WATER KNOWLEDGE NOTE Groundwater Governance and Adoption of Solar-Powered Irrigation Pumps Experiences from the Eastern Gangetic Plains Ram Bastakoti, Manita Raut, and Bhesh Raj Thapa1 Solar-powered irrigation pumps (SPIPs) have been promoted in the Eastern Gangetic Plains (EGP) in recent decades, but rates of adoption are low. This case study assesses the evidence from several solar pump business models being adopted in parts of the EGP, particularly eastern Nepal and northern India, and explores how different models perform in various contexts. It documents lessons for increasing farmers’ resilience to droughts through better groundwater use by promotion of SPIPs. Groundwater access for agriculture in the past was dependent on diesel and electric pumps, respectively constrained by costs and reliability of energy. Both government and nongovernment agencies have promoted SPIPs in the Ganges basin for irrigation and drinking purposes. SPIPs receive different levels of subsidies across countries and states in the region to facilitate adoption and ensure continuous and timely irrigation, which particularly benefits small and marginal farmers. Because the EGP faces variability in water availability, the SPIPs could help in building drought resilience. However, because low operating costs for SPIPs does little to incentivize farmers to use water efficiently, one critical question is how to balance equitable access to SPIPs while ensuring groundwater overdraft is not perpetuated. Farmers’ awareness of efficient water management options is crucial to avoid overextraction of groundwater. © Prashanth Vishwanathan / International Water Management Institute. The information in this case study was prepared as part of the South Asia Water Initiative (SAWI) technical assistance project, “Managing Groundwater for Drought Resilience in South Asia.” SAWI is a multidonor trust fund supported by the United Kingdom, Australia, and Norway and administered by the World Bank. Introduction Despite the commitment of both federal and state governments to support solar pumps through capital subsidy In recent years, groundwater irrigation has had a large schemes, the adoption of SPIPs has been slow because of impact on the livelihoods of poor people of South Asia, high initial capital costs, low awareness of farmers, and particularly because of the investments made by private poorly developed supply chains (Raymond and Jain 2018). farmers (Rijsberman 2003). The sustainability of such In this context, this case study documents how different impacts depends on the development of appropriate pro- solar pump adoption models in the region perform. It also poor institutions and technologies, but scholars point out provides lessons from the promotion of SPIPs that may that the institutional dimensions that govern groundwater help support better groundwater governance, recognizing have not been explored in sufficient detail (Mukherji and the opportunities and threats that SPIPs provide. Shah 2005). Groundwater irrigation, especially in water-abundant regions Extent of Irrigation Use and Policy such as eastern parts of India, Bangladesh, and Nepal, can Environment be a powerful way to alleviate poverty. In the Ganges basin, The extent of groundwater irrigation is driven by several groundwater represents a well-recognized resource, shared different factors including social dynamics, energy policies among the basin countries, and most marginal farmers and market economics. These are discussed further in this depend on buying water or renting pumps to meet their section. irrigation needs (Bastakoti, Sugden, et al. 2017; Jain and Shahidi 2018). The ownership of tubewells and pumps is Social Dynamics and Extent of Groundwater skewed toward medium and large farmers. Diesel and electric Irrigation pumps dominated groundwater extraction in the region for many decades. However, solar pumps are emerging as The livelihoods of most of the people in the Ganges basin an alternative to fill the gaps of inadequate coverage and depend on agriculture (Bastakoti, Bharati et al. 2017; unreliable electricity supply as well as expensive diesel Jain and Shahidi 2018). Access to reliable and affordable options (Jain and Shahidi 2018; Mukherji and Shah 2005; irrigation is the key to enhancing agricultural productivity Shah, Durga, et al. 2017). Governments at federal and state and incomes for farmers. levels are providing subsidies to promote the adoption of SPIPs. These pumps have been deployed through different About 244.8 billion cubic meters of groundwater is models (private and community-based) along with different available in the Ganges basin, with the highest potential in financial strategies, mainly varying rates of subsidies India (168.7 billion cubic meters), Bangladesh (64.6 billion (Agrawal and Jain 2018). A number of studies show that cubic meters), and Nepal (11.5 billion cubic meters), of SPIPs could help improve access to sustainable irrigation which an average of 54 percent has already been developed for farmers. However, such efforts reflect a supply-side push for irrigation, domestic, industrial, and other purposes that lacks proper considerations of farmers’ perspectives (Rajmohan and Prathapar 2013). About 61 percent of (Jain and Shahidi 2018). Promotion of SPIP through the available resources in India, 45 percent in Bangladesh, different subsidy-led adoption models eases farmers’ access and 10 percent in Nepal are already in use. Groundwater to irrigation and could play a role in providing irrigation development for agriculture has been possible in the facilities to deal with climate risks associated with uncertainty Ganges basin because of the favorable hydrogeological in water availability resulting from variable precipitation conditions, fertile soils, and level terrain (Jain et al. 2009). patterns, delayed onset of monsoons, and long dry spells The highest volume of groundwater extraction in the world (Aggarwal et al. 2004; Bastakoti, Bharati, et al. 2017; Li et occurs in the Ganges basin, where it plays a significant al. 2011; Moors et al. 2011; Sugden et al. 2014). However, role in maintaining the economy and standard of living caution should be taken to not accelerate the overextraction (Saha et al. 2016). Studies highlight that in recent decades, of groundwater. Additionally, subsidies promoting SPIPs groundwater irrigation has expanded significantly in South with little consideration of farmer typology could limit the Asia through an increase in the number of groundwater access of marginal and tenant farmers who make up the extraction mechanisms (Mukherji and Shah 2005). majority of the farming population in the region (Bastakoti, Sugden, et al. 2017) and already face disadvantages with The abundance of groundwater has contributed immensely respect to tubewell access. to poverty alleviation, food security, livelihood, and wider WATER GLOBAL PRACTICE CASE STUDY | GROUNDWATER GOVERNANCE AND ADOPTION OF SOLAR-POWERED IRRIGATION PUMPS 2 socioeconomic development within the basin. Mukherji nonagricultural ones and established a tight regime for farm and Shah (2005) reported that small and marginal farmers power rationing in the countryside. The Jyotigram scheme account for almost 40 percent of the groundwater-irrigated has halved the power subsidy to agriculture and reduced area. Groundwater is the main source of irrigation, which is groundwater overdraft. It has also produced negative impacts dominated by electric and diesel-powered pumps. However, on marginal farmers and the landless who depend on water a large majority of small and marginal farmers still lack markets for their access to irrigation, which have become access to an irrigation facility. Furthermore, groundwater much smaller post-Jyotigram. The government of Nepal is is relatively underutilized in the eastern part of the Ganges also facilitating groundwater access for farmers with about basin. Although the reason for this may be economic, it may a 50 percent subsidy per unit (kilowatt-hour) electricity cost also be a result of the presence of groundwater contaminants for agricultural purposes (Dhital 2015). in the region. The