ARTICLE IN PRESS
Land Use Policy 22 (2005) 103–114
Policy impact on desertification:
stakeholders’ perceptions in southeast Spain
Juan J. Oñate*, Begoña Peco
!
Department of Ecology, Universidad Autonoma
de Madrid, 28049-Madrid, Spain
Received 10 March 2003; received in revised form 9 January 2004; accepted 14 January 2004
Abstract
Two related land use change dynamics characterise the Guadalent!ın basin (southeast Spain) as one of the most severe cases of
desertification in Europe: (1) expansion of highly productive irrigated agriculture in the valley, and (2) intense contemporary
changes in the surrounding impoverished dry lands. On the basis of documented information, we trace the effects of past policies on
these dynamics, illustrating such role with the results of 25 in-depth interviews on the issue with relevant stakeholders in the area. In
line with relevant related research in other parts of the Mediterranean, our conclusion is that implemented policies have
overemphasised the economic dimensions of development at the expense of environmental sustainability, specifically targeted policy
instruments having failed to address the issue of desertification. Given this experience, it is estimated that only strict environmental
policy enforcement together with people education could bring the situation under control.
r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Desertification; Policy impacts; Stakeholders; Agriculture; Irrigation; Spain
Introduction
Desertification is a complex process of land degradation reducing land productivity and the value of natural
resources because of adverse human actions and climatic
variations. Identified as a global problem in the 1970s
(UNCOD, 1977), the need to combat desertification was
also quickly recognised in Mediterranean countries (i.e.
Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece) of the European
Union (EU) (Fantechi and Margaris, 1986; UNCCD,
1994).
Great efforts have been made by the EU to understand the physical processes involved in desertification
at a pan-Mediterranean scale (see review in Geeson et al.,
2002) and the contributing socio-economic factors
(Fantechi et al., 1995; CEC, 1997). To date, however,
land use scenarios have often used top-down rationalisations of the process, assuming that once a policy is
formulated it automatically has a beneficial outcome on
the ground. This has neglected the necessary integration
of perceptions, decision-making and varied responses to
policies by actors ‘on the ground’ (Lemon and Seaton,
1999), often leading to an incomplete understanding of
*Corresponding author. Fax: +34-91-3978001.
E-mail address: [email protected] (J.J. Oñate).
0264-8377/$ - see front matter r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.01.002
why many national and EU policies have failed to
rectify, and in some cases even exacerbated, desertification processes.
We focus here on the society-driven aspects of the
problem (van der Leeuw, 1998), under the assumption
that the development of regional and local scenarios and
feasible strategies and policy options to fight desertification can only be approached through the comprehension
of the context within which individual decisions are
made. The consideration of the perceived nature of the
problem and effects of past policies by the major
stakeholders in the policy arena is our first step towards
these objectives.
This paper reconstructs the effects of past policies on
desertification in the Guadalent!ın basin (southeast
Spain) on the basis of documented information and
the discourses of interviewed selected stakeholders at the
national, regional and local levels.
Methodological issues
Study area
The Guadalent!ın area covers 3300 km2 in the southeast of the Iberian Peninsula and encompasses the whole
ARTICLE IN PRESS
J.J. Oñate, B. Peco / Land Use Policy 22 (2005) 103–114
104
Irrigated surface (thousand ha)
250
Madrid
Castilla La
Mancha
Comunidad Valenciana
Andalucía
200
150
100
50
Región de Murcia
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Fig. 2. Regional trends in irrigated land up to the present 191,100 ha
(Source: CEH, 2001).
N
1100
42
1585
1103
Alhama
Guadalentín
River
176
Totana
Rationale of the study
255
494
1822
the expense of marginalised dry lands, adding important
social dimensions to the desertification issue in the area.
489
Lorca
331
879
1501
0
km
20
Fig. 1. Location of Guadalent!ın basin. Main cities and altitudes
(metres above sea level) are given for reference.
basin of the Guadalent!ın River, a tributary of the Segura
River. Administratively, most of the area is in the
Murcia region with a minor part in Andaluc!ıa (Fig. 1).
Two main dimensions characterise the Guadalent!ın as
one of the most severe cases of desertification in the
northern Mediterranean: (1) surface and groundwater
overexploitation (CHS, 2001), soil salinisation (Vela
et al., 2002) and natural habitat destruction (Mart!ınez
and Esteve, 2000) along with a massive increase of
irrigation agriculture in the valley in recent decades to
the present 48,000 ha (CEH, 2001); and (2) intense
erosive dynamics in the hilly dry land zones, rooted in
historical land use changes acting on a sensitive
combination of semi-arid climate and vulnerable soils
!
!
(see details in Lopez-Berm
udez
et al., 1997). The spread
of irrigated land is part of a regional trend (Fig. 2), now
almost 31% of the regional Utilised Agricultural Area,
more than two-fold the national level (MAPA, 2001).
Horticulture production and related activities have
driven a process of remarkable economic development,1
which has been the focus of resources and attention at
1
In the 1975–1996 period, the primary sector in the region grew at a
rate of 4.3%, while the growth of the entire regional economy was only
2.98% (MINHAC, 2000). As a result, in 1999 the share of the primary
sector in the Regional Gross Added Value was 8.9%, double the
national figure of 4.2% (INE, 2000).
Our point of departure is that desertification problems
in the Guadalent!ın are rooted in certain physical
circumstances—a semi-arid climate, available groundwater and highly erodable metamorphic and sedimentary rock—in which historical trends of land use, social
and technological change have developed. Development
paths before and after EU accession in 1986 have
exacerbated two related land use change dynamics,
considered proximate causes of desertification: expansion of irrigated agriculture in the valley, and intense
changes in the surrounding dry land areas. The former is
a main driver for aquifer depletion in semi-arid climates,
leading potentially to both boreholes drying up and
aquifer salinisation, in a similar equation to that faced in
the Greek Argolid valley (Lemon et al., 1994). The latter
include both intensification and abandonment of agricultural practices as well as sudden changes in crop
choices following the more rewarding EU subsidies,
which effects on erosion rates have also been reported
elsewhere in the Mediterranean (Kosmas et al., 1997).
On the basis of documented information and our own
work (Cummings et al., 2001), our first interest was to
reconstruct the role of past policies in these processes,
considering as well the perception of such effects by
stakeholders relevant to the issue (see next section). In
particular, the role of a set of recent instruments which
could have tackled the problem, such as agri-environmental and agri-forestry schemes, hydrological corrective measures and forestry measures and land use
planning policies, was investigated.
In-depth interviews
In order to contrast and illustrate the rationale of
our approach, the perception by selected stakeholders in
ARTICLE IN PRESS
J.J. Oñate, B. Peco / Land Use Policy 22 (2005) 103–114
Table 1
Thematic areas and categories used to classify the stakeholders’
discourse
105
them. Secondly, an analysis of stakeholders’ perception
of desertification is dealt with, useful to provide a
context for the interviewees’ discourse on our approach.
The next two sections focus on the reconstruction of the
origins (historical trends) and contemporary reality
(policy choices and resulting processes) of land use
change dynamics. The role of the recent policy instruments that could have tackled the problem is then
explored in section five. Finally, the main conclusions of
the research and the prospects for future action are
summarised.
Thematic area
Category
Background
Perceptions of desertification
Historical trends in land use change in
the area
Contemporary land
use changes and
ultimate effects—the
policy impacts
Irrigation expansion and related
processes
Changes in dry land and related
processes
Effects on desertification
Role of recent policy
instruments
Agri-environmental and agri-forestry
schemes
Hydrological corrective measures and
forestry measures
Land use planning and related policies
Power structure and politics of the network of interviewed
stakeholders
regard to both the nature of the problem and the effects
of past policies on desertification was acquired by means
of face-to-face semi-structured and taped interviews.
Pursuing the development of an holistic view of the
issue, an appreciation of the variety of perspectives was
considered essential (Lemon, 1999). Twenty-five relevant stakeholders were selected, including governmental
representatives at the national (six interviewees) and
regional (7) levels, farmers’ organisations (6), academics
(4), private corporations (1) and non-governmental
organisations (1). Appendix A shows coding and
affiliation of interviewed stakeholders. Existing contacts
at the governmental levels acted as ‘sponsors’, facilitating access to most administrative officials, some of
who in turn suggested ‘snowballing’ contacts (Lemon,
1999) from farmers’ organisations and private corporations. We directly contacted the remaining interviewees.
The interviews were roughly organised around
thematic areas and categories (Table 1), reflecting the
rationale of our approach. A semi-structured approach
(Lemon, 1999) was adopted, combining closed questions
for the analysis of, e.g., the perceptions of desertification, and the flexibility of more open questions targeted
at capturing the stakeholders’ discourse in regard to the
effects of past policies on desertification. In order to
reinforce the discursive nature of our paper, particularly
emphatic quotations from interviews have been included
in the text, balancing their number among interviewees
for the sake of objectivity.
Relationships between interviewed stakeholders seem
to be primarily a function of both the power structure
prevailing amongst the representatives of the administration and the historical and present status of the
irrigation issue in the region.
The 1978 Spanish Constitution decentralised government, sharing power between the central (hereafter
‘Nation’) and the regional governments or Comunidades
!
Autonomas
(hereafter ‘Regions’). Since 1982 the Region
of Murcia has become responsible for the legislative
development and implementation of several aspects
covered by this paper (Table 2).
In agriculture, the National role is now limited to
liasing between the EU Regulations and Regional
performance and co-ordinating inter-regional initiatives.
Real power lies thus with the regional Agriculture
Departments.
The Nation does, however, still have considerable
power over water resources through the River Boards,
which under the 1985 Water Act must design their
respective Hydrological Plans, administrate and control
public water resources, uses and the infrastructure
! Hidrografica
!
financed by them.2 The Confederacion
del
2
Segura (CHS) is responsible for the 18,815-km Segura
River basin, including the Guadalent!ın sub-basin.
Under the Franco dictatorship, the Ministry of
Agriculture, promoting land use transformation, and
the CHS, regulating and supplying water resources,
failed in overcoming, with the development of infrastructure plans, the historical ineffectiveness in consolidating and guarantying existing irrigation (CHS,
2001). The ‘irrigation problem’ had therefore already
arisen well before the establishment of the Regional
Government. From the point of view of national
representatives (i.e. interview respondents 5.NAd1,
Source: Authors.
Structure of the paper
We have structured the paper in six main sections.
Firstly, we shall describe the context in which the
network of interviewed stakeholders is inserted, needed
to understand the power structure and politics among
2
Having formerly belonged to the Ministry of Public Works, in 1996
water authorities were transferred to the newly created Ministry of
Environment, a change with no visible effects on the overall approach
to water management in Spain.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
J.J. Oñate, B. Peco / Land Use Policy 22 (2005) 103–114
106
Table 2
Year of transfer from national ministries and issues under the Murcia
regional administration
Year
Matter
1982
Promotion of regional economic development
under national policy objectives
Agriculture and rural development
1983
Physical planning and public works of
Regional interest
1984
Management of the environment
1985
Project, construction and exploitation of
hydraulic infrastructures
Water supply and sewerage
Management of nature conservation
Source: Own compilation.
6.NAd2, 7.NAd3, 8.NAd4, 9.NAd5 and 10.NAd6),
regional authorities have just worsened the problem
since they took over responsibility for the matter.
Regional authorities, on the contrary, argue that the
problem was a legacy they are trying to resolve.
Nonetheless, respondents 12.RAd2 and 16.RAd6, both
national administration civil servants ‘‘transferred’’ to
the regional level, have confirmed that autonomous
functioning has been considerably worse than the
previous centralistic one, pointing to lack of experience,
the political direction of the leaders, proximity to the
voter and shortage of means and financial resources, as
the main reasons. No additional justification of these
claims has been found in published literature.
In spite of the CHS being classified as ‘national
administration’, the rest of stakeholders, including
academics, still consider it responsible for the ‘irrigation
problem’ claiming that the CHS has abandoned
responsibility on issues such as groundwater control or
water quality. The CHS representatives in turn, assert
that regional administration has kept on promoting
irrigation and encouraging farmers’ demands for water,
while not having controlled industrial and urban
sewage. Besides, the CHS officials themselves also argue
that rigid implementation of the law provisions on water
control has been unaffordable due to the poor economic
and human resources available to the CHS.
Irrigation as a major regional interest is now
unanimously supported by the entire regional administration and, although recognising the negative effects of
its uncontrolled increase on their respective issues of
competence, both environment and physical planning
departments act as subsidiary to this objective, claiming
lack of effective powers to tackle the problem.
All interviewed stakeholders expressed their opinions
under the expectations raised by the recently enacted
National Hydrological Plan (NHP), which foresees a
huge investment in infrastructure for water transfer
from the Ebro River basin (northeast Spain) to Murcia
and neighbouring regions (MIMAM, 2001a). In the face
of heated debate and protests at the national level (Saur!ı
and Del Moral, 2001), expectations of new water
supplies have spurred most of Murcia society to support
the NHP, to the point where critics such as environmentalist groups and a few academics are branded as
‘traitors’ of regional interests. Also largely debated, a
National Irrigation Plan, scenario 2008, was passed in
April 2002, foreseeing no new irrigation expansions for
Murcia, just enhancements of existing ones (MAPA,
2002), and consequently water transferred from the
Ebro is in theory to cover the environmental deficit in
the basin. However, coastal tourism and recreation have
appeared as alternative development options for the
Region (MINHAC, 2000). Announcing the farm/tourism conflict over water already apparent in the nearby
Marina Baixa district (Mata-Porras, 2000), many in
the Region (including most interviewed farmers) are
suspicious of the real destination of transferred water
resources.
Perceptions of desertification
The stakeholders’ responses, which sometimes mix
concepts and causes, clearly reflect the ambiguity and
broad scope of the term, implicit in the vague UNCCD
(1994, p. 4) definition of desertification: ‘‘Land degradation in arid, semiarid and dry sub-humid areas resulting
from various factors, including climatic variations and
human activities’’.
Most respondents’ perceptions stemmed from the
climatic scarcity of water as the main characteristic of
the problem. As 5.NAd1 remarked, ‘‘aridity is frequently confounded with desertification’’. Emphasis on
the lack of water due to climatic conditions, and
consequent natural loss of vegetation cover, soil erosion,
and loss of productivity, was particularly reflected in the
responses from farmers’ organisations representatives
(19.OPA2, 20.OPA3, 21.OPA4, 22.OPA5, 23.OPA6). In
addition, national administrators related to water
management (9.NAd5, 10.NAd6) and irrigation planning (8.NAd4), and regional authorities in the agriculture department (11.RAd1, 12.RAd2, 13.RAd3,
15.RAd5), also fully agreed with this perception.
