GM Foods: A Moral Dilemma

Genetically modified (GM) food has come a very long way in terms of its technological advance and the stigma towards it. These stigmas are based on a lack of knowledge or myths which I wanted to explore in further depth. For example, in an article by the Economist in 2002 titled ‘Better dead than GM-fed?’, I was shocked to read how Zambia had refused American food aid into the country because of fears surrounding GM corn and soya (The Economist 2002). Levy Mwanawasa, president of Zambia, declared the aid as poison (ibid). There were uncertainties regarding the overall safety of these GM crops to human health, and fears of ‘contamination’ with other non-GM crops (ibid). Do these myths hold any weight? The phrase in the article’s title ‘better dead’ was very gripping as it demonstrates that sometimes difficult and unfavourable decisions have to made in order to achieve the lesser of two evils. But to reject food aid in a desperate situation where food supplies were expected to be depleted in Zambia within two weeks, is bizarre in my mind.

Throughout the course of this blog, I have demonstrated the various ways in which Africa is bracing itself for climatic variability and improving its adaptive capacity. GM foods can provide a way to increase crop yields and provide a greater outcome per unit of water. In other words, GM foods can be genetically engineered to more drought resistant and if implemented on a wide scale, can contribute to Africa’s long awaited green revolution (Schnurr 2015). GM foods can also be modified to be insect-resistant, herbicide-tolerant and more nutritious (Qaim 2014). For example, a new drought-resistant maize has been undergoing development and testing since 2008 by Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) (Schnurr 2015). Studies have revealed 20% increases in yield (ibid).

Myth 1: Health

The majority of studies have suggested that GM foods are indeed safe to eat, including a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences. But widespread public concern remains (National Geographic 2016). No matter how health-conscious you are nor how carefully you select your foods, you’re probably already consuming GM food without realising. Depending on where in the world you live, you will have different exposure to GM food in your diet.  For example, GM ingredients are found in 80% of packaged food in the USA (Fast Company 2014). This is contrasted to the UK which currently does not grow any GM crops (New Scientist 2015).

Myth 2: Contamination

One of the promises that you may have heard is that farms growing GM crops can be kept separate from other organic farms. Unfortunately, there have been many reported cases of contamination worldwide: 396 cases across 63 countries to be precise (Price and Cotter 2014). You can find more information about the specific cases here.

Myth 3: Seeds

The successful 20% increase in yields from the water efficient maize is distracting from one particular characteristic about GM food that I find distressing; farmers are forced to buy new GM seeds year on year because GM crops are designed to be sterile (Genetic Literacy Project 2015). How can this be morally correct, in a time where farmers in poverty cannot afford the seeds year on year? It seems wrong that companies would design their GM crops to be sterile. If they truly cared about poverty and food security, they would allow farmers to make a one off payment. The concept is formally named Genetic Use Restriction Technologies (GURTs), and is one of the most controversial biotechnologies in current debates surrounding GM crops (Lombardo 2014). The main reasons for this technology is to prevent unlicensed use of patented seeds. From an economic standpoint, research and development is a costly process and patents allow to compensate for this innovation (Genetic Literacy Project 2015).  Seed piracy, where GM crops are covertly planted in unregulated regions, can also be prevented by GURTs (ibid). This is extremely important because without regulation, the government will obtain inaccurate information regarding its use of GM foods and will not be ill equipped for any potential problems.

Even after explaining these justifications, the commercialisation of nature in this regard is still an upsetting one for me. GM foods have a big potential to provide resilience to climate change through drought-resistant crops, but we are disrupting the way of life for millions of people who depend on seed saving and the exchanging of seeds to save money and secure an income (Lombardo 2014).

List of References

Fast company (2014) ‘The Genetically Modified Food You Eat Every Day’ (WWW) (https://www.fastcompany.com/1676104/the-genetically-modified-food-you-eat-every-day; accessed 26/12/17).

Genetic Literacy Project (2015) ‘GMO patent controversy: Terminator genes, seed piracy and 'forcing' farmers to buy seeds’ (WWW) (https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2015/12/14/gmo-patent-controversy-terminator-genes-seed-piracy-forcing-farmers-buy-seeds/; accessed 26/12/17).

Lombardo, L. (2014) ‘Genetic use restriction technologies: a review’, Plant biotechnology journal, 12, 8, 995-1005.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2016). Genetically engineered crops: experiences and prospects, London: National Academies Press.

National Geographic (2016) ‘Scientists Say GMO Foods Are Safe, Public Skepticism Remains’ (WWW) (http://theplate.nationalgeographic.com/2016/05/17/scientists-say-gmo-foods-are-safe-public-skepticism-remains/; accessed 26/12/17).

New Scientist (2015) ‘More than half of EU officially bans genetically modified crops’ (WWW) (https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28283-more-than-half-of-european-union-votes-to-ban-growing-gm-crops/; accessed 26/12/17).

Price, B. and J. Cotter (2014) ‘The GM Contamination Register: a review of recorded contamination incidents associated with genetically modified organisms (GMOs), 1997–2013’, International Journal of Food Contamination, 1, 1, 5.

Qaim, M. (2014) ‘Genetically modified crops and development’, in V. Desai and R. Potter (eds.) The Companion to Development Studies: Third Edition, London: Routledge, Section 4.5.

Schnurr, M. A. (2015) ‘GMO 2.0: Genetically modified crops and the push for Africa’s green revolution’, Canadian Food Studies/La Revue canadienne des études sur l'alimentation, 2, 2, 201-208.

The Economist (2002) ‘Better dead than GM-fed?’ (WWW) (http://www.economist.com/node/1337197; accessed 26/12/17).

Groundwater in Rwanda

Can groundwater reserves in Africa be used sustainably?

This is the question that many are concerned about because even though Africa is sitting on a sea of untapped aquifers, excessive demand may limit groundwater recharge (Guardian 2016).

Figure 1: Groundwater availability in Africa (CGIAR 2016)

Figure 1 shows the distribution of groundwater which is available for irrigation, but the diagram on the right specifically shows Ground Water Irrigation Potential (GWIP). Availability of groundwater is one thing, but access to this is limited by factors which include: the drilling and pumping cost, which is determined by the depth of groundwater; the distance to market; access to electricity; and soil fertility which will determine its suitability for agriculture (CGIAR 2016). The distribution of groundwater does favour some countries more than others which means that unlocking the potential of groundwater is not applicable to the entire continent; countries in the equatorial band receive the greatest rainfall and therefore experience the greatest groundwater recharge, due to the effects of the moving ITCZ (Altchenko and Villholth 2015). Unfortunately, this means that countries in northern and southern Africa do not have access to renewable groundwater which means that alternative methods to improve food security must be sourced.

So having discussed the potential of groundwater, I wanted to investigate whether there have been any recent movements towards exploiting this resource. In recent news, solar powered irrigation systems have been used in Rwanda, which has doubled yields for farmers (New Times 2017). Smallholders have not been able to access groundwater reserves as they do not have the finances to afford pumping systems. The deeper the groundwater, the harder it is to access and the more the smallholders are priced out. In order to resolve this equity issue, solar powered systems are replacing diesel-fuelled pumping technology, reducing the environmental impact and cutting the cost (ibid). 

Figure 2: Gerard Munyeshuri Gatete in his 8-hectare farm in Nyagatare District, Rwanda (New Times 2017)

Gatete owns an 8 hectare farm in the Nyagatare District in Rwanda and is currently enjoying a doubling of his yields after the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) supported 75% of the financial cost towards the new Rwf22 million solar powered irrigation scheme (ibid). It has allowed him to farm all year round and has made him more adaptable to droughts (ibid). Just to put the finances into perspective, for one acre, farmers pay approximately $200 every month to run a diesel system to irrigate 1 acre of land. In contrast, farmers only need to pay $418 for the solar powered system which has a lifetime of 25 years, considering it is well maintained. This monetary gain is huge!

Is groundwater depletion inevitable?

Figure 3: Global groundwater depletion (IAH 2015)

As better and cheaper technologies become more accessible to farmers such as Gatete throughout Africa, the demand for groundwater will inevitably increase. Figure 3 shows the depletion of groundwater reserves worldwide and the exponential trend is very worrying. These resources need to be managed carefully and this leads to the question of who will take this responsibility? Groundwater salinisation is also an imminent threat which means that withdrawals need to be constantly monitored by specialists in order to review the impacts and vary withdrawals as necessary (IAH 2015).

However, this management takes on a unique transboundary dimension because aquifers cross international borders (World Bank 2017). This means that increased cooperation between countries is vital in order to share information on a central database to improve and contextualise management techniques (ibid). I am hopeful that with further research, groundwater can act as a safeguard during dry periods and work alongside small and large scale irrigation schemes. Groundwater depletion is not inevitable, so long as the correct management is in place.

List of References

Altchenko, Y. and K. G. Villholth (2015) ‘Mapping irrigation potential from renewable groundwater in Africa–a quantitative hydrological approach’, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions, 19, 2, 1055-1067.

CGIAR (2016) ‘Is groundwater the key to increasing food security in Sub Saharan Africa?’ (WWW) (https://wle.cgiar.org/thrive/2016/04/23/groundwater-key-increasing-food-security-sub-saharan-africa; accessed 21/12/17).

Guardian (2016) ‘Africa droughts prompt calls to start pumping untapped groundwater’ (WWW) (https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/aug/18/africa-drought-untapped-groundwater-aquifers-water-stress-ngo-partnership-ethiopia; accessed 21/12/17).

IAH (2015) Strategic Overview Series: Food Security & Groundwater, International Association of Hydrogeologists, Series 6.

New Times (2017) ‘Solar-powered irrigation sees farmers double their yield’ (WWW) (http://www.newtimes.co.rw/section/read/223551/; accessed 21/12/17).

World Bank (2017) ‘Hidden and Forgotten: Managing Groundwater in Southern Africa’ (WWW) (http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2017/06/07/hidden-and-forgotten-managing-groundwater-in-southern-africa; accessed 21/12/17).

Let's Acknowledge Indigenous Knowledge

Figure 1: A recent comment on my blog post

I would like to thank Mari for this comment. I wanted to respond in detail, which is why I decided to embed this comment in this blog post. It also naturally follows on from my previous blog post about small scale irrigation (SSI) schemes.

From a post-colonial lens, one strength of SSI that stands out for me is how the design and implementation of the schemes can empower local farmers and utilise traditional water management systems. However, many SSI schemes in Ethiopia have failed to utilise this local knowledge which has led to conflict, along with disrupting existing community organisation (Carter 2016). Upsetting traditional community structures should be avoided when managing SSI (ibid). Thus, there should be an element of integration within existing structures and practices in order to fully realise the benefits of SSI. To answer Mari’s question, incorporating indigenous methods is an essential part of the consultation process when introducing SSI, and must not be completely disregarded. Having said this, a major weakness of SSI schemes is that it has a track record of being unsuccessful during dry seasons and less adaptable to droughts - a time when demand for irrigation peaks (Kloos and Legesse 2010). Furthermore, the consultation process is time-consuming; time is of the essence since climate change is intensifying precipitation variability throughout Africa at a rapid rate. Mari is absolutely correct – the nature of precipitation is uncertain and SSI may not hold all the solutions for this, unless droughts are properly planned for by installing high quality storage systems with reduced leakage. Also, efficiency needs to be enhanced and difficult decisions need to made as to which crop to prioritise during dry spells.  

In the blog post that Mari commented on, I talked about how my grandmother used various forms of indigenous knowledge, passed down from her parents, to manage the limited water supply that was available to her. I found a paper which overlapped with some of the things that my grandmother used to do back home in Sri Lanka.

