The politics of policy : participatory irrigation management in Andhra Pradesh

This thesis studies the emergence, process and politics of the Andhra Pradesh reform policy of Participatory Irrigation Management (PIM). The reform has been labeled as the 'A? model' of irrigation reforms and supported by external aid agencies like World Bank. Within a short span of time Andhra Pradesh's PIM programe has received internal attention. The program has been seen as a successful model because of the political will and legal bureaucratic support it received and its big-bang approach to implementation. Consequently the reform program influenced the thinking on irrigation management policies in other states within India and abroad.This study investigates the process of PIM policy implemented since 1997 in the state. The objective is to understand the nature and dynamics of the policy process i.e. the role of different actors such as water users, water users' association leaders, politicians, irrigation bureaucrats and their contestation of policy and shaping of courses of action and outcomes. By doing so the study aims to contribute to the general debate on reform policies and particiculary irrigation reform policy in the state of Andhra Pradesh.The thesis is a product of intensive field work carried out from March 2001 to June 2002 with additional field work visits at different intervals during 2002-2004. The research was also benefited by my earlier research work carried out Gujarat Institute of Development Research on PM in Andhra Pradesh during 1999-2000. The first stage concerned a reconnaissance survey of WUAs in the state and a detailed study of WUAs formed on Madhira branch canal under Kalluru and Madhira irrigation sub-divisions. I studied the outcomes of reform policy contestation in key arenas of irrigation management namely, irrigation works, irrigation, expansion (i.e. bridging the gap command) and irrigation revenue assessment ( known as joint Azmoish) in Madhira branch canal. I focused on the day-to-day engagement of the WUA leaders and middle and lower level irrigation bureaucrats with the policy and implementation on the ground. The second stage of field work focused on policy actors at the state capital.The thesis is divided into nine chapters and an epilogue. After the introductory chapter, chapter 2 presents the conceptual framework used for the analysis. The subsequent empirical chapters set out to study the key means of policy implementation and related irrigation management policy process arenas. Chapter 3 discusses the emergence of Participatory Irrigation Management (PIM) policy in the state of Andhra Pradesh. Chapter 4 introduces the details of the irrigation and social organisation of Madhira Branch Canal (MBC). The Chapter shows how irrigation organisation linked with local social organisation.Chapters 5, 6, 7 and 8 are based on empirical analysis and together answer the main research question. Chapter 5 focuses on the first management arena of reform studied of irrigation works. It analyses the process of carrying out physical works (operation and maintenance and minimum rehabilitation works) after the introduction of the PIM programme in the state, and the key actors reshaping outcomes. Chapter 6 focuses on the second irrigation management arena of irrigation expansion and focuses in to government daims on bridging the gap command. Chapter 7 discusses the third irrigation management arena of reform in joint irrigation supervision and revenue collection (joint Azmoish). It examines the role and participation of the Irrigation, Revenue, Agriculture departments and the WUA in a new process created under the reforms through which the extent of area that received canal irrigation in a crop season will be jointly finalised. Chapter 8 returns to the issue of socio-political embeddedness as it reshapes reforms, looking this time at the system-bureaucracy domain and irrigation bureaucrats, especially the field level staff. Chapter 9 is the concluding chapter and summarises the key findings of the research. Many changes have taken place in the irrigation sector after 2002. The Naidu government that introduced the irrigation reforms stalled the elections for WUAs after the completion of their first term in the office. A Congress government came in to power in 2004. As a result there were many changes in the course of irrigation reform policy. I discuss these changes as a brief epilogue to the book.This thesis show how reform policies are interpreted and reconstructed by the participating actors. Initially the reform policies were resisted covertly by middle and lower level of irrigation bureaucrats. They understood that the programme aimed to decentralise their powers and transfer irrigation management activities to water users associations. In process these bureaucrats made alliances with WUA representatives and local leaders and controlled the irrigation management arenas. The lower level bureaucrats could successfully lobby with the higher officials and with government using legal measures and retained their status within the irrigation hierarchy. The irrigation bureaucracy gained more technical and financial powers in the process and retained their control in irrigation management and decision making processes. Hence I argue that, contrary to what is generally expected, PIM in Andhra Pradesh did not 1ead to participatory management of irrigation resources, but served to preserve or strengthen the actors' interests