Hydrological Sciences Journal

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/thsj20

Integrated water availability modelling to assess

sustainable agricultural intensification options in
the Meki catchment, Central Rift Valley, Ethiopia

Meron Teferi Taye, Girma Yimer Ebrahim, Likimyelesh Nigussie, Fitsum

Hagos, Stefan Uhlenbrook & Petra Schmitter

To cite this article: Meron Teferi Taye, Girma Yimer Ebrahim, Likimyelesh Nigussie,
Fitsum Hagos, Stefan Uhlenbrook & Petra Schmitter (2022) Integrated water availability
modelling to assess sustainable agricultural intensification options in the Meki catchment,
Central Rift Valley, Ethiopia, Hydrological Sciences Journal, 67:15, 2271-2293, DOI:
10.1080/02626667.2022.2138403

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2022.2138403

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa Published online: 21 Nov 2022.

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group.

Submit your article to this journal Article views: 1815

View related articles View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=thsj20
HYDROLOGICAL SCIENCES JOURNAL
2022, VOL. 67, NO. 15, 2271–2293
https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2022.2138403

Integrated water availability modelling to assess sustainable agricultural

intensification options in the Meki catchment, Central Rift Valley, Ethiopia
Meron Teferi Taye a, Girma Yimer Ebrahima, Likimyelesh Nigussiea, Fitsum Hagosa, Stefan Uhlenbrookb,c
and Petra Schmitter b,d
a
International Water Management Institute, East Africa and Nile Basin Office, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia; bInternational Water Management Institute,
Colombo, Sri Lanka; cWorld Meteorological Organization, Hydrology, Water and Cryosphere Branch, Geneva, Switzerland; dThe World Bank,
Washington, DC, USA

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The Meki catchment in the Central Rift Valley basin of Ethiopia is currently experiencing irrigation Received 29 November 2021
expansion and water scarcity challenges. The objective of this study is to understand the basin’s current Accepted 27 September 2022
and future water availability for agricultural intensification. This was done by simulating scenarios EDITOR
through an integrated SWAT-MODFLOW model to assess the water balance. The scenarios were co- S. Archfield
developed with communities who expressed their aspirations for agricultural intensification in conjunc­
tion with projected climate change. The results show that with the present land use and climate, the ASSOCIATE EDITOR
catchment is already water stressed and communities cannot meet their irrigation water demand, S. M. Pingale
particularly in the first irrigation season (October–January). However, in the second irrigation season KEYWORDS
(February–May) water resource availability is better and increasing irrigated area by 50% from the present agricultural intensification;
extent is possible. With a climate change scenario that favours more rainfall and shallow groundwater community-based scenarios;
use, agricultural intensification is feasible to some extent. Meki catchment; SWAT-
MODFLOW; water budget

1 Introduction
Water resources and agricultural land are becoming increas­
ingly scarce as the world population grows, demanding more
food production on limited land. Therefore, sustainable agri­
cultural systems and practices must be implemented to main­
tain the functionality of the natural system now and in the
future (Tendall et al. 2015). Sustainable agricultural intensifi­
cation has been promoted since the 1990s (Cook et al. 2015) to
deliver more products per unit of resource, while preventing
depletion of natural resources and ecosystem services (Garnett
et al. 2013). Water is essential for long-term agricultural inten­
sification worldwide, but especially in drought-prone Sub-
Saharan African nations (Cofie and Amede 2015), which are
recognized for high climate variability and climate change
sensitivity. Countries are looking into increasing irrigation to
achieve agricultural intensification while ensuring the sustain­
ability of their water resources. Among the several metrics
associated with sustainable intensification listed in
Mouratiadou et al. (2021), the aspect of water availability
from the environmental dimension needs to be explored in
water-scarce regions.
The implications of agricultural intensification due to the
increase in small-scale irrigation on the water availability of
a given area are yet unknown in most places in Sub-Saharan
Africa, including Ethiopia. Ethiopia’s Central Rift Valley
(CRV) is experiencing ecosystem degradation manifested as
decreasing river inflows to Lake Ziway and a reduction of the
size of Lake Abjiata, among other things (Legesse and Ayenew
2006, Getnet et al. 2014, Seyoum et al. 2015, Desta and
Lemma 2017, Goshime et al. 2019, Desta et al. 2020). Specific
to Meki catchment, Legesse et al. (2010) indicated that climate
and land-use change will have a decreasing streamflow impact.
Large- and small-scale irrigation schemes and associated
uncontrolled water abstraction are the main reasons for the
observed degradation (Goshime et al. 2019). The increasing
awareness of the benefits of irrigation and the promotion of
shallow groundwater for small-scale irrigation by the
Ethiopian Agricultural Transformation Agency (ATA) might
further expand/intensify agriculture in the area (ATA 2020).
Nevertheless, sustainable agricultural intensification options in
view of available water for the future, which consider the
aspirations of communities, are lacking in the area.
Hydrological or hydrogeological modelling approaches are
usually used to assess the water resources status of a given
region with a focus on either surface water or groundwater
sources. Integrated modelling that considers both water
sources in an integrated manner is rarely used in Sub-
Saharan Africa (e.g. Ebrahim et al. 2019). Nonetheless, inte­
grated hydrological models support system thinking that takes
into account a more holistic hydrological system analysis (US
EPA 2008), and is used to account for complex non-linear
interactions between surface water and groundwater systems
(Barthel and Banzhaf 2016). Such an approach leads to better
characterization of the feedback among the surface and
groundwater systems. It also facilitates the testing and design
of feasible water resources management plans and policies, for

CONTACT Meron Teferi Taye meron.taye@cgiar.org International Water Management Institute, East Africa and Nile Basin Office, c/o ILRI Ethiopia Campus,
Addis Ababa, 5689, Ethiopia
© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/),
which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.
2272 M. T. TAYE ET AL.
sustainable management interventions (Mirchi et al. 2012).
Such an approach was tested in the US through integrating
an agroecosystem model with a groundwater flow model and
was found to be a relevant tool in simulating hydrological
processes and conducting scenario analysis (Bailey et al.
2021). Setting up an integrated surface water and groundwater
model at the catchment scale is, however, challenging due
to the considerable amount of data required and the high
computational time (Barthel and Banzhaf 2016, Trichakis
et al. 2017). The use of such models to identify sustainable
intensification options is rarely found in the literature despite
their potential.
In this study, an integrated hydrological model has been
used to investigate the potential for sustainable agricultural
intensification from a water availability perspective to support
conjunctive management of surface and groundwater in one of
the upstream catchments of Lake Ziway, the Meki catchment.
This study used a participatory scenario development
approach to incorporate current practices and future aspira­
tions with relevant stakeholders. This type of approach is
gaining attention to enhance the relevance of modelling exer­
cises to local realities and to propose suitable development
options (McBride et al. 2017). Therefore, this study addresses
the following questions:
● What is the current surface water and groundwater avail­
ability in the Meki catchment, and how will it probably
change with future climate change?
● Which sustainable agricultural intensification options are
feasible based on combining community aspirations with
water availability?
2 Study area
The Meki River is one of the major rivers that drain into Lake
Ziway. It is located in Ethiopia’s CRV basin as the most
upstream catchment (Fig. 1). It has a drainage area of 2183 km2
with elevation ranging between 1653 m and 3614 m above
mean sea level. Mountainous areas with steep slopes are domi­
nant in the west of the catchment, and the eastern side has
relatively flat lowlands and well-developed agriculture. The
climate is semi-arid with average annual precipitation of
940 mm and the main rainy season between July and
September. The maximum and minimum temperature in the
area is 26 and 12°C, respectively (Fig. 2), while the average
annual potential evapotranspiration was about 2000 mm for
the period 1984–2010.
The dominant land use is cultivated land, with an area of
1338 km2 that translates to 61% of the catchment area based on
the land-use map of 2018 (Fig. 3). Irrigated agriculture during
the dry season produces cash crops, predominantly tomatoes
and onions. Rainfed agriculture focuses on cereals (teff, wheat,
maize, barley, sorghum) and false banana (enset).
A comparison of land-use maps between 1989 and 2018
showed an expansion of agricultural land, urban settlement
areas, and agroforestry in the past few decades. This expansion
is mainly at the expense of woodlands, as can be seen in Fig. 3.
Agricultural land increased by 32% and agroforestry increased
by 37%, while woodlands decreased by 56% and afro-alpine
area decreased by 24% (see the Appendix, Fig. A1). The three
woredas (districts, the third-level administrative division in
Ethiopia) Meskan, Sodo, and Silte (Fig. 3) that cover 73% of
the catchment area were selected to obtain community-based
data and information on smallholder agriculture.
Both river and groundwater sources are used for irrigation.
Groundwater use is dominant in areas such as Meskan and
Butajira (Fig. 1). The depth to the water table varies spatially
and temporally depending on the topography, climate, and
properties of the water-bearing materials. However, based on
static groundwater level data obtained from the Ministry of
Water and Energy of Ethiopia, the depth of groundwater ranges
between 2 and 270 m below the ground surface. A spatial map of
static water level data is shown (see the Appendix, Fig. A2).
Geologically, most of the CRV rift floor is covered by two
materials, ignimbrite (hard rock) and lake sediments (Williams
2016). The Meki catchment is covered with materials compris­
ing seven geological formations: Dino Formation (38%), Nazret
Series (35%), alluvial and lacustrine deposits (15%), Tarmaber
Megezez Formation (10%), Chilalo and Rhyolitic volcanic (2%)
(Fig. 1). According to pumping test results conducted in the
Meki catchment by JICA (2012), the transmissivity and hydrau­
lic conductivity values for the Dino Formation are 12.7 and
0.7 m/d, respectively, whereas the transmissivity and hydraulic
conductivity values for the Alluvial and lacustrine deposits range
from 6 to 12.3 m2/d and from 0.25 to 0.71 m/d, respectively.
3 Methodology
An integrated surface water and groundwater modelling approach
was used to investigate sustainable agricultural intensification
options for the Meki catchment. This supports conjunctive use
and management of surface and groundwater using the SWAT-
MODFLOW model (Bailey et al. 2016). The Soil and Water
Assessment Tool (SWAT) is a physically-based, semi-
distributed, and continuous-time simulation hydrological model
(Arnold et al. 1998), which has been applied to various small and
large watersheds in countries around the world including
Ethiopia. The model is developed to quantify the impact of land
management practices on water, sediment, and agricultural pollu­
tion in large complex watersheds with varying soils, land use and
management conditions over a long period (Neitsch et al. 2011).
The groundwater module in SWAT is a lumped model that
cannot reflect a distributed setting. MODFLOW, on the other
hand, is a three-dimensional finite-difference hydrogeological
model for simulating and predicting groundwater conditions
and groundwater/surface-water interactions (Harbaugh 2005).
MODFLOW is one of the industrial standard groundwater mod­
els developed by the United States Geological Survey (USGS); it is
well documented and adequately tested, and is available in the
public domain.
3.1 SWAT-MODFLOW model
3.1.1 SWAT model set-up
Initially, the SWAT model was set up using topographic, land-
use and soil data from the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission
(SRTM) 30 m × 30 m Digital Elevation Model (DEM),
LANDSAT with 30 m resolution, and Food and Agriculture
 HYDROLOGICAL SCIENCES JOURNAL 2273

