Exploring the irrigation potential in peri-urban landscapes
Olufunke Cofie &
Priyanie Amerasinghe
Presentation at the SRP Irrigation WorkshopILRI, Addis Ababa. 24 May, 2012
This Session
Describe the space: peri-urban landscape
Present the potential for irrigation
Highlight some research areas
Group discussion on relevance of research areas
The Rural – Urban Continuum
Rural Peri-urban interface
UrbanLivelihoods drawn from the land - crop cultivation, livestock, fishing etc
Livelihoods drawn from labour markets within non-agricultural production. Farming often secondary
Access to land for housing and buildingmaterials not generally a problem
Access to land for housing very difficult; housingand land markets highly commercialized
More distant from government as regulator and provider of services
Closer but more vulnerable to ‘bad’ governance
Access to infrastructure and serviceslimited
Access to infrastructure and services not as limited except for low-income groups.
Less opportunities for earning cash: more for self-provisioning;
Greater reliance on cash for access to food, water,sanitation, employment, garbage disposal etc
Conventional farms consisting of interdependent sub-units
partly unconventional farms more specialised independent units acting in cluster
Farm produce are staple crops mainly. Large livestock.
Farm produce are perishable products especially green vegetables, dairy products, poultry,
Production factorsLow land price; Lower costs of labour; High costs of commercial inputsVariable cost of water
Production factors High land price, land scarcityHigher costs of labour; Lower costs of commercial inputs; High cost of (drinking) water
Distant markets; marketing through chain
Closeness to markets; direct marketing to customers possible;
Urban characteristics in rural locations- tourism, mining, high-value crops, diverse non-agricultural production and strong links to cities
Rural characteristics in urban location (agriculture, ‘village’ enclaves, easier access to land than the urban areas
Adapted from Satterthwaite and Tacoli (2003) and De Zeew (2010)
Features of peri-urban landscape
• Pressure on available land and water resources• Constantly changing environment• Large concentration of low to middle income
earners• Often used as dump sites for urban wastes• Receives storm and waste water from the city
Drivers of Change in PU Landscape
Urban development
Demographic pressure
Political factors
Climate Variability
Market forces
ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL
Multi-functional • Recreational services• Receives/ use Urban Wastes• Reduction of Urban Ecological Footprint• Improved Micro-climate• Biodiversity
Building Social Capital• Poverty Alleviation• Social Inclusion• Community Building• Social Safety Net• Food Security & Nutrition
Market oriented agriculture• Income Generation• Employment Generation• Enterprise Development• Value chain development
ECONOMIC PU landscape serves many functions
Source: http://www.ifpindia.org/Indiapolis-Workshop-Urbanization-in-India,999.html
Trend of urbanization in Ashaiman, Ghana (Forkor et al, 2010)
2. Potentials of PU for Irrigation
Several past studies on the potential of UPA:• CGIAR Urban Harvest• FAO Food for cities• RUAF• SWITCH• URAdapt • SCOPE• IDRC’s Cities Feeding People• UN-Habitat• ARI, UniversitiesGenerally, all focused on ‘spot’ studies of urban agriculture and the immediate fringes; not much work on the PU landscape as a system
What do we know?
Timbuktu
Freetown
Cagayan de Oro, Philippines
-;
Institutional gardens with/without rain water harvesting
Kwazulu Natal, South Africa
Community Based Allotment Gardens
Roof Top Gardening, Darkar
Food Provided by UPA
City Local needs met by UPA (% )
Havana 64 (rice), 58 (vegetables), 39 (non-citrus fruits), 13 (tubers), 6 (eggs)
Dakar 70-80 (vegetables), 65-70 (poultry)
Dar Es Salaam 60 (milk), 90 (vegetables)
Jakarta 10 (vegetables), 16(fruits), 2 (rice)
La Paz 30 (vegetables),
Sofia 48 (milk), 53 (potatoes), 50 (vegetables)
Shanghai 60 (vegetables), 90-100 (milk), 90 (eggs), 50 (pork, poultry )
Nariobi 50 (low income households)
Hong Kong 45 fresh vegetable,68 live poultry,15 pigs, 45 vegetables
Singapore 25 vegetables
Hanoi 80 fresh vegetables, 50 pork, poultry and fresh water fish, 40 eggs
Kathmandu 37 Horticulture crops, 11 animals, 30 vegetables
United States 70 fruits, vegetables, ornamental plants
Vancouver 70 Spinach
Source: Compiled from various sources by Cofie et al. 2003
Significance for poverty alleviation
City, Country Typical net income in USD /month per farm
Bamako, Mali 20 – 200
Cotonou, Benin 50-70
Ouagadougou, Burkina 25-100
Accra, Ghana 40-50
Lagos, Nigeria 120
Source: Danso et al 2003
Monthly net income from mixed vegetable farming in selected cities in W. Africa
Sources: Moustier (2000), IWMI (2001)
Significance of UA for Family Livelihood Support
City, Country %of Households in agriculture
Doula, Cameroon (1998) 16
Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania (1988)
20
Nairobi, Kenya (1994) 30
Accra, Ghana (2001) 46
Kumasi, Ghana (2001) 57
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Dilutedwastewateror polluted
water
Untreatedwastewater
Groundwater Treatedwastewater
River Othersurface
water bodies
Rainfed Irrigationcanal
Opendrainage
Num
ber o
f citi
es
Water Lifting & Storage
Lome
Kumasi
Food flows in and out of Kumasi,
Ghana
Peri-urban Kumasi
KMA
Rural areas
Markets to Households
Food items to Markets
From markets out of city
Peak season (PS) 57%
Lean season (LS) 88%
PS 36%LS 12%
PS 7%LS 4%
48%
52%
Different cities, different paths to water sustainability
Chong Qing
Hamburg Beijing
Birmingham
Lodz Zaragoza
Alexandria Tel Aviv
Accra
Belo Horizonte
BLUE-G
REEN
network,
eco-hydrology
Leak reductio
n
Natural
treatm
ent,
water/city
planning
Urban design
Water
conservation,
strategic plans
Rainwater harvestin
g,
urban agricultu
re
Brown roofs Sustainable
drainage
Strategic
planning, urine
recyclingGreywater
recycling
Lima
Slum beautification,
urban agriculture
Cali
River restoration,
Sustainable dev.
Use of Musi River, Hydrabad• Adaptation to quality• Adaptation to demands
Urban Peri-urban Rural
40 KmVegetables Para grass Paddy Rice
Livestock
Hyderabad +40 Km
Water Quality in the Musi River
PHA Sept 2008 21
Irrigated agriculture in Hyderabad (QuickBird satellite image, 2006)
27 km stretch of Musi River
Amberpet to Pillaipally
City of Hyderabad
Periurban zone 1562 HH (6808)
Rural zone 1109 HH (5081)
For the Peri-urban landscape Problems are becoming more complex
Solutions need to be more holistic with new integrated scientific approaches, new paradigms
More demand-driven R4D outcome-oriented approach
Emphasis on partnerships and collective action
Need to develop a range of scientific, technological and socio-economic and institutional solutions suited to the changing context of the landscape
• understanding of the dynamics of transformative processes and pressures that is exerted on the peri-urban landscapes with reference to water availability, water quality, accessibility, storage. and overall potential for irrigation development
• assessment of water, land availability and access in the current context and predict future changes based on observed developments in the vicinity - implications for irrigation and associated water investments needs;
• assessment of coping mechanisms of people who are engaged in peri-urban farming in the face of development. Understanding how these mechanisms evolve in relation to developmental pressures will inform the kind of irrigation innovations to adapt to the changing environment
• innovative irrigation farming practices to cope with the dynamic changes brought on by urban development, environmental changes and also climate change.
Key Questions - 1
• What are the administrative and market driven approaches, for water transfers, and competition for irrigation of high value perishable vegetables and other uses.
• Will PU areas be the sinks for urban storm water /run-off and become areas of storage? Can we look at the water transfers, water productivity, aquifer recharge potential, ecosystem services, livelihood aspects, economic contribution to cities from the PU areas?
• Can we expect an ultimate scenario, where all rural settings acquire PU features?
• Some mapping and modeling to see the water hydrology and cropping patterns in these areas?
Key Questions - 2
• Can we have positive food balance despite urbanisation? If so, how? What is the scope for agriculture in controlled environments like greenhouses in Periurban areas?
• Can there be sets of greenhouses using water from harvested urban roofwater /runoff to produce ornamentals and fruits? Can we get major agri-businesses to explore this idea?
• What is the potential for conjunctive use of urban waste water and ground water in periurban areas?
Key Questions - 3
Possible Research Topics
Research Topic1
• Mapping Changes in PU landscapes and the potential for irrigation
Research Topic2 • Policies and Institutional Aspects
Research Topic3 • Water Demand and Allocation
Thanks for your attention
Questions, Comments, Clarifications???
SCENARIO IN 2012
ResourcesGreen growth
SCENARIO IN 2030