2013

Final Report: Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka

(Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Submitted by

Centre for Budget and

Policy Studies
 Directorate of Economics and Statistics
Department of Planning, Programme Monitoring and Statistics
Government of Karnataka

Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka

(Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

FINAL REPORT
MARCH 2013

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies

4, M N Krishna Rao Road
Basavanagudi
Bangalore 560004
Table of Contents

Page No.

Executive Summary

1.0 Introduction 1

1.1 Water use in Agriculture 1

1.2 Ground water Irrigation and promise of Micro Irrigation 3

2.0 Micro Irrigation Schemes 5

2.1 National Mission on Micro Irrigation 6

2.2 NMMI –Prescribed Implementation process 6

2.3 NMMI –Implementation in Karnataka 8

2.3.1 Implementation Process in Horticulture 9

2.3.2 Implementation Process in Agriculture 11

2.3.3 Micro irrigation in other departments 12

3.0 Objectives and Scope of the Study 15

4.0 Approach and Methodology 16

5.0 Economic rationale for Micro Irrigation 16

6.0 Advocacy efforts for popularizing the Micro Irrigation 21

7.0 Progress of Micro Irrigation scheme in Karnataka 22

7.1 Horticulture Department 27

7.2 Agriculture Department 31

8.0 Targeting of Subsidy across beneficiary categories 35

9.0 Spread of Micro Irrigation beyond the subsidy scheme 37

10.0 Documentation of Best practices in Micro Irrigation scheme 37

11.0 Shortcomings and Policy recommendations 41

12.0 Suggested sampling methodology, TOR and Sample beneficiary 47

schedules

13.0 References 55

14.0 Annexures 1- 12 56-

 Executive Summary
Improved productivity and savings in water, energy and labour provide the economic
rationale for adoption of micro irrigation. The Micro Irrigation has also emerged as a suitable
solution to manage the fast depleting ground water. Research studies have documented water
savings of 30% to 69 % in various crops and labour savings of 21 to 42 man days/hectare.
Similarly, savings in energy and water were estimated over 7 years (2003-04 to 2009-10) to
be of the order of 324 mi Kwh and 120 TMC. There was significant impact on income with
increased productivity, uniform growth, and earlier maturity.

In view of the multiple benefits from micro irrigation, both the state and the centre have been
quick to launch schemes with incentives for farmers to adopt micro irrigation. Karnataka
initiated the micro irrigation schemes as early as 1991 in horticultural crops and for
agricultural crops from 2003-04. A centrally sponsored scheme on Micro Irrigation started
being implemented from 2005-06 with a subsidy of 50% sponsored by the union and state
governments in the ratio of 80:20. The progress of coverage of Micro Irrigation picked up
pace after the initiation of this centrally sponsored scheme. It was scaled up and renamed as
National Mission on Micro Irrigation (NMMI) in 2010. An area of 69 million hectares was
estimated to be covered in the country by 2030. Marginal, small and women farmers were to
be covered under the scheme in a priority basis. Of the beneficiaries 16% and 8% were to be
covered under SC and ST categories respectively. The present study of Micro Irrigation in
Karnataka was undertaken to analyze the implementation of the above scheme in the State on
the basis of secondary data.
The NMMI scheme in Karnataka started during the year 2006-07. Unlike in many states
where there is a single implementing agency, both Agriculture and Horticulture departments
implement the scheme separately. The subsidy is fixed at 75% for all categories of farmers
and the beneficiary contribution is 25% (up to 2009-10, the subsidy rates in the districts of
Kolar, Bijapur and Chitradurga were 100%). The marginal, small and women farmers are to
be covered on a priority basis. The subsidy is back ended and is transferred to farmers in the
Horticulture department and to companies/dealers in the Agriculture department.

An area of 4.18 lakh hectares has been covered under the scheme during the period 2006-07
to 2010-11 incurring an expenditure of Rs. 664 crore. The overall utilisation of funds has
been 81.5% with the utilisation in Horticulture Department being 100%. Drip irrigation
accounted for 1.45 lakh hectares (or 38% of the total area) and 66% of the amount spent.
Sprinkler irrigation accounted for 62% of the area and 34% of the expenditure. Micro
irrigation as proportion of total area under irrigation from ground water (wells and bore
wells) has increased over the three year period of 2006-07 to 2008-09.
In horticulture, ten districts accounted for 70% of area. Bijapur, Tumkur, Chitradurga,
Chickmagalur, Davanagere were the top 5 districts under area covered while districts of
Chitradurga, Bijapur, Kolar, Haveri and Davanagere topped in expenditure. The average
growth rate of expenditure 11.6%. While Mysore, Gadag Kolar recorded higher than average
growth, Raichur, Koppal and Bellary recorded negative growth. Chamarajnagar consistently
exceeded the targets for 3 years. Fruits, vegetables, plantations and spices accounted for 45%,
16% 36% and 4% respectively.
Area covered under Agriculture was 2.71 lakh Ha with an expenditure of Rs. 294 crore. The
drip irrigation accounted for 4% of area and 14% of expenditure while the sprinkler
accounted for 96% of the area and 86% of expenditure. Belgaum, Bijapur, Shimoga, Bidar
and Bagalkot accounted for 45% of expenditure under sprinkler irrigation. Groundnut, Maize,
Sugarcane, Paddy and Sunflower were chief crops accounting for 70% of the area. Belgaum,
Bagalkot, Bijapur, Gulbarga and shimoga account for 74% of expenditure under drip
irrigation. Sugarcane, Hybrid maize and Cotton together accounted for 86% of the area under
drip.
Although subsidy as per the scheme is 100% (in some districts) the actual subsidy worked out
to 59% to 79% of the actual cost during the year 2009-10 and it worked out to 51% to 59% of
the actual cost in other districts where the subsidy rates were 75%. This was due to non-
revision of unit cost from time to time.
While back ended subsidy and the registering of all interested companies are good initiative
of Karnataka, good practices from other States included – a) adoption of single agency (e.g.
Andhra Pradesh Micro Irrigation Project (APMIP and Gujarat Green Revolution Corporation)
for implementing the project; b) Revision of unit cost and subsidy revisions every year in
Gujarat, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh; c) entrusting the Companies with responsibilities
of conducting demonstrations and trainings and d) third party inspections in Andhra Pradesh
and Tamil Nadu.

Among the shortcomings in implementation of the Scheme, the significant ones are: a) poor
database management where data on a large number of parameters (e.g. beneficiary wise
subsidy, total area covered by micro irrigation, etc.) important for monitoring is unavailable;
b) absence of strategic plan incorporating scientific estimation of potential for micro
irrigation in different districts to guide the implementation; and c) inadequate IEC efforts to
educate farmers on the benefits of MI and the proper use of the equipment.

The government proposes to establish a single agency, namely, Karnataka Antaraganga

Micro Irrigation Corporation to implement the scheme. Once this gets underway, the
implementation would have better focus. Similarly, an on line application for sanctioning the
installation and payment of subsidy is under implementation in Agriculture Department. This
software application would significantly improve availability of critical data and monitoring
the implementation in future should be better.
 Study of Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler)

1.0 Introduction
1.1 Water Use in Agriculture

Water is a vital input for agriculture. The availability of adequate, timely and assured
supply of water is an important determinant of agricultural productivity. Irrigation
raises cropping intensity (Dingar and Prasad, 1987) and crop yields besides
facilitating changes in cropping patterns. The increase in food grain output in the
country has come mainly from increase in land productivity. Of the inputs viz.
irrigation, high yielding varieties seeds and fertilizer nutrients, irrigation alone is said
to have contributed 60 percent to growth in agricultural productivity. However, high
level of investment in major and minor irrigation projects has reduced the agriculture
from the dependence on monsoon only to a small extent. On the other hand, creation
of intensive surface water irrigation facilities and excessive use of canal water has
resulted in the problems of water-logging, soil salinity, etc. Also, ground water is
declining very fast due to over-exploitation of water resources through increased bore
wells and inefficient use of water due to adoption of age old practices in irrigation
system. Poor management of water as a resource has lead to scarcity in some places
and at times when it is most needed.

Water is a relatively scarce resource in India since we have 16.0 per cent of the
world’s population and only 4.0 per cent of the usable fresh water. Irrigation is the
sector that uses water the most. Nearly 80% of the world’s water resources are used in
irrigation. In India also irrigation uses more than 80% of the available water. The
water resources in India are estimated at 4000 cubic kilometer given the geographical
area of 3.3 million square kilometer and an average annual rainfall of 1170 mm
(Table 1). Nearly 50 per cent of this water is lost to evaporation, percolation, sub-
surface flows to oceans and only 1953 Billion Cubic Meter (BCM) of water is
available. The temporal and special variation in the availability of water reduces it
further to 1086 BCM (Phansalker and Verma, 2005). It is estimated that the Annual
Water Resource that was 2214 cubic meters in 1996 would go down to 1496 cubic
meters by 2025. The Developed Water Resource (DWR) is estimated at 25% of the
available water resource (Gulati et al, 2005).

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 1

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Table 1: Water Resources in India

Average Annual Precipitation 4000 BCM
(3000 BCM during June to September)
Average runoff in all the rivers 1869 BCM
Utilizable surface water 1122 BCM
(i) By conventional means 690 BCM
(ii) Replenishable groundwater 432 BCM
Present utilization 605 BCM
Demand by 2025 AD 1093 BCM
Demand by 2050 AD 1447 BCM
Possible additional water utilization through Inter 170-200 BCM
Basin Water Transfer Scheme of GOI
Source: Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India (GOI) (2003)

Karnataka is unique in respect of its water resources as compared to the rest of the
country. Rainfall varies from 400 mm to 4000 mm across different agro-climatic
zones. The average normal rainfall of Karnataka is about 1220 mm. About 70% of the
rainfall is received during the south west monsoon during the months between June
and September. Karnataka is second most arid state after Rajasthan with 19 out of 30
districts being drought prone. Almost entire pulses and minor millet production is
under rain fed area. Major surface irrigation is through the water from the Krishna and
Cauvery rivers. Systematic efforts have been made to utilize the state’s share of these
river waters for irrigation by making adequate investments. The efforts to utilize the
rain water effectively by restoring the tanks and efficient management of watershed
are being undertaken on a large scale. The annual replenishable ground water of the
state is estimated at 15.93 BCM with net ground water availability at 15.30 BCM. The
irrigation potential by different sources is depicted in the Table 2.
Table 2 Irrigated Areas in India and Karnataka

INDIA KARNATAKA
Water Source Capacit Utilisation Ultimate Ultimate
Potential
y (million Irrigation Irrigation
created
(million ha) Potential* Potential
(million
ha) (million ha) (million
ha)
ha)
Major and Medium 32.69 28.02 58.50 3.50 2.04
Irrigation(surface water)
Minor Irrigation(Surface 10.89 10.12 17.38 1.00 0.96
water)
Minor Irrigation(Ground 45.73 42.50 64.05 1.60 1.00
water)
Total 89.31 80.54 139.90 6.10 4.00
*prepared by the Ministry of Water Resources (GOI).
Source: Gulati et al. (2005) and anonymous report of UAS Bangalore (2005)

Potential of the drip and sprinkler irrigation systems were assessed during the year
2010 by S. Raman using the state wise secondary data like the source wise irrigated
area for each state, cropped area, crop wise suitability for different micro irrigation

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 2

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

systems (Table 3). A potential of 11.6 million hectares and 30.6 million hectares
under drip and sprinkler respectively was estimated. Of which only 3.8 million
hectares has been covered constituting 9.16 % of the potential in the country. States
like Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra have
performed better than the other states in implementing micro irrigation in the country.
The potential as well as the actual coverage is based on the secondary data available
with the governments and the area coverage under the subsidy scheme.
Table 3: Potential and Actual area under Micro Irrigation in selected States (in thousand hectares)
State Drip Irrigation Sprinkler Irrigation Total
Potential Actual % Potential Actual % Potential Actual %
Andhra 730 363.07 49.74 387 200.95 51.93 1117 564.02 50.49
Pradesh
Gujarat 1599 169.69 10.61 1679 136.28 8.12 3278 305.97 9.33
Maharasht 1116 482.34 43.22 1598 214.67 13.43 2714 697.02 25.68
ra
Karnataka 745 177.33 23.80 697 228.62 32.8 1442 405.95 28.15
Chhattisga 22 3.65 16.58 189 59.27 31.36 211 62.92 29.82
rh
Haryana 398 7.14 1.79 1992 518.37 26.02 2390 525.5 21.99
Tamil 544 131.34 24.14 158 27.19 17.21 702 158.52 22.58
Nadu
All India 11659 1428.46 12.25 30578 2442.41 7.99 42237 3870.86 9.16
Source : Raman (2010) and Indiastat (2010)

1.2 Groundwater Irrigation and the promise of micro irrigation

In India, 34 per cent of the net sown area is irrigated which amounts to about 80
million ha. Sixty percent of the gross area under irrigation in India utilizes the
groundwater. Since 1970, the ground water has been increasingly contributing to
agricultural production and income. The contribution of groundwater to agricultural
income increased from Rs 2200 crore in 1970 to Rs 13200 crore in 1993 while surface
water increased from Rs 7700 crore to Rs 11500 crore (Shah and Deb, 2004). Tube
wells are now the largest source of irrigation in the country and their share has
increased from 1 per cent in 1960–61 to 37 per cent in 1999–2000 (MoRD, 2006).
Since this sector has almost no dependence on the government, it is growing at a rapid
rate and it is estimated that one million wells are added every year (Shah and Deb,
2004). According to the Ground Water Report (2010) by the Central Ground Water
Board, the ground water utilization for the country as a whole is 58%. The status of
ground water exploitation is comparatively high in the states of Delhi, Haryana,
Punjab and Rajasthan and UT of Daman & Diu and Pondicherry, where the utilization
is more than 100%, which implies that in these states the average annual ground water

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 3

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

consumption is more than average annual ground water recharge. In the states of
Gujarat, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh the average ground water
utilization is 70% and above. About 839 blocks accounting for 15% of the assessed
blocks were found to be over exploited. Such blocks were found to be highest in states
of Delhi (78%), Punjab (75%), Haryana (49%), Rajasthan (59%), Karnataka (37%)
and Tamil Nadu (37%) The number of blocks where groundwater utilization is more
than 90 per cent is increasing. The number of blocks where ground water is over
exploited (i.e. over 90% utilization) is expected to increase to 60 per cent in the next
25 years (MoRD, 2006).
Although the crop yields under the ground water irrigation were found to be 1.2 to 3
times higher than the surface irrigation due to greater control over the management of
resource unlike the surface irrigation through canal irrigation, there is an urgent need
to improve the efficiency of ground water use. Over exploitation of ground water as
pointed out above will be disastrous in the long term. Therefore, increasing water use
productivity in agriculture is important so that the resultant savings could be made
available to the other high priority or economically more efficient sectors.

Technological interventions like the drip1 and sprinkler2 method of irrigation can aid
significantly in achieving higher water use efficiency and thereby aiding in bringing
more area under irrigation, higher yields because of the efficient and timely use of
water by the crop. Researchers have documented the increase in the water use
efficiency through micro irrigation to an extent of 40% to 80% apart from increased
productivity (Table 4). It can also help in making pragmatic choices of crop
diversification based on the water availability and the markets. The micro irrigation
technology can also be effectively used under different gradients. Apart from water
savings, the weed management will be easier, soil and water pollution is reduced
along with the savings in labor cost.
Table 4: Irrigation Efficiencies under Different Methods of Irrigation
Irrigation Efficiencies Method of Irrigation
Surface Sprinkler Drip
Conveyance Efficiency (Canal) 40-50 100 100
(Well) 60-70
Application Efficiency 60-70 70-80 90
Surface water moisture evaporation 30-40 30-40 20-25
Overall efficiency 30-35 50-60 80-90
Source: Sivanappan (1997)

1
The drip irrigation refers to providing the irrigation to the root zone of plants through a network of
pipes, drippers and emitters that are designed to discharge water at prescribed rates.
2
The sprinkler irrigation system, water is sprinkled under pressure in the form of rainfall over the
foliage through nozzles fitted with the network of pipes. The sprinkler is suitable where the cropping
density is very high and the drip irrigation is not economical.

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 4

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

2.0 Micro Irrigation Schemes

Recognizing the importance of micro irrigation in economical use of water, both the
state and central government have sought to promote micro irrigation through various
incentives. The drip irrigation scheme was introduced in Karnataka during the year
1991-92 under the Department of Horticulture for horticultural crops. An amount of Rs.
450 crore has been spent as subsidy by the end of the year 2004-05 covering an area of
2.27 lakh hectares. The micro irrigation scheme was introduced in agricultural crops
during 2003-04 and significant progress has been made after the introduction of the
centrally sponsored scheme.

A Centrally Sponsored Scheme was launched during VIII plan (1992-97) to encourage
the drip irrigation in the country while the assistance for the sprinkler irrigation was
started during the seventh pan (1985-90) itself. Assistance to sprinkler was 50%, 75%
and 25% to small and marginal farmers, SC/ST farmers and other farmers respectively
during the seventh plan. During eighth plan the assistance was increased to 90 % for
small and marginal farmers, SC/ST farmer, women farmers while the assistance was
increased to 70% for other farmer category for both drip and sprinkler irrigation
systems.

A committee was constituted to look into the assistance for micro irrigation by
Government of India under the chairmanship of Commissioner of Agriculture,
Government of Maharashtra in the year 1997. The committee recommended the
increase in the unit cost by 15% from the unit cost recommended in the year 1994. The
committee recommended the lowering of assistance from 90% to 50% for small and
marginal farmers, SC/ST farmer, women farmers while the assistance was decreased to
35% for other farmer category for drip irrigation. The assistance under sprinkler was
also reduced to 50% and 33% for small and marginal farmers, SC/ST farmer, women
farmers and other farmer category subject to maximum assistance of Rs.15000 and Rs.
10000 respectively. The ceiling of assistance was fixed at 4 ha. This pattern continued
till the end of ninth plan (1997-2002). During the 10th Plan (2002-07), the assistance
was reduced to 25% for all categories both under drip and sprinkler irrigation.

Government of India constituted a task force in June 2003 headed by N. Chandrababu

Naidu, the then chief minister of Andhra Pradesh to look into the issues of micro
irrigation in India and suggest the strategies to expand micro irrigation, suggest
institutional mechanism for promoting micro irrigation, advise on technological
support for crop and region specific interventions and to suggest measures to reach the
benefits for the target groups. The task force submitted the report in January 2004. It
estimated the micro irrigation potential in the country as 69.5 million hectares with 27
million hectares and 42.5 million hectares under drip and sprinkler irrigation systems

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 5

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

respectively. It identified the constraints involved in adoption of micro irrigation

systems and reasons for its low adoption to be: a) high initial costs, b) lack of credit
facilities, c) technology intensiveness, d) lack of training and information on the
benefits and e) micro irrigation being viewed as different from the farm irrigation
management.
Taking into account the recommendations of the task force report Government of India
launched the centrally sponsored scheme on micro Irrigation during the year 2005-06.
Detailed guidelines of the scheme were brought out in January 2006. The subsidy was
fixed at 50% with contribution from Government of India and State Governments
sharing in the ratio of 80:20. The beneficiary farmer was to share the rest 50% of the
cost. Assistance is available to a maximum of 5 hectares. Assistance to drip and
sprinkler demonstrations at 75% of cost is also available for a maximum of 0.5 hectare
per beneficiary from Government of India.

2.1 National Mission on Micro Irrigation (NMMI)

During the year 2010, the Government of India reiterated the thrust on Micro Irrigation
by scaling up the scheme as National Mission on Micro Irrigation (NMMI) with revised
guidelines. The NMMI scheme intends to provide benefits to the categories of SC, ST
beneficiaries to the extent of 18% and 6% under Special Component Plan (SCP) and
Tribal Sub Plan (TSP) respectively. At least 33% of the allocation has to be used for
small, marginal and women farmers. The allocation to the SC/ST should be in
proportion to the SC/ST farms in the district. The Small and Marginal farmers are
provided a subsidy of additional 10% which makes them to get 60% subsidy from GOI.

The revised guidelines also places importance on the preparation of perspective plan for
the twelfth plan period (2012-2017) by all the states. This perspective plan and the road
map should guide in formulating the Annual Action Plans (AAP) prepared by the
districts. The strategic plan should contain potential for micro irrigation and strategy
for its adoption in each district with reference to cropping intensity, over all irrigated
area, percentage diversification of crops, and gains to farmer’s income. AAPs prepared
by the districts should contain the impact of micro irrigation interventions in the
previous years with respect to crop diversification, crop productivity, etc. Against the
task force estimation of potential at 69 million ha, 17 million ha is expected to be
covered by the end of 2012 and 69 million ha by the end of 2030.

2.2 NMMI – Prescribed Implementation Process

At the national level National Committee on Plasticulture applications in Horticulture

(NCPAH) headed by the minister of agriculture is the apex body to provide overall
guidance and review the progress on the coverage of area under Micro Irrigation in the

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 6

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

country. The Executive Committee headed by the Secretary Department of Agriculture

and Co-operation will oversee the activities of Micro Irrigation scheme and approve
action plans as well as action plans of Precision Farming Development Centre(PFDC).

At the State level, the State Micro Irrigation committee (SMIC) under the chairmanship
of Agriculture production commissioner/Secretary of Horticulture or Agriculture
department will steer the implementation of the scheme. The functions envisaged of the
SMIC are to:

a. organize base line survey and feasibility studies in different parts of the State,
covering various crops and technologies;

b. allocate the resources required for implementing the scheme and make it available
to the implementing agencies at the district level;

c. finalize and forward the consolidated action plans of districts to Department of

Agriculture and Co-operation;

d. circulate the list of suppliers/manufacturers registered with them along with price
list to the District Micro Irrigation Committee;

e. indicate the quantum of money to be paid by the beneficiary /bank to the

manufacturer before installing the system;

f. mobilize credit requirement of farmers for installing micro irrigation system through
financial institutions;

g. facilitate PFDC in organizing various training and extension programmes for

farmers, officials, NGOs, entrepreneurs; and

h. host a website indicating the details and status on the progress of Micro Irrigation in
different districts of the State;

At the District level District Micro Irrigation Committee (DMIC) headed by Chief
Executive Officer (CEO) will oversee the implementation of the scheme in the district.
The committee will have members from departments of Agriculture, Watershed,
Irrigation, Rural Development, Krishi Vignan Kendra, lead bank of the district,
Irrigation Association and others. The PRIs will have to be involved appropriately. The
DMIC has to review and forward the action plans to Department of Agriculture and Co-
operation through SMIC. The DMIC has to monitor and review the physical and
financial progress of implementation of Micro Irrigation scheme in the district and
provide feedback to SMIC on a monthly basis. The DMIC has to review the submission
of utilisation certificate by implementing agency.

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 7

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

The Implementing Agency (IA) is the department/agency that has been designated for
the implementation of the scheme in the district. One percent of the annual outlay of the
district is provided for monitoring of the scheme.
The Technical Support Group (TSG) is to be formed both at national level to provide
the technical support for the Scheme. Experts from various fields such as Agriculture,
Horticulture, water management, information technology, irrigation and plasticulture
constitute the TSG housed in NCPAH secretariat. At State level, the TSG can be
formed to provide the technical support for the IAs. SMIC can form the TSG involving
the experts at the State level. The principal investigator of PFDC can be involved in
selection of these experts to form the TSG. TSG at state level would help in

a. monitoring the scheme and providing guidance in technical matters

b. preparation of state level plans and assess the proposals of districts.
c. documentation and dissemination of success stories/ crop wise technologies.

2.3 NMMI – Implementation in Karnataka

The scheme is implemented in all the 30 districts of Karnataka. Unlike in many other
states where the scheme is implemented by a single agency, in Karnataka the scheme is
implemented by Horticulture and Agriculture departments separately. The Agriculture
department implements both the Drip and Sprinkler irrigation, Department of
Horticulture implements drip irrigation. All the cereal crops are covered by the
Agriculture department including Groundnut, Sunflower and Sugarcane. Horticulture
department is implementing the scheme covering all the horticultural crops. There is a
state level micro irrigation committee (SMIC) which is headed by the Additional Chief
Secretary/Development Commissioner to oversee and review the implementation of the
Scheme. The SMIC ensures the allocation of resources to the district level and also
finalizes the annual action plan of the districts and forwards it to GOI. Having two
agencies implementing the scheme has obviously resulted in certain divergent practices
and made coordination difficult. This is likely to be remedied once the proposed single
agency for micro irrigation i.e. the Karnataka Antaraganga Micro Irrigation Corporation
(KAMIC) is established and starts functioning.
The technical support group (TSG) as envisaged in the scheme offers the technical
expertise. This is being provided by the Precision Farming Development Centre (PFDC)
which helps in monitoring the scheme including the technical guidance in the technical
matters3. The PFDC also assess the action plans submitted by the districts for the release

The Precision Farming Development Centre (PFDC) located at University of Agricultural Sciences
scrutinizes the Annual Action Plan submitted by the departments to the Government of India for funding
under the Scheme. The action plans are revised accordingly and the suggestions are considered in

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 8

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

of funds apart from assisting in updating of BIS standards. At the District level, District
Micro irrigation Committee (DMIC) headed by the Chief Executive Officer of the Zilla
Panchayat is formed for which Deputy Director of the horticulture is the member
secretary. Representatives from the lead bank of the district, nearest Krishi Vignan
Kendra, farmers group and Irrigation Association of Karnataka are members of DMIC.
The DMIC plans the implementation of the project, reviews the implementation in the
districts through regular meetings and provide feedback to the SMIC.

2.3.1 Implementation Process in Horticulture

The Department of Horticulture is mainly implementing the drip irrigation systems

covering all horticultural crops except coffee, tea, and rubber. Only in the district of
Kodagu, the sprinkler systems are being provided to the farmers under the scheme.
Assistance is extended to a maximum of 5 hectares per beneficiary family. The subsidy
rates are 75% for first 2 hectares and 50% for the other 3 hectares. The limit is 5 hectares
for fruit and plantation crops while it is 2 hectares for flower and vegetable crops.
Registration of Companies: The Department of Horticulture approves the Micro
Irrigation companies (that supply/manufacture drip and sprinkler irrigation components
of BIS quality) after obtaining a security deposit of Rs. 1 lakh and Rs. 50000 for drip and
sprinkler components and a non refundable annual registration fee of Rs. 30000 and Rs.
25000 for drip and sprinkler irrigation systems separately. The companies have to
produce the certificates of BIS with respect to drip and sprinkler components valid for
the period at the time of registration. The company should furnish a certificate
confirming 3 year guarantee for effective working of the system and replacement of
defective parts, maintenance and repairs free of cost during the guarantee period.
Beneficiary farmer has to give a certificate to the effect that the micro irrigation system
installed will be maintained and utilized for a period of minimum 3 years.

Farmers’ registration and disbursal of subsidy: Farmers get in contact with the
department who registers and guides them to choose the dealer/company for the
installation after due verification of the eligibility (regarding the land, crops and water
availability) ascertained through Raita Samparka Kendra officers. The seniority list is put
up on the office notice board at taluk horticulture office. The registered
companies/dealers are then directed to install the drip/sprinkler system in the farmer’s
field. Farmers have to invest fully or partially (in case of loan from banks) and get the
irrigation system installed by paying the dealer (as per the approved prices of each
component at the time of registration and approval of companies). Farmers after getting

finalizing the funding to the state. The PFDC also conducts inspection of the micro irrigation plots
across the state with the help of the department.

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 9

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

installed the drip irrigation systems have to apply for the subsidy with application
complete in all respects. To avail the subsidy, the farmer has to submit to the department
the following documents:
a. crop certificate,
b. water analysis certificate,
c. the bills of the installations from the dealer,
d. bank documents in case of loan from the bank,
e. Record of Tenancy and Cultivation (RTC),
f. Photo of the installations
g. Guarantee card for 3 year period by the manufacturer,
h. Design of the installation and
i. Letter to the effect that the dealer/suppler has given the required training to the
farmer on the operating the drip/sprinkler system.
The RTC should mention the crop for which the installation is sought and in case it is
not mentioned, the farmer has to get the crop certificate duly attested by the village
accountant and the Revenue Inspector of the concerned Hobli/village.

The applications received at the taluk level offices are processed after due inspections
and farmers receive the subsidy if it is fully paid by him/her to their bank accounts
through ECS. The department has put in place an online system for the reporting of
progress from the taluks. The subsidy is adjusted to the loan account in case of the loan
obtained for installation of the irrigation system. However the subsidy is decided on the
basis of the unit cost as per scheme guidelines given by the GOI. According to the
guidelines issued the entire process of paying the subsidy should be completed in 20
days.

Funds Flow: The funds from the GOI received by the State at Joint Director (Drip) are
sent electronically to the respective bank accounts of the district units to be utilized
exclusively for the scheme. The share of the Government of Karnataka is given under
district sector (Zilla Panchayats) and the same has to be drawn from the Treasury and
put into the bank account. There should be a regular audit for the expenditure on the
scheme account. The utilisation certificates and progress reports have to be provided in
the prescribed format by the district offices regularly.
Before fifth day of every month, the taluk level officer has to submit the list of
applications received for the subsidy along with the list of the applications that has
been inspected to the Deputy Director of Horticulture at the district as well as the Joint
Director (Drip) at the state level via email. Every week the installing companies have to

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 10

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

provide details of the installation done by them in a prescribed format specifying the
area covered, crop, along with the bill number and amount.

The Deputy Director of Horticulture at the district level finalizes the Annual Action
Plans for the district and forwards it to the Joint Director (Drip) to be forwarded to GOI.
The Deputy Director of Horticulture forwards the progress in the district every month to
the State level.

2.3.2 Implementation Process in Agriculture

Registration of Companies: As in the case of Horticulture Department, the Agriculture

Department too provides subsidy for installation of both drip and sprinkler irrigation
systems for growing agriculture crops. The subsidy is 75% for all the category of
farmers. 16%, 8% and 33% of the beneficiaries are to be covered under SC, ST and
women beneficiaries. For this purpose it similarly registers and approves the companies
manufacturing micro irrigation equipment to supply and install the drip and sprinkler sets
in the farmers’ fields. The company should furnish a certificate confirming 3 year
guarantee for effective working of the system and replacement of defective parts,
maintenance and repairs free of cost during the guarantee period.
Registration of farmers and disbursal of subsidy: Farmers interested in availing the
sprinkler/drip irrigation system approach the department officers who after due scrutiny
of the eligibility requirements (land, water, and crop requirements) direct the approved
companies to install the system in the farmers plot. The company collects farmer’s
application along with RTC, photo, water source paper and an affidavit stating that
beneficiary has not availed the subsidy so far and gets the approval of Assistant Director
of Agriculture. Farmers pay their share by DD/cheque to the company, which along with
the application is submitted to the Assistant Director. The application is scrutinized and
at different levels and finally approved by the head office at the State level. Once
approved, Assistant Director issues a work order and returns the DD/cheque of farmer’s
share back to supplier. The Company installs the system and submits bills to Assistant
Director along with farmer’s ‘satisfactory’ certificate. The payment of subsidy has to be
made to the company within 30 days from the date of submission of bills to the Assistant
Director. All cereal crops, groundnut, sunflower, and sugarcane are covered under the
scheme.

Sprinkler irrigation: The subsidy is decided by using the lowest cost quote from the
price quotes obtained from the companies at the time of approval for the year. A farmer
has to incur more in case he wishes to go for a company other than the company that has
offered lowest quote. The limit of availing subsidy is fixed for 2 hectares. A farmer is

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 11

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

eligible to avail the subsidy under the scheme for the same piece of land only after 5
years.

Drip irrigation: The subsidy is calculated as per the unit cost for different spacing given
under the scheme guidelines issued by GOI. However, the spacings considered for
subsidy are 2x2, 1.5x1.5 and 1x1 only. Farmer has to incur the extra cost for the
installations along with the beneficiary share.

2.3.3 Implementation of Micro Irrigation in other departments

Apart from the NMMI, the drip irrigation systems are adopted under other schemes in
Department of Sericulture and Department of Horticulture (Oil Palm) in Karnataka. The
department of sericulture has 2 schemes one centrally sponsored under catalytic
development programme and one state scheme called Reshme Varadaaan with each
extending subsidy up to 1 hectare of mulberry. The subsidy is 75% and the unit cost is
fixed at Rs. 50000/hectare. The GOI and GOK contribute 40% and 35% of the subsidy
respectively. The Drip irrigation scheme started in 1997 under Catalytic Development
Programme with a limit of 1 hectare per beneficiary. About 6300 hectares were covered
till the end of 10th plan with a subsidy expenditure of Rs. 2044 lakhs. The details of the
physical progress and expenditure under 11th plan (2007-2012) are provided in Annexure
1. The Central Silk Board is the nodal agency for the scheme and responsible for
approval of annual plans and release of GOI share. During 2006-07 Government of
Karnataka started the scheme called Reshme Varadaan on the similar lines and extended
the limit to 2 hectares. The GOI share is deposited to the State treasury and the receipt is
conveyed to the State Government. The State government releases the matching share
and it is allocated to districts as per the annual plans. The approved companies in the
horticulture department are registered with the department after the companies provide a
bank guarantee of Rs. one lakh. The farmers approach the sericulture department and
they are directed to the company dealers who install the system to the satisfaction of the
farmer. The subsidy is released after due verification of the installations by the
sericulture officer. The farmers have to obtain No objection Certificate (NOC) from the
other departments. The SC/ST farmers are covered under the SCP/TSP plans
respectively. The prominent districts include Kolar, Chickballapur, Bangalore Rural,
Ramanagaram, Tumkur, Mysore Chamarajanagar, Chitradurga and Davanagere.

