Rainwater harvesting: A suitable poverty reduction strategy for small-scale farmers in developing countries?

7/29/2019 Rainwater harvesting: A suitable poverty reduction strategy for small-scale farmers in developing countries?

1/77

Rainwater harvesting

A suitable poverty reduction strategy for small-scale farmers in developing countries?

Lisa Bunclark

A dissertation submitted to the School of International Development of the University of

East Anglia in part-fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts

November 2010


2/77

Table of Contents

Page1. Introduction and Methods...... 1

1.1. Introduction.. 1

1.1.1. Background. 1

1.1.2. The case study: Botswana.. 3

1.2. Methods.... 5

1.2.1. Approach.... 5

1.2.2. Data collection and analysis.. 6

1.2.3. Limitations. 7

2. The problematisation of rainwater harvesting.... 9

2.1. The need for a new framework..... 9

2.2. Critical issues in RWH for small-scale agriculture.. 10

2.2.1. The challenges to crop production in marginal regions. 10

2.2.2. Understanding the priorities of small-scale farmers.. 12

2.2.3. The role of governance and institutions. 13

2.3. Beyond rainwater harvesting: Dynamic and complex systems 15

2.4. The situation in Botswana.... 15

3. Results and discussion 18

3.1. Results.. 18

3.1.1. Rainwater harvesting practices in Botswana. 18

3.1.2. Factors affecting adoption. 19

3.2. Discussion.... 23

3.2.1. The ability of rainwater harvesting to increase crop production and

reduce poverty in Botswana....

24

3.2.2. The suitability of rainwater harvesting: Towards a matrix for

assessment

27

3.3. Summary.. 32

4. Conclusion 33

Appendix A

Appendix B


3/77

Abstract

The first objective of this research is to determine the ability of rainwater harvesting (RWH)

to increase rain-fed crop productivity and reduce poverty in Botswana. The second objective

is to examine the factors that determine the suitability of RWH use in small-scale agriculture

in developing countries as a whole. The overall aim is to produce a decision-making matrix

that may be used in developing regions to assess the suitability of the technology for

increasing crop production and reducing poverty in any given context. Primary data

collected through the course of several interviews with key individuals are analysed via a

process of coding, which leads to the categorisation and contextualisation of the range of

factors that affect both the initial adoption and sustainable use of RWH systems by small-

scale farmers. Together with findings gathered from secondary data, results from the primary

data analysis are used to develop a decision-making matrix.

The results of this study indicate that current potential for increases in crop production

through the use of RWH in both Botswana and developing countries as a whole is uncertain;

this is primarily due to impacts of climate change and alterations to rural livelihood

strategies as a result of economic development. It is shown that the suitability of RWH for

increasing crop production and reducing poverty in developing countries depends on factors

related to climate and ecology, farming practice, availability of assets, livelihood strategy,

governance and institutions. With appropriate adaptation of systems and the development of

community level institutions to provide in-depth training to farmers potential may improve,

but it is possible that the prevalence of pastoral farming may prove too great a barrier to be

overcome in some areas. It is recommended that further research is conducted to refine and

expand the proposed decision-making framework into a more comprehensive RWH

implementation framework.


4/77

Acknowledgements

First and foremost I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr Bruce Lankford, for his guidance

throughout the duration of this research and without whom my fieldwork in Botswana would

not have been possible. Secondly, many thanks to the research participants for their time and

agreeing to share their experiences with me. I would also like to thank the staff of the German

Development Cooperation (GTZ) in Gaborone and all individuals who provided valuable

assistance in various stages of this research project, both within the UK and Botswana. Thank

you to family and friends for unwavering support and encouragement, as well as their help

with proof-reading and editing. Finally, a special thanks to both the Jack Wright Memorial

Trust and Engineers Without Borders UK, who provided much appreciated financial

assistance that enabled the undertaking of this research.


5/77

1

1.Introduction and Methods

1.1. Introduction

1.1.1. Background

Agriculture represents the primary livelihood strategy for the majority of the rural population

in the developing world (Baguma and Loiskandl, 2010) and plays a crucial role in economic

development and poverty reduction (Balke, 2008). Dependence on small-scale farming is

greatest in the semi-arid and dry sub-humid climatic regions (CA, 2007) where rainfall is

generally low and may not be sufficient for crop basic needs (Oweis and Hachum, 2006).

However, in many cases the main challenge to crop production is not the availability of an

adequate volume of water in absolute terms, but the inappropriate distribution of this water

(Nigi, 2009; Reij et al., 1988) and the short-term agricultural drought associated with this

(Falkenmark and Rockstrm, 2008). It is suggested that the introduction of an approach to

directly bridge these intra-seasonal dry spells may be the most appropriate way to improve

agricultural systems in these regions by reducing the moisture deficit in the soil and thereby

reducing the risk of crop failure (Rockstrm, 2003)

Debate concerning the most suitable strategy for achieving adequate crop water availability

centres around increasing the efficiency of green water (water stored as soil moisture),

rather than blue water (water stored in rivers and aquifers), through the use of rainwater

harvesting (RWH) (see Falkenmark, 2007; Rockstrm, 2003; Hatibu and Mahoo, 1999).

RWH is a collective term used to describe the process of rainfall runoff collection and

storage for subsequent beneficial use (Barron, 2009; Khaka et al., 2005; Mati et al., 2006;

Oweis and Hachum, 2006). The categorisation of different RWH methods varies greatly, but

in general systems are grouped into two categories: in-situ (or micro catchment) and ex-situ

(or macro catchment) approaches. In-situ RWH approaches encompass any system in which

runoff is collected in close proximity to crop growing area and used to replenish soil

moisture directly. Ex-situ methods involve the collection of rainfall runoff from large areas,

which may not be in close proximity to the crop land, and storage in ponds, containers or


6/77

2

underground reservoirs, for use as supplemental irrigation when necessary (Khaka et al.,

2005; Critchley and Siegert, 1991; Botha et al., 2008)

In the past two decades interest in RWH has grown steadily and several global and regional

declarations have pronounced it to be a solution to the developing worlds growing water

needs (Nijhof et al., 2010). However, evidence indicates that predicted improvements in

agricultural production and reductions in levels of poverty as a result of RWH use have not

been achieved (Reij et al., 1988; Hatibu et al., 2006). Countries are increasingly urged to

integrate RWH into their water resources management strategies (UN, 2006) and the

governments of many developing countries within both Asia and Africa now endorse the use

of the technology (Nijhof et al., 2010). Within the small-scale agricultural sector it is

claimed that with the use of RWH there is a potential to double current crop yields (NWP,

2007) and lift farmers out of the poverty trap (Barron, 2009; Vohland and Barry, 2009).

Nonetheless, techniques have failed to be adopted on a wide-scale despite the undertaking of

a significant number of pilot projects and research (Oweis and Hachum, 2006; Reij et al.,

1988). Furthermore, in regions where RWH is a traditional method of agricultural water

management it has been observed that systems have fallen into disrepair and been abandoned

(Kumar et al., 2008).

RWH technologies should not be viewed as a panacea for small-scale agriculture and

although some systems have been successfully used by small-holder farmers in parts of the

developing world for thousands of years (Critchley and Sieigert, 1991; Mamdouh, 1999), the

same technology may not prove effective in other areas. The suitability of any technique for

agricultural use depends on a wide range of factors (AfDB 2007) and a technology must be

accessible, affordable and appropriate for the target community (Coupe, 2001; Coventry,

2003) if it is to be successfully adopted and sustainably used. Existing research largely

ignores the complex environment that RWH systems must fit into (Cullis and Pacey, 1992;

Scoones et al., 2007; Vohland and Barry, 2009) and despite an acknowledgement of the

importance of contextual factors on the suitability of RWH systems in recent years,

implementation frameworks remain focused on the technical aspects of RWH only (see

Hatibu and Mahoo, 1999; AfDB, 2007; Young et al., 2002).

