Footnote:
Diese Datenquelle enthält auch Bestandsnachweise, die nicht zu einem Volltext führen.
Description:
The country's irrigation systems have had a long history of recovering maintenance cost from farmers. The Free Irrigation Service Act of 2018 was a radical departure from this policy. Based on examining secondary data, and primary information from key informant interviews and focus group discussions, this study conducts a preliminary assessment of the policy change. The assessment finds that the main benefit to farmers from free irrigation is the savings from paying the ISF in the case of NIS; and the subsidy for O&M in the case of CIS. The overall level of O&M may have increased despite the likely decline in O&M subsidy for NIS. However, while beneficiaries of free irrigation are poorer than average, a large majority of potentially beneficiaries are non-poor; to achieve equity objectives, targeted transfers are probably superior to in-kind transfers such as free irrigation. Several recommendations are provided: 1) Continue to pursue IMT within the context of free irrigation for both NIS and CIS, based on minimum maintenance for NIA maintenance, and transparent maintenance standards for both NIA and IA; 2) Provide for sustained and increasing O&M subsidy, but make it available only on a performance basis; 3) Explore water-saving as a performance criterion in O&M subsidy; 4) Transform NIA into a service providing agency specializing in technical assistance to IAs, contract design, and performance monitoring; 5) Introduce a mandatory review comparing FISA with other social assistance and social protection schemes in achieving equity objectives.