Competitive responses to water scarcity

Dear readers how are all of you?

Recently I've been talking quite about the use of greenhouses as water saving technology. The next couple of posts will be a little different, more of a birds-eye-view which will highlight some of the ideas behind large scale water management in Africa and other places.

While water saving adaptation and technology can change the playing field and enable more to be achieved with the same resources, country or river basin management ideology can often dictate ground conditions and make certain small adaptations feasible or unfeasible. Government policy aims and management policies are just as, or more important than small technologies.

Competitive usage of water

We start off with some competitive scenarios of water resource utilisation. Water resources are over-extracted and over-used in many parts of the world where agriculture is important, but rainfall is inadequate. Dam and irrigation projects, as well as groundwater abstraction projects can help meet some of the water shortfall, but there also exists competition over these resources.

In African irrigation projects, large dams and leaky channels which cause water loss to the ground and atmosphere have increased focus on water efficiency (producing more crop per water). However, this has diluted attention from an equally problematic issue; of how water is distributed in time and space. It is hardly equitable for downstream users of river water when upstream users consume most of the available resources, no matter how efficient they are. Competition for water between farmers of irrigation projects also occur during times of water stress.

Click for image source                                       

Many blue-water stressed areas have turned to groundwater abstraction to support intensive agriculture where the geology is favourable. In Africa, this includes parts of countries like Senegal and Zambia. However, in face of high demand, groundwater can also turn into an unsustainable and polluted source. In southern India, this undesirable scenario has played out; but insights offered by a more comprehensive view of water management have shed light on potential solutions.

In south India, farmers have been encouraged to intensively grow rice since the Green Revolution. This has stressed water supplies, but instead of reducing or moderating use, researchers found farmers competitively acquiring water for private use (using private groundwater sources) as a response to water stress.

Suggested solutions to solve overuse of groundwater in southern India include improving farmers' usage efficiency, promoting crops with lower water requirements, and institutionalising a price mechanism for groundwater. While the desire to provide water for rice cultivation is socially and politically motivated (i.e. avoid encroaching upon the rights of farmers), a wider scale, integrated water management approach highlights the impossibility of getting something out of nothing. 

Attempts to resolve groundwater shortages by using supply from rivers would decrease amounts available for downstream users, and does not do anything to stop demand from increasing in the future. As in the case of irrigation competition in Africa, efficient use of local water in one place doesn't exactly justify cutting water off for other places. Usage of ground or river water for large scale farming may cause economic losses for more vulnerable groups and farmers.

Consideration of external factors, (other than just local situation) has enabled academics to advise policy makers to take alternative action, instead of blindly increasing water supply. I'll write more about what I think integrated water management is about in another post, so till then.

Stay starchy people.

Mr. Cassava

Greenhouses for the desert 2

In my last post and one further back, I talked about greenhouses and how they might be used to grow food in desert climates.

This time, I will write about three different applications of high-tech greenhouses in wealthy nations to show what potential this rather old and familiar technology can reach, and also to discuss some potential problems related to mass implementation.


Spanish greens

I had already written about how some desert areas of Spain have helped it become one of the largest producers of certain crops in Europe, despite the difficulties. According to this article, 100,000 acres of greenhouse covered land grow more than US$1 billion worth of produce annually.

Surprisingly, its not high-end and fancy crops, and much of the produce is destined for budget german supermarkets like Lidl and Aldi. To me, this shows that costs of technology can be reasonably controlled and useful in farming lower margin crops, and is not only viable at high market prices for premium products.

Spanish greenhouses: an aerial view. (link to source)

This Spanish spectacle is not without controversy however. Despite the improved efficiency of greenhouses in retaining water, such farms have depended on groundwater abstraction because of the sheer scale of commercialised production in the region. Locals have enjoyed the jobs and the revival of the region's economic prospects, but the Spanish government has had to deal with a future water problem, as well as build costly desalination plants to deal with current problems of seawater intrusion into groundwater supplies.

I do worry that cheap vegetables are being grown and sold below the true costs of production if companies are exploiting groundwater resources for free or little cost. Such large scale usage definitely calls into question long term sustainability, and the answer is not not likely to be optimistic.


Tomatoes in Texas

Greenhouse temperature regulation is a challenge in deserts, because the internal temperatures of the greenhouse may rise to damaging levels, and much water is used to cool off the plants. However, Village Farms, an enterprise in Texas doesn't release that water vapour into the atmosphere. Instead it recycles all water inputs up to 5 times to achieve 87% water savings compared to field grown tomatoes.

Growing in controlled environments also enables the firm to control every aspect of the environment. Insects are kept out, except bees which aid pollination. Even the soil used for growing tomatoes is not conventional soil, but "coco peat", which is apparently selected for superior properties.

While I believe that it would be simpler and potentially more efficient to grow tomatoes in more suitable climates, questions of jobs and self-sufficiency (food security on national scales) may drive people to do agriculture in such inhospitable climates and may incentive governments to provide subsidies and aid to farmers in such regions. Certainly in rural Sub-Saharan Africa, families and youths have little mobility and security in their lives, and subsistence agriculture may be a large portion of their food and income.


Veggies AND Water in Doha

Probably one of the more innovative ideas is the seawater greenhouse project called the Sahara Forest Project. Sound impossible? Qatar has done it by utilising the power of the sun in deserts to evaporate and desalinate seawater, while also cooling greenhouses for growing crops. The testbed facility was only 1 hectare in size, but managed to produce cucumbers, arugala and barley. Although developed in Europe, the project has global ambitions.

The seawater greenhouse concept (link to source)

While this is unlikely to be relevant to farmers across most of Africa, particularly the driest landlocked areas, implementing such projects may increase water availability for coastal nations, My speculation is that there might even be opportunities for water export to inland nations, for use in large scale commercial farms or municipal use.


Summary of Greenhouses in agriculture

Not all greenhouses are created equal of course, and the lists of benefits and cautionary points would vary from project to project. However, in general it seems that most greenhouse projects exhibit the following characteristics.

Pros:
Protection of crops from pests, enabling higher yields and better appearances
Potential to costs save on resource inputs like fertiliser, and pesticides
Potential to recycle water inputs

Cons:
Many concepts are designed assuming access to electricity and other high-tech equipment
Need a method of heat and air regulation, as greenhouses trap gases and heat
Requires high capital investment
Requires expertise in regulating the greenhouse and growing crops under new conditions


Hope you enjoyed this stuff and as always, stay starchy

Mr. Cassava

Smartholders

Smartholders - I

Hi guys, today I'm writing a little post about technologies that can help small-scale farmers (smallholders). This was inspired by a cool video about setting up a greenhouse, made by a Kenyan organisation, to promote the benefits of technologies in agriculture.

Other than financial, resource input, advice or informational assistance, one possible role of organisations interested in development is to sponsor scientific research or programs (such as the Gates and Melinda Foundation in the health sector) or assist in bringing innovations to the field.


Why focus on smallholders?

Collier and Dercon argued in an article that development economists generally focus on helping the rural poor, and largely on smallholders. A variety of logic has been used to support this stance, such as promoting sectoral development (growth pole model), or the idea that the quickest way to ensure trade benefits the poor is to enable them to improve their productivity.

Some have questioned the methods used to assist smallholders, while others have questioned the focus on smallholders itself for instance, the Collier and Dercon (2014) article. Personally, I believe that agencies promoting development should look closely at what investments smallholders in low-income countries have found successful and profitable, even by themselves.

Some problems in this approach may be that smallholders have imperfect information, or that necessary services and technologies are not available locally and thus would have not been used, even if they were desirable. This is not to mention that the majority of learning done by smallholders is based on following examples or trials, perhaps due to the risky nature of agriculture and the need for evidence and trust.


Friendly neighbourhood heroes?

That's why local help groups that understand the demands of smallholders, and yet have the ability and expertise needed to advise farmers on technologies seem very important to me. In the video that follows, what struck me was the attention to detail in construction, as well as to the needs of farmers involved in the project. When watching the video, it also becomes obvious that specialist knowledge and experience would be required to successfully operate a greenhouse agriculture project.

There are many barriers to technology implementation, especially if smallholders themselves are not ready to adopt new practices, and are themselves unwilling to invest time to learn about new technologies.

Are the help groups and community support provided altruistically? I think that there is a relatively strong sense of community, aid and co-operation in Africa, and successful individuals do want to contribute back to their rural communities. But businesses can make good profits off selling technology, and that is also a large incentive for them to provide education and support. And if farmers make profits using technology and have access to capital, then that would be nice too.

Whatever it is, I think its cool that technology and community intersect in such ways. It also blows away the idea that technology is a "big" thing that requires lots of money.


Stay starchy,
Mr Cassava

Exceptions to the norm

As part of an assignment in the GEOG3038 module, I have been looking at water and agriculture in Nigeria. Unlike arid and some poor parts of Africa, Nigeria is one of the most populous countries in the world, with a thriving economy and is also a tropical country blessed with blue water resources. 

In this post, I will take a wider look at the country's economy, demographics and regional situation to show and also talk about challenges that still remain for agriculture, despite Nigeria's inherent advantages.

Nigeria is a tropical climate with a strong and distinct wet season. Source: World Bank

Nigeria straddles the boundaries between a tropical and semi-arid country. Northern and Central Nigera receive 500-1000mm of rainfall annually, much less than for instance the East Coast (4000mm) and West Coast (18000mm). So far so good for domestic and even agriculture. While high evaporation makes the amount of rainfall insufficient for growing crops like rice, Nigeria has an extensive drainage system that runs into hundreds of wetlands and out to lakes like Lake Chad. If timed rightly, natural flooding in the rainy season can provide the amount of water needed to grow wildrice.

However, as with many countries, Nigeria has been experiencing climate change. Since 1960, mean rainfall has decreased 1.8% per decade, or 3.5mm per month, calling into question long term availability of water in this rapidly growing and very youthful nation. The construction of many dam projects has reduced wetland flooding, and the traditional flood cycle that many farmers and rice cultivators relied on.

Before the expansion of the oil industry in Nigeria, agriculture was the highest earning export, and Nigeria exported valuable commodities like cocoa and rubber. The present decline in Nigeria's agricultural sector might not only reflect industrialisation, but also a reduction in water available for traditional wetland farmers.

Along with reduced water availability, grass and water for animals have also become scarcer, while demand for grazing has increased. Traditional cultures have little concern for the modern concept of borders, and herds from drier countries like Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso, as well as the Fulani tribe are seeking refuge in Nigeria during the dry season, as they have for decades. Unfortunately, this puts declining water resources and natural resources at further stress. Nigeria itself also has the largest cattle herd in Africa, and demand for beef  in the middle-income country is likely to multiply four-fold by 2050.

With industrial wealth and oil money, Nigeria can afford to buy food if water resources are limiting agricultural production. However, this hardly addresses the question of equity. Increased usage of water for commercial and irrigation farming projects may starve traditional small farmers in the wetland systems into poverty, or drive them out of those areas and into cities as wage laborers. While irrigated farms do use water efficiently on-site, irrigation channels and the dams that feed them are subject to high water losses through groundwater seepage and evaporation. Studies have shown that natural resources provided by wetlands are productive and valuable, and more so than wasteful and low water efficiency irrigation projects.

Whether the current management of water in Nigeria is equitable or not, a route of livelihood improvement should be provided to traditional wetland farmers who are displaced because of heavy upstream water usage. If not, it would be a huge loss and a shame.

What also seems interesting to me is that countries with relatively more water than others are still subject to water stress and questions of sustainability continue to arise, especially as populations grow larger, richer and consume greater amounts of resources.



Mr. Cassava