integrated development approach study jravishanker 2005

8/3/2019 Integrated Development Approach Study Jravishanker 2005

1/19

Integrated development approach for - water, land, forest andcattle. AKRSP(I)-Netrang, Gujarat experiences.

Year 2005.

byJ. Ravi Shanker.for Development Support Center. Ahmedabad.


2/19

Integrated development approach for - water, land, forest and cattle. AKRSP(I)-Netrang, Gujarat experiences. Page 1J. Ravi Shanker.

1

Integrated Watershed Development.

Case Study of MotaKakadiamba.

AKRSP(I)-Netrang, Gujarat experiences.

Contents:

1. Introduction

2. Study Objectives

3. Context

4. Integrated watershed development

5. MotaKakadiamba Watershed

6. Steps in IWD

7. Activities Undertaken

8. Benefits of IWD

9. Further Potential

10. Lessons for development agencies


3/19


2

Integrated development Convergence approachAKRSP(I)-Netrang, Gujarat experiences.

Introduction:

The watershed approach conventionally aimed at treating degraded lands with the help of low

cost and locally accessed technologies such as in-situ soil and moisture conservation,

afforestation and through close involvement of communities. Watershed Guidelines (1994) of

Ministry of Rural Development in India emphasized on increasing production and enhancing

productivity in cultivated areas-largely private. Attempts were made to enhance rural livelihood

support systems for poor and needy. Though the guidelines were revised in 2001, the focus has

been retained.

Revised Guidelines re-emphasised on participation of women, carrying out exit protocol, role of

Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRI), establishing credit facility in 2001. However some of the

projects in first batch (1996) have already incorporated some of these elements in their stride

leading to successful and sustainable models of watersheds. At the same time some of the

concepts like convergence, Twin Track Approach, Transparency were introduced at later stage

to enhance the effectiveness of the program. These ideas emerged out of some of the best

practices witnessed in the field. This document attempts to study some of such approaches.

Study Objectives

To study best practices in integrated watershed development

To document the approach of AKRSP-I to IWD

Lessons for replication

Context:

Aga Khan Rural Support Program India-AKRSP (I) is a non-profit organization and is part of Aga

Khan Development Network. Established in 1983 in Gujarat by Mr.Anil Shah as the first Chief

Executive Officer to empower rural communities manage their environment and control their

lives. Since then AKRSPI focused more on empowerment based models of community

development around land and water resources.

AKRSP-I played active role in execution of watershed program under Ministry of Rural

Development and this report studies one of the project villages MotaKakadiamba in Narmada

District of Gujarat.


4/19


3

Though initial focus was on natural resources such as water, land, forest and livestock AKRSP-I

geared up to concentrate on livelihood based approaches through programmatic intervention

Sustainable Community Based Livelihood Enhancement Program(SCALE) funded by

European Commission. The process of community empowerment is corner stone for

sustainable development of natural resources. And livelihood enhancement is possible through

integrated resource development. This complex relationship is studied by Development Support

Center in MotaKakadiamba watershed project as SCALE program.

Integrated Watershed development.

Ideally the micro watershed concept aims to establish an enabling environment for theintegrated use, regulation and treatment of water and land resources of a watershed based

ecosystem to accomplish resource conservation and biomass production objectives (Jensen et

al, 1996). However when we refer to available literature and observe couple of watersheds we

find that a typical watershed largely demonstrates soil conservation works, couple of water

harvesting structures and few user and self-help groups. Though it appears to be a complete

watershed it lacks integration and hence impact on resources is limited.

Integrated watershed development approach carefully appraises every resource available in thewatershed village and works out suitable mechanism for its optimization. Here the approach of

Project Implementing Agency largely determines the impact. Convergence with other programs

is key to integration. Unfortunately, the integrated approach to watershed is given up either for

lack of resources or Program Implementing Agencies (PIA) are more project focused. A study

conducted by Ninan and others found that integration of activities under watershed resulted in

enhanced crop yields, income and employment. Followed by reduction in variability of dry crop

yields, and better resilience of crop output to drought and other environmental stresses.

