The Farmer-led Irrigation Development Guide A what, why and how-to for intervention design About the Water Global Practice Launched in 2014, the World Bank Group’s Water Global Practice brings together financing, knowledge, and implementation in one platform. By combining the Bank’s global knowledge with country investments, this model generates more firepower for transformational solutions to help countries grow sustainably. Please visit us at www.worldbank.org/water or follow us on Twitter at @WorldBankWater. About GWSP This publication received the support of the Global Water Security & Sanitation Partnership (GWSP). GWSP is a multidonor trust fund administered by the World Bank’s Water Global Practice and supported by Austria’s Federal Ministry of Finance, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Denmark’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Netherlands’ Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, Switzerland’s State Secretariat for Economic Affairs, the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, and the U.S. Agency for International Development. Please visit us at www.worldbank.org/gwsp or follow us on Twitter #gwsp. The Farmer-led Irrigation Development Guide A what, why and how-to for intervention design Acknowledgments © 2021 International Bank for Reconstruction and The FLIDguide was prepared collaboratively by a group of authors from a wide set of Development/The World Bank specializations in water resources, smallholder irrigation and agricultural development. The authoring team was led by Gabriella Izzi (Senior Irrigation Specialist, The World 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433 Bank), Jonathan Denison (Lead Consultant), and Gert Jan Veldwisch (Associate Professor, Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank. Wageningen University). org The collaborating authors were, in alphabetical order: Stéphan Abric, Joy Busolo, Evan This work is a product of the staff of The World Christen, Nicole Lefore, Mutsa Masiyandima, Maria Guglielma da Passano, Barbara Bank with external contributions. The findings, Schreiner and Vikramjeet Sharma. Vandana Thottoli made valuable contributions to the interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this section on markets. Petra Schmitter and Thai Thi Minh (IWMI) kindly provided material work do not necessarily reflect the views of The that was included in the policy diagnostic information boxes. Pierrick Fraval, Innocent World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the Nzeyimana, Sanjay Pahuja, Pieter Waalewijn, Vinay Vutukuru and Andrew Sanewe made governments they represent. contributions to cases and to the information boxes. Guidance on graphics concept formulation and the design and layout of the FLIDguide were provided by Dudu Coelho. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy Ashton Dingle, Will Bendix and Derrick Bizimana gave graphics support. Catherine of the data included in this work. The boundaries, Andersson managed operations and Elana Bregin provided editorial input. colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment The FLIDguide preparation was carried out as part of the Water in Agriculture Global on the part of The World Bank concerning the Solution Group of the World Bank, and the authoring team is particularly appreciative of the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or overall guidance received from Pieter Waalewijn and Regassa Namara. The authoring team acceptance of such boundaries. is also grateful for the insightful reviews by numerous colleagues from the World Bank Group, including: Catherine Tovey, Eeman Amjad, Diego Arias Carballo, David Casanova, Rights and Permissions Richard Colback, IJsbrand de Jong, Kamila Galeza, Lucy Lytton, François Onimus, Joop Stoutjesdijk,Yukio Tanaka, Jorge Treviño, Rémi Trier and Svetlana Valieva. Many thanks also The material in this work is subject to copyright. to Karim Maria Krchnak and the 2030 WRG team for their inputs. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in All photo credits are provided on page vi. The team is particularly grateful to IWMI WLE for whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as use of their many open access photos. long as full attribution to this work is given. Citation: Any queries on rights and licenses, including Izzi, G., J. Denison and G.J. Veldwisch, eds. 2021. The Farmer-led Irrigation Development subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Guide: A what, why and how-to for intervention design. Washington, DC: World Bank. Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202- 522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org Contents Main Guide i-Boxes 37 A FLID systems framework 38 FOREWORD v B Catalizing FLID: Examples 42 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS vi C Notes on persuasive approaches 44 1 Why FLID? 01 D Working principles in FLID engagement 45 2 Understanding FLID 05 E Choice of financing instruments 47 3 Organization of the guide 07 F Outcome and choice of indicators for the FLID operation 49 4 Carry out your diagnostic 10 G Beneficiaries of a FLID operation 51 5 Consolidating the diagnostic 13 H Facilitating inclusion and shared benefits from irrigation 52 6 From diagnostic to interventions 19 I Field level leadership 54 7 From interventions to conceptualizing the J Uganda country case 57 operation 23 K Uganda country case – Setting up the (partial) subsidy 8 From concept to operation design 26 intervention 63 9 Readiness 32 L Uganda country case – Leveraging digital 64 10 Learning during implementation 33 M Uganda country case – Training public officials in a COVID- constrained setting 65 11 Illustrative examples of FLID operations 34 N Uganda country case – Communication strategy 67 12 Conclusion 36 O Niger country case 69 REFERENCES 75 THE FA R M E R - L E D I R R I G AT I O N D E V E LO P MENT GUIDE iii Modules Module 6 – Output Markets 6.1 Market systems and FLID Module 1 – Resource Potential 6.2 Diagnostic and scoring 1.1 Natural resources and FLID potential 6.3 Market access intervention examples 1.2 Diagnostic and scoring of the resource potential factor 6.4 Concluding note 1.3 Concluding note Module 7 – Technology Module 2 – Farmer Benefits 7.1 Technology and the farmer 2.1 Who is “the farmer”? 7.2 Diagnostic and scoring 2.2 Irrigation returns at field level 7.3 Guidance on intervention planning 2.3 Diagnostic and scoring of the farmer-benefits factor 7.4 Concluding note 2.4 Concluding note Module 3 – Policy and Legal 3.1 Water and land tenure in a FLID context? 3.2 Diagnostic and scoring Photo credits: 3.3 Examples of interventions Cover (from left, top row): Jonathan Denison | Gert Jan Veldwisch | Stéfan Abric | (middle row) Georgina Goodwin/Arete Stories | 3.4 Concluding note SunCulture Kenya | Adam Öjdahl/IWMI | (bottom row) Anouk Delafortrie/EU Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations | Module 4 – Knowledge JM Kelvin | Jacques Lemoalle 4.1 Irrigation actors and knowledge systems Page vii: Mulugeta Ayene/WLE 4.2 Diagnostic and scoring Page viii: David Brazier/IWMI 4.3 Examples of interventions Page 4: Jonathan Denison Pages 12, 61, 72: Nana Kofi Acquah/IWMI Module 5 – Finance Page 16: Stéfan Abric 5.1 Affordable financing in a FLID context Page 17: SunCulture Kenya 5.2 Diagnostic and scoring Page 21: Agriworks Uganda 5.3 Examples of interventions Page 29: Stéfan Abric 5.4 Concluding note Pages 37, 76: Romain Vidal/Water Alternatives iv THE FAR MER-LED IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT GUIDE Foreword Water is essential for communities – for drinking, for growing the by creating an enabling environment for smallholder farmers, food we eat and sell, for supporting the ecosystems within which while private sector can contribute through co-created solutions, we thrive. Ensuring sustainable management and access to water to open up possibilities for those who are less well connected and and sanitation for all is key for resilient livelihoods and for achieving resourced, and monitor the environmental and social impacts. the Sustainable Development Goals. FLID requires a new frame of mind, new modes of engagement, Climate shocks, inequitable access to water resources, critical new ways of learning, new technologies, new partnerships and weaknesses in the resilience of the natural resources on which new tools. The World Bank, through its Farmer-led Irrigation much of human livelihood depends and economic woes Development Initiative, and with many global and regional partners, amplified by the COVID-19 pandemic have resulted increasingly in aims to support solid diagnostics, practical guidance and policy institutional and economic water scarcity. This impacts heavily on change. The Guide consolidates this knowledge and hopes to farmers, particularly in Africa, disrupting their capacity to produce inspire informed action! and sell and severely affecting income and livelihoods. Scaling up and accelerating Farmer-led Irrigation Development (FLID) holds significant potential for short-term recovery for the most vulnerable farmers and, in the longer term, can also help to safeguard domestic food security and strengthen farmers’ ability to recover from shocks and adapt to a changing Jennifer J. Sara environment. FLID recognizes that farmers have persistently filled Global Director, Water Global Practice the gap where public-led irrigation services haven’t reached World Bank and improved on them where they do exist. They have taken the initiative to expand irrigation, optimize and increase productivity. They have developed technologies, invested, and crafted market linkages. And they have seen quick returns on their efforts, often against all odds. This guide aims to provide governments with the practical strategies to catalyze FLID and scale it up, making it a faster, more sustainable and inclusive process. Public sector can assist THE FAR M E R -LE D I RRI G ATI O N D E V E LO P MEN T GUIDE v Abbreviations and acronyms 4P public-private-producer partnership MSP multi-stakeholder platform DLI disbursement linked indicator NGO non-governmental organisation DPO development policy operation O&M operation and maintenance FLID farmer-led irrigation development PAYG pay-as-you-go FLL field level leadership PforR program-for-results GDP gross domestic product RECA Réseau national des Chambres d’Agriculture du Niger ha hectare (National Network of Chambers of Agriculture of Niger) i-box information box SDG Sustainable Development Goal ICT information and communication technology SIIP Sahel Irrigation Initiative Project IPF investment project finance SPIN Strategie de la Petite Irrigation au Niger (Small-scale Irrigation Strategy of Niger) M&E monitoring and evaluation TOR Terms of Reference MIS monitoring and information system vi Get the most from your guide NAVIGATING THE GUIDE ji To move quickly and easily between the interlinked information, set up your PDF reader so that the j PREVIOUS VIEW and i  NEXT VIEW buttons (as distinct from l previous page and k next page) are installed on the toolbar at the top of your screen. You can then freely explore the document using the navigation pane on the left of your reader or the many hyperlinks provided in the text, and backtrack to the start by repeatedly hitting the j button. To install the buttons (in Adobe Reader), ¢ Right-click anywhere on the toolbar and select them in the Show Page Navigation Tools options; or ¢ open the View drop down menu and select them from the Page Navigation options. Alternatively, try using these keyboard shortcuts: Windows: Press the alt key and t or u arrow Mac: Press the command key and [ or ] square bracket PRINTING Office desktop printers cannot print to the edge of the paper. To print pages of this document without losing any content, ¢ choose File > Print, and in the page sizing and handling area or pop-up menu, select Fit to Printable Area or Shrink to Printable Area. vii viii THE FAR MER- LED IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT GUIDE 1 Why FLID? Smallholder farmers take the lead in irrigation development I expansion   rrigation has multiple benefits for farmers. It allows for Larger areas with more farmers irrigating early-season planting, production of an additional crop where resources are plentiful in the dry season and crop diversification, and enables farmers to cope with dry spells in the wet season. productivity gains Individually or in groups, farmers have, for centuries, Better water productivity and yields where introduced, expanded and optimized their irrigated production resources are increasingly scarce without dependence on external support. Farmer-led irrigation development (FLID) unfolds without being driven by government and has taken place largely “off-the-record”. Over profitability increase the last two decades there has been increased awareness, by Better business strategies for higher incomes governments and development partners, of the massive areas and improved livelihoods involved and the potential gains that FLID can bring. Characteristically, farmers who autonomously develop irrigation are entrepreneurial innovators, targeting new markets and investing their own resources. Hundreds of In places where water and land are more limited, expansion of irrigated thousands of farmers have developed irrigation themselves, areas increases competition over water resources. In water-stressed but many more could benefit from improved agricultural water FLID contexts, such as in selected watersheds in Africa, there is use practices. Many smallholder farmers are constrained by potential for optimization to increase productivity and profitability. unfavorable surrounding conditions that slows their growth. Public interventions with a sustainability focus can improve the They face hurdles which elevate risks and increase both livelihoods of millions of farmers by increasing water productivity and financial and transaction costs. Where there is natural resource decreasing water access uncertainties. potential, such as in large parts of Africa, public action can help to address these hurdles. Public interventions with an The FLIDguide is a resource pack to help governments, development expansion focus have the potential to widen the circle of practitioners and other key stakeholders design public interventions people who benefit, making it a faster and more inclusive to catalyze FLID. It has a focus on Africa, but much of the material will process. be relevant to other regional contexts. THE FAR M E R -LE D I RRI G ATI O N D E V E LO P MEN T GUIDE 01 Catalyzing FLID is of interest to governments because of the Government motivations advantages when compared with conventional public-led irrigation to facilitate FLID development: All across Africa, governments are setting ambitious targets for irrigation expansion, agricultural intensification and increased productivity over the next decades. Irrigation contributes to the achievement of priority country development goals such 1 FLID imposes less burden on public finances: In other words, supporting FLID enables more farmers to benefit for the same public outlay. This is because: ¢ The unit investment costs are generally lower as farmers inevitably as those shown in Figure 1. Irrigation benefits are also aligned initiate their own irrigation activities where water is in close proximity to to high-level global development objectives such as the fields. Limited infrastructure is required to mobilize water. Public costs Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). are typically less than one third and the returns on investment are three to five times higher. ¢ Farmers typically finance irrigation development with their own S Increased agricultural GDP money. Sometimes public resources might complement farmers’ S Economic growth investment, but never replace it. S National debt reduction ¢ Farmers are primarily responsible for operation and maintenance (O&M). This is always the case with individual irrigation systems which S Reduced rural poverty are privately owned, thereby reducing the long-term public financial S Improved food security and nutrition burden associated with public schemes. 2 S Better water resource prioritization Farmers get irrigation faster: Views on “irrigation” are often S Improved resilience fixated on concrete and steel which not only are relatively costly, but have long construction timelines. This conflicts S Climate change adaptation with governments’ need to respond quickly to natural disasters such S COVID-19 recovery as droughts or pandemics, with related economic downturns. In catalyzing FLID, irrigation can be developed in a matter of months as the emphasis is on large numbers of small and simple systems. 3 Figure 1 High-level benefits of FLID More farmers benefit, including women: When farmers drive Public-led irrigation scheme development often fails to achieve the irrigation development process, access to resources and these promising outcomes. Public institutions seldom have tenure arrangements are less of a constraint than in the case the capacity and funding resources to accelerate irrigation of public-led irrigation development. Catalyzing FLID brings greater development at the needed rate. inclusion and can be a game changer for women farmers. 02 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E Users of the guide If you are working in the agricultural, food production or irrigation sector, then this guide is for you. Users will include specialists, practitioners and researchers from government agencies, development partners and NGOs, among others. To catalyze FLID you will need a mix of skills on your team, including engineering, agri-finance, irrigation agronomy, marketing, knowledge- exchange, and water resources management. The guide is written by and for people from these fields and is geared for practical application. FLID defined Woodhouse et al. (2017), who first popularized the term, define FLID as a process where farmers take the driving seat to improve their agricultural water use. Farmers bring in or develop new ideas and technologies, change investment patterns, and create new knowledge – inevitably involving other actors (such as the surrounding community, government, and the private sector). They are characteristically entrepreneurial, intentionally take risks and farm for cash. They are also widely diverse in their scale, to catalyze | an interaction at the critical point of transition so technology use and farming methods. FLID is thus not a typology or that the process requires a smaller push to clear the barrier. linked to one technology (such as small pumps) but is best viewed as a dynamic and unfolding development process. Recognition of “process” catalyzing FLID | an intervention in the surrounding requires a more reflexive approach that first aims to understand local environment of farmers and the private sector that enables: diversity and the weaknesses in the dynamic system, and then identifies n easier entry for new irrigation farmers, opportune interventions that catalyze constructive change. Some FLID n faster progress for those already irrigating, and animations can be found here: FLID-WB; FLID-SAFI. n inclusion of a wider circle of people who benefit. FLID is not limited to a defined range of farm sizes, but in Africa it typically involves farmers on less than 10 ha of land – with most on less than 2 ha. The main focus of the FLIDguide is on smallholders because they are the people generally less equipped – financially and in their access to knowledge – to overcome the binding constraints posed by an unfavorable surrounding environment. This does not mean, however, that FLID Ideas on how has a small impact. On the contrary, while individual farms are mostly small, they occur in such to pitch FLID massive numbers that, collectively, they have large impacts on food production, the economy, and their surrounding landscapes. THE FA R M E R - L E D I R R I G AT I O N D E V E LO P MENT GUIDE 03 FLID contexts FLID processes are commonly observed where there are certain combinations of landscape, geographical and water resource features. Water sources are usually near the fields, and the topography generally allows for simple and low- Figure 2 Locations cost technology to be used, although often with a heavy labor requirement for water lifting and earthmoving. Some and situations where of the contexts in which farmers take the lead in developing irrigated agriculture are outlined in Figure 2. FLID is prominent The most familiar contexts of FLID Wetlands Near large-scale Ponds, (dambos & schemes rivers & fadama) (tail & drainage groundwater water) Mountains & Urban outflows hillsides (streams (effluent & & springs) drainage flows) In wetter areas, farmers In wetland areas, bunds In urban and peri-urban Along canals, drains and In floodplains and flat often build diversion and drains are settings farmers use a tailwater outlets of many areas where groundwater structures on mountain constructed to control variety of wastewater major irrigation schemes, is well below the root streams leading water shallow groundwater sources, such as the individuals divert or zone, but still shallow into gravity irrigation levels just below the outflows from pump water to land on enough to access with systems using canals root zone to enable wastewater treatment the periphery. Soils are open wells (typically and flood irrigation. plant growth through plants and open roadside often marginal and water < 15 m), petrol and diesel Where the topography capillary action. drains. Water-quality unreliable. Technologies pumps, bucket-and-rope and financial means issues from sewage and are similar to open water systems, and solar- allow, plastic pipelines urban pollutants are bodies. electric pumps are used. feeding hoses or potentially serious. Similar technologies are sprinklers are used. used alongside rivers and within reservoirs of dams. mostly farmers’ groups mostly individual farmers 04 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E 2 Understanding FLID The FLIDguide describes how to approach the design Surrounding the farm is a set of external realities and the factors link to each of public operations to catalyze FLID. The approach other and across the different scales – local and beyond. The factors are not is founded on a rigorous yet rapid diagnostic of FLID only interconnected and interactive, but are also dynamic. A change in one potential and constraints. Constraints can be prioritized, factor affects the others in different measures (much like pulling one string and example interventions to address specific constraints in a net) and often with unexpected outcomes. Providing quality information, can inspire and inform the intervention design. How the for example, about on-farm water management or output-markets, can interventions are packaged together in an operation will cascade into a series of benefits for a farmer. The same holds true for access be different for each situation. to innovative technology, which can be achieved indirectly, through increased funding for research and development, or more directly by reducing import tariffs or facilitating access to loan-finance. On the flip side, small changes to Diagnostic Scoring critical elements can also undermine the farm operation, sometimes quickly. Interventions A fuel price hike, unavailability 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 Operations 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 of plant protection chemicals, a water conflict, or theft of a Resource Farmer key component, can trigger a potential benefits rapid cascade into failure of the irrigation enterprise. Identifying the Seven factors opportunities to trigger catalytic positive changes in The FLIDguide captures the complexity of the system the entire system at Farm by describing seven factors, shown in Figure 3 (details in business strategy national, local and farm i-box A). The structure guides the diagnostic of the system Policy levels, is the essence & Technology and is used to inform the design of public interventions to of responsive FLID legal trigger catalytic change. interventions. More It is difficult to understand which interventions will be most examples are provided effective in catalyzing FLID in a given situation because in i-box A. there are many interrelated factors. Irrigation farming is a Knowledge Markets complex socio-technical-ecological system that revolves Figure 3 Finance around the irrigation farmer and his or her farm business Seven factors for strategy. understanding FLID systems THE FA R M E R - L E D I R R I G AT I O N D E V E LO P MENT GUIDE 05 Rapid diagnostic approach of the enabling conditions, where constraints may be limiting FLID, is shown in the bottom half of the plot (the five blue axes). The diagnostic of the seven factors of the FLID framework defines When the surrounding environment is weak, meaning that the the potential for FLID and the constraints that are faced by farmers constraints to farmers developing their own systems are numerous who wish to develop or who are already developing their own or severe, the factor will be scored low. A low score means that a irrigation systems. Guidance on carrying out the diagnostic and public intervention is needed to change, improve, or strengthen scoring the potential and constraints is provided as a basis for the the situation to catalize FLID. Where the environment is assessed design of interventions. The outcome of the diagnostic is visually to be strong, with a high score, interventions are not needed and summarized on a multi-axial spider plot (example in Figure 4). public effort should be focused elsewhere rather than changing an autonomous dynamic which is working. The rationale for FLID is presented in the top half of the plot (the two green axes). The higher the score of these two axes (resource Pragmatism is needed when determining priorities and designing potential and farmer benefits) the more reason for farmers to interventions. It is important that only the truly significant constraints engage in, and private sector to support, irrigation. The status are addressed. Resource Farmer Rationale No attempt should be made to potential benefits for irrigation “fix things that are not broken” just because they are less than IL LU S T RAT IV E perfect, or do not fit conventional EX A M PL E experience. Such attempts can 1 = very weak waste scarce program resources 2 = weak – or worse, lead to unintended 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 3 = moderate outcomes. 4 = strong Policy Technology 5 = very strong & legal Figure 4 FLID systems framework applied for diagnosis and strategic planning of Knowledge Markets responses – As you work through the Enabling modules you will be guided to assess Finance conditions and score each of these axes (use the blank spider plot provided on page 12) 06 THE FA RM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E 3 Organization of the guide The main volume of the FLIDguide presents the core body of information that explains FLID and the process of intervention design. Thematic descriptions are included in seven modules. Information boxes (i-boxes) at the back of the Main Guide and each module provide additional detail, and hyperlinks throughout the guide access relevant external publications, websites, animation clips and videos. Info-Box Info-Box i-Box i-Box Module 1 Module 7 Resource Info-Box Technology Potential i-Box The Farmer-led Info-Box Info-Box i-Box Irrigation i-Box Development Module 2 Guide Module 6 Farmer Benefits A what, why and how-to for Markets intervention design If you have little time Info-Box Info-Box i-Box i-Box available, read the Main Guide and then refer to Module 3 Info-Box Module 5 i-Box the seven modules as Policy & Legal Finance Module 4 and when you need to. Knowledge FLIDguide layers of information THE FAR M E R -LE D I RRI G ATI O N D E V E LO P MEN T GUIDE 07 FLIDguide modules MODULE 1 MODULE 3 Resource Potential – Natural Policy and Legal – The rules of the resource availability and the cost game of mobilization A systematic approach for the review of water, land and The potential for irrigation development that is led by farmers other relevant policies and laws is described. The emphasis is mainly depends on the availability of the water and land resource base, on water and land, as the thematic details in the other modules inform and the cost of mobilizing the water from the source to the land. the policy and legal considerations and the scoring of each related Farmers initiate irrigation most easily where water is in close factor. FLID expansion and intensification brings not only multiple proximity to land where irrigation can be undertaken manually, benefits but also new challenges, especially for water permitting and with labor-based construction, or with low-cost equipment. The regulation, and for land tenure systems. Where the policy and legal implications of infrastructure scale are shown to be important. environment is identified as a constraint to autonomous FLID, examples Not only are the unit costs lower for small-scale systems, of interventions – including hybrid water law, institutional “bricolage”, but the most expansion potential is where many small-scale decentralized water management, and land tenure responses – are technologies can be used together to achieve large-scale described. impacts. MODULE 4 MODULE 2 Knowledge – FLID actors and their Farmer Benefits – The case information networks for irrigation from the farmers’ Farmers need relevant knowledge across many perspective disciplines to be successful. They learn from each other, extension The farmer, and his or her success in irrigation farming, is the officers, the internet, and from the private sector (especially main focus of the FLIDguide. You need to understand the technology and input suppliers, finance institutions and aggregators). different kinds of farmers, their motivations and their farming The module outlines what to consider when assessing the agricultural strategies. Pointers are given on the development of farming knowledge environment for FLID. It describes the actors and their typologies to aid the targeting of intervention designs. Irrigation often overlapping roles in services and knowledge provision. farming benefits, associated with expansion, intensification and Example interventions that are described include multi-stakeholder resilience, are discussed, along with guidance on the scoring of and innovation platforms; information dissemination through media farmer benefits. outreach (including information and communication technology responses); and facilitated farmer-to-farmer learning. 08 THE FARMER-LED IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT GUIDE MODULE 5 MODULE 7 Finance – Implications and options Technology – FLID technologies for irrigation financing and their social implications Access to finance is a potential constraint to farmers This module describes the multiple ways in acquiring both agricultural production inputs and irrigation in which technologies are embedded in wider social infrastructure. This module is focused on equipment and infrastructure and organizational relations at farm level. Transformative financing challenges. The semi-visibility of FLID, its diverse and technologies with application to many different FLID contexts autonomous character, and the wide range of actors interacting with are outlined. Some risks, pitfalls and assumptions related farmers in the process pose unique challenges when trying to improve to technologies and their use are outlined, illustrated by financial access. Four financing models that can be included in FLID examples from across Africa. Technologies are not stand- support interventions, independently or in combinations, are described. alone interventions, but are always part of other interventions, The importance of integrated responses is highlighted, where financing such as the financing of equipment purchases, or knowledge arrangements are supported with technical, agronomic and marketing exchange around use and maintenance. The intervention information to increase the chance of successful outcomes. section addresses this integration; it shows that technologies have social requirements and social effects, and why different MODULE 6 technologies are suited to different types of farmers. Markets – Strengthening output value chains Smallholder farmers are dynamic economic actors, but often struggle with the reality of weak value chains, where benefits are skewed towards corporate agri-business or powerful market intermediaries. The important role of informal markets, where smallholder farmers often have more agency, is highlighted. Value chain actors have a pivotal role in supporting irrigation expansion and intensification. Market sounding, as a way of assessing capabilities and preferences, is described. When marketing is identified as a constraint to autonomous FLID, interventions can overcome these. Example interventions include: organizing both informal groups and formal producer organizations; digital technologies for networks; and market knowledge exchange platforms. THE FA R M E R - L E D I R R I G AT I O N D E V E LO P MENT GUIDE 09 4 Carry out your diagnostic Resource potential Farmer benefits Work through the process The FLIDguide leads you through the diagnostic and scoring process. Specifically, it helps you to: 1 Explore and gain a better understanding of each of the seven factors. These considerations are “things to think about”, intended to raise awareness about the factor in general. Policy & legal Detailed Technology 2 guidance on Summarize the information to be collected diagnostic and in the diagnostic process for each factor. A scoring sample scope of work in the form of an outline Terms of Reference (TOR) is included in each of the modules. These provide guidance for contracting a specialist to undertake the diagnostic. Knowledge Markets Finance 3 Score the factor. The score reflects the strength of the factor in relation to the rationale for FLID (upper axes), or the enabling conditions (lower axes). Where opportunities and constraints are significant, this highlights that intervention responses are needed! Scoring of the factors is indicative at best and the process is more about prompting enquiry Click on the icons above to access the modules, detailed guidance on scoring, and outline TOR into constraints than a definitive conclusion in itself. for the respective FLID factors Scoring TOR Guiding questions for the scoring of each factor are included in an i-box in each module. A blank spider plot is included on page 12 and can be used as a sketch page to summarize your results as they emerge from In the end, the spider plot will capture your justification for scoring the relative the diagnostic and scoring activities. importance of factors and the key interventions to be further elaborated. 10 THE FAR MER- LED IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT GUIDE Who participates in the diagnostic? In developing irrigated agriculture farmers encounter many private and public stakeholders who Use the terms that have different interests and specializations, often distant from irrigation farming itself (Figure 5). resonate with national Part of the challenge of catalyzing FLID is to build bridges of understanding across these diverse stakeholders stakeholders to maximize cross-sectoral synergies to support farmers and achieve meaningful Each country has its own development outcomes. It is critical that all stakeholders have a seat at the table. Having only terminology, which may not one or two stakeholders (such as a sectoral Ministry or an include the term “FLID”. Some irrigation agency) involved in the diagnostic could lead to terminology highlights the Diversity is a public action that is based on the roles and functions of the scale of the irrigation farm itself strength to capitalize few involved and fails to address the priority constraints. (such as micro-scale, small- on, both for insights scale), or the kind of farmers Some stakeholders may not immediately see the and for action. It is who are targeted. It may be opportunities in driving a FLID agenda and the importance best to involve opportune to avoid using of joining the FLID diagnostic. Some notes on making a people from early on “irrigation” in a program title persuasive case are presented in i-box C. in the process. at all and rather use phrases Value chain like “smallholder horticulture” Ministry of actors Finance Water Basin or “commercialization of The final scoring Authority smallholder farmers”. Ministry of the process is offered Environment Development Whatever the term chosen, as a tool to partners Supplier make sure that it leaves encourage companies no room for confusion in the various Ministry of conveying that supporting stakeholders Agriculture Research farmers in developing their to exchange institutions own irrigation systems is about ideas on the Ministry large-scale impact, because of potential, on the Regional of Water Government the large numbers of farmers nature and severity Local Financial involved. constraints, and on institutions Government Farmers’ priorities in relation to the organizations Figure 5 other FLID factors. The final score Stakeholders who should reflects, rather than informs, any conclusions. have a seat at the diagnostic table THE FA R M E R - L E D I R R I G AT I O N D E V E LO P MENT GUIDE 11 Illustrative cases: Assess and score the factors Uganda Use the blank spider plot below to summarize the key elements of your diagnostic across the seven axes. Good luck! Niger Justification for score Justification for score Resource Farmer potential benefits 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 Justification for score Policy Justification for score & legal Technology Knowledge Markets Finance Justification for score Justification for score Justification for score 12 ER-L THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E 5 Consolidating the diagnostic Once the diagnostic is concluded, and with the scores Moving from left to right in Figure 6: n in place, it is now time for you to debate the question: “Is the scale and complexity of infrastructure declines and the unit it worthwhile for the government to intervene in order to cost of irrigation development decreases catalyze the FLID process, and if so, where?” The case for FLID n there is more individual ownership and autonomy of the irrigation system and equipment n The rationale for Resource Farmer there is increasing farmer-control of irrigation development potential benefits irrigation development (located around small dams, pans, shallow wells and streams, is reflected in the top where simpler technology can be used) half of the spider plot: farmers have more reason to engage in 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 n the participation trend is from consultation-style approaches of public-led large schemes to the more participatory domain of FLID n irrigation when there is a combination of high resource the rate of return on investment increases (by a factor of 3 to 5 potential (Module 1) and high incremental benefit (Module 2). times) n Water availability close to agricultural land is the most the viable area for expansion in Africa increases (by a factor favorable situation for farmers when initiating their own of 2), with massive potential for intensification on existing areas irrigation practices, because it allows for simple and cheap developed under FLID. irrigation methods to be used. The less the accessibility to water, the greater the need for infrastructure development The nature of the resource potential is a key determinant of the features of to mobilize water. The related costs and technical the FLID process. Where there is high resource potential, farmers prioritize engineering complexity, as well as the environmental, irrigation expansion as costs are low and returns on investment are high. regulatory and resettlement implications of water As resource potential becomes constrained, the scarcity of supply and mobilization, result in increased constraints for farmers, higher mobilization costs drive farmers towards intensification to achieve making it unlikely that they will be able to develop such more efficient use of the scarce resources. Increased water productivity, costly water infrastructure on their own. Assessment of the achieved through more sophisticated agronomic and irrigation practices resource potential is thus informed by these parameters and related business strategies, is an outcome of intensification (i-box 7.2). of water availability and proximity and discussed further in As competition for water increases, regulation of the resource through Module 1. The implications of water availability and proximity basin governance and water management arrangements (Module 3) is are illustrated in Figure 6 and summarized below. needed for long-term sustainability. THE FA R M E R - L E D I R R I G AT I O N D E V E LO P MENT GUIDE 13 nt me High cost est n inv  Complex > 12 000 USD/ha rno etu  Costly e ly r  Long time  Major storage Lik Priority  New large-scale intervention irrigation schemes  Canals 4 000–8 000 USD/ha  Irrigation structures  Rehabilitation of Cost/ha  Related infrastructure existing large-scale  Farmer labor irrigation schemes  Financial cost Potential scale of impact in Africa  Intake and canal repair  Transaction 3 000–6 000 USD/ha cost  Irrigation structures  Farmer  Measurement  Water harvesting organization ponds  Governance water users associations  Pumped group systems (caution!)  Low pressure pipelines 1 500–3 000 USD/ha  Land levelling – rice Low cost  Pumps H>25m 50–1 500 USD/ha  Simple  Distant D>500m  Cheap  Shallow wells  Larger hillside canals  Quick  Rivers and wetlands Public investment  Sprinklers/drip  Small hillside canals Farmer investment  Tubewells  No storage New public large-scale FLID in revitalisation Small dams and pans Small irrigation: step-up Small & simple irrigation schemes of large schemes in tech sophistication irrigation systems mostly farmers’ groups mostly individual farmers Figure 6 Costs of development, returns on investment and real possibility of increasing their income and improving their potential impact for different types of irrigation systems livelihood. When the benefits from irrigation are minimal, farmers (scale, group size and engineering complexity) do not engage in irrigation, and there is no reason for government to improve the enabling environment for FLID processes. For farmers to engage in irrigation, benefits must be significant. Smallholder farmers have experience of hardships and are aware Consolidating the argument for FLID requires quantification of of the substantial risks that come with any change in farming the benefits for different groups or types of farmers. Farmer types practice. They are most likely to pursue irrigation when they see can be characterized by elements such as farm size, cropping 14 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E 80 Range of net farm income for x USD 71 000 Farmers record higher benefits from 70 1 ha of irrigated mixed vegetables ma vs rainfed farming in Uganda irrigation through: 60 (lifetime cost over 10 years) USD (thousands) USD 50 000 early/delayed planting before/after the rainy season, with 50 ¢ s ble min advantages in market prices 40 e g eta e dv gat ¢ additional cropping seasons, increasing land-use intensity 30 irri and generating year-round income USD 23 000 20 veg etables rainfed ¢ greater crop diversification 10 ¢ reduced drought risk 0 ¢ stronger production links with dairy and livestock with more 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96 108 120 integrated farming -10 Months Figure 7 Comparative lifetime cost-benefit assessment of irrigation versus rainfed cropping pattern, agronomic skills, access to natural resources, use of technologies, and marketing strategies (i-box 2.1). Once the At this point in the process you should be able to establish: typologies of farmers are better understood, interventions can be targeted to meet the different needs and expectations. Cost- benefit assessments over the lifetime of irrigation equipment can be undertaken to predict impacts from interventions n  The storyline for FLID: Is there potential for farmers to engage in irrigation expansion, intensification, increasing profitability or a combination of these? How much variability exists between basins or (Module 7), in comparison with rainfed farming (Figure 7). sub-basins? Crop losses due to drought are an increasing risk resulting from climate change, and irrigation can help to mitigate negative impacts. Financial analysis of irrigation benefits is n  The type and extent of the natural resources to be exploited: Are small and simple irrigation solutions possible, or is there a need to “climb up the ladder” of the more complex and costly options? best assessed through drought scenarios, based on farmers’ Based on Figure 6, do you have any initial thoughts on suitable and agricultural officers’ experiences of the drought frequency technologies and infrastructure that may be needed (Module 7)? What cycle and the related crop losses in rainfed farming. There is the total area of irrigation development, in relation to the country is a need for caution to avoid over-promoting the idea of target, in which farmers could take the lead? “drought-proofing”. Attention needs to be given to the seasonal fluctuations of the water resource, as this may be limiting during periods of frequent drought, even when irrigation equipment is available (Module 1). n  The segment(s) of farmers who can gain the most from irrigation: What characterizes these farmers in terms of resources, challenges and aspirations? How much can they gain from THE FAR M E R -LE D I RRI G ATI O N D E V E LO P MEN T GUIDE 15 irrigation? Based on natural resource potential, are farmers likely to engage in irrigation individually or is there a need for them to come together as a group?   n Policy and Legal: Policies, laws and regulations set the rules for water, land, financial, environmental and organizational practices and can enable Constraints to FLID processes or constrain FLID processes. Farmers can face constraints in the right to use water; The conduciveness 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 permitting and abstraction thresholds; of the surrounding Policy Technology & legal type of land tenure arrangements; and environment is Permitting of hundreds of environmental limitations. These factors thousands of individual represented in the micro-users is administratively Knowledge Markets impact on perceptions of water and bottom half of the impossible in most settings. Finance land tenure security and, therefore, spider plot. This is specific willingness to invest. There are also particular gender and other for the segment(s) of farmers for which the diagnostic is carried inclusion constraints to access and use of both land and water out (Module 2). These farmers can more easily expand, intensify (i-box 3.12). or increase profitability of irrigation farming on their own, when n there is a high score for: Knowledge: The knowledge factor is constrained when n Policy and legal (Module 3) farmers have poor or no access to knowledge on irrigation practices, irrigation technologies, agronomy, finance or running n Knowledge (Module 4) a profitable irrigated agricultural enterprise. Particularly prone to n Finance (Module 5) such constraints are small enterprises run by young and/or women n Markets (Module 6) farmers. The wider knowledge environment is constrained when public n Technology (Module 7) In the unlikely scenario where all five factors score highly, there would be no need for government to influence the FLID process as the conditions surrounding the farmers are such that they are not held back by systemic constraints; they have the knowledge and capacity to interact with suppliers for the purchase of the equipment, raise the money from financial institutions, pay back loans, increase their income by profitably marketing their produce, and obtain the required permits and documentation. But more often than not, one or more factors will constrain farmers’ actions. 16 THE FAR MER-LED IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT GUIDE and private sectors have limited or no understanding of, and fail participation in domestic, regional and export markets; and where to operationalize support for, FLID processes, with corresponding digitization of value chains is weak, with few opportunities to access weak understanding of the real needs of different types of farmers market intelligence and reduce transaction costs (i-box 6.2). (i-box 4.3). n  Finance: The financial environment is constrained when financial policies and regulations are unsuitable for the n  Technology: The technology factor is constrained when farmers cannot easily find suitable technology on irrigation equipment supplier shop floors or cannot afford it, or when national particularities of the irrigation equipment market, and when farmers quality standards for equipment are absent or weakly formulated. have limited appropriate financial product options in the formal Access to suitable and affordable credit market. Laws and regulations technology by farmers is heavily Equipment Agribusiness suppliers related to finance pay little heed to influenced by constraints in equal access, with the result that related aspects of knowledge, Insurance Mobile companies banking women and other potentially affordable finance, and effective Commercial Micro-finance marginalized groups (e.g. service and supply markets; banks institutions those based on religion or thus, to an extent, technology Challenge funds SACCOs ethnicity) are often constrained constraints are a function of these in accessing credit by virtue of other limitations (i-box 7.11). Carbon credit climate funds Farmer groups their gender or other qualities. Information and Communication Country-specific diagnostics in three FLID Technology (ICT) systems can be underdeveloped, with few contexts opportunities to reduce the transaction costs of credit provision or risks of default for borrowers (i-box 5.3). Illustrative examples of diagnostic assessment are presented for three FLID contexts (Figure 8). These reflect a situation where n  Markets: Markets are constrained when the rural investment climate established by the government is inappropriate for development of market linkages, for example when there is resources are plentiful and FLID is nascent (Uganda); where FLID processes are well established and irrigated area is fast-growing, but with some resources unavailable (Kenya); and in a selected insufficient spending on catchment in Tanzania (Upper Pangani), where irrigated area has rural public goods that are Smallholder End markets expanded to the full extent of the available resources, with FLID farm Farm gate (domestic vital for production (such as production or export) processes a dominant contributor to total irrigation area. The agro-processing and export regional comparison highlights how different neighboring situations of high-value produce); when can be, and that site-specific solutions requiring differentiated regulatory and compliance strategies may be needed. The comparison also illustrates how the systems restrict farmers’ diagnostic process guides the focus of public sector interventions. THE FAR M E R -LE D I RRI G ATI O N D E V E LO P MEN T GUIDE 17 NASCENT FLID CONTEXT FAST-GROWING FLID CONTEXT Resource potential Farmer benefits Uganda Farmer Kenya Resource potential benefits 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 FLID diagnostic FLID diagnostic Policy Technology 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 & legal  Water-abundant country  Water scarce country and resources increasingly stressed Policy Technology and resources are widely & legal  Irrigation practice is widespread and dynamic Knowledge Markets available  Visible local successes catalyse growth with limited external input Finance  Limited farmer knowledge Knowledge Markets on irrigation technology and  Farmers have difficulty to afford irrigation development when water mobilization Finance practices infrastructures are needed  Farmers have limited access to credit, and  Offtakers, traders and commercial aggregators are engaged with irrigators irrigation equipment is expensive  Production and marketing risks remain significant with benefits accruing to relatively  Centralised technology outlets, only privileged farmers in major cities  Limited supplier knowledge about OPTIMIZATION FOCUS suitable irrigation technology Interventions should focus on improving farming efficiency and  Gap in national standards strengthen supply chains:  Cheaper more sophisticated technology for energy efficiency and higher water productivity EXPANSION FOCUS  Farmer-supplier-financer networks to increase affordability of technology Interventions should focus on  Knowledge promotion for better agronomy and soil water management promotion and establishment of  Stronger output markets for higher profitability irrigation:  Pursue knowledge campaigns around irrigation farming benefits and related practices Resource Farmer WATER-STRESSED FLID CONTEXT potential benefits  Strengthen nascent irrigation equipment supply chains through information and higher sales Pangani Basin in Tanzania volumes 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5  Reduce equipment prices through FLID diagnostic Policy Technology & legal tariff reductions and acquisition costs  Land and water resources close to fully utilized through matching grants  Water competition between irrigators and across sectors is Knowledge Markets  Policy and legal review will a social, ecological and political issue Finance set the stage for reforms in water governance SUSTAINABILITY FOCUS Interventions should focus on water governance and optimization for sustainable resource use:  Establish FLID-responsive water governance arrangements  Knowledge and technology sophistication and affordability (optimization) Figure 8  Water productivity and energy efficiency (optimization) FLID strategies and intervention  Output markets (optimization) 18 responses in three different contexts THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E 6 From diagnostic to interventions The diagnostic and scoring process will lead to a clear picture n targeted use of permits 1 Targeted use of permits of the potential for FLID and the hurdles that farmers face in n recognition of customary law 2 Recognition of customary law expanding and intensifying irrigated production to make their n prioritization of water use enterprises more profitable. Stakeholders involved in the diagnostic need collectively to assess where the public sector can best n permit exemptions Hybrid intervene to lift the most serious constraints, so as to accelerate the n collective permits. Water Rights 5 Collective permits FLID process, enable it to take place at a larger scale, and in a more Water resources governance 3 Prioritisation of water use inclusive and sustainable way. The question for you to debate here that focuses regulation efforts on is: “How can the government intervene in the constraints so as to the major abstractors (usually catalyze the FLID process?” fewer in number), with less 4 Permit exemption constraints on small users, Identification of interventions – possible but with extensive monitoring to enable sound and sustainable options in different combinations management is the optimal solution. These re-oriented priorities can improve both water resources governance practice and Public interventions should be identified only for the most environmental outcomes, thus ensuring more equitable access to constraining factors (meaning factors in the bottom part of the water. spider plot with the lower scores) and must be limited to “no-regret” actions. The example interventions given here are not prescriptive. Strengthening land tenure security similarly requires recognition Rather, they are intended to prompt ideas and discussion and can and protection of all legitimate rights, formal and customary be redesigned appropriately for each situation. Selected examples (i-box 3.2). Thus land tenure Interventions might include phased of interventions are highlighted below, and details are provided in implementation and “positive” discrimination to ensure inclusion. the respective modules. Knowledge (Module 4) Policy and Legal (Module 3) Constraints in the knowledge system can be overcome with Constraints in the water and land legal framework can be dealt with interventions aimed at creating and strengthening formal and through policy notes or with regulatory changes that enable more informal knowledge networks, such as: secure access for small-volume users. Hybrid law interventions (i-box 3.9) offer a key opportunity and build pragmatically on available laws, regulations, formal and informal rules. Possibilities include: n ●facilitation of multi-stakeholder platforms (i-box 4.4) to align the key players and reduce the burden of high transaction costs that constrain private sector services. Multi- THE FA R M E R - L E D I R R I G AT I O N D E V E LO P MENT GUIDE 19 stakeholder platforms (MSPs) can serve high-level policy and innovation processes. Initiating Adaptive planning n  Pay-as-you-go (PAYG) financial products (i-box 5.6) are provided by equipment suppliers and can be blended with credit guarantees (i-box 5.5). n  ●strengthening farmers’ problem-solving and innovation capacities (i-box 4.8) through facilitated Reflective monitoring Collaborative n  Subsidies (i-box 5.7) are a key instrument for accelerating irrigation equipment uptake when farmer affordability is low. n  action farmer-to-farmer learning while striving for Partial subsidies can strengthen supply networks and “demand-responsiveness” in service provision improve agricultural and technical knowledge, along with (i.e. meeting real expressed needs). related services and support. n  use of mass-media, information and communication ICT tools can catalyze and facilitate all of the above (i-box 5.8), technology (ICT) and communication outreach strategies and opportunities for ICT to improve efficiencies and accelerate the with targeted messaging for specific groups and stakeholders pace of rollout should be sought across all interventions. (i-box L, i-box 5.8). Markets (Module 6) Finance (Module 5) Smallholder farmers can be constrained in accessing output markets, but there are a number of principles that inform successful When finance is a constraint, interventions can catalyze private interventions: sector activity by: facilitating linkages Loans Financing institutions Pay between existing actors using knowledge Irrigation networking approaches to reduce transaction costs and bridge n  Establish and support producer organizations so that farmers cooperate to compete, and use collective structures to help gain bargaining power, scale and efficiency so as back equipment Irrigation service gaps; implementing to enter formal value chains and higher value Insurers equipment Purchase suppliers credit guarantee and risk- markets. Partner selection sharing arrangements that n  or PAYG Farmers Farm bring all parties together and Build productive alliances Develop business Monitoring & evaluation revenue High case value crops transfer the financing risk from with public-private- Agri- 4P business Government private to public sector, thus producer partnerships (the 4Ps). rationale offtakers triggering affordable access. Other This involves active facilitation Governance Financing mechanism modalities interventions can target affordability and support for new and ongoing Define more directly by reducing upfront and direct costs through hire- linkages between farmer-groups roles & responsibilities purchase-type arrangements or subsidies as follows: and private companies who sell inputs, 20 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E buy commodities, add value to products, and provide financial and agronomic services. n The advantages and challenges of technical design choices for technologies that are commonly part of FLID processes are also outlined (i-box 7.2 to 7.9). These include n Digitalization of agricultural markets connects farmers with services and output markets and includes: digitally-enabled value-chain integrators; mechanization access solutions; online pumping (buckets, manual, petrol and solar pumps); irrigation application methods; soil-water management instruments; and ICT innovations. Indicative purchase costs and operational costs are retailers of agricultural produce; and agricultural e-market sites. provided to aid planning and design. Technology (Module7) The intervention examples that are explained in the FLIDguide modules are listed in Figure 9 and can be accessed via the The possible technologies hyperlinks. that are identified in the FLIDguide are Linkages between interventions not interventions in themselves but constitute Since the factors in a FLID system are interlinked, a change in a core part of the one factor will ripple through and impact on others. A policy interventions outlined intervention, for example, can reduce import tariffs, leading to lower above. A set of intervention shop-floor prices, more affordability, and increased technology principles is presented. uptake. Knowledge exchange through multi-stakeholder platforms Most important of these is or farmer field schools can deepen farmers’ understanding of that the farmer must be at the center of decision-making. Highlights technology, market availability and lead to better informed choices. of Module 7 include: Other examples are outlined in i-box B. n Technologies must be best-fit, and solutions co- constructed: A fit-for-purpose strategy allows farmers to develop and/or choose solutions for themselves complemented by Factors are also interdependent. When finance is a constraint, for example, a sole emphasis on financing irrigation equipment is unlikely to address the limitations effectively. Farmers also need the necessary knowledge to enable them to do so. access to equipment markets, and to knowledge that will enable n informed choices, with technical support and advisory services. Technical advancement in FLID often takes place in small An integrated financing approach is more likely to overcome key steps, rather than a technological “big-bang”. Farmers at constraints. When planning interventions, the links between different stages of irrigation introduction, expansion or intensification factors should be anticipated to maximize the catalytic effect of will have different technology needs, risk appetite, and financial the chosen interventions and ensure that interdependencies are capacity. It is best to facilitate organic growth. adequately addressed. THE FA R M E R - L E D I R R I G AT I O N D E V E LO P MENT GUIDE 21 will than others and may not be opportune at the Policy & legal Technology particular moment. In such cases, the more easily  Hybrid law  Summary of attainable interventions should be pursued, alert to  Institutional technologies the effects on the system that result from any gaps in bricolage  Technology &  Gender & water finance implementation. Addressing some of the constraints rights Example  Technology & and making progress along parallel tracks can also  Land tenure interventions knowledge change political willingness and priorities down the road. Knowledge Markets Political will can be nurtured and encouraged. For  MSP  Farmer producer example, in your diagnostic you may have identified  Service provision organizations a major policy and legal constraint in relation to high Finance  P4 water permitting fees. Administrative processes  Media, ICTs  Education reform  Facilitate links  Digitalization of for small irrigation abstractors are cumbersome  Credit & risk agricultural markets and time-consuming. While this is an important sharing obstacle in the way of farmers, there may be a lack  PAYG of political willingness to deal with the policy aspect  Subsidies Figure 9 of permitting (Module 3). The lack of interest in this Summary of example regard should not prevent progress being made in interventions for the five factors in the enabling environment (click for details) other ways, however, as there will also most likely be constraints in relation to knowledge, finance, Prioritization of interventions markets, and/or technology. Ad-hoc solutions for the water permitting challenges might be possible Formulating interventions to address priority constraints should aim for while other more politically important avenues a complementary set of activities that would lead to a stronger enabling of action are supported. These could include environment. Through this, constraints would be reduced, and easier for exemptions, subsidies, targeted administrative farmers to overcome. More smallholder farmers could then initiate and develop support for processing, etc. As the irrigated area and profitable irrigation enterprises as part of irrigation expansion and intensification production increases, benefits and consequences processes. Through the diagnostic process, and informed by examples in the will become evident to political decision-makers, modules, multi-stakeholder consultations, and the team’s experience, you will while competition for water resources may also have been guided on how to compile possible interventions. increase. Political awareness and priorities can Not all of the identified interventions will be equally realistic or politically shift. Willingness to tackle policy revisions may be acceptable. Some of the interventions in a FLID agenda need more political stronger at a later stage. 22 THE FARMER-LED IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT GUIDE 7 From interventions to conceptualizing the operation Government action to support FLID As we have already pointed out, improving the environment for FLID requires coordination among stakeholders. It is important to Once you have identified the priority interventions and confirmed be inclusive in the diagnostic process and build understanding and political support, the government – through ministries, regional or relationships. In the course of the preparation of a FLID operation, local governments, public agencies or institutes – can move into a public sector champion for FLID may be identified. This ministry, action. Getting support for and implementing an intervention is department or public institute could be asked to lead the process easier when it is not controversial and requires because it commands the necessary respect a budget that is aligned to existing political to mobilize political support, bring together realities. An operation in support public and private stakeholders, and ensure of FLID is the set of that FLID is promoted in country strategies. The One intervention alone will rarely make a major priority interventions identification of a charismatic figure for the lead difference to how conducive the environment that, packaged together, role can make the difference between success is for FLID. Rather, interventions can be viewed makes the surrounding or failure of an operation. as complementary building blocks which, environment more combined in an operation, can achieve results at scale. conducive for farmers Theory of Change in a FLID to take the initiative in operation Sometimes, operations can be funded and irrigation. implemented by governments without In order to conceptualize the operation that the involvement of development partners. would support FLID, you need to formulate a When alignment between multiple stakeholders with conflicting theory of change based on all the available information (Figure interests is needed, operations can unfold more easily when a 10). The theory of change provides a schematic of the operational development partner (such as the World Bank) steps in. Depending logic from the constraints through to the long-term outcomes. On on the identified priorities, support from a development partner the left side of the figure are the constraints preventing farmers might come in the form of policy operations, aiming for policy from taking the initiative in irrigation. These correspond to the or institutional change; investment operations or results-based factors in the lower half of the spider plot with a low score. For the operations, particularly useful when infrastructure is to be most constraining factors, you will have identified the interventions developed; or guarantees to facilitate involvement of the private that can address the particular weaknesses in the enabling sector (i-box 5.5). The multi-sectoral nature of FLID means that environment. The implementation of the interventions leads to several donors might be involved, often with parallel initiatives and direct results (the outputs), which in turn contribute to the outcome different timelines. (i.e. the development objective). In a FLID operation, the outcome THE FA R M E R - L E D I R R I G AT I O N D E V E LO P MENT GUIDE 23 Interventions Constraints Inputs Constraints Outputs Inputs Long-term goals Constraints Outputs Inputs Outcome Constraints Outputs Resource Farmer Inputs potential benefits Constraints  Increased agricultural GDP  Economic growth 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5  National debt reduction Policy & legal Technology  Reduced rural poverty  Hybrid law  Summary of Policy Tech-  Improved food security and nutrition technologies & legal nology 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5  Institutional  Better water resource prioritization bricolage  Technology & finance  Improved resilience Policy Tech-  Gender & water nology rights  Technology & Knowledge Markets  Climate change adaptation & legal  Land tenure knowledge  COVID-19 recovery Finance Knowledge Markets Knowledge Markets Finance  MSP  Farmer producer  Service provision organizations Finance  P4  Media, ICTs  Education reform  Facilitate links  Digitalization of  Credit & risk agricultural markets irrigation expansion sharing  PAYG productivity gains  Subsidies profitability increase Figure 10 Theory of change in an operation to catalyze FLID can be defined as a more conducive (legal, knowledge, finance, markets, technology) environment for farmers to expand, intensify Keep the theory of change simple. In order to avoid an over- or increase profitability of irrigation farming. Stated more simply, complicated operation, you may have to leave out some of the it will be easier for farmers to take the initiative, their risks will be seemingly important interventions. You need to prioritize according lower and more will succeed in comparison to the initial situation. to political willingness, financial practicability, urgency, and Indicators that can be used for the outcomes are discussed in i-box inter-dependencies with other constraining factors. You may also F. Finally, the theory of change identifies how the outcome of the choose to avoid excessive fragmentation that results from bringing operation is aligned to the long-term country objectives. together interventions that depend on too many stakeholders. 24 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E Look at the added value that each stakeholder can bring: finding however, to predict how farmers’ practices will evolve. A typical synergies with aligned activities to achieve a common goal can mistake is to underestimate the time required for farmers to change simplify the operation. what they do. Only a minority of farmers will quickly make radical changes, as farmers understandably avoid risks associated with Once you have put together the theory of change, stop and unfamiliar practices or technologies. While change can improve ask yourself: What could be the unintended outcomes if this is their livelihoods, it can also tip them (especially those who are implemented? Could these changes make the situation worse for already vulnerable) into further poverty. a given segment of farmers, or for some private sector actors? Remember to avoid intervening in elements of the FLID system Time planning is complicated by the defining element of FLID, just because they are less than perfect or do not fit conventional which relies on farmers driving the process at their own pace. experience, and reconsider whether these interventions will indeed A scenario timeline map can be useful to explore the feasibility facilitate farmers to stay in the lead. of achieving the development outcome over the duration of the operation. The changes that a particular farmer might undergo The time element are mapped on a timeline in response to the lifting of various constraints (Figure 11). Different operations will have different When you define the outcome of an operation in support of FLID, starting points. Some farmers will start from rainfed farming while you are essentially stating what you expect farmers to do differently others may already be active in irrigation yet want to increase their in a few years’ time compared with the current situation. It is difficult, scale, or intensify because resources are scarce, or strive for more profitability. Figure 11 Scenario timeline map of the evolution of an irrigation farming system catalyzed by farmer-selected interventions Time (years) Rainfed, low value Bucket Increases Increases Expands Bucket now Obtains Learns to Sells to a Gets more Moves Expands area Farmer crops, mostly for irrigation share sold knowledge area under inadequate, extraction use new middleman financially from fuel under high subsistence, no access on a small on local on irrigation, mobilizes permit and system for savvy, keeps to solar, value crops, to finance, no irrigation portion of market irrigation, changes loan moves to improved records, from hose changes know-how land builds production fuel pump production mobilizes to crops in  but entrepreneurial, confidence time in & hose /quality formal sprinkler function of eager to improve function of financing market market demand Policy & legal Knowledge Finance Markets Technology THE FAR M E R -LE D I RRI G ATI O N D E V E LO P MEN T GUIDE 25 8 From concept to operation design While recognizing the wide variability among operations in support of FLID, this section provides pointers on some Women and FLID key design elements: beneficiaries; infrastructure; scale; Catalyzing FLID is not just about getting more of the same type of stakeholder roles (including private sector); and flow of funds. farmers engaged in productive irrigated farming. It is also about including farmers who, without the interventions, would not be Beneficiaries: defining the farmer focus able to participate in the process. FLID can be a game changer for women farmers Smallholder farmers are extremely diverse in their ambitions, capacity, knowledge, access to natural and financial resources, Women – as with men – do not represent a homogenous group, and it is important to understand the diversity within communities so and type of tenure (Module 2 Figure 2.1). In Module 2, you will that the FLID operation can meet the needs of different individuals have characterized the segment(s) of farmers and identified involved (i-box D). Suggestions are provided on how to make and prioritized interventions with those groups in mind. interventions gender sensitive (i-box H). In relation to knowledge, Remember: one operation cannot cater for the needs of all women may have less access to extension services, media and farmers. cell phones, and also have lower literacy levels, making access to knowledge on irrigation strongly gendered (Module 4 Section 4.1). The essence of “farmer-led” operations is that these are Women farmers face more challenges to access suitable financial demand-responsive. While general characteristics of target products, particularly institutional barriers (Module 5), and experience groups are defined, the farmers themselves are usually not different levels of access to and conditions for use of land, depending on local tenure systems and national institutions (Module 3). selected at the design stage. Instead, eligibility criteria – whether for individual farmers, groups, or both – are defined FLID represents opportunity for women compared to traditional (i-box G). irrigation development. The evolving nature of customary living law is reflexive to change, and this characteristic can be used strategically to improve equality and inclusion (i-box 3.3). The same can be said for Infrastructure: public, private, or not at all? hybrid water rights (i-box 3.12). Mobile irrigation technologies enable Operations aiming to catalyze FLID are not compelled to women to access irrigation services with greater flexibility, without substantial loans or risks of fixed technology investments. Tools are include infrastructure development or upgrade. Operations developing rapidly with FLID, enabling new financial products with might bring together policy, regulatory or knowledge fewer barriers, and creating access to information on agronomy and interventions only. When infrastructure development is needed, markets. Gender relations are dynamic, and FLID has in some cases there is a wide spectrum of options, not always directly generated incentives to favor women’s engagement in irrigated value associated with irrigation. Where markets are identified as a chains. major constraint to FLID, for example, investments in roads or 26 THE FAR MER- LED IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT GUIDE warehouses can have a significant positive ripple effect on profitability. When irrigation infrastructures are needed, they Beneficiaries, infrastructure, scale: can be private or public in nature. Whenever possible, FLID How budget ties these together operations should focus, as a priority, on catalyzing private The amount of public and private money available for the FLID infrastructure development. For example, operations driving operation determines its scale and how many beneficiaries can be an expansion agenda should first attempt to support farmers supported. Budget might be needed for cross-cutting soft activities, who have close access to water and can utilize small and like knowledge-exchange platforms, communication outreach or ICT simple irrigation systems with privately owned equipment. tools, for example. These are “loosely tied” with the number of farmers Only when there is no potential for simple solutions would who can benefit. investigation of more costly, complex and public infrastructure But when it comes to operations including irrigation infrastructure, be warranted (Figure 6). the number of farmers targeted is closely defined by the portion of public budget going into infrastructure plus the farmers’ contribution, Scale: think big! divided by the unit costs. For the same amount of public resource, a FLID operation can have a bigger scale than traditional irrigation When designing an operation in support of FLID, issues of development because of the higher contribution to costs by farmers scale dominate in different ways. Scale relates to geographic and the lower unit cost for infrastructure development (Figure 6; i-box scope – whether national or regional; to the numbers of 7.5 and 7.6). To make the rationale for the FLID operation stronger, you farmers potentially involved; and to the irrigation area can relate the scale of the operation to the country level goals (“How to be developed or improved. Scale will be informed by much does the FLID operation contribute to achieving country goals considerations of budget, type of for irrigation expansion, or for increased country food production?”). supportive interventions (infrastructure vs soft ones), farmers’ capacity to It is now time to contribute (Module 5), and government scale up support Stakeholder roles in the operation: keeping and private sector capability. to FLID! farmers at the center There have been some major FLID When designing the operation, the role and responsibility of each of programs across Africa, but more often the stakeholders involved must be defined. The provision of irrigation than not experiences have remained at pilot scale. Operations services to smallholder farmers involves many stakeholders across to catalyze FLID should offer farmers, en masse, the chance to technology, agronomy, marketing, information, and financial sectors. A take up irrigation, to expand to a larger irrigation area, and/or critical part of the FLID operation is about building alliances between intensify their farming practice in a demand-driven approach. the stakeholders. The multi-stakeholder networking approaches are Catalyzing FLID should endeavor to reach tens or hundreds detailed in Module 4 (i-box 4.4) and applied in the example interventions of thousands of farmers. in Modules 3, 5, 6 and 7. THE FA R M E R - L E D I R R I G AT I O N D E V E LO P MENT GUIDE 27 Catalyzing FLID requires a change While there are a multitude of possibilities for assignment of roles and responsibilities, one rule always applies: n Value chain actors may fail to see a clear entry point for themselves, and some effort may be required first to organize farmers (i-box 6.3) and then to link in roles between farmers should remain firmly at the with them through multi-stakeholder platforms (i-box 4.4). public officials, center of the FLID operation. The biggest private sector risk posed by public action in FLID is Farmer behavioral change may also be needed. actors and farmers. inadvertently to sideline farmers by failing The traditional approach for supporting farmers with to recognize their driving role, knowledge, interventions, where the irrigation system is handed over to priorities and technical preferences. But farmers, may be hard to change. In operations in support designing an operation that recognizes the farmer role is easier said than of FLID, farmers must stay in the lead and not be relegated done. A challenge in FLID operations is that often stakeholders have to to waiting for handouts. Placing farmers in the lead also adjust their ways of working to align to the new fundamentals of a farmer- brings uncertainty because with FLID an individual farmer’s responsive and farmer-centered approach: involvement is by free choice, and not just because they fall within the boundary of an irrigation scheme perimeter. n Public officials have to shift from being “implementers” of an irrigation project to facilitators of an irrigation process led by the farmers. Ensuring that public officials buy into this shift in focus and Their exact localities, numbers, technical and financial preferences cannot be defined in advance. Farmer agency, meaning that they have power over key financial and proactively support FLID development is not to be taken for granted: technical decisions impacting their lives, is a fundamental they can be threatened by the idea of losing their role, and struggle to working principle even if it increases operational risks. understand their new responsibility. Field level leadership is one of many Catalyzing FLID requires a fundamental shift that puts approaches that can make a constructive change (i-box I). farmers and human capital, rather than infrastructure development, at the core. n Financial institutions may not be used to working with smallholder farmers who have not been part of their business portfolio in the past and will need information and knowledge, as well as innovative Public officials will also have a changed role that can be facilitated through field level leadership. Public officials responses, to address the high transaction costs associated with who are involved in implementation will have to make a smallholders (Module 6 Section 6.3). significant shift from their familiar and relatively powerful role as an implementer bringing an irrigation project to n Irrigation equipment suppliers may not have trust in public procurement, which is usually lengthy and more appropriate for large-scale infrastructure and, along with knowledge and information, may farmers, to one of being a facilitator of a development process that is led by the farmers. This requires a whole different set of skills and processes and a strategy of field require financial interventions such as credit guarantees and risk-sharing level leadership can help that important transition to take (i-box 5.5). place (i-box I). 28 THE FAR MER-LED IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT GUIDE What does farmer-led mean in operation design? Farmers have a clear grasp of the “rules of the game”: Farmers favorable for farmers to join in the operation – but, conversely. affects need to be able to make their own decisions and that means they farmers’ priorities when making decisions about involvement and can have to understand the process, technical, and financial content. FLID undermine ownership if excessive. operations are heavily centered on the human element and adequate Farmers can opt out: Contrary to the development of public large- resources must be allocated to proper communication with farmers. If scale irrigation schemes, where a farmer is either within or outside farmers do not have knowledge, they cannot be in control. the command area, in a FLID process it is the farmers who decide to Farmers are given options: Where an operation supports a very limited develop irrigation by themselves, or in small groups. As the farmer set of technologies (such as in a kit approach), farmers may not find goes through the decision-making process, she/he might realize that equipment well-suited to their preferences. Farmers’ choices are the change in farming practice is not the right choice for them. This sometimes unconventional but justified by experience and practise may be due to costs being higher than expected, ineligibility to take (Module 7). The same applies to financial products which may not a loan, realization that benefits can be lower than expected, or that suit their requirements. Choosing a single financial intermediary for risks are too high. The operation should anticipate that a percentage of an operation (Module 5) would force farmers to open a bank account farmers will opt out throughout the process and should adjust farmer when they may not be keen to do so. expectations, processes, and targets accordingly. Farmers pay for irrigation: Being “in the lead” is reflected by Farmers can influence operation design (and re-design): Farmers’ farmers’ willingness to invest (proportionally to their means). It is organizations should be involved in the diagnostic assessment. important to preserve this principle, even if it translates into risk for However, the farmer-led nature of these operations means that the the implementation pace. When planning a FLID operation, there is farmers who are consulted are not necessarily the same ones who often a real concern that farmers may not show interest. Increasing will benefit. This is why FLID operations should allow for adjustments financial support (through subsidies or other means) makes it more along the way, based on farmers’ feedback. THE FAR M E R -LE D I RRI G ATI O N D E V E LO P MEN T GUIDE 29 Flow of funds: how to blend public and private money Credit guarantee Credit guarantee The government – through ministries, regional or local governments, Financing Value chain DFI institutions actors public agencies or institutes – would allocate budget to a FLID Loans for operation aiming to create a more conducive environment for FLID. equipment In parallel, private stakeholders (farmers and farmer groups, but also Offtaker contracts other private actors) may also allocate money. This section discusses how these two budgets can come together, and how money could flow. Irrigation equipment Farmers When it comes to the budget needed for the “hard elements” of suppliers Purchase supply on contract Farmers and equipment costs equipment development or rehabilitation of irrigation infrastructure, different are deducted options are possible depending mainly on the ownership of the infrastructure (public or private). In the case of public infrastructure, for example rainwater harvesting facilities that are used to supply water for irrigation, the budget is usually managed by a public entity, When farmers do not have the technical capacity to carry out sometimes with farmer contribution such as in-kind manual work. this process, public or private entities could take responsibility When there is private infrastructure, to be owned by farmers or for the procurement on behalf of the farmer. Financial institutions farmer groups, different options should be explored. Ideally, farmers can play this role, merging the farmers’ contribution and the – individually or in groups – should be responsible for covering public funds (i-box 5.5 [Variations A and B]). In situations where the costs and for the procurement process of any privately owned the FLID support operation has a strong market entry point, an equipment and infrastructure. Where farmers own their equipment, option would be for the value chain actor to procure the irrigation this leads to more sustained operations and better maintenance. equipment on behalf of the farmer or farmers’ group (i-box 5.5 [Variation C], Rwanda example in i-box 5.7). When farmers cannot afford to cover the full cost of equipment or infrastructure – even when access to credit is facilitated (Module 5), A further option is that the procurement role is assumed by a blending with public resources is needed. Farmers could nonetheless public entity (ministry, irrigation agency, local government), in remain in charge of the procurement process and ownership can which case public procurement rules prevail. The challenge in be promoted through co-payments. One arrangement is when the all cases is to ensure that the farmer or farmers’ group plays public contribution is provided to the farmer, wired through a financial a meaningful role in defining key decision points during the institution, an electronic voucher (i-box 5.9), or directly to the irrigation procurement process to ensure that farmers maintain agency in equipment supplier. the rollout process. 30 THE FARMER- LED IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT GUIDE Working principles in FLID interventions Engaging with stakeholders, or actors, requires ethical sensitivity and attention to some working principles. Now that you have designed your Engaging with FLID processes is people-centered, involving operation, make sure that it resonates with the working principles that farmers, government and the private sector. Co-planning of are summarized below. More detail is provided in i-box D. This is the right interventions with this wider group will yield the best results. time to make revisions to the design if needed.. 1 Catalyzing the system – reducing hurdles and speeding up processes FLID intervention design should maximize collaboration between actors and ensure that responses play a catalytic role. 2 A wider view of benefits Interventions should aim to support broad development processes, with goals that extend beyond the economic internal rate of return on investment, to include a strengthened natural resource base; water for multiple purposes; nutritional security; social stability; dignity through work; social equity; and giving voice to marginalized groups. 3 Intervention teams as temporary participants When interveners engage with FLID processes they are temporary participants. Any action should keep farmers firmly in the driver’s seat of development, without undermining farmer control. 4 Recognizing diversity in interests Farmers and the communities around them are not homogenous entities. Women or youth – as with men – do not represent a homogenous group. It is important to understand the diversity within communities to meet the needs of different individuals involved. 5 Facilitating influence for less powerful actors Interventions are processes of negotiation, and it is part of the social-facilitators’ responsibility to create an environment in which less powerful actors also have the opportunity to participate in the process. Failing to engage women, youth and other marginalized people may deepen inequalities, reduce access to water, and leave some people worse off than prior to the interventions. THE FA R M E R - L E D I R R I G AT I O N D E V E LO P MENT GUIDE 31 9 Readiness Moving toward the end of the preparation cycle for the operation to catalyze FLID, there is a need to define its readiness. Similar to a Readiness in a FLID operation Community Driven Development operation, beneficiaries and activities are not identified during preparation. “Readiness” means that everything is in place for the What defines the readiness of the operation is linked to the rollout to commence. In a FLID context it is judged by very establishment of the processes, organization of the stakeholders, training different parameters to traditional irrigation investments. It of personnel, and the development of the media and digital tools needed is not about feasibility studies and designs, but processes, for implementation. FLID operations also require preparedness of private capacity and people. sector actors through market sounding and pre-qualifications, etc. Establishing processes means clarifying who is expected to do what, by when, and in sequential order. Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 But it is more than that: Readiness can be achieved only once appropriate knowledge of these processes is held Farmer Supplier Awareness registration quotation by all stakeholders involved – and this is often where raising process process the real challenges start. It is one thing for processes to be perfectly described in an operational manual, Quotation Develop target Farm visit but quite another to ensure the requisite knowledge areas within verification process is disseminated to those involved in implementing districts process them. A key element in defining the readiness of the operation is to ensure that each stakeholder knows the Irrigation Equipment equipment supplier installation “rules of the game” in a way which is accessible to them pre-qualification verification and appropriate to “what they need to know” to set the operation in motion. Strategies for communication, At each stage of the rollout process, staff of the Supplier outreach and media are needed at different stages in payment implementing entity, farmers and private sector the operation (Figure 12). stakeholders need to have:  an explanation of the process  targeted information relevant to them Figure 12 Example intervention stages of Farmer  clarity on their role and expectations a FLID operation needing targeted and specific field schools  direction on any immediate actions needed information for each of the different stakeholders involved 32 THE FAR MER-LED IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT GUIDE 10 Learning during implementation Design at your best, but keep re-designing 3 Conduct the review with relevant stakeholders: Reflect on the assumptions made, what has been achieved, whether this confirms Farmers continuously change their practices based on the evolving that the theory of change and the timeline for change remain valid, situation around them, sometimes in unpredictable ways. Optimal and what lessons have been learned. solutions to the evolving needs are rarely static and cannot easily be found through a linear and time-bound pathway. The insights 4 Adjust the operation, including the estimated timelines. gained from action and experiences need to be used to inform Document the learning and redesign. implementation adjustments as the process unfolds. 