The article on Gradualism or Big Bang in the last INPIM Newlsetter provoked two contrasting responses. Humberto Yap-Salinas suggests a middle way he labels easy does it. A big-bang approach, he argues, might be counter-productive in many instances, particularly in regions of small, poor farmers. A different perspective is offered by R.K. Patil, who considers a big bang the only hope for transforming irrigated agriculture in India -- a country where small, poor farmers predominate. Perhaps these articles will inspire further discussion on the issue. Please send us your views and we will continue the debate in the next Newsletter.

Neither gradualism nor big bang, but easy does it

By L Humberto Yap-Salinas, International Irrigation Center, Utah State University (USA)

In the March, 1996 INPIM Newsletter, it was suggested that sudden revolutionary change, as in a ``big bang" is the most effective method to achieve this institutional transfer of responsibilities. It is also asserted that only in countries adopting ``big-bang" policies of rapid irrigation system management transfer is a high degree of user control achieved. The rapid execution of irrigation system management transfer in Mexico and Turkey was contrasted to that of the gradual, decades-long transfer employed in the Philippines. However, the choice of approach or method for implementation of the process for a given developing country depends on many factors, often with differing approaches or methods used within various areas within the same country.

The"Big Bang"-``Gradualism" Continuum

A continuum of options exists for successful, sustainable irrigation system management transfer, with ``big bang" and ``gradualism" representing the extreme ends of the continuum, and the choice of method and approach must be tailored to each situation. What may determine which option along the continuum is best are agroeconomic and socioeconomic (human resources) characteristics of the agricultural setting, hydrological conditions of the area, and sometimes other factors such as original purpose and underlying objectives of the irrigation system being considered for transfer. All these factors will affect the possible speed, success, and sustainability of a given transfer method chosen forimplementation.

Initial steps in the irrigation system management transfer process may more effectively involve a pilot, sample, or partial approach at first, in a more gradual way. Whena smaller-scale, or ``sample" process has been successful, this provides a further impetus, which can then lead to more rapid management transfer for other irrigation districts. This has been seen in the Dominican Republic, where a successful pilot, then sample area, approach led to enthusiasm both by water users and government for extension of irrigation management transfer to the rest of the country. Furthermore, due to the lessons learned in the pilot areas, the ``shoots around the original plant," i.e., water user association formation and irrigation management transfer to these in other irrigation districts in the country-grew faster and more effectively, than in the original pilot and sample areas.

The farmers, engineers, and technicians who learned by doing in the sample areas became promoters of change toward transfer at the regional and national levels. The sample areas served as ``hands-on" schools, not only for the farmers, technical personnel, and engineers involved in the original transfer process there, but farmers of other districts slated to undergo future transfer came for observation and cadres of technical people and promoters were trained to help in the implementation of transfer in new districts. A sustainable, effective process of irrigation system management transfer is taking place in the Dominican Republic. Furthermore, water users there not only exert a high degree of control over management of their irrigation systems, but have learned the process of participation in other areas of their lives as well. Rural societies there have seen development in democratic initiatives of self-government and representation.

Factors Affecting Choice of irrigation System Management Transfer Method & Approach:

Many factors must be considered in selecting an effective irrigation system management transfer method. Agroeconomic and socioeconomic characteristics can affect the speed, success, and sustainability of a given method of irrigation transfer. Agroeconomic factors include the size of farmers' lands, the quality of the soil, scarcity of water, and the types of crops grown. The physical condition and effectiveness of the irrigation system, marketing and credit opportunities, and legal framework protecting farmers' titles and recognition of their organization are also important. Socioeconomic factors include the farmers' level of education, background in community issues, their knowledge and understanding ofthe participatory process, irrigation traditions, agricultural expertise, and familiarity with appropriate agricultural and business management practices. 

The purpose and objectives of the irrigation system(s) as originally designed is also a factor in irrigation system management transfer. Sometimes there is a tendency to consider that all irrigation systems have the same purpose and underlying objectives, but this is not the case. When an irrigation system is set up to supplement a rainfed area with large profitable cash or export crops, this commercial purpose is different from the sociopolitical purpose involved when an irrigation system is set up to aid farmers in an arid area where little crop production can occur and social benefit is sought. Geostrategic purposes are involved when a region of a country is developed for political or security reasons, and environmental purposes are involved when better living conditions or reduction of flooding are sought. The purpose(s) can also change with time and priorities that farmers and governments bring to the transfer process, and these orientations and priorities will in turn affect the choice of transfer approach and methods and the sustainability of the transfer process. 

