Sudan- Hartum (Khartoum) Eyaleti’nde Sulama Kooperatiflerin Sulama İşletme Maliyetlerinin Tahmini ve Performanslarının Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Bu çalışma, 2018-2019 yılları arasında Sudan'da toprak-su kaynaklarının dağılımını ve kullanımını incelemiş ve Hartum Eyaleti'ndeki sulama kooperatiflerine odaklanmıştır. Hartum Eyaleti'ni temsil etmek üzere kamu kurumları envanterinden on kooperatif seçilmiştir. Toprak-su mevcudiyeti, enerji tüketimi, pompa debisi ve çalışma süresi, teorik su çekimi ve birim alan ve su hacmi başına enerji harcamaları hakkında veriler toplanmıştır. Bulgular, Sudan'ın ekilebilir arazisinin 112 milyon hektar olarak tahmin edildiğini ve bunun sadece %18,6'sının ekili alan olarak kullanıldığını ortaya koymaktadır. Sulanan arazi, ekili alanın %9'unu (1,9 milyon hektar) oluşturmaktadır. Hartum Eyaleti'nin 756.000 hektarlık tarımsal potansiyeli vardır, ancak bunun sadece %19,4'ü (147.000 hektar) yıllık olarak kullanılmaktadır. Kayıtlı 203 kooperatiften 45'i (%22,17) aktif, 36'sı (%17,73) pasif ve 122'sine (%60,10) henüz arazi tahsis edilmemiştir. Toplam kayıtlı kooperatif alanı 66.780,45 hektar olup, aktif kooperatifler 35.390,07 hektarlık ( %52,99) bir alanı kapsamaktadır. 2018 yılında, incelenen on kooperatifteki pompa istasyonlarının toplam elektrik tüketimi 1.693.306 kWh olmuştur. Pompa gücü 22 kW (Al Hamdab ve El Neya) ile 255 kW (Al Bagair El Ailafon, Al Jamuiye ve Wad Ramli) arasında değişmiştir. Toplam enerji ücretleri yıllık 76.016 ABD doları olup, en yüksek ücreti Al Jamuiye (33.333 ABD doları/yıl), en düşük ücreti ise Seyal Al Hawab (333 ABD doları/yıl) ödemiştir. Yıllık pompa çalışma süresi 4.105 saat (Al Hamdab) ile sadece 58 saat (Seyal Al Hawab) arasında değişmiştir. Teorik olarak yıllık çekilen su miktarı 15.646.858 m³ olup, en yüksek hacimler Al Khojalab'da (5,61 milyon m³), ​​Al Jamuiye'de (4,5 milyon m³) ve Wad Ramli'de (2,16 milyon m³) kaydedilmiştir. Metreküp başına ortalama enerji maliyeti 0,0067 dolardır. Çalışma, Sudan'da sürdürülebilir sulama tarımı için sulama kooperatiflerinin karşılaştığı yasal, mali, teknik ve yönetimsel sorunların ele alınmasının şart olduğu sonucuna varmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• sudan
• Hartum
• Su Yönetimi
• Sulama Kooperatifi
• sulama yönetimi
• sulama planlaması

Estimating Irrigation Operation Costs and Assessing Irrigation System Performance for Sudan's Khartoum State Irrigation Cooperatives

Öz

This study was conducted between 2018-2019, examined the distribution and utilization of soil-water resources in Sudan, focusing on irrigation cooperatives in Khartoum State. Ten cooperatives were selected from public institution inventory to represent Khartoum State. Data were collected on soil-water availability, energy consumption, pump flow rate and operation time, theoretical water withdrawal, and energy expenditures per unit area and water volume. Findings reveal that Sudan’s arable land is estimated at 112 million ha, with only 18.6% under cultivation. Irrigated land accounts for 9% (1.9 million ha) of cultivated area. Khartoum State has an agricultural potential of 756,000 ha, yet only 19.4% (147,000 ha) is utilized annually. Of 203 registered cooperatives, 45 (22.17%) are active, 36 (17.73%) inactive, and 122 (60.10%) have not yet been allocated land. The total registered cooperative area is 66,780.45 ha, with active cooperatives covering 35,390.07 ha (52.99%). In 2018, total electricity consumption by pump stations in the ten studied cooperatives was 1,693,306 kWh. Pump power ranged from 22 kW (Al hamdab and El neye) to 255 kW (Al bagair El ailafon, Al jamuiye, and Wad Ramli). Total energy fees amounted to $76,016/year, with Al jamuiye paying the highest ($33,333/year) and Seyal Al hawab the lowest ($333/year). Annual pump operating time varied from 4,105 hours (Al hamdab) to just 58 hours (Seyal Al hawab). The theoretical annual water withdrawn was 15,646,858 m³, with the highest volumes in Al Khojalab (5.61 million m³), Al jamuiye (4.5 million m³), and Wad Ramli (2.16 million m³). The average energy cost per cubic meter of water was $0.0067. The study concludes that addressing legal, financial, technical, and management issues facing irrigation cooperatives is essential for sustainable irrigated agriculture in Sudan.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sudan
• Khartoum state
• Irrigation Management
• Cooperative
• Water Management
• Irrigation Planning

Kaynakça

1. Abdalla, M. S. A. (2020). Cooperative Agricultural Societies in Sudan. Sudan NextGen. https://sudannextgen.com/ (access date: 20.04.2025).
2. Alento, M. (2006). The socio-economic impact of Al-jamuiye cooperative in Khartoum State. [MSc Thesis, University of Khartoum (unpublished)], Sudan.
3. Alhussein, I. A. M. (2007). The impact of agricultural cooperatives on rural development-The case of study; Hillat Koko Agricultural Cooperative - Khartoum State. [MSc Thesis, University of Khartoum (Unpublished)], Sudan.
4. Anonymous. (2019). Khartoum state. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khartoum_(state) (access date: 07.12.2024)
5. Basukala, A. K. (2024). Towards sustainable agricultural land use in Nepal under climate change: The role of efficient irrigation and fertilizer application. [PhD Thesis, University of Hamburg Earth Science Dept (unpublished)], Germany.
6. CBOS. (2019). From Support to Sustainability: A diagnostic assessment of Sudan's electrical sector. http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/ (access date: 28.03.2019)
7. Ceran, R., & Topak, R. (2020). Economic Analysis for Groundwater-Irrigated Oil Sunflower Farming in Konya Region. Selcuk Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences, 34(1), 7-13. https://doi.org/https://izlik.org/JA73BS97TL
8. Elsheikh, W., & Nasreldin, M. (2022). Impacts of Climate Change on Water Resources in Sudan. Eurasian Journal of Agricultural Research, 6(2), 83-90. https://doi.org/https://izlik.org/JA44TA44LS

9. Eversull, E. E. (2014). The long run: number of ag co-ops celebrating 100th anniversaries on the rise. Rural Cooperatives, 81(3), 18-24.
10. FAO. (2015). Country profile – Sudan. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Retrieved 19.02.2019 from https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/8cb2e0b6-4dd1-46b6-833c-14731c3596d4/content
11. FAO. (2017). Water for Sustainable Food and Agriculture. https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/ (access date: 20.02.2020).
12. Iliopoulos, C., Värnik, R., Filippi, M., Võlli, L., & Laaneväli-Vinokurov, K. (2019). Organizational design in Estonian agricultural cooperatives. Journal of Co-operative Organization and Management, 7(2), 100093. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcom.2019.100093
13. Jackson, T. M., Khan, S., & Hafeez, M. (2010). A comparative analysis of water application and energy consumption at the irrigated field level. Journal of Agricultural Water Management, 97(10), 1477-1485. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2010.04.013
14. Joshi, P., Rao, K., Bhadouria, R., Tripathi, S., & Singh, R. (2024). Blue-Green Infrastructure for Sustainable Urban Settlements: Implications for Developing Countries Under Climate Change. (Eds A. Alhuseen, H. Omer, E. Pauditšová, H. Sulieman, M. Kozová, P. Cudlín) Spatial Accessibility Disparities and Users' Opinion Assessment of Khartoum State Public Green Spaces, Switzerland, pp. 320-325.
15. Kara, M., & Çiftçi, N. (2010). Tarımda Kültürteknik (Ed N. Çiftçi), Tarımda Toprak-Su Kaynaklarının Geliştirilmesi ve Su Yönetimi, Selcuk University Publications, Konya. P 83-118.
16. Karaman, E., & Şahin, M. (2024). Farmers’ Knowledge on Agricultural Irrigation Programs: The Case of Altınekin District of Konya Province. Turkish Journal of Agriculture, Food Science and Technology, 12(2), 228-235. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24925/turjaf.v12i2.228-235.6664
17. Kelley, T. G., & Johnson, S. H. (1991). Monitoring Operations Performance in Large‐Scale Public Irrigation Systems in Indonesia 1. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 27(3), 495-508. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.1991.tb01450.x
18. Mahjoubi, I. (2024). Water ecosystem services under the effect of water scarcity in the Drâa Basin in Morocco: assessment of local perceptions and economic valuation towards an integration into regional decision-making processes. [PhD Thesis, Rhineland-Palatinate University of Technology Institute of Natural Sciences (unpublished)], Germany.
19. Meloni, R. (2025). Application of Remote Sensing for The Yield and Qualitative Improvement of Cereal Cultivation for Advanced Supply Chains. [PhD Thesis, University of Torino (unpublished)], Italy.
20. Mohammed, Y. F. A., & Cifici, N. (2019). Irrigation effectiveness of agricultural cooperatives in Sudan Khartoum State. International Congress of Science Culture and Education (INCES), Alanya/Antalya, Turkey.
21. Mohammed, Y. F. A., Çiftçi, N., & Şahin, M. (2025). An Investigation on Farmers’ Comprehension of Irrigation Applications and Assessment of Agricultural Cooperatives’ Services, Khartoum State, SUDAN. Turkish Journal of Agriculture-Food Science and Technology, 13(s2), 3444-3452. https://doi.org/10.24925/turjaf.v13is2.3444-3452.7953
22. Oczkowski, E., Krivokapic-Skoko, B., & Plummer, K. (2013). The meaning, importance and practice of the co-operative principles: Qualitative evidence from the Australian co-operative sector. Journal of Co-operative Organization and Management, 1(2), 54-63. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcom.2013.10.006
23. Prisa, D. (2024). Chabazitic zeolitite in cultivation and spray protection against Phytophthora infestans and Tuta absoluta in Solanum lycopersicum. Journal of GSC Biological and Pharmaceutical Sciences, 29(01), 007–016. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.30574/gscbps.2024.29.1.0353
24. Valentinov, V. (2007). Why are cooperatives important in agriculture? An organizational economics perspective. Journal of institutional Economics, 3(1), 55-69. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744137406000555
25. Yildirim, Y. E., Taş, İ., & Çakmak, İ. (2016). Assessment of irrigation efficiencies under central anatolia conditions. Current Trends in Natural Sciences, 5(10), 93-101.