Trade-off between water pollution prevention, agriculture profit, and farmer practice—an optimization methodology for discussion on land-use adjustment in China

• Published in: Environmental monitoring and assessment 2015-01, Vol.187 (1), p.4104-13, Article 4104
• Main Authors: Jianchang, Liu, Luoping, Zhang, Yuzhen, Zhang, Hongbing, Deng
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adjustment; Agricultural management; Agricultural practices; Agriculture; Agriculture - methods; Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution; Best management practices; China; Control systems; Cost benefit analysis; cost effectiveness; Decision making; Earth and Environmental Science; Ecology; Ecotoxicology; Efficiency; Environment; Environmental Management; Environmental Monitoring; Environmental protection; Environmental science; Farmers; Farming; Farms; Fisheries; income; Integrated approach; Laboratories; Land; Land area; Land use; Linear programming; Mathematical programming; Monitoring/Environmental Analysis; Nonpoint source pollution; Optimization; Pollutants; Pollution abatement; Pollution control; Pollution load; Pollution prevention; Prevention; Rivers; Rivers - chemistry; Sensitivity analysis; Soil erosion; Uncertainty; Water pollution; Water Pollution - analysis; Water Pollution - prevention & control; Water pollution prevention; Watershed management; Watersheds
• ISSN: 0167-6369; 1573-2959
• DOI: 10.1007/s10661-014-4104-z

Agricultural decision-making to control nonpoint source (NPS) water pollution may not be efficiently implemented, if there is no appropriate cost-benefit analysis on agricultural management practices. This paper presents an interval-fuzzy linear programming (IFLP) model to deal with the trade-off between agricultural revenue, NPS pollution control, and alternative practices through land adjustment for Wuchuan catchment, a typical agricultural area in Jiulong River watershed, Fujian Province of China. From the results, the lower combination of practice 1, practice 2, practice 3, and practice 7 with the land area of 12.6, 5.2, 145.2, and 85.3 hm², respectively, could reduce NPS pollution load by 10 %. The combination yields an income of 98,580 Chinese Yuan/a. If the pollution reduction is 15 %, the higher combination need practice 1, practice 2, practice 3, practice 5, and practice 7 with the land area of 54.4, 23.6, 18.0, 6.3, and 85.3 hm², respectively. The income of this combination is 915,170 Chinese Yuan/a. The sensitivity analysis of IFLP indicates that the cost-effective practices are ranked as follows: practice 7 > practice 2 > practice 1 > practice 5 > practice 3 > practice 6 > practice 4. In addition, the uncertainties in the agriculture NPS pollution control system could be effectively quantified by the IFLP model. Furthermore, to accomplish a reasonable and applicable project of land-use adjustment, decision-makers could also integrate above solutions with their own experience and other information.