MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE MECHANISATION AND IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT

DEPARTMENT OF IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT

DETERMINANTS OF THE PRODUCTIVITY AND SUSTAINABILITY OF IRRIGATION SCHEMES IN ZIMBABWE & PRE-INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK

Final report Harare, 30 May 2013 Alterra, in collaboration with Department of Irrigation and JICA Expert

1

Determinants of the productivity and sustainability of irrigation schemes in Zimbabwe & preinvestment framework. Final report 30 May 2013. Authors: Claire Jacobs, Mawira Chitima, Kees van ‘t Klooster, Kwinisa Bwanali Contact: Dr. C. E. van ‘t Klooster, Team Leader Alterra, Wageningen University and Research P.O. Box 47, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands Email: [email protected]

2

Executive summary Introduction Agriculture is the cornerstone of the Zimbabwean economy and over 70% of the population depends on it. Zimbabwe has one of the highest levels of water development for irrigation in the region and has a significant portion of its irrigated potential realized. Yet the history of smallholder irrigation in the country has been difficult. With the transformation of the agricultural sector after the Fast Track Land Reform Programme, there is greater participation of the majority of Zimbabweans in commercial agriculture. This transformation of commercial agriculture resulted in an initial dropping of the productivity of agriculture. Irrigation schemes in all categories of farming are facing challenges in productivity and marketing of produce. Zimbabwe is posed to revive its economy and improve agricultural performance. The key question is how to attract and make investments in irrigation more productive and sustainable.

Objectives of the Study The objective of this study is to present a broad diagnostic of the irrigation sector and deliver an outline for a strategic investment framework on how to address key issues in the sector and have best returns to investments. The study is organised in 3 components: Component I: Diagnostic study of irrigation scheme performance in Zimbabwe. A review is done on crop productivity, institutional arrangements, and financial and marketing arrangements. Based on the results of component 1, key issues in the irrigation sector are identified that feed into a prioritized investment program. Component II: Identification of strategic priorities and prerequisites for growth. Based on the diagnostic analysis and local consultations, priorities are identified for each category of irrigation, to determine where largest returns can be expected, both as quick wins and longer-term (e.g. capacity enhancement) needs. Component III: Development of a pre-investment framework. The framework describes the intervention models and policy support for the different types of irrigation, including institutional support, access to finance, M&E, and is based on national and regional empirical experience defining investment models offering the highest expected returns and greatest chances of success. The preinvestment framework is under pinned by a strong engagement of stakeholders along the process. This report assesses the performance of irrigation in Zimbabwe and delivers an outline for a strategic pre-investment framework on how to address key issues in the sector and have best returns to investments. The study was carried out in close collaboration with the Ministry of Agriculture, Mechanisation and Irrigation Development and the Department of Irrigation (DoI), and the JICA Irrigation Advisor.

Methodology 3

A diagnostic analysis of the irrigation sector was carried out to prepare an outline for a strategic investment framework on how to address key issues in the sector. The study combined information from an extensive field survey and stakeholder consultations. Five irrigation categories were studied: A1 and A2 schemes, communal schemes and gardens. From these categories a representative set of 110 irrigation schemes has been selected, and data on crops, marketing and institutional arrangements have been collected. An irrigation database was developed to store and analyse the data. A review was done on crop productivity, institutional arrangements and marketing arrangements. Based on this, key determinants for performance were identified and prioritised into risk categories to develop strategic objectives for the pre-investment framework. The framework describes recommended reforms and actions that will assist in making irrigation development productive and sustainable. The preinvestment framework provides recommendations for discussions among government entities and between government and development partners and investors. In addition, a scorecard for rating investment readiness of the country is given for tracking of implementation of prioritised reforms, while allowing an increase in investments. Finally a summary of possible policy implications in adopting the given reform agenda of irrigation development is provided. The pre-investment framework is under pinned by a strong engagement of stakeholders along the process.

Performance assessment results The main bottlenecks for irrigation performance indicated by stakeholders can be summarised as: 1. Poor Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) and planning: The lack of reliable information and poor monitoring and evaluation systems of irrigation schemes affects the quality of planning. There is no reliable information for the area equipped with irrigation equipment and for the area in a functional state. There is also an inconsistency in the estimation of irrigation potential. Schemes are planned and designed with little or no user input which has led to a lack of ownership and responsibility over the irrigation infrastructure, leading to cycles of decline and rehabilitation. There is significant pressure for rapid irrigation development without careful analysis of the schemes feasibility and viability. This has led to unsustainable schemes, with high maintenance and operational costs. 2. Unreliable and inadequate on-farm water supply and control: Electricity charges are too high for most farmers, and frequent power cuts affect the performance. Irrigation efficiency can be improved. The country’s capacity to design and construct irrigation schemes has been eroded over the last few years due to the brain drain experienced. 3. Lack of financing for irrigation development: The current state in the country’s agriculture, where land can no longer be used as collateral, banks not accepting the proposed 99-year leases as security, low liquidity of the financial institutions and the government, has caused a sharp decline in funding for irrigation development and for farmers’ working capital. Land tenure security is considered a key determinant of performance of agricultural investments. The key lessons from the field survey can be listed as:  The percentage area under irrigation is higher for smaller sized schemes than larger schemes. Crop choices vary by farming category and natural region. The highest diversity on cropping is observed in small gardens and in communal irrigation projects.  Farmers suffer from inadequate water availability. In general, one third of all farmers indicate that water access is not secure, both in quantity as well as in timing. The A2 farms suffer least from 4













 



 

insecure water supply, while farmers in communal schemes and gardens suffer most from insecurity. Poor repairing and maintenance of irrigation infrastructure was observed as a problem in all irrigation categories. About one third of the farmers indicate that the irrigation infrastructure is in a poor condition and needs to be rehabilitated. Leakages of pipes and breakdown of pumps is the most reported problem in all schemes. Yield analysis shows a tendency towards low yields. Around 85% of the farmers produce 25% of the maximum yield potential. A wide range of yield gaps are observed, with average yields ranging from roughly 20% to 35% of yield potential. Many irrigated cropping systems should target achieving about 80% of yield potential. Highest yields are shown in Gardens and A2 schemes and lower in communal irrigation projects. A1 and A2 schemes are (mostly) individually managed schemes while communal schemes are not operated by an individual but mostly several families are involved in a mutually agreed arrangement. Garden schemes are individually managed and usually include growing of vegetables. All communal smallholder schemes have an Irrigation Management Committee (IMC) responsible for scheme monitoring, planning and for settling disputes. The A1 and A2 are mostly driven by the land reform and have a management framework on conflict resolution mechanisms. Land tenure insecurity is an underlying issue leading to low performance of the irrigation sector. Land tenure for A1 and A2 farms is problematic. Ownership is based on Offer Letters, and the 99year leases, which have yet to be widely issued, are not attractive to both farmers and financial institutions. The communal and garden schemes are under communal tenure system, where land is communally owned and no title is issued to plot owners in gazetted irrigation schemes. The ownership of infrastructure appeared a complicated issue, as infrastructure comprises various parts: Headworks, conveyance, and infield structures. In some cases the ownership of headworks and delivery lines among A1 and A2 farmers was not well defined, leading to confusion. O&M in A2 and the Garden schemes is the responsibility of the owner. For the other schemes, it is a shared task between scheme members/farmers, IMC and DoI. Responsibility in O&M can be a problem, if farmers do not own it there appears to be less commitment. Not all schemes own a water permit. For A1 and A2 schemes, 21% of the schemes do not own a permit. For communal schemes this amounts to 38% and for Gardens to 89%. The highest amount of produce sold (% of production sold to market) is seen at A2 farms (A2 farmers sell about 75% of their production) and garden schemes. The gardens supply a considerable amount of vegetables to Harare and other urban centres around the country, with no or minimal government support. The small-scale farms concentrate on more locally marketed crops while A2 farmers enter more lucrative markets where they mix high value crops with the traditional ones. There is no coordinated marketing of produce in the irrigation sector. The main challenges farmers indicated in marketing their produce is strong competition, perishability of produce, low prices and large distance to markets. A relatively low number of farmers have access to credits (42% in A1 schemes; 53% in A2 schemes; 28% in communal schemes and 0% in Gardens). Overall, the best performance is shown by the farmer driven A2 schemes, followed by the garden schemes. They show higher yields, a higher percentage of produce sold, and higher value crops. Dependency on government support seems to reduce performance of irrigation.

5



The statistical analysis shows that the key determinants for performance are: Use of inputs/ fertilizers, water (reliability), farm size, natural region, technology (incl. seeds), mechanisation / labour and education of farmer / management.

The pre-investment framework Prioritization of performance issues The government objective for irrigation development in Zimbabwe is to guarantee food security through increased production from irrigable areas; The short term target is to develop 220,000 ha by 2015. A risk analysis was done to see which factors may affect the achieving of this government objective. The performance issues identified from the field survey and the discussions with stakeholders were used to build a risk breakdown structure. The key performance issues were grouped into risk categories then prioritized using a qualitative methodology (expert knowledge of senior staff members of the Department of Irrigation (DoI). A SWOT analysis was done with DoI to identify the key strengths, weaknesses, opportunities within the irrigation sector and the threats from outside the sector. Each strength and weakness was cross analysed with opportunities and threats to define the strategic objectives for the pre-investment framework for a sustainable improvement in irrigation. The prioritized risks have been grouped into eight thematic areas. This grouping enabled to formulate strategic priorities (objectives) that address a number of risks while utilizing multiple strengths and opportunities. For the eight thematic areas, a set of strategic objectives have been described that facilitate growth of the sector and attract investments from government, private sector and development partners. An overview of the proposed Strategic Objectives is provided in the box below. Thematic Area 1: Policy review and development SO1 SO2 SO3

Strengthen land tenure security for farmers Review, formulate and adopt effective policies and regulatory frameworks for irrigation development and management Formulate and adopt Irrigation Act

Thematic Area 2: Holistic planning SO4

Adopt holistic planning methodologies with all stakeholders

SO5

Adopt and implement effective integrated water resource management planning principles

SO6

Accelerated rehabilitation and new development of prioritised schemes

SO7

Promoting water use efficient technologies

Thematic Area 3: Institutional capacity development SO8

Capacity development for institutions

Thematic Area 4: Operation and management strategies Develop and adopt effective PPP models for funding and operation and management of SO9 irrigation projects Thematic Area 5: Marketing and market linkages SO10

Develop and Implement market linkages between farmers and traders

Thematic Area 6: Access to financial resources SO11

Explore ways to reduce current and future exposure of financial institutions

Thematic Area 7: Monitoring and Evaluation SO12

Adopt and implement effective monitoring and evaluation strategies

Thematic Area 8: Climate Risk Management

6

SO13

Develop and adopt effective climate risk management strategies

Proposed actions & recommendations Strategic Objective 1: Strengthen land tenure security for farmers in irrigation schemes For A1 and A2 schemes, current government effort to grant long-term leases to all farmers needs to be supported. The government is in the process of developing and issuing long-term leases that can be used as collateral for accessing finance from financial institutions. The land tenure issue remains shrouded in controversy as some of the land in A1 and A2 are considered disputed by potential investors, development partners and international financiers. For Large Scale Commercial Farms, security of tenure for farmers on irrigation schemes should consider the following: a) Clear tenure arrangements for farmers, which are long enough to encourage on-farm investments. This is typically above 25 years for irrigation infrastructure, but will vary with the type of investments done. Large investments in dams and off farm infrastructure require more time for the investor to earn dividends. b) Transferability of the leases from one farmer to another. This offers an exit strategy for those wanting to stop irrigated farming and encourage new entrants or expansions. c) Allow for consolidation of farms to allow for economies of scale and formation of new farming companies in all categories of farming, A1, A2, Communal, Old resettlement and LSCF. Strategic Objective 2: Review, formulate and adopt effective policies and regulatory frameworks for sustainable irrigation development, operation and management The productivity and general performance of irrigation schemes is affected by a number of policies from different sectors, e.g. industry, environment, and the financial sector. It is recommended that a comprehensive policy and regulatory framework stocktake be carried out, as part of the on-going irrigation policy development process, to determine how the different policies, legal framework and regulations are pro or anti irrigation productivity for each of the farming categories. The results will advise the contents of the new irrigation policy. Strategic Objective 3: Development and adoption of a legal framework to facilitate irrigation development: An Irrigation Act The process of developing the irrigation policy is being done by the MoAMID and led by the Department of Irrigation. Following the adoption of the irrigation policy, it is recommended that the drafting of an Irrigation Act, that will help to implement the policy, should begin. Strategic Objective 4: Adopt gender sensitive, holistic planning methodologies The planning of irrigation development should follow a holistic approach and take into account the different requirements of the various categories of irrigation in Zimbabwe. It is recommended that planning guidelines should be prepared for each category of irrigation scheme, and the guidelines 7

should include national and household objectives for irrigation development by farming category, institutional arrangements, financing approaches, technology choices and the required land tenure security. The Irrigation Masterplan can act as a coordination tool for the development of the irrigation sector, as it can identify priority areas for the development of irrigation for each category. Strategic Objective 5: Adopt and implement effective integrated water resources management planning principles The current levels of water utilisation are low and in the short term to medium term (5-20 years), water should not be a limiting factor. However, in the long term water is expected to be a limiting resource for irrigation development. It is recommended to: - Prepare detailed technical/institutional/process planning guidelines, by irrigation category - Enable accurate projections for future demand from the various sectors of the economy. - Establish a common approach for the estimation of the irrigation potential: The MoAMID estimates irrigation potential to be about 2 million ha, while MoWDM estimates it to be around 350,000 ha. - Reviewing of acceptable risk level for assessing availability of water for various uses is needed. The MoWDM uses 4% risk (1 failure in 25 years) for urban and industrial water supply and 10% risk (1 failure in 10 years) for agriculture. The MoAMID argues that this level of acceptable risk leads to a lower utilisation of water. - Introduce water tariff regulation. A water regulator should be established, to monitor the water tariffs. Strategic Objective 6: Accelerated rehabilitation and development of prioritised irrigation schemes. The number of A1 and A2 farms that are in need of rehabilitation and modernisation is considerable and exceeds the available national budgets. It is therefore crucial to prioritise projects, by farming category, and to seek other sources of funding for irrigation. Prioritisation of schemes is currently hampered by a lack of reliable, up-to-date information on irrigation schemes. A ranking of farming categories for investment readiness shows that LSCF has highest score (least risk to investment) and A1/A2 have lowest score, due to land tenure security issues. It is highlighted that once the land tenure security is resolved and the lease arrangements allow for possible joint ventures the A1/A2 schemes can easily jump to be top investment ready categories. ARDA schemes have a higher investment readiness score than A1, A2, and communal irrigation schemes. It is recommended that, following a rapid assessment of the condition of irrigation schemes, a comprehensive list of prioritised schemes by district and province is carried out for all the farming categories based on a multiple criteria decision model. It is further recommended that the development of irrigation schemes follows the project cycle whereby irrigation schemes are prepared to investment ready levels by having comprehensive feasibility reports. Strategic Objective 7: Promoting water use efficient technologies

