Climate change, increasing droughts, population expansion and intake behaviour have highlighted the scarcity of water available for agriculture. In Spain, reservoirs for human consumption and agriculture are reaching 52% of their capacity, a figure higher than in previous years, but which does not dispel considerations of long-term scarcity. The Guadalquivir basin, whose reservoirs average 41%, has been restricting the amount of water allocated for irrigation for several years. This scenario requires measures to be taken to reduce consumption and better manage water for crops. Faced with the imposition of an additional tax on water, as proposed by a European directive, a study by the WEARE organization of the University of Cordoba revealed that the most effective formula is still the one currently applied: the proportional deduction of the amount of water consumed. to have. users.
The study, which is part of Ángela Valle García’s doctoral thesis, in which her advisors, Carlos Gutiérrez Martín and Nazaret M. Montilla López, studied the most productive way of managing the water available for agriculture in the Guadalquivir Basin, comparing two policy controls: quota-based allocation (proportional relief from water allocations) instead of pricing; and from two points of view: social and private. To do this, they used a style based on Positive Mathematical Programming (PMP), which, in combination with knowledge about income, prices and arable area, reproduces the behavior of the farmer. “In this style,” explains Gutiérrez Martín, “it is not so much about optimizing what to do, but rather about trying to reproduce the truth and, from there, the farmer’s custom, applying a control policy to see what effect it would have. ” We have before us its implementation. The style allows us to know, depending on the amount of water we will have, what the cultivation plan that we will apply next year will be,” added Montilla López.
So from a social point of view, imposing an additional tax on water above the value already paid for its use to irrigate crops has an effect on society, since this money can be used for other purposes. The tax will work, but, according to the model, it is more negative than the allocation of a quantity of water, because, in addition to the difficulty of being able to identify a good enough value, from a personal point of view, those who manage agriculture suffer more economic losses with the increase of the water tax than with the allocation of a quota.
As Gutiérrez Martín maintains, “with the water tax we lose more than we receive. It is more effective to establish a quota because, by adding a tax, the farmer ends up wasting more. ” concept that can be taken into account through the political government when making specific decisions.
The study is published in the journal Water Resources Management and is funded through the e-MOHICAN commission (TED2021-131066B-I00), with a budget from the National Research Plan for the Ecological and Digital Transition (MCIN/AEI/10. 13039/501100011033) . and the European Union “NextGenerationEU”/PRTR).
Story Source:
Material provided through the University of Cordoba. Note: Content may be edited according to taste and length.
Registration reference:
Stay informed with ScienceDaily’s free e-newsletter, updated daily and weekly. Or check out our many news feeds in your RSS reader:
Stay up to date with the latest social media news from ScienceDaily:
Let us know what you think about ScienceDaily – we welcome positive and negative feedback. Do you have any challenges on this site? Questions?