Haryana’s irrigation divide: Groundwater, canals and changing crop patterns

Haryana is a state where irrigation has made intensive agriculture possible, yet access to water is far from uniform. Across its districts, canals, tube wells, rainfall and crop choices have created very different irrigation patterns. A district-level analysis now shows another shift: areas that once had limited irrigation are gaining access, while some districts with historically high irrigation intensity are seeing sharp declines.

The open access study titled ‘Spatio-temporal analysis of irrigation intensity in Haryana, India (2006-2025)’ by Dev Karan, Sahil Sahil and Kulvinder Kaur, published in Asian Research Journal of Agriculture, examines district-level changes in irrigation intensity between 2006-07 and 2024-25. It classifies districts into high, medium and low irrigation intensity categories and maps changes in irrigated areas to understand the geography of irrigation and its implications for planning and sustainable water resource development.

Haryana receives most of its rainfall during the southwest monsoon, while winter rain from western disturbances supports the rabi crop. Differences in rainfall, canal networks, groundwater availability and cropping patterns have shaped irrigation differently across the state. Agriculture depends on water intensive crops, including rice, wheat, cotton and sugarcane. The rice-wheat rotation has supported agricultural growth but has also placed considerable pressure on groundwater.

This pressure has grown alongside the expansion of tube wells. Their number increased from 0.2 million in 1975/76 to 0.73 million in 2011/12, marking a shift in the state’s irrigation system from greater dependence on canals towards groundwater.

What irrigation intensity tells us

Irrigation intensity measures the extent to which cultivated land is irrigated. It is calculated as the ratio of irrigated area to cultivated area. A higher intensity can indicate repeated irrigation of the same land during different crop cycles, supported by assured water supplies such as canals and groundwater. Lower intensity can reflect limited infrastructure, uncertain groundwater availability or crops that require less water.

The measure helps reveal differences between districts and can provide a basis for understanding irrigation planning and management. In Haryana, northern and northwestern districts generally have better access to canal and groundwater irrigation than southern and southwestern districts.

The northern region has developed a stronger concentration of water intensive crops, while the water scarce southern region has greater specialisation in wheat, bajra and rapeseed and mustard. These differences affect agricultural production, livelihoods and the sustainability of water resources.

Irrigation intensity is changing across districts

Across Haryana, overall irrigation intensity increased from 186% in 2006/07 to 196% in 2016/17 before falling slightly to 192% in 2024/25. The district-level picture, however, is more varied.

In 2006-07, the districts with the highest irrigation intensity included Faridabad, Panipat, Sonipat, Hisar, Panchkula and Mahendragarh. By 2016, Karnal, Nuh, Faridabad, Hisar, Mahendragarh and Bhiwani were in the high-intensity group. In 2024/25, Sirsa, Kaithal, Jhajjar, Hisar, Panchkula and Gurugram were featured among the districts with the highest intensity.

Some districts recorded particularly large changes. Panchkula had an irrigation intensity of 400% in 2006/07, which fell to 123% in 2016/17 before rising to 211% in 2024/25. Mahendragarh recorded 462% in 2006-07 but declined to 195% by 2024-25. The study associates this decline with groundwater depletion and changes in crops.

Hisar remained consistently high, with irrigation intensity of 237%, 212% and 211% across the three periods, supported by canal irrigation and tube wells. It was the only district to remain in the high-intensity category across all three periods.

These changes show that high irrigation intensity does not remain fixed within the same districts. Faridabad, Panipat, Karnal, Mahendragarh, Panchkula, Gurugram, Sirsa, Kaithal and Jhajjar moved between categories over the study periods, influenced by groundwater, canal access and crop choices.

More districts move into the medium category

The medium intensity category, covering 150% to 200%, expanded from nine districts in 2006/07 to 15 in 2024/25. The study identifies two movements behind this change. Some districts that previously had low irrigation intensity moved upwards, while some districts with high intensity shifted into the medium category.

Panchkula recorded the most pronounced movement, shifting from high to low and then back to high intensity. Karnal and Panipat also moved between categories.

At the same time, the number of districts in the low-intensity category, below 150%, declined from five in 2006/07 to four in 2016/17 and one in 2024/25. Palwal was the only district that remained in the low-intensity category.

Low-intensity districts were concentrated mainly in the southwest and southeast, where surface water is limited and groundwater is uncertain. By 2024/25, most of these districts had moved into the medium category.

In contrast, northern and northwestern districts such as Hisar, Sirsa, Kaithal and Karnal continued to record high irrigation intensity, supported by canal networks and tube wells. Ambala, Kurukshetra, Jind, Yamunanagar and Fatehabad remained in the medium category across all three periods.

Gains and declines reveal an uneven pattern

Looking at the change between 2006/07 and 2024/25, the study found that 11 districts recorded a net increase in irrigation intensity. Gurugram recorded the largest increase at 130 points, followed by Rohtak at 45 and Bhiwani at 41. These gains were concentrated in the south and parts of northwestern Haryana.

Nine districts recorded declines. The largest were in Mahendragarh, where intensity fell by 267 points, and Panchkula, where it fell by 189 points. Smaller declines were recorded in Hisar, Faridabad, Kurukshetra, Jind, Panipat, Sonipat and Ambala.

The pattern therefore runs in two directions. Irrigation intensity increased in several districts that had previously been less irrigated, while some districts with higher intensity experienced declines. The study links these shifts to differences in physiography, groundwater levels, canal coverage, cropping patterns and state and district level agricultural policies.

When greater irrigation access depends on groundwater

The movement of low-intensity districts into the medium category by 2024/25 indicates improved irrigation access. However, in areas with limited canal coverage, increased access can depend substantially on groundwater extraction.

For farmers, greater access to irrigation can provide more reliable water, support multiple crop cycles and reduce vulnerability. At the same time, greater dependence on tube wells and pumping can increase pressure on aquifers if extraction is not managed sustainably.

The study therefore presents irrigation intensity as a measure that needs to be read alongside the source of water supporting that irrigation. An increase in intensity does not by itself establish a more balanced distribution of water resources, particularly in areas where surface water is limited.

The wider groundwater context adds to this concern. Groundwater depth has been rising by about 55 cm a year, while Kurukshetra has recorded declines of more than 20 metres over 15 years. Farm incomes remain stagnant. Future groundwater availability is projected at 0.97 billion cubic metres in Haryana and 1.61 billion cubic metres in Punjab. These trends raise questions about the sustainability of irrigation.

Towards a more balanced irrigation system

The study points towards the need for a holistic irrigation policy that addresses spatial differences in access and water availability. Its recommendations include more equitable canal allocation, with greater attention to groundwater-stressed districts rather than further strengthening areas that already have relatively high access.

It also calls for stronger groundwater monitoring and limits in districts where aquifers are declining. Drip and sprinkler irrigation could be promoted in medium- and low-intensity districts to improve water use efficiency. Crop diversification away from water-intensive crops such as paddy and sugarcane is another suggested measure. The study also identifies targeted investment in infrastructure for persistently low-intensity districts such as Palwal as an area for attention.

Haryana’s irrigation story is therefore not a simple movement from low to high access. Districts are moving between intensity categories as groundwater levels, canals, crops and agricultural policies change. The findings point to the need to consider both where irrigation expands and where its water comes from. A more balanced approach would address areas with limited irrigation access while also managing the pressures created by intensive irrigation so that gains in agricultural water access can be sustained.