Performance assessment of irrigation water management in old lands of the Nile delta of Egypt

Abstract

This paper provides the methodology and results of a cross-scale diagnostic performance assessment program of the irrigation water management in the old lands of the Nile Delta of Egypt. The analysis was done at three levels; main canal level, branch canals level and on-farm level of the Meet Yazid command (82,740 ha) for the year 2008–2009 to highlight areas for improvement. At the main canal level the annual average percentage of irrigation water returning to drains and groundwater was 53% of the total water supplied. Since Meet Yazid lies at tail end of the delta, and there is groundwater salinity, opportunities for reuse are increasingly limited moving north to Lake Burullus. This would indicate opportunities for real water savings. The results of monthly relative water supply of the main canal indicated mismatch between demand and supply especially during the winter months, and when supply is low farmers do reuse drainage or groundwater. Also, the assessment of the three branch canals showed non-uniformity of water distribution and mismatch between demand and supply even when comparing improved and non-improved canals. At the on-farm level in paddy fields, the amount of irrigation flows to drains and saline sinks varied from 0.46 to 0.71 of inflow. In spite of these values of non-uniformity and low depleted fraction, the relative evapotranspiration (ratio of actual to potential) evaporation was uniformly high, indicating most crops of most farmers were not water stressed, which is also confirmed by the high yield values. The average values of productivity per unit water depleted by ETact were 1.04 and 1.05 kg/m3 for rice and wheat fields, respectively, with yields of rice and wheat at 8 and 6 t per ha respectively. On farm and tertiary improvements alone will not yield real water savings, as excess water in the main canal and drains will continue to flow out of the system. Rather the focus should first be on supplies to the main canal, accompanied by more precise on farm and water delivery practices at branch and tertiary levels, and ensuring that environmental flows are met. There is an added advantage of focusing on this tail end region of Egypt that this response would lessen vulnerability to reuse of polluted and saline water.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

References

  1. Abdel Azim R, Allam M (2004) Agricultural drainage water reuse in Egypt, strategic issues and mitigation measures. Workshop, Cairo

    Google Scholar 

  2. Allen RG, Pereira LS, Raes D, Smith M (1998) Crop evapotranspiration, guidelines for computing crop water requirements. FAO irrigation and drainage paper 56. Food and Agricultural Organization of United Nations (FAO), Rome, p 300

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bandara KMPS (2006) Assessing irrigation performance by using remote sensing. PhD thesis, ITC, Netherlands

  4. Bastiaanssen WGM, Bos MG (1999) Irrigation performance indicators based on remotely sensed data: a review of literature. Irrig Drain Syst 13(4):291–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bastiaanssen WGM, Menenti M, Feddes RA and Holtslag AAM (1998) A remote sensing surface energy balance algorithm for land (SEBAL): 1. Formulation”. Journal of Hydrology No. 212–213, pp 198–212

  6. Bastiaanssen WGM, Pelgrum H and Wimink S (2009) Remote sensing study for impact monitoring of the integrated irrigation improvement and management project. Draft Report

  7. Bos MG (2002) Performance assessment of irrigation and drainage. Wageningen

  8. Bos MG (2004) Using the depleted fraction to manage ground water table in irrigated area, irrigation and drainage systems No. 18, pp.201–209, Netherlands

  9. Bos MG, Burton MA, Molden DJ (2005) Irrigation and drainage performance assessment. Practical guidelines. CABI publishing, British Library, London

    Google Scholar 

  10. Chemin Y, Platonov A, Hassan M, Abdullaev I (2004) Using remote sensing data for water depleted assessment at administrative and irrigation system levels. Agr Water Manag J 64:183–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Doorenbos J, Pruitt WO (1992) Crop water requirement. Irrigation and drainage paper 24. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, p 118

    Google Scholar 

  12. DRI (2007) Salinity of groundwater and drainage water in the Nile delta, national water report center report, Cairo

  13. FAO (2007) Coping with water scarcity, challenge of the twenty- first century, world water day 22, March: “www.Worldwaterday07.org

  14. ITC (2001) ILWIS 3.0 academic user’s guide, international institute for aerospace survey and earth sciences, Enschede

  15. Jensen ME, Rangeley WR and Dielerman PJ (1990) Irrigation trends in world agriculture. Irrigation agricultural crops, Agronomy Monograph 30, ASA, Wisconsin, pp 31–67

  16. Kashef AI (1983) Salt water intrusion in the Nile Delta. Ground Water 21(2):160–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Keller AA and Keller J (1995) Effective efficiency: a water use efficiency concept for allocating freshwater resources, Discussion Paper No. 22, Center for Economic Policy Studies, Winrock International, USA

  18. Levine G (1982) Relative water supply: an explanatory variable for irrigation systems. Technical Report. No.6, the Department of Irrigation Project Problems in Developing Countries. Cornell University, Ithaca

    Google Scholar 

  19. Mohammed YA, Bastiaanssen WGM, Savenije HHG (2004) Spatial variability of evaporation and moisture storage in the swamps of the upper Nile studied by remote sensing techniques. J Hydrol 289:145–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Molden DJ (1997) Accounting for water use and productivity. SWIM (System Wide Initiative on Water Management) Report No.1, International Irrigation Management Institute, Colombo

  21. Molden DJ (2007) A comprehensive assessment of water management in agriculture. International Irrigation Management Institute, Colombo

    Google Scholar 

  22. Molden DJ, El-Kady M and Zhu Z (1996) Use and productivity of Egypt’s Nile water, USCID 14th Technical Conference

  23. Molden DJ, Sakthivadivel R, Perry CJ, de Fraiture C and Kloezen WH (1998) Indicators for comparing performance of irrigated agricultural systems.” Research Report 20. International Irrigation Management Institute, Colombo

  24. Molden D, Oweis T, Steduto P, Bindraban P, Hanjra MA, Kijne J (2010) Improving agricultural water productivity: between optimism and caution. Agr Water Manag J 97(4):528–535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. NWRP (2005) National water resources plan 2017. Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation, Cairo

  26. Perry CJ, Rock M, Seckler D (1997) Water as an economic good: a solution, or a problem? Research Report 14. IWMI, Colombo

    Google Scholar 

  27. Sakthivadivel R, de Fraiture C, Molden DJ, Perry C, Kloezen W (1999) Indicators of land and water productivity in irrigated agriculture. Water Resour Develop 15(1/2):161–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Seckler, D. (1996) The new era of water resources management: from “dry” to “wet” water savings. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Irrigation Management Institute (IIMI). iii, 17p. (IWMI Research Report 001 / IIMI Research Report 001)

  29. Zwart JS, Bastiaanssen WGM (2004) Review of measured crop water productivity values for irrigated wheat, rice, cotton and maize. Agr Water Manag J 69(2):115–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Doaa E. El-Agha.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

El-Agha, D.E., Molden, D.J. & Ghanem, A.M. Performance assessment of irrigation water management in old lands of the Nile delta of Egypt. Irrig Drainage Syst 25, 215–236 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10795-011-9116-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • Performance
  • Indicators
  • Irrigation
  • Efficiency
  • Actual evapotranspiration
  • Productivity
  • Water saving