Trade-offs or synergies? Assessment of Ecosystem Services in Multi-purpose Small Reservoirs in Burkina Faso

EU-IFAD (W4F) project

Bedru B. Balana, Marloes Mul, Olufunke Cofie, & Jennie Barron

IWMI

TropiLakes2015 Conference23-29 Sept 2015, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia

Phot

o: D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto

:Tom

van

Cak

enbe

rghe

/IW

MI

Phot

o : D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto:

Dav

id B

razie

r/IW

MI

BF & Small Reservoirs

Burkina Faso • Land area 274, 000 km• Estimated population17.3 million (2014)• Land-locked country (surrounded by Mali,

Niger, Benin, Togo, Ghana and Ivory Coast). • > 90% of territory falls in 2 River Basins –

63.1% in Volta Basin & 30.5% in Niger Basin.

• Volta Basin in BF comprises of two large watersheds, 47% White Volta & 53% Black Volta.

Phot

o: D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto

:Tom

van

Cak

enbe

rghe

/IW

MI

Phot

o : D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto:

Dav

id B

razie

r/IW

MI

Phot

o: D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto

:Tom

van

Cak

enbe

rghe

/IW

MI

Phot

o : D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto:

Dav

id B

razie

r/IW

MI

BF&SRs (contd.)

Small Reservoirs Context: Large spatiotemporal rainfall variability, climate-related

stress, gradual trend of increased aridity, and decrease in the growing season [Av. annual 750 mm; N-S d/ce: Sahelian-North < 600 mm; Sudano-Sahelian 600 & 900 mm; Sudanian zone (south) 900 and 1200 mm].

Small reservoirs as a viable option for water and food security Estimates No. SRs 1400 - 1700 reservoirs in the country

(Boelee, et al., 2009; Cecchi et al., 2011). (cf.110 in Tigray) Small reservoirs and dams retain an estimated 36% of the

annual surface water flow in BF (Boelee et al., 2009). Current main consumptive uses: irrigation (64%), domestic

(21%), livestock (14%) (MAHRH, 2003)

Phot

o: D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto

:Tom

van

Cak

enbe

rghe

/IW

MI

Phot

o : D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto:

Dav

id B

razie

r/IW

MI

Distribution of SR in BF

nn

Phot

o: D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto

:Tom

van

Cak

enbe

rghe

/IW

MI

Phot

o : D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto:

Dav

id B

razie

r/IW

MI

No. of SR in BF

<1910

1912-1939

1940-1956

1957-1973

1974-1987

1988-2001

2002-2007

>2007 (estimate)

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

10

12

65

108

523

335

143

198

Number of Reservoirs

Perio

d (Y

ears

)

Phot

o: D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto

:Tom

van

Cak

enbe

rghe

/IW

MI

Phot

o : D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto:

Dav

id B

razie

r/IW

MI

Ecosystem Services: ‘benefits people obtain from ecosystems’ (MA, 2005).

Multiple ES/benefits (dis-benefits from SR (Lit. review)

Benefits (or Ecosystem services) Crop production (yield increase) (P) Water for livestock (P) Limit rural out-migration (C) Enhance rural income (P) Support multiple livelihood (livelihood

diversification) (P) Buffer extreme weather and changing

climatic patterns (R) Improved access to domestic water

(drinking, Cooking) (P) Enhance women’s position within the

household (P, C) Recreation (Bathing, Scenery etc.) (C) Employment creation (P, C) Limiting floods (R) Improved greenness and increased

biodiversity (C, R, S)

Dis-benefits (or ecosystem dis-services)

Environmental deterioration (e.g., erosion of the shoreline due to upstream pumping) (– R) Decrease water quality (– R)Adverse health impacts e.g., malaria (– indirectly P, C)Water quantity (– P)Decrease in soil fertility (– R)Pests and crop disease (– P, R)

Seasonal distributions of use of SR in Goinre (Augustine et al.)

Trade-offs: What is it?

Giving up one thing to get more of something else

The ‘cost’ of something forgone in exchange to enjoy something else –

‘opportunity cost’ of a choice

 It can occur temporally (e.g., present vs. future consumption) or

spatially (e.g., land use/allocation – e.g., food production vs. biofuel)

Reduction in one ES as a consequence of increased use of another ES

In the context of ES, trade-offs between ES arise from management

and/or utilization choices made by humans, which can change the type,

magnitude, quality & relative mix of ES provided by the ecosystems.

Phot

o: D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto

:Tom

van

Cak

enbe

rghe

/IW

MI

Phot

o : D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto:

Dav

id B

razie

r/IW

MI

ToA approaches (SR)

nn1. Characterize SR: Main uses, Management, water extracting technologies, etc.) 2. Participatory identification of key multiple uses/benefits of the SRs

4. Assess level of provision/changes (+ve or -ve)

5. Analysis of the trade-offs/synergies - current SR management/use regimes

6. Analysis of alternative management scenarios

3. Develop indicators of ES linked to SRs

Indicator 1. Crop Yield (economic)

Cash crop (vegetables)• Double cropping (cropping intensities of ca.200%)

Staple crops (Rice)• Enhance food security

Fish • Fishery yield of about 80 kg/hectare for the Bagré reservoir

(Villanueva et al. (2006)• Annual productivity of 5,280 tons, involving 2,000 to 5,000

fishermen -this corresponds to an annual 2 m Euros – (2002).• Source of Protein/ nutrition

Livestock Watering

Indicator 2. Water (environmental) A reservoir in Burkina Faso with excessive phytoplankton and algal blooms growth from eutrophication (March 2011)

Indicator 3. Human Health (social)

SRs provides breeding condition for disease vectors like mosquitoes 1/2 million people (mainly rural) at risk from water-related diseases

(McCartney et al. 2007). Malaria (example) 3 SRs around Ouagadougou increased malaria risk during the rainy

season. A resident living near the reservoirs receives ave. 3-4 Anopheles

bites/night against a single bite for those living further away. The infection rate in children decreases with increasing distance

from the reservoir from 51 to 23%. The parasite load of Plasmodium falciparum in the blood diminishes

from 46 parasites/ml at 100 m to only 4/ml at 800-1,000 m from the reservoir.

Phot

o: D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto

:Tom

van

Cak

enbe

rghe

/IW

MI

Phot

o : D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto:

Dav

id B

razie

r/IW

MI

Human Health (contd.): Schistosomiasis

Phot

o: D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto

:Tom

van

Cak

enbe

rghe

/IW

MI

Phot

o : D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto:

Dav

id B

razie

r/IW

MI

Social conflict (Korsimoro reservoir 70km NE Ouagadougou)• Upstream veg. growers Vs. downstream rice farmers • Fishers vs. agrichemicals & and other pollutants from veg.

growers. • Pastoralists claim blocking passage of their cattle to the water • Signs of over-use and conflicts are emerging among users as a

result of the increase in the upstream area under irrigation and growing environmental problems.

Phot

o: D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto

:Tom

van

Cak

enbe

rghe

/IW

MI

Phot

o : D

avid

Bra

zier/

IWM

IPh

oto:

Dav

id B

razie

r/IW

MI

Empirical work to be undertaken

MCA framework for assessment of alternative SR mgt scenarios

Objective:Max. Multiple benefits from SR

Objective Alternatives(SR mgt. Scenarios)

Criteria Indicators (Data)

Assess the Performance of SRs (community-based)

Use a 5-point Likert scale:1 = Very poor 2 = Poor 3 = Average 4 = Good5 = Very good

ES Item Performance of SRYield increase 1 2 3 4 5Water for livestock

More DATA

Secondary sources/experiment judgements

Survey Data (econ. data): Crop yield data – major crops in the area

o time series (if available)– record of yield over time (SRs irrigated vs. non-irrigated)

o cross-sectional – survey of yield from sample of SR irrigated & non-irrigated fields

Inputs data – type of inputs, quantitiesPrice data – prices of inputs and outputs

Trade-offs curves (Quant.)

Crop(Yield)

Water quality

TC3

A

TC1 TC2

BD

C

F

EΔY

ΔTC1

ΔTC2ΔTC3

Trade-offs: community-based assessment

Elicit information on local people’s understanding/perception of trade-offs among various ecosystem services, e.g. irrigation use (more crop) vs. livestock water; irrigation use (more crop) vs. domestic use etc. Synthesize data and cluster results (e.g.):

Indicators of Regulating ES

Indicators of Provisioning ESHigh-provisioning (HP) Low-provisioning (LP)

High-Regulating (HR)

win-win(synergies)

win-lose(trade-offs)

Low-regulating (LR)

lose-win(trade-offs)

lose-lose(worst outcome)

Thank You!