Though a typical watershed program is project oriented guidelines emphasis on convergence

that is beyond project framework. The emphasis on cross cutting issues like gender, equity and

sustainability are thoroughly addressed. However in practice, gender and equity considerations

are used as lubricants to short term project execution. But integrated watershed development

looks beyond project cycle and engages long- term & sustainable objectives. Hence IWD does

not end at the project time frame. The exit protocol merits post project plans and set of

institutional frame works that sustain the resource output and distribution.


5/19


4

It is inevitable for PIA to ensure that WCs learn to take decisions in Gram Sabha and prioritizes

needs of poor and vulnerable. However integrated approaches look beyond activity specific

equities and ensure optimal resource enhancement and distribution. This helps in addressing

the needs of entire community whether they are Maldharis, fisherfolk, small farmers or rural

artisans. Adoption of innovative yet cost effective technologies and mobilising resources beyond

project framework is key to integration.

Watershed v/s Integrated Watershed.

In a typical watershed water harvesting intervention get concluded by constructing a check dam.

Extending small-scale irrigation technologies and measure would ensure higher crop

productivity. This would further lead to improvisation in cropping practices, cost effectiveness

and market access. Watershed Associations could continue credit, input supply and other

activities in post project scenario. However PIA should sustain its relationship with WAs albeit

with a different set of norms.

MotaKakadiamba Watershed:

Salient Features of MotaKakadiamba:

Physical characteristicsTwenty Five percent area of MotaKakadiamba village is degraded forestland. About 6%

cropland was under irrigation when watershed activities were initiated. Rest of the area was

under rainfed cultivation. Typically the productivity was very low and large number of families

were out-migrating as daily wage labors. Undulating land topography resulted in high runoff and

soil erosion further degrading the land productivity. A seasonal river flowing adjoining the village

Approach Typical Watershed Integrated Watershed

Area coverage Partial Full

Emphasis on activities Either equitable ordifferential

Equitable

Community involvement Individual & Group Group & Federation

Planning Sectoral & project based Integrated & beyondproject phase

Funding Project based Project & Convergence

Technology focus Site specific Site specific & user friendly

End results Project based Beyond project phase

Livelihoods Project centered Family centered


6/19


5

contributes to partial irrigation on riverbank. Forestland located on ridge is however degraded.

Most of the nallas from here terminates into river. Severe soil erosion is reported in these nallas.

It is a typical watershed otherwise found in any corner of the country.

In MotaKakadiamba ground water availability is certain but lack of resources to tap this source

limited its scope for development. Here the PIA & Watershed Committee (WC) took interest in

mobilizing additional resources from local programs and ensured the asset creation.

Property regimes

Farmers occupied village common lands for cultivation. Through there is free access collection

of firewood, Tendu Patta and right to access forest resources is controlled by Forest

Department. Watershed Association is actively involved in forest protection in post treatment

scenario. Fallow land on riverbank is accessed by landless and were entitled to cultivate and

harvest crops. The composition of livestock witnessed changes during watershed where number

of draught animals got reduced. People started owning new farm equipments, tools and assets

that could be easily liquidated.

Socioeconomic conditions

The village is stratified with small and marginal farmers, artisans, landless and scheduled caste

and scheduled tribe communities. Higher number of small farmers and landless dominate

village demography. Seasonal out migration is common practice. Wealth ranking conducted

during micro plan preparation also reinforces this fact. However in post watershed there is

increase in number of small farmers, people with increased asset holdings and assured

livelihood opportunities.

The village is however known for its unity when it boycotted legislative assembly elections

demanding for an over bridge on the river to improve trade access. An old bridge was damaged

long ago and disconnected the village from rest of the world. Protesting against administrative

apathy community boycotted local elections indicating strong social network despite varying

social strata.

Steps in integration:

Participatory appraisal & planning


7/19


6

The PIA should first conduct participatory appraisal (PRA) of the village resources,

communities, economic and social relations and political equations. Based on the outcomes it

has to draw a detailed plan to optimize resources.

When the AKRSP-I team first visited the village only 60 members represented in the first Gram

Sabha organsied to chalk out village development plan. The number increased in successive

meetings. Village resources were identified through mapping, transect and poorest of the poor

were identified by employing wealth ranking. Drinking water, soil erosion, water scarcity, low

productivity, poor markets were reported as major issues during this exercise. Various issues

related to livelihoods, resource rehabilitation and community participation in managing the

program were considered while planning.

Formation of village institutions

The process should begin with formation of self-help and user groups identified during

watershed planning process. PRIs should be taken into confidence while constituting WAs and

WCs. The process should be through Gram Sbha and based on micro plan document.

In MotaKakadiamba communities elected WC through Gram Sabha where 3 members were

from local Panchayat and 3 were women representatives. Most of the self-help groups (10)

formed around thrift and user groups confined to irrigation wells, Nalla buding, check dams and

agriculture credit.

Decide on community contribution and other norms

Community contribution norms should be laid in consultation with all groups. The contribution

should be differential by activities and members to ensure equitable burden on every member.

In MotaKakadiamba WC withheld program execution for six months to convincing members on

importance of contribution. All programs came to standstill. Only after continuous exposure and

training communities understood the need for contribution. PIA did not adopt short-cuts to raise

contribution when people refused. It took the long path of making people understand the need of

community contribution.


8/19


7

Emphasize on capacity building

Exposures, trainings, group discussions, informal brainstorming sessions should be a regular

phenomenon to ensure active and informed participation of communities. With out genuine

inputs communities might not mature to adopt good management practices.

In case of community contribution in MotaKakadiamba exposures, trainings and group

discussion helped to convince people to contribute, adoption of technologies like treadle pumps,

constructing group wells for irrigation.

Address most crucial problem first

It is important to address most critical issue first as entry point activity. Ignoring critical yet short

term problems does not elicit needed community response. At the same time one should not

take up complicated issues at the beginning, as one could not get immediate output in such

cases.

As in a typical watershed drinking water problem was addressed in entry point activity. Three

hand pumps and a water tank with motor was constructed. Watershed Committee took up

maintenance responsibility.

Prioritize and Sequence activities

Various activities under IWD should be prioritized and sequenced. This would help in

streamlining activities. There is no thumb rule for prioritizing interventions. Community needs

and insights should be considered while designing.

Livestock was given lesser priority in MotaKakadiamba. Community did not find it economically

beneficial. They felt that infrastructure and markets should be developed before taking up

livestock related activities. On the other hand mechanization replaced draught animals use in

agriculture activities. For example tillage by tractors is much viable option to manual ploughing

in small farms. Similarly in absence of road, diary could not be promoted.

Design programs around existing resources that could be executed beyond

project period.

Wisely exploited available ground water resources; surface water, forests, livestock and control

soil erosion. Community should have long term plans around these resources to rehabilitate and

benefit from its yield.


9/19


8

When authorities rejected their plea for community wells as part of watershed project, they took

the pain to demonstrate its viability to district authorities and succeeded to get it approved under

the project fund.

Communities included degraded forestland as part of watershed plan. Department denied their

request and treated it under Forest Working Schemes during the same period. Wisely WA took

permission from DRDA to divert the allocated sum to construct irrigation wells. As second step

WC accessed the forestland under JFM with the approval of successive Divisional Forest

Officer in post watershed scenario.

Understand the need for Convergence & be prepared

While designing and executing watershed, one has to constantly refer to need and importance

of convergence. Communities should take lead in actively advocating their problems and

alternatives.

In the study village Dy. Director-Watershed at District Rural Development Agency (DRDA)

rejected the community well component from micro plan stating that it caters to few individuals

and not entire community. But WC took officials to visit the site and explained how it could

benefit the entire community if incorporated. Though officials convinced about its benefits they

were worried about equitable distribution of resources (project funds) among all stakeholders.

WC suggested for 40-50% cost sharing norm for community wells. As a result more than 30% of

watershed area is under irrigation.

Approach different resource agencies at local level for additional resources and

support.

As integrated watershed development is beyond treatment of resources one should ensure

maintenance of resources, sustained productivity and equitable benefit distribution.

Technical measures such as Kotar buding and contour bunding were prioritiesed. As a result

cultivable area in the village has increased. As reported by user groups, increased moisture

availability influenced crop yields. Most of the farmers shifted to sowing better seed varieties.

Some Kotarswere not fully treated, as the budget was not matching requirement. Additional

funds were mobilized from Tribal Area Sub Plan-Narmada district and the WC is preparing new

set of action plan to cover entire village land.


10/19


9

Use simple and user friendly technologies/alternatives so that communities can

adopt and maintain easily.

As discussed above use of simple and cost effective technologies and approaches could only

sustain the impact of integrated watershed development. Such measures could yield good

results on long term.

Advantages of Treadle Pump: Minimal operating costs, as no fuel or electricity is

required for operation.

Effectively irrigates land holdings which are onehectare or less in size.

Suitable for lifting water from bore wells and surfacewater bodies-rivers, ponds, lakes, canals, wells,

tanks, etc. The pump is one of the cheapest irrigation systems

currently available in the world.

The treadle pump can also be used for drainingwaterlogged areas

With in the available resources artisans were provided with Tool Kits related to their

occupation. Some of the poor farmers who own very little patch of land were supported with

treadle pumps. These are the farmers who could not afford expensive diesel pumps to lift water

from river. Treadle pump is most economical and efficient option that was executed.

While designing and executing ensure equitable cost sharing mechanism.

For sustained impact of IWD cost sharing should be variable (equitable). Communities do not

contribute if the cost sharing norms are disproportional neither such norms sustain.

Equity aspects were given high priority in cost sharing. Even in post watershed activities user

contribution in community wells varied from group to group. On 5 wells excavation works were

part of user contribution, in another 4 wells user contribution collected in construction of

distribution network, motor & pump. No uniformity is maintained. Generally official projects insist

on uniformity but in practice it has to be equitable to sustain impact.

Ensure sustained relationship with Village Institutions in post project period.

As local communities gain awareness of their new rights and responsibilities in resource

management, demands for legal, financial, technical and logistical support from the public

sector increase.


11/19


10

The sustained relationship between community and AKRSP-I even after withdrawal from project

is a necessary condition here. Watershed Association is supported in legal, technical and

financial planning for better convergence of development activities.

Implementation of IWD

The integrated watershed development approach did not segregate interventions in rigid

sectoral blocks like soil and water conservation, forestry or livestock. It targets overall

productivity of the village and sustainable management of new regimes. A better return on

sustainable basis is possible by adoption of right technology, crop and land use pattern, and

economic diversification.

The village planned integrated activities with in available resources. The emphasis was more

on soil conservation and water harvesting activities. Total village was planed under treatment

where 72% land is cultivable. 25% land is forestland. Though the treatment was planned, forest

department executed it. Successively WC formulated a JFMC and communities manage the

land.

As the resources were limited emphasis on forestry and horticulture were covered in post

watershed scenario under watershed plus activities. Similarly check dams were also added in

post watershed period where the funds were mobilized by WC under 60:40 scheme of State

government. Treading on the same path, WC added few more group well with the assistance

from Tribal Area Sub-Plan office of the district.

This way the Watershed Committee so far mobilized additional resources to the tune of

10 lakhs. Though the entire watershed area was covered with soil conservation works the

resources were not sufficient to treat intensively to yield higher benefits. The WC members

shared the view that they are in the process of mobilizing additional funds from district

administration to intensify the treatment under a fresh action plan. AKRSPI is supporting the WC

in preparing the action plan.Year wise activities:

Landclassification

Area(hec.)

