07.03.2014 Views

economics of on-farm development - Institute for Social and ...

economics of on-farm development - Institute for Social and ...

economics of on-farm development - Institute for Social and ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

proporti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> fanners benefited under MCS is the highest in the head reaches (43<br />

%), followed by 38 per cent in the middle reaches <strong>and</strong> 32 per cent in the tail cnd.<br />

Thc coverage <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the area under the MCS is also very less across the three<br />

locati<strong>on</strong>s, the highest share being in the head reaches at 30 per cent, followed by<br />

28 per cent in the middle reaches <strong>and</strong> 14 per cent in the tail reaches (Table 6.24).<br />

Table 6.24: Farmers benefited by MCS in the Kallada project- Locati<strong>on</strong>wise<br />

Locati<strong>on</strong><br />

Benefited under the MCS<br />

Farmers (%) Area (acres) Area (%)<br />

Avg. size <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> holding<br />

(acres)<br />

Head 43.08 49.94 30.26 1.62<br />

Middle 3804 48.70 28.32 2.35<br />

Tail 32.45 17.72 14.23 0.68<br />

Total 34.65 116.36 25.21 1.43<br />

As reported already. ill P~~chi,<br />

<strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the two projects selected <strong>for</strong> the<br />

study. the groundwatcr !e\cl has increased after the introducti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> canal<br />

irrigati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Similar is the case with Kallada also. However. the intensity <strong>and</strong><br />

spread <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> groundwater recharge in the Kallada project is less, because, a major<br />

part <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the canal system is under the MCS wherein. percolati<strong>on</strong> loss is obviously<br />

low. Even so. a sizeable proporti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>farm</strong>ers has reported <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> having benefited<br />

by groundwater recharge as rcvcaled by the data presented in table 6.25.<br />

Table 6.25: Percentage <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>farm</strong>ers having water sources <strong>for</strong> irrigati<strong>on</strong>,<br />

including groundwater-Locati<strong>on</strong>-wise<br />

Details<br />

I<br />

lIead Reach Middle Reach Tail Reach Overall<br />

Groundwater sources 74.36 70.77 68.42 71.50<br />

Canal recharging 34.45 26.83 21.80 27.34<br />

Hydrants fixed 43.59 43.08 36.84 41.50<br />

Pump sets installed E05 27.69 24.56 28.50<br />

Total sample size 7& 65 57 200<br />

261

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!