A livelihood in a risky environment: Farmers’ preferences for irrigation with wastewater in Hyderabad, India
- 336 Downloads
Most cities in developing countries fail to treat their wastewater comprehensively. Consequently, farmers downstream use poor-quality water for irrigation. This practice implies risks for farmers, consumers and the environment. Conversely, this water supply supports the livelihood of these farmers and other stakeholders along the value chains. Linking safer options for wastewater management with irrigation could therefore be a win–win solution: removing the risks for society and maintaining the benefits for farmers. However, in developing countries, the high investment costs for the required treatment are problematic and the willingness of farmers to pay for the water (cost recovery) is often questionable. Using a choice experiment, this paper gives insight into farmers’ preferences for wastewater use scenarios, quantifying their willingness to pay. The case study is Hyderabad, India. Farmers there prefer water treatment and are prepared to pay a surplus for this. Considering the cost-recovery challenge, this information could be valuable for planning small on site wastewater treatment systems.
KeywordsAgriculture Choice experiment India Wastewater
Field research for this paper was supported by the International Water Management Institute and Ghent University. The authors thank Dr. Priyanie Amerasinghe for facilitating contacts and fieldwork in Hyderabad; Dr. George Danso and Dr. Krishna Reddy Kakumanu for their comments on the choice experiment and the questionnaire. We also thank many interviewees who generously shared information. Finally, we thank two anonymous reviewers whose comments helped us to improve this paper.
- Abu Madi, M., O. Braadbaart, R. Al-Sa’ed, and G. Alaerts. 2003. Willingness of farmers to pay for reclaimed wastewater in Jordan and Tunisia. Water Science and Technology: Water Supply 3: 115–122.Google Scholar
- Adamowicz, W., J. Louviere, and J. Swait. 1998. Introduction to attribute-based stated choice methods. Edmonton, AB: ADVANIS.Google Scholar
- Amerasinghe, P., P. Weckenbrock, R. Simmons, S. Acharya, A.W. Drescher, and M. Blummel. 2009. An atlas of water quality, health and agronomic risks and benefits associated with “wastewater” irrigated agriculture: A study from the banks of the Musi River, India. Report. Colombo: IWMI.Google Scholar
- Bennett, J., and R. Blamey. 2001. The strengths and weaknesses of environmental choice modelling. In The choice modelling approach to environmental valuation, ed. J. Bennett, and R. Blamey, 227–242. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
- Buechler, S., and G. Devi. 2003. Household food security and wastewater-dependent livelihood activities along the Musi River in Andhra Pradesh, India. Report. Geneva: World Health Organisation. http://publications.iwmi.org/pdf/H_34272.pdf. Accessed 22 Oct 2013.
- Buechler, S., G. Devi, and B. Keraita. 2006. Wastewater use for urban and peri-urban agriculture. In Cities farming for the future: Urban agriculture for green and productive cities, 243–273. http://www.ruaf.org/sites/default/files/Chapter%209.pdf. Accessed 27 Jan 2014.
- Census. 2011. Greater Hyderabad, City Census 2011 data. http://www.census2011.co.in/census/city/392-hyderabad.html. Accessed 22 Oct 2013.
- CPCB. 2009. Status of water supply, wastewater generation and treatment in class-I cities and class-II towns of India. Control of Urban Pollution series: CUPS/70/2009–10. New Delhi: Central Pollution Control Board, Ministry of Environment and Forests.Google Scholar
- Keremane, G.B. 2009. Urban wastewater use for irrigation: A case study of farmers along Musi River in Hyderabad. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences 22: 235–237.Google Scholar
- McCartney, M., C. Scott, J. Ensink, B. Jiang, and T.W. Biggs. 2008. Salinity implications of wastewater irrigation in the Musi River catchment in India. Ceylon Journal of Science 37: 49–59.Google Scholar
- McDonald, L. 2009. Development of a protocol for measuring wastewater exposure for farmers engaging in wastewater irrigated agriculture in Hyderabad, India. MSc Thesis, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London (unpublished).Google Scholar
- Ministry of Water Resources, Republic of India. 2012. National water policy. http://wrmin.nic.in/writereaddata/NationalWaterPolicy/NWP2012Eng6495132651.pdf. Accessed April 2013.
- National Panchayat Portal. 2013. Ghatkesar intermediate panchayat. http://www.ranghatkebp.appr.gov.in/hidden/-/asset_publisher/di5XrVERUf8s/content/about-ghatkesar/3093320. Accessed 5 Oct 2015.
- Quitzow, R., H. Bär, and K. Jacob. 2013. Environmental governance in India, China, Vietnam and Indonesia: A tale of two paces. FFU-Report 01-2013. Berlin: Environmental Policy Research Centre, Freie Universität Berlin.Google Scholar
- Rao, S.M., and P. Mamatha. 2004. Water quality in sustainable water management. Current Science 87: 942–947.Google Scholar
- Saldías, C. 2016. Analysing the institutional challenges for the agricultural (re)use of wastewater in developing countries. PhD Thesis, Ghent University, Ghent.Google Scholar
- Times of India. 2002. Ghatkesar ryots pay cess for polluted water. http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2002-02-18/hyderabad/27111813_1_water-tax-polluted-water-musi. Accessed 30 Oct 2013.
- Weldesilassie, A.B., O. Frör, E. Boelee, and S. Dabbert. 2009. The economic value of improved wastewater irrigation: A contingent valuation study in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 34: 428–449.Google Scholar