Economics Evaluation Methods of Soil and Water Conservation Techniques – Technical Guideline Note

cg.contactB.Dhehibi@cgiar.orgen_US
cg.contributor.centerInternational Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas - ICARDAen_US
cg.contributor.centerNational Agricultural Research Institute of Tunisia - INRATen_US
cg.contributor.centerNational Research Institute of Rural Engineering, Water and Forest - INRGREFen_US
cg.contributor.centerMinistry of Agriculture, Water Resources and Fisheries, Directorate General of Planning and Conservation of Agricultural Land - MARHP - DGACTAen_US
cg.contributor.centerThe Institution of Research and Higher Agricultural Education - IRESAen_US
cg.contributor.funderDeutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit - GIZen_US
cg.contributor.projectSoil Protection and Rehabilitation of Degraded Soil for Food Securityen_US
cg.contributor.project-lead-instituteInternational Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas - ICARDAen_US
cg.coverage.countryTNen_US
cg.coverage.end-date2023-03-31en_US
cg.coverage.regionNorthern Africaen_US
cg.coverage.start-date2020-12-10en_US
cg.creator.idDhehibi, Boubaker: 0000-0003-3854-6669en_US
cg.creator.idFrija, Aymen: 0000-0001-8379-9054en_US
cg.subject.agrovocgoal 1 no povertyen_US
cg.subject.agrovocgoal 2 zero hungeren_US
cg.subject.agrovocgoal 13 climate actionen_US
cg.subject.agrovocgoal 17 partnerships for the goalsen_US
cg.subject.agrovocgoal 15 life on landen_US
cg.subject.agrovocgoal 6 clean water and sanitationen_US
cg.subject.agrovocgoal 11 sustainable cities and communitiesen_US
cg.subject.impactAreaClimate adaptation and mitigationen_US
cg.subject.impactAreaPoverty reduction, livelihoods and jobsen_US
cg.subject.impactAreaEnvironmental health and biodiversityen_US
cg.subject.sdgSDG 1 - No povertyen_US
cg.subject.sdgSDG 2 - Zero hungeren_US
cg.subject.sdgSDG 3 - Good health and well-beingen_US
cg.subject.sdgSDG 4 - Quality educationen_US
cg.subject.sdgSDG 5 - Gender equalityen_US
cg.subject.sdgSDG 6 - Clean water and sanitationen_US
cg.subject.sdgSDG 7 - Affordable and clean energyen_US
cg.subject.sdgSDG 8 - Decent work and economic growthen_US
cg.subject.sdgSDG 9 - Industry, innovation and infrastructureen_US
cg.subject.sdgSDG 10 - Reduced inequalitiesen_US
cg.subject.sdgSDG 11 - Sustainable cities and communitiesen_US
cg.subject.sdgSDG 12 - Responsible consumption and productionen_US
cg.subject.sdgSDG 13 - Climate actionen_US
cg.subject.sdgSDG 15 - Life on landen_US
cg.subject.sdgSDG 17 - Partnerships for the goalsen_US
dc.contributorFrija, Aymenen_US
dc.contributorSouissi, Asmaen_US
dc.creatorDhehibi, Boubakeren_US
dc.date.accessioned2023-01-11T16:45:34Z
dc.date.available2023-01-11T16:45:34Z
dc.description.abstractSoil and water are basic for any agricultural production system. They are available under a huge pressure due to the increasing population and climate changes (Kumawat et al., 2020). Among the various degradation processes, soil erosion contributes seriously to the deterioration of soil and water resources. Soil erosion has also hampered agricultural productivity and economic growth in many regions and countries (Hengsdijk et al., 2005; Balana et al., 2010). Food production reduction in a specific country or region due to natural resources degradation, may not have a significant effect on food supply because of the potential substitution from other producing areas. However, the effect could be dramatic to food security of large number of people and to local economic activity (Scherr & Yadav, 1996). Practices related to soil and water conservation (SWC) enhance crop production, food security and household income (Adgo et al., 2013). Therefore, investments are promoting SWC technologies for improving agricultural productivity, household food security and rural livelihoods. Different SWC technologies have been encouraged among farmers to control erosion for example. However, investments by farmers in SWC are influenced by the ecological, economic, and social impacts of the SWC technologies (Huang et al.,2018). In Tunisia, since antiquity, inhabitants of arid and semi-arid regions have constructed water harvesting systems to cope with limited water supply. Impoundments were built to capture surface run-off. These structures are known to reduce soil erosion (Oweis et al., 2004). The Tunisian government has invested into soil and water conservation practices through institutional and legislative measures. A national strategy for soil and water conservation and agricultural development was launched since 1990. More than 600 000 hectares received conservation measures (Abouabdillah et al., 2014). The rapid expansion of soil and water conservation practices has raised questions concerning their economic and environmental impacts. The economic impact of SWC practices is mostly evaluated in monetary terms (cost-benefit analysis) (Bizoza and Graaff, 2012; Teshome et al., 2013). However, social, and ecological impacts as well as the interactions between different impacts are not easily quantified in monetary values (Tenge, 2005). Many evaluation methods of SWC measures are used to quantify the monetary and non-monetary value of SWC practices to enhance the decision-making process. Farmers' goals and motivations for investing in different SWC alternatives are different from those of researchers and extension staff, as they have other objectives besides reducing soil loss and maximizing benefits. These objectives may be conflicting, so no SWC measure can provide the best outcome for all farmers (Tenge, 2005). The objective of this work is to provide a technical guide on the different methods of economic evaluation of soil and water conservation practices for an efficient scaling up of SWC technologies, under different agroecosystems in Tunisia. This technical guideline is fulfilled in the framework of the SWC @Scale project that has concentrated its efforts and investments in two different sites in Tunisia (Northwest, Siliana, and Central west, Kairouan).en_US
dc.formatPDFen_US
dc.identifierhttps://mel.cgiar.org/reporting/downloadmelspace/hash/926dda24e22c2f2e4482cda1632b00c6/v/51687785145fafd946af1df0d74756b4en_US
dc.identifier.citationBoubaker Dhehibi, Aymen Frija, Asma Souissi. (7/11/2022). Economics Evaluation Methods of Soil and Water Conservation Techniques – Technical Guideline Note[Guideline]. Beirut, Lebanon: International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA).en_US
dc.identifier.statusOpen accessen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11766/67921
dc.languageenen_US
dc.publisherInternational Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA)en_US
dc.rightsCC-BY-SA-4.0en_US
dc.subjectclimate adaptation and mitigationen_US
dc.subjectenvironmental health and biodiversityen_US
dc.subjectpoverty reduction, livelihoods and jobsen_US
dc.titleEconomics Evaluation Methods of Soil and Water Conservation Techniques – Technical Guideline Noteen_US
dc.typeToolen_US
dcterms.available2022-11-07en_US
mel.funder.grant#Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit - GIZ :81265096en_US
mel.project.openhttps://mel.cgiar.org/projects/icardaprosolen_US

Files