Rosenberg International Forum on Water...

Rosenberg International Forum on Water Policy Water for food: Quantity and Quality in a Changing World

Zaragoza, Spain

June 2008

Water Policies in Spain:

Balancing water for food and water for nature

Consuelo Varela Ortega

Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM), Spain

1

Some highlights of the RF Key points

Hellen, Margaret, John

6. Public participation, stakeholders, credibility

legitimacy

Malin, Wendy… 7. Changes are Crisis-driven ….

Hellen, Uriel, John …

5. Scale matters, local-specific, context is critical

John, Maggie, Hellen…

4. Technology is right, institutions must evolve

Elias … 3. Water productivity can increase, complexity

science , multidisciplinary

John B… 2. Policy is one thing, enforcing policy is the key

issue

Maggie, Elias,

……

1. Get Management right

2

Contents

1. Overview: Irrigation agriculture and water use in Spain

2. The policy context: Water and agricultural Policies

3. Complying with the EU policies

4. Down-scaling to the Regional perspective: a case study of groundwater irrigation

5. Concluding remarks

3

Main Issues:

• Spain Mediterranean (aridity, water stress, ..

EU (policies)

Difficult adaptation, dual objective in water

• Policy-driven determinants for irrigation expansion and

water use

water policies, agricultural policies

• Clash between irrigation-based development and ecosystem protection

• Down-scale global EU policies to local actions

• Integration of water and agricultural policies

4

RENEWABLE RESOURCES(m3/person/year)

• In the WORLD 6,750

• In EUROPE 4,560

• In SPAIN 2,829

Water resources

Areas of physical and economic water scarcity

RENEWABLE RESOURCES (m3/person/year)

• In the WORLD 6,750

• In EUROPE 4,560

• In SPAIN 2,829

Heterogeneous distribution (spatial and temporal) of water resources and high precipitation variability

Only 10% of natural water resources are available

Little or no water Approaching physical water Physical water Economic water scarcity No estimated scarcity scarcity scarcity

Source: Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture, 2007

5

Water and Agriculture

% Agriculture water withdrawals as percentage of renewable water resources

Category Percentage

MEDITERRANEAN REGION (Agriculture represents a 63%

of total water demand)

: 42% in the North

: 81% in the South and East

Source: FAO, 2002

6

Source: FAO, 2002


% Agriculture water withdrawals as percentage of renewable water resources

Category Percentage

MEDITERRANEAN REGION (Agriculture represents a 63%

of total water demand)

: 42% in the North

: 81% in the South and East

2000 2025

WATER EXPLOITATION INDEX Source: Plan Bleu, 2005

7

Total water demand by country in the Mediterranean (1980 – 2025)

baseline scenario

Egypt

Turkey

Spain

Syria

8

Source: Plan Bleu, 2005

Mediterranean countries with unsustainable water production indices

Country

Spain

Malta

Cyprus

Israel

Palestinian territories

Egypt

Libya

Tunisia

Algeria

Overexploitation of renewable

water resources

(1)

(in billion m3/year)

0.70

0.02

0.04

0.19

0.03

0.00

0.77

0.18

0.00

Water demand

(2)

(in billion m3/year)

18.20

0.05

0.33

1.80

0.13

66.0

2.24

2.27

2.90

Index of unsustainable

water production

% (1)/(2)

4

31

12

10

23

0

34

8

0

Source. Margat, Plan Bleu (2004)

9

10


A recent vision of the Spanish agriculture

Surface (M ha) and Value of production (1000 M €, year 2000) 0

2.5

5

7.5

1

0

12

.5

15

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 año

Value of prod. (irrigated) Value of prod. (rainfed)

Surface (rainfed) Surface (irrigated)

Fuente: Anuarios MAPA

--

==

11


A recent vision of the Spanish agriculture

Surface (M ha) and Value of production (1000 M €, year 2000) 0

2.5

5

7.5

1

0

12

.5

15

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 año

Value of prod. (irrigated) Value of prod. (rainfed)

Surface (rainfed) Surface (irrigated)

Fuente: Anuarios MAPA

--

==

---

++++


Agriculture 80%

• Extends over 15% of all Arable Land (3.6 M ha)

• 60 % of total A. Production

• 80 % of Total Farm exports

• Irrigation technology: 35 % gravity, 23% sprinkler, 42% localized

LEGEND

• Water tariff: 82% area pricing, 13% 68% Surface 28% Groundwater

volumetric pricing, 5% binomic tariff 4% Mix

12

Source: MMA (PHN, 2002), MAPA (2006)

National Irrigation Plan (2002-2008)