Figure 1. Location of the Meki catchment in the Central Rift Valley and its location in Ethiopia’s river basins.

Organization (FAO) soil map of Ethiopia, respectively. The
land-use classification was carried out as per Desta and Fetene
(2020). The watershed was divided into eight sub-basins and
into 220 hydrological response units (HRUs) based on land
use, soil, and slope. Daily rainfall data from five stations
(Butajira, Bui, Meki, Tora, Koshe) and temperature data
from two stations (Butajira and Bui) were used (Fig. 1).
Wind speed, solar radiation, and humidity data from Butajira
station were used. Using this data, potential evapotranspira­
tion was estimated using the FAO Penman-Monteith method.
The climate data covered the period from January 1982 to
December 2010.
The SWAT model was calibrated from 1982 through 1991
and validated for the period 1997–2000 at a monthly scale
2274 M. T. TAYE ET AL.
Figure 2. Long-term (1986–2010) mean monthly rainfall, maximum temperature
and minimum temperature in the Meki catchment.
based on continuous streamflow data availability from Meki
gauging station. Four years were used as a warm-up period:
1982–1985. The calibration was carried out using SWAT
Calibration and Uncertainty Programs (SWAT-CUP)
(Abbaspour 2011), a standalone program developed for the
calibration of SWAT. For the calibration period land-use data
of 1989 was used. This land-use data was selected to be repre­
sentative of the calibration period. The assumption we made in
this study is that land use is similar for the calibation and
validation periods. However, one should note that land use
and land cover change over time and may have an impact on
streamflow. Using the calibrated parameters and land-use data
for 1989, the SWAT model was validated. To represent a long-
term baseline or historical period, the SWAT model was run
for a long-term period (1986–2010) using calibrated para­
meters and 1989 land-use data.
3.1.2 MODFLOW model set-up
The conceptual set-up of the MODFLOW model for the Meki
catchment was based on limited available data and informa­
tion from previous studies (Ayenew 2001, Ministry of Water
Figure 3. Land-use map of the Meki catchment in 1989 (left) and 2018 (right). Land-use data classification based on Desta and Fetene (2020).
Resources 2009). The active model domain covers the whole
Meki catchment area of 2183 km2. No flow boundaries were
used for the lateral boundaries that were coincident with the
watershed boundary. A general head boundary (GHB) was
assigned at the catchment outlet. GHB is used to represent
a boundary condition where water enters or leaves the model
area at a rate proportional to the head difference between the
specified head and the head in the model cell. The model
domain was divided into 702 rows and 660 columns with
a uniform grid size of 100 m × 100 m. The model was dis­
cretized vertically into one layer and simulated as an uncon­
fined aquifer. The shallow aquifer system thickness was
assumed to be uniform at 60 m. This is due to a lack of well-
log data. Based on the hydrogeology map, the Meki catchment
was divided into four zones of uniform hydraulic parameters
(see the Appendix, Fig. A3). The parameters (hydraulic con­
ductivity and specific yield) assigned to each zone were
adjusted during model calibration until the error between
observed and simulated water levels was minimized. The
steady-state calibrated hydraulic conductivity values for
zones 1, 2, 3, and 4 are 3.8, 0.3, 0.1 and 0.1 m/d, respectively.
It is important to note that the MODFLOW model calibra­
tion is a two-step process. First, the steady-state model is
calibrated using average groundwater level data; and in
the second step, using the steady-state model calibrated water
level data as an initial condition, transient model calibration
can be carried out. During steady-state model calibration,
hydraulic conductivity values are calibrated, whereas in
the second stage only aquifer storage parameters are calibrated.
A river stage of 0.5 m was assumed based on a previous
study (JICA 2012). Since information on the rate of ground­
water pumping at individual wells was not available, ground­
water abstraction rates were estimated using literature values
(MacDonald and Davies 2000, JICA 2012). An abstraction rate
of 1.5 L/s (130 m3/d) was assumed at individual shallow
motorized pumping wells and 3.5 L/s (302 m3/d) at boreholes.
A total of 80 pumping wells were used to represent ground­
water pumping from the shallow aquifer. Static groundwater
level data from 67 wells were used for steady-state model

