Nm sadguru foundation dahod gujarat

International Social Work 2015, Vol. 58(1) 23 –31 © The Author(s) 2013

Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0020872812463106 isw.sagepub.com

i s w

Irrigation-based social work relieves poverty in India’s drylands

Govindasamy Agoramoorthy Tajen University, Taiwan and Tata Visiting Chair, India

Minna J. Hsu National Sun Yat-sen University, Taiwan

Abstract India’s drylands, located in the states of Gujarat and Rajasthan, receive low rainfall (annual average of 95–1000 mm). Farmers have to rely on the monsoon rains to cultivate crops. Realizing the irrigation water need of the farmers who inhabit the drylands, a non-profit agency called NM Sadguru Water and Development Foundation (hereafter, the Sadguru Foundation), initiated social work based on irrigation water to assist farmers in growing more crops. In this article, we present data on the irrigation-based social work implemented by the Sadguru Foundation across the drylands of western India and how it benefits local farming communities.

Keywords agriculture, irrigation, poverty, social work, water

Introduction

Irrigation is fundamental for economic growth and poverty reduction since India leads the world in extent of irrigated areas (Droogers, 2002). Agriculture is the primary source of livelihood for 75 percent of India’s over 1 billion people. The majority of the Indian workforce (68%) relies on farming despite Indian agriculture’s contribution to the gross domestic product having diminished from 38 percent in 1975 to 19 percent in 2008 (Agoramoorthy, 2009). India’s indigenous communities (tribal or adivasi, meaning ‘aboriginal people’) live in the drylands; they are often faced with low and erratic rainfall in addition to droughts. They are also economically weak since they have less access to public services. From the government point of view, a single tribal hamlet is too small to economically justify a school or health centre, and the lack of purchasing power make village busi- nesses non-viable (Janaiah et al., 2000).

Corresponding author: Minna J. Hsu, Department of Biological Sciences, National Sun Yat-sen University, Kaohsiung 804, Taiwan. Email: hsumin@mail.nsysu.edu.tw

463106 ISW58110.1177/0020872812463106International Social WorkAgoramoorthy and Hsu 2013

Article

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1177%2F0020872812463106&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2013-04-02
24 International Social Work 58(1)

The worst social problem facing India now is poverty, so social work education principles, phi- losophies and practices have been criticized for failing to prepare the economically and socially weak communities to participate actively in poverty reduction schemes sponsored by various gov- ernment agencies (Barnabas et al., 1996; Cox and Pawar, 2006; Nanavatty, 1990). Several non- government organizations (NGOs) have been involved in rural development work across rural India (Minj, 1999), and some, such as the Professional Assistance for Development Action, BAIF Development Research Foundation, Ralegan Siddhi Pariwar, Seva Mandir and Tarun Bharat Sangh, work entirely on water resources (Kashwan, 2006; Mehta and Satpathy, 2008). Although India’s agricultural sector calls for the application of social work skills, less research has been done in the area of irrigation-based social work. In this article, we present data on irrigation-based social work practiced by a local NGO to demonstrate how it could enhance livelihoods of impoverished farmers across the drylands of western India.

Literature review

Irrigated agriculture has a long history and ancient Indian scriptures make reference to the benefits of wells, canals, and dams to society. Built during the second century AD, the Grand Anicut is considered to be the oldest still operational irrigation system in the world (Agoramoorthy, 2009). Historical record-keeping of irrigated areas began in the 1800s documenting 8 million hectares (M ha); by 1999 it had increased to 278 M ha (FAO, 2001). Most of the world’s irrigated areas are distributed over six countries, namely India (21.7%), China (19.4%), USA (7.9%), Pakistan (6.6%), Iran (2.8 %) and Mexico (2.4%) (Droogers, 2002). These countries also have the highest propor- tions of irrigation relative to cultivated area (50.1% India; 49.8% China, 21.4% USA; 17.2% Pakistan, and 7.3% Iran) (Postel, 1999). However, the agricultural system is considered sustainable only when productivity is maintained by profitability and sustainability (Kessler, 1994; van Wiren- Lehr, 2001).