8

The current level of water use efficiency in irrigation is low. Whilst water is not a current limitation to expanding irrigated lands, with the onset of climate change and the targeted increase in irrigated lands, the need to improve water use efficiency, across all farming categories is imperative. It is recommended to introduce strategies for improving irrigation efficiency: - Appropriate design and construction and operation methods should be documented in manuals and guidelines for use by irrigation professionals and farmers. - Promote the use of computer aided designs (CAD) for irrigation designs: The design processes, especially within the DoI, are still manually based. CAD designs can significantly improve the quality of designs, if used by appropriately trained personnel and with reliable base information. - Improved training and organisation for O&M: Poor operation, maintenance and management of irrigation system is a major source of inefficiencies in irrigation schemes, particularly for smallholder schemes. Strategic Objective 8: Capacity development for institutions The focus on sustainable irrigation development requires a re-look at the various roles and responsibilities of current institutions, particularly ZINWA, Department of Irrigation and Agritex, at all levels, to assess their effectiveness. It is recommended to undertake a comprehensive review of the key institutions in irrigation in Zimbabwe, with a view to consider options for the restructuring of state entities, especially DoI and ARDA and ZINWA. The restructuring of the DoI and ARDA may be necessary to make them play a facilitative role for the development of irrigation schemes with an increased participation of farmers and other private sector entities in the financing, construction and operation and maintenance in all categories of irrigation. Capacity building assessment should be carried out to determine the needs of the organisations in a reform setting and to meet the development objectives of the country. Strategic Objective 9: Develop and adopt effective PPP models for funding and operation and management of irrigation projects The capacity required to undertake the accelerated development of irrigation project within the 5 year period is beyond the capacity of government. To break the long cycle of low investment by government, that lead to deterioration and early rehabilitation, public private partnerships (PPP) should be considered for irrigation development. It is recommended that guidelines for private sector participation in irrigation development should be prepared. The guidelines should be in line with the national guidelines for private-public partnerships currently under preparation. Strategic Objective 10: Develop and implement market linkages between farmers and traders Access to the market is a major constraint to income enhancement for farmers. Often farmers produce without an understanding of market requirements. The marketing and production plans need to be developed simultaneously. During the planning of an irrigation scheme, the target market for the 9

farmers needs to be clear. Farmer organisation, production methodologies and irrigation design will depend on marketing arrangements. Recommendations: - Input supply should be improved; Contract farming could be a solution. - The roles and responsibilities of the scheme management committees have to be clear and separated as much as possible, especially for smallholder schemes. Commodity associations can be formed at each large A1 or smallholder irrigation scheme and some A2 schemes. - Market information services to farmers need to be improved. The role of government, farmer’s unions and other private sector entities to provide market information should be reviewed. The review will consider the role that can be played by ICTs such as mobile technologies for the dissemination of market information. - To add value to crops, it could be interesting to let farmers participate in some post-harvest facilities. Strategic Objective 11: Financing Irrigation Rehabilitation and Expansion The financial requirements for irrigation development and rehabilitation are beyond the capacity of the government alone. Approximately US$370 million is required to bring irrigation schemes back to pre2000 performance levels and a further US$250 million to develop new irrigation schemes from underutilised dams. To attract this level of funding for irrigation from commercial sources, there is a need for lease arrangements for periods over 25 years that are acceptable to financial institutions and which give security of tenure to farmers. It is recommended that: A National Farm Irrigation Fund is founded as a set of funds, with one fund to assist projects to be investment ready, the second fund to assist in the accelerated rehabilitation of irrigation infrastructure in ARDA, LSCF, Communal, A1 and A2 targeting an initial 58,000 ha over 5 years and the third fund to assist new irrigation scheme development: - An Irrigation Preparation Investment Fund (IPIF) should be put in place to finance the preparation irrigation feasibility studies and detailed designs, following the project cycle. The fund should be approximately USD25 million for rehabilitation of about 56,810 ha - An Accelerated Irrigation Rehabilitation Fund (AIRF) should be established to finance the rehabilitation of irrigation infrastructure in Zimbabwe. The fund should be approximately US$343 million and should be used to rehabilitate about 56,800ha over 10-15 years - An Irrigation Development Fund for New Schemes (IDF) is proposed to finance new irrigation development from prioritised underutilised dams in the country. The fund should be approximately US$250 million. The fund should be used to finance the development of about 33,000 ha from underutilised dams over a period of 10-15 years. - A Capacity building fund for the training of both farmers and professionals involved in irrigation development. The fund has been estimated at 10% of the total development funds. The total value of this fund will be about US$60 million It is necessary to review the role that existing credit rating agencies are serving the agricultural sector, especially for A2, and large scale commercial farmers and grouped small scale irrigators. This will avoid the “painting of all farmers with one brush”, of credit worthiness. The review should explore the need for setting up a specialised farm credit rating agency to serve help bridge the gap between financial institutions and farmers.

10

Due to the limited access to finance, mainly due to lack of collateral and reluctance of banks to lend out on business idea viability, it may be necessary to reduce the need for collateral by setting up a partial credit guarantee funds for A1, A2, communal and garden farmers. The fund can be set up by government, with assistance of development partners, to back loans taken by the farmers. The fund can be managed by an independent Board. The fund should not cover the full value of the loan as another part of the risk will be carried by the commercial banks. The proposed funds can be structured to be partial guarantee funds, as well as loans and grants. Strategic Objective 12: Adopt and implement effective results based monitoring and evaluation strategies To enable effective planning, impact monitoring and accountability the MoAMID and the department of irrigation should develop a monitoring and evaluation system for the agricultural sector and irrigation sub-sector that can be led by the Department of Economics and Markets in MoAMID. It is recommended that the following steps are followed in the development a results based monitoring and evaluation system: - Assessing the country’s readiness for a comprehensive results based M&E system; - Set and agree on outcomes for the irrigation sub-sector, setting target for the results; - Selecting key performance indicators; - Establish baseline data for the indicators; - Select a monitoring mechanism for results; - Internal and external evaluation of the outcomes by ZIMSTAT; - A database should be established that forms the bases of all record of water users. Strategic Objective 13: Develop and adopt effective climate risk management strategies Farmers are exposed to risks such as such as droughts, floods and hail storms, and risk management strategies are required for this. A number of climate change adaptation strategies can be used such as water harvesting, conservation measures and drought tolerant crop varieties (climate smart agriculture / mitigation strategies). In addition, the investigation and development of insurance products that cover these risks for the various irrigation categories is important for the sustainability of irrigation schemes.

Investment Readiness Score card An investment readiness scorecard is proposed to help in monitoring the implementation of the strategic objectives, as identified in the pre-investment framework.

Next steps This report has recommended priority strategic objectives to promote investment in irrigation in Zimbabwe, based on the results of a diagnostic study and stakeholder interviews, in order to help MoAMID and DoI in particular reach its objectives of sustainable household food security and increased income and increased contribution to GDP by the agricultural sector. Actions have been formulated for the short term, medium term and long term. The next steps from this study will include the following:

11

  



Discussion, revision and adoption of the strategic objectives and recommendations by the MoAMID and government as a whole through cabinet; Inclusion of policy implications of the pre-investment framework into the policy still under development; Develop an irrigation investment plan that translates the pre-investment framework into concrete programmes to be undertaken by various stakeholders. Programme development and role allotment for the implementation of the pre-investment framework; Setting up of multi-stakeholder thematic working groups to develop the investment plans.

12

Contents Executive summary

3

Foreword

15

Acknowledgements

16

Acronyms and Abbreviations

17

1

19

2

Overview of irrigation development in Zimbabwe 1.1

Water resources and irrigation

19

1.2

Categories of irrigation schemes and characteristics

21

1.3

Stakeholders, roles and responsibilities in irrigation

26

1.4

The Draft Irrigation Development Master Plan

28

1.5

Links with CAADP

28

Diagnostic analysis of irrigation performance 2.1

Overview of lessons learned from literature

31

2.2

Issues affecting irrigation performance from diagnostic study

31

2.2.1

Stakeholder consultations

31

2.2.2

Review of scheme performance and main determinants from field survey

36

2.2.3

Challenges indicated by farmers

41

2.3 3

4

31

Main determinants

41

Analysis and prioritisation of irrigation performance issues

43

3.1

Risk analysis

43

3.2

SWOT analysis for the irrigation sector

44

Pre-investment framework

47

4.1

Irrigation investments

47

4.2

Thematic areas

47

4.3

Strategic objectives pre-investment framework

49

4.3.1

Strategic Objective 1: Strengthen land tenure security for farmers in irrigation schemes 50

4.3.2 Strategic Objective 2: Review, formulate and adopt effective policies and regulatory frameworks for sustainable irrigation development, operation and management 51 4.3.3 Strategic Objective 3: Development and adoption of a legal framework to facilitate irrigation development (an Irrigation Act). 53 4.3.4

Strategic Objective 4: Adopt gender sensitive, holistic planning methodologies

54

4.3.5 Strategic Objective 5: Adopt and implement effective integrated water resources management planning principles 59 4.3.6 Strategic Objective 6: Accelerated rehabilitation and development of prioritised irrigation schemes. 60 4.3.7

Strategic Objective 7: Promoting water use efficient technologies

69

4.3.8

Strategic Objective 8: Capacity development for institutions

72

13

4.3.9 Strategic Objective 9: Develop and adopt effective PPP models for funding and operation and management of irrigation projects 78 4.3.10 traders

Strategic Objective 10: Develop and implement market linkages between farmers and 82

4.3.11

Strategic Objective 11: Financing Irrigation Rehabilitation and Expansion

84

4.3.12 Strategic Objective 12: Adopt and implement effective results based monitoring and evaluation strategies 89 4.3.13 4.4

Strategic Objective 13: Develop and adopt climate risk management strategies

Recommended actions for the short, medium and long term

93 94

5

Scorecard for rating investments readiness

99

6

Policy implication of the pre-investment framework

101

7

References

103

14

Foreword Agriculture is the cornerstone of the Zimbabwean economy. The sector contributed 14% to GDP in Zimbabwe in 2011 (ZIMSTAT, 2012) and over 70% of the population depends on it for food, income and employment. After a period of economic crisis characterised by hyper-inflation, negative economic growth, food shortages, massive de-industrialisation and international isolation, Zimbabwe is posed to revive its economy and improve agricultural performance. A major constraint to boosting agricultural production in the country is drought. Irrigation can help to ensure food security in times of drought and assists the Food and Nutrition Security Policy in Zimbabwe in reaching its objectives (Food and Nutrition Council, 2012). Zimbabwe is looking to unlock the potential of various forms of irrigated agriculture. The key question is how to make investments in irrigation more productive and sustainable. Recent government plans such as the Short Term Emergency Recovery Programmes (STERP) and the Medium Term Plan (MTP) recognise the importance of restoring productivity on agricultural land. The policy directions for the irrigation sector are included in the main policy document adopted by the government in the Medium Term Plan 2011-2015 (MTP), the draft Comprehensive Agricultural Policy Framework 2012-2032 (CAPF, replacing the ZAPF 1995-2020) and the draft Zimbabwe Agricultural Investment Framework (ZAIP). The CAPF policy recognises the increase in the number of smallholder farmers, the demands for knowledge in intensive agriculture and for transforming institutions to better serve the new farmers. The Department of Irrigation is currently leading a process to develop a National Irrigation Policy and Strategy. This policy foresees an increased role of the government in the operation and management of smallholder schemes, through the establishment of scheme management public institutions, and the involvement of the private sector in medium and large schemes. This report assesses the performance of irrigation in Zimbabwe and delivers an outline for a strategic pre-investment framework on how to address key issues in the sector and have best returns to investments. The study has been performed with assistance from the Multi-Donor Trust Fund (MDTF). The report provides a summary of key findings from a diagnostic study on productivity of irrigation schemes and a pre-investment framework. Recommended reforms and action strategic objectives that will assist in making irrigation development productive and sustainable are described. The preinvestment framework provides recommendations for discussions among government entities and between government and development partners and investors. In addition, a scorecard for rating investment readiness of the country is given for tracking of implementation of prioritised reforms, while allowing an increase in investments. Finally a summary of possible policy implications in adopting the given reform agenda of irrigation development is provided.

15

Acknowledgements The study was performed in close collaboration with the Ministry of Agriculture, Mechanisation and Irrigation Development and the Department of Irrigation (DoI), and the JICA Irrigation Advisor. Their support and assistance is highly appreciated. The study team is especially grateful to Mr. R.J. Muzamhindo, Dr. Conrade Zawe, Mr. Shephard Kadaira, Mr. Bezzel Chitsungo, and Mrs. Soneni Nyamangaral for their guidance, discussions and for organising the field campaigns. The support and contribution of Mr. Ryosuke Moritaki, the JICA Expert in the Department of Irrigation has been useful during the discussions on the diagnostic survey and the pre-investment work. Further, this report could not have been written without the useful information provided by consultations with individuals from the Ministries, members of the Irrigation Working Group (IWG), national institutes and international organisations. The authors wish to acknowledge the funding received from the Multi Donor Trust Fund and the technical support and guidance of the World Bank Office in Zimbabwe.

16

Acronyms and Abbreviations AfDB

African Development Bank

Agritex

Department of Agricultural, Technical and Extension Services

AgWA

Agricultural Water partnership for Africa

ARDA

Agricultural Rural Development Authority

CAADP

Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Programme

CFU

Commercial Farmers Union

CST

Country Support Tool

DoI

Department of Irrigation

EU

European Union

FAO

Food and Agricultural Organisation

FTLR

Fast Track Land Reform

GiZ

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit

GoZ

Government of Zimbabwe

ha

Hectares

HPC

Horticultural Promotion Council

IDBZ

Infrastructure Development Bank of Zimbabwe

IFAD

International Fund for Agricultural Development

IITF

Interministerial Irrigation Task Force

IMC

Irrigation Management Committee

IMWI

International Water Management Institute

IWG

Irrigation Working Group

JICA

Japan International Cooperation Agency

LSCF

Large Scale Commercial Farms

mm

millimetres

MoF

Ministry of Finance

MoAMID

Ministry of Agriculture, Mechanisation and Irrigation Development

MoWDM

Ministry of Water Development and Management

NR

Natural Region

O&M

Operation and maintenance

REA

Rural Electrification Agency 17

SSCF

Small scale commercial farm

t/ha

Tonnes per hectare

USAID

United States of Agency of International Development

WB

World Bank

WUA

Water User Association

ZAPF

Zimbabwe Agricultural Policy Framework

ZCFU

Zimbabwe Commercial Farmers Union

ZESA

Zimbabwe Electricity Supply Authority

ZFU

Zimbabwe Farmers Union

ZIM-ACP

Zimbabwe Agricultural Competitiveness Programme

ZIM-AIED

Zimbabwe Agricultural Income and Employment Development Programme

ZINWA

Zimbabwe National Water Authority

ZNFU

Zimbabwe National Farmers Union

18

1 Overview of irrigation development in Zimbabwe 1.1 Water resources and irrigation Zimbabwe‘s global water resources are estimated to be around 20 km3 per year of which 14 km3 per year are internally produced. The frequency and volume of flow in rivers is variable, and storage is important for effective utilisation. The potential yield at 10% risk (1 year of water shortage in every 10 year period) is about 11.26 km3/year. Of this yield, 8.5 km3/year is usable. Estimates done in 2007 suggest that agriculture uses about 82% of available surface water, domestic and industrial about 15% and mining 3%. Zimbabwe has 7 major catchments (hydrological units): Gwayi, Manyame, Mazowe, Mzingwane, Sanyati, Save and Runde based on the major rivers. The main catchments are divided into subcatchments, adopted as the water resources management units. The Water Act stipulates that the Zimbabwe National Water Authority (ZINWA) is responsible for the management of water resources countrywide on a commercial basis, allocation of water for agriculture and construction of dams. The department of Water Resources is responsible for the formulation and implementation of policies on the water resources development and management. Ground water is an important source of water for irrigation. The estimation of underground water resources varies widely. Groundwater is estimated to be between 3 to 6 x 10 6 Ml /per year, and its potential for supplying irrigation water is said to be low because of low yields. Wetlands and their high water tables also offer potential to grow crops in Zimbabwe. Surface water resources are of good quality for irrigation but ground water tends to be of variable quality with some boreholes being saline or sodic or both. Zimbabwe can be divided into five main natural regions according to differences in (effective) rainfall. Natural regions I, II and III are suitable for intensive crop cultivation and livestock raising, while regions IV and V offer limited scope for crop agriculture but are suitable for livestock raising on a large scale. About 80 % of the land area lies in the Natural Regions III, IV and V where rainfall is erratic and insufficient. To minimize the effects of dry spells and water shortages on harvests, irrigation in these regions is seen as a solution to reduce the dependence on uneven distribution of rain. Especially in Natural Regions IV and V with average annual rainfall below 600 mm, farming needs irrigation, but also parts of National Regions III can benefit from (supplementary) irrigation to ensure harvest security. About 80% of the country’s agricultural production is rainfed; the remaining 20% is under irrigation (National Investment Brief, 2008). Zimbabwe has one of the highest levels of water development for irrigation in the region and has a significant portion of its irrigated potential realized. Water is a far greater constraint than land for agricultural development in Zimbabwe. The irrigation potential of the country is considerable and depends on what sources of water are used and what technologies are used to harvest, store and utilize in agricultural production. The total developed irrigation area is estimated to be 206,590 ha, of which about 132,370 ha are currently irrigated (Table 1.1; Department of Irrigation, unpublished data). It is estimated by the Department of Irrigation that with improved irrigation efficiencies, more use of groundwater and utilization of trans-boundary water resources such 19

as Kariba dam and the Zambezi and Limpopo Rivers a total of 2 million hectares can be irrigated throughout the country (Department of Irrigation, unpublished data). Further studies are required to assess the economic feasibility of the irrigation potential. Table 1.1: Area equipped with irrigation infrastructure in Zimbabwe (Department of Irrigation, unpublished data) Sub-sector Farmer category Area Equipped (ha) Actual Irrigated Area (ha) Year 2000 Year 2010 Year 2012 Commercial White Large Scale 66 770 8 140 7 070 Commercial Farms (LSCF) Black Large Scale 9 250 9 250 8 060 Commercial Farms (LSCF) ARDA 13 500 13 500 11 760 Private Plantations 63 470 63 470 56 130 A2 12 450 10 850 Sub Total 152 990 94 360 93 870 Smallholder Estates Out growers 3 600 3 600 3 140 Communal and old 10 000 10 000 8 720 Resettlement Wet Land Cultivation 20 000 20 000 20 000 A1 7 620 6 640 Sub Total 53 600 61 220 38 500 Total 206 590 155 580 132 370

Key commodities produced in Zimbabwe fall into four categories: 1) Food grain crops, which include maize, wheat, barley and small grains (sorghum and millets); 2) Traditional export crops, such as tobacco and cotton, 3) Oilseed crops – soya bean, groundnuts and sunflower and 4) Plantations (sugarcane, tea, and coffee, citrus), horticulture (floriculture, fruits and vegetables) and other nontraditional export crops (e.g. paprika). The main agricultural exports from Zimbabwe include tobacco, sugar, beef, horticultural produce, coffee, tea, and cotton lint. Prior to the Fast Track Land Reform, the sector could be divided into two: large-scale commercial farms (80% by area) and small-scale1 farms (20% by area). With the Fast Track Land Reform (FTLR), more land has been made available for use by more people. Two resettlement models were used to reallocate land to the majority black farmers from white commercial farmers (Table 1.2). The support requirements for the different groups of farmers, including for the remaining existing large scale commercial farms are different and summarised in Figure 1.1. Table 1.2: Resettlement models in Zimbabwe

Resettlement model A1

Model A2 (Small):

1

Description Individual residential and arable lands but shared common grazing Self-contained: one consolidated farm unit, with state support for social services infrastructure Similar to A1 Self Contained. Commercial land and own support for productive farming.

Smallholder, mainly communal farms

20

Model A2 (Medium): Model A2 (Large)

Differs from the above in respect of the size of the land ˜45ha Mostly designed for huge investment and includes large agrobased farms

With the transformation of the agricultural sector after the FTLR, the productivity of agricultural crops dropped. The UNDP characterised existing constraints in Zimbabwean agriculture as “limited access to market information, unreliable supply of low cost inputs (e.g. seed, fertiliser and electricity), limited capacity to mobilise capital for equipment purchase, high transportation costs due to inadequate road infrastructure and environmental degradation, and vulnerability to climate change. The maize and wheat grain sectors have, therefore, been characterised by low volume and poor quality grain production relative to regional markets, thereby compromising national and household food and nutrition security (UNDP, 2010).” Figure 1.1: Requirements for policy support for the different farmer categories (adapted from FAO, 2008)

1.2 Categories of irrigation schemes and characteristics Currently, five categories of farming exist in Zimbabwe: 1. A1 (small scale farms) and A2 (small and medium scale commercial farms) schemes: 91,000 ha. The reform has split up commercial irrigation schemes in to small scale irrigators with shared infrastructure (A1) and commercial irrigators (A2). 2. Smallholder irrigation schemes: 15,000 ha. These refer to a group of farmers irrigating together and sharing the same water source and supply line. Smallholder irrigation plays an essential role in ensuring food security, economic growth and employment creation in Zimbabwe. 3. Large-scale commercial schemes: 81,000 ha. These are operations on land owned by private individuals or groups including estates and plantations.

21

4. Parastatal schemes: 11,000 ha. These are Agricultural and Rural Development Authority (ARDA) schemes. 5. Gardens schemes: These are privately run small gardens mainly on small areas of less than 0.5ha each. These gardens are mainly located in urban and peri-urban areas. The different types of schemes within each category are described below (typology). This typology is used throughout the report for planning of interventions as well as for monitoring and evaluation. All interventions are segregated by category and type, except where data is only available under some other categorisation. 1) A1 Category Small scale private: Individually run schemes of less than 6ha. The individual farmer is responsible for water supply to the farm and all farm operations. These farmer investors are driven by a strong profit motive and are predominantly located in peri-urban areas or in close proximity to urban areas. Small scale community: Farmers come together to share a common water supply system for a combine irrigation scheme of less than 50ha. The water supply may be a gravity fed canal/pipeline of pressurised system. The shared infrastructure is small and simple to operate. The group members will need to cooperate mainly on operating and maintaining the intake works from the water source (pump or weir). Due to the small size of the schemes, the number of water control points is, in general, few, making consensus building and water distribution easier. The smaller the scheme the easier it is to be managed by farmers. In most cases farmers have small land holding of an average 3ha. Investments are mainly government or donor driven for satisfying household food security and some income generation. Large scale community: Farmers come together to share a water supply system for a combined irrigation scheme of more than 50ha. The water supply system may be a gravity fed canal or pressurised system. The shared infrastructure is large with many water control points. Farmer organisation for efficient water supply and distribution is difficulty, but essential for scheme operation. Farmer are most likely organised in blocks. In most cases farmers have land holding averaging 3ha. Investments mainly government or donor driven for food security and some income generation. 2) A2 and Large scale Commercial Farms Categories Small scale private: Irrigation schemes owned by individuals, mainly in urban or peri-urban areas. These schemes are typically 5ha or less. The individual farmer is responsible for water supply to the farm and all farm operations. These farmer investors are driven by a strong profit motive and are predominantly located in peri-urban areas or in close proximity to urban areas Medium/large scale commercial, with individual ownership of water supply: These schemes are on farms with individual ownership, with sizes ranging from 10 to over 1000ha. The larger farms are typically multiple enterprises, engaged in cropping as well as livestock production, rainfed as well as irrigated crop production. Water supply is from run of river or dams, or boreholes, or a combination of all, with simple or complex water delivery systems. The water source is on the farm. These farms are mainly in Natural Regions II and III, along the Save and Limpopo valleys. Management requirements: The farms require sophisticated management, that is capable of integrating production and marketing and general farm business management. Financing: Prior to the FTLR, investments on these farms have been mainly from the farmers, with 22

state assistance in the provision of subsidised credit, such as the National Farm Irrigation Fund set up in 1995. The private banking also provided overdraft facilities, loan facilities, hire purchase arrangements and other financial instruments to these farmers, allowing them to grow into some successful businesses. In most cases, land titles were used as collateral, but in some cases, marketing agreements and trust (between farmer and bank manager) were enough to access financial facilities. All these facilities are not currently available to the broader farming sector, especially A2 farmers, hence production and productivity has gone down. Low liquidity, land tenure security and lack of trust were given as the major problems affecting financing of these schemes. Irrigation schemes on these farms over the best potential lands for agricultural production in Zimbabwe. In some cases, the irrigation infrastructure is damaged and in need of rehabilitation. During the FTLR, the irrigated fields on some farms were subdivided into smaller plots, rendering the irrigation system difficult to manage or redundant. There is need to rehabilitate or redesign the irrigation systems on these farms. Medium/Large scale commercial, with shared water supply (Joint schemes): Joint schemes are schemes with a water source on another property, and water delivery infrastructure that is shared by two or more farmers. These farms are the same as the individual schemes, except for the joint ownership of water supply infrastructure. Joint schemes were developed by syndicated farmers, who pooled resources, accessed loan facilities and constructed dams, water delivery pipelines, night storage reservoirs to services the syndicate members. The syndicated farmers formed a water management company or association to act as a service provider for the members. Management: With the new farm ownership, the ownership and management of the shared infrastructure requires review and reorganisation as most of the systems are neither operational nor efficient. These schemes are more appropriate for private sector participation in water supply, through PPP arrangements with farmers and government. 3) Communal category Small scale private: Individually run schemes of less than 2ha. The individual farmer is responsible for water supply to the farm and all farm operations. These farmer investors are driven by a strong profit motive and are predominantly located in peri-urban areas or in close proximity to urban areas Small-scale community: Groups of farmers sharing the same water pump and delivery line. Usually, there is one pump station and delivery line. The scheme area is below 50ha and each farmer has a holding of around 0.5ha. The farmers are normally in one block. Water supply can be from gravity or pumped systems. These groups tend to be better organised in operation and management of their systems. Capacity building in group dynamics is required during start-up, to facilitate group cohesion. Investment in the group schemes are mainly from government and NGOs. Project identification is usually top down (by either government or NGO). These group schemes form the bulk of the communal and old resettlement schemes. It is expected that the A1 category will have most groups under this type of schemes. The existing schemes of this type are contributing significantly to agricultural production for the country and in food security for their areas. Large scale community: Groups of farmers sharing the same water delivery system, as with smallscale community schemes. The area of these schemes is greater than 50ha, and may have blocks that are large (20ha or more). 23

Water supply can be gravity or pumped, with a complex water deliver infrastructure that will include large canals, night storage reservoirs, multiple stages pumping, or multiple boreholes. Organisational requirements for such schemes are higher and these schemes are mostly disorganised and fraught with problems. These type of schemes were formally managed by the government, Examples are: Nyanyadzi (440ha, large pump station, weirs, canals, night storage dams), Nyamaropa (320ha, dam, canals, night storage dams), Dewure (307), Mutema (150ha, with boreholes) in Mancaland, Mhakwe (202ha, dam, canals and night storage reservoirs) in Matebeleland South. Investments in these group schemes are mainly done by government and bilateral development partners. The planning is public sector led, with minimum farmer involvement. Opportunity: These types of schemes are a prime target for reform to improve their productivity and production. In most cases, the infrastructure is dilapidated and in need of rehabilitation or modernisation, and management arrangements do not have capacity to be effective. These schemes can contribute significantly to the agricultural productivity of the country. Appropriateness for private sector participation: These types of schemes are appropriate for private sector participation in water supply, through contractual arrangements between farmers and government. 4) Estates Category ARDA Estates ARDA runs state owned estates with over 30,000ha potential irrigation. ARDA estates are financed by government for capital development, through appropriations from parliament, borrowings or equity partnerships. The estates meet their recurrent costs from their operations. ARDA estates may have out-growers linked to a core estate. The out-growers were at schemes such as Chisumbanje and Middle Sabi Estates. The cropping programmes for the estate and out growers are generally coordinated to allow for effective support services and marketing. Private Estates Private run estates (such Triangle, Hippo Valley, Tanganda Tea, Ratelshoek, Mazoe Citrus) have over 64,000ha under irrigation. These are highly commercialised farms that operate with minimal government assistance. Private estates partner government for major water supply works, such as Tokwe Mukosi Dam and canal. The sugar cane estates in the south Lowveld, are well known for their out-grower system. The out-growers range from A1, A2, old Large Scale Commercial and communal farmers. The estates provide technical support, inputs, access to water and markets for the produce from the out-growers. The sugarcane out-grower model of irrigation development is viewed as successful. 5) Gardens category Urban/peri-urban: Farmers land holdings range from a few hundred square metres to a few hectares. The lands are in urban or peri/urban areas, close to markets. Individual farmers invest in the development of the schemes mainly for income generation with vegetable production dominating. Water supply is mainly from shallow or deep wells, from where water distribution is by using buckets or motorised pumps. The area under garden irrigation is not known but there are estimates ranging from 20,000 – 50,000ha. Farm households have, on average, about 0.2ha. Garden irrigation is a major source for the fresh produce that is sold in Harare and other urban areas. If the estimated areas under 24

garden irrigation are used, this type of irrigation reaches between 100,000 – 250,000 households. Garden irrigation is mainly practiced by female farmers with most of it being family-run farm businesses with some hired labour. Water supply is mainly from boreholes and small streams and utilise electricity, diesel or petrol powered pumps to irrigate using sprinkler or drip irrigation systems. The schemes mainly produce horticultural produce for sell in the nearby urban areas. Household investors are driven by a strong profit motive. These investments have not received public sector support. Some of the investors borrow money from banks, supported by their urban property title to land. Rural gardens: Rural gardens are similar to urban/peri urban gardens with the main differences being the types of crops grown due to distance to markets for fresh produce and the technology used for irrigation. Since the rural gardens are generally further away from urban markets the crops grown are mainly for household consumption, with a little surplus for the local market. The gardens are mostly irrigated by manual methods, especially bucket irrigation, using water from streams and shallow wells. The investment levels for these gardens are very low. Planning issues to consider for garden irrigation are: a) improving access to finance, b) provision of extension and other technical support services. A summary of the categories of farmers and the type of irrigation schemes is given below (Table 1.3). Table 1.3: Summary of irrigation farming categories and types2 Category Irrigation scheme type Irrigated land holding Small scale private 10ha shared water supply infrastructure Sub-total Small scale community Scheme - 50ha Holding: - 1.5ha Sub-total Small scale private 10ha Large scale commercial own water supply farms Medium/large scale – >10ha shared water supply infrastructure

2

Area (ha)

30,460

60,560

15,000

The information to fill this table was not readily available during the study period. However the table has been included as an example to develop clear irrigation business lines for irrigation planning.

25

Category

Irrigation scheme type

Estates

ARDA Private

Gardens

Irrigated land holding Sub-total

Area (ha)

Sub-total

63,470

Urban/Peri-urban Rural Sub-total

1.3 Stakeholders, roles and responsibilities in irrigation The roles and responsibilities for the various institutions in irrigation were analysed by looking at the different components of the water system. Roles and responsibilities are described for the three components: a) Catchment management and water allocation; b) bulk water development and management; and c) Infield water distribution and management. a) Catchment management and water allocation: This is primarily the responsibility of catchment councils and sub-catchment councils, assisted by the Ministry of Water resources (MoWR) and Zimbabwe National Water Authority (ZINWA). The catchment councils are responsible for the preparation of catchment development plans, allocation of water and monitoring catchment activities. The main responsibility of ZINWA is to develop and manage bulk water infrastructure and provide technical assistance to catchment councils. Schemes are allocated water through a permit but there is no enforcement on upstream abstraction to ensure that a permit holder is abstracting according to allocations. In addition, non-permit holders are also abstracting water with impunity. Water permits in Zimbabwe are based on either agreement water or abstraction permits. Agreement water is volumetric based, with a holder having an agreed volume of water stored in a government owned dam for the user to use as required. With agreement water, the user will request for a predetermined flows to be released such that the user abstracts the water at predetermined abstraction points. Agreement water is allocated and managed by the ZINWA. Whereas, abstraction permits allows a holder of the permit to abstract a given flow of water based on the available normal flow of a stream. Abstraction water permits are allocated and managed by Catchment Councils. As has been noted previously (Manzungu, 2011), permit holders between the dam and the point of abstraction of do not know when abstraction water has been finished and agreement water now flowing, instead they keep abstracting regardless of which water is flowing. There is a need to bring the two water allocation systems under one management platform. Water allocations to new A1 and A2 farmers are still to be regularised with most of the farmers abstracting water without permits. b) Bulk water development and management: This is primarily the responsibility of ZINWA. The ZINWA Act makes ZINWA responsible for the development and regulation of water resources in the country. ZINWA is mandated to develop water sources either through own resources or with private sector participation. The Authority is mandated to recover the cost of capital, operation and management of water resources from users. The draft water policy has expressed the intention to have the regulatory role of ZINWA be separated from the water development role. The draft National Water Policy proposes to split ZINWA’s functions into two: a) water resources development and management function and b) the treated water supply 26

function to be carried out by a new entity, a National Water Supply and Sanitation Services Utility, The role of ZINWA in supplying raw bulk water for irrigation is not adequately covered in the new policy. It is believed that this approach will enhance private sector investment in bulk water infrastructure. Farmers and the Department of Irrigation (DoI) view ZINWA to be responsible for bringing water to each farmers’ field edge, regardless of size of the field, with full cost recovery. There is a current debate between the DoI and ZINWA on what ‘delivery to field edge’ means in the context of smallholder farmers. The DoI would like to see ZINWA maintaining scheme level water distribution infrastructure up to each farmers’ field. This approach should assist mainly the A1 and A2 farmers who are sharing common infrastructure. c) Infield water distribution and management: This is the primary responsibility of the farmer or group of farmers. The ownership and management of operation and maintenance of infield irrigation infrastructure is not clear for smallholder irrigation schemes assisted by government. Farmers do not know their ownership status of the infrastructure. The same situation is now being felt by A1 and A2 farmers, as government assistance increases. A1 and A2 farms were designed for a single user but are now operated by multi-users. This has brought about a challenge on organising the operation and maintenance of the shared infrastructure. There is a lack of clarity on the ownership of water supply infrastructure that is shared. There are also no arrangements for sharing water and electricity costs. Whilst government, through ZINWA, has taken over the operation and maintenance of all dams in A1 and A2 areas, the ownership of shared headworks and delivery lines is still unclear. At each irrigation scheme, farmers Irrigation Management Committees (IMCs) have been established with the help of the government extension agency, Department of Agricultural Technical and Extension Services (AGRITEX). The main objectives of the IMCs are to enhance farmer’s participation in management and decision making at the scheme level, introduce a system of discipline among the farmers and to control infield water distribution (Svubure et al, 2011). With regard to extension services, users rely on government departments for advisory and extension services. The Department of Irrigation and AGRITEX are the main departments that are assisting farmers. The DoI is mainly responsible for by water management aspects and the AGRITEX for agronomic aspects. However, stakeholders interviewed3 thought the roles and responsibilities of the two departments should be further clarified to avoid duplication and conflicting messages. Farmers see increasing overlap of the two departments at scheme level, often with conflicting messages. It has been observed that there is room to increase the role played by the private sector in on farm advisory and extension services. Such models are being tried with the help of banks and development partner financing. Some examples are in seed production with Seed Co, financed by the IDBZ; sugarcane growing financed by ABC Bank, Banana production financed by USAID. Role of the private sector For the last 30 years, the private and public sectors worked together in the development of large scale irrigation schemes. The public sector put in place a favourable policy and regulatory framework that allowed private sector investments. The public sector would also come up with strategic programmes,

3

Farmer organisation, Non governmental organisation.

27

such as the National Farm Irrigation Fund, to facilitate private sector investments into the irrigation sub-sector.

1.4 The Draft Irrigation Development Master Plan The Department of Irrigation (DoI) is in the process of compiling a 50 year Irrigation Development Master plan. The aim of the Master Plan is not only to increase the irrigated area but also to correct historical imbalances in land, water and irrigation technology utilisation amongst the different farming sectors. Table 1.4 shows the target acreage to be developed in the short term (0-5 years), medium term (6-20 years) and long term (21-50 years) 4 . Inter-ministerial discussions are on-going among key ministries for the master plan to be adopted by government. Table 1.4: Zimbabwe's 50 year Irrigation Development Master Plan Phases by Farming Categories Requiring Functio Short Medium Long Rehabilitati SubEquipped Totals nal Term Term Term on Category 2012 (Ha) (Ha)5 (Ha) (Ha) (Ha) (Ha) (ha) A1 & old resettlement 30,460 22,620 7,840 22,620 92,427 222,900 368,407 schemes A2 ARDA Communal Large Private Estates Total

60,560

22,390

38,170

56,960

133,494

311,616

562,630

17,100

12,100

5,000

25,730

188,800

534,604

766,234

15,000

15,000

-

5,000

30,650

97,500

148,150

63,470

63,470

-

186,590

63,470

135,580

110,310

445,371

1,166,62 0

1,908,891

%

19% 29% 40% 8% 3% 100 %

1.5 Links with CAADP The Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Programme (CAADP) was endorsed by African Heads of State and Government as a frame work for the restoration of agricultural growth, food security and rural development in Africa in an integrated and coordinated approach. The CAADP has four pillars: I. Extending the area under sustainable land management and reliable water control II. Improving rural infrastructure and trade related capacities for market access III. Increasing food supply, reducing hunger and improving responses to food emergency crises; IV. Improving agricultural research, technology and dissemination and adoption

4

The target area of DoI to be developed in the next 50 years is disputed by other stakeholders as being too ambitious in terms of available land and water. 5

Total refers to the equipped area in 2012 plus the area planned for short term, medium term and long term.

28

In addition the following are cross cutting issues: a) Academic and professional training and support to farmer associations; b) Information and knowledge systems. Some of the main principles and targets that define the CAADP framework are: • Agriculture growth as the main strategy t achieve MDG goal of poverty reduction. • To achieve 6% average annual agriculture growth • Allocation of 10% of national budget to agriculture Zimbabwe is still to sign the CAADP compact and thus it is a pre-Compact country. At stakeholder consultative workshops held in 2009, some of the issues identified to drive the CAADP implementation forward are: i) full participation of farmers and farmer organisations, public sector, private sector, civic organisations and development partners in strategy formulation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation; ii) formulation of appropriate and consistent agricultural policies and strategies; iii) putting in place policy incentives that encourage investments in agriculture; iv) irrigation development to reduce dependence on rainfed agriculture; v) infrastructure rehabilitation and development; vi) putting in place an institutional framework to manage the sharing of land and water resources; and vii) implementing strategies to arrest and reverse environmental degradation. A total amount of $270 million was identified for irrigation development and rehabilitation of projects in 2009. A summary of the identified irrigation projects under CAADP are as follows:  Short term projects with an area of 9,081ha, requiring US$31,784,200.  Medium term projects with an area of 31,447ha requiring US$110,064,500.  Long term projects with an area of 36,617ha requiring US$128,159,500. The above targeted areas are given with identified and prioritised projects in districts and provinces of the country. It is not clear how the selected projects were identified and prioritised for investment. This study supports this earlier work under CAADP and looks into the growth determinants that will contribute to Zimbabwe’s agriculture achieving the targeted objectives under pillars I and II, while addressing the key issues identified above.

29

30

2 Diagnostic analysis of irrigation performance 2.1 Overview of lessons learned from literature Irrigation performance in Zimbabwe has been subject of many studies. Smallholder irrigation in Zimbabwe is a challenge, and more failures than successes are reported. The low performance of smallholder irrigation schemes is often attributed to unreliable and inadequate water delivery. Market connections, market access and distance to the market are vital factors for performance and sustainability of a scheme. In Zimbabwe, projects with good market access have rates of return generally three times higher than when the market access is poor (Worldbank 2005, in: Synthesis report 2007). Scoones et al. (2010) described how land reform has fundamentally changed the agrarian structure and economy. There are now new people on new land, engaging in new forms of economic activity and new markets. Here an “accumulation from below” is seen, with small scale capitalist farming. New investments were raised: new settlers have generated investments, through local accumulation from below. If these new resettlements are to contribute to not only to local livelihoods but also to national food security, investments are needed. This means infrastructure (water, dams) technology and coordination mechanisms (institutions, policy), financing (credit systems). The lesson learned is that large land areas are not the basic requirements of high-value agriculture, more important is market connections and quality control. Due to high electricity costs and frequent power cuts, the preferred irrigation option today seems gravity surface irrigation (lined canals, siphons). Pumped and pressurised irrigation are due to high electricity prices and power cuts not viable; It would only become sustainable in case of high value crops on a commercial basis with easy market access. Institutional design and empowerment by farmers are important. Systems managed by farmers or jointly by farmers have performed better than systems managed solely by a government agency (IWMI, 2005). Makombe and Sampath (1998) analysed the economic performance of two formal systems (government managed and community-farmer managed) and compared them to an informal management system. It was found that the farmer-managed community system consistently outperforms the government system in production, distribution and management performance. Farmer managed schemes were promoted in the Smallholder Micro-Irrigation Development Programme (SMIDSP), implemented in Zimbabwe between 2008-2011 (COWI, 2010). The programme showed that small scale sustainable schemes can indeed be developed, given that the technology suits the context, and a cost benefit analysis is undertaken at an early stage.

2.2 Issues affecting irrigation performance from diagnostic study 2.2.1 Stakeholder consultations Stakeholder consultations were held to gain a better appreciation of the nature of the issues/risks facing the irrigation sector. The stakeholders consulted are listed in Annex 1. Based on the discussions, the main bottlenecks for irrigation performance are summarised below. 31

Poor Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) and planning The current poor monitoring and evaluation systems affect the quality of planning. There is no reliable information for the area currently equipped with irrigation equipment and in a functional state. The irrigation schemes in Zimbabwe are currently not fully functional. The installed irrigation infrastructure is estimated to be between 30 to 75% functional. It is estimated that currently only 70,000-135,000 ha are being irrigated (Mazungu, 2011; Irrigation Masterplan, 2012). There is an inconsistency in the estimation of irrigation potential and the estimations vary widely. The country’s irrigation potential is estimated to range from about 600,000 to over 2 million hectares based on renewable internal resources and the potential utilisation of trans-boundary water sources. This estimate of irrigation potential, by the Ministry of Water Development and Management, based on a 10% supply risk factor and a water duty of 10 ML per hectare is about 500,000 ha, of which about 180,000 ha is already developed. The Department of Irrigation estimates that the country has an irrigation potential of over 2.0 million hectares (see chapter 1), if irrigation efficiencies are improved, a 20% risk factor in supply is used, more use of groundwater resources, utilisation of land allocated to other uses (such as national parks) and the utilisation of international water from the Zambezi and Kariba Dam6. The water storage capacity of the country is about 8.7 x 106 Ml with an annual yield of 3.7 x 106 Ml, at 10% risk of supply from over 8000 dams. This yield level can be increased if the country accepts a high risk of supply of 20-25%, as is now common in other countries such as India (25%), Malawi (20%) and Zambia (20%). The smallholder irrigation category has been dominated by public sector and donor investments and strong bureaucratic control. A smallholder irrigation scheme, in Zimbabwe, comprises of a group of farmers sharing the same water source and supply and distribution system of the irrigation works. However, there is individual control of water application from a shared tertiary line and farming activities by each farmer in his/her plot. Plot sizes are normally 0.12 ha, but range between 0.1 – 2ha. The objectives of establishing smallholder irrigation schemes have evolved over time from the political motives of keeping the rural population from urban centres during colonial times to poverty alleviation and food security during the early days of independence to the establishment of commercial schemes that can earn farmers with significant income. The availability of data on irrigation schemes has always been problematic such that the figures given should be treated with a degree of caution, and the available data in 2012 is inconsistent. The DoI in 2012 is still to have a comprehensive and reliable and up to database of irrigation schemes. The lack of information on schemes and their performance does not help in planning and improved allocation of funding. The department is preparing a database of all schemes, as part of the policy making process that began in 2012.

6

Manzungu (2011) identifies constraints to achieving the DoI potential of which key are the current land use given to some of the target area; the difficulty to achieve targeted irrigation efficiencies that translate to increased area and the need to have the new land be assessed with technical, environmental and economic criteria for sustainability. The potential identified by the DoI is a long term prospect and is included in the 50 year Master Plan.

32

Schemes are planned and designed with little or no user input. The approach of the planning and design efforts is still largely top-down. The DoI is involved in the prioritisation of irrigation projects to be developed, prepares the designs and contracts contractors to build the scheme. In most cases, the end user is a bystander. This has led to a lack of ownership and responsibility over the irrigation infrastructure, leading to cycles of decline and rehabilitation. Current government planning is mainly focussed on formal smallholder irrigation. Irrigation in Zimbabwe is mainly in the following categories: A1, A2, formal smallholder, gardens, large scale commercial, and estates. Prior to the fast track land reform, the government has mainly concerned itself with the development of government of community managed smallholder irrigation schemes. The planning and financing was mainly focussing on rehabilitation of government managed schemes such as Nyanyadzi, Nyakomba, and Dewure among others. These schemes appear in all the Public Sector Investment Projects since independence in 1980. However, with the resettlement programme, the government is also focusing in planning for the A1 and A2 schemes. Gardens/informal smallholder and rainwater control is still not being considered in the planning framework. The criteria for the selection and prioritisation of projects for funding are not clear and do not seem to take into account the viability and feasibility of the projects. There is significant pressure from communities and politicians for rapid irrigation development without careful analysis of the schemes feasibility and viability. Engineering designs are the primary requirements for irrigation development. This has led to unsustainable schemes, with high maintenance and operational costs. The intra government coordination in irrigation development and planning is low. The poor coordination of government departments and their agencies in irrigation development has affected the performance of the sector. The unclear electricity water tariffs regimes have affected production at irrigation schemes. The amount of underutilised water in dams in the country is an example of the need for better coordination in planning and implementation (Annex 3). The government, in establishing the Irrigation Interministerial Taskforce (IITF) is a plausible attempt to improve intersector coordination. The IITF is chaired by the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Agriculture, Mechanisation and Irrigation Development (MoAMID) and it brings together the ministries of Water development and management, economic planning, energy development, finance, lands, infrastructure development and their agencies.

Reliable and adequate on-farm water supply and control The shortage and cost of electricity erodes the profitability of the schemes, where it is used. Electricity charges are too high for most farmers at the current rate of production. The main causes of the high charges are due to a poor billing system that may be using faulty meters and estimation of farmers use. This is coupled by poor water management practices by farmers and poor pump operation procedures. The frequent power cuts affect the productivity of the schemes. Completion of scheme construction to specifications is a challenge that is affecting the ability of government objective to be met. The irrigation industry has limited technical and financial capacity to implement projects. The industry was not spared from the brain drain that all sectors of the country’s economy suffered over the last ten years. Banks do not accept a government contract as suitable collateral for the companies to borrow working capital finance. 33

The efficiency of irrigation systems can be improved. Sprinkler irrigation has been the most favoured infield technology, with about 56% of the current functional area under the system. Surface irrigation has always been favoured for smallholder irrigation development with over 80% of the area in smallholder irrigation under surface irrigation, and less that 15% is under sprinkler irrigation. The area under localised irrigation in smallholder irrigation is negligible. Surface irrigation, despite the low irrigation efficiencies achieved by farmers, is favoured as it is thought to be simple for rural farmers to operate and it has lower operation and maintenance costs. Surface irrigation systems, with gravity water supply, have tended to survive harsh economic conditions. Ease of management and infrastructure sustainability are key criteria for the selection of irrigation technology by the DoI. Since the 1990s, dragline sprinkler has been the irrigation technology of choice for sprinkler schemes. It has been widely believed that there have been efficiency gains by using dragline sprinkler to surface irrigation due to the individual control of the irrigation by each farmer. Use of localised drip systems is not yet wide spread, with only a few schemes using it. Localised irrigation technologies can offer significant benefits to smallholder farmers when properly managed. Some of the benefits are: high water application and use efficiency, low operational costs and easier water and fertiliser application control. Centre pivots were widely used in large scale irrigation but there are no centre-pivots used in smallholder irrigation in Zimbabwe. Regional experience, especially in Swaziland, has shown that centre pivots can be used for smallholder irrigation when farmers consolidate their plots and agree to grow the same crop at a time. Smallholder sugarcane farmers in Swaziland and Malawi have used centre pivots to irrigate their crop. The quality of irrigation designs and construction of irrigation systems is suspect. The capacity within the DoI and the private sector to design, supervise and construct irrigation schemes has been eroded over the last few years due to the brain drain experienced in the country.

Financing for irrigation development There is lack of financing for irrigation development and for working capital. Irrigation development on private farms, prior to land reform, was largely financed by funding from banks and the state. The current state in the country’s agriculture, where land can no longer be used as collateral, banks not accepting the proposed 99-year leases as security, low liquidity of the financial institutions and the government, has caused a sharp decline in funding for irrigation development and for farmers’ working capital. Smallholder irrigation schemes have been financed by government with assistance from development partners. The substantial increase in operational area under smallholder irrigation during the period 1990-1997 is due to an increase in government and donor-funded projects such as Ngezi A in Mashonaland West and Kanhukamwe in Mashonaland Central, both funded by KfW; Musikavanhu, Maunganidze, Gudyanga and Tonhorai in Manicaland, all funded by the EU and Nyakomba in Manicaland funded by the JICA.

34

In addition, banks have a narrow range of products suitable to farmers. While in the past, commercial farmers could access the following range of services: a) Short term working capital loans, for financing seasonal requirements, which were timely and flexible; b) Short-term investment loans, with 2-3year maturity, for low cost capital investment; c) Medium term investment loans, with maturity of up to 5years; d) Long term investment loans, with maturity greater than 5 years; e) leasing and hirepurchase options were also available for procuring farm equipment. All these options are no longer available. In the last decade, with the decline of commercial agricultural activities, there has been a reduced demand for loan based products from farmers, as the state sponsored programmes crowded out the financial sector and the high inflation rates made medium and long term loans unattractive to the financiers. The financial institutions believe the expertise is still available in the country and once the banks liquidity levels improve and the economic and political conditions bring back confidence in farming, these products will be available. The financial sector has high information asymmetry that makes them not be able to select the low risk customers. This has led to high indebtedness of farmers and banks with poor performing loan books. Liquidity of financial institutions negatively affects all categories of irrigation. The financial institutions limit themselves to mostly extending short term financial instruments for farmers, due to a lack of liquidity and lines of credit from international financial institutions. The few long term facilities available have high interest rates, above 15%, require urban based immovable property and a contract of marketing with an established agribusiness. Land tenure security is a key determinant of performance of agricultural investments. This is particularly relevant for the A1 and A2 irrigation categories, where tenure is perceived to insecure by both farmers and financial institutions. Development partners are reluctant to invest in the A1 and A2 categories as they consider the land to be disputed and high risk. Land tenure security is the key risk factor affecting A1 and A2 farmers. Security of tenure, as perceived by the farmers and potential investors will determine the levels of long term investments. Farmers and potential investors view long term investments in irrigation infrastructure as high risk due to the uncertainty of tenure of most farmers. This is mainly because a) most farmers are still to receive long term leases, to replace the current offer letters; b) the uncertainty of fair compensation if the land is expropriated by the state. Availability and cost of electricity is negatively impacting on productivity for all irrigation categories. The frequent power cuts and the high electricity bills that farmers are paying have negatively affected production and productivity of irrigation schemes. The area under irrigation, especially for winter wheat production, has been reduced significantly. Wheat and barley are most affected because they require full time irrigation in winter, whereas summer crops will get water from rainfall. The cost of production for crops has been increased due to the use of diesel or petrol generators for on farm supply of electricity. New farmers, in A1, A2 and communal irrigation schemes lack the technical and managerial knowhow to farm profitably. It will take some time for the new farmers given land under the FTLR to have the requisite experience and knowledge to farm profitably. The support to these farmers from

35

multiple sources of extension is required to enhance their skills, knowledge and attitude towards commercial farming.

2.2.2

Review of scheme performance and main determinants from field survey

A field survey was organised based on a selected set of 110 selected schemes and 300 farms throughout the country (Annex 2). Data on agricultural, financial, social, institutional and regulatory issues have been collected and a quantitative review of irrigation performance was done. A summary of the main findings is given below. The database developed for the analysis is described in Annex 5. The results of the field data analysis are described in detail in Annex 10.

Crop production and productivity 

Scheme and irrigated plot sizes vary by farming category. Irrigation schemes are made up of a grouping of individually irrigated farms (irrigated plots). The average sizes of schemes and irrigated plots vary by category of farmers, from as low as 0.8 ha to 2257 ha. From the study sample, A2 category has the largest average size of scheme (311.5 ha) and irrigated plots (185.7 ha). Table 2.1 shows the average scheme and farm size for the irrigation categories.

Table 2.1: Average scheme and farm sizes Category Average size of Average farm size scheme (ha) (ha) A1

164.6

6.3

A2

311.5

185.7

Communal

87.9

3.1

Garden

5.8

1.1



The percentage area under irrigation is higher for smaller sized schemes than larger schemes. The smaller size farms (A1, Communal and Garden) are performing better in terms of percentage irrigated area (ratio). A2 schemes have the poorest ratio of irrigated area over farm plot area, meaning that a substantial part of the farms is not used for irrigation or abandoned.



Crop choices vary by farming category and natural region, with maize as the dominant crop in all studied categories and regions. The highest diversity on cropping is observed in small gardens and in communal irrigation projects. Maize is the country’s staple crop and is the most common crop cultivated in all categories. In the smallholder schemes it is the major crop to be grown, along with small plots of horticultural crops. For the large scale A2 schemes the main crops are maize and wheat as well as high value crops such as oilseed crops (soybean) and tobacco, the traditional export crop. The most common factors identified by farmers for selection of crops are: a) availability of water and inputs; b) produce price, availability of market; c) season; and d) Agritex recommendations.



Region I shows little irrigation activity for the sampled schemes. Region IIb represents the largest variety of crops of the sample. The maize, wheat, soybean and potato crops are mostly

36

concentrated in the regions IIa and IIb while tomato solely occurs in the dry region V in Garden schemes. 

All farms own livestock and indicate that it reduces production risk. For all farms, poultry and cattle are ranked as the most important livestock type. Livestock plays an important role in the agriculture of Zimbabwe, where crops and livestock are integrated to improve food security and livelihood. Livestock is a means of diversification of income as a way of reducing vulnerability and (income) risk . Traction is the most important reason for keeping livestock and manure is an important input for crop production.



The major sources of water for irrigation are dams. Most (53%) of the studied irrigation schemes abstract water from dams, followed by direct abstractions from the river (28%) and boreholes (13%). The figure below shows the different water sources for the categories.



Farmers suffer from inadequate water availability. In general, one third of all farmers indicate that water access is not secure, both in quantity as well as in timing. The A2 farms suffer least from insecure water supply, while farmers in communal schemes and gardens suffer most from insecurity.



Water supply to irrigation schemes is done by farmers and sometimes ZINWA. Water distribution on farm is done by farmers through the IMC.



Smallholder irrigation in Zimbabwe is mostly under surface irrigation while commercial irrigation is dominated by sprinkler irrigation (Table 2.2). Schemes in dry regions (III, IV, V) are mostly using surface irrigation technologies. For smallholders surface irrigation is favoured because of lower O&M costs and because these are more easy to operate. The area under drip irrigation is negligible. About one third of the farmers in all categories indicate that the sprinkler systems and surface irrigation infrastructure are in a poor condition and need to be rehabilitated.

Table 2.2: Irrigation technologies for the different categories

Surface Pivot Sprinkler Drip Other

A1 A2 Garden Communal 16.7% 4.0% 80.0% 50.0% 16.7% 20.0% 0.0% 0.0% 58.3% 72.0% 20.0% 43.5% 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 4.0% 0.0% 6.5%



There is a large yield gap when comparing actual yield to potential yield. A wide range of yield gaps are observed around the country, with average yields ranging from roughly 20% to 35% of yield potential (Annex 9). Many irrigated cropping systems should target achieving about 80% of yield potential.



On average, highest yields are shown in Gardens and A2 schemes and lower in communal irrigation projects. In general crop yields are higher in the A2 farm category than in A1 and communal projects, with the exception of cabbages and potatoes that show lower yields than A1. 37

Lower yields are observed for most crops in the A1 category with the exception of tomatoes, cabbages and potatoes. The main explanations based on the yield trends are: i. The smaller fields in gardens makes the family labour management effective. The drop in yield in communal schemes can hence be explained by reducing effectiveness of management on the increasing cropped area. ii. Gardens generally procure seeds and seedlings from high yielding varieties. Communal farmers are most likely to use seed from the previous harvests reducing the crop technology productivity. 

Dependency on government support seems to reduce performance of irrigation. Over dependence on government support can reduce technical efficiency due to slower response to mitigation on determinants of productivity compared to locally driven small garden schemes. This is also supported by the fact that the yield of communal and A1 schemes is comparable with A2 having generally higher yield than A1. The institutional framework of gardens and A2 farmers is similar in so far as the role of farmers and government. This is also true for communal and A1 schemes as they depend on government for important decisions.



Extension and support is mainly given by government departments such as AGRITEX, Department of Irrigation and ZINWA. Table 2.3 shows the supporting service provided by the various organisations, from the survey.

Table 2.3: Support services Organisation Service AGRITEX  Advice on crop production,  assist in determining cropping programmes,  advice on planting dates,  provide training to farmers. Department of  Operation and maintenance, irrigation  inputs,  irrigation equipment,  scheme rehabilitation ZINWA  ZINWA is responsible for billing of water and provision of water.



Quality of the service perceived by farmers  Almost all farmers indicate to be (very) satisfied with the services provided.



Their service is valued as satisfactory to good but they seem understaffed and should improve equipment supply.



The general comment from farmers is that it has been working on well, however, their bills have become exorbitant and became too high for small scale farmers.

Gender: Female farmers are mostly represented in the Communal and Garden schemes (37% and 41%) and least in A2 scheme farms (8%), see Table 2.4.

Table 2.4 Representation female farmers % Female farmers A1 16% A2 8% Communal 37% Garden 41%

38

Institutional arrangements and management structures 

Management of the schemes varies across the categories. A1 and A2 schemes are (mostly) individually managed schemes while communal schemes are not operated by an individual but mostly several families are involved in a mutually agreed arrangement (Table 2.5). Garden schemes are individually managed and usually include growing of vegetables. All communal smallholder schemes have an Irrigation Management Committee (IMC) responsible for scheme monitoring, planning and for settling disputes. The A1 and A2 are mostly driven by the land reform and have a management framework on conflict resolution mechanisms.

Table 2.5: Ownership and management arrangements Average Land ownership Land tenure farm size (farm) (scheme) (ha) A1 6.3 Offer Letter / lease Offer Letter A2

185.7

Communal Garden

Legal registration

Management Arrangements

Not registered

Own / IMC

Offer Letter

Pvt Company / Other

Own

3.1

Offer Letter / Title Deed / lease None

Communal

IMC

1.1

None

Communal

Cooperative registered Cooperative

/

not

IMC



Land tenure insecurity is an underlying issue leading to low performance of the irrigation sector. There are four main systems of land tenure, being the freehold (private), state land, communal and leasehold (resettlement) system. Land tenure for A1 and A2 farms is problematic. Ownership is based on Offer Letters, and the 99-year leases, which have yet to be widely issued, are not attractive to both farmers and financial institutions. A1 and A2 farms are said to be contested land because issues of compensation of former owners are yet to be resolved. This has meant that no external commercial or donor funding can be channelled to A1 and A2 farms. Insecure land tenure hinders efficient and effective utilization of existing water resources and irrigation infrastructure, and is refraining farmers from new investments. The communal and garden schemes are under communal tenure system, where land is communally owned and no title is issued to plot owners in gazetted irrigation schemes.



The ownership of irrigation infrastructure, for A1 and communal schemes, is not clear. Farmers on A1 and Communal schemes report infrastructure as owned by either the IMC or ZINWA, including infield irrigation works.

Table 2.6: Ownership infrastructure Ownership irrigation infrastructure A1 A2 Communal Garden

Head works ZINWA / IMC Own ZINWA/IMC Own

Conveyance IMC Own ZINWA/IMC Own

In field IMC Own IMC Own

39



O&M in A2 and the Garden schemes is the responsibility of the owner. For the other schemes, it is a shared task between scheme members/farmers, IMC and DoI. Responsibility in O&M can be a problem, if farmers do not own it there appears to be less commitment. The main O&M costs are water, electricity and repairs. The farmers pay varying amounts for water use and electricity. During the survey, a substantial part of the smallholders indicated they have run up to large arrears in payments to ZINWA.



Not all schemes own a water permit. For A1 and A2 schemes, 21% of the schemes do not own a permit. For communal schemes this amounts to 38% and for Gardens to 89%. Water right is required by law, one has to apply through ZINWA. Farmers are not always aware and think water permits are for large schemes which make it an issue of knowledge and awareness. If farmers do not apply for permits, there are fewer guarantees that downstream users will have their share.

Financial and marketing arrangements 

All farming categories produce crops for the market. A2 farmers sell about 75% of their production and communal farmers are the lowest proportion at about 50%. Table 2.7 shows the main crops for the market and the percentage of the cultivation that is sold.

Table 2.7: Main crops for the market Main crops for the Most common market used market

Percentage of production sold

A1

Merchants / nearest town

53.0%

Contract market (wholesalers)

74.8%

Nearest town/ farm gate (retail)

49.5%

Farm gate

59.2%

A2 Communal

Garden

Maize, potato, soybean, beans Maize, wheat, tobacco, soybean Maize, beans/pulses, potato, cabbages, tomato Maize, carrots, leaf vegetables, onion



All sampled schemes organised a certain marketing strategy and grouped together for e.g. sourcing markets or organise collective transport. The small-scale farms concentrate on more locally marketed crops while A2 farmers enter more lucrative markets where they mix high value crops with the traditional ones.



There is no coordinated marketing of produce in the irrigation sector. Sustainable irrigated agriculture requires that the types of crops grown at irrigated schemes be of such value that farmers regard irrigation as a worthwhile business and also that food security at household and national levels are achieved. The main challenges farmers indicated in marketing their produce is stiff competition, perishability of produce, low prices and large distance to markets.



A relatively low number of farmers have access to credits. Credit and input financing of irrigation schemes in the last three years is as follows: o 42% A1 schemes had access to credit Grain Marketing Board (GMB). 40

o o

o

53% A2 schemes had access to credit, mainly for seeds and fertilizers, from various sources/banks (Agribank, CBZ). 28% communal schemes had access to credit for various crop production activities. The Communal schemes get subsidised inputs from government and donors that reduce the need for credit financing of inputs. For Gardens, no farms had access to credit. For Gardens, the input costs are much lower than other schemes. There is low use of external inputs and high use of locally available inputs such as manure from livestock and seeds from previous harvest.

2.2.3 Challenges indicated by farmers The main main constraints to improving production productivity and water use efficiency indicated by the schemes during the sampling (field visits) are: -

(Infield) infrastructure has depreciated and needs replacement; Shortage of inputs: contract farming should be introduced; Inadequate water supply - ZINWA should maintain dams; Inadequate power supply- government to fund ZESA adequately; poor repairing and maintenance of irrigation infrastructure - DOI should have a maintenance office closer to the scheme; Lack of skills - Irrigation department to do training courses for farmers; Water and ZESA bills too high: government should take part to help paying the bills; Leakages of pipes; breakdown of pumps; Fencing problem; Poor roads.

2.3 Main determinants The main productivity factors identified from the field data analyses are combined with the higher level issues raised during the stakeholder consultations (Table 2.8). These issues were included in the issues analysis and prioritisation process to determine strategic objectives (next chapter). Table 2.8 Key issues adopted for the pre-investment framework

41

Key issues database (field scale)

Key risk issues adopted for pre-investment framework

Inputs/ Fertilizers Water (reliability and availability) Farm size Natural region (crop suitability) Technology, seeds Mechanisation / Labour Education of farmer / management limited access to credits Unclear ownership of headworks and delivery lines (A1,A2) Poor repairing and maintenance of irrigation infrastructure Competition in marketing, perishability produce, large distance Financial constraints High electricity bills No records of water use Poor roads and weakly developed rural infrastructure

Inadequate farm handling facilities for inputs Inadequate infrastructure, augmentation of water resources Inadequate monitoring and evaluation of irrigation schemes Adverse climate effects Inadequate supply of quality fertilisers, seeds and chemicals Financing, inadequate farm machinery Lack of proper experience farmers and knowledge agronomic practices Financing Lack of understanding, commitment and roles and responsibilities Poor O&M Poor post harvets facilities / poor marketing infrastructure Financing High electricity charges Inadequate monitoring and evaluation of irrigation schemes Poor condition farm roads Inadequate multi-sectoral planning for irrigation development Inadequate planning with users Limited technical capacity of implementing agencies Non prioritisation of viable and feasible projects Lack of understanding of market requirements Non-adherence in marketing contracts Lack of enforcement of contracts Weak producer/commodity/farmer associations Poor control of operating expenses High water pollution

stakeholder consultations -->

42

3 Analysis and prioritisation of irrigation performance issues 3.1 Risk analysis The performance issues from literature review, stakeholders and field survey (chapter 2) were used to build a risk breakdown structure (RBS), similar to a problem tree, using 12 risk categories. The 12 categories were broken down into sub-categories, to make a risk tree. The used risk categories are: a) Adequacy and reliability of water supply; b) Supply of inputs; c) Irrigation system designs; d) Support infrastructure; e) Market availability; f) Institutional participants at all levels; f) Production related risk; g) Scheme completion; h) Environmental risks; i) Policy, regulations, and legal environment; j) Force majeure; and k) Financing risks Annex 6 describes the risk categories in detail. It is recognized that the impact of the risk factors is different with each scheme category, but for the study the analysis is generalised across all categories. Where the impact of one factor is significant for one sector, it is indicated. The key performance issues were first grouped into the 12 risk categories. The first level of the Risk Breakdown Structure (RBS) was further analysed and prioritized using a qualitative methodology, from the expert knowledge of senior staff members of the Department of Irrigation. Each risk was assessed on its possible impact and likelihood to occur (Figure 3.1). The impact was scored using the scale: 1 (negligible), 2 (Low), 3 (Medium), 4 (High), 5 (Critical). The likelihood to occur (probability) was scored using the following scale: 1 (Very Low), 2 (Low), 3 (Medium), 4 (High) and 5 (Certain). The risk score was obtained by multiplying the impact with the probability.

Probability 5=Certain 5=Critical

4=High

3=Medium

2=low

1=Very Low

Critical

Impact

4=High 3=Medium 2=Low

High Medium

1=Neglible

Low Negligible

No Risk

Figure 3.1: Prioritisation of Risk Factors

43

All risks with a score (impact x likelihood) of 16 and above were prioritised and used in the development of strategic objectives for the pre-investment framework. The risks have different impacts and mitigation strategies for each irrigation category. The prioritised risks affect all categories of irrigation, and mitigation strategies will have different levels of difficulty to implement per category. The higher the impact and more difficult it is to mitigate the risk, the more critical the risk is for the category. Table 3.1 gives the prioritised risk factors for each irrigation category in Zimbabwe. Table 3.1: Prioritised risks for increasing productivity for irrigation categories in Zimbabwe Priority Areas for Increased Productivity Category Irrigation scheme type Land Access to Availability and Technical and Tenure finance cost of management Security electricity skills Small scale private + + + + A1 Small scale community + + + + Large scale community + + + + Small scale private + + + + Medium/Large scale – + + + + own water supply A2 Medium/large scale – + + + + shared water supply infrastructure Small scale community + + + Communal Large scale community + + + Small scale private + + Medium/large scale – + + Large scale own water supply commercial Medium/large scale – + + farms shared water supply infrastructure ARDA + + + Estates Private + + Gardens Urban/Peri-urban + + Rural + +

3.2 SWOT analysis for the irrigation sector A SWOT analysis was carried out to identify the key strengths, weaknesses, opportunities within the irrigation sector and the threats from outside the sector (Table 3.2). This analysis is from the perspective of the stakeholders interviewed and the Department of Irrigation personnel involved in the study. The risk breakdown structure gives the main threats and weaknesses within the irrigation sector. Table 3.2: Strengths and opportunities in the irrigation sector Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities S1. Highly trained W1. Inadequate planning for O1. Private sector personnel in private and all categories participation (PPP) public services S2. Skill set within the W2. Non-prioritisation of O2. Available markets farming community viable and feasible projects for produce

44

Threats T1. Inadequate planning with users T2. Low access to and high electricity charges

S3. developed resources

Available water

S4. Available developed/equipped land resources S5. DoI and Agritex has personnel at all levels S6. Experience in irrigated farming in the country

W3. Inadequate monitoring and evaluation of performance of irrigation at all levels W4. Lack of understanding of market requirements W5. Non-adherence marketing contracts

to

W6. Weak producer/commodity/farmer associations W7. Lack of understanding, commitment and coordination of roles and responsibilities of government departments W8. Lack of facilitation capacity of extension services providers W9. Lack of knowledge of improved agronomic practices W10. Poor control operating expenses

of

W11. Poor operation and maintenance

W12. Inadequate and dilapidated infrastructure

O3. Available development partners

T3. Inadequate on-farm handling facilities for inputs and produce

O4. Increased investments in road and energy infrastructure O4. Restructuring of state owned enterprises

T4. Poor access roads

O5. New constitutional dispensation

T6. Poor post harvest facilities

O6. Stable environment

T7. Adverse change effects

political

O7. Growth of the economy/industrial capacity O8. Availability of appropriate irrigation technology in the region and internationally O9. Increased investment in ICT infrastructure

T5. Lack of or poor marketing infrastructure

climate

T8. High water pollution

T9. Low financing

access

to

T10. Lack of enforcement of contracts

O10. Farmer organisations at all levels (strength not opportunity?) O11. Increased investment in agricultural …

W12. Low land tenure security, particurlary for A1 and A2 farmers

The SWOT analysis was used to develop strategic objectives, by using the countries strengths to overcome weaknesses, exploit opportunities and mitigate threats, by carrying out a cross analysis with senior DoI staff. Each strength and weakness was cross analysed with opportunities and threats to define the strategic objectives for a sustainable improvement in irrigation (Table 3.3). Table 3.3: Representation of the cross analysis used to develop strategic objectives S

W

O

S×O: Expansion strategy

W×O: Improvement strategy

T

S×T: Improvement or threats reduction strategy

W×T: Evasion or defensive strategy

45

46

4 Pre-investment framework 4.1 Irrigation investments There are three general objectives to be achieved through irrigation investments in Zimbabwe: a) Short-term (5 years): To achieve the level of development and productivity of irrigation to pre2000 levels. This implies irrigation production from an area of 186,000ha from all the categories, A1, A2, Communal, old resettlement and Large scale commercial farmers, including estates. b) Medium term (20 years): To expand irrigation development to fully utilise all available internal water resources, from underutilised and newly constructed dams and improved water use efficiency. It is estimated that the target additional area can be as high as 200,000 ha. c) Long-term (50 years): To expand the area under irrigation to utilise transboundary water resources, mainly from the Zambezi River and Kariba dam. The target area for this longterm objective is estimated by DoI to be an additional 1.5 million ha. After discussions with the Department of Irrigation Development and various stakeholders, the targeted returns from investments in irrigation development are identified as:  To contribute to economic growth (GNP),  Contribution to employment creation  To ensure national and household food security and income  To mitigate the negative effects of climate change. The pre-investment framework will focus on investment priorities to achieve the short-term and (some of the) medium term objectives for irrigation development in such a way that it will deliver the returns as described above.

4.2 Thematic areas The prioritized risks from the previous chapter have been grouped into eight thematic areas (Table 4.1). Such grouping into thematic areas enables to formulate strategic priorities (objectives) that address a number of risks while utilizing multiple strengths and opportunities. Table 4.1: Grouping of prioritised issues/risk factors into thematic areas Grouped prioritised issues/risks into thematic areas 1

Policy review and development Strengthen land tenure security for farmers Development and adoption of a legal framework to facilitate irrigation development (an Irrigation Act) Review, formulate and adopt effective policies and regulatory frameworks for sustainable irrigation development, operation and management

47

Grouped prioritised issues/risks into thematic areas 2

3

4

5

6

7 8

Holistic planning Adopt gender sensitive, holistic planning methodologies Enable that a team of visionaries produce long term visions Adopt transparent and holistic planning methodologies with all stakeholders including district – and ward development committees Adopt and implement effective integrated water resources management planning principles Promote the ranking of schemes on viability and feasibility at National, Provincial and district levels. Expansion of area under irrigation through rehabilitation and new development Develop and implement effective and sustainable irrigation rehabilitation and modernisation strategies Promote water use efficient irrigation technologies Institutional capacity development and coordination Establish effective institutions and institutional coordination strategies Review periodically the coordination strategies to meet new priorities and challenges Capacity building of stakeholders Undertake capacity building of all stakeholders Promote international linkages Operation and management strategies Develop and implement capacity building strategies in irrigation development (including O&M) Develop and adopt effective PPP models for funding and operation and management of irrigation projects Marketing and market linkages Develop and Implement market linkages between farmers and traders Explore ways to reduce current and future exposure of financial institutions Access to financial resources Help financial institutions to manage their risks Promote farming as a business in order to build confidence amongst lending institutions Avail a strong Irrigation Fund Monitoring and Evaluation Adopt and implement effective monitoring and evaluation strategies Climate risk management Develop and adopt effective climate risk management strategies

For the eight thematic areas, a set of strategic objectives are described that will facilitate growth of the sector and attract investments from government, private sector and development partners. Achieving these strategic objectives will meet the objectives of the MTP, CAPF, Draft Water Policy and the draft irrigation policy. In developing the strategic objectives, the government is fully cognisant of the urgency that is required to reform the irrigation sector, under the new agricultural dispensation and will work with all partners; private sector, development partners and other government departments to ensure the meeting of the objectives set below. The strategic objectives and the subsequent actions and programmes need to put the role of the farmers central and should be gender mainstreamed to ensure effective implementation. The strategic objectives also need to specify the effects of the changes in land tenure following the introduction of the Fast Track Land Reform. This is specifically the case for actions for A1 and A2 farmers under all strategic priorities. Land tenure is therefore also a cross-cutting theme. Key indicators are suggested for monitoring the achievement of each objective of the pre investment framework. The indicators should be used to track progress during implementation of the preinvestment framework and form the foundation for measuring the achieving of results under each objective.

48

The strategic objectives are described in detail below and are summarised in Table 4.17. Table 4.18 provides a concise overview of the proposed actions along the short, medium and long term lines.

4.3 Strategic objectives pre-investment framework Thematic Area 1: Policy review and development It is recognised that agriculture, and the agricultural water management that is its foundation, are a key component of the economy. Agriculture contributes between 17-20% of GDP, and the nonperformance of the agricultural sector, due to moisture stress, has had a negative impact on the economy as a whole. Agriculture contributes to the economy in three primary ways: a) Supply of industrial and food crops such as soybean, sugarcane, tea, coffee, wheat, and maize. With the exception of maize, the other crops are produced under irrigation, full or supplementary, b) Employment in agriculture accounts for about 70% of the national employment and c) The production of export crops under irrigation, in horticulture, tea, coffee and sugarcane helps in generating national income. The performance of the agriculture sector depends on the availability of adequate moisture for crop production; hence irrigation and other water management strategies are important for economic growth of the country. There is consensus among stakeholders that a return to higher productivity in the irrigation sector is desirable, however, there are various opinions on how government can best facilitate. The role of government involvement in irrigation and water management in general is to facilitate through effective policies, showing leadership for good practices and provision for funding that should help ‘crowd in’ investors. Effective policies will influence the productivity of irrigation schemes, across categories, through three main channels7:  Incentives – the external pressure and discipline on the schemes to perform well  Capabilities – the human resources and knowledge systems, the institutions and infrastructure, needed to device productivity enhancing changes and support them effectively  Flexibility – the scope to make the necessary changes when needed by changing circumstances. The draft Zimbabwe Agricultural Policy Framework (ZAPF) categorises farmers as A1, A2, communal, old resettlement and large scale commercial. In general, the majority of communal farmers are mainly subsistence oriented, relying on rain-fed agriculture, and on poorer soils and relying on family labour. Large scale farmers, including estates, are highly commercialised, on good soils, with access to irrigation infrastructure, are highly mechanised and employ farm labour. The A1 and A2 resettled farmers have access to some of the best soils in the country, with irrigation infrastructure. A1 and A2 farms have the best technical conditions for improving agricultural production and productivity in Zimbabwe.

