See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/231928283

Performance of irrigation: An assessment at different scales in Ethiopia

Article  in  Experimental Agriculture · January 2011

DOI: 10.1017/S0014479710000955

CITATIONS READS

64 6,216

2 authors:

Seleshi BEKELE Awlachew Mekonen Ayana

United Nations, New York Adama Science and Technology University, Ethiopia
91 PUBLICATIONS   2,623 CITATIONS    32 PUBLICATIONS   601 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Integrated River Basin Management and Ecosystem Conservation View project

Integrated Watershed Management and Hydrology View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mekonen Ayana on 13 August 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Expl Agric. (2011), volume 47 (S1), pp. 57–69 
C Cambridge University Press 2011

doi:10.1017/S0014479710000955

P E R F O R M A N C E O F I R R I G AT I O N : A N
A S S E S S M E N T AT D I F F E R E N T S C A L E S I N E T H I O P I A

By SELESHI BEKELE AWULACHEW† and MEKONNEN AYANA‡

†International Water Management Institute (IWMI), Ethiopia, P.O.Box 5689, Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia and ‡Arba Minch University, P.O.Box 21, Arba Minch, Ethiopia

(Accepted 8 November 2010)

SUMMARY
Ethiopia has an irrigation potential of 5.3 million ha (Mha) of which 3.7 Mha can be developed using
surface water sources, and 1.6 Mha using groundwater and rainwater management. Irrigation contributes
to rapid transformation of agriculture as present-day agriculture is dominated by rainfed single crops. The
current irrigation development in Ethiopia is about 0.7 Mha, and the performance of the existing schemes
is not well understood. As the country is planning to expand irrigated agriculture in the next five years,
it will be useful to review existing performance and to identify areas for interventions that help revitalize
underperforming systems. In this paper, we have investigated the performances of irrigation at three levels:
(a) national level for broad performance, (b) regional level for small-scale irrigation and (c) scheme level for
large-scale irrigation. National level indicators measure (i) the relative proportion of operating schemes, (ii)
ratio of actually cultivated area to planned command area and (iii) relative number of benefited to targeted
number of households. The result shows that 86.5% of schemes are operating, 74.1% of command area is
under cultivation and only 46.8% of the planned beneficiaries have benefited from implemented irrigation.
For regional level irrigation performances, the regions of Southern Nations and Nationalities and Oromia
Regions were investigated. We used technological (structural) and management factors as measures of
performances. Sixty-four underperforming schemes were sampled from the two regions to analyse the
causes. About 30 parameters were identified as causes of underperformance. Watershed degradation
related problems that are causing erosion and sedimentation of water control and conveyance structures
are found to be the major cause for structural failures, while lack of sustainable funding, extension of
agronomic practice, and post harvest technologies are identified as the top management-related problems.
For evaluating performances of large-scale schemes, we used irrigation water delivery performance and
output performance indicators applied to six large-scale schemes. Scheme level performance indicators
results showed that all of the schemes considered have supplied adequate to excess amounts of water
during the period. The Wonji scheme that uses pump diversion showed higher water use efficiency
than other schemes that are using simple gravity diversion types. In this case it might be the running
costs of pumps that have encouraged efficient management of water. In terms of output performance,
sugarcane based irrigation schemes are superior and up to ten times that of banana, cotton, and maize or
tobacco production. The results of these assessments are useful for decision-makers and disclosed the low
performance of the existing irrigation schemes. They also indicated the need to revitalize existing schemes
to improve performance in parallel to the implementation of new projects. The paper also provided new
indicators of evaluation of performance with respect to national level, structural and management related
performance.

I N T RO D U C T I O N

Agriculture is the mainstay of the Ethiopian economy in terms of income, employment

and generation of export revenue. It directly supports 85% of the population of about

‡Corresponding author: [email protected]

58 S . B . AW U L A C H E W A N D M . AYA N A

80 million and 80% of the export value in Ethiopia. Its contribution to gross domestic
product (GDP), although showing a slight decline over the years, has remained very
high, at approximately 43% by 2009 (Hagos et al., 2009; MoARD, 2010). Among the
sub-sectors of agriculture, crop production is a major contributor to GDP accounting
for approximately 28% in 2005/2006.
Agriculture in Ethiopia is mainly dependent on rainfed systems, and this
dependency has put the majority of the Ethiopian population at the mercy of
meteorological variability. With increasing meteorological variability due to changing
climate, it is highly probable that the rainfed agriculture of Ethiopia will be vulnerable
to its effects.
On the other hand, Ethiopia has 12 river basins with annual surface runoff volume of
124.5 km3 (Awulachew et al., 2007; MoWR, 2002) and estimated irrigation potential of
5.3 million hectares (Mha). The groundwater potential is estimated at 6.5 km3 , which
could realize about 1.1 Mha irrigation development (Awulachew, 2010). Moreover,
ample rainfall is available to be tapped through rainwater management for household
level small-scale irrigation. However, the developed irrigation from all these sources is
so far, not more than 0.7 Mha (Awulachew, 2010).
Irrigation schemes in Ethiopia are classified on the basis of: the size of command
area, technology used and management system. In the command area classification,
they are classified as small (less than 200 ha), medium (200 to 3000 ha) and large
scale (over 3000 ha) (Awulachew et al., 2005; Hagos et al., 2009; MoWR, 2002).
The small-scale irrigation schemes are further classified into two major categories of
modern and traditional schemes. Modern schemes usually have fixed or improved
water control/diversion structures. Traditional schemes have no permanent diversion
structures and are reconstructed every year from local materials by farmers themselves.
The technological classification divides schemes according to the differences in the
technology used to control and divert water. These influence water availability,
efficiency of water use, and operation and maintenance costs. The third classification
takes into account the management system, namely traditional, modern, public and
private (Werfring, 2004).
In 2005/2006, the total reported area of irrigated agriculture in the country was
about 626 116 ha, of which traditional irrigation, modern small-scale irrigation,
modern medium- and large-scale irrigation schemes accounted for 77%, 9% and 14%
respectively. During the period considered, the total cultivated land area (irrigated plus
rainfed) was about 12.28 Mha (MoFED, 2006). The total irrigated area accounts for
approximately 5% of the total cultivated land. When the traditional schemes are not
considered, the irrigated area covers approximately 1.6% of the total cultivated area.
Since the baseline information was collected in 2006, there is no clear and updated
information about irrigation coverage. However, it is generally considered that the
coverage has increased in the small-scale traditional sectors, particularly in food crops
and commercial sectors of horticulture including floriculture.
Despite, the high potential of water resources, there is a high spatial variability in
water resources endowment and development in the country. Much of the formal
irrigation developments are located in the Awash Basin, where about 50 medium- and
 Performance of irrigation in Ethiopia 59

large-scale irrigated farms are located. This may be due to the suitability of the
morphology of the river for gravity diversion, topography of the basin for irrigation,
no complexity of the river in transboundary waters and easy access to the internal
market for produce.
With progressively increasing physical infrastructures of irrigation projects, special
attention should be given to the performance of the systems. Performance can be
simply defined as “the level of achievement of the desired objectives” (Mohtadullah,
1993). According to Molden et al. (1998), performance is assessed for a varieties of
reasons: to improve system operations, to assess progress against strategic goals, as an
integral part of performance-oriented management, to assess the general health of a
system, to assess impacts of interventions, to diagnose constraints, to better understand
determinants of performance and to compare the performance of a system with others
or with the same system over time. The type of performance measures chosen depends
on the purpose of the performance assessment activity.
Irrigation performance assessment is rarely conducted in Ethiopia due to lack of
field level data. Some attempts have already been made to assesses the scheme level
performance of some irrigation schemes (Belete, 2006; Habib, 2004; Mekonen and
Awulachew, 2009; Yusuf and Tena, 2006). There is a need to develop aggregate
indicators that provide a clue to the performance of irrigation development under
limited data availability. Yercan et al. (2004) have employed physical performance
indicators to assess irrigation performance in Turkey. These indicators mainly show
the extent to which the developed schemes are utilized to meet their objectives. These
types of indictors are useful in countries like Ethiopia where measured data are scarce
to carry out detailed scheme level performance assessment.
In this paper, the main objectives include: (i) broad assessment of the performance
of irrigation in Ethiopia; (ii) analysis of causes of underperformance of small-scale
irrigation in two major regions of Ethiopia and (iii) comparative performance analysis
of selected large-scale schemes.

METHODOLOGY

Indicators are used to measure performance. An indicator describes the level of actual
achievement in respect of one of the objective of irrigation. Indicators are used to
simplify the otherwise complex internal and external factors affecting the performance
of irrigated agricultural systems. Indicators used in this research are relative values
that compare actual achievements with target values.

Broad assessment of the performance of irrigation projects

Given the proper operation and management of irrigation, it is believed that the
greater the number of irrigation projects that are operational, the larger will be the
number of beneficiaries and the positive impact on household livelihoods. Hence,
we have used three major physical indicators to review the broad assessment of the
performance of irrigation at national levels. These are briefly described below.
60 S . B . AW U L A C H E W A N D M . AYA N A

Relative number of operational irrigated schemes: This is the ratio of aggregated number of
successfully operating irrigation schemes to the total developed irrigation schemes in
the country during the time considered.
Relative irrigated area: This is the total area under irrigation versus total designed
command areas of already implemented irrigation projects during a particular year
or averaged over years in the country or region.
Beneficiaries target performance: This is the ratio of actual number of beneficiaries using
irrigation schemes and planned or targeted number of beneficiaries. This is applicable
mainly to community-owned schemes in the country or region.
For capturing the potential of irrigation, we used secondary data sources based
on master plan studies and review of literature. For the assessment of broad
national performance, we used the database developed for this purpose according
to Awulachew et al. (2007).

Analysis of causes of underperformance of small-scale irrigation

The performance indicators we considered for small-scale irrigation focused on
studying major causes of underperformance of poorly performing schemes. Failure or
sub-optimal operation of small-scale schemes are due to numerous factors that can
be categorized in two major groups related to structural (hardware) and management
(social and institutional) factors.
Structural (hardware) performance: This relates the number of structurally functional
schemes to total number of schemes implemented during the period.
Social and institutional (management) performance: This is the ratio of number of
managerially functional schemes to that of total schemes implemented.
In order to evaluate the performance of the small-scale schemes, we have used
two regions in Ethiopia: Oromia and the Southern Nations and Nationalities
People’s Region (SNNPR). The two regions represent about half of the land mass
of Ethiopia and its population. The underperforming irrigation schemes sampled in
the two regions comprised 27 schemes in SNNPR (Robel, 2005) and 37 schemes
in Oromia (Girma, 2006). The causes for underperformances related to structural
and management problems were assessed using information gained from field
investigations and key informant interviews during 2005 and 2006.

Comparative performance of selected large-scale schemes

A number of researchers have defined and tested sets of indicators that characterize
irrigation system performance (Bos et al., 2005; Burton et al., 2000; Kloezen, 1998;
Molden et al., 1998). The intention is to evaluate the conditions of the performance and
identify the areas of improvement in the operation and management of irrigation to en-
hance efficiency and productivity of resources use. The major performance indicators
used in this study are those that were recommended by Molden et al. (1998) including
conveyance efficiency of irrigation systems. These are briefly described below.
Irrigation water delivery performance. An irrigation system is a set of physical and
institutional elements employed to acquire water from a naturally concentrated
 Performance of irrigation in Ethiopia 61

