Tag Archive: water resources


Clean, safe drinking water is scarce for over 3 billion people across the world. At least 1 billion literally never have access to clean, safe drinking water, putting them at constant risk of severe thirst-related ill health effects, infectious diseases or toxic contamination. Over 100 countries face either sporadic or chronic crisis-level problems related to clean water scarcity.

As the Innocentive project reports:

Yet, over half of the world’s population is at risk for water shortages, with far-reaching effects. Lack of adequate clean water has serious health implications, including the prevalence of water-borne diseases such as cholera, typhoid, hepatitis A and E, and diarrhea. Globally, diarrhea is the leading cause of illness and death and 88% of those deaths are due to inadequate sanitation and availability of clean water. Water shortages also foment civil unrest and often lead to violence and regional conflicts, as we have seen in Darfur, Somalia, Chad, Nigeria and Sri Lanka, among others. Lack of water perpetuates poverty, increases the risk of political instability, and affects global prosperity.

View full article »

Proposals & Analysis on Generative Economics, at TheHotSpring.comWater resource depletion leads not only to chronic scarcity of clean, safe drinking water for increasing numbers of people, but means arable land is harder to cultivate and to maintain. Persistent drought and accelerated desertification (the expansion of deserts into the farmed and/or built environment) are results of water resource depletion.

But the most insidious and threatening long term effect is the erosion of the overall human food supply. With climate destabilization accelerating, arable land increasingly hard to come by, and grain harvests collapsing, the global food supply is under serious threat. Long term political stability, and the defensibility of political borders, is linked to a sustainable food supply.

As Lester Brown notes, in his report “Rethinking Food Production for a World of Eight Billion“:

Farmers are faced with shrinking supplies of irrigation water, a diminishing response to additional fertilizer use, rising temperatures from global warming, the loss of cropland to nonfarm uses, rising fuel costs, and a dwindling backlog of yield-raising technologies. At the same time, they also face fast-growing demand for farm products from the annual addition of 79 million people a year, the desire of some 3 billion people to consume more livestock products, and the millions of motorists turning to crop-based fuels to supplement tightening supplies of gasoline and diesel fuel. Farmers and agronomists are now being thoroughly challenged.

View full article »

A World Bank study has projected that the global financial crisis and resulting recession will plunge some 53 million people across “emerging markets” —like China and India— into absolute poverty, in 2009 alone. In China, tens of millions of people have lost jobs related to the export-dependent manufacturing sector.

Such a collapse in private fortunes for millions in the developing world could lead to major political instability, so China and other nations are on the lookout, ramping up security operations and domestic crackdowns on dissent or public gatherings. Unrest in China’s western Xinjiang province tied to repression of the Uighur muslim minority also has a socio-economic component, as Beijing steers Han Chinese merchants into Xinjiang with subsidies, while Uighurs remain poor.

It is thought the upheaval in response to Iran’s apparently manipulated vote, indeed the manipulations themselves, may be rooted in failing economic fortunes, as foreign wealth to invest in commodities like petroleum shrinks and jobs and wealth across the Islamic Republic are threatened.

View full article »

CafeSentido.com :: In a tucked-away corner of the New Zealand coastline, a couple, both architects, Lance and Nicola Herbst, have designed a self-sustaining “off-the-grid” home that lends flavor and mood to everyday living. Their cedar-clad bungalow is designed to interact with the natural environment and optimize its use of resources, such as energy, water and nutrients.

Great Barrier Island is four and a half hours from Auckland, by boat, and its remote geography necessitates the kind of innovative green building choices visible in the home built by Lance and Nicola Herbst. When the South African-born couple first visited Great Barrier Island, they were taken with the unique beachside structures they encountered — “little timber shacks we had never experienced before—tiny buildings with 20 years’ accretion of stuff”.

They were smitten with the relaxed notion of the vacation bungalows (bachs — after “bachelors”, their traditional inhabitants) they found there, and also saw the scaled back standard requiring off-the-grid pragmatic innovation as a challenge to their design abilities. Achieving high-design innovation and stylistic and material “modesty” were part of the challenge.

View full article »

TheHotSpring.net :: NOW, with David Brancaccio, travels to the Indian Himalaya, to examine the problem of persistent accelerating ice melt which is speeding the erosion of glaciers that feed the Ganges River, which in turn provides water for hundreds of millions of people and sustains a precarious but massive food economy.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) finds global warming is causing glaciers to melt on every continent, and glacial melt is accelerating. It is expected land-based ice-melt could lead to a 3-foot rise in sea levels by the end of this century, a tidal surge, however gradual, that could displace 2-3 billion people living in coastal regions around the world.

But the immediate problem examined by NOW in this video is the potential worldwide food crisis resulting from failing river systems, starved of water fed from glacial sources at the top of their watersheds. The president of the Earth Policy Institute says the resulting scarcity and price-distortions could become a global security threat.

View full article »

The new administration in Washington, DC, has taken notice: climate change is not about a mild 1º increase in temperature on any given day; it is about a sweeping destabilization of global climate patterns, which could undermine the entire layout of civilization across the world. Building the infrastructure necessary for implementing and sustaining a green energy economy is a security priority in this new environment.

Key to understanding the gravity of climate destabilization are the wide array of catastrophic irreversible impacts that could amplify damage. One such area of concern is what are known as methane hydrates. Real Climate explains that:

There is an enormous amount of methane (CH4) on earth frozen into a type of ice called methane hydrate. Hydrates can form with almost any gas and consist of a ‘cage’ of water molecules surrounding the gas. (The term ‘clathrate’ more generally describes solids consisting of gases are trapped within any kind of cage while hydrate is the specific term for when the cage is made of water molecules). There are CO2 hydrates on Mars, while on Earth most of the hydrates are filled with methane. Most of these are in sediments of the ocean, but some are associated with permafrost soils.

Methane hydrates can be destabilized by warming ocean temperatures. When they are destabilized, they release trapped methane into the oceans, and eventually into the atmosphere. Methane has 8 times the greenhouse effect as carbon dioxide, meaning a massive release would significantly accelerate climate change related to global warming.

In the 1990s, the administration of Pres. Bill Clinton devoted $50 million over five years to researching how to extract fuel for energy generation from methane hydrates and carbon dioxide hydrates. But today’s concern is more focused on the potential harm from allowing any of the methane trapped in methane hydrates to escape into the atmosphere, whether from burning or melt-induced release.

View full article »

CafeSentido.com :: There are over 230 million people suffering from hunger or undernourishment in India. No other nation has so many people suffering chronic malnutrition, and the undernourished in India represent 27% of the worldwide hunger-stricken population. While India’s economy develops and the potential for an expanded middle class takes root, the total number of Indians going hungry has risen, despite the overall percentage of undernourished, as part of the whole population, having been reduced in recent years.

The current global economic crisis puts the most vulnerable in India at severe risk of persistent or even chronic hunger. Hundreds of millions of people living at the margins of a society in which the privileges of modern life are far from universal —people kept in a state of chronic poverty by countless socio-economic factors and often treated as the detritus of an incomplete political system struggling to comprehend its own massive responsibilities— simply do not have access to extra resources to cover worsening deficits in their food supply.

This means that a population the size of many nations may be facing the perils of a deepening condition of chronic hunger in a nation whose arable land is being diminished by huge dam projects, overuse and soil erosion, impromptu irrigation systems, hyper-expansion of water-use for non-sustenance purposes —industry, development and personal hygiene— and urban sprawl of a kind rarely seen in human history. Climate change is also putting India’s climate stability and water resources at risk, and chronic water shortage brings both the potential for tens of millions of water refugees and for outbreaks of cholera and other diseases.