ProposedTreatments

PlannedCoverage

ActualCoverage

Integration ofactivities(Y.wise)

ResourceAgencies

Soil and WaterConservation

231 Hec. 332 Hec. 1996 DRDA

Contour buding 186 Hec. 279 Hec. 1996 DRDANursery/Horti. 2 2 1996-97 DRDADemonstrationplots

4 4 1997 DRDA &Hort.Dept

Cultivableland:

334 (72%)

Nalla buding 045 Hec. 53 Hec. 1998 DRDA


12/19


11

Group wells 1 1+3 1998-2003 DRDA &TSP

Treadle pumps 2 2000 AKRSPI &

DRDACheck dams 1 1+2 1998-2004 DRDA

Wasteland 0 (0%)Forestland 114 (25%) JFM-community

protection114 Hec.

114 Hec. 2003 ForestDept.

Others 015 (3%) EPA-Hand pumpswith motor

3 1995 DRDA

Credit toproductiveactivities

1996-2004 InternalResources

Hire Purchaseof Generator

2002 InternalResources

Renting Audio

system forpublic events

2002 Internal

Resources

Vermicomposting

2002 TSP

Totalcoverage:

463(100%)

446 (93%)

Farmers switching to better seed variants in traditional crops, cultivating cotton & sunflower

reflects the impact of treatment so far carried. In a typical watershed also we may find similar

changes in cropping pattern and shift to commercial variants. But the changes hardly sustain

with out backstopping. The Watershed Committee here in this case took up the responsibility of

input supply and line up technical services (though with the support of PIA). Now it is also

looking for market support services.

Benefits of IWD

Livelihood of artisans and poor was separately considered:

Out of the total project cost, Rs.50, 000 earmarked as revolving fund for income generation

activities. Of this 50% again reserved for the poorest of the poor and asset less. Loans were

extended to families surviving on occupations like sewing, carpentry etc. 4 landless families

were provided with hand pump repairing equipments along with training. 6 families were

provided with treadle pumps where they cultivate 1/2acre (each) fallow land.

Access to fallow lands by landless:

Fallow lands on river slops/banks are generally ignored as unproductive lands. However asset

less entrepreneurs like Devabhai and Bhamatiben turned these lands to productive entities.


13/19


12

Similar is the case with other farmers who installed Treadle pumps as part of watershed

intervention. They changed the so-called degraded fallow lands to productive entities.

Now there are 110 dug wells (against 40 in pre watershed scenario) in village where water

levels are at 15-20ft. However 50% families irrigate from river Dodhan.

Productive loans & agriculture credit to members:

Watershed Committee held meetings every month deliberating on loan applications, proposals,

skills of applicant, return on investment etc. WC members ensure proper utilization of loan

amount and timely payments. Group and individual loans were offered for carpentry, tailoring,

fishing, dairying, selling vegetables etc. Maximum disbursal is in non-farm sectors. More thanRs.80,000 was disbursed and recovered among 45 members in 3 years time.

Sectors Amount % Category offamilies

No.offamilies

Amount

Agriculture 19500 24 Landless 31 40900Animal Husbandry 6500 8 Marginal farmers 5 16000Fishery 4000 5 Small farmers 7 18000Non-farm 50900 63 Medium farmers 2 6000

Higher cash flows ensured to boost productivity:

Cash flow is an important aspect in rural economy. The activities boosted needed cash flows to

the families. By providing much needed capital through micro finance route-revolving fund,

capital loans, and operational loans poor, landless families are integrated into watershed

program. Multi-sectoral integration achieved to sustain the impact of watershed. Some of the

enterprises like flourmill generated round the year income.

Migration reduced:

Migration during off-seasons reduced to 6-10 families. Earlier only 4 families used to stay back

at village and entire village

used to migrate. Landless

found new occupations to

survive and younger

generations are provided

training in livelihood related

activities.

