Solution Exchange Consolidated Reply: Regenerating Traditional Irrigation Systems from Kalpataru, Orissa: Experiences

Compiled by Pankaj Kumar S., Resource Person and Ramya Gopalan, Research Associate, 22 December 2006

 From Sarbeswara Sahoo, Kalpataru, Angul, Orissa, Posted 21 November 2006

Kalpataru is an NGO working in central Orissa on common property resources, specifically sustainable water resources management.

In our work, we have found that with the advent of modern watershed management technologies, such as cement checkdams, diversion weirs, canals, etc., the state and the community has very often completely ignored local, less-water intensive, low cost traditional irrigation systems. However, we find that these systems are still relevant and may play an important role, if regenerated.

In the above context, I request members to please respond to the following:

• In what ways and in what context are indigenous irrigation methods better than modern watershed/irrigation technologies? What is the relevance of these traditional irrigation systems in today’s world, where there are conflicting demands on water resources?
• What are the causes for decay of these traditional systems of irrigation and water management? What have also been the failures of these traditional systems? Since these technologies are available in all districts and regions, should we emphasize and revive them, or should we focus on modern systems of irrigation only?
• Members may also please send in their experiences and efforts at trying to regenerate/ modify/upgrade traditional irrigation systems in other parts of India.

Responses were received with thanks from

1. Debadutta K. Panda, MP Associates, Bhubaneswar
2. K. Padmaja, APMAS, Hyderabad
3. Rahul Banerjee, Aarohini Trust, Indore (Response 1; Response 2)
4. R. Amarnath Babu, Action for Food Production (AFPRO), Hyderabad
5. Mrinalinee Vanarase, IORA for Environmental Solutions, Pune
6. Paul Deverill, UNICEF, New Delhi
7. K. A. S. Mani, APFAMGS, Hyderabad
8. Y. Narasimhaiah, Training and Development Centre, Hyderabad
9. R. K. Sood, Centre for Health Promotion, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh
10.  V. Satya Bhupal Reddy, Research in Environment, Education and Development Society (REEDS), Hyderabad
11.  N. Sanyasi Rao, Action in Rural Technology and Service (ARTS), Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh
12.  V. D. Sharma, VBS Purvanchal University, Jaunpur, Uttar Pradesh (Response 1; Response 2)
13.  Sujit Choudhury, PAN Network Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata

Further contributions are welcome!

Summary of Responses

Comparative Experiences

International

Related Resources

Responses in Full

• Some “modern” practices have a tremendous tendency to generalize, particularly for grassroots work, without making basic investigation and understanding the real requirements. For example, in very few watershed cases drainage analysis takes place, although assume that this will be done.
• India is extremely diverse in terms of basic human geography, geology, agroclimatic condition etc. This is why the traditional water harvesting practices of Rajasthan, with different types of soils need not be successful in Sambalpur, Koraput or Mahanadhi delta in Orissa, without required improvisations for that region.
• Various issues like water harvesting, groundwater recharge, soil conservation, livelihoods, and aspirations of various stakeholders need to be addressed in a watershed program.
• In many cases, we found traditional water harvesting structures to be very successful, but the success was not because it is traditional but because it was evolved in the region and as it addressed local situations.
• Lastly, it has been proved that in watershed management, agronomic and vegetative measures are far more important than structural measures like building check dams, irrigation tank, etc. Unfortunately, the first two measures require time and major extension works with very little money and therefore do not get covered very much. I do not mean that structural measures are not important, but that it must take place in tandem with agronomic and vegetative measures, in order to prevent otherwise the benefits of the structures will not last for long periods.

My personal view is we need to thoroughly understand the geographical area being covered and only then evolve the most suitable practice on the basis of experience of village people after detailed discussions.

Many thanks to all who contributed to this query!

If you have further information to share on this topic, please send it to Solution Exchange for WES-Net at se-wes@solutionexchange-un.net.in with the subject heading “Re: [se-wes] Query: Regenerating Traditional Irrigation Systems, from Kalpataru, Orissa (Experiences). Additional Reply.”

Disclaimer:  In posting messages or incorporating these messages into synthesized responses, the UN accepts no responsibility for their veracity or authenticity.  Members intending to use or transmit the information contained in these messages should be aware that they are relying on their own judgment.

Copyrighted under Creative Commons License “Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5”. Re-users of this material must cite as their source Solution Exchange as well as the item’s recommender, if relevant, and must share any derivative work with the Solution Exchange Community.

Solution Exchange is a UN initiative for development practitioners in India. For more information please visit www.solutionexchange-un.net.in