Presented by:
Siddharth Dasgupta – 09EM033
Ravi Sharma – 09EM028
Parimal Sinha – 09EM024
Mukesh Kr Mishra – 09EM20
Kishor Kumar – 09EM17
Significant Achievements in Food Security:
40% of Food (on 17% Land)Increased Food Availability & Affordability Income and Employment IncreaseInvestments in Rural Infrastructure Multiplier EffectsGrowth in Rural
Economy PIM Experience (in over 60 countries) with
promising results
Costs and Consequences of Past Irrigation Development
Vicious Circle of Inadequate O&M, Poor Service
Delivery, Infrastructure Degradation, Low Cost
recovery, etc
Inefficient Water Use (physical & economic)
Unsustainable Public Subsidies to Irrigation
Growing Environmental and Social Problems
Objective:
Review and Analyze Concrete Examples of PPP and Draw Lessons from These for Guiding Future Interventions in PPP in I&D.
The private sector has been very active in Investing and managing:Irrigated Agricultural Farming and Production
and On-Farm Water Management Traditional Small-Scale Irrigation Systems (ex:
about 40% of Morocco’s irrigated area)Groundwater Development (ex: about 50% of
India’s irrigated area)Water User Associations
BUT Contrary to Water Supply and Sanitation…. There has been little PPP Investments and/or Management of Large-Scale I&D Schemes
Professionalism and Knowledge Transfer Better Governance Corporate Culture Financial Rigor and Budgeting Productivity Gains BUT…
Higher Costs of Private Capital Need for Increased Water Charges Greater Risks in I&D (Financial, Water
Resources, Demand)
duration (years)
Divestiture (asset sale)
35
30Build-Operate-
Own
25Concession
20
Build-Operate-Transfer
15Lease Affermage
10
5
Management contract
0Service contract
public privatecommercial risk or/and investment responsibility
Public Service Delegation
Service/Management Contract
PUBLIC AGENCY
PRIVATE COMPANY
GOVERNMENT AGENCY
WUAs FARMERS
IIIIIIIIIIIII
----------------------------------------------
Com
merc
ial
Ris
k
High
Low
Public Private
Country where cases have been considered and selected for the study
Country where cases have been considered but not selected for the study
Cases «With No Commercial Risk»(Water Service Charged to Local Entity):
1) CACG, ASA, France
2) SAED, Senegal
3) Alaotra, Madagascar
4) Nakhlet, Mauritanie
Cases «With Commercial Risk on OMM » (Water Service Charged to Users): 5) Juazeiro, Brazil6) Toula, Niger7)Pequin Kavaje, Albania8)Sonora, Mexico9)Tieshan, China10) Adasiyeh, Jordan 11) Ormva Reform, Morocco
Cases «With Commercial Risk on Investment» (Water Service Charged to Users):12) Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India13) Gap, Turkey14) CSS, Senegal15) Dina Farm, Egypt16) Business farms, Saudi Arabia17) SCP, France18) CACG Neste, France 19) Irrigation Murray Limited, Australia20) Toshka, Egypt21) Guerdanne, Morocco
Cases
I&D functions
01 -
CA
CG
-AS
A
02 -
SA
ED
03 -
Ala
otr
a
04 -
Nakhle
t
05 -
Juazeir
o
06 -
Toula
07 -
Pequin
Kav.
08 -
Sonora
09 -
Tie
shan
10 -
Adasiy
eh
11 -
OR
MV
A r
ef.
12 -
Easte
rn U
P
13 -
GA
P
14 -
CS
S
15 -
Din
a F
arm
16 -
Busin
ess f.
17 -
SC
P
18 -
CA
CG
-Nest
19 -
Murr
ay
20 -
Toshka
21 -
Guerd
ane
Investment
Decision
Financing
Design
Construction
Regulation & control
Water alloc. and police
Maint.audit & price regul.
OMM
Water alloc. managemnt
Maintenance
System operat. (&CRM)
Water value optimis.
Agricultural production
Service contracts PSD on OMM PSD on Investment
Demand for PPP is Mostly a Government Initiative Motivated by the Need to Reduce Recurrent Public Subsidies to I&D System O&M.
Almost All Contract Cases were for Private Sector Participation in one or more of the “OMM Functions”.
2/3 of the Contract Cases were for Private Sector Participation in one or more of the “Investment Functions”.
In Most Cases, Farmers are Organized in Groups/Associations.
In Terms of Contracts Service/Management Contracts Account for 13% of the
total PSD Contracts represent 81% of the cases, nearly
always including for OMM function as well
In Terms of Risks: Investment PPPs are More Sensitive to:
Financial Risks (Cost Recovery) Water Demand Risks Water Resources Risks “Rural Conditions” Risks (Markets, Poverty,..)
The I&D “Sustainability Vicious Circle” Calls for “Professionalization” of the Service Delivery Functions
This can be Brought by a “Professional Third Party” between Farmers --Preferably Organized in WUAs-- and Government Services.
This “Professional Third Party” could be:
Financially Autonomous Government Agency.
A professionalized Water User Association
A Private Company
Any combination of the above
Development Organizations Should Support the Emergence and Development of PPP Especially for the OMM Functions which are :Key to I&D SustainabilityLess Costly to undertake Less Risky
No Panacea… For Private Sector Involvement as The Unique Solution to improve the Performance of the Sector.
No Mantra… about The Need for Privatization of I&D Assets or Service Delivery Functions.
What the Study highlights is:
“The Need for a Professional Third Party Between Government and Farmers in PPP in I&D”
This Third Professional Party could be Government, Users, Private or Mixed Body, provided that it is legally and financially totally autonomous and accountable for the Users.
Can you bring additional cases of PPP in irrigation and drainage?
What can you suggest to enrich the conceptual framework?
Based on your own experience, is there indeed a need for PPP in I&D?
If yes, what are the most important functions that could benefit from PPP