Calder - Land Use Impacts On Water Resources

1.
Land Use and Water Resources Research
Land Use Impacts on Water Resources1

Ian R Calder
Centre for Land Use and Water Resources Research University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Abstract This paper aims to provoke discussion on land use and water resource impacts, particularly in relation to rural watersheds in developing countries, with a view towards surfacing key issues, identifying research needs and, ultimately, towards developing guidelines on instruments to distribute costs and benefits arising from land-use impacts on water resources amongst upstream and downstream stakeholders in a watershed. The paper is in three parts which address and question: l The adequacy of our scientific knowledge in relation to the environmental processes (biophysical/ climate) which determine land use impacts on water resources, summarising key points from the CGIAR SWIM paper 3 and the Earthscan publication: The Blue Revolution, (Calder, 1999; http:/ /www.cluwrr.ncl.ac.uk/ ). l The (often poor) connection between scientific knowledge and policy; the adequacy of the decisionmaking and policy-making processes of national and international organisations in relation to land use and water resources management; the self sustaining nature of pseudo science myths in relation to land use and water resources and the interdependence and interrelationships of stakeholders in relation to land use and water resources. l The adequacy of current management approaches and the need for consistent policies towards landuse and water resources management, development and poverty alleviation, which are applicable from the local to the global scale. Introduction
It is argued that to deal satisfactorily with Land-Use impacts on Water Resources requires an adequate scientific knowledge base, it needs this knowledge base to be connected efficiently to the policy and decision making processes and it also requires the formulation of land-use and water management policies which are not only upwardly and downwardly compatible, from the local rural watershed scale to the global scale, but are also consistent with, and are developed alongside, other global and local policies relating to sustainability, climate change, biodiversity, trade, food production and poverty alleviation. This paper seeks to open the debate on where effort is still required to assist with the management of land-use and water impacts in rural catchments.
1
The knowledge base - myth or reality

It has been argued (Calder, 1998, 1999) that the knowledge base that is being used for land use and water resource decision making is often still based more on perceived wisdom (myth) than science established reality. It is suggested that it is particularly necessary to purge the myths relating to forests and water because, arguably, not only do afforestation and deforestation activities account for the largest area of land use change occurring on the planet today, but they also account for some of the largest hydrological impacts. Seven mother statements relating to forestry and agroforestry issues are considered, as a means to highlight issues and identify gaps in our knowledge:
Based on the keynote paper presented at FAO Electronic-workshop on Land-Water Linkages in Rural Watersheds, 18 September to 27 October 2000. http://www.fao.org/ag/agl/watershed/
Land Use and Water Resources Research 1 (2000) 2.1-2.14 (http://www.venus.co.uk/luwrr)

Venus Internet
1. 2
1 2 3 4 5 6

There is some evidence that, on a continental scale, forests may form part of a hydrological feedback loop with evaporation contributing to further rainfall. On the Southern African subcontinent, the moisture content of air masses is dominated by marine sources, and afforestation will have negligible influence on rainfall and macroclimates. The distribution of forests is a consequence of climate and soil conditions not the reverse Conclusion: Although the effects of forests on rainfall are likely to be relatively small they cannot be totally dismissed from a water resources perspective. Research requirement: Further research is required to determine the magnitude of the effect, particularly at the regional scale. 2 Forests increase runoff? Based on process studies and from catchment experiments carried out throughout the world, a new understanding has recently been gained of the evaporative regime in forests and the way forests influence, and generally decrease runoff (contrary to widely accepted folklore), as compared with shorter crops. The difference between forest and short crop evaporation is most marked in the extremes of both very wet and very dry climates. In wet conditions interception losses will be higher from forests than shorter crops primarily because of increased atmospheric transport of water vapour from their aerodynamically rough surfaces. In dry (drought) conditions transpiration from forests is likely to be greater because of the generally increased rooting depth of trees as compared with shorter crops and their consequent greater access to soil water. The few exceptions, (lending some support to the folklore), are: 1 Cloud forests where cloud-water deposition may exceed interception losses. 2 Very old forests. Langford (1976) showed that following a bushfire in very old (200 years) mountain ash, Eucalyptus regnans, forest covering 48% of the Maroondah catchment, one of the water supply catchments for Melbourne in Australia, runoff was reduced by 24%. The reason for this reduction in flow has been attributed to the increased evaporation from the vigorous regrowth forest that had a much higher leaf area index than the former very old ash forest. Conclusion: Notwithstanding the exceptions outlined above catchment experiments generally indicate reduced runoff from forested areas as compared with those under shorter vegetation (Bosch and Hewlett, 1982; Hamilton, 1987). Caveat: Information on the evaporative characteristics of different tree species/soil type combinations are still required if evaporation estimates with an uncertainty of less than 30% are required. In both temperate and tropical climates evaporative differences between species and soil types are expected to vary by about this amount. 3 Forests regulate flows - increase dry season flows? Although it is possible, with only a few exceptions, to draw general conclusions with respect to the impacts of forests on annual flow, the same cannot be claimed for the impacts of forests on the seasonal flow regime. Different, site specific, often competing processes may be operating and the direction, let alone the magnitude of the impact, may be
Forests increase rainfall ? Forests increase runoff ? Forests regulate flows ? Forests reduce erosion ? Forests reduce floods ? Forests sterilize water supplies improve water quality ? 7 Agroforestry systems increase productivity ? Two additional, in some cases related, issues are also raised in this paper as areas where our understanding of the underlying processes and outcomes are uncertain: 8 Salinity control and downstream impacts; 9 Land use and water related natural disasters anthropogenic impacts and public perceptions. The available literature and field experience related to these issues is considerable. The titles referred to in the following sections are just examples and by no means exhaustive. A fuller account of the seven mother statements is given in earlier publications (Calder, 1998, Calder 1999) and only a summary is provided here together with relevant points made during an informal internet debate, stimulated by the CGIARs Polex newsletter of December 1998 (contact David Kaimowitz d.kaimowitz@cgiar.org), making reference to papers by Calder (1998) and Chomitz and Kumari (1998). 1 Forests increase rainfall? H C Pereira (1989) states in relation to forests and rainfall: The worldwide evidence that high hills and mountains usually have more rainfall and more natural forests than do the adjacent lowlands has, historically led to confusion of cause and effect. Although the physical explanations have been known for more than 50 years, the idea that forests cause or attract rainfall has persisted. The myth was created more than a century ago by foresters in defence of their trees The myth was written into the textbooks and became an article of faith for early generations of foresters. The overwhelming hydrological evidence supports Pereiras view that forests are not generators of rainfall. Yet this myth, like many others in forest hydrology may contain a modicum of truth that prevents it from being totally laid to rest. In earlier papers (Calder, 1998; Calder, 1999) it was argued that there is some evidence for land-use controls on precipitation, but often the magnitude of these effects are considerably less than is commonly imagined. Giambelluca and colleagues (Giambelluca et al., 1999) also make the important observation that many of the recent Global Circulation Model (GCM) predictions of reduced precipitation following forest clearance are likely to be overestimates because for the replacement vegetation ground surface parameters relating to grass, rather than scrub or secondary regrowth forest (the more usual vegetation cover following forest clearance), have been used in the simulation. Giambelluca claims, in relation to forests in Northern Thailand, It is likely, therefore, that simulated reductions in precipitation in the region due to deforestation will not be seen in model runs using more realistic scenarios of postdeforestation land cover characteristics. Perhaps the issue is best summed up by Bands et al.(1987), quoting from experience in South Africa: Forests are associated with high rainfall, cool slopes or moist areas.

Venus Internet
1. 3

In relation to beneficial impacts conventional theory and observations indicate that: 1 The high infiltration rate in natural, mixed, forests reduces the incidence of surface runoff and reduces erosion transport. 2 The reduced soil water pressure and the binding effect of tree roots enhance slope stability, which tends to reduce erosion. 3 On steep slopes, forestry or agroforestry may be the preferred option where conventional soil conservation techniques and bunding may be insufficient to retain mass movement of soil. Adverse effects, often related to forest management activities, may result from: 1 Bad logging techniques which compact the soil and increase surface flow. 2 Pre-planting drainage activities which may initiate gully formation. 3 Windthrow of trees and the weight of the tree crop reduces slope stability, which tends to increase erosion. 4 Road construction and road traffic which can initiate landslips, gully formation and the mobilization of sediments. 5 Excessive grazing by farm animals which leads to soil compaction, the removal of understorey plants and greater erosion risk. 6 Splash induced erosion from drops falling from the leaves of tree canopies, particularly if the litter layer and understorey are missing. The effects of catchment deforestation on erosion, and the benefits gained by afforesting eroded catchments will be very dependent on the situation and the management methods employed. Quoting Bruijnzeel (1990) In situations of high natural sediment yield as a result of steep terrain, high rainfall rates and geological factors, little, if any influence will be exerted by man. In the Himalayas, for example, there is evidence that a large proportion of suspended sediments in the rivers is contributed by big, deep, geologically induced landslides which occur on any type of land cover including forests (Galay, 1985). Also in situations where overland flow is negligible, in drier land, little advantage will be gained from afforestation. Versfeld (1981) has shown that at Jonkershoek in the Western Cape of South Africa, land cover has very little effect on the generation of overland flow and soil erosion. In more intermediate conditions of relatively low natural rates of erosion and under more stable geological conditions man-induced effects may be considerable. In these situations catchment erosion may well be hastened by deforestation and there may also be opportunities for lessening erosion by well-managed afforestation programmes. Even in these situations afforestation should not necessarily be seen as a quick panacea. In heavily eroded catchments, such as those on the slopes of the Himalayas, so much eroded material will have already been mobilized that, even if all the man induced erosion could be stopped immediately , it would be many decades before there was any reduction in the sediment load of the rivers (Pearce, 1986; Hamilton, 1987). The choice of tree species will also be important in any
difficult to predict for a particular site. From theoretical considerations it would be expected that: 1 Increased transpiration during dry periods will increase soil moisture deficits and reduce dry season flows; 2 Increased infiltration under (natural) forest will lead to higher soil water recharge and increased dry season flows; 3 For cloud forests increased cloud-water deposition may augment dry season flows. There are observations (Robinson et al., 1997) which indicate that for the uplands of the UK drainage activities associated with plantation forestry increase dry season flows both through the initial dewatering and in the longer term through alterations to the hydraulics of the drainage system. The importance of mechanical cracking associated with field drainage and its effects on drainage flows has been highlighted by Robinson et al.(1985) whilst the work of Reid and Parkinson (1984) indicates that landform and soil type may sometimes be the dominant factors determining soil moisture and drainage flow response. Bruijnzeel (1990) discusses the impacts of tropical forests on dry season flows and concludes that the infiltration properties of the forest are critical in how the available water is partitioned between runoff and recharge (leading to increased dry season flows). There are a number of observations from South Africa which indicate that increased dry period transpiration following afforestation with pine or eucalyptus species will significantly reduce low flows (Bosch, 1979; Van Lill et al, 1980; Scott and Smith, 1997). Scott and Lesch (1997) also report that on the Mokobulaan research catchments under Eucalyptus grandis the streamflow completely dried up by the ninth year after planting. When the eucalypts were clearfelled at age 16 years perennial streamflow did not return for a further five years. They attributed this large lag time as being due to very deep soil moisture deficits generated by the eucalypts which required many years of rainfall before field capacity conditions could be reestablished and recharge of the groundwater aquifer and perennial flows could take place. Conclusions: Afforestation will not necessarily increase dry season flows. Competing processes may result in either increased or reduced dry season flows. Effects on dry season flows are likely to be very site specific. Caveat: The complexity of the competing processes affecting dry season flows indicates that detailed, site specific models will be required to predict impacts. In general the role of vegetation in determining the infiltration properties of soils, as it affects the hydrological functioning of catchments through surface runoff generation, recharge and high and low flows and catchment condition remains poorly understood. Modelling approaches which are able to take into account vegetation and soil physical properties including the conductivity/ water content properties of the soil, and possibly the spatial distribution of these properties, will be required to predict these site specific impacts. 4 Forests reduce erosion? As with impacts on seasonal flows the impacts of forests on erosion are likely to be site specific, and again, many, and often competing processes, are likely to be operating.

Venus Internet
1. 4

conservation techniques related to vegetation type, soils and slope characteristics have not yet been fully developed. 5 Forests reduce floods? It is a widely held view, propagated by foresters and the media, that forests are of great benefit in reducing floods. Disastrous floods in Bangladesh and northern India are almost always associated with deforestation of the Himalayas; similarly, in Europe floods are often attributed by the media to deforestation in the Alps. However hydrological studies carried out in many parts of the world: America (Hewlett and Helvey, 1970), South Africa (Hewlett and Bosch, 1984), UK (Kirby et al., 1991; Johnson, 1995) New Zealand (Taylor and Pearce, 1982) and Asia (Bruijnzeel and Bremmer, 1989; Ives and Messerli, 1989; Hofer, 1998A; Hofer, 1998B, show little linkage between land use and storm flow and therefore do not support this view.From theoretical considerations it would be expected that interception of rainfall by forests reduces floods by removing a proportion of the storm rainfall and by allowing the build up of soil moisture deficits. These effects would be expected to be most significant for small storms and least significant for the largest storms. The high infiltration rates under natural forests also serve to reduce surface runoff and flood response. Certain types of plantation forests may also serve to increase infiltration rates through providing preferential flow pathways down both live and dead root channels. (Through the use of border trees around agricultural fields subject to surface runoff generation there may be some prospect for runoff and flood response mitigation whilst not introducing excessive evaporative losses from wide expanses of trees.) However field studies generally indicate that it is often the management activities associated with forestry: cultivation, drainage, road construction (Jones and Grant, 1996), soil compaction during logging, which are more likely to
programme designed to reduce erosion. Recent theoretical developments and observations (Hall and Calder, 1993; Calder 1999) confirm that drop size modification by the vegetation canopies of trees can be a major factor leading to enhanced splash induced erosion. These observations indicate that tree species with larger leaves generally generating the largest drop sizes. The use of large leafed tree species such as teak (Tectona grandis) in erosion control programmes would therefore be ill advised, especially if there is any possibility of understorey removal taking place. Conclusions: It would be expected that competing processes might result in either increased or reduced erosion from disturbed forests and forest plantations. The effect is likely to be both site and species specific. For certain species, e.g. Tectona grandis, forest plantations may cause severe erosion. It is a common fallacy that plantation forests can necessarily achieve the same erosion benefits as natural forests. Forest cover as such does not guarantee low rates of erosion, the forest quality (density of trees, quality of the lower canopy layers, the availability of surface litter) is an equally if not even more important factor (Hamilton, 1987). Smyle (2000, pers. comm.) has suggested that the erosion rates in undisturbed natural forest might be considered to represent a natural baseline or background erosion rate against which the erosion rates from all other land uses could be compared. The use of such an index may well be of value in land use management and the design of realistic erosion control programmes. Caveat: Although conventional erosion modelling methods such as the Universal Soil Loss Equation (U.S. Department of Agricultural Research Service, 1961) provide a practical solution to many problems associated with soil loss from agricultural lands it may not be adequate for the prediction of erosion resulting from afforestation activities. Process understanding of the erosive potential of drops falling from different tree species is not adequately appreciated and soil
Internet debate: Forests and landslips
Ian Cherret (FAO Honduras), on Hurricane Mitch: Calders comment on management activities is very relevant (That management activities associated with forestry such as cultivation, drainage, road construction, and soil compaction during logging are more likely to influence flood/erosion response than the presence or absence of the forests themselves.). This would be a good time to do field research in Honduras - Choluteca Basin - where first impressions are that extensive landslides that did so much damage ( a rough estimate of level of sediment carried by flood waters running through Tegucigalpa at their height is 15-17%). The impression is also that landslides were concentrated where mature trees had been cleared (only shallow roots holding the saturated soil) or pine woods that had suffered extensive burning last May (impoverished soils). This deserves investigating. Recent research by Texas A & M on an AID funded project in the worst hit basin suggests that soil loss through landslides is at least as important in Central America as loss through run off and wind (Technical Bulletin No. 98-2 1998). And the key to landslide control is deep roots provided by large trees. Our experiences do not contradict the conclusions of Calder or Chomitz (relating to the importance of management activities) but they do indicate that part of the need for further research requires unravelling relationships such as that of SOIL and vegetational cover as opposed to TREES per se. Jim Smyle (Natural Resources Specialist, Project RUTA, Costa Rica): The second topic (relating to lack of vegetation causing landslips) can be bit more thorny, as it can be governed by very local factors and those factors may have little to do with vegetation. For example, the Choluteca basin had a tremendous amount of landsliding. It is also heavily deforested. It also appears to have a geology and soil type which makes it highly susceptible to land sliding. Deep rooted trees could be the answer...though in Hawaiis unconsolidated upland soils the weight of forest on hillslopes often makes them MORE susceptible to sliding. Ian Cherret (FAO Honduras), on Hurricane Mitch: In the watershed Lempira Sur in Rio Mocal, serious landslides occurred in the upper watershed on mount Celaque, the highest peak (2900m) in Honduras, at over 2000 metres! they were deforested areas though - a thousand people have had to be relocated from just one landslide. Clearly the underlying geology has something to do with propensity to landslides. I believe that there is a need for a more scientific study looking at factors such as slope, cover, geomorphology and rainfall pattern.

