussion, it was observed that NWMP, with its limited objectives,concentrated on raising the performance of specific pilot irrigationproject. Considering the good prospects for a follow-up project,need was felt for a more comprehensive approach to water servicemanagement. Accordingly, the action points required to be taken ina time bound manner for preparation of proposals for follow-up phaseof NVMP, first at the State level and then for the overall appraisalreport at the national level, were discussed and finalised.

(iv) Initially, the progress of implementation of NWMP remained slow dueto several reasons. The approval of the sub-projects and negotiationsunder the project consumed most of 1986-87. Subsequently, preparationof summary reports followed by detailed scheme reports and othertechnical studies took another one or two years. NWMP being a newconcept, it took quite some time in setting up requisite organisationalstructure for implementation of N-WMIP in the States. Besides,Irrigation Department (ID) staff took some time in getting themselvesacquainted with the NWMP concepts. Due to the above reasons, verylittle investment was made in the intial two-three years. However,

196

once initial hurdles were over pace of implementation picked upin 1990 and steadily improved since then as is evident from thereimbursement claims made. In fact, the level of investment duringthe year 1992-93 constituted about twice the cumulative expenditureincurred during the first four years of the project and nearly two anda half times that in the previous year i.e. 1991-92. The pace of workwas further increased during 1993-94. Anticipating shortfall inutilization of the credit, the closing date of the project was extendedby one more year i.e. from 31st March, 1994 to 31 st March, 1995.With the extended period of one year, the credit assistance availablefor improved water management under the project was utilized fullycompleting 32 schemes and leaving others in different stages ofimplementation when the project came to a close in March, 1995.The completed schemes though covered 15 per cent of the projectcommand area of all the approved schemes, yet they achieved 67per cent of the appraisal target that too in three-four years of actualimplementation of the project.

3.3 The findings of the Mission about realisation of objectives under NWMP ought tobe viewed in the light of the following constraints.

(i) The irrigation schemes chosen for improved water management underNWMP were scattered and even the selected schemes were not takenup for rehabilitation in entirety. This stymied the implementation of theoperational plan prepared for whole scheme. The canal section notrehabilitated under the project constrained the system performance asrequired under the operational plan. This, in fact, is an importantlesson learnt during the project implementation and will need to bekept inview while planning for the follow-up phase.

(ii) The schemes selected under NWMP were such as operating at lowirrigation efficiencies because of inadequate maintenance in the past.To implement the operational plan prepared as per NWMP objectives, itwas essential that the canal networks were brought to proper shape.As such, the structural interventions proposed under NWMP formedan important component of the programme. Nearly eighty five per centof schemes' outlays was earmarked for infrastructural improvements.Being the first phase, this seemed to be inevitable. A better balance isexpected in the follow-up phase.

(iii) Changes in the timing of irrigation releases methods of water delivery,efficiency of water use and effectiveness of supporting services neces-sarily lead by themselves and together to modify cropping patterns,increase irrigation intensities and raise yields and value added. However,the speed with which these results can be achieved depends on the

197

effectiveness of operational plan adopted which in turn is directlylinked up with the completion of the required construction activitiesin all respects. Mere acceptance of the improved operational plan bythe users before the structural interventions are completed, cannot beexpected to cause achievement of these end.

3.4 The Economic Rate of Returns (ERR) of nine schemes evaluated by the Missionhas been found to be lower than that computed at appraisal. Given the status ofimplementation of the project by closure, it would be too early to quantify the benefits. Assuch, the results of the economic and financial analysis made under ICR by the Missioncould be regarded as indicative and not definitive as these schemes have just beencompleted in some form or the other. The benefits considered in the economic analysisare primarily those which relate to the areas in the command which in the past were eithernot receiving any irrigation supplies or even if irrigation waters fed these areas in someyears, it was both inadequate and not dependable and which after NWMP interventionshave started receiving timely and adequate irrigation supplies. Improved infrastructuralsystem results in not only increase in irrigated area and production thereof but also inenhancing the overall productivity of the entire command due to timeliness of irrigationsupplies and improved water use efficiency. If such benefits were also taken into account,ERR of the said schemes would improve considerably.

