Upload
deepak
View
25
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
ICARUS – I WRM for C limate Change A daptation in Ru ral Social Ecosystems in S outhern Europe. April 5, 2013. Euro-Mediterranean Centre for Climate Change(coordinator), Italy Universidade Atlantica, Portugal Universidad Politecnica de Valencia, Spain. OVERVIEW. The ICARUS project - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
ICARUS – IWRM for Climate Change Adaptation in Rural Social Ecosystems in Southern Europe
Euro-Mediterranean Centre for Climate Change(coordinator), Italy Universidade Atlantica, Portugal Universidad Politecnica de Valencia, Spain
April 5, 2013
OVERVIEW
• The ICARUS project
• Research direction:–Adaptation as a continuum between
autonomous and planned–An eParticipation platform as a
powerful communication tool
• Next steps & lessons learnt
ICARUS: problems addressed
Water resource management: challenge for the development of Mediterranean populations↘Social security at risk as a consequence of water scarcity↘Increasing demand for water:
Irrigated agricultureIntensive urbanisationTourism
↘Evident signs of climatic instability and negative future projections ↘Reduced food security, agro-industrial employment at risk, damage to the ecosystem, increased desertification, biodiversity loss…↘Need for policies to increase the efficiency of water management
Case studies
Project objectives
•Designing strategies for increased water efficiency in agriculture•biophysical, social, economic, and institutional dimensions of sustainable water management•innovative adaptation strategies, practices and tools for saving water in irrigated production systems
•Introducing the principles of “policy mainstreaming” and “climate proofing” in CCA•Supporting WFD implementation
•exchange of experiences•exploration of scenarios, methods and tool for water managers
»focus on irrigation in the mid term (2025)
Project activities
Three main research streams:
1.Climatic and integrated (agronomic and socio-economic) modelling to simulate (autonomous and planned) adaptation processes: ABM Simile2.River basin modelling to simulate water balance, irrigation needs, and effects on agricultural production and the water cycle (discharge): SWAT3.Internet based platform for public participation and support to strategic assessment of adaptation strategies: multi-lingual mDSSweb platform
All based on in depth review of scenarios of change, water uses and irrigation technologies in Southern Europe, and water governance in the three case studies
Agent based model to explore adaptation strategies in agricultural water management
Farming practices
Profits
Irrigation
Crop Yield
Water consumption
Soil water balance
Crop Phys.
&Market
SoilsIrrig. Sys.
Climate Serv. Climate
Farmer
Watershed
Agent based model to explore adaptation strategies in agricultural water management
Seasonal forecasts and crop allocation
Time
Forecast_s, run 1
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 60000
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Time
Alloc, run 1
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 60000
0.10
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Seasonal forecast
Maizeallocation
UNCERTAINTY
RISK TAKING ATTITUDE
Distributions of water uses and incomes
Irrigation volumes Farmers’ incomes
Coupling autonomous and planned adaptation through ePartipation
Bojovic et al, 2013
first online questionnaire – summer 2011
• perception of change• autonomous adaptation
development and test of online mDSS– winter-spring 2012
• MCA• methodological
simplification
second online questionnaire – summer 2012
• evaluation of planned adaptation measures
Q1: Agriculture, irrigation, and perception of change in RV
•Collaboration with ARPAV – Bollettino AgroMeteo Informa
•16 questions, 33 indicators• Socio-economic characterisation• Perception of current /past changes• Adaptation strategies• Training opportunities
•July– September 2011
•600 answers• 350 contacts
purpose not final decision-making, but exploration of perceptions, practices, and preferences, so number of answers satisfactory
overall, 87% claim that in the near future, adaptation will be necessary
Q1: autonomous adaptation measures
From Q1 to Q2: participatory modeling, mDSSweb
Selection of strategies and criteria through results of Q1 and experts’ consultation
From mDSS a mDSSweb• online• accessible to non-expert
public• tested with some farmers• refinement
Q2: The tool mDSSweb – 4 languages, 5 pages
Q2: MCA with mDSSweb
Q2: final ranking, Veneto Region
• 170 answers + 10 IBs
• Good distribution of answers per location, farm size, irrigation typology
Concluding remarks
• Adaptation as a continuum between autonomous and planned– Continuous process of change at farm level
– Interactions between autonomous and planned enables precious information to be collected – strengthen evaluations and sectoral policies
– Barrier for policy adoption is weak communication
– High policy interest
• An eParticipation platform as a powerful communication tool– Transfer of knowledge and experience
– High number of stakeholders involved through application of online tools
– Process contributes to quality and transparency of policy-making
– Iterative dialogue between scientists, policy-makers, and end beneficiaries
GRAZIE!
