Irrigation - Intensification - Illumination Exploring Limits and Trade-Offs in Agricultural Intensification

Transcription

1 Irrigation - Intensification - Illumination Exploring Limits and Trade-Offs in Agricultural Intensification Alexander Herzig, John Dymond, Anne-Gaelle Ausseil

2 Outline Objective Ecosystem Services & Models Identifying Trade-offs with LUMASS Agricultural Intensification in the Ruamahanga Black Creek White Rock

3 Objectives Assessing the impact of agricultural intensification on the provisioning of ecosystem services in the Ruamahanga catchment. Identification of trade-offs between environmental and agricultural objectives of land management. Guiding questions Do we make the best use of our natural resources? Is there environmental headroom for agricultural intensification?

4 Ecosystem service Process Indicator Model / Data Carbon fixation Carbon sequestration [t COeq. / ha / yr] CenW (Kirschbaum 1999) Greenhosue gas emission Methane and nitrous oxide emissions [t COeq. / ha / yr] New Zealand greenhouse gas inventory emission factors (MfE 1) Erosion control Soil erosion Soil erosion [t sediment / km / yr] NZeem(R) (Dymond et al. 1) Water-flow regulation Water cycling Water yield [mm/yr] WATYIELD (Fahey et al. 1) Clean water provision Nutrient cycling Nitrate leached [kg N / ha / yr] Overseer(R) (MAF et al. 11), literature figures (Lilburne et al. 1) Food and fibre Plant and animal growth Wool, meat, milk, crop, grapes, timber production [kg / ha / yr] Statistics NZ, Baker & Associates (9) Indicator Model / Data Operating surplus [Mio. $] ANZ (1, 14), Baker & Associates (9), Beef & Lamb (14), Lewis & Bryant (n.d.), Laurie (14) Global climate regulation Agricultural performance Farm profitability (modified from Ausseil et al. 13)

5 Multi-objective Spatial Optimisation A B C D? Resource Land-Use Land-Use Water Habitat = Criteria Productivity Env. Indicator Spec. Efficiency Suitability = = = = = Outcome max Revenue min Env. Imapct max Efficiency max Biodiversity

6 Land-Use A B C D Productivity Revenue $$$? + A B C D = $$$ $$ $$$ $ $$ $ $ $$$ $$ $$$ $$ $$ $ $$ $$ $ $$$ $$$ $$$ Land-Use Performance with Respect to Productivity

7 Allocation Constraints quantity per zone total allocation: AAAAAAA BBBBB CCCCC DDD Where? How much? proximity to stationary objects AAAAA BB D A ha dairy per region m3 water per irrigation zone no-go area AA BBB CCCCC DD nutrient cap depending on proximity to surface water housing suitability depending on proximity to industry business suitability depending proximity to transport (road / rail) habitat suitability depending on proximity to settlement, road, river, lake, forest, etc.

8 Performance Constraints quantity per zone the overall nitrate leaching must not be greater then XXX kg N a-1 Desired Performance Tolerated Impact aaaaa bb d the maximum nitrate leaching in zone X1 must not be greater than XXX kg N a-1 the overall net revenue from dairy must be greater than $XXX the total habitat value in zone X3 must be at least XXXX units aa bbb ccccc dd

9 Spatial Optimisation with LUMASS Environmental Models Spatial Constraints LUMASS Optimal Land-Use Socio-Economic Expectations Exploring Limits Identifying trade-offs Discovering Potentials

10 Ruamahanga Catchment Land Use 11

11 Ruamahanga Catchment Irrigable Areas Black Creek White Rock

12 Agricultural Intensification Scenarios S1 land-use intensification S intensive dairy expansion min nitrate leaching milk solids >= S1 + 3% S3 dairy, arable, viticulture expansion min nitrate leaching milk solids >= S1 + 3% crop yield >= S1 + 3% grapes >= yr11 + {5%,8%} (Ruamahanga) land-use conversion constraints dairy arable <x> irrigated dairy irrigated arable <x> sheep beef deer irrigated dairy sheep beef deer irrigated dairy irrigated arable viticulture S4 dairy, arable, viticulture expansion s. S3 S5 surplus maximisation max operating surplus <= yr11 N leach <= yr11 meat >= 3% yr11 wool >= 3% yr11 wood >= 3% yr11 <x> >= yr11 viticulture viticulture scrub scrub native bush native bush <x> <y>

13 Black Creek Land Use - 11

14 16 Black Creek land-use conversion constraints dairy arable <x> irrigated dairy irrigated arable <x> Relative Performance Change [%] BC-S Area Carbon Erosion Grapes MilkSolids OpSurpl Wood CropYield Meat Nleach WaterYld Wool Ruamahanga Relative Performance Change [%] Land Use Intensification Area Carbon Erosion Grapes MilkSolids OpSurpl Wood CropYield Meat Nleach WaterYld Wool Black Creek

15 Land Use - 11 Land Use Intensification

16 Intensive Dairy Expansion BC-Sb objective & performance constraints min nitrate leaching milk solids >= S1 + 3% Relative Performance Change [%] Black Creek Area dairy arable <x> irrigated dairy irrigated arable <x> -1 Ruamahanga Relative Performance Change [%] irrigated dairy Carbon Erosion Grapes MilkSolids OpSurpl Wood CropYield Meat Nleach WaterYld Wool land-use conversion constraints sheep beef deer Area Carbon Erosion Grapes MilkSolids OpSurpl Wood CropYield Meat Nleach WaterYld Wool Black Creek

17 Land Use - 11 Intensive Dairy Expansion

18 Potential nitrate leaching [kg N/ha/yr] for irrigated dairy farming Optimal and potential locations of land use change to increase milk solids production by 3% while minimising nitrate leaching.

19 Potential production of milk solids [kg milk solids/ha/yr] for irrigated dairy farming Optimal and potential locations of land use change to increase milk solids production by 3% while minimising nitrate leaching.

20 34 Black Creek objective & performance constraints 3 Relative Performance Change [%] Dairy, Cropping, Viticulture Expansion (constrained) BC-S3b min nitrate leaching milk solids >= S1 + 3% crop yield >= S1 + 3% grapes >= yr11 + 5% (Rua.) irrigated dairy irrigated arable <x> Area Carbon Erosion Grapes MilkSolids OpSurpl Wood CropYield Meat Nleach WaterYld Wool Relative Performance Change [%] dairy arable <x> irrigated dairy irrigated arable viticulture 5 6 Ruamahanga land-use conversion constraints sheep beef deer Area Carbon Erosion Grapes MilkSolids OpSurpl Wood CropYield Meat Nleach WaterYld Wool Black Creek

21 Black Creek 45 Dairy, Cropping, Viticulture Expansion (constrained) BC-S3b 35 Operational Surplus [Mio. $] objective & performance constraints min nitrate leaching milk solids >= S1 + 3% crop yield >= S1 + 3% grapes >= yr11 + 5% (Rua.) ARA IrARA 1 1 BEF DAI IrDAI DEE 11 FOR SHP SNB 7 VIT Ruamahanga Expansion land-use conversion constraints irrigated dairy irrigated arable viticulture dairy arable <x> irrigated dairy irrigated arable <x> 1 9 Operational Surplus [Mio. $] sheep beef deer ARA IrARA 1 1 BEF DAI 11 IrDAI DEE FOR Expansion SHP SNB 1 VIT Black Creek

22 Land Use - 11 Dairy, Cropping, Viticulture Expansion (constrained)

23 34 Black Creek objective & performance constraints 3 Relative Performance Change [%] Dairy, Cropping, Viticulture Expansion (unconstrained) BC-S4b min nitrate leaching milk solids >= S1 + 3% crop yield >= S1 + 3% grapes >= yr11 + 5% (Rua.) Area Carbon Erosion Grapes MilkSolids OpSurpl Wood CropYield Meat Nleach WaterYld Wool Ruamahanga land-use conversion constraints Relative Performance Change [%] viticulture viticulture scrub scrub native bush native bush <x> <y> Area Carbon Erosion Grapes MilkSolids OpSurpl Wood CropYield Meat Nleach WaterYld Wool Black Creek

24 Land Use - 11 Dairy, Cropping, Viticulture Expansion (unconstrained)

25 7 Black Creek objective & performance constraints max operating surplus <= yr11 N leach <= yr11 meat >= 3% yr11 wool >= 3% yr11 wood >= 3% yr11 <x> >= yr11 land-use conversion constraints viticulture viticulture scrub scrub native bush native bush <x> <y> Relative Performance Change [%] (unconstrained) BC-S Area Carbon Erosion Grapes MilkSolids OpSurpl Wood CropYield Meat Nleach WaterYld Wool 1, Relative Performance Change [%] Surplus maximisation 57 6, Area Carbon Erosion Grapes MilkSolids OpSurpl Wood CropYield Meat Nleach WaterYld Wool

26 Black Creek 45 Surplus maximisation 35 objective & performance constraints max operating surplus <= yr11 N leach <= yr11 meat >= 3% yr11 wool >= 3% yr11 wood >= 3% yr11 <x> >= yr11 Operational Surplus [Mio. $] (unconstrained) BC-S ARA 1 IrARA 1 1 BEF DAI IrDAI DEE FOR SHP 6 7 SNB VIT Ruamahanga Expansion 1 viticulture viticulture scrub scrub native bush native bush <x> <y> Operational Surplus [Mio. $] land-use conversion constraints ARA IrARA 1 BEF DAI 11 IrDAI DEE FOR Expansion 3 SHP 1 SNB 1 VIT Black Creek

27 Land Use - 11 Max. Surplus, maintain Environmental Performance of Ruamahanga Catchm. (unconstrained)

28 Impact of Land Use Scenarios for the Black Creek Irrigable Area on Ecosystem Services Provision in the Ruamahanga Catchment 57 3 Relative Performance Change [%] Area Carbon CropYield Erosion Intensification Dairy, Crop., Vit. Exp. (uncons.) Grapes Meat MilkSolids Dairy Expansion Max. Surplus, keep footprint Nleach OpSurpl WaterYld Dairy, Crop, Vit. Exp (cons.) Wood Wool

29 Ruamahanga Catchment Irrigable Area White Rock

30 White Rock Land Use - 11

31 7 White Rock land-use conversion constraints dairy arable <x> irrigated dairy irrigated arable <x> Relative Performance Change [%] WR-S Area Carbon Erosion Grapes MilkSolids OpSurpl Wood CropYield Meat Nleach WaterYld Wool Ruamahanga Relative Performance Change [%] Land Use Intensification Area Carbon Erosion Grapes MilkSolids OpSurpl Wood CropYield Meat Nleach WaterYld Wool White Rock

32 1 White Rock objective & performance constraints 1 Relative Performance Change [%] Dairy, Cropping, Viticulture Expansion (constrained) WR-S3b min nitrate leaching milk solids >= S1 + 3% crop yield >= S1 + 3% grapes >= yr11 + 8% (Rua.) dairy arable <x> irrigated dairy irrigated arable <x> Area Carbon Erosion Grapes MilkSolids OpSurpl Wood CropYield Meat Nleach WaterYld Wool Relative Performance Change [%] irrigated dairy irrigated arable viticulture Ruamahanga land-use conversion constraints sheep beef deer Area Carbon Erosion Grapes MilkSolids OpSurpl Wood CropYield Meat Nleach WaterYld Wool White Rock

33 Land Use - 11 Dairy, Cropping, Viticulture Expansion

34 (unconstrained) BC-S5 objective & performance constraints max operating surplus <= yr11 N leach <= yr11 meat >= 3% yr11 wool >= 3% yr11 wood >= 3% yr11 <x> >= yr11 land-use conversion constraints viticulture viticulture scrub scrub native bush native bush <x> <y> Area -4-3 Carbon Erosion Grapes MilkSolids OpSurpl Wood CropYield Meat Nleach WaterYld Wool Ruamahanga Relative Performance Change [%] Surplus maximisation Relative Performance Change [%] White Rock , , Area Carbon Erosion Grapes MilkSolids OpSurpl Wood CropYield Meat Nleach WaterYld Wool White Rock

35 Land Use - 11 Max. surplus, maintain environmental performance of Ruamahanga catchm. (unconstrained)

36 Impact of Land Use Scenarios for the White Rock Irrigable Area on Ecosystem Services Provision in the Ruamahanga Catchment Relative Performance Change [%] Area Carbon CropYield Erosion Intensification Grapes Meat Dairy, Crop. Vit. Exp (cons.) MilkSolids Nleach OpSurpl Max. Surplus, Keep Footprint WaterYld Wood Wool

37 Conclusions Agricultural intensification and expansion (S1-S3) increased the environmental footprint. The greater the expected production increase the greater the modelled environmental footprint. Relaxing the constraints on possible land-use conversions (S4) reduced the environmental footprint. The biggest increase in operating surplus, except for meat and wool, was modelled for scenario S5. The current land-use configuration does not use the full potential of the landscape to provide ecosystem services. The effect of agricultural intensification (S1-S5) in the Black Creek indicative irrigable area has a greater impact on the provisioning of ecosystem services in the Ruamahanga catchment than the effect of agricultural intensification in the White Rock indicative irrigable area.

38 Conclusions LUMASS supports the integration of performance indicators from different models the integration of stakeholder objectives and expectations the exploration of landscape limits and potentials the identification of trade-offs between conflicting objectives evidence-based spatial decision-making and policy development

39 contact