5 Proceed to implement (act) in line with the revised plan. The farmer-led nature of the FLID process means that you will more than likely have to adjust the operation “on the go”. The best Repeat steps 3, 4, and 5 periodically. approach is to preset milestones for reflection and assessment and periodically bring together all of the involved actors. In this Invest in communication reflection and replanning process, you would assess data and FLID operations have a more prominent human element than stakeholder feedback, verify that the theory of change and the public-sector-led initiatives that are more infrastructure focused. timeline for the anticipated changes is valid, and re-design the Well-informed, capable and motivated people are central to operation according to updated information. When following a successful operations and this translates to higher investments in process of learning, reflection and modification, there is a risk “soft elements”, such as knowledge exchange platforms (i-box 4.4), of constant “renegotiations” which should be avoided. This is capacity building, app development (i-box L), and communication particularly the case when subsidy programs are involved, and outreach (i-box N and 4.10). The bulk of the budget for these soft farmers may hold back from acting early in the hope of getting a activities will usually need to be supported with public funds. It higher subsidy if they delay their participation. may be a challenge to advocate for this budget, as the Ministry of Five rolling stages for the revision of operational designs can help Finance or line Ministry often favor public financing of infrastructure. with the setting of milestones for the timely review of activities Furthermore, the causality chain of these soft activities can be (modified from Andrews, Pritchett, and Woolcock 2017): difficult to establish, i.e., how the spending of public money in knowledge exchange translates into more irrigated hectares or 1 Design your FLID operation. higher productivity of irrigated land. You will need to highlight how these soft actions play a critical role for the whole change to 2 Define the milestones for review of the operation throughout the happen. This means explaining how the development outcomes implementation process. will be negatively affected if these soft actions do not take place.   THE FA R M E R - L E D I R R I G AT I O N D E V E LO P MENT GUIDE 33 Account for costs during implementation 11 Illustrative examples of FLID There is sometimes the misconception that operations operations aiming to facilitate FLID have less overhead costs A FLID operation can be assembled in many ways. Two examples, compared to more conventional heavy-infrastructure from Uganda and Niger, are presented here and illustrate how the irrigation operations. In medium and large-scale irrigation thinking process unfolded from the diagnostic of FLID potential and development, approximately ten percent of the construction constraints, to the identification of interventions, to operation design costs are required for the study, design and supervision of and implementation. The two cases reflect quite different situations, construction. with more detail given in i-boxes J to M, and O respectively. Operations in support of Operations to catalyze Uganda is a water-rich country, but one where farmers are finding FLID do not require heavy FLID have different but rainfed production increasingly difficult due to climate change, and engineering design and significant overhead where irrigation is not widely practiced or well-known. Niger is a supervision due to their costs. It is critical that dry country where irrigation farming is well-established and has technical simplicity, but there resources are put historically been beneficial in overcoming the prevailing climatic are different and equally aside to ensure that constraints. Both countries have resource potential for irrigation important support functions. the government has expansion and incremental benefits are substantial. Smallholder These have overhead the personnel, physical farmers in both countries are constrained from initiating irrigation costs that need budget and material resources development by a knowledge deficit, weak financial environment, allocated from the various and lack of suitable technologies that are easily available. The to successfully support stakeholders to achieve governments in each country moved to create a more conducive implementation. success. The human element environment for farmers to take up and expand irrigation but used is far more dominant than different strategies: by leveraging on the existing decentralization technology (which also plays agenda in Uganda; and on a regional knowledge exchange initiative an important role), and you have to plan for diverse support across the Sahel in Niger. Both FLID operations were supported including: specialists to address critical support activities by the World Bank, in the case of Uganda with a results-based such as media; app development; technical quality and financing, and in Niger with an investment financing. costing studies; financial studies; online training (i-box M); communication materials and outreach (i-box 4.10); support It is worth remembering that a FLID operation must be relevant to for training and information exchange (i-box 4.4 to 4.7); and many stakeholders. A clear narrative on the operation is needed, with leveraging digital technologies for rollout at scale, as well as a widely shared understanding on “Why the FLID operation matters for monitoring and evaluation (M&E) (e.g. apps, tablets, GPS). in the bigger scheme of things”. Some tips for ensuring relevance are shown in Figure 13, using the Uganda case as an example. 34 THE FAR MER- LED IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT GUIDE Do not present FLID as an end per se Give a sense of scale: how much FLID Compare this unit cost to the one for recently completed irrigation but link it to the role it can play for the can contribute to the achievement of development in the country: this is a quarter to a third of the achievement of country high level goals. the irrigation expansion country goal? average cost for public-led irrigation development in Uganda! Country context There is a strong case for FLID in Uganda. Increased agricultural production for internal and Half of the irrigation potential is close to regional markets is a priority growth path for surface water resources, making it possible Uganda. Historically, the favorable rainfall pattern for farmers to develop irrigation without Interventions and operation allowed farmers to produce two rainfed crops a need for major water mobilization The Government of Uganda has structured per year. Climate change has now made weather infrastructure (unit cost 3 000 to 5 000 the Micro-scale Irrigation Program, which is the main risk for smallholder farmers. Expansion USD/ha). Smallholder farmers can benefit aimed at supporting individual smallholder of irrigation has become a government priority. from a more conducive environment farmers to develop irrigation through a partial Public-led irrigation development is far from for irrigation, notably the 21 percent of subsidy system combined with facilitated matching the need, due to limited institutional smallholder farmers who are attempting to access to loans, and increased knowledge. The capacity and insufficient budget. transition to more commercial agriculture, World Bank supports the Micro-scale Irrigation but do not have the means to do so. Program with a USD 50 million loan, expected Resource Farmer potential benefits to be matched by up to USD 24 million of 1 500 000 farmers’ contribution. Target in the National Irrigation Policy 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 Highlight how much private Policy Technology money is leveraged! 1 000 000 & legal Impacts Every year, 70 000 ha of land should be put under irrigation The Program in the first few months of Knowledge Markets Finance implementation has seen 16 000 farmers 500 000 expressing interest (20% women). The Knowledge and finance are the major Current If current trend of irrigation establishment of a more conducive irrigated area expansion continues constraints holding this segment of environment is expected to translate into 0 smallholder farmers back from taking the between 12 000 and 28 000 smallholder 2010 2020 2030 2040 initiative in irrigation on their own, followed farmers establishing irrigation. The program by access to technology. is expected to contribute between 5 to 10% to This indicates the need for the governments the annual irrigation expansion target of the to change their irrigation strategy if they want You can multiply the annual expansion goal by National Irrigation Policy for 2022 and 2023. to achieve their goals: business as usual will the average unit cost of public-led irrigation not bring them where they want to be! development to give a sense of how much public money would be needed annually. Highlight the achievement of impact at scale, by referring to contribution to high level country goals. Figure 13 Simple narrative on a FLID operation for all involved stakeholders THE FAR M E R -LE D I RRI G ATI O N D E V E LO P MEN T GUIDE 35 12 Conclusion Faster Scale up Inclusive Sustainable Farmers across the world are leading an agricultural revolution, increasing food production and strengthening n resilience through irrigation practices. As countries aim Better mapping, as the extent of irrigation that is developed through towards “building back better” in their recovery from the FLID is not well defined and mapping is needed. effects of a pandemic, accompanying economic crises n and climate change impacts, catalyzing FLID can achieve Improving the knowledge on FLID by documenting diagnostics and locally rooted and robust outcomes that have direct harvesting cases of both success and failure. The more that FLID is impact on large numbers of people. While farmers lead quantified, recognized and documented, the easier it will be to support it. this process, often in interaction with other private actors, n governments also have a role to play. The public sector Enhancing interventions and operations by twinning, adaptive can take action to improve the enabling environment learning, and exchange between countries and regions. around farmers that will allow a greater number and n more diverse groups, including women, to participate in Improving outcomes for farmers in changing conditions by exploring a faster-paced process. Removing barriers to financing, further how governments can create space and use new technologies enabling access to technology and markets, building that can usefully disrupt the status quo. capacity and catalyzing knowledge transfer are powerful ways to accelerate FLID. Governments must ensure that the FLID process remains a sustainable one, particularly in view of groundwater depletion, pollution, wetland use, n Better understanding of how FLID can contribute to building resilient communities in fragile contexts where climate adaptation and mitigation can go hand in hand with irrigation development. and water security. While benefits are numerous, there is also the risk of unintended outcomes – not least, the sidelining of farmers themselves. The environment for FLID is constantly changing. The n Exploring how farmers can be acknowledged and strengthened in their role as stewards of the natural resources on which they depend. We hope that the FLIDguide will prompt a willingness to find new solutions constraints faced by farmers today are different from for irrigation development in the most opportune and sustainable ways. those that farmers will face in a few years from now. The more irrigation is practiced, the more the knowledge networks will be It is thus important to keep assessing changes in the strengthened with increased farmer-to-farmer exchange and higher demand enabling environment, to remain flexible and adapt for knowledge from both public and private actors. The real measure of responses accordingly, in order to better support farmers successful FLID operations will be when inclusive and dynamic farmer as conditions around them evolve. Opportunities for networks are initiated, and the resultant benefits extend far beyond the expanding knowledge on FLID include: intervention scope and timelines. 36 THE FARMER-LED IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT GUIDE i-Boxes i-BOX A FLID systems framework The seven main elements impacting on the farming business strategy In order to achieve outcomes from an intervention in a FLID Theoretical foundations process, whatever those may be, analyzing the process dynamics Studies on agricultural and irrigation development over the last 60 and tentatively predicting the impact of the intervention is years have highlighted the multiple factors that must be considered essential. This i-box briefly explains the origins, justification, and to grasp irrigation success or failure (RSA 1955; Bembridge 2000; characteristics of the simplified systems framework that is central Perret 2002; Bolding 2004; Prieto 2006; Ostrom 2009; Van Averbeke, to the diagnostic and intervention planning that the FLIDguide aims Denison, and Mnkeni 2011; Sender 2015; Mutiro and Lautze 2015; to support. Lankford et al. 2016; Van Rooyen et al. 2017). Irrigation farming activity has a special character because there are so many different Facing complexity head-on biophysical, social and technical elements that interact in a Many practitioners argue that there is no need to get overly complex, highly dynamic and interactive process. A small change theoretical, and that it is essential to “keep things simple”. While in any one of the elements can trigger a series of follow-on events the authors would fully agree, there is a reality to be faced that has that impact on the whole irrigation system, in ways both expected nothing simple about it. Irrigation development initiatives globally and surprising. A shift in weather, equipment functioning, markets, are well-known for their unpredictable – and too-often failed – water stress, social or political environment, among many other outcomes that have resulted from simplistic interventions, whether factors, can cause the system to cascade in a domino effect in technical, agronomic, marketing or organizational. Systems thinking upward or downward trajectories. itself dates back to Aristotle (350 BC), who famously noted that “the Factors everywhere, but it’s the big picture that counts whole is more than the sum of its parts”. The concept was formally popularized half a century ago by Von Bertalanffy (1968), though it There is broad agreement in the literature on the factors that can was observed and analyzed in irrigation in the preceding decade be used to describe the irrigation system. Yet there is no standard (Republic of South Africa [RSA} 1955), and probably even earlier by categorization or definition. Definition is complicated by the reality many others. A complex system view of irrigation is now viewed as that factors have a different character at different scales. What important and has become increasingly mainstream in theory and happens at the farm, on a scheme, in the immediate locality, in in practice. the sub-basin and nationally, are all variations of each other. There is also interconnectedness between the factors at any scale and across the scales in varying degrees. While care and attention is needed in defining and assessing key system factors, and in 38 FL ID SYSTEMS FRA MEWOR K i-BOX A understanding their relationships, a central focus on The FLIDguide framework – seven factors the big picture needs to be maintained. The ‘whole’ is something quite different from an aggregation The seven main factors for diagnosing FLID processes and planning interventions of factors, with its own character created by the are shown in the schematic and outlined in the table below. The many related ‘chemistry’ of interacting factors. In simple static considerations and issues are covered in more detail in the seven modules of the terms, salt is chloride plus sodium, but the taste is FLIDguide. neither. All the more so for a dynamic multi-factor FLID process. Intervention planning, by definition, is the intentional interference and adjustment of factors with the aim of changing the big picture dynamics to achieve better outcomes. In real terms, this translates Resource to the theory of change. To trigger the right kind potential Farmer benefits  Land suitability of change, the status of the factors must first be  Crop profitability  Surface water  Farm enterprise assessed, the effect they have on each other has to  Groundwater  Environment  Water quality be explored, and the implications of planned changes in one or more factors for the big picture must be predicted. The FLIDguide framework aims to be an Policy & legal Irrigation Technology instrument that helps develop the theory of change.  Policies: land and water business strategy  Availability  Laws: land and water  Supplier networks Pragmatism and compromise  Subsidies/incentives  Servicing and support  Accountability  Energy options The framework outlined here is the simplest combination of factors that the authors could devise that still adequately captures the complex Knowledge Markets dynamics of evolving FLID processes. Pragmatism  Research/advisory  Agric input/output  Benefits of irrigation  Financial & technical and the need for ease of reference (terminology) and Irri-farming skills   Local & export practical application (diagnostics) necessitated some  Operations/  Physical access maintenance Finance theoretical compromises. Some factors had to be  Own funds  Loan financing combined, and nuances in their descriptions across  Credit terms local and external scales simplified.  Insurance EXTERNAL LEVEL FARM & LOCAL LEVEL FL I D SYST E MS F RA M E WO RK 39 i-BOX A Table 1 Seven factors for diagnosing and planning interventions aimed at catalyzing FLID processes FLID process factor Description and summary elements Resource potential The natural resource factor comes down to the potential for multiple years) and across seasons (wet/dry); and water quality, n Land suitability irrigation development based on climate, soil and water resources. particularly in terms of siltation, nitrates and urban or agricultural n Surface water Considerations would include rainfall; number of growing seasons; pollutants. n Groundwater soils (drainage and salination); surface water and groundwater n Water quality resource adequacy and reliability over time (i.e. changes over Farmer benefits Irrigation farming brings a range of additional benefits over and connected to the farmer’s other rainfed and livestock activities, n Crop profitability above rainfed farming activities. These additional, or ‘incremental’, and is just one part of the wider farm enterprise. Thus there are n Whole farm system benefits result from higher yields from irrigated crops being potential direct agricultural benefits that extend beyond irrigation n Environment produced due to intensification, additional cropping seasons, and production through livestock feed, marketing and scale synergies, expansion of the irrigation farm. Typically, irrigation returns would cash-flow management, etc. There are also less quantifiable be two or three times that of rainfed farming, with a global average benefits of irrigation that must be considered, such as reduced risk of 2.6 (Molden 2007). The direct benefits can be quantified in terms exposure, increased resilience, reduced poverty, and improved of cash and food benefits to the farmer, to the extended farm nutrition and health. system, and to wider society. Irrigated production is often Policy and legal Policies, and the laws and regulations that institutionalise water, enforcement limiting wetland cultivation, and ensuring riverine n Policies: land & water land, financial and environmental institutions, can enable or conservation and soil erosion protection are important, but can n Laws: land & water constrain FLID processes. The status of the rule of law, and the also marginalise farmers. The type of land tenure arrangements, n Subsidies/incentives de-facto ability of a farmer to assert his/her rights is one high- the numbers of farmers under different tenure types, land rental n Accountability level consideration. The right of access to water, and maximum rates, perceptions of tenure security, and gender issues in regard thresholds of abstractions before permitting is required, are to access to and use of land are further elements to consider. particularly important for FLID. Similarly, the rights of use of These all provide insight into farmers’ risks in relation to their wetland resources and the legal basis for water management farming investments, and their ability to consolidate land, or organizations – and how those are given effect – impacts on expand the farm size through land exchange processes and conflicts and uncertainties where water is stressed. Environmental achieve economies of scale. Knowledge The knowledge factor is a synthesis of the “human resources” financing institutions have of irrigation farming profitability, risks n Research/advisory factor commonly described in the literature. It primarily addresses and potential market value. In considering the reality of FLID n Benefits of irrigation the knowledge of irrigation across all possible involved sectors and processes, there is also the need to consider labor availability, n Irri-farming skills stakeholders. Enquiry into knowledge needs to assess the formal and this is an additional human resources consideration that is n Operations/maintenance education system and extension services as well as non-formal, not captured by the chosen title of “knowledge”, but has some n Labor farmer-to-farmer learning in relation to agronomy, business- bearing on diagnosis and planning. Expansion of farming beyond a oriented farming and technology use. All knowledge is important, certain size means that family labor becomes insufficient to sustain including that which farmers have of technical alternatives; that production, and willing labor availability can be a constraint. suppliers have of smallholders’ technology needs; and that 40 FLI D SYSTEMS FRAMEWORK i-BOX A FLID process factor Description and summary elements Finance Access to finance is one potential constraint to farmers acquiring hesitant due to risks and lack of collateral, with limited appreciation n Own funds both agricultural production inputs and irrigation infrastructure. of benefits. Suppliers provide financing as a way of achieving sales, n Loan financing The FLID process is rarely supported with formal financing, and while aggregators and processors may do so to ensure sustained n Credit terms in most cases the step from rainfed farming to irrigation farming produce supply. Unlike agricultural (input) financing, which only n Grants is financed by own savings, or money borrowed informally from has a seasonal debt servicing cycle, infrastructure finance extends n Underwriting funds family or local lenders. Access to financing can unlock and fast over multiple seasons or years. There are different challenges n Insurance track the growth process, by enabling acquisition of technology to involved for different potential financial sources, whether from intensify or expand in a significant jump, rather than in many small savings and informal loans or formal loans from aggregators, micro-steps. The large range of actors interacting with farmers in suppliers or financial institutions. Matching grant arrangements the process combine to pose important challenges when trying to can reduce the upfront cost of equipment purchases, while crop improve financial access. The formal banking system is largely insurance and underwriting of loans can reduce lending risks. Markets Markets, as a factor, is a cross-cutting consideration that applies of FLID activity in a country, and the extent of services, financial, n Agric input/ouput to agricultural, technology and financial markets. Key market agricultural input supply, output markets and technologies, in n Financial & technical stakeholders, their roles, scope of services, and ability and terms of their de-facto accessibility, suitability to needs, and n Local & export interest in servicing the varied target groupings of farmers have affordability from a smallholder’s perspective. Decentralisation, n Physical access to be assessed. Key players include agricultural input suppliers, represented by physical distance from markets, is an illuminating credit and savings institutions, agricultural banks, co-operatives, determinant. Where services are decentralised and output technology suppliers, aggregators and processors. Smallholders, markets, aggregators, or suppliers are located in small centres, this who are the main focus of the FLIDguide, are characterised by indicates accessibility. Affordability is essentially addressed in the their weak linkages to markets and loose value chains which cost-benefit considerations under the factor of “farmer benefits”, combine to undermine their profitability and add risk, thus while suitability to available technology would be assessed under increasing vulnerability to shocks. Market considerations need to the technology factor. include the maturity Technology The availability of suitable irrigation technologies is one of the not inanimate but have important social requirements and effects. n Socio-technology factors that enables farmers to drive the irrigation development Technology types in relation to energy source, pumping, on-farm n Types of technology process. Labor, cost and water-saving innovations have irrigation system, and soil-water management are particularly n Servicing and support tremendous potential to radically transform the irrigation important in FLID processes. The range of equipment that is n Energy options enterprise in terms of benefits and operational risks. Yet available on the market, the purchase and operational costs, technologies cannot be separated from the people who use them operational and maintenance skills required and the implications and how they manage their time, learn skills, or organise their for servicing and support are all important elements. activities and other resources around them. Technologies are thus FL I D SYST E M S F RA M E WO R K 41 i-BOX B Policy and subsidy Examples of catalyzing new irrigation activity through policy changes or subsidies include the removal of tariffs on irrigation equipment, establishing matching grant arrangements for irrigation equipment, or subsidizing agricultural energy supply (among others). Resource Farmer These kinds of interventions have a set of follow-on implications potential benefits for other factors. The net positive result is that technology and/or pumping costs are made more affordable. This lowers the financial hurdle for farmers who want to transition to irrigation, and for existing irrigation farmers to intensify and expand. Policy While positive benefits include more food and increased profits, & legal Irrigation Technology there are also effects on other elements of the system. Market business saturation at a local scale can result if crop diversification or access strategy to more distant markets are not addressed. Increased water- and land-resource use can lead to competition within the immediate locality, requiring attention to social dynamics. At sub-basin levels, Knowledge Markets water permitting, environmental redress, or decentralized water governance responses may be needed. Thus a policy intervention needs to consider both potential limitations and the impact on other Finance factors to achieve stated goals. In addition to the policy or subsidy interventions, parallel responses to maximize benefits and mitigate potentially negative outcomes may be needed. smaller volumes are needed, this change has a set of follow-on Technical shifts requirements, such as the need for new knowledge of irrigation practices. The amount of irrigation applied is no longer easy to Another example of system interconnectedness is the popular, observe and can be far off what is needed. Labor is reduced, which though sometimes disappointing, introduction of drip irrigation on may not be a good thing if job creation is a priority or if labor has no pumped systems to replace furrow or micro-basin irrigation setups. opportunity cost. Timely access to spares is required, along with While the aim is to increase profits by reducing pumping costs, as the means to pay for spares at short notice. New maintenance skills 42 CATA LYZ ING FL ID : EXA MP L ES i-BOX B are needed. If filtration and flushing is sub-optimal, or the physical integrity of the piped system is not well maintained, distribution of water across the field can be poor. Thus the technical shift can result in lower production and financial losses, rather than the intended gains, due to reasons that go beyond the limitations of the technical change itself. A meaningful response must consider all of these interlinked realities and address those that are critical to the achievement of the intended goals. Value chains and marketing Somewhat differently – and stepping away from a technical focus, but ending up with technical opportunities – FLID can, for example, be catalyzed by strengthening a producer organization. The organization can link farmers to new higher-value markets. Economies of scale from increased aggregation volumes, attention to sorting, packaging and quality control can all improve profitability without any technical changes to the irrigation system. New markets can trigger demand for different crops, leading to the need for a host of other system changes in response, including demand for new irrigation technologies. CATALY Z I N G F L I D : E X A M P L ES 43 i-BOX C Notes on persuasive approaches A good starting point when promoting a FLID-support agenda is to reflect the current pace of irrigation development in ●n ●Speak their “language”: identify the common terms and phrases used to describe the subjects you are working on. If you don’t use their words and concepts, they won’t get your message. Don’t assume relation to the growth that is envisaged in policy. The required annual budget can be calculated by multiplying the envisaged they understand your terms, or expect them to adopt your conventions area by the current unit cost of public irrigation development – that is a process that may come about with time. n● (in excess of USD 10 000/ha). Dress in a way that is familiar to your audience: To be It is useful to look at national and sectoral strategies such believable, you must use every instrument at your disposal that as: the Country Partnership Strategy of the World Bank; enables the person to identify with you. These may include compliance continental strategies; and other relevant documents in with dress codes, social norms, document and presentation styles, and which the high-level priorities are clarified. These would be professional and cultural etiquette. identified in the policy review discussed in i-boxes 3.4 and 3.5; see also Minh et al (2021). A well-thought-out, strategically linked, and well-pitched one- or two-page motivation might ●n ●Convince their advisors first: Find out who the decision-maker listens to, or considers an authority on the subject. Engage with them and get insight into what might prevent the FLID pitch from be all you need to get the concept approved and to move into resonating easily. Address those issues, either in the pitch itself, or operational design. In preparing a FLID pitch there are some through lobbying the advisor. useful tactics that can help make impact and get traction. ●n ●Give them credit for what they are doing right: Acknowledging the good work done, despite multiple ●n ●Avoid being too dogmatic: While conviction is important, your point of view is more likely to be accepted if it is couched in ways that leave the decision-maker to make the decision, rather than having challenges or failures, can set a tone of positive engagement to concede to things put forward to them. and willingness to listen to new information. ●n ●Solve their problems: You need to find out what problem they have that a FLID intervention will ●n ●Pitch the message in a series of communications: Pitch the information in small but increasing bites. Allow time (even weeks) in between to let the idea settle in before getting to the detail. solve. Decision-makers need key messages that resonate Start with just the idea or concept and avoid any attempt to convince, immediately, in the first ten seconds, with their own interests, even where there is evidence. Allow the ideas to seed. Follow up with purpose, and current burning problems. It is important more detail, and in subsequent sessions, proceed into the full pitch. to establish through formal and informal research, with colleagues and advisors to the decision-makers, what kinds of problems they must solve right now, and what outcomes are important for them. Weave the FLID pitch around those. ●n ●Finally, keep it short and interesting: Visuals, images and charts with a few key big-letter messages are more likely to sink in than a barrage of facts. 44 NOTES ON PERSUASIVE APPROACHES i-BOX D Working principles in FLID to analyze dynamics, collectively identify problems, and then formulate solutions. The planning process and the intervention engagement design should thus aim to support collaboration between varied actors in irrigated agriculture to target the system weaknesses and The rate at which FLID unfolds is slow compared to the need for ensure that responses play a catalytic role. scaling up in order to meet the increasing demand for food and job 2 creation. The surrounding environment is rarely highly conducive in terms of markets, financial and technology access, and knowledge. Constraints require effort to be overcome them. Farmers and other A wider view of benefits agents of change involved in FLID have inevitably faced high Engagement with FLID processes can build on expected transaction costs in improving their situations, and it is usually the positive effects on a wide array of development- better-off individuals in society who are able to negotiate the hurdles, related indicators. Interventions should aim to support broad and who get the most benefit (Lefore et al. 2019). Engaging with development processes, with goals beyond the internal rate of FLID processes is intentionally and unavoidably people-centered return on investment, and also contribute to sustaining the natural – from consultation to co-planning and detailing the designs of resource base and the environment; providing water for multiple interventions. Engaging with stakeholders requires an ethical purposes; nutritional security; social stability; dignity through sensitivity and attention to some working principles, outlined below. work through providing jobs; social equity; and giving voice to 1 marginalized groups. Evaluating the economic and financial returns on interventions that catalyze FLID is one important part of planning. Returns are usually highly favorable, as farmers often Catalyzing the system – reducing carry a significant part of the overall direct investment cost. Yet, in hurdles and speeding up processes addition to financial evaluations, it is important that effort is made to Supporting FLID is essentially a catalytic intervention maximize these other benefits that are less easily quantified. 3 to allow easier entry for new irrigation farmers, enable the process to move more easily and faster, and widen the circle of people who will benefit. Working with FLID processes requires a quantum shift The intervener as a temporary in thinking, particularly for engineers and specialists, who are participant used to a conventional design process: study, plan and design, construction and perhaps some training along the way. By Across Africa, farmers continue to develop irrigated contrast, the FLID facilitator must work with potential and existing agriculture, finding creative solutions to obstacles they irrigation farmers (including men, women and youth), suppliers, encounter. When interveners engage with FLID processes, they are credit institutions, technology providers, traders and government facilitating an ongoing change process as temporary participants in WO R K I N G P R I N C I P L ES I N F L I D E N G AG E MENT 45 i-BOX D that process. Any action should have the eventual goal of keeping farmers firmly in the driver’s seat of development, and without undermining farmer control. In a participatory perspective, it is the intervener that participates in the farmers’ projects, rather than the other way around. 5 Facilitating influence for less powerful actors Irrigation interventions are processes of negotiation, and it is part of the facilitator’s responsibility to create an environment in which less powerful actors also have This requires a mindshift for development practitioners in the the opportunity to participate in the process. Facipulation – the irrigation sector, who are sometimes used to replicating projects balancing act between facilitation and constructive manipulation with the same modalities in different situations. Interventions – is a useful concept to draw on. Facilitators have the power catalyzing FLID are by their nature limited in time, and dialogue to steer participatory processes by setting agendas, informing needs to be continuously reshaped, and new solutions identified as and managing discussions, framing analyses and summarizing old challenges are resolved. conclusions. They can use processes and techniques to provide vulnerable people with the possibility to advance their position. 4 Failure to include all stakeholders, albeit at different levels of collaboration and decision-making, can result in conflict, Recognizing diversity in interests undermining positive outcomes. The intervener steps into and engages with a complex and dynamic process in which people not only seek 66% Global average 50% 60% to improve their irrigation practices together, but also struggle to obtain or further their control over resources. This 47% Figure 1 36% Women in the can be to the detriment of others. Recognition needs to be given 30% agricultural to the fact that farmers and the communities around them are 21% workforce in not homogenous entities. Women or youth – as with men – do selected regions Afghanistan North Africa Pakistan Sub-Saharan Nepal Bangladesh not represent a homogenous group; they play varied roles in Africa and countries agriculture, sometimes with divergent interests that depend on local context. Competing interests and goals are the norm, rather Women and youth often lack ‘voice’ in household and community than the exception. decisions. Failing to engage women and youth may deepen It is important to explore and understand the diversity within inequalities, reduce access to water for households, and leave communities and their sub-groups, failing which the proposed some people worse off than prior to investment. Interventions solutions risk missing the diversity of interests, opportunities and need to ensure equity in access to the inputs required for irrigated needs of the different individuals involved. production, and expertise on gender and youth may be required to support design and implementation. 46 WORKING P R INCIP L ES IN FL ID ENG AG EMENT i-BOX E Choice of financing instruments Types of financing One of the key decisions during the preparation of a FLID operation that is supported by a development partner concerns Investment operation: Loans, credits and grants financing choosing the most appropriate financing instrument. While activities are used for creating physical and social infrastructure. different agencies have different instruments, they can be broadly The main focus is infrastructure development which is achieved by concentrating on procurement processes and safeguard organized along the following lines: requirements. It is usual to adopt the procurement framework The choice among these financial instruments depends on and safeguard requirements of the development partner. Disbursement is made against eligible expenditure as agreed the kind of interventions to be implemented through the in a Financing Agreement. In the World Bank, this is called operation. For example, if the operation is “infrastructure heavy” an Investment Project Finance (IPF). appropriate investment operation might be one that is similar to a traditional irrigation operation. But more often than not, operations Result-based operation: The main focus is on the achievement involve small infrastructures, technically simple and low-risk in of results, rather than on the physical inputs to achieve those results. This helps the country to improve the design and nature, which are replicated across high numbers of farmers and implementation of a development program by strengthening farmer groups and will be better addressed through a results- institutions and building capacity. It also helps strengthen based operation. The results-based operation allows mechanisms partnerships between government, development partners, and to be established in order to rapidly achieve rollout at scale. other stakeholders by providing a platform for collaborating in Rollout happens, inevitably, through decentralized structures a country’s program. The country procurement and safeguard and personnel and the results-based approach is not unduly framework is usually adopted. Disbursement is linked to the achievement of agreed measurable and verifiable outputs and burdened by procurement and safeguard rules. This instrument outcomes indicators, establishment of processes, or institutional also facilitates rapid scaling-up, by building on country systems changes. In the World Bank, this is called Program-for-Results and partnerships, and in so doing, establishing a model that is (PforR). easily replicable across the country. By using existing structures Policy operations: This provides rapidly disbursing financing and systems, support for FLID is not rigidly tied to a single project to help the country address actual or anticipated development operational model, the latter being associated with challenges of financing requirements of domestic or external origins, against sustainability. the implementation of policy and institutional actions. In the World Bank, this is called Development Policy Operation (DPO). Investment financing might have a role to play at an early stage of the FLID process, when the country is still testing the theory Private sector operations: Guarantees facilitate involvement of change for FLID. You can test if and where the pilot operation of private sector stakeholders for mobilization of private effectively translates into an improvement of the enabling investment. environment before going to scale. Investment financing can also CH O I C E O F F I N A N C I N G I N ST R U M E N T S 47 i-BOX E allow farmer appetite for a FLID intervention to be has identified a key institutional change without which the lifting of other tested. Irrigation development is farmer-led so it is not constraints would not result in the expected change for FLID farmers. If there is possible to fully predict farmers’ behavior until actual no expectation of complementarity with a policy operation in the medium term, opportunities are made available on the ground. the inclusion of a DLI might be a strong enough incentive to create the needed political willingness. Each financing instrument has its place in supporting the variety of needs in a FLID intervention and it is While it is important to choose opportune at the preparation stage also to look at carefully the best instrument, “hybrid” operations. Investment and results-based The hybrid option based on the specific context, it is operations can play complementary roles in the also important to be opportunistic. evolving FLID dialogue in a country. While a results- When designing a FLID operation, the based operation might be better suited to support A results-based government and the development FLID interventions at scale, an investment operation operation with an partner might not have complete could be used to pilot interventions and explore investment component freedom to choose from among the solutions, as a way of informing decision-makers is a good solution to various financing instruments. With the about how to keep improving catalytic interventions catalyze FLID at scale increasing push towards bigger, and for FLID. These interventions blend the advantages while ringfencing some often multisectoral, operations, there of more than one financing instrument. This might be key activities. is the need to strategically assess appropriate, for example, when there is the need to the pros and cons of each financing ensure that some hard or soft activities take place in instrument in the light of the rest of order to allow the results-based design to thrive. For the portfolio. For example, a FLID results-based operation could be embedded example, training activities, purchase of key tools for in a larger one focused on local government service delivery, or a larger staff, or hiring of key consultants might all warrant the investment operation looking at community-driven development activities. This extra processing for the inclusion of a small investment is particularly true when there are policy or legal constraints as timing of policy component into a results-based design. operations is sometimes difficult to predict. In this sense, the best approach would be to have the rationale for the policy change drafted, and then “pushed An investment financing project with few through” when the opportunity arises. disbursement-linked indicators (DLIs) might become appropriate, for example, when the FLID diagnostic 48 CHOICE OF FINANCING INSTRUMENTS i-BOX F Outcome and choice of indicators for the FLID operation One element to keep in mind as the operation to support FLID is conceptualized through the theory of change Quantifying indicators in operations in support of FLID is is to keep the causality chain clear. The operation will uncertain not necessarily address all of the major constraints identified. Some of the constraints may be addressed FLID is demand-driven, so farmers respond on a free-choice by the government, with or without the support of other basis to opportunities made available. Predicting the responses development agencies, or by another operation, either in to interventions is inherently uncertain at the start. Scenario-setting parallel, or down the line. It is fundamental to understand with ranges is needed, and data from early-stage uptake can inform the linkage between these parallel interventions adjustments. and the development objective of the operation in order to catalyze FLID (parallel interventions are shown schematically in Figure 10 of the Main Guide as shaded Outcome indicators are a proxy measure of what you want to achieve boxes of inputs and outputs). It is important to bear in mind through the operation to catalyze FLID. Outcome indicators should quantify that: the change in irrigation expansion, intensification, and/or increased 1 There might be other interventions that are necessary to achieve the outcome. As much as they are not included in the operation design and support, their role in profitability resulting from the constraints that were lifted by the FLID operation. Together, the set of indicators is the matrix on which basis the success of the operation will be assessed. While there is no quick and easy the achievement of the outcome needs to be recognized answer to defining indicators that will work for all FLID operations, they can (such as legal covenants in the operation documents). be formulated along the following lines: n Any related risks must be factored in as a risk to the Number of beneficiaries: Assessing the number of farmers development outcome of the operation to facilitate FLID. who will benefit from a FLID operation is not a simple endeavor. 2 Operations are intrinsically demand-driven, and it is difficult to define There might be other interventions which are up front how many farmers will benefit from them. The situation is quite not essential to achieve the outcome but will be different for an intervention on a scheme with a boundary perimeter, where instrumental in the longer term. Examples include the the number of farmers, plot sizes, farmer typologies, etc., are known. intention to allow more farmers to be involved in the FLID In a FLID operation, subsidies may be given for a range of technology process beyond those involved in the operation, or the options that are made available to farmers. The choices of technology need for environmental sustainability in the FLID process. It can be estimated, but not well defined in advance. When new financing is important to keep an eye on this higher-level dialogue in instruments are introduced to overcome the affordability hurdle, it is hard parallel with the operation. O U TCO M E A N D C H O I C E O F I N D I CATO R S FOR THE FLID OPERATION 49 i-BOX F to say how many farmers will actually apply for different technology options, no matter how detailed a market assessment may have been. n Gender disaggregation: In the same vein, the gender disaggregation of beneficiaries might not be obvious, but it is necessary to think in these terms as the operation is conceptualized. The risk of sidelining some groups of farmers – notably women – if the interventions are not carefully assessed, is a real one. n Scenarios and indicator values: The best approach is to determine a range of indicator values, based on the potential uptake of scenarios. To estimate numbers, scenarios need to be defined during the conceptualization process, and the reasoning behind uptake should be elaborated. In this way the number of beneficiaries, irrigation areas, and other key indicators can be set with a lower and upper range. n Establishment of mechanisms: A FLID operation is not only about the farmers who, by the end of the operation, might have implemented a change in their farming system. These farmers will be the most entrepreneurial, but they are usually followed by a larger second wave of farmers who might be more risk averse but who will benefit from the more conducive FLID environment at that later time. It is thus important that indicators for the project development objective (PDO) record the establishment of mechanisms which might, in the future, benefit a larger number of beneficiaries. 50 OUTCOME AND CHOICE OF INDICATORS FOR THE FLID OPERATION i-BOX G Beneficiaries of a FLID operation One operation cannot cater for the needs of all farmers. Eligibility criteria should be clearly identified at the preparation stage, including whether the operation caters for individual farmers, farmer groups, or both (Module 2 i-box 2.1). Opening up an operation too much across the spectrum of farmers can become unmanageable and disperse focus and energy. Therefore, you need to target strategically – avoid pressure to respond to every opportunity in one operation. Keep in mind that working with a certain segment of farmers can have a ripple effect, through demonstrating the benefits to others. Start with those farmers for whom a relatively small change in the enabling environment can more easily catalyze action. One decision you need to take as the operation is designed is whether to respond to the needs of individual farmers, or to groups of farmers, or both. The challenges faced by each category are quite different, as are the interventions needed. In many countries, public interventions have most frequently revolved around group organizations at community level which may be a “comfort zone” for government agencies and development organizations alike. Eligibility criteria should be clearly identified at the preparation stage, including whether the operation caters for individual farmers, farmer groups, or both. The essence of “farmer-led” operations is that they are demand- responsive. While general characteristics of target groups can be defined, the farmers themselves are not selected at the design stage. Selection criteria can help determine boundaries and maintain focus, and might include: n maximum farm area that can benefit (i.e. could be limited to smallholder farmers or include larger farms ) n minimum land tenure requirements (must have official or acceptable informal documentation) n water access (maximum distance from the water source) n water source (available water) n existing value chain linkages (connection to output markets) n financial means (capacity to contribute a set amount) n collateral or credit history (needed to access a loan) BEN E FI CI AR I ES O F A F L I D O PE RATI O N 51 i-BOX H Facilitating inclusion and shared benefits from irrigation n Gender and generational inclusion at every project step: Women, youth and other resource-poor farmers often face added barriers across phases of technology adoption compared n Asset ownership: the shift from a men’s-only domain: Projects that seek to increase access to irrigation technologies also need to understand asset ownership for with male farmers at higher income levels. Project engagement women and youth. Irrigation pumps and related tools are often should therefore target gender and generational inclusion across considered substantial assets (similarly to cattle), and ownership each project cycle: participatory project design, implementation, and may default to men in a household or extended family, even if impact measurement. Attention should be given to gendered and women purchase or are given technologies. This is particularly generational roles across all project activities, including identification true in many countries in sub-Saharan Africa. of opportunities and priorities for support, both in the technological Default ownership by men reduces the ability of women in a domain and beyond. This includes awareness or reach of technologies household or extended family to access irrigation technologies and practices, trying out a technology, and continued or sustained use for use on their own or joint of the equipment along with improved practices. Default ownership plots, or control decisions about n Women face more constraints: Within male-headed families, by men reduces the the use of technologies or the women also face intra-household barriers, which can add ability of women (in a products of irrigation. This is another layer of blocks that prevent them from participating in project household or extended worsened where women cannot activities, owning technologies or assets, and contributing to decisions family) to access access credit and thus cannot about the use of technologies and irrigation technologies purchase complementary Awareness is the first step use of income from technologies. for use on their own or resources, such as farm inputs in technology adoption. Women may be excluded from shared plots. and labor, for their own or joint informational events, field days and plots. Irrigation technology in You must understand the trainings, which prevents reach the household may not reduce barriers women face in and awareness. This exclusion may the labor of women and may even add to their labor if women access to information. be intentional and based on local must simultaneously contribute to the men’s expanding areas gender social norms, or it may of production. Women may be expected to continue to draw relate to men controlling means of and apply water on separate fields manually, even if a male in information, such as cell phones and radios. In order to achieve the first the household owns a pump. In addition, women tend to lack Three step key elements in technology of adoption – awareness – projects must pay heed to influence over decisions about, or benefit from, income earned land tenure the barriers women face in accessing information and make efforts to through irrigation. They also tend to lack information about reach women through available or innovative communication tools. income that can be earned from irrigated production, in cases where men control sales in the market; women commonly 52 FACILITATING INCLUSION AND SHARED BENEFITS FROM IRRIGATION i-BOX H cannot exercise influence over decisions regarding income except for relatively low amounts. While women may have an interest and try out technologies, especially if those technologies can be used for multiple purposes, the lack of control over technology use and decision-making on income earned from irrigated production can lead to lack of sustained investment or even disadoption. n Changing access to other critical resources: Even where women may overcome the external constraints, such as access to credit, land and labor, irrigation technology adoption may not benefit women. Women and children may face increased labor demands, but without improved income or nutrition in male-headed households. Women in female-headed households may be unable to invest at all without external support. These are examples of contextualized constraints that projects will need to understand in order to develop strategies that go beyond gender mainstreaming. Projects will require specific actions and dedicated budget to remove or mitigate constraints for women farmers, and to achieve the impacts on food production and nutrition associated with empowering women farmers. A useful guideline with suggestions is the resource, “Considering Gender When Promoting Small-Scale Irrigation Technologies” (SNV; posters). FAC I L I TAT I N G I N C LU S I O N A N D S H A R E D BENEFITS FROM IRRIGATION 53 i-BOX I Field level leadership the performance of civil service and administration (Independent Evaluation Group [IEG] 2008). Therefore, success in FLID would 1 require going beyond policy and knowledge, in order to inspire and motivate the staff of irrigation and agriculture departments, who A different way of working with farmers literally embody the service delivery mechanism for FLID. 2 is needed in FLID interventions One of the challenges in a FLID operation is that private and public sector stakeholders have to adjust their ways of working Agents of behavioral change through to align to a farmer-responsive and farmer-centered approach. field level leadership Financial institutions, equipment suppliers and value-chain actors One successful way of prompting the needed change have to be supported and encouraged to view themselves as in role for government personnel is to create scores of change service providers who need to gear their offerings and products to agents through field level leadership. The conventional wisdom is to respond to farmers’ expressed needs, rather than what they think is pray for a caliber of leader who can organize and inspire the ranks. best for farmers. Example interventions that can facilitate change More recent advances emphasize the importance of decentralized, in private-sector dynamics are covered in Modules 4, 5, 6 and 7. multi-agent leadership, where progress happens not because of one Public officials who are involved in implementation will also heroic individual at the top of the organizational pyramid, but from have to make a significant shift from their familiar role of being the cumulative efforts of numerous champions at different levels, a powerful implementer in an irrigation project, to being a exercising different types of leadership (Andrews 2016). FLL is an facilitator of a development process led by the farmers. This operational approach designed for public-sector programs where requires a whole different set of skills and processes; a strategy for attitude and behavior of the “last mile” actors is a key determinant of dealing with this through field level leadership (FLL), is described success. The FLL approach aims to create change leaders at all ranks here. Ensuring that public officials buy into this shift in focus of staff, and is designed for efficient and sustainable implementation and proactively support FLID development cannot be taken for in public organizations (World Bank forthcoming 2021). 3 granted. Public officials can be threatened by the idea of losing their role, and struggle to understand their new responsibility. The effort to equitably support small farmers may be hamstrung by corruption and elite-dominated patronage networks. Intervention elements and process Formal policies have limited impact on personnel behavior in the The field level leadership process includes the following public sector. Institutional reforms targeted at changing policies elements: collective reflection by staff in safe spaces; and restructuring organizations do not account for informal culture networks of change champions; and individual commitments to rapid and norms, which often trump the formal rules and incentives results (90 days). It uses an internal, peer-to-peer model of behavior (Helmke and Levitsky 2004). A World Bank review indicates a more change, and is therefore more cost-effective and sustainable than 50% failure rate for the reform efforts aimed at improving compared to trainings by external coaches. 54 FIELD LEVEL LEADERSHIP i-BOX I Field level leadership in action Process Description: Field level leadership is intended to be implemented through a peer-to-peer learning model, whereby a public agency that has successfully implemented an FLL program provides the initial training and implementation support to a new agency. The full program requires 12–18 months for implementation, depending on the number of agency staff. Implementation of FLL is organized in four phases: n Phase 1: Creation of a Vanguard Group of FLL Facilitators. The process starts with the selection of a small seed group (10–20 people) of agency staff, who will become FLL master trainers for their organization. This group trains closely with the FLL experts from another agency, for a period of 10–12 days, to understand the FLL approach, develop an FLL workshop curriculum specific for their own organization, and learn how to lead FLL workshops. n Phase 2: Collective Introspection to Reveal Values and Motivations for Change. After the master trainers complete their training, they facilitate a series of 4-day workshops for their colleagues. The workshops create a safe-space environment for reflection and self-assessment. Participants are asked to share their individual hopes and aspirations; they discuss the challenges facing their organization. Difficult subjects such as corruption are also broached. Workshops conclude with each participant adopting a few goals that they believe can be achieved in the next 90 days. n Phase 3: Spontaneous Networking, Experimentation and Community Outreach. The workshops serve as a mechanism for people to find others who share their values and motivation. After the workshops, some of the participants start connecting with like-minded colleagues, by setting up regular meetings and virtual/online groups to share knowledge and support each other. A small group of champions is thus initialized within the organization. n Phase 4: Making Sense of the New Changes and Culture. A follow-up workshop is organized for each cohort, allowing the participants to share their experiences of successes and failures. There is significant discussion of possible changes in workplace systems and procedures for improving public service delivery. Costs: The main costs of implementing FLL include the training of the vanguard group of facilitators and the room and board costs for the FLL workshops. The FLL training program, hosted by a public agency with FLL expertise, spans 8–10 days, and costs about USD 50 000 for a batch of 20 facilitator candidates. The cost of local FLL workshops depends on location, and ranges from USD 30 000–80 000 for a department with 100 staff members. Network of FLL Expertise Providers: FLL expertise is provided through a public-public partnership, by public service delivery organizations that have successfully implemented their own FLL programs. Currently there are two centers for FLL training: Centre for Excellence in Change (Chennai, India) and the Legedadi FLL Training Centre established by the Addis Ababa Water and Sewerage Authority (Ethiopia). FLL expertise and trainings are likely to be available in French and Portuguese in future, in Morocco and Mozambique. FIE L D L E VE L L E A D E RS H I P 55 i-BOX I 4 Results and outcome From feedback on the various pilot implementations conducted by UNICEF and the World Bank, this intervention has shown remarkable success. Examples include: “I can say that I have full job satisfaction. The people in these villages welcome me now when I go there. They call me Sir or refer to me as their elder brother” – Irrigation Engineer (Tamil Nadu Irrigated Agriculture Modernization Project, India) n 34–77% higher outreach to communities; 80% increase in women “During my entire career, I was a technocrat. I would just reporting positive behavior from staff during community meetings prepare MIS tables. I didn’t know anything about water (Tamil Nadu Water and Drainage Board, India) management. Now I feel ashamed about that. I feel that with this training, I have been able to understand the traditional n 30% increase in site visits and 40% increase in satisfaction with wisdom of the community, their views, their needs” irrigation staff, reported by communities (Tamil Nadu Irrigated – Executive Engineer Agriculture Modernization Project, India) (Tamil Nadu Water and Drainage Board, India) n 55% improvement in reliability of scheduled water supply (Dar-es- “Initially I was hesitant in sharing my phone number with the Salaam Water and Sanitation Authority, Tanzania) villagers. Now I give my number easily.” n 47% increase in revenues; 50% reduction in employees coming – Junior Engineer late to work (Addis Ababa Water and Sewerage Authority, Ethiopia) (Tamil Nadu Water and Drainage Board, India) Some quotes and testimonials: “Prior to the training, if someone approached me for drip irrigation pipelines, I would say ‘This is not my department’. “Our staff have changed a lot. Key performance indicators Now I take his problem and connect him to the right people” have changed a lot. This is the area where we are investing – Agriculture Officer more: Changing the attitudes before investing in material (Tamil Nadu Irrigated Agriculture Modernization Project, India) projects” - Cyprian Luhemeja, CEO (Dar es Salaam Water and Sanitation Authority, Tanzania) “I live in Mlandizi, more than 50 km from Dar es Salaam. After the training I leave my house at 5am every day and I don’t have specific time anymore to go back home” - Technician (Dar es Salaam Water and Sanitation Authority, Tanzania) 56 FIEL D L EVEL L EA D ER SHIP i-BOX J Uganda country case to their agricultural activities (Figure 1). When facing a shock, smallholders have little means to fall back on, with a ripple effective on the livelihoods of a large share of the population. Country context In Uganda, agriculture plays a critical role for income generation, particularly for the poorest 40% of the population. The sector Weather-related event 68% contributes 22% to gross domestic product (GDP) and 50% of exports. Pests/diseases 15% The sector plays a fundamental role in job creation, employing 70% of Market prices 8% the total population and 80% of the poorest segment of society. It is a major source of employment for the younger generation, with around Input prices 2% 50% of household heads under the age of 40 engaged in agriculture. Health 2% Increased agricultural production for internal and regional markets Land being taken away 1% is a priority growth path for Uganda. The government, in the Second Power failure/shortage 1% National Development Plan, has defined agriculture as a key economic sector in Uganda’s transition to a middle-income country and has Don’t know 1% emphasized the importance of value addition, commercialization, Other 2% building resilience to climate change, and job creation. Nevertheless, the agricultural sector growth rate remains far below Figure 1 Most significant risk to agricultural activities according to potential: 70% of farmers are engaged in subsistence agriculture, and smallholder farmers (National Survey and Segmentation of Smallholder market dysfunctions are exacerbated by the small size of farms (1.1 ha Households in Uganda (reproduced from Anderson, Learch, and on average). Unreliable quality of agricultural inputs is a major problem, Gardner 2016) which discourages farmers from investing their limited resources, and The Government of Uganda recognizes the potential of the indeed the country records the lowest utilization of inorganic fertilizers agricultural sector for food security, jobs for a young population, in Africa. Most of the tilling is done by hand. and sustaining the transition to a middle-income country. Climate change has added a further challenge: while historically the However, these goals cannot be achieved if the agricultural favorable rainfall pattern allowed two rainfed cropping seasons per year sector remains vulnerable to climate change by relying almost in most parts of the country, the change in precipitation is creating the exclusively on rainfall. The Government, in its Vision 2040, need for irrigation, currently practiced on a mere 1% of the agricultural appropriately lists irrigation as a high priority, and the 2018 area. The rainy season, traditionally lasting eight to nine months in a National Irrigation Policy sets the ambitious targets of 1.5 Mha year, has become shorter, averaging six to seven months a year since irrigated by 2040, compared to the current 77 000 ha (although 2010. Smallholder farmers perceive weather to be the greatest risk this does not account for existing FLID areas, which are U G A N DA CO U N T RY CAS E 57 i-BOX J unknown). Public-led irrigation development is far from matching irrigation and small group schemes without need for major water this need, with only a few hundred hectares of newly irrigated land mobilization infrastructure. The estimated unit cost of 3 000 to each year. The Government of Uganda requested the World Bank 5 000 USD/ha is a quarter to a third of the average public-led to support irrigation expansion in 2017, in the form of an investment medium-scale irrigation development in the country. operation for large-scale irrigation schemes development. The The high Resource potential is accompanied by a high increase in preparation of the operation was also a chance to analyze the Farmer benefits derived from irrigation. The benefits result from a potential and constraints for individual micro-scale irrigation combination of an additional crop during the dry season, the ability development, resulting in the diagnostic, scoring and identification to deal with dry spells, and earlier production in the wet season, for interventions to catalyze FLID. The process, from diagnostics to thus ready to hit the market when prices are higher. However, the the operationalization of interventions, is presented below relatively high cost of irrigation equipment in Uganda negatively impacts the cost benefit analysis. 1 500 000 Target in the National Irrigation Policy 1 000 000 Every year, 70 000 ha of land should be put under irrigation 500 000 Current If current trend of irrigation irrigated area expansion continues 0 2010 2020 2030 2040 Years Figure 2 An example of current trends and future acceleration to Figure 3 Range of net farm income for 1 ha of irrigated mixed vegetables achieve targeted irrigation areas versus rainfed farming in Uganda (lifetime cost over 10 years) Diagnostic and scoring Irrigation would greatly benefit smallholder farmers who are Half of the irrigation potential in Uganda is close to surface water attempting to make the change towards more productive resources, making it possible for farmers to develop individual agriculture but do not have the means to do this. Constraints are 58 U G A NDA COU NTRY CAS E i-BOX J particularly limiting for an estimated 80% of farmers who live below the poverty line, identified as a segment of the 16% Options for growth farming population called “battling the elements” (Figure 3). 4% 4% Finance, knowledge and technology are the major Diversified and Strategic agricultural pragmatic entrepreneurship constraints holding smallholder farmers back from autonomously developing irrigation in Uganda. The scores 21% 54% for the factors are shown in the diagnostic spider plot Battling the Farming for sustenance together with the rationale. elements Overall in Uganda, there is a strong case for FLID: irrigation Segment Farming Battling the Diversified Options for Strategic agricultural expansion is a high-level government priority, there is a large for sustenance elements and pragmatic growth entrepreneurship natural resource potential, and there are proven benefits Above the 14% 20% 100% 62% 100% poverty line for smallholder farmers to irrigate. Indeed, the upper part Below the of the spider plot (“Making the case for FLID” diagnostic) poverty line 86% 80% 0% 38% 0% shows a large area of green. However, smallholder farmers are not autonomously developing irrigation because the environment for FLID is significantly constrained, as Figure 4 Uganda smallholder segments (Anderson, Learch, and Gardner 2016) represented by the small blue area in the lower part of the spider plot in Figure 5. U G A N DA CO U N T RY CAS E 59 i-BOX J Irrigation is still very much underdeveloped Irrigation can allow farmers to introduce a third crop production (1% of agricultural land irrigated), thus during the dry season, as well as to deal better with dry spells there are large land resources. The country and slightly shift production during the rainy seasons to hit the also has large potential in untapped water market when prices are higher. This translates into considerable resources (1 540 m3/yr per capita). The increase in benefits for the farmers. However, high cost of National Irrigation Policy sets the goal of irrigation equipment negatively impacts the cost benefit 1.5 million ha of irrigated land by 2040, analysis. of which half can be FLID with individual irrigation and small group schemes. Irrigation equipment is available in Uganda, with suppliers from nearby countries – Kenya Water and land tenure do not Resource Farmer benefits primarily – looking with increasing interest potential represent a constraint to farmers to to Uganda. Widespread use of solar for independently develop irrigation. domestic water supply makes transition While Uganda requires smallholder of the technology to the irrigation sector farmers to apply for an extraction straightforward. However, cost of irrigation permit with unaffordable charges, 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 equipment is considerably higher than in the large water potential translates Policy Technology neighboring countries due to the low number & legal into low enforcement of these of transactions. In addition, suppliers have regulations, with farmers developing limited penetration in the countryside, irrigation that is not formally Knowledge Markets and quality of the products is sometimes recorded. A progressive land tenure Finance questionable. system recognizes customary rights.. Market linkages for smallholder farmers are generally weak, but the value chains Irrigation is nascent in the country, thus Smallholder farmers do not have expected to benefit more from irrigation the knowledge network is strongly sufficient savings to develop irrigation. – coffee and horticultural – are the better underdeveloped. Most of the farmers They have very limited access to organized ones. The coffee value chain is have never seen irrigation. Public finance, due their lack of collaterals, well established and based on millions of sector is still in the process of recruiting risk aversion, and lack of knowledge of smallholder farmers. Horticultural value irrigation engineers, a profile which did financial institutions for irrigation. Some chains could benefit from diversification, not exist until a few years ago. Irrigation irrigation equipment suppliers provide with only a handful of value chain actors equipment suppliers are mostly located pay-as-you-go, but this applies to an currently controlling the market. in major cities, with limited contribution extremely small portion of the potential to knowledge dissemination. business scale. Even with access to finance, cost of equipment would remain unaffordable. Figure 5 Scoring rationale for FLID in Uganda 60 U G A NDA COU NTRY CAS E i-BOX J Interventions that address the priority An overview of the operation to catalyze FLID constraints Since 2017, the World Bank has been supporting the Government of The assessment of weaknesses in the enabling environment (i.e. the Uganda with its decentralization agenda, with a results-based loan scores) shows that the Government of Uganda can catalyze FLID aimed at improving through a set of interventions that minimize the main constraints the adequacy and faced by smallholder farmers. These targeted interventions are equity of fiscal summarized in the schematic and described thereafter. transfers and the fiscal management The interventions with the highest priority are the ones that aim of resources by local to improve the weakest factors, which are irrigation knowledge governments for health and education services.1 The Government and access to affordable finance. These two require a higher of Uganda and the World Bank agreed that this same vehicle could level of public investment while private sector actors and farmers be used to implement the interventions needed to catalyze FLID. themselves can contribute more directly to addressing the other In 2020, the results-based loan was increased and expanded to constraining factors. However, the diagnostic also revealed the support the Ministry of Agriculture and local governments in the critical underfunding of local governments which greatly restricts implementation of the irrigation interventions.2 their ability to implement various interventions, despite their mandate in the National Irrigation Policy to support micro-scale The theory of change (Main Guide Section 7): At the core of the irrigation development.. Program is the creation of a budget line for micro-scale irrigation at local government level, of which 25% is to support awareness-raising 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 Policy Tech- & legal nology Intervention 5: Ensuring quality standards Intervention 6: Using IT to reduce Knowledge Markets overhead costs Finance Intervention 1: Public sector officers’ knowledge development Intervention 3: Improved access Intervention 2: to loans Farmer learning and Intervention 4: Partial subsidy demand-led service provision 1 Uganda Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers Reform Program (P160250) 2 Uganda Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers Reform Program – Additional Financing (P172868) UGAN DA CO U N TRY CAS E 61 i-BOX J activities among farmers, the establishment of demonstration sites, brochures in Main Guide i-box M) and in the program knowledge and farmer field schools (i-box 4.8); the major portion of 75% is for interventions, relating to both stakeholder information exchange the partial subsidy to farmers for the purchase of individual irrigation and farmer field school content. This addressed the marketing equipment (i-box 5.7). element to the extent that it was possible. The World Bank supports the Micro-scale Irrigation Program with a USD 50 The Ministry of Agriculture supports capacity development of local million loan, expected to be matched by up to USD 24 million of government staff (Main Guide i-box N); sensitization of financial farmers’ contributions. institutions to increase their knowledge of both irrigation and of the risk-mitigation measures provided by the Program, thus increasing Impacts chances for farmers to obtain financing; and the pre-qualification of The Program in the first few months of implementation has suppliers to ensure quality equipment. The Program did not directly already seen 17 000 farmers expressing interest. Of these, 20% intervene in market linkages, given the unavoidable realities of time are women farmers. Among the male farmers, 80% also provided and budget and the need to prioritize interventions. Strengthened details for their wives so that they were included in the decision- market access and functions were important, however, so a strong making process and capacity-development activities. Over focus was put on value chains through the information outreach (see the period 2020–2023, the establishment of a more conducive environment is expected to translate to between 12 000 Constraints Interventions Outcomes Long-term goals and 28 000 smallholder farmers establishing irrigation, as well as Knowledge: Limited knowledge of Knowledge: strengthening the knowledge of Development of public irrigation among public officials sector officers farmers and public stakeholders. The program is expected to Knowledge: Increased farmer Limited Knowledge of LG funds for awareness raising, demo sites, knowledge in contribute between 5 to 10% to irrigation among farmers farmer field schools irrigation the annual irrigation expansion Food security target of the National Irrigation Finance: Jobs for young Financial institutions Farmers cannot afford sensitized Irrigation expansion population Policy across 2022 and 2023. irrigation equipment Middle-income country Finance: Irrigation LG funds for partial Farmers cannot afford equipment subsidy irrigation equipment purchased Technology: Pre-qualification of Equipment quality irrigation equipment is variable suppliers Figure 6 Uganda theory of change 62 UGANDA COUNTRY CASE i-BOX K Uganda country case – Setting up the (partial) subsidy intervention When farmer affordability is low, subsidies are a key instrument for accelerating This in turn is dependent on the possibility for the irrigation equipment uptake and intensification. Under the Uganda Micro-scale farmer to raise a loan. In the case of the Uganda Irrigation Program, the farmer and the local government co-finance the purchase Micro-scale Irrigation Program, the level of farmer of the irrigation equipment, which is then owned, operated and maintained by the co-payment was determined so that, if the farmer farmer. The farmer selects the typology of equipment (solar vs petrol vs diesel required a loan, he/she would be able to pay it pump; hosepipe vs sprinkler vs drip on-farm equipment; tank vs no tank) and back after six months in the case of a solar-powered provides his/her co-payment to the local government, either using savings or system, and over 12 months for petrol-powered obtaining a loan. The local government tops up the farmer contribution through equipment, taking into account the benefits from the subsidy, and competitively procures the irrigation equipment on behalf of irrigation. Under the Program, sensitization of the farmer. In other words, the subsidy is blended into equipment-purchasing commercial banks offering products for smallholder financing arrangements using matching grants where the farmer contributes a farmers was carried out, to increase the chance of part of the cost. smallholder farmers being granted a loan where needed. In order to ensure that farmers lead in the irrigation development process, subsidies should be partial, aiming only to bridge the affordability gap for the 1 ACRE SYSTEM smallholder farmer and nothing more. In setting the farmers’ contributions, Hosepipe attention needs to be given to considerations such as realistic affordability levels; the way the grant impacts on market costs; broader awareness of the Petrol 3.6 1.2 project from communications over time; and the government’s ability to finance. Solar (low pressure) 2.2 6.4 Subsidies are a quick and effective way of achieving affordability when the Solar (high pressure) 5.0 7.2 financing environment is weak, but caution is warranted to avoid dependency. Drip/Sprinkler The potential downsides must be carefully assessed. In the case of the Uganda Petrol 5.8 1.9 Micro-scale Irrigation Program, the subsidy level is set as a percentage of the Solar (low pressure) 4.3 7.2 equipment cost, depending on the energy choice by the farmer (25% subsidy Solar (high pressure) 7.9 7.2 in the case of a petrol or diesel pump; 75% for a solar pump). A cap is set on the subsidy amount as a function of the area to be irrigated, so as to focus the public Farmer co-payment 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 Government co-payment Uganda Shillings (Millions) support on farmers who have the best conditions for irrigation expansion (e.g. proximity to the water, enabling low cost of mobilization), and always capping at 1 ha per farmer to ensure focus on smallholder farmers. Figure 1 Indicative farmer and government contributions Setting up the level of the partial subsidy depends on the capacity of the to equipment costs in the Uganda micro-scale irrigation segment(s) of farmers targeted by the intervention to provide the co-payment. program U G A N DA CO U N T RY CAS E – S E T T I N G U P THE (PARTIAL) SUBSIDY INTERVENTION 63 i-BOX L Uganda country case – Leveraging digital Digital can be a game-changer in the implementation of suppliers beyond the major cities, means that suppliers have high interventions to catalyze FLID. In the case of the Uganda Micro- transaction costs in carrying out farm visits, and would often prefer scale Irrigation Program, local government staff carries out a farm losing a prospective client rather than incurring the cost of a farm visit for farmers who have expressed interest in the Program, visit without the certainty of getting the contract. Thanks to the data collecting farm data through a Program-dedicated App – IrriTrack collected through the App, suppliers can bid without having to visit - and feeding the data in real time to a monitoring and information the farmer (although this is given as an option) which allows for system (MIS). better competitive strategies among suppliers. Plus, increasing the number of farmers served in a certain area allows the suppliers to Benefits of using an App for farm data curb overhead costs, and set up aftersale services more efficiently. collection: n Can capitalize on the advisory service role of public extension officers to afford smallholder farmers the n ●Improves central monitoring: By feeding the information into a centrally managed MIS, the App allows for easy monitoring of the performance of the Micro-scale Irrigation opportunity to develop irrigation in the specific farm context: Program initiated by the Ministry of Agriculture. In addition, the App Knowledge has been identified as a major constraint for opens up the opportunity to link to water resource management smallholder farmers in Uganda monitoring, assessing, for instance, how water withdrawals by small When using information (i-box J). This impedes their irrigators impact a water-stressed hotspot. tools and Apps, you need capacity to autonomously to ensure appropriate assess the pros and cons of training is given as well as irrigation development for their the provision of suitable farm context, and leaves them devices for field staff. dependent on the advice of Remember to set aside irrigation equipment suppliers, money for this as you which may result in sub-optimal design the operation in decisions. n support of FLID! Increases competition among irrigation equipment suppliers while reducing their overhead costs: The dispersed nature of FLID farmers, coupled with their small size and the limited presence of 64 UGAN DA COU NTRY CASE – L EVERAG ING D IG ITA L i-BOX M Uganda country case – Training public officials in a COVID-constrained setting Projects and Programs aiming at catalyzing FLID, by definition involve Useful observations on using this kind of a large number of staff in their implementation. FLID might be a approach: phenomenon of interest for smallholder farmers, but the number of farmers can be huge, with, consequently, large-scale impacts. Training a large number of staff is not an easy endeavor, even more so in view of COVID risks and restrictions. n Self-pacing: On-line format allows staff to decide when to carve out time for training, and reduces conflict with other tasks. However, there is an advantage in having the whole group proceeding at a similar pace; thus, in the case of the In the case of the Uganda Micro-scale Irrigation Program, 40 local Uganda program, the modules were released one at a time, with governments districts are at the core of the implementation structure, release of the subsequent module depending on the completion thus the Program was faced with the challenge of how to train a rate of the previous one. Production of a certificate when a large number of public officials (about 15 per district) while limiting module was completed proved to be a powerful tool for allowing costs, keeping timelines tight, and adhering to COVID restrictions. the Ministry of Agriculture to track training progress at local The decision taken was to design an on-line training program, which government level. would allow for the training of 650 staff members in a few weeks at a fraction of the cost. n Facilitate exchange and feedback: One perk of having the whole group proceeding at a similar pace was the possibility of fostering discussion about the training material on You can get access to the online training of the Uganda Micro-scale shared platforms (WhatsApp groups were created in the case of Irrigation Program by contacting the Ministry of Agriculture in Uganda the Uganda Program and managed by the Ministry of Agriculture). at ugiftirrigation@agriculture.go.ug or clicking on the following links: When training is delivered on-line it is important to ensure Module 1: Introduction https://bit.ly/3gwuAO8 feedback loops (in the form of, for example, feedback forms or exercises). In the case of Uganda, discussions on the exchange Module 2: Getting started https://bit.ly/309Nftg group allowed the lack of understanding of certain technical Module 3: Important considerations https://bit.ly/3d7mIja aspects to be identified, which enabled quick response through Module 4: Preparation for Farm visits https://bit.ly/2FddAP2 the production of additional learning material. Module 5a: Farm visit https://bit.ly/3cKhrQk Check out the video: https://www.youtube.com/ Module 5b: Farm visit https://bit.ly/3jWqmAI watch?v=jxilqHhsuGA U G A N DA CO U N T RY CAS E – T RA I N I N G P UBLIC OFFICIALS IN A COVID-CONSTRAINED SETTING 65 i-BOX M n Ensure accessibility: Aside from needing a certain amount of computer savviness to learn through an on-line platform, there is the need to ensure that staff have adequate devices and are provided with internet data. You need to account for these costs as you design the operation in support to FLID. 66 U G ANDA COUNTRY CASE – TRAINING PUBLIC OFFICIALS IN A COVID-CONSTRAINED SETTING i-BOX N Uganda country case – Communication strategy The communication aspects of an operation in support of FLID should not be underestimated, considering the multiplicity of stakeholders involved, either directly in the implementation or needing to be sensitized, as well as the dispersed nature of the process. As the operation is put together, adequate budget needs to be set aside to this end. Under the Micro-scale Irrigation Program, brochures were found to be a simple but effective medium for information-sharing among key stakeholders (Module 4). Some pointers on this approach: 1 Breakdown by stakeholder group: Brochures were produced for farmers, local leaders and financial institutions. Each brochure remains short and crisp, focusing only on the information needed by the specific stakeholder over a given stage of the Program, and using appropriate language and tone that is accessible to the reader. 2 Breakdown by phase of the Program: Particularly when it comes to the farmers, striking the balance between completeness of the information (key in allowing them to remain at the core of the decision-making process) and simplicity (they might be overwhelmed by the amount of information needing to be processed) is tricky. In the case of the Uganda Micro-scale Irrigation Program, breaking down the information in sequential brochures was found to be a good approach. Plus, it allows the Program to adjust the messaging based on the performance results for each step of the Program. U G A N DA CO U N T RY CAS E – CO M M U N I CATION STRATEGY 67 i-BOX N Table 1 Communication outreach materials for the Uganda micro-scale irrigation program WHO is WHAT kind of information is communicated? WHAT are the intended outcomes? targeted? Farmer Potential farmers Explains the objectives and general principles of the Program, with a Gauge interest from farmers in the Program, but also brochure 1 who could focus on the co-financing mechanism, farmer’s co-payment, eligibility ensure that all farmers have access to the same information benefit from the criteria, the main steps of the Program, an indication of by when a (transparency) and guide local government staff in the Program farmer who is applying can expect to receive the equipment, supply provision of key information to farmers. of requisite form to express interest, contact information, etc. Farmer Farmers who Provides the farmers with the detailed steps of the Program, and Get farmers prepared for the farm visit. This is important as brochure 2 have expressed gives an overview of the questions they will be asked during the farm some of the aspects discussed during the farm visit can be interest in the visit and the documents they will need to produce. sensitive, such as land tenure or co-payment capacity. The Program more the farmer is mentally ready for these questions, the more she/he can have an open and constructive discussion with the local government staff. Farmer Farmers currently Provides the farmer with the sequential steps for the choice of the Ensure that the farmer remains solidly in the driver’s seat brochure 3 undergoing the most suitable irrigation equipment for their specific situation and of the irrigation development process by (i) providing them farm visit financial capacity. with the tools to make an informed decision on the irrigation technology, and (ii) explaining the financial implications (both in the short and long term) of their choice. Farmer Farmers who Provides the farmer with the details of the procurement process up to Ensure that the farmer understands the contractual brochure 4 have successfully installation. relationship among the key stakeholders, and how the completed the money flows. farm visit Local Political leaders, Explains the objectives and general principles of the Program with While they might not have an official role in the leaders religious leaders, a focus on the co-financing mechanism, the eligibility criteria for a implementation, local leaders can influence the perception local influencers farmer, the main steps of the Program, contact information, and the of the farmers. The brochure has the function of increasing role that local leaders can play in the success of the Program. their buy-in and outlining the (unofficial) role they can play for the benefit of their community. Financial Commercial Explains the Program and the role that financial institutions can play Financial institutions can feel more motivated to lend to institutions banks, in the provision of loans to farmers in order for them to cover the co- smallholder farmers if they feel that they are backed up by a microfinance payment. Provides details on the calculation of the farmer’s share and solid program that reduces their risk profile. institutions and – most important – presents the advantages that financial institutions others can get from the Program in terms of increased business volume. 68 UGAN DA COUN TRY CASE – COMMU NICATION STRATEGY i-BOX O Niger country case Country context Government drove irrigation expansion in the 1980s and early 1990s, pursuing a large-scale irrigation agenda, particularly along Niger remains one of the poorest countries in the world. the Niger River. Three factors contributed to the rapid expansion of Agriculture is a priority sector and accounts for 40% of the country’s irrigation: (i) the droughts in 1972–73 and again in 1983–84, which GDP. Similar to the other Sahel countries, Niger is classified as semi- put the spotlight on the risk of a rainfed agricultural sector; (ii) the arid to arid, with only a quarter of its territory exceeding 300 mm of higher yields achievable under irrigated conditions compared rainfall per year, concentrated in one season. Rainfed crops (millet, to rainfed agriculture, and the consequent increase in revenues sorghum, pulses) form the bulk of the production as staple food. (1.5–3 times higher [Abric et al. 2011]); and (iii) the active role of A small but increasing number of farmers are engaged in irrigated government in driving the irrigation expansion agenda, with the agriculture, favoring cash crops. However, these farmers struggle support of various development partners. From the 1990s onwards, with affordability of agricultural inputs, poor access to credit, the poor performance of large-scale irrigation schemes became limited contract farming with traders, and variable and narrow increasingly evident. Among the underlying factors was insufficient marketing opportunities for horticultural products, with increasing maintenance (and the difficulty of raising the necessary resources competition from other countries (Burkina Faso and Senegal) for from the farmers to do it); this in turn leading to the need to export of onions. Farmers lack the storage facilities to delay sales rehabilitate a fairly large proportion of scheme infrastructure, at and capitalize on better prices, thus resulting in low-value addition costs exceeding USD 15 000 per hectare, in cases where canal to products. Farming conditions are even more challenging for lining and the construction of dykes was necessary. The enabling women, with unequal and limited access to means of production institutional environment was unstable and often insufficient, (including land, financing, technology and infrastructure). making it difficult for the national irrigation agency to maintain a quality service. The same struggles and similar attempts to find The Government of Niger aims to achieve food self-sufficiency solutions were sought across the region. Attention started to be despite the challenges presented by climatic limitations and given to small-scale schemes and individual irrigation solutions hazards. The 2012 government’s 3N policy, “Nigeriens Nourrissent through pilot projects. les Nigeriens” (Nigeriens feed Nigeriens), is the primary policy driver of agriculture. Government considers irrigation instrumental In 2013, the Dakar Declaration on Agricultural Water Management to achieve the 3N goals, through rehabilitation of existing in the Sahel, adopted by all participating countries, the Economic infrastructure as well as irrigation expansion. Today, almost 100 000 Community of West African States (ECOWAS), and the Permanent ha are irrigated out of a potential of 270 000 ha, of which 11 000 ha Interstate Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel (CILSS), are public-led large-scale irrigation schemes, and the remaining recommended ensuring “that all hydro-agricultural developments are equipped lowland areas (FAO 2016). be based on appropriate sectoral policies and strategies, which NI G E R CO U N T RY CAS E 69 i-BOX O are integrated in a value chain approach and based on a rational it – albeit lower in comparison to other countries in the region, and sustainable use of available resources”. The World Bank thanks to manual drilling mainstreaming – is a constraining factor on support amplified this existing momentum and ensured that irrigation development. In this southern part of Niger (where most of the preconditions (sectoral policies and strategies) for a well- the population is concentrated), groundwater is shallow (less than 7 performing irrigation sector would be in place. It became clear m) and easily accessible using small pumps. that improving development and management of irrigation would Farmers could benefit greatly from irrigation to complement low require some paradigm shifts. Constraints faced by stakeholders and irregular rainfall, as demonstrated by the fact that private were similar across the Sahelian countries and related primarily irrigation continues to expand where water mobilization is affordable to “how” planning, design, construction and management was and markets for high-value crops are accessible. carried out. Addressing these constraints required, firstly, political momentum for reform to allow the necessary institutional changes The challenges limiting farmers to autonomously transition into to be put in place, and secondly, the capacity for scaling up irrigation include, firstly, the unaffordable cost to mobilize water interventions to improve economic efficiency across the value resources, which essentially translates to the high cost for drilling chains. The Dakar Declaration called for a renewed effort to and pumping. That is why most groundwater irrigation is still based scale up irrigation development and improve irrigation sector on labor-intensive manual lifting (hand- or foot-powered pumps) performance in six Sahel countries so as to contribute to regional and water application (buckets). Labor productivity is low. Additional food security within natural resource limits. challenges include limited last mile equipment and technology support to farmers, who are far removed from Niamey, where the Diagnostic and scoring technology and equipment vendors are located. Farmers have limited access to finance and are used to full subsidies for irrigation Under the renewed impetus provided by the Dakar Declaration, development, such as were provided to the few who benefited from the Government of Niger, with the support of various development irrigation development projects in the past. Farmers in Niger also partners, in 2016 consolidated the body of knowledge of irrigation have limited access to knowledge on irrigation and other production development that had been built up over 20 years in regard to technologies. For this reason RECA, the network of agricultural small-scale irrigation development. chambers of Niger, an institutionalized body, disseminates practical hands-on training on virtually anything that can help farmers In terms of water resources, the country has limited surface water, perform better in irrigated agriculture (e.g., pest management, with the exception of the Niger river. However, Niger is endowed pump maintenance, product packaging). The first donor-assisted with highly productive aquifers. Niger has about 2.5 billion m3 of irrigation projects that targeted small-scale irrigation in Niger in the groundwater, of which only 20% is used currently (Merrey and Sally mid-1990s (Abric et al. 2011) helped farmer organizations endorse 2014). This endowment of groundwater resources could present an a service-provider role. However, while knowledge is theoretically untapped potential to address both water access and agricultural available, it does not necessarily reach the end user. productivity. While groundwater is abundant, the cost to access 70 NIGER COUNTRY CASE i-BOX O Compared to rainfed agriculture, irrigation can reduce risk and boost yields over the Large untapped groundwater potential in the wet season and introduce a second cropping southern part of the country where there is season for horticulture (onion, tomatoes and shallow groundwater, offering potential for peppers) during the dry season. However, irrigation expansion to hundreds of thousands cost/benefit is less positive due to the cost of of smallholder farmers, but constrained by pumping. the cost of abstraction (digging well, energy). There is considerable potential for rainwater harvesting using water-spreading weirs. A succession of donor-financed projects since the early 1990s has facilitated the Resource Farmer potential benefits emergence of local irrigation service providers involved in design (of individual The national policy environment supports schemes, such as borehole, surface pump, small-scale irrigation. Smallholders are hoses/pipes, fencing, etc.) and/or repair identified in “SPIN” and are part of capacity- of equipment (pumps). Dozens of artisans 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 building strategies. There is also a focus were trained in manual drilling techniques on related technical support aspects. The Policy & legal Technology and business skills so they could establish challenge in Niger is that the strategies and companies as service providers. The policies have not been operationalized. But introduction of drip irrigation and training by (in theory) there are no restrictions. Knowledge Markets field agents makes this technology available Finance to farmers. However, high initial costs for pumps remain a prohibitive factor for many. As a result, the technology is inaccessible. While a considerable body of knowledge on small-scale irrigation is available in the country (RECA has strong production information and Established traditional and potential outreach systems and materials There is reduced appetite export routes from Niger to Nigeria, for use in scaling up in-country among farmers for borrowing Côte d’Ivoire, and other coastal knowledge), access to this for agricultural equipment, due countries exist, thus providing a knowledge among the wider group to the fact that government has significant and relatively stable of potential “beneficiary” farmers is traditionally subsidized equipment demand. Also, there are donor- limited. and donors have historically supported storage facilities and provided free equipment. markets. However, market-price Exacerbating this is the prohibitive fluctuations are rampant. Figure 1 Scoring rationale for FLID in Niger interest rates (>20% per annum). NI GE R CO U N T RY CAS E 71 i-BOX O Interventions that address the priority constraints The assessment of weaknesses in the enabling environment (i.e. the scores) shows that the Government of Niger can catalyze FLID through a set of interventions that minimize the main constraints faced by smallholder farmers. Finance being the major constraint, there is need for subsidies to allow farmers to afford irrigation. To overcome the financial constraints, it is estimated that subsidies of up to 95% of irrigation development costs will be needed for small community schemes and 40% subsidy for private developments. Women, having far fewer opportunities for access to financial services, would require much higher subsidy levels, 100% subsidy in the case of the poorest, women and youth. Multi-stakeholder platforms are useful for knowledge dissemination and understanding the challenges that farmers face, and also for providing opportunities for information- sharing and exchange. On the technology aspect, dissemination of better adapted solutions could be useful. Introducing more efficient technology – e.g., drip irrigation and semi-Californian systems, abstraction technologies such as solar-based pumping with appropriate delivery models to increase efficiency of production – as well as improving technology support (last mile support) for farmers, could all be a game changer. Intervention 2: Dissemination of more appropriate technologies. Intervention 1: Establish multi- stakeholder platforms Intervention 1: (MSPs) to facilitate Provision of subsidies. knowledge dissemination on appropriate technologies (more efficient on-farm irrigation technology and solar- based pumping). 72 NIGER COUNTRY CASE i-BOX O An overview of the operation to Interventions Objective Long-term goal catalyze FLID 1 As a result of this diagnostic process, two Modernization of An institutional environment the institutional conductive to irrigation outputs were produced: framework development Improve the capacity Expanded irrigated ●The national strategy prioritizes small- of stakeholders to agriculture that Irrigation solutions, aimed at develop and manage is productive, scale irrigation, Strategie de la Petite Financing irrigation expanding the irrigated areas irrigation and increase sustainable, and improving the performance the area under irrigation profitable, and Irrigation au Niger SPIN (SPIN 2015), approved investment solutions and sustainability of these by following a regional creates jobs and investments “solutions” approach in ensures food security in 2015. The SPIN identified the principles for the the participating in the Sahel. Sahelian countries. development of small-scale irrigation, including The production and principles for the matching grant. Depending on the Knowledge dissemination of knowledge related to the irrigation sub- management local geography, small-scale irrigation development sector and the coordination of project activities. can improve food security (collective village level schemes focused on cereals) or offer possibilities for more commercial agriculture for horticulture Figure 2 SIIP theory of change production. The Government and development partners focused on small village irrigation schemes few ha), by individual farmers or farmer groups wishing to transition to more and built on the long tradition of private, rudimentary, commercial crops such as vegetables. It also supports water mobilization (such as but efficient irrigation centered on the production of improved rainwater harvesting with partial water control, lifting groundwater using onions for markets in coastal countries (Nigeria, Côte solar energy, and introduction of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation, d'Ivoire) which created strong and steady demand. semi-Californian and Californian systems) for production of rice, sorghum and 2 vegetables. ● The operation to catalyze the FLID Impacts process, the Sahel Irrigation Initiative Project (SIIP), is a World Bank supported Small-scale irrigation in Niger is beginning to show results. Increasing knowledge regional investment project. The SIIP through demonstrations and improved access to technology has led to increased contributes to the expansion of productive, access to and demand for technology. With irrigation, some farmers successfully sustainable irrigation, job creation and food security, grow dry season crops. The use of improved technology (water-efficient aimed at supporting a variety of irrigation models. In application technology such as drip and semi-Californian, and solar pumping Niger, the project focuses on very small-scale with appropriate delivery model) has resulted in revenue increases of more than irrigation development (from less than 1 ha up to a 50%. SIIPs approach of establishing (social, environmental and economic) viability NI G E R CO U N T RY CAS E 73 i-BOX O of irrigation schemes when selecting sites complements other training programs that are available in Niger, for example, the site diagnostic guidance that is part of the water and irrigation training manuals. Four MSPs have been created in the SIIP intervention zones (Agadez, Dosso, Tahoua, and Tillaberi) to support knowledge sharing and learning. These combined knowledge-sharing interventions as part of the SIIP project have improved farmers’ access to irrigation technology and their investment options. 74 NIGER COUNTRY CASE References RE FE R E N C ES 75 Abric, S., M. Sonou, B. Augeard, F. Onimus, D. Durlin, A. Soumaila, html?lang=en and F. Gadelle. 2011. Lessons learned in the development of Helmke, G., and S. Levitsky. 2004. “Informal Institutions and smallholder private irrigation for high-value crops in West Africa. Comparative Politics: A Research Agenda.” Perspectives on Washington, DC: World Bank. Politics 2(4): 725–740. Anderson, J., C.E. Learch, and S.T. Gardner. 2016. “National Survey IEG (Independent Evaluation Group). 2008. Public Sector Reform: and Segmentation of Smallholder Households in Uganda: What Works and Why? An IEG evaluation of World Bank Understanding their Demand for Financial, Agricultural, and Support. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://openknowledge. Digital Solutions.” CGAP (Consultative Group to Assist the Poor) worldbank.org/handle/10986/6484 Working Paper, CGAP, Washington DC. https:/ /www.cgap. org/sites/default/files/publications/Uganda%20CGAP%20 Lankford, B.A., I. Makin, N. Matthews, A. Noble, P.G. McCornick, and Smallholder%20Household%20Survey%20Report.pdf T. Shah. 2016. “A Compact to Revitalise Large-Scale Irrigation Systems using a Leadership Partnership-Ownership ‘Theory of Andrews, C., 2016. “Integrating Public Service Motivation and Self- Change’.” Water Alternatives 9 (1): 1-32. determination Theory. International Journal of Public Sector Management 29(3): 238-254. Lefore, N., M.A. Giordano, C. Ringler. and J. Barron. 2019. “Sustainable and Equitable Growth in Farmer-Led irrigation in Andrews, M., L. Pritchett, and M. Woolcock. 2017. Building State Sub-Saharan Africa: What will it Take?” Water Alternatives 12 (1): Capability: Evidence, Analysis, Action. Oxford: Oxford University 156-168. Press. MacDonald, A. M., H. C. Bonsor, B. É. Ó. Dochartaigh, and R. G. Taylor. Bolding, A. 2004. “In Hot Water: A Study on Sociotechnical 2012. “Quantitative Maps of Groundwater Resources in Africa.” Intervention Models and Practices of Water Use in Smallholder Environmental Research Letters 7(2): 1–7. Agriculture, Nyanyadzi Catchment, Zimbabwe.” Research School for Resource Studies for Development, Wageningen University, Merrey, D. and S. Hilmy. 2014. “Improving Access to Water for Wageningen. Agriculture and Livestock in Niger.” A Preliminary Analysis of Investment Options for the Millennium Challenge Corporation Bembridge, T. 2000. Guidelines for Rehabilitation of Small-Scale Submitted to Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) in Farmer Irrigation Schemes in South Africa. Pretoria: Water Response to the Technical Directive Task Order (TO) against Research Commission. MBO Consultancy #MCC-10-0016-BPA, Call 13-CL-0074. https:/ / FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). 2016. AQUASTAT www.researchgate.net/publication/259911951 Main Database – Food and Agriculture Organization of the Minh, T. T., S. Zwart, R. Appoh, and P. Schmitter. 2021. “Analyzing the United Nations (FAO). Website accessed on 21/02/2021 10:44 Enabling Environment to Enhance the Scaling of Irrigation and http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/data/query/index. 76 THE FARMER-LED IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT GUIDE Water Management Technologies: A Tool for Implementers.” Generated by the Water Research Commission.” Water SA (WRC IWMI Working Paper 197, International Water Management 40-Year Celebration) 37: 797-808. Institute (IWMI), Colombo. doi: https://doi.org/10.5337/2021.201 Van Rooyen, A.F., P. Ramshaw, M. Moyo, R. Stirzaker, and H. Mutiro, J. and J. Lautze. 2015. “Irrigation in Southern Africa: Success Bjornlund. 2017. “Theory and Application of Agricultural or Failure?” Irrigation and Drainage 64: 180-192. doi: 10.1002/ Innovation Platforms for Improved Irrigation Scheme ird.1892 Management in Southern Africa.” International Journal of Water Resources Development 33 (5): 804-823. Ostrom, E. 2009. “A General Framework for Analyzing Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems.” Science 325: 419-422. doi: 10.1126/ Von Bertalanffy, L. 1968. General Systems Theory: Foundations, science.1172133 Development, Applications. New York: George Braziller Inc. Perret, S.R. 2002. “Water Policies and Smallholding Irrigation Woodhouse, P., G. J. Veldwisch, J. P. Venot, D. Brockington, H. Schemes in South Africa: A History and New Institutional Komakech, and A. Manjichi. 2017. “African Farmer-Led Irrigation Challenges.” Water Policy 4: 283-300. Development: Re-framing Agricultural Policy and Investment?” The Journal of Peasant Studies 44 (1): 213–33. Prieto, D. 2006. Modernization and the Evolution of Irrigation Practices in the Rio Dulce Irrigation Project. Wageningen: Wageningen World Bank. (Forthcoming). Field Level Leadership Guide. University Washington, DC: World Bank. RSA (Republic of South Africa). 1955. Commission for the Socio- Economic Development of the Bantu Areas within the Union of South Africa: Summary of the Report. Pretoria: The Government Printer. Sender, J. 2015. “Backward Capitalism in Rural South Africa: Prospects for Accelerating Accumulation in the Eastern Cape.” Journal of Agrarian Change 25 (2): 49-76. SPIN (Stratégie de la Petite Irrigation au Niger). 2015. Stratégie de la Petite Irrigation au Niger (SPIN). Niamey: Ministère de l’Agriculture. Van Averbeke, W., J. Denison, and N. Mnkeni. 2011. “Smallholder Irrigation Schemes in South Africa: A Review of Knowledge RE F E R E N C ES 77 1 The Farmer-led Irrigation Development Guide Module Resource Potential Land and water availability About the Water Global Practice © 2021 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433 Launched in 2014, the World Bank Group’s Water Global Practice brings together financing, Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org knowledge, and implementation in one platform. This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The By combining the Bank’s global knowledge with findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily country investments, this model generates more reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. firepower for transformational solutions to help countries grow sustainably. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this Please visit us at www.worldbank.org/water or work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal follow us on Twitter at @ WorldBankWater. status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. About GWSP Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Since The World Bank encourages This publication received the support of the Global dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for Water Security & Sanitation Partnership (GWSP). noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. GWSP is a multidonor trust fund administered Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to by the World Bank’s Water Global Practice and World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC supported by Austria’s Federal Ministry of Finance, 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Denmark’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Netherlands’ Ministry Citation: of Foreign Affairs, the Swedish International Izzi, G., J. Denison and G.J. Veldwisch, eds. 2021. The Farmer-led Irrigation Development Development Cooperation Agency, Switzerland’s Guide: A what, why and how-to for intervention design. Washington, DC: World Bank. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs, the Swiss Photo credits: Agency for Development and Cooperation, and the U.S. Agency for International Development. Cover and page 4: Nena Terrell/USAID | Page 8: Jonathan Denison | Page 10: Mulugeta Ayene/WLE | Page 11: Nana Kofi Acquah/IWMI | Page 12: Gert Jan Veldwisch | Pages 13, Please visit us at www.worldbank.org/gwsp or 25: Romain Vidal/Water Alternatives follow us on Twitter #gwsp. Contents ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 02 USING THE GUIDE 03 Resource Potential – Land and water availability 04 i-boxes 13 1.1 Natural resources and FLID potential 05 1.1 Understanding “scale” – smallholders, irrigation system size and impact 14 1.2 Diagnostic and scoring of the resource potential factor 11 1.2 Financial returns on investment at different irrigation-scheme and system scales 15 1.3 Concluding note 12 1.3 Groundwater development and FLID 17 1.4 Outline Terms of Reference for the resource potential diagnostic 19 1.5 Guidance on scoring the resource potential factor 23 REFERENCES 25 Abbreviations and acronyms AGP Agricultural Growth Program LSIS large-scale irrigation schemes EIRR economic internal rate of return Mha million hectare FAO Food and Agriculture Organization SSA Sub-Saharan Africa FLID farmer-led irrigation development SVTP Shire Valley Transformation Program i-box information box SWOT strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats IEG Independent Evaluation Group TOR Terms of Reference IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute TRIMING Transforming Irrigation Management in Nigeria IRLADP Irrigation Rural Livelihoods Agriculture Development Project M1-02 Using the guide Tips The main volume of the FLIDguide presents the core body of information that explains FLID and the process of intervention design. Thematic descriptions are included in seven modules. Information boxes (i-boxes) at the back of NAVIGATING THE GUIDE ji the Main Guide and each module provide additional detail, and hyperlinks To move quickly and easily between the interlinked throughout the guide access relevant external publications, websites, information, set up your PDF reader so that the animation clips and videos. j PREVIOUS VIEW and i NEXT VIEW buttons (as distinct from l previous page and k next page) are instaled on the toolbar at the top of your screen. You may then freely explore the document using the navigation pane on the left of your reader or the many hyperlinks provided in the text, and backtrack to the start by repeatedly hitting thej button. Info-Box Info-Box To instal the buttons (in Adobe Reader), i-Box i-Box Module 1 Module 7 ¢ Right-click anywhere on the toolbar and select Resource Info-Box Technology them in the Show Page Navigation Tools options; or Potential i-Box ¢ open the View drop down menu and select them from the Page Navigation options. The Farmer-led Alternatively, try using these keyboard shortcuts: Info-Box Info-Box i-Box Irrigation i-Box Development Windows: Press the alt key and t or u arrow Module 2 Guide Module 6 Mac: Press the command key and [ or ] square bracket Farmer Benefits A what, why and how-to for Markets intervention design PRINTING Info-Box i-Box Info-Box i-Box Office desktop printers cannot print to the edge of the Module 3 Info-Box Module 5 paper. To print pages of this document without losing any i-Box Policy & Legal Finance content, Module 4 Knowledge ¢ choose File > Print, and in the page sizing and handling area or pop-up menu, select Fit to FLIDguide Printable Area or Shrink to Printable Area. layers of information M1-03 1 Resource Potential Land and water availability M1-04 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E T Resource Farmer potential benefits he water and land potential in relation to FLID is described in Module 1. Resource potential is one of the two factors shown at the top of the diagnostic spider plot. The other factor relates to the farmer-benefits as 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 a result of irrigation and together these can be used to assess the “case for FLID”. In Module 1, resource potential is shown to The cultivated area in Africa is estimated at 271 million ha comprise attributes of availability (volume of water) and viability (costs of (Mha), but only 18.6 Mha of that area is recorded as being mobilizing the water). The importance of understanding irrigation system under agricultural water management. This includes all scale in relation to resource potential is highlighted and guidance on the forms of irrigation, water harvesting, and drainage control diagnostic and scoring of the resource factor is then provided. (Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO] 2016). It is widely accepted that the extent of agricultural water management 1.1 Natural resources and FLID and irrigation (a subset of agricultural water management), potential is unreliable due to its reliance on incomplete national databases. These generally only include government The question “What is the natural resource potential for FLID expansion?” schemes, corporate and large private holdings, but exclude must consider two aspects to inform a decision-making process: the FLID and many agricultural practices that are “off the radar” natural resource base itself; and the viability of using that resource (i.e. (Beekman, Veldwisch, and Bolding 2014; Woodhouse et the water mobilization cost) in practical terms. al. 2017; Wiggins and Lankford 2019). As such, only broad conclusions can be drawn. The natural resource base Estimates of total irrigation potential that assess the total The resource base is the total suitable land area that could be irrigated resource base also vary widely. The lowest reputable figure is with the available water, according to sectoral priorities and allocations. 38 Mha (Malabo Montpellier Panel 2018). FAO Aquastat states Across Africa, studies point to considerable potential for further expansion a figure of 47 Mha, while a detailed resource assessment of irrigation but also reveal that data on current and potential irrigation by Xie et al. (2014) concludes with 81 Mha of potential. The areas has high degrees of uncertainty (Giordano et al. 2012; Wiggins and wide variation in irrigation potential results from different Lankford 2019). assumptions. While water, in the form of runoff, may easily be M1-05 quantified and translated into theoretical potential irrigation Even though quantification is difficult, it is widely accepted that Africa areas, assessments do not account equally for a set of has substantial irrigation resources that can still be developed. Further, practical realities. Irrigation in the dry season needs storage, substantial opportunities exist not just for expansion, but also for and in many cases, abstractions will have a major impact on intensification – i.e. the better use of the available water – through water downstream users, people and the economy. While irrigation productivity improvements. potential may be evaluated to be vast, when realities are Attention to aspects of storage, sectoral allocations, the seasonal effects taken into account the total will be much lower (Wiggins and of irrigation on basin water balance, and the actual extent of existing Lankford 2019). irrigation (including FLID) is therefore essential to properly understand The resource potential for irrigation expansion is thus affected the resource potential. The data on the natural resource base provides by combined uncertainties: firstly, the existing total irrigation part of the information needed to understand resource potential as it and agricultural water managed areas are substantially reflects availability in volumetric terms (cubic meters of water), translated underestimated; and, secondly, the total resource potential to hectares. The diagnostic activity for this is described in Section 1.2. The is quantified on the basis of different parameters and varies cost of mobilizing water for irrigation is the second part of the resource widely. The available irrigation data on equipped areas, potential assessment. This is affected by the availability of the water based on Aquastat (FAO 2016), together with three estimates resource, proximity to the irrigable land, and the organizational capabilities of total irrigation potential are shown in Figure 1.1. The of farmers, discussed in the next section. figure reflects the major uncertainties and unknowns, and highlights the need for caution in use of such data . Resource potential and the cost of water mobilization 90 Mobilization costs result from the proximity of water to irrigable lands and 81 the need for storage. Much of the success of FLID has been attributed million ha 60 to the physical situations where farmers can easily and cheaply access FLID water for irrigation (Main Guide Figure 1), and where they can grow high 47.3 30 ?? 38 value crops and access markets to sell produce (Wiggins and Lankford 2019). Where large bodies of water are close to irrigable land, these 15.4 0 can be accessed easily by individuals and small groups of farmers Irrigation Potential Potential Potential with simple technology at relatively low costs. Where water supply equipped (Malabo (FAO 2016) (Xie et al. 2014) (FAO 2016) Montpellier Panel fluctuates seasonally, and is distant from irrigation land, heavy and costly 2018) engineering construction for both storage and transmission is needed. Figure 1.1 Estimated area equipped for irrigation versus two irrigation potential estimates for Africa (FAO 2016; Xie et al. 2014; Easy access, in practical terms, means where water is either in hillside Malabo Montpellier Panel 2018) streams that can be diverted into hand-constructed gravity canals or M1-06 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E through cheap pipelines to the fields, or within a few hundred The progression from highly favorable resource situations, where meters from shallow wells, rivers, wetlands, ponds or drains (urban FLID takes place most easily, to more costly, time-consuming and outfalls or agricultural drainage). Where water must be lifted, complex situations, is shown in Figure 1.2. farmers can readily use bucket-and-ropes, manual or small petrol pumps. Energy costs, whether human labor, fossil fuels, or solar Figure 1.2 panels, increase proportionally with distance and lifting height, so Resource potential elements and continuum in relation distance and pumping head are key parameters for “potential”. to optimum FLID opportunities ent tm High cost i nves n  Complex > 12 000 USD/ha urno  Costly ly ret  Long time  Major storage Like First priority  New large-scale intervention irrigation schemes  Canals 4 000–8 000 USD/ha  Irrigation structures  Rehabilitation of Cost/ha  Related infrastructure existing large-scale  Farmer labor irrigation schemes  Financial cost Potential scale of impact in Africa  Intake and canal repair  Transaction 3 000–6 000 USD/ha cost  Irrigation structures  Farmer  Measurement  Water harvesting organization ponds  Governance water users associations  Pumped group systems (caution!)  Low pressure pipelines 1 500–3 000 USD/ha  Land levelling – rice Low cost  Pumps H>25m 50–1 500 USD/ha  Simple  Distant D>500m  Cheap  Shallow wells  Larger hillside canals  Quick  Rivers and wetlands Public investment  Sprinklers/drip  Small hillside canals Farmer investment  Tubewells  No storage New public large-scale FLID in revitalisation Small dams and pans Small irrigation: step-up Small & simple irrigation schemes of large schemes in tech sophistication irrigation systems mostly farmers’ groups mostly individual farmers M O DUL E 1 – R ES O U RC E P OTE N TI A L M1-07 Where resource potential is high, which is reflected by close proximity to and plentiful supply of water, then costs and constraints to FLID are low. Farmers can adopt irrigation, expand and intensify with no or minimal public support. Where resource potential is low, meaning water is distant, water supplies are stressed, and/or substantial storage is needed, then financial and transactional costs and complexity are higher. The need for public funding to support FLID processes increases as resource potential decreases. There is another important element that is shown in the Figure, which is the return on public investment. A number of continental assessments of resource potential highlight the importance of water- accessibility (proximity) storage among other defining characteristics, such as soil type and slope (You et al. 2011; Xie et al. 2014; Xie et al. The viable irrigation 2018). Different irrigation categories were used in the analysis, in some potential in Africa cases a simplistic separation between “small-scale” and “large-scale” heavily favors multiple irrigation systems, explained further in i-box 1.1. The evidence shows small-scale systems, that not only are “small-scale” systems the most favorable in terms best developed of their rate of return (economic internal rate of return [EIRR]) of 28% through FLID. versus 6% for large-scale irrigation development), but there is more than double the viable expansion potential in sub-Saharan Africa (You et al. 2010) (i-box 1.2). Resource potential assessment must go beyond just physical resource availability and also consider: infrastructure development costs; potential to access and augment the resources cost-effectively (e.g. small dams, shallow wells); costs to be borne by farmers; and their organizational abilities. Assessment of the “resource potential” factor must strive to identify the high resource potential contexts where FLID can flourish. Suitability to small-scale irrigation systems, with close proximity to a water source with high water availability, are key parameters. One way that the resource potential can be increased, albeit at public cost, is through small dam and pan construction. M1-08 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E Increasing the potential – small dams and pans can catalyze FLID n Technical training and support can be focused on existing technologies, country practices and experiences – not least floodwater and silt management. Water resources assessments should also take into account the potential of new cost-effective public infrastructure that can catalyze FLID. These comprise small dams and pans which are typically less than 5 m in height. They can be built as dams (barriers) in drainage lines or off-channel, on n They are straightforward to construct with non- specialist and accessible machinery such as that routinely used by road-construction teams (excavators, perennial or ephemeral rivers. Where sediment loads are high, sand-dams bulldozers, roller compactors, water-bowsers, trucks etc.). may be favorable. Water-harvesting arrangements with excavated pans (sometimes lined) can capture overland sheet flow – a technique well suited to Arid and Semi-Arid Land contexts. n They are associated with small total project costs, easier procurement, limited environmental impacts, and easier regulatory permissions (storage and These kinds of small water storage structures can add to the water abstraction permitting). They have shorter timelines from resource potential and trigger FLID by providing additional water resources conception to completion, which are more easily aligned to for the irrigation of adjacent arable lands (De Fraiture et al. 2014). Their typical program intervention periods, unlike medium and potential, based on broad geographic characteristics (rainfall, runoff, slope, large water-storage structures. proximity of storage sites to land, etc.) needs to be assessed. Due to their size, small embankment dams and excavated pans have the following In the design of small storage structures, runoff-storage favorable characteristics: hydrology and peak-flood discharges must be assessed rigorously as these present a risk of failure. While important, n They are a familiar and known feature in rural areas and provide for multiple water uses: livestock, domestic (non-potable) and micro- irrigation. the assessment is relatively simple in the case of small catchments. Specialist support and input can easily be included in technical training initiatives at the local level as part of operations. n There are often established social norms and rules of use that provide a foundation for water governance essential for the sustainable and equitable co-management of similar new constructions. Small aquifer recharge structures are similarly simple, but as in the hydrology aspect of small storage structures, design and siting of recharge structures will require a level n of training and expertise to maximize groundwater benefits. They are technically simple to design, usually within the capability Publicly funded water storage and aquifer recharge of local government technical engineering teams in terms of structures can catalyze FLID and are an important element their hydrology assessments, topographic survey, layout planning, and of the resource potential assessments and subsequent embankment or excavation design. scoring of the factor. M O DUL E 1 – R ES O U RC E P OTE N TI A L M1-09 Groundwater and FLID use of both groundwater and surface water sources can extend the crop production season, Groundwater has played an important role in FLID in the past decades (Shah 2018), and offset the risks associated with surface particularly where shallow aquifers allow access via shallow wells (i-box 1.3). Shallow water variability and unpredictable over-use wells have low construction costs and are associated with simple hand-lifting by other water users who share the surface or pumping technology, though with heavy labour demand and requiring some resource. purchasing power, respectively. The opportunity to expand irrigation based solely on groundwater usage is limited in parts of southern and much of northern Africa, The promotion of groundwater as an irrigation yet groundwater plays an important part in more intensive, sustainable irrigation water source is associated with risks of over- development through the possibility of conjunctive use (Lefore et al. 2019). Conjunctive abstraction and resultant groundwater depletion and agricultural pollution. The risks depend on agricultural practices, the aquifer characteristics, other demands on the aquifer, and recharge dynamics. In assessing resource potential these risks must be identified in order to evaluate the role that groundwater can play as a viable and sustainable irrigation resource. Shallow groundwater where farmers can most easily carry the development costs of the resource themselves (via shallow well construction) is particularly important. Sustainable groundwater use can be aided by measures included in other modules in the FLIDguide. Regulation, allocation and water governance issues are addressed in Module 3 and technologies that can aid soil-water management, including leachate (and pollution) control, are described in Module 7 i-box 7.2. These management options need to be considered in relation to the status and sensitivity of the groundwater resource during the preparatory studies and in the subsequent formulation of intervention concepts and operational designs. M1-10 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E FLID clusters are pointers to the high 1.2 Diagnostic and potential areas scoring of the resource Studies that identified and mapped actual irrigated areas developed through FLID processes have also shown that farmers often develop potential factor irrigation in places not identified in classical irrigation potential studies (Beekman, Veldwisch, and Bolding 2014; De Bont 2018). Insights on FLID- Diagnostic friendly resource potential can be derived from identifying the kind of The diagnostic of resource potential would locations where farmers have already initiated (basic) irrigated agriculture. usually be carried out by a specialist consultant These practices can be analyzed into a typology based on characteristics and would be informed by the prior discussion of water resource type, agro-ecology, relief characteristics, soil type, market on data uncertainty and the broader concept of access and/or crop type. In understanding when and where farmers are “potential” that goes beyond just physical resource actually able to develop irrigated agriculture, it can be surmised that other availability. As irrigated agriculture developed under farmers might be able to develop similar irrigation practices in comparable FLID processes has hitherto been little noticed or “high-potential” situations. quantified, but often covers large (accumulative) Thus, rather than starting from identifying the available water and land areas that influence resource availability, the resources, a FLID potential study would start from farmers’ actual agency assignment includes the mapping of existing and abilities. Some areas that are classically seen to have irrigation irrigation. A more detailed outline Terms of Reference potential may then fall outside (TOR) with a scope of work is included in i-box 1.4. what farmers deem feasible to develop. On the flip side, certain Scoring areas that are conventionally seen as unsuitable for irrigation The scoring of the resource potential factor would may actually be quite easily aim to answer the question, “Why and when is FLID developed by farmers. These favorable?” from a resource perspective. The answer include, for instance, hillsides to this question would be that FLID is favorable (conventionally deemed when (1) water is abundant, (cost-effectively and too steep), river shores organizationally) accessible by farmers, and of good (conventionally thought to quality, and (2) when related land resources are be too vulnerable) and urban suitable for irrigation development by farmers. More spaces (usually outside the detailed guidance on the scoring of the resource potential search area). factor is provided in i-box 1.5. M O DUL E 1 – R ES O U RC E P OTE N TI A L M1-11 1.3 Concluding note Resource potential is one of the two factors shown at the top of the Resource potential Farmer benefits A key driver of FLID is when adequate water is in close proximity to diagnostic spider plot. The other a farmer’s field. Systems can be technically simple and costs are factor relates to the farmer-benefits relatively low and therefore more affordable. The less accessible from irrigation (Module 2). Together, Policy & legal Technology water is to farmers, in space and time, the more the need for costly these two factors can be used infrastructure development to mobilize the water. In resource- to assess the “case for FLID”. In Knowledge Markets Finance stressed contexts, the social and commercial competition due to planning a FLID operation it makes water and land scarcity is typically associated with contestation and, sense to focus on those resources often, conflict. In such stressed situations, the political priorities for that require the lowest cost to be mobilized. In these situations, agricultural water versus other economic sector usage becomes there will be easier access to resources by more farmers and important in the broader considerations. Minimum environmental thereby more rapid uptake, assuming that other critical constraints needs for sustainable resource use must be assessed. are adequately addressed. M1-12 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E i-Boxes M1-13 i-BOX 1.1 Understanding “scale” – FLID and the revitalization of LSIS smallholders, irrigation system There is a place for FLID processes in the revitalization of size and impact existing large-scale irrigation schemes (LSIS). In such situations, farmers would take the lead to expand the irrigation area, to Terms like “large-scale”, “small-scale”, and “smallholder’’ have repair existing infrastructure, and reorganize operations and different meanings to different people and are used freely and maintenance. Such efforts have been observed in Africa, as sometimes interchangeably. Clarity of meaning is important in regard on the Kano Irrigation Scheme in Nigeria where 230 ha was to farm size, irrigation system size, and development impact. independently developed by a farmers’ group, but are not Farm scale - FLID and farm size: FLID, per se, is not only about thought to be widespread in Africa. One particular challenge smallholders. The process includes any farmer regardless of farm relates to the operations and management functions of large- scale infrastructure and related governance arrangements, size (or “holding”) who takes the lead in developing irrigation, alone including asset management (Waalewijn et al. 2020). While FLID or in a group. However, given the broader development goals (see on LSIS warrants attention, perhaps more so beyond Africa, this Main Guide), the FLIDguide is explicitly aimed at interventions aspect of FLID resource potential has not been included in this that would support resource-poor smallholder farmers. These are first edition of the FLIDguide. farmers who are located on farm sizes of less than 10 ha, but most typically in the 0.5 to 2 ha size of irrigation farms. individual farmers (>10 ha) and corporate estates. Conversely, in Irrigation system size and FLID: Irrigation scheme size means the the FLIDguide applications, FLID is associated with smallholder whole area within the irrigated perimeter. System and scheme are farmers, primarily operating individually or in small groups, and used interchangeably in the FLIDguide. Around the world, large- using “small-scale irrigation systems”. scale irrigation schemes such as Chhatis Mauja in Nepal that covers FLID has large-scale impact: There should be no confusion about 3 000 ha, or the Zanjeras in the Philippines covering thousands of the large scale of FLID extent (in ha) and its related impacts – hectares, were developed over the centuries through a process of positive and negative. Impact is reflected most simply in irrigation what we now define as FLID (Tang 1992; Meinzen-Dick 2007). While area (ha) and numbers of farmers, though it has multiple other a historical view is helpful, the development of new large-scale important social, environmental, and economic indicators. Irrigation irrigation schemes through FLID, in a contemporary global reality, is in Africa under FLID covers hundreds of thousands, or more likely, unlikely. The technical complexity, costs, land-tenure, environmental millions of hectares – but no one has attempted even to estimate a and water-resource challenges exclude the practical possibility. number (in a publication). What we do know is that new interventions A new large-scale irrigation scheme (LSIS) infrastructure project aiming to catalyze FLID will involve tens of thousands of small in the FLIDguide context thus means a publicly funded major systems (or more), operated by groups or individuals. The combined infrastructure investment involving civil works (such as large dams, irrigation area, and the numbers of farmers involved in a FLID major canals and pipelines) and may include smallholders, large intervention, can thus easily surpass that of a new LSIS operation. M1-14 UN DERSTAN DIN G “ SCALE” – SM ALLHOLDERS, IR R IG ATION SYSTEM SIZ E A ND IMPACT i-BOX 1.2 Financial returns on investment at different n An internal review of EIRRs of ongoing large-scale irrigation projects, such as the Transforming Irrigation Management in Nigeria (TRIMING) in Nigeria (World Bank irrigation scheme and 2014) and the Shire Valley Transformation Program (SVTP) in system scales Malawi (World Bank 2017), were found to range from 13 to 18%, while those of small-scale irrigation, such as FADAMA The benefits (i.e. returns) on irrigation interventions are numerous in Nigeria (World Bank, 2016a; 2016b), Irrigation Rural and extend beyond the financial aspects as described in Module 2 Livelihoods Agriculture Development Project (IRLADP) in and in the Main Guide. The issue of financial returns is addressed Malawi (Independent Evaluation Group [IEG] 2016), and the here in more detail. Small-scale irrigation generally has higher Agricultural Growth Program (AGP) in Ethiopia (IEG 2017) were economic returns than large-scale irrigation, and there is a considerably higher, ranging from 26 to 40%. This aligns to much greater resource base in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), that the large difference in benefit and while more optimistic in the can be viably developed. The growth trajectory of small-scale values obtained, confirms the implication of the point above irrigation expansion (through FLID) has been the dominant driver (i.e. small-scale gives better returns). of expansion in Africa in the last 20 years, implying it is more easily achieved and has greater benefits than larger, more complex The above quantitative assessments are supported by one key schemes. recommendation from Inocencio et al. (2007) who investigated costs and outcomes of 317 World Bank irrigation projects across the Rates of return and successes on investment in small-scale world. They found that the most successful irrigation interventions irrigation are higher: While the financial and economic returns for are those that are developed through large-scale programs driving irrigation investments vary widely depending on many engineering, many small-scale irrigation projects (i.e. a programmatic response resource, agricultural and economic factors, there is both that activates FLID expansion). quantitative and anecdotal evidence that justifies prioritizing small- scale irrigation support, most effectively driven through catalytic Small-scale irrigation has greater resource potential for FLID interventions. economically viable expansion: An IFPRI study of land and water n An expansive International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) study across SSA projected that the average Economic Internal Rate of Returns (EIRRs) for large- resource availability identified that in Africa, 16.2 Mha of large-scale expansion and 7.3 Mha of small-scale expansion with better-than- marginal EIRRs was available, with an estimated 93% and 91% scale irrigation development in SSA is 6%, versus 28% for respectively being in SSA (You et al. 2010). small-scale irrigation (You et al. 2010). The natural resource base for viable small-scale development is similarly much However, when a minimum EIRR of 12% was set, the total (for greater (See Table 1). Africa) decreased significantly to 6.1 Mha, and the ratio between FIN AN C I AL R ETU RN S O N I N V ESTM E N T AT DIF F EREN T IRRIGATION -SC HEM E AN D SYSTEM SCA L ES . M1-15 i-BOX 1.2 large-scale and small-scale expansion opportunities was inverted. World Bank African Action Plan (World Bank 2010). Here, a case was Large-scale irrigation potential was found to be only 1.9 Mha, made for public scheme expansion of at least 1.3 Mha, and small- while small-scale potential was more than double that, at 4.2 Mha scale (private irrigation) expansion of 5.5 Mha, totaling 6.8 Mha by (You et al. 2010). While the report did not state what proportion of 2030. This reflects a slightly higher total than the IFPRI study (6.8 these viable areas are located in SSA, it is reasonable to assume versus 6.1 Mha). that it would be greater than 90% as was the case for marginal EIRRs. When all of the above is taken into account, there is a strong case to be made that intervention support should focus on multiple The findings summarized in Table 1 affirm the direction taken in the small-scale systems (4.2 to 5.5 Mha in SSA with high EIRRs) over 2009 Africa Country-Infrastructure Diagnosis Study, reported in the large-scale irrigation schemes (1.3 to 1.9 Mha with high EIRRs). Table 1 Irrigation expansion potential in Africa by system scale and rate of return on investment (Source You et al. [2010]) Scale/Type Resource potential in Africa (Mha) EIRR = marginal EIRR > 12% Average EIRR Large-scale schemes with heavy 16.2 1.9 6% infrastructure 7.3 4.2 28% Small-scale systems (moveable, small, relatively simple) TOTAL 23.5 6.1 --- M1-16 F I N A N C IAL RETURN S ON IN V ESTM EN T AT DIF F EREN T IRRIGATION-SCHEME A ND SYSTEM SCA L ES. i-BOX 1.3 Sometimes it is not a sophisticated technique. For example, in Groundwater Sahel thousands of smallholders own lined wells that store a small development and FLID amount of water in low-yielding aquifers (< 1m3/hr) that is lifted by hand power. By doubling the amount of water stored in the Groundwater as a FLID driver well and using a solar pump to lift the water, the irrigated area can be doubled. The World Bank-funded Irrigation Rural Livelihoods Groundwater remains an essential resource for the expansion of Agriculture Development Project (IRLADP) in Malawi also supported irrigated areas, a priority for many governments in sub-Saharan improvement of shallow wells initiated by farmers. See also De Bont Africa (SSA), and for continued sustainable irrigation across et al. (2019) on groundwater development and FLID in the upper the continent. The opportunity to expand irrigation based on Pangani/lower-Moshi area of Tanzania. groundwater usage has been exhausted in parts of southern and much of northern Africa, but access to shallow aquifers and Easily accessed groundwater up to 15 m deep, with related low-cost opportunities for conjunctive use are important opportunities to drilling techniques, represents the biggest potential for FLID. pursue. Conjunctive use brings resilience to the irrigation system, Supporting local manual drilling businesses in the most suitable providing backup in times of surface water stress, and extending areas where irrigation is taking place (sand-river/alluvial soils) the irrigation production season (Lefore et al. 2019). There is a proved successful in various countries. Manual drilling was rapidly strong relationship between FLID expansion and the improvement adopted by farmers in Niger and Nigeria because of its low cost of drilling techniques (Shah et al. 2018). Each drilling technique (ten times less expensive than machine-drilled and concrete wells) facilitates another transformative step in the modernization of farms. and because it is relatively easy and quick to execute. In Senegal The drilling progress is: (Niayes region) for around USD 60 a tube-well is drilled into the base of existing concrete wells to increase the yield capacity for n temporary unlined well (manual lifting with bucket) motorized pumping. n lined well (manual lifting with bucket, treadle pump) The existence of feasibility maps for manual drilling for groundwater n a pump located in the well (motor pump) development for irrigation can help decision-makers to identify n a shallow tube well (treadle pump, motor pump) suitable areas. In addition, there is a correspondence between the average limiting depth (20 m) for manual drilling and the most n a tube well for intermediate depth (submersible pump/solar) promising market segment for affordable solar pumps. UNICEF has already mapped 12 countries in SSA for suitable drinking water, but the feasibility maps can easily be adapted for irrigation. GR O UN DWAT E R D E V E LO P M E N T A N D F L ID M1-17 i-BOX 1.3 The real threats of overexploitation through the use of affordable a high chance of ending up in the groundwater that is used by the drilling techniques are in areas where the aquifer is shallow (less household (Sishu et al. 2020). than 7 m) with high flow rates that can be easily extracted with powerful motor pumps. In Senegal, there are more and more In working through the diagnostic logic, there are clear trade-offs motor pumps connected to two or three shallow tube wells at the between gains from irrigation and loss of water quality. Particularly same time. The likely direct consequences are the reduction of important is whether or not there are national standards and soil moisture, the disappearance of plant species, and/or enforced guidelines in place to regulate the use of agro-chemicals. In the changes in farming practices, as well as the premature drying up of Ethiopian case, farmers lacked guidelines in setting a threshold for ponds and streams. particular chemicals and also lacked the capacity to test the water, with the result that the pollution was not identified early enough. Groundwater and pollution Most African governments do not know what chemicals are being The impact of irrigation abstractions and related agricultural imported and farmers do not know what they are using (often pollution on streams, groundwater and lakes is important for repackaged for small-scale use without information or warnings). sustainable resource use. Groundwater is an enabler of irrigation The solutions will require longer-term policy changes, scientific but is also a risk factor for water quality. While farmers often investment and knowledge exchange with farmers to address this utilize groundwater for irrigation, those same households also significant risk for domestic water sources pollution, triggered by tend to rely on groundwater for domestic uses. Unregulated and intensified irrigated agriculture such as FLID, and particularly in uninformed use of pesticides and fertilizers results in these having sub-Saharan Africa. M1-18 GR OU NDWATER D EVELOP MENT A ND FL ID i-BOX 1.4 Outline TOR for the resource n n land tenure technologies, including equipment potential diagnostic n documented cases of existing farmer-led irrigation activities. General Scope of Work b. Assess the above from the angle of constraints, Country-level extent of, and potential for, FLID is established opportunities, and favoring factors. through country-specific diagnostics. A country-level diagnostic c. Assess the state of the enabling environment, including comprises mapping using remote sensing techniques, desktop existing private sector investments and public sector support. reviews, and field validations, including interviews with key stakeholders. Diagnostics typically take up to 3 months to complete. d. Assess the predominant systems for distribution of The diagnostic should be guided by the approaches outlined in agricultural products and financing models available, i-box 3.4 and 3.5, and in Minh et al. (2021). This information can be including various actors in the supply chain and their roles, attached to the consultant’s Terms of Reference (TOR). propose new options, and identify possible gaps. e. Identify the different farmer-led irrigation technologies and The country-level diagnostics will build on existing assessments financing mechanisms suitable for the local context and and focus on identifying gaps and business opportunities for farmer- available locally. led irrigation development, as well as the potential in a country. The diagnostics also examine the development of FLID within the f. Distil lessons and make policy and practical limits of natural resources (including water, soil, forests, and other recommendations for favoring and fast-tracking of farmer- ecosystems). led irrigation development. The specific objectives of the diagnostic studies are to: Activities a. Describe the extent of FLID in the country in terms of: To achieve the above study objectives, the following set of n area under FLID interrelated activities should be carried out. n location (if concentrated in specific areas) Assessment of the current extent of farmer-led Irrigation n production (quantitative – absolute and relative) and crops n Outline typologies of FLID present in the country smallholders, n economic viability (macro and micro) medium- and large-scale farmers, etc. n number of farmers engaged in FLID n Conduct value chain assessments to the extent it is feasible. n typology of FLID farmers, including assets and access to finance n Determine the role of FLID within the overall country farming n types of environment (water, proximity of urban centers, etc.) system and labor needs, including social and economic aspects. TO R S CO P E O F WO RK FO R TH E F L I D RESOURC E ASSESSM EN T M1-19 i-BOX 1.4 such as, but not limited to: gender, generational, access to Assessment of potential for expansion of FLID and reasons markets, access to land, etc., according to the consultant’s for supporting sustainable intensification expertise and the particularities of the region. n To the extent possible, compile relevant Natural Resources Assessments (with separate sections on water availability Part 2: Field visits and interviews and quality, and land availability and suitability). Desk reviews are complemented by field visits and interviews to n Identify the market potential for expansion of FLID. validate the findings from reports. During the field visits: n Determine the extent of an enabling environment for FLID, n Interview farmers and other stakeholders including relevant institutional structures. n Validate the existence of resources for FLID (water, land) n Assess the need and scope for advisory services. n Identify constraints – inputs supply chain of equipment, n Identify the market potential for expansion of FLID. extension services, distance to markets, etc. Assessment of potential for expansion of FLID and reasons for supporting sustainable intensification Guidance on a rapid resource inventory for diagnostic assessment n Challenges and constraints to FLID n Public sector engagement objectives The main purpose of the assessment is to answer the question: “What is the current extent of, and potential for, irrigation farming in Recommendations for implementation the country/region/locality?” The assessment would include the n Conduct a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats following elements: 1 (SWOT) analysis on the different alternatives for FLID for the consideration of decision-makers. Natural Resources Assessment Natural resources n Recommend institutional and policy support needed to assessments serve to identify where resources – support the business and implementation model. primarily water and land – are available and can support FLID. The suitability of an area for FLID depends Part 1: Desk review and mapping on many factors, including water resource availability, n Review available documentation on irrigation in the country. nearness to a water source, and depth of groundwater. The potential The review should cover studies, reports, research papers, is defined by biophysical suitability, largely water resource and land policy, maps, and other documentation related to FLID and resources. This suitability is based on rainfall, evapotranspiration, associated themes. the length of the growing period, temperature regime, elevation, n Map the extent of FLID using suitable mapping solutions. slope, and soil characteristics (texture, drainage, etc.). n Consult with stakeholders. n The report should consider particular important issues M1-20 TOR SCOPE OF WORK FOR THE FL ID R ES OU R CE ASS ESS MENT i-BOX 1.4 The suitability is qualified by other factors, for example proximity 4. Validate irrigation potential using local information (for to protected areas such as national parks and environmental water example groundwater knowledge based on existing wells requirements. Existing sources of water for FLID would include: and boreholes) for identifiable areas. harvested runoff, shallow groundwater that can be lifted without the FLID potential can be limited by water quality. For example, where use of pumping equipment, shallow groundwater that can only be water is in abundance but is of poor quality, the potential for FLID is lifted with pumps, deep aquifers, and river diversions. limited. Similarly, where water is available, but land is limiting, the Potential data and information sources for assessing natural resource potential is reduced. resource potential: Data sources for resource assessments include water ministries, Analysis of water resources potential for FLID makes use of a variety publicly available data sources (e.g. The Food and Agriculture of data, including Organization [FAO] Aquastat), ministries (land, water, and environment), and local water and land users. Local information from n Runoff users plays an important role, particularly for validating assessments. n Rainfall Due to unavailability of high-resolution data, for example for n Land cover groundwater availability, resource potential may be inaccurate at n Groundwater depth local level but more accurate at national or regional level. Validation n Groundwater recharge of resource potential is therefore required. Use of local information, n Aquifer productivity where available, can improve assessment of resource potential. n Aquifer storage 2 The parameters above are useful for carrying out a rapid resource inventory necessary to quantify potential based on water resources. Best estimate of irrigated extent, in groupings Three types of irrigation are observed with FLID: first, The steps for the assessment are: FLID as supplementary irrigation, where crops are 1. Identify data sources for the area or country. irrigated during dry spells experienced in the cropping season; second, when farmers irrigate to extend the 2. Estimate water available for irrigation (using [1] surface water rainfall season, observed when rainfall ceases before the season [2] groundwater [3] surface water + groundwater), plus other ends; third, irrigation in the dry season as farmers grow a second demands (domestic, livestock, environment, etc.) and crop- crop. The area under FLID in a country is variable because these water requirements. three components are variable. In particular, the area under FLID to 3. Estimate irrigable area in dry and rainfall season based on extend production beyond the rainfall season or for supplementary water and soil resources. irrigation depends on rainfall variability. TO R S CO P E O F WO RK FO R TH E F L I D RESOURC E ASSESSM EN T M1-21 i-BOX 1.4 Farmers practice FLID in various environments. These include Water sources used in FLID contexts are river water, harvested areas where groundwater is abundant and occurs at shallow levels, rainfall and runoff, groundwater, and small reservoirs. Small areas close to rivers, and areas close to markets with a demand for reservoirs are used for storage and to deliver water to plots using agricultural products. The extent of FLID can be estimated from surface canals. Farmers also collect rainwater in dug-out ponds or volumes of produce traded. It is also more accurately estimated basins to retain runoff for irrigation. For farmers with landholdings from mapping the area under FLID. close to rivers or streams, simple river diversions are used to supply water for irrigation. Equipment used in FLID contexts includes FLID is practised during the dry season when farmers grow buckets, treadle pumps and motor pumps. Small reservoirs, river additional crops. It is also practised towards the end of the rainfall diversions and tube wells are used to access irrigation water. season, as a way to extend the rainfall season. Irrigated crops Energy sources for motor pumps include diesel, petrol and solar, include cereals (maize, wheat and rice), and fruits, tomatoes, and are used for lifting water from canals, reservoirs and tube wells. onions, peppers, cabbages, beans, peas, potatoes, sweet potatoes, Methods for on-farm water application include canals, drip systems, sugar cane, and groundnuts. Production costs of these crops are and buckets. variable, ranging from USD 500 to USD 4 000/ha (Xie et al. 2014). FLID is also evident in areas where there are mid-season droughts during the rainfall season. During these extended dry periods farmers irrigate to mitigate crop failure due to moisture stress. It is also evident in cases where the rainfall season is shorter than normal and additional water is required for crops to mature. In such cases irrigation is used to extend the growing season. M1-22 TOR SCOPE OF WORK FOR THE FL ID R ESOU R CE ASS ESS MENT i-BOX 1.5 Guidance on scoring the For plots farther from the water source farmers will incur investment costs (e.g. for canals or pipes to deliver water to their plots). The resource potential factor water availability and nearness to the water source combined, have a weighted score ranging from highly suitable to unsuitable. The parameters to consider when scoring the resource include water availability (quantity), water resource type, distance to the Depth to groundwater and aquifer productivity are used to score water source, groundwater availability and accessibility. groundwater potential. When available at shallow depths and thus easily accessible, groundwater is given a high score. Where As water availability and proximity to water are of primary groundwater is available at depths up to 7 m, the conditions are importance, a score for water availability is generated from surface highly suitable for developing groundwater for FLID. With easily water and groundwater. Where surface water is abundant and accessible groundwater farmers can invest in less capital-intensive reliable it is often more convenient to exploit that than groundwater. methods to access water, for example, manual pumps, buckets Where surface water is limited and/or available only seasonally, and ropes. As groundwater depth increases, motorized pumps groundwater can be included in considerations. Groundwater also are required. Such cases would require higher investment but has the advantage that it can be developed close to the point of will nonetheless score highly in cases where there are benefits use, thus reducing investment needs for conveyance. The scores from irrigation. A second element to the groundwater score is the of these various parameters are combined to generate a single productivity and storage of the aquifer which will lower the water weighted score for natural resources potential. General guidance availability score if it is limiting. Two scenarios can be considered: is provided in Table 1. The guideline can be adjusted to align with highly suitable groundwater when the aquifer is highly productive, country-specific standards. with productivity of greater than 0.5 (see Table 3); and aquifer For surface water, a high score indicates nearness to the water productivity suitable for small-scale household gardens and source (river, reservoir, etc.) as water can then be delivered easily to community irrigation ranges from 0.5–5 l/s. Lower productivity the plot(s). aquifers are scored unsuitable for irrigation. GUI DAN C E O N S CO RI N G TH E RES O U RC E POTEN TIAL FACTOR M1-23 i-BOX 1.5 Table 1 Natural resources scoring guideline Score 5 4 3 2 1 Highly suitable Suitable Moderately suitable Moderately unsuitable Unsuitable Surface water: distance to water <10–250 250–500 500–1 500 1 500–2 500 >2 500 source (m) Water availability: Water is widely Water is abundant in Water availability is available for Water availability for a few sub-regions, heavily constrained, Water is abundant irrigation in irrigation is nominally but competition is competition and nationally and widely numerous sub- constrained; cross- a common factor in conflict are serious, available for irrigation. regions but there sectoral and localised regard to irrigation irrigation abstractions is scarcity in a few competition is a feature. use. are curtailed. sub-regions. Groundwater: <7 7–10 10–15 15–30 >30 depth (m) Groundwater: aquifer >0.5 0.1–0.5 - - - productivity (l/s) Slope (%) 0–2 2≤4 4≤6 6≤8 >8 M1-24 GUIDAN C E ON SCORING THE R ES OU R CE P OTENTIA L FACTOR References M1-25 Beekman, W., G.J. Veldwisch, and A. Bolding. 2014. “Identifying the Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review.” . World Bank, Potential for Irrigation Development in Mozambique: Capitalizing Washington, DC. on the Drivers behind Farmer-led Irrigation Expansion.” Physics Inocencio, A., M. Kikuchi, M. Tonosaki, A. Maruyama, D. Merrey, H. and Chemistry of the Earth Parts A/B/C, 76: 54-63. Sally, and I. de Jong. 2007. “Costs and Performance of Irrigation De Bont, C. 2018. “The continuous Quest for Control by African Projects: A Comparison of Sub-Saharan Africa and Other Irrigation Planners in the Face of Farmer-led Irrigation Developing Regions.” IWMI Report 109. Colombo: International Development: The Case of the Lower Moshi Area, Tanzania (1935- Water Management Institute (IWMI), 2017).” Water Alternatives 11 (3): 893-915. Lefore, N., M.A. Giordano, C. Ringler. and J. Barron. 2019. “Sustainable De Bont, C., H.C. Komakech, and G.J. Veldwisch. 2019. “Neither and Equitable Growth in Farmer-Led irrigation in Sub-Saharan Modern nor Traditional: Farmer-led Irrigation Development in Africa: What will it Take?” Water Alternatives 12 (1): 156-168. Kilimanjaro Region, Tanzania.” World Development 116: 15-27. Malabo Montpellier Panel. 2018. “WATER-WISE Smart Irrigation De Fraiture, C., G.N. Kouali, H. Sally, and P. Kabre. 2014. “Pirates Strategies for Africa.” A Malabo Montpellier Panel Report. or Pioneers? Unplanned Irrigation around Small Reservoirs in The Malabo Montpellier Panel, Dakar Almadies. https://www. Burkina Faso.” Agricultural Water Management 131: 212-220. mamopanel.org/media/uploads/files/SUMMARY_WaterWise. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). 2016. AQUASTAT Main pdf Database: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Meinzen-Dick, R. 2007. “Beyond Panaceas in Water Institutions.” Nations. Website accessed on 21/08/2020 11:44 http://www.fao. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104 (39): 15200– org/nr/water/aquastat/data/query/index.html?lang=en 15205. Giordano, M., C. de Fraiture, E. Weight, and J. van der Bliek, eds. Minh, T. T., S. Zwart, R. Appoh, and P. Schmitter. 2021. “Analyzing the 2012. Water for wealth and food security: supporting farmer-driven Enabling Environment to Enhance the Scaling of Irrigation and investments in agricultural water management. Synthesis report Water Management Technologies: A Tool for Implementers.” IWMI of the AgWater Solutions Project. Colombo: International Water Working Paper 197, International Water Management Institute Management Institute (IWMI). doi:10.5337/2012.207 (IWMI), Colombo. doi: https://doi.org/10.5337/2021.201 IEG (Independent Evaluation Group). 2016. “Malawi—Irrigation, Sishu F.K., E.K. Thegaye , P. Schmitter, N.G. Habtu, S.A. Tilahun, Rural Livelihoods, and Agricultural Development Project.” and T.S. Steenhuis. 2020. “Endosulfan Pesticide Dissipation Implementation Completion and Results Report Review and Residue Levels in Khat and Onion in a Sub-humid Region ICRR0020099, Independent Evaluation Group (IEG), World Bank, of Ethiopia.” International Conference on Advances of Science Washington, DC. and Technology. Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer ___. 2017. “Ethiopia Agricultural Growth Program (P113032) Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications M1-26 R EFER ENCES Engineering, 308: 16-28, edited by N. Habtu, D. Ayele, S. Fanta, B. World Bank. 2016a. “Implementation and Completion Report: Third Admasu, and M. Bitew. Springer International Publishing, Cham. National Fadama Development (Fadama III) Project.” Report No: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43690-2_2 ICR00003895, World Bank, Washington, DC. Shah, T.N. 2018. “Accelerating Farmer-led Irrigation in Sub-Saharan World Bank. 2016b. Delivery Case Study: The Nigeria Fadama Africa.” Presented at the Africa Green Revolution Forum (AGRF), National Development Series. How to build a pilot into a national Kigali, September 5-8, 2018. program through learning and adaptation. Washington, DC: Global Delivery Initiative, World Bank. Tang, S.Y. 1992. Institutions and Collective Action: Self-Governance in Irrigation. Washington, DC: ICS Publications. World Bank. 2017. “Project Appraisal Document: Shire Valley Transformation Program (Malawi).” Report No. PAD2241, World Waalewijn, P., R. Trier, J. Denison, Y. Siddiqi, J. Vos, E. Amjad, and M. Bank, Washington, DC. http://documents.worldbank.org/ Schulte. 2020. Governance in Irrigation and Drainage: Concepts, curated/en/379081508551260039/Malawi-Shire-Valley- Cases, and Action-Oriented Approaches—A Practitioner’s Resource. Washington, DC: World Bank. Transformation-Program Wiggins, S. and B. Lankford. 2019. Farmer-Led Irrigation in Sub- Xie, H., L. You, B. Wielgosz, and C. Ringler. 2014. “Estimating the Saharan Africa: Synthesis of Current Understandings. London: Potential for Expanding Smallholder Irrigation in Sub-Saharan Development and Economic Growth Research Programme Africa.” Agricultural Water Management 131: 183-193. (DEGRP). https:/ /degrp.odi.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/ Xie, H., N. Perez, W. Anderson, C. Ringler and L. You. 2018. “Can Sub- DEGRP-Synthesis-Farmer-led-Irrigation.pdf Saharan Africa feed itself? The role of irrigation development in Woodhouse, P., G. J. Veldwisch, J. P. Venot, D. Brockington, H. the region’s drylands for food security.” Water International (43)6: Komakech, and A. Manjichi. 2017. “African Farmer-Led Irrigation 796-814. doi: 10.1080/02508060.2018.1516080 Development: Re-framing Agricultural Policy and Investment?” You, L., C. Ringler, G. Nelson, U. Wood-Sichra, R. Robertson, S. The Journal of Peasant Studies 44 (1): 213–33. Wood, Z. Guo, T. Zhu, and Y. Sun. 2010. “What Is the Irrigation World Bank. 2010. The Africa Action Plan: Implementing the Potential for Africa? A Combined Biophysical and Socioeconomic Agricultural Water Development Scaling-up Program. Washington, Approach.” IFPRI Discussion Paper 00993, International Food DC: World Bank. Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington, DC. World Bank. 2014. “Project Appraisal Document: Transforming You, L., C. Ringler, U. Wood-Sichra, R. Robertson, S. Wood, T. Irrigation Management in Nigeria Project.” Report No.: PAD1001, Zhu, G. Nelson, Z. Guo, and Y. Sun. 2011. “What Is the Irrigation World Bank, Washington, DC. http:/ /documents.worldbank. Potential for Africa? A Combined Biophysical and Socioeconomic org/curated/en/610161468145179516/Nigeria-Transforming- Approach.” Food Policy 36 (6): 770–82.. http://doi.org/10.1016/j. Irrigation-Management-in-Nigeria-Project foodpol.2011.09.001 RE FE R E N C ES M1-27 2 The Farmer-led Irrigation Development Guide Module Farmer Benefits The gains from irrigation farming About the Water Global Practice © 2021 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433 Launched in 2014, the World Bank Group’s Water Global Practice brings together financing, Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org knowledge, and implementation in one platform. This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The By combining the Bank’s global knowledge with findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily country investments, this model generates more reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the firepower for transformational solutions to help governments they represent. countries grow sustainably. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this Please visit us at www.worldbank.org/water or work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal WorldBankWater. follow us on Twitter at @  status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. About GWSP Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Since The World Bank encourages This publication received the support of the Global dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for Water Security & Sanitation Partnership (GWSP). noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. GWSP is a multidonor trust fund administered Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to by the World Bank’s Water Global Practice and World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC supported by Austria’s Federal Ministry of Finance, 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Denmark’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Netherlands’ Ministry Citation: of Foreign Affairs, the Swedish International Izzi, G., J. Denison and G.J. Veldwisch, eds. 2021. The Farmer-led Irrigation Development Development Cooperation Agency, Switzerland’s Guide: A what, why and how-to for intervention design. Washington, DC: World Bank. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs, the Swiss Photo credits: Agency for Development and Cooperation, and the U.S. Agency for International Development. Cover and page 4: David Brazier/IWMI | Page 6 (from left): Clement Ono-Rapheal/IITA; Swathi Sridharan/ICRISAT; Elizeu Dias/Unsplash; David Stanley; Alex Proimos | Page 7: Please visit us at www.worldbank.org/gwsp or Natasha Skreslet | Page 10: Stéfan Abric | Pages 11, 19: Romain Vidal/Water Alternatives follow us on Twitter #gwsp. Contents ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 02 USING THE GUIDE 03 Farmer Benefits – The gains from irrigation farming 04 i-boxes 11 2.1 Who is “the farmer”? 05 2.1 Farmer typological framework 12 2.2 Irrigation returns at field level 07 2.2 Outline Terms of Reference for the farmer benefits diagnostic 16 2.3 Diagnostic and scoring of the farmer-benefits factor 09 2.3 Guidance on the scoring of the farmer-benefit factor 18 2.4 Concluding note 10 REFERENCES 19 Abbreviations and acronyms FLID farmer-led irrigation development ha hectare i-box information box TOR Terms of Reference M2-02 Using the guide Tips The main volume of the FLIDguide presents the core body of information that explains FLID and the process of intervention design. Thematic descriptions are included in seven modules. Information boxes (i-boxes) at the back of NAVIGATING THE GUIDE ji the Main Guide and each module provide additional detail, and hyperlinks To move quickly and easily between the interlinked throughout the guide access relevant external publications, websites, information, set up your PDF reader so that the animation clips and videos. j PREVIOUS VIEW and i NEXT VIEW buttons (as distinct from l previous page and k next page) are instaled on the toolbar at the top of your screen. You may then freely explore the document using the navigation pane on the left of your reader or the many hyperlinks provided in the text, and backtrack to the start by repeatedly hitting thej button. Info-Box Info-Box To instal the buttons (in Adobe Reader), i-Box i-Box Module 1 Module 7 ¢ Right-click anywhere on the toolbar and select Resource Info-Box Technology them in the Show Page Navigation Tools options; or Potential i-Box ¢ open the View drop down menu and select them from the Page Navigation options. The Farmer-led Alternatively, try using these keyboard shortcuts: Info-Box Info-Box i-Box Irrigation i-Box Development Windows: Press the alt key and t or u arrow Module 2 Guide Module 6 Mac: Press the command key and [ or ] square bracket Farmer Benefits A what, why and how-to for Markets intervention design PRINTING Info-Box i-Box Info-Box i-Box Office desktop printers cannot print to the edge of the Module 3 Info-Box Module 5 paper. To print pages of this document without losing any i-Box Policy & Legal Finance content, Module 4 Knowledge ¢ choose File > Print, and in the page sizing and handling area or pop-up menu, select Fit to FLIDguide Printable Area or Shrink to Printable Area. layers of information M2-03 2 Farmer benefits The gains from irrigation farming M2-04 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E Shifts in farming systems enabled by irrigation n early planting before the rainy season, leading to T early harvesting with market advantages n additional cropping seasons, thereby increasing benefits from a fixed land resource (i.e. increased land his module answers the question of “Who use intensity) and year-round income is the farmer?” and “What are the benefits n longer and more frequent growing seasons, from irrigation?” We first give attention to providing year-round incomes the idea of “the farmer” with an emphasis on their diversity. Farmers’ aspirations differ n greater diversity in available crops substantially as do their needs and their perceptions of what constitutes a benefit. Five fictional farmers are described to help envisage the kinds of people who are involved in FLID processes. Guidance is provided on developing farmer 2.1 Who is “the farmer”? typologies, which are a tool to aid more targeted and effective Smallholder farmers are of particular interest because they are more responses, given farmers’ diverse situations. likely to be resource-poor with less financial capacity, and have more difficulty accessing information, inputs and technology. Due to their large Irrigation farming has many benefits compared to rainfed numbers, working with this group has good potential to contribute to farming – it is associated with increased production, better development goals with large-scale impact. use of resources (i.e. intensification) and increased profitability. Irrigation leads to direct and indirect benefits for both farmers FLID unfolds in many different physical situations (Main Guide Figure 2), and and the wider economy. Examples of quantified irrigation even in seemingly similar locations, farmers may differ from each other. benefits for smallholder farmers in selected countries across There will be different technologies, crop choices, marketing strategies and Africa is presented. These show that significant cash returns financial capacity, with varied aspirations and experiences. Their rainfed can be achieved. This is followed by an outline of the terms of farming, livestock production, off-farm jobs, and other income-generation reference for the diagnostic exercise of farmer benefits and activities will also be different. These differences must be appreciated guidance on scoring the farmer benefits axis. When benefits to enable effective catalytic responses. To illustrate this point, five “case are low, there is no reason to pursue any intervention to descriptions” are shown in Figure 2.1. The stories and photos are fictional, support FLID, while the converse is a primary driver of FLID. but all of the details are drawn from the lives of real farmers in Africa. M2-05 Margaret in Malawi Naya Mahamadou Eddel Robert in Nigeria in Mali in Ethiopia in Rwanda Businesswoman and Traditional herbalist and Entrepreneur, part-time Agricultural graduate, Shopkeeper, business farmer; farming 2 ha of single mother: farming DJ, blogger, and farmer civil servant and farmer and traditional rice for own ½ ha of rainfed maize for cash; farming ½ ha of “remote-control” farmer, leader; farming 10 ha of consumption with (wet season) and cash crops (onions, managing operations bananas and vegetables surplus for the local irrigated vegetables (dry greens, tomatoes) on a daily via Whatsapp; for the local market, and market (wet season) and season) for local market rented peri-urban plot. grows high quality green 2 ha of passion fruit on half that area under sale. Uses a bucket and Employs full-time labor beans and okra for contract for export. Owns tomatoes for a nearby rope system and a and manages his own supermarkets on 1 ha of the land under a title cannery as an outgrower watering can from a informal sales outlets at leased land immediately deed in recently (dry season). Irrigation hand-dug shallow well urban taxi stops. Pumps downstream of a major formalized national application methods: to water her vegetables. water from urban irrigation scheme. Has tenure process. Global basin (rice) and furrow Reliant on family labor outflows, with 2 ha of teff on her family Gap registered. Uses (tomatoes). She is and farming on conjunctive use of a plot, for the local market. both drip (passion fruit) located on customary- “borrowed” land near a shallow well, with a Planning to export, she is and sprinkler irrigation held family land. Water is wetland. hose-to-furrow system completing Global Gap (bananas) from tube supplied via a small powered by a “temporary” registration. Uses wells, powered with a group gravity canal electric connection to a supplementary irrigation mixed system using both scheme shared with 10 nearby school. with sprinklers powered petrol and solar pumps. other families. by a petrol pump from a a shallow well. Figure 2.1 Fictional FLID farmers illustrate the diversity of context and farming business (based on true stories) characteristic groupings require different kinds of responses, yet share enough commonality within each group so that a targeted response Farmer profiling and typologies would work for all. This might be a policy, financial, knowledge, marketing, or technical response, or a mix of these. Simplification of farmer diversity using typologies is needed to enable interventions to be both responsive to diversity yet A typology allows for the capturing of meaningful information on manageable in practice. Typologies are useful because these anticipated outcomes from the farmers’ perspectives (i.e. intended M2-06 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E benefits) which have direct implications for planning in relation to risk appetite, financial means, ways of 2.2 Irrigation returns at field level marketing, scale of farming, and level of sophistication. Farmers are different and aim for different results. Some farmers will move There are a few ways to develop a typology. When from rainfed food-production to irrigation with the aim of securing food survey resources and sufficient farmer data is available, supply and marketing some of the produce. Micro-irrigators on very small cluster and other statistical analysis can be used. More plots (< 0.2 ha) will have limited volumes for sale after setting aside food for pragmatically, a qualitative approach may have to be used. their own provisioning. Others will be driving a fully fledged market agenda Discussions with farmers, farmer groups, and experienced at scale to generate cash. In all cases, the additional, or “incremental”, agricultural officers, combined with targeted field visits and benefits result from increased production that is associated with the secondary data, can achieve a useful result. Some defining introduction or expansion of irrigation, from intensification or from improved characteristics for smallholder farmer typologies are access to markets. explained in i-box 2.1. The financial returns of smallholder irrigation are most readily reflected by gross margins. Gross margins are a common comparable indicator and reflect the monetary net gain from a crop. The gross margin is calculated by taking the gross revenue from crop sales (or equivalent value if the crop is consumed) and all other production costs such as land preparation, seed, fertilizer, chemicals, pumping costs, labor, packaging, equipment, etc. Gross margin Resource Farmer assessments exclude fixed costs such as potential benefits administration and management. The annual net farming income would be calculated Policy from all of the crops that are produced in the & legal Technology year (i.e. the sum of the gross margins). In Knowledge Markets typical irrigation practice in Africa, between Finance 1.5 and 2.5 crops are grown on a field portion per year – depending on the climate, water availability, farmer interest and market demand. Gross margins range widely depending on crop, season and marketing strategies. The selected examples below reflect this wide range and also show the significant incomes that can be generated from irrigation farming (Figure 2.2). M O DUL E 2 – FA RM E R B E N E F I TS M2-07 In the Eastern Region of Ghana farmers realized gross margins on horticultural crops (tomatoes and Resource Farmer peppers) ranging from USD 500 to USD 1 700/ha (Namara et al. 2011). In Uganda, irrigated horticultural potential benefits crops for local and regional markets gave returns of USD 2 500/ ha to USD 3 600/ha (authors’ assessment 2020). Peri-urban fresh vegetable production within 2 hrs drive in major cities in Ethiopia recorded gross margins of USD 2 400 to USD 4 000/ha (Wiggins and Lankford 2019), while in Kenya, Policy & legal Technology tomatoes produced for urban fresh produce markets exceeded USD 8 000/ha (Wiggins et al. 2014). In Tanzania an analysis showed a gross margin on irrigated tomatoes from shallow wells of about 700 Knowledge Markets Finance USD/ha for petty commodity producers and about 4 500 USD/ha for capitalist farmers, the latter reaching over 7 000 USD/ha for irrigated onions (De Bont et al. 2019). 