4.7 Article

The consequences of land-use change and water demands in Central Mongolia

期刊

LAND USE POLICY
卷 28, 期 1, 页码 4-10

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2010.03.002

关键词

Hydrological model; Integrated water resources management (IWRM); Land-use model; Mongolian agriculture; SITE framework; Socio-environmental system; Water use

向作者/读者索取更多资源

After two decades of decreasing agricultural activities, in 2008 the Mongolian government started the Third Campaign of Reclaiming Virgin Lands, aiming at massive expansion and intensification of the agricultural sector. This policy motivated the study presented here, for which we used an integrated modelling approach to investigate the feedbacks between land-use dynamics, agricultural management and biophysical conditions, with a strong focus on assessing availability of water for irrigation. Our simulation results clearly show that under the current extend of irrigated agriculture in several years water demands exceeded water availability, indicating an overexploitation of water resources, mainly in the period 1995-2006. Consequently, the targeted expansion of agricultural water use will either severely deplete water resources with potential negative effects on other users and the environment, or policies are needed to mitigate or avoid potential adverse effects. As simultaneously Mongolian authorities struggle to implement integrated water resources management (IWRM), the latter might provide monitoring concepts and regulations needed to minimise the potential gap between water demands and availability. In this context, integrated modelling could be a scientific tool to support future land and water management decisions, as researchers already started to integrate views and demands of Mongolian authorities into scenario and model development (identified during stakeholder workshops), and will continue to do so during the coming years of collaborative research. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据