Project Report Final OFID October 2021

SCALING UP SMALL-SCALE IRRIGATION
TECHNOLOGIES FOR IMPROVING FOOD SECURITY

IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA
FINAL REPORT
Funding Agency Project Coordinator

The OPEC Fund for International Development (OFID) International Center for Biosaline Agriculture (ICBA)
2
This study has been possible with the generous financial support of the OPEC Fund for
International Development (OFID) within the ICBA-led project on “Scaling up small-scale irrigation
technologies for improving food security in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). This report is based on a
comprehensive four-year project implemented in four SSA countries: Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger,
and Senegal. This project was executed with the collaboration of the national partners in each
country. This report presents the current situation of the land and water productivity in the target
countries. It discusses the potential role of small-scale irrigation technologies in improving
agricultural productivity to improve food security and the livelihoods of the smallholder farming
communities. The technical, institutional, and policy constraints and limitations in the wide-scale
adoption of small-scale irrigation technologies and potential interventions are also discussed.
This project was led by the International Center for Biosaline Agriculture (ICBA),
Dubai, and implemented in collaboration with the Ministries of Agriculture of four target
countries. The project team is thankful to Dr. Tarifa A. Alzaabi, Acting Director-General,
ICBA, for her overall leadership and Ms. Seta Tutundjian, Director Programs, ICBA, for
her guidance during the project execution. The project team is also thankful to the Heads
of partner organizations in Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, and Senegal for extending technical
and logistical support to complete this project successfully. The hardwork and dedication
of the research and field staff in all partner countries are highly appreciated.
The views expressed in this information product are those of the authors and do not necessarily
reflect the opinions or policies of ICBA.
© ICBA 2021
ICBA encourages the use, reproduction, and dissemination of material in this information
product. Except indicated otherwise, the material contained in this report may be copied,
downloaded, and printed for private study, research, and teaching purposes, or use in non -
commercial products or services, provided that appropriate acknowledgment of ICBA as the
source and copyright holder is given and that ICBA’s endorsement of users’ views, products or
services is not implied in any way.
3
Acronyms
BCR = Benefit-Cost Ratio

CAADP = Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Program
DIPAC = Development of Private Irrigation and Related Activities
FAO = Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations
FFDs = Farmer Field Days
FFSs = Farmer Field Schools
GDP = Gross Domestic Product
ICBA = International Center for Biosaline Agriculture
IER = Institut d’Economie Rurale
INERA = Institut de l’Environnement et de Recherches Agricoles
IFPRI = International Food Policy Research Institute
INRAN = Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique du Niger
IPM = Integrated Pest Management
IPTRID = Intern’l Program for Technology and Research in Irrigation and Drainage
IWMI = International Water Management Institute
IsDB = Islamic Development Bank
ISRA = Institut Senegalais de Recherches Agricoles
NEPAD = New Program for Agricultural Development (
NGOs = Non-Governmental Organizations
OFID = The OPEC Fund for International Deelopment
RDS = Rural Development Services
SSA = sub-Saharan Africa
SSI = Small Scale Irrigation
4
Project partners and focal persons
Project Leader
Dr. Asad Sarwar Qureshi

Senior Scientist – Irrigation and Water Management
International Center for Biosaline Agriculture (ICBA)
Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Email: [email protected]
Focal Persons in the Partner Countries
Dr. Adama Traore

Soil scientist/ Agronomist system
Institut de l'Environnement et de Recherches Agricoles (INERA)
Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso.
Dr. Abdoulah Mamary Kane

Senior Researcher in Agricultural Economic, Agribusiness, Irrigation and Water Management
Rural Economic Institute-IER, ESPGR, Sotuba Center
Institut d'Economie Rurale (IER) BP 258 Bamako, Mali.
Dr. Abdoul Habou Zakari

Director
Regional Center of Agronomic research of Tahoua
CERRA-Tahoua, Niger.
Dr. sc. agr. Madiama CISSE

Institut Sénégalais de Recherches Agricoles (ISRA)
Centre de Recherches Agricoles (CRA)
de Saint-Louis BP 240 Saint-Louis, Senegal.
5
Table of Contents
ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................................... 4
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................ 8
LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................................... 9
FORWARD..................................................................................................................................... 10
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... 11
1. BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................... 14
1.1 Why to focus on small-scale irrigation in SSA? .......................................................... 15
1.2 Lessons learned from previous ICBA managed project in SSA ................................ 16
1.3 Low water use efficiency in agriculture ........................................................................ 16
1.4 Constraints and limitations for irrigation development in SSA ................................. 17
2. THE PROJECT ...................................................................................................................... 18

2.1 Objectives ........................................................................................................................ 18
2.2 The target groups ............................................................................................................ 19
2.3 Implementation strategy, approach, and methodology .............................................. 19
2.4 Project activities .............................................................................................................. 20
2.5 Outcomes and impacts................................................................................................... 22
2.6 Scaling up pathways ....................................................................................................... 22
2.7 Socio-economic and environmental impacts .............................................................. 23
2.8 Project partners ............................................................................................................... 23
3. THE COUNTRY PROFILES .................................................................................................. 24

3.1 Burkina Faso ................................................................................................................... 24
3.2 Mali ................................................................................................................................... 31
3.3 Niger ................................................................................................................................. 36
3.4 Senegal ............................................................................................................................ 40
4. SMALL-SCALE IRRIGATION SYSTEMS USED IN SSA ..................................................... 42

4.1 Manual lifting system ...................................................................................................... 42
4.2 Treadle pumps ................................................................................................................. 43
4.3 Motorized pumps ............................................................................................................ 44
4.4 Drip irrigation system ..................................................................................................... 45
4.5 Sprinkler irrigation system ............................................................................................ 45
4.6 Border and furrow irrigation systems ........................................................................... 46
4.7 Californian system .......................................................................................................... 46
5. INTRODUCING SMALL-SCALE IRRIGATION SYSTEMS .................................................. 48

5.1 Burkina Faso ................................................................................................................... 48
5.2 Mali ................................................................................................................................... 50
5.3 Niger ................................................................................................................................. 52
5.4 Senegal ............................................................................................................................ 54
6. LAND AND WATER PRODUCTIVITY OF DIFFERENT IRRIGATION SYSTEMS .............. 56

6.1 Burkina Faso ................................................................................................................... 56
6.2 Mali ................................................................................................................................... 57
6.3 Niger ................................................................................................................................. 58
6.4 Senegal ............................................................................................................................ 59
6
7. CROP WATER REQUIREMENTS AND IRRIGATION SCHEDULES .................................. 61
7.1 Burkina Faso ................................................................................................................... 61
7.2 Mali ................................................................................................................................... 63
7.3 Niger ................................................................................................................................. 67
7.4 Senegal ............................................................................................................................ 67
8. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENT IRRIGATION SYSTEMS .................................... 69

8.1 Benefit-Cost ratio of different crops ............................................................................. 69
8.2 Economic efficiency of the motor pump and solar pump .......................................... 71
9. KNOWLEDGE SHARING AND CAPACITY BUILDING ....................................................... 74

9.1 Burkina Faso ................................................................................................................... 74
9.2 Mali ................................................................................................................................... 74
9.3 Niger ................................................................................................................................. 75
9.4 Senegal ............................................................................................................................ 76
10. STRATEGIES FOR SMALL-SCALE IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT IN SSA ..................... 78

10.1 Farmers’ perceptions about small-scale irrigation technologies ........................... 80
10.2 Constraints and limitations for SSI development in SSA ........................................ 82
10.3 Institutional and policy constraints and interventions ............................................. 83
10.4 Strategic approaches for SSI development in SSA .................................................. 85
10.5 Prospects of SSI and solar pumps development in SSA ......................................... 87
11 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................... 89
11. REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................... 92
12. PUBLICATIONS .................................................................................................................... 95
ANNEX- I: A MODIFIED DESIGN OF THE CALIFORNIAN SYSTEM IN SENEGAL .................. 96
ANNEX– 2: COST FOR A CALIFORNIAN SYSTEM IN SENEGAL AND BURKINA FASO ...... 97
7
List of Tables
Table 1. Average monthly climatic data for Burkina Faso .................................................... 25
Table 2. Distribution of basins in Burkina Faso (Source: MEE, 2001).................................. 27
Table 3. Water storages in Burkina Faso ............................................................................ 27
Table 4. Characteristics of three potential sites in Mali.................................................... ....34
Table 5. Summary of cultivated crops and suitable irrigation technologies ...................... ....35
Table 6. Characteristics of surface runoff of different rivers................................................. 38
Table 7. Major aquifers of Niger .......................................................................................... 39
Table 8. Irrigation potential and level of planning and development .................................... 41
Table 9. Area (ha) for major crops in different areas of the Senegal River Valley ................ 41
Table 10. Area (ha) for major crops during dry hot season in the Senegal River Valley ...... 41
Table 11. Area (ha) for major crops during rainy season in the Senegal River Valley ......... 41
Table 12. Water productivity of vegetables under different irrigation systems in Burkina ..... 56
Table 13. Water productivity of vegetables under different irrigation systems in Mali .......... 57
Table 14. Water productivity of vegetables under different irrigation systems in Niger ........ 59
Table 15. Water productivity of vegetables under different irrigation systems in Senegal .... 60
Table 16. Crop coefficients at different development stages of vegetables (FAO, 1986) ..... 61
Table 17. Monthly ETo values in the Bobo-Dioulasso region............................................... 61
Table 18. Monthly ETo values in the Ouahigouya region .................................................... 62
Table 19. Water requirements of vegetables in the Koulikoro region................................... 64
Table 20. Irrigation schedules of vegetables in the Koulikoro region ................................... 64
Table 21. Water requirements for different vegetables in the Mopti region .......................... 65
Table 22. Irrigation schedules for vegetables in the Mopti region ........................................ 66
Table 23. Evapotranspiration values of different crops in Niayes zone of Mali .................... 67
Table 24. Irrigation requirements of Pepper with a three days schedule ............................. 68
Table 25. Production costs and prices of vegetables (1 US$ - 500 FCFA) .......................... 69
Table 26. Comparison of BCR of the different irrigation systems for vegetables ................. 69
Table 27. Comparison of BCR for cabbage for Californian and manual irrigation systems .. 71
Table 28. Comparison of motor and solar pumps................................................................ 73
Table 29. Advantages and disadvantages of motor and solar pumps.................................. 73
Table 30. Summary of trainings and field demonstrations organized during this project ...... 77
8
List of Figures
Figure 1. Agro-climatic zones of Burkina Faso .................................................................... 25
Figure 2. National Basins of Burkina Faso .......................................................................... 26
Figure 3. Main vegetables grown in different regions of Burkina Faso ................................. 29
Figure 4. Percentage of farmers using different irrigation systems. ..................................... 30
Figure 5. Use of motor pumps in different regions of Burkina Faso ..................................... 30
Figure 6. Agro-climatic zones in Mali ................................................................................... 32
Figure 7. Potential irrigable sites in Koulikoro region ........................................................... 33
Figure 8. Potential irrigable sites in Sikasso region ............................................................. 33
Figure 9. Potential irrigable sites in Mopti region. ................................................................ 33
Figure 10. Agro-ecological zones in Niger ........................................................................... 37
Figure 11. Distribution of homegenous hydrological potential.............................................. 37
Figure 12. Agricultural production systems in Senegal ........................................................ 40
Figure 13. Sites for the introduction of small-scale irrigation technologies ........................... 48
Figure 17. Potential and actual irrigated area in the target countries ................................... 79
9
Forward
For millions of poor farm families in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), access to irrigation water is a
dividing line between poverty and prosperity. Despite ample water resources, only 2% of the
total renewable water resources are used for irrigation due to a lack of water infrastructure.
Food production is entirely rain-fed, with irrigation playing a minor role. Only 4% of the region’s
total cultivated area is irrigated compared to 37% in Asia and 14% in Latin America. Thus,
Africa is far from realizing its irrigation potential, estimated at 42.5 million ha. Helping farmers
to access irrigation water by developing small-scale irrigation can enable them to boost
agricultural production, achieve food security, and nutritional health.
It is now realized that small, motorized pumps could expand irrigation by 30 million ha in SSA
(a four-fold increase over the current area) and improve food security for some 185 million
people. Therefore, scaling up small-scale irrigation technologies (SSI) (with cheaper access
to energy) should top SSA priorities. Over the last decade, ICBA has worked in SSA to identify
the cost-effective small-scale irrigation technologies that are suitable for the local conditions
and accepted by farmers. However, wide-scale adoption of these technologies by smallholder
farmers remained a challenge due to high costs and lack of technical support. This project has
explored the technical and policy options to support scaling-up these technologies to
smallholder farmers in the target countries.
It gives me immense pleasure to present the achievements of the project “Scaling-up small-
scale irrigation technologies to improve food security in sub-Saharan Africa”. The project has
been implemented from 2016-20 in four West African countries including Burkina Faso, Mali,
Niger, and Senegal. The project has evaluated technical and economic performance of
different SSI technologies and solar pumps against the existing irrigation practices. The crop
water requirements and irrigation schedules for potential vegetables grown in different regions
of the target countries have been estimated. Several farmer field days and capacity building
activities were carried out to educate farmers and extension workers on different aspects of
on-farm water management strategies. The project has reviewed the technical, institutional
and policy constraints for the adoption of SSI technologies. The potential policy interventions
to enable scaling-up of SSI technologies have also been suggested.
I would like to take this opportunity to express my sincere gratitude to the OPEC Fund for
International Development (OFID) for their generous grant for this project. I hope that our
genuine partnership with OFID will continue to realize our shared vision of ensuring food
security and improved livelihood in SSA and other regions. The support, and collaborative
efforts we received from our country partners in actualizing the project plans are highly
commendable. I acclaim the commitment of ICBA’s professional and support staff involved in
this project. I believe that the findings of this project will be useful for the farmers, scientists,
and policymakers in improving agricultural productivity and reducing poverty in SSA.
Dr. Tarifa A. Al-Zaabi

Acting Director General
10
Executive summary
This report presents the outcome of the OFID-funded project “Scaling up small-scale irrigation
technologies to improve food security in Sub-Saharan Africa.” The project was implemented
between 2016-20 in four West African countries (i.e., Burkina Faso, Niger, Mali, and Senegal).
The activities carried out for this project mainly focused on:
• Collect data on available water resources, irrigation methods, irrigation potential, and
potential cropping patterns
• Evaluate technical and economic efficiency of newly introduced small-scale irrigation
technologies (SSI) and solar pumps to grow vegetables on farmer fields
• Estimate crop water requirements and irrigation schedules for different vegetables
grown in these countries
• Organize training for farmers, irrigation technicians, and extension workers about
irrigation systems and on-farm irrigation practices
• Establish Farmer Field Schools to disseminate information about SSI technologies and
water and crop management practices to larger farming communities
• Review technical, institutional, and policy constraints to adopt SSI technologies in
these countries and suggest possible interventions
During the project, SSI technologies (i.e., drip, sprinkler, and Californian systems) were
introduced in three to four selected sites in each country. A solar pump was installed at one
site in each country to extract water from river streams or groundwater. Vegetables were
grown on all sites. The performance of these systems was compared with the traditional
bucket, drip, sprinkler, and gravity irrigation methods.
The results revealed that the total water used for tomato crops under bucket and gravity
irrigation systems was 50% and 8.5% higher than the Californian system, respectively. The
tomato yield under the Californian systems was 18% higher than the gravity method. The
water productivity of the bucket method was 54% higher than the gravity method, whereas it
was 18% lower than the Californian system. The water productivity of drip, sprinkler, and
Californian irrigation systems was almost double that of the bucket method. The highest water-
saving and yield gains were obtained under drip irrigation. The drip system produced a 38%
higher yield and used 20% less water than the bucket method. Similarly, the Californian
system had a 28% higher yield and saved 34% water than the bucket method for the onion
crop. In the case of sprinkler systems, water-saving was the highest (51%) compared to the
bucket method; however, potato yield was comparable. The economic productivity was
highest (3.87 $/m3) for tomatoes under the drip system. The economic productivity of the
bucket method was less than half of the drip, sprinkler, and Californian irrigation systems.
In all countries, the Californian and drip irrigation systems performed significantly better in
improving water use efficiency and crop yields than furrow and bucket methods. On average,
Californian and drip systems' economic and water productivity was two to three times higher
than the conventional irrigation systems. Farmers showed great interest in these systems and
were ready to adopt them to increase their agricultural productivity and save water. However,
the initial investment in drip systems (2000–4000 US$/ha) and operational and maintenance
11
costs were a matter of grave concern for them. Farmers showed interest in the Californian
System due to its low cost of installation (US$ 600-1000/ha), and cost-effective operation and
maintenance, in addition to significant water saving. Therefore, farmers are looking for
financial support to adopt the Californian system. Farmers were also keen to get improved
vegetable seeds and market access to maximize their economic returns. This will enable them
to extend these technologies to more areas using their financial resources.
The crop water requirements and irrigation schedules for the major vegetable crops grown in
different regions of the target countries were calculated. Farmers and extension workers were
trained to estimate the crop water requirements and to irrigate their lands according to crop
water demand. This can save more than 15% water and energy, increase net profit, and
enhance livelihood and food security. In each country, 30-50 farmers (primarily women)
shared a solar-based Californian system. The women groups developed irrigation schedules
to ensure equitable water distribution among water users. The women groups were also
responsible for the maintenance of the irrigation system and solar pumps. The project team
also helped women groups access local markets to get the actual value of their produce.
The economic analysis revealed that the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) of all irrigation systems
(California, drip, and sprinkler) was more than one, implying that they lead to more benefits
than costs. The BCR was highest in the drip system (2.579), followed by sprinkler (2.118) and
the California system (2.086). The BCR analysis for cabbage shows that the total expenses
for the bucket method (US$ 1170) were 21% higher than the Californian system (US$ 920).
The net margin under the Californian system was about US$ 9,920 compared to US$ 2,725
for the bucket method. The net margin per kg was US$ 0.32 for the Californian system
compared to US$ 0.21 for the bucket method. This indicates that farmers can earn up to three
times more profit for vegetables grown with the Californian system. In addition, they are
relieved of the hassle of operation and maintenance of diesel pumps.
The solar pump for water lifting can reduce production costs and improve food security and
farmers' income. However, because of extreme poverty, these pumps are out of the reach of
smallholder farmers. The average price of a motor pump is US$ 168 compared to US$ 2,837
for a 2.3 m3/h solar pump. The solar pump remains a technology currently inaccessible to
farmers. Therefore, government support would be needed to accelerate the adoption of solar
pumps. The local production of solar pumps may help in reducing costs. For this purpose, the
involvement of the private sector should be encouraged.
During the project's life, 920 extension workers and irrigation experts were trained in the target
countries. For the training of farmers, 20 farmer field days (FFDs) were organized at regular
intervals. Farmers of the neighboring villages attended these FFDs. to get first-hand
information about these technologies. During the field demonstration, 11,475 farmers visited
trial sites. The impact survey showed that the Californian system was adopted at more than
50,000 ha in all four countries. This coverage may be higher as we surveyed only the limited
area in each country. In addition, eighteen brainstorming sessions were organized with the
relevant stakeholders and policymakers to discuss potential policy interventions for scaling up
SSI technologies. Two MSc students were supported through this project. Seven training and
extension materials were developed in local languages for the benefit of farmers.
12
The main constraints related to the development of small-scale irrigation and agricultural water
management in the target countries were found to be:
• High cost and accessibility of equipment in local markets

• Limited availability of surface water and groundwater
• Existing land-tenure laws discourage smallholder farmers from investing in irrigation
technologies. Land-tenure problems are different in different countries
• Limited access to rural markets, credit, and maintenance services.
• Inadequate planning and monitoring capabilities of the responsible organizations due
to understaffing and low levels of training, logistical problems, and low salaries.
• High transaction costs, fewer market opportunities, and inadequate consultation
between public and private actors
• Lack of coordination at the national and regional levels to solve the problems of
jurisdictional conflict and the lack of integration of support into land development.
• Lack of knowledge of farmers on irrigation technologies and farming techniques
The discussions during the brainstorming sessions revealed that the strategic approach for
developing smallholder irrigation could be strengthened by:
• the inclusion and accountability of all public and private actors involved in the
development of irrigated agriculture. These include producers, suppliers, processors,
transporters, distributors, research, extension institutions, and funding institutions.
• valuing the comparative advantages of regions where smallholder irrigation has a high
potential through the implementation of agricultural investment plans.
• promoting processing and marketing sectors and attracting private investments and
creating cross-sectoral interactions with NGOs and government financial institutes.
• systematic consideration of gender and good governance in all interventions.
The small-scale irrigation technologies are irreplaceable for developing high-value crops. As
such, it deserves to be supported by development projects. Even if it is poorly organized, the
management of a private irrigation support project by a private association is no worse than
management by a service State. On the contrary, state control can be exercised without
influencing the direction of the day-to-day project. It is easy to promote simple technologies
(manual drilling, treadle pumps, solar pumps) without credit if the methodology of NGOs used
to launch the spread of treadle pumps in Africa is followed.
In addition, only technically proven products should be sold in the market. The cost of the
equipment should be affordable and should not be directly subsidized to ensure that the sale
continues after the project. The equipment must be sold primarily to individual farmers or small
groups. We need to use local builders and work with the private sector responsible for
providing maintenance and after-sales service. There is a need to introduce a well-defined
monitoring and mitigation system to address environmental impacts of irrigation on depletion
of water tables and pollution of minor aquifers. The development of smallholder irrigation must
include a social dimension by providing the needs of the poor and women. Support for women
could be done by promoting the post-harvest activities they most often do.
13
1. Background
The agricultural sector contributes, on average, 30% of GDP and 67% of employment in Sub-
Saharan Africa (SSA) countries and accelerating its growth has been a high priority in the
region (FARA, 2003). Some 80% of people in this region live in rural areas and 70% depend
on agriculture for their livelihoods (Murrey and Sally, 2008). More than 200 million people are
malnourished, one-third of whom were children (Murrey and Sally, 2008; World Bank, 2015).
In SSA, yields are on average a quarter of those in other parts of the world, soil fertility has
declined and agricultural productivity per capita has steadily fallen since 1961 while it has risen
everywhere else (Bunting, 2008). Therefore, the development of the agricultural sector is
central to combating hunger, reducing poverty, and achieving economic growth. However, this
cannot be achieved without ensuring substantial land and water development (FAO, 2011).
Most irrigated areas depend on groundwater or run-off-river pumping systems. Therefore,
transportation of water from the source to farmer fields is the major bottleneck in improving
agricultural productivity.
In Sub-Saharan African countries, lack of access to irrigation water is considered as the

primary reason for agricultural development. For many, the long dry season is a trying time of
one meal a day. One key strategy that could contribute to poverty alleviation and improvement
in food insecurity is assisting the poor farmers in accessing irrigation water. This project aims
to scale up tested and socially accepted low-cost small-scale irrigation technologies in SSA to
boost agricultural production and achieve food security. Adoption of these irrigation
technologies will enable farmers to irrigate their small plots to boost crop harvests, family
incomes, and nutritional health in the deepest pockets of hunger in SSA.
In Sub-Saharan Africa, only 3% of its total water resources are used for irrigation compared
to 33% for South and Southeast Asia (You et al., 2011). Food production in the region is
entirely rain-fed, with irrigation playing a minor role. Only 4% (6 million ha) of the region’s total
cultivated area is irrigated compared to 37% in Asia and 14% in Latin America. Thus, Africa is
far from achieving its irrigation potential, estimated at 42.5 million ha (FAO, 2015).
The available groundwater resources in SSA are 100 times those of renewable surface water.
But farmers often hold back from investing in groundwater irrigation because of the high drilling
costs and lack of information about groundwater availability (Kadigi et al., 2012). Furthermore,
the hydrology and aquifer characteristics of the area allow only low-yielding boreholes mainly
operated by hand pumps. Therefore, extracted groundwater quantities are too low to support
surface irrigation practices. Thus, irrigation techniques such as drip and sprinkle can help
increase the productivity of smallholder farmers in SSA (Svendsen, 2009).
The impact of climate change on crop yields and the social and economic repercussions is
another significant concern especially considering the region’s high dependence on rainfed
agriculture. As a result, several development initiatives in SSA have focused on introducing
irrigation systems in local farming systems to develop the resilience of the agricultural sector
towards the escalating climate change.
14
1.1 Why to focus on small-scale irrigation in SSA?
Except in North Africa, Madagascar, and South Africa, irrigation development potential has
not been effectively tapped in Africa. Though SSA has a rich water endowment, only 4% of its
cropland is irrigated. Some 43 million hectares (Mha) of land are suitable for irrigation, but only
7.3 million ha are irrigated. Studies have shown that small, motorized pumps could expand
irrigation by 30 Mha in SSA (a four-fold increase over the current area), generate annual net
revenues of $22 billion, and improve food security and incomes for some 185 million people
(IWMI, 2005; IFPRI, 2012). Therefore, scaling up small-scale irrigation (SSI) systems (with
cheaper and sustainable access to energy) should top SSA priorities. With targeted
investments and policies to expand SSI, the problems of hunger, poverty and malnutrition can
be addressed (Burney and Naylor, 2012).
Until recently, irrigated agriculture was mainly state-sponsored. The performance of state-
managed irrigation schemes has been far below expectations, and many of them have
become non-functional due to poor operation and maintenance. Over 30% of the state-
managed irrigation schemes in SSA have completed 20 years of life, and their rehabilitation
is becoming increasingly a pressing issue for national governments (World Bank, 2008; Venot
et al., 2013). The performance of most of the irrigation schemes in South Africa has been rated
as poor with little sustainability. In Mozambique, smallholder irrigation schemes are found in
every district but are either abandoned or partly utilized (FAO, 2015). In Zambia, Niger,
Tanzania, Mali, and Somalia, most irrigation schemes operate below economic potential
despite water management policies as they lack institutional mechanisms to manage water
and irrigation infrastructure (Bangwe and van Koppen, 2012). By contrast, decentralized small
irrigation systems designed to serve a single or community farm – are better compatible with
local conditions. The small-scale irrigation schemes are preferred due to the following benefits:
• Lower initial investment, operational, and maintenance costs

