IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v11y2021i2p116-d491262.html

Rethinking Environmental Flows for the Yellow River Estuary by Trading Off Crop Yield and Ecological Benefits

Author

Listed:
  • Aiping Pang

    (Key Laboratory for Water and Sediment Science of the Ministry of Education, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    Department of Public Management, Nanjing Academy of Administration, Nanjing 210046, China)

  • Fen Zhao

    (Key Laboratory for Water and Sediment Science of the Ministry of Education, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Chunhui Li

    (Key Laboratory for Water and Sediment Science of the Ministry of Education, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Yujun Yi

    (Key Laboratory for Water and Sediment Science of the Ministry of Education, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

Abstract

To solve the water use conflicts between agriculture and ecosystems in arid and semiarid areas, a multi-objective trade-off analysis method was applied to determine the environmental flows (e-flows) for the Yellow River Estuary, by considering the temporal and spatial discrepancies in water allocation. The results showed that during average years, a loss of 3.7 × 10 8 yuan was caused with every 1 × 10 8 m 3 of e-flows under the baseline scenario. The crop growth stages of April–July are sensitive periods for water requirements, and over 5000 yuan/ha production losses were caused by prioritizing e-flows during this time in dry years. The stages from July–October require more water by ecosystems than other stages, and the recommended e-flows during this time accounted for 57% of the e-flows during the total year. Under scenarios 1–3, which represent the short-term, medium-term and long-term scenarios, more water resources were supplied by underground water and water diversion projects; however, alleviating the water use contradiction remained difficult in dry years. During average years, e-flows between 148 and 168 × 10 8 m 3 are recommended to meet the ecological objectives of survival, reproduction and biological integrity of species for the Yellow River Estuary. The recommended e-flows in wet years could meet higher ecological objectives but still barely achieve the targets of sediment transport and ecosystem dynamic balance. In dry years, the economic losses may be beyond the acceptance of irrigation stakeholders if more water is allocated to improve e-flows. In this case, 71 × 10 8 yuan would be paid to them to compensate for their losses. This study proposes an e-flow recommendation framework that is economically and ecologically optimal in areas with irreconcilable water-use contradictions.

Suggested Citation

  • Aiping Pang & Fen Zhao & Chunhui Li & Yujun Yi, 2021. "Rethinking Environmental Flows for the Yellow River Estuary by Trading Off Crop Yield and Ecological Benefits," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-16, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:11:y:2021:i:2:p:116-:d:491262
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/11/2/116/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/11/2/116/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:iwt:jounls:h049329 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Jonas Jägermeyr & Amandine Pastor & Hester Biemans & Dieter Gerten, 2017. "Reconciling irrigated food production with environmental flows for Sustainable Development Goals implementation," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 8(1), pages 1-9, August.
    3. T. Sun & Z. Yang & B. Cui, 2008. "Critical Environmental Flows to Support Integrated Ecological Objectives for the Yellow River Estuary, China," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 22(8), pages 973-989, August.
    4. Daniel Crespo & Jose Albiac & Taher Kahil & Encarna Esteban & Safa Baccour, 2019. "Tradeoffs between Water Uses and Environmental Flows: A Hydroeconomic Analysis in the Ebro Basin," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 33(7), pages 2301-2317, May.
    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. Kumari, Ankita & Pathania, Tinesh, 2026. "Comprehensive review of optimization and surrogate models for agricultural water resources and reservoir water management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    2. Yin, X.A. & Yang, Z.F., 2013. "A reservoir operating model for directing water supply to humans, wetlands, and cones of depression," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 252(C), pages 114-120.
    3. Yang, Wei & Yang, Zhifeng & Qin, Yan, 2011. "An optimization approach for sustainable release of e-flows for lake restoration and preservation: Model development and a case study of Baiyangdian Lake, China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(14), pages 2448-2455.
    4. Siyu Yue & Huaien Li & Fengmin Song, 2023. "Temporal–Spatial Variations in the Economic Value Produced by Environmental Flows in a Water Shortage Area in Northwest China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-17, February.
    5. Jalilov, Shokhrukh-Mirzo & Watto, Muhammad Arif & Robertson, David E. & Wahid, Shahriar M. & Shokri, Ashkan, 2025. "Sensitivity of agricultural outcomes to water allocation scenarios under changing climate in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 317(C).
    6. Zhang, Cheng-Yao & Oki, Taikan, 2023. "Water pricing reform for sustainable water resources management in China’s agricultural sector," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 275(C).
    7. Florian Humpenöder & Alexander Popp & Carl-Friedrich Schleussner & Anton Orlov & Michael Gregory Windisch & Inga Menke & Julia Pongratz & Felix Havermann & Wim Thiery & Fei Luo & Patrick v. Jeetze & J, 2022. "Overcoming global inequality is critical for land-based mitigation in line with the Paris Agreement," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, December.
    8. Li, Zhibin & Feng, Bianbian & Wang, Wei & Yang, Xi & Wu, Pute & Zhuo, La, 2022. "Spatial and temporal sensitivity of water footprint assessment in crop production to modelling inputs and parameters," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 271(C).
    9. Yang, Wei, 2011. "A multi-objective optimization approach to allocate environmental flows to the artificially restored wetlands of China's Yellow River Delta," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(2), pages 261-267.
    10. repec:iwt:jounls:h049311 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Wang, Shunke & Chang, Jingjing & Xue, Jie & Sun, Huaiwei & Zeng, Fanjiang & Liu, Lei & Liu, Xin & Li, Xinxin, 2024. "Coupling behavioral economics and water management policies for agricultural land-use planning in basin irrigation districts: Agent-based socio-hydrological modeling and application," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 298(C).
    12. Qi, Peng & Li, Bo & Zhang, Dequan & Xu, Haipeng & Zhang, Guangxin, 2025. "Supply and demand of agricultural water resources under future saline-alkali land improvement," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 314(C).
    13. Michelle Scobie, 2020. "International aid, trade and investment and access and allocation," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 239-254, June.
    14. Rosa, Lorenzo & Sanchez, Daniel L. & Realmonte, Giulia & Baldocchi, Dennis & D'Odorico, Paolo, 2021. "The water footprint of carbon capture and storage technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    15. Fernández, J.E. & Alcon, F. & Diaz-Espejo, A. & Hernandez-Santana, V. & Cuevas, M.V., 2020. "Water use indicators and economic analysis for on-farm irrigation decision: A case study of a super high density olive tree orchard," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).
    16. Melissa Nogueira Sondermann & Rodrigo Proença Oliveira, 2021. "A Shared Vision on the Transboundary Water Management Challenges of the Tagus River Basin," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 35(13), pages 4647-4664, October.
    17. Han, Feng & Zheng, Yi & Zhang, Ling & Xiong, Rui & Hu, Zhaoping & Tian, Yong & Li, Xin, 2023. "Simulating drip irrigation in large-scale and high-resolution ecohydrological models: From emitters to the basin," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 289(C).
    18. Wei Yang & Zhifeng Yang, 2010. "An Interactive Fuzzy Satisfying Approach for Sustainable Water Management in the Yellow River Delta, China," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(7), pages 1273-1284, May.
    19. Yifru, Bisrat Ayalew & Lee, Seoro & Bak, Sangjoon & Bae, Joo Hyun & Shin, Hyungjin & Lim, Kyoung Jae, 2024. "Estimating exploitable groundwater for agricultural use under environmental flow constraints using an integrated SWAT-MODFLOW model," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 303(C).
    20. Afsaneh Kaghazchi & Seied Mehdy Hashemy Shahdany & Alireza Firoozfar, 2022. "Prioritization of agricultural water distribution operating systems based on the sustainable development indicators," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 23-40, February.
    21. Nixon Murathi Kiratu & Eefje Aarnoudse & Martin Petrick, 2025. "Analyzing the impact of irrigation on dietary diversity: a comparison between farmer-led and public irrigation in Kenya," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 17(2), pages 493-514, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jagris:v:11:y:2021:i:2:p:116-:d:491262. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.