water

Article
Optimization-Based Agricultural Water-Saving
Potential Analysis in Minqin County, Gansu
Province China
Qiong Yue, Fan Zhang ID
and Ping Guo *
Centre for Agricultural Water Research in China, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100083, China;
yueqxy@163.com (Q.Y.); zhagf@cau.edu.cn (F.Z.)
* Correspondence: guop@cau.edu.cn; Tel.: +86-106-273-8496




Received: 3 July 2018; Accepted: 8 August 2018; Published: 23 August 2018


Abstract: To deal with the contradictions that are caused by natural conditions and unreasonable
water allocations in Minqin County, which are located downstream of the Shiyang River basin in arid
northwest China, an optimization-based multi-scale calculation method was proposed for analyzing
agricultural water-saving potential. Firstly, an optimization model was developed for allocating
water and land resources legitimately with the conjunctive use of surface water and groundwater.
Secondly, the groundwater equilibrium was fully considered in developing optimization model to
achieve the ecological value of agricultural water savings. Then, multi-scale agricultural water-saving
potentials were analyzed based on optimal results under different water-saving levels. These results
provide local water managers with satisfactory economic benefit with higher water use efficiency.
With reasonable management strategies of water and land resources, the ecosystem of Minqin County
could gradually recover in the future. The results of the multi-scale water-saving potential analysis
can help decision makers to identify desired water-saving plans that consider the coordinated
development of the local economy, society, and ecology.

Keywords: water and land optimal allocation; conjunctive use of surface water and groundwater;
multi-scale agricultural water-saving potential analysis

1. Introduction
Due to the rapid urbanization and industrialization in China, the increasing conflict between
limited water resources and increased water demands calls for reasonable water allocation schemes.
As the biggest consumer in most areas, especially in arid and semi-arid areas that are characterized
by low rainfall and high evaporation, irrigation water plays an important role in agriculture
production [1,2]. For example, in the arid regions of northwest China, irrigation water accounts for
approximately 90% of the total water use [3], while the irrigation water use efficiency is far lower than
the advanced regions [4]. That is, enormous potentials exist in the conservation of limited agricultural
water resources. The accurate assessment of agricultural water-saving potential can not only help
local sustainable development by affecting local food security, ecological security, and water security,
but also provide specific water-saving direction to local decision makers. Minqin County, which is
located downstream of the Shiyang River Basin, is a typical arid area suffering serious ecological
deterioration due to the long-term exploitation of groundwater and unguided water management. It is
of great significance to study the water-saving potential of Minqin County as a typical case.
The agricultural water-saving potential was measured using various techniques, engineering
projects, and water-saving management, and involved four scales, including crop, field, irrigation
area, and regional/basin [5]. Many researchers have tried to measure the agricultural water-saving

Water 2018, 10, 1125; doi:10.3390/w10091125 www.mdpi.com/journal/water

Water 2018, 10, 1125 2 of 19

potential [6–9]. Different measures have been adopted, including efficient irrigation technology,
deficit irrigation regulation, and irrigation scheduling improvement [10]. However, comprehensive
analysis would be obtained by multiple scales of water-saving measures and considering multiple
effects [11]. Although every method has its appropriate applications, according to its advantages
and disadvantages, unreasonable results might be obtained when overlooking the important effects
that are created by agricultural water and land allocation. Zhang and Guo [12] integrated water
management optimization model and agricultural water-saving potential analysis methods to analyze
local irrigation water-saving potential based on optimization results. However, how to combine
multiple scales of water-saving measures with water and land resource optimal allocation has rarely
been considered and needs to be addressed.
Decreasing of available irrigation water and the increasing of water demand call for the reasonable
allocation and effective management of agricultural water resources. Additionally, crop planting
structure optimization, which allocates the optimum planting proportion to each crop to achieve the
goals of increasing agricultural economic benefits and decreasing irrigation water use [13], is equally
essential for sustainable agricultural development and to address serious water shortage problems.
Therefore, irrigation water and planting structure optimization models were extensively employed to
provide theoretical guidance for decision makers [14–16]. The interaction and exchange between
surface and groundwater resources were considered throughout the conjunctive use of surface
water and groundwater [17,18], in which the available groundwater depths were introduced [12,19].
In addition, some studies tried to combine various optimization models with a water-saving potential
analysis, and thus contribute to the optimal management of water and land resources [12,20]. However,
with more attention being paid to optimizing agricultural water and land resources separately via
different optimization models, the interactions between them were not fully considered and few
researchers realized the ecological value in agricultural water savings.
Therefore, to deal with the multiple contradictions that are caused by natural conditions and
unreasonable water allocation, which manifest in ecological harm and further affect agricultural
water and land resource management, the objectives of this study are to (1) establish an integrated
optimization model for water and land resource allocation based on the conjunctive use of surface
water and groundwater; (2) introduce the groundwater equilibrium constraint to obtain several
irrigation water schemes and planting areas under different water-saving levels; and, (3) conduct
the analysis of multi-scale irrigation water-saving potential with water-saving measures. Finally,
an optimization-based multi-scale research method for agricultural water-saving potential is developed.
The method was applied to Minqin County, which is located downstream of the Shiyang River basin
in northwest China, to demonstrate its effectiveness and practicality for agricultural water and land
management and agricultural water-saving potential analysis. The results may support local decision
makers formulate better allocation schemes, and the study methods should be helpful for managers to
identify the desired water and land allocation plans in similar areas.

2. Study System

2.1. Study Area

Minqin County is a typical arid region, located downstream of the Shiyang River basin, northwest
China, within the east longitude 102◦ 520 –103◦ 500 and the north latitude 38◦ 220 –39◦ 60 . As the green
barrier of ecological security in northwest China with the title of the desert oasis, Minqin County
is surrounded by the Badain Jaran desert and Tengger desert (Figure 1), and is located in an arid
climate zone, with an average annual precipitation and potential evaporation of about 110 mm and
2623 mm, respectively. Precipitation varies greatly among different seasons, with precipitation from
July to September, accounting for nearly 66% of the whole year’s precipitation [2]. The average annual
precipitation from 1985–2014 in Minqin County is shown in Figure 2, and the precipitation distribution
in 2014 of Minqin County is expressed in Figure 3. Minqin County has three main irrigation areas:
Water 2018, 10, 1125 3 of 19

Water 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 19

Hongyashan, Huanhe, and Changning, among which Hongyashan’s irrigation area occupies 92.8% of
theoccupies
whole
Water Minqin
92.8%
2018, irrigation
10, xof the
FOR area
whole
PEER [21]. All
Minqin
REVIEW of the surface
irrigation water
area [21]. All ofsupply for Minqin
the surface Countyfor
water supply comes
Minqin from
3 of 19
theCounty
Hongyashan
comes reservoir, and agriculture
from the Hongyashan is the and
reservoir, highest water use
agriculture sector.
is the highest water use sector.
occupies 92.8% of the whole Minqin irrigation area [21]. All of the surface water supply for Minqin
County comes from the Hongyashan reservoir, and agriculture is the highest water use sector.

Figure 1. Sketch map of the Shiyang River basin in northwest China.

Figure 1. Sketch
Figure map
1. Sketch of of
map thethe
Shiyang
ShiyangRiver
Riverbasin in northwest
basin in northwestChina.
China.
250
250

200
200
Precipitation/mm

150
Precipitation/mm

150

100 100

50 50

0 0
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014

Time/year
Time/year

Figure
Figure 2. Precipitationfrom
from1985–2014
1985–2014 in
in Minqin County.
Figure 2.2.Precipitation
Precipitation from 1985–2014 in Minqin
MinqinCounty.
County.
Because
Because of economic
of economic developmentand
development andpopulation
population growth
growth in
in the
the upper
upperandandmiddle
middlereaches
reachesofof
Because
the of
Shiyang economic
River, thedevelopment
available and
surface population
water in Minqin growth
Countyin the
is upper
rapidly
the Shiyang River, the available surface water in Minqin County is rapidly decreasing. Meanwhile,
and middle
decreasing. reaches
Meanwhile, of
aathe
Shiyang more serious
River, the problem is the
available over-exploitation
surface water in of the groundwater.
Minqin County is In the pastdecreasing.
rapidly few decades, the over-
Meanwhile,
more serious problem is the over-exploitation of the groundwater. In the past few decades, the over-
a more exploitation of the groundwater
seriousofproblem has caused a series
is the over-exploitation of
ofof ecological
the problems,Insuch
groundwater. theasasthe continuous
past
exploitation the groundwater has caused a series ecological problems, such the few decades,
continuous
decline
thedecline of
over-exploitation the groundwater level (Figure 4), deterioration of the groundwater environment, and the
of the groundwater level (Figure 4), deterioration of the groundwater environment, as
of the groundwater has caused a series of ecological problems, such and
further leads to serious desertification, increased salinity, and oasis shrinking [22]. To restore the
continuous decline
further leads of the groundwater
to serious desertification, level (Figure salinity,
increased 4), deterioration
and oasisofshrinking
the groundwater
[22]. To environment,
restore the
ecological system of the Minqin oasis, local water managers limited the groundwater exploitation,
andecological
further leadssystem to serious desertification, increased salinity, and oasis shrinking [22]. exploitation,
To restore the
and thus led to aofcorresponding
the Minqin oasis, local
reduction ofwater managers
agricultural limited
production. the groundwater
Although the government has
ecological
andtaken system
thus action
led to by of the Minqin
a corresponding
transferring wateroasis, local
reduction water managers
of agricultural
from other areas in recent limited
production. the groundwater
Although
years, the water for exploitation,
the government
availability has
the study
andtaken
thus
area is far less than the water requirement. Thence, both the water utilization efficiency and water has
led
action tobya corresponding
transferring reduction
water from of
other agricultural
areas in recentproduction.
years, the Although
water the government
availability for the study
areaaction
taken is farby
productionless than the need
transferring
efficiency water torequirement.
water from
be Thence,
other areas
improved. both the
in recent water
years, theutilization efficiencyfor
water availability andthewater
study
production
area is far lessefficiency
than the needwatertorequirement.
be improved. Thence, both the water utilization efficiency and water
production efficiency need to be improved.
 Water 2018, 10, 1125 4 of 19
Water
Water 2018,2018,
10, x10,
FORx FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 4 of 419of 19

45 45

40 40

35 35

30 30
Precipitation/mm
Precipitation/mm

25 25

20 20

15 15

10 10

5 5

0 0
1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 11 12 12
Time/month
Time/month

Figure
Figure 3.3.Precipitation
Precipitation
3. Precipitation
Figure distribution
distribution for2014
forfor
distribution 20142014
in ininMinqin
Minqin
Minqin County.
County.
County.

7 7 0 0
Groundwater
Groundwater availability
availability Groundwater
Groundwater depthdepth
6 6
5 5
Groundwater avalibility/108m3
Groundwater avalibility/108m3

Groundwater depth/m
Groundwater depth/m
5 5

4 10 10
4

3 3
15 15

2 2
20 20
1 1

0 0 25 25
20002000
20012001
20022002
20032003
20042004
20052005
20062006
20072007
20082008
20092009
20102010
20112011
20122012
20132013
20142014
20152015
Time/year
Time/year

Figure
Figure
Figure 4.4.Groundwater
Groundwater
4. Groundwater availability
availability and
availability and groundwater
groundwater
and depth
depth
groundwater from
depth from
from 2000–2015
2000–2015 in in
2000–2015 inMinqin
Minqin
Minqin County.
County.
County.

TheThe economic
economic development
development of Minqin
of Minqin County
County mainly
mainly depends
depends on agricultural
on agricultural production,
production, andand
The economic development of Minqin County mainly depends on agricultural production,
the main crops in Minqin include spring wheat, maize, cotton, vegetables, melons, and oil crops. TheThe
the main crops in Minqin include spring wheat, maize, cotton, vegetables, melons, and oil crops.
and the main crops in Minqin include spring wheat, maize, cotton, vegetables, melons, and oil
current
current irrigation
irrigation quotas
quotas of the
of the typical
typical crops
crops in Minqin
in Minqin County
County are are displayed
displayed in Figure
in Figure 5. The
5. The
crops. The current irrigation quotas of the typical crops in Minqin County are displayed in Figure 5.
statistical
statistical datadata of Minqin
of Minqin County
County in recent
in recent years
years cancan
be be
seenseen in Table
in Table 1, which
1, which showsshows
thatthat
the the
The statistical data of Minqin County in recent years can be seen in Table 1, which shows that the
proportion
proportion of economic
of economic cropscrops
hashas increased
increased gradually,
gradually, andand
the the cultivated
cultivated areas
areas of water-consuming
of water-consuming
proportion of economic crops has increased gradually, and the cultivated areas of water-consuming
crops
crops are are increasing
increasing too,too, indicating
indicating thatthat fierce
fierce contradictions
contradictions exists
exists between
between the the
cropcrop planting
planting
crops are increasing too, indicating that fierce contradictions exists between the crop planting structure
structure
structure andand limited
limited available
available water.
water. ThisThis contradiction
contradiction is aisgreat
a great challenge
challenge faced
faced by local
by local managers
managers
and limited available water. This contradiction is a great challenge faced by local managers in practice.
in practice.
in practice.
Table 1. Summary of crop acreage from 2011–2015 in Minqin County (unit: hm 2 ).
Table
Table 1. Summary
1. Summary of crop
of crop acreage
acreage fromfrom 2011–2015
2011–2015 in Minqin
in Minqin County
County (unit:
(unit: hm2hm
). 2).

Spring
Spring Wheat
Spring
Wheat Wheat Maize
Maize
Maize Cotton
Cotton
Cotton Oil Oil
FlexFlex Seed Seed
OilFlex Seed
Melon Melon
Melon
20112011 2011 7400.04
7400.04 7400.04 5386.69
5386.69
5386.69 12,826.73
12,826.73
12,826.73 7160.04
7160.04
7160.04 2106.68
2106.68
2106.68
20122012 3853.35
2012 3853.35 3853.35 9560.05
9560.05
9560.05 11,480.06
11,480.06
11,480.06 7773.37
7773.37
7773.37 2173.34
2173.34
2173.34
20132013 3353.35
2013 3353.35 3353.35 9373.38
9373.38
9373.38 8880.04
8880.04
8880.04 9666.72
9666.72
9666.72 2633.35
2633.35
2633.35
20142014 4473.33
2014 4473.33 4473.33 9646.67
9646.67
9646.67 7553.33
7553.33
7553.33 10,666.67 2320.00
10,666.67
10,666.67 2320.00
2320.00
20152015 2015 4673.57 4673.57
4673.57 9967.17
9967.17
9967.17 5000.25
5000.25
5000.25 11,513.91
11,513.91 2473.46
11,513.91 2473.46
2473.46
Water 2018, 10, 1125 5 of 19
Water 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 19

450

400

350
Irrigation quota/mm

300

250

200

150

100

50

0
Spring wheat Seed melon Cotton Maize Oil flax
Crops

Figure 5. Current irrigation quotas of typical crops in Minqin County.

Figure 5. Current irrigation quotas of typical crops in Minqin County.

With the
With the improvement
improvement of of agriculture
agriculture water
water management,
management, great great water-saving
water-saving potentials
potentials exist
exist in
in
local irrigation
local irrigation water
water allocation
allocation system.
system. Therefore,
Therefore, itit is
isof
ofgreat
greatsignificance
significance to
toanalyze
analyzethe
theagricultural
agricultural
water-saving potentials
water-saving potentials with
with the
the efficient
efficient utilization
utilization of of limited
limited water
water and
and land
land resources
resources in
in order
order toto
improve agricultural
improve agriculturalproduction, promote
production, socioeconomic
promote socioeconomic development, and helpand
development, ecological
help restoration
ecological
in Minqin County.
restoration in Minqin County.

2.2. Data
2.2. Data Collection
Collection
Natural environmental
Natural environmental data,
data, socio-economic
socio-economicinformation,
information,and andtypical
typicalcrops
cropsdata
data were
were used
used inin
this study. Meteorological data from 1985–2014 in the Minqin County were obtained
this study. Meteorological data from 1985–2014 in the Minqin County were obtained from the China from the China
Meteorological Data
Meteorological Data Sharing
Sharing Service
Service System;
System; crops
crops data
data [23],
[23], including
including thethe typical
typical crop
crop sensitivity
sensitivity
index, crop growth stages division, crop coefficient, and maximum crop
index, crop growth stages division, crop coefficient, and maximum crop yield, were used yield, were used in thisinstudy;
this
crop planting data and population were obtained from The Statistical Yearbook of Wuwei
study; crop planting data and population were obtained from The Statistical Yearbook of Wuwei City; City; streamflow
data, water supply
streamflow data, supply
data, water and current
data,irrigation waterirrigation
and current distributions
water originated in theoriginated
distributions survey of Wuwei
in the
survey of Wuwei City; the groundwater management objectives were available in TheKey
City; the groundwater management objectives were available in The Shiyang River Basin Governance
Shiyang River
Projects;
Basin Keythe current irrigation
Governance Projects; quotas were irrigation
the current obtained from quotasThewere
Wuwei Industry
obtained Water
from Quota;
The Wuwei and finally,
Industry
the value
Water range
Quota; andoffinally,
the parameters
the valueexpressed in Table
range of the 2 [24] were
parameters references
expressed of the
in Table coefficient
2 [24] including
were references
the regional specific yield, the leakage coefficient of the canal system, the precipitation
of the coefficient including the regional specific yield, the leakage coefficient of the canal system, the infiltration
coefficient, and
precipitation the field leakage
infiltration coefficient.
coefficient, All were
and the field used for the
leakage optimization
coefficient. All model.
were used for the
optimization model.
Table 2. The range of the main parameters.
Table 2. The range of the main parameters.
Precipitation Canal Leakage Irrigation Supply
Specific Yield
Specific Precipitation Infiltration
Infiltration Coefficient Canal Coefficient
Leakage Irrigation Supply
Coefficient
Clay Yield
0.02–0.05 Coefficient
0.08–0.15 Coefficient
0.08–0.15 Coefficient
0.08–0.12
Clay
Silt 0.02–0.05
0.05–0.10 0.08–0.15
0.12–0.18 0.08–0.15
0.12–0.18 0.08–0.12
0.12–0.18
Silt sand
Fine 0.05–0.10
0.06–0.20 0.12–0.18
0.15–0.22 0.12–0.18
0.15–0.22 0.12–0.18
0.15–0.20
Fine and
Sand sandgravel 0.06–0.20
0.12–0.25 0.15–0.22
0.18–0.25 0.15–0.22- 0.15–0.20
-
Sandstone
Sand and 0.04–0.10 0.05–0.10 - -
Basalt 0.12–0.25
0.05–0.08 0.18–0.25
0.08–0.15 - - - -
gravel
Sedimentary
Sandstone rocks 0.04–0.10
0.03–0.10 0.05–0.08
0.05–0.10 - - - -
Basalt 0.05–0.08 0.08–0.15 - -
Sedimentary
0.03–0.10 0.05–0.08 - -
rocks
Water 2018, 10, 1125 6 of 19
Water 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 19

3. Study
Study Methods

3.1. System
3.1. System Framework
Framework
land resource
This paper attempts to combine the optimization model for agricultural water and land resource
allocation with agricultural water-saving potential. This
allocation This section
section contains
contains two
two major components
(Figure 6): (1) integrated optimization model for agricultural water and land resource allocation and
(2) multi-scale
multi-scale agricultural
agricultural water-saving
water-savingpotentials.
potentials.The
Thejoint
jointconnect
connectpoint
pointbetween
betweenthese two
these twoparts is
parts
the total available water of Minqin County.
is the total available water of Minqin County.

Allocation optimization model for Groundwater Equilibrium Transformation

agricultural water and soil resources
Precipitation infiltration evapotranspirat
Evapotranspiration Planting Field infiltration ion
constraints structure Well water
Well irrigation return
Food security constraints optimization exploitation
Canal leakage Lateral
Groundwater equilibrium Conjunctive
Lateral recharge excretion
constraint
allocation
Planting area constraints
Underground aquifer
Water supply constraints Optimal
solutions
Study area and data

Water Resources Overview

Agricultural water-saving potentials
Precipitation Surfacewater Groundwater
Crop Field Irrigation Area
scale scale area scale scale
Data preparation

Decision alternatives Crops Social economy Nature

Figure 6. System framework.

Figure 6. System framework.

The optimization model is developed to achieve the efficient utilization of water resources and
The optimization
optimally allocate themodel
land isresources
developed oftocrops
achieveviathe efficient utilization
adjusting of water resources
the crop planting and
acreage. The
optimally allocate the land resources of crops via adjusting the crop planting acreage.
appropriate adjustments of agricultural water resources and cultivated areas are explored to supportThe appropriate
adjustments
decision makersof agricultural water resources
for better agricultural and cultivated areas are explored to support decision
water management.
makers for better agricultural water management.
When considering the realities of the study area, analysis with the multi-scale water-saving
When which
potentials, considering theofrealities
consists of the study
the crop-scale, area, analysis
field-scale, irrigationwith the multi-scale
area-scale, water-saving
and region-scale, are
potentials, The
conducted. which consists ofpotentials
water-saving the crop-scale, field-scale,
of different irrigation
scales are area-scale,
calculated and region-scale,
by corresponding water-
are conducted.
saving measures. The water-saving
By comparing potentials
the results amongof different scales aare
different scales, calculated
relatively by corresponding
reliable analysis could
water-saving measures. By comparing the results among different
be obtained to help local managers to alleviate agricultural water shortage. scales, a relatively reliable analysis
could be obtained to help local managers to alleviate agricultural water shortage.
3.2. Groundwater Equilibrium Analysis
3.2. Groundwater Equilibrium Analysis
Irrigated groundwater balance refers to the relationships between the total groundwater
Irrigated groundwater balance refers to the relationships between the total groundwater recharge,
recharge, the total discharge, and the storage during a period of time. That is, the difference between
the total discharge, and the storage during a period of time. That is, the difference between the
the groundwater recharge and the discharge in a certain period is equal to the change of the
groundwater recharge and the discharge in a certain period is equal to the change of the underground
underground reservoir inventory, which can be expressed as follows [25]:
reservoir inventory, which can be expressed as follows [25]:
ΔQ = Qs − Qe (1)
∆Q = Qs − Qe (1)
Water 2018, 10, 1125 7 of 19

where ∆Q is the change in the amount of groundwater during the certain period; Qs is the total
amount of groundwater recharge during the certain period; and, Qe is the total amount of groundwater
discharge during the certain period.
The main sources of recharge in the study area include precipitation infiltration, field infiltration,
canal leakage, well irrigation seepage feedback, and lateral recharge. The main discharges include
well water exploitation, evapotranspiration, and lateral discharge. The change of the groundwater
level indicates the amount of variation in the stored groundwater. The amount of lateral supply and
lateral discharge is so small as to be ignored. The limit depth of groundwater evaporation is 5 m [26].
Minqin’s groundwater depth is far more than 5 m, so the evapotranspiration is assumed to be zero in
this study. Therefore, the groundwater equilibrium function can be expressed, as follows:

µA∆H = Q p + Qc + Q f + Qw − Qo (2)

where the µ is the regional specific yield; A (hm2 ) is the area; ∆H (m) is the increase of the groundwater
level during the certain period; Qp (104 m3 ) is the precipitation infiltration during the certain period;
Qc (104 m3 ) is the canal leakage during the certain period; Qf (104 m3 ) is the field infiltration during
the certain period; Qw (104 m3 ) is well irrigation seepage feedback during the certain period; and, Qo
(104 m3 ) is the amount of well water exploitation during the certain period.

3.3. Integrated Optimization Model for Water and Land Resource Allocation
When considering the transformation of surface water resource, the Jensen model (which Jensen
M.E. first proposed in 1968) is introduced in this study to optimize the farmers’ net economic benefit
with an objective formulation. The decision variables are the allocation of the surface water and
groundwater for each crop in each period, and the crops’ cultivated areas. The objective function is
expressed as:

m n  SW λij m T m T m
ij + EPij + GWij
   
SWit GWit
max = ∑ Ai Bi Ymi ∏ ETmaxij − C1 ∑ Ai ∑ η1 − C2 ∑ Ai ∑ η2 − ∑ A i Di (3)
i =1 j =1 i =1 t =1 i =1 t =1 i =1

T
SWij = ∑ qijt SWit (4)
t =1
T
GWij = ∑ qijt GWit (5)
t =1

where i is the crop type; j is the number of crop growth stage; t is the index of time periods; Ai is the
crop area of crop i (hm2 ); Bi is the price of the crop per unit (CNY/kg); Ymi is the maximum yield of
crop i per unit under full irrigation (kg/hm2 ); SWij is the irrigated surface water of crop i during stage j
(mm); GWij is the irrigated groundwater of crop i during stage j (mm); EPij is the effective precipitation
of crop i during stage j (mm); ETmaxij is the maximum evapotranspiration of crop i during stage j (mm);
λij is the water sensitivity index of crop i within stage j; SWit is the irrigated water for surface water
of crop i during period t (mm); GWit is the irrigated water from the groundwater of crop i during
period t (mm); C1 is the price of surface water per unit (CNY/m3 ); C2 is the price of groundwater
per unit (CNY/m3 ); η1 is the utilization coefficient of surface water; η2 is the utilization coefficient of
groundwater; Di is the planting cost of crop i (CNY); and, qijt is the proportion of crop i during stage j
in the period t. There are some constraints in this model, as described below.

3.3.1. Groundwater Equilibrium Constraint

In order to prevent land salinization and desertification, respectively, caused by a high
groundwater level and low groundwater level, the groundwater equilibrium constraint was introduced
into the model. The available upper and lower bounds of the groundwater depth were used to control
Water 2018, 10, 1125 8 of 19

the groundwater level in a reasonable range in order to protect the groundwater resources. The specific
constraint is expressed as follows:
m h i
SW SW GWit
∑ Ai β η1it + β0 η 0 it + β00 GWit − λη2
αPt i =1
Ht = Ht−1 − − + EGt (6)
µ µA

Hmin ≤ Ht ≤ Hmax (7)

where Ht is the groundwater level depth in the period t (mm); Ht−1 is the groundwater level depth
in the period t − 1 (mm); Pt is the effective precipitation in the period t (mm); α is the precipitation
leakage coefficient; β is the canal leakage coefficient; β0 is the irrigation return flow coefficient; η 0 is
the field water use coefficient; λ is the ratio of agricultural water consumption to the total amount of
well water exploitation; β00 is the well regression coefficient; EGt is the groundwater evaporation in
the period t (m3 ); Hmin is the groundwater level upper limit (m); and, Hmax is the groundwater level
lower limit (m).

3.3.2. Water Supply Constraints

The amount of surface water and groundwater calculated in the model cannot exceed the total
available agricultural water supply, thus the following constraints are proposed.
Surface water supply constraint

m T
∑ Ai ∑ SWit ≤ Qη1 (8)
i =1 t =1

Groundwater availability constraint

m T
∑ Ai ∑ GWit ≤ Gη2 (9)
i =1 t =1

where Q (104 m3 ) is the surface water supply and G (104 m3 ) is the groundwater availability.

3.3.3. Evapotranspiration Constraint

In the model, the sum of precipitation and irrigation water during each growth stage should
be less than the maximum water requirement, and satisfy the minimum evapotranspiration of crops
during the corresponding growth stage. Therefore, the constraint is formed, as follows:

ETminij ≤ SWij + EPij + GWij ≤ ETmaxij (10)

where ETminij is the minimum evapotranspiration of crop i during stage j (mm).

3.3.4. Food Security Constraint

In Minqin County, the main grain crops are spring wheat and maize. The sum of the two
outputs should meet the minimum food requirements of the total population (420 kg/person) [20].
This constraint can be expressed, as follows:
!λij
k n SWij + EPij + GWij
∑ Ai Ymi ∏ ETmaxij
≥Y×S (11)
i =1 j =1

where Y is the per capita minimum food weight (kg/person) and S is the local population.
Water 2018, 10, 1125 9 of 19

3.3.5. Planting Area Constraints

In the process of optimization, the total acreage of the crops should less than the maximum area.
The maximum and minimum planting area constraints are formed to avoid the extreme cultivation
adjustment of certain crops. Constraints are expressed, as follows
m
∑ Ai ≤ Amax (12)
i =1

Ai ≤ Ai,max (13)

Ai ≥ Ai,min (14)

where Amax is the total crop acreage (hm2 ); Ai,max is the maximum acreage of the crop i (hm2 ); and,
Ai,min is the minimum acreage of the crop i (hm2 ).

3.3.6. Non-Negative Constraints

The total amount of irrigation water in each crop growth period must be greater than zero, and the
expression of these constraints are as follows:

SWit ≥ 0, GWit ≥ 0 (15)

Spring wheat, maize, cotton, seed melon, and oil flax are selected for model optimization in this
study. The number of crop growth stages is five, and the number of time periods is 12. The average
prices of spring wheat, seed melon, cotton, maize, and oil flax are 2.5 CNY/kg, 1.6 CNY/kg,
14.5 CNY/kg, 1.6 CNY/kg, and 6.5 CNY/kg, respectively. The precipitation meteorological data
multiplied by the effective utilization factor is calculated as the effective precipitation. The values of
ET0 and ETmax are obtained from the FAO-56 (Food and Agriculture Organization) Penman-Monteith
method. The available water supply is calculated when considering the proportion of planting and the
irrigation water use coefficient based on the total agricultural irrigation water consumption in 2014.
Other relevant parameters are shown in Tables 3–5. The optimization model is programmed by LINGO
mathematical optimization software (LINDO Systems Inc., Chicago, IL, America), and the results are
the optimization schemes of the comprehensive model of water and land resource allocation.

Table 3. Typical crops’ water product function parameters.

Growth Stage 1 2 3 4 5
Date 3.21–4.29 4.30–5.12 5.13–6.1 6.2–6.13 6.14–7.16
EP (mm) 5.55 2.72 4.39 4.03 22.72
Spring wheat
ETmax (mm) 72.69 61.04 113.49 78.76 233.29
λ −0.223 0.330 0.094 0.590 0.329
Date 5.1–6.20 6.21–7.5 7.6–7.31 8.1–8.20 8.21–9.17
EP (mm) 12.79 8.67 27.64 18.52 14.63
Seed melon
ETmax (mm) 97.14 40.02 115.60 42.77 50.35
λ 0.108 0.062 0.256 0.200 −0.038
Date 4.21–6.22 6.23–7.16 7.17–9.14 9.15–10.20
EP (mm) 15.28 19.69 48.32 10.58
Cotton
ETmax (mm) 55.63 89.08 170.12 16.59
λ 0.245 0.172 0.469 0.063
Date 4.14–5.20 5.21–6.28 6.29–7.26 7.27–9.13
EP (mm) 7.01 11.56 28.32 37.44
maize
ETmax (mm) 71.13 139.54 151.58 209.26
λ 0.193 0.115 0.005 0.100
Date 4.17–6.9 6.10–6.18 6.19–7.5 7.6–8.27
EP (mm) 11.64 3.02 9.34 52.65
Oil flex
ETmax (mm) 176.99 49.06 95.16 196.99
λ 0.172 0.084 0.102 0.011
Water 2018, 10, 1125 10 of 19

Table 4. Growth stage-time period transformation variable (qijt ).

January February March April May June July August September October November December
1 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Spring wheat 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.61 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
maize 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 1.00 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 1.00 0.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cotton 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.48 1.00 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00
4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.65 0.00 0.00
5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seed melon 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.00
1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.47 1.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Oil flex 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Water 2018, 10, 1125 11 of 19

Table 5. Variable declaration.

Variable Variable Meaning Description Value

η1 Surface water irrigation utilization coefficient 0.61
η2 Groundwater irrigation utilization coefficient 0.85
C1 Surface water price, CNY/m3 0.24
C2 Groundwater price, CNY/m3 0.26
α Precipitation leakage coefficient 0.20
β Canal leakage coefficient 0.16
β0 Irrigation backflow coefficient 0.20
β” Well irrigation compensation coefficient 0.20
η0 Field water delivery efficiency 0.85
λ Agricultural water consumption ratio 0.44
EGt Evapotranspiration, mm 0.00
µ Specific yield 0.16
A Area, 106 hm2 1.59
H1 Initial value of groundwater depth, m 18.75
Q Surface water supply, 104 m3 8511.39
G Groundwater availability, 104 m3 2794.85
Y Per capita minimum food weight, kg/person 420.00
S Population, 104 24.11

3.4. Multi-Scale Agricultural Water-Saving Potential Analysis Method

The agricultural water-saving potentials mainly include four scales: crop, field, irrigation area,
and region/basin. There are notable differences in the agricultural water-saving potential in each scale,
and the implementation of water-saving measures in the corresponding scales inevitably affects the
others [5]. The researches on the multi-scale agricultural water-saving potentials are as follows:

1. The crop physiological process is taken into account in the process of the crop-scale agricultural
water-saving potential calculation. To obtain satisfactory crop yields, the irrigation mode of water
deficit is applied to save irrigation water. Different degrees (5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, and 30%)
of water deficit are divided and implementation proportions of 10%, 20%, and 40% are set up,
from which the most advisable scheme can be picked out. The difference between the previous
irrigation water value and the current irrigation water value is calculated accordingly as the
crop-scale water-saving potential.
2. The field-scale water-saving potentials are obtained by calculating the differences between the
previous irrigation water consumption and the optimized irrigation water allocation with crop
planting structure adjustments. As displayed in Figure 5, the irrigation water consumption of
spring wheat and maize is larger than the other crops. Thus, reducing the planting area of these
two crops and increasing the area of cotton and oil flax appropriately could save more irrigation
water. However, to ensure regional food security, the area of spring wheat and maize cannot be
reduced too much.
3. The irrigation area-scale water-saving potentials are reflected by the leakage and the loss of
water in the process of irrigation water delivery, which relate to engineering measures, including
canal system seepage, pipeline water supply, sprinkler irrigation, and drip irrigation. Currently,
in Minqin County, the surface water irrigation utilization coefficient, and the groundwater
irrigation utilization coefficient reach 0.61 and 0.85, respectively, and could be further enhanced.
Assuming that the head flow is constant, the irrigation water delivered to the field is increased,
while the water utilization coefficient is improved. The increased amount of water is calculated
as the water-saving potential in the irrigation area.
4. The optimal combination of water-saving measures in crop, field, and irrigation areas is
considered in the calculation of the region-scale water-saving potential. The detailed calculation
steps (Figure 7) are as follows: (1) the optimization scheme of the integrated optimization
Water 2018, 10, 1125 12 of 19

model
Water 2018, 10, xfor
FORagricultural
PEER REVIEW water and land resource allocation is used as the optimal combination 12 of 19
of crop-scale and field-scale water-saving measures; (2) the agricultural net irrigation water
scale and field-scale
is calculated; water-saving
(3) water measures;
savings with (2) the
different agricultural
water netcoefficient
utilization irrigation water is calculated;
improvements are
(3) water savings with different water utilization coefficient improvements are calculated
calculated with engineering water-saving measures applied; (4) the amount of gross irrigation with
engineering water-saving
water is calculated; and, (5)measures applied;
the calculation (4) are
results thecompared
amount to of the
gross irrigation
current water
irrigation water is
calculated; and, (5) the calculation results are compared to the current irrigation
consumption, and the reduction of the headwater diversion is calculated as the region-scale water
consumption, and the reduction
agricultural water-saving of the headwater diversion is calculated as the region-scale
potential.
agricultural water-saving potential.

Integrated optimization model of agricultural

water and land resource allocation

Optimize net irrigation quota Optimize the planting structure

Net irrigation water

Crop scale demand Field scale

Canal water use coefficient Engineering

Field water use coefficient measures

Current status of Irrigation area

Gross irrigation water
irrigation water scale

Agricultural water-
Region scale
saving potential

Figure
Figure 7.
7. Region
Region water-saving
water-saving potential
potential calculation
calculation flow chart.
flow chart.

4. Results Analysis and Discussion

4. Results Analysis and Discussion
4.1.
4.1. Integrated
Integrated Optimization
Optimization Model
Model for
for Agricultural Water and
Agricultural Water and Land
Land Resource
Resource Allocation
Allocation
The
The integrated
integrated optimization
optimizationmodelmodelfor foragricultural
agriculturalwater
waterand
and land
land resource
resource allocation
allocationis used in
is used
order to obtain the distribution of water and crop area during the crop growth
in order to obtain the distribution of water and crop area during the crop growth period (Table 6, period (Table 6, Figure
8). As expressed
Figure in Table
8). As expressed 6, the6, optimization
in Table the optimization results increase
results thethe
increase water
water that
thatisisallocated
allocatedtoto maize
maize
because the maize has the highest water productivity among five crops.
because the maize has the highest water productivity among five crops. Simultaneously, the irrigation Simultaneously, the
irrigation water of other four crops is reduced when compared with
water of other four crops is reduced when compared with the current scheme. After optimization,the current scheme. After
optimization, 8.66 × 10water
8.66 × 104 m3 irrigation
4 m3 irrigation water can be saved. As shown in Figure 8, excessive
can be saved. As shown in Figure 8, excessive groundwater exploitation
groundwater
in the peak period of water supplypeak
exploitation in the can beperiod of water
effectively supply
avoided canconjunctive
by the be effectively avoided
allocation by the
of surface
conjunctive allocation of surface water and groundwater. Thence, the groundwater
water and groundwater. Thence, the groundwater depth can maintain a safe level with a slight degree depth can
maintain
of lifting, awhich
safe level with a slight
contributes degree
positively to of lifting,ecological
regional which contributes positively
restoration. to regional
The optimal ecological
total net benefit
restoration. The optimal total net benefit is 0.4 billion CNY, and the net benefit per
is 0.4 billion CNY, and the net benefit per unit water is 3.3 CNY. When considering maximum economic unit water is 3.3 CNY.
When
benefit, land resources are allocated to the crops with high yield and low water demand to makehigh
considering maximum economic benefit, land resources are allocated to the crops with full
yield and low water demand to make full use of limited resources. For local
use of limited resources. For local water managers, adjusting the local crop irrigation quota and crop water managers,
adjusting
acreage couldthe local cropwater
promote irrigation quota
savings, and cropincreases,
production acreage could promote water
and expanded revenue.savings, production
For local farmers,
increases, and expanded revenue. For local farmers, reducing the cultivation
reducing the cultivation of spring wheat and oil flax, and replacing them with maize, cotton, and of spring wheat and oil
seed
flax,
melon,and replacing
may themchoice
be a better with maize,
and bringcotton, and benefits.
greater seed melon, may be a better choice and bring greater
benefits.
 Water 2018, 10, 1125 13 of 19

Water 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 19

Table 6. Comparison of the indicators before and after optimization.
Table 6. Comparison of the indicators before and after optimization.
Spring Wheat Seed Melon Cotton Maize Oil Flax
Spring Wheat Seed Melon Cotton Maize Oil Flax
Present 390 360 300 420 300
Irrigation (mm) Present 390 360 300 420 300
Irrigation (mm) Optimization 366 237 238 473 286
Optimization 366 237 238 473 286
2) Present 4473 2320 7553 9647 10,667
Crop area (hm Present 4473 2320 7553 9647 10,667
Crop area (hm2) Optimization 3353 2633 8880 9970 9823
Optimization 3353 2633 8880 9970 9823
2 Present
Present 7321
7321 2250
2250 1476
1476 10,143
10,143 2200
2200
Yield(kg/hm
Yield (kg/hm2) )
Optimization
Optimization 7201
7201 2809
2809 1530
1530 14,614
14,614 3150
3150
Present
Present 2.08
2.08 0.61
0.61 0.44
0.44 2.41
2.41 0.69
0.69
Waterproductivity
Water productivity(kg/m 3) 3 )
(kg/m
Optimization
Optimization 1.78
1.78 0.88
0.88 0.46
0.46 2.62
2.62 0.87
0.87
3) 3
Present
Present 5.00
5.00 4.86
4.86 6.41
6.41 5.56
5.56 4.52
4.52
Water
Waterbenefit
benefit(CNY/m
(CNY/m )
Optimization
Optimization 4.27
4.27 7.04
7.04 6.69
6.69 6.03
6.03 5.65
5.65

600 Surface water Groundwater 17

Precipitation Measured groundwater depth
17.5
500 Optimized groundwater depth

18

Groundwater depth/m
400
Water applied/mm

18.5

300 19

19.5
200
20
100
20.5

0 21
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Time/month

Waterdistribution
Figure8.8.Water
Figure distributionand
andgroundwater
groundwaterlevel
levelchanges
changesinineach
eachmonth
monthof
of2014.
2014.

4.2.Multi-Scale
4.2. Multi-ScaleAgricultural
AgriculturalWater-Saving
Water-SavingPotential
Potential

4.2.1.Crop-Scale
4.2.1. Crop-ScaleWater-Saving
Water-SavingPotential
Potential
TheJensen
The Jensenmodel
modelwas was introduced
introduced to calculate
to calculate the the yield
yield of crops
of crops in each
in each scenario
scenario (Table(Table 7).
7). The
The highest yields minus the actual yields are regarded as the
highest yields minus the actual yields are regarded as the reduction of the crop yields. Thereduction of the crop yields.
The relationships
relationships between
between the reduction
the reduction of crop
of crop yields
yields andandthethe degree
degree of of water
water deficitare
deficit areexpressed
expressedinin
Figure 9. As shown in Figure 9, 15% is a desirable degree of water deficit while
Figure 9. As shown in Figure 9, 15% is a desirable degree of water deficit while considering both considering boththe
the
water-saving potential and crop yields. Based on the water-saving schemes,
water-saving potential and crop yields. Based on the water-saving schemes, water-saving potentials water-saving potentials
were obtained
were obtained by by reducing
reducing the theirrigated
irrigatedwater
waterbybyinin different implementation
different implementation proportion
proportion of 10%, 20%,
of 10%,
and 40% (Figure 10). In this study, 100% represents totally applying water-saving
20%, and 40% (Figure 10). In this study, 100% represents totally applying water-saving measures to measures to save
water
save in the
water in region. Although
the region. Although more water
more waterhashas
beenbeensaved
savedwith 40%
with 40%implementation,
implementation, assurance
assurancein
intechnology
technology and high
and costcost
high jointly hinder
jointly its application.
hinder Thus,
its application. a scheme
Thus, of 20%
a scheme of implementation
20% implementation with a
15% water deficit seems more recommendable for local managers, in which
with a 15% water deficit seems more recommendable for local managers, in which the water-saving the water-saving potential
reaches 9.68 5 m3 . In addition, as shown in Figure 9, reducing the irrigation water of oil flax and
× 109.68
potential reaches × 105 m3. In addition, as shown in Figure 9, reducing the irrigation water of oil
seed melon firstly contribute
flax and seed melon firstly contribute to minimizing farmers’farmers’
to minimizing losses. losses.
Water 2018, 10, 1125 14 of 19

Water
Water 2018,
2018, 10,
10, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER7.REVIEW
REVIEW 14
14 of
of 19
19
Table Summary of typical crop yields at different levels of water deficit.

Table
Table 7.
7. Summary
Summary of
of typical
typical crop
crop yields
yields at
at different
different levels of
of water
water deficit.
Yield (kg/hmlevels
2) deficit.
Water Deficit Yield (kg/hm 2))
2
Water
Water Deficit
Deficit Spring Wheat Seed MelonYield (kg/hm
Cotton Maize Oil Flax
Spring
Spring Wheat
Wheat Seed
Seed Melon
Melon Cotton
Cotton Maize
Maize Oil
Oil Flax
Flax
5%
5% 5% 7158.1
7158.1
7158.1 2676.5
2676.5
2676.5 1457.3
1457.3
1457.3 14,045.5
14,045.5
14,045.5 3322.13322.1
3322.1
10%
10% 10% 6738.0
6738.0
6738.0 2592.7
2592.7
2592.7 1384.4
1384.4
1384.4 13,319.8
13,319.8
13,319.8 3256.73256.7
3256.7
15%
15% 15% 6320.6
6320.6
6320.6 2507.0
2507.0
2507.0 1311.3
1311.3
1311.3 12,593.3
12,593.3
12,593.3 3188.93188.9
3188.9
20%
20% 20% 5906.1
5906.1
5906.1 2419.3
2419.3
2419.3 1238.0
1238.0
1238.0 11,866.0
11,866.0
11,866.0 3118.53118.5
3118.5
25%
25% 25% 5494.7
5494.7
5494.7 2329.2
2329.2
2329.2 1164.4
1164.4
1164.4 11,137.9
11,137.9
11,137.9 3045.33045.3
3045.3
30%
30% 30% 5086.5
5086.5
5086.5 2236.6
2236.6
2236.6 1090.6
1090.6
1090.6 10,408.9
10,408.9
10,408.9 2968.92968.9
2968.9

The
The degree
degree of
of water
water dificit
dificit
5%
5% 10%
10% 15%
15% 20%
20% 25%
25% 30%
30%
0%
0%
yields
crops'yields

5%
5%
of crops'

10%
10%
proportionof

15%
15%
reductionproportion

20%
20%
Thereduction

25%
25%

30%
30% Spring
Spring wheat
wheat Seed
Seed melon
melon Cotton
Cotton
The

35% Spring
Spring maize
maize Oil
Oil flax
flax
35%

Figure
Figure9.9.
Figure The
9.The relations
Therelations between
between the
relationsbetween the reduction
the reductionof
reduction ofcrop
of cropyields
crop yieldsand
yields and
and the
the
the degree of
degree
degree water
ofof deficit.
water
water deficit.
deficit.

250
250

200
200 193.5
193.5
m33
savings/1044m

150
Watersavings/10

150

100 96.8
96.8
100
Water

48.4
48.4
50
50

00
10%
10% 20%
20% 40%
40%
Implementation
Implementation proportions
proportions

Figure 10.The
Figure10.
Figure 10. The water
The water savings
water savings bydifferent
savings by
by differentimplementation
different implementation
implementation proportions.
proportions.
proportions.

4.2.2.
4.2.2.
4.2.2. Field-Scale Water-Saving
Field-ScaleWater-Saving
Field-Scale Potential
Water-SavingPotential
Potential

InIn
In this section,
section,itititisis
thissection,
this assumed
isassumed
assumed thatthat
that water
water quantity
water quantityin
quantity inthe
in thetypical
the typicalcrop
typical crop
crop growth
growth
growth period
period
periodis
is constant
constant
is constant
with
with the
the change
change of
of planting
planting area.
area. The
The saved
saved water
water consumption
consumption was
was
with the change of planting area. The saved water consumption was calculated, and the resultscalculated,
calculated, and
and the
the results
results were
were
were
shown
shown in Figure 11, where 100% represents that the planting structure is totally adjusted. Although
shown ininFigure
Figure11,11,where
where100% 100%represents
represents that
that thethe planting
plantingstructure
structureisistotally
totallyadjusted.
adjusted.Although
Although
the
the water
water consumption
consumption of of grain
grain crops
crops is
is high,
high, itit is
is inadvisable
inadvisable toto decrease
decrease grain
grain crops’
crops’ acreage
acreage too
too
Water 2018, 10, 1125 15 of 19

Water 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 19

theWater 2018,
water 10, x FOR PEER of
consumption REVIEW
grain crops is high, it is inadvisable to decrease grain crops’ acreage 15 of 19
too
much,
much, due
due totothe
therestriction
restrictionof
ofregional
regional food
food security.
security. From
Fromthe
thedata
dataininTable
Table1,1,
the current
the currentproportion
proportion
much, due to the restriction of regional food security. From the data it
in Table 1, the current proportion
of of grain
grain crops,
crops, including
including spring
spring wheat and
wheat and maize
maize is
is 41%.
41%.Therefore,
Therefore, itcan
canbebeconcluded
concluded that 15%
that 15%is ais a
of grain
proper crops,
adjustment including spring
proportion, wheat
with the and maize
field-scale is 41%. Therefore,
water-saving it can
potential be concluded
reaching 2.34 ×that
10 15%
6 m
63. is a
proper adjustment proportion, with the field-scale water-saving potential reaching 2.34 × 10 m3 .
proper adjustment proportion, with the field-scale water-saving potential reaching 2.34 × 106 m3.
350
350 321.0
300 321.0
300
250 234.0
3
4 m3 m

250 234.0
savings/104

200
savings/10

200 156.0
150 156.0
150
Water
Water

100 78.0
100 78.0
50
50
0
0 5% 10% 15% 20%
5% The degree of planting structure15%
10% adjustments 20%
The degree of planting structure adjustments
Figure 11.Water
Figure11. Water savings
savings of different planting
of different plantingstructure
structureadjustments.
adjustments.
Figure 11. Water savings of different planting structure adjustments.
4.2.3. Irrigation
4.2.3. IrrigationArea-Scale
Area-ScaleWater-Saving
Water-Saving Potential
Potential
4.2.3. Irrigation Area-Scale Water-Saving Potential
FromFrom the
thedata
dataofofwater
waterconsumption
consumption of different
differentindustries
industriesinin2014,2014,thethe current
current surface
surface irrigation
irrigation
From
is 1.40the
× 10data
8 8m 33of
water is 1.40 × 10 m , and the gross
water , water
and the consumption
gross ground of different
irrigation industries
water is 3.49 in× 2014,
10 7m7 the3
3. Incurrent
this surface
irrigation water is 3.49 × 10 m . In this study, the available
study, the irrigation
available
water iswater
irrigation
irrigation 1.40
water× is
10is1.74
8 m3, and the
1.74××10 1088 mgross ground
33,, which
which isistheirrigation
the water
calculation
calculation is 3.49
result
result ×the
ofofthe10total
7 m3. In this study, the available
totalagricultural
agriculturalwater supply
water supply
irrigation water
multiplied theis
bythe 1.74 × 10proportion
planting
8 m3, which is the calculation result of the total agricultural water supply
(70%).
multiplied by planting proportion (70%).Although
Although plenty
plentyof leakage
of leakage water couldcould
water be saved by
be saved
multiplied
irrigation by the planting
area-scale proportion
water-saving (70%). Although
engineering measures, plenty
it is of leakage
difficult to water couldimprove
substantially be savedthe by
by irrigation area-scale water-saving engineering measures, it is difficult to substantially improve
irrigation area-scaleof water-saving engineering measures, itcoefficient.
is difficultBased
to substantially improve the
thewater
water useuse
coefficient
coefficientthe ofcanal system
the canal and field
system water
and usewater
field use coefficient.on previous
Based researches
on previous
water
[5], use coefficient
reasonable targets of the
are setcanal
up, system
and the and field water
water-saving use coefficient.
potentials under Based onwater
different previous
use researches
efficiency
researches [5], reasonable targets are set up, and the water-saving potentials under different water
levels are calculated (Figure 12). When the surface water utilization coefficient is 0.66 efficiency
[5], reasonable targets are set up, and the water-saving potentials under different water use and the
use efficiency levels are calculated (Figure 12). When the surface water utilization coefficient is 0.66
levels are calculated
groundwater utilization(Figure
is 0.90, 12). When the surface
the water-saving water
potential of the utilization
irrigationcoefficient is 8.62
area-scale is 0.66×and
106 mthe
3.
andgroundwater
the groundwater utilization utilization
is 0.90, is water-saving
the 0.90, the water-saving
potential of potential
the of the
irrigation irrigation
area-scale is area-scale
8.62 × 10 6 m3. is
Therefore, it is necessary to choose suitable regional development water-saving targets, when
× 106 m3 .itTherefore,
8.62Therefore, is necessary it is to
necessary
choose to chooseregional
suitable suitable regional development water-saving targets,
implementing irrigation area-scale water-saving measuresdevelopment
in irrigation areas. water-saving targets, when
when implementing irrigation area-scale water-saving measures
implementing irrigation area-scale water-saving measures in irrigation areas. in irrigation areas.
1000.0
1000.0 groundwater surface water
900.0 groundwater surface water
900.0
800.0
3

800.0
4 m3 m

700.0
4
/10/10

700.0
600.0
savings

600.0
500.0
savings

500.0
400.0
Water

400.0
300.0
Water

300.0
200.0
200.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
0.01 The improvements
0.02 of irrigation
0.03water utilization
0.04coefficient 0.05
The improvements of irrigation water utilization coefficient
Figure 12. Irrigation area-scale water-saving potentials of different levels.
Figure
Figure 12.12.Irrigation
Irrigationarea-scale
area-scalewater-saving
water-saving potentials
potentials of of different
differentlevels.
levels.
Water 2018, 10, 1125 16 of 19

4.2.4. Region-Scale Water-Saving Potential

Water 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 19
From the results of the optimization model, it can be found that the net irrigation water requirement
is 9.984.2.4.
× 10 7 m3 , of which
Region-Scale Water-Saving
the surface water is 8.26 × 107 m3 , and the groundwater is 1.71 × 108 m3 .
Potential
Based on From the optimization
the results ofresults, the water-saving
the optimization model, itpotentials
can be found under different
that the net improvement
irrigation waterlevels
of water use efficiency
requirement is 9.98 ×are
107 calculated
m3, of which(Figure 13). water
the surface As shownis 8.26 in
× 10Figure 13,the
7 m3, and thegroundwater
possible region-scale
is 1.71
× 108 m3. potential
water-saving Based on the canoptimization
theoretically results,
reachthe
1.69 × 107 m3 . The
water-saving potentials under different
region-scale improvement
water-saving potential is
greaterlevels
than of any
waterother
use efficiency are calculated
scales, with (Figure considering
harmoniously 13). As shownthe in Figure
regional13, the possible region-
ecological, social, and
scale water-saving potential can theoretically reach 1.69 × 10 7 m3. The region-scale water-saving
economic stable development. Furthermore, it can be concluded that region-scale water-saving
potential is greater than any other scales, with harmoniously considering the regional ecological,
measures can effectively alleviate the contradiction between agricultural water supply and demand and
social, and economic stable development. Furthermore, it can be concluded that region-scale water-
improve the irrigation water use efficiency. For local managers, it is meaningful to execute a suitable
saving measures can effectively alleviate the contradiction between agricultural water supply and
water-saving
demand scheme via thethe
and improve optimal combination
irrigation water use of water-saving
efficiency. measures
For local in crop,
managers, it isfield, and irrigation
meaningful to
areas.execute
It is equally important
a suitable to choose
water-saving schemesuitable development
via the goals on of
optimal combination thewater-saving
basis of local reality. in
measures
To sum
crop, up,and
field, multi-scale
irrigationagricultural water important
areas. It is equally conservation measures
to choose candevelopment
suitable save considerablegoals onirrigation
the
waterbasis
and ease thereality.
of local regional water pressure. Through saving water intuitively, the water-saving measures
at the crop Toscale
sum have
up, multi-scale
a negative agricultural water conservation
impact on certain crops’ yields,measures
while the canfield-scale
save considerable
water-saving
irrigation water and ease the regional water pressure. Through saving
measures can increase crop yields for farmers with saving a large amount of irrigation water. water intuitively, the water-
Irrigation
savingwater-saving
area-scale measures at the crop scale
measures canhave
saveaanegative impact on
large quantity certainleakage.
of water crops’ yields, while
Finally, thethe field-
region-scale
scale water-saving measures can increase crop yields for farmers with saving a large amount of
water-saving measures embody the greatest advantage in saving water to ameliorate the status quo
irrigation water. Irrigation area-scale water-saving measures can save a large quantity of water
of water shortages. That is, a reasonable scheme can contribute to ecological restoration, effectively
leakage. Finally, the region-scale water-saving measures embody the greatest advantage in saving
alleviating
water to theameliorate
deterioration of the
the status quoecology
of waterand groundwater
shortages. That is, aenvironment
reasonable schemein Minqin County.toThus,
can contribute
the preferred choice is to adopt the region-scale water-saving measures for local
ecological restoration, effectively alleviating the deterioration of the ecology and groundwater ecological environment
protection and normal agricultural production. Several recommendations are
environment in Minqin County. Thus, the preferred choice is to adopt the region-scale water-savingpresented, as follows:
measures for local ecological environment protection and normal agricultural production. Several
1. To ensure the reasonable
recommendations allocation
are presented, of limited water resources, an optimal amount of irrigation
as follows:
water for five crops, which not include fallow or non-growing-season periods, should be allocated,
1. To ensure the reasonable allocation of limited water resources, an optimal amount of irrigation
with 366 mm for spring wheat, 237 mm for maize, 238 mm for cotton, 473 mm for seed melon,
water for five crops, which not include fallow or non-growing-season periods, should be
and 286 mm for oil flax.
allocated, with 366 mm for spring wheat, 237 mm for maize, 238 mm for cotton, 473 mm for seed
2. To achieve the286
melon, and efficient
mm forutilization
oil flax. of limited land resources, moderate adjustments of crop
cultivated
2. To achieveareasthe
could be made,
efficient including
utilization a 25%
of limited reduction
land resources,ofmoderate
spring wheat, 13.5%of
adjustments increase
crop of
seedcultivated
melon, 17.5%
areas increase
could be of cotton,
made, 3.35% areduction
including of maize,
25% reduction and wheat,
of spring 7.9% increase of oil flax.
13.5% increase of
3. seed melon, 17.5% increase of cotton, 3.35% reduction of maize, and 7.9% increase
To obtain a larger degree of water-saving, stronger financial support should be provided of oil flax.
3. To
for obtain a larger
engineering degree of water-saving,
water-saving renovation stronger financial
measures fromsupport should be provided
the government’s for
investment.
engineering water-saving renovation measures from the government’s investment. The
The comprehensive promotion of efficient water-saving irrigation technology should be the
comprehensive promotion of efficient water-saving irrigation technology should be the
development target for local agriculture water managers.
development target for local agriculture water managers.

1800.0
1600.0
1400.0
Water savings / 104 m3

1200.0
1000.0
800.0
600.0
400.0
200.0
0.0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06
The improvement of irrigation water utilization coefficient

Figure
Figure 13.13. Region-scalewater-saving
Region-scale water-saving potentials
potentialsofofdifferent
differentlevels.
levels.
Water 2018, 10, 1125 17 of 19

Furthermore, the entire region was considered in the optimization, to deal with the unreasonable
water allocation of the Minqin County. These efforts would support local managers to develop more
rational water allocation schemes. However, water resource managers face complicated problems in
the practice of optimization. For example, China’s agricultural land is decentralized. Farmers have
the right to choose the growing crops based on individual interests, rather than overall interests,
which makes the implementation of the optimization scheme difficult. These factors would be fully
considered in future research.

5. Conclusions
This study proposed an integrated optimization model for agricultural water and land resource
allocation, and an optimization-based multi-scale water-saving potential analysis framework for
support irrigation water management. It can offer alternative water-saving schemes in corresponding
conditions for decision makers.
The characteristics of this study are as follows:

1. The integrated optimization model incorporated planting structure optimization and water
resource allocation with the conjunctive use of surface water and groundwater, and it was applied
to Minqin County in Gansu Province, China. The optimization results provide comprehensive
and efficiency water-saving solutions with higher economic benefits.
2. The groundwater equilibrium constraint was used in the model. Taking full advantage of
the interaction between surface water and groundwater, this model keeps the groundwater
environment a stable and safe condition with a lifting tendency of the groundwater depth.
Through balancing agricultural water and ecological water, optimal solutions contribute to both
irrigation water saving and ecological restoration.
3. Four scales were chosen in order to analyze the agriculture water-saving potential via adopting
water-saving measures, including cutting down the water supply, adjusting the planting structure,
improving the utilization coefficient of irrigation water, and the optimal combination of above
measures based on integrated optimization model. By analyzing the results of the four scales,
it was found that region-scale water-saving scheme not only demonstrates a huge potential of
water-saving and agricultural benefit, but also contribute to balancing agricultural prolificacy
and ecological restoration.

In addition, the framework, the allocation optimization model and the analysis method in this
study can also be applied to other similar regions to help better water-allocation scheme formulation.
However, some limitations exist in the proposed method. For example, local policies, year-to-year
variability in supply and demand, as well as precise relationships in model formulation could be taken
into account in further research.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Q.Y.; Methodology, Q.Y. and F.Z.; Software, Q.Y.; Writing-Original
Draft Preparation, Q.Y.; Writing-Review & Editing, Q.Y., F.Z. and P.G.; Supervision, P.G.; Project Administration,
P.G.; Funding Acquisition, P.G.
Funding: This research was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (No. 2017YFC0403201) and
National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51621061).
Acknowledgments: The authors are grateful to the editor and the anonymous reviewers for their insightful
comments and suggestions.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Water 2018, 10, 1125 18 of 19

References
1. Li, M.; Guo, P.; Singh, V.P. Biobjective Optimization for Efficient Irrigation under Fuzzy Uncertainty. J. Irrig.
Drain. Eng. 2016, 142, 05016003. [CrossRef]
2. Li, M.; Guo, P.; Singh, V.P. An efficient irrigation water allocation model under uncertainty. Agric. Syst. 2016,
144, 46–57. [CrossRef]
3. Huang, Y.; Li, Y.P.; Chen, X.; Ma, Y.G. Optimization of the irrigation water resources for agricultural
sustainability in Tarim River Basin, China. Agric. Water Manag. 2012, 107, 74–85. [CrossRef]
4. Ye, Y.X. Development Status of agricultural water use and water saving agriculture in China. Mod. Agric.
2015, 75. (In Chinese) [CrossRef]
5. Kang, S.Z.; Yang, J.Z.; Pei, Y.S.; Feng, S.Y.; Huo, Z.L.; Sun, J.S.; Zhang, X.Y.; Wu, J.W.; Wang, J.L.; Tong, L.;
et al. Farmland Water Cycle Process and Agricultural Efficient Water Use Mechanism in Hai River Basin; Science
Press: Beijing, China, 2013; pp. 204–252. (In Chinese)
6. Zhao, X.; Wang, Y.; Xueming, M.A. Comprehensive evaluation of agricultural water-saving potential in the
middle reaches of Hei River using genetic projection pursuit model. Chin. J. Eco-Agric. 2014, 22, 104–110.
[CrossRef]
7. Karimov, A.; Molden, D.; Khamzina, T.; Platonov, A.; Ivanov, Y. A water accounting procedure to determine
the water savings potential of the fergana valley. Agric. Water Manag. 2012, 108, 61–72. [CrossRef]
8. Horst, M.G.; Shamutalov, S.S.; Pereira, L.S.; Goncalves, J.M. Field assessment of the water saving potential
with furrow irrigation in Fergana, Aral Sea basin. Agric. Water Manag. 2005, 77, 210–231. [CrossRef]
9. Yan, N.; Wu, B.; Perry, C.; Zeng, H. Assessing potential water savings in agriculture on the Hai basin plain,
China. Agric. Water Manag. 2015, 154, 11–19. [CrossRef]
10. Christian-Smith, J.; Cooley, H.; Gleick, P.H. Potential water savings associated with agricultural water
efficiency improvements: A case study of California, USA. Water Policy 2012, 14, 194. [CrossRef]
11. Liu, J.G.; Zhao, Y.; Pei, Y.S.; Tan, X.M. Agricultural water saving potential at different scales in Tuhaimajia
River Basin. Adv. Sci. Technol. Water Resour. 2012, 32, 50–53. (In Chinese)
12. Zhang, D.M.; Guo, P. Integrated agriculture water management optimization model for water saving
potential analysis. Agric. Water Manag. 2016, 170, 5–19. [CrossRef]
13. Zeng, X.T.; Kang, S.Z.; Li, F.S.; Zhang, L.; Guo, P. Fuzzy multi-objective linear programming applying to crop
area planning. Agric. Water Manag. 2010, 98, 134–142. [CrossRef]
14. Li, Y.P.; Huang, G.H. Planning agricultural water resources system associated with fuzzy and random
features. J. Am. Water Resourc. Assoc. 2011, 47, 841–860. [CrossRef]
15. Hassaballah, K.; Jonoski, A.; Popescu, I.; Solomatine, D.P. Model-based optimization of downstream impact
during filling of a new reservoir: Case study of Mandaya/Reseires reservoirs on the Blue Nile River. Water
Resour. Manag. 2012, 26, 273–293. [CrossRef]
16. Zhang, Z.Y.; Si, H.; Feng, B.P.; Hu, C.; Lu, M.X. An optimal model for agriculture water and land resources
configuration in water shortage irrigation area. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2014, 45, 403–409.
17. Safavi, H.R.; Darzi, F.; Mariño, M.A. Simulation-Optimization Modeling of Conjunctive Use of Surface Water
and Groundwater. Water Resour. Manag. 2010, 24, 1965–1988. [CrossRef]
18. Chen, C.W.; Wei, C.C.; Liu, H.J.; Hsu, N.S. Application of Neural Networks and Optimization Model in
Conjunctive Use of Surface Water and Groundwater. Water Resour. Manag. 2014, 28, 2813–2832. [CrossRef]
19. Yue, W.F.; Yang, J.Z.; Zhan, C.S. Coupled model for conjunctive use of water resources in the Yellow River
irrigation district. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. 2011, 27, 35–40. (In Chinese)
20. Xu, W.L.; Su, X.L. Agricultural water-saving potential analysis based on crop planting structure
optimization—A case study of Liangzhou. Agric. Res. Arid Areas 2010, 28, 161–165. (In Chinese)
21. Li, M.; Guo, P.; Fang, S.Q.; Zhang, L.D. An inexact fuzzy parameter two-stage stochastic programming model
for irrigation water allocation under uncertainty. Stochastic Environ. Res. Risk Assess. 2013, 27, 1441–1452.
[CrossRef]
22. Liu, Z.G. Analysis on the Reform of Water Resources Management in Minqin County. Gansu Sci. Technol.
2016, 32, 10–11, 13. (In Chinese)
Water 2018, 10, 1125 19 of 19

23. Kang, S.Z.; Su, X.L.; Du, T.S.; Feng, S.Y.; Tong, L.; Shen, Q.L.; Shi, P.Z.; Yang, X.Y.; Zuo, Q.; Wang, F.X.; et al.
Transformation of Water Resources in Watershed Scale in Northwest Arid Basin and Its Water Saving Regulation
Model—A Case Study of Shiyang River Basin in Gansu Province; China Water & Power Press: Beijing, China,
2009; pp. 247–251, 524–530. (In Chinese)
24. Wang, X.H. Study on the Coupled Simulation and Regulation of Groundwater and Surface-Water in Sanjiang Plain,
Northeast China; Northeast Institute of Geography and Agroecology Chinese Academy of Sciences, University
of Chinese Academy of Sciences: Huairou, China, 2015.
25. Virginia, V.; Krepper, C. Water balance of the Salado-Juramen to river basin (Argentina). Hydrol. Processes
2013, 27, 3825–3832. [CrossRef]
26. Zhang, R.L. The Characters of Distribution and Transformation of Water Resources in Shiyangriver Basin; China
University of Geosciences: Beijing, China, 2006.

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).