2.1. Description of the Study Region
The analyses were conducted for the Khorezm region in Northwest Uzbekistan. As part of the Lower Reaches of the Amu Darya lowlands, it is located between 60.05 and 61.39 N and 41.13 and 42.02 E. The distance from the present Aral Sea shore is about 250 km. The territory stretches 280 km from the Northwest to Southeast and covers 6,052 km2.
The Khorezm region borders with the Karakum and Kyzylkum deserts which determine the severely arid continental climate characterized by short cold winters, with temperatures falling as low as −20 °C, followed by long, hot and dry summers, with temperatures reaching +45 °C [
10]. Annually, 200 days are free of frost. The annual precipitation (80−120 mm) is far below the annual evaporation (1,200 mm), which necessitates irrigation for crop production. About 40% of the precipitation falls in spring, 20–25% in the fall, and only 10% during the summer months. Precipitation has little influence on the growth and development of agricultural crops [
9].
Despite being a rather small area (about 1.5% of the total area of Uzbekistan), the share of the population in Khorezm with 1.506 million inhabitants (as of 2007) is more than 5% of the total population of Uzbekistan. About three quarters of the population is rural. Although the World Food Program [
11] noted the threshold value of poverty in Central Asia at $2.15 per person per day, the $1 per day poverty threshold line has been frequently used for comparison and according to the latter threshold, slightly less than 30% lives below the poverty line [
12].
2.2. Cropland Allocation, Regional Population and Agricultural Commodity Prices
Secondary data from various sources from the years 2000 through 2007 were used during analyses. Demographic data as well as datasets on cropland allocation and production across the administrative districts were provided by the Regional Statistical Department of the Khorezm Region (OblStat). Since this Department usually elaborates data on the basis of farmers’ individual annual reports on land use and crop production levels as well as on the basis of the reports of local administrations, it is the sole and most reliable database.
Agriculture is the centerpiece of Khorezm’s economy, as evidenced by its 46% contribution to the Gross Regional Product (GRP) [
13] in which raw cotton, wheat and horticultural production have a major share [
14]. Moreover, agriculture is the main source of foreign hard currency, contributes to the development of industry and the service sector of the economy, and enhances food security. As a result of the high demand for agricultural commodities and triggered by the cotton self-sufficiency policy of the former Soviet Union era, the irrigated areas in Khorezm increased steadily from 200,000 ha in 1982 to 276,000 ha in 1999 until the drought periods of 2000 and 2001 (
Figure 1). Owing to these drought spells, as compared to 1999, the cropped land area decreased by 4% in 2000 and by 6% in 2001. The annual irrigated area has stabilized around 265,000 ha since 2001/2002.
Figure 1.
Dynamics of the irrigated area in Khorezm (1982−2006).
Figure 1.
Dynamics of the irrigated area in Khorezm (1982−2006).
One force driving the gradual but steady increase of irrigated areas in the study region is a steady population growth (
Figure 2). Whereas the total population increased by 50% between 1989 (1.014 million people) and 2007 (1.504 million people), the percentage of the rural population increased from 72.3% in 1989 to 78.2% in 2007. The high share of the rural population underlines the importance of the agricultural sector for their livelihoods.
Figure 2.
Population growth in the Khorezm region (1989−2007).
Figure 2.
Population growth in the Khorezm region (1989−2007).
Cotton was a major crop in Khorezm during the Soviet era. But even following independence in 1991, cotton remained the dominant state order crop (winter wheat is the second strategic crop), which is cultivated annually on about 110,000 ha or 48% of the total irrigated land (
Figure 3).
Figure 3.
Crop land allocation in the Khorezm region (1991−2007).
Figure 3.
Crop land allocation in the Khorezm region (1991−2007).
Export of the “cash crop” cotton, renders about 98% of the total regional export revenues [
13], thus contributing to the regional welfare via both the acquisition of hard currency and by the value added tax (VAT) generated during the domestic processing of raw cotton and fiber [
15]. Consequently, as a state order crop, cotton production is under strong scrutiny from the government, which regulates the cropped area for cotton production and determines the prices for inputs and raw cotton. In exchange, the government supports cotton producers with input subsidies to lower the expenses for fertilizers, chemicals and fuel, as well as by providing low interest rates for bank credits [
15].
The second major crop, winter wheat, covers on average 20% or 45,000 ha of the total cropped area annually. Until independence in 1991, very little wheat was produced on the irrigated areas in the region because the domestic demand was satisfied via imports from other Soviet republics [
15]. Following independence, wheat production became part of the crop rotation within the irrigated areas so as to reduce dependency on wheat imports and lay the basis for domestic food security. Consequently, the share and area of wheat-cropped lands has been increased annually while the area for fodder crops particularly has been substantially decreased. Winter wheat is mainly cultivated in rotation with cotton or rice and after harvest in July followed by vegetables, fodder maize or short-duration rice.
Furthermore, the downstream districts of the Amu Darya River, such as Khorezm, and the autonomous Republic Karakalpakstan, are the main rice producers in Uzbekistan. For instance, the Khorezm region provided 53% of the national rice production although in 2007 rice was cropped only on 32% of the entire rice cropped area in the country [
16,
17]. In spite of increased stress over water and the high water demand of the paddy rice production in these tail-end regions, main incentives to maintain rice growing are the flatness of the fields, the intensive salt leaching that occurs due to the large amounts of water used during rice cultivation, and the free market with a substantial internal demand. Fodder crops such as clover, maize and others, also occupy a significant area (in average 12% after 2000) of the arable land although they are cultivated mainly in small household plots or
Dekhkan (kitchen garden farmers) enterprises. The share of the areas cropped to vegetables and fruits are on average 3.7% and 3.0%, respectively.
Despite these generalizations, cropland allocation differs across the administrative districts of the region (
Figure 4). For instance, the highest share of cotton was observed in the Yangibazar district (50.6%) while the lowest share was found in the Urgench district (43.1%). The highest share of rice is found in Gurlen (17.6%) and Khazarasp (14.3%), due to their direct access to river water (
Figure 7). Downstream districts such as Khiva and Kushkupir cropped rice only on 4.2% of their territory.
Figure 4.
Cropland allocation across administrative districts, 2000−2007 average. (CTN—Cotton; GRN—Grain; RIC—Rice; FDR—Fodder; FRT—Fruit and Vegetables; OTH—other crops).
Figure 4.
Cropland allocation across administrative districts, 2000−2007 average. (CTN—Cotton; GRN—Grain; RIC—Rice; FDR—Fodder; FRT—Fruit and Vegetables; OTH—other crops).
Agricultural commodity prices were evaluated based on weekly conducted market surveys in Urgench and Khiva dekhkan markets during six years. Constant prices from 2007 were applied in this study to estimate agricultural revenue. The official exchange rate used for the US$ 1 was about UZS 1,500.
2.3. Land Privatization
Since the dissolution of the former Soviet Union, various privatization and market liberalization reforms have been taking place in the agriculture and irrigation sector in Uzbekistan, as was the case in other post-Soviet countries [
18]. In 1993, the former
kolkhozes and
sovkhozes were transformed into
shirkats (joint stock companies) while maintaining state land ownership. However, the entire production process and organization differed only slightly from the inherited ones [
19]. An exception was made for the so-called
tomorqas, which are about 0.23 ha in size and allocated to rural households within the boundaries of a
shirkat. These household plots provided workers with an opportunity to crop vegetables, other staples and fodder [
20]. Following privatization, the total number of livestock kept by households nearly doubled and currently accounts for about 92% of the total regional livestock resources, although it takes place on only 15% of the total cropped area [
13].
Large-scale privatization imposed after 1998 sparked the emergence of private farms which operate on an area larger than 10 ha, yet under a land lease contract from the government, spanning a minimum of 50 years. However,
shirkats retained the largest cropping areas and hence supplied the main share of the two state target crops—cotton and wheat—until 2004. On the basis of a Presidential Decree issued on March 3, 2000,
shirkats were almost fully transformed into private farms and, towards the end of 2006, 81% of the area was cropped by private farms while only 2% of the area remained allotted to state farms (
Figure 5).
Figure 5.
Change in the share of different entity types in total cropped land (in %) over time in the Khorezm region.
Figure 5.
Change in the share of different entity types in total cropped land (in %) over time in the Khorezm region.
2.4. Irrigation Water Use
Data on irrigation water use in the leaching and vegetation periods was provided by the Khorezm Regional Branch of the Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources Management (OblSelVodKhoz). Representatives of this ministry conduct daily measurements in each canal, and are therefore the sole source of complete and consistent data on irrigation water use and distribution [
21].
The water supply for irrigation needs originates from the lower Amu Darya, which is collected in the Tuyamuyun reservoir and released during the vegetation period. The total annual water intake from the Amu Darya for irrigation and leaching purposes amounts to approximately 4.5 km
3 in water abundant years (
Figure 6).
Nearly one fourth of the total water intake is annually used for leaching that takes place in late winter and early spring as a pre-sowing activity to wash salts out of the topsoil layers. About 3.3 km3 is used during the vegetation period. The lowest water intake was observed in 2000 (3 km3) and 2001 (2.2 km3) within a 50-year record of water supply. Water intake in 2007 was moderate. Other years observed can be defined as water abundant years, meaning sufficient to provide irrigation water during the vegetation season to the estimated 260,000 ha of potential cropland.
Figure 6.
Annual water intake from the Amu Darya for irrigation and leaching, 2000−2007.
Figure 6.
Annual water intake from the Amu Darya for irrigation and leaching, 2000−2007.
Water from the Amu Darya River is conveyed to the agricultural fields through a hierarchical network of
magistral,
inter-farm and
on-farm canals.
Magistral canals convey water through different districts from the river to
inter-farm canals that transport water to the boundary of WUAs.
On-farm canals are intermediaries between
inter-farm canals and field level networks [
22].
The irrigation water distribution system is based only partly on hydrological boundaries of water management, which in 2003 replaced the former solely administrative-territorial system of irrigation management [
22]. In spite of this change on the water management level, official data on agricultural production (and in fact many other parameters) is still collected on administrative boundary level. As we used datasets covering the years 2000 through 2007 and covered the period when this change occurred, the spatial dimension of this analysis could focus only at administrative districts rather than hydrological boundaries.
2.5. Water and Land Productivity; Productivity Differentiation; and Water Access Assessment Methodology
Water productivity analysis has been used to illustrate the yield or economic output obtained from the use of a unit of water [
23]. In this study, economic water productivity level was calculated as the ratio of the total value of agricultural production (output) to water intake of each district and used as an analogous for water productivity throughout this paper. Total agricultural production value (revenue) was estimated by summing individual crop revenues. Revenues for each crop were calculated as crop price multiplied by crop production volumes. Revenues from the livestock sector, which is about 50% of the overall agricultural sector production, were not included. Due to the high salinity level of drainage waters at the tail end zones, as well as their negative impact on crop yield, possible re-use of water that leaves the borders of the districts was not considered. Districts have been classified according to water productivity and water use per hectare to compare water use efficiencies in these districts.
To show land productivity and agricultural revenue distribution, per hectare and per capita agricultural revenue across districts and over the years was calculated. To estimate the differentiation of all aforementioned indicators around their average, variation coefficients (VC) were evaluated as a ratio of the standard deviation (SD) to the mean of the analyzed series.
Water availability in each district was estimated stepwise. In a first step, the distances between the border of the WUAs and water intake (source) point of the primary canal that attached each WUA, were calculated using ArcView software following Conrad [
9]. Next, the average distance of WUAs from the water intake point was calculated for each of the ten administrative districts (
Figure 7). This allowed, in a subsequent step, the classification of the districts according to the average distances of their WUAs from the source point of the nearest main canal.
Figure 7.
Water access levels and groups of administrative districts.
Figure 7.
Water access levels and groups of administrative districts.
The estimations showed that the districts Kushkupir, Khiva, Shavat, and Yangiarik are tail-end users, whilst Urgench and Yangibazar districts were middle-end users. The other four districts (Khazarasp, Bagat, Khanka and Gurlen) were classified as upper-end users. Since this categorization of the administrative districts was based on the remoteness of each WUA from the source point of its main water delivery canal, the impacts of hydrological boundaries were effectively covered.