STOA Annual Lecture 29 November 2011

1. The sustainable management of natural resources with a special focus on water and agriculture IP/A/STOA/FWC/2008-096/LOT3/C1/SC3 STOA Annual Lecture 29 November 2011

2. Introduction IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

3. The project STOA project ‘Sustainable Management of Natural Resources’ • August 2011 to January 2013: 18 months: • Project partners: IEEP, BIO IS and Ecologic Institute • First deliverable: Scoping Paper and workshop at STOA Annual Lecture PART 1 -- Management of water as a natural resource PART 2 – Management of natural resources linked to Europe’s agriculture and food production

4. The purpose of the project • to provide an overview of the sustainable management of natural resources from the points of view of: • water use and water management in the EU; • use of natural resources in agriculture in the EU; • to identify future challenges.

5. Policy context • Resource efficiency • Flagship of Europe 2020 strategy • Roadmap for resource efficiency • Sustainable management of water • Water Framework Directive • Communication on water scarcity and droughts • Blueprint to safeguard European Waters • Agriculture • Critical role in management of natural resources • CAP reform proposals

6. Study themes

7. Sustainable management of water resources – first findings IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

8. Objective Identifying, for the management of water resources: • Promising current research developments • Emerging technologies available • Good practices for efficient water management IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

9. Key water challenges in the EU – introduction • Imbalances between supply and demand • Importance of the problem: • geographical and climatic differences, • time variations • Impact of climate change on water supplies and water needs IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

10. Key water challenges in the EU – introduction EU water abstraction per sector IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

11. Key water challenges in the EU – introduction Water use concepts: abstraction IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

12. Key water challenges in the EU – introduction Water use concepts: abstraction IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

13. Key water challenges in the EU – introduction Water use concepts: consumption IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

14. Key water challenges in the EU – introduction Water use concepts: consumption IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

15. Key water challenges in the EU – introduction Water use concepts: consumption IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

16. Key water challenges in the EU – introduction Water use concepts: consumption IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

17. Scientific research on efficient water management Theme 1 IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

18. Main research questions • What are the most promising current and recent research developments for water use and water management? • For the research projects identified, to what extent can they help addressing • existing water challenges? • potential levels of water savings, • potential users, • uptake of the results

19. Scientific research on efficient water management Theme 1 …. Including contribution of other disciplines • First review of FP6 and FP7 projects • 12 projects identified, grouped into categories, on the following • topics: • the agricultural sector • the industrial sector • urban water services • integrated water resource management (IWRM) • economic policy instruments (EPIs) • global climate change, mitigation of drought and water • scarcity IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

20. Scientific research on efficient water management Theme 1 Overview of 5 preliminarily selected projects: 1. The agricultural sector • SIRIUS (2010 – 2013) 2. The industrial sector • Aquafit4use (2008 – 2011) IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

21. Scientific research on efficient water management Theme 1 3. Integrated water resource management (IWRM) • AquaStress (2005 – 2009) 4. Economic policy instruments (EPIs) for water savings and efficiency • EPI-WATER (2011-2013) 5. Global change • ALERT (2004- 2007) IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

22. Technical tools for improving EU water management Theme 2 IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

23. Main research questions • What are the most promising technical tools available to tackle water management issues in Europe? • What are their environmental co-benefits, potential trade-offs, potential levels of water savings, opportunities to extend implementation?

24. Technical tools for improving EU water management Theme 2 17 technological tools identified, grouped in 7 main categories: • Monitoring of water use; • Rating tools and standards; • Conveyance technologies; • Precision irrigation; • Alternative water sources; • Agronomic techniques; and • Decision making aid tools for water savings. IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

25. Technical tools for improving EU water management Theme 2 Overview of 5 selected tools: 1. Monitoring of water use • Metering, a basis for identifying inefficiencies and improving • practices • 2. Conveyance technologies • Opportunities for better distribution efficiency • Canal lining, which helps to avoid water losses IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

26. Technical tools for improving EU water management Theme 2 3. Alternative water sources • waste water recycling can have co-benefits in terms of nutrient • recovery 4. Agronomic techniques • for example conservation tillage, can help reducing surface • runoff and evaporation • 5. Decision making aid tools for water savings • decision support tools (e.g. IRRINET ) can help avoiding • unnecessary irrigation IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

27. Good policy practices on efficient water management Theme 3 IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

28. Main research questions • What are the best practices for efficient water management in the EU as set out within this project? • What are their environmental co-benefits, potential trade-offs, • potential levels of water savings, and opportunities to extend implementation?

29. Good policy practices on efficient water management Theme 3 The practices identified have been grouped into the following main categories: • Water management in agriculture • Urban water management • Cross sectoral (urban water management and agriculture) IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

30. Good policy practices on efficient water management Theme 3 Overview of practices identified: Water management in agriculture • irrigation efficiency, examples from • Cyprus (support for improved irrigation efficiency), and • Spain, Castilla-La Mancha (advice, cooperation agreements) • Waste water re-use • Gran Canaria (promotion of wastewater reuse in agriculture) • Water pricing • Spain, Guadalquivir river basin IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

31. Good policy practices on efficient water management Theme 3 Urban water management • Berlin (Germany) (integrated water management strategy); • Zaragoza (Spain) (reducing water demand); • Łodz (Poland) (water management in the urban development policy); • Cross sectoral (urban water management and agriculture) • Tel Aviv (Israel) policies to encourage urban waste water reuse in • agriculture; • several Spanish regions (exchange of water usage rights between • domestic and agricultural use). IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

32. Questions ?

33. Sustainable management of natural resources linked to Europe’s agriculture and food production – first findings IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

34. Objective Examining, with regard to the management management of natural resources in agriculture: • Interactions between agriculture and climate change • Agriculture and the CAP • The case of slurry acidification IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

35. Introduction: challenges to natural resources in agriculture • European targets for water quality and biodiversity are being missed, soil quality is declining and more is required to meet the climate challenge; • There is a clear responsibility on agriculture, like other sectors, to respond; a step change is required; • Greater sustainability is also in farmers’ interest over the next decades; • The CAP is a means to guide and support change in the management of natural resources; an opportunity not to be squandered; • Public support for farming is real, but depends on a sense of cultural integrity, compatibility with core European values. The environment is part of this.

36. Introduction: Challenges to agricultural productivity • A 2°C local warming in mid to high latitudes could increase wheat production by nearly 10 per cent • In low latitudesa 2°C local warming would have an opposite effect: by 2030 southern European regions could experience a 5-10 per cent decrease in yields; • The future productivity changes will differ locally and will be related to: • Biophysical factors ( eg changes in rainfall, temperature etc) • Adaptive capacity (adaptation strategies by farmers; advisory services, training, information etc.)

37. Introduction: Sustainable resource management and food security ’Food security’ (FAO, 1996) - involves a balance between viable food production and sustainable management of the natural resource base. Achieving this balance is dependent on: • retaining capacity of the land to produce food into the future; • retaining vital ecosystems resilient to climate change and plant health risks; • retaining water tables at a sustainable level; • retaining soil as a resource, and • ensuring capability of land to be resilient to droughts and floods.

38. Agriculture and climate change Theme 4 IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

39. Main research questions • What are the most promising technological and best practice options available in EU agriculture, which can contribute to mitigation and adaptation efforts? How cost-effective are these options based on the data available? What are the obstacles to implementation? • What are the synergies and trade-offs between practices for climate change adaptation and mitigation and practices for water savings in the agricultural sector?

40. Interactions between agriculture and climate change • agriculture accounts for cca10 per cent of total EU-27 GHG emissions; • three main sources: CH4 emissions from cattle enteric fermentation, direct and indirect N2O emissions from soils; • agriculture and land use are critical in maintaining carbon sinks; • the use of agricultural biomass for renewable energy.

41. Technically feasible mitigation and adaptation options Thetechnically feasible mitigation options should be evaluated against: • cost-efficiency; • implementation feasibility; • trade-offs and synergies with other environmental objectives; • how these measures interact with each other and with adaptation measures . For thetechnically feasible adaptation options • the ‘no-regret’ strategies are particularly important to identify.

42. Theme 4

43. Theme 4

44. Options in renewable energy production • The use of agricultural biomass can provide renewable energy and hence mitigate emissions from fossil fuel use. • However, environmental risks need to be addressed and hierarchy of uses should be respected: • Use of residual wastes (anaerobic digestion for organic manure/slurry; composting of animal by-products) • Use of arisings produced by habitat conservation and landscape management • Use of agricultural residues (e.g straw) • Use of biomass harvested from new and existing woodlands on agricultural land • Use of dedicated energy crops

45. Agriculture and the CAP Theme 5 IEEP Agriculture and Land Management Programme

46. Main research questions • What are the technologies and land management actions needed to deliver better outcomes for water, soil and climate change mitigation? • What type of policy measures within the current CAP and the CAP reform proposals can support technological and non-technological options for sustainable resource use? • What is the nature and degree of support from the CAP that may be potentially needed to incentivise their uptake?

47. The current CAP and the natural resource question • Since the 1992 McSharryreform- a gradual introduction of incentive payments to encourage the use of environmentally beneficial practices; • Since the 2003 Mid Term Review - a shift away from price support to decoupled payments and the introduction of environmental conditionality through cross compliance; • However, many of the environmental media affected by agricultural activity, such as water, soil and biodiversity, continue to deteriorate.

48. The future CAP and the natural resource question • Three overarching objectives: • Viable food production; • Sustainable management of natural resources and climate action; • Balanced territorial development. • Climate change is highlighted as a self-standing priority. • Knowledge transfer, innovation and advice also receive a much greater highlight than in the current CAP.

49. The current CAP

50. Pillar 1 - New design of Direct Payments • Source: DG Agriculture