Exploring alternative futures of the World Water System. a .... Agriculture.… · East and North...
Transcript of Exploring alternative futures of the World Water System. a .... Agriculture.… · East and North...
Exploring alternative futures of the World Water System.
Building a second generation of World Water Scenarios
Driving force: Agriculture
Hayato Kobayashi
2010
Prepared for the United Nations World Water Assessment Programme
UN WWAP
1
Table of Contents
1. Brief current assessment/conditions of the driver and how it affects water resources and their
use 2
1‐1 Rainfed agriculture...................................................................................................................3
1‐2 Irrigation ..................................................................................................................................4
1‐3 Water productivity ...................................................................................................................6
1‐4 Fertilizer use and its impact on water......................................................................................7
1‐5 Subsidies...................................................................................................................................8
1‐6 Waste water and urban agriculture ........................................................................................8
1‐7 Crops damage, loss and waste in production and logistics .....................................................9
1‐8 Precision farming ...................................................................................................................10
1‐9 Aquaculture............................................................................................................................11
1‐10 Deforestation .........................................................................................................................12
1‐11 Food security ..........................................................................................................................13
1‐12 International trade.................................................................................................................14
1‐13 Increase in trade‐offs between agriculture, key industrial activities, and large and growing
urban centres....................................................................................................................................14
2. List the possible developments that may have a major influence on the driver to 2050.15
2‐1 Climate Change ......................................................................................................................15
2‐2 Biofuels...................................................................................................................................17
2‐3 Livestock and potential of in‐vitro meat ................................................................................17
2‐4 Vertical farming in urban cities..............................................................................................18
2‐5 Organic farming .....................................................................................................................19
2‐6 Biotechnology.........................................................................................................................20
2‐7 Engineering photosynthesis process ......................................................................................21
2‐8 Seawater/ Saltwater agriculture ...........................................................................................22
2‐9 Brief discussion on wildcards .................................................................................................23
3. Matrix of Possible Developments .....................................................................................24
3‐1 Note on causal links with other drivers .................................................................................29
References ................................................................................................................................30
2
1. Brief current assessment/conditions of the driver and how it affects water resources and
their use
Improvements in agriculture over the last century have led to substantial improvements in global
food security through higher and more stable food production. Agriculture has become a main
contributor to global environmental change, particularly changes in the global hydrological cycle.
Through changes in land use, land cover and irrigation, agriculture has substantially modified the
global hydrological cycle in terms of both water quality and water quantity. Extensive use of
fertilizer also led to severe pollution, causing health and environmental hazard. Today, the
production of food and other agricultural products takes some 70 percent1 of the freshwater
withdrawals from rivers and ground water. Population growth and increasing per capita
consumption suggest that demand for water will keep increasing to produce more food including
water‐intensive products such as meat. At the same time, competition for water from other sectors
including water for serving urban population and maintaining environmental flows intensifies,
making water increasingly scarce resource.
Figure 1: Aggregated global gap between existing accessible, reliable supply and 2030 water
withdrawals, assuming no efficiency gains
Source: 2030 Water Resource Group (2009)
A study by 2030 Water Resource Group (2009) suggests that in a business as usual scenario, water
withdrawals for agriculture will increase from 3,100 billion m3 today to 4,500 billion m3 in 2030,
assuming no productivity gains during the period (Figure 1). The total demand including
non‐agricultural uses in 2030 is 40 percent greater than the supply of existing, accessible reliable
1 some estimates are as high as 85 percent (Hanasaki et al., 2008)
3
and sustainable water supply2. The study also suggests that increases in water productivity and
supply can address only fill 40 percent of the gap3. In other words, 60 percent of the projected gap
(1680 billion m3) will have to be addressed by non‐business as usual solutions, which include, for
example, using saltwater for agriculture (and biofuels), replacing livestock with in‐vitro meat, and a
drastic change in dietary pattern.
1-1 Rainfed agriculture
Rainfed farming covers roughly 80 percent of the agricultural land worldwide (Rockström et al.
2007). Although rainfed agriculture is associated with generally low yield and high on‐farm water
losses, rainfed croplands meet about 60 percent of the food and nutritional needs of the World’s
population (ibid: 315) and is the backbone of the marginal or subsistence farmers4. The relatively
low productivity of rainfed agriculture and the large gaps between actual and attainable yields in
many parts of the world suggest a large untapped potential for production increase (Figure 1). In
order to unlock the potential in rainfed agriculture, however, rainfall‐related risks need to be
reduced (Rockström et al. 2007: 316).
Figure 1: Yield gaps from major grains in rainfed agriculture for selected countries
Source: Rockström et al. (2010)
There is still a large surface area available for further expansion of agricultural croplands, especially
in Latin America and Africa (see Table 1). However, the productivity of a large proportion of these
lands is limited due to poor soil fertility, soil depth, and access to water. Rainfed agriculture is
generally known to be far better sustainable than irrigated agriculture which is, often, associated
with water logging and soil salinisation, but uncontrolled expansion of rainfed farming and land
conversions from forests, rangelands, protected areas will be environmentally costly and 2 Climate change could negatively affect the supply of existing water, especially in Africa. 3 Increase in water productivity is based on the historical improvements; Increase in supply is based on total increased capture of raw water through infrastructure buildout, excluding unsustainable extraction. 4 According to FAO, some 93% of farmed land is rainfed in Sub-Saharan Africa, 87% in Latin America, 67% in the Near East and North Africa, 65% in East Asia, and 58 percent in South Asia (FAO, 2002)
4
ecologically unacceptable (Richards, 1990). Increasing yield through enhanced productivity and
intensification of rainfed croplands should thus be a priority.
Table 1: Comparison of actual and potential available arable land for rainfed agriculture5
Net potential
arable land*
(1000 ha)
Actual arable
land in 1994
(1000 ha)
% of potential
arable land
actually in use
Sub‐Sahara Africa 1,050,083 157,608 15
North Africa and Near East 44,815 71,580* 160
North Asia, east Urals 275,902 175,540 64
Asia and the Pacific 742,672 477,706 64
South and Central America 979,946 143,352 15
North America 431,488 233,276 54
Europe 323,903 204,322 63
World 3,848,809 1,463,384 38 * North Africa and the Near East shows actual cultivation in excess of potential, because irrigated
cultivation is not included the potential arable land. Source: FAO (2003b), World Soil Resources Report
The key challenge is to reduce water‐related risks posed by high rainfall variability rather than
coping with an absolute lack of water. There is generally enough rainfall to double and often even
quadruple yields in rainfed farming systems, even in water‐constrained regions (Rockström et al.
2007). But it is available at the wrong time, causing dry spells and rendering much of it being lost. To
maximise the potential of rainfed agriculture, investments in infrastructure for water transfer and
storage will be critical. Nevertheless, relying on rainfed agriculture as a main source of food carries
risks. While measures to improve rainfed agriculture such as better water harvesting techniques
help bridge short dry spells, longer dry spells can lead to total crop failure (de Fraiture et al. 2010:
507). With climate change leading to greater uncertainties in rainfed agriculture and reduced glacial
runoff, investment in water storage will be increasingly critical. [See 2‐1: Climate Change]
1-2 Irrigation
Irrigation has ensured an adequate global food supply and raised millions out of poverty, especially
in Asia in the last decades. In addition to its direct benefit of increased productivity, irrigation offers
5 Estimates of the actual arable land vary greatly across different studies( ranging from 1.11 billion ha to 3.82 billion ha for the year 2000 (which include irrigated area). Global digital maps tend to overestimate agricultural areas as a result of the full pixel based area calculations. (A pixel when classified as agriculture is automatically taken to have 100% croplands in digital global maps although in reality, only a certain percentage of a pixel is cultivated and that percentage can vary significantly. In this table, Net potential arable land is calculated by subtracting land used for non-agricultural purposes (protected land for nature, etc. and land for human settlement) from gross potential arable land.
5
a number secondary benefit such as increased productivity of rural labour and promotion of local
agro‐enterprises. The overall multiplier effect of irrigation on the economy has been estimated at
2.5–4 (Faurès et al., 2007: 360) with the largest positive impacts on poverty and livelihoods.
Bhattarai and Narayanamoorthy (2003) noted that irrigation and farmer’s education level are the
two main factors in improving agricultural productivity and alleviating rural poverty in India.
Irrigation is particularly crucial in sustaining agriculture across the “dry belt” that extends from the
Middle East through Northern China to Central America and parts of the United States. China and
India mostly depend on irrigation, often double cropping, to feed their 2.6 billion populations
(Thenkabail et al., 2008). The FAO (2003a) predicts a slower average increase of 0.6 percent a year
between 1997/99 and 2030 in developing countries, compared with 1.6 percent a year from 1960 to
1990, but irrigation will remain critical in supplying cheap, high‐quality food. Its share of world food
production is projected to rise to more than 45 percent by 2030, from 40 percent today as yields
continue to increase and cropping patterns shift to higher value crops (ibid). This means 12–17
percent more water withdrawn for irrigation with potentially significant negative impacts on the
water resources. In OECD countries, water use for agriculture grew 2 percent over the period
1990/92 to 2001/03 mainly driven by a 8 percent expansion in the total irrigated area6 (OECD, 2008:
28).
Many of irrigation’s negative environmental effects arise from withdrawal, storage, and diversion
from natural aquatic ecosystems and the resultant changes to the natural pattern and timing of
hydrological flows (Falkenmark et al., 2007). Rivers have in many instances become disconnected
from their floodplains and from downstream estuaries and wetlands—with, in some instances, total
and irreversible wetland loss. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment warned that wetland water
quality has deteriorated especially in areas under high intensity irrigation (MEA 2005). The water
transfer and storage induced by irrigation also led to the introduction and proliferation of invasive
species, such as aquatic weeds, in both water management systems and natural wetlands.
The extent to which irrigation induces water‐logging and salinisation is estimated at 10 percent of
the total irrigated area worldwide (Faurès et al., 2007). The problem is more severe in large river
basins in arid regions with salinity buildups in drainage water and the consequent salinisation of the
land and rivers (Smedema and Shiati 2002). Salinisation causes the loss of natural vegetation,
reduces crop yields, and leaves drinking water unfit for human and animal consumption. Adapting
farming systems through the use of salt‐tolerant varieties may provide short‐term respite for
producers but the impact of salinisation on the ecosystem services will pose a longer‐term problem.
[See 2‐8: Seawater/ saltwater agriculture]
6 On the other hand, the average water application rate per hectare irrigated declined by 9% in the same period.
6
The underperformance of large‐scale irrigation reduced donor interest in irrigation in recent years
(Merrey, 1997). Concerns over negative social and environmental impacts, particularly the
dislocation of residents in affected communities and the calls for increased in‐stream flows for
environmental purposes have received heavy publicity and discouraged lenders from investing in
irrigation. For irrigation to continue to serve its critical role in supplying food for the world billions, it
will need to adapt to the new requirements. In fact, irrigation can also create or enhance wetland
ecosystems, generating habitats to support biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services. This is
particularly so where irrigation‐based agroecosystems have developed over centuries and function
as wetlands (Falkenmark et al., 2007).
1-3 Water productivity
Water productivity is the ratio of the net benefits from crop, forestry, fishery, livestock and mixed
agricultural systems to the amount of water used to produce those benefits (Molden et al. 2010).
Higher water productivity reduces the need for additional land and water resources and thus critical
in the face of growing water scarcity. With no gain in water productivity, Molden et al. (2007: 282)
estimates that evapotranspiration could double in the next 50 years with an increase in food
demand, but it could be held to 20‐30 percent increase with adequate investments and practices
aimed at improving water productivity.
There is substantial variability in water productivity for a given agricultural product including
livestock because of differences in harvest index (the ratio of marketable grain yield to total crop
biomass), climate conditions, cultivars, water stress, pest and diseases, nutritional and soil status,
and other management and agronomic practices. The China Agricultural University recently reports
that China produces 1–1.5 kilograms of wheat and corn per cubic metre of water, compared with
Ethiopia's 0.1–0.2 kilograms, India's 0.2–0.7 and Kazakhstan's 0.2–0.37. There appears to be
considerable scope for raising the amount of yield. The harvest index for wheat and maize, for
example, rose from about 0.35 before the 1960s to 0.5 in the 1980s (Sayre et al., 1997). The rate of
increase in the harvest index have slowed down and some argue that much of the potential for
increasing the harvest index for common grains such as wheat, maize and rice was met during the
green revolution (for example, Richards et al., 1993). Others, however, see some scope, especially in
crops that have not received so much intensive research in the past, such as sorghum and millet
(Bindraban, 1997; Bennett, 2003). Improvement in plant genetics may also offer a breakthrough in
improving water productivity. [See 2‐6: Biotechnology]
7 China's clever water use boosts food yields. (January 29, 2010). http://www.scidev.net/en/news/china-s-clever-water-use-boosts-food-yields.html
7
1-4 Fertilizer use and its impact on water
Fertilisers and pesticides have played an important role in enhancing agricultural productivity. China
is now the biggest user of fertilisers and pesticides and its use of fertilizer accounted for about 35
percent of total global consumption8. The use of fertilizer helped China to feed 22 percent of the
global population with only 7 percent of the world's land, but intensive and improper use has had a
grave impact on the environment. Agriculture is now China’s biggest source of pollution. According
to the recent census (Qiu, 2010), agriculture is responsible for 43.7 percent of the nation's chemical
oxygen demand (the main measure of organic compounds in water), 67 percent of phosphorus and
57 percent of nitrogen discharges in China9. In the UK, the cost of water pollution from agriculture is
estimated to be around €345 million in 2003/4 (OECD, 2008). Nutrient loading from fertilizers
(nitrogen and phosphorus) applied to irrigated and rainfed areas is one of the most important
drivers of ecosystem change, resulting in eutrophication, hypoxia, and algal blooms.
The present use of fertilizers in Sub‐Saharan Africa is only about 9 kg/ha of arable land, compared to
a world average of 101 kg/ha (Camara and Heinemaan, 2006). Increasing the use of mineral
fertilizers could significantly raise crop production in Africa, and the Africa Fertilizer Summit 200610
concluded that the use of fertilizers should be increased to a level of at least 50 kg/ha by 2015.
However, a more recent study suggests that organic farming could lead to greater yield as well as
better environmental outcome than fertilizer‐based farming practice (UNEP/UNCTAD, 2008).
Increasing concerns of and interests in food safety and organic products could help accelerate
uptake of organic farming [See 2‐5: Organic farming]. The fact that nitrogen fertilizer production is
tied directly to natural gas is another reason that encourages organic farming in developing
countries. Higher energy price means higher fertilizer prices, and therefore, agriculture dependent
on fertilizer is vulnerable to fluctuation in energy prices.
Nitrogen dependence also raises security concerns similar to oil. The United States, for example,
consumes about 12 percent of the global synthetic nitrogen fertilizer, but as natural gas prices began
rising, the domestic nitrogen fertilizer production went down and most of the fertilizer are imported.
Using gasified coal as the energy source for nitrogen fertilizer is increasingly economically feasible,
especially at high natural gas prices (Huang, 2009), but the nitrogen runoff comes from the synthetic
fertilizer applied to farm fields, as well as the manure generated from the intensive livestock farming
severely damaged river and marine ecosystem, leading to algal blooms, fish kills, habitat
degradation, and bacteria proliferations that endanger human health11. Carefully controlling timing
8 In 2007 alone, China used more than 50 million tonnes of chemical fertilisers, yet crops can only absorb about 25 percent to 35 percent of this, according to Greenpeace China. http://www.greenpeace.org/china/en/campaigns/food-and-agriculture 9 Negative environmental impacts go far beyond waterways. Approximately 100 million tons of coal are used annually to produce nitrogen fertilizer in China, and the amount is increasing by about 10 percent each year. 10 Africa Fertilizer Summit official website: http://www.ifad.org/events/fertilizer/index.htm 11 In addition, fertilizer runoff contributes to the expansion of a “dead zone” in the Ocean. In the US alone,
8
of the application of fertiliser will help mitigate the negative impacts without reducing the yields.
Precision farming will help optimize the use of fertilizer as it allows farmers to vary the rate of
fertilizer across the field according to the need. Also, seeds engineered for nitrogen‐use efficiency
could significantly reduce the fertilizer needs, contributing to lower food price and better
environmental outcome. [See 2‐6‐1: GM food]
1-5 Subsidies
Agricultural subsidies in developed and developing countries alike, can take many forms, but a
common feature is an economic transfer, often in direct cash form, from governments to farmers.
These transfers may aim to reduce the costs of production in the form of an input subsidy, for
example, for inorganic fertilizers or pesticides, or to make up the difference between the actual
market price for farm output and a higher guaranteed price. Subsidies shield sectors or products
from international competition, but by artificially reducing the costs of production, agricultural
subsidies encourage wasteful use of resources including water and also encourage over‐production.
Subsidies to irrigation water, in the form of less than full‐cost recovery pricing, encourage overuse of
scarce water, and hence, accelerating water logging and soil salinisation.
Similarly, energy subsidies in many developing countries help farmers to pump groundwater at very
low cost. Because energy subsidies hide the true cost of water, farmers face little direct incentive to
conserve water, and hence, leading to its overuse. Subsidies are often linked to a low uptake of
more efficient technologies and poor maintenance of irrigation infrastructure. Such subsidies often
pose significant fiscal burden to Governments and removing or reducing them would lead to
decreases in water use as well as economic cost saving. However, such decisions must be weighed
against the reduced output in crops and the corresponding reduction in economic activity. For
example, Bhatia (2007) estimates that if some regions of India were to remove energy subsidies, the
demand for water would decrease by almost a third, but it would also reduce the total crop
production by 15 percent and thus will have significant impacts on farmer’s income and India’s food
security.
1-6 Waste water and urban agriculture
Using waste water for agriculture can also reduce freshwater requirement for agriculture. Farmers in
urban and peri‐urban areas of many developing countries actually have no other choice than using
wastewater (Qadir et al., 2010)12. In some cases, they even use undiluted wastewater as it provide
nutrients or is more reliable and/or cheaper than other water sources, but such a practice Environmental Working Group (2006) found that more than 7.8 million pounds of fertilizer nitrate flow down the Mississippi River to the Gulf of Mexico every day when spring runoff pollution is at its highest. http://www.ewg.org/reports/deadzone 12 Worldwide, more than 800 million farmers are engaged in urban agriculture.
9
significantly harm human health and the environment. In particular, in countries where industrial
effluent enters domestic waste water and natural streams, chemical contamination can be of great
concern. The transfer of metallic iron from waste water to cow’s milk has been reported in the Musi
River in India (Minhas and Samra, 2004).
Proximity to urban markets is an important advantage in hot climates of many developing countries
where refrigerated transport and storage are limited. Urban agriculture will have an important role
in meeting urban populations’ growing demand for food, but for this to occur without significant
health and environmental consequences, improvement in wastewater management is critical.
Restricting productions of crops that are exposed to high contamination risk seems to help reduce
the health risks of waste water agriculture. In the Aleppo region of Syria, for example, less than 7
percent of the area under wastewater irrigation is cultivated with vegetables because government
officials uproot vegetables found to be growing there (Qadir et al., 2007: 440). [See 2‐4: Vertical
farming in urban cities]
1-7 Crops damage, loss and waste in production and logistics
Food losses in the field between planting and harvesting could be as high as 20‐40 percent of the
potential harvest in developing countries due to factors such as pests, pathogens and the lack of
adequate infrastructure. First of all, pre‐harvest production practices may seriously affect
post‐harvest returns in quality and quantity and result in the rejection or downgrading of products
at the time of sale (FAO, 1989). In addition to common pre‐harvest factors such as water supply, soil
fertility and cultivation practices, the US National Research Council (1978) suggests that introduction
of new plant varieties selected for high yields has resulted in greater post‐harvest losses.13 Also,
pre‐harvest sprouting (PHS), or precocious germination of grains, leads to a reduction in grain yield
and viability of seed, resulting into significant economic losses (Fang and Chu, 2008). Li et al. (2009)
have created an improved variety of wheat by discovering how to prevent this phenomenon which
is estimated to destroy about 20 percent of all wheat in China annually14.
Besides, significant losses and wastage occur in food processing, whole sale, retail and in
households and other parts of society (see Figure 2). Up to 50 percent of food produced in the US is
wasted, while a third of food purchased in the UK is never eaten. Lundqvist et al (2008: 24‐25)
estimate that food worth $48.3 billion is thrown away each year in the United States alone.
13 Traditional grain varieties, having survived storage for use in subsequent planting, might be well adapted to both the growing environment and post-harvest handling. Thus their characteristics may include lower moisture content in ripe grain which means they would dry more readily, and thicker seed coat would be harder for rodents and insects to penetrate. In contrast, new varieties are not as well adapted to the post-harvest conditions as traditional varieties. The US National Research Council (1978) said this issue should be a consideration both in selecting high-yielding varieties and in providing for their post-harvest treatment. 14 Engineered wheat thwarts pre-harvest sprouting (May 12, 2009). http://nature.berkeley.edu/blogs/news/2009/05/preharvest_sprouting.php
10
Figure 2: Estimates of the amount of food produced globally at field level and estimates of the
losses, conversions and wastage in the food chain
Source: Lundqvist et al., 2008
Reducing waste enhances food security as well as helps protect the environment. Some 30 million
tonnes of fish are currently discarded at sea every year. This could alone sustain more than a 50
percent increase in fish farming and aquaculture production, which is needed to maintain per capita
fish consumption at current levels by 2050 without increasing pressure on an already stressed
marine environment (UNEP 2009). By reducing the amount of food that is wasted will boost water
supply and land available for agriculture and other use. [See 2‐1: Climate Change]
1-8 Precision farming
Precision farming refers to the use of information technology to monitor crops and field conditions
and guide the application of seeds and agricultural chemicals. Using real‐time kinematic GPS, the
tractor can drive itself with an accuracy of 2cm – better than the most skilled human operator –
avoiding overlapping applications of seeds as well as saving fuel. Or, by using satellite data to
determine soil conditions and plant development, precision farming can lower the production cost
by fine‐tuning seeding, fertilizer, chemical and water use, and potentially increasing production and
lower costs. UK precision farming company SOYL15, for example, uses GPS technologies to obtain
detailed soil nutrient information, which in turn, help farmers to make better‐informed decisions in
terms of the amount of fertilisers and the timing to apply.. A recent study by the UK Agriculture and
Horticulture Development Board estimated that the net benefit over cost16 of investing in a
precision farming system on a typical arable farm was about £6 a hectare on a 300‐hectare farm,
15 SOYL Precision Farming, http://www.soyl.co.uk/index.htm 16 Precision farming equipment is not expensive compared with top-line agricultural machinery – adding somewhat $20,000, or 10%, to the cost of a fully equipped new tractor.
11
£10 a hectare on a 500‐hectare farm and £19 a hectare on a 750‐hectare farm (Knight, 2009).
A different approach of precision farming includes improving crop productivity through chemicals
that enable crops to make more efficient use of nutrients and reduce the stress on the plants and
pollution. Plant Impact17, another UK company in this field, uses nitrogen as an amine (a nitrogen
compound) so that waste and pollution through leaching into the soil will be reduced. In the US and
UK, precision farming is already used on up to half of large arable farms. Adoption of precision
farming in developing countries is still in infancy, but studies suggest the benefits both for farmers
and the environment.
1-9 Aquaculture
China dominates the market of aquaculture with 90 percent of fish food production coming from
aquaculture in 2006 (FAO, 2008: 17). Aquaculture accounted for 47 percent of the world’s fish food
supply (both animals and plants) in 2006, but the figure excluding China was 24 percent (see Figure
3). The maximum wild capture fisheries potential from the world’s oceans has probably been
reached (ibid, 7). In addition, the UNEP (2010a) warns that 30% of fish stocks have already been
collapsed (i.e. less than 10% of their former potential yield) and virtually all fisheries risk running out
of commercially viable by 205018. With an annual growth rate of 6.9 percent from 1970 to 200619,
aquaculture continues to be the fastest growing animal food‐producing sector, and its importance as
a means of sustaining global food security is likely to increase in the face of continued population
growth and the imminent collapse of the global fish stocks.
However, effluent from fish pens including antibiotics will pollute the surrounding waters, and
escaped fish can transmit diseases to wild stocks and disturb local marine and freshwater
ecosystems. Also, the use of wild fish such as Peruvian anchoveta to feed more marketable
carnivorous fish indicates that aquaculture could actually negatively affect the wild fish stocks20.
Improved technology and practices lower the environmental footprint of aquaculture, and in some
cases, it is reported that aquaculture could have positive impacts on the environment.
17 Plant Impact, http://www.plantimpact.net/ 18 The UNEP (2010b) also warned that overexploitation, pollution, and rising temperatures threaten 63% of the world’s assessed fisheries stocks. 19 During the same period, per capita supply from aquaculture increases from 0.7 kg to 7.8 kg (FAO, 2008). 20 According to WWF Swiss (2008), each pound of farmed salmon require up to 6 pounds of wild fish. Ozeane in Gefahr – Faktenblatt zum Thema Überfischung, http://assets.wwf.ch/downloads/2008_05_28_faktenblatt_fisch_d.pdf
12
Figure 3: Aquaculture production by region in 2006
Source: FAO (2008)
Any increase and/or decrease of the temperature of the habitats would have a significant impact on
the rate of growth and thus total production, reproduction, seasonality and even possibly
reproductive efficacy (FAO, 2009: 169). Therefore, greater temperature variations induced by
climate change will have an impact on spatial distribution of species specific aquaculture activities.
At the same time, aquaculture may provide adaptation possibilities for other sectors, for example,
where coastal agriculture becomes non‐viable due to sea level rise.
1-10 Deforestation
The worldwide pace of deforestation has slowed down for the first time on record (FAO, 2010a). On
a total forest area of four billion hectares, 13 million hectares of forests were converted to other
uses or lost through natural causes per year between 2000 and 2010, down from around 16 million
in the 1990‐2000 period21. However, the rate of deforestation is still very high in many countries and
the area of primary forest continues to decrease. The highest annual losses over 2000‐2010 period
tool place in South America, which lost four million hectares, and Africa, which lost 3.4 million
hectares. In these regions, conversion of forests to agricultural land and pastures is a major cause of
deforestation and land degradation22. In addition, tendencies to focus on a few types of cash crops
such as soybeans, coffee and cacao have several problems besides the loss of forest. First,
monoculture makes the crop highly vulnerable to disease and pests. Second, the planting of
monocultures can be economically risky with the price fluctuations so common in international
commodities markets. Additionally, a single cold spell or drought can devastate a tremendous part
21 The net loss of forest area (after reforestation is taken into account) was reduced to 5.2 million hectares per year between 2000 and 2010, down from 8.3 million hectares annually in the 1990s. 22 Once nutrients locked up in vegetation and plants (released by slash and burn technique) dry up, copious amounts of fertilizer are required to keep agriculture viable or the area is reverted to cattle pasture.
13
of the agricultural economy. Nevertheless, such practices appear to continue particularly in Latin
America. Soybeans have become one of the Brazil's most important crops in the Amazon, as well as
in the nearby cerrado grassland ecosystem. Since 1998, Brazil has added 30 million acres of
soybeans and it will likely soon supplant the United States as the world's leading exporter of
soybeans, at the expense of the forests and savannas of the Amazon basin.
Deforestation and forest degradation are major causes of greenhouse gas emissions23. Reducing
Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) is an effort to create a financial value
for the carbon stored in forests, creating greater incentives to reduce emissions from forested lands.
It is predicted that financial flows associated with REDD could reach up to US$30 billion a year. In
addition, maintaining forest ecosystems can provide a number of benefits beyond emission
reductions (REDD plus) which contribute to poverty reduction improvements in local livelihood
through improved ecosystem services.
1-11 Food security
FAO announced that the number of world hungry is projected to reach a historic high of 1,020
million people in 200924 and that 33 countries are currently in emergency situation requiring
external assistance25. By far the most important driver in water use during the coming decades will
be the increase and changes in global food demand due to population growth and changes in diet.
Population growth to 8.3 billion by 2030 will increase food and energy demand by 50 percent and
fresh water by 30 percent26. Feeding another 2.3 billion people by 2050 and at the same time limit
the environmental impact of the farm sector is a huge challenge27 and how this need will be met
will have huge implications on the future of water. The World Summit on Food Security in 2009
adopted a declaration to renew efforts to halve hunger by 2015 and improve international
coordination and governance for food security.28 The challenge is that it has to be done while
climate change and other environmental degradation undermine agricultural productivity and
potentially negate the progress that has been made to date. UNEP (2009) warns that 25 percent of
the world’s food production might be lost by 2050 due to environmental breakdown. [See 2‐1:
Climate Change] 23 The IPCC, using 1980s and 1990s-era forest surveys and satellite data, previously estimated emissions from deforestation and forest degradation at around 17% of total anthropogenic carbon dioxide. The new study, based on updated forest cover data puts the figure at 12%, although the authors, led by Guido van der Werf of Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam, note that the percentage is highly variable on a year-to-year basis. 24 http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/20568/icode/ 25 Of those 33, 21 are in Africa. FAO Crop Prospects and Food Situation No.1 (February 2010) 26 Statement of John Beddington, chair of UK Cabinet Office task force to address food security, at the Sustainable Development UK 09 conference. http://www.wessex.ac.uk/09-conferences/sustainable-development-2009.html 27 The experts’ views seem to be mixed. In a straw poll of the experts on whether the world will be able to feed its population in 40 years, 73 said yes, 49 said no and 15 abstained. Experts Worry as Population and Hunger Grow (October 21, 2009). http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/22/world/22food.html?_r=3 28 Declaration of the World Summit on Food Security (November 2009) http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/wsfs/Summit/Docs/Final_Declaration/WSFS09_Declaration.pdf
14
Several food‐importing countries including China, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, have
started buying or leasing land in developing countries, particularly in Sub‐saharan Africa to improve
their food security. Some 2.5 million hectares (about 20 percent of all EU farmland) in developing
countries have been subject to transactions or talks involving foreigners since 2004, in deals
estimated to worth $20 billion‐$30 billion (Braun and Meinzen‐Dick, 2009). Some of these countries
are recipients of food aid, and the so‐called ‘land grab’ is provoking a debate on ethical issues
relating to food and water security.
1-12 International trade
Productivity in terms of economic value per drop can be enhanced by switching to higher value
crops (but could undermine food security). In countries stretching over many climatic zones,
switching crop production from regions with lower water productivity to regions most suited for
agriculture could reduce the demand for water. Given a major geographical difference within the
country, for example, China may benefit by concentrating multi‐cropping in the water‐rich southern
region.
In addition, global gains in water productivity can be achieved by growing crops in places where
climate and management practices enable high water productivity and trading them to places with
lower water productivity. This is commonly referred to as virtual water trade. In 1995, global trade
from high water productivity areas to low water productivity areas resulted in an estimated 7
percent less evapotranspiration and 15 percent less depletion of irrigation water than would have
been required to grow the same amount of crops without trade (de Fraiture et al., 2004). Increasing
concerns of climate change and energy consumption during the transport may hamper the growth
of virtual water trade. Similarly, food exporting countries, particularly in developing countries, may
become more reluctant to export crops if domestic food security deteriorates29.
1-13 Increase in trade‐offs between agriculture, key industrial activities, and large and growing
urban centres
Lands available for food production may be swallowed up by urban sprawl, biofuels, cotton and land
degradation by 8‐20 per cent by 2050, and yields may become depressed by 5‐25 percent due to
pests, water scarcity and land degradation (UNEP, 2009). An increasing number of countries now
have targets to increase production and consumption of biofuels such as the EU target of sourcing
10 percent of its transport fuel from renewable sources30. However, ActionAid (2010) warns that if
29 For example, India and Indonesia blocked rice exports to guarantee domestic supplies remain affordable during the food crisis in 2008. 30 The EU's Renewable Energies Directive mandates a 10% share of renewable energies (including solar and wind) in
15
all global biofuels targets are met, food prices could rise by an additional 76 percent by 2020 and
force an extra 600 million people into hunger. Development of second generation biofuels that do
not compete with food production is key to avoid the zero‐sum competition for land and water
between food and biofuels. Similarly, using waste water or salt water could increase the amount of
water available for other uses. [see 2‐2: Biofuels and 2‐8: Seawater/ saltwater agriculture]
Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) is “the process of promoting the coordinated
development and management of water, land and related resources, in order to maximize the
resultant economic and social welfare in an equitable manner without compromising the
sustainability of vital ecosystems31.” IWRM has been advocated as a modern and holistic approach
that will help balance competing demands for water and ensure long‐term sustainability. Only 6
countries claim to have fully implemented national IWRM plans32, but interests are growing both in
developed and developing countries. In addition, transboundary application of IWRM could help
optimise the water use beyond national borders with significant environmental benefits. For
example, the German‐Vietnamese joint R&D project, “Integrated Water Resources Management
Vietnam” is developing a Planning and Decision Support System (DSS) on a regional scale (Mekong
Delta)33. The DSS includes methods for the aggregated evaluation of water demand and use, water
resources and contamination potential. These components are evaluated and aggregated into maps
and reports. Creating financial value to environmental services, such as biodiversity and the
maintenance and control of water flows, will also help improve the quality of water management in
agriculture34. Last year, EU farm ministers first debated the concept of making public goods
(including environmental public goods) the main focus of agricultural payments after 201335. Also, a
recent EC‐commission report (Cooper, Hart and Baldock, 2010) called for budget increases and
stricter compliance measures for the EU's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) which would help
farmers to deliver "green public goods and services."
2. List the possible developments that may have a major influence on the driver to 2050
2-1 Climate Change
Changes will cause yield and productivity decline for the most important crops. In addition to direct
impacts on water availability, higher temperatures increase the water requirements of crops while transport fuels by 2020. Unless ectric cars and second-generation biofuels produced from waste and non-food crops will be widely available by 2020, a large chunk of the requirements will need to be met by conventional biofuels. 31 Definition by Global Water Partnership, http://www.gwpforum.org 32 2008 Survey by UN Water. A further 10 countries claim to have plans in place and partially implemented. Status report on Integrated Water Resources Management and Water Efficiency Plans (2008) 33 Design and Implementation of IWRM in Vietnam Examples of Climate and Land Use Changes, http://www.glowa.org/de/konferenz_potsdam/dokumente/poster_elbe/rub_Stolpe.pdf 34 The ‘Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity’ (TEEB) study estimates the losses caused by the decimation of fauna and flora at up to five billion euros per year. 35 Ministers mull farm policies as 'public good' (June 3, 2009) http://www.euractiv.com/en/cap/ministers-mull-farm-policies-public-good/article-182787
16
encouraging weed and pest proliferation. Climate change will have varying effects across regions,
but South Asia will be particularly hard hit36. Climate change will result in price increases for
important agricultural crops. Also, higher feed prices will result in higher meat prices, reducing the
growth in meat consumption slightly and causing a more substantial fall in cereals consumption.
IFPRI (2009: 10) projects that calorie availability in 2050 under climate change will not only be lower
than in the no–climate‐change scenario, but it will actually decline relative to 2000 levels
throughout the developing world, and as a result, child malnutrition will increase by 20 percent
relative to a world with no climate change which eliminates much of the improvements that would
occur without climate change. The same study (ibid: 16) estimates that aggressive agricultural
productivity investments of US$7.1–7.3 billion are needed to raise calorie consumption enough to
offset the negative impacts of climate change on the health and well‐being of children.
Up to 25 per cent of the worlds food production may become lost due to 'environmental
breakdowns' by 2050 unless action is taken (UNEP, 2009). Speaking at the High Level Forum on
“How to Feed the World 205037”, FAO Director‐General Jacques Diouf noted the varying impacts of
climate change could lead to a 30 percent reduction in agricultural output in Africa and a 21 percent
reduction in Asia. Colin Chartres, Director General of the Consultative Group on International
Agricultural Research (CIGAR) warned that countries depending on snowmelt could expect water
levels to drop by up to 30 percent and US$270 billion investment in drinking and irrigation
infrastructure in Sub‐Saharan Africa and India will be needed38.
Given that rising sea levels due to climate change are/will increasingly inundate coastal acquifers
with seawater, seawater/saltwater agriculture should merit serious attention (See 2‐8
Seawatewr/saltwater agriculture). Studies suggest potential of seawater/saltwater agriculture as a
means of climate change mitigation and adaptation (for example, Glenn et al., 1992). An initial
experiment that utilizes seawater agriculture as a means of climate change mitigation is underway
in Eritrea on the horn of Africa (Sato et al , 1998)39. However, there are some indications that, for
North Africa, greatly increased vegetation cover could affect continent‐scale atmospheric motions.
Therefore, serious predictive computations and model studies should be undertaken previous to
any large irrigation efforts in the region to ensure that this form of “Terra Forming” will not cause
adverse unintended consequences.
36 Cline (2007) notes that there might be some initial overall benefit to warming for a decade or two because productivity may increase in a minority of mostly northern countries. The global impact of climate change on agriculture, however, will be negative by the second half of this century. 37 "How to Feed the World in 2050" High Level Experts Forum (12-13 November 2009) http://www.fao.org/wsfs/forum2050/wsfs-forum/en/ 38 Press Conference on Key Issues Relating to Climate Change, Sustainable Development (November 6 2009), http://www.un.org/News/briefings/docs/2009/091106_Climate_Change.doc.htm 39 The Manzanar Project (Sato et al, 1998) combines seawater aquaculture and direct seawater irrigation of Mangrove trees for timber and animal fodder.
17
2-2 Biofuels
An ethanol boom in Brazil would double the demand for water for agriculture in São Paulo state,
and increase the size of the state’s supply‐demand gap from 2.6 to 6.7 billion m3 (2030 World
Resources Group, 2009: 17). The sustainability of many first‐generation biofuels that are produced
primarily from food crops such as grains, sugar cane and vegetable oils has been increasingly
questioned. More efficient second‐generation biofuels could also become unsustainable if they
compete with food crops for available land. Therefore, promotion of second generation biofuels
based on residues/wastes or grown in saltwater appears to be most promising. Assuming that 25
percent of global forestry and agricultural residues are converted to either LC‐Ethanol,
BTL‐diesel or Bio‐SNG, the International Energy Agency estimates that second‐generation
biofuels can meet up to 14.8 percent of the projected transport fuel demand in 2030 (IEA, 2010: 10).
