Post on 28-Mar-2023
For Peer Review O
nly
Seeing 'Invisible Water': Challenging conceptions of water
for agriculture, food and human security
Journal: Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d’études du développement
Manuscript ID: CJDS-2014-0006.R3
Manuscript Type: Original Article
Keywords: food security, water productivity, green water, virtual water, Central Asia
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
For Peer Review O
nly
Figure 1: Water withdrawal as a percentage of total water available
Source: http://www.unep.org/dewa/vitalwater/jpg/0400-waterstress-EN.jpg
Figure 2: World Water Scarcity
Source:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Map_showing_Global_Physical_and_Eco
nomic_Water_Scarcity_2006.gif
Table 1. Criteria for Determining Socio-Ecologically Productive (SPG) and Non-
Productive Green Water
Page 1 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
SPG Water SNPG Water
● transpires through vegetation
● maximizes transpiration, or water use
efficiency (WUE), in growing an
agricultural product
● is used to grow plants in climates they
are physiologically-adapted to
● contributes to local household food and
livelihood security
● contributes to the sustainability of the
ecosystem
● ensures ecosystem services are
maintained with sufficient amount of
water
● is not utilized to grow invasive
species, or to cultivate plants which
degrade the land
● transpires through vegetation
● does not maximize WUE in growing an
agricultural product
● is used to grow plants in climates not
suited to their physiology, thereby
creating a higher water input
● undermines local household food and
livelihood security
● compromises the sustainability of the
ecosystem
● is utilized in activities which do not
leave a sufficient amount of water for
ecosystem services
Table 2: Consumptive water use (blue + green water) use at field level for cotton
production in 10 largest cotton producing countries
Country (Rank) Cotton
production
(1000
metric
tonnes in
2013/14)
Crop water
requirement
(mm)
Effective
rainfall
(Green
water)
(mm)
Blue water
requirement
(blue water
withdrawal)
(mm)
Irrigated
share of
area (%)
Total
consumptive
water use
(mm)
Australia (7) 893 901 322 579 90 843
Brazil (5) 1633 606 542 65 15 551
China (1) 6967 718 397 320 75 638
Greece (10) 298 707 160 547 100 707
India (2) 6641 810 405 405 33 538
Page 2 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
Pakistan (4) 2068 850 182 668 100 850
Turkey (8) 501 963 90 874 100 963
Turkmenistan
(9)
327 1025 69 956 100 1025
United States
(3)
2811 516 311 205 52 419
Uzbekistan (6) 904 999 19 981 100 999
Source: derived from Chapagain et al, 2006: p. 190; and
www.statista.com/statistics/263055/cotton-production-worldwide-by-top-countries/
Table 3: Governance Indicators for Canada and Uzbekistan 2013
Indicator Canada Uzbekistan
Voice and accountability 95.3 2.1
Political stability and violence 83.9 26.5
Government effectiveness 97.1 17.7
Regulatory quality 95.2 3.2
Rule of law 94.8 11.4
Control of corruption 95.2 8.1
Source: World Bank http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.aspx#reports
Page 3 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
Abstract
Climate change and variability combined with increasing population shape a discourse of ‘water
crisis’, with a heavy emphasis on water scarcity particularly in the global South. The primary
metric used to reach this conclusion involves ‘freshwater availability’, the ratio between
population and renewable freshwater defined as annually available surface and groundwater. In
this article, we challenge this view of limited or diminishing freshwater availability particularly
as it relates to food production – characterized as a ‘blue water bias’ – and introduce the concepts
of green water and virtual water. In particular, we expose the fallacy of ‘water scarcity’ as it
relates to freshwater availability, highlight the value of a green water perspective, and apply
these conceptual understandings to the case of cotton production in Uzbekistan. We show that
there is enough water and land for food security for all. Shortages are most often the result of a
combination of ‘water blindness’ and decision making in support of narrowly conceived
economic criteria rather than satisfaction of basic human needs. Therefore, to achieve food
security, the discourse for water and agriculture must broaden and begin to explore new
explanations and perspectives around key issues; more specifically, it should challenge dominant
conceptualisations of ‘scarcity’ through new and refined concepts such as blue, green and virtual
water. New perspectives and concepts yield new insights regarding the many social and
environmental challenges ahead.
Page 4 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
1
Introduction
The world water crisis is said to be a freshwater crisis partly of our own making. While the
amount of freshwater in the world is limited and finite, the human population with all of its
complex needs is increasing. For nearly three decades, a veritable mountain of research has
been conducted to demonstrate the facts of this crisis. At the end of the 1990s, Postel
(1998) questioned whether we would have enough water for food production in 2025. At
about the same time, the World Bank declared that future wars would be fought over
water. During the first decade of the 21st Century, numerous meetings were held to
establish a global governance framework for water. Today, a great deal of speculation
concerns the impact of climate change on hydrological cycles, food and energy production
capacities, leading to a complex ‘nexus’ of resource (in)security (WEF, 2011). At the heart
of these exercises are three questions: Is there enough water for our needs? Is there
enough water for food production in order to feed the world? If we do not have the ability
to grow our own food, how do we ensure food security? (Falkenmark, 2001).
