Abstract: The 21st century revival of large-scale water resources development projects makes it important to keep assessing their impacts – preferably from an interdisciplinary perspective – in order to not repeat past mistakes and explore whether they could improve livelihood conditions for rural communities. In this study, costs and benefits of the World Bank-funded Ribb Irrigation and Drainage Project (RIDP) were investigated using a unique systems approach. The impact for farmers with different initial farming systems (rainfed – residual moisture – irrigated) was studied using field observations, document analyses, remote sensing, agronomic data and semi-structured interviews (n = 165). Data on project-induced changes to land and water availability, cropping patterns, farming systems and farm-level economics were collected. The results show that dam and dyke construction has reduced flooding, which has resulted in declining rice productivity ( – 42%) and concomitant shifts to lower value cropping systems. Results also reveal that the land redistribution has caused widespread livelihood deterioration as households had to give up 25% of their farmland and the communal grazing land was fully converted into farmland. Due to top-down implementation, nontransparent communication, delayed construction and lagging financial compensation, social resistance has appeared in the command area, impeding the construction works. In addition to these problems, if no rapid change to higher value crops can be realized, 20.5% of the farmers (those who already irrigate) will experience a loss of livelihood, 64.1% of the farmers (those with rainfed and residual moisture cultivation) will be on the verge of livelihood deterioration and only 13.5% of the farmers (those with solely rainfed cultivation) will enjoy RIDP-induced improved livelihoods. The fate of this project stresses the importance of investigating initial farming systems, exploring worthy project alternatives, improving participation, communication and benefit-sharing and strengthening the institutional capacity of implementing authorities.

Abstract: A lot of attention in the debate on the 2014-2020 programming period of the EU CAP and rural development policy revolves around the policy's contribution to enhancing resource use efficiency, decreasing environmental impact, restoring ecosystems and how to ensure more efficient and effective agrienvironmental measures (AEMs). Nevertheless, studies that simultaneously address multiple measures with multiple environmental objectives and targets are underrepresented in the scientific literature. The objectives of the present article are (i) to present an integrated tool-kit for AEM design resulting from the combination of farm modelling with the Sustainable Value Approach (SVA), and (ii) to evaluate the potential of the tool-kit to support AEM design through an application to estimate cost-effective organic agriculture payments for the dairy sector in Mugello, northern Tuscany. Sustainability assessment of organic and conventional farming systems (OFS and CFS, respectively.) under the 2007-2013 EU CAP support schemes and a no EU support scenario show better OFS performances regarding nitrogen leaching (-52% and -47% under the current CAP and the no EU support scenarios, respectively), soil erosion (-24% and -34%), potential pesticide risks (-100%), biodiversity (+13% and +30%). Income foregone for the production of environmental benefits from organic agriculture under a no EU support scenario is equal to 210 Euro/ha. Sustainable value calculations combined with modelling results indicate soil erosion and nitrogen leaching as the environmental processes to be addressed with specific policy measures to further increase the efficiency of organic farming. A new organic agriculture support scheme designed based on such indications further increases the OFS SV and almost closes the GAP with a benchmark farm of the area, featured with ideal performances in terms of environmental and economic indicators. The payment scheme we designed with the support of the integrated tool-kit shows to be more cost-effective and efficient of current AEMs. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Abstract: In this paper, we evaluate the potential of life cycle assessment (LCA) to support environmental decision making at commercial dairy farms. To achieve this, we follow a four-step method that allows converting environmental assessment results using LCA into case-specific advice for farmers. This is illustrated in a case-study involving 20 specialized Flemish dairy farms. Calculated LCA indicators are normalized into scores between 0 and 100, whereby a score of 100 is assumed optimal, to allow for a mutual comparison of indicators for different environmental impact categories. Next, major farm and management characteristics affecting environmental performance are identified using multiple regression and correlation analyses. Finally, comparing specific farm and management characteristics with those of best performing farms identifies farm-specific optimization strategies. We conclude that this approach complies with most of the identified critical success factors for the successful implementation of LCA as a decision support system for farmers. Key aspects herein are (i) the flexibility and accessibility of the model, (ii) the use of readily available farm data, (iii) farm advisors being intended model users, (iv) the identification of key farm and management characteristics affecting environmental performance and (v) the organization of discussion sessions involving farmers and farm advisors. However, attention should be paid (i) to provide sufficient training and guidance for farm advisors on the use of the applied LCA model and the interpretation of results, (ii) to evaluate the correctness of the used data and (iii) to keep the model up-to-date according to new scientific insights and knowledge concerning LCA methodology. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.