Water and food security - E-consultation to set the track of the study
The CFS, in its 40th session, requested the HLPE to prepare a report on Water and Food Security for its 42nd session in 2015, as follows:
“In the follow-up of major international events such as Rio+20 and the World Water Forum, the HLPE will further explore the “water and food security” issue. Water has an important role in food security through its multiple impacts on: health and nutrition (drinking water, cooking water, sanitary aspect/diseases), on agricultural production (access to water, water management, improvement of irrigation and dryland agriculture) and on food processing (water management, quality of water…). This topic should be seen in the wider context of the nexus between water, soil, energy and food security which is recognized as a pillar of inclusive growth and sustainable development. The HLPE report could put together information on how countries and regions are addressing the management of this important resource.
Through a food security lens, the HLPE will focus its analysis on water for agricultural production and food processing, taking also into account gender-related aspects. More specifically, the HLPE could, from a food security perspective, assess the impacts of water management practices on food security, including water usage for agricultural production, food processing and other ways of consumption. It should also consider in particular issues related to the sustainability of irrigation systems, the salinization of agricultural land and the reduction of the quality of the ground water. On this basis, it will give appropriate recommendations so as to improve water and food security policies, as well as coordination among the different fields and actors at all levels, with a long-term perspective.”
As part of its report elaboration process, the HLPE is launching an e-consultation to seek views, public and expert feedback and comments, on the following proposed scope and building blocks of the report, outlined below.
The HLPE ambitions to synthesize and analyze available evidence expected to be useful to support action by the public and private sectors and civil society. Based on this evidence a set of policy recommendations will be made.
1. Water use for health, nutrition and food security - global and regional trends
Water is central to food and nutrition security. Safe drinking water and sanitation are fundamental to good nutrition, the health and dignity of all. Water is also key for food security because it is an important and essential input for agricultural production, food processing, preparation and cooking of food.
First, the HLPE proposes to summarize the latest evidence-based information on the use of water for health and nutrition (drinking water, cooking water, sanitary aspect/diseases), and for food and agriculture, - indicating how much water is consumed for the production, processing, and consumption of food as well as for sanitation and drinking water. This section of the report would also include:
- Metrics on access to safe drinking water and adequate sanitation: trends in the number of people who lack access to safe water and adequate sanitation. Latest data and trends in water consumption by the food and agriculture sector, the manufacturing industry, the energy sector, IT based communication systems and services. What are the global and regional patterns and anticipated increases in water consumption in these sectors over the next 30 years?
- Metrics on global freshwater withdrawals for food production. Available data on the consumption of surface and groundwater water for food and agriculture in different regions. Assessment of existing projections of future water prices.
- Global and regional statistics on water quality. To what extent, - and how -, is water quality changing in rural and urban areas, both within and between countries? How does the geography and current trends in water quality affect the capacity of different genders and social groups to access clean and good quality water?
The report would critically discuss the accuracy and reliability of all the metrics and water accounting methods used in this report.
2. Governance of water and food security
Water governance is now a key concern in a context of increasing water scarcity, local and trans-boundary water conflicts, and global climate change. The HLPE report would therefore focus on the governance of water management for food and nutrition security. In this context, governance refers to the interactions among different institutions, actors and structures that determine how and by whom power is exercised, and where decisions are taken on water and food security. Rights, relationships, responsibility, and accountability are key issues here along with the set of rules, cultural or social norms that regulate access, use and control over water.
Actors, entitlements and rights. The HLPE report would briefly describe the various categories of actors who participate in the governance of water management for food and water security. These actors include water collectors (mostly women), small scale food producers (men and women farmers, pastoralists, fishing communities, forest dwellers, indigenous peoples, urban and peri-urban farmers...); public actors (local and national); and the private sector (small and medium size business to large multinational corporations). The report would distinguish these different actors on the basis of clear criteria, - including their specific capacities for water management; their entitlements and rights to manage water resources; their capacity to influence policy making and institutional choices at local/national/international levels; and ability/willingness to invest specific resources in the governance of water management for food security.
Special attention would be given to the contributions and roles of women as food and water providers. What do we know (and do not know) about gender relations and women’s roles, rights, and responsibilities in the governance of water and food security?
Policies for water and food security. The HLPE report will seek to compile available information on how countries and regions are addressing the management of water for food and water security through their policies and institutions. The report will aim to identify common denominators and fundamental divergences in the policies and institutions for water governance that are promoted by different actors (the State, corporations and other private sector actors, indigenous peoples, non governmental organisations, peasant/farmer organisations, and social movements... ). It would be useful to focus on national and international policies for this analysis of different practices and normative views on water governance and food/water security.
3. Management of water for food and nutrition security: impacts, sustainability and resilience
Water management. What are the key issues for the management of water for human health and nutrition, agriculture, and processing? How do changing diets affect water demand and water management options, and vice versa? Most national plans for agriculture and food security focus on expanding the area under irrigation by some significant amounts. What are the challenges for water management? What is the potential to accommodate demands for more irrigation? How far can water management stretch the resource?
How do management decisions to first allocate water for cities, industry, mining, and the energy production sector affect access and quality of water for human consumption and agriculture & food processing? How is water management challenged by the demands of urbanisation and population growth? What are the implications for the right to water and the right to food for all?
The HLPE report would compare and contrast the water use efficiency of different food systems and water management practices for the production, processing and consumption of food, - including drinking water using the concept of ‘water footprints’[1] and other water accounting methods. The strengths and weaknesses of the different water accounting methods used for these comparisons would be critically discussed.
What is the effect of water availability on the international trade of food (crops and livestock products)? What are the risks and opportunities associated with the expansion of international trade in water intensive commodities? How are people’s right to water and right to food affected by the changing relationships between (inter)national trade and water management? How do these trends impact on local and national food/water sovereignty? After critically assessing the strengths, weaknesses, and relevance of the ‘virtual water’[2] concept, the HLPE report would describe the impacts of international trade on domestic water resources and on how water is managed and allocated within river basins, watersheds and villages/municipalities for drinking water, sanitation, farming, food processing and so on.
How could climate change affect water availability for human needs and agriculture in different regions? What are the likely impacts of climate change on groundwater use, water storage, and the availability of surface water for drinking/cooking water, sanitation, agricultural production, and food processing? The report would critically discuss the potential of technological and institutional innovations for water conservation and its sustainable use in the context of climate change, - focusing on water management for health, nutrition and water security and on agriculture and food security.
The report would also offer critical reflections on the resilience of the water management systems and practices currently used by different actors. How do the water management systems and practices of these different types of actors compare in terms of their resilience and capacity to adaptively respond to change, - including climate change and market volatility?
Water governance impacts & emerging issues. Available evidence and knowledge will be used to critically analyse the impacts of different governance regimes for water management on a) local and national water and food security, and b) on the livelihoods and food/water security of actors centrally involved in water harvesting and collecting, water distribution, sanitation, food production, processing and food preparation. When assessing the short and long term outcomes of different water governance regimes on food and water security and key actors, the HLPE proposes to consider both negative and positive i) environmental impacts; ii) social and cultural impacts; iii) public health impacts; and iv) economic impacts.
Last, the HLPE proposes to examine some critical emerging issues for the governance of water management. For example, the HLPE report would analyse the impacts of water grabs/acquisitions on food and nutritional security. Water is both a target and driver of the recent large scale land investments/land grabs for agricultural production (including biofuels). Particular attention would be given to the documented impacts of ‘water grabs’ on the food, nutritional and water security of women, vulnerable peoples and groups. The report would identify uncertainties, gaps in knowledge, and needs for further research on the long term consequences of water grabs/acquisitions for water and food security.
Equity and sustainability. The HLPE proposes to offer a critical assessment of the equity and sustainability outcomes of a range of water governance regimes and management practices, emphasizing implications for the food, nutritional, and water security of different genders and social groups. The report will seek to clearly identify gaps in knowledge and uncertainties in their discussion of controversies, contentious issues, and competing and conflicting approaches to water and food security, inclusive growth, and sustainable development.
4. Policy recommendations for water management and food security
As in previous reports, the HLPE will seek to elaborate policy recommendations, taking into account three important elements. First, the recognition of the need to take into account the diversity of converging and diverging perspectives, thereby trying to elicit controversies as well as competing visions and conflicting paradigms for water and food security. Second, the currently uncertain policy context that exists for water and food security. Third, the current context of increasingly rapid and unpredictable environmental, economic and social change.
The HLPE will ambition to take a long term perspective in its recommendations on how to improve policies and institutions for water and food security, as well as coordination at all levels among different sectors and actors.
[1] The “water footprint” of a food commodity (or any other product) is the total volume of water of freshwater used - that is consumed and polluted - to produce the food commodity, measured over the whole production chain. It is an indicator of freshwater use that looks at both the direct and indirect use of water to produce a particular food (or any other product).
[2] The “virtual-water” content of a food product is the freshwater ‘embodied’ in the product. The virtual-water balance of a country or continent over a given time period is defined as the net import of virtual water over this period, which is equal to the gross import of virtual water minus the gross export. A positive virtual-water balance for the food and agriculture sector implies net inflow of virtual water to the nation from other nations. A negative balance means net outflow of virtual water.
- أقرأ 51 المساهمات
One of the important contributions of the proposed study is the compilation of the various ways that countries are addressing water and food security (last paragraph of Section 2, Governance). Such a comparative study has the potential to be quite useful in helping countries choose among alternative paths to water and food security. To serve this purpose, however, the study needs to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of various approaches, against certain parameters. I would suggest that the parameters used should go beyond water efficiency or economic efficiency (though both are clearly important) to a broader vision of agriculture. The parameters I suggest (and which I have applied in my own work on water ethics) are the following: (1) environmental sustainability and impacts on water ecosystems and agricultural lands; (2) social benefits such as equity, employment, nutrition, institutional capacity-building, etc.; (3) cultural benefits such as identity, empowerment, and capacity for cultural self-determination; and (4) economic efficiencies, including water efficiency and managing ecosystem services.
By articulating these (or some other) parameters, the study will be able to offer assessments about the particular strengths and weaknesses of different approaches to food and water security, in terms of the particular parameters. I am attaching the agricultural chapter of my book, "Water Ethics: A Values Approach to Solving the Water Crisis" (Routledge 2013) to illustrate how these four parameters can be used in assessing alternative agricultural strategies.
The reason I feel we need to be very explicit about the parameters by which one agricultural strategy is considered better than another is that there is an unstated default prameter of monetized costs that is typically applied. In order to weigh additional factors of social, cultural, and envrionmental benefits, these need to be explictly addressed, or they will inevitably be overlooked.
The iusse is complex. Water is linked with food security and food safety and health and all is linked together. All contributes to inclusive and sustainable development. To answer to the HLPE ambitions I think that system dynamics could represent a tools to synthesize and analyze different fields, actors and to set the best strategy to assure water and food safety to people in every countries.
Recognizing that meeting societal demand for food is a global challenge, as recent estimates indicate that the world will need 60% more cereal production between 2000 and 2050 (FAO, 2009), the fertilizer industry would like to draw attention to the synergy between water and nutrient management and the solutions it can provide for increased sustainable food production.
The objective of nutrient use is to increase the overall performance of cropping systems by providing economically optimum nourishment to the crop while minimizing nutrient losses from the field into the environment, including into water. Therefore, NUE and WUE are inextricably linked concepts.
Trials have shown that water use efficiency can be improved through nutrient management (Hatfield et al., 2001). Nutrient availability affects aboveground biomass, canopy cover to reduce soil evaporation, plant residue production, nutrient dynamics in soil, and thereby improves crop growth and WUE (Norton and Wachsmann, 2006).
Moreover, data from a lysimeter experiment conducted in Canada on spring wheat offers an excellent example of the relationship between NUE measures and WUE across a range of N levels. The study included both rainfed (dry) and irrigated) treatments and shows the tremendous impact water status can have on yield response to N.
Even though NUE generally decreased as N rates increased, the simultaneous increase in WUE and yield until an optimum N rate was attained improved over-all system performance, showing that efficient and effective use of either water or crop nutrients requires that both be managed jointly at optimum levels within a specific crop system.
Numerous efficiency and productivity enhancing nutrient and water management technologies and practices exist, but many are underutilized. The International Fertilizer Industry Association stresses that locally defined guidelines for NUE that are specific for nutrients, soils, cropping systems and mindful of plant-water status are needed to help farmers identify where improvements are most needed and easiest to advance.
Thank you very much for the opportunity to contribute ideas and potential solutions to this incredibly important issue and discussion.
When considering a long term strategy concerning water and food security it is obvious that water is the dominant factor in the equation. When considering water security the entire water cycle and the environments it depends upon to function effectively need to be addressed.
"We recognize the key role that ecosystems play in maintaining water quantity and quality and support actions within the respective national boundaries to protect and sustainably manage these ecosystems." (The Future We Want RES/A/66/288 para.122)
“The Future We Want’ of the Rio+20 Conference (2012). Resolution 62/196, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2007, referred to ‘the global importance of mountains as the source of most of the Earth’s freshwater”.
(UNESCO 2013, ‘Climate Change impacts on Mountain Regions of the World’)
“Given their important role in water supply and regulation, the protection, sustainable management and restoration of mountain ecosystems will be essential.”
(UNESCO 2013, ‘Climate Change impacts on Mountain Regions of the World’)
“Maintaining the integrity of ecosystems before they become compromised is an essential component of achieving water security and reducing the potential for conflicts. The continuous pace of human development is threatening the capacity of ecosystems to adapt, raising concerns that ecosystems will reach a tipping point after which they are no longer able to provide sustaining functions and services, and will become unable to recover their integrity and functions (Maas, 2012). Establishing sustainability boundaries will set the capacity of ecosystems before their limit is surpassed, acting as a preventative measure before crises and conflicts arise.” (U.N Analytical Brief 22/3/13)
“Ensuring that ecosystems are protected and conserved is central to achieving water security – both for people and for nature. Ecosystems are vital to sustaining the quantity and quality of water available within a watershed, on which both nature and people rely. Maintaining the integrity of ecosystems is essential for supporting the diverse needs of humans, including domestic, agricultural, energy and industrial water use, and for the sustainability of ecosystems, including protecting the water- provisioning services they provide.” (U.N Analytical Brief 22/3/13)
Given this vast body of knowledge from numerous UN sources, it would seem that all the information for securing water is already complete. Now what is needed is the formulation of a global action plan to implement the protection and restoration of the environments essential for the renewal function of freshwater to secure an adequate amount of freshwater for present and future generations. This will also enable the potential production of food for both present and future generations.
Thank you for your consideration
Regards
Stella Joy
For further information please visit our Homepage in MAHB Stanford University
“Effective water management” let it be a Groundwater or Surface water resources is a much more a complex challenge in a democratic country like India. Here there are many a competing interests at the political, administrative, and also at basin levels with competing users for agriculture, Industries and Drinking water supplies. The water based and water oriented industries are thriving on a larger scale in many a states of India. Likewise, water intensive crops are cultivated in water starved regions of many a states in India, as it has been practiced from historical past. The futuristic predication says a huge gap between water supply and demand will exist up to more than 25% by year 2030. This will be most acute in water scare states; unless a better water management practices are adhered too.
The upcoming process on water and food security is a vicious cycle, where in the food Security will be a question mark at the expense of many multinational water based companies exploiting the precious commodity. Hence, it may pose a 'wicked challenge' in the years to come.
The existing line Department in many a states of India is a complex mix of expertise in hydrology, Hydrogeology, engineering, constitutional, legal, political, social, inter-sector, institutional, and agriculture etc and each department work out as a separate entity with vested interests. There is no uniformity and common consensus approach as far as the safe up keep of the water resources are concerned.
In India, ownership and user rights, as well as responsibility for the management of water are largely a vested interest in the hands of the state governments and Union Territories. The role of the central government is limited to Trans-boundary issues between states or across national boundaries. Thus, basin wide water conflicts between states are more prevalent and the conflict continuous for years without any solution for the problem quoted.
The prime factors which may pose a setback towards water and food security in India are:
Vested Interest of Government.
- Increasing political Influence.
- Weak Institutional capacity.
- Non- coherence of strategies and approaches among various line department concerned.
- Decision making processes are very slow and ambiguous.
- Community are not taken in the decision making process.
- No concerned Department is willing to take up the responsibility, accountability, prompt implementation of projects and positive outcomes.
- The process of sustainable agriculture and water management is carried out without proper interface of Agriculture, CGWB, or other concerned department.
- The Draft National Water Policy has been published in June 2012 and the government has also announced its 12 five-year plan to redress past weaknesses. The draft water policy is contributing to active debate on the appropriate balance between centralized and decentralized approaches to water management and governance in India and the debate process still goes on without any outcome. The extent to which India will be able to provide decisive and common consensus direction between state and Central Government, developing nested multi-level solutions, and implementation of the same with a common goal/objective in an effective, efficient, rapid, and sustainable way through democratic process is a big question mark and carries a lot of turbidity in it.
The effective and efficient water and food security can be ensured provided:
Good Interdepartmental interaction and derivation of common consensus and well defined plan of action with all political support at micro to macro level.
- Community members are to be considered as one of the stakeholders and their ideas and thoughts are also to be valued.
- Better, more reliable and transparent information on the changing nature of hydrological condition needs to be available on a common platform without any restriction so that, the decision makers and implementation agencies can have a sound back up support for more deriving a sustainable plan for water utilization.
- Awareness raising, information, and advocacy campaigns among people and decision makers at all levels to develop consensus on the seriousness of the water challenge. This is an essential ingredient in developing effective solutions that are to be effectively and efficiently implemented.
- Also, various primary and secondary data related to soil, agriculture, groundwater and surface water status, socio-economic profile of various regions, Environment set up, identified issues and problems of the regions, contact officials etc can be published in a public domain and the data are to be constantly updated for any implementing agency or decision makers to promptly rely up on beyond doubt.
MURALI KOCHUKRISHNAN.
SR. MANAGER, PROJECTS( HYDROGEOLOGY)
IL&FS ENVIRONMENT, MUMBAI.
This very important study is expected to cover some important issues as follows:
- treaties & agreements on water & their future impact on planning for food security
- impact of sanitation system on water quality
- possible threats to food security as aresult of inappropriate policies
This study is certainly most needed and timely.
In my view, it should articulate micro and macro dimensions of water management: so far there has been a bias – explicit and implicit - towards macro and commercially driven aspects. This must be rebalanced. But it should also give specific attention
o to the most vulnerable (food insecure) who may depend on access to water for their survival and have limited say or visibility
o to the most fragile eco-systems
You may therefore want to consider an initial section summarizing community level issues within representative territorial perspective?
An important dimension of access to water is that of opportunity cost for fetching water (and related gender and youth implications). Time and labour-saving interventions (including rainwater harvesting) can be essential for improved livelihoods.
I assume the section on Actors, entitlements and rights will bring out cultural dimensions: (I am thinking of water access problems linked to the cast system in Nepal).
The reference to water grabs is well appreciated. It is important that the study explicitly acknowledges the potential water grab effect of agriculture interventions: driving a borehole for horticulture (or for a guesthouse in an oasis) can have an impact on water access of people depending on the same groundwater table for their livelihoods (seasonally or not).
If we are aiming at sustainable development (and sustainable food systems), we need to adapt crops to the environment rather than the environment to crops, and screen irrigation efforts accordingly. Locally appropriate alternatives to increasingly standardized agriculture products should be systematically investigated. Retrieval of indigenous knowledge (including water management) and sustainable management of local biodiversity can contribute significantly to more effective water management.
The study may want to give more attention to the reuse of waste water, in particular in urban and peri-urban areas (I assume IWMI will be involved in this initiative?), and to the accountability of private sector (e.g. industry, mining companies) regarding contamination – I am thinking of the impact of effluents on homestead food production In the Andes, or on UPA in Nairobi. Water and food security are an important dimension of rural-urban linkages.
The study may also want to include DRM issues (e.g. prevention of floods), particularly in the context of climate change, as a key dimension of food security?
The scope defined by the Steering Committee lists :
4. Policy recommendations for water management and food security
As in previous reports, the HLPE will seek to elaborate policy recommendations, taking into account three important elements.
As a resident of Mumbai which is expected to have groundwater whether sweet or brackish at reasonably small depths - I see around me ever increasing obstructions created by the actions of the local body through its "Infrastructure development" projects & by builders of real estate who have no hesistation in filling up sea as well as mangrove lands for converting to concrete masses. Similar situation exists in other coastal towns as well as hinterland cities like Bangalore in India
1. While Infra development is a must, we have no right to close the earth from soaking from the abundant rains that batter Mumbai every monsoon. The water is now wasted into the Sea after causing severe floods to the city and suburbs. This can be prevented if alongside the Roads and Bridges , as the construction goes on , deep (6-9 m x 200mm dia) shafts reaching the subsoil are provided at say 10 m intervals and the rain water / storm water is funneled into the shafts. Needless to mention , the water passage has to be kept without any clogging and tampering while personal security is ensured to prevent accidental fall into the shafts. This can be easily implemented because for private buildings the town municipalities are insisting on Water harvesting. It becomes important the practice begins at home in the very projects of the local Authority.
2. The builders / real estate developers trying to use Mangrove / Sea shores must be reined in by a rule that these townships / colonies can be only on stilts with deep pilefoundations for supporting the beams that will form the base of the buildings. All roads leading to these buildings / towns must also be on Piledriven columns so that the earth remains exposed under and around the buildings. With rainwater harvesting simplified through guided stormwater drains to carry water into the soil , the rain water will return to the mother Earth. As there would be cost implications , the builders could be compensated through additional permission of Floor Space Index as notified by the Authority.
Benefits : Several million litres of water will go into the earth in Mumbai alone while the people will have flood free roads and green surroundings. Green surroundings will to a large extent help controlling the emissions escaping into the atmosphere.
Thus Policy making for development can help in Water security.
Dear All,
As water is one of the natural element viz.Earth,Fire,Water,Air,Space. So Water is natural element which can not produced by human being.It's god gift.We have to manage this precious gift of God.So as per prevailing conditions of Water availability in India and World we have to take strong actions like harvesting of rain water,save water,save energy,save earth by use of vermicompost.
For saving of water and managing them in proper way,we have to save each drop of water from rain,We have to use water wisely and recycle the treated water effectively.
As an average we have wasted about 85% of water.For recycling the waste water and water use technology we have to think off.
For Rural areas and Urban areas we are wasting water drastically.For that we have to take actions for behaviour change.It is not simple but it is very gradual process for changing of behaviour and mindset of public.
We have to go for public private models for managing water in smart way.I think for food industry we have to develop new technology for treatment and use of water.Treated water can be use for recircultating as well as for reuse
So many natural resources are not being maintaned because they are of Public.So we have to lookout and take strong actions for managing resources.
For Sanitation, Behaviour change is the basic tool for any hardware work.Behaviour change is not so easy as hardware work.We have to change mindset of people.It's a big challenge for any government to takle this issue.So we have to develop a model of PPP(Public Private Partnership).
Water measurmnet from any agriculture industry is difficult,so we have to educate and try to change mind set of farmers to save water.
Thanks
SAVE WATER SAVE LIFE
j'ai participé aux travaux des journnées de terres et l'eau à Amman -fin 2013_ et des réunion sur la punirité de l'eau en afrique du nord, de ce fait je vous propose les ldées suivantes:
* la gestion de l'eau d'irrigation tout au long de sa trajectoire, depuis la source jusqu'à la parcelle, pour évaluer les pertes physiques en eau et identifier les noeuds et les points noirs où il faut intervenir.
* l'irrigation constitue une opération trés détirminante dans le niveau des rendements des cultures irriguées. Mais , il se pose la question suivante: est ce que toute culture doit elle être irriguée ? et quelle quantité et quand ? ici on traite la question des assolements et les priorités chez la population, face à la politique du pays d'économie d'eau d'irrigation.
* la gouvernancet et la sensibilisation des usagers d'eau d'irrigation constituent tout les deux le vrai levier d'une vraie gestion rationnelle de l'eau.l'integration des ONGs est determinant. au Maroc, il y a les association des usagers d'eau d'irrigation. c'est eux qui gerent les circuits et controle la duree où le volume d'eau à la parcelle.
* et en la valeur de l'eau, qui devient un reculateur detirminant pour mieu utiliser cette ressource.
BC.
تم إغلاق هذا النشاط الآن. لمزيد من المعلومات، يُرجى التواصل معنا على : [email protected] .