Is Agriculture

Becoming Resilient
to Droughts?

Pratap S Birthal
Institute of Development Studies, Jaipur 302 004

Background
67% of Indias geographical area is vulnerable to

droughts
The probability of occurrence of a drought is about

35%- - ranging from 20% in dry-humid regions to 40%

or more in arid regions.
India experienced 13 major droughts since 1966;

and 4 of these occurred during 2001 to 2012.

A severe and prolonged drought affect food
production , deplete productive assets, exacerbate
rural poverty, force outmigration, contract
demand for non-agricultural goods and services
and lead to over-exploitation of natural resources,
including land and water.
25-60% shortfall in household income and 1233% increase in head-count poverty (Pandey et
al. 2007)

Drought management
After 1987 drought that affected 60% of
the geographical area, Indias strategy
to cope with droughts has been
undergone a paradigm shift, from crisis
management to risk management.
preparedness in terms of

meteorological forecasts and

development of location- specific
contingency plans,
mitigation and adaptation through

improvements and innovations in

irrigation management and crop breeding
for drought-tolerance, and

Drought and rice

3000

10

2500

2000

1500

-5

1000

-10

500

-15

-20

Yield (kg/ha)

% deviation

In this presentation
Examine

the frequency, severity

and
Assess
the impact
of droughts
spread
of droughts
in India
food production, focusing on rice
Assess the role of irrigation and other
adaptation strategy in mitigating
impact of droughts
District-level data for 200 districts (at
1970base) for 1969-2005

Drought?
No universal definition: meteorological, hydrological, and

agricultural
A drought is defined and measured in terms of extent of

shortfall in rainfall from its normal.

An area is affected by drought if the actual rainfall is 25% or

more below its historical mean. If the rainfall-deficit is
between 25% and 50% then the drought is of moderate
intensity, otherwise it a severe one

This measure of drought is based solely on the

Scientific evidence suggests that dry and hot weather
degree of dryness.

is more harmful to crops rather just the dry conditions .

Several studies on climate impacts show that climate
impacts are largely driven by rise in temperature

Thus, a drought can be conceptualized as an outcome of

the occurrence of two joint events, abnormally low

moisture due to poor rainfall and abnormally hot
temperature.

Relationship between deviations

in rainfall
and temperature?
There is a negative
relationship
betweenthese, evoking
simultaneous
that
abnormally
occurrence
high of
temperature
and
abnormally low rainfall
(quadrant IV) could be
more damaging
to
crops
than rainfalldeficit alone (quadrant I)

Constructing a Drought
Index

Subscripts i and t denote district and time respectively.

Deviations are standardized by district standard

deviations to make it comparable across districts and

years
In words, there will be a drought if temperature goes

Utility of Drought Index?

DI summarises degree of hotness and degree of dryness;

and also provides severity level of a drought event

DI is the product of deviations. Hence, lays relatively more

emphasis on larger deviations

It utilizes district-level/local weather data; hence more

relevant to the cropping activities there.

It comprises of two important causes of crop damage, viz.

lack of moisture and excess heat; hence a single index

rather multiple weather variables offers an easy means of
assessing impacts of climate change on agriculture.
It provides level of severity of a drought, making it

convenient to quantify crop loss at different severity

levels, and to take adaptation measures accordingly.

Frequency Distribution of Drought

Events
The index ranges from 0

to 8;
Zero implies rainfall
being more than normal
and temperature being
less than normal.
Abnormally low values
of DI can be
considered to
representt normal
weather.
DI is skewed towards its
lower bound, means most

Severity of drought
Based on the dispersion of DI, drought events have

been classified as low, moderate and severe droughts

Low intensity: if DI is one standard deviation less than its

own mean.
Moderate intensity: if DI falls within 1 standard

deviation around
mean; and
Severe : if DI is equal to or more than one standard

deviation above mean.

Droughts: Severity, Distribution and

Area Affected
Based on the dispersion of DI, drought events have
been classified as low, moderate and severe
droughts
Severity
Mean
% of total
% rice area

19692005

19691987

19882005

Low

drought
index
0.05 (0.07)

Moderate

events

affected
2.7

1.1

0.47 (0.45)

82.7

25.7

Severe

2.59 (1.26)

14.6

4.6

Mean

0.77 (0.99)

100.0

31.4

Low

0.04 (0.04)

2.3

0.7

Moderate

0.49 (0.47)

76.8

24.5

Severe

2.84 (2.55)

20.9

6.5

Mean

0.97 (1.21)

100.0

31.8

Low

0.06 (0.08)

3.1

1.5

Moderate

0.45 (0.42)

88.4

26.8

Severe

2.00 (0.78)

8.5

2.7

Mean

0.57 (0.64)

100.0

31.0

Year wise rice area affected by

droughts

Impact on Rice Yield?