The setup of water users associations, imposed from the government ``top-down" can produce different results affecting sustainability of irrigation system management transfer, if certain enabling conditions for success are not present, as compared to setup of water users associations, developed or induced ``bottom-up" with more gradual growth of water users in participation and management skills. 

The size of farmers' landholdings often, though with exceptions, is another factor. With farmers of medium to large land holdings with crops of higher rentability and better soil, the irrigation management transfer is often faster, and more successful with a rapid transfer method. These farmers are likely to already have concepts of management and participation; large farmers/owners often employ managers and to have experience in discussing issues and making decisions in a teamwork situation. In addition, these lands often have irrigation systems in better condition, and the farmers/owners likewise often have well-established marketing channels and greater availability of credit than smaller farmers. Two attitudes result in the face of possible irrigation system transfer: some of these larger farmers may prefer to continue enjoying power and control in the status quo, and may not be so enthusiastic about irrigation system management privatization. Others, however, see more clearly the advantages of being free of government intervention and welcome Irrigation transfer. A ``big bang" approach might be more likely to succeed in this type of environment.

In contrast, smaller farmers have traditionally looked to paternalistic government help for solutions. Unlike larger farmers, these farmers generally lack the economies of scale and have extremely limited economic resources, availability of credit and marketing channels. Likewise, they often lack experience in management and participation, and must be shown the benefits of these. Furthermore, their soil is often of poorer quality and the physical systems of irrigation and drainage serving their farms are frequently in poor condition. Accordingly, provision of adequate physical conditions on their lands for successful irrigation is often a prerequisite so that water supply is assured and good crop production is made possible. Without sufficient physical provision of possibilities for success in the agricultural enterprise, and without guidance in concepts and procedures of participation, shared decision-making and management, simple organization into water users associations will not be able to ensure success and sustainability in irrigation system management transfer. Thus a more gradual approach, inducing success and showing farmers the positive benefits of organization for their own benefit, is necessary in poorer, less developed agricultural areas.

There can be exceptions, of course, to these generalizations. As individuals, water users can respond differently toward the prospect of irrigation management transfer. As noted previously, some larger farmers may not welcome the concept at all. Similarly, while many small farmers, for lack of tradition and preparation, may not be ready for more rapid transfer. Other small farmers, if they have a long tradition of irrigation and communal work, with a sense of community and organization, may, in terms of enabling conditions for success, be more open and more prepared for irrigation transfer. 

Hydrological conditions are also a significant factor in WUA formation and function. In the arid areas of the Dominican Republic, small farmers predominate and water was made even more scarce by poor conditions of the irrigation system due to mismatching of the supply and demand in the agricultural operation, poor water application scheduling, and inequities in water distribution. Before irrigation transfer could take place, several preliminary actions were necessary. These were: provision of sufficient and functional physical infrastructure to provide adequate water with timely application, establishment of rules for equitable water distribution during water user association formation, and induction and training in participation and management. Clearly, a ``big bang" rapid transfer process would not have worked in this region - as in fact it did not work when the government initially tried to establish WUA's there in the late 1970s and early 1980s.

In the Dominican Republic, a more gradual method, using first a pilot and partial, ``sample" approach was, therefore, necessary, particularly in the arid region farmed by poor, smaller farmers. In the rainfed, supplemental irrigation area farmed by larger farmers with more experience and irrigation tradition, success was seen much more rapidly in the sample area, and transfer was able to proceed much more rapidly and spontaneously. Thus it can be seen that one method does not work for all, and the ``big bang" rapid transfer method will not always produce successful, sustainable transfer. 

The transfer process may be ``site-specific," and the approach to each particular region must be flexible. Therefore, in general, a more gradual approach, balanced between the extremes of ``big bang" and gradualism is probably most appropriate for many countries. Proceeding more gradually will allow response to various factors that will affect the sustainability and ultimate success of the transfer in the long run.

Lastly, a pending issue in seeking successful, sustainable irrigation system management transfer is that of assuring effective on-farm irrigation water management and irrigation system management. Often in the turmoil and pressure toward irrigation transfer, this crucial goal is overlooked. Indeed, the main reason for this trend toward transfer/privatization is dissatisfaction with irrigation system output and performance and with the government's handling of the irrigation system. But transfer for the sake of transfer does not solve this problem. If water users and their associations are not prepared to receive this transfer and achieve better irrigation system output and performance, the transfer will accomplish nothing, and possibly worse. Rather, all those involved in the transfer must determine where the problems have been in irrigation system management and seek to solve these problems and improve irrigation management in and through the transfer.