9 000 8 000 7 000 Lighter shades indicate the range The financial 6 000 of market prices returns of irrigation vary USD/ha 5 000 widely with the 4 000 crop, season 3 000 and marketing strategies of 2 000 smallholder 1 000 farmers. 0 Ghana Uganda Ethiopia Kenya Tanzania Tanzania (tomatoes/peppers) (mixed vegetables) (fresh vegetables) (tomatoes) (tomatoes) (onions) Figure 2.2 Gross margins for irrigated horticultural crops from selected countries in Africa Annual and lifetime assessments, particularly comparisons of irrigation and rainfed scenarios, are also useful in understanding farmer benefits. Analysis by the authors in Uganda for mixed horticultural crops (in 2020) showed net irrigation farm incomes averaging USD 5 000 to USD 7 100/ha/annum with double cropping that was enabled by irrigation. Rainfed farming, by comparison, generated a net average farm income of USD 2 300/ha/annum (Figure 2.3). M2-08 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E 80 70 Range of net farm income for 1 ha ma x USD 71 000 2.3 Diagnostic and scoring 60 of irrigated mixed vegetables vs rainfed farming in Uganda of the farmer-benefits USD (thousands) (lifetime cost over 10 years) 50 et abl es min USD 50 000 factor 40 veg ted irriga 30 Diagnostic les USD 23 000 20 vegetab rainfed The farmer benefits diagnostic requires information of 10 the comparative benefit of irrigation in relation to rainfed 0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96 108 120 farming. It will include for higher yields associated with -10 irrigation (and related production intensification), and Months production of multiple crops per year (intensity of 200%), Figure 2.3 Comparison of rainfed and irrigated horticulture farming in a lifecycle assessment in Uganda and the prevention of crop losses from drought. The diagnostic would usually be carried out by a specialist Besides the influence of production modalities such as the use of agricultural economist, and an outline Terms of Reference inputs, external labor, etc., the gross margins differ considerably (TOR) with a scope of work is included in i-box 2.2. depending on the timing of production (in- or off-season) and the location of selling (e.g. at the farm or in the city). Van den Pol (2012) Scoring the farmer benefits shows that in Central Mozambique the gross margin for selling tomatoes at the farm is about 2 000 USD/ha while selling in a nearby To assess the farmer benefits, you will need to consider city amounts to about 3 500 USD/ha. The traders at the farm gate the incremental benefit of the gross margins; the mark up 75% of the farmers’ selling price. Seasonal fluctuations are benefits from drought-proofing (which itself depends on also large. The price for tomatoes ranges between 2 and 7.5 USD/ water availability when droughts occur); the relevance crate, with the low price corresponding to the dry season when of the broader benefits to the farmer, including food tomatoes are easy to grow under irrigation, and the high price provisioning; and links to the rainfed farming and livestock reserved for off-season production in the rainy season, when it is production systems. Where rainfall is high and droughts particularly difficult to produce tomatoes due to pests and diseases. are infrequent, then the incremental benefit will be Understanding and assessing benefits therefore needs attention to small. Where there is high market demand and rainfall is these kinds of pricing variables and output market realities (Module 6). insufficient and/or unreliable, the incremental benefits While gross margins tell part of the story, it is the incremental benefit to farmers will be high and the rationale for a FLID compared with rainfed farming that is important and that also has to intervention will be stronger. More guidance on scoring of be evaluated in the diagnostic of the farmer benefits. the farmer benefits is provided in i-box 2.3. M O DUL E 2 – FA RM E R B E N E F I TS M2-09 2.4 Concluding note A high score on the diagnostic spider plot axis for farmer benefits means that irrigation is a game changer for farmers. Farmers can gain financially, be more food secure, and complement other rainfed and livestock farming activities. Investing in irrigation will be attractive to them. The incremental benefits from irrigation are the second part of the equation in understanding the overall rationale for FLID, the first being the resource potential which is described in Module 1. When farmer benefits are minimal, there is no reason to support FLID, regardless of the resource potential. When farmer benefits are significant, the case for FLID is a function of both the factors on the upper half of the plot and is discussed in Section 5 of the Main Guide. M2-10 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E i-Boxes M2-11 i-BOX 2.1 Farmer typological framework n 2 Entrepreneurial farming, as termed by Van der Ploeg (2008), is characterized by full market engagement (input, including labor, and output) with the primary purpose There are different ways of grouping people. Two are outlined here, of generating profits. As a result, farming is subject to markets the first being a “farmer typology”, the second based on a farming volatility, which represents risk. This kind of farming is the same household assessment approach. that which Van Averbeke et al. (2011) called business farming. Farmer typologies based on enterprise type n 3 Corporate farming has the same orientation as entrepreneurial farming but is undertaken by corporate entities. This type of farming is larger in scale and is financed by International perspectives on typologies of farming-based venture capital, often within a web of interlinked agri-enterprises. livelihoods (Green 2008; Van der Ploeg 2008; Scoones 2009; Vertical integration across the value chain, including on-farm Van Hofwegen 2010) share core characteristics of peasant, production, agro-processing, industrial packhouses and entrepreneurial and corporate farming types as described by Van transport fleets for national and international distribution, is a der Ploeg (2008). feature. Corporate farming has strong potential synergies with These building block concepts are briefly explained below and FLID, potentially in outgrower relationships, where aggregation then modified into a practical typology for use in FLID diagnostic and/or processing is vertically integrated. This group has a major applications in Table 1. impact on smallholder ability to compete due to their large economies of scale, competitive pricing, and high degree of sophistication. n 1 Peasant farming is characterized as farming with the primary intention of strengthening the agricultural resource base. Income is only one of several motivations for There are two aspects that are not explicit in any of these farmer typologies and which need be considered in relation to FLID: farming; others include: producing food for own consumption; i) the degree of capital investment by the farmer and his/her investment in social linkages; resource reproduction in the long indebtedness (financial capital); and ii) the degree of risk that is term; and livelihoods resilience. Peasant farmers tend to have a acceptable to farmers. Chipfupa and Wale (2018) developed a farmer limited appetite for risk and try to reduce their dependence on typology that included such financial descriptors, as well as a sixth external markets. Risk and independence are important factors element of psychological capital. in making farming decisions. The peasant mode of farming does not mean that there is a disconnect from markets, particularly They highlighted the heterogeneity of smallholder farmers in terms output markets, but rather that such farmers tend to seek out of characteristics such as education, age, cautiousness, social-grant and develop relationships with markets that do not threaten dependency and psychological endowment (ie. emotional IQ), along their autonomy (Van der Ploeg 2008). with other livelihoods capital and farming attributes. M2-12 FA R MER TYP OLOG ICA L FRA MEWOR K i-BOX 2.1 They confirmed the importance of access to finance, education and training, and market access as critical to entrepreneurial development, a point underscored in the FLIDguide systems framework. These perspectives are useful and lead to a farmer typology that can be tailored for use in different contexts. Table 1 Indicative smallholder typology for FLID analysis (amended by the authors, based on Van den Pol [2012]; Manderson [2015]; and Cousins [2014]) Attribute SMALLHOLDER CATEGORIES Food producers Market-oriented Market-oriented Business farmers smallholders in loose value smallholders in tight value chains chains Objective of production Home consumption Home consumption + cash Cash income + home Profit income consumption Proportion of marketed Proportion of marketed 50% or > 75% or > 100% output output Marketing strategy Selling small amounts Different traders buying One customer/trader In contracts to traders or to different customers at small amounts per field, after agreeing selling directly in the city farm or along roadside a price after cellphone to wholesalers negotiation Contribution to Reduces expenditure Variable, from small to Significant Significant household income significant Labor Family Family + some hired Family + significant Hired numbers hired Mechanization Very low Low Medium to high High Capital intensity Very low Low Medium to high High Access to finance Absent Some Significant Very significant FA R ME R T Y P O LO G I CA L F RA M E WO RK M2-13 i-BOX 2.1 Entrepreneurship is an important characteristic of FLID and the final Table 2 Useful criteria for defining smallholder farming typology provides nuance in the scale, purpose, market proportion households (from Anderson, Learch, and Gardner [2016, 6]) and sophistication of the farming strategy. The typology is useful as a basis for defining more locally specific typologies for any situation, Key Criteria Considerations thus enabling more targeted planning and design to meet the different needs of the different groups. Market orientation Subsistence vs market-oriented vs hybrid Household livelihoods typology Landholding size Threshold Another approach is to consider the farmer within the context Labor input Family vs hired of her/his household, rather than simply the farm enterprise in itself. This can provide additional contextual data to allow Shared income from farming, Income segmentation, and then more careful targeting of the intervention multiple sources responses. Some key criteria that can be used in statistical cluster Farming system Technology, irrigation analysis or similar grouping approaches are listed below (Table 2). Where farmer sample sizes are sufficient, cluster analysis can Farm management Owner, influence over how to provide valuable results that reflect the characteristics of the responsibility farm most vulnerable groupings, and facilitate targeting for the most opportune groupings. Owner, influence over how to Capacity farm   Legal aspects Formal vs informal Level of organization Member of group - producer, supply chain, service provider M2-14 FA R MER TYP OLOG ICA L FRA MEWOR K i-BOX 2.1 Additional elements included in a clustering assessment: n Educational attainment n Socio-economic status n Access to emergency funds n Mobile phone ownership n Attitudes around work and self-determination n Incidence of livelihood shocks An example of a clustering outcome that facilitates intervention targeting is shown in Figure 1. Descriptive name of Farming for Battling the Diversified and Options Strategic agricultural household segment subsistence elements pragmatic for growth entrepreneurship Key characteristics Typical quintessential Persevere through The realities would Stable, optimistic for Actively engaged farming household harsh agricultural lead them to diversify the future and has in agriculture, and that struggles to challenges and out of something options for the future growing agricultural support its needs remains optimistic they enjoy if given the within and outside of activities about farming choice farming Stands to gain the Financial Embody the realism Could pivot into Model or “use case” most from financial mechanisms have and inner conflict or out of farming for inspiring growth in and agricultural enabled some of that can characterize depending on other segments support interventions their perseverance households opportunities Figure 1 An example of a market segmentation output with characteristic names for each group (Anderson, Learch, and Gardner 2016, 59) FA R ME R T Y P O LO G I CA L F RA M E WO RK M2-15 i-BOX 2.2 Outline TOR for the farmer The assessment will include attention to the benefits diagnostic following detail: n Mapping of FLID: Identify and map the locations in the country Objective of the assignment where FLID is prevalent. Make a best estimate of the extent of the irrigated area developed through FLID processes, differentiated by The objective of this assignment is to develop typical financial farmer typology. analysis for smallholder farmers developing small-scale irrigation (individually or in small group schemes). The diagnostic is guided n Description of smallholder farmers: Who are the farmers by the approaches outlined in i-box 3.4 and 3.5, and in Minh et al. interested in introducing small-scale irrigation in a more (2021). This information can be attached to the consultant’s Terms of independent way? How many are they? How can they be Reference (TOR). segmented? n Crops: Provide a description of the types of crops grown and the Scope of work typical crop-combinations. Make a best estimates of the production The consultant will analyze the following aspects in general: areas of each. n A climate analysis (if needed, conducted per region of the n Crop budget: The consultant will define a realistic range of crop country), linked with typical (rainfed) cropping calendars budgets for key crops, notably mixed-horticulture enterprise. The crop budget will consider a range of crop performances in terms of n Risk analysis of crop failure as a result of dry spells minimum/average/maximum achievable yields. The crop budget n Irrigation cropping calendar and typical irrigated crops for will also take into consideration the time and motivation required irrigation farmers in FLID areas for the farmer to transition from rainfed to irrigated agriculture, and will reflect a range of access to knowledge in terms of absence/ n A farmer typology (if needed, differentiated per region) limited/high provision of extension services. The consultant n Gross margin analysis for typical (rainfed) crops, and for FLID may start to identify the key crops either from the perspective of farmers’ irrigated crops under different types of farming methods farmers’ own familiarity or from a market segmentation perspective; (based on farmer typology) this should provide for ease of adoption of the key crops. n Gross margin: The consultant should define a realistic farm- typical plot, in terms of combination of crops and with ranges for subsistence vs commercial production. Using pessimistic/ optimistic market-price envelopes, the consultant will develop gross margins for typical farms. M2-16 OUTLIN E TOR FOR THE AS S ESS MENT OF FA R MER BENEFITS i-BOX 2.2 n Cost-benefit analysis: For the development of the cost-benefit contribution that might be needed (in the form of matching analysis, a range of technologies will be considered and the grants) to make the irrigation equipment affordable. In addition, profitability of investing in irrigation from the point of view of the the consultant should check the capacity of the farmer to repay a farmer will be assessed. The consultant will show comparative loan (over 6/12/18 months) should the farmer be eligible to access water cost in the crop budget of capital repayment and operating credit for irrigation development, and identify a monthly (micro- irrigation tech (solar and petrol) (water total cost as a percentage loan) repayment amount for the solar option that is similar to a of Gross Margin is a useful indicator: excellent <10%; affordable petrol-pumped system (based on 1 acre). 10–20%; difficult 20–30%; unlikely 30–40%). Lifetime horizons should n Sensitivity analysis (by agro-ecological zone): The consultant be 5, 10, 15-year on the solar/petrol tech comparison with few should assess risks of drought (a 10-year timeline, how many of sensitivity variables. those are going to be hit?). In addition, the consultant will analyze the case of gravity-fed n Conclusions (by agro-ecological zones): The consultant will systems where these are common. use the result of the analysis to build the narrative of why FLID is n Farmers’ capacity to pay: Based on the above, the consultant an opportunity for farmers from a benefits perspective (notably, will advise on the capacity of typical farmers to pay for irrigation increased productivity vs social stability). equipment. The assessment will advise on the level of financial O U T L I N E TO R FO R TH E AS S ES S M E N T O F FARM ER BEN EF ITS M2-17 i-BOX 2.3 Guidance on the scoring Farmer-benefit is high when: n Irrigation can provide a considerable safeguard against of the farmer-benefit factor crop failure as a result of dry spells. The scoring of the farmer-benefit axis on the diagnostic spider plot n There is a clear (and long) dry season in one or more is based on a simple ranking from very low to very high, with a score regions in the country where irrigation could offer a of 1 to 5 respectively. The farmer benefits are high when moving possibility for off-season production, and where different from rainfed to irrigated agriculture (reduction of drought-related types of farmers could increase their cropped area by crop failure, increased total production, increased yield, increased making use of this possibility. profit). The farmer benefits are low if introduction of irrigation is n Different types of farmers could make a considerably of little incremental benefit to farmers (drought failure is not a higher gross margin with supplementary irrigation, or by major issue or cannot be avoided through irrigation, off-season switching from rainfed production to irrigated production. production possibilities are limited, no [accessible] market for irrigated produce). As farmer-benefit is different depending on how agricultural production is organized at the farm the diagnoses and the scoring need to be done while taking into account the farmer typology, relating to scale, gender, market orientation and other relevant socio-economic and cultural-political aspects. Farmer-benefit also may vary widely from region to region within a country as rainfall seasonality differs. M2-18 GUIDAN C E ON THE SCOR ING OF THE FA R MER -BENEFIT FACTOR References M2-19 Anderson, J., C.E. Learch, and S.T. Gardner. 2016. “National Survey Report. Southern African Food Lab website accessed on and Segmentation of Smallholder Households in Uganda: 09/12/2015 14:55 at https://www.southernafricafoodlab.org/ Understanding their Demand for Financial, Agricultural, and supporting-smallholder-farmers-to-enter-the-organics-sector- Digital Solutions.” CGAP (Consultative Group to Assist the Poor) in-south-africa/ . Working Paper, CGAP, Washington DC. https:/ /www.cgap. Minh, T. T., S. Zwart, R. Appoh, and P. Schmitter. 2021. “Analyzing org/sites/default/files/publications/Uganda%20CGAP%20 the Enabling Environment to Enhance the Scaling of Smallholder%20Household%20Survey%20Report.pdf Irrigation and Water Management Technologies: A Tool for Chipfupa, U. and Wale, E., 2018. “Farmer Typology Formulation Implementers.” IWMI Working Paper 197, International Water Accounting for Psychological Capital: Implications for On-farm Management Institute (IWMI), Colombo. doi: https:/ /doi. Entrepreneurial Development. Development in Practice 28(5): org/10.5337/2021.201 600-614. Van Averbeke, W., J. Denison, and N. Mnkeni. 2011. “Smallholder Cousins, B. 2014. “Constraints and Innovative Approaches in Small- Irrigation Schemes in South Africa: A Review of Knowledge scale Agriculture in South Africa.” In Proceedings of the Third Generated by the Water Research Commission.” Water SA (WRC Carnegie Enquiry Action Dialogue. Goedgedacht, University of 40-Year Celebration) 37: 797-808. Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch, South Africa, August 6-8, 2014. Van den Pol, B. .2012. “‘Hot tomatoes’: Smallholder business De Bont, C., H.C. Komakech, and G.J. Veldwisch. 2019. “Neither strategies, market opportunities and irrigation system dynamics Modern nor Traditional: Farmer-led Irrigation Development in in Messica, Central Mozambique”. MSc thesis. Wageningen Kilimanjaro Region, Tanzania.” World Development 116: 15-27. University. Green, D. 2008. From Poverty to Power: How Active Citizens and Van der Ploeg, J. D. 2008. The New Peasantries: Struggles for Effective States can Change the World. Oxford: Oxfam International. Autonomy and Sustainability in an Era of Empire and Globalization. London: Earthscan. Namara, R.E., L. Horowitz, S. Kolavalli, G. Kranjac-Berisavljevic, B.N. Van Hofwegen, P. 2010. “Improvement of Irrigation and Drainage Dawuni, B. Barry, and M. Giordano. 2011. “Typology of irrigation Efficiency through Participatory Irrigation Development systems in Ghana.” IWMI Working Paper 142, International Water under Small Land Holding Conditions: General Report.” In the Management Institute (IWMI), Colombo. International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage (ICID) 6th Scoones, I., 2009. Livelihoods perspectives and rural development. Asian Regional Conference. Yogyakarta, Indonesia, October 14-16, The Journal of Peasant Studies 36(1): 171-196. 2010. Manderson, A. 2015. Supporting South African Smallholders Wiggins, S. and B. Lankford. 2019. Farmer-Led Irrigation in Sub- to Enter the South African Organic Sector: The Process Saharan Africa: Synthesis of Current Understandings. London: M2-20 R EFER ENCES Development and Economic Growth Research Programme (DEGRP). https://degrp.odi.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/ DEGRP-Synthesis-Farmer-led-Irrigation.pdf Wiggins, S., G. Argwings-Kodhek, S. Gebreselassie, S. Asuming- Brempong, E. Chirwa, M.M. Matita, ... and K. Mutabazi. 2014. “Smallholder commercialisation in Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi and Tanzania: findings from village studies.” FAC Working Paper 82, Future Agricultures Consortium (FAC), Brighton. RE FE R E N C ES M2-21 3 The Farmer-led Irrigation Development Guide Module Policy and legal The rules of the game About the Water Global Practice © 2021 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433 Launched in 2014, the World Bank Group’s Water Global Practice brings together financing, Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org knowledge, and implementation in one platform. This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The By combining the Bank’s global knowledge with findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily country investments, this model generates more reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the firepower for transformational solutions to help governments they represent. countries grow sustainably. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this Please visit us at www.worldbank.org/water or work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal WorldBankWater. follow us on Twitter at @  status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. About GWSP Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Since The World Bank encourages This publication received the support of the Global dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for Water Security & Sanitation Partnership (GWSP). noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. GWSP is a multidonor trust fund administered Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to by the World Bank’s Water Global Practice and World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC supported by Austria’s Federal Ministry of Finance, 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Denmark’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Netherlands’ Ministry Citation: of Foreign Affairs, the Swedish International Izzi, G., J. Denison and G.J. Veldwisch, eds. 2021. The Farmer-led Irrigation Development Development Cooperation Agency, Switzerland’s Guide: A what, why and how-to for intervention design. Washington, DC: World Bank. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs, the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, and the Photo credits: U.S. Agency for International Development. Cover and page 4: Jeffery M Walcott /IWMI | Page 9: Stéfan Abric | Page 12: Hamish John Appleby/IWMI | Page 13: Stephan Gladieu/World Bank | Pages 14, 46 : Romain Vidal | Please visit us at www.worldbank.org/gwsp or i-Box images, page 42: (top to bottom) Romain Vidal/Water Alternatives / / Annie Spratt/ follow us on Twitter #gwsp. Unsplash // Stéphan Abric / / Kate Holt/AusAID/Wikimedia Commons Contents ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 02 USING THE GUIDE 03 Policy and Legal – The rules of the game 04 i-boxes 14 3.1 Water and land tenure in a FLID context 06 3.1 Water governance – Historical origins and their consequences 15 3.2 Diagnostic and scoring 09 3.2 Impact of land tenure on FLID 17 3.3 Examples of interventions 10 3.3 Tenure rights and legal pluralism 20 3.4 Concluding note 13 3.4 Informal rules and practices 22 3.5 Types of policies and intervention projects that can inform the diagnostic 24 3.6 Outline TOR for the water and land policy and legal diagnostic 26 3.7 Guidance on scoring the policy and legal factor 28 3.8 Bricolage – pragmatic institution-building process 29 3.9 Hybrid water law 30 3.10 Adaptive management 38 3.11 Decentralizing governance to local levels 39 3.12 Gender sensitivity and hybrid water rights 42 3.13 Ten characteristics of water regulation to support FLID processes 43 3.14 Mitigating potential negative impact on land tenure 45 REFERENCES 46 Abbreviations and acronyms CAAC catchment area advisory committee TOR Terms of Reference FAO Food and Agriculture Organization WHO World Health Organization FLID farmer-led irrigation development WRA water resource authority ICT information and communication technology WRM water resources management IWUA irrigation water user associations WRMA water resources management authority M&E monitoring and evaluation WUA water user association O&M operation and maintenance M3-02 Using the guide Tips The main volume of the FLIDguide presents the core body of information that explains FLID and the process of intervention design. Thematic descriptions are included in seven modules. Information boxes (i-boxes) at the back of NAVIGATING THE GUIDE ji the Main Guide and each module provide additional detail, and hyperlinks To move quickly and easily between the interlinked throughout the guide access relevant external publications, websites, information, set up your PDF reader so that the animation clips and videos. j PREVIOUS VIEW and i NEXT VIEW buttons (as distinct from l previous page and k next page) are instaled on the toolbar at the top of your screen. You may then freely explore the document using the navigation pane on the left of your reader or the many hyperlinks provided in the text, and backtrack to the start by repeatedly hitting thej button. Info-Box Info-Box To instal the buttons (in Adobe Reader), i-Box i-Box Module 1 Module 7 ¢ Right-click anywhere on the toolbar and select Resource Info-Box Technology them in the Show Page Navigation Tools options; or Potential i-Box ¢ open the View drop down menu and select them from the Page Navigation options. The Farmer-led Alternatively, try using these keyboard shortcuts: Info-Box Info-Box i-Box Irrigation i-Box Development Windows: Press the alt key and t or u arrow Module 2 Guide Module 6 Mac: Press the command key and [ or ] square bracket Farmer Benefits A what, why and how-to for Markets intervention design PRINTING Info-Box i-Box Info-Box i-Box Office desktop printers cannot print to the edge of the Module 3 Info-Box Module 5 paper. To print pages of this document without losing any i-Box Policy & Legal Finance content, Module 4 Knowledge ¢ choose File > Print, and in the page sizing and handling area or pop-up menu, select Fit to FLIDguide Printable Area or Shrink to Printable Area. layers of information M3-03 3 M3-04 Policy and Legal The rules of the game THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E M odule 3 covers the diagnostic assessment of policies and laws, with primary attention on water and land. The purpose is to identify how policies and laws enable or constrain FLID, and – when needed – define interventions to overcome constraints. There are other policies and laws that relate to the knowledge, finance, markets and technology factors, which are also important to enable a thriving FLID environment. They are considered and assessed separately in Modules 4, 5, 6 and 7, as they are informed by the content in those chapters. This module is structured into three sections. The first presents an overview of “things to think about”, firstly in relation to water, and then to land – the two primary irrigation resources. It has been observed that secure Tenure type describes the specific characteristics of the holding arrangements of land or water rights. Governance water or land rights are not always essential conditions for FLID to take place (Woodhouse et al. 2017). Yet, is about how efforts to remove hurdles and reduce the risks associated with insecure water and land tenure can both the rights are accelerate FLID and facilitate vulnerable and risk-averse farmers to adopt irrigation practices. When an managed and investment is made on the land for any kind of development, it will affect power relations and impact the influences the tenure governance system. Understanding existing primary and secondary rights, customary norms, and reality of who the impact of water and land tenure security, can strengthen the interventions, decrease risks and advance benefits from the benefits more equitably. The second section provides guidance on the scope of the diagnostic, and also on resources and how to score the “legal and policy” axis of the diagnostic spider plot. In the third and final section, a number of related services. suggestions for water governance and land tenure interventions that can improve the enabling environment for FLID are presented. Regulation is about setting limits, the mechanisms for enforcement, An enabling environment is when policies, institutions, support and incentives services and other conditions create a business setting where for sustainable irrigation farming enterprises can start easily, develop, and and efficient use. thrive. M3-05 3.1 Water and land tenure in a FLID context Water tenure and FLID Tenure – What it means and Irrigation expansion resulting from FLID processes is not well defined. FLID is why it matters associated with some unique characteristics and problems that are compounded by historical water governance arrangements. One challenge of FLID is that data is Land and water tenure systems are created by generally not included in formal records. This means that balancing the unknown societies to define and regulate how people, irrigation demand with other water demands in the basin relies on guestimates as individuals or in association with others (including as families, clans, communities, (if FLID is even acknowledged) and is difficult and inaccurate. A further challenge non-profit organizations, business enterprises is that as FLID continues to expand, there will be increasing risks to the water and governments), gain access to natural resources sustaining it (see Module 1). Thus, it is important to understand the extent resources. They determine who can use of water resource use (including abstractions for irrigation for smallholder uses) to which resources, for how long, and under ensure information sharing, and to identify ways of addressing issues of inequity and what conditions. Tenure rights are the main potential impacts on other water demands, including downstream irrigators. way in which people, the resources, and the conditions of use are connected (Food and Many systems for permitting and enforcement are poorly suited to the FLID context. Agriculture Organization [FAO] 2017). The permitting of hundreds of thousands of small users with classical approaches of For people to derive benefits, tenure rights individual permits results in administrative overload and an inability to process and must be secure, and a sound governance record permits (see history in i-box 3.1). Getting access system is needed. Secure tenure can prevail to rights (through permitting) is time-consuming and under formal, customary, or informal systems, complicated for many farmers and, in consequence, or a mix of these, as long as all those involved regulations are often ignored. Enforcement is also in the use and management of the resources perceive it as legitimate. This means that impractical. The system works for modest numbers of people understand their rights and obligations medium and large users, but usually fails under the concerning the resource, including the sheer mass of numbers in a FLID reality. conditions under which they can acquire, transfer, or lose their rights. It also means that Irrigation growth through FLID processes is organic, the social and institutional system of reference making catchment management and equitable guarantees those rights, and a mechanism allocations difficult. FLID growth is characterized by is in place to address any dispute that could Permitting of hundreds of a flourishing progressive expansion along rivers, on emerge. thousands of individual and adjacent to wetlands, around large-scale irrigation micro-users is administratively schemes and in peri-urban areas (Figure 2). These impossible in most settings. M3-06 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E conglomerations of smallholder farms have a large- Land tenure and FLID scale effect where water use ratchets steadily upwards, though most often is not registered in the formal Land tenure is relevant to FLID because the level of tenure security is associated administration systems. with diminishing risks, incentivizing investment, and promoting inclusion. Where irrigation systems are small and mobile – such as the use of hand-lifting devices, There are three main implications of insecure water small petrol and solar pumps – the mobility mitigates some of the risk as they tenure for smallholder irrigators: can be relocated if necessary. On small group schemes, infrastructure such n First, the lack of data, stemming from as intakes, canals, or buried pipelines, is inevitably fixed without the chance of inadequate tenure systems, means that the physical relocation, and the risks of insecure tenure are higher. Farm investments, irrigation abstractions are seldom accounted for in however, go beyond just irrigation infrastructure and equipment, and include catchment water management plans. The balancing soil-fertility improvement, levelling, land preparation, labour and costly of demands in stressed catchments, and decisions agricultural inputs – all potentially constrained by insecure land tenure. When on water allocations across sectors, including for there is tenure security on the other hand, farmers invest more readily, leveraging smallholder agricultural use, excludes smallholder the land and other resources for more sustainable development (i-box 3.2). irrigation farmers, leaving them at a disadvantage. Land tenure insecurity has high costs in terms of human and food security, n Secondly, water competition is increasingly common and the absence of explicit arrangements, whether formal, customary, or informal, stability, productivity, and long-term sustainability. When tenure is not secure, public interventions to catalyze FLID can easily result in unintended outcomes, thus increasing risks of exclusion. Land becomes a source of conflict, a brings uncertainty and increased risk for smallholder perpetrator of social inequalities and discrimination, and a factor in the depletion irrigation farmers. Uncertainty acts as a disincentive to of natural resources. farmers’ investment in irrigated farming, and scarcity Tenure risks are amplified when farmers increases their vulnerability due to lower production or Resource Farmer potential benefits plan to make significant financial and crop failure. labor investments in irrigation equipment, n Thirdly, while some farmers may benefit from a lack of monitoring and enforcement, the absence of effective regulation is likely to increase Policy & legal Knowledge Technology Markets soil fertility, drainage, or flood protection earthworks. It is self-evident that any irrigation investment would be at risk if Finance inequality. More powerful individuals are able to the right to use the land and to exclude capture relatively more of the limited water resource, others (from harvesting the crop or be it through social pressure, their location relative to keeping invading animals out) were interrupted – exposing the irrigation farming the source (proximity), or their ability to purchase more enterprise to damage. The larger the investments, the longer the duration of suitable equipment. secure rights that is needed to derive benefits from those investments. The 3 P O L I CY AN D L EG A L M3-07 longer the duration of secure rights, the more the farmer will be interested Project and ready to invest in the sustainable use of resources. State Investments, in turn, have an impact on the land and may weaken right- International holders’ security of tenure. This causal relationship is complex, but it often gravitates around the increased value and competition for land as a result Figure 3.1 of the investment. Legal pluralism: The entry point to understanding the potential impact of land tenure on A foundation of the Religious hybrid law intervention FLID, during the diagnostic phase, is the assessment of the type and response to the FLID quality of the governance system in place. The assessment will map Local / water and land existing primary and secondary tenure rights holders and the level of Customary governance challenge tenure security experienced in the target area. A strong tenure system is one that is legitimate, inclusive, A large percentage of the water and land in Africa is managed A sound land accountable, and transparent. The and accessed under customary law. While customary land tenure governance higher the level of tenure security, the mechanisms are widespread, there are only a few cases system provides higher the chances of FLID sustainability where African water legislation recognizes the implications tenure security and success. The weaker the system, of, or customary/pluralistic arrangements for, improved and can become the lower the level of tenure security, water management. There is, however, increasing interest in a powerful FLID the higher the investment risks – and how this issue can be resolved, with ongoing research being enabler. the greater the chance of unwillingly conducted, for example, into the customary water regimes facilitating or legitimizing land grabbing of Africa and how to align statutory and customary practices. or land rights dispossession. The tenure governance system assessment Studies have already shown that customary laws and determines how much weight should be given to land tenure aspects in institutions can be very effective in resolving local level water the context of FLID to maximize impact and mitigate risks. use disputes (Ramazzotti 2008; Nkonya 2006). At the international level, there has been recognition of the Legal pluralism – A reality and an opportunity importance of customary law for sustainable natural resource Legal pluralism is when two or more legal systems operate within the management (see, for example, Principle 22 of the Rio same geographical area. This is a reality of life for most smallholder Declaration on Environment and Development). Yet statutory farmers. Local and customary law overlaps, complements, or can even water law in Africa has generally failed to address this aspect, contradict aspects of the formal legal system, also impacted by religious so customary water law is largely ignored or overridden by laws and social norms (Figure 3.1). statutory law. Customary law practices in other sectors, such M3-08 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E 3.2 Diagnostic and scoring Diagnostic – Collecting and assessing information The diagnostic involves the collation and analysis of all relevant policy and legal information for both water and land in the context of FLID. The policy and legal review of the other factors is dealt with in their relevant modules, though the process is the same for all (Section 4 of the Main Guide; and checklists in i-boxes 3.4 and 3.5). A more comprehensive approach is described in Minh et al. (2021). The evaluation of policies and laws would also tackle related topics – such as policies for the promotion, assessment, planning or regulation of irrigation; environmental values; water quality; and legal mechanisms beyond tenure for regulating land and water – and explore how FLID can thrive within as land tenure, provide both precedent and lessons to processes. Attention also needs to be paid to mechanisms for recognizing FLID inform a more hybrid practical approach in the water as a phenomenon (in policies, laws and strategies), and for allowing farmers’ sector. voices to be heard in agricultural, land, and water debates. A typical outline Legal pluralism (de facto) can be translated into practice Terms of Reference (TOR) with a scope of works for the diagnostic is included as hybrid law (de jure) and is a valuable instrument in in i-box 3.6. ensuring locally applicable and enforceable rules that harmonize with national legal frameworks (see i-box Scoring the enabling environment 3.3). When the water and land tenure and governance Assigning a score aims to reflect the extent of constraints in the policy arrangements are weak or insecure, the risk and and legal environment as it relates to the impact of water and land tenure vulnerability for smallholder farmers is high. This is on smallholder irrigation uptake and expansion. Scoring follows from the particularly the case when investments are made in diagnostic and is as much about the discussion and debate (within your own irrigation that have the effect of increasing the returns mind and with your team members) as it is about setting a final ranking. from, and thereby the value of, the available land and water resources. It is essential to understand the full Deciding on a score must take into account the policy and legal constraints that range of laws, rules, and norms that impact on farmers’ inhibit natural resource access and use, as well as the impact of constraints on irrigation practices in order to identify constraints other factors (knowledge, marketing and technical). A set of guiding questions and plan effective responses. New governance is provided in i-box 3.7. The final score will reflect the extent to which the water arrangements may be needed if FLID processes are to and land tenure enabling environment constrains FLID and, consequently, the be accelerated and risks adequately managed. need for a targeted intervention to help overcome the constraints. 3 P O L I CY AN D L EG A L M3-09 3.3 Examples of interventions There is good reason to initiate policy and legal reforms where 2 Strictly regulate the water use of high-impact users, through the implementation of water use permits and the rigorous enforcement of permit conditions. 3 significant constraints are identified in relation to land tenure, water rights, water permitting, and water resource access. Preparation of Monitor and assess irrigation development and other water a “policy note” (an advisory note with recommendations for policy use trends across catchments to identify when and what change) can make a valuable contribution to longer-term change. kind of interventions may be necessary. Monitoring can be done Most often, however, more immediate solutions must be found to through registration of significant water uses, status monitoring, deal with weaknesses in the water and land legal framework, in and remote sensing. implementation planning and design. The ability of the state to regulate, allocate, and control water use takes shape with reference to the existing legal frameworks. In an Suggested water tenure interventions imperfect legal environment, this can be achieved through the Interventions in water resource management and governance may be process of bricolage, or building with what is at hand. Bricolage, needed when the demands on smallholder irrigators for permitting as a practice, is about pragmatism to achieve “whatever works” is onerous and when the administration system, compliance and in the context. It often replicates what is already happening, but enforcement constrains water access for new irrigation farmers. in a more structured and explicit way. Bricolage (i-box 3.8) draws on Effective regulation supports national economic activity, statutory and customary law, as Bricolage draws on development, and equity, and promotes efficient and equitable well as norms and informal rules, statutory and customary social and environmental policies. Excessive regulation, to enable reliable access to water laws, formal and informal especially when non-transparent and arbitrarily enforced, for smallholder irrigation farmers. rules, and local and raises transaction costs for the economy as a whole and religious norms to arrive at generates a variety of risks, including corruption. Hybrid law intervention a hybrid law outcome. – paraphrased from Schiavo-Campo and Sundaram 2000, 25 options (i-box 3.9) There are three critical functions that governance interventions There are five regulatory responses that can be used alone must strive for in support of FLID processes. These emphasize or in combinations to ensure that critical water governance sustainability, regulation, and monitoring: functions, and inclusion, are achieved when crafting hybrid 1 law solutions in a FLID context (Figure 3.2). Depending on Support the sustainable and productive use of water by micro- considerations of practicalities, precedence, political willingness, abstractors, through legal protection from predation by larger social acceptability, and the timelines involved, one or more water users. interventions can be selected to achieve the desired functionality. M3-10 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E Figure 3.2 Hybrid law toolkit combining statutory and 1 Targeted use of permits 2 Recognition of n Gender sensitivity (i-box 3.12): Ensuring equitable access to water for all is difficult but important. There is a customary law need to consider how best a hybrid water customary water law rights system can facilitate access to water for female smallholder farmers, and avoid These interventions (in entrenching intersecting gender- and class- Hybrid whatever suitable combination) Water Rights based forms of injustice. n are strongest when they 5 Collective are informed by adaptive permits A pro-poor water rights system management modalities, 3 Prioritisation should support the water use of water use decentralized governance of smallholder irrigation enterprises to arrangements, and a system that maximize the resultant economic and social is gender sensitive and pro-poor: welfare in an equitable manner without compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems (i-box 3.13). n Adaptive management 4 Permit exemption (i-box 3.10): Enables Guidance on land governance water managers to track the interventions outcome of implementation of the hybrid water rights system in relation to key indicators (access, environmental impact, conflict etc.), to identify the Stand-alone land tenure interventions are not included as problems and adjust the system as needed. part of the FLIDguide but FLID has an impact on tenure security. There are risks, described earlier, related to n Decentralized governance to local levels (i-box 3.11): Decentralization is a strategy to include irrigation farmers who have established themselves outside of the administrative and regulation increased investment in irrigation. Mitigation responses in relation to land tenure may therefore be needed as part of other FLID interventions. A range of strategies that can fold. Water user groups, irrigation mitigate FLID risks are listed below and in i-box 3.14. These Resource Farmer organizations, and water user must be planned and budgets allocated early in the design potential benefits associations are key. Transparency phase of the intervention. and accountability are incentivized Policy through initiatives that strive for water Options may range from positive discrimination policies & legal Technology use efficiency, water productivity, to ensure inclusion of most vulnerable groups in FLID, to Knowledge Markets and profitability, and include tech, the following: participatory planning processes to identify Finance agronomic and marketing support. strategies to renegotiate and guarantee secondary rights; 3 P O L I CY AN D L EG A L M3-11 Resource potential Farmer benefits empowering the existing tenure governance system to streamline and secure processes for land access; and supporting processes n Fit-for-purpose The specific objective pursued in securing tenure rights, and the existing policy, legal and institutional Policy of land rights documentation in order to framework, dictate the type of intervention designed; the & legal Technology move progressively towards land rights human, financial and technical costs of the action; and Knowledge Markets formalization, if appropriate. The approach the expected impact in the immediate and long term. Finance to be taken will depend on the specific Strengthening tenure security is a progressive exercise that circumstances in each instance and should can be implemented in phases. follow the principle of progressive and context-appropriate strengthening of threatened or insecure land tenure rights. n Realistic planning Investment projects have limited resources and n Inclusion and participation In order to achieve improved tenure governance and strengthen tenure security, it is critical to recognize and protect all legitimate tenure time constraints. It is critical to realistically assess what can be achieved within the given timeline and ensure that targets and budgets are realistic. rights. The key to the success of land tenure interventions at any level is meaningful participation and inclusion of all stakeholders (beneficiaries, rights holders, local authorities, etc.). This may at times require an additional investment in empowering and capacitating those who are traditionally n Sustainability Land tenure is a dynamic domain in continuous evolution. Land rights can only be protected when its three excluded from land governance and decision-making. critical features (the plot, the right/s and the legitimate rights holder) are clearly identified. If the objective is to secure tenure rights beyond the life of the FLID investment, human and financial capacity must be in place to continually appraise changes. n Ensure sound mechanisms are in place for dispute resolution Conflict is a natural element of life, and FLID is likely to exacerbate existing conflicts related to secure access to land or create new conflicts because of increased competition and the need for land for expansion. It is critical that a legitimate, accessible and transparent system is in place to address and peacefully resolve emerging conflicts. M3-12 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E 3.4 Concluding note At the end of the policy and legal diagnostic process outlined in this chapter you should have better insight into the land- and water- related factors, and a broadened perspective on tenure strengths and weaknesses in practice. The potential need for catalytic FLID support in relation to tenure inadequacies that may limit the effectiveness of, or bring risks to, an intervention, should be clear. You should be able to identify strengths in the policy and legal enabling environment that will provide a platform to facilitate faster and easier FLID processes. Where significant constraints have been found, intervention responses may be needed to reduce risks to farmers and ensure more secure and equitable access to water. Land tenure security risks may need to be mitigated. Women, resource-poor farmers, and secondary land rights holders need particular attention. The land and water legal interventions that are informed by the diagnostic assessment should aim to catalyze the FLID process by combining public and private investment and drive inclusive growth while actively pursuing sustainable resource use. 3 P O L I CY AN D L EG A L M3-13 i-Boxes M3-14 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E i-BOX 3.1 Water governance – Historical origins and their consequences The aim of water resources governance (given effectiveness Water use permit systems can’t cope through regulations) is to maximize equitable economic, social and environmental benefits through the sustainable use of limited Water permit systems are in place across much of Africa, and water resources. Where water is scarce and competition high, water permits are often a statutory requirement for small and micro resources regulation becomes more important than in a context of irrigation enterprises as well as large enterprises. Research has, water abundance and includes the need to be able to minimize and however, revealed the general failure of such systems either in address disputes between competing users. protecting the water rights of small scale farmers, or in achieving the Resource Farmer Resource Farmer objectives of the state in relation potential benefits potential benefits to effective water resources management (Schreiner and Van Policy 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 Policy 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 Koppen 2018). The research shows & legal Technology & legal Technology that large numbers of smallholder Knowledge Markets Knowledge Markets farmers across Africa operate under Finance Finance customary water (and land) tenure systems. Permitting of hundreds of thousands of individual When resource potential is low, i.e. water and land are micro-users is administratively very stressed, then a strong and enabling policy and Small scale water users often impossible in most settings. legal environment is more important. mistrust statutory systems and see them as being expensive, cumbersome and lacking in legitimacy. Regulation works most effectively where it is seen as being Figure 1 Resource potential extremes and the relative importance of an enabling policy and legal environment legitimate and many communities have a preference for informal customary conflict resolution processes around water use. They see these as being more effective and fair, less costly, and carrying more legitimacy than the formal processes which result in a winner and a loser (Sakketa 2018). The failure of water permit systems in Africa also discriminates against the rural poor. The lack of a water permit means that their water use is, strictly speaking, illegal and they therefore have no legal recourse in the face of competition with other users, WAT E R GOVE RN A N C E – H I STO RI CA L O R IGIN S AN D THEIR CON SEQ UEN C ES M3-15 i-BOX 3.1 particularly big water users. At the other end of the scale, large water users Water regulation is particularly important where there are equipped to negotiate the formal administrative systems to obtain is competition for limited water resources – whether permits, thus securing legal protection for their water use. Many African seasonal, continual, or during drought periods only; a governments have put in place statutory water permits systems with the regulatory system must be able to address this issue general intention of replacing all other water rights systems, including effectively and, in particular, ensure that the water rights customary law systems, thus driving inequality rather than ensuring inclusion of small-scale farmers are protected in such situations. (Langford and Russell 2017). Adoption of a hybrid or bricolage approach that brings together the best of the various legal systems (statutory Pragmatic focus on the heavy users and customary) into one effective system is an option that really works on the ground. Monitoring is the tracking and recording of water use. Regulation is a combination of permitting, compliance monitoring and enforcement, supported by the payment of water-related fees. The emphasis on who must be monitored and who must be regulated depends on which groupings are 100% using the most water. 90% 80% Water use patterns vary from catchment to catchment. There are rural catchments dominated by many micro-abstractors, and others where water 70% use is highly skewed, with most water utilized by a few large users. 60% 50% Small-scale farmers often operate in the same catchment as towns, hydropower, industry and/or large irrigation farming estates. As an example, 40% in the WamiRuvu basin in Kenya, of the 960 water use permits in the basin, 30% 89% of the water was used by only 30% of the users, while the rest of the 930 20% permit holders used only 11% of the water. This picture does not include the 10% other small-scale users who were using water in the basin without permits. 0% Largest Remaining In a context of combined skewed water use of this nature and limited state 30 permits 930 permits resources, an effective regulatory system would be focused on regulating (and charging for) the water use of the few large-scale water users and Number of % of total permit holders water used supporting the effective and productive use of water by micro-abstractors. There is still a need for monitoring more broadly in order to understand and quantify the impact of multiple micro-abstractors, who can, when the Figure 2 Number of permit holders vs amount of water used in numbers are large, have large-scale impacts on the resource. WamiRuvu basin (Sumuni 2016) M3-16 WATER GOV ERN AN C E – HISTORICAL OR IG INS A ND THEIR CONSEQU ENCES i-BOX 3.2 Impact of land tenure on FLID Land tenure in FLID context Land is much more than a physical or economic asset. Control of Three key elements of land tenure land and resources determines power relationships. Across different cultures, land further translates as identity, culture, development, food, shelter and human security. Secure access to land is indissolubly linked to human development n The land parcels – where is it located, how big is it, what are its physical features, and does it have associated resources. and may determine the success or failure of land-based n development. When small-scale irrigation is initiated and developed The land rights, claims and encumbrances by the farmers themselves, they gain access to land and secure it – who has the right to do what on the land, through the local land governance system and operate at whatever and under which conditions. level of tenure security and legitimacy the system can provide. But n when an external investment comes in to support and develop The subjects entitled to those rights – who farmer-led irrigation, the cash/technology/knowledge injection are the legitimate rights holders. will have an impact on local power relations and, in turn, on tenure dynamics. How does FLID impact tenure in different contexts? What are the potential negative effects of FLID The type and severity of FLID impact on tenure rights are directly on tenure? 1 related to the quality of the existing tenure governance system and the associated level of tenure security. Effects can be positive or Tenure insecurity. In instances where the tenure governance negative, and their intensity can range from negligible (which can system is weak, farmers’ security of tenure will be in jeopardy, be addressed within the existing tenure system), to severe (the risks increasing the investment risks and diminishing the incentives to are so high that they deter FLID). Most contexts where the impact use natural resources sustainably. 2 is identified as negative would fall somewhere in the middle of the Land grabbing/dispossession. Participants have no ranges, and measures can be taken to mitigate risks. When a positive legitimate access to their plots, and the investment empowers impact is assessed, land tenure interventions could become an infringements on primary or secondary tenure rights. incentive for investment, expansion and sustainability. IM PACT O F L AN D TE N U RE O N F L I D M3-17 i-BOX 3.2 3 Benefits sharing. The initial investment will typically support the purchase of equipment and increase the beneficiaries’ Table 1 Criteria for assessing level of tenure security Low tenure security High tenure security capacity, which in turn raises the value of the land. Without a sound tenure governance High Risks, FLID (potential) Low risks, FLID (potential) Criteria negative impact positive impact system in place and understanding of the pre- existing tenure arrangements, there is a chance Single systems (formal or of elite capture or unfair benefits distribution. Formal and customary Blended/conflicting and customary) and harmonized legal, policy and 4 informal systems plural systems (blended/ institutional framework Sustainability. To ensure that the mutually reinforcing) equipment and capacity are retained and become an integral part of the local socio- Weak, ad-hoc and Transparent, sound, economic capital, it is critical to assess whether inaccessible (land legitimate and accessible Tenure governance administration services are (land administration services participants reside and settle in the areas and system expensive, far away, unclear, are within reach, affordable have legitimate rights to use the land, water and ineffective) and transparent) equipment. Only partially recognized, Primary and secondary Known, recognized and How do you assess the potential right holders and users and in some instances protected discriminated against impact of FLID on land tenure? The FLID tenure impact assessment aims to Low accountability for, and Protection and discrimination against, certain identify potential risks and opportunities related Transparent and inclusive inclusion rights holders (women, youth to land in the FLID framework, estimate their and other vulnerable sectors) likelihood, and inform the design of related land tenure measures if appropriate. It determines Multiple fora with no Legitimate, accessible and how much weight should be given to tenure Grievance-redressing hierarchy, no harmonization, empowered to decide and mechanisms and conflicting principles and aspects in the context of FLID to maximize enforce processes impact and mitigate risks. This diagnostic is based on an analysis of the current land tenure governance framework (de jure and de facto). Normally, where tenure security is high for primary and secondary rights holders, Table 1 provides an overview of the criteria and a there is a sound land governance system in place and the investment will have higher broad indication of the potential impact of FLID chances of success and reduced risks of negatively affecting the most vulnerable on tenure based on the specific circumstances. tenure rights holders. M3-18 IMPACT OF L A ND TENU R E ON FL ID i-BOX 3.2 Tenure systems are dynamic and highly diverse. Therefore, the different criteria must be looked at individually. For example, there is no fixed correlation between the level of formality of the system and the level of tenure security. Formal systems with limited record-keeping and implementation capacity may be weaker than customary systems based on a fully oral tradition with a high degree of local legitimacy. The assessment of the Similarly, there is no guarantee that a system that scores high on one of the tenure governance criteria will obtain the same score across all criteria. For example, customary systems is fully context- systems with a high level of local legitimacy and enforcement capacity may specific in determining, guarantee secure tenure against the external competition for the land, but on a case-by-case basis, may not constitute an enabling environment for expansion of irrigated area how much weight should and risk-free investment. Land transfer is often based on short-term informal be given to land tenure agreements (one season or a year), based on crop-share arrangements (you aspects in the context of give the land, I farm it, we share the harvest) or informal cash-rental agreements FLID to maximize impact (with a hand-shake, or COVID-era elbow bump). These informal agreements and mitigate risks. are based on individual negotiations and open to contestation, thus increasing investment risks related to discontinuation of access to the land. IM PACT O F L AN D TE N U RE O N F L I D M3-19 i-BOX 3.3 Tenure rights and legal pluralism What exactly is legal pluralism? Legal pluralism refers to a Project context in which two Legal pluralism refers to a context in which two or more de jure or or more de jure or de facto legal systems operate within the same geographical area. State de facto legal Rather than complicating regulation challenges, it offers important systems operate International opportunities for devising an approach that can secure water rights within the same for small-scale FLID despite lack of implementation capacity in geographical the state. De jure legal pluralism recognises multiple legal systems area. operating within the formal justice system. De facto legal pluralism indicates that the state does not formally recognize non-state or Religious informal legal systems but may allow their operation in parallel to the formal legal system. Legal pluralism may occur at the same level of governance, or at different levels of governance (Obani and Local / Gupta 2014). In legal pluralism, one may see relationships between Customary the different legal systems based on indifference, competition, accommodation, or mutual support (Obani and Gupta 2014). Understanding legal pluralism enables the development of an appropriate regulatory framework for water rights for small-scale The opportunity is in the current practices farmers. Across Africa (and the world), a large number of people still live in National constitutions, legislation (national or state/provincial) and areas where customary law governs land and water tenure. These subsidiary regulations include statutory formal law and, in the case customary systems operate in parallel with the formal statutory of de jure legal pluralism, provisions for customary law. However, in legislation, giving rise to a situation of legal pluralism. many countries in Africa customary land and water tenure practices exist without legal recognition and provide de facto governance “Customary rights” refer to established, traditional patterns of of large areas of land and water. There is little formal capturing of norms that can be observed within a particular socio-cultural such systems, and their ability to evolve according to changing setting. Sets of customary rights and obligations may be conditions has earned them the title of “living customary laws”. called customary law. Customary rights exist where there is a These laws govern “local communities’ water access, use, and consensus of relevant actors considering them to be “law”. control” (Hellum, Kameri-Mbote, and Van Koppen 2015, 7). – Thompson (1991) M3-20 TENU R E R IG HTS A ND L EG A L P LU RA L ISM i-BOX 3.3 To date, little has been done to consciously align the statutory The ability of the state to regulate, allocate and control water and customary rights systems in the water sector. In the land use depends on the existence and nature of an appropriate legal sector many countries in Africa have undertaken policy reforms framework. This framework may be captured in a specific water law, in the last 10-15 years to harmonize and ensure better synergies often at the national level; provisions in different laws; regulations between the formal and customary systems. Examples include or subsidiary legislation; customary or traditional law; rulings Kenya, Uganda, Malawi, Namibia, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Ghana, arising from court cases; and/or constitutional provisions. Such Ivory Coast, Tanzania, Somalia, Mozambique and Madagascar. In legal frameworks may also specify the different roles of national, some countries customary law provincial/state and local institutions in regulating water use Customary law is an is formally recognized, while (Salman and Bradlow 2006). unwritten store of legal in others it functions without The evolving nature of customary living law creates spaces for ideas and knowledge formal recognition. change which can be used strategically to improve equality and passed down orally from inclusion from a gender perspective. A good example comes from In regard to water, customary one generation to the next. law is the reality on the ground the Marakwet in Kenya. Historically, male-dominated practices It is living and adaptable, that governs the water use of around the design, construction and maintenance of furrows and thus suited to new most smallholder irrigators. This excluded women from decision-making processes. And yet, as applications. has to be contrasted with the younger women are entering into the commercial farming arena, implementation of statutory and are developing knowledge and expertise around the furrow water law, which has been system, they are gradually finding a place in water governance. partial at best in many countries, particularly in relation to water While formal statutory systems often distinguish between water use permits. Due to limited state capacity and incentives, very few services and water resources, customary systems tend to take a micro-abstractors, like smallholder irrigation farmers, have water more holistic approach to water generally. permits, recognize the legitimacy of state systems, or even know In the face of weak formal systems and the persistence of that they are expected to have such permits. When dealing with customary systems, a bricolage or hybrid approach that draws water rights for smallholder irrigators developing their own irrigation on the best of both can provide the most effective approach to systems, it is important to understand the nature of the legal protecting the water rights of smallholder farmers. pluralism in the specific country and how it can support access to water for small-scale irrigators. TE N UR E R I GH TS A N D L EG A L PLU RA L I S M M3-21 i-BOX 3.4 Informal rules and practices strengthen accessibility, effectiveness and legitimacy of institutional solutions. The policy and legal diagnostic activity will require the ●n Perceptions around land rights and gender in an irrigation context assessment of both the formal and the informal institutions can hinder access to land, and rights of use. that influence irrigation farmers’ decisions and actions. This will include the study of policy, legal, project and other n Social priorities and beliefs around off-season activities in relation documentation, as well as interviews with stakeholders, both to farming can impact a range of irrigation related activities, both individuals and groups. Institutions, in this sense, means the in relation to farming and infrastructure or equipment use and formal and informal rules which frame the relationships and maintenance. actions of all stakeholders involved in the irrigation farming n Societal hierarchies including the roles and duties of different business (individuals, informal groups, formal organizations, private sector bodies, government, etc.). segments of society are different. Understanding the norms in relation to the old, young, women, men, formally educated people, In the diagnostic process it is useful to be alert to the community and religious leaders, can improve how planning and considerations in the checklist below. These are prompts for the implementation processes can take place most favorably. enquiry. Understanding the informal rules and environment help us to better understand the behaviors and choices that irrigation n Land ownership traditions and practices impact on access and the farmers make and highlight opportunities to strengthen the perception of threat and tenure insecurity. enabling environment. n Traditions of collective action can be harnessed for collaborative Customs, beliefs and traditions: management, but can also potentially undermine individual action and innovation. ● Water is often perceived as an open-access common good to n be shared by all. This belief can hinder more formalized water Political and development norms to be allocation and sharing arrangements, compliance with rules, and considered include: water-management fee payment arrangements. n The bias towards large-scale or small-scale irrigation schemes ●n The existence of (shared) infrastructure can be perceived to n The cost of irrigation equipment beyond the reach of smallholder convey a right of use to those who have access to and benefit farmers from the infrastructure, when the rights of use are more likely a separate requirement. n Should government be the sole provider of irrigation facilities n Conflict resolution practices and local practice usually involve n The assumption that interventions must necessarily fit into existing traditional or religious leaders and awareness of norms can farming systems M3-22 INFOR MA L R U L ES A ND P RACTICES i-BOX 3.4 n The notion that smallholder farmers do not pay back credit outsiders and lead to false perceptions that modern is better than local practice simply because it is modern.) n The assumption that existing farming practices (smallholder farmers) are backward/obsolete Incentive structures can help catalyze including: n Corruption (procurement issues, commissions, kickbacks, public relations) ●n Level of tenure security and ways to increase it n How informal groups operate (groups of traders, groups of farmers, ●n Cooperative membership arrangements etc.) ●n Subsidies for acquisition/operation/maintenance of Individual cognition aspects of importance are: technology ●n Experience with new technologies in the past ●n Access to inputs, equipment and markets n People’s attitudes towards development projects ●n Knowledge/access to other levels of the value chain beyond production n Motives, level of ambition and objectives in embracing FLID ●n Market prices for produce n Level of self confidence in their abilities to innovate (i.e. Confidence in local knowledge can be undermined, intentionally or not, by locals or ●n Loans/credit/lease IN FO R MAL R U L ES A N D PRACTI C ES M3-23 i-BOX 3.5 Types of policies and intervention projects that can inform the diagnostic The FLID process, and therefore the intention to promote its ●n ●Youth employment programs acceleration, cuts across different policy clusters including: agriculture, ●n ●Micro-finance programs water, economic, food security, climate change, poverty reduction and rural development. The policy scoping process should encompass ●n ●Land tenure reforms multiple line-ministries to identify as many opportunities and synergies as possible to accelerate FLID. ●n ●Seed money/business development/lease It is useful to critically assess past and current country programs and Private sector interventions include: interventions led by the government (with or without the support of ●n ●Micro-finance service providers development partners), non-government organisations (NGOs) and the private sector. The list below provides guidance on the type of ●n ●Lease programs for agricultural equipment interventions that may be of interest and can help identify where to start looking for information. ●n ●Loans for procuring equipment Government programs and projects include: NGO and development organization interventions include: ●n ●Agricultural development programs ●n ●Climate change adaption projects ●n ●Water and land development/planning programs ●n Capacity development ●n ●Agricultural mechanization programs n Micro-finance ●n ●Irrigation development programs (smallholder, large-scale) n Land tenure reform (advocacy) ●n ●Capacity building programs n Agricultural development ●n ●Climate change adaptation programs and strategies ●n Social inclusion (gender, marginalized groups) ●n ●Food security programs ●n Irrigation development projects ●n ●Commodity-based value chain development programs M3-24 TY PES OF POLIC IES AN D IN TERV EN TION PROJECT S THAT CA N INFOR M THE D IAG NOSTIC i-BOX 3.6 Outline TOR for the water and land policy and legal diagnostic The policy and legal diagnostic in this module is focused on water reference to: ministries (water and agriculture), ministry of and land, and the policy and legal considerations of the remaining land, irrigation agencies, regional development authorities, factors are addressed in each of the other modules separately – as and local government (districts or counties, sub-counties or they are dependent on the content therein. Some overlap across the wards or similar). The consultant will also touch upon the role FLID factors during a policy and legal review is inevitable as the factors of NGOs and private stakeholders in small-scale irrigation do not exist in silos but are interlinked in reality. The team will have to development. The consultant will include reference to policy engage with each other on overlapping issues and resolve differences framework, laws and regulations where these respective and gaps. The diagnostic is guided by the approaches outlined in i-box roles are spelled out, as well as indicate relevant trends 3.4 and 3.5, and in Minh et al. (2021). These additional information sets over the past/upcoming decades, notably in regard to the can be attached to the consultant’s Terms of Reference (TOR). decentralization agenda. More specifically, the consultant will present the organizational structure for small-scale irrigation The main themes of the scope of work in relation to land and water service delivery (including organization of departments tenure, governance and regulation are outlined below. Remember that and units as for procurement and extension services, and the policy and legal review will contribute to understanding the barriers respective reporting lines to central ministries) at local level. in the enabling environment, and that all of the other factors (potential, It is recognized that there is ample variability across and benefits, markets, knowledge, finance, and technology) all have policy within countries, and the consultant will be asked to present and legal aspects. These will be diagnosed and scored as part of their a few cases to represent such a variability. The consultant respective factor assessments, described separately in each thematic will present reporting lines for small-scale irrigation service module. delivery, flow of funds, and provide a general sense of the representativeness of technical staff among the various public Outline of Scope of Work stakeholders. Finally, the consultant will highlight differences The consultant will need to analyze the following aspects in relation to (if any) between theory and practice in the respective water and land policies and laws: mandates. n ●Roles and responsibilities in individual and small-scale irrigation development: Based on available legislation and other documents, the consultant will analyze what the expected role n ●What legislation covers issues of access to water? In some countries, for example, access to water under customary law falls under forest and land legislation, rather of farmers is (individually and in groups) vs public institutions in small- than under national water legislation. ● scale irrigation development (individual and in group schemes), with O U T L I N E T E R M S O F RE F E RE N C E FO R THE WATER AN D LAN D POLICY AN D LEGAL DIAGN OSTIC M3-25 i-BOX 3.6 n ●What does statutory legislation (and subsidiary regulations) require in relation to water use rights for smallholder farmers, i.e. what are the mandatory legal requirements for legal The words authorization, permit and license are often used interchangeably but sometimes are intended to be distinct water use? In many countries, this may be the need for some from each other. Attention to meaning is needed for each form of permit or permission/authorization from the state. In other country. countries, the requirements may be lighter for small-scale water use. n In Kenya, for example, you need a permit to abstract water, ●What institutions are responsible for the administration of and in addition, an irrigation license to do so, from two different the water resources regulatory system, and at what level? authorities. n Public incentives and subsidies in regard to land and water: The consultant will present which kind of public support (at central and local level) is available for smallholder In South Africa, a general authorization allows irrigation abstraction below certain thresholds (maximum flow-rates and total volume/day). The water users simply have to inform farmers (individually and in groups) for small-scale irrigation government (to allow monitoring), but do not have to obtain development. The consultant will present both streamlined permission for their usage. Irrigators above that threshold, approaches as well as projects and program-based approaches and however, have to apply for a water-use license to abstract for will compare them in terms of the kind of irrigation development irrigation (among other uses). fostered and the kind of support provided. Under each approach, the consultant will analyze the process from the expression of interest to the actual irrigation development and provide a will elaborate on the role of the water resource authority, agency judgement on the level of formalization of such a process. Finally, or similar body, within the context of the Water Act. Finally, the the consultant will critically analyze how the current avenues consultant will summarize how the aspect of water permitting in available to farmers to request support are aligned to the roles irrigation development has been tackled in on-going irrigation and responsibilities of the various stakeholders as analyzed in the development projects and programs. n previous point. Land registration and land administration: The diagnosis ●n Water licensing/permitting: The consultant will investigate and assess the policy and legal requirements for water abstraction for small-scale irrigation development (individually and looks at the tenure governance system with the main intention of understanding the level of tenure security it grants to primary and secondary right holders (those leasing or using the in groups), the stakeholders involved (including at basin level), and land of others). The aim is not to make the land issue onerous, but will highlight the difference (if any) between theoretical requirements to understand the land tenure context on the ground in relation and practice. An analysis of the documentation required, and of the to FLID and identify and mitigate risks. The transparency, strength cost associated with the permitting will be included. The consultant and legitimacy of the system define the level of tenure security of M3-26 O U T LIN E TERM S OF REF EREN C E FOR THE WATER AN D L A ND P OL ICY A ND L EG A L D IAG NOSTIC i-BOX 3.6 the smallholder irrigation farmers and secondary rights holders. The consultant will elaborate on: ●n Farmers groups: The consultant will investigate and assess the policy and legal requirements for farmers’ groups 1 The type of tenure governance system – whether it is formal (dictated and enforced by statutory authorities); customary (dictated and enforced by customary authorities); plural (regulated for small-scale irrigation development. Consultant will identify the legal framework mix that would facilitate compliance with obligations set in agreements between farmers and private and by parallel systems which may be harmonized and mutually public entities in irrigation development and contract farming, and reinforcing, or conflicting); or informal (regulated by temporary the enforcement mechanisms, without jeopardizing their rights. ●n rules agreed among occupants in a legal and physical space that is Monitoring and evaluation (M&E): The consultant will beyond the scope or enforcement capacity of formal and customary analyze the available tools used by the public stakeholders systems in place). There is no fixed correlation between the level supporting small-scale irrigation development for M&E. n of formality of a tenure system and the level of tenure security but Conclusion: Following the analysis of these key understanding the type of tenure allows security of tenure then elements, the consultants will propose necessary support to be assessed. Instead, single systems (formal or customary) and mechanisms for further development of support processes of harmonized plural systems (blended/mutually reinforcing) tend to farmers leading the development of irrigated agriculture. guarantee a higher level of tenure security than blended/conflicting and informal systems. In contexts where plural systems coexist and the quality of governance is sound, the highest level of tenure security is typically granted by blended/mutually reinforcing (hybrid) systems. 2 The quality of tenure governance – the diagnostic must evaluate to what degree the system(s) in place cater for all existing primary and secondary right holders; set transparent rules and safeguards for acquisition and transfer of land; have the capacity to address disputes and enforce decisions on the ground; and be understood and perceived as legitimate by all stakeholders. The quality criteria are not always directly related. For example, a system may be perceived as highly legitimate and have the capacity for management and enforcement of rights, yet still discriminate against vulnerable groups. It may not allow for owners to sell their land, while still granting users a very high level of security. O U T L I N E T E R M S O F RE F E RE N C E FO R THE WATER AN D LAN D POLICY AN D LEGAL DIAGN OSTIC M3-27 i-BOX 3.7 Guidance on scoring the policy and legal factor Specific questions regarding water policies livelihoods, increased rural stability and food security, and their and laws economic contribution? It is important to understand the status of customary land and water law within the same area. This helps to identify what the immediate options are in terms of securing water rights. It requires an understanding of the n● Do smallholders have difficulty in accessing and using water sources in practice, or are they constrained by permitting requirements and the enforcement thereof? Regulations may waiver the need for a permit when the possibility that there may be plural legal systems operating in the area abstraction volume is below a certain volumetric threshold – (statutory law, formal and informal customary norms, and human rights such as when provided for in a general authorization for small principles) that may provide both opportunities and/or constraints in users. It is common that onerous requirements for licenses, and relation to access to water rights for FLID. This analysis may also give environmental and water rise to the recognition that there is a need for legislative amendment The presence of a pump, resource authorizations, to better protect the water rights of small-scale farmers. Particular regardless of size, apply to any irrigator considerations in regard to water regulations should include: (even the smallest) who typically triggers the need n● What are the constraints to implementation of the legislation? Can these be addressed with some level of support, or are they more fundamental challenges that cannot easily be addressed? for an irrigation license or a water permit. is not farming purely for subsistence purposes. The presence of a pump, n● regardless of size, typically ●What is the status of implementation of legislation on the triggers the formal ground? In a number of countries, implementation of regulatory requirement for an irrigation license and/or a water permit. instruments such as permits is only partial/weak, and this may have These demanding legal provisions potentially present a implications with regards to securing water rights for large numbers of constraint to farmers using water in practice, especially when smallholder farmers. water resources are stressed. n● What is the actual practice in the country with regards to water rights for smallholder farmers? The options may include requiring permits or permissions for small-scale farmers; recognition n ●Does the law make provision for different kinds of permits (refer to i-box 3.5), either collective or targeted? Collective permits are when allocation of water (formal or otherwise) of customary law for small-scale farmers in is afforded through a permit to a water user association or selected areas; collective permits; and/or de facto “turning a blind eye” similar local body, which then allocates the water to individual to unauthorized water use by small-scale users. irrigators. Targeted permits prioritize permitting, monitoring, and n ●Are smallholder irrigators acknowledged in policy, such that their water use is prioritized, given their contribution to improved compliance for the largest users, but this is not applied equally for large and small users. M3-28 GUIDAN C E ON SCO R ING THE P OL ICY A ND L EG A L FACTOR i-BOX 3.8 Bricolage – pragmatic institution-building process “Institutional bricolage” is a process by which people draw the context of FLID, such a system must be able to support and on a range of existing practices to create institutions that are promote the agency of smallholder farmers in accessing and using a dynamic “mix of the ‘modern’ and ‘traditional’, ‘formal’ and water to enhance productivity. ‘informal’”. – Cleaver (2001, 26) A hybrid water use rights system might, for example, see the use of strictly enforced permits for high-impact users, while Supporting FLID calls for a regulatory system that meets the other instruments are used needs of both the regulator and the water users. Access to water This approach supports to enable the legal water rights for FLID is dependent on the formal regulatory system the development of uses of small-scale users, (legislation and regulations), as well as the status of implementation institutions, including which could include: legal of the law in the particular country/catchment. In many contexts, recognition of customary regulatory approaches, implementation of legislation is extremely poor. law; collective permits that are directly relevant administered through to the context on the Water resources management is not an end in itself, but a local water management mechanism to enable the use of water to support the attainment of ground, rather than the institutions; or exemptions local and national development objectives. An effective regulatory importing of apparent of domestic and small- system is one that can be implemented within existing human, “best practice” which may scale productive uses of technical and financial resource constraints in a way that best not work well in the local water with prioritized legal achieves the desired outcome. Such a system must also protect context. status. Development of those that are most vulnerable in the face of market failure: poor/ such an approach is highly small-scale water users and the environment. Appropriate hybrid dependent on the context in approaches can reduce transaction costs for both individual and each country, including the legal and regulatory system(s), the enterprise level water users (Schreiner and Van Koppen 2018). In socio-economic context, and water resources availability. BRI CO L AGE – PRAG M ATI C I N STI TU TI O N -B UILDIN G PROC ESS M3-29 i-BOX 3.9 1. Targeted use of permits and/or categorization of permits by Hybrid water law level of impact Where the diagnostic assessment identifies that legal weaknesses ●2. Recognition of customary law with equal legal standing can constrain an intervention – particularly when there is water ●3. Prioritization of water use for smallholder irrigators stress – a hybrid water law approach is the best response. A hybrid law system that combines statutory and customary water law can ●4. Exemptions from permit applications with a raised threshold provide a strong framework, particularly in a context of limited state capacity for implementing water permit systems. In building a ●5. Collective permits hybrid water rights system there are a number of tactical elements or practices that can be used to arrive at a workable composite system. The key practices are listed here and detailed below. 1 Targeted use of permits and/or categorization of permits by level of impact 1 Targeted use In many parts of the developing world, and extensively in Africa, of permits water use permits have been incorporated into water legislation as a tool for controlling water use. However, as has been examined, 2 Recognition of implementation of these permit systems has been partial at best customary law in most countries, and many of the water permit systems currently in place neither protect nor effectively address the water use of smallholder farmers. This calls for a more nuanced approach to “regulating” small-scale water use for irrigation. Hybrid Permits can be an extremely useful water regulation tool if applied Water Rights appropriately. However, the use of permits requires sufficient 5 Collective technical, administrative and financial capacity to assess permit permits applications, issue permits with appropriate conditions, and enforce 3 Prioritisation adherence to the conditions. If this cycle is not completed, the of water use simple issuing of permits is not an effective regulatory approach. In the context of limited state resources the application of a differentiated approach to regulation would enable those resources to be focused on regulating and controlling the (generally) small 4 Permit number of large water users, enabling the state to complete the exemption cycle described above and, through this, to regulate the highest M3-30 HYBR ID WATER L AW i-BOX 3.9 impact water use. At the other end of the scale, in order to support The use of permits to regulate high-impact users requires poverty eradication through local economic development (and, consideration of the threshold for which a permit is needed, or, in this case, farmer-led irrigation development), the state should as in the Kenyan case, a series of thresholds for differing levels focus on supporting and enabling the use of water by smallholder of water use. Setting the threshold too high may lead to over-use farmers and encouraging local level regulation based, where of water in some areas, while setting it too low will continue to appropriate, on customary living law. This would enable the most criminalise the water use of small-scale users. Determination effective use of limited state resources in achieving sustainable use of the threshold also requires a consideration of the capacity of water resources while supporting local economic development of the state to implement a water use permit system across a and poverty eradication. Developing such a differentiated approach large number of users. The lower the threshold, the higher the needs to take into account that, in many cases, a dual legal system number of permits that must be assessed, issued, monitored and (statutory and customary) is often already operating. enforced. In addition, while the categorisation of permits is an extremely useful tool, having too many categories becomes administratively cumbersome and confusing to water users, while too few Focus regulation effort here categories undermines the purpose. It should be recognized that it is also often possible, within the water legislation, to have different requirements per catchment, which also allows efforts to Strict be focused on those areas where competition is particularly severe, regulation through rather than on catchments where there is still an abundance of permits water. In closing basins or ecologically sensitive areas, the category Increasing volume per thresholds might be lower than in unstressed catchments. If such permit an approach is not permitted under existing legislation, a legislative Increasing number of amendment may be required. water users Protection of 2 water rights, provision of Recognition of customary law support and enabling with equal legal standing conditions “The greater recognition of the customary is also an element of the social: a recognition and acceptance of the norms by which the rural poor live their lives can only be of benefit to Figure 1 Regulation of high water use through permits vs protection of large the whole society.” numbers of small-scale irrigation farmers (Schreiner and Van Koppen 2018) – McAuslan (2006, vii) H Y B R I D WAT E R L AW M3-31 i-BOX 3.9 As has been discussed, a large percentage of the land in Africa is function in a bricolage of traditional, democratic and statutory managed and accessed under customary law, and yet little of the systems (Logan 2009). water legislation in African countries recognizes the implications or potential of this for improved water management. There is, however, Government officials, on the other hand, are often faced with increasing interest in how this issue can be resolved, with ongoing a mismatch between the statutory tools and capacity at hand, research being conducted into the customary water regimes of and the lived reality on the ground – statutory water law seldom Africa and how to align statutory and customary practices. Studies provides guidance to them on how to respond to customary have already shown that customary laws and in­ stitutions can be water law practices. Constitutional and statutory law in Africa very effective in resolving local level water use disputes (Ramazzotti shows varied responses to customary law, ranging from equal 2008; Nkonya 2006). standing with statutory law (usually somewhat generically at the Constitutional level and without specific reference to water law) At the international level, there has been recognition of the through to provisions that apply to customary land tenure, or to a importance of customary law for sustainable natural resource specific ethnic group. In general, however, water law in Africa has management (see, for example, Principle 22 of the Rio Declaration failed to grapple effectively with the implications and potential of on Environment and Develop­ ment). However, statutory water law in customary water law. Africa has generally failed to address this, so that customary water law is largely ignored or overridden by statutory law. Customary As an example, the Malawi Water Resources Act (2013) requires law has been more widely recognized in other sectors, such as that the issuing of a water permit must be subject to “the land tenure, and there are lessons that can be learned from these protection of the environment and water resource from which approaches to inform an approach in the water sector. the abstraction is made, the stream flow regime, and other ing uses existing and potential use of the water resource, includ­ The challenge is to give customary water law a role in water es.” (s43b). It does by virtue of customary use rights and practic­ management equal to statutory rights. The benefits of doing so are not, however, explicitly give customary water rights equal status to straightforward: customary law is already in place on the ground statutory water rights. across most of Africa, and operates with local legitimacy on a daily basis; statutory water law has not reached many of those governed In the Tanzania Water Resources Management Act (2009, section under customary law due to the financial and human capacity 52), customary water rights “held by any person or community in constraints of the state. Harnessing the power of customary law ognized and [are] in every aspect of a watercourse shall be rec­ to govern water for small-scale irrigation can, therefore, address ­fect to a granted right”. This is an important equal status and ef both the benefits of local legitimacy and agency and the limitations step forward, but these rights are essentially weakened by the of the state. It is a win-win situation. It also responds to the lived requirement that such rights must be recorded through the permit reality of Africans – surveys conducted in 15 African countries show application procedures within two years from the promulgation of that people living in contexts of legal pluralism recognise that they the Act. The poor capacity of the state and the lack of information M3-32 HYBR ID WATER L AW i-BOX 3.9 provided to communities on this matter means that these rights Benefits Limitations have largely been eroded in legal terms, although the water use continues on the ground. n Already in place across n Formal recognition may require large parts of Africa legislative amendment, which can Formal recognition of customary water law and rights is an take time n Reduced administra­ tive important step in supporting and enabling the water use of small- burden on the state for n No written record of water use scale irrigators across Africa. Its recognition can enable water rights authorizing water use rights is provided to the user for use derived from customary law to be of equal legal status to those in raising finance with formal banking n Affordable, acces­sible institutions derived under statutory law and permits. This can be a blanket and carries legitimacy approach for the whole country, or specific to geographical areas or among small­ holder farmers, n May be weak in addressing issues identified communities. There may be other customary law regimes including for dispute of gender and other traditionally resolution marginalized groups (e.g. land tenure or forestry tenure) which may serve as a basis for 3 this approach. It is important, however, that customary water law be applicable only to communities that are truly governed by such law Prioritization of water use for and does not open a door for external opportunists to claim water smallholder farmers under a system that does not apply to them. Prioritization of water use for small-scale irrigators can provide To prevent potential abuse of the system by outsiders, or by significant protection for their water use, particularly in times of community members wanting to use significantly high volumes that water shortage. Currently, most of the water legislation in Africa might impact negatively on other users, it may be appropriate to set allows for some degree of prioritization of water use – whether as a limit of abstraction above which customary law would not apply. an absolute priority, or a priority that is to be used in times of water The challenge is to set a limit that is sufficiently high to support shortage to inform curtailment options. small-scale irrigation without enabling water-grabbing by those Most of the current legislation grants the highest priorities to water with sufficient resources to do so. for ecological functioning (environmental flows) and water for If customary water law is not formally or sufficiently recognised in basic human needs. The latter is usually defined in relation to the statutory law, this may require policy and legislative amendments. human right to water, and is seen as water for drinking, cooking ment of regulations or Where it is recognised, the develop­ and hygiene. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), subsidiary legislation that clearly define the water rights and this amounts to 50–100 liters per person per day. Beyond this, responsibilities may enable better protection of the rights for prioritization is generally according to broad water use categories. small-scale farmers and a better understanding, on the part of One of these categories is often agricultural water use or irrigation. government officials and other water users, of the nature and extent The gathering of all types of irrigation under one category has made of such rights. the targeted protection of small-scale irrigators’ water use difficult. H Y B R I D WAT E R L AW M3-33 i-BOX 3.9 The need to prioritize the water use of smallholder irrigators is driven by the fact that they are generally highly vulnerable to water constraints, having limited financial resources or insurance capacity 4 Exemptions from permit applications with a raised threshold to fall back on in times of water shortage. Since smallholder The exemption of a certain level of water use from permit irrigation in Africa plays a huge role in meeting the human right to requirements is contained in most of the water legislation across food security and nutrition of millions of rural households, it can sub-Saharan Africa. Often referred to as water for primary purposes, be argued strongly that their water use should be accorded a high this generally covers little other than a very small amount for priority (Hellum, Kameri-Mbote, and Van Koppen 2015). domestic water use, domestic food gardening and the watering of livestock for domestic pur­ poses. It does not include abstraction for Priorities of water use established under statutory water law smallholder irrigation. A relatively easy approach to enabling the should inform the allocation of water rights and be called on in water use of smallholder irrigators is to raise the threshold of such dispute resolution issues. Critically, they should play a role in exempted water use. the determination of curtailments imposed on water use during droughts and other water shortages. Based on a requirement of 2 500 m3 per annum to irrigate one hectare of land (this amount varies according to crop, number of Thus, in order to support small-scale irrigation, in the prioritization rotations and rainfall, but is a conservative estimate), large numbers of water-use sectors, smallholder and large commercial irrigation of small-scale farmers are currently required by law to apply for a should be treated differently. A higher priority should be given permit (or, in Kenya, permission to use water and, in South Africa, to smallholder irrigation, since such users are economically a general authorisation to use water). Exemption thresholds could vulnerable should they lose their access to water for even one be raised significantly – for example, to not less than 5 000 m3 per season, and because of the critical importance of their water use annum, and preferably closer to 12 500 m3 per annum. To support in meeting household and national food se­ curity needs. The rules such water abstractions, it may be necessary in some areas to for curtailment of water use during water shortages may also need construct water-storage facilities or curtail to some degree the to be reviewed to protect the water use of smallholder irrigators water use of commercial farms, large industry and urban areas. during times of water shortage. However, it must be recognized that the exemption of small-scale Benefits irrigation from the requirement to apply for a permit does not necessarily protect this water use in times of water shortages, n Little to no administrative burden on the state unless accompanied by the prioritization of smallholder irrigation n Easy to introduce referred to in the section above, and/or formally given the same status as permitted water use. Category A water use in Kenya, for n Protects the water rights of smallholder irrigators, including in times example, which does not require a permit, is formally recognized as of drought having the same legal standing as water use under a permit. M3-34 HYBR ID WATER L AW i-BOX 3.9 Benefits on the water resource. Permit applications in this category are n Easy to put in place handled by the [WRMA] Regional Office” (WRMA 2007a, 67). n Minimal administrative burden on the state Category C is defined as “water use activity deemed by virtue of its scale to have a measurable impact on the water resource. n Gives rural smallholders protected rights to use water if Permit applications in this category will be determined by accompanied by prioritization of small-scale irrigation Regional Offices in consultation with the Catchment Area Committees [CAACs]” (WRMA 2007a, 67). Category D covers “water use activity which involves either international waters, two different catchment areas or is of a Example of Kenya permit categories large scale or complexity and which is deemed by virtue of its scale to have a measurable impact on the water resource. In Kenya, exemptions from permit or permission requirements Permit applications in this category will be determined by cover water for domestic purposes only. In terms of permits/ [WRMA] Regional Offices in consultation with the Catchment permissions, there are four categories, A–D. Area Advisory Committees and approval by [Water Resources Category A water use is defined as “water use activity deemed Management] Authority Headquarters” (WRMA 2007a, 67). by virtue of its scale to have a low risk of impacting the water The thresholds for each of these categories were determined resource. Applications in this category will be determined by according to three principles: the [Water Resources Management Authority (WRMA)] Regional Offices” (WRMA 2007a, 67). This category of water use does not n The need for flexibility so that different thresholds can be require a permit but does require that the water user makes an applied to different regions and sub-catchments in response to application to the WRMA regional office, thus allowing the water resource availability and the state of the resource use to be registered with the state. Should the water use meet the criteria for Category A, a letter of permission to use the water n The need to manage the task of issuing permits – so that is issued. This still imposes an administrative burden on the permit applications for complex situations, over-stressed or state, although less of a burden than the issuing of a permit. It over-polluted sub-catchments or aquifers can receive adequate also provides the water user with a written authorization, which scrutiny and simple permit applications can be approved is of equal legal standing to a permit. In this sense, it gives legal quickly and easily protection to the small-scale water user (WRMA 2007b). n The extent to which the permit conditions need to be Category B is defined as “water use activity deemed by virtue enforced (WRMA 2007b). of its scale to have the potential to make a significant impact H Y B R I D WAT E R L AW M3-35 i-BOX 3.9 Example of General Authorizations: 5 Collective permits South Africa Collective permits are fairly widely used in the irrigation sector, often through the allocation of water through a permit to a local water In South Africa, the National Water Act (1998) enables management body, such as a water user association. The local body then the use of General Authorizations which can specify allocates the water to individual irrigators (Ramazzotti 2008; FAO 2016). In volumes of water that can be used in defined areas without the need for a permit. Registration of water use such cases, the use of collective permits is dependent on there being a above a certain quantity is still required, and in recent local institution that is able to hold such a permit, allocate water among years the requirement has been put in place that users members and handle dispute resolution. Collective permits can be used to apply for a General Authorization as with Category support allocation of water to smallholder irrigators, including those using A water use in Kenya. The conditions under which water under customary law. Not all legislation specifically allows for the water may be used can be specified in the General use of collective permits, but it may be possible to use this approach even Authorization. where it is not specifically referred to as such. Originally, the General Authorization was intended to be used as an enabling tool that could reduce the administrative burden imposed on the state by water Example of collective permits use permits. However, due to the high levels of water competition in South Africa, the levels have been set so The Water Resources Act of Malawi (2013) allows for the specific use low that it has become a restrictive, rather than enabling of collective permits, stating: tool. Nonetheless, it has the potential to be used as a tool to support the water rights of small-scale irrigators. 131.(1) An association of water users [...] may be established by the It can be targeted to support specific water use, specific ple majority of a group of water users, at agreement of the sim­ groups of people using water, or particular geographical their initiative or also at the initiative of the Authority, for one or a areas of water use (Anderson et al. 2007). combination of the following purposes: This has the potential to be a powerful tool, which (a) to manage, distribute and conserve water from a source used could even be used to give legal status to customary jointly by the members of the association; water use. Despite this, it is not widely present in African (b) to acquire and operate an abstraction licence or a discharge water law, so that, in most countries, amendment of the permit under this Act; national legislation would be re­ quired to introduce it. bers of the association related (c) to resolve conflicts between mem­ to the joint use of a water resource. M3-36 HYBR ID WATER L AW i-BOX 3.9 Research into the nature of effective local water management institutions suggests that the bricolage approach, where people “consciously and unconsciously draw on existing social and cultural arrangements to shape institutions in response to changing situations” (Cleaver 2002) creates strong and effective institutions that draw on the best of different formal and informal traditions. Effective functioning of local institutions is also supported by clear roles and responsibilities, and local legitimacy. Such local structures are important in local water management and in the application of collective permits. In Tanzania, for example, River Committees allocate water from a specific stretch of river and are mandated to resolve conflicts over water use, including by smallholder irrigators, commercial farmers and municipalities (Komakech and Van der Zaag 2011). Benefits Limitations n Limited administrative burden n Requires water users to be on the state organized into a formal structure of some form, such as a water n Relatively affordable and user association accessible for organized rural small­holders n Does not accord for­ mal individual rights to farmers n Supports local man­agement and dispute resolution over local n Membership may fail to be water resources inclusive of all users of the same source H Y B R I D WAT E R L AW M3-37 i-BOX 3.10 Adaptive management The introduction of a hybrid water rights system is best done within a framework of adaptive management. Adaptive management, or learning by doing, ensures a structured approach to learning – with managers, technical experts, and stakeholders – in order to Design  Design hybrid water rights system continually improve the functioning of the system (Figure 1).  Determine scope, nature & intended outcome Adaptive management enables water managers to track the outcome of implementation of the hybrid water rights system Plan Capture implementation in relation to key indicators – such as access to water, impact & share learning & monitoring  Document lessons  Develop implementation on environmental flows, or levels of conflict over water – to  Share lessons Adaptive plan, including communication plan identify the problems and adjust the system as needed. Adaptive  Create learning environment management  Develop monitoring plan with key management intentionally and systematically facilitates ongoing for hybrid indicators minor adjustments to the entire management system – or, where water rights system significant challenges arise, major adjustments. The changes might require the introduction of a different tool, or configuration of tools, Analyze available from the toolbox (i-box 3.9). & adapt Implement  Prepare data for analysis & monitor  Analyze results  Implement hybrid water rights system  Adapt hybrid water rights system as  Monitor results appropriate Figure 1 Steps in adaptive management applied to hybrid water rights M3-38 A DA P TIVE MA NAG EMENT i-BOX 3.11 Decentralizing governance to local levels Overview reduced risks, because they plan and invest with greater confidence). To achieve these benefits, a set of parallel measures is needed: The institutional and regulatory arrangements established at basin, sub-catchment and local levels have to be able to respond effectively to changing resource availability and environmental conditions. Users have to be involved and informed, and their n Participation in rule-making and in designing monitoring systems: Farmers should participate in the formulation of rules, monitoring and communication arrangements, and be abstractions adjusted, monitored and managed. supported with organizational capacity development for local water monitoring. Flow monitoring and communication instruments, A key tactic in achieving transparency, accountability and ensuring transparency, need to be linked to basin institutions. inclusion of irrigation farmers who have established themselves outside of the administrative and regulation fold is through decentralizing governance to the lowest appropriate level. This means establishing or supporting water user groups, irrigation n Agronomic and marketing efforts: Increase enterprise profitability through increased production and strengthened market linkages. n organizations and water user associations Technical energy and irrigation innovations: Increase water productivity (both crop and financial water productivity) Involving irrigation farmers in through improved on-farm soil-water management and lower-cost decentralization and regulation processes pumps as well as on-farm application systems that use less water. n Many irrigation farmers who have developed their own systems, Local water governance interventions: Reduce risks of and participate where farm sizes are smaller, do not have permits water supply failure through localized water governance even when legally required. Inclusion into the regulatory system arrangements, explicit rules for when the resource is low, and simple, means both restrictions on their water access and an increased transparent monitoring infrastructure so farmers in a locality are financial burden in the form of fees. These disincentives need aware of other farmers’ water uses. Information and communication to be actively countered in an intervention design so that the technology (ICT) can be highly enabling in this regard. net benefit of being in a regulatory arrangement is positive. If irrigation farmers are going to be included in decentralized water Guidance on water governance processes and intervention principles management with tighter regulation and enforcement processes, is provided elsewhere in this Guide. Through a combination of their abstractions will be constrained at some point. To participate transparent decentralization of regulation roles and functions, and willingly, they have to derive greater benefits from being part of by ensuring net gains in profitability at the same time, more inclusive, the process, and most likely with less water. Benefits arise in the sustainable and equitable water resources management in a FLID form of increased profitability and reliability of water supply (i.e. context is possible in practice. DECE N T RAL I ZI N G G OV E RN A N C E TO LO CAL LEV ELS M3-39 i-BOX 3.11 Basin institutions – an overview of roles and The sharing of responsibilities among institutions varies by country. responsibilities Also, the configurations of responsibilities vary depending on the country. At times, basin institution administrative boundaries do The river basin, or catchment, is the hydrological unit for managing not coincide with hydrological or basin boundaries, resulting in water resources. River basin boundaries overlap with administrative governance challenges. An example is where a basin traverses boundaries, with basin institutions falling within two or more two or more administrative boundaries, as is the case with sub- administrative areas. As such, responsibilities for water resources catchments of the Orange-Senqu River basin. management institutions and decision-making span multiple groups with overlapping boundaries. Water user associations The configurations of responsibilities (and nomenclature) of basin Basin institutions institutions vary with the country. In some countries, such as South Basin institutions, also referred to as water resources management Africa, Uganda, Zambia and Tanzania, a Water User Association (WRM) institutions, are those institutions that share the (WUA) has broad responsibility for water resources planning and responsibilities for water resources management in a river basin. water use monitoring and They include water authorities, catchment authorities (referred to in The legal responsibilities coordination. In these countries, some countries as catchment councils), sub-catchment councils, of a Water User separate entities of irrigation and water user associations. The hierarchical presentation of WRM Association varies organizations (on irrigation institutions in a river basin is shown in Figure 1. schemes) and water user significantly in different groups (collectives of individual countries. It is important small abstractors) would be to confirm their the first level of involvement WRMA irrigation management of irrigation farmers. In other versus sub-catchment countries, such as in draft water mandate roles to avoid legislation in Nigeria, and more Catchment Council miscommunications and widely globally, water user wrong assumptions. associations are specifically dedicated to irrigation scheme Figure 1 Sub-catchment Council water management functions. Hierarchy of They have no wider mandate for sub-catchment planning, WRM institutions monitoring and coordination. Water User Association The composition of a water user association includes individual or private irrigators, irrigation organizations, rural and urban water M3-40 DEC EN TRALIZ ING G OVER NA NCE TO LOCA L L EVEL S i-BOX 3.11 users, and any other water users in the catchment. Representation Where WUAs have a more limited irrigation scheme mandate, in a typical WUA is shown in Figure 2. Irrigation farmers who their main functions include water allocation, and operation and have established themselves through FLID processes would fall maintenance (O&M) of the irrigation system itself. Responsibilities under this fourth tier of WRM institutions, the WUAs, and likely be also include the collection and management of user fees from organized in water user groups around a shared river (bank), or members of the WUA to cover O&M costs (Aarnoudse, Closas aquifer in a limited locality (within a few kilometers of each other). and Lefore 2018). In some countries revenue collection is the responsibility of the catchment council, whereas in others it falls under the WUA. As such, water user associations need to have capacity for revenue collection and management. Irrigators  Irrigation Rural water supply n Farmers or irrigators are part of water user associations (WUAs). n  Domestic  Livestock In some cases, for example in Ethiopia, separate WUAs for irrigation, known as Irrigation Water WUA Urban water users User Associations (IWUA), also exist. n  Domestic  Industrial IWUAs are more focused on irrigation-related functions. For example, in Ethiopia, the tasks of Other IWUAs are strictly limited to the management, operation,  Other livelihoods usage maintenance of an irrigation and drainage system, and (e.g. fisheries, artisanal purposes) watershed management and protection. (Lempériere et al. 2014) Figure 2 WUA composition when there is a sub-catchment mandate in law n In some countries, for example Kenya, the Water Resources Authority (WRA) is responsible for the national water strategy, regulation and use, policy, permits, and collection of water fees. DECE N T RAL I ZI N G G OV E RN A N C E TO LO CAL LEV ELS M3-41 i-BOX 3.12 Gender sensitivity and hybrid water rights Land is much more than a physical or economic asset. Control of land and resources determines power relationships. Across different cultures, land further translates as identity, culture, development, food, shelter and human security. In practice, female farmers often experience intersecting marginalization that takes place on the basis of gender, race, ethnicity, geography and income. Where there is increasing demand for limited water resources, poor and elderly women are most disadvantaged in access to water, and permit systems have failed to address this issue. Indeed, studies have shown that permit systems tend to strengthen the water access of larger water users relative to smaller and poorer users (Hellum, Kameri-Mbote, and Van Koppen 2015). Female farmers (and other marginalised groups) often face difficulties in effectively participating in decision-making processes and operate under unfair laws and practices, not least around the ownership of land. Since water permits are often tied to land, women’s constrained access to land ownership simultaneously constrains their access to water. Most female farmers in Africa either own small pieces of land or do not own land at all. They also struggle to access finance, credit and information. Extension services often fail to meet the needs of female farmers. Water governance interventions must proactively respond to the needs of female smallholder farmers and to achieve this, an inclusive process is needed. The implications for water reform actions require attention to the steps of design, implementation, monitoring and adaptation of land and water rights (see Figure 1). These actions are likely to be most responsive to the needs of women when have the enabling characteristics described in (i-box 3.11). Figure 1 Responding to the needs of female farmers through their active involvement in the water institutions reform process (Schreiner and Van Koppen 2019) M3-42 GEN DER SENSITIVITY A ND HYBR ID WATER R IG HTS i-BOX 3.13 Ten characteristics of water regulation to support FLID processes The intended outcome of integrated water resources management is the coordinated development and management of water, land and related resources in order to maximize the resultant economic and social 3 wa­ It regulates and controls high impact users Not all water us­ers have the same potential impact on other ter users and on water resources. Some water users have particularly welfare in an equitable manner without compromising significant impacts, either due to the volume of water abstracted or to the sustainability of vital ecosystems. To achieve these the potential level of pollution from their activities. These users can be ends, an effective water use rights system is one with classified as high-im­ pact users, and it is particularly important that their the following elements: water use is strictly regulated and that requirements of water legislation such as prior notification and consultation are enforced. – Schreiner and Van Koppen (2018) 1 It supports sustainable and productive water use in the public interest A water use rights system should support the productive use 4 It protects ecological functioning of aquatic ecosystems The need to protect the ecolog­ ical functioning of aquatic ecosystems is very well recognized in water policy and legislation in and development of water in the public interest and in support Sub-Saharan Africa. Any water use rights system needs to be able to of national development goals, while ensuring that such water ensure that the ecological functioning of water resources is sufficiently use remains within eco­logically sustainable boundaries. tected, such as through the determination of an ecological reserve. pro­ 2 It provides legal protection for low-impact water users In striving to support rural development and the growth of 5 It is cost-effective, efficient, and makes optimal use of limited state resources The water use rights system should strive for maximum efficiency and smallholder agriculture for poverty eradication and improved cost-effectiveness both for the state and for the water users, aiming to food security, a water use rights system must provide at minimize financial and administrative burdens on both – and particularly least equal legal protection for the water use of low-impact on small abstractors and poor water users – while still retaining the core users. These include those who use small volumes of water effectiveness of the water use rights system. This also requires that where through collective or communal systems, relative to large the water use rights system is used as the basis for revenue generation water users. There is reason even to prioritize the water use for the water authority, rigorous assessments ensure that the internal of small abstractors above that of large users, particularly processes of the state are efficient, and also that the revenue generated in times of drought, as has been done in some countries in from users exceeds the cost of collecting the revenue. An efficient wa­ ter Latin America. use rights system ensures that limited state resources can be used for TE N CH ARACTE RI STI C S O F WATE R REG U LATION TO SUPPORT THE F LID PROC ESS M3-43 i-BOX 3.13 8 maximum develop­ mental impact, rather than being consumed by It is equitable, inclusive and gender sensitive unwieldy and difficult to implement regulatory requirements. dress The water use rights system must sufficiently ad­ 6 the water use needs and priorities of all water users and must It is administratively fair be designed to recognise and support the differentiated and Fairness does not im­ply a one-size-fits-all water rights looked water use needs and priorities of women, who often over­ regime. On the contrary, a differentiated system is required to ers and the constitute a large percentage of smallholder farm­ ensure administrative fairness in the context of significant economic majority of domestic water users in Sub-Saharan Africa. inequalities. A water use rights system should be responsive to the dif­ferent administrative, educational and financial capabilities of users, as well as requiring an ap­propriate level of effort from users dependent on the likely level of impact arising from their planned water use. This means that, for exam­ ple, the system should provide 9 It makes optimal use of polycentric and multi-level governance Climate variability and change, regulation of water use in easy application procedures for small abstractors, particularly those outlying areas, and limited state resources poses challenges in outlying areas and without access to the Internet, with much and uncertainties. It makes good sense that a water use rights higher demands of information and investigation for users with tiple system should be polycentric (i.e. there should be mul­ planned large-scale or high-impact water uses. centres of control), both within the state and other, non-state 7 ter management institutions and local systems such as local wa­ It serves to reduce conflict between water users and customary law systems. Decentralized yet nested systems of water support effective conflict resolution where necessary governance that have mechanisms for coordination across levels of Where there is competition over water, the water use rights system governance (local to national) and among various sectors are should reduce potential conflict by setting clear boundaries necessary to respond to the increasing levels of ongoing change for water use by different water users, as well as clear rules for in water availability and quality that is becoming the new normal constraining water use during times of water shortage. Where across the region. 10 conflict over water does arise, the water use rights sys­tem should provide a strong reference point for resolving the conflict. This It is participatory should include, where possible, priorities among different types of uses or users, or considerations for calculating such priorities. larly water users, should be Affected parties, particu­ The system should also ensure that adequate dispute resolution able to participate in management of water resources, including mechanisms are ac­ cessible to the poor and to those in outlying co-decision-making with managers, and could even administer rural areas, such as providing legal recognition for lo­ cal or elements of the water use rights system, particularly through local customary dispute resolution mechanisms as first instance avenues level institutions (Bhaduri et al 2014). This must include meaningful for conflict resolution. mechanisms for including traditionally marginalized water users. M3-44 TEN C HARACTERISTIC S OF WATER REGULATION TO S U P P ORT THE FL ID P R OCESS i-BOX 3.14 Mitigating potential negative impact on land tenure The key to mitigating the potential negative impact of irrigation governance system to streamline and secure processes for land development initiated by farmers when the diagnostic scores low on access and protection of tenure rights. These processes require the land tenure enabling environment is tenure security. Increasing a high investment in terms of technical backstopping and human tenure security is the one solution that can help address most resources, a variable investment in terms of time and limited tenure-related challenges. All tenure-related activities should be financial investment. guided by the principles of inclusion and participation, fit-for-purpose, If the priority is to identify and clarify rights, mapping and realistic planning, sustainability and sound land disputes resolution. documentation of existing land tenure rights may be the most Depending on the context, the type of challenges, the specific appropriate option. In the last few decades, technology objectives pursued in securing tenure rights, and the type of developers and project managers have joined forces to explore investment, a range of interventions may be considered with how to secure tenure rights through recording, inventory and different associated costs in terms of time, technical capacity, and mapping them efficiently and effectively. The costs of mapping, financial and human resources. as well as the expected impact on tenure security, are variable and will depend on what has to be mapped and the specific If there is a need for structural changes in the land rights framework objective pursued. A community-driven exercise aiming primarily to achieve long-term tenure security (i.e. if rights are not recognized at clarifying rights and resolving internal disputes will not require or protected by the current system, and this is considered to be many resources. If the aim is to strengthen the right through an insurmountable obstacle to the development of farmer-led formal recognition, costs will be higher. The effects of mapping on irrigation), there may be scope for a land policy reform process or a tenure security may differ if resilience and strength are variable, tenure governance reform process, including land and water. These but they are usually immediate. lengthy processes require high investments in terms of human, If the priority is to create space for recognition and protection financial and time resources, but are the only avenue to achieve of secondary rights and right holders within a sound tenure long-lasting systemic changes. governance system, local processes such as awareness raising, If the existing framework does provide space to further secure facilitation and mediation of local dialogue, or participatory tenure rights, capacity development targeting land service providers planning, may be an appropriate option. They are locally driven, (statutory or customary) can effectively empower the existing tenure generate a high sense of ownership and are affordable. M I T I GAT I N G P OTE N TI A L N EG ATI V E I M PACT ON LAN D TEN URE M3-45 i-BOX 3.14 References M3-46 M ITIGATIN G POTEN TIAL NEG ATIVE IMPACT ON L A ND TENU R E Aarnoudse, E., A. Closas, and N. Lefore. 2018. “Water User Komakech, H.C., and P. van der Zaag. 2011: “Understanding the Associations: A Review of Approaches and Alternative Emergence and Functioning of River Committees in a Catchment Management Options for Sub-Saharan Africa.” IWMI Working of the Pangani Basin, Tanzania.” Water Alternatives 4 (2): 197-222. Paper no. 180, International Water Management Institute (IWMI), Langford, M., and A. Russell, eds. 2017. The Human Right to Water: Colombo. doi: 10.5337/2018.210 Theory, Practice and Prospects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Anderson, A., G. Quibell, J. Cullis, and N. Ncapayi. 2007. “General Press. doi:10.1017/9780511862601. Authorisations as a Tool to Promote Water Allocation Reform in Lempériere, P., F. Hagos, N. Lefore, A. Haileslassie, and S. Langan. South Africa.” Law, Environment and Development Journal 3 (2): 2014. Establishing and Strengthening Irrigation Water Users 166-178. http://www.lead-journal.org/content/07164.pdf Associations (IWUAs) in Ethiopia: A Manual for Trainers.Colombo: Bhaduri, A., J. Bogardi, J. Leentvaar, and S. Marx, eds. 2014. The International Water Management Institute (IWMI). https://doi. Global Water System in the Anthropocene: Challenges for org/10.5337/2014.232 Science and Governance. Cham: Springer. Logan, C. 2009. “Selected Chiefs, Elected Councillors and Hybrid Cleaver, F. 2001. “Institutional Bricolage, Conflict and Cooperation in Democrats: Popular Perspectives on the Co-existence of Usangu, Tanzania.” IDS Bulletin 32 (4): 26-35. https://opendocs.ids. Democracy and Traditional Authority.” Journal of Modern African ac.uk/opendocs/handle/20.500.12413/8741 Studies 47 (1): 101–128. Cleaver, F. 2002. “Reinventing Institutions: Bricolage and the McAuslan, P. 2006. “Improving Tenure Security for the Poor in Africa.” Social Embeddedness of Natural Resource Management.” The Framework paper for the legal empowerment workshop - Sub- European Journal of Development Research 14 (2): 11-30. doi: Saharan Africa, Legal Empowerment of the Poor (LEP) Working 10.1080/714000425 Paper 1, Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation). 2016. Addressing Minh, T. T., S. Zwart, R. Appoh, and P. Schmitter. 2021. “Analyzing the Governance for Increased Effectiveness of Interventions at Country Enabling Environment to Enhance the Scaling of Irrigation and Level. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization. Water Management Technologies: A Tool for Implementers.” IWMI ___. 2017. “The State of Food and Agriculture: Leveraging Food Working Paper 197, International Water Management Institute Systems for Inclusive Rural Transformation”. Food and Agriculture (IWMI), Colombo. doi: https://doi.org/10.5337/2021.201 Organization (FAO), Rome. Nkonya, L.K. 2006. “Customary Laws for Access to and Management Hellum, A., P. Kameri-Mbote, and B. van Koppen, eds. 2015. Water of Drinking Water in Tanzania.” Law, Environment and Development is life: Women’s Human Rights in National and Local Water Journal 2 (1): 52-66. http://www.lead-journal.org/content/06050. Governance in Southern and Eastern Africa. Harare: Weaver Press. pdf RE FE R E N C ES M3-47 Obani, P. and J. Gupta. 2014. “Legal Pluralism in the Area of Human Managers. Pretoria: Pegasys Institute and Colombo: International Rights: Water and Sanitation.” Current Opinion in Environmental Water Management Institute (IWMI). https:/ /publications.iwmi. Sustainability 11: 63–70 org/pdf/H048975.pdf Ramazzotti, M. 2008. “Customary Water Rights and Contemporary Sumuni, P.M. 2016. “Influence of Institutional Set-Up on Performance Water Legislation: Mapping out the Interface.” FAO Legal Papers of Traditional Irrigation Schemes: A Case Study of Nyandira Ward, Online 76, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO_, Rome. Mvomero District Tanzania”. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, http://www.fao.org/3/a-bb109e.pdf Master thesis, Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro, Tanzania. Sakketa, T.G. 2018. “Institutional Bricolage as a New Perspective to Analyse Institutions of Communal Irrigation: Implications Thompson, E.P. 1991. Customs in Common: Studies in Traditional Towards Meeting the Water Needs of the Poor Communities.” Popular Culture. London: Merlin Press. World Development Perspectives 9: 1-11. https:/ /doi.org/10.1016/j. Woodhouse, P., B. J. Veldwisch, J. P. Venot, D. Brockington, H. wdp.2017.11.003 Komakech, and A. Manjichi. 2017. “African Farmer-Led Irrigation Salman, S.M. and D.D. Bradlow. 2006. Regulatory Frameworks for Development: Re-framing Agricultural Policy and Investment?” Water Resources Management: A Comparative Study. Washington, The Journal of Peasant Studies 44 (1): 213–33. DC: World Bank. WRMA (Water Resources Management Authority). 2007a. “The Schiavo-Campo, S., and P. Sundaram. 2000. To Serve and to Water Resources Management Rules, 2007.” Water Resources Preserve: Improving Public Administration in a Competitive World. Management Authority, Nairobi. Mandaluyong City: Asian Development Bank. http:/ /hdl.handle. WRMA (Water Resources Management Authority). 2007b. “Water net/11540/278 Resources Allocation Thresholds for Classification of Permits Schreiner, B. and, B. Van Koppen. 2018. Establishing Hybrid Water Documents.” Water Resources Management Authority, Nairobi. Use Right Systems in Sub-Saharan Africa. A practical Guide for M3-48 R EFER ENCES RE FE R E N C ES M3-49 M3-50 R EFER ENCES 4 The Farmer-led Irrigation Development Guide Module Knowledge FLID actors and their information networks About the Water Global Practice © 2021 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433 Launched in 2014, the World Bank Group’s Water Global Practice brings together financing, Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org knowledge, and implementation in one platform. This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The By combining the Bank’s global knowledge with findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily country investments, this model generates more reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the firepower for transformational solutions to help governments they represent. countries grow sustainably. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this Please visit us at www.worldbank.org/water or work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal WorldBankWater. follow us on Twitter at @  status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. About GWSP Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Since The World Bank encourages This publication received the support of the Global dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for Water Security & Sanitation Partnership (GWSP). noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. GWSP is a multidonor trust fund administered Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to by the World Bank’s Water Global Practice and World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC supported by Austria’s Federal Ministry of Finance, 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Denmark’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Netherlands’ Ministry Citation: of Foreign Affairs, the Swedish International Izzi, G., J. Denison and G.J. Veldwisch, eds. 2021. The Farmer-led Irrigation Development Development Cooperation Agency, Switzerland’s Guide: A what, why and how-to for intervention design. Washington, DC: World Bank. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs, the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, and the Photo credits: U.S. Agency for International Development. Cover and page 4: Mulugeta Ayene/WLE | Page 9: Stéfan Abric | Page 15: heylagostechie/Unsplash | Page 16, 36: Romain Vidal/Water Alternatives Please visit us at www.worldbank.org/gwsp or follow us on Twitter #gwsp. Contents ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 02 USING THE GUIDE 03 Knowledge – FLID actors and their information i-boxes 16 networks 04 4.1 Stakeholders in the FLID ecosystem 17 4.1 Irrigation actors and knowledge systems 06 4.2 Knowledge diagnostic TOR – example scope of work 19 4.2 Diagnostic and scoring 10 4.3 Guidance on scoring the knowledge factor 22 4.3 Examples of interventions 10 4.4 Key functions of an MSP host 24 4.5 Stakeholder categories involved in MSPs for FLID 26 4.6 MSP process model 27 4.7 Nine establishment lessons for FLID multi-stakeholder platforms 28 4.8 Farmer Field School highlights 30 4.9 Supply-side financing versus demand-side financing 32 4.10 Example of an information outreach and training strategy targeting different stakeholders 33 4.11 Main elements of a FLID-sensitive education focus 34 REFERENCES 36 Abbreviations and acronyms AEAS Agricultural Extension and Advisory Service IAP irrigation acceleration platform CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural ICT information and communication technology Research MSP multi-stakeholder platform CIG common interest group O&M operation and maintenance CPD continuing professional development PO producer organization FAO Food and Agriculture Organization SACCO savings and credit cooperative FFS farmer field school SWS smart water solutions FLID farmer-led irrigation development TOR Terms of Reference i-box information box WUA water users association M4-02 Using the guide Tips The main volume of the FLIDguide presents the core body of information that explains FLID and the process of intervention design. Thematic descriptions are included in seven modules. Information boxes (i-boxes) at the back of NAVIGATING THE GUIDE ji the Main Guide and each module provide additional detail, and hyperlinks To move quickly and easily between the interlinked throughout the guide access relevant external publications, websites, information, set up your PDF reader so that the animation clips and videos. j PREVIOUS VIEW and i NEXT VIEW buttons (as distinct from l previous page and k next page) are instaled on the toolbar at the top of your screen. You may then freely explore the document using the navigation pane on the left of your reader or the many hyperlinks provided in the text, and backtrack to the start by repeatedly hitting thej button. Info-Box Info-Box To instal the buttons (in Adobe Reader), i-Box i-Box Module 1 Module 7 ¢ Right-click anywhere on the toolbar and select Resource Info-Box Technology them in the Show Page Navigation Tools options; or Potential i-Box ¢ open the View drop down menu and select them from the Page Navigation options. The Farmer-led Alternatively, try using these keyboard shortcuts: Info-Box Info-Box i-Box Irrigation i-Box Development Windows: Press the alt key and t or u arrow Module 2 Guide Module 6 Mac: Press the command key and [ or ] square bracket Farmer Benefits A what, why and how-to for Markets intervention design PRINTING Info-Box i-Box Info-Box i-Box Office desktop printers cannot print to the edge of the Module 3 Info-Box Module 5 paper. To print pages of this document without losing any i-Box Policy & Legal Finance content, Module 4 Knowledge ¢ choose File > Print, and in the page sizing and handling area or pop-up menu, select Fit to FLIDguide Printable Area or Shrink to Printable Area. layers of information M4-03 4 Knowledge FLID actors and their information networks M4-04 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E The FLID knowledge environment is conducive K when key stakeholders systematically align their nowledge and innovation processes are strongly intertwined. Knowledge comes from efforts to respond to farmers’ experience and education – formal or informal. In real needs. a FLID context, knowledge comprises the facts, information, and skills about irrigation farming business where farmers are in the lead. Innovation is the process of creating new knowledge where novel ideas are put into practice, usually involving other actors. This module focuses on the process of innovation, involving the exchange of useful information, and adaptation of Across Africa, FLID farmers knowledge to new situations. Particular innovations around FLID farmers must be able to learn from each other by access to finance, market relations and irrigation technologies analyse their own situations, observation and informal are discussed in Modules 5, 6 and 7, respectively. The draw on their knowledge discussions, and they module first identifies the many different stakeholders who and proactively ask for new innovate constantly. These have relevant knowledge for farmers and describes their and relevant information, innovations travel by word often overlapping roles. The different ways in which farmers and then co-shape the of mouth, or with migrating acquire knowledge, and how the process and content suit technologies, methods, and farmers who bring new their different needs, is then outlined. The second part services they need to reach knowledge and practices of the module provides guidance on the diagnostic and their goals (Blum, Cofini, and to their resettled locations. scoring of the knowledge factor. The final section describes Sulaiman 2020). Farmers also gather new examples of public interventions that can catalyze FLID information from outsiders: through accelerated knowledge exchange, by fostering via private sector input multi-stakeholder platforms, farmer learning, and information (technology suppliers, aggregators), from extension officers and research dissemination through media outreach. Information and institutions, and from the internet. In all cases, making new ideas work communication technology (ICT) opportunities to support in their specific farming business and agro-ecological context requires knowledge and innovation dissemination are also outlined in farmers to experiment, observe and make adaptations. this module, and further addressed in subsequent modules. M4-05 4.1 Irrigation actors and knowledge systems Stakeholders and the roles they play Mixed roles and multiple motivations The provision of irrigation services to smallholder farmers Knowledge and services are needed across the multiple sectors in order involves many different stakeholders, across the technology, to catalyze FLID effectively. Gaps in the FLID services ecosystem can agronomy, marketing, information, and financial sectors. be debilitating for farmers, and to the value chain actors who rely on Stakeholders generating and sharing knowledge include successful farming to generate sales. Where effective knowledge and the farmers themselves, financial service providers, irrigation innovation networks lag, supply chain actors often go beyond their core equipment suppliers, market offtakers, input suppliers, functions to fill these knowledge gaps. universities, and government institutions. A full list of Development and national financing institutions, suppliers, and agri- stakeholders is included in i-box 4.1. business take on multiple roles to provide packaged solutions. They Few of these stakeholders, other than farmers themselves, extend their range of services beyond their core service to include are aware of the nature and extent of FLID processes elements that farmers are missing because of service gaps. Suppliers and how they, as service providers, could respond to the and agri-business offtakers often provide three critical services: financing, demands and wishes of a diverse range of farmers. Many agri-business support services, and technology. The mixed roles and the farmers experience gaps in service provision. There are overlapping services are illustrated in Table 4.1. notable exceptions where service providers engage Irrigation equipment suppliers often see their sales constrained by lack responsively across some or all related sectors and improve of credit and, sometimes, also agronomic knowledge related to irrigated the range and performance of their core products. More production. Consequently, they must fill the gap in credit provision and commonly, however, the modus operandi aims to convince agricultural advice even though many would prefer to avoid the risks farmers of the suitability of existing agronomic, technical, or and transaction costs. Yet, there is little choice if their sales are to be financial solutions. These are most often developed in offices increased. Agronomy and marketing support are also provided to increase or laboratories where there is little understanding of the farm profitability, and thereby reduce their clients’ risk of default. day-to-day realities of FLID. These marketplace actors often emphasize the need for heavy investment in technology, Agri-business and market offtakers need consistent volumes of quality marketing and training, based on what they know and think, produce, so they finance inputs and agronomy, and sometimes provide rather than what farmers need. A shift to a learning attitude, irrigation technology for farmers to secure their bulk produce supplies. based on farmer feedback, is called for – one where efforts Outgrower or contract farming arrangements, in which agricultural inputs are made to redesign products in response to farmers’ and services are provided on credit, are common in high value export expressed needs and varied circumstances. crops (such as vegetables, fruit and coffee). M4-06 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E Table 4.1 Overlapping roles of SERVICES actors across financing, agri-business support Financing Agri-business Irrigation equipment and technology services Pay-as- Financial Sales and Advisory Agri loans Tech loans Agronomy Marketing Warranty you-go literacy supply support Financing core core sometimes institutions service service STAKEHOLDERS Agri-business core core sometimes sometimes offtakers service service Irrigation core core equipment sometimes sometimes sometimes sometimes sometimes service service suppliers Financing institutions sometimes provide financial literacy services in addition to credit or link financial services to agronomic assessment and advice, mainly as a mechanism to reduce the risk of defaults. Their different core businesses, and motivations to move beyond their core services, influence the nature of the knowledge and information services that are provided. It is generally relatively large and commercial farmers who are reached through these services, but in outgrower arrangements, and in some irrigation equipment initiatives (such as solar pump suppliers [Thottoli, Zevenbergen, and Van Veldhuizen 2019]), smaller scale farmers are increasingly included in these combined service packages. The prevalence of these mixed services reflects the gap in access to credit, and in reliable information for smallholder farmers. The commonality in the responses highlights the strong links between the factors. While each of these value chain actors can play a different role in a pluralistic knowledge landscape, it requires effective coordination to minimize transaction costs, and to amplify the complementary benefits. M O DUL E 4 – K N OW L E D G E M4-07 Knowledge and innovation networks It is important to understand the networks of knowledge and innovation exchange, and their strengths and weaknesses, to Innovation and local adaptation do not depend on individual promote improved knowledge flows. Figure 4.1 depicts the actors, their capacities and strategies, but on the interactions in relations in an “open innovation network” around smallholder open innovation networks. It is therefore crucial to understand the irrigated agriculture. The relations and collaborations between collaborations and alignments between actors in a FLID ecosystem. these actors is what makes innovation and local knowledge In places where processes of interaction, knowledge exchange and adaptation work. social learning become effective, it is often because of knowledge brokers. Sometimes actors within these networks naturally assume government & government such roles, but they can also be facilitated externally. This is affiliated financial institutions particularly important around complex issues such as irrigation service irrigation providers technology development and because new trends call for reflection on suppliers appropriate responses. Agricultural knowledge systems are increasingly pluralistic (i.e. market farmers involving mixed public and private actors), more decentralized – with offtakers input farmer suppliers ICT and remote information access a key dynamic – and tending to organizations operate less hierarchically. There is also more of a partnership modality with farmers and farmer organizations, driven by academic & research “Pluralistic advisory service market forces (Blum, organizations media systems are characterized Cofini, and Sulaiman non- by the coexistence of 2020). The reason for this governmental organizations multiple public, private, is that product sales will Figure 4.1 and civil society service increase when farming Network of irrigation stakeholders providers, offering various activities are successful types of service; have diverse – thus, where gaps in financial resources; and Farmers are diverse and acquire knowledge knowledge and support use multiple sources of in different ways services are evident, it is in knowledge, technologies, the commercial interests Smallholder farmers are diverse in a variety of ways, which know-how and information.” of service providers to affects their agricultural knowledge needs and interests. For – Blum, Cofini, and Sulaiman (2020, 20) address these more instance, they have different education levels, contrasting scales directly. of enterprise, and are involved in the production of crops with M4-08 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E dissimilar requirements. They are also tied into value chains in myriad an authority such as a teacher, preacher, or specialist such as an ways. This farmer diversity is illustrated in Module 2, Figure 2.1. engineer, even when the information is wrong for their situation, and contradicts their lived experience and rational logic. They The smaller and poorer farmers are, the less likely they are to have may defer to such people on principle because the attributes of access to quality agricultural advice services (Bitzer et al. 2016). the messenger – such as education level, social status, vestiges Women and youth are also considerably constrained in their access of modernization, or material wealth – are perceived to be good to innovation processes and to useful knowledge. The future of reasons for deference. Alternatively and strategically, finding the (irrigated) agriculture depends on engaging with young people, right messengers for a particular audience can be a valuable tool and it is therefore of great importance to cater for the particular for effective knowledge exchange. needs and interests of youth – both rural girls and boys and young women and men. Important topics The multi-faceted nature of farming also complicates knowledge would include how to gain access uptake. Problems and poor outcomes may be attributed to Farmers have different to land and water, credit, market “irrigation” but could result from agronomic practices, soil fertility, information and support information, and training (Blum, or lack of plant protection information, etc. Experimentation and requirements, often aligned Cofini, and Sulaiman 2020). Poor adaptation in multiple subsystems are needed to make cropping with their education level, access to knowledge intersects systems perform optimally. There is thus no simple right or wrong scale of enterprise, cropping with low literacy, which – given the answer to most challenges that farmers face. In the end, farmers systems, socio-economic close correlation between women have to be provided with sound information in different ways, from characteristics, and the way and lower literacy levels – makes sources they believe, and be encouraged to adapt and experiment they are tied into value chains. access to knowledge strongly themselves to find the best solutions for their situations. gendered. Attention given to reaching non-literate and low- literate farmers, limiting reliance on written texts and using local languages, can contribute to broadening the base of farmers able to access useful knowledge on irrigation. People are different and acquire knowledge differently. It is well known that facts will not convince those who refuse to consider evidence because of their belief systems, prior education, (limited) experiences, or preconceptions. Yet if the same useful information The power dynamics of knowledge exchange is provided by someone they trust or respect, they are more likely must be considered. Engagements should be to accept it. This reality of having “faith in the messenger” poses strategically facilitated to maximize relevant knowledge both a risk and an opportunity. The risk is that farmers may believe uptake between all stakeholders, including farmers. M O DUL E 4 – K N OW L E D G E M4-09 4.2 Diagnostic and scoring farmers is mediated by the knowledge environment, and the assessment of the environment is thus taken into consideration when scoring the knowledge factor. Diagnostic – collecting and assessing information The knowledge environment is weak when it is characterized by (1) a public sector that has limited or no understanding of In diagnosing the knowledge factors that enable FLID processes, irrigation engineering, agronomy and FLID processes, or fails to the central question is whether farmers of different scales, gender, operationalize support for FLID; (2) private sector service providers and socio-economic status can access appropriate knowledge, and that are non-responsive to the real needs of different types of use it to their benefit. In the diagnostic of the knowledge factor you farmers and tend to promote their own envisaged solutions; (3) should not only assess differentiated farmers and their access to significant gaps in services and approaches between actors in knowledge, but also the wider pluralistic knowledge environment the FLID ecosystem; and (4) poor quality or non-existent formal and how it is organized and governed at both national and sub- professional education and training of a technical irrigation cadre. national levels. The assigned score is not definitive but is a best assessment, based A consultant would usually be assigned to undertake the on team discussion and debate, to guide intervention decision- diagnostic, and a typical scope of work is included in an outline making. More detailed guidance on scoring the knowledge Terms of Reference (TOR) in i-box 4.2. The diagnostic also includes environment is provided in i-box 4.3. When the knowledge-related the policy and legal aspects of the knowledge environment. This constraints are assessed to be severe, then the score is a low 1 (very part of the diagnostic is informed by the approach described in weak) or 2 (weak) and interventions may be needed to address the Section 4 of the Main Guide and guided by details in i-boxes 3.4 critical issues to catalyze FLID. and 3.5. These details can be appended to the consultant’s TOR. Scoring the knowledge factor 4.3 Examples of interventions The knowledge factor is constrained when the types of farmers When the diagnostic and scoring processes lead to the conclusion who are chosen as the focus of a potential FLID intervention have that the knowledge domain is one of the crucial areas to limited or no access to essential knowledge. If the focus includes strengthen, this would merit interventions. Public interventions smaller enterprises, or female and younger farmers, these farmers aiming to support FLID processes must take stock of the multiple are more at risk of poor access to knowledge. Knowledge gaps activities of stakeholders, and understand their motivations and can include irrigation practices and equipment, agronomy and views on their roles. Where service providers are simply purveyors the business side of running a profitable irrigated agricultural of pre-defined products, they need to be challenged and motivated enterprise. The score of the knowledge axis should reflect the to become responsive to farmers’ real needs. Such responsiveness extent of access to useful knowledge by farmers. This access by can be promoted in various interventions. It can be achieved, for M4-10 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E example, through the targeted monitoring of technical can be hosted, for instance, by NGOs, universities or network organizations. preferences during implementation, through funding for MSP facilitators need to be locally based, widely trusted organizations that applied research, and by purposefully facilitating farmer can facilitate the collaboration of feedback in interventions, such as multi-stakeholder different stakeholders and lead the platforms and farmer field schools. platform. A longer list of functions of the MSP host organization can be This section proposes four public interventions to found in i-box 4.4. strengthen the FLID knowledge environment: (1) Facilitated stakeholder collaboration; (2) Farmer empowerment and demand-led service provision; (3) Figure 4.2 The MSP Guide, by Brouwer Mass media and communication outreach; and (4) Formal et al. (2015 ), is a rich source book for education reform and investment. practical information on MSPs, their establishment, functioning and possible Example intervention 1 role in innovation processes and development policies. Facilitated stakeholder collaboration and multi-stakeholder platforms MSPs have also been referred to The FLID knowledge environment is often rich in actors as Innovation Platforms or, in the but poor in alignment, leaving considerable gaps in case of FLID processes in Kenya, service provision and opportunities for collaboration as irrigation acceleration platforms unexplored. Knowledge networks can become more (IAPs). The IAPs in Kenya were initiated by the Smart Water for Agriculture effective when knowledge brokers contribute to project. They bring together various stakeholders and facilitate interactions coordination, identifying gaps and avoiding unnecessary between them to achieve effective joint actions to improve FLID processes competition and repetition. Public interventions are (Thottoli, Zevenbergen, and Van Veldhuizen 2019). Platforms are created at well suited to take a lead in aligning key stakeholders the local level (district, county or irrigation cluster) for coordination of concrete in the FLID ecosystem. This can take the form of a implementation activities with farmers, and at national level for alignment of loosely organized process, or be more formalized and policies and strategic collaborations. Farmers, public actors, and a variety of institutionalized into multi-stakeholder platforms (MSP) value chain actors jointly assess and prioritize challenges and opportunities focused around smallholder irrigation development. related to FLID processes in order to find the best response strategies Public actors can lead the process of initiating MSPs and (i-box 4.5). contribute staff time and funding, but should take care not Platforms allow for sharing of information, knowledge, and experience related to control the platform, as it should function as a place of to irrigation practices. Platforms also jointly mobilize resources and facilitate interaction between a wide variety of stakeholders. MSPs effective support services around promising financial and technological M O DUL E 4 – K N OW L E D G E M4-11 Farmer products. IAPs can become the Example intervention 2 Resource benefits organizing entity for field days, Farmer empowerment and demand-led potential demonstrations, farmer training, pilots service provision Policy and tests. They can also assist with & legal Technology FLID processes are characterized by farmers being central farmer exchange visits and participate Knowledge Markets in trade fairs and exhibitions. to developing their own irrigation practices. Enabling and Finance strengthening FLID requires that farmers keep that leading Experience has demonstrated that role, and demand knowledge and innovations that fit their MSPs need to be carefully designed to maximize their effectiveness in particular needs. At the same time, enabling FLID requires achieving the intended outcomes. The MSP process model (Brouwer et service providers in both public and private sectors to be al. 2015) emphasizes that every MSP process is unique and will follow its responsive to the specific wishes of farmers. To assist both own path and logic, but there are common process considerations with public and private actors, FLID interventions initiated by the four main phases (i-box 4.6). government could include elements in the design such as The process model of the examples that follow. 1 MSPs fits well with the Initiating Strengthen farmers’ problem-solving and innovation understanding that change Adaptive planning capacities processes are iterative and Participatory approaches to farmer-learning and innovation are best served by collaboration strengthen farmers’ problem-solving capacities. Farmer between complementary partners. field schools (FFS) are one of the most effective approaches. Reflective They focus on the empowerment of farmers by developing Figure 4.3 monitoring Collaborative their capabilities to make well-informed decisions – about MSP process model action cropping, irrigating and marketing. Farmers are thereby In Tanzania, agricultural innovation enabled to select the types of technologies they want. The platforms that were set up with irrigating process of farmer learning in FFS encourages and facilitates communities created synergies between a variety them to conduct their own on-farm observations and research, of knowledge actors. They linked up several knowledge and innovation and to come up with their own localized and applicable entities not previously working in the area, thus broadening the group of solutions (Blum, Cofini, and Sulaiman 2020). farmers that could benefit from them. Equally important, the platforms The FFS methodology is well elaborated and tested. became engines for capacity building and empowerment of farmers, who The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) operates a strengthened their ability to mobilize knowledge and innovation actors Global Farmer Field School Platform with resources on (Mdemu et al. 2020). Experience with MSPs for FLID processes have led to how to organize FFS and integrate them into public and ten main lessons, summarized in i-box 4.7. private agricultural extension services. See i-box 4.8 for a M4-12 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E quick overview of principles of FFS providers push their “solutions” without taking heed of farmers’ Resource Farmer potential benefits and benefits for both farmers and wishes. A public-sector-led FLID intervention can stimulate service development organizations. Farmer providers to work more demand-responsively, for instance, by Policy field schools that are oriented to making demand-responsiveness an explicit selection criterion for & legal Technology irrigation practices could make use of partnerships and subsidies. Government programs can choose to Knowledge Markets instruments like the Chameleon card partner with service providers that take farmers’ wishes seriously Finance readers and the wetting front detector and that have procedures in place to use farmers’ feedback to (discussed in Module 7). The FFS improve their products. approach involving this kind of technology facilitates learning about soil-water management and soil fertility, both crucial for successful irrigation agronomy. Farmer-to-farmer approaches can contribute to strengthening 3 Make service providers financially accountable to farmers FLID interventions aim for an outcome where service providers remain accountable to farmers beyond the life of the intervention. local innovation and knowledge-sharing processes that keep Where service providers operate in free and competitive markets farmers at the center of developing irrigated agriculture. MSPs can and generate profits purely from farmer payments, this is to a also be encouraged to work with these farmer-to-farmer networks large extent already the case. Yet, in practice, where there is through partners within the platform, either from the public or heavy reliance on subsidies (by governments and development private sector. organizations), there is a risk that companies, NGOs, and non-profit enterprises may continue to promote and market products and 2 “Demand-responsiveness” as a selection criterion for partnerships and subsidies Knowledge systems can only be responsive to farmer demands services that farmers have not asked for. Demand-side financing of agricultural Resource potential Farmer benefits when farmers know what they need, and are able to express it services, where farmers confidently. On the other hand, service providers have to pay heed receive money to pay for Policy Technology to farmers’ preferences and be responsive in what they offer and services, is one way to & legal how they design and redesign make agricultural service Knowledge Markets Resource Farmer their services and products. financially accountable Finance potential benefits This holds true also for credit to farmers (see i-box 4.9). institutions, public extension Experiences with financing mechanisms to stimulate demand-led Policy officers, agronomic advisory service provision in both the private and public sector can be found & legal Technology services and irrigation in Module 5 of Blum, Cofini, and Sulaiman (2020). A public-sector- Knowledge Markets technology providers. Far led FLID intervention could seek to align with ongoing reforms or Finance too often, these service experiments with demand-led agricultural service provision. M O DUL E 4 – K N OW L E D G E M4-13 4 Give farmers control over innovation funds A final mechanism to empower farmers, and make service providers and their products more demand-responsive is to assign farmers, through Be realistic about ICT options Though ICTs have the potential to reach high numbers of their representatives, a role in allocating innovation funds. FLID interventions farmers in remote areas, in practice there are important can set aside substantial funds to subsidise the limitations: content is of limited relevance in many local Resource Farmer development of promising technologies and contexts; ICT initiatives in project contexts are often potential benefits other innovations. Farmer-managed innovation unsustained after project closure; and a digital divide funds tend to respond better to farmer needs (inequitable access to smartphones, computers, and Policy (Waters-Bayer et al. 2011). It is crucial that internet connectivity) leads to a gap in access, use and Technology & legal impact along lines of poverty and gender. (Blum, Cofini, farmer representatives in such positions reflect and Sulaiman 2020) Knowledge Markets the diversity of irrigation farmers that the FLID Finance support programme aims to support. ICT interventions can be publicly funded or existing Example intervention 3 platforms can be used. One example of public funding is Mass media, ICTs and communication outreach the multi-purpose IrriTrack app that combines stepwise practical project implementation support to field Knowledge and innovation processes, by definition, require adaptations to personnel, with essential technical and financial information fit new locations as well as existing farming practices. Where the aim is to for farmers. The information generated by the app, based promote uptake at scale, the broadcasting of these new ideas and related on site specifics and farmer preferences, enables farmers information – by word-of-mouth, print, or internet-based media – is pivotal. to be better informed and make personalised choices Activities could include direct outreach to farmers, but also aim to reach based on their needs and means (see Main Guide i-box K). other actors in the FLID domain. An example of information materials targeting different stakeholders is included in i-box 4.10. Traditional media Existing platforms, programmes, and apps can also be broadcasting through television, radio and the print media is increasingly used to share content on FLID processes and particular tied into internet-based platforms and innovations. They can contribute to attitudinal change Resource Farmer apps. While the potential is undoubtedly towards farmers’ initiatives in developing their own potential benefits huge, there is need for realism (see box on irrigation, and to raising farmers’ awareness of service the right). In the context of FLID support providers that they could approach for support in their Policy programmes, ICT initiatives cut across the local contexts. Broadcasting information and success & legal Technology FLID factors that are further discussed in stories on particular irrigation practices and technologies Knowledge Markets Modules 5, 6 and 7 on finance, marketing and needs to consider the many stakeholders and their Finance technology, respectively. differentiated contexts (i-box 4.1), and emphasize the M4-14 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E need for local adaptation of technologies and ideas. Collaboration FLID-sensitive technical and multi-disciplinary training between farmers, technology providers and agronomic advisory Responsiveness to FLID opportunities requires more than services, among others, is a key part of knowledge development and just numbers of experts. The domination by engineers with a dissemination, expanded further in Modules 5, 6 and 7. technically dominant mindset also has to be tackled (De Bont et al. 2019; Liebrand 2019; De Bont and Veldwisch 2020). Irrigation is Example intervention 4 multi-faceted and FLID is essentially people-centred. If technical Formal education reform and investment personnel are effectively to support FLID processes they must In order to support irrigation farmers and the irrigation sector more be able to work in interdisciplinary teams and be sensitized broadly, a country needs a sufficient number of trained irrigation beyond their core disciplines. Examples of people-centred experts at different levels (university, polytechnic, vocational). Irrigation educational interventions (expanded in i-box 4.11) include: skills are needed in different disciplines (engineering, agronomy, ●n Curricula revision and development to ensure an extension, economics, sociology, etc.). If a country does not have a interdisciplinary and farmer-centered emphasis body of irrigation experts working at national and local levels, and does not have corresponding education programs, a FLID support program n Re-orientation of educators could invest in setting up such programs or sponsoring students to n Continuing professional development (CPD). follow existing programs. Through using these various educational Research partners in FLID interventions interventions, a skilled and suitably trained technical cadre can have both immediate and long-lasting positive effects on FLID in a country. Besides acting as knowledge- and capacity-building partners, universities can also be involved as research partners. A sponsored PhD program can contribute to consolidating academic and educational practice on interdisciplinary irrigation studies, while establishing new foundational knowledge in a country. Regular student programs (like Young Professional programs) can conduct internships and field research in collaboration with project implementation activities. This can strengthen the practical orientation of educational programs, encourage critical and independent thinking among young academics and technicians, and add person power to field activities. PhD programs can also link to international research organizations such as the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) and international universities, strengthening relevance, profile and excellence. M O DUL E 4 – K N OW L E D G E M4-15 i-Boxes M4-16 R EFER ENCES i-BOX 4.1 Stakeholders in the FLID ecosystem Stakeholder Role and importance in the FLID process Farmers Irrigation practices spread when smallholder farmers adopt farmers spreading knowledge amongst each other. Farmers must them. Their views on what is feasible and relevant are crucial. The be a central part of any demonstration, testing, or research activity success of unsupported FLID processes has largely depended on that aims to reproduce such processes. Farmer organizations Farmer organizations play a fundamental role in advancing focus; Irrigation Organizations (managing group schemes); Water collective interests – usually in relation to shared irrigation systems Users Associations (WUAs) (either managing schemes or involved or increasing marketing power through their numbers. Farmer in wider watershed activities) and cooperatives that often take on organizations can be formal or informal groups and include: multiple roles of marketing and/or water management (though common interest groups (CIGs) for organizing local initiatives; less suited to the latter [Waalewijn et al. 2020]). producer organizations (POs) with a commodity-based marketing Financial service Commercial and retail banks, microfinance institutions, mobile supporting FLID. Informal credit provision is an important link providers money platforms, insurance providers, Savings and Credit in unsupported FLID processes. Informal credit provision is an Cooperatives (SACCOs), investors, etc. provide credit for important link in unsupported FLID processes. Irrigation technology Irrigation technology supply companies are increasingly offering This category also includes distributors, retailers of irrigation suppliers products on credit. They are important drivers for change in farmer technologies, hardware stores and other such suppliers, who are irrigation practices, providing the smart water technology as well usually the first port of call for farmers for their irrigation needs. as spreading the required knowledge. Market offtakers FLID is heavily influenced by farmers’ access to guaranteed brokers and traders – are critical stakeholders to engage in credit markets. Market offtakers – including processors, exporters, provision interventions. Government and Various government departments and agencies spearhead the They are important at both the national and local government government- affiliated development of irrigation – through setting policies, regulations levels, especially for program rollout and extension services. institutions and standards. Input suppliers Improving on-farm agriculture and irrigation practices needs a of seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, etc. – manufacturers, distributors as holistic approach. It is therefore important to involve suppliers well as local sales outlets. Academic and Research and extension organizations provide agricultural and development of new irrigation technologies as well as information research organizations water information and knowledge. They support testing and for establishing standards. STAKE H O L DE R S I N TH E F L I D ECO SYSTE M M4-17 i-BOX 4.1 Stakeholder Role and importance in the FLID process Non-government Local, national and international NGOs provide a range of business especially with youth and women farmers, and can support organizations development services. They are often locally trusted players, implementation or program pilots. Media Radio/TV, social media and ICT platforms can spread knowledge uptake and usage. on irrigation solutions, farmer-to-farmer learning, and influence M4-18 STA KEHOL D ER S IN THE FL ID ECOSYSTEM i-BOX 4.2 Knowledge diagnostic Element 1 TOR – example scope of work Policy and legal aspects of agricultural knowledge and extension. A consultant will usually conduct the knowledge diagnostic and Policy and legal aspects of the agricultural knowledge systems, analyze the implications for individual farmers, those on group including enabling or constraining provisions in relation to irrigation schemes, and other stakeholders in the FLID ecosystem. information and communication technology (ICT) as a knowledge The diagnostic of the knowledge component focuses on: (1) the tool, and the agricultural education environment. The policy and organization of the FLID ecosystem and the alignment and legal review is guided by the approaches outlined in i-box 3.4 and coordination of services between the stakeholders; and (2) the 3.5, and in Minh et al. (2021). This information can be attached to the access to and use of suitable knowledge and innovations for consultant’s TOR. different types of farmers. The diagnostic process should address the six elements described below and draw conclusions based on their strengths and Element 2 weaknesses. For two of these elements, the diagnostic process Farmers’ access to and use of suitable knowledge and innovations in (and not limited to) the following domains. will build on data gathered on the basis of the Terms of References (TORs) in other modules. Element 2 will build on information a. Accessing water sources (pumps, diversions, etc.) drawn from the farmer surveys and farmer typology compiled for the farmer profitability assessment. Element 4 will build on b. Water transportation methods (pipes, canals, hoses, etc.) input from interviews with service providers conducted on the c. Field water application methods and timing basis of the TORs in Modules 5, 6 and 7 (Finance, Marketing and Technology). Data for elements 3, 5 and 6 (below) will be gathered d. Costs, benefits and profit margins of irrigated production by a contracted consultant or the team implementing the diagnostic e. Agronomy of irrigated crops, including pest and disease process for the knowledge component. The elements of the management, and soil fertility management diagnostic are expanded below. Both the suitability of knowledge and innovations, and the access to them are highly differentiated for different types of farmers. The diagnosis under Element 1 thus needs to be differentiated for scale, gender, market orientation and other relevant socio- economic and cultural-political aspects. KN OW L E DGE D I AG N O STI C TO R – E X A M PLE SCOPE OF WORK M4-19 i-BOX 4.2 The diagnostic analysis of this element will be done by the knowledge consultant on the basis of data gathered by the Element 4 consultant for the Farmer Profitability axis and the draft Farmer Demand-responsiveness of the private sector service Typology constructed by that consultant (Module 2). providers and their servicing to different types of farmers. This relates to the willingness and ability of service providers (in Element 3 providing advice on agronomy irrigation technologies and finance) to understand, appreciate and respond to farmers’ differentiated Knowledge on irrigation engineering, irrigation agronomy demands. Questions to be answered include: How do service and FLID processes present and operationalized in the providers differentiate their products to farmers of different scale, public sector. gender, market orientation and other relevant socio-economic and This entails the knowledge of (1) how FLID processes evolve; (2) cultural-political aspects? How have service providers arranged awareness of the extent of irrigated areas developed by farmers; for feedback from farmers to influence their products, design and and (3) the acknowledgement of the importance of FLID-based redesign processes? agricultural production for food security, farmer income and the (local) economy. These factors can be assessed in different The diagnostic analysis of this element will be done by the knowledge branches of government, both at national and local government consultant on the basis of data gathered by the consultants for the levels, as well as in different line ministries of government Finance, Markets and Technology axes (Modules 5, 6 and 7). (e.g. agriculture, irrigation, water resources management). The consultant should establish the existence and use of irrigation development guidelines at national and sub-national levels. Element 5 She/he should investigate the extent to which farmers’ irrigation The collaboration, coordination and alignment of services experience and knowledge contributes to and influences irrigation and approaches between actors in the FLID ecosystem. design and planning processes, and whether their views are This concerns a variety of both public and private actors in the FLID heeded. The number of formally trained irrigation engineers and domain (i-box 4.1), both at national and local government levels. agronomy experts employed by the government (national and Questions to be answered include: Are different parties aware of sub-national) should be established, along with the awareness of the activities, objectives and constraint of other parties? Are there FLID processes and the ability to support them. platforms and procedures to exchange experiences and explore synergies, and are these actively being used and facilitated? The knowledge consultant will gather the data needed for the diagnostic analysis of this element and analyze the data. The knowledge consultant will gather the data needed for the diagnostic analysis of this element and analyze the data. M4-20 K N OW LEDGE DIAGN O STIC TOR – EXA MP L E S COP E OF WOR K i-BOX 4.2 Element 6 Formal professional education and training available at national level. Data will be collected and collated to answer the following questions: At the national level, what programs exist to train irrigation engineers and agricultural experts and to what extent is supporting FLID processes part of the curriculum? How is irrigation knowledge incorporated in the training programs of agricultural extension officers? Are universities, polytechnics and practical training institutes offering professional (short) courses on irrigation and supporting FLID? To what extent are they participating and making their knowledge available in partnerships and knowledge-brokering processes with other public and private actors in the FLID domain? The knowledge consultant will gather the data needed for the diagnostic analysis of this element and analyze the data. KN OW L E DGE D I AG N O STI C TO R – E X A M PLE SCOPE OF WORK M4-21 i-BOX 4.3 Extent to which farmers’ irrigation experience and knowledge Guidance on scoring the n contributes to, and influences irrigation design and planning knowledge factor processes n Presence of formally trained irrigation engineers and irrigation The scoring of the knowledge axis on the diagnostic spider plot agronomy experts in government institutions and their awareness of is based on a simple ranking from very weak to very strong, with FLID processes and ability to support them a score of 1–5 respectively. The knowledge factor is constrained when several types of farmers (particularly small enterprises, young and women farmers) have no or poor access to useful knowledge on irrigation practices, irrigation technologies, irrigation agronomy 1 Demand-responsiveness of the private sector service providers and their servicing to different types of farmers (Element 4 of the diagnostic): and running a profitable irrigated agricultural enterprise. n The willingness and ability of service providers (providing Access by farmers is mediated by the knowledge environment, advice on agronomy irrigation technologies, and finance) which is poor when it is characterized by: (1) a public sector that to understand, appreciate and respond to farmers’ has limited or no understanding of irrigation engineering, irrigation differentiated demands agronomy and FLID processes and fails to operationalize support n The degree to which service providers differentiate their for FLID processes; (2) private sector service providers that are non- products to farmers of different scale, gender, market responsive to the real needs of different types of farmers and rather orientation and other relevant socio-economic and cultural- push their own envisaged solutions; (3) important gaps in services political aspects and approaches between actors in the FLID ecosystem; and (4) n The extent to which service providers have arranged feed- formal professional education and training that is of poor quality or back from farmers to influence their products, design and non-existent. redesign processes n n Quality of the knowledge of how FLID processes evolve Extent of awareness of the irrigated areas developed by farmers 2 The collaboration, coordination and alignment of services and approaches between actors in the FLID ecosystem (element 5 of the diagnostic): n Acknowledgement of the importance of its production for both n The degree to which both public and private actors in the food security, farmer income and the (local) economy FLID domain (see i-box 4.1) are aware of the activities, objectives, constraints, etc. of other parties n Existence and use of irrigation development guidelines, including participatory methods and methodology to support FLID processes n The degree to which stakeholders in the FLID knowledge domain are communicating, collaborating M4-22 GUIDAN C E ON SCOR ING THE KNOWL ED G E FACTOR i-BOX 4.3 3 Knowledge on irrigation engineering, irrigation agronomy and FLID processes present and operationalized in the public sector (element 3 of the diagnostic): n Partnering both for particular purposes and for strategic, longer-term alignment n Are there platforms and procedures to exchange experiences and explore synergies and are these actively being used and facilitated? 