Irrigated farming systems: using the water footprint as an indicator of environmental, social and economic sustainability

In the current study, for the main crops cultivated in the Campania region (South of Italy), three indicators were proposed and analysed. The blue water footprint (WFb), which gives an indication of the impact of irrigation on the water resource; the gross margin WFb (GMWFb), describing the economic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Altobelli, F., Cimino, O., Natali, F., Orlandini, S., Gitz, V., Meybeck, A., Dalla Marta, A.
Formato: Journal Article
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/10568/111839
_version_ 1855533706908794880
author Altobelli, F.
Cimino, O.
Natali, F.
Orlandini, S.
Gitz, V.
Meybeck, A.
Dalla Marta, A.
author_browse Altobelli, F.
Cimino, O.
Dalla Marta, A.
Gitz, V.
Meybeck, A.
Natali, F.
Orlandini, S.
author_facet Altobelli, F.
Cimino, O.
Natali, F.
Orlandini, S.
Gitz, V.
Meybeck, A.
Dalla Marta, A.
author_sort Altobelli, F.
collection Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace)
description In the current study, for the main crops cultivated in the Campania region (South of Italy), three indicators were proposed and analysed. The blue water footprint (WFb), which gives an indication of the impact of irrigation on the water resource; the gross margin WFb (GMWFb), describing the economic productivity of irrigation; and the job WFb (JWFb) that expresses the social value of blue water in terms of job opportunities. Results confirmed that water applied through irrigation is much higher compared with crop requirements. In terms of GMWFb, silage maize, maize and alfalfa had the highest values, while olive, potato and tomato had the lowest. Concerning JWFb, silage maize was the crop with the highest value. Even though a deeper analysis should be done in terms of added value in the entire supply chain, the results indicated a clear difference between the crops related to animal feeding (alfalfa, maize) and the other crops taken into consideration. In fact, for the former, both the GMWFb and the JWFb achieved their highest values. Results showed that for certain irrigation volumes and for certain crops, the economic and social impacts are very different and the choice of an irrigated crop rather than another has different repercussions in terms of environmental and socio-economic sustainability. The proposed indicators would allow water managers and farmers to assess and compare production systems in terms of the different benefits that their use of water can provide.
format Journal Article
id CGSpace111839
institution CGIAR Consortium
language Inglés
publishDate 2018
publishDateRange 2018
publishDateSort 2018
publisher Cambridge University Press
publisherStr Cambridge University Press
record_format dspace
spelling CGSpace1118392024-11-15T08:52:53Z Irrigated farming systems: using the water footprint as an indicator of environmental, social and economic sustainability Altobelli, F. Cimino, O. Natali, F. Orlandini, S. Gitz, V. Meybeck, A. Dalla Marta, A. farming crops irrigation livestock In the current study, for the main crops cultivated in the Campania region (South of Italy), three indicators were proposed and analysed. The blue water footprint (WFb), which gives an indication of the impact of irrigation on the water resource; the gross margin WFb (GMWFb), describing the economic productivity of irrigation; and the job WFb (JWFb) that expresses the social value of blue water in terms of job opportunities. Results confirmed that water applied through irrigation is much higher compared with crop requirements. In terms of GMWFb, silage maize, maize and alfalfa had the highest values, while olive, potato and tomato had the lowest. Concerning JWFb, silage maize was the crop with the highest value. Even though a deeper analysis should be done in terms of added value in the entire supply chain, the results indicated a clear difference between the crops related to animal feeding (alfalfa, maize) and the other crops taken into consideration. In fact, for the former, both the GMWFb and the JWFb achieved their highest values. Results showed that for certain irrigation volumes and for certain crops, the economic and social impacts are very different and the choice of an irrigated crop rather than another has different repercussions in terms of environmental and socio-economic sustainability. The proposed indicators would allow water managers and farmers to assess and compare production systems in terms of the different benefits that their use of water can provide. 2018-07 2021-03-08T08:14:36Z 2021-03-08T08:14:36Z Journal Article https://hdl.handle.net/10568/111839 en Limited Access Cambridge University Press Altobelli, F., Cimino, O., Natali, F., Orlandini, S., Gitz, V., Meybeck, A., Dalla Marta, A. 2018. Irrigated farming systems: using the water footprint as an indicator of environmental, social and economic sustainability. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 156 (5): 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002185961800062X
spellingShingle farming
crops
irrigation
livestock
Altobelli, F.
Cimino, O.
Natali, F.
Orlandini, S.
Gitz, V.
Meybeck, A.
Dalla Marta, A.
Irrigated farming systems: using the water footprint as an indicator of environmental, social and economic sustainability
title Irrigated farming systems: using the water footprint as an indicator of environmental, social and economic sustainability
title_full Irrigated farming systems: using the water footprint as an indicator of environmental, social and economic sustainability
title_fullStr Irrigated farming systems: using the water footprint as an indicator of environmental, social and economic sustainability
title_full_unstemmed Irrigated farming systems: using the water footprint as an indicator of environmental, social and economic sustainability
title_short Irrigated farming systems: using the water footprint as an indicator of environmental, social and economic sustainability
title_sort irrigated farming systems using the water footprint as an indicator of environmental social and economic sustainability
topic farming
crops
irrigation
livestock
url https://hdl.handle.net/10568/111839
work_keys_str_mv AT altobellif irrigatedfarmingsystemsusingthewaterfootprintasanindicatorofenvironmentalsocialandeconomicsustainability
AT ciminoo irrigatedfarmingsystemsusingthewaterfootprintasanindicatorofenvironmentalsocialandeconomicsustainability
AT natalif irrigatedfarmingsystemsusingthewaterfootprintasanindicatorofenvironmentalsocialandeconomicsustainability
AT orlandinis irrigatedfarmingsystemsusingthewaterfootprintasanindicatorofenvironmentalsocialandeconomicsustainability
AT gitzv irrigatedfarmingsystemsusingthewaterfootprintasanindicatorofenvironmentalsocialandeconomicsustainability
AT meybecka irrigatedfarmingsystemsusingthewaterfootprintasanindicatorofenvironmentalsocialandeconomicsustainability
AT dallamartaa irrigatedfarmingsystemsusingthewaterfootprintasanindicatorofenvironmentalsocialandeconomicsustainability