calibration, which is the first step in MODFLOW calibration.
Automatic calibration was performed using a model-
independent non-linear parameter estimator called PEST
(Doherty 2004). The range of the hydraulic conductivity was
constrained using pumping test data from JICA (2012). For
the second step, due to the lack of groundwater level time-
series data to calibrate the transient MODFLOW model, the
transient MODFLOW model was developed based on litera­
ture values for specific yield of 0.1 and specific storage of 10−6
(JICA 2012), following Ebrahim et al.’s (2016) approach . The
transient MODFLOW model was run using a monthly stress
period.
3.1.3 SWAT-MODFLOW model set-up
Integrating the SWAT-MODFLOW model requires values of
state variables to be passed from SWAT to MODFLOW and
from MODFLOW back to SWAT. These include: (i) recharge
from SWAT HRUs to MODFLOW grid cells, (ii) the difference
between potential evapotranspiration and actual evapotran­
spiration from SWAT HRUs to MODFLOW grid cells, (iii)
sub-basin channel stage from the SWAT sub-basin channel to
MODFLOW river cells, and (iv) groundwater–stream
exchange rates from the MODFLOW river cells to SWAT sub-
basin channels.
Linking files and coupling the SWAT-MODFLOW model
followed the approach of Bailey and Park (2019). SWAT HRUs
were disaggregated using a Geographic Information System
(GIS) into individual polygons to create a designated geo­
graphic location that does not exist in the SWAT model. The
geo-located polygons facilitate the connection between SWAT
and MODFLOW. For the Meki catchment, independently
calibrated SWAT and MODFLOW models were coupled and
further calibration was not done after coupling, similar to the
study by Chunn et al. (2019). In the water budget of the
coupled model, the difference in inflow and outflow during
the model simulation is within 1% as recommended by
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM 2010),
signifying the closure of the water balance. The coupled
SWAT-MODFLOW model was run at a monthly time step
for the period 1986–2010, which is used as a reference simula­
tion period.
3.2 Scenario development
3.2.1 Community-based scenarios
The design of contextually relevant scenarios involved under­
standing the livelihoods of communities, their current water
usage for irrigation and future demand, the government’s
current activities and future strategies, past land-use changes,
and future projections of precipitation and temperature under
climate change. Scenario development was carried out with
communities and stakeholders in the Meki catchment and
translated into appropriate scenarios for the coupled SWAT-
MODFLOW model.
The information gathered from local communities, govern­
ment administrators, and experts is centred on the use of water
for agricultural production. A qualitative study was conducted
in three woredas (Fig. 3) representing upstream (Silte woreda),
mid-catchment (Meskan woreda) and downstream of the
HYDROLOGICAL SCIENCES JOURNAL 2275
catchment (Sodo woreda). Primary data was collected through
key informant interviews (KIIs) with woreda officials, focus
group discussions (FGDs), and case studies with community
members in selected kebeles (the smallest administrative unit
of Ethiopia) of the woredas. The FGDs and case studies were
conducted for two separate groups, kebeles that use irrigation
and those that use only rain-fed agriculture. The KIIs and
FGDs are aimed at understanding the communities’ liveli­
hoods and aspirations, water availability, water resource devel­
opment plans, existing initiatives, and water requirements for
irrigation, domestic, and livestock purposes. Through this data
the area under irrigation during the dry season, the dominant
crops in irrigation systems, water sources for irrigation, and
the number of irrigation seasons were obtained.
The potential pathways to intensify agriculture in the catch­
ment are drawn from communities’ and stakeholders’
responses. The communities are keen to shift from depending
on only rain-fed agriculture to using irrigation for dry season
production including through the expansion of irrigated area.
They highlighted their aspiration to increase groundwater use
to intensify agriculture. The use of an advanced water applica­
tion system through drip irrigation instead of the traditional
furrow system is another pathway considered by the stake­
holders. They also proposed an expansion of rainwater har­
vesting and implementation of soil and water conservation
measures to increase the availability of water for agricultural
intensification. While these are the potential pathways the
communities and stakeholders identified to intensify agricul­
ture, what was modelled in the integrated hydrological model
was the shallow groundwater use under a changing climate.
The impact of improving irrigation efficiency was assessed
using assumed irrigation efficiencies from the literature for
drip irrigation technology (White 1999, Van Der Kooij et al.
2013). The impacts of rainwater harvesting and soil conserva­
tion measures were not directly modelled, but inferences were
made based on literature values.
3.2.2 Climate change and shallow groundwater
development scenarios
3.2.2.1 Climate change. To assess the impact of climate
change on water resource availability we focused on antici­
pated changes to hydro-meteorological variables such as pre­
cipitation and temperature, which were estimated using
climate models. Climate model data from Coupled Model
Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) models were used.
These are available on the Earth System Grid Federation
(ESGF) website (https://esgf-node.llnl.gov/search/cmip6/).
Twenty-five climate model runs were downloaded with their
historical and future projections. In the CMIP6 the scenarios
are based on shared socioeconomic pathways (SSPs), which are
scenarios of projected socioeconomic global changes up to
2100 (O’Neill et al. 2014).
The historical climate model runs were compared with data
from Climate Hazards Group InfraRed Precipitation with
Station (CHIRPS), which is a blend of satellite-based rainfall
estimates and gauge data (Funk et al. 2015). CHIRPS was
considered as an observational dataset for this purpose. The
period 1981–2010 was used as a historical period. Given that
climate models usually show considerable bias when compared
2276 M. T. TAYE ET AL.

to observations, we have assessed the 25 models’ representa­
tiveness. This was done statistically using relative bias at the
monthly scale and proper capturing of the annual precipitation
cycle. Seven climate models based on relative bias in the range
of −0.5 to 0.5 and those that capture the annual precipitation
cycle were selected for future projections. The seven selected
global climate models (GCMs) were HADGEM_GC_LL,
HADGEM_GC_MM, MPI_ESM_LR, MPI_ESM_HR,
EC_EARTH3, CAMS_CSM, and AWI_CM_MR (see the
Appendix, Figs A4 and A5). The change factor method was
used to downscale the coarse-resolution GCM outputs to
catchment-scale levels. The approach used by Prudhomme
et al. (2010) was adopted to estimate the monthly change
factors.
Future projections of precipitation and temperature were esti­
mated for the catchment using the seven selected climate models
and their SSP 126 and SSP 585 scenarios for the period 2021–
2050. The ensemble mean of these models’ runs for precipitation
and temperature represent the mean climate change (MC) sce­
nario, which were then used in the SWAT-MODFLOW model to
generate the water balance components for the future. An addi­
tional scenario that represents dry and hot climate change (DHC)
was developed by selecting the dry precipitation projection and
the hottest temperature projection from the climate runs. The
climate change scenario runs were done with the 2018 land use to
represent the recent land-use situation.
Temperature is projected to increase for the Meki catchment
until 2050. The monthly temperature projections range from 0.5
to 1.6°C. The months of June, February, and March have the
highest temperature projections while November has the lowest
temperature projections (see the Appendix, Fig. A6).
Precipitation projections show mixed signals of increasing and
decreasing change for the future period (2021–2050). At the
seasonal scale, precipitation increased from 12% to 47% for
March–May and July–September seasons, while a decrease of
up to 40% was projected for the October–December season (see
the Appendix, Fig. A7). At the annual scale, the MC scenario
showed a 19% increase in precipitation and an increase in tem­
perature by 1°C. The DHC scenario showed a 13% decrease in
precipitation and an increase in temperature by 1.4°C.
3.2.2.2 Changes in crop water requirements during the dry
season. The crop water requirements (CWR) for dominant
crops in the Meki catchment were estimated using CROPWAT
(Smith 1992) climate data from 1986–2010 for the historical
period and for future climate projections. The reference crop
evapotranspiration (ETo) was estimated using the Penman-
Monteith equation in Allen et al. (1998). For specific crops, the
crop evapotranspiration (ETc) was determined by multiplying
ETo by the crop coefficient (Kc) of specific growth stages
(Allen et al. 1998) as in Equation (1). Other parameters
required in CROPWAT, such as the number of days for
different stages of crop development, Kc values, rooting
depth, depletion fraction and yield response fraction, were
taken from FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56 (Allen
et al. 1998). The CWR is then estimated by subtracting effec­
tive rainfall from ETc as in Equation (2). Effective rainfall was
obtained using the USDA Soil Conservation Service approach
(Patwardhan et al. 1990). Given the traditional type of irriga­
tion and subsequent huge water loss through seepage, the total
gross irrigation requirement (GIR) is estimated using Equation
(3) (Savva and Frenken 2002). An irrigation efficiency of 50%
was assumed to account for expected water losses.
ETc ¼ ETo � Kc (1)
where ETc is the crop evapotranspiration under standard
conditions (mm/month) and Kc is the crop coefficient for
a particular growing stage (-).
CWR ¼ ðETc PeÞ if ETc > Pe; otherwise
CWR ¼ 0 due to enough rainfall (2)
where CWR is the net irrigation water requirement (mm/
month), and Pe is the effective rainfall (mm/ month).
GIR ¼ CWR=Ieff (3)
where GIR is the gross irrigation requirement (mm/month),
and Ieff (-) is the irrigation efficiency.
In the three woredas, the first season of irrigation is from
October to January while the second irrigation season is from
February to May. Silte and Meskan woredas mainly use
groundwater while Sodo woreda uses river water for irrigation.
The dominant irrigated crops are onion and tomato, whose
CWR is shown in Table 1. The total water withdrawals for the
irrigated area in Silte, Meskan, and Sodo woredas were calcu­
lated by multiplying the monthly average GIR of onion and
tomato by the respective irrigated areas (Table 2).
The three woredas cover only 73% of the catchment area. The
total GIR of the catchment was estimated by linear interpolation
from the three woredas’ total GIR to the total catchment area.
Therefore, the total GIR for the Meki catchment is about
209 × 106 m3 for the historical period of the two irrigation seasons
considering the default 24 h of irrigation in CROPWAT.

Table 1. Crop water requirement (CWR) of the dominant crops for dry season irrigation in the Meki catchment, including future projections with climate scenarios.
Historical CWR (mm) Mean climate scenario CWR (mm) Dry hot climate scenario CWR (mm)

Month Onion Tomato Onion Tomato Onion Tomato

October 79.8 57.4 93.7 59.5 108.9 74.4
November 144.2 136.1 149 131.3 152.5 134.7
December 149.9 165 154 169.7 157.3 173.2
January 115.6 133.6 106.7 132 115.5 141.1
Total (1st season) 489.5 492.1 503.4 492.5 534.2 523.4
February 79.1 57.6 87.1 55.1 104.2 71.9
March 111 97.1 100.5 72.9 124.8 96.9
April 100.5 116.4 82.6 98.9 106.6 122.9
May 75.9 95.1 57 83.8 76.3 103.2
Total (2nd season) 366.5 366.2 327.2 310.7 411.9 394.9
 HYDROLOGICAL SCIENCES JOURNAL 2277

Table 2. Total irrigated area during the two seasons of irrigation in the three selected woredas of the Meki catchment.
Woreda irrigation area (ha)

Irrigation season Silte Meskan Sodo Total catchment irrigated area (ha)
1st season (October to January) 4984 3382 3564 11 930
2nd season (February to May) 2158 1158 1536 4852

Table 3. Gross irrigation requirement for the Meki catchment for the historical
period and with future climate projections for three irrigation application hours.
Gross irrigation requirement (106 × m3)
Irrigation hours
Scenario 24 h 12 h 8h
Historical 209.1 418.2 627.4
Mean climate 205.2 410.3 615.5
Dry hot climate 226.5 452.9 679.4
However, if the irrigation time decreases to 12 and 8 h, the GIR
increases (Table 3). The CWR projection for the MC shows a 2%
reduction, while for the DHC it shows an 8% increase for the
default 24 h of irrigation. With this change the total GIR for the
catchment is 205 × 106 m3 for the MC and 226 × 106 m3 for the
DHC (Fig. 4). Given that the rainfall in the second irrigation
season is better than that of the first, it a has higher GIR (Fig. 4).
3.2.2.3 Increased use of shallow groundwater for irrigation.
Given that there is increased promotion of shallow groundwater
for small-scale irrigation by the government and donors, farmers
tend to complement surface water irrigation sources with shallow
groundwater. To assess the impact of potential expansion of
shallow groundwater use in the area, shallow groundwater extrac­
tion scenarios using an additional 400 and 1000 hypothetical wells
were tested. The 400 wells were applied to use the positive change
in groundwater storage during the baseline period and the 1000
wells were selected with the assumption of increasing the 400
wells by more than double.
These are additional wells on top the existing 80 wells (Fig. 1,
red dots) considered during the SWAT-MODFLOW model set-
up. The wells were generated with an assumed individual shallow
groundwater pumping rate of 3.5 L/s or 302 m3/d (JICA 2012) in
areas where the groundwater level is relatively shallow and the
land surface slope is relatively flat (less than 6%), where existing
wells and irrigated areas were concentrated. To avoid having two
wells lying in the same MODFLOW grid, the wells were generated
with a minimum spacing of 100 m. Based on the assumption that
wells are shallow, with a low pumping rate and low hydraulic
conductivity and storage coefficients, a conservative estimate of
radius of influence equivalent to saturated thickness (~50 m) was
assumed. The shallow groundwater extraction scenarios were
carried out using the 2018 land-use and climate change projec­
tions. The ratio of total groundwater abstraction to total ground­
water recharge was used as an indicator for potential shallow
groundwater use. The total groundwater recharge in this case is
the sum of diffuse recharge and focused recharge along river
channels.
3.2.3 Selected scenarios
The scenario development used the information obtained from
the communities on where and how they plan to intensify
agriculture. The plan is both to expand and to intensify

Figure 4. Total monthly gross irrigation water requirement (GIR) of Meki catchment during the historical period and for future projections with irrigation hours of 24,
12, and 8.
2278 M. T. TAYE ET AL.

irrigation, mainly around their current farming locations.
They are generally targeting high-value crops. The commu­
nities’ aspirations to increase water availability include shallow
groundwater use, rainwater harvesting, and drip irrigation.
From this information shallow groundwater use and future
climate scenarios were translated to the following scenarios
that were tested with the integrated model (see Table 4).
Rainwater harvesting and drip irrigation options were not
modelled in the SWAT-MODFLOW. However, their potential
use and implications for the community are explored in the
discussion section.
4 Results
4.1 SWAT-MODFLOW calibration and validation resullts
SWAT model calibration and validation performance were
assessed using two statistical parameters: Nash-Sutcliffe effi­
ciency (NSE) and percent bias (PBIAS). The simulated
monthly flow matched the observed values for the calibration
period with NSE and PBIAS values of 0.7 and −2.3, respectively
(Fig. 5(a)). For the validation period, the simulated and the
observed monthly flows showed acceptable results, with NSE
and PBIAS equal to 0.6, and 8, respectively (Fig. 5(b)). The
calibrated parameters and their sensitivity rank is provided
(see the Appendix, Table A1). Overall, the calibration and
validation results were found to be satisfactory for data-
scarce regions.
To assess the performance of the MODFLOW model, gra­
phical plots and standard numerical measures such as root
mean square error (RMSE) and mean absolute error (MAE)
were used. In general, good agreement was obtained between
simulated and observed groundwater levels (Fig. 6). The RMSE
and MAE between the observed and simulated groundwater
levels during the calibration period were 5 and 9 m, respec­
tively. As recommended by Hill (1998) the residuals were
randomly distributed across the sites, and the simulated
water levels contours were also in agreement with the observed
overall regional groundwater flow directions.
The SWAT model was coupled with MODFLOW, and the
annual water balance of the SWAT-MODFLOW during the
calibration period is presented in Table 5.
4.2 Historical water availability and use (1986–2010)
The mean annual water budget for the baseline is presented
schematically in Fig. 7. The mean annual simulated evapotran­
spiration is about 79% of the mean annual rainfall over the

Table 4. Scenarios used in assessing water availability in Meki catchment, including justification for their choice.
Land Groundwater
No. Scenario name Climatic data use wells Justification
1. Baseline 1986–2010 1989 80 To assess historical water availability
2. Mean climate (MC) 2021–2050 2018 80 To assess future water availability using an ensemble mean of climate models with
current shallow groundwater uses
3. Dry hot climate (DHC) 2021–2050 2018 80 To assess future water availability under the dry and hot climate model scenario with
current shallow groundwater uses
4 Mean climate (MC) + 2021–2050 2018 400 To assess future water availability using the ensemble mean of climate models with
400 GW shallow groundwater wells increased by 400
5 Mean climate (MC) + 2021–2050 2018 1000 To assess future water availability using the ensemble mean of climate models with
1000 GW shallow groundwater wells increased by 1000
6. Dry hot climate (DHC) + 2021–2050 2018 400 To assess future water availability under the dry and hot climate model scenario with
400 GW shallow groundwater wells increased by 400
7. Dry hot climate (DHC) + 2021–2050 2018 1000 To assess future water availability using the dry hot climate model scenario with shallow
1000 GW groundwater wells increased by 1000

Figure 5. (a) Observed and simulated streamflow in the downstream of Meki catchment for the calibration period (1986–1991); (b) observed and simulated streamflow
in the downstream of Meki catchment for the validation period (1997–2000).
 HYDROLOGICAL SCIENCES JOURNAL 2279

Figure 5. (Continued).

Figure 6. Observed and simulated groundwater level for the calibration period (1986–1991).

Table 5. Water balance values during the model calibration period from the SWAT-MODFLOW
model.
Water balance components Water balance (mm/a)
Rainfall 938.3
Evapotranspiration from land use 770.7
Runoff 92.0
Lateral flow 38.7
Seepage to the aquifer 0.2
Recharge 36.9
Evapotranspiration from groundwater 27.7
Groundwater discharge to the river 4.0
Groundwater pumping 1.2
Head-dependent boundary (GHB) flux out of the aquifer 5.1
Change in storage −0.9

study area, while the diffuse recharge and the mean surface
runoff account for 5.7% and 11.3% of the annual rainfall,
respectively. The spatially distributed diffuse recharge is
shown (see the Appendix, Fig. A8). The total flux to the river
from lateral flow and flows from the aquifer is about 28.9% of
the total streamflow, which is equivalent to the baseflow index
(28.6%) determined using a recursive digital filter algorithm
developed by Nathan and McMahon (1990) and a filter para­
meter used by Ebrahim and Villholth (2016) (see the
Appendix, Fig. A9). Evapotranspiration directly from
2280 M. T. TAYE ET AL.
Figure 7. Water balance components of the Meki catchment during the baseline period (1986–2010).
groundwater is a significant component of the groundwater
budget of the study area. It accounts for 64.5% of the recharge.
Groundwater in the Meki catchment is relatively close to the
surface in some areas, within 2 m of the ground surface.
Evapotranspiration extinction depth was determined to be
3 m based on soil type and land cover (Shah et al. 2007). The
groundwater evapotranspiration calculation considers not
only the crops selected in this study (onion and tomato) but
also natural vegetation types based on land-use classification.
Hence, there are deep-rooted natural vegetation types that
have root depth exceeding the minimum depth to ground­
water, which is 2 m). After groundwater evapotranspiration,
the second largest discharge component of the groundwater
budget is groundwater discharge to the river, which accounts
for 9.5% of the recharge.
The total water yield (surface water) during the dry season
(October to May) is about 85 × 106 m3. The total groundwater
pumping from October to May is about 2.62 × 106 m3. The total
GIR for the catchment is about 209 × 106 m3 assuming 24 h of
irrigation. This indicates that surface water covers only 40.7% of
the total GIR, while groundwater covers only 1.3% of the total
GIR with the existing 80 wells. Hence, the available surface water
and groundwater during the dry season are not enough to meet
the GIR of the entire irrigated area without considering other
demands such as environmental flow. The total water yield and
groundwater pumping in the first irrigation season (October–
January) are 33 × 106 m3 and 1.3 × 106 m3, respectively. The
total GIR during this period is about 160.4 × 106 m3, hence surface
water covers only 20.6% of the GIR during the first irrigation
season while groundwater abstractions cover nearly 0.82% of the
GIR during the first irrigation season with the existing 80 wells. If
the irrigation hours are reduced to 8 h the total GIR for the
catchment will increase to 627.4 × 106 m3 (Table 3), which
indicates that surface water only covers 13.5% of GIR and
groundwater covers only 0.4% of GIR. With 12 h of irrigation,
the total GIR for the first irrigation season will increase to
481.2 × 106 m3 (Table 3), which means surface water only covers
6.9% while groundwater covers only 0.27% of the GIR during the
first irrigation season.
From the water budget at the catchment scale, the ratio of total
groundwater abstraction to groundwater recharge is about 2.2%,
as shown in Fig. 7, which indicates that abstraction is far less than
recharge during the baseline period. The annual change in
groundwater storage is about +8.9 mm. This signifies that there
is some potential to intensify irrigated agriculture through shallow
groundwater use during the dry season. Also, given that the
irrigated area based on the three woredas is about 12.5% of the
cultivated land, there is potential for expanding the irrigation area
if water is not a limiting factor.
4.3 Water availability under climate change
The water budgets for the MC and DHC scenarios are presented
in Figs 8 and 9, respectively. In the MC, there is a significant
increase in rainfall to about 1120 mm/a – an increase of about
176.5 mm compared to the baseline. The increase in rainfall is
translated into an increase in runoff (by about 94.5 mm), an
increase in actual evapotranspiration by 42.9 mm/a, and an
increase in recharge by 30.1 mm/a. The increase in recharge in
turn increased the change in storage by 132 mm/a. However, if the
future has more of a dry and hot climate, there will be a significant
decrease in rainfall (by 60.2 mm/a) which is translated into
a decrease in actual evapotranspiration from land use (by
40.3 mm/a) and a decrease in recharge (by 12.1 mm/a). The
decrease in recharge in turn results in a decrease in evapotran­
spiration from groundwater (by 4.3 mm/a) and a decrease in
groundwater storage (by 7.3 mm/a).
The total water yield during the first irrigation season
(October–January) under MC and DHC was 42.4 × 106 m3
and 17.1 × 106 m3, respectively. The total groundwater pump­
ing from October to January under MC and DHC remains
similar to that in the baseline period (1.3 × 106 m3). As rainfall
is the main driver controlling water resource availability, water
yield increased by about 70.7% under the MC whilst it
decreased by 5.4% for the DHC (Fig. 10). Even though the
water yield increased under MC (42 × 106 m3), it is not
sufficient to meet the GIR during the first irrigation season
(160 × 106 m3). The ratio of total groundwater abstraction to

Figure 8. Water balance components of the Meki catchment for the mean climate change scenario, based on 2018 land use and 80 shallow groundwater wells.
Figure 9. Water balance components of the Meki catchment for the dry hot climate change scenario based on 2018 land use and 80 shallow groundwater wells.
groundwater recharge is about 2.8% and 1.3% under the DHC
and MC, respectively. The annual change in groundwater
storage for the MC and DHC is about +21.8 mm and
1.4 mm, respectively. For the MC, the projected increase in
recharge and runoff relative to the baseline period is about
55.9% and 88.7%, respectively.
4.4 Impact of increased agricultural intensification on
water availability
Agricultural intensification through shallow groundwater-based
irrigation using additional wells provided water budget values as
presented in Table 6, and Fig. 11. As can be seen, groundwater
evapotranspiration is reduced significantly due to an increase in
pumping. This is expected: when the groundwater pumping
increases, the groundwater level drops below the root zone. In
both abstraction scenarios, the overall groundwater storage is
significantly reduced from the baseline period. In addition, the
HYDROLOGICAL SCIENCES JOURNAL 2281
discharge of groundwater to the river is reduced as the pumping
increases.
The change in groundwater storage for the DHC + 400 GW
and DHC + 1000 GW scenarios is −6.1 and −24 mm/a, respec­
tively (Fig. 11). The change in groundwater storage for the MC +
400 GW and MC + 1000 GW scenarios is +16.9 and +5.3 mm/a,
and the ratio of total groundwater abstractions to groundwater
recharges is 25.2% and 60.2%, respectively. In the MC ground­
water recharge exceeds abstraction for both pumping scenarios,
signifying the potential for further groundwater exploitation. In
the DHC + 1000 GW scenario, abstraction far exceeds recharge,
heralding a significant groundwater level decline. A ratio of
groundwater abstraction to groundwater recharge higher than
100% indicates abstraction is greater than recharge, resulting in
depletion of groundwater (Vrba et al. 2007) and meaning that
intensifying agriculture is not feasible. For the same scenario
groundwater discharge to the river is reduced by 67.8% compared
to the baseline (i.e. 5.1 mm/a), affecting the base flow and envir­
onmental flow requirements.
2282 M. T. TAYE ET AL.

Figure 10. Total water yield and groundwater recharge for the baseline, mean climate (MC), and dry and hot climate (DHC) scenarios.

Table 6. Long-term mean water balance parameters (mm/a) for shallow groundwater abstraction scenarios compared to the baseline period simulation (1986–2010).
Water balance components MC + 400 GW MC + 1000 GW DHC + 400 GW DHC + 1000 GW
Rainfall 1120.4 1120.4 883.7 883.7
Evapotranspiration 788.5 788.5 705.3 705.3
Runoff 200.9 200.9 102.7 102.7
Lateral flow 47.2 47.2 34.0 34.0
Seepage to the aquifer 0.4 0.7 0.4 0.7
Recharge 83.9 83.9 41.8 41.8
Evapotranspiration from groundwater 34.1 18.6 19.4 9.6
Groundwater discharge to river 5.0 2.5 2.4 0.8
Groundwater pumping 21.2 51.0 21.2 51.0
Head dependent boundary (GHB) flux out of the aquifer 6.0 6.0 4.7 4.7
Change in groundwater storage +17.9 +6.6 −5.5 −23.6

The total water yield during the first irrigation season
(October–January) under MC + 400 GW and DHC + 400
GW is 41.2 × 106 m3 and 16 × 106 m3, respectively. The total
water yield during the dry season (October–January) under
MC + 1000 GW and DHC + 1000 GW is 39.4 × 106 m3 and
15 × 106 m3, respectively. The total groundwater abstraction
from October to May under MC + 400 GW and DHC + 1000
GW is 16 × 106 m3 and 37.7 × 106 m3, respectively. The ratio of
total water availability (surface and groundwater) during the
first irrigation season to GIR under MC + 400 GW and DHC +
400 GW is 35% and 19%, respectively. Similarly, the ratio of
total water availability to GIR under MC + 1000 GW and DHC
+ 1000 GW is 48% and 30%, respectively.
5 Discussion
5.1 Current and future water availability
Agricultural intensification under historical and expected
changing future climate in the Meki catchment is limited by
availability of water resources. Intensifying agriculture using
irrigation with surface water is only feasible for approximately
3390 ha in the first irrigation season. Under the MC this area
could potentially increase to 4253 ha, and it would decrease to
1612 for the DHC. Hence, expansion of irrigation in the Meki
catchment based purely on surface water resources will be
impossible and would be highly risky for smallholder farmers
given the intra-annual variability of rainfall and water yield.
With climate change, variability of rainfall is expected to be
higher, and storing water in different forms, reservoir or
groundwater, might be relevant.
The available water resource (surface and groundwater)
during the first irrigation season in the Meki catchment covers
only 22% of the total GIR of the current irrigated area for the
baseline scenario. This shows that the available water resource
during the dry season is not enough to meet the GIR of the
entire irrigated area even without considering non-irrigation
water demands such as municipal, domestic, livestock, indus­
trial, and environmental flow. Climate change is expected to
decrease the GIR by about 2% under the MC and to increase

Figure 11. Groundwater pumping and change in groundwater storage for the baseline, mean climate (MC), and dry and hot climate (DHC) scenarios under scenarios
assuming 400 and 1000 shallow groundwater pumps.
GIR by about 8% under DHC in future. The available water
under the MC and DHC covers only 27% and 11% of the GIR,
respectively. This indicates that water is the limiting factor for
the intensification of irrigation in Meki catchment currently
and under future climate change conditions, especially in the
first irrigation season (October to January). This is in agree­
ment with the findings of Xie et al. (2021), who showed that
most of the river basins in Ethiopia are at high risk of water
scarcity during the dry season and that expansion of irrigation
during this period is strongly constrained by water scarcity.
Taye et al. (2021) showed a similar water shortage problem in
the Lake Tana sub-basin during the dry season as the flow is
not sufficient for irrigation.
Unlike the first irrigation season, the availability of water
resources in Meki catchment is abundant in the second irriga­
tion season, signifying the potential for agricultural intensifi­
cation during this season. The irrigated area in the second
irrigation season is smaller than that of the first irrigation
season by 59% or 7078 ha. Due to availability of better rainfall
the irrigation in this season can be considered supplementary.
Therefore, a better opportunity for agricultural intensification
exists in the second irrigation season.
5.2 Intensification pathways
As the ratio of current groundwater abstraction to recharge is low,
further agricultural intensification using shallow groundwater seems
feasible. However, the potential for expansion of shallow ground­
water use depends on the extent to which the future climate aligns
with the MC and DHC and the potential increase in inter-annual
variability (see the Appendix, Fig. A10). Whilst expansion of the
current 80 wells is possible with additional wells below 1000 under
HYDROLOGICAL SCIENCES JOURNAL 2283
the MC, in the case of DHC, it will have to be below 400 wells. It is
important to note that finding the number and location of wells that
provide optimal total groundwater abstraction under certain con­
straints (i.e. discharge to the river, drawdown, and change in storage)
is an optimization problem, which is beyond the scope of the present
paper. Overall, shallow groundwater use and expansion is a suitable
intensification pathway under favourable climate conditions such as
under the MC for the Meki catchment.
The second potential suitable intensification pathway is
improving irrigation efficiency to increase water availability
for irrigation. Irrigation in Meki catchment is carried out
using the traditional furrow irrigation system, which is subject
to high water loss due to seepage, evaporation, and other
reasons. The efficiency of such systems is on the order of
50% or more in most developing countries (Mengel 2008).
More efficient methods of irrigation include drip irrigation
and sprinklers (such as centre pivots), which the woreda-
level experts said that they want to promote. With drip irriga­
tion, the irrigation efficiency is in the range of 90% (White
1999, Van Der Kooij et al. 2013). If drip irrigation is properly
implemented, which would require significant investment in
technology as well as in capacity for proper operation and
maintenance, this could result in a reduction by about 40%
in water use compared to the conventional furrow irrigation
method. This translates to an increase of about 29% and 12% in
the first-season irrigated area with MC and DHC, respectively,
compared to what is irrigated by a furrow irrigation system.
The communities desire to increase rainwater harvesting
(i.e. diverting surface runoff to small reservoirs), and this can
contribute to irrigation if sufficient storage can be provided.
However, if the captured water is not used shortly after the
rainy season, most of the water may be lost to evaporation and
2284 M. T. TAYE ET AL.
therefore will not be available during the dry season. Hence,
due to the climate of the region, which has a high evaporation
demand, the implementation of rainwater harvesting should
be considered only if it is used in conjunction with managed
aquifer recharge, which is the purposeful recharge of water to
aquifers during wet periods for subsequent use during dry
periods. If we assume water harvesting ponds of size 30 m3
are implemented by individual smallholder farmers across the
catchment area to store rainy season runoff, about 53% of the
stored water in individual ponds will be lost to evaporation.
The October–January evaporation rate can be as high as
798 mm (Ayenew 2003). The open-water evaporation rate
would be higher if farmers opt for ponds with a large surface
area and a shallow depth. Therefore, water harvesting ponds
are not a viable option for agricultural intensification in the
Meki catchment due to the high open-water evaporation rate
(Vallet-Coulomb et al. 2001, Ayenew 2003, Melesse et al.
2009).
Communities and woreda-level experts also expressed a desire
to increase available water using soil and water conservation
measures. Soil and water conservation practices such as soil
bunds and stone bunds, which are effective in reducing runoff
and soil erosion and increasing infiltration, were identified as
potential measures for better water availability. This is
a commendable approach as such conservation activities promote
soil infiltration, and enhance groundwater availability and base­
flow. Research in the central highland watersheds of Ethiopia
showed that soil bunds reduced the average annual runoff by as
much as 28% (Adimassu et al. 2014). Such a reduction in runoff
can contribute to an overall increase of soil moisture and ground­
water recharge that can increase water availability.
While further intensification of agriculture during the main dry
season by smallholders is feasible to some extent by using shallow
groundwater and with favourable conditions of increased rainfall,
attempting to meet future water demands by increasing withdrawal
of surface and groundwater without strengthening communities and
government institutions in conjunctive water governance (Blomquist
et al. 2001) will result in further unsustainable development for the
CRV basins. The qualitative study conducted in Meki catchment
with woreda officials and communities indicated a weak water
resource governance framework to regulate inefficient water man­
agement, which will likely contribute to unsustainable development.
5.3 Model uncertainties and limitations
This study showed the potential of using an integrated modelling
approach for the identification of sustainable agricultural intensi­
fication options via the conjunctive use of surface and ground­
water. However, the modelling approach used is not without
limitations. The three main sources of uncertainties in the present
study are: uncertainty related to climate projections, and uncer­
tainty related to the SWAT and MODFLOW models.
Uncertainties in climate projections arise from various sources
such as model structural differences, initial conditions, scenarios,
parameters, and resolution or bias-correction methods (Falloon
et al. 2014). Compared to temperature projections, rainfall projec­
tions are more uncertain and show higher spatial and seasonal
dependence (Niang et al. 2014). The present study considered
projections of both precipitation and temperature as they are the
main drivers of the hydrological cycle. The projection of monthy
precipitation ranges from decreasing signals of more than 40% to
increasing signals of more than 100% (see the Appendix, Fig. A7).
The projections in dry months were mostly uncertain due to
exaggerated increasing signals. The use of the ensemble mean
approach is therefore applied to reduce such known uncertainties.
The known sources of uncertainties in the SWAT model
include: (1) the 1989 land use is assumed to be representative
of the historical period and the 2018 land use is assumed to be
representative of future land use; (2) the spatial location of
irrigated area is unknown; (3) SWAT-calibrated parameters
were assumed to remain the same in the future; (4) it was
assumed that the meteorological variables such as wind speed,
solar radiation, and humidity for the future are the same as the
present-day climate; and (5) the SWAT model has limitations
in capturing high runoff season flows. This might be related to
the curve number method SWAT utilizes, which is dependent
on total rainfall volume rather than rainfall intensity and
duration (King et al. 1999, Akoko et al. 2021).
The main sources of uncertainties in the MODFLOW model
include: (1) the steady-state MODFLOW model was calibrated
using static water level data measured in different wells over time;
(2) transient MODFLOW model calibration was not possible due
to the lack of groundwater level time-series data; and (3) the aquifer
is represented by a single layer with uniform model thickness due to
a lack of lithological data. The large RMSE (5 m) and MAE (9 m)
during the model calibration were due to local heterogeneity which
could not be resolved during model calibration. These include the
influence of faults that likely isolate the water-bearing zones, higher
heads measured in shallow wells due to perched conditions which
do not reflect the regional flows system, etc. In addition to local
variations, the difference in time during which the static water levels
are measured influences the model calibration. A large difference in
observed and simulated groundwater levels is expected in catch­
ment-scale modelling where there is a significant difference in
groundwater level in the model domain (Tiedeman et al. 2003,
Jagelke and Barthel 2005, Cao et al. 2013). To overcome the non-
uniqueness problem in model calibration, we constrained model
calibration with pumping test results so that realistic parameters
consistent with known information were obtained, which gives us
some confidence that the developed model is overall representative
of the groundwater flow in the study area. The transient
MODFLOW model was developed with assumed specific yield
values from the literature following Ebrahim et al.’s (2016)
approach. As the specific yield values vary in a narrow range,
particularly in hard rock aquifers, the error introduced due to this
assumption is considered minimal (Lloyd 1999).
It is important to note that the location of the actual irrigated area
is not available from official sources. Also, mapping the extent of
irrigated areas is difficult using remote sensing-based methods,
mainly due to small and fragmented areas. Hence, we were unable
to verify the area and determine where irrigation intensification could
occur in the future. Given that the current irrigated area is large
compared to the dry season water availability, it is possible that the
farmers use deficit irrigation, or the reported irrigated area might be
slightly over-estimated by the woreda officals. Furthermore, this
study has not considered non-irrigation activities that consume
water such as domestic, industrial and large commercial farms,
which usually use deeper groundwater sources.

6 Conclusions and recommendations
To provide guidance on the conjunctive use and management of
surface and groundwater for sustainable agricultural intensification
through smallholder irrigation, an integrated hydrological model
using coupled SWAT and MODFLOW models was developed for
the Meki catchment. The coupled SWAT-MODFLOW model
allowed us to analyse the water balance dynamics of the catchment
in detail. It was also used to assess different scenarios that were co-
developed with local communities. This is one of the first studies to
use integrated modelling to assess sustainable agricultural intensi­
fication through smallholder irrigation with community scenarios.
Our analysis shows that under the current climate and land
use the catchment is already water stressed, particularly during
the first irrigation season (October–January). However, the
ratio of shallow groundwater withdrawal to groundwater
recharge is low, signifying the possibility of increasing shallow
groundwater use to complement surface water resources.
Shallow groundwater use will be more relevant to locations
in Butajira, Enseno, and other low-lying areas of the catch­
ment. In contrast to the first irrigation season, water resource
availability in the Meki catchment in the second irrigation
season is relatively abundant, hence further agricultural inten­
sification seems possible during this period.
However, given that the CRV basin is experiencing uncontrolled
water abstraction, it is vital to make sure that agricultural intensifica­
tion is done through considering water availability for all kinds of
users. Uncontrolled expansion of shallow groundwater may result in
significant drawdown locally and might reduce the amount of water
that flows to rivers, with various implications for downstream uses
and ecosystems. The water managers should consider lessons from,
for instance, the experience of several regions in India that depleted
groundwater sources because of excessive extraction. An additional
option for increasing water availability in the catchment is the use of
better irrigation technologies such as drip irrigation. Furthermore,
since soil and water conservation measures enhance the available soil
moisture and recharge, they may have a substantial role to play in
agricultural intensification in the area and hence should be promoted.
Acknowledgements
This research was funded by Land and Water Solutions for Sustainable
Intensification (LWS) of the CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land,
and Ecosystems (WLE) and supported by Funders contributing to the
CGIAR Trust Fund (https://www.cgiar.org/funders/). The research was
also partially funded by the Future Leader – African Independent
Research (FLAIR) Fellowship Program (FLR\R1\201160 FLAIR
Fellowships 2020) granted to the first author. The FLAIR Fellowship
Program is a partnership between the African Academy of Sciences and
the Royal Society funded by the UK Government’s Global Challenges. We
received data from several sources to conduct this study: baseline data on
the Central Rift Valley basin from Farm Africa; river flow data from the
Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy (MoWIE), Ethiopia; and meteor­
ological data from the National Meteorology Agency (NMA), Ethiopia. The
authors thank Dr Mebruk Mohamed of Addis Ababa University,
Department of Civil Engineering, and Dr. Behailu Birhanu of Addis
Ababa University, Department of Earth Science, for their support regarding
groundwater-related data and constructive discussions during this research.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
HYDROLOGICAL SCIENCES JOURNAL 2285
Funding
This work was supported by the CGIAR Research Program on Water,
Land and Ecosystems (WLE); and the Royal Society.
ORCID
Meron Teferi Taye http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4687-4622
Petra Schmitter http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3826-7224
References
Abbaspour, K.C., 2011. Swat-Cup2: SWAT calibration and uncertainty
programs manual version 2, department of Systems Analysis, Integrated
Assessment and Modelling (SIAM). Duebendorf, Switzerland: Eawag.
Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, 106.
Adimassu, Z., et al., 2014. Effect of soil bunds on runoff, soil and nutrient
losses, and crop yield in the central highlands of Ethiopia. Land
Degradation & Development, 25 (6), 554–564. doi:10.1002/ldr.2182
Akoko, G., et al., 2021. A review of SWAT model application in Africa.
Water, 13 (9), 1313. doi:10.3390/w13091313
Allen, R.G. et al., 1998. Crop Evapotranspiration - guidelines for
Computing Crop Water Requirements - FAO Irrigation and
Drainage Paper 56. FAO, Rome.
Arnold, J.G., et al., 1998. Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment part I:
model development 1. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources
Association, 34 (1), 73–89. doi:10.1111/j.1752-1688.1998.tb05961.x
ASTM, D5447, 2010. Standard guide for application of a groundwater
flow model to a site-specific problem.
ATA, 2020. ATA (Ethiopian agricultural transformation agency), shallow
ground water mapping. Available from: http://www.ata.gov.et/pro
grams/highlighted-deliverables/input-voucher-sales-system-ivs/
[Accessed November 2020].
Ayenew, T., 2001. Numerical groundwater flow modeling of the Central
Main Ethiopian Rift lakes basin. SINET: Ethiopian Journal of Science,
24 (2), 167–184. doi:10.4314/sinet.v24i2.18184
Ayenew, T., 2003. Evapotranspiration estimation using thematic mapper spectral
satellite data in the Ethiopian rift and adjacent highlands. Journal of Hydrology,
279 (1–4), 83–93. doi:10.1016/S0022-1694(03)00173-2
Bailey, R.T., et al., 2016. Assessing regional-scale spatio-temporal patterns
of groundwater–surface water interactions using a coupled SWAT-
MODFLOW model. Hydrological Processes, 30 (23), 4420–4433.
doi:10.1002/hyp.10933
Bailey, R.T., et al., 2021. APEX-MODFLOW: a new integrated model to
simulate hydrological processes in watershed systems. Environmental
Modelling & Software. 105093. 10.1016/j.envsoft.2021.105093
Bailey, R. and Park, S., 2019. SWAT-MODFLOW tutorial version 3
documentation for preparing and running SWAT-MODFLOW
simulations.
Barthel, R. and Banzhaf, S., 2016. Groundwater and surface water inter­
action at the regional-scale–a review with focus on regional integrated
models. Water Resources Management, 30 (1), 1–32. doi:10.1007/
s11269-015-1163-z
Blomquist, W., Heikkila, T., and Schlager, E., 2001. Institutions and
conjunctive water management among three western states. Natural
Resources Journal, 653–683.
Cao, G., et al., 2013. Use of flow modeling to assess sustainability of
groundwater resources in the North China Plain. Water Resources
Research, 49 (1), 159–175. doi:10.1029/2012WR011899
Chunn, D., et al., 2019. Application of an integrated SWAT–MODFLOW
model to evaluate potential impacts of climate change and water with­
drawals on groundwater–Surface water interactions in West-Central
Alberta. Water, 11 (1), 110. doi:10.3390/w11010110
Cofie, O. and Amede, T., 2015. Water management for sustainable agri­
cultural intensification and smallholder resilience in sub-Saharan
Africa. Water Resources and Rural Development, 6, 3–11. doi:10.
1016/j.wrr.2015.10.001
Cook, S., et al., 2015. Sustainable intensification revisited. London:
International Institute for Environment and Development.
2286 M. T. TAYE ET AL.
Desta, H., et al., 2020. Water use and management of Lake Ziway and its
watershed, Ethiopia: the perception of experts vis-à-vis the latest state
of research. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 22 (4),
3621–3640. doi:10.1007/s10668-019-00359-8
Desta, H. and Fetene, A., 2020. Land-use and land-cover change in Lake
Ziway watershed of the Ethiopian Central Rift Valley region and its
environmental impacts. Land Use Policy, 96, 104682. doi:10.1016/j.
landusepol.2020.104682
Desta, H. and Lemma, B., 2017. SWAT based hydrological assessment and
characterization of Lake Ziway sub-watersheds, Ethiopia. Journal of
Hydrology: Regional Studies, 13, 122–137. doi:10.1016/j.ejrh.2017.08.002
Doherty, J., 2004. PEST model-independent parameter estimation user
manual. Watermark Numerical Computing, Brisbane, Australia, 3338,
3349.
Ebrahim, G.Y., et al., 2016. Simulation-optimization approach for evalu­
ating the feasibility of managed aquifer recharge in the Samail lower
catchment, Oman. Journal of Water Resources Planning and
Management, 142 (2), 05015007. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.
0000588
Ebrahim, G.Y. and Villholth, K.G., 2016. Estimating shallow groundwater
availability in small catchments using streamflow recession and
instream flow requirements of rivers in South Africa. Journal of
Hydrology, 541, 754–765. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.07.032
Ebrahim, G.Y., Villholth, K.G., and Boulos, M., 2019. Integrated hydro­
geological modelling of hard-rock semi-arid terrain: supporting sus­
tainable agricultural groundwater use in Hout catchment, Limpopo
Province, South Africa. Hydrogeology Journal, 27 (3), 965–981. doi:10.
1007/s10040-019-01957-6
Falloon, P., et al., 2014. Ensembles and uncertainty in climate change
impacts. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 2, 33. doi:10.3389/fenvs.
2014.00033
Funk, C. et al., 2015. The climate hazards group infrared precipitation
with stations – a new environmental record for monitoring extremes.
Scientific Data, 2, 150066. doi:10.1038/sdata.2015.66
Garnett, T., et al., 2013. Sustainable intensification in agriculture: pre­
mises and policies. Science, 341 (6141), 33–34. doi:10.1126/science.
1234485
Getnet, M., Hengsdijk, H., and Van Ittersum, M., 2014. Disentangling the
impacts of climate change, land use change and irrigation on the
Central Rift Valley water system of Ethiopia. Agricultural Water
Management, 137, 104–115. doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2014.02.014
Goshime, D.W., et al., 2019. Impact of water abstraction on the water level
of Lake Ziway, Ethiopia. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the
Environment, 239, 67–78. doi:10.2495/WS19007167
Harbaugh, A.W., 2005. MODFLOW-2005, the US Geological Survey mod­
ular ground-water model: the ground-water flow process. US
Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey. Reston, VA, USA.
Hill, M.C., 1998. Methods and guidelines for effective model calibration. US
Geological Survey. Denver, CO, USA.
Jagelke, J. and Barthel, R., 2005. Conceptualization and implementation of
a regional groundwater model for the Neckar catchment in the frame­
work of an integrated regional model. Advances in Geosciences, 5,
105–111. doi:10.5194/adgeo-5-105-2005
JICA, 2012. The study on groundwater resources assessment in the Rift
Valley Lakes Basin in the federal democratic republic of Ethiopia Final
Report Main Report by Japan International Cooperation Agency
(JICA) Kokusai Kogyo CO., LTD.
King, K.W., Arnold, J., and Bingner, R., 1999. Comparison of
Green-Ampt and curve number methods on Goodwin Creek
watershed using SWAT. Transactions of the ASAE, 42 (4), 919.
doi:10.13031/2013.13272
Legesse, D., et al., 2010. Streamflow sensitivity to climate and land cover
changes: Meki River, Ethiopia. Hydrological Earth Systems Science,
14 (11), 2277–2287. doi:10.5194/hess-14-2277-2010
Legesse, D. and Ayenew, T., 2006. Effect of improper water and land resource
utilization on the central Main Ethiopian Rift lakes. Quaternary
International, 148 (1), 8–18. doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2005.11.003
Lloyd, J., 1999. Water resources of hard rock aquifers: in arid and
semi-arid zones. Paris: UNESCO.
MacDonald, A. and Davies, J., 2000. A brief review of groundwater for
rural water supply in sub-Saharan Africa. Keyworth, Nottingham:
British Geological Survey.
McBride, M.F., et al., 2017. Increasing the effectiveness of participatory
scenario development through codesign. Ecology and Society, 22 (3).
doi:10.5751/ES-09386-220316
Melesse, A.M., Abtew, W., and Dessalegne, T., 2009. Evaporation estima­
tion of Rift Valley Lakes: comparison of models. Sensors, 9 (12),
9603–9615. doi:10.3390/s91209603
Mengel, K., 2008. Limiting factors and Liebig’s principle. Encyclopedia of
Ecology, 2184–2187. doi:10.1016/B978-008045405-4.00805-3
Ministry of Water Resources, 2009. Rift Valley Lakes Basin inte­
grated resources development master plan study project phase 2
final report part ii prefeasibility studies integrated watershed man­
agement of western lake ziway sub-basin prefeasibility study,
volume 2: annexes A-K
Mirchi, A., et al., 2012. Synthesis of system dynamics tools for holistic
conceptualization of water resources problems. Water Resources
Management, 26 (9), 2421–2442. doi:10.1007/s11269-012-0024-2
Mouratiadou, I., et al., 2021. Quantifying sustainable intensification of
agriculture: the contribution of metrics and modelling. Ecological
Indicators, 129, 107870. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107870
Nathan, R.J. and McMahon, T.A., 1990. Evaluation of automated techni­
ques for base flow and recession analyses. Water Resources Research,
26 (7), 1465–1473. doi:10.1029/WR026i007p01465
Neitsch, S.L., et al., 2011. Soil and water assessment tool theoretical
documentation version 2009. Texas: Texas Water Resources Institute.
Niang, I., et al. 2014. Africa climate change 2014: impacts, adapta­
tion, and vulnerability. part b: regional aspects. contribution of
working group ii to the fifth assessment report of the intergovern­
mental panel on climate change ed vr barros et al. Climate
Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: Part B:
Regional Aspects: Working Group II Contribution to the Fifth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change, 1199–1266. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
O’Neill, B.C., et al., 2014. A new scenario framework for climate change
research. Climatic Change, 122, 363–372. doi:10.1007/s10584-013-
0912-3
Patwardhan, A.S., Nieber, J.L., and Johns, E.L., 1990. Effective rainfall
estimation methods. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering,
116 (2), 182–193. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(1990)116:2(182).
Prudhomme, C., et al., 2010. Scenario-neutral approach to climate change
impact studies: application to flood risk. Journal of Hydrology, 390 (3–
4), 198–209. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.06.043
Savva, A.P. and Frenken, K., 2002. Crop water requirements and irrigation
scheduling. Harare: FAO Sub-Regional Office for East and Southern
Africa Harare.
Seyoum, W.M., Milewski, A.M., and Durham, M.C., 2015. Understanding
the relative impacts of natural processes and human activities on the
hydrology of the Central Rift Valley lakes, East Africa. Hydrological
Processes, 29 (19), 4312–4324. doi:10.1002/hyp.10490
Shah, N., Nachabe, M., and Ross, M., 2007. Extinction depth and evapo­
transpiration from groundwater under selected land covers.
Groundwater, 45, 329–338. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6584.2007.00302.x
Smith, M., 1992. CROPWAT: a computer program for irrigation planning
and management. Land and Water Development Division. Rome: Food
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Taye, M.T., et al., 2021. Effect of irrigation water withdrawal on the
hydrology of the Lake Tana sub-basin. Journal of Hydrology: Regional
Studies, 38, 100961. doi:10.1016/j.ejrh.2021.100961
Tendall, D., et al., 2015. Food system resilience: defining the concept.
Global Food Security, 6, 17–23. doi:10.1016/j.gfs.2015.08.001
Tiedeman, C.R., et al., 2003. Methods for using groundwater model
predictions to guide hydrogeologic data collection, with application
to the Death Valley regional groundwater flow system. Water
Resources Research, 39 (1). doi:10.1029/2001WR001255
Trichakis, I., et al., 2017. Towards a pan-European integrated ground­
water and surface water model: development and applications.
Environmental Processes, 4 (1), 81–93. doi:10.1007/s40710-017-0216-0

US EPA, 2008. Integrated modeling for integrated environmental decision
making, White Paper EPA 100/R-08/010.
Vallet-Coulomb, C., et al., 2001. Lake evaporation estimates in tropical
Africa (lake Ziway, Ethiopia). Journal of Hydrology, 245 (1–4), 1–18.
doi:10.1016/S0022-1694(01)00341-9
Van Der Kooij, S., et al., 2013. The efficiency of drip irrigation unpacked.
Agricultural Water Management, 123, 103–110. doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2013.03.014
Vrba, J., et al., 2007. Groundwater resources sustainability indicators.
Paris: UNESCO.
White, G.F., 1999. Water for the future: the West Bank and Gaza Strip,
Israel, and Jordan. In: Water science and technology board and the
HYDROLOGICAL SCIENCES JOURNAL 2287
board on environmental studies and toxicology, national research
council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. doi:10.17226/
6031
Williams, F.M., 2016. Understanding Ethiopia. In: W. Eder, P.T.
Bobrowsky, J. Martínez-Frías and A. Vollbrecht, eds. Geology and
scenery. Cham: Springer, 356.
Xie, H., et al., 2021. Mapping development potential of dry-season
small-scale irrigation in Sub-Saharan African countries under joint
biophysical and economic constraints-An agent-based modeling
approach with an application to Ethiopia. Agricultural Systems, 186,
102987. doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2020.102987
2288 M. T. TAYE ET AL.

Appendix

Table A1. SWAT model calibration parameters and their sensitivity rank for Meki catchment.
No. Parameter Description Sensitivity rank Fitted values
1 r__CN2.mgt SCS runoff curve number 1 0.06
2 v__ALPHA_BF.gw Base flow alpha factor 7 0.52
3 v__GW_DELAY.gw Groundwater delay 9 198.2
4 v__GWQMN.gw Threshold depth of water in 8 1782.5
shallow aquifer
5 v__ESCO.bsn Soil evaporation compensation factor 6 0.97
6 v__EPCO.bsn Plant uptake compensation factor 10 0.97
7 v__GW_REVAP.gw Groundwater “revap” coefficient 5 0.14
8 v__REVAPMN.gw Threshold depth of water in the shallow aquifer for “revap” to occur 4 312.6
9 r__SOL_AWC().sol Soil available water capacity 2 0.29
10 r__SOL_K().sol Soil saturated hydraulic conductivity 3 0.14

Figure A1. Comparison of the 1989 and 2018 areas of the Meki catchment according to land-use classification.

Figure A2. Static groundwater level map of the Meki catchment.

 HYDROLOGICAL SCIENCES JOURNAL 2289

Figure A3. Hydrogeology of Meki catchment and its hydraulic conductivity zones.
2290 M. T. TAYE ET AL.

Figure A4. Selected climate models that represent the annual rainfall cycle reasonably well, their ensemble mean and a comparison with CHIRPS rainfall data for the
historical period.
HADGEM - Hadley Centre Global Environment Model; MPI - Max Planck Institute for Meteorology; CAMS - Chinese Academy of Meteorological Sciences; AWI - The Alfred
Wegener Institute Climate Model.

Figure A5. Selected climate models’ bias relative to CHIRPS precipitation for the seasons June to September (JJAS) and March to May (MAM) and at the annual scale for
the historical period.
 HYDROLOGICAL SCIENCES JOURNAL 2291

Figure A6. Monthly temperature projections until 2050 for three scenarios: ensemble mean, 75th percentile representing hotter conditions (high) and 25th percentile
representing cooler conditions (low).

Figure A7. Annual precipitation projections until 2050 for three scenarios: ensemble mean, 75th percentile representing wetter conditions (high) and 25th percentile
representing drier conditions (low).
2292 M. T. TAYE ET AL.

Figure A8. Spatially distributed diffuse recharge estimation for Meki River catchment for the baseline period 1986–2010.

Figure A9. Baseflow index for Meki River catchment.

 HYDROLOGICAL SCIENCES JOURNAL 2293

Figure A10. Inter-annual variablity in rainfall and groundwater recharge under future climate scenarios.