The role of the community in irrigation management

To help you specialized Agriculture - Forestry - Fishing with more data in the process of learning and working, you are invited to consult the thesis The role of the community in irrigation management below. Hopefully document useful service for you.

The role of the community in irrigation

Department of Urban and Rural Development,

Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences

ABSTRACT

This research is carried out to answer the questions on how the community of water users participates

in irrigation management activities for agricultural production, consequences of participation for outcomes and what factors influence the success in irrigation management

By a qualitative approach with perceptions and assessments of local people in two communities in Tuyen Quang province - Vietnam, this research gives a supplementary understanding on the role of the community in irrigation management to other research working on quantitative approach This research also contributes to considering type of community management through the cooperative The success in irrigation management depends on who define it and its linkage to participation of the community in management activities

Findings of this research show that irrigation management through the cooperative may engage water users in different activities from planning, operation and maintenance, decision making and monitoring However, the type of participation in two study sites is different, symbolic in Y La and traditional in Kim Phu This difference has consequences for outcomes in irrigation management in terms of water distribution, maintenance and financial management Water users have their own perceptions and assessments on those outcomes, not depending on assessments by the State Findings also show that participation of the community is not sufficient for the success in irrigation management The success in irrigation management may be achieved by some factors motivating participation of the community (management organization) or influencing management in practice (leadership, partnership), but also may be achieved by conditional factors like cemented canals

I also want to thank Dr Britta Ogle, Dr Le Duc Ngoan and other RDViet staff who gave financial and administrative support for this research

There will be shortcomings if my thanks can not go to the lecturers during various theoretical courses I am very lucky to have their lectures I was really impressed by their teaching methods,

knowledge that I improve from their lectures and discussions helped me much in doing this research

I thank the local authorities and people of Tuyen Quang province in general, of Y La and Kim Phu communes in particular Their welcome and supply of data contributing to this research are invaluable The last, my thanks goes to my family, friends and colleagues who gave me mental and scientific support to complete this research

Thank you very much!

Hue, 18th February 2008

Cap Thi Phuong Anh

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Justification 1

1.2 Problem Statement 2

1.3 Research questions 2

1.4 Research hypothesis 2

1.5 Limitation of the research 2

1.6 Research structure 3

2 LITERATURE REVIEW 4

2.1 Some concepts 4

2.1.1 The community 4

2.1.2 Participation of the community 4

2.1.3 Irrigation management with participation of the community 5

2.2 Participation of the community, the success and failure in irrigation management 5

2.3 Factors influencing the “success” of irrigation management with participation of the community 6

2.4 Concluding remark 7

3 IRRIGATION MANAGEMENT IN VIETNAM 8

3.1 History of irrigation management 8

3.2 The failure of the State in irrigation management 8

3.3 Increasing participation of the community by irrigation management transfer 9

3.4 Three current irrigation management models 10

3.5 Irrigation management through the cooperative 11

4 METHODOLOGY 12

4.1 Analytical framework 12

4.2 Approach 13

4.3 Methods 13

4.3.1 Site selection 13

4.3.2 Literature review 14

4.3.3 Data collection 14

4.3.4 Data analysis 15

5 STUDY SITE 16

5.1 Natural, socio-economic characteristics of Tuyen Quang 16

5.2 Characteristics of irrigation systems in Tuyen Quang 16

5.3 Irrigation management and irrigation management transfer in Tuyen Quang 17

5.3.1 Irrigation management in the past and management transfer to cooperatives 17

5.3.2 Current irrigation management 17

5.4 Management of Ngoi La irrigation system 18

5.4.1 General characteristics of management 18

5.4.2 Y La irrigation system management 18

5.4.3 Kim Phu irrigation system management 18

6 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 20

6.1 Irrigation management by the cooperative as community management 20

6.1.1 Formation of the community of water users 20

6.1.2 Irrigation management organization of the community 21

6.1.3 Irrigation management in practice and participation of the

community 24

6.1.4 Discussion and interpretation on irrigation management and participation of the community 28

6.2 Management outcomes 28

6.2.1 Failures of irrigation management in the past 28

6.2.2 Outcomes of the current irrigation management mode 29

6.2.3 Discussion and interpretation on outcomes of irrigation management 34

6.3 Factors influencing the “success” in irrigation management 35

6.3.1 Assessment of the community 35

6.3.2 Discussion and interpretation on the factors and their importance 38

7 CONCLUSION 41

REFERENCES 1

ANNEXES 1

ACRONYMS

CPC Communal People‟s Committee

LIST OF TABLES, DIAGRAMS AND BOXES

TABLES

Table 5.1: Irrigation works in Tuyen Quang province 16

Table 6.1: Number of cooperatives members and non-members in two study sites (in 2006) 21

Table 6.2: Assessment of the local people on the water waste over 10 years 29

Table 6.3: Assessment of the farmers on the timing of water supply in two study sites 30

Table 6.4: Assessment of the farmers in two study sites on the canal maintenance 32

Table 6.5: Expenditures of the cooperatives in 2005 34

Table 6.6: Assessment of local people on factors influencing the success in irrigation management in ranked order 35

DIAGRAMS

BOXES

Box 6.2: Responsibilities of the cooperatives in terms of irrigation management as regulated in the

Box 6.6: Analysis of farmers in Y La on the reason why water supply is still wasted in some areas of

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Justification

The entry point of this research is the idea of community management, a concept on which there are presently ongoing debates In this context issues are raised concerning how the community is organized to manage resources, how it works to address failures of the State and/ or market; why one community can be successful in management while others are not Irrigation management for agricultural production may be an appropriate case to explore these issues

The irrigation sub-sector, in recent decades in many countries in the world, is marked by a significant change in management The States, who played the key role in irrigation management in the past, carries out series of transfer programs in which management responsibilities and authority of small-scale irrigation systems or branch canals of large- and medium-scale ones are handed over to local organizations of water users like water user associations, cooperatives or just a group of farmers Since then the community of water users increasingly participates at different levels in managing irrigation systems serving their agricultural production themselves [Barker & Molle, 2002; Vermillion, 2006]

One of the key reasons that cause such change originates from failures of the irrigation management mode in the past, when the State owned and managed irrigation systems without motivating water users in management rather than failures of technical issues [Barker & Molle, 2002; Thuan, 2004; Tiep, 2004; Trung, 2006] These failures are confirmed in various reports and have included low productivity of agriculture and water, budget deficit, canal deterioration or water waste [Barker & Molle, 2002; Vermillion, 2006]

Therefore, participation of the community of water users in management activities is expected to be

a solution to address the gaps of these failures In many countries, for example Turkey or Mexico, when the community of water users increasingly participate in irrigation management activities, it brings about better outcomes in term of functioning of irrigation systems [ Samad & Vermillion, 1999; Svendsen & Nott, 1999] However, outcomes do not always get better after the increased participation

of the water user Some just get partial benefits or continue to get failures even when the community participates in management like in the cases of Sri Lanka, Morocco [Vuren et al, 2002] Many studies show that the success or failure of irrigation management with increased community participation is influenced by not only participation of the community but also other factors like partnership with the State and other actors, characteristics of the community [Jones & Little, 2000; Khawaja, 2002; Krishna, 2003]

In Vietnam, irrigation management transfer program which promotes participation of the community of water users in irrigation management began in the 1990s Among the first piloted provinces, Tuyen Quang implemented in the late 1996 The community of water users then participates in management of irrigation systems nationwide in different modes of water user associations (prevalent in the South), cooperatives (prevalent in the North) or groups of farmers; in different scales of a group, a village or a commune, inter-communes [Biltonen, 2004; Plusquellec, 2003] In the National Workshop on participatory irrigation management in Vietnam in 2004, many policy makers, researchers and farmer representatives expressed their concerns on how to manage irrigation systems well to get good outcomes when the community participates in irrigation management in partnership with the State in large- and medium- scale systems or in their own in small ones

A lot of research has been done on irrigation management related issues but most concentrate on management models, transfer program or management mechanism, rather than focus on the community, the direct stakeholders and beneficiaries from irrigation service If some works try to investigate the objective aspects of management (system, mechanism), this research strives to observe and discuss the subjective aspect of management which is the community with their perceptions and

assessments This research supposes that the assessment on irrigation management based on the perceptions and assessments by local people who have empirical knowledge on the service for their production themselves will provide important supplementary understandings of assessment on the outcomes of irrigation management with participation of the community and factors influencing the

“success” in irrigation management

From that context, this research is designed to reach the goal of contributing to improve knowledge

on the role of the community in irrigation management for agricultural production Specifically, the

research tries to reach the objective of identifying factors influencing the “success” in irrigation

management in Y La and Kim Phu, two communities in Tuyen Quang province;

1.2 Problem Statement

The State had failures in the past in managing irrigation systems Irrigation management transfer has been implemented, which reduced the role of the State and increased the role of the community of water users Increased participation of the community in management activities is expected to address the failure of the State when it plays the key role in irrigation management However, not all irrigation systems with participation of the community are able to function well

1.3 Research questions

This research attempts to answer the following:

1) How does participation of the community address the failure of the previous State-managed irrigation

systems?

2) Why does participation of the community in management activities not always bring about the success

in irrigation management?

1.4 Research hypothesis

1) Participation of the community in irrigation management activities, including planning in terms of

irrigation schedule and financial plans, decision making, operation and maintenance of canals, monitoring, is an important factor addressing the failures of the previous State-managed irrigation schemes;

2) To gain the “success” in irrigation management, participation of the community in activities has to go

together with many factors like building strong community and enhancing partnership relation with the State or other actors

1.5 Limitation of the research

Participation has a broad meaning which may cover various components The discussion in this research would benefit from a deeper exploration into all its aspects, its nature and participation level

in order to provide more understandings about farmers‟ perceptions and assessments However, this

has been beyond the scope of this study Only general participation in activities regarding irrigation management and perceptions of the farmer are explored Concretely, this research just works on the fields of how the community is organized and how they manage irrigation systems, what activities they participate in Frequency of participation, what force or motivate participation, factors influencing the participation like imitation, their interest or awards may be broad to be considered in this research

It is also a limitation of this research to consider the cooperatives as the organizations of the community to manage irrigation systems The cooperatives in fact do not include all community

members and do work under the cooperative law However, to one extent, the cooperative can be seen

as representing the community in irrigation management because of some reasons In one side, the cooperative is also an organization of voluntary members to benefit irrigation service for agricultural production The cooperative does irrigation for all farmers not excluding its non-members In other side, principles for operation of the cooperative are common agreement of members in annual congresses This will be more explained in the next chapters

It may be also interesting to consider the differences on participation and assessments of the poor and non-poor in irrigation management However, it may also be too broad to be covered in this research

1.6 Research structure

The research is structured into seven chapters The first is an introduction where the reader can see the reasons why research issue is chosen and research and questions The second is a literature review summarizing the debates and related studies around community participation in irrigation management, outcomes which it brings about and factors influencing the success in management The third is about empirical background of the research focusing on irrigation management in Vietnam The fourth is on methodology presenting the approach and methods used to collect and analyze data Chapter five describes the study site One of main sections of the research is the six with findings and discussions around the community and irrigation management related issues happening in the field The last chapter, the seventh one, is conclusion and questions on which the researcher wants to do

further research

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter discusses participation of the community with focus on irrigation management It filters the previous and current debates and related studies, which are briefly stated in the introduction chapter, on the need of participation of the community in irrigation management, outcomes which it brings about and reasons for those changes