3.5. The lower ERR is stated to be attributable to (i) reduction in benefitted area (ii)increase in cost of rehabilitation and (iii) less than anticipated changes in croppingpatterns. This situation arose because of the fact that the rehabilitation and modernisationworks were scattered, started at a late date and therefore some of the important workswere still incomplete by the closing date. The farmers were also unwilling to change thecropping pattern, as planned in the SAR. Morevoer, there is always considerable time-lagbetween the scheme completion and accrual of the full benefits. After realising theanticipated benefits of the said schemes, ERR would reach optimum level.

3.6 Insufficient farmers participation has been cited as one of the major weakness ofthe programme. It will be appreciated that at the time the project was launched, theconcept of farmers participation was in infancy. Also no provision was made in theproject estimates for meeting the cost of promotion of farmers participation in the schemesincluded under the programme. However, over the period the concept of farmersparticipation in irrigation management has gained momentum and at present this concepthas found wide acceptance both amongst the States and the farmers. GOI has prepared aNational Action Plan (NAP) to support Participation Irrigation Management (PIM) in thecountry. One of the wings (WM Wing) of MOWR has been designed as nodal wing for itspromotion. The implementation of NAP has begun. As per the present thinking, WaterUsers' Association would be established at minor canal level. The system below minorwould be turned over to them. Powers will be delegated to WUA's to undertake O&M ofthe system and also collect water charges. MOWR has recently organised a series ofseminars on PIM in different States for propagation of the concept. The underlyingobjective of these seminars was to help prepare the draft action plan on PIM for the

198

States. Most of the States are now preparing the State action plans on PIM. ThePlanning Commission has constituted a Working Group on PIM, recommendations ofwhcih would be considered during finalization of the country's Ninth Five Year Plan. It ishoped that funds will be earmarked for PIM. In the follow up NWMP, efforts towardsfarmers organisations would be an explicit part of both operational systems improvementand physical works. The farmer organisations would be multilevel, capable of dealing withproblems and representing farmers below the outlet, at the minor distributing level and atsystem level.

3.7 Even after the completiion of restoration work under the project, it is essential tomaintain all the schemes properly so that they continue to provide sustainable service.There has been general awareness in the States of the need to improve the level ofmaintenance by providing adequate O&M funds and for rationalising the existing waterrates so as to convey the scarcity value and foster the motivation for economy in water usewith recovery of annual maintenance and operation charges. The Committee on Pricing ofIrrigation Water set up by the Planning Commission has examined these aspects in detailand made important recommendations thereon in its report (September, 1992). Therecommendations of the Committe, inter-alia, include adequate provisions for O&M andlinking of water rates with recovery of O&M costs in phases. The Tenth FinanceCommission also seeks to make adequate provisions for O&M based on certain norms. Inview of these facts, it is expected that State Governments would provide adequate O&Mfunds for sustenance of the NWMP schemes.

3.8. Systematic monitoring and evaluation of the key parameters of the schemes takenup for improvement is undoubtely important. However, in the absence of propermeasuring, devices and other necessary infrastructure the monitoring process started latein most of the schemes. However, data on physical progress of works, financialexpenditure, cropped area, reservoir levels, gauge, and discharge of important canals etc.were maintained by the project authorities right from the beginning and were reviewedfrom time to time. The hydraulic data so maintained were used for finalising operationschedules in the various canals in consultation with the beneficiary farmers.

3.9 In the above backdrop, it is apparent that NWVP being a pilot programme hasbeen a modestly successful programme. The experience of the project has givenencouraging results and its impact has been well appreciated at various forums includingBank missions. Water management and maintenance have improved considerably in theschemes completed and those nearing completion. The benefitted areas have shown anincrease in agricultural productivity ranging between 15 per cent and 67 per cent throughimproved water deliveries and by better water use efficiency. Thus, the project schemeshave been able to raise the productivity of land thereby increasing the income of farmers inthe command areas. The project interventions have also created conditions for equitabledistribution of irrigation water. There has also been increase in irrigated area in theNWMP schemes. The tail end commands of completed NWMP schemes have startedgetting irrigation water, some for the first time after the inception. The impact of some ofthese schemes in terms of irrigated area and agricultural productivity has been highlighted

199

in chapter 9 of the MOW1R Completion Report on NWMP. All this reflects the positiveimpact of the programme on irrigated agriculture.

4.0 LESSONS LEARNT

4.1 Some of the lessons drawn from the project implementation are given below:

(i) The working period in the command being limited, adequate funds arerequired to be made available at the State level at the beginning of thefinancial year.

(ii) The concept of NWMP should be clearly understood by the users,managers and administrators of the system through trainings, seminars andworkshops with a view to realise the objectives of the project.

(iii) There is considerable scope for strengthening the operational plan aspect inNWMP schemes. The selected scheme included for improvement underthe NU7MP should be taken up for rehabilitation in its entirely, instead oftreating only a part of it.

(iv) Inter-organizational coordination of irrigation and agricultural managementwhich has hitherto been quite inadequate in most of the NWMP Statesneeds to be strengthened to make the programme more effective.

(v) Even after carrying out the restoration works, NWMP schemes stillsuffer from the problem of O&M. It is imperative to provide adequateprovisions for maintaining all the project components properly so thatthe irrigation projects continue to provide sustainable service.

(vi) It should be obligatory on the part of the project authorities to ensureformation of users' groups in the command and transfer the responsibilityof O&M below certain level of the irrigation system to the beneficiaries.

(vii) The progress of the communication component of the schemes underNWMP on the whole have been practically insignificant. A greater use ofmodern tools of communication under NWMP scheme is called for.

(viii) Efforts need to be made by the States for monitoring and evaluatingthe scheme performance intensively and effectively.

5.0 BORROWERS PERFORMANCE

5.1 The Water Management Cell (WMC) in the MOWR was established to helpprepare and promote the NWMP. The Cell provided policy direction, acted as a catalystfor extending the approach across State boundaries and administered and coordinated the

200

NWVMP as a whole. It was also responsible for the clearing of the detailed scheme reports.The cell has an all round technical support from other specialised organisations like CWC,ICAR, Ministry of Agriculture, Planning Commission etc. WMC was staffed as perrequirements assessed by the Ministry from time to time. With the progress of the project,the number of States/schemes under implementation increased. Because of lateral entry oflarger number of schemes into the programme and the urgency for according themapproval, the time available for proper scrutiny was short. However, with the activesupport of the above referred specialised organisations all possible efforts were made toensure proper appraisal of the schemes. After the schemes were cleared by GOI they wereagrain examined by the World Bank and approval accorded. Nevertheless, inadequate andpoor quality of hydrological and other data on which some of the schemes wereformulated affected adversely on their performance. Central Water Commission (CWC)has now established it's regional offices in most of the irrigation dominated States, tocoordinate the work in the water resources sector in terms of National Water Policy.Modalities are being worked out to deploy the monitoring and appraisal units of theregional offices of CWC in the concerned State for technical test-auditing and monitoringthe progress and performance of schemes under follow-up project.

5.2 All the above aspects have been discussed in detail in Chapter 10 of the MOWRCompletion Report on NWMP referred to in para 3.1 above.

6.0 BANK PERFORMANCE

6.1 Excellent cooperation was received from the World bank for implementation ofNWMP. The Bank while clearing the schemes under the project thoroughly examined theproject reports and rendered valuable suggestions to the project authorities with regard tofeasible interventions required for dealing with the problem of water management. TheBank Missions had been reviewing the progress of implementation - Statewise regularly asis evident from Missions' Supervision Reports prepared from time to time.

7.0 CONCLUDING REMARKS

7.1 NWMP has been modestly successful. The deliberately limited objectives of this,which was a first intervention for system upgradation as a pilot project, now needbroadening with a comprehensive approach to water service management to resolveseveral problems experienced during the project implementation. The follow up project asand when materialises will focus on project sustainability, rationalising its scope by takingup priority schemes in their entirely instead of going in for individual distributaries as faras possible; introducing flexibility in the per hectare ceiling on expenditure; carefulprioritising investment programme; strengthening institutional and organisational structurefor better management and service delivery; providing appropriate level of funds for O&Mfacilities; preparing pragmatic improved operational plans with focus on conjunctive use ofsurface and ground water and implement them effectively with proper tools of monitoringand evaluation; introducing modem management information system; promoting farmersparticipation in water management and rotational water supply (RWS) principles to them;

201

volumetric supply of water to Water Users' Associations (WUAs) and moving over timeto price services at cost etc.

202


INDIA

NATIIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT(Credit 1770-IN)

Appendix 4

Excerpts from the Ministry of Water Resources' Completion Report

Chapter 10. Lessons Drawn from NWMP-I

10.1 BACKGROUND

10.1.1 The NWMP is in operation for the last eight years. During this period the NWMPactivities gained momentum and its impact has been well appreciated. Beginning withmerely three states in the South, the project now covers eight additional States. MoreStates are keen to be included under the NWMP. It is evident from the study of someschemes already completed under NWMP, like Bhadra in Karnataka, Sathanur in TamilNadu, that water management and maintenance of such schemes have greatly improved,resulting in increase in productivity per unit of land and water. These have been able tocreate conditions for reliable and equitable distribution of irrigation water.

10.1.2 Keeping in view the usefulness of the programme, the Eight Five Year Plan (1992-97) envisages covering more areas under the NWMP. The Committee on Pricing ofIrrigation Water has also appreciated the functioning of the NWMP schemes and stressedto expand the project substantially, having considered it as an appropriate instrument forimplementation of their recommendations.

10.1.3 At the stage when the programme is coming to a close, it is necessary to know theextent to which various requirements laid down under the NWMP have been fulfilled bythe individual schemes, the difficulties faced in attaining these requirements and the extentto which these requirements need to be modified in the subsequent phase in the light of theexperience gained so far. All said and done, though the credit has been utilized fully underthe project, the programme remains incomplete since spill-over schemes under the projectare as many as 70, despite an extension of time by one year from the originallycontemplated date of closure. The lessons learnt can mostly be described from theproblems faced in the implementation. Some of the lessons learnt which could be relevantfor future implementation of any such programme are highlighted in the followingparagraphs.

203

10.2 FUNDS CONSTRAINTS

10.2.1 The NWMP programme was to be cost effective and the schemes thereunder wereexpected to yield results quickly within a span of 3-5 years. Even during theimplementation of the programme itself, the benefits from the scheme were expectedflowing to the farmers. This has not happened in many of the schemes in different States.This has mainly been due to non-availability of funds at State level in accordance with theschedule of implementation. The working period in the command being limited,substantial funds are required to be made available right at the beginning of the financialyear. The States due to resource constraints find it difficult to provide requisite funds intime. Whatever is provided is found to be meager. Moreover, reimbursement takes quitesometime and whatever amount is reimbursed at Central level is credited to the State'sresources which takes time in percolating down to the project authorities. The proceedsavailable under NWMP should be treated as earmarked outlays in the State plan andshould not be adjusted against the State's resource liability in general.

10.2.2 Although the Ministry of Finance has been providing advance Central Assistancefrom time to time, but the amount is quite meager. Presently, the Irrigation Departmentsin each of the NWMP State have built up departmental capabilities to spend annual budgetof considerable order. It would be appropriate to explore possibility of releasing anadvance of about Rs.50 Million in the first week of April every year as a revolving funddirectly utiliseable by the organizations responsible for NWVMP works.

10.3 CONCEPT

10.3.1 The project authorities formulated revised operational plans in most of thecompleted or nearly completed sub-projects and water delivery practice had accordinglycommenced under NWMP. However, the progress in adoption of the operational plansand the rules had not been steady. In most of the cases, the operational plans were eithernotional or still at draft stage, to be approved by the State Government. Merelypreparation of operational plan does not help unless it is implemented. This implies thatthe main system management has to be responsive and effective in terms of canaloperation, and effective communication with the farmers and monitoring of the system.

10.3.2 This further implies that unless the operation plan is implemented strictly, thefarmers are involved actively in compliance of the same, the objectives of the NWMPcannot be attained. Apparently there is a considerable scope for strengthening theoperational plan aspect in NWMP schemes. It is, therefore, necessary to get the farmersfully acquainted with the plans and their reactions taken into account. The canaloperational plan is to be notified in advance of each crop season. While issuing thenotification of the irrigation schedule, strict implementation of the relevant section of theIrrigation Act has to be intensified with greater use of modern techniques.

204

10.3.3 Operational plan should be prepared with a good understanding of the waterbalance within the command. A major component of the water balance comprises thelosses, return flows, rainfall, groundwater development and utilisation.

10.3.4 The plan should be prepared after studying the whole infrastructural system,cropping pattern etc. in consultation with the agricultural and soil analyst and should beapproved by the farmers. Unauthorised command area should also be included in the plan.

