Aquifer committees and

groundwater over-exploitation

Case Study:

The State of Guanajuato

Mexico

The state of Guanajuato

Area: 30,768 km2 of which 83%

belong to the Lerma Chapala

Basin (44% of the area of the

basin). Population: 4.7 million 3.1% GNP of the country 480,107 irrigated

ha (60% of it with

groundwater) Severe groundwater

exploitation problems

Groundwater exploitation in the

Lerma Chapala Basin

Red areas are

overexploited Darker blue in

balance Light blue under

used Note the state of

Guanajuato (Most

red areas)

How is the water used?

Agriculture (%)

Industry (%)

Public (urban & rural) (%)

Surface water 99.73 0.00 0.27

Groundwater 83.20 1.80 15.00

Global water use

87.81 1.30 10.89

Intense groundwater use

All aquifers are being mined and water extractions are still increasing (4000

MCM/year with a deficit of 1250 MCM/year) High productivity and forward-linked export agriculture. Growing urban and industrial water needs

2,778

REC

HA

RG

E

4,027

TO

TA

L A

BS

TR

AC

TIO

N

Gro

un

dw

ate

r-1,249

Deficit

Intense water use

Number of wells is still increasing

year

Deep

wells

Consequences of overexploitation

Average aquifer decline of 2.03 m/year

(with extremes of 5 m/year) Increasing pumping costs Decline in groundwater quality Subsidence (up to 3 cm/year)

Subsidence

What has been done before to regulate

groundwater?

Historical responses to regulate groundwater

– Vedas bans on new wells

– 1956 (Groundwater users are required to get

permits/concessions)

– Since the new water law (1992) regularization of groundwater

concessions (REPDA)

What has been done before to

regulate groundwater?

Current programs to register wells with an annual volumetric concession.

BUT

Ineffective in controlling groundwater exploitation

What is being done

aquifer management

programs

raise agricultural productivity

import water

efficiently satisfy growing public

needs

preserve sources and ecosystems

rescue water volumes

reclaimwastewater

reform financial structures

improve and sustain human

capacities

promote good- practices-enabling

social values

implement adequate

technology

improve institutional

settings

implement water exchange schemes

What are COTAS

MSP’s (Multi Stakeholder

Platforms) at aquifer level aimed

at organizing users in aquifer

management councils to reach

agreement on reductions in

extractions

What are COTAS

All water users of an aquifer can

become a member of COTAS,

multi-sectoral (1997-2000) 14 COTAS + 1

coordinating institution CEH

(Consejo Estatal Hidraulico)

Guanajuato

Structure of the COTAS

Technical Group

TECHNICAL EXPERTISE

Consultative Group

GOVERNMENTAL SUPPORT

Technical Committee - Guanajuato State’s

Trust for Social Participation in Water

Management(FIPASMA)

General Assembly

Directive Board

Manager

Administrative Suppport

COTASWater Technical Council

SOCIETY(Organized Water Users)

Technical support

Outputs of COTAS

0

5

10

15

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

COTAS installed Mathematical models completed

Economic assessment performed GW Management Programs in progress

1. Technical support to users

2. Studies and mathematical models of all aquifers

3. Institutional development

4. Communication of a “water culture”

5. User-oriented services

Challenges and opportunities

Challenges

– Low participation (2-3% of total users)

– Lack of legal faculties (no enforcement faculties)= works on

the good will of users

– Has had little effect on groundwater extraction levels

Challenges and opportunities

Opportunities

– Strong state government support (CEAG)

– Increasing awareness of users

– 15 formed and functioning institutions

Lessons learned

Participation is difficult when users don’t see direct benefits. Is 1000 or more users for one COTAS too much? The lack of legal power to enforce control and measures is an

important constraint. COTAS could play a role in titling, eg, through

responsibility and supervision of group concessions. User awareness is slowly increasing; this creates a base for action.

Water use in agriculture

Rationale: higher irrigation

efficiency will reduce

groundwater use

Programs

– Modernization of

groundwater irrigation

systems

– Plot leveling

Irrigation system Application Efficiency (%)

Earthen Channels 40%

Low Pressure Systems 60-65%

Sprinkler Irrigation 75-80%

Drip Irrigation 85-90%

Farmer applies for subsidies for

improving his irrigation technology

(requirements)

- Legal groundwater use permit

- Contribution of the farmer

(10%-50% of total costs)

- With the new project flow

meters are installed on pumps

How does it work

State Secretary of Agriculture (SDA)

reviews the application The project gets approved and

installed Farmers are responsible for the proper

installation of technology, if it is not

well installed the state does not pay. Subsides get liberated (paid by the

federal and state governments when

to work is approved and completed)

How does it work

Results of the programs

Total investment 1,2 million

dollar Benefited users 35,500 Hectares 173,000 ha Effects

– More efficient

groundwater use

– Higher agricultural

outputs

– No significant

groundwater use

reductions

Lessons

Increasing irrigation

efficiency raises

agricultural production but

does not necessarily

decrease groundwater

exploitation

Raising irrigation efficiency

to reduce groundwater use

is only effective if there is

strict control over pumped

groundwater volumes

Energy pricing

Concessioned wells receive

energy subsidy up to

concessioned volume -

enforcement difficult. All power connections for

wells require proof of

concession title. Energy tariff fixed at Mex$

0.30 (US$ 0.0316) per kWh

up to annual energy

consumption limit based

on concessioned volume.

Energy pricing

Supply manipulation

options unfeasible:

– restrictions on new

connections

– caps on capacity or

amperage, and

– reductions in hours of

power supply Pricing options...

Conclusions

Groundwater management is a

key challenge that requires

regulatory and participatory

approaches coupled with

changes in demand behavior

of pumpers.

Institutions have to work

together with each other and

with the users to reach

agreements on how to reduce

groundwater use.

Conclusions

The enabling legal and human

resources to impose strict control

are not always available so other

options have to be devised.

The options are many… but

which one(s) will work?

Can different strategies be

combined to fit the specific

needs established by a specific

context?

Acknowledgement

This case study is based on:

Jaime D. Hoogesteger van Dijk

‘The Underground; Understanding the failure of intitutional

responses to reduce groundwater exploitation in Guanajuato’

(Wageningen University, The Netherlands)

Pictures made available by Jaime Hoogesteger van Dijk.

With special thanks to:

the CEAG (www.guanajuato.gob.mx/ceag/) and SDA for making

the information available.