While access to assured irrigation is a prerequisite for sustainable agricultural intensification, increasing use of groundwater for the same and decreasing areas under surface irrigation are expected to cause considerable hydro-ecological imbalance and hence serious concerns for sustainability. Importantly, the extent, nature, efficiency and impact of irrigation vary across regions depending on the geophysical and agro-climatic conditions, farming practices and socioeconomic setup. Nevertheless, it is suggested that appropriate crop diversification coupled with necessary policy and institutional supports can potentially reduce pressure on groundwater and make intensification in agriculture sustainable. Given this backdrop, this paper examines impact of irrigation and crop diversification on agricultural intensification and its implications for future groundwater dynamics in major Indian states. Using secondary data and applying panel data regression techniques for the period 1990–1991 to 2014–2015, the paper finds that both greater irrigation facilities and diversified crop basket increase cropping intensity. Similarly, use of more chemical fertilizers and higher yield also influence cropping intensity positively. However, rainfall variations and share of GSDP in agriculture have no significant impact. Based on the literature review and the above findings as well as using the insights from the informal interactions and random discussion carried out with the farmers and others stakeholders (e.g., researchers, community workers, extension service providers, NGO, etc.), the fuzzy cognitive models show that future policies and institutions should focus on improvement in agricultural systems and promoting surface irrigation. Besides, conservation and harvesting of rainwater, efficient functioning of the user groups, judicious use of chemical fertilizers and emphasis on cultivation of less water-intensive crops would also be crucial in this regard.

No abstract

No abstract

The IA frameworks outlined below are conceptual models that identify and delineate the main elements of each theme and their causal connections, capturing the structure and functioning of the system. Each framework maps out assumptions about the process by which change occurs from interventions or activities through to the targeted outcomes. We took the perspective of an individual farmer or farmer group (referred to as the actor) when defining objectives and outcomes and not, for example, that of an NGO, government or research body. In doing so, we looked beyond the outcomes (e.g. increased income) that are often considered by external bodies, and recognise that each actor has a different set of needs and wants. Anticipated (desired) outcomes or emergent outcomes attained from agriculture, that support the capacity of the actor to meet their underlying goals, can include not only goods and services purchased through income, such as health care, housing maintenance or improvements, education, food and other expenditures, but also social and psychological outcomes such as improved relationships, a sense of freedom, happiness and respect.