2.

Innovation Irrigation Practices: Analytical Perspectives

2.1 Practical Limitations of Water-efficient irrigation technology
Full Season Drought Management

Because of the vagaries in weather, spatial variability in soils, irrigation system breakdowns and
external factors, crop yields may drop sharply under deficit conditions. In addition, the ability to
manage deficit irrigations may also be limited by water delivery and regulatory constraints.
Thus, deficit irrigation strategies will demand a rethinking of the total system from delivery
systems to crop insurance and other farm safety net programs.
There are three basic variations of controlled root zone strategies when limited water is
available for the entire season, including regulated deficit irrigation, controlled late season
deficit irrigation, and fallowing land. The first technique has become more and more common
on tree and vine crops, but has also been used on as many annual crops [Chalmers et al.,
1986; Fereres et al., 2003; Fereres and Soriano, 2006].

Regulated deficit irrigation (RDI) is limited to relatively arid areas with limited summer rainfall
and is mostly a strategy for high-value perennial crops using conventional irrigation systems. A
variant of RDI called partial root zone drying alternates water applications from one side of the
plant to the other, basically requiring two irrigation systems. This technique deliberately
imposes specific plant water stresses during specific growth stages (usually early in the season)
using daily sprinkler or microirrigation techniques, but only replaces 10–30% of the plant's daily
water use. The wetted soil volume contracts from the sides and bottom of the root zone. At the
end of the stress period, as may be indicated by various physiological markers, water application
amounts are increased (e.g., up to 85–100% daily plant potential ET); but soil water profiles are
not totally refilled, and the size of the small wetted soil volume remains constant and relatively
small. Water productivity for RDI of many perennial pome, stone and vine crops may be
misleading because the plants are managed (pruned, thinned, etc.) to meet certain size and
quality standards at levels considerably below maximum yield.

These management strategies are taking advantage of physiological responses of certain crops
to drought stresses that result in a reduction in vegetative production in favor of fruit yield.
Research has shown beneficial responses in Australia on peaches [Chalmers et al., 1981] and
pears [Mitchell et al., 1984]; and in Washington on apples [Proebsting et al., 1977; Middleton
et al., 1981; Peretz et al., 1984; Evans et al., 1993, Ebel et al., 1995; Drake and Evans, 1997],
citrus [Goldhamer and Salinas, 2000], grapes [Evans et al., 1990; Dry and Loveys,
1998; McCarthy et al., 2000], and other crops. These results have shown that carefully
managing the severity and duration of a uniform, constant level of water stress on vigorous
perennial crops can be advantageous to crop quality, depending somewhat on rootstocks and
varieties. RDI has been found to control vegetative growth, increase fruiting, advance fruit
maturity, and increase precocity and soluble solids in fruits. The key to successful RDI is good
control of all water (irrigation or rain) to limit soil water volumes, which in turn limit vegetative
growth, but water must be available for the entire growing season.
Controlled or late season deficit irrigation (CDI) generally describes irrigation strategies whereby
water supplies are relatively adequate early in the growing season but are later limited. This is a
common scenario in many areas where late season water applications are in deficit. Irrigations
are managed to minimize negative physiological responses on annual or perennial crops at
critical growth stages because of the late season drought stresses. CDI is often used as a water
conservation technique with perennial crops in arid areas, such as peaches, plums, or cherries,
which are harvested in early to midsummer, but careful management of postharvest stresses
are needed to avoid negative yield effects on the following year's crop. Annual water savings will
be on the order of 10% to 25% or more.

Fallowing Irrigated Lands selected fields may be intermittently “fallowed” (not irrigated) for one
or more years as part of multiyear rotations using the water savings to irrigate the reduced
acreage. The semi- “fallowed” land may be planted in dryland crops, converted to dryland
pasture or managed to conserve as much precipitation as possible for subsequent irrigated
crops.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2007WR006200/full

Limitations of Irrigation Water Quality Guidelines from a Multiple Use Perspective

