Sept 10 – 16 2006, PWTC, Kuala Lumpur

IRRIGATION INTAKE WATER MODEL FOR PADDY WATER

MANAGEMENT

Hajime Tanji*1, Kiri Hirohide*1, Tesuo Nakaya*1, Osamu Toda*2

ABSTRACT

In the Asian monsoon areas, where the main irrigated crop is rice, paddy irrigation is focused
on water replenishment in the rainy season. Assuming that irrigation intake water management
by farmers is based not on irrigation efficiency but on economic merit, we propose a simple
economic model of irrigation intake water management whereby paddy irrigation uses intake
water from a river. Intake water includes a) crop water requirement, b) conveyance loss and
c) water management. Here, crop water requirement is defined as intake water to plots of
paddy fields from tertiary canals.

The basic form of the economic model treats parameters as vectors of water volume, cost and
benefits. For example, irrigation intake water is expressed as a vector (discharge, cost, benefit).
Water management is expressed as changing the state of water from the “before” to the
“after”. If the difference in cost between before and after and that in benefit are given, the
net benefit of one type of water management will be given as the difference in costs minus
the difference in benefits.

This model was simulated under the condition of two types of water management strategy
assuming the existence of several cost and benefit parameters. Although the cost and benefit
function cannot be given here, the results of the qualitative analysis showed that in drought
conditions, selecting economic water management would increase irrigation efficiency, but
in the rainy period, it would not.

Keywords: Economic model, Water management, Irrigation

*1
National Institute for Rural Engineering, NARO, 2-1-6 Kannnondai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan
*2
Graduate School of the University of Tokyo, 1-1-1 Yayoi, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan

A-58
 3rd Asian Regional Conference

IRRIGATION INTAKE WATER MODEL FOR PADDY WATER

MANAGEMENT

Hajime Tanji*1, Kiri Hirohide*1, Tesuo Nakaya*1, Osamu Toda*2

ABSTRACT

In Asian monsoon areas, where the main irrigated crop is rice, paddy irrigation is focused
on water replenishment in the rainy season. Assuming that irrigation intake water management
by farmers is based not on irrigation efficiency but on economic merit, we propose a simple
economic model of irrigation intake water management whereby paddy irrigation uses intake
water from a river. Intake water includes a) crop water requirement, b) conveyance loss and
c) water management. Here, crop water requirement is defined as intake water to plots of
paddy fields from tertiary canals. The basic form of the economic model treats parameters
as vectors of water volume, cost and benefit. For example, irrigation intake water is expressed
as a vector (discharge, cost, benefit). Water management is expressed as changing the state
of water from the “before” to the “after”. If the difference in cost between before and after
and that in benefit are given, the net benefit of one type of water management is given as
the difference in costs minus the difference in benefits. This model was simulated under the
condition of two types of water management strategy assuming several cost and benefit
parameters. Although the cost and benefit function cannot be given here, the results of
qualitative analysis showed that in drought conditions, selecting economic water management
would increase irrigation efficiency, but in the rainy period, it would not.

Keywords: Economic model, Water management, Irrigation

INTRODUCTION

In dealing with water resource problems, irrigation water comprises the major part of water
use. Improved water use efficiency is one of the main themes. For example, the World Bank
studied past irrigation projects and found that the actual level of irrigation efficiency was low.
Participative management of irrigation facilities is one of the methods for improving irrigation
efficiency.

1
* National Institute for Rural Engineering, NARO, 2-1-6 Kannnondai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan
2
* Graduate School of the University of Tokyo, 1-1-1 Yayoi, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan

1
Sept 10 – 16 2006, PWTC, Kuala Lumpur

METHODOLOGY

Past studies on irrigation models are based on the assumption that water is delivered to each
field simply on demand. In irrigation economic models, water is delivered for the maximum
benefit of irrigation. The economic model is essentially based on the assumption of maximum
benefit, but in the quest for it, there should be given feasible space from a technical point of
view. If there is ample space, optimization is essential in the model, and if there is little space,
that is, few selectable operations, a feasible space must be estimated. Therefore, there are
two approaches: a simple economic modeling approach and a feasible operation approach.

Economic modeling approach

Diaz et al. (1997) described many functions for water allocation and Spulbar et al. (1997)
discuss economy of water resources, but these researches mainly treat the economics of water
between different sectors. Dinar et al. (1996) discussed economic modeling of water
management issues at the field level, mainly focusing on water quality problems. Gibbons
(1987) discussed the relationship between marginal product value and irrigation efficiency.
However, there is no economic model for farmers’ water management activities such as gate
operations.
Therefore, the framework of economic modeling is examined, and economic modeling of
irrigation operation is proposed here. In this model, a simple optimizing operation is assumed.

Feasible operation approach

In this approach, feasible operation combination is discussed. Here, possible technical

operation based on the present control facilities is examined. Operation that can improve
water use efficiency is also examined.

Total approach

The combination of the above two approaches is discussed here.

RESULTS AND SPECIFICATION

The modeling target of irrigation intake water management is intake from a river to paddy
fields. Figure 1 shows the outline of the target system. For these canals, efficiency is defined
as follows:

Efficiency = Total intake at each paddy field / intake at river (1)

This efficiency avoids the evaluation of intake to paddy fields. Apposite intake to paddy fields
depends on infiltration, evapotranspiration, land leveling, growing stages and crop varieties,
parameters for which sufficient information is usually not available. Another difficulty is that
intake to each paddy field has strong relation to management water of canals. To avoid these
problems, grouping of paddy fields is introduced and paddy fields of the same group are
considered unique. This grouping method is based on actual technique, although the theoretical
basis is weak. However, this efficiency is the most simple and avoids detailed discussion.

2
 3rd Asian Regional Conference

“Operation” of the system means operating the check and diversion gate in Fig. 1. That is,
operation is two sets of gate openings, before and after operation. Here, the simple assumption
that channel flow can be expressed as a steady flow is introduced. Although at the actual
time of gate operation, an unsteady flow appears temporarily; these unsteady conditions are
excluded from the discussion. If steady flow is assumed, one set of gate openings has one
set of discharges at each channel or diversion works. In this case, two sets of gate openings
means two sets of discharges. If two sets of discharges are given, it gives two sets of efficiency
or the difference in efficiency. The operation time between these two situations is assumed
to be one to several days.

RESULTS OF ECONOMIC MODELING APPROACH

Economic models express the operation as maximizing the net benefit; benefit minus cost.
Two sets of gate openings consist not only of discharge but also cost and benefit. The operation
adopted in the economic model is not the one with the highest efficiency but the one with the
highest net benefit.

Figure 2 shows the concept of the irrigation economic model. For each water management,
a set of gate openings and discharge, is expressed as a point of (discharge, cost, benefit)
space. For calculation of net benefit, there are two methods:
1) Calculation of profitable space where benefit > cost.
2) Calculation of difference in cost and benefit between two types of water management
(WMA and WMB).

An example of a simple economic model is based on the second method described as follows:
Net benefit of paddy farmers is the selling price of rice minus the production cost. The water
management cost is part of the production cost. Two intake conditions, A and B, which are
called water management WA and WB, are assumed. The selling price of rice under these
water management conditions is defined as PA and PB. The difference in selling price is
PA2B = PA – PB. The water management cost for changing WA to WB is defined as WCA2B.
Under this condition, the condition for farmers to change the type of water management is
as follows:

Fig. 1 Outline of water management system (Contour de système de gestion de l'eau)

3
Sept 10 – 16 2006, PWTC, Kuala Lumpur

Fig. 2 Discharge-Cost-Benefit spaces (Les espaces d'Décharger-Coût-Avantage)

PA2B > WCA2B (2)

The main difficulty in applying this model is estimating the cost and benefit of each operation.
There is no standard method for measuring cost or benefit. The only applicable method is
estimating the characteristics of cost or benefit and obtaining some values that can explain
the actual operation.

RESULTS OF FEASIBLE MODELING APPROACH

Component analysis

The feasible modeling approach focuses on the operation of gates. Figure 3 shows the concept
of intake from a river and consists of three components. The first is conveyance loss, which
explains seepage and evaporation from channels. The second is management water, which
is used for control of water delivery to paddy fields. The third is irrigation intake water, which
is the water withdrawn into paddy fields.

Each component’s cause of low efficiency is listed in Table 1. For improving efficiency by
conveyance loss, decrease in seepage or evaporation is needed. For improving efficiency by
management water, decrease in spilling water or delivery errors is needed. Delivery errors
refer to surplus intake to some paddy fields, and insufficient intake to other paddy fields.
Delivery errors are important for water management but do not affect the defined efficiency.
If there is a strong rainfall, reducing intake to paddy fields can decrease the intake at the
river, but this operation cannot improve the defined efficiency.

The relationship between efficiency and the operation of gates for the main and secondary
canals are considered. From the results, control of spilling water is the only countermeasure
for improving efficiency. Therefore, there is little room for controlling the main facilities for
improving efficiency.

4
 3rd Asian Regional Conference

Fig. 3 Outline of intake water (Contour de l'eau de prise)

Table 1 Intake component and efficiency

Excess intake model

The accuracy of the value of intake discharge depends on the measurement and control
system. For this reason, excess intake occurs. The most simple and common error distribution
function is the normal distribution. If variance of intake can be expressed as a normal
distribution N(m, ), excess intake based on errors can be discussed.
If farmers intend to fulfill the target discharge, m, at 90% probability, N(m, ) distribution
should be changed to N(m+1.5 , ).

N(m, ) N(m+1.5 , ). (3)

The relative measurement error for open channel flow is generally 10-20%. If is s% of m,
the target for intake m is changed to m + 0.0015 x s x m. If s = 10, then the target value is
15% of the excess intake. Actually, the upper limit of intake is restricted by the size of facilities
and the distribution of intake is not a simple normal distribution. An example of this distribution
is shown in Fig. 4. This bias decreases the target value of 1.15 m to the smaller side.

Figure 5 shows a histogram of the difference in intake discharge at O weir in 1990 in Japan.
The difference in intake discharge is the difference in intake between today and yesterday.
The maximum intake of this weir is 17 m3/s. At a smaller difference, the intake gate will not
operate and the difference is caused by measurement errors. It can be seen from this figure
that there is a high count of differences of less than 1.0 m3/s and a moderately high count
even for differences of less than 1.7 m3/s. Therefore, 6 to 10% of the maximum discharge
is the range of control

5
Sept 10 – 16 2006, PWTC, Kuala Lumpur

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This study was supported by research funds from CREST-JST, the Global Warming Project of
the Ministry of the Environment, RR2002 of MEXT and the Water for Food Project of MAFF.

REFERENCES

Diaz, G.E., Brown, T. and Sveinsson, O. 1997, 2000 rev. AQUARIUS: A Modeling System
for River Basin Water Allocation, USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report RM-GTR-
299, p. 172
Dinar, A. and Letey, J. 1996. Modeling Economic Management and Policy Issues of Water
in Irrigated Agriculture, Praeger, p. 239
Gibbons, D.C. 1987. The Economic Value of Water, Resource for the Future, p. 101
Spulbar, N. and Sabbaghi, A. 1997. Economics of Water Resources: From Regulation to
Privatization, Second Edition, Kluwer Academic Publishers, p. 342

10