1377

1134

242 138

86 18

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Total

Modernization

New irrigation

Current projects

Social irrigation

Private irrigation

Surface: 1000 ha

6000

5025

5000 Budget: Million €

4000 3056

3000

2000

1137

682 1000

124 Source: MAPA 2007 26 0

13


14

1377

1134

242 138

86 18

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Total

Modernization

New irrigation

Current projects

Social irrigation

Private irrigation

Surface: 1000 ha

Budget: Million € 5025

3056

1137

682

124 26 0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

MODERNIZATION

OF IRRIGATION

SYSTEMS

80 %

65 %

Source: MAPA 2007

1377

1134

242 138

86 18

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Total

Modernization

New irrigation

Current projects

Social irrigation

Private irrigation

Surface: 1000 ha

Objectives


Budget: Million €

5025

3056

1137

682

124 26 0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000 •Ecologic: water saving 1350 Mm3 •Water av. security reduce risk •Increase crop divers. & prodictiv. •Employment, population stability •Multifunctional agriculture

15 Source: MAPA 2007

Technological change: irrigation modernization

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

1,2

1,4

Gravity Sprinkler Sprinkler Mot. Drip

Mill

ion

ha

2002 2003 2004 2005

Source: MAPA 2007 16


42% M

illio

n h

a

1,4

1,2

1

0,8

0,6

0,4

0,2

0

35%


2002 2003 2004 2005



Mill

ion

ha

1,4

1,2

1

0,8

0,6

0,4

0,2

0

TARIFFS: 82 % surface 13% volumetric 5 % two-part


2002 2003 2004 2005


1199

Water productivity comparisons between rainfed and irrigated agriculture

Crop productivity - comparison rain fed / irrigation

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Cereals Olive Vineyard Horticulture Citrus Fruit trees

(other)

Other

crops

Total crops

(w ith subs)

Total crops

(no subs.)

CROPS

Ne

t m

arg

in (€

/ha

)

rainfed irrigation

Water consumption and value-added by water productivity range

Water consumption and value added by water productivity range

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

< 0,02 0,02 - 0,20 0,20 - 0,40 0,40 - 0,60 0,60 - 1,00 1,00 - 3,00 > 3

Net margin (€/m3)

Mm

3

W.Consumption (Mm3)

2200



21

36

18 16

5 3

10

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

< 0,02 0,02 - 0,20 0,20 - 0,40 0,40 - 0,60 0,60 - 1,00 1,00 - 3,00 > 3

Net margin (€/m3)

Mm

3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

%

W.Consumption (Mm3) W.Consumption (%)

2211



21

36

18 16

5 3

10,1

5

11 9 9

20

45,9

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

< 0,02 0,02 - 0,20 0,20 - 0,40 0,40 - 0,60 0,60 - 1,00 1,00 - 3,00 > 3

Net margin (€/m3)

Mm

3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

%

W.Consumption (Mm3) W.Consumption (%) Value Added (%)

2222

y e s or e per o -

Productivity of irrigated crops (€ /ha) (average values of prices and i ld f th i d 1997 2002)

23

Source: MMA (2007)

The EU policy context: water and agricultural policies

AGRICULTURAL POLICIES

CAP Reform 2003

WATER POLICIES

Water Framework Directive, 2000

24


Sustainable & competitive Agriculture

•Direct aid payments decoupled from

production

• Single farm payment (per farm)

• Cross-compliance mechanisms direct payments are subject to compliance

with environmental regulations

• Rural Development Programs

Sustainable use of water resources & Good ecological status of all waters(2015)

• River Basin Organization as

management unit

• Planning and integrated management of

all water resources RBMP

• Cost recovery, polluter pays principle

• Transparency and public participation


CAP Reform 2003

WATER POLICIES


25




production







management unit






CAP Reform 2003

WATER POLICIES


IRRIGATED AGRICULTURE

Multifunctional Competitive

26 Environmentally sustainable

Adaptable to new challenges (i.e. climate change)




production







management unit






CAP Reform 2003

WATER POLICIES






Agriculture

upled from

r farm)

Sustainable use of Good ecological sta

• River Basin Organ

management unit

• Plannin and inte


Sustainable & competitive

•Direct aid payments deco production

• Single farm payment (pe




water resources & tus of all waters(2015)

ization as

g grated management of





CAP Reform 2003

WATER POLICIES



CAP ‘HEALTH CHECK’ 2009…

•Water management

•Climate change

•Biofuels




• River B

managem


29



production






asin Organization as

ent unit






CAP Reform 2003

WATER POLICIES



Environmentally sustainable


National Policies


The EU Water Framework Directive

• Quality-driven:

• ..”This Directive aims at maintaining and improving the aquatic environment in the Community. This purpose is primarily concerned with the quality of the waters. Control of quantity is an ancillary element in securing good water quality and therefore measures on quantity, serving the objective of ensuring good quality, should also be established …” (pre. 19)

• Difficulty for the RBA to comply with two objectives: – SPANISH Guarantee water availability to all users

– EU WFD Good ecological status of all waters

• Effects on irrigated farms ?

30

Water policy: water tariffs

Effect of cost recovery of the WFD in other Spanish Irrigation areas

Duero

Segura

Júcar

Guadalquivir

Guadiana

31



Water demand reduction (%) Income loss (%)

Duero

Segura

Júcar

Guadalquivir

Guadiana

30-50%

10-15%

10-40%

0-40%

30%

20-30%

10-15%

0-10%

0-30%

Water scarcity regions

15%

32



Water demand reduction (%) Income loss (%)

Duero

Segura

Júcar

Guadalquivir

Guadiana

30-50%

10-15%

10-40%

0-40%

30%

20-30%

10-15%

0-10%

0-30%

Water scarcity regions

15%

33

THE EU COMMON AGRICULTURAL POLICY (CAP)

• Effects on land use and cropping patterns

• Can the CAP reform induce water savings?

• The ‘water dimension’ of the CAP

34

Win

ter ce

real

s

Mai

ze

Legu

mes

Tube

r crop

s In

dust

rial c

rops

Forra

gecr

ops

Hor

ticul

ture

Citr

us Fru

ittre

es

Vine

Oliv

e

35

Effects of the CAP reform: Changes in crop surface

Source: Data from MAPA (2007)

Spain - Irrigated crops

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Su

rfac

e (x

1000

ha)

2004

2006

XX

REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF CAP DIRECTPAYMENTS 2006 (M €)

36

30 %

Source: MAPA 2007

ASTURIASASTURIAS GALICIAGALICIA

ARAGARAGÓÓNN CATALUCATALUÑÑAA

NAVARRANAVARRA

MADRIDMADRID

E TREMADURAE TREMADURA

ANDALUCANDALUCÍÍAA MURCIAMURCIA

VALENCIAVALENCIA

P.VASCOP.VASCO

RIOJARIOJA

CANTABRIACANTABRIA

CASTILLACASTILLA--LELEÓÓNN

CASTILLACASTILLA--LA MANCHALA MANCHA

605

1362

404935

520

252

76

25

101

50

Total SPAIN

4,800 M €

14%

20 %

11 %

9%

The Common Agricultural Policy: effects on water use

POLICY POLICY OBJECTIVE

POLICY INSTRUMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

SOCIETAL EFFECTS

CAP Luxembourg Reform 2003

2005…

• Multifunctional & Competitive agriculture • Farm income stability • Environmental sustainability • Reinforce Rural development

• Single farm payment decoupled from production • Payments reduction: modulation

• Cross Compliance schemes: payments tied to environmental regulations

• Increase in extensive productions and low water demand crops

• Lower water use in some regions

• Higher environ.sust.

• Control of water consumption

• Decrease in farm income (decrease in DP)

• RD Regionalspecific programs

• Regional disparities

CA

P

CAP New reform

“health check”

2009-2013

• Economic, social and environmental sust. • Environ. protection and biodiversity

• New challenges: • water management, • Climate change • biofuels

• Simplification and unification of the Single Farm Payment

• Simplify and reinforce Cross Compliance

• Reinforce Rural Development measures

• Reduction of land set-aside • Increased surface for energy crops • Increase market competit. crops • Increased environmental protection, natural resources conservation and biodiversity

• Reinforce RD region-specific programs for:

• sustainable management of land, water and ecosystems

• management of risk protection measures

37



POLICY INSTRUMENT


SOCIETAL EFFECTS


2005…











CA

P

CAP New reform

“health check”

2009-2013










38



POLICY INSTRUMENT


SOCIETAL EFFECTS


2005…











CA

P

CAP New reform

“health check”

2009-2013










39



POLICY INSTRUMENT


SOCIETAL EFFECTS


2005…











CA

P

CAP New reform

“health check”

2009-2013










40



POLICY INSTRUMENT


SOCIETAL EFFECTS


2005…











CA

P

CAP New reform

“health check”

2009-2013










41

CROSS COMPLIANCE IN THE CAP 2003

42

REGISTRATION OF ANIMALS

•Identification and registration of bovine, ovine and porcine animals

ANIMAL HEALTH •Food-&-mouth disease, swine vesicular disease, blue tongue disease

ANIMAL WELFARE •Housing of calves, swine in animal farms

PUBLIC AND PLANT HEALTH

•Plant protection products

•Hormones, thyrostatic and ßantagonists (animals)

•Control of EBS

•Food safety and traceability

ENVIRONMENT 1. Wild Birds Directive

2. Ground Water

pollution Directive

3. Sewage Sludge Dir.

4. Nitrates Pollution

Directive

5. Natural Habitats

conservation Dir.

