HLPE CONSULTATION ON WATER AND FOOD SECURITY REPORT
General comments
Types of water: the draft report addresses the issue of types of water and water usage. We would like to draw the attention of the HLPE to the Codex international standards such as the Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Fruit and Vegetables that have quite prescriptive requirements around the types of water that can be used in production and measures to be taken to prevent contamination of the produce and/or water used. The Code may assist around water usage, particularly where it might concern re-use of water.
Integrating water quality into water quantity policies: It would be good to have more description about integrating water quality into water quantity policies and decisions, particularly for water resource allocation. There was a comment late in the report about quantity impact on quality but it did not appear to be discussed earlier on in the report. For more information, the report could refer to the report prepared on characterising the relationship between water quality and quantity on the Department of Environment’s website: http://www.environment.gov.au/resource/characterising-relationship-between-water-quality-and-water-quantity.
The report could also look at the Australian Murray Darling Basin Plan for an example of integrating water quality targets into water resource allocation plans: http://www.mdba.gov.au/what-we-do/basin-plan
Water for agricultural systems – Irrigation: On approaches and methodological issues (page 29, line 50), we believe that metrics and data for water and food security are adequate and valuable. However, we would like to suggest to incorporate more maps on irrigated area that have positive outcomes on food security including systems used for these achievements and more graphs (especially scatter plots) for a broad understanding and critical review of the correlation between water usage across the globe and food security with emphasize on best practices used in irrigation. An Australian a case study in Victoria is found below as an example.
Case study: Victorian On-Farm Priority Project
“The Victorian On-Farm Priority Project was designed to deliver on the Commonwealth Government’s environmental priorities for water-related programs in the Murray Darling Basin through on-farm efficiencies which increase the viability of farm businesses. The project is helping to maintain and grow milk production to meet increasing demand, despite the challenges of climate variability. In turn, a strong dairy sector maintains and creates regional employment: both directly (through on-farm roles) and indirectly (through associated industries).
The project is estimated to have boosted the regional economy and community with an estimated net present value of $78 million, and the creation of approximately 200 short- and long-term jobs. Additional benefits expected over the long-term include improved water quality and salinity management, and increased resilience of the regional economy to a range of socioeconomic and environmental pressures.
Victorian On-Farm Priority Project enabled farmers to invest in new technology to help combat climate variability, which had already impacted the value of production during years of lower water allocations.
The project strengthened the Goulburn Murray Irrigation District economy (estimated to be $1.6 billion at the farm gate, and $6.5 billion with processing and other value adding) as it provided a stimulus to farm infrastructure investment and retained 50 per cent of the resultant water savings for productive use.
In developing the Victorian On-Farm Priority Project, the Victorian Government estimated water use efficiency increases and productivity increases of 13 to 22 per cent, depending on the farming industry (e.g. dairy, grains, horticulture, etc.).
Irrigation upgrades:
- install irrigation scheduling equipment including soil-, plant- or weather-based monitoring systems to calculate crop water requirements and water budgets
- improve border-check irrigation by lasering, installing reuse systems, automating bay outlets, facilitating fast , establishing farm channel reconnections or installing pipes and risers
- lay piping and lining farm channels
- convert border-check irrigation systems to pressurised systems, including conversion to centre pivot, linear move, fixed sprinkler or surface and sub-surface drip systems.”
Salinity: The draft report refers to two strategies are available to deal with salinity (page 30, lines 22-27). We note that the draft report covers a more worldwide perspective where in most cases salinisation of productive land is occurring due to salts being added to soils in cultivation processes, for example, from fertilisers or in the water being used for irrigation (particularly if it is from treated sewage effluent and/or storm water). The two methods described (cultivating more saline tolerant species or allowing leaching to remove the salts) are the two options. It should be noted that leaching would require the amount of salt being added to the soil be reduced through either better fertiliser management and /or lowering the salt level in the water being applied to allow leaching to occur. It would also be enhanced through increase drainage but this could lead to downstream impacts (i.e. the salts do not disappear; they get dissolved in water and moved somewhere else in the environment). The draft report focuses on agricultural productivity and does not seem to discuss any environmental risks associated with the transfer of the salts. The Australian dry land salinity issue is slightly different with the salts already in the soil being mobilised through changing land use practise and irrigation that leads to rising water tables. This means that in addition to the options from above, land management, such as tree planting, and optimised irrigation management which would both decrease water table rises, could be added to the list.