Figure 2: My grandmother in action. My grandmother utilised indigenous knowledge whilst farming

Ulluwishewa (2014) describes how Terminalia Arjuna (kumbuk) trees were placed on the side of wells due its cooling effect, and once burnt, would be positioned at the bottom of wells to reduce the salinity of the water. In the clay pots that grandmother and mother used to use to collect water from wells, these were lined with the seeds of Stryclinos potatorum, also known as the clearing nut, which helped to clean the water (ibid). These actions may be perceived as outdated, but these are highly innovative ways of coping with difficult situations and utilising the resources that are available.

Similarly, indigenous knowledge has played a vital role in allowing populations across Africa to cope and adapt to the effects of climate change (Nyong 2007). For example, in the Sahel region, nomadic pastoralists often circulate between dry areas towards to the north and wetter areas in the South in order to reduce pressure on less fertile grazing land (ibid). They also kill weak livestock during droughts for food (ibid). Astonishingly, indigenous knowledge has also been important for climate change mitigation, through the use of agroforestry and forest management acting as a form of carbon sequestering (ibid). Agroforestry is a ‘rational land-use planning system that tries to find some balance in the raising of food crops and forests’ (ibid: 793). Local populations have thorough understanding of the properties of various plants and the performance of trees under various climatic environments which has proven invaluable to the success of forest management (ibid: 793)

To summarise, it is important to acknowledge the nuanced difference between mitigation and adaptation. Mitigation strategies will help to reduce climate change, which in turn will reduce the intensification of water scarcity throughout Africa. However, adaptation is accepting the terrifying fate of climate change and adjusting accordingly. Still, there is nothing wrong in adapting in order to save lives in a currently desperate situation. Indigenous knowledge must not be disregarded from climate change discussions as a whole, as it is a useful tool for climate change mitigation and adaptation.

List of References

Carter, R. and K. Danert (2006) FARM-Africa Ethiopia: planning for small-scale irrigation intervention, London, UK: Farm-Africa.

Kloos, H. and W. Legesse (2010) ‘Small scale irrigation and microdams’, in H. Kloos and W. Legesse (eds.) Water Resources and Management in Ethiopia: Implications for the Nile Basin, London: Cambria Press, 103-116.

Ulluwishewa, R. (1994) ‘Women's indigenous knowledge of water management in Sri Lanka’, Indigenous knowledge and development monitor, 2, 3, 17-19.

Nyong, A., F. Adesina and B. O. Elasha (2007) ‘The value of indigenous knowledge in climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies in the African Sahel’, Mitigation and Adaptation strategies for global Change, 12, 5, 787-797.

Small is the New Tall: Ethiopia's Utopia?

As I mentioned in my blog post titled ‘Too Late to Irrigate?’, there are different types of irrigation schemes which countries can adopt at various scales (Sullivan and Pittock 2014). This post will explore whether small scale irrigation schemes have the power to improve Ethiopia’s adaptive capacity.

Figure 1: Case study location of Ethiopia (Central Intelligence Agency 2017)

An Overview of Ethiopia

Ethiopia is a country located in the horn of Africa and is a fascinating country to focus on due to its unique transboundary water problems, sharing the Blue Nile with Egypt. For example, the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, which is currently around 60% complete, is creating anxiety for many Egyptian officials and has been a source of many political tensions in the area (Telegraph 2017). Another reason for focusing on Ethiopia is that only 42% of its population has access to clean water, a problem which is exacerbated in rural areas (The Water Project 2017). Millions are left to source water from contaminated water supplies which has been causing water-borne illnesses – the leading cause of death in young children in Ethiopia (Engage Now Africa 2017).  Climate change is a major threat to sub-Saharan African countries, including Ethiopia, as water scarcity is likely to intensify (Armede 2015).

Small is the New Tall

Small scale irrigation (SSI) schemes, defined as ‘irrigation, usually on small plots, in which farmers have the major controlling influence, and using a level of technology which the farmers can effectively operate and maintain’, have only received growing attention in Ethiopia since 2005 (Kloos and Legesse 2010: 104). Microdams have also been offered as an alternative to larger scale infrastructure projects as a part of the ‘development from below’ movement (ibid). It has benefits such as lower operation and construction costs, and can incorporate wider community views – an integral part of grassroots development (ibid).

Other schemes include (Smith et al. 2014):

• Watering can
• Treadle pumps
• Motorised pumps
• Solar pumps
• Shallow wells
• Canal and pipe conveyance systems
• Open gravity canal systems
• Sprinkler irrigation
• Drip irrigation
• River and spring diversion

I have included the list above to show how diverse SSI schemes can be. These schemes are easy to maintain and involves less enterprise capability (Tafesse 2003). From the list above, notice how the use of the watering can does not require specialised knowledge. Generally, there have been many studies showing increases in crop productivity and improvements in food security, especially at the household level (Kloos and Legesse 2010). For the livelihoods of smallholders across Ethiopia, SSI is deemed ‘crucial’ (Yami 2016: 132). An example is the SSI scheme implemented by FARM-Africa Ethiopia in Sero, Tigray, where gully plugging was used to raise the water level of the local river by seven meters (Carter 2006). Even though the stone gabions which blocked the gully (see Figure 2 and 3) had been washed away on a yearly basis, it contributed to soil build up at the back of the gabions which was then used to construct a pond nearby (ibid). The use of motorised pumps has been able to irrigate the land of 42 farmers who have grown crops such as maize, green pepper and papaya (ibid). Along with many other schemes in the Tigray region, this has contributed to increases in household income and a reduction in the dependence on food aid (Kloos and Legesse 2010).

Figure 2: Gully plugging (Newseq 2013)

Figure 3: Cross-section of a gully, using a Brushwood check dam (SSWM 2017)

Overcoming barriers

In contrast to the successful SSI example in Tigray and many other sites across Ethiopia, there have been many examples of less successful SSI throughout the country (Carter 2006). What makes SSI so inconsistent? The following is by no means an exhaustive list, but it provides an overview of the common problems faced during different stages of the implementation of SSI schemes (Kloos and Legesse 2010):

• Prone to seasonal drought
• The design of the scheme
• Weak management
• Seepage and overwatering
• Salinity build up
• Decline in soil fertility
• Increase in algal blooms (can reduce oxygen levels in water)

It is useful to consider whether these disadvantages are also applicable to larger scale irrigation schemes, many of which are, apart from the first one on the list. This is where one of the biggest differences lies, as dams can cater for changes in rainfall variability. Adding to this list, SSI can be seen to disturb pastoralists’ way of life, promoting a sedentary lifestyle which can be unsustainable in the long run (Carter 2006). There are also gendered impacts from SSI if labour intensive forms of irrigation places a higher labour burden on women (ibid). The impacts could also be positive if increases in household income allows women to have more disposable cash (ibid).

However, there was one particular finding in a paper which I read which caught my attention. It was found that in many failed SSI schemes, farmers had not been properly consulted (Carter 2006). If SSI schemes are supposed to be a form of ‘development from below’, then surely this is a substantial failing which needs to be addressed in the future? In many cases, it was found that ‘inadequate attention given to traditional water management systems among neighbouring villages has led to conflicts among farmers’ (Yami 2016: 137). This links into my next blog post where I will be discussing whether local and traditional water management practices can realistically offer a practical alternative to modern day techniques, especially in the complex environment of modern day challenges.

I hope I have displayed the sheer potential of small scale irrigation which offers a real alternative to larger scale infrastructure projects. However, it is frustrating to see that failures could have been prevented with better planning, design and consultation. These are mistakes that must be avoided in the future if Ethiopia, along with the rest of the continent, is to start strengthening its food security.

List of References

Amede, T. (2015) ‘Technical and institutional attributes constraining the performance of small-scale irrigation in Ethiopia’, Water resources and rural development, 6, 78-91.

Carter, R. and K. Danert (2006) FARM-Africa Ethiopia: planning for small-scale irrigation intervention, London, UK: Farm-Africa.

Engage Now Africa (2017) ‘Ethiopian Water Crisis: Know the Facts’ (WWW) (https://engagenowafrica.org/water-crisis-know-the-facts/; accessed 25/11/17).

Kloos, H. and W. Legesse (2010) ‘Small scale irrigation and microdams’, in H. Kloos and W. Legesse (eds.) Water Resources and Management in Ethiopia: Implications for the Nile Basin, London: Cambria Press, 103-116.

Smith, M., G. Muñoz and J. Sanz Alvarez (2014) Irrigation techniques for small-scale farmers: key practices for DRR implementers. FAO, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Sullivan, A. and J. Pittock (2014) ‘Agricultural policies and irrigation in Africa. Water, food and agricultural sustainability in Southern Africa’, in J. Pittock, R. Q. Grafton and C. White (eds.) Water, food and agricultural sustainability in Southern Africa, Prahran: Tilde, 30-54.

Tafesse, M. (2003) Small-scale irrigation for food security in sub-Saharan Africa. CTA Working Document Number 8031. CTA, Wageningen, The Netherlands.

Telegraph (2017) ‘Death of the Nile: Egypt fears Ethiopian dam will cut into its water supply’ (WWW) (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/02/death-nile-egypt-fearsethiopian-dam-will-cut-water-supply/; accessed 25/11/17).

The Water Project (2017) ‘Water in Crisis – Ethiopia’ (WWW) (https://thewaterproject.org/water-crisis/water-in-crisis-ethiopia; accessed 25/11/17).

Yami, M. (2016) ‘Irrigation projects in Ethiopia: what can be done to enhance effectiveness under ‘challenging contexts’?’, International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 23, 2, 132-142.

Famines: It's Not All About Water

My blog post on the Gezira Irrigation Scheme prompted me to think about famines and what causes them. How much of a role does water have to play?

In South Sudan earlier this year, a year where I thought we had progressed, a famine was declared for the first time in 6 years (BBC 2017). With the problem extending over to neighbouring regions such as Somalia and Yemen, 20 million people were on the brink of starvation and this matter could not go unnoticed in my blog (ibid). 

Figure 1: Pictures of dry land is a common way of visualising famine (Escooped 2016)

When thinking about the causes of famines, drought often does come to mind. The media is often covered with pictures of deserts or land that is so dry that it is cracked (see Figure 1). Even though water and other climatic factors do play a fundamental role in determining whether crop yields are sufficient to meet demand, there are a myriad of other factors which need to be discussed, in order put the role of water into context. My problem with images such as Figure 1 is that it makes it out as if famines are completely a natural, environmental problem. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that anthropocentric climate change has induced these common droughts throughout Africa and other parts of the world. Other man-made factors include issues surrounding access, caused by poor management or civil war for example.

 

Figure 2: A woman eating sorghum in South Sudan (Guardian 2016)

Images such as Figure 2 have a deeper story behind them, offering an alternative view to Figure 1. For example, the fact that this woman is eating sorghum highlights two things: sorghum was imported and airdropped into the country as a form of international aid, and secondly, sorghum is one of the main crops of the Gezira irrigation scheme (BBC 2017; Karimi et al. 2012).

I came across an opinion piece which I found remarkably biased. I wanted to respond to some of the statements that were made by Sam Akaki on the Guardian. Akaki claims that ‘increases in famine […] are not a result of British colonialism. They are a graphic and tragic demonstration of the failure of self-governance in Africa’ (Guardian 2017). In my previous posts, I have written in depth about government failure, but to disregard the impacts of colonialism is unsettling. 

Figure 3: Borders of ethnicities in Africa (Freakonomics 2011)

Civil war has been cited as the ‘main driver’ of the famine in South Sudan (Luka and Burgess 2017: 70). Several studies have provided evidence to suggest that racial tensions were created primarily by the arbitrary colonial borders which forcibly split up different ethnicities. Figure 3 shows the numerous partitioned groups caused by European colonisers and this has been a driver of civil conflict in the post-colonial period. Linking back to one of my previous blog posts on linear trajectories of development and modernisation, I mentioned how the failures of large scale development projects were also a factor is causing failed crop yields. So indirectly, these colonial development projects, funded by the World Bank, are also to blame.

Looking ahead

‘Famines in the 21^st century? It’s not for lack of food’, an article written for The Conversation by Daniel Maxwell who is a Professor in Food Security at Tufts University, was an interesting read because not only did Maxwell discuss the man-made factors responsible for a famine, he also discussed the practical solutions for preventing one. He goes on to write that famines are caused by ‘cumulative processes we can observe and predict’, which means that better warning systems can be implemented (The Conversation 2017). I thought the concept of prediction is a very important one, but also the need for acting swiftly is also equally as important (ibid).

In both of these pieces mentioned above, it becomes apparent that water is not the only factor which determines the conditions for a famine. Even though my blog is about water in Africa, it was important to discuss these other factors in order to understand how water fits into the overall picture. The aim of this blog post is to stop people falling into the trap to believe that droughts and floods are the only causes of famine, which can hide a deeper, darker truth. 

List of References

BBC (2017) ‘South Sudan no longer in famine’ (WWW) (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-40352926; accessed 15/11/2017)

Freakonomics (2011) ‘The violent legacy of Africa’s arbitrary borders’ (WWW) (http://freakonomics.com/2011/12/01/the-violent-legacy-of-africas-arbitrary-borders/; accessed 15/11/2017)

Guardian (2016) ‘Drought, hunger add to South Sudan’s woes’ (WWW) (https://guardian.ng/news/drought-hunger-add-to-south-sudans-woes/; accessed 15/11/2017)

Guardian (2017) ‘Africa’s tragedies are not a result of British colonialism’ (WWW) (https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/jul/27/africa-tragedies-not-a-result-of-british-colonialism; accessed 15/11/2017)

Karimi, P., D. Molden, A. Notenbaert and D. Peden (2012) ‘Nile Basin farming systems and productivity’, in S. B. Awulachew (ed.) The Nile River Basin: Water, Agriculture, Governance and Livelihoods, London: Routledge, 133-154.

Luka, E. E. and A. Burgess (2017) ‘Famine and its effects on health in South Sudan A Commentary’, South Sudan Medical Journal, 10, 3, 69-70.

The Gezira Scheme

Even though I make sure I have my critical thinking hat on when reading for university, it is difficult to not have a biased opinion about large scale irrigation schemes, especially when development literature generally favours smaller scale irrigation in recent times (Adams 2014). I spoke about the Gezira scheme in my previous blog post and wanted to expand on this case study, in relation to the Aral Sea disaster.

I recently came across a journal article that I found profound. 

Figure 1: An article in Nature Geoscience (Alter et al. 2015)

Despite the numerous negative effects that were created as a result of the implementation of this scheme, this article explored the climatic shifts that occurred in East Africa as a result of the irrigation scheme (Alter et al. 2015).  Even though I had been aware of unfavourable climatic shifts resulting from the Aral Sea shrinking for example, it was surprising to hear that favourable climatic shifts had taken place in this part of Africa (Micklin 2007). The Aral Sea, which used to be the fourth biggest lake in the world, has been reduced to 10% of its size due to irrigation expansion in the 1960s; it has drained two of its tributary rivers completely (ibid). An article by the BBC, ‘Waiting for the Sea’, is visually stunning and illustrates the climatic changes in an uncomfortably beautiful way. 

Figure 2: Visually stunning: ‘Waiting for the Sea’ (BBC 2015)

You would expect major lessons to have been learnt from the Aral Sea environmental catastrophe in order to prevent similar large scale irrigation schemes in Africa. In contrast to this event, rainfall has actually been consistently enhanced in particular eastern areas surrounding the land irrigated by the Gezira Scheme (Alter et al. 2015).  This was due to increased latent heat and evapotranspiration, as a result of increased plant growth and soil moisture (ibid). It is important to consider and undertake research on how rainfall intensities and patterns will be impacted by large scale irrigation schemes (ibid). The following 3 minute video explains the findings using an animated map of the irrigated area.

Links to Food

On the surface, the findings may be perceived to have promising impacts for food security, as this region with a hot and arid climate will then be able to produce larger quantities of food, due to increased precipitation. However, more research needs to be done in order to ensure how this will impact agricultural productivity (ibid).

The scheme has been partly to blame for the Sudanese famines in the latter half of the 20^th century (Laki 1996). The performance of the irrigation scheme has been influenced by external factors such as (ibid):

• Bad macroeconomic policies
• Poor management
• Civil War
• Foreign debt
• Drought
• Inadequate infrastructure

Poor management on differing scales has been a long term factor hindering its performance; the management of the Gezira scheme needs to be improved if it is to ensure that growing food demands are met in Sudan (Karimi et al. 2012). One pivotal point in the scheme’s history is the economic liberalisation of crops which took place in 1981, where changes in agricultural policy meant that farmers where given freedom of choice regarding which crop they grew (ibid). This resulted in a gradual decline in cotton exports and an increase in sorghum production, which aided food security (ibid). There have been studies showing how crop yields are strongly determined by different policy agendas (Abdelgalil and Adeeb 2015). Better management on a national scale has proved to be beneficial in 1981 specifically, but more can be done with main national government interventions which include (Laki 1996):

• Land management practices
• Management of fertiliser and pesticides
• Setting prices for wheat and cotton
• Mandating cropping patterns
• Provision of irrigation water

Better management and education can also help improve yields. At a local scale, these following problem areas have been identified (Laki 1996):

• Lack of skilled labour
• Shortage of equipment and supplies
• Bad local management
• Poor operation and maintenance
• Late delivery of inputs

It is important to note that I am not saying by alleviating all of the above problems, the famines in Sudan could have been prevented. Not at all. There are a whole host of other factors which contributed. What I am arguing for is better management and education as one way to improve food security.

As Africa continues down the path of expanding its large scale infrastructure projects, is it a wise move to try and stop this movement (Adams 2014)? It would be more useful to plan appropriately and undertake practical next steps to learn from the past. 

List of References

Abdelgalil, E. E. B. and A. M. Adeeb (2015) ‘Impact of changing policies on agricultural productivity: a case of the Gezira scheme, Sudan’, International Journal of Sustainable Agricultural Management and Informatics, 1, 1, 49-60.

Adams, W. M. (2014) Wasting the Rain (Routledge Revivals): Rivers, People and Planning in Africa, London: Routledge.

Alter, R. E., E. S. Im and E. A. Eltahir (2015) ‘Rainfall consistently enhanced around the Gezira Scheme in East Africa due to irrigation’, Nature Geoscience, 8, 10, 763-767.

BBC (2015) ‘Waiting for the Sea’ (WWW) (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-a0c4856e-1019-4937-96fd-8714d70a48f7; accessed 3/11/2017).

Karimi, P., D. Molden, A. Notenbaert and D. Peden (2012) ‘Nile Basin farming systems and productivity’, in S. B. Awulachew (ed.) The Nile River Basin: Water, Agriculture, Governance and Livelihoods, London: Routledge, 133-154.

Laki, S. L (1996) ‘Economics of Crop Production in the Gezira Irrigation Scheme’, Northeast African Studies, 3, 3, 7-25.

Micklin, P. (2007) ‘The Aral sea disaster’, Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci., 35, 47-72.