Informing irrigation investments in Tanzania: A Spatially Explicit Analysis

Jawoo Koo, Hua Xie, Liangzhi You, Zhe Guo, Jeffrey Dickinson, and Cindy CoxInternational Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC

SAGCOT Corridor (224K km2)

Providing technical support to the New Alliance partners:

1) Setting priorities for national commodity value chains and their targets

2) Geospatial targeting and ex-ante impact analysis to optimize investments

3) Designing of the Technology Platform components and developing their prototypes

Supp

orti

ng D

ata

/ Ana

lysi

s

Figure 1: New Alliance Technology Platform - National Target & Technology Analysis

Other Investment Plans

CAADPNational Agricultural

Investment Plans

Development PartnersGovernment and National Partners Private Sector

New Alliance Technology Platform Country Steering Group

Status & Trends

• Nationalproduction,consumption, tradeand price statistics

- FAO, Ministry, Statistics Offices

Productivity Enhancement Potential• Assess achievable yieldscompared to currentfarmer yields (yield gaps)

- farmer and experimentdata

- crop models

Demand & Welfare

•Trends in demand - sectoral studies, IFPRI

IMPACT model• Contribution to nutrition• Poverty & gender factors

- HH survey data

Yield Gap and Adoption Studies & Literature

• Field trials (on station, on farm)• Modeling studies• Dissemination pathway

assessments • Diffusion and Adoption

Studies (e.g. DIVA)

Nationalstatistics, household survey data, experimental data, farmer plots (e.g., own management and demonstrations), performance trials, adoption studies, crop models, technology evaluations, national data and thematic expertize, national technology and development scenarios

Sub-NationalAnalyses

• Multi-location trials• Location specific crop

modeling (e.g. IFPRI)• Investment

Document & Evaluate Focus Technologies

• Seeds• Fertilizers (e.g., ISFM)• Small scale irrigation• Agronomy (e.g. tillage)•Institutional Capacities (e.g. FARA)

National Priority

Commodities (All)

National Technical Group(including Technical Partners: CGIAR, AGRA, FARA)

Coor

dina

tion

& R

espo

nse

Core

Acti

viti

es

Technology Packages to Meet Sub-National

Yield & Adoption Targets (2022)

Sub-National Adoption Targets

Sub-National Yield Targets

National Yield Targets (2022)Achievable

Yields

Adoption Targets (2022)New Alliance

Focus Commodities

New Alliance National Technology Coordination and

Investment Plan

Identify focus commodity sub-set for

New Alliance

M O T I V A T I O NNEW ALLIANCE FOR FOOD SECURITY AND NUTRITION: TECHNOLOGY PLATFORM

D E M A N DTANZANIA AGRICULTURE AND FOOD SECURITY INVESTMENT PLAN (2010-2020)

WHAT ARE THE KEY CHALLENGES? Limited institutional capacity Inadequate hydrological resource

database Reliance on gravity-fed irrigation

schemes Inadequate investment in water

infrastructure Inadequate capacity of farmers to

invest in infrastructure Low level of funding available by the

government Low rate of investment by the private

sector Inadequate capacity of the private

sector Absence of law which protects

irrigation potential and irrigation developed areas

Increased malaria incidences Inadequate integration of water

resources management systems

.95M ha land area

.44M ha suitable for agriculture

.07M ha suitable for irrigation0.3M ha currently irrigated

R E S E A R C H C H A L L E N G EWHY IRRIGATION POTENTIAL ASSESSMENT IS CHALLENGING?

GIS environmental suitability and rural demographic

analysis

A: Ex-ante Spatial Analysis

B: Biophysical Modeling (SWAT) C: Economic Modeling (DREAM)

Predict crop price effect from smallholder irrigation

expansion

Crop mix optimization, return to potential area expansion, net revenue, rural population reached

and irrigation water consumption

D: Benefit-cost Analysis

─ runoff ─ groundwater recharge ─ water requirement for irrigation ─ crop yields

Biophysical Socioeconomic

– Cost-benefit analysis on production of irrigated crops

– Values in livestock production, water supply and other social benefits

Institutional Synergy with other agricultural

technologies

DIFFICULT TO ANSWER “WHERE” QUESTIONS: What crops are under irrigation? Where does irrigation occur? When (In which season) are irrigation applied? How do farmers cultivate irrigated crops?

E A R L I E R S T U D I E SIRRIGATION POTENTIAL ASSESSMENTS STUDIES AT IFPRI: FINDINGS (2010)

Potential of large-scale irrigation is location-bound

Small-scale irrigation can be more readily profitable, but sensitive to cost

Need to keep investment costs low to improve viability

Potential increase in gross revenue per hectare from small-scale irrigation

You et al. (2010)

? Study done in 2010 using data from 2000; time to update?

Relevancy at sub-national level for national investment planning?

Static scenarios; can’t be usefulness for geospatial targeting of new technologies?

Production System& Market Access AnalysisMESO SCALEPixels as Units of Analysis

Production System

Ecosystem Services

Infrastructure/Market Access

Investment/Policy AnalysisMACRO SCALEAggregate, market-scale (geo-political) units

Fixed Geographies of Analysis

e.g., IMPACT/WATER,GTAP derivatives

Flexible Geographies/Units of Analysis

e.g., DREAM,MM models

AggregationBy Commodity

Urban/Rural Consumption InputsProductionIncome tercileRegionHousehold CharacterizationMICRO SCALE

Change(e.g., policy)

Change(e.g., climate,technologies)

R E S E A R C H Q U E S T I O NWHERE IN SAGCOT HAS THE MOST POTENTIAL OF IRRIGATION EXPANSION FOR RICE?

INDICATORS TO CONSIDER (10 km grids)

Mapping of current extent of irrigation (GMIA v5)*

Profitability of existing irrigation (You et al., 2011)

Cropland extent (IIASA, 2014) Subnational poverty mapping

(HarvestChoice, 2014)* Current geography and productivity of rice

(HarvestChoice, 2014)* Groundwater availability (British Geological

Survey) Slope (Derived from SRTM 90m, CGIAR-CSI) Accessibility to surface water (Authors) Technology adoption rate (Authors, based on

Agricultural Census, 2007)

DEMO – TABLEAUhttps://public.tableausoftware.com/profile/ifpri.td.hc#!/vizhome/tanzania_sagcot_rice_irrigation/dashboard

TOOL DEMONSTRATION

New datasets with GEOSHARE’s co-sponsorship improved quality and relevance at sub-national investment analysis. Plus, helped to take research data out of researchers’ black box (?) and bring the research processes under the microscope of community. Peer-review for the publication goes only so far; it takes a community-involvement (More on this at the SPAM session).

Practicality of geospatial research dataset – much more than publications. Being used as the evidences of policy making process. Implications on the national agricultural investment planning and development projects. Doing one’s best may not be enough.

Balance between robust research framework and flexibility/user-friendliness for capacity building and clear interpretation – not easy!

C O N C L U D I N G R E M A R K SCAN YOU, RESEARCHERS, (REALLY) STAND BY YOUR DATA?