Agriculture consumes between 70% and 90% of abstracted fresh water resource in developing
countries (Seckler et al. 1998). With the present population growth, more food will have to be
produced. At the same time, the water requirements of urban areas, industries, and the
environment are increasing rapidly. There is therefore an increasing pressure on the irrigation
sector to produce more food with less water by making irrigation more efficient and by using
recycled water of lower quality. As a tool to assess the adequacy of water quality for irrigation
use, guidelines have been developed by irrigation and water resources authorities in many
countries and by international organizations such as the FAO (Ayers & Westcot 1985). The
guidelines normally contain threshold values based on certain criteria such as optimum crop
yield, crop quality, soil suitability, and maintenance of irrigation equipment (Ayers & Westcot
1985; Department of Water Affairs and Forestry 1996). In the following, we argue that with the
increasing scarcity of water and the changing vision on fresh water resources in the context of
integrated water resources management, there is a need to review the different sectoral water
quality guidelines. In the first place, apart from irrigating crops, irrigation water is used for many
other purposes. These non-agricultural or “multiple” uses were described in a series of reports
commissioned by the Agricultural Development Council and the U.S. Agency for International
Development in the early eighties (Ault 1981; Yoder 1981). More recently, the International
Water Management Institute has taken up the task of systematically describing the multiple
uses and users of water to ensure that water resource policies take all these uses and users into
account. The nonagricultural uses of irrigation water are site specific and depend on geological,
socio-economic, and cultural settings. They have largely been unrecognized or even ignored by
policy makers and project planners. This was partly due to the sectoral approach to water by the
research community. Most current guidelines do not consider the intensive multiple use and
frequent contamination of irrigation water in developing countries. They usually assume that
the water is used strictly for agricultural purposes and that alternative sources of water are
available for other uses, including domestic use. Secondly, even if water is applied to fields for
irrigation of crops, a considerable part will not be used for crop evapotranspiration. In older
terminology these were considered “losses” but the reality is that this water is often reused
further downstream for agricultural or non-agricultural purposes. Thirdly, when water becomes
scarce in river basins there is increasing competition for water between different uses and the
same source of water could be used for different purposes at different times. Finally,
wastewater from cities and industries is increasingly used for irrigation. Special guidelines are
available for irrigation with polluted water, such as urban wastewater, and these incorporate
human health issues (WHO 1989), but again the guidelines are developed for one particular use
and do not take possible other uses into account. (Al-Nakshabandi et al. 1997; Asano & Levine
1996).
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1012941329395

2.2 Reasons for those limitations and ways to overcome them.

Water conservation and the need to meet the anticipated future demands for food, fiber,
livestock feed, and biological fuel alternatives are creating a paradox. On one hand, demands to
increase crop production imply greater water use by agriculture. On the other hand,
competition for this limited resource will cause a general decrease in the agricultural use of
water well below current values over large areas. The later represents a paradigmatic shift from
the current emphasis on maximizing yield per unit area, and it will require a significant
rethinking of how, where, and why irrigation is practiced by both urban and agricultural water
users.
Water can be conserved at a watershed or regional level for other uses only if evaporation,
transpiration, or both are reduced and unrecoverable losses to unusable sinks are minimized
(e.g., salty groundwater or oceans). Agricultural advances will include implementation of crop
location strategies, conversion to crops with higher economic value or productivity per unit of
water consumed, and adoption of alternate drought-tolerant crops. The most effective means to
conserve water appears to be through carefully managed deficit irrigation strategies that are
supported by advanced irrigation system and flexible, state-of-the-art water delivery systems.
Nonagricultural water users will need to exercise patience as tools reflecting the paradigmatic
shift are actualized. Both groups will need to cooperate and compromise as they practice more
conservative approaches to freshwater consumption.

2.3 Methods and Sources: Eco-Water Project

EcoWater is a Research Project supported through the 7th Framework Programme of the
European Commission, implemented by a Consortium of 10 Institutes and Universities across
 Europe.
EcoWater aims to address the existing gap in meso-level eco-efficiency metrics by adopting a
systems’ approach to develop eco-efficiency indicators, using water service systems as case
application examples
The specific research objectives of EcoWater concern the:

1. Selection of eco-efficiency indicators, suitable for assessing the system-wide eco-efficiency

improvements (or deteriorations) from innovative technologies.
2. Integration of existing tools and assessment methods in a coherent modelling environment,
allowing for system-wide environmental and economic benchmarks of innovations.
3. Elaboration of exemplary Case Studies in different systems and sectors to assess innovative
technologies and practices.
4. Analysis and characterisation of existing structures and policy instruments for technology
uptake, through the development and testing of different scenarios on relevant policy and
management factors.
https://www.eip-water.eu/projects/ecowater-project

3. Sinistra Ofanto case (The Sinistra Ofanto Irrigation Scheme)

The irrigation schme of Sinistra Ofanto forms an important agricultural district and irrigation
system in the River Basin of Ofanto, in the region of Apulia.
Which has a surface area approximately 39,000 hectares from the Ofanto river to the town of
Cerignola. This irrigation system was constructed on the 1980's.

In the past few decades an important change occured to have more profit and input demanding
crops. For this reason the performance of the delivering network is worsening, the system
undergoes inadequate discharges and pressure, and the pumps irrigating the water uses up its
optimal efficiency thus increasing the energy comsumed and also the cost of agricultural
products. In addition the water delivery is bounded during peak hours resulting to the farmers
diverting the groundwater from ther local wells and surface water in the river of Ofanto. This
additional supply partially covers the water deficit, which exceeds 21 hm³/yr.

The hefty uncontrolled recession of groundwater (about 2000 local wells exist, managed directly
by farmers) frequently brings excessive drops of the groundwater table and saltwater intrusion
in the aquifers later results in the use of salty water for irrigation with degradation of soil
quality. Altogether, these excessive maltreatment of the water resources will surely cause
degradation and reduction of water quantity of surface ang groundwater quality consisting the
conditions of our ecosystem.The usage of conventional pesticides and fertilizers results to the
leaching of residues in receptors and degradation of the quality of soil and water.

The above environmental issues result to conflicts between irrigation water use and the need
for environmental conservation.

http://environ.chemeng.ntua.gr/ecoWater/Default.aspx?t=180

3.1. Irrigation patterns and resource burdens

In the Sinistra Ofanto area, the irrigation demands are increasing but the supply is no longer sufficient
to match the demand with the given conditions assumed at the design stage. Henceforth, the delivery
peroformance for water is getting worse, the experiences inadequater discharge and pressure

Hence, the performance of the water delivery network is worsening, the system suffers from
inadequate discharge and pressure, and irrigation pumps work out of their optimal efficiency range
increasing energy consumption and the cost of agricultural products. Moreover, during peak periods, a
restriction in water delivery is imposed. As a result, farmers abstract groundwater from the local wells,
and surface water directly from the Ofanto River. The massive uncontrolled withdrawal of groundwater
periodically causes excessive drops of the groundwater table, saltwater intrusion in the aquifers, and
subsequently results in the use of salty water for irrigation with degradation of soil quality.

http://environ.chemeng.ntua.gr/ecoWater/Default.aspx?t=175

3.2. Innovative practices for stakeholders’ consideration

4.0 Monte Novo case

Monte Novo Irrigation is mainly supplied by the reservoir of Loureiro, which is an intermediate point in

the subsysterm of Alqueva. Water is transferred to the reservoir of Monte Novo. From the year 1982

the reservoir of Monte Novo has been used for supplying water in the Evora municipality for some

agricultural sites and also for irrigation. The local irrigation system was made to give supply of water

base on demand, allowing the farmers to use water in the desired quantity and without time

restrictions. The water is delivered to the farmers by making use of the gravity, low or high pressure

according to the characteristics and location of the irrigation block components. Based on the relevant

Environmental Impact Assessment the Monte Novo scheme was implemented for the consequent crop

substitution and the impacts for irrigation on the soils would contribute to the loss of upland habitats,

degradation of soil quality including the aggravation of the effects of erosion by irrigation, and

salinisation, alkalinisation, and degradation of the structure of the soil, the degradation of surface

water quality due to runoff and inflow of nutrients in water courses and also the contamination of the

aquifer in Evora because of the intensive use of fertiliers and pesticides.

http://environ.chemeng.ntua.gr/ecoWater/Default.aspx?t=183
The Case Study in Brief
Full Title:
Meso-level assessment of eco-efficiency improvements through innovative technologies for irrigation
water management and agricultural production
Case Study Area:
Sinistra Ofanto, Italy
Technologies to be assessed:
Water management:
· Remote control of irrigation water supply and withdrawals
· Sensors for monitoring weather variables and soil moisture
· Treated wastewater use
· Alternative irrigation technologies
Energy consumption
· Solar-powered irrigation pumps
· Eco-friendly variable speed pumps
· Network sectoring and dynamic pressure regulation
Eco-friendly agronomic practices
· Use of biodegradable mulches
· Application of minimum tillage
· Changes in cropping patterns