Avocado production did not create Chile’s long drought by itself. In the Petorca basin and other dry parts of central Chile, water scarcity reflects a combination of prolonged low rainfall, warming, water allocation rules, intensive irrigation and weak enforcement. Large avocado orchards can intensify that scarcity because they add substantial demand in a water-limited landscape.
That distinction matters. Calling avocados the sole cause is too simple; ignoring the crop’s local water demand is equally misleading. The useful question is how climate, governance and agricultural expansion interact.
Why Petorca became the focus
Petorca Province, in Chile’s Valparaíso Region, has a semi-arid Mediterranean climate and a long history of irrigated agriculture. Export-oriented avocado orchards expanded on hillsides while the region experienced an extended megadrought. Communities reported dry wells, reduced river flow and dependence on trucked drinking water, turning the basin into a prominent case of water injustice.
A peer-reviewed study of the basin describes the crisis as the combined result of drought and water management, rather than a single crop acting alone. The Petorca basin study in the journal Water examines rainfall, surface water, groundwater and allocation arrangements together.
How avocado orchards increase pressure
Avocado trees need reliable irrigation in Chile’s dry growing areas. When orchards expand, total demand can exceed what rivers and aquifers can sustainably supply, especially during consecutive dry years. Deep wells and hillside irrigation may allow production to continue after shallower community sources decline.
The crop’s impact is therefore highly local. An avocado grown in a humid, well-managed basin does not carry the same water-scarcity risk as one grown in a stressed catchment. A global litres-per-kilogram figure can hide that difference because it mixes green water from rainfall with blue water withdrawn from rivers and aquifers.
Climate change and the megadrought
Central Chile has experienced an unusually persistent drought, and rising temperatures increase evaporative demand. Climate change does not explain every allocation decision or illegal diversion, but it tightens the water budget and makes over-allocation more damaging. Less reliable snowpack and rainfall also reduce the margin available to households, ecosystems and farms.
It is inaccurate to say orchards caused the meteorological drought: farming does not determine whether rain falls. Agriculture can, however, deepen hydrological and social drought by increasing withdrawals from already diminished rivers and groundwater.
Chile’s water-rights system
Chile historically separated water-use rights from land and allowed rights to be traded. In an under-monitored basin, legal rights on paper may exceed reliable supply, while users with capital can drill deeper wells or secure more access. Allegations of unauthorised wells and diversions have added an enforcement problem to the allocation problem.
Legal reforms can change priorities and enforcement, but the physical basin still has limits. Effective management requires accurate withdrawal data, ecological flow protection, drinking-water security and rules that respond when drought reduces supply.
Social and environmental consequences
- Household insecurity: rural residents may depend on delivered water when wells and local systems fail.
- Unequal access: large users can be more resilient than small farmers and communities during shortage.
- Ecosystem stress: reduced streamflow and groundwater can affect riparian habitat and native vegetation.
- Livelihood change: small-scale agriculture and livestock can become harder to sustain.
- Conflict and distrust: opaque rights and weak measurement make it difficult to establish who is using how much.
A 2025 analysis in Global Sustainability places the Chilean avocado trade in a wider social–ecological system, connecting overseas demand with local water pressure and governance.
Does buying fewer avocados solve the problem?
Consumer demand matters, but a blanket boycott is a blunt tool. It can reduce income for farms that manage water responsibly while providing little information about the worst basins. Stronger procurement asks where the fruit was grown, whether the catchment is water-stressed, how withdrawals are measured, and whether workers and nearby communities have secure access to water.
Retailers and importers can require basin-level water-risk assessment, legal and metered withdrawals, credible farm audits and transparent grievance processes. Certification can help only if it tests outcomes and local context rather than treating efficient drip irrigation as proof that total water use is sustainable.
What consumers can do
- Buy avocados in moderation and avoid letting ripe fruit become food waste.
- Look for country and region of origin rather than assuming all avocados have the same footprint.
- Ask retailers for catchment-level water sourcing and audit information.
- Vary meals with seasonal foods that fit the local climate.
- Support policies and supply chains that put drinking water and ecological limits before unchecked expansion.
For the wider footprint—including land use, farm inputs, refrigeration and transport—see our evidence-based guide to the environmental impact of avocados.
Bottom line
Chile’s water crisis cannot be reduced to “avocados caused a drought.” The drought is climatic; the severity of water scarcity is also shaped by agricultural demand, allocation and enforcement. In Petorca, intensive avocado production has been an important pressure within that larger system. Better basin governance and transparent sourcing are more useful than a simple slogan.
Great article. I do not buy avocados anymore after I understood how big of a problem they are for the environment. Speaking about the article and the environment, I would argue that you loose two Points about avocado Production:
1) deforestation.
2) The fact that avocado farmers become sick from the pesticides used in the farming.
This is something I found online through a newspaper called the Independent:
“According to The Independent, avocado cultivation leads to deforestation and health problems for those who grow the fruit. According to the website, Michoacan in Mexico is undergoing massive deforestation due to the need for space to grow avocados.
In addition, experts are concerned that the use of pesticides in avocado plantations is the cause of diseases in the population of the areas around the plantations. The Independent tells of, among other things, the teacher Salvador Sales, who for 15 years has seen that his students have had more and more breathing and stomach problems.”
But why are people turning their head against this? I mean: why arent people going mental over the fact that some people are killing each other for avocados? and then shipping the avocados to other countries for profit?
From what I can see, this is a super bad thing that just goes into the account of how corrupt South America is…sorry to say it, but its true. Killing other people over a fruit? way to go ,guys
Would you say that Chile is famous for corruption?
I am not sure about that. I know it has been a big problem in the past, and I really understand how it looks like for foreigners, but things have gone better. Now, I know that avocado is a fruit (many people mistake it for a vegetable) that has a high carbon footprint attached to it. We cant do anything about that.
On the flipside, I really like that you highlight various environmental issues that is going on around the world. After all, we need to be more careful about the food that we eat. So much can be traced back to pollution now, and I think red meat is possibly the worst?
just wanted to hear your thoughts, thanks
Hello Juan, thanks a lot for your comment. It actually made me investigate the corruption level in Chile. The Corruptions Perceptions Index gave Chile a score of 67/100. 0 is very corrupt and 100 means that a country has no corruption at all.
Compared to a lot of the neighboring countries, I will have to agree with you. Chile is not a very corrupt country if you compare that to other South American neighbors.
Yes, red meat is the worst thing we can eat – with beef as the top 1. However, I wanted to write and publish this article because very few people are aware of the high carbon footprint of eating avocados. I also find it interesting that the avocado production does not only create global problems in terms of pollution, but also local problems within Chile.
I actually had no idea that this was happening. But in my country (Denmark), some shops have stopped selling avocados because of its environmental impact. We had one woman who started to write a lot of newspaper articles about how avocado farms are destroying the planet, and BOOM -. Suddenly the grocery stores felt that they were required to stop producing them. Madness
Hi Luisa, thanks for your comment!
Your story proves a point that I have tried to make all the time since I started this website. If private-owned, profit-seeking companies are going to change their environmental policies, it has to be driven by media attention and a change in customer behavior. As long as most people believe that avocado tastes good and are able to look away from the harm it does in this world, we wont find a sustainable solution.
🙂