COPing strategies

My previous blog post stressed the importance of good governance to effectively tackle climate change issues in Africa, particularly in regard to water and agriculture. Although farmers can make changes on the small-scale to maximise yields and use water sustainably, they look to governments and international bodies to pioneer and institute frameworks on a wide scale to benefit the agricultural sector. From the outcomes of COP22, it looks like the international community are playing their part.

The COP (Conference of the Parties) is the decision-making body of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and this international event is held annually to discuss the progress in the worldwide fight against climate change. This year’s COP22 climate talks, which concluded only a couple of weeks ago, were hosted by the Moroccan government in Marrakech.

It has been understood that water scarcity and food shortages are potentially the most severe impacts of climate change (DW 2016), and six of the ten countries most affected by climate change are in Africa (El Filali 2016). Morocco itself has already started to feel the effects of climate change on agriculture, particularly through the ever more erratic rainfall patterns. Only last year, Morocco received 42.7% less rain than the average year, leading to a 70% decrease in agricultural output. So Morocco hoped to make COP22 the ‘African COP’, putting issues pertaining to Africa’s agricultural vulnerabilities to climate change in the spotlight (Hicks 2016).

And it seems that they were successful. The Moroccan government launched the Adaptation of African Agriculture project, or the ‘Triple A’, which seeks to strengthen the agriculture sector through three main pillars: effective management of land, water, and climate risk (IPS News 2016).

How does the Triple A strive to improve water management?

It wants to create better water storage infrastructure, alongside better management of existing water sources, so that farmers can withstand the increasing occurrence of dry spells. One target could be Ghana, which currently only exploits 2% of its available surface and groundwater resources, but still suffers from crop failures when drought hits (Bird 2016). Furthermore, better water storage allows for more irrigation projects to be introduced. For example, a third of olive growers in Morocco are using far more water than necessary by practising traditional flood irrigation methods, but the NGO ICARDA (International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas) is working alongside the Moroccan government to encourage the uptake of drip irrigation which lowers water use by up to 70% (Abou-Sabaa 2016).

The Triple A also strives to increase access to farming inputs as well as improved weather forecasting for farmers – a new SMS system is being trialled in Egypt, Sudan and Ethiopia which delivers field-specific weather information (Bird 2016). The aims of the Triple A will be undertaken in partnership with the FAO, and so far the scheme has been endorsed by 27 countries (AAA 2016).

COP22 was the first session where water was a key focus of the talks (Euro News 2016), proving that the world has now woken up to the importance of water issues, and is taking an international step to combat water challenges. The Moroccan Government, in collaboration with the French Government and the World Water Council, publicised their Blue Book on Water and Climate which stresses how water is the ‘first victim’ of climate change, and includes key advice from water organisations worldwide on how to best implement adaptations to climate change, such as by providing pragmatic solutions on how to build resilience through water management.

In addition, the Moroccan Government, together with the African Development Bank, introduced the Water for Africa initiative which is a specific action plan on how alliances can be made with political, financial and institutional bodies worldwide to develop water and sanitation services across Africa and counter the impacts of climate change (UN News Centre 2016).

As part of their climate change strategies submitted to the UNFCCC, all African countries included agricultural adaptations, which shows that this is an issue that is being taken seriously by African governments (Abou-Sabaa 2016), but a crucial ingredient to the successful implementation of these climate change initiatives is sufficient funding. Africa currently receives only 5% of global climate change funding even though 65% of Africa’s population will be affected (Bird 2016). The African Development Bank has stated that adapting to climate change is expected to cost between $20bn and $30bn every year until 2030 (Abou-Sabaa 2016), and so by securing more funding from better-off countries, they will be able to invest in these numerous projects. Through agreements from COP22, wealthier nations have pledged to fund climate-friendly development in poorer countries as well as contributing to adaptation measures. However it has also been highlighted that the most effective way that wealthier nations can help is by stopping fossil fuel consumption and exploiting the resources of poorer nations – a more indirect way of assisting Africa (DW 2016).

The FAO is planning to invest $1.5m to support six African small island developing states (SIDS) in making their agricultural practices more resilient to climate shocks and to improve the efficiency of farming practices. This will provide funding to train farmers on climate-smart food production, as well as the money needed to find innovative ways to increase crop yields. As SIDS nations suffer from high levels of unemployment and poverty and are heavily reliant on food imports, this investment should kill two birds with one stone by increasing food security and boosting development (Coastweek 2016).

The outcomes of COP22 are a fantastic example of how governments can work alongside NGOs – and each other – in a more equitable fight against climate change. These initiatives all sounds brilliant on paper, but only time will tell whether they lead to any real, tangible outcomes that truly benefit Africa’s water management, food security, and development.

Hungry for agricultural resilience

Food: we grow it, we eat it, we sell it, and we would not survive without it. But shockingly, one in three people in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) suffer from chronic hunger (Schlenker and Lobell 2010).

Agriculture is an integral part of every society, particularly in SSA, where it provides employment to over 60% of the population and makes huge contributions to GDP. For example, 85% of Ethiopia’s population are employed in agriculture, and it comprises more than 40% of GDP and 90% of exports (Di Falco 2014). So it’s no surprise that expansion of agriculture is deemed by development experts as a pathway to the alleviation of poverty (Challinor et al. 2007).

However, farming in SSA is mainly subsistence focused and there is practically no technology used – 89% of cereal crops in SSA are rain-fed, and so crop production is highly reliant on rainfall patterns (Di Falco 2014, Challinor et al. 2007).

This means that climate variability is closely related to the development and food security of many SSA countries (Di Falco 2014), so the effects of climate change will disrupt agricultural development and trigger food shortages – and small-scale farmers are expected to be the hardest hit (IPCC 2008).

These food shortages will extend further than national borders, as seen through the example of South Africa which already has extremely low rainfall of only 450mm per year and high evaporation rates. Climate change is expected to increase temperatures while reducing precipitation by between 2% and 8% by 2100, and South Africa is predicted to be one of the most water scarce countries by 2025. As South Africa supplies more than half of southern Africa’s staple crop maize, the exacerbated stresses on water supply will impact agriculture and food security across the whole southern African region (Benhin 2006).

Luckily, it’s not all bad news. Some regions, such as the Ethiopian highlands, are predicted to experience a lengthened growing season due to the warming temperatures and rainfall changes (Thornton et al. 2006). Plus, frost reduction in the highlands of Mt Kenya and Kilimanjaro will allow for more temperate crops to be grown such as apples, pears, barley and wheat (Parry et al. 2004).

Even where the future of food production in SSA does look bleak, this doesn’t have to be the case. Awareness of the challenge of climate change should act as an incentive for more serious investments to be made to improve agricultural productivity. Adaptation measures can be introduced, and modernisation of agricultural practices can be adopted to give farmers greater control over their yields (Schlenker and Lobell 2010).

Adaptation measures have been used traditionally by subsistence farmers to conserve water during periods of low rainfall, such as water harvesting techniques, water storage, and planting drought-resistant crops (IPCC 2008). Furthermore, farmers in South Africa have responded to the shifts in rainfall that have become shorter but more intense by planting later, and making furrows to collect rainwater near the plants, in order to take full advantage of the rainfall (Benhin 2006). It is possible that when drought becomes widespread and persistent these adaptation measures will become inadequate on the farm-scale (Challinor et al. 2007), but such traditional knowledge should be incorporated into climate change policies as these techniques are sustainable and cost-effective (IPCC 2008).

Rainwater harvesting in South Africa

If traditional adaptation techniques alone are not enough, they should be complemented by the introduction of new technologies to ensure the future of agriculture in Africa. Africa currently lags far behind the rest of the world in respect to technology adoption for agriculture, but governments can play a role in encouraging the uptake of technologies, such as high-yielding crop varieties and the application of fertilisers (Kurukulasuriya et al. 2006, Di Falco 2014). Surely African governments will be eager to explore such modernisation paths if it will prevent a drop in national GDP, and already a number of countries, including Uganda, Zambia and Kenya, have introduced modernisation of agriculture schemes in the hope of reducing poverty and vulnerability to climate change (Challinor et al. 2007).

Additionally, expanding irrigation can vastly improve the productivity of farmland, as well as increasing its resilience to precipitation changes. Non-irrigated farmland is worth $319 per hectare whereas irrigated farmland is worth $1,261 per hectare, which means that if governments invest in infrastructure for water storage, their investments will be repaid in a number of years (Kurukulasuriya et al. 2006). However, in South Africa already 50% of water resources are used to irrigate only 10% of the available farmland, so increasing irrigation in response to climate change will put pressure on the water supply for the rest of the country. Therefore if irrigation is expanded in South Africa – and other SSA countries facing similar water constraints – it is essential that water resources are managed efficiently (Benhin 2006).

Granting farmers access to weather forecasting can also assist them in adapting to climate variability, as improved weather information allows farmers to tactically plan according to the seasons, and to shift planting dates according to when rain is predicted to fall (Cooper et al. 2008, Challinor et al. 2007).

It seems ironic that Africa only contributes 3.8% of global greenhouse gas emissions, but its people will suffer the most because of their low levels of resilience to climate change (AMCOW 2012). But we can see that there is so much potential to change this in regard to agriculture, and a strong governance framework is key to ensuring that adaptation measures are effectively implemented.

Hampering Hydroelectricity?

Only 30.5% of sub-Saharan Africa has access to electricity (Cole et al. 2014). Electricity is an essential ingredient for developing an economy, but it is also important for this energy to be cheap to produce and come from an environmentally friendly, renewable source. So what energy source ticks all these boxes? Hydroelectric power!