Forming the second category, several respondents
emphasised the human causes of desertification. For
these interviewees climatic aridity is not itself desertification but a characteristic condition of semi-arid
environments. Instead, these respondents (5.NAd1,
16.RAd6, 17.RAd7, 25.NGO2) pointed to the influences
of human activities as the main component of desertification, mainly deforestation and inadequate agricultural practices.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
J.J. Oñate, B. Peco / Land Use Policy 22 (2005) 103–114
Desertification understood as humans deserting the
area, agricultural abandonment and/or population
loss following fall of land productivity, forms a third
category of the problem perception among the respondents (8.NAd4, 14.RAd4, 18.OPA1, 23.OPA6, 26.PC1).
The drivers of this fall in land productivity were seen to
be both aridity and market conditions, and the problem
was invariably located in the nowadays economically
non-profitable dry lands. As respondent 18.OPA1 put
it ‘‘if there is no farmer activity, desertification
increases’’.
A fourth category of respondents stressed the need to
actualise the concept of desertification in order to focus
attention on the unsustainable management of water
resources, which they regard as the main component of
actual desertification processes. Overgrazing, deforestation and inadequate agricultural practices were all
considered causes of past erosion in the hills. Instead,
these respondents (2.Ac2, 24.NGO1) identified irrational overexploitation of aquifers, due to irrigation
expansion, as the main driving force of the current
erosion and salinisation problems. Respondent 2.Ac2
pointed out the difficulty of recognising problems,
which, like desertification, are based on value judgements: ‘‘loss of productivity accompanies desertification
for those interested in biological production (fixed
carbon/m2), but from the economic point of view even
a degraded soil may be quite profitable if inputs of
matter and energy are provided’’.
Finally, a fifth category understood desertification as
a global process of environmental degradation, with
both natural and human drivers, and multiple spatial
expressions, ‘‘resulting from the rupture of the equilibrium between natural resources and socio-economic
systems’’ as respondent 3.Ac3 expressed it. Academics
(1.Ac1, 3.Ac3, 4.Ac4) and two national administrators
(6.NAd2, 7.NAd3) supported this view. Relationships
between in-migrant workforce and natural residents and
their role in development were considered as well as
contemporary expressions of the global process by
respondent 1.Ac1.
Historical trends of land use change in the area
Historical trends and social and technological change
affecting the entire Region emerged in the research as
the framework for an understanding of contemporary
land use changes in the Guadalent!ın.
Millenary irrigation cultures existed along the lower
river courses, typically limited by technological factors.
The remaining territory was only densely occupied in the
18th century, when dry land agriculture expanded into
the uplands, causing serious soil erosion and sporadic
flood damage in the main lowland cities (Romero-D!ıaz
et al., 2002). But the late 19th century railway link
107
between Murcia and the inner Peninsula facilitated the
arrival of much more competitive cereal from Castile,
triggering an impoverishment of the regional economy
and emigration. By that time, ‘Murcia and its farmers
were amongst the poorest in the country’ (4.Ac4).
Irrigation promotion entered the political arena at the
turn of the 20th century, when water become an
instrument of social, economic and spatial transformation and the state paid for the costs of the necessary
dams and related infrastructure.3 Opportunities arose
for individual farmers and job-creating agro-business
companies, reversing the emigration trends (Sa! nchez
and Ort!ı, 1993), and under the model of the Development Plans of the 1960s (Harrison, 1993), ‘the south-east
of the Peninsula was definitely allotted the function of
horticulture and fruit production’ (1.Ac1). Consequently, water demands for irrigation increased and
the arrival of submersible pumps initiated the ‘mining of
groundwater resources’ (5.NAd1).
The ‘off-site implications of the new model’ (7.NAd3)
became evident with the construction of the Tagus–
Segura transfer channel in the mid-1970s. The channel
brought water from the centre of the country, contributing to the expansion of both real and perceived
water availability. Land was ploughed above the
designated transfer height (200 m), following the reasoning ‘we’ll first plough and then we will be given water’
(3.Ac3). However, an intense drought in the late 1970s
revealed that the design parameters for the channel had
set unrealistic expectations of water surplus in the donor
!
!
basin (Lopez-Berm
udez
et al., 2002). As a consequence,
Murcia never received the expected yearly 900 Hm3 of
water, and the water deficit become structural in the
basin (CHS, 2001).
As of the dry lands, the highest erosion rates were
probably reached in the 1940s, when cereal growing was
promoted even at the expense of forest areas (Barbera!
et al., 1997). Further changes continued in the 1960s
when the esparto (Stipa tenacissima, a native grass
species used traditionally in wickerwork) became useless
with the appearance of plastic. Almonds, carobs and figs
were planted in esparto areas, many slopes ploughed
vertically when tractors became available. Severe floods
and their effects on lowland settlements made the
situation worse and preventive forestation measures
were implemented in the uplands during the 1950s.
Aggressive methods such as terracing with heavy
machinery and conifer plantations were widely introduced, clearly out of place in most cases (Chaparro and
Esteve, 1995): ‘Those policies mostly worsened many of
the existent problems’ (5.NAd1).
3
The lack of consideration for the environmental dimensions of
water completes the axes of the so-called ‘water paradigm’ (Saur!ı and
Del Moral, 2001), which has determined Spanish water policy ever
since.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
108
J.J. Oñate, B. Peco / Land Use Policy 22 (2005) 103–114
Decline of dry land crops and orchards and expansion
of horticulture and fruit growing were exacerbated by
new market opportunities for irrigation products after
1970. The preferential agreement with the EEC facilitated
access to and demand from the international market,
which opened completely on Spain’s accession in 1986
and the Single Market in 1992 (Pe! rez Yruela, 1995).4 As
one respondent argued, ‘business dynamics in agriculture
ran ahead of the process’ (4.Ac4), and not surprisingly,
government support for irrigation increased in the form
of infrastructure construction and farm subsidies. Attention was diverted away from dry lands and cereals
declined further with the late 1970s drought. The
consequent abandonment of traditional soil conservation
techniques accelerated the ongoing erosion problems
(Cerda! , 1997), although in some areas a slow but
constant process of shrub vegetation recovery was also
reported (Obando, 2002). Logically, the water deficit in
the basin has also kept increasing (CHS, 2001),5 despite
part of each new water input being theoretically allocated
to deficit avoidance. Irrigation technology has been
geared to serve this expansion, since ‘every drop of saved
water is used in subsequent irrigation expansion and
yields increased productivity’ (24.NGO1).
As a result, in less than two generations farmers have
returned from forced emigration to industrial centres in
Barcelona and Madrid to live in the region with one of
the highest growth rates of agricultural productivity in
the country (CESRM, 1997). This clear enhancement
of people’s economic standards has led to a social
momentum in favour of irrigation at the expense of dry
land farming. Several interviewees used the Latin
expression, ‘animus regandi’: ‘People irrigate because it
is part of their culture’ (9.NAd5). Further, irrigation has
recently acquired surprising functions in peoples’
perceptions based on the assumed equations of water=
irrigation, drought=desertification: ‘Irrigation is a
constraint on the advance of the desert’ (20.OPA3) or
‘In this Region they say that the desert begins where
lettuces end’ (9.NAd5).
Contemporary policies and ultimate effects—the policy
impacts
Irrigation expansion
Early policies underlying irrigation expansion culminated in the construction of the Tagus–Segura transfer
4
Volume of vegetable exports doubled between 1986 and 1996,
representing in the latter 47.5% of the entire Murcian foreign trade
(INE, 2000), Germany, the United Kingdom, France and The
Netherlands being the destination of 84% of horticulture foreign
trade (CESRM, 1997).
