Paddy and Water Environment

, Volume 11, Issue 1–4, pp 503–511 | Cite as

In-crisis delivery rate: a novel measure of success in communal water management

  • Taro TakahashiEmail author
  • Hideo Aizaki
  • Takeshi Sato
  • Na Guo
  • Yasuhiro Nakashima
  • Shigeo Ogawa
  • Nanae Yamada
  • Xiaoyun Zheng


Of the plethora of studies that discuss requirements for successful irrigation management, few pay close attention to what actually happens when the supply of water becomes extremely low. Such an oversight in the literature is unfortunate, because this is precisely when management matters. To understand what separates success from failure in irrigation management at times of critical water shortages, the authors conducted emergency fieldwork in February 2010 along four major irrigation channels in a drought-stricken rice-growing area within the Chinese province of Yunnan. Separately, satellite images of the four villages dated February 2009 and February 2010 were jointly analysed to produce a novel indicator for a village’s success in water management. Called the in-crisis delivery rate, this indicator compares water delivery between normal and drought years and directly evaluates performance in water management during crisis periods. The results led to an unexpected discovery that, contrary to common expectations, the only village of the present study that deployed a traditional earthen water channel secured substantially more water throughout the drought period than those with concrete-lined channels. It is hypothesised that the labour intensive, rather than capital intensive, nature of repair work of the earthen channel enabled flexible operations, and hence had the comparative advantage under a skilled management team. This result confirms the importance of daily maintenance work, which tends to occur less often after modernisation of water paths.


Drought Performance indicator Remote sensing Water management 



This research was supported by Japan Society for the Promotion of Science Grant-in-aid (#21405025).

Supplementary material

Supplementary material 1 (MP4 51842 kb)


  1. Aggarwal RM, Narayan TA (2004) Does inequality lead to greater efficiency in the use of local commons? The role of strategic investments in capacity. J Environ Econ Manag 47:163–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baland JM, Platteau JP (1997) Wealth inequality and efficiency in the commons. Part I: the unregulated case. Oxford Econ Pap 49:451–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baland JM, Platteau JP (1998) Wealth inequality and efficiency in the commons. Part II: the regulated case. Oxford Econ Pap 50:1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baland JM, Platteau JP (1999) The ambiguous impact of inequality on local resource management. World Dev 27:773–788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bardhan P (1993) Analytics of the institutions of informal cooperation in rural development. World Dev 21:633–639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bardhan P (2000) Irrigation and cooperation: an empirical analysis of 48 irrigation communities in south India. Econ Dev Cult Change 48:847–865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. British Broadcasting Corporation (2010) Severe drought hits south-west china. Accessed 1 Sept 2010
  8. Dayton-Johnson J (2000) Determinants of collective action on the local commons: a model with evidence from Mexico. J Dev Econ 62:181–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dayton-Johnson J, Bardhan P (2002) Inequality and conservation on the local commons: a theoretical exercise. Econ J 112:577–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fujiie M, Hayami Y, Kikuchi M (2005) The conditions of collective action for local commons management: the case of irrigation in the Philippines. Agr Econ 33:179–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gaspart F, Jabbar M, Melard C, Platteau JP (1998) Participation in the construction of a local public good with indivisibilities: an application to watershed development in Ethiopia. J Afr Econ 7:157–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Grafton RQ (2000) Governance of the commons: a role for the state? Land Econ 76:504–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jones EC (2004) Wealth-based trust and the development of collective action. World Dev 32:691–711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lam WF (1996a) Institutional design of public agencies and coproduction: a study of irrigation associations in Taiwan. World Dev 24:1039–1054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lam WF (1996b) Improving the performance of small-scale irrigation systems: the effects of technological investments and governance structure on irrigation performance in Nepal. World Dev 24:1301–1315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lam WF (2001) Coping with change: a study of local irrigation institutions in Taiwan. World Dev 29:1569–1592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mather PM, Koch M (2011) Computer processing of remotely-sensed images: an introduction. Wiley, ChichesterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Meinzen-Dick R, Raju KV, Gulati A (2002) What affects organization and collective action for managing resources? Evidence from canal irrigation systems in India. World Dev 30:649–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Miyamoto K, Yamamoto T, Anyoji H (2004) Crisis management of water shortage in an irrigation area with a pipeline network system. Paddy Water Environ 2:59–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. National Climatic Data Center (2010) NNDC climate data online: global average of the day data series. Accessed 1 Sept 2010
  21. Ostrom E (2000) Collective action and the evolution of social norms. J Econ Perspect 14:137–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ounvicht T (2011) Equal water sharing in scarcity conditions: the case of the Chaisombat Muang Fai irrigation systems in Thailand. Paddy Water Environ 9:325–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Shioda K, Onimaru T (2007) Successful factors and activation theory/concept of water users’ organization: based on the MWMS project in Thailand. Paddy Water Environ 5:15–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sugden R (1984) Reciprocity: the supply of public goods through voluntary contributions. Econ J 94:772–787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tanaka Y, Sato Y (2003) An institutional case study of Japanese water users association: towards successful participatory irrigation management. Paddy Water Environ 1:85–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Teamsuwan V, Satoh M (2009) Comparative analysis of management of three water users’ organizations: successful cases in Chao Phraya Delta, Thailand. Paddy Water Environ 7:227–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wade R, Seckler D (1990) Priority issues in the management of irrigation systems. In: Sampath RK, Young A (eds) Social, economic, and institutional issues in third world irrigation management. Westview Press, Boulder, pp 13–30Google Scholar
  28. White TA, Runge CF (1995) The emergence and evolution of collective action: lessons from watershed management in Haiti. World Dev 23:1683–1698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yuanyang County Government (2010) Outline of Yuanyang County. Accessed 1 Sept 2010

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Taro Takahashi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Hideo Aizaki
    • 2
  • Takeshi Sato
    • 1
  • Na Guo
    • 3
  • Yasuhiro Nakashima
    • 1
  • Shigeo Ogawa
    • 2
  • Nanae Yamada
    • 4
  • Xiaoyun Zheng
    • 3
  1. 1.The University of TokyoTokyoJapan
  2. 2.National Institute for Rural EngineeringTsukubaJapan
  3. 3.Yunnan Academy of Social SciencesKunmingChina
  4. 4.Institute for Developing EconomiesChibaJapan

Personalised recommendations