ABSTRACT

This study relates agricultural income and agricultural carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in the context of environmental Kuznets curves for South Africa. We posit likely relationships between UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 1, 2 and 13, relating food production to climate change action. CO2 emissions, income, coal energy consumption and electricity energy consumption time series data from 1990 to 2012 within the South African agricultural sector were used. The autoregressive distributive lag bounds-test and the error correction model were used to analyse the data. The results show long-run relationships. However, agricultural income was only significant in the linear and squared models. Changes in agricultural CO2 emissions from the short run towards the long run are estimated at 71.9%, 124.7% and 125.3% every year by the linear, squared and cubic models, respectively. Exponentially increasing agricultural income did not result in a decrease in agricultural CO2 emissions, which is at odds with the Kuznets hypothesis. The study concludes that it will be difficult for South Africa to simultaneously achieve SDGs 1, 2 and 13, especially given that agriculture is reliant upon livestock production, the largest CO2 emitter in the sector. The sector needs to shift to renewable energy consumption with fewer CO2 emissions.

No abstract

No abstract

The objective of the study was to identify the extent of benefits and their determinants to communities surrounding the Qamata Irrigation Scheme (QIS) in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. The study used a quantitative based cross-sectional survey of 197 households within a radius of 20 km from the QIS. Multiple sampling methods were utilized where the villages were randomly and the households conveniently selected. A semi-structured pre-coded questionnaire was utilized to collect the data which was analyzed using descriptive statistics and multinomial logit regression. The study identified 14 discriminant benefits ranging from job opportunities, income increment food diversification to share cropping. Sixty-two percent of the households identified less than 5 benefits, whilst 27% and 11% identified 6-10 and 11-14 benefits respectively. Determinants of a surrounding household to attain benefits were significantly influenced by the distance from the scheme, the main source of income and gender of household head (P<0.01); marital and employment status (P<0.05); and access to farm land (P<0.1). The study concludes that the level of benefit diffused to surrounding households is based on socio-economic factors. The study recommends conscientization of surrounding communities on the peripheral benefits accrued from the proximity to the QIS, achievable through awareness initiatives.