IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/unadrs/313230.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

IFAD Research Series Issues 66 - Can perceptions of reduction in physical water availability affect irrigation behaviour? Evidence from Jordan

Author

Listed:
  • Kafle, Kashi
  • Balasubramanya, Soumya

Abstract

Frequent droughts and rapidly depleting groundwater reserves have deepened the water scarcity crisis in Jordan. Even though most farms use ‘water-saving’ technologies, groundwater depletion continues at an alarming rate. We investigate how perceptions of physical water availability in the past are related to farmers’ current irrigation behaviour – frequency of irrigation and methods used in determining irrigation need. Using primary data from a survey of 414 commercial farms in Mafraq and Azraq governorates, we find that respondents who perceived reduction in physical water availability and faced agricultural losses in the past irrigated more frequently and were more likely to use self-judgement in determining irrigation need. These relationships were more pronounced for smaller farms, farms with sandy soil, mono-cropping farms and farms where the owner was the manager. These effects were lower for farms that preferred internet-based and in-person approaches for receiving irrigation advice. In addition, while the frequency of irrigation was higher among stone-fruit farms, the probability of using self-judgement in determining irrigation need was higher in olive farms and vegetable farms. We argue that farmers’ irrigation behaviour must be considered for groundwater management policy and planning in Jordan.

