Water

Maybe a simple question with which I am currently dealing but for which I find contradictory answers in the literature…

To set the scene: 19 century Bali, the highly sophisticated irrigated rice terraces have long been established.

But were it the kings who invested into large dam structures to enable such systems and benefit from the usufruct or were it the farmers all by themselves, everynow and then paying some tribute to the(ir) lords?

And what about the trade in those days: Were it only the elites who engaged in such activities (after 200 years of successful slave trade), selling the little surplus that pawns made on royal land, or were it farming communities who actively participated not only in the local but regional and even inter-island trade to sell their produce from their own fertile lands?

Those who argue for the former it seems then are kind of saying that these communities serving the lord have no thinking of their own, they are mere pawns on a chessboard awaiting the orders from somewhere above to move. ‘Inward’ people as Geertz called it focusing on subsistence only. On the other hand, the latter argument of an almost acephalous organisations of farmers that manage it all by themselves purposfully cultivating goods for the market is somewhat unimaginable too.

So finally, it probably comes back(at least partially) to the question of equality or hierarchy? Both Geertz and Lansing have attempted to answer this (among many other issues) in their respective books Negara (Geertz 1980) and Perfect Order (Lansing 2006). I can’t make up my mind yet…

Mike Bourke (Argument Moderator)

This was an excellent Argument with all speakers making compelling cases. As well as the panel, Janelle McGufficke, Manager of Environmental Programs at Ricegrowers’ Association of Australia and Deborah Kerr from the National Farmer’s Federation, gave short presentations, making a strong case for irrigated rice production in Australia. The event was recorded and is available as podcast, if you were not able to be there.

From left: Barney Foran, Eric Craswell, John Angus and Mike Bourke.

Read the rest of this entry >>

It is that time of the year again! Activists, researchers and professionals working on water are gathering in Stockholm later this month. This year’s theme is Progress and Prospects on Water for a Clean and Healthy World, with a special focus on sanitation. GWA is holding sessions on water as the means to end conflicts.

For the full program, click here: http://www.worldwaterweek.org/Downloads/Final_Programme_08_lowres.pdf

Rice and water in Australia: a debate set in a rapidly changing global context

The debate by three eminent scientists about whether growing rice in Australia is a waste of Australian water takes place in the broader global context of water scarcity and climate change. What are the details of the broader picture for Australia?

Firstly there is a severe drought affecting much of south east, particularly the Murray Darling Basin. Each week brings even more dire warnings from expert commentators about how severe the effects of the drought are for irrigated agriculture, the health of the river system and associated ecology. It is particularly alarming that, without rain, meeting urban water supply in the lower part of the Basin is uncertain beyond 2009-2010 - a very short time frame in which to plan mitigation.

The ramifications of drought significantly impact our ability to supply global and local grain markets. Many of us believe that the global economy changed irreversibly in the middle of the decade and we are witnessing a period of particularly rapid change. A number of major physical and economic forces are operating that will require significant adjustments to outlook and policy.

Read the rest of this entry »

Dr Mike Bourke has invited three eminent agricultural scientists to debate the issues of growing rice in Australia. Dr John Angus will argue that rice is not a waste of Australian water and will contest that high profitability along with the ability to change production in response to water supply, are positive factors. Disputing this position, Dr Eric Craswell will illustrate a global perspective and highlight the incongruence of rice growing under conditions of scarce water supply. He recommends Australia abandon rice production and leave it to countries with a adequate water, such as Thailand and Vietnam. Dr Barney Foran will argue that the ‘rice and water’ debate needs to be set within a consumption lifestyle frame and recommends a water policy based on analysis of ‘full life cycle’ impacts - those created by us, the consumers.

The Argument will be held on Monday 28 July 2008 at 4.30-5.30 pm in the Sparke Helmore Theatre with opportunity for discussion over refreshments that follow. Biographical data of the panel and Dr Mike Bourke, the Moderator for the Australian Rice Argument, is available on the Argument Page and comments regarding issues raised are welcomed.