Exxon Mobil Corp. announced that it will invest $600 million in algae‐based biofuels. Collaborating
with a biotech company Synthetic Genomics Inc., Exxon is to research and develop next‐generation
biofuels produced from sunlight, water and waste CO2 by photosynthetic pond scum. Algae‐based
biofuels, according to Exxon, could yield more than 2,000 gallons of fuel per acre of production each
year, compared with 650 gallons for palm trees and 450 gallons for sugar canes40. Algal fuel does not
compete with food. Algae farm can go vertical and since algae can grow in salt water (as well as
freshwater), it could save land and freshwater for other uses.
2-3 Livestock and potential of in‐vitro meat
Global meat production is projected to more than double from 229 million tonnes in 1999/01 to 465
million tonnes in 2050 with the bulk of growth occuring in developing countries (FAO, 2006). Today,
grazing occupies 26 percent of the Earth’s ice‐free terrestrial surface, while feed crop production
requires about a third of all arable land. In total, livestock production accounts for 70 percent of all
agricultural land and 30 percent of the land surface of the planet with significant environmental
impacts. In terms of water consumption, the livestock sector accounts for over 8 percent of global
human water use, mostly for the irrigation of feed crops. Satisfying the growing demand with
conventional livestock production is clearly unsustainable.
One potential solution is to exploit modern biotechnology and process technology to produce meat
from normal muscle progenitor cells in bioreactors at an industrial scale. This so‐called in‐vitro meat
could free up huge areas of land for other purposes while at the same time offers economic, ethical,
environmental and health benefits. Water pollution due to livestock, ranging from animal wastes to
40 Exxon to Invest Millions to Make Fuel From Algae (July 13, 2009), http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/business/energy-environment/14fuel.html. Another biotech company, Joule Biotech, is developing even more efficient engineered bugs that that can produce fuels 15,000 gallons of diesel per acre annually, at costs as low as $30 per barrel equivalent. Its pilot plant operations will begin with ethanol in 2010, with commercial development to start in 2012. http://www.jouleunlimited.com/about/overview
18
hormones and chemicals to fertilizers for feed crops, contributes to eutrophication, dead zones in
coastal areas, degradation of coral reefs. Livestock production is a major cause of deforestation. The
world’s 1.5 billion livestock are responsible for about 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions41.
Since in‐vitro meat will be 100 percent muscle, it could also be an efficient solution to address
starvation and kwashiorkor. It also reduces the risk of animal induced diseases. A number of
vegetarian groups support the development of in‐vitro meat42. People for the Ethical Treatment of
Animals (PETA), an animal rights group, offer USD1 million prize to anyone who can market a
competitive in‐vitro meat by 201243. Jason Matheny of New Harvest said in‐vitro meat might be on
the market within the next few years, while Mark Post, a biologist at Maastricht University involved
in the In‐vitro Meat Consortium, said it could take about a decade.
2-4 Vertical farming in urban cities
With the growing concerns of food miles (the distance food has to travel from source to consumer),
urban agriculture could flourish in both developed and developing countries44 (while negatively
affect the global food trade). Also, possibility of suspension or rationing of food export due to
domestic food shortage would provide strong incentive for food importing countries to expand local
food production45. In many urban cities, food and biofuels production can go vertical and dirt‐free
by building multi‐level greenhouses that utilizes hydroponics. Because there is no soil involved in
hydroponics, there are very few potential contaminants to the crops. Pest problems (and the need
of pesticide) are reduced and so are all soil borne diseases. Plants are therefore healthier and,
because their roots are visible and their environment is easy to control, they can always be studied
so that these growing methods can be improved. Hydroponic techniques have already been used to
produce food in some of the most inhospitable parts of the planet46, but vertical hydroponic farms
would not only revolutionize and improve urban life but revitalize land that was damaged by
traditional farming. For every indoor acre farmed, some 10 to 20 outdoor acres of farmland could be
allowed to return to their original ecological state or to be used for other purposes47. Vertical farms
would bring a great concentration of plants into cities. As many cities try to go green, vertical
41 Various studies suggest livestock contributes to between 15% and 24% of total current greenhouse gas emissions, although Goodland and Anhang (2009) reports that the figure is as high as 51%. 42 Groups include VEBU (Vegetarian Federation of Germany), EVA (Ethical Vegetarian Alternative of Belgium, and the Duch Vegetarian Society). 43 A study by the In Vitro Meat Consortium (2008) noted that it should be possible to produce in vitro meat in large quantities for less than Euro 3300-3500 per tonne. This compares with the unsubsidised production of chicken meat at around Euro 1800 per tonne. 44 Local production is not always more energy-efficient compared with imported food. A 2005 report by UK DEFRA indicated that tomatoes imported from Spain by lorry than is more energy efficient than tomatoes grown in a heated greenhouse in the UK. Lettuce grown out of season in the UK also compared unfavourably with Spanish salad when total carbon emissions were measured. 45 Many countries falling in this category have few options but explore production in urban areas. 46 Hydroponic fed the US military personnel stationed in Wake Island in the Pacific during the Second World War. More recently, it feeds hundreds of scientists and researchers at the McMurdo station in Antarctica. 47 A Farm on Every Floor (August 23, 2009), http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/24/opinion/24Despommier.html?_r=2
19
farming may become “fashionable.” In 2008, Las Vegas announced it will build the world's first
vertical farm with the capacity to feed 72,000 people for a year48. A combination of vertical farms
and in‐vitro meat factories may help feed increasing urban population while at the same time
lowering energy requirement for transporting foods.
2-5 Organic farming
Organic farming refers to an attempt to create a viable agricultural system that relies to the greatest
extent on i) local or on‐farm renewable resources and ii) the management of ecological and
biological processes. As of 2008, 35 million ha of agricultural land are managed organically by more
than 1.4 million producers, including smallholders and the area is increasingly rapidly (IFOAM 2010).
The organic land area increased by almost 1.5 million ha compared to the data from 2006. About
one third of the world’s organically managed land – almost 12 million hectares ‐ is located in
developing countries, and almost half of the world’s organic producers are in Africa. Adopting
organic practices help protecting soils and enhance their fertility, improving long‐term viability of
agriculture. And studies suggest that the organic and low‐input systems have yields comparable to
the conventional systems 49. Also, new plant varieties and better knowledge on how to manipulate
biological processes within agricultural systems help improve productivity of organic farming (FAO,
1998).
While organic food accounts for only 1–2 percent of total food sales worldwide, the organic food
market is growing rapidly in both developed and developing nations. The world organic market has
been growing by 20 percent a year since the early 1990s. The global sales jumped from US$23
billion in 2002 to $52 billion in 200850. Removing subsidies on inputs such as fertilizers and
pesticides will increase financial incentive of adopting organic practices. Providing financial incentive
to farming practices that preserves water flows and other ecosystem services through, for example,
Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) could boost more environmentally friendly farming practice51.
Strong domestic demand for organic food is likely to support the growth of organic farming in OECD
countries. In developing countries, reducing the costs of becoming a certified organic producer
(which is essential for exports of organic products to developed countries) will help the uptake of
organic practice among small‐scale farmers.
48 The project is estimated to cost $200. Once operational, the farm could potentially make up to $25 million a year, plus $15 million in potential tourist revenue. Operating costs are projected to be $5 million. 49 A UNCTAD/UNEP study (2008) found that organic practices outperformed traditional methods and chemical-intensive conventional farming and also found strong environmental benefits such as improved soil fertility, better retention of water and resistance to drought. Werf (1993) found that the median yields over two years were higher on organic farms for 4 out of the 5 crops. Some of these were considerably higher (such as 54% for paddy rice), while the median for finger millet, the only crop with lower yields, was 7% lower on organic farms. 50 Datamonitor (2009). Food: Global Industry Guide, http://www.researchandmarkets.com/research/18f9c2/food_global_indus 51 For example, see Proposals for the future CAP (January 2010) by Birdlife International and European Landowners’ Organisation. http://www.cla.org.uk/policy_docs/ELO_Birdlife_Joint_Paper.pdf
20
2-6 Biotechnology
2-6-1 GM food
Since Monsanto launched the world's first Genetically Modified (GM) crop in 1996, more than 25
countries have taken to growing biotech crops, including soybean, maize, tomato, squash, papaya,
and sugar beet. According to the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri‐biotech
Applications (ISAAA), an industry lobby group, 14 million farmers grew 134 million hectares of
'transgenic' produce in 2009, a 7 percent rise from 2008. However, the use of GM ingredients in
food products remains highly controversial. Consumer attitudes toward GM food products are
largely negative in many of the developed countries in the European Union as well as Japan.
Consumer skepticism in these countries is usually attributed to the unknown environmental and
health consequences, such as tendencies to provoke allergic reaction, gene transfer and outcrossing.
Studies in Europe and Japan provide strong evidence that consumers are willing to take on the
unknown risks of consuming genetically modified foods only if these products are offered at
significant cost savings over non‐GM foods. On the other hand, studies in the United States find
consumers to be more accepting of genetically modified foods52.
