United Nations Public Service Awards Case Studies

Several factors had contributed to irrigation management frustration. Initially, the senses of ownership of the irrigation system among farmers were low since public irrigation staff failed to encourage public participation in every process of reservoir development, that is, planning, design, operation, maintenance, and monitoring. The public irrigation staff customarily held decision-making power on water allocation and distribution and maintenance needs and did not provide opportunities for farmers to share in the decision making. Farmers perceived the management of irrigation system as state-initiated and state-oriented without the benefit of providing better access to water since upstream farmers usually got surplus irrigation water, resulting in downstream farmers being left in need. The public irrigation staff was simply unable to provide irrigated water in a sufficient and timely manner creating further frustration. The diversification of public interest beyond farming activities, moreover, distracted them from participating in agricultural career.
Despite the best efforts and under detailed and demanding responsibilities, the Royal Irrigation Department (RID) generally struggled to achieve two of its missions, i.e. allocating water to every stakeholder in the equitable and sufficient manner and promoting public participation process under water development projects and irrigation management. The specific problems faced by the RID were the following issues. The RID’s manpower was continuously downsized according to the 2003 Good Governance Reform Royal Decree. The retired RID staff were minimal replaced. Thus, the number of civil servants and permanent employees of the RID remained only 6,000 (previously 9,000 persons) and 20,000 (previously 50,000 persons), respectively. Irrigation structures were destroyed by farmers because they lacked senses of ownership of the irrigation system. Farmers did not cooperate in water operation and maintenance. Local politicians frequently interfered irrigation management. Irrigation management did not immediately respond to farmers’ needs. There were no incentives for water saving, thus leading to water shortages and water fight among farmers. A demonstration was organized by farmers whenever farmers faced water shortages. Farmers lacked understanding of their roles in irrigation management. Water decision-making by public irrigation staff did not completely serve the public needs. Farmers had no access to updated water information. Water conflicts were usually occurred among farmers as well as between farmers and public irrigation staff.

What is the initiative about? (the solution)
The initiative provided tremendous benefits to various parties from an individual level to a global level, that is, farmers, RID, Thailand, and the ultimate world. At an individual level, farmers gained an understanding of water demand and supply in the areas, thus saving water for the next crop season. In 2009, farmers helped save water about 10 million m3 in the dry season. Farmers were able to do farming activities more than one time per year as well as to apply the crop diversification. Farmers’ income grew from US$3,900 per household/year to be US$5,233 per household/year (US$1 = 30 Thailand Baht). The yield of main crops in the area, i.e. rice and sugar cane, rose significantly. The rice yield of the first and second crops increased from 2,000 kg/acre to be 2,530 kg/acre and from 2,125 kg/acre to be 2,635 kg/acre, respectively. The sugar cane yield was 25 ton/acre and then turned to be 35.4 ton/acre after implementing the initiative. The plot preparation of tail-end farmers was reduced from six weeks to be four weeks because the initiative made the irrigated water flow faster through the end of a canal. The water conflicts between farmers and farmers and between farmers and public irrigation staff were dramatically decreased. Farmers were able to resume their relationships in the community. Farmers got great satisfaction in water service delivery supported by the initiative because they received water in a sufficient and timely manner. Finally, the initiative was a forum to devolve the water management decision-making to farmers, either through representatives or committee bodies, thus reinforcing the democratic society. The initiative also assisted the RID in better maintaining the irrigation structures although its manpower was continuously downsized according to the 2003 Good Governance Reform Royal Decree. The manpower of the Kra Seaw Operation and Maintenance Office, for example, was 110 and 58 persons in 2001 and 2010, respectively. This helped save the salary about US$312,000 per year. The annual budget for canal and ditch maintenance was considerably saved US$53,333. The service satisfaction evaluated by farmers in the areas soared to 90% in the year 2008. The initiative helped the Kra Seaw Operation and Maintenance Office completely serve at least 6,740 farmers under the irrigation areas of 52,000 acres. The saving water allowed the Kra Seaw Operation and Maintenance Office to further supply water for domestic use of farmers outside of the irrigation areas of 28,000 acres during wet and dry seasons. At the national level, the initiative led to ease water conflicts in Thai society. The increase of farmers’ income helped alleviate the standard of living of farmers. This helped maintain agricultural careers, which accounted for 34% of the country, conserved the irrigation areas, and enhanced the food and energy security of the nation. The agricultural export served as one of the main contribution of the GDP. At the global level, the initiative promoted the food security of the world. The security was built on the food availability and food access through the Thai agricultural export.