The equity aspect is best illustrated by a small case of RajuVasava a landless agriculture labor who used to migrate 5-6months in a year to Surat Town as wage labor. In 1999, Rajuavailed Rs.1500 from revolving fund and purchased a bicycleand ice cream storage box. He started selling ice-creams duringsummers covering 2 villages in a day. Earning up Rs.80 with aslittle working capital of Rs.50 was indeed good business. Hepaid back his loan in daily installments instead of monthly. Nowhe sells ice cream through out the year.


14/19


13

Cultivable land increased:

Four group wells came up as result of watershed interventions. Though the first one constructed

under watershed plan, remaining 3 were built at a later stage. The water level earlier available

at 30ft to 40 ft is now available at 15 to 20ft. and in sufficient quantity to irrigate 4-6 acres on

each well benefiting more than 60 families. This has changed the cropping pattern, practices

and productivity leading to introduction of improved and new variety seeds, increased pump

sets and farm mechanization.

Watershed Committee reported that 15 to 20 acres cultivated land added as a result of

watershed works. Thirty percent productivity improvement reported in Paddy, Juvar (Sorghum),

Tuver (Lentil) and Kapas (Cotton) crops in post watershed scenario. For example plantation

method replacing aerial sowing in Paddy due to increased land availability for Paddy cultivation.

Cropping pattern changed:

Cropping pattern changed due to easy access to irrigation water, timely and cost effective input

services by WC and guidance from PIA. Farmers adopted new seed (6201,1160) varieties in

Paddy and Sorghum and Lentil sowing area reduced by 25%. Cotton, Black Gram and Guvar

replaced these varieties in Rabi (second sowing) season. Sunflower and red Chilies are new

commercial crops being introduced as a result of increased land productivity and availability of

water.

Mechanization increased in

agriculture:

Number of small pump sets

increased from 7 to 35 in post

watershed period. About 60 acres

is regularly covered under groupwells.

Increase in well-off families:

Wealth ranking exercise if carried

again at the end of the project

would suggest increase in well off

families (to around 40) and

Devabhai and Bhamatiben purchased a small calf and tried tocultivate riverside fallow land. The thin stream tempted them tocultivate some Pigeon pea that could be bartered for bowl ofrice. Both used to lift water from riverbed through buckets andirrigate small patches of scattered land.

The turning point was however a Treadle Pump. After itsinstallation they collectively graded the slope, leveled the landand reinforced with stone bunds. Fair portion of fallow turnedinto rich cultivable land. They could harvest vegetables, developsmall orchard and even paddy. As a result they were elevatedto purchased buffalo and sold milk and earned up to Rs.80 perday. They also sent their child to schooling.

When Devabhai paid Rs.500 contribution to buy Treadle Pump,he was not very sure how it could benefit him. They earn fromselling vegetables & milk in the village. Now roughly 2 acres isunder irrigation. Treadle pump changed the concept ofcultivable land and irrigation. It sustained the livelihood of poorfarmers like Devabhai and Bhamatiben.


15/19


14

reduction in poor (to 6-10 families). Substantiating this argument a Watershed Committee

member said that post watershed there are 8 motorcycles in the village. Farmers are

increasingly adopting tractor for agriculture operations.

The approach to integrated watershed in MotaKakadiamba reveals that the communities are

graduating from handling large chunk of external resources at the beginning of the project with

the support of PIA. However by end of 4 years they learnt to manage their own credit, assets,

produce and benefits. Systematically convergence was introduced where external agencies,

government departments, networks increasingly involved with WC. This helped the Watershed

Committee to independently plan and approach for resources. Role of institutions like AKRSP-I

here step up to address second-generation activities like agriculture diversity, value addition,

enterprise promotion, infusing better management practices.Potential for IWD

The success of watershed depends not only on classification of watershed problems, and

integrating various activities into it but also on understanding processes from which

communities and support staff can evolve workable solutions. The ultimate indicator of success

is the ability of communities to take advantage of new opportunities and to what extent these

benefits are sustained in the post project phase.

In each and every watershed there is similar potential for integration of various activities and

optimizing the resources. This would change the economic and social scenario of the village.

However the WC should be well trained and should express needed commitment beyond

political preferences.

For example in case of MotaKakadiamba in post treatment scenario, agricultural input needs to

be sustained and reoriented as per demand to maximise the benefits from physical investment.

As benefits of integrated watershed activities are now visible the demand for new seed varieties,

soil and crop management practices, off-farm livelihood alternatives would increase. This

perhaps stimulates communities long-term engagement with external agencies. Unlike typical

watershed where the PIA withdraws in post project scenario here AKRSP-I sustained its

interaction albeit with a different approach.


16/19


15

There is huge potential for optimizing resources and creating bigger impact by converging

various activities into watershed. Integrated watershed is an approach that looks beyond project

cycle where in various resources, institutions and funds are mobilized around best practices.

This potential need to be exploited by way of integrating various activities into watershed

villages. Leaving these villages after project period would amount to waste of resources. The

social capital so generated should be channelised by way of pumping additional resources and

optimizing resource productivity. PIAs as active link between communities and government

should be engaged to facilitate this process.

Lessons in IWD

While planning integrated watershed approach all possible resources should be

considered. Convergence is the most preferred approach to optimize resource

productivity. Local department like agriculture, livestock etc., could support programs

additional activities.

Do not ignore PRIs while forming WCs or other bodies at village level. Take them into

confidence. Many infrastructure needs could be met by funds from PRI accounts-roads,

electricity etc.

Promotions of low cost local technologies like Treadle Pumps are best alternative for

small farm irrigation on riverside fallows. Landless families could be effectively

rehabilitated under this alternative who otherwise receive inequitable share of

development resources.

Small-scale community irrigation should be part of integrated watershed development to

optimize resource productivity in post project period. Group wells are highly successful

alternative under watershed to enhance crop productivity and ensure sustained group

interaction around manageable assets.

Small groups (user) around decentralized assets/resources sustain longer and individual

share of inputs are minimal and manageable. Resulting into vibrant and self-sustaining

groups in post project scenario. The success of group wells could be attributed to this

condition.

Do not overemphasis on SHGs in village. They remain more as liability than self-driven

groups. Constructive group activity with assured income would only sustain in long run.

Thrift groups in isolation would collapse sooner.

While prioritizing gender concerns in integrated watershed, communities should be

conscious about gender needs and integrate activities to benefit women. Decisions like


17/19


16

stall feeding animals to protect forest land should be considered against weighing the

burden on women and working out alternatives.

Having couple of educated (preferably graduates) members on Watershed Committee

would help in maintaining records (Bhaidas bhai is a graduate and Secretary of WC in

MotaKakadiamba).

Do not impose stereotype programs on communities. For example the community may

not prefer livestock interventions especially when common property regimes are

uncertain and other support structures are not properly placed. In fact cattle population

reduced in post watershed period in MotaKakadiamba.

It is important for WC to conduct saving and credit activities to reduce dependency on

moneylenders and improve easy access to funds. Moneylenders adopt differential rates

for consumptive loans to cover repayment risk. WC could take a leaf from here.

Similarly Watershed Development Fund should be allowed to credit productive activities

where by the maintenance fund could increase by earned interest. This will help the WC

to maintain the assets regularly with out much constraint.

MotaKakadiamba watershed is one that integrated various approaches to optimize

resource use. Technologies like setting up Treadle Pumps, convergence in Community

Irrigation Wells and sustained agriculture credit and inputs in post project period

perhaps suggest planned approach to convergence beyond the project.

PIA has to conduct an exit protocol to ensure that the responsibilities are transferred and

Watershed Committee remains accountable for all works in post project period. This has

been successfully conducted in MotaKakadiamba and both PIA and WC are clear about

their roles and norms of association.