While the US accounts for nearly half of GM acreage, China, India, Argentina and Brazil are catching
up. Brazil is now the second biggest GM farmer, with a focus on soy and corn. Of the 14 million or so
farmers using the technology, some 90 percent live in developing countries. In November 2009,
China approved a locally‐developed strain of GM rice, paving the way for large‐scale production in 2
to 3 years53. Transgenic rice, developed by Huazhong Agricultural University, would help reduce the
use of pesticide by 80 percent while raising yields by as much as 8 percent, said Huang Jikun, the
chief scientist with the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Given that China is the world's largest rice
producer and consumer, it could have significant impacts on the circulation of GM food in the global
market54. Advocates of GM crops argue that the technology will help feed the world in the face of
looming water and food shortage55 while critics argue that the benefits are overemphasised and
52 One study conducted in Norway concluded that consumers in Norway were willing, on average, to purchase bread made with GM wheat only if it were offered at a 49.5% discount over non-GM bread (Grimsrud et al.,2003). Another study of consumer attitudes toward genetically modified foods in the United Kingdom, concluded that male shoppers were willing to pay an extra 26% to avoid animal and plant GM technology, whereas female shoppers were willing to pay an extra 49.3% (Burton, et al., 2001). McCluskey et al. (2003) found that Japanese consumers in their sample, on average, required a discount of greater than 50% for noodles made with GM ingredients relative to GM-free noodles. On the other hand, studies in the United States find consumers to be more accepting of GM foods. For example, a study by Lusk et al. (2001) found that 70% of their respondents were not willing to pay a premium for non-GM corn chips. A Canadian study found that consumers were willing to purchase genetically modified potatoes if offered at equal or slightly discounted prices (International Centre for Agricultural Science and Technology, 1995). 53 China makes 'landmark' GM food crop approval (December 17, 2009), http://www.scidev.net/en/news/china-makes-landmark-gm-food-crop-approval.html 54 GM rice has been produced in China before the official endorsement. In 2006 and 2007, European officials discovered an unauthorized variety of GM rice made in China in processed food exported to EU countries. 55 The ISAAA claims that about 224,000 tons of pesticide was saved during the decade from 1996 to 2006, thanks to the
21
the risks remain unaddressed. The debate about GM’s potential contribution to food security
revolve around issues of access and control, especially the roles played by public and private sectors,
and the effects of intellectual property rights (IPRs), in shaping the types of biotechnologies that are
developed and how they are made available. Removing obstacles to the free flow of knowledge and
technology, which are imposed by restrictive IPRs, may facilitate the efforts of scientists working to
develop “pro‐poor” biotechnologies for farmers in the developing world. The Royal Society (2009) is
calling for a £2 billion "Grand Challenge" research programme on global food security including
investment in genetically modified crops which the Society says the world needs both to increase
food yields and minimize the environmental impact of farming.
Other non‐GM innovations in agriculture include the introduction of germplasm from
higher‐producing breeds through artificial insemination and crossbreeding to raise dairy cattle milk
yields in Bangladesh (FAO, 2010b) and the use of DNA‐based methods to detect shrimp diseases in
India (FAO, 2010c). Noting that overemphasis on GM technologies overshadows other
biotechnologies, FAO called for a new approach to agricultural research and development
supporting the wider and wiser use of agricultural biodiversity to promote development and
improve food security56.
2-7 Engineering photosynthesis process
Plants can be divided into three categories, C3, C4 and CAM (Crassulacean Acid Metabolism),
depending on the way photosynthesis takes place (Edwards and Walker, 1983). C3 photosynthesis is
the typical photosynthesis that most plants use. C4 and CAM photosynthesis are adaptations to arid
conditions and both result in better water use efficiency. In addition, CAM plants can remain "idle"
and save energy and water during harsh times. C4 plants can photosynthesize faster under the high
heat and light conditions than C3 plants such as rice57. Rice, with an annual harvest of 0.6 billion
metric tonnes, is and will continue to be the most important cereal crop for feeding the world's
population (IRRI, 2002). Dr Robert Zeigler, Director‐General of the International Rice Research
Institute estimates that a 50 percent increase in rice yield is needed by 2050 to keep pace with the
world's population growth58. Conventional breeding programs will only be able to deliver only small
increments in yield, and thus, redesigning rice photosynthesis must be part of the solution. By
expansion of GM crops. 56 Biotechnologies should benefit poor farmers in poor countries (March 1, 2010), http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/40390/icode/ 57 C4 plants, such as maize, are capable of concentrating CO2 at the Rubisco active site, and thus have many desirable agronomic traits, including high photosynthetic capacity and high mineral-use efficiency, especially under high light, high temperature, and drought conditions. The C3 plants such as rice, on the other hand, have lower photosynthetic efficiencies because of the O2 inhibition of photosynthesis and the associated photorespiration. 58. “Global demand for rice to increase 50% by 2050, says Zeigler” (June 25, 2005), http://www.financialexpress.com/news/Global%20demand%20for%20rice%20to%20increase%2050percent%20by%202050,%20says%20Zeigler%20/143891/
22
introducing the photosynthesis genes of maize into rice, researchers demonstrated that the new rice
strains could boost photosynthesis and grain yield by up to 35 percent59.
Research in this field, particularly a possibility of replicating the natural process of photosynthesis or
“artificial photosynthesis” may help produce carbon‐neutral fuel as well as mitigate climate change.
Artificial photosynthesis does not require arable land and thus does not compete with the food
production. The possibility of sequestrating CO2 directly from the air also offers an opportunity for
net reduction of CO2. A team of researchers at MIT recently demonstrated a new way for artificial
photosynthesis, breaking water down into hydrogen and oxygen, by using a virus to serve as a
scaffold that attracts molecules of the catalyst iridium oxide and a biological pigment (Nam et al.,
2010).
2-8 Seawater/ Saltwater agriculture
In several parts of the world, people have utilized a class of plants termed “Halophytes” (salt‐plants)
and brackish/saline water for both food and fodder and to “reclaim”/“desalinate” land (Bushnell,
2006). Using seawater for agriculture means that 97 percent of water on the planet is available for
agriculture and precious fresh water can be used for other purposes. In addition, seawater contains
a wide variety of important minerals and order of 80 percent of the nutrients needed for plant
growth. There are some 10,000 “natural” Halophyte Plants of which some 250 are potential “staple”
crops, and genomic and biotechnology research is ongoing worldwide to enhance the overall
productivity of Halophytes (idid). Over 100 halophyte plants are now in different stages of trials for
commercial applications with nearly 20 countries are involved60. In particular, China has reported
Genomic versions of Tomatoes, Eggplant, pepper, wheat, rice and rapeseed grown on beaches using
seawater (Bushnell, 2006).
In addition to salt‐tolerant crops, various livestock can thrive on halophytes or a combination of
halophytes and conventional feed. Comparison of sheep fed with halophyte forage and sheep fed
Bermuda grass indicates that the halophyte diet appears to have contained balanced nutrients
(Swingle, Glenn and Squires, 1996). Cattle fed a halophytic grass gained weight equally to maize
fodder fed controls (Khan and Ansari, 2008)61
59 "Scientists achieve major breakthrough in rice; data to be shared with Worldwide research community", ISB News Report, May 2000 60 Much of this effort is assessable via the website for the International Center for Biosaline Agriculture in Dubai, UAE, at: www.biosaline.org. Other sources include Seawater Foundation (http://www.seawaterfoundation.org) and Seawater Greenhosue (http://www.seawatergreenhouse.com). 61 The most salt tolerant farm animal is the camel, followed by sheep, then cattle, followed by horses, and the least tolerant are pigs and chickens. Camels appear to be a promising source of meat in areas where halophytes irrigated with sea water can pasture large camel herds.
23
2-9 Brief discussion on wildcards
Global pandemic induced by livestock – Pandemic induced by livestock (e.g. mad cow, avian and
swine flu) kills millions in the world and forces the world to replace conventional livestock with
in‐vitro meat. “Real” meat becomes luxury goods and short‐term economic impacts would be
negative, but in the long‐term, rapid uptake of in‐vitro meat may improve the water situation in the
world. On the other hand, abuses of the technology (e.g. attempt to produce and eat human) may
trigger serious public opposition, leading to international ban of the technology.
Increases in food prices and food shortage halt global food trade – This could have significant
economic and security consequences. Many countries not suitable for agriculture may have to
engage in food production, leading to lower water productivity. On the other hand, it will accelerate
the adoption of urban/seawater agriculture in countries where conventional agriculture is not viable.
Collapse of agriculture due to pest/ environmental breakdown – Over‐dependence on few selected
crops results in catastrophic collapse of agricultural output, or abrupt climate change and other
environmental hazards significantly reduce yields/productivity. As a result, malnutrition and hunger
significantly. Land owned/leased by foreign countries becomes a source of international conflict.
3. Matrix of Possible Developments
Possible developments
What might make this happen?
When might it happen?
What determines when it will happen?
What would be the positive and/or negative impacts on water resources and their use?
