Watching the TED talk on smallholder farmers being the answer to developing countries left me with a few thoughts. For a large part of it, because the TED talk was based in Myanmar, the arguments weren’t directly applicable to the case of Africa. In fact, we ought to be weary of simply transplanting successful development strategies from one country to another without considering local conditions and circumstances.
Nonetheless, it did make me think of the role of smallholder farmers and in particular, the opportunity and challenges of expanding smallholder irrigation in Africa.
Setting the scene
Why smallholder farmers? Smallholder farmers are generally poorer farmers with plots of land smaller than 2 ha privately owned. There are about 450-500 million smallholder farmers worldwide, accounting for 85% of farms worldwide (Nagayet 2005). This population is also estimated to represent 75% of the hungry in Africa (Sanchez and Swaminathan 2005). Equipping smallholder farmers with groundwater irrigation (GWI) is expected to promote productivity while reducing poverty and food insecurity.
However, in 2008, the World Bank predicted that 85% of sub-Saharan Africa lived in rural areas and depended on rainfed agriculture with low crop yields for their livelihoods (Mwamakamba et al. 2017).
6% of Africa's total cultivated land is equipped for irrigation. This pales in comparison to Asia's 37% and Latin America's 14% (You et al. 2010). Within Africa, sub-Saharan Africa in particular has only 4% of its total cultivated land equipped for irrigation (Burney et al. 2013).
This is largely unsustainable for two reasons: (1) with global population set to hit increase by 2 billion and sub-Saharan Africa’s to double by 2050 (United Nations 2019), current agricultural productivity is not sufficient to keep up with demand; (2) climate change with predicted reduction in precipitation and increased variability increases uncertainty of agricultural productivity.
Irrigation potential
The problem with rainfed agriculture is that year-round harvests becomes prohibitively difficult. A study of Malagasy farmers by Harvey et al. (2014) found that this was the case for 75% of farmers surveyed. There was a unique "lean" season that coincided with the cyclone period that lasted for 3.8 months around December to March. Food insecurity is exacerbated by market price volatility. 84% of sampled households sell their harvest immediately after harvesting to cover input costs and living needs. Because of the glut, farmers are forced to sell at low prices. Later during the "lean" season, they have to cope with limited income often buying back harvests at higher prices.
The irrigation opportunity here is a coping mechanism for the lean seasons in particular where greater crop yields and crop variety can be grown per year. These are also often high-value crops and labour gotten from places where agricultural productivity is low (during dry seasons) such that unemployment falls and poverty is reduced (Carswell 1997).
Why then groundwater irrigation (GWI)? I attended UCL’s inaugural lecture on the 27th of October when Professor Richard Taylor was talking about surviving the Anthropocene and the role of groundwater. A summary of the key arguments:
Global warming intensifies precipitation, especially in the tropics, resulting in fewer low/medium rainfalls and more heavy rainfalls which Allan et al. (2010) term “extreme events”
The intensification is universal in the tropics – more frequent and intense flooding and more frequent and prolonged droughts
A pan-African analysis with data from 9 countries compared rainfall data against groundwater levels to show that environments across Africa are changing
Intensified rainfall reduces soil moisture and evapotranspiration but increases flood risk (more episodic discharge) and groundwater recharge
While flooding can be disruptive, depending on how much water is leaking into the subsurface, replenished groundwater can then be used for purposes like agriculture
Personally, I see groundwater irrigation as a way of future-proofing smallholder farmers against the impacts of climate change. GWI has also become more accessible over the years with the proliferation of items like the KickStart treadle and hip pumps ($70-$170) (KickStart 2019) and competitively priced gas/fuel pumps (~$250). Villholth (2013) argues that the decrease costs have made it more accessible for smallholder farmers. Climatic changes and population growth making GWI more likely for smallholder farmers in less-arid climates.
In a three-year study by Giordano et al. (2012) funded by the Bill and Malinda Gates Foundation, it was found that these small-scale motorised pumps could increase irrigated area by 30mil ha in SSA, bring in revenues of $22bil and improve the food security and livelihoods of 185 million people.
You et al. (2011) also estimated that the internal rates of return for such decentralised smaller scale irrigation schemes were higher than large scale ones, debunking the popular opinion that larger scale schemes are better simply because of economies of scale. By engaging smallholder farmers themselves, it is oft argued that this allows smallholder farmers to make technical and financial decisions themselves while avoiding the cumbersome bureaucracy that centralised schemes bring.
Keeping it real
While GWI potential remains a hopeful development strategy given the hydrogeology and climate, the success of GWI and the sustainable use of such freshwater is also defined by local politics and economics. The lack of microfinance institutions for example, make it difficult for smallholder farmers to gain access to credit (Burney et al. 2013). Future geopolitical issues from transboundary water may also arise from the use of shared underground aquifers (Nijsten et al. 2018). While the physical infrastructure continues to develop for GWI, the human environment needs to grow alongside it to support its accessibility and feasibility for smallholder farmers.