From local to virtual water control: The globalization of water insecurity and water access Jeroen Vos, Rutgerd Boelens, and Patricio Mena Wageningen University, The Netherlands Discussion Paper 1418 May 2014 This article looks at the implications of virtual water trading for water security. The growing use of water for export from water- poor countries to water- rich countries is increasingly affecting ecosystems and water users livelihoods. In many areas of the world local water security is increasingly threatened by virtual water exports controlled by large agro- export companies. The Global Water Forum publishes discussion papers to share the insights and knowledge contained within our online articles. The articles are contributed by experts in the field and provide: original academic research; unique, informed insights and arguments; evaluations of water policies and projects; as well as concise overviews and explanations of complex topics. We encourage our readers to engage in discussion with our contributing authors through the GWF website. Keywords: water security, virtual water, indigenous water rights Virtual water export is increasing worldwide. Scholars and policy-makers have promoted the import of virtual water water used to produce crops and manufacture products as a solution to increase food security in water-scarce countries. According to neoliberal reasoning, relatively water-rich countries have comparative advantages and supposedly export their virtual water to generate income. Free Trade Agreements, agricultural exportation incentives, and the increasing transnationalization of major food-chain companies and financing institutions have augmented the export of agricultural commodities and luxurious products, including high water consumptive flowers and fresh offseason vegetables. However, contrary to neoliberal assumptions about more market forces facilitating the export of agricultural produce from relatively waterrich countries to relatively water-poor ones, many water-scarce regions have become export zones. Examples include the Peruvian coast, North-Western Mexico, and Western India, whereas water-rich countries like The Netherlands are net importers of virtual water. Rather than relative water scarcity, the agenda of virtual water flows is set by the importing regions purchasing power 1. The growing use of water for export agriculture has increasingly affected ecosystems and water Suggested Citation: Vos, J., Boelens, R. and Mena, P. (2014), From local to virtual water control: the globalization of water insecurity and water access, GWF Discussion Paper 1418, Global Water Forum, Canberra, Australia. Available online at: http://www.globalwaterforum.org/2014/05/13/from- local- to- virtual- water- control- the- globalization- of- water- insecurity- and- water- access- /
users communities in the relatively water-scarce regions. Over-allocation of river water for export agriculture has generated between downstream and upstream users and wetland desiccation. Aquifers are being quickly depleted. Local subsistence farmers with shallower tube wells lose access to groundwater while export users drill ever-deeper ones. Furthermore, agrochemicals pollute groundwater and surface water 2. A project of the Water Resources Management group of Wageningen University (The Netherlands) and the Catholic University (Peru) investigates the local-global effects of the increased export of virtual water through case studies in Ecuador and Peru. In rose production areas in Ecuador, most of the irrigation water available is used by agribusinesses to the detriment of traditional short-cycle crop 3. In Peru, sugarcane for biofuel as well as asparagus, table grapes, bananas, avocados and mangos, are grown by large companies in the desert for export to Europe and the US, competing with and drying out the smallholder 2. National governments install new policies, including Free Trade Agreements and subsidies, to augment agricultural export. In Peru and Ecuador, the development of roads, airports and irrigation systems is especially geared towards the agro-export sector. The Peruvian Majes, Chavimochic and Olmos projects, intended to support thousands of small/medium foodgrowers, have invested more than 4,000 million dollars of public resources in infrastructure to irrigate 225,000 hectares, ultimately allocated to a tiny minority of large (inter)national agribusinesses 4,5. These companies buy land with water rights from indebted smallholders, pressuring water authorities to grant new water rights for these arid lands, and by (illegally) drilling deep tube wells. In Piura, in the Peruvian dry North Coast, two large companies obtained water rights in over 20,000 hectares of ethanol-oriented sugarcane for (exported) biofuel. Simultaneously, local water user groups are denied water rights to expand their irrigated areas. This process disturbs livelihoods of water users communities and local water governance practices in divergent ways. On one hand, local communities are deprived of part of their access to water, and water sources might be contaminated; on the other, community members and labour immigrants might be able to generate income as agribusiness labourers. Next, local water governance practices (management of community irrigation and drinking water systems or local water conservation practices) are altered by the increased control of water resources by agribusinesses. Furthermore, agro-export companies can offer higher payments for access to water and infrastructure maintenance, a perverse incentive that often prompts inequitable water allocation practices. Agro-exporting also alters broader realms of local communities, such as increased commodification of labour and resources, modified consumption patterns and social differentiation. Income-related status becomes increasingly important, affecting long-standing community cooperation. One study shows that producing and exporting fresh mangos from the Peruvian North Coast profoundly changes norms, values and meanings regarding personhood, gender, the community, water resources and local management 2. Export companies not only adhere to national legislation regarding resource use: also,
international standards drive their water governance practices. Certification may be required for export and sometimes includes criteria that inhibit and oblige certain water management practices. Widely used schemes like GlobalGAP impose efficient drip irrigation, and require official water rights and detailed registration of irrigation activities. This excludes smallholders from exporting, or forces them in sharecropping arrangements with exporting companies, while local norms are altered in favour of international norms and formal water rights. Moreover, smallholders have virtually no say in the development of these certification schemes 6. Surprisingly, few cases of large-scale organized resistance are seen against agribusinesses increased use of water resources, expanding political power, and virtual water encroachment. The Ecuadorian case of a canal in a flower growing area is emblematic. When the Tabacundo canal was under municipal control, over ninety percent of its water was allocated to large export flower companies. In February 2006, some 3,000 indigenous smallholders marched and eventually took control over the canal. As the communities strongly depend on the large flower companies for their income, the indigenous organization did not withdraw the companies water entitlements, but this conquest brought about important water security changes: the big companies were forced to take less canal water and invest in reservoirs to collect rainwater from the greenhouses rooftops. The saved water is now used by smallholders for subsistence agriculture, but also to irrigate their own micro rose farms. Representatives of the flower companies have to partake in the communal assemblies of the local water users and contribute labour to collective canal-related activities (mingas). This is not a major monetary sacrifice for them; however, the symbolic implication of this submission is an important rupture with the big landowner s dominance heir to the hacienda era. A similar resistance case was reported in Peru: the struggle of highland communities in Huancavelica affected by the Incahuasi canal that takes water away from their communities to irrigate export asparagus in the dry coast of Ica. We can conclude that in many areas local water security is increasingly threatened by the capture of virtual yet very real and material water flows in contexts dominated by agroexport companies. They control water via material-technological forces that alter water flows, economic power, influence on national policies, and prerogatives to set internationally enforced production standards, as well as the need of local people to sell their labour force.
References 1. Boelens, R. and J. Vos, 2012. The danger of naturalizing water policy concepts. Water productivity and efficiency discourses from field irrigation to virtual water trade. Journal of Agricultural Water Management 108: 16-26. 2. Vos, J., R. Boelens, C. Domínguez, P. Mena, P. Urteaga, and M. Zwarteveen, 2011, The transnationalization of local water battles: water accumulation by agribusiness in Peru and Ecuador and the politics of Corporate Social Responsibility. NWO-WOTRO Integrated Programme. Wageningen: Wageningen University. 3. Zapatta, A. and P. Mena Vásconez, 2013, Acumulación de agua y floricultura en un mosaico de territorios de riego: el caso Pisque, Ecuador, in: A. Arroyo and R. Boelens, eds., Aguas Robadas. Despojo hídrico y movilización social, pp. 167-184. Abya Yala, Quito. 4. Oré, M.T.. L. Del Castillo, Laureano, S. Orsel and J. Vos, 2009, El agua, ante nuevos desafíos. Actores e iniciativas en Ecuador, Perú y Bolivia. Lima, Perú: IEP; Oxfam International, 2009. 5. Dominguez Guzman, C., 2013. Olmos, anhelo lambayecano: aspectos simbólicos de los grandes trasvases intercuencas y sus fines políticos. In A. Arroyo & R.A. Boelens (Eds.), Aguas Robadas: despojo hídrico y movilización social (Serie Agua y Sociedad, 19) (pp. 103-116). Quito: Abya-Yala, Instituto de Estudios Peruanos (IEP). 6. Vos, J. and R. Boelens, 2014, Sustainability Standards and the Water Question, Development and Change. 45(2): 1-26 About the author(s) Dr. Jeroen Vos is Senior Researcher Water Resources Management, Dept. Environmental Sciences, Wageningen University. Jeroen.Vos@wur.nl. Prof. Dr. Rutgerd Boelens is Professor Political Ecology of Water in Latin America, CEDLA/University of Amsterdam, and Senior Researcher Water Resources Management, Dept. Environmental Sciences, Wageningen University. Rutgerd.Boelens@wur.nl. Patricio Mena, M.Sc., is researcher with the Water Resources Management Group, Dept. Environmental Sciences, Wageningen University. Patricio.Menavasconez@wur.nl. About the Global Water Forum The Global Water Forum (GWF) is an initiative of the UNESCO Chair in Water Economics and Transboundary Governance at the Australian National University. The GWF presents knowledge and insights from leading water researchers and practitioners. The contributions generate accessible and evidence-based insights towards understanding and addressing local, regional, and global water challenges. The principal objectives of the site are to: support capacity building through knowledge sharing; provide a means for informed, unbiased discussion of potentially contentious issues; and, provide a means for discussion of important issues that receive less attention than they deserve. To reach these goals, the GWF seeks to: present fact and evidence-based insights; make the results of academic research freely available to those outside of academia; investigate a broad range of issues within water management; and, provide a more in-depth analysis than is commonly found in public media. If you are interested in learning more about the GWF or wish to make a contribution, please visit the site at www.globalwaterforum.org or contact the editors at editor@globalwaterforum.org. The views expressed in this article belong to the individual authors and do not represent the views of the Global Water Forum, the UNESCO Chair in Water Economics and Transboundary Water Governance,
UNESCO, the Australian National University, or any of the institutions to which the authors are associated. Please see the Global Water Forum terms and conditions here. Copyright 2013 Global Water Forum. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivative Works 3.0 License. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ to view a copy of the license.