Impact of Irrigation on Poverty and Environment in Ethiopia Draft Proceeding of the Symposium and Exhibition held at Ghion Hotel, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 27th -29th November, 2007 Compiled by: Seleshi Bekele; Makonnen Loulseged; Aster Denekew International Water Management Institute P.O.Box 2075, Colombo, Sri Lanka University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Muthgasse 18, A- 1190 Vienna, Austria Haramamaya University, P.O.Box 138, Dire Dawa, Ethiopia Arba Minch University, P.O.Box 21, Arba Minch, Ethiopia Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research P.O.Box 2003, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Austrian Research Centers GmbH, A-2444 Seibersdorf, Austria Ministry of Water Resources P.O.Box 5673, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development P.O.Box 62345, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia IWMI receives its principal funding from 58 governments, private foundations, and international and regional organizations known as the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). Support is also given by the Governments of Ghana, Pakistan, South Africa, Sri Lanka and Thailand. Awlachew, S.B.; M. Loulseged.; Yilma, A.D.; 2008. Impact of irrigation on poverty and environment in Ethiopia. /water management/irrigation management/socioeconomic impact/environnemental impact/water right/ ISBN : ISBN : Copyright © 2008, by IWMI. All rights reserved. Please direct inquiries and comments to: iwmi@cgiar.org v Table of Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations .................................................................... vii Acknowledgement........................................................................................ ix Welcoming address ...................................................................................... xi Seleshi B. Awulachew................................................................................................................ xi Akissa Bahri, IWMI ................................................................................................................. xiii Opening Address........................................................................................ xvi H.E Dr. Leopohld Moll ............................................................................................................ xvi H.E Ato Adugna Jebessa ......................................................................................................... xvii Theme one: Status Quo Analysis, Characterization and Assessment of Performance of Irrigation in Ethiopia.................................................. 1 Statues quo analysis, Characterization and Assessment of Performance of Irrigation in Ethiopia ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 Comparison of irrigation performance based on management and cropping types .................. 14 Irrigation and Rain-fed Crop Production System in Ethiopia ................................................... 27 Basline Servey of Irrigation and Rainfed Agriculture in........................................................... 37 Blue Nile Basin ......................................................................................................................... 37 Assessment of Design Practices and Performance of Small Scale Irrigation Structures in South Region ....................................................................................................................................... 47 Across System Comparative Assessment of irrigation performance of community managed scheme in Southern Ethiopia ..................................................................................................... 59 Analysis of irrigation systems using comparative performance indicators: .............................. 77 A case study of two large scale irrigation systems in the upper Awash basin .......................... 77 Discussion on Theme 1: Status Quo Analysis, Characterization, and Assessment of Performance of Irrigation in Ethiopia ........................................................................... 93 Theme two: Irrigation Impact on Poverty and Economy....................... 95 Rural poverty and inequality in Ethiopia: does access to .......................................................... 97 small-scale irrigation make a difference?.................................................................................. 97 An Assessment of the financial viability and income impact of small scale irrigation in Ethiopia ................................................................................................................................... 117 Importance of Irrigated Agriculture to the Ethiopian Economy: Capturing the direct net benefits of irrigation ................................................................................................................ 127 Investment in irrigation as a poverty reduction strategy: Analysis of small-scale irrigation impact on poverty in Tigray, Ethiopia..................................................................................... 156 The Impact of Small Scale Irrigation on Household Food Security: The Case of Filtino and Godino Irrigation Schemes in Ada Liben District,.................................................................. 179 East Shoa, Ethiopia.................................................................................................................. 179 A Comparative Analysis of the Technical Efficiency of Irrigated and ................................... 193 Rainfed Agriculture: A case of Awash and Rift Valleys of Ethiopia...................................... 193 Impact of irrigation on livelihood and food security in the modern Hare river irrigation scheme in Southern Ethiopia ................................................................................................................ 210 Impact Assessment of Rainwater Harvesting Ponds: .............................................................. 223 The Case of Alaba Woreda, Ethiopia ...................................................................................... 223 Discussion on Theme 2: Irrigation Impact Poverty and Economy ............................. 256 Theme three: Irrigation Institutions and Support Services ................. 259 vi Status of Irrigation Institutions and Support Services in Ethiopia .......................................... 260 Does Access To Small Scale Irrigation Promote Market Oriented Production In Ethiopia? .. 262 Small Scale Irrigation Interventions for System Productivity and .......................................... 282 Natural Resource Management in Ethiopian Highlands: ........................................................ 282 Institutions, Management Practices and Challenges of Small-Scale Irrigation Systems in Ethiopia: A Case Study of Two Modern Smallholders Irrigation Systems in Western Oromia, Ethiopia ................................................................................................................................... 298 Water Rights and the Processes of Negotiations Among Irrigators in .................................... 323 West Shewa Zone: The Case of Indris Scheme in Toke Kutaye District ................................ 323 Technical and Institutional Evaluation of Geray Irrigation Scheme in West Gojjam Zone, Amhara Region........................................................................................................................ 342 Discussion on Theme 3: Irrigation Institutions and Support Services........................ 354 Theme four: Environmental and Health Impact of Irrigation ............ 356 Case study review of investigated irrigation projects in Ethiopia ........................................... 357 Environmental Impact Analysis of Two Large Scale Irrigation Schemes .............................. 370 in Ethiopia ............................................................................................................................... 370 GIS And Remote Sensing Integrated Environmental Impact Assessment of Irrigation Project In Finchaa Valley Area ................................................................................................................ 400 Entomological studies on the impact of a small-scale irrigation scheme on malaria transmission around Zeway, Ethiopia........................................................................................................... 418 Malaria Transmission In Ziway, Eastern Shewa Zone, As Related to Irrgation Development439 Discussion on Theme 4: Environmental and Health Impact of Irrigation .................. 455 Group discussion and findings ................................................................ 461 Way Forward and Synthesis Plan........................................................... 461 Exhibition .................................................................................................. 461 Closing........................................................................................................ 462 List of Participants ……………………………………………………...463 vii Acronyms and Abbreviations ADA Austrian Development Agency ADB African Development Bank ADLI Agricultural Development-led Industrialization AHFSI Aggregate Household Food Security Index AIP Amibara Irrigation Project AMU Arba Minch University ARC Austrian Research Centers ARIS Annual Relative Irrigation Supply ARWS Annual Relative Water Supply BOKU University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences CA Comprehensive Assessment CSA Central Statistical Authority CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research DAP Diammonium Phosphate Fertilizer DPPC Disaster Prevention and Protection Commission EARO Ethiopian Agricultural Research Organisation EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EIAR Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research EPA Environmental Protection Authority ESDA Ethiopian Sugar Development Agency FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FDRE Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia FFW Food-for-Work GDP Gross Domestic Product GMs gross margins GSDID Gobu Seyo District Irrigation Desk HU Haramaya University IAR Institute of Agricultural Research IDP Irrigation Development Program IDP Irrigation Development Strategy IFAD International Food and Agricultural Development IIPE Impact of Irrigation on Poverty and Environment IWMI International Water Management Institute MoA Ministry of Agriculture MoARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development MoFED Ministry of Finance and Economic Development MoWR Ministry of Water Resources viii MSI Medium Scale Irrigation NDVI Normalized Difference Vegetation Index OIDA Oromia Irrigation Development Authority PA Peasant Association PASDEP Plan for Accelerated and Sustained Development to End Poverty PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper REST Relief Society of Tigray RWH Rain Water Harvesting SNNPR Southern Nation and Nationalities People Region SSI Small Scale Irrigation TUs Tertiary Units UNDP United Nation Development Project USDA United States Department of Agriculture WDR Water Delivery Ration WSDP Water Sector Development Program ix Acknowledgement This proceeding is the output of three days symposium and exhibition organized by International Water Management Institute (IWMI), University of Boku, ARC Sieberdorf, Haramaya University (AU), Arbaminch University (AMU), and Ethiopian Institute for Agricultural Research (EIAR). There were over 126 participants representing institutions from Government, NGOs, private sector, irrigators and students supported by the project who have contributed to the success of this symposium. The International Water Management Institute is thankful to Austrian Government for allocating the necessary resource to undertake this research which will provide comprehensive and valuable input to the irrigated agriculture sub sector in Ethiopia in particular and Sub Saharan Africa in general. The authors and co-authors who presented pepares during this symposium also acknowledge the support and assistance provided by various parties in the successefull accomplishment of their respectieve research work. x xi Welcoming address Seleshi B. Awulachew Head, International Water Management Institute (IWMI) East Africa and Nile Basin, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Your Excellency Ato Adugna Jebessa, State Minister, Ministry of Water Resources Representatives of partner institutions for Impact of Irrigation on Poverty and Environment from Univeritaet Bodunkultur Wien, ARC Sibersodrf, Arba Minch University, Haramaya University, Ethiopian Institute of Agriculture Delegates from various federal and regional government offices Academic and research institutions International donor communities International and regional institutions Non governmental organizations Private sector representatives Irrigation scheme operators Ladies and gentlemen: Thank you very much for accepting our invitation on the Impact of Irrigation on Poverty and Environment symposium and poster exhibition and welcome. The symposium and exhibition are organized towards the final period of the project which has been implemented during the last three and half years The three days symposium and exhibition are organized in order to share the generated knowledge by the researchers to the wider audience and stakeholders in the irrigation sector. The symposium is organized with the objectives of: Bring together and share experiences among government (policy makers, technical experts), NGOs, private sector, international donors and financial institutions and related stake holders that are working on irrigation, socio-economy and environment; Disseminate and Share the results generated during the project implementation period; Carry out focused discussion to explore opportunities and mechanisms through which the uptake of knowledge, application, and dissemination and out scaling of findings could be enhanced. The symposium is organized under four themes that include: 1. Statues quo analysis, Characterization and Assessment of Performance of irrigation in Ethiopia: 2. Irrigation Impact on Poverty and Economy 3. Irrigation Policy, Institutions and Support Services) 4. Environmental and Health Impact of Irrigation In total 28 papers will be presented. In addition a number of posters will also be exhibited. We will be having a number of plenary discussions and group work deliberations. You have the details of the program in your bags. xii It is my hope that you will enjoy this event and we can make useful discussions that can lead to a good synthesis of knowledge building on the result of the project and wealth of experience and wisdom of the participants towards the support of sustainable development irrigation in Ethiopia. In order to start and officially open the symposium I will like to request the representative of the various institutions sitting on the podium to make opening remarks. After the opening remarks, his Excellency Ato Adugna Jebessa will make an official opening speech of the symposium. Accordingly, first I will like to invite: - Prof. Willibald Loiskandl, BOKU - Prof. Belay Kassa, HU - Dr. Tarkegn Tadessa, AMU - Dr. Solomon Assefa, EIAR - Dr. Akissa Bahri, IWMI Thank you! xiii Welcoming address Akissa Bahri, IWMI Head, International Water Management Institute (IWMI) Africa Region, Accra, Ghana Your excellency, Mr. Ato Adugna Jebessa, State Minister of Ministry of Water Resources Dr. Leopohld Moll, Director, Austrian Development Cooperation Prof. Willibald Loiskandl, Universität für Bodenkultur Wien Distinguished representatives of partner institutions for Impact of Irrigation on Poverty and Environment from Universität für Bodenkultur Wien, ARC Siebersdorf, University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Science, Arba Minch University, Haramaya University, Ethiopian Institute of Agriculture Ladies and gentlemen, It is with great pleasure that I welcome you all on behalf of the International Water Management Institute and on my own behalf to this symposium on “Impact of Irrigation on Poverty and Environment in Ethiopia” and to this opening session. This two-day symposium is the output of a collaborative research project sponsored three years ago by the Austrian Development Agency (ADA) and implemented by the International Water Management Institute (IWMI), Austrian Institutions, Universität für Bodenkultur Wien (BOKU, Vienna), Austrian Research Centers (ARC Siebersdorf), the University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Science and Ethiopian Institutions: Arba Minch University (AMU), Haramaya University (HU), the Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR), the Ministry of Water Resources (MoWR), the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MoARD) and the Regional Bureaus for Irrigation and Agriculture. The International Water Management Institute, member of the CGIAR system, is the leading international scientific research organization on water, food and environment, with an overall mission of “improving the management of water and land resources for food, livelihoods and nature”. In Africa, IWMI conducts research in three sub-regions; the Nile Basin and East Africa, West Africa and Southern Africa. Water scarcity, poverty, low productivity, health issues, water quality, endemic droughts and floods and transboundary conflicts in water management, along with land degradation are some of the critical issues Africa faces. IWMI works closely with Africa-wide sub–regional organizations and many national and agricultural research systems to study the land and water management challenges facing poor rural communities and to develop innovative approaches, tools and interventions that can improve food security, livelihoods, health and ecosystem services. Improved land and water management is essential for sustainable development and poverty reduction in sub-Saharan Africa including Ethiopia. I would therefore like to mention two key research programs, the Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture (the CA) (Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture. 2007) and the xiv Investment in Agricultural Water for Poverty Reduction and Economic Growth in Sub-Saharan Africa (a collaborative program of the World Bank, FAO, IFAD, ADB and IWMI, in partnership with NEPAD, 2007) whose findings should be considered along the results of the present project. • The CA has critically evaluated the benefits, costs and impacts of the past 50 years of water development, the water management challenges communities are facing today, and solutions people have developed. The results of the CA will support better investment and management decisions in water and agriculture in the near future and over the next 50 years. • The synthesis report of the Agricultural Investment Study analyses the contribution to date of agricultural water management to poverty reduction and growth in the sub- Saharan Africa, the reasons for its slow expansion and apparently poor track record, as well as the ways in which increased investment in agricultural water management could make a sustainable contribution to further poverty reduction and growth. Investment in irrigation is needed to reduce poverty in rural areas. Eighty-five percent of sub- Saharan Africa’s poor live in the rural areas and depend largely on agriculture for their livelihoods. The Nile basin is home to an estimated 175 million people and more than 330 million people live in the NBEA sub-region. The Nile Basin and East Africa sub-region is far from being homogenous in terms of agro-ecology, socio-economic development, historical and political background. The Sub-region, despite having significant water and land resources, has the highest proportion of people living below the poverty line and is the most food insecure sub-region in the world. Dependence on rainfed agriculture, coupled with high rainfall variability, is one of the main causes of food insecurity. Drought is a frequent and recurrent event throughout much of the region, the impacts of which are made worse by HIV-AIDS and war. The majority of the people, over 70%, depend on subsistence agriculture. However, the resource base of land and water is not well utilized, nor appropriately managed, and is degrading very rapidly. Water-related diseases are common and a major cause of the relatively low life expectancy in the region. Agricultural growth is therefore clearly key to poverty reduction; it can also help drive national economic growth. Ethiopia relies on agriculture for a large part of its GDP (44%). Raising agricultural productivity is the most viable option for reducing poverty, and irrigation development can enhance economic development. Irrigation schemes can facilitate multiple uses of water that combine agriculture with livestock, fisheries, and other income-generating activities to enhance rural incomes and sustainability. Investment in irrigation is also needed to keep up with global demand for agricultural products and adapt to changing food preferences and societal demands, to adapt to urbanization, industrialization, and increasing allocations to the environment and to respond to climate change. Climate variability and extreme events will require water resources development, large water storage facilities, further irrigation development, and changes in the operation of existing schemes. Your excellency, Distinguished participants, Ladies and gentlemen, I hope that at the end of this symposium, we would gain insights into how various irrigation strategies have impacted on agricultural output and hence the reduction of poverty as well as improvement in the environmental conditions of Ethiopia. This should then help us to better understand the role that irrigation can play in Ethiopia’s development process and hence improve rural poverty, achieve gender equity and protect Ethiopia’s environment. xv It is my hope that this symposium will constitute a major step that will lead to better natural resources management in Ethiopia. On behalf of IWMI, I would like to thank you all for coming and look forward for a fruitful and rewarding symposium. Thank you xvi Opening Address H.E Dr. Leopohld Moll Director, Austrian Development Cooperation Addis Ababa, Ethiopia His Excellency Dr. Leopohld Moll, Director Austrian Development Cooperation in his oral speech said that the Austrian Government is pleased to support t the Government of the Federal Republic of Ethiopia in its effort to fight poverty and improve the well being of its people. The Austrian government recognizes the significance of irrigated agriculture in mitigating the impacts of climate variability and attaining food security in Ethiopia. He said, it is my sincere belief that the out puts of the research results of the IIPE project provides veritable information that can assist policy makers to make appropriate policy related decsions in the subsector. Finally, he wished participants a successful two days deliberation. xvii Opening Address H.E Ato Adugna Jebessa State Minister, Ministry of Water Resources Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Dear delegates of government and non governmental organizations Representatives of academic and research organizations Dear invited guests and participants Ladies and Gentlemen, It is indeed my great pleasure to be here with you today for the opening of this important workshop on impact of irrigation on poverty and environment research in Ethiopia. As you all know there is a global consensus to fight poverty and improve human well being through appropriate measures that can target the issues related to poverty. Accordingly, in the year 2000 the MDG have set quantitative targets to be achieved by the year 2015 for the reduction of poverty, i.e. improvement in health, education, and the environment and other dimensions of human well being, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa where about 25% of the world poor live. The economy of Ethiopia is significantly agricultural based. Access to reliable water is a fundamental factor in influencing poverty and economy. In this country, recurrent droughts have caused serious failures in agricultural production that have resulted in mass starvation and loss of human and animal life, not to mention the devastation of the natural environment. A more satisfactory outcome can be achieved through the development of the country's water resources for growth of productivity and irrigation, wherever opportunities exist. Population explosion and food insecurity are serious twin problems that must be addressed simultaneously on priority basis. Despite several attempts to address the situation, the problem of environmental degradation, agricultural productivity and food shortage remains critical. Unless they are seriously tackled they are threats to the country and can worsen poverty in the face of the rapidly growing population. The Ministry of Water Resources in an effort to develop and utilize the countries water resources in a systematic way has prepared policy, strategy and development plans for effective and efficient water use. Through the river basin master plan studies all the potentials for irrigation developments are identified and there exists over about 3.5 million hectares of land suitable for irrigation development. In addition, improving water management in the rain fed systems as well has significant scope to increase productivity of agriculture Recognizing these facts, while small scale irrigation and rainfed agriculture water management are undertaken by regional government, medium and large scale irrigation developments have been given significant attention by the federal government and the Ministry of Water Resources xviii in it's development program. Accordingly, 487,000 ha of land are planned to be irrigated during the PASDEP period (2009/10) in addition to the existing one. Some of these projects are ready for detail design and construction and some are already under construction. This clearly shows, substantial investment in irrigated agriculture is needed to meet targets for poverty alleviation, food security and economic growth. I would like to also stress that some of the large and medium scale irrigations are and will be designed to benefit the smallholder farmers, as the government of Ethiopia strongly committed to eradicate the rural poverty. Notable example is the Koga irrigation development which is designed to develop about 6,000ha with over 7,000 (?) beneficiaries. As the development of large schemes for small holders is new experience for the country, it is important for research institutions to support such endeavors by undertaking adoptive and applied research which can support this and future development in sustainable manner While many Sub-Saharan countries and Ethiopia alike committed to water infrastructure development, lending for irrigation in Sub-Saharan Africa has declined considerably over the past few decades. But still, there are reports that indicate many Bank-financed irrigation projects had produced satisfactory outcomes and the outputs of this particular research are expected to prove that the benefits of investment have reached the poor. However, it is clear that there are issues to be addressed and constraints to be overcome if investments in agricultural water or irrigation development are to achieve viability and sustainability. Among other factors, capacity building stands as a key factor to obtain diversified expertise and to increase knowledge that is required for sustainable irrigation and drainage. There are pertinent issues with regard to technology, material and equipment selection and even methodologies in engineering design of irrigation projects. In this regard, researchers are expected to contribute significantly towards scientific, practical, and multidisciplinary solution for the prevailing irrigation development constraints and be able to advice decision makers. At this juncture, I would like to mention the MOU signed with International Water Management Institute (IWMI) is having such an objective of initiating conceptual and practical research on high priority areas in collaboration with Ethiopian partners, including issues that would have impact on the development. Another important area is to ensure that all the partners public, private, civil society as well as donor/lending partners, have sufficient information from our data base to allow them understand the benefits of irrigation development from both social and economic perspective. I hope studies like the Impact of Irrigation on Poverty and Environment for which this symposium is organized can help to enhance such understanding and synthesize the new knowledge generated. Finally, I would like to thank IWMI, BOKU, ARC Sieberdorf, and Ethiopian Institutions such as Arba Minch University, Haramaya University and Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research and other collaborating institutions for the initiative that they have taken in support of irrigation development in general and conducting the related research. The Ministry of Water Resources would like to reiterate its commitment to collaborate and closely work with all stakeholders that are interested in promoting and developing the water resources of this country. Finally, for those of you who came from abroad wishing you a pleasant stay in Addis Ababa, I wish you all, success in your deliberation and I declare the workshop open. Good bless you I thank you Theme one: Status Quo Analysis, Characterization and Assessment of Performance of Irrigation in Ethiopia Papers 1. Status quo analysis, characterization and assessment of performance of irrigation in Ethiopia 2. Comparison of irrigation performance based on management and cropping types 3. Irrigated and rainfed crop production systems in Ethiopia 4. Baseline survey of irrigation and rainfaid agriculture in Ethiopian part of Nile Basin 2 Statues quo analysis, Characterization and Assessment of Performance of Irrigation in Ethiopia Seleshi B. Awulachew and Aster Denekew Yilma International Water Management Institute for Nile Basin and East Africa s.bekele@cgiar.org Abstract This paper first looks in to the background on major challenges of Ethiopia with respect to poverty. It discuses the root cause of poverty and its vicious cycle nature, the interlink of population growth, the scarcity of land and natural resources, the extension of agriculture in to marginal land, the decreasing productivity, inability to invest and deepening of poverty and further aggravation as a result of various shocks such as drought, flood, war, etc. The paper also looks in to the importance of the broad agricultural water management in general and irrigation in particular with respect to increasing productivity and capability to break the vicious cycle and opportunity to reverse in to virtuous cycle that can help eradicate poverty and develop the poor economy. The paper also looks in to how poor management of water resources and impacts of variability of rainfall and related drought affecting the socio-economy and the overall wellbeing of the country to the extent that significant population became dependent on imported food. Results of broad assessment of water resources, database of irrigation development and potential, characterization by typology and major performance in Ethiopia are presented. Key water resources information related to each of the 12 river basins in Ethiopia is summarized. Details of existing irrigation and future potential are also captured in the paper. A geographic information system (GIS) database describing irrigation by typology, region and location, scheme size, type of structures, water source, number of beneficiaries, investment cost, etc, are some of the important attributes of the database. In addition, schemes that are operational and failed are identified in the database. Based on the broad database, performances of the schemes are highlighted. Furthermore, the various sites that are used in the detail study and the selection criteria for the impact of irrigation on poverty and environment project and the specific characteristics of these sites are described. Key words: poverty, water scarcity, database, GIS, irrigation, water resources. 1. Introduction Ethiopia is mainly agrarian nation and the rainfed system has always played a central role in Ethiopian society. Dependency on rainfed system has put more than 80% of the society at the mercy of meteorological variability. Ethiopia's agricultural population 7 6 7 8 8 0 8 2 8 4 8 6 8 8 9 0 1 97 9-1 98 1 1 98 9-1 99 1 19 99 -20 01 2 00 3 2 00 4 Yea r Pe rc en ta ge o f p op ul at io n Figure 1: Ethiopia’s agricultural population (data extracted from the World Bank Development Indicator WB 2006b) 3 Figure 1, shows the dependency of Ethiopian population on agriculture and in 25 years the agricultural population reduced only from 89% to 81%. Agriculture in Ethiopia is dominated by small holder production of cereals under rainfed condition, accounting a total area of approximately 10 million hectares. According to Central Statistics Authority [CSA, 1995-1999], within agriculture, some 60 percent of the output is from crops, with livestock and forestry producing 30 percent and 7 percent respectively. Crop production by area is predominantly cereals (84.55 percent) followed by pulses (11.13 percent) and others (4.32 percent). Five crops account for almost all cereal production: maize (15.75 percent), teff (Eragrostis tef) (25.78 percent), barley (12.29 percent), sorghum (12.39 percent) and wheat (10.76 percent). According to Mulat et al (Mulat et al 2004), agriculture remains the main activity in the Ethiopian economy. It is the most important contributor to the country’s GDP: accounted, on the average, 65.5%, 52.7% and 47.1% of the GDP during 1960- 1973, 1974-1991 and 1992-2002, respectively. Despite the above mentioned facts, there are a number of factors that led to failure of achieving food security in Ethiopia. The major causes for food insecurity in Ethiopia can be associated to the following: - Population growth and associated inadequate resource base to support - Lack of growth of production and productivity - Vulnerability to climatic variability - Political instabilities and war - and poverty The main development objective of the Ethiopian Government is poverty eradication. Hence, the country's development policies and strategies are geared towards this end (MOFED: PASDEP 2006). As Ethiopia’s economy and majority of people’s livelihood is dependent on Agriculture, to develop the socio-economy of Ethiopia and eradicate poverty, the policy and interventions should focus on Agriculture as entry point. The current rural development policy and strategy of the government clearly stipulates this as priority. Building further on the above factors, the poverty situation in Ethiopia is a vicious cycle in nature and requires key entry points for intervention. The following figure is a schematic example showing poverty is linked to and aggravated by various demographic, biophysical, production system, productivity and other socio- economic factors. Figure 2: The vicious cycle of poverty and aggravating factors in Ethiopia Socioeconomic development and civilization of human being is closely associated to ability to utilize and control water resources. Water serves as a positive input for many activities and play negative roles. Positively, it serves essential biological needs, as basic element of social and economic infrastructure, and as a natural amenity contributing psychological welfare. Water also serves in negative roles such as flooding and diseases transmission. In Ethiopia, as in all societies, there has always been a struggle to reduce the negative/destructive impacts of water and Population growth Inability to invest to or improve land productivity Poor health, malnutrition Deepening poverty Poor productivity, food insecurity Agriculture pushed in to marginal land Deforestation, land & water degradation Scarcity of land in the settlement areas 4 enhance its positive/productive impacts, but with limited focus and capacity. These efforts have been increased since the past three to four decades and more so during the last few years. However, the ability to use and enhance the positive role of water and to reduce its negative impacts, in Ethiopia in general has been low. 2. The Importance of Agricultural Water Management and Irrigation in Ethiopia It is essential to increase agricultural productivity in order to eradicate poverty, improve the economy, and reduce degradation. Irrigation and improved agricultural water management practice is important in Ethiopia for the following major reasons: - Population in Ethiopia is rapidly increasing (over 80,000,000 currently), land holding size particularly in highland areas is decreasing substantially. Intensification and increasing productivity of land and labour is essential to produce enough food, particularly from the limited available land. - Agriculture is primarily rain fed dependent. Unless the rain fed system is upgraded through improved water management, recurrent drought and dry spell continue to affect productivity and hamper agricultural production - Ethiopia’s economy is strongly dependent on rain fed based agriculture, and rainfall variability impact costs the economy significantly. Therefore, unless agriculture is de-linked from the strong linkage to rainfall variability, the economy of the country will continue to be severely affected. Particularly, this could be more severe under the strong impact of climate change and variability. WB (2006) and IWMI (2007) describe the impact of costs 1/3rd of growth potential of Ethiopian economy. The impact of this can be shown from the recent information. According to MOFED (MoFED 2006), GDP Growth of Ethiopia in 2002/3 was -3.3% during the drought year while the previous and latter years were positive. In 2004/5, GDP growth was 11.9% and 2005/6 was 10.6%, which brings the three year average down to 6.4%. - Improved agricultural water management and irrigation can increase productivity of land, water and labor. The following figure based on Central Statistical Authority data and Mulat et al (2004) shows the crop productivity and productivity growth for the period of the last two decades for major crops in Ethiopia. However, recent data of 2004/5 onwards and predicted productivity data according to MOFED (2006) shows there has been increase in productivity of cereals. The increase is mainly attributed to increased input use (seed, fertilizers, and pesticides) and improved water management for agriculture in certain areas. The strategy to achieve the future targeted result focuses to use intensification (irrigation, vertisol management, seed, fertilizer, pest control) and expansion. 5 Cereal Yields in Ethiopia (1980-2001) 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 Year Yi el d in to n/ ha Cereal Yield t/ha Pulses yield in t/ha Oilseed Yield t/ha) Figure 3: Crop yield in Ethiopia for the period of 1980-2001 (Data source: Mulat 2004) Produc tiv ity (Q/ha) plan 14 .35 20 .03 22.91 25.85 31.57 34.84 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 2004 / 05 2005/ 06 2006/ 07 2007 / 08 2008 / 09 2009/ 10 Year Figure 4: Cereal productivity and productivity Plan of Ethiopia (Data source: MOFED, PASDEP 2006) - Contrary to the first bullet above, there are considerable land and water resources in various relatively remote parts of the country. The constraining factors for development however are low infrastructure that includes accessibility such as roads, and communication; unregulated water resources; no settled people to develop the resources; lack of capital; and lack of knowledge and capacity. Improving on these can enhance development of these resources. Particularly, the irrigation development through improved infrastructure is an important measure that may be pursued in Ethiopia to cope with complex problems leading to poverty and insufficient food production The major sources of growth for Ethiopia is still conceived to be the agriculture sector, as it is expected to be insulated from drought shocks through enhanced utilization of the water resource potential of the country (through development of small scale irrigation, water harvesting, and on-farm diversification), coupled with strengthened linkages between agriculture and industry 6 (agro-industry), thereby creating demand for agricultural output (MOFED 2006). Irrigation development, including large and medium scale irrigation development, as public schemes, commercial farming and for small holders are getting importance under the current government, particularly since 2004. 3. Irrigation Status in Ethiopia 3.1 History There is no documented history of water management for agriculture. Remnants of millennium old water storage structures for non-agricultural use around Axum in Tigray show the oldest usage of water in a controlled manner. Certain, non-irrigation related technologies to conserve water and soil have been practiced by Konso people in the South, at least for the last four hundred years. However, there is no well- documented resource material on water use for irrigation in Ethiopia. Modern irrigation development in Ethiopia is not having centuries old history. There is no written history on how Ethiopia has used irrigation technologies to secure agricultural production, as the vast country with small population had adequate natural resources base and rainfall to produce the food requirements without the need to develop irrigation. Private concessionaires who operated farms for growing commercial crops such as cotton, sugarcane and horticultural crops started the first formal irrigation schemes in the 1950s in the upper and lower Awash Valley. In the 1960s irrigated agriculture was expanded in all parts of the Awash Valley and in the Lower Rift Valley. The Awash valley saw the biggest expansion in view of the water regulation afforded by the construction of the Koka dam and reservoir that regulated flows with benefits of flood control, hydropower and assured irrigation water supply. In addition, the construction of the tarmac Addis-Assab road opened the Awash Valley to ready markets in the hinterland as well as for export (Metaferia, 2004). Although certain aspects of the development during the pre-Derge era have wrong doings in terms of property and land rights, there has been remarkable emergence of irrigation development and establishment of agro industrial centers. Teshome (2003) has reviewed and discussed the land tenure system in the various regimes in Ethiopia. These establishments were highly motivated private sectors, which are both export and domestic market oriented. During the Derge era, all private farms were nationalized to establish the so-called state farms, thereby ending the embryonic private sector. The government pursued the development of medium and large-scale irrigation schemes in a number of river basins in addition to expansion in the Awash Valley. The Amibara Irrigation Project in the Middle Awash, Alwero Irrigation Project in Gambella, Gode-West Irrigation near Gode town, the Omorrate Irrigation scheme in Southern Omo, the Tana Beles, the Fincha Suger State, etc are some of the expansions, most of which are suspended currently. Following the downfall of the Derge, the current government withdrew from the expansion of State Farms and further construction of medium and large-scale irrigation (Metaferia, 2004). This has been the trend until the aftermath of the 2002/3 severe drought that has caused about 15 Million population under extreme food shortage. Not only the government hesitated to expand medium and large scale irrigation but also it has interrupted finalization of the above 5 major irrigation projects started in the former regime. On the other hand, the government indeed provided certain attention on small scale irrigation mostly in the food insecure areas. Nevertheless, in the water sector development program (WSDP) it was identified to expand large and medium scale irrigation by about 147,000 ha 7 and small scale irrigation by about 127,000 ha. As strategy of developing irrigation sector, the plan of the government targets to develop a total of additional 274,612 ha of land which brings the total irrigated area of about 478,000 ha by 2015. Despite ignoring the medium and large-scale sector for a decade long, recently after the development of the water sector development program, there is a growing attention to the irrigated agricultural sector. The revised strategy even plans to put more irrigated land in short period of time. 3.2 Water Resources, Irrigation Typology and Existing Schemes Ethiopia has 12 river basins. The total mean annual flow from all the 12 river basins is estimated at about 122 BMC (WRMP, 1999); Figure 5 and Table 1 show the river basins and distributions of water resources in various basins. The water resources distribution shows slightly higher values as extracted from recent master plan studies. Figure 5: Ethiopia’s River Basins 8 Table 1: Water resources distribution by river basins of Ethiopia River Basin Area (Km2) Runoff (Bm3) Estimated ground water potential (Bm3) Tekeze 82,350 8.2 0.20 Abbay 199,812 54.8 1.80 Baro-Akobo 75,912 23.6 0.28 0.13 Rech/yr Omo-Ghibe 79,000 16.6 0.42 (.10) Rech /yr Rift Valley 52,739 5.6 0.10 Mereb 5,900 0.65 0.05 Afar /Denakil 74,002 0.86 - Awash 112,696 4.9 0.14 Aysha 2,223 - - Ogaden 77,121 - - Wabi-Shebelle* 202,697 3.16 0.07 Genale-Dawa* 171,042 5.88 0.14 Total 1,135,494 124.25 2.86 Source: IWMI Working paper 123 (Awulachew et. al, 2007) In addition, Ethiopia has also 11 fresh and 9 saline lakes, 4 crater lakes and over 12 major swamps or wetlands. Majority of the Lakes are found in the Rift Valley Basin. For details refer Awulachew et al (2007). The total surface area of these natural and artificial lakes in Ethiopia is about 7,500 km2, representing about 0.67% of area of Ethiopia. Most of the lakes except Ziway, Tana, Langano, Abaya and Chamo have no surface water outlets, i.e. they are endhoric. Lakes Shala and Abiyata have concentrations of chemicals. 3.2 Irrigation Typology The irrigation schemes in Ethiopia are divided according to the following typology: o Small scale: These are schemes less than 200ha. Two major categories under this are modern schemes which usually have fixed or improved water control/diversion structures and water users associations that have by laws and traditional schemes – developed and managed by community tradition and usually characterized by non fixed structures and practiced traditionally. o Medium scale: Schemes exceeding 200ha but less than 3,000ha o Large scale: schemes exceeding 3,000ha The latter two are mostly public schemes, owned and managed by the government, and in certain cases by large communities. There are also irrigation typologies that are not clearly captured in policy and strategy documents. These are o Water harvesting based irrigation; e.g. Household based minute irrigation; o Ground water irrigation; o In-situ Agricultural Water Management. 