Download full report in pdf format - Natural Resources Institute

To date, much of the debate in Andhra
Pradesh has centred on only two demand
management options, namely, introduction of
irrigated-dryland crops (i.e. crops with an
assumed higher water use productivity than
paddy rice and sugar cane) and increased
electricity tarifs for pumping groundwater for
irrigation. However, as Figure 55 shows there are
many other demand management options that
could be considered. Figure 55 also illustrates
that demand management actions and objectives
vary with scale.
8.6 Recommendation 5 –
Use of GIS-linked participatory
assessments as part of the M&E
of rural water supply
programmes
Participatory assessments carried out as part of
the Water Audit revealed a major disparity
between official statistics and the users’ view of
the status of domestic water supplies. One reason
for this disparity is the strong emphasis of current
rural water supply M&E on the functioning of
infrastructure and the meeting of supply norms
(i.e. 40 lpcd). Many of the other potential
problems faced by users are ignored by existing
M&E systems. However, these additional
problems can be considered and appropriate steps
could be taken if routine M&E and response
systems take users’ views into account.
With regard to routine M&E, the
participatory assessment methodology used
during the Water Audit does not have many of
the constraints of participatory rural appraisaltype
methodologies. In particular, it is rapid
(a small team takes one day per village) and it
produces numerical data that can be stored and
analysed with relative ease and presented in
tables, GIS layouts or other formats that are easy
to assimilate and act upon by decision makers.
8.7 Recommendation 6 –
Reassessment of “official”
water-related statistics
The survey work carried out primarily by
government departments to groundtruth
secondary data has shown large discrepancies
between “official” water-related statistics and the
reality observed in the study mandals. The
“official” statistics that showed the largest and
most important discrepancies included: well
numbers, land areas under irrigation and numbers
of domestic water points not meeting Rajiv
Gandhi National Drinking Water Mission norms.
Since well number and irrigated area statistics are
used for estimating stage of groundwater
development, this is currently grossly
underestimated. The discrepancies relating to
domestic water supplies, if they are representative
of the region, put in question the state level
statistics. More recent information gathered on
fluoride levels by the WHiRL project casts some
doubt over official statistics relating to the
incidence of fluoride in domestic water supplies.
Many of the statistics listed in this report are used
to underpin policies and inform decisions that
involve disbursement of huge amounts of
expenditure, for example, decisions relating to:
watershed development-type work, groundwater
development, NABARD loans, power sector
reform, protection of rural water supplies, river
basin management, inter-basin transfers, tank
rehabilitation and irrigation development.
Findings from the Audit have also shown that
some of the beliefs that also underpin the many
programmes (e.g. annual runoff is 30-40% of
annual rainfall) need to be re-evaluated. Hence it
is strongly recommended that further checks on
relevant official statistics be carried out.
In discussions with line department and NGO
staff, the accessibility of information was
frequently cited as being a problem. Although, in
many cases, relevant staff know that the waterrelated
information they need is being collected or
held by a particular department, it is not always
readily accessible in a format that makes it
immediately useful. It is therefore recommended
that consideration be given to creating systems
that improve both the quality and accessibility of
water-related information. Given the importance
of water resource management in Andhra
Pradesh, it is also recommended that
consideration be given to setting up a unit that
has specific responsibility for the management of
water-related information.
97