108

PROMOTING DRIP IRRIGATION

*
WHERE AND WHY?
D. Suresh Kumar
1
Abstract
This paper tries to look at the changes which drip irrigation brings to the farming system and the factors
which limit or motivate drip irrigation. The study revealed that adoption of drip irrigation technology increased the
net sown area, net irrigated area and there by helped in achieving higher cropping intensity and irrigation intensity.
Discussion with the farmers revealed that huge initial investment and small size of holding are the major constraints
limiting the adoption of drip technology. Other reasons are unsuitable cropping pattern, lack of access to subsidy
and no technical support for follow up action. As cropping pattern decides the adoption and suitability of drip
irrigation, widespread adoption of micro irrigation could be promoted in the regions where there is a shift towards
crops like coconut, banana, grapes etc. Further, drip irrigation is suitable in areas where there is a scarcity of water
and labour.
1. INTRODUCTION
Water is becoming an increasingly scarce resource and limiting agricultural development in many
developing and developed economies across the world. Developing infrastructure for water resources and their
management have been the common policy agenda in many developing economies particularly in arid and
semi-arid tropical countries. Physical and economic scarcity of water across regions has forced water
resources economists and scientist to critically analyze different options for managing water. A study by the
International Water Management Institute (IWMI) shows that around 50% of the increase in demand for water
by the year 2025 can be met by increasing the effectiveness of irrigation. Most of this gain in irrigation efficiency
can come in countries which grow high percentage of irrigated rice.
The capacity of large countries like India to efficiently develop and manage water resources is likely to
be a key determinant of global food security in the 21st century (Seckler et al., 1998). In India, almost all the
easily possible and economically viable irrigation water potential has already been developed. However, the
demand for water for different sectors has been growing continuously (Saleth, 1996; Vaidyanathan, 1999).
Moreover, the water use efficiency in the agricultural sector, which still consumes over 80% of water, is only in
the range of 30-40% in India, indicating that there is considerable scope for improving the water use efficiency.
A lot has been discussed on the ever-increasing demand for water resources for multiple uses which has
led to overexploitation of groundwater. It is argued that low electricity pricing policies and shifting of electricity
tariff from pro-rata to flat rate have reduced the marginal costs of water to zero. As a result, farmers use both
groundwater and electricity inefficiently. The effect of such cheaper electricity has resulted in various negative
externalities such as over pumping, changes in crop pattern towards more water intensive crops, well
deepening, drilling new bore wells, increase in well investments, pumping costs, well failure and abandonment
and out migration which are increasing at a much faster rate (Narayanamoorthy, 1997; Palanisami and Suresh
Kumar, 2003).
The review of past studies shows that the solution to the problem of growing groundwater scarcity and
persistent groundwater resource degradation across regions are two fold: Firstly, the supply side management
1
Associate Professor, Department of Agriculture Economics, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University. Coimbatore. India. E-mail:
rithusuresh@yahoo.com
109
practices like watershed development, water resources development through major, medium and minor
irrigation projects. The second is thorough the demand management by efficient use of the available water both
in the short and long run. This includes drip irrigation and other improved water management practices.
Recognizing the importance of sustainable water use efficiency in agriculture, a number of demand
management strategies (like water pricing, water users association, turnover system) have been introduced
since the late seventies to increase the water use efficiency especially in the use of surface irrigation water. While
various strategies introduced for improving the water use efficiency have been continuing, the net impact of
these strategies in increasing water use efficiency is not very impressive (Narayanamoorthy, 2003).
One of the demand management mechanisms is the adoption of micro irrigation such as drip and
sprinkler method of irrigation. Evidences show that the water use efficiency increases up to 100% in a properly
designed and managed drip irrigation system (INCID, 1994; Sivanappan, 1994). Drip method of irrigation helps
to reduce the over exploitation of groundwater that partly occurs because of inefficient use of water under
surface method of irrigation. Environmental problems associated with the surface irrigation like water logging
and salinity are also completely absent under drip method of irrigation (Narayanamoorhty, 1997). In addition,
drip method helps in achieving saving in irrigation water, increased water use efficiency, decreased tillage
requirement, higher quality products, increased crop yields and higher fertilizer use efficiency (Qureshi et al,
2001; Sivanappan, 2002; Namara et al., 2005). In addition to the private benefits, the drip irrigation generate
substantial social impacts in the form of enhanced food security, women participation in agriculture (http://
www.ide-india.org/ide/socialimpact.shtml) and social status (Shah et al.,).