10.3.5 The operational plan prepared should be continuously revised and refined on thebasis of flow measurements, rainfall, cropping pattern etc.

10.4 Coordination

10.4.1 Inter-organizational coordination of irrigation and agriculture management hasbeen quite inadequate in most of the NWMP States. Various agencies such as irrigation,agriculture, the CADAs, credit institutions etc. are still functioning independently and inisolation from each other. The role of agricultural office in advising the engineer on waterdelivery schemes on one hand and the farmers on cropping patterns and irrigationpractices below outlets on the other is equally important in providing linkage between thefarmers and the engineers in irrigation system management. There should be strongorganizational coordination among all the concerned agencies -- irrigation, agriculture,revenue and the beneficiaries to facilitate the formulation and implementation of theoperational plan.

10.5 MAINTENANCE

10.5.1 Under the NWMP, physical improvements are being made not only to restore thecapabilities of an irrigation system but also upgrade the main system to bring it to thedesired standard to ensure a more reliable, predictable and equitable irrigation service.About 80 percent of the total cost of a scheme under NWMP is spent on physical works.Even after such restoration work is carried out, it is essential to maintain all the projectcomponents properly so that the project continues to provide sustainable service. Unlessthe system is maintained properly it cannot perform well and the purpose of the NWMPcould get defeated. For a defined operation under varying conditions of availability anddemand pattern, only a well maintained system can respond quickly with minimum loss inoperation. Operations and maintenance are thus inter-related and integral part of themanagement of the system. Therefore, adequate funds and responsible agencies are thepre-requisites for satisfactory operation and maintenance.

10.6 FARMERS' PARTICIPATION

10.6.1 It is learnt from the experience of the current phase of the NWMP that without theactive involvement of farmers in irrigation water management, the objective of the NWMPschemes could not be realised completely. Even if some of the objectives were realizedpartially they could not be sustained in the long run. There is, therefore, a pressing need

205

to organise the farmers during the course of implementation of NWMP scheme to dealwith the problem related to irrigation management. It should be obligatory on the part ofthe project authorities to ensure formation of users' groups in the command and transferthe responsibility of O&M below certain level of the irrigation system. However, the stepsfor accelerating the process of forming effective users' groups have to be conceived in awider framework combining better management of the system as a whole with incentivefor group operation. Initially, the aim should be to increase user participation inmanagement at the level of distribution and minors, and in due course at the level of thesystem as a whole.

10.7 COMMUNICATION

10.7.1 The progress of the communication component of the schemes under NVMP ONthe whole have been practically insignificant. The efforts made in this regard in respect ofBhadra, Sathanur and Thandva have not yielded encouraging results. Computerisedmanagement information system is yet to be developed. Although National InformaticCenter has developed a software package for Bhadra, the same is yet to be replicated inother sub-projects in and outside the State. However, NRSA, Hyderabad is using satelliteremote sensing techniques which have been quite useful for monitoring the Bhadracommand area. The technique needs to be applied increasingly in all the importantcommand areas of the NWMP schemes. The telecommunication network, along withcomputer processing facilities and the remote sensing techniques, provide the means for anefficient monitoring and analysis of irrigation management system with a view toaccelerate the optimum utilization of scarce water resources. The greater use or suchmodern tools under NWMP schemes is called for.

10.8 MONITORING

10.8. 1 Monitoring and evaluation has been receiving increasing attention of most of theproject staff who are intensively monitoring project performance utilising the formatsrecommended for the purpose in the participating States of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu.The monitoring data maintained by the project staff shows that most sub-projects areusing less water, per hectare than what was used before they were brought under NWMP.Also there has been overall increase in crop yield and also productivity per unit of waterdelivered. As a result, the gross agricultural income per unit of water delivered at maincanal head has also substantially increased. This is indeed an encouraging feature. A lotmore could be done in this regard by the intensive application of modern tools ofcommunication as mentioned above, and monitoring the projects as per norms. Effortsneed to be made by States for monitoring the project performance intensively andeffectively.

I ll AG I NG i

iep&z Mo c I I: 160- -I1TypDe: IC'1

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY - World Bank Documents

Documents

Transcript of FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY - World Bank Documents