2.1 Some concepts

2.1.1 The community

The concept of the community is fluid and difficult to define The community can be seen as an organization of people tied by bloodline, location or common interest, which is run by rules or social norms [Hayami, 1998] Or the community is nothing other than groups of individuals, mainly competing, but sometimes coming together in interest groups for a common purpose [Schouten & Moriarty, 2003] Further to this point, in the irrigation sub-section, Schouten and Moriarty see the community of water users as all the individuals who use the water supply system Sometimes, the community exists when people who make it up think that it does [Schouten & Moriarty, 2003]

2.1.2 Participation of the community

Participation of the community is considered as a range of processes through which local communities are involved and play a role in issues which affect them [Kelly, 2001] Kelly refers to participation of community as two kinds: the first is consultation and the second is partnership Consultation is the periodic involvement of the community in organization-driven or top-down activity Whereas partnership is the higher level of participation in which the community and the governmental agencies share power in decision-making or collective management

Participation is an abstract word Many scientists classify it in different levels [Szentendre, 1996, Botes & Rensburg, 2000, cited by Kelly 2001] But the most suitable one seems to be the one classified by Szentendre (1996) He divides participation into 5 levels from active to passive involvement

 Level 1 – The community as decision maker: People in the community have the clearest and perhaps

the most accurate perception of needs and priorities of their community and should make the decisions themselves

 Level 2: The community as consultant: The community should occasionally be consulted to contribute

their professional opinions during the decision making process, and when given adequate information can make educated decisions about various proposals

 Level 3: The community as respondent: The community does not necessarily know what is needed or

what is the best approach, but their opinions should be surveyed and analyzed by well-trained experts and used in the decision making process

 Level 4: The community as constituent: Experts of trained elected representatives have the right to

make decisions on behalf of people in the community and to assume that they are representing their

constituents‟ interest unless hearing otherwise

 Level 5: The community as voter: The community should vote for their representatives, but public

decision making is a scientific pursuit and should be left to skilled experts and policy makers, not the general public

Two upper levels of participation listed above are considered by the authors as real participation while the three other ones are not because they just passively participate in activities and decision making Therefore it may be considered the lower three levels as non-participation and two upper levels of consultant and decision-maker as participation

2.1.3 Irrigation management with participation of the community

According to Vermillion (2006), irrigation management or to manage an irrigation system is to utilize resources to provide a designated irrigation service

Peter (2004) also gives a definition of irrigation management with participation of the community

as participation of the farmer in managing irrigation systems It means that the farmer plays the key role in all aspects of irrigation management at all levels All aspects refer to planning, making decisions, operation and maintenance, financial contribution and monitoring the work All levels say the levels of canals from headwork, main, secondary, tertiary and farm canals

2.2 Participation of the community, the success and

failure in irrigation management

Participation of the community in irrigation management for agricultural production has become a popular and recognized concept in many countries in the world, especially developing countries where agriculture plays a crucial role in socio-economic development Participation of the community is considered as an answer for the large-scale break down of water supply system for agricultural production and the failure of the State to efficiently manage irrigation systems in service of agriculture [Schouten & Moriarty, 2003; Vermillion, 1999]

Most of the irrigation systems in service of agricultural production were previously owned and managed by the State Farmers were beneficiaries from the service This management mode lasted until the 1970s There have been many experiences of the failure [FAO, 1995 cited by Hung, 2004; Repetto, 1986 cited by Peter, 2004] The failure might be different among countries and have included budget deficit, canal deterioration, bad quality, un-equality between upstream, midstream and downstream locations as well as low productivity of land and water In Turkey, the productivity was reduced due to the low rate of irrigated area; canals were deteriorated due to the lack of capital for maintenance; the rate of irrigation fee collection from farmers was low; expenditures for administrative personnel were high [Svendsen & Nott, 1999] Similarly there have been failures facing many systems in other countries like Mexico, Sri Lanka, Philippines, China, Vietnam, Indonesia and India [Li & Wang, 2004; Peter, 2004] According to many scientists, these failures result from management rather than technical issues [Trung, 2005; Loi, 2004] Management failures were partly caused by the lack of involvement of water users in management [FAO, 1995 cited by Hung, 2004; Thuan, 2004; Tiep, 2004]

The idea that it is better for irrigation management to involve the community participating in management activities comes partly from an erosion of the belief on the State to efficiently supply services for the population, and partly from the belief that the community has skills and motivation to meet their own essential needs [Schouten & Moriarty, 2003] This idea is also supported by analysts who highlight the importance of the community in addressing the failure of the State and/ or market because the community has the strength of trust and cooperation among members, relations of blood

or location and they know best their needs and resources [Barker & Molle, 2002; Li & Wang, 2004; Samad & Vermilion, 1999]

From that belief on the community, series of irrigation management transfer programs have been piloted and implemented in numerous countries to increase participation of the community in management activities, starting in Mexico then Turkey, India, Indonesia and other countries [Groenfeldt & Svendsen, 2000; Svendsen, 2002, cited by Peter, 2004] There are different types of transfer in different areas and the water user will participate in different management activities They can take part fully in managing irrigation systems at small-scale or branch canals of large- or medium-scale ones; or just partly according to contract-based activities like in Philippines [Peter, 2004]

For more than two decades of increasingly encouraged participation of water users in irrigation management, many researches have been carried out to confirm that important role of participation in

bringing about better outcomes in irrigation management of many cases compared to those outcomes when the State played the key role in management [Peter, 2004; Svendsen & Nott, 1999; Vermillion, 2006; Vuren et al., 2002]

According to Svendsen and Nott (1999), Turkey is the most successful case in reducing the role of the State in irrigation management, increasing the role of the local organizations and getting better irrigation performance Management responsibilities are transferred to local government units or special-purpose irrigation associations which are in large-scale and unified organizational structure

By quantitative assessment with secondary data, Svendsen and Nott conclude that in this country, irrigation fee collection rates are doubled, there is shifting of O&M expenditures from the public to the private sector, an accumulation of reserves for future capital purchases, reduced wage bill for system O&M personnel and indications of expansions of irrigated area

Trung et al (2005) with their study on assessment of different irrigation management models in Vietnam concludes that the models with increased participation of the community of water users in irrigation management in decision-making process, outcomes in terms of irrigation performance will

be better

Many provinces in China are also reported to get more successful outcomes in irrigation management after the community of water users participate in management activities [Li & Wang, 2004]

However, participation of the community of water users in irrigation management is not “panacea”

to address all the failures when the State managed irrigation systems

Many scientists agree that participation of water users is not sufficient condition for efficient irrigation management One side, they criticize that the community has its own failures and can not work well alone in all circumstances [Krishna, 2003] In the other side, they argue that the success of management with participation of the community has to go together with many other conditions like support from other sectors including the government because the weakness of the community is the lack of skills and authority [Ostrom, 1996; Therkildsen 2000, cited by Krishna, 2003]; Utility and performance of management with participation of the community in managing public or common goods in general and irrigation systems in particular will be enhanced if the community works in partnership with other actors [Owen, 2004]

In irrigation sub-sector, Vuren et al (2002) says that not all cases which engage water users in irrigation management can get better outcomes, for example India and Philippines Peter (2004) also cites examples of India, Pakistan and Nepal where water user associations have collapsed soon after establishment due to the lack of legal framework and partnership with the government

By analyzing trends in performance of 50 samples of irrigation systems (using methods of modelling and perceptions of farmers), Samad and Vermillion (1999) conclude that in Sri Lanka,

organizations and get better outcomes in term of government recurrent expenditures but they do not get higher results in term of crop yields, the quality of irrigation service or the value of agricultural production [Samad and Vermillion, 1999]

2.3 Factors influencing the “success” of irrigation

management with participation of the community

The success is defined as achievement of a goal or just opposite of the failure1 The success of management can be assessed in different ways It can be measured by concrete indicators or just subjective perceptions of people

1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Success

The “success” of irrigation management does not depend only on participation of the community of

water users but also on other factors This implies that motivating the participation of water users may

be a solution to deal with the failures of State-managed irrigation systems but not an integrated solution to address all those failures Some cases can get better outcomes in certain fields of investment, higher agricultural productivity and also can not get better outcomes in other fields According to Schouten and Moriarty (2003), the success or failure of management can be measured

simply by how well the “members” (those who pay) are served Schouten and Moriarty also show the

importance of leadership in persuading and mobilizing people to take part in activities; and partnership

or support by “outsider” like the State or other actors

According to Geijer [1995, cited by Vuren et al, 2002], the difference between the successful (Turkey, Mexico) and un-successful cases (most Asian countries) is caused by the differences in economy, higher literacy rates and standards of living This is confirmed in the study of Vuren et al (2002) about the unsuccessful case of Morroco partly caused by the lack of real incentive mechanism motivating participation and high rate of illiteracy of the farmer

Vermillion [1995, cited by Vuren et al 2002] with his study in 5 countries, concludes five

conditions for the “success” of irrigation management with participation of the community: strong

high-level political support with clear policy direction, legal basis for new managing entities, economic benefits for the farmers, well-defined water rights at system and farmer levels, functional irrigation facilities Wherever there are such good conditions, there will be good outcomes However, Vuren et al also argues that the conditions for success of change in irrigation management are indeed strongly linked to context specificities

Lessons learnt from the case of India that performance monitoring needs to be strengthened and restructuring capacity building with at least 60% management staff trained in aspects of irrigation management with participation of the community [Raju, 2001]

One of the famous papers on the community denotes that characteristics of the community are vital

for the “success” of the community management with participation of the community [Khawaja,

2002] Those include size of the community, inequality and heterogeneity

2.4 Concluding remark

As above reviews, participation of the community is increasingly encouraged in irrigation management in many countries for recent decades Outcomes which it brings about in terms of crop productivity, operation and maintenance of systems, water distribution, irrigation fee collection rates, government expenditures are critical, some better and some not better Debates around it remain a confirmation that participation of the community of water users is a necessary but not a sufficient

bring about better outcomes to irrigation management is influenced by many other factors like the characteristic of the community, strengthening capacity, economy and legal environment support or partnership with the State and other actors Every factor can be very board and play an important role

in irrigation management with participation of the community in certain context specificities

3 IRRIGATION MANAGEMENT IN VIETNAM

This chapter discusses the empirical background of irrigation management in Vietnam Irrigation management in Vietnam has experienced some periods with notable institutional changes These make the role of stakeholders including the State, IDMCs or cooperatives and the farmer change accordingly

3.1 History of irrigation management

Vietnam is an agriculture-dominant country, in which the agriculture sector has a high share of the labour force (52.1%) and GDP (15.53%) [GSO, 20062] As a result, the State and people always pay much attention to irrigation development work as a means to promote agricultural production

In the past, most of irrigation systems were small-scale, which were constructed by farmers themselves to make use of natural advantages of gravity water sources Only some medium- and large-scale systems were constructed during the French colonialism in the South to facilitate agricultural production [Loi, 2004]

In the 1960s, the State started to construct the large-scale irrigation systems in region planning as a solution for agricultural development in whole country These systems were centrally managed by the State in irrigation administration units from provincial to district level Farmers at that time did farming in the collective mode, being beneficiaries of those irrigation systems [Trung, 2006]

This situation lasted until the 1970s with the emergence of series of policies on irrigation system management reform Circular 13-TL dated 6/8/1970 guiding regulations on irrigation system management marked the notable change in irrigation management Irrigation and Drainage Management Companies were established in provinces to manage headwork, main and possibly secondary canals Agriculture or agro-forestry cooperatives were assigned to support managing tertiary and farm canals through the contracts with the IDMCs Notable sign was the decentralization

in which the State gradually reduced its sole role in irrigation management The IDMCs worked as public, non-profit and financially autonomous enterprises However, in some special cases, these companies could receive subsidies from the State [Trung, 2005]

The next marked point for the significant change in irrigation management in Vietnam is the 1990s Originating from the failures in Vietnam and experiences from other countries, the State launched a series of legal documents on management transfer of small-scale irrigation systems (in service of less than 150 ha of land area) or medium- and large-scale ones from the State to the water users to increase participation of water users in irrigation management Farmers are encouraged to become clients participating in irrigation management activities rather than beneficiaries as in the past Accordingly, farmers can form associations (prevalent in the South Vietnam) or manage through cooperatives (prevalent in the North) or groups of farmers [Biltonen, 2004; Plusquellec, 2003] Until 2004, Vietnam had around 13,273 water user groups (11,249 cooperatives, 958 associations and 1,039 groups of farmers) [Tiep, 2004]

3.2 The failure of the State in irrigation management

Prior to the 1990s, the State played the key role in irrigation management Farmers worked in collective production They had to join cooperatives compulsorily and played the role as beneficiaries from irrigation services [Thuan, 2004] There was experience on the failure in irrigation management

2

in this period A lot of research and national workshops confirm these failures [Barker & Molle, 2002; Hung, 2004; Thuan, 2004; Tiep, 2004; Trung, 2006] Among failures, the main ones include:

 Budget deficit: In order to run irrigation systems, it required expenditures for administration, operation

and maintenance of canals, which had to be paid by returns of irrigation fees However, irrigation fee collection rates were low, just around 50% on average of collectable amounts Many systems could not collect these fees, leading to budget deficit and the State had to subsidize these expenditures According

to the Document 3538/BNN-QLN dated 19 October 2000, the total amount of irrigation fee debt of 39 cities nationwide was 272 billion Vietnam dong which the State had to absolve from payment [Loi, 2004]

 Canal deterioration: Canals had been deteriorating for a long time and had to be upgraded and repaired

regularly by returned funds from irrigation fee However, the low rate of irrigation fees collected just met 34-40% total costs for maintenance and regular repairs of irrigation systems [Loi, 2004] Many works lacked funds for big repairs Meanwhile, State budget for canal maintenance was limited Simultaneously, the farmer did not perceive canals as their property so that they were not willing to protect and pay to repair them As a result, canals were deteriorated

 Low quality of irrigation service: irrigation management did not facilitate the connection between water

supply of management units (IDMCs, the cooperative, management boards) and demand of farmers Lack of water used to happen in downstream areas Timing of taking water was not always in time of cropping

 Low efficiency of irrigation systems: One failure was interactive with others Canal deterioration and

low quality of service were main reasons causing low efficiency of irrigation systems Water and land productivities in less or un-irrigated areas were much lower than in irrigated area Water waste happened in many places [Loi, 2004] According to Tiep (2004), upstream areas wasted 5-10 times of designed water volume while downstream areas lacked water

 Water conflict: There were water conflicts between the farmer in downstream and upstream areas and

also among farmers in downstream location

These failures were caused mainly by management rather than technical issues Farmers, the direct beneficiaries and users from irrigation services did not participate in irrigation management They perceived the irrigation systems as the State property and did not have a view to protect and develop these systems As a result, they were not also willing to pay for services or maintenance of works Loi and Trung, among others, concluded that this management mode which did not involve farmer/ water users was not good [Loi, 2004; Trung, 2006] and required a change to increase the participation of the water users in irrigation management

3.3 Increasing participation of the community by

irrigation management transfer

Irrigation management transfer program of small-scale systems or branch canals of large- or scale ones from the State to water users in Vietnam has been in implementation since the 1990s to increase the participation of the community of water users in irrigation management Various legal documents have been launched such as Resolution 06/1998/BTC dated 10/11/1998 on encouraging participation of farmers in investment and management of irrigation schemes; Resolution dated on March 18, 2002 by Central Party Committee emphasizing the development of water user organizations and water management by farmers, Document No 1959/BNN-QLN dated on May 12, 1998 on strengthening grass-root water user organizations in which each irrigation structure should be managed

medium-by a specific organization especially structures within a village or commune, Circular BNN by MARD dated 20 December 2004 on Guiding the establishment and development of water user associations Notably, a Framework Strategy No 3213/BNN-TL on development of participatory irrigation management in Vietnam was established in December, 2004

75/2004/TT-According to the statistics of Central Department of Irrigation and Drainage, in 2004 there were 13,273 water user organizations nationwide under the forms of cooperatives, management boards, user associations and groups of farmers [Tiep, 2004] These organizations are expected to work to reduce

management costs, raise irrigation fee collection rate and ensure funds for maintaining irrigation works [Su, 2004]

3.4 Three current irrigation management models

Currently, irrigation management in Vietnam generally involves the important role of the State and increased role of water users In which, the IDMCs and cooperatives are still the most important management units It is common that IDMCs are responsible for managing headwork and main canals while cooperatives manage the tertiary and farm canals

Trung 2005 categorizes into 3 irrigation management models in Vietnam (see diagram below) The first is the joint management by a state agency and farmer organization (model A); the second is a shared management by a quasi-state organization and a farmer organization (model B); and the third is management solely by a farmer organization (model C)

Diagram 3.1: Irrigation management models in Vietnam

Source: Trung, T.C 2005

Joint management by a state agency and farmer organization

This is the conventional management model and often applied in the medium- or large-scale systems There are three management levels: IDMCs at headwork and main canal level; irrigation station at secondary canal level and cooperatives at tertiary and farm canal level Irrigation stations

make contracts to cooperatives on behalf of IDMCs In these systems, farmers benefit from irrigation service and pay irrigation fee back upto irrigated land area through the cooperative

Shared management by a quasi-state organization and a farmer organization

This model emerges after the transfer program and usually takes place in the large- or medium- scale systems, inter-commune or inter-district At tertiary and farm canal level, management is still done by the cooperative At higher level of secondary and main canals, the management board is established It is often that this board includes governmental staff but works concurrently under

farmers‟ organizations In term of operation, the higher management board signs the water delivery

contracts to the cooperative management board to deliver water for agricultural production of the farmer Farmers then have to pay for the service through the cooperative

Management solely by a farmer organization

This model is often applied in the small-scale irrigation systems The first form is that farmers themselves organize to manage irrigation systems through setting up associations or groups In this model, farmers actively participate in service supply for their agricultural production The second form

is that farmers organized to manage irrigation systems through cooperatives

3.5 Irrigation management through the cooperative

The cooperative, as discussed above, is an important irrigation management unit in Vietnam which presents the water users either to manage small scale systems or to contract with IDMCs or management board for irrigation service in medium- or large-scale ones Although the cooperative has played a role in irrigation management for a long time, that role has been changed along with the institutional changes in irrigation management as well as with reforms for the cooperative In 1996, the cooperative law being issued created many changes in the cooperative In the past, all farmers in one commune had to compulsorily join the cooperative of that commune to produce agriculture in collective modes They were at that time beneficiaries from irrigation services After 1996, farmers have rights to voluntarily be members of the cooperative The cooperatives become the representative

of farmers or water users who are encouraged to participate in irrigation management activities as client of irrigation service

Today, the cooperative is still the most prevalent form of farmers‟ organization in irrigation

management with the number of 11,249 nationwide [Tiep, 2004; Trung, 2006]

As defined in the cooperative law, the cooperative is a collective organization of individuals or households who are legal entities and have common interests, needs, voluntarily invest labour and capital under regulations to make use of collective strengths, increase together the efficiency of production and business as well as improved mental and physical life of members and contribute to the socio-economic development of the country

Normally each cooperative supplies various services like irrigation, seeds, fertilizer, botanical protection and field protection The general organization of the cooperative comprises of management board and supporting groups The management board includes 3-5 people in which one is in charge of general management activities and 1 responsible for irrigation service Supporting groups include 2 accountants, 1 cashier, 1 controller and irrigation-drainage teams [Trung, 2006] Every year, there is a cooperative congress where all plans and decisions are made based on common agreements of participants who are farmers and their representatives

4 METHODOLOGY

The methodology chapter illustrates how the research was carried out to collect data in two study sites

in Tuyen Quang Also, methods and tools used for data collection, processing and analysis are presented

4.1 Analytical framework

The framework employed in this research recognizes the cooperatives in Y La and Kim Phu communes in Tuyen Quang provinces as organizations of the community of water users in irrigation management for the following reasons Firstly, as regulated in the current cooperative law, the cooperative is an organization of farmers who voluntarily join the cooperative to use and benefit from services Comparing with the concept of the community of Schouten and Moriarty (2003) that the community is nothing other than groups of people who come together in interest groups for common purpose, it is right that in this case, farmers join together to use and benefit water for agricultural production Secondly, although not all farmers who use and benefit water for agricultural production can be cooperative members, they are able to participate in meetings of production teams to raise ideas and contribute to decisions Thirdly, in the principle, the cooperative has to work under the cooperative law, it ensures the right of the farmers in management activities by the principle of common agreements by a majority of farmers in the annual congresses

As a result, this research works with the cooperatives to explore how the community is organized

to manage irrigation systems and how management activities are carried out, focusing on three issues: participation of the community in irrigation management, management outcomes and factors

influencing the “success” in irrigation management

Participation of the community in irrigation management: Participation is an abstract word with a very broad meaning However, the research only works to explore how the community organizes (through the cooperatives) and participate in activities of irrigation management when the Province assigned them to be in charge of secondary, tertiary and farm canal management Participation is considered on the aspects of decision making, planning in terms of irrigation schedule and financial plan, canal operation and maintenance as well as monitoring Both management in organization and practice will be explored

Management outcomes: Management outcomes are means to assess the success in irrigation management and the extent to which participation of the community in management activities addresses the failures of the previous State-management irrigation systems Outcomes in irrigation management can be measured by a range of indicators of fee collection rate, crop yields, the quality of irrigation service, maintenance or value of agriculture production

However, in this research, management outcomes/ the success will be assessed by perceptions of the local people using indicators of water distribution, maintenance and financial management Outcomes getting better compared to those of State management in the past in the perception and

The reasons for choosing those indicators to assess the success in irrigation management in the two study sites are that they revealed shortcomings in irrigation systems in the past in Tuyen Quang and lie

in the goals of the Province when increasing participation of the community in managing irrigation systems Concurrently, these are also the direct outcomes from the management In terms of water distribution, water waste and quality of the service relating to timing and quantity of water delivery are assessed Equity between the farmers in different field locations of upstream, midstream and downstream is then considered In terms of maintenance, the main focus is on the satisfaction of farmers on the service of cleaning canals because most of canals in the sites are newly built, so it is difficult to have an assessment on the destruction or deterioration over time Financial management is

considered regarding the irrigation fee collection rate as returns from investment in irrigation service whether the community has funds for maintenance of canals and whether returns can cover costs

At the beginning, the researcher intended to use crop yield or productivity to assess management outcomes However, in order to consider this indicator as a management outcome, it has to be followed by many other assessments, because increased or reduced crop yield or productivity may be consequences of other factors than irrigation management, like new variety, good caring So this indicator is not used in the research to assess management outcomes

Factors influencing the “success” in irrigation management: Factors influencing the success in

irrigation management of the study sites are identified by the local people themselves through a series

of discussions Concurrently, local people also discuss importance of each factor for irrigation management and rank those factors by importance

4.2 Approach

The research focuses on investigating how the community organizes and manages irrigation systems,

irrigation management In order to understand deeply how and why local perceive like that, qualitative approach is the most suitable one to apply Following that way, the research strives to engage all partners/ stakeholders in irrigation management in the study sites of Y La and Kim Phu in a high participatory manner, including communal authorities, irrigation management board of Ngoi La, the large-scale irrigation system, and the cooperatives, local people groups and farmers Phases carried out

to collect information comprise of:

Phase 1: Pre-survey at the study sites

After developing ideas to do research in two communities in Tuyen Quang, pre-survey at study sites is very necessary Firstly, it aimed to provide researcher with general understanding about the sites Adjustment to fill the gap between the idea and practice was done At this phase, some secondary data were also collected Secondly, the researcher tested the sites regarding whether the sites met the requirements of the selection criteria Those contain: (i) sites belong to a large-scale irrigation scheme; (ii) sites have the farmer involving in irrigation management; (iii) one site gets

more “success” than the other Results of this phase were basis for the researcher to develop the

research idea and tools to collect data in next phases

Phase 2: Main survey

This was a main phase of the research to collect data in the field In this phase, all data in service of the research were collected through research methods and tools (see the section below) One emphasis

of this phase was that survey was done in consideration of different groups of water users, including upstream, midstream and downstream farms This enabled the comprehensive vision of issues

Phase 3: Completion

Completion phase was done with the purpose of filling the missing data after the researcher summarized data collected in the survey phase At the end of this phase, results from the fieldtrip survey were also presented to get feedback from the local people

4.3 Methods

4.3.1 Site selection

The research selected Y La and Kim Phu to be study sites These are two communities in Tuyen Quang province, Y La in Tuyen Quang Township and Kim Phu in Yen Son district Both benefit from Ngoi La inter-district irrigation system of which secondary, tertiary and farm canals have been transferred to the member cooperatives to manage Y La is assessed by the Province to be successful

where as Kim Phu is assessed to be unsuccessful However, both sites are not significantly different in term of accessing to water supply source from Ngoi La headwork and main canals (see annex 2)

4.3.2 Literature review

Literature review was done through out the research process At the beginning, the literature review was to identify what people have said or debated around the research issue on the role of the community in irrigation management; how they proved with evidence and what conclusions were Basing on that review, the research developed an analytical framework and data needed in the field Literature review was also carried out during data collection and analysis to fit with those Literature used in this research included debates and related studies discussing around participation of the community in irrigation management, irrigation performance outcomes and factors influencing the

“success” in irrigation management with participation of the community in the world and in Vietnam

4.3.3 Data collection

4.3.2.1 Secondary data collection: Secondary data was collected from the reports and papers by the Province, two communes and cooperatives of study sites, Ngoi La management board Simultaneously, legal documents on irrigation management and data from papers presented in the National Workshop on PIM 2004 were also used

4.3.2.2 Primary data collection:

This research mainly applied the techniques of group discussion, in-depth interviews and observation

to collect primary data

Group discussion: As stated above in the approach sub-section, a series of different group discussions were carried out with different participants These participants comprised of commune authority, the management board, irrigation-drainage teams, production team heads and farmers at upstream, mid-stream and downstream Sometimes they could join together in one group discussion but mainly in separate group discussions Besides, the manager and CPC were separate from group discussions of farmers so that participants could freely and honestly show their ideas and evidence without being pressured by managers or authority In group discussions, apart from discussions on general issues of irrigation management by the cooperatives, tools applied to collect data include:

 Mapping: Although a detailed technical map on irrigation systems and rice fields of two study sites was

provided by Ngoi La management board, another map was drawn by six local people inclusive of the vice head of cooperatives in charge of irrigation service, a land staff of the commune, two production team heads and two experienced farmers Result of the mapping was a simple map allowing the researchers to quickly imagine the community and irrigation canals as well as facilitating local people

irrigation- Transect walk: transect walk was carried out after doing mapping The transect walk helped to check

the map, observe and give reality for discussions later on

In-depth interviews: Along with group discussions, in-depth interviews are rather important to collect primary data In-depth interviews were implemented following the information nodes of clusters in irrigation management These were done to: (i) deeply understand about what have been raised and perceived in group discussions; (ii) get specific cases which are considered as outcomes of

irrigation management or factors influencing the “success” Correspondents of this technique were

identified through group discussions but most were managers, production team heads and farmers who had a prominent role in irrigation management or experienced people Interviewees also included examples of farmers not paying irrigation fees and irrigation-drainage team members paying fine Observation: Observation was carried out during the field work People often had different perceptions/ assessments of one issue As a result, observation contributed to cross-checking information to have concrete discussions

4.3.4 Data analysis

Data analysis and interpretation were done through three periods including data reduction, display and drawing conclusions Data reduction including selecting, focusing, abstracting and transforming was done before, during and after data collection Data display was done as organized to cite the best evidences proving the arguments Preliminary conclusions were then drawn after that

In 2005, the agriculture sector accounts for 35.7 % GDP of the Province

Tuyen Quang has three large rivers flowing through: Lo, Gam and Pho Day The length of Lo river

in the Province is 145 km Besides, there are many small rivers connecting in the three large river valleys to create the water sources supplying water for life and production in the Province2

The terrain of Tuyen Quang is rather complex and separated by mountains and rivers Rice fields are mainly terraced, causing difficulties in the irrigation work

5.2 Characteristics of irrigation systems in Tuyen

Quang

Irrigation systems in Tuyen Quang are in numerous amounts but scale and irrigation area of works are small Currently many of them (61%) are cemented or temporarily-cemented (semi-ground) canals The rest (39%) are unsettled2 [TuyenQuang, 2005]

In 2005 in Tuyen Quang, there are 2,332 irrigation works of irrigation area of more than 1 ha, which serve 75% cultivated agricultural land area

Table 5.1: Irrigation works in Tuyen Quang province

Note: A barrage is an artificial bar or obstacle placed in a river to increase the depth of water

Source: Secondary data, 2005

3

5.3 Irrigation management and irrigation management

transfer in Tuyen Quang

5.3.1 Irrigation management in the past and management transfer to

cooperatives

5.3.1.1 Irrigation management in the past and the need of management transfer to cooperatives

In early 1995, there were 1,342 irrigation systems in Tuyen Quang Due to the characteristics of scattered irrigation systems in the Province, Tuyen Quang had irrigation management into two types The small-scale ones of 1,190 works, which served around 70% of cultivated area, were managed by cooperatives themselves The others of 152 works (11.3%) were managed by the Provincial Drainage and Irrigation Company, serving around 30% cultivated land area [Provincial report, 2005]

Collection work of irrigation fee had been done mainly by the Company who achieved 70 - 80% of planned amount However, irrigation fees for irrigation systems managed by cooperatives were not collected As a result, there was no funds for maintenance so that degraded canals were not repaired leading to inefficiency of irrigation performance [Provincial report, 2005]

Starting from the above failures, the Province has launched a program on which irrigation management is transferred to cooperatives, the organization of farmers, in order to increase irrigation performance, sustainability of the systems and irrigation fee collection rates [Provincial report, 2005] 5.3.1.2 Transfer process and legal framework for the transfer

Tuyen Quang started the transfer process in June 1996 and finished in March 1997 by the Decision

followed and supported by many other documents on irrigation fee level (Decision 299/Q -UB dated

30 March 1996, amended by Decision 37/2006/Q -UBND dated 26 July 2006 and Decision 44/2006/Q -UBND dated 18 August 2006); organization and operation of cooperatives (Decision 911/Q -UB dated 12 December 1995); temporary regulations on management and use of State-supported funds with cements for irrigation system construction (Decision 100/Q -UB dated 5 February 1999)

After transfer, the Drainage and Irrigation Company was dissolved Instead, 156 irrigation management boards have been established including one inter-district, 6 inter-commune and 149 cooperatives within communes [Duong et al 2000, cited by Shank et al, 2004]

5.3.2 Current irrigation management

Currently, irrigation systems in Tuyen Quang are managed by the irrigation management boards at different levels These management boards are entitled to manage transferred irrigation systems but

have to follow guidelines of the Province Commune‟s People Committee is encouraged to support

cooperatives in irrigation management, particularly in irrigation fee collection [Group discussions, 2007]

For inter-district and inter-commune systems, they organize two management levels: cooperative management boards and higher management boards4 Higher management boards seasonally contracts

to member cooperatives to manage tertiary and farm canals while they are in charge of headwork and secondary canals There is a management board at each level responsible for water regulating and maintenance work at that level However, irrigation fee collection work is done by cooperatives [Provincial report, 2005]

For irrigation systems within one commune or village, management is simply managed by the cooperative or village management board who plans, operates and maintains canals as well as monitoring the work by themselves [Provincial report, 2005]

5.4 Management of Ngoi La irrigation system

5.4.1 General characteristics of management

Ngoi La gravity irrigation system originates from Ngoi La reservoir This is inter-district system because it serves for 414 ha of cultivated land area in one school and four communes belonging to the township and Yen Son district of Tuyen Quang [report of Ngoi La management board, 2007]

Irrigation management of the system belongs to the model B as discussed in the background section One management board has been established during 1996 by the Province to manage this irrigation system, including five people: one head, one accountant and three technicians Besides,

chairman of commune People‟s Committee and the head of cooperative members are also included in

this board Main responsibility of the board is to protect and manage the irrigation canals, distributing water to the water-divided valves to the member cooperatives

In member cooperatives, a management board is also established to support Ngoi La to manage canals within the commune where the cooperative is located The cooperative management board works on the contracts signed with Ngoi La seasonally, including distributing water, maintaining canals and collecting irrigation fees Cooperative management board is paid by Ngoi La for this supporting service [report of Ngoi La management board, 2007]

5.4.2 Y La irrigation system management

Y La community was established in 1960 from the immigrants from other plain provinces Thai Binh, Hai Duong and Hung Yen and from the ethnic minorities in the area, like Nung, Tay and Cao Lan The cooperative was also set up at that time, which has been doing many agricultural services including irrigation

Y La cooperative is the largest member cooperative in Ngoi La irrigation system which contracts with a biggest amount of water in every cropping season Most of fields in Y La are supplied with water from Ngoi La source which serves nearly 300 ha of rice land area 80% canals in this system are cemented [report of Ngoi La management board and group discussion, 2007]

As stated above, managing irrigation canals in Y La is done by the cooperative whose management board is selected by farmer representatives in every three year cooperative congresses This cooperative was established long time ago with the compulsory membership of all farmers However, after the Cooperative Law in 1996, the farmer can voluntarily join the cooperatives The cooperative management board is considered as representative of member farmers to do agricultural service Irrigation is the main service among eight ones supplied by Y La cooperative

5.4.3 Kim Phu irrigation system management

Kim Phu community was established in 1960 along with the establishment of Y La The cooperative was initiated at that time gathering all villagers who are migrants from Thai Binh, Hung Yen and Hai Duong In 2003, Kim Phu welcomed the immigrant people from Na Hang district of Tuyen Quang to settle new villages when they had to move due to the construction of the Na Hang electricity hydraulic dam work These new comers have been also joined the cooperative for agricultural services including irrigation

Kim Phu is also one of five member cooperatives in Ngoi La irrigation system, which serves nearly

200 ha of rice land area However, apart from Ngoi La, Kim Phu has other water supplying sources from Kim Thang reservoir and a set of five small lakes within its administrative boundaries