Though the potential benefits generated by the drip irrigation methods are apparent, the adoption of drip
irrigation is yet to be widely promoted across regions and states. Though there are many studies attempted to
identify factors limiting the adoption of drip irrigation, still, it is not clear where we should promote micro
irrigation. The issue of promoting micro irrigation forms one of key policy agendas in many developing countries
including India. Keeping these issues in view, the present paper addresses three important issues: (i.) what
changes the drip irrigation brings to the farming system?, (ii) whether the adoption of drip irrigation is motivated
by the cropping pattern or the cropping pattern is followed by the drip adoption? and (iii) what factors limit or
motivate drip adoption?.
2. METHODOLOGY
The present study aims to analyze the adoption and impact of drip irrigation. To identify the factors
driving adoption of drip irrigation and assess the associated positive and negative externalities, one control region
where there is no drip adoption was selected.
The study was conducted in Coimbatore district of Tamil Nadu state where groundwater resource
degradation is alarming. Two blocks each representing water scarcity were selected and studied. From the
selected block, two revenue villages were selected purposely where the adoption of drip irrigation is widespread.
Farm households in the selected villages constituted the sample units. To examine the adoption and impact of
drip irrigation on resource use, agricultural production and farm income, 25 drip adopting farmers were selected
in each village and correspondingly 25 non-drip adopters were selected in control villages. In additon to drawing
sample farmers in the control village, farmers who did not adopt from the drip village were also studied. A sample
of 10 non-drip adopters in the same village was studied. Thus, we studied two set of control farmers. One set of
control farmers with in the drip village and another set of farmers from the control village. Total samples of 120
farmers were studied.
2.1 Source of data
For the purpose of the study, both secondary and primary information were collected from different
sources. The secondary information included rainfall trends, growth in number of wells, wells functioning,
number of defunct wells, cropping pattern, crop yields, occupational structure, area irrigated and socio-eco-
nomic conditions like migration, employment. The general particulars of the area were collected from the
110
assistant director of statistics, and assistant director of agriculture of the respective regions. Interview schedules
were formulated and pretested. The needed information were gathered by personal interview of the respondents.
The primary information collected from the farm households include details on well investment, groundwater
use, extraction and management, crop production including input use and output realized, farm income, adoption
of drip irrigation, and investment on drip irrigation. This also includes asset position, education, consumption
and other socio-economic conditions.
2.2 Factors influencing adoption of drip irrigation
A key concern of policy makers is to make farm households adopt micro irrigation technologies in order
to manage the growing groundwater scarcity. Thus, an important research question is what factors influence
farm households decision to adopt drip irrigation. For the purpose, area covered under drip irrigation is
considered as the dependent variable.
The dependent variable for adoption of drip irrigation would be zero for those households who do not
adopt drip irrigation. If the dependent variable is censored, values in a certain range may all be recorded as single
value. Given that dependent variable is censored at zero, a Tobit estimation rather than OLS is appropriate
(Madalla, 1989; Tobin, 1958). In such a case, Tobit estimators may be used. Thus, the functional form of the
model specified in the present study with a Tobit model, with an error term (Ui) which is independently, normally
distributed with zero mean and constant covariance, is
T*i = Xi b + Ui
Ti = T*i = 0 if, Xi b + Ui > 0
if Xi b + Ui <= 0
i = 1....n
(1)
where,
Ti = Area covered under drip irrigation in hectares
Xi = Vector of independent variables
b = Vector of unknown coefficients
n = Number of observations
In the above functional relationship, the Ti is the endogenous variable which is expected to be influenced
by other exogenous variables viz., age of the farmer in years (AGE), educational level of the farmer in years of
schooling (EDUCATION), farm size in hectares (FSIZE), proportion of wider spaced crop ( WIDERCROP),
participation in off-farm and non-farm income activities (OFFFARM) and percentage of area irrigated by wells
(AWELLS).
Economic implications can be drawn by using the results of the empirical model. Following a Tobit
decomposition framework suggested by Mc Donald and Moffitt (1980), the effects of the changes in the
explanatory variables on the elasticity of adoption of drip irrigation and intensity of adoption could be obtained.
