Impact Assessment of Watershed Development Projects in Rajasthan LNRMI Hyderabad
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Draft for Comments. Not to be quoted LIVELIHOODS AND NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE Impact Assessment of Watershed Development Projects in Rajasthan LNRMI Hyderabad 2010 12- 2 - 417/18, S ARADANAGAR, H YDERABAD 500067 CONTENTS Page No Preface 3 Glossary 5 List of Tables 6 List of Figures 7 List of Maps 10 I. Introduction 11 -Profile of Rajasthan 13 -Watershed Development in Rajasthan 20 -Objectives 23 -Methodology 24 -Structure of the Report 29 II. Performance of Watershed Development Programme: Perceptions of the Communities 30 -Introduction 30 - Profile of the sample districts 30 - Performance of the Sample Watersheds 33 -Case Studies 43 -Conclusions 45 III. Watershed Development Programme: Bio-physical Impact 52 -Introduction 52 -District-wise Analysis 53 -Size class-wise Analysis 61 -Scheme-wise Analysis 66 -Conclusions 71 IV. Watershed Development Programme: Economic Impact 72 -Introduction 72 -District-wise Analysis 72 -Size class-wise Analysis 86 -Scheme-wise Analysis 94 -Conclusions 102 V. Watershed Development Programme: Institutional Impact 104 -Introduction 104 -District-wise Analysis 104 -Size class-wise Analysis 113 -Scheme-wise Analysis 119 -Conclusions 126 VI. Factors Influencing the Impact of Watershed Development Programme 127 -Introduction 127 -Watershed Wise Analysis 127 -Determinants of Impacts/ Factors Influencing WSD Performance 131 -Conclusion 137 VII. Conclusions and Policy Implications 141 References 149 2 Preface This study is part of a larger all India level study across states initiated by the Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and Coordinated by the National Institute of Rural Development (NIRD), Hyderabad. While watershed development (WSD) is a flagship programme of Government of India, its implementation has reached a crucial stage with recent policy changes. WSD is being brought under the National Rainfed Area Authority (NRAA) with a set of new guidelines doubling the per hectare allocations, increase in the size of watersheds (5-10000 ha), extended implementation time frame, emphasis on livelihoods components, etc. Besides, new institutional structures have been brought in for better implementation. The new watersheds under these guidelines are being implemented from 2010 onwards. In the above context, the set of large scale studies initiated by MORD, GOI are expected to identify various concerns for improved performance of the WSD programme. These concerns can be addressed in the implementation of the new schemes. The methodology and approach of the present study was pre-designed in order to ensure comparability and consistency across states. It follows a direct assessment approach rather than the standard deductive approach thus reducing the scope for subjective interpretations. Besides, the scale and coverage of the study is large enough to make generalisations at the state level for policy. Livelihoods and Natural Resource Management Institute, Hyderabad has been entrusted with the study in Rajasthan. The study covered 110 watersheds spread over 15 districts. Number of people have contributed and facilitated the completion of the study. First of all we would like to thank the Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India, and the National Institute of Rural Development (NIRD), Hyderabad, for giving us the opportunity to take up the study and providing the financial support. In this regard, the study benefited from regular inputs in the form of suggestions and comments from Dr. S. S. P. Sharma and Dr. J. Venkateswarlu. We gratefully acknowledge and thank them for their inputs, support and encouragement throughout the study. Dr. M. S. Rammohan Rao has gone through the report and provided valuable inputs. Our grateful thanks are due to him. Dr. P. Prudhvikar Reddy Dr. M. Srinivas Reddy, CESS, provided lot of support in organising and collating secondary data at various levels. 3 In Rajasthan the state level Watershed Department, the nodal agency, provided all the support in conducting the study in all the fifteen districts. The district level and block level officials have provided full support in providing information despite our numerous demands at odd hours and even holidays. Our grateful thanks are due to the state level nodal agency, district and block level officials for providing all the information and facilitating the fieldwork in a smooth manner. The Watershed implementing agencies, various line departments, were kind enough to share their views and spend time with the team in discussing various issues pertaining to the implementation. The study would be incomplete without their cooperation despite the fact that their role as an implementing agency was over long back. Our grateful thanks are due to all the officials of the implementing agencies. Members of the watershed associations and committees have provided the much needed support in collecting information and details at the watershed level (Village and Rapid questionnaires). Sample households have been kind enough to spare their time in sitting through the household interviews and answering our complicated and sensitive questions with lots of patience. We are thankful to the support and cooperation received from all the village people. Prof. Surjit Singh, Director, Institute of Development Studies, Jaipur, has helped in organising the field work in Rajasthan. But for his help and support the field work would have taken much longer time. Our profuse thanks are due to him for all his support. Dr. Jaisingh Rathore and Mr. Ratanlal Jogi, have helped us in putting together a good team of investigators, planned the field work and supervised the fieldwork at various stages. We gratefully acknowledge their help in conducting the field work. A team of thirteen field investigators (Mr. R. C. Sharma, Mr. R. S. Rathore, Mr. Mahesh Soni, Mr. S. S. Rathore,, MR. V. S. Kuhar, Mr. M. K. Sain, Mr. P. K. Sharma, Mr. J. Singh, Mr. D. S. Khangarot, Mr. R. Parekh, Mr. S. K. Naga, Mr. A. Gothwal, and Mr. A. Jain) participated in the data collection at the watershed level tirelessly with good quality. Their quality inputs are gratefully acknowledged. Our thanks are due to the team consisting of Mr. P. R. Narender Reddy, Ms. P. Bhushana, Ms. K. Panchakshri, Ms. Rama Devi and Mr. B. Sridhar for processing the data efficiently. V. Ratna Reddy Sanjit Kumar Rout T. Chiranjeevi LNRMI. 4 Glossary CBO: Community Based Organisation CSS: Centrally Sponsored Scheme CPR: Common Pool Resources CV: Coefficient of Variation DDP: Desert Development Programme DPAP: Drought Prone Area Development Programme GDP: Gross Domestic Product GoR: Government of Rajasthan HDI: Human Development Index IWDP: Integrated Wasteland Development Programme IWMP: Integrated Watershed Management Programme LMF: Large and Medium Farmers NIRD: National Institute of Rural Development NRAA: National Rainfed Area Authority NWDB: National Wasteland Development Board PIA: Project Implementing Agency RRS: Rapid Reconnaissance Survey SC: Scheduled Caste SDP: State Domestic Product SHG: Self Help Groups SMF: Small and Marginal Farmers ST: Scheduled Tribes ToR: Terms of Reference UG: User Group VIF: Variance Inflation Factor WA: Watershed Association WC: Watershed Committee WDF: Watershed Development Fund WDP: Watershed Development Programme WHS: Water harvesting Structures WSD: Watershed Development 5 List of Tables Table 1.1: Area Treated (m ha) and Investment (Rs. crores) in Watershed Programmes in India Table 1.2: Salient Features of Agro climatic Zones in Rajasthan Table 1.3: Land Utilization across Agro climatic Zones of Rajasthan Table 1.4: Distributions of Sample Watersheds across Schemes and Districts Table 2.1: Bio-Physical and Economic Features of Sample Districts Table 2.2: Demographic Features of the Sample Districts Table 2.3: Impact on Bio-physical Indicators across Sample Watersheds Table 2.4: Performance of Bio-physical Indicators in the Sample Watershed across Districts Table 2.5: Performance of Bio-physical Indicators across Schemes in the Sample Watersheds Table 2.6: Impact on Economic Indicators in the Sample Watersheds Table 2.7: Performance of Economic Indicators in the Sample Watersheds across Districts Table 2.8: Performance of Economic Indicators across Schemes in the Sample Watersheds Table 2.9: Impact on Institutional Indicators in the Sample Watersheds Table 2.10: Performance of Institutional Indicators in the Sample Watershed across Districts Table 2.11: Performance of Institutional Indicators across Schemes in the Sample Watersheds Table 2.12: Distribution of Watersheds by their Performance Table 3.1: Average Performance of WSD across Districts (% score) Table 3.2: Performance of WSD between Size Class of Farmers (SMF-LMF) Table 3.3: Performance of WSD between Schemes Table 4.1: Average Economic Performance of WSD across Districts and Indicators. Table 4.2: Average Economic Impact of WSD across Size Classes Table 4.3: Performance of WSD between Schemes Table 5.1: Performance of WSD in Terms of Social Impacts Table 5.2: Performance of WSD across Size Classes Table 5.3: Performance of WSD in Terms of Social Impacts across Schemes Table 6.1: Performance of Watersheds in Rajasthan Table 6.3: Measurement and Expected Signs of the Selected Variables Table 6.4: Regression Estimates of Selected Specifications Appendix Table A6.1: Watershed Wise Performance (Scores) Appendix Table A6.2: Descriptive Statistics of Selected Variables 6 List of Figures Figure 3.1: Impact of WSD on Soil Erosion across Sample Districts Figure 3.2: Impact of WSD on