The population facing food shortage is roughly half the population of the expanded European Union. In fact, only China, India, the United States and Indonesia have populations larger than the 230 million undernourished within India. That population is actually about 5 million more than the combined populations of Uzbekistan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Venezuela, Malaysia, North Korea, Taiwan, Ghana and Romania — all among the 50 most populous nations. So one could say that the number of malnourished in India encompasses the entire populations of 8 populous nations.

India’s food production and food consumption are both massive, by any standards, but the huge population makes the modes of distribution intensely relevant to the quality of life of hundreds of millions who find themselves at the fringes of that system. According to Time magazine:

India’s current food-distribution system is a legacy of the 1940s and ’50s, when chronic food shortages led the government to crack down on hoarding of produce by unscrupulous cartels. In 1966 the government introduced a new law that banned farmers from dealing directly with retailers and forced them to sell through licensed middlemen, called mandis.

India’s problem may be more to do with global harvest capacity and food distribution than with the nature of the retail sector there, however. India’s central plateaus are one of the world’s most prolific grain-producing regions. The country was saved from catastrophic famine in the 1960s by the so-called ‘Green Revolution’, which used modern farming techniques and highly efficient grain varieties to vastly increase crop yields, eventually making India a major exporter of grains. But in 2006, India was forced to import 3.5 million tons of wheat.

View full article »

Feature excerpted from Sustainable Development Update, Issue 5, 2008, by kind permission of Albaeco : Stockholm, Sweden

Fredrik Moberg, Albaeco :: Earlier this year UNEP, UNDP and the World Bank teamed up with World Resources Institute to publish a report focusing on the concept of resilience “for cushioning the impacts of climate change and delivering continuing benefits to the poor”. Recently, the Volvo Environment Prize was given to the “father of resilience theory”, C.S. Holling. But what is this resilience-thing really all about? We thought it was about time to try to sort this concept out once and for all.


Building economic, social, and environmental resilience that cushions the impacts of climate change is becoming increasingly important. Photo by Annette Löf/azote.se: thunderstorm approaching over Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Resilience has become one of the new buzzwords of sustainability. This is not only due to the fact that the father of resilience theory, Canadian ecologist Crawford “Buzz” Holling, recently won the Volvo Environment Prize, it all started much earlier. The concept of resilience was introduced by Holling already back in 1973 as: “a measure of the ability of systems to absorb change… and still persist”. In an ecological context, resilience is generally described as the long-term capacity of an ecosystem to cope with and adapt to change and perturbation, such as storms, fire and pollution. Hence, it is both the capacity of a system to withstand pressures and to rebuild and renew itself if degraded.

– Resilience is the answer to the question: how can things change and persist at the same time, explains Steve Carpenter, Professor of Zoology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Loss of resilience tends to lead to more vulnerable systems, and possible ecosystem shifts to undesired states that provide fewer ecosystem goods (like fish and crops) and services (like flood control and water purification). Clear lakes can suddenly turn into murky, oxygen-depleted pools, grasslands into shrub-deserts, and coral reefs into algae-covered rubble. It is often caused by gradual loss of biodiversity making the ecosystem progressively more susceptible to disturbances like hurricanes or pollution.

Resilience is the capacity of a system to deal with change and continue to develop. It is both about withstanding shocks or disturbances and regaining functions afterwards. In human systems, this is closely linked to the ability to adapt to changing conditions through learning and innovation or even transformation.

International development cooperation
The report, World Resources 2008: Roots of Resilience: Growing the Wealth of the Poor, which we highlighted in SDU 4/08, is a clear sign that resilience thinking is becoming increasingly mainstreamed in the international development community. It is a joint effort produced by the World Resources Institute, UNEP, UNDP and the World Bank, which argues that properly designed ecosystem-based enterprises can create economic, social, and environmental resilience that cushion the impacts of climate change, and deliver continuing benefits to the poor.

– Economic and social progress rests on a healthy environment, from local ecosystems to the biosphere as a whole. Maintaining the resilience of ecosystems is not only a question of saving the environment. It is about securing human development, explains Carl Folke of the Stockholm Resilience Centre.

A perspective – not a measure
In recent times, many resilience scholars have started to put much more emphasis on the social side of the resilience theory and also focused more on the adaptability and renewal of coupled systems of humans and nature – so-called social-ecological systems (SES).

Following this, the resilience concept has developed more into a perspective than a measure, a perspective recently defined to encompass the three aspects: (1) Persistence: the capacity of a system to maintain structure and function when faced with shocks and change (e.g. for a forest to withstand a storm); (2) Adaptability: the collective capacity of people in SES to adapt to changing conditions in order to stay within a desired state (e.g. the ability to safeguard current food production systems under climate change); and (3) Transformability: the capacity of people in SES to learn, innovate and transform in periods of crisis in order to create a new system when ecological, social or economic conditions make the existing system untenable (e.g. turning the current financial crisis into an opportunity to transform the global economy).

View full article »

As the “perfect storm” gathers from inchoate, deceptively non-threatening winds, we can look ahead, backward and into the mirror and ask how crisis comes, or why, if it is inevitable, if we might just fall right out of it, as we fell into it. But the answer is simple: human crisis comes from excess, from inordinate ambition, from misplaced aggression, from over-exploitation of resources, each of which generates real and problematic tension across the landscape of human experience.

The Dust Bowl of the 1930s resulted from a misguided atomized over-exploitation of arable land. Ancient Sumerian civilization collapsed entirely because excesses of irrigation coupled with poor planning raised soil salinity to levels toxic to agriculture. At the end of the 20th century, global industrial activity had come to far outstrip the available resources feeding into it, and our global economy had come to depend on increasing demand and increasing output to feed unsustainable rates of increasing growth, across the planet.

Something had to give. The mathematics of the whole big picture had come to rest on the assumption that already over-stressed basic resources could expand along with economic expansion. They could not. We may now be seeing just the beginning of this realignment of economic expectations, forced by circumstance.

As major resource scarcity spreads, with China losing ever more arable land to encroaching northwestern deserts and road building in the industrial east, as China’s exploding demand for petroleum, steel, copper, water, meat and grains, put pressure on world markets and pushes the cost of basic goods like food staples ever higher across the world, as the unsustainable demand for fuel moves the US corn belt to shift to cropping for ethanol —as much as 40% of world corn exports are from Iowa, which now devotes 18% of harvest to bio-ethanol—, we are experiencing the natural results of an economy that hinges on hyper-exploitation of resources. The correction, when fully upon us, may yet be far more severe than the 2008 credit-freeze crisis.

Hyper-exploitation is a doctrine: it underpins public policy, government spending, security policy and the philosophical arguments for and against deregulation and the trickle-down theory of economic growth as related to tax policy. It requires that we believe in unstated, unproven modes of natural replenishment; it is a proposition that all things can be tapped, moved, transformed and spent, infinitely, because somehow, the market will set all the right limits and excesses will never be so severe as to ignore the laws of nature.

It is, for this reason, dangerous, because it not only is a doctrine that requires us to use more of the vital resources we require than can be replaced at sustainable levels, it moves us deeper into the vice of living on borrowed time. The result is that we must periodically learn the lesson that borrowed time cannot be financed, that we must pay the full price when it comes due, and our unprecedented resource depletion will leave us, quite simply, without the level of supply required to sustain our standard of living.

Already, wealthy governments are moving to take over cropland in poor countries in order to shore up their own food supplies, as the food security crisis spreads throughout the world, affecting even the wealthiest economies. The fear is that this over-consumption now extending to land use in poor foreign states may lead to a wave of mass starvation throughout the developing world, sparking conflicts and threatening the integrity of the international system as such.

According to the Guardian’s Julian Borger:

“In the context of arable land sales, this is unprecedented,” Atkin said. “We’re used to seeing 100,000-hectare sales. This is more than 10 times as much.”

At a food security summit in Rome, in June, there was agreement to channel more investment and development aid to African farmers to help them respond to higher prices by producing more. But governments and corporations in some cash-rich but land-poor states, mostly in the Middle East, have opted not to wait for world markets to respond and are trying to guarantee their own long-term access to food by buying up land in poorer countries.

India and Bangladesh are constantly disputing river water resources that both countries depend on for basic sustenance for tens of millions of people. Ethiopia, Sudan and Egypt are gripped by a struggle over control of the Nile’s water, with the river running dry at the Nile delta on the Mediterranean during some seasons. The Colorado River in the US has failed to reach the sea and is seeing its flow through the Grand Canyon significantly reduced, as states in the Colorado River Basin dispute claims on the river’s water.

Hyper-exploitation even extends to the use of natural resources like water as dumping grounds. The level of toxic chemicals and plastic polymer byproducts now found in ocean water the world over has reached alarming levels, threatening vast ecosystems and undermining the health of human beings and wildlife in most of the world. Drinking water across the US was found to be contaminated by high levels of pharmaceuticals earlier this year, raising the specter of as yet unknown potential harm to public health, over the long term.

High levels of contaminant emissions or toxic dumping are an abusive use of natural resources we often overlook —like air, land, water and forest cover— in our quest for combustible fuels, industrial-scale production and economies of scale we hope will reduce costs, even if they also increase the risk to our long-term economic and physical health and wellbeing. We are now facing a structural economic crisis, which requires us to reformulate and rebuild our economic model, at the most basic levels, a process which will be more or less painful, depending on how seriously we commit to getting it done and done right.

Lester R. Brown, EPI :: A fast-unfolding food shortage is engulfing the entire world, driving food prices to record highs. Over the past half-century grain prices have spiked from time to time because of weather-related events, such as the 1972 Soviet crop failure that led to a doubling of world wheat, rice, and corn prices. The situation today is entirely different, however. The current doubling of grain prices is trend-driven, the cumulative effect of some trends that are accelerating growth in demand and other trends that are slowing the growth in supply.

The world has not experienced anything quite like this before. In the face of rising food prices and spreading hunger, the social order is beginning to break down in some countries. In several provinces in Thailand, for instance, rustlers steal rice by harvesting fields during the night. In response, Thai villagers with distant fields have taken to guarding ripe rice fields at night with loaded shotguns.

In Sudan, the U.N. World Food Programme (WFP), which is responsible for supplying grain to 2 million people in Darfur refugee camps, is facing a difficult mission to say the least. During the first three months of this year, 56 grain-laden trucks were hijacked. Thus far, only 20 of the trucks have been recovered and some 24 drivers are still unaccounted for. This threat to U.N.-supplied food to the Darfur camps has reduced the flow of food into the region by half, raising the specter of starvation if supply lines cannot be secured.

In Pakistan, where flour prices have doubled, food insecurity is a national concern. Thousands of armed Pakistani troops have been assigned to guard grain elevators and to accompany the trucks that transport grain.

Food riots are now becoming commonplace. In Egypt, the bread lines at bakeries that distribute state-subsidized bread are often the scene of fights. In Morocco, 34 food rioters were jailed. In Yemen, food riots turned deadly, taking at least a dozen lives. In Cameroon, dozens of people have died in food riots and hundreds have been arrested. Other countries with food riots include Ethiopia, Haiti, Indonesia, Mexico, the Philippines, and Senegal. (See additional examples of food price unrest.)

The doubling of world wheat, rice, and corn prices has sharply reduced the availability of food aid, putting the 37 countries that depend on the WFP’s emergency food assistance at risk. In March, the WFP issued an urgent appeal for $500 million of additional funds.

Around the world, a politics of food scarcity is emerging. Most fundamentally, it involves the restriction of grain exports by countries that want to check the rise in their domestic food prices. Russia, the Ukraine, and Argentina are among the governments that are currently restricting wheat exports. Countries restricting rice exports include Viet Nam, Cambodia, and Egypt. These export restrictions simply drive prices higher in the world market.

The chronically tight food supply the world is now facing is driven by the cumulative effect of several well established trends that are affecting both global demand and supply. On the demand side, the trends include the continuing addition of 70 million people per year to the earth’s population, the desire of some 4 billion people to move up the food chain and consume more grain-intensive livestock products, and the recent sharp acceleration in the U.S. use of grain to produce ethanol for cars. Since 2005, this last source of demand has raised the annual growth in world grain consumption from roughly 20 million tons to 50 million tons.

Meanwhile, on the supply side, there is little new land to be brought under the plow unless it comes from clearing tropical rainforests in the Amazon and Congo basins and in Indonesia, or from clearing land in the Brazilian cerrado, a savannah-like region south of the Amazon rainforest. Unfortunately, this has heavy environmental costs: the release of sequestered carbon, the loss of plant and animal species, and increased rainfall runoff and soil erosion. And in scores of countries prime cropland is being lost to both industrial and residential construction and to the paving of land for roads, highways, and parking lots for fast-growing automobile fleets.

New sources of irrigation water are even more scarce than new land to plow. During the last half of the twentieth century, world irrigated area nearly tripled, expanding from 94 million hectares in 1950 to 276 million hectares in 2000. In the years since then there has been little, if any, growth. As a result, irrigated area per person is shrinking by 1 percent a year.

Meanwhile, the backlog of agricultural technology that can be used to raise cropland productivity is dwindling. Between 1950 and 1990 the world’s farmers raised grainland productivity by 2.1 percent a year, but from 1990 until 2007 this growth rate slowed to 1.2 percent a year. And the rising price of oil is boosting the costs of both food production and transport while at the same time making it more profitable to convert grain into fuel for cars.

Beyond this, climate change presents new risks. Crop-withering heat waves, more-destructive storms, and the melting of the Asian mountain glaciers that sustain the dry-season flow of that region’s major rivers, are combining to make harvest expansion more difficult. In the past the negative effect of unusual weather events was always temporary; within a year or two things would return to normal. But with climate in flux, there is no norm to return to.

The collective effect of these trends makes it more and more difficult for farmers to keep pace with the growth in demand. During seven of the last eight years, grain consumption exceeded production. After seven years of drawing down stocks, world grain carryover stocks in 2008 have fallen to 55 days of world consumption, the lowest on record. The result is a new era of tightening food supplies, rising food prices, and political instability. With grain stocks at an all-time low, the world is only one poor harvest away from total chaos in world grain markets.

Business-as-usual is no longer a viable option. Food security will deteriorate further unless leading countries can collectively mobilize to stabilize population, restrict the use of grain to produce automotive fuel, stabilize climate, stabilize water tables and aquifers, protect cropland, and conserve soils. Stabilizing population is not simply a matter of providing reproductive health care and family planning services. It requires a worldwide effort to eradicate poverty. Eliminating water shortages depends on a global attempt to raise water productivity similar to the effort launched a half-century ago to raise land productivity, an initiative that has nearly tripled the world grain yield per hectare. None of these goals can be achieved quickly, but progress toward all is essential to restoring a semblance of food security.

This troubling situation is unlike any the world has faced before. The challenge is not simply to deal with a temporary rise in grain prices, as in the past, but rather to quickly alter those trends whose cumulative effects collectively threaten the food security that is a hallmark of civilization. If food security cannot be restored quickly, social unrest and political instability will spread and the number of failing states will likely increase dramatically, threatening the very stability of civilization itself.

Originally published online: 16 April 2008
(http://www.earthpolicy.org/Updates/2008/Update72.htm)
Republished here by permission of Earth Policy Institute
Copyright © 2008 Earth Policy Institute

Powered by WordPress | Theme: Motion by 85ideas.