Marco P. Maneta, PhD - Montana...
Transcript of Marco P. Maneta, PhD - Montana...
Farmers’ response to water scarcity, policy, and risk
Marco P. Maneta, PhD
Geosciences DepartmentThe University of Montana, Missoula
January 7, 2013
Integrated hydroeconomic analysisObjectives
How do droughts impact crop mix and water use?
How does agricultural change impact water availability and otherwater uses?
How do farmers respond to water policy?
What water policy maximizes the social and economic benefits ofirrigated agriculture while mitigating the negative impacts on otherwater users
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 2 / 18
Integrated hydroeconomic model
Optimization variables:- Crop mix and acreage- Hired and family labor used- Water applied- Amounts of seeds used- Amount of fertilizer used- Amount of pesticides used- Capital- Energy/electricity used
Productionfunction
Climate Flows
Production costs
Social constraints:- Available labor
Physical constraints:- Available land
Policy constraints:- Water allocation rules- Environmental flow mandates- Nitrogen export limits - Subsidies on production- Subsidies on acreage- Minimum wages
External price of inputs:- Price of fertilizers
- Price of seeds- Price of hired labor
- Price of energy- Price of water
Market price of crops
Environmental Social Farmer revenues
Trade-off curves showing the best(Pareto-optimal) policies
Risk aversion costs
PrecipitationGW availableSW available
Crop mixEvapotranspirationGWdemandSW demand
Optimization objectives
Agroeconomic model
Hydroclimatic model
Gross revenue
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 3 / 18
ResultsEffect of access to water: Spatial component
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 4 / 18
ResultsSimulation of scenarios
How do farmers behave in a drought?:- Baseline scenario: Precipitation and ET in 2004- Drought Scenario: -40% rainfall +20% increase in ET
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 5 / 18
Impact of droughtsChange in demand from reservoirs
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 6 / 18
Impact of droughtsGroundwater use (Farmer 4)
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 7 / 18
Impact of droughtsEconomic effects (water and land use)
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 8 / 18
Impact of droughtsEconomic effects (profits and labor)
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 9 / 18
Impact of droughtsPrecipitation shortfalls and farm profits
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 10 / 18
Test runFarm in Yolo county, CA
Demonstration for a farm in California
610 ac commercial farm
All crops under irrigation
Farmer is not water constrained
Four crops (Alfalfa, wheat, corn, and tomato)
Three inputs (land, water, labor)
Xi ,j =
Alfalfa Wheat Corn Toms
land...
water...
labor. . .
...
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 11 / 18
ResultsReproduction of baseline observations
120 140 160 180 200 220 240Land (ac.)
0.000
0.005
0.010
0.015
0.020
0.025
0.030
0.035
Pro
babili
ty
Alfalfa
140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220Land (ac.)
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05Wheat
70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140Land (ac.)
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06Corn
50 100 150 200 250 300Land (ac.)
0.000
0.005
0.010
0.015
0.020Tomato
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400Water (cf/ac)
0.0000
0.0005
0.0010
0.0015
0.0020
0.0025
0.0030
0.0035
Pro
babili
ty
250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700Water (cf/ac)
0.000
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
0.007
0.008
200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650Water (cf/ac)
0.000
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
0.007
0.008
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200Water (cf/ac)
0.0000
0.0005
0.0010
0.0015
0.0020
0.0025
0.0030
0.0035
0.0040
0.0045
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000Labor(hrs)
0.0000
0.0002
0.0004
0.0006
0.0008
0.0010
0.0012
Pro
babili
ty
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000Labor(hrs)
0.000
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
0.007
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000Labor(hrs)
0.000
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.005
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000Labor(hrs)
0.00000
0.00005
0.00010
0.00015
0.00020
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 12 / 18
ResultsReproduction of baseline observations
120 140 160 180 200 220 240Land (ac.)
0.000
0.005
0.010
0.015
0.020
0.025
0.030
0.035
Pro
babili
ty
Alfalfa
140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220Land (ac.)
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05Wheat
70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140Land (ac.)
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06Corn
50 100 150 200 250 300Land (ac.)
0.000
0.005
0.010
0.015
0.020Tomato
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400Water (cf/ac)
0.0000
0.0005
0.0010
0.0015
0.0020
0.0025
0.0030
0.0035
Pro
babili
ty
250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700Water (cf/ac)
0.000
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
0.007
0.008
200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650Water (cf/ac)
0.000
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
0.007
0.008
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200Water (cf/ac)
0.0000
0.0005
0.0010
0.0015
0.0020
0.0025
0.0030
0.0035
0.0040
0.0045
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000Labor(hrs)
0.0000
0.0002
0.0004
0.0006
0.0008
0.0010
0.0012
Pro
babili
ty
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000Labor(hrs)
0.000
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
0.007
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000Labor(hrs)
0.000
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.005
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000Labor(hrs)
0.00000
0.00005
0.00010
0.00015
0.00020
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 13 / 18
ResultsSimulation of scenarios
Test drive: New water allocation rules that results in:- Scenario 1: 30% reduction in water available- Scenario 2: 50% reduction in water available
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 14 / 18
ResultsImpact of a reduced access to water
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 15 / 18
ResultsSummary of impacts
Baseline 30% reduction 50% reduction
Water available 2300 1610 1150Water used 2060 1610 1150Shadow value $0.0 $9.00 $25.3% loss net rev -2.76 -11.3% change hiring -11.7 -28.9
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 16 / 18
Conclusions
Hydroeconomic models are a valuable tool to inform policy and watermanagement
Hydroeconomic models may help develop water markets
Impact of water shortage on rural economies is complex. Losses donot scale with water shortage
Farmers react to reduced access to water (drought or policy) byreallocating land and water, hiring less or stress irrigating some cropsto reduce costs or improve profitability
Relative location of individual farmers in a region matters. Policy canensure fair and equal access to water and reduce economic imbalances
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 17 / 18
Conclusions
Hydroeconomic models are a valuable tool to inform policy and watermanagement
Hydroeconomic models may help develop water markets
Impact of water shortage on rural economies is complex. Losses donot scale with water shortage
Farmers react to reduced access to water (drought or policy) byreallocating land and water, hiring less or stress irrigating some cropsto reduce costs or improve profitability
Relative location of individual farmers in a region matters. Policy canensure fair and equal access to water and reduce economic imbalances
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 17 / 18
Conclusions
Hydroeconomic models are a valuable tool to inform policy and watermanagement
Hydroeconomic models may help develop water markets
Impact of water shortage on rural economies is complex. Losses donot scale with water shortage
Farmers react to reduced access to water (drought or policy) byreallocating land and water, hiring less or stress irrigating some cropsto reduce costs or improve profitability
Relative location of individual farmers in a region matters. Policy canensure fair and equal access to water and reduce economic imbalances
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 17 / 18
Conclusions
Hydroeconomic models are a valuable tool to inform policy and watermanagement
Hydroeconomic models may help develop water markets
Impact of water shortage on rural economies is complex. Losses donot scale with water shortage
Farmers react to reduced access to water (drought or policy) byreallocating land and water, hiring less or stress irrigating some cropsto reduce costs or improve profitability
Relative location of individual farmers in a region matters. Policy canensure fair and equal access to water and reduce economic imbalances
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 17 / 18
Conclusions
Hydroeconomic models are a valuable tool to inform policy and watermanagement
Hydroeconomic models may help develop water markets
Impact of water shortage on rural economies is complex. Losses donot scale with water shortage
Farmers react to reduced access to water (drought or policy) byreallocating land and water, hiring less or stress irrigating some cropsto reduce costs or improve profitability
Relative location of individual farmers in a region matters. Policy canensure fair and equal access to water and reduce economic imbalances
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 17 / 18
THANK YOU
M. Maneta (UM) Resiliency of agricultural systems January 2013 18 / 18