Sustainable Intensification of Agriculture with Sustainable Irrigated Agroecosystem Services
Ian W. Makin[1] and Herath Manthrithilake[2]
Submitted to: International Network for Water and Ecosystems in Paddy Fields (INWEPF) Symposium 2015
Achieving the Goals of Food security in Sustainable Paddy Water Ecosystems
November 3-5, 2015, Colombo, Sri Lanka
Abstract
Irrigated agriculture is undeniably a significant modification to natural ecosystems, and one which has not been without significant adverse impacts on the ecology and hydrology of the landscapes and river basins in which irrigation systems are located. A lack of consideration for broader ecosystem service values during planning, implementation and subsequent operation of irrigation projects may explain the underperformance of investments in irrigation systems. In many cases, this has arisen because irrigation schemes have been designed for a single purpose (intensification or increase) of agricultural production without due consideration being given to other ecosystem functions, and in isolation from the landscape of the entire catchment.
Large-scale irrigation systems (LSIS) and smaller, often community managed, systems have been a central component in the food security of the population in much of Asia[3], and these systems are expected to make increased contributions to food security and improved livelihoods in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Irrigation has been an essential input to agriculture to meet the fast-increasing demand for food and is also a contributor to poverty reduction. Future population growth and economic development means that the increasing demand for food must be expected to continue, and it is projected that intensified irrigated agriculture will have to provide about 60% of the extra food needed (World Bank, 2007). Yet, the expansion of irrigated areas has slowed, rates of productivity improvement are slowing, and water availability for irrigation is being constrained by alternate demands for water. Simultaneously, concerns over loss of biodiversity and disruption of ecosystems have increased, resulting in the increasing examination of the sustainability of agricultural value chains and the role of agriculture in the landscape.
The core objective of the CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE), led by the International Water Management Institute (IWMI), is to promote the sustainable intensification of agriculture through evidence-based research and policy development. Fundamental to the achievement of this goal is the application and uptake of an ecosystem services and resilience-based approach.
This paper presents an ecosystem service-based approach to sustainable intensification of irrigated agriculture, highlighting approaches to guide research, policy development and strategies to stimulate ecosystem-inclusive management of irrigated agriculture. The concepts of ecosystem services are reasonably well established. However, attempts to develop ecosystem-inclusive management of LSIS is new.
INTRODUCTION
Feeding a world population of over 9 billion people in 2050 requires increasing food production by about 70% over the production levels during the period 2005-2007, mostly in low-income countries (Boelee et al 2013; FAO, 2009), in addition to establishing systems to ensure more equitable access to food. In developing countries, rising food prices form a major threat to food security, particularly because people about or below the poverty line spend50-80% of their income on food. According to UNDESA (2014), the surge in food prices in 2008 is estimated to have driven 110 million people into poverty and added 44 million more to the list of undernourished. This was a serious setback to the efforts to eradicate poverty, and 925 million people went hungry because they could not afford to pay for food.
In the 1960s, when many of the large-scale irrigation systems (LSIS) in Asia were developed, two-thirds of the world’s population lived in rural areas and 60% of the economically active population worked in agriculture. Today, half of the people live in rural areas, and just a little more than 40% of the economically active population depend directly on agriculture for their livelihoods (FAO, 2007). By 2050, two-thirds of the world’s population will live in cities. Accelerating urbanization is also increasing the competition for water between the urban and agriculture sectors. The urban dwellers increasingly have different expectations about how rural land and water resources are managed.
A conservative estimate of the global annual value of production from LSIS is approximately USD 280-290 billion, with perhaps about 60-70% of that value being generated in Asia (Langford, 2015). In South Asia, LSIS (with command areas over 3,000 ha) account for about 24.5 million hectares (Mha), which is about 33% of the total irrigated area.[4] These systems provide considerable local and national benefits in terms of food and energy security, employment, economic growth and ecosystem services.
Acknowledging the significant local, national and global roles and challenges associated with LSIS, there is a clear need for new thinking by policymakers when considering how to prepare for the future national and global challenges related to economic, food, water, energy and environmental security and services (Mukherji et al, 2012).
Modernization of irrigation services, and the supporting infrastructure, institutions and management systems will be an essential part of the efforts to provide secure nutrition for a global population expected to reach over 9 billion by 2050.[5] However, although substantial investments have been made to create and rehabilitate the systems, LSIS are generally considered not to be achieving the levels of performance expected in terms of water productivity, equity of water distribution, sustainable operations and economic return on investment. Although the surge in food prices in 2007 and 2008 triggered an increase in investments (G8, 2009) to enhance food security, there is a diminishing focus by official development assistance agencies on agriculture, irrigation and rural development.
Notwithstanding the importance of LSIS in terms of rural employment, utilization of land and water resources, and contribution to food security, irrigated agriculture continues to suffer from ongoing deficiencies in management and governance leading to underperformance of these important investments.[6] These deficiencies are being evidenced in six ways: (i) investment in irrigation by governments and development partners have commonly been repeating cycles of ‘build-neglect-rebuild’; (ii) financial performance of LSIS is, in general, poor and cost-recovery from users is dismal; (iii) water, land and labor productivity in LSIS are all sub-optimal; (iv) large volumes of water diversion, combined with variable but generally poor irrigation services, have adverse impacts on the governance of water in river basins and limits allocation of water for other uses; (v) investments in capacity building for irrigation professionals has declined; and (vi) investments in irrigation research is substantially less than the significance of the sector warrants.
Irrigation has been an essential input to agriculture to meet the fast-increasing demand for food and as a contributor to poverty reduction. LSIS and smaller, often community managed, systems have been at the heart of food security of the population of much of Asia[7], and are expected to make increased contributions to food security and improved livelihoods in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).
Future population growth and economic development means that the increasing demand for food must be expected to continue, and it is projected that intensified irrigated agriculture will have to provide about 60% of the extra food needed (World Bank, 2007). Yet, the expansion of irrigated areas has slowed, rates of productivity improvement are slowing, and water availability for irrigation is being constrained by alternate demands for water. Simultaneously, concerns over loss of biodiversity and disruption of ecosystems have increased, resulting in the increasing examination of the sustainability of agricultural value chains and the role of agriculture in the landscape.
Paddy farming is a leading user of irrigation services in Asia and increasingly in Africa, and is the reason for the creation of extensive artificial wetland ecosystems. It is important to understand that paddy ecosystems created provide substantial ecosystem services (Box 1).
The central objective of the CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE), led by the International Water Management Institute (IWMI), is to promote the sustainable intensification of agriculture through evidence-based research and policy development. Fundamental to the achievement of this goal is the application and uptake of an ecosystem services and resilience-based approach.
The concepts of ecosystem-inclusive management of LSIS are well aligned with the objectives of the International Network for Water and Ecosystems in Paddy Fields (INWEPF): (i) food security and poverty alleviation, (ii) sustainable water use, and (iii) partnerships. INWEPF recognizes that agricultural water not only provides substantial provisioning services, but also a wide range of services that add value to the community, culture and environment.
Therefore, the aims of WLE to improve irrigation services is consistent with the multi-functionality concepts that are central to the INWEPF program. Such multiple functions and the value of agricultural water use must be adequately recognized and evaluated in order to ensure that development and management of water resources continue to provide these services sustainably.
This paper presents a short discussion of the concepts of ecosystem services and why these are important in the context of the future of irrigated agriculture. Understanding and managing the links between ecosystems, water and food production are critical for the sustainability of each area (Boelee et al. 2013). The paper then introduces the concept of ecosystem-inclusive management of LSIS as a means to focus the attention on the values that irrigated agriculture provides to communities, society and the environment. In conclusion, a summary of strategies that would enable agricultural intensification and sustainable agroecosystem services in irrigated agriculture, particularly in irrigated rice systems, is provided.
WHAT ARE ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
Ecosystems are defined by CBD (1992) as the “dynamic complex of plant, animal and microorganism communities and their non-living environment interacting as a functional unit.” The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA, 2003) defined four categories of ecosystem services as the basis for a common analytical framework for discussion of landscape use and values:
• Provisioning: products obtained from ecosystems, including food, freshwater and fuel.
• Regulating: benefits derived from the regulation of ecosystem processes, such as erosion control, storm protection, climate and water regulation.
• Cultural: non-material benefits obtained from ecosystems, including heritage, recreation and tourism.
• Supporting: services that are necessary for the production of all the other services, such as soil formation and retention, nutrient and water cycling.
The above definition of ecosystem services was further advanced by Walker and Salt (2006), and under WLE[8]. WLE has defined ecosystem services as “the combined actions of the species and physical processes in an ecosystem that perform functions of value to society” (WLE, 2014). This definition is important as it highlights the benefits that ecosystems provide to people, and captures the notion that the biological and physical characteristics of a system underpin the delivery of ecosystem services illustrated in Figure 1.
The core premise of the WLE ecosystem services and resilience (ESR) framework (Figure 1) is that ecosystems are fundamental to human livelihoods, and need to be safeguarded to ensure continued productivity and sustainable benefits.
Figure 1. WLE ecosystem services and resilience (ESR) framework (source: WLE 2014).
However, in the ecosystem services concept, protection of the environment per se is not advocated at the expense of human livelihoods. Rather, safeguarding the environment is recognized as essential for the assurance of long-term sustainability of ecosystem services that underpin agriculture. As Shah (2014) observed, we do not want to ‘kill the goose that lays the golden eggs’ as it will compromise our health, incomes, well-being and ultimately our survival.
Gordon et al. (2010) indicated that trade-offs do occur as a landscape is transformed from a natural ecosystem to an agricultural ecosystem (Figure 2). The challenge is to maintain a desirable balance between the regulating, provisioning and cultural services provided by the landscape as it evolves.
Figure 2. Re-balancing of ecosystem services (source: Gordon et al, 2010).
Pittock (2015) expanded on the concepts presented by Gordon et al., (2010), observing that evaluation of trade-offs among services in an ecosystem will be required. This will require valuation of alternative scenarios, for example, as illustrated in Figure 3, to estimate the cost and benefit of transforming an ecosystem from an over-exploited condition (State B) to a more sustainable and beneficial condition (State A). Well-defined and transparent methods to establish ecosystem values[9] are required to assist resource and system managers to deal with the effects of market failures[10], by measuring the cost to society of foregone economic benefits resulting from a particular set of activities in the landscape.
Figure 3. Illustration of potential trade-offs of ecosystem services in irrigated agroecosystems (source: Pittock, 2015)
Dale and Polasky (2007) summarized the relationship between agriculture and ecosystem services in three ways: (1) agroecosystems generate beneficial ecosystem services, such as soil retention, food production and aesthetics; (2) agroecosystems receive beneficial ecosystem services from other ecosystems, such as pollination from non-agricultural ecosystems; and (3) ecosystem services from non-agricultural systems may be impacted by agricultural practices. A result of current agricultural practices designed to provide food security for a rapidly increasing population has been that “… monocultures have replaced natural ecosystems that once contained hundreds to even thousands of plant species, thousands of insect species, and many species of vertebrates. Thus, agriculture has caused a significant simplification and homogenization of the world’s ecosystems… The tradition in agriculture has been to maximize production and minimize the cost of food production with little regard to impacts on the environment and the services it provides to society…..- it is critical that agricultural practices be modified to minimize environmental impacts even though many such practices are likely to increase the costs of production.” (Tilman 1999).
HOW DO ECOSYSTEM SERVICES RELATE TO IRRIGATED AGRICULTURE
Sustainable intensification of agriculture has emerged as a promising response to the challenges of food and water security, where the focus is on increasing food production in ways that do not undermine the natural resource base upon which this production depends (Nicol et al. 2015). There have been recent attempts to define, more precisely, what sustainable intensification means (see, for example, Garnett et al. 2013) and understand how it might be achieved (Poppy et al. 2014a).