Water Availability Challenges in Mozambique – Implications to the Nexus

Water availability challenges in Mozambique – implications to the Nexus

Author: Ylva Nordström Supervisor: Eunice Ramos Examiner: Prof. Mark Howells Registration number: TRITA-ITM-EX 2019:14

January 2019 Master of Science Thesis KTH School of Industrial Engineering and Management Division of Energy Systems Analysis SE – 100 44 Stockholm

Sammanfattning Den här rapporten undersöker möjliga framtider för vattentillgångarna och vattenkonsumptionen i området kring Pungwefloden i Mozambique med hänsyn till den naturliga miljön och vattenanvändningen. De vanligaste landklasserna i området är olika typer av skog. De vanligaste ekonomiska aktiviteterna, jordbruk, boskap och fiske äger rum i den nedre delen av flodområdet kring Pungwe. Studien gjordes genom att utföra en kvalitativ analys of vatteninnehållet och andra resurssystem vilket ledde till identifieringen av tre utmaningar; tillgång till dicksvatten; klimatförändringar och tillgång till vatten för bevattning. Det följdes av en kvantifieringsanalys centrerad kring utvecklingen av en vattensystemmodell för området kring Pungwe som gjordes med modellverktyget Water Evaluation and Planning (WEAP). Ett scenario skapades för varje utmaning för att undersöka den inverkan de har på vattentillgången. I det första scenariot har hela populationen i flodområdet kring Pungwe tillgång till rent dricksvatten vid 2030. Det är i linje med den första delen av det sjätte hållbarhetsmålet satt av FN. I det andra scenariot är klimatet i området varmare och torrare än i referensscenariot. Klimatet är modellerat efter den torraste körningen av Representative Concentration Pathway 6.0 (RCP6.0). I det tredje scenariot är den odlade området större, precis som den bevattnade andelen av den odlade marken. Det andra scenariot är en fortsättning av det första och det tredje är en fortsättning av det andra. Det betyder att 100% av populationen har tillgång till rent dricksvatten 2030 i alla scenarier och att de sista två har klimatdata från RCP6. WEAP-modelleringen indikerade att ytvattentillgången inte är ett problem för 100% vattentillgång i det övre och nedre avrinningsområdet med avseende på vattenkvantitet fram till 2050 i alla scenarier. I det mellersta avrinningsområdet däremot brister vattentillgången redan i referensscenariot. Bristen sker under den torra säsongen. För varje scenario börjar underskottet tidigare och tidigare, fler månader påverkas och allvaret i det ouppfyllda behovet ökar. I bevattningsscenariot är januari den enda månaden som inte påverkas av vattenunderskott. Flödet i floden påverkas mycket av klimatförändringscenariot. Vid lågt flöde är påverkan mindre men under perioder med högt flöde är det inte ens hälften av vad det var tidigare. Efter analysering av resultaten och besvaring av forskningsfrågorna står det klart att vattnet i Pungwefloden inte är en tillräcklig vattenkälla för att tillmötesgå det ökande vattenbehovet i flodområdet, framförallt inte om bevattningen ökar. Möjliga lösningar för att handskas med vattenunderskottet som presenteras i rapporten är regnskörd, vattenbehandling, avsaltning i nedre avrinningsområdet och reglerad vattenförbrukning.

2 Abstract This report investigates futures for water supply and consumption in the Pungwe River basin in Mozambique taking into consideration the natural environment and water uses. The most common land classes in the basin are forest and woodland. The major economic activities of agriculture, live-stock production and fishing take place in the lower part of the Pungwe River basin. The study was made by doing a qualitative analysis of the water contents and other resource systems which then led to the identification of three challenges; access to drinking water; climate change and access to water for irrigation. This was followed by a quantification analysis that had its center in the development of a water systems model for the River basin using the Water Evaluation and Planning (WEAP) modelling tool. A scenario was formed for each challenge to investigate the impact they all have on the water availability. In the first scenario, the entire population in the Pungwe River basin has access to clean drinking water by 2030. This is in line with the first target of Sustainable Development Goal 6. In the second scenario, the climate in the basin will be warmer and drier than in the baseline scenario. The climate is modeled after the driest climate model run of the Representative Concentration Pathway 6.0 (RCP6.0). In the third scenario, the cultivated area of the basin is increased as well as the irrigated share of the cultivated area. The second scenario is a continuation of the first and the third is a continuation of the second. This means that the all three scenarios have 100% access to drinking water by 2030 and the last two both have RCP6.0. climate data. The WEAP modelling indicated that surface water availability is not a limitation for the achievement of 100% water access in the upper and lower catchments, in terms of water quantity, every year until 2050 in all the scenarios. In the middle catchment, however, there is a deficit in water access already in the reference scenario towards the century. The deficit occurs in the dry season. For each scenario, the deficit starts years earlier, more months are affected and the severity of the unmet demand increases. In the irrigation scenario, only January is unaffected by insufficient water access. The streamflow in the river is greatly affected in the climate change scenario. During low flow there is not much difference but in high flow the streamflow is not even half of what it was earlier. After analyzing the results and answering the research questions it is clear that the surface water in the Pungwe River will not be a sufficient water source to accommodate the increasing water demand in the basin, in particular if the use of irrigation is expanded. Possible solutions to cope with the water deficit presented are rain harvest, water treatment, desalination in the lower catchment and regulated water consumption.

3 Table of Contents Sammanfattning 2 Abstract 3 Table of Contents 4 Table of Tables 7 Acronyms and abbreviations 8 Introduction 9 Background 11 National context 11 Socio-economic trends 11 Overview of the status of the nexus systems 12 Climate – national 12 Land – national 12 Energy – National 13 Water – National 15 Pungwe River basin context 15 Socio-economic trends 17 Characterization of nexus systems 17 Climate 17 Land 17 Energy 18 Water 18 Overview of the status of the nexus systems 18 Climate 20 Identification of water challenges in the Pungwe river basin 20 Review of studies focused on analyzing water resources availability and use in Mozambique/Pungwe 21 Water governance 21 National level 21 Basin level 21 Methodology 22 Overview of methodology 23 WEAP model development 23 Model structure 25 Model calibration 26 4

Scenarios for Pungwe River basin 28 Reference scenario – description and main assumptions 29 Population: 29 Water 30 Irrigation 30 Land use 31 Climate 32 Water access scenario 32 Climate change scenario 32 Irrigation scenario 33 Results and Discussion 33 Reference scenario 33 The water access scenario, SDG6, compared to the reference scenario 35 The climate change scenario, CC, compared to the water access scenario, SDG6 38 The irrigation scenario, IRR, compared to the climate change scenario, CC 40 Conclusions and implications to policy design/planning 42 Answers to research questions 42 Limitations 43 Future work 44 References 45

Table of figures

Figure 1: Mozambique highlighted on a map of Africa (JCDecaux, n.d.). 11 Figure 2: Pie chart showing the share of energy sources for total primary energy supply and total final energy consumption (IEA, 2018). 14 Figure 3: Pungwe river basin outlined on a map of Mozambique. 16 Figure 4: Pungwe River basin outlined on Manica and Sofala. Manica is the province to the left and Sofala is to the right. 16 Figure 5: Pie charts showing the crop shares in the Sofala and Manica provinces (MASA, 2015). 18 Figure 6: The water agencies in Mozambique (NEPAD, 2013). 22 Figure 7: Diagram over the methodology. 23 Figure 8: Schematic of the Pungwe River basin in WEAP. 25 Figure 9: Streamflow comparison at the Bue Maria stream gauge. 27 Figure 10: Percentage of time exceeded at the Bue Maria stream gauge. 27 Figure 11: Streamflow comparison at the E.N. 102 stream gauge. 28 Figure 12: Percentage of time exceeded at the E.N. 102 stream gauge. 28 Figure 13: Diagram of the land classes each catchment of the basin. 31 Figure 14:Graph showing the annual total supply requirement (including loss, reuse and DSM) for the catchments in the reference scenario. 33 Figure 15: Graph showing the supply requirement of the different water consumers in each catchment. 33 Figure 16: Coverage in the upper catchment.

Error! Bookmark not defined.Figure 18: Coverage in the middle catchment. 34 Figure 19: Monthly average of coverage in the middle catchment. 34 Figure 20: Streamflow in the Pungwe River basin. The 6th reach is after the upper catchments demand return, 12th is after the middle catchments demand return and 18th is after the lower catchments demand return. 35 Figure 21: The supply requirements for each catchment in the SDG6 scenario relative to the reference scenario. 35 Figure 22: Supply requirement for the water consumers in the different catchments in the SDG6 scenario. 36 Figure 23: Coverage in the basin’s middle catchment. 36 Figure 24: The monthly average of the coverage in the middle catchment for the reference and SDG6 scenarios. 37 Figure 25: The streamflow of the different catchments in the SDG6 scenario relative to the reference scenario. The 6th reach is after the upper catchments demand return, 12th is after the middle catchments demand return and 18th is after the lower catchments demand return. 37 Figure 26: Coverage in the middle catchment in the CC and SDG6 scenarios. 38 Figure 27: Monthly average of the coverage in the CC and SDG6 scenarios. 38 Figure 28: Streamflow in the upper catchment in the CC and SDG6 scenarios. 39 Figure 29: Streamflow in the middle catchment in the CC and SDG6 scenarios. 40 Figure 30: Streamflow in the lower catchment in the CC and SDG6 scenarios. 40

Figure 31: The supply requirement in the irrigation scenario relative to the climate change scenario. 41 Figure 32: The supply requirement in the irrigation scenario divided into water consumer and catchment. 41 Figure 33: Coverage of the middle catchment in the irrigation and climate change scenarios. 42 Figure 34: Monthly average of the coverage of the middle catchment in the irrigation and climate change scenario. 42

