Small Scale Irrigation in Sub Saharan Africa: The other irrigation option

                       “If you want to go fast go alone. If you want to go far go together” – African Proverb

In last week's blog I touched on Large Scale Irrigation (LSI) projects in Sub Saharan Africa (SSA) and concluded that from irregular financial resources, most projects have not helped in aiding food security. This week I will be considering the latter option being looked at to decrease food insecurity, which is small scale irrigation (SSI). To be consistent, I will be discussing SSI projects only in SSA. 

Unlike traditional farming methods regarding water use, which is still the dominant way of farming in SSA, SSI does involve some sort of new construction system to be put into place. With regards to LSI, the fundamental difference is the ownership that farmers have over the SSI system, as well as the overall amount of land that is irrigated. Adams defines SSI as“… the management of the supply of water to crops or other economically useful plants, which is initiated organized and controlled by the landholder or groups of landholders; the extent of such activities does not normally exceed 10 ha per farm family, and may be as little as 0.1 ha” (Adams,1987). The key point from this definition that is important for this blog post is the emphasis on the farmers controlling and organizing the irrigation system. Some forms of SSI that can be used are; rainwater harvesting, flood recession, river diversion, treadle pumps and flood water spreading (Tafesse,2003). I will now focus on the positives and negatives researched about SSI projects to answer the question of whether this is a more promising method than LSI to battle food scarcity in SSA. 

Treadle Pump being used as a form of SSI (Source)

 Recently, the International Food Policy Institute and many NGOs have stated that more resources need to go into SSI in SSA as this is deemed the most proficient way to increase food supply sustainably. Arguably the main overarching reason for the push of SSI is to empower family farmers with knowledge of maintaining their own irrigation system. Therefore, in the long run farmers will be able to sustain themselves with little help from NGOs or government. The focal point of SSI is around the farmers becoming an essential part of the irrigation management. In a perfect world this is called Operation and Management, otherwise known as O&M, where the local people will manage and take over the irrigation system, after some initial help with building from a government or private company (Sakaki, 2013). SSI systems are also encouraged due to the low cost of implementation. Farmers and the town community can use their own money sometimes to buy a SSI system which can then be monitored and operated by the community. Perhaps the most important variable of SSI is the data on positive increase in food crop yield in the dry seasons. Consequently, this has raised farmers’ incomes in the dry season, “In Tanzania, an estimated 50% of the cash incomes of smallholders involved in private irrigation is derived from dry season vegetable cultivation” (Fraiture, 2014). Overall, as I considered the basis of SSI systems that were written in these research papers, there is an overwhelming consensus that if SSI is put in place with consistent management, it will help the community economically and provide more food. 

Farm profit in Ghana, comparisons showing unirrigated versus irrigated farms (Source)

Much of what is the negative or more worrying aspect of SSI, is the dependency of the management of the local farmers and the relationship to whatever their initial financial source may be. Management wise there is a problem of control. In some cases, farmers may lose interest in maintaining their irrigation systems or on the flip side, there could be problems with sharing said ownership with the government or an NGO. Figure 1 is able to show a scenario of what may arise from community management complexities. 

Figure 1: Depiction of the different problems that can arise from a community managed system (Source)

Adding more confusion to this O&M situation is the amount of people working on the project and the easy way that one group could be left out with all these different actors. 

Figure 2: This matrix depicts the different factors that will go into the management of the SSI (Source)

Questions of roles regarding different families working together, the part of a woman in management, if the community can keep up maintenance costs, and traditional values are all aspects that can hinder the perfect O&M system, this is shown by all the variables in figure 2. The most ethical way to avoid this problem is stated by Barnett that each new irrigation project must be treated as its own, ranging from country to country or even city to city. This is due to different ways of life and knowledge in each community that needs to be at the center of the SSI system (Barnett, 1984). Another factor for SSI not working is environmental issues. With blurred lines of who owns the water pump it is easy for a farmer to consider it as their own and overuse the water source. In Ghana, farmers on the edge of the reservoir do not ask permission to draw water from the reservoir directly, which can incite many problems socially and environmentally (Fraiture, 2014). Additionally, if there is poor land management of the O&M system this could lead to land degradation or poor water quality if not monitored correctly (Tafesse, 2003). 

The potential of SSI in SSA is hopeful as one of the necessary ways to reduce food insecurity and poverty. Compared to LSI, smaller irrigation projects have proven to be more worthwhile in terms of empowerment of the community and allowing family farmers to have their land while most importantly providing a water source throughout the dry season. With this utopic way of looking at SSI, compared to my finding last week on LSI, smaller irrigation projects seem the better way economically and socially for SSA. Although, as seen in the negatives that research has touched on concerning management of SSI, it will only be shown with time if these community management schemes will be able to last in the long term to be a safe and productive option for food security issues.