Deviation in rice
yield from its trend
against the drought
index
The relationship is
negative, and the
estimated
correlation
coefficient is -0.27
and statistically
significant at 1%
level.

Deviation in rice yield from trend

across severity levels of drought
Average

19691987

Severe

Averag
e

1246
.2

1259.0

1139.7

1234.
1

Deviation from trend

(Kg/ha)
Deviation from trend (%)

+37.
4
+3.0

-45.5

-191.2

-73.7

-3.6

-16.8

-6.0

1936.
9
+4.
6
+0.
2

1900.3

1814.2

1894.6

-25.2

-147.0

-34.3

-1.3

-8.1

-1.8

1705.8

1584.3

1328.3

1550.5

-35.2

-178.8

-54.8

-13.5

-3.5

Deviation from trend

(Kg/ha)
Deviation from trend (%)
Yield (Kg/ha)

19692005

Moderat
e

Yield (Kg/ha)

Yield (Kg/ha)
19882005

Low

Deviation from trend

(Kg/ha)
Deviation from trend (%)

+15.
6
+0.
9

-2.2

Econometric estimation:

Thefixedeffectsregressionequation:

where, subscripts i and t denote district and year, respectively. Y is crop

yield in kg/ha, DI is drought index, T is time trend and IRR represents

rice area irrigated in percent.
To control for time-invariant heterogeneity across districts, we have

included district fixed effects, DCTi, in the model. Further, we assume a

linearEquation
trend, varying
across rice
districts
).
decomposes
yield(DCT
into ithree
components:

(i) deterministic trend yield with district- specific mean yield that includes

=1

improvements in crop yield due to advances in rice breeding, increased use of inputs,
etc;
(ii) variation in trend yield due to drought, irrigation and their interactions, and
(iii) a residual term, representing the effect of other random factors.

Model results
The coefficient on DI and DI-squared is
negative , drought reduces yield
Coefficient on DI*T is positive: suggests rice
has become less vulnerable to droughts.
A positive coefficient on DI*DI*T indicates that
the rice has also become less susceptible to
severe droughts.
The coefficient associated with IRR is positive
and significant
The interaction of IRR with DI-squared is
positive, means that irrigation moderates
harmful effects of severe droughts
The effectiveness of irrigation seems to have
declined : negative and significant coefficient
of DI*DI*T*IRR

Hypothesis :

The loss yield due to drought is estimated :

Yield lossduetodroughtshasremainedconstantovertime,

Irrigationhavenotmadeanysignificantdifferencetoyie

ld loss due to droughts;

Efficacyofirrigation inmitigatingharmfuleffectsof

droughtshasnotchanged overtime.

Marginal effects associated with time trend, drought

and irrigation evaluated at their mean values.
The marginal effect of time
indicates an increase in the rice
yield at a rate of 1.6% or
23.4kg/ha per annum during the
period 1969-2005, but the trend
varies considerably across
districts

The effect of drought on yield is

negative to the extent of 194
kg/ha or 25% of the normal yield.
A positive marginal effect of
irrigation reinforces its role in
improving rice yield.
Test of Hypothesis
the yield loss due to
droughts has remained
constant overtime
the expansion of irrigation
has not affected droughtinduced yield loss,
the efficacy of irrigation in
mitigating harmful effects of

Linear

Log
linea
r

Trend

23.4***
(0.42)

0.016***
(0.0003)

DI

-194.0***
(14.1)

-0.246***
(0.022)

IRR

289.2***
(106.8)

0.181***
(0.063)

0.75

0.0072**
*
(0.0014)

Average marginal effects

Test of hypotheses (at mean DI = 0.77, IRR =

0.50)
H0: Loss(T) = 0

(1.22)
H0: Loss(IRR) = 0

22.46
(30.92)

H0: Loss(T,IRR) = 0

-3.38
(3.09)

0.2102**
*
(0.0401)
0.0117**
*
(0.0035)

Predicted yield loss overtime at mean DI

(0.772)

Keeping the level of irrigation constant (at its mean level

during 1969-2005) in equation , we estimate marginal

effect of droughts assuming no change in their severity
level overtime, .i.e., DI=0.77.
Average
Yield loss
(Kg/ha)

Yield loss
(%)

196
9

197
4

197
9

198
4

198
9

199
4

199
9

200
4

200.
5

198.
6

196.
6

194.
7

192.
8

190.
9

189.
0

187.
0

(34.1
3)

(26.1
1)

(19.1
4)

(14.7
6)

(15.3
8)

