Analysis of irrigation water tariffs and taxes in Europe

Berbel, Julio; Borrego-Marín, María M.; Expósito, Alfonso; Giannoccaro, Giacomo; Montilla-López, Nazaret M.; Roseta-Palma, Catarina

doi:10.2166/wp.2019.197

Cited by 61 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, we obtained similar results with a reduction in water stress of around 1% when treated water was priced at €0.5/m 3 . This is not surprising given that farmers in the EU pay a small share of the total irrigation cost, with average prices sometimes well below the treatment cost, ranging between €0.005/m 3 in Germany to €0.12/m 3 in Italy ( Berbel et al, 2019 ). The main reason that could explain why our findings for Italy differ from those of Vergine et al (2017) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reuse of treated water in European agriculture: Potential to address water scarcity under climate change

Hristov

Barreiro‐Hurlé

Salputra

et al. 2021

Agricultural Water Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of reclaimed or treated water from urban wastewater treatment plants for irrigation has been proposed as an alternative water source to address water scarcity issues in Europe. In this paper using agro-economic modelling, we analyse if treated water available for agriculture has the potential to reduce freshwater abstraction and, consequently, water stress. Implementing exogenous treated water quantities as an additional water supply at NUTS 2 level in the CAPRI model, we found that treated water reuse is a possible alternative supply source to address water shortages with a very negligible effect on farmers’ income and food production in the EU. However, the actual water reuse and water stress reduction is very limited due to high costs. Even climate change effects on water availability and precipitation failed to induce higher use. The one-size-fits-all approach modelled via a flat rate water price only encourages the reuse of treated water in a limited number of EU member states. Thus, in order to maximise the potential of reused water to address water scarcity, different rates should be used so as to ensure higher treated water volumes at lower costs.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reuse of treated water in European agriculture: Potential to address water scarcity under climate change

Hristov

Barreiro‐Hurlé

Salputra

et al. 2021

Agricultural Water Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the EU-Med countries, irrigation water use represents an average 70% of total water withdrawals [24]. On the other hand, more than 80% of the irrigated land-acreage in Spain, involving 7•10 5 irrigators and 2•10 6 -hectare, is serviced by an irrigation district [25].…”

Section: Irrigated Cropsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Techno-Economic Viability of Agro-Photovoltaic Irrigated Arable Lands in the EU-Med Region: A Case-Study in Southwestern Spain

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Solar photovoltaic (PV) energy is positioned to play a major role in the electricity generation mix of Mediterranean countries. Nonetheless, substantial increase in ground-mounted PV installed capacity could lead to competition with the agricultural use of land. A way to avert the peril is the electricity-food dual use of land or agro-photovoltaics (APV). Here, the profitability of a hypothetical APV system deployed on irrigated arable lands of southwestern Spain is analyzed. The basic generator design, comprised of fixed-tilt opaque monofacial PV modules on a 5 m ground-clearance substructure, featured 555.5 kWp/ha. Two APV shed orientations, due south and due southwest, were compared. Two 4-year annual-crop rotations, cultivated beneath the heightened PV modules and with each rotation spanning 24 ha, were studied. One crop rotation was headed by early potato, while the other was headed by processing tomato. All 9 crops involved fulfilled the two-fold condition of being usually cultivated in the area and compatible with APV shed intermitent shading. Crop revenues under the partial shading of PV modules were derived from official average yields in the area, through the use of two alternative sets of coefficients generated for low and high crop-yield shade-induced penalty. Likewise, two irrigation water sources, surface and underground, were compared. Crop total production costs, PV system investment and operating costs and revenues from the sale of electricity, were calculated. The internal rates of return (IRRs) obtained ranged from a minimum of 3.8% for the combination of southwest orientation, early-potato rotation, groundwater and high shade-induced crop-yield penalty, to a maximum of 5.6% for the combination of south orientation, processing-tomato rotation, surface water and low shade-induced crop-yield penalty.

show abstract

“…A similar exercise is run by European Environmental Agency (2013 [101]) considering all cost recovery measures including in agriculture and referring to the literature on the impacts of these policies. Bar-Shira, Finkelshtain and Simhon (2006 [102]) study the impact of block-rate versus uniform water pricing, using data from Israeli agricultural communities between 1992 and 1997 to estimate water demand elasticities and simulate water demand with a uniform pricing rate. Still, quantitative evaluations of pricing are difficult to find, perhaps due to limited application of developed pricing schemes in the irrigation context.…”

Section: Monitoring Progress In Water Pricing Initiativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring progress in agricultural water management

Gruère¹,

Shigemitsu²

2021

OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measuring policy progress on agriculture and water policies is essential to help decision makers identify necessary policy changes and understand how further progress may be achieved to improve agricultural water management. A thorough review of existing evaluations of agriculture and water policies suggests three types of progress to be measured: policy design, policy implementation capacity and policy results. The quality and robustness of these measures of policy progress depends upon three main factors. First, assessment of policy design requires matching policy alignment with cross cutting objectives or with a reference text. Second, assessment of progress in implementation capacity requires gauging evolution towards predefined capacity needs or identified governance gaps. Third, evaluation of policy results requires clearly defined objectives, timelines and scales for assessments. Seven practical options are identified for applying these principles to agriculture and water policies, illustrated by applying them to assessing progress in the sustainable management of water for irrigation under climate change and in controlling diffuse nutrient pollution.

show abstract

Analysis of irrigation water tariffs and taxes in Europe

Cited by 61 publications

References 20 publications

Reuse of treated water in European agriculture: Potential to address water scarcity under climate change

Reuse of treated water in European agriculture: Potential to address water scarcity under climate change

Techno-Economic Viability of Agro-Photovoltaic Irrigated Arable Lands in the EU-Med Region: A Case-Study in Southwestern Spain

Measuring progress in agricultural water management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About