Current Affairs

General Studies Prelims

General Studies (Mains)

Minor Irrigation Census (MIC)

Minor Irrigation Census (MIC)

The latest edition of the Minor Irrigation Census (MIC), the sixth in its series, provides valuable insights into the power sources used in the extraction of water for irrigation in India. This census encompasses a wide range of privately owned irrigation sources, including borewells and tubewells, shedding light on the significant role of minor irrigation schemes in Indian agriculture.

About Minor Irrigation Schemes

Minor Irrigation schemes are instrumental in enhancing agricultural productivity and livelihoods, particularly in areas prone to drought and beyond the reach of Major and Medium projects. These schemes are characterized by their ability to cover Culturable Command Areas up to 2000 hectares individually and utilize either groundwater or surface water.

Types of Minor Irrigation Schemes

The schemes can be broadly classified into six major types:

  • Dugwell: These schemes can draw water from a maximum depth of 15 meters.
  • Shallow Tubewell: Capable of drawing water from depths of up to 35 meters.
  • Medium Tubewell: Reach depths of up to 70 meters.
  • Deep Tubewell: Extend beyond 70 meters.
  • Surface Flow Schemes: Utilize surface water sources.
  • Surface Lift Schemes: Involve lifting water from surface sources.

About the Minor Irrigation Census (MIC)

The MIC is essential for planning, developing, and managing minor irrigation schemes that significantly contribute to the agricultural sector. The first census took place in 1986-87, and the latest, the sixth MIC, was conducted with reference to 2017-18. It covers all states and union territories except Delhi, Daman & Diu, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, and Lakshadweep. Due to the comprehensive data collection process down to the block level, there is a time lag in compiling and releasing the data, making the findings reflective of the past.

Key Findings of the Sixth MIC

  • Proliferation of MI Schemes: In total, there were 23.14 million MI schemes reported across the country from 695 districts. This represents an increase of approximately 1.42 million schemes between the fifth and sixth editions. Most of these schemes (96.6%) were privately owned, with small and marginal farmers, holding less than two hectares of land, owning the majority.
  • Groundwater Dominance: Out of all MI schemes, 94.8% (21.93 million) were dedicated to groundwater extraction, while 5.2% (1.21 million) were focused on surface-water extraction. Uttar Pradesh had the highest number of MI schemes (17.2%), followed by Maharashtra (15.4%) and Madhya Pradesh (9.9%). The leading states in groundwater schemes were UP, Maharashtra, and MP, whereas Maharashtra, Karnataka, Telangana, Odisha, and Jharkhand had the highest share in surface-water schemes.
  • The Role of Electricity: Electricity emerged as the dominant source of power for water extraction, with 76% of sources being powered by electricity. While there was a significant increase from 56% in 2011 to 70% in 2017, the growth rate has slowed down. This shift towards electrification corresponds to the increased use of tube wells and borewells capable of extracting water at greater depths.
  • Changes in Groundwater Sources: While ‘dug-wells’ or ponds have traditionally been the primary source of groundwater, their numbers declined from 87 lakh to 82 lakh between the fifth and sixth editions of the MIC. ‘Shallow’ tube wells also saw a decrease from 59 lakh to 55 lakh. Conversely, ‘medium-sized’ wells increased from 31 lakh to 43 lakh, and ‘deep’ wells rose from 26 lakh to 37 lakh. The reasons behind the growth of more powerful and deep-reaching tubewells remain unexplored in the report.

UPSC Mains Questions

  1. What are the socioeconomic implications of the increasing dominance of electricity in minor irrigation schemes, especially in terms of access for small and marginal farmers?
  2. How might the decline in traditional sources of groundwater extraction impact local ecosystems and water availability in rural areas?
  3. What policies and incentives have contributed to the proliferation of powerful and deep-reaching tubewells, and what are the environmental consequences?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Archives