Water quality: We do not agree with some of the recommendations to address water quality (pages 76-77). While ‘investing in water quality monitoring to address food security and nutrition and public health challenges’ is a good idea, we think there needs to be words around monitoring being targeted and risk based otherwise it can be impractical and expensive.
Closing the nutrient cycle in water in wastewater: The recommendation to ‘close the nutrient cycle in water and wastewater’ should be investigated on a case-by-case basis. We suggest that it is more appropriate for smaller scale cases as economics and health and safety issues of re-using wastewater products as fertilisers have been difficult to resolve. We believe that while there are risks associated with stormwater and sewage re-use, these have to be balanced against the environmental effects and or the health and safety issues associated with the current practices, which may be very unsanitary and environmental damaging, and the benefits of increased environmental water (if extraction is reduced,) decreased nutrient transfer (eutrophication) and pathogen release and increased agricultural productivity.
Development and implementation of water-neutral industrial and domestic water and wastewater strategies: It is not clear to us what the recommendation means. We believe it may mean that significant resources even on the most basic scale, for example, a house that collect roof top rain water (i.e. not a farm dam or other interference with environmental flows), stores it in a tank, uses it for domestic purposes (which may require disinfection), collects the used water, treats it to remove pathogens and excess nutrient and applies it to crop or treats it further for domestic re-use. Even this basic model would require a tank, some plumbing for the collection of the used water, a septic or other biological treatment system, plumbing to and a pump to move the treated water to a crop or back to storage and possibly a disinfection and or filtration system, all of which would cost money to purchase and would require ongoing maintenance. There might need to be some clarification on what this recommendation is trying to achieve.
Water reform processes: we supply a copy of the study below conducted to help understanding the balance between the water needs of communities, industries and the environment as key to achieving a healthy working Basin.
Case study - Sustainable Rural Water Use and Infrastructure Program
‘Within Australia, the Murray–Darling Basin is Australia's largest and most iconic river system. It is also one of the largest river systems in the world and one of the driest covering an area of over 1 million km2. More than 2 million people live in the Murray–Darling Basin, with more than 1.3 million people who live outside the Basin also dependent on its water resources.
Irrigated agriculture in the Murray–Darling Basin makes an important contribution to the Australian and regional economies. In 2010–11, the Basin accounted for 61 per cent of Australia’s total area irrigated and 40 per cent of Australia’s irrigating agricultural businesses (ABS 2012). These businesses undertake a variety of irrigated agricultural enterprises, including vegetable crops, perennial tree and vine crops, pastures for grazing, hay, rice, cotton, cereals and oilseed crops. Many of these enterprises rely heavily on irrigation water.
Ensuring a balance between the water needs of communities, industries and the environment is key to achieving a healthy working Basin. The Basin Plan, which came into law on 22 November 2012, sets new long-term average sustainable diversion limits (SDLs) that reflect an environmentally sustainable level of water use (or 'take'). This is the amount of water that can be taken for town water supplies, industry, agriculture and other human or 'consumptive' uses, while ensuring there is enough water to maintain healthy river and groundwater systems.
The Australian Government is meeting the challenges of water scarcity through long-term strategic investments that will improve water management arrangements and deliver a range of water policy reforms. More than $12 billion has been committed for programs in support of water reform in the Murray-Darling Basin. Of this, over $5 billion will be invested through the infrastructure component of the Sustainable Rural Water Use and Infrastructure Program (SRWUIP). SRWUIP provides funding for rural water infrastructure upgrades to improve water use efficiency on and off farm, with a share of water savings helping to ‘bridge the gap’ to the sustainable diversion limits in the Murray-Darling Basin Plan.”
Miscellaneous general comments
The table below contains miscellaneous general comments for noting on a range of topics found throughout the report that may improve text/language clarity.
AustraliaMonica Allami