Public subsidies for water‐conserving irrigation investments: Hydrologic, agronomic, and economic assessment

Abstract

[1] Public subsidies for promoting the adoption of water-conserving on-farm irrigation technologies are frequently cited as means for making additional water available for higher-valued uses in the water-scarce western United States. On the basis of an agroeconomic model reflecting conditions in northeastern Colorado, hypothetical conservation subsidy policies are analyzed with regard to their effects on hydrologic and agronomic factors such as irrigation water delivery, consumptive use, and return flows, as well as on economic factors including crop mix, input use, irrigation technology choice, and agricultural net returns to water. The cost-effectiveness of different subsidy arrangements for generating delivery reductions is also assessed, and implications for their implementation are derived. In contrast to assumptions underlying federal policies, the results confirm and extend earlier academic findings that subsidy policies are unlikely to provide real water conservation under many frequently encountered river basin conditions. Citation: Scheierling, S. M., R. A. Young, and G. E. Cardon (2006), Public subsidies for water-conserving irrigation investments: Hydrologic, agronomic, and economic assessment, Water Resour. Res., 42, W03428,

Water conservation in irrigation can increase water use

“…However, it increases overall water use. These findings support the conclusions of Schierling et al (20) as well similar findings published by Huffaker (35), Huffaker and Whittlesey (19), and Ahmad et al (36). They also concur with the recent conclusions of Molden (37).…”

“…Moreover, studies that connect water use efficiency with wet † water savings are rare. Notable exceptions include the works of Hussain et al (16), Huffaker and Whittlesey (17), Peterson and Ding (18), Huffaker and Whittlesey (19), and Schierling et al (20).…”

Literature Review on Rebound Effect of Water Saving Measures and Analysis of a Spanish Case Study

“…As a conclusion of the review of published research, and regarding the mentioned water management policy conditions for avoiding the rebound effect, the policy options that may avoid any rebound effect implies the achievement of one of several of these conditions: a) water consumption does not increase significantly unless irrigated area increases allowing farmers to use the 'water savings' (Berbel and Mateos 2014;Ward and Pulido 2008;Graveline et al 2013;Soto-García et al 2013;Scheierling et al 2006). b) when the quality of infrastructure in previous systems is very deficient (lack of uniformity, fallow land due to water supply restrictions, deficit irrigation applied), the modernization may increase productivity and consequently increase ETc (Lecina et al 2010;Playán and Mateos 2006;Pfeiffer and Lin 2014).…”

“…Nevertheless, as in Gómez-Gómez and Pérez-Blanco (2014), Huffaker provides ambiguous results where both the rebound effect and the net water saving outcome are possible. Scheierling et al (2006) developed an agro-economic model, concluding that subsidies to irrigation efficiency investment may increase consumptive use "if farmers can expand irrigated acreage use". Central Asia General Whittlesey (2003) proposed an analytical framework based on a simplified model that linked crop yield, consumptive water use and applied irrigation.…”

Simple Myths and Basic Maths About Greening Irrigation

“…However, after an increase in the irrigation efficiency, although water use may actually fall, water availability for other uses may decrease through increased consumptive use, reduced return flows and lost aquifer seepage. This hydrological paradox can be found for example in Jensen (2007), Rodríguez-Díaz et al (2012), Scheierling et al (2006) and Ward and Pulido-Velazquez (2008).…”