PDF - sudan academy of sciences
Transcription
PDF - sudan academy of sciences
Ahmed et al., Sudan Academy of Sciences Journal-Special Issue (Climate Change), Vol. 11, 2015, 103-114 ISSN 1816-8272 Copyright © 2015 SAPDH Coping strategies to water shortages in central Sudan; Almanagil locality Muna M.M. Ahmed1* and Magda M. El-Mansoury2 Abstract The study focused on Almanagil plateau, located in central Sudan, within three states of Gezira, Sennar, and White Nile, which was excluded from the Geizera Agricultural Scheme. Various coping strategies carried by inhabitants were studied as means of climate change adaptation. A structured questionnaire (50 small-scale farmers), key-informant interview and group discussions were undertaken in seven villages within this plateau. Questions covered coping strategies with drought and flood shocks, suggestions for water shed managements, improving surface, subsurface and ground water availability, in addition to willingness to participate in adaptation and mitigation activities. Secondary data included meteorological rainfall data for the last 6 years (20052010), expectations for water requirements for the next coming 10 years (20102016). Sources of water and quantities consumed by households and animals were studied. Remote sensing and GIS and GPS survey level data were used to provide information on potentialities for improving water sources for human consumption and irrigation. All of the surveyed villages lie within S2 with moderate suitability for irrigation but with different soil characteristics, generally slightly calcareous, susceptible to erosion. All respondents in all villages expressed shortages in water availability for both human and animal consumptions. Coping strategies with drought or floods reported were temporal migration, selling part of their animals or properties, turning to other activities. Willingness to participate in natural resource conservation was expressed by all respondents. Suggestions to improve water resources included building dams on streams, terracing, extending water pipes from canals to farmers’ field, ponds construction, enlarging and deepening of streams beds, establishing water pumps. It was concluded that the concept of multi water use services could meet farmers’ needs for cooking and sanitation and promote small enterprises as livestock raising, horticulture and crop production. In areas with gentle sloping, surface run-off could be collected and used for supplementary irrigation during dry spells. Keywords: Climate change adaptation, coping strategies, water sources potentialities Introduction In sub-Saharan Africa, agriculture accounts for 35% of the gross domestic product (GDP) and employs 70% of the population (World Bank, 2000), and more than 95% of the agricultural area is rainfed (FAOSTAT, 2005). In this region, agriculture is the engine for overall economic growth and, therefore, broad-based 1 Institute of Environmental Studies, University of Khartoum, Corresponding author email: prof.mahjoub@gmail.com. 2 UNDP consultant. 103 Ahmed et al., Sudan Academy of Sciences Journal-Special Issue (Climate Change), Vol. 11, 2015, 103-114 poverty reduction (IFAD, 2001; DFID, 2002; Koning, 2002). In many areas, poverty is strongly influenced by agricultural production, which in turn is dependent on climate in general and water availability in particular. Across Sudan, UNEP noted a general trend of intensification of traditional rainfed agriculture and associated land degradation. In the drier areas, repeated monoculture without crop rotation and adequate fallow periods has led to a decline in soil fertility. This, in turn, has increased run-off and topsoil erosion, further degrading the soil and inhibiting re-establishment of non-pioneer vegetation and potential restoration of wildlife habitats. The adoption of improved technologies by the resource-poor farmers under rainfed conditions is limited, primarily due to risk associated with drought. The key challenge is to reduce water shortage-related risks posed by high rainfall variability rather than coping with an absolute lack of water (Wani et al., 2003). This study focused on Almanagil plateau, located in central Sudan, within three states of Gezira, Sennar, and White Nile, which was excluded from the Geizera Agricultural Scheme. The aim was to study various coping strategies carried by inhabitants as means of climate change adaptation. Sources of water and quantities consumed by households and animals were studied. GIS and GPS survey level data were also used to provide information on potentialities for improving water sources for human consumption and irrigation. Materials and Methods Area of the study: Almanagil plateau lies between latitude 12o-13o N and longitude 