Table of Tables Table 1: Electricity generated by fuel in 2014 (IEA, 2018) 14 Table 2: The existing hydropower plants, largest to smallest (IHA, 2016). 14 Table 3: Population and area of the Pungwe basin in Mozambique and Zimbabwe (SWECO, 2004). 16 Table 4: Linkages between the water sector and the land and energy sectors. The third column provides an overview of interactions between the water and climate systems (and not sectors). 19 Table 5: Sources for the data used in the geospatial analysis 24 Table 5: Description of the three scenarios. 29 Table 6: People in the Pungwe catchments. 29 Table 7: The different land classes for the catchments. 31

Acronyms and abbreviations ARA Adminisração Regional de Águas BAU Business As Usual CLEW Climate, Land, Energy and Water GHG Greenhouse gases GDP Gross Domestic Product GIS Geographic Information System GNP Gross National Product GRDC Global Runoff Database HCB Hidroeléctrica de Cahora Bassa IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency IHA International Hydropower Association INE Instituto Nacional de Estatística KNMI Koninklijk Nederlands Meteorologisch Instituut (Royal Dutch Meteorological Institute) Lppd Liters per person per day MASA Ministério de Agricultura e Segruanca Alimentar MNR Mozambique National Resistance MRI Meteorological Research Institute NGO Non-Governmental Organization RCP Representative Concentration Pathway SADC Southern African Development Community SAPP Southern African Power Pool SDG Sustainable Development Goal SMHI Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute UNDP United Nations Development Program USD US Dollar WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene WEAP Water, Evaluation and Planning WSP Water and Sanitation Program

Introduction The aim of this study was to investigate different futures of water availability and use in the Pungwe River basin in Mozambique. Mozambique is an African country, located in the south eastern part of the continent. It is a part of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) along with all the African countries below Democratic Republic of Congo. The aim of the community is to improve the quality of living in Southern Africa by promoting self-sustaining development, peace and security, achieve economic growth and optimize utilization of resources among other objectives. Most rivers, lakes and aquifers within the SADC are transboundary which means that the management must be transboundary as well (SADC, 2012). In Mozambique, 73% of the water consumed is used for agricultural purposes. The municipal sector consumes 25% and the remaining 2% is used for industry. It is hard to find exact numbers for the water consumption in the Pungwe River basin (FAO, 2016). Mozambique is not a water scarce country but there is a lack of significant infrastructure to get the water to where it is needed (FAO, 2016). An important challenge related to water is reassuring access to clean drinking water for the population. Currently the access to basic drinking water in Mozambique is 45%, 78% in urban areas and 30% in rural (World Bank, 2018). The access to water also affects agriculture in Mozambique. Agriculture is the most common occupation but only 2% of the potential area for irrigation is irrigated. This causes the yield of crops to be highly dependent on precipitation and therefore also unpredictable. The Pungwe River basin is located in the center of Mozambique. The basin spans over the provinces Manica and Sofala and a small part of it, about 8%, is located in Zimbabwe. The Pungwe basin was chosen greatly due to data availability. The development of a water model requires flow data for calibration of the model results. Data from two stream gauges were available in the Pungwe River that allowed for the split of the basin in three sub-catchments of relative similar size. Additionally, in Mozambique most of the river basins are transboundary and the Pungwe is one of the main basins that is mostly located in the country. During the civil war (1977-1992) the guerilla had a stronghold in Sofala, in the Gorongosa mountains, and many battles were fought there (Mlambo, n.d.). This led to the infrastructure used for irrigation being abandoned. In 2015, around 1,524,800 people lived in the basin area in the Mozambican part. The largest part of the population in this basin is rural, around 70%, and about 460,000 people live in the only large city in the basin, Beira (INE, 2018). The main activity in the Pungwe basin is agriculture. Other than crop cultivation, other agricultural activities include livestock production, forestry and fisheries. There is also some gold mining and eco-tourism (Sida, 2008). A potential threat to the Pungwe river basin is climate change. Studies made on the climate in the Pungwe basin shows that the temperature is expected to rise by 1.5 to 2 °C the precipitation reduce by 10%, and the rainy season delayed in one month. One of the objectives of the study was to model the water resources in the Pungwe River basin in order to investigate the water access in it if the demand for water is increased. To test if the Pungwe River can provide enough water to meet the supply requirement of water for drinking and irrigation in a future where the demand for both is increased. Another objective was to look at how the streamflow of the Pungwe River is affected by climate change causing it to get 9 warmer and drier in the basin and how this can have consequences for the supply requirement for drinking water and irrigation. With these objectives and water challenges Pungwe in mind, three research questions were formulated:

● Is there enough surface water to ensure 100% water access? ● Could climate change compromise the achievement of water access targets in the Pungwe River basin? ● How does the expansion of irrigation under dry climate future affect water access in the Pungwe river basin?

In this report a nexus approach in regard to the water challenges was investigated. The nexus approach takes into consideration how different systems, such as Climate, Land, Energy and Water, interact (Howells, et al., 2013). The incorporation of the nexus approach in their planning decisions is not a common practice in SADC countries, which is the case for Mozambique (Mabhaudhi, et al., 2016). The study began with a literature review over Mozambique and the Pungwe River basin. Data regarding climate and water consumption was collected and a geospatial analysis was made using ArcGIS to calculate population, area, land classes and define the boundaries of the system and decide on three catchments. From the literature review the water challenges the basin faces were identified and from that three scenarios were designed. The basin was the modeled in WEAP with the data collected and calculated in ArcGIS. With the results from WEAP the scenarios could be compared, and conclusions could be drawn. Three scenarios, other than the baseline, were modeled in this thesis. These scenarios result from a sequential combination of assumptions. The first scenario is related to the water access and considers the partial achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 6 (SDG6), “By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all”. The second scenario explores the potential implications to water access of climate change, considering the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 6.0, inheriting assumptions from the SDG6 scenario. The third scenario investigates potential changes to water resources availability due to the expanded use of irrigation, in a context of climate change under RCP6.0 and taking into consideration SDG6. In this case the impact of the increased water uses by different sectors, domestic water supply and agriculture, is analyzed under historical climate conditions, in the case of the SDG6 analysis; and a climate change scenario. Understanding how water resources may change, both in terms of natural changes induced by climate and human interventions, could assist the planning process related to water towards the more sustainable management of resources. When expected water levels are known it is easier for the administrations, in this case ARA-Centro, to decide on what policies to implicate in order to tackle the challenges concerning water use in the area.

Background This chapter provides an overview of the current socio-economic conditions of Mozambique and the Pungwe River basin, as well as information on the status of the sectors that directly relate to the nexus systems of climate, land, energy and water. Firstly, the socio-economic context for both the country and the basin are introduced. National context Socio-economic trends Mozambique is a country located in the southeast of Africa that covers an area of 801,590 km2. Neighboring countries are Tanzania, Malawi, Zambia, Zimbabwe, South Africa and Swaziland. The eastern border is a coast towards the Indian Ocean, as seen Figure 1. Maputo is the capital and it is situated in the far south (UNDP, 2018). In 2016 the population was 28.8 million people, of these around 45% are under the age of 15 (World Bank, 2018).

Figure 1: Mozambique highlighted on a map of Africa (JCDecaux, n.d.). In 1975 Mozambique became independent after 500 years of Portuguese colonialization. In 1977 a civil war broke out between the government and the guerilla movement Mozambique National Resistance (MNR) who also had support from white minorities from South Africa and Zimbabwe. The war ended in 1992 when MNR and the government signed the General Peace Agreement for Mozambique (UNDP, 2018). Since the war ended Mozambique has made an astonishing recovery by rebuilding the infrastructure and starting to cultivate abandoned lands again, however, it is still an extremely poor country. In 2014, 46.1% of the population were below the poverty line (World Bank, 2018). According to UNDP, in 2016, Mozambique ranked at 181 out of 188 countries on the

Human Development Index1 and the rank for Gender Inequality Index2 was 139 out of 188 countries. On the Multidimensional Poverty Index3 (MPI) Mozambique scored 0.39. (UNDP, 2016). In 2016 the GDP was 11 billion USD. In the last 10 years the annual GDP growth has varied between 3 and 7% (World Bank, 2018). The sectors that contribute to the GDP are agriculture (22%), industry (33%) and services (45%) (World Bank, 2018). Of the workforce in Mozambique 75% works in agriculture, 21% in services and only 4% in industry. In 2014, the labor force participation rate of the population in Mozambique aged between 15-65 was 76%. Droughts and floods both have significant impact on the agricultural sector which in turn affect the GDP (World Bank, 2018). Overview of the status of the nexus systems The Climate, Land4, Energy and Water (CLEW)s approach recognizes the importance of cross- sectoral interlinkages. This means that actions taken in one system of the nexus affect another (Howells, et al., 2013). The land, energy and water sectors affect each other and in turn the functioning of all systems affects the climate, and vice-versa (IAEA, n.d.). Often when policies are designed in sectoral silos they do not take into consideration effects on other sectors. A problem with transboundary basins is that neighboring countries can be affected by the implemented policies in riparian nations. Sometimes the effects on other sectors can have dire consequences (UNECE, 2015). For an example, over exploitation of rivers and lakes can affect the ecosystem and cause trouble with the water reliability in neighboring countries sharing basin (UN WATER, n.d.) . Climate – national There are two main seasons in Mozambique: The rainy season begins in December and ends in March. During these months there is a high flow in the rivers. The rain during the rainy season stands for 60-80% of the annual rainfall (World Bank Group, 2018). The annual rainfall is different in various parts of the country. In the north the annual rainfall can exceed 1000 mm, and, in the south, it is usually around 500 mm (The World Bank Group, 2007). Land – national In rural Mozambique most people farm their own land making agriculture the most common occupation in the country (The World Bank Group, 2007). Of the country’s total area, 62% is agricultural land most of which is permanent meadows and pasture, and 7% of total agricultural area is cultivated (FAO, 2016). In 2005, 24.6% of Mozambique’s area was forest. Mozambique lost about 3.8% of its forest between 1990 and 2005 due to deforestation (Mongabay, 2006).

1 HDI is a measurement of achievements in human development. The dimensions included in the HDI are life expectancy, education and standard of living (UNDP, 2018). 2 GII is a measurement of how equal countries are. All countries are ranked and being at the top of the list means being the most equal country. The dimensions included in the GII are health, empowerment and labor market (UNDP, 2018). 3 MPI is a measurement of poverty that goes beyond income. The considered dimensions of poverty are health, education and standard of living. A country can score between 0.001 and 0.584. The higher the score the poorer the country is. The MPI covers 77% of the global population (UNDP, 2018). 4Land includes the food system. 12

The majority of crop cultivation is rain-fed and there is very little irrigation (FAO, 2010). In 2010, 118,120 ha of the agricultural lands were equipped for irrigation but only 62,000 ha were actually irrigated. Irrigation infrastructure is obsolete as most dates from the pre-independence period. After independence, most landowners fled and abandoned their lands. The new owners did not have the knowledge to keep the irrigation systems going. Another reason for the decreased irrigation is that some irrigation schemes were destroyed and submerged by floods in 2000 and 2001 (FAO, 2010). The potential for irrigation is 3,072 thousand ha, which means that the actual irrigated area corresponds to only is 2% of the potential. Most of the potential for cultivation is in the north and the middle of the country. The south has a much less favorable climate; however, it is where the demand for agricultural goods is the greatest as it is where the capital Maputo is located, where 38% of the country’s population live. The irrigated land is owned by commercial farmers and the rest is used by farmer families and smallholders (FAO, 2010). Of the working irrigation schemes, more than half is used for sugarcane and the remaining is used for rice and vegetables (FAO, 2010). The main crops cultivated by the small farmers in Mozambique are the food crops maize, sorghum, millet, rice, cereals, beans, groundnuts and cassava and the cash crops tobacco and cotton. Livestock in Mozambique are cattle, goats and sheep. The condition to keep livestock is excellent in the south but due to the tsetse fly it is difficult to keep livestock in the north and the center of Mozambique. Many people have pigs and poultry in their own back yard (FAO, 2010). In 2015, 80% of the population could not afford an adequate diet. 24% of the population was chronically food insecure and 25% suffer from malnutrition (WFP, 2018). Energy – National In 2014, the total primary energy supply (TPES) in Mozambique was 13,151 ktoe and the total final consumption (TFC) was 10,414 ktoe (IEA, 2018). Figure 2 shows the shares of how much energy the different energy sources contribute with. Biofuels and waste have the biggest shares in both TPES and TFC and is mostly used for cooking, 98% of the population in rural area use it and 69% of the total population (Hivos, 2009).

Figure 2: Pie chart showing the share of energy sources for total primary energy supply and total final energy consumption (IEA, 2018). In 2014, the access to electricity in Mozambique was 21.87%. In rural areas only 4.45% had access to electricity, while in urban areas access was 58.95% (The World Bank Group, 2014). Table 1 shows electricity generation by fuel type.

Table 1: Electricity generated by fuel in 2014 (IEA, 2018)

Fuel Generated [GWh] % Gas 2,554 12.8 Coal 0 0 Oil 152 0.8 Hydro 17,207 86.4 Total 19,913 100

Hydropower is the largest source of electricity in Mozambique. There are currently six main hydropower plants. Five of them, Mavuzi, Chicamba, Corumana, Cuamba and Lichinga, are operated by Electricidade de Moçambique (EDM, 2018). The largest, Cahora Bassa, is located in the Zambezi valley and is operated by an independent power producer, Hidroeléctrictrica de Cahora Bassa (HCB) (HCB, 2009). Most of the generated electricity from Cahora Bassa is exported via the Southern African Power Pool (SAPP) (IHA, 2016). In addition to this there are ten micro hydro power plants. The largest of micro plant has a capacity of 75 kW and the other have a capacity of around 20 kW each (SCIELO, 2013). Table 3 shows how much capacity the existing power plants have.

Table 2: The existing hydropower plants, largest to smallest (IHA, 2016).

Power plant Installed capacity [MW] Cahora Bassa 2 075 Mavuzi 52 Chicamba 38.4 Corumana 16.6 Cuamba 1.9 Lichinga 0.730 Honde 0.075

Chitofu 0.030 Ngwarai 0.025 Chihururu 0.022 Lino 0.022 Nquarai 0.022 Ndiriri 0.020 Jimy 0.018 Tendayi 0.014 Tendayi Zvemapowa 0.001 Total 2 184. 9

According to the International Hydropower Association (IHA) there is potential for 12 500 MW hydropower in Mozambique. Over 80% of the capacity is in the Zambezi valley. The production of electricity from hydropower is expected to increase (IHA, 2016). There are plans to expand the Cahora Bassa plant with 1 245 MW and a new hydroelectric dam, Mphanda Nkuwa, with a capacity of 1,500 MW (Club of Mozambique, 2018). The new plant will be on the Zambezi river but there is no indication on what year it will be finished, or the construction initiated. Water – National Mozambique has abundant water resources. There are 13 main rivers running through the country and two main lakes, Lake Nyasa and Lake Chiura. Yet, most Mozambican river basins are sub-basins of transboundary river basins, which drain to the Indian Ocean in Mozambique. The Zambezi River is the fourth largest river on the African continent and its basin holds the majority of the potential for both irrigation and hydropower (NEPAD, 2013). The wastewater treatment in Mozambique is extremely under developed and up until 2012, Maputo was the only area connected to a central sewage system for domestic sewage. This wastewater treatment plant is out of function causing the water to go untreated straight to the Indian Ocean (FAO, 2016). Wastewater from industries is not treated either and is discharged directly into the ocean or the nearest water course (FAO, 2016). The agricultural sector has the highest water demand of all sectors. Of the 1,473 million m3 withdrawn water in 2015, 73% went to irrigation, forestry and livestock. 25% of the water was used for the municipal sector and the remaining 2% for industry (FAO, 2016). ¨ In 2014, the share of the population that had access to basic sanitation services was 22.76%, 46.29% in urban areas and 11.42% in rural areas. The access to basic water services was 45.54%. In urban areas it was 77.74% and in rural areas 30.43% (World Bank, 2018). Pungwe River basin context The Pungwe river basin is located in the center of Mozambique. The western half is in the Manica province and the eastern part in the Sofala province and a small part is in Zimbabwe. Figure 3 shows the Pungwe basin outlined on a map and Figure 4 shows the Pungwe basin area relative to the provinces of Manica and Sofala.

Figure 3: Pungwe river basin outlined on a map of Mozambique.

Figure 4: Pungwe River basin outlined on Manica and Sofala. Manica is the province to the left and Sofala is to the right. The Pungwe River originates in the Zimbabwe Highveld on an altitude over 1,000 m above sea level and has its estuary near the city of Beira. It is 359 km long and covers an area of 31,000 km2 (SWECO, 2004). About 92% of the basin area is located in Mozambique. Table 3 shows population and area distribution in the Pungwe basin in the two countries.

Table 3: Population and area of the Pungwe basin in Mozambique and Zimbabwe (SWECO, 2004).

Mozambique Zimbabwe Population in basin (inhabitants) 1,103,698 95,869 Population (%) 95.3 4.7 Area of the basin (km2) 28,520 2,480 Area of the basin (%) 92.0 8.0

The population in Pungwe is predominantly rural. Most of the urban population lives in the city Beira by the river’s estuary. Socio-economic trends There are a few urban centers and one big city in the Mozambican part of the basin. Just like in the rest of the country, most of the rural population works in agriculture and other agro-based activities such as livestock production and fisheries. Other occupations include goldmining and eco-tourism (Sida, 2008). The education level in the Mozambican part of the basin is lower than the Zimbabwean. In Mozambique most pupils only complete the first level of primary school and in the Zimbabwean part most pupils proceed to the secondary level (Sida, 2008). Poverty is widespread in the rural areas of the Pungwe River basin and income is lower than the level of basic needs (Sida, 2008). Characterization of nexus systems Climate The climate in the northern and eastern part of the basin is tropical savannah and in the rest the climate is humid and subtropical. The mean annual precipitation in the basin is 1,100 mm and the mean annual runoff is 115 mm. The average annual flow is 6,600 mm3 the highest flow is in February and the lowest is in October (Diop, et al., 2016). Pungwe experiences recurring floods and drought due to its annual variation in precipitation. It is hard to control the impacts of floods and droughts since the Pungwe River basin does not have any reservoirs that can assist in flow regulation (Sida, 2008). Land The land classes in Pungwe are mostly different types of forest and woodland. A very small part of the area is used for cultivated crops. In this study the most important land class is cropland. Water for crops was identified as one of the challenges in this report and the water demand for cropland increasing is one of the tested scenarios. Specific information regarding the types of crops, and respective land shares, cultivated in the Pungwe River basin were proven difficult to find in the literature. Thus, it was assumed the cropland profile of the basin is similar to the provinces of Sofala and Manica. The types of crops grown in the provinces are similar to the crops in the rest of the country, the difference being that sesame is more common instead of sorghum and cassava. In the Manica province the total cultivated area is 340,389 ha and in Sofala it is 262,286 ha (MASA, 2015). Figure 5 shows the area share of each crop in the Sofala and Manica Provinces.

Figure 5: Pie charts showing the crop shares in the Sofala and Manica provinces (MASA, 2015).

Energy In the Mozambican part of the Pungwe river basin there is one operational micro-hydro power plant (75 kW) in Honde Valley in the Manica province. It was constructed by the Provincial Government of Manica with support from the German Development Agency (Jonker Klunne, 2013). It is used to electrify 200 households in a village near the valley as well as their health center, school, a few shops and two maize mills. In 2013, there were no plans to build more power plants in Pungwe river basin and no more recent reports state otherwise (Jonker Klunne, 2013). In the Zimbabwean part there are three hydro power plants, Pungwe A with a capacity of 2.7 MW, Pungwe B with a capacity of 15 MW and Pungwe C with a capacity of 3.75 MW, 21.45 MW in total. Here are no immediate plans to expand the hydro power in the Pungwe basin in Zimbabwe (IHA, 2016). Water The main source of water in the Pungwe River basin is surface water, and there is no information regarding groundwater being additionally used. The Pungwe River and its tributaries are the only sources of water (Sida, 2008). The water consumers in the basin are the agricultural sector, municipal sector and industry and tourism. Agriculture and especially irrigation consume the most, 86.5% of total water demand. Municipalities use 10.5% and industry and tourism only 3% (Sida, 2008). Overview of the status of the nexus systems For this study the focus in on the water sector in the Pungwe River basin. In Table 4 most important linkages related to the water sector are presented. Interlinkages in the nexus are not always direct. For example, events in the land sector, such as increased agricultural area, can

18 affect the water sector as the demand for irrigation increases. That in turn, can affect the electricity sector as electricity is used to pump water. (Laspidou, 2017).

Table 4: Linkages between the water sector and the land and energy sectors. The third column provides an overview of interactions between the water and climate systems (and not sectors).

Water used for Land Water used for Energy Water to Climate ● Water used for irrigation. ● Water is used in ● Water consumed might ● Water (as precipitation) hydropower plants to not return to the river is linked to agriculture produce electricity. which can lead to water productivity; shortage downstream. ● Water required for domestic supply in cities/villages, livestock (agriculture). Land used for Water Energy used for Water Climate to Water ● The use of land is linked ● Electricity is required for ● Precipitation amounts to the water balance: it pumping water, both for affect how much water affects how much water domestic water supply, will accumulate in the is absorbed in the soil other supply, and river. and infiltrates as irrigation. ● Temperature can groundwater; it also ● Electricity is required to determine how much affects how much water power water systems water evaporates to the runs off to rivers and (includes pumping), and atmosphere. streams, and how much for water treatment before ● Changed precipitation water evaporates to the the water is distributed; patterns can cause more atmosphere. Thus, land electricity is also required extreme floods and cover affects the water in the treatment of droughts. balance in a particular wastewater. area. . ● Infrastructure (i.e. industry) located on a specific area can also affect water availability, depending on its water footprint of production.

The challenges in the region affect the interactions between the nexus sectors. For example, the need for more drinking water implies a requirement of increased electricity supply to pump and treat the water. Climate change can cause a decreased water supply which in turn can affect the agricultural production, part of the land system. Increased water demand for both domestic and agricultural uses causes larger water abstraction from the river which affect the ecosystems and the river flow downstream. This can cause the climate downstream to get drier which can have severe impact in the region, especially during low flow or dry years when the water availability will be decreased.

Most of these challenges are not particularly threatening in their present state but as urbanization and populations increase the pressure on all sectors increase and the challenges get tougher. The current most prominent is the impact climate has on water. The region is already affected by floods and droughts and a change in climate could have a negative impact on the severity of these events. Climate According to studies made by SMHI (Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute), in collaboration with ARA-Centro and UNDP, the temperature is expected to increase by 2°C in the dry season and by 1.5 °C in the rainy season. The precipitation is expected to decrease by 10% over all sub-basins and the rainy season will be delayed by one month (SMHI, 2006). In this study, three scenarios were designed as combinations of two different global models, the ECHAM4 and CCSM3, and two IPCC emission scenarios from the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) (Nakicenovic et al, 2000): A2, in which the global population increases, Gross National Product (GNP) grows moderately and high emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG); and B2, in which the GNP is the same as in A2, slower population increase and lower GHG emissions. The timeframe was from 2006-2050. Identification of water challenges in the Pungwe river basin Even though Mozambique is not a water scarce country it faces many water challenges. One challenge is that it shares most of its water resources with the neighboring countries and that it is downstream from the other countries on all major rivers except Rovuma. This makes Mozambique vulnerable from a water security perspective, if the upstream countries consume too much water upstream and affect the flow downstream (The World Bank, 2007). The infrastructure used for water in Mozambique is not sufficient to fulfill the water demand in the country. There is limited storage for water which is unfortunate since there is high variation in rainfall, 60-80% of the annual precipitation occurs in 4 months of the year, between December and March. There is also large variation from year to year. Mozambique experiences frequent floods and droughts and is not equipped with enough flood control infrastructure and mechanisms (The World Bank Group, 2007). There is not enough infrastructure to provide the entire population with water and sanitation. In 2015, 47% of the population had access to clean drinking water and 23.5% had access to at least basic sanitation services (World Bank, 2018). There is also not enough infrastructure to irrigate the cultivated land. Agriculture is the most common occupation and a large contributor to the GDP. Expanding the irrigation schemes would help with making sure more people had access to food and reduce poverty levels (The World Bank Group, 2007). Another challenge is to adapt to the climate change mentioned previously. Decreased precipitation and higher temperatures are likely to cause reduction in water availability and consequently affect water supply. The latter would exacerbate the other challenges mentioned above.

Review of studies focused on analyzing water resources availability and use in Mozambique/Pungwe Most studies with focus on the basin are led by non-Mozambican institutions although national- level institutions are frequently involved. Of the studies used as sources in this report, many were made by Swedish institutions in collaboration with Mozambican institutions and other international organizations. In 2004, SWECO made a thorough report on the basin in collaboration with Dutch and Mozambican companies. The aim of the report was to find development strategies for the Pungwe region. The conclusion reached was that to increase the social and economic benefits for the population. Presented development options were to secure the water supply during dry periods and control floods and pollution from for example gold mining. A suggestion to this was to build both small and large dams and other hydraulic infrastructures. Another report from the same consortium was released in 2005 stating the current water demand in the Pungwe River basin in 2005 and predictions for the demand in 2025. They state that it is hard to make projections for Pungwe since Mozambique does not have long-term plans related to water. SMHI made a study with ARA-Centro to investigate the impact of climate change at basin level for different climate futures. This report is referenced in several studies made on the climate in Pungwe. A report with focus on water resources and challenges related to economic development in Mozambique was published by the World Bank in 2007. It states that in addition to the population’s well-being, the economy in Mozambique is linked to water availability. Floods and droughts have impact on the agriculture which in turn has impact on the GDP. It also brings up the problem with shared water resources Mozambique. This study identified important areas to improve that will need financial aid from the government and private actors. The recommended priority areas were: development and management of water resources in the Incomati, Umbeluzi and Zambezi basins; development of small scale water resources; risk reduction and disaster management; development of policies in the water sector and strengthening the institutions; as well as support in water and sanitation. Water governance National level Law Nr. 16/91 is the law that regulates water use in Mozambique. It covers all inland waters, surface waters, groundwaters and all hydraulic works, equipment and dependencies. The water use is divided into common and private use. The common water use is free and used for domestic purposes, small-scale agriculture and cattle. For private use an authorization is required that can be given by law, license or concession. In the event of water scarcity, the law states that all common use and water used for environmental conservation has priority over all private uses (Sida, 2008). Basin level There are five regional water agencies responsible for the management of water resources’ use on a local level. The location of rivers and basins decide which agency they belong to. The

Pungwe basin belongs to ARA-Centro (NEPAD, 2013). Figure 6 shows the spatial scope of action of the different water agencies.

Figure 6: The water agencies in Mozambique (NEPAD, 2013). The strategic plans are mostly organizations wanting the Mozambican government to make Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) programs a higher priority (WaterAid Mozambique, 2016). There are several Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOS) operating in the water access and sanitation challenges in Mozambique. WaterAid Mozambique’s strategy to ensure that access to increase Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) services, is to mobilize communities and make them claim their rights. They also want to put pressure on the government to make WASH a higher priority when implementing policies, and make other sectors care more about and bring attention to WASH services (WaterAid Mozambique, 2016). UNICEF is investing in WASH programs in schools and small towns in Manica, Inhambane and Tete. The goal is to reduce the gap in access to WASH services between urban and rural areas (UNICEF, 2014).

Methodology For the first part of the project an extensive literature review was performed for an understanding of the status of nexus systems and of the socio-economic situation in Mozambique, with emphasis on the Pungwe River basin and its water resources. The main sources of the literature review include the World Bank Group, FAO, UNDP and SWECO, as well as the Mozambican institutions such as the Ministry of Agriculture (Ministério de Agricultura e Seguranca Alimentar, MASA), and the National Institute of Statistics, (Instituto Nacional de Estatística, INE). With the information from the literature review the river basin could be identified and the water challenges in the basin could be defined. The Pungwe River basin was chosen because of the amount of available data. It was one of the basins with the most stream gauge data. Unlike all other river basins, the largest part of the basin is located in Mozambique. Because of this the same water agency is in charge of most of the basin which makes it easier to gather information about it.