The basic relationship between the expected value of all observations, E(T), the expected value
conditional upon being above the limit, E(T*), and the probability of being above the limit, F(z), is
..(2)
The effect of a given change in the level of the explanatory variables on the dependent variables can be
obtained by decomposing the equation (2) is,
...(3)
111
Thus, the total elasticity of change in the level of the explanatory variable consists of two effects: (i)
change in T of those above the limit (i.e. elasticity of intensity of adoption, for those households who already are
adopter) and (ii) the change in the probability of being above the limit (i.e. probability of adoption).
To assess the physical, and socio-economic impact of adoption of drip irrigation, the impacts on
different domains were compared between the regions of high degree of adoption with the region of no drip
adoption (control region). Both, with and without and before and after approaches were employed to assess the
impact of drip irrigation technologies.
The adoption of micro irrigation is expected to have impacts on resource use (water, labour, fertilizers
in agricultural crop production), area irrigated, cropping pattern, cropping intensity, water potential of the wells,
crop yield, farm household income, asset position, consumption, education, livestock possession and labour
absorption etc. It will also have bearing on the wage rate, prices of cereals, migration and mobility of labour. In
addition, the additional employment created through development of allied industries. Inter-temporal comparison
was also made to study the impact of drip irrigation.
2.3 Social impacts
The adoption of drip irrigation has significant bearing on the society as a whole and generates various
positive and negative externalities (Dhawan, 2000). The positive externalities may include reduction in well
failure rate, reduction in deepening of existing wells or cost of drilling new wells, and increased availability of
irrigation water. Similarly, the adoption of drip irrigation also generates negative externalities such as reduction in
human labour employment due to cropping pattern changes i.e. labour intensive annual cereal crop production to
less labour intensive trees, and additional consumption expenditure incurred by the local villagers because of
increased local price of cereals due to reduced local production. Generally, externalities arise when certain
actions of producers or consumers have unintended external (indirect) effects on other producers or
consumers. Externalities exist when not all costs or benefits are taken into consideration by consumers and
producers while conducting their consumption and production activities (Markandya et al., 2002). Externalities
may be positive or negative. Positive externalities arise when an action by an individual or a group confers
benefits to others. Negative externalities arise when an action by an individual or group of producers gives
harmful effects to others. In an activity generating positive externality, social benefit is higher than private benefit
and in an activity generating negative externality, social cost is higher than private cost.
2.4 Quantification of benefits and double difference methodology
Farm level data was collected for both drip adopters and non-adopters before and after drip irrigation
technology. This enables the use of the double difference method to quantify the impacts due to adoption of drip
irrigation. The framework was adapted from the program evaluation literature (Maluccio and Flores, 2005).
Table.1: Double Difference Method of Quantifying Impacts Due to Drip Technology
Particulars Drip adopters Non-drip adopters Difference across groups
After drip D1 C1 D1-C1
Baseline/Before drip D0 C0 D0-C0
Difference across time D1-D0 C1-C0 Double difference
(D1-C1)-(D0-C0)
The columns distinguish between the groups between drip adopters and non-drip adopters and the rows
distinguish between before and after the drip adoption. This is best explained in the Figure.1.
In order to quantify various positive and negative externalities caused by the drip irrigation technology,
it is essential to enumerate and differentiate between the private and social cost and benefits. Since the social cost
is the sum of private cost and external cost and the social benefit is the sum of private benefit and external
benefit, it is crucial to enumerate these costs and benefits (Markandya et al., 2002).
112
Figure.1: Illustration of impact of drip adoption by double difference method
Table.2: Cost and Benefits Associated with Drip Adoption
Cost Benefit
Private External Private External
Capital cost Reduction in labour Value of saved water Increased water availability
(investment cost) absorption per ha of for irrigation purposes
traditionally irrigated
crop replaced by drip
system
Maintenance cost Reduction in food Value of labour saved Reduced power energy
security due to consumption in agriculture
replacement of traditional
cereals by high valued
vegetables, cash crops
and fruits
Depreciation on Additional cost incurred Increase in value of Reduction in cost of
drip equipments towards purchase of outputs (due to well deepening
cereals because of increased yield)
drip adoption
Interest on fixed Expansion in cropped Reduction in cost of
capital - area drilling new bore wells
/ wells
Reduction in well failure
It is apparent that the adoption of drip irrigation generates various positive externalities. They include
increase in water availability for irrigation, reduction in cost of electricity, reduction in cost of well deepening,
reduction in cost of drilling new wells/bore wells and reduction in well failure.
