CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 10Water resources management and optimizationWater-Energy-Food Nexus StudiesWater Governance and Infrastructure

How shifts in societal priorities link to reform in agricultural water management: Analytical framework and evidence from Germany, India and Tanzania

Open access
Seijger, Chris·2023·Science of The Total Environment
DOI 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.163945
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Climate change, environmental awareness, and food security are just some of the new priorities societies pursue. Due to the very large influence of agriculture on water quantity and quality, often a certain degree of reform in agricultural water management is required to accommodate such new priorities. To assess the degree of reform an analytical framework is introduced to account for social (e.g. contestation, path dependency) and biophysical limitations (water balance as a zero-sum game, limited gains in biomass productivity) to reform in agricultural water management. The hypothesis tested in this paper is whether the framework is capable to link shifts in societal priorities to actual reform in agricultural water management and if the framework can assess to what extent agricultural water management has changed to accommodate shifting societal priorities. The analytical framework and variables assess ex-post the degree of a reorientation, which is understood as the interplay between shifts in societal priorities and reform in agricultural water management to accommodate such shifts. The framework offers a causal chain of 6 variables to assess a reorientation. A test is performed by probing the framework in diverse contexts of Germany, India and Tanzania. Evidence from Germany, India and Tanzania confirm the validity of the social and biophysical limitations as they acted as real boundaries for the amount of reform achieved. In Tanzania much reform was achieved and agricu…

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.163945

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Maintenance of pipelines, reservoirs, treatment plants, and irrigation networks determines whether physical scarcity is amplified by distribution inefficiencies.

    “Maintenance of pipelines, reservoirs, treatment plants, and irrigation networks determines whether physical scarcity is amplified by distribution inefficiencies.”

    From Climate Security, Water Governance, and Resilience How Climate-Induced Water Stress and Migration Challenge State Capacity (2026) · cites this paper as Seijger, 2023

    Section 2.1 (p. 2) discusses how irrigation interventions can redistribute water and reduce downstream return flows, but does not address maintenance or distribution inefficiencies. Searches for pipelines, reservoirs, treatment plants, irrigation-network maintenance, and physical scarcity found no passage supporting the attributed claim. (LLM, conf=0.74)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 66