7

From The Productivity Policies: the “to do list” by Gary Banks, Chairperson of The Productivity Commission in Australia: Economic and Social Outlook Conference, ‘Securing the Future’, Melbourne, 1 November 2012.

49

Policy interventions should be differentiated by farmer category to ensure impact of irrigation and other water management infrastructure. The following strategic objectives are proposed to improve production and productivity for irrigation schemes under this thematic area.

4.3.1 Strategic Objective 1: Strengthen land tenure security for farmers in irrigation schemes A1 and A2 Schemes Following the FTLR, all agricultural land now belongs to the state. The best opportunity to improve agricultural production and productivity in the country is in developing A1 and A2 farms, hence the need for land tenure security of A1 and A2 farmers. Current government effort to grant long-term leases to all farmers needs to be supported. The government is still in the process of developing and issuing long-term leases that can be used as collateral for accessing finance from financial institutions. Farm level investments by farmers will be limited unless land tenure is secure for the farmers in these two farming categories. Farmers need assurance of reaping the long-term benefits of their short to medium term investments, especially with irrigation infrastructure. The land tenure issue remains shrouded in controversy as some of the land in A1 and A2 are considered disputed by potential investors, development partners and international financiers. The controversy stems is mainly because compensation for improvements on the land has not yet been paid to some former farm owners.

Communal and Old Resettlement farms The security of tenure for communal and old resettlement farms is not regarded an issue. While security of tenure on communal lands is generally regarded as a non-issue, there has been evidence in other countries that enhanced land tenure security is productivity enhancing and empowers the farmers, particularly women. Farmers take a long-term view to investments, and are more likely to build permanent productive structure. The rural land certification programme in Ethiopia has been reported to be having a positive impact on soil and water related local investments and gender equality.

Large Scale Commercial Farms All farm land belongs to the state and farmers, individuals and companies need to get leases from government. This process is still in progress, hence uncertainty for investment in this category. It is recommended that security of tenure for farmers on irrigation schemes, should consider the following: a) Clear tenure arrangements for farmers, which are long enough to encourage on-farm investments. This is typically above 25 years for irrigation infrastructure, but will vary with the type of investments done. Large investments in dams and off farm infrastructure require more time for the investor to earn dividends. b) Transferability of the leases from one farmer to another. This offers an exit strategy for those wanting to stop irrigated farming and encourage new entrants or expansions. c) Allow for consolidation of farms to allow for economies of scale and formation of new farming companies in all categories of farming, A1, A2, Communal, Old resettlement and LSCF.

50

4.3.2 Strategic Objective 2: Review, formulate and adopt effective policies and regulatory frameworks for sustainable irrigation development, operation and management The performance of irrigation schemes is affected by many policy initiatives by government. Some of the policies that affect irrigation schemes are: water policy, food security policy, banking policies, environmental policies, among many. It is recommended that a comprehensive current policy and regulatory framework stocktake be carried out, as part of the current irrigation policy making process, to determine how the policies, legal framework and regulations are pro or anti irrigation productivity, differentiated by irrigation farming categories and types. The stocktake should be done by an independent panel of experts, appointed by the Minister of Agriculture, Mechanisation and Irrigation Development. The study can be done over a period of 3 months. After a desk top review and stakeholder consultations, the panel should give identify policy instruments, legal structures and regulatory frameworks, across the economic spectrum, that are considered anti-irrigation productivity and recommend suggestions for new policy initiatives.

A possible to do list for the proposed policy stocktaking The government is in the process of developing policy instruments in agriculture, irrigation, water and land management and marketing contract arrangements. The development of these policy instruments give an opportunity for policies that favour the promotion of improved productivity in the irrigation sector. The irrigation policies and performance will be mainly influenced by the following policy instruments: a) Zimbabwe Agriculture Policy Framework The draft ZAPF recognises the different categories of farmers as A1, A2, communal, small scale commercial and large scale commercial. The interventions pronounced clearly the government intentions to promote the following:  Rehabilitation and modernisation of all previously equipped area. (see SO6)  Developing new irrigation schemes aiming at full utilisation of available water resources, including full utilisation of trans boundary waters. (see SO6)  Promoting research for irrigation development, that will include improved water management techniques, production practices and adoption of new technologies.  Improving marketing arrangements for farmers, especially by promoting contract farming. (SO10)  Financing of irrigation development through the setting up of a National Farm Irrigation Fund and promoting partnership between farmers, government and other private sector or international partners. (see SO11) After the adoption of the policy framework, this study recommends that the following guidelines should be developed:  Development of strategies for intervention for the different categories of farmers  Guidelines for the participation of private sector in irrigation schemes by category (see SO9) 51

b) Agricultural Rural Development Authority (ARDA) ARDA is an authority established by government, with the following key functions: i. To construct, establish, acquire, maintain and operate dams, reservoirs, canals, irrigation works and hydro-electric power stations on such terms and conditions ii. To develop, engage in, establish, operate or manage schemes for the purpose of: a. the irrigation of land or the provision of water for the irrigation of such land; b. the settlement of farmers on land; c. the preparation for processing or marketing or the processing or marketing of agricultural produce or any other commodity; d. research into agriculture and agricultural development; iii. To supply technical and other assistance and specialized advice, information and guidance. The Authority is no longer able to full fill its mandate. It is no longer at the fore front of identification, feasibility studies and preparation for development of large scale irrigation schemes, as a tool for rural development. Its current role is the commercial operation of state farms. The commercial operations have been in decline due to the challenges listed above. ARDA is currently facing the following challenges in accomplishing its functions8: • Absence of capital inflows from government, ARDA has not been able to re-capitalize for the last 15 years and during the last 10-12 years there has been a breakdown of irrigation infrastructure and other machinery such as tractors. • Lines of credits have been closed by banks and financial houses. • Brain drain as experienced workers and managers leave the parastatal in numbers. The Authority can play a significant role in the development of irrigation in the country, by being an irrigation authority responsible for large scale irrigation development through: • Strengthening its out-grower programmes to include smallholder communal, A1 and A2 irrigation schemes. This may require the setting up of core farms (hub farms), in strategic areas to support clusters of irrigated farms through coordinated input procurement, farm machinery supply and harvesting and marketing. • Attracting finance and skills from the private sector. ARDA’s current strategy of entering into joint ventures for the commercial operation of state farms, will assist in irrigation development in all categories by promoting linkages through service contracts for operation and maintenance of schemes. The joint venture will attract new skills in agricultural production and irrigation from the private sector. c) Water Policy and legislation The key elements in the draft Water Policy 2012 that influence investments in agricultural water management, particularly irrigation are:  Responsibility for the management, utilisation, and care for water is vested in the state. All water users should have a permit.  Water management is based on a catchment approach. The planning for irrigation development should follow this principle.

8

Draft report of the Portfolio Committee on agriculture, water, lands and resettlement on viability of ARDA operations and its impact on agricultural productivity and food security, 2010.

52





    

Water for primary needs is a right. The design of irrigation infrastructure should take into account supply of water for primary needs to communities, especially for communal based schemes. Multiple water use designs. Water is a finite, limited and scarce resource that must be conserved and used efficiently. The mechanisms to achieve this are listed as a) pricing, b) volumetric allocations and licensing, c) monitoring regulations. Punitive action for water polluters. Adoption of the principle of subsidiarity in determining the roles of responsibility 9 of the different levels of government (National, provincial and district) in water management. Investments in water must self-finance to meet the capital and recurrent costs, but investments for primary needs will meet the full recurrent costs. User pays the full cost of water provision. The national blend pricing of water being replaced by a more local level blend pricing. Information management and research undertaken from a scientific and technical basis.

To align irrigation development with the new water policy, the following imperatives are noted for the new irrigation policy:  The separation of functions seems to be mainly concerned with selling raw water to a Water Supply Services Utility for processing and selling potable water to consumers. It is not clear how the selling of raw water to irrigation schemes will be done, especially for small and medium schemes. It seems that there is an opportunity for the inclusion of raw water service providers to irrigation schemes. These services providers will buy bulk water from ZINWA and retail it to farmers, delivering water to farm edge. These service providers can be catchment wide or scheme specific. The service providers, where necessary, should also be responsible for the management of shared infrastructure for all categories of irrigation. The options for water service providers in Zimbabwe are ARDA, new private companies or statutory body, or Irrigation Board (such as was existing on some canal systems such as the Odzani Canal Board) or ZINWA. Irrigation categories were this is most appropriate: a) Communal, A1, A2, LCSF with shared water supply infrastructure. b) Areas with clustered schemes (all categories) that can benefit from scale in water services provision.  There is need for an institutional reform for the irrigation sub-sector. The roles and responsibilities for the Department of Irrigation and Development need to be reviewed, considering the adoption of the subsidiarity principle. Some options that can be considered are listed under SO7.  Incentives should be put in place for farmers to manage their demand for water by being more efficient in water use. Options are considered under SO6.

4.3.3 Strategic Objective 3: Development and adoption of a legal framework to facilitate irrigation development (an Irrigation Act).

9

The principle of subsidiarity means that nothing that can be done by a smaller, more local organisation should be done by a larger organisation.

53

The government identified the need for an irrigation policy and irrigation Act in the Medium Term Plan 2011. The work towards finalising a draft irrigation policy, through stakeholder consultations, is underway and a draft policy document is scheduled to be finalised during the first quarter of 2013. The process of developing the irrigation policy is being done by the MAMID and led by the Department of Irrigation. Following the adoption of the irrigation policy, it is recommended that the drafting of an Irrigation Act, that will help to implement the policy, should begin. The policy and Act will achieve the following: a) Recognise the different categories and types of irrigation in Zimbabwe and their different characteristics (see SO4 for suggested typology of irrigation schemes). b) Clarify the ownership of irrigation infrastructure on A1, A2 and communal irrigation schemes and any other off farm shared infrastructure that is financed by public funding. c) Clarify the roles of stakeholders such as government departments, farmers, donors, private sector, and local authorities in irrigation development financing, construction, operation and management, recognising the subsidiarity principle as adopted by the draft water policy. d) Encourage the development of irrigation water service providers e) Define restrictions and obligations of farmers to ensure long-term sustainability of the schemes. This may include mandatory submission of water use information to a government. f) Define how charges for irrigation will be set, by a public or private service provider.

Thematic area 2: Holistic planning and irrigation development 4.3.4 Strategic Objective 4: Adopt gender sensitive, holistic planning methodologies There is a need for holistic planning in all scheme categories. The planning of irrigation development should take into account the different requirements of the various categories of irrigation in the country. In particular, scheme objectives, technology choice, crop choices, financing arrangements and management arrangements differ by category. Farmer objectives: farmers of smallholder schemes and gardens may place a higher priority on food security than income generation for participating in an irrigation scheme. The more commercially oriented A2, large scale commercial and Estates focus on income generation on the selection of crops. In this regard, estates mainly grow cash crops such as sugarcane, tea and fruit trees, while smallholder schemes grow mainly food crops, especially maize. National Objectives: Planning irrigation development has to take into consideration the farmer and national objectives. National objectives take into account the contribution of the schemes to GDP, employment creation, and redressing past inequalities. Technology choice: The objectives of the scheme and the management arrangements for scheme operation should determine the choice of technology to be used. In general, the more commercially oriented the schemes, the more advanced the system they will use. Land tenure security: The requirement for security of tenure is important for all categories of irrigation. The forms of security of tenure available to agricultural land are leases and permits. For the highly 54

commercial schemes, the long-term lease arrangement may be more suitable, whilst for the less commercial schemes permits to farm may be sufficient. Institutional arrangements: The institutions involved in irrigation are either from private or public sectors. The more a scheme is for income generation (commercial), the less the involved of the public sector. In cases of shared water schemes or construction of dams, the public sector may assist private schemes to finance. The less commercial the schemes in A1 and communal schemes receive more support from the public sector agents. The role of the privates sector in the less commercial schemes is increasing under PPP arrangements. Institutional arrangements are different for the different stages of scheme development from planning, feasibility assessment, construction, operation and maintenance and farming operations. Financial arrangements: The financing of irrigation schemes from the public sector depends on national objectives. A2, large scale commercial and estates are more self financing and aimed at income generation to benefit the owners, hence will not be significantly supported by public funds. The A1 and smallholder schemes that have the objectives of food security depend on some public funding for infrastructure development. Possible considerations for holistic planning in irrigation are given in Table 4.2.

55

Table 4.2: Considerations for holistic planning of irrigation schemes, by category Different considerations for planning by category and type of irrigation schemes Farmer Objectives National Objectives Technology choice

Category

Irrigation scheme type

A1 Average land holding: