Irrigation in Brazil

Last updated
Irrigation in Brazil
Land area8,459,000 km2
Agricultural land31%
Cultivated area equipped for irrigation4.4%
Irrigated area3,500,000 ha
Systems
  • Flood irrigation: 42%
  • Furrow irrigation: 6%
  • Sprinkler irrigation: 22%
  • Central pivot irrigation: 23%
  • Localized irrigation: 6%
Share of irrigated agriculture in GDP ~8% (1998)
Water sources for irrigationSurface water (95%)
Tariff3.51 to 24.58 USD per 1,000 m

Irrigation in Brazil has been developed through the use of different models. Public involvement in irrigation is relatively new while private investment has traditionally been responsible for irrigation development. Private irrigation predominates in the populated South, Southeast, and Center-West regions with most of the country’s agricultural and industrial development. In the Northeast region, investments made by the public sector seek to stimulate regional development in an area prone to droughts and with serious social problems. These different approaches have resulted in diverse outcomes. Of the 120 million hectares (ha) that are potentially available for agriculture, only about 3.5 million ha are under irrigation, although estimates show that 29 million ha are suitable for this practice.

Contents

Development

Infrastructure and linkages with water resources

Although irrigation methods in Brazil may be considered modern compared to those of other countries in the region, gravity irrigation accounts for 48% of the total irrigated agricultural area (3.5 million ha), 42% use flooding (rice), and 6% use furrows or other gravity methods. Of the remaining 52%, approximately 22% use mobile sprinkler systems, 23% use mechanized sprinkling (central pivot), 1% uses perforated or gated tubes, and 6% use localized irrigation, i.e., drip and/or micro-sprinkling systems. [1]

Brazil has always been considered a country rich in water. However, Brazil's hydro-climatic regions and irrigation systems vary widely. In the South, frosty conditions in winter have limited irrigation mainly to summer flooding of lowlands for rice production. In the milder Southeast, irrigation in winter has made double-cropping possible. Winter wheat, peas, or beans are rotated with rainfed summer crops, including cotton. Local water shortage occurs in some small watersheds in the Southeast and South where irrigation development and water consumption for industry and municipal use have been relatively uncontrolled. [2] The large size and level terrain of farms in the vast cerrado areas of the Center-West are well suited to center-pivot and self-propelled irrigation systems, which have expanded rapidly in the last few years.

Much of the Northeast is semi-arid land and has severely limited water resources compared with the other regions. Most irrigation projects depend upon the few perennial rivers such as the Sao Francisco. The groundwater supply is limited so approximately 95% of irrigated lands use surface water. [2] Water from the Sao Francisco River, the main river in the Northeast, has to be conveyed over considerable distances to irrigable land . [1] Most of Brazil's humid tropics are in the North. Irrigation needs in that region are low, and development is limited to small areas of lowland rice. [1]

Environmental impacts

Little information is available on drainage, salinity, and waterlogging in Brazil. [2] The natural saline areas in Brazil are quantified on average at 86 million ha, located especially in the driest areas with average precipitation below 1,000 mm/y. The area affected by salinity as a result of improper irrigation is estimated at 15,000 ha and is located mostly in the Northeast, affecting 40% of the irrigated land. [3] The extension of the areas with natural waterlogging, called "varzeas", is 13.35 million ha. [2]

History

Agricultural land

In 1970 there were fewer than 800,000 hectares (ha) of irrigated land, used mainly as rice paddies in the state of Rio Grande do Sul, and less intensively in some public irrigation areas in the Northeast. Irrigation has really only taken off since then, with the implementation of public investment policies in infrastructure for irrigation, energy transmission and distribution, and finance for equipment and day-to-day expenses through programs such as the Northeast Irrigation Program (PROINE) and the National Irrigation Program (PRONI).

Today about 3.5 million ha are under irrigation, although 29 million ha are estimated to be suitable for irrigation by the National Water Agency (ANA). Irrigation is developing through different models. In the South, Southeast, and Center-West regions, private irrigation predominates. with emphasis on planting rice and grain crops. In these areas investment depends on the return obtained from the sale of the irrigated crops. Investment in the Northeast has traditionally been focused on crops such as corn or beans, and has moved to irrigated fruit production. [4]

Institutional development

Law 94904 of December 1965 entrusted the National Department for Water and Electrical Energy (DNEE) with the management and control of Brazil’s water resources. In June 1979, the Ministry of the Interior (MINTER) assumed the power to authorize water use for irrigation. The authority for water use was therefore divided between DNAEE, which remained responsible for water use for all purposes, and MINTER, which was allocated control over water for irrigation. In February 1986, the federal irrigation functions of MINTER were consolidated under the direction of a special Ministry of Irrigation Affairs. A National Irrigation Program was created in 1986 with two coordinating bodies for the Northeast Irrigation Program (PROINE) and the National Irrigation Program (PRONI), which were in charge of the coordination and promotion of irrigation programs in the Northeast and the rest of the country, respectively, in collaboration with the newly created state-level Irrigation Coordinating Committees. Its initial plan to increase the total irrigated area by 3.0 million ha, or 120%, in five years (1986–90) was scaled back due to technical and institutional constraints, cutbacks in the availability of federal and state funding, and uncertain macroeconomic conditions in Brazil. In December 1988, PROINE and PRONI were merged into a single national irrigation program (a new PRONI). A month later, the special Ministry of Irrigation Affairs was abolished and its functions transferred to the Secretariat of Irrigation Affairs under the Ministry of Agriculture. The federal executing agencies were also transferred to the Ministry of Agriculture.

In addition to these institutional arrangements, private irrigation development was supported through the Program for the Development of Flood Plains (PROVARZEAS), created in 1981, and the Program for Financing Irrigation Equipment (PROFIR), created in 1982, both under the Ministry of Agriculture. [1]

Field implementation of federally funded irrigation infrastructure was carried out by the Company for the Development of the Sao Francisco Valley (CODEVASF) and the National Department for Drought Defense Works (DNOS). Since January 1999, irrigation affairs, including DNOS and CODEVASF, have been transferred to a "Special Secretariat for Regional Policies," which falls under the Ministry of National Integration. Various responsibilities in support of irrigation projects have also been transferred to the Ministry of Agriculture and Supply (MAA). [2]

The 1934 Water Code was the first relevant water resources management legislation in Brazil. [5] This Act ensured the free use of any water current or spring for basic life necessities and permits everyone to use any public waters, observing administrative regulations. [2]

The 1988 Constitution established a national water resources management system. The Constitution divided the country’s waters between the union and the states, and states began to implement their own water resources management systems. São Paulo pioneered this process and approved a water resources management act in 1991. [5]

An Irrigation Law, enacted in 1979, sets government policies for irrigation development dealing with: (i) utilization of land and water; (ii) research and planning; (iii) implementation of public projects; (iv) water tariffs for public projects; (v) preservation of water quality; (vi) expropriation of land for irrigation construction; and (vii) promotion of private projects. The Irrigation Law and its regulations provide for the cost recovery of investment and operation and maintenance (O&M) costs of government-supported irrigation projects through water charges to beneficiaries. [2]

Institutional framework

Management and control of the country's water resources are divided among several government agencies. There is no formal mechanism for effectively coordinating their policies and activities. The Ministry of Environment is in charge of water policies, with the exception of irrigation.

The Ministry of National Integration deals mainly with irrigation and programs to promote the development of the country’s neediest regions. The main executing agencies of the Ministry of National Integration are: CODEVASF, which implements irrigation projects in the São Francisco River Basin; the Office of the Superintendent for the Development of the Northeast Region (SUDENE), which implements programs targeted to the Northeast; and the Office of the Superintendent for the Development of the Amazon Region (SUDAM), which implements programs targeted to the Northern Region.

Brazil underwent an important process of decentralization during the 1990s, allowing local governments to exert a strong influence on policy making. Most state governments have their own Secretariats of Agriculture and carry out a wide range of tasks related to the agricultural sector, such as agricultural extension and research, irrigation investments, and poverty alleviation projects, especially in the Northeast.

Outside the government, civil society organizations, universities, and other research institutions play a very influential role in policy making. [6]

Public-private role

According to the Irrigation Law, irrigation projects may be either public or private (Art. 8). Public Projects are those whose irrigation infrastructure is designed, built, and operated, either directly or indirectly, under the responsibility of the Public Authority. Private Projects are those whose irrigation infrastructure is designed, built, and operated by the private sector, either with or without public sector incentives.

Although this classification makes it possible to easily distinguish between projects that are clearly of a public nature, in which the Public Authority builds and operates the common irrigation infrastructure and settles family farmers, and projects that are entirely of a private nature, carried out with private infrastructure and on private land, the classification of projects with the relevant participation of both the Public Authority and the private sector is not yet clear.

The aim of Bill No 6.381 (Irrigation Bill), being considered by the Chamber of Deputies and already approved by the Federal Senate (PL 229), is to reformulate the National Irrigation Policy, adapting it to present circumstances and revoking Law No 6.662/79. The Irrigation Bill will propose a third category—the Mixed Irrigation Project—defined as a project executed and implemented in accordance with Law No 11079 of December 30, 2004, which establishes the public-private partnership scheme–PPP (Art. 12). [6]

Pontal public-private partnership in irrigation

This project seeks to establish a public-private partnership (PPP) for irrigation infrastructure in an area of 7,717 hectares for commercial agriculture in the Pontal region, State of Pernambuco. The government would cede the land and the existing infrastructure, already covering a significant part of the target area. The private partner would operate, manage and further develop the infrastructure to ensure that the area is fully irrigated within six years. Up to 75% of the land would be farmed by large commercial producers and at least 25% by small farmers, who would be integrated into the production chain of the commercial producers. The private partner will be remunerated through the sale of water and a capacity payment by the government. [7]

Water tariff and cost recovery

No bulk water fees are charged for the use of water for irrigation. An inconsistent system of water tariffs for O&M in public irrigation projects is in use. These tariffs are allocated to the sponsoring agency and distributed to the irrigation districts. In 1997 the cost of water tariffs in public irrigation projects ranged from US$3.51 to US$24.58 per 1,000 m3.

Water fees in public irrigation projects are regulated by the Irrigation Law (1984 Law 89.496). This legislation states that water tariffs in public irrigation projects are estimated by the sum of two coefficients, Kl and K2. Coefficient K1, calculated annually, corresponds to the payment of public capital investment in a project's infrastructure. It assumes a 50-year repayment period and subsidized interest rates, and its value is a function of the irrigated area. In 1998, the K1 value for public irrigation projects was R$4.41/ha/month. Coefficient K2 is meant to cover the total O&M cost of a project, and is estimated as a function of the volume of water used (R$/1,000 in3). In practice, the K1 tariff is paid to the sponsoring federal agency, while the K2 component is usually paid directly to the water user district. [8]

Investment

Most Brazilian irrigation development has been carried out by the private sector, with little government support. Government investments have focused on the semi-arid Northeast area, with a high concentration of poor population. More than US$2 billion in public funds have been invested in irrigation works over the past three decades, serving 200,000 ha in the Brazilian semi-arid region, 140,000 ha of which are under production.

Investment costs for settling small farmers in public irrigation projects have averaged US$6,500/ha, including on-farm development and the necessary irrigation equipment. For a farm size of 6.0 ha the investment per family is some US$40,000 on average, not including the cost of agricultural support services and operational subsidies. The cost of public irrigation projects that provide water for large farmers and commercial farming enterprises (only the off-farm, main conveyance system) are considerably lower, depending on the distance of the irrigated area from the water source, the elevation of the command area, and the layout of the schemes. Investment costs of private irrigation development, with short conveyance distances from the source of water to the irrigated areas and low pumping lifts, are usually a fraction of the cost of public schemes and range from less than US$600 to US$3,500/ha, depending on the type of on-farm technology used. Generally, investment costs for private irrigation are higher in the Northeast than in other regions due to more limited access to perennial sources of water. [1]

Possible climate change impacts

Global climate change will affect the climate of Northeast Brazil. According to an assessment by Krol and Van Oel for the State of Ceara, the direction of precipitation changes cannot be determined with certainty. Both very significant precipitation losses and moderate precipitation increases should be considered plausible. The impacts of precipitation losses would cause large-scale reductions in the availability of stored surface water, leading to an increasing imbalance between water demand and water supply after 2025. Agricultural production would show negative tendencies after 2025 due to insufficiency of water supply to meet irrigation water demands. [9]

External cooperation

In 2008, the Government of Brazil, represented by CODEVASF/Ministry of National Integration, is seeking help from the World Bank to prepare an environmental, social, and financial assessment for the concession of public irrigation perimeters in the Southeast region.

Lessons learned

A World Bank evaluation of irrigation projects in Brazil's Semi-Arid Region concluded that, despite many problems, there was a positive evolution in the implementation of irrigated agriculture—both public and private—in the Semi-Arid Region in the three decades since it began. The focus of public projects evolved from socially based efforts to sustainable entrepreneurial activity; from subsistence farming to agribusiness; from traditional subsistence crops to highly technical fruit cultivation; and from conventional irrigation to modern localized and precision irrigation techniques.

The study showed that the inclusion of entrepreneurial producers in public irrigation perimeters, through the successful partnership between public- and private-sector agents, was a key factor in the positive performance of irrigated agriculture in the region. Other factors that contributed to success were: (i) suitable scales and rates of implementation; (ii) ongoing political and financial support; (iii) skilled and creative executing agencies; (iv) adequate urban/municipal support; (v) effective technological support; (vi) proximity to markets and ports; (vii) aggressive, efficient marketing; (viii) organization of producers; (ix) organization and standardization of products; and (x) good management of primary production units. Successful projects had high rates of economic return (between 16 percent and 19 percent). [6]

See also

Related Research Articles

Access to at least basic water increased from 94% to 97% between 2000 and 2015; an increase in access to at least basic sanitation from 73% to 86% in the same period;

Water supply and sanitation in Indonesia is characterized by poor levels of access and service quality. Almost 30 million people lack access to an improved water source and more than 70 million of the country's 264 million population has no access to improved sanitation. Only about 2% of people have access to sewerage in urban areas; this is one of the lowest in the world among middle-income countries. Water pollution is widespread on Bali and Java. Women in Jakarta report spending US$11 per month on boiling water, implying a significant burden for the poor.

Water resources and irrigation infrastructure in Peru vary throughout the country. The coastal region, an arid but fertile land, has about two-thirds of Peru’s irrigation infrastructure due to private and public investment aimed at increasing agricultural exports. The Highlands and Amazon regions, with abundant water resources but rudimentary irrigation systems, are home to the majority of Peru's poor, many of whom rely on subsistence or small-scale farming.

While Peru accounts for about four per cent of the world's annual renewable water resources, over 98% of its water is available east of the Andes, in the Amazon region. The coastal area of Peru, with most of economic activities and more than half of the population, receives only 1.8% of the national freshwater renewable water resources. Economic and population growth are taking an increasing toll on water resources quantity and quality, especially in the coastal area of Peru.

Water resources management is a significant challenge for Mexico. The country has in place a system of water resources management that includes both central (federal) and decentralized institutions. Furthermore, water management is imposing a heavy cost to the economy.

Mexico, a classified arid and semi-arid country, has a total land area of 2 million square kilometres, 23% of which is equipped for irrigated agriculture. The agricultural sector plays an important role in the economic development of the country accounting for 8.4 of agricultural gross domestic product (GDP) and employing 23% of the economically active population. Irrigated agriculture contributes about 50% of the total value of agricultural production and accounts for about 70% of agriculture exports. Mexico's government initiated a number of structural reforms in the water sector aimed to introduce modern water management and irrigation.

Water resources management is a key element of Brazil's strategy to promote sustainable growth and a more equitable and inclusive society. Brazil's achievements over the past 70 years have been closely linked to the development of hydraulic infrastructure for hydroelectric power generation and just recently to the development of irrigation infrastructure, especially in the Northeast region.

Bolivia’s government considers irrigated agriculture as a major contributor to "better quality of life, rural and national development." After a period of social unrest caused by the privatization of water supply in Cochabamba and La Paz, the government of Evo Morales is undertaking a major institutional reform in the water resources management and particularly in the irrigation sector, aimed at: (i) including indigenous and rural communities in decision making, (ii) integrating technical and traditional knowledge on water resources management and irrigation, (iii) granting and registering water rights, (iv) increasing efficiency of irrigation infrastructure, (v) enhancing water quality, and (v) promoting necessary investment and financial sustainability in the sector. Bolivia is the first country in Latin America with a ministry dedicated exclusively to integrated water resources management: the Water Ministry.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Water resources management in Bolivia</span>

Bolivia has traditionally undertaken different water resources management approaches aimed at alleviating political and institutional instability in the water sector. The so-called water wars of 2000 and 2006 in Cochabamba and El Alto, respectively, added social unrest and conflict into the difficulties of managing water resources in Bolivia. Evo Morales’ administration is currently developing an institutional and legal framework aimed at increasing participation, especially for rural and indigenous communities, and separating the sector from previous privatization policies. In 2009, the new Environment and Water Resources Ministry was created absorbing the responsibilities previously under the Water Ministry. The Bolivian Government is in the process of creating a new Water Law – the current Water Law was created in 1906 – and increasing much needed investment on hydraulic infrastructure.

Irrigation in Colombia has been an integral part of Colombia's agricultural and rural development in the 20th Century. Public investment in irrigation has been especially prominent in the first half of the Century. During the second half, largely driven by fiscal shortages and a common inability to raise sufficient revenues from collection of water charges, the Colombian government adopted a program to devolve irrigation management responsibility to water users associations. Irrigation management transfer has occurred only partially in Colombia, as the government has maintained strong managerial tasks in certain irrigation districts.

The water resources management system in Uruguay has been influenced by the general sense of water as an abundant resource in the country. Average annual rainfall is 1,182 mm, representing a contribution of 210 km3 annually throughout its territory. In 2002, the per capita renewable water resources was 41,065 cubic meters, way above the world average 8,467 m3 in 2006. Uruguay also shares one of the largest groundwater reserves in the world, the Guarani Aquifer, with Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay. The Guarani aquifer covers 1,200,000 square kilometers and has a storage capacity of 40,000 km3.

Irrigation in the Dominican Republic (DR) has been an integral part of DR agricultural and economic development in the 20th century. Public investment in irrigation has been the main driver for irrigation infrastructural development in the country. Irrigation Management Transfer to Water Users Associations (WUAs), formally started in the mid-1980s, is still an ongoing process showing positive signs with irrigation systems in 127,749 ha, being managed by 41,329 users. However, the transfer process and the performance of WUAs are still far from ideal. While WUAs show a significant increase in cost recovery, especially when compared to low values in areas under state management, a high subsidy from the government still contributes to cover operation and maintenance costs in their systems.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Water supply and sanitation in Tunisia</span>

Tunisia has achieved the highest access rates to water supply and sanitation services among the Middle East and North Africa. As of 2011, access to safe drinking water became close to universal approaching 100% in urban areas and 90% in rural areas. Tunisia provides good quality drinking water throughout the year.

Water supply and sanitation in Jordan is characterized by severe water scarcity, which has been exacerbated by forced immigration as a result of the 1948 Arab–Israeli War, the Six-Day War in 1967, the Gulf War of 1990, the Iraq War of 2003 and the Syrian Civil War since 2011. Jordan is considered one of the ten most water scarce countries in the world. High population growth, the depletion of groundwater reserves and the impacts of climate change are likely to aggravate the situation in the future.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Water resources management in Argentina</span>

Water resources management (WRM) functions in Argentina are handled by multiple institutions operating at the national, provincial, and river basin level, with a variety of functions and jurisdictions. On the national level, the National Institute for Water and the Environment (INA) and the National Water and Sanitation Utility (AySA) are charged with the duties of researching, water resources preservation, developing services, and implementing water projects.

Integrated urban water management in Aracaju, the capital city of the Brazilian State of Sergipe (SSE) has been and still is a challenging prospect. Home to half a million people, Aracaju is located in a tropical coastal zone within a semi-arid state and receives below average rainfall of 1,200 mm/year where average rainfall in Latin America is higher at 1,556 mm/yr. Most of the residents do have access to the potable water supply and non-revenue water losses are nearly 50%.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Water supply and sanitation in Morocco</span>

Water supply and sanitation in Morocco is provided by a wide array of utilities. They range from private companies in the largest city, Casablanca, the capital, Rabat, Tangier, and Tetouan, to public municipal utilities in 13 other cities, as well as a national electricity and water company (ONEE). The latter is in charge of bulk water supply to the aforementioned utilities, water distribution in about 500 small towns, as well as sewerage and wastewater treatment in 60 of these towns.

Costa Rica is divided into three major drainage basins encompassing 34 watersheds with numerous rivers and tributaries, one major lake used for hydroelectric generation, and two major aquifers that serve to store 90% of the municipal, industrial, and agricultural water supply needs of Costa Rica. Agriculture is the largest water user demanding around 53% of total supplies while the sector contributes 6.5% to the Costa Rica GDP. About a fifth of land under cultivation is being irrigated by surface water. Hydroelectric power generation makes up a significant portion of electricity usage in Costa Rica and much of this comes from the Arenal dam.

The management of Jamaica's freshwater resources is primarily the domain and responsibility of the National Water Commission (NWC). The duties of providing service and water infrastructure maintenance for rural communities across Jamaica are shared with the Parish Councils. Where possible efficiencies have been identified, the NWC has outsourced various operations to the private sector.

Guatemala faces substantial resource and institutional challenges in successfully managing its national water resources. Deforestation is increasing as the global demand for timber exerts pressure on the forests of Guatemala. Soil erosion, runoff, and sedimentation of surface water is a result of deforestation from development of urban centers, agriculture needs, and conflicting land and water use planning. Sectors within industry are also growing and the prevalence of untreated effluents entering waterways and aquifers has grown alongside.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 World Bank (September 1990). "Brazil Irrigation Subsector Review" (PDF). World Bank. pp. 1–6. Retrieved 2008-04-03.[ permanent dead link ]
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Aquastat (2000). "Country Profiles: Brazil". Food and Agriculture Organization. p. 1. Archived from the original on 2008-06-27. Retrieved 2008-04-07.
  3. Stockle, Claudio O. (n.d.). "Environmental Impact of Irrigation: A review" (PDF). Washington State University. pp. 1, 3–5. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2007-08-13. Retrieved 2008-04-04.
  4. ANA (August 2002). "Evolution of Water Resources Management in Brazil". ANA. p. 1. Retrieved 2008-04-04.
  5. 1 2 Mejia, Abel; et al. (June 2003). "Water, Poverty Reduction and Sustainable Development" (PDF). World Bank. pp. 1, 3–6. Retrieved 2008-04-07.[ permanent dead link ]
  6. 1 2 3 Ninio, Alberto; et al. (2006). "Framework Analysis for the Implementation of Public–Private Partnerships in Public Irrigation Perimeters". World Bank, Sustainable Development Working Paper. 31 (A): 1, 7–12. Archived from the original on 2014-07-19. Retrieved 2010-09-13.
  7. Public-Private Partnerships in Infrastructure Resource Center. "PPPIRC".
  8. Asad, Musa; et al. (June 1999). "Management of Water Resources: Bulk Water Pricing in Brazil" (PDF). World Bank. pp. 1, 18–32. Retrieved 2008-04-03.[ permanent dead link ]
  9. M.S. Krol and P. van Oel (2004). "Integrated Assessment of Water Stress in Ceará, Brazil, under Climate Change Forcing" (PDF). University of Twente, The Netherlands. pp. 1, 5. Retrieved 2008-04-03.