Water Resource Management: An Opportunity or Curse for Farmers?

Welcome back! In this blog I would like to discuss water resource management, commonly also referred to river basin management. The focus is placed on large scale water management schemes and their impacts on farmers and food production. I will also use a suitable case study from Nigeria to highlight the potential consequences of such projects. I hope you enjoy reading this blogpost and please feel free to ask questions!  

Man and the practice of managing water 

Humans have managed water resources for decades, allowing towns to expand and industries to grow. What must be noted, however, is that the way in which water management is thought about has changed drastically. This can be illustrated by 12^thcentury king of modern Sri Lanka, Parakrama Bahu the Great, who stated: “Let not even a small quantity of water obtained by rain go to the sea, without benefitting man” (Robertson and Watts, 1999). His statement clearly emphasises that water management at the time was greatly about bringing benefits humans, and did not take the environment into consideration. Nevertheless, practices have evolved to consider both the ecosystem as well as human needs. For example, in 2009 the UK Environment Agency mentioned that “the management and use of water and land must be shown to be sustainable - environmentally, socially and economically”. Their understanding to water management shows a more holistic approach, considering the environment, society as well as the economy. Therefore, such contrasting statements not only imply that humans have managed water resources for a long time, but also suggest that people take into account the needs of-, and implications for both humans and the environment. 

Water management in Nigeria

Nigeria is located in West Africa, bordering Niger, Chad, Cameroon and Benin. The country has a current population of nearly 196 million people, with an annual population growth rate of around 2.5% (Worldbank, 2018). Given such expansion of people, and hence needs, water management is essential to ensure that there is enough of the resource to irrigate crops, achieve adequate sanitation standards, reduce gender inequalities and to have available for drinking. In terms of irrigation for agriculture in Nigeria, small scale farmers traditionally adopt shadoof (also called well pole), pumping, gravity flow, natural flow and bucket methods. With the rise of modern technology, these practices are overpowered by the damming of major rivers. Such large scale irrigation schemes have the aim of making large amounts of water available in both wet- and dry seasons. They are believed to be most effective when designed carefully in order to be appropriate under socio-economic conditions at the time of implementation (Yahaya, 2002). Given that agriculture heavily relies on irrigation, projects completed in such a way can have various positive impacts on food production (Norman, 1996): 

1.     Improved variety of crops for growing, also allowing increased range of livestock to be fed

2.     Farmers empowered to be more flexible in decision making

3.     Reducing the risk of crop failure

4.     Improving the capacity of farm land, enabling the input of other factors

5.     Allowing higher yields per hectare

6.     Sizing-up of farm businesses, potentially leading to greater economic returns; Money can also be used to buy food during dry seasons 

7.     Reduction of food insecurity in the short-and long term, leading to general socio-economic development

Despite the various beneficial outcomes of large scale water resource management schemes, one should not dismiss the real-life consequences observed in Nigeria. 

(If you would like to read more about the topic of irrigation, please read my irrigation blogpost) 

The Bakolori Project in Nigeria

The Bakolori Project is an interesting case study to be considered in the context of river basin management. The term Bakolori refers to rural communities found in the Sokoto state in northwest Nigeria. This area lies in the Sahel Savannah and has a fairly short wet season lasting from April/June until October. The Sokoto state is dominated by farmers who mainly cultivate rice in the wet season, and vegetable crops during the dry season (Adams, 1985a). 

The proposed water management project involved the construction of a dam on Sokoto River (Figure 1). Before the start of the construction of the dam in 1974 , the river had a natural flow of about eight months, releasing discharges in July, August and September. Overall, the floodplain delivers water to 50,000 people and is around two to ten kilometres broad.  

Figure 1 – Sokoto River. Red circle indicates where the Bakolori Irrigation Project is located. (Adapted from Adams, 1993)

The dam holds a total of around 450 million cubic metres of water and covers an area of 8,000 ha. Construction finished in 1979, feeding water into 15km canals that transport it to longer secondary and tertiary canals (Yahaya, 2002; Adams, 1985a; Adams, 1993) (Figure 2). Actors involved in the scheme included the Sokoto-Rima Basin Development Authority (SRBDA) that had the task of regulating and overseeing all the land and water resources in the river basin. The design of the dam was completed by an Italian company called ‘Il Nuovo Castoro’. In addition, the contractor was a Nigerian company ‘Impresit Bakolori Ltd.’, which essentially built the project. Lastly, another Nigerian company entitled ‘MRT Nigeria Ltd.’ Acted as ‘consulting engineers’, supervising the contractor and advising the SRBDA (Adams, 1993).

Figure 2 – Bakolori Dam in Sokoto State, Nigeria (Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission, n/d) 

Reasons for implementing the scheme included a desire to assist agricultural productivity and economic development in the Sokoto state. It should prevent further food crises by directly supplying irrigation water to approximately 40,000 - 50,000 farm families. Moreover, the dam would reduce dependency on food imports and instead allow the population to focus on local production (Adams, 1992).

Consequences for Farmers

Unfortunately, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was not carried out prior to construction, resulting in an unsatisfactory outcome of the dam. Firstly, the scheme caused a significant reduction in wet season flooding, necessary for downstream farmers to cultivate staple crops. Consequently, they suffered from inflexible cropping structures and had to grow sorghum and millet during times of when they would have normally grown rice (Adams, 1985b). Table 1 indicates the changes observed in wet season crops, implying that there was a 52% decrease in rice crop area. 

Table 1 – Percentage change of  crops under wet season in the Sokoto Valley (Adapted from Adams, 1985b). 

	Before	After	Change
Rice	66	14	- 52
Millet	35	61	+ 26
Sorghum	41	75	+ 34

Second, the heavy machinery used for clearing and levelling land meant that soil had to be excavated, leading to the destruction of economic trees, farmland and thus livelihoods. Third, approximately 13,000 farming families were dispossessed of their land and relocated to ‘suitable’ farmland nearby. However, the land they were allocated was not as productive as their original plots, and subsequent promised cash compensation did not get paid. Fourth, after construction, farmers oftentimes did not receive land at all, and the ‘lucky’ ones were given the wrong plots resulting in conflicts and severe delays. Moreover, powerful farmers could demand ‘better’ land, resulting in unfair outcomes for the most disadvantaged families (Yahaya, 2002). Lastly, although fishing was an important source of food for many people in the area, the developers of the dam did not consider potential outcomes on fish populations. In various villages, fishing was completely eradicated as fish species gradually declined (Adams, 1985b).  

It must be noted that I have only touched on the outcomes regarding food production and food consumption. Direct results on the economy or the environment have not been included. When considering the outcomes on agriculture, it can be claimed that the negative outcomes of the dam outweighed the positive ones. The probably most significant element in creating these various problems was the exclusion of farmers in the decision making process. The design and construction of the dam solely relied on ‘expert knowledge’, dismissing any form of incorporation of locals’ suggestions and experiences. 

What is the solution?

To solve the issue of large scale water management schemes harming food availability, one must move on from engineer-dominated projects, in which external companies decide who is entitled to water and how much water is needed. Coordination between different actors of the scheme, as well as the active inclusion of the public, must be made possible. Therefore, a more holistic approach is needed. Integrated river basin management, or integrated water resource management (IWRM), is now oftentimes believed to be an appropriate guide. It can be defined as a form of management that “acknowledges the entire water cycle with all its natural aspects, as well as the interests of the water users in the different sectors of a society” (Savenije and Van der Zaag, 2008: 292). This means that IWRM considers humans and the environment, and should not result in the negative outcomes that were observed in Nigeria (Van der Zaag, 2005). 

This solution, however, has only become popular in recent years. The history of water management practice shows that there have been three main stages between which opinions differed considerably (Table 2). 

Table 2 – Paradigm shift of water management (Adapted from: Savenije and Van der Zaag, 2008)

Water resources development  (1960s – 1970s)	Water resources management (1980s–1990s)	Integrated water resources management (1990s– present)
-       Water is a resource to be exploited -       Engineering approach of ‘predict and provide’ -       Emphasis on infrastructure -       Individual projects	-        Recognition that water can be ‘overexploited’ -        Accounting for ecological and social constraints -        Regional and national planning  -        Demand-side measures	-        Water management embedded in overall policy for socio-economic development -        Public participation -        Focus on sustainability

As implied by this evolution of paradigms, large scheme projects like those in Nigeria were implemented as a result of a particular (Western) vision of Africa. Africa had to ‘conform’ to the global North, and should develop accordingly by using modern technology. Farmers should have become businessmen who grow cash crops for the global market. Nonetheless, these wishes could not be fulfilled, and the construction ‘experts’ gradually realised that a more holistic approach like IWRM is needed. If IWRM is successful, then conflicting demands can be reconciled, environmental issues are included in water management and sustainable strategies are implemented. 

However, not all accounts are positive about this approach. It has been argued that IWRM is difficult to implement, given the often corrupted countries and bureaucratic regimes. Moreover, IWRM is not ‘re-usable’ in multiple contexts, as availability of natural resources, cultural norms and institutional organisation vary from place to place (Biswas, 2004). As a result, the IWRM approach may not be as holistic as currently believed. As a result, I ask myself: If this isn’t the solution, then what is? Do you have an idea? 

All in all, the Bakolori Project in Nigeria suggests that large scale river basin management schemes can have various negative implications for local farmers. Rather than improving food security, damming may make families more vulnerable and create unfair conditions between people. If an integrated water resource management approach is implemented, the outcomes may be less harmful. Nevertheless, a further challenge arises if the IWRM measure has to succeed in different cultural-, economic-, and political contexts. 

I really hope you enjoyed reading this blogpost. Let me know what you think about the topic in the comments!