Ten principles to integrate the water-energy-land nexus with climate services for co-producing local and regional integrated assessments.

The water-energy-land nexus requires long-sighted approaches that help avoid maladaptive pathways to ensure its promise to deliver insights and tools that improve policy-making. Climate services can form the foundation to avoid myopia in nexus studies by providing information about how climate change will alter the balance of nexus resources and the nature of their interactions. Nexus studies can help climate services by providing information about the implications of climate-informed decisions for other economic sectors across nexus resources. First-of-its-kind guidance is provided to combine nexus studies and climate services. The guidance consists of ten principles and a visual guide, which are discussed together with questions to compare diverse case studies and with examples to support the application of the principles.

The economic value of stochastic climate information for agricultural adaptation in a semi-arid region in Austria.

Identifying efficient adaptation measures in land and water use requires integrated approaches and a spatially and temporally explicit representation of water demand and supply. Stochastic climate information may further improve adaptation assessments to reduce the risk of misinterpretation of climate signals. We aim at developing an integrated modeling framework (IMF) that meets these requirements for assessing impacts of three stochastic climate scenarios (DRY, SIMILAR, WET), and regional irrigation water restrictions on land and water use. Furthermore, impacts on regional net benefits and the economic value of stochastic climate information (VOI) are assessed. The VOI is defined as the difference between regional net benefits with and without efficient adaptation of land and water use to a specific climate scenario. The IMF has been applied to the semi-arid Seewinkel region in Austria. Considering efficient adaptation, regional net benefits amount to 8 M€ and irrigation water use to 8.4 Mm³ in a DRY climate scenario. In a WET climate scenario and a scenario with SIMILAR conditions compared to the past, regional net benefits amount to 38 and 20 M€ and irrigation water use to 41 and 21 Mm³, respectively. High regional net benefits are obtained through an expansion of vineyards, irrigation, and fertilization. On average, the VOI is highest if land and water use is efficiently adapted to DRY but a WET scenario is realized (506 €/ha/a) and lowest with efficient adaptation to WET but the realization of a SIMILAR scenario (58 €/ha/a).

Developing stakeholder-driven scenarios on land sharing and land sparing - Insights from five European case studies.

Empirical research on land sharing and land sparing has been criticized because preferences of local stakeholders, socio-economic aspects, a bundle of ecosystem services and the local context were only rarely integrated. Using storylines and scenarios is a common approach to include land use drivers and local contexts or to cope with the uncertainties of future developments. The objective of the presented research is to develop comparable participatory regional land use scenarios for the year 2030 reflecting land sharing, land sparing and more intermediate developments across five different European landscapes (Austria, Germany, Switzerland, The Netherlands and Spain). In order to ensure methodological consistency among the five case studies, a hierarchical multi-scale scenario approach was developed, which consisted of i) the selection of a common global storyline to frame a common sphere of uncertainty for all case studies, ii) the definition of three contrasting qualitative European storylines (representing developments for land sharing, land sparing and a balanced storyline), and iii) the development of three explorative case study-specific land use scenarios with regional stakeholders in workshops. Land use transition rules defined by stakeholders were used to generate three different spatially-explicit scenarios for each case study by means of high-resolution land use maps. All scenarios incorporated various aspects of land use and management to allow subsequent quantification of multiple ecosystem services and biodiversity indicators. The comparison of the final scenarios showed both common as well as diverging trends among the case studies. For instance, stakeholders identified further possibilities to intensify land management in all case studies in the land sparing scenario. In addition, in most case studies stakeholders agreed on the most preferred scenario, i.e. either land sharing or balanced, and the most likely one, i.e. balanced. However, they expressed some skepticism regarding the general plausibility of land sparing in a European context. It can be concluded that stakeholder perceptions and the local context can be integrated in land sharing and land sparing contexts subject to particular process design principles.