5
‘It is now officially estimated to be 460 Hm3, although considering
illegal overexploitation, it may reach 800 Hm3’ (9.NAd4).
channel in the late 1970s (CHS, 2001), when most
permits for running water were also allocated. Since
demand by the transformed areas exceeded the water
actually transferred, ‘Groundwater extractions were
begun provisionally (for 2 years) in expectation of
further transfers that did not arrive’ (8.NAd4). Constant
groundwater exploitation began, and enhanced technology enabled wells to be drilled deeper.
The 1985 Water Act legalised most groundwater
pumps and instituted a permit system, but could not
inhibit their illegal spread: ‘The Water Act reached
Murcia 20 years too late, when most wells were already
operating’ (12.RAd2). As irrigation business grew, an
unregulated water market arose, with permit owners
illegally selling part of the water they were allocated but
did not use. ‘The mobility of water all across the Region
hinders control over its legal origin, and the CHS just
sits and watches what happens’ (24.NGO1).
After Spain’s entry into the EEC, structural aid for farm
modernisation (under Regulations EEC/797/85, EEC/
2328/91, EC/950/97, EC/1257/99) promoted increased
productivity and indirectly, irrigation expansion. Now
with full powers in agriculture and environment, ‘The
Region defended its farmers by consolidating irrigation
just to worsen the deficit and force new water transfers’
(8.NAd4). Regional administrators argue that they were
only pursuing water use efficiency but ‘did not have power
over water management’ (13.RAd3). CHS respondents
complain that they did not have enough staff to cope with
the Water Act provisions, which ‘was an excessive
responsibility for this body’ (9.NAd5). Academics believe
that, ‘Delegation of responsibility by CHS to other actors
is an historic phenomenon: they did let it happen’ (2.Ac2).
Conversely, EU accession did not serve to limit or control
irrigation expansion since the Common Agricultural
Policy (CAP) has never covered horticulture production.
Farmers’ vision, in turn, still demands more support
to irrigation agriculture from public authorities, particularly for small and medium sized holdings. When
surface waters became scarce and in order to afford
investments made to introduce irrigation, they ‘were
obliged to extract groundwater’ (20.OPA3), and ‘thanks
to that we have survived’ (19.OPA2). They complain
that the regional agriculture administration and the
CHS have not co-ordinated efforts in order to manage
the dynamics of irrigation expansion, and that they have
favoured big companies of industrial agribusiness to the
neglect of the small farmer: ‘Big producers are the ones
who really control the situation: water, market, investments’ (18.OPA1). Anyhow, irrigation is seen as the
only development possibility for them, so they keep on
demanding water, although some of them recognise that
‘the legacy to our children is going to be a disaster’
(23.OPA6).
The 1999 Water Act prohibited new wells but
could not reverse the trend. As in the rest of Spain
ARTICLE IN PRESS
J.J. Oñate, B. Peco / Land Use Policy 22 (2005) 103–114
(Sumpsi, 2001), rural policy design and implementation
(e.g. Reg. 1257/99/EEC) is still dominated by a
‘productivist’ ethos, in which ‘Agriculture and water
policies are combined to modernise and improve the
competitiveness of irrigation’ (11.RAd1).
All respondents agree that aquifer overexploitation is
!
!
an effect of irrigation (see also Lopez-Berm
udez
et al.,
2002; and Lemon et al., 1994 reporting the same effect in
the Greek Argolid), but legally prescribed restoration
plans have not been put into practice ‘due to lack of
collaboration from users’ (10.NAd6). Irrigation with
extracted saline water is lowering production due to soil
salinisation in many places (Pe! rez-Sirvent et al., 2003),
especially in the Guadalent!ın, where ‘The situation has
reached a limit in fruit orchards’ (20.OPA3).
Water table depletion has dried up natural wells and
wetlands, also widely acknowledged although some
argued that ‘The drying of natural wells is due to the
lack of rainfall; if it rained they would recover’
(16.RAd6). Impact on valuable fauna and flora has
been evident in the case of the Saladares del Guadalent!ın
wetland, where ‘Water used to rise to the surface, but
they are now dry and partially ploughed in spite of being
a protected area’ (15.RAd5).
Another symptom of water overexploitation has been
the lowering of river flow rates and the inability to dilute
sewage from the growing population.6 As newspapers
state, ‘The Segura River is a sewer’ (El Pa!ıs, 1999). In
spite of being responsible for sewage control and water
treatment, the Region has only recently started to tackle
the problem, and ‘Works cannot be finished overnight’
(11.RAd1).
Besides expansion, specialisation and intensification of
irrigated agriculture have undeniably taken place in the
area,7 with associated land degradation effects such as
diffuse pollution. However, provisions under the Nitrate
Directive (676/91/EEC) have not been implemented
(Izcara Palacios, 1998): ‘To live is to pollute and with
an intensive activity like irrigation it is obvious that you
must enter into conflict with the environment’ (14.RAd4).
Changes in dry land areas
In the early 1980s, and with CAP subsidies in mind
(e.g. EEC Reg. 2727/75, 466/82 and 797/85), surviving
6
According to the 2001 census, regional population has increased
25.03% since 1981, more than three-fold the national figure of 8.21%
(INE, 2002).
7
Intensification is reflected in the 1993 figures for the quotient
between Standard Gross Margin and Utilised Agricultural Area, which
was 944.2 h/ha, and for that between Gross Margin and Annual
Labour Unit, which was 11,133 h/ALU, two-fold and three-fold,
respectively, the national figures (CESRM, 1997). Horticulture and
fruit growing represented, in the same year, 62% of the total
agricultural production of the region, reflecting a much higher
specialisation than in the rest of the country (28%, CESRM, 1997).
109
cereal crops as well as traditional almond plantations
were extended at the expense of recovering scrublands,
without conservation practices or soil care. ‘Given the
public and indirect benefits the government should have
resolved the situation by taking the Mediterranean
forest domain out of private hands,’ (5.NAd1). After
1986, the CAP clearly helped to expand and intensify
dry land agriculture in the hills, with renewed ploughing-up of abandoned zones, ‘A forbidden but almost
impossible to control practice; no one in Europe has
controlled it’ (13.RAd3).
Following the area payments for cereals, almond
subsidies (e.g. Reg. EEC/1035/72 and EC/2000/96) were
particularly harmful for erosion (van Wesemael et al.,
2003), with new orchards planted after surface levelling
with machinery. Agriculture administrators now acknowledge the negative effects of destroying terracing
but, ‘Agricultural policies and thus the government
focused exclusively on profitability. The environment
was scarcely mentioned in the CAP until Agenda 2000’
(13.RAd3).
Positive effects of CAP regulations were also mentioned in the interviews, particularly concerning setaside (Reg. EEC/1094/88), which in some locations
‘facilitate the natural recovery of protective vegetation
and reduce previous erosion’ (16.RAd6). Nevertheless,
set-aside was also claimed to have been a driver of
erosion, especially in places where farmers were still
undertaking soil protection techniques. ‘The Government should be more careful in selecting areas to
implement these policies’ (3.Ac3).
In any case, the extent of current erosion problems
caused by dry land agriculture appears to be much
smaller than those caused by the uncontrolled irrigated
invasion of hilly areas (Barbera! et al., 1997). Thanks to
the technical mobility of water, ‘Many farmers who own
both irrigated and dry land just move their irrigation to
less exhausted or salty soils’ (12.RAd2). Further, agribusiness companies have bought low-priced dry land,
invested in pumping their water allocations, eliminated
erosion-preventing structures such as terraces, and
installed irrigated groves, ‘Greenhouses having even
been seen in the mountains’ (13.RAd3). Heavy machinery can easily work the highly mouldable metamorphic
and sedimentary rock to create a levelled surface which,
despite the lack of soil, has enough fine particles to feed
the crop, ‘Agriculture is no longer linked to soil, which
just acts as a physical base’ (9.NAd5). After the water
supply ends or the soils become too salty for horticulture, the transformed plots are usually either reconverted into dry land or directly abandoned. As a
result of the loss of soil conservation techniques, ‘The
erosion hazard may become even greater than before the
changes’ (13.RAd3).
Lastly, perhaps the most far-reaching effects of
irrigation expansion in the area, at least in human
ARTICLE IN PRESS
110
J.J. Oñate, B. Peco / Land Use Policy 22 (2005) 103–114
terms, have been on social awareness and culture in the
dry lands. In this sense, human, technical and economical resources focussing on the problems and demands
of dry land areas have been kept to a minimum in
comparison to those targeting irrigation. As one
agriculture official put it, ‘Contact with dry land farmers
is minimal, and is only done to monitor the received
subsidies’ (15.RAd5). CAP and the EU were criticised
for not being sensitive enough to the problems of
southern European countries, as ‘These problems are
not understood by those who have not suffered from
them’ (12.RAd2). As a result, locals have seen how the
legacy of their ancestors has become undervalued in
economic terms and government consideration, and in
the absence of social recognition, ‘Frustrated farmers
tend to refuse the role of ‘nature guardians’ foreseen in
CAP reform orientations’ (4.NAd4). In this situation,
farmers’ management decisions tend to be more drastic,
seeking the most rewarding subsidy regardless of good
agricultural practices, before being forced to abandon
the farm. ‘From a desertification perspective, social
change operates in a negative way for dry land farmers
and their successors’ (2.Ac2).
The role of recent policy instruments
Agri-environmental and agri-forestry schemes
The first agri-environmental programme (Reg. EEC/
2078/92) in Murcia (1994–1999) covered nearly 1550
farmers (2.7% of total), 40,000 ha (9.1% of arable area)
and roughly h 8.97 million. Unfortunately, a breakdown
of figures for the Guadalent!ın area is not available.
As in many areas of Spain (Peco et al., 2000), the
Regional Agriculture Department blamed the limited
implementation of this scheme on budget restrictions,
especially since in Murcia, ‘Irrigation is a top priority
and agri-environmental measures have more budgetary
limits’ (11.RAd1). Passive resistance against the agrienvironmental schemes was also related to the conflict
they face with predominant ‘productivist’ orientations
(Peco et al., 2000) and its high transaction costs, ‘which
caused the delay and low level of its implementation’
(7.NAd3). Although these initiatives were considered
useful for avoiding erosion and reducing agro-chemical
usage, many respondents claimed the present CAP does
not adequately support them, ‘Payments from these
initiatives are quite low’ (19.OPA2).
The cereal extensification measure has been the most
important in terms of uptake, particularly in the upper
part of the basin where around 4000 ha are engaged in
the programme, ‘Ploughing along contour-lines is the
most rewarding commitment in terms of erosion
prevention’ (13.RAd3). The measure for integrated pest
control on white grape vineyards has also been
important, concentrating most education and training
efforts. However, its anti-desertification role seems
limited because it is implemented on irrigated land,
and the lack of a national regulation on integrated
production ‘facilitates the concealment of commercial
production under an environmental facade’ (7.NAd3),
an opinion shared by environmentalist groups. No
figures on the uptake of organic farming were available,
but since no detailed requirements concerning good
agricultural practices were included in the measure, its
impact on desertification is doubtful beyond the positive
effects of lower chemical usage.
A new agri-environmental programme is available for
the 2002–2006 period, including measures for dry land
erosion combat, cereal extensification, organic farming,
integrated pest control and education and training. The
number of applications (approximately 5000 farmers)
has surpassed expectations and all measures include a
compulsory code of good agricultural practice. The
programme design, particularly the integrated control
measure, was nevertheless thought to have insufficient
details since, ‘The technical complexity of these issues is
not appropriately reflected in the commitments because
the government lacks sufficient technical support’
(13.RAd3). For academics, anti-desertification measures
should be targeted much more at specific areas, given
the spatial diversification of existing problems and
!
!
opportunities (Lopez-Berm
udez
et al., 1997), ‘a matter
of sensitivity and technical capacity’ (2.Ac2).
The agri-forestry scheme (Reg. EEC/2080/92) suffered from scarce budget allocation even in comparison
to the agri-environmental package, in spite of the
perception that it is ‘highly positive in terms of retiring
low-productive, intermittently cultivated dry lands and a
common source of desertification’ (12.RAd2). Only
approximately 10,000 ha have been planted in the entire
Region (Guadalent!ın data unavailable). Nevertheless,
this scheme was also criticised because of design
deficiencies, ‘It just promotes tree plantations with a
view to productivity, which is ridiculous in a semiarid
climate’ (24.NGO1). Furthermore, ‘It is creating a
mosaic of unconnected forested patches with a dubious
environmental outcome’ (7.NAd3).
Altogether, the so-called ‘subsidy culture’ was raised
as a threat concerning desertification, especially in the
case of the foreseen reduction or even complete
abandonment of the subsidy regime by 2006–2008,
‘farmers accustomed to subsidies might abandon soil
conservation practices, which for better or worse, they
are performing today’ (3.Ac3). This is a vision
unfortunately confirmed by one respondent from a
farmers’ organisation: ‘they go into these schemes
because it helps in monetary terms not so much because
of principles’ (19.OPA2).
Modulation or cross-compliance of direct payments
were seen as possible financial sources to overcome the
ARTICLE IN PRESS
J.J. Oñate, B. Peco / Land Use Policy 22 (2005) 103–114
budgetary restrictions on these schemes. However, its
applicability in Murcia was said to be low, ‘because
there are not that many big holdings’ (13.RAd3) and
‘due to lack of political will’ (7.NAd3).
Hydrological corrective measures and forestry measures
As in the rest of Spain, these have been the only
publicly financed erosion initiatives, with two types of
instruments usually implemented on public land (Rojo
Serrano, 1998). First, water authorities design and
execute projects for the hydrological correction of
creeks and protective forestation in order to prevent
dams filling with sediments. Second, forest services
implement forestation measures, under ‘protective’ or
‘productive’ aim depending of the location. Both have
benefited from the EAGGF-Section Guidance and the
Cohesion Funds after accession to the EU.
Methods and techniques have been criticised regardless of the instrument and the Government concerned
(e.g. Garc!ıa Pe! rez and Groome, 2000), as the quantity of
the forested area rather than quality of the restored
ecosystem is usually the main objective. The Guadalent!ın is not an exception, and examples of counterproductive actions (e.g. aggressive terracing methods,
planting of inadequate species and lack of site-targeted
design) abound, since ‘A standard model has been
implemented regardless of site-specific conditions’
(4.Ac4). In spite of the general experience, examples of
good erosion control results were also mentioned, and
community memory of flood damage in the area
explains why locals generally perceive these measures
as having positive effects on desertification. There has
been no official systematic monitoring of their effects on
erosion rates, and the number of afforested hectares is
the only indicator of effectiveness (Chaparro, 1994).
More interest was expressed in bolstering instruments
to subsidise measures in private forests (58% of regional
wooded surface, CAAMA, 2001), since ‘due to low
productivity owners do not take care of forests, leading
to a greater fire hazard’ (16.RAd6). Although instruments serving these ends have been in place for a long
time (e.g. Reg. EEC/1610/89) and they are considered to
be ‘Adequate tools to fight desertification’ (6.NAd2),
budget cuts have prevented their wider implementation,
‘Forestation of marginal or abandoned agricultural
land, managed by the Agriculture Department has
taken the lion’s share’ (16.RAd6).
Land use planning and related policies
Paradoxically, the expansion of intensive irrigation
is forbidden since 1986, when the first Regional land
use planning legislation was issued. Subsequent hydrological planning documents confirm this limitation.
In reality, however, it seems obvious that ‘Physical
111
planning has been subsumed to the logic of irrigation
expansion’ (1.Ac1). Many respondents doubt whether
these policies could have stopped or re-oriented irrigation expansion: ‘There is no way to resist such powerful
social and economic pressure’ (17.RAd7, 2.Ac2).
In Spain, land use planning policies have traditionally
focused exclusively on the territorial location of
economic activity and necessary infrastructure arrangements (Oñate et al., 2002a). This approach partly
explains why the total area of protected land in the
Region was reduced by near 11,000 ha in 2001, mainly
around areas of agricultural and/or tourist interest (La
! 2001). Related legislation on nature conservaOpinion,
tion, for example, has not prevented the perfectly visible
invasion of protected areas by expanding irrigation, a
process denied by respondents from the Regional
Government, ‘Non-agrarian zones have not been
affected’ (16.RAD6), belittled, ‘Invasions are not overall
significant’ (12.RAd2), or justified, ‘Levelling is a
benefit, not an erosion problem because it compacts
the soil’ (15.RAd5). Although planning documents
(MIMAM, 2001a; CHS, 2001; MAPA, 2002) mention
the need to take environmental considerations into
account when implementing irrigation projects, experience shows that this has never been a priority. ‘Impact
mitigation measures should have been implemented
before, to preserve particular locations of outstanding
natural interest, avoiding landscape simplification, and
maintain native vegetation strips to enhance connectivity between natural habitats’ (2.Ac2). In the absence of
legislation prescribing environmental assessment at the
strategic levels of plans or programmes (Oñate et al.,
2002b), impact assessment at the project level has
proved unable to control irrigation expansion and
ameliorate its subsequent effects, ‘in spite of legislation
that prescribes it for every transformation’ (25.PC1).
Unfortunately, in February 2004 Spain is the only
northern Mediterranean country that has not delivered
to the UNCCD its National Action Plan to Combat
Desertification (NAPCD), and only a working draft was
made available in 2001 (MIMAM, 2001b). Significantly
only seven out of the 25 interviewees acknowledged
familiarity with the draft NAPCD, eight had heard
about it but were not aware of details, while the
remaining 10 were unaware of its existence. In the light
of this poor result at the local level, it seems fully
justified the appreciation that its design process, ‘lacks
communication with society, and many Government
Departments disown the plan’, as one of its writers
recognised (3.Ac3). However, it is significant that the
respondents from the CHS, the Physical Planning
Department and four of the representatives of farmers’
organisations were not aware of the NAPCD.
The fact that the Plan is co-ordinated nationally by
the Ministry of Environment could explain the low
interest detected amongst agriculture-related actors.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
112
J.J. Oñate, B. Peco / Land Use Policy 22 (2005) 103–114
Further, its coincidence with the passage of other
national plans related to the issue such as the Hydrological and Irrigation Plans, was pointed out as evidence
of the lack of political will to tackle the root of the
problem. ‘Governments attach much more importance
to other issues, while desertification is politically
unprofitable’ (6.NAd2).
Conclusions
The stakeholder interviews in the Guadalent!ın basin
illustrated the clear impacts of past policies on land
degradation, reflecting that desertification, as an environmental issue, has suffered from the so-called
‘Mediterranean syndrome’ (e.g. La Spina and Sciortino,
1993), which makes the promotion of non-economic
interests rare or at least difficult at a local level. The
different dynamics followed in irrigated and dry land
areas require a separate re-orientation of anti-desertification policies in each area.
Current social, economic and institutional attention is
clearly focussed on the new prospects of water transfer
foreseen in the recently passed NHP. Experts have
argued that solutions to the structural water deficit in
the basin have been tackled from the supply side rather
than from the demand side (e.g. Sumpsi et al., 1998).
Although no new expansions of the irrigated area are
officially foreseen for the Region, further irrigation
expansion can be expected due to economic reasons.
Considering that the marginal value of water allocated
to conversion of dry land into irrigation is at least three
times that of water allocated to precarious irrigation
consolidation,8 the most rational economic behaviour
by farmers is to further expand their irrigated land.
Therefore, established control mechanisms in the NHP
to police the destination of transferred water are in risk
to be as useless as those included in previous regulations.
Even the full implementation of the EU Water
Framework Directive, which establishes the integral
recovery of investment and maintenance costs of new
infrastructures, does not seem capable of deterring this
unsustainable expansion (Escart!ın and Santafe! , 2001).
The marginal productivity of water for this type of
intensive irrigation is 0.3–0.6 h/m3, and even higher in
greenhouse farming (MAPA, 2002), still enough to
compensate for the future cost of transferred NHP
water, estimated to be roughly 0.31 h/m3. Even if the
large transfer infrastructure envisaged in the NHP
were not built,9 irrigation expansion has the potential
8
According to figures from the own NHP, estimations for the
marginal value of water range between 0.18–0.36 h/m3 in the former
case and 0.054 h/m3 in the latter (MIMAM, 2001a).
9
This is a plausible possibility due to the protests against the transfer
in donor regions and to the doubts about EU co-financing (total cost is
estimated at present at more than 4 billion h).
to continue. Desalinated seawater currently costs
around 0.42–0.48 h/m3, but future technological developments will probably lower this to figures perfectly
affordable by intensive irrigation farmers (Sumpsi et al.,
1998).
Therefore, neither water prices, which in this case do
not serve to regulate water demand, nor CAP regulations,
which do not cover this type of production, will be able to
control irrigation expansion. In policy terms, only strict
environmental policy enforcement to tackle the negative
on- and off-site impact can bring the situation under
control, although the economic and political costs of this
option will clearly be high. The only other restraint to
water demand and irrigation expansion comes from the
market side. Although only foreseeable in the longer term
in the context of further international trade liberalisation,
a possible saturation of European fresh vegetable and
fruits markets could be expected following increased
imports from third countries (e.g. Morocco).
The possibility of addressing desertification in dry land
areas through policies seems much more feasible, simply
because expectations of economic results are much lower
than on irrigated land. Current policies, mainly EU driven,
have played a contradictory two-fold role, simultaneously
promoting agricultural set-aside and land use intensification, while erosion mitigation has never been an objective
of the agricultural subsidies. However, clearer options to
focus policies on desertification are now starting to appear
at present. The new agri-environmental schemes begun in
2002 are the closest positive example. In addition, public
forest management schemes and forestry measures on
private land could be implemented in the near future under
the recent Regional Forest Strategy. Most importantly, the
medium-term CAP review could free more budget
resources to empower these socially and institutionally
feasible options.
Acknowledgements
The European Commission funded this work under the
ongoing research project MedAction: Policies for land
use to combat desertification (EVK2-CT-2000-00085).
More information is available at www.icis.unimaas.nl/
!
medaction. Thanks go also to C. Cummings, A. Gomez
and J. Sumpsi who collaborated in the first stages of this
research, to all those who participated in the interviews,
and to three anonymous reviewers whose comments
greatly improved previous versions of the paper.
Appendix A. Stakeholder identification
The 25 interviewed stakeholders are classified into the
following six groups, showing the background and
ARTICLE IN PRESS
J.J. Oñate, B. Peco / Land Use Policy 22 (2005) 103–114
position of each stakeholder:
*
Academics (Ac):
1.Ac1. Sociologist. University of Murcia.
2.Ac2. Biologist. Researcher at CSIC-CEBAS.
3.Ac3. Geographer. Murcia University.
4.Ac4. Economist. Researcher at CSIC-CEBAS.
*
National administration (NAd):
5.NAd1. Forest Engineer. Environmental Engineering Area, Public Works Ministry.
6.NAd2. Forest Engineer. Co-ordination Office
of NAPCD, Environment Ministry.
7.NAd3.
Agronomist.
Agri-environmental
Schemes Area, Agriculture Ministry.
8.NAd4. Agronomist. Co-ordination Office of
the National Irrigation Plan, Agriculture
Ministry.
9.NAd5. Civil Engineer. Water Authority, Environment Ministry.
10.NAd6. Civil Engineer. Water Authority,
Environment Ministry.
*
Regional administration (RAd):
11.RAd1. Lawyer. Regional Agriculture,
Water and Environment Department advisor
(CAAMA).
12.RAd2. Agronomist. Irrigation Infrastructure
Service, CAAMA.
13.RAd3. Veterinary surgeon. Technical Support Service, CAAMA.
14.RAd4. Agronomist. Water Planning Service,
CAAMA.
15.RAd5. Agronomist. Guadalent!ın Agrarian
Office, CAAMA.
16.RAd6. Forestry Engineer. Natural Resources
Service, CAAMA.
17.RAd7. Civil Engineer. Regional Public
Works and Physical Planning Department.
*
Professional Agricultural Organisations (OPA):
18.OPA1. Agronomist. COAG farmers’ union,
Murcia.
19.OPA2. COAG Secretary, Lorca.
20.OPA3. Pantano de la Cierva Irrigation
Farmers’ Union.
21.OPA4. Totana irrigation-farmers’ association.
22.OPA5. Agronomic Technical Engineer. Lorca
irrigation-farmers’ association.
23.OPA6. President of AGROSOL co-operative.
*
Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO):
24. NGO1. Biologist, Ph.D. Environmentalist
!
Group Ecologistas en Accion-Murcia.
*
Private Environmental Consultants (PC):
25.PC1. Biologist. Ambiental Ltd.
113
References
!
!
Barber!a, G.G., Lopez-Berm
udez,
F., Romero D!ıaz, A., 1997. Cambios
! en el Mediterr!aneo: El caso del
de uso del suelo y desertificacion
!
sureste ib!erico. In: Garc!ıa Ruiz, J.M., Lopez
Garc!ıa, P. (Eds.),
! humana y desertificacion
! en ambientes mediterr!aneos.
Accion
Instituto Pirenaico de Ecolog!ıa CSIC, Zaragoza, pp. 9–39.
CAAMA [Consejer!ıa de Agricultura, Agua y Medio Ambiente], 2001.
! de Murcia. CAAMA, Murcia.
La Estrategia Forestal de la Region
CEC [Commission of the European Communities], 1997. International
conference on Mediterranean desertification: research results and
policy implications. European Commission EUR 17782 EN,
Luxembourg.
CEH [Consejer!ıa de Econom!ıa y Hacienda], 2001. Anuario estad!ıstico
! de Murcia 2001. CEH, Murcia.
de la Region
Cerd!a, A., 1997. Soil erosion after land abandonment in a semiarid
environment of southeastern Spain. Arid Soil Research and
Rehabilitation 11, 163–176.
!
! de Murcia], 1997.
CESRM [Consejo Economico
y Social de la Region
Informe sobre el sector hortofrut!ıcola ante la reforma de la OCM
de frutas y hortalizas frescas, Informe 1/1997. CESRM, Murcia.
Chaparro, J., 1994. Consecuencias ambientales de repoblaciones
forestales mediante aterrazamientos en ambientes semi!aridos.
Ph.D. Thesis (unpublished), Universidad de Murcia, Murcia.
! geomorfol!ogica de
Chaparro, J., Esteve, M.A., 1995. Evolucion
laderas repobladas mediante aterrazamientos en ambientes semia! ridos (Murcia, SE de España). Cuaternario y Geomorfolog!ıa 9,
34–49.
! Hidrogr!afica del Segura], 2001. Plan hidrologico
!
CHS [Confederacion
de la cuenca del Segura. CHS-Ministerio de Medio Ambiente,
Murcia.
!
Cummings, C., Oñate, J.J., Gomez,
A., Peco, B., Sumpsi, J.M., 2001.
Report on the identification and justification of past and present
policies operating in the Guadalent!ın Target Area that should form
the focus of the investigation. Report to the Medaction Project. EU
Fifth Framework Programme, Contract EVK2-CT-2000-00085
(available at www.icis.unimaas.nl/medaction).
El Pa!ıs, 1999. El Segura, una cloaca. El Pa!ıs, Valencia, 3 June, p. 29.
Escart!ın, C.M., Santaf!e, J.M., 2001. Application of the cost recovery
principle in Spain: policies and impacts. In: Anonymous Pricing
Water: Economics, Environment and Society. European Commission, Brussels, pp. 131–140.
Fantechi, R., Margaris, N.S. (Eds.), 1986. Desertification in Europe.
D. Reidel, Dordrecht.
Fantechi, R., Peter, D., Balabanis, P., Rubio, J.L. (Eds.), 1995.
Desertification in a European Context: Physical and Socioeconomic Aspects. EUR 15415. Office for Official Publications of
the European Communities, Luxembourg.
Garc!ıa P!erez, J.D., Groome, H., 2000. Spanish forestry dilemmas:
technocracy and participation. Journal of Rural Studies 16,
485–496.
Geeson, N.A., Brandt, C.J., Thornes, J.B. (Eds.), 2002. Mediterranean
Desertification: a Mosaic of Processes and Responses. Wiley,
Chichester.
Harrison, J., 1993. The Spanish Economy: From Civil War to the
European Community. Macmillan, Basingstoke.
INE [Instituto Nacional de Estad!ıstica], 2000. Contabilidad Regional
de España. INE, Madrid.
!
INE [Instituto Nacional de Estad!ıstica], 2002. Censo de Poblacion
2001. INE, Madrid.
Izcara Palacios, S.P., 1998. Farmers and the implementation of the EU
nitrates directive in Spain. Sociologia Ruralis 38, 146–162.
Kosmas, C., Danalatos, N.G., Cammeraat, L.H., Chabart, M.,
Diamantopoulos, J., Farand, R., Gutierrez, L., Jacob, A.,
Marques, H., Martinez-Fernandez, J., Mizara, A., Moustakas, N.,
Nicolau, J.M., Oliveros, C., Pinna, G., Puddu, R., Puigdefabregas, J.,
ARTICLE IN PRESS
114
J.J. Oñate, B. Peco / Land Use Policy 22 (2005) 103–114
Roxo, M., Simao, A., Stamou, G., Tomasi, N., Usai, D., Vacca, A.,
1997. The effect of land use on runoff and soil erosion rates under
Mediterranean conditions. Catena 29, 45–59.
La Spina, A., Sciortino, G., 1993. Common agenda, southern rules:
European integration and environmental change in the Mediterranean states. In: Liefferink, J., Lowe, P., Mol, A. (Eds.), European
Integration and Environmental Policy. Belhaven Press, London,
pp. 217–236.
! 2001. La Comunidad dice que suprime zonas de espacios
La Opinion,
! Murcia, 24 March, p. 8.
naturales por no tener valor. La Opinion,
Lemon, M. (Ed.), 1999. Exploring Environmental Change Using an
Integrative Method. Gordon and Breach, Reading.
Lemon, M., Seaton, R., 1999. Policy relevant research: the nature of
the problem. In: Lemon, M. (Ed.), Exploring Environmental
Change Using an Integrative Method. Gordon and Breach,
Reading, pp. 1–16.
Lemon, M., Seaton, R., Park, J., 1994. Social enquiry and the
measurement of natural phenomena: the degradation of irrigation
water in the Argolid Plain, Greece. International Journal of
Sustainable Development and World Ecology 2 (3), 206–220.
L!opez-Berm!udez, F., Romero-D!ıaz, A., Cabezas, F., Rojo-Serrano, L.,
Mart!ınez-Fern!andez, J., B.oer, M., Del Barrio, G., 1997. The
Guadalent!ın basin, Murcia, Spain. In: Mairota, P., Thornes, J.,
Geeson, N. (Eds.), Atlas of Mediterranean Environments in Europe.
The Desertification Context. Wiley, Chichester, pp. 130–142.
!
!
Lopez-Berm
udez,
F., Barber!a, G.G., Alonso Sarri!a, F., Belmonte, F.,
2002. Natural resources in the Guadalent!ın basin (SE Spain): water
as a key factor. In: Geeson, N.A., Brandt, C.J., Thornes, J.B.
(Eds.), Mediterranean Desertification: a Mosaic of Processes and
Responses. Wiley, Chichester, pp. 233–246.
!
MAPA [Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentacion],
2001.
Anuario de estad!ıstica agroalimentaria. MAPA, Madrid.
!
MAPA [Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentacion],
2002. Plan
Nacional de Regad!ıos. Horizonte 2008. MAPA, Madrid.
Mart!ınez, J., Esteve, M.A., 2000. El regad!ıo en la Cuenca del Segura y
!
sus efectos ambientales y sociales. In: Mart!ınez, J. (Ed.), Gestion
alternativa del agua en la Cuenca del Segura. Ecologistas en
!
! Murciana, Murcia, pp. 53–70.
Accion-Regi
on
Mata-Porras, M., 2000. Brief description of the Marina Baixa
comarca. In: Engelen, G. (Ed.), Modulus: a Spatial Modelling
Tool for Integrated Environmental Decision-making. Final Report
to the Commission of the EU, Brussels, pp 37–55 (available at
www.riks.nl/RiksGeo/projects/modulus/Report Vol1.pdf).
!
MIMAM [Ministerio de Medio Ambiente], 2001a. Plan Hidrologico
Nacional. MIMAM, Madrid.
MIMAM [Ministerio de Medio Ambiente], 2001b. Programa de
! Nacional Contra la Desertificacion.
! Borrador de trabajo.
Accion
MIMAM, Madrid.
MINHAC [Ministerio de Hacienda], 2000. Plan de Desarrollo
Regional 2000–2006. MINHAC, Madrid.
Obando, J.A., 2002. The impact of land abandonment on regeneration
of semi natural vegetation: a case study from the Guadalent!ın. In:
Geeson, N.A., Brandt, C.J., Thornes, J.B. (Eds.), Mediterranean
Desertification: a Mosaic of Processes and Responses. Wiley,
Chichester, pp. 269–276.
Oñate, J.J., Su!arez, F., Anula, J., 2002a. Conservar el territorio y los
paisajes: M!as all!a de la Red Natura 2000. In: Araujo, J. (Ed.),
Ecolog!ıa: perspectivas y pol!ıticas de futuro. Junta de Andaluc!ıaFundaci!on Alternativas, Sevilla, pp. 97–116.
!
Oñate, J.J., Pereira, D., Su!arez, F., Rodr!ıguez, J.J., Cachon,
J.,
! Ambiental Estrat!egica: La evaluacion
! ambiental
2002b. Evaluacion
de pol!ıticas, planes y programas. Editorial Mundi-Prensa,
Madrid.
Peco, B., Su!arez, F., Oñate, J.J., Malo, J.E., Aguirre, J., 2000. Spain:
first tentative steps towards an agri-environmental programme. In:
. A. (Eds.), Agri-environmental Policy
Buller, H., Wilson, G., Holl,
in the European Union. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp. 145–168.
P!erez-Sirvent, C., Mart!ınez-S!anchez, M.J., Vidal, J., S!anchez, A.,
2003. The role of low-quality irrigation water in the desertification of semi-arid zones in Murcia, SE Spain. Geoderma 113,
109–125.
P!erez Yruela, M., 1995. Spanish rural society in transition. Sociologia
Ruralis 35, 276–296.
Rojo Serrano, L., 1998. Programmes of National agencies for
mitigation of desertification in Spain. In: Burke, S., Thornes, J.B.
(Eds.), Actions Taken by National Governmental and Nongovernmental Organisations to Mitigate Desertification in the
Mediterranean. European Commission EUR 18490, Brussels,
pp. 211–232.
!
!
Romero-D!ıaz, A., Tobarra, .P., Lopez-Berm
udez,
F., Barber!a, G.G.,
2002. Changing social and economical conditions in a region
undergoing desertification in the Guadalent!ın. In: Geeson, N.A.,
Brandt, C.J., Thornes, J.B. (Eds.), Mediterranean Desertification: a Mosaic of Processes and Responses. Wiley, Chichester,
pp. 289–302.
! In: Colino, P.
S!anchez, P., Ort!ı, J., 1993. Estructura de la poblacion.
(Ed.), Estructura econ!omica de la Region de Murcia. Civitas,
Madrid, pp. 221–242.
Saur!ı, D., Del Moral, L., 2001. Recent developments in Spanish water
policy: alternatives and conflicts at the end of the hydraulic age.
Geoforum 32, 351–362.
Sumpsi, J.M., 2001. Actors, institutions and attitudes to rural
development: the Spanish national report. In: Baldock, D., Dwyer,
J., Lowe, P., Ward, N. (Eds.), The Nature of Rural Development:
Towards a Sustainable Integrated Rural Policy in Europe. IEEP,
London.
Sumpsi, J.M., Garrido, A., Blanco, M., Varela, C., Iglesias, E., 1998.
! del agua en la agricultura. MAPAEconom!ıa y pol!ıtica de gestion
Mundi Prensa, Madrid.
UNCCD, 1994. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification. UNEP, Geneve.
UNCOD [United Nation Convention on Desertification], 1977.
Desertification, its Causes and Consequences. UNEP-Pergamon
Press, New York.
van der Leeuw, S.E. (Ed.), 1998. The Archaeomedes Project: Understanding the Natural and Anthropogenic Causes of Land
Degradation and Desertification in the Mediterranean Basin:
Research Results. EUR 18181. Office for Official Publications of
the European Communities, Luxembourg.
van Wesemael, B., Cammeraat, E., Mulligan, M., Burke, S., 2003. The
impact of soil properties and topography on drought vulnerability
of rainfed cropping systems in southern Spain. Agriculture,
Ecosystems and Environment 94, 1–15.
Vela, N., Vicente, M., Hern!andez, J., Ort!ız, R., 2002. Study of the
spatial distribution of soil salinity in croplands by GIS. In: Faz, A.,
Ort!ız, R., y Mermut, A.R. (Eds.), Sustainable Use and Management of Soils in Arid and Semiarid Regions. Quaderna Editorial,
Murcia, pp. 403–404.