incidence of geogenic uranium (Kumar et al. 2018), fluoride (Mukherjee and Singh 2018), and Global experience reveals four key policy instruments that arsenic (Saha and Sahu 2016) in the groundwater of parts seek to regulate the behavior of groundwater users (Shah of the EGP is known. SPIPs have been introduced in the 2009), including direct administrative regulations, economic region since the 2010s and their numbers are still small, but instruments, tradable water rights, and participatory aquifer growth is backed by government subsidies and support from management. The policy and institutional mechanisms to national and international nongovernmental organizations support groundwater use vary from country to country and (NGOs). among states (Saha et al. 2016). Groundwater Market, Energy, and Policy In Nepal, the Water Resources Act of 1992 and Water Framework Resources Regulations of 1993 provide the key water- related legal and regulatory basis for the country but are Groundwater extraction requires an investment in tubewell formulated mainly for surface water and offer no specific installation and pumping equipment that not all farmers provision to regulate groundwater use. An order by the can afford. In addition, a high degree of land fragmentation Committee for Underground Water in 1975, chaired by the impedes irrigation of all of a farmer’s plots using the same secretary of the Ministry of Irrigation, mandates surveys, tubewell. These are two of the largest constraints regarding studies, supervision, and monitoring of groundwater, as groundwater extraction in the Terai region of Nepal and well as developing an information system and plans for its Bihar in India (Bastakoti, Sugden, et al. 2017). A major utilization. The National Water Plan 2005, together with institutional response to this problem has been the emergence the National Water Resources Strategy 2002, recognizes the of dynamic and complex informal groundwater markets, importance of groundwater resources for socioeconomic evidence of which are found in all South Asian countries development. The Irrigation Policy (an amendment made including Bangladesh, India, Nepal, and Pakistan. The in 2013), Groundwater Act 2015, and Renewable Energy consensus is that the water markets give irrigation access to Policy 2016 promote the use of renewable energy for those who do not have their own source of irrigation water groundwater abstraction. and thereby helps to increase net irrigation production. In the federal structure of India, groundwater remains a Groundwater markets lack formal institutional arrangement. state responsibility under the constitution. The central The role of government has been primarily through regulating government circulated a groundwater bill in 1970, with goals electricity and fuel supply. The growth of the groundwater of protecting groundwater resources, taking measures against economy has come at the cost of heavy subsidies in electricity overexploitation, and ensuring its equitable extraction. The often guided by vested political interests, such as in the case of bill was recirculated in 1992, 1996, and 2005 but has had Andhra Pradesh (Shah, Deb, et al. 2003). In another example, limited success. In the Ganges basin, groundwater is regulated energy subsidies in the state of Gujarat led to groundwater through state government initiatives only in Delhi and West overdraft (Shah, Bhatt, et al. 2008). Electricity management Bengal. The Central Groundwater Authority (CGWA) has was considered an option for groundwater governance been constituted under the Environment Protection Act responding to such situations (Shah, Bhatt, et al. 2008). 1986 to regulate groundwater development and management From 2003 to 2006, the government of Gujarat launched the in the country. It has issued notifications to 162 areas in Jyotigram (lighted village) scheme, which invested US$290 the country prohibiting construction of new wells, many of million to separate agricultural electricity feeders from these areas being within the Ganges basin. Aside from these WATER GLOBAL PRACTICE CASE STUDY | GROUNDWATER GOVERNANCE AND ADOPTION OF SOLAR-POWERED IRRIGATION PUMPS 3 notifications, CGWA is imposing conditions on industries and residential customers, which aimed to incentivize seeking to extract groundwater in overexploited areas to invest accountability and long-term performance, ensuring in artificial recharge structures, particularly in the states where that renewable energy systems are reliable investments in the state governments are not regulating groundwater. The Nepal. Of the two kinds of subsidies for commercial and Planning Commission of India, in its report on groundwater residential projects, the government provides subsidies on management and ownership in 2007, addressed issues bank interest. The subsidy of 4.5  percent is provided on related to sustainable groundwater management. The report interest for commercial projects of more than 1.5 kilowatt- emphasized the need to develop a framework of groundwater peak and 2.5 percent for residential projects of less than governance. 1.5 kilowatt-peak. The payment for solar is broken down to make it affordable in the long term with a small interest rate These policies have focused more specifically on extraction in the payment period. In the case of SPIPs, the subsidy is of groundwater than on who accesses it and how it should provided under four categories: individual farmers; private be utilized. The presence of a groundwater protection act company that owns and has leased lands; community based alone cannot regulate groundwater extraction, especially in or group of farmers; and special purpose vehicle (SPV). informal groundwater market settings. A study in northern The idea behind SPV is that a private company accesses the India showed that the main reasons behind farmers’ interest subsidy and rents out SPIPs to farmers to increase marginal in solar pump adoption are zero operational costs and farmers’ access to groundwater. convenience of use (Jain and Shahidi 2018). The reason behind disinterest in adoption is high capital cost, mostly In comparison to India, where SPIP promotion has been among small and marginal farmers. Financial support primarily led by state and central departments (see next to address high SPIP investment costs and subsidies for section for more details), developmental agencies have led irrigation purposes ensure water access for farmers. A critical interventions in Nepal. Nepal’s renewable energy policy question is how to promote equitable access to SPIPs without has brought a grant model with a 60 percent grant and 40 perpetuating or exacerbating groundwater overdraft. percent farmer contribution, a grant and loan model with a 60 percent grant and the rest as a loan to farmers, and a pay- Emergence of SPIPs in the Ganges Basin as-you-go model in which a 50 percent grant is provided to the solar water service entrepreneur who sells water to Government and nongovernment agencies have promoted farmers (Paul-Bossuet 2017). International organizations SPIPs for both irrigation and drinking purposes. There are such as iDE have promoted small-scale pumps targeting different levels of subsidies that vary across countries and small and marginal farmers, and ICIMOD has piloted SPIP states in the Ganges basin, as outlined in this section. via both community-managed and water entrepreneur– managed modalities. More discussion will follow in the Nepal SPIPs as an Alternative section. Various programs of government organizations and NGOs have promoted SPIPs in Nepal, with both community India and individual models (UNDP 2016). The front runners in implementing SPIPs in Nepal are Alternative Energy In India, the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy Promotion Center (AEPC), International Centre for (MNRE) has promoted solar pumps in different parts of Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), Winrock the country for drinking and irrigation purposes since International, United States Agency for International 1992. In subsequent years, the government of India set Development (USAID), International