Three Thousand Hectares in the South Rupununi
A village of 480 people in the South Rupununi, Region 9, holds title to 12,000 hectares of savannah. Forty families raise cattle; in the dry season the animals graze the low ground near the creek, which already stops flowing for about six weeks each year. A company offers a 25-year lease on 3,000 hectares for a soya farm. It promises 60 jobs, a 12 km access road to the Lethem road, and an annual rent. The soya would need irrigation in the dry season and would be grown on the same low ground the cattle use. A second offer is a grant for a 12-room eco-lodge with airstrip access, expected to employ 15 people year-round, and dependent on the savannah and the creek staying as they are. The village council must recommend one option at a general meeting, and the decision needs a majority of the 210 adults.
1. Explain why the company considers this land suitable for soya, using the physical and locational geography of the Rupununi.
Read the worked answer
The offer is not random; it follows the physical and locational facts.
Physical:
- The Rupununi savannah is flat and treeless over large areas, so machinery can work it and a 3,000 ha block can be laid out without clearing forest.
- Soils are deep enough for field crops, and the seasonal rains supply most of the water requirement.
- The low ground near the creek holds moisture longest, which is exactly where soya would do best in a dry year.
Locational:
- The site is near the Lethem road, so the 12 km access road connects the farm to a route that reaches Georgetown and, across the Takutu bridge, Brazil.
- Land is cheap and the population is sparse, so there are few settlements to negotiate with.
But the same facts cut the other way: the creek already fails for six weeks, and the flat low ground is the cattle's dry-season reserve. The advantages and the risks sit on the same hectares.
2. Recommend an option, or a modified one, using at least three clear criteria. Show the trade-offs you are accepting.
Read the worked answer
Criteria: (1) income per household and how many households benefit; (2) effect on dry-season water and grazing; (3) how long the commitment lasts and whether it can be undone; (4) risk if the buyer or the tourists do not come.
Soya: more cash - rent, 60 jobs, a road - but only 60 jobs among 210 adults, mostly seasonal; 25 years is irreversible in practice; and it takes the water and grazing the herd depends on. If the crop fails in a dry year, the village has lost the grazing and gained little.
Lodge: fewer jobs (15), but year-round and lasting; the land and creek stay intact; risk is that tourist numbers fall or the airstrip is not maintained.
Recommendation: do not lease the 3,000 ha of low ground. Either take the lodge and keep the cattle, or negotiate a much smaller lease (say 300–500 ha) on upland only, with a metered water limit and a bond. Accept lower cash in exchange for keeping the herd and the creek.
3. Identify the single piece of missing evidence that would most change your recommendation, and explain why it matters more than the rest.
Read the worked answer
A dry-season measurement of the creek's flow, set against the volume the soya farm would extract.
Why this one above all others: water is the binding constraint. The creek already stops flowing for six weeks, and both the cattle and the irrigation depend on it. If the measured flow cannot cover both, the soya option is not merely risky, it is physically impossible without drying out the village herd - and no amount of rent or jobs changes that.
Almost every other unknown can be managed. Job numbers can be written into a contract; the road can be required; the rent can be renegotiated. Water cannot be manufactured.
A close second would be the lease terms - whether jobs are guaranteed for villagers and whether land reverts - but those are negotiable, while a drying creek is not.