4 Formal professional education and training available at national level (element 6 of the diagnostic): n The extent to which graduates of irrigation programs (engineers, agronomists, interdisciplinary actors) are able to supporting FLID processes, both in numbers and in qualities n The possibilities for professionals to follow (short) courses on irrigation and supporting FLID at universities, polytechnics and practical training institutes n The extent to which universities, polytechnics and practical training institutes are participating and making their knowledge available in partnerships and knowledge brokering processes with other public and private actors in the FLID domain. GUI DAN C E O N S CO RI N G TH E K N OWL E D GE FACTOR M4-23 i-BOX 4.4 Key functions of a multi-stakeholder platform (MSP) host Performance area To be achieved Assessment Facilitation and Facilitating interactions between stakeholders towards the Number of stakeholder groups represented and actively brokering common objective participating in platform meetings Establishing trust, establishing working procedures, fostering Quality and interactivity of meetings learning, motivating, and managing conflict. Brokering connections between actors that benefit from each Bi/multi-lateral agreements (formal/informal) between other’s services or roles; bringing multiple actors together different actors. informally, more formally or bilaterally Building networks Scanning, scoping, filtering and matchmaking partners with Number and diversity of stakeholder groups represented in the complementary resources, including matching information or irrigation acceleration platform (IAP) product demand and supply Clarifying key issues Helping to define main challenges and opportunities that the IAP Challenges and opportunities identified and activities will address developed accordingly Soliciting further studies if needed to deepen understanding Keeping IAP focused on priority tasks agreed by members Mobilising external Promoting the platform to ensure support and buy-in into the Quality of support provided by non-platform members. support network by individuals and organizations that matter Lobbying essential stakeholders to join and contribute resources Resources committed to the IAP activities to the platform Representing the IAP and its members at higher levels Participation in external meetings, networks and fora Problem solving and Identifying, proposing and providing practical solutions to address Technical advice provided and accepted by platform members mediation bottlenecks hindering progress of multi-stakeholder action Undertaking conflict resolution and preventing (hidden) power Number of conflicts addressed successfully struggles M4-24 KEY FU NCTIONS OF A N MS P HOST i-BOX 4.4 Performance area To be achieved Assessment Capacity building Monitoring and identifying capacity gaps for implementing smart Timeliness and quality of planning and reporting docs water solutions (SWS) and helping to find ways to develop the capacity required Management Regular planning and reporting of flows (narrative, financial) from Timeliness and quality of planning and reporting docs stakeholders, across the IAP and to the intervention team Documentation Ensuring that process and results of meetings and activities are Main findings and lessons learnt, captured in well-organized and well captured so that they can be shared more broadly accessible documents Source: Thottoli, Zevenbergen, and Van Veldhuizen (2019, 14) KE Y FU N CT I O N S O F A N M S P H O ST M4-25 i-BOX 4.5 Stakeholder categories involved in MSPs for FLID Stakeholder category Role in, and benefit of, a multi-stakeholder platform (MSP) 1. Facilitation and brokering The actual implementation of irrigation practices is by farmers, and Farmers are part of any demonstration, testing, or research their access to services and innovations can be mediated through activity. Organizations joining the MSP can be formal or an MSP. Farmers’ views on what is feasible and relevant are crucial informal groups, water users’ associations, cooperatives, etc. in the development of innovations. 2. Irrigation technology and These can be important carriers of change when they make and can find partners among, for example, finance institutions agro-input suppliers technologies and support services available in response to farmer- and market offtakers. demand. They see MSPs as an important medium to access potential clients 3. Market offtakers Businesses acting as traders or direct exporters play an important producers and avoid having to provide credits and irrigation role in securing farmer income. Through coordinated activities of technologies themselves. MSPs they can benefit from building relations with reliable 4. Private and public Research and extension organizations provide agricultural and Other organizations, including NGOs, provide managerial and agricultural service water knowledge and support SWS testing and development. business development services. providers 5. Financing institutions, Formal credit providers can align with technology suppliers and/ banks, savings and or market offtakers to offer irrigation-specific financial products to credit cooperatives and reliable farmer (groups). microfinance institutions 6. Policy and regulatory Though funding for MSPs and their activities can come through variety of private sector actors in an MSP may be an efficient bodies public-sector led interventions, government actors should and effective strategy for private sector investments to align not use these to push their specific agendas or take over with (parts of) their policy objectives. coordinating roles. For public organizations, working with a Source: Thottoli, Zevenbergen, and Van Veldhuizen (2019, 14) M4-26 STAK EHOLDER CAT EG OR IES INVOLVED IN MS P S FOR FL ID i-BOX 4.6 Multi-stakeholder platform (MSP) process model 1. Initiating 2. Adaptive planning n Clarify reasons for an MSP n Deepen understanding and trust n Undertake initial situation analysis n Examine future scenarios (stakeholders, issues institutions, power and politics) n Generate visions for the future n Establish interim steering body n Identify issues and opportunities n Build stakeholder support n Agree on strategies for change n Establish scope and mandate n Identify actions and responsibilities n Outline the process Initiating n Communicate outcomes Adaptive planning Reflective monitoring Collaborative action 3. Reflective monitoring 4. Collaborative action n Create a learning culture and environment n Develop detailed action plans n Define success criteria and indicators n Secure resources and support n Develop and implement monitoring mechanism n Develop capacities for action n Review progress and generous lessons n Establish management structure n Use lessons for improvement n Manage implementation n Maintain stakeholder commitment Source: Brouwer et al. (2015, 29) M S P P R O CES S M O D E L M4-27 i-BOX 4.7 Ten establishment lessons for FLID multi-stakeholder platforms (MSP) 5 Clarity of MSP objectives and roles. Provide adequate time and space to discuss, clarify and negotiate the platform’s central objectives and roles with all stakeholders. Monitor the MSP regularly and facilitate interaction and discussion to address emerging frustrations regarding the way objectives and roles are 1 The MSP host organization. Local organizations such as non- given shape. 6 government organizations (NGOs) or universities that typically are good at facilitating an MSP often also have their operational Implementation of activities. MSPs need time to experiment challenges, and interventions need to carefully monitor and with various innovations and types of activities; this involves logistically support the host organizations. a process of trial and error to understand what works in their respective areas. Even if this process takes considerable time, it is 2 The facilitator. As success of MSPs depends largely on the effort and motivation of the individual facilitators, it is important recommended over providing an “institutional fix” from the project intervention side, as it also contributes to maturation of the platform. 7 to carefully select individuals with the complex set of qualities and attitudes required. Interventions should aim to support the host in Communication and documentation. Training on this. communication planning and tools needs to be provided so that MSPs can be effective in communicating with their members 3 Organizing and managing the platform. Local platforms should be given space to develop their organization and management structures in line with what is preferred between through SMSs, WhatsApp groups, radio, printed brochures, emails or newsletters. This is particularly important in relation to information on upcoming events and facilitates good participation in the events. 8 partners in the platform. MSP hosts should take care to share responsibilities and delegate tasks. Periodic work plans can be Ownership of the platform. Generally, MSP hosts and co- helpful. facilitators must take ownership of this platform. Particular effort may need to be made with farmers, who tend to have weaker 4 Representation. All major stakeholder groups need to be represented and actively participate in key activities. Experience shows that farmers, in particular, should not miss ownership of the platform and its objectives. Sharing responsibilities and paying more attention to the process of establishment could aid farmer-ownership. The name chosen for the endeavor is important. sessions, as this hampers the transmission of knowledge to farmers, Words like “Irrigation Acceleration Platform” are seen as project as well as critical feedback from farmers on the services and jargon and the choice of a local name in the vernacular language, by technologies that are promoted by other stakeholders. the members, can help to strengthen ownership perceptions. M4-28 N IN E ESTAB LISHM EN T LESSON S FOR FL ID MU LTI-STA KEHOL D ER P L ATFOR MS i-BOX 4.7 9 Project support to MSPs. If MSPs depend on project finance it is critical to streamline the planning, budgeting and fund- release process between the project and the platform members. To prevent conflicts around financial resource allocation among the MSP members, it is important for the MSP host to be transparent about the budget allocations, and standardize any allowances to members. 10 Sustainability. If MSPs want to continue after project closure their long-term financial sustainability should be on the agenda from the onset. Members should be trained and assisted to develop and implement a financial strategy that makes them independent of the project that initiated them. This includes raising funds from the private sector for activity-based funding or through writing proposals to donors. Source: Thottoli, Zevenbergen, and Van Veldhuizen (2019) NI N E ESTAB L I SH M E N T L ES S O N S FO R F L ID M ULTI-STAK EHOLDER PLATFORM S M4-29 i-BOX 4.8 Farmer Field Principles of Farmer Field Schools School (FFS) highlights n The field is the learning place Facilitation, not teaching Farmer-to-farmer approaches strengthen n Hands-on and discovery-based learning local innovation. “Farmer-to-farmer approaches engage n farmers on a voluntary basis in providing advice and training to n The farmer as expert other peer farmers. Farmer advisers are usually individuals with n Equity and no hierarchy little formal education, who receive initial training on technical n Integrated and learner-defined curriculum themes, facilitation and communication skills. Through a process n Comparative experiments of experimentation, learning and practice, they increase their n Agro-ecosystem analysis knowledge and become capable of sharing it with others [...]. Farmer n Special topics, e.g. irrigation methods advisers are empowered to become change agents, promoting n Team building and social animation rural development processes and improving livelihood in their communities. [...] Farmer advisers are also in a better position to n Participatory monitoring and evaluation respond to locally identified priorities of the communities and to determine, and change, the course of their development. In Benefits for farmers enhancing demand drive, farmer-to-farmer approaches have the potential to improve feedback from farmers [...]. Farmer-to-farmer approaches are also very suited for engaging with women, youth, n Strengthening observation capability and increasing knowledge ownership through and the poor, thus making their voices heard” (Blum, Cofini, and discovery-based learning Sulaiman 2020, 40). n Building self-confidence and enhancing decision- making capacity n Minimizing risks in experimenting with new practices n Changing deep-rooted beliefs and practices n Developing problem-solving capabilities M4-30 FA R MER FIEL D SCHOOL HIG HL IG HTS i-BOX 4.8 How does FFS help government and development agencies? n Structured implementation process n Facilitating inter-sectoral collaboration n Empowering extension officers n Expanding results effectively n Joining the global FFS network Challenges of FFS? n FFS requires having a group of experienced FFS facilitators n Appropriate fund-release mechanism and effective logistics n Quality Control n Cost n Monitoring of FFS Source: Hagiwara et al. (2011) FA R ME R FI E L D S C H O O L H I G H L I G H TS M4-31 i-BOX 4.9 Supply-side financing versus demand-side financing Demand-side financing of agricultural services, where farmers receive money to pay for services, is one way to make agricultural service financially accountable to farmers. Experiences with financing mechanisms to stimulate demand-led service provision in both the private and public sectors can be found in Module 5 of Blum, Cofini, and Sulaiman (2020). A public-sector-led FLID intervention could seek to align with ongoing reforms or experiments with demand-led agricultural service provision. AEAS = Agricultural Extension and Advisory Service Source: Blum, Cofini, and Sulaiman (2020, 77) M4-32 SUPPLY-SIDE F IN AN C ING VER SU S D EMA ND -SID E FINA NCING i-BOX 4.10 Communications outreach to government personnel was far more Example of an information comprehensive. This took the form of a multi-module awareness- outreach and training strategy raising online training program involving 650 personnel, trained targeting different stakeholders during the peak of the 2020 pandemic. The outreach included details on the program context, extensive attention to the rollout processes, the technical elements of field assessments, and data Different stakeholders need different information content. The management. delivery style and choice of platform needs to match their capabilities and allow easy access to new information. Short and Links to the training modules and videos can be found in the Main targeted messaging with essential information for a particular Guide i-box M. A description of the brochure with links can be group is more useful than comprehensive descriptions covering found in Main Guide i-box N Table 1. many groups to avoid information overload and reduce meaning and impact. An example of a targeted message from the Uganda Micro-scale Irrigation Program is shown in Main Guide i-box N Table 1. The messaging was split into discrete segments and targeted key stakeholders (farmers, local leaders, and financing institutions) with the specific information that they needed to know. EXAMP L E O F A N I N FO RM ATI O N O U TRE AC H AN D TRAIN IN G STRATEGY TARGETIN G DIF F ERENT STA KEHOL D ER S M4-33 i-BOX 4.11 Main elements of a FLID- n Economic aspects of irrigation, related to operation and maintenance (O&M), inputs and outputs, marketing and sensitive education focus producer organizations Scope of learning: curricula n Gender issues in agriculture and, more specifically, how gender relations affect the functioning of smallholder irrigation as well as FLID-sensitive irrigation curricula content should aim at multi- equity and sustainability of irrigation systems, and its implication disciplinary training of socio-technical engineers, agronomists for the designs and participatory processes involving smallholder and irrigation managers. Technical knowledge and skills need to include basic aspects of: Re-orientation of educators n hydrology n crop water requirement Few staff at agricultural and irrigation training institutes currently n irrigation engineering in a FLID context (Module 7 have the capacity and appropriate qualifications to offer the courses Technology) with the envisaged curriculum content. A review and development n field application methods (Module 7 - Technology) of curriculum can be accompanied by a teacher training trajectory in four steps: n permitting and water law (Module 3 - Policy and Legal) n Joint review of current curricula with key training staff In addition, curricula should also aim at the development of socially aware technicians and engineers by including subjects such as: n Joint development of new training material and training curricula n Social and managerial knowledge n Teacher training provided “on-the-job”, in the shape of staff n The history, problems and potential of irrigation and development workshops. extension services in the country and continent. n Special attention to development of field practical exercises n Operation, maintenance and organizational needs of and internships, as these will form an essential part of the smallholder irrigation schemes new curricula. M4-34 M AIN ELEM EN TS OF A FL ID -SENSITIVE ED U CATION FOCU S i-BOX 4.11 Continuing professional development (CPD) The newly developed curricula and teacher skills at the supported polytechnics and universities may be opened up for mid- and advanced career specialists through the offering of short courses. These individuals may thus update their knowledge while interacting over policy and strategy questions related to supporting FLID processes. A FLID support program could offer to sponsor short courses at partner institutes, thus contributing to both capacity and team building at the same time. Curricula developed at the practical training institutes can also double, in shortened form, as refresher and specialization courses for extension workers in both public and private extension services. M AI N E L E ME N TS O F A F L I D - S E N S I TI V E EDUCATION FOC US M4-35 References M4-36 R EFER ENCES Bitzer, V., M. Wongtschowski, M. Hani, M. Blum, and I. Flink. 2016. Rooyen, R. Stirzaker, and P. Ramshaw. 2020. “The Role of Soil Towards Inclusive Pluralistic Service Systems. Rome: Food and Water Monitoring Tools and Agricultural Innovation Platforms in Agriculture Organization. http://www.fao.org/3/i6104e/i6104e.pdf Improving Food Security and Income of Farmers in Smallholder Irrigation Schemes in Tanzania.” International Journal of Water Blum, M.L., F. Cofini, and R.V. Sulaiman. 2020. Agricultural extension in Resources Development 36 (sup1): S148-S170. transition worldwide: Policies and strategies for reform. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization. https://doi.org/10.4060/ca8199en Minh, T. T., S. Zwart, R. Appoh, and P. Schmitter. 2021. “Analyzing the Enabling Environment to Enhance the Scaling of Irrigation and Brouwer, J. H., A.J. Woodhill, M. Hemmati, K.S. Verhoosel, and S.M Water Management Technologies: A Tool for Implementers.” van Vugt. 2015. The MSP guide: How to design and facilitate multi- IWMI Working Paper 197, International Water Management stakeholder partnerships. Wageningen: Centre for Development Institute (IWMI), Colombo. doi: https:/ /doi.org/10.5337/2021.201. Innovation. https://library.wur.nl/WebQuery/wurpubs/ fulltext/358948 Thottoli V., H. Zevenbergen, and L. van Veldhuizen. 2019. Platforms for Brokering and Learning: Lessons on Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration De Bont, C., J. Liebrand, G. J. Veldwisch, and P. Woodhouse. 2019. for Farmer-Led Irrigation Development. Nairobi: SWA Kenya, SNV “Modernisation and African Farmer-Led Irrigation Development: Netherlands Development Organisation.https:/ /www.kit.nl/ Ideology, Policies and Practices.” Water Alternatives 12 (1): 107-128. wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Lessons-on-Multi-Stakeholder- De Bont, C. and G.J. Veldwisch. 2020. “State Engagement with Collaboration-for-Farmer-Led-Irrigation-Development.pdf Farmer-Led Irrigation Development: Symbolic Irrigation Waalewijn, P., R. Trier, J. Denison, Y. Siddiqi, J. Vos, E. Amjad, and M. Modernisation and Disturbed Development Trajectories in Schulte. 2020. Governance in Irrigation and Drainage: Concepts, Tanzania.” The Journal of Development Studies 56 (12): 2154-2168. Cases, and Action-Oriented Approaches - A Practitioner’s https://doi.org/10.4060/ca8199en Resource. Washington, DC: World Bank. Hagiwara, T., S. Ogawa, P. Kariuki, J. Ndeti, and J. Kimondo. Waters-Bayer, A., L. van Veldhuizen, M. Wongtschowski, C. 2011. Farmer field school implementation guide. Rome: Kenya Wettasinha, B. Triomphe, F. Mekonnen, and T. Fenta. 2011. Forest Service, Food and Agriculture Organization and Japan “Farmer-Managed Innovation Funds Drive Multi-Stakeholder International Cooperation Agency. http://www.fao.org/3/ Learning Processes.” In Proceedings of the International i2561e/i2561e.pdf Conference on Innovations in Extension and Advisory Services: Linking Knowledge to Policy and Action for Food Liebrand, J. 2019. “The Politics of Research on Farmer-Managed and Livelihoods. Nairobi, Kenya, November 15-18, 2011. http:// Irrigation Systems in Asia: Some Reflections for Africa.” Water extension.cta.int/pages/Documents/Learning%20Networks/2. Alternatives 12 (1): 129-145. Farmer-Driven%20Networks/CTA129%20Farmer-Driven%20 Mdemu, M., L. Kissoly, H. Bjornlund, E. Kimaro, E.W. Christen, A. Van Networks_Waters-Bayer_04.pdf RE FE R E N C ES M4-37 M4-38 R EFER ENCES 5 The Farmer-led Irrigation Development Guide Module Finance Implications and options for FLID financing 1 OVE RVI E W i About the Water Global Practice © 2021 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433 Launched in 2014, the World Bank Group’s Water Global Practice brings together financing, Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org knowledge, and implementation in one platform. This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The By combining the Bank’s global knowledge with findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily country investments, this model generates more reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the firepower for transformational solutions to help governments they represent. countries grow sustainably. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this Please visit us at www.worldbank.org/water or work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal WorldBankWater. follow us on Twitter at @  status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. About GWSP Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Since The World Bank encourages This publication received the support of the Global dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for Water Security & Sanitation Partnership (GWSP). noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. GWSP is a multidonor trust fund administered Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to by the World Bank’s Water Global Practice and World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC supported by Austria’s Federal Ministry of Finance, 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Denmark’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Netherlands’ Ministry Citation: of Foreign Affairs, the Swedish International Izzi, G., J. Denison and G.J. Veldwisch, eds. 2021. The Farmer-led Irrigation Development Development Cooperation Agency, Switzerland’s Guide: A what, why and how-to for intervention design. Washington, DC: World Bank. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs, the Swiss Photo credits: Agency for Development and Cooperation, and the U.S. Agency for International Development. Cover, pages 4, 6:: Stéfan Abric | Page 10: Mutsa Masiyandima | Page 16, 38: Romain Vidal/Water Alternatives Please visit us at www.worldbank.org/gwsp or follow us on Twitter #gwsp. ii THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E Contents ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 02 USING THE GUIDE 03 Finance – Implications and options for FLID financing 04 i-boxes 16 5.1 Affordable financing in a FLID context 06 5.1 Crop and equipment insurance 17 5.2 Diagnostic and scoring 10 5.2 Outline Terms of Reference for the finance diagnostic 18 5.3 Examples of interventions 11 5.3 Guidance on scoring the financial factor 20 5.4 Facilitating linkages between existing actors 21 5.4 Concluding note 15 5.5 Credit guarantee arrangements 23 5.6 Pay-as-you-go 25 5.7 Subsidies 27 5.8 ICT and financial interventions 32 5.9 E-voucher subsidies 35 REFERENCES 38 1 OVE RVI E W M5-01 Abbreviations and acronyms DFI development finance institution RAB Rwanda Agriculture and Animal Resources FLID farmer-led irrigation development Development Board GHG greenhouse gas R&D research and development GoR Government of Rwanda SACCO savings and credit cooperative GSM global system for mobile communications SME small and medium-sized enterprise i-box information box SSA sub-Saharan Africa IAP irrigation acceleration platform SSI Small-scale Irrigation ICT information and communication technology SSIT Small-scale Irrigation Technologies MFI micro-finance institution TOR Terms of Reference PAYG pay-as-you-go VAT Value Added Tax M5-02 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E Using the guide Tips The main volume of the FLIDguide presents the core body of information that explains FLID and the process of intervention design. Thematic descriptions are included in seven modules. Information boxes (i-boxes) at the back of NAVIGATING THE GUIDE ji the Main Guide and each module provide additional detail, and hyperlinks To move quickly and easily between the interlinked throughout the guide access relevant external publications, websites, information, set up your PDF reader so that the animation clips and videos. j PREVIOUS VIEW and i NEXT VIEW buttons (as distinct from l previous page and k next page) are instaled on the toolbar at the top of your screen. You may then freely explore the document using the navigation pane on the left of your reader or the many hyperlinks provided in the text, and backtrack to the start by repeatedly hitting thej button. Info-Box Info-Box To instal the buttons (in Adobe Reader), i-Box i-Box Module 1 Module 7 ¢ Right-click anywhere on the toolbar and select Resource Info-Box Technology them in the Show Page Navigation Tools options; or Potential i-Box ¢ open the View drop down menu and select them from the Page Navigation options. The Farmer-led Alternatively, try using these keyboard shortcuts: Info-Box Info-Box i-Box Irrigation i-Box Development Windows: Press the alt key and t or u arrow Module 2 Guide Module 6 Mac: Press the command key and [ or ] square bracket Farmer Benefits A what, why and how-to for Markets intervention design PRINTING Info-Box i-Box Info-Box i-Box Office desktop printers cannot print to the edge of the Module 3 Info-Box Module 5 paper. To print pages of this document without losing any i-Box Policy & Legal Finance content, Module 4 Knowledge ¢ choose File > Print, and in the page sizing and handling area or pop-up menu, select Fit to FLIDguide Printable Area or Shrink to Printable Area. layers of information 1 OVE RVI E W M5-03 5 Finance Implications and options for FLID financing M5-04 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E Financing responses help W farmers to bridge the irrigation affordability gap. here individuals or small groups of farmers want to move beyond rudimentary irrigation practices, they will need equipment. Indicative More is at stake, however, than just accelerating the uptake of benefits of suitable technologies are equipment for irrigation expansion and intensification. In the assessed for selected situations (Module 2). In a farmer-led process, absence of affordable credit and equipment, interventions to farmers own the equipment and infrastructure and are the ones support FLID run the risk of perpetuating current trends, with who pay for it. better-off male farmers progressing because they have the financial means, or the social capital to borrow informally, while women and However, affordability is often a major constraint. Irrigation resource-poor farmers are left behind. Financing interventions must technology (Module 7) that is common in FLID contexts (Main Guide address access and inclusion at the same time. Figure 1) includes petrol and solar pumps with plastic pipelines, storage tanks, and a range of on-farm irrigation technologies Module 5 unravels some of these complications to make irrigation (hoses, sprinklers, and drip systems). On gravity schemes, usually systems affordable and find solutions that work for farmers. These go involving groups of farmers, infrastructure includes diversion weirs beyond the market-driven responses typically provided by financing and canals. Costs per hectare range widely depending on the institutions that tend to remain out of reach for most who need them. country, system type, and quality. In rudimentary systems such as The module follows on directly from Module 4 – Knowledge, with hand-dug wells with bucket-and-ropes, or simple gravity earth- the section on stakeholders being important preparatory reading. canal schemes, high labor requirement can offset the equipment The first section of this module describes credit and financial service cost. Cheap, low-quality petrol pumps can be bought for a few provision in a FLID context; these are the things to think about when hundred dollars, while high-quality, fully equipped installations will assessing the financing environment. The second section provides cost many thousands of dollars per hectare (i-boxes 7.5 and 7.7). guidance on the diagnostic and scoring of the financial enabling Even when costs are on the lower side of the scale, the financial environment. This is followed by an outline of possible intervention hurdle for establishment and acquisition can keep the technology responses that address affordability, credit availability and financial that farmers need far out of their reach. Financing responses such services constraints. Four examples of interventions are outlined, as access to credit, and subsidies, can provide a critical bridge with ideas on how information and communication technology (ICT) across the affordability gap and are the focus of this module. can catalyze financial service provision at scale. 5 FI N AN C E M5-05 5.1 Affordable financing in a FLID context Globally, agricultural finance is associated with strong positive impacts having to pay for husbandry costs up front, with revenue only such as increasing poor farmers’ wealth, reducing poverty, and generated after marketing. raising expenditure levels. Much experience has been consolidated through the rapid expansion and application of various development programs since the 1980s. Important lessons have been learnt about limitations and opportunities. This section highlights a few 3 The life-cycle cost-benefit reflects the net returns over the long term (typically a 10-year period for smallholder farms and equipment). The time taken to the break even point, where the considerations in relation to financing in a FLID context. Challenges and net benefits accrued are greater than would have been obtained lessons of experience are outlined to provide insight into the financing without irrigation (see Module 2), is an important parameter. dynamics, and the potential constraints that a financing intervention When tackling the affordability challenge, all three of these would need to address. elements need to be considered, particularly from the Equipment financing triple-jump perspective of the farmers – their ability to pay up front, the farm cash flow, and their appetite for risk. The financing solutions that Most agricultural financing is focused on short-term credit for are pursued – whether credit services, subsidies, or both – should seasonal inputs (fertilizer, seed, chemicals), which is repaid at the end enable a farmer to clear each of these three jumps comfortably. of one season. The relatively high cost of Resource Farmer irrigation equipment needs longer-term potential benefits capital, and there are three financial hurdles to consider in any assessment: 1 Policy & legal Technology The down payment required to Knowledge Markets purchase equipment is probably Finance the strongest limitation to acquisition for farmers other than those relatively well-off. Financing support may be needed to ensure inclusiveness, as upfront costs can extend to thousands of dollars per hectare. 2 The loan repayment installments usually extend between 12 and 36 months, and their timing and spread can have important impact on monthly cash flows for both farmers and suppliers. Loan repayments compound the financial stress of crop establishment and M5-06 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E Many players in the financing game Formal and informal partnerships, alliances, and innovation platforms are increasingly used as a way of engaging stakeholders There are many stakeholders involved in credit provision for as well as a mechanism for coordination and networking, and to smallholder farmers across the finance, agricultural services, agro- create linkages with farmers. Through these platforms, farmers processing and equipment supply sectors. There is a bewildering interact with various market actors for advice, knowledge, input variety of possible financing solutions involving credit and subsidies, and output markets, as well as other services, such as access to alone or combined. These are often tied into other agricultural and financing solutions. The stakeholders and examples of innovation technical support services to maximize the chance of profitable platforms are described in Module 4. farming, and thereby loan repayment. Formal and informal financing Understanding the different stakeholders and the roles they play is essential, along with foundational information Smallholder farmers who develop irrigation by themselves in order to understand the financing landscape, and for rely mainly on informal networks for financing their production assessing strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities. systems and for marketing their produce. Informal money- borrowing systems include group saving schemes, rotating Equipment credit schemes and moneylenders, usually located within the Agribusiness suppliers community. One attractive arrangement, often with people outside of the community, is pre-financing of the cropping season by informal traders. They provide the financing on the promise Insurance Mobile companies banking that the crop will be sold to them, thus solving the farmer’s finance and market challenges all at once. The risk of fluctuating market prices is typically shared between the farmer and the Commercial Micro-finance banks institutions trader. While informal arrangements are the dominant FLID financing Challenge mechanism, they can be risky. Farmers might not achieve the SACCOs funds expected harvest in terms of quantity and quality, or the market cash returns may be less than anticipated, making loan repayment Carbon credit Farmer difficult, with no formal recourse, and potential impact on social climate funds groups relations. Despite the risks, however, informal financing relations are generally much easier to navigate than formal loans at finance institutions. Key characteristics of informal and formal financing Figure 5.1 Credit provision stakeholders arrangements are compared in the box below. 5 FI N AN C E M5-07 High interest rates slow FLID down Comparative financing constraints High interest rates push up costs and constitute Informal Formal a barrier both for smallholder farmers buying equipment and for suppliers who are keen to sell Informal lending from relatives, Formal credit systems are poorly friends, moneylenders, and informal adapted to the FLID context. Farmers or rent out equipment. Interest rates from informal traders are the dominant financial are typically autonomous, operating sources, including offtakers, are generally higher force behind the FLID phenomena. small enterprises, and have minimal than official or commercial rates (Chokkakula and While they constitute a key FLID recordkeeping. These characteristics Giordano 2013; Fuglie et al. 2020). In Ghana, for driver, their weaknesses include: do not match the expectations of conventional financing institutions: example, interest rates can be as high as 45% per ¢ Interest rates from short-term annum. Monthly rates as high as 20–30% have informal lenders are often even higher ¢ Structured business plans, written been reported in Southern Africa. Such sky-high than formal financing. marketing contracts, farm financial records and collateral are usually rates make equipment acquisition very costly. ¢ Short repayment periods can place heavy cash-flow stress on farmers. absent. Irrigation assets are generally not accepted as collateral. This situation is partly explained by the tendency ¢ Limitations in loan amounts for higher charges on short-term loans because constrain choices on quality and ¢ Often land is held in customary suitability, and can undermine tenure, or farmers are tenants, thus of the fact that smallholder farmers are thought reliability, profitability and enterprise excluding the possibility of land as to be a risky business proposition; and by the high resilience when things break down. collateral. transaction fees – the costs of client acquisition – ¢ Those with less social capital tend ¢ Financing packages tend to be due to many and widely dispersed farmers taking to be excluded from the lending inflexible, and therefore limited in their small loans. These factors combine to seriously channels. usefulness – minimum loans are often constrain credit affordability (Chipfupa and Wale much higher than farmers’ need. ¢ Farmers cannot build credit history 2018; Mutambara 2016). and financial records for future formal ¢ Interest rates can be prohibitively loans. high. A few countries have policies and set national guidelines which have lower interest rates to support several sectors, including agriculture. However, while these rate caps apply to banks, The two forms of financing can also be complementary, and easy-to-access they may not necessarily apply to micro-finance short-term financing can bridge an important gap – if relatively small. Despite institutions (MFIs) or financial cooperatives. In the prevalence and relative ease of access, the risks and costs of informal credit Kenya and Ethiopia, for example, MFIs and savings remain high, and more structured finance interventions are often needed to and credit cooperatives (SACCOs) are either not catalyze FLID. regulated or are subject to different rules. M5-08 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E Interest rate regulations are also not Markets drive FLID Resource Farmer potential benefits watertight and have gaps that can be exploited. Lower interest rates, for There is a strong message emerging from case experiences that Policy example, can be offset with higher the market for high-value irrigated produce is a primary driver of & legal Technology FLID. Evidence from Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, Mali and Burkina transaction fees, or exposure can Knowledge Markets be limited through loan caps that Faso – as well as beyond the continent (e.g. South Asia) – suggests Finance that a strong market “pull” factor is associated with profitable and are below the likely cost of irrigation equipment. Another downside is that expanded FLID. Clusters of irrigators tend to be built around growth regulated (low) rates tend to disincentivize commercial lending. in value chains, particularly Rural banks and MFIs generate their revenue through interest rates where there is demand for Resource Farmer potential benefits and related fees. The rate caps may be unattractive, resulting in high-value irrigated produce disinterest in providing credit to farmers and agribusiness who are (Muturi et al. 2019; Nkoka, keen to invest in equipment. Farmers who have potential are then Veldwisch, and Bolding Policy & legal Technology excluded from gaining the substantial benefits of irrigation. 2014; Abric et al. 2011; De Fraiture and Giordano 2014). Knowledge Markets Finance Inclusion These markets are growing, particularly as sub-Saharan Younger, better-off male farmers tend to benefit most from Africa (SSA) urbanizes and consumer habits and diets shift (Tschirley FLID across Africa. Women and resource-poor farmers, while et al. 2015). Markets are addressed in more detail in Module 6 but constituting the majority, are particularly disadvantaged in the FLID are highlighted here because of the strong link between the market process. The two main reasons for this are the high upfront costs players and how financing arrangements are envisioned. of equipment and the difficulty in accessing credit – even informal credit. Other reasons relate to the agricultural production cycle, Crop and equipment insurance for including: inadequate information on irrigation farming; difficulty risk reduction in accessing seed and fertilizer; lower labor availability; weak land rights; and poor market integration (Lefore et al. 2019). Limiting risk through insurance is part of an integrated financing response. Weather shocks, disease, and the loss of equipment The combination of more constrained credit access and exclusion due to vandalism or theft can lead to production losses or failure, from important agricultural system factors leads to widened with resulting loss of profit. While irrigation itself is “insurance” inequality and more wealth in fewer hands. Addressing the against water scarcity risks, the use of financial insurance products limitations that women and resource-poor farmers face in bundled within loan products can help mitigate these hazards. accessing affordable credit is therefore essential to enable more There are two main types of insurance: group-yield index and multi- equitable outcomes. peril insurance (i-box 5.1). 5 FI N AN C E M5-09 Insurance products bundled 5.2 Diagnostic and scoring within loans can limit the financial shock of destructive The purpose of the diagnostic and scoring exercise is to reflect the severity of the weather, disease and financial constraints that are faced by smallholder farmers when they want to build equipment theft. their own systems (materials, machinery, labor), or purchase irrigation equipment. An intervention is needed where significant constraints are identified and the score for the financial factor is low. Diagnostic – collecting and assessing information The diagnostic requires information on the category of the farmers targeted in the intervention, the type and quality of financial services and credit provision arrangements, and the broader set of financial services that are available to smallholder farmers. This includes accessible banking, accounting, e-commerce, digital money etc., as credit provision is but one service in the suite of financial services provided by the financial sector. The diagnostic would also cover the policy and legal aspects of the financial environment informed by Section 4 of the Main Guide and guided by the approach in i-boxes 3.4 and 3.5. This information can also be included in the consultants’ Terms of Reference (TOR). The information collected under the financial theme will require information-sharing by team members and will feed into scoring deliberations, as described in the next section. A consultant would usually be assigned to undertake this task and a typical scope of works of a TOR for the diagnostic is included in i-box 5.2. In SSA, it is notable that while these products are available, uptake is low due to high costs and poor Scoring the financial environment understanding of the benefits of the products. To assess how limiting or enabling the financial environment is for a farmer attempting Some insurance products are still not sufficiently to access financial support, you have to consider financial policies and laws; the range tailored to the needs of the farmers, particularly of financial and credit services that are available to smallholders; and the accessibility smallholder irrigation producers. The prevalence, of those services across the country. We know that better-off farmers tend to find ways strength, and extent of uptake of insurance have a to finance irrigation equipment through savings and informal or formal borrowing. bearing on the diagnostic scoring of the financial factor because insurance impacts risk, and risk is In assessing the score we must ask: What is the category of farmers targeted in the one key determinant of the cost of finance. intervention? And can they accept the risks and afford the cost of the equipment they M5-10 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E need? Where the cost of credit is high, or financial products are poorly suited to smallholders’ needs, or the accessibility of services is so weak as to limit targeted farmers from acquiring equipment; then the score for the finance factor will be low. In turn, this means that a financing or subsidy intervention is needed to catalyze FLID. More detailed guidance on the issues that inform the scoring assessment is provided in i-box 5.3. 5.3 Examples of interventions There are many different finance interventions that can be used singly or together. It is inevitable that a solution that is responsive to the constraints in any context would involve a mix of the intervention examples presented next. The choice of intervention(s) is informed by the diagnostic, and complemented with information from the diagnostics on knowledge, markets and technologies. Figure 5.2 While financing is the focus, the linkages across factors are strong. Though financing can play an important role Elements of integrated in lifting farmers and their enterprises to new levels of production and financial vitality, a sole emphasis irrigation financing on financing equipment should be avoided. Financing institutions, aggregators, and irrigation equipment suppliers who offer credit have identified strong linkages to output markets as a critical factor to reduce the risk of farmers’ defaulting on their loans. Strengthening financial Irrigation Inputs & services may enable farmers to purchase equipment, but on its own is unlikely to be financing services enough to ensure loan repayment that depends on sustainable irrigation enterprises  Private company  Improved inputs  Farmer Union  Crop insurance (Merrey and Lefore 2018). This means that effective access to markets, as well as support  Other entity (MFI, bank)  Mechanized service providers and advisory services, are needed in an integrated financing approach (Figure 5.2).  Direct to farmer or farmer group The first two financial models strive to catalyze private sector activity based on an integrated irrigation financing approach. These include stakeholders in loan finance, agronomy, markets, and technology sales and service provision. The other two FARMER models target affordability more directly, by reducing direct costs through matching Market Digital grants, or facilitating hire-purchase-type arrangements. information advisory & & access payment services There are other catalytic opportunities that extend across all of the financing options,  Value addition  Irrigation guidance  Crop price, market  Weather information such as the use of insurance, ICT and financial technology, and the mobilization of calendar  Digital payments  Offtaker contact green or climate funds. These potentially transformative complementary interventions are addressed at the end of the section. Combinations of solutions can markedly strengthen financial access, inclusion and affordability, but make implementation more complex in practice. The risks from additional complexity versus the benefits to farmers must be assessed and rationalized. 5 FI N AN C E M5-11 Example intervention 1 Where these common interests are present, albeit misaligned Facilitating linkages between existing due to coordination weaknesses, FLID can then be accelerated actors (i-box 5.4) Financing by dynamizing the linkages between the interested institutions actors. Change can be catalyzed by facilitating This intervention recognizes that there farmer business plans; resolving gaps in Loans is willingness and demand from all Pay Irrigation financing criteria; identifying holistic finance, back equipment actors in the irrigated agriculture value Irrigation equipment, marketing and extension Insurers equipment chain but identifies that the linkages suppliers packages for farmers; mitigating financing Purchase are weak and their expectations risks by engaging insurers; and motivating misaligned. The intervention builds on or PAYG public sector finance for roads, water permits, Farmers stakeholder networking approaches that Farm and other agricultural value chain investments. revenue are described in Module 4. It is often a weak High Multi-stakeholder platforms, described in Module value financing environment that calls for this crops 4, can play a valuable role in this process, as can Agri- approach. It is based on the observation, in business Government other forms of networking such as media outreach offtakers many situations, that: and digital connection platforms. 1 Farmers are technically ready to adopt new irrigation technology but cannot afford it. Figure 5.3 Facilitating linkages between farmers and market players 2 Financing institutions (agricultural and development banks) face high transaction costs in identifying farmers who are investment-ready. Example intervention 2 Credit guarantee and risk-sharing arrangements (i-box 5.5) 3 Aggregators and agro-processors have unmet demand for consistent and reliable supply of produce for processing. Credit guarantee arrangements to finance irrigation can work well because they bring all parties together and transfer the risk from private to public sector. There are numerous 4 Suppliers of irrigation equipment are often established (even if in major and not in minor centers) and have suitable technology solutions, but cannot carry the risks and transaction costs of financing. variations of the approach in terms of how funds flow, but they share the same strategy. A development finance institution (DFI) provides a guarantee to national financing institutions, to suppliers, or to agribusiness companies. They provide credit 5 Government is often looking for private sector partners to leverage private financing and achieve more integrated and sustainable development. to farmers to access equipment without carrying the risk of default. Three variations are listed below, and expanded in i-box 5.5. M5-12 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E n Variation A – DFI guarantees a financing institution, such as an agricultural or development bank. They in turn guarantee credit to In the variations of the credit guarantee model, the intervention would require engagement with private sector entities, commerce groupings, and multiple government line ministries. Selection criteria and application modalities for eligible selected (proven) MFIs, who act as agents during an financing institutions and MFIs would have to be established, along with funds intervention rollout and lend to farmers directly. management, disbursement procedures and financial safeguards. Involvement n of financial management and agricultural financing specialists is essential. Variation B – DFI guarantees a supplier, Collaboration with co-financing institutions focused on the private sector could which then provides credit to individual farmers, as a conventional loan or with a pay-as-you- be advantageous. go (PAYG) financing arrangement (discussed later). Example intervention 3 n Variation C – DFI guarantees an agribusiness company, such as a cannery, bulk aggregator/exporter or processor, which in turn Pay-as-you-go (PAYG) (i-box 5.6) PAYG are financial products for end consumers (farmers). These are different finances the irrigation equipment of outgrowers. from the credit guarantee and other models that target higher-level financial institutions, equipment suppliers, and produce offtakers, but still for the farmer’s benefit. The PAYG model is most common with solar pump arrangements that have a relatively high capital cost. They are similar to hire-purchase agreements, where a down payment is followed by installments over 12 to 36 months, with DFI payment often facilitated by mobile money. Sometimes equipment is global Credit guarantee Credit guarantee system for mobile communications (GSM) enabled, so it operates as and when payments are made. Variation A Variation B Variation C Equipment companies have developed these financial products for credit, as Financing Irrigation equipment Value chain they are among the few ways that the companies can increase the sales of their institutions suppliers actors products when affordability is low and the finance environment is weak. The Loans to farmers Loans to farmers PAYG financial products readily complement, but do not replace, other financing interventions. The public sector can promote PAYG by increasing knowledge about this modality among irrigation equipment suppliers, supporting digitally enabled equipment Farmers (such as GSM-equipped pumps) , and adding PAYG capabilities to risk-sharing interventions (such as example intervention 2). Figure 5.4 Credit guarantee variations 5 FI N AN C E M5-13 Pay-as-you-go rental and irrigation Example intervention 4 service provision models have real Subsidies (i-box 5.7) advantages: It might happen that even with a conducive credit system, smallholder ¢ They enable women and other farmers still cannot afford the development of irrigation, as costs are resource-poor farmers to bypass social prohibitive given their resources. When farmer affordability is low, subsidies ownership barriers and remove the are a key instrument for accelerating irrigation equipment uptake, to support financial burden of the down payment intensification and expansion. Subsidies can strengthen supply networks, improve agricultural and technical knowledge, and related services and ¢ Existing MFIs or SACCOs are often support. When successful, these lead to lower prices, with cascading farm- able to provide adequate short-term financial and wider economic benefits. When used inappropriately, they credit to cover pump rental or irrigation can also distort competition, weaken value chains, undermine other useful services technologies, or skew demand and prices. ¢ The irrigation service provision model fills a niche market of smallholders who To ensure that farmers remain in the lead of the irrigation development cannot purchase pumps, while engaging process, subsidies should be partial, aiming solely at bridging the affordability small and medium-sized enterprises gap of the smallholder farmer and nothing more. Subsidies are administered (SMEs) in irrigated value chains. through either matching grants or revolving funds. In a matching grant, the public subsidy reduces the capital cost for the farmer and is blended into the equipment-purchasing financing arrangements. Farmers contribute a part of the cost. Matching grants promote ownership, increase affordability, encourage sales, and strengthen supplier networks and product knowledge Variations of PAYG include one where payments by increasing turnover and technology penetration. In setting the farmers’ lead to equipment ownership (effectively a hire- contributions, attention needs to be given to realistic affordability levels; the purchase setup) and another which is a simpler rental impact of the grant on market costs, broader awareness and knowledge; and arrangement for water services provision. The latter the government’s ability to finance its portion. has evolved rapidly with a surprising footprint across Africa, with studies suggesting that an estimated 25% of In a revolving fund, the subsidy is used to capitalize a loan fund, which is then irrigators in many countries are being served in this way administered by an entity that could be a farmers’ or savings group, a SACCO, (De Fraiture and Clayton 2012). There is real potential or similar. The group has a reserve of money (the Fund) which is used to to increase irrigation market density with this “uber for lend to borrowers from the group. Over a set period of time, the borrower is irrigation” approach, especially when combined with expected to repay the original sum that restocks the fund, and then others get ICT platforms. access to loans in subsequent rounds. M5-14 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E Subsidies, through matching grants or revolving funds, can be effective in bridging the affordability gap when the financing environment is weak. Caution, however, is 5.4 Concluding note warranted, and the potential downsides – such as negative impact on markets, the Irrigation technology is usually costly setting of precedents and promoting dependency etc. – must be carefully assessed. for farmers to acquire, partly explaining why FLID is dominated by the relatively Cross-cutting intervention – ICT (i-box 5.8) better-off, mostly younger men. Low ICT tools can catalyze and facilitate all manner of interventions, and opportunities for levels of affordability, when combined ICT to improve efficiencies and accelerate the pace of rollout should be sought in all with expensive or inaccessible financing of the above intervention examples. ICT reduces the costs and risks associated with options, form a serious constraint to rapid offering financial products, and also helps to close the gap in both equipment and technology uptake that has the potential produce markets. In public interventions, ICT innovations can be accounted for as to trigger intensification, profitability and directly funded services, as well as included in pre-qualification specifications and/ greater inclusion. or tendering criteria. The use of ICT tools can be identified at multiple steps in the financing process, as illustrated in Figure 5.5. Informal financing currently drives FLID, and assessment of the informal environment can help highlight Repeat sales/financing weaknesses, leading to the design of intervention responses where informal Customer Agronomic Customer Payment financing bridges a smaller and more credit and market identification transactions manageable gap. Solutions that are evaluation support financially enabling will be varied and context specific; subsidies will be informed Figure 5.5 Steps in the FLID financing process by political priorities and the national fiscus; while networking solutions will be informed Widely used and accessible ICT solutions can be integrated with the interventions, and by the status of financial, agribusiness and are expanded in i-box 5.8 and 5.9. These include: technology supply actors. Interventions will n Mobile money and e-wallets most likely comprise a mix of approaches outlined in this module. ICT is a potential n Remote sensing and remote monitoring of use of pumps game changer in extending information n Credit scoring tools services, linking farmers and catalyzing n Apps to link irrigation customers to produce buyers access to, and beneficial outcomes of, n Data services for credit and inputs, and e-Voucher systems for subsidies. financial services. 5 FI N AN C E M5-15 i-Boxes M5-16 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E i-BOX 5.1 Crop and equipment insurance The most commonly used insurance products are indemnity-based crop insurance, where an insured farmer receives compensation for the verifiable loss or damage at the end of the growing season, and n Multi-peril insurance – provides a cover for several agreed- upon losses, such as loss of production due to weather conditions, pests or diseases. Insurance firms use satellite weather weather index insurance, where the farmer makes claim payments data to verify this. However, this is not a preferred option as it calls based on the realization of an objectively measured weather for multiple physical inspections (planting, production and harvest variable (e.g. rainfall) that is correlated with production losses. Some seasons), the costs of which are usually borne by the farmers. of the other variations made within insurance products to incentivize This insurance product has to be bundled together with irrigation uptake of irrigation equipment include: equipment insurance, which provides cover against loss due to fire, n vandalism or theft, to promote uptake of irrigation equipment and Group yield index – uses a combination of weather index also mitigate perceived risks by the financial institutions. and group dynamics to estimate potential loss or damage of product. Upon loss of production yields, the insurance firms Insurance companies partner with commercial banks, offtakers and evaluate the loss based on the weather conditions first, and in equipment suppliers to design credit products whereby insurance addition use yield data collected from the farmer group to assess premiums are bundled into the loan products when lending to any additional loss or damage outside of the weather conditions. farmers. The insurance covers the cost of production and potential This product is mostly applicable in situations where farmers income lost and is mostly tailored to a specific crop. The premiums are organized in groups, have structured offtake contracts, are cost ranges between 5% to 10% of the overall production cost for provided with inputs and/or equipment, and target yields set at the weather and pest insurance policies and 2% to 5% of the equipment beginning of the offtake contract. cost for irrigation equipment insurance. CR O P AN D EQ U I PM E N T I N S U RA N C E M5-17 i-BOX 5.2 Outline TOR for the finance diagnostic 3 Description of the flow of funds for irrigation service delivery in the following areas: n Within the national government structures The consultant will analyze the following aspects in relation to n Within the local government structures (from local government subsidy and financing aspects as they impact on individual and headquarters down to the lowest level of local government group schemes in small-scale irrigation development: administration) for irrigation service delivery. n Between the national government and local government With reference to policy and legal aspects of financing: The structures diagnostic will cover the policy and legal aspects of the financial environment informed by Main Guide Section 4 and guided by the approaches outlined in i-box 3.4 and 3.5, and in Minh et al. (2021). 4 The consultant will be required to focus on the public financing and procurement aspects noting that a separate assignment regarding policy, institutional and legal environment is being This information can be attached to the consultant’s Outline TOR for the finance diagnostic. The assessment of the policy and legal undertaken with a focus on roles and responsibilities of the different environment will feed into the diagnostic and subsequent scoring institutions and departments relevant for small-scale irrigation of the legal and policy factor. development. This assignment will complement that separate legal and policy review with a particular focus on subsidies, loan structures and procedures currently in use for procurement. With reference to existing government programs (not related to donor-funded projects) With reference to donor-funded projects: the consultant will 1 be expected to analyze these in relation to individual and group Assessment of the current public financing structures within the schemes for small-scale irrigation development, taking into national government and county government for provision of consideration how these models and value chain actors could subsidies and loans to individual farmers and groups of farmers for complement public support. small-scale irrigation development. Among the aspects to be assessed n Analysis of financing models used in small-scale irrigation projects is whether there are any procedures for farmers to express interest in and examples or case studies of how other agricultural inputs have applying for subsidies. been disbursed to farmers (either individually or in groups). 2 n Analysis of the role of value chain actors in provision of financial Assessment of the current procurement structures within the national and local government for procurement of irrigation products and market linkages (e.g contract farming) in relation equipment from suppliers on behalf of individual farmers and groups of to financial institutions (commercial banks, savings and credit farmers for small-scale irrigation development. cooperatives (SACCOs), micro-finance institutions (MFIs), digital money platforms) and other non-state actors (e.g. NGOs). M5-18 OUTLINE TOR FOR THE FINA NCE D IAG NOSTIC i-BOX 5.2 Proposals: Following the analysis of these key elements, the con- n The range of financial loan products currently used for individual sultant will provide suggestions on suitable financing models or irrigators, related financing models used in small-scale irrigation mechanisms for further development of FLID. projects, and examples or case studies of how donor funded 1 projects have supported farmers to access irrigation equipment With reference to private finance: the consultant will be and other agricultural inputs and methods of disbursement (either expected to analyze the following areas in relation to how individually or in groups) [1]. private finance providers support farmers to invest in irrigation: Proposals: Working closely with the public finance specialist (TOR n Identify and assess the experience of financial institutions, their attached), the consultant will be required to analyze these key respective market reach or presence in countries and their financial elements, and provide concrete suggestions on suitable financing products offered (loans, collateral required, credit assessments, models or mechanisms and levels of subsidy for further develop- risk mitigation structures) for small-scale and individual irrigation ment of FLID in a report and short power point presentation equipment; n Analyze the capacity of financial institutions to provide loans and make recommendations on public action necessary to scale [1] The consultant will be required to refer to the recent work done up FLID; by Stichting Nederlandse Vrijwilligers (Netherlands Development n Analyze the experience and financial products key value chain Organization) (SNV) on assessment of FLID in Kenya and constraints actors and traders involved in the financing of small-scale and and barriers to smallhold farmers investing in irrigation. The individual irrigation farmers. This will include the mapping of their consultant is expected to review the financial models identified and experience, respective value chains, offtake models and types of explore their applicability to achieve scale with consideration of use of financial products, market linkages and related constraints. The public finances. study will include contract farming arrangements involving financial institutions (such as commercial banks, SACCOs, micro-finance institutions, and digital money platforms) and other non-state actors (NGOs). 2 With reference to donor-funded projects: the consultant will be expected to analyze: n Financial arrangements in relation to individual and group schemes for small-scale irrigation development, taking into consideration how these financing mechanisms and models could complement public finance interventions aiming to increase access to affordable financing for smallholder farmers; O U T L I N E TO R FO R TH E F I N A N C E D I AG NOSTIC M5-19 i-BOX 5.3 Laws and regulations related to finance pay little attention to Guidance on equal access; women and other recognizable groups (e.g. those scoring the financial factor based on religion or ethnicity) are constrained in accessing credit The scoring of the financial axis on the diagnostic spider plot n Women are required by cultural or religious rules to get the is based on a simple ranking from very weak to very strong, permission of male relatives to access credit . with a score of 1 to 5 respectively. Characteristics of a weak n Women and other recognizable groups are barred by laws or financial environment describe a general situation that constrains regulations from accessing credit. smallholders’ access to finance, and might include: n Women and other recognizable groups face unreasonable bureaucratic barriers by financial institutions to accessing credit, e.g. Financial policies and regulations that are unsuitable for irrigation literacy or education requirements, excessive information demands, equipment markets and irrigated value chain development complexity of forms, the need for signatures, or the presence of n Interest rate policies are not in place for agriculture and male relatives, among others. climate-smart technologies. Information and communication technology (ICT) systems are n Tariffs, including exemptions, are implemented haphazardly and underdeveloped, with few opportunities to reduce transaction inconsistently for equipment and related products, such as solar costs of credit provision and risks of default for borrowers systems, batteries, and parts. n Foreign exchange is in short supply, and foreign exchange rates n Money mobile is unaffordable, inaccessible, and not widely used are unstable. by companies and farmers. n Equipment suppliers are unable legally to offer products on n Internet access is expensive and generally inaccessible in rural credit – e.g. pay-as-you-go (PAYG), asset finance models. areas. n Apps are seldom used to link equipment suppliers, offtakers Appropriate financial products (for smallholder farmers) are and post-harvest agribusinesses (aggregators, processors etc.) limited in the formal credit market with each other and with individual producers and farmers’ organizations. n Longer-term credit, seasonal repayment and affordable annual n Information services, such as weather, market and agronomic interest rates are unavailable. n Insurance for producers and other actors in irrigation value advice, are unavailable. chains is costly or difficult to access. n There are weak linkages and networking opportunities for different actors across agricultural, finance and technology sectors in the irrigation space, enabled by ICT. M5-20 GUIDAN C E ON SCOR ING THE FINA NCIA L FACTOR i-BOX 5.4 Facilitating linkages between existing actors The market system in most developing countries is loose and lacks integration, a fact which, some argue, is a major cause of earlier failures to build a market for irrigated supply chains. The 3 Aggregators and agro-processors have unmet demand for consistent and reliable supply of produce for processing (e.g. tomato canneries, mango juicing) or pack houses for export. Outgrower lack of linkages between actors creates poor information flows, arrangements that are centered on aggregators are well established reduces trust between actors, and discourages innovation – all and widely successful, but usually include only input supply (seed, of which contribute to high risks of failure. The intervention fertilizer) and extension support. Side selling is widespread despite aims to build bridges between these actors based on an contracts, with related risks of not recouping integrated irrigation financing approach. It is based on the When there is input loans provided in advance. Equipment following: a clear failure costs are higher than inputs and repayment 1 timelines are longer. The equipment Farmers are technically ready and financially able to adopt in coordination financing risks are excessive for most new irrigation technology. They are, however, unable to between multiple aggregators, pointing to a need for other develop the kinds of business plans and financing proposals willing and financing modalities. that formal financing institutions – such as agricultural banks interested actors or national development banks – require. Where farmers are organized in groups, their institutional establishment is often weak, without bank accounts, administrative records or clear in the value chain, interventions can bridge these gaps. 4 Suppliers of irrigation equipment are usually established in major centers, if not decentralized to small centers. In organizational roles and responsibilities. general, they either already have or are able to get suitable technology solutions needed 2 Financing institutions (agricultural and development banks) face high transaction costs in identifying farmers who are investment-ready, and in supporting the coherent by farmers. Their business motivation is to increase equipment sales but, as in the case of aggregators and financing institutions, they cannot carry the heavy transaction costs of facilitating the linkages – even if package of agricultural services and inputs that farmers need. they had the expertise and capacity to do so. This package usually includes not only loans for equipment, but also access to quality seed, fertilizer, extension support and secure markets. Access to the whole package – and potentially to insurance in addition – increases the chance of farming 5 Government is often looking for private sector partners to leverage private financing and achieve more integrated and sustainable development, with opportunities in collaboration with success and reduces loan default risks. Financing institutions river basin or catchment management agencies, regional and district may have interest but cannot carry the costs of establishing development funds, climate and green funds, and local infrastructure these linkages. investments. FAC I L I TAT I N G L I N K AG ES B E TWE E N E X I STIN G ACTORS M5-21 i-BOX 5.4 Where these aligned interests are present, though separated by a failure in Figure 1 Facilitating coordination, then FLID can be accelerated by dynamizing the linkages between linkages between farmers and the financial institutions and other interested actors. Brokering engagement can market players bridge such information gaps and, importantly, develop trust between actors. Financing institutions Knowledge brokers should aim to ensure incentives for different types of actors to remain engaged. In addition, brokering engagement often works best if it is nested at multiple scales (local, regional and national), with information moving Loans Pay Irrigation across scales. Different types of knowledge exchange and innovation platforms back equipment Irrigation are described in Module 4 and can be used to activate this kind of intervention. Insurers equipment suppliers They catalyze change by: Purchase n Facilitating financing with the advantage of reducing the cost of customer acquisition for financing institutions and equipment suppliers. Farm revenue Farmers or PAYG n High Offering business advice and capacity development to farmers who are value crops technically ready to invest in new farming practices, and need support to Agri- develop business plans and financing proposals. business Government offtakers n Identifying and bringing together a coherent package of technologies that require financing to enhance success across the system: irrigation, greenhouses, seeds, agro-chemicals, extension support and post-harvest storage. Irrigation acceleration platforms (IAPs) can be limited n Creating linkages to mitigate financing risk, often through assurance of by the role that government wants to play, and by the good market opportunities, thus opening opportunities for formal offtake preferences of other types of actors, such as private agreements with agribusinesses. companies and external stakeholders, in leading such networking initiatives. Platforms are also often difficult n Enabling private sector actors to access data and market intelligence that are not easily available, contribute to finance innovations, and identify priority information on opportunities for co-investment and risk sharing (Minh et to maintain after a specific project closes – though they may play an important role in the short term, by bridging initial market and knowledge gaps so that al. 2020). sufficient momentum is obtained. n Bringing attention to the need for financing key public sector services (such as access roads and bulk water supply, as well as the necessary land and water rights), and for financial policy. M5-22 FAC ILITATIN G LINKAG ES BETWEEN EXISTING ACTOR S i-BOX 5.5 Credit guarantee Variation A – A DFI guarantees the financing institution and, in turn, the MFIs, who lend arrangements to farmers Credit guarantee arrangements to finance irrigation can The basic arrangement is that a DFI provides a credit guarantee to a work well because they bring all parties together and commercial bank or irrigation fund, and the credit guarantee then cascades transfer the risk from private to public sector. There down to selected MFIs or savings and credit cooperatives (SACCOs – i.e. are numerous variations of the approach in terms of a local financing institution). The MFIs or SACCOs then provide credit to how funds flow but they share the same strategy. A individual farmers or small groups, who purchase irrigation equipment from development finance institution (DFI) provides a guarantee a supplier. The purchase can be either in cash, or through PAYG, a form of to national financing institutions, to suppliers, or to hire-purchase explained in i-box 5.6. agribusiness companies. They provide credit to farmers to The farmers sell produce at local, distant or contract markets, generate profit access equipment without carrying the risk of default. and repay the loans to the MFIs. The risk of loan default is effectively carried n Variation A – A DFI guarantees a financing institution, such as an agricultural or development bank. They, in turn, guarantee credit to selected (proven) by the DFI. micro-finance institutions (MFIs), which act as agents during an intervention rollout and lend directly to farmers. Credit guarantee Credit guarantee n Financing Variation B – A DFI guarantees a supplier, who institutions MFIs or DFI SACCOs then provides credit to individual farmers, as Loans for a conventional loan, or with a pay-as-you-go (PAYG) equipment purchase financing arrangement (i-box 5.6). n Variation C – A DFI guarantees an agribusiness company, such as a cannery, bulk aggregator/ exporter or processor, which in turn finances the irrigation Farm revenue High value Pay back loans Irrigation equipment Purchase suppliers equipment of outgrowers. Markets crops Farmers equipment or PAYG Figure 1 Financing institutions, MFIs or SACCOs as credit providers CR E DI T GUARA N TE E A RRA N G E M E N TS M5-23 i-BOX 5.5 Variation B Variation C – A financing institution guarantees the irrigation equipment – A financing institution guarantees the agribusiness/offtaker suppliers The credit guarantee is provided to the agribusiness entity, such as The credit guarantee is provided from the DFI to the financing a cannery, mill, packaging, or processing facility. A critical element institution, and cascades onwards to the irrigation technology of this variation is that the agribusiness company will have a supply suppliers. The suppliers facilitate the credit services, either as a contract with the farmer for the produce. This approach is routinely direct loan or under a PAYG arrangement. used to provide inputs (seed and fertilizer) and chemicals, but less often for equipment, because of reasons explained earlier (default risk, theft, crop failure, etc.). Credit Credit guarantee guarantee Irrigation Financing technology Credit Credit institutions suppliers guarantee guarantee DFI Financing Value chain Pay back institutions loans DFI actors or Loans for PAYG equipment Payments from Offtaker market offtakers contracts Loans High value for equipment Markets crops purchase Farmers Irrigation equipment Farmers suppliers supply on contract Purchase and equipment costs equipment Farmers are deducted Figure 2 Irrigation equipment suppliers as credit providers Figure 3 Agribusiness companies as credit providers M5-24 CR ED IT G UA RA NTEE A R RA NG EMENTS i-BOX 5.6 Pay-as-you-go Pay-as-you-go (PAYG) in overview These are financial products for end consumers (farmers), which are different from Country experiences the credit guarantee and other models that target higher level financial institutions, One barrier to asset-based financing is equipment suppliers or produce offtakers. Equipment companies have developed these the requirement and management of financial products for credit, as it is one of the few ways in which they can increase the the down payment, usually 25% to 50% sales of their products when affordability is low and the finance environment weak. of the equipment price. Matching grant payments or subsidies to cover part of This finance model is often referred to as PAYG because the equipment may include the costs from public or development global system for mobile communications (GSM) shut-off switches to block use for non- funds have had mixed results. In one case, payment (made with mobile money such as m-pesa, e-bucks, etc.). PAYG is primarily in Ghana, that predated remote shut-off available for solar pumps, which have higher up-front costs than petrol pumps (although systems, farmers did not make any solar pumps have much better returns over ten years when interest is not unreasonably payments after the publicly sponsored high [see Module 7 i-box 7.6]). deposit because they lacked incentives in the absence of a robust compliance The PAYG model has been driven by a few private equipment developers and system. manufacturers and is cascaded down through their distributors as a financial option provided to farmers. It has generally relied upon support from blended sources, In other countries, such as Uganda, where particularly private equity sources, including company research and development matching grants for irrigation equipment have been used, the public procurement (R&D), crowdsourcing and private investment firms, as well as through climate or energy systems and norms have excluded the funds, and credit guarantees. Development funds and social enterprise funds have possibility of farmers engaging in a PAYG enabled piloting and strengthening of this finance model. Accountable to investors, arrangement with the supplier. This the companies providing PAYG often pursue parallel approaches to reduce risk, such constraint has eliminated the chance of as using ICT tools and information or marketing partnerships that can improve farm using PAYG to reduce the upfront cost, profitability and reduce client default. thus potentially excluding farmers with lower affordability levels who otherwise The PAYG financial products are increasingly more available to irrigation farmers and would have been accommodated. can complement other financing interventions, by being nested within them. On their own, they do not replace the other financing responses which extend equipment access by providing higher level financial muscle to financing institutions, suppliers and aggregators. PAY-AS -YO U - G O M5-25 i-BOX 5.6 PAYG to ownership More information can be found at: Some equipment developers and suppliers have begun to offer pumps on a consumer http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/ finance model, effectively using the irrigation equipment for asset-based finance akin en/387931552667416907/pdf/135340-WP- to hire-purchase arrangements. These models often include warranties and service P165652-PUBLIC-15-3-2019-11-41-29-WeBook. packages that ensure product quality during the payment period, which is typically a pdf down payment followed by regular payments over 18 to 36 months. https://www.pv-magazine. com/2019/12/18/a-solar-powered-irrigation- PAYG rentals and service provision pump-with-pay-as-you-go-option/ Another version of PAYG falls under equipment rental and irrigation services. Evidence https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/ points to a significant rental market for pump users (AgWater Solutions and ILSSI IRENA/Agency/Publication/2020/Jul/ sources) serving more than 25% of irrigators across multiple countries in sub-Saharan IRENA_Pay-as-you-go_models_2020.pdf?la= Africa (SSA). Additional studies point to a pathway from rental to eventual ownership. en&hash=7A2E7A7FF8B5BAB7748670876667 This highlights the potential for pump rental and irrigation service as a PAYG irrigation 628A39DE40D5 (focused on the solar energy business and to increase the irrigation market density. The market size is sufficient to sector – not irrigation per se, but offering explore development of ICT platforms for this type of “uber for irrigation” service to useful information on PAYG models) reach more farmers. As most pump renters and irrigation service providers are individual entrepreneurs, the source of finance for their investment in equipment has been individual savings and remittances. Pay-as-you-go rental and irrigation service provision models have some real advantages: n The arrangement enables women and other resource-poor farmers to bypass social ownership barriers and removes the financial burden of the down payment. n Existing micro-finance institutions (MFIs) or savings and credit cooperatives (SACCOs) are often able to provide short-term credit of an adequate amount to cover pump rental or irrigation services. n The irrigation service provision model fills a niche market of smallholders who cannot purchase pumps, while engaging small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in irrigated value chains. M5-26 PAY-AS-YOU -G O i-BOX 5.7 Subsidies Subsidies have the benefit of strengthening the overall market system for What to consider when setting subsidies irrigation, prompting growth and benefits. They are used when markets and matching grant amounts alone do not deliver the best outcomes for farmers or for national development priorities. However, subsidies can have negative effects. They can distort competition, undermine the perceived value of products, and weaken the value chain when used inappropriately. Subsidy programs can n What can the farmer afford? The sub-grouping of farmers who would benefit, or, conversely, those who would be excluded from the benefits, depends on also inadvertently undermine other (similar) useful technologies that may the size of the subsidy and how much farmers can afford. be well established and still relevant, skewing demand and prices. They Factors to consider would include the socio-economic can also promote some types of firms over others, or entrench unrealistic standing of the group of interest, size of farm, crop mix, perspectives about the true value of the technology being subsidized. and profitability of the farm enterprise in comparison with More sweepingly, subsidies can distort allocation of resources and shift the anticipated capital contribution. It is useful to compare markets across the economy, prompting technology use or production that the probable farmer contribution with other common was not anticipated or part of the initial subsidy objectives. Yet, subsidies assets (such as motorbikes) to get a sense of what farmers remain a powerful instrument when demand and supply networks are are likely to afford from their own resources and savings. weak, and farmer-affordability is low. Affordability surveys can also be helpful. Subsidies are often blended into equipment purchase financing arrangements using matching grant arrangements. These are a form of subsidy, where farmers contribute some of their own capital, thereby n How much is the funding reality going to change over time? It is possible to set a high initial public contribution for the purchase of irrigation equipment, strengthening ownership and leveraging private sector investment (in this with the intention of reducing the subsidy once there is case individuals and small groups of smallholder farmers). A percentage momentum and wider uptake. The subsidy intervention of the equipment purchase (perhaps 25% to 75%) is funded by the state, could prompt a much broader awareness of the benefits of to increase affordability, encourage sales and uptake by farmers, and irrigation, and encourage individual action because farmers strengthen supplier networks and product knowledge. Subsidies can also would observe others in their locality who are benefitting. take an indirect form through down payments on equipment for farmers Short-term fertilizer subsidies have been shown to trigger through projects implemented by NGOs or corporate social responsibility this effect when the issue in question is not only affordability programs. but also the fact of farmers not having had the opportunity to see the advantages of irrigation for themselves. In such instances, the subsidy accelerates knowledge around the benefits and can be steadily reduced. SUB S I DI ES M5-27 i-BOX 5.7 n What is the state’s fiscal capacity to finance subsidies? The government financial resources have to be taken into account and Country examples in summary balanced with the numbers and types of farmers Uganda micro-scale irrigation program who would likely be beneficiaries of the subsidy. Political appetite is key. The program supported irrigation farmers on less than 1 ha to gain access to a range of irrigation equipment. Solar pumps were heavily subsidized, in view of n What kinds of items are being subsidized? the positive impact on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the lifetime cost If the support is for a short-term investment advantages (twice the net returns, over ten years, of using petrol pumps for mixed vegetables). (like fertilizer), it differs from a long-term investment (irrigation equipment). In the case of a short-term n Subsidies were capped differently, so that the simplest irrigation arrangement investment, the relative amount is smaller, and the had a similar down payment for both solar and petrol systems. benefits are accrued in a season. In a longer-term, n Suppliers were prequalified, and designed different systems according to larger investment there can be ongoing dependency each farmer’s specific needs. on the subsidy, because even with the appreciation of the benefits and positive impact of irrigation, n Government paid suppliers in two installments, and farmers paid their affordability may not always be there. matching contribution via the district offices. Rwanda small-scale irrigation technology subsidy program The program supported irrigation farmers on 2 to 10 ha to accelerate and promote the widespread use of sustainable, demand-driven, affordable, farmer-led and -owned irrigation systems. Technology included motorized, solar powered and treadle pumps. n Subsidies were fixed across the full range of technologies, whether solar, petrol or manual systems. n Suppliers were prequalified and provided predesigned irrigation kits from which farmers could select those most suited to their specific requirements. n Government paid suppliers the subsidy up front, and farmers paid their matching contribution directly to suppliers when the installation was completed. M5-28 SU BSID IES i-BOX 5.7 Country example: Micro-scale Irrigation Experiences informing the Uganda case Program in Uganda Why a subsidy and not just access to financial services? It In the Micro-scale Irrigation Program the farmer and the local might happen that, even with conducive credit arrangements, government co-financed the purchase of irrigation equipment. many smallholder farmers will still not be able to afford the initial Solar-powered and petrol-powered systems were supported with development cost of an irrigation system. The requirement for different levels of subsidy in order to encourage the uptake of down payments, or the monthly repayments while waiting for their climate-smart and more profitable solar-power. Solar-powered crops to grow and generate profits, may be prohibitive. Equipment systems have a higher purchase cost than petrol or diesel subsidies are also useful beyond helping those who would pumps, though they have higher returns in a comparative lifetime otherwise never be able to acquire equipment. Subsidies can also assessment. While the initial cost of petrol is lower, the high cost of strengthen supply networks, improve agricultural and technical fuel makes these more costly overall in the long run. The subsidy knowledge and related services and support. Used carefully, the was structured so that the initial purchase cost to farmers effect of subsidies can lead to lower prices with cascading farm- was similar, thereby triggering climate-related and long-term financial and wider economic benefits. Used inappropriately, they financial benefits for farmers. The co-purchased equipment was can distort competition, weaken value chains, undermine other owned, operated, and maintained by the farmer. The subsidy level useful technologies, or skew demand and prices. depended on the irrigation technology chosen by the farmer and Farmers in the lead and matching grants: Subsidies are a quick was capped at a maximum of 1 ha per farmer. and effective way of achieving affordability when the financing The local government procured the irrigation equipment on behalf environment is weak, but caution is warranted, and the potential of the farmer after collecting the farmer co-payment. Where downside must be carefully assessed. In order to ensure that farmers finance their contribution through loans, formal or informal, farmers stay in the lead of the irrigation development process, the substantial increase in profits resulting from irrigation enables subsidies should only be partial. The subsidy should aim to repayments of the loans. In the solar and solar pump examples, bridge the affordability gap that is faced by smallholder farmers. the farmer would be able to pay back the investment cost of the Matching grants, where farmers contribute part of the costs, equipment after 6 to 12 months. The farmer with solar would pay promote ownership and increase affordability. In setting the farmers’ back more quickly because they would make approximately double contributions, attention needs to be given to: realistic affordability the net profit compared to the petrol-powered system, due to the levels; the impact of the grant on market costs and broader continuous high costs of petrol. awareness of equipment; related knowledge over time; and the government ability to finance. SUB S I DI ES M5-29 i-BOX 5.7 Country example: Small-Scale Irrigation Technology Subsidy Program in Rwanda 2 What farm elements are subsidized. The SSIT program targets the use of portable diesel/petrol water pumps and/or treadle pumps, solar pump driven irrigation 1 Why the subsidy? The Irrigation Policy endorsed by the Gov- ernment of Rwanda (GoR) in July 2014, identified several chal- lenges limiting the growth of the irrigation sub sector in Rwanda. units, delivery pipes, and dam-sheet technology to irrigate relatively small plots/farms ranging from 0.1 ha to 10 ha. Fabrication and assembly of some of the SSIT equipment is done locally through The foremost challenge is the high cost of irrigation equipment pri- strategic partners. This would drastically reduce the cost of marily as a result of Rwanda’s hilly extensive topography. Pumped irrigation development to around USD 1 500/ha. irrigation schemes that occur on the hillside require relatively bigger pumping systems which must be imported at a significant cost. The high cost of irrigation development is also related to the lengthy procurement process associated with governmental procurement 3 How it works – the operational mechanisms themselves The Rwanda Agriculture and Animal Resources Development Board (RAB) works with the administrative districts in order to policies and the related transaction and financial costs that are encourage uptake of the SSIT equipment at district, sector or village incurred as a result. levels. They also work together to select strategic private service providers who will be asked to set up service shops and sales of the This high investment cost has tended to deter individual SSIT equipment in the district in the following steps. farmers from participating in irrigation development, leaving n The districts also receive an annual budget to cover the SSIT the government as the sole investor. The scenario, in which the subsidies, which can go up to 50% of the equipment cost. government is carrying the entire burden of the costs of irrigation development, is unsustainable. n Interested farmers are required to approach the service providers with a proposal for SSIT. In light of these challenges the GoR adopted the farmer-led small- n The service provider will check the feasibility of a farmer’s scale irrigation technology subsidy program using small-scale proposal and provide a quotation for the SSIT equipment to be irrigation technologies (SSIT) in 2014. The farmer-based approach supplied and installed. aimed to promote widespread use of demand driven, affordable n The proposal with quotation is then submitted to RAB for further and locally assembled SSI equipment. It was expected that the verification before a final recommendation for a subsidy is made. SSIT subsidy program would support Rwandan smallholder farmers with simple and cheap irrigation technology systems to increase n If successful, the farmer will take the approved proposal to the their crop productivity and improve the sustainability of irrigation service provider and pay 50% of the SSIT equipment cost. development through a farmer-led approach. n The service provider will receive the balance of payment from a RAB enabled guarantee fund at an appointed financial institution and will be obliged to install the SSIT with a warranty. M5-30 S U BSID IES i-BOX 5.7 4 Experiences – enabling factors, what worked and what could be done differently capacity in the operation and maintenance of SSIT equipment. This could be part of the SSIT subsidy package offered by the SSIT service providers. What worked well: n Access to finance: To facilitate the farmers’ taking advantage of the 50% subsidy, attention needs to be directed towards creating an n SSIT decentralization and budget: To facilitate accessibility of enabling environment for the farmers to secure financial loans for the SSI equipment, the GoR decided to decentralize the program the other 50%. and its operational budget at district level. This could even be leveraged to sector level. Sources: Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources, Rwanda [MINAGRI] (2014a); MINAGRI (2014b); Nzeyimana (2018); Rwanda n Government incentives: Due to high cost of imported irrigation Agriculture and Animal Resources Board [RAB] (2018). equipment, the GoR (in addition to SSIT subsidy of up to 50%) approved some tax exemptions such as duty free and Value Added Tax (VAT) on imported irrigation equipment.   n SSIT equipment suppliers: Starting from 2014 to date, the list of eligible SSIT service providers has been growing, and their performance in selling, supplying and distributing SSIT equipment has also improved. What could be done better: n Expand list of subsidy-eligible SSIT: Although RAB has approved a long list of SSIT equipment eligible for subsidy, it is important to include a wide range of small-scale irrigation technologies that qualify for subsidies, particularly more sustainable technologies such as ones that use solar power and are more water efficient. n Value chains: Integrating the produce resulting from SSIT into value chain systems need to be prioritized since SSIT farmers show a preference for producing high value crops like vegetables. n Capacity building: There is a need for increased farmer SUB S I DI ES M5-31 i-BOX 5.8 ICT and financial Mobile money and e-wallets Mobile money use in Africa is mostly person-to-person and is interventions growing. Mobile money makes it easier for individual farmers or groups of farmers to make payments for inputs such as pumps. Relevance across the process E-money also facilitates withholding of pump payments from Information and communication technology (ICT) tools can reduce produce revenue, such as through produce offtakers. Mobile the costs and risks associated with offering financial products, and money companies are also motivated to support the increased also help to close the gap in both equipment and produce markets. use in agriculture; they are creating financial profiles of clients for The use of ICT tools can be identified at multiple steps in the the finance industry. More creative uses are also being found to financing process, as illustrated in Figure 1. overcome barriers to credit. One project in Zambia, for example, is exploring how e-wallets can be used by women’s groups to jointly Repeat sales/financing save for down payments on pumps, which increases transparency Customer Agronomic and protects group savings. However, some countries impose Customer Payment credit and market regulations on person-to-company transactions, reducing the identification transactions evaluation support opportunity to market operators and entrepreneurs. The level  Identifying regions  Evaluation method  Customer saving  Follow-on services or communities with used prior to offering and transfer of down provided to increase of mobile money expansion and the regulations on use vary for suitable hydrology customer financing payment customer success and agricultural (credit scorecard) with irrigation each country.  Payment transfers aspirations (agronomic  Farm and water  Monitoring of information and  Finding and resource evaluation payments based on contacting potential (use of third-party customized advice) Remote sensing and remote monitoring of the usage customers information, data schedule to assess  Monitoring collected at farm, default risk equipment and crop of pumps remote sensing) conditions  Linking clients to Remote sensing, farm level moisture sensors, and sensors on market offtakers  Linking clients to pumps are all being used to assess farmer irrigation practices, storage options to alert credit providers to the risk of loan default and to build up data for future credit assessments. Remote sensing and satellite Figure 1 Steps in the FLID financing process data analytics of irrigated areas and water resource use is being used to identify where and how to support farmers to improve Examples of ICT tools irrigated practices, from basin to farm level. In Kenya, information The effectiveness of ICT tools to compensate for gaps in market provision to farmers based on remote sensing data is emerging systems is highly dependent on the level of market development as a commercial service, while in most countries remote sensing and, particularly, access to reliable and affordable internet/ remains a public or donor investment, because of the high costs. smartphone use. In case studies, the ICT tools appear to work best At present, tools and equipment are being fitted to transmit data when multiple tools and irrigation equipment are bundled. on farm water use. Solar pump suppliers are fitting pumps with M5-32 ICT A ND FINA NCIA L INTERVENTIONS i-BOX 5.8 bluetooth and water use sensors, which enable the companies to prices specific to farm monitor use. Soil moisture sensors, such as the Chameleon sensor, context, thus giving are also bluetooth enabled to monitor on-field water use. Data is farmers a tool for making analyzed regarding location and timing of pump use as well as informed decisions. abstraction rates, which can flag inappropriate use and indicate risk In addition, it allows of default on pumps. This enables pump suppliers to know if clients increasing competition need in-person field visits or phone-based push messaging in order among suppliers. The to improve agronomic practices. Efforts are underway to combine dispersed nature of FLID various data sources and apply machine learning that can support farmers, coupled with credit-worthiness assessments and reduce risks of default. One their small farm size and project in Uganda provided farmers with smartphones to enable the limited presence of bluetooth upload of information from pumps, while also providing an suppliers beyond major opportunity to push out agronomic and market advice. cities, means that suppliers have high transaction costs in carrying out farm visits, and would prefer to lose a Uganda country example: prospective client rather than incur the cost of a farm visit IrriTrack - a FLID intervention-support App without the certainty of getting the contract. Data collection IrriTrack was developed for the Government of Uganda as part by local government allows transaction costs to be reduced. of a World Bank-supported FLID intervention in the country Over time, as suppliers establish presence in the countryside, (Uganda Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers Reform Program) this public support will be less and less needed. Further case study details in Main Guide i-box L. IrriTrack is downloadable from Google PlayStore and is How can digital drive down irrigation costs? one example of an ICT intervention that not only supports The local government carries out the farm visit, collecting farm the practical field exercise within an operation, but further data through a Program-dedicated App – IrriTrack. Through a collates all farmer information for onward transfer to monitoring and information system (MIS) – which also allows suppliers (for tendering purposes) and to micro-finance central monitoring by Ministry of Agriculture – farmers’ data is institutions. This information exchange maximizes linkages shared with irrigation equipment suppliers, who submit a bid and opportunities for financial support, as well as competition for each farmer. This allows public extension officers to provide for equipment supply. In so doing, the ICT intervention aims advisory services to smallholder farmers on the opportunity to support the whole intervention process to arrive at the (or lack thereof) of introducing irrigation in their specific farm best solution for farmers based on their site-specific physical context. The App makes possible an indicative estimate of conditions, their farm vision, and their affordability status. ICT AN D FI N AN C I A L I N TE RV E N TI O N S M5-33 i-BOX 5.8 Credit scoring tools Other resources for ICT tools Equipment suppliers and financial service providers employ a World Bank 2017. ICT in Agriculture: Connecting Smallholders to wide range of criteria to score credit worthiness in markets where Knowledge, Networks, and Institutions. Updated Edition. Washington, smallholders lack credit history. Tools include quantitative data- DC: World Bank. driven analytics, satellite data analytics, qualitative information assessment, local references and social capital, and a combination of all these methods. The lessons from tool development and pilots should be heeded, particularly as credit scoring tools can be biased against the poorest and women farmers. Apps to link irrigation customers to produce buyers Apps are being piloted and used commercially to link producers, storage and other post-harvest services, as well as produce buyers. While some successes are noted, evidence suggests that the apps do not compensate for lack of markets or infrastructure in general, and are limited in areas with low ICT access. Data services for accessing credit and inputs Entrepreneurs are emerging as information service providers to develop and operate ICT tools that enable farmers’ greater access to credit and inputs on credit. For example, data service providers gather data on farmers for financial service providers to assess credit worthiness, such as FarmDrive. Another service, MyAgro, enables smallholders to build up savings on a lay-away format, and then access inputs. M5-34 ICT A ND FINA NCIA L INTERVENTIONS i-BOX 5.9 E-voucher subsidies e-voucher interventions. Where it is mature and developed with strong participation from the private sector, the use of mobile banking tools (such Overview as e-money) easily and quickly facilitates farmers’ adoption of e-vouchers. In other cases, e-voucher scheme may have to deliver farm inputs to E-voucher programs improve access and productive use farmers through messaging to their mobile phones. Development partners of agricultural inputs by beneficiary farmers and build a experiences and ongoing operations can also be used to gain momentum sustainable demand for inputs from smallholder farmers as quickly with an e-voucher initiative. well as further the development of the private sector input supply. For smallholder farmers, access to productivity- Guidance on e-voucher design enhancing inputs through input subsidy programs (ISPs) allow them to improve the quality and quantity of their A set of key learnings from ongoing programs in Africa is summarized farm output and increase their incomes. Throughout the below. These are important for the adoption and sustainability of e-voucher 1990s and until 2005, agricultural input subsidy programs initiatives, and could be useful when designing interventions. (ISPs) had been largely phased out in sub-Saharan Africa as evidence emerged that these programs were largely ineffective in promoting African governments’ development 1 Enabling policy environment and ecosystem are critical for the sustainability of e-voucher programs. E-vouchers, as an instrument, have the potential to deliver pluralistic extension and advisory services that goals, thus contributing little to agricultural productivity could bring transformation in smallholder agriculture. E-voucher programs, growth, food security, or poverty reduction while placing when supported by a strong policy environment, can play a critical role in a major fiscal burden on treasuries.1 Starting in 2005 the the way subsidies are administered and can trigger a cascade of positive landscape changed profoundly as large-scale ISPs became changes to the agricultural services sector (i.e. with business benefits to the centerpiece of many African governments’ agricultural local input suppliers, strengthened distribution channels, etc.). A supportive development programs primarily driven by the ‘Malawi policy environment will include provisions for easier adoption of e-vouchers miracle’.2 The Malawi case had an important effect on by farmers, strong ownership at all administrative levels of governments, policy discourse on the continent, convincing numerous supportive policies for voucher agencies, etc. Some of the aspects of the governments to undertake similar targeted input subsidy policy environment could be embedded in the project design while others programs. are more gradual to follow. There are many ways of formulating E-voucher models but in general they all provide greater involvement of both private individuals and financial institutions. The status of the financial enabling environment is key to formulating 2 Client capacity is a critical element in mainstreaming an innovative electronic public policy instrument such as e-vouchers. Skilled human resources or a higher order of government capacity is critical 1 Kherallah et al. 2002; Morris et al. 2007; World Bank 2008 2 Smart Subsidies, Reaping Richer Returns: http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/720751489776752023/122290272_201800290000052/additional/113592-PUB-PUBLIC.pdf E-VO U CH E R S U B S I D I ES M5-35 i-BOX 5.9 for implementation. Capacity building must be embedded in the intervention and could be in the form of a separate subcomponent within the project design. 5 A mature fintech sector or mobile money banking environment is one of the key enablers for the smooth implementation of an e-voucher program. Fintech includes mobile money, digital payment systems, and other electronic 3 Capacity of non-state actors including farmer organizations/ cooperatives is another critical element especially because these actors could make up for the weak capacity of the public sector. The payment systems, etc. Countries with established fintech ecosystems will be the first to tap into the potential of the e-voucher system for agriculture. non-state actors include those along the commodity value chain where their capacity is dependent upon the maturity of the value chain. Farmer organizations {FOs) and cooperatives are other key actors. They are building blocks of the e-voucher programs as the beneficiary farmers are 6 Early identification and selection of the voucher management agency and other associated technical providers is foundational to success. Electronic cards and often required to be members of cooperatives to be eligible. The FO or associated mobile payment system should be procured cooperative organizational infrastructure helps the program to connect from a competent technical provider through a competitive with a large set of beneficiary farmers easily. The capacity building selection process. Some eligibility requirements to assess the activities for farmer organizations/cooperatives could also be included competences of a potential voucher management agency in the project design. The capacity of equipment and agro-dealers at the (vendor) are listed below: local level is also key for implementation. Insufficiently developed local n Having the legal and systematic infrastructure recognized in markets will lead to delays in the supply of goods and services that the the country to process mobile (and digital) transactions e-voucher system is intended to provide. The presence of e-vouchers does not necessarily translate into supporting or developing the re- n Experience with electronic cards and provision of point-of- establishment of equipment supplier and dealer networks at the local sale devices at outlets level but could stimulate the establishment of their operations up to the ‘last mile’. n Ability to work seamlessly with other stakeholders of the e-voucher system. e.g., national ID authority, national statistical 4 Last-mile infrastructure and digital connectivity are the key necessary conditions of a reliable e-voucher system. Where connectivity is unstable this can lead to partial redemptions, lack of SMS services, Government e-Payment Gateway, etc. n Ability to manage an information system that can produce notifications, and a breakdown of information flows that undermine the management reports with the required information (i.e., input achievement of impact at scale. The digital connectivity and last-mile type, quantity, unit price, amount per farmer, name of agro- infrastructure should be considered for geographical targeting. dealer). M5-36 E-VOU CHER SU BSID IES i-BOX 5.9 n The existence of local branches and kiosks in project target areas is plus n Ability to provide technical trainings to project implementation staff, agro-dealers, and other partners on: (i) the mobile transaction system; (ii) irrigation equipment; and (iii) agricultural inputs to be redeemed. n Shortest possible time to set up the system in order to ensure quick implementation. E-VO U CH E R S U B S I D I ES M5-37 References M5-38 R EFER ENCES Abric, S., M. Sonou, B. Augeard, F. Onimus, D. Durlin, A. Soumaila, in Sub-Saharan Africa: a review of lessons learned.” International and F. Gadelle. 2011. Lessons learned in the development of Water Management Institute (IWMI) 185. smallholder private irrigation for high-value crops in West Africa. Minagri (Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources, Rwanda). Washington, DC: World Bank. 2014a.“Feasibility Study on the Farmer-led SSIT Program.” Chipfupa, U. and E. Wale. 2018. “Explaining smallholder aspirations Government of Rwanda, Kigali. to expand irrigation crop production in Makhathini and Ndumo-B, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.” Agrekon: Agricultural Economics ____. 2014b. “Implementation Strategy for Small Scale Irrigation Research, Policy and Practice in Southern Africa 57: 3-4. Technologies.” Government of Rwanda, Kigali. Chokkakula, S. and M. Giordano. 2013. “Do policy and institutional Minh, T., O. Cofie, N. Lefore and P. Schmitter. 2020. “Multi-stakeholder factors explain the low levels of smallholder groundwater use in Dialogue Space on Farmer-led Irrigation Development in Ghana: Sub-Saharan Africa?” Water International 38(6): 790-808. https:/ / An Instrument Driving Systemic Change with Private Sector doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2013.843842 Initiatives.” Knowledge Management for Development Journal 15(2): 98-118. https://www.km4djournal.org/index.php/km4dj/article/ De Fraiture, C. and T. Clayton. 2012. “Irrigation Service Providers: A view/489 Business Plan - Increasing access to water for smallholders in sub-Saharan Africa.” AgWater Solutions. http:/ /awm-solutions. Minh, T. T., S. Zwart, R. Appoh, and P. Schmitter. 2021. “Analyzing the iwmi.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/documents/ Enabling Environment to Enhance the Scaling of Irrigation and publication-outputs/learning-and-discussion-briefs/irrigation- Water Management Technologies: A Tool for Implementers.” IWMI service-providers-a-business-plan.pdf Working Paper 197, International Water Management Institute (IWMI), Colombo. https:/ /doi.org/10.5337/2021.201. De Fraiture, C. and M. Giordano. 2014. “Small private irrigation: A thriving but overlooked sector.” Agricultural Water Management Mutambara, S. 2016. “Smallholder irrigation farmers’ financial 131: 167-174. exclusion in Zimbabwe: A resilience threat.” International Journal of Agricultural Policy and Research 4(8): 256-270. Fuglie, K., M. Gautam, A. Goyal, and W.F. Maloney. 2020. Harvesting Prosperity Technology and Productivity Growth in Agriculture. Muturi J., S. Oggema, L. van Veldhuizen, A. Mehari and G.J. Veldwisch. Washington, DC: World Bank. 2019. Accelerating Farmer-led Irrigation Development: Theory and Lefore, N., M.A. Giordano, C. Ringler. and J. Barron. 2019. “Sustainable Practice of the Smart Water for Agriculture in Kenya Project. Nairobi: and equitable growth in farmer-led irrigation in sub-Saharan SWA Kenya, SNV Netherlands Development Organisation. Africa: what will it take?” Water Alternatives 12(1): 156-168. Nkoka, F., G.J. Veldwisch, and A. Bolding. 2014. “Organisational Merrey, D.J. and N. Lefore. 2018. “Improving the availability and modalities of farmer-led irrigation development in Tsangano effectiveness of rural and “Micro” finance for small-scale irrigation District, Mozambique.” Water Alternatives 7(2): 414-433 M5-39 Nzeyimana, I. 2018. “Assessment of Farmer Led Irrigation (FLI) Development in Rwanda.” World Bank and International Finance Corporation (IFC), Washington, DC. RAB (Rwanda Agriculture and Animal Resources Board). 2018. “The Feasibility Study for the Identification of Potential Small-Scale Irrigation Areas.” Rwanda Agriculture and Animal Resources Board, Kigali. Tschirley, D., T. Reardon, M. Dolislager, and J. Snyder. 2015. “The Rise of a Middle Class in Urban and Rural East and Southern Africa: Implications for Food System Transformation.” Journal of International Development. 27(5) July: 628-646. M5-40 R EFER ENCES RE FE R E N C ES M5-41 6 The Farmer-led Irrigation Development Guide Module Output Markets Strengthening output value chains About the Water Global Practice © 2021 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433 Launched in 2014, the World Bank Group’s Water Global Practice brings together financing, Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org knowledge, and implementation in one platform. This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The By combining the Bank’s global knowledge with findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily country investments, this model generates more reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. firepower for transformational solutions to help countries grow sustainably. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this Please visit us at www.worldbank.org/water or work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal follow us on Twitter at @ WorldBankWater. status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. About GWSP Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages This publication received the support of the Global dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for Water Security & Sanitation Partnership (GWSP). noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. GWSP is a multidonor trust fund administered Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to by the World Bank’s Water Global Practice and World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC supported by Austria’s Federal Ministry of Finance, 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Denmark’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Netherlands’ Ministry Citation: of Foreign Affairs, the Swedish International Izzi, G., J. Denison and G.J. Veldwisch, eds. 2021. The Farmer-led Irrigation Development Development Cooperation Agency, Switzerland’s Guide: A what, why and how-to for intervention design. Washington, DC: World Bank. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs, the Swiss Photo credits: Agency for Development and Cooperation, and the U.S. Agency for International Development. Cover and page 4: Stephan Gladieu/World Bank | Page 9: J M Kelvin | Page 15: Scott Wallace/World Bank | Pages 16, 23: Romain Vidal/Water alternatives Please visit us at www.worldbank.org/gwsp or follow us on Twitter #gwsp. Contents ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 02 USING THE GUIDE 03 Output Markets – Strengthening output value chains 04 i-boxes 16 6.1 Market systems and FLID 06 6.1 Outline TOR for the market diagnostic 17 6.2 Diagnostic and scoring 11 6.2 Guidance on scoring 19 6.3 Building blocks of a successful public-private-producer 6.3 Market access intervention examples 11 partnership 21 6.4 Concluding note 15 REFERENCES 23 M O DUL E 6 – O U TPU T M A RK E TS M6-01 Abbreviations and acronyms 4P public-private-producer partnerships M&E monitoring and evaluation comex commodity exchange MFN Mastercard Farmers Network CTA Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation MMP mobile money provider D4Ag Digitalization for Agriculture NRA net rate of assistance FLID farmer-led irrigation development P2P person-to-person FMCG fast-moving consumer goods PAYG pay-as-you-go FPO farmer producer organization PDCRE Smallholder Cash and Export Crops Development FSP financial service provider Project (Rwanda) GAP Good Agricultural Practice SSA sub-Saharan Africa IFC International Financing Corporation TOR Terms of Reference IOT Internet of Things VODP Vegetable Oil Development Project (Uganda) ITC International Trade Centre WRS warehouse receipt systems KPI key performance indicator M6-02 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E Using the guide Tips The main volume of the FLIDguide presents the core body of information that explains FLID and the process of intervention design. Thematic descriptions are included in seven modules. Information boxes (i-boxes) at the back of NAVIGATING THE GUIDE ji the Main Guide and each module provide additional detail, and hyperlinks To move quickly and easily between the interlinked throughout the guide access relevant external publications, websites, information, set up your PDF reader so that the animation clips and videos. j PREVIOUS VIEW and i NEXT VIEW buttons (as distinct from l previous page and k next page) are instaled on the toolbar at the top of your screen. You may then freely explore the document using the navigation pane on the left of your reader or the many hyperlinks provided in the text, and backtrack to the start by repeatedly hitting thej button. Info-Box Info-Box To instal the buttons (in Adobe Reader), i-Box i-Box Module 1 Module 7 ¢ Right-click anywhere on the toolbar and select Resource Info-Box Technology them in the Show Page Navigation Tools options; or Potential i-Box ¢ open the View drop down menu and select them from the Page Navigation options. The Farmer-led Alternatively, try using these keyboard shortcuts: Info-Box Info-Box i-Box Irrigation i-Box Development Windows: Press the alt key and t or u arrow Module 2 Guide Module 6 Mac: Press the command key and [ or ] square bracket Farmer Benefits A what, why and how-to for Markets intervention design PRINTING Info-Box i-Box Info-Box i-Box Office desktop printers cannot print to the edge of the Module 3 Info-Box Module 5 paper. To print pages of this document without losing any i-Box Policy & Legal Finance content, Module 4 Knowledge ¢ choose File > Print, and in the page sizing and handling area or pop-up menu, select Fit to FLIDguide Printable Area or Shrink to Printable Area. layers of information M O DUL E 6 – O U TPU T M A RK E TS M6-03 6 M6-04 Output Markets Strengthening output value chains THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E FLID is characterized by market-oriented farming – T farmers’ livelihoods depend on lively markets! his module elaborates on the importance of access to agricultural output markets for farmers developing their own irrigation systems; how they benefit from it; and the enabling environment that facilitates easy and equitable market access. Farmers’ ability processing, trading, transport and storage, and increasing local to expand, intensify and increase profit from irrigated agriculture is not consumption. Module 6 is focused on the link between FLID only mediated by access to finance (Module 5) and technology (Module processes and agricultural output markets, providing insights 7), but also by their engagement with agricultural output markets. on the enabling environment needed for smallholder farmers Market-oriented farming is one of the defining characteristics of farmers to make their irrigated farming more profitable. who lead the way in developing irrigation, which includes farmers at The first section of this module describes market systems, all scales. Among these, smallholder farmers, who are the focus of the different types of output markets, and the main factors that FLIDguide, often struggle to make the best use of input and output govern the level of market participation by smallholders. It markets, thus constraining their enterprise productivity and profitability. highlights factors that restrict or limit smallholder access to Understanding the different market systems in relation to crop types, markets, and opportunities to facilitate better access. In the demand and supply, market services, the different actors involved, and second section, the key points of enquiry when assessing the constraints and opportunities in the market system, is essential for output markets are outlined and expanded in a scope of works planning an intervention for supporting FLID processes. for a market diagnostic. A set of guiding questions is provided to Effective market participation can provide farmers with the incentive assist with the scoring of the markets factor. The third and final and capability, in terms of income, to adopt and expand irrigation section describes example interventions that can strengthen activities. In turn, investments in irrigation allow farmers to engage in individual farmers’ agency and access to markets, including crop commercialization and intensification, resulting in higher farm agricultural-tech platforms, aggregation models, electronic incomes. Improved linkages between farmers and agricultural output markets, and certifications. The module content overlaps with markets have multiplier effects across the rural economy, raising the and complements the Knowledge (Module 4) and Finance demand for labor and farm inputs, creating more downstream jobs in (Module 5) modules. M O DUL E 6 – O U TPU T M A RK E TS M6-05 6.1 Market systems and FLID Market access as a catalyst the supply chain; and public investment in rural public goods, including roads, warehouses and other physical infrastructure Globally, ease of market access for smallholders has shown a (Wiggins and Keats 2013). positive correlation between increased incomes and increased investment into improving farming practices. Most smallholder While these two parameters that make output markets more farmers in Africa are, however, poorly linked to markets for several accessible and inclusive for smallholders “are necessary conditions, reasons – remoteness, low production, low farmgate prices, they are not always sufficient conditions” (Wiggins and Keats 2013, and lack of information. Further, farmers’ levels of participation viii). This section explores a few considerations in relation to market in markets is dependent on the nature of the commodity (food/ access in a FLID context. Key constraints and lessons of experience cash/niche crops), gross margins, market requirements (quality, are outlined to provide insight into the market dynamics. safety, certifications, customer preferences), and risks involved (price volatility, trade embargo, erratic weather conditions, climate Market systems change). An agriculture market system consists of farmers who grow If small-scale farmers – the majority of Africa’s farmers – are to crops for sale, buyers who purchase crops, and other value chain take advantage of opportunities in markets, then additional action actors who participate in the trade of a given crop. Broadly, a needs to be taken to improve their access to inputs (credit, financial market system has three components – core market, supporting services, technical advice) and to output markets, especially those functions, and enabling environment (Figure 6.1). with growing demand and favorable prices. There is mounting evidence that smallholder farmers developing their own irrigation Factors such as commodity, production systems, farming traditions, practices make significant investments in developing irrigation, and the level of development in a country differentiate one market both at household and aggregate levels – to enter irrigation farming or marketing system from another. There are different types of with markets in mind (rainfed farmers), to upscale production with markets based on location and proximity to farmers – primary a strong business orientation (small and rudimentary irrigation markets (rural and assembly), secondary markets (wholesale and enterprises), or to intensify production and sophistication to semi-wholesale), and terminal markets (processor, retail or export). increase profitability (established business irrigation farmers) (see For more information on market systems, marketing channels and the Main Guide). agricultural marketing see Smallholder Agriculture and Market Participation (Poole 2017). The market environment varies from place to place, informed by two key parameters: the rural investment climate that is conducive There are many stakeholders in a value chain, which include to investment and innovations by farmers and other players in farm input suppliers, storage operators, processors, wholesalers, M6-06 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E Core market Supporting functions Direct market players Suppliers of supporting goods and services  Producers: Farmers – small, medium and large – growing rice for sale in the  Input suppliers: Dealers and companies that sell seeds, fertilisers, markets. pesticides and other inputs to rice farmers.  Buyers: Market intermediaries – such as collection agents, traders,  Equipment suppliers: Dealer and companies that provide specialised wholesalers, millers, processors etc. – who buy and sell equipment such as farming tools, irrigation pumps, tractors, dehuskers, rice in the markets before it reaches the end- moisture meters, solar dryers, etc. to rice farmers. consumers.  Warehousing companies: Harvested rice needs to be  Consumers: People who purchase rice from supermarkets and grocery stores for own stored under controlled environmental conditions to consumption. protect it from moisture, fungal infections, and rodents. Private sector players provide professional warehousing services to store rice for long durations.  Logistics operators: Transporters that facilitate Enabling environment collection, aggregations, and transportation of rice from farm to off-takers and end-consumers.  Government: Market regulations, trade rules, export/ import policies, food safety laws, support prices, public  Certification agencies: Companies that provide quality testing procurement, quality & grading standards, crop-related and certifications services required by certain market segments, especially subsidy and other government actions that regulate export markets. activities and behavior of all market players.  Banks and financial institutions: Institutional credit lenders such as  Infrastructure providers: Roads, electricity, telephone banks, micro-finance institutions, agri-financing companies that extend services, public warehouses, agricultural markets, and mobile technologies that are needed for the market system to function. loan facilities to rice farmers.  Industry associations: Associations (farmer/trader/transporter/processors/  Digital platforms: Companies and startups that provide a suite of digital retailer association) that advocate or lobby for favorable industry policies, bring services such as weather forecast, market prices, and extension services investment, and promote collective branding and advertising. through mobile and IOT based platforms. Figure 6.1 Three main elements of a market system exporters, and retailers (Module 4). Depending on the offtaker, n Model 1 – Aggregator-back model Intermediaries, traders and wholesalers purchase, aggregate and transport agricultural produce from farmers to offtakers and add margins market requirement, level of formalization, and scale of on top of the farmgate prices offered to farmers. Smallholders rely on operation, smallholder farmers participate in arrangements sales via intermediaries to meet their daily cash requirements, but due to that can be summarized into four market-access models lack of market information and price discovery channels, they often have (illustrated in Figure 6.2): to sell crops at lower farmgate prices. M O DUL E 6 – O U TPU T M A RK E TS M6-07 n Model 2 – Producer-forward model Farmers form groups (informal groups, producer organizations, cooperatives) to aggregate and transport agricultural n Model 3 – Processor-back model Farmers engage with processors through pre-harvest contracts to deliver a specified commodity as per the quality and produce at large-scale to end-buyers. Due to economies of scale, quantity requirements of the buyer for an agreed price in advance. farmers get cost benefits, higher farmgate prices, and improved In some interlinked contracts, in addition to agreement on sales and negotiating power in trade transactions. However, weak governance quality of the produce, the processor also supplies inputs, finance structures and lack of processes and mechanisms that ensure and technical assistance in advance to the smallholder on the accountability can lead to management inefficiencies, corruption, promise of sales, with the costs of these deducted from payment. and political interference, all undermining individual farmers’ agency within such models. Figure 6.2 Common types of market-linkage models (Infographic developed on the basis of Tam and Mitchell [2020]) Smallholder Aggregation Processing Transport, End markets farm Farm gate Transport and warehousing (domestic production storage Primary Secondary & marketing or export) 1 Farmer informally aggregates, transports and sells crops to processor (e.g. COOP) Producer forward 2 Aggregator back Aggregator purchases crops, provides input/support to farmers, aggregates and transports to processor 3 Processor back Processor purchases, aggregates, transports and processes crops 4 Integrated corporation Vertically integrated corporation coordinates entire value chain Integrated corporation M6-08 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E Such market linkages provide assured markets and better farmgate dominant structure of trade in Africa across many value chains, prices to smallholders and help in curbing fire-sales of crops at especially for perishables and staples. As a result, business models discounted prices to intermediaries. However, when contract prices trying to integrate smallholder farmers into modern supply chains are way off the current market prices at the time of crop delivery, are including informal trade as part of the overall model. These either farmers or processors tend to default on contract obligations. changes highlight the fact that informal and formal markets can not only co-exist but also be mutually beneficial to each other. n Model 4 – Vertically integrated model Large-scale corporations, beverage manufacturers, fast- moving consumer goods (FMCG) companies, and others integrate Informal markets play a pivotal role in smallholder farmers’ pursuit of diversified avenues of income, mainly because in many cases informal markets are easier to access and more profitable. a large number of smallholder farmers into their supply chains Moreover, buyers in traditional markets are better placed to meet by leveraging contract farming. The corporations provide high- urgent needs of smallholder farmers – such as cash or informal quality inputs, irrigation, storage, transport and extension services credit. Acknowledging the importance of informal markets, many to smallholders in a particular region in order to grow high-value governments and development institutions are actively supporting export crops and “buy back” the final produce at an agreed market traditional markets by addressing key bottlenecks such as price price. Since farmers are locked into the supply chain of the offtaker, fluctuations and power disparities between buyers and sellers. they sometimes lose their negotiating powers. Better understanding of informal markets and supply chains can help governments in formulating more inclusive policies to facilitate Appreciation of the different models and market linkage services smallholder farmers and low-income consumers to realize the full provided by the stakeholders within each model are key to potential of these markets. understanding the market access landscape, and to assess constraints and opportunities for interventions to support FLID processes. Smallholders and informal markets Informal trade and traditional market structures are dominant in many parts of Africa (Vorley, Del Pozo-Vergnes, and Barnett 2012). Despite their limitations, such as lack of traceability and food safety, traditional markets have linked farmers and consumers effectively. Informal transactions between smallholder farmers and local traders are most often the first links, even in the “modern” food supply chains. The growth of formal markets has not replaced the traditional informal markets and the latter continue to be the M O DUL E 6 – O U TPU T M A RK E TS M6-09 Limitations of informal markets: While Smallholder farming markets – lessons of experience informal markets provide easy access and The experiences of governments, donors, NGOs and private companies in linking flexibility in trade to smallholder farmers, smallholders to markets have generated seven prominent lessons that need to be considered they are also vested with some major in relation to the diagnostic, both in scoring of the market factor and in the subsequent bottlenecks, including poor traceability, lack planning of interventions as required (summary based on Wiggins and Keats [2013]). 1 of food safety systems, monopolies and Informal markets impose few market-entry constraints with respect to quality and crop cartels. Further, smallholder farmers standards and hence play a pivotal role in small-scale farmers’ livelihoods. who only trade in informal markets and fail to integrate into formal markets are unable to build the critical mass essential 2 Domestic and regional markets are characteristically larger, more stable and have lower demands with regard to product quality and safety in comparison to export markets. Export markets are accessible only to a small proportion of smallholder farmers; for the for influencing markets and government majority of smallholders, it is more pragmatic to focus on products traded in large volumes in policies. domestic and regional markets. 3 Drawbacks of formal markets: Many Grouping smallholder farmers into producer organizations or cooperatives helps to smallholder farmers do not participate in achieve economies of scale, thereby reducing the high transaction costs incurred by formal and high-value markets because individual farmers while trading with value chain actors. of high entry barriers set up by formal buyers with respect to extensive quality requirements. And while formal buyers 4 Farmer organizations should be cautious in diversifying their portfolio of services. While producer organizations and cooperatives can reduce transaction costs, leading to better farmgate prices and cheaper inputs for members, there are other value chain demand high-quality produce, they do not activities such as warehousing services, micro-financing, packaging, etc. which are done more always give farmers competitive prices, efficiently and effectively by the private sector. making formal markets less profitable for smallholders. Formal buying arrangements between companies and smallholders, such 5 Value chain actors can make supply chains more effective and efficient through investments in new business models. Such initiatives are likely to work when there is a clear business opportunity and the value chain actor does not extract undue rents. as contract farming, often restrict farmers from selling produce to other companies. Moreover, the tradition of on-the-spot payments and easy access to informal credit 6 Market linkage initiatives at farm or supply chain level should focus on business objectives and prioritize returns on investments. Social objectives of reaching the most poor and vulnerable farmers are not always feasible or economically viable. 7 from local traders against future harvests Private sector and government agency efforts to link farmers to supply chains and makes informal markets more lucrative for markets should concentrate on developing processes rather than imposing standard smallholder farmers. For more information models. These outside agencies should foster trust between farmers and other value chain on informal markets see Vorley, Del Pozo- actors, build up local competencies, and resist “too much change too quickly” in order to meet Vergnes, and Barnett (2012). project targets and budget constraints. M6-10 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E 6.2 Diagnostic and scoring 6.3 Market access intervention Diagnostic examples Example intervention 1 The diagnostic requires critical enquiry into access to markets and information on the strength of the enabling environment. Farmer producer organizations This would include assessment of agricultural trade policies; the Smallholder farmers can organize themselves into formal legal regulatory environment; public and private marketing infrastructure; structures – producer organizations, cooperatives, associations the range of supporting services available to smallholders; and – to exert their collective economic agency and power in formal the accessibility of those services across the country. Guidance on markets. Farmer producer organizations (FPOs) allow smallholder policy and legal aspects of the diagnostic are included in Module 3 farmers to gain more bargaining power in formal markets and (also in i-box 3.4 and 3.5). More detailed information on a diagnostic reduce transaction costs, thereby delivering on their expectations: approach is available in Minh et al. (2021). The diagnostic would higher farmgate prices, more stable markets and access to typically be carried out by a specialist market consultant, informed affordable credit (Vorley, Del Pozo-Vergnes, and Barnett 2012). by the scoping Terms of Reference in i-box 6.1. Scoring the market factors Key factors that make farmers’ groups Efficient access to markets underpins a strong business case and powerful and sustainable 1 provides the impetus for smallholders to invest in irrigation systems. Farmer producer organizations (FPOs) are formed with a The purpose of the scoring exercise is to reflect the severity of the clear agenda and the farmers with common interest take market access constraints that are faced by smallholder farmers membership voluntarily. 2 in accessing different kinds of output markets. Key elements of the FPOs’ management is skilled and demonstrates scoring would include consideration of the categories of farmers adaptability in line with the needs of its members and that could be targeted in the intervention; the rural investment market requirements. 3 climate; state of supporting infrastructure; regulatory and They are recognized as legitimate and credible institutions compliance systems; and access to market intelligence. Guidance within policy circles, practise evidence-based advocacy, on the scoring of the market factor is provided in i-box 6.2. negotiate effectively, and implement agreements and laws. If the constraints to market access are high and the enabling environment is poorly suited to smallholders’ needs, then the score 4 They demonstrate the ability to change, innovate, and evolve as per the demands of market systems. of the market factor will be low. In turn, this means that a market- systems-based approach may be needed to catalyze FLID. Source: Vorley, Del Pozo-Vergnes, and Barnett (2012, 40) M O DUL E 1 6––R OES T M U TPU O U RC EA PRK OTE E TS A L N TI M6-11 FPOs, often set up by an external agency Public interventions can directly initiate, facilitate or support Resource Farmer potential benefits (government or NGO) can deliver value existing linkages between small-scale producers and private for smallholder farmers by leveraging companies. The multi-stakeholder platforms and farmer field economies of scale, facilitating access school approaches, described in Module 4 Section 4.3, are Policy & legal Technology to technology and inputs at lower costs, useful modalities to establish and promote these partnership and integrating farmers into high-value outcomes. Knowledge Markets Finance markets which are usually out of their reach. A public-private-producer partnership (4P) model is an innovative approach that can help private-sector companies Example intervention 2 expand their business with smallholder farmers and which provides an opportunity for governments to attract private- Public-private-producer partnerships sector investment in the agricultural sector (Baumgartner Private-sector companies can play a crucial role in addressing 2016). Moreover, a 4P model offers an equitable partnership market failures in dysfunctional agricultural markets. Especially when arrangement in which smallholder producers are respected government budgets for partners and not relegated to a secondary role, where they agriculture are limited, suffer because of the asymmetries in the balance of power “4Ps involve cooperation private-sector expertise, between them and private actors. The 4P model ensures between a government, investment capital, and farmers’ agency in price-setting mechanisms, enforcement of business agents and small- efficiencies can complement contracts, payment modalities, ownership, and coordination. scale producers, who agree the public-sector efforts In a typical 4P the private-sector partner is selected through to work together to reach to improve incomes and a competitive process and producers are actively engaged in a common goal or carry negotiations, partnership arrangements and overall monitoring. livelihoods of smallholder out a specific task while farmers in Africa. Moreover, Example intervention 3 jointly assuming risks and private-sector firms offer responsibilities, and sharing a multitude of services to Agricultural commodity exchanges benefits, resources and smallholder farmers, such An agricultural commodity exchange (comex) is an organized competencies.” as access to inputs and and regulated market in which registered buyers and sellers – Baumgartner (2016, 3) working capital, raw material trade standardized contracts* (spot, future, forwards, procurement, specialized technical assistance, market * a trading contract that stipulates standard quantity, standard quality, intelligence, and investment in community assets such as warehouses, minimum price, and delivery specifications (date, place, payment mode) of a transportation and processing facilities (Table 4.1 and i-box 4.1). commodity traded on the exchange between a buyer and a seller. M6-12 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E derivatives) of agricultural commodities (maize, rice, wheat, etc.) based on the exchange’s trading rules and procedures (Songwe 2016). The success of various comex in Africa has shown that n Institutional requirements: A robust regulatory framework with clear rules and terms for market participation; a trusted dispute resolution process; an inclusive brokerage commodity exchanges can “play an important role in connecting network; robust institutional ownership and governance rural areas to the urban centers as well as linking small farmers to arrangements; a functional technology platform; and multiple major buyers” (Songwe 2016, 3). A centralized trading process via channels to disseminate market information. commodity exchanges tends to have Resource potential Farmer benefits a discernable positive impact on agricultural markets – in the form of improved market transparency, better n Legal and policy framework: Communication, storage and transportation infrastructure; efficient flow of information; a developed financial system; an appropriate legal and compliance price discovery, reduced transaction system; effective policies for fiscal and monetary management; Policy & legal Technology costs, higher returns for market and foreign trade. Knowledge participants, and tighter control over Markets Finance price fluctuations. Moreover, comex Example intervention 4 helps in defining better quality Warehouse receipt systems standards, accelerating product standardization, and making the Warehouse receipt systems (WRSs) are an innovative financing overall market more fair, robust and competitive. mechanism that allows farmers, farmer groups, traders, exporters Enabling conditions for well-functioning commodity exchanges can and other value chain actors to store agricultural commodities be broadly categorized into four types as outlined by Songwe (2016): (grains, coffee, etc.) in an accredited and certified warehouse in exchange for a warehouse receipt (International Trade Centre [ITC] n Commodity-related requirements: Availability of the specified commodity, grades and standards, spot market with large number of participants and value, robust warehouse 2007). Issued by the warehouse operator, the receipt specifies the quantity, quality and location of the stored commodity and is used by the receipt holder as collateral to access credit from financial network, price flexibility for futures exchanges, local-currency institutions. WRS plays a crucial role in curbing “fire-selling” by denominated contracts, etc. smallholder farmers immediately after harvest when market prices are normally low, since it provides an option to store a crop, n ❏Contract-related requirements: Attractive contracts for market participants (producers, hedgers, speculators, etc.); contracts that are not biased towards some market participants monitor market conditions, and sell when prices are favorable – often resulting in a 35–40% increase in price (International Financing Corporation [IFC] 2015). Moreover, WRS helps in over others; contracts usable as collateral in the banking system; drastically reducing post-harvest losses since the stored crop is predictable interest rates; warehousing costs, transportation costs, managed by certified warehouse operators equipped with proper etc. M O DUL E 6 – O U TPU T M A RK E TS M6-13 facilities and expertise. Broadly, two types of warehouse receipt systems exist: unregulated WRS, in which trade partners are bound by contractual laws; and regulated WRS, in which trade is managed 1 Digitally-enabled value chain integrators are D4Ag solutions that use digital tools that link agricultural markets to smallholder farmers. These solutions enable agents of the market by an independent government or private regulatory agency. offtakers to aggregate produce from a larger number of smallholder farmers, bringing efficiencies to the operations of the offtakers and WRSs are considered a viable FLID financing mechanism for increasing margins for both farmers and offtakers. Twiga Foods smallholder farmers in Africa to access capital to invest in irrigation and Digifarm are leading digital offtake market integration solution equipment against the stored commodity in a warehouse. As providers in Kenya. WRS mainly concerns non-perishables, specifically staples, in the 2 context of FLID processes this usually entails rice. D4Ag mechanization access solutions use digital tools Example intervention 5 and channels to link smallholders to farm machinery or Digitalization for agriculture (D4Ag) farm mechanization services, reducing the farmers’ need to purchase expensive technologies for farming or irrigation. The best Digitally-enabled market linkage solutions have a critical role to established example is Lagos-based Hello Tractor which now has play in connecting smallholder farmers to high-quality farm inputs, operations across multiple SSA countries, and Sunculture which agriculture machines and mechanization services, offtake markets, provides pay-as-you-go (PAYG) services in East Africa. and local or international end-customers. By introducing efficiency and transparency into the informal agriculture value chains, digital market linkage solutions allow smallholder farmers to lower their production costs through access to inputs, finance, irrigation and 3 Agri-input and food e-commerce solutions are online retailers of agricultural produce for urban consumers or agricultural inputs for smallholder farmers. They rely on online mechanization products and services, and increase their incomes order fulfilment for aggregating demand, and offline shipping and through reducing the costs and risks of finding and transacting logistics for ensuring that the products reach the end-customers. with buyers. At the same time, these solutions help agribusinesses These solutions have seen an increase in demand during the across the value chains to reduce their operating costs and grow COVID lockdown periods. Examples of such direct-to-consumer their markets and businesses. local produce e-commerce enterprises include FarmFresh in Four major clusters of digital market linkage models currently Gambia, Get It Rwanda in Rwanda, and KwikBasket in Kenya. stand out in the sub-Saharan African (SSA) region: digitally-enabled value chain integrators; mechanization access solutions; agri-input and food e-commerce solutions; and agriculture e-marketplaces. For more information on the digitalization of African agriculture 4 Agriculture e-marketplaces are D4Ag market linkage solutions that bring individual buyers and sellers of inputs and produce together, through a virtual trading marketplace. Mastercard see report from the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Farmers Network (MFN), active in Uganda, is an example of an Cooperation (CTA). e-market place. M6-14 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E Apart from the market linkage solutions, there are also supply chain management solutions that are designed to make agribusiness operations more efficient and profitable. These solutions are already providing tangible results in well-established, tight smallholder value chains such as tea, coffee and high-value horticulture crops, and showcasing their ability to scale into loose value chains. SourceTrace, CropIn and E-prod are examples of existing supply chain management solutions in Africa. 6.4 Concluding note Market-oriented farming is one of the defining characteristics of farmers who take the lead in developing irrigation. Different categories of farmers will likely face different kinds of constraints, including the rural investment climate, state of supporting infrastructure, regulatory and compliance systems, and access to market intelligence. A range of interventions can overcome these constraints, such as smallholder farmers organizing themselves into formal legal structures to exert collective economic agency in formal markets; public-private-producer partnerships, where the private sector companies, enabled by public finances, can support and expand the businesses of smallholder farmers; agricultural commodity exchanges, playing an important role in linking small farmers to major buyers, and bridging the rural- urban divide; warehouse receipt systems, as an innovative financing mechanism that enables efficient storing and trading of agricultural commodities; and digitally- enabled market linkage solutions, introducing efficiency and transparency into informal agriculture value chains through access to inputs, finance, irrigation and mechanization products, thus reducing transaction costs and risks. Farmers’ ability to expand, intensify and increase profit from irrigated agriculture is heavily dependent on markets. Enabling their efficient access to, and effective engagement with, agricultural output markets, along with the necessary knowledge, finance and technology, is key to facilitating farmers’ business success. M O DUL E 6 – O U TPU T M A RK E TS M6-15 i-Boxes M6-16 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E i-BOX 6.1 Outline TOR for the market diagnostic To assess how limiting or enabling the market environment is for and technologically, for farmers to engage in a particular market. a farmer attempting to access different types of markets, one has Do these factors change the ratio of benefits to costs at farm-gate to consider agricultural trade policies and regulations; the range level and suppress the value of outputs, thereby disincentivizing of supporting services that are available to smallholders; and the farmers from participating in some markets? 2 accessibility of those services across the country. The diagnostic is Macro-economic instability, lack of risk mitigation options, guided by the approaches outlined in i-box 3.4 and 3.5, and in Minh and insecure property rights – pertains to stability of et al. (2021). This information can be attached to the consultant’s government policies on trade, price controls, subsidies, exchange Terms of Reference (TOR). rates and the incidence and risks related to bad weather. The The consultant will provide an overview of the general market impact of property rights and/or the absence of formal land titles characteristics and include the following metrics: on cropping, financial inclusion and the insurance sector should be taken into account (see Module 3). Based on the information, assess ❏ Labor availability ❏n if these factors create an enabling environment or if they deter ❏ ❏n Energy availability farmers and private sector from participating actively in markets and/or investing in farms and supply chains. 3 ❏ ❏n Domestic market (projected demand for irrigated crops, Market failures due to high costs of information – population trend, income growth, etc.) transaction costs1 incurred in gaining information required to ❏ ❏n Export markets make trade deals, negotiate contracts and monitor implementation of contracts; ease of access to information on market prices and More specifically, in order to understand smallholders’ access to extension knowledge sought by farmers; farmer’s competence, output markets, four categories will be investigated. The extent collateral and credit history required by banks; supply-demand to which each of these four categories (Wiggins and Keats 2013, information sought by inputs and equipment dealers; raw material 25–28) is responsible for low market involvement by smallholders supply required by processors, wholesalers and retailers in order will be analyzed, based on the information collected in the to make investment in processing plants, warehouses and storage diagnostic. Data needs to be collected on the following: facilities. Based on data on transaction costs incurred by different 1 Research and development; technology dissemination and uptake; cost drivers; and overall economics – relates to crop yields, vulnerability to pests, labor costs, input costs, value market players, assess whether they would increase or suppress 1 Costs borne by market participants in accessing information on prices, quantity, of outputs, etc., and the effect of crop gross margins for a range of quality, and other characteristics of an agricultural product, in order to buy or sell it in crops. Based on the data, assess if it makes sense, economically the marketplace, lend credit, make investment decisions, etc. O U T L I N E TO R FO R TH E M A RK E T D I AG N OSTIC M6-17 i-BOX 6.1 overall investment at farm and supply chain level and prevent farmers from engaging actively in markets. 4 State of monopoly and competition in rural markets – local traders, input dealers, and informal lenders have power to extract rents (unearned profits) by charging higher prices owing to lack of competition in the market. Gather information on net margins earned by different market intermediaries from farm-gate to retail and assess the impact of these margins on farmers’ participation in certain value chains and markets. The marketing assessment will be informed by the development of farmer typologies that are outlined in Module 2, and would be developed as part of the separate TOR described there. M6-18 OUTLINE TOR FOR THE MA R KET D IAG NOSTIC i-BOX 6.2 Guidance on scoring 2 Insufficient spending on rural Guidance on the issues that inform a scoring assessment is provided below. As with all of the thematic factors in the FLID system, the public goods that is vital for scoring of the market axis on the diagnostic spider plot is based production, agro-processing and on a simple ranking from very weak to very strong, with a score of export of high- value produce. 1 to 5 respectively. Characteristics of a weak market environment (Wiggins and Keats 2013) describe a general situation that constrains n Physical infrastructure such as reliable roads, power, water smallholders’ access to markets, and might include: supplies & drainage, and warehouses & cold chains vital for 1 agricultural produce, agro-processing, and export of high value produce is weak or under-developed. A rural investment climate provided by ▪n Communication infrastructure such as mobile connectivity the government that is inappropriate for and internet access lacks scale, penetration, and sophistication development of market linkages. (2G & 3G networks), limiting smallholder farmers’ direct access n Macro-economic stability is not strong enough to enable to digital agricultural solutions. investment and innovation in agricultural output markets. n Agricultural research and extension services systems do n Net rate of assistance (NRA) to agriculture i.e. government taxes not adequately address the productivity, crop protection, pest and public spending does not favor agriculture. control and post-harvest management issues of smallholder farmers, due to poor reach and knowledge gap. n Trade policies are inconsistent and unfavorable for smallholder 3 farmers to access national, regional, and export markets. Lack of regulatory and compliance n Foreign exchange is in short supply and foreign exchange rates are systems that restrict farmers’ unstable, unpredictable or non-competitive. participation in domestic, regional, n Taxation on agriculture is high with tax not reinvested in public and export markets. goods, agricultural institutions & research, and agricultural markets. n Food safety laws, standards and regulations are not in place; do not address harmonization among domestic, regional n Land property laws are weak and property rights are not recognized. or international market requirements; lack compliance, audit and certification systems; or the cost of compliance leads to exclusion of smallholder farmers from markets and policy discourse. GUI DAN C E O N S CO RI N G M6-19 i-BOX 6.2 n Organic certifications systems are unavailable, costly or difficult to access. n Legal system for drafting, negotiating and enforcing farming contracts between farmers and buyers under different market- linkage models either do not exist or are weak in regard to dispute resolution. 5 Laws and regulations related to marketing of agricultural produce that do not ensure equitable access to markets for women and youth. n Women and youth face unreasonable bureaucratic barriers to form producer groups or cooperatives. n Traceability systems to identify agricultural product origin and n Women and youth face cultural or systemic exclusion by market subsequent movements throughout a supply chain, as well as track intermediaries or value chain actors and institutions from the adoption and implementation of good agricultural practices (GAPs), management and marketing of agricultural produce. social and environmental practices, food safety and payments, do not exist. 4 Poor level of digitization of value chains with few opportunities to access market intelligence and reduce transaction costs. ▪ Internet access is expensive and generally inaccessible in rural n areas. n Digital commodity markets do not exist and the preconditions, such as rules and bylaws, contract specifications, quality standards, warehousing systems, brokerage networks, technology infrastructure, and reliable financial settlement systems are absent or weak. n Mobile money providers (MMPs) and financial service providers (FSPs) are unable to provide a combination of digital payments services legally – e.g. airtime top-up, person-to-person (P2P) remittance, bill payments, merchant payments, agricultural credit, and insurance products are nonexistent, expensive, or not accessible to smallholder farmers. M6-20 G U IDA NCE ON S COR ING i-BOX 6.3 Building blocks of a successful public-private-producer partnership Designing an effective and equitable multi-stakeholder partnership is a big challenge. It requires a diligent and meticulous analysis of interests, motivations and priorities of all stakeholders involved in order to make the partnership 7 Develop a 4P monitoring and evaluation (M&E) process: follow a robust M&E process that helps stakeholders track and monitor the project’s successful, results-oriented, and sustainable. Finding answers to the set of key performance indicators (KPIs) and alerts them of guiding questions below (Baumgartner 2016, 6–8) can help to achieve the deviation from KPIs. desired outcomes of a public-private-producer partnership (4P) model: The responses to the questions above constitute the 1 Define a clear rationale for adopting the 4P model: nature of problem (opportunities and challenges), need for a partnership, alignment of common interests, stakeholder incentives, overall goals and objectives. “building blocks” of a successful 4P model. 2 Select the 4P partners: selection process through competitive bidding or due diligence; identifying the capacity-building needs of partners, especially farmers. Partner selection 3 Develop a business case for a 4P model: negotiate and develop a viable business model and bind producers, private companies and government into a partnership based on the type of business model chosen, e.g. contract Develop business case Monitoring & evaluation farming, out-grower model, joint-venture, etc. 4P 4 Ensure long-term financial viability of the 4P model: identify the funding rationale sources – public goods, semi-public assets, private sector investments, producer assets – required for making a 4P partnership successful. Governance Financing mechanism modalities 5 Define roles and responsibilities of partners: for each partner, negotiate roles and responsibilities, agree on the share of risks and benefits, and identify strengths and weaknesses. Define roles & responsibilities 6 Develop a 4P governance mechanism: establish internal rules, regulations and mechanisms for conflict-resolution, risk-mitigation, decision-making and stakeholder communication. Figure 1 Building blocks of a private-producer-partnership (4P)-based market intervention (reproduced from Baumgartner [2016, 7] with minor amendments) BU I L DI N G B LO C K S O F A S U CC ES S F U L P UB LIC -PRIVATE-PRODUC ER PARTN ERSHIPS M6-21 i-BOX 6.3 There are different value chain development models that are nucleus estate and negotiated direct contracts with local farmers adopted by the private sector to link smallholder farmers to the to source raw material. 3 output markets. The type of model depends on the nature of the product (perishable, bulk commodity, differentiated, etc.), the list of partners (producers, buyers, processors, exporters, etc.), and Joint-venture models end-market. In a joint-venture business model, farmers are not only The different public-private-producer suppliers of agricultural commodities but shareholders partnership models are (Baumgartner 2016): in a joint venture between them and the private company or 1 investor. Unlike the previous two models, this model gives more power to smallholder farmers in decision-making, facilitates their ❏ Horizontal business models ownership of assets and has implication for sharing of benefits and risks within the 4P. In Rwanda, the government purchased 30% In such models, the partnership between producers and and 15% shares in two tea-leaf processing factories on behalf of private companies is informal in nature, not based on tea-producer cooperatives as part of the Smallholder Cash and any written contracts or agreements. The model requires farmers Export Crops Development Project (PDCRE) to encourage farmers’ to be organized into groups, cooperatives or associations with the ownership and create opportunity for them to get dividends. capacity and bargaining power to supply agricultural commodities to one or more private players (e.g. traders, processors, retailers). An example of this model in Africa comes from Ghana where farmer producer organizations and district value chain committees linked smallholder maize farmers to markets and enabled access to training, inputs and technology via a cashless credit system. 2 ❏ Vertically integrated models These business models are based on a formal, written contract between farmers or farmer organizations and a private company. The contracts can range from seasonal contracts to fully integrated outgrower schemes and depend on the private company, country, agricultural commodity and other factors. Vegetable Oil Development Project (VODP) in Uganda falls in this category of business model in which an oil processor established a M6-22 BUILDIN G BLOC K S OF A SUCC ESSF UL PUB LIC-P R IVATE-P R OD U CER PA RTNER SHIP S i-BOX 6.1 References DI AGN O ST I C S CO P I N G TO R FO R A F L I D M ARK ET ASSESSM EN T M6-23 Baumgartner, P. 2016. How to do Public-Private-Producer Partnerships Songwe. V. 2016. Developing Regional Commodity Exchanges in (4Ps) in Agricultural Value Chains. Rome: International Fund Africa. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution’s Ending Rural for Agriculture Development (IFAD). https:/ /www.ifad.org/ Hunger Project. https://assets.ctfassets.net/5faekfvmlu40/2pb documents/38714170/40314128/Public-Private-Producer+Partne gnY7Q2g8Y4gCkWUW0U8/4590047e395bee246c8985ba7fc2 rships+(4Ps)+in+Agricultural+Value+Chains/853d82f8-45c9-4493- ad95/Songwe_Commodity_exchanges.pdf b2da-b509112cc0b3 Tam, V. and C. Mitchell. 2020. A New Paradigm of African Agricultural IFC (International Financing Corporation). 2015. How Warehouse Development. Boston: Bain & Company, Inc. https:/ /www.bain. Receipts Can Improve Lives. Website accessed at https:/ /www. com/globalassets/noindex/2020/bain_report_farmer_allied- ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/news_ext_content/ifc_external_ intermediaries.pdf corporate_site/news+and+events/news/how+warehouse+receipt Vorley, B., E. del Pozo-Vergnes, and A. Barnett. 2012. Small producer s+can+improve+lives on 01/03/2021 14:25. agency in the globalised market: Making choices in a changing ITC (International Trade Centre). 2007. Cotton Exporters Guide. world. London: International Institute for Environment and Geneva: International Trade Centre (ITC). https://www.intracen. Development (iied) / The Hague: Hivos. https:/ /pubs.iied.org/ org/uploadedFiles/intracenorg/Content/Publications/ sites/default/files/pdfs/migrate/16521IIED.pdf Cotton%20Guide%20August%202013%20small.pdf Wiggins, S. and S. Keats. 2013. Leaping and Learning: Linking Minh, T. T., S. Zwart, R. Appoh, and P. Schmitter. 2021. “Analyzing the Smallholders to Markets in Africa. London: Agriculture for Impact, Enabling Environment to Enhance the Scaling of Irrigation and Imperial College and Overseas Development Institute. https:/ / Water Management Technologies: A Tool for Implementers.” IWMI www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications- Working Paper 197, International Water Management Institute opinion-files/8401.pdf (IWMI), Colombo. doi: https:/ /doi.org/10.5337/2021.201 Poole, N. 2017. Smallholder Agriculture and Market Participation. Rugby: Practical Action Publishing.https:/ /www.google.com/ url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8& ved=2ahUKEwjF-bvMoa3vAhUClFwKHcY9CXkQFjABegQIARA D&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fao.org%2F3%2Fi7841e%2Fi7841e. pdf&usg=AOvVaw2wTs3ev0_YFfI_ICpQoJBl M6-24 R EFER ENCES RE FE R E N C ES M6-25 7 The Farmer-led Irrigation Development Guide Module Technology FLIDt echnologiesa nd their social implications About the Water Global Practice © 2021 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433 Launched in 2014, the World Bank Group’s Water Global Practice brings together financing, Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org knowledge, and implementation in one platform. This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The By combining the Bank’s global knowledge with findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily country investments, this model generates more reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the firepower for transformational solutions to help governments they represent. countries grow sustainably. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this Please visit us at www.worldbank.org/water or work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal WorldBankWater. follow us on Twitter at @  status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. About GWSP Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Since The World Bank encourages This publication received the support of the Global dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for Water Security & Sanitation Partnership (GWSP). noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. GWSP is a multidonor trust fund administered Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to by the World Bank’s Water Global Practice and World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC supported by Austria’s Federal Ministry of Finance, 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Denmark’s Citation: Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Netherlands’ Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Swedish International Izzi, G., J. Denison and G.J. Veldwisch, eds. 2021. The Farmer-led Irrigation Development Development Cooperation Agency, Switzerland’s Guide: A what, why and how-to for intervention design. Washington, DC: World Bank. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs, the Swiss Photo credits: Cover and page 4: Maheder Haileselassie/IWMI | Page 6: Stéfan Abric Agency for Development and Cooperation, and the | Page 7: Mário Chilundo | Page 9: Agriworks Uganda | Page 10 (from top): Nana Kofi U.S. Agency for International Development. Acquah/IWMI; Jonathan Denison; Jean-Phillipe Venot; Nana Kofi Acquah/IWMI; Adam Öjdahl/IWMI | Page 14: V. Atakos/ICRAF | Page 16: Philip Junior Mail/Unsplash | Pages Please visit us at www.worldbank.org/gwsp or 17, 43: Romain Vidal/Water Alternatives | i-boxes: Page 25: VIA (in i-box 7.3) | Page 27: follow us on Twitter #gwsp. Moisés Buduio (in i-box 7.4) | Page 36: Stéphan Abric (in i-box 7.9) Contents ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 02 USING THE GUIDE 03 Technology – FLID technologies and their social i-boxes 17 implications 04 7.1 Water Productivity 18 7.1 Technology and the farmer 05 7.2 Summary of technologies 20 7.2 Diagnostic and scoring 11 7.3 Soil-water management technology examples 25 7.3 Guidance on intervention planning 12 7.4 Soil-water management technology – benefits 27 7.4 Concluding note 16 7.5 Comparative capital costs of solar versus petrol for irrigation 30 31 7.6 Comparative benefits of solar versus petrol for irrigation 7.7 Solar pump indicative costs and selection considerations 32 7.8 General guidance on the applications and use of solar irrigation pumps and systems 34 7.9 Alternative effective water application systems for FLID 36 7.10 Challenges with drip irrigation technology 38 7.11 Outline Terms of Reference for the technology diagnostic 39 7.12 Guidance on scoring the technology factor 40 7.13 Remote monitoring systems and digital agriculture 41 REFERENCES 43 Abbreviations and acronyms CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research IFC International Financing Corporation Organisation M&E monitoring and evaluation D4Ag Digitalisation of African Agriculture PAYG pay-as-you-go ESMAP Energy Sector Management Assistance Program RMS remote monitoring systems FAO Food and Agriculture Organization STEPS Social, Technological and Environmental Pathways to FLID farmer-led irrigation development Sustainability GHG greenhouse gas TDH total dynamic head GPS global positioning system TOR Terms of Reference GSM global system for mobile communications VIA Virtual Irrigation Academy GSWI Global Solar and Water Initiative WFD Wetting Front Detector HP horsepower WHO World Health Organization i-box information box WP water productivity M7-02 Using the guide Tips The main volume of the FLIDguide presents the core body of information that explains FLID and the process of intervention design. Thematic descriptions are included in seven modules. Information boxes (i-boxes) at the back of NAVIGATING THE GUIDE ji the Main Guide and each module provide additional detail, and hyperlinks To move quickly and easily between the interlinked throughout the guide access relevant external publications, websites, information, set up your PDF reader so that the animation clips and videos. j PREVIOUS VIEW and i NEXT VIEW buttons (as distinct from l previous page and k next page) are instaled on the toolbar at the top of your screen. You may then freely explore the document using the navigation pane on the left of your reader or the many hyperlinks provided in the text, and backtrack to the start by repeatedly hitting thej button. Info-Box Info-Box To instal the buttons (in Adobe Reader), i-Box i-Box Module 1 Module 7 ¢ Right-click anywhere on the toolbar and select Resource Info-Box Technology them in the Show Page Navigation Tools options; or Potential i-Box ¢ open the View drop down menu and select them from the Page Navigation options. The Farmer-led Alternatively, try using these keyboard shortcuts: Info-Box Info-Box i-Box Irrigation i-Box Development Windows: Press the alt key and t or u arrow Module 2 Guide Module 6 Mac: Press the command key and [ or ] square bracket Farmer Benefits A what, why and how-to for Markets intervention design PRINTING Info-Box i-Box Info-Box i-Box Office desktop printers cannot print to the edge of the Module 3 Info-Box Module 5 paper. To print pages of this document without losing any i-Box Policy & Legal Finance content, Module 4 Knowledge ¢ choose File > Print, and in the page sizing and handling area or pop-up menu, select Fit to FLIDguide Printable Area or Shrink to Printable Area. layers of information M7-03 7Technology FLID technologies and their social implications M7-04 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E T Co-constructing technical solutions is an iterative process, with farmers his module addresses technologies and the role they can play in farmer-led at the center. irrigation expansion, intensification, and profitability. The contents are not a comprehensive description of technical irrigation options – which are extensive and widely available in the public domain – but guidance on how technologies 7.1 Technology and the farmer might be better incorporated in a FLID intervention plan. The socio-technical dimension The first part of the module draws attention to the reality The introduction of any technology triggers some measure of social and that technology is not a dislocated object but has a powerful behavioral change. It can dramatically improve the farming business social dimension. The idea of “transformative technologies” by reducing labor and overall is routinely part of FLID intervention discussions. While its production costs, increasing crop use can be justified, the phrase risks missing the critically Irrigation technologies and water productivity (i-box 7.1), and important aspect of context. Technology must be assessed must fit the social, improving the quality of agricultural in relation to the farmer’s particular situation, either as an organizational, produce. Less evident, perhaps, individual or within a group using an irrigation system. It is financial, and are the deterministic effects that this context that defines which technology is transformative, agricultural realities to technology has on behaviors, and which is not. Two prominent technology examples function effectively. farming practices, gender roles, that frequently feature in FLID interventions are used to and social relations. Some of these highlight this point: the choice of pumping energy (solar effects are outlined below. vs petrol), and a range of field application methods that are often misunderstood. The second part of the module provides guidance on the diagnostic and scoring of the technology environment in a country. The final part of the n Knowledge and role changes Changes in technology often require different sets of technical, irrigation and agronomic skills, and can shift the timing and alter the module describes a set of principles that inform the process workloads of women and men. There are essential conditions for of technology selection. These need to be taken into technology to perform well, and there is an implicit assumption, in the consideration when knowledge and finance interventions are technical design itself, that the irrigation technologies are relevant to a set designed (as per Modules 4 and 5). of physical, financial and operational realities. Understanding those implicit M7-05 assumptions (particularly for equipment maintenance and water-application), and linking them functionally to the technology at hand, is therefore important to achieve the intended results. n Inclusion Technology processes and choices can strengthen inclusion (Main Guide i-box H). Roles n in farming, and the distribution of benefits from Impact on local customs agriculture production, are both gendered and Technology choices can impose changes on farming households, generational. Women, men, youth and the elderly farmers’ groups, and the surrounding community, and can be inadvertently have different roles in farming and food value chains disruptive. Alternatively, choices can institutionalize new practices that are that vary even within communities. Women and youth aligned to changing customs. Notably, roles for water management on group typically undertake specific tasks in production, schemes, and for irrigated production on individual farms, may be more flexible harvesting, processing and the marketing of farm where irrigation is relatively new and agriculture has traditionally been rainfed. outputs. At the same time, both women and men may Roles are also reshaped continually based on new incentives emerging from control decision-making – and undertake different changing social and economic conditions. One common example of such tasks – on their separate plots, while still adhering change occurs with migration: if men or women migrate seasonally out of a to customary norms on joint or household plots. community to seek off-farm cash income, spouses “left behind” often take up Understanding customs and norms is important roles in domestic water management, farming, and marketing which may not to anticipate the wider impacts of intentional have been the norm under previous customs, particularly if they cannot afford, or technology changes. find, labor to hire for those tasks. Best-fit technology FLID is characterized by diverse personalized practices (Module 2 Figure 2.1) with a wide range of technical solutions that are used successfully (i-box The wider 7.2). These include solutions that are locally developed impact of based on years of experience, and those that are technology freshly invented or modified from what farmers have change must observed in other settings. This personalized character be informed by of technical solutions in FLID is somewhat different customs and from technology-centered interventions that are norms. imagined to be ‘silver bullet’ solutions. These are often promoted as if they will solve all of the challenges that farmers struggle with daily. They assume that all farmers will need the same solutions and respond in M7-06 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E the same way. Even though such technologies may not Integrated practice counts be the best-fit choices, they typically have an image of Irrigation practices modernity and are frequently favored by policymakers, must be the focus The practice of irrigation – meaning engineers, and farmers, alike (De Bont and Veldwisch – they include how knowledge informs the use of the 2020; Beekman and Veldwisch 2016; Venot et al. 2014). knowledge and the technology – plays a big part in determining whole technology the outcomes from a given technology. A fit-for-purpose There are few right or wrong technical mix, not just a Resource Farmer strategy that allows solutions, but rather preferences and potential benefits single technology farmers to develop practices that determine the best choice. on its own. and/or choose solutions Preferences are informed by many factors Policy & legal Technology for themselves – that include: experience, crop type, complemented by affordability, other existing technology on the farm (pumps and tanks), labor Knowledge Markets knowledge that Finance availability, access to spares, water quality and security, social and family allows them to do commitments, and costs in general. so – is needed to drive technology change in programs aiming to achieve Technology, in turn, can promote better practice. An inspired example is meaningful outcomes. where water productivity can be greatly improved by the use of cost-effective soil-water measurement instruments (Figure 7.1 and i-box 7.3). Adaptive irrigation scheduling is not practiced by most FLID is technologically balanced smallholders because they lack the A characteristic of FLID is that farmers find a equipment and knowledge to understand balance between their choice of technology and the status of water in the root-zone soil their context. Even where farmers may have more profile. It is also almost impossible for advanced options available, many often prefer farmers to know whether they are retaining labor- and knowledge-intensive, or locally available fertilizer in their soil or leaching it out. solutions. These include simple stream diversions Soil-water monitoring equipment can help with earth furrows; bucket-and-rope methods farmers manage water and nutrients in drawing from shallow wells; or hand-dug ditches to control drainage. Others may find a balance with the root zone more effectively, whether more capital intensive technology – like small petrol in simple furrows or sophisticated drip pumps, popular because they are widely available, systems. The benefits of managing soil- affordable, mobile, and easily serviced. water are substantial in terms of labor, Figure 7.1 Using a soil-water fertilizer and pumping cost savings – monitor in Mozambique M O DUL E 7 – TEC H N O LO GY M7-07 translating to increased water productivity (i-box Solar is the future, but petrol has Resource Farmer potential benefits 7.4) and financial returns. A doubling and tripling its place of yields, and of gross margins, is recorded in multiple countries and farming contexts across Small petrol pumps for irrigation are widely used, Policy & legal Technology Africa (i-box 7.4). readily available, and cheap to purchase in Africa (i-box 7.5). They are mostly used by individuals, but sometimes Knowledge Markets There is also a process of evolution regarding Finance shared within small groups. Their affordability, mobility technical choices. Technical advancement in and simplicity explain their widespread presence, but FLID often takes place in small steps, rather they do have their drawbacks – in the form of very than a technological “big-bang”. Farmers at different stages of irrigation high operational costs (fuel, oil and spares), negative introduction, expansion or intensification will have different technology needs, environmental impact, and short lifespans. Solar pumps, risk appetite, and financial capacity. A petrol pump and hose-pipe setup may though far less prevalent in Africa, are increasingly be chosen to start irrigation farming because it is affordable, even though a popular for a range of reasons: solar pump, sprinklers or a drip system may have been preferred at the time. As farmers become more financially established and gain more experience, they might choose more sophisticated technologies, like drip irrigation and fertigation. These are more complicated, require different skills, and better 1 The financial case to be made for solar-energy- pumped systems on a lifetime assessment, when comparing purchase, operations and maintenance spares backup to sustain functionality over time (Figure 7.2). costs, can be significantly positive. Assessments show that net financial returns are between two and three times better with solar than petrol, with payback periods of between one and three years (i-box 7.6) (World Bank 2018; Food and Agricultural Organization [FAO] 2018; Global Solar and Water Initiative [GSWI] 2018). Figure 7.2 Farmers have different technology needs that vary over time There are many examples of “silver-bullet” thinking about a single technology. Two stand out in relation to FLID: solar-pumping systems as better than petrol pumps; and the promotion of drip irrigation as better than, for example, 2 Solar pumps offer a more environmentally responsible alternative to petrol pumps. Life-cycle assessments (“cradle to grave”) indicate a potential hosepipe or short-furrow irrigation. While solar-pumped and drip systems reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of 97 undoubtedly have transformative potential in certain situations, they will not suit percent compared with diesel pumps (FAO 2018). all farmers. These points are elaborated further in the section that follows, with In many lowland areas across Africa, thousands of detail in the i-boxes to demonstrate that it is a combination of established and small petrol pumps are found in close proximity, with new technologies that can dramatically change the lives of many, rather than cumulative and significant negative impacts at scale one technology alone that solves all of a farmer’s or farmer group’s problems. that can be offset by solar. M7-08 THE FARM ER-L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E 3 There is a major opportunity for suppliers to meet farmers’ demand for affordable solar pumping solutions. The International Financing Corporation (IFC) has estimated the value of the market that could benefit from solar pumping as 3.5 billion USD in Africa in the next five years. The value of the market that could afford solar pumps in Africa was assessed to be 456 million USD (IFC 2019). Even if the numbers are subject to debate, the potential for sectoral growth is clearly at a massive scale, with corresponding large-scale multiple benefits including cost savings and reduced environmental impact. Despite these advantages, the uptake of solar pumping remains low in Africa. One reason is that there is limited knowledge of solar- pump technology among both farmers and suppliers. Another, and probably the main, reason is that although lifetime costs are advantageous, the upfront cost of solar is much higher than petrol. This upfront cost is the first of the financing triple-jump that has to be cleared by farmers (Module 5 Section 5.1), and clearing this hurdle is difficult because affordable financing is generally limited in Africa. relatively high flow rates compared to solar pumps. It is important So, while solar pumps have clear advantages in the lifetime cost then, before potentially transformative technical solutions are comparison, successful uptake at scale depends on some enabling prioritized, that rigorous conditions. These include access to affordable finance and/or country-specific analyses Farmer subsidies on solar-pumping equipment, as well as knowledge are carried out to quantify Resource potential benefits interventions for farmers, equipment suppliers and financing the comparative benefits institutions. General guidance on the selection criteria and of solar versus petrol Policy pumps. The need for, and & legal Technology applications of solar pumps are included in i-box 7.7 and i-box 7.8. practicalities of, parallel Knowledge Markets Petrol pumps, by contrast, do not depend on any of these factors interventions (such as Finance for uptake at scale. They are widely known, cheap, highly mobile, affordable financial access, and easily maintained locally (e.g. by motorcycle mechanics). Petrol subsidies, knowledge, pumps can also be used easily in pump-rental arrangements due market development) must be fully assessed to ensure that to their mobility (easily transportable on a motorbike), and their selected technologies will be “transformative” in a specific context. M O DUL E 7 – TEC H N O LO GY M7-09 Suitable on-farm irrigation application methods Irrigation application technologies, and their efficiencies in particular, are a classic focus point for irrigation engineers. In a FLID context, however, there is a need to revisit conventional knowledge to enable farmers to select the best-fit solutions. While sophisticated technologies have their place, there are many low-cost, reasonably efficient and robust technologies that may suit farmers better than more sophisticated options. Good management can ensure that all of these irrigation technologies are effective in practice. HOSE A popular and robust irrigation option is the use of flexible hose pipes for water application, either with spray nozzles or in combination with short furrows. Hoses have the advantage of being low-cost, portable (easier to protect from theft), and simple to maintain. In the watering activity, farmers pay close attention to crop health and are more attuned to volumes of water applied than in the case of mechanized field methods (when no soil-water management instruments are used). The lack of water efficiency in these relatively rudimentary methods is often raised as a reason for objection to them, but contrary to popular engineering perception, the irrigation application efficiency of short furrows in a smallholder setting can be greater than 80% (Reinders 2011). The short-furrow practice is completely different from the SHORT FURROW SPRINKLER SPRAY TUBE DRIP M7-10 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E long-furrows method, from where the well-known low efficiencies 7.2 Diagnostic and scoring originate. The reasons why short-furrow irrigation is widely used by smallholders in water-scarce settings are: furrows are short and Diagnostic level so there is no percolation gradient; irrigation is more hands- on and farmers are attentive to applied volumes; pumping energy The technology and equipment diagnostic requires to lift water is costly for smallholders, and is used only judiciously information on the kind of smallholder farmers who have as a result. the most potential (Module 2) and might be targeted in an intervention. It will take cognizance of the range of water Other practical and efficient methods (i-box 7.9) include the and land resource contexts, and the farming types that are “California system” and low-cost “spray tubes”. While these characterized by scale, markets, and technology. Information simpler technologies tend to require additional labor, they also on technical system availability, system costs, quality have their advantages: costs are low, water application is more variability, and national standards, is needed. This information visible, and maintenance is relatively simple. Crop husbandry is important for affordability assessment. The diagnostic would (weeding, inspection, protection) takes place at the same time. usually be carried out by a specialist consultant, and an outline Drip irrigation is widely promoted, given the high application Terms of Reference (TOR) with a scope of work is included in efficiencies that can be achieved, and the reduced pumping i-box 7.11. costs that result from lower water demand. It is also particularly well-suited to solar pumps which have relatively low flow rates Scoring the technical environment (and with longer daily pumping hours). Drip systems are popular To assess the strength of the technical enabling environment, because they are seen to be modern by funders, politicians, and you first have to understand what type of equipment is farmers alike. preferred and used by farmers, what is available on the Yet there are nonetheless significant challenges in practice and market, and what the market demand is (from the diagnostic drip systems have had limited widespread successful uptake process above). Attention must be given to technology gaps in smallholder farming in Africa. The high unit costs; the need in the country, and to technologies that can fill these gaps, for continued and effective maintenance; the unsuitability to informed by wider regional and global experiences. Key high silt loads, or iron/calcium solutes in water; and costliness parameters for assessment of the environment are: the degree and low availability of spares are some of the reasons for this of physical access, quality and costs of the needed (known) (i-box 7.10). It is also significant, particularly given the essential and potentially useful (not widely known) equipment. A weak character of FLID that this guide aims to catalyze, that there are technical environment is scored low and is where technical very few spontaneous adoptions of drip systems despite the solutions of sufficient quality are not locally available at a numerous attempts to introduce the technology (Venot et al. 2014; reasonable price. More detailed guidance on scoring of the Abric et al. 2019). technology factor can be found in i-box 7.11. M O DUL E 7 – TEC H N O LO GY M7-11 7.3 Guidance on intervention planning In countries, or parts of countries, where resources are abundant and in the team and farmers themselves more widely benefits are significant, irrigation expansion can be promoted through public consulted. In regard to pumping technology, while interventions that make irrigation equipment GHG emission imperatives and the long-term financial Resource Farmer accessible and affordable. The type of advantages of solar pumps arguably justify heavy potential benefits equipment to be promoted depends on the subsidies, pumping interventions will likely include both physical characteristics of the resource base solar and fossil-fuel options to meet diverse needs. A Policy (see FLID contexts in the Main Guide Figure 1) FLID intervention also needs flexibility to allow farmers & legal Technology and the kinds of farmers who are likely to be to choose their on-farm water application system from Knowledge Markets prioritized. This information is gathered in the among those best suited to their physical, financial and Finance diagnostic described in Module 2. technical realities, and their personal experience. The possible technologies that are identified are not interventions in themselves but are the subject of interventions that are detailed in the Knowledge and Finance Modules of the FLIDguide. Two n Awareness and balance: When farmers make technology choices, they balance their knowledge and capability set, their financial situation, groupings of intervention principles are described: those that pertain to the and their willingness to take risks. The key, then, is to financing of technology; and those that involve knowledge-exchange about identify those technologies that are likely to match a technology. In all cases, best-fit technical solutions are based on consultative farmer’s needs and ways of working, when providing planning, with farmers in the lead. The best-fit technologies are then used in the information and options. Remote monitoring systems, intervention design process described in the Main Guide Section 6. for example, can facilitate affordable financing through pay-as-you-go (PAYG) arrangements (i-boxes 7.8 and Intervention principle 1 7.13) while providing opportunities for the monitoring of Resource Farmer potential benefits Technology and finance abstractions for better water governance (Module 3). The technologies that suit farmers best will both minimize Foundations of a technical their dependence on external parties and improve their Policy & legal Technology approach farming outcomes. Knowledge Finance Markets n Farmers at the center of decision-making: Interventions must take account of the full range of Co-dependency between tech choices and implementation realities considerations from the farmers’ perspective when introducing, promoting, or Technology availability, farm financial returns, financing packaging technical solutions. Farmers’ representatives need to be included availability, and related affordability of technology M7-12 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E are a critical nexus for implementation design. The type and mix of technical options to be included in an intervention, and Irrigation kits versus tailored solutions – the costs thereof, impact heavily on how the intervention will implications for rollout be rolled out at scale. In turn, the practical rollout realities and limitations will impact on the type and mix of technical solutions Technology choices must fit social realities and farmers’ means. At that can be included. What is easily done in a pilot project is the same time, implementation realities have limits. The decision on what kind of tech is best included in an intervention, and often not possible in a rollout at scale because the human how it will be packaged and procured, is impacted directly by a resource, physical support (vehicles, survey instruments, digital number of factors. The wider the range of technology options tablets, global positioning systems [GPS] etc.), and the financial supported, the more the intervention will respond to individual absorption capacity of government administration, is simply not farmers’ needs, but the more difficult it will be to assess individual available. farm suitability, to process farmers’ applications in administration systems, and to procure, supply, and instal systems when When assessing technology options that warrant inclusion in the implementing at scale. scope of a program, the following must be considered: Implementation using a matching grant mechanism of a single n The diversity of farming contexts, and whether irrigation kit (say, targeting vegetables on a half-hectare farm located close to water) is relatively straightforward. This might packaging of technology into kits of some sort is comprise a solar-powered pump with a plastic transmission warranted. Kits simplify implementation but compromise pipeline and a hosepipe. Perhaps a soil-water monitoring responsiveness to individual needs and preferences. instrument is included. While such a solution would be perfect for some farmers, the kit will certainly fail to meet the diverse needs n The capital and operational costs over the lifetime of the equipment. in different situations. The kit may be rejected, or part thereof will be redundant for many. This means that real opportunities will be missed, and program resources may be wasted. n The experience, distribution and capability of technology suppliers; their assessment of risks; and their willingness to engage in government-funded initiatives. On the other hand, assessment of every farmer’s site-specific physical and farming preferences, with tailored technical solutions, is close to impossible due to technical capacity limitations. It requires sophisticated data processing and administration, and has n complex procurement issues at scale due to many small, different The capability of local government teams who will systems. inevitably be at the forefront of technical discussions and of driving administration and knowledge exchange with farmers. Wherever public finances support technology uptake, a balance has to be found between the number and type of technical n options, and the capacity of the staff and administrative systems Procurement realities (at national and local government involved. level). M O DUL E 7 – TEC H N O LO GY M7-13 n  The political willingness and fiscal strength of the country in relation to the public component of matching grants, and government experience in similar Intervention principle 2 Technology and knowledge arrangements. Promote farmers’ own technology development n  Resource Farmer The suitability for individuals, as well as for small potential benefits Farmers – by virtue of their need for groups, and the subsequent irrigation water urgent practical solutions on a daily management and organizational implications that then have Policy Technology basis, coupled with the reality of the to be included. & legal resources available to them – are Knowledge Markets natural design innovators, practical The process of deciding on which technologies should Finance problem solvers, and technical be included in FLID initiatives is inevitably iterative. The inventors. It would be beneficial, in implications of seemingly simple choices only emerge as intervention planning and design, to give thought to allocating resources the implementation processes are defined and detailed. (financial and technical backstopping where needed) for farmers to be Funding availability, affordability, legal and administrative provided with materials, and/or small construction equipment, in order to procurement realities, and other essential rollout elements implement their own best-fit solutions. This could apply, as an example, (media, on-line training, digital data collection tools, apps, to groups of farmers sharing their own water system (gravity canals or etc.) will influence the technical character of interventions. pumped), so that they can improve and expand their system as they see Thinking ahead, assessing what is reasonable, even with fit, based on their experience. Cost-efficient support can then be provided program financing, support and training, and adjusting tech from intervention funds. options and targets accordingly, is vital to success. Co-constructed solutions It is widely accepted that development outcomes are rarely sustained Understanding the when external organizations impose technologies in developing contexts. range of irrigation When working with farmer groups, social heterogeneity means that poorer contexts, the possible farmers can easily be left out, so attention to inclusion is essential. Elite tech options and capture of natural and financial resources risks worsening conditions for the lifetime costs the resource poor. In planning interventions, it is important that solutions is essential for are co-created with representative farmers and local stakeholders implementation (Ostrom 2007). planning. Projects need to budget time and resources to co-design activities that aim to increase equity in access to, or benefits from, irrigation. An M7-14 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E important first step is to understand the social and economic context, such as who is excluded and why. A next step is to engage producers and local stakeholders in the co-design process Where technical solutions involve to identify joint solutions that will work in their context. Producers, like other stakeholders, have the supply of irrigation equipment, specific insights and may suggest, for example, intervention sites, storage options, marketing the best results are achieved when support, appropriate financial products, or equipment adaptations. Additional participatory farmers are centrally involved in steps could include facilitation of input from farmer-based organizations for water monitoring all steps of the process: problem and management, and from marketing groups and cooperatives, in designing indicators for identification, the formulation of monitoring and evaluation (M&E). The co-construction process is iterative, with farmers at the options, and the final setting of center, and is illustrated in Figure 7.3. performance requirements. Figure 7.3 The iterative co-construction cycle (Source: Beekman and Veldwisch 2016) Problem Identification Conceptual Design Construction & Re-design 1. Field discussion 1. Field discussion 1. Field discussion 2. Conceptual 2. Agreement in 2. Problem brainstorm of construction articulation possible solutions arrangement 4. Agreement on 4. Re-design proposal or 4. Agreement on design solutions and need for agreement on physical and implications for O&M external intervention construction 3. Joint review of 3. Review of design 3. Participatory review problems options during construction M O DUL E 7 – TEC H N O LO GY M7-15 Participatory intervention design involving farmer-based organizations that aims to reach men, women, youth and resource- 7.4 Concluding note poor producers effectively can also benefit from an “institutional The aim, in regard to the technology aspects of intervention bricolage” approach (Merrey and Cook 2012) (Module 3 i-box 3.8). planning, is to identify the missing or difficult-to-access technology Bricolage is effective in water and land governance and can also solutions that can speed up farmer-led irrigation, while promoting be applied to other organizational aspects of farmer-led irrigation. farmer initiatives and investments. In this module, technologies Another useful resource on facilitating participatory processes that impact on FLID have been highlighted, and the importance of with agricultural communities is the Social, Technological and understanding how knowledge informs practice, and the outcomes Environmental Pathways to Sustainability (STEPS) Center, which from technology use, has been emphasized. Assessment of the offers methods and tools for working with farmers. environment that enables inclusive access to technologies and related constraints are identified from the diagnostic assessment. The strength of the technology environment is thereby scored. Best-fit technology selection for interventions must match local preferences and be informed by the benefits that can be derived in the cropping enterprises they are intended to improve. When farmers contribute to solutions that work for their particular needs and preferred practices, they are more likely to continue using and improving those technologies. Interventions must allocate time and resources for farmer and supplier engagement in the co-construction of solutions. In this way, self-organization of the technology supply chains can be nurtured and can catalyze FLID far beyond the timelines of the intervention cycle. M7-16 THE FARM ER- L ED IR R IG ATION D EVELOP MENT G U ID E i-BOX 7.1 i-Boxes FL I D T EC H N O LO GY O P TI O N S M7-17 i-BOX 7.1 Water productivity 1 farmers from the available resource (if physically available) but Increased output for the same often leads to the opposite (Perry and Steduto 2017; Optsal et al. evapotranspiration 2020). The reason for this is that greater water productivity means that the unit cost of water is lower per unit of crop produced. The Water productivity is about getting more output from the consequence of the lower cost of water is that, unless regulation and same amount of water used for crop production. It becomes more compliance measures are effectively in place, then the increased important at farm-level when water stress increases both at farm water productivity tends to incentivize more production. It is relatively level and within the wider catchment. If a farmer’s water supply cheaper for a farmer to pump more water to expand or intensify is limited, either by physical resource availability or regulatory their output. The introduction of more sophisticated application curtailment, that can drive him/her to find more sophisticated ways technology, such as drip irrigation, with higher efficiencies, is of maximizing output with the same volume of water. Stress at farm associated with a similar behavioral trend (Perry and Steduto 2017). level can prompt farmers to climb up the sophistication ladder in 3 terms of their technical system efficiency, their crop and cultivar selection, and their irrigation farming knowledge. Better agronomy and irrigation practices can significantly increase the harvestable Real savings need combined fraction of the crop yield per unit of water. It has been shown, for agronomic, technical and governance example, that yields for the same evapotranspiration can vary by as interventions much as up to five times in wheat, for example, through a range of To achieve real water savings through increased water improved agricultural practices (Giordano et al. 2017). productivity, beyond the boundary of the irrigation farm itself, 2 intervention design needs to focus on three elements together (Opstal et al. 2020). Water productivity does not equate to 1. Invest in irrigation agronomy to increase the harvestable yield less water being used in the locality for the same water-use (better varieties, reduce weed growth, While farmers may respond to water stress with better fertilization and disease management, reduced water stress sophistication in their irrigation system and their agronomic choices, through soil-water management, and strategic planting times). increased water productivity does not mean that they will use Farmer field schools can play an important role in this aspect less water. Behavioral factors come into play. It is well established (Module 4). that increased technical system efficiency, and increased water 2. Make sure that abstraction measurement, control and productivity, do not necessarily lead to reduced abstraction by enforcement (through both technical and water governance M7-18 WATER P R OD U CTIVITY i-BOX 7.1 interventions) are part of interventions where water is stressed (Module 3). 3. Reduce the non-recoverable fraction of return flows by minimizing open water evaporation (ie. get tailwater on the farm back into the streams). This can be achieved through better technical design practices and inclusion of these aspects in knowledge interventions. WAT E R P R O DU CTI V I TY M7-19 i-BOX 7.2 Summary of technologies Farmers’ technology preferences are informed by many factors that include: their experience, crop type, capital cost, operating cost, other existing technology on the farm (pumps and tanks), labor availability, access to spares, water quality, security, cultural norms and social/family commitments. There are few technology solutions that will be applicable to every farmer’s situation. Not only do their needs differ widely, but they change over time. Some famers may progress from rudimentary technology to more complicated systems as their enterprise grows in size and sophistication; others may choose to stay with a (basic) technology that works for them and their farming strategies. A summary of common technologies is presented in Table 1 and further technical details and indicative costs are included in the Module 7 i-boxes that follow. Table 1 Summary of common smallholder irrigation technologies and challenges Technology type Applications and advantages Challenges Buckets, n Can be started with little cost and risk. n Labor need for applying water is high but there is no maintenance. Water-lifting watering cans n Water source close to the field. n At peak crop-water requirement, work is intense, and farmers may n Portable. not be able to keep up with demand. n Smallest of micro-scale irrigation options (10 – 100 m2) n Often used with low-yield water sources which may not be enough when shared by multiple farmers. Rope and washer n Usually installed as a community facility for household n Labor requirement is high if the pump is human powered. However, pumps supplies but can be used for irrigation by farmers who have a they can be powered by motors (solar or fossil fuel) and by animal use. suitable water source nearby their field. n The water source needs to be close to the field unless a gravity pipe n Suited for borehole or well applications when lifting system can be used to transfer the water to the field. water from less than 30m depth. n Needs regular maintenance. n Fixed position pump. n Parts (usually the valves) may not be locally available. n Small-scale irrigation, depending upon power source and depth of 100–1 000 m2. Hand pumps n Usually installed as a community facility for household n If a communal pump, irrigation use is unlikely due to competition (lever action) supplies, but the water can be used for irrigation by farmers with household water users. who have small plots around their homes. n Heavy labor requirement. n A fixed-position pump that typically draws from n Unlikely to be specifically installed by a single farmer for irrigation boreholes or wells of less than 80m depth. use. n Smallest of micro-scale irrigation (10–100 m2) n Maintenance with associated technical skills is needed and parts may not be locally available. M7-20 SU MMA RY OF TECHNOLOG IES i-BOX 7.2 Technology type Applications and advantages Challenges Treadle and hip n Foot- or hand-operated pump specifically designed for n Labor requirement is intense. Water-lifting pumps irrigation where the movement is ergonomically designed n Easy to repair, minimal seasonal maintenance. and makes it easy to pump for prolonged periods. n Can only be used with surface water supplies but produces pressure that can be used with a pipeline to the field and/or sprinklers. n Portable pump. n Low cost. . n Medium-scale irrigation 1 000–10 000 m2 Petrol pumps n Widely known, cheap, highly mobile. n Regular (monthly) maintenance required. n Easily serviced and easily maintained locally by n High fuel costs. motorcycle mechanics. n High operational costs (fuel, oil and spares). n Can also be used easily in a rental mode due to their n Short lifespans (1–2 years). Environmental pollution. mobility. n Easily transportable on a motorbike. n High flow rates and can irrigate large areas 1–5 ha. n Mixed ownership arrangements are possible – can be one farmer, shared or rented. n Can only be used when water is close to the surface (max 7 m below ground). Diesel pumps n Same function as petrol pumps but more expensive to n High operational costs (fuel and oil). purchase. n Environmental pollution. n Less expensive to maintain than petrol (spares), use less fuel and are more robust than petrol pumps. Solar pumps n Minimal maintenance and running costs, seals and minor n Can only operate during full sunlight i.e. 6–7 hours/day so there is electronics replacement needed after a few years. less flexibility in terms of irrigation activities. n Assessments show that net financial returns are between n There is limited knowledge of solar-pump technology among both two and three times better with solar than petrol, with farmers and suppliers. Leads to less supply/marketing and farmers payback periods of between one and three years. need more training than with petrol pumps. n Very attractive where petrol/diesel is expensive and/or n Although lifetime costs are advantageous, the upfront cost of solar difficult to access. is much higher than petrol. n Smaller systems (<0.5 ha) are portable and trolly arrangments are made for slightly larger systems. n Electricity can be multiple use – to run cellphone chargers, lights in off-season etc. n Can be either surface water or borehole/well pumps. n Medium-scale irrigation 1 000–10 000 m2 SUM M ARY O F TEC H N O LO G I ES M7-21 i-BOX 7.2 Technology type Applications and advantages Challenges Watering can n Low cost and easy to use. n High labor requirement. Irrigation application n Associated with growing high value crops like vegetables n During peak crop-water demand the water source may not be and often used in communal gardens. enough when shared by multiple farmers. n The water source needs to be very close (edge of the n Some of the lowest value crops may be abandoned in peak demand field/garden) to reduce the labour. The water can be in ponds times though with experience farmers work out how to balance supply or from a supply pipe. Water is usually not over-applied due and demand. to the labor required. Short furrow n Short furrows are 5 to 10 m long and are level. They are n Considerable skill is required in the layout and operation of short effective as long as they are not on steep land or very sandy furrows to get effective watering over short time periods. soils. n More labor required than for sprinklers or drip systems. n High application efficiencies (> 80%) when there is n Crops can easily be waterlogged leading to poor root development experience and good water application management. and fertilizer leaching. n Furrows are low cost – mainly labor only (though can n Use on land that is too steep or on sandy soils leads to ineffective be mechanized) – and can easily be rearranged for different irrigation. crops. n Best used with gravity-fed systems that can sustain high flow rates. n In the watering activity, farmers pay close attention to crop health. n Well suited to petrol and diesel pumps. Hosepipe n Very good entry point technology for farmers. n Maintenance cost is minimal, but more labor is needed than with n Can be used on varying slopes and soil types more easily sprinklers or drip systems, than furrows. n Under or over watering can easily occur. n Hoses are low-cost and portable so avoiding theft or n Tendency to wet foliage which can lead to fungal and other vandalism problems that can occur with sprinkler and drip. problems. n Similar time requirement as for irrigation with furrows, though less arduous. n In the watering activity, farmers pay attention to crop health and are more attuned to volumes of water applied than with sprinklers and drip. n Can be used with solar and petrol pumps. Sprinklers (5–15 m n These classical conventional sprinklers are usually in n Poor coverage of water where farmers do not understand the Radius) small sets (2–5) and are moved around the field in a weekly or wetting pattern and spacing requirements properly. bi-weekly cycle depending on the soils, crop and crop water n Wetting of leaves can lead to fungal diseases. demand. n Breakages and thefts lead to reduced capacity systems. n Reduced labor compared to hosepipe or furrows, but fuel costs are comparable. n Can be used with solar and petrol pumps, but better suited to petrol pumps that typically have higher flow rates. M7-22 SU MMA RY OF TECHNOLOG IES i-BOX 7.2 Technology type Applications and advantages Challenges Rain-gun (30 m n Large capacity single sprinklers can cover a greater land n Reduced labor compared to the smaller sprinkler sets but higher Irrigation Radius) area with a lower capital cost and less labor than smaller fuel costs due to higher operating pressures. application sprinkler sets. n Poor coverage of water due to farmers not understanding the n Suitable for more robust crops that will not be affected wetting pattern. by large droplet sizes and mud-splash on leaves. n Poor performance in windy conditions. n Wetting of leaves can lead to fungal diseases. Can degrade soils due to large droplet sizes and high water application rates. n Not suitable, in practical terms, for solar pumps. Spray tubes/ n These systems are set in place with main and lateral n Damage to the spray and micro sprinklers by animals or blockage lines & pipes. due to particles in the water or by ants. microsprinklers n They are suitable for well-established farmers who have n Replacement costs of plastic pipelines every five years can be high. an established layout of crops, especially permanent or semi-permanent crops like strawberries and trees. n Labor requirement is minimal. n Can be used with solar and petrol pumps. Drip n Most suitable for farmers with experience of irrigation. n Sophisticated understanding of the technology, and substantial skill The farmer needs good experience of irrigation, crop is needed to operate and maintain successfully. agronomy and the financial stability to purchase and n Requires substantial training and back-up to get the full potential maintain. benefits of use as not only water but also fertiliser (fertigation) should be n Reduced pumping costs result from lower water applied to optimize investment in the system. demand. n Equipment needs careful handling and maintenance and n Particularly well-suited to solar pumps which have replacement after 5 years. relatively low flow rates and longer daily pumping hours. n Spares are often not available at local level. n Labor is minimal and efficient. n Irreparable damage often occurs due to: n Can be used with petrol and diesel pumps. 1) animals chewing the drip lines 2) drip lines becoming blocked with soil or other particulates due to inadequate filtration 3) drip lines becoming blocked due to chemical precipitates 4) removing and storing the driplines to allow for tillage SUM M ARY O F TEC H N O LO G I ES M7-23 i-BOX 7.2 Technology type Applications and advantages Challenges Wetting front Helps farmers to manage water and nutrients. Devices inform n Farmers need training and have to plan and allocate time to take Irrigation detector the farmer about fertilizer retention in soil, or whether it is measurements. application being leached out. Water management in the root zone n Purchase of ongoing nitrate measurement kits is needed for fertilizer can be effectively managed – whether in simple furrows or management, and availability may be limited. sophisticated drip systems. n Cheap and affordable with benefits quickly evident n Cross-learning between farmers on both the system’s operational use and on water management practices is rapid. n Major benefits in terms of labor savings, lower fertilizer use, reduced pumping costs and reduced agricultural pollution (less deep percolation). n A doubling and tripling of yields, and of gross margins, is recorded in multiple countries and farming contexts across Africa. Soil-water In practice, farmers often irrigate with fixed amounts, or n Farmers need training and have to plan and allocate time to take Soil-water sensors at a constant intervals, with little regard for variability in measurements for the systems to yield benefits. management weather conditions and actual crop-water requirements. The n The main reasons for non-adoption of technologies include the generalized observation is the tendency to over-irrigate in the difficulty and high cost of using older generation tensiometers, and early and late stages of crop growth but under-irrigate in mid the perception that scheduling provides little benefit. New generation stages. The benefits of managing soil water are substantial in instruments have overcome this limitation. water, productivity and financial terms. These benefits result from: n Reduced fuel consumption and costs when using petrol/ diesel pumps n Reduced wastage of fertilizer through deep percolation n Reduced labor requirements by irrigating less frequently and only when needed n Increased crop productivity and yields n Increased profitability through reduced costs and increased production. Remote sensing Estimates of crop-water status and health can be made by n Only suitable for farmers with large contiguous blocks of single tools remote sensing. This is undertaken remotely from the farm crops, e.g. minimum 1 ha of a single crop in a single field. and information is delivered to the farmer about when to n The farming style and the technology are not compatible and the irrigate or fertilize. communication between farmer and information supplier is ineffective. n Needs good communication, i.e. smartphone and high level of understanding by farmer and supplier. n No burden on the farmer but the service has to be paid for by the farmer or NGO/government. M7-24 S U MMA RY OF TECHNOLOG IES i-BOX 7.3 Soil-water management technology examples Examples of robust, cost-effective and simple monitoring instruments are those developed by Australian scientists at the How does it work? Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO): the Chameleon soil water sensor and the Wetting Front The sensors measure soil water suction, or how hard it is for a Detector (WFD). Information below is provided by the Virtual plant to extract water from the soil (like a tensiometer). They do Irrigation Academy (VIA). not need to be calibrated for soil type. Whether the soil is sandy or clay, blue means the soil is adequately wet and red indicates the What is the Chameleon Card starter kit? need for water. The Chameleon Card contains The Chameleon Card measures soil sensors using colored a micro-processor and LED lights to tell you when to irrigate. The Chameleon Card starter and is powered by a watch kit (shown in Figure 1) lets you know how hard the plants must battery which will last for at work to extract water from the soil. The kit consists of a reader, least 1 000 readings. The that looks like a credit card, plus three sensors. The reader on battery can be replaced. Rigorous testing of each the Chameleon Card has a light (see Figure 2) which changes batch of sensors in a modern color in response to the soil water status. laboratory ensures accuracy. Figure 2 The Chameleon Card n Blue means the soil is wet (do not irrigate). n Green means the soil is moist (get ready to irrigate). Farmer’s Testimony “I am set to earn Tsh 5 124 000 n Red means the soil is dry (plant experiencing water stress). (about USD 2 329) from yellow bell The sensors can be buried in three pepper from just a 0.5 acre. I have already started harvesting different fields, or at different depths 10 bags monthly. It is not magic; it in one location. Simply touch the is about relying on the Chameleon wires against the contact pads on the monitoring tools to determine when reader and the light will change color to provide water and manage the to show the soil water status. It could use of fertilizer.” not be simpler. Figure 3 Farmer holding a - Robert Chiliwa, Chameleon Card (Farmer from Tanzania) Figure 1 Chameleon Card starter kit EXAMP L ES O F S O I L-WATE R M A N AG E M E N T TEC HN OLOGY M7-25 i-BOX 7.3 What is the Wetting Front Detector? The Wetting Front Detector shows you how deeply water infiltrates into the soil and helps you to save fertilizer. The Wetting Front Detector helps you to “see” what is happening down in the root zone when you irrigate the soil. Wetting Front Detectors are plastic tubes (shown in Figure 1) which are buried in the soil at the bottom of the root zone and pop up an indicator to show when the infiltrating water goes past. They also capture and store a sample of water from the wetting front. The Wetting Front Detector can be used to: n Find out if you are irrigating too little or too much n Assist in the management of fertilizer and salt n Show if the soil is water-logged A water sample can be taken from the Wetting Front Detector, using the syringe that is supplied, and tested for nitrate nitrogen using simple paper strips to measure the soil fertility. This then informs the farmer a) whether they are leaching nitrate out of their root zone and b) whether they have any nitrate in their root zone for the plants. Whether you are using mineral or organic fertilizers, nitrogen (nitrate) is the key nutrient to monitor, as it is easily washed out of the root zone. The color strips show how much nitrate is in the soil by turning white (no nitrogen content) or pink or purple (high nitrogen content). Figure 4 Wetting Front Detector kit M7-26 EX AM PLES OF SOIL-WATER MA NAG EMENT TECHNOLOGY i-BOX 7.4 Soil-water management technology – benefits Management technology triggers benefits 2019; Olivier and Singels 2004). While sophisticated technologies abound, there are only a few suitable, Smallholder irrigation water and fertilizer management is rarely optimal in robust and cost-effective instruments on the market African contexts. This negatively impacts crop productivity, labor demand, (Figure 1). energy use and water abstractions. Yields and profits suffer. Understanding In practice, farmers often irrigate with fixed amounts, or management by answering “when and how much to irrigate” is key to improving at a constant interval, with little regard for variability in irrigation management, reducing fertilizer wastage, and increasing water-use weather conditions and actual crop-water requirements. efficiency. Accurate monitoring of water in the root zone allows farmers to vary The generalized observation is the tendency to over- the timing and amount of water applied, based on crop-water consumption irrigate in the early and late stage of crop growth but that varies with crop development stage and daily changes in rainfall and under-irrigate in mid stages. The benefits of managing evapotranspiration. Improved irrigation scheduling further reduces fertilizer loss soil water are substantial in water, productivity and and so improves yields and reduces environmental pollution (Van der Laan et al. financial terms (Chilunda et al. forthcoming; Moyo et al. 2015; Jacobs et al. 2014; Stevens et al. 2005; Senzanje et al. 2003). 2020; Schmitter et al. 2017). These benefits result from: Well-informed, adaptive irrigation scheduling is not practised by most n ●Reduced fuel consumption and costs when using smallholders because they lack the equipment and knowledge to petrol/diesel pumps. understand the status of water across the root zone soil profile. It is almost n Reduced wastage of fertilizer through deep percolation. impossible for farmers to know whether they are retaining fertilizer in their soil or n Reduced groundwater pollution from nitrates and leaching it out. Monitoring equipment agricultural chemicals through less deep percolation. ranges from simple mechanical sensors to multi-depth continuous recording n ●Reduced labor requirements by irrigating less electronic sensors with web-based frequently and only when needed. data access. The main reasons for ●n Increased crop productivity and yields by ensuring non-adoption of technologies include close to optimum water availability in the root zone and Figure 1 Soil water management the difficulty and high cost of using avoiding water-stress. instruments need to be simple to older-generation tensiometers and the use and affordable to catalyze FLID perception that scheduling provides ●n Increased profitability through reduced costs and processes. little benefit (Myeni, Moeletsi, and Clulow increased production. M AN AGE M E N T TEC H N O LO GY – B E N E F I T S M7-27 i-BOX 7.4 ●n Expanded irrigated areas with the same equipment and labor due to overall lower irrigation applications. WP in 2013/14 1.40 WP in 2016/17 (for farmers without tools) Willingness to pay for the instruments was also found to be high WP in 2016/17 (for farmers with tools) 1.20 despite their cost (approximately USD 100 to 200 per farmer), because farmers witnessed the gains that could be made (Resilience 1.00 WP (kg/m3) BV 2020). Importantly, improving crop production was not achieved 0.80 only by introducing technology, but included farmer-to-farmer 0.60 knowledge-exchange processes such as those described in Module 0.40 4. 0.20 Case Narratives 0.00 Mkoba Silalatshani Case 1 – Crop productivity increased five fold in Zimbabwe Figure 2 Water productivity (WP) before and after the introduction of the In Zimbabwe smallholder tools, for farmers with and without tools (Moyo et al. 2020) farmers in two smallholder Zimbabwe 12–13 days – effectively a water- schemes (Mkoba and Silalatshani) were provided with use reduction of 35%. With Ethiopia easy-to-use tools to measure Crop water productivity in reduced water applications the their soil water and nitrogen maize increased from 0.2 wheat crop yield also went up kg to over 1 kg/m3 in 2 by 10–20%. The gain in terms Water abstraction for content. Their water productivity years of use. wheat was reduced went from a low 0.19-0.2 kg/ of water productivity or “crop by 35% while yields m3 to 1.00–1.28 kg/m3 two per drop” was high at 75%. The increased by 20%. years later (Figure 2). That is a 5 to 6-fold increase. Interestingly, farmers noted that improved even farmers not given the tools increased their water productivity water management resulted in to 0.69–0.95 kg/m3 by learning from those with the instruments a faster rotation among water (Schmitter et al. 2017). users in the same group – and a decline in water-related conflicts. The saved water was used to extend the area under cultivation (Van Case 2 – Water use in Ethiopia drops by a third Steenbergen and Schmitter 2020). In Ethiopia farmers using tools to manage irrigation in their wheat fields achieved spectacular results. According to key farmers, they extended the irrigation cycle from the local storage reservoirs from 8–11 days to M7-28 M ANAG EMENT TECHNOLOGY – BENEFITS i-BOX 7.4 Case 3 – Half the labor and with less water needed in Mozambique 400% with tools without tools In a Mozambique smallholder irrigation scheme half the green maize growers 350% were provided with the easy-to-use tools to measure their soil content and soil nitrogen. The changes in irrigation water 300% management were tracked over six Mozambique 250% seasons. The number of irrigation events declined rapidly both for those with 200% Labor for irrigation was and without the instruments – a 40% reduced by 31%, water use 150% decrease for the farmers with, and 14% by 38%, and gross financial for the farmers without. In addition, the margins increased nearly 4 100% farmers reduced the duration of irrigation times. Cash value of savings 1 2 3 4 5 6 from 4.6 hours at the beginning to 3.2 averaged USD 300/annum. Season hours by the end. In the first season the irrigation applied was roughly the same Figure 3 Relative yield of green maize over six seasons with for both groups. This combination of fewer and smaller irrigation events resulted in and without management instruments in Mozambique (Chilunda et al. forthcoming) 38% decrease in the irrigation water applied. The improved irrigation also resulted in massively improved yields (see Figure 3 below) (Chilunda et al. forthcoming). The benefits of reduced irrigations and increased yields resulted in farmers with tools increasing their gross margins by 370%, and those without tools by 250%. As with other similar interventions, these gains cannot be attributed to the instruments alone, as they were accompanied by farmer-to-farmer learning on better irrigation practice and agronomy, that is also reflected by the progressive increase in yields over time for farmers both with and without instruments. Those without instruments or tools learnt from neighboring farmers using the instruments or tools. In a separate study in other horticultural crops in the Chimoyo locality involving nine farmers, it was found that equivalent cash savings due to the use of the equipment was USD 880/annum (Resilience BV 2020). Eight of the farmers were willing to pay up to USD 180 capital cost for the Chameleon Technology without any subsidy or support, because they witnessed the direct benefits. That willingness is indicative of the technology value to smallholders. M AN AGE M E N T TEC H N O LO GY – B E N E F I T S M7-29 i-BOX 7.5 Comparative capital costs of solar versus petrol for irrigation Upfront costs of solar are high and Table 1 Pumping energy options and advantages (indicative costs in USD from authors’ field notes) widespread uptake depends on Human-powered affordable financing and/or subsidies. Petrol pump < 3 HP Solar pump < 1 HP pump There are significant challenges in relation to financing of solar pumping USD 60 to 200 USD 100 to 200 USD 600 to 4500 Upfront cost systems. The capital cost is high, technology quality and access can Food or labor cost to pump 0.5 to 1.2 USD/hour or 0.05 to Effectively zero Operational cost 3 0.12 USD/m be limited, and quality and backup Seasonal Weekly or monthly (oil Seasonal or yearly services may be weak or absent. In Maintenance cost drainage) Sahelian countries and in East Africa, 7 m for treadle pumps and Maximum of 7 m but up to 0 to 80 m with a decrease of for example, the entry price for (low Pumping depth limit up to 15 m for rope pump 10 m if the pump is lowered flow with the depth quality) petrol pumps is six to seven (low volumes – not ideal) (excavation to a lower platform for the pump) times less that of entry-level solar 3 systems that are of much smaller flow 1 to 3 m /h 5 to 15 m3/h 1 to 15 m3/h Operating flow capacity (Abric et al. 2019). The costs for Any time Any time 6 to 7 hours per day comparable systems in terms of their Pumping time ability to service irrigation demands 2 to 5 2 to 5 (2 500 to 3 500 running Surface pump 3 to 5 Lifetime (years) (i.e. meet the same crop water demand hours) Submersible 5 to 7 – sensitive to per hectare) is between 10 to 15 times Controller 3 to 5 sediment load PV panel 15 to 20 the initial purchase price depending on and maintenance frequency quality. The reason for the large price differential is that in purchasing the solar 0 kg 60 to 110 kg/crop season for 0 kg CO2 emission panels, the farmer is purchasing all of 0.1 ha their energy upfront for the next 10 to A hundred to a thousand Tens of thousands Nascent but accelerating Level of adoption in 15 years. Indicative costs for different pumps countries systems are shown in Table 1. Drip with elevated tank, spray Furrow/basin combined with Drip without elevated tank, Suitable for hose Californian system, spray spray tube, water can with hose, spray tube, sprinkler water storage, low pressure (low pressure) sprinkler HP: horsepower M7-30 COM PARATIV E CAPITAL COSTS OF SO L A R VER SU S P ETR OL FOR IR R IG ATION i-BOX 7.6 Comparative benefits of solar versus petrol for irrigation Comparative lifetime benefits of solar irrigation versus fossil the year for other uses, tends to limit the residual value in practice. fuels are generally positive but highly sensitive to assumptions Costs of equipment in different countries also vary widely. – rigorous analysis for irrigation is scarce. Comparisons of lifetime Numerous anecdotal narratives, from suppliers and NGOs among cost estimates in domestic water supply are well documented and others, do show consistently positive and noteworthy savings show between two and ten times the benefit for solar systems when a switch is made from petrol to solar pumping. In Kenya, versus fossil fuels (Global Solar and Water Initiative [GSWI] 2018; enterprise benefits of between 235% and 350% were recorded for Energy Sector Management Assistance Program [ESMAP] 2017). The farmers switching from petrol to solar systems with loan finance wide variation is linked to differences in the lifecycle (10 or 20 years) at 15% (Winrock 2015, 2016). These kinds of gains were confirmed and the inclusion, or not, of lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in a comparative study conducted by the authors in Uganda that and other benefits. showed net financial benefits for horticultural crops that were There are few detailed comparative assessments in irrigation and approximately double for solar compared to petrol pumps over rigorous analysis seems to be a gap in the literature. There are many a 10-year lifecycle (zero subsidy or loan). The Uganda analysis is more variables to consider (climate, crop type, monthly variation in conservative compared with many other African countries, as the demand, irrigation application cost of equipment was comparatively high there, given that the The net financial benefits type, cost of financing, and Uganda solar-technology market is nascent. Solar equipment in for a horticultural crop subsidy effects, etc.). Unlike Kenya, for example, was assessed to be approximately two-thirds domestic water supply that has the cost in Uganda, with petrol equivalent in USD terms, aligning enterprise can be two to a consistent water demand, the higher Kenyan results (Winrock cases) to the Ugandan findings. three times better for solar irrigation demand tends to vary Inclusion of GHG and other environmental benefits such as when compared to petrol greatly across the year and this reduced pollution from fossil fuels and oils, would have the effect where financing costs are has the effect of reducing the of increasing the relative benefits even further. High interest rates, modest. comparative net benefit of solar absence of subsidies for solar, assumptions of short lifecycles in the versus fossil-fuel pumping. The assessment, and low crop-water demand (equating to low petrol electrical power generated by consumption), all contribute to petrol pumping competitiveness. the photovoltaic panels is partly The point here is that rigorous country and farmer-specific redundant in the off-peak months. While the residual electrical analysis is needed to quantify the comparative farm-level power is potentially available for other beneficial uses, distance benefits of solar pumping. from panels (located at the pumping site) to the point of use (such as a homestead), and the inconsistent availability of supply over CO MPARAT I VE B E N E F I TS O F S O L A R V E R SUS PETROL FOR IRRIGATION M7-31 i-BOX 7.7 Solar pump indicative costs and selection considerations A wide range of solar pumps is on the market for almost any situation, at different prices and various capacities. Each component of the solar irrigation solution must be considered in order to know the implication in the choice of a pump. Water availability – knowledge of the water flow and depth are essential The flow of the water resource will tell you how much surface you can irrigate, according to the water requirements of the crops, and which water application can be used depending on the operating flow rate. The flow can be high for surface water (river, stream, pond, dam reservoir) beyond 50 m3/ha, but variable during the season. Yield of underground water is often limited by hydrogeological conditions and the type and quality of construction of water infrastructures (well, borehole). From Northern Nigeria (Fadama), to the large fossil valleys Table 1 Type of solar pumps most commonly used for irrigation depending on water availability.1 Irrigated Water Volume (m3/ Volume x surface per Mobility availability Price (USD) day) TDH (m4) day (m3/h) (m2/day) Submersible Yes 1 6 90 500 to 1 500 750 to 1500 Surface Yes 2 12 90 1 000 to 1 500 1 500 to 3 000 Submersible Yes/No 3 18 270 1 500 to 2 500 2 500 to 4 500 Submersible No 5 30 450 2 500 to 4 500 4 000 to 7500 Submersible No 10 60 900 4 000 to 6 500 8 000 to 1.5 ha TDH: Total Dynamic Head Volume x TDH in m4 facilitates the comparison between different pumping conditions Irrigated surface per day for a range of water applications from 4 to 8 mm with the use of efficient irrigation methods (basin and spray can, spray hose, drip, spray tube) 1 Table 1 is a compilation of data collected from West and East Africa for the most common situations encountered on project experiences (authors’ field notes). The range of results emphasizes the importance of the context. M7-32 SOLAR PUM P IN DICATIV E COSTS A ND SEL ECTION CONS ID ERATIONS i-BOX 7.7 in Niger (Dallol), and the coastal areas of Benin, Senegal and Togo, the level of the ground (by means of an excavated platform with an the shallow aquifer (< 10 m) in sandy soils is highly productive access ramp). 3 beyond 10 m /h. In consolidated soils and metamorphic geology, encountered everywhere in Africa, the yield of the shallow aquifer Application methods and pump type is rarely beyond 1 m3/ha and can reach 5 m3/ha at great depth (30 Water application systems are important in the choice of a solar to 60 m) in bedrock fractures, through using heavy mechanized pump. High pressure and flow will increase the cost of the pump drilling machines. and the solar generator. Low operating pressure and efficient irrigation methods are the preferred solutions, but not the norm, The flow rate of the water resource guides the type of pump: helical or piston when the flow is less than 3 m3/ha and centrifugal as it depends on the context of the irrigated plot. When the water when it is higher. Submersible pumps have no depth limit and contains fine particles, filtration is mandatory but increases the can be installed for surface water (horizontally if the water level is need for pressure and maintenance to prevent clogging. In this low), or in a well or borehole. The depth limit for the use of surface case it is preferable to use a less efficient irrigation technique to pumps is 7 m but can be lower where the pump is installed below facilitate adoption by the users. Table 2 Type of water application systems and their efficiencies Furrow/basin Spray can Spray hose Spray tube Sprinkler Drip Saving water Operating orange/red pressure Labor intensity green/orange Ease of adoption Affordability orange/red Sensitivity to green/orange silt Solar compatibility SO L AR P U M P IN D I CATI V E CO STS A N D S ELECTION CON SIDERATION S M7-33 i-BOX 7.8 General guidance on the applications and use of solar irrigation pumps and systems Small stand-alone solar systems Mobility issues and solutions Solar pumps come in two categories: suction type or submersible. Pumps and lightweight panels, if left in the field, can easily be stolen. The suction-type pumps cannot lift water from more than The portability of the pump and panel is thus an asset, depending on 6–8 m below ground but there is no physical limit to the lift above weight and size. Submersible pumps are more fragile and difficult to ground. In some cases suction pumps can be lowered into the transport. In general, the size of the solar panels and length of pipes well (if the diameter of the well allows it) to enable the extraction makes transportation more difficult than the pump itself. Beyond of water from up to 10–12 m depth. This could be particularly 250W panels, the pump becomes very difficult to move in remote areas. Here the efficiency of the pump plays a role. A highly efficient advantageous when the ground water level drops towards the pump can deliver the same amount of water per day with the power end of the dry season. Manufacturers of portable solar surface from a smaller panel, whereas an inefficient pump will need a bigger pumps are few in number, such as Ennos and FuturePump, with panel for the same output. distributors in Asia and Africa. Submersible pumps are, as the name implies, submerged in the water, so there are no suction Solar spares and maintenance issues. These pumps are widely available on the market from various manufacturers. The 2019 Global LEAP Awards Buyer’s For cheaper solar pumps, spare parts are simply not available, and Guide for solar pumps gives a partial overview of manufacturers even if they were, it is often not possible to open the pump to replace and models according to flow and head ranges. parts full of electronic components. If it breaks down, you have to buy a new one. The lifetime of these pumps depends on intensity of use Shared group solar systems and quality of water. A high sand content in the water can wear out a pump very quickly in a year, as is the case in Senegal in the Niayes Communal systems are generally heavy in infrastructure costs region, even with expensive European brand pumps. and highly prone to failure due to dependence on a single solar pump. Since one large pumping system is expensive, users If a pump is designed with repairability in mind, a minimum of cannot replace it once it is broken. The REGIS-ER (Niger and local know-how and available spare parts will be required to keep Burkina Faso) project showed that both the infrastructure cost and it running for many years. Futurepump SF2 model comes with a risk of failure can be reduced by using several shallow tube wells five-year warranty and a set of spare parts. Despite these precautions, and small solar pumps instead of one large pumping system on a many causes of failures are due to misuse or poor maintenance deep borehole. If one pump fails, there is still water from the other by farmers, as reported by SISAM program on 100 installed solar solar pumps. irrigation pumps in Benin, Burkina Faso and Togo. M7-34 G E N E RA L GUIDAN C E ON THE APPLICATION S AN D USE OF SO L A R IR R IG ATION P U MP S A ND SYSTEMS 8 i-BOX 7.8 Solar design guidance and conceptual pitfalls The choice of a solar pump depends on the specifications for each n An advantage of small solar pumps is that the solar panel can easily be moved to be pointed at the sun throughout the day. This will give about 25% extra output per day as compared component of the solution. Different configurations are possible to fixed panels. An automatic sun tracker is an option but not depending on the context. affordable. n Unlike a petrol-driven pump, a typical solar pump has no surplus capacity. It can only deliver so much water per day and running it for more than 8 hours a day is not possible. In n The use of batteries allows irrigation at any time of the day with no variation in pumping conditions. This option is not recommended because of its high cost, short lifespan, heaviness practice, the output of a solar pump is limited to 6–7 hours at full to transport, and lack of recycling capacity. However, technology is capacity per day. The capacity of the pump should be such that it evolving rapidly and new generations of more efficient batteries are can deliver enough water to cater for the peak needs of the plants. appearing on the market, though at this stage still too expensive. In n Water storage in an elevated tank is not mandatory. A solar pump can be connected directly to irrigation equipment as long as the pressure and flow rate are sufficient to operate it as the next decade we can expect a significant decrease in the cost of energy storage similar to that recorded for solar panels. Report on Solar Irrigation Powered System gives an extensive recommended. This has been documented by field experiences in overview of the state of the technology in terms of the water-lifting, Senegal, where 70% of the volume of water in a day was applied by energy supply and irrigation system components, its economics, spray tube or drip in acceptable conditions. The remaining volume ecological boundaries and management requirements as well as is stored in small ground basins (2 m3) for irrigation with a spray potential and barriers. can, giving a good combination of modern and traditional irrigation methods (Video). n Oversizing the panels usually means that the pump starts operating earlier in the day and continues to operate longer in the afternoon. It is a way to increase the number of hours in the day during which flow and pressure are sufficient to irrigate directly without water storage. Performance will also be less affected by cloudy conditions, but the investment in panels will be higher. In Madagascar, the experiences conducted by the Integrated Growth Pole Project (World Bank) in a commercial farm (13 ha), showed that it is possible to irrigate the entire surface without water storage from three solar pumps supplying water to sprinkler, drip, and travelling big gun. GE N E RAL GU I DA N C E O N TH E A PPL I CATION S AN D USE OF SOLAR IRRIGATION PUM PS AN D SYSTEMS M7-35 i-BOX 7.9 Alternative effective water application systems for FLID Hose and spray can – example of effective the spray tube affordable for farmers, even cheaper than at the irrigation in practice cost found in Benin. Labor is widely available in communal gardens and the irrigated surface California system (low-cost piped to simple per person is relatively small. In the REGIS-ER project 44 solar pumps outlet box - surface irrigation) were installed at communal gardens in Burkina Faso and Niger. Several Californian system is the perfect example of non-invasive application set-ups were installed, and technique without changing farmer practices. The earth the most popular was to pump water canals to convey water are replaced by buried PVC pipes with directly to the field using a flexible hose. several outlets located as close as possible to the irrigated The second preferred option was to basins or furrows. It can reduce by 30 to 40% the pumping fill basins that could be used by many time, including fuel and labor farmers at the same time to fill spray cans. expenses, while increasing Despite being labor intensive, such simple the irrigated surface. Saving methods seem to be more durable than complex solutions like drip water in the conveyance irrigation and easy to manage for collective irrigation for small plots. system has a major impact on the global irrigation efficiency Spray tubes of the system from pump to plant roots. Its simple design, Since 2015, in the coastal area of Benin and Togo, well known for intensive low cost, and easy application makes the Californian system vegetable production, the spray tube (mist irrigation with perforated popular among farmers since its introduction in Mauritania tubes) is quickly spreading without any external support. Gradually it (VISA project) and Niger (PIP2 project). Californian system is replacing or co-existing with other efficient is the perfect example of non-invasive technique without methods (spray hose and sprinkler), because of changing farmer practices. The its simple installation and use, energy saving (less earth canals to convey water are pressure) and low cost. By changing the context replaced by buried PVC pipes with in Burkina Faso the retail price becomes 3 times several outlets located as close higher. Modelling a new import business model as possible to the irrigated basins in Senegal, involving a large farmers’ association or furrows. It can reduce by 30 to in the supply chain which links an Asian 40% the pumping time, including manufacturer to customers in the field, makes fuel and labor expenses, while M7-36 ALTERN ATIV E EF F ECTIV E WATER A P P L ICATION SYSTEMS FOR FL ID 8 i-BOX 7.9 increasing the irrigated surface. Saving water in the conveyance system has a major impact on the global irrigation efficiency of the system from pump to plant roots. Its simple design, low cost, and easy application makes the Californian system popular among farmers since its introduction in Mauritania (VISA project) and Niger (PIP2 project). ALT E R N AT I VE E F F ECTI V E WATE R A PPL I CATION SYSTEM S FOR F LID M7-37 i-BOX 7.10 Challenges with drip irrigation technology While drip irrigation has advantages in application efficiency if heavy in iron and/or fine colloidal particles) is a key factor limiting well maintained, and will be relevant to some smallholder farming wider use. Where water quality is low, after just a few crop cycles contexts, caution is needed with regard to widespread promotion the transmitters clog up, distribution efficiency is compromised, and regardless of context. Drawing from Venot et al. (2014) and Abric et yields suffer, triggering abandonment. 5 al. (2019), some challenges include: 1 ●Sophistication in irrigation practice and agronomy: Drip High capital cost: Drip systems are relatively costly, between systems need specialist knowledge for the proper and USD 2 000 to USD 3 000 per ha, and often unaffordable for effective irrigation application, most obviously because the volume smallholders. Quality is highly variable and national standards may of water cannot be seen, unlike with sprinklers or furrow systems. be weak or absent, with the consequence that cheaper systems Inadequate design in relation to soil types, emitter spacings and can have poor irrigation performance and shorter lifespans. The water quality, compounded by maintenance challenges (unequal price of the drip kit is only one part of the system, and the price of flows or blocked emitters), means that more sophisticated the borehole, pump and tank must be added. The whole system management knowledge and instruments is important cost is what the farmer considers, and the addition of a drip complementary technology to achieve successful outcomes. installation reduces affordability. 2 High maintenance costs and limited access to spares: Drip systems have high replacement costs every three to 6 ●Long-term financial rationale: Drip irrigation, given the high upfront cost, requires a different financial rationale for farmers who tend to focus on obtaining short-term results with the least five years, and the replacement cycle is often not affordable. The amount of risk. routine maintenance requirements are also significant, and while cost is one factor, simple access to the necessary spare emitters, drip lines, fittings and filtration unit parts, is another. 7 Appreciation of technology-need linked to water scarcity: Unlike in water-scarce contexts, where water is abundant, it 3 is more difficult to convince farmers they should adopt expensive Standard drip kits are often unsuitable for the technology, which is understandable given the low financial costs circumstances: Standard equipment in kit form is often (essentially labor) of alternatives such as furrow irrigation. unsuitable for crop combinations, planting density, spacing, farming cultural practices, or for the needs of larger producers. 4 ●Specialist knowledge in maintenance: Maintenance of drip-lines, emitters and filtration units, when not conducted properly, leads to failure. Water quality (particularly water that is M7-38 C HALLEN GES WITH D R IP IR R IG ATION TECHNOLOGY 8 i-BOX 7.11 Outline TOR for the technology diagnostic The consultant will analyze the technical aspects of irrigation as they impact on individual and group irrigation schemes. The approach to, and challenges of, assessing the scale of the FLID sector is n ● t is important to understand what kinds of on-farm I irrigation systems are widely used (open furrows, hose- pipes, spray-tubes, rain-guns, drip irrigation, petrol pumps, solar addressed in Module 1. A resource assessment described in the pumps, etc.), for which crops, and what the related areas of outline Terms of Reference (TOR) in Module 1 will aim to quantify: difficulty may be. It is then possible to better predict the mix of customized technical solutions that might fit different segments of 1. the current hectarage that has been developed through FLID farmer interest, given their crop type and affordability profile. ●2. the different physical contexts ●3. the types of farmers involved in irrigation and develop a classification or typology. n A country-specific database of prices for typical irrigation system components, and related budget prices, would be useful to facilitate concept design options. This would include: The diagnostic in this assignment will cover first, the policy and legal information on petrol, diesel and solar pumps suitable for 0.2 ha aspects of the technical environment that is informed by Module 3, to 10 ha (indicative data is included in i-box 7.4 and 7.6); plastic i-boxes 3.4 and 3.5, with more detailed information on review and pipelines (LDPE, HDPE, uPVC from 32 to 110 mm range) including diagnostic approaches in Minh et al. 2021. This information can be a percentage markup for control valves and fittings; on-farm attached to the consultant’s TOR. irrigation application systems (flexible hose, sprinkler, rain-gun, spray tube, drip). Based on the above analysis a detailed assessment of the technologies that are currently in use, the demand and need for new technologies that can support FLID growth in the varied physical contexts, and the likely range of types of farmers, will be assessed. n The prices would contribute to a comparative lifetime cost- benefit assessment for some typical systems addressed in Module 2; the tech costs are needed to “build the case for FLID”. The assessment must consider both existing and new irrigation The options would include fossil fuel and solar pumps and two farmers, as well as individuals and small groups. or three main crops of interest (generally high value horticultural plus others like banana, coffee, etc.). A sensitivity analysis is useful Information on tech preferences, challenges, and opportunities can to understand the effect of drought cycles, yields, market-price be obtained through interviews with farmers, farmer-representatives variations, and loan-financing interest rates. and organizations, selected suppliers, and ad-hoc visits to supplier shop floors. More systematically, data can be collected through surveys, market-sounding processes (Module 6), and consultative workshops with suppliers, government, farmer-organizations, and NGOs in the sector. TECH N O LO GY FACTO R D I AG N O STI C TO R - SCOPE OF WORK M7-39 i-BOX 7.12 Guidance on scoring the technology factor After the diagnostic is concluded the score of the surrounding Transformative technology is relatively costly for farmers: technical environment, ranging between very-weak and very- strong, will indicate how important it is for an intervention to n ●Supplier prices are so high that sales turnover is limited. address the technology supply chain. The scoring is informed n● R ● eturns on investment for technologies are marginal, whereas truly by some guiding questions outlined below. transformative tech should result in at least a doubling of gross margins A constrained environment in regard to technology would be (though even greater levels are found in practice and are possible, as one where: referenced in the i-boxes) in a comparative lifetime-costing over 10 Transformative technology is not readily available years. on irrigation equipment supplier shop floors across National quality standards for equipment are absent or are the country: weakly formulated to ensure necessary quality control for all irrigation equipment: n There are few suppliers (and where they exist, they are only in major centers) where farmers can find innovative n ●National quality standard documents have gaps in technical enterprise-transforming technologies, and obtain information system specifications with regard to all of their component elements about their suitability, costs and operational advantages and and installation requirements. disadvantages. n● ●The testing facilities and knowledge around quality testing are n● Items like small portable solar pumps (< 0.5 ha mobile or inadequate to ensure quality control nationally. semi-portable systems), low-pressure spray-lines, sprinklers and drip-lines, are not well known or routinely supplied by n ●The compliance and regulation of equipment quality is weak in irrigation equipment outlets. practice. n● Robust management instruments are seldom supplied or used by farmers. n● Larger solar pump installations (> 0.5 ha) for irrigation are few in practice, and the related design and operational experience among suppliers is lacking. M7-40 GUIDAN C E ON S COR ING THE TECHNOLOGY FACTOR 8 i-BOX 7.13 Remote monitoring systems and digital agriculture to authorized persons. In setting up these kinds of systems, pump Remote monitoring systems enable new suppliers can help governments with data to monitor program applications implementation progress, groundwater levels, energy utilized, or Remote monitoring systems (RMS) are increasingly embedded with assessing impacts over time. in new agricultural devices and irrigation equipment such as solar pumps, crop advisory support instruments, and monitoring A status update of the sector equipment, among others. Machine to machine communication The Digitalisation of African Agriculture (D4Ag) report (Tsan et al. makes it easy to monitor the water level in a well, the vital signs of a 2019) reviewed how far the sector has advanced, its prospects, and pump, or to geo-locate and/or take control of a device. Where data what it will take to further unlock the potential of the sector. Key loggers are connected to the device it automatically sends the findings included: data by global system for mobile communications (GSM) to a web platform. Bluetooth functions can transfer data to a smartphone ● n A large number of players comprise this relatively young when it is located a few meters away from the data logger – a sector preferred solution in case of poor mobile network coverage, a situation that is common in rural areas. These functionalities are ●n The economics are improving, and a handful of players are already well-established and included in numerous manufacturers’ beginning to develop viable businesses with attractive financial solar pump products that are on the market in Africa. models In a water-stressed environment, effective monitoring en masse ●n Registrations are concentrated. While there are D4Ag solutions can be enabled through this kind of innovation. Digitally enabled present in at least 43 out of 49 sub-Saharan African countries, over devices would have to be complemented with alternate monitoring half of the solutions are headquartered in East Africa and nearly arrangements for other, less sophisticated systems to ensure two-thirds of registered farmers are based in East Africa, with Kenya comprehensive coverage. This kind of monitoring can help farmers leading the way to be aware of what others are abstracting and support local water management arrangements. It can also link to higher levels of basin ●n Investments remain small, and primarily fueled by donors, management to keep track of what is being abstracted. while private investment is lagging The technology allows a web dashboard to give a complete ●n Some promising impact metrics are emerging. Though early, overview of the entire system – either for abstraction monitoring, or limited, and in some cases, mixed, the overall results suggest that other purposes (user information, distributor support, knowledge D4Ag solutions could achieve transformative results bases, payback tracking, repairs etc.). Access is always restricted RE MOT E M O N I TO RI N G SYSTE M S A N D D IGITAL AGRIC ULTURE M7-41 i-BOX 7.13 ● n While D4Ag’s reach is impressive given the relative newness, RMS. When buying a pump, farmers pay for the hardware (data use in practice remains low logger), software (web platform) and cost of GSM transfer with no extra costs involved. RMS is a strong commercial sales argument RMS and pay-as-you-go (PAYG) arrangements to support climate-smart agriculture with data generated (volume of water used, fuel saving, energy produced, estimation of irrigated One of the solutions with significant potential to overcome the surface), but not for the farmers who pay without receiving benefits. affordability hurdle, is the PAYG payment model also described Suppliers also give the possibility of buying a pump without RMS in Module 5. This is used by suppliers to finance the purchase of to decrease the price of the pump and to adapt the offer to each solar pumps for their customers through small regular installments. segment of customer. In cases of default of payment, the supplier can remotely switch off and on the pump (by GSM mobile networks if these are good Challenges: Several of today’s barriers – notably, limited access enough to communicate between the pump and a web payment to technology and connectivity – will start to be overcome as platform [e.g. Angaza, Mobisol]); or a payment code arrangement cellphone coverage is expanded. While these support networks with an entry keypad that is connected to the device (which is a are on a positive trajectory, the sophistication of D4Ag solutions more reliable method). In the second arrangement, the customer has begun to outpace the readiness of entrepreneurs, users, and pays with a mobile money facility (e.g. MTN, Orange, MoneyMoov government actors to embrace and leverage them. The pace of etc.) and receives a digit code by SMS to enter into the keypad digital solution development is fast, and knowledge application which then activates the pump. The presence of mobile money risks being left behind. Many companies are still working to develop and digitally enabled interactive technologies provides a significant viable business models. Weaknesses in data may be limiting in that opportunity in intervention design, with the absence thereof D4Ag infrastructure, such as farmer registries, digital agronomy presenting something of a constraint. The digitalization of irrigation data, soil mapping, pest and disease surveillance, and weather is part of the wider trend in agriculture and the presence and data infrastructure, are relatively weak, reducing the effectiveness benefits are skewed across Africa. of D4Ag solutions. While some countries like Kenya and Nigeria Who pays for what? More and more solar pump suppliers (Lorentz, are well advanced, there is a wide range of country and regional Grundfos, FuturePump, Sunculture, among others) have integrated variation in D4Ag growth across the continent. M7-42 REM OTE M ON ITORIN G SYSTEMS A ND D IG ITA L AG R ICU LTU R E i-BOX 7.1 References FL I D T EC H N O LO GY O P TI O N S M7-43 Abric, S., G.J. Bom, Y. Diallo, P.M. Ly, and B. van den Pol. 2019. in Sub-Saharan Africa. Washington, DC: International Finance “Intermediate-Depth Solar Pumping Irrigation Solutions for Corporation. Smallholders in the Niayes Region. Practica Foundation, Jacobs, C., M. Chitima, K. van‘t Klooster, and K. Bwanali. 2013. Papendrecht. https:/ /www.practica.org/wp-content/ Determinants of the Productivity and Sustainability of Irrigation uploads/2019/02/Final-report-Senegal-English-FINAL.pdf Schemes in Zimbabwe and Pre-investment Framework. Beekman, W. and G.J. Veldwisch. 2016. “Supporting Farmer-Led Washington, DC: World Bank. Irrigation in Mozambique: Reflections on Field-Testing a New Design Approach.” Sustainability 8 (6): 580. Merrey, D.J. and S.E. Cook. 2012. “Fostering Institutional Creativity at Multiple Levels: Towards Facilitated Institutional Bricolage.” Water Chilundo, M., W. de Sousa, H. Bjornlund, E. Christen, R. Stirzaker and Alternatives 5 (1): 1-19. http://www.water-alternatives.org/index. A. Machava. (Forthcoming). “Improving Green Maize Productivity php/volume5/v5issue1/154-a5-1-1/file using Soil Moisture and Nutrient Monitoring Tools in Smallholder Irrigation in Mozambique.” Minh, T. T., S. Zwart, R. Appoh and P. Schmitter. 2021. “Analyzing the enabling environment to enhance the scaling of irrigation De Bont, C. and G.J. Veldwisch. 2020. “State Engagement with and water management technologies: a tool for implementers”. Farmer-Led Irrigation Development: Symbolic Irrigation Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute Modernisation and Disturbed Development Trajectories in (IWMI). 18p. (IWMI Working Paper 197). doi: https:/ /doi. Tanzania.” The Journal of Development Studies 56 (12): 2154-2168. org/10.5337/2021.201 https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2020.1746278. Moyo, M., A.F. van Rooyen, H. Bjornlund, K. Parry, R. Stirzaker, T. Dube, ESMAP (Energy Sector Management Assistance Program). 2017. and M. Maya. 2020. “The Dynamics between Irrigation Frequency Solar water pumping for sustainable water pumping. Website and Soil Nutrient Management: Transitioning Smallholder accessed at http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/water/brief/ Irrigation Towards more Profitable and Sustainable Systems in solar-pumping 07/12/2020 11:35. Zimbabwe.” International Journal of Water Resources Development FAO. 2018. The Benefits and Risks of Solar-Powered Irrigation – A 36 (1): S102-S126. doi: 10.1080/07900627.2020.1739513 Global Overview. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the Myeni, L., M. Moeletsi, and A. Clulow. 2019. “Present Status of United Nations. http:/ /www.fao.org/3/i9047en/I9047EN.pdf Soil Moisture Estimation over the African Continent.” Journal GSWI (Global Solar and Water Initiative). 2018. “Evaluation of the of Hydrology: Regional Studies 21: 14–24. doi: 10.1016/j. Sustainability of Solar Powered Water Supply Systems in Kenya.” ejrh.2018.11.004. EED Advisory Limited, Nairobi. Olivier, F.C. and A. Singels. 2004. “Survey of Irrigation Scheduling IFC (International Finance Corporation). 2019. The Market Practices in the South African Sugar Industry”. Proceedings of the Opportunity for Productive Use Leveraging Solar Energy (PULSE) South African Sugar Technologists Association 78: 239-244. M7-44 R EFER ENCES Ostrom, E. 2007. “A Diagnostic Approach for Going Beyond Venot, J.P., M. Zwarteveen, M. Kuper, H. Boesveld, L. Bossenbroek, Panaceas.” PNAS 104 (39): 15181-15187. doi: 10.1073/ S.V.D. Kooij, J. Wanvoeke, M. Benouniche, M. Errahj, C.D. Fraiture, pnas.0702288104 and S. Verma. 2014. “Beyond the Promises of Technology: A Review of the Discourses and Actors who make Drip Irrigation.” Reinders, F.B. 2011. “Irrigation Methods for Efficient Water Application: Irrigation and drainage 63 (2): 186-194. doi: 10.1002/ird.1839 40 Years of South African Research Excellence.” Water SA (WRC 40-Year Celebration Special Edition) 37: 765–770. Winrock. 2015. “Solar Water Pump (SWP) Return on Investment Case Study: Machakos County, Kenya.” Winrock International, Resilience BV. 2020. “Use of the Soil Humidity Sensor: New Washington, DC. introduced low-tech innovation to manage the water management on your field.” Resilience BV, Wageningen Winrock. 2016. “Solar Water Pump (SWP) Return on Investment Case Study: Homa Bay County, Kenya.” Winrock International, Schmitter, P., A. Haileslassie, Y. Desalegn, A. Chali, S. Langan, and Washington, DC. J. Barron. 2017. “Improving On-Farm Water Management by Introducing Wetting-Front Detector Tools to Smallholder Farms Van der Laan, M., A. Jumman, and S.R. Perret. 2015. “Environmental in Ethiopia.” LIVES Working Paper 28, International Livestock Benefits of Improved Water and Nitrogen Management in Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi. Irrigated Sugar Cane: A Combined Crop Modelling and Life Cycle Assessment Approach.” Irrigation and Drainage 64 (2): 241-252. Senzanje, A., I. Samakande, E. Chidenga, and D. Mugutso. 2003. doi: 10.1002/ird.v64.2 “Field Irrigation Practice and the Performance of Smallholder Irrigation in Zimbabwe: Case studies from Chakohwa and Van Steenbergen, F. and P. Schmitter. 2020. More Crop per Drop: Mpudzi Irrigation Schemes.” Journal of Agriculture, Science and Farmer-Learning and the Promise of Improved Water Use Technology 5 (1): 1-21. in Agriculture. The Water Channel. Website accessed on 21/01/2021 11:44. https://thewaterchannel.tv/thewaterblog/ Stevens, J. B., G. H. Duvel, G.J. Steyn and W. Marobane. 2005. “The more-crop-per-drop-farmer-learning-and-the-promise-of- Range, Distribution and Implementation of Irrigation Scheduling improved-water-use-in-agriculture/ Models and Methods in South Africa.” Water Research Commission Report No. 1137/1/05. World Bank. 2018. Solar Pumping: The Basics. Washington, DC: Tsan, M., S. Totapally, M. Hailu, and B.K. Addom. 2019. “The World Bank. http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/ Digitalisation of African Agriculture Report 2018–2019.” The en/880931517231654485/pdf/123018-WP-P159391-PUBLIC.pdf Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Co-operation (CTA), Proud Press, The Netherlands. RE FE R E N C ES M7-45