Who were the principal sources of information with regard to this development (institution, individual and contact)
The causal links between the driver being researched and the other nine drivers, classifying them as strongly important, somewhat important or not relevant”
Climate Change 25% of global food production lost
Per capita calorie availability goes down compared with 2000
Child malnutrition increased by 20%
No serious efforts in mitigation/adaptation
Lack of funding for adaptation in developing countries
Impacts of climate change greater than expected
2050
Level of international commitment to address climate change
Amount and speed of funding flow to developing countries
Speed/degree of climate change
Increase in drought/flood; less water available for agriculture
Increase in ground water withdrawal to compensate the loss of surface water
A few countries may experience productivity increase due to warmer climate
IPCC: www.ipcc.ch/ FAO: www.fao.org IFPRI: www.ifpri.org/ (Gerald Nelson: [email protected])
Strongly important: Water resources and ecosystem; Technology; Economy and Security; Infrastructure Somewhat important: Governance; Politics; Demography; Ethics, society and culture Not relevant:
Biofuels Biofuels production increasingly in
Policy favouring conventional biofuels such as corn‐based
2020
Oil and gas prices
National,
More severe trade‐off between food,
IEA: www.iea.org/ Dennis Bushnell, Chief Scientist, NASA Langley
Strongly important: Climate change; Technology; Economy and
25
competition with food
ethanol continues fuel and other uses
Second generation biofuel successfully de‐couple biofuel and land/freshwater
Greater R&D incentive for next generation biofuels
Life‐cycle assessment for biofuel production and use
2030
sub‐national targets of biofuels
Subsidies and other economic incentive to different types of biofuels
R&D
Freshwater can be free up for other purposes
Research Center [email protected]
Lester Brown, President, The Earth Policy Institute +1(202) 496‐9290
Security; Infrastructure Somewhat important: Politics; Water resources and ecosystem; Ethics, society and culture Not relevant: Demography; Governance ;
Livestock /in‐vitro meat
Global meat production more than double
Continued growth in the South
2050
Rate of economic growth
Potential changes in dietary preference
More water/land consumed for meat production, undermining food security of the poor
Commercialisation of in‐vitro meat
Significant cost reduction and public acceptance
2050 Quality and safety of the products
R&D
Free up water for other uses
The In Vitro Meat Consortium: www.invitromeat.org/
Jason Matheny New Harvest (in‐vitro meat) / Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford University [email protected]
Strongly important: Water resources and ecosystem; Economy and Security; Ethics, society and culture; Technology; Demography Somewhat important: Climate change;; Politics Not relevant: Governance; Infrastructure
Vertical farming in cities
Local production of food/fuel in urban cities
Increased concerns of food miles, and food security, (esp. in food importing countries)
Preference to “greener” cities
2030 Productivity Costs (Other revenue possibility e.g. farm as a tourist attraction may
Less water pollution because of the limited use of pesticide
Water recycled over time,
Dickson Despommier Columbia University [email protected]
Las Vegas City (announced a $200 project to build one )
Strongly important: Climate change; Ethics, society and culture; Infrastructure Somewhat important: Politics;
26
help the uptake of this option)
leading to greater efficiency
Technology; Water resources and ecosystem; Economic and security; Demography Not relevant: Governance
Organic farming Organic farming more productive than chemical‐based farming
Greater incentive for environmentally friendly practices
Fertilizer prices continue going up
Expansion of the market of certified food
2030 Concerns for food safety
Development of more productive crop varieties that do not require much chemical inputs
Public willing to pay premium for organic products
Less water pollution because of the limited use of chemical input
Enhanced ecosystem services
Greater resilience to pest and weed
FAO: www.fao.org UNEP: www.unep.org/ UNCTAD: www.unctad.org/ The Organic Center: www.organic‐center.org/
Strongly important: Water resources and ecosystem; Ethics, society and culture Somewhat important: Climate change; Governance; Technology; Economy and Security Not relevant: Infrastructure; Demography; Politics
GM/ Biotechnology
GM accepted globally and improves food security
Conventional crop varieties cannot keep up with growing demand
GM safety verified
2050
The level of global hunger/ malnutrition
R&D and changes in public perception
Improved water productivity by using more efficient engineered seeds
FAO: www.fao.org WHO: www.who.int/ FDA: www.fda.gov/ The Royal Society: www.royalsociety.org/
Strongly important: Politics; Governance; Technology; Ethics, society and culture Somewhat important: Climate change; Water
27
towards GM and biotechnology
Backrush against GM
Evidence showing GM’s toxicity found
Control of seeds by few companies with monopoly power
2020‐2030
resources and ecosystem; Economy and Security; Demography Not relevant: Infrastructure;
Photosynthesis 50% yield increase in some crops as a result of enhanced photosynthesis
Producing food by artificial photosynthesis
R&D Rapid increases in the demand for liquid fuel
2050
R&D
Increase in agricultural water productivity
Potential net‐reduction of CO2 (which protects hydrological cycle and ecosystem)
FAO: www.fao.org IFPRI: www.ifpri.org/ Angela Belcher, MIT [email protected]
Strongly important: Climate change; Technology Somewhat important: Water resources and ecosystem; Economy and Security; Infrastructure; Demography Not relevant: Governance;; Ethics, society and culture; Politics
Seawater/ Saltwater
Varieties of Halophytes producing food and fuel along coastlines and/or using saline water
R&D Limit/ban/moratorium on biofuel production that competes with food
2020‐30
Cost and productivity of halophytes plants
Oil and gas prices (higher prices would
Freshwater can be used for other purposes
Large‐scale changes in vegetation along coastline/
Dennis Bushnell, Chief Scientist, NASA Langley Research Center [email protected]
The Seawater Foundation: www.seawaterfoundation.org/
USDA: www.usda.gov/
Strongly important: Climate change; Technology; Economy and Security; Water resources and ecosystem Somewhat
28
Halophytes used to feed livestock
accelerate the use of halophytes based fuels
desert may have unintended consequences on the hydrological cycle
important: Infrastructure; Politics; Ethics, society and culture; Demography Not relevant: Governance
3-1 Note on causal links with other drivers
Other drivers Relevance Brief description on causal links
Water resources
and ecosystem
strongly
important
Irrigation and intensive use of fertilizer severely damage
water resources and ecosystem; Adoption of more
environmentally sound practice helps ensure
sustainablity of the driver
Climate change strongly
important
Climate change could significantly affect
productivity/yields
Governance somewhat
important
Lack of sound governance (e.g. corruption, inconsistante
enforcement of laws) tends to bias rural, subsistence
farmers.
Technology strongly
important
Biotechnology has significant potential to increase yield;
ICT, remote sensing and other technology help improve
efficiency.
Economy and
Security
somewhat
important
GDP growth is associated with more meat consumption
and more water‐intensive lifestyle, intensifying
trade‐offs.
Infrastructure strongly
important
Improvement in water storage critical for irrigation;
better infrastructure will reduce food loss/waste during
the transport.
Demography strongly
important Population increase means greater demand for food.
Ethics, society
and culture
somewhat
important
Consumers' acceptance of GM food; preferences
(organic, fair trade, vegetarian) affect water
requirements for agriculture
Politics somewhat
important
International aid to support agriculture in developing
countries will be critical for reducing hunger/ improve
water productivity
30
References
2030 Water Resource Group. 2009. Charting Our Water Future Economic frameworks to inform
decision‐making. 2030 Water Resources Group.
ActionAid. 2010. Meals per gallon: the impact of industrial biofuels on people and global hunger.
Brussels: ActionAid.
Bennett, J. 2003. Opportunities for Increasing Water Productivity of CGIAR Crops through Plant
Breeding and Molecular Biology In J.W. Kijne, R. Barker, and D. Molden (eds), Water
Productivity in Agriculture: Limits and Opportunities for Improvement. Wallingford, UK, and
Colombo: CABI Publishing and International Water Management Institute.
Braun, V. J. and Meinzen‐Dick, R. 2009. “Land Grabbing” by Foreign Investors in Developing
Countries: Risks and Opportunities. IFPRI Policy Brief 13. Washington, DC: The International
Food Policy Research Institute.
Bhatia, R. 2007. Water and Energy Interactions, Handbook of Water Resources in India. Washignton,
DC: The World Bank.
Bhattarai, M. and Narayanamoorthy, A. 2003. Impact of Irrigation on Rural Poverty in India: An
Aggregate Panel‐Data Analysis. Water Policy 5 (5–6): 443–58.
Bindraban, P.S. 1997. Bridging the Gap between Plant Physiology and Breeding: Identifying Traits to
Increase Wheat Yield Potential Using Systems Approaches. Ph.D. thesis. Wageningen
Agricultural University, The Netherlands.
Biradar et al. 2009. A global map of rainfed cropland areas (GMRCA) at the end of last millennium
using remote sensing. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation.
11 (2): 114‐129.
Burton, M., Rigby, D., Young, T., & James, S. 2001. Consumer attitudes to genetically modified
organisms in food in the UK. European Review of Agricultural Economics. 28: 479–498.
Bushnell, D. 2006. Seawater/Saline Agriculture for Energy, Water, Land, Food and Warming. Paper
presented at conference in Cairo, Egypt.
Camara, O. and Heinemaan, E. 2006. Overview of the Fertilizer Situation in Africa. Background
paper for African Fertilizer Summit, Abuja, Nigeria, June 9–13.
Cline, W. 2007. Global Warming and Agriculture: Impact Estimates by Country. Washington, DC:
Peterson Institute
Cooper, T. Hart, K. and Baldock, D. 2009. The Provision of Public Goods Through. Agriculture in the
European Union. Report Prepared for DG Agriculture and Rural Development, Contract No
31
30‐CE‐0233091/00‐28, Institute for European Environmental Policy.
Datamonitor, 2009. Food: Global Industry Guide. Dublin: Research and Markets
de Fraiture, C. et al. 2004. In Does International Cereal Trade Save Water? The Impact of Virtual
Water Trade on Global Water Use. IWMI, Colombo, Sri Lanka 32.
de Fraiture, C. et al. 2007. Looking ahead to 2050: scenarios of alternative investment approaches.
In David, M. (ed.), Comprehensive Assessment (CA) of Water Management in Agriculture, Water
for Food and Water for Life: A Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture.
International Water Management Institute, London: Earthscan and Colombo: 91–145.
de Fraiture et al. 2010. Investing in water for food, ecosystems, and livelihoods: An overview of the
comprehensive assessment of water management in agriculture. Agricultural Water
Management 97: 495–501
Edwards, G. and Walker, D. 1983. C3,C4: Mechanisms, and Cellular and Enviromental Regulation, of
Photosynthesis. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press
Engelhaupt, E. 2008. Do food miles matter? Environmental Science & Technology 42 (10): 3482
Environmental Working Group. 2006. Dead in the Water. Reforming Wasteful Farm Subsidies Can
Restore Gulf Fisheries.
Falkenmark, M. et al. 2007. Agriculture, water, and ecosystems: avoiding the costs of going too far.
in David, M. (ed.), Comprehensive Assessment (CA) of Water Management in Agriculture, Water
for Food and Water for Life: A Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture.
International Water Management Institute, London: Earthscan and Colombo: 233‐276.
Falkenmark, M. and Lannerstad, M. 2005. Consumptive water use to feed humanity – curing a blind
spot. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences. 9 (1/2), 15–28.
Fang, J. and Chu, C. 2008. Abscisic acid and the pre‐harvest sprouting in cereals. Plant Signal &
Behavior 3(12): 1046‐1048.
FAO. 1989. Prevention of post‐harvest food losses: Fruits, vegetables and root crops. A training
manual. Rome: FAO.
FAO. 1998. Evaluation the potential contribution of organic agriculture to sustainability goals. FAO's
technical contribution to IFOAM's Scientific Conference, Mar del Plata, Argentina, 16‐19
November. Rome: FAO.
FAO. 2002. Value of virtual water in food: principles and virtues. Paper presented at the
UNESCO‐IHE Workshop on Virtual Water Trade, 12‐13 December 2002, Delft, the Netherlands.
32
FAO. 2003a. World Agriculture towards 2015/2030: An FAO Perspective. Rome: FAO.
FAO. 2003b. World Soil Resources Report. In Data Sets, Indicators and Methods to Assess Land
Degradation in Drylands, FAO: Rome.
FAO. 2006. Livestock's Long Shadow ‐ environmental issues and options. Rome: FAO.
FAO. 2008. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture. Rome: FAO.
FAO. 2009. Climate change implications for fisheries and aquaculture. Rome: FAO.
FAO. 2010a. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010. Rome: FAO.
FAO. 2010b. Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries
(ABDC‐10/5.1). Background paper for the Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries
Conference, Mexico, 1‐4 March 2010.
FAO. 2010c. Current status and options for biotechnologies in fisheries and aquaculture in
developing countries (ABDC‐10/6.1). Background paper for the Agricultural Biotechnologies in
Developing Countries Conference, Mexico, 1‐4 March 2010.
Faurès, J. M. et al. 2007. Reinventing irrigation. In David, M. (ed.), Comprehensive Assessment (CA)
of Water Management in Agriculture, Water for Food and Water for Life: A Comprehensive
Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture. International Water Management Institute,
London: Earthscan and Colombo: 353‐394.
Glenn, et al. 1992. Growing Halophytes to Remove Carbon From the Atmosphere Environment 34
(3): 40‐43.
Goodland, R. and Anhang, J. 2009. Livestock and Climate Change. World Watch Magazine.
Washignton, DC : WorldWatch Institute.
Grimsrud, K. et al., 2003. Consumer attitudes toward genetically modified food in Norway. IMPACT
Center technical working paper. Pullman, WA: International Marketing Program for Agricultural
Commodities &rade.
Hanasaki et al. 2008. An integrated model for the assessment of global water resources Part 1 and 2.
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 12 (4): 1007‐1037.
Huang, Wen‐yuan. 2009. Factors Contributing to the Recent Increase in U.S. Fertilizer Prices. US
Department of Agriculture AR‐33. Washington, DC: USDA.
IEA. 2010. Sustainable Production of Second‐Generation Biofuels ‐ Potential and perspectives in
major economies and developing countries. Paris: OECD/International Energy Agency.
International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM). 2010. The World of Organic
33
Agriculture: Statistics and Emerging Trends 2010. Bonn: IFOAM.
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). 2009. Climate Change Impact on Agriculture
and Costs of Adaptation. Washington, DC: The International Food Policy Research Institute.
International Centre for Agricultural Science and Technology. 1995. Consumer acceptance of
potatoes that have been genetically modified through biotechnology. Saskatoon, SK:
International Centre for Agricultural Science and Technology.
In Vitro Meat Consortium. 2008. Preliminary Economics Study Project 29071.
IRRI. 2002. Rice almanac: source book for the most important economic activity on earth. Oxon, UK:
CABI Publishing.
Khan, M. and Ansari R. 2008. Potential use of halophytes with emphasis on fodder production in
coastal areas of Pakistan. In C. Abdelly et al. (eds). Biosaline Agriculture and High Salinity
Tolerance. Birkhäuser Verlag: Switzerland.
Knight, S., et al. 2009. RR71 An up‐to‐date cost/benefit analysis of precision farming techniques to
guide growers of cereals and oilseeds. Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board (HGCA)
Project No: 3484.
Lai, L. et al. 2006. Generation of cloned transgenic pigs rich in omega‐3 fatty acids. Nature
Biotechnology 24 (4): 435–436.
Li, Y. C. et al., 2009. The Level of Expression of Thioredoxin is Linked to Fundamental Properties and
Applications of Wheat Seeds. Molecular Plant 2(3):430–441.
Lundqvist, J. et al. 2008. Saving Water: From Field to Fork – Curbing Losses and Wastage in the Food
Chain. SIWI Policy Brief. SIWI.
Lusk, J.L. et al., 2001. Alternative calibration and auction institutions for predicting consumer
willingness to pay for nongenetically modified corn chips. Journal of Agriculture and Resource
Economics. 26(1): 40–57.
McCluskey, J.J. et al., (2003). Consumer response to genetically modified food products in Japan.
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review. 32(2): 222–231.
Merrey, D.J. 1997. Expanding the Frontiers of Irrigation Management Research: Results of Research
and Development at the International Irrigation Management Institute 1984–1995. Colombo:
International Water Management Institute.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA). 2005. Ecosystem and Human Well‐being: Wetlands and
Water Synthesis. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.
34
Minhas, P.S. and Samra, J. S., 2004. Wastewater Use in Peri‐urban Agriculture: Impacts and
Opportunities. Karnal, India: Central Soil Salinity Research Institute.
Molden, D. et al., 2007. Pathways for increasing agricultural water productivity. In David, M. (ed.),
Comprehensive Assessment (CA) of Water Management in Agriculture, Water for Food and
Water for Life: A Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture.
International Water Management Institute, London: Earthscan and Colombo: 278‐310.
Molden et al. 2010. Improving agricultural water productivity: Between optimism and caution.
Agricultural Water Management 97: 528‐535.
Nam Y. S. et al. 2010. Biologically templated photocatalytic nanostructures for sustained
light‐driven water oxidation. Nature Nanotechnology 5:340‐344.
National Research Council, Commission on International Relations, Board on Science and
Technology for International Development. 1978. Post‐harvest Food Loss in Developing
Countries. Washington, D.C.: National Research Council/National Academy of Sciences.
OECD. 2008. Environmental Performance of Agriculture at a Glance. Paris: OECD.
Qadir, et al., 2007. Agricultural use of marginal‐quality water – opportunities and challenges. In
David, M. (ed.), Comprehensive Assessment (CA) of Water Management in Agriculture, Water
for Food and Water for Life: A Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture.
International Water Management Institute, London: Earthscan and Colombo: 425–457.
Qadir et al., 2010. The challenges of wastewater irrigation in developing countries. Agricultural
Water Management 97: 561–568.
Qiu, J. 2010. China takes stock of environment. Nature (doi:10.1038/news.2010.68). Published
online on 12 February, 2010.
Richards, J.F., 1990. Land Transformation in B. L. Turner, (ed.) The Earth as Transformed by Human
Action. New York, NY: Cambridge with Clark University.
Richards, R.A. et al., 1993. Improving the efficiency of water use by plant breeding and molecular
biology. Irrigation Science 14 (2), 93–104.
Rockström et al. 2007. Managing water in rainfed agriculture. in David, M. (ed.), Comprehensive
Assessment (CA) of Water Management in Agriculture, Water for Food and Water for Life: A
Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture. International Water
Management Institute, London: Earthscan and Colombo: 315‐352.
Rockström et al. 2010. Managing water in rainfed agriculture—The need for a paradigm shift
Agricultural Water Management 97: 543–550
35
The Royal Society. 2009. Reaping the benefits: Science and the sustainable intensification of global
agriculture. London: the Royal Society.
Sahota, A. 2009. The Global Market for Organic Food and Drink. In Willer H. and Kilcher L. (eds.),
The World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics and Emerging Trends 2009. IFOAM, Bonn; FiBL,
Frick; ITC, Geneva.
Sato, et al , 1998. The Manazar Project: Towards a Solution to Poverty, Hunger, Environmental
Pollution and Global Warming through Sea Water Aquaculture and Silviculture in Deserts. In
Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology – Animal. 34(7): 509‐511
Sayre, K.D. et al. 1997. Yield potential progress in short bread wheats in Northwest Mexico. Crop
Science 37 (1), 36–42.
Smedema, L.K., and K. Shiati. 2002. Irrigation and Salinity: A Perspective Review of the Salinity
Hazards of Irrigation Development in the Arid Zone. Irrigation and Drainage Systems 16 (2):
161–74.
Swingle R.S., Glenn E.P. and Squires V. 1996. Growth performance of lambs fed mixed diets
containing halophyte ingredients. Animal Feed Science and Technology, Volume 63 (1),
137‐148.
Thenkabail, et al. 2008. A Global Irrigated Area Map at the End of the Last Millennium using
Multi‐sensor, Time‐series Satellite Sensor Data. Colombo: International Water Management
Institute.
UNCTAD and UNEP, 2008. Organic Agriculture and Food Security in Africa (UNCTAD/
DITC/TED/2007/15), New York: United Nations Publications.
UNEP. 2009. Green Revolution with a Capital G is Needed to Feed the World. Nairobi: UNEP.
UNEP. 2010a. Green Economy Report: A Preview. New York, NY: UNEP
UNEP. 2010b. Yearbook 2010. New York, NY: UNEP
Werf, E. v. d. 1993. Agronomic and economic potential of sustainable agriculture in South India.
American Journal of Alternative Agriculture, 8(4): 185–191.