Although researchers have successfully identified factors that influence the adoption and

sustainable use of RWH (Botha et al., 2008; Kundhlande, et al., 2004; Baiphethi, et al.,


7/77

3

2009), little is known about how these factors interact (Andersson et al., 2009). Key issues

identified in previous research include climatic characteristics, availability of resources,

livelihood strategy, policies and institutions, but what specific factors affect the adoption of

RWH by small-scale farmers in the case study country of Botswana and how these can be

categorised? Furthermore, what contextual issues shape these influential factors? With the

knowledge of these issues, what conclusions can be drawn regarding the ability of RWH to

reduce poverty in Botswana and the suitability of the technology for small-holder farmers in

developing countries in general? The overall aim of this research is to produce a decision-

making matrix that may be used by those considering the implementation of RWH schemes

in developing regions.

This paper argues that the current approach of researchers and developmental organisations

to the use of RWH in agriculture does not place enough emphasis on the context within

which the systems are placed. In some cases RWH may not be able to increase crop

production or reduce poverty and steps need to be taken to incorporate non-technical factors

into implementation frameworks to ensure that the technology is only advocated where

suitable. The remainder of this section explains the use of Botswana as a case study for this

research and outlines the methodological approach used in the collection and analysis of

both primary and secondary data. The second section summarises the findings from currentliterature regarding factors that affect the successful use of RWH in developing countries to

reduce poverty and highlights the gaps present in past research. The third section presents

and analyses the results from the primary data collected and proposes a decision-making

matrix that can be used to aid those considering the implementation of RWH schemes.

Tentative conclusions regarding the suitability of RWH for reducing the poverty of small-

scale farmers in developing countries in general are drawn in the final section.

1.1.2. The case study: Botswana

As shown in Figure 1.1, Botswana is a land locked country in southern Africa encompassing

approximately 582,000 km2

(FAO, 2005). The nation has a population of about 1,950,000

(World Bank, 2010), over 80 per cent of which is concentrated to the east of the country

(FAO, 2005). Since gaining Independence in 1966 Botswana has developed rapidly, but


8/77

4

despite the large increases in per capita income the country still faces serious challenges of

poverty (GoB, 2009).

The need for productivity increases in small-

scale farming to help improve incomes in

rural areas is recognised as a key concern in

efforts to alleviate poverty in Botswana

(Acquah, 2003) and this is one of the reasons

for the selection of the country as a case

study for this research. Traditional crop

production is characterised by low-input,

low-management rain-fed systems and

primarily involves the cultivation of sorghum

and millet (GoB, 2009) Despite attempts by

the government to assist small-scale farmers

through extension services traditional farms

continue to perform poorly (GoB, 2006a) and productivity remains low at between 200-300

kilograms per hectare (CAR, 2007; FAO, 2005; Whiteside, 1998), which is only 30 per cent

of potential yields (Rockstrm et al., 2010). High incidences of both short- and long-termdrought represent significant barriers to crop production (CAR, 2007). RWH systems have

been traditionally used in Botswana for many years for domestic purposes (Pacey and Cullis,

1991), but views regarding the suitability of the technology for agricultural production vary

(c.f. FAO, 2003; Mati et al., 2006); the aim of this research is to reach a conclusion on this

issue.

The concept of RWH in agriculture is not new to the Government of Botswana. Since 1970

the Water Development Section of the Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) has provided

syndicates of farmers with small earth dams to harvest rainwater for cattle watering and a

limited amount of supplemental irrigation (FAO, 2005), although it is reported that many of

these dams have fallen into disrepair and are no longer operational (FAO, 2005). The

Government of Botswana recognises that low productivity in the rain-fed agricultural sector

is primarily due to poor management of soil moisture (GoB, 2006a) and has identified the

benefits that could be obtained through the use of RWH in rain-fed agriculture (GoB, 1999).

There have been several governmental schemes aimed at traditional arable farmers including

Figure 1.1: Location of Botswana

(Source: Batisani and Yarnal, 2009)


9/77

5

Accelerated Rain-fed Arable Programme (ARAP), Arable Lands Development Project

(ALDEP), National Master Plan for Arable Agriculture and Dairy Development

(NAMPAADD) and Integrated Support for Arable Agricultural Development (ISPAAD)

(AfDB, 2008, CAR, 2007), of which ALDEP was the largest scheme responsible for

rainwater tank construction (GoB/UNDP, 2004). However, the impact of these schemes on

increasing production appears to be relatively modest and the uptake of the technology has

been low (Acquah, 2003). Despite heavy subsidies and assistance from the government

water harvesting packages adopted by farmers through ALDEP comprised less than 2 per

cent of all packages distributed (GoB, 2006a). Little examination of these schemes has been

conducted and one of the objectives of this research is to determine the range of factors that

led to such low levels of adoption of RWH systems by small-scale farmers in Botswana in

the presence of what appears to be an enabling environment. The analysis of these results

will provide key additional insights into factors that affect the suitability of RWH for

agriculture in other developing regions.

1.2. Methods

1.2.1. ApproachThe findings of this research are drawn from both primary and secondary qualitative data.

The secondary data provide a comprehensive summary of past research and experience in

the field of RWH within Botswana, the southern African region and the developing world as

a whole. The primary data collected from a series of interviews conducted during fieldwork,

provides in-depth information on the context of RWH within Botswana specifically.

Interviews were chosen as the principal method of primary data collection as they provide

rich qualitative data related to experiences, opinions and values (May, 2001) and this is the

type of data needed to answer the research questions posed. A semi-structured interview in

particular was used as this type of interview allows for a certain degree of flexibility and the

ability to modify the structure of the discussion based upon what the researcher perceives as

suitable at the time (Robson, 2002). It is via this combination of generalised secondary

research and more focussed primary research that key concepts have been identified and

analysed.


10/77

6

Grounded theory, as described by Strauss and Corbin (1998), was used as the basis for this

research and data collection and analysis was driven by concepts identified in existing

theories. Following the process of theoretical sampling, as explained by Bryman and

Burgess (1994), the preliminary collection of secondary data was used to generate categories

that shaped the interview guide and the collection of primary data. These interviews led to

the identification of further themes via a process of coding and additional secondary data

was collected where necessary until all themes were fully explored and considered

saturated (Strauss and Corbin, 1998). This particular approach is appropriate to the aim of

this research due to the ability it has to generate concepts and categories (Bryman, 2004),

which is needed for the formulation of the decision-making matrix.

1.2.2. Data collection and analysisSecondary data were gathered from a range of reliable sources, including books, peer-

reviewed journals and material published by relevant organisations and research institutions,

such as the Government of Botswana (GoB) and the Food and Agriculture Organisation of

the United Nations (FAO). The material was located through searches of library catalogues,

academic databases and general internet search engines; some material was also acquired

through personal contacts. This data contributed to the formulation of an interview guide(see Appendix B) that increased the level of consistency between each interview, which

acted to maintain a certain degree of objectivity and quality of data obtained (Robson, 2002).

Since the identification of those with knowledge or experience of the use of RWH in small-

scale farming was problematic participants were identified through a process of snowball

sampling. According to Bryman (2004) snowball sampling comprises the identification of an

initial set of participants relevant to the research topic, who are then used to establish contact

with other relevant groups or individuals. This sampling method is particularly useful for

situations where no specific sampling frame exists (Bryman, 2004; Faugier and Sargeant,

1997) and takes advantage of social networks of participants to expand the sample size. For

the purposes of this study, an initial list of potential participants was compiled with the use

secondary data and these individuals were then used to establish contacts with other relevant

organisations and individuals with knowledge and experience of RWH in small-scale

agriculture, whether through research and policy making, or via first-hand experience in the

field. A total of twelve individuals were interviewed, representing ministries, non-


11/77

7

governmental organisations (NGOs) and institutions working at national and local levels in

Botswana; the traditional Batswana farming community; and two individuals from academic

institutions in South Africa.

In order to ensure the interviews met with ethical approval, each potential participant was

read and given a copy of the pre-prepared Research Participation Information Form.

Informed consent was obtained from all participants and a list of those interviewed was

recorded through the course of the fieldwork. To ensure informed consent was provided by

each participant, interviewees were made aware that they may refuse to answer any

questions they choose and can withdraw from the research project at any time. Finally,

participant confidentially and anonymity was maintained throughout the course of the

research in order to prevent any adverse effects that may occur due to their involvement in

the project.

Although recordings of the interviews were not carried out, extensive notes were taken and

subsequently word processed to increase the ease of analysis. Copies of the notes taken

during the interviews can be found in Appendix B; as mentioned previously, the

interviewees have been anonymised in order to protect their identity. Initially all notes were

read several times to increase familiarisation with the data and allow preliminary coding, thesoftware package Nvivo was later used to conduct more extensive and systematic coding

using word-based techniques. As mentioned above, themes were partially pre-determined by

the concepts identified in the secondary data, although additional categories were determined

through the course of the coding process. Word repetition and the analysis of the context

within which key words were used, as outlined by Ryan and Bernard (2003), led to the

identification of additional themes as text was sorted into groups with similar meaning.

1.2.3. Limitations

Although efforts have been made to ensure the validity of this research, some limitations are

still identifiable. Firstly, it is possible that insufficient triangulation of data obtained from the

NGOs, government ministries and research institutes with that of traditional farmers may

reduce the credibility of the findings (Bryman, 2004). Furthermore, the small size of the total

sample may not be representative of the population and may limit the transferability of the

conclusion drawn from this research, although it is anticipated that the depth of data obtained


12/77

8

will compensate for this to a certain extent (Bryman, ibid). Lastly, problems with reliability

and accuracy of data may also be increased due to the use of interviews as the method of

primary data collection. Although efforts were made to ensure the positionality of the

interviewer were minimised, it is never possible to guarantee neutrality in an interview

(Rapley 2004). Data may also have been affected in the cases where more than one

participant was interviewed simultaneously, as the presence of other individuals may have

affected the participants response to questions posed (Chacko, 2004).


13/77

9

2. The problematisation of rainwater harvesting

In this section the research topic is explored through existing literature and main theories are

presented and examined. The importance of the context within which rainwater harvesting

(RWH) systems must operate is discussed and the need for an updated framework for the

implementation of the technology is argued. Gaps in knowledge regarding the suitability of

rainwater harvesting (RWH) for improving production in small-scale agriculture and

reducing poverty among farmers are highlighted. Key variables and factors that affect the

appropriateness of RWH are presented and the complex nature of the problem of low crop

yields is examined. Evidence is presented from the case study of Botswana and questions

regarding the suitability of the technology for reducing poverty within the country are posed.

2.1 The need for a new framework

We need to offer the poor real technology choice over affordable, appropriate

and accessible options. It is not hi-tech or low-tech but right tech.

(Coventry 2003:1)

RWH technologies have been traditionally used by farmers in many marginal regions of the

developing world and so are undeniably relevant, but the introduction of new and

inappropriate methods must be avoided (Pacey and Cullis, 1991). Within the field of

development, there is a tendency to assume that successful technologies in one region can be

transferred easily to another (Scoones et al., 2007) and that RWH systems produced by

research are likely to show equally promising results in the field (Rling, 2009). The

dynamic context within which these technologies must fit is often ignored (Cullis and Pacey,

1992; Scoones et al., 2007; Vohland and Barry, 2009) and fundamental factors which

contribute to the success or failure of a scheme are addressed inadequately (Parr and Shaw,

1999). Although researchers have successfully identified factors that affect RWH (Botha et

al., 2008; Kundhlande et al., 2004; Baiphethi et al., 2009), little is known about the

interactions between these factors (Andersson et al., 2009), or how they affect adoption

trends at household level (Baguma and Loiskandl, 2010). Issues regarding the sustainabilityof the technology are also often not addressed (Kundhlande et al., 2004).


14/77

10

Despite the acknowledgement of the importance of contextual factors on the suitability of

RWH schemes, there is no evidence of their incorporation into models or frameworks that

assess the use of the technology in agriculture (see Young et al., 2002;AfDB, 2007; Hatibu

and Mahoo, 1999). Existing models and frameworks, as shown in Appendix A, focus on the

technical aspects of RWH only and this has led to problems with many projects implemented

(Hatibu and Mahoo, 1999). It is argued that there is a need for the compilation of a much

wider range of factors into a decision-making matrix that can be used by those working with

RWH in agriculture. RWH is not a silver bullet (Barron, 2009) and a combination of

interconnected approaches will be necessary to solve a problem as complex as low crop

production and high poverty (Pauli and Bjerregaard, 1999).

2.2 Critical issues in RWH for small-scale agriculture

2.2.1 The challenges to crop production in marginal regions

RWH is thought to be particularly suited to the application of supplemental irrigation in arid

and semi-arid areas where the rainfall level is low, highly variable, often dispersed over asmall number of high intensity events and yield losses high due to moisture stress (Barron,

2009; Nigi et al., 2007; Reij et al., 1988). The optimum rainfall level for the successful use

of RWH in agriculture falls within the range of 200mm-1200mm (Pacey and Cullis 1991;

Mati et al., 2006), although it is primarily the intensity of rainfall, rather than volume, that

determines the degree of runoff and quantity of water harvested (Critchley and Siegert, 1991;

Pachpute, et al., 2009). In these regions variations in rainfall may range between 33 per cent

to 200 per cent of the long term average (Stewart 1988 in Rockstrm et al 2002) and in the

most arid areas it is not unlikely that no rain will fall for several consecutive years, with an

upper variation limit as high as 350 per cent of the long term average (Critchley and Siegert,

1991). This variability in rainfall presents the greatest challenge to crop production (Barron,

2009; Nigi, 2009) and there is an opinion that in some areas rainfall is simply too erratic for

RWH to sustain crop yields successfully (Reij et al., 1988). Furthermore, rainfall is often not

distributed in line with the crop-growing seasons (Balke,, 2008; Oweis and Hachum, 2006)

and RWH can only prove effective if sufficient amounts of runoff can be harvested and

stored outside of the growing period (Rost et al., 2009). In consideration of this, it is possible


15/77

11

that the use of RWH to bridge intra-seasonal dry spells may be limited in areas where

assistance is needed most as ultimately crop water supply remains governed by the reliability

of rainfall (Kumar et al., 2008).

The majority of small scale farmers in developing countries are located in areas with less

than ideal conditions for growing crops, where low and erratic rainfall is coupled with poor

soils (Kundhlande et al,. 2004) and high evaporation rates (Kumar et al., 2008). Soil fertility

is generally the second most limiting factor on crop production after water scarcity

(Critchley and Siegert, 1991) and a certain amount of organic matter needs to be present in

soils to produce satisfactory crop yields (Balke, 2008). The implementation of RWH may be

fruitless in regions where small holder farmers work with infertile soils and either lack the

financial resources to use fertilisation methods (Hatibu et al., 2006), or do not perceive it

worth investing in such measures due to high risk of crop failure (Rockstrm et al., 2002),

yet this is a factor that is often overlooked (FAO, 2003). Even in areas where soil fertility is

initially adequate for high yields, water harvesting schemes combined with a lack of nutrient

replenishment may lead to depletion of fertility through nutrient mining, meaning initial

increases in crop yields are unsustainable in the long-term (Critchley et al., 1992;

Falkenmark and Rockstrm, 2004 in Falkenmark, 2007). Furthermore, soils with a high

infiltration rate such as those with a high sand content can pose limitations on potentialrunoff (Boers, 1994), have a low water holding capacity resulting in low water availability in

the root zone (Rockstrm et al., 2002), as well as lacking the structure necessary for the

construction of RWH system components such as bunds (Critchley and Siegert, 1991).

Finally, high potential evaporation may equate to higher soil moisture stress and a reduction

in runoff harvested, but also a reduction in water volume available for irrigation for systems

where water is stored in open reservoir (Kumar et al., 2008).

The suitability of RWH to provide adequate water to meet crop demand and reduce poverty

is further contested when considered in the context of climate change. Since the beginning of

the twentieth century, patterns of reduced rainfall levels and number of rainy days have been

observed across southern Africa (Batisani and Yarnal, 2009; Hulme et al., 2001; Parida and

Moalafhi, 2008) and are predicted to continue (Hulme et al., 2001; Makurira et al., 2009).

Decreased and more stochastic rainfall may cause difficulties with the design of an effective

RWH system (Boers, 1994; Critchley and Siegert, 1991; Reij et al., 1988) and may decrease


16/77

12

adoption levels as farmers view the degree of uncertainty and variability in rainfall as too

great to invest in the technology (Botha et al., 2008; Boyd and Turton, 2000).

2.2.2 Understanding the priorities of resource poor small-scale farmers

The availability of resources such as finances, land and labour are widely cited as

constraining factors to the adoption of RWH systems by farmers (Pachpute et al., 2009;

UNESCO-IHE & IWMI, 2009). Many RWH systems demand a high initial labour input,

which can present problems for some families, particularly those that are poorest, or headed

by women (Cullis and Pacey, 1992), even where the willingness to replicate these systems is

substantial (Nijhof et al., 2010). In some cases, the land demanded by RWH may leave the

technology inaccessible to the poorest farmers who have little or no land suitable for crop

production (Ellis, 2000; Kumar et al., 2008). Permanent RWH systems may also be

unsuitable for nomadic farmers (Pacey and Cullis, 1991; Swatuk and Kgomotso, 2008), or

those who do not formally own the land upon which they farm (Critchley and Siegert, 1991;

Balke, 2008), due to the short-term potential benefits available from the installation of RWH

on the land.

Rural livelihoods centre around the need to reduce the level of risk and uncertainty to ensuresurvival and well-being (Whitehead, 2002) and the suitability of RWH depends on the

acceptance of the risk involved in the use of the technology by farmers (Andersson et al.,

2009). Nigi et al. (2007) argues that the extent of unfavourable agricultural conditions with

which farmers in developing countries are faced encourages them to adopt technologies such

as RWH to lower risk levels. However, Toulin and Chambers (1990) are of the opinion that

the harsh and widely varying conditions experienced in complex, diverse and risk prone

areas prevent farmers from adopting RWH, as the technology fails to adequately reduce the

risk levels involved in crop production (Boyd and Turton, 2000).

In marginal areas RWH cannot be considered as a stand-alone activity (Ramisch, 1999) and

concentrating on improving water availability only will not solve all the problems connected

to low agricultural productivity (Rockstrm et al., 2010), other inputs and cultural practices

must also be optimised (Oweis and Hachum, 2006). In some cases the key resource lacking

from farmers may the knowledge and skill required to manage their farmland effectively;

therefore even with the provision of RWH to increase water availability it is possible that


17/77

13

production levels may remain low. Aside from aspects such as the application of fertilisers

mentioned above, poor farm management practices that may limit yield increases include the

selection of crops with a water demand that does not provide the best fit to rainfall patterns

(Yuan et al., 2003), the untimely sowing of seeds (Kronen, 1994) and the inefficient

application of water made available from RWH (Barron, 2009).

The suitability of RWH for agriculture and poverty reduction in developing countries also

depends on the synchronisation of the technology with common farming livelihood

strategies at both household and community level. At household levels livelihood strategies

comprise extensive land use characterised by low levels of input (Dixon et al., 2001) and

diversification to spread the level of risk and provide a higher level of buffering (Toulin and

Chambers, 1990). On this basis it is argued that RWH may be unsuitable for small-scale

farmers, as it is a practice that demands land use intensification (Jodha, 1990) and may limit

the potential for diversification due to competition the technology may create between cattle

and crops for land and resources may (Whitehead, 2002). At a community level the

transformation of land that has historically been reserved for grazing into cropland for the

purposes of RWH may intensify any conflict occurring between pastoral and arable farmers

(Vohland, K. and Barry, B 2009). It is recommended that any RWH strategies consider

methods for integrating both pastoral and arable farming (Botha et al., 2008; Pacey andCullis, 1991), as schemes are likely to fail unless cattle grazing can be controlled (Critchley

and Siegert, 1991; Vohland and Barry, 2009).

Possible future trends in livelihood strategies are also important to consider as these will

relate to the appropriateness of RWH for small scale farmers in the long-term. If farming

practices are intensified as predicted (Netting, 1993 in Ellis 2000; Ramisch,1999), RWH

may become more in-line with and appropriate for farmers livelihood approaches. However,

if crop production is regarded with increasingly low priority in the livelihood strategy as

suggested by Ellis (2000), insufficient resources may be allocated to allow for the adoption

of the technology (Borhang, 1992; Boyd and Turton, 2000; Hatibu and Mahoo, 1999).

2.2.3 The role of governance and institutions

Any government policy that has a significant influence on livelihood strategies of farmers,

such as those regarding economic development, welfare, agriculture, investment and land


18/77

14

tenure, will affect the adoption and sustainability of RWH (Agarwal and Narain, 1999; Boyd

and Turton 2000; Kumar et al., 2008) and is likely to long after it is ever withdrawn

(Rethman and Muhangi, 2009). The involvement of the government is said to be a key

influence on implementation of large-scale RWH strategies (Kahinda et al., 2007) and in

areas where the government provides incentives for farmers, the adoption rate of RWH

schemes appears to be higher (Baguma and Loiskandl, 2010; Tumbo et al., in press).

Furthermore, government policies that lead to increased investments in infrastructure may

allow for easier access to markets, which is thought to be an important requirement in

encouraging farmers to adopt and sustain RWH (Rockstrm et al., 2010). However, Nigi

(2009) found political intervention, at national or local level, to be detrimental to the success

of projects and Jodha (1990) observed that public policies, such as drought relief schemes,

disregard traditional coping strategies of farmers and replace the satisfaction of needs at the

local level, which may reduce the adoption of RWH schemes as farmers rely more on

external sources of food and income.

RWH schemes must be considered together with institutional and organisational

environment (Cullis and Pacey, 1992) as a lack of emphasis on institutions may minimise the

impact of any government policies or investments designed to encourage RWH (Baiphethi,

et al., 2009). Institutional structures similar to those for full irrigation schemes are needed forthe successful implementation of RWH schemes (Rockstrm et al., 2010) and catchment

scale institutions in particular are important for ensuring the sustainability of crop production

increases by both upstream and downstream farmers (Pachpute, et al. 2009). Nevertheless,

the introduction of formal institutions and legal frameworks by governments has reduced the

effectiveness of traditional and informal arrangements in RWH schemes in the past (Jodha,

1986; Boyd and Turton, 2000) and the resulting loss of traditional knowledge has led to a

reduction in adoption and use of RWH (Boyd and Turton, 2000).

Institutions are a key factor to ensuring that RWH techniques move beyond a simple

disseminated technology, to a sustainably adapted and managed technology (Botha et al.,

2008) capable of reducing poverty. Institutions play a primary role in learning and

knowledge exchange, development of best practices and experiences, farmer support and the

management of RWH systems (Nijhof et al., 2010) and may help provide the poorest

households with resources needed for the adoption of the technology (Fox et al., 2005 in

Rockstrm et al 2010). However, RWH needs to be developed within the context of small-


19/77

15

scale farms (Whiteside, 1998) and although demonstrative field trials have proved a

successful form of dissemination in some areas (Pachpute, et al., 2009), extensive training is

likely to be a necessary part of any RWH scheme to provide farmers with the knowledge to

not only apply the technology, but adapt it to their needs to ensure maximum benefit

(UNESCO-IHE & IWMI, 2009).

2.3 Beyond Rainwater Harvesting: Dynamic and complex systems

Although RWH systems are generally viewed as benign (Batchelor et al., 2003; Kumar et al.,

2008), benefits accrued by schemes implemented in one area may result in significant

negative trade-offs in others (Batchelor et al., 2003). At a basin level RWH has the potential

to drastically affect hydrology and ecosystems (Barron, 2009) as one third of rainfall is

required to sustain the wider environment (UNEP, 2006). To maximise reductions in poverty

and land degradation, societal and ecological demands need to be considered in combination

with crop production (Vohland and Barry, 2009), as hydrology and ecosystems in semi-arid

and arid areas are highly sensitive to changes in green water flow and small changes to

rainfall and runoff levels may be large in a relative sense (Falkenmark, 2007). The analysis

of implementation of RWH schemes, therefore, cannot be restricted to individual systems inisolation, particularly in the context of non-equilibrium environments that are characteristic

of arid and semi-arid regions (Scoones et al., 2007).

2.4 The situation in Botswana

Botswana has a semi-arid to arid environment with a mean annual rainfall of 416mm (FAO,

2005), although in the east where the majority of small-scale crop production is carried out

mean rainfall is between 200-550mm (see Figure 2.1). Rainfall is erratic and generally

occurs in localised intense showers (Rethman and Muhangi, 2009); most regions of the

country have a rainfall reliability of between 0.5 and 0.7 (Tsheko, 2003). Potential

evaporation is about four times the average annual rainfall at 2000mm (Ganesan, 2001) and

rates are highest in the summer, between October and April, when the vast majority of the

rainfall occurs (FAO, 2005). The country is characterised by gently undulating topography

populated by occasional rocky outcrops (FAO, 2005), and sandy infertile soils which are not


20/77

16

very suitable for crop production (FAO, 2003). However, the hardveld region in the east

consists of more fertile loamy clay soils with higher water holding capacity and more

suitable for crop growth (Rethman and Muhangi, 2009).

Economic growth has lead to rapid urbanisation with formal employment becoming a major

source of income in some areas (Rethman and Muhangi, 2009), but arable farming is still

said to provide an important contribution to livelihoods, with 65 per cent of households

using it as a source of livelihood (BIDPA, 2001 in CAR, 2007). Figure 2.1 indicates the

distribution of farming livelihood zones in Botswana and highlights the areas in which crop

production is most important.

Figure 2.1: The farming livelihood zones in Botswana (shown with hydrology

and rainfall levels included)

(Sources: Rethman and Muhangi, 2009 for livelihood zones map; GoB, 2009 for rainfall data)

60

55

50

45

35


21/77

17

Water scarcity in Botswana is high and this poses a significant restriction on crop

production, but water availability is not the only factor affecting arable farming; poor farm

management, inadequate arable land, an ageing farming population, inadequate market

access, damage to crops by livestock and a lack of community level institutions are all

aspects thought to limit crop production (AfDB, 2008; GoB, 2009; GoB, 2006a; Whiteside,

1998).

Evidence indicates that the government has a significant influence on crop production as the

strong social support system is said to have led to the development of an enduring belief

within the rural population that the government will provide come what may (Rahm et al.,

2006). Drought relief programmes in particular are said to have reduced the uptake of yield

enhancing technologies such as RWH (CAR, 2007). Furthermore, land allocation policies

have provided farmers with plots that are unsuitable for crop production in some cases

(Borhang, 1992) and the drive for rapid economic development by the Government has

created more competition for labour and finances (Howard et al., 2007). However, little is

known about how these issues may limit the adoption and sustainable us of RWH in

Botswana.

Looking into the future, the Government of Botswana recognises a continued need toincrease the productivity within the arable sector to reduce the growing level of food imports

and the dependence on government in rural areas (GoB, 2009), yet there is no explicit

evidence of plans to encourage the use of RWH in small-scale agriculture (GoB, 2006b).

Meteorologically there is a trend towards a reduction in rainfall levels, decrease in rainy days

and decrease in rainfall intensity in the future as a result of climate change (Batisai and

Yarnal, 2009) and mean annual rainfall could decrease by between 8 per cent and 54 per cent

by 2100 (Kenabatho et al., 2009); therefore water availability will continue to be a primary

concern among farmers. It is possible that this need to increase small-scale agricultural

productivity could be met by RWH, but research needs to be conducted to determine the

ability of the technology to overcome the risks involved in crop production, including those

associated with climate change.


22/77

18

3. Results and discussion

3.1 Results

Twelve interviews were carried out as part of the primary data collection in Botswana.

During the interview process participants were asked to describe the types of rainwater

harvesting (RWH) used by small-scale farmers in Botswana and outline the factors that

affect the adoption of the technology. Comprehensive notes from the interviews can be

found in Appendix B; as mentioned previously, the interviewees have been anonymised in

order to protect their identity. A coding process was used to identify key themes in the

participants responses and the findings are summarised in the following section.

3.1.1 Rainwater harvesting practices in Botswana

[RWH is] the most important technical innovation for farmers dependent on

rain-fed agriculture.

(Interviewee A)

The primary data indicates that RWH is used by small-scale farmers in Botswana, but that

systems have not been widely adopted . Systems are built either independently by farmers, or

through government-led schemes implemented by the Ministry of Agriculture (MoA). A

range of different RWH techniques was mentioned by the participants, including both in-situ

and ex-situ systems, the latter of which appear to be the most extensively used. The use of

in-situ RWH methods was observed at one location only, no other evidence of the use of in-

situ systems in small-scale agriculture was found. Many participants referred to the use of

pans to provide water for agriculture, particularly in the west of Botswana where it was

reported they often provide the only source of water. Other ex-situ methods of water

collection reportedly used are sand rivers, hafirs and small earth dams. However, there was

mixed opinion as to how much these methods of water collection are continuing to be

utilised by small-scale farmers.


23/77

19

3.1.2 Factors affecting adoption

Hydro-ecological factors

The volume of water is not enough to provide for irrigation due to low

levels of rainfall, even if roof tops are utilised as well as land.

(Interviewee L)

Insufficient rainfall was the most frequent factor cited for the non-adoption of RWH

strategies by small-scale farmers in Botswana: more than half of the participants were of the

opinion that the volume of water collected does not provide adequate irrigation to crops.

Nonetheless, a number of participants were of the opinion that rainfall levels in Botswana

are sufficient to provide water to meet crop demand for the entire duration of the crop

growing season. Interviewee K stated that with the use of an in-situ RWH system, a good

harvest was virtually guaranteed. A common agreement among the vast majority of

participants was that traditional methods of RWH have successfully maintained agricultural

water availability for crop production in the past, but no longer provide farmers with enough

water for the entire growing season. According to Interviewee C rainfall cannot be

depended upon these days and the increasingly stochastic nature of rainfall in Botswana hascontributed to the inability of traditional methods to continue providing adequate water for

crop growth. It was reported that traditional rainfall patterns are still essentially in place in

some areas and rainfall is slightly delayed or heavier than usual. In others, rainfall no longer

has an observable pattern and significant volumes of rain can occur in the traditionally dry

winter months of June to August.

The high evaporation rate was reported to have a marked affect on the ability of RWH

systems to provide adequate water to increase production, contributing to a lack of adoption

of systems by some farmers. Participants commented that a high rainfall-evaporation ratio

results in the loss of a significant proportion of rainfall harvested that would otherwise be

available for crop consumption, particularly in traditional systems where water is lost

through evaporation form surface storage in pans. In in-situ systems evaporation directly

from the soil causes most problems and the application of mulch on crop land was said to be

needed to reduce the loss of water stored in the soil. However, in some areas the majority if

mulch is consumed by cattle and so unavailable for use in RWH schemes.


24/77

20

Availability of assets

Rainwater harvesting [for small-scale farmers in Botswana] is a good

idea in theory, but not in practice.

(Interviewee K)

An important factor affecting the adoption of RWH systems (even those which the

Government has heavily subsidised) is the reluctance of farmers to dedicate their time and

labour to implementing the systems. Two participants involved in the MoA Water

Development Sections small earth dam construction scheme stated that in some cases

farmers have only agreed to help with construction of dams upon receipt of payment, despite

the fact that labour is expected to be given in-kind in return for the construction of the dam

by the Government. According to the participants, problems regarding labour availability are

primarily attributed to a lack of willingness to work on farmland among the rural population,

which is partly due to competition for labour from the formal sector.

Availability of labour for RWH implementation is apparently restricted further by a lack of

community cohesion within Botswana and a lack of willingness to work at group level. Manyof the interviewees mentioned that people in Botswana are not keen to work together and any

strategies involving the group cooperation of farmers are not likely to be successful. In some

cases this was attributed to divides created by unevenly distributed development causing

social tension, but in others this was said to be due to the co-existence of pastoral and arable

farmers with conflicting priorities.

Interviewees gave mixed opinions regarding the influence that availability of financial capital

has on RWH schemes, but the majority stated it to be a barrier to the initial adoption of the

technology, even when heavily subsidised by the Government.

There was a government scheme in the past to provide a roof rainwater

harvesting system., but farmers had to provide funds for this and so the

scheme ultimately didnt work due to farmers lack of financial resources

(Interviewee B)


25/77

21

Issues associated with a lack of financial resources regarding crop production in general also

appear to have an indirect affect on the adoption of RWH by small-scale farmers. For

example, an inability to purchase fencing reduces the likelihood of crop production, because

without fencing the potential of damage to crops by livestock is high. Furthermore,

insufficient finances for public transport prevents many farmers from accessing their fields,

which are generally located several kilometres away from the homestead. Possibilities to

obtain grants and loans are said to be available for farmers through the Citizen

Entrepreneurial Development Agency (CEDA), but a lack of collateral appears to cause

problems in gaining access to these.

An inability of some individuals to obtain a plot of land at all also poses problems. One

reason for farmland scarcity is that elders are reportedly retaining family crop land, depriving

younger generations from land that would have traditionally been passed through family

generations. It is possible for these young farmers, or any household without farmland, to

obtain a plot through the Land Board, but the process is said to be convoluted and

applications to take many years to process. Moreover, it is reported that the Land Board has

in some cases allocated land unsuitable for crop production.

The final asset that has been identified as limiting the uptake of RWH, is farming skill andknowledge. The training available to farmers is said to be inadequate and poor farm

management at both an individual and group level restricts the performance of agriculture,

which in turn makes farmers reluctant to invest in RWH technology.

Livelihood strategies

Pastoral farming is a fundamental part of the traditional livelihood strategy for many

Batswana and this appears to be a key factor limiting the adoption of RWH. It seems that

farmers in Botswana are reluctant to invest in crop production technologies, such as RWH,

when the level of competition with cattle is high due to the risk this imposes on crop yield

levels.Although the erection of fencing may reduce the risk to crops posed by freely grazing

cattle, in some areas this may not be possible due to limited land resources and the use of a

plot of land purely for crop production may create conflict between arable and pastoral

farmers. The competition for resources between crops and cattle was a re-occurring theme in

the interviews and evidence indicates the needs of cattle are generally prioritised over those


26/77

22

of crops at both household and community level due to the higher value attributed to cattle

through greater potential income.

Growing changes in livelihood strategies in Botswana also appear to limit the potential

adoption rate of RWH in the future due the decreasing priority allocated to crop production.

In recent years high economic development and a dramatic increase in the availability of

formal employment has led to migration from rural areas, particularly among young

Batswana, and farming no longer provides an attractive career choice. All participants spoke

of a general trend of moving away from agrarian livelihoods in rural areas; traditional

farming households appear to be abandoning their cropland and moving towards other

livelihood strategies. The priority now appears to be on pursuing strategies that provide

higher incomes that will enable the purchase of food, rather than continuing to grow it.

Those households remaining in the farming sector are reported to be increasingly

concentrating on pastoral farming over crop production, due to low prices and lack of

accessible market for traditionally grown crops, such as maize, compared to high prices and

large accessible market available for cattle.

Governance and institutions

The findings from this research indicate that the implementation of policies and plans by theGovernment of Botswana related to RWH, have had little influence on increasing uptake of

the technology by small-scale farmers. The participants confirmed that the impacts of

incentivised government schemes aimed at increasing the adoption of RWH, such as the

Arable Lands Development Plan (ALDEP), have had some success, but in most cases

confirmed that dissemination of the technology has not extended past the pilot projects.

The increasing provision of water resources infrastructure, such as hand dug wells and

boreholes, in rural areas under the current Integrated Support for Arable Agricultural

Development (ISPAAD) scheme, is said to reduce the perceived need for RWH among

farmers and increased dependence on the government for water supplies. In addition,

extensive support given to rural populations through drought relief schemes has reduced not

only the uptake of technologies such as RWH in crop production, but led to a reduction in

arable farming in general:


27/77

23

Rainwater harvesting will not work in Botswana as there is no pressure to

grow food. People receive too much help from the government and so have

stopped farming.

(Interviewee K)

Reductions in arable farming are also said to have occurred in recent years due to an

emphasis by the Government on growth of the formal employment sector, commercialisation

of agriculture, reduced support for small-scale farmers and a focus of support on pastoral

farming. The increasing allocation of land by the Land Board of plots that are unsuitable for

crop production was also stated to present problems, as mentioned previously, along with the

allocation of land in the runoff path of traditional RWH pans.

Finally, insufficient institutional capacity in Botswana is reported to have limited adoption of

RWH, due to both a lack of number present and the ineffectiveness of existing institutions.

Several of the interviewees stated that the Agricultural Extension Workers from the MoA

have insufficient time to attend to farmers needs in their designated area and inadequate

transport to reach the most rural areas. Furthermore, many of the extension workers do not

possess adequate knowledge to advise farmers suitably on RWH schemes. The number of

institutions available to assist farmers in Botswana has declined significantly in the past fewdecades; those that remain appear not to work efficiently and group organisation has become

a problem across the whole agricultural sector. NGOs, farming organisations and

cooperatives that encouraged the adoption of RWH schemes among farmers in the past, but

sharp falls in funding from donors since Botswanas achievement of middle-income status is

said to have led to the collapse of many such organisations. This has made it more difficult

for farmers to obtain funds for projects and gain knowledge to allow them to implement

RWH on their land.

3.2 Discussion

The results indicate that RWH has been traditionally used by small-scale farmers in

Botswana, but current use is not widespread. Factors identified as limiting the adoption of

the technology include climate, availability of assets, rural livelihood strategy, government

policy and institutions. In the first part of this section, the implications of these findings are


28/77

24

discussed and the ability of RWH to reduce poverty in Botswana is analysed. In the second

part of this section, the findings from this analysis are used together with past research to

propose factors that may affect the suitability of RWH for increasing crop production and

reducing poverty in developing countries in general. Finally, these factors are summarised in

a decision-making matrix that may potentially be used to aid the implementation of RWH

projects.

3.2.1 The ability of rainwater harvesting to increase crop production and reduce poverty inBotswana.

Dynamic and interdependent environment

Primary data indicates that in the past RWH has traditionally played an important part in

small-scale farming in Botswana, but the abandonment of these schemes in recent years, as

reported by the participants, is an indication that the benefits originally gained from using

the technology may no longer be felt. Despite reductions in rainfall volume during the past

few decades (Batisani and Yarnal, 2009) the mean annual rainfall for Botswana still falls

within the optimum range for RWH (Pacey and Cullis 1991; Mati et al., 2006); therefore it is

possible that rainfall has simply become too erratic to sustain rain-fed crop production, as

found in other dryland areas (Reij et al., 1988). It is possible that the adaption of thesetraditional methods to include the storage of water in a closed container as opposed to an

open reservoir may increase the ability of RWH to increase crop production in Botswana, as

this would reduces losses due to evaporation and increase water availability for irrigation,

but more research is required to determine if this is the case. In the future it is possible that

even adapted traditional systems may prove unsuccessful at increasing crop yields as climate

change predictions for the region indicate a continuing decrease in volume and increase in

variability of rainfall (Hulme et al., 2001; Kenabatho et al, 2009).

Interviewee K provided evidence for the ability of in-situ methods to increase crop

production, but this approach is relatively new to the country and there is no evidence as to

whether in-situ RWH has the ability to consistently increase crop yields in the long-term, or

whether it can be up-scaled across rural Botswana without impacting negatively on the wider

environment. Again, further investigation is required before the full extent of the potential of

in-situ RWH can be assessed.


29/77

25

Allocation of minimal resources to achieve maximum benefits

The findings from this research confirm current ideas that the availability of labour and

finances poses a significant barrier to the adoption of RWH (Pachpute, et al., 2009;

UNESCO-IHE & IWMI, 2009; Pauli and Bjerregaard, 1999). The requirements for initial

inputs on systems seem to cause problems for some farmers, as has been experienced in

other areas (Cullis and Pacey, 1992; Nijhof et al, 2010). However, in Botswana even

government-led schemes that provide a high degree of assistance towards labour and

finances have not helped to encourage the widespread adoption of RWH, in contradiction to

findings by others (Baguma and Loiskandl, 2010; Tumbo et al, in press). This suggests that

other factors more influential than labour and finances may pose a greater barrier to the

adoption of RWH and potential for increases in crop production.

In accordance with RWH literature (Barron, 2009; Kronen, 1994; Yuan et al., 2003), water is

one of the many barriers to crop production and findings indicate that benefits from the

adoption of RWH in Botswana may be limited unless improvements in farm management

are also made. Farmers traditionally adopt a low input and low management approach to

agriculture and have little knowledge of effective farm practice; as a result of this any

potential benefits due to the adoption of RWH may either not materialise, or may be

unsustainable in the long-term. Moreover, rural livelihood strategies focus on the need toreduce uncertainty (Whitehead 1997), so unless RWH can be shown to adequately reduce

risk levels involved in crop production in Botswana, farmers will be reluctant to allocate any

additional resources other than the minimum necessary (Boyd and Turton, 2000).

Regardless of whether RWH can be proven to decrease the risk associated with crop

production, it is argued that adoption rates may remain low due to the conflict the use of the

technology creates with other key sources of livelihood. Pastoral farming and the process of

freely grazing cattle is an important part of livelihood for the majority of rural Batswana and

it is argued that increases in crop production may only be achieved if a RWH strategy

integrating both pastoral and arable farming is considered, as recommended by Botha, et al.

(2008) and Pacey and Cullis (1991). As found by Pacey and Cullis (1991) in Kenya, the use

of RWH in Botswana appears to intensify conflict between arable and pastoral farming at

both community and household level, as land usually available for grazing is transformed

into cropland; competition for water and vegetation also causes conflict (Whitehead 1997).

Due to the higher potential cattle have to provide livelihood security to small-scale farmers


30/77

26

their needs are generally prioritised over those of crops; therefore as long as RWH schemes

in Botswana do not allow for the effective production of livestock in conjunction with crops,

it is predicted that the technology is not likely to be adopted by farmers.

In recent years evidence suggests that economic development and a rapid increase in formal

sector employment has led to a reduction in importance of arable farming in rural

livelihoods, in agreement with Ellis (2000). It is suggested that this has resulted in the

insufficient allocation of resources (primarily labour) for RWH, as identified in previous

research (Borhang, 1992; Boyd and Turton, 2000; Hatibu and Mahoo, 1999) and if the

importance of arable farming continues to decrease into the future, the potential for

widespread adoption of RWH may be low. It is proposed that due to the level of

development that has occurred in Botswana and the low priority allocated to crop production

by households, the potential to increase small-scale crop production through RWH may be

limited.

Enabling environment and support systems

The results from this research confirm findings in the literature that governments may have a

detrimental effect on the ability of RWH to increase small-scale crop production (Agarwal

and Narain, 1999; Boyd and Turton, 2000; Kumar et al., 2008). In agreement with findingsby Jodha (1990), the implementation of extensive social security measures by the

Government of Botswana has created a high level of dependence within the rural population

and a disregard for coping strategies at the local level. It is suggested that high levels of

dependence on the state have led to low levels of RWH adoption as farmers see no need to

increase productivity because any requirements for food during times of need are met

through government relief schemes. It is argued that unless attempts are made to increase the

independence of the rural population on the state, the possibilities for increasing crop

production remain low.

As highlighted in previous research (Jodha, 1986; Boyd and Turton, 2000), the involvement

of the Government in RWH schemes and agriculture appears to have reduced the

effectiveness of traditional and informal arrangements in rural areas. In particular, increased

bureaucracy has reduced the adoption of traditional RWH methods, due to the need to apply

for permission to excavate pans to collect runoff. Furthermore, a focus on the

commercialisation of agriculture and an apparent lack of provision of access to local markets


31/77

27

may have discouraged farmers from increasing small-scale productivity, in accordance with

findings by Rockstrm et al (2010). If Government policies were adjusted to reduce the

degree of bureaucracy and provide more incentives for small-scale farmers to increase

productivity, it is likely that the uptake of RWH may increase.

It is suggested that a lack of appropriate institution building has minimised the impact of

RWH schemes in Botswana, as found in South Africa by Baiphethi, et al. (2009). If RWH is

to have the potential to increase small-scale crop productivity on a widespread basis it is

suggested that the capacity of existing institutions, such as the MoA extension scheme, need

to be improved and new institutions need to be created at the community level to provide a

platform for learning and knowledge exchange between farmers (Nijhof et al., 2010), along

with more extensive training to equip them with the skills to adapt RWH systems to their

particular needs (UNESCO-IHE & IWMI, 2009). However, unless the unwillingness of

Batswana to work together at community level can be overcome, the sustainability of any

institutions may be low.

3.2.2 The suitability of rainwater harvesting: Towards a matrix for assessment

The evidence from Botswana reiterates that dryland agricultural systems are inherently risky(Enfors and Gordon, 2007) and that the suitability of RWH for increasing crop production

and reducing poverty ultimately depends on the potential the technology holds for reducing

the risk involved in arable farming, without restricting benefits gained from other important

livelihood sources. Drawing on both current literature and findings from this research, key

requirements needed to ensure the suitability of RWH in any particular context have been

proposed and divided into those affecting initial adoption and those affecting longer-term

sustainability of RWH. These requirements are outlined in the following section and

summarised in a potential decision-making matrix in Table 1.

Climate and ecology

This research has confirmed that one of the greatest risks to rain-fed crop productivity is

high rainfall variability and the ability to reduce the reliance on stochastic rainfall is the key

to the suitability of any technology aimed at increasing productivity (Falkenmark and

Rockstrm, 2008). In order to be suitable for increasing crop production the distribution of

the rainfall must be timely as RWH can only decrease the negative impact of rainfall


32/77

28

variability on crop production to a certain extent (Kumar et al., 2008). In some semi-arid and

arid areas the variability of the rain may be too great for certain types of RWH to provide

sufficient benefits (Reij et al, 1988). Furthermore, RWH must enable crop water demand to

be met both in the short- and longer-term future, maintaining a lowered level of risk in arable

farming even in the context of climate change. The findings from this research indicate that

the relationship between the climate and crop water demand is extremely complex and each

case needs to be assessed on an individual basis to determine if the combination of climatic

characteristics is compatible with RWH and if adequate water can be harvested to meet crop

water demand for the duration of the growing season.

Climatic factors need to be considered closely with wider ecological issues, as these can

have a marked influence on yields. For example, areas with unfavourable soil characteristics,

such as low moisture holding capacity, or low fertility may not be suitable for RWH

(Critchley and Siegert 1991). Data collection in Botswana reiterated the importance of

combining RWH with soil conservation measures if crop production is to be most successful

(AfDB, 2007, Rockstrm et al., 2002).

Farming practice

Findings from this research also highlight the need for effective farming practice, as aspectssuch as unsuitable sowing time (Kronen, 1994) and ineffective use of water harvested

(Barron, 2009) may restrict crop production despite increased water availability.

Additionally, although data gathered from Botswana was unable to confirm that the presence

of RWH in traditional farming increases the likelihood of the uptake of new RWH strategies,

literature suggests that this has proved the case in other projects (AfDB, 2007). As a result it

may be possible to conclude that RWH may be more suitable for use in crop production in

areas where it has been used traditionally, as farmers are likely to be more familiar with the

systems.

