Virtual Water Trade in Dairy Economy: Irrigation Water Productivity in Gujarat Author(s): O. P.

Singh, Amrita Sharma, Rahul Singh, Tushaar Shah Source: Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 39, No. 31 (Jul. 31 - Aug. 6, 2004), pp. 3492-3497 Published by: Economic and Political Weekly Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4415345 . Accessed: 30/09/2011 10:00
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Economic and Political Weekly is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Economic and Political Weekly.

http://www.jstor.org

Virtual

Water

Trade
Water

in

Dairy

Economy
Gujarat

Irrigation

Productivity in

During the past 50 years, Gujarat has led India's exemplarygrowth in dairy production by forging the world's best known cooperative movement.Thanksto the market access and production enhancementprogrammes run by cooperatives, dairying has emerged -at the centre stage of rural livelihoods systems in arid and semi-arid regions. However, intensification of dairying has been accompanied by intensive use of water used in growingfeed and fodder. This study estimates that dairying-based rural livelihoods systems are now threatening the limited water resources of arid and semi-arid areas, and their future in turn is threatened by the depletion of these resources. The paper analyses virtual water exports and imports by some of the leading dairy cooperatives of Gujarat.

OP SINGH, AMRITA SHARMA,RAHUL SINGH, TUSHAARSHAH

I

Introduction
ith the adventof green revolutiontechnologiesand water-intensive on for crops,thepressure groundwater T Tirrigation hasenormously increased Gujarat in [Bhatia levels leadingto increase 1992].Seculardeclinein groundwater in cost of waterabstraction is structures depriving resource poor, small, and marginalfarmersof direct access to groundwater. Those, whose wells have dried up, largely depend on water from rich well ownersoften at prohibitive purchased pricesto sustainirrigated [Gass et al 1996; IRMA/UNICEF agriculture 2001]. To cope with the situation,farmersare shiftingto low water-intensive 2000, cropshavinghigheconomicvalue[Kumar Kumarforthcoming].Farmersare also switching from crop production to dairy production given the short-termcash flow andstable income from it. The dairy industryhas seen a after inception 'Operation the of FloodProgramme' major upswing in India, whichwaslaunched theNational by DairyDevelopment Board,Anandin 1970.Indiahasemergedas thelargestproducer of milkin the worldby attaining milliontonnesduring2001 81 is of [Singhand Pundir2003]. Gujarat one of the fore runners in But trend added has dairyproduction thecountry. thischanging to the burdenon alreadystressedgroundwater resources. involvesnot only directconsumptive wateruse Dairyfarming but waterin green by cattlefor milkproduction, also embedded fodderandbyproducts cerealcropsandothercerealsandcrop of residues arefed to cattle.Dairyfarmers Gujarat heavily that in are dependenton importof dry fodder and feed, which points to growingtradein 'virtualwater' [Allan 1993]. Virtualwateris definedas thevolumeof waterrequired produce commodity to a or service [Allan 1998; Hoekstra1998]. It has also been called water'[Hoekstra 'embedded of water 1993].The transfer virtual embeddedin variouscommoditiesand services thatare traded is becomingan important elementof watermanagement discussions at global as well as regionallevel, particularly regions in whichexperiencewaterdeficitsfor food production [Chapagain and Hoekstra2003]. Chapagainand Hoekstra (2003) have developeda methodologyto quantifythe virtualwaterflows between nations through trading of livestock and livestock W 3492

to watertrade products. According theirestimates, globalvirtual is to through cropandlivestockproducts estimated be 940 km3/ year, equivalentto a quarterof India's annualprecipitation. Livestockand livestockproductsaccountedfor 26 per cent of this trade. A dairyanimalrequiresonly about70 and 80 litresof water per day in the form of drinkingwater.Lactatingdairyanimal requiressome more waterto producemilk (2.5 litres drinking waterperlitreof milkproduction). cow or a buffaloproducing A 10 litres of milk a day, then, would requireabout 100 litresof water (Trivedi, communication, 2003).Butthis drinking personal is only the tip of the icebergso faras wateruse in dairyfarming is concerned. SinghandKishore(2003) foundthataverage daily waterused by buffalo and crossbredcow in Mehsanadistrict of Gujarat was 10.18 m3 and 10.51 m3, respectively,with the of water share drinking beingless then1percent,whileembedded wateraccountsfor the rest.

II and Objectives Methodology

The objectives of this paper are to: (i) quantifythe total waterused for crop and dairyproduction different in irrigation and wateruse in dairyproduction regionof Gujarat, disaggregate for buffalo,crossbred cows and indigenouscows; (ii) estimate the irrigation waterproductivity crop and dairyproduction of both in agronomicand economic terms;and (iii) quantifythe virtualwatertradethroughtradingof milk in differentregions of Gujarat. The studycoveredfive districtcooperative dairycooperative unionsfallingin threedistinctregionsof Gujarat: Anandand (a) Surat districts dairy unions in south and central Gujarat; districtsdairy unions in north (b) Mehsanaand Banaskantha and Gujarat; (c) Rajkotdistrict dairyunionin Saurashtra region. Twovillageswereselectedfromeachunionandfromeachvillage a sampleof 30 dairyfarminghouseholdswas surveyed. Mehsanaand Banaskantha in the northGujarat fall region, whichis 'absolutely waterscarce'going by MalinFalkenmark's indexof physicalwaterscarcity[IRMA/UNICEF 2001]. Rajkot districtfalls in Saurashtra, which accordingto the same index
Economic and Political Weekly July 31, 2004

Figure 1: Imported Virtual Water Use in Milk Production (Per Animal/Day)

30 s-

%25.
I25-

AX

* Buffalo

Cow 0 Crossbred

IIndigenousCow | il
6 0

l20"
15.

10 *ot .n-C
and South Central Gujarat Saurasntra

;
North Gujarat

is a 'water scarce' region. Anand and Surat fall in south and central Gujarat, which is a 'water abundant' region (ibid). The study considered both direct consumptive water use and embedded water use (irrigation water used for producing inputs of dairy production) to estimate total water used for dairy production. The estimates understate true water use because all calculations are done for irrigation water use; the use of rainfall and soil moisture is excluded. Throughout the paper then by 'water productivity', we mean 'irrigation water productivity'. Table 1: Gross Cropped Area and Percentage Area under Fodder Crops (Areain Ha)
Year Kheda 1975-76 1980-81 1985-86 1990-91 1995-96 29910 [5.14] 35551 [5.94] 26336 [4.61] 24863 [4.09] 24585 [3.76] Surat Name of the District Mehsana Rajkot 23157 [3.02] 26260 [3.24] 16200 [2.24] 18734 [2.31] 64790 [8.35] 47882 [5.27] 55160 [6.25] 61556 [6.87] 95265 [11.02] 128134 [13.88] Banaskantha 143553 [14.65] 159117 [16.51] 152232 [15.70] 154291 [14.69] 211503 [18.79]

The following formulation was employed to quantify irrigation water use for crop production and included all majorcrops grown in the respective regions. Total water use (m3) = Number of irrigation x Hours per irrigation x Pump discharge (m3/hrs) Water productivity for crop production is calculated as: Crop water productivity (kg/m3) = Crop output (kg)/Total water used (m3) The total water used for dairy production depends on two variables: (i) drinking water; and (ii) irrigation water used for the production of green and dry fodder and concentrates. The water used per day per animal is defined as: Total water use (m3/day/animal) = (Drinking water (m3) + Green fodder (m3) + Dry fodder (m3) + Concentrate (m3)) Milk production per m3 of water is calculated as: Water productivity in milk production (litre/m3) = Milk production (litre)/Water use (m3)

ResultsandDiscussion
During 2000-01, total milk production in the state was 53.13 lakh metric tonnes and it accounted for 6.57 per cent of India's milk production. The per capita milk availability was 294 grams/ day and is higher than the national average and also the nutritional requirement recommended by the Indian Council of Medical Research, i e, 250 grams/capita/day.Continuous and rapidgrowth in dairy production in Gujaratwas achieved through increase in holding of improved cattle breed, increase in use of balanced cattle feed, and improved veterinaryservices. Another significant important input of dairy production was expansion of irrigated fodder crops. The contribution of irrigated area under fodder crops to gross cropped area is presented in Table 1. The contribution of irrigated area under fodder crops has declined in south and central Gujarat during 1975-76 to 1995-96, whereas significant increase in the area under fodders is observed in north

III

65938 [14.61] 66612 [15.53] 65459 [15.32] 57959 [12.77] 58401 [11.92]

Note: Figure in parenthesis represents percentage area under fodder crops. Source: Government of Gujarat, undated.

Table 2: Water Use for Major Crop Production and Water Allocation Name of Crops South and CentralGuiarat MainProduct Total Byproduct A GreenFodder
1 Mayo 2 Jariya 677.76 1292.13 677.76 1292.13 -

Average Depthof Watering(mm) SaurashtraRegion MainProduct Byproduct Total

NorthGuiaratRegion MainProduct Byproduct Total

3 Alfalfa
4 Maize 5 PJowar

1080.19
276.39 1789.40 675.64 460.09 630.32 1168.19

180.29 97.77 86.20 74.62

1080.19
276.39 1969.69 675.64 557.85 716.52 1242.81

1320.45
274.36 81.31 370.65 160.53 -

13.20 ---

1320.45
274.36 -

2079.10
948.30 1067.50

2079.10
948.30 1067.50

B Cash Crops
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Sugar cane Tobacco Groundnut Cotton Cumin Castor Sesamum Mustard Green gram

--

94.51 370.65 160.53 -

1346.49 949.33 370.49 622.45 141.61 259.04 620.87

97.09 182.72

1346.49 949.33 370.49 622.45 141.61 356.14 803.57

C Foodgrain Crops
1 Bajara (K) 2 Bajara (S) 3 Paddy

4 Wheat

607.14
-

39.42
-

646.55
-

375.75
-

54.86
-

433.61
-

802.40
76.47 138.92 510.03

117.28
20.39 118.41 416.11

919.32
96.86 303.89 926.14

5 Guvar 6 Jowar (K) 7 Jowar (S)

Economic and Political Weekly

July 31, 2004

3493

Figure 2: VirtualWaterTrade by the MilkUnions, Gujarat

c, ,

1400-

1200 -

Gross Export 0 Net Import O Net Export

1 800 1. 600

";:y":

200

-200 -200

-55.65

Mehsana Milk Banaskantha Milk Union Union

Anand Milk Union

Rajkot Milk Union

Surat Milk Union

Gujarat and Saurashtra region during the same period of time (Table 1). Table 2 presents our survey data on the average depth of irrigation water applied by farmers to major crops and their allocation between main and byproduct. We allocated the total water used between main and byproduct according to the ratio of income from the main and byproducts [Dhondyal 1987]. Alfalfa is one of the important green fodders and is being grown by dairy farmers in all regions. Average depth of watering for alfalfa varied from 1,080 mm (in south and central Gujarat) to 2,079 mm (in north Gujarat). Dairy farmers are growing maize as a green fodder across the study area and its average depth of watering varied from 274 mm (Saurashtraregion) to 948 mm (north Gujarat). Sugar cane and tobacco are important among cash crops which farmersin south and centralGujaratgrow. Sugar cane is more water-intensive compared to tobacco (Table 2). In Saurashtra, highest water use occurs in cotton and the lowest in kharif groundnut. Among foodgrain crops, wheat is grown all over Gujarat and the depth of watering applied in it varied between 634 mm (in Saurashtra)and 919 mm (in north Gujarat). Seasonwise average daily feed and fodder input to in-milk and dry animal and calf were estimated first using our survey data; using average daily feeding pattern, these values were imputed into the entire life cycle of the animal. Based on these, the daily inputs of dairy production were estimated. In south and central Gujarat,of average daily fodder fed to dairy animals, large share comes from the local grasses, whereas bulk of the dry fodder fed is paddy straw. In case of concentrate, larger portion comes through balanced cattle feed ('Amuldan/Sumuldan') (Table 3). In Saurashtraregion, large share of greens comes from maize fodder (Table 3); while the most popular dry fodder in the region is groundnut straw. Balanced cattle feed ('Rajdan') and cottonseed cake are used as concentrates. Dairy farmers of Saurashtra breed the indigenous 'Gir cow', known for its endurance and relatively higher milk yield when compared to other non-descript cows. In north Gujaratregion, alfalfa is a preferredgreen fodder (Table 3); bajra and jowar straw are the main sources of dry fodder. The concentrate is given in the form of balanced cattle feed ('Sagardan'/'Banasdan') and cottonseed cake (Table 3). Across the regions, almost the same quantum of green and dry fodder is fed to in-milk and dry animals. However, the concentrate is fed only to in-milk and pregnant cows and buffaloes in advanced pregnancy. In south and central Gujarat, average daily milk production of buffalo and crossbred cow were estimated to be 1.87 litres and 2.90 litres per animal, respectively. Average daily milk production in Saurashtraregion for buffalo, crossbred cow and

indigenous cow are 4.72 litres/animal, 6.39 litres/animal and 4.08 litres/animal, respectively. For north Gujarat region, it is 3.82 litres/animal, 5.14 litres/animal, and 4.00 litres/animal for buffalo, crossbred cow, and indigenous cow, respectively. With shorter inter-calving period, less time to arrive at first calving stage and longer period of lactation, the average daily milk production of crossbred cow is more than that of buffalo and indigenous cow. Interregional variation in productivity of crossbredcows is probablyexplained by the differences in relative importanceof dairying in the livelihoods. In water abundantsouth and central Gujarat,crop production is the main source of livelihood but in water scarce north Gujarat and Saurashtra, dairy farming is the primary source of livelihood and crop production is secondary. Table 4 presents the physical, net, and gross value productivity of majorcrops grown across the three regions of Gujarat.Physical productivity is crop yield per unit of irrigation water (kgs/m3), whereas value productivity is the value of output per unit of irrigation water (Rs/m3). The physical and gross value productivity of water in alfalfa was found to be the highest in south and central Gujaratand lowest in north Gujarat(Table 4). Dairy farmers grow maize as a green fodder across the study area and physical and value productivity of water in maize production was highest in Saurashtraregion and lowest in northGujarat(Table 4). In south and central Gujaratfarmersgrow sugar cane and tobacco, and gross value productivity of water in tobacco was found to be higher than that of sugar cane. In Saurashtra region, value productivity of irrigationwater was the highest for kharifgroundnut and lowest for cumin (Table 4). In north Gujarat, cotton,
Table 3: Average Feed and Fodder Fed to Livestock in Different Regions of Gujarat (Kgs/day/animal) Nameof Feed SouthandCentral Saurashtra North Gujarat and Fodder Gujarat Region Buffalo Cow Buffalo CB Indigenous BuffaloCB Indigenous Cow Cow Cow Cow A Greenfodder 13.77 12.90 1Local grass 5.85 5.51 green 2 Sugarcane top 3.50 1.12 3 Mayo 1.51 0.91 4 Jariya 0.73 2.70 5 Alfalfa 0.72 1.34 6 Maize 0.68 0.39 7 Jowar 8 Pioneer jowar 9 Others 0.78 0.93 5.96 5.35 BDryfodder 1 Paddy straw 2.84 2.32 2 Bajara straw 1.95 2.75 3 Wheat straw 0.50 0.19 4 Jowar straw 0.37 0.10 5 Groundnut straw 6 Local grass C Concentrate 2.04 2.10 1 Balanced cattlefeed (Amuldan/Sumuldan/ Sagardan/ Banasdan) 0.99 1.56 2 Cotton cake 0.51 0.23 seed 3 Groundnut cake 4 Guvar 5 Maize 0.10 0.26 6 Others 0.44 0.05 D Drinking Water (Lts) 38.59 31.96 14.04 13.39 1.27 1.88 -. . 3.09 3.80 8.78 6.82 0.90 0.89 11.17 11.74 0.14 0.14 10.88 11.20 0.14 0.40 3.23 4.29 12.84 1.56 3.39 7.51 0.38 9.04 0.21 8.05 0.78 3.18 20.01 18.00 13.60 5.09 3.37 5.67 8.22 1.44 3.32 1.94 6.38 0.45 2.35 0.60 2.99 2.15 7.68 1.68 3.53 1.74 5.74 0.37 2.43 0.56 2.39 2.30 4.67 0.59 2.68 0.00 5.29 0.18 1.91 0.20 3.00 1.29

0.30 1.08 2.90 3.21 0.03 0.00 40.77 33.62

0.12 3.06 0.00 27.87

1.38 0.11 0.08 0.58

1.77 0.07 0.08 0.38

0.80 0.16 0.06 0.27

52.14 48.59 37.54

Source: Authors' estimate own basedon primary surveydata,2003.

3494

Economic and Political Weekly

July 31, 2004

castor, and mustardare the main cash crops and net value of productivity wateris the highest for green gramand lowest for sesamum(Table4). wheatis grownacrossall thethreeregions Amongfoodgrains, of Gujarat understudy, and gross value productof wateruse in wheat is lowest in northGujarat and highest in Saurashtra (Table4). The net value productof waterin paddyis estimated to be Rs 0.20/m3.In northGujarat region,farmersare growing bajraandjowarduringbothkharifand summerseason.The net value productof water in kharifbajraand summerbajraare Rs 0.64/m3and Rs 0.62/m3, respectively(Table4). Water Used in Dairy Production and Its Productivity In this section, we present the estimatesof the amountof embeddedwaterin the feed and foddersof differenttypes of waterapplied.Table5 presents cattleon the basis of irrigation direct(drinking water)and indirect(waterused for feed daily and fodderproduction) waterconsumedby differenttypes of The water animals acrosstheregionsof Gujarat. shareof drinking is less than 1 per cent of total water used by dairy animals. Insouthandcentral embedded wateruse is thehighest Gujarat, in the form of concentrate feeds, followed by green and dry fodder.The physicalandnet valueproductivity waterin milk of productionfor crossbredcow is more than that for buffalo (Table5). In Saurashtra region,daily waterused for milk production,highestportionof embeddedwatercomes from concentrate followedby greenanddryfodder(Table5). Thephysical is productof waterin milk production highest for indigenous cow and lowest for buffalo, whereasnet economic efficiency of milk production highestfor buffaloand lowest for indigis enous cow (Table5). In northGujarat region,of the totalwater usedformilkproduction, largestsharecomesin theformof green fodder followedby concentrate dryfodder.Thephysicaland and net valueproductivity wateruse in milkproduction highest of is
Name of the Crops South and CentralGujarat Value Product Physical Product (Rs/M3) (Kg/M3) Gross Net Main ByProduct product
1.02 3.18 5.01 3.40 2.22 13.34 0.13 10.26 4.09 5.29 9.10 6.39 3.63 0.53 2.17 2.44 1.95 1.18 1.70 0.20 0.54 0.54 0.37 2.55 2.97 6.09 5.23 -

for crossbredcow and lowest for indigenouscow (Table5). Normally farmersdo not consider those inputs which are of alreadyavailablewith them either as byproducts crop productionor fodderproducedin their farm.They consideronly those inputswhich are purchased from the market.Secondly, farmersdo not considerthe 'virtualwater'which comes from outsideof the region in form of cattle feed. For calculation of in we waterproductivity dairyproduction, considered waterused which for green fodderproduction, of ingredients concentrate is producedwithin the region and drinkingwater.The water in for cow is higher productivity dairyproduction the crossbred cow in southandcentral thanthatof buffaloandthe indigenous and whereas,in Saurashtra Gujarat northGujarat, regionit was for indigenous cow (Table5). It is important notethat to highest in Saurashtra regiondairyfarmers prefertheGirbreedof cow as it is moreefficientin dairyproduction thanthe indigenous cow. Alfalfa is a highly water-intensive crop, though the water variesfromregionto region(Table2). Out of the requirement totalgreenfodder,shareof alfalfafor differenttypesof animals variesacrossregions(Table3). Itis quitelow in southandcentral at in Gujarat 5 percentto 10percent,whereas, Saurashtra region, it is 22 per cent to 28 per cent and in northGujarat region,it is as highas 34 percent to 46 percent. In northGujarat, annual draft groundwater is about1,528.8millioncubicmetres(mcm)/ annum.Out of this alfalfa,alone takes away about 13 per cent of diverted irrigation for (198mcm/annum) thetotalwater [IRMA/ UNICEF2001]. In northGujarat, we could cut down water if applicationrate or increase irrigationwater productivityof alfalfa,then it would help in making dairy productionless and water-intensive will lead to substantial in reduction groundwaterdraft. Kumar al (2003) studiedthe performance dripirrigation et of in alfalfa cultivationin Banaskantha districtof northGujarat regionand foundthatit could save about43 per cent irrigation waterandincrease cropyieldby 10percent.Thedairyunions the
NorthGujarat Region ValueProduct PhysicalProduct (Rs/M3) (Kg/M3) Gross Net Main ByProduct product
-

Table 4: Gross and Net Physical and Value Product of Water in Production of Major Crops SaurashtraRegion ValueProduct PhysicalProduct (Rs/M3) (Kg/M3) Gross Net Main ByProduct product
---

A Greenfodder
1 Mayo 2 Jariya 3 Alfalfa 4 Maize 5 PJowar 3.21 12.90 6.43 12.90 -

1.16 1.06 1.80 -

B Cash crops
1Sugar cane 2 Tobacco 3 Groundnut 4 Cotton 5 Cumin 6 Castor 7 Sesamum 8 Mustard 9 Green gram 32.40 18.40 24.61 -.

2.32 2.12 2.38 -

11.71 12.96 16.74 -

2.17 0.74 0.41 -

14.08 -

3.25 4.41 2.92 4.59 7.12 3.56 2.47 1.29 2.60 0.96 2.53 3.30 0.64 0.62 0.12 0.31 0.12 0.31 0.47 0.74 0.53 3.62 2.40 -

C Foodgrain crops
1 Bajara (K) 2 Bajara (S) 3 Paddy

4 Wheat
5 Guvar 6 Jowar (K) 7 Jowar (S)

3.56
-

1.56
-

0.65
-

7.12
-

8.19
-9.12

4.82
-

1.09
-

8.18
-

3.36
5.89 2.98

1.23
0.40 4.78 1.38

0.45
0.79 1.12 0.40

2.13
2.95 4.30 1.50

~~~~~~~~0. 1 4 .5

Economicand PoliticalWeekly July 31, 2004

3495

are in and of north Gujarat majorstakeholders milkprocurement from are constantlystrivingto increasetheirmilk procurement dairy farmersthroughpromotingimproved technologies for feed energyconversionefficientsuchas chaff-cutters improving research andureamolassesblock(UMB).Emerging suggeststhat to milkunionsneedto seriouslyconsiderprogrammes motivate dairyfarmersto adoptwater-saving technologies,if necessary to creditandsubsidysupport them.Doingthismakes by providing sense not only from the viewpointof improvingtheirbusiness the resource butalso in termsof managing preciousgroundwater in whichis so crucialfor sustaining dairyindustry northGujarat. VirtualWater Used in Daily Feed Regimen of Cattle In dairyproduction of water process,hugequantity embedded is tradedin the form of dry fodderand concentrates. have We considered only the embeddedwaterin the cattlefeed which is tradedbetweenthe regions of Gujarat betweenthe states. and of the virtual waterused Figure1 presents contribution imported in milk productionper day per animal across the regions of with differenttypes of animals.The virtualwaterconGujarat sumedby differenttypes of animalsdependson the amountof cattle feed fed to them. Buffaloes consume largeramountof virtualwateras compared crossbred to cow in southandcentral In it was the highestfor crossbred Gujarat. Saurashtra region, cow ascompared buffaloandindigenous to in cow, whereas north Gujarat indigenouscows consume more importedwater than buffalo and crossbredcow (Figure 1). In the methodologywe have used, the virtualwatercontent of milk is the total waterused for milk production. Based on this notion,our study makesan attemptto quantifythe annual virtualwatertradethat takes place by the dairyunions in the form of liquid milk export outside the district/region the and balanced importof balancedcattlefeed or inputsfor producing cattlefeed fromoutside.For estimationof virtualwaterimport

and export,five-year averagesof milk export and cattle feed inputs importsby the dairy union have been considered.We assumedthat total raw milk procurement union minusraw by milk sold withinthe districtwas the net milk exportoutsidethe district.Then we derive, Milk exportby dairy union = milk procurement milk sale within the district Net virtualwaterexport = Grossvirtualwaterexport(milk)- Net importof inputs of cattle feed Firstof all we considered ratioof milkof buffalo,crossbred the cow intototalmilkprocured the district cow, andindigenous by dairy union. On the basis of this, total waterused to produce thatquantity milkwasestimated multiplying waterused of the by for producing litre of milk by dairyanimalsacrossthe dairy a unions. As perourestimate,the Ananddairyunionexports642 mcm of embedded waterevery yearin formof milk,while it imports 93.79mcm/year embedded water formof ingredients balanced in of cattle feed. The net virtualwaterexportby Anandmilk union is about491.59 mcm/annum (Figure2). The Suratdairyunion is a netimporter its totalmilkprocurement consumed as is within the districtitself.The net virtualwaterimportwere55.65 mcm/ year in the form of cattle feed. Surat,which falls in a water abundant virtualwaterthrough regionof southGujarat, imports cattlefeed imports.In the case of Rajkotdairyunion,the gross virtual water 24.85 mcm/year virtual water exportis about against of in import 3.1 mcm/year the formof cattlefeed fromMehsana dairyunion.The net virtualwaterexportis about21.84 mcm/ year.The gross virtualwaterexportby Mehsanadairyunionis while it imports74.5 mcm/year the form in 1,311.49mcm/year of ingredientsof cattle feed. The net virtualwater export is the 1,237.09 mcm/year. Similarly, Banaskantha union dairy exports were913.43mcm/year virtual of wateragainst import 34.47 an of The waterexportby theBanaskantha mcm/year. netvirtual dairy

Table 5: Water Use in Dairy Production and Productivity of Animals (Per Day/animal) South and CentralGujarat Saurashtra Region Buffalo CB Cow Buffalo CB Cow IndCow 1 Greenfodder(M3) 2 Dryfodder(M3) 3 Concentrate (M3) 4 Drinking water(M3) 5 Totalwaterused (M3) 6 Milk production (litre/day) 7 Waterproductivity (litre/M3) 8 Gross value productof water in dairy production (Rs/M3) 9 Net Valueproductof water in dairyproduction (Rs/M3) 10 Effectivenet value productof waterin production (Rs/m3) 11 Waterused forone litredairyproduction Note: CB cow: crossbredcow; Ind.cow: Indigenouscow Source:Authors' own estimate based on primary survey. Table 6: Dairy Production and Water Used for Dairy Production during 1998-99 Milk Production '000 Tonnes - 1998-99 in WaterUsed in Milk Production (BCM) Buffalo Total IndigenousCow CrossbredCow IndigenousCow CrossbredCow Buffalo Total (Cow+ Buffalo) (Cow+ Buffalo) 358.99 332.94 571.54 120.04 1383.51 127.99 141.26 16.76 1.26 287.27 1284.27 1041.96 766.86 79.98 3173.06 1771.25 1516.16 1355.17 201.28 4843.84 1.056 1.070 0.960 0.202 3.288 0.377 0.268 0.029 0.002 0.676 5.925 3.349 1.560 0.163 10.996 7.357 4.687 2.549 0.367 14.960 2.01 1.45 2.51 0.04 6.01 1.87 0.31 3.99 0.60 1.57 3226 1.76 1.52 2.20 0.03 5.51 2.90 0.53 4.34 0.70 2.18 1887 2.67 0.84 4.22 0.04 7.77 3.82 0.49 6.43 0.32 3.65 2041 2.62 0.86 5.31 0.03 8.82 5.14 0.58 5.34 0.17 1.39 1724 1.75 0.67 4.27 0.03 6.71 4.00 0.60 5.13 0.14 1.74 1667 Buffalo 7.41 1.65 2.70 0.05 11.81 2.56 0.22 2.74 0.23 1.39 4546 NorthGujarat CB Cow IndCow 7.52 1.51 2.54 0.05 11.63 3.95 0.34 2.76 0.30 1.32 2941 3.42 1.33 2.33 0.04 7.11 2.42 0.34 3.07 0.12 2.18 2941

Name of the Region

North Gujarat South and centralGujarat Saurashtra region Kachchhregion TotalGujarat Source:GOG.Undated.

3496

Economic and Political Weekly

July 31, 2004

unionis 878.96mcm/year which (Figure2). Thus,northGujarat, is themostwaterscarceregionof thestate,exportsthemaximum quantityof virtualwater(2,116.05 mcm) throughits dairyindustries. For the purposeof quantification totalwaterused by dairy of farmingin the state, we collected districtwisemilk production by differenttypes of animalsfor the year 1998-99 (GOGUndated).We have assumedthat:(i) waterused by differenttypes of animalsto produceone litre of milk in Kachchhregion is similarto thatin Saurashtra region;and (ii) in southandcentral cow consumessame amountof irrigation Gujarat, indigenous wateras a buffaloof same region is consumes. of Totalmilkproduction thestateduring1998-99was4,843.84 thousand tonnes.Outof this, 28.54 per cent milk was produced and cows, 5.93 percentby crossbred by non-descript indigenous cows, and 65.53 per cent frombuffaloes.Fromour survey,we know the estimatedtotal waterused to producea litre of milk in fromdifferent animals different regions(Table5). typesof dairy To quantifythe total waterused for milk during1998-99, we by multipliedtotal milk production waterused for a litre milk Based on the averagefigures of waterintensityof production. milk production differenttypes of dairyanimalsin different for regions,the total amountof milk producedfrom these regions and its composition,the irrigation wateruse for dairyfarming was estimated.The estimatedirrigationwater use to produce tonnesof milk by differenttypes of animals 4,843.84 thousand (buffaloes,crossbredcows, and indigenouscows) in the state is about14.96 BCM (Table6). It is important point out that to thisestimate basedon the assumption purelyrain-fed milk is that is production insignificantin Gujarat.

Virtualwatertradethroughmilk by the dairyunionpresents showthatnorth a counter-intuitive Our Gujarat, picture. estimates which is 'absolutewaterscarce', is exportinga net volume of about 2,116.05 mcm of virtualwater annuallythroughdairy in waterimport theformof feed andfodder business.Thevirtual water on is one of the optionsto reducethe pressure irrigation Thesewater andSaurashtra in waterscarcenorth region. Gujarat scarceregionscan reducethe pressureon theirpreciouswater resources meetingtheirfeed andfodderrequirements through by importfrom regions which have surplusbiomass. ISE3
Address for correspondence:

o.singh@cgiar.org t.shah@cgiar.org

References
There Are Substitutesfor WaterOtherwise Allan, A J (1993): 'Fortunately our Hydro-politicalFutureswould be Impossible', Prioritiesfor Water Resources Allocation and Management, ODA, London, pp 13-36. - (1998): 'GlobalSoil Water:A Long-TermSolutionfor Water-Short Middle EasternEconomies', Proceeding of WaterWorkshop: Avertinga Water Crisis in the MiddleEast - Make Watera Mediumof CooperationRather than Conflict, Green Cross International,March, Geneva. Bhatia, B (1992): 'Lush Fields and ParchedThroats:Political Economy of Groundwater Gujarat',Economic and Political Weekly,XXVII (51in 52): A 12-170. Chapagain,A K and A Y Hoekstra(2003): 'VirtualWaterTrade:A Quantificationof Virtual WaterFlows betweenNationsin RelationtoInternational Trade of Livestock and Livestock Products, Virtual Water Trade', proceedings of the international expert meeting on virtual water trade, edited by A Y Hoekstra,Value of WaterResearchReport Series # 12. Dhondyal, S P (1987): Farm Management, Friend Publications, Meerut, India, p 58. Graham,G, M Dinesh Kumarand David Mc Donald (1996): 'Groundwater Degradationand its Socio-economic and Health Impacts:Practicaland of Resource Policy OptionsforMitigation', DraftReport VIKSAT-Natural Institute CollaborativeResearch Project. Government Gujarat of (undated):16'' SurveyReporton Estimatesof Major Livestock of Government Product(1998-99),Director AnimalHusbandry, of Gujarat.http://www.indiastat.com - (undated): 'Season and Crop Report', Departmentof Economics and Statistics Division, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar,various issues. VirtualWaterTrade', Hoekstra,AY (1993): 'VirtualWater:An Introduction, proceedings of the international expert meeting on virtual water trade, edited by A Y Hoekstra,Value of WaterResearch Report Series # 12. - (1998): Perspectives on Water:An IntegratedModel-based Exploration of the Future, InternationalBooks, Utrecht, the Netherlands. http:// web243.petrel. ch/GreenCrossPrograms/waterres/middleeast/allan.html. IRMA/UNICEF(2001): WhitePaper on Waterin Gujarat',reportprepared for the government of Gujarat. Kumar, M D (2000): 'Institutions for Efficient and Equitable Use of Groundwater: Irrigation ManagementInstitutionsand WaterMarketsin Gujarat,Western India', Asia-Pacific Journal of Rural Development, Vol X (1), July. - (forthcoming): of PricesandVolumetric Water Allocation 'Impact Electricity on EnergyandGroundwater DemandManagement: AnalysisfromWestern India', Energy Policy, in press. Kumar, M D, Tushaar Shah, Maulik Bhatt and Madhu Kapadia (2003): 'Dripping Water to a Water Guzzler: Techno-economic Evaluationof Efficiency of Drip Irrigationin Alfalfa', paper presentedat 3rd IWMITata AnnualPartners'Meet, International WaterManagementInstitute, Anand. of Singh,O P andAvinashKishore(2004): 'WaterProductivity Milk Production in NorthGujarat, WesternIndia', paperpresentedat 3rd IWMI-Tata AnnualPartners' WaterManagement Anand. Meet,International Institute, Singh, O P and R S Pundir(2003): 'Dairy Development in UttarPradesh during OperationFlood Programme', The Maharashtra Co-operative Quarterly,LXXXX (5), pp 38-50.

Conclusion
sourcesof livelihood Dairy farmingis one of the important in ruralGujarat. is more pre-eminent the regions facing It in physical scarcity of water due to the shortage of power supplyandacute scarcity of irrigationwater. In water abundantsouth and central Gujarat,crop productionis still the mainsourceof livelihoodand milk production of secondary is importance. is Dairyfarming highlywater-intensive, thoughthe efficiency of wateruse variesacrossregions and also acrossanimals.As Table 5 (row 11) shows, Gujaratuses 1,900-4,600 litres of waterper litre of milk produced; is muchhigher this irrigation than2,749 litresof total wateruse per litre of milk production at all-India level andthe globalaverageof 874 litres[Chapagain andHoekstra needto reduce water the 2003].Thissuggestsstrong in intensityof dairyproduction Gujarat. Use of highly water-intensive irrigatedgreen foddermakes In dairyfarmingmorewater-intensive. view of this, it becomes to fodder imperative improvewateruse efficiency of irrigated in production differentregions of Gujarat. of in which Application dripirrigation alfalfacropproduction, is a highlywater-intensive greenfodderandlargelygrowngreen fodderin northGujarat, would save irrigation wateruse by up to 43 percentin north it Therefore, is criticalto promote Gujarat. watersavingtechnologyat least in alfalfain northGujarat, but also in other water-stressed regions. Water of also across different productivity dairy production varies cows were foundto have highest types of livestock.Crossbred waterproductivity all the threeregions. in irrigation

Economic and Political Weekly

July 31, 2004

3497