Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Antónia Fortes Duarte Ferreira
 -- 2838 2023-07-27 15:28:37 |
2 minor layout change
Sirius Huang
 Meta information modification 2838 2023-07-28 03:27:48 |

Video Upload Options

We provide professional Video Production Services to translate complex research into visually appealing presentations. Would you like to try it?
No, upload directly Yes

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Ferreira, A.; Rolim, J.; Paredes, P.; Cameira, M.D.R. Water Accounting. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/47363 (accessed on 21 December 2024).
Ferreira A, Rolim J, Paredes P, Cameira MDR. Water Accounting. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/47363. Accessed December 21, 2024.
Ferreira, Antónia, João Rolim, Paula Paredes, Maria Do Rosário Cameira. "Water Accounting" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/47363 (accessed December 21, 2024).
Ferreira, A., Rolim, J., Paredes, P., & Cameira, M.D.R. (2023, July 27). Water Accounting. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/47363
Ferreira, Antónia, et al. "Water Accounting." Encyclopedia. Web. 27 July, 2023.
Water Accounting
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/agronomy13071938

To improve water use efficiency and productivity, particularly in irrigated areas, reliable water accounting methodologies are essential, as they provide information on the status and trends in irrigation water availability/supply and consumption/demand. At the collective irrigation system level, irrigation water accounting (IWA) relies on the quantification of water fluxes from the diversion point to the plants, at both the conveyance and distribution network and the irrigated field level.

water demand water availability hydrant distribution network

1. Definitions and Evolution

Water accounting can be defined as the systematic quantitative assessment of the status and trends in water supply, demand, distribution, accessibility, and use in specified domains, producing information for water science, management, and governance to support sustainable development outcomes for society and the environment [1][2]. The WA procedure relies upon the law of conservation of mass through water balances, which in turn identify the destination of the water used and distinguish between consumptive and nonconsumptive uses [2][3][4][5].
The WA concept has evolved over time, with different researchers and organizations contributing to its development. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, irrigation technology advanced in Europe and North America, and new methods for measuring irrigation water supply and use were developed. For example, water meters were installed on irrigation systems to measure water applied, allocated, or delivered, and irrigation districts began charging farmers based on the volume of water used [6][7][8]. In the mid-20th century, with the increasing demand for water resources for other uses, such as industrial and urban applications, WA became more important for water resources management (WRM) among users at a larger scale [9].
The United Nations (UN) established the International Hydrological Program (IHP) in 1975 (https://www.unesco.org/en/ihp, accessed on 2 May 2023), which has evolved into a holistic program facilitating the sustainable WRM and governance, based on science, reliable data, and dissemination of knowledge. Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO) is one of the organizations that has played a major role in the development and promotion of WA in irrigated agriculture. In the 1960s and 1970s, FAO developed guidelines for WA, focused on measuring water use in agriculture for the improvement of irrigation management. In the early 2000s, FAO initiated the AQUASTAT program, Global Information System on Water and Agriculture (https://www.fao.org/aquastat/en/, accessed on 2 May 2023), which aimed to improve the global knowledge base on water resources by collecting, analyzing, and disseminating information on water resources and their use by country.
The International Water Management Institute (IWMI) developed the Water Accounting Plus (WA+) framework (https://wateraccounting.un-ihe.org/wa-framework-0, accessed on 2 May 2023) in 2013, in partnership with the IHE-Delft Water Accounting team and FAO. It applies a comprehensive approach to measuring and managing water resources in agriculture at the basin level, with a strong focus on satellite-based remote sensing (RS) data. It has been widely used in different regions and contexts [10][11][12]. The framework combines RS data with other available global datasets and ground measurements to produce WA sheets supported by graphs and tables, which provide a standardized approach to tracking water resources and their use in different sectors, including agriculture. The approach is based on the principles of Integrated Water Resources Management that emphasize the need for WRM using a holistic approach, considering social, economic, and environmental factors.
In 2018, FAO and World Water Council released a white paper on water accounting for agriculture [13], an initiative that contributed to the work plan of the Global Framework on Water Scarcity previously launched at the Marrakech Climate Conference in November 2016. The World Bank also contributed to the development of WA by developing its own framework and methodologies for tracking water resources and use [14].
Recently, FAO developed and made available the portal WaPOR (https://wapor.apps.fao.org/home/WAPOR_2/1, accessed on 2 May 2023) that monitors WP through open access of remotely sensed derived data to support water accounting at different scales. Data are available at diverse resolutions (250 m, 100 m, and 30 m) and temporal resolutions (10–day, seasonal, annual). This tool is available for monitoring and reporting on agricultural WP over the African continent and Near East.
In recent years, the concept of WA has been incorporated into the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, which aim to ensure by 2030 universal access to clean water and sustainable water management practices (https://sdgs.un.org/goals, accessed on 2 May 2023).
To standardize the concept of water use for the different stakeholders, Molden [4] defined WA as the art of classifying the components of the water balance into water use categories, considering the consequences of human intervention in hydrological cycles and the domain of inputs and outputs according to their uses and productivity. Different definitions of WA can be found in the literature, e.g., refs. [1][2][5][15].
Agricultural WA, or more precisely and within the scope of the present review, irrigation water accounting (IWA), involves the systematic measurement, monitoring, estimation, and reporting of water resources in irrigated systems [1][2]. The methodology considers and assesses both the supply and demand aspects of irrigation supply systems [16] and integrates different uses of water into the water balance.
An initial and critical step of IWA is to define the system (3D) domain and specify spatial and temporal boundaries, which are dependent on the study objectives. It can be the root zone of an irrigated field for an irrigation event, from the water diversion to the farm gate, or an entire water basin, including surface water and groundwater, over a period of several years [17]. It also involves classifying inflows and outflows across the domain borders according to their uses. Gross inflow is the total amount of water flowing into the water balance domain from precipitation and surface and subsurface sources. Net inflow is the gross inflow plus any changes in storage. Water depletion is the use or removal of water that renders it unavailable or unsuitable for further use. It entails water that goes to the atmosphere (beneficial water consumption) or other sinks (nonbeneficial use). An example of the latter is the non-recoverable runoff and drainage because (i) it is not economically exploitable, such as saline water bodies and deep aquifers, or (ii) its quality prevents its reuse.
Outflow is the part of the diverted water that can be reused. It is divided into committed and uncommitted fractions. The first fraction encompasses the outflow that is allocated to other uses, e.g., downstream water rights, while the latter corresponds to water flowing out of the considered domain due to a lack of storage or operational measures. It is the case of water flowing to the sea, in excess of the requirements for beneficial uses [17].

2. Different Perspectives on Irrigation Water Accounting

IWA has been approached from various perspectives, each one providing different insights into the WRM and the role of irrigation in sustainable development. According to some authors, e.g., refs. [3][9], water accounting has developed from three distinct perspectives.
-
The hydrology perspective: This perspective focuses on understanding the natural water cycle and quantifying the role of precipitation, evaporation, and transpiration, runoff to streams and rivers, recharge to aquifers, outflows to the sea and storage, to determine water availability in a particular region [3][4], usually a basin;
-
The irrigation engineering perspective: This perspective focuses on interventions designed to utilize surface water or groundwater flows to meet irrigation requirements. It also focuses on the design, construction, and operation of storage structures, conveyance and transport of irrigation water, control structures, and on-farm irrigation systems [2][18][19][20]. From this perspective, IWA can help identify the water requirements of different crops and quantify nonbeneficial uses, such as evaporation and leakage, at both the field and the conveyance and distribution network levels. In this case, the impact of different management practices on water use efficiency and WP can be assessed. Ultimately, it can identify opportunities to modernize the CDN [19][21];
-
The monitoring and evaluation perspective: This perspective focuses on the use of water accounting to support management decisions. Examples are the optimization of water distribution to farmers, optimization of irrigation schedules, use of more efficient irrigation systems, adoption of drought-tolerant crops, or accessing incremental improvements in policy and practice on both the supply and demand sides of water supply and delivery services [1][2][22]. Decisions on water management are usually made at different levels, including farms, water users’ associations, and regional water planning agencies.
Other authors also debated the following perspectives of IWA, which can be considered transversal to the previous ones.
-
The environmental perspective: This perspective focuses on the assessment of the impact of irrigated agriculture activities on water quality and the environment. This includes monitoring the discharge of pollutants from agricultural sources, such as fertilizers and pesticides, and evaluating the impact of agriculture on water quality and aquatic ecosystems [23][24][25][26];
-
The economic perspective; This perspective focuses on the value of water resources in agriculture and the costs and benefits of its use [27][28][29][30][31]. It seeks to optimize the use of water resources to maximize agricultural productivity and profitability. This involves evaluating the costs and benefits of different irrigation systems, crop varieties, and water management practices, and developing policies and programs that promote the efficient use of water resources in agriculture and effective water allocation [18], pricing, and management [21][32];
-
The social perspective: This perspective is concerned with issues such as access to water for irrigation, equity, social justice, and participation in water governance [33][34]. It involves assessing the social and cultural values of water, identifying the needs and priorities of different stakeholders, and developing policies and programs that promote social equity and participation [35][36].
An integrated perspective on IWA considers all the above perspectives and seeks to balance economic, environmental, and social considerations [37]. It aims to promote sustainable water management in agriculture that meets the needs of all stakeholders while preserving the environment.

3. Scales and Levels for Which Agricultural Water Accounting Procedures Are Developed

Agricultural WA can provide information about water availability and use at different scales [17]. The scale of application depends on the purpose of water accounting and the availability of data and resources. The following scales can be considered:
-
Macro scale: This scale corresponds to the basin or sub-basin level, often encompassing multiple uses and services, including agriculture, industry, landscape, and households. Furthermore, at this scale, data should be collected on water use from multiple sources. This scale of application is useful for identifying areas of conflict and cooperation among different water users, for developing integrated water resource management plans, and for understanding the spatial and temporal dynamics of water availability and use in the basin. The WRM at the basin level sets limits to water allocations to reduce consumption to sustainable levels and encourages and supports all users to maximize the net benefit of allocated water [18]. So far, different frameworks have been introduced in this regard, e.g., IWMI-WA [4], SEEAW [38], GPWA [5], and Water Accounting Plus” (WA+) [10]. Delavar et al. [32] present a water accounting framework based on a modified SWAT model for better policymaking at the basin level. Perez-Blanco et al. [39] discuss water basin accounting definitions and concepts. Wheeler et al. [40] use water accounting at the basin level to investigate the rebound effect of groundwater extraction from subsidizing irrigation infrastructure in Australia, while the authors of [24] propose WA to study climate change effects on water resources in different river basins.
-
Mezzo scale: This scale corresponds to the service level of analysis within a basin area, typically involving multiple users who share common water supply, conveyance, and distribution [19][41]. At this scale, WA is used to quantify and balance the supply and demand at the collective irrigation system [19][42][43][44], to determine WP and IF from water diversion to the root zone, and to promote effective water allocation, pricing, and management. It is the scale for which fewer scientific studies are found in the literature, and thus, further research is required.
-
Local scale: This is where water availability and use are assessed for a specific area, such as a field or a farm [45][46]. WA involves measuring and monitoring water inputs and outputs, such as rainfall, irrigation water delivered at the hydrant/turnout, water use by crops, and nonbeneficial uses, such as drainage, runoff, and wind drift. Local water accounting can be used to calculate on-farm WP and IF, helping farmers to better manage their water resources, to identify opportunities for water conservation, and to reduce water waste [47].
Agricultural WA can also be applied at different levels, depending on the complexity of the system being analyzed and the level of detail required for decision-making. The following are the common levels of application.
-
Sector level: This level involves analyzing the water balance and water use within the agricultural sector, including the water supply and uses for crops [45][46] and livestock [48][49]. This level of application is useful for understanding the water requirements and water use patterns of the sector and for developing strategies to sustainably manage water within the sector.
-
System level: This level involves analyzing the water balance and water use for a specific system within a sector. This level of application is useful for optimizing water use efficiency within the system, identifying areas of water loss or waste, and improving the performance of the system. Examples of systems are the irrigated field and the collective irrigation service [19][47], and the specific term irrigation water accounting (IWA) can be used to characterize the system [21][50].
By applying WA at different scales and levels of detail, decision-makers can gain insights into the water requirements and water use patterns of different systems, sectors, and regions, and develop targeted strategies to manage water sustainably for the benefit of people and the environment according to the water availability. A key output of water accounting should be a common information base available and acceptable to all the key stakeholders involved in using, planning, or other decision-making processes [1][2].

4. Different Terminology with Similar Meanings: Are We Speaking the Same Language?

Several terms related to understanding and managing the use of water resources are used interchangeably with WA, despite their different meanings and implications. The vast terminology used in the literature for the different scales and levels of application constitutes a setback for a wide implementation of water accounting. The disagreement between terms and concepts often leads to poor use of the published results [27][51][52], confusion in the interpretation of data on crop water use, and comparison between different studies [38]. It is therefore important to identify and distinguish these terms and concepts, being the most common:
Water balance—refers to the calculation of the total amount of water that enters and leaves a particular system, such as a watershed or aquifer, over a specific period. It is important to adequately set the system spatial and temporal boundaries. Water balance is a key component of WA; however, it is only one part of a broader set of activities that make up water accounting [53];
Water footprint—refers to the quantification of the amount of water used throughout the entire supply chain of a product or service, from its production to its disposal. It has three components: the green component is related to the precipitation stored in the root zone, the blue one to the surface or groundwater resources, and the grey component is related to freshwater pollution [30][54][55];
Water auditing—is a process that places the findings, outputs, and recommendations of WA into a broader framework comprising governance, institutions, public and private expenditures, legislation, services delivery, and the wider political economy of specified domains [1][2][5][41];
Water allocation—is the process of assigning available water resources to various uses or users, such as agriculture, industry, and households [18][24][53][56];
Water governance—encompasses a set of political, social, economic, and administrative systems that are in place to develop the WRM and the delivery of water services at different levels of society. It comprises the rules, mechanisms, and processes through which water resources are accessed, used, controlled, transferred, and related conflicts are managed [13][57][58];
Water pricing—is the practice of setting prices for water use to reflect the true cost of water resources and encourage more efficient and sustainable use of water [31][36][59].
Furthermore, the science of hydrology and the practice of irrigation engineering have been developed at different scales [60], which contributes to a large set of different terms to conceptualize WA. A divergence of terminology can pose a challenge to understanding irrigation and other categories of water use within a broader context when irrigation becomes a significant component of basin hydrology [18]. The interpretation of the results depends on both the analyst’s background and the scale of the analysis [9]. A farmer or an agronomist usually considers drainage as a loss (depleted/consumptive nonbeneficial use). However, a hydrologist working at the basin level may quantify it as a flux of water within the same system that can be allocated to other uses (nonconsumptive use), with a negligible impact on the basin water balance [38][51][61].
Understanding the interactions between the levels of analysis helps us understand the impact of management decisions and means to benefit from improvements in policy. In order to match irrigation service or basin requirements with field-level interventions, it is necessary to account for water use at the field level and then place it within the context of the irrigation service and basin levels.

References

  1. Steduto, P.; Faurès, J.-M.; Hoogeveen, J.; Winpenny, J.; Burke, J. Coping with Water Scarcity: An Action Framework for Agriculture and Food Security; FAO Water Reports No 38: Rome; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2012; ISBN 9789251073049. Available online: https://www.fao.org/3/i3015e/i3015e.pdf (accessed on 2 May 2023).
  2. Batchelor, C.; Hoogeveen, J.; Faurès, J.M.; Peiser, L. Water Accounting and Auditing: A Sourcebook; FAO Water Reports No 43: Rome; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2016; ISBN 9789251093313. Available online: http://www.fao.org/publications/card/en/c/d43dad58-d587-48dd-ad0e-7c4a7397a175/ (accessed on 2 May 2023).
  3. Perry, C.; Steduto, P.; Allen, R.G.; Burt, C.M. Increasing Productivity in Irrigated Agriculture: Agronomic Constraints and Hydrological Realities. Agric. Water Manag. 2009, 96, 1517–1524.
  4. Molden, D. Accounting for Water Use and Productivity; International Irrigation Management Institute, SWIM Paper 1; International Irrigation Management Institute: Colombo, Sri Lanka, 1997; ISBN 929090349.
  5. Chalmers, K.; Godfrey, J.M.; Lynch, B. Regulatory Theory Insights into the Past, Present and Future of General Purpose Water Accounting Standard Setting. Account. Audit. Account. J. 2012, 25, 1001–1024.
  6. Cornish, G.; Bosworth, B.; Perry, C.J.; Burke, J. Water Charging in Irrigated Agriculture: An Analysis of International Experience; FAO Water Reports No 43: Rome; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2004; ISBN 9251052115. Available online: https://www.fao.org/3/y5690e/y5690e00.htm (accessed on 2 May 2023).
  7. Hedley, C.B.; Knox, J.W.; Raine, S.R.; Smith, R. Water: Advanced Irrigation Technologies. Encycl. Agric. Food Syst. 2014, 5, 378–406.
  8. Perez-Blanco, C.D.; Standardi, G.; Mysiak, J.; Parrado, R.; Gutierrez-Martin, C. Incremental Water Charging in Agriculture. A Case Study of the Regione Emilia Romagna in Italy. Environ. Model Softw. 2016, 78, 202–215.
  9. Molden, D.; Murray-Rust, H.; Sakthivadivel, R.; Makin, I. A Water-Productivity Framework for Understanding and Action. In Water Productivity in Agriculture: Limits and Opportunities for Improvement; Cabi Publishing: Wallingford, UK, 2003.
  10. Karimi, P.; Bastiaanssen, W.G.M.M.; Molden, D. Water Accounting Plus (WA plus)—A Water Accounting Procedure for Complex River Basins Based on Satellite Measurements. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2013, 17, 2459–2472.
  11. Delavar, M.; Eini, M.R.; Kuchak, V.S.; Zaghiyan, M.R.; Shahbazi, A.; Nourmohammadi, F.; Motamedi, A. Model-Based Water Accounting for Integrated Assessment of Water Resources Systems at the Basin Scale. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 830, 154810.
  12. Singh, P.K.; Jain, S.K.; Mishra, P.K.; Goel, M.K. An Assessment of Water Consumption Patterns and Land Productivity and Water Productivity Using WA+ Framework and Satellite Data Inputs. Phys. Chem. Earth 2022, 126, 103053.
  13. FAO. Water Accounting for Water Governance and Sustainable Development; FAO World Water Council, White Paper: Rome; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2018; ISBN 9789251304273. Available online: https://www.fao.org/3/I8890EN/I8890EN.pdf (accessed on 2 May 2023).
  14. Hundertmark, V.; Valieva, S.; Uyttendaele, P.; Bastiaanssen, W. Making Water Accounting Operational: For Informing Improved Agricultural Water Management—From Concept to Implementation: A Synthesis Report; ADB: Mandaluyong, Philippines; FAO: Rome, Italy; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2020; Volume 1.
  15. Vardon, M.; Lenzen, M.; Peevor, S.; Creaser, M. Water Accounting in Australia. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 61, 650–659.
  16. Amarasinghe, U.A.; Smakhtin, V. Global Water Demand Projections: Past, Present and Future; IWMI Research Report 156; IWMI: Colombo, Sri Lanka, 2014.
  17. Molden, D.; Sakthivadivel, R. Water Accounting to Assess Use and Productivity of Water. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 1999, 15, 55–71.
  18. Perry, C.; Steduto, P.; Karajeh, F.; Pasquale, S.; Fawzi, K. Does Improved Irrigation Technology Save Water? FAO: Cairo, Egypt, 2017; Volume 42, ISBN 9789251097748. Available online: https://www.fao.org/3/I7090EN/i7090en.pdf (accessed on 2 May 2023).
  19. Cunha, H.; Loureiro, D.; Sousa, G.; Covas, D.; Alegre, H. A Comprehensive Water Balance Methodology for Collective Irrigation Systems. Agric. Water Manag. 2019, 223, 105660.
  20. Loureiro, D.; Beceiro, P.; Moreira, M.; Arranja, C.; Cordeiro, D.; Alegre, H. A Comprehensive Performance Assessment System for Diagnosis and Decision-Support to Improve Water and Energy Efficiency and Its Demonstration in Portuguese Collective Irrigation Systems. Agric. Water Manag. 2023, 275, 107998.
  21. Tingey-Holyoak, J.L.; Pisaniello, J.D.; Buss, P. Embedding Smart Technologies in Accounting to Meet Global Irrigation Challenges. Meditari Account. Res. 2021, 29, 1146–1178.
  22. Koech, R.; Langat, P. Improving Irrigation Water Use Efficiency: A Review of Advances, Challenges and Opportunities in the Australian Context. Water 2018, 10, 1771.
  23. Sun, S.; Liu, J.; Wu, P.; Wang, Y.; Zhao, X.; Zhang, X. Comprehensive Evaluation of Water Use in Agricultural Production: A Case Study in Hetao Irrigation District, China. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 4569–4575.
  24. Serra, J.; Cameira, M.R.; Cordovil, C.M.S.; Hutchings, N.J. Development of a Groundwater Contamination Index Based on the Agricultural Hazard and Aquifer Vulnerability: Application to Portugal. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 772, 145032.
  25. Serra, J.; Cordovil, C.M.S.; Cruz, S.; Cameira, M.R.; Hutchings, N.J. Challenges and Solutions in Identifying Agricultural Pollution Hotspots Using Gross Nitrogen Balances. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2019, 283, 106568.
  26. Hunink, J.; Simons, G.; Suárez-Almiñana, S.; Solera, A.; Andreu, J.; Giuliani, M.; Zamberletti, P.; Grillakis, M.; Koutroulis, A.; Tsanis, I.; et al. A Simplified Water Accounting Procedure to Assess Climate Change Impact on Water Resources for Agriculture across Different European River Basins. Water 2019, 11, 1976.
  27. Molden, D.; Oweis, T.; Steduto, P.; Bindraban, P.; Hanjra, M.A.; Kijne, J. Improving Agricultural Water Productivity: Between Optimism and Caution. Agric. Water Manag. 2010, 97, 528–535.
  28. Darouich, H.; Cameira, M.R.; Gonçalves, J.M.; Paredes, P.; Pereira, L.S. Comparing Sprinkler and Surface Irrigation for Wheat Using Multi-Criteria Analysis: Water Saving vs. Economic Returns. Water 2017, 9, 50.
  29. Pedro-Monzonís, M.; Solera, A.; Ferrer, J.; Andreu, J.; Estrela, T. Water Accounting for Stressed River Basins Based on Water Resources Management Models. Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 565, 181–190.
  30. Mekonnen, M.M.; Hoekstra, A.Y.; Neale, C.M.U.; Ray, C.; Yang, H.S. Water Productivity Benchmarks: The Case of Maize and Soybean in Nebraska. Agric. Water Manag. 2020, 234, 2–10.
  31. Setlhogile, T.; Arntzen, J.; Pule, O.B. Economic Accounting of Water: The Botswana Experience. Phys. Chem. Earth 2017, 100, 287–295.
  32. Delavar, M.; Morid, S.; Morid, R.; Farokhnia, A.; Babaeian, F.; Srinivasan, R.; Karimi, P. Basin-Wide Water Accounting Based on Modified SWAT Model and WA+ Framework for Better Policy Making. J. Hydrol. 2020, 585, 124762.
  33. Kpadonou, B.A.R.; Barbier, B.; Wellens, J.; Sauret, E.; Zangré, B.V.C.A. Water Conflicts in Tropical Watersheds: Hydroeconomic Simulations of Water Sharing Policies between Upstream Small Private Irrigators and Downstream Large Public Irrigation Schemes in Burkina Faso. Water Int. 2015, 40, 1021–1039.
  34. Zema, D.A.; Nicotra, A.; Zimbone, S.M. Improving Management Scenarios of Water Delivery Service in Collective Irrigation Systems: A Case Study in Southern Italy. Irrig. Sci. 2019, 37, 79–94.
  35. El Chami, D.; Scardigno, A.; Khadra, R. Equity for an Integrated Water Resources Management of Irrigation Systems in the Mediterranean: The Case Study of South Lebanon. New Medit. 2014, 13, 39–45. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279330977 (accessed on 2 May 2023).
  36. Bassi, N.; Schmidt, G.; de Stefano, L. Water Accounting for Water Management at the River Basin Scale in India: Approaches and Gaps. Water Policy 2020, 22, 768–788.
  37. Blanco-Gutiérrez, I.; Varela-Ortega, C.; Purkey, D.R. Integrated Assessment of Policy Interventions for Promoting Sustainable Irrigation in Semi-Arid Environments: A Hydro-Economic Modeling Approach. J. Environ. Manag. 2013, 128, 144–160.
  38. Perry, C. Accounting for Water Use: Terminology and Implications for Saving Water and Increasing Production. Agric. Water Manag. 2011, 98, 1840–1846.
  39. Perez-Blanco, C.D.; Hrast-Essenfelder, A.; Perry, C. Irrigation Technology and Water Conservation: A Review of the Theory and Evidence. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 2020, 14, 216–239.
  40. Wheeler, S.A.; Carmody, E.; Grafton, R.Q.; Kingsford, R.T.; Zuo, A. The Rebound Effect on Water Extraction from Subsidising Irrigation Infrastructure in Australia. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2020, 159, 104755.
  41. Lyu, F.; Zhang, H.; Dang, C.; Gong, X. A Novel Framework for Water Accounting and Auditing for Efficient Management of Industrial Water Use. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 395, 136458.
  42. Muchara, B.; Ortmann, G.; Wale, E.; Mudhara, M. Collective Action and Participation in Irrigation Water Management: A Case Study of Mooi River Irrigation Scheme in KwaZulu-Natal Province, South Africa. Water SA 2014, 40, 699.
  43. Ortega-Reig, M.; Sanchis-Ibor, C.; Palau-Salvador, G.; García-Mollá, M.; Avellá-Reus, L. Institutional and Management Implications of Drip Irrigation Introduction in Collective Irrigation Systems in Spain. Agric. Water Manag. 2017, 187, 164–172.
  44. Takayama, T.; Matsuda, H.; Nakatani, T. The Determinants of Collective Action in Irrigation Management Systems: Evidence from Rural Communities in Japan. Agric. Water Manag. 2018, 206, 113–123.
  45. Paredes, P.; Pereira, L.S.; Rodrigues, C.; Botelho, N.; Torres, M.O. Using the FAO Dual Crop Coefficient Approach to Model Water Use and Productivity of Processing Pea (Pisum sativum L.) as Influenced by Irrigation Strategies. Agric. Water Manag. 2017, 189, 5–18.
  46. Jovanovic, N.; Pereira, L.S.; Paredes, P.; Pôças, I.; Cantore, V.; Todorovic, M. A Review of Strategies, Methods and Technologies to Reduce Non-Beneficial Consumptive Water Use on Farms Considering the FAO56 Methods. Agric. Water Manag. 2020, 239, 106267.
  47. Tribouillois, H.; Constantin, J.; Murgue, C.; Villerd, J.; Therond, O. Integrated Modeling of Crop and Water Management at the Watershed Scale: Optimizing Irrigation and Modifying Crop Succession. Eur. J. Agron. 2022, 140, 126592.
  48. Heinke, J.; Lannerstad, M.; Gerten, D.; Havlík, P.; Herrero, M.; Notenbaert, A.M.O.; Hoff, H.; Müller, C. Water Use in Global Livestock Production—Opportunities and Constraints for Increasing Water Productivity. Water Resour. Res. 2020, 56, e2019WR026995.
  49. Boulay, A.M.; Drastig, K.; Amanullah; Chapagain, A.; Charlon, V.; Civit, B.; DeCamillis, C.; De Souza, M.; Hess, T.; Hoekstra, A.Y.; et al. Building Consensus on Water Use Assessment of Livestock Production Systems and Supply Chains: Outcome and Recommendations from the FAO LEAP Partnership. Ecol. Indic. 2021, 124, 107391.
  50. Garrido-Rubio, J.; González-Piqueras, J.; Campos, I.; Osann, A.; González-Gómez, L.; Calera, A. Remote Sensing–Based Soil Water Balance for Irrigation Water Accounting at Plot and Water User Association Management Scale. Agric. Water Manag. 2020, 238, 106236.
  51. Foster, S.S.D.; Perry, C.J. Improving Groundwater Resource Accounting in Irrigated Areas: A Prerequisite for Promoting Sustainable Use. Hydrogeol. J. 2010, 18, 291–294.
  52. Pereira, L.S.; Cordery, I.; Iacovides, I. Improved Indicators of Water Use Performance and Productivity for Sustainable Water Conservation and Saving. Agric. Water Manag. 2012, 108, 39–51.
  53. Molden, D.; Theib, Y.O.; Pasquale, S.; Jacob, W.K.; Munir, A.H.; Prem, S.B. Water Use and Productivity in a River Basin, Pathways for Increasing Agricultural Water Productivity Coordinating; IWMI: Colombo, Sri Lanka, 2007; pp. 278–310. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266382480 (accessed on 2 May 2023).
  54. Hoekstra, A.Y. Water Footprint Assessment: Evolvement of a New Research Field. Water Resour. Manag. 2017, 31, 3061–3081.
  55. Sun, J.X.; Yin, Y.L.; Sun, S.K.; Wang, Y.B.; Yu, X.; Yan, K. Review on Research Status of Virtual Water: The Perspective of Accounting Methods, Impact Assessment and Limitations. Agric. Water Manag. 2021, 243, 106407.
  56. Cai, W.; Jiang, X.; Sun, H.; Lei, Y.; Nie, T.; Li, L. Spatial Scale Effect of Irrigation Efficiency Paradox Based on Water Accounting Framework in Heihe River Basin, Northwest China. Agric. Water Manag. 2023, 277, 108118.
  57. OECD. Drying Wells, Rising Stakes: Towards Sustainable Agricultural Groundwater Use; OECD Studi; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2015; ISBN 9789264238701. Available online: https://www.oecd.org/greengrowth/drying-wells-rising-stakes-9789264238701-en.htm (accessed on 2 May 2023).
  58. Molden, D. Scarcity of Water or Scarcity of Management? Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 2020, 36, 258–268.
  59. Rodgers, C.; Hellegers, P.J.G.J. Water Pricing and Valuation in Indonesia: Case Study of the Brantas River Basin; IFPRI: Washington, DC, USA, 2005; p. 141. Available online: https://www.ifpri.org/publication/water-pricing-and-valuation-indonesia (accessed on 2 May 2023).
  60. Perry, C. Efficient Irrigation; Inefficient Communication; Flawed Recommendations. Irrig. Drain. 2007, 56, 367–378.
  61. Foster, S.; Perry, C.; Hirata, R.; Garduno, H. Groundwater Resource Accounting Critical for Effective Management in a Changing World; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2009.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Agricultural Engineering
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Antónia Ferreira
,
João Rolim
,
Paula Paredes
,
Maria do Rosário Cameira
View Times: 723
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 28 Jul 2023
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Video Production Service
    Feedback