The Horticulture department provides the drip irrigation subsidy to oil palm under the
Integrated Scheme for Oilseeds, Pulses, Oil Palm and Maize (ISOPOM) for the farmers
cultivating the oil palm as a part of Oil palm development programme. The spacing is
triangular 9x9x9 and is not covered under NMMI. The subsidy offered is Rs
9600/hectare or 50% for SC/ST farmers and Rs 6300/hectare for other category farmers

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 12

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

at 35% subsidy considering a unit cost of Rs. 18600/hectare. However the unit cost in
current prices is about Rs. 35000/hectare. Even under NMMI considering the nearest
spacing works out to be Rs. 10400 at 75% subsidy. Subsidy is provided under ISOPOM
and Rastriya Krishi Vikas Yojna (RKVY) scheme. Here also the subsidy is back ended
and the farmer is paid after due verification by the department officers. As of now the
farmers are forced to get subsidy by going for intercrops and obtaining the subsidy for
them. Belgaum, Shimoga, Mysore, Haveri and Davanagere are important districts that
cover the oil palm area in Karnataka. The details of the physical and financial progress of
ISOPOM are provided in the Annexure 2.

Micro Irrigation in Karnataka- A Summary

Departments Agriculture Horticulture Horticulture Sericulture
Involved (NMMI) (Oil Palm)
Type of MI Mainly Sprinkler Mainly Drip Drip Drip
and drip
Crops Cereals, pulses, All Horticultural crops Oil palm Mulberry
oilseeds, cotton and
sugarcane
Schemes NMMI NMMI ISOPOM, Catalytic
SCP/TSP SCP/TSP RKVY Development
SCP/TSP Programme
Reshme
Varadaan
SCP/TSP
Operated under State and District State sector State sector State sector
sector
Fund flow
GOI to State (GOI RTGS to Bank RTGS to Bank account To State To State
Share) account Treasury Treasury
GOI Share to State to Districts State to Districts through State to State to
Districts through banks Banks Districts Districts
through through
Treasury Treasury
GOK Share Through Treasury Through Treasury Through Through
(District sector + (District Sector) Treasury Treasury along
state sector) with GOI share
Treatment of year- GOK share lapses GOK funds are drawn on GOK share GOK share
end balance at the end of the GIA bill and added to GOI lapses at the lapses at the
year share in Bank accounts end of the end of the year
GOI funds in bank Both GOI and GOK funds year GOI funds
account available remain in various bank GOI funds needs
for next year. accounts and available for needs revalidation for
next year. revalidation next year

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 13

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

for next spending

year
spending
Unit cost and Lowest cost is GOI guidelines is GOI Unit cost is
Subsidy considered for considered for unit cost guidelines is fixed at Rs
subsidy calculation and subsidy considered 50000/ha for
for unit cost subsidy
and subsidy calculations
Farmers pay their Farmers pay the actual Farmers pay Farmers pay the
share + difference cost the actual actual cost
in the amount from cost
the lowest cost
Subsidy rates 75% for all 75% for all category of 75% for all 75% for all
category of farmers farmers category of category of
farmers farmers
Subsidy limits 2 hectares 2 hectares (75%) and other 1 hectare under
3 hectares (50%) each of the
scheme
Subsidy is paid to Companies Farmers Farmers Farmers
Is there a delay in Yes Yes No No
payment of subsidy
What does Farmers share paid Farmer paid the total cost NA NA
Pendency mean while the subsidy is by loan/own funds and
yet to be paid to waiting for release of
company/dealer by subsidy
the govt.

It may be pointed out that apart from the schemes there is Micro Irrigation market
outside the scheme. The Micro irrigation companies also market outside the scheme.
There are low cost drip systems promoted by International Development Enterprise
(IDE) like the Global Easy Water Products and Driptech which are mainly targeting the
small and marginal farmers and offer the drip systems at about one fourth of the cost of
standard BIS drip system. This low cost drip system is popular in the vegetable belts of
Kolar and Chickballapur districts. Godrej Agrovet is marketing the Driptech systems in
Karnataka. The IDE promoted Global easy water Products (GEWP) has also established
a market in Karnataka. The local made low cost products without brand name are also
available in the market targeted especially the vegetable and flower growers. According
to industry experts there is existence of about 15% of the drip systems in the low cost
category.

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 14

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

3.0 Objectives and Scope of the Study

Micro irrigation involving drip and sprinkler irrigation has proven advantages in terms
not only of saving water but also in saving energy and labour, improved weed
management, enhanced productivity, etc. While the micro irrigation scheme was
introduced in Karnataka as early as 1991-92 for horticultural crops and from 2003-04
for agricultural crops, significant progress has been made after the introduction of the
centrally sponsored scheme in 2005-06 and after it was scaled up as National Mission
on Micro Irrigation Scheme in 2010.

Since the implementation of the centrally sponsored scheme on Micro Irrigation, about
4.18 lakh ha have been brought under micro irrigation while incurring Rs. 665 crore on
subsidy under the scheme. Given the importance of micro irrigation in creating savings
in water, energy and labor, a need was felt to take stock of the progress with a view to
assess the not only the achievements but also the problems and issues in the
implementation of the scheme as also to understand farmers’ perceptions and
experiences for improving the delivery under the scheme. Importantly the study seeks
to assess the spread of micro irrigation beyond what is impelled by the subsidy scheme.
The study is also expected to detail out the issues while also providing insights from the
best practices adopted by different states in implementing the scheme.

The scope of the Study includes:

a. Analysis of the district-wise, crop-wise area under the micro irrigation scheme.

b. Analysis of the targeting of subsidy across different beneficiary categories.

c. Documentation of the best practices prevalent across states in the implementation of
the micro irrigation scheme, looking at the following:
i. Technical support provided to farmers

ii. IEC efforts undertaken – including trainings and demonstrations

iii. Unit cost and subsidy revisions

iv. Reporting formats and mechanisms

d. Analysis of the data on sales and installations of micro irrigation equipment from
the companies involved in these activities in Karnataka

e. Analysis of IEC efforts through demonstrations, workshops, seminars by the

department

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 15

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

f. Documentation of the economics of water, energy, labour savings, and impact on

income due to adoption of micro irrigation/implementation of micro irrigation
scheme
g. Analysis of the shortcomings of the micro irrigation scheme and policy
recommendations for the improvement of the scheme.
h. Suggesting the sample methodology and sample sites for the conduct of field
evaluation, develop TOR and draft beneficiary schedules.

4.0 Approach and Methodology

The study is based on the secondary data related to the scheme from the Departments of
Agriculture and Horticulture. Apart from the secondary data from the departments, data
from the Micro Irrigation companies is to be analyzed. Further, a desk review of best
practices in implementation of the scheme across different States is expected.
Economics of the micro irrigation across various crops in terms of savings in labor,
water, energy as well as impact on the income of the farmer are to be documented from
various research studies. The issues and problems in the implementation of the scheme
are to be documented by the interaction with the state departments and the Micro
Irrigation companies.

As can be seen from the above, the Study is based on analysis of data to be provided by
the Departments of Horticulture and Agriculture and the companies. Timely availability
of data was thus extremely critical for successful completion of the Study.

5.0 Economic rationale for micro irrigation

The essential rationale for the central sponsored scheme as well as the motivation on
part of the farmer for the adoption of micro irrigation is that the drip and sprinkler
irrigation provide savings and enhance productivity. The study reviewed a sample of
the existing research in this area to assess to what extent the actual experience has
borne this out.

A study conducted in Shimoga and Davanagere districts during 2003-04 regarding the
use of drip irrigation systems for the crops of arecanut and banana showed that more
than 95% of the farmers acknowledged the saving of water, 92% of sampled farmers
acknowledged the labour savings and over 70% expressed the increase in quality yield
in both arecanut and banana. Drip irrigation had recorded an increase of 5.94% and
3.54% over the surface irrigation compared to the previous year.

The study by the Nabard Consultancy Services (NABCONS) during the year 2009
evaluated the impact of the drip and sprinkler irrigation systems in the districts of
Kolar, Chitradurga, and Bijapur as a part of the evaluation of the centrally sponsored

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 16

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

scheme in six states. The NABCONS study found that water saving under different
fruit crops, coconut, arecanut and vegetables were to the tune of 21 to 33 percent
compared to flood/surface irrigation. Energy savings between 23-32 percent was
recorded for fruits, vegetables, coconut and arecanut. Yields were found to have
increased in the range of 22 to 52 percent over the surface irrigation. Water use
efficiency increase for coconut recorded a highest increase at 188% while the efficiency
increase for lime was found to be lowest at 63%. The labour savings at the time of land
preparation, irrigation, weeding, and fertigation was calculated for the fruit crops,
vegetables, coconut and arecanut. The average savings in labour for various crops
ranged from 21 to 42 man days per hectare. The study revealed that there was an
increase in irrigated area under drip ranging from 23 % to 170% under different farm
categories. All the farm categories recorded the increase in the farm income in the
sample districts( Table 5). The additional income from sprinkler was found to be 36%,
39% and 20% in Chitradurga, Bijapur and Kolar districts respectively.
Table 5: Increase in Farm income in drip irrigation across districts

Farm category Chitradurga Bijapur Kolar

Marginal 42% 33% 35%
Small 41% 36% 36%
others 53% 28% 39%

The study estimated that the aggregate benefit accruing due to drip and sprinkler
irrigation at Rs. 56950 lakhs and Rs. 14000 lakhs. It also estimated that about 1.87
lakh persons got jobs. The income from per hectare under drip irrigation over the flood
irrigation recorded an increase of 60%, 38% and 68% in Chitradurga, Bijapur and
Kolar districts respectively. The gains from sprinkler irrigation over the flood
irrigation were found to be higher by 36%, 39% and 20% in Chitradurga, Bijapur and
Kolar districts.
In the study done by Centre for Sustainable Development in Bidar taluk of Bidar
district, 100 percent physical verification of the micro irrigation systems installed in
Bidar taluk was under taken. About 95% of the beneficiaries reported the increase in
the cropping intensity by using the limited water in summer to grow
vegetables/groundnut. About 30% to 40% of water savings were reported while the
labour savings was about 50%.
The economics of micro irrigation scheme APMIP in Andhra Pradesh was analysed by
Yellareddy and Satyanarayana (2010). They worked out the economics of the
implementation of scheme since its inception in 2003-04 till 2009-10. An area of 0.654
million hectares was covered during the period. The total cost of the micro irrigation
systems installed was Rs.1962 crore while the beneficiary contribution investment at

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 17

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Rs. 687 crore. An estimated average increase in income of Rs 15000/hectare has

resulted in increase in income by Rs. 981 crore. The average pay back period was
calculated as 2.0 years while it was 0.7 years considering only the beneficiary
contribution. Every rupee invested in the micro irrigation is calculated to have resulted
in additional income of Rs. 2.4. Along with these benefits the project is also estimated
to have saved about 120.12 TMC of water, 324 million Kwh of energy apart from
labour saving and large scale employment generation.
Narayanamoorthy (1996) documented the water savings and productivity gains
through drip irrigation under fruit crops, vegetables, sugarcane, cotton coconut and
groundnut. Productivity increase was estimated to be over 40% above the flood
method of irrigation for vegetables while it was 70% increase over the flood method of
irrigation under fruit crops Sugarcane productivity increased by 33% compared to
flood method of irrigation.
The yield of sugarcane under drip irrigation was found to be higher compared with that
of the flood method of irrigation across various locations in India. The single cane
weight, cane girth, cane length, length of internodes, leaf length and leaf breadth were
found to be higher in case of the crop under drip irrigation. The sugar recovery rate
was found to be higher in crop grown under drip as moisture stress was less compared
to flood method of irrigation. Indian National Committee on Irrigation and Drainage
(INCID) report (1998) documented the impacts of sprinkler irrigation method for 15
crops across different locations in India. Higher water savings were observed under
cereal crops while the higher yields were observed under the oilseeds. The following
table presents the results from a number of studies on water savings and yield impacts
of drip irrigation. All studies recorded increase in crop yield and savings in water use.

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 18

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Table 6: Results available from past studies on water saving and yield impacts of drip irrigation 1
Name of Location Nature of Results on
researchers study Water Saving Crop Yield
Jadhav et al. Haryana Socio-economic 31 per cent saving in Yield increase by 50
(1990) water use in tomato %
Hapase et al. Maharashtra Socio-economic 50-55 per cent saving in Yield increase in the
(1992) water in sugarcane crop range of 12-37%
Muralidharan Kolar, Socio-economic Water-saving benefits
and others Karnataka highlighted, not
(1994) quantified

Narayanamoort Nashik, Socio-economic 41 per cent water Productivity higher

hy (1996) Maharashtra (respondent saving for banana and under DMI for both
survey) 59 per cent for grapes crops
Reddy and Bangalore, Experimental Water-saving benefits Seed cotton yield
Thimmegowda Agricultural farm not quantified increased by 13%
(1997) University measurements under drip tap; 16%
under emitter drip

R. L. Shiyani Four districts of Socio-economic Water saving not Yield enhancement in

and others Saurashtra in survey quantified; but cotton in all districts,
(1999) Gujarat viz., estimated reduction in averaging 22%
Junagadh, irrigation cost as
Rajkot, Amreli varying from 25% to
and Bhavnagar 51%; increase in
(Cotton) irrigation cost in
Bhavnagar
Palanisamy and Coimbatore Socio-economic 50 % water saving in 20-30 per cent
others (2002) (Coconut) study coconut increase in coconut
(respondent yield
survey)
Kumar and Banaskantha, Techno- Reduction in water Yield increase in the
other (2004) Gujarat economic application in the range range of 5-10 per
(Alfalfa) evaluation of of 7-43 per cent cent
drips in demo
farms of alfalfa
Waykar and Ahmednagar Socio-economic Data on water-saving Higher yield of
others (2003) district of survey not available sugarcane (up to
Maharashtra 27%) for adopters of
(Sugarcane) drip systems.
Source: Synthesis of various studies

Dinesh Kumar and et.al (2007) studied the water saving technologies and their impact
on the productivity enhancement. They found that the documentation by various
researches was skewed towards drip irrigation. They also found that the studies very
rarely captured the physical, socio-economic and institutional settings that determine
the adoption of micro irrigation systems, changes in cropping pattern and thereby
influencing the changes at the farm level. Many researches were from the experimental
stations which operate at a different situation from the farmers plot in terms of funds,
technical input and others.

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 19

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

The study asserts that water savings from the adoption of micro irrigation is very
difficult to monetize unless the farmer expands the area under the crop and makes a
benefit (Table 7). Since the water pumping from the depths is free of cost or low cost
(due to power subsidy in many states), the savings of the water is hardly recognized. On
the other hand due to well interference in hard rock areas/shallow alluvial soils the less
withdrawal by a farmer do not guarantee him/her water availability during the next
season because other farmers would be extracting water from the same aquifer. Only
labour savings, higher yields, higher quality produce are the immediate benefits for the
farmer. Farmers can also alter the sowing/transplanting by a week or two to suit the
market to fetch a better price because of the water management through micro
irrigation. The authors also documented the issues with respect to the adoption of micro
irrigation technology as a method of water saving, productivity enhancing technology.
The authors opine that in long run energy crisis would emerge as the major impediment
to the adoption of the pressurized micro irrigation technology especially sprinkler
irrigation. While the power of higher quality is required for longer hours to adopt the
pressurized micro irrigation systems, power supply is very restricted or erratic due to
the power subsidies (free/very low cost power). On the other hand the restricted power
supply is also acting as regulator by restricting the pumping in certain areas.
Table 7: Aggregate Saving in Water Possible with Drip Irrigation Systems

Sl. Name of Current Expected Yield Water Use Modified Water

No Crop Yield Coming from the Efficiency Water Saving
(ton/ha) Potential States* Use (BCM)
3
(Million ton) (Kg/m ) Efficiency
(Kg/m3)
1 Sugarcane 128.0 170.0 5.950 18.09 31.00
2 Cotton 2.600 4.391 0.303 1.080 10.42
3 Groundnut 1.710 2.840 0.340 0.950 1.453
4 Potato 23.57 34.47 11.79 17.21 0.127
5 Castor 1.260 1.350 0.340 0.670 0.497
6 Onion 9.300 12.20 1.544 2.700 0.963
7 Total 44.46
Source: Water saving and Yield enhancing technologies, DineshKumar et al.
*States where water-saving technologies are likely to be adopted. This is obtained by multiplying the average crop
yield under conventional irrigation with the sum of the estimated area under that crop in each state.

The researchers opined that the best scenario would be the metered connections to
irrigation pump sets and pro-rata based pricing which would force the farmers not only
to adopt the micro irrigation technology but also to adopt the suitable cropping systems
and crops apart from proper pricing of the irrigation water.

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 20

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

The study by Indian Resources Information and Management Technologies ltd

(INRIMT) has indicated that 83% of the sample farmers increased their income by 15-
25% with respect to perennial crops and 40-50% with respect to annual crops after
installing the drip irrigation system in their fields. About 42% of respondents made use
of the drip to mitigate the labour problem. Power problems, need to increase area under
irrigation were other criteria for adopting the drip irrigation.

Thus, it is seen from various research studies that micro irrigation has indeed resulted in
the anticipated savings in water, energy and labour; and it has led to improved
productivity. The promise held out by micro irrigation has proved to be realizable and,
it does reinforce the underlying rationale for the continuance and strengthening the
further adoption of micro irrigation.

6.0 Advocacy efforts for popularizing micro irrigation

Notwithstanding the undoubted benefits of micro irrigation for the farmers in particular
and the society in general, its adoption on a large scale critically depends upon the
efforts made to promote micro irrigation through information, education and
communication (IEC) by the state agencies. The IEC efforts also are needed to educate
farmers on appropriate use of micro irrigation so that the potential benefits such as
saving in water are actually realized. A review of the IEC efforts showed that this was
inadequate.

The Horticulture Department conducts training in collaboration with PFDC on water

use efficiency, management of micro irrigation systems, integrated pest management,
integrated nutrient management and post harvest management for the benefit of farmers
as a part of their regular trainings of the department (Table 8).

Table 8: Number of Trainings conducted by Horticulture Department

Year Water use Management of MI Integrated Nutrient Post Harvest

efficiency systems Management Management
2007-08 295 283 177 160
2008-09 406 429 311 231
2009-10 364 377 293 249
The Horticulture Department has incidentally had entrusted the task of demonstrations
and documenting the case studies to micro irrigation companies. However, only 2-3
companies had responded to it.

The data from the Agricultural Department indicates that the only 6 demonstrations had
been carried out spending Rs.0.4 lakhs against the allocation of Rs 106 lakhs during the
years 2006-07 to 2010-11 against envisaged 282 demonstrations. Despite the comments
made by PFDC on the action plans and suggestion to increase the demonstrations, there

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 21

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

is little effort on part of the departments in this regard. Demonstrations are allowed in
0.5 hectare at 75% subsidy which is equal to the subsidy provided for beneficiary under
the scheme. In the event there appears to be no incentive for farmers to come forward to
undertake the demonstrations. This is possibly one of the factors responsible for low
number of demonstrations.
Trainings were also done by the PFDC as part of the scheme. PFDC also produces
literature in the form of books, folders and pamphlets and documentaries for the benefit
of officers, farmers and entrepreneurs on a large scale (Table 9). PFDC staff also
regularly participates in programs aired on Radio and Television as well as phone-in
programs. The PFDC staff regularly attends the phone calls from the farmers/NGO’s
regarding various technical issues related to the micro irrigation. Despite the PFDC’s
mandate of 80 percent research and 20 percent extension activities being changed to 80
percent of extension activity and 20 percent of research from 2005, the trainings
(particularly demonstrations) conducted by PFDC are highly inadequate considering the
overall requirement of educating the farmers of the benefits of micro irrigation.
Table 9: Trainings conducted by PFDC for the year 2009-10

No. of training No. of training

Category of No. of participants
programs programs Subjects covered
participants trained
proposed conducted
Farmers 29 7 Micro irrigation 249
Officers 5 9 technology, greenhouse 408
technology, plasticulture
KVKs/ 6 497
4 application, farm pond
NGOs’ 2 lining, Precision farming 53
Dealers 4 6 and mulching technology 692
Total 42 30 1899
Source: PFDC, Bangalore

To illustrate, the NABCONS Study had found that there was over irrigation to the tune
of 68% in coconut, 69% in grapes, 74% in arecanut crops in the sample districts in the
drip irrigation systems. The excess irrigation was found to be in the range of 13% to
74% across different crops4. The study also indicated that there is further scope to
improve the irrigation efficiency by proper irrigation scheduling. This is an area that
could have been suitably addressed by IEC efforts.

7.0. Progress of Micro Irrigation Scheme in Karnataka

The progress of the Micro Irrigation scheme was analysed by compiling the
expenditures from the Department of Agriculture and Horticulture. An amount of Rs.
664 crore has been spent recording a cumulative expenditure of 95% over the five year

4
The efficiency of water use in some crops was worked out by comparing the actual water used with
theoretically determined water requirement.

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 22

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

period. It is seen that the allocations as well as the expenditure recorded a consistent
increase during the period 2006-07 to 2010-11 (Table 10).
Table 10: Expenditure under Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler) (Rs. In lakhs)
Utilization Utilization
Total to Releases to Available
Year OB* Releases Available Expenditure CB (%) funds ( % )
2006-07 NA 10435.86 10435.86 6728.87 3706.99 64.48 64.48
2007-08 3473.63 14784.83 18258.46 11480.05 6778.41 77.65 62.88
2008-09 4114.14 14780.90 18895.04 14994.65 3900.39 101.45 79.36
2009-10 3797.55 13606.85 17404.40 16585.90 818.50 121.89 95.30
2010-11 841.37 16209.47 17050.84 16682.90 367.93 102.92 97.84
Total 69817.90 66472.38 95.21
Growth 8.30 24.41 14.87 13.31
Source: Data from Agriculture and Horticulture Departments

* The opening balance is less unspent state share which lapses at the end of the year.
The expenditure under the micro irrigation increased from Rs. 6728 lakh in 2006-07
to Rs. 16683 lakh during 2010-11. The growth of grants was 8.3 % p.a. while the
expenditure grew by 24 % annually. The grants decreased during the year 2009-10 by
Rs. 11 crore compared to the previous year. The utilization against the allocation
increased from 64% during 2006-07 to 102 % percent during 2010-11. However, the
utilisation against the total funds available showed a consistent increase from 64% to
98% over the period 2006-07 to 2010-11.
Figure 1: Area Covered under the Micro Irrigation Scheme in Agriculture and Horticulture Departments.

Source: Departments of Agriculture and Horticulture

The cumulative total area which came under Micro Irrigation scheme over the period
2006-07 to 2010-11 was 4.18 lakh hectares (Figure 1). About 55% of this happened
between the years 2008-09 and 2009-10. The area additionally brought under the

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 23

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

scheme during the year 2010-11 is less by over 34000 hectares as compared to the
previous year. The Agriculture Department accounted for 65% of the area covered
while the Horticulture Department accounted for the rest 35% of area.
As ground water is the main source of micro irrigation (>90%) the area under the
micro irrigation was compared with that of the area irrigated under wells and bore
wells in the district. The data was available for only 3 years (2006-07 to 2008-09). It
is observed that the area under micro irrigation as a percent to the area irrigated from
wells and bore wells in the entire state has increased from 3.29% in the year 2006-07
to 14% in the year 2008-09. The district wise area under Micro Irrigation as a percent
to the area irrigated from wells and bore wells is given in the Figure 2. Chickmagalur,
Uttarakannada and Kodagu districts show higher area under Micro Irrigation than the
area irrigated from the wells and bore wells. This may be due to the substantial use of
surface water for micro irrigation which needs to be further explored. Districts like
Shimoga, Hassan, Gulbarga, Dharwad, Haveri, Davanagere, Mysore and Bidar had
higher coverage of the area under Micro Irrigation.
Figure 2: District wise area under micro irrigation as a % to total area irrigated from wells /
bore wells

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 24

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

The growth over the three year period 2006-07 to 2008-09 is given in the Figure 3.
Against the average growth of 1.07%, 15 districts recorded higher than the State
average while the other 12 districts recorded a growth less than the average.
Figure 3 Growth of Micro Irrigation across districts (2006-07 to 2008-09)

However, the above gives only a partial picture of growth in the absence of data
regarding micro irrigation outside the scheme and its application in other crops like
mulberry and oil palm. Moreover, even within the districts there are large variations
as can be seen from the table 11. The top ten districts account for 66% of the area
covered under Micro Irrigation in Karnataka. The top 10 districts under drip irrigation
and sprinkler irrigation account for 74% and 71% of the area respectively. Belgaum
occupies first place with respect to coverage of sprinkler area while Chitradurga
occupies the first place under drip irrigation. The district wise share of the area under
drip and sprinkler is provided in the Annexure 3. Not withstanding the variations, it
would be instructive to review the districts which have progressed faster which may
help in evolving better strategies.

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 25

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Table 11 - Top Ten Districts with respect to Drip and Sprinkler area covered under the Scheme

% % Drip& %
Districts Sprinkler share Districts Drip share Districts Sprinkler share
Belgaum 35023 13 Chitradurga 19237 12 Belgaum 44380 11
Bijapur 24531 9 Bijapur 13785 9 Bijapur 38316 9
Shimoga 22898 9 U.Kannada 13245 8 Davanagere 29526 7
Gulbarga 19567 7 Kolar 13207 8 Chitradurga 28867 7
Davanagere 19002 7 Haveri 11591 7 Haveri 25409 6
Bagalkot 18035 7 Davanagere 10524 7 Gulbarga 25205 6
Bidar 15319 6 Belgaum 9358 6 Bagalkot 23750 6
Haveri 13818 5 Chikmagalur 8024 5 Shimoga 23656 6
Chikmagalur 12060 5 C.R.Nagar 6316 4 Chikmagalur 20084 5
Hassan 11851 5 Bagalkot 5715 4 Bidar 16934 4
0thers 69231 26 Others 45536 29 others 141744 34
Total 261334 100 Total 156537 100 Total 417871 100

The foregoing shows that there has been an overall increase in allocations as well as
utilization, and with the exception of 2010-11 there has also been an impressive
addition to area covered by the MI scheme. However, this does not tell the whole story
in the absence of an estimation of area that can be potentially brought under micro
irrigation. The State-level Micro Irrigation Committee is required to organize base line
survey and feasibility studies in different parts of the State, covering various crops and
technologies. The revised guidelines of the Scheme also stipulate that the SMIC
formulates a strategic plan and a road map to achieve the goals set therein. The annual
action plan is also required to be prepared based on the strategic plan and the road
map. However, it is seen that the SMIC has not prepared any such strategic plan and
consequentially the action plans are also devoid of any strategic vision.

While the Horticulture Department implements drip irrigation, the Agriculture

Department implements both the drip and sprinkler irrigation for agricultural crops.
The sprinkler accounted for 63% of the area covered and 37% of the expenditure under
the scheme for the period 2006-07 to 2010-11. The drip irrigation covered under the
scheme in both the departments together accounted for 37% of the area and 63% of the
expenditure under the scheme. The coverage under sprinkler was 0.91 lakh hectares
during 2009-10 and it was 0.35 lakh hectares during 2010-11(Figure 4). However, drip
irrigation recorded consistent growth in terms of area coverage. While the expenditure
during the years 2009-10 and 2010-11 almost remained the same, the expenditure
under drip irrigation increased by about 70% during 2010-11 over the year 2009-
10(Figure 5).

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 26

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Figure 4: Drip and Sprinkler irrigation coverage under the Micro irrigation Scheme

Figure 5: Drip and Sprinkler irrigation expenditure under Micro Irrigation Scheme

Source: Data from Agriculture and Horticulture Departments

7.1 Horticulture

Department wise analysis was also done to understand the expenditure pattern over
the study period. The Horticulture Department incurred a total expenditure of
Rs.375.48 crore registering 100% expenditure against the allocation. The utilisation
percentage recorded a steady increase from 80% in 2006-07 to 100% during 2010-11.
The allocation from the GOI and GOK saw a decrease during the period 2009-10.
(Table 12)

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 27

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Table 12: Expenditure under Drip Irrigation in Karnataka (Horticulture Department) Rs. In lakhs

Utilisation %
Opening
GOI GOK Total Total Of Of
Year Balance Releases Releases Releases available Expenditure Balance Releases Available
2006-07 NA 3584.10 3194.46 6778.56 6778.56 5453.72 1324.84 80.46 80.46
2007-08 1324.84 4685.86 3338.30 8024.16 9349.00 6920.72 2428.28 86.25 74.03
2008-09 2428.28 3026.88 3527.50 6554.38 8982.66 7072.50 1910.16 107.90 78.74
2009-10 1910.16 1765.00 2665.99 4430.99 6341.15 6340.55 0.60 143.10 99.99
2010-11 0.60 7254.00 4506.25 11760.25 11760.85 11760.25 0.60 100.00 99.99
Total 20315.84 17232.5 37548.34 37547.74 100.00
Growth
Rate (%) 4.43 4.74 5.21 15.60 9.87 7.63
Source: Data from Agriculture and Horticulture Departments

The grants from the GOI decreased by about 40% during 2009-10; however, the
expenditure against the total available funds for the year was almost 100%. During the
year 2010-11, the GOI grants increased by more than 4 times while the State grants
increased by 80%. It appears that the utilization of grant influences the releases in the
coming year.

District-wise expenditure under the Horticulture Department (Drip Irrigation) was

analysed. The utilisation percentages vary significantly across the districts. The
district wise expenditure and utilisation percentages for the five year period are given
in the Annexure 4 and 5.Over the period 2005-06 to 2010-11, it is seen that more
districts have been able to fully utilize the allocations fully (Table 13).
Table 13: Utilisation pattern of Expenditure in Department of Horticulture

No of Districts
Utilisation % 2006-07 2007- 08 2008 - 09 2009 - 10 2010 - 11
< 50 2 7 2
51-90 6 14 10
91-100 10 6 3 4 30
>100 9 14 26
Total 27 27 29 29 30

An analysis of the district-wise crop category wise area coverage under the scheme
was analysed. Bijapur, Tumkur, Chitradurga, Chickmagalur, Davanagere, Haveri and
Koppal districts form the chief coverage area under the drip irrigation together
accounting for 58% of the area covered under drip irrigation. The 20 districts account
for 30% of the area while the top 10 districts accounted for 70% of the area coverage.
In terms of the crop coverage, fruit crops followed by the plantation crops account for

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 28

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

45% and 36% of the total area covered under drip irrigation respectively. Vegetables
accounted for 14% while spices accounted 4% of the total area (Figure 6)
Figure 6: Share of different crop category under drip irrigation through Horticulture Department

Source: Data from Horticulture Department

Bijapur has the largest area of drip irrigation covered under fruit crops followed by
Chitradurga, Koppal, Belgaum, Gulbarga and Bagalkot districts. Banana,
pomegranate, lime, grapes, sapota and papaya are important crops covered under this
category. Tumkur district stands first with respect to the drip area coverage under
plantation crops followed by Chickmagalur, Davanagere Chitradurga, Shimoga and
Hassan districts. Coconut and Arecanut are the chief crops covered under this
category. In vegetable crops Kolar stands first in drip area coverage followed by
Haveri, Bijapur and chickballapur districts. Haveri district stands first in the drip area
coverage under spices constituting nearly 40% of the total area under drip in spice
crops in Karnataka. Chilli is grown under drip in this district. Kodagu district stands
second with production of pepper under drip. Flowers are grown under drip mainly in
Bangalore rural, Chickballapur, Kolar and Bellary districts due to the proximity to the
market as well as the perishability of the produce. The district wise coverage of drip
under different crop categories is provided in the Annexure 6.
An analysis of the performance of drip irrigation was done by looking into targets set
at the beginning of the year with that of the achievements over a three year period.
The district wise performance was analysed with respect to physical targets in
hectares over three years 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11(Table 14).

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 29

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Table 14: Physical achievements as percent of physical targets

2008 - 09 2009 - 10 2010 - 11

Maximum 226 117 244
Minimum 0 0 26
Median 52 52 101
More than Median 13 13 15
Less than Median 13 14 14
Median 1 1 1
Districts
Zero Utilisation 2 1 0
Total 29 29 30
No. exceeded target 5 2 15

Chamarajanagar district exceeded the targets in all the three years. The performance
against the target was lowest in the year 2009-10 at 51%. This is the year which had
recorded highest utilisation in all the districts with respect to the financial
achievements. Thirteen of the 30 districts recorded physical achievements more than
the state average. In the year 2010-11, 15 districts exceeded the targets while the
financial achievement was at 100% in all the districts. The district wise achievements
against the targets are given in the Annexure 7.

The targets and achievements were also compared with the action plans for the years
2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11(Table 15). Action plans are prepared by the
department at the district level and are compiled and sent to GOI which in turn sends
it to the PFDC through NCPAH to assess the plans. The corrections by PFDC are
incorporated by the states and GOI considers the recommendations by the PFDC for
financial allocations. A comparison has been made with respect to the action plan,
revised targets based on the financial allocations received from GOI and the
achievements made under prominent crops. It becomes clear that some crops like
chilli which has been increasing in area in Haveri and Davanagere districts do not find
place in the action plans. Despite covering an area of 950 hectares during 2009-10, it
is not included in 2010-11. Similarly the ginger is not covered in the action plans. The
lime/lemon crop is under estimated in all the three years 2008-09 to 2010-11.
Pomegranate and banana are overestimated in all the three years.

