For
the Middle East, water has always been a politically
sensitive issue, linked as it is to production of food.
Brian Whitaker looks at how the region allocates this
precious commodity.
The Guardian, 25 July, 2001
THE
RIVER Jordan, in the words of the old gospel song, is
deep and wide with milk and honey on the other side...hallelujah!
But no matter how deep and wide it may have been in biblical
times, today the river is not much more than a trickle.
This summer, another river in
Jordan - the Yarmuk - is so low that for the third year in
succession water is being pumped from Syria. Nearby, Lake Galilee
is drying up so fast that some Israelis are talking of chopping
down fruit trees to save it.
None of this surprises Tony Allan,
professor of geography at the School of Oriental and African
Studies in London. The Middle East, he says, has had a water
shortfall since the 1970s.
"Two parts of the world that
are really dry and have many countries in them are the Middle East
and southern Africa. But in terms of water resources and
population the Middle East is much worse off than southern
Africa." The Middle East (including North Africa) has 300m
people and an annual water supply of 200bn cubic metres.
On average, one million people
require a billion cubic metres of water a year, which means that
the Middle East can meet only two-thirds of its needs. These
alarming figures make the situation look better than it actually
is, says Allan, because comparisons with wetter regions ignore
moisture - or lack of it - in the soil.
"In the UK we only count the
rivers and groundwater, which doesn't have to supply the
agriculture. About 80-90% of UK water is in the soil," Allan
says. The Middle East, on the other hand, has little soil water.
"Egypt, with a similar
population to the UK, has 55bn cubic metres from the Nile - and
that's all. It's all engineered water and it gets counted,"
says Allan.
This raises some intriguing
questions. If the Middle East has been so massively short of water
for years, how has it survived? And why have governments in the
region not pressed the panic button? The answer, Allan suggests in
a new book, lies in "virtual water" - a term that his
team at SOAS claim to have invented.
Most of the water that we use does
not go on drinking, washing or flushing the lavatory. It is
imbedded in foods which may even appear perfectly dry - such as
flour. We each drink about one cubic metre of water a year and use
between 50 and 100 for domestic purposes. But it takes a further
1,000 cubic metres a year to meet each person's food needs.
"At the national level, over
90% of all water budgets are devoted to the agricultural
sector," Allan says. So, although it may help to take a bath
less often, that is a drop in the ocean compared with the use of
water by farmers.
Some years ago, Israeli economists
looked at the export trade in oranges and found that customers
were paying 10-20% of the real cost of the water used to grow
them. In effect, Israel was giving away much-needed water.
Exploring this idea further, the
SOAS team looked at other crops in terms of their "virtual
water" content. Growing a tonne of wheat, for instance, takes
about 1,000 cubic metres of water. A country which imports wheat,
rather than growing it locally, therefore saves 1,000 cubic metres
of water for every tonne it imports. This, almost without being
noticed, is how the Middle East has survived. Its "virtual
water" imports, in the form of grain during the mid-1990s,
were equivalent to the flow of the river Nile into Egypt.
Water, for everyone in the Middle
East, is a highly sensitive issue - not least because it is so
closely related to the food supply. As a result, Allan says,
politics gets in the way of devis ing economically and
environmentally logical policies. "No politician will dare
admit that his country is short of water and therefore short of
food. If he did, people would say that he was not competent.
"Importing virtual water
reduces anxiety about water. Ministers can stand up and say, 'we
are not short of water' because the water coming in is both
invisible and silent."
Logically, says Allan, the first
priority is to bring the issue into the open and secure supplies
of virtual water - since there is no other way to make up the
deficit - through international food agreements.
The second priority is to manage
the demand for water and re-allocate it to the most profitable
uses. The third priority is to use it more efficiently by
improving irrigation, reducing waste, and so on. But in terms of
political feasibility, these priorities are reversed in the Middle
East.
The idea that the region will have
to meet its water shortage by import ing vast and growing
quantities of food - for ever - creates feelings of deep
insecurity, linked as it is to many people's livelihoods. In Saudi
Arabia, for example, at enormous expense they started to grow
wheat and even exported some.
But re-allocating water resources
can bring huge benefits says Allan, citing the example of his own
college, SOAS, which stands on a hectare of land. As a field of
wheat, the land would use 10,000 cubic metres of water per year,
generate revenue of $3,000-$4,000 and provide half a job. As a
university college, it uses the same amount of water, turns over
$50 million a year, provides 1,000 jobs and educates 3,500
students. This helps to explain why many Middle Eastern
governments are so enthusiastic about information technology: you
can write software in the desert, and it takes less water than
growing a row of beans.
Reallocating water to more
profitable uses also involves social change as people move to
different types of jobs - arousing controversies that the
politicians would rather avoid. In Egypt, farmers are an important
political force. "Allocating water efficiently has a high
political cost," Allan says. "People don't want to move
water out of agriculture."
The only country in the region
that has opened up debate on these issues and done something about
them is Israel. In 1956, agriculture accounted for 20% of Israel's
GDP; today it is only 2%. "The Israelis took 30 years to move
from a small awareness that allocation efficiency is a good idea
to putting it into practice," says Allan.
In the face of competing claims on
scarce resources, the allocation process can also become highly
political. The mayors of Tel Aviv and Haifa were last week
battling with the water authorities to save their cities' public
gardens. Mayor Ron Huldai of Tel Aviv said he would not allow the
few green areas available to city residents to dry up.
Instead, the city dwellers want
Israel to stop growing avoca does, which need large amounts of
water, and to cut down banana groves near Lake Galilee. These
local difficulties fade into insignificance alongside the bigger
picture. What the Middle East needs is a think tank to look at
global food and its significance with respect to water, Allan
believes.
"What happens in China is
more important than what Middle East politicians can do at
home," he says. "The Chinese have increased their cereal
production four or five times since 1961, which, despite the
rising demand for cereals for food and for animal fodder has taken
them off the world market for virtual water in most years."
But a lot also depends on Chinese
population policy. The success or failure of Chinese birth control
programmes alone could make the difference between salvation and
ruin for the people of Cairo, Damascus and Tel Aviv. China should
achieve a population 'saving' of about 300m people by 2020 -
which, as it happens, is equal to the entire population of the
Middle East.
|