 |
|
|
|
Approaches to Spate Irrigation: the Yemen Case
Experience with spate irrigation IFAD-cofinanced projects has been limited to Yemen (013-YA, 068-YD, 228-YD). In traditional spate-irrigated areas, users built main and secondary canals, along with dikes and bunds in the wadis (seasonal watercourses). ‘Water masters’ are hired to supervise flood water distribution, look after the maintenance of canals and dikes following heavy floods and to resolve disputes. Unfortunately, the projects have not taken advantage of this valuable tradition of local resources mobilisation. The results are irrigation systems that are costly to construct, operate and excessively dependent on government support.
The fundamental feature of traditional spate irrigation schemes is the well-established principle which gives upstream irrigators priority rights to water abstraction over the downstream users. Once the upstream user has satisfied his needs, he has an obligation to release water downstream. With traditional systems, modest and often temporary upper deflectors allowed water to pass to lower off-takes, thus creating a perception amongst farmers, of a large degree of fairness in water utilisation. A precursor project to 013-YA made allowance for traditional rights while the latter project, through changes to the original design concept, allowed one upstream group of farmers to commandeer an excessively large share of both base flows (low volume perennial flows) and spate flows with the result that a much lower area is now irrigated than envisaged at appraisal. Downstream water users have been adversely affected and are, reportedly, worse-off than before the project.
The selection of the appropriate development concept of a spate irrigation system requires a very clear understanding and appreciation of traditional water rights and operating arrangements at the design stage. Farmers downstream should not be deprived of what little rights they had to water without some compensation. The recommended scheme should give careful consideration to the social implications of any changes to the system and traditional concepts should not be discarded without justification. Maintenance requirements based on a user pays principle should be borne utmost in mind.
As a general guiding principle, future interventions in spate irrigation should favour low-cost diversion structures and avoid sophisticated technical solutions which prove to be economically unjustifiable and difficult to operate properly.
Careful consideration needs to be given to the implementation process, for instance if farmers can be productively involved in implementation, changes are more likely to be adopted and sustained.
National technicians be trained in participatory design and implementation of irrigation projects.
Government should develop a clear cost recovery strategy aimed at charging beneficiaries enough to pay for the bulk of public sector involvement in spate irrigation schemes.
Spate irrigation should be self-reliant insofar as routine operations and repair are concerned. While systems will need to be backstopped by a responsive and technically competent public sector units, government should not be expected to provide the bulk of resources for maintenance.
References:
1. Yemen - Country Portfolio Evaluation, CPE92 CESYE92E IFAD 1992.
2. Yemen, A.R. - Tihama Development III (Wadi Mawr), 013-YA, IFAD, 1979
3. Yemen, P.D.R. - Cooperative Development of Rainfed Agriculture, 068-YD, IFAD, 1981
4. Yemen, P.D.R. - Eastern Regional Agricultural Development, 228-YD, IFAD, 1988