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 30

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Table 15 Comparison of Action Plan with the Actual coverage (through Horticulture Department)
Crop wise area coverage in Hectares
2008-09 2009-10 2010-11
Action Action Action
CROPS plan Actuals Difference plan Actuals Difference plan Actuals Difference

Pomegranate 2645 1465 1181 2149 446 1703 1671 1116 555
Banana 3902 2404 1498 5798 2868 2930 8171 7794 377
Grapes 1748 2111 -364 2014 1437 577 2456 3081 -625
Lime 275 1143 -867 346 1317 -971 350 805 -455
Papaya 1346 793 553 874 515 359 856 1481 -625
Sapota 2263 327 1936 1587 194 1393 3228 136 3092
Mango 2244 617 1627 3262 904 2357 3491 1807 1683
Vegetables 2989 2091 898 3901 1818 2083 4161 8318 -4157
Coconut 2834 2215 619 3685 1675 2010 4149 2316 1834
Arecanut 5518 5790 -272 7751 5673 2078 10412 11282 -870
Chilli 0 0 955 -955 0 1216 -1216
Flowers 0 0 453 274 179
Turmeric 0 0 30 789 -759
ginger 0 0 0 299 -299
others 1537 3354 -1817 1754 1841 -86 2100 2300 -200
Total 27302 22311 4991 33121 18688 14433 41528 43014 -1485
Source: Data from Horticulture Department

The analysis of the physical performance as well as the crop wise performance against
targets indicates that the planning and achievements differ significantly and the plans
are more of ad hoc in nature. Since district wise allocations are difficult to move across
the districts depending upon the demand, the utilisation gets affected which also points
to the need for periodical scientific assessment of the potential area that can be brought
under Micro Irrigation.

7.2. Agriculture Department

The Agriculture department incurred an expenditure of Rs. 289 crore against an

allocation of Rs. 322 crore during the period 2006-07 to 2010-11 registering an
utilisation of 89 % (Table 16). As the department provides both drip and sprinkler
irrigation systems, the coverage and expenditure was analysed for the same (Figure 7).

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 31

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Table 16: Expenditure under Micro irrigation in Karnataka (Agriculture Department) in Rs. Lakhs

Utilisation %
Opening
GOI GOK Total Total Closing Of Of
Year Balance* Releases Releases Releases available Expenditure Balance Releases Available
2006-07 0 1200.55 2456.75 3657.30 3657.30 1275.16 2382.14 34.87 34.87
2007-08 2148.79 4582.00 2178.67 6760.67 8909.46 4559.33 4350.13 67.44 51.17
2008-09 1685.86 3934.77 4291.75 8226.52 9912.38 7919.52 1992.86 96.27 79.90
2009-10 1887.39 4559.56 4616.30 9175.86 11063.25 10245.35 817.90 111.66 92.61
2010-11 840.77 2471.84 1977.38 4449.22 5289.99 4922.65 367.33 110.64 93.06
15520.8
Total 16748.71 5 32269.56 28922.01
Growth
Rate
(%) 15.48 3.22 7.22 42.07 32.49 29.13

*Opening balance excludes the unspent state grants that lapses at the end of the year

Figure 7: Year wise Coverage of Drip and Sprinkler (2006-07 to 2010- 11)

The share of the drip irrigation was 4 percent with respect to area and 14% with
respect to that of the total expenditure in the department while the share of sprinkler
irrigation was 96% with respect to area and 84% of the expenditure under the scheme.
Area coverage was highest during the year 2009-10(Figure 8). The coverage as well
as the expenditure dipped during the year 2010-11.

The utilisation against the allocations were analysed for all the districts for the five
year period 2006-07 to 2010-11. The number of districts that showed utilisation of
over 100% was significant (Table 17). The utilisation has improved significantly over

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 32

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

years. The district wise expenditure and utilisation are provided in the Annexure 8 and
9.
Table 17: Physical achievements as percent of physical targets

No of Districts
Utilisation % 2006-07 2007- 08 2008 - 09 2009 - 10 2010 - 11
< 50 17 12
51-90 9 8 4 5 9
91-100 1 1 9 4 11
>100 7 16 20 10
Total 27 28 29 29 30
Belgaum occupies first place with respect to sprinkler and drip area coverage as well
as the expenditure. The districts of Belgaum, Bijapur, Shimoga, Bidar, Bagalkot and
Gulbarga constitute more than 50% of the area under sprinkler irrigation Belgaum and
Bagalkot districts account for 60% of the area under drip irrigation (Table 18).
Table 18: District wise area under Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation

Area under Area under

Districts Drip % share Districts Sprinkler % share
Belgaum 4554 40 Belgaum 35023 13
Bagalkote 2144 19 Bijapur 24531 9
Chamarajanagar 420 4 Shimoga 22898 9
Bijapur 365 3 Gulbarga 19567 7
Bidar 349 3 Davanagere 19002 7
Chickballapura 340 3 Bagalkote 18035 7
Gulbarga 319 3 Bidar 15319 6
Mysore 312 3 Haveri 13818 5
Kolar 298 3 Chikmagalur 12060 5
Shimoga 259 2 Hassan 11851 5
others 1938 17 others 69231 26
Total 11297 100 Total 261334 100
The crop wise area covered under drip and sprinkler irrigation was also analysed for
the available data. The data was available only for 3 years 2008-09 to 2010-11 and
was not of all the districts (Table 19). Groundnut, Maize, Sugarcane, paddy,
Sunflower, and pulse crops accounted for significant area during all the three years.
Sugarcane maize and cotton were chief crops even under drip irrigation.
The GOI guidelines clearly say that the sprinkler be used only when the drip is not
feasible. However, it is observed from the available data that both drip and sprinkler
irrigation systems were being offered for the same crop. In Mudhol taluk both drip
and sprinkler systems were installed for sugarcane crop. In the southern districts of
Chickballapur, Tumkur and Kolar districts ragi and maize are being grown under drip

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 33

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

irrigation (although sprinkler irrigation is more appropriate for them) since these
crops are grown along with pulses (particularly red gram and field bean which need
drip irrigation) as inter crop. Similarly, sunflower when grown as a mono-crop uses
sprinkler irrigation but when it is mixed with pulses the farmer uses drip irrigation. In
the event, there is a possibility of incorrect admission of subsidy resulting in
undermining the scheme’s objectives.
Table 19: Crop wise Acreage (in Hectares) covered under sprinkler irrigation in Karnataka

Sprinkler (Ha) Drip(Ha)

Crops 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 Crops 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11
Groundnut 15029 19171 3762 Sugar Cane 1960 4977 519
Maize 8691 12047 3227 Maize 122 263 3
Sugarcane 4782 9221 1955 Cotton 107 126 57
Paddy 5388 8378 2824 Redgram 74 65
Sunflower 6470 7577 1194 Ragi 53 47
Soybean 2494 4287 635 Ground nut 44 10
Pulses 3288 2876 2221 Sunflower 46 145
Ragi 1108 2704 121 Field bean 29 24
Jowar 1142 2275 206 other 16 13
Bengalgram 3158 1618 712 No details 732
Greengram 501 1091 929 Total 2452 6402 579
Redgram 1646 1002 1725
Cotton 1100 863 311
Others 5003 2158 2089
Total 59799 75269 21912
Figure 8: Crop wise Acreage (in Hectares) covered under Sprinkler and Drip irrigation

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 34

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Groundnut, Maize, Sugarcane, Paddy and Sunflower constitute for 80% of the area
under sprinkler irrigation while Sugarcane alone accounts for 79% of the area under
drip irrigation.
The physical achievements were compared with that of the targets for the year 2008-
09 to 2010-11(Table 20). The physical progress during the year 2010-11 has shown
reduction compared to the other two years. The median utilisation percentage has
reduced during the three year period. The number of districts that exceeded the target
is significant in number which points out to the issues of planning and the utilisations.
The district wise physical progress against the targets is given in the Annexure 10.
Table 20: Physical achievements as percent of physical targets

2008 - 09 2009 - 10 2010 - 11

Maximum 514 200 252
Minimum 11 28 0
Median 87 63 52
More than Median 14 14 13
Less than Median 14 14 15
Median 1 1 2
Districts
Zero Utilisation 2
Total 29 29 30
No. exceeded target 12 6 7

8.0 Targeting of the subsidy across categories

The guidelines indicate that the SC and ST have to be provided with the subsidy
under micro irrigation scheme at 16% and 8% on a priority basis. Women
beneficiaries are also to be given priority so that they constitute 30% of the
beneficiaries. Similarly, small and marginal farmers have to be given priority so they
constitute at least 25 percent of the beneficiaries.

It was seen that the category wise data is not maintained in a uniform manner across
the state. Till 2009-10 data on only subsidy disbursed was collected in Horticulture
department. From 2009-10, both the cost and subsidy data were collected. Some
districts use the castes (e.g. Bellary) while some others use classifications like
minority, others, etc. with no reference to male/female. The data for the year 2010-11
and 2011-12 do not have farmer category as there is no provision in the format for
collecting this data. The data in agriculture department regarding the beneficiary
category is mixed with the farm category. Districts like Gulbarga do not have crop
details, but just the name and subsidy amount. The beneficiaries are classified as
general or SC/ST or small farmer or marginal farmer or women beneficiaries. The
sample sheets of the data are provided in the Annexure 11.

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 35

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

In the absence of the beneficiary data, monitoring of the scheme from the stand point
of one of its chief objectives i.e. to benefit disadvantaged sections of farming
community was not possible. It was, however, observed during the discussions with
JD (Agriculture) that from 2011-12 the collection of beneficiary data in particular and
overall monitoring has been streamlined with application of an on-line application.
With this the collection of beneficiary data in future as also the monitoring will be
much better.
The subsidy availed for prominent crops in the districts were calculated for the year
2009-10 for drip irrigation in Horticulture. Even in year 2009-10, many districts did
not have the cost of the installations. The subsidy percent against the actual costs were
analysed and a prominent crops in four districts covering 2 each under the different
subsidy rates are provided in the Table 21. The subsidy rates were 100% for the
districts of Bijapur and Kolar districts while it was 75% for the Tumkur and Raichur
districts. The crop wise subsidy in Kolar and Bijapur was in the range of 59% to 83 %
of the actual cost whereas the subsidy offered to the farmers in these districts was
100%. The subsidy worked out to 51% to 58% in Raichur and Tumkur districts. The
differences with respect to the cost for same crop and area could be due to the
customization of the drip system to the plot. The subsidy worked out to be close to
70% under vegetables. The district wise crop subsidy is given in Annexure 12.
Table 21: Comparison of Unit cost and subsidy across districts and crops -2009-10 (Horticulture Department)

Crop Cost Subsidy

Actual per per Subsidy
District Area cost Subsidy Hectare hectare %
Tumkur Arecanut 742.87 32325107 17189248 43514 23139 53
Coconut 1368.65 30959996 15875783 22621 11600 51
Raichur Pomegranate 59.88 2408497 1386367 40222 23152 58
Bijapur Grapes 813.54 34764614 24462152 42733 30069 70
Banana 145.51 7321048 4326082 50313 29730 59
Leman 127.12 3394209 2369544 26701 18640 70
Pomegranate 43.99 2532925 1754959 57580 39894 69
Kolar Potato 174.49 13504031 9619186 77391 55127 71
Tomato 366.34 25316443 19913622 69106 54358 79
Mango 94.47 2223849 1841467 23540 19493 83
Banana 47.29 3030785 2257530 64089 47738 74
Beans 22.68 1859389 1262573 81984 55669 68
Cabbage 17.81 1270964 967066 71362 54299 76
Capsicum 19.79 1586541 1035788 80169 52339 65
Carrot 28.14 2031878 1584001 72206 56290 78
Source: Data from Horticulture Department

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 36

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

The analysis also throws light upon the need for the regular revision of the unit cost
for the subsidy calculations to ensure that the subsidy works out to the percent that is
targeted by the Government. This is more so because of the back ended subsidy and
farmer has to bear the increasing cost under horticulture crops which may act as
disincentive to adopt drip systems.

9.0 Spread of Micro Irrigation beyond the subsidy scheme

It is expected that the farmers would be encouraged to adopt micro irrigation beyond
the area covered by subsidy as the benefits accruing from it would in themselves be a
big inducement. The government departments maintain only the area covered by the
subsidy. The picture of the total area covered by micro irrigation would be possible
only if the total number of micro irrigation equipment sold in the state by all the
companies in a year along with corresponding area is available.
The analysis of data on sales and installations by the micro irrigation companies was
expected to give the picture of the coverage under the scheme as well as outside the
scheme in the state. The companies were repeatedly approached through the Irrigation
Association of Karnataka, which also collects information about the members
(companies) sales data every year. However, it was learnt that the Companies have
only data of sales turnover in rupees and not in terms of area covered.
A letter was addressed by JD (Drip) to 41 drip irrigation companies and 28 sprinkler
irrigation companies seeking data of total number of installations and corresponding
area covered under MI scheme and outside the scheme. Only five companies
furnished some data. Of these three companies did not provide data of installations
outside the scheme.

Since spread of micro irrigation beyond the incentive based scheme is important from
the policy perspective, it was necessary that the state government should have
prescribed mandatory filing of some vital information such as district-wise number of
installations and corresponding area, drip or sprinkler, crops involved and so on. In
the absence of this data, the government would now have to estimate the coverage of
MI outside the scheme through a sample survey.

10.0 Documentation of Best Practices in Micro Irrigation

The best practices across different states were analysed with the help of desk review,
web search and consultation with the companies. Based on the analysis for a number
of states, three states are identified as the best practices. These are presented below:

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 37

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Karnataka

Karnataka has put in place the process of registering the manufacturers/suppliers of

Drip and Sprinkler irrigation components who supply and install the products of BIS
standards. Every year the both Horticulture and Agriculture departments verify the
certificates of standards with validity for the period before approving them to
undertake the installations in the field.

The farmers have to pay the amount in full and avail the subsidy for Horticulture
crops. This back ended subsidy is another good initiative which ensures that farmers
who are interested and willing to make judicious use of water will avail the benefit
and not just for the sake of subsidy.

In other states few companies are selected to provide the installations and targets and
districts are fixed for the same. Only big companies have chance based on their
capacities with respect to supply and installations. In Karnataka all potential
companies are registered and approved to enable the small players to get into the
market. This also induces price competition actually doing a price negotiation.
Farmers can choose the dealer/company to his satisfaction unlike in other states where
the supplier is fixed for an area. Decentralised system of functioning has been hailed
as another important step in ensuring the scheme benefits to farmers.

Transparency is ensured in the selection of beneficiaries through maintenance of

seniority lists.

The state has initiated efforts to establish the Karnataka Antaraganga Micro Irrigation
Corporation (KAMIC) and will become the single agency operating the micro
irrigation schemes in the state. A portal has been launched in the Department of
Agriculture which would enable in better monitoring as well as the database
management in the agriculture department.

Andhra Pradesh

The micro irrigation scheme is implemented under a special purpose vehicle launched
in the name of Andhra Pradesh Micro Irrigation Project created under the department
of Horticulture to guide, supervise and monitor the implementation of project. The
project is being coordinated by Andhra Pradesh Micro Irrigation Committee at the
State and District levels which has technical persons looking into the design aspects
of the micro irrigation systems. Micro irrigation engineer at district is responsible for
examining the survey reports and designs. At Mandal level a separate resource centre
called bindu mitra coordinates it.

Special project cell team consisting of Agriculture/Horticulture specialist,

entomologist and agricultural engineer are provided at the district level who regularly

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 38

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

provide the extension services as well as capacity building programmes in the district.
A technical committee of experts looks into all the issues related to the project and
advises the State micro irrigation committee. Third party inspection (nominated by the
Government) is compulsory for all the installations and release of money to the
company made only after the report by the third party inspections. The selected
company has to have a district level coordinator in every district and should have a
demonstration plot in each mandal. Farmers have to be provided with crop and micro
irrigation systems manual. Companies have to organize trainings and field visits by
experts. Companies have to emboss Made for APMIP on the components supplied by
them and are periodically subjected to quality testing by Central Institute for Plastics
Engineering and Technology (CIPET). Micro irrigation has been conferred the status
of infrastructure and loans from NABARD has been availed under Rural
Infrastructure Development Fund. Sales tax is exempted for Micro irrigation systems.
Loans are provided by banks at 9% for marginal and small farmers and while it is at
10% for large farmers. Up to a limit of Rs. 50000/- banks are directed not to insist for
collateral security from farmers who opt for loan to install micro irrigation systems.

The prices of the micro irrigation systems are negotiated by the state level committee
every year. Subsidy is provided on the rates negotiated every year. There is no
ambiguity with respect to subsidy as the ceiling is fixed. Recently the subsidy ceiling
was fixed at Rs. 1 lakh or 2.20 acres whichever less for all the categories.

Monitoring and Evaluation consultants regularly monitor by inspecting 10% of the

installations every year and evaluate the installations with respect to bench mark
survey, design of the system, supply of micro irrigation equipment by the company as
per the specifications, installations, Operations and maintenance, and agronomic and
extension services. They also collect samples of installations and send it to Central
Institute for Plastics Engineering and Technology (CIPET), Hyderabad for inspection.
The inputs from Monitoring and evaluation consultants are used by the state
committee in planning and implementation. Over 500 case studies of various crops
have been documented.
Resource centres at mandal level provide advisory services/training to farmers. They
also sell spare parts required for micro irrigation systems for farmers. Local village
youth have been trained to create a pool of paraprofessional workers who can provide
services to farmers by charging fee from them.
A strong team working in mission mode is expecting to reduce the irrigation water
requirement by 10% in the next 7-8 years by adopting the micro irrigation
technologies.

