Agricultural Water Management 56 (2002) 193–206

SIMIS: the FAO decision support system for

irrigation scheme management
Luciano Mateosa,*, Ignacio López-Cortijob, Juan A. Sagardoyb
a
Instituto de Agricultura Sostenible, CSIC, Apdo 4084, 14080 Córdoba, Spain
b
FAO, Land and Water Development Division, Rome, Italy
Accepted 28 February 2002

Abstract

Scheme irrigation management information system (SIMIS) is a decision support system for
managing irrigation schemes. It can be used either as a management tool or as a training tool. The data
needed for the technical and administrative management of the scheme can be stored, edited and
displayed in various forms. They can then be used for helping in water management, calculating
irrigation requirements, developing irrigation layouts, scheduling water deliveries, and keeping
records of water consumption. The SIMIS approach is based on simple water balance models with
capacity constraints. The user can simulate management alternatives, assess the results and try out
new alternatives, until a satisfactory solution is found. SIMIS also helps in the administrative aspects
of managing irrigation schemes (accounting, calculating water charges, controlling maintenance
activities) and in assessing their performance. # 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Decision support; Irrigation scheme; Irrigation management

1. Introduction

In many countries around the world, there is an increasing concern about the perfor-
mance of irrigation schemes because many schemes are not producing the expected
returns, or they are suffering water supply restrictions and/or water quality problems.
Although good on-farm irrigation is crucial for good performance of any scheme, the
bottleneck is often in the irrigation delivery system. An inappropriate system design may
be the root of some of the problems, but proper asset management is also essential for the
effective operation and maintenance of irrigation water delivery systems (Malano et al.,
1999). Operation encompasses activities related to storing, conveying and delivering water.

*
Corresponding author. Tel.: þ34-957-499228; fax: þ34-957-499252.
E-mail address: aglmainl@uco.es (L. Mateos).

0378-3774/02/$ – see front matter # 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 3 7 8 - 3 7 7 4 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 3 5 - 5
194 L. Mateos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 56 (2002) 193–206

The objectives of maintenance are to keep the system in proper operating conditions, to
maximize the life of the system’s facilities, and to prevent interruptions in water deliveries.
Several manuals are available to assist in the management of irrigation schemes (FAO,
1982; ASCE, 1991; Skogerboe and Merkley, 1996), which set out concepts for managing
these facilities, and describe relevant planning, operational, maintenance, administration,
monitoring, and assessment activities and procedures. However, implementing appropriate
management concepts and procedures is not always straightforward in practice. Several
decision support systems for planning irrigation projects have been reported in the
literature (Chávez-Morales et al., 1992; Prajamwong et al., 1997; Kuo et al., 2000),
but operational decision support systems are more rare. Suryavanshi and Reddy (1986)
used linear programming to determine optimal operational parameters for constant
frequency–variable depth schedules. Yamashita and Walker (1994) presented a model
that can simulate aggregate water demands by command areas and generate inputs for the
operation of irrigation delivery systems. Khepar et al. (2000) described a model for the
distribution of water under an equitable delivery schedule. Nixon et al. (2001) applied a
genetic algorithm for optimizing off-farm irrigation scheduling. These models were
designed to find optimum irrigation delivery schedules for specific modes of water
delivery scheduling. However, they all addressed only parts of the operation of the delivery
system.
Scheme irrigation management information system (SIMIS) began in 1993 as a DOS-
based information system (Sagardoy et al., 1994) designed to help managers and staff
responsible for irrigation schemes in their daily tasks by providing a comprehensive
database application. Training courses and field verifications were carried out in Argentina,
Egypt, Cuba and Thailand (Hatcho and Sagardoy, 1996a,b). It was soon developed into a
MS Windows-based decision support system (FAO, 1998a), and in its current format,
SIMIS is a decision support system for helping in the management of irrigation schemes. In
contrast to other decision support systems, it is intended to be valid for all the most
common planning, water delivery, maintenance, administrative, and performance assess-
ment activities carried out in any irrigation scheme. Thus, it could potentially help in the
integrated management of any irrigation project.
In this paper, we describe the approach followed in the development of SIMIS. We then
present its structure and describe its content and models used in its development. Finally,
key features of the application are outlined.

2. The SIMIS approach

SIMIS was primarily designed as a management tool that irrigation engineers could use
in their day-to-day tasks. However, SIMIS has also become a training tool for illustrating
the application of technical concepts to the practical operation and maintenance of
irrigation schemes. Operation here refers essentially to the delivery of water, so one of
the main sub-modules in SIMIS is devoted to scheduling water delivery. This sub-module
is applicable to any branched irrigation distribution system, but it mainly addresses open
canal systems. The scheduling periods can be varied from a few days to several weeks, but
the scheduled and actual deliveries can be stored for seasonal analysis.
 L. Mateos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 56 (2002) 193–206 195

SIMIS allows the simulation of different cropping patterns, irrigation network designs,
water-distribution modalities, and water-distribution schedules. It also provides a module
for assessing irrigation planning scenarios and management alternatives. The user can
approach optimum alternatives by simulating and assessing options, implementing them in
the field if feasible, and reassessing them. In contrast to other decision supports reported in
the literature designed to assist in planning (Kuo et al., 2000) and operation (Khepar et al.,
2000; Nixon et al., 2001), SIMIS does not attempt to identify optimal parameters, but acts
as a tool in the learning process towards satisfactory irrigation management (Skogerboe
and Merkley, 1996).
SIMIS uses a coherent modeling approach in all of its component modules based on the
water balance, together with capacity constraints. This simplification is used for modeling
the root zone water balance, and in the distribution model. The root zone water balance is
done by daily time-steps. The distribution model covers canals, pipes, reservoirs and
secondary sources. Each component constrains the system according to its volume capacity
or its carrying capacity. Canals and pipes have outlets at discrete locations, and they may be
subject to continuous seepage losses. The excess over the distribution component capacity
is considered a spill loss. The time-step in the distribution model varies from minutes to a
day.
This water-distribution modeling approach is simpler than that of non-steady and steady
state hydraulic models. The assumptions in SIMIS imply that the hydraulic simulations are
not accurate—unless intensive field calibrations are undertaken, which are costly and
require highly specialized staff—thus the water delivery schedules are only approxima-
tions that the user should adjust to the real situation. The water travel time (the time needed
to fill the distribution components with water at operational flow levels) is either estimated
by the user or calculated by SIMIS, based on crude assumptions. The water levels needed to
adjust gates cannot be estimated with SIMIS.

3. SIMIS description

3.1. Project data

The project data are organized into five main sets, related to meteorological, cropping,
irrigation layout, plot and maintenance aspects, respectively (Fig. 1).
The climatic variables to be entered in SIMIS are reference evapotranspiration and
effective rainfall values. Daily, decadal or monthly data are entered for pre-defined climatic
stations. Each climatic data set represents an area, a time period or certain weather
conditions. The monthly or decadal data are transformed into daily data by interpolation.
The calculation of reference evapotranspiration figures was deliberately avoided, to give
users the freedom to select the method they consider most suitable for their area.
The soils in the area covered by the irrigation scheme are inventoried in the soil database.
The variables stored are the names of the soil classes, their water holding capacity (in terms
of depth of water per unit depth of soil) and the depth of the soil profiles. If paddy rice is
cultivated in the scheme, the depth of water needed for soaking the profile at the beginning
of the cropping season must also be entered.
196 L. Mateos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 56 (2002) 193–206
Fig. 1. Chart of SIMIS project data.
 L. Mateos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 56 (2002) 193–206 197

Similarly, the water use characteristics of the crops that are usually cultivated in the
scheme are entered in the crop database. These characteristics are defined as in FAO (1977,
1979, 1998b). The crop coefficients are calculated from their respective values during the
initial, mid, and late development stages, and the duration of each stage is entered by the
user. The user must also enter the rooting depth, allowable depletion and water deficit
response factors, for the initial, mid, and late crop development stages. Additional
information (nursery area, nursery period, crop coefficient during the nursery period,
land preparation period and decomposition period) is necessary for paddy rice.
Data on the components of the irrigation layout are stored in the irrigation network database.
The networks in SIMIS must have a branched layout. The components are the main source,
canals, pipes, reservoirs, secondary sources, plot outlets, pumping stations, and other hydraulic
structures. The method for setting up the irrigation layout database involves defining parent–
child relationships. For each parent component, the user enters the downstream components
connected to that parent. When entering the data, the user must start at the main source. For
entering a new component, the user first selects the parent and then assigns a name to the new
component and its flow capacity. If the parent is a canal or a pipe, the distance from the
connection to the origin of the parent has to be specified. If the component is a plot, the irrigable
and irrigated areas are input data; if it is a canal or pipe, its length is an input datum; if it is a
reservoir, its capacity (volume) has to be entered. The seepage losses are entered by the user in
terms of volume of water lost per unit length and time, or they are calculated by SIMIS from an
efficiency value entered by the user. In the second case, it is assumed that the efficiency has
been measured or estimated under the operational flow depth. Distribution efficiency (account-
ing only for seepage losses) is then calculated for each reach in the distribution component,
assuming uniform seepage losses along the component. The irrigation layout database can be
complemented with optional additional information. In the case of canals, pipes, pumping
stations or other hydraulic structures, this information relates to the geometry and hydraulic
characteristics of the component; in the case of the plots, the optional information is related to
details of land ownership, tenancy and the on-farm irrigation system.
In the plot database, the user enters for each plot, the crops present in the respective
season, their planted area and date of planting.
In the maintenance database, the user can define and describe a series of maintenance
activities with their cost per unit. Since maintenance affects the irrigation network and also
the drainage and road networks, the user has to enter additional information defining the
components of these networks. Other sub-modules in the maintenance database allow
information to be stored about the maintenance staff, machinery, material and contractors
participating in the maintenance activities.

3.2. Management modules

There are two management modules (the first for water management and the second for
financial management), each of which is composed of several sub-modules (Fig. 2).

3.2.1. Water management

The water management module in SIMIS deals with four key issues: crop water
requirements, seasonal irrigation planning, water delivery scheduling, and recording water
198 L. Mateos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 56 (2002) 193–206

Fig. 2. Chart of the SIMIS management modules.

consumption. These four modules are independent, but the user is supposed to use them in
an integrated manner.
The crop water requirements sub-module follows the approach of CROPWAT (FAO,
1992). It calculates the daily crop water requirements for all possible crop-planting date
combinations in the irrigation project, using the input data for the climatic variables and the
crop water use characteristics. Soil-specific net irrigation requirements and optimal field
irrigation schedules can also be calculated. Using the information in the land use database,
the crop water and net irrigation requirements can be aggregated for individual plots, or for
all plots of a network branch. This feature allows the net irrigation requirements of any
canal (based on the actual planted area) to be compared with the design flow and
determines the flexibility of the canals to satisfy the demand.
In the irrigation plan sub-module, the net irrigation requirements throughout the season
can be calculated for different cropping patterns with staggered planting dates. The net
irrigation requirements are converted to continuous flow in operating hours, taken the
distribution efficiency into account. The results are then compared with the system’s
capacity and the available flow. The user can search for a feasible and satisfactory cropping
pattern to be used in a sector, section, or the whole system.
The water delivery scheduling sub-module is the core of SIMIS. The physical structure,
together with the social and institutional constraints of the scheme, determines the water
delivery mode selected by the user. SIMIS can handle three main water delivery modes
(Clemmens, 1987; Horst, 1998): fixed rotation, arranged rotation (also known as ‘‘semi-
demand’’), and proportional supply.
In fixed rotation mode, the operational flow is rotated in a given sequence (from head to
tail, from tail to head or some other order set by the user) in order to apply a pre-determined
depth (based on irrigable or planted area). The water is rotated within sections (i.e. groups
 L. Mateos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 56 (2002) 193–206 199

of plots served by the same tertiary or secondary canal or pipe) and the sections are grouped
in sectors. The pre-determined depth can be the same for all plots. Alternatively, it can be
fixed according to the crop water requirements of each plot, or it can be entered plot-by-plot
by the user. The irrigation time is calculated for each plot according to the outlet operating
flow. Several plots can be irrigated simultaneously if the canal or pipe operating flow is
sufficiently great.
The semi-demand option is an arranged mode, in which the irrigator requests a specific
depth of water and flow rate to be supplied on one or several days. The manager checks if
the requests can be satisfied by the operational flow and delivery sequence selected, and the
sector and section assignations. If not, new manager–irrigator arrangements will have to be
made.
In the proportional method, the flow available at each node is divided according to a
proportionality criterion, which can be based on the irrigable or planted area downstream of
the division, or decided by the user for each division node. The proportionality can be
applied without taking into consideration the water-distribution losses downstream of each
division. If qi represents the branch flows downstream of a given division node and the
proportionality criterion selected is the area, then
P i
qo m j¼1 Aij
qi ¼ Pn Pmi (1)
i¼1 j¼1 Aij
where Aij is the area of plot j in branch i downstream of the division, n is the number of
branches, mi is the number of plots in branch i, and qo is the flow to be divided. A second
variation of proportional supply seeks equity between the head and tail plots by taking into
account the water-distribution losses downstream of the divisions in the network. If the
proportionality is based on area, the water-distribution losses are accounted for by using
adjusted areas, A0ij , instead of the real areas, Aij, in Eq. (1). The adjusted areas are calculated
by summing the plot areas downstream of the division, divided by the respective
efficiencies of distribution between the division node and the plot outlets. If there are
secondary sources or reservoirs in the network, their flow contribution is added to the flow
in the component to which they are connected.
The proportional supply can deliver a continuous flow (typically in paddy rice mono-
culture schemes) or rotate the flow within the plots of a section (defined as each part of the
network receiving a continuous flow over the scheduling period). During the rotation, the
plot irrigation time can be set to be proportional to the plot area, so the depth in each plot
will vary according to the flow at the plot outlet, or the volume can be proportional to the
area, i.e. all plots will receive the same depth.
Finally, in the water consumption sub-module, the user enters the actual volume of water
delivered to each plot or distribution component on every day, if measurements are
available. The default values are the scheduled volumes and dates. These data can be used
later for other purposes (water tariff, performance assessment, etc.).

3.2.2. Financial management

The accounting sub-module helps the user to check the expenses incurred in the
operation and maintenance of the scheme. Payments and incomes are recorded and
classified in a database that can be used for other purposes.
200 L. Mateos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 56 (2002) 193–206

The water fees sub-module is used in SIMIS to control and keep records of the payments
due from, or made by, the farmers for recovering the costs of the investment and services
involved in the operation, maintenance, and administration of the scheme. This sub-module
is also used for issuing bills. The water fees are calculated for the period determined by the
user. The payments can be based on either area or volume. If the volume delivered is
measured, the reading should be used for calculating the water fee. If the volume is not
measured, the scheduled volume or the estimated crop water requirements can be used for
this purpose.
In the control of maintenance activities sub-module the user can first enter current
maintenance needs, the location of components that need attention, the type of main-
tenance activity required, the magnitude of damage and the planned starting and finishing
dates. The user can then control the planned maintenance activities by recording the
resources (machinery, staff, material, and contractors) used, the time spent and the amount
of work done for each activity.

3.2.3. Performance indicators module

Assessment is a crucial phase in the SIMIS approach since it indicates the progress being
made in the learning process towards better management. The assessment is based on a
nested systems framework. The boundary of each system or sub-system to be assessed, and
the period to be covered in the assessment, must be clearly defined. The performance
indicators are of the internal type for the scheme level. However, indicators of the external
type, i.e. indicators relating outputs to inputs in a given system, are also used for sub-
systems within the scheme. The manager can make spatial comparisons to identify areas
where management is relatively strong or weak, and by applying SIMIS in different
periods, he or she can also make temporal comparisons.
SIMIS is oriented towards operational rather than strategic decisions. Thus, most of the
performance indicators refer to operational parameters. The performance indicators selected
have been taken mainly from Bos et al. (1994). Four groups of such indicators are
distinguished related to: the water distribution, agricultural intensity, maintenance, and
financial matters. The performance indicators related to water distribution (Table 1) allows
evaluation of the irrigation efficiency, distribution efficiency, distribution capacity, and
quality of the water supply service from the user’s perspective. These indicators can be
calculated for a scheduling period or for the whole season when seasonal data are stored. The
performance indicators related to agricultural intensity (Table 2) allow assessment of the use
of the land and the water from the crop production point of view. The three performance
indicators related to maintenance (Table 3) allow evaluation of the functionality of the
system, the effectiveness of the maintenance program and the relative cost of maintenance.
The last group of performance indicators, those related to economic considerations (Table 4),
evaluate the costs per unit of selected assets (area, length of water carrier, staff, volume of
water) and the financial viability and self-sufficiency of the project.

4. Software

SIMIS is user-friendly software (FAO, 2001) in which the user enters and retrieves
information through forms. The input data can be edited in various ways and displayed in
Table 1
Irrigation scheme performance indicators related to the water distribution
Water delivery capacity
Irrigation efficiency
Distribution efficiency
Seepage losses fraction
Spill losses fraction
Dependability of supply
Reliability of deliveries
Equity of supply
Fraction of metered outlets
canal capacity to deliver water at the head Canal capacity to deliver water at the head: volume resulting from
peak irrigation requirement multiplying the operational flow at the inlet of the selected branch by the
duration of the selected peak demand period. Peak irrigation requirement:
irrigation requirement at the head of a branch during the peak demand period
L. Mateos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 56 (2002) 193–206
irrigation water beneficially used Irrigation water beneficially used: sum of the volumes of water delivered to
water delivered at the head the plots of the selected branch multiplied by the respective plot application
efficiencies. Water delivered at the head: volume of water delivered at the
head of the selected branch during the scheduling period
water delivered to outlets Water delivered to outlets: volume of water delivered at the plot inlets of
water delivered at the head the selected branch during the scheduling period
seepage in the distribution network Seepage in the distribution network: volume of water lost by seepage in the
water delivered at the head selected branch during the scheduling period
spill in the distribution network Spill in the distribution network: volume of water spilled in the selected
water delivered at the head branch during the scheduling period
 
jscheduled water delivery  actual water deliveryj Actual water delivery: actual depth of water delivered at the plot outlets of
1
scheduled water delivery the selected branch during the scheduling period. Scheduled water delivery:
scheduled depth of water for the plots of the selected branch during the
scheduling period
 
jscheduled discharge  actual dischargej Actual discharge: actual discharge at the plot inlets of the selected branch
1
scheduled discharge during the scheduling period. Scheduled discharge: scheduled discharge at
the plots of the selected branch during the scheduling period
 
japplied depth  average applied depthj Applied depth: depth of water applied to each of the plots in the selected
1
average applied depth branch, during the scheduling period. Average applied depth: average of the
depths of water applied to the plots in the selected branch, during the
scheduling period
number of metered outlets
Number of metered outlets and total number of outlets for a given period in
total number of outlets
the selected branch
201

Table 2
Irrigation scheme performance indicators related to agricultural intensity
Irrigation intensity
Planted area performance
Irrigated area performance
Relative irrigation supply
(scheduled and actual)
total planted area
total irrigable area
total planted area
total planned area
total irrigated area
total irrigable area
applied water for maximum yield
scheduled applied water
applied water for maximum yield
actual applied water
202
L. Mateos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 56 (2002) 193–206
Total planted area and total irrigable area for the panning period in the whole system
Total planted area and total planned area for the planning period in the whole system
Total irrigated area and total irrigable area for the panning period in the whole system
Applied water for maximum yield: sum of irrigation requirements in an optimum crop irrigation
schedule extended to the plots in the selected branch, and to the period of evaluation. Scheduled
applied water: applied water according to the distribution schedule in the selected branch and
period
Actual applied water: applied water according to the records in the selected branch and period
 L. Mateos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 56 (2002) 193–206 203

Table 3
Irrigation scheme performance indicators related to maintenance

Functionality of number of structures functioning Number of structures functioning: total

the system total number of structures number of structures minus the num-
ber of structures in need of mainte-
nance in the selected branch. Total
number of structures: total number of
structures in the selected branch

Effectiveness of the number of structures repaired Number of structures repaired: number

maintenance number of structures in need of reparation of structures actually repaired (within
program the deadline) in relation to the number
of structures in need of reparation
Relative weight of machinery=contractors= Machinery/contractors/material/staff
maintenance costs material=staff maintenance costs maintenance costs: cost of each of the
maintenance costs listed activities in relation to the total
maintenance costs

tables. Many inputs and outputs can be graphically displayed and printed in reports. All the
geo-referenced information (inputs and outputs) can be visualized through the geographic
information system (GIS) contained within SIMIS. The irrigation network components can
be entered with the help of the GIS.
The user can choose from five languages: English, Spanish, French, Russian and Kyrgyz.
The help document can assist the user on every screen and it is available in English, Spanish
and French.

Table 4
Irrigation scheme performance indicators related to the economics and finance

Total financial viability actual O&M allocation Actual O&M allocation: total amount actually
total O&M requirements available for O&M. Total O&M requirements: total
amount required for appropriate O&M

Financial self-sufficiency irrigation fees collected
total O&M requirements
Fee collection performance irrigation fees collected
irrigation fees due
Cost per unit of O&M costs
irrigable area irrigable area
Cost per unit of volume O&M costs
of water delivered water delivered at the head
Cost per unit length O&M costs
of carrier length of carriers
Number of staff per unit number of O&M staff
length of carrier length of carriers
Irrigation fees collected: actually collected irrigation
fees. Total O&M requirements: total cost of the
operation and maintenance requirements
Irrigation fees due: irrigation fees due, collected
and non-collected
O&M costs: total operation and maintenance costs.
Irrigable area: area that can be irrigated in the
scheme
Water delivered at the head: volume of water
delivered at the head of the system or the selected
branch
Length of carrier: length of the distribution compo-
nents in the system or the selected branch
Number of O&M staff: number of employees
dedicated to operation and maintenance activities
204 L. Mateos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 56 (2002) 193–206

Fig. 3. Software and programming languages used in the development of SIMIS.

Other valuable features of SIMIS include the use of a password to limit the risk of
unauthorized access, the incorporation of many controls over the data entered to reduce
typographic and other kinds of errors, and its modular form, which permits selection of
modules that are most relevant to the user.
SIMIS has been developed in Microsoft Access# 97. The calculations and graphics are
programmed in Access Basic. The GIS was developed with Map Objects# 1.2, an ESRI
product. The whole package is compiled using Microsoft Developer# to produce a run-
time Microsoft Access application (Fig. 3). A personal computer with at least 70 MB of
available memory, 32 MB of RAM and 100 MHz is required.
SIMIS can be obtained on request from the Distribution and Sales Section, FAO, Viale
delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy, or by e-mail to publications-sales@fao.org.

5. Conclusions

SIMIS has demonstrated that the asset management activities of an irrigation scheme
can be systematized in an information and decision support system designed to help the
managers perform their daily tasks. Given the integrated approach and rationality of the
system, SIMIS can also act as a useful training tool.
The management learning process implicit in SIMIS, based on simulation–execution–
assessment cycles, is based on a distinctive approach whose validity should be evaluated as
the use of SIMIS is extended. Finding satisfactory solutions rather than seeking optimal
solutions seems to be a more realistic approach for supporting decision making in irrigation
scheme management. Again, this approach should be validated as the use of SIMIS is
extended.
Therefore, although SIMIS is already being applied in several irrigation schemes around
the world, it would still be desirable to apply SIMIS in a selected set of test cases in order to
test the validity of the approaches used in the model.
 L. Mateos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 56 (2002) 193–206 205

Acknowledgements

SIMIS has been developed under the auspices of the FAO. A number of people have
collaborated at different stages of its development and their contribution is acknowledged.
Messrs. Pastore and Lozano programmed the current version. Messrs. Yamashita, Hatcho,
Vanden Bulcke and Bellostas participated in the development of previous versions. L.
Mateos acknowledges the assistance of the FAO in appointing him for 4 months in 1999 as
a visiting expert under its program of cooperation with academic and research institutions.