Unlike the non-tribals who prefer to live in cities, tribal communities often inhabit remote wil- derness regions covering India’s vast drylands (Jha, 2002). They own land but of poor quality with no irrigation facilities. Although irrigation has been known to alleviate poverty (Bhattarai et al., 2007; Brisco, 1999; Chitale, 1994), the gravity irrigation practised usually along the plains and flatlands is not at all suitable for the rugged drylands where farms are at a higher level than the rivers (25–40 m). Thus lifting water directly from rivers or from the smaller check dams built across rivers to upland farms using mechanized pumps is commonly known as ‘lift irrigation’ and is considered the best option for rugged terrain (Agoramoorthy and Hsu, 2008). However, financial support is crucial in building lift irrigation systems and check dams and then only rainwater can be harvested, stored in check dams and used for irrigation. Global infrastructure investment for power, transport and irrigation water accounts for nearly half of all the government spending. However, the results in terms of benefit to people have been unsatisfactory in past decades (Brisco, 1999).

In recent years, India’s rain-fed agriculture has been dwindling due to erratic monsoons associ- ated with global warming. Debt-ridden farmers who lose crops due to crop failure often commit suicide and the numbers are increasing annually (NCRB, 2007). Faced with an ever growing popu- lation, India has no choice but to double the food grains productivity by 2025 to guarantee food security. The fact that agriculture is an important sector in rural development cannot be denied (Jewitt and Baker, 2007). By 2050, humanity will demand resources at double the rate at which the Earth can generate. Therefore, agricultural sustainability has become a priority in recent years (Agoramoorthy, 2009; Borch, 2007). Five conditions are crucial for an agricultural system to be sustainable: the system must be ecologically sound; socially just; economically viable; humane for

Agoramoorthy and Hsu 25

humanity; and adaptable to the changing climate (Reijntjes et al., 1992). Without the participation of farming communities in rural areas even the highly funded development projects are doomed to fail. For example, in the Jhabua District of Madhya Pradesh (India), the government installed 1000 lift irrigation systems of which 70 percent ended in failure (Choudhry et al., 2002). Similarly, 80 percent of the check dams built in China failed due to poor construction and lack of community participation (Xu et al., 2004).

Objectives, study area and methods

The objective of this study is to demonstrate how social work can be employed in India’s dryland villages to develop community irrigation in order to enhance agriculture and improve the liveli- hoods of the impoverished farmers. This article presents data on irrigation-based projects imple- mented by the Sadguru Foundation in the states of Gujarat (Dahod district) and Rajasthan (Jhalawar and Banswara districts) between 1977 and 2008. The Dahod district (area 3642 km²) of Gujarat State has a population of 1,636,433 of which 72 percent belong to the Bhil tribe. It receives 860 mm of average rainfall resulting in drought every third year. The Banswara district (area 5037 km²) of Rajasthan State has a population of 1,500,420 of which 94 percent live in rural areas. The Jhalawar district (area 6928 km²) is one among the least developed in Rajasthan State (population 1,180,342; 86% rural). Average rainfall is about 95–1000 mm (Government of India, 2001). All the above three districts are among the poorest in the country.

Villages located in Gujarat and Rajasthan were visited between January 2007 and December 2008 to record data on lift irrigation systems set up in check dams and their benefits to the dryland farmers. Information on lift irrigation operation, water source, lifting heights, total cost, irrigated area expansion and number of beneficiaries was pooled from the archives of the Sadguru Foundation. A total of 250 farmers were randomly selected in villages to gather data on households, sex ratio, land holdings, irrigation area, crops grown, security of food grains and immigration patterns. Major monsoon crops (Kharif in Hindi) recorded during this study were maize and paddy (June–September) while post-monsoon crops (Rabi in Hindi) included wheat, maize, gram, and pulses (October– February). Statistical Analysis System software was used for analyses, and all mean values are presented as ± 1 standard deviation (SAS Institute, 2000). Spearman correlations were used to test the relationships among the number of lift irrigation systems, the number of farmers and the size of irrigated area. The General Linear Model was used to test the effect of state (Gujarat/Rajasthan) and number of lift irrigation systems on the dependent variables (expansion of irrigated area).