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 39

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Gujarat

A special purpose vehicle called Gujarat Green Revolution Company limited is

created for the purpose of implementing the scheme. A dedicated website is launched
www.ggrc.co.in .

The website provides the application forms that can be downloaded. It provides the
links for the expert advice through email, success stories and other related literature in
downloadable form in vernacular language. Transparency is ensured by using on-line
MIS in public domain. Applications can be tracked for the status from the website.
Periodically the policies, procedures are updated in the website. The rates of the drip
and sprinkler components, the subsidy rates, unit costs are regularly notified in the
website.
There is no limit for the adoption of micro irrigation system under the scheme.
However the subsidy given is 50% of the unit cost. Subsidy is higher for SC/ST
farmers. An initiative of installation of Micro irrigation systems in the Sardar Sarovar
Neeravari Nigam Limited (SSNNL) command area has been undertaken to evaluate in
a pilot area and extend the same to the entire command area. The network of Gujarat
fertilizers and state company network is effectively involved in extension activity.
Training of ST youth as paraprofessional workers to promote Micro irrigation apart
from attending to maintenance of the micro irrigation system has enabled the ST
youths to get self employment. Priority is given for provision of electricity to farmers
opting for this scheme. A copy of all the documents relating to the installation along
with the manual should be given to farmer for his/her reference.

Tamil Nadu

Targets are fixed for companies in terms of the area to be covered. Companies are
responsible for identifying the beneficiaries. Companies should also cover small and
marginal farmers under the scheme as per rules.

Unit costs are negotiated with the companies. Subsidy is based on the revised cost.
Ceilings of subsidy are fixed for different category of farms.

It is seen that the Government of Karnataka is already on the way to adopting some of
the best practices such as single agency to implement the scheme and web based
application for approving installations and subsidy payment, which incidentally will
help collect a large number of important data items. Third party inspections are also
being adopted in Agriculture, which may be also replicated in horticulture. Some
other good practices that Karnataka may consider adopting are a) companies to be
made responsible for carrying out demonstrations; and b) training of rural youth in
maintenance and repair of the micro irrigation systems.

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 40

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

11.0 Shortcomings of the Micro Irrigation Scheme implementation in Karnataka and Policy
recommendations for improving the same.
The foregoing discussion on implementation of the micro irrigation scheme in
Karnataka has helped identify some of the shortcomings which are discussed below.
An attempt has also been made to suggest possible policy responses to the identified
lacunae.

Horticulture department:

a) Reinforce the role/inputs of SMIC, DMIC and PFDC

The State-level Micro Irrigation Committee is required to organize base line
survey and feasibility studies in different parts of the State, covering various crops
and technologies. The revised guidelines of the Scheme also stipulate that the
SMIC formulates a strategic plan and a road map to achieve the goals set therein.
The annual action plan is also required to be prepared based on the strategic plan
and the road map. However, it is seen that the SMIC has not prepared any such
strategic plan and consequentially the action plans are also devoid of any strategic
vision. DMIC is also not effective/non-existent in many districts.
The department should undertake a baseline survey to determine the potential
area that can be covered in each district taking into account the agro climatic
situation and the ground water availability (based on the Central Ground Water
Board data) as well as the exhaustive list of the crops that should be covered
under the scheme. This would serve in preparation of strategic plan for a longer
period as well as in formulation of proficient annual plans. This will not only help
the department at the state level to scrutinize the plans sent by district efficiently
but also to evaluate the targets set for different crops in each district.

b) Improve the IEC efforts.

Despite the undeniable benefits of micro irrigation for the farmers in particular
and the society in general, its adoption on a large scale still critically depends
upon the efforts made to promote micro irrigation through information, education
and communication (IEC) by the state agencies. The IEC efforts also are needed
to educate farmers on appropriate use of micro irrigation so that the potential
benefits such as saving in water are actually realized. It was observed that the IEC
efforts were inadequate. The subsidy offered to farmers for the demonstration
plots are not encouraging (0.5 ha and 75% subsidy) since it is on par with the
subsidy for the crop under the scheme.

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 41

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

There is a need to use the Horticultural farms of the department across the state
for the purpose of conducting Micro Irrigation demonstrations on various crops.
Farmers should be encouraged to visit the Horticultural farms at their meeting in
Raita Samparka Kendras. In addition to augmenting the trainings of famers, the
government should consider directing the accredited micro irrigation companies
to i) have demonstration plots in taluks so that there is at least one such
demonstration plot for every taluk; and ii) organize trainings for farmers and field
visits by experts

c) Strengthen the database management:

Periodical monitoring is essential for any scheme so as enable the administration
to make necessary mid course corrections. For any monitoring to be meaningful,
data on critical parameters is imperative. Even preparation of strategic plan or
annual plans will be difficult in the absence of data of past performance. This has
been the recurring and persistent issue in the implementation of the MI Scheme.
The data on many parameters was insufficient, incomplete, inconsistent or
completely unavailable. For instance data on beneficiaries was incomplete and
unreliable. Certain data such as crop wise beneficiaries and crop wise area do not
tally with the state level data of the same. Data of MI equipment sold and
corresponding area in respect of farmers not availing subsidy (that is, outside the
scheme) is not available. Non realistic estimation of the area to be covered adds to
the problem of pending lists.

Data focus is on the beneficiary while the land details are not given much
importance. The computerized land document (RTC- Records of Tenancy and
Cultivation-Bhoomi) could be used very effectively to identify the crops, area, etc.
This data could be shared across departments of Agriculture, Horticulture and
Sericulture so that the issue of no objection certificate could be avoided. This
database could also be used in identification of small and marginal farmers in a
taluk/district.

Analysis of spread of Micro irrigation outside of the NMMI was not possible
because of the reason that the Micro irrigation companies did not share the data
with the department/study team stating the non availability of data as the reason.
There is a need to put in place a system to collect the information in a required
format from the companies that are registered with the departments. The
collection of data on the coverage of Micro irrigation outside the scheme crop
wise and district/taluk wise would help the State in better planning of the Micro
Irrigation development in the State.

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 42

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

d) Delay in disbursement of subsidy

There is delay in the disbursement of subsidies to the farmers. Though the

guidelines stipulate that the entire process be completed in 20 days, delays have
been found to be common. NABCONS study pointed out that the time required
for scrutiny of applications is one month and about the same time for processing
applications from the taluks in the districts. The time taken for sanctioning of
subsidy varies from one week to 6 months depending upon the funds availability.
In case of the subsidy is to be received by farmers, delays could prove to a major
hindrance to adoption of micro irrigation particularly by small and marginal
farmers.

The government should review the entire process of application vetting, approval
and disbursement of subsidy from the point of view of the recipient of subsidy.
While there must be necessary controls to make sure that the subsidy is paid only
in genuine cases and after the equipment is duly installed, the process must ensure
minimum time lag between installation and payment of subsidy. Government must
consider engaging third party inspections for installations, if necessary.
e) Subsidy calculation be made more dynamic

Although on paper subsidy was 100% in the districts of Kolar, Chitradurga and
Bijapur, the actual subsidy was found to be as low as 41.91%. In reality this may
also be discouraging many farmers from adopting micro irrigation because of their
sheer inability to afford the balance cost. It was also found by the PFDC
inspections that few farmers would intimate higher area coverage to the
department to offset the higher cost wherein the company people as well as
officers collude to approve and certify higher area coverage than the actual area.

The government should index subsidy to actual cost in a way that the legitimate
increases in the cost are defrayed by the subsidy.

Agriculture department:

a) Strengthening SMIC and DMIC

The NMMI guidelines stipulates the need for a base line survey as well as feasibility
studies in different parts of the State, covering various crops and technologies. The
revised guidelines of the Scheme also stipulate that the SMIC formulates a strategic
plan and a road map to achieve the goals set therein. The annual action plan is also
required to be prepared based on the strategic plan and the road map. However, it is
seen that the SMIC has not prepared any such strategic plan and consequentially the

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 43

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

action plans are also devoid of any strategic vision. NABCONS study revealed that
DMIC was a non starter and is nonexistent in most of the districts. In the absence of
strategic plans and road map, it is difficult to say whether or not the achievement vis-
à-vis annual plan target is satisfactory. In a sense there is neither a goal post nor are
there any mile stones
The capacities of SMIC and DMIC should be suitably augmented so that they are able
to undertake the feasibility studies and prepare strategic plans and road maps. This
may be entrusted to the proposed Corporation. In any case, it is important that the
State has a strategic plan according to which the scheme is implemented. More
specifically, there should be an estimation of District-wise Potential area (Drip and
Sprinkler) using data (and expertise) from PFDC, Central Ground Water Board,
(taluk wise replenishable ground water availability) as well as the state departments.
This should form the basis for setting targets and conducting evaluations.

b) Coordinated and focused IEC efforts

Despite the undeniable benefits of micro irrigation for the farmers in particular and
the society in general, its adoption on a large scale still critically depends upon the
efforts made to promote micro irrigation through information, education and
communication (IEC) by the state agencies. The IEC efforts also are needed to
educate farmers on appropriate use of micro irrigation so that the potential benefits
such as saving in water are actually realized. It was observed that the IEC efforts were
inadequate. Nabcons study had identified higher water use despite the use of
drip/sprinkler irrigation systems.

In addition to augmenting the trainings of famers, the government should consider

directing the accredited micro irrigation companies to i) have demonstration plots in
taluks so that there is at least one such demonstration plot for every taluk; and ii)
organize trainings for farmers and field visits by experts. Farmers have to be
educated regarding the optimum use of water through the field demonstrations for
various crops.

c) Strengthening Database Management

Periodical monitoring is essential for any scheme so as enable the administration to

make necessary mid course corrections. For any monitoring to be meaningful, data on
critical parameters is imperative. Even preparation of strategic plan or annual plans
will be difficult in the absence of data of past performance. This has been the
recurring and persistent issue in the implementation of the MI Scheme. The data on
many parameters was insufficient, incomplete, inconsistent or completely unavailable.

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 44

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

For instance data on beneficiaries was incomplete and unreliable. Certain data such as
crop wise beneficiaries and crop wise area do not tally with the state level data of the
same. Data of MI equipment sold and corresponding area in respect of farmers not
availing subsidy (that is, outside the scheme) is not available.

Before any scheme is implemented the project management must identify critical data
elements that are required for monitoring the progress of the implementation. In some
cases (such as expenditure), the data will automatically be collected and thus be
available. In other cases, the management must prescribe the data to be collected, the
precautions to be taken to ensure integrity of data and measures for collection,
validation and collation at different levels. The new on line system being implemented
by Agriculture Department is a step in the right direction. Yet, it is recommended that
the systems should be reviewed to ensure that information requirements of monitoring
are fully met.
d) Delay in disbursement of subsidy

There is delay in the disbursement of subsidies to the companies. Some are paid partly
while some are not paid at all. The delay in disbursement of subsidy could result in
the companies compromising on the quality or transferring the cost (interest burden)
to the farmers.

The government should review the entire process of application vetting, approval and
disbursement of subsidy from the point of view of the recipient of subsidy. While there
must be necessary controls to make sure that the subsidy is paid only in genuine cases
and after the equipment is duly installed, the process must ensure minimum time lag
between installation and payment of subsidy.

Implications common to both departments

a) Single Implementing Agency

Unlike in many other states where the scheme is implemented by a single agency, in
Karnataka the scheme is being implemented by Horticulture and Agriculture
departments separately. Having two agencies implementing the scheme has obviously
resulted in certain divergent practices and made coordination difficult.
This is likely to be remedied once the proposed single agency for micro irrigation,
namely, the Karnataka Antaraganga Micro Irrigation Corporation (KAMIC) is
established and starts functioning.
b) Dedicated website

There is a need to provide information about the Micro Irrigation scheme through a
dedicated website in vernacular language. The prices of various drip and sprinkler

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 45

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

components, the subsidy rates, and unit costs have to be regularly notified in the
website. Online application along with the provision for tracking the application for
its status should be provided to enhance transparency.
Various studies, success stories classified by crops and region should be made
available through the website.
c) Updation and Use of the Computerized Land information database(RTC-Bhoomi)

The state has proposed to link the Bhoomi with the Banks so that creating a charge or
releasing it would be done directly and farmer can obtain loan from bank without going to
taluk sub registrar office to create charge and get mutations done. The banks could also view
the loans obtained by farmer from other banks if any or the extent of land under his/her
name by looking into the RTC (Record of Tenancy and Cultivation or Pahani).

Similarly the details of the Micro irrigation coverage can also be linked to the RTC. Linking of
the benefits would result in the RTC showing the details of the improvements for that piece
of land. Similarly it is possible to link all the developments to a piece of land through various
schemes or loans to the RTC and track the same. The regular update and linking of RTC
becomes crucial for this purpose.

d) Subsidy to conserve water

Since ground water is the predominant source of micro irrigation, the subsidy rules of
providing it to only 2 hectares could be re examined. Farmers with higher
landholdings ( more than 5 ha) are more likely to go for another bore well in case of a
bore well failure which in turn can affect the water availability for others in the same
aquifer. Depending upon the water availability, there is a need to formulate different
strategies for the region. ( Gujarat state extends subsidy @50% with no limit on area
coverage)

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 46

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

12.0 Suggested Sample Methodology, ToR and beneficiary schedules

12.1 Sampling Methodology

The sample will be drawn by selecting 2 districts having higher coverage in each of
the revenue divisions. The taluks will be chosen based on the micro irrigation area
covered. One taluk which is has highest coverage and one taluk which has the lower
coverage will be taken. Crop wise samples will be drawn so as to cover the important
crops. A total of about 100 farmers per district will be selected to cover all the crops.
A total of 800 beneficiary farmers will be chosen for the study.

12.2 Terms of reference for the follow-up study

The preliminary study based on analysis of secondary data shows that the micro
irrigation scheme has been successful in so far as incurring of expenditure against the
releases by GoI and the state government. While some districts have done relatively
better in utilizing the releases, some have lagged behind. There is also a variation
among crops in use of micro irrigation. There are critical gaps in secondary data
which have imposed limitations on the present study. These gaps can be made good
only through a primary survey. While the detailed terms of reference would be
prepared based on the foregoing study, briefly the terms of reference for the follow up
study would be to:
a. assess the steps of installation and obtaining the subsidy along with timelines,
procedures and costs of claiming subsidy.
b. assess the socio economic characteristics of the sample beneficiaries in terms of their
farm category (SC/ST women etc) to ascertain compliance with the eligibility criteria.
c. assess the project cost and subsidy percent based on the cost incurred.

d. analyse the problems faced by the beneficiaries in the process of getting the subsidy.
e. evaluate the functioning of the drip units in the field (BIS markings, presence in field
with all necessary components like ventury, etc. as per specifications and approval)

f. assess the water savings, labor savings and impact on Income.

g. analyse the role played by the dealer/company in educating the beneficiaries

h. analyse the crop/region wise problems with respect to drip irrigation systems.
i. assess the IEC efforts by the departments and companies

j. assess the process of estimation of targets, action plan, sending of utilisation

certificate, fund disbursal from state to beneficiary.

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 47

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

k. assess the use of drip systems after the short duration crops like vegetables and the
technical knowhow as well as costs required to adjust it to other crops.

Interview Schedule for the Department

Sl.N Particulars Cod
o. e
1. Has the State level Micro Irrigation Committee (SMIC) been formed?
2. How many meetings of SMIC were conducted in an year?
3 Whether the District-wise Action Plan is prepared?
4 Whether steps have been taken to ensure that eligible farmer gets loan from bank?
5 Whether the State level Technical Support Group formed? Yes/No
6 Whether monitoring system is put in place? What are they?
7 Whether Utilisation certificates are forwarded regularly?
When was it done this year?
Any delays?
8 Whether state level workshops, seminars have been organized for
officials/farmers/NGO’s ?
9 How are the progress reported by the Districts? Is it followed as prescribed by GOI
?
10 Whether Manufacturers/suppliers are registered/approved at the State?
11 Are companies evaluated every year before renewal of their registration?
12 Is there a charter that details the role of companies/departments/beneficiaries
under the scheme?
13 Is there a provision for taking action against erring suppliers/dealers? If so what
action can be taken
14 What are the publicity measures taken in the state to popularize the scheme?
List them.
15 How is unit cost for the purpose of subsidy determined?
GOI indicative costs
Revised every Year
Use the quoted minimum price
16 Whether the District-wise potential area under Micro Irrigation is calculated?
17 Whether the GOI grants under the scheme adequate compared to action plans/
sought funds? If No, give the deviations for last 3 years (in %)
18 Whether the water requirement of different crops based on the different agro-
climatic zones made available to farmers? Yes/No
19 Whether the step wise process in disbursement of subsidy along with the time
lines notified? Yes/No If so how many days?
20 Are there the pending applications?

