Economics of salt-induced land degradation and restoration

Food security concerns and the scarcity of new productive land have put productivity enhancement of degraded lands back on the political agenda. In such a context, salt-affected lands are a valuable resource that cannot be neglected nor easily abandoned even with their lower crop yields, especially in areas where significant investments have already been made in irrigation and drainage infrastructure. A review of previous studies shows a very limited number of highly variable estimates of the costs of salt-induced land degradation combined with methodological and contextual differences. Simple extrapolation suggests that the global annual cost of salt-induced land degradation in irrigated areas could be US$ 27.3 billion because of lost crop production. We present selected case studies that highlight the potential for economic and environmental benefits of taking action to remediate salt-affected lands. The findings indicate that it can be cost-effective to invest in sustainable land management in countries confronting salt-induced land degradation. Such investments in effective remediation of salt-affected lands should form part of a broader strategy for food security and be defined in national action plans. This broader strategy is required to ensure the identification and effective removal of barriers to the adoption of sustainable land management, such as perverse subsidies. Whereas reversing salt-induced land degradation would require several years, interim salinity management strategies could provide a pathway for effective remediation and further showcase the importance of reversing land degradation and the rewards of investing in sustainable land management

Economics of salt induced land degradation and restoration, natural resources forum

Food security concerns and the scarcity of new productive land have put productivity enhancement of degraded lands back on the political agenda. In such a context, salt-affected lands are a valuable resource that cannot be neglected nor easily abandoned even with their lower crop yields, especially in areas where significant investments have already been made in irrigation and drainage infrastructure. A review of previous studies shows a very limited number of highly variable estimates of the costs of salt-induced land degradation combined with methodological and contextual differences. Simple extrapolation suggests that the global annual cost of salt-induced land degradation in irrigated areas could be US$ 27.3 billion because of lost crop production. We present selected case studies that highlight the potential for economic and environmental benefits of taking action to remediate salt-affected lands. The findings indicate that it can be cost-effective to invest in sustainable land management in countries confronting salt-induced land degradation. Such investments in effective remediation of salt-affected lands should form part of a broader strategy for food security and be defined in national action plans. This broader strategy is required to ensure the identification and effective removal of barriers to the adoption of sustainable land management, such as perverse subsidies. Whereas reversing salt-induced land degradation would require several years, interim salinity management strategies could provide a pathway for effective remediation and further showcase the importance of reversing land degradation and the rewards of investing in sustainable land management

A review of evidence on the environmental impact of Ireland’s Rural Environment Protection Scheme (REPS)

peer-reviewedSince its inception in 1994, there has been strong demand for evidence of the environmental effectiveness of the Rural Environment Protection Scheme (REPS), which paid farmers in the Republic of Ireland over €3 billion by 2010. A variety of research projects have been undertaken that investigate the environmental effects of REPS through an examination of either specific environmental measures or specific geographical areas. A review of available publications confirmed the absence of a comprehensive, national-scale study of the environmental impacts of REPS. Because of this, there is insufficient evidence with which to judge the environmental effectiveness of the national-scale implementation of the whole scheme. For some specific measures, however, sufficient evidence is available to inform an objective assessment in some cases, and to help learn how to improve environmental effectiveness in most cases. The majority of the REPS payments are now dedicated toward biodiversity objectives. Thus, biodiversity measures and options should be a priority for any national-scale environmental assessment of the scheme. Such a study would help identify the environmental benefits of REPS, the specific elements of REPS that are performing adequately, and those elements that are in need of improvement. Given the considerable overlap between REPS measures and options and those included in the 2010 Agri-Environment Options Scheme (AEOS), assessment of REPS measures could also be used to inform the likely environmental performance of the AEOS