Advertisement

A Water Perspective on Land Competition

  • Antje Bruns
  • Tobias Krueger
  • Bruce Lankford
  • Fanny Frick
  • Catherine Grasham
  • Christina Spitzbart-Glasl
Chapter
Part of the Human-Environment Interactions book series (HUEN, volume 6)

Abstract

This chapter reflects on land competition from a water perspective. Conceptual thoughts are enriched with evidence drawn from case studies as well as other published studies about both land and water. At the same time, it lays down an analytical framework for these case studies. Starting with a discussion of the inherent relationship between land and water, we explore recent disconnects in land and water studies that make it difficult to collate empirical evidence and comprehensive understanding of how competition between water and land are inherently linked. For us the term competition refers to gaining access to or control over—either land or water—and thus simultaneously captures social and material dimensions. To address these linkages, we employ the concept of waterscapes. One way of seeing waterscapes is through the lens of the competition that occurs at specific places, in various positions and on/across various scales, thereby capturing a combined view of land and water. The notion of waterscapes is mainly used by scholars from the fields of political ecology and critical geography thinking to explore how power is wielded, and in determining when and where who or what gets how much water/land. We briefly review the different notions of competition in disconnected literature concerning land and water in order to instil a further analytical dimension: whilst the term “competition” is increasingly used in land change science to refer to the global rush for land, water scholars refer rather to the various means of water governance.

Keywords

Critical geography Waterscape Governance Land–water coupling Resources Water as a hybrid 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Emily Raab and Viviana Wiegleb for their support. This research is partly funded by BMBF Global Change Research under the reference number 01LN1316A.

References

  1. Agnew, J. (1997). The dramaturgy of horizons: Geographical scale in the ‘Reconstruction of Italy’ by the new Italian political parties, 1992–1995. Political Geography, 16(2), 99–121. doi: 10.1016/S0962-6298(96)00046-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allan, J. A. (2003). Virtual water—the water, food, and trade nexus. Useful concept or misleading metaphor?: Water international. Water International, 28(1), 106–113. doi: 10.1080/02508060.2003.9724812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allan, J. A., Keulertz, M., Sojamo, S., & Warner, J. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook of land and water grabs in Africa: Foreign direct investment and food and water security (1st ed.). London: Routledge international handbooks. Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Bakker, K. (2002). From state to market?: Water mercantilización in Spain. Environment and Planning A, 34 (5), 767–790. doi: 10.1068/a3425
  5. Bakker, K. (2009). Water. In N, Castree., D. Demeritt., D. Liverman., & B. Rhoads, (Eds.), A companion to environmental geography (pp. 515–532). Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. Bandaragoda, D. J. (2006). Water-land linkages: A relatively neglected issue in IWRM. In P. P. Mollinga, A. Dixit, & K. Athukorala (Eds.), Integrated water resources management: Global theory, emerging practice, and local needs (pp. 172–185). New Delhi, Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  7. Barnes, J. (2012). Pumping possibility: Agricultural expansion through desert reclamation in Egypt. Social Studies of Science, 42(4), 517–538. doi: 10.1177/0306312712438772
  8. Biermann, F., Betsill, M. M., Gupta, J., Kanie, N., Lebel, L., Liverman, D., et al. (2009). Earth system governance. People, places, and the planet: Science and implementation plan of the earth system governance project 20. Accessed January 21, 2016.Google Scholar
  9. Boroto, J. R., Chiramba, T., Mafuta, C. & Williams, T. O. (2014). Analysis of impacts of large-scale investments in agriculture on water resources, ecosystems and livelihoods; and development of policy options for decision makers: Summary of initial findings. http://www.grida.no/publications/water-grab/
  10. Borras, S. M., Franco, J., Wang, C. (2012). Competing political tendencies in global governance of land grabbing. Discussion paper.Google Scholar
  11. Brenner, N. (1998). Between fixity and motion: Accumulation, territorial organization and the historical geography of spatial scales. Environment and Planning D, 16 459–482.Google Scholar
  12. Bruns, A. (2015). Wasser- und Bodenschutz in der Landschaftsplanung. In W. Riedel, H. Lange, E. Jedicke, & M. Reinke (Eds.), Landschaftsplanung (pp. 1–9). Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Budds, J. (2009). Contested H2O: Science, policy and politics in water resources management in Chile. Geoforum, 40(3), 418–430. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2008.12.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Budds, J. (2013). Water, power, and the production of neoliberalism in Chile, 1973–2005. Environment and Planning D. Society and Space 31(2), 301–318. doi: 10.1068/d9511
  15. Budds, J., & Hinojosa-Valencia, L. (2012). Restructuring and rescaling water governance in mining contexts: The co-production of waterscapes in Peru. Water Alternatives, 5(1), 119–137.Google Scholar
  16. Cohen, A., & Davidson, S. (2011). The watershed approach: Challenges, antecedents, and the transition from technical tool to governance unit. Water Alternatives, 4(1), 1–14.Google Scholar
  17. Conway, D., van Garderen, E. A., Deryng, D., Dorling, S., Krueger, T., Landman, W., et al. (2015). Climate and southern Africa’s water-energy-food nexus. Nature Climate Change, 5(9), 837–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cortner, H., & Moote, M. (1994). Trends and issues in land and water resources management: Setting the agenda for change. Environmental Management, 18(2), 167–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cotula, L. (2012). The international political economy of the global land rush: A critical appraisal of trends, scale, geography and drivers. Journal of Peasant Studies, 39(3–4), 649–680. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2012.674940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. de Vries, D. H. (2011). Temporal vulnerability in hazardscapes: Flood memory-networks and referentiality along the North Carolina Neuse River (USA). Global Environmental Change, 21(1), 154–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Di Baldassarre, G., Kemerink, J. S., Kooy, M., & Brandimarte, L. (2014). Floods and societies: The spatial distribution of water-related disaster risk and its dynamics. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water, 1(2), 133–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Falkenmark, M. (1979). Main problems of water use and transfer of technology. GeoJournal, 3(5), 435–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Falkenmark, M. (1997). Society’s interaction with the water cycle: A conceptual framework for a more holistic approach. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 42(4), 451–466. doi: 10.1080/02626669709492046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Falkenmark, M., & Folke, C. (2002). The ethics of socio-ecohydrological catchment management: Towards hydrosolidarity. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions, 6(1), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. FAO. (2012). Coping with water scarcity: An action framework for agriculture and food security. Rome: FAO Water Reports.Google Scholar
  26. Franco, J., Mehta, L., & Veldwisch, G. J. (2013). The global politics of water grabbing. Third World Quarterly, 34(9), 1651–1675. doi: 10.1080/01436597.2013.843852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gheewala, S., Berndes, G., & Graham, J. (2011). The bioenergy and water nexus. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining, 5(4), 353–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gibson, C. C., Ostrom, E., & Ahn, T. (2000). The concept of scale and the human dimensions of global change: a survey. Ecological Economics, 32(2), 217–239. doi: 10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00092-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gleick, P. (2002). Water management: Soft water paths. Nature, 418(6896), 373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. GWP, Global Water Project. (2014). Coordinating land and water governance: An essential part of achieving food security. Perspectives paper.Google Scholar
  31. Haberl, H. (2015). Competition for land: A sociometabolic perspective. Ecological Economics, 119, 424–431. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.10.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Haberl, H., Mbow, C., Deng, X., Irwin, E. G., Kerr, S., Kuemmerle, T., et al. (2014). Finite land resources and competition. In K. C. Seto & A. Reenberg (Eds.), Rethinking global land use in an urban era (Vol. 14, pp. 35–69). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  33. Hanjra, M. A., & Qureshi, M. E. (2010). Global water crisis and future food security in an era of climate change. Food Policy, 35(5), 365–377. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2010.05.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hodgson, S. (2004). Land and water—the right interface. Rome.Google Scholar
  35. Keys, P. W., van der Ent, R. J., Gordon, L. J., Hoff, H., Nikoli, R., & Savenije, H. H. G. (2012). Analyzing precipitation sheds to understand the vulnerability of rainfall dependent regions. Biogeosciences, 9(2), 733–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Krueger, T., Maynard, C., Carr, G., Bruns, A., Mueller, E. N., & Lane, S. (2016). A transdisciplinary account of water research. WIREs Water, 3, 369–389. doi: 10.1002/wat2.1132.Google Scholar
  37. Lambin, E., & Meyfroidt, P. (2011). Global land use change, economic globalization, and the looming land scarcity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(9), 3465–3472. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1100480108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lankford, B. A. (2013). Resource efficiency complexity and the commons: The paracommons and paradoxes of natural resource losses, Wastes and Wastages. Abingdon: Earthscan Publications.Google Scholar
  39. Lankford, B. A., Tumbo, S., & Rajabu, K. (2009). Water competition, variability and river basin governance: A critical analysis of the Great Ruaha River, Tanzania. In F. Molle & P. Wester (Eds.), River basin trajectories: Societies, environments and development (pp. 171–195). Cambridge, MA: CABI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lebel, L., Garden, P., & Imamura, M. (2005). The politics of scale, position, and place in the governance of water resources in the Mekong region. Ecology and Society, 10(2), 18.Google Scholar
  41. Linton, J., & Budds, J. (2014). The hydrosocial cycle: Defining and mobilizing a relational-dialectical approach to water. Geoforum, 57, 170–180. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2013.10.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Loftus, A. (2007). Working the socio-natural relations of the urban waterscape in South Africa. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 31(1), 41–59. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2427.2007.00708.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Loftus, A., & Lumsden, F. (2008). Reworking hegemony in the urban waterscape. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 33(1), 109–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mehta, L., Veldwisch, G. J. & Franco, J. (2012). Introduction to the special issue: Water grabbing? Focus on the (Re)appropriation of finite water resources. Water Alternatives, 5(2), 193–207.Google Scholar
  45. Molle, F. (2007). Scales and power in river basin management: The Chao Phraya river in Thailand1. The Geographical Journal, 173(4), 358–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Molle, F. (2009). River-basin planning and management: The social life of a concept. Geoforum, 40(3), 484–494. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2009.03.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Molle, F., Wester, P. (Eds.). (2009). River basin trajectories: Societies, environments and development. Comprehensive assessment of water management in agriculture series (vol 8). Cambridge, MA: CABI.Google Scholar
  48. Moss, T., & Newig, J. (2010). Multilevel water governance and problems of scale: Setting the stage for a broader debate. Environmental Management, 46(1), 1–6. doi: 10.1007/s00267-010-9531-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Norman, E. S., & Bakker, K. (2009). Transgressing scales: Water governance across the Canada–U.S. Borderland. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 99(1), 99–117. doi: 10.1080/00045600802317218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Norman, E., Bakker, K., & Cook, C. (2012). Introduction to the themed section: Water governance and the politics of scale. Water Alternatives, 5(1), 52–61.Google Scholar
  51. Oliveira, G. D. (2013). Land regularization in Brazil and the global land grab. Development and Change, 44(2), 261–283. doi: 10.1111/dech.12009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ostrom, E. (1999). Revisiting the Commons: Local Lessons. Global Challenges. Science, 284(5412), 278–282. doi: 10.1126/science.284.5412.278.Google Scholar
  53. Pahl-Wostl, C., Holtz, G., Kastens, B., & Knieper, C. (2010). Analyzing complex water governance regimes: The management and transition framework. Environmental Science & Policy, 13(7), 571–581. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2010.08.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Palmer, D., Fricska, S. & Wehrmann, B. (2009). Towards improved land governance. Land tenure working paper, vol 11. UN-HABITAT.Google Scholar
  55. Perreault, T., Wraight, S., & Perreault, M. (2012). Environmental injustice in the Onondaga Lake waterscape, New York State, USA. Water Alternatives, 5(2), 485–506.Google Scholar
  56. Perrone, N. M. (2013). Restrictions to foreign acquisitions of agricultural land in Argentina and Brazil. Globalizations, 10(1), 205–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Qadir, M., Wichelns, D., Raschid-Sally, L., McCornick, P. G., Drechsel, P., Bahri, A., & Minhas, P. S. (2010). The challenges of wastewater irrigation in developing countries. Agriculture Water Management, 97(4), 561–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Ringler, C., Bhaduri, A., & Lawford, R. (2013). The nexus across water, energy, land and food (WELF): potential for improved resource use efficiency? Aquatic and marine systems. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5(6), 617–624. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2013.11.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Rockström, J., Gordon, L., Folke, C., Falkenmark, M., & Engwall, M. (1999). Conservation ecology: Linkages between water vapor flows, food production and terrestrial ecosystem services. Conservation Ecology, 3(2), 5.Google Scholar
  60. Rulli, M. C., Saviori, A., & D’Odorico, P. (2013). Global land and water grabbing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(3), 892–897. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1213163110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sikor, T., Auld, G., Bebbington, A. J., Benjaminsen, T. A., Gentry, B. S., Hunsberger, C., et al. (2013). Global land governance: From territory to flow? Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5(5), 522–527. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2013.06.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Simpson, T. W., Sharpley, A. N., Howarth, R. W., Paerl, H. W., & Mankin, K. R. (2008). The new gold rush: Fueling ethanol production while protecting water quality. Journal of Environmental Quality, 37(2), 318–324. doi: 10.2134/jeq2007.0599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sjöstedt, M. (2011). The impact of secure land tenure on water access levels in sub-Saharan Africa: The case of Botswana and Zambia. Habitat International, 35(1), 133–140. doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2010.06.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Skinner, J. & Cotula, L. (2011). Are land deals drivingwater grabs? The global land rush. http://pubs.iied.org/17102IIED
  65. Steffen, W. (2009). Interdisciplinary research for managing ecosystem services. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(5), 1301–1302. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0812580106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Swyngedouw, E. (1997). Neither global nor local: ‘Glocalization’ and the politics of scale. Spaces of globalization: Reasserting the power of the local.Google Scholar
  67. Swyngedouw, E. (1999). Modernity and hybridity: Nature, regeneracionismo, and the production of the Spanish waterscape, 1890–1930. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 89(3), 443–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Swyngedouw, E. (2004). Social power and the urbanization of water: Flows of power. Oxford, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Swyngedouw, E. (2009). The political economy and political ecology of the hydro-social cycle. Journal of Contemporary Water Research & Education, 142(1), 56–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. The Land Matrix Global Observatory. (2016). Agricultural drivers for land deals. http://www.landmatrix.org/en/get-the-idea/agricultural-drivers/. Accessed January 31, 2016.
  71. Trottier, J. (2008). Water crises: Political construction or physical reality? Contemporary Politics, 14(2), 197–214. doi: 10.1080/13569770802176929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Walsh, A. (2011). The commodification of the public service of water: A normative perspective. Public Reason, 3(2), 90–106.Google Scholar
  73. White, B., Borras, Jr, Saturnino, M., Hall, R., Scoones, I., & Wolford, W. (2012). The new enclosures: Critical perspectives on corporate land deals. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 39(3–4), 619–647. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2012.691879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Wolford, W., Borras, S. M., Hall, R., Scoones, I., & White, B. (2013). Governing global land deals: The role of the state in the rush for land. Development and Change, 44(2), 189–210. doi: 10.1111/dech.12017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zeitoun, M., & Mirumachi, N. (2008). Transboundary water interaction I: Reconsidering conflict and cooperation. International Environmental Agreements, 8(4), 297–316. doi: 10.1007/s10784-008-9083-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Zimmer, A. (2011). Everyday governance of the waste waterscapes—A Foucauldian analysis in Delhi’s informal settlements. Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelm Universität Bonn.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antje Bruns
    • 1
  • Tobias Krueger
    • 2
  • Bruce Lankford
    • 3
  • Fanny Frick
    • 1
    • 2
  • Catherine Grasham
    • 3
  • Christina Spitzbart-Glasl
    • 4
  1. 1.Governance and Sustainability LabTrier UniversityTrierGermany
  2. 2.Department of Geography and IRI THESysHumboldt-Universität zu BerlinBerlinGermany
  3. 3.School of International DevelopmentUniversity of East AngliaNorwichUK
  4. 4.Institute of Social EcologyAlpen-Adria UniversityViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations