23Rd International Congress on Irrigation and Drainage 8-14 October 2017, Mexico City, Mexico
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
23rd International Congress on Irrigation and Drainage 8-14 October 2017, Mexico City, Mexico Symposium on ‘Global Review of Institutional Reforms in Irrigation Sector for Sustainable Agriculture Water Management, including Water Users’ Association’ Country Papers and Case Study Volume II INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE COMMISSION INTERNATIONALE DES IRRIGATIONS ET DU DRAINAGE Symposium on ‘Global Review of Institutional Reforms in Irrigation Sector for Sustainable Agriculture Water Management, including Water Users’ Association’ Country Papers and Case Study Volume II 23rd ICID Congress 8-14 October 2017 Mexico City, Mexico 1 | P a g e Table of Contents 1. AUSTRALIA ............................................................................................................ 2 2. CHINA ................................................................................................................. 26 3. INDIA .................................................................................................................. 35 4. INDONESIA .......................................................................................................... 60 5. IRAN ................................................................................................................. 100 6. JAPAN ............................................................................................................... 112 7. SOUTH KOREA ................................................................................................... 121 8. MALAYSIA ......................................................................................................... 133 9. MEXICO ............................................................................................................. 147 10. NEPAL ............................................................................................................... 164 11. SUDAN .............................................................................................................. 182 12. CHINESE TAIPEI ................................................................................................. 189 13. TURKEY ............................................................................................................. 203 14. UKRAINE ........................................................................................................... 227 2 | P a g e AUSTRALIA COUNTRY PAPER: INSTITUTIONAL REFORMS IN IRRIGATION SECTOR FOR SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE WATER MANAGEMENT, INCLUDING WATER USERS’ ASSOCIATIONS 1 INTRODUCTION Australia is the driest inhabited continent. Our use of water in irrigation has reaped great rewards in terms of the development of rural industries, the growth of the economy and the modernisation of Australia. Water resource policies since European Settlement were, like those relating to other resources, focused on promoting economic and population growth, and creating jobs.1 The formative years of irrigation in Australia were in the 19th Century and the major irrigation developments occurred initially in the Murray-Darling Basin, where the conditions were the most conducive to such development. The late 19th and early 20th centuries saw a dramatic increase in irrigation development both in the Murray Darling Basin and elsewhere as governments attempted to overcome a natural water scarcity. Drought was always of concern. The Australian Government recognised that turning the coastal (eastern) flowing streams of the Snowy Mountains of south east Australia inland could improve water security for irrigation as well as be a source of hydroelectricity production. The Scheme was completed 1974 and increased irrigation allocations to farmers in the Murray Darling Basin’s main southern rivers. The implications of this additional water use together with water pricing policies which undervalued this resource were not fully understood and there was a cost, not just in terms of environmental degradation of productive land and river systems. There have also been costs in terms of lost agricultural production value, lost investment and increasing uncertainty about the availability of water. Australia has now moved well away from the traditional thinking, attitudes and actions which underpinned Australia’s use of water since European settlement. Over the past 20 years or so, it has become clear that this approach has not served Australia well. As with other industries, the 1980s saw a change in focus for water management. No longer was the focus on bigger dams to solve water issues, but rather, consistent with other microeconomic reforms of the time, options were being examined to improve the allocation of existing entitlements. The objective behind this was to promote efficiency and equity in water allocation while protecting the environment. At the same time, droughts during the 1980s forced governments to consider flexibility and transferability of water allocations/licences as farmers sought to transfer unused allocations from farm to farm in the same ownership. Farmers were also seeking greater input into the operation and management of irrigation schemes, first steps in irrigation management transfer. By the 1990s, most of the available economic water resources had been exploited and the incremental cost of water supply was increasing sharply. Conflict was starting to emerge between the old developmental objectives and newer economic and environmental objectives. 1 J Tisdell, J Ward and T Grudzinski, The Development of Water Reform in Australia, Technical Report 02/05, Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology, May 2002, p. iii. 3 | P a g e Reforms were needed to improve the efficiency of the water sector and in 1994 the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) endorsed a framework of initiatives for the water industry to run over a seven-year period. This covered: water pricing reforms based on the principles of consumption-based pricing and full cost recovery; elimination of cross subsidies and making other subsidies transparent; clarifying water property rights; allocating sufficient water for environmental purposes; facilitating and promoting water trading; rigorous assessment of new rural water projects; and reforming water industry institutions. The COAG water reform framework required the development of a comprehensive system of water allocations (including water sharing plans) and entitlements. These reforms were enhanced in 1995 when NSW, Victoria, South Australia and Queensland agreed to implement a cap on diversions as part of the Murray-Darling Basin Agreement, based on 1993-94 levels of utilisation. The Cap had the effect of requiring users to obtain additional water requirements through the market rather than through increased diversions under existing or new entitlements, thus taking a significant step towards sustainable water use. In 2003, COAG agreed to refresh its 1994 water reform agenda by developing a new National Water Initiative. Among other things, the Initiative set out reforms for best practice pricing and institutional arrangements. This included: promoting the economically efficient and sustainable use of water; giving effect to the principles of user-pays; achieving pricing transparency; and facilitating the efficient functioning of water markets. The Australian Government recognised the returning of diversions to sustainable levels would be facilitated by a funding stream that would also minimise impacts on regional and rural communities. The Sustainable Rural Water Use and Infrastructure Program (SRWUIP) was established as a national program which invests in rural water use, management and efficiency, including improved knowledge and market reforms. Water savings arising from SRWUIP investment in infrastructure efficiencies are shared between the irrigators/irrigation water providers and the Commonwealth (for environmental use). As part of the ongoing reforms the Australian Government has implemented a strategy to secure Australia’s long-term water supply. The ‘Water for the Future’ program is investing $12.9 billion over 10 years in water buybacks, infrastructure and policy reforms. The program includes $3.1 billion for purchasing water entitlements in the Murray Darling Basin to return to the river, and $450 million for improving water information systems (Box 1). Table 1. Comparative data on irrigation service providers Notes: ML delivered is the total for all users; ‘Report of the National Program for Irrigation R&D Benchmarking Project’, edited by Barraclough & Co, Occasional Paper 17/98. 4 | P a g e Box 1. Overview of Australia’s national water reform and key events 1863: Inter-colonial conference discusses management of the River Murray 1887: South Australian Royal Commission examines the effects of irrigation on river navigation in the River Murray 1914–1917: New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia sign the River Murray Waters Agreement and establish the River Murray Commission 1970: River Murray Commission publishes detailed study of irrigation and salinity 1981: River Murray mouth closes temporarily 1987: Murray–Darling Basin Agreement signed 1989: River Murray Salinity and Drainage Strategy agreed 1992–1996: Commencement of corporatisation and price regulation in urban water 1994: COAG agrees to Water Reform Framework and National Competition Policy 1995: Initial cap on water diversion from the River Murray 1997: Millennium Drought commences (persists until 2009) 2004: National Water Initiative 2007–2008: Water