Environmental flows in support of sustainable intensification of agriculture in the Letaba River Basin, South Africa

This study evaluates the socioecological consequences of the potential trade-offs between maintaining environmental flows (e-flows) and providing water for sustainable subsistence agriculture and livelihoods to the vulnerable human communities living along the lower Great Letaba River in South Africa. Implementation of e-flows is now generally recognized as an essential part of water resources management as they are designed to ensure that sufficient water is retained in a river to protect river ecosystems and all the beneficiaries of services that arise from those ecosystems. Understanding the relationship between e-flows and the use of water for small-scale agriculture is important for the management of trade-offs. The Letaba River Basin and it's tributary, the Great/Groot Letaba, are located in the eastern part of the Limpopo province in South Africa. This is one of the most important river basins in the region supporting both large-scale commercial and small-scale farmers. The river sustains many vulnerable human communities who depend on the ecosystem services provided by the river. Yet, the water resources of the Letaba River are heavily overutilized due to expanding developments, including upstream dams with associated offtakes mostly for irrigation. The findings of the study indicate that irrigation water demand from subsistence agriculture in the Great Letaba Basin amounted to around 2 million cubic meters annually with median demand not exceeding 300,000 cubic meters per month. This means that irrigation water demand from smallholder agriculture only amounts to about one-tenth of the estimated e-flow requirement. However, small-scale farmers contend with an increasing crop water gap which limits irrigated agriculture, especially during the dry season. Given the need to sustainably maintain e-flows for ecological purposes, crop water gaps are only likely to increase and compromise the sustainability of irrigated agriculture. With active upstream supplementation of river flows from dams to maintain both environmental and livelihoods-oriented river flows, the crop water gap can be fully eliminated. This supplementation is not assured due to competing uses

Influence of governance institutions on households' willingness to pay for resources conservation in Khalong-la-Lithunya wetland area Lesotho

This study uses the double-bounded bid elicitation format to estimate how much households in the Khalong-la-Lithunya wetland area (KWA) would be WTP (on top of monthly water bills) for wetland resource conservation, and test whether WTP significantly varies with the institution responsible for its conservation management. KWA was purposely selected on account of the critically important role it plays in securing water provisioning ecosystem services; a role that is currently threatened by proximate and ultimate factors hypothesised to be driven by its unrecognised economic value. WTP was thus elicited and compared when the governance institution was (i) the Ministry of Natural Resources, and (ii) a private environmental conservation agency that is currently active in Lesotho i.e. the Transformation Resource Centre (TRC). Purposive and simple random sampling methods were used to collect survey data from 204 households. Results show that respondents have high levels of factual knowledge about the threats to the sustainability of KWA. They also have attitudes, opinions, and perceptions that are receptive to a policy that improves the status quo. Mean WTP was M78.80 per household per month (UB M92.89 and LB M38.21) when the Ministry of Natural Resources was responsible for conservation management in KWA (equivalent to M 0.011 per litre or M0.21 per 20 litre jerry can), and M83.09 per household per month (UB M98.00 and LB M32.94) when TRC was responsible for conservation management in KWA (equivalent to M0.011 per litre or M0.22 per 20 litre jerry can). The null hypothesis of equality of the two mean WTP values was rejected at the 1 % level (t= 4.34 and p = 0.000), suggesting that institution responsible for conservation management in KWA significantly influences households' WTP. Double bounded models differentiated by institution responsible for conservation management in KWA were used to econometrically determine factors that influence households' WTP. Results show that WTP was positively related to the following variables: income, age, education, whether households had experienced seasonal water shortages, knowledge of health risks associated with water shortages, and gender (males had higher WTP). WTP was found to be negatively related to household size (the more the household members, the lower the WTP). These results were consistent with prior expectation and literature. Considering, also, that this study further used secondary sources to estimate that households, on average, spend about M300 per month on water (equivalent to M0.04 per litre or 0.80 per 20 litre jerry can), three key recommendations follow. First, subject to extensive stakeholder consultations, the Water and Sewerage Authority (WASA) of Lesotho should consider adding to the regular charge a resource conservation tax amounting to at least M0.011 per litre of water delivered to customers, i.e. instead of charging M0.04 per litre of water delivered, WASA should charge customers at least M0.051 per litre of water delivered. Second, WASA should consider instituting a policy that isolates the conservation charge from the M0.51 per litre, and explicitly invest it in mitigating the resource conservation challenges in KWA (i.e. the charge should be used to support activities that secure the sustainable water provisioning ecosystem services from KWA). Finally, WASA should consider engaging TRC directly in converting the proceeds from the conservation charge to tangible resource conservation outcomes in KWA, given that households expressed higher WTP when TRC was responsible for its conservation management.Dissertation (MSc (Agric))--University of Pretoria, 2017.Agricultural Economics, Extension and Rural DevelopmentMSc (Agric)Unrestricte

Africa Agriculture Transformation Scorecard: Performance and Lessons. Malawi

The Malabo Declaration on accelerated agricultural growth and transformation for shared prosperity and improved livelihoods is a set of goals that were adopted by Heads of State and Government of the African Union in 2014 in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea (AUC 2014). To translate the seven Malabo commitments into results, a call for action was made by the Heads of State and Governments, by calling upon the AU Commission and the NEPAD Planning and Coordinating Agency, in collaboration with partners, to initiate a review process to be conducted on a biennial basis starting 2017, with an objective of tracking, measuring, and reporting progress towards achieving the Malabo Declaration commitments by 2025. Three Biennial Reviews (BR) have been conducted—the inaugural BR in 2017, the second BR in 2019, and the third and most recent BR in 2021. This brief draws on the third BR report to summarize the performance of Malawi in pursuit of the seven Malabo Declaration commitments across the three BR cycles, highlights challenges and lessons from the third BR, and outlines policy and programmatic measures required for the country to meet the Malabo Declaration commitment targets by 2025. The third BR shows that Malawi is currently off-track to meet its 2025 targets under the Malabo Declaration. This is a step back from the first BR, which showed Malawi on course to meet four of the seven Malabo commitments. However, even though off-track, the country is rated as progressing well toward achieving the Malabo targets. A key recommendation from the analysis is for Malawi to further open up to intra-regional trade by utilizing structured markets and adding value to its agricultural products. Fostering regional trade will increase incomes and reduce poverty

Africa Agriculture Transformation Scorecard: Performance and Lessons. Botswana

The Malabo Declaration on accelerated agricultural growth and transformation for shared prosperity and improved livelihoods is a set of goals that were adopted by Heads of State and Government of the African Union in 2014 in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea (AUC 2014). To translate the seven Malabo commitments into results, a call for action was made by the Heads of State and Governments, by calling upon the AU Commission and the NEPAD Planning and Coordinating Agency, in collaboration with partners, to initiate a review process to be conducted on a biennial basis starting 2017, with an objective of tracking, measuring, and reporting progress towards achieving the Malabo Declaration commitments by 2025. Three Biennial Reviews (BR) have been conducted—the inaugural BR in 2017, the second BR in 2019, and the third and most recent BR in 2021. This brief draws on the third BR report to summarize Botswana’s performance in pursuit of the seven Malabo Declaration commitments across the three BR cycles, highlights challenges and lessons from the third BR, and outlines policy and programmatic measures required for the country to meet the Malabo targets by 2025. The third BR reveals that Botswana is not on-track for achieving the Malabo Declaration commitments. However, the analysis notes an improvement in the country’s overall performance score since the second BR cycle. This progress from the second to the third BR indicates a turnaround from the decline the country registered between the first and second BR cycles. A key recommendation from the analysis is for the country to enhance its resilience to climate change by providing sufficient public funding. The country should also establish government budget lines to respond to spending needs on resilience-building initiatives

Africa Agriculture Transformation Scorecard: performance and lessons. Mozambique

The Malabo Declaration on accelerated agricultural growth and transformation for shared prosperity and improved livelihoods is a set of goals that were adopted by Heads of State and Government of the African Union in 2014 in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea (AUC 2014). To translate the seven Malabo commitments into results, a call for action was made by the Heads of State and Governments, by calling upon the AU Commission and the NEPAD Planning and Coordinating Agency, in collaboration with partners, to initiate a review process to be conducted on a biennial basis starting 2017, with an objective of tracking, measuring, and reporting progress towards achieving the Malabo Declaration commitments by 2025. Three Biennial Reviews (BR) have been conducted—the inaugural BR in 2017, the second BR in 2019, and the third and most recent BR in 2021. Mozambique has participated in all three BRs, submitting a country report to the African Union in each BR cycle. This brief draws on the third BR report to summarize the performance of Mozambique in pursuit of the seven Malabo Declaration commitments, assessing the challenges faced and the lessons learned by the country, with policy and programmatic measures required for Mozambique to meet the Malabo Declaration commitment targets by 2025. The third BR indicates that Mozambique underperformed and is not on track to meet all the Malabo Declaration commitments by 2025. Despite exceeding the overall performance benchmark in the first BR, the country remained off-track with very little improvement between the second and the third BRs. One of the key recommendations of the analysis is for Mozambique should strengthen the resilience of its farmers, as the country's agricultural sector is particularly exposed to extreme weather events, which can wipe out anticipated harvests very quickly; appropriate mechanisms, such as agricultural insurance, should be made available to farmers

Environmental flows in support of sustainable intensification of agriculture in the Letaba River Basin, South Africa

This study evaluates the socioecological consequences of the potential trade-offs between maintaining environmental flows (e-flows) and providing water for sustainable subsistence agriculture and livelihoods to the vulnerable human communities living along the lower Great Letaba River in South Africa. Implementation of e-flows is now generally recognized as an essential part of water resources management as they are designed to ensure that sufficient water is retained in a river to protect river ecosystems and all the beneficiaries of services that arise from those ecosystems. Understanding the relationship between e-flows and the use of water for small-scale agriculture is important for the management of trade-offs. The Letaba River Basin and it's tributary, the Great/Groot Letaba, are located in the eastern part of the Limpopo province in South Africa. This is one of the most important river basins in the region supporting both large-scale commercial and small-scale farmers. The river sustains many vulnerable human communities who depend on the ecosystem services provided by the river. Yet, the water resources of the Letaba River are heavily overutilized due to expanding developments, including upstream dams with associated offtakes mostly for irrigation. The findings of the study indicate that irrigation water demand from subsistence agriculture in the Great Letaba Basin amounted to around 2 million cubic meters annually with median demand not exceeding 300,000 cubic meters per month. This means that irrigation water demand from smallholder agriculture only amounts to about one-tenth of the estimated e-flow requirement. However, small-scale farmers contend with an increasing crop water gap which limits irrigated agriculture, especially during the dry season. Given the need to sustainably maintain e-flows for ecological purposes, crop water gaps are only likely to increase and compromise the sustainability of irrigated agriculture. With active upstream supplementation of river flows from dams to maintain both environmental and livelihoods-oriented river flows, the crop water gap can be fully eliminated. This supplementation is not assured due to competing uses

Africa Agriculture Transformation Scorecard: performance and lessons. Angola

This brief highlights Angola’s performance in the second BR and assesses challenges faced and lessons learned by the country during the review process. The brief also reviews policy and programmatic changes in Angola that can be attributed to the first (2017) and second BRs. It concludes by highlighting required policy actions for Angola to meet the Malabo Commitments by 2025