4.7 Article

Environmental flow provision: Implications for agricultural water and land-use at the global scale

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.10.015

Keywords

Environmental flows; Water-use; Land-use; Land-water-nexus; Global; Model

Funding

  1. European Community's Seventh Framework Program (FP7) [266992, 308329]
  2. BMBF through the INNOVATE project [01LL0904D]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Human activity has led to freshwater ecosystem degradation in the past and is likely to continue doing so if no appropriate protection mechanisms are implemented. One potential protection measure is the reallocation of water from human use to environmental purposes - also called environmental flows. Such reallocation may decrease the availability of irrigation water with possible adverse effects on agricultural production. In this analysis, we provide an initial quantitative estimate of how the allocation of annual volumes of water for environmental flow protection (EFP) might influence the food production system on a global scale. The application of a spatially explicit global land and water-use allocation model (MAgPIE) allows us to explore the effect of EFP on agricultural water withdrawals. We will also examine associated reactions in terms of land-use changes and agricultural intensification. Our results suggest that the implications of conserving annual volumes of water for EFP on the land-use system are moderate on an aggregate global level. Cropland expansion into unmanaged land arising from increased food demand up to 2045 is higher by a factor 5-9 than cropland expansion induced by EFP. Global forest losses associated with EFP remain below 1% of current forest area. Production reallocation and associated land-use change hotspots suggest that local effects are of more concern than aggregate cropland expansion and deforestation. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available