Community benefits of lift irrigation

A total of 286 lift irrigations were established in Gujarat and Rajasthan, benefiting 120,552 farmers (average lift irrigation/taluka = 19.1 ± 20.2, n = 15, range 1–76; average irrigation cooperatives/ taluka = 18.1 ± 19.1; see Table 1). The average number of benefitted farmers was 8036.8 (± 9719.1, n = 15) and the expansion of irrigated area averaged 1362.5 acres(± 1655.77, range 24–5951; see Table 1). Gujarat had 189 lift irrigations with 181 cooperatives while Rajasthan had 97 lift irriga- tions with 91 cooperatives, showing increasing support from farmers, government agencies and donors. In addition to the irrigation cooperative members, other farmers who had farms in the vicinity of the irrigation scheme also benefitted by getting water from the lift irrigation systems. The total expansion of irrigated area was 20,438 acres, and 70.8 percent was in Gujarat, benefitting 90,774 farmers. Gujarat’s Jhalod taluka had the highest number of lift irrigation (26.6%) and coop- eratives (n = 72), benefitting 34,722 farmers and expanding 5951 acres of irrigated land. The

26 International Social Work 58(1)

number of lift irrigations was significantly correlated with the number of beneficiaries and size of irrigated area (p < 0.001, Spearman correlation, n = 15). Furthermore, the number of lift irrigations had significant impact on the size of irrigated area (F1, 12 = 207.27, p < 0.001).

Case studies of crop yields recorded in six villages, namely Parasali, Khejadia, Motizer, Zerjitgadh, Motadharola and Sampoi, showed the highest agricultural productivity in the post-mon- soon season for grams and pulses (85.1%). Productivity increased from 96.3 kg/acre (± 88.2) to 648.17 kg/acre (± 370.3). Similarly, the post-monsoon maize yield after the establishment of lift irrigation systems also increased dramatically, by 79.2 percent (from 140 kg/acre ± 198 to 671.5 kg/ acre ± 449.0). Prior to the involvement of social workers, all households in the above villages had faced food shortages and farmers had to migrate to nearby towns and cities in search of work. After social workers set up the lift irrigation systems and taught community members how to manage the irrigation water through the village-level irrigation cooperatives, farmers attained self-sufficiency in food grain production leading to the end of seasonal migration. The lift irrigation systems also played a major role in reducing the usage of diesel engines and fuel cost. For example, a farmer had to spend one US dollar on an hourly basis previously due to the use of diesel engine. But after switching to the electricity-based lift irrigation system, 50 percent of the diesel cost was reduced.

Applied social work in community irrigation

The idea of irrigation-based social work is based on the fact that drylands receive adequate mon- soon rains and if harvested, it will greatly improve agriculture in the water-scarce drylands. The Sadguru Foundation has two founding directors and both have a Master’s degree in social work. They lead a team of 20 social workers (with social work university education) and 30 irrigation engineers. Farmers knew this and hence approached the Foundation’s social workers for help. The Foundation’s directors then assigned two social workers to each village to discuss with community

Table 1. Community irrigation cooperatives established in villages of Gujarat and Rajasthan States of India till December 2008.

State Taluk No. of lift irrigation systems

No. of irrigation co-operatives

No. of members

No. benefitted farmers

Expansion of irrigated areas (acre)

Gujarat Dahod 42 42 3859 23,316 3156 Garbada 7 7 1300 5550 854 Fatepura 5 4 378 1734 581 Limkheda 32 30 2609 15,126 2731 Devgarg Bariya 16 15 643 6756 672 Jhalod 76 72 6067 34,722 5951 Dhanpur 11 11 503 3570 518 Rajasthan Kushalgarh 36 31 2032 10,074 2475 Bagidora 15 15 500 3852 563 Choti sarvan 1 1 29 348 24 Gadhi 3 2 99 714 112 Aaspur 4 4 172 684 141 Simalwada 11 11 346 1860 164 Dug 21 21 1359 9672 2246 Bhawanimandi 6 6 254 2574 250 Mean 19.1 18.1 1343.3 8036.8 1362.5

