GCP/IND/176/NET Andhra Pradesh Water Management Project

Report of the Evaluation Mission

Hyderabad

September 2008

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ...... i 1. Introduction ...... 1 1.1. Background ...... 1 1.2. Methodology ...... 1 2. National Context and Background to the Project ...... 2 2.1. National Context ...... 2 2.2. Origins of the Project ...... 3 3. Assessment of Project Concept and Relevance ...... 4 3.1. Project Theory ...... 4 3.2. Project Objectives and Logic ...... 5 3.3. Project Design ...... 5 3.4. Project Relevance ...... 6 4. Project Implementation ...... 7 4.1. Project Budget and Expenditure ...... 7 4.2. Government Support ...... 7 4.3. Project Management ...... 8 4.4. Technical and Operational Backstopping ...... 8 5. Project Contribution to the Development Objective ...... 10 5.1. Outputs and Results ...... 10 5.1.1. Site Selection and Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) ...... 10 5.1.2. Irrigation and Drainage Improvement ...... 10 5.1.3. Agronomic Practices ...... 14 5.1.4. Capacity Building and Training Activities ...... 15 5.2. Gender Issues ...... 15 5.3. Environmental Issues ...... 16 5.4. Sustainability: institutional, social, technical and economic ...... 16 5.5. Overall Effectiveness ...... 17 5.6. Potential Long-term Impact ...... 17 6. Conclusions and Recommendations ...... 18 6.1. Conclusions ...... 18 6.2. Recommendations ...... 19

Annex 1 - Terms of Reference for the evaluation of project GCP/IND/176/NET “Andhra Pradesh Water Management Project” ...... 21 Annex 2 – Mission Itinerary and List of Persons Met...... 27 Annex 3 – List of Project Activities ...... 31 Annex 4 – Socio-economic impact of project interventions in Modukuru and Mutluru pilot areas ...... 39

ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

i. The evaluation of GCP/IND/176/NET (Andhra Pradesh Water Management (APWAM) project) forms part of the overall evaluation of FAO’s activities in India over the period 2003-2008. A major part of FAO’s national project portfolio during the evaluation period consisted of three projects, funded by the Netherlands and implemented under the National Execution (NEX) modality. The project is implemented by the Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University (ANGRAU). Technical assistance was provided under a contract with Alterra-ILRI, a research institute of Wageningen University in the Netherlands. ii. Under FAO’s corporate evaluation policy, all projects with a budget in excess of USD 4 million are subject to at least one independent external evaluation during their period of operation. The findings of these evaluations will contribute to the decisions that must be taken soon by FAO on utilization of the unspent balance of funds from the Netherlands. iii. The project was intended to address the major problems in irrigated agriculture in Andhra Pradesh. Irrigation systems with supply-oriented design and operational procedures had provided insufficient means for tuning water deliveries to cropping patterns and actual water requirements. This had resulted in a number of inter-linked problems, including uncertainty and delay in release of canal supplies; unreliable and unequal availability of water supplies; very low irrigation efficiencies; sub-optimal cropping patterns and irrigation practices and inefficient irrigation methods; lack of conjunctive use of rain, ground and surface waters; and waterlogging and soil salinity in irrigation commands. These were compounded by the fact that farmers had not been involved in the maintenance and operation of irrigation and drainage systems when they were built and thus they did not perceive sufficiently a stake in their effective operation. iv. The APWAM project was based on the premise that irrigation rehabilitation, and adoption of crop production technologies that were both more water efficient and productive, would require a high degree of engagement with target beneficiaries (farmers in the command areas). It was unusual for a university in India to work directly with farmers in their fields. v. The evaluation found that the project was very relevant to State Government policy, the need to improve irrigation performance and equity in distribution of irrigation benefits and to involve farmers in the operation and maintenance of irrigation systems. The relevance was constrained somewhat by the fact that irrigation water is provided at a very nominal charge to farmers. Thus, farmer interest in water saving technologies becomes keen only in times of water scarcity. vi. The activities conducted by the project were appropriate to the project objectives and efficiently conducted. The project conducted PRAs at each project site that were used to determine the work programmes. Infrastructure improvement was carried out with the participation of farmers and required a financial contribution from them. This was commendable, as it gave beneficiaries a stake in effective operation the system. Several water-saving technologies for rice cultivation were tried in farmers’ fields and some may be of interest in case of water scarcity. However, at least in the pilot areas, SRI proved not to be popular, because of labour requirements. The project also developed other cropping alternatives that were both more water-efficient and showed greater financial returns to farmers. vii. Capacity building has been an important focus of the project, both formal training of scientific staff and activities for farmer training. The training activities at pilot sites

i have been intensive and reinforced through specific campaigns. There is a continuing requirement for formal training, as some staff have been promoted or transferred. viii. At the level of the pilot sites, it is believed that most of the technologies that have been introduced can now be practiced by farmers on their own, if they choose to do so. However, in the last three years the pilot sites have received excellent monsoons. As water is priced very low, the incentive to conserve it is limited. Nonetheless, should water scarcity again become an issue, the farmers have been exposed to technologies that will greatly enhance their chances to raise a crop. ix. The project has met its objectives relating to equity of water distribution and water use efficiency, and creation of participatory research capacity at the level of the project sites. This was not easy; it is clear from the project reporting that much work had to be done to achieve the necessary level of “buy-in” from farmers in the target areas. A key factor has been the dedication of the project staff, including the continual presence of an able Project Manager. The project also benefited from a very high level of foreign technical assistance, considerably more than the norm in FAO-implemented projects. x. Finding ways to apply the expertise gained and lessons learned thus far will be an important aspect of an extension phase to the project. As this was a pilot project, it is unlikely that a project for scaling-up would be able bring similar levels of resources as APWAM to address all these problems in a similarly integrated fashion. Projects for scaling up will work in larger areas, with lesser resources for each site. The eventual long-term impact will be determined by the degree to which the lessons learned in this project, in irrigation rehabilitation, maintenance and operation and application of water-saving crop production technologies, can be further disseminated once the project ends. xi. The evaluation makes 10 recommendations for the future, including for a two-year extension of the project to carry out specific tasks; organization of a national workshop on the project’s results; advocacy of beneficiary participation (including financial) in irrigation rehabilitation; retention of staff in the project during the extension phase; frequent collaboration with line Departments; establishment of links with FAO’s MASSCOTE work; and incorporation of the project work into FAO’s normative activities. It also makes recommendations concerning future work with Alterra-ILRI and the contracting process for this.

ii 1. Introduction 1.1. Background 1. The evaluation of GCP/IND/176/NET (the APWAM project) forms part of the overall evaluation of FAO’s activities in India over the period 2003-2008. A major part of FAO’s national project portfolio during the evaluation period consisted of three projects, funded by the Netherlands and implemented under the National Execution (NEX) modality. The three projects were at various stages in their implementation, but subsequent to a decision by the Government in 2004 to restrict the number of bilateral donors in India, the funds for operating these projects were transferred by the Embassy of the Netherlands to FAO. Technical support for the projects from FAO was funded by a separate project organized expressly for this purpose (GCP/IND/177/NET).

2. An MoU was signed between FAO and Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University (ANGRAU), the implementing institution for the APWAM project in August 2004 and FAO took over implementation from 1 November 2004. The FAO-ANGRAU agreement was for four years, to 31 October 2008. The project budget was USD 4,646,565.

3. Under FAO’s corporate evaluation policy, all projects with a budget in excess of USD 4 million are subject to at least one independent external evaluation during their period of operation. The three NEX projects all had budgets above this level. As all the projects were scheduled to terminate their present phase in October 2008, an evaluation of each of these projects by independent teams was organized to take place during September 2008. The findings of these evaluations will contribute to the decisions that must be taken soon by FAO on utilization of the unspent balance of funds from the Netherlands.

4. The evaluation of GCP/IND/176/NET took place from 15-27 September 2008. The team assembled on 15 September in Hyderabad, home of the main campus of ANGRAU, where an initial briefing took place. Field visits to four of the five project centres (Undi- Bhimavaram, Bapatla, Garikapadu, Tirupati) took place from 16-21 September; a briefing session was provided to the mission on 21 September in Hyderabad by the one centre (Jagtial) not visited. The mission’s terms of reference are in Annex I; people met and the mission itinerary are in Annex II.

5. The mission members were: Robert Moore, FAO Evaluation Service, Team Leader Vasudha Pangare, Independent consultant, socio-economics and gender M.G. Shivakumar, Independent consultant, irrigation engineering

6. The mission is most grateful for the outstanding assistance furnished to it during the course of the evaluation. Project presentations and organization of field visits were uniformly excellent and the project staff members were unfailingly available to provide documentation or answers to questions, sometimes on short notice. Thanks for directing the organization of the mission go to the Honourable Vice-Chancellor of ANGRAU, Dr. P. Raghava Reddy and the directors and staff of the Co-ordinating Centre and each of the Network Centres. We are particularly grateful for their unstinting cordiality and attention to the needs of the mission to the former Project Manager, Dr. T.V.Satyanarayana and the new Project Manager Dr. K. Yella Reddy. We have enjoyed and appreciated the chance to work with you.

1.2. Methodology

1 7. The evaluation adopted a consultative approach with stakeholders and used triangulation as a key method for validation of information and evidence. The project has maintained very good reporting records that provided much of the required factual information for analysis by the evaluation. The evaluation team gathered supplemental information and carried out triangulation through field observations at four of the Centres, semi-structured interviews with project stakeholders, including University/project staff, relevant actors within the Government of Andhra Pradesh and in other related projects and beneficiaries at pilot sites. At one site, discussions were conducted with non-beneficiary farmers to assess their interest in technologies being demonstrated by the project. The mission is convinced that it has received a sound evidence base for arriving at its conclusions and recommendations, and that the methodology was appropriate to the time and resources available for the evaluation.

8. As is standard practice in FAO, the evaluation report was discussed with and fact- checked by key stakeholders before its official submission.

2. National Context and Background to the Project 2.1. National Context 9. India’s total cultivable land is 183 million ha., with an ultimate irrigation potential of 140 million ha. Net irrigated area during 2003-04 was 56.62 million ha., which grew to 60.19 million ha by 2005-06. Irrigation has played a very significant role in the impressive growth of agricultural production in India. However, several problems have cropped up over the years such as water-logging, salinity, soil erosion and water pollution. It is currently estimated that an area of 4.5 million ha is waterlogged and 6.73 million ha is salt affected, thus seriously limiting the production potential of these lands.

10. It is now becoming increasingly important to reclaim such areas to meet the ever increasing demand for food. Such reclamation measures would particularly help small and marginal farmers that represent a large component of the population in waterlogged and salt-affected command areas to improve their livelihoods.

11. Situated in the southern part of India, the State of Andhra Pradesh covers an area of 27.84 million ha with a population of over 82 million, of which about 73% depends on farming as their main source of livelihood. Out of 13 million ha of cultivable area, about 5.75 million ha are irrigated from surface and ground water resources 1. The rapid expansion of irrigation in recent years has led to dramatic increases in agricultural production and yields, for rice and a number of other crops including maize, cotton, chillies, groundnuts, pulses, jowar (sorghum) and bajra (pearl millet).

12. With the present level of withdrawal of available water at 58%, the State is considered to be “water scarce”. Due to increasing population, the per capita availability of water is expected to come down to less than 1000 cubic meters by 2025, moving the state to a “water severe” situation. The per capita availability of land, which was 0.42 ha in 1991, had come down to 0.35 ha in 2002. About 65% of the farmers have less than one hectare of land. Irrigation efficiencies range from 17 to 42%, some of the lowest in the world. Against the backdrop of increasing competition and conflict for water, across social classes and geographical areas, the State needs to manage water demand, improve the efficiency and equity of its existing water supply and distribution and effectively deal

1 “Water Management-Andhra Pradesh”, presentation by Dr M Devender Reddy

2 with the threat of decreasing productivity of agricultural lands. The State has already formulated “Andhra Pradesh Water Vision” to deal with water management strategies and launched in the year 2003. The main principles include: • Clean, hygienic, accessible, affordable and secure drinking water supply; • Sustainable levels of water extraction from rivers, tanks and groundwater without jeopardizing their future use; • Conservation of rain water and its efficient use for agriculture, plantations, livestock and groundwater recharge; • An efficient, well-managed and sustainable irrigated agriculture sector – enhancing value and ensuring farming livelihoods; • Mitigating of the effects of droughts, with short-term emergency responses and log- term planning; • Prevention of the pollution of water resources used by people and livestock, agriculture and industry; • Integrated governance of water; • Participatory water management at every level –individual, community, and Government, with emphasis on the participation of women and landless persons in decision-making.

13. FAO has a long history of assisting countries with irrigation management; one recent effort worth noting is the MASSCOTE (Mapping System and Services for Canal Operation Techniques) methodology which was field tested in irrigation projects in the neighbouring State of Karnataka during 2006-2007. Since 2006, MASSCOTE has been applied in 12 large irrigation systems in China, India, Morocco, Nepal and Thailand. Some variations of the methodology were applied in Sri Lanka and Pakistan earlier. The MASSCOTE document is published as the FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper no 63.

14. FAO has been continuously assisting in capacity building of engineers by conducting MASSCOTE workshops in Karnataka and trained more than 200 engineers in modernizing irrigation management, exposing them to newer concepts such as Service Oriented Management (SOM) and Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM). Interest has been shown and initial training carried out also in Uttar Pradesh.

2.2. Origins of the Project 15. The project had its origins in the Indo-Dutch Network Project on Drainage and Water Management for Salinity Control in Canal Commands, a bilateral project financed from 1998-2002 through the Royal Netherlands Embassy in which ANGRAU participated along with institutes in three other Indian states (Karnatka, Gujarat, Rajasthan). This project also received technical assistance from the then-called ILRI (now Alterra-ILRI). ANGRAU’s field of expertise had primarily been in crop research; the experience gained through the Indo-Dutch project stimulated several initiatives, such as hosting a National Seminar on Capacity Building for Agricultural Water Demand Management in November 2001.

16. As the Indo-Dutch project drew to a close, the Royal Netherlands Embassy (RNE) indicated a willingness to finance a follow-up project in those States that were interested and could formulate a proposal for consideration. The leader of the project in Andhra Pradesh (who would become the Project Manager of APWAM) responded within the deadline set by the RNE and his proposal was duly approved. The approved project

3 continued technical support arrangements with ILRI; in October 2002 ANGRAU had signed an MoU for twinning arrangements with Alterra-ILRI-Wageningen University.

17. The Government of India then announced its decision to restrict the number of bilateral donors. Contacts were established shortly thereafter between the FAO office in India and RNE concerning transfer of the implementation responsibilities of this and the other two NEX projects to FAO.

18. The project was intended to address the major problems in irrigated agriculture in Andhra Pradesh. Irrigation systems with supply-oriented design and operational procedures provided insufficient means for tuning water deliveries to cropping patterns and actual water requirements. This had resulted in: • Uncertainty and delay in release of canal supplies; • Unreliable and unequal availability of water supplies; • Very low irrigation efficiencies; • Sub-optimal cropping patterns and irrigation practices and inefficient irrigation methods; • Lack of conjunctive use of rain, ground and surface waters; • Waterlogging and soil salinity in irrigation commands; • Over-exploitation of ground water in non-command areas; • Lack of information on water requirements of different crops and appropriate water management practices for various agro-climatic regions of the State; • Lack of advisory services and extension of water management practices to the farming community.

19. The problems noted above are inter-linked. For example, excessive water use by head- enders leads to conditions of waterlogging and salinity and also deprives tail-enders of enough water for even minimum requirements. However, tail-enders are also susceptible to waterlogging and salinity, the former due often to topography and the latter to long periods in which soils are not covered in crops as water is not available. The project was intended to address these constraints in an integrated fashion, at sites representing different agro-climatic zones of Andhra Pradesh.

3. Assessment of Project Concept and Relevance 3.1. Project Theory 20. Irrigation structures have deteriorated over time because of poor operations and maintenance. Built as Government programmes initially and without effective participation and interest in their maintenance from the farming communities they were intended to serve, the APWAM project was based on the premise that irrigation rehabilitation, and adoption of crop production technologies that were both more water efficient and productive, would require a high degree of engagement with target beneficiaries (farmers in the command areas). Generally adopted as a strategy by NGOs, participatory approaches involving farmers were not a usual method of operation for an agricultural university, which traditionally developed “technically correct” solutions on research fields and then wrote up the results in academic papers that almost never reached farmers, or which were isolated from the practical possibilities of farmers to implement them. In this sense, the APWAM project was very innovative in India.

21. The project document does not emphasize the pilot aspects of the project but implicitly they have been recognized. The project worked with some 1200 farmers at the pilot sites;

4 with a total project budget of over USD 4.6 million. At that level of “unit cost”, clearly this project was not a directly replicable initiative; rather it had to develop workable models that could be extend elsewhere at far lower cost. This should be the measure by which the eventual success of this project is judged. Additionally, the project was designed to strengthen ANGRAU as an institution and partner in future activities to improve agricultural productivity and preserve and enhance the natural resource base. The extent to which ANGRAU will be able to fulfil this role is another measure to assess the impact of the project in the future.

3.2. Project Objectives and Logic 22. The stated development objective of the project is that water use efficiency should be increased, the benefits of irrigation spread to tail-enders and agricultural production capacity should be maintained in irrigation command areas. It also mentions soil improvement, i.e. that lands threatened by waterlogging and salinity will be preserved and those already unproductive will be reclaimed. Thus, the project development objective was broad, but it reflects well the natural end result of the various initiatives that the project proposed to undertake.

23. The stated immediate objectives were: 1. Demonstrated greater equity in water distribution and improved water use efficiency (these are actually two objectives, the latter of which is part of objective 3 below); 2. Enhanced participatory research and implementation skills of ANGRAU staff; 3. Adoption of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) skills by farmers in the project area; 4. Establishment of a monitoring system for long-term impact of IWRM measures at ANGRAU.

24. While the first three of these are objectives, the last one should be an output of the project as this would be entirely within the control of the project management. The project has interpreted this final item as referring to drainage system performance measurement, including at two sites where such information has been gathered since 1999 under the previous Indo-Dutch project. This information includes crop yields, annual soil salinity measurements and socio-economic information that is updated annually.

25. The project document included a logical framework matrix, which is intended to establish the logical linkages in the project. It is apparent that this was prepared as a requirement rather than being used as a tool for means-ends analysis. For example, the statements listed under “objectively verifiable indicators” for the results are actually a description of the end-of-project status. In addition, particularly at the objective level where they are conceptually significant, the assumptions listed are inappropriate. The “pilot” nature of the project does not emerge from the logical framework.

26. The mission concludes that the project objectives were defined in a satisfactory manner but there was considerable room for improvement in the elaboration of the project logic (means-ends analysis).

3.3. Project Design 27. The project design was sound. Adequate resources were provided to implement the project along the lines specified and the time frame for the pilot experiments was appropriate. The project was set up within the ANGRAU structure, with a separate

5 Advisory Committee, chaired by the ANGRAU Vice-Chancellor, to supervise the implementation of project activities and provide overall strategy to the project. There was also a Project Implementation Committee for programme monitoring, ensuring cooperation between the centres, finalizing nominations for training, etc.

28. The project was headquartered at the Bapatla campus of ANGRAU (Guntur District), with network centres of the project at district-level research facilities at Jagtial (Karimnagar District), Garikapadu (Krishna District), Undi (West Godavari District) and Tirupati (Chittoor District). Multi-disciplinary teams were set up at each of the Centres to implement the project, with Research Associates posted at each of the pilot sites to ensure daily interaction with the farmers. This was a high level of staffing but a key element in ensuring the quality of work performed.

29. A key part of the project was the involvement of Alterra-ILRI, a research institute of Wageningen University in the Netherlands. This organization has a history of cooperation with ANGRAU, dating to the Indo-Dutch project. Because of Alterra-ILRI’s previous experience in India and involvement with ANGRAU, they were an appropriate choice to continue provision of technical support on a subject where ANGRAU had little previous experience.

30. An initial project work plan was included in the project document and detailed work plans were prepared annually that provided a good basis to assess project progress and against which achievements were reported.

31. Beneficiaries were identified in the project document at a general level (farmers in the project areas as “ultimate” beneficiaries; participants from ANGRAU and the Departments of Irrigation and Agriculture as “intermediate” beneficiaries). The project document also mentions the need to address gender aspects and that the project should examine possibilities to work with the Andhra Pradesh Training of Women in Agriculture Project (see Section 5.2).

3.4. Project Relevance 32. Given the large and increasing demand for food in the country, irrigation performance improvement and crop production technologies that minimize water use are very relevant to the needs of Andhra Pradesh and India at large. Greater equity in irrigation water availability is an important aspect of poverty reduction, as tail-end farmers tend to be the poorest. Past experience has shown that irrigation expansion needs to take place with farmer involvement, to ensure that they have a vested interest in its effective, equitable operation and maintenance. Thus, a project with an integrated strategy to address these issues was indeed relevant to needs. The project was also directly relevant to the main goals of the Andhra Pradesh Water Vision (mentioned above).

33. The overall relevance of the project is constrained somewhat, however, by the fact that irrigation water is provided at a very nominal charge to farmers and the charge is established by crop, not actual use. Thus, farmer interest in water saving technologies becomes keen only in times of water scarcity, when efficient water use practices may make the difference between harvesting a crop and crop failure. Indeed, if water is available, many farmers prefer to flood their field as a means of weed control, due to the increasing costs of labour. Furthermore, in the last several years, Andhra Pradesh has been blessed with very good monsoons, unlike in the years immediately preceding the

6 approval of APWAM. As a result, water storage structures have been full to capacity, meaning that large amounts of water have been released for irrigation purposes, or even when there is no storage capacity being released into the Bay of Bengal.

4. Project Implementation 4.1. Project Budget and Expenditure 34. The NEX projects have a very simple budgetary format, with only two budget lines – for contracts, which includes all disbursements to the implementing agency and for FAO support costs. FAO disbursed funds to ANGRAU and also on ANGRAU’s behalf to Alterra-ILRI. ANGRAU itself disbursed funds to the NGO partners contracted by them for project implementation activities. Although for the purposes of reporting to FAO detailed budgets and expenditure statements were not required, the project has naturally maintained these due to its accountability requirements as part of the University. Records kept by centre and budget heading, with annual budget and expenditure levels available for each network centre and the co-ordinating centre at Bapatla.

35. As of September 2008, total disbursements from FAO amounted to USD 3,835,675, of which USD 1,520,000 had been sent on ANGRAU’s behalf to Alterra-ILRI, leaving an outstanding balance in the project of USD 810,890.

36. For those funds made available directly to ANGRAU, no problems were noted in their receipt or eventual distribution to the network centres. A major problem, however, was encountered in the transfer of funds against the Alterra-ILRI contract. The contract between ANGRAU and Alterra-ILRI was specified in Euros, but for reasons that the evaluation was unable to establish, an equivalent amount in dollars was also stipulated in the contract. Furthermore, the contract contains a provision protecting Alterra-ILRI if the USD declined more than 5% against the Euro. Payments made to Alterra-ILRI by FAO on ANGRAU’s behalf were made in USD, but due to depreciation of the USD, Alterra- ILRI realized some €84,389 (presently equivalent to USD 126,584) less than the amount stipulated in the contract. Until now, no action has been taken to remedy this situation. As it would be morally unjustified due to this error to do otherwise, FAO will need to pay this amount to Alterra-ILRI from the FAO technical support project (GCP/IND/NET/177). In order to avoid this situation in the future, contracts should be stipulated in the currency of payment only; if for some reason an indication of an equivalent in another currency is given, the leading currency, i.e. the currency in which the obligation is incurred and the payment made, must be clearly specified in the contract.

4.2. Government Support 37. Government support to the project came at different levels. ANGRAU is a state run University and has the mandate to provide research inputs to the Agriculture Department. The University has state wide jurisdiction with a network of teaching institutions, research centres, and transfer of technology centres across the state. In the project the relationship with the Agriculture Department was most evident at the field sites and Department staff members were also beneficiaries of some of the project’s training activities.

38. Since the project was being implemented in areas that fall under the jurisdiction of the Irrigation Department, it would not have been possible to carry out project activities without the cooperation of the Irrigation Department. The University had never before worked so closely with the Irrigation Department.

7

39. Effective working relationships contributed to the project being able to complete almost all activities as per the planned schedule. The project also organised interaction meetings between the farmers and representatives of these departments during which farmers are able to discuss their problems and seek advice on various issues; these were deemed effective for garnering support from Government institutions at field level.

40. Policy support came largely through the Project Advisory Committee, chaired by the Vice Chancellor of the University and co-chaired by the Secretary (Agriculture), Government of Andhra Pradesh, which included senior members of the Agriculture and Irrigation Departments. This facilitated support and cooperation between departments and with the project scientists.

4.3. Project Management

Project Advisory Committee (PAC)

FAO ANGRAU Alterra-ILRI Govt. of AP (Managing Organisation) (Implementing Organisation) (Implementing Organisation) Irrigation Dept Financial Assistance Technical Assistance Agriculture Dept

Director of Research

Project Implementation Committee (PIC)

ADR's of Zones Project Manager Network Centers Network Centers Main Center Admn Control Technical Control Admn & Tech Control

41. Project management has been effective. The APWAM project management structure involves dual lines of reporting. One is that of the University itself, since the project is being implemented by University staff and the second is the traditional reporting line from the project staff to the Project Manager.

42. Technical and financial monitoring and reporting is governed by University rules and regulations. Besides by senior project staff, monitoring is also done by the Research Department of the University and the Comptroller. The project has been monitored very closely within the University set-up.

43. The procedures for reporting and monitoring have not had an adverse effect on project implementation; they have in fact been used to advantage. Monitoring by the Research Department and the University Network Centres has enabled the involvement and participation of highly qualified University scientists not assigned to the project. Examples include the involvement of University scientists in the Farmer Field Schools and other training activities.

44. At the highest level, the Project Advisory Committee (PAC) gave standing instructions for decentralizing technical and financial decisions and actions. For example, the Comptroller is a member of the PAC. Financial decisions and budget approvals taken in the PAC are communicated to the Assistant Comptrollers who actually disburse the funds to the Network Centres. As a result, local level financial decisions and approvals can be taken at the level of the Network Centre.

4.4. Technical and Operational Backstopping

8 45. Technical backstopping for the project came from two sources: primarily from Alterra- ILRI under the contract with ANGRAU and secondly from FAO, whose inputs were funded under GCP/IND/NET/177, which provided support to all three NEX projects. The project also had contracts with local NGOs for work related to farmer participation.

46. While the contract from Alterra-ILRI accounts for a notable share (over one-third) of the total budget, this has permitted extensive and continuous contact over the four-year period of the project. To June 2008, the CTA had made 20 visits to the project, of which 14 included visits to two or more of the network centres; two visits were to the Bapatla nodal centre only and four were to Hyderabad only. Five other Alterra-ILRI staff made a total of 21 visits (3-6 visits each) to the project in the same time frame, for training and to make specific technical inputs in their respective areas of expertise (modelling, drainage, irrigation management, remote sensing).

47. The mission had an opportunity to interact with the CTA during its visit. He has considerable prior experience in India, is knowledgable about the problems being faced and interacted very well with the project team. Most importantly, he had a keen appreciation that his role was that of adviser and not a manager, which is clearly left to ANGRAU. The mission did not meet the other Alterra-ILRI consultants but the project staff were satisfied with their services.

48. FAO for its part provided technical backstopping from Headquarters on drainage and gender aspects of the project, and the FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (RAP) organized two training courses at Bapatla in 2005 on irrigation modernization . The senior officer from RAP also served as principal resource person for a two-day workshop for senior officers from the Department of Irrigation, also in 2005.

49. The drainage and salinity management officer from the Land and Water Division visited the project in January 2007, going to three of the network centres and making a number of technical recommendations to the project. His recommendation concerning performance evaluation of SSD was said to be particularly valuable and is being followed. In both missions, the officer noted the relevance of the project to the normative activities of his Division and in the second mission, the role that could be played by FAO in making recommendations to the Andhra Pradesh authorities to scale up the project results. However, as yet there has been no follow-up to these recommendations.

50. The gender officer was a key resource person for a workshop in Bapatla and training course in Hyderabad in January 2006 for all the NEX projects, including APWAM. The project staff felt this mission was valuable as they had little previous experience in this area. The visit catalysed some follow-up activities by the project (see Section 5.2).

51. The project worked with different local NGOs, primarily on conduct of PRAs, farmer training and awareness campaigns. The NGOs associated with each centre were: Bapatla: PARTNER (Peoples Activity and Rural Technology Nurturing Ecological Rejuvenation) Garikapadu: ANKITA (Association for Needy and Kindle the Illiterate Through Action) Jagtial: CEAD (Center for Education and Agricultural Development ) Tirupati: GVS (Gram Vikas Samastha) Undi-Bhimavram: SNEHA (Society for National Integration Through Education and Humanising Action)

9

52. The evaluation was particularly impressed with the training carried out by PARTNER, which used a Farmers’ Field School approach that was applied rigorously and achieved good results.

5. Project Contribution to the Development Objective 5.1. Outputs and Results 5.1.1. Site Selection and Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) 53. The project carried out field experiments/demonstrations in pilot areas after identifying problems through PRAs and a benchmark survey, which were conducted with the assistance of the NGO partners at the pilot sites. Demonstrations were conducted to improve Water Use Efficiency (WUE) in project commands of Godavari Western Delta (GWD) , Krishna Western Delta (KWD) and Nagarjunsagar Left Canal and to increase productivity in problematic agricultural lands in GWD command and KWD command through Closed Sub-surface Drainage (CSSD) technology and Open Sub-surface Drainage (OSSD) technology. Experiments on water saving techniques and agronomic practices were also conducted to achieve improvement in yield and conserve water

54. The PRAs appear to have been conducted well. The best indicator is that they resulted in clearly differentiated problems at each of the project sites, which required varied solutions. This required the project to carry out site-specific experiments deemed to be most appropriate to the needs of the target beneficiaries.

5.1.2. Irrigation and Drainage Improvement 5.1.2.1.Irrigation Infrastructure 5.1.2.1.1. Rehabilitation of Structures 55. The PRAs identified irrigation rehabilitation as a primary need at all selected pilot sires. Irrigation infrastructure, including canals, distributaries, laterals, minors and field channels, was in poor condition, thus contributing to low WUE .

56. The reasons identified for poor WUE in Modukuru Br.Canal No2 of KWDT (Bapatla) included uneven distribution of water among head, middle and tail reaches. Contributing to this was uncertainty in canal water release, application of excess water by farmers, field to field irrigation and poor drainage. Improvement in the infrastructure by desilting of canals, renovation of existing structures to minimize losses and installation of gates for proper regulation was undertaken as part of the response to these problems. Similarly, in Nagarjunsagar Left canal (Garikapadu), improvement in canal infrastructure was performed by desilting, providing lining in vulnerable places, construction of regulators for field channels and renovation of drop structures.

57. In the Sri Ramsagar project (Jagtial), rehabilitation of structures in 3 pilot areas (head, middle and tail) included remodelling of the canal with concrete lining, fixing up of regulatory gates and division boxes at critical points, thus enabling water to reach up to the 11 th km as opposed only the 7 th (of 14) km before the start of the project.

58. In the Western Godavari command (Undi), the project emphasized reclamation of waterlogged and saline lands. Water was not reaching the area due to silt in the canal and there was no proper arrangement to drain excess water from the command. The silt was removed through participatory approach with farmers (flow capacity enhanced by 8%) and a flap gate was installed to drain excess water from command.

10

59. At Musilipedu tank in Chittur district (Tirupati), the sluice was repaired, the weed ipomea carnea in the tank bed was removed by chemical means, division boxes were constructed and lining for a substantial length of the canal was completed.

60. The priority given to rehabilitation of the irrigation infrastructure was a necessary pre- condition for any other activities to improve WUE, as improved water flows were indispensable to the project goals of improving equity in distribution and ensuring water availability. A key aspect for the success of the intervention and its eventual sustainability was the involvement of farmers, who contributed to meet a portion of the costs of rehabilitation (10 %), thus giving them a financial stake in the maintenance of structures in the command area.

5.1.2.1.2. Measuring Inflows 61. In the irrigation projects, there were either no or inaccurate measurements of the flow of water into the canal commands at the level of distributaries/minors. There was no awareness among the farmers as to how much water they were supplied with; as a result, farmers ended up using excess water over the requirements for crops or allowed water to go waste. The project staff also needed this information to determine the WUE at the various project sites .

62. RBC (Replogle, Bos and Clemmens) flumes were used in the pilot areas at critical locations so measurements of inflows to the fields could be taken. Measurements were taken daily and recorded in registers. The outflow was similarly measured and quantity of water actually used in the fields determined. The farmers were trained in taking measurements of inflows and outflows themselves and trained in the controlled releases of water. The CRIWAR software developed by Alterra-ILRI was used to calculate the potential evapotranspiration of crops grown in the pilot areas, while the CROPWAT software developed by FAO was used to calculate the required water use pattern.

63. This intervention helped the project to correlate releases from the canal with crop water requirements and thereby quantify potential savings in water. The technical expertise in installing the RBC flumes was provided by the CTA .

5.1.2.2.Drainage 64. One of the main objectives of the project was reclamation of waterlogged and saline irrigated agricultural lands to increase agricultural productivity. This was to be achieved through the use of CSSD and OSSD technologies, again with technical support from Alterra-ILRI.

65. A pilot area (Mutluru) under the KWD command area was selected by the Bapatala Co- ordinationg Centre for demonstration of CSSD and OSSD technology. As a part of this activity, rehabilitation of canals was carried out to ensure free flow of water and maintenance was handed over to the farmers. The inflow was measured with RBC flumes installed by the project and quantity of water required for crop evapotranspiration and for leaching of salts was assessed. OSSD and CSSD technologies were installed in two nearby villages (P R Palem and Kovelamudi). Installation of SSD resulted in yield improvements in the rice crop and an increase in cropping intensity. However, OSSD proved less popular because of the land area that went out of production in order to install the drains. As with

11 the irrigation infrastructure, farmers contributed a portion of the cost towards the SSD installation (in this case 15%).

66. In Kalipatnam pilot area of Undi Network centre, lands affected by salt water intrusion (the pilot site is near the confluence of the adjoining Upputeru River with the sea) were effectively reclaimed by installation of SSD . The lands in this area were left vacant due to waterlogging. In the mid-1990s, the area had been converted into ponds for aquaculture, but the ponds were abandoned as it was no longer profitable due to input costs and disease problems. The CSSD , along with improvements in the canal system and better farm practices, have led to substantial yield improvement in rice (30-40 % in Kharif and Rabi seasons) and increases in cropping intensity.

67. The farmers are also trained in maintaining the system. The project staff have been trained in design, installation and maintenance aspects of SSD technology and are in a position to provide technical support for eventual upscaling in larger command areas.

5.1.2.3.Water Saving Techniques 68. Water saving techniques are key elements to improve WUE and consequently yield and cropping intensity. Water saving techniques, predominantly for rice, were successfully applied in farmers’ fields in pilot areas. A key to the success of the experiments and demonstrations is the participatory approach with farmers. When introducing these techniques, the project provided incentives in the form of seeds, fertilizers and other inputs to the participating farmers.

5.1.2.3.1. Semi-dry rice 69. In Modukuru pilot area of Bapatla center, the semidry rice experiment gave an 18% increase in yield and 23% saving in water over farmer’s practice. Over the three years period of experimentation, the area under semidry cultivation had increased over three times in this pilot area due to voluntary adoption by farmers.

70. At Jagtial centre, working in the command area of D51 distributary of Kakatiya canal of Sri Ramsagar project, semidry rice showed an increase of 3% yield and a saving of 19% of water over farmer’s practice. Though here the yield improvement was marginal, an important finding is that the farmer was much more assured of rice crop during kharif , even when there was delay in release of water to the canal command by 30-45 days if there are poor inflows into the reservoir.

71. The work done in semidry cultivation needs to be upscaled to a unit area under a particular canal/minor command, where farmers of large unit can come forward in larger numbers to adopt this method of cultivation. Valuable experience could be gained from an expanded experiment.

5.1.2.3.2. System of Rice Intensification (SRI) 72. System of Rice Intensification (SRI) has been tried through experiments and field demonstrations in farmers’ fields in the pilot areas associated with the Bapatla, Garikapadu, Jagtial and Tirupati centres. Of the water-saving technologies demonstrated, SRI had highest yield and water savings over farmer’s practice. In Bapatla center, SRI on- farm demonstrations showed 42% yield increase and 48% water savings over farmer’s practice (2005-08). In Garikapadu center, the yield increase was 12% and water savings of 24% over the same period. In Jagtial center, SRI practices demonstrated 8% more yield

12 and 21 % water savings. In Tirupati center working in a tank command where rice was a rabi crop only (due to rainfall in October-November months from north-west monsoon/cyclone), the yield increase was 13.7% (2004-05 to 2006-07) and water savings was 30.4% (2005-06 to 2006-07).

73. Though having highest WUE , SRI was largely not acceptable to the farmers because of issues related to weed control and water management. Weeding operations were required thrice at 10 day intervals, starting 10 days after transplanting. Attempts were made to introduce a mechanical weeder, but it was too difficult to operate manually. Water management was complex, due to the need to keep the field at saturation level up to panicle initiation stage and 5 cm depth thereafter.

74. SRI thus appears to be of very limited interest, perhaps for some farmers with very small plots and large amounts of family labour. The project has gained sufficient research data on SRI with respect to technical and socio-economic issues to explain the limitations of the SRI. For these reasons, it is dubious whether SRI experiments should be continued in the present project sites.

5.1.2.3.3. Alternate Wetting and Drying (AWD)/Rotational irrigation 75. Alternate wetting and drying (AWD) or Rotational irrigation for rice is another method of cultivation which was demonstrated on the farms in the pilot areas. The demonstration in the Bapatla pilot site showed an increase in yield of 7% and water saving of 36% over farmer’s practice (2005-08). At the Garikapadu pilot site, the field demonstrations showed a marginal increase in yield, but water saving of 30%. At the Jagtial site, rotational irrigation increased yield marginally by 3% and 6% for kharif and rabi seasons with a corresponding water savings of 11% and 20% respectively. In the Tirupati site, AWD demonstrations during rabi in tank command showed an increase in yield of 8.4% (2004- 05 to 2006-07) and water savings of 21.9% (2005-06 to 2006-07). Although yield increases were minimal, it is a technique that could be of interest particularly in cases of water scarcity.

5.1.2.3.4. Sprinkler/drip irrigation 76. At the Garikapadu pilot site, a demonstration of sprinkler irrigation on the groundnut crop resulted in an average 15 % higher kernel yield with water saving of 19 % over the check basin method of irrigation (2004-2008). At the Jagtial site, demonstrations in farmers’ fields on drip irrigation conducted for maize + turmeric intercropping showed yield increases of 4% and 10% respectively and water savings of 33%. Demonstrations of drip irrigation on sugarcane showed 20% yield increase and 26% savings in water. However, these have cost implications in terms of initial investments and operation and maintenance.

77. There is good scope for upscaling the water saving techniques over large irrigation command areas of Krishna, Godavari delta and other irrigation projects of the State after ascertaining on a larger scale the social acceptability and economic viability of each technique so that the saved water could be put to other uses. The project has urged government departments to include the canal irrigated area farmers in drip/sprinkler irrigation under the subsidy scheme of the Andhra Pradesh Micro Irrigation Project

5.1.2.4.Remote Sensing

13 78. Remote sensing was included as an additional element during the course of the project. An irrigation performance assessment study was conducted for KWD command in association with NRSA-Hyderabad and Alterra ILRI -Wageningen University and water productivity computed for different canals in the delta by the Bapatla center. Remote sensing data and field data were combined to evaluate irrigation performance in KWD command areas in terms of uniformity of water application, water productivity and WUE . The results indicated an average yield for rice crop of 5.2 t/ha which corresponded well to the target yield values between 5.0 and 5.5 t/ha (2005). Among the various canals, the high level canal command had highest average yields with lowest variability, indicating highest efficiency (85%) and largest water productivity (1 kg/cum of water).

79. The study would go a long way in formulating integrated water release plan for kharif taking in to account monthly variations in crop water demands and the pattern of rainfall for the past 20 years. The study could be useful in water saving, improving yields and reducing risk of breach of canal embankments. An estimate projected that water savings could have been as high as 44% for kharif releases during 2005 with the application of this modelling. One of the important recommendations of the study was to reduce excess use of water by farmers of upstream reaches by fixing up water rates on volumetric basis instead of the present acre basis.

80. There is scope to upscale the model to other project commands and appropriate models developed for planning water releases.

5.1.3. Agronomic Practices 81. The centres also experimented with different crops and varieties to save water, give better financial returns to the farmers, sustain and improve soil fertility and increase cropping intensity. Some of the noteworthy ones included:
Micro irrigation (sprinkler) in rice fallow blackgram in Mudukuru pilot area (Bapatla center) had yield improvement of 33% and water saving of 88%.

Experiments conducted by Undi center showed that MTU 2716, MTU 1061, MTU 1064 varieties were best suited for kharif season, giving better yields for salt-affected soils of Godavari Western Delta. The salt-tolerant varieties MTU 1010, NLR 34449 and MTU 4870 varieties suit rabi season (19% increase in yield over other existing varieties). Application of Sesbania was shown to be effective in salt affected soils of Godavari Western Delta.

Garikapadu center demonstrated a variety of methods including in-situ green manuring and other bio fertilizers, gypsum application for reclamation of alkali soils in paddy and introduction of tank silt as soil amendment. All resulted in more productivity over farmer practice.

Jagtial center introduced red gram as inter crop in maize during kharif , with considerable increase in yield and water productivity, with some improvement in soil fertility. Introduction of maize as alternate crop to rab i rice resulted in 62% less water use, had 300% higher water productivity and 44 % higher net returns. Effective demonstrations were also carried out on: drip irrigation for maize + turmeric intercropping; drip irrigation in sugar cane; sprinkler irrigation in groundnut.

14
Tirupati center introduced, green manuring (Sunhemp and Dhaincha) prior to rabi rice. The demonstration resulted in an increase of rabi rice grain yield by about 14%.

5.1.4. Capacity Building and Training Activities 82. Capacity building activities and training events were organized all through the project period (see Annex 3), for project (ANGRAU) staff, line Department staff and farmers. For formal training, much of which was conducted outside India, approval for participation in training programmes, conferences and workshops was given by the PAC. It is commendable that many scientists were given the opportunity to participate in different events.

83. The scientists received specific training from Alterra in drainage technologies, IWRM and water use efficiency. The outcomes and results of technical activities are evidence of the usefulness of this training such as the effectiveness of the sub-surface drainage installations and the demonstrated water use efficiency in cultivation of different crops. The project has clearly contributed to capacity building at the University. However, some 35% of the persons who received external training are no longer with the project, usually due to promotion or new responsibilities. Such losses are inevitable in projects, but underscore the need for continuous training and capacity building until a critical mass of expertise is achieved. In an extension phase of the project, further training will be required, and it is to be hoped that staff transfers can be minimized in this critical period.

84. Capacity building activities at the field level included interaction meetings with farmers, awareness campaigns, special events such as World Food Day and World Water Day, specific training programmes on water management, farming practices, water saving technologies and FFS. As was noted earlier, many of these activities were carried out by or with the NGO partners. It was evident from interactions with farmers that they had assimilated the learning from the activities. Several farmers, both men and women informed the Evaluation Team that they were now confident enough to train other farmers. In an informal way they were already passing on the knowledge and information they had gained about IPM and water saving technologies to farmers in their own village and in neighbouring villages. Several farmers who have adapted these technologies have received awards for progressive farming at the district and state levels. Farmers expressed confidence that after the project is withdrawn, they would continue to practice what they had learned.

85. Results of the project have been further disseminated through the Zonal Research Extension Advisory Council (ZREAC), a statutory body of the University set up under National Agricultural Research Project system in 1980s. The state of Andhra Pradesh is divided into seven agro-climatic zones. Each zone will have a ZREAC with about 3000 farmers attending three days workshop each with about 10 concurrent sessions, one of which is on water management. The APWAM Project has presented the results of the on- farm research programmes twice in a year at these sessions. The feed back on the project results and achievements are taken from the farmers. The pilot area farmers are included in the 3000 farmers group. The APWAM project centers are situated in four zones of the state. Hence, the Project has an opportunity to influence farmers outside the pilot areas. The ZREACs are attended by the university scientists, officials of departments of agriculture, irrigation, horticulture, fisheries and marketing.

5.2. Gender Issues

15 86. Efforts were made to identify the needs and problems of women farmers in the benchmark survey in all the pilot areas. However, needs-specific activities were taken up initially only by Bapatla Co-ordinating Centre.

87. The target group identified for the project is small and marginal farmers, not farming households. Therefore only women farmers who own land and are members of Water User Associations have been “mainstream beneficiaries” of the project. There are very few women members in the WUAs. However, those that were participated in the technical training programmes organised for the WUAs and they also participated in the FFS.

88. About half-way through the project, a training programme was organised on gender issues for which FAO Rome provided technical guidance (see Section 4.4 above). After this workshop, efforts were made to organise special needs-based training programmes for women. Women have received training in vermicompost, mushroom cultivation and kitchen gardens, with a view to providing income generation activities. Anecdotal evidence indicated that the kitchen gardens provided sufficient vegetables for daily consumption of some participants and a number of women expressed positive views about the project and the impact it has had on their lives.

89. No gender specialist was identified in the initial project design. Staff identification has been done on the basis project needs and there is a comparatively small pool of women within the University structure who have the required qualifications. Out of 80 total project staff at present, 60 (75%) are male, 13 (16%) are female and 7 posts are vacant. Those women scientists who have worked on the project have been highly appreciated. They have worked closely with farmers and have been involved in the installation of structures and other technical aspects of the project.

5.3. Environmental Issues 89. The overarching goal of the project is sustainable use of water resources, which would be of considerable environmental benefit. SSD is itself intended to ameliorate environmental degradation brought about by importation of salts from large scale irrigation schemes. However, drainage activities can have environmental impacts. The possible effects include change in habitat of aquatic fauna (bio-diversity) brought on by an increase in the value of electrical conductivity (Ec) and pH of water in the side drains, lowering of the water table, and leaching of nutrients, pesticides and other elements from the land. Potential downstream effects from disposal of drainage effluent include an impact on flora and fauna and reuse of drained water having higher Ec values by tail-end farmers.

90. Studies have shown that salinity levels return to normal levels some 5-7 years after SSD is installed. However, it is important to monitor these aspects. A study undertaken by the project has recommended that a monitoring and evaluation programme be put in place for those SSD-related parameters that are relatively easy to evaluate.

91. Therefore, it is felt that continuous monitoring of effects of SSD in the project area and on the downstream area should become an integral part of the APWAM project and during large scale implementation of SSD over large water logged and salt affected command areas of Andhra Pradesh (e.g. within the RKVY proposal).

5.4. Sustainability: institutional, social, technical and economic

16 92. At the level of the pilot sites, it is believed that most of the technologies that have been introduced can now be practiced by farmers on their own, if they choose to do so. The training activities at pilot sites have been intensive and reinforced through specific campaigns. Some technologies, such as AWD, semi-dry rice production and rotational irrigation are being adopted already. WUA will be progressively assuming responsibility for regulating intake in the pilot command areas and indeed this is an important objective for project management.

93. When the project began, water scarcity was a real issue. In the pilot areas, the improvements to irrigation infrastructure in the command areas have promoted more equitable water distribution in sites where this was pursued. However, in the last three years the pilot sites have received excellent monsoons. As water is priced very low, the incentive to conserve it is limited. Nonetheless, should water scarcity again become an issue, the farmers have been exposed to technologies that will greatly enhance their chances to raise a crop.

94. From the outset, participation has been a cornerstone of the project: farmer involvement in irrigation rehabilitation, maintenance and operation has been stressed, and farmers have been extensively exposed to water-efficient cropping methods and improved agronomic practices. The project has also made efforts to assist women through income-generating interventions, particularly after the afore-mentioned training activity (see Section 5.2). It is too early to assess the degree of long-term interest and thus whether these activities will be sustainable or not.

95. The project has been identified by the technical division (NRLW) as being of interest to its normative work. How to do this would be a consideration during the extension phase of the project. To the degree that this could be done, the sustainability and potential impact of the project could be enhanced.

5.5. Overall Effectiveness 96. The project has met its objectives relating to equity of water distribution and water use efficiency, and creation of participatory research capacity at the level of the project sites. IWRM skills are being adopted in the pilot areas and achievement is believed to be satisfactory although targets were not established for adoption in the pilot phase.

97. It is clear from the project reporting that the task faced by the project was considerable and much work had to be done to achieve the necessary level of “buy-in” from farmers in the target areas. This is evident when one reads the reports (and project reporting has been extensive and detailed) of the situation in 2004-05, when the project began, and the situation today. The results in terms of capacity building at all levels have been impressive.

98. A key factor has been the dedication of the project staff, including the continual presence of an able Project Manager. The project also benefited from a very high level of foreign technical assistance, considerably more than the norm in FAO-implemented projects. However, the project was intended to introduce concepts and methods for which ANGRAU had limited capacity at the outset and the foreign partner was well-qualified in these areas.

5.6. Potential Long-term Impact

17 99. At the level of the individual project sites, the evaluation feels that there is a high likelihood of positive long-term developmental impact (see Annex 4 on socio-economic impacts at Modukuru and Mutluru pilot areas). There seems a genuine interest and commitment to effective management of irrigation on the part of the beneficiary farmers and much interested in improved cropping techniques has been created. In case of water shortage, or if water prices would increase to reflect the cost of supply, there would likely be even greater impact. Economic impact in the pilot areas has been positive: farmers in the pilot area are able to invest the increased income in acquiring the fixed assets and expressed that they are enjoying a better standard of living.

100. Looking at long-term impact, it must be remembered that the project is a pilot effort. It is thus too early to judge APWAM’s long-term impact on IWRM more broadly, since ANGRAU’s participation in follow-up programmes has not yet been concluded. However, discussions have been held with respect to ANGRAU’s involvement in two activities: 1. a project of the Government of Andhra Pradesh to be funded under the national programme Rashtriya Kishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY) whereby ANGRAU would contribute to mapping waterlogged and salt-affected lands in the Krishna and Godovari deltas through remote sensing; making pre-drainage investigations in selected areas identified; making SSD designs and supervising construction works of SSD systems; 2. providing technical services as part of the consortium for the Andhra Pradesh Community-Based Tank Rehabilitation, funded through a $189 million WB loan. The project, approved in April 2007, will run until December 2012.

101. Indeed, finding ways to apply the expertise gained and lessons learned thus far will be an important aspect of an extension phase to the project. As this was a pilot project, it is unlikely that a project for scaling-up would be able bring similar levels of resources as APWAM to address all these problems in a similarly integrated fashion. Projects for scaling up will work in larger areas, with lesser resources for each site. The eventual long- term impact will be determined by the degree to which the lessons learned in this project, in irrigation rehabilitation, maintenance and operation and application of water-saving crop production technologies, can be further disseminated once the project ends. The challenge will now be to scale them up sufficiently to make a difference in developmental terms. It is promising that ANGRAU is aware of this challenge and is willing to address it in the extension phase.

6. Conclusions and Recommendations 6.1. Conclusions 102. The APWAM project was and continues to be relevant to important developmental needs of Andhra Pradesh and India at large. It has been effectively implemented and through the dedication of its staff, achieved to a large extent the goals set out for it in the project document, particularly relating to improvement of irrigation management (including equity in water distribution), development of more water-efficient technologies and cropping patterns.

103. The project is novel in India, as it is rare for a university to work directly with farmers on applied agricultural research and demonstration. This has been a major reason for project success, due to the openness of University staff to participatory approaches and a willingness to work with NGOs that have expertise in these areas.

18

104. Due to training carried out by the project (both in India and overseas), capacity has been built in ANGRAU so that it can play a leading role in other initiatives built around areas addressed by the project. A key task for ANGRAU in the near to medium term will be to position itself to put the knowledge gained to practical benefit of the farming community at large in Andhra Pradesh. This will require strong linkages particularly with the Departments of Irrigation and Agriculture.

105. The principal factors for project success, aside from those mentioned above, include: i. focus on local problems, established through a PRA at the beginning of the project, with different objectives at each project site; ii. strong field presence, including staff based permanently at project sites; iii. highly qualified, young staff being assigned to the project and willing to work in sometimes difficult field circumstances; iv. appropriate multi-disciplinary teams at each of the project centres; v. knowledge of new technologies and methods, developed through the partnership with Alterra-ILRI (Wageningen University);

106. Although not explicitly recognized as such in the project document, APWAM was essentially a pilot project. It attempted new ways of working with farmers, utilizing new technologies for India, and it was largely successful in doing so. However, relative to its overall cost, the project reached a limited number of farmers. This is normal in pilot activities. The eventual success of the project, however, will be determined only in the future, depending on how ANGRAU can position itself to make use of the knowledge and expertise it has acquired in the pilot phase and bring it to the benefit of much greater numbers of farmers in Andhra Pradesh or elsewhere in India.

107. The project has engaged in a considerable number of interventions at each of the project sites. However, some of them may not be scaled up either because of lack of farmer interest (e.g. SRI) or the high cost that would be incurred in large scale expansion (e.g. regular soil testing in farmers’ fields). Technical and economic feasibility need to be demonstrated for all interventions proposed for scaling up.

108. At field level, there appears to be good interaction with the Irrigation Department. At policy level, the project is known but thus far it appears that the University could be better integrated into on-going and proposed initiatives, in particular for the World Bank-funded tanks rehabilitation project and the RKVY programme on SSD in Waterlogged and Salt- affected Agricultural Lands. This will require a higher degree of interaction with both the State Irrigation and Agriculture Departments than heretofore.

6.2. Recommendations

109. Recommendation 1: FAO should approve a two-year extension of the project, until 31 October 2010. The main thrusts of the project should be for ANGRAU to position itself for the post-project period, i.e. development of an exit strategy. This may include: i. defining terms and methods for involvement in other on-going and potential initiatives, e.g. World Bank tank rehabilitation project, RKVY SSD proposal, establishment of a Drainage Research Institute at Undi;

19 ii. expansion of less resource-intensive aspects of the project work (e.g. crop-water requirements and scheduling of irrigation supplies) to other branch canal commands; iii. continuing to build capacity of male and female farmers to manage irrigation in their command areas; iv. further promotion of technically and economically feasible water- saving techniques for large-scale adoption and specific identification of those that have been tried but found not appropriate for scaling-up, along with reasons; v. updating socio-economic information gathered from the pilot areas; vi. documenting work undertaken for further dissemination of lessons learned, including guidelines for conducting participatory research on issues related to drainage and efficient irrigation water use, and guidelines for IWRM in Andhra Pradesh.

110. Recommendation 2: As part of the extension phase, assuming funds are available, the project should organize a national workshop to present its results and to compare experience with other projects that may have been working in similar areas. The project should also seek opportunities to present its results at suitable venues.

111. Recommendation 3: The project should advocate strongly the critical importance of male and female farmers’ participation in all phases of irrigation rehabilitation and maintenance, including a financial contribution to cover part of the costs.

112. Recommendation 4: As the budget-neutral proposal for project extension foresees reduced staff at all centres, ANGRAU should seek to ensure that trained staff are not transferred at least until the end of the expansion phase in October 2010.

113. Recommendation 5: In order to more effectively participate in initiatives such as those described in Recommendation 1.ii. above, more frequent meetings and collaboration should take place with the appropriate State authorities of the Departments of Irrigation and Agriculture in Hyderabad. In this respect, the extension period will likely see critical decisions being made that will require heavy presence of the Project Manager to participate in the deliberations and appropriate arrangements should be made to facilitate this.

114. Recommendation 6: The project should establish links with FAO’s work on MASSCOTE (Mapping Systems and Services for Canal Operation Techniques). MASSCOTE is a comprehensive methodology for analyzing the modernization of canal operation. The aim is to enable experts to work together with users in determining improved processes for cost-effective service-oriented management. As this is relevant to the work that has been carried out within APWAM, there may be possibilities for mutually beneficial information exchange and learning.

115. Recommendation 7: FAO should follow-up on the recommendations of the January 2007 mission of the Drainage and Salinity Management Officer with respect to incorporating the results of the project in its normative activities and contributing to the preparation of recommendations to the Andhra Pradesh Government for up-scaling the project.

20 116. Recommendation 8: FAO should pay to Alterra-ILRI the amount in Euros due but not yet paid under the existing contract (€84,389). As ANGRAU was not responsible for the shortfall in payment, FAO should charge the amount to GCP/IND/177/NET.

117. Recommendation 9: ANGRAU should continue its cooperation with Alterra-ILRI during the extension phase, utilizing the unspent balance from the contract of €148,000 plus additional funds that may be required. FAO India should be involved in the examination of requirements and contract negotiations, as it would have to authorize any additional allocation to the project.

118. Recommendation 10: Contracts should be stipulated in the currency of payment only; if for some reason an indication of an equivalent in another currency is given, the leading currency, i.e. the currency in which the obligation is incurred and the payment made, must be clearly specified in the contract.

21 Annex 1

TERMS OF REFERENCE

Evaluation of FAO cooperation with India

Terms of Reference for the evaluation of project GCP/IND/176/NET “Andhra Pradesh Water Management Project”

Introduction

1. FAO’s cooperation with India includes three large projects, which started at different points in time with funds from the Royal Embassy of The Netherlands in India. Following a decision by the Indian Government in 2004 to restrict the number of bilateral donors, the donor withdrew completely from this type of engagement. Funds allocated to the three projects were transferred to FAO on the basis of specific agreements to continue working under the National Execution modality (NEX) with the same cooperating organizations that had already been implementing the activities. The three projects and their implementing institutions are: • GCP/IND/174/NET: Promoting Livelihood Improvements in Dryland Farming on the Deccan Plateau, implemented by the Agriculture, Man, Ecology Foundation (AMEF), Bangalore; • GCP/IND/175/NET: Andhra Pradesh Farmer-Managed Groundwater Systems (APFaMGS), implemented by Bharatiya Integrated Rural Development Society (BIRDS), Hyderabad; • GCP/IND/176/NET: Andhra Pradesh Water Management Project (APWaM), implemented by Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad.

2. With respective budgets all above US$ 4 million, the NEX projects represent the largest financial undertaking by FAO in India in the last few years. Under FAO’s corporate evaluation policy, projects of this size are always subject to an independent external evaluation. The fact that these projects were scheduled to be completed in 2008 led FAO Evaluation’s Service and the then-FAO Representative in India to agree on the evaluation of FAO Cooperation with India, as part of the Service’s programme of work on country evaluations. The project evaluation reports will be included in the overall country evaluation report. 3. These projects are the first application of the NEX modality, which was approved by the FAO Conference in 2003. Under NEX agreements, FAO has no direct implementation responsibility, but rather assists national implementing institutions in making appropriate choices. These three projects include only two budget lines: for contracts and FAO support costs. All technical support from FAO is funded through a fourth project: GCP/IND/177/NET: Programme Support to Nationally Executed (NEX) Land and Water Programme in India. This project provides funding inter alia for the national land and water officer based in the FAOR, Delhi and technical backstopping missions for the three projects from FAO HQ and RAP staff.

Background of Project GCP/IND/176/NET

4. The project has been in operation in Acharya N G Ranga Agricultural University (ANGRAU) since November 2003 with the main objective of improving the water use efficiency and improving the productivity of problematic lands in irrigated commands in the state. The project was initially approved for 2 ½ years with a budget of USD 4,646,565 (approximately Rs. 120 million at the time). 5. The State of Andhra Pradesh needs a secure water future to achieve its planned economic growth, improve the livelihoods and quality of life for urban/rural communities and revitalize its ecosystems. With the present level of withdrawal of available water at 58%, the state is considered to be “water scarce”. Due to increasing population, the per capita availability of

22 water is expected to come down to less than 1000 cubic meters by 2025, moving the state to a “water severe” situation. The per capita availability of land, which was 0.42 ha in 1991, has come down to 0.35 ha in 2002. About 65% of the farmers have less than one hectare of land. The Project Irrigation Efficiencies are as low as 17 to 42 %, some of the lowest in the world. It is estimated that the soil salinity and water logging problems affect about 1.2 million hectares. Against the backdrop of increasing competition and conflict for water, across social classes and geographical areas, the state needs to mobilize its collective will to manage water demand, improve the efficiency and equity of its existing water supply and distribution and effectively deal with the threat of decreasing productivity of agricultural lands due to poor management of land and water resources. The state has already formulated “Andhra Pradesh Water Vision” to deal with the effective water management strategies. 6. Since agriculture is the major consumer of water, ANGRAU has initiated operational research in the field of Water Management with a view to improving the water scarcity situation and promoting sustainable agriculture. ANGRAU, the largest agricultural university in India, has a network of 18 Teaching Institutions, 67 Research Stations, 22 District Agricultural Advisory and Transfer of Technology Centers, 6 Krishi Vignan Kendras, One Extension Education Institute and One Agricultural Information and Communication Center. About one-third of the country’s rice cropped area is covered by rice varieties developed by ANGRAU. The ANGRAU has built statewide rapport with the farming community by developing and demonstrating technologies for sustainable agriculture through its wide spread research and extension activities, including the Village Adoption Programme, Rythu Mithra (TV Live Phone–in Programme), Farmers Call Center, Crop Escort Teams, and Crop Expert. 7. The project works through five centres located in different districts in Andhra Pradesh, each one working on different aspects of irrigation management. The Main centre is located at Bapatla (Gantur District); the four Network centres are at Jagtial (Karimnagar District), Garikapadu (Krishna District), Undi (West Godovari District) and Tirupati (Chittoor District). 8. ANGRAU is the implementing agency for the project. The project receives technical assistance through a contract with Alterra-ILRI. Alterra is a research institute of Wageningen University (Netherlands) dedicated to environmental enhancement, including sustainable agriculture and natural resource use. Alterra-ILRI is the non-profit business arm of the institute. Under this contract, a CTA is retained who regularly visits the project and its network centres. 9. There is a Central Implementation Committee (CIC) for each of the 4 network centres headed by the Associate Director of Research (ADR) of the zone, which prepares technical programmes and monitors progress. University bodies like Zonal and State level Technical Program Approval Committees further review the programs. 10. A Project Implementation Committee (PIC) headed by Director of Research approves programmes, monitors progress, ensures cooperation between various offices, reviews finances and finalizes nominations for training, study tours, etc. The Project Manager is the Secretary. Other members are the Chief Technical Advisor (CTA), Local Coordinator, Comptroller, Associate Directors of Research of Lam, Jagtial and Tirupati, Assistant Comptrollers at Bapatla, Lam, Jagtial and Tirupati and Heads of all network centers. 11. A Project Advisory Committee (PAC), co-chaired by the Hon’ble Vice-Chancellor, ANGRAU and the Secretary (Agriculture), Government of Andhra Pradesh, supervises the implementation of project activities and provides the overall strategy for the project. Representatives of the Department of Agriculture, Government of India, FAO, New Delhi, the CTA, Local Coordinator, Director of Extension, Comptroller, ADR of Headquarters, Project Manager and representatives from the Water and Land Management Training and Research Institute (WALAMTARI) and Agriculture and Irrigation Departments are members. One member of University Board of Management also is a member. The Director of Research is the Member- Secretary. 12. The overall project objectives are to: • Enhance implementation of integrated water resources management (IWRM) in Andhra Pradesh; • Improve water use efficiency in agriculture in the framework of IWRM; • Bring equity in water distribution over the command area.

23 • Preserve the agricultural production capacity of waterlogged and saline areas in irrigated agricultural lands. 13. The project works to achieve these through the following actions: • Development, introduction and evaluation of interventions to improve water management in irrigated agriculture; • Organization and empowerment of the farmers in the implementation, operation and maintenance of improved water management practices; • Establishment of partnerships with stakeholders and dissemination of information (technological and institutional) to improve agricultural water management practices; • Monitoring of the long-term effects of improved water management in irrigated agricultural land; • Development of participatory research and implementation methods in agricultural water management; and • Capacity Building in Integrated Water Resources Management

Purpose of the Evaluation

14. The evaluation aims at informing the Government of India, ANGRAU, FAO and other stakeholders about the achievements of the Project and the efficiency and effectiveness of the methodologies used, of the technologies diffused and of the NEX implementation modality. 15. The evaluation will also formulate recommendations and draw lessons for the future development.

Scope of the Evaluation

16. The evaluation will analyse among others that may emerge during the evaluation process, the following aspects:

I. Relevance of the project to development priorities and needs; II. Assumptions and the theory of change underpinning the project idea and design; III. Quality, clarity and adequacy of initial project design and Annual Work Plans including:  the links and causal relationships between inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes and impact (specific and development objectives);  relevance and appropriateness of indicators;  validity of assumptions and risks;  approach and methodology;  time frame and resources;  institutional set-up;  management arrangements; and  stakeholders and beneficiaries identification.

IV. Project management and implementation including:  effectiveness and efficiency of operations management;  effectiveness of strategic management;  efficiency and effectiveness of projects’ coordination and steering bodies and mechanisms at State level;  set-up, efficiency and effectiveness of monitoring and internal evaluation processes;  elaboration and implementation of an exit strategy;  quality and quantity of administrative and technical support by FAO, in particular through project GCP/IND/177/NET, and Alterra-ILRI;  implementation gaps and delays if any, their causes and consequences, between planned and implemented outputs and outcomes; and assessment of any remedial measures taken.

V. Project budget and expenditure including

24  efficiency and effectiveness of the NEX implementation mechanism: between FAO and the implementing agent and between the implementing agent and beneficiaries;  compliance with FAO’s policy for national execution and with audit’s recommendations;  relevance of budget allocations and expenditures to project objectives;  rate of delivery and budget balance of the project at the time of the evaluation.

VI. Project results, including an assessment of a sample of outputs produced to date. A complete list of outputs prepared by the project team will be included in annex. The mission will especially review, the status, extent and quality of work on:  increasing water use efficiency to improve cropping intensity and production;  spreading of irrigation benefits to tail-end areas;  addressing problems of water-logging and salinity;  involvement of farmers in the work of the project to make it more appropriate to farmers’ needs;  enhancement of knowledge about problems and solutions and capacity-building at the level of farmers, state officials and policy-makers at state and national level;

VII. Issues of gender and social equality, including:  extent and quality of women and other disadvantaged group participation in project activities, their access to projects’ resources and benefits, capacity building and empowerment aspects;  analysis of how gender relations, gender equity and processes of social inclusion were and will be affected by the project in the area/sector of intervention; and  extent to which gender and social equity was pursued in project management.

VIII. The prospects for sustaining the project's results by the beneficiaries and the host institutions after the termination of the project. The mission should examine in particular:  institutional, technical and economic sustainability of proposed technologies;  social sustainability of participatory processes initiated through the projects, including contribution to women’s visibility and participation in local development processes;  actual and potential contribution of project outputs and outcomes to FAO’s normative work and function;

IX. Environmental issues, including:  environmental sustainability of technologies introduced and diffused;  project contribution and/or impact on natural resources in terms of maintenance and/or regeneration of the natural resource base.

17. Based on the above analysis the mission will draw specific conclusions and make proposals for any necessary further action by Government and/or FAO to ensure sustainable development, including any need for follow-up action. The mission will draw attention to any lessons of general interest. Any proposal for further assistance should include specification of objectives and major suggested outputs and inputs required.

25

Methodology

Methods and approach

18. The evaluation will adopt a consultative approach with stakeholders and triangulation as a key method for validation of information and evidence. A range of tools will be used, including: consultation of existing reports, elaboration of check lists for semi-structured interviews with key informants and stakeholders, and direct observation during field visits.

Consultations

19. The mission will maintain close liaison with ANGRAU and FAO. Although the mission should feel free to discuss with the authorities concerned anything relevant to its assignment, it is not authorized to make any commitments on behalf of the Government or FAO. 20. The evaluation team will benefit of a briefing meeting with ANGRAU upon start-up of the evaluation exercise. The team will present its preliminary findings and conclusions in a debriefing meeting with ANGRAU at the end of its mission. 21. The Terms of Reference of the evaluation and the final draft report will be circulated among key stakeholders before finalisation; comments and suggestions will be incorporated as appropriate.

Reporting

22. The mission is fully responsible for its independent report which may not necessarily reflect the views of the Government or of FAO. 23. The mission leader bears responsibility for submitting the final draft report to FAO within two weeks of the mission’s conclusion. Within two additional weeks, FAO will submit to the team its comments and suggestions that the team will include whenever appropriate to finalize the report. A tentative outline for the report is to be found in Appendix 1 to these ToRs. 24. The final evaluation report will be a public document available on the website of FAO Evaluation Service. FAO will elaborate the Management Response to the report which will also be a public document and will submit it to the national government.

Composition of the Mission

25. The evaluation team will combine among its members the following fields of expertise: • Irrigation and related soil management aspects; • Food Security • Social development and participatory processes • Project management and evaluation • FAO financial and management procedures and their applicability to NEX projects.

26. The team will be composed by four team members, who together will cover all the fields of expertise listed above. Three will be in the mission full time; the fourth team member will serve part-time to assess finance and management related to NEX for this and the other NEX projects being evaluated at the same time. 27. All team members will have a University Degree and a minimum of 15 years of professional experience in their respective areas. All will be fluent in English. Mission members will have no previous direct involvement with the project either with regard to its formulation, implementation or backstopping. All will have signed the FAO Evaluation Service Declaration of Interest form. 28. The final selection will be the responsibility of FAO’s Evaluation Service, according to the criteria set out above.

26

Timetable and Itinerary of the Mission

29. The evaluation mission is scheduled for the period 15-26 September 2008. The team will assemble in Hyderabad, where it will hold meetings with ANGRAU, its partners and any other stakeholder at government and non-government level. Field visits will be organized to the main project centre in Bapatla, plus the Network Centres at Bhimavaram (Undi), Garikapadu and Tirupati. Field visits will be completed by 21 September, with the remaining time of the mission for report writing and debriefing. The de-briefing meeting will be held in Hyderabad on September 26. The mission leader will debrief the FAO Representative in New Delhi on 29 September.

Consultations

30. The mission will maintain close liaison with the FAO Representative and the concerned national agencies and project staff. Although the mission should feel free to discuss with the authorities concerned anything relevant to its assignment, it is not authorized to make any commitments on behalf of the Government, the donor, or FAO.

27 Annex 2

Mission Itinerary and List of Persons Met

15 th September 2008, Hyderabad

Initial Briefing Meeting with ANGRAU, Teachers’ Home, Hyderabad

Persons present: Dr. P Raghava Reddy, Vice Chancellor, ANGRAU Dr. L Giri Rao, Director of Extension, ANGRAU Smt. N Srikala, Comptroller. ANGRAU Dr. K. Yella Reddy, Principal Scientist and Project Manager, APWAM Project Dr. T V Satyanarayana, Associate Dean, College of Agricultural Engineering, Bapatla

Team travelled by overnight train to Bhimavaram

16th September 2008, Network Centre, Undi (Bhimavaram)

Morning session at Kalipatnam Pilot area: Field visit to the Pilot area and interaction with farmers. Twenty-six farmers were present.

Afternoon Session: Visit to Network Office: Presentations by Er. S. Vishnu Vardhan, Scientist (Ag. Engg) and Dr. C. Venkata Reddy, Senior Scientist (Agro) & Head.

Persons present: Dr. J. Boonstra, Chief Technical Advisor, Alterra-ILRI, The Netherlands, Dr. K. Yella Reddy, Project Manager, APWAM Project, Er. Krishna Prasad, Executive Engineer, Drainage Division, Bhimavaram, Dr. C. Venkata Reddy, Senior Scientist (Agro) & Head, Dr. Ch. Sreenivas, Scientist (Soil science), Er. S. Vishnu Vardhan, Scientist (Ag. Engg).

Team visited the soil science laboratory, Krishi Vignana Kendra laboratories and Fisheries Research Station.

17 th September 2008, Network Centre, Bapatla

Morning: Travel by road from Bhimavaram to Bapatla

The team stopped at Prakasam barrage, Vijayawada and observed the release of water at the Head regulator, before proceeding to the ITC guest house at Guntur, where Dr.T.V.Satyanarayana, Associate Dean, CAE, Bapatla and former Principal Scientist (SWE) & Project Manager and Dr.T.Yellamanda Reddy, Associate Director of Research, RARS, Lam, Guntur and SE (I& CAD), Guntur joined the team

Afternoon: Presentations by Principal Scientist (SWE) & Project Manager, Principal Scientist (SS), APWAM Project, Bapatla and Scientist (SWE), RARS, Jagtial

28 Afternoon: Field visit to Modukuru Pilot area, visit to the office of the Water User Association and interaction with farmers

Evening session: Visit to Field Office of Network Centre and meeting with farmers. Thirty- two farmers were present.

18 th September 2008, Bapatla

Morning session: APWAM office, Bapatla

Staff Meeting was held at APWAM office, Bapatla. Associate Dean, CAE, Bapatla, & former Project Manager and CTA, APWAMP joined the meeting.

Afternoon session: Technical Presentations by Senior Scientist (Agronomy) and Scientist (Agril.Extension).

Post lunch: Field visit to Mutluru pilot area and interaction with farmers.

Evening session: Visit to Field Office and interaction with Field staff (Research Associates & Agricultural Extension Officers) and farmers. Twenty nine farmers were present.

19 th September 2008, Garikapadu

Morning: Presentation at the Network Office by Er. G. Ravi Babu, Scientist (Ag.Eng) & Head.

Persons present: Dr. J. Boonstra, CTA, Alterra – ILRA, The Netherlands Dr. P.R.K.Prasad, Principal Scientist (SS), APWMP, Bapatla Sri Ravi Kumar, Director, Ankita NGO Er. G. Ravi Babu, Scientist (Ag.Engg) Sri. S. G. Mahadevappa, Scientist (Agro.) Dr. D. Balaguravaiah, Principal Scientist (SS), ARS, Garikapadu Dr. B. Prameela Rani, Senior Scientist (Agro), ARS, Garikapadu Dr. Siva Narayana, Programme Coordinator, KVK, Garikapadu

Afternoon: Visit to Ganapavaram Pilot area, interaction with farmers, line departments and NGO.

Persons present: 43 farmers including 6 women farmers • WUA Members: 1. Sri. Kollu Swamy (Nagarjuna Sagar Project Distributory Committee, President) 2. Sri. Chitta Rami Reddy 3. Sri. Erla Varahala Reddy • ANKITA, NGO 1. Sri. Ravi Kumar ( Director) 2. Sri. Eranna (Programme In-Charge)

• Irrigation Department

29 1. Sri. B.Durgaiah (Junior Engineer, Nagarjuna Sagar Project) 2. Sri. Upendra (Work Inspector, Nagarjuna Sagar Project)

• APWAM Project Staff 1. Er. G. Ravi Babu, Scientist(SWE)&Head 2. Sri. S.G. Mahadevappa,Scientist (Agronomy) 3. Sri. K.N. Raja Kumar,R.A (Ag.Engg) 4. Sri. T. Venkateswarlu,R.A (Economics) 5. Sri. Meghanath Varma,R.A (Agro) 6. Sri. A. Krisha Kumar, AEO 7. Sri. B. Lakshminarayana, Data Recorder 8. Sri D. Sheshagiri Rao

20 th September, Tirupati

Morning : Travel by train to Gudur and then by road to Tirupati.

Afternoon: Visit to APWAM office at Regional Agricultural Research Station, Tirupati and presentation by Dr. V. Munaswamy, Principal Scientist (SS) & Head of Tirupati Center.

Persons present: Dr. J. Boonstra, CTA, APWAM, ALTERRA-ILRI, Ther Netherlands Dr. K. Yella Reddy, Project Manager, APWAM Project Dr. K. Raja Reddy, Associate Director of Research, RARS, Tirupati Dr. V. Munaswamy, Principal Scientist (SS) & Head, APWAM, RARS, Tirupati Dr. Ravindranatha Reddy, Principal Scientist (Agronomy), Agricultural Research Station, Ananthapur Dr. C. Ramana, Senior Scientist (Ag.Engg), APWAM, RARS, Tirupati

21 st September 2008, Tirupati

Morning: Field visit to Musilipedu pilot area and interaction with farmers. Forty-four farmers were present, out of which 18 were women.