Who proposed the solution, who implemented it and who were the stakeholders?
There were four key players contributed to the design and implementation of the initiative. Four key players included the RID’s executives, the Office of Public Participatory Promotion, the Kra Seaw Operation and Maintenance Office, and water users. The water users at the Kra Seaw Reservoir were comprised of 6,740 farmers, including a district waterworks authority, a sugar factory, and an ethanol factory. The RID had long faced the struggle with irrigation management. The struggle caused continuous conflicts between public irrigation staff and water users because the sole water management decision-making hold by the public staff did not deliver water in a sufficient and timely manner. The RID’s executives then specified a strategic plan regarding the initiative so called participatory irrigation management (PIM), allocated budgets, and identified a key performance indicator, the percentage of established water user organizations in an irrigation area, to monitor the initiative. The Office of Public Participatory Promotion was responsible for implementing the initiative, preparing the PIM manuals and guidelines, developing the PIM facilitators, arranging relevant training sessions for related public irrigation staff, and allocating budgets for implementation and monitoring. The responsibilities of the Kra Seaw Operation and Maintenance Office involved establishing and developing water user organizations and Joint Management Committee for Irrigation (JMC), selecting irrigation volunteers, and facilitating the meetings, training sessions, and study tours for farmers. The roles of water users were: to be engaged in establishing and being committee members of water user organizations and JMC; to serve as irrigation volunteers; to attend the capacity building sessions provided by public irrigation staff; and, to collaborate in water sharing and maintaining irrigation structures.

Describe how and when the initiative was implemented by answering these questions
a. What were the strategies used to implement the initiative? In no more than 500 words, provide a summary of the main objectives and strategies of the initiative, how they were established and by whom.
Two common problems of the RID were poorly maintained irrigation systems, thus providing low efficiency and inequitable water allocation. In addition, the RID’s manpower was continuously decreased due to the 2003 Good Governance Reform Royal Decree. The RID then tried to seek cooperation from farmers in operation and maintenance to ease difficulties in irrigation management. The initiative served as a forum to exchange water information and concerns between farmers and public irrigation staff. The RID characterized PIM as the involvement of both water user organizations and local administrative organizations in planning, making decisions in irrigation management and operation, receiving benefits, and monitoring at all levels of an irrigation system including a reservoir or water resource, irrigation canals (i.e. primary, secondary, and tertiary canals), and on-farm irrigation system (i.e. ditch). The water user organizations and JMC got involved in irrigation co-management while local administrative organizations were target agencies to be transferred the ownership of a small irrigation project situated within their areas. The local administrative organizations assisted in allocating maintenance budgets. The implementation strategies used by the RID included: proclaiming the PIM policy to relevant agencies by the RID’s Director General; incorporating PIM into the Department‘s Strategic Plan; establishing the Office of Public Participatory Promotion; specifying a key performance indicator to evaluate the implementation; and, allocating budgets for public participation process. The attitude of public irrigation staff regarding PIM implementation was crucial for success. Therefore, the Office of Public Participatory Promotion mainly dealt with building a PIM understanding and developing skills among public irrigation staff and farmers. The approaches to building a PIM understanding and developing skills consisted of: arranging the training sessions, workshops, seminars, and study tours; preparing PIM manuals and guidelines, pamphlets, posters, and videos; and, organizing PIM network. Awarding an outstanding water user organization at regional and national levels was a means to stimulate incorporation of the initiative. The Kra Seaw Operation and Maintenance Office was a principal agency to implement the initiative in the field. There were three approaches of water management in the field planned by the Kra Seaw Operation and Maintenance Office. Level 1, water management at a reservoir or water resource, the JMC assisted in managing water from the reservoir to irrigation canals. Level 2, water management at an irrigation canal, water was administered within each irrigation canal by an integrated water user group. Level 3, water management at a ditch, a water user group held the right to allocate water to every plot.

b. What were the key development and implementation steps and the chronology? No more than 500 words
The key development of the initiative was the establishment of water user organizations, JMC, and irrigation volunteers. This helped identify clear responsible persons at every level of an irrigation system. It should be noted that each development came separately based on the action learning. At a ditch level, a water user group, which was a fundamental group of water user organizations, was organized to allocate water in a ditch, but area covered should be less than 400 acres. The administrative structure was comprised of an elected chief and members who use irrigated water from the same ditch. At a canal level, an integrated water user group was united from several water user groups that used water from the same canal. It may take responsibility of a primary, secondary, or tertiary canal, but the area should be covered less than 8,000 acres. The administration was in a form of elected committee to manage irrigated water in a canal. At a reservoir or water resource level, the JMC was responsible for reaching a mutual agreement on water allocation and delivery plan in each crop season. The JMC was made up of representatives from four sectors including water user organizations, local administrative organizations, the Kra Seaw Operation and Maintenance Office, and relevant public and private agencies. An irrigation volunteer acted as a coordinator between the public irrigation staff and farmers regarding irrigation management. The volunteer was a farmer being a member of an integrated water user group. The coverage area of one volunteer was 1,000 - 1,200 acres. The Office of Public Participatory Promotion provided a training session for the elected volunteers before start working. The implementation steps involved: first, to establish water user groups at every ditch all over the irrigation areas; second, to unite water user groups under the same primary or secondary canals to be integrated water user groups throughout the areas; third, to develop irrigation volunteers covering the irrigation areas; and, fourth, to organize the JMC who held absolute power to make final decision-making about irrigation management at the Kra Seaw Reservoir. During the year 2000 – 2001, the Kra Seaw Operation and Maintenance Office first established 278 water user groups throughout and provided a series of training sessions for farmers to introduce fundamental irrigation system, PIM concepts, and roles and responsibilities of relevant parties. After each water user group had a chance to practice working as a group, they were united to be nine integrated water user groups to manage water of the primary or secondary canals in 2002. Thus far, there were 29 irrigation volunteers in the irrigation areas of the Kra Seaw Reservoir. The JMC at the Kra Seaw Reservoir was organized in 2006. There were 51 committee members consisting of 29 representatives from integrated water user groups, 11 representatives from local administrative organizations, four representatives from the Kra Seaw Operation and Maintenance Office, and seven representatives from relevant public and private agencies, including four district agricultural offices, a district waterworks authority, and two factories.

c. What were the main obstacles encountered? How were they overcome? No more than 500 words
Five main obstacles were encountered during the implementation of the initiative. First, the public irrigation staff resisted implementing the initiative because they did not want to lose their sole power in water management decision-making. The RID arranged a series of training sessions to make the staff understand the PIM concepts and approaches. This helped change the staff’s attitude. The RID also identified a key performance indicator to monitor the initiative implementation. Second, farmers, as well, did not understand the PIM concepts and refuse to collaborate on the initiative. The Kra Seaw Operation and Maintenance Office continuously provided seminars and training sessions for farmers including PIM concepts, technical skills in irrigation, administrative skills, and organic farming. However, the key success was the sincerity, determination, and continuity of the staff of the Kra Seaw Operation and Maintenance Office who worked closely with farmers during the implementation period. Third, local administrative organizations did not collaborate on allocating maintenance budgets of the transferred irrigation projects. The RID continually provided the regional workshops to make clear about the budget source and how to use the budgets. Fourth, the public irrigation staff lacked public participation skills. They were therefore reluctant to incorporate the initiative. The RID together with a non-government agency initiated a series of capacity development sessions to create the new spirit of public service among public irrigation staff. The entire capacity development for the staff took three years. The first year training constituted two, 5-day workshops. Each workshop was limited to 25 participants. The training was to introduce the concept and skills needed to be an effective facilitator of meaningful public participation activities. Only qualified participants moved on to the second year training. The second year training blended the best arts of finding oneself and living with others from western and oriental doctrines. It contained four consequent courses as follows: (1) Enneagram: nine basic personality types of human nature and their complex interrelationships; (2) tasks, power of groups, and happiness; (3) leadership that stressed power of water user organizations; and, (4) restorative conflict resolution mechanisms in a public meeting with water user organizations. Each course lasted about four days. The third year training focused on developing skills of being a facilitator. Each course was carefully designed for 30 participants from the second year training. The training comprised four sequential courses: (1) beginning facilitator for PIM; (2) intermediate facilitator for PIM; (3) advanced facilitator for PIM; and, (4) relaxation and consciousness building that helped generate management skills in a public meeting. Each course took about four days. The capacity development efforts had been periodically revised on trial and error basis. Fifth, the areas of implementation were large. Thus it was hard to complete the initiative in a short period. The Office of Public Participatory Promotion in collaboration with the Kra Seaw Operation and Maintenance Office clearly specified an implementation plan and evaluated it regularly. The RID’s executives acknowledged the importance of the initiative and continually allocated budgets for this purpose.

d. What resources were used for the initiative and what were its key benefits? In no more than 500 words, specify what were the financial, technical and human resources’ costs associated with this initiative. Describe how resources were mobilized
The RID supported the initiative by using its regular budget. The budget for establishing a water user group was US$116 per group or US$32,248 for 278 water user groups under the initiative. The establishment of an integrated water user group was budgeted US$1,333 or US$11,997 for nine integrated water user groups under the initiative. The allotted budget for JMC establishment was US$1,723. The annual budget was approximately allocated US$11,200 for strengthening the initiative. The activities that helped strengthen the initiative comprised meetings, training sessions, and study tours. The RID, moreover, provided a monthly allowance of US$40 for an irrigation volunteer. To mobilize the initiative, the RID’s executives specified a strategic plan regarding the initiative and allocated a budget. A key performance indicator, the percentage of established water user organizations in an irrigation area, was identified to monitor the initiative. Awarding an outstanding water user organization at regional and national levels was a means to stimulate incorporation of the initiative. The attitude of public irrigation staff was vital for success of the initiative. Therefore, the Office of Public Participatory Promotion was responsible for building a PIM understanding and developing skills among public irrigation staff. The approaches to building a PIM understanding and developing skills consisted of: arranging the training sessions, workshops, seminars, and study tours; preparing PIM manuals and guidelines, pamphlets, posters, and videos; and, organizing PIM network. Farmers in the irrigation areas attended a number of training sessions and study tours provided by staff at the Kra Seaw Operation and Maintenance Office.

Is the initiative sustainable and transferable?
The initiative is definitely sustainable. Due to the population increase, the water demand of every sector has escalated and caused water fight among water users. The RID acknowledges the essence of water by clearly stating its missions, that is, allocating water to every stakeholder in the equitable and sufficient manner and promoting public participation process under water development projects and irrigation management. The initiative has incorporated in a strategic plan, thereby gaining a budget allocation since 2004. Moreover, the sustainable water management is practical because the final water management decision-making is based on a mutual agreement between every stakeholder. As of September 2009, there were 43,048 water user groups, 1,319 integrated water user groups, 35 water user associations, 45 water user cooperatives, 23 JMCs, and 1,057 irrigation volunteers throughout the country. The water user organizations established thus far cover approximately 54% of the entire irrigated areas of the nation and are associated with 829,563 members. The ultimate goal of the RID is to establish water user organizations and JMCs all over the irrigated areas, 9.6 million acres. The establishment of the water user organizations and JMCs runs on a voluntary basis. The duty of public irrigation staff is to present possible benefits of the establishment. However, the final decision depends on farmers’ readiness and consent. Once farmers agree to establish a water user organization or JMC, the public irrigation staff merely provide guidelines for the formation of those organizations. The chief or president and every member in those organizations are responsible for setting their own rules based on topographical, economic, and social constraints in each area. The number of members can vary from ten persons in a water user group up to more than 30,000 in a water user association or water user cooperatives. The coverage area ranges from less than 400 acres in a water user group to more than 48,000 acres in a water user association or water user cooperatives. A water fee to cover the expenses of operation and maintenance and organization administration is optional for a water user organization, but if such a fee is to be charged it must be based on mutual agreement of members. For example, a number of water user organizations set a one-time membership fee from US$0.67 - 6.67 per member. A water user organization in northern Thailand acquires rice (about 19 kg/acre/year) from members as a water fee. Or, a number of water user organizations do not collect water fees, but sharing a maintenance cost on a case by case basis. These flexible approaches applied by the RID make the initiative transferable to every topographical, financial, social and economic, cultural, environmental, institutional, and regulatory circumstance. The approaches also boost farmers’ commitment which inspires a sense of ownership in the established water user organizations and JMCs, thus encouraging farmers to participate in activities of the organizations.

What are the impact of your initiative and the lessons learned?
The initiative undoubtedly causes the great impact from an individual to a global level. At an individual level, marginalized Thai farmers, either by themselves or through representatives, hold absolute power in water management decision-making at every level of an irrigation scheme. Attending the meetings gives opportunities for individual farmers to exercise their rights in formulating an organization. The initiative, moreover, creates opportunities for farmers to access relevant and timely information regarding water and agriculture, to share water problems and concerns with public irrigation staff, to be treated as valuable personnel with a right to speak and be listened to, and to influence decision-making in irrigated water delivery, thus refining service accountability. Such opportunities for marginalized farmers are signals of empowerment. The water service accountability, furthermore, facilitates multi-farming activities, thus increasing crop production and farmer’s income. This leads to improve the quality of life of Thai farmers. At the global level, Thailand serves as the biggest exporter of the following agricultural products including rice, para rubber, cassava, sugar, poultry, shrimp, canned pineapple, and canned tuna. Thailand is recognized as the 8th rank of the world to occupy the big agricultural plots. In 2007, Thailand was the 13th rank of the world’s agricultural product exporter. This shows that Thailand serves as one of the main food sources of the world. The initiative makes the water service accountable, thus ensuring multi-farming and crop diversification. It can be said that the initiative enhances the food security in relation to the food availability and food access to the world. The key elements to success are the followings: (1) to build a sense of ownership among farmers by letting them commit to organization establishment; (2) to encourage compassionate communication among JMC members by helping them to get acquainted through an overnight study tour; (3) to build rapport with individual farmers by making frequent visits to meet farmers in the field in order to make them feel more comfortable sharing their opinions in a meeting setting; and, (4) to treat farmers as valuable persons by ensuring equal information distribution to every stakeholder, regularly updating information, greeting farmers first at a meeting, indicating that every opinion welcome in a meeting, and offering a caring response to farmers‘ problems. It can be concluded that people learn from a real and meaningful project by engaging in an interactive action. The incorporation of the initiative in a local community provides more opportunities to advance learning among relevant parties. The lessons learned demonstrate the inherent potential of marginalized Thai farmers, who are capable of directing their own water service delivery. The lessons also illustrate the proper role of public irrigation staff as organizers who arrange the ideal conditions for promoting the authentic dialogue in PIM discussion, thus facilitating mutual learning among stakeholders. Opportunities from the initiative help reinforce the recognition of being valuable persons in the local communities of marginalized Thai farmers and, moreover, become the strengthened foundation of Thai society that is able to endure the growing challenge.


Institution Name:		Royal Irrigation Department
Institution Type:		Government Agency
Contact Person:		Dr. Wachiraporn Kumnerdpet
Title:		Environmental Scientist, Office of Public Particip
Telephone/ Fax:		+ (66) 2 669 3775
Institution's / Project's Website:		+ (66) 2 669 1460
E-mail:		indianroller@hotmail.com
Address:		811 Sam-sen Road, Dusit
Postal Code:		10300
City:
State/Province:		Bangkok
Country:		Thailand

The Problem

Solution and Key Benefits

Actors and Stakeholders

(a) Strategies

(b) Implementation

(c) Overcoming Obstacles

(d) Use of Resources

Sustainability and Transferability

Lessons Learned

Contact Information