Cola-Rose, Lothar R. Fanslau
Today I am going to look at a better-known export product from Kenya: flowers.
I will explore the virtual water footprint of the horticultural industry and show that it is operating in highly unsustainable ways. At the end of this post, I will also present a possible solution that could be a first step towards a market of water conscious flowers.
Kenya is one of the
largest cut flower exporter in the world, trading these horticultural crops
mainly to Holland, Germany and the UK (Kenya Flower Council). Cut flowers make
up 12 % of Kenya’s total exports and have an export value of 701 million US$ (OEC Kenya).
On these images you
can see how the Kenya Flower Council promotes the flower trade by illustrating the
impact on Kenya’s economy. Admittedly, the cut flower export industry does
contribute considerably to Kenya’s economic growth, by generating high foreign
exchange earnings and increasing GDP.
Also, the commercial
farms employ over 25.000 workers and provide them with free access to housing,
schools and hospitals (Mekonnen et al. 2012, 3732). Apart from questioning this
complete dependency of the farm workers, one main question arises: How
sustainable are these commercial flower farms?
Concerns have been
raised about the environmental impacts of the cut flower industry on local freshwater
resources. The Lake Naivasha basin (northwest of Nairobi) is the main site of the
horticultural industry in Kenya ,95 % of Kenya’s cut-flowers export comes from
this area (Mekonnen et al. 2012). The basin can be split up into the upper
catchment area (where smallholder farmers operate) and the lower area around
lake Naivasha (where commercial farms produce for export). While smallscale
flower farmers in the upper catchment area mainly rely on rainwater, the big
farms around the lake mainly rely on irrigation for their crops from either
groundwater, the lake or from rivers flowing into the lake (Mekonnen et al.
2012, 3726). The irrigated area around lake Naivasha is 4.4 ha: of this area
43% are used for growing flowers, the rest for vegetables and fodder
(Mekonnen et al. 2012, 3729). It is also interesting to note that 70% of the
flowers grown are roses.
How much water does this massive amount of flowers consume?
In the following we
will look at the water footprint of
flowers in the basin, grown by commercial farms in the area around the
lake.
From the total water footprint of the basin (102 million m3 per year), the largest share
is green water (68%), followed by blue water (19%) and grey water (13%)
(Mekonnen et al. 2012, 3729). This means that most of the water consumption is rainwater used in crop production in the basin. Because I
want to focus on the flowers grown by commercial
farms around the lake Naivasha, I am most interested in the blue water
footprint, which refers to the volume of surface and groundwater consumed. In this regard it is vital to emphasize that 98%
of the blue water footprint in the basin is caused by commercial farms.
Around the lake,
flowers cover an area of 1.700 ha and have on average used 16.000.000 m3 of
water every year between 1996 – 2005 (22 % green water, 45 % blue water and 33
% grey water).
This means that 16 Mm3/yr of virtual water are exported every
year in the form of cut flowers, mainly to the European Union (Mekonnen et al.
2012, 3729).
I have now provided enough facts that illustrate the scope of water consumption related to the horticulture industry in Kenya.
But what are the
potential impacts on Lake Naivasha, if this surface water is used as a common
pool resource?
The main potential
impacts on Lake Naivasha are the decline of lake level, deterioration of water
quality and reduction of biodiversity (Mekonnen et al. 2012).
Decline in lake level: The decline in the
lake level the most obvious result and most pressing issue of the unsustainable
water abstraction of the crop agriculture in the basin. It has been shown that already
in 1998, lake Naivasha was 3.5 lower that it would have been according to
hydrological records (Becht and Harper 2002). The decrease in water levels can
majorly be attributed to commercial farms around the lake.
Lake water quality: The
deteriorating water quality results from increased levels of nutrients than can
lead to eutrophication (lack of oxygen). The agricultural nutrient inflow into
the lake results from surface runoff (municipal sewage from small scale farms
in the upper catchments) and leaching to the groundwater from commercial farms. The
increased nutrient transport flowing into the lake probably comes from loss of
riparian vegetation, increase in sediment flow and fertilisers leaching and
running of to water systems …(Mekonnen et al. 2012, 3735).
How to quantify sustainability?
Even though the conditions explained above are already strong indicators of unsustainable water use, we can also quantitatively assess
the sustainability of the water footprint - by comparing
the blue water footprint with blue water available for human use.
Available blue water for human use =
R (annual runoff) – EFR (environmental flow requirements)
Water footprint in
basin is about 13% of R (=13% of annual runoff is needed for irrigation, which
leaves 87 % to be absorbed by environmental flows).
In order to account
for seasonal variation, monthly runoff data have to be taken into consideration
to assess sustainability. In this graph, the relationship between blue-grey
water footprint, monthly runoff and environmental flow requirement are
illustrated.
It becomes apparent
that in the months between November – March, the blue water availability
(surface or groundwater sources) is lower than the water footprint related to
crop production, which leads to the conclusion that in these months, the water
footprint in unsustainable.
How to make
water abstractions more sustainable?
Official water regulations in the Lake Naivasha Basin include
a water pricing policy (0.50 Kenyan shillings per m3 of water abstracted), the
requirement of a license to access water as well as the installation of a water
meter. However, the implementation of these regulations is very weak – illegal
water abstractions are very common, control measures are not enforced and the
funds generated by the pricing policies are very small. These circumstances,
and especially the lack of funding, are hindering the sustainable water use in
flower farming in the Lake Naivasha Basin.
As a solution to the competing interests of economic growth and
environmental sustainability, one central solution has been suggested by
Mekonnen et al. (2012):
ENVIRONMENTALLY CONSCIOUS CONSUMERS
They argue that the water footprint in the basin could be reduced by
involving the agents of the flower supply chain (such as cut flower traders,
retailers and consumers overseas). In their article ‘Mitigating the water
footprint of export cut flowers’ they suggested a water-sustainability premium
to be paid by consumers to raise awareness of the value of water as well as
generate funds to increase sustainability (by investing in better watershed management and
and make flower farmers to comply with criteria on sustainable use of water
resources to reduce their water footprint).
’if
we assume a water sustainability premium of 0.01 € per stem of cut flower at
the retailer, to be paid by the consumer, one would raise 16.9 million €/yr’
The final goal is by getting consumers to buy
flowers from premium certified farms will both encourage the demand for
’environmentally conscious’ crop products and generate the cash that can enable
such sustainable farming schemes.
References:
Becht R, Harper D. (2002) Towards an
understanding of human impact upon the hydrology of Lake Naivasha, Kenya.
Hydrobiologia 488:1–11
Kenyaflowercouncil.org. (2016). KFC Profile.
[online] Available at: http://kenyaflowercouncil.org
Mekonnen, M., Hoekstra, A. and Becht, R.
(2012). Mitigating the Water Footprint of Export Cut Flowers from the Lake
Naivasha Basin, Kenya. Water Resources Management, 26(13), pp.3725-3742.
Mekonnen, M., Hoekstra, A. (2014). Water
conservation through trade: the case of Kenya. Water International,
39(4), pp.451-468.
OEC (2016). OEC -
Kenya (KEN) Exports, Imports, and Trade Partners. [online]
Available at: http://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/ken/