Weakness of Gradualism

In his brief note on `Gradualism or Big Bang', Mr. Groenfeldt has put forward lucidly the relative strengths and weaknesses of the alternative approaches. Implicitly he advocates the big bang route as the impact is rapid, deep, and sustainable. 

Our experience in India supports the weaknesses of the gradualism approach that have been stated. Though PIM was initiated in some Indian States as early as 1988, the movement has failed to take roots. The reasons for the failure are those partly elaborated by Mr. Groenfeldt. Additionally, pilot experiments in operating the PIM concept were taken in different locations and hence, in the absence of monitoring and guidance, the farmers' associations were left to fend for themselves. 

Second, even though there was a silent acceptance of the concept at the political level, the bureaucracy was opposed to the concept, perhaps because of the loss of power. 

Third, while farmers generally were willing to discharge their obligations (maintenance of infrastructure), water agencies were not in a position to discharge their obligations for providing adequate and timely water supplies. This was due to the fact that the existing system required extensive rehabilitation before turnover and the State Governments did not have funds for the purpose.

Finally, in the Indian context `water resources' is a State subject and the Central Government cannot enforce the concept. The recent shift in political power (1996) has strengthened the States vis-a-vis the Centre and the former are in no mood to accept the Centre's advice (along with the control of funds) for implementing PIM. This means States will have to be persuaded to adopting a big bang strategy.

That the impact of a big bang approach could be both rapid and sustainable is logically coherent and correct; but the question is how do we operationalise it in the South Asian situation.

In most of the South Asian countries ownership of water resources, their development, management and distribution are in the hands of Government and as such only the Government can take a decision on Big Bang in democratic (or even otherwise) countries, the existing system has created vested interests and they would oppose any big hang strategy. What is therefore needed is a determined decision at the highest political level.

Under these circumstances, what could be done to implement a big bang approach?

Convince the decision-makers at the highest level about the importance of PIM, its costs and benefits and the need for a big bang strategy for accelerated cost-effective development of irrigated agriculture. This is likely to be a tardy process, but may bear fruit eventually. The Union Ministry of Water Resources in India has been implicitly operating this strategy for the past year by organizing meetings of senior state officials and PIM seminars for middle-level officers and farmers.

In a way, theWorld Bank is also using this strategy through its insistence on PIM in irrigation projects which receive substantial World Bank assistance. However, at the field level very little success is to be seen, based as it is on the gradualism approach.

Another strategy could be to organize the farmer beneficiaries of irrigation projects to take over the management by appraising them of the benefits and costs of PIM. This may create a lobby, to whom the persons in authority may have to listen. The question then is who should organize the farmers - bureaucracy, political parties or non-governmental organizations? Whatever is the answer, adequate resources need to he made available to these entities.

The third possibility is to allow the existing situation to continue with its dire effects: conflict generation at the village level, inter-village and inter area levels, and wasteful use of water, inequities and so on. This would also mean deterioration of irrigation infrastructure, and huge costs to be borne by government. The strife and financial burdens, so generated, may at some future date force the decision-makers to adopt PIM with a big bang. It may he added here that gradualism is bound to fail in the Indian context, because this strategy provides ample space and time for the bureaucracy to maneuver PIM failure. Once this is done, big bang may not have any effect.

- R.K. Patil, Society for Promoting Participative Ecosystem Management (SOPPECOM), Pune (India)