Development ambitious targets for expanding the country’s renewable Enterprises (iDE), and International Water Management energy-generating capacity. In 2010, the government Institute (IWMI). launched the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission. In 2014, as part of this mission, the MNRE outlined the Solar The AEPC of Nepal targeted installing 500 solar photovoltaic Pumping Program with the aim to promote the adoption of water pumps by 2017 (Kunen et al. 2015). The government solar pumps for irrigation and drinking water over five years of Nepal is providing 60 percent subsidies on solar-powered (Raymond and Jain 2018). groundwater pumping systems for irrigation purposes through AEPC. In 2016, the government of Nepal announced SPIPs in India are implemented mainly through two a new policy subsidizing renewable energy for commercial financing schemes. In the first, farmers receive central WATER GLOBAL PRACTICE CASE STUDY | GROUNDWATER GOVERNANCE AND ADOPTION OF SOLAR-POWERED IRRIGATION PUMPS 4 financial assistance of 30 percent of the benchmark cost Scale and Governance Models of SPIPs of the pump and possible additional subsidies at the state level. The second is a market-based approach in which Three models of SPIPs are in operation in the Ganges basin: the MNRE launched a “credit-linked capital subsidy” an individual-owned model, a community-owned model, scheme through the National Bank for Agricultural and and an entrepreneur model (Anonymous 2015). There are Rural Development (NABARD) in 2014. Under this also state- and non-state-supported models and a range of scheme, the MNRE contributed 40 percent as capital pump sizes. Table 1 summarizes SPIPs by scale of operation subsidy, beneficiary farmers contributed 20 percent, and and governance models. the remaining 40 percent is provided to farmers as a loan implemented through NABARD. The capital subsidy Small-Scale-Dominated SPIPs in Nepal scheme initially aimed to support 100,000 pumps in 2014 and reach a target of 1 million by 2021. However, The SPIPs installed in different parts of Nepal are largely progress was slow because of limited uptake by farmers. of small scale, though they represent different governance As of November 2017, India had a cumulative installation models. The iDE has been a pioneer in promoting small- of 142,000 solar pumps. Figure 1 depicts the growth scale solar pumps of about 80 watt-peak targeting small and in yearly solar pump installations over 2012 to 2017 marginal farmers. The system uses the Sunflowerpump, an (Agrawal and Jain 2018). According to the Council on efficient, versatile, and cost-effective piston pump powered Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW), the current by a photovoltaic panel, which is coupled with affordable, subsidy-led approach alone will not meet the target (Jain ultra-low-pressure drip irrigation kits to maximize the and Shahidi 2018). agricultural output and value of the water pumped. The Sunflower pump is operated either individually or by a The state of Bihar has a particularly conducive environment small group of farmers as a community model. It is being for adoption of solar-powered irrigation for several reasons. promoted in several districts of the southern Terai plains The shallow groundwater table and high solar radiation of Nepal. IWMI, in collaboration with partners, promoted presents solar as a viable solution for agricultural irrigation, Sunflower pumps of 80 watt-peak in two villages of the especially given the unreliable nature of electricity in the Saptari district in Nepal that face water scarcity in the region. The Bihar state scheme provides a capital subsidy of winter and summer seasons. Those pumps were installed 60 percent in addition to the MNRE subsidy of 30 percent, because of the fluctuation of electricity and frequent requiring farmers to pay just 10 percent for solar water power cuts coupled with the expensive diesel price. The pumps. Bihar has also experimented with a pay-as-you-go pumps are managed with a community model composed model, also referred to as “water as a service,” in which the of five to eight members cultivating less than 1 hectare of system provider pays for the capital cost of the system and land. Both female and male farmers received training on charges an irrigation fee set by the government. operation and maintenance. These small solar-powered FIGURE 1. Solar Pump Installations in India, 2012–17 45 41,479 38,687 40 Number of installations (thousands) 35 31,472 30 25 20 18,043 15 10 5 2,8 1,055 0 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16 2016–17 November 2017 Source: Agrawal and Jain 2018. WATER GLOBAL PRACTICE CASE STUDY | GROUNDWATER GOVERNANCE AND ADOPTION OF SOLAR-POWERED IRRIGATION PUMPS 5 TABLE 1. Scale Versus Governance Models of SPIPs in the EGP Operating models Scale of operation Individual Group/community ISP/entrepreneurship <1 HP • Common in • Common in Nepal Terai • None Nepal Terai 1–3 HP • Bihar, India, • Nepal Terai as community model—in some cases • Nepal Terai as enterprise model owned by supported with battery—surplus energy used in • Bihar, India, as enterprise model individual other agricultural purpose farmer • Bihar, India, as community model (part enterprise as well) • West Bengal, India, as community model 3–5 HP • Bihar, India, as community (water-as-a-service) model • Bihar, India, as enterprise model >5 HP • Bihar, India, as enterprise model Sources: Anonymous 2015; Blunck 2013; Ghose 2015; Paul-Bossuet 2017; Rai 2018; Soman et al. n.d.; UNDP 2016. Note: EGP = Eastern Gangetic Plains; HP = horsepower; ISP = irrigation service provider; SPIP = solar-powered irrigation pump. pumps have ensured continuous and timely irrigation. The watt-peak in the eastern Terai district of Nepal. The piloted experience from collective management of the pump has SPIPs are being operated in two modalities: community- demonstrated that access to irrigation is not only about the managed and water entrepreneur–managed. Community- size and capacity of solar pumps but also how the system is managed SPIPs are a 1-horsepower SPIP operated by a managed. This included making irrigation schedules among farmers’ association at the Haripur village of the Saptari the members and the collection of group funds for repair district and a 1-horsepower SPIP operated by women and maintenance of the system. Similarly, overextraction is farmers at the Rayapur village of Saptari. The 1-horsepower a result of not only availability and capacity of solar pumps pump (with a 1,200-watt-peak solar panel) piloted in but also farmers’ knowledge of irrigation management. Saptari irrigates about 2 to 3 hectares in a season. It can run Although farmers initially overirrigated their plot because for five or six hours with full discharge and one to two hours of increased water availability using the solar pump, they more with reduced discharge. The system costs US$3,800. came to adopt efficient water application through continual Likewise, a 2-horsepower SPIP is being operated by a water training and engagement. Training and extension services seller at the Hardiya village of Saptari under the enterprising on efficient water management have the potential to shape model (Paul-Bossuet 2017). To implement these pilots, farmers’ behavior and prevent overabstraction. ICIMOD has rolled out three financing models: subsidy, loan, and rental. In the subsidy model, 40 percent subsidy The Sunflower pump has gained popularity among and 60 percent equity is provided. Under the loan model, smallholders for several reasons. Because of its small size 40 percent subsidy, 40 percent loan, and 20 percent equity and investment, smallholders can afford to install it and is provisioned. Monthly usage rental payment is arranged it is easy to operate. It is appropriate to combine with under the rental model. micro-irrigation techniques, particularly for low-water-use commercial crops. Sunflower pumps can be moved easily to Likewise, medium-scale SPIPs are promoted by Winrock different fields and, thus, farmers with scattered parcels of International through a USAID-funded project in western land can use it easily. The key aspect of this technology is Terai and mid-hill (lower valley) districts of Nepal. Through that it helps significantly in increasing smallholders’ access coordination with private suppliers, banks, and financial to groundwater, which is a crucial part of groundwater institutions, various business models were devised such governance. The low-cost water lifting options combined as “credit financing, rent to own, water entrepreneurship with micro-irrigation technologies could provide efficient and vendor financing” (UNDP 2016). One of the systems on-farm water management solutions (Namara, Nagar, and installed has the capacity of 1,260 watt-peak (1 horsepower) Upadhyay 2007). and is used for vegetable farming. A loan of US$3,000 was taken from a local farmers’ cooperative, and a grant ICIMOD has piloted medium-scale 1- and 2-horsepower of US$2,200 was provided. It is managed collectively pumps with solar panels of 1,200 watt-peak and 2,400 by 16 farmers in a group called Sitaram Krishi Samuha WATER GLOBAL PRACTICE CASE STUDY | GROUNDWATER GOVERNANCE AND ADOPTION OF SOLAR-POWERED IRRIGATION PUMPS 6 (UNDP 2016). The next system was installed in the user fee and irrigation schedule and carrying out transactions Surkhet district in 2017, managed by a farmer’s cooperative related to the bank. The group collects ₹20 (US$0.29) per of 30 members. The 2,340-watt-peak modules from China month to create a fund for future maintenance. The excess and 2-horsepower AC (alternating current) surface pumps water is sold to neighboring farmers, indicating that it were installed with a water storage tank. The total cost of partly operates as an enterprise model as well. the system was US$5,170. Another is a relatively large hybrid system installed in 2016 with the capacity of 3,120 Likewise, GIZ (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale watt-peak (3 horsepower) in the Piparkoti village of the Zusammenarbeit), in partnership with Claro Energy Pvt. Kailali district. It is owned and managed by the 20-member Ltd., has piloted SPIPs under three business models operating farmer group. It is a system attached with a battery bank under different scales in the Vaishali district of Bihar used to operate a crop grinder processing unit with a cost of (Blunck 2013). The largest is a 4-horsepower submersible US$7,430 (UNDP 2016). pump that is owned and managed by a farmers’ cooperative under a pay-as-you-go model. The second is a 2-horsepower The community-owned SPIP model being implemented pump owned by a diesel entrepreneur, and the third is a in different parts of Nepal has shown positive outcomes, 1-horsepower surface pump owned by an individual farmer. particularly regarding marginal and tenant farmers’ access To roll out these activities, GIZ has carried out training to irrigation. The partnership among the farmers in terms and awareness-raising activities and workshops for key of financial assistance and group management of the stakeholders. One such example is training bank managers solar equipment is vital. There are challenges to group on solar technology and the financial viability of solar management because it is continuous work to maintain pumps. GIZ has demonstrated a community-based solar group dynamics to ensure equitable sharing of the resource. pump under a pay-as-you-go service model, which is like One is the lack of knowledge of repair and maintenance. the water-as-a-service model at the Vaishali district in Bihar. Because the solar-powered irrigation is in its infancy in these GIZ organized demonstration camps for farmers (Ghose areas, the support systems for repair and maintenance work 2015). The pumps installed were 2-horsepower alternating are still inadequate. The financial support from NGOs is current submersible pumps with a 240-watt panel. The total another important aspect in promotion of solar-powered cost of the system was approximately US$8,548, and the pumps. The high initial installation cost limits farmers’ cost of the 200 feet boring was about US$1,887. In 2014, capacity to invest in solar-powered systems, which brings the system served a total number of 147 farmers in a total in the question of whether such systems will always require catchment area of 60 acres with 730 hours of operation. financial support from external agencies. IWMI has collaborated with partners to pilot medium- Medium- and Large-Scale SPIPs with scale SPIPs in selected villages of Bihar and West Bengal Different Business Models in Bihar and representing water-scarce situations in winter and summer. West Bengal Two SPIPs of 3-horsepower capacity are installed in the Bhagwatipur village of the Madhubani district in Bihar. A range of SPIPs have been piloted and promoted in After using the solar pump, farmers could save the cost different parts of Bihar, varying in scale of operation and required to purchase diesel or water from diesel pump business models. Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd. and PRAN owners. Likewise, two 2-horsepower pumps have been (Preservation and Proliferation of Rural Resources and piloted, one each in the Dhaloguri village of the Cooch Nature) Gaya collaborated in August 2013 to pilot SPIPs Behar district and in the Uttar Chakoakheti village of and drip irrigation in the Rajapur village of the Gaya Alipurduar district in West Bengal. Both pumps in West district in Bihar (Soman, Verma, and Harley n.d.). The Bengal have been promoted through a community- pilot project aimed to provide benefits to vulnerable farmers managed model, with one advantage being that farmers by improving access to irrigation through the use of SPIPs save money periodically. These funds work as a contingency and examining synergies between SPIP and drip irrigation to pay for repair and maintenance, so members do not have in paddy. A 2.5-horsepower solar pump was provided to to contribute additional large amounts for emergencies. seven farmers in a group and managed collectively at a cost of approximately US$8,000. It was a 2.5-horsepower DC Likewise, the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, (direct current) submersible pump with 2400-watt panels. Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS)has been involved The women members are responsible for deciding the water in developing and piloting contextualized business models WATER GLOBAL PRACTICE CASE STUDY | GROUNDWATER GOVERNANCE AND ADOPTION OF SOLAR-POWERED IRRIGATION PUMPS 7 for solar irrigation as off-grid and on-grid models in different faces drought almost every year because of the uncertain parts of India. The off-grid model is applicable to areas with rainfall pattern, particularly delayed onset of monsoon, and poor or no electric connections. It was developed in the long dry spells, resulting in significant variations in water context of Bihar: Although rich in groundwater, electricity is availability for agriculture (Bastakoti and Bharati 2017); unavailable, so farmers have to use expensive diesel pumps. Moors et al. 2011; Sugden et al. 2014). In such a context, The cost of using these diesel-powered pumps was one of SPIPs could play a crucial role in building drought resilience the reasons for lower agricultural productivity for village by providing cost-efficient access to irrigation water. An farmers. Five-horsepower SPIPs were introduced in the assessment of different types of solar pump technologies and Chakhaji village in the Pusa block of the Samastipur district business models available in India for irrigation reveals that in Bihar through farmer entrepreneurs. In addition to large the wide variety of solar technology available and limited solar pumps, buried pipelines were provided to the selected knowledge of what works best for farmers makes it hard for solar irrigation service providers (SISPs) in the village. Aga them to decide on a technology (MIT 2017). Khan Rural Support Programme and the IWMI-Tata Trust supported initial investment for installation, including A study conducted in Nepal provides a cost comparison both loans and subsidies. Five individuals are enterprising of different systems covering solar, electric, and diesel as SISPs to provide water for 180 acres of land (Rai 2018). pumps (Renewable World 2018). The study compared Smallholders can irrigate their fields by purchasing water the cost-effectiveness of different pumping technologies, from these SISPs. Water access for irrigation has improved considering the most commonly used solar pumping unit because competition among SISPs in the village keeps water (which has 1,200 Wp (watts peak), a 1.5-horsepower prices low, and so far, some of the diesel-powered pump usage pump, and 5-meter lift height). The life cycle cost (LCC) has waned. The cumulative revenue and money saved from was calculated over a 20-year period, accounting for up- not making payments for diesel pump rentals over time has front, operating, maintenance, and replacement costs at an made this model an attractive one. Small land-holding size assumed discount rate of 10 percent. The cost calculation in Bihar makes the off-grid model an attractive solution. included the overall cost of operation. Likewise, the Fragmentation of land parcel means that only one irrigation analysis included calculation of the cost per unit of water infrastructure is insufficient to irrigate all cultivated plots, for a diesel-powered pump and grid-operated electric pump and purchasing irrigation infrastructure is a major financial to deliver the same volume discharge over 20 years. The investment—and an unprofitable one. There are two main cost per unit of water was calculated considering LCC at advantages with solar water entrepreneurs: Smallholder a different capacity utilization factor (CUF). The cost per farmers can avoid the high initial investment, and they can unit of water for a diesel pump and an electric pump was access irrigation at affordable prices. calculated for different scenarios matching the equivalent volume of water pumped by a solar pump at different CUFs. SPIPs as an Alternative Table 2 compares the cost per unit of water for different energy options with different utilization factors. Results The suitability of SPIPs as an alternative to existing practices show that solar-powered pumps could give better results is influenced by economic drivers, adequate technical at a higher capacity utilization factor but seem inefficient knowledge, the ownership model and farmer awareness. at a lower CUF. Prices are calculated based on the electric grid in the nearby land parcel, which is not common in the Suitability of SPIP for Irrigation EGP. Hence, off-grid farmers have the choice of either solar or diesel, and SPIPs are the best option for them beyond a SPIPs are an important technology for irrigation for small 50 percent utilization factor. and marginal farmers in the dry season in Nepal and India (MIT 2017). SPIPs offer significant opportunities Raymond and Jain (2018) reported that an off-grid farmer to facilitate irrigation access in an affordable and could choose to own a diesel or solar pump. They reveal environmentally sustainable manner while decoupling that without government subsidy, a stand-alone solar irrigation from the rising power subsidy burden (Agrawal pump is less attractive to a farmer than diesel, whereas a and Jain 2018). Poor availability of electricity resulting 30 percent government subsidy makes ownership of a solar from limited grid connection and power fluctuation, and pump more attractive for a farmer compared to owning a expensive and greenhouse gas-emitting diesel, positions diesel pump from a lifetime cost perspective. This situation solar as a suitable alternative for irrigation. The EGP region depends on a farmer’s annual irrigation requirement and WATER GLOBAL PRACTICE CASE STUDY | GROUNDWATER GOVERNANCE AND ADOPTION OF SOLAR-POWERED IRRIGATION PUMPS 8 TABLE 2. Cost Comparison for Different Energy Options in Nepal Cost per unit of water (NPRs/m3) Capacity utilization factor (%) (considering 5% increment in every fifth year) Pump type 10 25 50 70 90 Solar-powered pump 24.40 9.80 5.00 3.60 2.83 Diesel pump 8.80 6.39 5.51 5.48 5.26 Grid electric pump 5.58 3.81 3.14 3.06 2.90 Source: Renewable World 2018. Note: m3 = cubic meter; NPR = Nepalese Rupee (US$107) TABLE 3. Ownership Models and Their Advantages and Disadvantages Ownership model Advantages Disadvantages Individual-owned • Suitable for large farmers • High investment cost • Pump may not operate at efficient scale Collective • Reduces up-front cost for the pump ownership • Powerful farmers may dominate • Farmers can have a group fund to pay for marginal and tenant farmers in terms of maintenance/repair expenses pump usage • Essential for the cooperative members to have contiguous plots while one single farmer may have land in multiple places in Bihar and Nepal Terai Entrepreneur • Suitable for resource-constrained farmers, especially • High investment cost (pay-as-you-go) marginal and tenants because they can purchase • Difficult to get “entrepreneur” water when in need for service without bearing the system cost • Government-fixed rental charges can better serve farmers paying higher irrigation rental charges in informal groundwater market • Familiar model because it is like existing water markets the price of diesel. An increase in the annual pumping solar generates additional revenue for farmers (Shah, Durga, hours makes solar more attractive than diesel, particularly et al. 2017). for small and marginal farmers dependent on pump rental or purchasing water. For them, the shift to solar pumps Different ownership models have advantages as well as could be an economically attractive option in the long run, disadvantages and thus provide a range of policy lessons but the up-front cost may remain a barrier to solar pump (table 3). Although the individual-owned model seems ownership. better for large farmers, the initial investment cost could still hinder the adoption of SPIPs. The constraints associated Studies show that the capital cost of a solar pump is well with initial investment could be better handled through the beyond the normal financial means of a small farmer. collective model. Both collective and entrepreneur models In such context, the government could put efforts on could be a better option for resource-poor farmers. But the enhancing marginal farmers’ affordability. Innovations in collective model also could fall in the trap of elite capture highly efficient, low-cost solar pumps and financing may by better-off farmers; thus, marginal farmers could once improve the affordability of pump ownership for marginal again be sidelined. Some examples of better functioning farmers. Suitability of SPIPs could be enhanced through entrepreneur models were seen. But such entrepreneurs connecting the solar pump to the grid so that they can sell should be able to arrange operating resources; they should surplus energy and earn additional revenue. Though not yet be risk-takers and motivated to work in rural areas. in practice in EGP, a pilot study in the Dhundi village of Therefore, finding such entrepreneurs in rural areas is a the Gujarat district has demonstrated that grid-connected challenge. WATER GLOBAL PRACTICE CASE STUDY | GROUNDWATER GOVERNANCE AND ADOPTION OF SOLAR-POWERED IRRIGATION PUMPS 9 Because knowledge is limited on what works best for model, though some other models are also adopted. The them, farmers tend to purchase expensive solar with higher individual ownership model may continue to remain the capacity than they need. One of the ways to better assist main one, especially with large farmers. High capital cost farmers to adopt expensive solar equipment is through a for installation is one of the key barriers for farmers not combination of subsidizing solar and paying for excess being interested in adopting solar pumps. However, the electricity produced as is being rolled out in Gujarat practice of agriculture as a primary source of income, (MIT 2017). Efficient water use is important to optimize and farmers’ future investment plans for renting out farm the food-water-energy nexus, and the solar pump system machinery, still motivates them to adopt the SPIPs. Because should be installed through appropriate governmental the high capital cost could be a barrier for most small and policies. A pump sizing tool, such as that developed by marginal farmers, they are interested particularly in a joint the Comprehensive Initiative on Technology Evaluation ownership model. A study conducted in 10 districts of (CITE), will help farmers better understand the pump size Uttar Pradesh showed that about 20 percent of the farmers they need to buy according to their field size and water prefer a joint ownership model for solar pumps, in which requirement (MIT 2017). they could share the cost of purchase. The majority of farmers preferred buying water for irrigation if it is available An individually owned and operated off-grid solar model at an economical rate, indicating that the water-as-a-service for irrigation helps farmers irrigate more easily and in a (enterprise) model is the preferred model for solar pumps less expensive way than through diesel and electric pumps. (Jain and Shahidi 2018), where the price is competitive Although solar incurs higher costs in the beginning, in the relative to the prevailing local water market prices. long run, irrigation will be cheaper through a solar pump than through a diesel pump and infrequent electric supply. A study carried out by CEEW in Uttar Pradesh reveals However, this also means that the individually owned solar that only 27 percent of farmers had heard of solar pumps, pump entrepreneurs could end up overextracting water by less than 15 percent had seen a solar pump in reality or supplying to more farmers, particularly if there is a desire on television, and only 2 percent had heard of government to recover the installation cost faster. The on-grid models, schemes related to solar pumps (Jain and Shahidi 2018). like those of Gujarat, could be more effective in preventing This result indicates a low level of penetration of SPIPs in groundwater overextraction because farmers can sell excess the Gangetic region. MNRE estimates show that, of the power to the connected grid. nearly 30 million irrigation pumps in use throughout the country, only 0.4 percent are solar (MNRE 2017). The There is more than one way to recover the up-front cost low penetration could be because only a limited number of of SPIPs. Farmers can also improve the economics of solar farmers are aware of the government schemes for installing pump ownership by selling water to neighbors or renting SPIPs, indicating a major awareness gap in this domain. out the pump. The feasibility of water sales depends on the proximity of other farms, the timing of local irrigation Farmers’ perception of the successful operation of a solar needs, portability of the pump, and the availability of other pump increased with demonstrations of its use (Jain and irrigation options such as government tubewells. Alternately, Shahidi 2018). This finding corroborates the observations farmers can improve the utilization of solar pumps by using made in IWMI-led pilot intervention sites in Madhubani, the power in other productive activities such as post-harvest Bihar, and Cooch Behar as well as Alipur districts of West processing, which was observed in one case from Nepal. Bengal that farmers develop positive views about operation after seeing the solar pumps in action. Many farmers showed Awareness, Perceptions, and Adoption interest in adopting solar pumps particularly because of of SPIPs zero operational cost and convenience of use. The choice of pump size and size of farmers’ plots have been In the EGP, as a result of male out-migration, women shown to be correlated (Jain and Shahidi 2018). Marginal need to handle new agricultural responsibilities. They face farmers mostly preferred SPIPs of 3 horsepower, whereas challenges in irrigating their plots with diesel pumps because among the medium to large farmers, 5 horsepower was the they are difficult to operate. In such a context, women most popular choice. farmers have been using solar pumps in combination with proper training in the operation of SPIPs (Bastakoti, Regarding the different models for SPIPs, normally the solar Sugden, et al. 2017). Operation of a solar pump requires less pumps are deployed as a conventional individual ownership labor, which has made solar pumps an attractive, easy, and WATER GLOBAL PRACTICE CASE STUDY | GROUNDWATER GOVERNANCE AND ADOPTION OF SOLAR-POWERED IRRIGATION PUMPS 10 cost-effective alternative in comparison to diesel pumps. from highly subsidized, low-tariff electricity mostly at flat The range of solar pump sizes can cater to marginal, small, rates (Dhawan 2017). The consequent decrease in water medium, as well as large farmers. Different solar business table further increased the use of energy for pumping models laid out by ICIMOD (as discussed in the previous groundwater from deeper levels. The important question is section) can be more appropriate for farmers with limited what India and Nepal can learn from past experiences going financial capacity. Furthermore, organizing marginal forward in terms of greater adoption of SPIPs. and tenant farmers in groups through consolidating land together, installing solar pumps, and operating the system SPIP systems require high initial investment, and purchasing collectively have addressed challenges associated with access them without subsidy and support can make the systems to water. unaffordable, particularly for marginal and small farmers. Results discussed in previous sections show that different If SPIPs are not managed adequately, there are risks of models of deploying solar pumps should be context- and unsustainable water use (Hartung and Pluschke 2018). farmer-specific. Because the emergence of SPIPs is still in Increased access to cheap groundwater through SPIPs may its infancy, lessons can be drawn from the water governance result in overapplication of water in the field, increasing examples from the past as well as from the evolving practices farm area under irrigation, shifting to high-value water- adopted by governmental and nongovernmental agencies in intensive crops, and selling water to neighboring farmers Nepal and India. As diverse as the farmer groups are in these (Hartung and Pluschke 2018). In such situations, it is regions, the scale of SPIP and governance mechanisms are crucial for the government in India and Nepal to recognize equally different. There is no one best SPIP adoption method. water overdraft–related risks from the beginning for the Hence, the installation, adoption, and replication of SPIP sustainable use of SPIP technologies at the outset, from should be context-specific, as indicated in table 4, which the design and financing stages. Smart and integrated summarizes the suitability of different operating models. subsidy schemes that bring together benefits from increased With the technological advancement resulting in the water access and efficient use of water and energy could be emergence of new SPIP models, it is comparatively easy to promoted (Schmalensee 2015). pursue context-specific SPIP programs. For example, if the farmers are small and marginal, a collective approach can be Key Lessons for Improved Groundwater a good fit. For fragmented plots, which seem to be common Governance in the EGP, even the solar enterprise model on an agreed Subsidies for irrigation purposes is not a new phenomenon. fee can be a good option. However, in the off-grid model, Post–green revolution agricultural and irrigation subsidies chances of overextraction of groundwater are higher because helped Indian farmers access and utilize groundwater of the limit on incentives (for example, selling excess power to some extent. However, it is also true that subsidies on to the grid). Although subsidy-led SPIP programs reduce electricity in Indian States, such as Punjab, resulted in an the cost of water extraction for farmers on one hand, the alarming rate of groundwater depletion (Schmalensee “free water extraction” could lead to unsustainable water 2015). Several other parts of India also face severe water withdrawal practices on the other. Hence, proper regulatory stress and declining groundwater level. One of the reasons mechanisms are necessary to withdraw water within a is widespread adoption of inefficient pumps resulting prescribed limit. TABLE 4. Conditions for Different Operating Models Operating model Types of farmers best suited Landholding size (ha) Crop type and farming Individual Large >2 Conventional farming with cereals, sugarcane, and others Collective Small and marginal including >0.5 and landless Commercial farming with high-value crops landless Entrepreneur Small and marginal 0.5–2.0 Commercial farming with high-value crops, (pay-as-you-go) market-targeted production Note: ha = hectare. WATER GLOBAL PRACTICE CASE STUDY | GROUNDWATER GOVERNANCE AND ADOPTION OF SOLAR-POWERED IRRIGATION PUMPS 11 The water-as-a-service model with the involvement of could be considered as a climate-smart option as well village-level entrepreneurs is a promising SPIP model to as crucial in enhancing drought resilience, although both improve the utilization of solar pumps and provide the initial capital for solar investment is quite high and irrigation access to marginal farmers. In the areas with a could be a factor in restricting the adoption especially dominance of diesel pumps for renting or selling water, a for marginal and tenant farmers. In such a situation, solar-based water-as-a-service model could have a payback the range of solar pump sizes can cater to marginal, of two to four years. But, if the farmers have access to reliable small, medium, as well as large farmers. Adoption of electric grid connection, the electric pump would generate different solar business models coupled with a range of the most profit for the entrepreneur using subsidized collective/community models can be more appropriate agricultural connection because electricity is subsidized for for farmers with limited financial capacity. agricultural use in most parts of the Ganges basin. On the • Farm size and investment capacity of farmers are other hand, in the areas lacking electric grid connections, crucial for the installation of any groundwater diesel and solar pumps would be the only options for such extraction mechanism. This suggests that collective/ entrepreneurs. Although the entrepreneurs will not have any community models could be an option for option to sell surplus energy, they could generate additional smallholders through which their consolidated efforts revenue using that surplus energy in other activities such as can help improve access to groundwater. The shared post-harvesting activities. The entrepreneurs could possibly investment to install an SPIP system and collective displace the diesel pump owners as well. water allocation mechanisms help address investment- related challenges. Likewise, in the areas lacking electric grid connections, • Collective sharing of water infrastructure can lead to individually owned medium-scale solar pump deployment conflict among farmers, which can undermine the could also be a better option. Encouraging pump sharing idea of cost and water sharing. Hence, careful methods by marginal farmers could increase the utilization of solar should be put in play to formulate rules of collective pumps. By doing so, governments would be able to realize action. This could also be a way to address the increased impacts of their efforts (such as subsidies) and, irrigation challenges in fragmented land parcels, which at the same time, could consider options for creating is one of the major problems in this part of the world. market-based solutions for efficient and judicious use of • Accessing irrigation is one aspect of sustainable water groundwater. It should, however, be noted that the viability use, and promotion of SPIP is one way to go about it. of sharing the solar pump in a group, and the significance Efficient groundwater use depends on an appropriate of the revenue from such a system, is sensitive to the timing combination of micro-irrigation technologies with of local irrigation needs. SPIPs. This could help achieve higher efficiency with less use of water. Concerning the financing of the SPIPs, it could be difficult • Institutional options that facilitate farmers’ access to to promote a subsidy-led approach. Governments may find government support services could be considered. it not so easy to deploy SPIPs at scale, given their high up- Examples include government provision of subsidies front cost. For the large-scale deployment of solar pumps, for solar installations such as through AEPC in Nepal credit-based delivery models would be crucial. It indicates and federal and state government–financed subsidies the need for long-term finance being able to ensure in India. widespread adoption of SPIPs. However, several risks and • Provision of after-sales service is crucial for operation operational challenges may constrain flow of long-term and maintenance of the system. finance for SPIPs. • Promotion of options with low operational cost could aggravate the problem of overextraction of groundwater We can draw some lessons from those cases that could help through uncontrolled pumping. Therefore, some form improve groundwater governance. of regulatory mechanism to manage the rational use of groundwater resources is needed. • In many parts of the Ganges basin, farmers still rely on expensive diesel (even availability of fuel is a concern, Awareness building among farmers regarding the capacity like Nepal) and an unreliable electricity supply. In such of solar systems is essential. At present, the sources of a situation, promoting alternate energy options such information on solar pumps are largely solar companies. as SPIPs could provide a viable option. Solar options Farmers need to know what system would best cater to their WATER GLOBAL PRACTICE CASE STUDY | GROUNDWATER GOVERNANCE AND ADOPTION OF SOLAR-POWERED IRRIGATION PUMPS 12 requirements considering their size of land and irrigation REFERENCES needs. This eliminates the issue of overinvestment in the system. Aggarwal, P. K., P. K. Joshi, J. S. I. Ingram, and R. K. Gupta. 2004. “Adapting Food Systems of the Indo-Gangetic Plains Conclusion and Policy Implications to Global Environmental Change: Key Information Needs to Improve Policy Formulation.” Environmental Science and Groundwater in the Ganges basin offers great opportunities Policy 7 (6): 487–498. for sustaining the livelihoods of the people. SPIPs have the potential to enhance access to irrigation, promote low- Agrawal, S., and A. Jain. 2018. Financing Solar for Irrigation carbon agriculture, and improve farmers’ resilience against in India: Risks, Challenges and Solutions. New Delhi, India: climate change. SPIPs could be scaled up by adopting Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW). context-specific strategies and focusing on improving awareness about the technology, and they could play a Anonymous. 2015. Solar Powered Pumps for Irrigation crucial role in building drought resilience of the farmers in Purposes (SPIP). Kathmandu, Nepal: ICIMOD. the EGP. Bastakoti, R., F. Sugden, M. Raut, and S. Shrestha. 2017. Three models of SPIPs are in operation in the Ganges basin: “Key Constraints and Collective Action Challenges community-owned, individual-owned, and entrepreneur. for Groundwater Governance in the Eastern Gangetic In a community-owned model, a group of farmers share Plains.” In Water and Collective Action—Global Multi-scale the SPIP, and it may be beneficial for farmers in Bihar and Governance Challenges, edited by D. Suhardiman, A. Nicol, Nepal Terai where the majority are small and marginal and E. Mapedza. pp.131-142. Oxon, UK. Earthscan. farmers. Well-off farmers who can afford the SPIP and have installed them use an individually owned model. The third Bastakoti, R. C., L. Bharati, U. Bhattarai, and S. M. Wahid. is the entrepreneur model, in which solar-run pumps are 2017. “Agriculture under Changing Climate Conditions installed by one or more individuals to sell water to farmers. and Adaptation Options in the Koshi Basin.” Climate and Development 9 (7): 634–648. When promoting solar for irrigation, policy makers must consider government spending and economic viability Blunck, M. 2013. Potential and Challenges for Solar of deployment, and they should seek strategies that take Irrigation in Bihar. New Delhi: IGEN (Indo-German care of the interests of all parties. The high capital cost of Energy Programme). the technology is the biggest barrier to its adoption. But the limited consideration of farmers’ perspectives on solar Dhawan, V. 2017. “Water and Agriculture in India.” pumps could also be one of the key reasons for the limited Background paper for the South Asia expert panel during uptake of SPIPs under government programs. Therefore, the Global Forum for Food and Agriculture (GFFA). the focus could be on awareness generation and technology Hamburg. https://www.oav.de/fileadmin/user_upload/5​ demonstration through engaging with the channels that are _Publikationen/5_Studien/170118_Study_Water_Agriculture​ already reaching out to the farmers, including both state _India.pdf and non-state stakeholders. Dhital, R. P. 2015. Government Policies for Solar Pumps As part of any promotion of SPIPS, governments must (Drinking and Irrigation in Nepal). Kathmandu, Nepal: consider and manage the risk of the overextraction of AEPC (Alternative Energy Promotion Center). groundwater. Furthermore, in the EGP, given the known incidence of groundwater contamination in the region, Ghose, N. 2015. Solar Pumps for Irrigation: GIZ’s Work the quality of groundwater must be properly understood, in Bihar. New Delhi: IGEN (Indo-German Energy including the influence of both geogenic and anthropogenic Programme). contaminants. Hartung, H., and L. Pluschke. 2018. The Benefits and Risks NOTE of Solar-Powered Irrigation—A Global Review. Rome, Italy. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United 1. International Water Management Institute (IWMI), Nations) and GIZ (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Kathmandu, Nepal. Zusammenarbeit). WATER GLOBAL PRACTICE CASE STUDY | GROUNDWATER GOVERNANCE AND ADOPTION OF SOLAR-POWERED IRRIGATION PUMPS 13 Jain, A., and T. Shahidi. 2018. Adopting Solar for Irrigation: Mukherji, A., and T. Shah. 2005. “Groundwater Socio- Farmers’ Perspectives from Uttar Pradesh. New Delhi, India: ecology and Governance: A Review of Institutions and Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW). Policies in Selected Countries.” Hydrogeology Journal 13 (1): 328–345. Jain, S. K., B. R. Sharma, A. Zahid, M. Jin, J. L. Shrestha, V. Kumar, S. P. Rai, J. Hu, Y. Luo, and D. Sharma. 2009. Namara, R. E., R. K. Nagar, and B. Upadhyay. 2007. “A Comparative Analysis of the Hydrogeology of the “Economics, Adoption Determinants, and Impacts of Indus-Gangetic and Yellow River Basins.” In Groundwater Micro-Irrigation Technologies: Empirical Results from Governance in the Indo-Gangetic and Yellow River Basins, edited India.” Irrigation Science 25 (3): 283–297. by A. Mukherji, K. G. Villholth, B. R. Sharma, and J. Wang. pp.43-64. London, UK CRC Press, Taylor Francis Group. Paul-Bossuet, A. 2017. Can Solar Pumps Give Nepal’s Women Farmers a Brighter Future? Thomas Reuters Foundation News, Kumar, D., A. Singh, R. K. Jha, S. K. Sahoo, and V. Jha. March 21. 2018. “Using Spatial Statistics to Identify the Uranium Hotspot in Groundwater in the Mid-Eastern Gangetic Rai, U. 2018. “Chasing the Sun in Samastipur, Delhi.” Plain, India.” Environmental Earth Sciences 77 (19): 702. The Hindu Business Line, March 9. https://www​ .thehindubusinessline.com/specials/india-interior/solar​ Kunen, E., B. Pandey, R. Foster, J. Holthaus, B. Shrestha, -powered-irrigation-in-bihars-samastipur-helping-farmers​ and B. Ngetich. 2015. Solar Water Pumping: Kenya and /article23005940.ece. Nepal Market Acceleration. In conference proceedings of Solar World Congress 2015, Daegu, Korea, November Rajmohan, N., and S. A. Prathapar. 2013. “Hydrogeology 8–12. http://proceedings.ises.org/paper/swc2015/swc2015​ of the Eastern Ganges Basin: An Overview.” IWMI Working -0175-Pandey.pdf. Paper 157, International Water Management Institute, Colombo, Sri Lanka. Li, X., S. R. Waddington, J. Dixon, A. K. Joshi, and M. C. de Vicente. 2011. “The Relative Importance of Drought and Raymond, A., and A. Jain. 2018. Solar for Irrigation: A Other Water-Related Constraints for Major Food Crops in Comparative Assessment of Deployment Strategies. New Delhi, South Asian Farming Systems.” Food Security 3 (1): 19–33. India: Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW). MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology). 2017. “MIT Renewable World. 2018. 10-year impact report. London. Researchers Release Evaluation of Solar Pumps for Irrigation Renewable World. https://renewable-world.org/app​ and Salt Mining in India.” MIT News, November 13. http:// /uploads/2018/12/RW-Impact-Report-WEB.pdf news.mit.edu/2017/mit-researchers-release-evaluation​ -solar-pumps-used-irrigation-and-salt-mining-india-1113. Rijsberman, F. 2003. “Can Development of Water Resources Reduce Poverty?” Water Policy 5 (5-6): 399-412. MNRE (Ministry of New and Renewable Energy). 2017. Annual Report 2016–2017. MNRE. New Delhi. https:// Saha, D., and S. Sahu. 2016. “A Decade of Investigations mnre.gov.in/file-manager/annual-report/2016-2017/EN​ on Groundwater Arsenic Contamination in Middle Ganga /pdf/4.pdf. Plain, India.” Environmental Geochemistry and Health 38 (2): 315–337. Moors, E. J., A. Groot, H. Biemans, C. T. van Scheltinga, C. Siderius, M. Stoffel, C. Huggel, et al. 2011. “Adaptation to Saha, D., A. Zahid, S. R. Shrestha, and P. Pavelic. 2016. Changing Water Resources in the Ganges Basin, Northern “Groundwater Resources.” In The Ganges River Basin: Status India.” Environmental Science and Policy 14 (7): 758–769. and Challenges in Water, Environment and Livelihoods, edited by L. Bharati, B. R. Sharma, and V. Smakhtin, 24–51. Mukherjee, I., and U. K. Singh. 2018. “Groundwater Oxon, U.K.: Routledge—Earthscan. Fluoride Contamination, Probable Release, and Containment Mechanisms: A Review on Indian Context.” Schmalensee, R. 2015. “The Future of Solar Energy: Environmental Geochemistry and Health 40 (6): 2259–2301. A Personal Assessment.” Energy Economics 52 (1): 142–148. WATER GLOBAL PRACTICE CASE STUDY | GROUNDWATER GOVERNANCE AND ADOPTION OF SOLAR-POWERED IRRIGATION PUMPS 14 Shah, T. 2009. Taming the Anarchy: Groundwater Governance Soman, P., A. Verma, and A. Harley. (n.d.) “Using Solar in South Asia. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future Press. Power and Drip Irrigation Pumps (SPIP) to Improve Livelihoods for Vulnerable Women Farmers in Bihar, Gaya.” Shah, T., S. Bhatt, R. K. Shah, and J. Talati. 2008. “Groundwater Project Report, ICIMOD. Kathmandu, Nepal. http://www​ Governance through Electricity Supply Management: .icimod.org/resource/17197. Assessing an Innovative Intervention in Gujarat, Western India.” Agricultural Water Management 95 (11): 1233–1242. Sugden, F., N. Maskey, F. Clement, V. Ramesh, A. Philip, and A. Rai. 2014. “Agrarian Stress and Climate Change in Shah, T., A. Deb, A. Roy, A. S. Qureshi, and J. Wang. 2003. the Eastern Gangetic Plains: Gendered Vulnerability in a “Sustaining Asia’s Groundwater Boom: An Overview of Issues Stratified Social Formation.” Global Environmental Change and Evidence.” Natural Resources Forum 27 (2): 130–141. 29: 258–269. Shah, T., N. Durga, G. P. Rai, S. Verma, and R. Rathod. UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). 2016. 2017. “Promoting Solar Power as a Remunerative Crop.” Renewable Energy for Rural Livelihood Program. Kathmandu, Economic and Political Weekly 52 (45): 14–19. Nepal: UNDP. WATER GLOBAL PRACTICE CASE STUDY | GROUNDWATER GOVERNANCE AND ADOPTION OF SOLAR-POWERED IRRIGATION PUMPS 15 Connect with the Water Global Practice www.worldbank.org/water worldbankwater@worldbank.org    @worldbankwater blogs.worldbank.org/water © 2019 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank. Some rights reserved. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. This work is subject to a CC BY 3.0 IGO license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo). The World Bank does not necessarily own each component of the content. It is your responsibility to determine whether permission is needed for reuse and to obtain permission from the copyright owner. If you have questions, email pubrights@worldbank.org. SKU W19070