provisioning ecosystem services of likangala river catchment in southern malawi. land use change....
TRANSCRIPT
Land use/land cover change and implications for provisioning
ecosystem services in the Likangala River Catchment, Malawi
Deepa Pullanikkatil Lobina Palamuleni Tabukeli Ruhiiga
North West University, Mafikeng
Presented at Society of Southern African Geographer’s 10th Conference East London, South Africa
26-27 June 2014
Outline of Presentation
• Introduction
• Research questions
• Objectives
• Study area
• Methodology
• Results
• Conclusions
Introduction
• Land use and land cover change has implications for provisioning ecosystem services
• But usually studied separately
• Decisions on land use do not necessarily consider impacts on ES
• This study – Likangala River, Southern Malawi
Past Studies
• Jamu et al (2003) studied the land use change (1985, 1995) and breeding of fish Likangala river
• Chavula et al (2007) on water quality of the river • Mulwafu (2003) on domestic water use • Peters (2004) on Likangala Irrigation scheme and • Mulwafu et al (2003) on conflicts and management
of Likangala Irrigation scheme. • This study will fill the research gaps:
– Recent land use mapping since Jamu et al (2003) – Provisioning ecosystems services in the Likangala
catchment.
Research Questions
1. How has land use in Likangala Catchment changed over past years?
2. What are the provisioning Ecosystem Services found in Likangala Catchment?
Objective
The objective of this study was to study land use change in Likangala catchment from 1985 to 2013, inventory provisioning ecosystem services and make recommendations for catchment management.
Study Area
Originates in Zomba Plateau 1
Mulunguzi dam 2
3 Pollution – Zomba City
River Bank Cultivation 4
Domestic and Recreation
100 villages
Illegal Sand Mining 6
Tobacco estates 7
Rice Irrigation Scheme 8
Ending in Lake Chilwa 9
50km
Challenges
• Deforestation
• Sand mining
• Cultivation in marginal land (slopes)
• River bank cultivation
• Wetland cultivation
• Urban sprawl
• Waste disposal into river
Methodology
• Land use mapping – satellite images Landsat 5,8
The images were processed using Image Analyst Extension in ArcGIS 10.0 software and the various land cover types that were observed from the NDVI images, colour composites and field visits were classified into different classes depending on their spectral signatures.
• Focus Group Discussions at 7 locations
Results
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
1984 1994 2005 2013
Cultivation and grazing land
44% increase
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
1984 1994 2005 2013
Woodland
88.6% Decrease
0
5
10
15
20
25
1984 1994 2005 2013
Urban
143% increase
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
1984 1994 2005 2013
Wetland
81% Decrease
SqKm
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
1984 1994 2005 2013
Shrubs
16.7% Decrease
49.8% Decrease
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1984 1994 2005 2013
Water
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
1984 1994 2005 2013
Estates
SqKm
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
1984 1994 2005 2013
Rice Scheme
Ecosystems Services
Cultural services cultural, intellectual and spiritual inspiration, recreational experiences (including ecotourism), scientific discovery
Provisioning services
food (including fish and game), crops, wild
foods, and spices, water, minerals ,
pharmaceuticals, biochemicals, and industrial
products, energy (hydropower, biomass fuels)
Regulating services
carbon sequestration and climate
regulation, waste decomposition and
detoxification, purification of water and air
, crop pollination, pest and disease
control
Supporting services
nutrient dispersal and cycling,
seed dispersal, Primary
production
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Cultivated area in 1000s of Hectares for Malawi (Source: FAOSTAT 2014)
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
20
04
20
06
20
08
20
10
20
12
MAIZE
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
20
04
20
06
20
08
20
10
20
12
RICE
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
20
04
20
06
20
08
20
10
20
12
SORGHUM
0
50
100
150
MILLET
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
20
04
20
06
20
08
20
10
20
12
CASSAVA
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
20
04
20
06
20
08
20
10
20
12
SWEET POTATO
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
20
04
20
06
20
08
20
10
20
12
GROUNDNUTS
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
20
04
20
06
20
08
20
10
20
12
PULSES
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
20
04
20
06
20
08
20
10
20
12
TOBACCO
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
20
04
20
06
20
08
20
10
20
12
COTTON
Figure 4 Major crop estimates in Metric tons for Zomba District (1994-2013) Source: Zomba District Agricultural Office, 2014
Agriculture and ES Ecosystem services were negatively impacted due to agricultural expansion in
– Australia (Sandhu et al., 2012) and
– China (Feng et al., 2010)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
1984 1994 2005 2013
Cultivation and grazing land
44% increase
Power (2010) argues that maximizing provisioning services from agriculture may result in negative impacts on other ecosystem services such as
• loss of wildlife habitat, • nutrient runoff, • sedimentation of waterways, • greenhouse gas emissions, and • pesticide poisoning of humans and non-target species.
Agriculture and ES
Disservices from agriculture include – loss of habitats for biodiversity
– Pesticide pollution and runoff of fertilizers affecting water quality
Resulting in loss of species diversity and negative health implications for humans (Power, 2010).
We need to manage tradeoffs to ecosystems services and minimize disservices.
Anecdotal Evidence
“To grow fruits and vegetables we need to apply fertilizer more than before. In the past years people did not need to have fertilizer.” “These bush fires are caused deliberately when they hunt for small wild animal such as mice.” “Trees are now becoming scarce at the plateau. For making handicrafts we now get wood from Liwonde.” “Wild animals are now scarce than before. Deforestation has forced animals to runaway.”
Ecosystem services
Non food
• Wood for timber, Handicrafts, firewood, charcoal
• Reeds – ropes, baskets, mats
• Elephant grass - houses
• Everlasting flowers
• Semi precious stones
• Sand, clay for bricks
Food
• Wild hare
• Springbok, Antelope
• Wild pigs, Grasshoppers
• Birds
• Fruits – strawberries, passion fruit, mulberry, black berry, mango, avocado, figs
• Herbs, vegetables – rhubard,
• Crabs, fish, crickets, frogs
Num Plant/tree (common name)
Scientific name Part of plant used Medicinal use
1 Mtutumuko Croton megalobotrys To treat headaches 2 Mpoza Annona senegalensis To treat headaches 3 Bluegum Ecucalyptus
spiciformis leaves To treat headaches
4 Acacia Acacia polyacantha leaves To treat headaches 5 Mkathankhuku Rubus ellipticus To treat headaches 6 Wild aloe vera Aloe vera leaves To treat stomach ache 7 Guava Psidium guajava leaves To treat stomach ache 8 Naphini Terminalia sericea leaves To treat stomach ache 9 Kachere/ Fig tree Ficus natalensis roots To treat stomach ache 10 Chamba (marijuana) Cannabis sativa leaves For promoting hair growth 13 Mpolowoni Steganotaenia
aralicea Leaves, stem Aphrodisiac
14 Jam Physalis peruviana To treat coughs 15 Neem Azedirichita indica Antiseptic and used to treat body pain
17 Avocado Percia amaricanum Leaves (rich in iron)
To treat anaemia
18 Linjere Leaves and roots To treat sore throat
22 Mwanamphepo Cirius intergrifolia To treat loss of appetite, improve digestion
25 Chamwamba/Moringa
Moringa oliefera Leaves Increase immunity especially those on anti-retro viral drugs
25 Mtutumuko Croton megalobotrys bark To treat cuts 26 Tsitsi la Amanda Asparagus africanum To treat fever in babies 27 Tatu Entada abyssinica Leaves To cure incessant menstruation
28 Nthandanyerere Cassia singueria To treat dysentery
Anecdotal evidence
• "Previously I used to find medicinal plants close to my house, now I have to walk far"
• "Some medicinal plants are founf along river banks, but now people are farming there and so these plants are few"
Anecdotal evidence
“ There has been shortage of sand because there has been high demand for sand to build town houses. This is due to high population.” “There is no fishing in the river because of sewage disposal from the hospital and rubbish disposal from house holds makes the river not an ideal habitat for fish breeding.” “ Land for forests has been used for farming and settlement.”
DPSIR Framework
Drivers Pressures
State
Impact
Responses
Drivers of Ecosystem change
• Increasing population (demand for food, agric land, settlements)
• Increasing urban sprawl (settlements, waste)
• Increasing agriculture
• Small industries
• Tourism
Pressures on Ecosystem
Human activities directly affecting ecosystem:
• Waste disposal
• Natural resources related economic activities – sand mining, brick making
• Degrading agricultural practices – river bank cultivation, cultivation on slopes, deforestation for increasing cultivation area
State of Ecosystem
• Decrease in woodlots by 119.83sqkm from 1984 to 2013
• Soil erosion (Jamu et al, 2003)
• Water pollution (Chidya et al, 2011; Pullanikkatil et al, 2014)
• Declining wild foods, animals, medicinal plants
Impact on Ecosystem
• Increasing agricultural production for some crops, while declining for others
• Negative health impacts of contaminated water – Cholera (DHO, Zomba)
– 2000 People affected in 2012/13, 3 people died
• Localised flooding – declining forest cover?
Responses
• Afforestation – river banks
• Energy needs – fuel efficient stoves, clean energy
• Technologies such as Conservation Agriculture
Conclusion Strict buffers for river banks, zoning Illegal sand mining – to be addressed Address need for increasing cultivated land through
– Irrigation, solar pumps – Winter cropping, drought resistant crops – Intensive agriculture methods
• Waste management Land use planning must consider impacts on ecosystem services First step is to document and map Provisioning Ecosystem Services
Thank you