Agoramoorthy and Hsu 27

members and get to know their needs for water-harvesting structures. During the meetings, social workers motivated farmers to mobilize themselves to form irrigation cooperatives so that the lift irrigation infrastructure could be maintained by the people. Afterwards, civil engineers accompa- nied by social workers conducted field surveys to fix the lift irrigation distribution chambers and water lifting points in the villages. The participation and consultation of farmers were crucial dur- ing the survey because of the necessity of learning about the past history of watersheds. Afterwards, social workers had to write grant proposals to raise funds through government agencies and private donors to construct irrigation infrastructures. The foundation raised a total of USD 1.46 million on average during 1997–2008 from government agencies (Water Resources, Tribal Development and Rural Development). The second largest funding of USD 0.70 million came from international sponsors (Ford Foundation, Aga Khan Foundation and Norwegian Agency for Development). It was followed by corporate sponsors, namely Mafatlals, Jamsetji Tata Trust, Sir Ratan Tata Trust and Sir Dorabji Tata Trust (USD 0.58 million).

After the setting up of community-level cooperatives in the villages by social workers, farmers were eligible to get water from the participatory system. Each cooperative was managed by a com- mittee of 12 members and they were elected to represent the community while two social workers served as advisors. The committee was headed by a chairman assisted by a secretary, who kept financial records and organized monthly meetings. The cooperative oversaw auditing, water distri- bution, collection of fees, electricity bill payment, staff salaries, maintaining/repairing machinery, and solving irrigation disputes. When farmers were unable to pay dues, they were allowed to pay in full before the next irrigation season with an annual interest of 20 percent. The cooperatives saved money and profits were deposited in banks indicating financial self-sufficiency at village level. It also shows how well farmers managed their cooperatives with the support of social work- ers. The Sadguru Foundation gave technical training to community members to learn skills in machinery maintenance, water pricing, record-keeping, accounting, public relations, conflict reso- lution, fundraising, business, leadership, and natural resource management. The applied social work at village-level contributed to the empowerment of community members who became self- reliant and confident in managing irrigation projects. Social workers made a special effort to ensure the participation of women in the training since they are involved in the decision-making process of rural agriculture activities. They also continue to work with communities to manage the lift irrigation systems and village-level cooperatives.

The involvement of social workers at grassroots level is critical during crisis. For example, in Alawa village of Rajasthan (population 1000), farmers started pumping water using diesel engines from two check dams. The dams were built on the Ahu river in 2007 with a storage capacity of 25 m cft. The dams irrigated 500 acres benefitting 150 households. Seeing the progress, neighboring villagers started competing for water by placing long hoses for 3–6 km in order to transport water. The conflict among farmers became intense in January 2008 so they approached social workers for help. Subsequently, a meeting of all parties involved including the senior authors to resolve the conflict. At the meeting, two social workers from the Sadguru Foundation provided solutions. Finally, all parties agreed to implement the following to resolve the standoff: i) source for low water consuming crops, ii) set up rules to restrict water use by farmers from adjoining villages, iii) minimize water wastage, iv) reduce the use of the polluting diesel engines and replace them with electrified motors managed by the community, and v) discuss with engineers the possibility of increasing the height of check dams to hold more water. The above solutions coincided with the recommendations of the International Water Management Institute that called for the wise use of water for agriculture. It also showed how the social workers played a crucial role in mitigating the conflict involving water resources among two villages (Molden, 2007).

28 International Social Work 58(1)

Empowering communities through social work

By working with farmers in villages across the dryland states of Gujarat and Rajasthan, social workers from the Sadguru Foundation created several village-level cooperatives and registered under India’s Cooperative Societies Act. Between 1980 and 2010, a total of 2577 village institu- tions were created that include lift irrigation cooperatives, horticulture groups, women’s self-help groups, watershed associations and dairy cooperatives with a total membership of 334,259 (Table 2). The creation of such cooperatives is fundamental not only to managing water infrastructures, but also to improving the livelihoods of local people. Similarly, diverse social networks of civic associations are known to confront poverty, resolve social disputes and provide opportunities for community development (Midgley and Livermore, 1998; Varshney, 2000).

Moreover, the Sadguru Foundation’s social workers gave direct employment to farming com- munities while constructing irrigation infrastructures. Between 1985 and 2010, 430,719 person- days with 62.7 percent involvement of women benefitted through the employment. Furthermore, farmers usually relied on migration to nearby towns in search of jobs and after the construction of check dams and lift irrigation systems, farmers had access to irrigation water, stopping the migra- tion. The average number of people migrating before in villages was 74.58 (± 40.36, range 18– 143, n = 12) with 178.83 average days (± 22.44, range 137–219, n = 12). Afterwards, the number of people migrating to towns and cities reduced to 25.58 (± 13.30, range 6–48, n = 12) with 57.5 aver- age days (± 30.26, range 9–111, n = 12). The reduction in migration showed gender differences as well: for example, migration of men reduced by 61 percent, from an average of 45.75 (± 18.85, n = 12) to 17.83 (22.44, n = 12), while women’s migration reduced even more, by 73 percent, from an average of 28.83 (± 23.97, n = 12) to 7.75 (7.03, n = 12). This indicates that irrigation- based social work can minimize migration and maximize livelihood opportunities for the dryland farmers.

Discussion

A total of USD 10.75 million was spent to complete all the lift irrigation structures between 1990 and 2008. In 2008 alone, the irrigated land area increased to 1575 acres from 13 completed check dams, followed by 1303.5 acres from nine check dams completed in 1995. Most of the lift irriga- tion established in rivers (82.6%) benefitted people between 1995 and 2008 with an expansion of

Table 2. Village-level institutions associated with the Sadguru Foundation (1980–2010).

Name of village-level institution No. of village-level institutions

No. of members

Lift irrigation cooperative 333 25,495 Check dam management group 239 1912 Joint forest management group 27 4339 Horticulture cooperative-women 07 6947 Horticulture group-women 279 15,122 Women’s self-help group 1430 16,498 Farmers’ group 147 1822 Watershed association 40 14,221 Drinking water committee 33 610 Dairy cooperative 42 2766 Total 2577 89,732

Agoramoorthy and Hsu 29

10,619 acres. Overall, USD 11.31 million was spent between 1977 and 2008 to complete the lift irrigation schemes that expanded 43,900 acres of irrigated land, ultimately helping 23,000 households.

The Sadguru Foundation has gained a reputation for building high quality irrigation infra- structures with experienced engineers supported by professional social workers (Jagawat, 2005). Moreover, participation of community members at grassroots level in villages is impor- tant: only then will rural development work succeed (Cox and Pawar, 2006). Unfortunately, government agencies across India, while building minor irrigation infrastructures such as check dams and lift irrigation systems, do not emphasize the participatory approach and seldom con- sult with social workers, and as a result, many schemes often end in failure (Choudhry et al., 2002; Jagawat, 2005).

The government of the desert state of Rajasthan is more sympathetic to farmers even now by subsidizing or cancelling costly electricity bills during drought years. This approach can be extended to other dryland states across India to help farmers in crisis since they lack crop loss insurances. Another issue affecting rural farmers is the shortage of electricity. Unfortunately, India does not produce adequate electricity. It generates 129,000 MW of power annually but the demand is 200,000 MW. Farmers in Rajasthan get only six to eight hours of electricity daily while in Madhya Pradesh only two to four hours. The Prime Minister of India has called the electricity shortage a national emergency and admitted the lack of foresight on the part of policy-makers in tackling this looming social crisis (Singh, 2007). It is hoped that India’s bilateral nuclear agreement with the USA and the growing renewable energy options involving solar and wind power may help to ease the power distress in future (Agoramoorthy, 2012).

When people collaborate to create their own social rules, opportunities for individuals and col- lective empowerment can emerge (Ostrom, 1992; Singh et al., 2001). Participatory approaches to managing irrigation, agriculture, forestry, mining, watershed, and fisheries have been known to improve livelihoods (Beck, 2001; Pretty, 1995). When rural farmers face economic hardships due to sudden crop failure, the final safety net of survival constitutes their friends, family members and social workers. The formation of grassroots irrigation cooperatives collectively formed by commu- nity members with the assistance and leadership of social workers serve as a form of ‘social capital’ with the potential to ease social and economic crises. When farmers form diverse social networks via civic associations similar to the irrigation cooperatives highlighted in this article, they are in a better position to solve problems related to economic loss, crop failure, poverty, social conflicts and suicide (Isham, 2000; Narayan, 1995; Varshney, 2000). In fact, India’s crop failures and bankruptcy have led to an average of 15,000 farmer suicides annually (NCRB, 2007). India, being a signatory to the World Trade Organization (WTO), it is under pressure to open its market to the globalized economy. So, the impoverished farmers will certainly need assistance to improve agriculture and for this reason the irrigation-based applied social work presented in this article has great potential to reduce poverty by reviving economic development at the grassroots level.

Acknowledgements

The authors extend sincere thanks to Harnath Jagawat and Sharmishta Jagawat, directors of the Sadguru Foundation for their generous hospitality, encouragement and support. The contributions of Sunita Chaudhary and Kanhaiya Choudhry for sharing their experiences on check dams and lift irrigation are acknowledged with gratitude.

Funding

The financial support of Sir Dorabji Tata Trust (Mumbai, India) to carry out research at the Sadguru Foundation through Tata Visiting Chair status awarded to the senior authors is greatly appreciated.

30 International Social Work 58(1)

References

Agoramoorthy, G. (2009) Sustainable Development: The Power of Water to Ease Poverty and Enhance Ecol- ogy. Delhi: Daya Publishing House.

Agoramoorthy, G. (2012) ‘India Should Exploit Renewable Energy’, Nature 481: 145. Agoramoorthy, G. and M.J. Hsu (2008) ‘Reviving India’s Grassroots Social Work for Sustainable Develop-

ment’, International Social Work 51: 544–55. Barnabas, A.P., P.D. Kulkarni, M.C. Nanavatty, and R.R. Singh (1996) ‘The Social Development Summit and

the Developing Countries’, Social Development Issues 18: 79–84. Beck, T. (2001) ‘Building on Poor People’s Capacities: The Case of Common Property Resources in India and

West Africa’, World Development 29: 119–33. Bhattarai, M., R. Barker, and A. Narayanamoorthy (2007) ‘Who Benefits from Irrigation Development

in India? Implications of Irrigation Multipliers for Irrigation Financing’, Irrigation and Drainage 56: 207–25.

Borch, K. (2007) ‘Emerging Technologies in Favor of Sustainable Agriculture’, Futures 39: 1045–66. Brisco, J. (1999) ‘The Changing Face of Water Infrastructure Financing in Developing Countries’, Interna-

tional Journal of Water Resources Development 15: 301–08. Chitale, M.A. (1994) ‘Irrigation for Poverty Alleviation’, Water Resources Development 10: 383–91. Choudhry, K., H. Shah, and H. Jagawat (2002) A Study of Government-installed Lift Irrigation Schemes in

District Jhabua, Madhya Pradesh. Dahod: Sadguru Foundation. Cox, D. and M. Pawar (2006) International Social Work. New Delhi: SAGE. Droogers, P. (2002) Global Irrigated Area Mapping: Overview and Recommendations. Colombo: IWMI. FAO (2001) Food and Agriculture Organization database, available online at: www.apps.fao.org. Government of India (2001) Census of India 2001. Delhi: Government of India Press. Isham, J. (2000) ‘The Effect of Social Capital on Technology Adoption: Evidence from Rural Tanzania’, IRIS

Center Working Paper No. 235. Jagawat, H. (2005) Transforming the Dry Lands. The Sadguru Story of Western India. Delhi: India Research

Press. Janaiah, A., M.L. Bose, and A.G. Agarwal (2000) ‘Poverty and Income Distribution in Rainfed and Irrigated

Ecosystems: Village Studies in Chattisgarh’, Economic and Political Weekly 30: 4664–9. Jewitt, S. and K. Baker (2007) ‘The Green Revolution Re-assessed: Insider Perspective on Agrarian Change

in Bulandshahr District, Western Uttar Pradesh, India’, Geoforum 38: 73–89. Jha, P. (2002) Land Reforms in India. New Delhi: SAGE. Kashwan, P. (2006) ‘Traditional Water Harvesting Structure: Community Behind Community’, Economic

and Political Weekly 18: 596–8. Kessler, J.J. (1994) ‘Usefulness of Human Carrying Capacity Concept in Assessing Ecological Sustainability

of Land-use in Semi-arid Regions’, Agriculture Ecosystem and Environment 48: 273–84. Mehta, A.K. and T. Satpathy (2008) ‘Escaping Poverty: The Ralegan Siddhi Case’, CPRC Working Paper No.

119, Chronic Poverty Research Centre, London, UK. Midgley, J. and M Livermore (1998) ‘Social Capital and Local Economic Development: Implications for

Community Social Work practice’, Journal of Community Practice 5(1/2): 29–40. Minj, S. (1999) Lift Irrigation to Lift from Poverty. Delhi: Manak Publication. NCRB (2007) Accidental Death and Suicide in India. Delhi: National Crime Records Bureau, Ministry of

Home Affairs, Government of India. Molden, D. (2007) Water for Food, Water for Life. London: Earthscan. Nanavatty, M.C. (1990) ‘Changing Pattern of Social Work Education in Developing Countries with Special

Reference to India: Need for Alternate Models’, Indian Journal of Social Work 2: 309–21. Narayan, D. (1995) Designing Community-based Development. Washington, DC: World Bank. Ostrom, E. (1992) Crafting Institutions: Self-governing Irrigation Systems. San Francisco, CA: Institute for

Contemporary Studies. Postel, S. (1999) Pillar of Sand: Can the Irrigation Miracle Last? New York: W.W. Norton. Pretty, J. (1995) ‘Participatory Learning for Sustainable Agriculture’, World Development 23: 1247–63.

Agoramoorthy and Hsu 31

Reijntjes, C., B. Haverkort, and A. Waters-Bayer (1992) Farming for the Future: An Introduction to LEISA. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

SAS Institute (2000) SAS/ETS Software: Changes and Enhancements. Release 8.1. Cary, NC: SAS Institute. Singh, M. (2007) ‘Power Shortages of this Magnitude Can Be a Serious Impediment to Economic Activity’,

Times of India, 30 May. Singh, S., T. Coelli, and E. Fleming (2001) ‘Performance of Diary Plants in the Cooperative and Private Sec-

tors in India’, Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics 72: 452–79. van Wiren-Lehr, S. (2001) ‘Sustainability in Agriculture: An Evaluation of

Principal Goal-oriented Concepts to Close the Gap between Theory and Practice’, Agriculture Ecosystem and Environment 84: 115–29.

Varshney, A. (2000) Ethnic Conflict and Civic Life: Hindus and Muslims in India. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Xu, X.Z., H.W. Zhang, and Q Zhang. (2004) ‘Development of Check Dam Systems in Gullies on the Loess Plateau, China’, Environment Science and Policy 7: 79–86.

Author biographies

Govindasamy Agoramoorthy is Distinguished Research Professor in the College of Humanities and Social Sciences, Tajen University, Yanpu, Pingtung 907, Taiwan and Tata Visiting Chair, Sadguru Foundation, Gujarat State, India.

Minna J. Hsu is Professor in the Department of Biological Sciences, National Sun Yat-sen University, Kaohsiung 804, Taiwan.