9 3.3 Existing Irrigation Schemes One of the objectives of impact of irrigation on poverty and environment project is to develop GIS database of irrigation schemes to understand the spatial distributions and their characteristics. Accordingly, a database have been developed for about 790 modern irrigation schemes having various attributes such as name, administrative locations, georefenece, type of irrigation, typology, etc. For details refer Awulachew et al (2007). Based on this the following map is one of the products of the database, showing irrigation distribution in Ethiopia based on attribute of typology and regions. Note also that the map is not showing the complete list of the irrigation schemes, as some of the geo-referencing information is missing and the map represents 107 schemes of complete large and medium scale irrigation and some small-scale irrigation. OROMIA SOMALI AFAR AMHARA TIGRAY SOUTHERN REGION GAMBELLA BENISHANGUL -GUMUZ DIRE DAWA HARARIADDIS ABEBA Genale River Aw as h R i v e r Wabeshebele River Abbay River Angereb River G ibe R iver Tekeze R iver Baro River Atbara River Gojeb River Irrigation Schemes Large Scale Medium Scale Small Scale Rivers Lakes 0 330 660165 Kilometers· Figure 6: Existing Irrigation schemes distributed in the regional states of Ethiopia According to MOFED (2006), with respect to irrigation development, within the program period of PASDEP 2004/2005 to 2009/2010, pre-design studies will be carried out for 17,988 hectares, full-fledged design studies will be undertaken on 464,051 hectares, and construction works will be completed for 430,061 hectares. Currently, actual implementation projects at Tendaho and Kessem totaling about 90,000 ha in the Awash Valley, 7,000ha Koga irrigation development in Blue Nile River Basin are actually near completion. There are also many additional scale development projects under construction invested by regional governments, donors and NGOs and private sector. 3.4 Irrigation Potentials by River Basins In Ethiopia, under the prevalent rain fed agricultural production system, the progressive degradation of the natural resource base, especially in highly 10 vulnerable areas of the highlands coupled with climate variability have aggravated the incidence of poverty and food insecurity. Water resources management for agriculture includes both support for sustainable production in rain fed agriculture and irrigation (Awulachew et al 2005). Currently, the MoWR has identified 560 irrigation potential sites on the major river basins. The total potential irrigable land in Ethiopia is estimated to be around 3.7 million ha (Awulachew et al 2007). Table 2 and Figure 7 show the irrigation development potential by river basins in Ethiopia. Detail characterization of the potentials by basins is provided in Awualchew et al (2007). Table 2: Irrigation Potential in the River Basins Irrigation potentials (Ha) (Respective recent master plan studies) WAPCOS, 1995 Basin Catchment Area (Km2) Small scale Medium scale Large scale Total Total Drainag e Area (km2) Irrigable Area (Ha) % Irrigable Area of the Country Abbay 198,890.7 45,856 130,395 639,330 815,581 201,346 1001000 27 Tekeze 83,475.94 N/A N/A 83,368 83,368 90,001 317000 8.5 Baro-Akobo 76,203.12 N/A N/A 1,019,523 1,019,523 74,102 985000 26.5 Omo-Ghibe 79,000 N/A 10028 57900 67,928 78,213 445000 12 Rift Valley 52,739 N/A 4000 45700 139,300 52,739 139000 3.7 Awash 110,439.3 30,556 24,500 79,065 134,121 112,697 205000 5.5 Genale-Dawa 172,133 1,805 28,415 1,044,500 1,074,720 117,042 423000 11.4 Wabi-Shebele 202,219.5 10,755 55,950 171,200 237,905 102,697 200000 5.4 Danakil 63,852.97 2,309 45,656 110,811 158,776 74,102 - - Ogaden 77,121 - 77,121 - - Ayisha (Gulf of Aden) 2,000 - 2,000 - - Total 1,118,074.53 3,731,222 982,060 3,715,000 100 Note: The national water resources master plan (WAPCOS, 1995) was a desk study without significant field investigation. 11 Figure 7: Irrigation Potentials in Ethiopia by River Basins 12 The complete database is developed for existing irrigation development and irrigation potential. We trust that this database creates important information system and a foundation for complete and comprehensive database that can be updated continuously for irrigation development in Ethiopia. The database is also made available to regional irrigation development bureaus and federal institutions for use and further updating. This information system establishes a public good and any interested institution or individual can receive a copy. The available formats for sharing include GIS products, Microsoft Excel or Microsoft Access database categorized per typology, river basins and regions. 4. General performance of the irrigated systems The performances of the existing irrigation schemes are highly variable. Some of the schemes from all typologies in terms of water use efficiency, productivity, sustainability are performing very well, while some are not performing efficiently, interrupted while under construction, abandoned after implementation, or transferred from public to private or community and their performances are not known. Many successful schemes are providing increased income, higher productivity, significant job opportunity and considerable contribution to the economy. The existing irrigated schemes are estimated at about 2% of the total agricultural land but contribute over 5% of the agricultural production. On the other hand, there are also a number of schemes with critical problems leading to complete abandonment or under performance, missing the targets of performance in terms of land area developed, number of beneficiaries or sustainability. The assessment related to the database development, see also Awulachew et al (2007) reveals that 17% to 22% of schemes in the Amhara, SNNPR, Oromia and Tigray, particularly small scale irrigation schemes fall under this category. A number of medium and large irrigation schemes, with a total area of 44,050 hectares, that were under construction, during the previous government, were suspended by the present one. The underlying reason seems to be the policy of market economy precluding government involvement in such economic activities added with the complexity of the projects that were under establishment at remote areas with low infrastructure, insufficient labor and market linkage. However, the wisdom of the decision, for abandonment of development schemes on which hundreds of million have been invested, remains to be questionable. It might be wiser to finalize the schemes and settle smallholders of the area and/or encourage private operators to take over under an attractive/ acceptable arrangement. On the contrary, private initiatives to takeover and finish some of the schemes - Meki-Zeway, Belbela & Wedecha, Alwero - either have not been accepted or have failed of their own accord until recently whereby the former two have attracted the attention of flower farmers. According to MCE (2004) some of the schemes have been turned over to party affiliated companies with limited success. These projects represent priority schemes for rehabilitation and completion. Besides the suspended schemes a total of 26,347 ha are transferred from public to private or communal developers. The operation of this transferred schemes are variable. Some are successful, some are failed after transfer and the performances of some are not known. MCE (2004) and Awulachew et al (2007) discuss these. 5. Conclusion This paper, which is related to the wider impact of irrigation on poverty and environment research project, provided information and database on the water resources of Ethiopia, potential of development, extent of existing development focusing on irrigation development. It also discussed irrigation development categorized by various river basins and regions. Discussions were also made on schemes that are non-operational or transferred to community and private sector and their implication on performance. Specific database is also developed for existing irrigation schemes having a number of attributes. The developed database has information about the existing irrigation 13 schemes and potentials. The database under GIS environment, maps their spatial distribution using point maps from those schemes for which geo-refenced data is available. It is obvious that Ethiopia is extremly dependent on rain fed agriculture; its majority of population are dependent on agriculture without limit to move out of the sector, agriculture being at low productivity, rapid population growth and lack of innovation to maximize the benefit of the combination of population, land and water. Hence, most of the population are poor and agriculture and overall economy is vulnerable and remains very weak against the shocks of the climatic variability. The last five years attentions towards development taking the rural development policy and strategy, the water sector policy, the irrigation development strategy, the PASDEP actions are encouraging and hoped to accelerate development endeavors. Ethiopia’s challenges towards development are immense and require significant actions and efforts addressing the various problems from various sectors that speed up rapid development. References Awulachew, S. B., Yilma, A. D., Loulseged, M., Loiskandl, W., Ayana, M. and Alamirew, T. 2007. Water Resources and Irrigation Development in Ethiopia. IWMI Working Paper 123 Awulachew, S.B., Merrey, D.J, Kamara, A. B., Van Koopen, B., De Vries, F. Penning, and Boelle, E., 2005. Experiences and Opportunities for Promoting Small-Scale /Micro Irrigation and Rainwater Harvesting for Food Security in Ethiopia, IWMI Working Paper 98, 2005 IWMI (International Water Management Institute) 2007. Ethiopia: Agricultural Water Management Policy Briefs. Issue 1, 2007 MCE (Metaferia Consulting Engineers). 2004. The World Bank. Assessment of experiences & opportunities on medium & large-scale irrigation in Ethiopia. Draft Report MoFED (2006). Ethiopia: Building on Progress A Plan for Accelerated and Sustained Development to End Poverty (PASDEP) (2005/06-2009/10) Volume I: Main Text Ministry of Finance and Economic Development September, Addis Ababa. MoWR (Ministry of Water Resources). 1999. Water Resource Management Policy (WRMP), Addis Ababa: Ethiopia. MoWR (Ministry of Water Resources). 2002. Water Sector Development Program (WSDP), Addis Ababa: Ethiopia. Mulat Demeke, Fantu Guta and Tadelle Fered. 2004 Agricultural Development In Ethiopia: Are There Alternatives To Food Aid? Department of economics, Addis Ababa University. Unpublished Report WAPCOS (Water & Power Consultancy Services (I) Ltd.). 1995. The National Water Resources Master Plan, Addis Ababa: Ethiopia. World Bank (WB) 2006a. Ethiopia: Managing Water Resources to Maximize Sustainable Growth: Country Water Resources Assistance Strategy. The World Bank, Washington DC World Bank (WB) 2006b. Africa Development Indicators 2006. International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Washington DC 14 Comparison of irrigation performance based on management and cropping types Mekonen Ayana and Seleshi Bekele Awulachew Arba Minch University, Arbaminch, Ethiopia International Water management Institute for Nile Basin and East Africa meko_amu@yahoo.com Abstract Although performance evaluation of irrigated agriculture has gained momentum since late 1980s worldwide such attempt is rarely carried out in Ethiopia. The aim of this study was to assess the performance of 7 irrigation schemes some of which are expected to contribute much to the national economy. Sugar cane is grown by three of these schemes whereas cotton is grown by three schemes and the remaining single scheme grows tobacco. With regards to management types both government agency and community managed schemes are considered. The scheme level values of water supply performance indicators show that there was no constraint of water availability and supply at scheme level. In general, schemes that grow sugar cane were found to have attained higher outputs per units of land and water used which ranges from 7794 – 10834US$/ha and 0.24 – 0.55 US$/m3 respectively. On the other hand, whether state farm or community managed, schemes that grow cotton have shown low output per units of land and water, i.e. 310 – 385 US$/ha and 0.01 – 0.05 US$/m3 respectively. Large productivity performance differences have been observed between irrigation schemes with same cropping and management types. From scheme level performance values it is not simple to identify the area where and what is going wrong which is responsible for low performance. Generally, problems casing low productivity derive both in management and deterioration of physical structures. Hence investment on improvements of physical structures, management and operation of the system at all levels will bring substantial improvement in the performances of cotton producing schemes. 1. Introduction Irrigation is highly expected to play a major role in the realization of Ethiopian food security and poverty alleviation strategy. Irrigation enhances agricultural production and improves the food supply, income of rural population, opening employment opportunities for the poor, supports national economy by producing industrial crops that are used as raw materials for value adding industries and exportable crops. From this important viewpoint irrigation projects are widely studied, planed and implemented throughout the country. However, little or no attention is given to the monitoring and evaluation of the performance of already established irrigation schemes. Whether traditional or modern, public agency or community managed many of the existing irrigation systems are deteriorating in their physical structures, operation and management. Performance assessment is used to identify the present status of the scheme with respect to the selected indicators and will help to identify ‘why the scheme is performing so’ which in turn imply means of improvement. Of course performance evaluation needs relevant and reliable data which is rarely measured in Ethiopia. According to Clemmens, A.J. and Molden. D.J. (2007) two major approaches to performance evaluation are to consider, how well service is being delivered and the 15 outcomes of irrigation in terms of efficiency and productivity of recourses use. To measure these performances a number of indicators have been proposed and tested in different parts of the world (Molden, D. et al. 1998; Kloezen W.H., 1998; Burton, M. et al. 2000; Lorite, J. et al. 2004, Bos, M.G. et al. 2005, Vandersypen et al., 2006). IWMI’s minimum sets of performance indicators were used by many researchers to compare different irrigation schemes. Comparison helps to identify ‘who is doing what right’ and what lesson can be learnt or who can be a benchmark for a particular activity. The objective of this study was to assess the performance of 7 irrigation schemes in Ethiopia based on management and cropping types using IWMI’s performance indicators. 2. Technical background on performance assessment Performance can be simply defined as “the level of achievement of desired objectives” (Mohtadullah, K., 1993). Indicators are used to measure performance. An indicator is some number that describes the level of actual achievement in respect of one of the objective of irrigation system. Indicators are used to simplify the otherwise complex internal and external factors affecting the performance of irrigated agricultural system. Performance can be measured from process and output points of view. Process measures of performance relate to a system’s internal operations and procedures whereas output measures of performance examine the quality and quantity of the system’s final output (Small, L. and M. Svendsen, 1990). While quoting the value of certain indicators, at a particular irrigation system and time, it means that all other factors and processes are ignored or neglected. The fact that an indicator services as a guideline for further decision making it should be carefully chosen, measured and interpreted. Irrigation performance, whether bad or good, is the result of verities of activities such as planning, design, construction, operation of facilities, maintenance and proper application of irrigation water and agronomic activities (Small L. and Svendsen M. 1990). Facilitation and execution of these activities requires proper coordination of six functional processes of irrigation, i.e. personnel management and support, equipment management, financial management and accounting, and resources mobilization. Planning, design and construction of irrigation schemes are mainly dealing with creation of physical infrastructure to facilitate the capturing of water from its source and transportation up to the farm level. These physical facilities need to be properly operated to ensure the capturing, allocation and delivery of water at the right time and adequate quantity. Maintenance activities are designed to ensure the capabilities of physical infrastructure to deliver the intended amount of water over the project life time. Application of water to the field is the core activity of irrigation which is designed to disperse the incoming stream from higher level canal over the field thereby storing in the crop root zones. Substantial improvements in the performance of such a complex system is not possible by making big improvements at only one level within the system (Clemmens A.J. & Molden D.J., 2007). Physical or management improvements may need to be made at all levels before substantial improvements in the performance can result. Gorantiwar S.D. and I.K. Smout (2005) have summarized performance measures proposed by various researches into allocation type and scheduling types. Allocation types performance measures are those which need to be attained primarily during the allocation of the resources at the planning and operation stages. Productivity and equity are performance measures under allocation type category. Scheduling type performance measures consists of irrigation scheduling, i.e. temporal and spatial distribution of irrigation water to the users. This measures adequacy, reliability, flexibility, efficiency and sustainability. 16 Scheduling should be such that water deliveries need to be adequate both in planning and operation, reliable, flexible and sustainable. The same authors grouped these two categories of performance measures into: economic (productivity), social (equity), environmental (sustainability) and management (reliability, adequacy, efficiency and flexibility). Conveyance efficiency is used to compare the amount of water delivered at the turnouts of the main irrigation conveyance network to the total amount of water delivered into the irrigation scheme. Its measurement is important in that water allocation plans are developed using estimated efficiencies of water flow at various stages and time. Deterioration of efficiency over the years will reduce the performance of the irrigation scheme over this period. Gorantiwar and I.K. Smout (2005) categorized the importance of efficiency in two ways: Firstly, appropriate optimum allocation plans cannot be developed if proper consideration is not given to efficiency. Inaccurate or simplified estimates also have a major influence on other performance parameters such as productivity, adequacy, equity and reliability. Secondly, the inspection of efficiencies over space and time at different levels enables the irrigation authorities to learn which part of the scheme is inefficient, where it is inefficient and how it is deteriorating. Productivity is related to output from the system in response to the input added to the system and there are several indicators of productivity. The primarily output of the scheme is the total crop yield or its economic equivalence per units of land or water used. Hence, most often the productivity is expressed in terms of land or water supplied to produce a certain level of output. Water productivity deals with the amount of production (mass or monetary equivalent) per water supplied to the scheme during the season. Land productivity on the other hand is production per unit of land cultivated. 3. Materials and Methods 3.1. Description of the schemes This study uses six government owned irrigation schemes for detail investigations which are believed to have large contribution to national income and one community managed irrigation schemes. The schemes are geographically located in south, east and central parts of the country. Table 2 gives brief information on the schemes. For details on the characteristics of the schemes, see Girma and Awulachew (2007). 3.2. Performance indicators The performance indicators adopted in this study are: 1. Irrigation water delivery performance a. Conveyance efficiency (EC ) b. Annual relative water supply (ARWS) c. Annual relative irrigation supply (ARIS) d. Water delivery performance or water delivery ration (WDR) 2. Output performance indicators a. Output per harvested area (tons/ha) b. Output per harvested area (US$/ha) c. Output per command area (US$/ha) d. Output per water supplied (US$/m3) 17 These indicators were measured using the following mathematical descriptions: systemthetoinflowingWater systemtheofoutflowingWaterEC = (1a) demandwatercropofvolumeTotal pliedwaterofvolumeTotalARWS sup = (1b) demandedwaterirrigationofvolumeTotal divertedwaterirrigationofvolumeTotalARIS = (1c) deliveredbetowaterofvolumeendedint deliveredactuallywaterofVolumeWDR = (1d) )( )(Pr)/( haareacroppedIrrigated tonsoductionhatonsareaharvestedperOutpout = (2a) )( $)()/$( haareacroppedIrrigated USproductionofvalueLocalhaUSareaharvestedperOutpout = (2b) )( $)(Pr)/$( haareaCommand USoductionofvalueLocalhaUSareacommandperOutpout = 2c) )(sup $)(Pr)/$(sup 3 3 mplyirrigationDiverted USoductionofvalueLocalmUSpliedwaterperOutpout = (2d) Data used in this study are emanating from different sources. Sugar estates have their own records regarding annual production, water diverted to the schemes and meteorological data. Table 1: Sources of important data Irrigation schemes Data Metahara Wonji Finchaa Hare Sille Bilate Metro Data Estate Estate Estate NMSA NMSA Tessema, 2006 Production Estate Estate Estate Belete, 2006 Aklilu, 2006 Tessema Water supply Estate Estate Estate Belete Aklilu ARWS calculated calculated calculated Belete Aklilu Tessema ARIS calculated calculated calculated Belete Aklilu Tessema Efficiency measured measured Belete Aklilu 18 Table 2: Characterization of selected irrigation schemes Scheme name Hare Sille Bilate Metahara Wonji Finchaa Latitude 6º 30´ to 6 º 38´ N 5º 49' to 5º 55' N 6048’ to 6050’N 8º 21' to 8º 29' N 8º 21' to 8º 29' N 9º 30' to 9º 60' N Longitude 37 º 33´ to 37º 37´ E 37º 26' to 37º 29' E 3804’ to 3805’ E 39º 12' to 39º 18' E 39º 12' to 39º 18' E 37º 10' to 37º 30' E Average annual rainfall (mm) 830.7 748 734 659.6 832 1300 Average annual ETo (mm) 1651.2 1540 1958 1596.5 Predominant soil types Sandy loam to clay soil Silty loam and clay loam Sandy to loam Sand to clay loam Clay, light soil black heavy clay Water source Hare River Sille River Bilate River Awash River Awash River Finchaa River Water availability Scarce in some periods Scarce in some periods sufficient abundant abundant abundant Irrigated area (ha) 1962 1082 870 11058 7279.8 8500 Main crops Banana, cotton, maize, fruit trees, sweet potato, vegetables Banana, cotton, maize Tobacco, maize Sugar cane Sugar cane Sugar cane, horticultural crops Year first operational 1996 1957 1962 1966 1954 1991 Type of management community government Government/ private government government government Land ownership private government Government government government government Method of water abstraction Gravity (inundation, weir) Gravity (inundation) Gravity (barrage) Gravity (weir) Pump Gravity/ weir Water delivery infrastructure Open channel Open channel Open channel/ pipelines Open channel Open channel Open channel/pipe Predominant on-farm water application method Furrow, basin Furrow, basin furrow furrow Furrow Sprinkler/ furrow 19 4. Results and Discussions 4.1. Water delivery performance Water delivery performances considered are conveyance efficiency, annual relative water supply, and annual relative irrigation supply and water delivery ratio. The results of conveyance efficiency measurements given in Fig. 1 show that there is a high water loss especially in community managed Hare irrigation scheme. Through filed measurements it was evidenced that the canal losses more than 50% of water over 5 km canal distance from the diversion point. As the physical conditions of canal in Hare irrigation scheme is bad, the losses are mainly attributed to seepage from the canals. Moreover, even if they are closed, points of unauthorized water turnouts contribute also to low conveyance efficiency because of leakages. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 Distance from headwork (m) C on ve ya nc e ef fic ie nc y (% ) Metahara Wonji Hare Fig. 1: Variation of conveyance efficiency along the canals of some schemes Conveyance efficiency underlies spatial variations based on the conditions of the canal and management system. Farm units which are located along the canal segment with low conveyance efficiency tend to suffer from unreliable and untimely supply of water. These problems have been observed in community managed irrigation schemes such as in Hare. To this effect, farmers located at tail-end of the canal (>7km) are limited in their crop diversification and forced to grow relatively water stress resistant crops such as cotton and sweet potato. Not only bad conditions of physical structures but also leakage through unofficial points of water turnouts are observed to be reasons for rapid decline of conveyance efficiency in Hare irrigation schemes Previous studies in Wonji indicated that seepage losses in the tertiary canals account to about 40% and contributed to rising of groundwater level to 0.94m below the surface (Habib, 2005). The values of water delivery performance, i.e. annual relative water supply (ARWS) and annual relative irrigation supply (ARIS) are given in table 3. These indicators are evaluated as optimal if their values would be equal to one. Less or greater than one would mean under or over supply of water respectively. ARWS relates the total volume 20 of water applied (irrigation plus total rainfall) to the volume of water required by the crops. It can also be used both as a measure of adequacy and seasonal timelines (Levine 1982 and Meinzen D., 1995, In: Kloezen W.H & G.-R. Carlos, 1998). The annual relative irrigation supply (ARIS) on the other hand is the ratio of the volume of irrigation water delivered to the volume of irrigation water demanded (net irrigation water requirement). It indicates also the extent to which the water supplied was adequate to satisfy the water demand. The value of this indicator is nearly unity in Wonji irrigation scheme and range from 1.46 to 2.05 incase of other schemes indicating that the amount of water supplied at scheme level exceeded the estimated crop water requirement. Table 3: Values of water delivery performance indicators (2005/06) Values of water supply performance Scheme name ARWS ARIS WDR Hare 1.22 2.05 1.07 Sille 1.66 1.46 0.95 Bilate 1.86 2.00 1.30 Metahara 1.45 1.59 1.03 Wonji 1.11 0.95 0.62 The water delivery ration (WDR) is an indicator that relates the amount of water delivered to the amount of water needed to be delivered, i.e. total water supplied to the scheme divided by gross irrigation water requirement. According to the values of this indicator, Wonji and Sille irrigation schemes were found to have delivered less amount of water than theoretically forecasted. Wonji scheme is characterized by lower values of all water supply and delivery performance indicators compared to other schemes. The cost involved in pump diversion might have contributed to efficiency of resources use in Wonji 4.2. Production per unit area Values of crop production per units of harvested land in the studied irrigation schemes are presented in Table 4 and figures 2-4. As can be seen from table 4, production varies from 122 to 174 tons per hectare in sugar cane producing irrigation schemes and from 0.50 to 3.56 tons per hectare in cotton producing schemes. The productivity of tobacco varied between 0.45 to 1.55 tons per hectare. The average sugar cane production in Metahara, Wonji and Finchaa is respectively 162.3, 147.1 and 136.5 tons per hectare. This shows that Metahara has produced more cane per units of area. With a standard deviation of 13.7, the productivity variation is higher in Finchaa followed by Metahara and Wonji sugar estates. Huge differences between minimum and maximum productions in table 4 show inconsistencies that exist in the management practices as well as practically attainable level of productivity under the existed condition. Compared to sugar cane producing schemes, large coefficients of variation (Cv) in cases of cotton and tobacco producing schemes have been observed indicating high productivity variation from year to year. The reasons could be inconsistencies in the agricultural practices, management system and input supplies. 21 Table 4: Output per units of harvested land (from 1998/99 – 2005/06 except for Hare scheme) productivity (tons/ha) Scheme name Crop grown minimum maximum mean SD Cv (%) Metahara Sugar cane 152.6 173.8 162.3 9.3 5.6 Wonji Sugar cane 137.2 152.8 148.1 5.6 3.4 Finchaa Sugar cane 123.5 169.0 138.3 13.4 9.7 Average (sugar cane) 137.2 165.2 148.6 9.52 6.5 Hare1 Cotton 0.70 2.20 1.30 0.65 50 Sille Cotton 0.50 2.40 1.09 0.79 72 M. Sedi Cotton 1.57 3.56 2.51 0.67 26.7 Average (cotton) 0.92 2.72 1.67 0.65 43 Bilate Tobacco 0.47 1.55 0.90 0.33 36.9 1. Compared between different villages in the scheme The productivity of cotton presented in this study, when compared to the optimum yield, i.e. 5.4 tons/ha (Aklilu, 2006), it is evident that there is a room for improvement. Melka Sedi was found to perform better than other cotton producing farms. To compare the outputs of schemes and productivity of different crops per units of land and water supplied, monetary equivalents of the production during the season 2005/06 have been considered. This type of calculation was made taking into account the farm gate unit price of sugar, cotton and tobacco in the year 2005/06 as 491.2, 1069.77 and 1962.79 US$ per tons respectively. The results presented in figures 2 and 6 show that outputs per units of land and water are by far large in sugar producing schemes than cotton and tobacco farming schemes. 310 385 2077 1500 7794 9379 10834 17 2 37 6 46 4 56 97 61 04 53 14 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 Sille Hare M.Sedi Bilate Finchaa Metahara Wonji Scheme name O ut pu t ( U S $/ ha ) Output per harvested area Output per cropped area Fig. 2: Output per units of harvested and irrigable area (2005/06) The difference between schemes in terms of output per irrigable area is less compared to output per harvested area. In the year 2005/06, the proportions of harvested to total cultivated area in Wonji, Metahara and Finchaa are 49, 65 and 73% respectively. 22 Even if the cane production per harvested area in 2005/06 was higher in Metahara (Fig. 4) than other cane producing schemes output per units of harvested land (US$/ha) was higher in case of Wonji than Metahara (Fig. 2). This is because the end sugar productivity was higher in Wonji than others, i.e. 21.92, 15.98 and 15.77 tons of sugar per hectare of harvested area respectively in Wonji, Metahara and Finchaa. Sugar produced per hectare per month was also greater in Wonji followed by Metahara and Finchaa which may be attributed to the differences in the cutting ages of the cane. Fig. 3 shows the relationships between the size of area harvested and the corresponding cane production during the last 8 years (1998/99 – 2005/06). 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Area harvested (ha) C an e ( * 1 03 to ns ) Wonji Metahara Finchaa Fig. 3: Comparison of harvested area and cane production (1998/99 – 2005/06) Annually harvested area and hence total cane production is greater in Metahara sugar estate followed by Finchaa and lowest in Wonji. The regression coefficients (r2) of the relations given in figure 3 are 0.36, 0.004 and 0.88 for Wonji, Metahara and Finchaa respectively. This shows that both harvested area and cane production was not significantly increased in Metahara and Wonji. In case of these schemes, the points showing the relationships between areas harvested and cane production are concentrated at almost same area. Within the period 1998/99 – 2005/06 the total cropped area has increase from 9911.5 ha to 10145.9ha in Metahara. This is an increment of about 2.4%. However, the size of harvested area was variable from year to year without showing linear increase. Figure 4 and 5 show the deviation of annual production of sugar cane and cotton from the overall average production of the schemes involved in producing the same crop during the last 9 years. While the productivity of Wonji is consistently close to the average line, the productivity of Metahara scheme is greater than the average 23 and that of Finchaa scheme is lower than the mean productivity of the schemes. From the two cotton producing schemes, Melka Sedi was found to consistently produce more than average production. On the contrary the productivity of Sille scheme is below average in all 9 years considered except in one year, i.e. 2001/02 (Fig. 5). Although both belongs to the state farms, government managed, the management setup and conditions of physical structures under which they are operating is different. The more than 40 years old irrigation infrastructure in Sille farm and less motivated and unskilled staff as well as low input services are contributed to low productivity of the farms. -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 1997/98 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 Year D ev ia tio n fr om m ea n (to ns /h a) Metahara Wonji Finchaa Fig. 4: Deviation of annual sugar cane production from mean, i.e. 149 tons/ha -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 1996/97 1997/98 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 Year D ev ia tio n fr om m ea n (to ns /h a) Sille Melka Sedi Fig. 5: Deviation of annual cotton production from mean, i.e. 1.97 tons/ha 24 Although adequate or more water than required is supplied to the scheme, the output obtained in Sille and Hare schemes are very low. It may not be the total amount of water diverted to the scheme which is so important to evaluate the influence of irrigation water on production rather adequacy and uniformity of its distribution on the cropped field. 4.3. Output per units of water supply Water productivity has been defined as the amount of output produced per unit of water involved in the production, or the value added to water in a given circumstance (Molden et al. 1998). It was calculated by dividing the value of agricultural production obtained from a unit area of land by volume of irrigation water supplied during the production season. Fig. 6 shows the productivity of water for different irrigation schemes. 0.01 0.05 0.29 0.24 0.55 0.48 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 Sille Hare M. Sedi Metahara Finchaa Wonji Scheme name Pr od uc tiv ity (U S$ /m 3 ) Fig. 6: Output per unit water supplied Output (US$) per units of water supply (m3) varies between 0.01 in Sille, 0.05 in community managed scheme and 0.55 US$ in government managed irrigated sugar cane farm. Water productivity in other areas was found to be 0.04 – 0.56 US$ (Merdun, 2004), 0.03 – 0.91 US$ (Molden et al. 1998). Differences have also observed not only between different schemes, cropping and management types but also between the same cropping and management type in different schemes. The results indicate that Wonji irrigation scheme was found to be efficient in economical use of irrigation water followed by Finchaa and Metahara. In terms of cane productivity Metahara was found to produce more. However, sugar gained is more in case of Wonji. This may be due to the differences in the cutting ages adopted by the schemes. Results given in Fig. 6 are also influenced by the value of crops grown, irrigation management and weather conditions such as contribution of rainfall. Proper irrigation scheduling that takes into account the contribution of rainfall during growing season will have improving effect on water productivity. The difference in the water productivity between sugar cane producing scheme is attributed to the management practices. Despite adequate water deliveries at the scheme level (Table 3) in Sille and Hare irrigation schemes, both land and water productivity is low compared to Melka Sedi scheme, producing the same 25 crop, i.e. cotton. It is not the total amount of water diverted to the scheme which so important to influence the production, rather its adequacy, uniformity and proper spreading over the cropped field. 5. Summary and Conclusion The assessment of irrigation performance in seven irrigation schemes using output and water supply performance showed that there is a tremendous difference between the schemes in their output performance. This is true even for the same cropping and management types. Government agency managed schemes that grow sugar cane have got higher productivity that ranges 123.5 - 173.8 tons/ha, 7794 – 10834 US$ per harvested area and 0.24 – 0.55 US$/m3. On the other hand schemes that grow cotton have relatively low productivity that ranges from 310 US$/ha in community managed scheme to 385 US$/ha in state farm. The water productivity of these schemes is respectively 0.05 and 0.01 US$/m3. It is evident that as the management setup, staffing, capacity, and availabilities of resources are different, not all schemes under similar management and cropping types have similar performance. Then, there is a huge difference in the attainment of the primary objective of irrigation, i.e., increased outputs. The scheme level values of water supply performance indicators (ARWS and ARIS) revealed that there were no water supply constraints during the season. That means the water supplied during the season (2005/06) could meet the forecasted crop and irrigation water demand in all schemes considered. However, it should be noted that the scheme level values does not give any clue how efficiently, adequately, uniformly, timely and reliably the water was distributed within the farms. It is evident that measuring these indicators requires intensive field data which need to be generated from field level measurements. Government agency managed schemes that grow sugar cane have got higher productivity that ranges from 123.5 - 173.8 tons per hectare of harvested area, 7794 – 10834 US$ per harvested area (2005/06) and 0.24 – 0.55 US$/m3 of water supplied (2005/06). On the other hand schemes that grow cotton have relatively low productivity and high variations that ranges from 310 – 2077 US$/ha in community managed and state farm. Output per units of water supplied varied from 0.01 – 0.29 US$/m3 of water supplied to the scheme. Cotton growing schemes are characterized by high productivity variations between seasons. This could be due to inconsistencies in the management systems, input services and inability to minimize the influences of climate conditions through adoption of effective irrigation scheduling. Huge variations between outputs of same crop type in different schemes reveal that there is a room for improvement in the productivity of land and water. However, answer to the question, ‘which one is doing what better and why?’ need the examination of internal process indicators. Low productivity of irrigated agriculture in schemes such as Hare and Sille is possibly attributed to poor conditions of the irrigation infrastructure, inadequate management capacity and skills, lack of proper operation and on-farm water management practices and procedures, lack of incentives and hence low motivation to improve performance. Investment on improvements of physical structures, management and operation of the system at all levels will bring substantial improvement of performances of these schemes. Scheme level values of water delivery and supply performance indicators presented in this paper are based on data sets of one year. It doesn’t show also how adequately, uniformly, efficiently and timely the water distributed over the field and field units throughout the season. Hence the scheme level performance indicators are of use for strategic thinking and don’t serve as such operational purpose, because they don’t indicate exactly where the problems 26 responsible for low performance of the system lie. The next study should focus on assessment of performance based on internal processes indicators such as adequacy, uniformity, reliability, efficiency and sustainability. References Aklilu Adagn. 2006. Assessment of irrigation system at Sille state farm. MSc-thesis. Arba Minch University, Ethiopia Belete Bantero. 2006. Across-system comparative assessment of medium- scale irrigation system performance. MSc-thesis. Arba Minch University, Ethiopia. Bos, M.G., M.A. Burton and D.J. Molden (2005): Irrigation and Drainage Performance Assessment. Practical Guidelines. CABI Publishing, CAB International, Wallingford, UK Clemmens, A.J., D.J. Molden. 2007. Water uses and productivity of irrigation system. Irrigation systems. 25, 247-261 Gorantiwar, S.D., and I.K. Smout. 2005. Performance assessment of irrigationwater management of heterogeneous irrigation schemes: 1. A framework for evaluation. Irrigation and Drainage Systems. 19: 1-36. Habib D. 2005. Study on hydraulic performance of some irrigation canals at Wonji sugar state. Proceedings of 9th sysmposium on sustainable water resources development. Arba Minch University. 52-57. Kloezen, W.H. and C. Garce’s-Restrepo. 1998. Assessing irrigation performance with comparative indicators: The case of the Alto Rio Lerma irrigation District, Mexico. IWMI Research Report No 22. Colombo Sri Lanka. Mohtadullah K. (1993): performance of irrigation systems. 15th- congress on irrigation and drainage. ICID . CIID, 74 – 83. Molden, D., R. Sakthivadivel, C.J. Perry, C. de Fraiture and WimH. Kloezen (1998): Indicators for comparing performance of irrigated agricultural systems. IWMI Research Report No 20, Colombo, Sri Lanka Small, L., M. Svenddsen. 1990: A framework for assessing irrigation. Irrigation and Drainage system. 4, 283- 312. Tessema B. 2006. Assessment of hydraulic performances and irrigation potential of Bilate tobacco development irrigation scheme. MSc. Thesis. Arba Minch University, Ethiopia. Vandersypen, K., Bengaly, K., Keita, A., Sidibe, S., Raes D., Jamin, J.-Y. 2006. Irrigation performance at tertiary level in the rice schemes of the Office du Niger (Mali): Adequate water delivery through over-supply. Agricultural water management, 83, 144-152. Yercan, M., M. Dorsan, M.A. Ul. 2004. Comparative analysis of performance criteria in irrigation schemes: a case study of Gediz river basin in Turkey. Agricultural Water management. 66, 259 – 266. 27 Irrigation and Rain-fed Crop Production System in Ethiopia Tilahun Hordofa1, Michael Menkir2, Sileshi Bekele2, Teklu Erkossa1 1 Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 2 International Water Management Institute (IWMI) Subregional Office for the Nile Basin and East Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia tilahun_hordofa@yahoo.com Abstract Crop production is a function of water, nutrient, climate and soil environment. Provided that all other requirement are satisfactorily for proper growth and production, rainfall rarely meets the time with required amount of water application for plant growth. As a result average yield of agricultural crops under rain-fed agriculture is low compared to irrigated agriculture. This study assesses irrigation and rain-fed agriculture system in connection to its potential productivity under existing practice. While the rain-fed areas considered in this study are the aggregate at the national level, five systematically selected Medium and large scale irrigation schemes were selected based on cropping patter, geographic and agro ecological representation These are Fincha’a, MAAE, Metehara, Sille, and UAAIE which are located at three river basins, viz, Nile (Abbay), Awash and the Rift valley basins. Data were collected using pre-formulated checklists, through series of interviews and discussions; and from published and unpublished documents. The result indicated that crop production was undulating under rain-fed agriculture and as a result the performance of rain-fed productivity remained low and stable for most crops. Although crops grown by small- holder private farmers are different, cereals occupy about 74 per cent followed by pulses and oil seeds with small proportion. During the last one decade, the maximum and minimum cultivated land by small-holder peasant farmers at the national level was 10.7 and 6.6 M ha, respectively. Increased cultivable area by private small-holder farmers could not seem to contribute to the increased production. Total irrigated land by private peasant farmers ranged between 66 and 147 thousand hectares for the last one decade. During the last decade the area under irrigation was steadily increasing for most of the large scale schemes. Particularly Fincha’a and Metehara farms are significantly increasing while MAAE farm has shown only a slight increase. At UAAIE farm, crop production shows a decreasing trend. Productivity of banana at Sille farm was decreasing despite its increasing in land area. Key words: Irrigation, Rain-fed, crop production, productivity, large scale scheme, private small-holder 1. Introduction Crop production is a function of water, nutrient, climate and soil environment. Complex relationship existed between these factors and the crop as a consequence of the involvement of biological, physiological, physical and chemical processes. However, efficient crop production and optimum yield can be achieved only when the water supply is precisely in fine tune with the biological needs provided that the crop is well supplied with the required nutrients and well adapted to the prevailing environment. On the other 28 hand, there is no crop without water, what so ever needs are in place. Therefore, timely supplied with an adequate amount of precipitation and/or irrigation could play a major role in increasing agricultural crop production. Rainfall rarely meets the time with required amount of application for plant growth. As a result average yield of agricultural crops under rain-fed agriculture is low compared to irrigation, which is the application of controlled amount of water at specified time of application. In Ethiopia, traditional rain- fed agriculture is the dominant form of farming in which the peasant farm households contribute the largest proportion of the total agricultural production. Out of the total land area of 112.3 M ha, about 16.4 M ha are suitable for the production of annual and perennial crops. Of the estimated arable land, presently about 10 M ha is used annually for rain-fed crops (CSA, 2006). The pattern and intensity of rainfall in the country is quite variable in which most of the highlands receive between 510 to 1530mm of rain annually and in typical arid and semi-arid areas generally receive less than 500mm to about 750mm rain, respectively. However, rainfall in most cases is unreliable and erratic and moreover, productivity is constrained by several interlinked factors such as unpredictable climate (flood, frost, pest etc.) small and fragmented land holding, land degradation, limited technological inputs, etc. About 80 percent of the population lives in the highlands. Over population in these area caused shortage of land and thereby pushing the farmers onto lands with fragile soils and steep