Adaptation of irrigation management practices

In the absence of water or under conditions of increased rainfall variability due to climate change, irrigation of crops from rivers, lakes and shallow groundwater offer opportunities for adaptation to climate change. Small-scale irrigation is practiced in many parts of the SSA drylands; for exam-ple in Mali (Aw / Diemer 2005), in northern Ghana (cf. Laube / Awo / Schraven 2008), in Kenya (cf. Ifejika Speranza 2006b; Neubert et al.

2007). Irrigation contributes to increased food production, reduced poverty and rural-urban migration (Neubert et al. 2007; Laube / Awo / Schraven 2008). However, in some cases, the benefits of irrigation, that is, increased food production and improved incomes vary with time and are therefore not sustained. The source of this paradox is to be found in competition for market (comparative advantage or disadvantage) between locally produced vegetables and grains and imported ones. Laube, Awo and Schraven (2008, 3) for instance report that "Ghana’s market is flooded with cheap tomato paste from countries (European Union) where the production of

tomatoes is highly subsidised". Further, the lack of processing industries means that the benefits achieved through irrigation cannot be sustained.

The lesson of this paradox is that adaptation needs to be evaluated in a cross-scalar and multi-actor perspective and across the whole product chain from production to consumption. The case of the smallholder irri-gators shows that improved on-farm production (and building resilience to environmental and climate change alone) is not sufficient for long-term poverty reduction and sustainability in development. The influences of policies and institutions on adaptations need to be considered. Thus, planned adaptations (for example, adaptation projects) need to consider the integrated social-ecological system and the inter-linkages as a whole in order to achieve sustainability in adaptations. Also the issue of local mar-keting, that is, transporting produce to the markets, dealing with middle-men and selling at fair prices, remains a challenge for the smallholders (Neubert et al. 2007).

Further, traders monopolise trade in certain agricultural produce, thereby depressing the prices for farmers (Laube / Awo / Schraven 2008). Thus farmers must also be in a position to deal with market failure (e. g. tomato, pepper, onions production); crop diseases, occasional water shortages, land conflicts; competition; and the phasing of production to take advan-tage of low supply periods.

In cases where commercial farms also use irrigation water or where pre-mium plots block access to rivers and lakes (Ifejika Speranza 2006b), it is important to ensure rights of access to water by the poor smallholders.

However, institutionalising rights and access through formal laws or the introduction of water fees by governments, where, poorly conceived, may constrain the rights and access of poor smallholders to water for irrigation (Maganga et al. 2003; van Koppen et al. 2004). This is contrary to the aim of the same governments to support small-scale irrigation.

While irrigation and water harvesting in dams might be an option, there have been cases where single storm rainfall events that exceed the capacity of storage and irrigation infrastructure, lead to flooding, devastation of crops and mortality (Laube / Awo / Schraven 2008). This means that con-structed dams for harvesting irrigation water need "buffer capacity" to accommodate heavy rainfall events.

Often many SSA governments design large scale irrigation schemes where access to irrigation water and benefits are centrally managed. Authoritative management style of the irrigation authorities is one major factor that limited the adoption of irrigation by small scale farmers, but through re-forms such management structures were replaced with co-management styles (cf. Aw / Diemer 2005 in Mali) or farmer management (cf. Laube / Awo / Schraven 2008 in northern Ghana). Irrigation has led to improved livelihoods but the "over-adoption" of this technology leads to increased conflict between up-stream and down-stream users and between farmers and conservation projects (e. g. Tanzania: Mbeyale / Songorwa 2008, 232 ff.; Cameroon: Fokou / Haller 2008). Thus, while implementing such ad-aptation practices on a large scale, the "side-effects" on other users and the environment need to be considered from the outset.

Van Koppen, Namara and Safilios-Rothschild (2005, 60) report that se-curing only access to irrigation by the poor or poorest does not automati-cally guarantee improvements in their wellbeing, hinting at the need for more integrated approaches. The authors found that poor people with ac-cess to irrigation operate at less than half the productivity levels achieved by the better-off farmers. They suggest that special consideration needs to be given to the poor in terms of training to upgrade their agronomic and other skills, and in terms of credit provision, extension and access to inputs and other services. For irrigation to effectively contribute to poverty re-duction certain pre-conditions need to be realised. These include en-hancement of road infrastructure, farmer willingness to participate, ex-change of knowledge and experience among farmers, especially where there is no extension.

Neubert et al. (2007) found that irrigation in Kenya has lead to increased food security, higher incomes and more empowerment, in particular, in government schemes that target the poor. Women also profited as they could increase their incomes although this came with increased workload for them, which was eventually reduced through the modernisation of the irrigation systems.

However, over-abstraction of river water and bad management practices in irrigation also threaten the continued existence of irrigation. Environ-mental degradation such as deforestation and erosion, leading to the silting of rivers and irrigation canals on the one hand make irrigation less profit-able but on the other hand make irrigation necessary in order to secure

livelihoods. In addition, inequality in the distribution of water has led to conflicts (Liniger et al. 2005; Neubert et al. 2007). Neubert et al. (2007) point out that increasing on-farm water use efficiency is not adequate as it does not address inequality in water distribution and suggest linking this measure with reducing the absolute amount of water extracted. Water logging and salinity problems are usually associated with irrigation but few studies report them as major problems in irrigation agriculture in SSA.

Competition between unequal water users like commercial farms and smallholder farmers in some parts of Kenya like Lake Naivasha, Mount Kenya and the Upper Ewaso Ng’iro highland-lowland system led in many cases to violent conflicts over water not only between these two actor categories, but also with pastoral populations. In response to the increasing tensions over water, the various stakeholders are now organised in Water Users Associations (WUA) that have been successful in addressing and ameliorating conflicts related to over-abstraction (Liniger et al. 2005). The authors report that besides solving conflicts, the WUAs are also involved in environmental education, awareness creation, improved irrigation prac-tices, afforestation and regulating water abstraction. Consequently, WUAs now have a formalised role in the Ministry of water and irrigation in Kenya.

Against the backdrop of increasing water scarcity in the Mount Kenya region, Notter et al. (2007) show that climate change will likely pose addi-tional challenges to water management in the period 2040 to 2069. The authors found that the variability of discharge would increase, with an increase of annual runoff by 26 percent, associated with a severe increase in flood flows, and a reduction of the lowest flows to about a tenth of the 2006 value. Such scenarios highlight the importance of installing water storage facilities and encouraging rainwater harvesting as well as improv-ing land management to reduce erosion by water.

The trend of rising food prices is expected to be a longer-term develop-ment that will have positive effects on most rural households if they are able to adapt and boost their output. This expected positive trend will also contribute to poverty reduction (Brüntrup 2008). Thus, this context offers a situation conducive to increase agricultural investment, both at the na-tional and at the farm-levels. However, measures need to be in place to ensure that high transaction costs, middlemen and market inefficiencies,

raise their incomes. In targeting such an increase in agricultural produc-tion, the climate change-induced increase in rainfall variability needs to be accounted for.

Contributions to resilience to climate change:

Contributions to ecological resilience

– The danger of over-abstraction is one factor that reduces the ecological resilience of irrigation systems to climate change. Rainfall variability and water abstraction need to be attuned to each other to ensure that irrigation does not adversely affect the environment. Although irrigation remains low in SSA, the potentials of irrigation to emit methane need to be accounted for in irrigation practices.

– Where institutional arrangements exist on the use of irrigation water, the negative effects of irrigation on the ecosystem can be reduced.

Contributions to economic resilience

– Through contributing to increased food security and incomes, irrigation improved the economic resilience to climate change. The assumption is that with increased food security and income, farmer households are better able to deal with fluctuations in production conditions due to increased rainfall variability.

– Through improving water use efficiency, more crops can be produced with less water thereby contributing to the economic resilience to high rainfall variability.

Contributions to social resilience

– Improving irrigation facilities that lead to reduced workload for women allows women to re-allocate their time and resources to other livelihood activities.

– The reduction of conflicts by water users associations has enhanced the social capital of their members.

The cross-scalar nature of the benefits and problems arising from irrigation as an adaptation practice highlights the strength of the resilience check as an analytical tool. At farm-level, irrigation increases agricultural produc-tion and food security. However, analysis of the contribuproduc-tions of the policy level to resilience shows that contradictory effects occur. Increasing

irri-gation upstream can lead to tensions between upstream and downstream users, and where practised can endanger downstream irrigation. Against the backdrop of increased production, the local produce competes for markets with imported and subsidised products from other origins, thereby reducing the economic gains that local farmers can derive from the irriga-tion-related increase in production.