[email protected]@unive.it
www.tiamasg.org/Icarus/sawENhttp://www.cmcc.it/research/research-projects/icarus-1/icarus
Q1: some results
Q1: some results
Q1: some results
Q1: analysis of farmers’ choices
• 4 adaptation packages– dependent variables• no adaptation• crop and soil management only• irrigation management only• both crop and irrigation management adaptation
• most significant variables• age, UAA, agricultural income, maize, vineyards, tree crops
(excl.wineyard), forage crops (incl. grassland and soya), market gardens, worried of future environmental changes, irrigated farm, sprinkler irrigation only, drip irrigation only, mixed irrigation system, perception of past temperature changes, perception of seasonal shifts, perception of increased flood frequency, perception of changes in biodiversity, perception of changing water availability, cca necessary in the future, information on climate change , information on new techniques
Q2: The tool mDSSweb
Q2: The tool mDSSweb
Q2: The tool mDSSweb
Q2: The tool mDSSweb
Q2: Water conservation as adaptation to climate change,An example from Italy
• Collaboration with ARPAV – Bollettino agroMeteo Informa- e VenetoAgricoltura – Bollettino colture erbacee
• July – September 2012: farmers• November 2012: Irrigation Boards
• 170 risposte + 10 Ibs
• Good distribution of answers per location, farm size, irrigation typology
Q2: some results
Q2: some results
Q2: broken-up ranking
Q3: highlighted criticalities by IBs
• Seawater intrusion• Inadequate infrastructure (storage, conveyance,
distribution)• No water saving culture• Scarce water availability in summer (few reservoirs)• Missing resources for modernisation of
irrigation network (also at the farm level)• Few extension services available • Innovation-adverse farmers
Risk attitudes and crop allocation
Farmers’ age Crop allocation
Time
Maize_alloc, run 1
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 50000
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Time
age, run 1
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 600030
40
50
60
70
Water use and farmers’ incomes
Water withdrawals Farmer’s incomeTime
Cum_irr, run 1
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
0
1000
2000
3000
Time
Cum_Ag_income, run 1
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
Q2: analysis of preferences
• Strategy «high efficiency irrigation methods»• Irrigation: gravity• Trees crops
• Strategy «increasing water supply»• Less than 1 ha and more than 20 ha• Irrigation: gravity• Forage crops and market crops
• Strategy «less water demanding crops»• between 1 to 20 ha• Irrigation: gravity
• Strategies «information services (existing and new)»• Between 5 and 20 ha• Irrigation: no irrigation and drip irrigation
irrigation type and farm size influence more significantly farmers’ preferences than farm size and its location.
Q2: farmers versus IBs
PROs and CONs of the methodology
CONs• Contextual specificity• Need of established online communication channels
PROs• Enables collection of large amount of information
– Drivers and pressures
– Needs
– State of the arts of adaptation on the ground
– Identification of gaps amenable to policy interventions
• Overcoming of temporal and spatial barriers• Simplification of linguistic barriers• Transferral of knowledge and experience• Contained costs
Q2: ranking of farmers’ preferences in Jucar basin
Q1: some results
90% of participants have felt environmental changes in the past 10 years
Q1: some results
Q1: factors that influence adaptation
• CCA_irrigation_only (11%)• the smaller their farm is• if they grow no maize• if they expect further environmental change• if they do not have sprinkler or drip irrigation• If they have access to information on new technologies
• CCA_crops_only (34%)• the bigger the farm is• if they grow maize• irrigation practice (the less structured, the more likely) • perception of changes in past temperature and biodiversity• if they have access to information on climate change
• CCA_both (30%)• If they have a farm larger than 20 ha• agricultural income • tree crops (excluding vineyards) • irrigation practice (emergency and structured) • access to information on climate change and new techniques
for crop and water management