References

ASCE, 1991. Management, operation and maintenance of irrigation and drainage systems. In: Johnston, W.R.,
Robertson, J.B. (Eds.), ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice no. 57. New York, USA, p. 432.
Bos, M.G., Murray-Rust, D.H., Merrey, D.J., Johnson, H.G., Snellen, W.B., 1994 Methodologies for assessing
performance of irrigation and drainage management. Irrig. Drain. Syst. 7 (4), 231–261.
Chávez-Morales, J., Mariño, M.A., Holzapfel, E.A., 1992 Planning simulation model of irrigation district. J.
Irrig. Drain. Eng. 118 (1), 74–87.
Clemmens, A.J., 1987. Delivery system schedules and required capacities. In: Zimbelman, D.D. (Ed.),
Proceedings of an ASCE Symposium on Planning, Operation, Rehabilitation and Automation of Irrigation
Water Delivery Systems, Portland, OR, USA, 28–30 July 1987, pp. 18–34.
FAO, 1977. Crop water requirements. In: Doorembos, J., Pruitt, W.O. (Eds.), Irrigation and Drainage Paper 24.
FAO, Rome, Italy, p. 144.
FAO, 1979. Yield response to water. In: Doorembos, J., Kassam, A.H. (Eds.), Irrigation and Drainage Paper 33.
FAO, Rome, Italy, p. 193.
FAO, 1982. Organization, operation and maintenance of irrigation schemes. In: Sagardoy, J.A. (Ed.), Irrigation
and Drainage Paper 40. FAO, Rome, Italy, p. 166.
FAO, 1992. CROPWAT: a computer program for irrigation planning and management. In: Smith, M. (Ed.),
Irrigation and Drainage Paper 46. FAO, Rome, Italy, p. 126.
FAO, 1998a. SIMIS: scheme irrigation management information system, version 1.0 for Windows. In: Sagardoy,
J.A., Pastore, G., Yamashita, I., López-Cortijo, I. (Eds.), Land and Water Digital Media Series no. 6. FAO,
Rome, Italy.
FAO. 1998b. Crop evapotranspiration—guidelines for computing crop water requirements. In: Allen, R.G.,
Pereira, L.S., Raes, D., Smith, M. (Eds.), Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56. FAO, Rome, Italy, p. 300.
FAO. 2001. SIMIS: scheme irrigation management information system, version 2.0 for Windows. In: Sagardoy,
J.A., Pastore, G., Yamashita, I., López-Cortijo, I., Lozano, D., Mateos, L. (Eds.), Land and Water Digital
Media Series no. 6. FAO, Rome, Italy.
Hatcho, N., Sagardoy, J.A., 1996a. Optimum irrigation scheduling under scheme irrigation management
information system (SIMIS). Irrigation Engineering and Rural Planning no. 30. Japan, p 15.
Hatcho, N., Sagardoy, J.A., 1996b. Application of an irrigation scheduling module of scheme irrigation
management information system (SIMIS) in Mendoza, Argentina. Irrigation Engineering and Rural Planning
no. 31. Japan, p 15.
Horst, L. 1998. The dilemmas of water division: considerations and criteria for irrigation system design.
International Water Management Institute. Colombo, Sri Lanka, p 123.
Khepar, S.D., Gulati, H.S., Yadav, A.K., Brar, T.P.S., 2000 A model for equitable distribution of canal water.
Irrig. Sci. 19 (4), 191–197.
Kuo, S.-F., Merkley, G.P., Liu, C.-W., 2000 Decision support for irrigation project planning using a genetic
algorithm. Agric. Water Manage. 45 (3), 243–266.
Malano, H.M., Chien, N.V., Turral, H.N., 1999 Asset management for irrigation and drainage infrastructure.
Principles and case study. Irrig. Drain. Systems 13, 109–129.
Nixon, J.B., Dandy, G.C., Simpson, A.R., 2001 A genetic algorithm for optimizing off-farm irrigation
scheduling. J. Hydroinformat. 3 (1), 11–22.
206 L. Mateos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 56 (2002) 193–206

Prajamwong, S., Merkley, G.P., Allen, R.G., 1997 Decision support model for irrigation water management. J.
Irrig. Drain. Eng. 123 (2), 106–113.
Sagardoy, J.A., Hatcho, N., vanden Bulcke, M., Bellostas, J.M., 1994. SIMIS (scheme irrigation management
information system): an introduction to its use and potential. Irrigation Water Delivery Models, Water
Reports 2. FAO, Rome, Italy, pp. 49–61.
Skogerboe, G.V., Merkley, G.P., 1996. Irrigation maintenance and operations learning process. Water Resources
Publications, LLC, Highlands Ranch, Colorado, USA, p. 358.
Suryavanshi, A.R., Reddy, J.M., 1986 Optimal operation schedule of irrigation distribution systems. Agric.
Water Manage. 11 (1), 23–30.
Yamashita, S., Walker, W.R., 1994 Command area water demands. Part I. Validation and calibration of UCA
model. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 120 (6), 1025–1042.