The paper looks at the impact of water harvesting programs in ground water recharge through the case of the Sujala watershed in Karnataka. On comparison with areas of non sujala watershed and non watershed cases in one normal rainfall and one drought year, it was revealed that Sujala has been successful in recharging
groundwater, improving farmers’ incomes and increasing crop production. Further the program is inclusive and the benefits were accrued even to the small and marginal farmers. In fact the net return for small and marginal farmers was higher that that for large and medium farmers. The study concluded that there is potential for
expansion of Sujala pattern of watershed development program in other parts of Karnataka and India.
Details
Title
EQUITY IN DISTRIBUTION OF BENEFITS FROM WATER HARVESTING AND GROUNDWATER RECHARGE – AN ECONOMIC STUDY IN SUJALA WATERSHED PROJECT IN KARNATAKA
Record Identifier
https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/43618
PURL Identifier
http://purl.umn.edu/43618
Page Range
721 - 747
Total Pages
27
JEL Codes
Sujala watershed program externalities drought ANOVA
Note
In this study, economic impact of water harvesting and groundwater recharging was analyzed in the
context of Sujala watershed equity and efficiency in the distribution of benefits in Chitradurga district, Karnataka.
Field data for 2004-05 (drought year) and 2005-06 (normal year) from 30 sample farmers in Sujala watershed
form the data base for the study. Another sample of 30 farmers from Non-Sujala (or DPAP) watershed, and 30
from outside watershed area form the control. Farmers were further classified as: (i) those who had bore well
irrigation; and (ii) those who had no borewell irrigation in order to assess the impact of watershed.
It was found that the amortized cost per functioning well and cost per acre inch of groundwater in
Sujala watershed is lower than that in non-Sujala watershed and non-watershed area. The economic contribution
in terms of incremental net returns per acre in (i) Sujala over non-watershed area (in drought year, normal year)
as the contribution of Sujala watershed are Rs. 1726 and Rs. 3650; (ii) Sujala over Non-Sujala (DPAP)
watershed (as the contribution of Sujala watershed institutions) is Rs. 1067 and Rs. 898); (iii) Non Sujala
(DPAP) over non-watershed area (equal to contribution to Non-Sujala or DPAP watershed) is Rs. 133 and Rs.
2226. These indicate economic supremacy of Sujala watershed program.
The incremental net returns of Sujala over non-watershed area in drought year and in normal year
for farmers possessing irrigation wells were Rs. 614 and Rs. 5056 respectively; for farmers not possessing
irrigation wells is Rs. 7354 and Rs. 5326; for all classes of farmers is Rs. 3066 and Rs. 4967 are the prima facie
indicators of economic contributions of Sujala watershed program. The negative externality per well per year in
Sujala was Rs 2652, in Non-Sujala watershed was Rs. 2735, and in non-watershed area was Rs. 4285. It shows
that the negative externality in groundwater irrigation has reduced by 38% in Sujala over non-watershed area.
Sujala watershed program had a higher expenditure as compared to non-sujala watershed. Still the B-C
ratios were higher in Sujala watershed during both drought and normal year.
Series Statement
Paper presented at the IWMI-TATA 7th Annual Partners’ Meet, ICRISAT, Hyderabad, India, April 2-4, 2008
Proceedings of the IWMI-TATA Water Policy Research Program, Vol.2, 2008, pp. 720-747.
