Fourth International Seminar on PIM - Bali, Indonesia

Indonesia hosted the Fourth International Seminar this year. It was held in Bali from 14 to 19 July and was sponsored by no fewer than five organizations: Indonesia's INPIM chapter-to-be, global INPIM, the Directorate-General of Water Resources Development of the Ministry of Public Works, the International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage (ICID), and the Economic Development Institute of the World Bank.

The seminar showed that INPIM is ready to occupy its niche among the world's organizations concerned with irrigation. The seminar's focus on themes, links with ICID, amendments to the by-laws, and INPIM's potential expansion to new countries all helped prepare INPIM for its more independent role.

Thematic Discussions

The Bali seminar focused on four themes: (1) the impact of PIM on agricultural yields and system performance, (2) the impact of PIM on poor rural people, (3) how best to combine lobbying for changes to legal frameworks with efforts to organize farmers into associations, and (4) how to combine turnover with rehabilitation. The participants expressed appreciation for this focus on themes and they found the topics relevant to their respective contexts. They not only signed up in equal numbers for all themes, they also submitted nearly the same number of papers for each topic.

PIM vs. IMT

The two themes on impact were merged into a single one and discussed in a working group chaired by Hatsuya Azumi. In truly participatory fashion, the chairperson asked the participants to list and prioritize the issues they wanted to discuss. Three issues were chosen, the first of which sought to define the links between PIM and IMT: Is PIM part of irrigation management transfer (IMT) or is IMT part of PIM? Participants felt that this was a crucial issue and it provoked much debate. The group concluded that in the real world one finds different degrees of IMT and different degrees of PIM. However, wherever there is IMT, one finds PIM. To complicate things further, it was stressed that there are many cases of PIM without IMT.

Monitoring and Evaluating PIM

The second issue that arose was how to monitor and evaluate PIM, and how to apply the results elsewhere. Traditionally, monitoring and evaluation (M&E) is carried out primarily for the benefit of policymakers and agencies to measure the impact of their interventions. But with PIM, farmers too have an interest in knowing the impact. So the issue is who should carry out M&E in a PIM setting. The consensus reached was that M&E should be commissioned by those who will use the results and should address the needs of all stakeholders.

PIM, Poverty and Agriculture Policy

The third issue discussed by the impact group concerned the link between PIM, poverty reduction, and agricultural policy. Pricing policies by the government have a deep impact on rural poverty and the distribution of purchasing power between rural and urban people. While PIM can hardly counter these by itself, its contribution consists of making development sustainable, supporting infrastructure, and protecting sources of water from decay, depletion and pollution.

Top Down vs. Bottom Up

A session on top-down versus bottom-up approaches was chaired by Dr. Hafied Gany (Indonesian member of the INPIM Board). Since this group addressed many interesting issues that merit greater attention, they will be reported on more fully in the next Newsletter, which will be devoted to the Seminar. The group agreed that enabling, as opposed to prescriptive, legal frameworks have major advantages, particularly in terms of local activities and initiatives. Such a framework, it was emphasized, can give rise to institutions that are well-suited to local social conditions. These adapted institutions may in turn influence the policies that are formulated. Under such a framework, then, local organizing efforts and changes in the legal framework run in parallel and interact.

A group on PIM and scheme rehabilitation, which was chaired by Peter Sun, came up with several clear suggestions. The first recommendation was that no rehabilitation should ever be started when there is no farmer organization, because it is farmers, through their WUAs, who should say what they want done. A legal contract should define the rights and obligations of both agencies and farmers. Such a contract cannot be signed with each individual farmer, so an organization is necessary. If there is no other way to attract rehabilitation investment, farmers will adopt PIM.

Second, to ensure WUA sustainability after management transfer, the group recommended that water fees contain a levy for the WUA's capital reserve account. If the WUA maintains its part of the system satisfactorily, government can reward the WUA with contributions to this account. The group left unresolved the issue of what to do with projects that are not viable from the economic point of view. The group also discussed how to make PIM demand-driven. It was suggested that PIM be made a condition to access funds in extension, credit etc. It was also suggested that water charges be raised in combination with a rebate on the water fee for canals run by a WUA.

INPIM and ICID

Bali was the milieu of a two-way exchange between INPIM and ICID. The Vice President of the Indonesian Commission on Irrigation and Drainage, Dr. Hafied Gany, is also the Indonesian Board member for INPIM, and his leadership in finding synergies between the two organizations was invaluable. The Executive Secretary for INPIM, Peter Sun, was invited to present the results of INPIM's sessions in the ICID conference which followed the INPIM seminar. As a result, INPIM became more visible to many ICID members.

Amendments to the bylaws

The General Assembly changed several bylaws related to INPIM's sources of income, mandate, and links to its donors. The bylaws now state that INPIM can receive income from fee-based services and contributions from donors. The bylaws also contain a reference to environmental protection and gender equity. Finally, the new bylaws created an Advisory Board to allow INPIM to continue to benefit from the experience, insight and networks of professionals who have contributed significantly to PIM and/or INPIM.

New countries

The Seminar benefited from the contributions by teams from three important countries that have not yet joined INPIM: Brazil, Nigeria and Tanzania. We particularly welcome these countries and hope that they will soon establish their own national chapters of INPIM.

- Geert Diemer, Executive Secretary, INPIM

Special Issue on Fourth International Seminar on PIM

The next newsletter will be a special issue devoted to the Fourth International Seminar on PIM that was held from July 14-19, 1998 in Bali, Indonesia. Some of the items in this issue will include: abridged versions of four papers presented at the conference; INPIM's new by-laws that were established in Bali; and perspectives from participants at the conference.