IJLTEMAS International Journal of Latest Technology in Engineering, Management & Applied Science (IJLTEMAS) IJLTEMAS 2278-2540 IJLTEMAS 22 10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2026.150700017 Geospatial Hydrological Geospatial Hydrological Modelling and Linear-Programming-Based Optimisation of Water and Land Allocation in a Canal Command Area: A SWAT-Based Case Study of the Purna Irrigation Project, Maharashtra, India Madhukar L. Chavan Dr. HOD (Agricultural Engineering) MGM Nanasaheb Kadam College of Agriculture, Gandheli, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar – 431007 (Maharashtra), India India U. M. Khodke Dr. Ex-Associate Dean and Principal, College of Agricultural Engineering and Technology, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani – 431402, Maharashtra, India India G. Shrinivasan Dr. Scientists, Regional Remote Sensing Center, (North), New Delhi India S. H. Jedhe Dr. Taluka Agricultural Officer, Joint Director of Agriculture, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar – 431002 Maharashtra, India India 15 7 221 234 16 07 2026 21 07 2026 06 08 2026 SWAT model; canal command area; water allocation; linear programming; hydraulic performance indicators; crop water productivity; Purna Irrigation Project Abstract

Sustainable management of surface water resources in large canal command areas requires an integrated understanding of catchment hydrology, crop water demand, canal delivery performance and land-water allocation economics. This study presents an integrated assessment of the Purna Irrigation Project (PIP), a major canal irrigation scheme of the Marathwada region of Maharashtra, India, combining the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) with hydraulic performance evaluation and a linear-programming (LP) optimisation framework. The catchment (7784 km²) draining to the Siddheswar reservoir was delineated into four sub-basins and fourteen hydrological response units using a 90 m Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) digital elevation model, land-use/land-cover classification and soil textural data prepared in ArcGIS. The model was calibrated (1992–2004) and validated (2005–2013) against observed monthly streamflow using the SWAT-CUP SUFI-2 algorithm, achieving a coefficient of determination (R²) of 0.98 and Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) of 0.98 during calibration, and R² of 0.95 with NSE of 0.56 during validation, indicating good-to-very-good model performance as per established rating criteria. Average annual water availability in the reservoir over the 1992–2013 simulation period was 927.72 Mm³, of which 540.92 Mm³ (58.3%) was utilised for irrigation, drinking and lift-irrigation purposes. Crop water requirements were estimated for eleven major crops using the FAO-56 Penman–Monteith approach with stage-wise crop coefficients, and canal delivery performance for the Basmat branch canal was evaluated using adequacy, efficiency, equity, dependability, deficiency and wastage indicators, revealing poor-to-fair system performance (mean adequacy = 0.19; mean efficiency = 0.84; mean equity coefficient of variation = 0.89). A linear-programming model with land and water availability constraints was developed to maximise net benefit across seven cropping-intensity scenarios (10–100%). Results indicate that the existing cropping pattern, operating at 53% cropping intensity and consuming approximately 70% of available reservoir water, generated a net benefit of Rs. 210.67 crores from 30,734 ha, whereas full utilisation of the 57,988 ha command area under the optimised scenario (100% cropping intensity) could nearly double net returns to Rs. 416.00 crores. The study demonstrates that an integrated SWAT–performance-indicator–LP framework provides a transferable, data-efficient decision-support tool for water allocation planning in data-scarce semi-arid canal command areas, and recommends reallocation of area under high-water-consuming, low-return perennial crops (sugarcane, banana) toward higher water-productivity field crops (wheat, gram, cotton, turmeric).

 References Abbaspour, K. C., Johnson, C. A., & van Genuchten, M. T. (2007). Estimating uncertain flow and transport parameters using a sequential uncertainty fitting procedure. Vadose Zone Journal, 6(1), 53–64. https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2006.0097 Doorenbos, J., & Kassam, A. H. (1979). Yield response to water. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 33. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. Gassman, P. W., Reyes, M. R., Green, C. H., & Arnold, J. G. (2007). The Soil and Water Assessment Tool: Historical development, applications, and future research directions. Transactions of the ASABE, 50(4), 1211–1250. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.23637 Lenhart, T., Eckhardt, K., Fohrer, N., & Frede, H.-G. (2002). Comparison of two different approaches of sensitivity analysis. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 27(9–10), 645–654. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-7065 (02)00049-9 Loucks, D. P., Stedinger, J. R., & Haith, D. A. (1981). Water resource systems planning and analysis. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. Maji, C. C., & Heady, E. O. (1980). Optimal reservoir management and crop planning using deterministic and stochastic dynamic programming. Water Resources Bulletin, 16(3), 438–443. Molden, D. J., & Gates, T. K. (1990). Performance measures for evaluation of irrigation-water-delivery systems. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, 116(6), 804–823. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(1990)116:6(804) Molden, D. J., Sakthivadivel, R., Perry, C. J., de Fraiture, C., & Kloezen, W. H. (1998). Indicators for comparing performance of irrigated agricultural systems. IWMI Research Report 20. International Water Management Institute, Colombo. Molden, D., Murray-Rust, H., Sakthivadivel, R., & Makin, I. (2003). A water-productivity framework for understanding and action. In J. W. Kijne, R. Barker, & D. Molden (Eds.), Water productivity in agriculture: Limits and opportunities for improvement (pp. 1–18). CABI Publishing, Wallingford. Moriasi, D. N., Arnold, J. G., Van Liew, M. W., Bingner, R. L., Harmel, R. D., & Veith, T. L. (2007). Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations. Transactions of the ASABE, 50(3), 885–900. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.23153 Nash, J. E., & Sutcliffe, J. V. (1970). River flow forecasting through conceptual models, part I — a discussion of principles. Journal of Hydrology, 10(3), 282–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694 (70)90255-6 Raut, P. D., & Khodke, U. M. (2007). Development of a computer software for canal performance evaluation (SPI_CANAL). Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani. Santhi, C., Allen, P. M., Muttiah, R. S., Arnold, J. G., & Tuppad, P. (2005). Regional estimation of base flow for the conterminous United States by hydrologic landscape regions. Journal of Hydrology, 351(1–2), 139–153. Van Griensven, A., & Meixner, T. (2006). Methods to quantify and identify the sources of uncertainty for river basin water quality models. Water Science and Technology, 53(1), 51–59. Veith, T. L., & Ghebremichael, L. T. (2009). How to apply the right GLUE methodology for sensitivity analysis, calibration and validation of catchment models. SWAT-CUP Documentation, Eawag, Dübendorf. Yang, J., Reichert, P., Abbaspour, K. C., Xia, J., & Yang, H. (2008). Comparing uncertainty analysis techniques for a SWAT application to the Chaohe Basin in China. Journal of Hydrology, 358(1–2), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.05.012