Dilemmas in water use: How is the water resource distributed in the Colombian Amazon basin?
Vol 4, Issue 2, 2021
VIEWS - 1036 (Abstract) 182 (pdf)
Abstract
This paper contextualizes the economic environment of the productive sectors that depend on the intensive use of water resources in the Colombian Amazon basin (it is composed of the departments of Amazonas, Caquetá, Guainía, Guaviare, Putumayo, Vaupes, La Bota Caucana and southern Nariño) through the collection and organization of information from official entities and consultations in the region carried out by the Amazon Scientific Research Institute (ASRI). Macroeconomic indicators of the Amazonian departments in each of the different sectors were analyzed considering the added value exposed in the annual average of the Gross Domestic Product (2000–2012 in constant values) and contrasted with the sectoral demand for water and the growth projection, both of the human population and the growth trends of the economic activities. As a relevant result, it was found that the departments with a mining-energy tradition base their economic growth on the intensive use of water (greater pressure on the resource in m3/year). An average annual value of $374.42 million dollars is reported in water use (economic cost for the department of Putumayo alone) for oil extraction, which will increase in the future. This value has not been offset by the department, let alone taken into account in the economic growth indicators. It is concluded that the policy guidelines for water resource management in Colombia should be differentiated by sectors and by departments, considering the economic dynamics in the demand for water use and the heterogeneity of the populations.
Keywords
Full Text:
pdfReferences
1. National Administrative Department of Statistics (DANE). Cuentas departamentales (Spanish) [Department accounts] [Internet]. [cited 2013 Apr 10]. 2012. Available from: www.dane.gov.co.
2. Gutiérrez F, Acosta LE, Salazar CA. Perfiles urbanos en la Amazonia Colombiana: Un enfoque para el desarrollo sostenible (Spanish) [Urban profiles in the Colombian Amazon: An approach for sustainable development]. Bogotá: Instituto Amazónico de Investigaciones Científicas-SINCHI; 2004.
3. Murcia U, Sánchez L, García O, et al. Uso y gestión del agua en las tropicales (Spanish) [Utilization and management of tropical water]. Logroño: Universidad de la Rioja; 2003.
4. Institute of Hydrology, Meteorology and Environmental Studies of Colombia (IHMESC). Estudio nacional del agua (Spanish) [National water resources study]. [cited 2013 May 2]. 2010. Available from: http://institucional.ideam.gov.co.
5. Turner K, Georgiou S, Clark R, et al. Economic valuation of water resources in agriculture. Rome: United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization-FAO; 2004.
6. Banco de la República. Informe de Coyuntura Económica Regional: Departamento del Amazonas (Spanish) [Regional economic situation report: Amazon Department]. [cited 2013 Mar 23]. 2010. Available from: https://repositorio.banrep.gov.co/.
7. Banco de la República. Informe de coyuntura económica regional: Caquetá (Spanish) [Regional economic situation report: Caquetá]. [cited 2013 Mar 23]. 2013. 2011. Available from: https://repositorio.banrep.gov.co/.
8. Banco de la República. Informe de coyuntura económica regional: Nuevos Departamentos (Spanish) [Regional economic situation report: New department]. [cited 2013 Mar 23]. Available from: https://repositorio.banrep.gov.co/.
9. National Administrative Department of Statistics (DANE). Estudios postcensales No-7 (Spanish) [Post census research No. 7]. [cited 2013 Apr 19]. 2009. Available from: www. dane.gov.co.
10. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). El estado mundial de la agricultura y la alimentación (Spanish) [World food and agriculture situation]. Delhi: FAO; 2019.
11. Office of the Auditor General of the Republic (AGR). Minería en Colombia: fundamentos para superar el modelo extractivista (Spanish) [Mining in Colombia: Fundamentals to overcome the mining model]. Bogotá: Contraloría General de la República; 2013.
12. Alcamo J, Henrichs T, Rosch T. World water in 2025: Global modeling and scenario analysis for the World Commission on Water for the 21st Century. Kassel: University of Kassel; 2000.
13. Cai X, Rosegrant MW, Ringler C. Physical and economic efficiency of water use in the river basin: Implications for efficient water management. Water Resources Research 2003; 39(1): 111–112.
14. Chapman D. Water quality assessments: A guide to the use of biota, sediments and water in environmental monitoring. 2nd ed. Cambridge: UNESCO, WHO, UNEP; 1996.
15. Hardin G. The tragedy of the commons. Science 1968; 162(3859): 1243–1248.
16. Hoekstra AY, Mekonnen MM, Chapagain AK, et al. Global monthly water scarcity: Blue water footprints versus blue water availability. PLoS ONE 2012; 7(2): art.no.e32688. doi: 10.1371/journal. pone.0032688.
17. Men B, Yu T, Kong F, et al. Study on the minimum and appropriate instream ecological flow in Yitong River based on Tennant method. Nature Environment and Pollution Technology 2014; 13(3): 541–546.
18. Pastor AV, Ludwig F, Biemans H, et al. Accounting for environmental flow requirements in global water assessments. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 2014; 18(12): 5041–5059.
19. Smakhtin V, Revenga C, Doll P. A pilot global assessment of environmental water requirements and scarcity. Water International 2004; 29(3): 307–317.
20. Sullivan CA, Meigh JR, Giacomello AM, et al. The water poverty index: Development and application
21. a)at the community scale. Natural Resources Forum 2003; 27(3): 189–199.
22. Berkes F. Evolution of co-management: Role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and social learning. Journal of Environmental Management 2009; 90(5): 1692–1702.
23. Vergara WV. La ganadería extensiva y el problema agrario. El reto de un modelo de desarrollo rural sustentable para Colombia (Spanish) [Extensive livestock farming and the agrarian problem. Challenges of sustainable rural development model for Colombia]. Revista Ciencia Animal 2010; 1(3): 45–53.
24. Verschoor G, Torres C. Mundos equivocados: Cuando la “abundancia” y la “carencia” se encuentran en la Amazonía colombiana (Spanish) [The wrong world: When “abundance” and “lack” meet in the Colombian Amazon]. Revista Iconos 2016; 20(54): 71–86.
25. Torras M. The total economic value of Amazon deforestation, 1978–1993. Ecological Economics 2000; 33(2): 283–297.
26. Fearnside P. Environmental services as a strategy for sustainable development in rural Amazonia. Ecological Economics 1997; 20(1): 53–70.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24294/nrcr.v4i2.1558
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2021 Camilo Torres Sanabria, Mauro Alejandro Reyes Bonilla, Jorge Armando Cuartas Ricaurte, Edwin Agudelo Córdoba
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
This site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.