Analysis of impacts of large scale investments in agriculture

on water resources, ecosystems and livelihoods

Timothy Olalekan Williams

Director, Africa

International Water Management Institute (IWMI)

Outline of Presentation

• Introduction

• Study Objectives

• Methodology

• Results

• Key messages

The context

Potential positive outcomes

• Increased agricultural productivity leading to improved national food security and rural household incomes.

• Infusion of capital, technology and know-how.

• Increased employment.

• Improved social amenities.

Potential negative

consequences

Displacement of currentland users

Water pollution and river sedimentation

• AMCOW’s call for development of research-based policy options for effective management of land and water in large-scale agricultural land investments (LSALIs).

• UNEP, GRID-ARENDAL and FAO enlisted IWMI to conduct an analytical study to shed light on the potential and actual impacts of LSALIs.

Study background

Study objectives• Better understand the impacts of LSIA on

Water resources,

Ecosystems

Livelihoods

• Provide recommendations on policy options for leasing agricultural land that takes water into consideration and that will lead to:

Equitable distribution of benefits

Protection of ecosystem services.

Methodology: A three-prong approach

1. A sub-continental level analysis of drivers, extent, characteristics and production activities of 148 LSALIs in 22 SSA countries, based on Land Matrix database.

1. A field-level, case study analysis of 3 LSALIs each in 6 countries: Ghana, Mali, Ethiopia, Tanzania, Mozambique and Zambia to examine the adequacy of policy and institutional frameworks for guiding and managing such investments.

2. A socio-hydrological simulation modeling exercise in Baro-Gilo basin in the Gambella region of Ethiopia to assess impacts of LSALI on water resources and evaluate trade-offs.

Key results at the pan-continental level

• Based on the 148 LSALIs in 22 countries analyzed, a total area of approximately 3.4 million hectares was acquired across these countries during the period 2000-2012.

• Ten countries accounted for 70% of this acquisition.

• In 2000-12, ten countries accounted for 70% of LSLAs in SSA• Area acquired in each of these countries > 100,000 ha

15%

11%

9%

6%5%4%

50%

Ethiopia

Mozambique

Tanzania

Ghana

Mali

Zambia

Others

(15%)

(11%)

(9%)

(6%)

(5%)

(4%)

(50%)

Percentage distribution of total area of LSALI

in SSA by country, 2000-2012

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

1 000 - 10 000 10 000 - 50 000 50 000 - 100 000 > 100 000

% o

f LS

ALI

s

Land area (ha)

39%

7% 4%

Percentage distribution of LSALI by area (ha) in SSA, 2000-2012

50%

Total area under crop & livestock production

activities on LSALI farms by country, 2000-2012

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

Are

a (h

a)

Countries

Biofuel

Food crop

Livestock

Key results – Detailed case studies

• In all the 6 study countries, land and water aregoverned under separate but parallel policy, legal and institutional frameworks.

• Within each framework, multiple property rightsregimes, including state property, customary propertyand private property, coexist and are operatedsimultaneously.

3. In Ghana and Zambia state and customary property rightsregimes are recognized in land matters. In Ethiopia, Mali,Mozambique and Tanzania all land is vested in the state.

Land and water governance

Main government organizations with key roles in L&WG for LSALI in Mozambique

Water access and use rights

• In Mali, Mozambique, Tanzania and Zambia water accessand use rights are systematically included in LSALI contracts. The main requirements are for the investorsto regularly pay water fees and to maintain secondaryor tertiary canals. In Ghana and Ethiopia water rightsare not often discussed at the time of land contract negotiation.

• In all 6 study countries, the volume of water to be extracted by LSALI is not usually specified and water pricing, where it exists, is not related to volume extracted.

Hydrological simulations

• Unintended and potentially damaging long-term consequences can occur, including

- increased stream flow variations- groundwater recharge reduction- increased flood risk.

• These may jeopardize livelihoods and ecosystem services relied upon by other land and water users

(e.g. fisherfolks, pastoralists etc.) living around the LSALIs.

Livelihood impacts

Variable

Ghana Mali Mozambique

LSALI LSALI LSALI

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

Prior

consultation

No No No No No No No No No

Displacement

of current

land users No Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes

Employment

created No Limited Limited No No No Yes Limited Limited

Livelihood impacts

Variable

Ethiopia Tanzania Zambia

LSALI LSALI LSALI

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

Prior

consultation

No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No No

Displacement

of current

land users

Not

known Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No

Employment

created Notknown

Not

Yet

Not Yet Not

Yet

Yes

NU

Yes Yes

BL

Yes,

BL

Yes

Monitoring and assessment of impacts

6. In all 6 study countries the agencies charged with the responsibility of monitoring compliance with economic, social and environmental impacts and mitigation measures are poorly funded and lack the capacity toeffectively perform their functions.

7. Parallel systems of land and water rights administrationand management, poor cross- sectoral coordination of regulatory activities and inadequate capacity in relevant government agencies hampered effective and coordinated L&WG in all six study countries.

Actors/institutions typically involved in LSALI negotiations in Ghana

Seven Key messages: 0ptions for policy action

1. Governments need to monitor and ensure that water availability, use and management is factored into (LSALI) contracts.

2. Water valuation is key to efficient and equitablewater use and management. Governments have a key role to play in instituting frameworks and policies for implementation of practical andpolitically feasible water valuation systems.

3. Governments need to improve the coherence, complementarity and coordination of land, water and environmental policies

4. Governments, through relevant national agencies, need to commission and conduct detailed assessmentof the socio-hydrological implications of LSALI.

5. Investors need to adhere to the principles for responsibleinvestment in agriculture and food systems, includingadoption of inclusive business models.

6. Governments need to apply laws in the statute books torevoke land not utilized.

7. Governments and investors need to fully discloseinformation on LSALIs.

1.

Thank you for your attention