Financial Feasibility of Water Conservation in Agriculture

dc.bibliographicCitation.firstPagee2020EF001726eng
dc.bibliographicCitation.issue3eng
dc.bibliographicCitation.journalTitleEarth's futureeng
dc.bibliographicCitation.volume9eng
dc.contributor.authorSiderius, Christian
dc.contributor.authorBiemans, Hester
dc.contributor.authorConway, Declan
dc.contributor.authorImmerzeel, Walter
dc.contributor.authorJaegermeyr, Jonas
dc.contributor.authorAhmad, Bashir
dc.contributor.authorHellegers, Petra
dc.date.accessioned2022-01-20T06:06:44Z
dc.date.available2022-01-20T06:06:44Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.description.abstractGlobal water use for food production needs to be reduced to remain within planetary boundaries, yet the financial feasibility of crucial measures to reduce water use is poorly quantified. Here, we introduce a novel method to compare the costs of water conservation measures with the added value that reallocation of water savings might generate if used for expansion of irrigation. Based on detailed water accounting through the use of a high-resolution hydrology-crop model, we modify the traditional cost curve approach with an improved estimation of demand and increasing marginal cost per water conservation measure combination, adding a correction to control for impacts on downstream water availability. We apply the method to three major river basins in the Indo-Gangetic plain (Indus, Ganges and Brahmaputra), a major global food producing region but increasingly water stressed. Our analysis shows that at basin level only about 10% (Brahmaputra) to just over 20% (Indus and Ganges) of potential water savings would be realized; the equilibrium price for water is too low to make the majority of water conservation measures cost effective. The associated expansion of irrigated area is moderate, about 7% in the Indus basin, 5% in the Ganges and negligible in the Brahmaputra, but farmers' gross profit increases more substantially, by 11%. Increasing the volumetric cost of irrigation water influences supply and demand in a similar way and has little influence on water reallocation. Controlling for the impact on return flows is important and more than halves the amount of water available for reallocation.eng
dc.description.versionpublishedVersioneng
dc.identifier.urihttps://oa.tib.eu/renate/handle/123456789/7856
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.34657/6897
dc.language.isoengeng
dc.publisherHoboken, NJ : Wiley-Blackwelleng
dc.relation.doihttps://doi.org/10.1029/2020EF001726
dc.relation.essn2328-4277
dc.rights.licenseCC BY 4.0 Unportedeng
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/eng
dc.subject.ddc550eng
dc.subject.otherbenefit cost analysiseng
dc.subject.othercost curveeng
dc.subject.otherfinancial feasibilityeng
dc.subject.otherreallocationeng
dc.subject.othervalue of watereng
dc.subject.otherwater conservationeng
dc.titleFinancial Feasibility of Water Conservation in Agricultureeng
dc.typeArticleeng
dc.typeTexteng
tib.accessRightsopenAccesseng
wgl.contributorPIKeng
wgl.subjectGeowissenschafteneng
wgl.typeZeitschriftenartikeleng
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Financial Feasibility of Water Conservation in Agriculture.pdf
Size:
2.8 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description: