An overview of Micro Irrigation Dr. A. Narayanamoorthy Reader Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics Pune – 411 004 E-mail: email@example.com Tel: 020-5675067; Fax: 020-5652579 Coverage • Importance of drip irrigation • Area and crops covered • Statewise position of drip method of irrigation • Subsidy schemes across states • Results of experimental station • Results of field level studies (grapes, banana and sugarcane). – Cost of cultivation – Water use efficiency – Productivity increase – Electricity saving – Economic viability Policy Recommendations Importance of drip irrigation • Water is supplied through a network of pipe using dripper/emitters. • Water is supplied at a regular interval and at a required time/ quantity. • Since evaporation and conveyance losses are negligible, water use efficiency under DMI is over 90%. • Productivity gains through DMI varies from 20% to about 50% depending upon the crop. • Mostly useful to wide spaced crops • Importantly, under DMI system, water is supplied to the crop but not to the land. Area and crops covered under DMI • As per INCID report, about 80 crops are suitable for drip method of irrigation. • Almost all the fruit and vegetable crops, coconut, cotton and even some oilseed crops are highly suitable for DMI. • Area under DMI increased from around 500 ha during early 1980s to about 3.50 lakh ha in 2000 in India. • Maharashtra state alone accounts for over 50 of India’s total area. • The important crops that are cultivated under DMI in Maharashtra are grapes, banana, s.cane, pomegranate, mango, etc. Subsidy Schemes for DMI • Both Central and state subsidy schemes are available for adopting DMI in India. • Maharashtra started providing subsidy since 1985-86 onwards. • Central subsidy schemes started during the year 1990- 91. • Except Maharashtra, other states do not have state subsidy schemes for DMI. • Subsidy varies with farmers landholding size. However, 50% of capital cost is provided as a subsidy for farmers who adopt drip method of irrigation. • Central scheme does not provide subsidy to sugarcane crop. Field Level Results • Field level studies are not available for different states. • We have carried out three different studies on grapes, banana and sugarcane using data collected from Maharashtra. • Our focus was to estimate the economic viability of DMI under with and without subsidy condition. • We have compared the drip farmers with the non- drip farmers in different parameters. DMI impact on cost of cultivation • On an average DMI reduces total cost of cultivation by 15 to 20%. • However, it significantly varies with operation. • Cost saving is found to be higher in operations like weeding, irrigation, ploughing and even in fertilizers. Water use efficiency/Water saving • Water saving varies from 25 percent to 35 percent among the three crops considered for analysis. • Water saving is found to be very high in sugarcane,which is a water intensive crop. • Water required to produce per unit of output is very low under DMI compared FMI in all three crops. • From the saving of water farmers were able to bring additional irrigated area to tune of 1.3 acres from every ha of DMI. Productivity increase • Productivity of crops cultivated under DMI is higher by about 20-35 percent when compared to the crops that are cultivated under FMI. • Market price realized by the DMI farmers is relatively higher because of better quality produce. Electricity Saving • Electricity saving by DMI has not been studied by the researchers. • By reducing the consumption of water and working hours of pumpsets, DMI could save about 1200-1500 kwh/ha electricity. • Electricity use efficiency is also very high under DMI compared to FMI. Economic viability of DMI • BC ratio and NPW were estimated using discounted cash flow technique with different rate of discounts (10%, 12% and 15%) under with and without subsidy condition. • Investment on DMI is found to be economically viable in all three crops. BC ratio varies from 1.78 to 2.80 under different discount rates. • Investment on DMI is also found to be economically viable even without subsidy. • NPW calculation shows that the farmers cultivating grapes and banana will be able to pay back the entire capital cost from the first year profit itself. What needs to be done? • Statewise potential and required investment for DMI need to be estimated. • Measures need to be introduced to reduce the capital cost. • Structured subsidy schemes followed in Maharashtra should be introduced in other states. • Better awareness about the DMI should be created among the farmers through quality extension network. • Differential subsidy rate should be followed: higher subsidy rate for water intensive crops and vice-versa. • Cultivation of sugarcane should be promoted using DMI with the help of sugar factories. • Drip set manufactures should be asked to involve in providing training to the farmers who are ready to adopt it.
Pages to are hidden for
"Statewise Irrigation Data India"Please download to view full document