Hydroelectric power (HEP) is generated by using turbines built into dam infrastructure to capture the kinetic energy of river flow and convert it into electrical energy. It’s a clean and affordable method of producing electricity, and its uptake and expansion would be a welcome shift in countries such as South Africa which is so reliant on coal for energy that it now has one of the highest carbon footprints worldwide (Mukheibir 2007).

HEP generation is currently concentrated in sub-Saharan Africa on the main rivers: the Nile, the Congo and the Zambezi. Many sub-Saharan African countries are highly dependent on this energy source, with some – including Mozambique, Zambia, Uganda and the DRC – deriving over 90% of their energy from HEP (Blackshear et al. 2011, Sharife 2009). HEP is a valuable tool for sustainable development as well as for alleviating poverty, and it’s estimated that Africa has only exploited 9% of its HEP potential (Cole et al. 2014).

So surely current HEP infrastructure power should be expanded – what could possibly go wrong?

Well, actually, a lot.

Hydroelectricity generation relies on a plentiful supply of water in the rivers, but climate change threatens the success of HEP schemes across Africa due to shifting rainfall patterns and rising temperatures. The increase of drought frequency and intensity due to climate change will lower water levels which will in turn reduce the capacity of hydroelectric plants.

However, these environmental considerations have not been taken into account when locating existing and planned African dams. For example, a dam is being planned on the border between Burundi, Congo and Rwanda on their common border regardless of all three countries having experienced power shortages from plummeting river levels (Cole et al. 2014).

Already, droughts in the past decade have forced power rationing in a number of sub-Sahara African countries: the Kenyan drought in 1998-2000 caused HEP production to fall by 25% (Karekezi et al 2009), lack of rainfall in 1998 in Ghana reduced hydropower production by 40%, and Tanzania had to impose electricity rationing after droughts in both 2006 and 2011 (Cole et al 2014). As climate change continues, this is only expected to worsen over time (Blackshear et al 2011).

A 10-20% decline in rainfall is predicted in some regions which will completely dry up the rivers in Botswana and Tunisia (Sharife 2009). On the Zambezi River, even though precipitation is predicted to increase during the rainy season, the dry season is expected to get even drier, resulting in the annual flow levels of Victoria Falls to decrease by 10-35%. If water levels fall by 35%, power production will drop by 21% making HEP production here uneconomic (Harrison and Whittington 2002).

The location of the Zambezi River in East Africa

Zambia is one of the most recent victims of electricity shortages. The Kariba Dam along the Zambezi River is one of the world’s largest hydroelectric dams and in the past has provided Zambia with such abundant cheap energy that as well as achieving political stability, its economy has been growing at over 5% every year through the copper mining industry (which requires vast quantities of water). However due to climate changes in the region, between 1960 and 2003 temperatures have increased by 1.3°C, rainfall has dropped by 2.3% every decade, and the rainy season has shortened (New York Times 2016). Consequently, recent droughts have led to a 25% decrease in HEP generation capacity (Reuters 2015). Due to Zambia’s extremely high reliance on the Kariba Dam for its energy requirements, power shortages are now frequent, rolling blackouts have been introduced, and copper mines are being threatened with 30% less power (Kozacek 2015). As a result, Zambia has been forced to reach out to the IMF for assistance.

The Kariba Dam

But what about the periods of increased precipitation that are predicted to occur in the wet season and in certain years on the Zambezi River? Surely this is an advantage of these environmental changes? Unfortunately not – although more rainfall can be a huge benefit by increasing the capacity of HEP generation, unexpected flooding can be destructive to hydroelectric infrastructure due to the vast quantities of sediment, vegetation, and even logs that accumulate and block the dam, decreasing its efficiency and requiring infrastructure repairs (Mukheibir 2007).

Nevertheless, the exploitation of hydroelectricity should not be ruled out as a source of electricity in Africa. If hydroelectric power is to be expanded to serve rising energy demands across the continent, it is essential that HEP generation coexists alongside other renewable energy sources, such as biomass, because diversifying the energy mix will reduce the vulnerability of economic development to hydrological changes (World Bank 2013). Furthermore, effective water management methods should be put in place at the water basins used for HEP generation to ensure that all water is used efficiently in order to maximise capacity (Yamba et al 2011).

Lastly, if the goal of expanding HEP generation is to increase the capacity of energy available for development across Africa, it is vital that this energy is equitably distributed. For example, even though Mozambique currently produces enough electricity to power the whole country, they export much of this energy, leaving only 9% of Mozambicans with access to electricity. Small scale farmers, rural communities and the poor members of the population have been excluded from the ‘luxury’ of electricity (Sharife 2009). At present, this 91% don’t have to worry about climate change; power cuts are irrelevant if you never had any electricity to begin with.