Search

The literature identifies cultural values and beliefs as key drivers of climate change risk perception, but evidence is lacking about how media narratives and cultural values influence preferences for adapting to environmental consequences of climate change, including groundwater shortage. We elicited groundwater preferences using a choice experiment survey involving outcomes of the Mississippi River Valley Alluvial Aquifer. We randomly assigned respondents to an individualistic cultural narrative about climate change to test for framing effects predicted by culturally congruent and incongruent messaging. Results suggest that culturally incongruent messaging (i.e., to non-individualists) emboldens opposition and makes promoted groundwater policies less tractable. This is instructive to policy makers that identifying different stakeholders and avoiding incongruent messages about climate change could improve the effectiveness of collaborative water governance., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Two approaches to augment irrigation water supply are managed aquifer recharge (MAR) and on‐farm reservoirs with tail‐water recovery (OFS‐TWR). We explore the joint use of MAR and OFS‐TWR to sustain groundwater and agricultural income with climate variability by farmer risk preference. We find that MAR use declines slightly with greater risk aversion and declines rapidly with MAR cost. The use of OFS‐TWR increases with risk aversion. The use of MAR increases income by a larger percentage for risk‐neutral than very risk‐averse producers. Across risk aversion degree, the use of MAR leads to a percentage increase in income that is double the percentage increase in the standard deviation of income (i.e., income risk). At a low cost of MAR, there is little difference in MAR use between a very risk‐averse and a risk‐neutral producer across scenarios of crop profit margin and the initial depth to water. Large differences in OFS‐TWR use between a very risk‐averse and a risk‐neutral producer occur when there are relatively high crop profit margin, low initial water depth, or a low discount rate. Key Points: Optimal use managed aquifer recharge and on‐farm reservoirs with tail‐water recovery were computed in a stochastic programming modelThe results show managed aquifer recharge use is most sensitive to cost while surface reservoirs are sensitive to climate uncertaintyManaged aquifer recharge is similar for risk neutral and risk averse farmers when the cost of managed aquifer recharge is low [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Valuation of water in an aquifer depends on reliable information about the hydrologic conditions of an aquifer. Regions of depression emerge in an aquifer because groundwater cannot seamlessly flow between shallow and deep aquifer locations, and our analysis shows that the degree of lateral flow influences the value of the water in the aquifer. The assumption that groundwater declines uniformly over a landscape, a bathtub aquifer, leads to an underestimate of the value of a unit of water in an aquifer but an overestimate of the wealth that the aquifer represents. For the alluvial aquifer in Arkansas, USA, the average accounting price of water in an aquifer is almost 40% higher if there is no lateral flow, but the groundwater wealth is 10% lower. The value of an aquifer with the limited lateral flow is less sensitive to changes in agricultural markets, the discount rate, or the natural recharge of the aquifer. Recommendations for Resource Managers Average value of water in an aquifer with limited lateral flows is nearly 40% higher than the value of an aquifer with high lateral flows.Groundwater wealth weights the accounting prices of water in the aquifer by the amount water underneath each site. As lateral flows decline, the wealth of the aquifer rises and then falls because the distribution of accounting prices change so most water is beneath sites with lower accounting prices.The average value of water in an aquifer is less sensitive to changes in hydro‐economic model parameters such as the natural recharge or discount rate when the lateral flows are less. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Groundwater overdraft has consequences in the long-run for the economic and ecological sustainability of an agricultural landscape. In response to aquifer depletion, we examine the tradeoff of non-market ecosystem service benefits (e.g., groundwater supply, greenhouse gases, and surface water quality) and market returns from crops in the Lower Mississippi River Delta. Farmers may turn to conjunctive water management using on-farm reservoirs and tail water recovery when groundwater pumping becomes expensive. We use separate objectives for market returns from crops and the non-market benefits of ecosystem services to study whether on-farm reservoirs are built with optimal cropping and irrigation choices. The use of reservoirs enables the landscape to attain up to 10% higher market returns for a given level of all non-market ecosystem service benefits by lowering the costs of irrigation, increasing groundwater levels, and reducing fuel combustion and associated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from groundwater pumping. A landscape that internalizes both non-market ecosystem service benefits and market value from crops has 30% greater social value than a landscape where only market returns or only non-market value is optimized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]