318
15 Agricultural Water Management in Northern China
15.4 Key Sectoral Reforms
Many issues impact agricultural water resources management. Therefore, in
reviewing policy changes in China, the main driving forces can grouped into three
areas: sectoral factors, external factors, and field-level factors. Sectoral factors
include internal changes to agricultural water resources management, such as
those involving water resources management institutions, water rights, and pricing.
External factors are those that impact agricultural water resources management but
are not specific to the sector, such as financing and subsidies. Field-level factors
include those changes happening in the field that are introduced and promoted by
public agencies or innovated by farmers.
15.4.1 Institutional Reform
Since 1990, two key institutional reforms have been directly connected with agricultural water resources management: one is water infrastructure management institutional reform; the other is WUA development. Both of them have led to the formation
of a full range of organizations in terms of water supply services.
15.4.1.1 Water Infrastructure Management Institutional Reform
The nationwide reform of how water infrastructure is managed was outlined in
2002 in a policy paper on hydraulic engineering issued by the Office of the State
Council (see list, above). At that time, water infrastructure management organizations (including those responsible for agricultural water resources such as irrigation
district management bureaus/stations) were short of revenues and had limited budgets
for operation and maintenance, resulting from institutional and mechanical problems
and water pricing. Budget shortages caused a lack of regular maintenance and thus
less efficient infrastructure.
The aim of the policy was to reform management institutions and improve operational mechanisms. This included developing the following: water infrastructure
management institutions with clear functions, responsibilities, and accountabilities;
water infrastructure that abides by scientific principles and normal practices; marketbased, professional, provided-by-society water infrastructure maintenance systems;
a rational water pricing formulation mechanism, as well as collecting and metering
methods; a standard capital input, use, management, and supervision mechanism;
and lastly, a policy and legal support system.
The first step of the reform was to clarify the nature of water infrastructure management organizations and to define their positions and staffing. Three organizational
groups of agencies were developed, according to their respective tasks and revenue
sources:
15 Agricultural Water Management in Northern China
15.4 Key Sectoral Reforms
Many issues impact agricultural water resources management. Therefore, in
reviewing policy changes in China, the main driving forces can grouped into three
areas: sectoral factors, external factors, and field-level factors. Sectoral factors
include internal changes to agricultural water resources management, such as
those involving water resources management institutions, water rights, and pricing.
External factors are those that impact agricultural water resources management but
are not specific to the sector, such as financing and subsidies. Field-level factors
include those changes happening in the field that are introduced and promoted by
public agencies or innovated by farmers.
15.4.1 Institutional Reform
Since 1990, two key institutional reforms have been directly connected with agricultural water resources management: one is water infrastructure management institutional reform; the other is WUA development. Both of them have led to the formation
of a full range of organizations in terms of water supply services.
15.4.1.1 Water Infrastructure Management Institutional Reform
The nationwide reform of how water infrastructure is managed was outlined in
2002 in a policy paper on hydraulic engineering issued by the Office of the State
Council (see list, above). At that time, water infrastructure management organizations (including those responsible for agricultural water resources such as irrigation
district management bureaus/stations) were short of revenues and had limited budgets
for operation and maintenance, resulting from institutional and mechanical problems
and water pricing. Budget shortages caused a lack of regular maintenance and thus
less efficient infrastructure.
The aim of the policy was to reform management institutions and improve operational mechanisms. This included developing the following: water infrastructure
management institutions with clear functions, responsibilities, and accountabilities;
water infrastructure that abides by scientific principles and normal practices; marketbased, professional, provided-by-society water infrastructure maintenance systems;
a rational water pricing formulation mechanism, as well as collecting and metering
methods; a standard capital input, use, management, and supervision mechanism;
and lastly, a policy and legal support system.
The first step of the reform was to clarify the nature of water infrastructure management organizations and to define their positions and staffing. Three organizational
groups of agencies were developed, according to their respective tasks and revenue
sources: