Physics and Chemistry of the Earth xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Physics and Chemistry of the Earth

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/pce

An assessment of groundwater use in irrigated agriculture using

multi-spectral remote sensing
Luxon Nhamo a, b, *, Girma Yimer Ebrahim a, Tafadzwanashe Mabhaudhi b,
Sylvester Mpandeli c, g, Manuel Magombeyi a, Munyaradzi Chitakira d, James Magidi e,
Mbulisi Sibanda f
a
International Water Management Institute, Southern Africa (IWMI-SA), 141 Cresswell Street, Weavind Park, P. Bag X 813, Silverton, 0184, Pretoria, South Africa
b
Centre for Transformative Agricultural and Food Systems, School of Agricultural, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, P. Bag X01,
Scottsville, Pietermaritzburg, 3209, South Africa
c
Water Research Commission of South Africa, 4 Daventry Street, Lynnwood Manor, Pretoria, 0081, South Africa
d
University of South Africa (UNISA), Department of Environmental Sciences, Private Bag X6, Florida, Johannesburg, 1710, South Africa
e
Geomatics Department, Tshwane University of Technology, Staatsartillerie Road, Pretoria, 0001, South Africa
f
Department of Geography and Environmental Science, School of Agricultural, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, P/Bag X01, Scottsville
3209, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa
g
School of Environmental Sciences, University of Venda, Private Bag X 5050, Thohoyandou, 0950, South Africa

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Declining water resources in dry regions requires sustainable groundwater management as trends indicate
Climate change increasing groundwater use, but without accountability. The sustainability of groundwater is uncertain, as little
Groundwater is known about its extent and availability, a challenge that requires a quantitative assessment of its current use.
Remote sensing
This study assessed groundwater use for irrigated agriculture in the Venda-Gazankulu area of Limpopo Province
Resilience
Water management
in South Africa using crop evapotranspiration and irrigated crop area derived from the normalised difference
Water productivity vegetation index (NDVI). Evapotranspiration data was derived from the Water Productivity through Open access
of Remotely sensed Actual Evapotranspiration and Interception (WaPOR) dataset (250 m resolution), and irri­
gated areas were characterised using dry season NDVI data derived from Landsat 8. Field surveys were conducted
for four years to assess accuracy and for post-classification correction. Daily ET for the dry season (May to
September) was developed from the actual ET for the irrigated areas. The irrigated areas were overlaid on the ET
map to calculate ET for only irrigated land parcels. Groundwater use during the 2015 dry period was 3627.49
billion m3 and the irrigated area during the same period was 26% of cultivated land. About 82 435 ha of
cultivated area was irrigated using 44 million m3/ha of water, compared to 186.93 million m3/ha on a rainfed
area of 237 847 ha. Groundwater management is essential for enhancing resilience in arid regions in the advent
of water scarcity.

1. Introduction recurring droughts, eutrophication and sewage spillage (Khatri-Chhetri

Water scarcity severely reduces biodiversity in both aquatic and
terrestrial ecosystems, impacting negatively on the provision of
ecosystem goods and services (Dallas and Rivers-Moore, 2014). Demand
for freshwater continues to grow due to the extensification and inten­
sification of agriculture, population and economic growth, as well as
urbanisation (Satterthwaite et al., 2010). A combination of these factors
also contributes to the degradation of surface water resources, severely
affecting its quality and quantity. The challenges are exacerbated by
et al., 2016). Consequently, more than one billion people in the world
live without adequate and safe drinking water and sanitation (Bigas,
2012; WHO, 2001), and about 90% of the infectious diseases reported in
developing countries are transmitted from polluted water (Brown et al.,
2013). These big numbers present challenges towards the realisation of
the 2030 Global Agenda on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs),
particularly Goal 6 on providing clean water and sanitation. Apart from
contributing to stunting and malnutrition to children, water scarcity
accentuates already fragile situations and causes conflict and violence

* Corresponding author. International Water Management Institute (IWMI), 141 Cresswell Street, Weavind Park, P. Bag X 813, Pretoria, South Africa.
E-mail address: nhamot@ukzn.ac.za (L. Nhamo).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2019.102810
Received 12 March 2019; Received in revised form 22 October 2019; Accepted 11 November 2019
Available online 16 November 2019
1474-7065/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: Luxon Nhamo, Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2019.102810
L. Nhamo et al.
particularly in regions where water resources are transboundary (Bain
et al., 2013). The unreliability of surface water has resulted in an in­
crease in groundwater use, although aquifer storage is still unknown in
many parts of the world (Connor, 2015; Mateo-Sagasta and Burke, 2012;
Zaveri et al., 2016).
At global scale, groundwater accounts for about 26% of renewable
freshwater resources, most of which is used for irrigation, yet little is
known about the extent of its availability (Elbeih, 2015; Pimentel et al.,
2004; Siebert et al., 2010). There are significant knowledge gaps and
uncertainties in current groundwater quantity and quality in available
inventories, yet they inform investment decisions and policy making
(Nhamo et al., 2018a; Van Der Gun and Minelli, 2012). This presents
major challenges in achieving the SDG 6.
In a water scarce country like South Africa, groundwater manage­
ment has become topical due to its importance in water supply (Braune
and Xu, 2008; Donnenfeld et al., 2018). Besides the little knowledge on
groundwater quantity, 13% of the country’s freshwater resources come
from groundwater of which 59% is used in irrigation, 13% in domestic
water supply, 13% in mining, 6% in livestock and 9% for other uses
(Bronkhorst et al., 2017). Currently, 15% of South Africa’s domestic
water supply comes from groundwater, as more than 280 urban areas
either wholly or partially depend on groundwater (Knüppe, 2011; Pie­
tersen et al., 2011). Between 1950 and 2004, groundwater use increased
exponentially from 684 million cubic metres to 1770 million cubic
metres per annum (Braune and Xu, 2008). Thus, groundwater plays a
strategic role in South Africa, providing drinking and sanitation, sup­
porting irrigation and industry, reducing poverty and disease and
maintaining important aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems (Knüppe,
2011). However, the use of groundwater as an adaptation strategy could
turn out to be mal-adaptation if not informed on its extent of utilisation
and sustainability. Thus, the importance of groundwater in ensuring
water security requires evidence-based research that can drive the
adoption and implementation of a sustainable groundwater strategy.
Remotely sensed products such as the normalised difference vege­
tation index (NDVI) and satellite based crop evapotranspiration (ET)
provide useful data to assess groundwater use for irrigated agriculture
(Saadi et al., 2018). Integrated remote sensing and Geographic Infor­
mation Systems (GIS) have emerged as useful tools for groundwater
mapping, assessment and management (Elbeih, 2015; Yang et al., 2011).
Remotely sensed crop ET is a more convenient and cost effective means
of assessing potential groundwater use, in a spatially explicit manner
(Anderson et al., 2015; Ozdogan et al., 2010). Precise estimates of
groundwater consumptive use by crops has been limited by lack of ET
datasets with reasonably high resolution. Existing ET datasets have
presented some challenges of either poor accuracy or low resolution. For
example, the MODIS16 ET product (250 m resolution) has been reported
to underestimate ET along the tropics (Hu et al., 2015; Ramoelo et al.,
2014), and the GLEAM product (25 km resolution) is too coarse for small
area studies. However, recent developments have produced remotely
sensed ET products at reasonably high resolution, and with near accu­
rate estimates. For example, Liu et al. used a spatial-temporal thermal
data sharpening scheme to integrate MODIS and Landsat land surface
temperature (LST) to estimate more accurate ET at regional level (Liu
et al., 2018), and in 2019, the same authors spatially disaggregated
satellite LST with a non-linear model to produce ET datasets across
agricultural areas in China and the USA (Liu et al., 2019).
Remote sensing products have been used in groundwater exploration
and estimation (Jha et al., 2007; Mallast et al., 2013), as well as sup­
porting policy decisions related to sustainable development and
groundwater management (Anbazhagan and Jothibasu, 2016; Elbeih,
2015). In agriculture, crop ET is essential in assessing consumptive use
for irrigated agriculture and evaluating crop water requirements
(Gowda et al., 2008; Nhamo et al., 2016). Thus, crop ET is an input in
determining crop water productivity as it accounts for crop water uptake
and not water supplied. This is because not all water supplied to a field is
consumed by crops as some percolates back into the ground, flows
2
Physics and Chemistry of the Earth xxx (xxxx) xxx
downstream or evaporates from the soil (Molden et al., 2010; Nhamo
et al., 2016; Sharma et al., 2015).
Crop ET is a process whereby water changes from liquid to gaseous
state as it moves from the soil to a plant systems and then into the at­
mosphere (Graham et al., 2010; Verstraeten et al., 2008). It is a com­
bination of evaporation that takes place from both the soil and
vegetation through a process called plant transpiration, and as the two
processes occur at the same time, together they are called evapotrans­
piration (ET) (Verstraeten et al., 2008). Crop ET, thus, refers to both
evaporation from soil and vegetative surface and transpiration from
plants. Therefore, during dry periods when groundwater is the sole
source of water supply for irrigation, groundwater use by crops can be
quantified through crop ET (Nhamo et al., 2016). Crop ET refers to the
ET derived only from cropped areas.
This study sought to quantify groundwater use by crops in irrigated
areas of Venda-Gazankulu area of Limpopo Province, South Africa
during the dry season, using crop ET and irrigated crop area delineated
using the NDVI as an indirect method. Irrigated areas were delineated
using Landsat 8 NDVI and supervised classifications. The analysis was
carried out during the dry season when irrigation is necessary for
compensating soil moisture deficit. Comprehensive field surveys were
carried out to identify the source of water for irrigation and found out
that the source of irrigated agriculture is predominantly groundwater.
Crop ET for irrigated areas was then estimated to determine the
consumptive groundwater use during the 2015 dry season.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Description of the study area
The study was conducted in the Venda and Gazankulu former
homelands, in the Limpopo Province in South Africa (Fig. 1). Former
homelands are areas that were allocated to indigenous black people
during the apartheid era and were generally limited in resources. The
two former homelands of Venda and Gazankulu are entirely in Vhembe
and Mopani districts respectively (Fig. 1). The Venda and Gazankulu
homelands have a combined surface area of 16 774 km2, and were
chosen for this study as they have the highest density of irrigated areas
in Limpopo Province as shown in Fig. 1. The population is predomi­
nantly rural, agriculture being the main economic activity (DAFF, 2016;
Mostert et al., 2008). Smallholder farmers who dominate the area have a
land tenure of about 2 ha and they cultivate mainly horticultural crops
such as potatoes, tomatoes, groundnuts, maize, among others and do
well during the dry season under irrigation (Graeub et al., 2016).
The varied topography ranges from 240 to 1400 m above sea level,
dominated by valleys with abundant fertile soils (Vincent et al., 2010).
The Venda-Gazankulu area is generally hot and dry, with average tem­
peratures ranging from 25 � C to 32 � C per annum. Crop production
during the dry season is entirely irrigated from groundwater sources as
surface waterbodies run dry. The climate is subtropical, with rainfall
averaging 500 m per annum. The physical and climatic conditions
favour crop and subtropical fruit production (Mostert et al., 2008).
Rainfall is received during the summer season (October to April) whilst
winters (May to September) are mild and generally frost-free.
2.2. Analysis period
To estimate groundwater use for irrigation purposes, dry winter
seasons (May to September 2014–2016) were considered. The dry
winter season period was chosen because this is when little to no rainfall
is received in the study area as illustrated on Fig. 2. The study was also
motivated by the fact that the 2015/16 agricultural season was a
drought year, and in some provinces of South Africa like the Western
Cape the drought persisted until early 2018 (Nhamo et al., 2019; SADC,
2016). In this regard, the aim of the study was to assess groundwater use,
as it became the main source of water during the drought period.
L. Nhamo et al.
Fig. 1. Locational map of Venda-Gazankulu former homelands in Limpopo Province and South Africa, showing winter irrigated areas.
Fig. 2. Mean monthly average rainfall in Limpopo Province (1972–2014).
Moreover, smallholder famers that are dominant in the study area
generally rely on groundwater during the dry season, as noted and
confirmed during field surveys (Cai et al., 2017; Nhamo et al., 2018b).
Thus, the study assessed groundwater use for irrigated agriculture from
May to September. All fields that were identified as irrigated during the
winter of 2015 were considered irrigated from groundwater.
Fig. 3 presents the cropping calendar of some of the irrigated crops
grown in the Venda-Gazankulu former homelands. There is cultivation
throughout the year, but it is divided into two types of agriculture,
irrigated and rainfed. Horticultural crops such as green peas, butternut,
tomatoes, potatoes and dry beans are generally grown during the winter
under irrigation. Irrigation for other cash crops done during the summer
is generally supplementary irrigation and is normally done at commer­
cial level (Cai et al., 2017).
3
Physics and Chemistry of the Earth xxx (xxxx) xxx
2.3. Mapping agriculture fields using satellite data
Cloud free Landsat 8 (NASA, 2015) imageries for the year 2015
(spatial and temporal resolution of 30 m and 16 days, respectively) were
processed to delineate agricultural fields (both rainfed and irrigated
areas) of the study area. Of the 255 Landsat scenes that were down­
loaded from the United States Geological Surveys (USGS) Earth-Explorer
website (NASA, 2015), only eight scenes, for the months of July and
August of 2015 were used in the classification of agriculture fields and
extraction of winter irrigation areas. Most of the summer images were
not used in this study due to the prevalence of clouds, which obscured
the croplands in the study area. Prior to any analysis, the satellite im­
ageries were imported into a Geographic Information System (GIS)
where they were pre-processed. In the pre-processing procedure, the
images were radiometrically corrected and calibrated into top of at­
mosphere reflectance (TOR) from digital numbers (DN) values using the
formula given on Equation (1) (Qin et al., 2001; Dube and Mutanga,
2015).
Lλ ¼ ML Qcal þ AL ; (1)
where, Lλ ¼ TOR spectral radiance (Watts/(m2 * srad * μm)), ML ¼ Band-
specific multiplicative rescaling factor from the metadata, AL ¼ Band-
specific additive rescaling factor from the metadata, and Qcal ¼ Quan­
tized and calibrated standard product pixel values (DN) 1.
The satellite imageries were layer-stacked and mosaicked into three
segments. A maximum likelihood supervised classifier was used, based
on prior knowledge of the area (personal experience, ground truth visits,
and Google Earth zoom-in views). Prior knowledge of the area benefited
selecting and setting-up discrete samples for each land use/cover class
and assigning names to the classes. These samples were converted into
point map, which was used to extract the spectral signatures (mean
values and variance of top of atmosphere reflectance) of each of the
training sites. At least fifteen training sites and spectral signatures were
created for each of the four landuse classes considered: water, urban and
L. Nhamo et al.
Fig. 3. Cropping calendar for some irrigated crops in Venda-Gazankulu.
bare areas, natural vegetation and agriculture, although the focus was
agricultural area. These were used as input to perform the supervised
classification to delineate agricultural fields. Using statistical algo­
rithms, every pixel on the images was compared with the signatures on
the training sites and was assigned to the classes it resembled. Fruit plots
and shade-nets that had clear boundaries were classified as agriculture.
2.4. Delineation of irrigated areas
NDVI computed on the same Landsat 8 cloud free winter images
(June to August) were used to enhance the detection and identification
of irrigated croplands. NDVI is a vegetation index derived from the
Fig. 4. Methodological flowchart of the data inputs, procedures and outputs followed to delineate irrigated areas.
4
Physics and Chemistry of the Earth xxx (xxxx) xxx
reflectance values of near infrared and red portions of the electromag­
netic spectrum, and is used to quantify photosynthetic capacity, water
stress, and vegetation productivity (Panda et al., 2010). NDVI is calcu­
lated based on Equation (2) (Tucker, 1979),
NIR R
NDVI ¼ ; (2)
NIR þ R
where, NIR represents the spectral reflectance in near infrared band and
R represents the red band. Healthy vegetation reflects more infrared and
absorbs more red and blue portions of the electromagnetic spectrum.
The blue portion is affected by atmospheric scattering, hence the use of
red and near infrared bands to calculate NDVI and other vegetation
L. Nhamo et al.
indices. In arid areas and dry seasons there is less absorption of the
visible light and low reflection of the infrared light, thereby a low NDVI
value and the opposite applies in humid areas and wet seasons. NDVI
values range from 1 to þ1 where 0 to1 represents high plant produc­
tivity, and any value below zero represents and unhealthy or no vege­
tation cover, presence of clouds, water or glaciers. Unlike previous
Landsat satellite series, in the Landsat 8 OLI, band 5 is the NIR, and band
4 is the red section of the electromagnetic spectrum. These are the two
bands that were used to compute NDVI.
An NDVI threshold of 0.14 was used to separate irrigated from
rainfed areas during the dry season, which falls during the winter season
in the study area as in Bhandari et al. (2012). Pixels with NDVI values
above the 0.14 threshold were classified as irrigated areas and those
below were classified as non-irrigated. This classification assumed that
crops in the study area could only have healthy conditions during the
dry winter season when under irrigation. Additional post classification
techniques were applied in ArcGIS 10 to separate irrigated and rainfed
areas through the Reclassify tool.
The irrigated area mapping procedure, thus, included data collec­
tion, processing and map generation as shown on Fig. 4. The identifi­
cation of agricultural fields was achieved through NDVI analysis. The
area equipped with centre pivots highlighted in the flowchart (Fig. 4)
refers to all areas equipped with pivots whether irrigated or not. Centre
pivots are highly mechanized irrigated areas and are easily identified by
their circular shape.
2.5. Field data collection
Two sets of field surveys were conducted for field verification, ac­
curacy improvement and post-classification correction on both agricul­
tural and irrigated areas, respectively. The first set of field surveys was
manually done in the field using Handheld Android GPS compatible
with Open Data Kit (ODK) Collect. The survey was carried out in the
months of September and October of 2014, 2015 and 2016 (Fig. 4).
Sample fields of both irrigated and rainfed areas were randomly sur­
veyed, as the purpose was mainly to assess the mapping accuracy and
gain understanding of the ground reality during pre-processing. The
second fieldwork, which was done in October of 2017, used an un­
manned aerial vehicle (UAV), also called drone, to assess the accuracy
and to refine irrigated fields that were derived from the remotely sensed
agriculture fields. Thus, the second fieldwork was mainly for post-
classification correction (PCC) of irrigated areas. During the first field­
work, 185 pre-classification ground-truth points were collected, and
then 74 points were collected during the second field survey. The 185
points produced an accuracy of 96% on the agricultural areas map, but
the accuracy reduced to 71% on the extracted irrigated areas map. The
reduction in the accuracy of irrigated areas was due to some abandoned
fields that were invaded by invasive alien species or abandoned fruit
fields being detected as irrigated fields because of their lush green and
healthy canopies. After the PCC using the UAV on irrigated areas, ac­
curacy improved from 71% to 95%. Thus, the PCC procedure identified
the misclassified irrigated plots, rectified them and improved the map­
ping accuracy. The field surveys targeted smallholder agricultural plots,
which are generally difficult to map because of their small size.
2.6. Estimating crop evapotranspiration
Total crop ET was calculated from the daily actual evapotranspira­
tion (ET) derived from the Water Productivity through Open access of
Remotely sensed Actual Evapotranspiration and Interception (WaPOR
AETI) dataset, which has a 250 m spatial resolution (FAO and IHE-Delft,
2019). The downloaded data was multiplied by 0.1 as recommended by
the WaPOR guide. The total monthly actual ET for the months of May to
September of 2015 from the WaPOR AETI dataset were used to calculate
the total winter groundwater use for irrigation using ArcGIS Pro’s zonal
statistics tool. An ET map for the five months from May to September
5
Physics and Chemistry of the Earth xxx (xxxx) xxx
(153 days) was developed to be able to extract actual ET for the irrigated
areas. The winter irrigated area map was overlaid with the total ET map
to calculate ET for only irrigated land parcels using the zonal statistics
tool. The zonal statistics tool returns the total ET of the irrigated area
from each corresponding ET pixel value. The method excludes forested
and other landuse types that are not croplands. ET from irrigated areas
represents consumptive groundwater use in irrigated croplands and is
referred to as irrigated crop ET or consumptive irrigated water use. The
same procedure was also followed to calculate crop water use during the
summer period, when agriculture is generally dependant on rainfall to
compare crop water use per hectare in each system.
The WaPOR product was preferred in place of other ET products such
as GLEAM, WECANN, MTE and GLDAS, which have low resolution to
pick up detailed spatial variations, such as smallholder irrigated areas
(FAO and IHE-Delft, 2019). Previous studies have shown that the
Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) (MOD 16)
and the SEBS products underestimate ET over arid and semi-arid regions
of southern Africa, besides also having the same 250 m resolution (Hu
et al., 2015; Kim et al., 2012; Majozi et al., 2017; Ramoelo et al., 2014).
The WaPOR ET product was consistent with the water balance of 28
river basins, confirming it as the most realistic signatures (FAO and
IHE-Delft, 2019). Other techniques used to assess the accuracy of the
WaPOR ET product and whose results where within acceptable ranges
include the eddy covariance flux towers, and soil water balances at field
scale (FAO and IHE-Delft, 2019).
2.7. Estimating total groundwater use for irrigation
The total irrigation water requirements represent the amount of
water necessary for particular crops consumptive use and losses. Since,
all irrigated agriculture in the study area is supplied by groundwater no
surface-water delivery was assumed. In addition, the period selected for
the present analysis is the dry season, with an assumed zero effective
rainfall. Therefore, the net groundwater volume pumped for irrigation
was calculated by multiplying the total irrigation water requirements
derived using the crop evapotranspiration from irrigated land charac­
terised using NDVI. Since the main interest for this study was the actual
groundwater use rather than the gross groundwater abstraction, the
estimated volume of consumptive groundwater use was not divided by
irrigation efficiency.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Irrigated area
The 2015 winter irrigated areas (Fig. 5) were derived from NDVI
analysis on Landsat 8 images for the months of June to September, when
vegetation is expected to be dry. However, when NDVI values are high
during the dry season it is an indication of vegetation richness (green­
ness), thereby signifying irrigation presence. This is particularly true in
Venda-Gazankulu as during the dry season the indigenous deciduous
vegetation sheds leaves. As shown in Fig. 5, irrigation is spread
throughout the study area and not necessarily along surface water­
bodies. The distribution of irrigated areas supports groundwater use in
the area, as they are not only concentrated along rivers. The total winter
irrigated area in 2015 was 82 435 ha, yet the total cropland area was
320 282 ha, indicating that only 26% of cropped area was irrigated
during the winter season of 2015 and the rest was rainfed. This is
characteristic of smallholder farming areas, as most of the agriculture is
rainfed (Table 1). Fig. 5 shows the irrigated areas of Venda-Gazankulu
and the location of field survey points.
3.2. Crop evapotranspiration
The developed total ET dataset (mm) was used to derive the actual ET
for both irrigated and rainfed areas for the months of May to September
L. Nhamo et al. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 5. Winter irrigated areas in Venda-Gazankulu former homelands in 2015.

m3/ha of water use in irrigated areas during the winter season (Table 1).
Table 1
However, net groundwater use for irrigation is relatively smaller as
Crop water use in Venda-Gazankulu during the 2014/15 cropping season.
compared to water use in rainfed areas during the rainy season, which is
Agriculture Months Area Av. crop Av. crop ET Consumptive 4150.95 million m3/ha. The consumptive groundwater use for irrigation
type (ha) ET (mm) (million water use (m3/
represents the water requirements for irrigated crops or net ground­
m3) ha)
water used by crops during the dry season, and not groundwater that
Irrigated May to 82 298.27 245.88 2982.66
was abstracted for irrigation. The total groundwater abstracted is likely
Sept 435
Rainfed Nov to 237 415.10 987.29 4150.95
to be higher than the value presented above, depending on the
March 847 conveyance and field application efficiencies of the irrigation systems
Total May to 320 713.36 1233.17 7133.62 and infrastructure used. Water supplied to agricultural fields is not all
March 282 used by crops as there is always a fraction that percolates back into the
ground or flows downstream.
and November to March respectively (Fig. 6). The actual ET was Total crop water use in Venda-Gazankulu in the 2014/15 agricul­
calculated for cropped areas only, and the process excluded other tural season was 1233.17 million m3 (Table 1). There was higher crop
landuses. Maximum average ET during the dry season (May to water use during the rainy season (987.29 million m3) than during the
September, 153 days), when crops are under irrigation, was 821 mm and dry season (245.88 million m3), which was mainly groundwater irri­
the minimum was 46.1 mm. The low ET rates are because of the low gation. During the rainy season, an average of 4150.95 m3/ha of water
temperatures prevailing during the dry season and that vegetation was used as compared to 2982.66 m3/ha during the dry season
would have shed leaves, factors that limit ET. However, during the wet (Table 1). Low water use per hectare in irrigated areas is because of
season (November to March, 153 days) ET rates doubled with the better water management than in rainfed areas. This is particularly
maximum average ET of 934.3 mm and the minimum of 123.6 mm. The characteristic in smallholder farming areas as they lack resources to
high ET values during the wet season are because of high temperatures apply advanced agronomic practices to limit water loses. Previous
and high availability of water during the wet season and healthier studies have also shown that crop water productivity is low in rainfed
vegetation with green leaves, factors that favour increased ET. areas as compared to irrigated areas (Molden et al., 2007; Nhamo et al.,
2018b). Evapotranspiration rates are higher during the summer and wet
season as temperatures are higher and crops and other vegetation are
3.3. Total groundwater use for irrigation
greener allowing them to transpire more. This is the reverse during the
dry/winter season as temperatures are generally low and the indigenous
Results of the analysis showed that the consumptive groundwater use
deciduous trees shed their leaves, thus contributing to the low
during the dry season of 2015 was 245.88 million cubic meters on an
evapotranspiration.
irrigated area of 82 435 ha (Table 1). This represents a rate of 2982.66

6
L. Nhamo et al.
Fig. 6. Total actual ET over Venda-Gazankulu during the 2014/15 agricultural season. Fig. 6a represent the actual ET during the dry season (May to September) and
Fig. 6b represents the actual ET during the rainy season (November to March).
Of the total cultivated area of 320 282 ha in Venda-Gazankulu, 74%
was under rainfed agriculture in the 2014/15 agriculture season, pro­
ducing crops only once a year. If groundwater is quantified, well
managed and found to be enough to meet crop requirements for an
expanded irrigated area, crop yield would actually increase and meet the
much needed food requirements for a growing population. Well-
managed groundwater resources in irrigated areas would result in
water savings that would give room to expand the irrigated area, or can
be used to support other ecosystems that provide goods and services for
communities. Agriculture water management is important in that agri­
culture already accounts for about 60% of the freshwater usage in South
Africa (Bronkhorst et al., 2017; Von Bormann and Gulati, 2014). An
in-depth groundwater assessment is needed to provide an evidence
based expansion of irrigated areas using groundwater. Although
increasing the area under irrigation has potential to increase yields and
ensure food security, its expansion should be done in the framework of
the water-energy-food (WEF) nexus to ensure sustainability and proper
managements of trade-offs (Nhamo et al., 2018a). Hydrogeological
mapping and groundwater assessment require immediate investment
dedicated towards research. Currently, groundwater withdrawal is
mostly not metered, and many municipalities charge fixed amount
where there is evidence of groundwater use. Thus, one of the challenges
in achieving the SDG 6 on providing clean water and sanitation by 2030
is lack of knowledge on aquifer storage, a scenario limiting groundwater
management. Sustainable groundwater use is a priority in South Africa
as it can help meet the National Development Plan’s (NDP) vision of
affording all South Africans with sufficient safe water, enough nutritious
food and dignified lives by 2030.
4. Conclusions
The Venda-Gazankulu former homeland area had a combined crop­
ped area of 320 282 ha in 2015, of which only 82 435 ha, representing
only 26% of the cropped area, was irrigated. Only 26% of cultivated land
was productive throughout the year and the rest was cultivated only
during the rainfall season under rainfed agriculture. During the dry
season, 2982.66 m3/ha of net groundwater was used for irrigation,
compared to 4150.95 m3/ha in the rainfed area because of better water
7
Physics and Chemistry of the Earth xxx (xxxx) xxx
management in irrigated areas. Irrigation improves agricultural water
management and crop water productivity and increases crop yield. The
remote sensing based method used in this study uses globally available
datasets and is easy to use. The results from the present study can be
used as a guide to support groundwater management in terms of plan­
ning and groundwater licensing. Although the WaPOR dataset is reli­
able, it still remains too coarse at 250 m spatial resolution for
smallholder croplands of about 2 ha. There is still need to develop even
higher resolution ET products that can be used at local level, particularly
from images derived from unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Also,
further studies are needed to assess groundwater quantity and quality
and provide evidence for irrigation expansion other than the current
arbitrary abstraction. There is need for a comprehensive groundwater
dataset summarising availability, irrigation status, and development and
track trends, which is currently unavailable. Information on ground­
water is significant, particularly in areas inhabited by large groups of
formerly disadvantaged populations who rely on agriculture for their
livelihoods. Such an inventory would be essential in informing policy
where targets have been set out for agriculture and irrigation
development.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgements
This work is as a result of collaboration between the Department of
Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) of South Africa and the In­
ternational Water Management Institute (IWMI) in mapping irrigated
areas in Limpopo Province. The Tshwane University of Technology
(TUT), University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN), the Water Research Com­
mission (WRC) and the University of South Africa (UNISA) provided
material and technical support.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
L. Nhamo et al.
org/10.1016/j.pce.2019.102810.
Funding
This research was funded by the Department of Agriculture, Forestry
and Fisheries (DAFF) of South Africa. The uMngeni Resilience Project
(URP), which is funded by the Adaptation Fund and the Sustainable and
Healthy Food Systems (SHEFS) programme, which is funded by the
Wellcome Trust’s Our Planet, Our Health Programme [grant number:
205200/Z/16/Z] for supporting TM.
References
Anbazhagan, S., Jothibasu, A., 2016. Geoinformatics in groundwater potential mapping
and sustainable development: a case study from southern India. Hydrol. Sci. J. 61,
1109–1123.
Anderson, R., Lo, M., Swenson, S., Famiglietti, J., Tang, Q., Skaggs, T., Lin, Y., Wu, R.,
2015. Using satellite-based estimates of evapotranspiration and groundwater
changes to determine anthropogenic water fluxes in land surface models. Geosci.
Model Dev. (GMD) 8, 3021.
Bain, L.E., Awah, P.K., Geraldine, N., Kindong, N.P., Siga, Y., Bernard, N., Tanjeko, A.T.,
2013. Malnutrition in Sub–Saharan Africa: burden, causes and prospects. Pan Afr.
Med. J. 15.
Bhandari, A., Kumar, A., Singh, G., 2012. Feature extraction using normalized difference
vegetation index (NDVI): a case study of Jabalpur city. Procedia Technol. 6,
612–621.
Bigas, H., 2012. The Global Water Crisis: Addressing an Urgent Security Issue. United
Nations University-Institute for Water, Environment and Health (UNU-INWEH).
Papers for the InterAction Council, 2011-2012. Hamilton, Canada: UNU-INWEH.
Braune, E., Xu, Y., 2008. Groundwater management issues in Southern Africa: an IWRM
perspective. Water S.A. 34, 699–706.
Bronkhorst, S., Pengelly, C., Seyler, H., 2017. Water 2017 Market Intelligence Report.
GreenCape, Cape Town, South Africa, p. 52.
Brown, J., Cairncross, S., Ensink, J.H., 2013. Water, sanitation, hygiene and enteric
infections in children. Arch. Dis. Child. 98 (8), 629–634. https://doi.org/10.1136/
archdischild-2011-301528. Archdischild-2011-301528.
172 Cai, X., Magidi, J., Nhamo, L., van Koppen, B., 2017. Mapping irrigated areas in the
Limpopo province, South Africa. In: I.W, P. (Ed.), IWMI Working Paper 172.
International Water Management Institute (IWMI), IWMI Working Paper 172,
Colombo, Sri Lanka, p. 37.
Connor, R., 2015. The United Nations World Water Development Report 2015: Water for
a Sustainable World. UNESCO Publishing, Paris, France.
DAFF, 2016. Abstract of Agricultural Statistics 2016. Department of Agriculture, Forestry
and Fisheries (DAFF), Directorate Statistics and Economic Analysis, Pretoria, South
Africa.
Dallas, H.F., Rivers-Moore, N., 2014. Ecological consequences of global climate change
for freshwater ecosystems in South Africa. South Afr. J. Sci. 110, 01–11.
Donnenfeld, Z., Crookes, C., Hedden, S., 2018. A Delicate Balance: Water Scarcity in
South Africa, ISS Southern Africa Report. Institute for Security Studies (ISS),
pp. 1–24.
Dube, T., Mutanga, O., 2015. Evaluating the utility of the medium-spatial resolution
Landsat 8 multispectral sensor in quantifying aboveground biomass in uMgeni
Catchment, South Africa. ISPRS J. Photogrammetry Remote Sens. 101, 36–46.
Elbeih, S.F., 2015. An overview of integrated remote sensing and GIS for groundwater
mapping in Egypt. Ain Shams Eng. J. 6, 1–15.
FAO, IHE-Delft, 2019. WaPOR Quality Assessment. Technical Report on the Data Quality
of the WaPOR FAO Database Version 1.0. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the
United Nations (FAO), and IHE Delft Institute for Water Education (IHE DELFT),
Rome, Italy, p. 134.
Gowda, P.H., Chavez, J.L., Colaizzi, P.D., Evett, S.R., Howell, T.A., Tolk, J.A., 2008. ET
mapping for agricultural water management: present status and challenges. Irrig.
Sci. 26, 223–237.
Graeub, B.E., Chappell, M.J., Wittman, H., Ledermann, S., Kerr, R.B., Gemmill-
Herren, B., 2016. The state of family farms in the world. World Dev. 87, 1–15.
Graham, S., Parkinson, C., Chahine, M., 2010. The Water Cycle. NASA Earth
Observatory, Florida, USA, p. 12.
Hu, G., Jia, L., Menenti, M., 2015. Comparison of MOD16 and LSA-SAF MSG
evapotranspiration products over Europe for 2011. Remote Sens. Environ. 156,
510–526.
Jha, M.K., Chowdhury, A., Chowdary, V., Peiffer, S., 2007. Groundwater management
and development by integrated remote sensing and geographic information systems:
prospects and constraints. Water Resour. Manag. 21, 427–467.
Khatri-Chhetri, A., Aryal, J.P., Sapkota, T.B., Khurana, R., 2016. Economic Benefits of
Climate-Smart Agricultural Practices to Smallholder Farmers in the Indo-Gangetic
Plains of India.
Kim, H.W., Hwang, K., Mu, Q., Lee, S.O., Choi, M., 2012. Validation of MODIS 16 global
terrestrial evapotranspiration products in various climates and land cover types in
Asia. KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 16, 229–238.
Knüppe, K., 2011. The challenges facing sustainable and adaptive groundwater
management in South Africa. Water S.A. 37, 67–79.
8
Physics and Chemistry of the Earth xxx (xxxx) xxx
Liu, K., Su, H., Tian, J., Li, X., Wang, W., Yang, L., Liang, H., 2018. Assessing a scheme of
spatial-temporal thermal remote-sensing sharpening for estimating regional
evapotranspiration. Int. J. Remote Sens. 39 (10), 3111–3137.
Liu, K., Wang, S., Li, X., Wu, T., 2019. Spatially disaggregating satellite land surface
temperature with A non-linear model across agricultural areas. J. Geophys. Res.:
Biogeosciences. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JG005227.
Majozi, N., Mannaerts, C., Ramoelo, A., Mathieu, R., Mudau, A., Verhoef, W., 2017. An
intercomparison of satellite-based daily evapotranspiration estimates under different
eco-climatic regions in South Africa. Remote Sens. 9 (4), 307.
Mallast, U., Schwonke, F., Gloaguen, R., Geyer, S., Sauter, M., Siebert, C., 2013. Airborne
thermal data identifies groundwater discharge at the north-western coast of the Dead
Sea. Remote Sens. 5, 6361–6381.
Mateo-Sagasta, J., Burke, J., 2012. Agriculture and Water Quality Interactions: a Global
Overview. SOLAW Background Thematic Report—TR08. FAO, Italy.
Molden, D., Oweis, T., Steduto, P., Bindraban, P., Hanjra, M.A., Kijne, J., 2010.
Improving agricultural water productivity: between optimism and caution. Agric.
Water Manag. 97, 528–535.
Molden, D., Oweis, T.Y., Pasquale, S., Kijne, J.W., Hanjra, M.A., Bindraban, P.,
Bouman, B.A., Cook, S., Erenstein, O., Farahani, H., 2007. Pathways for increasing
agricultural water productivity. In: Molden, D. (Ed.), Water for Food, Water for Life:
A Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture. Earthscan/
IWMI, London, UK/Colombo, Sri Lanka., pp. 279–310
Mostert, T.H., Bredenkamp, G.J., Klopper, H.L., Verwey, C., Mostert, R.E., Hahn, N.,
2008. Major vegetation types of the Soutpansberg conservancy and the Blouberg
nature reserve, South Africa. Koedoe 50, 32–48.
NASA, 2015. Landsat 8 OLI (operational land imager) and TIRS (thermal infrared
sensot), 2015. In: USGS Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center
(Sioux Falls, South Dakota).
Nhamo, L., Mabhaudhi, T., Magombeyi, M., 2016. Improving water sustainability and
food security through increased crop water productivity in Malawi. Water 8, 411.
Nhamo, L., Mabhaudhi, T., Modi, A., 2019. Preparedness or repeated short-term relief
aid? Building drought resilience through early warning in southern Africa. Water S.
A. 45, 20.
Nhamo, L., Ndlela, B., Nhemachena, C., Mabhaudhi, T., Mpandeli, S., Matchaya, G.,
2018. The water-energy-food nexus: climate risks and opportunities in southern
Africa. Water 10, 18.
Nhamo, L., van Dijk, R., Magidi, J., Wiberg, D., Tshikolomo, K., 2018. Improving the
accuracy of remotely sensed irrigated areas using post-classification enhancement
through UAV capability. Remote Sens. 10, 712.
Ozdogan, M., Yang, Y., Allez, G., Cervantes, C., 2010. Remote sensing of irrigated
agriculture: opportunities and challenges. Remote Sens. 2, 2274–2304.
Panda, S.S., Ames, D.P., Panigrahi, S., 2010. Application of vegetation indices for
agricultural crop yield prediction using neural network techniques. Remote Sens. 2,
673–696.
Pietersen, K., Beekman, H.E., Holland, M., 2011. South African Groundwater Governance
Case Study. Report Prepared for the World Bank in Partnership with the South
African Department of Water Affairs and the WRC. WRC Report No. KV 273/11
(Pretoria, South Africa).
Pimentel, D., Berger, B., Filiberto, D., Newton, M., Wolfe, B., Karabinakis, E., Clark, S.,
Poon, E., Abbett, E., Nandagopal, S., 2004. Water resources: agricultural and
environmental issues. Bioscience 54, 909–918.
Qin, Z., Karnieli, A., Berliner, P., 2001. A mono-window algorithm for retrieving land
surface temperature from Landsat TM data and its application to the Israel-Egypt
border region. Int. J. Remote Sens. 22, 3719–3746.
Ramoelo, A., Majozi, N., Mathieu, R., Jovanovic, N., Nickless, A., Dzikiti, S., 2014.
Validation of global evapotranspiration product (MOD16) using flux tower data in
the African savanna, South Africa. Remote Sens. 6, 7406–7423.
Saadi, S., Boulet, G., Bahir, M., Brut, A., Delogu, E.,� Fanise, P., Mougenot, B.,
Simonneaux, V., Chaba^ ane, Z.L., 2018. Assessment of actual evapotranspiration over
a semiarid heterogeneous land surface by means of coupled low-resolution remote
sensing data with an energy balance model: comparison to extra-large aperture
scintillometer measurements. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 22, 2187.
SADC, 2016. SADC Regional Humanitarian Appeal, June 2016. Southern Africa
Development Community (SADC) (Gaborone, Botswana).
Satterthwaite, D., McGranahan, G., Tacoli, C., 2010. Urbanization and its implications
for food and farming. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Biol. Sci. 365, 2809–2820.
Sharma, B., Molden, D., Cook, S., 2015. Water use efficiency in agriculture:
measurement, current situation and trends. In: Drechsel, P., Heffer, P., Magen, H.,
Mikkelsen, R., Wichelns, D. (Eds.), Managing Water and Fertilizer for Sustainable
Agricultural Intensification. International Water Management Institute (IWMI),
Colombo, Sri Lanka, p. 39.
Siebert, S., Burke, J., Faures, J.-M., Frenken, K., Hoogeveen, J., D€ oll, P., Portmann, F.T.,
2010. Groundwater use for irrigation–a global inventory. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 14,
1863–1880.
Tucker, C.J., 1979. Red and photographic infrared linear combinations for monitoring
vegetation. Remote Sens. Environ. 8, 127–150.
Van Der Gun, J., Minelli, L., 2012. Groundwater and Global Change: Trends,
Opportunities and Challenges, United Nations World Water Assessment Programme
SIDE. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO),
Paris, France, p. 44.
Verstraeten, W., Veroustraete, F., Feyen, J., 2008. Assessment of evapotranspiration and
soil moisture content across different scales of observation. Sensors 8, 70–117.
Vincent, K., Cull, T., Archer, E.R., 2010. Gendered vulnerability to climate change in
Limpopo province, South Africa. In: Dankelman, I. (Ed.), Gender and Climate
Change: an Introduction. Earthscan, London, pp. 160–167.
L. Nhamo et al.
Von Bormann, T., Gulati, M., 2014. The Food Energy Water Nexus: Understanding South
Africa’s Most Urgent Sustainability Challenge. WWF-SA. World Wide Fund for
Nature (WWF), South Africa, p. 40. Cape Town, South Africa.
WHO, 2001. Water for Health: Taking Charge. World Health Organization (WHO),
Geneva, Switzerland, p. 40.
Physics and Chemistry of the Earth xxx (xxxx) xxx
Yang, X., Smith, P.L., Yu, T., Gao, H., 2011. Estimating evapotranspiration from
terrestrial groundwater-dependent ecosystems using Landsat images. Int. J. Digit.
Earth 4, 154–170.
Zaveri, E., Grogan, D.S., Fisher-Vanden, K., Frolking, S., Lammers, R.B., Wrenn, D.H.,
Prusevich, A., Nicholas, R.E., 2016. Invisible water, visible impact: groundwater use
and Indian agriculture under climate change. Environ. Res. Lett. 11, 084005.