Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 21:56 10 September 2007 A India ** SHAH** * TUSHAAR & SCOTT* A. CHRISTOPHER Mexico and India from Insights Policy: Agricultural Energy through Reduction Overdraft Groundwater 2004 June 149–164, 2, No. 20, Vol. Development, Resources Water 7002 rn/3004 Online/04/020149-16 Print/1360-0648 0790-0627 einlOfie / CIA,Ptnhr 0 2,Adr rds,Ida mi:[email protected] Email: India. Pradesh, Andhra 324, 502 Patancheru ICRISAT, c/o Office, Regional address: Correspondence O:10.1080/0790062042000206156 DOI: h rvosyge anfdcoso eedpneto ietc or livestock on supply, dependent and timing were farmers of or Reliability of 2004). hands same crops (Buechler, the the income rain-fed of to At sources irrigation. grew irrigation non-farm of brought previously larger sources dis- have far conventional who is markets to are it groundwater accessible impossible than either Because time, potentially farmers is is 2001). of irrigation principal groundwater Mukherjee, (canal) numbers the expensive, surface & of prohibitively where (Shah one areas or as irrigation large emerged for across has tributed water groundwater of decades, two sources past the Over Introduction regu- groundwater and ongoing explored. with regulatory are supply countries legal, and both pricing of in power efforts implica- Examples electrical the lation Finally, linking Mexico. assessed. reviewed, of are and are management tions irrigation groundwater India and to approaches energy disincentives contrasting participatory between financial linkages few and The with are pumping. comparing there However, limit connections, overdraft. countries to of available farmers Both groundwater readily for users alike. reduce and Mexico costs to largest energy and measures low forces India the driving regulatory in primary of attempted countries irrigation are two have pricing for two The and pumping challenges. supply are groundwater energy overdraft behind electrical Mexico critical that face and given and both declined compared, and are India have world tables the deteriorated. in water groundwa- groundwater groundwater has been recharge, the has aquifer quality world of exceeds the water pumping driver around where regions overlooked numerous overdraft; often energy—usu- in ter agricultural though outcome cheap serious critical of One a supply boom. this agricultural the driven power—is in has however, electrical pumps increases side; ally and demand significant wells the in to on investment leading expansion Farmer world, incomes. rising the and around productivity regions in economy ot saRgoa fc,ItrainlWtrMngmn nttt,Hdrbd India Hyderabad, Institute, Management Water International Office, Regional Asia South utial rudae aaeet nentoa ae aaeetIsiue Anand, Institute, Management Water International Management, Groundwater Sustainable BSTRACT ai xaso fgonwtrirgto a rnfre h rural the transformed has irrigation groundwater of expansion Rapid hitpe .Sot nentoa ae aaeetIsiue ot Asia South Institute, Management Water International Scott, A. Christopher  04Tyo rni Ltd. Francis & Taylor 2004 Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 21:56 10 September 2007 ino giutr,itnicto ffradadbcwr ikgs and linkages, energy backward and resources and water forward agriculture, supply. of of adaptation regulation capitaliza- intensification government increased resources, for heightened agriculture, implications. need water the of equity conditions, dwindling marketing tion serious and groundwater for production the without new from competition to resulting not transformation processing. include social is post-harvest of revolution processes value-added however, the of and growth, Some labourers, farmers rapid groundwater agricultural these of Such improved as incomes all through well rising In economies diversification, as sectors. and rural groundwater productivity transformed their crop has in groundwater South contrasts some and countries, and Africa and countries in groundwater-exploiting similarities extent principal lesser relevant the a lists to 1 and Table America, America. North and Asia, East/West cl.Ti slreybsdo rvt neteti rligwls installing wells, drilling in investment massive private etc. a on pipe, on irrigation based irrigation and largely groundwater pumps improved adopted is of to few have This a amenability farmers scale. just and reasons are etc.) crops, many drip, to the sprinkler, applied irrigation, (precision water technologies of irrigation volumes over control 150 rdsra,freshdo-eadacs owtrwtottecomplications the without power the water As to other. access the on-demand on had and irrigation supply farmers groundwater electricity spread, and between hand, grid link one the comparison the the on the on light to perspective, pricing sheds this India related From and Mexico effectively. issues between more groundwater of exploit di- series to agricultural a for of and critical expansion was markets, of boom. itself rationale for groundwater the this production on however, more versification, generally; based source. energy transport probably an was as road diesel subsidy govern- on significant and diesel the equipment The by irrigation course, pump farmers on of pumps of and subsidies facilitated, centrifugal ment was phases flexibility, small This purchased groundwater. initial most readily extract the example, the to for In provided Asia, irrigation. South technology throughout groundwater diesel to adoption, switch pump to farmers enabling onr/gonwtrsrcue tutr eedn on dependent structure structures groundwater region Country/ China Pakistan–Punjab India rn4 . 