Climate change, water security and the need for integrated policy development: the case of on-farm infrastructure investment in the Australian irrigation sector

Maraseni, Tek; Mushtaq, Shahbaz; Reardon‐Smith, Kathryn

doi:10.1088/1748-9326/7/3/034006

Cited by 36 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We acknowledge that cooling-technology retrofits often require large time and financial investments, and thus in reality, responses in electricity may not occur at the scale or rate shown here due to the barriers that are outside the scope of our analysis. Meanwhile, retrofitting irrigation technologies-such as from flood to drip irrigation-also requires additional capital and operational costs that often hinder adoptions, especially for the poor households (Blanke et al 2007, Maraseni et al 2012. There are also a variety of non-financial factors that influence the adoption of water-saving technologies at farms (Khanal et al 2018) and need policy incentives to implement (Nikouei et al 2012).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regional responses to future, demand-driven water scarcity

Cui

Calvin

Clarke

et al. 2018

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explores regional response strategies to potential water scarcity. Using a model of integrated human-earth system dynamics (GCAM), we test a wide range of alternate water demand scenarios to explore regional response strategies. We create a typology that categorizes countries and basins according to their responses in electricity and agriculture to potential water scarcity. Three different categories are found. First, little response is observed for many basins because water demands do not increase enough to create scarcity. Second, the primary response is adjustments in the electricity sector (e.g. most basins in Western Europe, the United States and China) with a transition to water-saving cooling systems but marginal impact on total power generation or the fuel mix. Third, where there is a lack of sufficient responding capacity in the electricity sector (e.g. Pakistan, Middle East and several basins in India), additional response occurs through reduced irrigation water withdrawals, either by switching from domestic production to imports or from irrigated agriculture to rain-fed production. The primary response mechanism to demand-based water scarcity for individual basins is quite robust across the range of water demand scenarios tested. The results and typology in this paper will be valuable for future research exploring global water scarcity due to both demand and supply drivers.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regional responses to future, demand-driven water scarcity

Cui

Calvin

Clarke

et al. 2018

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As noted, Australia could cut its emissions by 45% from 2005 levels by 2030 at far less cost (<US$16/tCO 2 e) than that of a similar scale of cut at the global level, which has been estimated at some US$100/tCO 2 e [24,40]. Directing scarce resources into the right abatement measures would also have sustainable financial and environmental benefits for both Australia and the global community [59]. In addition, mitigation measures have multiple synergies with Sustainable Development Goals, including: Health; Clean energy; Cities and communities; Responsible consumption and production; and Oceans (SDGs 3, 7, 11, 12, and 14, respectively) [60].…”

Section: Issues and Potential Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meeting National Emissions Reduction Obligations: A Case Study of Australia

Maraseni

Reardon‐Smith

2019

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Akin to a public good, emissions reduction suffers from the ‘free rider’ syndrome. Although many countries claim that they are meeting their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction commitments, the average global temperature and GHG emissions continue to rise. This has led to growing speculation that some countries may be taking advantage of the system by effectively exploiting a range of loopholes in global agreements. Using a case study approach, we critically review the evidence from Australia, exploring how Australia has participated in global climate change negotiations and the way in which this emissions intensive country’s national emissions reduction obligations have been met. The findings suggest that: (1) successful negotiation to include Article 3.7 (‘Adjusting the 1990 Baseline’ or ‘the Australia Clause’) in the Kyoto Protocol significantly favored Australia’s ability to meet its First Kyoto Commitment (2008–2012); and (2) successful bargaining for the accounting rule that allowed carbon credits from the first commitment period to be carried over to the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol benefitted Australia by 128 MtCO2e. At the national level, a lack of bipartisan political support for an effective mechanism to drive emissions reduction has also been problematic. While the introduction of the Carbon Pricing Mechanism (CPM) in 2012 reduced emissions from electricity production from about 199.1 MtCO2e to 180.8 MtCO2e in 2014, a change of government led to the abolition of the CPM in 2014 and emissions from electricity production subsequently rose to 187 MtCO2e in 2015 and 189 MtCO2e in 2016 with adverse impacts in many sectors as well as Australia’s overall emissions. The current Australian government continues to undermine its commitment to mitigation and the integrity and credibility of its own emissions reductions policy, introducing a softer ‘calculated baseline’ for its own Safeguard Mechanism, which allows companies to upwardly adjust their calculated baselines on the basis of their highest expected emissions, permitting emissions in excess of their historical emissions. While disappointing in the context of the global emissions reduction project, Australia’s actions are sadly not unique and we also provide examples of loopholes exploited by countries participating in a range of other negotiations and emissions reduction projects. Such strategies undoubtedly serve the short-term political and economic interests of these countries; however, it is increasingly apparent that the cumulative impact of such tactics will ultimately impact the entire global community.

show abstract

“…However, pressurized irrigation systems may alter patterns of on-farm energy consumption and may increase cropping intensity. More intensive land use might involve more fuel, farm machinery and agrochemicals, and the production, packaging, transportation and application of these also requires significant energy resources, leading to an increase in GHG emissions (Maraseni and Cockfield, 2011a,b;Maraseni et al, 2012a;2012b). This suggests that there is a potential conflict in terms of mitigation and adaptation policies, and thus warrants a comprehensive and robust investigation.…”

Section: The Water-energy-food-climate Nexusmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Topak et al (2005) and Baillie (2009) have compared the energy consumption of various irrigation systems, but these studies failed to provide a complete picture as they did not analyze soil carbon, GHG emissions associated with the use of primary farm inputs, and water consumption and GHG implications of more intensive cropping systems. Similarly, Maraseni et al (2012a;2012b) tried to assess GHGs and water saving implications of converting flood irrigation systems into pressurized irrigation systems through five case studies (3 cotton, 1 lettuce and 1 lucerne) in southern Queensland, Australia. Yet, these studies considered only one crop and did not assess all crops in a rotation.…”

Section: The Water-energy-food-climate Nexusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chapter 1: Solar, wind and geothermal energy applications in agriculture: back to the future?

Dixon¹,

Ming²

2017

Sustainable Energy Developments

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Energy audits are a crucial part of farm energy management (Chen and Baillie, 2009a). This type of audit refers to the systematic examination of a farm, facility or site, to determine whether, and to what extent, it has used energy efficiently. An energy review determines how efficiently it is being used. It also identifies energy cost saving opportunities and highlights potential improvements in productivity and quality. An energy check may also assess potential savings through strategies such as fuel switching, tariff negotiation and demand-side management (e.g., by changing to alternative farming systems and farm layouts). An energy assessment may be undertaken as part of a broader plan to manage production inputs on-farm (Chen and Baillie, 2009a). The objectives of energy audits include: • Conserve energy inputs. • Reduce greenhouse gas emissions. • Achieve operational and cost efficiencies with improved productivity and profitability. Extensive research has been conducted on both energy use and conservation in agriculture. Recent results of energy efficiency programs have shown considerable variation in energy use between different crops and also different farms of similar production systems (Chen et al., 2015). Pellizzi et al. (1988) found that in Europe, the range of field energy consumption for wheat-like cereals varied from 2.5 GJ/ha to 4.3 GJ/ha. For cotton, a study by Chen and Baillie (2009b) showed that the direct energy inputs for cotton production in Australia ranged from 3.7 to 15.2 GJ/ha. Diesel energy inputs ranged from 95 to 365 liters/ha, with most farms using between 120 to 180 liters/ha. Dryland cotton was at the lower end of this range. The direct on-farm energy use of some nursearies may be up to 20,000 GJ/ha (Chen et al., 2015).

show abstract

Climate change, water security and the need for integrated policy development: the case of on-farm infrastructure investment in the Australian irrigation sector

Cited by 36 publications

References 25 publications

Regional responses to future, demand-driven water scarcity

Regional responses to future, demand-driven water scarcity

Meeting National Emissions Reduction Obligations: A Case Study of Australia

Chapter 1: Solar, wind and geothermal energy applications in agriculture: back to the future?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About