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 48

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Schedule for gathering information at the district and Taluk levels

Profile of the sample District:

Name of Annual Average Rainfall
the
District
List Major crops under Drip
List the area under Sources of Irrigation
1 well
2. Bore well
3. Canal
4. Others
List major crops under Sprinkler
Whether potential area has been estimated?
Whether Annual Action plan has been prepared?
Has the District Micro Irrigation Committee (DMIC) formed?
How Many meetings have been done by DMIC in last one year
List 5 activities of DMIC
Whether case studies on Micro Irrigation has been done on any crops in the
district?
Whether measures undertaken to ensure the eligible farmer could get loan?
Whether trainings and extension programmes conducted by the
department?
What are the mechanisms to popularize the scheme
Pamphlets; 2. News papers; 3. Local TV channels; 4 others
Whether the Utilisation certificates (UC) are forwarded regularly?
Is there any delay in submission of the UC? If so why?
Whether dealers in the district are notified?
Whether the details of the approved dealers/suppliers made available to
the eligible farmer? if yes How? Any brochure/pamphlet by dealers?
Whether the releases from GOI are in time? If yes how many times a year
releases are made?
Whether the releases from GOK are in time? If yes how many times a year
releases are made?
How many applications are received in last 2 years?
Is there a pendency of applications?
Give the number of pending applications

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 49

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Year wise scheme implementation in the district (Drip)

Sl.No Year Target (Ha) Target (Rs) Achievement(Ha) Subsidy(Rs)

Year wise scheme implementation in the district (Sprinkler)

Sl.No Year Target (Ha) Target (Rs) Achievement(Ha) Subsidy(Rs)

Year-wise scheme implementation in Taluk

Sl.No Taluk Year Total GOI GOK Number of

cost Subsidy Subsidy Beneficiaries
(Rs)

Drip

Sprinkler

Demonstrations

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 50

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Profile of Sample Taluk

1 Annual Average Rainfall
2 List Major crops under Drip
List the area under Sources of Irrigation
1 well
2. Borewell
3. Canal
4. Others
3 List major crops under Sprinkler
4 Whether case studies on Micro Irrigation has been done on any crops in the
taluk?
5 Whether measures undertaken to ensure the eligible farmer could get loan?
6 Whether the lead banks are identified for the purpose?
7 Whether trainings and extension programmes conducted by the department?
8 What are the mechanisms to popularize the scheme
Pamphlets; 2. News papers; 3. Local TV channels; 4 others
8 Whether the Utilisation certificates(UC) are forwarded regularly?
10 Is there any delay in submission of the UC? If so why
11 Whether dealers in the taluk are notified.?
12 Whether the details of the approved dealers/suppliers made available to the
eligible farmer?
Yes/No if yes How? Any brochure/pamphlet by dealers?
13 How many applications are received in last 2 years?
14 Is there a pendency of applications? Yes/No
Give the number of pending applications
15 Whether crop wise requirement of type of system for spacing available?
16 Whether procedures to verify the eligibility of farmer put in place?
17 What is the adoption level of Micro Irrigation in the taluk?
< 10%
10-20%
20-40%
> 50%
18 How do you rate the scheme in the taluk
very good
Good
Poor
19 List 5 issues related to implementation of scheme
20 List 5 suggestions to improve the scheme

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 51

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Schedule for interviewing beneficiaries

District…………………………………..

Taluk………………………………………..

No. of Beneficiaries selected in the Taluk………………………….

Village………………………………………..Hobli……………………….

Application No in the Office Record………………………………………

Drip/Sprinkler

Schedule for interviewing beneficiaries

SL. Particulars Code
No.
1. Name and Address of Beneficiary
2. Sex (Male-1 Female 2)
3. Category SC-1 ST-2 Others-3
4. Land Holding Marginal(< 2.20 acre) -1,
Small(2.20-5.00 acre )- 2
Others( 5.00 acres and above)
5 Coverage of area
Survey Number
Total Area
Area for which subsidy is availed
Crop
Spacing
6 Cost of the unit
7. Subsidy Amount
8 Whether taken loan? Yes/No
9 Mode of payment
Cheque/DD to beneficiary-1
Cheque /DD to Agency-2
10 Whether subsidy received in time?
Yes/No
11 Whether department provided assistance in obtaining loan? Yes/No
12 Details of loan
Bank
Amount of loan
Rate of interest

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 52

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

No. of Installments
Documents submitted
1.
2.
3
13 How many days were spent to get the loan?
14 How much money was spent in getting the loan?

Details of the Unit

1 Source of water
Well-1,
Borewell-2
Surface water-3
2 Usage of the unit
1-summer
2-rabi
3-Kharif
4- All seasons
3 Source of power
Electricity
Diesel pumpset
4 Date of receipt of application
5 Date of installation of system
5 Name and address of Company
6 Name and address of the dealer
7 Whether the dealer is approved? Yes/No
8 Whether the components are of BIS Yes/No
9 Whether the components as per quotation/specification
Yes/No
10 List the components that are not supplied as per
specification
11 Whether the unit exists? Yes/No
12 Whether the unit is functioning? Yes/No
13 What are the reasons for not functioning?
14 Does the beneficiary has the warranty card? Yes/No
15 Whether training has been provided to the beneficiary
Yes/No
16 Whether the beneficiary has been provided with manual? In

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 53

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Kannada? Yes/No
17 Whether the dealer conducted the demo? Yes/No
18 Whether the unit can be used for other crops?
19 What are the additional units required to adjust it to other
crops?
20 How many times have you encountered the problems in the
unit?
21 Has the dealer/supplier responded to your call Yes/No

Impact Assessment before and after the commissioning of the unit(per acre)
Sl.No. Description Before After Increase or
Decrease %
Area covered
Yield
Labour
consumption(mandays)
Use of fertilizer
growth
Quality of produce

Opinion of the farmer

About the Unit

About the dealer

About spares and repairs

About department/officers

___________

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 54

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

References

A., N. (n.d.). Potential for drip and sprinkler irrigation in India. Retrieved december
2011, from an IWMI website:
nrlp.iwmi.org/.../12.%20Water%20Savings%20Technologies%20- ...Similar
Anil Punetha and Yella reddy k. (n.d.). APMIP - THE FIRST AND LARGEST
COMPREHENSIVE MICROIRRIGATION PROJECT IN INDIA. Retrieved December
2011, from Netafim india: marketing.netafimindia.com/2011-Aug-
%2006/118APMIP.pdf
(2010). Deep Wells and prudence: Towards pragmatic action for addressing ground
water exploitation in India. washington: The world bank.
Dinesh kumar M., e. a. (n.d.). A NRLP IWMI . Retrieved December 2011, from IWMI
website: nrlp.iwmi.org/PDocs/DReports/.../12-Water%20Saving-Dinesh.docSimilar
(2010). Dynamic Ground water resources ofKarnataka as of March 2009. Bangalore:
Water Resources Department Government of Karnataka.
(2006). Dynamic groundwater resource of India as of march 2004. Faridabad: Central
ground water board.
(2010). Ground water year book 2010. Faridabad: Central Ground Water Board.

India infrastructure report. (2007). Retrieved December 2011, from IITKanpur website:
http://www.iitk.ac.in/3inetwork/html/reports/IIR2007/07-Irrigation.pdf
Karnatkaka at a glance 2009-10. Bangalore: Directorate of Economics and Statistics,
Government of Karnataka.
Nabard Consultancy services. (2009). Evaluation of centrally sponsored scheme on
Micro Irrigation. Mumbai: Nabcons.
(2004). Report of Task force on Micro irrigation. Delhi: Department of Agriculture and
cooperation, GOI.
Shashidhara K.K., e. a. (2007). Benefits and Constraints in Adoption of Drip Irrigation
Among the Plantation Crop Growers*. Mysore journal of Agric. sciences , 82-84.
Yella reddy K, S. T. (2010). MICRO IRRIGATION PAYS RICH DIVIDENTS-
EXPERIENCES OF ANDHRA PRADESH, INDIA. Retrieved December 2011, from
www.rid.go.th/thaicid/_6.../3.19-K_Yella_R-TV_Satyanarayana.pdf

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 55

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Annexure 1 - Coverage of Drip irrigation under Mulberry

Year Area (Ha) Exp (lakhs)

2007-08 2504 929
2008-09 1948 695
2009-10 1260 472
2010-11 3503 1009

Annexure 2: Coverage of Drip irrigation under oil palm under ISOPOM scheme

Year Area (Ha) Exp (lakhs)

2008-09 463 56.81
2009-10 213 28.74
2010-11 324 41.35

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 56

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Annexure 3: District wise area covered under Micro irrigation over the period 2006-07 to
2010-11

% Drip and
Districts Sprinkler share Drip % share Sprinkler % share
Bagalkote 18035 7 5715 4 23750 6
Bangalore(R) 504 0 3987 3 4491 1
Bangalore(U) 219 0 1070 1 1289 0
Belgaum 35023 13 9358 6 44380 11
Bellary 1157 0 4247 3 5403 1
Bidar 15319 6 1616 1 16934 4
Bijapur 24531 9 13785 9 38316 9
C.R.Nagar 5943 2 6316 4 12259 3
Chikballapura 909 0 4451 3 5360 1
Chikmagalur 12060 5 8024 5 20084 5
Chitradurga 9630 4 19237 12 28867 7
D.Kannada 2060 1 401 0 2461 1
Davanagere 19002 7 10524 7 29526 7
Dharwad 7707 3 847 1 8554 2
Gadag 5068 2 1498 1 6566 2
Gulbarga 19567 7 5638 4 25205 6
Hassan 11851 5 2636 2 14486 3
Haveri 13818 5 11591 7 25409 6
Kodagu 5138 2 190 0 5328 1
Kolar 251 0 13207 8 13458 3
Koppal 3323 1 5417 3 8740 2
Mandya 636 0 549 0 1185 0
Mysore 10222 4 3377 2 13600 3
Raichur 4382 2 1410 1 5792 1
Ramanagar 301 0 2889 2 3190 1
Shimoga 22898 9 758 0 23656 6
Tumkur 7891 3 4348 3 12239 3
U.Kannada 2685 1 13245 8 15930 4
Udupi 989 0 116 0 1105 0
Yadagiri 218 0 90 0 308 0
Total 261334 100 156537 100 417871 100

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 57

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Annexure 4: District wise expenditure under Drip Irrigation (Horticulture)

Total Growth %
Sl. District 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 rate(%) Share
No
1 Bagalkot 185.12 100.14 258.31 173.26 220.87 937.70 9.43 2.50
2 Bangalore (U) 61.00 61.69 32.49 52.25 82.50 289.93 4.47 0.77
3 Bangalore (R ) 199.00 225.00 160.95 81.90 330.13 996.98 0.02 2.66
4 Belgaum 285.86 302.73 148.63 200.63 311.72 1,249.57 -2.35 3.33
5 Bellary 258.83 218.67 279.44 190.87 114.64 1,062.45 -16.18 2.83
6 Bidar 54.22 0.00 70.69 37.18 169.00 331.09 0.88
7 Bijapur 731.23 541.17 892.37 599.02 1040.99 3,804.78 8.41 10.13
8 Chamarajnagar 305.89 279.75 197.16 181.90 561.23 1,525.93 8.15 4.06
9 Chikaballapur 132.00 250.46 757.63 1,140.09 3.04
10 Chikmaglur 423.01 216.63 332.83 308.27 639.00 1,919.74 12.50 5.11
11 Chitradurga 708.73 759.82 729.35 704.02 1597.59 4,499.51 16.76 11.98
12 D. Kannada 19.00 13.85 19.61 31.84 7.50 91.80 -9.76 0.24
13 Davanagere 766.00 368.76 592.11 670.88 635.00 3,032.75 2.26 8.08
14 Dharwad 21.50 21.57 20.84 14.68 51.09 129.68 14.41 0.35
15 Gadag 71.00 10.82 73.87 39.19 175.86 370.74 36.36 0.99
16 Gulbarga 141.13 0.00 227.51 250.01 765.63 1,384.28 3.69
17 Hasan 114.21 108.00 164.78 46.39 206.25 639.63 3.43 1.70
18 Haveri 602.69 534.34 839.42 523.36 994.03 3,493.84 10.30 9.31
19 Kodagu 25.00 0.00 0.00 15.04 25.01 65.05 0.17
20 Kolar 540.80 371.42 796.11 579.74 1360.00 3,648.07 25.73 9.72
21 Koppal 415.00 398.49 179.50 153.99 225.00 1,371.98 -19.55 3.65
22 Mandya 22.52 0.00 8.07 51.82 48.50 130.91 0.35
23 Mysore 80.12 90.38 121.46 146.37 363.13 801.46 41.97 2.13
24 Raichur 174.00 224.00 158.39 158.65 65.00 780.04 -20.66 2.08
25 Ramanagar 27.99 38.59 57.00 123.58 0.33
26 Shimoga 232.66 201.55 214.11 276.51 183.80 1,108.63 -1.54 2.95
27 Tumkur 649.41 493.00 340.45 470.35 668.75 2,621.96 0.12 6.98
28 Udupi 26.83 8.87 0.00 7.45 8.10 51.25 0.14
29 Uttara Kannada 65.23 45.27 54.06 85.94 75.90 326.40 9.90 0.87
30 Yadagiri 19.40
Total

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 58

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Annexure 5 : District wise utilisation percentages with respect to the releases

under Drip Irrigation (Horticulture)

Utilisation Percent
Sl.No. Districts 2006-07 2007- 08 2008 - 09 2009 - 10 2010 - 11 Total

1 Bagalkot 101.52 42.76 142.41 149.13 100.00 100.29

2 Bangalore (U) 97.38 94.14 76.63 135.71 100.00 99.44
3 Bangalore (R ) 99.36 67.05 319.35 100.00 100.00 99.87
4 Belgaum 113.92 99.98 62.63 179.33 100.00 102.88
5 Bellary 103.16 62.46 143.36 132.59 100.00 100.75
6 Bidar 52.72 168.27 212.46 100.00 87.19
7 Bijapur 164.93 61.71 111.14 169.85 100.00 108.19
8 Chamarajnagar 100.43 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.09
9 Chikaballapur 49.53 216.04 100.00 100.00
10 Chikmaglur 112.70 54.14 110.45 197.25 100.00 102.55
11 Chitradurga 109.52 100.07 99.93 100.00 100.00 101.39
12 D. Kannada 61.86 45.07 98.84 212.27 100.00 88.45
13 Davanagere 97.20 52.66 184.30 109.94 100.00 99.28
14 Dharwad 98.60 66.64 196.05 104.19 100.00 99.76
15 Gadag 69.00 19.90 191.82 126.42 100.00 92.08
16 Gulbarga 45.80 86.49 224.77 100.00 89.23
17 Hasan 114.44 67.79 122.20 185.56 100.00 102.31
18 Haveri 100.36 76.84 103.30 134.49 100.00 100.06
19 Kodagu 38.56 752.00 100.00 62.02
20 Kolar 109.45 45.71 144.61 150.91 100.00 101.30
21 Koppal 96.78 99.99 85.27 125.20 100.00 99.00
22 Mandya 33.58 34.19 317.91 100.00 74.61
23 Mysore 98.71 65.49 82.78 199.17 100.00 99.87
24 Raichur 100.00 88.74 62.83 433.71 100.00 99.99
25 Ramanagar 100.00 99.95 100.00 99.98
26 Shimoga 99.91 76.26 75.37 192.29 100.00 99.98
27 Tumkur 202.28 76.56 109.56 134.71 100.00 114.32
28 Udupi 54.00 82.51 1490.00 100.00 69.16
29 Uttara Kannada 70.42 100.00 58.10 182.85 100.00 92.25
30 Yadagiri 100.00
Total 105.92 69.74 107.91 143.10 100.00 101.07
Maximum 202.28 100.07 319.35 1490.00 100.00 114.32
Minimum 33.58 19.90 34.19 99.95 100.00 62.02
Median 99.36 67.79 100.00 169.85 100.00 99.98
Source: Data from Horticulture Department

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 59

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Annexure 6: District wise Area (in hectares) covered under drip irrigation
(Horticulture) for 2006-07 to 2010-11