The answers given to each of these questions reflect conventional beliefs in
humanity’s having reached a number of limits, boundaries or tipping points (Rockstrom et
al, 2009). So, while there is enough water for both our needs and for food production now,
there is no guarantee this will be so in the near future. For those states having already
reached their limits, they must abandon any interest in food self-sufficiency and pursue,
instead, a policy of food security, which may mean guaranteeing access to imported staples
such as rice or wheat, or actually acquiring the rights to land and water in another country.
Each of these hypothesized options are steeped in controversy: the former in terms of the
dangers of putting a state’s food security in the hands of global food markets; the latter in
Page 5 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
2
terms of the perception of land and water ‘grabs’, meaning the alienation of local small
holder farmers from common lands by rentier states interested in new streams of national
revenue.
All of these discussions are dominated by a discourse of ‘scarcity’: that available
freshwater resources are threatened by ever expanding human uses and demands; that many river
basins are ‘closed’ and cannot accommodate new users; that climate change will make all of this
worse (WWDR I-IV). Decision makers are being asked to better integrate water related decisions
as they impact across the resource use landscape within what is now called the ‘water-energy-
food-climate security nexus’ (WEF, 2011). Unfortunately, the water crisis and scarcity narratives
place their emphasis on a limited and, in our view, outdated conceptual understanding of the
resource that inadvertently narrows the possibilities for better decision-making. The discourse
on water availability must broaden and begin to explore new explanations and perspectives on
water, especially as they relate to: (i) the overall resource endowment; and (ii) the types of water
available for the production of food and other agricultural goods.
In this article, we challenge theseveral dominant and emerging conceptualizations of
water availability in order to push the discussion forward regarding how much water there is
available for human use, in particular for food and agricultural production. In particular, we
examine the concepts freshwater availability, water scarcity, and blue, green and virtual water.
Sustainable and equitable approaches to water use and management require new ways of
understanding the resource base. The article proceeds as follows. In the next section, we address
the question ‘how much water is there?’ showing that there is a great deal more water available
than we are generally led to believe. This is because a ‘blue water bias’ exists that makes a
majority of water professionals and policy makers blind to the significant amounts of green water
Page 6 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
3
available for human needs. In the third section we discuss the concept green water, arguing that
while it is fundamentally important in helping us understand how much water there is in the
world, the concept needs to further distinguish between types of productive green water. We
label these socio-ecologically productive green water (SPG) and socio-ecologically non-
productive green water (SNPG). While large scale mono-cropping produces biomass (SPG), it
often produces negative environmental and social effects (SNPG) as well. In the penultimate
section, we present a case study focused on cotton production in Uzbekistan to illustrate the
utility of the conceptual advances we are proposing. The final section presents some policy
related concluding remarks.
How much water is there?
In his first World Water Report, Peter Gleick asked the important question, ‘how much
water is there, and where is it?’ The answer, then, as it is now, was offered in terms of country-
by-country freshwater availability (see also WWDR I). Freshwater is defined as naturally
occurring surface and groundwater. Available freshwater is that which is readily accessible for
human use, which is said to be only 0.007 per cent of all water on earth. The water scarcity – and
therefore ‘water for human security’ – narrative turns on the fact that it is only this small amount
of water on Earth that ‘is available to fuel and feed its 6.8 billion people’
(www.environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/freshwater/freshwater-crisis/). While a
common (and perhaps alarming) statement, it is incorrect. Of the 1700m3 of water we each need
per year to survive, approximately 1400m3/cap/yr manifests in the form of food, of which an
estimated 1200m3/cap/yr is embedded in food grown through direct rainfall (Falkenmark and
Rockstrom, 2004). In other words, 70% of all the water we need each year bears no direct
relation to ‘freshwater availability’, measured as rainfall runoff and aquifer recharge.
Page 7 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
4
Researchers remain blind to the important role this water – taken up directly by plants through
soil moisture – plays in overall water security. For Falkenmark and Rockstrom (2004: 9), such a
perspective constitutes a ‘blue water bias’ as well as a ‘water blindness’: although ‘some 60-70%
of world food production originates from rainfed agriculture’, for engineers and water
professionals ‘crop production [is] thought of as an irrigation issue’. In their opinion, it is a grave
error to continue to base our food production systems around the potential for commandeering
accessible blue water, i.e. about 14% of all the rain that falls on land and turns into run-off, while
ignoring the other 86%. If we are to achieve food security in a sustainable way, it is imperative to
focus not on blue water but on what Falkenmark and Rockstrom term green water. We return to
this concept below.
Fanning the flames of fear about looming water shortages is the conceputalisation of
‘water scarcity’. Brown and Matlock (2011) and Lautze and Hanjra (2014) provide useful
overviews of water scarcity indices and methodologies. Originally developed by Falkenmark
(1986) as a ‘water crowding index’, the scarcity index measures freshwater availability in terms
of cubic metres per capita with a threshold of 1700 m3/cap – i.e. the amount of water required to
satisfy human needs on average each year – below which countries will experience either stress
or scarcity (<1000m3/cap/yr). In 2007, the United Nations added the category of water
vulnerability, i.e. <2500m3/cap/yr (see www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/scarcity.html). Situations
of water stress or water scarcity will lead to particular difficulties in resource use decision
making, not present in ‘water rich’ countries. The two most common depictions of increasing
world water insecurity are presented in the two well-known maps below (Figures 1 and 2), the
first one from the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP); the second from the
International Water Management Institute (IWMI).
