Post on 23-Jan-2018
transcript
Analysis of impacts of large scale investments in agriculture
on water resources, ecosystems and livelihoods
Timothy Olalekan Williams
Director, Africa
International Water Management Institute (IWMI)
Outline of Presentation
• Introduction
• Study Objectives
• Methodology
• Results
• Key messages
The context
Potential positive outcomes
• Increased agricultural productivity leading to improved national food security and rural household incomes.
• Infusion of capital, technology and know-how.
• Increased employment.
• Improved social amenities.
Potential negative
consequences
Displacement of currentland users
Water pollution and river sedimentation
• AMCOW’s call for development of research-based policy options for effective management of land and water in large-scale agricultural land investments (LSALIs).
• UNEP, GRID-ARENDAL and FAO enlisted IWMI to conduct an analytical study to shed light on the potential and actual impacts of LSALIs.
Study background
Study objectives• Better understand the impacts of LSIA on
Water resources,
Ecosystems
Livelihoods
• Provide recommendations on policy options for leasing agricultural land that takes water into consideration and that will lead to:
Equitable distribution of benefits
Protection of ecosystem services.
Methodology: A three-prong approach
1. A sub-continental level analysis of drivers, extent, characteristics and production activities of 148 LSALIs in 22 SSA countries, based on Land Matrix database.
1. A field-level, case study analysis of 3 LSALIs each in 6 countries: Ghana, Mali, Ethiopia, Tanzania, Mozambique and Zambia to examine the adequacy of policy and institutional frameworks for guiding and managing such investments.
2. A socio-hydrological simulation modeling exercise in Baro-Gilo basin in the Gambella region of Ethiopia to assess impacts of LSALI on water resources and evaluate trade-offs.
Key results at the pan-continental level
• Based on the 148 LSALIs in 22 countries analyzed, a total area of approximately 3.4 million hectares was acquired across these countries during the period 2000-2012.
• Ten countries accounted for 70% of this acquisition.
• In 2000-12, ten countries accounted for 70% of LSLAs in SSA• Area acquired in each of these countries > 100,000 ha
15%
11%
9%
6%5%4%
50%
Ethiopia
Mozambique
Tanzania
Ghana
Mali
Zambia
Others
(15%)
(11%)
(9%)
(6%)
(5%)
(4%)
(50%)
Percentage distribution of total area of LSALI
in SSA by country, 2000-2012
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
1 000 - 10 000 10 000 - 50 000 50 000 - 100 000 > 100 000
% o
f LS
ALI
s
Land area (ha)
39%
7% 4%
Percentage distribution of LSALI by area (ha) in SSA, 2000-2012
50%
Total area under crop & livestock production
activities on LSALI farms by country, 2000-2012
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
Are
a (h
a)
Countries
Biofuel
Food crop
Livestock
Key results – Detailed case studies
• In all the 6 study countries, land and water aregoverned under separate but parallel policy, legal and institutional frameworks.
• Within each framework, multiple property rightsregimes, including state property, customary propertyand private property, coexist and are operatedsimultaneously.
3. In Ghana and Zambia state and customary property rightsregimes are recognized in land matters. In Ethiopia, Mali,Mozambique and Tanzania all land is vested in the state.
Land and water governance
Main government organizations with key roles in L&WG for LSALI in Mozambique
Water access and use rights
• In Mali, Mozambique, Tanzania and Zambia water accessand use rights are systematically included in LSALI contracts. The main requirements are for the investorsto regularly pay water fees and to maintain secondaryor tertiary canals. In Ghana and Ethiopia water rightsare not often discussed at the time of land contract negotiation.
• In all 6 study countries, the volume of water to be extracted by LSALI is not usually specified and water pricing, where it exists, is not related to volume extracted.
Hydrological simulations
• Unintended and potentially damaging long-term consequences can occur, including
- increased stream flow variations- groundwater recharge reduction- increased flood risk.
• These may jeopardize livelihoods and ecosystem services relied upon by other land and water users
(e.g. fisherfolks, pastoralists etc.) living around the LSALIs.
Livelihood impacts
Variable
Ghana Mali Mozambique
LSALI LSALI LSALI
1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
Prior
consultation
No No No No No No No No No
Displacement
of current
land users No Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes
Employment
created No Limited Limited No No No Yes Limited Limited
Livelihood impacts
Variable
Ethiopia Tanzania Zambia
LSALI LSALI LSALI
1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
Prior
consultation
No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No No
Displacement
of current
land users
Not
known Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No
Employment
created Notknown
Not
Yet
Not Yet Not
Yet
Yes
NU
Yes Yes
BL
Yes,
BL
Yes
Monitoring and assessment of impacts
6. In all 6 study countries the agencies charged with the responsibility of monitoring compliance with economic, social and environmental impacts and mitigation measures are poorly funded and lack the capacity toeffectively perform their functions.
7. Parallel systems of land and water rights administrationand management, poor cross- sectoral coordination of regulatory activities and inadequate capacity in relevant government agencies hampered effective and coordinated L&WG in all six study countries.
Actors/institutions typically involved in LSALI negotiations in Ghana
Seven Key messages: 0ptions for policy action
1. Governments need to monitor and ensure that water availability, use and management is factored into (LSALI) contracts.
2. Water valuation is key to efficient and equitablewater use and management. Governments have a key role to play in instituting frameworks and policies for implementation of practical andpolitically feasible water valuation systems.
3. Governments need to improve the coherence, complementarity and coordination of land, water and environmental policies
4. Governments, through relevant national agencies, need to commission and conduct detailed assessmentof the socio-hydrological implications of LSALI.
5. Investors need to adhere to the principles for responsibleinvestment in agriculture and food systems, includingadoption of inclusive business models.
6. Governments need to apply laws in the statute books torevoke land not utilized.
7. Governments and investors need to fully discloseinformation on LSALIs.
1.
Thank you for your attention