•Protection and

conservation of soils from

erosion

•Maintaining soil organic

matter

•Maintaining soil structure

•Avoid deterioration of

habitats

ANEX III STATUTORY MANAGMENT REQUIREMENTS

EU Directives

ANEX IV Good Agricultural and Environmental

Conditions


43








•Control of EBS



2. Ground Water

pollution Directive



Directive

5. Natural Habitats

conservation Dir.

•Protection and


erosion


matter


•Avoid deterioration of

habitats


EU Directives


Conditions


44








•Control of EBS



2. Ground Water

pollution Directive



Directive

5. Natural Habitats

conservation Dir.

•Protection and


erosion


matter


•Avoid deterioration of habitats


EU Directives


Conditions


45








•Control of EBS



2. Ground Water

pollution Directive



Directive

5. Natural Habitats

conservation Dir.

•Protection and


erosion


matter


•Avoid deterioration of habitats


EU Directives


Conditions

Overexploited aquifers

Down-scaling global policies to regional actions

• CASE STUDY:

The Upper Gaudiana Basin, region of Castilla-La Mancha

• NEWATER (New approaches to adaptive water management under uncertainty) (2005-2009) www.newater.info

– IP, 43 research teams, 18 countries, 7 basins (Europe: Rhine, Elba, Tisza, Guadiana. Africa: Nile, Orange. Asia: Amuradya)

integrated and adaptive water resources management, multidisciplinary perspective (ecological, economic, social institutional), stakeholder participatory process

46

www.newater.info

The WFD Pilot Basins

47

48

Groundwater overexploitation in the Upper Guadiana basin

• ecosystem / socio-economic sustainability ??

OVEREXPLOITED AQUIFERS

Western La Mancha Aquifer:

most important aquifer in the Upper Guadiana Basin

So

urc

e: M

IMA

M (2

000

)

AREA OF STUDY: The Western La Mancha Aquifer (Upper Guadiana River Basin)

O Area: 5.500 Km2

O Capacity: 15.000 Hm3

O Irrigation ± 180,000ha

O Irrigation 95% w. uses

O Ground water is 95%

O RAMSAR wetlands

O UNESCO biosphere reserve

O Irrigation-based development Fuente: Martínez Santos P., Llamas R. (2005) 49

05) 5

Fuente: Martínez Santos P., Llamas R. (20

AREA OF STUDY: The Western La Mancha Aquifer (Upper Guadiana River Basin)

O Area: 5.500 Km2

O Capacity: 15.000 Hm3

O Irrigation ± 180,000ha

O Irrigation 95% w. uses

O Ground water is 95%

O RAMSAR wetlands

O UNESCO biosphere reserve

O Irrigation-based development

O Overexploitation of aquifer

O Wetland loss

O Environmental degradation

O Water use limitations

O Social unrest

O Illegal drillings

O Difficult policy enforcement 0

51

“TABLAS DE DAIMIEL” NATIONAL PARK (Ramsar Wetlands)

52

July, 2006

The policy context in the Upper Guadiana basin:

• Policy context Actions taken one objective and 2 instruments –– NNaattiioonnaall PPoolliiccyy: Water Management Regime (Water use

restrictions) (1991….) • Water Quotas compulsory

–– EEUU ppoolliiccyy: CAP Agri-Environmental Program Income compensation for reducing water use (1993 ...2007)

• Water Quotas + Income compensation Voluntary

• New developments: policy-driven solution? –– WWFFDD

–– SSppeecciiaall PPllaann ooff tthhee UUppppeerr GuGuaaddiiaannaa:: Water Bank, Purchase of water rights, land use measures (forestation, rainfed farming…) (2007 – 2027)

53

-

The policy context: centralized management

Water policies have not been capable to attain water conservation targets – Water abstraction Plan (National Policy, 1991)

Water quotas: reduction from

5000 2000 m3/ha

Compulsory

No compensation of income

loss

Unsuccessful

Social unrest

Farmers’ litigations

– Agri-Environmental Program (CAP, 1993…..)

- Water quotas: % reduction (50-70

100%)

Voluntary

Compensation of income loss

Highly successful

Reduction of social conflicts

Low cost-effectiveness

Source: Varela-Ortega (2007) 54

55

Water abstractions and irrigated surface in the UGB

W. abstractions (Hm3)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Hm

3

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

Ha

1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006



0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Hm

3

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

Ha

560 Hm3

1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006

56



0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Hm

3

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

Ha

NRR

230 Hm3

560 Hm3

1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006

57

58



0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006

Hm

3

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

Ha

NRR

230 Hm3

560 Hm3

Provisional overexploit.

Definitive overexploit

.


W. abstractions (Hm3) Irrigated Surface (Ha)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Hm

3

0

20.000

40.000

60.000

80.000

100.000

120.000

140.000

160.000

Ha

NRR

230 Hm3

1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006

59


W.abstractions (Hm3) Irrigated surface (Ha)

60

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006

Hm

3

0

20.000

40.000

60.000

80.000

100.000

120.000

140.000

160.000

Ha

NRR

230 Hm3

CAP-Before 92 WAP

Water Abstraction Plan (WAP) + Agri-Environmental Program (AEP)

WAP + AEP modulated

Evolution of the EU income compensation program in the Upper Guadiana basin (1993-2006)

Level of Water

consumption reduction

Compen pay€/ha

sation ments

1993 1997 2001 2003 …2006 modulation

50% 156 164 179

1-40 ha 209 40-80 ha 125 > 80 ha 63

70% 258 271 296

100% 360 379 414

1-40 ha 518 40-80 ha 311 > 80 ha 155

61

300

400


W.abstractions (Hm3) Surface joining the program (Ha) Irrigated surface (Ha)

600 160.000

140.000 500

120.000

230 Hm3

1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006

100.000

80.000

NRR 60.000 200

40.000

100 20.000

0 0

Hm

3

Ha

62 CAP-Before 92 WAP

Water Abstraction Plan (WAP) + Agri-Environmental Program (AEP)

WAP + AEP modulated

Case study results

• The NEWATER project – Integration of an economic - hydrology modeling

• The CAP programs • -AEP compensation: 0.16 – 0.20 €/m3

• -W dual value: 0.87

• PEAG - (Special Plan of the Upper Guadiana) (2007….2027) (5,000 M €)

W savings . 272 Mm3

• Purchase of water rights (Water rights Exchange Center)

• closing up illegal wells

• legalization of illegal wells

• other measures: forestation , rainfed farming…

• Projections to 2027 the aquifer’s recovery path 63

oct-99oct-02

oct-05oct-08

oct-11oct-14

oct-17oct-20

oct-23oct-26

WEAP Model: Groundwater storage

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000 G

rou

nd

wat

er S

tora

ge

(th

ou

san

ds

of M

m3)

Reference; Expected Climate

Reference; DryCycle Climate

64

oct-99oct-02

oct-05oct-08

oct-11oct-14

oct-17oct-20

oct-23oct-26


0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000 G

rou

nd

wat

er S

tora

ge

(th

ou

san

ds

of M

m3)


WAP only; Expected Climate


65

oct-99oct-02

oct-05oct-08

oct-11oct-14

oct-17oct-20

oct-23oct-26


0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000 G

rou

nd

wat

er S

tora

ge

(th

ou

san

ds

of M

m3)



F2 AEP to 2006 then failed SPUG; Expected Climate


66

oct-99oct-02

oct-05oct-08

oct-11oct-14

oct-17oct-20

oct-23oct-26


0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000 G

rou

nd

wat

er S

tora

ge

(th

ou

san

ds

of M

m3)



F2 AEP to 2006 then SPUG; Expected Climate

F2 AEP to 2006 then failed SPUG; Expected Climate


F2 AEP to 2006 then SPUG; DryCycle Climate

67

CONCLUSIONS

• Spain has an added difficulty adapting to quality-driven EU water policies

– public participation and stakeholder involvement may help (RBMP)

– adaptation of RBA

• Irrigation modernization will not attain water savings unless institutional development comes in (w.rights

exchanges…

• Encourage new more flexible water demand instruments: water rights exchanges, purchase of WR

68

CONCLUSIONS

• CAP and water:

• Crop shift, water use may not change

• Tendency to reinforce environmental requirements

• The future reform: Include water management and CC

• Approximation of CAP and WFD

• Policy integration and cohesion:

• administrative coordination

• enforcement, legitimization, credibility

• public transparency and participation

69

THANK YOU FOR YOUR IDEAS AT THE RF!

70

Date post:	03-Oct-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	vunguyet
View:	214 times
Download:	0 times

Rosenberg International Forum on Water...

Documents