Water Conservation with Managed Aquifer Recharge under Increased Drought Risk

Economic analysis of managed aquifer recharge (MAR) typically focuses on identifying the quantity of water to add cost-effectively to natural rates of recharge. However, to the extent that MAR is successful, higher groundwater levels or at least slower depletion are likely to influence crop choice a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Environmental management (New York) 2020-10, Vol.66 (4), p.664-682
Main Authors: Tran, Dat Q., Kovacs, Kent, Wallander, Steve
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aquatic Pollution
Arkansas
Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution
Conservation of Water Resources
Droughts
Earth and Environmental Science
Ecology
Environment
Environmental Management
Forestry Management
Groundwater
Nature Conservation
Waste Water Technology
Water Management
Water Pollution Control
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Economic analysis of managed aquifer recharge (MAR) typically focuses on identifying the quantity of water to add cost-effectively to natural rates of recharge. However, to the extent that MAR is successful, higher groundwater levels or at least slower depletion are likely to influence crop choice and groundwater pumping dynamics. Using a landscape-level model, we maximize farm net returns taking into account MAR and on-farm surface reservoir storage, crop choice, and the impacts of drought on groundwater use in Eastern Arkansas, USA, over 120 years. We find that drought frequency (risk) has a stronger influence on groundwater pumping and MAR use compared with drought severity. There is evidence of a substantial slippage, the percentage of the increase in groundwater use with versus without MAR divided by the MAR use, under a range of MAR cost and drought scenarios. Total slippage ranges from about 32 to 75% of total MAR water, indicating that only 68–25% of the MAR water raises groundwater levels. Even if the costs of MAR are relatively high and slippage is present, the total net returns to farms in this region are higher, and the variability in those returns are less with MAR.
ISSN:0364-152X
1432-1009
DOI:10.1007/s00267-020-01329-x