Book of Extended summaries ISDA

International Conference on Reimagining Rainfed Agro-ecosystems: Challenges &
Opportunities during 22-24, December 2022 at ICAR-CRIDA, Hyderabad
cent farm ponds had irrigation potential throughout the year with cultivated area of 2 to 3 ha.
The state government exceeded its goal of building 1,35,257 farm ponds; the original goal was
to build 1,12,311; Aurangabad and Amravati divisions met their goal and had the most farm
ponds of any district in Maharashtra. The majority of beneficiaries (86.75 %) used farm pond
water during rabi season, followed by summer season (70.63 %), adopted drip (68.75%) and
sprinkler (18.75%) methods of irrigation for horticulture crops, and used sprinkler (51.25%)
and manual (28.75%) methods of irrigation for vegetables. Only 23.75 per cent of beneficiaries
were aware of the critical stages of irrigation and the irrigation schedule (75.63%). A little over
33.75 per cent of them adopted, and 15 per cent of them stopped fishing following adoption.
Majority respondents (49.38%) were observed in medium level of sustainability followed by
high (31.25%) and low (19.37%) level of sustainability, respectively. The value of enterprises
cost effectiveness index (ECEI) of major crops increased from 17.27 to 48.83 among
beneficiaries and cultivated land utilisation index (CLUI) was found significant (1% level) in
all major crops except sorghum and pearl millet. The coarsened exact matching method was
done to know impact of farm pond on beneficiaries, it is found that overall income i.e 16,946.4
and HHI index (0.052) was found significant at 1 % level. The analysis of logit regression
result revealed that variables like dairy animal, fishery, income, income log, percentage of
irrigation area and HHI were found significant at 1% level and it is also found that beneficiaries
investing more in horticulture component (Mean±SD, 401) followed by animal component
(Mean±SD, 360) and less in maintenance of farm pond (Mean±SD,136). The majority of
beneficiaries (56.88%) used farm pond income to buy input, followed by buying farm
equipment (18.13%) and lending money to others (1.25%), with an overall shift in
beneficiaries' means of subsistence reported at 84.09%.
Beneficiaries' top three perceived obstacles were Government funding for the farm pond was
not fully covered, and the farm pond's shorter lifespan or lower output were caused by the
adoption of less durable building materials. Major challenges faced by the respondent included
a lack of labour, inadequate family labour, a lack of owned resources, low rainfall, unusual
weather, a high rate of evaporation, high costs for building and maintaining the ponds, and a
lack of credit facilities. Major perceived factors for discontinued farm ponds included: Draining
a bore well or well used to store water in a farm pond is followed by a reduction in the
productivity or lifespan of the farm pond, an inadequate or low water harvest, an insufficient
amount of family labour, Low and prolonged rainfall.
Conclusion
Given the importance of farm ponds, the government should concentrate on maintaining the
programme and extending benefits to small and marginal farmers, as well as making changes
to the way subsidies are provided. Also, strict guidelines need to be put in place to prevent
groundwater extraction for storage in farm ponds.
Resilience through land and water management interventions, water management and governance
133 | Page