  1. Baron, R., Kenny, D., 1986. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 51, 1173 -1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173. · DOI · Paper page
  2. Barron, J., Kemp-Benedict, E., Morris, J., de Bruin, A., Wang, G., Fencl, A., 2015. Mapping the potential success of agricultural water management interventions for smallholders: where are the best opportunities? Water Resour. Rural Dev. 6, 24 -49. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.wrr.2015.06.001.
  3. Beck, H., Zimmerman, N., McVicar, T., Vergopolan, N., Berg, A., Wood, E., 2018. Present and future Köppen-Geiger climate classi fi cation maps at 1-km resolution. Scienti fi c Data 5, 180214. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2018.214. · DOI
  4. Bjornlund, V., Bjornlund, H., 2019. Understanding agricultural water management in a historical context using a socioeconomic and biophysical framework. Agric. Water Manag. 213, 454 -467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2018.10.037. · DOI
  5. Boelens, R., Hoogesteger, J., Swyngedouw, E., Vos, J., Wester, P., 2016. Hydrosocial territories: a political ecology perspective. Water Int. 41, 1 -14. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 02508060.2016.1134898.
  6. Boelens, R., Shah, E., Bruins, B., 2019. Contested knowledges: large dams and mega-hydraulic development. Water 11, 416. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11030416. · DOI
  7. Chambers, R., 1989. Managing Canal Irrigation: Practical Analysis from South Asia. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0048-9697(2302566-4/rf0035)
  8. Chaudhary, M., Walker, T., 2019. River ganga pollution: causes and failed management plans. Environ. Int. 126, 202 -206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2019.02.033. · DOI
  9. Checkland, P., Scholes, J., 1990. Soft Systems Methodology in Action. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
  10. De Fraiture, C., Molden, D., Wichelns, D., 2010. Investing in water for food, ecosystems, and livelihoods: an overview of the comprehensive assessment of water management in agriculture. Agric. Water Manag. 97, 495 -501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2009.08. 015. · DOI
  11. Douxchamps, S., Ayantunde, A., Barron, J., 2014. Taking stock of forty years of agricultural water management interventions in smallholder systems of Burkina Faso. Water Resour. Rural Dev. 3, 1 -13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wrr.2013.12.001. · DOI
  12. Dutta, V., Dubey, D., Kumar, S., 2020. Cleaning the River Ganga: impact of lockdown on water quality and future implications on river rejuvenation strategies. Sci. Total Environ. 743, 140756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140756. · DOI
  13. Eeden, A., Mehta, L., Koppen, B., 2016. Whose waters? Large-scale agricultural development and water grabbing in the Wami-Ruvu River Basin, Tanzania. Water Altern. 9. https:// doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvh8r2qk.15. · DOI
  14. FAO, 2021. The State of the World ' s Land and Water Resources for Food and Agriculture -Systems at Breaking Point. Synthesis Report 2021. FAO, Rome. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0048-9697(2302566-4/rf0075)
  15. Garrett, R., Koh, I., Lambin, E., le Polain de Waroux, Y., Kastens, J., Brown, J., 2018. Intensifi cation in agriculture-forest frontiers: land use responses to development and conservation policies in Brazil. Glob. Environ. Chang. 53, 233 -243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. gloenvcha.2018.09.011. · DOI
  16. George, A., Bennett, A., 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. MIT Press, Cambridge.
  17. Gordon, L., Finlayson, C., Falkenmark, M., 2010. Managing water in agriculture for food production and other ecosystem services. Agric. Water Manag. 97, 512 -519. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.agwat.2009.03.017. · DOI
  18. Grafton, R., Williams, J., Perry, C., Molle, F., Ringler, C., Steduto, P., Udall, B., Wheeler, S., Wang, Y., Garrick, D., Allen, R., 2018. The paradox of irrigation ef fi ciency. Science 361, 748 -750. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aat9314. · DOI
  19. Griewald, Y., 2018. The art of the state to intervene: insights into agricultural land management in Russia. Ecol. Econ. 151, 1 -9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.04.026. · DOI
  20. Hasselquist, E., Mancheva, I., Eckerberg, K., Laudon, H., 2020. Policy change implications for forest water protection in Sweden over the last 50 years. Ambio 49, 1341 -1351. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s13280-019-01274-y. · DOI
  21. Haug, B., Hella, J., 2013. The art of balancing food security: securing availability and affordability of food in Tanzania. Food Secur. 5, 415 -426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571013-0266-8. · DOI
  22. Hellegers, P., 2022. Food security vulnerability due to trade dependencies on Russia and Ukraine. Food Secur. 14, 1503 -1510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-022-01306-8. · DOI
  23. Hellegers, P., Van Ierland, E., 2003. Policy instruments for groundwater management in the Netherlands. Environ. Resour. Econ. 26, 163 -172. https://doi.org/10.1023/A: 1025685621417. · DOI
  24. Holling, C., 1986. The resilience of terrestrial ecosystems: local surprise and global change. In: Clarck, W., Munn, R. (Eds.), Sustainable Development of the Biopshere. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 67 -109. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0048-9697(2302566-4/rf0135)
  25. Hommes, L., 2022. Infrastructure Lives: Water, Territories and Transformations in Turkey, Peru and Spain. PhD Thesis. Wageningen University and Research https://doi.org/10. 18174/569800.
  26. Hoogesteger, J., Wester, P., 2017. Regulating groundwater use: the challenges of policy implementation in Guanajuato, Central Mexico. Environ. Sci. Pol. 77, 107 -113. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.08.002. · DOI
  27. Iglesias, A., Garrote, L., 2015. Adaptation strategies for agricultural water management under climate change in Europe. Agric. Water Manag. 155, 113 -124. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.agwat.2015.03.014.
  28. INTACH, 2017. Reviving Hindon River: A Basin Approach. INTACH, New Delhi. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0048-9697(2302566-4/rf0155)
  29. IPBES, 2019. Summary for Policymakers of the Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0048-9697(2302566-4/rf0160)
  30. IPCC, 2022. Summary for policy makers. Climate change 2022: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambrige. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0048-9697(2302566-4/rf0165)
  31. Keller, A., Keller, J., 1995. Effective Ef fi ciency: A Water Use Ef fi ciency Concept for Allocating Freshwater Resources. Center for Economic Policy Studies Winrock International, Arlington. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0048-9697(2302566-4/rf0170)
  32. Kirschke, S., Häger, A., Kirschke, D., Völker, J., 2019. Agricultural nitrogen pollution of freshwater in Germany. The governance of sustaining a complex problem. Water 11, 2450. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11122450. · DOI
  33. Köhler, J., Geels, F., Kern, F., Markand, J., Onsongo, E., Wieczorek, A., Alkemade, F., Avelino, F., Bergek, A., Boons, F., Fünfschilling, L., Hess, D., Holtz, G., Hysslo, S., Jenkins, K., Kivimaa, P., Martiskainen, M., McMeekin, A., Mühlemeier, M., Nykvist, B., Pel, B., Raven, R., Rohracher, H., Sand ' en, B., Schot, J., Sovacool, B., Turnheim, B., Welch, D., Wells, P., 2019. An agenda for sustainability transitions research: state of the art and future directions. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 31, 1 -32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist. 2019.01.004. · DOI
  34. Lebel, L., Grothmann, T., Siebenhüner, B., 2010. The role of social learning in adaptiveness: insights from water management. Int. Environ. Agreements 10, 333 -353. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10784-010-9142-6. · DOI
  35. Leeuwis, C., Boogaard, B., Atta-Krah, K., 2021. How food systems change (or not): governance implications for system transformation processes. Food Secur. 13, 761 -780. https://doi. org/10.1007/s12571-021-01178-4. · DOI
  36. Meals, D., Dressing, S., Davenport, T., 2010. Lag time in water quality response to best management practices: a review. J. Environ. Qual. 39, 85 -96. https://doi.org/10.2134/ jeq2009.0108.
  37. Meurs, M., Bogushev, A., 2008. Forward to the past ? Agricultural restructuring in Bulgaria. Mediterranee. https://doi.org/10.4000/mediterranee.545. · DOI
  38. Min, L., Shen, Y., Wang, S., Liu, M., 2019. Groundwater recharge under irrigated agroecosystems in the North China Plain: from a critical zone perspective. J. Geogr. Sci. 29, 877 -890. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11442-019-1634-x. · DOI
  39. Molden, D. (Ed.), 2007. Water for Food Water for Life. A Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture. Earthscan, London. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0048-9697(2302566-4/rf0205)
  40. Molden, D., Oweis, T., 2007. Pathways for increasing agricultural water productivity. In: Molden, D. (Ed.), Water for Food Water for Life. A Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture. Earthscan, London, pp. 278 -310. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0048-9697(2302566-4/rf202305102353398618)
  41. Molden, D., Sakthivadivel, R., 1999. Water accounting to assess use and productivity of water. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 15, 55 -71. https://doi.org/10.1080/07900629948934. · DOI
  42. Molden, D., Oweis, T., Steduto, P., Bindraban, P., Hanjra, M., Kijne, J., 2010. Improving agricultural water productivity: between optimism and caution. Agric. Water Manag. 97, 528 -535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2009.03.023. · DOI
  43. Molle, F., Wester, P. (Eds.), 2009. River Basin Trajectories: Societies, Environments and Developments. CABI, Wallingford.
  44. Molle, F., Mollinga, P., Wester, P., 2009. Hydraulic bureaucracies and the hydraulic mission: fl ows of water, fl ows of power. Water Altern. 2, 328 -349. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0048-9697(2302566-4/rf0230)
  45. Mollinga, P., Bolding, A. (Eds.), 2004. The Politics of Irrigation Reform: Contested Policy Formulation and Implementation in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Ashgate, Aldershot.
  46. Mollinga, P., Meinzen-Dick, R., Merrey, D., 2007. Politics, plurality and problemsheds: a strategic approach for reform of agricultural water resources management. Dev. Policy Rev. 25, 699 -719. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7679.2007.00393.x. · DOI
  47. Namara, R., Hanjra, M., Castillo, G., Ravnborg, H., Smith, L., van Koppen, B., 2010. Agricultural water management and poverty linkages. Agric. Water Manag. 97, 520 -527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2009.05.007. · DOI
  48. Ostrom, E., 2009. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science 325, 419 -422. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1172133. · DOI · Paper page
  49. Peng, S., Cassman, K., Virmani, S., Sheehy, J., Khush, G., 1999. Yield potential trends of tropical rice since the release of IR8 and the challenge of increasing rice yield potential. Crop Sci. 39, 1552 -1559. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1999.3961552x. · DOI
  50. Pérez-Blanco, C., Loch, A., Ward, F., Perry, C., Adamson, D., 2021. Agricultural water saving through technologies: a zombie idea. Environ. Res. Lett. 16, 114032. https://doi.org/10. 1088/1748-9326/ac2fe0.
  51. Phi, H., Hermans, L., Douven, W., Van Halsema, G., Khan, M., 2015. A framework to assess plan implementation maturity with an application to fl ood management in Vietnam. Water Int. 40, 984 -1003. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2015.1101528. · DOI
  52. Qadir, M., Boers, T., Schubert, S., Ghafoor, A., Murtaza, G., 2003. Agricultural water management in water-starved countries: challenges and opportunities. Agric. Water Manag. 62, 165 -185. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3774(03)00146-X. · DOI
  53. Radmehr, A., Bozorg-Haddad, O., Loaiciga, 2022. Integrated strategic planning and multicriteria decision-making framework with its application to agricultural water management. Sci. Rep. 12, 8406. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-12194-5. · DOI
  54. Reganold, J., Wachter, J., 2016. Organic agriculture in the twenty- fi rst century. Natur. Plants 2, 15221. https://doi.org/10.1038/nplants.2015.221. · DOI
  55. Rizzo, G., Monzon, J., Tenorio, F., Howard, R., Cassman, K., Grassini, P., 2022. Climate and agronomy, not genetics, underpin recent maize yield gains in favorable environments. PNAS 119, e2113629119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2113629119. · DOI
  56. Salomon, M., Schmid, E., Volkens, A., Hey, C., Holm-Müller, K., Foth, H., 2016. Towards an integrated nitrogen strategy for Germany. Environ. Sci. Pol. 55, 158 -166. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.10.003. · DOI
  57. Schaller, L., Targetti, S., Villanueva, A., Zasada, I., Kantelhardt, J., Arriaza, M., Bal, T., Fedrigotti, V., Giray, F., Häfner, K., Majewski, E., Malak-Rawlikowska, A., Nikolov, D., Paoli, J., Piorr, A., Rodríguez-Entrena, M., Ungaro, F., Verburg, P., van Zanten, B., Viaggi, D., 2018. Agricultural landscapes, ecosystem services and regional competitiveness -assessing drivers and mechanisms in nine European case study areas. Land Use Policy 76, 735 -745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.03.001. · DOI
  58. Schaub, S., 2021. Public contestation over agricultural pollution: a discourse network analysis on narrative strategies in the policy process. Policy. Sci. 54, 783 -821. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s11077-021-09439-x.
  59. Seijger, C., Hellegers, P., 2023. How do societies reorient their agricultural water management towards new priorities for water, agriculture, and the environment? Agric. Water Manag. 227, 108104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2022.108104. · DOI
  60. Seijger, C., Ellen, G., Verheijen, E., Janssen, S., Erkens, G., 2018. Sinking deltas: trapped in a dual lock-in of technology and institutions. Prometheus Crit. Stud. Innov. 35 (3), 193 -213. https://doi.org/10.1080/08109028.2018.1504867. · DOI
  61. Seijger, C., van Halsema, G., Korbee, D., 2019. Synthesis of strategic delta planning in action: vested interests, expected and unexpected changes. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 62 (9), 1636 -1653. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2019.1622516. · DOI
  62. Sen, S., 2020. Ganges: The Many Pasts of an Indian River. Yale University Press, London. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0048-9697(2302566-4/rf0330)
  63. Sinclair, T.R., Tanner, C.B., Bennet, J.M., 1984. Water-use ef fi ciency in crop production. BioScience 34, 36 -40. https://doi.org/10.2307/1309424. · DOI
  64. Steduto, P., Hsiao, T., Fereres, E., 2007. On the conservative behavior of biomass water productivity. Irrig. Sci. 25, 189 -207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-007-0064-1. · DOI
  65. Valvo, P., Miralles, D., Serrago, R., 2018. Genetic progress in argentine bread wheat varieties released between 1918 and 2011: changes in physiological and numerical yield components. Field Crop Res. 221, 314 -321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2017.08.014. · DOI
  66. Venot, J., Molle, F., Courcier, R., 2008. Dealing with closed basins: the case of the lower Jordan River basin. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 2, 247 -263. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 07900620701723703.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Seijger, C.
Affiliations
Wageningen University & Research (NL)
Corresponding author
Seijger, Chris
ORCID
Seijger, Chris
Venue
Science of The Total Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-08
Volume
886
Pages
163945
ISSN
0048-9697 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.163945
OpenAlex
W4375948344
Cited by
10
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1
FWCI
1.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • The Science of The Total Environment (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Ocean Engineering › Water resources management and optimization
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Water-Energy-Food Nexus Studies
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Water Governance and Infrastructure
Keywords
agricultural water management, reform, reorientation, analytical framework, path dependence, contestation, water balance, biomass productivity, environmental protection, agricultural expansion, food security, climate change, Germany, India, Tanzania
MeSH terms
Agriculture, Germany, Tanzania, Water, Biomass

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review