Availability of assets

Although socio-economic factors are often neglected by those working on the

implementation of RWH schemes, this research has highlighted that such factors have a

crucial influence on the suitability of schemes. A lack of resources, including finances,

labour and land, is a key constraint to the adoption of RWH by the poorest farmers

(Pachpute et al., 2009; UNESCO-IHE & IWMI, 2009) and although government schemes in


33/77

29

Botswana were unsuccessful, in general the provision of grants and assistance from

governments or NGOs has been shown to reduce the barrier to the use of the technology

(Baguma and Loiskandl, 2010;Tumbo et al., in press).

Livelihood strategy

Evidence suggests that in order sufficient resources to be allocated for the adoption and

sustained use of RWH, crop production should be allocated with a relatively high priority

level within the household livelihood strategy. The conflict between pastoral and arable

farming poses perhaps the greatest barrier to the use of RWH in countries where livestock

make a large contribution to livelihoods and competition for land, water and vegetation may

lead to the failure of RWH systems unless an appropriate system that allows the co-existence

of cattle and crops can be implemented (Pacey and Cullis, 1991). Lastly, in nations with high

levels of economic development and formal employment where the importance of crop

production in rural livelihood strategies is reducing (Ellis, 2000), RWH may not be suitable

for increasing crop production as the investment in non-farm income is seen by farmers as

having greater potential for reducing livelihood vulnerability than those in arable farming.

Governance

The benefit of policies and schemes involving subsidies and grants specifically for thepurpose of RWH adoption has already been discussed, but if the use of RWH is to be

sustainable on a large-scale it is suggested that these incentives need to be accompanied by

complimentary policies that encourage the growth of small-scale agriculture. This may

include policies comprising improvements to rural infrastructure to allow market access for

farmers (Rockstrm et al., 2010) and an appropriate reduction in drought relief to provide

incentives to increase the efficiency of crop production.

Institutions

It is suggested that suitability of RWH in small-scale agriculture will be greater if both

informal and formal institutions exist at local and national level, as this will ensure the

sustainable utilisation of RWH (Botha et al., 2008) where benefits are shared equally among

all users and allow for the training of farmers and sharing of experiences in the field (Nijhof

et al., 2010). This research has highlighted the difficulties that may be experienced with the

involvement of political institutions in RWH schemes and small-scale agriculture in general

and reiterated the need for community level institutions (Nigi, 2009).


34/77

30

Table 1: Decision-making matrix indicating requirements for the suitability of

RWH systems in agriculture in terms of initial adoption and longer-term

sustainability.

Factor Initial adoption Longer-term sustainability

Climate and

ecology

Adequate data on rainfall, evaporationand soil properties to allow for effective

design of systems

Potential rainfall and runoff volume anddistribution compatible with crop water

demand

Soil with good water holding capacity(and sufficient structure if required for

any construction in association with

RWH system)

Soil nutrient level capable of sustainingcrop growth in at least the short-term

Sufficient availability of water to maintainwider ecosystems in region despite

presence of RWH systems

Equal benefits for both downstream andupstream users in basin

Minimal affects of climate change onability of RWH to provide adequate water

Rainfall patterns offer opportunity forenhancement via RWH with little

excessive drought

High predictability of rainfall, or provisionof weather forecasts, to allow for timely

farming practice and efficient use of water

harvested

Farming

practice

Traditional use of RWH in cropproduction

Growth of relatively high value cashcrops

Labour and equipment investmentacceptable

Combined use of RWH with soilconservation methods and application of

fertiliser

Optimisation of farm management skillsto decrease limitations on crop production

caused by factors other than water

availability (eg. seed sowing)

Fits wider farming systems in locationAvailability

of assets

Availability of finances, materials andlabour required for adoption through

subsidies and assistance from

appropriate institutions

Adequate land availability and landtenure

Knowledge and understanding of RWHLow input demand for adoption

Adequate availability of land suitable forlong-term crop production close to

homestead

Low input demand for maintenance Availability of finances, materials and

labour required for maintenance through

subsidies and assistance from appropriate

institutions

Possession of skills to adapt RWH systemto meet specific needs of farm/catchment


35/77

31

Livelihood

strategy

Crop production high priority inlivelihood strategy

Significant reduction in risk of cropfailure with implementation of scheme

Rapid return on initial investmentLack of conflict with other current

livelihood strategies (eg. pastoral

farming)

No detrimental impact on wider livelihoodstrategy (eg. diversification)

Provides consistent boost to householdincome and nutrition

Sustained high priority of agriculture inlivelihood strategy

Low competition for resources from otherlivelihood strategies (eg. formal

employment)

Governance Incentivised policies and schemes,including grants and subsidies

Provision of adequate institutions toprovide training and assistance with

adoption

Policies encouraging independence ofrural population from government

Minimal government bureaucracyinvolved in adoption of RWH schemes

Complimentary policies encouraging theincreased importance and growth of small

scale agriculture and crop production.

Legal framework defining rights andresponsibilities of water users

Provision of infrastructure to increaseaccess to markets

Provision of adequate institutions toprovide training and assistance with

maintenance and use

Institutions Government with high capacity toimplement relevant policies and schemes

Presence of local level institutions toimplement farmer centred research and

extension

Assistance of community/village leadersin adoption issues

Presence of institutions to provideresources for initial investment (eg.micro credit organisations)

Catchment level institutional linkagesbetween upstream and downstream users

to monitor and manage water supply and

demand within both agriculture and other

sectors

Community level institutions to allow forfarmer participation in planning, cost

sharing, continual evaluation and

improvement of systems

(Source: various)


36/77

32

3.3 Summary

The results indicate that RWH is being used by some farmers in Botswana, but that

widespread adoption has not taken place. The factors affecting RWH in Botswana have been

found to not only include issues related to the technical capability of the technology to

increase crop production, but also issues related to the context within which the technology

must fit, such as the availability of assets, livelihood strategy of farmers, government policy

and institutions. The current potential for increases in crop production through the use of

RWH in Botswana appear to be limited and potential for the future is uncertain, primarily

due to impacts of climate change and alterations to rural livelihood strategies due to

economic development. With appropriate adaptation of systems and the development of

community level institutions to provide in-depth training to farmers potential may improve,

but it is possible that the prevalence of pastoral farming may be too great a barrier to be

overcome.

The factors that affect the suitability of RWH for improving crop yields and reducing

poverty in any particular developing country are evidently significantly more complex than

those considered in existing frameworks. This research indicates that important factorsneeding consideration relate to climate and ecology, farming practice, availability of assets,

livelihood strategy, governance and institutions; all of which need to be taken into

consideration when considering the implementation of RWH in small-scale agriculture. The

suitability of RWH for use in developing countries in general is uncertain as a wide range of

factors influence the successful adoption and sustained use of the technology. Each potential

project needs to be assessed individually, with particular emphasis given to the context

within which the system(s) must fit.


37/77

33

4.Conclusion

In the past two decades interest in rainwater harvesting (RWH) has grown steadily (Nijhof et

al., 2010) and there is a general belief that the technology has the potential to lift farmers out

of the poverty trap through the improvements it can provide to agricultural productivity

(Barron, 2009, NWP, 2007; Vohland and Barry, 2009). However, in many areas empirical

evidence does not support this hypothesis and improvements to livelihoods due to the use of

RWH have been low (Reij et al., 1980;Hatibu et al., 2006). With the use of Botswana as a

case study and source of primary research, one of the main objectives of this research has

been to categorise and contextualise the range of factors that affect both the initial adoption

and longer-term sustainability of the technology; the implications these factors have on the

ability of the technology to increase crop production has also been analysed. The overall aim

has been to examine the factors that determine the suitability of RWH use in small-scale

agriculture for increasing crop production and reducing poverty in developing countries in

general and produce a decision-making matrix that can be used to assess the level of

suitability in an

Documents

Rainwater harvesting: A suitable poverty reduction strategy for small-scale farmers in developing countries?