Venus Internet
1. 5
Internet debate: Deforestation-sedimentation-flooding Bruce Aylward (Environmental economist): One complicating factor in this regard that is not often considered in flooding is the potential role of sedimentation of waterways. I am not saying it is the case, but what if the river bottom is now X inches/feet higher than it used to be due to the accumulation of sediment and bed-load one source of which would be forest conversion/logging, etc? That said, I expect the damages have much more to do with population/development trends and too much rain. Question is does climate change play into the latter . . . in which case forests do play a role. I have been waiting for someone to blame the disasters associated with Hurricane Mitch on deforestation as well, and was partially rewarded by a commentary sent into the Oregonian: Contrary to the television images, the devastation wrought by Mitch was no mere act of God but a far more human tragedy. Misguided government policies and poor farming practices - the two are interrelated - had already pushed the region to the brink of ecological collapse. The torrential rains only gave it a final push . . . the article then goes on to repeat (false) conventional wisdom on forests and soil/water conservation. Ian Cherret (FAO Honduras), on Hurricane Mitch: Indicating levels of sediment on flood waters following landslips in Choluteca Basi: a rough estimate of level of sediment carried by flood waters running through Tegucigalpa at their height is 15-17%. Jim Smyle (Natural Resource Specialist, Project RUTA, Costa Rica): Yes, the flooding impacts were probably made worse by channel aggradation (i.e., river bottoms raised by the sedimentation caused by deforestation and upland land use changes) in some reaches of rivers, but I would bet this was less of a problem than human encroachment in flood plains. Internet debate: Forests and floods the scale issue Robert K. Simons (Hydrological consultant, Simons & Associates, 3538 JFK Parkway, Ft. Collins, CO 80525. e-mail: rksimons@simons.com, website: www.simons.com ): On this subject, our experience has been that deforestation causes increased water and sediment runoff. We conducted detailed data collection studies and developed computer models of watershed water and sediment runoff specifically related to timber activities for the USDA Forest Service on experimental watersheds. These were relatively small in size. Given the fact that there is increased water and sediment runoff for small watersheds, it is difficult to believe that there is no increase for larger watersheds. I suspect it is more difficult to determine for larger watersheds because runoff from large watersheds integrate the cumulative effect of the entire watershed, of which only a relatively small percentage may have been affected by deforestation. In addition, hydraulic attenuation (which tends to result in decreased flood peaks but longer timed base hydrographs) may mask the increased flow. Based on the type of hydrologic modelling that could be conducted, one could develop some sense of the magnitude of increased runoff effects on larger watersheds. Ken Chomitz, (Development Research Group, World Bank): We really need to run these models for large basins using detailed info about the geographical size, intensity, and movement of large storms. There is evidence that deforestation can cause flooding in small basins. Bruijnzeels argument is that small storms average out over large basins; and that storms large enough to cover an entire basin at once tend to be so intense as to saturate the ground, so that runoff is the same with and without forest. The case is by no means closed and any info would be useful. Ian Calder (CLUWRR): ... deforestation generally leads to increased annual and often seasonal runoff, the deforestation process leads to increased erosion but the effects of deforestation on flood peaks, especially the largest flood peaks, is probably marginal (and more related to the deforestation process and other forest management activities than the presence or absence of the forest itself). I would imagine that the USDA model would also show that as the size of the flood event increases the effects of land use would become less important. I am still unaware of any hydrological (as opposed to anecdotal) evidence that establishes a link between major floods and deforestation.
influence flood response than the presence or absence of the forests themselves. In the Himalayan Dilemma (Ives and Messerli, 1989) it is suggested that the scale-approach is a key-issue in the understanding of the highland-lowland linkages. Whereas on the micro-scale (small watershed) the effects of human interventions such as forest cutting can be directly documented in terms of higher discharge peaks or higher sediment load, on a large-scale (Ganga-BrahmaputraMeghna Basin in Bangladesh) natural processes are dominant, and the impacts of human activities in the Himalayas are neither detectable nor measurable. This does not relieve the mountain inhabitants of their responsibility
to use the environment in a sustainable manner, however. Lauterburg (1993) states: Forestation of mountain watersheds and extensive soil conservation measures are valuable for the sake of the hill farmers, if appropriately carried out. It is potentially disastrous, however, for foreign aid agencies and national government authorities to undertake such activities with the conviction that they will solve problems on the plains. Conclusions: For the largest, most damaging flood events there is little scientific evidence to support anecdotal reports of deforestation as being the cause. Caveat: Carefully conducted controlled catchment experiments with different climates/soils/species will be

Venus Internet
1. 6

(water, light, nutrients and carbon dioxide) when supplies of these resources are limited. It is thought that the increased productivity that has been recorded from mixtures of agricultural crops is largely the result of temporal complementarity, especially when one crop is an annual and the other a biennial, or a result of, for example, nitrogen fixation or other factor or condition created by one of the crops. Mixtures with pigeon pea, grown either as an annual or biennial legume, exhibits both and has been found to show complementarity with many species such as maize, sorghum, groundnut and cowpea (Ranganathan and de Wit 1996). Agroforestry is built on the belief that mixtures of agricultural crops and trees can also lead to increased productivity, the belief that it is possible to find overyielding mixtures of crops and trees which, when combined, would have a higher yield than when grown separately on the same land area. However it is now becoming evident that the claims in support of the beliefs, and the trials on which they are based, are flawed. Ong and colleagues, from detailed studies of resource capture between both intercropping and agroforestry systems, carried out at the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) sites at Hyderabad in India and the International Centre for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF) sites at Machakos in Kenya, have developed a science framework and process understanding which is at variance with claims for increased biomass from agroforestry systems. These experimental studies suggest that with agroforestry systems often the best that can be achieved is near to neutral productivity. Ong and colleagues (Ong et al., 1991, 1996), by the application of rigorous scientific reasoning, have also identified some of the pitfalls that have trapped agroforestry researchers into thinking that complementarity and overyielding systems had been achieved. These have arisen mainly because the control plots containing the sole crop stands have not been under optimal conditions, so that the mixture receives a favourable bias.
l
required to resolve this issue but species impacts are probably not as significant as often portrayed. Management activities are most likely to be paramount. At smaller spatial scales there is a greater likelihood of land use affecting both peak storm flow and the time to peak. 6 Forests sterilize water supplies - improve quality? Forests were historically the preferred land use for water supply catchments because of their perceived sterile qualities associated with an absence of livestock and an absence of human activities. More recently the generally reduced fertilizer and pesticide applications to managed forests and forest plantations compared with agricultural lands has been regarded as a benefit with regard to water quality of runoff and recharge. Reduced soil erosion from undisturbed or well-managed natural forests can also be regarded as a benefit. Offsetting these benefits, management activities: cultivation, drainage, road construction, road use, felling, are all likely to increase erosion and nutrient leaching. Furthermore, deposition of most atmospheric pollutants to forests is higher because of the reduced aerodynamic resistance of forest canopies compared with those of shorter crops. In high pollution (industrial) climates this is likely to lead to both long-term acidification of the catchment and acidification of runoff. Conclusions: Except in high pollution climates water quality is likely to be better from forested catchments. Adverse effects of forests on water quality are more likely to be related to bad management practices rather than the presence of the forests themselves. Caveat: Studies may still be required to determine the magnitude of the impacts for specific sites and the means to minimize adverse impacts. 7 Agroforestry systems increase productivity? Agriculturalists have long recognised the productivity benefits that can be obtained from crops by avoiding resource constraints on growth particularly in relation to water and nutrients and also, in some situations, with regard to light and carbon dioxide. Increasingly the tradeoffs between increased production from irrigation schemes are being assessed with respect to the costs to downstream users of often both reduced and poorer quality water resources. Perhaps less well appreciated is that systems which increase productivity through crop mixtures and agroforestry, are likely, if successful, also to have downstream impacts through increased resource (water resource) use. Arguably there is a case for cost benefit analysis which takes into account upstream- downstream benefits not only for forestry and irrigation systems but also for agroforestry systems, when these systems impact significantly on downstream water resources. Farmers are well aware of the productivity benefits that can sometimes be gained by mixing different agricultural crops. When a crop such as pigeon pea is mixed with sorghum or maize much higher production can be obtained compared with pure crops of these species which occupy the same total ground area. When productivity of the mixture is superior to that of sole cropping it is regarded that the mixture is overyielding and that complementarity has occurred. Requirements for complementarity are that the crops, together in a mixture, make better use of resources
One identified pitfall is that, for the convenience of statistical analysis, the same plant densities are used in both the sole crops and the mixtures, although, to achieve optimal productivity in the sole stand, higher densities would be required. A second is that the mixture and sole crop are managed identically even though this management may result in sub-optimal productivity in the sole crop. For example, pruning, which has been used in the mixture to reduce competition from the trees and to return nutrients to the system, would not produce optimal productivity if applied to the control plot. A third example is that plot sizes may be too small, allowing tree roots from the mixture or the sole tree plots to penetrate into the plots of the sole agricultural crop and reduce their yields (van Noordwijk et al., 1996). Ong (1996) has shown from studies at Machakos, Kenya, that the roots of the tree Leucaena leucocephala can reduce the yield of maize 5m away within two years of growth.
One of the fundamental differences between agroforestry systems and intercropping systems is that the tree component in an agroforestry system, after the initial establishment

Venus Internet
1. 7

productivity gains would need to be assessed in relation to the (marginal) cost of the extra water consumed. These recent research findings discussed above have far reaching implications for the practice of agroforestry. They show, contrary to the mother statements underlying much of agroforestry practice, that there are in fact few opportunities for gains in productivity by mixing trees with agricultural crops. Conclusions: Despite the claims made by over enthusiastic agroforesters there is little scientific evidence to show that enhanced productivity can be achieved in agroforestry systems. Growth of the woody component will virtually always be associated with a decrease in biomass and value of the associated annual agricultural crop. The huge investment in the development and demonstration of agroforestry systems purporting to increase productivity might not have been wasted had more attention been paid by development workers to the indigenous knowledge of local people. When high yielding crop systems are achieved it should also be borne in mind that the productivity gains are being achieved at the expense of increased resource use and, when the resource is water, any increased productivity gains should be assessed in relation to the (marginal) cost of the extra water consumed, and the impacts on downstream users of the water. These impacts need to be taken into account for all high water using crop systems whether forestry, agroforestry or irrigated agriculture. Caveat: Although it would be expected that close proximity competition from the woody component in agroforestry systems would generally prevent productivity benefits there might well be achievable synergies in agricultural crop and tree crop systems which rely on rotations or tree crop fallows. With these systems it is possible that the deep rooted nature of most trees may, although consuming deep soil water reserves, bring to the surface through leaf fall, nutrients which are located at depths greater than annual crops can access. A rotation with an annual crop may then allow these nutrients to be utilised by the crop whilst the crop itself, through having a less developed root system, will not be able to utilise all the rainfall, and some water will be available to recharge deeper layers in the soil that the tree crop had previously depleted. 8 Salinity control in agricultural systems and downstream impacts It is widely recognised that salinity control and the avoidance of waterlogging are important considerations, not only in salinity prone dryland farming but also in the design of irrigation schemes. The failure of salinity control measures may lead not only to land being rendered useless for productive purposes but also to salinisation of watercourses with consequent impacts on downstream users. Deficiencies in our knowledge of the environmental processes determining salinisation are probably not a significant constraint in finding solutions to the problem. The quotation by Robertson (1996) salinity and its avoidance or management has been an enigma in Australia. On one hand there has been a wide understanding of the inherently salty nature of the environment and the inevitability of salinity. On the other, there has been a high propensity to ignore the problem and believe that for some reason salinity will not develop in any specific area. illustrates the frequently occurring situation world-wide where, when land use and water resources decisions need to
period, has a well-developed and deep root system. Opportunities for spatial complementarity of below ground resources are therefore limited because the tree roots tend to exploit the whole root zone. Spatial complementarity of above ground resources, particularly in relation to light capture, is however achievable with tree crop mixtures. Rao and colleagues (Rao et al., 1990) have shown that at the ICRISAT, Hyderabad site a mixture of Leucaena leucocephala and millet increased the light capture above that of a sole millet crop. Yet this improved light capture did not result in increased biomass production of the mixture - the biomass produced by the trees was essentially equal to the loss in biomass yield of the crop. This lack of improvement has been explained (Cannell et al., 1998) in terms of the photosynthetic processes operating in trees (all C3 type) which are less efficient in their light to biomass conversion efficiencies than crops, such as millet, which are of C4 type and will have much higher efficiencies. Even though greater resource capture is achieved this does not translate through as higher total productivity. It is now becoming apparent that trees in agroforestry systems will generally lead to a reduction in biomass of the associated crop (Ong 1996) and neutral total biomass production is usually the best that can be expected. Modelling studies (Cannell et al., 1998) also support this view. Cannell and colleagues, through the use of a process based agroforestry model which takes into account competition for light and water (but not nutrients), were able to simulate the growth of a sorghum and tree crop mixture under different climatic conditions. Their conclusions can be summarised as:
l
l l
at sites with less than 800 mm rainfall, maximum total site biomass production was obtained with a sole crop, without overstorey trees; at sites with 800-1000 mm rainfall neutral biomass production was obtained with a mixture; at sites greater than 1000 mm rainfall biomass production would be increased with a mixture provided the Leaf Area Index (LAI) of the trees was greater than 0.25 - but this increase in overall production would be at the expense of a 60% reduction in sorghum grain yields; any decrease in crop yields due to tree competition will automatically increase the frequency of years with poor yields and threaten food security.
Therefore, for low rainfall sites sole crops would clearly be the best option and, even at higher rainfall sites, to achieve higher total biomass production, it would be necessary to accept a huge, 60% reduction in the sorghum crop yield. Cannell and colleagues make the point that the biomass produced by the trees must be of considerable value, relative to that of sorghum grain, for this sacrifice in yield to be worthwhile. The holy grail of agroforestry, a tree species which has roots at depth which can exploit deep soil resources of water and nutrients but with few roots in the surface layers to offer competition to shallow rooted agricultural crops, is still being sought. But, even if it ever were discovered, the spatial complementarity that would be achieved would not be without costs. As for overyielding intercrops, the productivity gains would be at the expense of increased resource use and, when the resource is water, any increased