Next step was to model the basin in the Water Evaluation and Planning (WEAP) software. WEAP is a modelling tool for water systems management developed by SEI (WEAP, 2018). For the modeling to be possible, a geospatial analysis was made with ArcGIS to calculate land- use related parameters, define the physical boundaries of the system, and also for population analysis. The location of stream gauges was used to define the number of sub-catchments in ArcGIS. These calculations were then used to develop a water system model the Pungwe basin in WEAP. The three catchments had one demand site each, used to represent use of water by urban and rural population as well as agriculture demand for irrigation. When the reference scenario was modeled three new scenarios where developed, based on the water challenges identified for the Pungwe river basin. Scenarios are discussed in the chapter “Scenarios for Pungwe River basin” in the report. Overview of methodology Figure 7 shows a diagram over the methodology. The diagram shows what tasks were done and in what order. It starts in the top left corner with literature review. The next steps was the geospatial analysis, data collection and the identification of challenges. The rounded parts show what kind of data was collected from the data and calculated with geospatial analysis. Data from the geospatial analysis and data collection were entered in WEAP to model the river basin and a reference scenario. Following the identification of challenges new scenarios to be tested were developed and they could also be modeled in WEAP. When the modeling was finished the results were analyzed and conclusions were drawn.

Figure 7: Diagram of the main methodological steps followed in this study for the analysis of water challenges in the Pungwe River basin. WEAP model development For the modelling a tool for Water Evaluation and Planning, WEAP, was used. The purpose of WEAP is to help in supporting decisions concerning integrated water resources and policies. The calculations are based on rainfall, base flow and groundwater recharge. It can be used to calculate, for example, water demand, supply, runoff, streamflow, storage and discharge.

But before the WEAP modeling could start, a geospatial analysis was made with ArcGIS, a geospatial analysis tool, publicly available datasets were retrieved from different websites and imported to ArcGIS. The boundaries of the system were defined by the Pungwe River basin and the time frame for which the model should count for was set up until 2050. For this report rasters and shapefiles containing information on topography and information on land use for Mozambique and Zimbabwe were added as well as run off stations along Pungwe River. To calculate the flow direction and river accumulation, rasters and tif files from different areas had to be mosaicked to get a complete picture of the basin. After that the tools used in the program is called flow accumulation and flow direction. In order to calculate the catchments, pour points were placed on the run off stations and the tool snap was used. The tool tabulate area was used to calculate the land use for the Pungwe basin and for the catchments inside. The sources and respective datasets used in the geospatial analysis, performed using ArcGIS, are presented in Table 5.

Table 5: Sources for the data used in the geospatial analysis. Data Year Source URL Population data 2000 Worldpop http://www.worldpop.org.uk/data/summary/?doi=10. 5258/SOTON/WP00178 Administrative 2013 GADM https://gadm.org/download_country.html boundaries Transmission 2015 Geofabrik http://kunden.geofabrik.de/5b0549d1678781b49910 lines e0d875210452/ Rivers and Geoserver http://geoportal.rcmrd.org/geoserver/wfs?format_opt streams ions=charset%3AUTF- 8&typename=servir%3Amozambique_rivers_and_st reams&outputFormat=SHAPE- ZIP&version=1.0.0&service=WFS&request=GetFea ture Land use Forobs http://forobs.jrc.ec.europa.eu/products/historical_pro ducts.php Roads Geo server http://geoportal.rcmrd.org/geoserver/wfs?format_opt ions=charset%3AUTF- 8&typename=servir%3Amozambique_roads&output Format=SHAPE- ZIP&version=1.0.0&service=WFS&request=GetFea ture Stream gauges 1981 GRDC http://www.bafg.de/GRDC/EN/Home/homepage_no (Global de.html;jsessionid=EA67EEED8E9C3060B233A31 Runoff A20077DE4.live21302 Database) Climate data 2000 KNMI https://climexp.knmi.nl/start.cgi?id=someone@some Climate where explorer Digital 2003 CGIAR http://srtm.csi.cgiar.org/ elevation maps

SRTM 90m (1km)

When the geospatial analysis was done, the first step of the WEAP model was to create the schematics of the basin and respective catchments ot be modeled. The schematic includes the representation of the river and the catchments, demand sites of the basin as well as the transmission links and return flows of the catchments and demand sites and the location of stream gauges on the river. An analysis of the past flows was made using historic data from stream gauges and climate stations. The next step was to create the reference scenario, REF, where current data was entered and future trends were defined, based on historic trends and assumptions in line with a continuation of the recent development, without major changes. The needed data can depend on what calculations are made and, in this case, the necessary data is water demand for agriculture and municipalities, precipitation, runoff, groundwater resources. In the reference scenario the future of the basin was predicted as if trends continue as they always have with current policies in order. After that a set of other scenarios were created, based on the REF scenario, but some variables were changed in order to see how they affect the outcome. The new scenarios were an access to water scenario, a climate change scenario and an irrigation scenario, and are explored in more detail in the scenario section. After all scenarios were finished, the last step was to analyze and compare results across scenarios and derive insights from the findings. Model structure The boundaries of the Pungwe river basin and catchments considered in the analysis are shown in Figure 8. The river starts in the north west and flows to the south east where it meets the ocean. The basin was split in 3 catchments identified as “Upper”, “Middle” and “Lower” following an upstream to downstream representation. The catchment in purple is Upper Pungwe, Middle Pungwe is represented in blue, and the yellow is Lower Pungwe. The green dots describe the catchments and the red dots represent demand sites. The blue dots in between the catchments, and placed over the river, identify the stream gauges. Each catchment has its run-off accumulation point in a stream gauge (except for the lower which drains into the ocean), therefore, the number of stream gauges provide an indication of how many catchments to consider in the analysis, as the data from the flow measurements can be used for calibration of the modelled flow. Between the Upper and Middle Pungwe is the stream gauge E.N. 102 and between Middle and Lower is the stream gauge Bue Maria. From every green dot is a blue dotted line that represents the run off to the river. To every red dot there is a green line that represents a transmission link to the demand sites and from the red dots there is a red line that represents the return to the river. In the catchments the data entered is the area, climate and land classes of each catchment. It is defined under land classes how big the share of each land class is and what their kc5 is. The soil

5 Kc, crop coefficient, is a property that predicts a plants evapotranspiration. The Kc is different during the different phases of the plant. Starting with initial kc_ini the beginning of the season. During the crop development the kc increases. When it reaches its peak, in the beginning of the mid-season kc_mid is used. In the end of the mid- season the kc starts to decrease during the late season, the kc in the end of the cycle is kc_end.

25 moisture method is used for the water balance in the catchments. The soil moisture method is a two dimensional “bucket” scheme. The first bucket is closest to the surface and is called the soil water capacity and the second bucket is the deep water capacity (WEAP, n.d.). Water users are represented in the demand sites. In this model the two water consumers considered are population, split in urban and rural, and agriculture. Activity levels define how much population lives in each catchment; and in water use, annual consumption per person per day multiplied by the number of days in one year, to estimate the total annual consumption per person. In agriculture, the irrigated area of each catchment is entered as well as the annual water consumption per km2. Irrigated areas in the demand sites and in the catchments are equivalent. Stream gauge data is entered under supply and resources.

Figure 8: Schematic of the Pungwe River basin in WEAP.

Model calibration The development of a water model (not only a WEAP model), which aims at replicating the natural availability of water resources, requires the calibration of the results to make sure the model is producing results which are coherent with the actual flow of the river. This ensures the model can be used to evaluate future scenarios of water supply and demand. The measured

26 stream flows in the stream gauges (obtained from GRDC) are compared to the stream flows produced by the model, for the reaches before the gauges. Measured stream flows for the Bue Maria stream gauge cover the period of 1954-1981 and measured stream flows for E.N.102, 1954-1980. Therefore, the calibration period was 1954 - 1980. When comparing the stream flows obtained with the model and the stream gauges data, it is verified that the peaks on the graph should align and they should be similar in height. Figure 9 shows the streamflow’s for the Bue Maria stream gauge, between the middle and lower catchment. The peaks are aligned as they should. It is often hard to make a perfect calibration for both high and low flows. At Bue Maria the low flows are better calibrated than the high. This can be seen in Figure 10 which shows the percentage of time exceeded at different flows. The two lines should be as close to each other as possible.

Figure 9: Streamflow comparison at the Bue Maria stream gauge. The red line represents historical data and the blue line represents the stream flow obtained by the model.

Figure 10: Percentage of time exceeded at the Bue Maria stream gauge. The red line represents historical data and the blue line represents the stream flow obtained by the model.

At the E.N. 102 stream gauge, between the upper and middle catchments, the peaks are also aligned with some peaks corresponding very well to each other and some that don’t correspond that well as can be seen in Figure 11. For this stream flow the calibration worked better for the high flows than the low. Figure 12 shows the percent of time exceeded and it can be seen that the two lines are close to each other.

Figure 11: Streamflow comparison at the E.N. 102 stream gauge. The red line represents historical data and the blue line represents the stream flow obtained by the model.

Figure 12: Percentage of time exceeded at the E.N. 102 stream gauge. The red line represents historical data and the blue line represents the stream flow obtained by the model.

Scenarios for Pungwe River basin Three different scenarios are explored in this thesis. The first is the water access scenario where the access to water will be 100% in 2030, identified as SDG6; the climate change scenario, identified as CC, in which the climate will be much drier than historically observed; and the irrigation scenario, identified as IRR, in which the irrigated land will be increased. The second scenario (CC) is built under the first (SDG6) and the third scenario (IRR) is a further expansion on the climate change scenario. This means that the irrigation scenario will take into consideration the assumptions and constraints of the SDG6 (increases water access) and CC scenarios. A summary description of the scenarios is presented in Table 5.

Table 6: Description of the three scenarios investigated for the Pungwe River basin.

Name Abbreviation Description and purpose Reference REF In this scenario infrastructure to create access to water will continue to grow at the current rate. Water access was at 45.5% in 2014 and has historically increased with approximately at a 2% annual rate, which would mean 100% water access is reached in the year 2047. Precipitation and temperature will follow historic trends. Water access SDG6 In this scenario part of SDG6, drinking water for all by 2030, will be achieved and maintained to 2050 in respect to access to safe drinking water by population in the basin. The model does not explore access to sanitation nor the achievement of the SDG6 at a national level. Climate CC This scenario is built on the previous scenario with access to change drinking water by 2030. In addition to this the climate will have changed and become much drier which will decrease the water supply. RCP6 will be used for modeling of the drier climate. Irrigation IRR This scenario is a further expansion of the two previous scenarios, incorporating expansion of cultivated land under irrigation. In it the irrigated are will be increased which will lead to an increase in water use.

Reference scenario – description and main assumptions In the reference scenario is designed with data from the geospatial analysis and assumptions made from the collected data. Population: The population is calculated with geospatial analysis, with information taken from Worldpop, for every fifth year starting in 2000 and ending in 2020, using an interpolation function. The calculations in ArcGIS showed a growth of approximately 14% every 5 years. Table 6 presents the estimate of population in the catchments up until 2015 and a forecast for 2020. After 2020 the population was projected in WEAP based on predefined growth.

Table 7: Population distribution in the Pungwe basin sub-catchments considered in the WEAP analysis.

Total in Year Upper Middle Lower Pungwe 2000 167,493 494,753 396,609 1,058,855 2005 181,696 566,993 459,638 1,208,327 2010 209,697 668,939 533,829 1,412,465 2015 237,172 754,797 613,774 1,605,743 2020 268,181 866,626 703,254 1,838,061 2025 296,093 956,825 776,449 2,029,367 2030 340,118 1,056,412 857,262 2,253,792

2035 360,936 1,166,364 946,487 2,473,787 2040 398,502 1,287,760 1,044,998 2,731,260 2045 439,979 1,421,791 1,153,762 3,015,532 2050 485,772 1,569,773 1,273,847 3,329,392

The share of urban and rural population in the basin could not be calculated in the geospatial analysis and were taken from the INE. In 2015, the upper catchment had an urban population of 9.1%, the middle catchment had an urban population of 7.7% and the lower catchment had 84.5% urban population (INE, 2018). Water This report only takes water from the Pungwe River under consideration which means that no groundwater is used to supply water to the different consumers. The different catchments have different demand priorities when it comes to water use. The upper catchment is first priority, since it is mostly rural population and they do not have access to other water sources. The middle catchment has second priority and the lower catchment has last priority. The access to water is assumed to grow at the current rate. The first year water access data is available for is 2000 and the increase in access to basic drinking water has been linear between 2001 and 2014, which is the last year of available data. In 2014 the share of people having access to at least basic drinking water services were 45.5% (World Bank, 2018). The growth rate for water access is approximately 2%. At this rate the entire population would have access to basic drinking water services by 2047. However, this is just the average growth rate in the country and the rural water access is increasing at a slower rate. In the urban areas the access to water is much higher than the national average. In 2014, 77.7% had access to clean water and at the current growth rate 100% access would be reached in 2031. In rural areas 28.7% of the population had access to clean water in 2014 and 100% access would be reached in 2056.

The data for water consumption in the reference scenario is taken from an investigation made by SWECO (SWECO, 2005). According to the study, the amount of water consumed by rural population in the Pungwe basin was 4.1 Mm3 in 2005 and expected to be 8.5 Mm3 in 2025 (SWECO, 2005). These values are used to estimate the water use rate per inhabitant dividing the total rural water consumption by the number of rural inhabitants in the Pungwe River basin, for those respective years. In 2005, water use rate is estimated to be 6 Lppd. This value is very low, WHO recommends that a person should have access to at least 20 Lppd. Irrigation Water used for irrigation is taken from a report written by NEPAD and the European Commission (NEPAD, 2013). In 2003, the irrigated area in the Pungwe River basin was 74.2 km2 and the water demand for this area was 111 Mm3. This means that the average amount of water used to irrigate each km2 is approximately 1.5 Mm3. The share of irrigated cropland is assumed to be equally large in the middle and lower catchments and no cropland area is considered in the upper catchment. The irrigated area in the middle catchment was 58.1 km2 and 16.1 km2 in the lower catchment in 2003. There was also a projection for 2015

30 corresponding to 106.2 km2, with respective water demand of 160 Mm3. The average water demand per km2 is still approximately 1.5 Mm3. Land use From the geospatial analysis the five most important types of land use, in terms of area of land, were identified, namely closed deciduous forest, deciduous forest, deciduous shrubland with sparse trees, closed grassland, and Swamp bushland and grassland. Even though cropland corresponds to a small area it was chosen since it is an interesting one. The need for water access for irrigation of croplands was identified as a challenge and the third scenario depends on the irrigated share of cropland area. It is also the land that most of the population make their living from.

The geospatial analysis indicated that the land use in the basin was dominated by the forest and woodland land classes. Only 0.66% of the land was used for crop cultivation. Figure 13 shows a diagram the land classes in the basin and Table 7 shows land classes in the catchments and how large the area shares of each land class are. Even though the shares of cropland are extremely small in comparison to other land cover types, are considered a separate class in the model do to its relevance for water consumption. The upper catchment has no cropland at all, the middle catchment has 82% of the basin’s cropland and the lower catchment has 18% of it.

Figure 13: Diagram of the land classes each catchment of the basin.

Table 8: The different land classes for the catchments.

Land class Upper Middle Lower Closed deciduous forest 62.6% 61% 47% Deciduous woodland 36.6% 29% 28% Deciduous shrubland 8% 5.9% Swamp 16% Cropland 1.28% 0.22% Other 0.8% 0.72% 2.88%

The total cropland area in the basin is 182.5 km2 of which 142.9 km2 is in the middle catchment and 39.6 km2 is in the lower catchment. The crops in the basin are assumed to be the same as in the Manica and Sofala provinces presented earlier. The middle catchment is represented by Manica and the lower catchment by Sofala. The crop shares are assumed to stay the same up until 2050. Of the crop area, approximately 50% was irrigated in 2003 and with the projection by NEPAD it would increase to 58% in 2015, this is quite high in comparison to the country wide share of only 2% irrigation. Climate Climate data for the basin is collected from the Royal Dutch Meteorological Institute (KNMI) Climate Explorer database. The climate variables used are temperature and precipitation. KNMI is a Dutch meteorological institute that forecasts weather as well as monitor climate change and seismic activity (KNMI, n.d). They do not have a lot of weather stations in Mozambique and there are none inside the Pungwe River basin. The closest temperature and precipitation stations possible are used to represent the different catchments. Because of Mozambique’s troubled past historical data can be hard to find. For the temperature stations used for the upper and middle catchment data is available for the period 1951-1970, and for the lower catchment for 1950- 1971. Precipitation data was available for the following periods: for the upper catchment 1950- 1979; the middle catchment, 1950-1977; and for the lower catchment,1950-1982. The future climate for the reference scenario is obtained by cycling the historic data in WEAP. Missing data is replaced with an average temperature and precipitation for that month. Water access scenario The Sustainable Development Goal (SDG6) is defined “Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all”. The target this scenario focuses on is target 6.1 “By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all”. The indicator for that goal is “Proportion of population using safely managed drinking water services” (UN, 2015). In a report by the World Health Organization (WHO) and UNICEF (WHO, 2000) it is stated that the minimal amount of water a person should have access to per day is 20 liters. This target is used to define the water use rate in the SDG6 scenario by rural population. It is assumed that when the average water consumption in rural areas is 20 Lppd the goal for 100% water availability is reached, and therefore set for the year 2030, in accordance with the 2030 Agenda. Climate change scenario In the CC scenario the climate is expected to be both warmer and drier due to climate change, to model it, RCP 6.0 precipitation and temperature data was chosen. Climate data for temperature and precipitation was collected from KNMI climate explorer. It corresponds to the outputs for the Global Climate Model run MRI-CGCM3, developed by Meteorological Research Institute (MRI), which forecasts the lowest precipitation of the eleven model runs tested for RCP6. The reference year for emissions is 1990 and data was retrieved from the data base for the period 1990-2050. There are four different RCPs, 2.6, 4.5, 6 and 8.5. They are all mentioned by the radiative forcing level obtained in 2100 (RCP Database, 2009). In RCP6.0, the concentration of GHGs

32 will be 6 W/m2 in 2100. The mean temperature is expected to increase by 0.8-1.8 °C globally (IPCC, 2013). Irrigation scenario For the IRR scenario the cultivated area will increase with 25% from 2015 to 2025. After that, the cultivated area is expected to increase further reaching 329.5 km2 in 2050, 241.1 km2 in the middle catchment, and 88.4 km2 in the lower catchment. The share of irrigated cropland will increase as it will be necessary to supply more water for irrigation in line with a warmer and drier climate future. In 2050, 80% of the cultivated area will be irrigated. It is assumed that the water demand per km2 stays at 1.5 Mm3 and that the crop share in the catchments will continue to be the same as in the reference scenario.

Results and Discussion The results from the reference scenario will be presented first. Then the SDG6 scenario will be compared to the reference scenario followed by a comparison between the CC and SDG6 scenarios. Lastly, the comparison between the IRR and CC scenarios is performed. Reference scenario As expected, the results from the reference scenario showed that the middle catchment is the one that requires the most water in all the scenarios. The difference in demand between all catchments will continue to grow as time goes by. Figure 14 shows the annual supply requirement for the catchments in the reference scenario. In 2050, the upper catchment requires approximately 9 Mm3, the middle catchment 285 Mm3, and the lower catchment 99 Mm3.

Figure 14: Graph showing the annual total supply requirement (including loss, reuse and DSM) for the catchments in the reference scenario. Brown corresponds to the upper catchment, yellow to the middle catchment and red to the lower catchment.

Agriculture will continue to be the largest water consumer in the basin, except in the upper catchment where there is no agriculture. The supply requirement for the water consumers can be seen in Figure 15.

Figure 15: Graph showing the supply requirement of the different water consumers in each catchment. Grey corresponds to the water demand from the population in the upper catchment, the yellow to the populations demand in the middle catchment, the orange to the agricultural demand in the middle catchment, the red to the population in the lower catchment and the blue to the agricultural demand in the lower catchment.

In the upper and middle catchments, the demand coverage is at 100% every year. Demand coverage informs on the share of the demand that is met by water supplied by the river. In the middle catchment however, the demand is unmet for the first time in 2044 and in almost every year after that. In the upper and lower catchment, the coverage is at 100% all year round, every year. Figure 18 shows the demand coverage for the middle catchment. It can be seen that there are yearly dips in coverage from 2030 and onwards. The most severe one being at almost 75%.

Figure 18: Monthly demand coverage in the middle catchment.

A monthly average in the demand coverage in the middle catchment for the years that experience water shortage is shown in Figure 19 and it can be seen that the affected months are July-October which is the last half of the dry season.

Figure 19: Monthly average of coverage in the middle catchment.

The streamflow if the river is shown in Figure 20. During the rainy season, especially in February, the flow is the highest. The streamflow of the river is the highest in the lower catchment at the mouth of the river and lowest in the upper catchment at its origin.

Figure 20: Streamflow in the Pungwe River basin. The 6th reach is after the upper catchments demand return, 12th is after the middle catchments demand return and 18th is after the lower catchments demand return.

The water access scenario, SDG6, compared to the reference scenario Up until 2033 the supply requirement increases faster than in the reference scenario. After that the growth continues at about the same rate. By 2050 the supply requirement has increased with 1.6 Mm3 in the upper catchment, 5 Mm3 in the middle catchment and 2.3 Mm3 in the lower catchment. The total increase in the basin is approximately 9 Mm3. The supply requirement in the SDG6 scenario relative to the reference scenario is shown in Figure 21.

Figure 21: The supply requirements for each catchment in the SDG6 scenario relative to the reference scenario.

The agricultural sector is still the biggest consumer of water in the catchment. Figure 22 shows that even though the domestic water consumption has increased it is still quite small compared to the agricultural consumption.

Figure 22: Supply requirement for the water consumers in the different catchments in the SDG6 scenario. Grey corresponds to the water demand from the population in the upper catchment, the yellow to the populations demand in the middle catchment, the orange to the agricultural demand in the middle catchment, the red to the population in the lower catchment and the blue to the agricultural demand in the lower catchment.

The coverage is still 100% in the upper and lower catchments. In the middle catchment the demand is unmet for the first time in 2040, four years earlier than in the reference scenario. The coverage in the middle catchment is shown in Figure 23.

Figure 23: Demand Coverage in the basin’s middle catchment in the water access scenario (SDG6). The orange line represents the reference scenario and the yellow line represents the SDG6 scenario

The monthly average of the coverage is shown in Figure 24. The difference between the SDG6 and reference scenario is that the water shortage starts in June instead of July and is a little more severe during the affected months.

Figure 24: The monthly average of the coverage in the middle catchment for the reference and SDG6 scenarios.

The streamflow decreases in every catchment. There is no big dip in the streamflow. The unit for the decrease in streamflow is thousand m3 which is small compared to the actual stream flows unit which is measured in billion m3. The streamflow in the SDG6 scenario compared to the REF scenario is shown in Figure 25. It can be seen that the difference between streamflow in the two scenarios increases until 2033, after that the difference stays about the same for a while until the streamflow becomes more irregular.

Figure 25: The streamflow of the different catchments in the SDG6 scenario relative to the reference scenario. The blue line represents the streamflow after the upper catchments demand return, the red line the streamflow after the middle catchments demand return and the orange line the streamflow after the lower catchments demand return.

The climate change scenario, CC, compared to the water access scenario, SDG6 Since nothing is changed in the demand sites in this scenario there are no changes in the supply requirement. But the unmet demand is increased since the warmer and climate decreases the water supply in the basin. The middle catchment is still the only one with problems with coverage. In the CC scenario it starts in 2036 which is 4 years earlier than in the SDG6 scenario. The severity of the unmet demand has increased and in the most severe year the coverage is lower than 60%. This is shown in Figure 26.

Figure 26: Coverage in the middle catchment in the CC and SDG6 scenarios.

The monthly average of the coverage, shown in Figure 27, shows that more months are affected by water shortage. It begins in March which is the last month of the rainy season. The coverage in the affected months is almost decreased threefold compared to the SDG6 scenario.

Figure 27: Monthly average of the coverage in the CC and SDG6 scenarios.

The reason the coverage is lower than before, even though the supply requirement is the same, is because the streamflow in the basin is greatly dependent on precipitation. Figures 28, 29 and 30 show the streamflow in the catchments. Up until 2030, the streamflow in the CC scenario is higher than in the SDG6 scenario in the upper and middle catchments. In the lower catchment the streamflow in the CC scenario is lower than in the SDG6 scenario almost every year. It is in the lower catchment the largest difference in streamflow occurs. In some years the difference is larger than 6 billion m3. During low flow there is not much difference between the two scenarios and the months that had high flows in the SDG6 scenario are the most affected by climate change.

Figure 28: Streamflow in the upper catchment in the CC and SDG6 scenarios. The blue line represents the CC scenario and the yellow line represents the SDG6 scenario.

Figure 29: Streamflow in the middle catchment in the CC and SDG6 scenarios. The blue line represents the CC scenario and the yellow line represents the SDG6 scenario.

Figure 30: Streamflow in the lower catchment in the CC and SDG6 scenarios. The blue line represents the CC scenario and the yellow line represents the SDG6 scenario.

The irrigation scenario, IRR, compared to the climate change scenario, CC The supply requirement increases steadily in the middle and lower catchments, both due to the SDG6 assumptions and to the increase in area under irrigation. The upper catchment is unaffected in the irrigation scenario since there is no cultivated area there. In 2050, the supply requirement in the middle catchment will have increased to 61 Mm3 and in the lower catchment with to 47 Mm3. Making it a total of 108 Mm3 in the basin. Figure 31 shows the supply requirement in the IRR scenario compared to the CC scenario.

Figure 31: The supply requirement in the irrigation scenario relative to the climate change scenario (blue – Lower Pungwe catchment, red – Middle Pungwe catchment).

Figure 32 shows the supply requirement for the population and agricultural sector in each catchment. By 2050, for the assumptions in the analysis, the total supply requirement of the catchment reaches approximately 520 Mm3, with agriculture continuing to be the largest water consumer in the basin.

Figure 32: The supply requirement in the irrigation scenario. Grey corresponds to the water demand from the population in the upper catchment, the yellow to the populations demand in the middle catchment, the orange to the agricultural demand in the middle catchment, the red to the population in the lower catchment and the blue to the agricultural demand in the lower catchment.

The coverage is still at 100% in the upper and lower catchments but in the middle, water availability conditions worsen. The first year experiencing water shortage is 2033, three years earlier than in the CC scenario. The severity of the unmet demand increases and in the later years as little as 46% of the supply requirement is covered. This is shown in Figure 33.

Figure 33: Monthly demand coverage in the middle catchment in the irrigation and climate change scenarios.

The monthly average of the coverage, shown in Figure 34, shows that the only month unaffected by water shortage is January, when the whole period of analysis is taken into account. It also shows that the unmet demand is almost doubled compared to the CC scenario.

Figure 34: Monthly average of the coverage of the middle catchment in the irrigation and climate change scenario. The red corresponds to the irrigation scenario and the blue to the climate change scenario.

Conclusions and implications to policy design/planning In this chapter the research questions will be answered, and possible solutions will be presented. The solutions are divided into the ones that will increase water availability and the ones that control the water consumption. After that limitations of this study will be presented and lastly suggestions on what the next steps could be if one were to elaborate this study. Answers to research questions From the results presented above the research questions can be answered.

Considering no changes in the climate until 2050, the analysis indicated that enough surface water exists to cover the demand in the middle and lower catchment but not in the middle catchment. The latter has the largest area and population out of the three catchments. This is directly related to the highest demand for water. Trends in the coverage of each scenario show that the access to water will worsen over the years. In the SDG6 scenario the most severe unmet demand is 5% which is quite low. 100% water access cannot be achieved with the water supplied from the Pungwe river. Not even in the reference scenario where the water consumption is as low as 6 Lppd 100% water access is achieved. Regarding the potential incompatibility of the achievement of water access targets, i.e. SDG6, in a dryer climate future; it is concluded that climate change for the warmer and drier greatly compromises the achievement of water access in the middle catchment. Warmer climate means that more water will evaporate, and less precipitation means the area will be provided with less water, streamflow will be reduced and the period of low flows in a year will increase. This will lead to less water available to meet the supply requirement in the catchment. Expansion of irrigation causes even higher levels of unmet demand in the Pungwe River basin. Especially in the middle catchment where the irrigated area is the largest in the basin. Therefore, expansion of irrigation under a dry climate future can potentially affect water access in the Pungwe river basin. Form the analysis conducted, it is clear that the Pungwe River basin could face important challenges related to water availability and supply. The most important solutions are the ones that ensure an increased water availability in the basin. Some solutions could be investigated to tackle the water availability issues. These include, for example, rainwater harvesting systems at the household level and building reservoirs that can collect water during the rainy season to be used later during the dry season when the water shortage occurs. Another is to build water treatment plants in urban settlements and recycle water which could be used for irrigation. Rainwater harvest is doable for all three catchments and the water treatment plants would be least suitable for the upper catchment where there are hardly any urban centers. In the lower catchment there could be potential to build a desalination plant. In that case for example the city of Beira could get its water from the ocean and not put as much pressure on the Pungwe River to meet its water supply needs. Possible solutions not related to increasing the available water could be for the government or local water agency to decide on regulations to keep people from consuming more water than necessary and implement water efficiency measures (e,g, infrastructure maintenance). It can also be to change the priority among the water consumers. For example, municipal use could be prioritized over other consumers. However, this could have other consequences that would have to be taken into consideration. Limitations One of the limitations of this study was that the irrigation was modeled as a demand site instead of part of a catchment. This led to the annual water consumption for irrigation was spread evenly over the year which is not the case in reality. If the irrigation were to be modeled in the catchments instead that would be possible. The irrigated area would also be linked to the land

43 classes and irrigation water taken up by the soil would be provided to the river. Another limitation is that data specific for the Pungwe River basin is hard to find. Climate data is not necessarily taken from weather stations inside the basin but from the closest possible weather stations. The types of crops cultivated in the basin is also hard to find and assumptions had to be made that they were the same as in the Manica and Sofala provinces. The distance between the settlements and the river and its estuaries was not taken into consideration. As a result, the infrastructure needed and the cost to build the infrastructure is not taken into consideration. Future work Part of the next steps should be to address the limitations of the study and alter the model so that the irrigation was modeled in the catchments instead and add livestock and industry as additional water consumers. Also, to do an even more extensive literature to try to find more detailed information on the basin and add an analysis of the necessary infrastructure and the cost to build it. It could also be interesting to add a wider range of climate scenarios to test other possible climate futures as well. For example, the other three RCPs. Other areas worth considering if developing this study further are the analysis of crop production and yields, and how these would be affected by the different scenarios. This would extend the analysis to the food security dimension in the basin. In addition, options to explore electricity access options in the basin, e.g through hydropower, could be also investigated.

References Alba, R. & Bolding, A., 2016. IWRM Avant la Lettre? Four Keys Episodes in the Policy Articulation of IWRM in Downstream Mozambique. [Online] Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308970569_IWRM_Avant_la_Lettre_Four_Key_Ep isodes_in_the_Policy_Articulation_of_IWRM_in_Downstream_Mozambique Baum, Z. et al., 2018. Hernessing households to mitigate renewables intermittency in the smart grid. Renewable Energy; An International Journal, pp. 1216-1229. Club of Mozambique, 2018. Construction of the Mpanda Nkuwa dam in Mozambique is a priority for the Cahora Bassa Hydroelectric Plant, s.l.: Club of Mozambique. Diop, S., Scheren, P. & Ferdinand, J., 2016. Estuaries: A Lifeline of Ecosystem Services in the Western Indian Ocean. s.l.:Springer. EDM, 2018. Generation. [Online] Available at: https://portal.edm.co.mz/en/website/page/generation Expert Africa, 2017. Mozambique Information. [Online] Available at: https://www.expertafrica.com/mozambique/weather-and-climate/graphs FAO, 2010. FAO/WFP Crop and Food Security Assessment Mission to Mozambique. [Online] Available at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/ak350e/ak350e00.htm#3 FAO, 2016. Mozambique. [Online] Available at: http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/countries_regions/MOZ/index.stm Future Water, 2014. Hydrological analysis and modelling of the Pungwe River Basin, Mozambique, s.l.: Future Water. Gridwatch, 2018. G.B. National grid status. [Online] Available at: http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/ HCB, 2009. [Online] Available at: http://www.hcb.co.mz/content/search?SearchText=cahora+bassa Hivos, 2009. Mozambique: Energy Profile. [Online] Available at: https://hivos.org/sites/default/files/mozambique_profile.pdf Howells, M., Welsch, M., Hermann, S. & Rogner, H., 2013. Adding value with CLEWS - Modelling the energy system and its interdependence for Mauritius. Volume 113. IAEA, n.d.. Seeking Sustainable Climate, Land, Energy and Water (CLEW) Strategies, s.l.: International Atomic Energy Agency. IEA, 2018. Statistics. [Online] Available at: https://www.iea.org/statistics/?country=MOZAMBIQUE&year=2015&category=Key%20indi cators&indicator=TPESbySource&mode=chart&categoryBrowse=false&dataTable=BALAN CES&showDataTable=false IHA, 2016. Mozambique Country Profile. [Online] Available at: https://www.hydropower.org/country-profiles/mozambique

INE, 2018. Populacao Pojectada por distritos. [Online] Available at: http://www.ine.gov.mz/estatisticas/estatisticas-demograficas-e-indicadores- sociais/projeccoes-da-populacao/populacao-projectada-por-distritos-sofala- 2007_2040.xls/view IPCC, 2013. Summary for Policymakers, Cambridge: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. JCDecaux, n.d.. JCDecaux. [Online] Available at: http://www.continentaloutdoor.com/africa/mozambique [Accessed 8 11 2018]. Jonker Klunne, W., 2013. Small hydropower in Southern Africa - an overview of five countries in the region, Pretoria: Journal of Energy in Southern Africa. KNMI, n.d.. About KNMI. [Online] Avaliable at: https://www.knmi.nl/over-het-knmi/about Laspidou, C., 2017 D1.1: Scientific Inventory of the Nexus Mabhaudhi, T. et al., 2016. Southern Africa´s Water-Energy Nexus: Towards Regional Integration and Development, s.l.: MDPI. Maps of World, 2013. Mozambique River Map. [Online] Available at: https://www.mapsofworld.com/mozambique/river-map.html MASA, 2015. Anuário de Estatísticas Agrárias 2015, Maputo: República de Mocambique, Ministério de Agricultura e Segruanca Alimentar. Mlambo, N., n.d.. Raids on Gorongossa - Zimbabwe's Military Involvement in Mozambique 1982-1992, Cape Town: Defence Digest. Mongabay, 2006. Mongabay. [Online] Available at: https://rainforests.mongabay.com/deforestation/archive/Mozambique.htm [Accessed 6 11 2018]. Nakicenovic, N. et al., 2000. Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES), A Special Report of Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-80493-0 NEPAD, 2013. Mozambican Country Water Resource Profile, s.l.: NEPAD Planning and Coordinating Agency. RCP Database, 2009. Description of the RCPs. [Online] Available at: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/web- apps/tnt/RcpDb/dsd?Action=htmlpage&page=welcome#descript SADC, 2012. Member States. [Online] Available at: https://www.sadc.int/member-states/ SADC, 2012. Southern African Development Community - SADC Objectives. [Online] Available at: https://www.sadc.int/about-sadc/overview/sadc-objectiv/ [Accessed 06 11 2018].

SCIELO, 2013. Small hydropower in Southern Africa - an overview of five counries in the region. [Online] Available at: http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1021- 447X2013000300003 Sida, 2008. Case study: Pungwe river basin in Mozambique, s.l.: SWECO. SMHI, 2006. Climate Change Imacts on Water Resources in the Pungwe Drainage Basin. [Online] Available at: http://www.undp.org/content/dam/aplaws/publication/en/publications/environment- energy/www-ee-library/water-governance/climate-change-impacts-on-water-resources-in-the- pungwe-drainage-basin/CLIMATE%20CHANGE%20IMPACTS%20Pungwe_CC_Final.pdf SMHI, 2017. Vad är RCP?. [Online] Available at: https://www.smhi.se/klimat/framtidens-klimat/vagledning-klimatscenarier/vad- ar-rcp-1.80271 SWECO, 2004. Development of the Pungwe River Basin Joint Integrated Water esources Management Strategy, s.l.: SWECO. SWECO, 2005. PUNGWE BASIN DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS - Water Demand and Water Balance Analysis, s.l.: SWECO. The World Bank Group, 2007. MOZAMBIQUE - Country Water Resources Assistance Strategy 2008-2011, s.l.: The World Bank Group. The World Bank, 2007. Mozambique Country Water Resources Assistance Strategy: Making Water Work for Sustainable Growth and Poverty Reduction, s.l.: The World Bank. The World Bank, 2010. The Zambezi River Basin - A Multi-Sector Investment Opportunities Analysis, Washington DC: The World Bank. The World Bank, 2018. Mozambique. [Online] Available at: https://data.worldbank.org/country/mozambique UN, 2015. Sustainable Development Goals. [Online] Available at: http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/ UNDP, 2016. Human development report. [Online] Available at: http://hdr.undp.org/en/2016-report UNDP, 2018. Mozambique. [Online] Available at: http://www.mz.undp.org/content/mozambique/en/home/countryinfo/ UNDP, 2018. United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Reports. [Online] Available at: http://hdr.undp.org/en/data [Accessed 4 11 2018]. UNECE, 2015. Reconciling resource uses in transboundary basins: assessment of the water- food-eneregy-ecosystems nexus, New York and Geneva: United Nations. UNICEF, 2014. Mozambique - Water, Sanitation & Hygiene. [Online] Available at: http://www.unicef.org.mz/en/our-work/what-we-do/water-sanitation-hygiene/

UN WATER, n.d.. Transboundary Waters. [Online] Available at: http://www.unwater.org/water-facts/transboundary-waters/ WaterAid Mozambique, 2016. Mozambique Country Pragramme: Strategy 2016-2021, s.l.: WaterAid. WEAP, 2018. Why WEAP?. [Online] Available at: http://www.weap21.org/index.asp?action=201 WEAP, n.d.. Soil moisture method. [Online] Avaliable at: https://www.weap21.org/WebHelp/Two-bucket_Method.htm WHO, 2000. Global Water Supply and Sanitation Assessment 2000 Report, New York: World Heatlh Organization. Vinjar, A., 2012. Cahora Bassa. [Online] Available at: https://snl.no/Cahora_Bassa World Bank Group, 2018. Average Monthly Temperature and Rainfall for Mozambique from 1901-2015. [Online] Available at: http://sdwebx.worldbank.org/climateportal/index.cfm?page=country_historical_climate&This CCode=MOZ World Bank, 2018. Mozambique. [Online] Available at: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.NAHC?locations=MZ WSP, 2018. Mozambique. [Online] Avaliable at: https://www1.wfp.org/countries/mozambique