stoa annual lecture 29 november 2011

STOA Annual Lecture29 November 2011

The sustainable management of natural resources with a special focus

on water and agriculture IP/A/STOA/FWC/2008-096/LOT3/C1/SC3

Introduction

IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

The project

STOA project ‘Sustainable Management of Natural Resources’

• August 2011 to January 2013: 18 months: • Project partners: IEEP, BIO IS and Ecologic Institute• First deliverable: Scoping Paper and workshop at

STOA Annual Lecture

PART 1 -- Management of water as a natural resourcePART 2 – Management of natural resources linked to

Europe’s agriculture and food production

The purpose of the project

• to provide an overview of the sustainable management of natural resources from the points of view of:

o water use and water management in the EU;o use of natural resources in agriculture in the EU;

• to identify future challenges.

Policy context• Resource efficiency

Flagship of Europe 2020 strategyRoadmap for resource efficiency

• Sustainable management of waterWater Framework DirectiveCommunication on water scarcity and droughtsBlueprint to safeguard European Waters

• AgricultureCritical role in management of natural resourcesCAP reform proposals

Study themes

Sustainable management of water resources –

first findings


Objective

Identifying, for the management of water resources:

• Promising current research developments • Emerging technologies available • Good practices for efficient water management


• Imbalances between supply and demand

• Importance of the problem:o geographical and climatic differences, o time variations

• Impact of climate change on water supplies and water needs


Key water challenges in the EU – introduction

EU water abstraction per sector


Energy production45%

Agriculture22%

Public water supply21%

Industry12%

Source: Eurostat,2010



Water use concepts: abstraction



consumptionWater use concepts:


Scientific research on efficient water management

Theme 1


Main research questions

What are the most promising current and recent research developments for water use and water management?

For the research projects identified, to what extent can they help addressing • existing water challenges?• potential levels of water savings, • potential users,• uptake of the results

…. Including contribution of other disciplines

• First review of FP6 and FP7 projects

• 12 projects identified, grouped into categories, on the following topics:

o the agricultural sectoro the industrial sectoro urban water serviceso integrated water resource management (IWRM)o economic policy instruments (EPIs) o global climate change, mitigation of drought and water scarcity


Scientific research on efficient water management Theme 1

Overview of 5 preliminarily selected projects:

1. The agricultural sector• SIRIUS (2010 – 2013)

2. The industrial sector• Aquafit4use (2008 – 2011)



3. Integrated water resource management (IWRM)• AquaStress (2005 – 2009)

4. Economic policy instruments (EPIs) for water savings and efficiency• EPI-WATER (2011-2013)

5. Global change • ALERT (2004- 2007)



Technical tools for improving EU water management

Theme 2



What are the most promising technical tools available to tackle water management issues in Europe?

What are their environmental co-benefits, potential trade-offs, potential levels of water savings, opportunities to extend implementation?

17 technological tools identified, grouped in 7 main categories: • Monitoring of water use;• Rating tools and standards;• Conveyance technologies;• Precision irrigation;• Alternative water sources;• Agronomic techniques; and • Decision making aid tools for water savings.


Technical tools for improving EU water management Theme 2

Overview of 5 selected tools:

1. Monitoring of water use• Metering, a basis for identifying inefficiencies and improving practices

2. Conveyance technologies • Opportunities for better distribution efficiency• Canal lining, which helps to avoid water losses



3. Alternative water sources• waste water recycling can have co-benefits in terms of nutrient recovery

4. Agronomic techniques• for example conservation tillage, can help reducing surface runoff and evaporation

5. Decision making aid tools for water savings• decision support tools (e.g. IRRINET ) can help avoiding unnecessary irrigation



Good policy practices on efficient water management

Theme 3



What are the best practices for efficient water management in the EU as set out within this project?

What are their environmental co-benefits, potential trade-offs,potential levels of water savings, and opportunities to extend implementation?

Good policy practices on efficient water management Theme 3

The practices identified have been grouped into the following main categories:

• Water management in agriculture

• Urban water management

• Cross sectoral (urban water management and agriculture)



Overview of practices identified:

Water management in agriculture• irrigation efficiency, examples from

o Cyprus (support for improved irrigation efficiency), ando Spain, Castilla-La Mancha (advice, cooperation agreements)

Waste water re-use• Gran Canaria (promotion of wastewater reuse in agriculture)

Water pricing • Spain, Guadalquivir river basin



Urban water management• Berlin (Germany) (integrated water management strategy);• Zaragoza (Spain) (reducing water demand);• Łodz (Poland) (water management in the urban development policy);

Cross sectoral (urban water management and agriculture)• Tel Aviv (Israel) policies to encourage urban waste water reuse in agriculture;• several Spanish regions (exchange of water usage rights between domestic and agricultural use).


Questions

?

Sustainable management of natural resources

linked to Europe’s agriculture and food production –

first findings


Objective

Examining, with regard to the management management of natural resources in agriculture:

• Interactions between agriculture and climate change• Agriculture and the CAP• The case of slurry acidification


Introduction: challenges to natural resources in agriculture

• European targets for water quality and biodiversity are being missed, soil quality is declining and more is required to meet the climate challenge;

• There is a clear responsibility on agriculture, like other sectors, to respond; a step change is required;

• Greater sustainability is also in farmers’ interest over the next decades;

• The CAP is a means to guide and support change in the management of natural resources; an opportunity not to be squandered;

• Public support for farming is real, but depends on a sense of cultural integrity, compatibility with core European values. The environment is part of this.