District
Fruits Vegetables Spices Plantation Flowers Others Total % Share
Bagalkot 3076.28 48.02 98.11 20.10 10.90 18.28 3271.69 2.61
Bangalore (U) 475.20 255.28 3.92 103.85 74.24 0.00 912.49 0.73
Bangalore ® 1703.98 914.33 9.38 676.50 182.99 1.31 3488.49 2.78
Belgaum 3355.49 450.28 203.80 43.75 31.81 6.00 4091.13 3.26
Bellary 2702.93 439.37 121.92 142.03 114.97 0.48 3521.70 2.81
Bidar 1415.68 229.54 250.70 17.69 7.60 10.44 1931.65 1.54
Bijapur 12012.06 2173.59 30.77 11.56 12.48 0.45 14240.91 11.36
Chamarajnagar 2500.91 537.54 684.03 572.84 4.20 23.47 4322.99 3.45
Chickmagalur 382.36 164.59 63.07 8783.42 1.54 0.00 9394.98 7.49
Chitradurga 5190.32 197.59 19.51 6876.22 35.89 7.60 12327.13 9.83
Kodagu 51.26 1.32 717.74 68.84 0.00 0.00 839.16 0.67
D. Kannada 8.45 0.90 0.00 342.22 0.12 7.64 359.33 0.29
Davanagere 1207.63 74.97 42.85 8747.25 17.71 3.51 10093.92 8.05
Dharwad 497.95 3.09 4.60 31.70 2.40 4.20 543.94 0.43
Gadag 541.47 265.92 160.91 9.60 19.62 2.80 1000.32 0.80
Gulbarga 3214.87 200.47 91.14 7.00 10.69 42.03 3566.20 2.84
Hassan 577.46 71.93 213.53 2743.97 1.80 0.00 3608.69 2.88
Haveri 1382.09 3780.45 1915.82 177.06 28.74 0.00 7284.16 5.81
Kolar 1505.66 5527.37 41.93 66.33 130.81 2.37 7274.47 5.80
Koppal 4697.69 292.18 21.65 9.30 13.80 27.27 5061.89 4.04
Mandya 286.03 165.46 3.00 181.16 5.90 0.00 641.55 0.51
Mysore 1033.18 175.34 49.56 204.52 2.06 8.00 1472.66 1.17
Raichur 2333.86 142.66 24.94 0.00 23.15 0.00 2524.61 2.01
Shimoga 959.73 43.75 16.40 4579.13 3.54 20.67 5623.22 4.49
Tumkur 2863.36 78.59 35.60 9608.75 25.17 9.00 12620.47 10.07
Udupi 17.75 0.84 0.00 164.74 0.00 0.00 183.32 0.15
Uttar Kannada 586.19 36.22 1.00 339.82 2.84 8.80 974.87 0.78
Chikkaballapur 1626.69 1603.73 30.64 53.38 56.10 1.80 3372.34 2.69
Ramanagara 256.26 27.31 0.20 211.73 11.80 0.00 507.30 0.40
Yadagiri 60.65 5.21 5.10 224.60 0.00 0.00 295.56 0.24
Total 56523.43 17907.84 4861.82 45019.06 832.87 206.12 125351.14 100.00
Source: Data from Horticulture Department

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 60

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Annexure 7: District wise Physical performance under Drip Irrigation

(through Horticulture Department)

Physical Achievements( in Percent to Targets)

SL.No. District 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11
1 Bagalkot 84 61 178
2 Bangalore (U) 35 63 244
3 Bangalore (R ) 56 39 131
4 Belgaum 49 52 59
5 Bellary 76 37 33
6 Bidar 36 19 192
7 Bijapur 131 72 158
8 Chamarajnagar 226 117 184
9 Chikkaballapur 27 48 68
10 Chikmaglur 48 49 66
11 Chitradurga 158 41 115
12 Kodagu 0 10 130
13 Dakshina Kannada 52 52 30
14 Davanagere 146 89 53
15 Dharwad 32 35 26
16 Gadag 74 115 98
17 Gulbarga 50 54 120
18 Hasan 42 28 70
19 Haveri 77 34 95
20 Kolar 171 69 154
21 Koppal 23 59 102
22 Mandya 10 86 90
23 Mysore 79 69 109
24 Raichur 33 16 71
25 Ramanagar 53 73 78
26 Shimoga 57 53 106
27 Tumkur 68 34 111
28 Udupi 0 1 99
29 Uttar Kannada 53 66 198
30 Yadgir 0 0 26
Total 72 51 99
Source: Data from Horticulture Department

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 61

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Annexure 8 District wise expenditure of Micro Irrigation in Agriculture Department

Districts 2006-07 2007- 08 2008 - 09 2009 - 10 2010 - 11

Bagalkot 129.18 704.94 838.52 858.63 454.31
Bangalore (R ) 10.54 7.34 21.08 51.47 4.8
Bangalore (U) 1.65 5.42 8.23 2.81 1.86
Belgaum 192.55 610.71 1139.62 1603.46 1351.27
Bellary 8.31 32.28 49.21 24.52 6.63
Bidar 46.66 119.74 676.42 804.38 163.26
Bijapur 121.73 610.33 512.76 646.62 299.01
Chamarajanagar 6.65 50.72 134.45 167.03 110.59
Chickballapur 0 5.17 11.56 80.86 47.77
Chickmagalur 17.48 177.17 605.45 618.81 245.45
Chitradurga 13.3 71.31 175.95 330.73 43.62
Dakshina
Kannada 15.78 32.39 49.29 46.67 15.16
Davanagere 58.42 240.95 581.51 498.98 169.29
Dharwad 77.19 160.11 204.08 319.97 148.2
Gadag 29.29 78.46 130.84 271.91 66.93
Gulbarga 98.81 254.95 826.02 797.63 317.32
Hassan 26.31 170.84 227.6 635.64 100.84
Haveri 25.51 205.56 308.59 617.6 196.93
Kodagu 52.34 97.07 281.35 180.28 94.71
Kolar 30.08 35.99 55.12 36.64 10.61
Koppal 37.26 87.76 100.74 159.74 148.28
Mandya 4.51 18.95 35.75 30.85 8.04
Mysore 49.02 202.32 266.53 328.17 155.1
Raichur 30.62 87.53 85.37 101.64 59.12
Ramanagar 0 3.15 5.3 25.48 10.94
Shimoga 117.94 349.35 310.44 640.39 539.01
Tumkur 21.22 90.25 180.11 268.73 44.87
Udupi 11.22 16.81 33.32 28.71 13.4
Uttara Kannada 41.58 31.76 64.3 66.99 55.51
Yadagiri 0 0 0 0 39.84
Total 1275.16 4559.33 7919.52 10245.35 4922.65
Source: Data from Agriculture Department

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 62

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Annexure 9: District wise utilisation % under micro irrigation in Agriculture

Department

Districts 2006-07 2007- 08 2008 - 09 2009 - 10 2010 - 11

Bangalore (U) 29 48 205 77 93
Bangalore (R ) 28 13 228 1458 89
Ramanagar 8 96 144 88
Kolar 62 31 251 115 52
Chickballapur 98 261 96
Tumkur 36 67 111 107 128
Shimoga 90 196 61 95 99
Chitradurga 11 40 199 145 100
Davanagere 32 60 99 119 118
Mysore 58 112 101 107 113
Chamarajanagar 23 73 107 79 199
Mandya 11 19 203 91 80
Kodagu 100 156 99 140 74
Hassan 27 128 98 103 99
Chickmagalur 30 214 112 101 85
Dakshina
Kannada 67 62 103 111 95
Udupi 74 57 110 156 102
Dharwad 89 102 98 82 99
Gadag 51 67 99 99 104
Haveri 34 148 75 121 98
Uttara Kannada 79 35 126 161 94
Belgaum 26 57 73 178 144
Bijapur 45 99 82 112 100
Bagalkot 47 112 95 127 99
Raichur 15 17 249 57 364
Koppal 15 34 264 141 102
Bellary 4 14 197 96 96
Gulbarga 27 62 97 74 94
Bidar 53 17 145 104 132
Yadagiri 86
State 34.87 67.44 96.27 111.66 110.64

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 63

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Annexure 10: District wise Physical performance under Micro Irrigation

(Agriculture Department)
Physical Achievements( in Percent to Targets)
Districts 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11
Bagalkote 10 153 100 67 76
Bangalore(R) 16 10 206 48 18
Bangalore(U) 12 71 105 35 0
Belgaum 92 64 80 139 125
Bellary 8 15 25 28 0
Bidar 28 21 108 58 21
Bijapur 63 127 180 118 28
Chamrajanagar 58 196 344 97 138
Chikballapura 87 160 252
Chikmagalur 96 91 83 46 40
Chitradurga 0 83 79 200 16
D.Kannada 83 68 84 128 100
Davanagere 45 124 97 38 70
Dharwad 143 178 38 54 52
Gadag 102 123 117 50 24
Gulbarga 97 91 48 34 18
Hassan 117 153 75 45 19
Haveri 0 253 95 59 78
Kodagu 108 145 29 100 69
Kolar 31 12 11 69 109
Koppal 4 35 82 53 52
Mandya 11 40 74 60 19
Mysore 72 184 124 74 79
Raichur 24 33 258 39 46
Ramanagar 67 81 107
Shimoga 113 363 54 99 72
Tumkur 74 133 178 72 23
U.Kannada 65 42 514 71 150
Udupi 72 61 115 63 73
Yadagiri 3
Maximum 143 363 514 200 252
Minimum 0 10 11 28 0
Median 63 91 87 63 52

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 64

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Annexure 11: Samples of data sets showing the information gaps

Sample a) No crop details and acreage of farmer’s plot

Benificiary Village Crop Area Drip/Sprikler General 35% 40%
name (Ha) Subsidy Subsidy
C. Gopalappa Cholagatta, - 1 Sprinkler 13144 7144 6000
S/O Krishnappa Vemgal
Ramachandrappa - 1 Sprinkler 13144 7144 6000
S/O Sonnappa
Ramachandrappa Baarandalli - 1 Sprinkler 13144 7144 6000
S/O Sonnappa
Hanumappa S/O Patalipura - 1 Sprinkler 14723 6000 8723
Mulavagalappa
C.M. Sambapura - 1 Sprinkler 14723 8723 6000
MarkandappaS/O
munishamappa
Munichowdappa - 1 Sprinkler 13144 7144 6000
S/O BasappA Kenchapura

Sample b) No crop and category details ( SC ST etc)

vÀÄAvÀÄgÀÄ

gÉÊvÀgÀ ºÉ¸ÀgÀÄ UÁæªÀÄ ¸ÀªÉð. «¹ÛÃtð C¼ÀªÀr¹zÀ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ¥ÀÆtð gÉÊvÀgÀ

& vÀAzÉ ºÉ¸ÀgÀÄ £ÀA (JPÀgÉ) «¹ÛÃtð ºÉ¸ÀgÀÄ zÀgÀ ªÀAwUÉ
(ºÉ)

ªÉÊgÀªÀÄÄr ©£ï ºÉƸÀ«ÃqÀĺÀÄAr 160 2.07 1 Q¸Á£ï 18991 5847

vÉÆÃ¥ÀAiÀÄå EjUÉõÀ£ï

¥ÀÄlÖzÉêÀAiÀÄå ºÉƸÀ«ÃqÀĺÀÄAr 167 3.01 1 Q¸Á£ï 18991 5847

©£ï EjUÉõÀ£ï
UÉÆÃ¥Á®AiÀÄå
ªÀĺÀzÉêÀAiÀÄå ºÀgÀUÀ£ÀºÀ½î 186/2 2.12 1 Q¸Á£ï 18991 5847
©£ï EjUÉõÀ£ï
ªÀÄÄzÀÄݪÀiÁzÀAiÀÄå
Dgï.¸ÀtÚªÀiÁzÀAiÀÄå ¹AzsÀĪÀ½î 47 2.34 1 Q¸Á£ï 18991 5847
©£ï gÁªÀÄAiÀÄå 294/1 EjUÉõÀ£ï

¥ÀÄlÖªÀiÁzÀAiÀÄå PÀ¼À¯É 301/1© 2.2 1 Q¸Á£ï 18991 5847

©£ï §¸ÀªÀAiÀÄå 301/1J EjUÉõÀ£ï
303/1

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 65

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Sample c) No crop and category details ( SC ST etc) and total cost

‘Ðõ. ƒÎÐÀЯ˷РÊÐÌѦÐÔ·°Ð¹Ð·Ð

ÊÐ ÁËêÓ±þ ÀÙÖ³Ðê
»°ÐÄѹÐÔ¾°ÐÁ¦ÐÔ
Gulbarga Afzhalpur ‘Ðõ. ÌÙÊФÐÔ (Š-–ÐÔ)

ÀЦÑÎлÐï ³Ð·Ù
Gulbarga Afzhalpur 1 ›Ð·ÑõÀÐÔ»Ðï 0.86 32432

Gulbarga Afzhalpur 2 ‘ÐÄÑô±Ò ÇÀФѦÐÔ 0.4 15975

Gulbarga Afzhalpur 3 ƒº³Ñ ÀÐÔÌÙÓÆÐ 0.7 26663

¤ÙÓÀÐÕ¾ÑÂÔ
Gulbarga Afzhalpur 4 ÀЦÑÎлÐï 0.4 19575

Sample d) category details ( SC ST etc) wrongly mentioned

Farmers Name and Address Village Cast

Sanna Hanumantha Reddy S/o D Thimmappa. Gollalingammanahalli Reddy
H.Hanumantha Reddy
Gollalingammanahalli Reddy
S/o Thimmappa.
B.Prakash
Gollalingammanahalli Reddy
S/o Anjineya Reddy.
R.Ranga Narayana Shetti S/o Ranga Gurappa shetti. Choranuru Vyashya
Budde Anjineya Reddy
Gollalingammanahalli Reddy
S/o Budde Thimmappa
M.Kumarashwamy
Gollalingammanahalli Reddy
S/o Govindappa.
Gangadharappa
Thimmappana Halli SC
S/o Gangappa.
Kumarashwamy
Juigena Halli Veerashaiva
S/o Dyamappa.
Nagaraju S/o Yallappa. Gollalingammanahalli ST
Gangamma
Yarrangali. ST
W/o Malleshappa.

Sandur Chittappa S/o Sanna Rajaiah. Ankamanala Golla

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 66

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Annexure 12: Comparison of Unit cost and subsidy across districts and crops
(Horticulture Department)

Crop Cost Subsidy

Actual per per Subsidy
District Area cost Subsidy Hectare hectare %
Tumkur Arecanut 742.87 32325107 17189248 43514 23139 53
Coconut 1368.65 30959996 15875783 22621 11600 51
Raichur Pomegranate 59.88 2408497 1386367 40222 23152 58
Uttara Arecanut
kannada 315.05 10107914 4472575 32084 14196 44
Banana 78.88 2461543 1171326 31206 14849 48
Mysore Banana 312.24 19515367 10398283 62501 33302 53
Coconut 35.67 1012443 518836 28384 14545 51
bagalkote Banana 188.4 12897844 6088464 68460 32317 47
Pomogranate 108.84 6144892 2691100 56458 24725 44
Grapes 84.32 6249487 2492363 74116 29558 40
Bellary Banana 182.43 15615221 5478636 85596 30031 35
cucumber 50.9 2992577 2091793 58793 41096 70
Mango 37.8 1232155 665593 32597 17608 54
Pomegranate 25.63 1197112 516792 46707 20164 43
Dakshina Areca
Kannada 24.024 1308858 726164 54481 30227 55
Banana 140.15 10033563 5064400 71592 36136 50
Grape 161.99 10221383 4781807 63099 29519 47
Bijapur Grapes 813.54 34764614 24462152 42733 30069 70
Banana 145.51 7321048 4326082 50313 29730 59
Leman 127.12 3394209 2369544 26701 18640 70
Pomogranate 43.99 2532925 1754959 57580 39894 69
Chickmagal Arecanut
ur 327.21 10809875 5015576 33037 15328 46
Coconut 323.26 8014706 2937355 24793 9087 37
Haveri Banana 115.6 9411336 5455700 81413 47195 58
Chilli 607.6 41599326 28589700 68465 47053 69
Mango 49.97 1880540 957300 37633 19157 51
Tomato 289 19530703 13581300 67580 46994 70
Turmaric 0.8 37626 22000 47033 27500 58
Hassan Arecanut 47.42 2537568 1107163 53513 23348 44
Banana 17.99 986794 471264 54852 26196 48
Cardamum 6.55 328282 177500 50119 27099 54
Coconut 250.23 7081041 3152334 28298 12598 45
Ginger 16.46 851701 391595 51744 23791 46
Kolar Potato 174.49 13504031 9619186 77391 55127 71
Tomato 366.34 25316443 19913622 69106 54358 79
Mango 94.47 2223849 1841467 23540 19493 83
Banana 47.29 3030785 2257530 64089 47738 74

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 67

 Study on Micro Irrigation in Karnataka (Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation)

Beans 22.68 1859389 1262573 81984 55669 68

Cabbage 17.81 1270964 967066 71362 54299 76
Capsicum 19.79 1586541 1035788 80169 52339 65
Carrot 28.14 2031878 1584001 72206 56290 78
Chitradurga Arecanut 1821.29 51184254 28103
Coconut 275.17 3372939 12258
Banana 386.61 11765746 30433
Pomegranate 51.38 1084781 21115
Mosambi 54.74 910265 16629
Sapota 23.96 394055 16446
Mango 53.24 751474 14116
Papaya 62.13 1697022 27312
Chamaraja-
nagar Banana 486.05 15713777 32330
Mandya Coconut 45.26 564745 12478
Mandya Banana 59.86 1988837 33225

Centre for Budget and Policy Studies Page 68