18/19


17

References:

An Assessment of European - aided Watershed Development Projects in India from the Perspective of

Poverty Reduction and the poor, CDR Working Paper 98.3, January 1998 K.N.Ninan

Dharmedra Chandurkar, Jairam Rabari and Kishore Kamani. Revolving Fund; Evolving Livelihoods. Thecase of MotaKakadiamba watershed development project, AKRSP-I Sagbara, Narmada. 2002

Government of India. 1994. Guidelines for Watershed Development. Ministry of Rural Areas andEmployment, New Delhi.

GOI, 2003; Hariyali Guidelines Ministry of Rural Development, New Delhi.

GOI, 2001; Revised Watershed Guidelines, Ministry of Rural Development, New Delhi,

GOI, 1994; Watershed Guidelines, Ministry of Rural Areas and Employment, New Delhi.

GOK (1997) Panchayati Raj in Karnataka: Contours of Decentralised Governance, Department of RuralDevelopment & Panchayati Raj. Government of Karnataka: Bangalore.

Groundwater Markets and Small Farmer Development: An Argument and Evidence from India, in UnitedNations book Groundwater Economics, edited by Dr.A.Gurgui, published by Elsevier, London.1987.

Integrated Rural Development (Rapporteur's Report) in proceedings of the International Seminar on IRD:Lessons from Experience in Asia, Sponsored by Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok and the Institutefor Social Studies, The Hague, held at ISEC, Bangalore, July 7-9, 1988. (KNN)

John Farrington and P.Baumann 2000; Panchayati Raj and natural resource management-how todecentralize management over natural resources ODI London.

John Kerr 2000; Evaluation of a portfolio of Indian Watershed Projects; Michigan State University.

Kerr, J., Pangare G., Pangare, L.V., and George, P.J. 1998. The Role of Watershed Projects inDeveloping Rainfed Agriculture in Semi-Arid Tropics. Draft. ICAR/World Bank Research Project onRainfed Agricultural Development, New Delhi.

Koppen, van B. 1999. Sharing the last drop: water scarcity, irrigation and gendered poverty eradication.IIED Gatekeeper Series 85 IIED, London.

Malhotra, K.C. and Poffenberger, M. (eds). (1989) Forest Regeneration through Community Protection:The West Bengal Experience. West Bengal Forest Department: Calcutta.

Mukherjee, K. (1998) Peoples Participation in Watershed Development Schemes in Karnataka:

Changing Perspectives. National Workshop on Watershed Approaches to Wastelands Development.

Korten, D. (1980) Community Organisation and Rural Development: A Learning Process Approach.Public Administration Review. Vol.40, No.5.

Ostrom, E. (1990) Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. CambridgeUniversity Press: Cambridge.

Pari Baumann 1998; Panchayati Raj and Watershed in India; constraints and opportunities ODI London"Water Users' Associations in India: Lessons for Watershed Management" and Integrated WatershedManagement: Scaling Up with Sustainability", papers presented in the Workshop to Produce a ResourceBook on Strategies, Appraoches and Institutional Issues in Integrated Micro-Watershed Management inIndia, February 28 to March 12, 2000, held at New Delhi.


19/19


18

Rural development: Learning from experience in Indias watersheds; south Asia brief; Rebeca Robboy &Geetanjali Chopra World Bank 2004.

Rhoades, RE. 1998. Participatory watershed research and management: where the shadow falls. IIEDGatekeeper Series 81. IIED, London.

Sustainable Development - The Case of Watershed Development in India, in Proceedings of theInternational Symposium on `Models of Sustainable Development - Exclusive or ComplementaryApproaches of Sustainability?, Universite Paris I Pantheon Sorbonne and AFCET, Paris, held at Paris,France from March 16-18, 1994, Vol.I, pp.468-473, (With S Lakshmikanthamma). (KNN)

Shah,T, Alam, M., Kumar, M.D., and Singh, M. (1999). Pedal Pump and the Poor: Social Impact of aannual Irrigation Technology in South Asia: International Development Enterprises, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Turton, C., Coulter, J., Farrington, J and Shah, A. 1998. Participatory Watershed Development in India:Impact of the new guidelines. Overseas Development Institute, London.

integrated development approach study jravishanker 2005

Documents