Supporting decision making on rehabilitation and management transfer of government smallholding irrigation schemes : The smile approach

Government smallholder irrigation schemes (SIS) were developed in former homeland areas of South Africa during the apartheid era. These schemes are now facing serious problems, owing to deteriorating infrastructures, low yields, limited access to services, weak and unclear institutions regarding water and land, and lack of support. Although representing a small percentage of irrigated land at country level, their location in poor rural areas represents a potential for poverty alleviation and food security. The central and provincial governments aim to both revitalise SIS and curtail the financial burden of their maintenance and operation costs. South Africa has cautiously embarked on the transfer of a number of schemes from government agencies to water users associations in the Northern and Eastern Cape Provinces. It is difficult for decision-makers and operators to evaluate the potential for long-term sustainability, then to organise rehabilitation and transfer accordingly, owing to a context of low participation, weak local institutions, and lack of information regarding farmers' strategies, land tenure arrangements, cropping systems, household socio-economics, and so on. A research team from CIRAD (Centre de Cooperation Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Developpement) and the University of Pretoria proposes an action-research approach of SIS, in three steps: (1) data collection on the socio-economic and technical circumstances at household and scheme level; (2) the development of a model that calculates both the costs incurred by scheme management, and the possible contributions by farmers to cover these costs; and (3) running the model on a scenario-testing basis, evaluating the impact of certain measures or decisions, or certain farmers' strategies. The following principles form the background of the approach: (1) establishing and sustaining multi-disciplinarity and partnership; (2) considering local and specific circumstances; (3) developing and using a typology of farmers; (4) acquiring a management perspective of the scheme; (5) modelling then running simulations as ways to analyse the present situation, to show the likely results of certain decisions or measures, to investigate and raise new questions, and to foresee issues and problems. The approach itself has been developed in a scheme of the Northern Province. In-depth field surveys revealed a huge inner diversity, in terms of farmers' strategies and performances. A first simulation tool (Smile, Sustainable Management of Irrigated Land and Environment) was developed. Scenario simulations show that the current situation is not viable. Costs are not covered and can hardly be reduced, since the bulk lays on capital and maintenance costs. The current biggest problem is the majority of non-farming plot occupiers, with low capacity and willingness to pay water fees. Also, low land productivity strongly limits farmers' income and capacity to pay back water services. It was shown that slight changes could significantly improve the situation (i.e. reduction of the proportion of non-farming occupiers, shift from mere subsistence towards some commercialisation, increased land use and improved cropping systems, etc.). A number of recommendations measures and decisions may be drawn from the simulations. Operators and decision makers should especially address inner land tenure arrangements, farmers' training, access to markets and services. An inescapable prerequisite to sustainable management is the establishment of a sound local managing organisation, which cost is included in the model. Although requiring accurate and reliable background data, the methodology shows huge potential for decision-making support and for investigation on sound management pathways. (Résumé d'auteur