Limpopo Basin Focal Project LBFP Research Team The Limpopo Basin Focal Project is a multi disciplinary, multi-institutional research project being undertaken in the basin. It is a two year project, coming to a close at the end of 2009.

Basin Focal Projects (BFPs) Identifying the major issues Establishing the links between issues Exploring options for change Producing guidelines for future research This BFP is one of several being undertaken in Africa, Asia and Latin America. The project has been charged with four major objectives: Identify the major issues related to agricultural water management in the basin Establish linkages between emergent issues Explore options for positive change in target areas and target audiences of the basin. Produce guidelines for future research, focused on reducing poverty among natural resource dependent communities. It is a collaborative effort under the leadership of FANRPAN and the Agricultural Research Council of South Africa.

Work Packages WP1 Poverty Analysis WP2 Water Availability WP3 Water Productivity WP4 Institutional Arrangements WP5 Options for Intervention WP6 Knowledge Management The project is organized in 6 inter-linked work packages—each of which is responsible for basin coverage. There are also individuals and teams responsible for country coverage and data acquisition. WP 1 is led by Malawi Polytechnic WP 2 is led by the University of Botswana and the ARC WP 3 is led by IWMI’s office in Pretoria WP 4 and 5 are led by FANRPAN WP 6 is led by the ARC of South Africa. These work packages are supported by IIAM and UEM in Mozambique, GWP Southern Africa, University of Zimbabwe and the University of Pretoria.

Basin population is over 14 million within the four riparian countries. Nearly 25% of South Africa’s population & over 60% of Botswana’s live in the basin. Although mainly rural, major cities within/adjacent to the Basin include Johannesburg-Pretoria, Gaborone and Bulawayo. 57% of the basin is classified as grassland 40% is estimated to be under rainfed agriculture. .6% is devoted to irrigated agriculture, yet they use .8% of available water resources. In practical terms, the project is looking at the following questions and issues: Where is the water (availability)? How is the water used (productivity)? Institutional factors affecting access and use? Observable links between water, agriculture and livelihoods? Feasible intervention packages Generating and sharing insights with stakeholders

Where is the water? This is a runoff map of the Limpopo Basin. It shows where runoff occurs, indicating that relatively more water is available in the south western portion of the basin than the balance of the basin. Several factors contribute to this water availability including rainfall, soil type, ground cover, and slope. Within the river course, there seems to be a large area where water that flows in does not necessarily flow out.

When is the water available? This graph shows a 70 year simulation of the water that arrives near Hartebeersport in the Crocodile Basin as rainfall and flood peaks. Much of this water goes unused. High priority use (demands for industry and drinking water) are shown in red—and are typically met first. Anything below the red line becomes an unmet need for water. This illustrates nicely that there is no steady supply for non-priority users, including irrigators. This unpredictability takes an especially high toll on smallholders and manifests itself as risk and enterprise failure. This type of analysis raises a number of questions: Who uses what water at what risk—outside priority demands? Is there competition for high risk (peak) water other than agriculture?

Water Productivity Water productivity is a measure of return per unit of water consumed. The scale goes from low productivity in red to higher in blue. The is generally very low productivity particularly in areas where runoff is high. Water Productivity (WP) values in Limpopo basin are extremely variable, but generally very low; Poor rainfall distribution makes the predominant rainfed areas and the associated farmers more vulnerable to risks;

Institutions All riparian countries have policies aimed at supporting small-scale farmers to increase their productivity and profits, yet effectiveness of implementation varies considerably; Limited inter-ministerial and departmental collaboration for promoting agricultural water management limits cross-cutting integrated policies to support agricultural water management, hinder best arrangements; LIMCOM’s emergence as an effective RBO significantly enhances the capacity of the basin countries to implement major benefit-sharing programs The work package on institutions has reviewed institutional arrangements pertaining to basin water management. This includes policy profiles of initiatives and approaches pertaining to natural resource dependent rural populations. Among the major issues emerging from this review are the following: Each country has policies aimed at supporting small scale farmers—yet consistent effective implementation proves difficult—often in the face of changing conditions, including the natural resource base itself. As we know from examples around the world, water governance is not always done in concert with planning for economic development but rather with limited communication between the implicated sectors. LIMCOM has a crucial role to play in designing and implementing wide-reaching benefit sharing, at the basin scale.

Water, agriculture, livelihoods & poverty The example is taken from the Mozambican portion of the basin. Four districts in the basin have high proportions (90 to 95%), of the population who live on less than $1 per day. Based on this profile alone, Chicualacuala, Chigubo, Funhalouro and Pande constitute areas of priority for analyzing the relationship between livelihood and water poverty in the Mozambican portion of the Limpopo Basin. The GIS drought profile shows the northern district Massangena to be the most drought stricken area in the Mozambican portion of the basin, followed by Mabote and Chigubo districts. Chigubo and Mabote happen to be districts with high incidences of poverty as shown in the poverty GIS Map. This overlap can be further assessed in terms of livelihood indicators such as education levels, sources of income, and distance from roads to help identify poverty hotspots where agricultural water management interventions can be targeted.

Strategic Interventions The LBFP is identifying those interventions with the greatest potential for improving water availability, access & productivity to reduce poverty in the rural population. In order to do this, we 1. Collect approaches being used, organize them by theme. 2. Develop data base of interventions to better understand their potential 3. Technical sift of interventions to assess appropriateness of different technologies in different locations (water requirements, poverty reduction, risk, etc). 4. Stakeholder consultations: ground truthing what might work under which conditions for which audiences-- 5. Compile list of appropriate strategic intervention packages

Output Management Which stakeholders need which information, when, and in what format? How is that linked to what we are producing. One work package is devoted entirely to knowledge management for the project. In addition to on-going communication, data sharing activities, they are responsible for packaging the wide range of outputs emerging from this proeject. Not the least of which is a significant data base. Maps Database Strategic Interventions/Enabling environments Impact

Major Issues -Vulnerability of smallholder farmers to water shortages (increased risk of food insecurity) -Where water productivity is low and can be increased, it should be a priority (depends upon diagnosis) -Underdeveloped institutional frameworks for nr management at different levels (targeting) As we tie together technical outputs, a number of issues are emerging across the basin. Primary among these

Thank you