The sustainability of irrigated agricultural systems under the Water Framework Directive: first results☆

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2003.12.018Get rights and content

Abstract

The paper reports the first results of the Project WADI (Sustainability of European Irrigated Agriculture under Water Directive and Agenda 2000), funded under the 5th Framework Programme of the European Union (EU). The objective of the project is to evaluate the economic, social and environmental sustainability of European irrigated farming under different scenarios concerning water policy and the Common Agricultural Policy. The methodology relies on scenario analysis combined with farm level mathematical programming models. Two pilot case studies are presented for Italy: cereal farming and fruit farming. According to the first results, the impact of the directive, up to reasonable prices, may be summed up in a minor reduction of water use associated with a sharp decrease of farm income and a significant reduction of employment. Nevertheless, different farming systems may react in very different ways. More detailed local analyses are needed in order to support the design of effective and efficient policies at basin level.

Section snippets

Background and objectives

Agriculture is one of the main water-using sectors in the European Union (EU), with a share of total water use ranging from 40 to 80% of total water usage for the main EU countries. Irrigated agriculture is very relevant from many points of view, as it represents one of the most viable forms of agricultural activities. On the other hand, such agricultural activities are often profitable only thanks to the large delivery of public subsidies for water provision.

The use of water in agriculture

The WADI project

The project WADI, Sustainability of European Irrigated Agriculture under Water Directive and Agenda 2000, is funded under the 5th Framework Programme of the European Union (2001–2003).1

Water and agriculture in Italy

In Italy, as in many countries, the issue of water management is rapidly gaining attention. Total usable water in Italy is around 110 billion m3 per year. Most of the reservoirs are located in the north, while the centre and the south are less endowed, with a bigger need for water supply due to recurrent droughts. Water scarcity phenomena are common in several Italian regions. About 12% of the total population in Italy is affected by discontinuity of supply, with the highest proportion of the

Scenario analysis

The project provides for two main stages of analysis. First, a qualitative analysis is carried out, with the aim to identify possible scenarios for CAP and WFD application. Later, simulation models are constructed which are able to quantify the impact of different scenarios on the sustainability of irrigated agriculture. Scenarios are statements of what is possible, of prospective rather than predictive futures. They are not intended to predict the future, but rather to think about it.

The

The cereal system

As a case study for the annual crop mix typology, a representative farm in the territory of the Reclamation and Irrigation Board ‘Comprensorio Navarolo Agro Cremonese Mantovano’ has been modelled (Lombardia, Northern Italy). In this area, irrigation is based on open canals with a fixed charge per unit area equal to 125 €/ha. The representative farm has a usable area of 21 ha, of which 13 ha are of medium texture and 8 ha are of light soil. The whole farm is irrigable. The main crops are maize

Discussion and policy implications

The simulations show the great difference of the reaction to changing water prices in the two agricultural systems considered, to the extent that they sometimes exhibit opposite trends.

In the cereal system, the impact of the WFD up to reasonable prices may be summed up as a reduction of water use, associated with a sharp decrease of farm income, a relatively high reduction of employment and an environmental improvement. Given the reactivity of farms, the adoption of pricing instruments can

References (28)

  • J. Berbel et al.

    The impact of water-pricing policy in Spain: an analysis of three irrigated areas

    Agricultural Water Management

    (2000)
  • C. Varela-Ortega et al.

    Water pricing policies, public decision making and farmers response: implications for water policy

    Agricultural Economics

    (1998)
  • Bazzani, G.M., Rosselli Del Turco, C., 2002. A DSS for water policy design and the economic-environmental assessment of...
  • Berbel, J., Morris, J., Boymanns, D., Bazzani, G.M., Gallerani, V., Viaggi, D., Gomez, G., Twite, C., Weatherhead,...
  • Berkhout, F., Eames, M., Skea, J., 1998. Environmental Futures Scoping Study. Final Report. Science and Technology...
  • J.W. Cary et al.

    Relationships among farmers' goals and farm adjustment strategies: some empirics of a multidimensional approach

    The Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics

    (1982)
  • Commission of the European Communities, 2002. Communications from the Commission to the Council and the European...
  • Dinar, A., Subramanian, A., 1997. Water Pricing Experiences. An International Perspective. World Bank Technical Paper...
  • Easter, K.W., Smith, R., 2002. Do institutional limitations block the enlargement of water markets, Agadir Conference,...
  • W. Edwards

    Use of multiattribute utility measurement for social decision making

  • P.C. Farmer

    Testing the robustness of multiattribute utility theory in an applied setting

    Decision Sciences

    (1987)
  • J.A. Gómez-Limón et al.

    Socio-economic and environmental impact of Agenda 2000 and alternative policy choices for market liberalisation on an irrigated area in North-Western Spain

    Agricultural Economics Review

    (2000)
  • J.A. Gómez-Limón et al.

    Conflicting implementation of agricultural and water policies in irrigated areas in the EU

    Journal of Agricultural Economics

    (2002)
  • W.H. Harper et al.

    An evaluation of goal hierarchies for small farm operations

    American Journal of Agricultural Economics

    (1980)

    • Cited by (0)

    ☆

    The paper is a common work of the authors. In particular, G.M. Bazzani wrote Sections 4.2 and 5.1; S. Di Pasquale wrote Section 3; S. Morganti wrote Section 4.1; M. Raggi wrote Section 5.2; D. Viaggi wrote Sections 2 and 4.3; V. Gallerani has co-ordinated the research. Sections 1 and 6 are a common work of the authors.

    View full text
    Copyright © 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.