Post on 18-May-2015
description
transcript
Toward a LWP Assessment Methodology
A contribution to
the Karkheh CPWF workshop
ICARDA, Syria, April 2005
Presented by Don Peden, ILRI
Outline
• Background & context
• What is livestock water productivity (LWP)?
• Examples
• Some methodological questions
• Inter-basin collaboration
Background: Why Livestock?
• Generates income for poor farmers (especially women) & pastoralists.
• Provides a drought coping livelihood strategy.
• Traditional basis of wealth.
• Culturally important.
• Opportunity for trade.
• Quality nutrition & health.
• Animal power.
• Overgrazing?
• Impact on water resources. Kenana Dairy Corporation, Sudan supported by irrigated residue
DEVELEOPMENT CONTEXT
Demand water for animal products to 2025
Meat & Milk consumption in SSA is increasing rapidly!
Country
group
Annual growth
(%)
Per capita consumption (Kg/person)
Meat Developed 0.6 83
SSA 3.5 11
Milk Developed 0.2 189
SSA 3.8 30 Source: Delgado et al., 1999
Market & dev. Opportunities
•Similar forces drive demand for irrigation and animal products.
• Meeting this demand can help poor people generate income
DEVELEOPMENT CONTEXT
Livestock densities in SSA (TLU/km2)
Production system Criteria Irrigated Rainfed Grazing
Mean
Good 39 23 17 22 Market access Bad 14 14 10 11
High 45 31 39 33 Human density Low 26 14 11 12
High 55 15 10 14 Available water Low 16 22 12 16
Mean 32 20 11
• Agricultural intensification attracts livestock production• Irrigation is associated with highest livestock densities
DEVELEOPMENT CONTEXT
Integrated livestock & water planning lacking
• Irrigation attracts animals, but planning historically lacking.
• Leads to: Low productivity Damage to infrastructure Low LWP
Water, water everywhere, but not a drop to drink!
DEVELEOPMENT CONTEXT
Livestock, annual cropping & sedimentation
• Annual croplands contribute greatly to siltation of water resources• Improved INRM including livestock is needed• Livestock are part of problem, but soil management is most important.
Source: Hurni, 1989
Sources of soil loss and sedimentation in Ethiopia,the “water tower of the Nile
Area (%)
Soil loss (%)
Annual cropland
13 45
Grazing land
51 21
DEVELEOPMENT CONTEXTPoorly planned expansion of irrigation and rainfed farming sparks conflict with herders
• “Conflict … rooted in the soil.
• 6 Million … farmers & herders.
• Graziers migrate from arid North to South after August rains.
• Traditional tribal laws settled conflict & people co-existed.
• Persistent drought in 1980s forced herders into arable land.
• Competition for resources turned violent.
4 Oct 2004
An SSA-wide problem!!!
The Nile project
Goal: Improve human well-being and livelihoods• More productive and equitable use of Nile water• Better livestock management to safeguard water
Four objectives:• Assess Livestock-water productivity in diverse Nile
production systems.• Community management of livestock & water.• Policy for water & livestock in the Nile Basin.• Dissemination and capacity building.
Hypothesis: Improved livestock management is essential for effectively
increasing Nile water productivity
The Nile: Diverse production systemsNile
Basin
• Mixed rainfed humid/sub-humid
PLUS: Urban & peri-urban
• Livestock grazing semi-arid• Mixed rainfed temperate highland• Livestock grazing humid/sub-humid
• Mixed irrigated semi-arid & arid
The Nile: Where are the animals?Nile Basin
Tropical Livestock Units per Km2
<11-10
10-2020-30>30
Background: The Nile Basin
1 TLU = 250 kg live wt
Estimated TLU and maintenance water in the Nile Basin Part of the
Riparian Countries
Country Million TLU
Billion
M3 H20
Sudan 23.2 10.4Ethiopia 11.7 5.3Egypt 6.5 2.9Kenya 5.3 2.4Uganda 5.2 2.3Tanzania 4.8 2.2Other 4 1.6 0.72Total 58.3 26.2
Assume 4 people /TLU Animal & human biomass equal Animal feed >= human food Hypothesis: If water limits
human food security, then it also limits animal production.
What is Livestock Water Productivity (LWP)?
• Ratio of beneficial livestock outputs (products and services) to water depleted in producing them.
• Part of over-all water productivity.
• Multi-scalar concept – Local to national to global.
LWP: based on water accounting concepts
•
WATER ENABLED OUTPUTS
Beneficial:Grain, other foods,animal feed, wood, fibre
Wild biodiversity
Meat, milk, eggs, hides, power, manure, wealth
Exported water
Non-beneficial:
Discharge
Floods
Contamination
Land
evop
orat
ion
Transpiration
Degraded/devalued
Commited outflowUncommited outflow
Export
Plantproduction
Livestockproduction
Groundwater
In-
flow
Recharge
Rain
Surface Inflow
Framework for assessing livestock water productivity (LWP)In
- f
low
Trees
Pasture/range
Food crops
Feed
Imported feed
Grazing & watering
Feed Sourcing
DRINK
Livestock play multiple roles that affect water productivity
Discharge/flood
Ground
Ground & soil water recharge
Rain
Surface In flow
Evaporation
Degradation
Tra
nspi
ratio
n
Animal production
Plant production
Husbandry, health & genetics
Key LWP entry points:
• Improved feed sourcing strategies.
• Improved grazing and watering strategies.
• Strategic provision of dinking water.
• Improving animal productivity OR Enhancing the transpiration to output link.
Relation between % crop residue in animal feed and LWP in irrigated and non-irrigated households in the Awash
basin, Ethiopia
y = 0.0119x - 0.3045
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
20 40 60 80Crop residue (% of total)
LW
P (
$/m
3)
Example feed sourcing strategy
Selected investment optionsEffective feed sourcing strategies
• Increase water productivity by feeding crop residues to animals because no extra water is used.
• But, protect soil by returning some residue and manure.• Added value of animal production with little use of water
increases profitability and provides farm power.
Feed source Maintenance H2O depleted (m3/TLU/year)
Crop residue only 0
Forage crops only 450
Teff for Feed
Dry season feed availability for livestock of irrigator and non-irrigator households probably affects
productivity per animal (e.g., Godino, Ethiopia)
Irrigated Non-irrigated
Water harvesting and livestock: Belatu’s story(Preliminary results - Sasakawa Global 2000 & ILRI collaboration)
1997: Subsistence & family income less than $50/year
Example feed sourcing and watering
strategy
NOW:• 2 underground tanks @ 65 m3
• $1500; year round; multiple sources.• Crops: 2 or 3 per year.• Garlic, onion, tomatoes .• Milk: From <1 to 20 l/day• Up to 6 $/day with value added.
SUCCESS FACTORS:• Intensified command area agric.• Market access.• More effective use of labour.• Value added production (milk).• WH increased rainfed LWP for dairying.• Education.
Water harvesting and livestock: Belatu’s story(Preliminary results - Sasakawa Global 2000 & ILRI collaboration)
1997: Subsistence & family income less than $50/year
• Good years: cattle increase up to 90/HH.• Drought years: about half die.• Most kept for wealth and drought insurance.• Only 18/HH needed for food and income.• Limiting herd size to 40/HH could:
– save one billion m3 year (1000 micro-dams)
– save feed to support animals in dry years.
• Rainwater “saved” can help restore biodiversity, sequester carbon & provide ecosystem services.
• Policy and institutions needed.
Borana PlateauEthiopia
90,000 km2
325,000 people1,000,000 cattle
WLP in rainfed Borana pastoral areas:A water demand management approach
• Continuous drinking water increases LWP• Provide watering sites in pastoral areas with feed surplus• Control of Fasciolosis and other water-borne disease• Conservation tillage that reduces need for livestock• Improved animal nutrition• Animal breeding• Area-wide integration = integrated river basin mgt.• Select lean rather than “fatty” animals• Satisfy animal health and food safety standards needed for trade in
animals and animal products.• Community based approaches to management of grazing and
watering areas.• Reduce sedimentation through mitigation of up-slope soil loss.
Some other possible LWP options
Basin WP - Data needs
• Stratifying basins into agricultural production systems.• Up-to-date livestock census data (FAO/ILRI/NARS?)• Standard integrators – TLU, Western AU, Iranian AU, or?• Descriptions of animal diets (seasonal feed sourcing strategies).• Transpiration and associated evaporation for feed production
– (RS or field based surveys)
• Gendered & multi-scaled value of animal outputs and services.• Case studies of options to improve watering and grazing practices
and feed sourcing strategies.• Animal productivity indicators linking transpiration to outputs
(animal health, genetics, husbandry, etc).
Ag. Production systems
Available Discret. water Market accessPlus Urban livestock
15 Water-Livestock Development Domains
Should we think beyond WP and identify investment domains where with high potential for improving WP?
Human pop. density
Final thought: Preliminary estimate of water depleted for maintenance feed production in the Karkheh Basin
Million animal units
1 AU = 45 kg sheep
Million m3 water transpired
Cattle 2.03 132
Goats 1.79 189
Sheep 2.78 243
TOTAL 6.60 563
Water transpired or depleted for livestock production in the Karkheh basinbased on FAO livestock corrected estimates 2000
* Many assumptions made and available on request*
Waterfor Feed
Drinking Water Health & Environment
We look forward to collaborating with you to develop a CPWF-wide
approach to assessing WP.
Thank you!