(20.5
6)

(27.8
5)

(36.0
0)

35.3

32.2

29.2

26.2

23.2

20.2

17.2

14.1

(4.99
)

(4.03
)

(3.14
)

(2.40
)

(2.00
)

(2.12
)

(2.71
)

(3.53
)

Predicted rice yield, with and without

irrigation, at different levels of drought
severity

Predicted drought-induced yield loss at

different
levels
of
irrigation

Test for role of irrigation in coping with harmful effects of

droughts overtime assuming a constant time trend and no change
in severity of droughts (DI=0.77)

% rice area irrigated

Average
Yield loss
(Kg/ha)

Yield loss
(%)

20

40

60

80

100

212.6

204.9

197.3

189.7

182.1

174.5

(24.68
)

(18.64
)

(14.89
)

(15.23
)

(19.45
)

(25.70
)

37.5

32.2

27.0

21.7

16.4

11.2

(4.33)

(3.36)

(2.47)

(1.78)

(1.55)

(1.97)

Trend in yield loss under varying levels of

irrigation at DI=0.77

Slope of the curves is

negative in both the figures

but it moderates at a
higher level of irrigation.
This implies that although
irrigation is important to
cope with droughts, its
effectiveness diminishes
when it is thinly distributed
over a larger area.

loss curve associated with

no irrigation lies above

their irrigation
counterfactuals, i.e., 50%
and 90% irrigation,
indicating that drought has
a bigger impact on rice
yield in rainfed farming
systems, but its impact
has weakened overtime.

This is an important

observation. Implicitly it
brings out the role of
adaptation strategies other
than irrigation in

Trend in yield loss under different levels

of
Year
197 197 198 198 199 199 200
irrigation at196
DI=0.77
9
4
9
4
9
4
9
4
Counterfactual scenario 1: no irrigation
Average yield
228. 223. 219. 215.
loss (Kg/ha)
3
9
5
1
Average yield
53.1 48.8 44.5 40.1
loss (%)
Counterfactual scenario 2: 50% area under
Average yield
200. 198. 196. 194.
loss (Kg/ha)
6
6
7
7
Average yield
35.3 32.3 29.2 26.2
loss (%)
(5.0) (4.0) (3.1) (2.4)
Counterfactual scenario 3: 90% area under
Average yield
178. 178. 178. 178.
loss (Kg/ha)
5
4
4
4
Average yield
21.0 19.0 17.1 15.1
loss (%)

210.
6
35.8

206.
2
31.5

201.
8
27.1

197.
3
22.8

irrigation
192. 190. 188.
7
7
7
23.2 20.1 17.1

186.
8
14.1

(2.0) (2.1)
irrigation
178. 178.
4
3
13.1 11.1

(2.7)

(3.5)

178.
3
9.1

178.
3
7.1

Irrigation

Source of irrigation

Canal
1969-70
1986-87
2005-06
2010-11

9.1
11.8
11.8
11.1

Groundwat
er
8.1
14.9
25.6
27.6

Rice area
irrigated
(%)

Others

All

4.6
3.8
5 .7
6.3

21.8
30.5
43.1
44.9

38.2
43.6
56.0
58.7

Rice varieties (No./annum)

Summing Up
The droughts have become more frequent but

less intense
over time.
Drought adversely affects crop production; but their

impact has weakened over time.

Irrigation, drought-tolerant varieties and other

adaptation strategies have played an important role

in mitigating the harmful effects of droughts on
rice yields.

Adaptation strategy

Technological

Institutional and policy

Government policy and program (NAPCC,
DPAP, DDP, IWMP, PDS, MNREGA)
Agro and weather advisory Information
access
Evidence based policy
Strengthening governance structure

Micro-irrigation, conservation agriculture, insitu, ex-situ, water harvesting,

Social
Group action - social networks, information
dissemination, migration
SHGs, community projects, coping strategies,
Local water management techniques, in-house
conflict resolution,

Farm level
Crop and varietal adjustment drought tolerant and
extensive root crop
Crop management practices - changes in inputs, timings,
tillage
Intercropping and mixed cropping
Irrigation practices,
Crop rotation, crop choice, crop and
Income
diversification
Crop harvesting and processing
Agro forestry Agri-silvi-horti-pastoral system

Layers of
resiliency

Way foreword?
Develop seed systems that are capable of providing
seeds of crops/varieties differentiated by their level of
tolerance
Disseminate information (action research/extension)
on climate smart agronomic and water management
practices
Invest in efficient water management techniques
(drip/sprinkler)
Prioritize adaptation strategies for short, medium
and long run and for different agro-ecologies
Crop breeding
Agronomy
Water management