3. STUDY AREA
The study area comprises Coimbatore district of western zone of Tamil Nadu state. The average annual
rainfall of this district is 647.2 mm from winter, hot weather, southwest monsoons and northeast monsoons.
113
There are six different soil types viz., red calcareous soil, black soil, red non-calcareous soil, alluvial and colluvial
soil, brown soil and forest soil. The chief source of irrigation in the district is through wells, which play a
significant role in the irrigation of the district followed by surface water structures. The district also receives
water through tanks. There are 66 irrigation tanks in the district.
A wide range of high-grade metamorphic rocks of the peninsular gneissic complex covers the district.
These rocks are extensively weathered and overlain by recent valley fills and alluviam at places. The major rock
types present in the district are charnockites, granites, complex gneisses mainly hornblende biotite and sillimanite
gneiss with basic and ultra basic intrusives, crystalline limestone, syenite, pegmatite and quartz veins.
3.1 Groundwater potential
The importance and need of water, particularly, for agriculture and its role in augmenting food
production needs no emphasis since water is the basic input. Prudential planning for systematic and scientific
development of groundwater resources by means of various types of groundwater abstraction structures
requires balanced estimation of groundwater potential.
The groundwater potential as on January 2003 indicates that the total groundwater recharge is 880.97
million cubic meter (MCM). Net groundwater availability (90% of total groundwater recharge) is 792.87 MCM.
Domestic and industrial draft is 40.57 MCM and irrigation draft is 779.13 MCM. Balance available for future
development is 0 MCM and the stage of development is 103%. The level of groundwater development exceeds
100% of the utilisable groundwater recharge in eleven blocks, between 90-100% in four blocks and between
70-90% in four blocks. The groundwater potential, net draft, balance potential available and stages of groundwa-
ter development are furnished in Table.3. The stages of groundwater development is 169% in Thondamuthur
block and 173% in Annur block. Well failure is found to be about 20% - 60%. This led farmers to adopt various
demand side coping strategies like adoption of drip irrigation, shifting agricultural crops to trees, etc.
Table.3: Groundwater potential, utilization and balance potential in the study area (as on 2003)
Name of the Total Annual Natural Net GW Irrigation Net Stage of Stages of
Blocks groundwater recharge availability draft groundwater groundwater groundwater
recharge during non (MCM) as on availability development development
(MCM) monsoon 2003 for future as on 1998 As on 2003
(MCM) (MCM) irrigation
development
(MCM)
Thondamuthur 37.92 3.79 28.21 46.47 0.00 167 169
Annur 38.77 3.88 34.13 56.84 0.00 170 173
Coimbatore 880.98 88.09 792.87 779.13 112.34 - -
district
3.2 Source wise area irrigated
The area irrigated by different sources has significant bearing on the adoption of micro irrigation. Heavy
dependence on groundwater necessitates the farmers to go for wide adoption of micro irrigation to cope with
growing groundwater scarcity. The trend in source wise area irrigated shows a significant decline in tank
irrigation. This is augmented by groundwater as evidenced by increasing area under both open well and bore well
irrigation. The groundwater irrigation is to some extent reliable as the co-efficient of variation is small (14.63%
in open well). Farmers in this district rely heavily on groundwater for irrigation.
3.3 Groundwater irrigation in selected blocks
Dependence on groundwater for irrigation is a common phenomenon in both the study blocks. The
source wise area irrigated indicates that groundwater accounts 88.7% and 52% to the total area irrigated
114
respectively in Thondamuthur and Annur blocks. This confirms the importance of groundwater for agricultural
crop production. The area irrigated by different abstraction structures is much more than that of surface water
sources. The irrigation system often suffers due to inadequate supply of surface water and depends upon
groundwater sources to supplement surface water to stabilize irrigation.
Figure 2: Sourcewise Area Irrigated in Coimbatore District
Figure 3: Groundwater Irrigation in Selected Blocks
4. RESULTS FROM FIELD STUDIES
Development of micro irrigation helps the agricultural sector in many ways. Evidence shows that drip
irrigation achieves resource saving, enhances yield of various crops and generates various positive externalities.
This section examines the spatial and temporal changes in farming system as a result of adoption of micro
irrigation.
4.1 What changes the drip method brought in to the farming system?
Key indicators about the impact of drip irrigation across regions over a period were analyzed. Here our
aim is to observe any significant changes in land holdings, cropped area, irrigated area due to the introduction of
drip irrigation. For the purpose, the drip adopters are compared with two types of control households. It is seen
from the Table.4 that the size of holding is worked out to 5.69 hectares for drip adopters and 2.14 hectares for
non-drip adopters and 2.3 hectares in control village. It can be seen that the average size of holding among the
drip adopters is significantly large when compared to non-adopters both in the same village and in control village.
Since drip method of irrigation involves huge initial investment, large farmers adopt widely when compared to
small and marginal farmers.
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
1
9
8
0
1
9
8
1
1
9
8
2
1
9
8
3
1
9
8
4
1
9
8
5
1
9
8
6
1
9
8
7
1
9
8
8
1
9
8
9
1
9
9
0
1
9
9
1
1
9
9
2
1
9
9
3
1
9
9
4
1
9
9
5
1
9
9
6
1
9
9
7
1
9
9
8
1
9
9
9
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
2
0
0
2
2
0
0
3
2
0
0
4
Canal Tank Ordinary well Tube well
115
It is argued that drip irrigation increases cropped area and area under irrigation as it is a viable water
saving technology. Our study confirms the earlier findings that the drip irrigation technology increased the net
sown area, net irrigated area and there by helps in achieving higher cropping intensity and irrigation intensity. For
instance, in the drip village, the net sown area increased from 4.63 ha to 5.39 ha where as the gross cropped area
increased from 4.88 ha to 6.44 ha. Similar trend was observed in net irrigated area and gross irrigated area.
During the survey, we found that drip irrigation technology resulted in significant impacts. It led to 40-50%
water saving and helped double the irrigated area and cropped area.
Table.4: Drip irrigation and its impact on farming
Drip village
Drip adopters Non-adopters
Before After Before After Before After
Number of farm households 50 20 50
Number of workers in the 2.7 2.7 2.1 2.1 2.3 2.3
household
Farm size (ha) 5.69 5.69 2.14 2.14 2.48 2.48
Net sown area (ha) 4.63 5.39 1.95 2.05 2.12 2.08
Gross cropped area (ha) 4.88 6.44 2.06 2.11 2.30 2.13
Cropping intensity (%)
a
105.37 124.84 102.44 102.26 108.49 108.87
Net irrigated area (ha) 3.65 4.97 1.46 1.78 1.80 1.75
Gross irrigated area (ha) 3.84 6.26 1.53 1.85 2.03 1.84
Irrigation intensity (%)
b
104.88 130.16 117.0 116.83 112.78 109.97
% of area irrigated 80.21 96.73 91.77 88.92 88.26 86.38
by wells to the total cropped
area
% of area irrigated 66.35 .. ..
under drip to gross
cropped area
% of area irrigated 68.57 .. ..
under drip to gross irrigated
area
Source : Field survey during 2007-08
Notes:
a : Cropping intensity is defined as the ratio of gross cropped area to net sown area and expressed as
percentage
b : irrigation intensity is the ratio of gross irrigated area to net irrigated area and expressed as percentage
It is interesting to note that drip irrigation not only resulted in private benefits to the drip adopters, but
also generate positive externalities. Debate is going on among the hydrologists, water resource managers and
agronomists whether drip technology helped in water saving at meso level i.e at village level or watershed level
or basin level. Though it is not based on experiments like pumping test, our discussion with the farmers revealed
that water level in the wells adjacent to the drip adopters field were raised in many cases or maintained at the
same level. It is evidenced that the net irrigated area among non-adopters in the drip village increased from 1.46
ha to 1.78 ha where as the gross irrigated area increased from 1.53 ha to 1.85 ha. Growing groundwater scarcity
Crops
Control village
116
is a common phenomenon in the entire state of Tamil Nadu and declining groundwater table is alarming. In spite
of frequent failure of monsoon coupled with growing groundwater scarcity, the net irrigated area has increased
slightly over the years. This increase might be due to several reasons like rise in water table due to rainfall,
reduction in groundwater extraction due to shift from agricultural to non-agricultural use of land, water saving
technologies such as drip irrigation and so on. However, it is not immediately apparent that the increase in
irrigated area among non-adopters is due to wider adoption of drip irrigation, one cannot ignore that it is also due
to drip irrigation. The net irrigated area has declined from 1.80 ha to 1.75 ha over the years in the control village.