Introduction: Challenges to agricultural productivity

• A 2°C local warming in mid to high latitudes could increase wheat production by nearly 10 per cent

• In low latitudes a 2°C local warming would have an opposite effect: by 2030 southern European regions could experience a 5-10 per cent decrease in yields;

• The future productivity changes will differ locally and will be related to:

o Biophysical factors ( eg changes in rainfall, temperature etc)o Adaptive capacity (adaptation strategies by farmers; advisory

services, training, information etc.)•

Introduction: Sustainable resource management and food security

’Food security’ (FAO, 1996) - involves a balance between viable food production and sustainable management of the natural resource base.

Achieving this balance is dependent on:• retaining capacity of the land to produce food into the future; • retaining vital ecosystems resilient to climate change and plant

health risks; • retaining water tables at a sustainable level; • retaining soil as a resource, and • ensuring capability of land to be resilient to droughts and floods.

Agriculture and climate change

Theme 4



• What are the most promising technological and best practice options available in EU agriculture, which can contribute to mitigation and adaptation efforts? How cost-effective are these options based on the data available? What are the obstacles to implementation?

• What are the synergies and trade-offs between practices for climate change adaptation and mitigation and practices for water savings in the agricultural sector?

Interactions between agriculture and climate change

• agriculture accounts for cca 10 per cent of total EU-27 GHG emissions;

• three main sources: CH4 emissions from cattle enteric fermentation, direct and indirect N2O emissions from soils;

• agriculture and land use are critical in maintaining carbon sinks;

• the use of agricultural biomass for renewable energy.

Technically feasible mitigation and adaptation options

The technically feasible mitigation options should be evaluated against:• cost-efficiency;• implementation feasibility; • trade-offs and synergies with other environmental objectives; • how these measures interact with each other and with

adaptation measures .

For the technically feasible adaptation options• the ‘no-regret’ strategies are particularly important to identify.

Theme 4

Options in renewable energy production

• The use of agricultural biomass can provide renewable energy and hence mitigate emissions from fossil fuel use.

• However, environmental risks need to be addressed and hierarchy of uses should be respected:

o Use of residual wastes (anaerobic digestion for organic manure/slurry; composting of animal by-products)

o Use of arisings produced by habitat conservation and landscape management

o Use of agricultural residues (e.g straw)o Use of biomass harvested from new and existing woodlands on

agricultural land o Use of dedicated energy crops

Agriculture and the CAP

Theme 5



What are the technologies and land management actions needed to deliver better outcomes for water, soil and climate change mitigation?

What type of policy measures within the current CAP and the CAP reform proposals can support technological and non-technological options for sustainable resource use?

What is the nature and degree of support from the CAP that may be potentially needed to incentivise their uptake?

The current CAP and the natural resource question• Since the 1992 McSharry reform - a gradual introduction of

incentive payments to encourage the use of environmentally beneficial practices;

• Since the 2003 Mid Term Review - a shift away from price support to decoupled payments and the introduction of environmental conditionality through cross compliance;

• However, many of the environmental media affected by agricultural activity, such as water, soil and biodiversity, continue to deteriorate.

The future CAP and the natural resource question

• Three overarching objectives:o Viable food production; o Sustainable management of natural resources and

climate action; o Balanced territorial development.

• Climate change is highlighted as a self-standing priority.

• Knowledge transfer, innovation and advice also receive a much greater highlight than in the current CAP.

The current CAP

Pillar 1 - New design of Direct Payments

• Source: DG Agriculture•

Pillar 2 - New design of the rural development policy6 Union priorities:• Knowledge transfer• Enhancing competitiveness• Food chain and risk management• Preserving and enhancing ecosystems• Resource efficiency and transition to a low carbon economy• Realising the jobs potential and development of rural areas

Cross-cutting objectives: • innovation, environment and climate change mitigation and

adaptation

The case of slurry acidification

Theme 6



What is the potential of slurry acidification for reducing GHG emissions?

What is the feasibility of deploying slurry acidification technology (or other similar technologies) in different geographic locations and on different types of farms?

What is its cost-effectiveness in comparison with other technologies or practices with a similar effect on agricultural greenhouse gas emissions?

GHG emissions and manure management

• Methane and nitrous oxide (CH4 and N2O )-- two important greenhouse gases

• The deposition of NH3 or particulates of NH4 to land and water leads to eutrophication.

• As well as reducing GHG emissions, certain types of manure management may reduce ammonia emissions with a knock-on benefit for mitigating negative impacts on water, soil and air.

• Additionally, improvement of the fertiliser efficiency for manure applied to surface will be achieved.

Slurry acidification

• A common practice in The Netherlands and Denmark;

• During storage, following acidification of the slurry, the NH3 emissions by volatilisation were reduced by 90 per cent compared to untreated slurry;

• In the field, the acidified slurry had a much lower share of the volatilised NH3 than for untreated slurry.

Thank You for Your [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

stoa annual lecture 29 november 2011

Documents

water use

water scarcity

water quality

water quantity issues

sustainable use of resources

key water issues

good water status

eu use of natural resources