An integrated approach to agriculture and the Nexus

Expert Group Meeting on Improving Access to Water, Sanitation and Energy Services in Asia and the Pacific, by addressing the Water-Food-Energy nexus

21 March 2013 | Bangkok, Thailand

Alessandro Flammini, PhD Natural Resources Management and Environment Department| FAO, Rome

Understanding the NEXUS NEXUS Challenges: • 0.87 billion people are undernourished • 1.3 billion people lack access to electricity • 0.9 billion people lack access to safe drinking water and 2.6 billion to

adequate sanitation • 60% more food will be needed by 2050 Exacerbating factors:

Climate Change Population growth Consumption patterns

Action is urgent! But business as usual is not working. A nexus approach can enhance security by:

• increasing efficiency • reducing trade-offs • building synergies • improving governance across sectors

Understanding the NEXUS

Water for Food

Challenge: The World is Thirsty

Because it is Hungry

Responses: • New water resources: Non-conventional waters • Water harvesting • Increase water productivity: more crop per drop • Save food: save water • Shift consumption patters

It takes on average 3000 liters of water to produce the food needed to feed one person for one day.

Energy and Food

Challenges: • Climate change mitigation and access

to clean energy • Decouple agriculture productivity from fossil

fuel intensification

Responses: • Energy-smart food • Save food: save energy • Shift consumption patters

Around 1/3 of total end-use energy is consumed by the Agri-Food chain 1/3 of this energy is lost as food wastage

Energy and Water

Challenges: • Substitute part of fossil fuels consumption

with sustainable energy

Responses: • Ensure bioenergy and biofuels sustainability

mainstreaming production practices for bioenergy feedstock cultivation

• Sustainable management of hydropower resources

Examples of NEXUS applications

Micro irrigation Solar pump

Integrated Food-Energy Systems (IFES) Bio-refinery concept

Recent work on the Nexus 1/2

• How to establish a nexus between land, water, food, energy and wealth? Resource accounting in sustainability assessments

• We tried to do it testing a multi-scale integrated approach able to capture internal constraints (MuSIASEM approach): – Mauritius (sugarcane production and diversion to biofuels)

– Punjab (grain production and over exploitment of underground aquifers)

– South Africa (biomass and CHP as alternatives to coal power)

Recent work on the Nexus 2/2

• Technical workshop MOVING AHEAD TO IMPLEMENT THE NEXUS APPROACH

held at FAO headquarters | 5-6 March 2013 – Validate the work done so far

– Present and discuss interesting tools that could be part of a Nexus Package

– Discussing next steps

with the participation of SEI, QEERI, GIZ, UK DECC/DFID, IAEA, KTH, WBCSD, European Commission, FAO among others.

The accounting framework • MuSIASEM (Multi-Scale Integrated Analysis of Societal and Ecosystem

Metabolism)

• It is an accounting method capable of keeping coherence in quantitative information referring to different scales and dimensions of analysis with data organized in conventional databases or in GIS

• Pre-analytical step based on semantic definition of “what the system is” (fund elements) and “what the system does” (required functions)

• Ideally consistent with UN-SEEA

Slide 7

An example of flows and funds

CONSUMPTION FLOWS FUNDS

FOOD (PJ-NFS)

ENERGY (PJ-GER)

WATER (hm3-GWR)

VALUE ADDED

(million US$)

HUMAN ACTIVITY (million hr)

POWER CAPACITY (MW-GER)

LAND USE (ha)

HH (n-1) 5.9 15 84 N/A 10,197 10,812 28,070 PW (n-1) N/A 39 409 8,658 1,273 2,785 102,564

SG (n-2) N/A 7.9 15 5,178 680 960 N/A TR (n-2) N/A 13 1.5 826 92 627 N/A BM (n-2) N/A 16 23 2,158 409 1,093 N/A AG (n-2) N/A 0.35 112 316 83 35 20,516 EM (n-2) N/A 2.1 258 180 8.5 70 negligible LOSSES 2.1 1.2 110 N/A N/A N/A N/A

WHOLE (n) 8.0 56 1,700 N/A 11,469 13,596 102,564 EXPORTS negligible 0 1,100 5,130 N/A N/A 53,978

SUPPLY IMPORTS 6.7 48 1,600 6,235 N/A N/A 211,466

EM N/A 7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A AG 1.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20,516

Slide 8

As diagnostic tool

Household Consumption Carb. Prot. Fat 3.6 0.7 1.6 (PJ/year)

URBAN Carb. Prot. Fat 1.5 0.3 0.7 (PJ/year)

RURAL Carb. Prot. Fat 2.1 0.4 0.9 (PJ/year)

Tourists Carb. Prot. Fat 0.07 0.01 0.03 (PJ/year)

Women Carb. Prot. Fat 0.7 0.1 0.3 (PJ/year)

Men Carb. Prot. Fat 0.8 0.2 0.4 (PJ/year)

*: numbers may not add up due to rounding

Final Consumption

LOSSES

Invested in Food Production

Multi-Level Grammars

moving across levels using GRAMMARS

Invested in Food Production

LOSSES

Linking data about rate of flows (per hour) to data about density of flows (per hectare)

CONSUMPTION FLOWS FUNDS

FOOD (PJ-NFS)

ENERGY (PJ-GER)

WATER (hm3-GWR)

VALUE ADDED

(million US$)

HUMAN ACTIVITY (million hr)

POWER CAPACITY (MW-GER)

LAND USE (ha)

HH (n-1) 5.9 15 98 N/A 10,197 10,812 28,070 PW (n-1) N/A 39 1,608 8,658 1,273 2,785 102,873

SG (n-2) N/A 7.9 17 5,178 680 960 N/A TR (n-2) N/A 13 2 826 92 627 N/A BM (n-2) N/A 16 27 2,158 409 1,093 N/A AG (n-2) N/A 0.35 1,300 316 83 35 74,494 EM (n-2) N/A 2.1 262 180 8.5 70 negligible LOSSES 2.1 1.2 108 N/A N/A N/A N/A SA (n) 8.0 56 1,706 N/A 11,469 13,596 102,564

EXPORTS negligible 0 1,827 5,130 N/A N/A 53,978

SUPPLY IMPORTS 6.7 48 3,281 6,235 N/A N/A 211,466

EM N/A 7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A AG 1.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20,516

Example Mauritius (2010)

LOCAL PRODUCTION

Tonnes Ha CARB PROT FAT FOOD ENERGY

Cereals, Roots & pulses

26,312 1,880 0.094 0.010 0.004 0.108

Animal products

71,380 7,000 0.004 0.161 0.209 0.374

Vegetables &fruits

109,283 5,639 0.101 0.011 0.007 0.119

Oil crops 5,484 214 0.003 0.002 0.118 0.123

Others 364,910 5,782 0.594 0.001 0.003 0.598

TOTAL 577,369 20,515 0.796 0.185 0.341 1.322

Slide 15

Water Grammar

Climatic zones

Crop land Supply systems (administrative)

Land Uses Water accounting requires Land Use analysis and GIS

Slide 16

FLOWS

exports

consumption & investment

FOOD (PJ-NFS)

imports

exports supply

imports

LAND FLOW/FUND ratios EMR

(MJ-GER/hr) WMR

(hm3/Mhr) ELP

(US$/hr) WMD

(m3/ha) ELD

(US$/ha) EMD

(GJ-GER/ha) HIGH HIGH

LOW

500

1,800

0.1

> 5.0 > 50

1

204,000 ha

Mauritius (2010)* ENERGY (PJ-GER)

WATER (hm3-GWR)

GDP (billion US$)

negl.

1.3

6.6

7.2

48

8.0

*: numbers may not add up due to

rounding

56

-1,700

1,700

1,700

5.1

-6.2

9.8

11

LOW

Managed 50%

6.6 0.29 7.7 540 33,000 95,000

0

990 11 0.08

1,700

POPULATION

1,280,000

71% age 15-64

FUNDS

PRODUCTION FACTORS

Labor Technical Capital Arable Land hrs/yr p.c. ha p.c. kW p.c.

Density of flows per ha

Rate of flows per hour

Level n Whole society

Level n-1 Household sector

8,760

7,825

work force

Population structure of Japan

In China the economy has 1 hr of work out of 5 hrs of human activity!

In Italy the economy has 1 hr of work out of 13 hrs of human activity!

Human Activity (hrs p.c./y)

The importance of demographic variables Human Activity in Paid Work (hrs p.c./y)

935

Spain, 2010

DEMAND FOOD (PJ-NFS)

ENERGY (PJ-GER)

WATER (hm3-GWR)

VALUE ADDED (million US$)

HUMAN ACTIVITY

(million hr)

LAND USE (ha)

POWER CAPACITY

(GW)

HH (n-1) 5.9 15 84 N/A 10,000 28,000 11 PW (n-1) N/A 39 409 8,700 1,200 74,500 2.78 SG (n-2) N/A 8 15 5,200 680 N/A 0.96 TR (n-2) N/A 13 1.5 800 92 N/A 0.63 BM (n-2) N/A 16 23 2,200 410 N/A 1.09 AG (n-2) N/A 0 110 300 50 20,500 0.04 EM (n-2) N/A 2 260 180 8 negligible 0.07 LOSSES 2.1 1 110 N/A N/A N/A N/A

WHOLE (n) 8.0 56 1,700 N/A 11,500 102,500 14.00 EXPORTS (n-2) negligible 0 1,100 5,100 33 54,000 N/A

SUPPLY IMPORTS 6.7 48 1,600 6,200 N/A 211,500 N/A EM N/A 7.17 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A AG 1.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 20,500 N/A

Moving the vector of production factors of sugarcane from “exports” to “EM”

1,100 33 54,000

Exports of Sugar = 4% of GAV using 90% of water

As Simulator Tool

Consequences of moving the vector from AG to EM

DEMAND FOOD (PJ-NFS)

ENERGY (PJ-GER)

WATER (hm3-GWR)

VALUE ADDED (million US$)

HUMAN ACTIVITY

(million hr)

LAND USE (ha)

POWER CAPACITY

(GW)

HH (n-1) 5.9 15 84 N/A 10,197 28,000 11 PW (n-1) N/A 39 1,515 8,658 1,273 74,500 3 SG (n-2) N/A 7.9 15 5,178 680 N/A 1 TR (n-2) N/A 13 1 826 92 N/A 1 BM (n-2) N/A 15 23 1,500 403 N/A 1 AG (n-2) N/A 0.26 110 217 49 15,800 0 EM (n-2) N/A 2.5 1,360 310 48 58,700 0 LOSSES 2.1 1.2 110 N/A N/A N/A N/A

WHOLE (n) 8 56 1,700 N/A 11,469 102,500 14 EXPORTS negligible 0 0 4,900 N/A negligible N/A

SUPPLY IMPORTS 6.7 40 1,600 6,094 N/A 211,466 N/A EM N/A 15 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A AG 1.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 20,516 N/A

MuSIASEM as a simulator tool: Moving from Sugar to Biofuel (same cropping pattern)

- 8 PJ = - 5% of energy imports using 90% of water

Example: Transition from a cropping pattern based on sugar cane to another cropping pattern

Step 2: Selection of location of cropland according to soil and slope constraints.

Sugar Cane Types of Soil Slope

Step 1: Selection of other crops according to main food needs.

Check of Previous Locations

+ Compatibility with soils

Slope compatibility + Spatial location of an

alternative crop mix

Transition from a cropping pattern based on sugar cane to another cropping pattern

Scenarios in Mauritius

Changing the geographical distribution of the pattern of water metabolism

Current pattern of CWR Scenario 2 pattern of CWR

Facing internal constraints: new crop mix is incompatible with the profile of HA

DEMAND FOOD (PJ-NFS)

ENERGY (PJ-GER)

WATER (hm3-GWR)

VALUE ADDED (million US$)

HUMAN ACTIVITY

(million hr)

LAND USE (ha)

POWER CAPACITY

(GW)

HH (n-1) 5.9 15 84 N/A 10197 (!) 28,070 11 PW (n-1) N/A 39 540 8266 (!) 1273 (!) 127,092 3 SG (n-2) N/A 8 15 4302 (!) 680 (!) N/A 1 TR (n-2) N/A 13 1 707 (!) 92 (!) N/A 1 BM (n-2) N/A 16 23 1789 (!) 409 (!) N/A 1 AG (n-2) N/A 0 240 1,256 280 99,022 0 EM (n-2) N/A 2 260 212 (!) 8 (!) negligible 0 LOSSES 2.1 1 110 N/A N/A N/A N/A

WHOLE (n) 8 56 730 N/A 11,469 127,092 14 EXPORTS negligible 0 200 5,197 N/A N/A

SUPPLY IMPORTS 5.3 48 480 5,648 N/A 211,466 N/A EM N/A 7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A AG 2.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A 20,516 N/A

Transition from a cropping pattern based on sugar cane to another cropping pattern

MuSIASEM as a simulator tool: scenarios in Mauritius

Strength of MuSIASEM • It establishes coherence in quantitative Multi-criteria and Multi-scales analysis providing a holistic representation of the situation across dimensions and levels of organization • The mosaic effect across levels and dimensions provides a quality check on the data and makes it possible to infer information in the case of data gaps • Can be tailored on specific situations and can be complemented by engineering-based input-output tools

• Can be developed and used within participatory frameworks and processes such as Sustainable Livelihoods and the Ecosystem Approach

Further work needed / Next steps • identifying typologies of tools that can be part of a ‘nexus support

package’ for policy-making at country and project level + typologies of countries, tailored at specific ‘nexus’ inter-linkages to be addressed.

• developing a rapid appraisal nexus assessment tool, able to highlight in a quick and simple way where criticalities are and those nexus aspects that would deserve a deeper analysis (possibly by applying the full ‘nexus support package’)

• strengthening links between accounting frameworks for nexus assessments and the UN-SEEA process.

• improve sharing of information and coordination in implementing a ‘nexus’ approach.

Thank you for your attention

alessandro.flammini@fao.org