Asartepe Sulama Birliğinde Sulama Performansının Belirlenmesi: Türkiye’den Bir Çalışma

Year 2009, Volume: 22 Issue: 1, 1 - 8, 01.06.2009

B. Çakmak H.e. Polat - B.kendirli Z. Gökalp

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Türkiye’de Asartepe Sulama Birliğinde sulama sistem performansını değerlendirmektir. Arazide elde edilen verilere göre sulama alanına saptırılan su, sulanan alana dağıtılan su ve su temin oranı sırasıyla 3.975-7.368 m3/ha, 8.586-13.611 m3/ha ve 0,99-2,05 olarak belirlenmiştir. Yatırımın geri dönüşüm oranı, bakım masraflarının gelire oranı, birim alan düşen işletme masrafı, su dağıtım personeli başına düşen masraf, su ücreti toplama performansı ve personel başına düşen birim alan olmak üzere mali performans göstergeleri sırasıyla 52-170 %, 24-38 %, 47-109 $/ha, 1.523-5.611 $/kişi, 54-100%, 83,1-105,0 ha/kişi olarak tespit edilmiştir. Üretim performansı kapsamında elde edilen sulama alanına, sulanan alana, saptırılan suya ve tüketilen suya göre brüt üretim değerleri ise sırasıyla 1.979 – 2.262 $/ha, 3.534 - 4.930 $/ha, 0,28-0,55 $/m3, 2,79-3,37 $/m3’dir

Keywords

Mali Performans, Su Dağıtım Performansı, Üretim Performansı, Sulama Birliği

EVALUATION OF IRRIGATION PERFORMANCE OF ASARTEPE IRRIGATION ASSOCIATION: A CASE STUDY FROM TURKEY

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the irrigation system performances of the Water User Associations in Asartepe irrigation scheme in Turkey. Based on the field study, amount of water delivered to command area, water delivered to irrigated area and relative water supply were determined as 3.975-7.368 m3/ha, 8.586-13.611 m3/ha and 0,99-2,05, respectively. The financial performance indicators including cost recovery ratio, maintenance expenditure to revenue ratio, operating cost per unit area, total cost per person employed on water delivery, revenue collection performance, unit area per staff member were found out as 52-170 %, 24-38 %, 47-109 $/ha, 1.523-5.611 $/staff member, 54-100%, 83,1-105,0 ha/staff member respectively. As regard to productive performance, output per unit command area, output per unit irrigated area, output per unit irrigation supply and output per unit water consumed were determined as 1.979 - 2.262 $/ha, 3.534 – 4.930$/ha, 0,28-0,55 $/m3, 2,79-3,37 $/m3, respectively.

Keywords

Financial Performance, Production Performance, Water Delivery Performance, Water User Association

References

• Bekişoğlu, M., 1994. Irrigation Development and Operation and Maintenance Problems in Turkey. Proceedings of the Conference on Development of Soil and Water Resources, General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works, Ankara, 579-586.
• Beyribey, M., 1997. Devlet Sulama Şebekelerinde Sistem Performansının Degerlendirilmesi. Ankara Univ. Ziraat Fakultesi Yayınları, Ankara.
• Bos, M.G 1997. Performance Assessment for Irrigation and Drainage. Irrigation and Drainage Systems, Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands.
• Çakmak, B., 2002a. Kızılırmak Havzası Sulama Birliklerinde Sulama Sistem Performansının Değerlendirilmesi. KSU Fen ve Muhendislik Dergisi, 2, 130-141.
• Çakmak, B., 2002b. Ceylanpınar Ikicırcıp Sulama Birligi’nde Sulama Sistem Performansının Degerlendirilmesi. Harran Univ. Ziraat Fakultesi Dergisi, 1-2, 1-9.
• Cakmak, B., Beyribey, M., Yıldırım, Y.E., Kodal, S., 2004. Benchmarking Performance of Irrigation Schemes: A Case Study from Turkey. Irrigation and Drainage, 53, 155-163.
• Değirmenci, H., 2001. Devredilen Sulama Şebekelerinin Karşılaştırma Gostergeleri ile Degerlendirilmesi. Uludag Univ. Ziraat Fakultesi Dergisi, 15, 31-41.
• Dorsan, F., Anaç, S., Akçay, S., 2004. Performance Evaluation of Transferred Irrigation Schemes of Lower Gediz Basin. Journal of Applied Sciences, 4, 231-234.
• Malano, H., Burton, M., 2001. Guidelines for Benchmarking Performance in the Irrigation and Drainage Sector. International Programme for Technology and Research in Irrigation and Drainage (IPTRID) FAO.
• Molden, D.J., Sakthivadivel, R., Perry, C.J., Fraiture, de C., 1998. Indicators for Comparing the Performance of Irrigated Agricultural Systems. IWMI Research Report, 20, 26p.
• Murray-Rust, D.H., Svendsen, M., 2001. Performance of Locally Managed Irrigtaion in Turkey: Gediz case study. Irrigation and Drainage Systems, 15, 373-388.
• Rodriguez, Diaz J.A., Camacho Poyato, E., Lopez Luque, R., 2004. Applying Benchmarking and Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) Techniques to Irrigation Districts in Spain. Irrigation and Drainage, 53, 135-143.
• Svendsen, M., Nott, G., 1999. Irrigation Management Transfer in Turkey: Process and Outcomes. EDI Participatory Irrigation Management Case Studies Series, Draft Paper.
• Svendsen, M., Murray-Rust, D.H., 2001. Creating and Consulting Locally Managed Irrigation in Turkey : The National Perspective. Irrigation and Drainage Systems, 15, 355-371.
• Vermillion, D.L., Sagardoy, J.A., 1999. Transfer of Irrigation Management Services: Guideline. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper, 58, FAO.
• Vermillion, D.L., 2000. Guide to Monitoring and Evaluation of Irrigation Management Transfer. International Network on Participatory Irrigation Management (INPIM), USA.