War of the Roses - Investigating the water and politics of the Kenyan cut flower industry

Lake Naivasha is a lake in the south-west of Kenya, close to Nairobi, and is home to Kenya’s booming cut-flower business. The industry has grown hugely in the last 40 years and now makes up 7% of Kenya’s exports, providing jobs for 25,000 employees (Mekonnen et al, 2012). However the rapid increase in both large-scale flower production and the resultant population increase have created significant water management issues in the area. Lake levels have declined, water quality deteriorated and biodiversity is threatened; the lake has shrunk to 75% of its original size since 1982 (Vidal, 2007).

Greenhouses for flower farms on Lake Naivasha, Kenya.

Issues Created

The growth in cut-flower production has prompted greater water use in the Lake Naivasha area; around 20,000 cubic metres of water per day (Vidal, 2007). In particular, non-accredited farms use large amounts of water and it has been suggested that there is the potential of losing the lake within 10-15 years if current water use trends continue (Leipold and Morgante, 2013). In addition the booming flower industry has led to an increase in population around the lake of 300,000 people in the last 30 years (Vidal, 2007). Thus significant threats to the local ecosystem have ensued such as land degradation due to excess farming, deforestation for firewood and soil erosion. In addition, the increase in flower farms has restricted access for nomadic Massai tribes to provide for their cattle, concurrently demand for meat is increasing leading to further need for cattle feed and land degradation. Thus a vicious cycle is created by increase demands for water and food alongside decreased capabilities to meet them. In addition to this the biodiversity around the lake has been harmed seeing a decline in fishing industry as Naivasha become polluted with harmful pesticides and chemicals.

Lake Naivasha is famed as a wetlands area and historically had a great tourism trade, however as bird populations are affected by the cut flower industry, so bird watching is in ‘terminal decline’ creating revenue losses for the local area (Food and Water Watch, 2006). Furthermore unregulated farms are being set up on protected wetland habitats (Leipold and Morgante, 2013), further endangering the biodiversity and natural beauty of this area.

The issues faced in Lake Naivasha highlight the integrated nature of water and ecosystems; nature clearly lies in a balance that has been hugely disturbed by large-scale, intrusive cut-flower farming operations.

Benefits?

However, whilst it is easy to focus on criticising the cut flower industry, it provides vital employment and income for Kenya, a country on the cusp of economic development. The industry employs 25,000 farmers around Lake Naivasha with around 175,000 more indirectly employed. Furthermore some companies provide free medical services and schools helping to improve social development in the local area (Mekonnen et al, 2012). Although there are reports that private medical services provided by companies aim to hide the diseases caused by chemicals to employees (Leipold and Morgante, 2013).

The cut flower industry at Lake Naivasha also generates a debate around ‘fair trade’, it is argued that many companies accredited with fair trade are engaging in unethical practices. Many companies that claim to be ‘fair trade’ are paying workers too low, polluting water with pesticides or other detrimental practices (ARB, 2007). Companies such as Oserian have been cited to engage in unfair fair-trade, advertising their flowers in consumer markets as ‘fairly grown’ and ‘environmentally sustainable’ despite being not so. Thus this highlights that Lake Naivasha isn’t just an issue of water management but also one of rights, fairness and global representations of trade.

The solution?

Now that I’ve highlighted a whole host of issues created by the cut-flower industry around Lake Naivasha, its pertinent to consider the best way to minimise the impacts on the water system and environment.

One method that has been successful is accreditation of farms and the utilisation of local watchdog bodies. Industry accreditation bodies provide certification to arms that engage in responsible farming practices such as using less water or less pesticides. This transfers to the consumer-side in which it is expected that buyers of flowers will prefer to buy from approved and accredited growing companies (Leipold and Morgante, 2013). Furthermore by instilling good practice in accredited farms, it is hoped that these practices will spill-over to become industry norms amongst all farms. Watchdog bodies also assist in reducing the environmental impact of the business, such as the Lake Naivasha Riparian Association, which aims to regulate water used by each farm (Leipold and Morgante, 2013) and create fair and responsible allocations of water. In addition accreditation agencies such as fair trade labelling encourage the preservation of natural habitats by planting trees etc. and thus limit the destruction of biodiversity.

An idea that can be used alongside accreditation is adding a water sustainability premium at the retail end of the supply chains. Increasing the cost of cut flowers to buy for example in the UK will add a ‘sustainability premium’ ensuring that consumers pay a price that coverts the full environmental cost of production (Mekonnen et al, (2012). Whilst it may be presumed that this will reduce demand for flowers, the ethical consumption market is growing in the global north and accreditation agencies such as fair trade can tap into this by educating consumers and providing finances to reduce the ecological footprint of cut flowers.

NGO’s investigations and reports into the issue of cut flowers in the Lake Naivasha area have been vital in uncovering environmental and issues such as overuse of water, pollution of the lake such as the Ethical Trading Initative’s 2005 report.

However there are fears that stricter rules for cut-flower farms could lead to a movement of firms to neighbouring countries such as Ethiopia. Five major flower companies have already moved there following incentives such as 10 year tax holidays and duty-free import of capital goods (ARB, 2007). Thus it begs the question, will Kenya prioritise its economic development or its environment, or can it strike a balance of the two? The current trends are certainly not sustainable and thus it is in the interests of flower companies to improve their relationship with the environment and reduce their water usage.

Roses being sold

List of references

ARB (2007) Flowers: Kenya. Af Res Bull 43(11):17197A–17198A

Becht R, Harper DM (2002) Towards an understanding of human impact upon the hydrology of Lake Naivasha, Kenya. Hydrobiologia 488:1–11

Food and Water Watch (2006) Lake Naivasha Report. Available at: http://documents.foodandwaterwatch.org/doc/NaivashaReport.pdf (Accessed: 26 November 2016).

Leipold, B. and Morgante, F. (2013) ‘International public policy review the impact of the flower industry on Kenya’s sustainable development’, International Public Policy Review, 7(2).

Mekonnen, M.M., Hoekstra, A.Y. and Becht, R. (2012) ‘Mitigating the water footprint of export cut flowers from the lake Naivasha basin, Kenya’, Water Resources Management, 26(13), pp. 3725–3742 .

Vidal, J. (2007) Drained of life. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2007/feb/14/kenya.conservation (Accessed: 26 November 2016).