80012–18 000 58 0.5 45 Mexico Iran S 0 . 0 000 500 0.2 100 USA Source ntesbeun hs,rrleeticto ruh ofrestemeans the farmers to brought electrification rural phase, subsequent the In force driving primary a been has agriculture to power of supply The h rudae eouinhscuh odi ot sa h Middle the Asia, South in hold caught has revolution groundwater The Shah : .A ct .Shah T. & Scott A. C. al 1. Table tal et (2003). . xetadmgiueo h lblgonwtrrevolution groundwater global the of magnitude and Extent s (km use nulEtato/population Extraction/ Annual 5 19 150 52 500 21 0.5 75 45 930000 300 29 3 ) groundwater ubrof Number (million) 3.5 0.1 (m 0000 90 3 900 7 ya)groundwater /year) ecnaeof Percentage Ͻ 22–25 55–60 60–65 5–6 1–2 Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 21:56 10 September 2007 nindmcay tteedo h a,i saqeto fhwindividual electrical how overdraft. the of groundwater of on question policies dent a pricing) a is (and make it supply will the day, that which to utilities the drought, adapt power of major pump end a Trade of who of the calculus farmers Free decision-making grips At politicized the American highly democracy. the from Indian North in emerged constraints groundwater own the just important its have The imposes in India making. embedded in decision its regions is Rural important constrains it an which either passed in Agreement, however, recently played very Law; be has address Mexico will also Energy seen. card to be policy have to approaches energy remains both the participatory country far Importantly, and How supply. overdraft. regulatory energy groundwater be legal, rely to will long with that for adaptation Mexico experimented agriculture sectors witness electrified and agricultural had to have India important enough both irrigation; of have groundwater Both on cases for heavily contrasted. the demand and overdraft, manage compared groundwater to reducing solutions creative for that devise world, is to point the The need water. enhanced of urgent of groundwater. scarcity through an regions physical supplies is sheer semi-arid source by groundwater there precisely limited and are primary of is these recharge augmentation And arid the aquifer Mexico. where and in is India regions both i.e. groundwater groundwater the of swaths the where agriculture, broad to of Suffice true for characteristic related paper. problems particularly water this of is of today—the for range remains This point whole been—and a has starting boom. extensively lowered clearly of been the overdraft symptom have sense groundwater pumps principal and that one water known say drinking agricultural well in to decline, rural it are are for table These as pumps and quality. water hand documented, water water of on on reach or impacts effective for supply, the its below competition boom, tables water groundwater inter-sectoral the all charge on of and excesses meter below). to the discussion were further it fact (see could in groundwater India if of well. example users particular fledgling end a this equivalent for an from depth yields learn concessioned the efficiency, well groundwater on electro-mechanical of based fixed which, volume a which (kWh) and annual Law, hours table Energy kilowatt water Rural in the Mexico’s limit of with energy to groundwater annual case rural address supply an to and the tool caps agricultural energy particularly effective foster is an electrical to of This means And that makings overdraft. a the paper, as exploitation. has only also this not it groundwater development; viewed of be on thesis supply—particularly to has principal power effect agriculture in the braking inefficiencies lies of the clouds a herein grey that otherwise rationing—have is the in crisis power case lining sector silver Indian power only bailouts are The the massive The states through exchequers. various solvency rationing. state financial in the to to from utilities clinging power or related bankrupt as totally choices illustrative (in)ability either particularly ensuing its is infrastructure, across and here supply tariffs presented power resultant demand, with the meet do and they agriculture to to as distortions subsidies groups unwittingly These with consumer were pumps. do all electrical distortions to of sector much adoption power as massive of have of host result a A as chain. introduced supply diesel the of nodrt xlr h mlctoso giutrleeg oiya tool a as policy energy agricultural of implications the explore to order In describe to or overdraft groundwater detail to here intent the not is It rudae vrrf Reduction Overdraft Groundwater 151 Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 21:56 10 September 2007 fteserdniyo el u o2 e km per 20 to in (up invest wells example of to graphic density farmers a provides sheer forced 2 central the have Figure of parts of repositioning. new levels in or Similarly, drilling water deepening water. depths well of declining strike expensive because to cost Mexico, year order the per in northern feet million) the million), and 600 (US$190 to exceed US$520 billion to addition or have 8.6 In now Rs. billion, year. every approximately 24 affected every is are Rs. dry wells that some at equipment go and instance, (estimated wells structures for million year groundwater Karnataka, the 1.2 of In total value India. state’s fixed peninsular the sustain- beyond and of cases Western 20% many annu- in in Bangladesh expanded, limits, and for has responsible India able use is Eastern groundwater that contrast, through By runoff sweep ally. surface that and the floods surface of land devastating some the the near of from infiltration groundwater additional down billion allow draw also a poor. would world’s it half economy, the the to potential—in of greatest basins—home concentration the major Brahmaputra geographical has a and skewed it including has Groundwater people, where the Ganges India. region shows Eastern in the resources 1 water-rich in energy rapidly Figure and expanded water supply. not twin and the rapid policy of of distribution energy economy to wider excesses. part the its control and to farmers attempting to while to benefits agricul- how expansion, dilemma: export-oriented the groundwater unique in preserve a ushered face and has makers ensure it Policy (Shah cropping. Mexico areas high-value has in through rural as boom ture in just groundwater diversification 2001), the Mukherjee, and time, & are growth same number these economic the of a unparalleled majority At wells, the brought pumps. million year; electrical 20 per million some with one are equipped approximately volumes There at absolute users. increasing both is of of that terms number in total user, and groundwater pumped largest world’s the is India India in Boom Groundwater The 152 xliaino rudadsraewtr diigtesaegvrmn on government a state the constitutes advising which water, 2002, surface Act, in- and the Trees for regulating ground conservation, Pradesh, and of water promoting Andhra exploitation Land with tools. charged Water, authority administrative state-level the and adopted legal it stance, on manage- and based direct India. monitoring, that regulation in clear than limitations is severe It other has data. anything groundwater groundwater of of for trove ment not its presence does guard It field to management. continues vs effective development 1996—was over current an interest the in of In have conflict Authority development. a groundwater has Groundwater promote it govern- Central and context, foster the the to 1), created as Groundwa- (Table initially Central reconstituted India are management—the in Board, there groundwater users ter Although with groundwater de- charged task. of agency difficult number through ment and large overdraft complex very groundwater regulate a more or regulating now the stimulate is two, either management the to mand makers Of use. policy use. groundwater to priority groundwater available restricting options of The the ways state. examined find Pradesh to be Andhra must in conditions Hyderabad such under near watershed semi-arid nrae rudae xrcini hsrgo ol o nybotthe boost only not would region this in extraction groundwater Increased in responding India, in skewed highly been has development Groundwater hsde o apnteetuis fidvda ttsfrgroundwater for states individual of enthusiasm the dampen not does This Shah .A ct .Shah T. & Scott A. C. tal et 20;rlvn ruet n nig umrzdhr)have here) summarized findings and arguments relevant (2003; . 2 oe natpclhard-rock, typical a in bored ) Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 21:56 10 September 2007 rudae vrrf Reduction Overdraft Groundwater

Figure 1. Skewed energy and water resource distribution in India. 153 Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 21:56 10 September 2007 au n a ni utrcnl nPna.I te ttsi scagda flat a Tamil at charged in is free it and states is other energy In power Punjab. total Agricultural in recently of 3). just rate 27–45% until (Figure was ‘vote consumes revenue and agricultural Nadu, agriculture of the of 0–12% states, dictates represents different (electoral) itself political In states—finds the reforming bank’. with pump- in huge contend their India—even hold in to affect sector and unable policies power groundwater The for pricing behaviour. demand ing and farmers’ influence supply to potential to electricity enlightening Appropriate be management. groundwater- would numerous State, in India. Guanajuato in bans Mexico’s makers example official distant. decision of for be appear decades regions, to groundwater five dependent is regulating over regulation with successfully Pradesh, groundwater Andhra experience of in that wells chances watershed million clear two the is village With fiat. it regulates administrative through underway, also implemen- achieved actual currently Act the is While prohibiting The activities. or tation harvesting sources, areas. rainwater water their over-exploited and drinking committees public in sunk of be wells metres to 250 wells new the of new through for distance permission whether a granting groundwater, within wells, all all regulating of matters. registration with these mandatory charged in participation is public authority enhancing The on resources, government natural the conserve advising to and measures economic and administrative legislative, 154 1 nIdai eea,ltl teto a enpi oteotosfrindirect for options the to paid been has attention little general, in India In ae ntehreoe aigo h pump. the of rating horsepower the on based .A ct .Shah T. & Scott A. C. iue2. Figure eldniyi aehaa aese,Adr Pradesh. Andhra watershed, Maheshwaram in density Well Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 21:56 10 September 2007 vial,telkl sottr)otoewudb oqikntepc of made pace were the voltage quicken rationing. to constant be strict to be at with nature—appears continue would supply in politically interim to are outcome full solution—perhaps demand The (short-term) if metered overdraft. pumping groundwater the likely time, of that out the same clear bite available, the a is intent At take It reformers to infeasible. rationing. sector required power without the increases supply on tariff groundwater efficient lost of be advocating frequency, rate to the on and appears limiting voltage point of erratic This consequence or unintended exploitation. (rationing, the farmers India having in are either etc.) agriculture to pumping; to in is acceptable supply limit power It are sector to than supply. incentive higher behaviour metered power no demand significantly by to elastic provides be for the politicians. revert required tariff to Bolstered tariff to likely the flat-rate donors, metered agriculture. are set in or increases in is zero multi-lateral from the however, India a embedded collection the in that supplying held states largely are revenue from in bankrupt reforming abysmal users) are various incurred mainly Boards the losses urban Electricity support high State to and that the due figures, claim (industry supply the agricultural customers meet on to based paying frequency, difficult figures, of loss proving these drops, 14, are that voltage for to schedules Nadu schedules. result leading Tamil supply rationing deteriorates, day, etc. 2002; the infrastructure restricted per in (Gulati, the hours with these as institutionalized nine rapidly Even for supply, been growing power etc. exceeds are have supplies Pradesh and cuts significantly Andhra billion) power Demand (US$5.4 prolonged 2001). billion 260 Lim, Rs. at hti oal o h upsso hsdsuso sta iefiinis in ‘inefficiencies’ that is discussion this of purposes the for notable is What of veracity the on debate significant is there that fact the Despite estimated been have boards electricity the of losses operating annual The iue3. Figure giutrlpwrspl n eeu,1999–2000. revenue, and supply power Agricultural rudae vrrf Reduction Overdraft Groundwater 155 Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 21:56 10 September 2007 iue4. Figure 156 nulgonwtrdati eioi siae ob 9km 29 be to estimated is Mexico in Mexico draft in groundwater Approaches Annual Participatory and Regulatory Overdraft: Groundwater rvnb obnto fdrc fdrladsae oenetsupport government favourable state) process as well a and as years, (federal installation 50 equipment direct past and the of drilling over well combination wells for of a programmes number by the in driven explosion the shows ags muto oharclua nryadgonwtri h country. the in km groundwater 1.3 and at energy estimated is agricultural overdraft both states Groundwater of in country, amount groundwater the largest Sonora. for of and northwest demand Chihuahua and Zacatecas, energy centre Guanajuato, of the Intensive as 6% in such than 5). concentrated less (Figure represented is 2001 pumping demand in which energy GWh/yr, 7000 total about at growth stagnating dramatic be 4). of (Figure result decades the four are 13 past pumps, India’s the than irrigation over numerous driven less electrically significantly although million 2001, in connections power eotda oetc nutil t. a rw ya vrg f7.65% of average an by grown has are etc.) for connections water industrial, connections rural open (Comisio power pumps—other domestic, annually from electrical irrigation lifts as of are low number which reported to the of limited 1960s, (98.8% are early agriculture engines the diesel Since India; sources. in as just tricity, challenges. management overdraft aquifer water result, Mexico’s a to As cities. central under is often are areas depletion groundwater wc shg,wihepan h ihrprhcaeco ilsadrapid is and demand yields water (Scott crop groundwater industrial per-hectare from and higher met municipal the increasingly Mexico’s explains depletion. which groundwater high, as twice ae oIdas10km 150 India’s to pared hr a enagonwtrbo nGaaut,tesaeta ssthe uses that state the Guanajuato, in boom groundwater a been has There to appears nationally agriculture in consumption energy time, same the At h rnia nrysuc o upn rudae nMxc selec- is Mexico in groundwater pumping for source energy principal The .A ct .Shah T. & Scott A. C. nraei giutrlpwrcnetosi eio 1962–2001. Mexico, in connections power agricultural in Increase ´n eea eEetiia CE,20) h 511agricultural 111 95 The 2002). (CFE), Electricidad de Federal 3 oee,o e-riae-etr ai ti nearly is it basis per-irrigated-hectare a on however, ; (2002). tal et 3 nulyi hssae iue6 Figure state. this in annually ,20) n h otcritical most the and 2001), ., 3 oetcom- modest , Source CFE : Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 21:56 10 September 2007 iue6. Figure Unofficially, drilled. were wells new no that indicate data today. effect official in the remain of when parts and different 7) in (Figure imposed groundwater 1948 been restrict since have to wells India state in new the efforts on mirrors bans adopted that Official been process exploitation. have a extraction success, groundwater little of with expansion the control to strategies giutrlpouto n aktn odtos atclryi h Baji the in particularly conditions, (Wester Guanajuato marketing southern of and region production agricultural iue5. Figure nsieo h as h ubro el otne oices ni 2000, until increase to continued wells of number the bans, the of spite In nraei ubro rudae el,Gaaut tt,1930–2000. State, Guanajuato wells, groundwater of number in Increase giutrleeg osmto nMxc,1962–2001. Mexico, in consumption energy Agricultural Comisio ´n saa eAu eGaaut (2002). Guanajuato de Agua de Estatal tal. et rudae vrrf Reduction Overdraft Groundwater 01.Rgltr n participatory and Regulatory 2001). , Source F (2002). CFE : Source 157 ´o : Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 21:56 10 September 2007 iue7. Figure 158 n nrmna rc nrae aeltl rn mato ead hsi the is This When demand. value. on marginal impact low no remains its or demand to little of close have elasticity level increases the price a returns, incremental than to and lower increases significantly water are of costs cost Mexico the in when addressed equally regions. be applies groundwater-intensive This must other draft. and strategy groundwater India, mitigation reduce and risk to Farmers’ a salinity. attempting damaging as secondary A when and Particularly over-irrigation requirement. waterlogging groundwater. for are water hand, notably preference crop’s wetlands, other and the rivers, the on replenish sources outcomes, of flows water a return excess surface irrigation As that in etc.). other risk be fertilizers, irrigate of may varieties, degree outcome to (seed positive significant tend a production small farmers conveys of relatively it factors result, a although other costs, represents for input generally mitigation total Irrigation the returns. of internally and fraction indeed, costs councils, of or aquifer calculus approaches. associations, government, participatory users’ with water the affiliate of (b) of part and the the part etc.) on hold (whether imposed the controls who and regulatory users, on devised accept (a) that mandated pump, order to externally much in how incorporated of decision be behaviour—energy ultimate pricing—must demand groundwater and of element supply third A councils). technical mre oognz ae sr rudtecnrlpolmo groundwater of have ( problem efforts COTAS central years, level—the the six aquifer past around the the users at In water overdraft successful. organize been to not emerged were have to wells means permission regulatory 1000 official had over these of that one-quarter wells. indicates about existing only reposition drillers informal while An 2001, well sunk. in be drilled Guanajuato to continue of wells unregistered association that apparent is it however, cnmcter el sta amr ilaotcnevtoitbehaviour conservationist adopt will farmers that us tells theory Economic financial farmers’ by influenced strongly is pumping for energy for Demand eiosatmt tgonwtroedatmngmn hog purely through management overdraft groundwater at attempts Mexico’s .A ct .Shah T. & Scott A. C. moiino fca aso e el,Gaaut tt,1948–present. State, Guanajuato wells, new on bans official of Imposition Comisio ´n saa eAu eGaaut (2002). Guanajuato de Agua de Estatal osjst´ncsd aguas de te´cnicos consejos ,or Source water : Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 21:56 10 September 2007 odsest rnfrcnesoayrgt o rudae oues The users. to rights, groundwater water all for of concessioning rights and Comisio taken titling concessionary (CNA, the has Commission Mexico transfer Water etc., to National irrigation, drip steps distribution, bold piped promote recurring to crops. lower grammes lower-water-demand at to draft area shift same groundwater the to irrigate reduce and to costs) increasing to words while to pumping other capacity efforts ways pump (in farmers’ downsize real efficiency of to irrigation result are only a approach efficiency over- as The the increases often through investments. well though per their irrigated real ten- area recover irrigation very the total groundwater One the for investment, that improvements pumped. capital is efficiency volume technical high who of the the outcome those maximize looked recover by to to is behaviour order dency conservationist In against groundwater. militates Garce´s-Restrepo,pump costs & operating (Scott low irrigation groundwater under an area through of 2001). the overdraft expansion in or in the not results down is for demand increase hand, drawn unbounded scope other and little in the constrained, is on resulting physically there surface availability, scarcity result Groundwater of water systems, area. a surface-water-irrigated that as irrigation to reservoirs; exceeded canal due surface groundwater Guanajuato’s limited depleted In of are times. Garce´s-Restrepo, cost supplies or three & water the surface approximately that (Kloezen from by fact same irrigated water the crop the despite same studies essentially the 1998), where were for Guanajuato sources depths including irrigation groundwater regions, that many shown in have groundwater with case nyoetido h 90wlsaecnesoe opm necs f20000 200 of excess in pump exceed to instance, volumes concessioned for are pumped Guanajuto, wells that in 1900 m admit the aquifer is of alike Silao-Romita clause one-third the CNA This only CNA. In the the volumes. and to concessioned volumes Users pumped enforced. report not and meter flow of (sale) volumetric transfer cessation the well, years), the consecutive of etc. three repositioning rights, (over conces- reported, regarding land of volumes volume irrigable norms unutilized of annual the for area the the out rights and several specifying spells well the past title to of the addition their the discharge formalize the In over on must of based users) title. motion sioned of process a groups in (or a with owners set However, concessions well been individual rights. which above—has in the for years, all described CNA defied that bans the those pay official groundwater—even for to formality. rights agricultural groundwater have a industrial ‘regularizing’ of not just share public/urban, largest does is recognized: the this extraction, represents are which practice groundwater Agriculture, damage in agricultural. of no and however, that uses substantiated; requires principal ground- process be Three for application parties years The 10 third renewed. (typically to be concession specified must the a (REPDA, of and for Rights period water) granted Water the are of over Concessions volume Register Agua). annual Public de the Derechos in de Pu´ recorded blico Registro are which sources, ter h vrg updvlm e giutrlwl s2000m 000 250 is well agricultural per volume pumped average the nesafdadamt t w nblt omk uevso iist vna even to visits supervision make to inability own its admits and understaffed 3 y;hwvr ti siae rmteaufrdatfiue o hsaufrthat aquifer this for figures draft aquifer the from estimated is it however, /yr; nadto oefiinyipoeet hog ag ftcnclpro- technical of range a through improvements efficiency to addition In relatively the and well a for cost fixed high the between difference large The l giutrlcneso ilsnwseiyta h srms ntl a install must user the that specify now titles concession agricultural All rudae vrrf Reduction Overdraft Groundwater ´n 2 ainld ga administers Agua) de Nacional obt ufc n groundwa- and surface both to 3 y.TeCAis CNA The /yr. 159 Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 21:56 10 September 2007 e$.13(S003 e W.I on oiyiiitv,teCEand uniform CFE a the SAGARPA establish tariffs. initiative, slab would was increasing policy 2002 eliminate that joint April and rationalization kWh in a per Mexico average tariff (US$0.0316) in In The Mex$0.30 a use agriculture. kWh. proposed agricultural to for per SAGARPA supply energy power (US$0.033) of of unit Mex$0.3133 costs per covers rising cost also the various tariff examined defray mandate have security) to whose food means and department, fisheries development, agricultural rural livestock, federal (the SAGARPA upd hsi ihrta ni’ oe etrsbiyo S54blin The billion. US$5.4 of water subsidy Commission—Comisio of sector in Electricity volumes power level the India’s (Federal national to than CFE the relation higher In at is million). agriculture this (US$592 pumped, to billion subsidy Mex$5.62 power was be 2000 estimated will The Mexico. that in demand a groundwater introduced with This the link 2002. pay energy October below. to subsi- the 1 assessed have the to from of instead with effect entitled element would only, with be significant but tariff agriculture not wells (commercial) for 4 would agricultural regular tariff from wells to power deadline agricultural electrical applied the unregistered dized of 2002 all 1995, extension (October that September latest years caveat 30 The seven past to 2002). the February February over and deadlines 1996 wells. several experience, October 000 passed Mexican then 100 the and regulate just of set concession effectively dose to alone strong years let taken a wells, has from of it benefit where millions Andhra would and register pumping, Karnataka and as their such locate 2001 states to in Indian in Pradesh Mexico 8 afoot in Figure Efforts wells state. 2002). the (SAGARPA), agricultural in of wells concessioning agricultural (Secretarı with 000 progress 17 the nearly shows the of sample meaningful 160 h nrygonwtrnxsi o oto eea n tt authorities state and federal on lost not is nexus energy–groundwater The has wells, including general, in rights water for process regularization The .A ct .Shah T. & Scott A. C. ´a eArclua Ganaderi Agricultura, de iue8. Figure ecnaeo el titled. wells of Percentage ´a, earloRrl ec Alimentacio y Pesca Rural, Desarrollo ´n eea eEetiia)and Electricidad) de Federal ´n Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 21:56 10 September 2007 h uhrte hc a eue omdf h auso yai itand This lift circumstances). possible. dynamic any is of under manipulation 0.52 values of than degree the less certain modify be a to not that used may suggests to latter be presented (the can regulations be efficiency the conditions—to which local Indeed, authorities on difficult. studies—based prove the technical will 2). and enforcement data Table that allow (see likely is tariffs 26.8% it to 9M supply, of equivalent and 2%, tariff 9 at agricultural compounded 9-CU be regular single will year. the increase the per at tariff the at the billed exceeds month billed be that Every consumption to is energy is AEL Electrical AEL kWh. the per than (US$0.0316) Mex$0.30 lower Consumption set. yai iteult h et ftebr nmte satoie nthe in authorized as metres in bore the of depth the and to title, concession equal lift dynamic ovrinconstant), conversion 9)(.36 (0.0386) (0.0316) a (9M) hr 3 stelgtn eurmn o h elshed, well the for requirement lighting the is 438 where eimtension Medium ii AL nkhy sstfrec ela follows: as well each Energy for Annual an set Additionally, is CNA. requires kWh/yr the it in from draft; title (AEL) groundwater concession and Limit to valid low a linked both per of is under (US$0.0316) proof pumping 9-CU Mex$0.30 agricultural Normatively, of for tension. tariff introduced single-rate medium was new 9-CU A called 2003. kWh January 7 on be Oficial) to subsidies. appears Canadian energy law and significant the competitors—US plan of enjoy principal implementation intent Mexico’s producers—who with The and agricultural field budget. playing budget federal the the annual level in to an included be with must Programme mandates that law Energy The above. agriculture, Rural discussed in a rationalization use tariff electricity ‘irrigation the and adopting sources effectively stimulate energy petroleum-based for further incentives Energı de to technology. (Ley more sprinkler Law proposed Energy and consuming drip those were of subsidize adoption Incentives to the in i.e. level. 