Sustainability of farmers' organization of water management in the Office du Niger irrigation scheme in Mali

Abstract

The Office du Niger is a centrally managed collective irrigation scheme of 80 000 ha, mainly cultivated with flooded rice. In the context of recent reforms, water distribution and maintenance at the tertiary canal level were left to farmers. In this paper, their ability to resolve collective action problems through devising, monitoring and enforcing rules is diagnosed through a questionnaire survey of 89 farmers on 59 tertiary canals from five villages. Results show that rules are devised only on 30 and 24% of the canals for water distribution and maintenance respectively. Moreover, there is often no consensus on rules among farmers, and monitoring and sanctioning mechanisms are absent. This results in individualistic behavior causing problems concerning water distribution and maintenance for respectively 20 and 43% of the interviewed farmers. Ineffectiveness of peer pressure and farmers' incomplete mentality shift towards assuming collective responsibility are impediments to successful organization of water management. With water supply being abundant and the infrastructure recently rehabilitated, organization of water management at tertiary level is, however, not always required in order to avoid problems. On the other hand, the current state of affairs is not considered sustainable, as the irrigated area will strongly expand and the irrigation infrastructure ages with time. Measures of sensitization and group empowerment accompanying the process of management transfer will therefore be desirable. Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. key words: irrigation; water management; irrigation management transfer; collective action; rules; Mali RÉ SUMÉ L'Office du Niger est un périmètre rizicole collectif de 80 000 ha avec une gestion centralisée. Dans le cadre de réformes, la distribution de l'eau et l'entretien au niveau tertiaire du réseau ont été transférés aux exploitants. Ce papier a comme sujet une diagnostique sur leur capacité de résoudre des problèmes d'action collective en montant et imposant des règles. La recherche est basée sur des enquêtes avec 89 exploitants de 59 canaux tertiaires et cinq villages. Les résultats montrent que des règles sont définies seulement dans 30 et 24% des canaux pour respectivement la distribution de l'eau et l'entretien. En plus, souvent il n'y a pas de consensus sur les règles parmi les exploitants, et des moyens de les contrôler et imposer sont absents. Il en résulte que des stratégies individualistes dominent, produisant des problèmes concernant la distribution de l'eau et l'entretien pour respectivement 20 et 43% des exploitants enquêtés. L'inefficacité de pression sociale et l'adoption incomplète

Water Communities in the Republic of Macedonia: An Empirical Analysis of Membership Satisfaction and Payment Behavior

“…To protect the latter, state control has been adopted frequently but in practice many state-managed irrigation systems perform poorly. In particular, state financed and managed technological solutions in irrigation have often fostered an unhealthy dependence on external aid (Araral, 2005b) and failed at the local level due to ineffective monitoring and enforcement of rules (Vandersypen et al, 2006).…”

The contribution of information systems in maintaining large‐scale irrigation schemes

“…Moreover the project stopped at the tertiary canal, beyond which maintenance falls under the responsibility of farmers. Yet farmers face difficulties coordinating the conception, implementation, and supervision of management rules ensuring the individual and collective maintenance of canals (cleaning out weeds and maintaining dikes) (Vandersypen et al, 2006). These difficulties create disequilibrium with the process implemented on the secondary network.…”

Farmers' perceptions and engineering approach in the modernization of a community‐managed irrigation scheme. A case study from an oasis of the Nefzawa (South of Tunisia)

“…The farmer was first asked to describe the farming and cropping systems from a historical perspective, before the interview focused on the constraints mentioned by the farmer. The dialogue was structured as recommended by Vandersypen et al (2006). When a farmer brought up a specific problem, the following questions were asked: How did you identify the problem?…”