Suggested Citation

  • Kafle, Kashi & Balasubramanya, Soumya, 2021. "IFAD Research Series Issues 66 - Can perceptions of reduction in physical water availability affect irrigation behaviour? Evidence from Jordan," IFAD Research Series 313230, International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:unadrs:313230
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.313230
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/313230/files/RS66.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.313230?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pfeiffer, Lisa & Lin, C.-Y. Cynthia, 2014. "Does efficient irrigation technology lead to reduced groundwater extraction? Empirical evidence," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 189-208.
    2. Daniel A. Brent & Corey Lott & Michael Taylor & Joseph Cook & Kim Rollins & Shawn Stoddard, 2017. "Are Normative Appeals Moral Taxes? Evidence from a Field Experiment on Water Conservation," Departmental Working Papers 2017-07, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    3. Brent, Daniel A. & Ward, Michael B., 2019. "Price perceptions in water demand," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    4. Sylvain Chabé-Ferret & Philippe Le Coent & Arnaud Reynaud & Julie Subervie & Daniel Lepercq, 2019. "Can we nudge farmers into saving water? Evidence from a randomised experiment," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 393-416.
    5. Mondaca-Duarte, F.D. & van Mourik, S. & Balendonck, J. & Voogt, W. & Heinen, M. & van Henten, E.J., 2020. "Irrigation, crop stress and drainage reduction under uncertainty: A scenario study," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    6. Louis Sears & Joseph Caparelli & Clouse Lee & Devon Pan & Gillian Strandberg & Linh Vuu & C. -Y. Cynthia Lin Lawell, 2018. "Jevons’ Paradox and Efficient Irrigation Technology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-12, May.
    7. Alauddin, Mohammad & Sarker, Md Abdur Rashid, 2014. "Climate change and farm-level adaptation decisions and strategies in drought-prone and groundwater-depleted areas of Bangladesh: an empirical investigation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 204-213.
    8. Sylvain Chabé-Ferret & Philippe Le Coent & Arnaud Reynaud & Julie Subervie & Daniel Lepercq, 2019. "Can we nudge farmers into saving water? Evidence from a randomised experiment," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 46(3), pages 393-416.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kafle, Kashi & Balasubramanya, Soumya, 2021. "Can Perceptions of Reduction in Physical Water Availability Affect Irrigation Behaviors? Evidence from Jordan," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315121, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Massfeller, Anna & Meraner, Manuela & Hüttel, Silke & Uehleke, Reinhard, 2021. "Farmers’ acceptance of results-based agri-environmental schemes – insights from a case study in North Rhine-Westphalia," 61st Annual Conference, Berlin, Germany, September 22-24, 2021 317066, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    3. Wang, Yanyun & Long, Aihua & Xiang, Liyun & Deng, Xiaoya & Zhang, Pei & Hai, Yang & Wang, Jie & Li, Yang, 2020. "The verification of Jevons’ paradox of agricultural Water conservation in Tianshan District of China based on Water footprint," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 239(C).
    4. Kuhfuss, Laure & Préget, Raphaële & Thoyer, Sophie & de Vries, Frans P. & Hanley, Nick, 2022. "Enhancing spatial coordination in payment for ecosystem services schemes with non-pecuniary preferences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    5. Cai, Wenjuan & Jiang, Xiaohui & Sun, Haotian & Lei, Yuxin & Nie, Tong & Li, Lichan, 2023. "Spatial scale effect of irrigation efficiency paradox based on water accounting framework in Heihe River Basin, Northwest China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 277(C).
    6. Fei, Rilong & Xie, Mengyuan & Wei, Xin & Ma, Ding, 2021. "Has the water rights system reform restrained the water rebound effect? Empirical analysis from China's agricultural sector," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    7. Hang Xu & Rui Yang & Jianfeng Song, 2021. "Agricultural Water Use Efficiency and Rebound Effect: A Study for China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(13), pages 1-16, July.
    8. Michels, Marius & Luo, Hao & Weller von Ahlefeld, Paul Johann & Mußhoff, Oliver, 2023. "Compliance with pre-harvest interval rules in apple production—A comparative analysis of green nudges among fruit growers and agricultural students in Germany," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    9. Philippe Coent, 2023. "Payment for environmental services related to aquifers: a review of specific issues and existing programmes," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 104(3), pages 273-310, December.
    10. David Font Vivanco & Jaume Freire‐González & Ray Galvin & Tilman Santarius & Hans Jakob Walnum & Tamar Makov & Serenella Sala, 2022. "Rebound effect and sustainability science: A review," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(4), pages 1543-1563, August.
    11. Massfeller, Anna & Meraner, Manuela & Hüttel, Silke & Uehleke, Reinhard, 2022. "Farmers' acceptance of results-based agri-environmental schemes: A German perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    12. Dimitri Dubois & Stefano Farolfi & Phu Nguyen-Van & Juliette Rouchier, 2020. "Contrasting effects of information sharing on common-pool resource extraction behavior: Experimental findings," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-20, October.
    13. R. Aaron Hrozencik & Jordan F. Suter & Paul J. Ferraro & Nathan Hendricks, 2024. "Social comparisons and groundwater use: Evidence from Colorado and Kansas," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 106(2), pages 946-966, March.
    14. Peter Howley & Neel Ocean, 2022. "Can nudging only get you so far? Testing for nudge combination effects," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(5), pages 1086-1112.
    15. Daniele Curzi & Sylvain Chabé‐Ferret & Salvatore Di Falco & Laure Kuhfuss & Marianne Lefebvre & Alan Matthews, 2022. "Using Experiments to Design and Evaluate the CAP: Insights from an Expert Panel," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 21(2), pages 28-34, August.
    16. María Ángeles García-Valiñas & Sara Suárez-Fernández, 2022. "Are Economic Tools Useful to Manage Residential Water Demand? A Review of Old Issues and Emerging Topics," Post-Print hal-04067487, HAL.
    17. Benjamin Ouvrard & Raphaële Préget & Arnaud Reynaud & Laetitia Tuffery, 2020. "Nudging and Subsidizing Farmers to Foster Smart Water Meter Adoption," Working Papers hal-02958784, HAL.
    18. Benjamin Ouvrard & Arnaud Reynaud & Stéphane Cezera & Alban Thomas & Dishant Jojit James & Murudaiah Shivamurthy, 2023. "Distributive Justice in the Field: How do Indian Farmers Share Water? ," Working Papers hal-04150233, HAL.
    19. Yoshitaka Miyake & Shota Kimoto & Yuta Uchiyama & Ryo Kohsaka, 2022. "Income Change and Inter-Farmer Relations through Conservation Agriculture in Ishikawa Prefecture, Japan: Empirical Analysis of Economic and Behavioral Factors," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, February.
    20. Whittemore, Donald O. & Butler, James J. & Bohling, Geoffrey C. & Wilson, Blake B., 2023. "Are we saving water? Simple methods for assessing the effectiveness of groundwater conservation measures," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 287(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness; Agricultural and Food Policy; Food Security and Poverty;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:unadrs:313230. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifaunit.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.