Spain is repeatedly facing severe droughts, and water scarcity is a top concern for more than half
of the country. In those territories 2/3 of water is consumed in agriculture and many rivers and
groundwater bodies are overexploited, leading both to wetland desiccation, and to biodiversity
and economic losses, up to the point of putting at risk water supply for the population. Such a
context seems ideal for prioritizing more efficient water use and most of the public river basin
management plans provide investments on this topic. As a consequence, in the past decade,
more than 2.900 M€ - co-financed by the EU EARDF primarily - have been invested in approx.
1.470.000 hectares, with the “officially stated” aim of producing savings up to 1.813 hm 3/year.
Although those investments have not been properly evaluated, further ones are planned under
the 2014-2020 EU funding framework.
Over the past 10 years, WWF Spain has tried to understand better the role of irrigation
modernization projects in addressing water scarcity and resource efficiency.
While assessing if the modernization of irrigation has saved water, WWF has only found lack of
transparency on what really happens on the ground and on how much water has been saved
within the water authorities. WWF has informed the Spanish Ombudsman several times on this
matter and it repeatedly has given the reason to the organization recalling this fact as “abusive
obscurantism”. As a result, WWF decided to develop its own analysis of the situation with the
support of experts from the University of Zaragoza (Spain). In this analysis1, WWF applied the
knowledge acquired over more than ten years in this field, the deep assessment of eight case
studiesand the review of a vast sum of scientific references on this matter, leading to the
conclusion that extraordinarily bad governance practices had occurred. In particular, the
following should be highlighted:

None of the screened projects has effectively saved water; whilst they increased water
consumption between +4% and +42% compared with previous levels.

In almost all cases (6), the modernization has led to agricultural intensification,
including crop changes, an increase of the irrigated area or implementation of double
harvests.

No action has been reported by the water authorities in order to reduce water rights, in
accordance to the expected savings. There is one project where water rights were even
increased.

Even though the official investment’s purpose was saving water, a significant number of
projects target on other vested purposes instead, such as new irrigation surfaces, leisure
and golfing areas, or housing.

Several projects cover illegally established areas, providing water to irrigators that had
no previously established rights.
The European Court of Auditors has also identified part of these conclusions in its special report
number 4/0214 Integration f EU water policy objectives with the CAP: a partial success 2.
Modernization of irrigation also increases significantly energy consumption, leading to
substantially higher costs for farmers, and acting against the EU climate change, mitigation and
adaptation strategies. Within water-stressed river basins, the intensified irrigation is usually less
resilient to droughts and climate change, and thus a bad practice for adaptation to climate
change. Although the “EU money” in the short term provides benefits for infrastructure
companies and higher sales for energy providers, the mid- and long-term effects on the
environment, economy and farmers have never been assessed realistically.
The analysis carried out has allowed WWF to identify seven key facts to be improved. These are
seven lessons derived from the errors committed that should never be repeated in the future:
Improve transparency and information on water
The lack of transparency and data impedes verifying if real water savings have occurred
with the modernization of irrigation, and even more, it impedes assuring that these
actions have contributed to achieving the Water Framework Directive (WFD) objectives.
Use adequately the concept of “water saving”
When assessing the water savings of a modernization of irrigation project, it is
necessary to consider water consumption at the river basin level. In addition, it is
necessary to consider what is abstracted from the water body, the water consumption at
the crop field and the water that returns to the water bodies (at a river basin scale), once
it has gone through the crop fields. Even projects were there is a reduction in the
abstraction from a reservoir, for example, the result is often that less water is available
in the basin.
Avoid increasing water consumption at the river basin level
The modernization of irrigation has implied higher water consumption at the filed level
and less water resources available at the river basin level. This results from the
reduction of the water that returns to the water bodies, due to the improvements in
efficiency of irrigation techniques, increases in the irrigated surface or changes to other
crops with higher water demands.
Minimize the increase of energy consumption
The modernization of irrigation has led to significant increases of energy consumption
at the crop plot level, in a context of higher prices for electricity, lower sell prices for
agricultural products and climate change.
Avoid public funding of illegal exploitations
The modernization of illegal exploitations has led to account as water savings reductions
in water consumption that could have been reached simply by applying the law and
closing illegal abstractions instead. This lack of governance from water administrators
also creates a dangerous precedent that stimulates illegal use of water and soil for
irrigated agriculture.
Mandatory water permits review
The fact that in the majority of modernization projects, no review of the water permits
occurred, has led to further intensification of water use at the crop field level and has
impede potential water savings to be allocated to other social water uses or to contribute
to the good status of rivers, wetlands and aquifers.
Ensure cost recovery
Not applying the cost recovery principle for water has reduced the private investments
in water saving and has led to public investments in modernization of irrigation projects
that do not need to ensure water savings.
This year the Rural Development Programs (RDPs) should be approved, and they are the main
funding source for modernization of irrigation projects. For accessing this funding, there are
some environmental limitations to comply with – within others, a minimum of water savings
estimated – in accordance with article 46 of the EU EARDF regulation. Even though these
limitations are an improvement comparedwith the previous legislation, they are clearly
insufficient to ensure that modernization actions contribute to comply with WFD objectives. In
addition, River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs) for the period 2015-2021 should be approved
before December 2015. These RBMPs are the frame were both the modernization projects and
the water availability should be environmentally justified for new irrigation areas.
The modernization of irrigation projects are being set out as key measures of the RBMPs and the
RDPs, using an environmental justification that will never become a reality due to the lack of
strict conditions for the projects, as explained above. In addition, there are still no assessments
on the modernization projects already put in place and no learned lessons are being considered.
WWF believes that modernization of irrigation can be carried out in a different way and society
should entail that this is reflected in the new RBMPs and RDPs. Public funding must benefit the
society as a whole and not only some interested sectors.
WWF calls for significant changes in the planning, design, implementation and evaluation
phases of irrigation modernization projects before any further funding might be invested. These
changes start with strict limitations and follow-up of the modernization projects, in order to
assure that they really save water and that these resources are allocated for the achieving of good
status of rivers, wetlands and aquifers as stated in the WFD.
All authorities with competences have some sort of responsibilities in this process. There are
specific recommendations for:

The European Commission, to ask Spain to develop an integrated planning of irrigation,
starting with an adequate definition of the status of water bodies and the future trends
on this status, as well as to evaluate the impacts of the modernization of irrigation
projects and new irrigated areas foreseen. It must ensure that Spain complies with the
environmental objectives of the EU, especially in relation with water and climate.

Water authorities, to comply with their obligations of closing illegal water abstractions,
to ensure full cost recovery of water (in accordance with article 9 of the WFD). Also, to
avoid including the modernization of irrigation projects in the Programs of Measures
(PoMs) of the new RBMPs neither as basic, complementary or “other” measures, if they
do not fulfil the conditions to contribute to the Good Status of water bodies, as proposed
by WWF. This is in line with what the COM has asked Spain in its Communication of
March 9, 2015.

The authorities responsible of the Rural Development and Agriculture planning, to
ensure coordination with water authorities in order to integrate both water planning
and rural development for achieving a more sustainable development model of rural
areas. In addition, they must strictly establish the limitations needed in the
modernization to contribute to the WFD objectives and they must ensure its compliance
and control, including previous assessment of the works executed up to this day. They
must also assure public participation of all stakeholders in the design, the
implementation and follow-up of these policies.

The authorities responsible for managing of the European funds (Ministry of Economy
and Ministry of Public Administration) to ensure the compliance of exante conditioning,
asking other competent authorities to recover the full cost of water (also required by the
WFD) for irrigation investments. In addition, they must facilitate the required public
participation process in the European Funds planning.
To the absence of water savings by the modernization of irrigation projects, the threat of new
irrigation areas foreseen up to 2027 must be added. More than 700.000 new hectares would
lead to a new infringement of the WFD objectives, putting in risk freshwater ecosystems and
their capacity of providing services for society, such as water allocation to urban areas or flood
control.
WWF considers that the solution to all of the fails detected up to now in the modernization of
irrigation should go far beyond the improvement of the projects. The solution starts with
reconsidering the rural development model, but also with appropriately using the opportunity
that this new funding cycle provides to promote a green economy that ensures the future of our
ecosystems and rural areas.
1- Further information can be found on the report developed by WWF on the Modernization of irrigation in
Spain, in the following link: http://awsassets.wwf.es/downloads/modernizacion_regadios.pdf
2 The special report Nº 4/2014 of the European Court of Auditors can be downloaded in the following link:
http://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR14_04/SR14_04_EN.pdf
More information:
Eva Hernández
Head of Freshwater and Agriculture Programme
WWF Spain
[email protected]