Venus Internet
1. 8

drain their field or pump groundwater in a similar fashion rivers will undergo progressive salinization until the ecology of the river is destroyed and lower reaches become unfit for human use or irrigation. Piping the effluents for discharge into the sea has been considered in some locations but is generally thought to be not cost effective. 9 Land use and water related natural disasters anthropogenic impacts and public perceptions Many development organizations have recently questioned perceived wisdom in connection with the natural disasters, Hurricane Mitch and the floods in China. The type of questions asked were:
l
be taken promptly and where there is no lack of understanding of the processes, the issues are often fudged and deferred. Deferral of decision-making in these circumstances leads to progressive salinisation of watercourses, destruction of the river ecology and the lower reaches of river systems becoming unfit for human use or irrigation. Three types of options have been recognized as being beneficial in controlling salinity problems in dryland agriculture and irrigation schemes: land management and engineering solutions, which are discussed here, and economic/ policy instruments which are discussed in the last section of the paper. Land management approaches to salinity control In salinity prone dryland areas replanting tree and shrubs in the recharge areas of a catchment will increase the evaporation, through increased interception and probably also increased transpiration, and reduce recharge and groundwater levels. This will alleviate salinity problems in seepage areas by both lowering watertables and lowering the level at which seepage takes place, hence reducing the land area affected, and also by reducing the volume of seepage waters. In areas where dryland salinity problems are not extreme changes in cropping pattern have been advocated. In Australia research is now being conducted to determine agricultural crop combinations which reduce recharge (Zhang et al., 1999) and, for areas where salinity problems are more acute, combinations of agricultural and tree crops. Land management has also been suggested as a method for salinity control in irrigation schemes. In situations where water rather than land is the primary constraint, land management involving dry drainage has been suggested (Gowing and Wyesure, 1992) as an alternative to the traditional engineering approach. The serious downside to the dry drainage approach, which involves perhaps up to one half of the land area, rather than the watercourse, becoming the sink for saline wastewaters, is that this sacrificed land becomes essentially lost to productive use. On this sacrificed land surface evaporation allows the build up and concentration of salts in the soil profile. In conjunction with the dry drainage approach the use of shallow saline groundwater as a source of water for crop growth, rather than lowering groundwater tables through pumping and then reapplying fresh water as irrigation water following traditional engineering practice, has been advocated as having additional benefits. The loss of land for productive use clearly does not make the dry drainage option particularly attractive and cannot be regarded as a sustainable solution to land management. However, perhaps in some circumstances, where salinisation has already occurred, the approach may have some benefits as compared with costly conventional engineering solutions. Engineering solutions Various engineering solutions have been proposed. These include the interception of saline groundwaters and the diversion of the excess water (returns) from irrigation schemes to evaporation pans or directly to rivers. Direct pumping of groundwater to lower groundwater tables has also been advocated in both dryland agricultural areas and within irrigation schemes but a major problem with these solutions is the disposal of the saline effluents. Disposal to rivers is the common option but often serves only to salinize the vital water supply for the less fortunate users who happen to be located downstream. If downstream users also
Is there any evidence that the change in nature and/or frequency of natural disasters has been caused by climate change or environmental degradation? Is there any evidence that their impact has been greater because of environmental degradation and if so, what types of degradation?
Clearly these are important questions to address. Aid organisations are called on to assist in the relief of natural disasters and funds allocated for preventive measures could conceivably be a more effective use. The media often cite anthropogenic impacts as the cause of natural disasters, often reflecting the interests of one or other pressure groups whose interests will be served by their solutions. The Financial Times article of 11/12March 2000 by Victor Mallet argues in relation to the Mozambican flood of 2000 that Drainage schemes, over-grazing and the spread of concrete in Mozambiques neighbours have destroyed their lands ability to absorb heavy rains. The conversion of wetlands to agricultural lands is also given as another reason for the flooding. At discussions at the World Water Forum in the Hague on the Mozambican floods (see http:// www.worldwaterforum.com/news/frameset2.cfm) the Dutch solution of dam building was evident: But most of all its very important to get the help of people with expertise who know how to build dams to prevent future flooding. A recent informal internet debate, stimulated by the CGIARs Polex newsletter of December 1998, making reference to papers by Calder (1998) and Chomitz and Kumari (1998), involving representatives of the World Bank, CGIAR, international consultants and research organisations, has highlighted not only the inadequacy in our scientific knowledge in relation to the environmental processes and anthropogenic influences which may lead to and exacerbate natural, water related, disasters but also another important factor: the public perception of disasters. Perhaps the public perception of the increased frequency and severity of water related disasters may be as much (if not more) related to increased media coverage, higher world populations and higher numbers of people at risk (particularly in relation to the increased numbers of people living in flood plains and subject to flood risk) as to climatic change or land use change impacts? Understanding the role of indigenous knowledge may be a key factor in comprehending the public perception of natural disasters (Barr, 1998). Comments from this debate, which raised three new issues (or sub issues), are given below with permission of the authors.

Venus Internet
1. 9

With the media who are generally content with repeating conventional wisdoms and pseudo science rather than checking authenticity? l With the scientific community who have a vested interest in assuring that no question is finally answered so that research funding can continue? l With inadequacies in the structure and linkages between and within large organisations which hinder information flows? l With the systems of economic incentives and penalties, and of regulation, which govern land management and production practices? Probably all of these are responsible, and new mechanisms, methods and research may be needed to overcome these constraints. It has been argued (Calder, 1999) that another difficulty faced in the task of connecting science to policy is the mindset that has been generated in relation to some environmental issues. The perception that forests are always necessarily good for the water resources has become so deeply ingrained in our collective psyches that it is usually accepted unthinkingly. The view is routinely reinforced by the media and is all-pervasive; it has become enshrined in some of our most influential environmental policy documents. The report by the United Nations Commission on Environment and Development (1992), states: The impacts of loss and degradation of forests are in the form of soil erosion; loss of biological diversity, damage to wildlife habitats and degradation of watershed areas, deterioration of the quality of life and reduction of the options for development. These simplistic views, particularly as they imply the inevitable link between the absence of forests and degradation of water resources, have created a mindset which not only links degradation with less forest but rehabilitation and conservation with more forest. This mindset has caused, and continues to cause, governments, development agencies and UN organisations to commit funds to afforestation or reforestation programmes in the mistaken belief that this is necessarily the best or only way to improve water resources. Clearly there are many valid reasons for afforestation or reforestation programmes but where the objectives are to improve water resources they are unlikely to be achieved. The mindset created by the old paradigm which inevitably links the absence of forests with degradation of water resources, and more forest with improved water resources has not yet been destroyed. Until it is replaced it will continue to cause governments, development agencies and UN organisations to commit and waste funds on afforestation or reforestation programmes in the belief that this is the best way or only way to improve water resources. An example would be the ODA-funded forestry programme in Sri Lanka where ODA in the early nineties initiated a large scale forestry programme on the Mahaweli catchments in Sri Lanka based on the old paradigm assumption that pine reforestation would regulate flows and reduce erosion to the catchments feeding the Victoria reservoir complex. It is now realised (Calder, 1992; Finlayson 1998) that the pine afforestation is serving only to reduce both annual and seasonal flows. Even if planted at the highest altitudes, where there is still some remaining indigenous cloud forest at Horton Plains, recent research indicates that afforestation would give no net benefit to
l
Connecting science to policy

For land use related research to have any value it has to be connected to the decision making and policy making process. Traditionally the culture of the research community, which has been fostered and is still being fostered by research councils, is to publish research findings in tightly defined disciplinary, peer-reviewed research journals the number of research papers published and the number of citations received determines the credit they achieve. Many environmental research scientists still operate under the happy delusion that once published their findings will also shortly be taken up and made use of in the development of environmental policy. Sadly, this is not often the case. The readers of research journals are generally fellow researchers, not managers and decision makers. Decades may elapse, particularly it seems in relation to land use and water resource issues, before research findings trickle into policy. Arguably, addressing the reasons for this lack of connection between science and policy, may be the single most effective use of resources in furthering land use and water resources management at all scales. The problem is not just one of the developing world. The UK Governments Rural White Paper on England (1995) called for a doubling of lowland forests, mainly for amenity considerations, without demonstrating any awareness of the water resource implications of such a large change in land use. Although the knowledge base for understanding the reasons for dryland salinity in Australia have been known for over 50 years (viz. the removal of forests reduces evaporation and saline water tables rise to produce saline seeps) forests are still being cut in the dryland areas and, to aggravate matters further, afforestation is occurring in the headwater areas, thus reducing dilution flows. In Spain afforestation of the Pyrenees is being promoted by the Spanish Government to improve downstream water resources. In Panama, Law 21, (with USAID support) has been passed which promotes afforestation of the Panama catchments as a means of enhancing flows and improving the functioning of the canal. In respect to the need for water in order to increase the capacity of the Panama Canal , it is estimated that if 1000 ha per year of deforested land in the watershed was reforested, it would not be necessary to construct an additional dam proposed for the Rio Ciri - Reported in: CEASPA. 1997. Panama: Evaluation of National Sustainability. Series: Panama Today No. 7. Pg.111 and taken from calculations made by Nathan/Intercarib S.A., 1996, the consulting firm which developed the basis for Law 21. Where does the problem lie?
l With the researcher for not making his results available to a wider community of researchers operating in the different disciplines which all relate to environmental research and decision making, and to the wider public and decision making community? l With the research councils which still promote single disciplinary research and where no impact factor is ascribed to any real world takeup of results in policy or decision making? l With the managers and decision makers for not taking the trouble to make themselves aware of new scientific developments?

Venus Internet
1. 10

and aggravating this problem - and are now morally responsible for helping with its resolution, is perhaps another question that needs to be broached. As a means towards developing improved and more consistent land-use and water resource policies, applicable particularly at the rural watershed scale in developing countries, the following questions are raised for discussion regarding the adequacy of present approaches. 1 Compatibility of IWRM and SL approaches Are Integrated Water Resources Management, IWRM (resource focussed), and Sustainable Livelihoods, SL (people focussed), approaches necessarily complementary or even compatible at all spatial and temporal scales ? The DFID White Paper on International Development, Eliminating World Poverty: A Challenge for the 21st Century, presents the concept of the stewardship of natural resources so that the needs of both present and future generations can be met. The White Paper also promotes the concept of sustainable livelihoods and this, together with the management of the natural and physical environment is expected to achieve the overall goal of poverty alleviation. DFID provides the following definition for a sustainable livelihood: A livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets (including both material and social resources) and activities required for a means of living. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stresses and shocks and maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets both now and in the future, while not undermining the natural resource base. Five types of assets, upon which individuals draw to build their livelihoods, are defined: natural capital, social capital, human capital, physical capital and financial capital (Carney, 1998). The Sustainable Livelihoods approach is still relatively new and untested and the consequences for natural resource management of applying this new people-first poverty focussed approach to sustainable development is not yet known. There are concerns that poverty alleviation approaches focussed at the microcatchment scale may result in tragedy of the commons type impacts at larger scales. Conversely, it could be argued that IWRM approaches, although aiming to achieve net economic benefits to basin inhabitants, may not be taking sufficient account of the poorest in society. 2 Socio-economic impact of demand-management approaches Do we fully understand the socio-economic implications of applying IWRM, demand-management, economic instruments such as the registration and licensing of high water using land uses (e.g. forests and sugar cane), water pricing and tradable water rights? Is there a danger that unless properly conceived the poorest sectors of society will be disadvantaged? Here again there may be a conflict between IWRM approaches and poverty alleviation; in particular the need to set water pricing at a level that the poorest in society can afford. The South African Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) now recognise that the primary goal of the Government of South Africa is the alleviation of poverty. Barbara Schreiner, Chief Director, Water Use and Conservation, DWAF, explains the issue eloquently:
flows; the measured interception losses from the forest exceed the enhanced cloudwater deposition. Furthermore, where the planting is generally taking place, on old, abandoned tea plantations, on-site soil erosion has virtually ceased following the regrowth of pattana grasslands. Forestry operations involved with planting and road construction will almost certainly be increasing on-site erosion. Understorey fires under the pines, a common occurrence in Sri Lanka, also leave the soil exposed to splash induced erosion from the forest canopy. The forestry project is therefore having the opposite effect to that intended. Furthermore, Stocking (1996) claims that even where there is bad on-site erosion on the Mahaweli catchment, and erosion from tobacco fields planted on steep slopes is probably the worst source of erosion on the catchment, this is not getting into the reservoirs. Recent sedimentation studies reveal that there is, in fact, very little sedimentation occurring in the reservoirs. Stocking claims that the on-site erosion from the slopes is being deposited on the lower slopes and flood plains and paddy field farmers are actually benefiting from the sediment by incorporating it into their paddies.
The need for consistent policies

The need for land-use and water management policies that are based on our best science rather than myth, that are not only upwardly and downwardly compatible, from the local rural watershed scale to the global scale, but are also consistent with other global and local policies relating to sustainability, climate change, biodiversity, trade, food production and poverty alleviation, is surely undeniable. Perhaps nowhere is this need more acute than in relation to forests and water policies. As discussed above, commercial forestry has often been promoted by development organisations on its perceived environmental benefits. Yet science based research has shown, and shown for a long time, that many of the expected environmental benefits (which may in some cases be provided by natural forests) cannot be achieved through commercial plantations. Increasingly we are now becoming aware of the environmental dangers, rather than benefits that have been caused by these plantations. Not only is there usually a high cost in terms of lost water associated with fast growing commercial plantations but, as has been recognised by the government of South Africa, there may also be dangers associated with escaping plantation trees. The South African Government, in the February 2000 budget, awarded a further R1,000,000,000 (over five years) to the Working for Water Programme (DWAF, 1996) for the purposes of controlling and eradicating alien invading tree species. The expectation is that without this programme the invaders would eliminate indigenous plant species and seriously reduce water resources. The programme also has, through specifically targeting the poorest in society for employment, a major poverty alleviation component. However, the expectation is that the water resource and ecological values of the programme alone will justify the costs. Although the alien invader issue has been recognised in RSA, the extent of this problem has not really been quantified for the rest of the developed and developing world. The extent to which past and present policies of development organisations may have been responsible for introducing

Venus Internet
1. 11
There are those for whom water resources management appears to be an end in itself, and for whom the challenge is to perfect the science, perhaps even the art of water resources management. For these people, economic growth is necessary in order to provide the necessary context for improved water resources management, as though improved water resources management has some inherent and ultimate value in and of itself. Then there are those for whom water resources management is a tool, and not an end. There are those for whom water resources management is one element in the struggle to build a socially and environmentally just society, not only in South Africa but across the whole world. For such people, and I number myself amongst them, the ultimate purpose of what we do is to create a society in which there is no more poverty, to create a world in which all human beings have sufficient food and water, a place to live, a job, a clean and healthy environment, education, and a chance for a life of dignity and self fulfilment. (Schreiner, 1999) 3 Carbon sequestration benefits and water resource dis-benefits of forests Will the promotion of forestry as a land use in rural watersheds through carbon sequestration credits (Kyoto Protocol) reduce downstream water resources and aggravate downstream water resource conflicts ? One of the difficulties in reconciling forest policy in relation to both water and climate change is that there are two separate research communities addressing these issues. An example of this is given by the physical separation of the two communities into parallel sessions at the Forests and Atmosphere-Water-Soil Conference held at Soltau, Northern Germany in July 1999. The recognition that forest carbon sequestration benefits may be at the expense of reduced water resources does not seem to have registered strongly in either community. Yet, even if the principles underlying the Kyoto Protocol are accepted, there are important questions to be asked by countries seeking carbon sequestration credits through afforestation policies, in relation to the value of these credits as compared with the value of the water that will be forgone. In monetary terms they may be quite similar. Taking (conservative) estimates of 250 and 400 mm per year as the average loss of water under deciduous hardwood and pines/ eucalypts respectively (Bosch and Hewlett, 1982) and (conservative) average values for water for agricultural or industrial water use as $100 per 1000 m3 ( values as high as $4000 for industrial processes and nearly $2000 have been quoted for some speciality crops) the loss in value of water under hardwood afforestation would be $250 per hectare and $400 under pines/eucalypts. Aylward (Aylward 1998; Aylward et al. 1998) suggests, from studies in Latin America, that carbon sequestration credits arising from afforestation would amount to around $200-$500 per hectare with a price of $20/ton (amongst the highest of the present carbon valuation) for carbon. Clearly if there were higher value uses for water within a catchment which were able to afford more than $100 per 1000 m3 on strict economic arguments alone, forgetting the possible socio- economic downsides, there would be little merit in pursuing carbon credits.
4 Increased production efficiencies at the expense of downstream environmental problems The fallacy of striving for increased irrigation efficiency at the farm level which involves reducing the amount of lost return waters from the irrigation scheme has been ably pointed out by Seckler (see Seckler 1996, http:// www.cgiar.org/iwmi//reps.htm). At a larger basin scale these return waters are not lost if they are being used for environmental or other downstream purposes. Similarly it should perhaps be argued that where increased production efficiencies of other high water using land uses, whether irrigated farming, forestry or agroforestry, are achieved at the expense of increased (water) resource use, the production benefits need to be considered in relation to the marginal cost of the water to other downstream users and, where necessary, compensation mechanisms to downstream users should be considered. For agroforestry systems we seem to have the particularly curious situation that, irrespective of the downstream water consequences of increased productivity, increased productivity from agroforestry systems as compared with non mixed forestry and agriculture seems impossible to achieve. Research has established that through competition for resources, particularly water, the best that can normally be achieved from agroforestry systems is the neutral productivity condition (i.e. the presence of trees will, for all known tree and agricultural crop mixtures, reduce the productivity of the agricultural crop). Yet it would appear that agroforestry is still being promoted by UN and other development organisations as a means of increasing production notwithstanding the extra labour requirement that agroforestry systems usually entail. Is there a mismatch between the knowledge base and policy in relation to the promotion of agroforestry as a means of increasing productivity? 5 Water subsidies to agriculture and increased downstream environmental problems In most countries government policies are such that irrigation water is still provided, through subsidies, at an artificially low price. Increasingly it is being recognized that the use of these subsidised and low prices leads to inefficiencies in water use which are direct contributory factors to both waterlogging and downstream salinity problems. Increasing the price for irrigation water is one method that has been adopted for encouraging efficient water use. Another method, which has been used in the USA and Australia, is the Transferable Water Entitlement (TWE) or transferable water right. This is a mechanism by which a market for water can be achieved by allowing entitlements to be bought and sold without the necessity of buying and selling the accompanying land. The use of the mechanism is expected to increase efficiencies in a number of ways including the transfer of water to higher value uses and higher valued crops. It is also expected to lead to the increased adoption of water saving irrigation technologies, because the saved water can then be sold. Decreased use of irrigation on land which is poorly suited and where economic returns are low, perhaps because of existing waterlogged or salinized conditions, might also be anticipated. Arguably combinations of three approaches: land management, engineering solutions and economic

Venus Internet
1. 12

Report to the Project on Rural Poverty and Natural Resources. Panam: INRENARE/MIDA. Aylward, B., Echeverra, J., Fernndez Gonzlez, A., Porras, I., Allen, K., Mejas, R. 1998. Economic Incentives for Watershed Protection: A Case Study of Lake Arenal, Costa Rica. Final Report to the Government of the Netherlands under the program of Collaborative Research in the Economics of Environment and Development (CREED). London: IIED, TSC and the International Center for Economic Policy, National University at Heredia (CINPE). page 130. Bands, D.P., Bosch, J.M., Lamb, A.J., Richardson, D.M., Van Wilgen, B.W., Van Wyk, D.B. and Versfeld, D.B. 1987 Jonkershoek Forestry Research Centre Pamphlet 384, Department of Environment Affairs, Private Bag X447 Pretoria 0001. ISBN 0-621-11242-9. Barr, J.J.F. 1998 Use of indigenous knowledge by natural resources scientists: issues in theory and practice. Paper presented at the National Workshop on The State of Indigenous Knowledge in Bangladesh Dhaka, 6th-7th May, 1998. Bosch, J.M. 1979 Treatment effects on annual and dry period streamflow at Cathedral Peak. S. Afr. For. J. 108: 29-38. Bosch, J.M. and Hewlett, J.D. 1982 A review of catchment experiments to determine the effects of vegetation changes on water yield and evapotranspiration. J. Hydrol. 55: 3-23. Bruijnzeel, L.A. and Bremmer, C.N. 1989. Highlandlowland interactions in the Ganges-Brahmaputra river basin: A review of published literature. ICIMOD Occasional Paper 11. Kathmandu, Nepal: ICIMOD. Bruijnzeel, L.A. 1990 Hydrology of moist tropical forests and effects of conversion: a state of knowledge review. UNESCO International Hydrological Programme, A publication of the Humid Tropics Programme, UNESCO, Paris. Calder, I.R. 1992 The hydrological impact of land use change (with special reference to afforestation and deforestation). In: Proceedings of the Conference on Priorities for Water Resources Allocation and Management. Southampton, July 1992. Overseas Development Administration, London. ISBN: 090 2500 49X. pp. 91-101. Calder, I.R. 1998 Review outline of Water Resource and Land Use Issues. SWIM Paper 3. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Irrigation Management Institute (IIMI). ISBN: 92 9090 361 9. Calder, I.R. 1999 The Blue Revolution, Land Use and Integrated Water Resources Management, Earthscan Cannell, M.G.R., Mobbs, D.C. and Lawson, G.J. 1998 Complementarity of light and water use in tropical agroforests II. Modelled theoretical tree production and potential crop yield in arid to humid climates. For. Ecol. Manage. 102: 275-282. Carney, D. 1998 Implementing the Sustainable Rural Livelihoods Approach. In: D. Carney. (Ed.) Sustainable Rural Livelihoods, What contribution can we make? Papers presented at the Department for International Developments Natural Resources Advisers Conference, July 1998. DFID, London. IBSN 1 86192 082 2. Chomitz, M. and Kumari, K. 1998 The domestic benefits of tropical forests: a critical review. The World Bank
instruments, may hold the best prospects for the management of salinity and downstream environmental problems 6 Matching local land-use and water-resource policies with global ideals The Global Water Partnership (GWP) document Towards Water Security, Framework for Action (http:// www.gwpforum.org/Vision.htm#FFA) presents again the messages contained in the Dublin Statement and UNCED (UNCED, 1992) report of almost a decade earlier. Some have questioned (see NGOs express serious concerns http://www.worldwaterforum.com/news/frameset2.cfm ) the lack of progress that has been made over this decade and most would agree that further development of the ideals, and the huge costs that this entails, is not what is required. What is required is action in terms of realistic policies applicable at the local level. Where this is happening, and the case of South Africa, with a new water act, and with the development of new sectoral strategies being developed, may be the best example, perhaps we should be looking for Best Management Practices, to see how such policies are performing and to see how they may be applied, with any necessary modifications, elsewhere in the world? It may also be necessary to explore the GWP proposals for consistency and to ask questions such as are some of these Global approaches useful or meaningful at the local, rural catchment scale?, e.g. Is the GWP sending out an ambiguous message in calling for achieving water-food security implying notions of national water-food security and self sufficiency, when virtual water transfers through food trade may be a more efficient alternative? A 30% increase in water productivity for food production from rainfed and irrigated farming by 2015 is called for in the GWP, Towards Water Security, Framework for Action to meet future global food requirements. Are such projections based on an adequate knowledge base? Are such exhortations in anyway meaningful at a local scale? Do they mask the other economic and socio-political realities presently constraining food production and water availability at the rural catchment scale? If it is agreed, during the conference, that some of the above questions are valid and require an answer, perhaps a follow-up question that should be posed is: How can a solution be found, what more must we do to ensure consistent, integrated policies within watersheds of different scales which deal with land use impacts on water resources, with the impacts of upstream activities on downstream users, which make use of appropriate economic, social and political mechanisms within watersheds and which are making best use of current scientific knowledge?
Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank all those that contributed to the internet debate that was reported here and to Thomas Hofer for his valuable editorial comments on this paper.
References
Aylward, B. 1998. Beneficios y Costos De Oportunidad De La Conservacin De Biodiversidad En El Corredor Biolgico Panameo - Componente Atlntico. Final

Venus Internet
1. 13

29: 87-114. Lauterburg, A. 1993 The Himalayan highland-lowland interactive system: do land use changes in the mountains affect the plains? In: Messerli, B., Hofer, T. and Wymann, S, (eds). Himalayan einvironment: pressureproblems-processes. 12 years of research. Geographica Bernensia G38, University of Berne, 206 pp Ong, C.K., Odango, J.C.W., Marshall, F. and Black, C.R. 1991 Water use by trees and crops. Five hypotheses. Agroforestry Today. April-June: 7-10. Ong, C.K., Black, C.R. Marshall, F. and Corlett, J.E. 1996 Principles of resource capture and utilization of light and water. In: Ong, C.K. and Huxley, P. (Eds.) TreeCrop Interactions CAB International, Wallingford, UK. ISBN 0-85198-987-X. pp. 73-158. Ong, C.K. 1996 A framework for quantifying the various effects of tree-crop interactions. In: Ong, C.K. and Huxley, P. (Eds.) Tree-Crop Interactions CAB International, Wallingford, UK. ISBN 0 85198 987 X. pp. 1-23. Pearce, A.J. 1986 Erosion and sedimentation. Working paper. Environment and Policy Institute, Honolulu, Hawaii, 18 pp. Pereira , H.C. 1989 Policy and practice in the management of tropical watersheds. Westview Press, Colorado. ISBN 0 8133 7731 5. Ranganathan, R. and de Wit, C.T. 1996 Mixed cropping of annuals and woody perennials: an analytical approach to productivity and management. In: Ong, C.K. and Huxley, P. (Eds.) Tree-Crop Interactions CAB International, Wallingford, UK. ISBN 0 85198 987 X. pp. 25-49. Rao, M.R., Sharma, M. and Ong, C.K., 1990 A study of the potential of hedgerow intercropping in semiarid India using a two-way systematic design. Agrofor. Syst. 11: 243-258. Reid, I. and Parkinson, R.J. 1984 The nature of the tile-drain outfall hydrograph in heavy clay soils, J. Hydrol. 72: 289-305. Robertson, G. 1996 Saline Lands in Australia its extent and predicted trends. Proceedings of the 4th National Conference and Workshop on the Productive Use and Rehabilitation of Saline Lands. Published by Promaco Conventions PTY Ltd, Australia. Robinson, M., Moore, R.E. and Blackie, J.R. 1997 From Moorland to Forest: The Coalburn Catchment Experiment, Institute of Hydrology and Environment Agency Report, Institute of Hydrology, Wallingford, UK. Robinson, M., Ryder, E.L., and Ward, R.C. 1985 Influence on streamflow of field drainage in a small agricultural catchment. Agricultural Water Management, 10: 14558. Scott, D.F. and Lesch, W. 1997 Streamflow responses to afforestation with Eucalyptus grandis and Pinus patula and to felling in the Mokobulaan experimental catchments, South Africa. J. Hydrol. 199: 360-377. Scott, D.F. and Smith, R.E. 1997 Preliminary empirical models to predict reduction in total and low flows resulting from afforestation. Water SA 23: 135-140. Schreiner, B. 1999 Keynote address: SANCIAHS Conference, Cape Town, 29 November 1999, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, RSA. Seckler, D. 1996 The new era of water resources
Research Observer, vol. 13, no.1; 13-35. DFID 1997 White Paper on International Development. Department for International Development. London. DOE (Department of the Environment) 1995 Rural England: a nation committed to a living countryside ISBN: 0 10 130162 6 The Stationary Office DWAF 1996 The Working for Water Programme, Ministry of Water Affairs and Forestry, Cape Town, South Africa. Finlayson, W. 1998 Effects of deforestation and of tree planting on the hydrology of the Upper Mahaweli Catchment. Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka. ISBN 955 9185 02 0 Galay, V. 1985 Hindu-Kush Himalayan erosion and sedimentation in relation to dams. Paper presented at the International Workshop on watershed management in the Hindu Kush-Himalayan region, Chengdu. International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, Kathmandu. 26 pp Giambelluca, T.W., Fox, J., Yarnasarn, S., Onibutr, P. and Nullet, M.A. 1999 Dry-season radiation balance of land covers replacing forest in northern Thailand. Agric. and For. Meteorol., Vol.95, No.1, pp.53- 65. Gowing, J.W. and Wyesure, G.C.L. 1992 Dry drainage, a sustainable and cost effective solution to waterlogging and salinisation? Proceedings of the 5th International Drainage Workshop, Lahore, Vol. III 6.26-6.34. Hall, R.L. and Calder, I.R. 1993 Drop size modification by forest canopies - measurements using a disdrometer. J. Geophys. Res. 90: 465-470. Hamilton, L.S. 1987 What are the impacts of deforestation in the Himalayas on the Ganges-Brahmaputra lowlands and delta? Relations between assumptions and facts. Mountain Research and Development. 7: 256-263. Hewlett, J.D. and Bosch, J.M. 1984 The dependence of storm flows on rainfall intensity and vegetal cover in South Africa, J. Hydrol. 75: 365-381. Hewlett, J.D. and Helvey, J.D. 1970 Effects of forest clearfelling on the storm hydrograph. Water Resour. Res. 6 (3): 768-782. Hofer, T., 1998A. Floods in Bangladesh. A highlandlowland interaction? Geographica BernensiaG48. Berne: University. Ives, J.D. and Messerli, B. 1989. The Himalayan dilemma. Reconciling development and conservation, London: United Nations University Press. Hofer, T., 1998B. Do land use changes in the himalayas affect downstream flooding? Traditional understanding and new evidences. Memoir Geological Society of India (19): 119-141. Johnson, R.C. 1995 Effects of upland afforestation on water resources: the Balquhidder experiment 1981-1991. Institute of Hydrology Report No. 116, Institute of Hydrology, Wallingford. 73 pp. Jones, J.A and Grant, G.E. 1996 Peak flow responses to clear-cutting and roads in small and large basins, western Cascades, Oregon. Water Resour. Res. 32: 959-974. Kirby, C., Newson, M.D. and Gilman, K. 1991 Plynlimon research: the first two decades. Institute of Hydrology, Report No. 109. Institute of Hydrology, Wallingford. 188 pp. Langford, K.J. 1976 Change in yield of water following a bushfire in a forest of Eucalyptus regnans, J. Hydrol.

Venus Internet
1. 14

ex Maiden) and Pinus patula (Schlecht. Et Cham.) On streamflow from experimental catchments at Mokobulaan, Transvaal. J. Hydrol, 48: 107-118. Van Noordwijk, M., Lawson, G., Soumar, A., Groot, J.J.R. and Hairiah, K. 1996 Root distribution of trees and crops: competition and/or complementarity. In: Ong, C.K. and Huxley, P. (Eds.) Tree-Crop Interactions CAB International, Wallingford. ISBN 0 85198 987 X. pp. 319-364. Versfeld, D.B. 1981 Overland flow on small plots at the Jonkershoek Forestry Research Station. South African Forestry Journal, 119. 6 pp. Zhang, L., Hume, I.H., OConnell, M.G., Mitchell, D.C., Milthorpe, P.L., Yee, M., Dawes, W.R. and Hatton, T.J. 1999 Estimating episodic recharge under different crop/pasture rotations in the Mallee region. Part 1. Experiments and model calibration Agric. Water. Manage., Vol.42, No.2, pp.219-235
management. Research Report 1. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Irrigation Management Institute (IIMI). ISBN: 92 9090 35 2. Stocking, M. 1996 Soil erosion - breaking new ground. In: M.Leach and R. Mearns (Eds.) The Lie of the Land, Villiers Publication, London. pp.140-154. Taylor, C.H. and Pearce, A.J. 1982 Storm runoff processes and sub-catchments characteristics in a New Zealand hill country catchment. Earth Surf. Process. Land forms, 7: 439-447. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development 1992 Agenda 21 & the UNCED proceedings. Proceedings of the UNCED Conference, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. 1992.,UNCED, New York, ISBN 0379103508 U.S. Department of Agricultural Research Service, 1961 A Universal equation for Predicting Rainfall-erosion Losses, USDA-ARS Spec. report. 22-26. Van Lill, W.S., Kruger, F.J. and Van Wyk, D.B. 1980 The effects of afforestation with Eucalyptus grandis (Hill

Venus Internet

Calder - Land Use Impacts On Water Resources

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Calder - Land Use Impacts On Water Resources

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

1.

Land Use and Water Resources Research

Land Use Impacts on Water Resources1

The knowledge base - myth or reality

Land Use and Water Resources Research 1 (2000) 2.1-2.14 (http://www.venus.co.uk/luwrr)

Land Use and Water Resources Research

Land Use and Water Resources Research 1 (2000) 2.1-2.14 (http://www.venus.co.uk/luwrr)

Land Use and Water Resources Research

Land Use and Water Resources Research 1 (2000) 2.1-2.14 (http://www.venus.co.uk/luwrr)

Land Use and Water Resources Research

Land Use and Water Resources Research 1 (2000) 2.1-2.14 (http://www.venus.co.uk/luwrr)

Land Use and Water Resources Research

Land Use and Water Resources Research 1 (2000) 2.1-2.14 (http://www.venus.co.uk/luwrr)

Land Use and Water Resources Research

Land Use and Water Resources Research 1 (2000) 2.1-2.14 (http://www.venus.co.uk/luwrr)

Land Use and Water Resources Research

Land Use and Water Resources Research 1 (2000) 2.1-2.14 (http://www.venus.co.uk/luwrr)

Land Use and Water Resources Research

Land Use and Water Resources Research 1 (2000) 2.1-2.14 (http://www.venus.co.uk/luwrr)

Land Use and Water Resources Research

Connecting science to policy

Land Use and Water Resources Research 1 (2000) 2.1-2.14 (http://www.venus.co.uk/luwrr)

Land Use and Water Resources Research

The need for consistent policies

Land Use and Water Resources Research 1 (2000) 2.1-2.14 (http://www.venus.co.uk/luwrr)

Land Use and Water Resources Research

Land Use and Water Resources Research 1 (2000) 2.1-2.14 (http://www.venus.co.uk/luwrr)

Land Use and Water Resources Research

Land Use and Water Resources Research 1 (2000) 2.1-2.14 (http://www.venus.co.uk/luwrr)

Land Use and Water Resources Research

Land Use and Water Resources Research 1 (2000) 2.1-2.14 (http://www.venus.co.uk/luwrr)

Land Use and Water Resources Research

Land Use and Water Resources Research 1 (2000) 2.1-2.14 (http://www.venus.co.uk/luwrr)

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen