Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bridging the Gap: Assessing Performance and Planned Importance in Watershed Projects Using Participatory Methods

  • ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION
  • Published:
Journal of The Institution of Engineers (India): Series A Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) has become a significant policy objective worldwide. In India, the government plans to apply the IWRM protocols through different projects under Prime Minister Krishi Sinchayee Yojna (Watershed Development Component), with stakeholder participation, to achieve sustainable economic growth. The programs adopt a common strategy of multi-resource management involving all stakeholders within the watershed who, together as a group, co-operatively identify the resource issues and concerns of the watershed and develop and implement a watershed plan with environmentally, socially, and economically sustainable solutions. However, evaluating the performance of watershed projects is challenging as the diverse socio-economic characteristics influence project goals. Commonly, watershed managers face a major problem: identifying key performance evaluation variables for a participatory appraisal to assess ‘the’ disparity in performance against planned importance. In this paper, a participatory performance evaluation framework is proposed from a base-line study of three Integrated Watershed Management Program projects in the lower Brahmaputra valley zone of Assam, India, namely, the Satpokholi, Kaldia, and the Turkunijan. The framework contains 65 variables divided into eight categories of developmental goals built on IWRM principles, priorities in planning, project goals, and regional socio-economic settings focusing on community information. Based on the framework, a structured questionnaire survey, using a four-point ratio scale field surveys are conducted amongst the community in the selected projects. Performance Index (PI) of each projects are obtained by analysing the data. The results show that besides providing better bottom-up performance evaluation in watershed management, this model would provide inputs to design intervention against the nonalignment of project performance and planned importance by policy-makers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

(Source: Detailed Project Report of Satpokholi, Turkunijan and Kaldia IWMP)

Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The datasets are submitted in SI files.

Code Availability

We have used commonly available Real Statistics software and Microsoft Excel tools for data analysis. The applied statistical tests have full acceptance in the research community.

References

  1. Common Guidelines for Watershed Development Projects-2008. India: National Rainfed Area Authority, Planning Commission, Government of India, NASC Complex, D.P. Shastri Marg, New Delhi-110012, 2011, p. 64. [Online]. Available: http://dolr.nic.in/dolr/downloads/pdfs/Common Guidelines for WDP 2008 Revised Edition 2011.pdf

  2. Composite Water Management Index In association with Ministry of Jal Shakti and Ministry of Rural Development,” New Delhi, 2019

  3. Compendium of Best Practices in Water Management 2.0, New Delhi, 2021. Accessed: Jun. 06, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.niti.gov.in

  4. A.K. Gupta, M.K. Goyal, S.P. Singh (eds.), Ecosystem Restoration: Towards Sustainability and Resilient Development (Springer Nature, Singapore, 2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-3687-8

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. IWRM Key Performance indicators for African transboundary River Basins, 2010. [Online]. Available: http://www.aquacoope.org/PITB

  6. O. Mohamed, A. Adam, I.M. Abdel-magid, Key performance indicators for integrated water resources management in some African countries. J. Eng. Comput. Sci. 16(2), 50–60 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  7. B. Hooper, River basin organization performance indicators: application to the Delaware River basin commission. Water Policy 12(4), 461–478 (2010). https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2010.111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Imported from https://unilytics.com/5-steps-to-actionable-key-performance-indicators/, [Online]. Available: https://unilytics.com/5-steps-to-actionable-key-performance-indicators/

  9. B.P. Hooper, Integrated water resources management: governance, best practice, and research challenges. J. Contemp Water Res. Educ. 135, 1–7 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1936-704X.2006.mp135001001.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. B. Nagaraja, G. Ekambaram, A critical appraisal of integrated watershed management programme in India. IOSR J. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 20(6), 17–23 (2015). https://doi.org/10.9790/0837-20611723

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. B. Mondal, N. Loganandhan, S.L. Patil, A. Raizada, S. Kumar, G.L. Bagdi, International soil and water conservation research institutional performance and participatory paradigms : comparing two groups of watersheds in semi-arid region of India. Int. Soil Water Conserv. Res. 8(2), 164–172 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iswcr.2020.04.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Benchmarking of Watershed Management Outcomes - Operational Guidelines, 2015. India: DoLR,Government of India, 2015. Accessed: Feb. 29, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://dolr.gov.in/sites/default/files/Benchmarking%20of%20Watershed%20Management%20Outcomes%20-%20Operational%20Guidelines%2C%202015%20-%20English.pdf

  13. B. Mahanta, A.K. Sarma, S.K. Kakoty, Harmonising Stakeholders’ perspectives: a watershed project desirability index. Water Conserv. Sci. Eng. 9(1), 10 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41101-024-00242-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. D. S. Kenney, “Assessing the Effectiveness of Watershed Initiatives: The Current State of Knowledge," 2000. https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1033&context=books_reports_studies

  15. SLNA, Detailed Project Report for Turkunijan IWMP (3A2A6/a2), Barpeta District, Assam Under the Department of Land Resources Ministry of Rural Development Government of India, New Delhi 2010. [Online]. Available: http://slnaiwmpassam.gov.in

  16. Indicators and Benchmarks for Watershed Management Outcomes Institute of Rural Management Anand Department of Land Resources Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and The World Bank 2014.

  17. Common Guidelines for Watershed Development Projects. India: Government of India, 2008, pp. 1–57. Accessed: Mar. 23, 2019. [Online]. Available: http://slnaiwmpassam.gov.in/xfiles/CommonGuidelines2008.pdf

  18. N. I. T. I. Aayog India, Composite water management index. India: NITI Aayog, Government of India 2017

  19. Welcome To SLNA(IWMP), ASSAM http://slnaiwmpassam.gov.in/?page_no=home page. Accessed: Mar. 23, 2019. [Online]. Available: http://slnaiwmpassam.gov.in/?page_no=home page

  20. SLNA, Detailed Project Report for Kaldia part III IWMP-upper (3A2A7/4), Barpeta District, Assam Under the Department of Land Resources Ministry of Rural Development Government of India New Delhi, 2010. [Online]. Available: http://slnaiwmpassam.gov.in

  21. SLNA, Detailed project report for Maloibari IWMP (3B2A2) of Kamrup district, Assam under the Department of Land Resources Ministry of Rural Development Government of India, New Delhi,” 2010. [Online]. Available: http://slnaiwmpassam.gov.in

  22. SLNA, Detailed Project Report for Satpokholi IWMP(3B1C8) 2011–2012, Kamrup District, Assam Under the Department of Land Resources Ministry of Rural Development Government of India, New Delhi, 2011. [Online]. Available: http://slnaiwmpassam.gov.in

  23. K. Krippendorff, Computing Krippendorff’s Alpha-Reliability, 2011. [Online]. Available: https://repository.upenn.edu/handle/20.500.14332/2089

  24. P. Bhandari, Ratio Scales | Definition, Examples, & Data Analysis, Jul. 2023, [Online]. Available: https://www.scribbr.com/statistics/ratio-data/

  25. I. Heathcote, Integrated Watershed Management Principles and Practice, 2nd edn. (John Wiley & Sons Inc, New Jersey, 2009)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the officers of the Irrigation, Soil Conservation and Water Resource department, Assam, Project consultants from monitoring agencies and community stakeholders participating in this study for their valuable opinions. In addition, the authors thank Mr P.K. Sarma and Mr K.C. Das for helping the field Survey in the project area.

Funding

The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Scholar, School of Agro and Rural Technology, Indian Institute of Technology, Amingaon, Guwahati, Assam, 781039, India

    Bhabesh Mahanta

  2. Civil Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology, Amingaon, Guwahati, Assam, 781039, India

    Arup Kumar Sarma

  3. Mechanical Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology, Amingaon, Guwahati, Assam, 781039, India

    Sashindra Kumar Kakoty

Authors
  1. Bhabesh Mahanta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arup Kumar Sarma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sashindra Kumar Kakoty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualisation: Bhabesh Mahanta, Arup Kumar Sarma and Sashindra Kumar Kakoty. Methodology: Bhabesh Mahanta, Arup Kumar Sarma and Sashindra Kumar Kakoty. Formal analysis and investigation: Bhabesh Mahanta. Writing—original draft preparation: Bhabesh Mahanta; Writing—review and editing: Arup Kumar Sarma and Sashindra Kumar Kakoty; Resources: Bhabesh Mahanta, Arup Kumar Sarma and Sashindra Kumar Kakoty. Supervision: Arup Kumar Sarma and Sashindra Kumar Kakoty.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bhabesh Mahanta.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix 1: Goal-wise Performance Scores

Appendix 1: Goal-wise Performance Scores

See Tables 7, 8, 9.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mahanta, B., Sarma, A.K. & Kakoty, S.K. Bridging the Gap: Assessing Performance and Planned Importance in Watershed Projects Using Participatory Methods. J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. A (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40030-024-00827-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40030-024-00827-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation