Beneficiary Participation in Irrigation Water Management: The Kerala

move out of the region, or country; there is also the danger that the tasks and responsibilities
might not be properly formulated and carried out. Water Users Association is found to be,
on the other hand, acceptable everywhere. Even in African countries, where farmers have
little experience in modern irrigated agriculture outside the family and tribal structures,
management tasks of operation and maintenance are entrusted to water users, sometimes
specifically linking these tasks to rehabilitation programmes. The governments train the
users and help them set up necessary structures to control disorderly development like overexploitation
of local ground water or temporary over-production. In scattered areas of southern
Sahara countries, non-governmental organisations also provide the required help to the
water users associations.
Beneficiary participation
Another water management issue relates to the division of responsibility between irrigation
officials and irrigation users in (i) operation and maintenance of irrigation and drainage
systems, and (ii) assessment and collection of water charges. To carry out these functions,
there are three types of organisational structures: (i) controlled by farmers (ii) controlled by
government, and (iii) controlled by both government and farmers. For success of any
agricultural programme, beneficiary participation to the extent possible has to be ensured.
The farmers in the study area are inexperienced in administration and management and not
highly educated; they are not competent to handle on their own the technically complex
problem of water distribution. Disputes are common among the farmers everywhere about
water distribution and use which they themselves may find difficult to solve. This fact
points to the need for another agency to act as an arbitrator. In the non-CADA projects, the
exclusive control is with the government of operation, maintenance and assessment, and
collection of water charges. Exclusive control by government is not entertained by farmers.
In all CADA projects, mass participation in management of irrigation projects is sought to
be achieved through formation of BFAs. The extent of mass participation contemplated and
the extent to which it has been realised is discussed later in this section.
Beneficiary participation essentially has come to mean the involvement of the users of
irrigation water in meeting the costs of the scheme, either in part or as in whole. Usually it
is the recurring costs that the beneficiaries pay in part or in full. Beneficiary participation in
the true sense has to go much beyond meeting costs. However, at present, no operational
decisions are taken with beneficiary involvement though a Project Advisory Committee is
in position. This is in contrast with the practice in some countries 48 . At no stage in the
planning, formulation, and implementation of projects were the views of the local people,
the potential beneficiaries, ascertained in Kerala. It is worth noting here that a project is
likely to be more effective and irrigator-participation more active, if a project is launched
with the acceptance of the community 49 . In such cases, the relationship between the
beneficiaries and the government would be cordial and collaborative 50 .
In MIP the fact that management of irrigation demands a co-ordinated approach is not
adequately taken care of. The task of running the projects and supplying water to farmers is
considered the exclusive task of officials. In the release and distribution of water, neither
65