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.