000 technification’, step 15 this than would less CFE consume than who while users annually, agricultural to kWh subsidies the provide would o eso (9) tension Low e$prkh(S nbakt)b osmto lc e iln cycle. billing per block consumption by brackets) in (US$ kWh per Mex$ ept h neto h a,wihlnsgonwtretato oenergy to extraction groundwater links which law, the of intent the Despite h nta euain o h a perdi h fca aet (Diario Gazette Official the in appeared law the for regulations initial The Rural the passed unanimously Deputies of Chamber the 2002 December In al 2. Table –00kWh 1–5000 e (0.0316) .0 0.367 0.300 .0 0.364 0.300 ϭ V .2 h lcrmcaia fcec ftepump-motor the of efficiency electromechanical the 0.52, giutrleeg tariffs, energy Agricultural steana ocsindvlm (m volume concessioned annual the is ´a aae ap)t euaemre ehnssand mechanisms market regulate to Campo) el para AEL 011 0 5013 000 001–35 15 000 5001–15 ϭ 005)(0.0422) (0.0354) (0.0349) 438 0.336 0.332 kWh Consumption ϩ rudae vrrf Reduction Overdraft Groundwater KVC/e a aur 2003 January (0.0383) kWh K ϭ .06( units (a 0.0026 Ͼ 501kWh 001 35 3 ), (0.0419) 0.401 0.398 C sthe is 161 Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 21:56 10 September 2007 162 ntnei ua oe upy ol as netadselpltcldoom. political already spell and areas unrest Urban cause for would politically. cutbacks, Mexico supply, further like and and power country services, rural socially public a in of both instance in share difficult disproportionate option regulatory a this very command conscious Exercising be a immense. of would being hours are limiting and than supply of generation implications with power demand overdraft do groundwater to own to the more However, their has approach. relative it size there capacity although to India, distribution framework. as regulatory owners such the countries well in in lacuna allowing a opportunity, be invest- to electrical lost SEB limiting appears of not a transformers that lack assessment is the the to are for connections Similar too compensate 2002). there (Samra, to farmers capacity bankruptcy, transformers ment of With purchase verge possible. the to now on compelled India are in upgrades boards sold irrigate capacity electricity are to state owner—transformers voluntary well periods distributors—so trans- the pump non-peak of Additionally, by responsibility selling. during with the or used is title, trading installation be concession water former through may the including under capacity land, irrigation watered idle additional peak be that meet to to result authorized sized the land be the must pumps for However, demand Mexico. in with wells. mented manage- new groundwater appears on to connections—this approach bans electrical regulatory exiting new the of on of ment. defiance ban shortcoming parallel another in granted be no example be to are present may for at wells itself legislation, is agricultural well There groundwater for the with connections though electrical states even new Indian Pradesh, and Andhra Mexico supply. both power In of hours in amperage reductions or acceptable capacity (c) or on difficult contexts): connections caps most Mexican new (b) and on to Indian restrictions least the (a) of in order technically energy and (in politically India entails socially, extraction. in this groundwater although power, on electrical options, brake unintended supply an energy as these to served address has paid Less rationing to mechanisms. been significant pricing has initiatives have through groundwater primarily that attention emerging policy, countries between energy with two agricultural links Mexico, through problems the and be overdraft India to reviewed pricing- in groundwater needs and has energy that supply- paper and challenge energy irrigation This major and a approaches. participatory is farmers based regulatory, overdraft to aquifer through benefits yet addressed economic world, significant the provided around has irrigation Groundwater overdraft. groundwater addressing Conclusion in successful be commit- to political and are motion, public they require in and if will Law set that ment Energy initiatives been Rural far-reaching The have are required. COTAS consolidation Mexico additional in significant is management there groundwater to approaches euto ntehuso evc sa nryspl oto en used being control supply energy an is service of hours the in reduction A experi- been have capacity transformer to limits through caps Amperage for here; discussion further some warrant options supply energy The participatory and regulatory while that above review the from apparent is It .A ct .Shah T. & Scott A. C. Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 21:56 10 September 2007 ar,J .(02 mato rudae aaeetadeeg oiiso odscrt fIndia. of security food on policies energy and management New groundwater Reforms, of Distribution Impact on (2002) Conference S. at J. India Samra, in Sector Energy on Presentation (2001) R. E. Lim, lee,W .&GresRsrp,C (1998) C. Garce´s-Restrepo, & H. IWMI– W. the Kloezen, for Paper Punjab. in irrigation groundwater of implications Energy (2002) S. A. Gulati, Comisio Comisio uclr .(04 oe ttehl firgtdarcluei eio h te ieo male of side other the Mexico: in agriculture irrigated of helm the at Women (2004) S. Buechler, References ambiguity definitional some is there however, nation; the of property the considered is Water 2. on based users agricultural charged (SEBs) Boards Electricity State the 1970s, the until Up 1. Notes sustainable of cornerstones the are appro- options all, pricing above management. and, and groundwater general supply in energy accom- management be in priate water participation can environment and public water policy groundwater mechanisms, for a around regulatory/legal demands create integrated final and to Finally, the interests is modated. In competing Mexico on prescriptions. and or etc.) policy multiple India water, stated which for canal of challenge of ignorance the appropriation or analysis, head-end disregard rush in falls, a Indian ground it boom, groundwater the The where (the resources. water activity harvest water user frenetic to limited present for to demands appears scenario expanding rapidly of feature oiisfrGonwtrMngmn:Eeg,WtrRsucs n cnmcApproaches’, ‘Forward-Thinking Economic on September. and 2–6 Dialogue Resources, Delhi, Water Policy New Centre, Energy, sponsored International Management: India Plan Groundwater IWMI–ICAR–Colombo for Policies the for Paper October. 12–13 Delhi, Institute). Management Irrigation International Lanka: aaeet nry ae eore,adEooi prahs,IdaItrainlCentre, International India Approaches’, September. Economic 2–6 Groundwater and for Delhi, Policies Resources, New ‘Forward-Thinking Water on Energy, Dialogue Management: Policy sponsored Plan ICAR–Colombo h aeo h pe Rı Upper the of Case The n ae nLtnAmerica Latin in Water and irto,i:V ent,M ivsRc .D´ia(Eds) Da´vila S. & Rico Nieves M. Bennett, V. in: migration, eadn sae aes(ufc ore htoiiaeadaedpee ihnasae.All state). a within depleted are and originate present. that property. at national sources donors is same (surface groundwater the waters by pumping, criticized ‘state’ being for uninterrupted. regarding is energy day country subsidized a the hours highly dedicated which 24 receive a pump for should move could for farmers unsustainable farmers that stipulation an that stipulated loan and so further a pumps designed loan the contained The Bank to International that electricity World The line (IFAD), by in supply the funded Development electricity example, roles Pradesh, Agricultural rural Uttar For played in for of contradictory. Irrigation have Fund Groundwater as centerpiece often Bank on tariffs project are the World metered a that became for implemented the pricing case pump. power like the and agricultural the institutions been supply as have financial of inevitably terms International rating rate would however, flat real well. this horsepower decades, to in two Nevertheless, switch the ensuing largesse. fell the the political on of In problem, or metering. a based costs of stagnated be agricultural costs rate the to tariffs transaction 1980s, proved and flat and and financial still 1970s the a rating readers, the eliminated horsepower during to meter of result, converted falsification a of Although As were level readers. tariffs meter of the of tampering power staff at with large associated corruption a costs maintaining transaction under-billing, impossible the it pilferage, found particularly SEBs billing, meters, increased, and wells metering tube of manage number to the as however, consumption; metered h noenblt fhgl optdwtrrsucsmysml ea be simply may resources water competed highly of ungovernability The ´n ´n eea eEetiia 20)Aalbea www.cfe.gob.mx at Available (2002) Electricidad de Federal saa eAu eGaaut 20)Upbihddt,CA,Gaaut,Mexico. Guanajuato, CEAG, data, Unpublished (2002) Guanajuato de Agua de Estatal ´o em ie riainDsrc,Mexico District, Irrigation River Lerma Ptsug,P:Ptsug nvriyPress). University Pittsburgh PA: (Pittsburgh, sesn riainPromnewt xenlIndicators: External with Performance Irrigation Assessing rudae vrrf Reduction Overdraft Groundwater wmigaantteCret Gender Current: the against Swimming eerhRpr 2(oob,Sri (Colombo, 22 Report Research , 163 Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 21:56 10 September 2007 Secretarı ct,C . iv-co,P,FoecoCu,V etr .(01 optto o ae nthe in water for Competition (2001) P. Wester, & V. Florencio-Cruz, P., Silva-Ochoa, A., C. Scott, ct,C .&GresRsrp,C 20)Cnuciemngmn fsraewtradgroundwa- and water surface of management Conjunctive (2001) Garce´s-Restrepo, C. & A. C. Scott, 164 hh .&Mkeje .(2001) A. Mukherjee, & T. Shah, hh . ct,C,Ksoe .&Sam,A (2003) A. Sharma, & A. Kishore, C., Scott, T., Shah, etr . evle .&RmsOoi,S 20)Isiuinlarneet o ae management water for arrangements Institutional (2001) S. Ramos-Osorio, & R. Melville, P., Wester, ai Management Basin em–hpl ai,i:A asn&M a fedn(Eds) Afferden van M. & Hansen Management and A. Evaluation in: basin, Lerma–Chapala e nteMdl Rı Middle the in ter tne aPolm´iad aEnergi la de Problema´tica la Atender September. Aad nentoa ae aaeetInstitute). Management Water International (Anand: nteLraCaaaBsn n .Hne .vnAfre (Eds) Afferden van M. & Management Hansen and A. Evaluation in: Basin, Lerma–Chapala the in Industry Institute). Power Management Viable Water with International Prosperity Agrarian to .A ct .Shah T. & Scott A. C. ´a eArclua Ganaderı Agricultura, de p 7–9 NwDli xodUiest Press). University Oxford Delhi: (New 176–198 pp. , ´o em ai,Mxc,i:A .Bsa .Traaa(Eds) Tortajada C. & Biswas K. A. in: Mexico, Basin, Lerma p 9–2 Lno:Kue Academic/Plenum). Kluwer (London: 291–323 pp. , p 4–6 Lno:Kue Academic/Plenum). Kluwer (London: 343–369 pp. , h oi-clg fGonwtri Asia in Groundwater of Socio-Ecology The ´a, earloRrl ec Alimentacio y Pesca Rural, Desarrollo ´a l´tiae aArclua Subsecretari Agricultura. la en Ele´ctrica eerhRpr o 0(oob,SiLanka: Sri (Colombo, 70 No. Report Research , nryIrgto eu nSuhAi:Approaches Asia: South in Nexus Energy–Irrigation h em–hpl Watershed: Lerma–Chapala The h em–hpl Watershed: Lerma–Chapala The WITt okn Paper Working IWMI–Tata , ´n 20)Pousa para Propuestas (2002) ´a eArclua 2 Agricultura, de nertdRiver Integrated