33o23'-32o38'E, at an altitude of 300-350.2 ft ASL, with an area of 1,125 ha located at the top of the plateau (Map 1), located within the three States of Gezira, Sennar and White Nile in Central Sudan. The plateau is triangular defined by Alshawal major canal to the east and west boarders, and Sennar State at the southern border. The plateau lies within the low rainfall Savanna zone with annual rainfall of 300 mm (MOAI, 2014). Due to its high elevation, it was excluded from the Gezira scheme where agricultural lands is flooded by gravity irrigation. The area therefore suffers from frequent drought due to fluctuation in rainfall. There are many seasonal streams if well managed would provide an important source for both pastoral and sedentary farmers. The study area is characterized by the dry savannah climate, with short wet and long dry seasons with average temperature reaching 32 oC in April-May in summer and 26 -28oC in autumn. In winter the range is between 32-33oC reaching a minimum of 13o-16oC. Annual rainfall of 300 mm, mostly during July-August, variability is high reaching up to 30% (MOAI, 2014). Copyright © 2015 SAPDH ISSN 1816-8272 104 Ahmed et al., Sudan Academy of Sciences Journal-Special Issue (Climate Change), Vol. 11, 2015, 103-114 Map 1. Managil plateau Data collection Primary data: Remote sensing and GIS technique were used to provide information about potentiality of surface water sources for human consumption and irrigation: Digital Elevation Module (DEM 30 M) and GPS survey level data was used to produce Digital contour map in the study area. Soil suitability for irrigation: The method of land suitability for irrigation is defined according to the value of the capability (or suitability) index (Ci), calculated by a weighted average for the upper 100 cm of the soil profile for slope class, texture, soil depth, calcium carbonate status, salinity, sodicity, and drainage. The soil of the study area was classified with respect to their suitability for irrigation after rating the different qualities (Van der Kevie and Eltom 2003). Electrical conductivity was also studied. Village survey and questionnaire: Seven villages out of 55 representing Almanagil plateau were chosen randomly, with a 13% sampling. A total of 350 households were involved in the questionnaire (150,000 inhabitants) (Table 1). Table 1. Villages surveyed, their population and number of households per village Villages Population No. of Households Himirat 2350 350 Baghadi 2086 298 Wad mahamoud 1330 230 Alshikeneiba 6600 1100 Albraghna 3900 700 Barghol 700 110 Goz Alsheikh-Algaily 265 53 Total 18331 2851 Copyright © 2015 SAPDH ISSN 1816-8272 105 Ahmed et al., Sudan Academy of Sciences Journal-Special Issue (Climate Change), Vol. 11, 2015, 103-114 Participatory Rural Appraisal was used to collect data through semi-structured, interviewing, focus group discussions, and preference ranking Household Survey (HHS): The questionnaire (a pre-coded open and close-ended one) was developed based on standard format for baseline information and further adjusted with consultation with the agricultural administration unit at Almanagil locality. The semi structural group included popular committee and women groups at each selected village, to respond and discuss specific questions. The focus group discussion included 7-9 farmers from each selected village. Key-Informant Interview (KI) and Group Discussion: These two nonconventional methods were used to supplement information needed by focusing on types of data that were more relevant to be addressed by people having enough knowledge on affairs of their community. These included responsible persons from Almanagil locality agricultural, rural water, range, and forestry administrations, as well as the faculty animal Production University of Gezira at Almanagil town. Field Observations: Field Observations used to collect as many information pertaining to water resources, livelihood means, farming systems, soils, range and forest conditions, animal types, housing type etc. Secondary Information: This included Necessary information from secondary sources like published and unpublished reports as well as records of various government institutions and NGOs. The data included rainfall, surface, subsurface water, ground water, environment, villages more subjected to flood or drought and livelihood associated\not associated with water. Results The contour map showed that the plateau elevation ranged between 370-380 m above the sea level. This indicated much variation in the surface level. This could be divided into three physiographic units; relatively high land, midland and lowland (Fig. 1). Source: RSA, 2011 Fig. 1. Almanagil plateau Contour Map 106 Copyright © 2015 SAPDH ISSN 1816-8272 Ahmed et al., Sudan Academy of Sciences Journal-Special Issue (Climate Change), Vol. 11, 2015, 103-114 Soil rating: Soil rating for quality was done according to Van der Kevie and Eltom (2003). Soil fertility calculations included such parameters as pH, OC%, N%, P, CEC, base saturation and micronutrients. Fig. 2 shows different rating areas according to fertility. The area rated as unit 3 lies in the most arid part of the area, it has the least fertility, the soil is sub angular with blocky structure, and coarse gravels (<3% of the surface coverage). Unit 2 (with moderate fertility) is found in an area susceptible to erosion as shown by some evidence of sheet erosion, the soils are slightly calcareous. Unit 1 (most fertile) topography for gravity irrigation is smooth to promote uniform distribution of water and provide surface drainage to the most parts of the study area. Fig. 2. Soil rating for agriculture suitability Water Consumption and Sources: The total working numbers of boreholes at some of the surveyed villages are 13 each of a capacity of 2500m3, with total of 32500m3. Water quantity at Hafir Sheikeneba was estimated to be 30,000m³, while that of Goz Alsheikalgaili was 12,000m³. Therefore, total available water at the study villages was estimated at 74,500 m³, equivalent to 73,755,000 litre (Table 2). Human consumption (l/c/d) at the surveyed villages, calculated according to a human population of 18,441 pesons and an estimated daily consumption of 20 liter\person/day, was 368820 l\c\d. Animal consumption \litre \day (Table 3). Total water consumption for both human and animal consumption was 1,561,3353 litre (368820+15244533). Total water available was estimated at 73,755,000 litre indicating a deficit of -58,141,647 litre (Table 3). Copyright © 2015 SAPDH ISSN 1816-8272 107 Ahmed et al., Sudan Academy of Sciences Journal-Special Issue (Climate Change), Vol. 11, 2015, 103-114 Table 2. Types of water services at the surveyed villages Village Himirat Baghadi Wadmahamoud Alshikeneiba Albraghna Barghol Goz Alsheikh- Algaily Total Water yard 3 2 pipe Network 5with pipe Network 3with pipe Network 1 1 with pipe network 15 Hand dug well 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 9 Ponds (Haffir) 1 1 1 1 2-Twining 1 1-lasts for one month 8 Table 3. Liter of water consumed per day (lcd) for different animal species Animal species population Cows Sheep Goats Camels Donkeys\Horses Total 273,200 311,250 123,800 4,333 242 Average water consumption 360 13.5 9 18 360 765.5 Total consumption per animal species 9,835,200 4,201,875 1,114,200 77,994 15,264 15244533 Main sources of water at all villages in the study area are ground water, except, Goz Alsheikh-Algaiely which depends mainly on subsurface source (known locally as Ed), whereas other villages use groundwater which corresponds to 85.7% compared with 13.0 % for surface water (Table 4). Most studied villages showed almost similarly high degree of water dissatisfaction (frequency 233 with 66.9%) as at Bargool, Bagadi, Wadmahamoud, Himirat and Albraghna villages except Alshikaneiba and Goz Alshikh-Algaily (Table 5). Table 4.Main water sources at individual villages Villages main source of drinking water Subsurface (Ed) Ground Total Goz Alsheikh-AlGaiely Alshekaneiba Bargool Bagadi WadMahamoud Himirat Albraghna 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 50 50 50 50 50 39 50 50 50 50 50 50 Total 39 300 339 Copyright © 2015 SAPDH ISSN 1816-8272 108 Ahmed et al., Sudan Academy of Sciences Journal-Special Issue (Climate Change), Vol. 11, 2015, 103-114 Table 5.Degree of drinking water satisfaction at individual villages degree of satisfaction Villages Yes No Total Goz Alsheikh-Algaiely 39 0 39 Alshekaneiba 37 2 39 Bargool 0 50 50 Bagadi 13 36 50 WadMahamoud 2 38 50 Himirat 0 50 50 Albraghna 2 38 50 113 233 338 Total Adaptation to climate change and coping strategies: Coping strategies included activities such as seasonal migrations represented the highest percentage of 33.0% and frequency 153 mostly in Bargool, whereas working as labors elsewhere represented a second alternative, of frequency 135 and 31.3% (Tables 6 and 7). Most of those who worked as labors were in Alshekaneiba and Bagadi villages. Other options came as second priority for most of villages as temporal migration, selling animals or properties or changing to alternative crop, while seeking other livelihood means showed the least alternative by respondents in all villages (Table 8). Villages Table 6.Coping strategies at individual villages Coping strategies seasonal labor migration other Goz AlsheikhAlGaiely Alshekaneiba Bargool Bagadi Wad-Mahamoud Himirat Albraghna 23 25 2 Total 50 33 6 33 18 20 12 16 38 10 16 20 29 1 6 7 16 9 9 50 50 50 50 39 50 Total 135 153 50 339 Copyright © 2015 SAPDH ISSN 1816-8272 109 Ahmed et al., Sudan Academy of Sciences Journal-Special Issue (Climate Change), Vol. 11, 2015, 103-114 Table 7. Coping strategies at individual villages, frequency and percent Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid laboring 135 31.3 31.5 31.5 seasonal migration 153 33.0 33.1 85.7 other 50 13.3 13.3 100.0 Total 339 99.7 100.0 1 0.3 350 100.0 Missing Total Table 8.Other coping strategies at individual villages to climate change Village Goz AlsheikhAlgaiely Alshekaneiba Bargool Bagadi WadMahamoud Himirat Albraghna Total Other coping strategies to climate change raising Change other selling other type of types of temporal part of options of crop animals migration properties livelihood 0 0 50 0 0 0 2 1 2 2 12 19 1 1 0 0 0 1 3 0 33 21 7 28 27 177 19 0 9 26 2 3 60 30 2 19 15 18 6 90 Total 50 50 39 50 50 50 50 339 Perception of climatic change impact on natural resources and crop production: Table 9 shows respondents’ opinion on impact of climate change on natural resources deterioration. About 69.7% of the respondents expressed that climate change was the cause of drought, 3.3% related climate change to floods and 26.6% of the respondents related both drought and floods to climate change. Crop production was witnessed to decrease by most respondents in all villages as compared to increase or no change (Table 10). Over 83.0% of respondents agreed on a decreased crop production in comparison with 13% who favored an increased production. Willingness to participate in natural resource management: All respondents at all villages' agreed to participate in forest conservation (Table 11) whereas most of the respondents villages were willing to contribute in water resource especially at Bagadi, Wad-Mahmoud, and Himirat (Table 12) Copyright © 2015 SAPDH ISSN 1816-8272 110 Ahmed et al., Sudan Academy of Sciences Journal-Special Issue (Climate Change), Vol. 11, 2015, 103-114 Table 9. Respondents’ opinion about impact of climate change on natural resources deterioration Damages Villages flooding Drought Alsheikh0 23 Goz Algaiely Alshekaneiba Bargool Bagadi WadMahamoud Himirat Albraghna both flood and drought 23 Total 38 0 2 0 0 3 7 37 38 35 35 39 16 3 0 15 15 8 27 50 50 50 50 50 50 Total 12 233 93 339 Table 10. Respondents’ opinion about impact of climate change on crop production Village Crop production Increased Decreased No Total change Goz AlsheikhAlGaiely 3 37 9 39 Alshekaneiba 0 37 3 50 Bargool 2 33 13 50 Bagadi 0 50 0 50 WadMahamoud 1 33 6 50 Himirat 0 37 13 50 Albraghna 0 35 5 50 Total 6 293 50 339 Table 11. Willingness to participate in forest conservation at individual villages Village Forestry conservation Goz AlsheikhAlGaiely 50 Alshekaneiba 50 Bargool 50 Bagadi 50 Wadmahamoud 50 Himirat 50 Albraghna 50 Total 350 Copyright © 2015 SAPDH ISSN 1816-8272 111 Ahmed et al., Sudan Academy of Sciences Journal-Special Issue (Climate Change), Vol. 11, 2015, 103-114 Table 12. Willingness to participate in water management solutions at individual villages willingness to contribute in solution and management Villages Total Yes No Alshekaneiba 2 0 2 Bargool 25 0 25 Bagadi 39 1 50 WadMahamoud 36 3 50 Himirat 33 5 39 Albraghna 33 17 50 Total 199 27 226 Mitigation options for water management: Suggestions proposed by respondents for water harvesting for farming, and animal raising were terracing, dams on streams, establishing water pumps, enlargement and deepening of streams (Table 13). Terracing and dam building showed higher percentages (28.3, 23.3% respectively) followed by establishing water pumps and extending water pipes from canals (13.9, 13.3% respectively). Pond construction and enlargement, and deepening of stream came as the least options (11.7, 6.9%). Options for improving water resources for domestic purposes at individual villages (Table 3.28) included maintenance of existing sources (37.7%, frequency 132), as well as constructing new sources (25.7% frequency 90) (Table 14). Table 13. Mitigation options for water management at individual villages Water harvesting techniques Villages Building Water Ponds dams in pipes from constructi streams Terracing canals on Goz AlsheikhAlGaiely Enlarging &deepening of streams Establishing beds water pumps Total 22 3 3 3 10 7 50 Alshekaneiba 2 37 3 3 1 3 50 Bargool 17 13 2 1 8 7 39 Bagadi 6 7 3 12 10 12 50 WadMahamoud 9 23 16 0 0 2 50 Himirat 16 7 8 1 9 8 39 Albraghna 10 7 13 3 3 13 50 Total 82 99 50 23 31 52 338 Copyright © 2015 SAPDH ISSN 1816-8272 112 Ahmed et al., Sudan Academy of Sciences Journal-Special Issue (Climate Change), Vol. 11, 2015, 103-114 Table 14.Mitigation options for water management at individual villages, frequency and percent Water options Valid management Valid Frequency Percent Percent Cumulative Percent Building dams terracing Water pipes from canals Pond construction Enlarging &deepening of streams Establishing water pumps 82 99 50 23 31 23.3 28.3 13.3 6.9 11.7 23.6 28.3 13.3 6.9 11.8 23.6 52.0 66.3 73.3 85.1 52 13.9 13.9 100.0 Total 338 99.3 100.0 2 0.6 350 100.0 Missing Total Discussion Al-Mangil plateau faces shortages of water augmented by dry spells and desert encroachment. Increased temperature coupled with reduced rainfall could influence soil water content, run-off and erosion. This study indicated that various water harvesting systems could be applied, as evidenced by the contour map, where three physiographic units; relatively high land, midland and lowland could be identified. The northern part where the red soil exits and with gentle slope 13%, water harvesting could be done, the soil non-cracking and good drainage. All the surveyed villages were within the clay loam to sandy loam soils, which are sodic or non-sodic and slightly calcareous. The soils are classified as being moderate suitability for agriculture (S2). The area was found to be susceptible to erosion as shown by some evidence of sheet erosion. Accordingly, sprinkler irrigation would be most suitable, since it allows water to reach the root and as water saving technique. Most of the respondents were well aware of climate change impact on natural resources, crop production and water availability. They adopted different strategies to cope with climate change, they were willing to participate in several water storage techniques including terracing, dams on streams, establishing water pumps, and enlargement and deepening of streams. Surface storage could be through small dams, ponds and man-made tanks or small-scale reservoirs in which the source of water is usually ephemeral or intermittent flows in wadis or valleys (Oweis et al., 1999). In many countries, harvest results from farmers’ fields showed substantial increases in crop yield in response to the application of relatively small amounts of irrigation water. For example, the area of wheat under SI in northern and western Syria (where annual rainfall is greater than 300 mm) has increased from 73,000 ha (in 1980) to 318,000 ha (in 2000), an increase of 370%. The ratio of increase in estimated annual net profit per hectare to estimate difference in annual costs between rainfed and SI was 200% (Oweis and Hachum, 2006). Research in Burkina Faso and Kenya has shown that SI of 60–80 mm can Copyright © 2015 SAPDH ISSN 1816-8272 113 Ahmed et al., Sudan Academy of Sciences Journal-Special Issue (Climate Change), Vol. 11, 2015, 103-114 double, and even triple, grain yields from the traditional 0.5–1.0 t/ha (sorghum and maize) to 1.5–2.5t/ha. In this study, people using communal ponds suggested using pipes for provision of water near to their fields. In both cases, the importance homestead-scale multiple water uses tends to be income for women, because water-related activities near the homestead are generally managed and carried out by women. With improved water services, the animals yielded more milk, providing women with a higher income with less effort. Homestead-scale cultivation can provide up to 58% of a family’s daily energy intake, and the welfare and health benefits from increasing vitamin and mineral intake make this more beneficial than ‘kitchen gardening’ (Koppen et al., 2009). References Koning, N. 2002. Should Africa protect its farmers to revitalise its economy? Working Paper North–South Centre.Wageningen University and Research Centre, Wageningen, the Netherlands. MOAI. 2014. Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation (MOAI) annual reports. Khartoum, Sudan. Oweis, T. and Hachum, A. 2006. Water management in rainfed agriculture – investing in supplemental irrigation. In: Agricultural Water Sourcebook: Shaping the Future of Water for Agriculture. The World Bank, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 206–213. Oweis, T., Hachum, A. and Kijne, J. 1999. Water harvesting and supplemental irrigation for improved water use efficiency in the dry areas. SWIM Paper 7. International Water Management Institute, Colombo, Sri Lanka. Van der Kevie, W. and El-Tom, O. A. M. 2003. Manual for Land Suitability Classification for Agriculture with Particular Reference to Sudan.Ministry of Science and Technology, Agric. Research and technology Corporation.Land and Water Research Center, Wad-Medani, Sudan. Wani, S.P., Pathak, P., Sreedevi, T.K., Singh, H.P. and Singh, P. 2003. Efficient management of rainwater for increased crop productivity and groundwater recharge in Asia. In: Kijne, W., Barker, R. and Molden, D. (eds) Water Productivity in Agriculture: Limits and Opportunities for Improvement. CAB International, Wallingford, UK, pp. 199–215. Copyright © 2015 SAPDH ISSN 1816-8272 114