sources, to facilitate and control the movement of the water from its source to
the root zone of land devoted to the production of agricultural crops (Small and
Svendsen, 1990). A properly operated and maintained irrigation system delivers, in
timely fashion, an adequate amount of water to the point of use. Indicators, used to
measure the adequacy and efficiency of water delivery, are described below:
a) Annual relative water supply (ARWS): This relates the total volume of water applied
(irrigation water plus total rainfall) to the volume of water required by the crops
during the period. Total volume of water supplied during the period in the case of
large-scale schemes were obtained from the respective scheme administration. The
volume of water demanded by the crops was estimated using meteorological data
obtained from meteorological stations of the schemes and CROPWAT 4 version
4.3 (FAO, 1989).
b) Annual relative irrigation supply (ARIS): This is the ratio of total volume of irrigation
water delivered to the volume of irrigation water demanded (net irrigation
requirement, i.e. crop evapotranspiration minus effective rainfall).
c) Water delivery ratio (WDR): This relates the amount of water actually delivered to the
scheme versus amount of water needed to be delivered, i.e. total water supplied to
the scheme divided by gross irrigation water requirement. The later was estimated
by considering 65% irrigation efficiency.
d) Conveyance efficiency (Ec): This is the total amount of water flowing into a canal system
at a point divided by the amount of water reaching a certain distance downstream
of the previous point. It measures the efficiency of the canal system to convey water
and shows the amount of water loss over a given travel distance. Ec was measured
using current meter and floating methods in which the water flow velocity in the
known cross-sectional areas of the canal system was measured and discharge was
calculated as the product of velocity and canal cross-sectional area.
Output performance indicators. The final output of irrigated agriculture is crop
production which can be expressed in terms of productivity, i.e. yield in tonnes or
its monetary value in US$ per unit of land and water resources used. The following
indicators were used to measure the output performances:
i. Output per harvested area: is the amount of yield in tons or its monetary value in US$
obtained per units of harvested land.
ii. Output per water supplied: is expressed as the monetary values in US$ earned per
units of water supplied in m3 . With this indicator it is possible to compare the
productivity of different schemes and crops.
The above described comparative performance indicators were employed to
evaluate the performances of five government-owned irrigation schemes, which are
believed to have a large contribution to national income and one community-managed
irrigation scheme. The selected schemes include Hare, Sille, Billate, Methara, Wonji
and Finchaa. The Hare scheme is community-managed. Major crops grown in Hare
and Sille are banana, cotton and maize. Whereas Billate scheme has been producing
tobacco the other three are growing sugarcane.
62 S . B . AW U L A C H E W A N D M . AYA N A

Data required to measure the indicators have been collected from the respective
schemes and also drawn from different sources (Awulachew, 2007; Belete, 2006;
Girma, 2006; Mekonen and Awulachew, 2009; Robel, 2005).

R E S U LT S A N D D I S C U S S I O N

The results of quantified broad national level and regional level performance indicators
as well as scheme level comparative performance indicators are presented in the
following sections.

Irrigation potential and national level performances

Total irrigation potential versus developed irrigation. Awulachew (2010) provided revised
estimate that total irrigable land potential in Ethiopia is 5.3 Mha, including 1.6 Mha
through rainwater harvesting and groundwater potentials. This estimate is made based
on level of irrigation technologies currently in use and river basin master plan studies
such as reported in BCEOM (1999).
According to the review results, the distribution of irrigation potential can be
summarized as follows:
• Large-, medium- and small-scale based on master plan studies in 12 river basins
covers 3.73 Mha from surface water, which is the aggregated sum results of master
plan studies (Awulachew et al., 2007).
• Rainwater harvesting, largely based on limited technologies of water harvesting at
0.1 ha per household and five million farmers in erratic rainfall areas, covers 500
000 ha.
• Groundwater development, largely in the crop cultivating areas based on 6.5 km3
water potential (Awulachew, 2010), and at the water demand volume of about
6000 m3 per ha, provides irrigation for about 1.08 Mha.
National level irrigated development performance. Irrigation development is considered as
one of the strategies of the country to fight against poverty and food insecurity. The
data that have been collected with the existing information systems (Awulachew et al.,
2007) cover only 312 schemes of different sizes. As there is no newer data, we have
based our national level performance analysis on this database for modern small- and
large-scale schemes.
The results of the national level (broader scale) irrigation performance indicators
are presented in Table 1.
The result shows that 86.5% of the developed 312 small- and medium-scale
irrigation schemes were operational during the period of the study. Even those
schemes that were characterized as operational were not functioning at their full
capacity. That means either they were serving less than the planned command areas
or cropping intensity all-round the year could not be increased. As a result 74% of
the total command area was cultivated during the period considered. This shows that,
apart from inefficiencies that may exist in cultivated command areas, 26% of the
created irrigation potential is not being used. The already developed small- and
 Performance of irrigation in Ethiopia 63
Table 1. Broad irrigation performance indicators on the status of irrigation in Ethiopia.

Sample Performance
Performance indicators Parameters of performance counts level

Relative number of operational Total number of operational schemes 270 86.5%

irrigation schemes
Total number of developed schemes 312
Relative irrigated area Actual irrigated area (ha) 28 954 74.1%
Total planned command area (ha) 39 094.7
Beneficiaries target performance Actual beneficiaries 38 463 46.8%
Target beneficiaries 82 194

medium-scale irrigation schemes serve only about 50% of the targeted number
of beneficiaries. Detailed information about the schemes can be obtained from
Awulachew et al. (2007). Although the country is committing scarce financial resources
to develop irrigation with the view to ensure food self-sufficiency at household level
and reduce poverty, the potential created is not properly utilized. Hence, parallel to
the efforts exerted to develop new irrigation projects, attention need to be given to
proper management of existing schemes. Although the national level performance
assessment sounds broad and does not provide scheme-specific information, it gives
the first insight into the general status of the performance of irrigation development
in the country.

Analysis of underperformance of small-scale irrigation

Based on the data provided by Robel (2005) and Girma (2006), we were able
to identify 26 factors of structural (hardware) causes that led to underperformance
of irrigation schemes in SNNPR and Oromia. Similarly, 27 factors that are
of social or management nature were also identified as causes contributing to
underperformance of irrigation schemes in the regions. The occurrence of the
factors causing underperformance were counted and plotted in the form of frequency
distribution (Figures 1 to 4).
The results reveal that sediment-related problems resulting in main canal siltation
and sediment accumulation in the upstream of the weir or headwork are the major
causes of structural problems (Figures 1 and 3). These are inherently caused by
transported sediment from the degraded areas of the watersheds. This indicates the
importance of integrating watershed management with irrigation development to
sustain irrigated agriculture.
With regards to management-related problems, limitation in agronomic practices,
lack of funding or mechanisms of fund raising for operation and maintenance,
prevalence of crop disease, crop selection, and post harvest technologies for storage
are major causes of management-related underperformances (Figure 2 and 4).

Comparative performance of selected large-scale schemes

Water delivery performances. The indicators of water delivery performance are
computed and presented in Table 2. The values of conveyance efficiencies of the
64 S . B . AW U L A C H E W A N D M . AYA N A

Seepage through foundation

Underperformance cause Damage on wier proper
Damage on d/stream structure
U/stream flooding
Drying of river
Change of river course
Damage on d/stream bed
Damage on under sluice
Damage on intake gate
Main canal seepage
Headwork sedimentation
Main canal siltation

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Frequency %

Figure 1. Qualitative assessment of causes and frequency of technological underperformance of small-scale irrigation
schemes in SNNPR.

Problem of access road to market

Underperformance cause

Input supply problem

Conflict of interest GO and NGO
Market problem
Water right conflict among users
Delayed establishment of WUA
Lack of interest on the scheme
Handing over problem
Lack of funding for O&M

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Frequency %

Figure 2. Qualitative assessment of causes and frequency of management underperformance of small-scale irrigation
in SNNPR.

Upstream flooding
Change in the river course
Underperformance causes

Damage on weir proper

Damage on the sill
Damage on d/stream cut off
Damage on d/stream apron
Damage on the retaining wall
Down stream scouring
Damage on scouring sluice
Clogging on the under sluice
Damage on the intake
Damage on farm lands
Main canal siltation
Head work sedimentation

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Frequency %

Figure 3. Qualitative assessment of causes and frequency of technological underperformance of small-scale irrigation
in Oromia region.
 Performance of irrigation in Ethiopia 65
Lack of WUA
Limited benefit of the system
Lack of supply of improved
Lack of timely hand over
Underperformance causes

Lack of experts support on

Market problem(access)
Lack of additional income
Lack of cooperatives
Participation in construction
Limited access to pesticides
Beneficiaries under planned
Under planned area
Water shortage
Lack of community initiation
Lack of credit
Lack of land redistribution
Malaria case
Crop disease
Lack of storage facilities
Lack of crop selection

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Frequencies %

Figure 4. Qualitative assessment of causes and frequency of management underperformance of small-scale irrigation
in Oromia region.

Table 2. Comparison of various large scale irrigation schemes: water delivery

performance indicators (2005/06).

Values for irrigation water delivery

performance indicators
Scheme Irrigated area
name (ha) Ec (%) ARWS ARIS WDR

Hare 1962 58.0 1.22 2.05 1.07

Sille 1082 79.7 1.66 1.46 0.95
Bilate 870 88.6 1.86 2.00 0.81
Metahara 11058 87.0 1.56 1.59 1.03
Wonji 7280 78.7 1.11 0.95 0.62

Ec: Conveyance efficiency; ARWS: Annual relative water supply; ARIS: Annual relative
irrigation supply; WDR: Water delivery ratio.

main systems vary between 58% in the Hare scheme and 88.7% in the Bilate scheme.
In the Hare scheme, the system consists of earthen channels and is poorly maintained
leading to higher water losses. In Bilate scheme the conveyance system consists of a
concrete canal and closed pipes providing higher conveyance efficiency.
Annual relative water supply relates the total volume of water applied (irrigation
plus total rainfall) to the volume of water required by the crops. The results in Table 2
show that the values of ARWS are equal or greater than unity. Pèrez et al. (2005)
categorized ARWS values ranging from 0.9 to 1.2 as adequate and from 1.2 to 1.8
as excessive and values from 1.8 to 2.5 as very excessive. Accordingly, except Wonji
and Hare, the other schemes considered are operating in the range of excessive water
application. Better water management can save the excessive water that could be used
either for the expansion of irrigated land or ecosystem functions.
66 S . B . AW U L A C H E W A N D M . AYA N A

Table 3. Crop productivity of various large-scales schemes in Ethiopia (crop yield per units
of area).

Productivity (tons per ha)

Scheme Crop
name type Mean Maximum Minimum Standard deviation

Bilate Tobacco 0.9 1.6 1.5 1.2

Metahara Sugar 16.5 21.2 10.9 2.5
Wonji Sugar 20.8 22.9 17.6 1.4
Finchaa Sugar 15.3 18.6 10.8 2.1
Sille Cotton 1.4 2.6 0.5 0.6
Banana 3.2 4.5 1.3 1.2
Hare Cotton 1.6
Banana 3.8

Annual relative irrigation supply, 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). The value of this indicator is nearly unity in the Wonji irrigation
scheme and ranges from 1.46 to 2.05 in case of other schemes, indicating that the
amount of water supplied exceeded the estimated crop water requirement.
Unlike ARIS, WDR relates the amount of water delivered to the amount of water
needed to be delivered. According to the values of this indicator, Wonji and Bilate
irrigation schemes were found to have delivered less amount of water than needed.
The values of water delivery indicators showed that except Wonji the other
considered schemes have diverted excess amount of water than actually required
during the growing period. At Wonji scheme, water is diverted using pumps which
have higher running costs compared to gravity diversion and at the same time provide
an opportunity to better control the amount of water that enters the farm. Hence, the
costs incurred as a result of pumping might have encouraged better management of
water at Wonji.
Output performance of selected large-scale schemes. The output performances of different
irrigation schemes in tonnes per ha are given in Table 3. We found it difficult to
compare the output performances of different schemes with different production
objectives (e.g. sugar production vs maize) unless monetary value is considered as the
major indicator. Comparison at this stage has to be made between schemes of similar
operation or the values obtained here can be compared with an initially set target or
values obtained at a particular location or time (Bos et al., 2005).
The results in Table 3 show that there is variability of agricultural productivity
between schemes growing similar crops. This is mainly attributed to differences in
management practices. There is also inter-seasonal variability of productivity within
the same scheme. This is depicted by wide ranges between maximum and minimum
yields obtained by all schemes. Wonji was found to be the most productive among
sugarcane producing schemes.
To make the comparison of outputs across the schemes, the outputs were converted
in to monetary values per units of water, harvested area or irrigated land. The results
of these computations are provided in Table 4.
 Performance of irrigation in Ethiopia 67

Table 4. Productivity of large-scale schemes in Ethiopia (output per resources utilized, monetary† values (2005/06)).

Indicators Hare Sille Bilate Metahara Wonji Finchaa

Output per water supplied (US$ m−3 ) 0.1 0.01 0.24 0.55 0.5
Output per harvested area (US$ ha−1 ) 385 310 1499 9379 10834 7794
Output per irrigable area (US$ ha−1 ) 376 172 464 6104 5314 5697

† The currency exchange rate of Birr to US dollars used is related to the year the data was gathered.

The productivities of cotton, maize and banana crop varieties given in Table 3
above are very low compared to the yield potential of the respective crops, i.e. 5.4,
8.0, 32.4 tons per ha respectively (Aklilu, 2006).
Poor irrigation water management practices and subsequent rise in groundwater
levels are reported to have caused water logging and salinization of the soils in the
Sille, Billate and Hare schemes, which have negative effect on land productivity (Aklilu,
2006; Belete, 2006). Furthermore, low level of skills of farmers and lack of support
services to access improved agricultural inputs and extension services constrained
productivity of the schemes.
On the other hand, large-scale irrigation schemes that grow sugarcane and are
managed by government agencies are achieving higher productive yield, providing
monetary benefits exceeding ten-fold that of other crops.
In large-scale schemes, the values of conveyance efficiencies of the main systems
are higher in government-managed schemes (79–89%) than community-managed
ones (58%). The scheme level values of water supply performance indicators such as
ARWS and ARIS revealed that water diverted to the farms was sufficient to satisfy the
water demanded during the season considered. Schemes that grow sugarcane were
found to achieve higher outputs per units of water supplied and area harvested. In
contrast, community-managed schemes such as Hare are characterized by low water
productivity. Many of the irrigation canals and water storage infrastructures are losing
their water carrying and storage capacities in a very short time due to erosion and
sedimentation. Hence, integration of irrigation development with proper watershed
management practices is crucial for sustainable solutions.
This performance study was made on limited data in terms of time series covering
year 2005 and 2006 for small-scale schemes. However, we believe that it has provided
insights to understand the performance of irrigation systems and contribute to the
broader knowledge of understanding performance of irrigation in developing countries
such as Ethiopia. The results are particularly important, as the country is embarking
on the second phase of ‘Plan for Accelerated Socio-economic Development to End
Poverty (2010/11 to 2015)’ which is to be implemented by the government of Ethiopia
and its development partners.

C O N C LU S I O N S

Irrigation development is very much needed in developing countries as it enhances

land, water and labour productivity and improves use of agricultural inputs. Irrigated
68 S . B . AW U L A C H E W A N D M . AYA N A

agriculture shows significant improvement over rainfed agriculture productivity

(Bastiaanssen and Perry, 2009). It provides improved resilience against climate
variability, improves food security and enhances intensification. However, the
performance of irrigation in developing countries is also questioned due to relatively
low performances. In order to improve performance, measures are needed to develop
the capacity of the actors to design realistic infrastructure, support irrigation users and
develop capabilities to improve management of systems.
This research showed that irrigation schemes in Ethiopia are not functioning at
their optimal capacity. On the other hand, there are certain systems/schemes that are
performing well by many measures and indicating irrigation as a viable opportunity.
Many of the small- and medium-scale irrigation schemes are underperforming due
to inadequate planning, design and construction failures, lack of operation and
management of schemes, soil erosion and sedimentation, and lack of maintenance
of the water control and conveyance structures (Aklilu, 2006; Girma, 2006; Robel,
2005). Based on evidence of Oromia and SNNPR, lack of adequate extension to
advice agronomic practices, lack of responsible managing institutions, low technical
and financial capacity for sustained operation and management of schemes, post
harvest storage, processing and marketing, weakness of support services are crucial
challenges that need to be tackled in order to improve performances of smallholder
irrigated systems.

Acknowledgements. The authors would like to thank the Austrian Development

Agency for the financial support provided to the project entitled Impact of Irrigation
on Poverty alleviation and the Environment and BMZ-Germany for faciltating the
publication of this paper.

REFERENCES

Aklilu, A. (2006). Assessment of irrigation system at state farm. MSc Thesis. Arba Minch University, Ethiopia.
Awulachew, S. B. (2010). Irrigation potential in Ethiopia: Constraints and opportunities for enhancing the system. (Based on own
data and draft report for government of Ethiopia). Unpublished report.
Awulachew, Seleshi 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.
Awulachew, Seleshi 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.
Bastiaanssen, W. and Perry, C. (2009). Agricultural water use and water productivity in the large-scale irrigation
schemes of the Nile Basin. Report submitted to the Nile Basin Initiative. Entebbe, Uganda.
BCEOM (1999). French Engineering Consultants, in association with ISL and BRGM, “Abbay River Basin Integrated
Development Master Plan Project (ARBIDMPP)”, phase 2 Volume I Main report. Report to the MoWR, Ethiopia.
Belete, B. (2006). Across-system comparative assessment of medium-scale irrigation system performance. MSc Thesis. Arba Minch
University, Ethiopia.
Bos, M. G., Burton, M. A. and Molden, D. J. (2005). Irrigation and Drainage Performance Assessment. Practical Guidelines.
Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing.
Burton, M., Molden, D. and J. Skutsch (2000). Benchmarking irrigation and drainage system performance. Position
paper, IPTRID-FAO-WORLDBANK. Working Group on Performance Indicators and Benchmarking, Report on a Workshop,
3–4 August 2000, FAO, Rome, Italy.
FAO (1989): Guidelines for designing and evaluating surface irrigation system. Irrigation and Drainage Paper. No. 45.
 Performance of irrigation in Ethiopia 69
Girma, A. (2006). Evaluation of failures and design practices of river diversion structures for irrigation: Case study in Oromia. MSc
Thesis, Arba Minch University, Ethiopia.
Habib, D. (2004). Performance evaluation and sensitivity analysis of fixed and cutback flows for furrow irrigation at Metahara Sugar
Estate. MSc Thesis. Arba Minch University. Ethiopia.
Hagos, F., Namara, R., Godswill, M. and Awulachew, S. B. (2009). Importance of irrigated agriculture to the Ethiopian
economy: Capturing the direct net benefits of irrigation. IWMI Research Report 128.
Kloezen, W. H. and Garcés-Restrepo, C. (1998). Assessing irrigation performance with comparative indicators: The
case of the Alto Rio Lerma irrigation District, Mexico. IWMI Research Report 22.
Mekonen, A and Awulachew, S. B. (2009). Assessment of the Performance of Selected Irrigation Schemes in Ethiopia.
Journal of Applied Irrigation Science 44: 121–142.
MoARD (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development). (2010). Ethiopia’s Agriculture Sector Policy and Investment
Framework: Ten Year Road Map (2010–2020). Unpublished draft report.
MoFED (Minstry of Finance and Economic Development) (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. Unpublished report.
Molden, D., Sakthivadivel, R., Perry, C. J., de Fraiture, C. and Kloezen, W. H. (1998). Indicators for comparing
performance of irrigated agricultural systems. IWMI Research Report 20.
Mohtadullah, K. (1993). Performance of irrigation systems. 15th Congress on Irrigation and Drainage: Water Management in
the Next Century – Transactions Vol.1-J Keynote Addresses, International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage, 74–83.
MoWR (Ministry of Water Resources) (2002). Water Sector Development Program (WSDP), Addis Ababa: Ethiopia.
Unpublished report.
Pèrez, L., Rodriguez, J.A., Camacho, E. and Lopez, R. (2005). Monitoring and evaluation of irrigation using quality
performance indicators. ICID 21st European regional Conference, 15–19 May 2005, Frankfurt.
Robel, L. (2005). Assessment of design practices and performance of small-scale irrigation structures in South Region. MSc Thesis.
Arba Minch University, Ethiopia.
Small, L. E. and Svendsen, M. (1990). A framework for assessing irrigation performance. Irrigation and Drainage System
4: 283–312.
Werfring, A. (2004). Typology of irrigation in Ethiopia. Thesis submitted to the University of Natural Resources and
Applied Life Sciences Vienna. Institute of Hydraulics and Rural Water Management in partial fulfilment of the
degree of Diplomingineur.
Yercan, M., Dorsan, F. and Ul, M. A. (2004). Comparative analysis of performance criteria in irrigation schemes: a
case study of Gediz river basin in Turkey. Agricultural Water Management 66: 259–266.
Yusuf, K. and Tena, A. (2006). Performance assessment of small-scale irrigation schemes using comparative indicators:
a case in Awash River Basin of Ethiopia. Proceeding of the 10th Symposium on Sustainable Water Resources Development,
Arba Minch University, October 9–10, 2006, 12–14.

View publication stats