Droughts - Namibia and California Flashcards
Impact on People - California
Water restrictions were imposed on people.
Biggest impact was on the agricultural sector (farmers use 80% of water used by people).
Led to 5% of irrigated land not being planted, losing 17,100 jobs.
Fruit / veg prices increased by 6%
Impact on People - Namibia
Worst for 30 years.
1 in 3 at risk of malnutrition
Nearly 800000 experienced food insecurity as harvest was 42% lower.
Wells dried up so people had to leave to seek water.
Contrast on Impacts on People
In Namibia the impacts were much worse on people. Namibia is less resilient (people have less savings / alternative income).
In Namibia there is less infrastructure to store water (i.e. reservoirs).
In California the biggest impact was on agriculture because many water intensive crops are grown.
This led to economic impacts but not to malnutrition as the US can afford to import more food to make up a shortfall.
Impacts on Environment - California
Wildfires occurred more often and earlier in the year (starting in May rather than the Autumn near San Diego).
Grapes grow well in relatively dry conditions so the grape harvest was excellent and the wines tasted better.
Impacts on Environment - Namibia
Namibia contains a large savannah ecosystem, but parts of it are changing to desert as the vegetation dies and the soil is eroded; this will be a permanent change.
Some edible grasses are being replaced by more drought resistant, but inedible grasses, which the cattle cannot survive on.
Contrast on Impacts to the Environment
The whole way of life in Namibia is at greater risk due to the reliance of nomadic herdsman on the environment. If their cattle cannot survive they cannot make a living.
The changes in Namibia are affecting the type of ecosystem (very profound changes).
The changes in California can be more easily managed.
There aren’t really environmental benefits in Namibia (unlike the boost to the wine industry in the US).
Individual Responses - California
Farmers have to pay more to pump water.
People have to use water more efficiently.
Farmers plant smaller or less water intensive crops.
Individual Responses - Namibia
Farmers forced to sell their livestock.
People migrate to towns for work; in one village 350 (almost all) left to find water and grazing land.
Contrast on Individual Responses
People can more easily adapt in California as it is less extreme a change and they have more resources (so they are more resilient).
Generally in California people could adapt their lifestyle / farming practices without having to leave their land.
Organisations Responses - California
New laws passed to conserve water (I.e. hotels must ask guests to reuse towels / linen to save washing).
NASA are developing more advanced forecasting models to help farmers adapt.
Developing new ways to store water and monitor usage.
Organisations Responses -Namibia
UNICEF appealed for US$7m to support emergency food relief.
Algeria donated US$1m in food aid.
Contrast in Organisations Responses
In Namibia management was much more short term and focused on disaster relief (to avert a humanitarian catastrophe).
In the US it was much more about behavioural change to try and reduce water consumption and limit the impacts of drought / make it less likely to occur in the future.
Due to the different levels of development Namibia was much more reliant on outside organisation to help (I.e. charities), whilst California had sufficient resources.
Government Responses - California
Governor Brown issued a state of emergency.
The US President made available $183m of federal funds.
California passed drought-relief legislation worth $687m, including $25m for food relief.
The state has undertaken fish rescues, capturing them and transporting them close to the Ocean (where water is deeper).
Government Responses - Namibia
In May 13 the President declared a state of emergency, requesting $1m aid.
Government pledged $13m to the worst hit families.
The Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry helped farmers by buying their livestock or transporting them to areas of better grazing (before they died).
Contrast in Government Response
In the USA much larger sums of money could be made available, making it possible to take more actions (not just emergency relief). For example there could also be a focus on helping the environment (rescuing fish), whilst in Namibia the limited resources had to be targeted at people’s needs.
In California more was spent just on food relief than on the whole government response in Namibia (contrasting level of resources affects response).