Persons present: Dr. J. Boonstra, CTA Dr. K. Yella Reddy, Project Manager Dr. K. Raja Reddy, Associate Director of Research

NGO Representatives:

Sri Ch. Rambabu, Director , Gram Vikas Samastha, Madanapalli Sri G.S. Madhu Kumar, N.F.E.F, Gram Vikas Samastha, Madanapalli Sri G. Balaji, I.D.F, Gram Vikas Samastha, Madanapalli

Afternoon: Return to Hyderabad

Evening: Presentation by Jagtial Network Centre

Persons present: 1. Dr K Yella Reddy, Project Manager, APWAM

30 2. Dr V B Bhanu Murthy, Associate Director of Research 3. Er E Ramakrishna Goud, Scientist (SWE) and Head, APWAM, Jagtial 4. Dr R Uma Reddy, Soil Scientist 5. Dr K Avil Kumar, Senior Scientist (Agronomy)

22 nd September 2008, Hyderabad

Meeting at Jal Soudha, Department of Irrigation, Hyderabad

Persons present: 1. Mr. B S N Reddy, Engineer in Chief, Irrigation, I & CAD Department 2. Mr M Singa Rao, World Bank Tank Rehabilitation Project 3. Dr P N Chowdary, Agriculture Consultant (APILIP), CAD Department 4. Mr C V Sharma, Assistant Director of Agriculture 5. Mr I N S Raju, CE/CDO, I & CAD Department 6. E Ramakrishna Goud, Scientist and Head, APWAM, Jagtial 7. Dr R Uma Reddy, Scientist (SS), APWAM Project, RARS, Jagtial 8. Dr P R K Prasad, Principal Scientist, APWAM, Bapatla 9. Dr T V Satyanarayana, Associate Dean, College of Agriculture Engineering, Bapatla 10. Dr K Yella Reddy, Prinicpal Scientist and Project Manager, APWAM

25 th September 2008, Hyderabad

Debriefing meeting

Persons present: 1. Dr. P Raghava Reddy, Vice Chancellor, ANGRAU 2. Dr. K. Yella Reddy, Principal Scientist and Project Manager, APWAM Project 3. Dr. T V Satyanarayana, Associate Dean, College of Agricultural Engineering, Bapatla

31 Annex 3

List of Project Activities

Main Center Bapatla Line Department and policy makers

• The project organized two study tours to drainage and water management institutions in the Netherlands Egypt, USA and Italy. • The first one in May, 2004 for university officials led by Director of Research • Study tour to Egypt, Netherlands and Italy during 15-31, May 2006 for the Hon’ble Minister of Agriculture, Hon’ble Vice-chancellor and principal secretary (Agri) to Government of Andhra Pradesh. The tour has provided the officials an opportunity to study the agriculture and allied aspect in these Countries. • The working group consisting of engineers of the state Irrigation Department has been trained on “Irrigation Modernization, Management Improvement and Bench marking” with technical assistance from the FAo regional office for Asia and Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand in august, 2006. • Organized training programme on Water use efficiency computation (I& CAD dept), DUFLOW, CRIWAR& CROPWAT models (Dept of agriculture) to the working group on hydrological modeling during 4 th -8th July, 2005 at Bapatla. Field visits were conducted at Modukuru, Mutluru pilot areas and visited prakasam barrage. Observed the inlet structures and head regulators in the irrigation canals of KWD as well as gathered data for the computer programmes that were to be used in the second week & got acquainted with the computer programs CRIWAR 3.0, DUFLOW 3.7. • Imparted a training programme for field staff of AP FAMGS project (another FAO NEX Project in the state) on “Surface Water Hydrological measurements” during 06-06-06 to 09-06-06 at APWAM Bapatla, 15 members were participated in this training progaramme. • Organised a training programme on “Reclamation of Problematic soils by using drainage systems” (Kovelamudi drainage pilot area ) for the staff of DHAN Foundation, Tamilnadu during 18-05-06 to 19-05-06 at APWAM Bapatla, • Organised Study tour to officials of Dept of Agricultural and irrigation and CAD Department, Scientist of APWAM along with REAC Members from ANGRAU visit sub- surface drainage technologies which were implemented on scale at Haryana state during 22 nd April 2008 to 1 st May 2008,15 members participated in the study tour. • Organized an interaction meeting with the irrigation engineers lead by the superintending engineer of the Krishna western delta on the results of the irrigation performance assessment of KWD using the remote sensing and GIS in June 2008.

International Training/ Conference

• Srinivasulu, A., Ravi Kumar, M., Satyanarayana, T. V. and Sai Sudha, 2003, Comparison of crop water requirement and actual water applied in Krishna Western Delta in Andhra Pradesh, In: Proceedings of International Conference on water and environment , 15-18 December 2003, Bhopal, India. • Dr. D Srinivas, scientist (SS) participated in international training course on land drainage (ICLD) at the Netherlands from 7 th September to 29 th November 2003. • Satyanarayana, T.V., Terwisscha van Scheltinga, C., Boonstra, J. and Mukunda Rao, R. Capacity Building for Improved Water Management in Andhra Pradesh: The design and

32 implementation of the APWAM project. In: Workshop Proceedings on Design and Implementation of Capacity Development Strategies, ICID-IPTRID, Beijing 2005. • Dr. G. Subbarao, Dr.M Ravindranath Reddy Mr. B. Mukunda Rao attended International course on institutions in water management(ICIW) during 19 th may to 30 th may,2005. • Dr. T V Satyanarayana ,Principal scientist& project manager, APWAM project attended the International conference on “Watershed Management” organized by ASCE at Williamsburg, USA during 17 th to 24 th July, 2005 • Dr. T V Satyanarayana ,Principal Scientist and Project Manager, AP Water Management Project, Bapatla attended the International Agricultural Engineering Conference at Bangkok, Thailand during 4-8th December, 2005 • Prasad, P.R.K. presented paper on Effect of Integrated Nutrient Management on Soil Properties and Yield of Rice Grown in Salt - Affected soils of Coastal Andhra Pradesh at 8th National Seminar on “Strategies for Improved Farming and Ecological Security of Coastal region”, Central Tuber Crops Research Institute, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala during 21 st - 24 th December 2005 • International Collaborative Research from 19 June to 14 July 2006, a team of Indian scientists has visited Alterra-ILRI to follow a special collaborative research programme and training. • Twenty Project Scientists have been trained on “ Institutional Aspects of Water Management”, “ Land Drainage “ and “ Computer Models in Irrigation and Drainage at Alterra-ILRI, Wageningen in The Netherlands during 19 th June to 14 th July 2006 • Dr.T V Satyanarayana, Principal Scientist and Project Manager, AP Water Management Project, Bapatla participated in the short course on Water Resources planning, organized by UNESCO-IHE at Delft during 5 th -23 rd March, 2007. • Dr.P R K Prasad, Principal Scientist (Soil Science), and Er. S. Ramesh Chandra, Scientist SG (Agril. Engg). AP Water Management Project, Bapatla visited Sacramento. California, USA during 30 th September to 6 th October, 2007 and attended the International Conference on Irrigation and Drainage at Sacramento and also presented the paper on “Reclamation of saline and Waterlogged soils in Mutluru Channel Command of Krishna Western Delta, Andhra Pradesh State, India. “ and on “ performance Evaluation of Sub- surface Drainage System under Steady State Flow Conditions in Coastal Saline Soils and Andhra Pradesh, India.” respectively. • Kalpana, D., Ramesh Chandra, S., Satyanarayana, T V., Subbarao, G., Prasad, P R K Mukundarao, B., Sriivas, D., Ravi Kumar, K N., 2007. Transitions in rice cultivatin for enhancing water productivity- A case study in Krishna Western Delta, 2 nd International Conference on Hydrology and Water shed Management with a focal theme on improving water productivity in the Agriculture, Jawaharlal Nehru University

National training programmes/conferences/seminars

• Yella Reddy, K., 2004. Critical flow based modal for economic pipe size selection. Technical paper presented in 38 th ISAE Conventions held at Dapoli during 16 th -18 th Jan 2004. • Venkateswarlu, B. and Subba Rao, G., 2004, Performance of groundnut at various land configurations and nutrient management levels. Proceedings of National Seminar on Resource Management for Sustainable Agriculture , 28 th –30 th January 2004, Bapatla. PP: 468-470. • Yella Reddy, K., 2004, Economic design of trickle irrigation system. Technical paper presented in 38 th ISAE Conventions held at Dapadi during 16 th -18 th Jan 2004.

33 • Two working groups have been trained on “Tools for Agricultural Water Use and Assessment- An IWRM perspective” held during 21 st Nov to 11 th Dec 2005 at Teachers home Hyderabad, ANGRAU 30 members participated. • All Scientists are trained on computer models related to irrigation and drainage water management CRIWAR, CROWAT, DUFLOW, SALTMOD, SURDEV, ERDAS, RS and GIS models during 4 th to 8 th July 2005 at Bapatla. • Dr.G.Kishore Babu, Senior Scientist (Soil Science) has been participated in International training course on “Increasing Water Use Efficiency in Agriculture” during September 24 th to October 14 th 2007 at teacher’s home, Boiguda, Hyderabad. • Dr.G.Subba Rao, Senior Scientist (Agronomy) and Er.K.V.S.Rami Reddy, scientist (Agril. Engg.) has been participated in the training programme on “Participatory Media and Knowledge Management,” held on 5 th -25 th September at NAARM, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad.

A) Mutluru Pilot Area

Farmers (in collaboration with PARTNER NGO) • Organized four training programmes at APWAM Office, Bapatla and one at P R palem office on better water management practices, reclamation of problematic soils, rodent control, integrated nutrient management, pest & disease management and weed management. • Organized two Field campaigns on better water management practices, reclamation of problematic soils and rodent control • Organized two Farmers field schools on Rice and Rice fallow black gram regarding participatory technology development • Conducted five Exposure visits to research institutes and related development organizations and also conducted four exposure visits to different places to visit problematic soils and it’s management • Organized five kalajatha programmes for faster transfer of technology on reclamation of problematic soils • Organized twenty seven Farmers interaction meetings and group meetings • Organized two Rythusadassu programs • Conducted removal of weedsprogramme (1700 mt) for improving the irrigation and conveyance efficiency

Gender (Women Farmers) aspects

• With FAO, NEX assistance, organized gender workshop on “Gender aspects in land and water management” at Bapatla main center • Training on vermicompost unit management to educate farm women and to create self empowerment • Organized one Training on mushroom cultivation to create awareness on Nutritional values and also for self employment • Organized six Result Demonstrations on kitchen gardens and three vermi compost units to increase Nutritional values, cultivation of leafy Vegetables and vegetables by organic manures and also for self employment • Conducted five Exposure visits to create and to improve the awareness about latest technologies • Organized two World food days and one World water day at APWAM , Bapatla

34 • Organized one capacity building programmes at P R Palem • Organized five training programmes APWAM, Bapatla

B) Modukuru Pilot Area

Farmers (in collaboration with PARTNER NGO)

• Organized ten training programmes on better water management practices, reclamation problematic soils, rodent control, integrated nutrient management, pest & disease management and weed management • Conducted two training programmes to contact farmers to create awareness about less water use rice production technologies • Organized two Field campaigns on better water management practices, reclamation problematic soils and rodent control • Conducted three Farmers field schools on Rice and two Farmer Field School on Rice fallow black gram created awareness on optimum application of fertilizers, IPM methods, less water use rice production technologies, pest & disease management etc. • Condcted three field days under Farmer Field School. As Chief guest Dr. P.Raghava Reddy, Director of Research, and ANGRAU inaugurated the FFS on Rice fallow black gram, stressed the importance of Water Management and Integrated pet management practices • Organized Five Exposure visits to Research institutes and related development organizations to create and to improve the awareness about latest technologies • Organized four kalajatha programmes for faster transfer of technology • Organized seventeen Farmers interaction meetings and group discussions to create awareness Water management Practices and devises, weed management etc. • Organized two Rythusadassus at modukuru pilot area and also conducted four rythu sadassus at APWAM, Bapatla • Conducted removal of weeds programme (850 mt) for improving the irrigation and conveyance efficiency

Gender (Women Farmers) aspects

• With FAO, NEX assistance, organized gender workshop on “Gender aspects in land and water management” at Bapatla main center. • Conducted training programme on vermicompost unit management to educate farm women and to create self empowerment • Organized one training programme on mushroom cultivation to create awareness on Nutritional values and also to create self employment • Conducted six result demonstrations on kitchen gardens and three result demonstrations on vermi compost units, to increase Nutritional values, cultivation of leafy Vegetables and vegetables by organic manures and also for self employment • Introduced drip irrigation in kitchen gardens • Organized Five Exposure visits to create and to improve the awareness about latest technologies

Reports

35 • Reconnaissance survey report • Bench Mark survey report • Annual reports of the Project • Semestral reports of the Project • Preliminary report on Irrigation Performance Assessment of Krishna Western Delta using Remote Sensing (Renowned agricultural scientist in India Prof. Dr M. S. Swaminathan released the report on 30.12.2006). • Ten scientific papers published including two in international journals • Two papers presented in international conferences • Two scientific bulletins published in Telugu • About 50 press notes issued for creation of awareness among the general public and the farmers

Accomplishments as Coordinating Main Center

• Twenty Project Scientists have been trained on “Institutional Aspects of Water Management”, “Land Drainage” and “Computer Models in Irrigation and Drainage at Alterra-ILRI, Wageningen in The Netherlands. • Two working groups on “Hydrological Modelling” and “Remote Sensing and GIS Applications” have been trained on “ Tools for Agricultural Water Use and Assessment – An IWRM Perspective”. • All scientists are trained on computer models related to irrigation and drainage water management CRIWAR, CROPWAT, DUFLOW, SALTMOD, SURDEV, ERDAS, RS and GIS models. • The Project organized two Study Tours to Drainage and Water Management institutions in The Netherlands, Egypt, USA and Italy • Organised field visits to the participants of the training courses on IWRM conducted by the Water Technology Center of ANGRAU and other organizations. • Lectures by Project scientists on agricultural water management for enhancing water productivity in international training courses at WTC, ANGRAU, Hyderabad. • Study tour of the officials from Irrigation & CAD and Agriculture Departments and Farmer members of REAC of the University to Haryana state to study Drainage systems implemented on large scale. • Facilitated research work of two students one from Italy and one from Wageningen UR in their internships for their Ph. D and MS programmes respectively. • The Main center has made efforts to establish a Water Technology Center in ANGRAU in 2006 • The Main Center has organized a National Training Course on “ TOOLS FOR AGRICULTURAL WATER USE ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT – AN IWRM PERSPECTIVE” during 21 November – 11 December 2005 at Hyderabad with Alterra – ILRI with full funding from APWAM Project • As an agreement with ANGRAU, the WTC has organized the second international training course on “ AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT FOR ENHANCING WATER PRODUCTIVITY” during 22 January – 11 February 2007 at Hyderabad with 75:25 share of budget on APWAM:ANGRAU • As part of the agreement, the Water Technology center has organized the third training course on “ INCREASING WATER USE EFFICIENCY IN AGRICULTURE” during 24 September – 14 October, 2007 at Hyderabad with 50:50 share of budget on APWAM:ANGRAU

36 • Standardized Methodology for estimation of Water Use Efficiency for existing cropping patterns (discharge measurement, effective rainfall, cropping pattern, water budget) in coordination with the CTA • Economic Analysis on the cropping systems, water saving rice production systems and drainage technologies has been carried out on scientific basis for the first time in the University • Economic analysis (Rice: B: C ratio 0.23, Black gram: B: C ratio 0.52). • Economic analysis (OSSD : B: C ratio -0.07, CSSD 0.09 by the end of second year). • Reconnaissance survey report. • Bench Mark survey report. • Annual reports of the Project. • Semestral reports of the Project. • Report on Irrigation Performance Assessment of Krishna Western Delta using Remote Sensing and GIS applications

Network Center Garikapadu Capacity building to farmers, Line departments and project staff on knowledge and skills relating to cropping system based water management

• Training programmes (12 Nos.) on different water saving techniques, increasing crop productivity, participatory water management to the pilot area farmers, WUA members and line departments. About 350 members participated in these programmes. (Enhancement of skills and awareness) • Formation of 24L minor canal farmers committee to regulate the water and to reduce the wastage of water and to monitor the canal rehabilitation works. (Participatory water management to reduce inequity) • Organization of kalajatha programmes (8 No. of programmes and 2650 farmers) in collaboration with ANKITA NGO, Miryalaguda to create the awareness on water management practices, water management methods, SRI Cultivations and its importance, canal rehabilitation works and its maintenance, micro irrigation, INM, IPM practices under different crops and importance bio fertilizers etc. (Enhancement of knowledge and skills in partnership with NGO ) • Organization of farmer’s field days (8 No. of programmes and 425 farmers) and farmers field schools. (2 No. of programmes and 50 farmers) to demonstrate water management practices, INM and IPM techniques etc. (Capacity building). • Advisory services by the project staff for pilot area farmers enables in timely taking of different field operations resulted in improved productivity and minimizing the losses (Enhancement of knowledge and skills). • Exposure visits (7 No. of programmes and 178 farmers) for pilot area farmers, WUA members and line departments officials to national, international private organizations and other canal commands in Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra helped in enhancing awareness on water management aspects (Capacity building). • Printing and distribution of bulletins and soil health card on water management and soil nutrient status of pilot area farmers (Popularization of technologies) • Organization of farmers meeting (Rythu Sadassu) in the occasion of world food day and world water day every year since 2004 helped in enhancing awareness on food security and importance of water (Capacity building).

37 • Study tour of the officials from Irrigation & CAD and Agriculture Departments and Farmer members of REAC of the University to Haryana state to study Drainage systems implemented on large scale • On top of these, farmers have offered to manage the irrigation water themselves in the pilot area with the support from the line departments and the Project during the extension period ( Participatory water management including water budgeting)

Network Center, Jagtiyal Creating awareness among farmers on the potential of improved water management practices in increasing farm income . • Introduction of social regulation of water among pilot area farmers (change of mindset) • Training programmes on less water technologies in crop production to pilot area farmers (change of mindset and awareness enhancement) • Formation of Direct Pipe committees to regulate the water and to reduce the wastage of water (leadership development and sharing responsibility) • Conduct of interaction meetings to farmers of pilot areas and between three water user associations (cooperation and coordination in sharing water to reduce inequity) • Organization awareness campaigns and kalajatha programmes with the partner ship of CEAD (NGO), Nirmal on integrated water resource management (Improving knowledge) • Advisory services by the project staff for pilot area farmers (Timely advise for reducing loss) • Organization of field days (seeing is believing) and farmers field schools (learning by doing) • Exposure visits for pilot area farmers to other canal commands and water shed areas for enhancing awareness on importance of water (seeing is believing) • Printing and distribution of bulletins in local language for farmers on increasing productivity of major crops and micro irrigation (seeing and believing) • Printing and display of banners (flaxy) on on-farm results of APWAM Project at villages and display of sign boards on water saving technologies along the canal (reminding the importance of water and water saving technologies) • Farmers have voluntarily came forward for having warabandi system and that too, they only suggested that 10 days can avoid excess irrigation results in water saving • Awareness was brought in about taking up of crops like maize, sunflower etc during rabi in kharif, rice fallows • Farmer realized the importance of canal cleaning which would minimize the loss of water • Awareness was created about the usage of complexes as based instead of top dressing • Awareness was also created about INM in crops. So that they are using manures, adopting crop rotation in addition to chemical inputs • Farmers were trained in vermi-compost preparation earlier they used to burn the crop wastes.

Network Center, Tirupati Capacity Building • Farmers of ayacut were given trainings during crop season on water management in field crops, crop production and plant protection measures

38 • Farmers were taken to exposure visits to SRI field, and to GVS (NGO), Madanapalli, BIRDS, Muthyalapadu, Kurnool district • Training programmes were conducted for women farmers on crop management aspects. • Water measurements through flumes and water meters (borewells) in Musilipedu ayacut were demonstrated farmers. • Farmers trained in recording rainfall and evaporation in meteorological observatory in Musilipedu ayacut • Farm advisory services being made regularly. • Field day conducted during crop season by involving officials of line department • Literature related to improved water management practices in crops prepared in Telugu (local language) and distributed to the farmers.

Network Center, Undi To bring awareness on better water management practices among farmers and officials of line departments

• Introduction of IPM, INM measures in the paddy fields in the pilot area • Training programmes o Pilot area farmers ( target farmers – 36, trainings given – 36) o Non- Pilot area farmers – 2150 o District level model farmers – 350 o Line department officials -5

• Exposure visits for pilot area farmers to Konanki and Uppugunduru pilot area in the region to understand the importance of participatory management. (three exposure visits undertaken) • Advisory services by project staff for pilot area farmers o By Field staff and Research Associates – Daily o Need based by Scientific staff – Weekly o Pilot area farmers meeting - Monthly • Preparation of Technical bulletins – o Annual Reports -4 o Half yearly progess reports – 7 o Scientific papers – 10 o Conference papers – 2 o Scientific bulletins – 1 o Press notes - 140 • Dr. Ch. Sreenivas, Scientist (Soil Science) of this network centre got “ANGRAU Young Scientist Award” for the Year 2007. • All project staff members are actively involved in various State Government Development programmes like Rythu Chithanya Yatra and Adarsha Rythulaku shikshana, Agricultural Marketing Committee (AMC) meetings and others

39 Annex 4

Socio-economic impact of project interventions in Modukuru and Mutluru pilot areas a. Update of benchmark survey All the network centres had conducted benchmark surveys in their respective pilot areas in the first phase of the project, i.e. within the first two years of the start of the project (2004-2005). This survey has not been updated to reflect the impact of the project activities. At the request of the Evaluation Team, the Bapatla Centre updated the survey in Modukuru and Mutluru pilot areas. The findings are as follows: Modukuru pilot area: • The overall increase in land available for cultivation has increased from 1.27 ha in 2005 to 1.46 ha in 2008. • The area under cultivation for small farmers (landholding 1 to 2 ha), or farmers in the socio-economically deprived communities has increased. • The number of farmers that fall under the category of marginal farmers (landholding less than 1 ha) has decreased and the number of those falling under the small (1 to ha) and large (more than 2 ha) category has increased. • The market value of agricultural land for sale and rental purposes has doubled since 2005. • The annual expenditure of families on food, clothing, house repairs, rent, health services has increased substantially with the percentage of farmers spending more than Rs. 30,000 on these items up from approximately 10% in 2005 to approximately 60% in 2008.

Pathareddypalem pilot area, Mutuluru command: • The literacy rate has increased by 8%. • The land available for cultivation per capita has increased from 0.37 ha in 2005 to 0.41 ha in 2008. • The number of farmers having less than 1 ha of land has decreased, while the number of farmers under small (1-2 ha) and large (more than 2 ha) category has increased. • There is a 1/3 rd increase in market value of agricultural land for sale, while the rental value has increased three times since 2005. • There is no substantial increase in the annual expenditure of farmers on items such as food, clothing, house repairs, rent, medicines b. Farmers’ perceptions

The following impacts were perceived by the farmers: (summary of responses during interactions with the Evaluation Team)

Higher yields • There is a significant increase in the yield of paddy in kharif and rabi season • The rice is of good quality and has more weight compared to rice from other farmers’ fields which are saline. • Cropping intensity has increased

40

More income • There is more money to spend on their children’s education, medical expenses and clearing old debts etc. • Farmers are able to send children to good schools and colleges for higher education • Farmers are able to take additional land on lease for cultivation, resulting in increased income for the family • Farmers are able to buy assets like motor cycle, oil pumps, sprayers etc. • Houses can be repaired and permanent structures can be built. • Households can have an improved diet, leading to better health • Farmers have invested in rearing milch animals, goats and chicks and are getting an extra income from the sale of milk and eggs • Women farmers have increased their savings in Self Help Groups and therefore internal lending has increased • Farmers have increased access to credit. Farmers are able to take loans from banks because they are able to repay loans. They have assured crop for one season at least.

Land improvement • The value of land has increased • Since agriculture is now more profitable, farmers who previously engaged in aquaculture are shifting to agriculture • Before the land was rehabilitated, only “usur grass” a variety found only on saline land used to grow in the fields. Now other grasses and weeds are also found. This indicates decrease in salinity

Increased knowledge • Farmers have gained hands on experience in the water management aspects • They have learned to use appropriate INM and IPM measures in rice cultivation • Through FFS, farmers have gained knowledge about the semi dry system of rice cultivation and some have begun to use the system. Yields have increased wherever the system is being used. • Knowledge of improved technologies has resulted in increased yields • Farmers have learnt to distinguish between beneficial and harmful insects, and got a better idea about timely control measures for pest & diseases • Awareness about IPM has helped to reduce chemical spraying 50% and reduced the cost of cultivation. • They have learned about fertilizer application and importance of green manure crops • Farmer Water School has helped to increase knowledge on water management practices. • Farmers are aware about cultivation of crops under different situations of water availability

Change in agronomy/farming • Shifting from traditional to semi dry rice has reduced the investment as this type of rice cultivations does not require nursery raising and transplantation • Women are successfully developing kitchen gardens. One woman has grown 6 types of vegetables and harvests vegetables worth Rs. 50/- per day for household consumption • Farmers have begun to successfully harvest a second crop

41 • Farmers have identified salt tolerant varieties like BPT 5204, NLR 145 and Swarna (MTU 7029) • Farmers are interested in adopting micro irrigation • Farmers have understood that AWD is more adoptable • Farmers are using herbicide since they have understood its usefulness in rice cultivation • Improved varieties of groundnut yield more than local varieties • Advantages of rainfed crops are observed clearly

Equity in water distribution and water management • Tail end farmers are getting water and conflicts are reduced • Farmers are using water judiciously because it is being regulated • Farmers are able to sow crops at the appropriate time • Groundwater levels have increased because water is staying in the canals and channels for a longer since the flow of water is being regulated

42