Page 8 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
5
FIGURES 1 AND 2 ABOUT HERE
In Map 1, it is clear that many parts of the world that seem to have abundant freshwater
resources (South America, Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA)) are also those areas where many people
lack access to sufficient potable water and water-borne sanitation systems. In Map 2, this is
partly explained by the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) in the SSA case as a
function not of absolute water scarcity, but economic water scarcity, i.e. that there are
insufficient resources available for the harnessing of the available water resources for improving
human security.
What is perhaps more puzzling is the claim that large sections of the United States and
Mexico, Central and South Asia, North Africa and the Middle East, suffer from or are near to
approaching ‘physical water scarcity’, yet there are no violent conflicts over the resource in these
areas. How is this to be explained? In the main, it is explained by the major contribution of green
water to daily water use. In addition, Allan (1998; 2002) pioneered the concept ‘virtual water’, to
explain how the Middle East in particular was able to live beyond its ‘water barrier’ by importing
the vast majority of the (green and blue) water it consumed in the form of food. He labelled this
‘virtual water’ – the measurable amount of water embedded in the production of a commodity,
most particularly food. In global terms, as a major food exporter, the United States is a net
exporter of virtual water (Konar et al., 2011).
When we combine green water with virtual water, we are able to see that there is often a
great deal more water available in places considered to be ‘water stressed’, so helping to explain
the absence of conflict. Indeed, the World Bank highlights that, in 2013, while Canada had
Page 9 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
6
81,062m3/cap in internally renewable freshwater resources, Jordan had on 106m
3, Israel had
93m3, Egypt only 22m
3, and Uzbekistan 540m
3 per capita. Yet violent conflict, where it is
present, is about many things, but not available water.
In our view, achieving food security – particularly across the arid and semi-arid regions
of Africa and South/Central Asia – requires moving beyond accepted criteria such as blue water
availability toward new ideas and framings, such as green water. Let us now turn to a discussion
of green water.
Green Water
Green water is defined as the sum of the amount of water that has evaporated (from the
soil and through interception), plus the amount of water that has transpired through a plant
(Falkenmark and Rockstrom, 2004). In this definition, transpiration is considered ‘productive
green water’, because biomass is produced, while evaporation is considered ‘non-productive
green water’, because no biomass is produced as the water returns directly to the atmosphere.
The utility of this approach is clear: an accurate measure of green water provides a baseline from
which planners, policy makers and resource users such as farmers, can estimate the potential for
increasing biomass production through manipulation of the landscape, crop choice, tree-planting,
and so on. An empirical measure also provides an important baseline for comparing
‘productivity’ across similar landscapes, say semi-arid savannas, which could then support
research regarding the factors leading to more or less productive green water, such as landscape
change due to widespread deforestation. For example, Falkenmark and Rockstrom (2004: 53)
suggest that ‘in generic terms and disregarding the impact of management, it is possible to talk of
a relatively universal average of some 1500m3 of green water to produce one tonne of terrestrial,
plant-based food, which is equivalent to 150mm/tonne/ha’. However, ‘[t]he range of actual green
Page 10 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
7
water use in a farmer’s field is huge, often between 1000 and 6000m3/tonne (or 100-600
mm/tonne/ha) for a given crop within a given hydroclimate’. Their conclusion is that ‘the
negotiable part of crop water needs’ – i.e. what is grown where, why and how – ‘induces a larger
variation of crop water requirements than the non-negotiable biophysical parameters’
(Falkenmark and Rockstrom, 2004: 53).
As stated above, around 1200 m3/person/year of green water flow originates from rainfed
food production (Falkenmark & Rockstrom, 2004: 69). Green water plays a prominent role in the
production of horticultural crops, so contributing importantly to nutritional security. There is a
misconception that the majority of the world’s food is produced through blue water withdrawal
by irrigation, since 90% of direct water needs are used to produce food, but in reality, most food
is produced with rain at the point where water hits the soil. Indeed, 80% of cropland on a global
level is rainfed, with rainfed agriculture contributing to 60-70% of world food crops (Falkenmark
& Rockstrom, 2004: 67). With food production’s high dependence on rainfed agriculture, then,
water management must not take for granted, or overlook the improvements to be made in this
form of agriculture and focus instead on how best to increase yields through blue water use in
commercial farming, as is currently the norm across much of South and Central Asia (Allan,
2003). With the multiple ecological, political, and economic limitations of enlarging large-scale
irrigation at a global level, improvements in rainfed agriculture is a logical focus for 21st Century
food policy.
Despite popular belief, much research has shown that it is not water scarcity due to low
cumulative rainfall that is to blame for crop failure. Rather, it is the poor distribution of rainfall
over time that hinders crop yields (Rockstrom, 2000). In tropical and sub-tropical regions, the
climate tends to alternate between dry and wet seasons. Within these regions, are semi-arid zones
Page 11 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
8
where rates of potential evaporation tend to be higher than precipitation: i.e., a majority of the
water that falls evaporates immediately, leaving little to none for infiltration into the soil.
Worsening the situation are human-made disturbances to the land surface: conventional
agricultural practices, such as mechanized or draught-animal tillage, can compact the soil,
lowering the ratio of how much water is infiltrated versus that which evaporates or becomes
surface runoff (Falkenmark & Rockstrom, 2004: 34). With decreased infiltration, the amount of
water necessary for the most crucial times in crop growth – germination, flowering, and filling –
is compromised. Ultimately, management of water resources for food must take into account
these environmental pre-conditions. Proposed solutions to meet the water demand of feeding an
immense population have included vapor shifting green water in present cropland, adding more
local water to crops through supplemental irrigation, and capturing surface runoff generated from
adjacent non-agricultural land (Falkenmark & Rockstrom, 2004: 62). In all situations, the water
utilized must be productive: maximizing efficiency by producing more crop per drop, while
maintaining the surrounding ecosystem.
A green water focus allows us to begin to incorporate the significant amounts of
‘invisible water’ directly into planning processes. It provides us with a new way of thinking
about how much water we have and, in particular, of the relationship between rainfall,
biophysical location, and evaporative demand. For Falkenmark and Rockstrom, a green water
focus encourages planners, policy makers and farmers to concentrate on achieving a vapour shift:
discouraging evaporation and encouraging infiltration at the point where the rainfall hits the soil,
so that water is available to plants in their growth cycles thereby enhancing the biophysical
pathway for productive green water.
Page 12 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
9
Where food security is concerned, green water provides an empirical means for assessing
the social value of biomass production: what sort of plants are being grown, where, when and
why. Thus, in our view, the productivity of green water is not just a biophysical process, but a
socio-economic/socio-political/socio-ecological one as well. The productivity of green water is
subject to human intervention, as humans play a large role in determining when, how, for whom
and for what biomass is produced.. It is important to recognize, therefore, that ‘productivity’ is
determined by natural processes made subject to social ends, so plant physiology and climates in
relation to, among other things, agricultural practices, crop choice, governance, trade policy and
so on. Thus, for green water, as a concept, to help contribute to food security, its definition must
be refined, distinguishing between the biophysical and social pathways of productive green
water.
Biophysical and Socio-ecological Pathways of Productive Green Water
Humans exert a powerful influence over the quantity of water that is directed towards
various means. Technological advancements have enabled the damming, diverting and draining
(Conca, 2006) of entire water bodies, thereby controlling how much, to where, and to what end
uses water should serve. What water is used for, though, is highly politicized, rendering it to
flow towards means that do not always consider environmental impacts, or utilize the resource
efficiently nor in an equitable way for all peoples. Beyond the strictly empirical measure of
evaporation relative to transpiration (the biophysical pathway), it is imperative to ask the
question ‘what sort of vegetation, for what benefit and for whom?’ Rockstrom et al (2014: 266)
argue that ‘[s]trategies for water resilience require water governance and management regimes
that focus on ecosystem-based landscape management’ which must include ‘favorable
partitioning of rainfall into green and blue flows, the generation of bundles of ecosystem services
Page 13 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
10
and safeguarding moisture feedback for future rainfall’. Essential to achieving such outcomes,
however, is a clear recognition that decisions are taken for socio-political and socio-economic
purposes.
By asking what sort of biomass is produced through green water productivity, we are
encouraging debate regarding the best use to which green water is put, its relationship to blue
water use and availability, and the ecosystem more generally. Food security should begin with
growing crops for local human consumption, before, say, maize or jatropha or sugar cane for
biofuel production. IThis is because, in an era of climate change, where hydrological cycles are
unpredictable and perhaps destabilized, it makes far more sense to grow drought resistant crops
in semi-arid environments based on vapour shift – i.e. concentrating on where the raindrop hits
the soil – utilizing a prudent mix of blue water storage and withdrawal, as opposed to engaging
in expensive blue water engineering projects for sugar cane or wheat or cotton production,
thereby tying national economies into virtual water dependency relations (Mwadalu and
Mwangi, 2013), while, in many instances, driving small holders off of their land, as has most
recently happened in Mali, Ethiopia and Tanzania (Rulli et al, 2013; Arezki et al, 2011). Finally,
the water that is utilized through the pursuit of growing food and agricultural products can only
be categorized as socio-ecologically productive if its share of the green water flow considers the
sustainability of the surrounding ecosystem. This includes ensuring that sufficient water is left
available for important ecosystem services (e.g., biodiversity, including local fisheries, through
wetlands maintenance as a result of sufficient groundwater recharge), or that the water is not
utilized to grow invasive species, or to cultivate plants which degrade the soil.
Along the biophysical pathway, non-productive green water is empirically demonstrable
as water that evaporates, producing no biomass. It is only non-productive strictly in this sense, as
Page 14 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
11
evaporation performs other sorts of ecosystem services. Along the socio-ecological pathway,
biophysically productive green water may be deemed non-productive where it produces biomass
but either (i) negatively impacts the environment through, for example, invasive species; or (ii)
negatively impacts local households’ food and livelihood security through resource capture for
non-local, often non-food production.= In each case, the unproductive nature may be empirically
demonstrable, but, like certain aspects of biophysically non-productive green water, causality
and/or persistence will be embedded in social practices. We label this socio-ecological non-
productive green water (SNPG water).
In Table 1 below, we put forward several criteria for defining green water as either
productive or non-productive along the socio-ecological pathway.
TABLE 1 ABOUT HERE
To illustrate the utility of our conceptual innovations, we turn briefly to the case study: cotton
production in Uzbekistan.
Uzbekistan: addicted to cotton
In many ways, Uzbekistan is a prisoner of its history as an outpost of the Soviet Union at
a time when man truly believed that he could dominate nature – the era of the ‘hydraulic
mission’ (Allan, 2003). First under Stalin and then under Krushchev, Soviet Central Asia was
turned into a feeder economy, producing cotton and wheat through industrialized collective
farming, for the Russian heartland. Despite their arid environments, with rainfall in the range of
100-500mm per annum – achieving perhaps 900mm in the highlands near the top of watersheds
– large swaths of this region were turned over to irrigated agriculture. By canalizing the waters
Page 15 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
12
of the Amu Darya and Syr Darya rivers – together constituting more than 50% of available
renewable freshwater in the region -- Kazakhstan was turned into one large wheat cropping
monoculture, with Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan effectively becoming cotton plantations.
According to World Bank data (http://wdi.worldbank.org/table/3.5 ), Uzbekistan uses 56 billion
m3 of freshwater, of which only 16 billion m
3 is internally renewable. Most of the water it uses,
therefore, originates outside of its own borders in upstream countries such as Tajikistan and
Kazakhstan. Typical of projects conceived for the periphery by the centre, the Soviet drive for
food and textile self-sufficiency ruined not only local economies and cultures but entire
ecosystems, as illustrated by the loss of smallholder farming, artisanal and commercial fisheries,
the decimation of wetlands of all types, most poignantly the Aral Sea (Spoor, 1998;
http://undp.akvoapp.org/en/project/525/). Despite such widespread socio-ecological disaster, as
an independent country, Uzbekistan seemingly remains trapped by its need to generate wealth
and jobs: cotton in all its destruction is its ‘comparative advantage’.
Cotton is the most important and heavily used fibre in the global textile industry
(Chapagain et al., 2006, p. 187). According to the International Cotton Advisory Committee, in
2014/15, Uzbekistan was the third largest exporter of cotton in the world, accounting for 8 per
cent of global exports. Only the United States (30.7%) and India (15.7%) exported more cotton
(https://icac.generation10.net/index/index). The industry is said to employ more than one million
Uzbeks, but at harvest time this number swells into several million as the Uzbek government
forces citizens of all walks of life, including children as young as nine years of age, to pick
cotton. (Economist, 2013). This practice of government-sanctioned forced labour has brought the
Uzbek government in for a great deal of global criticism. While farms are now held by individual
farmers in private leasehold from the government, farm owners exist in a quasi-feudal
Page 16 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
13
relationship to the government which sets quotas, prices and so on. Farmers must sell their entire
crop to the government at prices considerably below world market values. The government, in
turn, sells on the international market – mainly to China and Bangladesh – reaping considerable
profit which, the Economist says, disappears into ‘opaque accounts’ (Economist, 2013).
Accrording to the World Bank, irrigated agriculture, of which cotton constitutes the large
majority, accounts for 93% of Uzbek water withdrawals (domestic at 4% and industry at 3%
account for the rest). Agriculture constitutes 18% of Uzbekistan GDP, standing third behind
industry and services. Government reports that 26% of the population is employed in agriculture,
with 17% of the total population living below the poverty line (UNDP, 2014). Access to
improved sources of water and sanitation are high by world standards: 100% for sanitation in
both rural and urban areas; 81% and 99% for rural and urban water supply. Despite being an
agricultural society, with 36% of the population living in cities, staple food imports have been
rising, with imports of wheat accounting for 82% of cereal imports over the 2005-8 period. In
2013, according to official figures, food imports increased by 19.5% to USD 1.2 billion while
food exports fell by 55.9% to USD 884 million. Malnutrition is also on the increase, with 5%
(1.1 million) of the population being malnourished in 1990-2 as compared with 11% (3 million)
in 2005-07. Partly in response to criticisms regarding food insecurity and lack of differentiation
in the agricultural sector, the government has shifted irrigated land out of cotton and into wheat.
As a result, cotton production has decreased by 30% over the 1991-2012 period, whereas cereal
production more than doubled over the first decade of the 21st Century. Despite this shift, the
agricultural sector remains extremely inefficient and World Bank data shows that Uzbekistan
withdraws more than 342% of its internally renewable and more than 100% of its total renewable
water resources.
Page 17 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
14
Table 2 illustrates the top ten cotton producing countries of the world in terms of: total
crop production for the year 2013/14; the crop water requirement which reflects the physiology
of the plant and the climate of the country; the amount of effective rainfall, i.e. rainfall that is
taken up by the crop as soil moisture; the amount of blue water required to supplement effective
rainfall; the percentage of the growing area of cotton that is irrigated (through blue water
withdrawals); and the total consumptive water used in the production of the crop (blue water plus
green water).
TABLE 2 ABOUT HERE
According to Falkenmark and Rockstrom (2004: 55), cotton’s water requirement
generally ranges between 550-950mm/ha, i.e. the amount of seasonal water required per hectare
depending on hydroclimate, soil types and so on. This will yield 4-5 tonnes of product. They also
show that cotton’s average water productivity (i.e. the amount of water required to produce 1
tonne/ha of cotton) is 2160m3. In comparison, wheat’s water requirement ranges from 450-
650mm, with a yield range of 4-6 t/ha, and a water productivity average of 1480m3/t/ha.
Table 2 shows the relative water use efficiencies of growing cotton in different parts of
the world, with the United States and Brazil being by far the most efficient, followed closely by
India and China. At the other end of the scale, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan show water
requirements beyond the range presented by Falkenmark and Rockstrom: 999mm/ha in
Uzbekistan and 1025mm/ha in Turkmenistan, with 100% of the cropped land being irrigated.
Considering this high water requirement, it is important to examine further, what methods of
irrigation are being used and what is the water efficiency of those systems.
Page 18 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
15
In the case of Uzbekistan, in September 2013 the Asian Development Bank pledged USD
220 million to help modernize their irrigation systems (Economist, 2013). The main method of
irrigation in Uzbekistan from about 1960 until about the late 2000s has been furrow irrigation.
By the 1970s they were already experiencing waterlogging and salinity problems (Mohan Reddy
et al., 2013). Furthermore, they were consuming huge quantities of water; this is a result of the
fact that the government owned the land and leased it to civilians, on which they mandated
cotton and winter wheat to be grown. Then they provided bulk water, for free, to the Water User
Associations (WUA) who then distributed the water to leaseholders who used it for irrigation.
Civilians were only charged a service fee, by the WUA, for supplying the water, and were
charged based on the area of their crops and not the amount of water they actually used; thus
farmers had no incentive to practice water efficiency or monitor their water consumption (Mohan
Reddy et al., 2013).
Realizing that this was unsustainable, the Government of Uzbekistan has recently been
encouraging improved methods of irrigation and water management (e.g. short-furrow irrigation,
laser land leveling) (Ibragimov et al., 2007). Drip irrigation is slowly increasing in popularity
and short furrow and alternate furrow irrigation are quickly becoming the dominant forms of
irrigation (Mohan Reddy et al., 2013).
The shift from open furrow to drip irrigation is important as this will put back into the
system a great deal of blue water, which, as it flows downstream and recharges aquifers may
constitute the beginning of new and more sustainable forms of land use practice and the
regeneration of degraded systems such as wetlands. Or, it may simply lay the foundation for the
extension of already socio-ecologically destructive mono-cropping practices. As stated earlier,
new ways of seeing water provide the basis for more informed decision making. While
Page 19 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
16
biophysical parameters are fairly constant, the productivity of the land for people and ecosystems
can be greatly influenced by human decision making and action (Falkenmark and Rockstrom,
2004). How decisions are taken, therefore, matters a great deal. World Bank governance
indicators for Uzbekistan suggest that new knowledge about water resource availability may not
lead to better practice. Table 3 shows a comparison between Uzbekistan and Canada across six
governance indicators, with scores ranging from 0 (worst possible governance) and 100 (best
possible governance). These indicators are averaged out from nine sources drawn together by the
World Bank (see . http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.aspx#reports).
TABLE 3 ABOUT HERE
It is clear that governance is a serious problem in this part of ex-Soviet Central Asia.
Achieving food security, therefore, is about much more than having enough water and land. For
example, in terms of malnutrition, ‘food is available but the main problem is more the quality of
people’s diets, their purchasing power distribution, and access to food for all the groups within
the population’ (UNDP, 2010). Put differently, it is the social dynamics across the country that
put a significant cohort of the population at risk; not the absence of the resource itself – be it land
or water – but access to it in quality and quantity appropriate to household food security.
Discussion
Let us now evaluate the case study in relation to the three questions asked at the outset: Is
there enough water? Is there enough water for food? In difficult (arid and semi-arid)
environments, what should be done in relation to achieving water and food security? We answer
Page 20 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
17
these questions in relation to the concepts discussed: freshwater availability, scarcity, virtual,
blue and green water.
World Bank data shows that per capita freshwater availability is only 540m3/cap/yr. The
Falkenmark indicator suggests, therefore, that Uzbekistan should be facing dire choices
regarding freshwater allocation. However, there is little empirical evidence to support this.
Typical of most regions in the world, data for Uzbekistan show that population densities and
human settlements vary directly with amounts of precipitation and the presence of surface water.
In particular, the vast majority of the population is located along the Amu Darya river and its
tributaries. In terms of systems of delivery for domestric use, Uzbeks have access to improved
water and sanitation in both rural and urban areas. Food is also available but the poor
composition of the diet – with more than 50% of dietary energy derived from cereals, in
particular wheat – is reflected in the doubling of the percentage of malnourished people over the
last twenty years. While the country consumes more than three times the available internally
renewable water resources, 93% of this use is for irrigated agriculture, most of which is exported.
Porkka (2011) shows that Uzbekistan is a net importer of virtual water, primarily due to the need
to import wheat from outside the country. The government has, for more than a decade, been
aggressively pursuing policies of wheat self-sufficiency, and high food commodity
protectionism. While the shift from cotton to wheat leads to significant improvements in
freshwater use efficiencies, the UNDP (2010) suggests that this focus should be reconsidered.
The implication is that Uzbekistan could open up its domestic market and possibly shift some of
the water saved through inexpensive imported food toward industrial activities such as textile
manufacturing. Imported wheat could also release land for crops or livestock with greater water
use efficiencies. This suggests that there is a great deal of opportunity for improved land and
Page 21 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
18
water use for improved food security in Uzbekistan. Indeed, according to Porkka (2011: 27),
while ‘Central Asia is generally perceived as a water scarce region, even though its water
resources are relatively abundant … the actual problem in the region is not the availability of
water resources but its uneven distribution and excessive use.’
Let us now turn to the second question: is there enough water for food production? The
simple and obvious answer is yes. As the sixth largest producer of cotton in the world, it is clear
that there is abundant water for agricultural production. It is also clear from the evidence
provided above that present systems are terribly inefficient: because they produce cotton;
because of the way they produce cotton; and because of the social and ecological impacts that
result from state-directed monocropping of cotton. So pervasive are these blue water-focused
systems of agriculture, it is almost impossible to speculate about the possible contribution to be
made from green water. If cotton production was halved, what would this do to the landscape
through a shifting water balance? Is it too far-fetched to believe that the Aral Sea could recover?
(Palaniappan and Gleick, 2009). Table 2 shows that Uzbek cotton has a water requirement of 999
mm/ha, of which 19 mm derives from green water. Its meagre 2% contribution notwithstanding,
it seems fair to conclude that green water use in cotton production in Uzbekistan satisfies all
criteria determining socio-ecologically non-productive green water (SNPG): it is inefficient;
helps undermine local household security particularly as it relates to food; and contributes
directly to ecosystem degradation. As the installation of drip irrigation systems help realize water
use efficiencies, green water should be turned away from SNPG toward SPG activities.
Lastly, in terms of the third question, it is clear that the presence of significant amounts of blue
water flowing across arid and semi-arid environments creates opportunities for domestic food
and non-food agricultural production quite different from similar environments without perennial
Page 22 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
19
surface waters. It is also clear, however, that the presence of blue water – like Middle Eastern
states’ abilities to import cheap food as virtual water – creates a complacence among decision-
makers that is misguided. In Uzbekistan, it is clear that the government has no intention of
participating in virtual water trade to take the pressure off of national and shared transnational
fresh water resources and freshwater dependent ecosystems. It is determinedly pursuing national
food security strategies through wheat monocropping. It is using cotton in the export market as a
hard currency generator. Poor governance is driving these practices, which among other things
put the needs of the central state ahead of the majority of Uzbek citizens. It is obvious from the
evidence provided here that the Uzbek state has a significant blue water bias leading it to be not
only water blind, but blind to the socio-ecological challenges that stem such a bias.
Conclusion
The world water crisis is said to be a function of poor governance and improper
management leading to unsustainable practices and resource scarcity. In many places,
particularly arid and semi-arid environments, we are said to be heading toward tipping points.
There seems to be no better example than the decimation of the Aral Sea. Yet, in our view, the
crisis and scarcity narrative closes off lines of inquiry that may assist us in moving forward
toward real, lasting and sustainable solutions.
In this article, we have challenged the utility of current conceptualisations of freshwater
availability and water scarcity. To do so, we disaggregate water into its blue, green and virtual
components, so helping us see water more holistically. We expanded the definition of green
water to include biophysical and socio-ecological pathways of productivity, recognizing that
most limitations to food security stem from human dimensions of resource use as opposed to
strictly biophysical limits. To demonstrate the utility of these innovations, we presented the case
Page 23 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
20
of Uzbekistan where it was shown that (i) there is plenty of water but that it is misused largely
due to a ‘blue water bias’; (ii) scarcity is largely social in the sense that malnutrition and poverty
affect approximately one-fifth of the Uzbek population despite massive agricultural output; and
(iii) advances toward more sustainable water use and food security could be made through shifts
away from cotton production, and the importation of virtual water in the form of wheat.
Moreover, we suggest that (iv) there will surely be major socio-ecological benefits from
improved water use efficiency, in particular for those downstream nearer to the mouth of the
Amu Darya and Syr Darya rivers. However, (v) the real challenge is not the biophysical limits
imposed by the semi-arid environment but the socio-political and socio-economic limits imposed
by adherence to nearly a century of wrong-headed agricultural policy and practice which, today,
serves to reinforce a situation of poor governance. We recognize the deeply political nature of
water and land use around the world, but we argue that advances in both policy and practice
require more critical thinking not only about what drives policy but about the concepts and ideas
that often reinforce practice.
References
Allan, J.A., 1998. Virtual water: a strategic resource. Global solutions to regional deficits.
Groundwater, 36(4), 545-546.
Allan, J.A., 2002. Hydro-peace in the Middle East: Why no water wars? A case study of the
Jordan River Basin. SAIS Review 22(2): 255-272.
Allan, J.A., 2003. IWRM/IWRAM: a new sanctioned discourse? Occasional paper 50. SOAS
Water Issues Study Group. London: School of Oriental and African Studies/King’s
College London (April).
Arezki, R., K. Deininger, H. Selod, 2011. What Drives the Global “Land Rush”? IMF Working
Paper WP/11/251 (November).
Brown, A. and M.D. Matlock, (2011). A Review of Water Scarcity Indices and Methodologies.
The Sustainability Consortium White Paper 106: University of Arkansas (April).
Chapagain, A.K., Hoekstra, A.Y., Savenije, H.H.G., & Gautam, R. (2006). The water footprint
Page 24 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
21
of cotton consumption: An assessment of the impact of worldwide consumption of cotton
products on the wider water resources in the cotton producing countries. Ecological
Economics (60), p. 186- 203.
Conca, K. (2006). Governing Water. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Economist, The, (2013). In the Land of Cotton: forced labour in Uzbekistan, (October 16).
Available at: http://www.economist.com/blogs/banyan/2013/10/forced-labour-
uzbekistan
Falkenmark, M. (2001). The Greatest Water Problem: The Inability to Link Environmental
Security, Water Security and Food Security. International Journal of Water
Resources Development, 17(4), 539-554.
Falkenmark, M. (1986). Fresh water – Time for a modified approach. Ambio 15(4): 192-200.
Falkenmark, M., & Rockstrom, J. (2004). Balancing water for humans and nature: the new
approach in ecohydrology. London; Sterling.
Gleick, P., 1998. The World’s Water, 1998-1999. The Biennial Report on Freshwater Resources.
Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
Ibragimov, N., S.R. Evett, Y. Esanbekov, B.S. Kamilov, L. Mirzaev, J.P.A. Lamers, 2007. Water
Use efficiency of irrigated cotton in Uzbekistan under drip and furrow irrigation. Agricultural
Water Management 90(1-2) May: 112-120.
Konar, M., Dalin, C., Suweis, S., Hanasaki, N., Rinaldo, A., Rodrigues-Iturbe, I. (2011). Water
for food: The global virtual water trade network. Water Resources Research (47), p. 1-17.
Lautze, J., and M.A. Hanjra, ‘Water Scarcity’. In: J. Lautze, ed., 2014. Key Concepts in Water
Resource Management: A Review and Critical Evaluation. Routledge & Earthscan: London &
New York, pp. 7-24.
Mohan Reddy, J., Jumaboev, K., Mayyakubor, B., & Eshmuratov, D. (2013). Evaluation of
furrow irrigation practices in Fergana Valley of Uzbekistan. Agricultural Water
Management (117), p. 133-144.
Mwadalu, R., & Mwangi, M. (2013). The Potential Role of Sorghum in Enhancing Food
Security in Semi-arid Eastern Kenya: A Review. Journal of Applied Biosciences,
71(1), 5786-5799.
Palaniappan, M. and P. Gleick, (2009). Peak Water. In: P. Gleick, ed., The World’s Water,
2008-2009. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, pp. 1-16.
Porkka, M. (2011). The role of virtual water trade in physical water scarcity: case Central Asia. Master’s Thesis, Aalto University, School of Engineering.Postel, S. (1998). Water for Food Production: Will there be enough in 2025? Bioscience 48(8): 629-37.
Page 25 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960
For Peer Review O
nly
22
Rockstrom, J. et al. (2014). Water Resilience for Human Prosperity. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Rockstrom, J., Karlberg, L., Wani, S., Barron, J., Habitu, N., Oweise, T., Bruggeman, A.,
Farahani, J., & Qiang, Z. (2010). Managing water in rainfed agriculture—The need for a
paradigm shift. Agricultural Water Management 97, p. 543–550.
Rockstrom, J. , et al., (2009). Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for
Humanity. Ecology and Society 14(2): article 32.
Rockstrom, J. (2000). Water resources management in smallholder farms in eastern and southern
Africa: An overview. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Part B: Hydrology, Oceans and
Atmosphere, 25(3), 275-283. Rulli, M.C., A. Saviori, P. D’Odorico, 2013. Global land
and water grabbing. PNAS, 110:3, pp. 892-897.
Spoor, M., 1998.The Aral Sea Basin Crisis: Transition and Environment in Former Soviet
Central Asia. Development and Change 29(3): 409-35.
UNDP (2014). Human Development Report. New York: Oxford University Press.
UNDP, (2010). Food Security in Uzbekistan. Tashkent: UNDP.
UNESCO and UN Water, 2003. Water for People, Water for Life (WWDR I).
http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/environment/water/wwap/wwdr/wwdr1-2003/
UNESCO and UN Water, 2006. Water, a Shared Responsibility (WWDR II).
http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-
sciences/environment/water/wwap/wwdr/wwdr2-2006/
UNESCO and UN Water, 2009. Water in a Changing World (WWDR III).
http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/environment/water/wwap/wwdr/wwdr3-
2009/
UNESCO and UN Water, 2012. Managing Water under Uncertainty and Risk (WWDR IV).
http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/environment/water/wwap/wwdr/wwdr4-
2012/
World Economic Forum (WEF), 2011. Water Security: The water-food-energy-climate nexus.
Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
World Water Development Reports, Volumes I – IV.
Page 26 of 26
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjds
Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du développement
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960