|
|
|
Case
Background
Environment Aspect Conflict Aspect Environment Conflict Overlap Related Information |
|
|
|
Case
Background
Environment Aspect Conflict Aspect Environment Conflict Overlap Related Information |
I. CASE BACKGROUND
After the Russian Empire was replaced by the Soviet Union,
this began to change. Traditional agricultural practices were
destroyed by collectivization, and Soviet planners sought products
that could be exported for hard currency. They placed cotton high
on their list, calling it `white gold,' and the Soviet Union became
a net exporter of cotton in 1937. Change accelerated in the
1950s, as Central Asian irrigated agriculture was expanded and
mechanized. The Kara Kum Canal opened in 1956, diverting large
amounts of water from the Amu Darya into the desert of
Turkmenistan, and millions of hectares of land came under
irrigation after 1960.
A crucial juncture had been reached, and after 1960 the level
of the Aral Sea began to drop, while diversion of water continued
to increase. While the sea had been receiving about fifty cubic
kilometers of water per year in 1965, by the early 1980s this had
fallen to zero.
As the Aral shrank, its salinity increased, and by 1977 the
formerly large fish catch had declined by over seventy-five
percent. By the early 1980s, commercially useful fish had been
eliminated, shutting down an industry that had employed 60,000.
The declining sea level lowered the water table in the region,
destroying many oases near its shores.
The devotion to irrigated agriculture had other direct effects
as well. Much ecologically sensitive land in the river deltas was
converted to cropland, and pesticide use was heavy throughout the
Aral basin, resulting in heavy contaminant concentrations in the
sea. Overirrigation caused salt buildup in many agricultural
areas.
By the beginning of the 1990s, the surface area of the Aral
had shrunk by nearly half, and the volume was down by seventy-five
percent. A host of secondary effects began to appear.
Regional climate became more continental, shortening the
growing season and causing some farmers to switch from cotton to
rice, which demanded even more diverted water. The exposed area
of former seabed was now over 28,000 square kilometers, from which
winds picked up an estimated 43 million tons of sediments laced
with salts and pesticides, with devastating health consequences for
surrounding regions. These contaminated Aral dust storms have
been reported as far away as the Arctic and Pakistan.
Respiratory illnesses were particularly common, and throat cancers
burgeoned. Regional vegetation loss may have increased albedo,
possible reducing precipitation.
These developing problems had not gone unnoticed during the
Soviet era. The solution devised was characteristic of Soviet
planners: the waters of Siberia's Ob River were to be diverted
southward, so that they would flow to Central Asia rather than the
Arctic. Mikhail Gorbachev's glasnost put an end to this scheme, as
the Soviet populace became aware of ecological disasters, and began
to have the freedom to petition and protest.
In 1988, the Soviet Central Committee decreed that cotton
growing was to be reduced, so that the Aral Sea could receive water
in gradually increasing amounts through 2005. There was some
reduction in water diversion as a result.
The dissolution of the Soviet Union at the end of 1991 ended
any such central authority; the Aral crisis was now in the hands of
the five Central Asian nations.
They signed an agreement in 1992 pledging efforts toward Aral
rehabilitation, but little action has been taken. Another
meeting, in January 1994, resulted in offers to reduce water
consumption, and promises of money for an Aral fund.
For the present, the Aral continues to shrink, and may soon be
lifeless. Its future prospects are uncertain. The sea could be
stabilized with improvements in the efficiency of irrigation, but
would remain incapable of supporting most fauna, and the current
problems of pollution and lost habitat would go unaddressed.
Substantial but feasible irrigation improvements, and some
reduction in cropland, would allow partial restoration of the sea,
though it would still be incapable of supporting its former
fisheries.
Full restoration would require wholesale regional changes,
such as a shift away from agriculture. Urbanization, combined with
large revenues from oil and gas projects, might facilitate such a
shift. Genetically engineered crops in need of less water might
also provide a solution in the next few decades.
Other agricultural products, chiefly rice, are also grown with
water diverted from Aral feeders. As changing climate reduces the
growing season, rice has been replacing cotton as the crop of
choice around the southern end of the lake.
Mideast
Asia Mideast
Uzbekistan
The Aral Sea is shared by Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, but water
conservation would also affect Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, and
Kyrgyzstan.
1. Abstract
The destruction of the Aral Sea ecosystem has been sudden and severe. Beginning in the 1960s, agricultural demands have deprived
this large Central Asian salt lake of enough water to sustain itself, and it has shrunk rapidly. Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and
other Central Asian states use this water to grow cotton and other export crops, in the face of widespread environmental consequences,
including fisheries loss, water and soil contamination, and dangerous levels of polluted airborne sediments. It is generally
agreed that the current situation is unsustainable, but the poverty and export dependency of the Central Asian states have prevented
real action, and the sea continues to shrink.
2. Description
It is no exaggeration to say that the case of the Aral Sea is
one of the greatest environmental catastrophes ever recorded.
Humans have made use of the waters of the Aral basin for thousands
of years, borrowing from its two major rivers: the Amu Darya, which
flows into the Aral Sea from the south; and the Syr Darya, which
reaches the sea at its north end. As the twentieth century began,
irrigated agriculture in the basin was still being conducted at a
sustainable level.
3. Duration: 1970s to now
The Central Asian countries have made agreements concerning
the Aral. A 1992 document called for insuring delivery of water to
the sea and its deltas. In 1994, the countries pledged to give
one percent of their GNPs to an Aral Sea fund, and agreed to use
less irrigation water. However, little action appears to have
been taken. For instance, it was reported in late 1994 that no
money had so far reached the Aral fund.
4. Location
5. Actors: Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan
II. Environment Aspects
Turkmenistan obtained 46.4% of its net material product by value through agriculture in 1991. Agriculture constituted 33.9% of Kazakhstan's net material product that year. Twenty percent of the labor force was employed in agriculture in the period 1990- 1992.
The agricultural industries of Central Asia are able to significantly reduce costs by nearly complete externalization of environmental costs. Were these costs to be internalized, output would be considerably reduced.
Central Asia is at the same latitude as Maine: the area around the Aral is too far north for optimal cotton production. Without the massive government support inherited from Soviet planning, the region might not be a natural producer of cotton on the world market.
IV. Environment and Conflict
Overlap
Causal Diagram The problem is general habitat loss, brought on by unsustainable usage of water in the Aral basin, resulting in the gradual disappearance of the sea. Most animal life in the Aral died as the sea's volume declined from 1,075 cubic kilometers with a salinity of 10 grams per liter, to only 54 cubic kilometers with more than ten times that salinity. Wetlands along the shore disappeared as the lake receded, and falling water tables destroyed oases.
Additional habitat was lost as river water was diverted from delta wetlands, which were also being converted into cropland. Plant and animal populations shifted, with environmental changes favoring species better adapted to drought and salinity. Further strain was placed on the environment by the onset of a more continental climate in the region, induced by the loss of the Aral's moderating influence.
There are secondary sink problems, which include loss of cropland to accumulating salts, and air and water pollution. Excessive irrigation has caused salt accumulation in soil throughout the Aral basin, causing declining harvests. Between 1968 and 1985, sixty percent of the cropland in the Amu Darya delta was affected by salinity.
The shrinking of the sea has exposed almost 30,000 square kilometers of lake bed, which is so filled with salts and chemicals that it is toxic to plants. Millions of tons of such sediments are lifted from the lakebed by winds, damaging plants, crops, and human health. In some areas, airborne salt accumulates at a rate of four tons per hectare per year.
Increasing salinity became intolerable for various kinds of fish beginning in the 1970s, and some species unique to the Aral Sea are now extinct. Others are found elsewhere, and could be reintroduced if the lake were sufficiently restored. Destruction of isolated oases undoubtedly eliminated some unique species. Other species are being driven from the area by habitat loss, but are not in danger of extinction.
Humans are suffering health impacts, from pesticide- contaminated and saline water, and from windblown sediments containing salts and chemicals. Anaemia and infant mortality are reported to have risen. There are heightened rates of throat cancer, as well as respiratory and eye diseases. Deteriorating conditions have also been tied to increases in leukemia and liver and kidney diseases.
V. Related Information and Sources
ICE Cases
Economist, 15 October 1994. "No More Caviar," 38, 43.
Ellis, William S. "A Soviet Sea Lies Dying." National
Geographic 177 (February 1990): 72-93.
Gleason, Gregory. "Uzbekistan: From Statehood to Nationhood?"
In Nations and Politics in the Soviet Successor States,
ed. Ian Bremmer and Ray Taras, 331-360. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Kuznetsov, N. T. "Geographical and Ecological Aspects of
Aral Sea Hydrological Functions." Post-Soviet Geography
33 (May 1992): 324-331.
Micklin, Philip P. "The Aral Crisis: Introduction to the Special
Issue." Post-Soviet Geography 33 (May 1992): 269-282.
Nature, 20 January 1994. "Asian Republics Agree on Joint
Rescue Plan to Save the Aral Sea," 206.
New Scientist, 22 January 1994. "Neighbors Sign Deal to Save
Aral Sea," 10.
Smith, David R. "Change and Variability in Climate and Ecosystem
Decline in Aral Sea Basin Deltas." Post-Soviet Geography
35 (March 1994): 142-165.