Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Kerala, Maharashtra, and Assam. The
results also indicate that several states are at the low end of efficiency scale (below
national average) such as Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Punjab, Kerala,
Maharashtra, and Uttar Pradesh. It implies that the potential for easier gains through
technical efficiency tends to be higher in these states. At the other end of the scale,
the above-mentioned states have operated at relatively higher levels of efficiency,
suggesting little scope for improvement.
The sub-period analysis shows that an increase in efficiency is achieved mainly
in Kerala, Gujarat, Bihar, Karnataka, Odisha, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, and
West Bengal. The deterioration in efficiency is visible in Assam, Himachal Pradesh,
Uttar Pradesh–Uttarakhand, and Andhra Pradesh–Telangana. This implies lack of
efficiency gains due to inappropriate use of technology or combination of inputs or
higher expenditure than required. The result for Andhra Pradesh–Telangana combined should be taken cautiously. Since the inception of the state Telangana,
considerable initiatives have been taken to make irrigation water available to
farmers under the Pradhaan Mantri Krishi Sinchai Yozna. Perhaps a disaggregated
analysis of the two states can show higher level of efficiency in Telangana.
The result from output-oriented model (output, i.e. % share of canal irrigated
area increases while keeping the inputs, i.e. capital and revenue expenditures
constant) is fairly similar to the first approach. The all India average TE score is
slightly lower at 0.52 compared to the input model at 0.59. While the ranking of
states in terms of scores remains unchanged, the values of indexes in some of the
states are slightly different compared to the values obtained in the first model. There
is enough potential to improve efficiency through expenditure in most of the states
(average 52% from the efficiency frontier) with a few exceptions. A sub-period
analysis of TE performance again provides mixed results. J&K, Madhya Pradesh
and West Bengal are among the top in experiencing technical efficiency throughout.
The turnaround is found in Assam and Uttarakhand with a significant deterioration
in efficiency change. Gujarat, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, and Bihar registered a
spectacular performance over the years. These results have implications for good
governance and the fact that public policy should focus more on outcomes rather
than on outlays.
Finally, results on slacks from output-oriented model are given in Table 10. The
slack inputs are indicative of the excess inputs. It is calculated as the difference
between actual input consumed minus the target input a state/institution should
have consumed. An efficient unit will have zero input–output slacks. The results
show that the inefficiency is more due to capital expenditure which has also
increased over the period. On an average, a state utilises the capital and revenue
expenditures efficiently, but the capital is being used in excess in some of the states.
Based on recent years analysis, if a state aspires to be efficient, it should reduce
about Rs. 5905 per ha of capital expenditure and Rs. 499 per ha of revenue
expenditure. Among the states, Gujarat, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh,
Himachal Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Bihar, and Uttar Pradesh can easily reduce
expenditure by avoiding delays in the completion of projects and maintaining
day-to-day expenses.
Estimating Efficiency of Public Investment in Irrigation ...
61
results also indicate that several states are at the low end of efficiency scale (below
national average) such as Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Punjab, Kerala,
Maharashtra, and Uttar Pradesh. It implies that the potential for easier gains through
technical efficiency tends to be higher in these states. At the other end of the scale,
the above-mentioned states have operated at relatively higher levels of efficiency,
suggesting little scope for improvement.
The sub-period analysis shows that an increase in efficiency is achieved mainly
in Kerala, Gujarat, Bihar, Karnataka, Odisha, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, and
West Bengal. The deterioration in efficiency is visible in Assam, Himachal Pradesh,
Uttar Pradesh–Uttarakhand, and Andhra Pradesh–Telangana. This implies lack of
efficiency gains due to inappropriate use of technology or combination of inputs or
higher expenditure than required. The result for Andhra Pradesh–Telangana combined should be taken cautiously. Since the inception of the state Telangana,
considerable initiatives have been taken to make irrigation water available to
farmers under the Pradhaan Mantri Krishi Sinchai Yozna. Perhaps a disaggregated
analysis of the two states can show higher level of efficiency in Telangana.
The result from output-oriented model (output, i.e. % share of canal irrigated
area increases while keeping the inputs, i.e. capital and revenue expenditures
constant) is fairly similar to the first approach. The all India average TE score is
slightly lower at 0.52 compared to the input model at 0.59. While the ranking of
states in terms of scores remains unchanged, the values of indexes in some of the
states are slightly different compared to the values obtained in the first model. There
is enough potential to improve efficiency through expenditure in most of the states
(average 52% from the efficiency frontier) with a few exceptions. A sub-period
analysis of TE performance again provides mixed results. J&K, Madhya Pradesh
and West Bengal are among the top in experiencing technical efficiency throughout.
The turnaround is found in Assam and Uttarakhand with a significant deterioration
in efficiency change. Gujarat, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, and Bihar registered a
spectacular performance over the years. These results have implications for good
governance and the fact that public policy should focus more on outcomes rather
than on outlays.
Finally, results on slacks from output-oriented model are given in Table 10. The
slack inputs are indicative of the excess inputs. It is calculated as the difference
between actual input consumed minus the target input a state/institution should
have consumed. An efficient unit will have zero input–output slacks. The results
show that the inefficiency is more due to capital expenditure which has also
increased over the period. On an average, a state utilises the capital and revenue
expenditures efficiently, but the capital is being used in excess in some of the states.
Based on recent years analysis, if a state aspires to be efficient, it should reduce
about Rs. 5905 per ha of capital expenditure and Rs. 499 per ha of revenue
expenditure. Among the states, Gujarat, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh,
Himachal Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Bihar, and Uttar Pradesh can easily reduce
expenditure by avoiding delays in the completion of projects and maintaining
day-to-day expenses.
Estimating Efficiency of Public Investment in Irrigation ...
61