• Easy accessibility to remote farms and better control on water
• Less negative environmental impacts
• Increased resilience for droughts and seasonal water shortages
Despite these advantages, farmers' adoption of small-scale irrigation systems remains a

challenge due to high initial investments (pumps and motors) and operational costs. The
availability of electricity and fuel in villages is another problem. For many smallholders, the
price of diesel or electric pumps (40% of the total production cost) is not affordable (Qureshi
and Shoaib, 2016). Therefore, the potential of solar pumps needs to be explored. Few NGOs
have done useful work in northern Benin–a region with no electricity and groundwater too
deep to access with manually operated treadle pumps – solar-powered pumps are used to
manage drip irrigation systems. These projects have improved household food security. In
addition to energizing irrigation pumps, solar systems can energize household lamps and fans,
bringing a revolution in their lives as children will have better conditions for education. These
developments could assist in poverty reduction (Hanjra et al., 2009). National governments,
NGOs, and international donors should provide credit facilities in easy conditions for farmers
to install small-scale irrigation systems (Amjath-Babu et al., 2016).
15
1.2 Lessons learned from previous ICBA managed project in SSA
In 2011, ICBA launched a project in SSA with the funding of the Islamic Development Bank
(IsDB). Covering seven countries, namely Burkina Faso, Gambia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger,
Nigeria, and Senegal, the main objective of this 4-year project was to identify the most cost-
effective SSI technologies for smallholder farmers that are suitable for the local conditions and
accepted by farmers. The tested technologies include drip and sprinkler system, Californian
system, and gravity/pump system.
The project results indicate that these technologies perform better in terms of efficient water
use and increased crop production. The water used by drip irrigation was one-third of the
conventional gravity irrigation system used by most farmers in this region. On average, the
Californian system uses 15-20% less water than flooding irrigation systems, producing about
10-15% more crop yields. Reduced water application to different crops directly increases
farmers' incomes as it reduces the cost of irrigation (less fuel used). This clearly shows that
these irrigation technologies are most suited for saving water and reducing irrigation costs.
Despite these advantages, the large-scale adoption of small-scale irrigation technologies by

smallholder farmers remains a challenge. These challenges are related to low expertise,
knowledge, and capacity to develop and manage irrigation systems. Initial investment costs
for installing these technologies (pumps and motors) and the operational costs (fuel and O&M
costs) are considered the major problems in adopting these innovative irrigation technologies
by smallholder farmers. The cost of drip system is US$ 2000–4000 per ha and US$ 600-1000
per ha for the Californian system. These initial investments and operational and maintenance
costs of these systems are a matter of concern for smallholder farmers.
1.3 Low water use efficiency in agriculture
Sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries are characterized by low yield levels and poor water use
efficiencies. Water use efficiencies are only 22-25%, which is half of the world average of 45%
(Kadigi, 2012). The increased water productivity can be achieved by introducing agronomic,
engineering, and management technologies such as changing crop varieties, crop
substitution, deficit, supplemental or precision irrigation ((Kijne et al., 2003). In most of the
irrigated areas of SSA, the irrigation water application is irrelevant to the actual crop water
requirement. Farmers are mainly unaware of the concepts of ‘usual’ or ‘optimum’ depth of
irrigation application. Their perception about good irrigation is the depth of irrigation applied to
the field regardless of soil moisture deficiency and the age and conditions of the crop. As a
result, the applied irrigation amounts are higher than the actual crop water requirement
(Qureshi and Shoaib, 2016). This suggests that farmers need to be educated regarding
improved water management practices and water-saving strategies. The on-farm field losses
can be reduced by adopting innovative irrigation technologies such as drip and sprinkler
systems. Farmers also need to be educated on actual crop water requirements, suitable
irrigation schedules, and the adoption of best cultural practices for principal crops grown in
these areas. Despite the higher potential for drip irrigation, its adoption is low in SSA. With
proper marketing and technical support, farmers' access to drip systems can be increased
(Maisiri et al., 2005).
16
The water-use efficiency can be improved by adopting water-saving techniques (e.g., drip and
sprinkler systems) and soil and crop management practices such as leaving crop residues on
the soil surface and planting cover crops (Howell, 2001; Kijne et al., 2003). However, with the
increasing water scarcity resulting from the growing population and shrinking water resources,
increasing the productivity of the existing water resources deserves much attention as well.
Increasing water productivity means producing the exact yield with fewer water resources or
obtaining higher crop yields with the same water resources (Zwart and Bastiaanssen, 2004).
In a broader sense, it reflects the objectives of producing more food, income, livelihood, and
ecological benefits at less social and environmental cost per unit of water consumed.
1.4 Constraints and limitations for irrigation development in SSA
The main constraints related to agricultural water development and management are: (i) lack
of a coherent and efficient mechanism for synergizing irrigated agricultural and water
development between agriculture and other water sectors, (ii) planning developments
according to administrative redistricting does not consider watershed boundaries. In addition,
the low involvement of credit institutions in the financing, the high dependence on grants and
other support from the State, the low participation of private developers in the financing of
developments, and the weakness of the human and material resources of the decentralized
services for the proper technical supervision of producers are considered major constraints
for the development of SSI in sub-Saharan African countries.
The constraints in the development of irrigation in SSA can be categorized as follows:
Environmental factors
• Water shortage and poor water quality due to heavy sedimentation

• Land degradation (low soil fertility, soil salinity, lack of irrigation infrastructure, etc.).
• Poor on-farm irrigation practices resulting in water logging and soil salinization.
The capacity of the farmers
• Low level of expertise, knowledge, and capacity to develop irrigation systems.

• Lack of financial resources of most farmers and the relatively high investment costs
involved in developing and maintaining irrigation schemes.
• Ineffective cultivation practices and unsuitable crop varieties (i.e., vegetables such
potatoes, onions, peppers etc.) assuring high yields and market values
Government policy; institutional and legal support
• Higher-level neglect in development irrigation schemes for smallholder farmers.

• Poor institutional arrangements to support farmers in irrigation development
• A land tenure system does not encourage farmers to invest permanently in their plots
and make improvements to obtain credits for further development.
• Farmer’s limited access to financial services – credit and insurance
• Farmer’s access to local and regional markets
17
2. The Project
One of the significant outcomes of the IsDB-funded project in SSA implemented by ICBA was
that there is a need to scale up recommended SSI technologies to other parts and countries
of the region. To reduce the operational costs, the introduction of solar pump irrigation systems
was suggested. For large-scale adoption of these technologies, farmers suggested improving
accessibility to equipment and materials, providing financial support from the government
and/or NGOs, reducing the cost of equipment, access to credit from financial institutions,
training, and organizing farmers, and supplying inputs at a subsidized price (Qureshi and
Shoaib, 2016). ICBA took the lead in securing funding for the second phase of the project
because of its understanding of local issues and strong association with the region's local
NARS and farming communities.
In 2016, the OPEC Fund for International Development (OFID) provided a grant to ICBA to
launch the second phase of this project with particular emphasis on expanding low cost and
water-efficient irrigation technologies and addressing related constraints and limitations for
large scale adoption by smallholder farmers in the four countries: Burkina Faso, Niger, Mali,
and Senegal. These countries have the most considerable potential for small-scale irrigation
(SSI) investments. This project aimed to scale up tested SSI technologies and introduce the
best on-farm water and crop management practices to smallholder farmers to increase
agricultural productivity and food security. The project also introduced solar systems as a
sustainable source of energy to run irrigation pumps.
2.1 Objectives
The specific objectives of this project were:
• Review existing availability and use of SSI technologies by farmers in the target
countries. This information is necessary to understand the dynamics of SSI before
taking up scaling-up issues.
• Identify and map potential areas where the introduction of SSI technologies will be
economically viable, technically suitable, and socially adaptable. Potential regions will
be mapped using data on access to irrigation water, cropping patterns, and the
economic conditions of the farmers in different regions of each target country.
• Demonstrate the use of solar systems for small-scale irrigation technologies for
vegetable crops at selected farmer fields for exchanging experiences.
• Demonstrate suitable cultivation practices for vegetable crops, including optimum
sowing date, plant density and improved varieties, fertilization, and pest control.
• Estimate crop water requirements and irrigation schedules for the vegetable grown in
the target areas. This is linked to the water demand management strategy.
• Enhance the capacity of farmers to develop, maintain and operate SSI technologies
using local knowledge and expertise to reduce costs and increase sustainability.
• Assess institutional, socio-economic, and financial constraints and develop
mechanisms to overcome these issues to facilitate farmers for large-scale adoption.
• Develop policy guidelines to accelerate expansion of SSI in target countries.
18
2.2 The target groups
The project will directly target about 2,000 resource-poor smallholder farmers of Niger, Mali,
Senegal, and Burkina Faso who has the potential of enhancing their agricultural productivity
but are constrained by the access to irrigation water. The project outputs are expected to
impact about 10,000 farmers indirectly. Despite having potential and capabilities, these
farmers are not getting the needed knowledge about these irrigation technologies due to weak
extension services and a lack of adequate knowledge about these technologies. Therefore,
there is a need to enhance their capacity and skills to educate farmers in these technologies.
The project will train about 40 project staff and 60 extension workers in each target country to
develop, operate, and maintain different SSI technologies. The project will assist local farmers
in the operation and maintenance of solar-based irrigation systems.
Farmers are reluctant to invest in SSI technologies because they are not getting reasonable
prices for the produce. Group marketing is not practiced in most cases, and this situation
favors merchants and traders who fix prices to their advantage. Crop diversification is also not
practiced, which often results in low prices. Therefore, any improvement in small-scale
irrigation should include applying irrigation technology, market analysis, extension, support
systems, etc. The Project Team will work with local market players to develop effective
linkages between farmers and buyers so that farmers can earn good profits, which will enable
them to build and maintain these irrigation technologies.
Analysis of socio-economic data of the IDB-funded project reveals that the profitability of
growing traditional vegetables using small-scale irrigation technologies in these countries is
relatively low due to high production costs. On average, farmers earn US$ 1000-1500 per ha
from the production of vegetables. Fertilizer and fuel costs are the leading production cost
elements. Fuel and fertilizer make up 25% and 30% of the total costs, respectively. The
primary threat to the enterprises' profitability was the fluctuation in farm gate crop prices. The
introduction of solar pumps for SSI schemes could help in increasing the productivity of
smallholder farmers. Adoption of these technologies will improve the production of high-quality
crops. In addition, these technological interventions can positively affect livelihoods by
alleviating food insecurity, generating income, and enhancing human health.
2.3 Implementation strategy, approach, and methodology
The project will adopt a participatory approach to work with smallholder farmers to adopt small-
scale irrigation technologies in the target countries. The project team will jointly select and
implement the best management practices and technologies for different agro-ecological
zones in each country. Smallholder farmers (especially women and young farmers) will be
involved to motivate farming communities. The main components of this strategy will be:
• Identification of key stakeholders - for the execution of the project. This will include
farmers, extension workers and irrigation experts from the government institutes.
• Site selection - for the field demonstration of tested irrigation technologies in most
vulnerable areas in Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, and Senegal.
19
• Awareness campaign – to highlight benefits of the SSI technologies to farmers,
extension workers, and irrigation technicians. The involvement of government officials
and decision-makers in seminars and workshops will create awareness at the highest
policy level about the new approaches to irrigation management.
• Technology transfer - introduce small-scale irrigation technologies, solar systems,
and on-farm water management practices through farmer-to-farmer peer interaction,
extension workers, and irrigation departments of target countries.
• Capacity building – to enhance skills of farmers and technical staff of extension
departments on small-scale irrigation technologies and best soil and water
management practices for improved efficiency, productivity, and sustainability.
This project strategy would first diagnose the issues related to SSI irrigation technologies in
the target countries and then develop long-term strategies for introducing these technologies
to smallholder farmers, considering all limitations and constraints.
This project will work to provide concrete answers to the following questions:
• How to increase farmers' knowledge and technical skills to access irrigation technology
and operate and maintain them within their available resources?
• How to reduce production costs using small-scale irrigation technologies? The
possibility of using solar pumps need also be evaluated.
• How to cultivate crops and choose the optimum date of sowing, density and suitable
varieties, and appropriate fertilization and pest control practices?
• How to financially support poor farmers (loans, credits, etc.), and develop workable
cost recovery schemes for smallholder farmers?
• How to improve the accessibility of producers to local and regional markets to ensure
good returns and improve their incomes and livelihoods?
• What policies and government incentives are required to promote the adoption of these
irrigation technologies among the smallholder farming communities?
• How to empower women to play a key role in decision-making in water management
to ensure household food security?
2.4 Project activities
Output 1: Map areas most suited for the small-scale irrigation technologies
1.1 Collect baseline data on irrigation potential and irrigation methods used, current farming
systems (crops, cropping pattern, crop yields, etc.) in target countries.
1.2 Analysis of data to develop GIS maps to identify potential irrigated areas for the
introduction of small-scale irrigation technologies and to devise a long-term strategy for
increasing land productivity after adopting irrigation technologies.
1.3 Identify suitable crops to be grown for the selected areas based on quantity and quality of
available water, type, and fertility level of the land.
1.4 Analyze socio-economic, policy, and institutional constraints for scaling up small-scale
irrigation technologies in the target areas. This will be done through formal and informal
discussions with farmers, policy makers, NGOs, and relevant stakeholders.
20
Output 2: Appropriate irrigation technologies and practices are introduced
2.1 Select representative farms in different regions for establishing field trials of tested
irrigation technologies and crops in collaboration with the national partners.
2.2 Introduce innovative irrigation technologies and solar pumps for different vegetable crops
in the selected field trial areas of the target countries.
2.3 Develop technological packages to reach 10,000 farmers covering 25,000 ha through
NARS, extension workers, and NGOs.
2.4 To scale-up promising irrigation technologies to 10,000 farmers by establishing linkages
with extension workers and farming communities. During the process, a strategy
addressing the long-term sustainability of these technologies will be developed.
Output 3: Selected irrigation technologies are adopted in 25,000 ha
3.1 Exchanging experiences and limitations associated with the working of irrigation
technologies with different stakeholders of areas other than the project's target areas for
possible scaling up. This will include discussions with local farmers, extension workers,
and local manufacturers.
3.2 Estimate crop water requirements and irrigation schedules for potential crops grown in
target areas as a part of water demand management strategy. The calculated water
requirements for different crops will be disseminated to farmers using the national
governments' extension network in each country. Farmers will also be educated on
different water conservation strategies to improve water use efficiency.
3.3 Develop community and policy level guidelines for the scaling up and wide-scale
adaptation of selected and tested irrigation technologies and schedules.
3.4 Prepare a position paper from a technical and policy perspective for large-scale adoption
of irrigation technologies in all four target countries.
Output 4: Capacity and skills of farmers are enhanced to ensure sustainability
4.1 Management of data and knowledge generated under this project in different forms
(archives, GIS, databank, etc.) for future use in development projects in these areas. This
will be done by developing a comprehensive data management system.
4.2 Develop high-quality educational audios/videos in the local dialects for highlighting the
benefits of tested irrigation technologies and water management practices for various
crops. These videos will be made available in the public domain through the internet and
accessible to all stakeholders.
4.3 Organize technical training for farmers, researchers, and extension workers regarding
selected irrigation technologies and water management practices for different crops. This
training will include irrigation-plant growth linkages, water requirements for crops, and
strategies to increase water use efficiency for crop production.
4.4 Establish Farmer Field Schools (FFS) to educate farmers on new irrigation technologies
and water and crop management practices. Special training will be organized for women
because they are the significant contributors to small-scale irrigation in SSA. Based on the
success and interest of the farming community, FFS will be transformed into Farmer Field
Centers (FFCs), which can continue working after the conclusion of this project.
21
Output 5: Policies to adopt of SSI technologies are discussed with the policymakers
5.1 Develop learning tools and extension material for farmers and extension workers to
disseminate project results and outcomes. We will develop project reports, technical
reports, and training packages that can guide the establishment of new irrigation
technologies under different soil, water, climate, and environmental conditions.
5.2 Organize multiple brainstorming sessions with different stakeholders and policymakers to
prepare policy guidelines to facilitate the adoption of tested technologies and solicit their
political and administrative support for scaling up project activities.
5.3 Organize at least one workshop in each country with leading academic professionals from
universities to present the basics of sustainable agricultural production and develop a
strategy for integrating these principles in the syllabus of farming schools.
5.4 Develop policy briefs at different stages of project implementation to keep various
stakeholders aware of project progress and outcomes.
2.5 Outcomes and impacts
The project's primary outcome will be the introduction of promising irrigation technologies in
the pilot sites. The long-term outcome will be new thinking and awareness of the gains
possible from new irrigation technologies and on-farm water management approaches. This,
will lead to the out-scaling of irrigation management strategies beyond the project area. The
successful implementation of the above activities will increase agricultural lands' productivity,
positively contributing to the country’s economy and reducing rural poverty. The overall impact
of the project will be a revitalized irrigated agriculture in four target countries. The move from
output to outcomes and impact will be facilitated by the collaborative project design. This
includes awareness creation of issues and prospects, the introduction of tested SSI
technologies, and supporting extension services under changing conditions for scaling-up.
Together this leads to a shared vision and action by those in the best position to act.
The project will directly engage 20,000 smallholder farmers who are constrained by access to
irrigation water. The project will impact 50,000 farmers indirectly. Through farmer field schools,
demonstration plots, access to extension material, awareness campaign, and informal
meetings and training, these farmers will benefit.
2.6 Scaling up pathways
The critical element of this project is to “scale up’ recommended SSI technologies to small-
holder farmers. The farming communities will act as the champions of change and essential
drivers of this process. During the demonstration stage of the project, opportunities and socio-
economic constraints that may affect the scaling-up process will be critically evaluated, and a
strategy will be developed to overcome these issues. Based on these discussions, the project
team will develop a suitable outreach strategy for scaling up project intervention with key
stakeholders. This strategy will include the development of partnerships and networks with the
key players who can provide the required infrastructure, support, and leadership for going to
scale from the beginning. These will include government agencies, extension services, NGOs,
and top-level policy and decision-makers.
22
2.7 Socio-economic and environmental impacts
It is anticipated that the adoption of SSI technologies and alternate cropping patterns will help
increase farm productivity, farmers' income and improve the livelihood of poor rural
communities, especially women. Adopting these interventions will also be instrumental in
reversing or reducing many social impacts of low productivity, low income, and poverty.
Improvements in the productivity of irrigated crops will also contribute directly to poverty
reduction by increasing the availability of fuel, wood, construction materials, wild foods, and
medicinal plants. On the social side, improved crop yields and farm incomes will reduce
migration to cities and help in stabilizing family structures.
2.8 Project partners
The project was implemented in collaboration with the national partners, which involves
Ministries of Agriculture, Extension, Water Resources, Local NGOs, and companies dealing
with the different irrigation technologies. In addition, local university students and professors
were engaged in devising policy and capacity building of project staff, extension workers, and
farmers. The following NARS were implementing partners in each country.
Country Institutes
Burkina Faso Institut de l’Environnement et de Recherches Agricoles (INERA)
Mali Institut d’Economie Rurale (IER)
Niger Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique du Niger (INRAN)
Senegal Institut Senegalais de Recherches Agricoles (ISRA)
2.9 Project organization and management
ICBA was responsible for the overall management of the project. ICBA’s Senior Scientist led
the project. He monitored the project progress according to the agreed work plan. He will
produce annual progress reports and coordinate meetings regularly with all the national
partners in each country to discuss technical and management aspects of the project. Project
Steering Committee (PSC), composed of all stakeholders, was established to provide overall
guidance and support to the project. A Project Technical Committee (PTC) was constituted
with representation from partners, donors, and ICBA scientists to discuss and review the
project progress to ensure project achievements according to the work plan.
The project was integrated into ICBA’s institute-wise project portfolio and was subject to the
Quality Management System, which involves standardized documentation, reporting,
monitoring, and evaluation of projects. The PL was responsible for monitoring the project funds
and work plan and identifying any changes in the implementation plan if needed. ICBA’s online
accounting and time tracking system supported the project implementation. Quality control
was further ensured through ICBA’s internal set-up, with the Director of Programs, overall, in
charge of the research program.
23
3. The Country Profiles
3.1 Burkina Faso
Burkina Faso is a Sahelian country with an area of 274,000 km². It has a population of 17.3
million with a growth rate of 3.1% per year. Agriculture occupies over 85% of the workforce
and contributes nearly 33% of GDP and over 85% of export earnings (MAH, 2010). Despite
more than 10% spending of the national budget every year on agriculture, income levels
remain low. Agriculture is essentially subsistence farming dependent on rainfed crops and
dominated by poorly equipped small farmers. About 88% of the cultivated area is dependent
on the scanty nature of the rainfall and is therefore vulnerable to the vagaries of climate and
cannot meet the food needs of the growing population (FAO, 2010). Rainfed cereals dominate
agricultural production, and productivity is characterized by sizeable inter-annual rain
fluctuations, resulting in persistent food insecurity and household poverty.
Since the 1960s, the dry season crops have been the primary asset for developing agricultural
production in Burkina Faso. However, after the severe drought of 1970 in the CILSS countries,
Burkina has made significant progress in the dry season crops. It first adopted fruit and
vegetable crops and then integrated them with other food crops (cereals) to compensate for
the chronic food deficits caused by climate hazards and other limiting factors. Since the
adoption of the Strategic Framework for the Fight against Poverty in 2000, the dry season
crops are deemed a strategic alternative to reduce food insecurity, increase household
incomes, create jobs, and reduced poverty (CAPES, 2007).
Since the 1980s, irrigation has become a national priority in Burkina Faso. These attempts for
efficient use in agriculture continued until 1990 when the country opted for the exclusive
development of lowlands at the expense of large areas under irrigation. The emphasis on dry
season crops reflects the adoption of a policy of sustainable development of irrigation as an
operational program lighthouse Small Irrigation Project Villager (PPIV) pilot phase (2001-
2004). Its objective is to increase cereals and legumes production during the dry season, using
irrigation systems and low-cost and appropriate production technologies.
Burkina Faso has two main seasons: the dry season from October to March and the rainfall
from May to September. The country has three main climatic zones (Figure 1).
• The Sudanian zone, with annual rainfall between 900 and 1100 mm.
• The Sahelian zone in the North, with annual rainfall below 600 mm.
• The Sudano- Sahelian zone, with rainfall between 600 and 900 mm.
High temperatures characterize the climate. The humidity increases southwards and ranges
from a winter low of 12% to 45% to a rainy season-high of 68% to 96%. The harmattan, a dry
east wind, brings with it spells of significant heat from March to May. The maximum
temperature rises from 40°C to 48°C from May to October. The climate from November to
March is dry, whereas temperatures in January range from 7°C to 13°C. The rainy season
lasts for four months in the northeast to six months in the southwest (May – October).
24
Figure 1. Agro-climatic zones of Burkina Faso
The annual evapotranspiration varies between 1854mm in the South to 2225mm in the North
(MEE, 2001). From June to August, precipitation exceeds evapotranspiration causing wet and
humid conditions. The highest rainfall months are July and August, followed by June and
September. October to April is the most critical period as rainfall is almost negligible, and crop
production is dependent on irrigation (Table 1).
Table 1. Average monthly climatic data for Burkina Faso

Months Temperature Average Average Wet Days Average Relative Wind
(oC) Temp Rainfall (>0.1mm) Sunlight Humidity Speed
Min Max (°C) (mm) hr/ day (%) (Beaufort)
January 16 35 24.5 0 0 8.3 19 2
February 20 32 28.5 2 1 8.9 19 2
March 23 40 32 13 2 9.1 20 2
April 26 39 33 16 3 8.3 28 2
May 26 38 32 83 6 8.5 40 2
June 24 36 30 122 9 8 49 2
July 23 33 28 203 11 7.3 62 2
August 22 31 26.5 280 14 5.7 67 2
September 23 32 28 144 10 7.1 60 1
October 23 35 29 33 4 9.3 44 2
November 22 36 29 1 1 9.4 30 1
December 17 35 26 0 1 9 23 1
25
Surface water resources
Burkina Faso is divided into 13 regions which are pathways of 3 international river basins i.e.,
Volta, Niger, and Comoé. These three basins are feeding four national basins i.e., the
Nakanbé, the Volta, the Niger, and the Comoé (Figure 2). These four basins are further divided
into 17 national sub-basins.
• Comoé: This basin is essential for agricultural activities. The land surface of the basin
is 4980 ha irrigated, and 1880 ha managed shallows.
• Mouhoun: This basin covers 5360 ha 3315 ha of various shallows managed to Sourou,
Kou Valley, and Banzon. The managed Shallows are about 2090 ha.
• Nakambé: This basin covers 2620 ha, 1000 ha for Bagré (hydroelectric and hydro
agricultural barrage). Shallows managed to cover almost 2175 ha.
• Niger: The Niger is the smallest of all basins. The managed irrigation area under this
basin is low. The most critical irrigated areas are Dakiri (120 ha) and Liligouri (60 ha).
Shallows managed areas are approximately 660 ha.
Figure 2. National Basins of Burkina Faso
Despite their substantial interannual variability, the four national basins are the country's
primary source of surface water. The annual surface water availability is 8 billion m3 (Bm3)
(FAO, 2010). It currently has more than 1200 water storage (dams, lakes, ponds, sills, and
Boulis/artificial lakes,) for multiple uses such as irrigation, livestock, domestic, fishing, etc. The
total water storage capacity is 5 Bm3billion m3. The distribution of basins in Burkina Faso is
given in Table 2. The quantity of water leaving Burkina is estimated as 7.5 Bm3. The annual
total volume stored is 2.66 Bm3. Based on the past 30 years (1970-1999) data, Burkina Faso
has an annual potential of 8.6 Bm3 surface water (Table 2).
26
Table 2. Distribution of basins in Burkina Faso (Source: MEE, 2001)
International basin National basin National Sub-basin Surface area (km2) Percentage
COMOE COMOE Comoé - Léraba 17 590 6
NIGER NIGER - 83 442 30
Beli 15 382
Gorouol 7 748
Dargol 1 709
Faga 24 519
Sirba - Gouroubi 11 946
Bonsoaga 7 231
Dyamangou 3 759
Tapoa - Mekrou 5 707
Banifing 5 441
VOLTA 172 968 30
NAKANBE - 81 932
Pendjari - 21 595
Kompienga
Nakanbé 41 407
Nazinon 11 370
Sissili 7 559
MOUHOUN - 91 036 33
Mouhoun supérieur 20 978
Mouhoun inférieur 54 802
Sourou 15 256
BURKINA FASO 274,000 100
Table 3. Water storages in Burkina Faso

Region Dams Pond Boulis/artificial lakes Lakes Sills
Cascades 20 2 6 3 2
Centre 84 1 3 0 1
Centre-Est 68 5 2 4 1
Centre-Nord 82 10 12 4 0
Centre-Ouest 171 2 49 0 4
Centre-Sud 103 1 5 0 0
Est 63 5 3 2 0
Hauts-Basins 34 10 1 2 0
Boucle du Mouhoun 49 2 3 0 0
Nord 93 1 22 0 1
Plateau Central 84 2 18 0 1
Sahel 38 28 53 1 0
Sud-ouest 37 4 2 2 2
Total 926 73 179 18 12
27
Groundwater resources
The groundwater resources are estimated at 113.5 Bm3 in two major geological zones of the
country (FAO, 2010). These include:
• Crystallin zone (82% of the territory). Flows in boreholes are low (0.5 to 20 m3/h).
• Sedimentary zone (18% of the territory) is in a band from south-west to north and
in South-East.
The accessibility to groundwater is limited due to drilling costs and a lack of machinery and
technical expertise. Therefore, farmers prefer to use surface water. As is being practiced in
many other countries such as India and Pakistan, the “community wells” are not common in
Burkina Faso. Farmers share wells' installation and operational costs in the community wells
and collectively use groundwater for irrigation. In Burkina Faso, groundwater is mainly used
for domestic purposes because groundwater quality is generally reasonable.
Water demand in Burkina Faso
The total water demand of Burkina Faso is estimated at 2500 million m3 per year, of which
80% comes from hydroelectric units. About 95% of hydroelectric demand is met by Nakanbé
basin (MEE, 2001). The water demand is estimated at 505 million m3/year. Three main water
use sectors are irrigation (64%), domestic use (21%), and livestock (14%) (MEE, 2001).
Distribution of vegetable cropped areas
Vegetables are grown in all 13 administrative regions of Burkina Faso (Figure 3). These
include Nord, Centre-Nord, and Hauts-Bassins regions due to their importance for dry season
crop production. There are 4,844 vegetable crop sites. The Nord, Hauts-Basins, and Centre-
Sud regions each have more than 10% of vegetable crops sites. The vegetables are grown
mainly in the dry season. The onion bulb is cultivated on 11,449 ha (41% of the total vegetable
cropped area). The main 5 regions for onion bulb include: the Nord (3,134 ha), the Centre
Ouest (1,662 ha), the Hauts-Bassins (1,423 ha), the Centre Nord (1,165 ha) and the Boucle
du Mouhoun (1,039 ha). The area cultivated with tomatoes is 5,224 ha (18.9%). This area of
tomato is unevenly distributed in the 13 regions of the country. Thus, the Nord region alone
has about 25% of the total area cultivated with tomatoes.
The cabbage area is 2,438 ha (8.8% of the total vegetable area). Lettuce is practiced on 2,116
ha (7.6%). The lettuce area is in the Centre region (1,272 ha). The Hauts Basins and the
Boucle du Mouhoun register respectively 427 ha and 146 ha of lettuce.
The eggplant is cultivated in all regions on about 482 ha (1.7% of the vegetable area). The
largest site is in the center-est part (85 ha). The cultivation of local eggplant is very little
practiced in the Est (1.02 ha). Approximately 2.4% of the national vegetable area, or 666 ha,
was sown for leaf onion production. More than 100 ha, or more than 15% of the national area,
were cultivated for leaf onions in South-Central and Eastern regions. Apart from East Central
(82 ha) and Central (70 ha), the other areas grow less than 50 ha of leaf onions.
28
Figure 3. Main vegetables grown regions of Burkina Faso
29
Irrigation methods used in Burkina Faso
In Burkina Faso, more than 76% of the farmers lift irrigation water manually (Figure 4). The
motor pumps are used only by 15% of the farmers, whereas the rest use pedal pumps (6%)
and gravity methods (3%). The manual irrigation mode is standard in all regions except the
Centre-Nord, where the motor pump model is dominant. Most motor pumps are small (up to
10 hp) and have limited suction capacity. The highest rate of motor pump use is in the Centre
Nord (63%) and the Centre (31.8%) regions, whereas the center-est area has the lowest rate
of motor pump use (1.0%) (Figure 5). The amount of water lifted through the manual devices
is low and cannot irrigate large areas. Women mainly do this job as male family members go
to towns to do off-farm employment. For women, manual irrigation is a tiring job as they must
perform other household activities.
Gravity
3% Motor pump
15%
Pedal pump
6%
Manual
76%
Figure 4. Percentage of farmers using different irrigation systems.
Figure 5. Use of motor pumps in different regions of Burkina Faso
30
3.2 Mali
Mali has an agriculture-based economy, which accounts for 36% of GDP and is the main
source of income for at least 80% of the population. In addition, the sector contributes about
40% of export earnings. Mali's population is estimated at 14.5 million with an average density
of 11.7 inhabitants/km², which varies from 20 in the South (regions, Koulouri, Keyes, Segou,
Sikasso, Mopti, Gao) and less than one inhabitant/km² in the north (Tombouctou and Kidal
regions). The average annual growth rate of GDP over the past decade is 5%, and the rate of
population growth for the same period was 3.6%, with per capita GDP of US$ 693.
In Mali, agriculture is mainly dependent on rainfall, although the country has land and water
resources adequate for the development of irrigated agriculture. The Malian government has
tried to expand the country’s irrigation infrastructure to improve agricultural production. Before
the year 2008, Dougabougou and Siribala was the largest sugarcane plantation area.
Currently, the government is implementing a national program to ensure food security for
smallholder farmers targeting small-scale irrigation systems.
The types of irrigation technologies practiced in Mali are drip irrigation, Californian system,
sprinkling system, and gravity system. Drip irrigation is used to grow tomatoes, onion, shallot
(Allium fistulosum), bananas, papaya, and oranges. Sprinkler systems are used for
commercial farms to produce high-value crops such as fruit trees, coffee, sugarcane, and
horticultural crops. The Californian irrigation system is a network of PVC pipelines buried in
the soil that decreases infiltration. It routes water on a parcel moved away from the pumping
source or having an irregular topography and follows the triage and row-level without adding
or manipulating hoses. Water is lifted from the surface or the underground water source and
distributed to plants through furrows.
Mali has a great diversity in climate, hydrology, hydrogeological, and soil conditions, making
it suitable for irrigated agriculture (DNGR, 2016). In general, 98% of water needs in Mali are
covered by surface water. The exploitation of groundwater for irrigated agriculture is very low,
whereas the potential of groundwater exploitation is enormous (2700 Bm3 of static reserves
with an annual renewal rate of 66 Bm3). Currently, groundwater resources are mainly used for
market gardening. In recent years, the various projects, and programs for the fight against
poverty and food self-sufficiency have focused on developing market gardening in rural areas
as an income-generating activity. In the peri-urban areas of the major cities where
groundwater is shallow, market gardening is practiced. The watercourses near dam areas that
serve to recharge groundwater tables on a local scale also help develop market gardening. In
addition, new techniques are emerging, among which we can cite the peri-urban private small
and micro-perimeters and the oasis irrigation.
In these areas, 10,033 ha are managed by the National Proximity Irrigation Program (PNIP)
from 2012-16, including 195 ha of market gardening. The rate of exploitation of market
gardening is low in Koulikoro, high in Sikasso, and very high in Mopti. In Mali, 98% of water
consumption needs are covered by surface water, and the groundwater exploitation is very
limited, although groundwater potential is very high (2700 Bm3 of static reserves with an annual
renewal rate of 66 Bm3).
31
The irrigation water for vegetable crops is supplied through canals, cemented large diameter
wells, and shallow manual drilling. The water distribution for irrigation is done through gravity,
pedal pumps, low power pumps, and rarely electric motor pumps with generators and solar.
The water distribution techniques used at the farm include (i) gravity irrigation (the most
common) to the water-spray ray with calabash, (ii) irrigation at the calabash or watering cane
with manual water transport (iii) sprinkling with hose and watering cane, and finally the micro-
irrigations systems (drip and sprinkler) that are struggling to put in place.
Figure 6. Agro-climatic zones in Mali
Figures 7-9 show the agricultural areas most suitable to produce crops and vegetables by
promoting small-scale irrigation systems. These maps are developed with local partners. The
general characterization of the three regions is in Table 4. A summary of suitable cropping
patterns and the irrigation methods for these selected regions is given in Table 5. Table 5 also
provides crop market gardening and appropriate irrigation technologies in the circles and
agricultural areas of the three areas targeted by the ICBA project. Thus, all market gardening
(leafy vegetables, fruit, bulb, and tuber crops) is cultivated in all three regions of Mali.
Gravity irrigation cannot solve the adverse effects of climate change and their impacts on
reducing rainfall and the availability of surface water and groundwater. Therefore, micro-
irrigation techniques (sprinkler, drip) supported by the Californian water delivery system need
to be introduced as an alternative to expand small-scale irrigation to produce vegetable crops.
32
Figure 7. Potential irrigable sites in Koulikoro region
Figure 8. Potential irrigable sites in Sikasso region
Figure 9. Potential irrigable sites in Mopti region.
33
Table 4. Characteristics of three potential sites in Mali
Characteristics Regions
Koulikoro Sikasso Mopti
Areas (km2) 90 910 71 790 79 017
Relief Mount Manding at Mount Kouloum Cliffs of Bandiagara and Mount Hombori
South
Surface water resources Niger River, Baoulé, Sankarani River, Niger River, Sourou, Diaka, Bara Issa, Koli Koli, Bani,
Sankarani, Bagoé, Bagoé, Baoulé, Yamés, Dakadjan, Sense, Diallo, Wango, Oualado,
Baní and Bafing Banifing, Katiorniba Débo, Korientzé, Korarou, Aougoudou and Niangaye
Drilling done between 1992-2000 442 1624 1105
Productive drilling between 1992-2000 505 1390 506
Pumps made between 1992-2000 500 1776 863
Modern wells between 1992-2000 1165 389 1914
Water supply between 1992-2000 24 26 21
Major hydraulic infrastructures Manicoura Dam of Sélingué Threshold of Djénné under construction
Areas potential suitable for irrigation (ha) 110 000 150 000 35 484
Area realized (ha) from 2015 by the National 410 1 641 1 291
Proximity Irrigation Program (PNIP)
Area Developed in Small Market Perimeters 85 14 111
(PPM) from 2012 to 2015 (ha) by PNIP
Area developed in lowlands and pools from 873 5 054 1448
2012 to 2015 (ha) by the PNIP
Area developed in PIV from 2012-15 by PNIP 0 40 2626
Area used for market gardening (ha) 20,53 9,3 98,23
Market gardening rate (%) 32 66 95
Water distribution techniques used at the plot - gravity irrigation (the most widespread) to the line with sprinkling of water to the calabash.
or plant for market gardening - irrigation with calabash or watering can with manual transport of water between water point and the
plant, Spray with hose and watering cane, Californian micro-irrigations, drip and sprinkler.
Water sources for market gardening Surface waters (river, micro-dams, canals, ponds), Underground waters, rains
Means of drainage from market garden crops Gravity, pedal pumps, low-power pumps/motor pumps, electric pumps with generator and solar (rarely).
Means of capture - irrigation channels, Cemented large diameter wells, manual drilling at shallow depth.
Number of operators (Farmers) 1491 997 4063
Average production yield in market gardening 18 14,41 19,71
(PNIP and National) (t / ha)
Market gardening production (ton) 431 131,4 1505
No. AHA population requests registered by 300 323 82
PNIP National Orientation and Monitoring
Committee (CNOS) for Proximity Planning
Program (PAP)
Populations in 2009 (RGPH) 2 418 305 2 625 919 2 037 000
Population earning from the rural sector (%) 80 to 84 66 to 80 84 to 87
Economic agriculture, livestock, agriculture, livestock, agro-sylvopastoral and halieutic, tourism, crafts
beekeeping, fishing fishing, forestry, mining
Table 5. Summary of cultivated crops and suitable irrigation technologies

Region Agriculture Area Crops Suitable Irrigation Technologies
Koulikoro Koulikoro, -Vegetables with leaves (cabbage, lettuce etc.
Banamba Dioïla, Kangaba, Kati, -Fruit vegetables (tomato, okra, cucumber, eggplant, etc. Sprinkler, drip, Californian and
Kolokani, Nara, OHVN, OPIB -Vegetables with bulb, tuber, root (shallot / onion, potato, carrot, etc. gravity systems
Manicoura
Sikasso Sikasso, Bougouni, Kadiolo, - Vegetables with leaves (cabbage, lettuce, etc.
Kolondiéba, Koutiala, Yanfolila - Fruit vegetables (tomato, okra, cucumber, eggplant, etc. Sprinkler, drip, Californian and
Yorosso - Vegetables with bulb, tuber, root (shallot / onion, potato, carrot, etc. gravity systems
Mopti Bandiagara, - Vegetables with leaves (cabbage, lettuce, etc.

Bankass, Djenné - Fruit vegetables (tomato, okra, cucumber, eggplant, etc. Sprinkler, drip, Californian and
Douentza, Koro - Vegetables with bulb, tuber, root (shallot / onion, potato, carrot, etc. gravity systems
Mopti, Ténenkou
Youwarou
- 35 -
3.3 Niger
Niger covers an area of 1,26 million km2. The national strategy for Irrigation (SNDI)
development was developed in 2001 and updated in 2005 to expand its scope to Rural
Development Strategy (RDS). Under this strategy, the Government abolished all public
irrigation schemes, and it was decided that all such initiatives should be taken with the support
of the private sector. Even with public investment, Niger irrigation must be supported and
managed by private farmers to double its contribution to GDP by 2015. This strategy intends
to double or even quadruple crop yields to increase rural farmers and lift them from chronic
poverty. In addition to irrigation water delivery, there is a need to provide quality seed and
other farm inputs. This project is well placed in the National Agenda of Niger because it
focuses on improving access to small-scale irrigation systems to increase water use efficiency
and crop productivity of smallholder farmers.
Niger is a Sahelian country belonging to the dry tropics. The rains are erratic and poorly
distributed in time and space. Agriculture is mainly subsistence farming. Agriculture is the main
economic activity and the first source of income for the rural population. Its contribution to the
national GDP is significant. Millet and sorghum are the primary food crops. Each year, the
planted area planted for these two crops increases while the yield remains low.
Since 1980, the government of Niger has adopted an agricultural policy that supports irrigated
crops production and commercialization. Irrigated farming of vegetables (onion, pepper, and
tomato) has become the main cash crop. The areas assigned to these crops are 48,000 ha,
with an annual production of about 700,000 (MDA, 2013). Despite the importance of
vegetables for the national economy, limited attention is paid to their winter production,
resulting in their import. The problems related to irrigated agriculture in Niger are:
• Multi-crop orientation: millet, sorghum, cowpea, and other vegetable crops. Rice has
traditionally grown along the river where irrigation water is available.
• Use of hand tools for agricultural activities – no mechanization.
• Use of poor-quality seed for crops and vegetables and low fertilizer use.
The climate of Niger is Sahelian type characterized by a long dry season from October to May
and a rainy season from June to September. There is a significant variation in rainfall days
from North to South, ranging from an annual rainfall between 100 mm and 700-800 mm. Niger
has the following climatic zones.
• The Saharan zone (65% of the national territory) with less than 100 mm/year
precipitation. The temperature average is about 35°C, and the climate is desert type.
• The Sahalo-Sahelian (12% of the national territory) region has an annual precipitation
of 100 to 300 mm. The climate is sub- desert type.
• The Sahelian zone (13% of the total area) with a Sahelian area to the North, where
annual rainfall ranges from 300-600 mm, and a Sudanese domain to the South.
• The Sahelo- Sudanian zone (10% of the total area), receives over 600 mm/year.
• The relationship between the ten years of wet and dry annual precipitation reaches 2.5
to the isohyets 500 mm/year and more than 3 to 200 mm/year.
24
22
Sahelo
Soudian zone
600
20 Sahelian
Iférouane
zone
Bilma
300
e
d 18
u Tabelot
Sahelo
tita Agadez Saharian Zone
L
150
16 Tchintabaraden
Saharian
Tesker
Ayorou Tahoua
Keita Dakoro
Tanout zone
Chikal Bouza
Tillabéry Bagaroua Madaoua N'Guigmi 0
Téra Gouré
14 Birni N'Konni Zinder
Tessaoua Goudoumaria
Doutchi
Niamey Loga Maradi Diffa
Maraka Mainé Soroa
Dosso Magaria
Tapoa
Gaya -50
12
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Longitude
Figure 10.10.
Figure Agro-Ecological zones
Agro-ecological ofinNiger.
zones Niger
Figure 11. Distribution of homogenous hydrological potential
37
Surface water resources are dependent on the Niger River and its tributaries of the right bank.
Although flows have reduced over time, significant areas of different regions (Ader-Doutchi
Maggia, Maradi, and Komadougou Valley) are irrigated by this water (Table 6). Other
territories have limited flows with large fluctuations from year to year.
Table 6. Characteristics of surface runoff of different rivers

Physiographic unit Rivers Control point Catchment Average annual
area (km²) runoff (106 m3)
Niger river valley River Niger Niamey 700 000 30 000
Gorouol Alkonki 44 850 220
Dargol Kakassi 5 490 160
Sirba Garbey Kourou 38 750 680
Goroubi Dioungoré 15 350 160
Diamangou Tamou 4 030 100
Tapoa W parc 5 330 40
Mékrou Barou 10 500 800
Dallols, Bosso, Maouri Bengou Negligible, 4.3
Ader-Doutchi-Maggia Maggia Birn’Konni 2 500 118
Vallée de Keita Baga 101
Badéguichiri Badéguichiri 825 37
Goulbis Goulbi N’maradi Madarounfa 4 800 218
N’Kaba Negligible
Korama Zermou Zermou 474 9
Komadougou Komadougou Bagara 115 000 501
Aïr valley and oasis Téloua Azel 1430 21
systems Kori d’Iférouane 4 130 12
Tadrisa 1 760 11
Tagoura 2 130 15
Wederer 2 440 12
Baouet 5 630 39
Zilalet 3 600 36
Makarer 2 740 33
El Méki 2 800 28
Berje Moustare 2 710 16
Barghot
The groundwater resources are 2.5-4.4 km3/year. Major aquifers are given in Table 7.
• Alluvial aquifers of the goulbi Maradi, Aïr valleys, kori Teloua, koris of the Ader-Doutchi
Maggia zone, Bosso, Maouri & Foga dallols, Komadougou Valley, koramas.
• Discontinuous aquifers of the basement, including Liptako and Damagaram-Mounio.
• Aquifers of the continental terminal and the continental hamadien.
• The water of the Pliocene of the basin of Lake Chad.
• The water table of the Manga in the basin of Lake Chad.
• The Agadez sandstone aquifer.
• There are two million m3 of non-renewable groundwater reserves, to support mining.
38
Table 7. Major aquifers of Niger
Type of Stratigraphic Major Litho logy Total area Superficie Zone à
aquifers stage (km²) Surface Libre Km2
Alluvial Quaternary Sand, gravel, silt Dispersed
Koramas Silty sand 13,430 13,430
Plio quaternary Silty sand 125,190 125,190
Lac Tchad
Continental Sandy Silt, sand, 103,000 103,000
Terminal laterit
Sandstone of Bilma Sandstone, 44,465
silty sandstone
Generalized Continental Sandstone, silty 343,075 161,675
Intercalary and Sandstone, Sand
Hamadian
Sandstone of Sandstone, silty 28,535 4,775
Agadez sandstone, sand
Namurian Tarar, Sandstone, silty 25,000
Single Guezouman) sandstone
stratum or Viséen Cimented silty 25,900
multistratum (Farazekat, sandstone
Amesgueur)
Devonian Sandstone, silty 3,150
(Touaret, Idekel) sandstone 7,700
Cambro- Coarse sandstone
ordovicien
quartzitiques
Cracked Voltaien Quartz sandstone 3,360
Granitic bed, Granite, 148,425
Metamorphic quartzite, schist
The success of SSI in Niger depends on the development and dissemination of low-cost
irrigation technologies and addressing related technical and financial problems. The
Californian and gravitation systems of irrigation are now widely used in Niger. The Californian
is a small irrigation system, which distributes water to crops through PVC pipes buried in the
ground. Water intakes are connected to these rigid pipes at regular intervals (18-36 m). Water
is delivered to fields through terminals that are located at standard distances. Alternatively, a
movable 14 m flexible hose can be attached to hydrants to irrigate plots. Water is extracted
from river streams and groundwater using diesel or solar pumps.
This system allows serving the entire field regardless of topographical conditions. This system
is suitable for irrigating small areas (0.1-2 ha). However, the pumping rate determines the size
of the irrigable area. This system saves up to 40% water and reduces energy costs by 25%.
The initial installation cost is US$ 600 to 1000 per ha with a return on investment in 2 to 3
years). The system can be extended depending on the financial capacity of the producer.
Under West-African conditions, the life of the California system is 6-10 years, depending on
the quality material and level of maintenance by farmers.
39
3.4 Senegal
Most of Senegal lies within the drought-prone Sahel region, with irregular rainfall and generally
poor soils. With only about 5% of the land irrigated, the heavy reliance on rainfed cultivation
results in large fluctuations in production. Agriculture accounts for 18% of GDP, with 70%
population involved in farming. Most Senegalese farms are small (1.5–2.4 ha), and 11% of the
total land area is cultivated. Pearl millet is grown on 40% of the cultivated land and peanuts
on 36%. Senegal's climate is tropical with well-defined dry and humid seasons. The mean
annual rainfall ranges from 270mm in the North to 1793mm in the South.
The largest water resource in the country is the Senegal River in the North, shared with
Mauritania, Mali, and Guinea (Table 8). Its average flow is 37 Bm3 per year. However, water
in most parts of the country is scarce due to the lack of irrigation infrastructure. Senegal has
about 3 Bm3 per year of renewable groundwater resources, excluding those that overlap with
surface water. The total surface water withdrawals are about 1.4 Bm3, of which 92% is used
for agriculture, 3% for industry, and 5% for domestic purposes. Groundwater stocks are 7 Bm3.
Groundwater over-exploitation is causing the lowering of groundwater levels in many areas.
Currently, villagers need to drill as deep as 80m to pump groundwater. This has increased the
cost of pumping, restricting groundwater accessibility for the poor farmers. This results in low
crop productivity, reduced incomes, and increased household poverty.
Figure 12. Agricultural production systems in Senegal
Agriculture is mainly subsistence farming, and the country is a net food importer of rice, which
represents 75% of cereal imports. Peanuts, sugarcane, and cotton are important cash crops,
along with fruits and vegetable. Fishing sector remains major foreign exchange earner while
the poultry and livestock sectors are underdeveloped and needs modernization.
40
Senegal has an irrigable land potential of 400,000 ha, mainly in the Senegal River Valley
(SRV). Schemes managed areas in total or partial control are estimated at 105,000 ha. They
are distributed between the VFS (76,000 ha), the low and medium Casamance (15,000 ha),
the Niayes (10,000 ha), the Anambe Valley (4,000 ha), and the Eastern Senegal (600 ha).
Despite completing these schemes, the cultivation area remains low and would be 32% for
the VFS and 17% for the Anambe. Even though the potential of irrigated areas is well-known,
irrigated land occupies only 4% of the cultivated land is irrigated.
Table 8. Irrigation potential and level of planning and development

Zones Irrigable potential Schemes developed Cultivated area
(ha) area (ha) (ha)
Senegal River Valley 228000 76 000 41300
Low& mid-Casamance 70000 15000 9000
Anambé 16000 4000 500
Gambia 4100 600 250
Shallow water 5000 pm pm
Niayes 12000 10000 10000
Groundnut basin 14 000 pm pm
Total 349,100 104,780 (30%) 6,350(18%)
Tables 9-11 give an area of crops grown during different cropping seasons in the SRV.
Table 9. Area (ha) for major crops in different areas of the Senegal River Valley
Planned crop area (ha)
Crops Dagana/Lake Podor Matam Bakel Valley
Tomato 1600 1560 150 0 3310
Onion 1600 3000 500 128 5300
Maize 750 360 1 500 43 3460
Sweet potato 1000 0 100 0 1200
Gombo 300 215 200 24 1400
Others 1000 215 250 329 3030
Total 6,250 4,042 2,700 552 17,700
Table 10. Area (ha) for major crops during dry hot season in the Senegal River Valley
Zones Planned crop area (ha)
Total Rice
Dagana/Lake 40,000 38,000
Podor 9300 8000
Matam 3745 3000
Bakel 1850 1000
Total 54,895 50,000
Others: Gombo, sweet potato, groundnut, etc. Rice representing 91%
Table 11. Area (ha) for major crops during rainy season in the Senegal River Valley
Zones Planned crop area (ha)
Total Rice
Dagana/Lake 32500 30000
Podor 11077 10000
Matam 10250 10000
Bakel 4000 1000
Total 57,827 50,000
41
4. Small-scale irrigation systems used in SSA
Smallholder farmers in Africa have been exposed to many SSI technologies during the last
two decades. These include manually operated treadle pumps and small-scale drip systems
(e.g., Jain drip system from India). The gravity-operated small-scale drip systems (i.e.,
JainDripKit) have proved successful in irrigating kitchen gardens. These systems are available
for 50m2 to 2000m2 area and are simple and easy to install and operate. These systems are
especially suitable for areas with a long gap between rainy and dry seasons and/or unavailable
electricity. They are considered survival irrigation tools and are now being used by many small
farmers in Asia and Africa, India, and Senegal. These systems have specific benefits for
smallholder farmers but have their limitations and constraints.
They can be operated only up to a maximum head of 4 m with a delivery discharge of 1.5
liters/h. Therefore, they are suitable only for kitchen gardens or where land holdings are
minimal. These systems can operate in areas where a water source is available at the location.
Mostly farmers make a water reservoir close to the field, and water is pumped into the 3-4
meters high water tank for use in the drip system. This requires land as well as money to build
a water reservoir. Solar pumps have also been introduced to lift shallow groundwater for filling
the water tank in a few places. The major bottleneck is that these systems cannot be used if
the water source is far from the field. These irrigation systems cannot support fertigation
unless liquid fertilizer is available to farmers, which is rare in SSA.
A brief description of different small-scale irrigation technologies used in SSA is given below.
4.1 Manual lifting system
The hand lifting technique is a traditional method to extract water from wells and rivers. This
water is then used for irrigation using buckets. Women usually operate this system, and more
than 80% of their household time is used in water lifting and irrigation. In the Africa region,
more than 70% of vegetables are grown using this irrigation method.
Main characteristics of this system are as follows:
• Smallholder farmers use manual devices to lift water from river streams and wells.
• They are mainly used to irrigate small holdings up to 0.5 ha or less.
• These devices are pervasive to irrigate small vegetable and fruit gardens. Since flows
are low, it takes a considerable amount of time to irrigate small parcels of land.
• In Burkina Faso – the average area irrigated by these devices is about 1000 m2.
• About 80% of the labor time of the households is used in water lifting and distribution.
Usually, men and women are both involved in irrigating lands with this method.
• In Senegal, for example, an estimated 7,000 hours are used to irrigate one hectare of
land using this method. This discourages farmers from using this method of irrigation.
42
4.2 Treadle pumps
The treadle pumps were first developed in Bangladesh in the 1980s and then introduced in
India where farmers used them to lift large quantities of water through shallow lifts of 1-2
meters. These pumps were later modified (called as pressure pumps) to meet the needs of
African farmers, who lift water from deeper sources (>4m) and irrigate undulating land with
sprinklers or hosepipes. The modified pumps were introduced in many African countries such
as Senegal, Mali, Burkina Faso, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Kenya, and Niger. Initially, these pumps
were welcomed as they helped farmers irrigate small fields, increasing their cultivation area
and crop production. However, their utility becomes restricted over time because of their
capacity to work at low heads and low discharges to irrigate large areas. Treadle pumps can
work at greater depths (up to 5-8 meters), but the discharges are low (0.3 l/s), which are not
feasible for the required physical human input.
The area irrigated with a treadle pump depends on the crop, the climate, and the irrigation
application efficiency. In broader terms, assuming an irrigation time of 20 hours per week with
a crop water requirement of 30 mm per week and a power input of 50 watts (only one person
pumping water), the area that can be irrigated is approximately 0.20 ha. Under similar
conditions, the bucket method would reduce the irrigated area to 0.05 ha (IPTRID, 2000). This
shows that treadle pumps are slightly more beneficial than the bucket method.
Social and cultural issues vary from country to country. In Zambia, for example, irrigating
crops, weeding, fertilizing, and harvesting are generally considered to be women’s activities.
Women use treadle pumps and see this as an opportunity for empowerment. IPTRID (2000)
has reported that women find the pumps harder to operate than men do. Of all the pumps sold
in 1999 in Zambia, only four were purchased by women, though women are the primary users
of treadle pumps. Although treadle pumps are not so widely used in Zimbabwe, the
improvement of family nutrition because of the increase in garden produce has been noted in
many areas. However, there is a little economic benefit as most communities produce just
enough for their home consumption. The use of treadle pumps is still restricted to few framers
because of its cost (US$ 100). More than half of the pumps in use were donated and are thus
community property.
Another type of manually operated pump used in SSA is called “Nafa pumps.” These pumps
are available in six different types, and farmers can select pumps depending on their cost and
availability. However, their price remains a challenge for smallholder farmers.
43
The characteristics of different treadle pumps are given below:
1. The Nafa suction pump with driving back arrangement: Lifting depth is 8m with a driving
back capacity of 150m on flat land. The flow rate is 6-8 m3/h and can lift groundwater
and surface water. The potential area that can be cropped is 0.5 ha
2. The suction Nafa pumps: Lifting depth is 8m but cannot deliver water under pressure.
The flow rate is between 4.5 and 5.3 m3/h with a potential irrigated area of 0.25 ha.
3. The Nafa pumps for deep conditions (mono-cylinder and bicylinder): Maximum lifting
depth is 18m. The flow rate varies from 1.5-3.5 m3/h. This pump is used for deep wells.
4. The manual Nafa pumps: Maximum lifting depth is 9 m. The flow rate is between 3.2 and
8.2 m3/h. The potential area that can be irrigated with these pumps is 0.6 ha.
5. The Big flow Nafa pumps: Lifting depth varies from 2 to 3 m. These are suitable for
surface water (wells, dams). The flow rate of these pumps is between 7.5-9.8 m3/h.
6. The Compact Nafa pumps: The lifting depth is 7m. They are used for lifting water from
wells and dams. The flow rate is between 2.2-5.2 m3/h and can irrigate up to 0.4 ha.
4.3 Motorized pumps
Different types and capacity motor pumps are available in the region. Generally, 2-5 hp pumps
are used for shallow groundwater and 12-15hp for deep groundwater areas. Small motor
pumps can irrigate 1-2 ha of land, whereas large pumps can irrigate 2-5 ha. The fuel
consumption of these pumps is around 1.0 to 1.5 liters per hour. The price of these pumps
varies from US$ 230 to US$ 300. The cost of accessories depends on the quality and varies
between US$ 40 to US$120. Most of the pumps are China-made and readily available in local
markets. Maintenance is done locally or in the big towns. These pumps can lift water from 3
to 8m. The average life of these pumps is around five years.
44
4.4 Drip irrigation system
The drip irrigation system distributes water to individual plants through a network of tubes or
pipes at a controlled low flow rate. This system reduces water losses, produces fewer weeds,
and is suitable for coarse soils. However, high initial costs, clogging of drippers, and risk of
damages during land cultivation and animal walk are few severe disadvantages. The drip
irrigation system is mainly used for vegetables and fruits. In SSA countries, the adoption of
this system is limited due to its cost, high maintenance, and low availability in local markets.
The average cost of installation of these systems is US$ 2000-3000 per ha.
The drip irrigation system is mainly used for vegetables and fruits. Despite established
efficiency, the adoption of drip irrigation systems in SSA countries is limited due to its initial
investment cost, low availability in local markets, and lack of maintenance services. In Mali
and Senegal, some private companies have started making local materials, which might help
in reducing costs. In other countries, drip system systems are mainly imported, which makes
it expensive for smallholder farmers.
4.5 Sprinkler irrigation system
The sprinkler irrigation system is used to imitate the rainfall. The water under pressure is
supplied through pipes, and sprinklers do irrigation. Large commercial companies primarily
use this system. These systems are adaptable to varied land topography, saves labor, reduce
erosion and fertilizer loss. However, high installation costs, limited availability of equipment
and maintenance services in the local markets are limitations in the large-scale adoption of
these systems. The installation cost varied from US$600 to US$4000 per ha, depending on
the location, type of soil, and crop.
45
4.6 Border and furrow irrigation systems
Farmers commonly use the border and furrow irrigation systems for irrigating lands. Water is
applied to the field through an outlet, and water distribution within the area is done through
gravity. The efficiency of these systems is generally low; however, farmers prefer them
because they do not have high investment or maintenance costs.
4.7 Californian system
The Californian system is a network of PVC pipelines buried in the soil to route water from the
source to farmer fields having an irregular topography. The PVC pipes are buried in the ground
with several terminals for irrigation. Water is lifted from the surface or groundwater source and
distributed through furrows with crops planted on ridges. This system is most suitable for
irrigating areas up to 3-4 ha. This system has several advantages over traditional irrigation
systems. These include:
• The system is well adapted for fields with varied topography as it minimizes water
loss during water delivery and irrigation and ensures uniform water distribution.
• The irrigation frequency reduces to two times per week compared to three to four
times a week with the bucket method. It also reduces irrigation time and gives the
possibility to use several terminals at the same time.
• The labor needed for irrigation is lower with the Californian system. Two persons
can irrigate a 0.5 ha plot with this system, compared to 4 to 5 men with the bucket
method. It saves lots of lands because pipes take up less space compared to
surface channels.
• Easy installation, use, and maintenance because all materials are primarily
available locally. Easy extension and opportunity to expand the irrigated area.
• Unlike treadle pumps, there are no socio-cultural issues with this system. Women
happily use these pumps because it does not involve a lot of physical labor.
• Due to sufficient water availability under this system, kitchen vegetables and
legumes, grains, and fodder crops can be irrigated.
• During the dry periods when water level drops in channels and 2-cylinder pumps
do not work, the Californian system works efficiently. Farmers can achieve higher
yields due to timely plantation of seeds and timely irrigation of crops.
• The Californian system is efficient in saving irrigation water.
46
The installation cost of the Californian system varies between US$ 600-1000 per ha,
depending on the topography and the soil type. For example, if the soil is sandy, the installation
cost is higher because the number of terminals will increase to meet the water demand of this
soil type. The life of the Californian system is 8-10 years compared to 2-3 years of drip system.
Moreover, the maintenance cost of the Californian system is almost negligible compared to
drip systems. The pump used for this system consumes 1.5 l/h of fuel and has a discharge
capacity of 20 m3/h discharge capacity. The pump needs to be operated 5-8 hours/day to
irrigate one ha of land, depending on the crop's growth stage.
The average cost of this system is about US$ 600/ha. However, prices may vary from US$
500 to US$ 800 for different locations depending on the land topography and the soil type. For
example, in sandy soils, the cost is higher because the number of terminals will increase to
meet the water demand of this soil type.
The economic analyses done for different crops grown in other countries have shown that
farmers with the Californian system can earn up to US$ 1000-2000 per ha per season more
compared to bucket and drip irrigation systems. The net benefit depends on the crop grown
and its market price. This makes it possible for them to recover the cost of the system in 2-3
cropping seasons.
Since more than 70% of farmers in SSA are involved in subsistence farming (cultivating less
than 2 ha), it would be prudent to promote the Californian system for irrigation because of its
low cost. However, scaling up these technologies would require financial and technical
assistance from the government, NGOs and/or other development partners. The kick-start
provides pumps to farmers on easy installments in Burkina Faso and Ethiopia. NGOs in few
other countries (i.e., Kenya) have also helped small farmers with credit facilities. Still, they do
not have enough capital to expand and administer such loans on a commercial basis.
To increase accessibility, a reduction in the costs of these irrigation technologies would be

inevitable. This objective can be achieved by involving the private sector in the local
manufacturing of pumps and related accessories. Private manufacturers would require
government support in building their capacity and knowledge for technology development and
application into the agriculture sector (FAO, 2011). Improving local pump manufacturing
capacity and facilitating imported pumps and spares at affordable costs can increase crop
productivity while providing resilience against erratic rainfall patterns in SSA.
47
5. Introducing small-scale irrigation systems
Enormous conveyance and field application losses characterize irrigation in SSA countries.
Due to varying topography and poor land leveling of farmer fields, irrigation efficiencies are
low, resulting in poor crop yields and increased soil salinization. Water from the source to the
areas is transported through earthen channels, which increases water loss through seepage,
especially in sandy soils. The uneven fields are over-irrigated, resulting in uneven plant growth
and poor water use efficiency. Under these conditions, the Californian system is more suitable
as it can irrigate uneven fields. In addition, different SSI technologies were introduced to grow
vegetables at various locations. The solar irrigation pumps were also introduced as a
sustainable source of energy. The details of this activity are given below.
5.1 Burkina Faso
Four sites were selected for introducing SSI technologies. These include Nord region with the
site of Kouni, the Centre-Nord region with Kora and Zorkoum, and the Auts-Bassins region
with the location of Dandé. These sites have producer groups favoring the extension of SSI
technologies. At three sites (Kora, Zorkoum, Dandé Dandé), diesel pumps lift water from wells.
Due to the high cost, the solar pump system was installed only in the Kouni site of the Nord
region. The location of these sites is given in Figure 13.
Figure 13. Sites for the introduction of small-scale irrigation technologies
Kouni field site
Californian irrigation system along with a 600W solar pump was installed on a 2500 m2 site in
the Kouni site of the Nord region. The pump has a flow rate of 2.3 m3/hour and extracts water
from a 9m deep well to irrigate different vegetable crops such as onion, eggplant, tomato, and
sweet pepper. A group of 15 farmers shares the installed system. The project provided inputs
48
to grow vegetables such as sprays and agricultural inputs (fertilizer, seeds, and pesticides)
with the promise that farmers would manage these inputs during the next growing season.
The irrigation to the onion field was done using the Californian system. The system got the
attention of the local farmers because it has decreased the production cost due to reduced
consumption of fuel. The yield of the onion crop achieved through this system was about 33
tons/ha. For large-scale demonstration to get farmers’ attention, the project has also installed
a Californian system (without a solar system) at three other locations (Dandé, Kongoussi, and
Kaya regions), operated using motor pumps.
Dandé field site
The Dandé field site occupies an area of 4600 m². Onion crop was grown using Californian
system. A pump (with a capacity of 60 m3/h) was used to lift water from an open dug well.
Several crops were successfully grown under the Californian system.
Zorkoum field site
The Zorkoum site occupies 6000 m², with 5700 m² for onion and 300 m² for tomato. A diesel
pump powers the irrigation system. Farmers in the area used irrigation water from Lake Dem.
Several crops were grown under the Californian irrigation system in two steps. During the first
step, onion, tomato, cabbage, and sweet pepper were cultivated. Then cabbage was grown
on an area of 1800 m². The obtained cabbage yield was 70 tons/ha. The onion, tomato, and
sweet pepper yields were 25, 20, and 25 tons/ha.
49
Kora field site
The site of Kora occupies an area of 7500 m² with 5000 m² for green beans, 1500 m² for
carrots, and 1000 m² for tomatoes. A diesel motor pump is used for water lifting from Lake
Bam through the Californian irrigation system. Onion, green bean, and tomato crops were
grown in this field. The crops performed very well. The onion, green bean, and tomato yields
were 17, 5, and 23 tons/ha. Field activities at all sites were carried out in collaboration with the
local partners. The members of farmer organizations helped in data collection and
maintenance, and operation of the system.
5.2 Mali
Under this project, SSI technologies were introduced at three locations. These include Geralo,
Koulikoro, and Mopti regions. At the Geralo field site, a solar panel irrigation system and the
Californian irrigation system were installed, covering 2400 m2. A submerged pump is installed
to extract groundwater for irrigation. The pump was operated using photovoltaic solar panels
(Solar pump). Four photovoltaic solar panels of 250 W each were installed to energize the
submerged pump of 3 m3/hr capacity. During this cropping season, farmers grow cabbage,
onion, eggplant, lettuce, tomato, and sweet pepper.
50
The experimental site was jointly shared and managed by 100 smallholder farmers, including
77 women and 23 men. Each farmer was allotted a small field of 12 m x 2 m (24 m 2), and a
schedule to use irrigation water through the Californian system was developed. The project
also provided small market gardening equipment for the first growing season consisting of
burrows, wheelbarrows, rakes, fittings, sprays, and agricultural inputs (fertilizer, seeds, and
pesticides) to smallholder farmers.
The total area of this site was 2400 m2. The place was managed by 77 women and 23 men at
one California water outlet per beneficiary. The area per beneficiary is 24m2 (12m x 2m). The
site is managed by an administrative committee headed by a woman. The beneficiaries and
the management were trained to monitor the project activities. At the Koulikoro and Mopti
sites, only Californian systems were installed to grow tuber vegetables.
Solar pump at Garalo site Californian system at Garalo site
51
The field data at all sites were collected on hydraulic, agronomic, and socio-economic
parameters. For this purpose, fact sheets and data collection books have been made available
to the agricultural service officer. The agricultural officers were trained in water management,
crop management, and repair and maintenance of solar and Californian systems. Filed days
were organized to raise awareness among neighboring farmers about gardening techniques,
equipment, wheelbarrows, rakes, fittings, sprays, and inputs (fertilizer, seeds, and pesticides)
needed to grow vegetables. For all three demonstration sites, farm inputs and equipment were
provided by the project. The data on applied irrigation amounts, energy used, crop production,
home consumption, and sold-out pieces were collected.
In Mali, the agriculture system is mainly based on small-scale farming, with more than 70% of
farmers cultivate less than 4 ha of land and 14% are large farmers cultivating more than 10
ha. Therefore, it would be wise to promote a drip irrigation system for large farmers who can
grow high-value crops and recover their investments in drip systems.
The Californian system may be preferred for smallholder farmers because of its low cost and
acceptance within the farming community. Government should ensure financial support
through policy reforms to encourage wide-scale adoption of this irrigation technology by
smallholder farmers. The involvement of the private sector needs to be enhanced to promote
local manufacturing of these systems to bring down costs and increase accessibility.
5.3 Niger
Four field sites were selected to demonstrate the Californian system. The first site is in
Bonkoukou village in the Tillabery region. This site is 150 km far from Niamey. The town's
population is 3,454 inhabitants, including 1,564 men and 1,890 women, divided into 573
households. The soil is rich and suitable to grow tubers, potatoes, and other vegetables. The
Bonkoukou is the main potato production area in the Balleyara department. At this site, the
Californian system was installed with the solar pump to lift water for the Californian irrigation
system. This site is managed by 22 women farmers. At the other three field sites, Californian
systems were operated using diesel pumps.
The second site (Salewa village) is in the Dogaraoua in the Tahoua region. It is 80 km far from
the Tahoua region. The town has 2435 inhabitants, including 1,270 men and 1,165 women.
The soil is rich and is suitable to grow tomatoes, onion, potatoes, and other vegetables. The
Dogaraoua field is an excellent site for tomato production in the Tahoua region. Tomato
production is the main activity of farmers between October and April. The introduction of
varieties adapted in the rainy season is good news for tomato producers. The third site
(Balleyara village) is in the Tillabery region (Figure 15). It has a population of 778 inhabitants,
including 408 men and 370 women. The soil is suitable to grow crops such as cereals,
sorghum, and other vegetables.
The fourth site (Nakoni village) is in the Tahoua region. The town has 1,946 inhabitants,
including 1,045 men and 901 women. The soil is ‘’fakara’’ rich and suitable for growing
tomatoes, onion, potatoes, and other crops.
52
The primary source of irrigation water is dug wells or river water. A Californian system was
laid to transport water from the nearby river stream to the fields. Water distribution within the
farmer's fields was done through furrows and flexible pipes. Farmers grow different vegetables
such as lettuce, cabbage, tomato, onion, and okra. For our experiment, a tomato crop was
raised, and the Californian irrigation system results were compared with the traditional bucket
method.
Crop yields are generally low due to poor cultural and management practices and poor seed
and fertilizer application rates. Farmers preferred the Californian system because of its
suitability in controlling water infiltration losses in sandy soils. Water was stored in the tanks
and later used for irrigation both for drip and furrow systems. Farmers also use the bucket
method for irrigating small vegetable fields, especially those owned by women.
53
5.4 Senegal
Irrigation in Senegal is usually characterized by substantial water losses due to the high
permeability of soils. Due to varying topography and poor land leveling of farmer fields,
irrigation efficiencies are low, resulting in poor crop yields and increased soil salinization. Long
channels are made in the ground to irrigate elevated portions with the traditional method,
increasing water loss through infiltration during water transportation. The water loss is much
higher in sandy soils. The capacity of commonly used two-cylinder pumps is meager and
unsuitable for irrigation in low flow periods. For this purpose, the Californian irrigation system
was selected for demonstration because of its suitability for delivering water in varying
topography areas. The possibility of connecting flexible pipes to irrigation terminals makes it
easier to irrigate elevated portions of the fields.
Four sites were selected after due consultation with the local partners. These include Sanente,
Mbane, Nder, and Mbayene villages on the eastern and western bank of the Guiers Lake
(Figure 16). One 0.5 ha farmer field was equipped with the Californian system at each site,
and onion crop was grown in all areas. In the Sanent village, a solar system was also installed.
The system was operated and shared by 30 women farmers. This helps women avoid the
daily hassle of repairing and maintaining diesel pumps and bringing fuel from the nearby
market. The main crops grown include maize in the rainy season, onion, tomatoes, sweet
potatoes in the cold season, and rice and melon in the dry, hot season.
54
Californian irrigation system was one of the most promising technologies in the region.
Farmers from the nearby villages visited the project site and requested to extend this project
to their villages. They agreed to contribute part of the installation cost if any government or
private agency helped them get this system for their lands.
Farmers realized differences in the performance of the Californian system and the bucket
method. They observed that the Californian system prevents soil compaction and allows soil
aeration that helps the growth of shallot bulbs. They also preferred this system because of its
low installation cost because most of the material is available in local markets. The life of this
system is more than ten years, while the operation and maintenance costs are minimal.
The women farmer group developed their rotational system to irrigate water at regular
intervals. The group also elected their president, who looks after the rights of all farmers to
ensure that each farmer gets timely delivery of the allocated quantity of water for irrigation.
This group developed contacts with the local traders to sell their produce at competitive prices.
The project team helped them in the smooth functioning of the system. The data on water use,
crop yields, fuel consumption, and income was collected to evaluate this system's technical
and economic efficiency compared to traditional methods.
55
6. Land and water productivity of different irrigation systems
The data collected from the field trials were analyzed to determine vegetable crop water and
economic productivities under different irrigation technologies. The performance of the
Californian system was compared with the bucket method, drip, and sprinkler systems. The
results of data analysis in each target country are presented below.
6.1 Burkina Faso
For this project, two significant crops (tomato and onion) were selected. Onion is grown on
48% of the cultivated area, whereas tomato occupies about 22%. Farmers practice mixed
cropping (for example, tomato/maize and onion/maize under irrigation) and the monoculture
of tomato or onion. Onion is grown with tomato in biannual rotation. Fertilizer application rates
are low (150 kg/ha), which is the primary reason for low crop yields.
In Burkina Faso, 21% of the farmers have motor pumps for gravity irrigation, whereas the rest
rely on the bucket irrigation system. The gravity pump irrigation is widely used for onion crops
grown on large plots. Women mainly use the bucket system to irrigate small home gardens.
In the Kouni site, a drip irrigation system for tomato and a Californian system for onion crops
was installed. This site was also equipped with a solar system. The frequency of irrigation
depends on the growth stage and soil type. Farmers always irrigate with the bucket method
during the seedling stage and move to the Californian system one month later when crop
demand increase. During the first month, irrigation frequency was three times a week with
bucket method and twice a week with motor pump. The data regarding seasonal irrigation
amount applied, crop yields, and water productivity for tomato and onion crops under different
irrigation systems is presented in Table 12.
Table 12. Water productivity of vegetables under different irrigation systems in Burkina Faso
Experimental Crop = Tomato Crop = Onion
sites/Parameters Gravity Bucket California Gravity Bucket California
method method n system method method n system
Total water applied 9950 5270 4820 11750 11190 9863
(m3/ha)
Crop yield (kg/ha) 20500 16780 18650 16770 15375 15850
Water productivity 2.06 3.18 3.86 1.42 1.37 1.60
(kg/m3)
Economic Productivity 1.03 1.59 1.93 0.71 0.69 0.80
($/m3)
Price of tomato = 0.5 $/kg and onion = 0.5 $/kg
Table 12 shows that the Californian system conserves the highest amount of water compared
to the gravity and bucket method. The total water used under bucket and gravity irrigation
systems was 50% and 8.5% higher than the Californian system, respectively. The highest
yields were obtained for the gravitational method, followed by Californian and bucket methods.
However, yields obtained under the bucket and Californian systems were only 18% and 9%
lower than the gravitational method. The water productivity for tomatoes was the lowest for
the gravity method, whereas it was highest for the Californian systems. The water productivity
of the bucket method was 54% higher than the gravity method, whereas it was 18% lower
56
than the Californian system. Although the average onion yield obtained under the Californian
system was only marginally higher than the gravity and bucket method, the amount of water
applied for irrigation was 16% lower than these two irrigation systems. This indicates that the
Californian irrigation system saves more water without compromising too much on crop yields.
These analyses suggest that farmers should prioritize the drip irrigation system to save
irrigation water without compromising crop yields and reducing irrigation costs. However, the
initial investment in drip systems (1000–4000 US$/ha) and operational and maintenance costs
were a matter of concern for smallholder farmers. Farmers showed interest in the Californian
System due to its low cost of installation (US$ 600/ha), ease of operation, and cost-effective
operation and maintenance, in addition to significant water saving.
The products from small-scale irrigation are sold in the local market. The buyers come from
the nearby big towns and neighboring countries (Ghana, Ivory Coast, Togo, and Benin). Prices
are negotiated directly in the fields or the local market, and the products are immediately
removed. This system does not benefit farmers because they are forced to sell their products
at a low price due to limited access to big markets and a lack of storage facilities. The
smallholder farmers from the villages have little access to loans from NGOs, and micro finance
institutions to buy inputs (seeds, fertilizers, and pesticides).
Farmers use their income from vegetables, small ruminants (goats, sheep), and poultry to buy
farm inputs. Farmers usually do not have extension services except for fields trials carried out
by research institutes and NGOs. Therefore, to increase the income of smallholder farmers,
greater market access and supply of farm inputs at affordable prices need to be ensured. The
increased revenue will enable farmers to invest in SSI technologies to improve land and water
productivity, enhance the livelihood, and reduce poverty.
6.2 Mali
In Mali, farmers use manual irrigation methods with calabashes to transport water from the
source to the field and watering canes and buckets for water application to crops. Therefore,
the performance of drip, sprinkler, and Californian systems was compared with the traditional
bucket method. The Geralo site was equipped with a Californian system with a solar pump.
The data on total water applied and crop yields for tomato and onion crops under different
irrigation systems were analyzed, and the results are presented in Table 13.
Table 13. Water productivity of vegetables under different irrigation systems in Mali
Experimental Geralo Koulikaro Mopti
sites/Parameters Crop = Onion Crop = Potato Crop = Tomato
Californian Bucket Sprinkler Bucket Drip Bucket
Total water applied (m3/ha) 4100 6240 4260 8700 6300 7920
Crop yield (kg/ha) 22630 16250 16148 16060 48811 30304
Water productivity (kg/m3) 5.51 2.60 3.79 1.84 7.74 3.82
($/m3)
Price of onion = 0.25 $/kg, potato = 0.30 $/kg and for tomato = 0.5 $/kg
57
Table 13 shows that the water productivity of drip, sprinkler, and Californian irrigation systems
is almost double that of the traditional bucket method. The highest water saving, and yield
gains were obtained for tomatoes under drip irrigation. The drip system produced a 38% higher
yield and consumed 20% less water than the bucket method. The Californian system had a
28% higher yield and saved 34% water than the bucket method for onion crops. In the case
of sprinkler systems, water-saving was the highest (51%) compared to the bucket method;
however, potato yield was almost comparable. The economic productivity was highest (3.87
$/m3) for tomatoes under drip irrigation systems due to higher products and high prices in the
market. Like water productivity, the economic productivity of the bucket method was less than
half of the three (Californian, drip, sprinkler) irrigation systems.
Farmers much appreciated the drip irrigation system. They stressed the need for wide-scale
dissemination of this technology because of its advantages such as uniform distribution of
water to plants, water-saving, low labor requirements, better use of fertilizer, and increased
crop yields. However, at the same time, they were concerned about the cost of this technology
and suggested financial support from the government for its adoption by smallholder farming
communities. Farmers felt that the Californian system prevents soil compaction and allows
aeration of the soil that provides better crop stand.
In Mali, the agriculture system is mainly based on small-scale farming, with more than 70% of
farmers cultivate less than 4 ha of land and 14% are large farmers cultivating more than 10
ha. Therefore, it would be wise to promote a drip irrigation system for large farmers who can
grow high-value crops and recover their investments in drip systems. The Californian method
is preferred by smallholder farmers because of its low cost and acceptance within the farming
community. Government should provide financial support through policy reforms to boost
wide-scale adoption of SSI technologies by smallholder farmers. The involvement of the
private sector can help local manufacturing of these systems to bring down costs.
6.3 Niger
In Niger, the efficacy of irrigation technologies was tested at two locations in the Bonkoukou
field site. This site is in the Sahelian agroecological zone. It is a small village of 573 households
and 3500 inhabitants. The soil type was sandy loam suitable to grow multiple crops such as
tubers, potatoes, and vegetables. Potato is the primary irrigated crop of this area, practiced
on more than 65% of the area. The experiments for this study were conducted in the INRAN
research station. Two plots of 500 m2 each were selected. Each parcel was divided into two
sub-plots (250 m2 each). At the first location, the tomato was planted on drip and furrow
system; At the second location, sweet potato was sown using Californian and furrow method.
The primary source of water is dug wells or river. The Californian system was preferred for
field trials because of its suitability in controlling water infiltration losses in sandy soils. Water
was stored in the tanks and later used for irrigation both for drip and furrow systems. Farmers
use the bucket method for irrigating small vegetable fields, especially those owned by women.
The data regarding the average seasonal irrigation amount applied, crop yields, and water
productivity for Cowpea and tomato crops is presented in Table 14.
58
Table 14. Water productivity of vegetables under different irrigation systems in Niger
Experimental Bonkoukou (Location # 1) Bonkoukou (Location # 2)
sites/Parameters Crop = Tomato Crop = Sweet potato
Californian Bucket Californian Bucket
system system system system
Total water applied (m3/ha) 4250 8650 7980 8820
Crop yield (kg/ha) 32900 17735 26794 17200
Water productivity (kg/m3) 7.70 2.05 3.35 1.95
Economic Productivity ($/m3) 3.87 1.03 1.67 0.98
Price of tomato = 0.5 $/kg, sweet potato = 0.5 $/kg
Table 14 illustrates that amount of water applied through the bucket method is 10% higher
than the drip irrigation system. In contrast, the yield increases for tomato and sweet potato
crops under the Californian system are 25% and 37% higher than the bucket method,
respectively. The tomato yield under the Californian system was much higher than the bucket
method, whereas the water application for irrigation was almost half of the bucket method.
The water productivity of tomatoes for the Californian system was more than three times that
of the bucket method. The water productivity of tomato and sweet potato under the Californian
system was 46% and 76% higher than the bucket method, respectively.
The economic return per cubic meter of water use was significantly lower for the bucket
method compared to the Californian system. The well-being of smallholder farmers is also
directly linked with the higher crop yields because this can increase their income to recover
investments in the installation of Californian and other irrigation systems. Increased crop
production would also require better access to big markets to get the actual value of their
produce. The shelf life of crops is minimal, forcing farmers to dispose of them quickly
regardless of the price. Therefore, better access to good seeds with training to protect crops
for a reasonable time after harvest needs to be given priority to reduce poverty.
In Bonkoukou, good quality potato seed was also supplied to FAO, ensuring higher yields.
Similar arrangements should be made for providing seed for other crops such as maize and
vegetables. Although 90% of farmers in Bonkoukou use fertilizer on their farms, the fertilizer
use rate is much lower than required. According to an estimate, about 50% of farmers only
apply inorganic fertilizer, 35% use organic fertilizers, 5% use microelement, whereas 10% do
not use fertilizer. This is also one of the primary reasons for low crop yields. The results of this
project suggest that, in Niger, provision of good quality seed, appropriate fertilizer amounts,
and training on nutrient management is of paramount importance to ensure higher crop yields
and livelihood of poor rural smallholder farmers.
6.4 Senegal
For this project, the performance of the Californian irrigation system was compared with the
traditional bucket method. For this purpose, three field sites were selected in partnership with
the producer organization. These sites were in Nder, Mbane and Mbayene villages. One 0.5
ha farmer field was equipped with the Californian irrigation system at each site, and an onion
crop was grown in all areas. The data on applied irrigation volumes, crop yields, irrigation time,
and irrigation frequency were collected for the Californian system and the bucket method. The
results of the three sites are presented in Table 15.
59
Table 15. Water productivity of vegetables under different irrigation systems in Senegal
Experimental Nder Mbane Mbayene
sites/Parameters Crop = Onion Crop = Onion Crop = Onion
California Gravity California Bucket California Bucket
n system method n system method n system method
Total water applied (m3/ha) 4680 6720 6240 7200 5520 6480
Crop yield (kg/ha) 11610 7847 13200 9800 11600 6800
Water productivity (kg/m3) 2.48 1.17 2.11 1.36 2.10 1.06
($/m3)
Price of Onion = 1.2 $/kg
Table 15 shows that the Californian system used 15% to 25% less water at all three sites than
the bucket method. The Californian system produced a 48% higher yield and used 44% less
water than the furrow method. Similarly, the Californian system and the bucket method noted
25% to 40% yield increases. The irrigation frequency for the Californian system was 5-7 days
compared to 3-5 days for the manual systems. Differences in yields are related to soil
characteristics and crop management practices of farmers at three sites. The water and
economic productivities achieved under the Californian system are almost double the
traditional techniques, which shows the superiority of this system over other systems.
The experimental results and the feedback from farmers suggest that the Californian irrigation
system has advantages that justify its recommendation for other areas. The average cost of
the Californian system is around US$ 1200 per ha, which is not affordable for most smallholder
farmers. Therefore, wide-scale adoption of this system would require financial and technical
support to farmers. For these experiments, the project provided good onion seed, which
produces higher yields than neighboring farmer fields. This resulted in higher economic returns
for farmers, and they spent this money to expand the Californian system in other areas. This
implies that the economic viability of this system is linked with higher yields, which can be
achieved by supplying good seeds to the farmers.
The results obtained from all partner countries reveal that Californian and drip irrigation
systems performed significantly better in water use efficiency and crop yields than traditional
furrow and bucket methods. On average, Californian and drip systems' economic and water
productivity was two to three times higher than the conventional irrigation systems. Farmers
showed great interest in these systems and were ready to adopt them to increase their
agricultural productivity. The farmers were seriously concerned about the cost of the drip
system and the operational and maintenance costs (US$ 2000-4000/ha). In contrast, the
Californian system was cheaper to install and easy to maintain (US$ 600-1000/ha) because
most of the material and skills are locally available.
Despite a solid wish to adopt this system, lack of capital was reported as the biggest problem.
Therefore, there is a strong need to make concerted efforts to support farmers both financially
and technically. Along with these irrigation systems, farmers should be provided with improved
crop seeds and market access to maximize their economic returns. This will increase their
incomes, enabling them to extend these technologies to more extensive areas using their
financial resources.
60
7. Crop water requirements and irrigation schedules
7.1 Burkina Faso
The crop water requirements of vegetables were calculated using climatic data from local
meteorological stations for all field sites. FAO's ClimWat 2.0 was used to generate climate
data for two field sites. In contrast, FAO’s CropWat 8.0 software developed data regarding
effective rainfall, crop coefficient (Kc), soil hydraulic parameters, and crop calendar (Table 16).
Crop water requirements (ETc) were calculated using the following equation.
ETc = Kc * ET0
Kc = crop coefficient; ETo = reference evapotranspiration estimated by modified Penman-

Monteith equation; Peff (mm): the effective rainfall was calculated by “FAO / AGLW Method”.
𝐼𝑅𝑛 = 𝐾𝑐 ∗ 𝐸𝑇𝐶 − 𝑃𝑒𝑓𝑓
Table 16. Crop coefficients at different development stages of vegetables (FAO, 1986)
Crops Development stages Period Maximum
(day) Rooting
Initial Development Mid Late
depth (m)
season season
Tomato Kc 0.45 0.75 1.15 0.8 145 0.7 – 1.5
period (day) 30 40 45 25
Pepper Kc 0.75 1.05 1.05 0.8 0.3 - 1
period (day) 35 45 45 30 150
Cabbage Kc 0.45 0.75 1.05 0.9 120 0.4 – 0.5
period (day) 20 25 60 15
Onion bulb Kc 0.5 0.7 1.0 0.8 155 0.3 – 0.5
period (day) 35 45 45 30
Green Kc 0.5 1.05 1.05 0.9 90 0.7
bean period (day) 20 30 30 10
Table 17. Monthly ETo values in the Bobo-Dioulasso region

Month Min Max Humidity Win Sun Rad. ETo
Temp. Temp % km/day hours MJ/m²/day mm/d
January 18.4 32.4 18 277 8.1 19.1 7.26
February 21.2 34.5 20 277 7.9 20.1 7.81
March 23.6 36 26 277 7.6 20.8 8.11
April 24.3 35.5 47 311 6.3 19.2 7.25
May 23.5 34 60 328 7 20 6.44
June 21.8 31.4 71 311 6.8 19.4 5.25
July 21.1 29.7 78 277 5.9 18.1 4.38
August 20.8 29 83 242 4.5 16.2 3.69
September 20.7 29.5 80 207 57 17.9 3.98
October 21.4 33 67 216 7.3 19.5 5.03
November 20.3 33.9 44 199 7.9 18.9 5.69
December 18.5 32.5 25 233 7.8 18.2 6.36
Mean 21.3 32.6 52 363 6.9 18.9 5.94
61
The average monthly ETo in the Bobo-Dioulasso region was 5.94 mm/d. The lowest ETo was
observed during August (3.69 mm/d) and the highest during March (8.11 mm/d) (Table 17).
The average ETo in the Ouahigouya region was found to be 5.56 mm/d. The lowest ETo was
observed during August (4.55 mm/d) and the highest during May (7.08 mm/d) (Table 18).
Table 18. Monthly ETo values in the Ouahigouya region

Month Min Max Humidity Win Sun Rad. ETo
Temp Temp % km/day hours MJ/m²/day mm/d
January 15,9 32,7 25 156 8,1 18,5 5,16
February 18,4 35,9 22 156 8,7 20,8 5,89
March 22;1 38,4 22 156 8 21,2 6,47
April 25,6 40,3 30 156 7,7 21,4 6,80
May 26,7 39,8 44 190 8 21,6 7,08
June 24,9 36,9 60 190 8,1 21,5 6,21
July 23,1 33,5 71 164 7,6 20,8 5,16
August 22,5 32,3 80 138 7,2 20,4 4,55
September 22,6 33,4 79 130 7,5 20,6 4,60
October 22,6 37,1 60 104 8,5 20,8 5,06
November 18,7 36,2 39 112 8,8 19,6 4,97
December 16,3 33,3 30 130 8,2 18 4,73
Mean 21,6 35,8 47 148 8 20,4 5,56
Net water requirements of different vegetables at different field trial sites is given below:
• The net water requirement for tomatoes is 7055 m3/ha; 7055 m3/ha; 7120 m3/ha, and 8692
m3/ha for Zorkoum, Kouni, Kora, and Dandé sites, respectively.
• The net water requirement for cabbage is 7722 m3/ha; 7722 m3/ha; 8331 m3/ha and 10757
• The net water requirement for peppers is 7781 m3/ha; 7781 m3/ha; 7851 m3/ha and 9879
• The net water requirements for the pepper are 9588 m3/ha; 9588 m3/ha; 9815 m3/ha, and
12662 m3/ha for the Zorkoum, Kouni, Kora, and Dandé sites, respectively.
Net water applications to different vegetables at different project field sites is given below:
• The amount of water applied for tomatoes is 10,079 m3/ha in Zorkoum and Kouni
areas, whereas it was 12,417 m3/ha in Dandé and 10,175 m3/ha in Kora area.
• The amount of water applied for cabbage is 11,030 m3/ha in Zorkoum and Kouni areas,
whereas it was 14,533 m3/ha in Dandé and 11,901 m3/ha in Kora areas.
• The amount of water applied for peppers is 11,161 m3/ha in Zorkoum and Kouni areas,
whereas it was 14,113 m3/ha in Dandé and 11,216 m3/ha in Kora areas.
• The amount of water applied for the onion bulb was 9,588 m3/ha in Zorkoum and Kouni
areas, whereas it was 12,662 m3/ha and 9,815 m3/ha for Dandé and Kora areas.
62
Due to water shortage, farmers intentionally under-irrigate their fields to irrigate more area with
the available water. The water application can be significantly reduced by using drip, sprinkler,
and the Californian system. Therefore, it is suggested that farmers use advanced irrigation
methods to optimize their crop yields with the minimum water use. As most of the irrigation
water is pumped from surface streams or groundwater, lower water use for irrigation will
decrease their production cost and increase farm income.
7.2 Mali
Field trials were established for the Californian irrigation system driven by a diesel pump in all
field sites. However, all other activities were carried out in these locations as well. These
include farmer training, organization of farmer field days, calculations of crop water
requirements, and supply of inputs. During the farmer field days, local manufacturers were
invited to contact with the farmers interested in installing this system on their lands. These
manufacturers informed farmers about the cost and accessibility of these systems.
The actual crop water requirements of different vegetable crops grown in these locations were
calculated using locally available climatic data to educate farmers about improving water use
efficiency. This information was passed on to farmers for use in their experiments. Tables 19-
22 show crop water requirements and irrigation schedules for the gardening crops grown in
the Koulikoro and Mopti regions. Thus, in the Koulikoro region, the daily water requirements
of fruit vegetables under drip irrigation from January to April vary from 5 to 7.5 mm/d. The daily
irrigation rate is from 2 to 4 m3/day. In the same region (Koulikoro), tuber vegetables are grown
from January to March under the spray, crop water requirements range from 2.40 to 7 mm/d
for daily irrigation rates of 3 to 8 mm/day.
In the Mopti region, daily irrigation rates to meet the water requirements of all garden crops
during the periods from September to December and then from November to February vary
from 4 to 8 mm/day.
63
Table 19. Water requirements of vegetables in the Koulikoro region
Parameters January February March April
Decade (days) 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
PET (mm/day) 4,7 4,7 4,7 6 6 6 6,6 6,6 6,6 6,6 6,6 6,6
KC 1,25 1,25 1,25 1,25 1,25 0,9 0,9 0,7 0,7 0,7 0,7 0,7
S (ha) 0,05 0,05 0,05 0,05 0,05 0,05 0,05 0,05 0,05 0,05 0,05 0,05
Need Crop water (mm/day) 5,88 5,88 5,88 7,50 7,50 5,40 5,94 4,62 4,62 4,62 4,62 4,62
Total water required (m3/day) 3,08 3,08 3,08 3,94 3,94 2,84 3,12 2,43 2,43 2,43 2,43 2,43
Adjusted Irrigation Dose (mm/day) 6,17 6,17 6,17 7,88 7,88 5,67 6,24 4,85 4,85 4,85 4,85 4,85
Rainfall system or speed (mm/h) 3,33 3,33 3,33 3,33 3,33 3,33 3,33 3,33 3,33 3,33 3,33 3,33
System speed; Rainfall (m3/h) 1,67 1,67 1,67 1,67 1,67 1,67 1,67 1,67 1,67 1,67 1,67 1,67
Duration of irrigation (h/day) 1,9 1,9 1,9 2,4 2,4 1,7 1,9 1,5 1,5 1,5 1,5 1,5
Irrigation time 1h 54 1h 54 1h 54 2h 24 2h 24 1h 42 1h 54 1h 30 1h 30 1h 30 1h 30 1h 30
mn mn mn mn mn mn mn mn mn mn mn mn
Adjusted irrigation (m3/day) or 1000 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 2 2
liters per day and by irrigation
Table 20. Irrigation schedules of vegetables in the Koulikoro region