The percentage of area irrigated by wells to the total cropped area has increased significantly among
drip adopters in drip village. It is evidenced that the percentage of area irrigated by wells to gross cropped area
has increased from 80.21% to 96.73% due to the drip intervention. From the analysis, it is clear that drip has two
effects: (i) it saves water both at farm level and at meso level if there is limited/or no scope for further expansion
i.e. when land is limited and (ii) it helps in expansion of cropped area when there is unlimited land resource. In
this case, drip method may not be a water saving technology at meso level.
Whether drip irrigation had followed a certain new cropping system or the crops had followed drip
technology which is a response to growing water scarcity?.
Changes in cropping pattern due to drip adoption are analyzed and discussed here. The cropping pattern
i.e. proportion of area under different crops is a good indicator of resources development and agricultural
production. It is expected that drip method of irrigation helps in developing water resource potential and thereby
helps the farmers to get more crop and income per drop of water.
Table.5: Drip irrigation and cropping pattern (Percentage)
Drip village
Drip adopters Non-adopters
Before After Before After Before After
Banana 15.00 15.97 23.12 29.72
Turmeric 6.99 10.56
Sorghum 14.70 14.61 8.70 17.39
Ragi 4.17 7.41 13.04 21.74
Maize 8.75 8.84 6.72 8.88
Cotton 3.15
Sugarcane 26.09 8.70
Coconut 4.92 22.48 6.09 7.48 17.39 34.78
Grapes 18.82 24.01 3.89 9.58
Vegetables including tomato 30.47 21.69 38.05 33.77 34.78 17.39
The longitudinal analysis of cropping pattern across farm households and villages revealed that the
adoption of drip irrigation is motivated by many factors. The two major constraints limiting agricultural
production are human labour and water scarcity. These made the farmers alter their cropping pattern towards
less labour and water intensive crops. Resource poor farmers go in for rain-fed crops like sorghum and maize.
However, the big farmers who have adequate access to capital adopt various coping strategies. One such
strategy is adoption of drip irrigation. In regions where there is severe water and labour scarcity, first there is a
shift from labour and water intensive crops such as vegetables, sugarcane, cotton, paddy to less labor intensive
crops such as coconut and the next is drip adoption. As drip irrigation saves human labor substantially, by
reduction in irrigation labor and weeding labor, water intensive crops such as banana and grapes are planted.
Experiences from the survey revealed that there is a significant shift towards crops such as coconut and
grapes in the drip villages. Similarly, there is a reduction in vegetable crops. The percentage of area under
Crops
Control village
117
vegetables declined from 22% - 30% among drip adopters. In the control village, there is a reduction in
vegetable, sugarcane and increase in coconut, and rain fed cereals. It is thus clear that micro irrigation can be
promoted in regions with high water and labour scarcity. As cropping pattern decides the adoption and suitability
of drip irrigation, widespread adoption of micro irrigation can be promoted in the regions where shift towards
crops like coconut, banana, grapes etc. are common.
4.2 What influences adoption of drip irrigation?
Estimation of the factors that determine adoption of drip irrigation is presented in Table.6. The sample
includes 70 farmers both the drip adopters and non-adopters in the drip village. Given the significance of the
coefficients obtained for the different variables hypothesized to determine adoption of drip method of irrigation,
we have greater confidence in our results.
It could be seen that the variables of age, education, family size, widercrop, and off-farm are found to
be significant determinants of adoption of drip irrigation on the expected positive line. Age of head of the
household influences the adoption of drip irrigation positively. The age, which reflects the experience in farming
has significant bearing on adoption of various agricultural crop production technologies. Our results confirm
that the experience in farming significantly influences the drip adoption. The educational level of the head of the
household has a positive and significant impact on adoption of drip method of irrigation. Education improves
awareness about the positive externalities generated by drip irrigation and motivates farmers to initiate action.
The size of the farm reflects the wealth status of the farmers, which is expected to influence drip irrigation
positively as drip involves huge initial investment.
Table.6: Factors influencing adoption of drip irrigation
Regression Elasticity of Elasticity of
Coefficient Intensity of Adoption Adoption
CONSTANT - 8.025 .. ..
(-4.515)
AGE 0.0219 * 0.3762 0.4407
(1.904)
EDUCATION 0.3251 *** 1.0190 1.1937
(4.968)
FISIZE 0.6187 *** 0.9359 1.0963
(7.383)
WIDERCROP 0.0172 *** 0.6092 0.7136
(2.814)
OFFFARM 1.0145 *** 0.3238 0.3793
(2.870)
AWELLS 0.0199 0.1780 0.2085
(1.202)
Log-likelihood function - 80.7137
Number of observations 70
Dependent variable DAREA
Model TOBIT
Source: Field Survey 2007-2008
Note: *** significance at 1 % level; ** significance at 5 % level; * significance at 10 % level
Figures in parentheses indicate estimated t ratios
Variables
118
We found that size of the farm exerts a significant and positive influence on adoption of drip irrigation.
However, few small and marginal farmers also show inclination towards adoption of drip irrigation. However,
for want of initial investment all low income farmers do not opt for drip irrigation.
Cropping pattern in any region has significant bearing on the adoption of drip technology. It is known
that drip technology is more suitable when the cropping pattern is dominated by wider spaced crops such as
banana, coconut, grapes, sugarcane and so on. It is clear from the analysis that the proportion of wider spaced
crop significantly influences drip adoption. In our study area, the farmers prefer to grow crops like coconut,
grapes and banana. This change in cropping pattern again motivates the farm households to adopt drip
technology.
One can expect that participation in off-farm and non-farm income activities enabled the households to
generate additional income to manage both their households and make adequate investments on farm
development. It is evident that the variable off-farm is found to significantly and positively influence drip
adoption. Participation in off-farm and non-farm activities is more when the number of workers is more in the
household.
It is evidenced that the variable education has the highest impact on both probability of adoption and
intensity of adoption followed by fsize and widercrop. The total elasticity for the variable fsize is estimated to be
2.0322 which is divided into 1.0963 for probability of adoption and 0.9359 for intensity of adoption. This
suggests that a 10% increase in farm size is expected to result in about 20% increase in adoption of drip
technology and extent of drip irrigation. Similarly, the other factors viz., educational level of the head of the
household and area under wider spaced crops have significant influence on drip adoption and extent of adoption.
Enough efforts have also been made to know the impact of drip irrigation on agricultural crop
production and farming system. Almost 100% of the farmers reported that drip irrigation helps in resource
saving, expansion in irrigated area, reduction in cultivation cost, increase in groundwater table, labour saving and
reduction in pumping hours. Nearly, 32% of the farmers reported that there is increase in yield of crops.
Table.7: Opinion of farmers about drip irrigation and their like impact
Particulars % of farmers
Resource saving 100.00
Expansion in area irrigated 100.00
Increase in crop yield 32.00
Increase in cropping intensity 85.65
Reduction in cost of cultivation 100.00
Increase in groundwater table 100.00
Reduction in pumping hours 100.00
Labour saving 100.00
Altered cropping pattern 76.54
Discussion with the farmers also revealed that huge initial investment and small size of holding are the
major constraints limiting the adoption of drip technology. Other reasons are unsuitable cropping pattern, lack of
access to subsidy and no technical support for follow up action.
5. CONCLUSION
The present paper aimed to study the adoption and impact of drip irrigation both spatially and
temporally. The study revealed that adoption of drip irrigation technology increased the net sown area, net
irrigated area and there by helped in achieving higher cropping intensity and irrigation intensity. As cropping
pattern decides the adoption and suitability of drip irrigation, widespread adoption of micro irrigation could be
119
promoted in the regions where there is a shift towards crops like coconut, banana, grapes etc. The analysis of
factors influencing drip adoption revealed that the age of the farmer, educational level, farm size, area under
wider spaced crops and participation in off-farm and non-farm activities found to significantly influence
adoption of drip technology. Thus, our policy focus may be tilted towards promotion of drip irrigation in regions
where water and labour scarcities are predominant and regions where shift towards wider spaced crops has
taken place.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This paper is based on an ongoing study titled An Analysis of Social Cost and Benefits of Drip Irrigation
in Tamil Nadu funded by IWMI-TATA Water Policy Program, International Water Management Institute.
REFERENCES
Dhawan, B.D (2000), Drip Irrigation:Evaluating Returns, Economic and Political Weekly, 35 (42) : 3775-3780.
GOTN (1994), A Profile of Coimbatore District, Tamil Nadu, State Ground and Surface Water Resources Data
Centre, Water Resources Organisation, P.W.D, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai-600113. http://
www.ide-india.org/ide/socialimpact.shtml
GOI (1994), Indian National Committee on Irrigation and Drainage, Drip irrigation in India, Government of
India, New Delhi.
Maddala, G S (1989), Limited Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics, Econometric Society Mono-
graphs, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Maluccio, A. John and Rafael Flores (2005), Impact Evaluation of a Conditional Cash Transfer Program : The
Nicaraguan Red de Social, Research Report 141, International Food Policy Research Institute,
Washington.D.C.
Markandya, Anil; P.Harou; L. G. Bellu and V. Cistulli (2002), Environmental Economics for Sustainable Growth:
A Handbook for Practitioners, Edward Elgar, USA.
Mc Donald J. F.and R. A. Moffitt (1980), The Uses of Tobit Analysis, The Review of Economics and Statistics,
62(2) : 318-321, 1980.
Namara, Regassa E; Bhawana Upadhyay and R. K. Nagar. (2005); Adoption and Impacts of Microirrigation
Technologies : Empirical Results from Selected Localities of Maharashtra and Gujarat States of India,
research Report 93, International Water Management Institute, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Narayanamoorthy, A. (1997), Impact of Tariff Policies on the use of electricity and Groundwater:Arguments
and Facts Artha Vijnana, 34 (3):323-340.
Narayanamoorthy, A. (1997), Drip Irrigation: A Viable Option for Future Irrigation Development, Productivity,
38 (3):504-511.
Narayanamoorthy, A. (2003), Averting Water Crisis by Drip method of Irrigation: A Study of Two water inten-
sive crops, Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 58 (3) :427-437.
Palanisami, K.and D.Suresh Kumar, Power Pricing, Groundwater Extraction, Use and Management: Compari-
son of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu states, Water, Livelihoods and Environment in India: Frontline
Issues in Water and Land Management and Policy, January 27-29, 2003, IRMA, Gujarat.
Qureshi, M. E; M. K. Wegener, S. R. Harrison, and K. L. Bristow (2001), Economic Evaluation of Alternate
Irrigation Systems for Sugarcane in the Burdekin delta in North Queensland, Australia in in: C.A.Brebbia;
K, Anagnostopoulos; K.Katsifarakis; and A. H. D.Cheng (Eds.), Water Resource Management, WIT
120
Press, Boston, pp. 47-57.
Saleth, R. Maria (1996), Water Institutions in India:Economics, Law and Policy, Commonwealth Publishers,
New Delhi.
Seckler, David; U. Amarasinghe; D. Molden; Radhika de Silva and R. Barker (1998), World Water Demand and
Supply,1990 to 2025: Scenarios and Issues, Research Report 19, International Water Management
Institute, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Shah, Tushaar; Shilp Verma; V. Bhamoria; S. Ghosh and R. Sakthivadivel, Social Impact of Technical Innova-
tions : Study of Organic Cotton and Low Cost Drip Irrigation in the Agrarian Economy of West Nimar
Region.
Sivanappan, R.K. (1994), Prospects of Micro-irrigation in India, irrigation and Drainage Systems, 8(1):49-58.
Sivanappan, R.K. (2002), Strengths and weaknesses of growth of drip irrigation in India, In Proc. Micro irriga-
tion for sustainable agriculture. GOI Short term training 19-21 June 2002, WTC, Tamil Nadu, Agricul-
tural University, Coimbatore.
Tobin, J (1958), Estimation of Relationship for Limited Dependent Variables, Econometrica, 26 (10): 24-36.
Vaidyanathan, A. (1999), Water Resources Management: Institutions and Irrigation Development in India, Ox-
ford University Press, New Delhi.