Your search found 2 records
1 Magombeyi, M. S .; Rasiuba, T.; Taigbenu, A. E.. 2009. Maize productivity under supplementary irrigation in the Olifants River Basin, South Africa. In Humphreys, E.; Bayot, R. S. (Eds.). Increasing the productivity and sustainability of rainfed cropping systems of poor smallholder farmers: proceedings of the CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food, International Workshop on Rainfed Cropping Systems, Tamale, Ghana, 22-25 September 2008. Colombo, Sri Lanka: CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food. pp.99-110.
Rainfed farming ; Water stress ; Supplemental irrigation ; Water productivity ; Maize / South Africa / Olifants River Basin
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: 631 G000 HUM Record No: H042439)
(8.92MB)
A daily field water balance experiment was conducted for three consecutive cropping seasons to study the effects of supplementary irrigation on grain yield and water productivity of maize (Zea mays L.) in the semi-arid Olifants River Basin, South Africa. Maize yield was affected by seasonal total rainfall and its distribution. Average maize yields under rainfed and supplementary irrigated conditions were 0.7 t ha (standard deviation of 0.44 t ha) and 1.7 t ha (standard deviation of 0.28 t ha) respectively. Supplementary irrigation during dry spells increased average yields by 196%. The benefits of supplementary irrigation were greatest during a season with low rainfall which was poorly distributed. Average evapotranspiration under rainfed and supplementary irrigation for the three seasons was 344 mm and 431 mm, respectively. However, crop water productivity with respect to evapotranspiration was significantly greater for supplementary irrigation (4.0 kg mm?1 ha) than for rainfed (2 kg grain mm?1 ha?1). The mean incremental water productivity from supplemental irrigation of 12.8 kg mm?1 ha?1 implied that timely application of 1 m3 of irrigation water can produce ZAR 2.56 (US$ 0.26) worth of maize, 5 times the cost of the water used. The values demonstrate the monetary gains from timely and adequate supplementary irrigation to bridge dry spells. The results show significant yield increases irrespective of the season under supplementary irrigation, demonstrating the potential of supplementary irrigation to improve and stabilise smallholder farmer maize yields, thereby enhancing livelihoods.
2 Magombeyi, M. S.; Taigbenu, A. E.; Barron, J. 2016. Rural food insecurity and poverty mappings and their linkage with water resources in the Limpopo River Basin. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 92:20-33. [doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2015.10.020]
Food insecurity ; Rural poverty ; Mapping ; Rural areas ; Water resources ; Water availability ; Households ; Income ; Living standards ; Socioeconomic environment ; Population growth ; River basins / Botswana / Mozambique / South Africa / Zimbabwe / Limpopo River Basin
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H047330)
(5.35 MB)
The mappings of poverty and food insecurity were carried out for the rural districts of the four riparian countries (Botswana, Mozambique, South Africa and Zimbabwe) of the Limpopo river basin using the results of national surveys that were conducted between 2003 and 2013. The analysis shows lower range of food insecure persons (0 – 40%) than poverty stricken persons (0 – 95%) that is attributable to enhanced government and non-government food safety networks in the basin countries, the dynamic and transitory nature of food insecurity which depends on the timings of the surveys in relation to harvests, markets and food prices, and the limited dimension of food insecurity in relation to poverty which tends to be a more structural and pervasive socio-economic condition. The usefulness of this study in influencing policies and strategies targeted at alleviating poverty and improving rural livelihoods lies with using food insecurity mappings to address short-term socio-economic conditions and poverty mappings to address more structural and long-term deprivations. Using the poverty line of $1.25/day per person (2008–2013) in the basin, Zimbabwe had the highest percentage of 68.7% of its rural population classified as poor, followed by Mozambique with 68.2%, South Africa with 56.1% and Botswana with 20%. While average poverty reduction of 6.4% was observed between 2003 and 2009 in Botswana, its population growth of 20.1% indicated no real poverty reduction. Similar observations are made about Mozambique and Zimbabwe where population growth outstripped poverty reductions. In contrast, both average poverty levels and population increased by 4.3% and 11%, respectively, in South Africa from 2007–2010. While areas of high food insecurity and poverty consistently coincide with low water availability, it does not indicate a simple cause-effect relationship between water, poverty and food insecurity. With limited water resources, rural folks in the basin require stronger institutions, increased investments and support to enable them generate sufficient income from their rain-fed farming livelihood to break out of the poverty cycle.
Powered by DB/Text WebPublisher, from