Parameters January February March
Decade (day) 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
PET (mm/day) 4,7 4,7 4,7 6 6 6 6,6 6,6 6,6
KC 0,5 0,5 1 1 1,1 1 1 0,5 0,5
S (ha) 0,05 0,05 0,05 0,05 0,05 0,05 0,05 0,05 0,05
Need of plant in water (mm/mn) 2,35 2,35 4,70 6,00 6,60 6,00 6,60 3,30 3,30
Adjusted Irrigation Dose (mm/day) 2,82 2,82 5,64 7,20 7,92 7,20 7,92 3,96 3,96
System rainfall (mm/h) 8,62 8,62 8,62 8,62 8,62 8,62 8,62 8,62 8,62
Irrigation duration (h/day) 0,33 0,33 0,65 0,84 0,92 0,84 0,92 0,46 0,46
Irrigation duration (mm/day) 20 20 39 50 55 50 55 28 28
Table 21. Water requirements for different vegetables in the Mopti region
Decade September October November December
1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
ETP (mm/day) 4,9 4,9 4,9 4,7 4,7 4,7 4,7 4,7 4,7 4,1 4,1 4,1
Hydraulic Parameters
Irrigation dose (m3/day/ha) 37 37 58 57 78 78 78 78 78 61 61 49
Irrigation dose (mm/day/ha) 4 4 6 6 8 8 8 8 8 6 6 5
Irrigation duration (hour/day/ha) with 2 2 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3

motor-pump de 36 m3/hour
Irrigation duration (hour/day/ha) motor 2 2 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3
pump de 35 m3/hour
Irrigation dose (liters/2 days/ha) with pump 73 000 73 000 116 800 113 806 156 484 156 484 156 484 156 484 156 484 121 935 121 935 97 548
motor 36 and 35 m3/hrs.
Irrigation dose (liter/2 days) on an average 3 3 5 5 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 4
elementary area of 0.42 m2
(70 cm x 60 cm)
Irrigation dose (liter/2 days) on an average 365 365 584 569 782 782 782 782 782 610 610 488
elementary area of 50 m2
(25m x 2m)
Duration of irrigation (minute/day) for an 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2
irrigation frequency of 2 days with a motor
pump of 36 m3/hour on an area of 50 m2
Duration of irrigation (minute/day) for an 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2
pump of 35 m3 / hour on an area of 50 m2
65
Table 22. Irrigation schedules for vegetables in the Mopti region
Decade November December January February
1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
ETP (mm/day) 4,7 4,7 4,7 4,1 4,1 4,1 4,6 4,6 4,6 5,6 5,6 5,6
Hydraulic Parameters
Irrigation dose (m3/day/ha) 35 35 56 49 67 67 76 76 76 84 84 67
Irrigation dose (mm/day/ha) 4 4 6 5 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 7
Irrigation duration (hour/day/ha) with 2 2 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 4
motor-pump de 36 m3/hour
Irrigation duration (hour/day/ha) motor 2 2 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 4
pump de 35 m3/hour
Irrigation dose (liters/2 days/ha) with 70 500 70 500 112 800 97 548 134 129 134 129 151 161 151 161 151 161 167 143 167 143 133 714
pump motor 36 and 35 m3/hrs.
Irrigation dose (liter / 2 days) on an 3 3 5 4 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 6
average elementary area of 0.42 m2
(70 cm x 60 cm)
Irrigation dose (liter / 2 days) on an 353 353 564 488 671 671 756 756 756 836 836 669
average elementary area of 50 m2
(25m x 2m)
Duration of irrigation (minute / day) for an 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 2
pump of 36 m3 / hour on an elementary
area of 50 m2
Duration of irrigation (minute / day) for an 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 2
pump of 35 m3 / hour on an elementary
area of 50 m2
66
7.3 Niger
Under this project, actual crop water requirements to grow different vegetable crops in different
regions have been calculated using locally available climatic data. This information is provided to
the local farmers, irrigation technicians, and extension workers to educate farmers. Training has
also been organized to calculate crop water requirements to develop this information for other
crops grown in the area. This information is vital for smallholder farmers because they are still
using traditional irrigation methods based on the philosophy of “more water more crop” instead of
“more crop per drop”. The project team developed extension material in the local languages to
educate them on crop water requirements for different vegetables.
7.4 Senegal
In the Sanente village, a small meteorological station was installed to collect climatic data to
calculate actual crop water requirements and irrigation scheduling of different crops.
Installation of weather station in the Sanente village
In the Niayes zone, minimum and maximum potential evapotranspiration (Penman) values are
estimated to be ~ 4.5 mm day-1 during the dry, calm, and 6 mm day-1 during the warm season.
The minimum and maximum values of crop evapotranspiration (ETmax and ETmin) of the most
grown crops in the Niayes zone are given in Table 23.
Table 23. Evapotranspiration values of different crops in Niayes zone of Mali

Crop Kc-min Kc-max ETmin ETmax
(-) (-) (mm day−1) (mm day−1)
Tomatoes 0.7 1.15 3.2 6.9
Onion 0.7 1.05 3.2 6.3
Cabbage 0.7 1.05 3.2 6.3
Carrot 0.7 1.05 3.2 6.3
Eggplant 0.7 1.05 3.2 6.3
Sweet potato 0.7 1.15 3.2 6.9
67
In the Sanente village, climate data were used to develop irrigation schedules, which can be used
in other farmer fields such as the Women Farmer Group and producers in a nearby village like
Mbane, Nder, and Mbayene western bank of the Gueirs Lake. Data obtained from this station was
used to determine irrigation amounts for pepper for three-day scheduling (Table 24).
Table 24. Irrigation requirements of Pepper with a three days schedule

Date ETo ETc Adjusted Net Irrigation Gross Irrigation Irrigation
(mm) (mm) Water Deficit Water demand Water demand duration
(mm) (mm) (mm) (min)
01/11 4.57 2.74 5.25 0 0 0
02/11 4.39 2.63 7.88 0 0 0
03/11 3.08 1.85 9.73 0 0 0
04/11 4.55 2.73 10.5 10.5 12.35 247
05/11 4.68 2.81 2.81 0 0 0
06/11 4.28 2.57 5.38 0 0 0
07/11 4.74 2.84 8.22 8.22 9,67 193.4
In Senegal, ISRA has also developed a simple model for calculating crop water requirements
based on the global climatic data, which can be accessed free of cost. This model was shared
with the researchers in the other three countries to calculate crop water requirements in their
respective locations. The model is still not available to farmers as it has copy rights.
68
8. Economic analysis of different irrigation systems
8.1 Benefit-Cost ratio of different crops
A detailed study was conducted to calculate the benefit-cost ratio of different crops grown under
different irrigation systems in Mali. The capital cost of irrigation systems was calculated at the
prevailing market rate. The summarized results on running cost, duration to maturity, yield, and
market information in the production of potatoes, tomatoes, and shallots in the various irrigation
systems are presented in Table 25.
Table 25. Production costs and prices of vegetables (1 US$ - 500 FCFA)
Parameters Crops Tomato Potato Shallot
Running costs Seeds 399,916 750,200 150,150

Manure 125,400 125,000 120,000
Fertilizers 150,050 212,540 206,420
Pesticides 95,000 175,127 70,564
Labor 250,000 415,625 350,061
Transportation 125,000 125,000 115,372
Other costs 2,530 5,050 3,040
Duration to Vegetative cycle (month) 2 to 3 3 to 4 3 to 4
maturity and Yield (t/ha) 10 to 40 25 70
yield
Marketing Producers (Fcfa/kg) 150 125 to 275 100
Market (Fcfa/kg) 500 156 to 533 400
Return Gross (Fcfa/ha) 37,500,000 34,450,000 112,000,000
Net 36,377,500 32,644,375 110,992,000
The discount rate used must be the real interest rate. The present value of the benefits and costs
are discounted at 13% back to time zero since the interest rate on long-term bonds is 18% and
the inflation rate is 5%. The results of BCR of the three irrigation systems for different vegetables
are given in Table 26.
Table 26. Comparison of BCR of the different irrigation systems for vegetables
Benefi-Cost Ratio (BCR)
Irrigation systems Potatoes Shallots Tomatoes Mean
California system 1.899 2.124 2.147 2.086
Drip irrigation system 1.964 2.825 2.948 2.579
Sprinkler irrigation system 1.727 2.252 2.375 2.118
(Calculated F-Value (4,269) = 11.15, P-value = 0.001, Critical F-Ratio (2,267) = 3.03)
Table 26 shows that the BCR of all irrigation systems (California, Drip, and Sprinkler) is greater
than unity (1), which implies that they lead to greater benefits than costs. The advantages
69
compared to costs are highest in the drip system (BCR = 2.579), followed by sprinkler (BCR =
2.118) and the California system (2.086). The test of differences in average BCR of the various
irrigation systems was performed using one-way ANOVA. The calculated F-value of 11.15 was
more significant than the Critical F-ratio of 3.03. This implies that the average BCR for the selected
irrigation systems differed significantly from the drip (2.579), yielding the highest BCR scores.
This was followed by Sprinkler (2.118) and Californian (2.086), respectively.
The BCR analysis was also done for cabbage for the Garalo site, where the Californian system
was installed with the solar pump. The irrigation systems used in this area include buckets and
watering canes adopted by 31% of the market gardeners and the Californian system adopted by
69% of the market gardeners. The comparison was made for one hectare of land. Table 27
presents the results of benefit-cost analysis for cabbage.
The total operating expenses for the bucket system (585,883) were 21% higher than the
Californian irrigation system (457,586). The crop yield with the Californian system was 143%
higher than the manual system. The net margin with the Californian irrigation system was FCFA
4,959,334 compared to FCFA 1,362,061 for the manual irrigation system. The net margin per kg
was FCFA 158 for Californian system compared to FCFA 106 for the manual irrigation system.
The results show that the benefits of growing vegetables under the Californian system are much
higher than the common practice of manual irrigation systems. The production cost of cabbage
manual irrigation system was FCFA 45 per kg compared to only FCFA 15 per kg for the Californian
irrigation system. This clearly shows that farmers can earn up to three times more profit by
growing vegetables by adopting the Californian system, mainly due to lower production costs. In
addition, farmers are relieved of the hassle of bringing fuel for pumps from nearby towns and
maintaining pumps over time. This way, farmers can save plenty of time, which can be utilized in
other farm activities.
Adopting drip, sprinkling, and Californian technologies ensure that crops do not suffer from the
water stress and help grow high yielding crop varieties due to consistent irrigation water supply.
When irrigation farming is practiced, the outcome is credited with increased production and timely
yields that can fetch better prices. These technologies are more likely to lead to more significant
benefits than costs because irrigation and the simultaneous expansion of irrigated area results in
numerous direct and indirect benefits.
Irrigation helps to increase agricultural production by two to three times higher. It helps to better
utilize the land for agriculture. Farmers can also benefit from high-valued cash crops whose
supply usually is not uniform throughout the year. The yields are stable and reliable from the
irrigated fields, and assured production targets can be met. There are reduced fluctuations in the
year-to-year products and the risk of crop failure due to drought. Irrigation allows for continuous
cultivation.
70
Table 27. Comparison of BCR for cabbage for Californian and manual irrigation systems
Categories All values in FCFA
Manual irrigation Californian irrigation
system system
Cost of seed 49,741 65,853
MIneral fertilizer 43,517 47,298
Organic fertilizer 43,586 41,533
Herbicides 8,977 10,768
Insecticides 12,000 15,939
Petrol cost 67,500 0
Engine oil cost 33,712 0
Operational cost 141,850 119,195
Irrigation water cost 140,000 112,000
Soil preparation costs (plowing, spreading, 25,000 25,000
harrows, etc.)
Maintenance cost 20,000 20,000
Total operating expenses 585,883 457,586
Sales price per kg 188 188
Total yield (kg) 12,888 31,340
Value of production 2,422,944 5,891,920
Gross margin 1,837,061 5,434,334
Amortization 475,000 475,000
Net margin 1,362,061 4,959,334
Charges par Kg 45 15
Net margin par Kg 106 158
8.2 Economic efficiency of the motor pump and solar pump
The technical and economic efficiency of a motor and solar pump was evaluated at Dandé site.
The motor pump is used for gravity irrigation, whereas the Californian system with solar pump
was the project intervention. The data for this study were collected from an onion field.
Irrigation with motor pump
• Water availability with motor pump is 60 m3/h. The flow rate can reach up to10 m3/h.
• The irrigable area is 428 m2/h (0.0428 ha/h) or 3424 m2/day with 8 hours of pumping.
• The maximum volume of water pumping is 480 m3/day in 8 h of operation
• The net dose measured by the irrigator is 233 m3/ha.
• The fuel consumption by pump is 1.5 liter/hour (FCFA 1050/hour or $1.76/hour).
71
Irrigation with solar pump
• The lifting system is a LORENS solar pump with an average flow rate of 1.25 m3/h between
8-12 am and 2.1 m3/h between 12 - 3.30 pm.
• The irrigable surface area in one hour is 68.5 m2/h or 522 m2/day (8 hours of pumping).
• The probable pumping volume per day is 12.8 m3.
• The net dose measured by the irrigator is 233 m3/ha.
Flow rate and pumping cost with motor pump and solar pump
The maximum water supplied by the solar system is 12.2 m3/day or 366 m3/month, with 8 hr/day
pumping in the peak water-demand period.
A comparison of farmers’ irrigation practice with motor and solar pumps is given in Table 28.
72
Table 28. Comparison of motor and solar pumps
Farmer practice Irrigation practice
(with motor pump) (with the solar system)
Water flow Constant flow rate of 10 m3/h, but Flow rate varies with sunshine
can go up to 60 m3/h.
Area irrigated (m2/h) 428 65.2
Area irrigable (m2/day) 3424 (8 h of pumping) 521.6 (8 h of pumping)
Irrigation time per day 8 h/day operation with possibility to 8 h/day with no possibility to irrigate
irrigate at any time during day. during low sunshine and night.
Total water lifting per 480 m3 12.17 m3
day
Table 29. Advantages and disadvantages of motor and solar pumps

Solar pump Motor pump
Advantages No fuel charge • High flow rate
• Low cost of ownership
($168/pump motor pump)
Disadvantages • High acquisition cost of the motor High fuel charge
pump and solar plates ($2,837)
• Low flow rate for sheet irrigation
• Risk of equipment theft
The solar pump for water lifting can reduce production costs and improve food security and
farmers' income. However, because of extreme poverty, only projects can currently equip farmer
fields with solar pumps. The average price of a motor pump is US$ 168 compared to US$ 2,837
for a 2.3 m3/h solar pump. The solar pump remains a technology currently inaccessible to farmers
without the support of state or project subsidies. Therefore, government support would be needed
to support the adoption of solar pumps by smallholder farmers. The local production of solar
pumps may help in reducing costs. For this purpose, the private sector can play an important role;
therefore, their involvement should be encouraged.
73
9. Knowledge sharing and capacity building
9.1 Burkina Faso
During this project, several technical training and field demonstrations for farmers and extension
workers were organized at the project locations. Farmers were briefed about different aspects of
the Californian irrigation system and the working of the solar pump. Farmers (especially women)
took a keen interest in these systems and asked to extend this facility in their areas. Farmers
reported that the most significant advantage of these systems was that it makes crop production
possible in the dry period of the year. The primary concern reported by farmers was the cost of
solar pumps, which is beyond their reach. The farmers showed a willingness to pay back loans if
they were provided loans on easy interest rates from the government or other funding agencies.
The group discussion with farmers reveals that the government should facilitate the access of SSI
technologies to farmers. These may include:
• The rehabilitation of irrigation and drainage systems in the country.

• Facilitate farmers’ access to equipment (motor pump, piping, solar pumps, drip systems)
through subsidy or soft loans.
• The market companies may set up processing units and storage facilities for vegetables
as they are highly perishable.
Farmer Field Days at different locations in Burkina Faso
9.2 Mali
This project has been included in the National Proximity Irrigation Program (PNIP) of Mali, which
focuses on strengthening the resilience of rural populations against climate change, youth
migration, and food insecurity in the country. This is being done by equipping 80% of the farmers
with SSI technologies. In this context, market gardening plays a vital role in diversifying the
peoples’ dietary habits and increasing the producers' income. This justifies an increase in areas
planted with the SSI technologies for vegetable production. During the project, it was realized that
the direct involvement of neighboring farmers was helpful to get them enthusiastic about this
project and expressed their wish to extend this project's scope to other areas.
74
Several technical training and Farmer Field days (FFDs) were organized at different sites in Mali.
Farmers, especially women, took a keen interest in the training and field demonstration, as they
are mainly involved in small-scale irrigation to home gardens. Farmers were more attracted to the
Californian system due to low cost and ease of maintenance. Since most of the material used in
this system is locally available, farmers do not have to engage sale agents to access these
systems. Training on micro-irrigation systems and good water management practices for farmers
were also organized.
Farmer Field Days at the Garalo site in Mali.
9.3 Niger
The technical expertise about small-scale irrigation technologies in Niger is limited. Therefore, the
project organized several training and field demonstrations for farmers. During these events,
farmers can discuss their issues with the experts and learn from other farmers. Apart from the
training, farmers are also involved in monitoring solar pumps to evaluate their technical and
economic feasibility before they can be propagated on a large scale. One of the main problems
is that the initial installation cost of these pumps is high and beyond the economic reach of
smallholder farmers. If proved successful, the government must develop a policy to financially
support farmers through subsidies or interest-free loans to buy these pumps. Meetings with
policymakers were also arranged to discuss possible incentives for the farmers.
Farmer Field Days at different locations in Niger.
75
9.4 Senegal
The knowledge sharing and capacity building activities carried out in Senegal were as follows:
1. Technical training on on-farm irrigation and water management

2. Specialized training on soil and crop management
3. Training on the installation, operation, and maintenance of different irrigation systems
4. Special training for women on seed cleaning, storage, and preservation
These training events were attended by farmers, extension workers, and irrigation technicians.
The training courses were articulated around different modules covering different aspects of
irrigation management. The modules were based on theoretical lectures, class exercises, field
visits, and brainstorming/discussion sessions.
Farmer Field Days (FFDs) were also organized to disseminate project outcomes to larger farming
communities. Farmers of the neighboring villages attended these FFDs. They were keen to learn
about new irrigation and soil and crop management techniques to improve agricultural
productivity. Farmers were introduced to local manufacturers to get first-hand information about
the availability of material for installing these systems, along with the costs.
Figure 11: Dr Sall and Mr Modou Sène (technician) giving onion seed to Mr Djibril Mbaye, partner
Farmer Field Days at different locations
farmer in Mbayènein Senegal
village on November 22
During the project's life, 920 extension workers and irrigation experts were trained in the target
countries. For the training of farmers, 20 farmer field days were organized at regular intervals.
Farmers were educated on SSI technologies and solar systems. During the field demonstration,
11,475 farmers visited trial sites to get information about these technologies.
The field survey shows that the Californian system was installed at more than 50,000 ha in all
four target countries. This coverage may be higher as we surveyed the only limited area in each
country. The adoption of the solar system was low due to its cost. A summary of the involvement
of farmers in training, field demonstrations, and scaling up is given in Table 30.
76
Table 30. Summary of trainings and field demonstrations organized during this project
Project activities Burkina Faso Mali Niger Senegal Total
No. of extension workers trained 220 272 204 224 920
Farmers attended field demonstrations 2875 3000 2750 2850 11,475
Adoption of Californian system (ha) 12,000 15,275 10,680 14,530 52,485
No. of FFSs established 4 5 6 5 20
No. of training materials developed 2 2 1 2 7
No. of brainstorming sessions organized 4 5 5 4 18
No. of PhD/MSc students supported 1 1 0 0 2
No. of articles published 1 1 1 1 4
A manual for the Californian system used for training of farmers in Senegal and other countries.
77
10. Strategies for small-scale irrigation development in SSA
Water has been a constraint to agricultural development in West Africa, but not necessarily
because of low availability but due to lack of irrigation infrastructure. This constraint is widely
recognized by the New Program for Agricultural Development (NEPAD) in Africa and strongly
reflected in Pillar 1 (agricultural water control and development) of its Comprehensive African
Agricultural Development Program (CAADP). This constraint has been felt in all West African
countries, especially those in the Sahel. Innovative water management practices and
technologies are needed to realize the targets of CAADP and to maximize water availability to
crops at appropriate times of year. Most irrigation technologies are now widely available in West
Africa and elsewhere on the continent. What is required is an adaptation, scaling-up, and
dissemination for use on a sustainable basis by poor rural communities.
Small-scale irrigation is understood in the context of either informal smallholder irrigation with
limited irrigation infrastructure and technology, or small-scale community water control, which
goes beyond conventional large-scale irrigation. Small-scale agriculture is the predominant form
of agriculture on the continent, and that the majority is currently undertaken without organized or
adequate water control. The strategic priority is to improve the reliability of these production
systems – not only where rainfall is low but also where it is unreliable- to allow dry-season crop
production. Where rainfall is low and unpredictable, enhancement may be possible by
supplementary irrigation from water harvesting. With some 60% of production reliant on rain-fed
production, the overriding requirement for resource-poor farmers is to overcome erratic rainfall
and harvest sufficient foodstuff to ensure the households' nutrition.
The strategic priority for small-scale community water control embraces the three general types:
water harvesting and soil and water conservation; inland valley/wetland cultivation; and small-
scale community of smallholder irrigation in rural and peri-urban areas. Small-scale community
water control embraces a range of options that extend from the most rudimentary of mulching and
contour bunds to community vegetable gardens supplied from pumped groundwater, with various
water distribution options.
The 2008 food crisis re-legitimized the intervention and showed the risks of a high level of
dependence on food imports (including rice). Climate change and demographic dynamics have
also led the West African states and their financial partners to reinvest in agriculture, especially
irrigation. In 2013, the governments of Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, and Senegal appealed for
investment in the irrigation sector to increase the irrigated area to one million ha by 2020, at a
total cost of $7 billion. The World Bank supported this Initiative Sahel (IS) program. The Program
suffered a delay and started only in 2017.
As in many other parts of the continent, erratic rainfall creates uncertainty for rainfed agricultural
producers in the four target countries. This uncertainty complicates the planning and execution of
national agricultural development programs and the implementation of effective policies to
78
optimize the allocation of scarce resources. In many instances, severe food shortages are
attributed to extreme climatic events, including floods, and more often, droughts. The role of
irrigation in reducing the risks associated with rainfed agriculture has long been recognized in the
Sahel. Therefore, water storage and distribution techniques for food production and the
conservation of the environment have become highly relevant.
The population growth rate in the West African countries is above 2.5% with increasing food
requirements. Rainfed farming is responsible for 58% of food production in Africa (FAO, 2015)
and 99% production of the main cereals, such as maize, millet, and sorghum in SSA (Wani et al.,
2009). The water and irrigation development remain an indispensable constituent of the overall
strategy for increasing food production.
The four target countries of this project are among the poorest countries in the world and have
underdeveloped economies. These countries fall under the low-income category (GNP per capita
of Burkina: $822.3; Mali: $793.5; Niger: $558.4; Senegal: $1584.5) (World Bank, 2015). Despite
high irrigation potential, the proportion of the irrigated area formally developed is the world’s
lowest (between 1 and 6.8% of the potential). The distribution of potential and actual irrigation
land in the project countries as distributed in the basins is presented in Figure 17.
600
500
400
(x 1000 ha)
300
200
100
0
Burkina Faso Mali Niger Senegal
Actual Planned
Figure 17. Potential and actual irrigated area in the target countries
Farmers in these countries derive their income from rainfed agriculture that is highly linked to the
vagaries of climate change. Therefore, development of irrigated agriculture is central to make
crop production resilient to the high vagaries of climate. The irrigation development will increase
crop water availability, secure production, and control soil erosion and salinization problems. In
all countries, the development of viable and sustainable large and small-scale irrigation systems
is considered a strategic response to contribute to food security and income generation. However,
there are several constraints in the development of irrigation systems in these countries.
79
10.1 Farmers’ perceptions about small-scale irrigation technologies
During the last year of the project, an impact evaluation survey was conducted in all partner
countries. For this survey, a comprehensive questionnaire was developed and pre-tested in the
field. The survey data was analyzed to document farmers’ perceptions about the performance of
different irrigation technologies introduced by this project. The results indicate that the exposure
to improved cultural practices for irrigated crops was considered as the most important benefit
derived from the project because this helps farmers increase their productivity which in turn
improved their income and standard of living. Formation of women farmer groups was also highly
appreciated because this helps them to share scarce water resources and establish links with
sources of genuine farm inputs and markets. During the survey, farmers also highlighted their
concerns regarding constraints in improving agricultural productivity and farm incomes.
This survey results showed a great satisfaction by the farming community about the SSI
technologies. The farmers also realized true benefits of these technologies and demanded that
more work should be done to improve farmer access to these technologies. These include
provision of technical and financial assistance and availability of improved seeds. Farmers were
convinced that these interventions will enhance their agricultural productivity and farm incomes.
However, high costs of engines, pumps and lack of funds were described as the major bottlenecks
in the adoption of these technologies by farmers. They stressed the need for credit facilities on
soft conditions from government or other financial organizations to acquire these technologies.
Farmer preferences of irrigation technologies Challenges in the adoption of irrigation technology
More than 70% farmers think that better access to funds would accelerate the adoption of these
technologies. For this to happen, reduction in the installation costs of these technologies and
making maintenance costs affordable would be inevitable. This objective can be achieved through
the involvement of private sector in the local manufacturing of pumps and equipment used in
these irrigation systems. Manufacturers of low-cost equipment face a host of problems. Their
knowledge for technology development limited and government policies are more focused on crop
and livestock research and little attention is given to support agricultural engineering.
80
Improving pump manufacturing capacity and availability of imported equipment and spares at
affordable costs can help increase crop productivity while providing resilience against erratic
rainfall patterns of SSA. The national governments need to formulate policies to facilitate private
equipment manufacturers, importers of spares and providers of maintenance services. The Asian
countries (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh) have revolutionized their irrigated agriculture through
increased access to irrigation and energy. In these countries, electricity and diesel supply for
agriculture was supplied at discount rates and import of irrigation pumps were heavily subsidized.
These policies increased agricultural production making them self-sufficient in food despite
growing concerns that indiscriminate use of energy for irrigation is causing environmental
problems. The SSA countries may also follow these models to revitalize agriculture.
In SSA countries, farm products are generally sold in the local markets where buyers come from
the nearby big towns and neighboring countries. Prices are negotiated directly in the fields or in
the local market and the products are immediately removed. This system does not benefit farmers
because they are forced to sell their product at low price due to limited access to big markets and
lack of storage facilities. Lack of market information restrict farmers to transport their produce to
distant areas due to the fear of market saturation. Improving road infrastructure can enhance
market access, which may lead to increased farm gate prices by lowering transactions costs.
Smallholder farmers also need help to fortify processing activities to reduce post-harvest losses
and earn better price in the market. In countries such as Mali and Senegal, few farmers have
contracts with exporters, which allows them to earn competitive profits.
Farmers may be encouraged to form cooperatives or farmer to afford installation of expensive

equipment for shared benefits. Farmer groups may acquire bank loans and establish links with
sources of genuine farm inputs and markets. This will reduce poverty at the community and
household levels and contribute positively to overall national economy. However, this process
needs strong motivation because experience in Kenya has shown that farmers often pool their
resources to pay for conveyance systems but are extremely reluctant to share irrigation pumps.
The crop yields in smallholder farms of SSA are far lower than regional and international
standards. In addition to lower water availability, poor soil fertility, low fertilizer application rates
and use of poor-quality seed are the major contributing factors. Smallholder farmers of SSA are
in desperate need of good quality seed to enhance their agricultural productivity. Low soil fertility
problem can partially be solved by micro-dosing of fertilizers with sufficient farmyard manure and
organic matter. Farmer need to be educated in integrated nutrient management, which involves
timely application of nitrogen as per crop demand and irrigation schedules.
The accessibility to better quality seed is the key to narrow down potential and existing yield gaps
and reduce post-harvest losses with minimal spoilage during storage; unlike the local varieties
which mature late, produce low yields, and do not withstand stress during handling and long-
distance transportation. Better quality produce therefore earns good market price. This advocates
that economic viability of improved irrigation systems is directly linked with the provision of good
quality seed to the farmers.
81
10.2 Constraints and limitations for SSI development in SSA
The main constraints related to the development of irrigation are: (i) high cost of construction and
rehabilitation of large and medium-sized perimeters, (ii) technical and economic problems in
mobilizing groundwater resources, (iii) siltation of reservoirs and streams due to water erosion
and poor cultural practices, (iv) poor condition of water infrastructures and the degradation of the
vicinity of reservoirs and reservoirs, (v) the mismatch between inland valley hydrological
development and regime, (vi) lack of regulations for water withdrawals from water bodies; (vii)
use of many temporary water sources or low flows of many water structures, (vii) difficult access
to water for animals often results in conflicts between farmers and herders, and (viii)
malfunctioning of water bodies and lack of maintenance of facilities.
The main constraints related to the development of small-scale irrigation schemes and agricultural
water management are: (i) rainfall hazards jeopardizing the filling of small water-harvesting
structures and depletion of soils under irrigation due to the low use of organic fertilizers, (ii) poor
control of irrigation techniques by farmers, (iii) non-compliance with the crop calendar by different
farmers, (iv) high cost of equipment, (v) accessibility of equipment In local markets, (vi) insufficient
agricultural equipment and limited access to good quality credits and seeds, (vii) secondary
salinization of soils, (viii) overexploitation of watersheds resulting in the degradation of soil fertility
through intensive double-cropping systems, (ix) pollution of surface and ground water resources,
(x) persistent land issues (many producers do not own their plots) which limits investments in the
maintenance of soil fertility, and (xi) limited availability of water.
Land issues are critical to the development and success of smallholder irrigation schemes. Land
problems faced by potential private irrigators are very different from country to country with other
proposed solutions. In Mali, obtaining land titles (topographical plan, red tape, and taxes) is
subsidized; this component has been hijacked to the extent that some subsidies have not invested
in irrigation. In Burkina Faso, DIPAC (Pilot Project for the Development of Private Irrigation and
Related Activities) supports potential homeowners without subsidies. In Niger, the law recognizes
customary ownership of land with a title to the property. In Senegal, though the land tenure system
exists, the land belongs to the state, the only entity that can deliver a title.
Other constraints that inhibit the growth of small-scale irrigation in SSA include (i) the low
involvement of credit institutions, (ii) the slow processing of contracts by donors (iii) the lack of
partners for the financing of development and rehabilitation, (iv) lack of human resources for the
proper technical supervision of producers, (v ) the low level of professionalization of the actors of
irrigated agriculture (producers, upstream and downstream actors), (vi) incompatibility with the
process of the transfer of the management of irrigated perimeters.
The major technical and institutional constraints and limitations in SSI development in SSA are
given below.
82
1. High cost of equipment and lack of technical skills.
2. Lack of funding to develop irrigation. National financial institutions provide virtually no
long-term financing to enable the development of private irrigation.
3. The preliminary design of irrigated systems and poor maintenance and management
of the irrigation infrastructure often leads to their abandonment.
4. Limited access to rural markets, credit, and maintenance services.
5. Inadequate monitoring and coordination capacity due to understaffing and low levels
of training, logistical problems, and low pay levels.
6. Non-functional consultation frameworks at the local, regional, and national levels.
7. The current strategies for agricultural production, conservation, and processing of farm
products results in high transaction costs, fewer market opportunities, and inadequate
consultation between public and private actors.
8. There is no coordination at the national and regional levels despite the problems
associated with the jurisdictional conflict.
9. Existing land-tenure laws discourage farmers from investing in irrigation schemes.
10. Agricultural production developed on irrigated perimeters is grouped into two main
categories: (i) irrigated cereal production where rice is mainly dominant, with some
experiments on maize and sorghum in inland valleys; and (ii) horticultural production
dominated by onion and tomato. Investment efforts have focused on maximizing
irrigated cereal production without considering the economic cost of this approach.
10.3 Institutional and policy constraints and interventions
(a) Consolidating the legal basis for building economically viable farms
Although the national law does not recognize the land as an economic good, it is increasingly
becoming a scarce resource. Suppose one chooses to irrigate a plot of a viable size (one hectare
on average). In that case, it will be necessary for him to respond to two problems: the recovery of
plots of developed perimeters that are not currently cultivated and the revision of allocations within
the boundaries to ensure coherent operations. Current regulations determine the appropriate
bodies and procedures for various stakeholders to access irrigable land. The rules should be
revisited to protect access to irrigable land for the potential stakeholders.
It is necessary to develop a framework for interventions to the various public and private actors
involved in irrigated agriculture. This should include provisions relating to the (i) definition and
control of development based on the capacity to supply water to the parcel; (ii) the
decommissioning and reallocation of undeveloped stocked plots; and (iii) a mechanism to pay
back investments to the people wishing to leave their lands.
(b) Review of water management procedures
The review should focus on two points: (i) the easing of administrative procedures by limiting the
authorization; (ii) the reconciliation of users' water management (the public water law which
83
involves the central and decentralized administration. In the local context, it is difficult to get the
farmer to admit that water has a price, and therefore charging for water may be difficult. It would
be desirable creating local funds fueled by a percentage of the levy to be determined. These funds
would be allocated to social investments such as water, health, and education).
(c) Institutional orientations
There is a need to take corrective measures to address the institutional constraints identified, with
the threefold concern: (i) clarification in the division of roles of the decentralized institutions, (ii)
better adequacy of the means and powers of the decentralized communities, and (iii) a more
adapted structuring of the peasant world. There is a need to develop framework defining the area
of intervention of each of the partners involved in developing SSI. The technical guidance about
these systems is either non-existing or unavailable at the time of need.
(d) Investment policy
The investment policy would include the categorization of irrigation investments, the technical
design of the facilities, and the financing methods differentiated by the type of beneficiaries.
✓ Categorize investment by type of development and development zone.

✓ Establish technical standards and an effective monitoring system for their application.
✓ Promote and monitor the performance of specific investment management provisions.
✓ Ensure recapitalization of the agricultural sector.
(e) Agricultural investment valuation policy
The agricultural investment policy should include the interests of producers, processors, and
traders to develop cooperation and a fair distribution of risks, profits, rights, and duties.
✓ Focus on high-value market speculation and increase the intensities of rice systems.
✓ Focus on diversification of production.
✓ Ensure competitive prices to farmers.
✓ Provide specialized advisory support to the irrigator.
(f) Environmental policy
Proposals in this area aim to introduce a natural environment (which is currently lacking) into the
development process of small-scale irrigation to planning bodies and investors:
- Establish and enforce specific environmental standards by homogeneous zone, and

systematize, for any development study, the identification of ecological constraints
induced by investments and the mandatory implementation of the corrective actions.
- Public investments need to be distributed judicially for the structural development of areas
weakened by climate change and/or soil degradation and SSI development.
-
84
(g) Policy of integrating women into the development of small-scale irrigation
The following strategic proposals should be part of the overall agricultural development policy and
consider the need for the involvement of all stakeholders in the sector, particularly women,
depending on its essential place in this sector:
➢ Systematically apply the gender approach to small irrigation development programs.

➢ Strengthen women's participation in preparing, implementing, and monitoring small
irrigation development programs/projects.
➢ Strengthen women's participation in preparing, implementing, and monitoring small
irrigation development programs/projects.
➢ Focus on informing and training women in irrigation schedules.
➢ Strengthen the structures of women irrigators.
10.4 Strategic approaches for SSI development in SSA
The future of irrigation in SSA will be governed by decisive external factors, such as rapid urban
growth, climate change, and land acquisitions. Farmers’ ability to adapt to this context will depend
on the agricultural, energy, and land policies that the respective governments will implement. Vast
areas are experiencing new dynamics, especially in Senegal, Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger
through private agro-industries and individual small systems, with or without the support of
governments (Sonou and Abric 2010; Bélières et al., 2013).
With the climate and physical resources available, and given the economic opportunities for
specific agricultural sectors, the small-scale irrigation could contribute: (i) to reduce the current
deficit in certain products (including horticultural); and (ii) to develop exciting initiatives to promote
export to regional and international markets. Agricultural production developed on irrigated
perimeters is grouped into two main categories: (i) irrigated cereal production where rice is mainly
dominant, with some experiments on maize and sorghum in inland valleys; and (ii) horticultural
production largely dominated by onion and tomato.
Irrigated cereal production (including rice) accounts for most of the developed areas in the study
countries. The main zones of paddy rice production are located along temporary and permanent
rivers and created inland valleys. In any study country, the total rice production barely satisfied
the national demand, making respective countries highly dependent on imports. In Senegal, for
example, the average national paddy production covers a small share (20%) of the national
consumption (500,000 tons/year), and the difference is imported, mainly from Asia. Cereal
production has significantly increased in the four countries with the development of irrigation
schemes, the introduction of new high-yielding varieties, and the institutional and financial reforms
of the irrigation sector.
The data shows a continuous increase in the output over 2005-15, especially in the cultivation of
tubers and horticulture products for export in Senegal and Burkina Faso. It can therefore be
85
pointed out that irrigated production has contributed significantly to food security in various forms
as it: (i) is used as an alternative to food to household food stock; (ii) generates revenue used to
purchase cereals during the welding period; (iii) improves the nutritional status of populations by
providing certain vegetables and other foods rich in vitamins.
Many conflicts remain between the technical services of the State and technological services and
civil society (NGOs, projects). For example, many rice irrigated or market gardening perimeters
are carried out on external financing under the guidance of NGOs or state projects whose support
in terms of advice for development (extension) is not well done by the Directorate of Agriculture.
The reasons given are the lack of human and material resources, the non-involvement in the
upstream process. The only valid explanation would be the lack of consultation for a better set of
roles and responsibilities of each. It remains clear that state support for communities remains
sustainable while interventions by technical and financial partners are limited in time and space.
The economic profitability of irrigated rice is limited, among other things, by the characteristics of
the socio-economic environment related to the size of the plots, the difficulty of improving
marketing, a lack of capacity and initiative to channel rural savings towards productive agricultural
investments, and finally, a limited supply of financial products in line with the needs of producers.
The investments have focused on maximizing irrigated cereal production without considering the
economic cost of this approach. The lack of economic competitiveness of irrigated rice farming,
the substitution of imports for domestic production, the imbalance between urban and rural
demand for rice, the lack of capital accumulation, and self-financing are clear indicators of an
inefficient economic allocation of resources. Added to these are the constraints associated with
poor financial services and a lack of structuring of the supplying sectors to give a rather negative
framework for irrigated agriculture.
The strategic approach for developing smallholder irrigation can be strengthened by:
❖ the inclusion and accountability of all public and private actors involved in the development
of irrigated agriculture. These include producers, suppliers, processors, transporters,
distributors, research, extension institutions, and funding institutions.
❖ valuing the comparative advantages of regions where smallholder irrigation has a high
potential through the implementation of agricultural investment plans.
❖ promoting the various sectors for the collection of farm products in well-defined regions
for processing and marketing while providing facilities to attract private investments, the
creation of cross-sectoral interactions, the supervision, and financing of the actors
involved as well as for research and action.
❖ systematic consideration of gender and good governance in all interventions.
The experience of the few small private irrigation development projects, i.e., individual, or small
voluntary groups, has provided some lessons: Smallholder irrigation, especially private schemes,
is irreplaceable for the development of high-value crops added to the market, whether local or
86
export; As such, it deserves to be supported by development projects. The management of a
private irrigation support project by a private association, even if it is poorly organized, is no worse
than management by a service State; On the contrary, state control can be exercised without
influencing the direction of the day-to-day project. It is easy to promote simple technologies
(manual drilling, treadle pumps, solar pumps) without resorting to credit provided that the
methodology of NGOs launched the spread of treadle pumps in Africa (IPTRID, 2000).
In addition, only technically proven products with a critical mass should be sold in the market. The
cost of the equipment should be affordable and should not be directly subsidized to ensure that
the sale continues after the project. The equipment must be sold primarily to individual farmers or
small groups. We need to use local builders and work with the private sector responsible for
providing maintenance and after-sales service.
The projects must include a well-defined monitoring and mitigation component of irrigation's
environmental impact on depletion of groundwater tables and pollution of minor aquifers. A
methodology for the follow-up involving the irrigators is still to be worked out. In Niger, there is a
component to protect against water erosion and wind turbines. Indeed, many small irrigation sites
are attacked by dunes or Wadis. Most projects also include integrated pest management and
awareness-raising of risks associated with fertilizers and pesticides. The development of
smallholder irrigation must include a social dimension by providing the needs of the poor and
women. Support for women could be done by promoting the post-harvest activities.
10.5 Prospects of SSI and solar pumps development in SSA
Smallholder agricultural growth is critical for to ensure food security ad poverty alleviation in Sub-
Saharan African countries (Deininger and Byerlee, 2012). Agricultural growth was found to be five
times more effective in reducing poverty than non-farm growth in low-income countries but 11
times more so in SSA (Christiansen et al., 2011; FAO 2012). Increasing population at a rate of
3% per year in SSA would increase the future food-demand. Furthermore, anticipated climate
changes are predicted to increase the variability of precipitation in SSA, increasing the risks
associated with rainfed farming and posing new challenges of drought mitigation and adaptation.
At the turn of the millennium, agricultural economy of SSA must grow at a rate of 6% per year to
provide enough food for the growing population, reduce rural poverty, and accelerate economic
growth in a sustainable manner (FARA, 2003). Given little irrigation development in Sub-Saharan
Africa so far, there is enormous scope for expanding smallholder irrigation areas at modest
investments over a short period.
The global experiences of last three decades dictate that farmers and governments are interested
to lay greater emphasis for accelerating agricultural growth on small-scale irrigation as a viable
alternative to large-scale irrigation projects whose benefits were increasingly being questioned
(Woodhouse et al. 2017). By expanding small-scale irrigation, SSA can be moved from an
unpredictable rainfed farming system to a more sustainable irrigation farming regime. According
to the World Bank estimates, about 85% of Sub-Saharan Africa’s population lives more than 10
87
kilometers from a major river or lake, and they are unlikely to benefit from gravity irrigation (World
Bank 2018). This means that small-scale irrigation development will depend on scavenging water
from small reservoirs or shallow groundwater. Chances are that irrigation schemes that require
complex collective action will gradually give way to smaller, simpler irrigation structures driven by
individual or small group entrepreneurship.
Sub-Saharan Africa has 660,000 km2 of nonrenewable deep groundwater resources, which are
expensive to develop due to high cost of drilling and energy. Therefore, they are beneficial to
meet municipal demand and for large-scale commercial farming than smallholder irrigation
development (MacDonald et al., 2012). Even in the driest regions of SSA, which compose 40%
of its land mass and houses 64% of its population, has ample groundwater available at the depths
of 25m or less (World Bank, 2028). Groundwater irrigates only 0.4 meters per hectare in SSA,
and the region has enough shallow groundwater to irrigate between 44.5 million ha and 105.3
million ha (Altchenko and Villholth, 2015). Based on a comprehensive study of 13 SSA countries,
Pavelic et al. (2013) has suggested that the known groundwater resource can easily support 120
times their current groundwater-irrigated area.
In Sub-Saharan Africa, more than 600 million rural people are without access to electricity (Okoye
and Oranekwu-Okoye, 2018). Therefore, solar irrigation pumps (SIPs) can help in advancing the
agenda of small-scale irrigation development in this region. Studies have shown large swaths of
SIPs in SSA due to abundant solar radiation and availability of shallow groundwater (Smitter et
al., 2018). The initial capital investment in solar irrigation pumps may be a deterrent; however,
when volumes are large, SIP costs are dropping sharply. In India, for example, SIPs (panels,
pumps, invertor, and meters) costs were more than US$1,500 to US$1,700/kWp in 2015.
However, they dropped to US$850 per kilowatt-peak (excluding pumps) in 2018. Sub-Saharan
Africa should also experiment with alternative techno-institutional models of SIP irrigation—
including mini-SIPs popular with NGOs; mobile, cart-mounted SIPS; solar irrigation service–
providing entrepreneurs; and others and choose what is best suited to its specific conditions.
Governments are once again at the forefront in promoting SIPs among smallholders in large
groundwater extraction countries such as India, Pakistan, China, Bangladesh, etc. In India, the
number has crossed 180,000 in 2018 from 1,000 in 2012. Throughout Bangladesh, eastern India,
and Nepal terai, there is a strong demand of solar pumps due to increasing prices of diesel and
lack of electricity network. Like many nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and donors in Sub-
Saharan Africa, governments are promoting miniature solar pumps of 0.1 to 2 kilowatt-peaks for
garden irrigation. The objective is to demonstrate solar technology and spread limited subsidy
funds over many smallholders. However, it is being recognized that right-sized SIPs (that is, 3.5
to 5 kilowatt-peaks) can play a far bigger role in promoting irrigation. The governments of Asian
countries are assisting entrepreneurs in operating SIPs for providing irrigation service to
smallholder farmers. The governments of SSA can also use these models to accelerate the
adoption of small-scale irrigation technologies and solar irrigation pumps.
88
11 Conclusions and recommendations
Developing irrigated area, improving water use efficiency and increasing productivity of irrigated
agriculture remain the most important domains of the strategy needed to achieve sustainable
water management, food security and economic growth in SSA. Food production in the area is
still almost entirely rain-fed with irrigation playing a minor role. Despite abundant renewable water
resources, only 2% of the area is irrigated. Only 4% of the region’s total cultivated area is irrigated
compared to 37% in Asia and 14% in Latin America. Thus, Africa is far from realizing its irrigation
potential, estimated at 42.5 million ha. Helping farmers to access irrigation water by developing
small-scale irrigation can enable them to boost agricultural production, achieve food security, and
nutritional health. This is now increasingly realized that access to irrigation water can give a
considerable boost to production of food staples and high value export crops and insure farmers
against droughts and famines.
The main constraints related to agricultural water development and management are: (i) lack of
a coherent and efficient mechanism for synergizing irrigated agricultural and water development
between agriculture and other sectors, (ii) planning developments according to administrative
redistricting does not consider watershed boundaries. In addition, the low involvement of credit
institutions in the financing, the high dependence on grants and other support from the State, the
low participation of private developers in the financing of developments, and the weakness of the
human resources of the decentralized services for the technical supervision of producers are
considered major constraints for the development of SSI in Sub-Saharan African countries.
Over the past three decades, several initiatives have been initiated in SSA to introduce irrigation
systems, but the success has been limited. The slow irrigation development in Africa is linked to
high development costs, weaker participation of farmers, and issues related to land tenure. On
the contrary, there is a long history of reforms in Asia regarding the land tenure, water, and energy
sector to address the changing needs of farmers. The success of irrigation schemes in Asia was
achieved by recovering the capital cost from the farmers. In contrast, the involvement of farmers
in the development, rehabilitation, and management of irrigation schemes in Africa has been
peripheral. Cost recovery of irrigation schemes is critical to avoid the built-neglect-rebuild and
neglect syndrome, especially in Africa where national governments have financial constraints.
The development organizations such as World Bank, IsDB, IFAD, OFID, AfDB, and many others
have invested heavily in the development of irrigation schemes in SSA. However, due to the
magnitude of the problem, donor-driven solutions are not enough. Therefore, local governments
need to designate more capital and resources to achieve the targets. With targeted investments
and policies to expand small-scale Irrigation, the problems of hunger, poverty, and malnutrition
can be addressed. The research organizations such as ICBA can help in identifying potential
solutions based on their experiences in SSA and other regions. This involves an understanding
of SSA's water resources and geohydrology to know where and how much irrigation capacity can
89
sustainably be developed. They can also train farmers in different on-farm water conservation
strategies, including economical cropping patterns, to maximize returns on their investment.
A new irrigation development paradigm has now emerged, and its major focus is on market-driven
prosperity and private investment. Under this approach, commercial profitability is the
superseding concern, and the private sector (farmers and private suppliers of irrigation
technologies and services) should assume the leading role in investment and management. The
government only facilitates the private development and invests in economically viable and
financially sustainable schemes. With this approach, smallholders can also become commercial
farmers and governments have a major role to play in facilitating this transition.
The entry point for policy makers should be to identify effective irrigation development and
management practices. To effectively identify these practices, policy makers should be informed
about research findings. The SSA governments should take appropriate measures should make
special arrangements to scaling out and up of “successful” irrigation development initiatives. Since
scaling-up and scaling-out is a complex task, concerted actions and commitment are required
both from governments and development partners. It also requires a paradigm shift from holding
onto rigid and centrally managed irrigation to implementation of more flexible and holistic
governance and development of irrigation schemes. This in turn, highlights the need of SSA water
governance regimes to overcome the existing institutional and political drawbacks.
4
The key policy lessons drawn from this review of irrigation development in SSA are:
• Governments in SSA need to recognize the importance of irrigation development for

enhancing food security and economic growth, as well as the need for water to be
developed within a broader framework that promotes agricultural growth through profitable
investment and market-oriented production.
• Irrigation development can only contribute to food security and economic growth when
investments are profitable at the farm level, economically viable and sustainable
• Efforts should be made to identify the kind of investments in irrigation development that
give the best return
• Governments need to provide incentives for farmers to adopt new technologies and move
towards intensification of agricultural production, while encouraging the involvement of the
private sector to create competitive markets for agricultural inputs and outputs. The
relative roles of public and private investment must be clarified to foster private investment
• Governments in SSA can promote private investment into irrigation by developing the legal
and institutional framework governing agriculture and by investing in infrastructure and
research and development
• Transparent, accountable, efficient, and financially self-sustaining institutions are key to
successful improvement of large-scale irrigation
90
• Many of the donor-financed projects that have been evaluated as successful on
completion in recent years have been characterized by both decentralized and
participatory approaches
• More reliable access to irrigation water is part of the story, but other components (e.g.,
markets, inputs, extension, environmental management, etc) are part and parcel of a
comprehensive package that enables farmers to maximize productivity and profitability in
agricultural production
• Water markets and pricing mechanisms which were adopted by many governments as
water management tools have proven to be ineffective, at least in the context of SSA.
• Farmers in the irrigated areas are mostly unaware of the concepts of 'usual' or 'optimum'
irrigation depths. Therefore, applied irrigation amounts are usually much higher than the
actual crop water requirements. Crop yields are well below their productive potential due
to deficient use of fertilizers, and poor access to irrigation water. Water use efficiencies
are only 22-25%, which is half of the world average of 45%. This suggests that farmers
need to be educated on improved water management practices, including water-saving
techniques as a demand management strategy.
91
11. References
Allen, R. G., Pereira, L. S., Raes, D., Smith, M., 2006. Crop Evapotranspiration: Guidelines for
computing crop water requirements. FAO Publication No. 56. Food and Agricultural
Organization, Rome, Italy. 174 p.
Altchenko, Y., and K. G. Villholth. 2015. “Mapping Irrigation Potential from Renewable
Groundwater in Africa: A Quantitative HydrologicalApproach.” Hydrology and Earth
System Sciences 19 (2): 1055–67.
Amjath-Babu, Krupnik, T.J., Kaechele, H., Aravindakshan, S., 2016. Transition to groundwater
irrigated agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa: An indicator-based assessment. Agr. Wat.
Manage. 168, 125–135.
Bangwe, L., van Koppen, B., 2012. Ag Water Solutions Project Case Study Smallholder Out
Growers in Irrigated Agriculture in Zambia. International Water Management Institute,
Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Barker, R., Molle, F., 2004. Evolution of Irrigation in South and Southeast Asia Comprehensive
Assessment Research Report 5. Comprehensive Assessment Secretariat, Colombo.
Bélières, J.F. Jamin, J.Y. Seck, S.M. Tonneau, J.P. Adamczewski, A. Le Gal, P.Y. 2013.
Dynamiques foncières, investissements et modèles de production pour l’irrigation en
Afrique de l’Ouest : logiques financières contre cohérences sociales ? Cah Agric 22 : 61-
66. doi : 10.1684/agr.2012.0574
Bunting, M. 2008. “At Last, Africa Is Starting to See a Green Revolution. Let’s Hope It’s Not Too
Late.” The Guardian, April 21. Accessed July 2,2018.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/apr/21/development.debtrelief.
Burney, J., and R. L. Naylor. 2012. “Smallholder Irrigation as a Poverty Alleviation Tool in
Sub-Saharan Africa.” World Development 40 (1):110–23.
Burney JA, Naylor RL, 2012. Smallholder irrigation as a poverty alleviation tool in sub-Saharan
Africa. World Dev. 40 (1), 110–123.
CAPES, 2007 : Contribution des cultures de saison sèche a la réduction de la pauvreté et a
l’amélioration de la sécurité alimentaire
Christiaensen, L., Demery, L., Kuhl, J., 2011. “The (Evolving) Role of Agriculture in Poverty
Reduction: An Empirical Perspective.” J. of Development\. Economics 96 (2): 239–54.
Deininger, K., and D. Byerlee. 2012. “The Rise of Large Farms in Land Abundant Countries: Do
They Have a Future?” World Development 4 (40):701–14.
DNGR, 2016. Status report on the implementation of the National Proximity Irrigation Program
(PNIP). Ministry of Agriculture, Mali.
FAO, 1986. Irrigation in Africa south of the Sahara. FAO Investment Centre, Tech. Paper No. 5.
FAO, 2010. Cartographie des zones socio-rurales du Burkina Faso, 70 p.
FAO, 2011. Why Has Africa Become a Net Food Importer? Explaining Africa Agricultural and
Food Trade Deficits. Trade and markets division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations, Rome.
92
FAO, 2015. Regional overview of food insecurity: African food security prospects brighter than
ever. Accra, Ghana. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
FAO, 2018. AQUASTAT (database), Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations,
Rome, accessed on October 13, 2018
http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/tables/WorldData-Irrigation_eng.pdf.
FARA (Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa). 2003. “Securing the Future for Africa’s Children:
Building Sustainable Livelihoods throughIntegrated Agricultural Research for
Development.” Sub-Saharan Africa, Challenge Program Proposal, FARA, Accra, Ghana.
Hanjra, M.A., Ferede, T., Gutta, D.G., 2009. Reducing poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa through
investments in water and other priorities. Agr. Water Manage. 96, 1062–1070.
Howell, T.A., 2001. Enhancing Water Use Efficiency in Irrigated Agriculture. Agronomy Journal,
93, 281-289.http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj2001.932281x
IFPRI, 2012. Increasing Agricultural Productivity and Enhancing Food Security in Africa.
International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, D.C.
IPTRID, 2000. Treadle pumps for irrigation in Africa. Knowledge Synthesis Report No. 1.
International Program for Technology and Research in Irrigation and Drainage, Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy. 64 pp.
IWMI, 2005. Improving irrigation project planning and implementation processes in sub-Saharan
Africa: diagnosis and recommendations. S. Morardet, D. J. Merrey, J. Seshoka, and H.
Sally. IWMI. Colombo, 87pp. available at
http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/africanwaterinvestment/index.asp.
IWMI, 2011. Livelihood Impacts of Improved On-farm Water Control in Sub-Saharan Africa: an
Empirical Investigation of Three Modes of Small-holder Agricultural Water Management:
Nigerian Case Study. International Water Management Institute, Colombo.
Kadigi, R.M.J., Tesfay, G., Bizoza, A., Zinabo, G., 2012. Irrigation and water use efficiency in
SSA. Briefing Paper Number 4, GDN Agriculture Policy Series. The Global Development
Network (GDN), Oxford.
Kijne, J.W., Barker, R. Molden, D., 2003. Improving Water Productivity in Agriculture: Editors’
Overview. In:Kijne, J.W., Barker, R. and Molden. D., Eds., Water Productivity in
Agriculture: Limits and Opportunities for Improvement, CABI, Wallingford, xi-xix.
MacDonald, A. M., H. C. Bonsor, B. É. Ó. Dochartaigh, and R. G. Taylor 2012. Quantitative Maps
of Groundwater Resources in Africa.Environmental Research Letters 7 (2012):
024009.https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/7/2/024009/pdf.
Makin, I. W. 2016. Irrigation Infrastructure for Sustainable and Improved Agricultural
Productivity. Topic Guide. Hertfordshire, UK: Evidence on Demand.
MAH, 2010. Rapport bilan de la campagne agricole de saison sèche 2009-2010 du Burkina
Faso, Ministère de l'Agriculture et de l’Hydraulique.
Maisiri, N., Senzanje, Rockstrom, A., Twomlow, J., 2005. On Farm Evaluation of the Effect of
Low-Cost Drip Irrigation on Water and Crop Productivity Compared to Conventional
Surface Irrigation System. Physics andChemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C, 30, 783-
791. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2005.08.021
MDA, 2013. Rapport national de synthèse sur l’évaluation de la campagne agricole au Niger.
93
MEE, 2001. État des lieux des ressources en eau du Burkina Faso et de leur cadre de gestion,
Ministère de l'Environnement et de l'Eau.
Molle, F., T. Shah, and R. Barker. 2003. “The Groundswell of Pumps: Multi-level Impacts of a
Silent Revolution.” Paper prepared for the ICIDAsia meeting, Taiwan, November 10–12.
Okoye, C. O., and B. C. Oranekwu-Okoye. 2018. “Economic Feasibility of Solar PV System for
Rural Electrification in Sub-Sahara Africa.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
82 (3): 2537–47.
Pavelic, P., K. G. Villholth, Y. Shu, L.-M. Rebelo, and S. Vladimir. 2013. “Smallholder
Groundwater Irrigation in Sub-Saharan Africa: CountryLevel Estimates of Development
Potential.” Water International 38 (4): 392–407.
Qureshi, A.S., Shoaib, I., 2016. Improving agricultural productivity by promoting low-cost irrigation
technologies in Sub-Saharan Africa. Glo. Adv. Res. J. Agric. Sci. July 2016 Vol: 5(7): 283-
292.
Smitter, P., S. K. Keyfyalew, L. Nicole, and J. Barron. 2018. “Suitability Mapping Framework for
Solar Photovoltaic Pumps for SmallholderFarmers in Sub-Saharan Africa.” Applied
Geography 94: 41–57.
Sonou, M.; Abric, S. 2010. Capitalisation d’expériences sur le développement de la petite
irrigation privée pour des productions à haute valeur ajoutée en Afrique de l’Ouest: Revue
des expériences récentes et en cours. Ouagadougou: Burkina Faso.
Svendsen, S., Ewing, M., Msangi, S., 2009. Measuring Irrigation Performance in Africa', IFPRI
Discussion Paper No 894.
Villholth, K. G. 2013. “Groundwater Irrigation for Smallholders in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Synthesis
of Current Knowledge to Guide SustainableOutcomes.” Water International 38 (4): 369–
91.
World Bank, 2008. Mobilizing Public-private Partnerships to Finance Infrastructure Amid Crisis.
World Bank, Washington DC.
World Bank, 2015. Poverty in a rising Africa: An overview. Washington, D.C.
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2015/10/25158121/poverty-rising-africa-
overview
World bank, 2018. “An Assessment of Groundwater Challenges and Opportunities in Support of
Sustainable Development in Sub-Saharan Africa:Discussion Paper.” Draft, World Bank,
Washington, DC.
You, L., C. Ringler, U. Wood-Sichra, R. Robertson, S. Wood, T. Zhu, G. Nelson, Z. Guo, and Y.
Sun. 2011. “What Is the Irrigation Potential for Africa? A Combined Biophysical and
Socioeconomic Approach.” Food Policy 36 (6): 770–82.
Zwart, S.J., Bastiaanssen, W.G., 2004. Review of Measured Crop Water Productivity Values for
Irrigated Wheat, Rice, Cotton and Maize. Agricultural Water Management, 69, 115-133.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2004.04.007.
94
12. Publications
Qureshi, A.S., Shoaib, I., 2016. Improving agricultural productivity by promoting low-cost irrigation
technologies in Ssb-Saharan Africa. Glo. Adv. Res. J. Agric. Sci. July 2016 Vol: 5(7): 283-
292 (ISSN: 2315-5094). Available online http://garj.org/garjas/home
Qureshi, A.S, Traore, A., Madiama, C, Dembele, D., Mebrouk, H., Kane, M.T., 2018. Improving
water use efficiency for sustainable crop production in sub-Saharan Africa”. Paper
presented at the International Conference on Sustainable Water Management in River
Basins: Innovations and Sustainable Development, October 4-6, Agadir, Morocco.
Zakari, A.H., Mahamadou, C.G., KANE, A.M., Ousmane, S., Qureshi, A.S., 2020. Insecticidal
effect of neem oil in the control of Brevicoryne brassicae, Journal of Research in Ecology
8(2): 2762-2769.
Abdoulah. K.M., Kibiwot J.B., Jackson, K.L., Bino, T., Samuel, N. W., 2018. Economic efficiency
of water uses in the small-scale irrigation systems used in vegetables production in
Koulikoro and Mopti regions, Mali. Advances in Agricultural Science, Vol. 6 (4), 72-84.
95
ANNEX- I: A modified design of the Californian system in Senegal
Based on their experience, farmers modified their design and recommend the following actions:
• Use diesel pumps instead of gasoline.

• Use pumps with a higher flow rate and a larger diameter. The central pipe diameter of 75
mm should be changed to 110 mm as shown in below diagram.
• Avoid soil erosion due to water fall at the water outlets. For this purpose, a plastic sheet
or cemented hose can be used at the outlet of the pipe.
• To reduce the time spent for irrigation, more PVC pipes were added in the farmer fields.
These modifications were made for Nder, Mbayene, Mbane and Sanente villages.
Due to the lack of robustness and poor performance of GMP pumps, diesel pumps were introduced. This
pump reduces drastically the number of pump failures during the operation. During the quasi-running
session, no pump failure in the new gasoline pump was observed. This improves the performance of the
Californian system as continuous water supply was available for irrigation.
96
ANNEX– 2: Cost for a Californian system in Senegal and Burkina Faso
Item Number Length Unit price Total price Total price
(m) (FCF) (FCF) (US$)/hectare
Tuyaux PVC 26 156 4600 119,600 240
Tuyaux PVC 1 6 3500 3500 7
Tuyau Flexible 1 5 30,000 30,000 60
T – 75 1is com0 - 1000 10,000 20
T - 63 10 - 1000 10,000 20
Reducer - 63 10 - 1000 10,000 20
Embout – 75 1 - 3000 3000 6
Coude - 75 2 - 900 1800 3
Bouchon - 75 2 - 1000 2000 4
Bouchon – 63 20 - 1000 20,000 40
Motor pump 1 - 125,000 125,000 250
Total 334,900 670*
(I US$ = 500 FCFA)
* The installation cost of the Californian system may vary from country to country depending on the type
of soil, crops to be grown, availability and price of materials in local markets.
97
About the International Center for Biosaline Agriculture (ICBA)
ICBA is a not-for-profit, international center of excellence for research and development in marginal
environments. It was established in 1999 through the visionary leadership of the Islamic Development
Bank (IDB), the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) Fund, the Arab Fund for Economic
and Social Development (AFESD) and the Government of United Arab Emirates. The host country, through
the Ministry of Climate Change and Environment and the Environment Agency – Abu Dhabi extended the
agreement with IDB in 2010 and increased their financial support to the Center.
ICBA originally focused on the problems of salinity and using saline water for irrigated agriculture. Over the
last 15 years, ICBA has evolved into a world-class modern research facility with a team of international
scientists conducting applied research to improve the well-being of poor farmers in marginal environments.
In 2013, the Center developed a new strategic direction addressing the closely linked challenges of income,
water, nutrition, and food security. The new Strategy takes innovation as a core principle and identifies five
innovations that form the core research agenda: assessment of natural resources; climate change
adaptation; crop productivity and diversification; aquaculture and bioenergy, and policy analysis. ICBA is
working on several technology developments including the use of conventional and non-conventional water
(s saline, treated wastewater, industrial water, and seawater); water and land management technologies;
remote sensing and modeling for climate change adaptation.
ICBA is a unique institute with a clear mandate and capacity to work on the rehabilitation of salt-affected
lands. ICBA is custodian of the world’s largest collections of genetic resources of crops and forages suitable
for salt-affected lands with a proven capacity of seed development and seed multiplication for variety of
environments. In addition, ICBA’s long history of working in Africa with local partners makes it fully qualified
and eligible to lead this project.
98
99
The International Center for Biosaline Agriculture (ICBA) implemented a four-year
project titled “Scaling up small-scale irrigation technologies for improving
agricultural productivity in Sub-Saharan Africa”. The project was funded by the
OPEC Fund for Agricultural Development (OFID) and executed with the technical
and logistic support of the Ministries of Agriculture of the four West0African countries
(Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, Senegal).
The project is of great importance for the smallholder farmers, especially women and
children, who face high food insecurity and malnutrition. The project has introduced
small-scale irrigation technologies and solar irrigation pumps to promote irrigated
agriculture for improved agricultural production. The adoption of small-scale irrigation
technologies will enable farmers to irrigate their small plots to boost crop harvests,
family incomes, and nutritional health in the target countries.
The International Center for Biosaline Agriculture

Academic City, Al Ain Road
Al Ruwayyah 2, Near Zayed University
Dubai, United Arab Emirates
P.O. Box 14660
[email protected]
www.biosaline.org
+971 4 304 6300
+971 4 304 6355
100
101

Project Report Final OFID October 2021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Project Report Final OFID October 2021

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Project Report Final OFID October 2021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SCALING UP SMALL-SCALE IRRIGATION

TECHNOLOGIES FOR IMPROVING FOOD SECURITY

Funding Agency Project Coordinator

BCR = Benefit-Cost Ratio

Dr. Asad Sarwar Qureshi

Focal Persons in the Partner Countries

Dr. Adama Traore

Dr. Abdoulah Mamary Kane

Dr. Abdoul Habou Zakari

Dr. sc. agr. Madiama CISSE

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................ 8

LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................................... 9

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... 11

2. THE PROJECT ...................................................................................................................... 18

3. THE COUNTRY PROFILES .................................................................................................. 24

4. SMALL-SCALE IRRIGATION SYSTEMS USED IN SSA ..................................................... 42

5. INTRODUCING SMALL-SCALE IRRIGATION SYSTEMS .................................................. 48

6. LAND AND WATER PRODUCTIVITY OF DIFFERENT IRRIGATION SYSTEMS .............. 56

8. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENT IRRIGATION SYSTEMS .................................... 69

9. KNOWLEDGE SHARING AND CAPACITY BUILDING ....................................................... 74

10. STRATEGIES FOR SMALL-SCALE IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT IN SSA ..................... 78

11 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................... 89

11. REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................... 92

12. PUBLICATIONS .................................................................................................................... 95

ANNEX- I: A MODIFIED DESIGN OF THE CALIFORNIAN SYSTEM IN SENEGAL .................. 96

Dr. Tarifa A. Al-Zaabi

• High cost and accessibility of equipment in local markets

In Sub-Saharan African countries, lack of access to irrigation water is considered as the

• Lower initial investment, operational, and maintenance costs

Despite these advantages, farmers' adoption of small-scale irrigation systems remains a

Despite these advantages, the large-scale adoption of small-scale irrigation technologies by

1.3 Low water use efficiency in agriculture

1.4 Constraints and limitations for irrigation development in SSA

The constraints in the development of irrigation in SSA can be categorized as follows:

• Water shortage and poor water quality due to heavy sedimentation

The capacity of the farmers

• Low level of expertise, knowledge, and capacity to develop irrigation systems.

Government policy; institutional and legal support

• Higher-level neglect in development irrigation schemes for smallholder farmers.

The specific objectives of this project were:

2.3 Implementation strategy, approach, and methodology

2.4 Project activities

Output 3: Selected irrigation technologies are adopted in 25,000 ha

Output 4: Capacity and skills of farmers are enhanced to ensure sustainability

2.5 Outcomes and impacts

2.6 Scaling up pathways

2.8 Project partners

2.9 Project organization and management

3.1 Burkina Faso

Table 1. Average monthly climatic data for Burkina Faso

Figure 2. National Basins of Burkina Faso

Table 3. Water storages in Burkina Faso

Water demand in Burkina Faso

Distribution of vegetable cropped areas

Figure 4. Percentage of farmers using different irrigation systems.

Figure 5. Use of motor pumps in different regions of Burkina Faso

Figure 6. Agro-climatic zones in Mali

Figure 8. Potential irrigable sites in Sikasso region

Figure 9. Potential irrigable sites in Mopti region.