Organisation of Irrigation
Schemes
The three Levels of the Irrigated
Agriculture System
• Irrigation Sector Level– At the highest level, the
primary constituents are policy makers (E.g the
government level ) , concerned with the overall
performance of the sector vis-a-vis other sectors ,
• Agency Level- here various institutions share
responsibility for management of inputs and services
that support the irrigation farming community
(government departments, parastatals, private
companies NGOs),
• The irrigation system level. – Where the allocation ,
distribution and utilisation of water takes place.
• Focus of this module is on the Irrigation system level.
Objectives of an Irrigation System
• Adequacy- a measure of the degree to which water
deliveries meet soil-plant- water requirements .,
• A system that has adequacy objectives anticipates
delivering water in sufficient volume at appropriate
times to avoid potential yield reductions caused by
periods of water shortages that create plant stress,
• Equity- an expression of the share for each
individual or group that is considered fair by all
system members.
• Reliability- An expression of confidence in the
irrigation system to deliver water as promised
Organizational Structure.
• The success of an organization depends partly on its
structure (the way in which tasks and responsibilities
are formally allocated among its members) and
partly on its management process (the way in which
decisions are taken within the existing structure).
• The choice of an appropriate structure will depend
on a large number of factors specific to the particular
objectives and context of the organization
concerned.
• In other words, there is no single "ideal" structure
which is best for all organizations in all circumstances
Dimensions of Organisational
Structure
• Organizational structure has a horizontal and a vertical dimension.
• The horizontal dimension is concerned with the way in which the
various essential activities can best be differentiated (in
accordance with the specialist skills required for each activity) and
then coordinated in order to have an efficient and effective
organisation.
• The vertical dimension is concerned with the way in which
responsibilities are distributed among members working at
different levels of the organization and its component units.
• Important factors affecting the choice of an appropriate form of
horizontal organization at the project level are the size of the
project area, the nature and objectives of the project
implementers.
• Other important factors include the objectives of government and
the character of existing institutions in the area concerned.
Organizational chart of a State Farm (Kufra Production Project, Libya , Source
FAO,1986)
Types of Irrigation Schemes
Large Commercial Projects:
• In Zimbabwe these usually include private
company estates such as Hippo valley and
Triangle and government owned estates such as
ARDA estates.
• Usually greater than 200 ha or more (FAO,
1986). In Zimbabwe can be more than 10 000ha
• Usually run commercially and require a
substantial professional staff to manage them.
Medium-sized Commercial/Individual
Projects
• In Zimbabwe these are usually comprised of
individually owned commercial farms made up of
white commercial farmers, and resettled A2
farmers,
• Usually run more or less along commercial lines and
require a considerable input of professional staff to
operate and maintain them.
Small Scale Individual Projects
• In Zimbabwe usually include old resettlements ,
A1 farms and individual plots in communal areas.
• Stand alone units are normally run on semi
commercial to subsistence basis.
Formal Communal Irrigation Schemes,
• In Zimbabwe these are schemes located in
communal areas and were set up by government
or non governmental agencies.
• Farmers own plot or plots usually ranging from
0.25ha to 0.5ha within an irrigation scheme.
• Usually main objective is food security and are
normally run on subsistence bases.
• A farmer irrigation management body (IMC)
usually coordinate activities in the scheme.
• Can be farmer, government or jointly managed.
Informal Communal Irrigation Schemes
• Schemes that are established informally by communal
people using their own initiatives.
• Individual irrigators usually own pieces of land within the
scheme
• The irrigators themselves are entirely responsible for the
activities of water distribution, repairs and maintenance and
financing, though they may be dependent on outside
support for extension advice and input supplies.
• Group members are often willing to accept stringent
discipline from their selected leaders, who are accountable
to them.
• The most common example of these schemes in Zimbabwe
is the wetland or dambos farming in areas such as
Domboshawa and Mahusekwa and river diversion schemes
mostly found in the Eastern Highlands .
Irrigation Cooperatives
• Many types of cooperatives exist but here reference is
made to a particular type in which a group of farmers
associate to develop a common irrigation system for
their properties, and jointly farm the land.
• Such a type of cooperative occurs mostly among
progressive farmers and is generally found in developed
countries.
• In Zimbabwe it can be in the form of A1 and A2 farmers
who pulled together resources to either jointly develop
infrastructure or to run the schemes or engage in crop
production e.g. Chifundi Scheme in Mash West.
• It is often financially attractive to farmers because they
enjoy the advantages e.g. pulling together of resources
and expertise.
The Organizational Structure at
Communal Schemes
• There is a particular need to establish farmer
management groups at the Scheme. e.g. Irrigation
Management Committees, IMCs
• On large and medium-sized irrigation projects, this
generally leads to the need for water users' groups
(Water Users Associations, WUAs) to be formed for
the purpose of organizing water distribution and
maintenance work in shared infrastructure.
• There will almost always be a need for intensive
extension work on water management and irrigated
farming especially in the early stages of an irrigation
project.
Organization at the Government Level
• Here reference is made to the organizational structure at the
national and provincial government levels,
• This often have a very significant influence on an irrigation
project's performance.
• As far as horizontal relationships between departments are
concerned, it is desirable that collaboration between irrigation and
agriculture be very close even if they are not in fact part of the
same Ministry.
• This is particularly important for the purposes of achieving a
balanced and integrated approach to project planning.
• Invaluable support can also be given to the improvement of
management practices at the project level through a central
research agency with responsibilities for directing and
coordinating field experiments on crop water requirements,
optimum irrigation intervals, etc., in different agro-climatic regions
of the country.
• The results of these experiments can then be tested on each
irrigation project and adapted to its own particular circumstances.
Organization at the Government Level
Cont.
• The nature of the vertical relationship between the higher
level of government administration and project management
is of great importance.
• If the project manager is to perform his function well it is
essential that so long as his appointment is in the hands of
government, very substantial authority and autonomy of
decision-making should be delegated to him.
• At the later stages of a project's development the manager
may automatically acquire greater autonomy if a policy is
followed for e.g of retaining the revenue.
• In the absence of such a policy of devolution of powers to or
a project authority, however, the government must ensure
that the project manager and his senior staff are in a position
to act as relatively independent managers, not simply as
passive administrators of policies laid down for them at
higher levels.
State Farms
• Often established where the land is nationalized or where land reform
processes have taken place.
• The purpose of establishing a State Farm can be to maximize agricultural
production or to gain experience on newly reclaimed lands for its later
transfer to farmers as settlement projects. The first type is the most
commonly found.
• Much disappointment exists all over the world with the performance of
State Farms, despite all the production inputs normally being provided at
their optimum level.
• However, it is often found that the production levels are higher in private
farms and their operating costs may be similar to those of the State Farms.
• The management of a large State Farm, with all the numerous and complex
activities that it involves, is extremely difficult under the limitations usually
imposed on public institutions.
• Some of the reasons which often hamper the management of State Farms
are;
–
–
–
–
Late release of government funds for operating the farm,
unavailability of inputs at the time needed,
lack of involvement by the government officials in the potential benefits,
and large bureaucracies,
State Farms Cont.
• In order to maximize the productivity, there is a noticeable
tendency to use highly capital intensive technology for the
water distribution systems and machinery for the
agricultural practices.
• This in turn means that the management of these farms
must be highly technically qualified.
• Unfortunately such personnel are not abundant in
developing countries and they are more attracted by
positions in the main offices than by those in the field.
• Lack of properly trained personnel is often a serious
limitation for the development and operation of State
Farms.
• The organizational structure of State Farms is characterized
by a number of units covering the main development and
production activities. An example is shown in Figure
below.
Organizational chart of a State Farm (Kufra Production Project, Libya , Source
FAO,1986)
Irrigation Settlement Projects
• These aim at improving the economic and social welfare of landless people or poor
farmers by providing them with irrigated land and agricultural production means.
• The greatest difficulty in managing an irrigation settlement project successfully
arises from the fact that most of the settlers have a low educational level,
practically no financial resources and, occasionally, even no experience in
agriculture.
• To upgrade them from their subsistence level to farmers living on commercial
agriculture is a huge task, that require a lot of effort and time, frequently 15 or 20
years.
• According to FAO 1986, the key to the success of a settlement project is that
government officials must initially be responsible for and perform many of the
tasks, only giving the farmers simple and straightforward tasks which they can carry
out with their own means.
• As time goes by, it may be possible to transfer more and more of the tasks and
responsibility to the farmer.
• Insecurity of land tenure becomes a particularly inhibiting factor, since farmers
have no long-term interest in investing in their own land.
• According to FAO, 1986, a policy is followed in Spain, where new settlers are
probationary tenants during the first 5 years of the transitional stage but are
subsequently allowed access to a permanent title to their land if they satisfy the
government authorities with regard to their standards of farming and irrigation.
Irrigation Scheme Management
• The degree of intervention by the government in undertaking
irrigation related functions indicates the main types of schemes,
which are:
i. Farmer Managed:
• The farmer or irrigator has overall management control. These can
be commercial, communal , resettled schemes, individual small
holder schemes in communal areas, estates and plantations and
irrigation cooperatives.
ii. Government Managed Schemes: The government has overall
management control. These are also very numerous and are found
in many countries (Zimbabwe, Spain, Turkey, Bolivia, Iraq, most of
Ecuador and Kenya). These include state farms and communal
schemes.
iii. Jointly Managed Schemes: There is joint management control by
farmers and government officials. Usually the main irrigation
system is managed by government officials while the infield
irrigation infrastructure such as field canals are controlled by
farmers or their associations.
Government Managed Schemes
Advantages
• Availability of experts,
– O&M, extension, research
• Availability of capital for O&M,
inputs
• More equitable distribution of
water- less water related
conflicts
• More orderly cropping
programmes and hence easier
to implement irrigation
schedules and disease control,
• Can allow scheme to be well
established before slowly being
handed over to farmers.
• Committed/productive
farmers are selected/retained
in the communal scheme
Disadvantages
• Sometimes officials are not
motivated or are inexperienced
•Rigid or bureaucratic decision
making process can effect
operations,
•Operations can be affected by late
disbursements of funds
•Interference in decision making
and operations,
•Sometimes lack of accountability
resulting in poor O&M practices
•At communal schemes, there is
lack of commitment as farmers feel
they don’t own the scheme.
•Profits usually diverted from farm,
• Can create a dependency
syndrome
• All the above factors can result
in sub optimal crop production.
Farmer Managed Schemes
• Advantages
• Decision making process
streamlined
• Disadvantages
• Lack of resources, esp.
Communal schemes
– efficient/faster/flexible
• Could be susceptible to
• Normally there is a sense of
lack of skills/ expertise,
ownership and commitment,
esp. in Communal
schemes
• Efficient utilisation of funds
and re ploughing of profits
• Dominance by certain
into the operations esp. on
individuals can result in
large scale schemes and
marginalisation and
estates.
conflicts, esp. In
Communal schemes
• Hence good performance ,Esp
on large scale commercial
• →Poor performance
farms and private estates,
esp. In communal
schemes
Jointly Managed Schemes
• Advantages
• Decision making process
streamlined
– efficient/faster/flexible
• Normally there is a sense of
ownership and commitment,
• Availability of experts,
– O&M, extension
• Availability of capital for
O&M,
• More equitable distribution
of water- reduced conflicts
• Farmers benefit from skills
transfer,
• Better production levels
than farmer managed
communal schemes
Disadvantages
•Rigid or bureaucratic
decision making
process,
•Operations can be
affected by late
disbursements of funds
•Interference in decision
making and operations,
•Conflicts of interest,
•Sometimes there is no
sense of ownership.
The Management Function on
Irrigation Schemes
• There are two main elements in the management of irrigation
projects.
• One is the overall management function, which has much in
common with the management of any other kind of
organization.
• It is concerned with the direction and coordination of the
decision-making processes within the project area and its
purpose is to get all those involved in the process (farmers,
staff, external government agencies) to work towards the
achievement of the project's objectives.
• The other element is the management of specialized
activities (water distribution, maintenance, irrigation
assistance services, crop production etc) which are peculiar to
irrigation projects.
• These activities have certain characteristics calling for
particular kinds of management skills and styles of operation.
Overall Direction and Coordination
• The most important tasks of the project manager include:
- setting objectives and priorities (short-term, medium-term, long-term); - directing the
annual planning and budgeting processes;
- directing the formulation of detailed work programmes for staff members within each of
the project's units;
- monitoring and training staff and farmers to implement the programme;
- supervising the day-to-day implementation of the programme, identifying problems that
arise and finding solutions for them;
- monitoring project performance against objectives;
- monitoring staff performance against agreed work targets;
- seeking the opinion of the project's clients (the farmers) about the quality of the services
provided to them;
- identifying strengths and weaknesses and recommending appropriate remedies for the
weaknesses.
• For the last of these tasks - the diagnosis of causes for poor project performance the project manager will require a system of monitoring capable of identifying the
relative importance of the following factors as influences on performance:
– i. Resources (finance, manpower, equipment).
– ii. Skills (technical, management, communication).
– iii. Motivation (material incentives - salaries, bonuses, promotions; non-material
incentives - job satisfaction, recognition of good performance by senior officials).