Abstract

This research is about how farmers adapt to water scarcity. Using experimental economics methods, field experiments were carried out in a region exposed to severe water scarcity in Colombia. Willingness of water users to cooperate in conforming to extraction caps, as a means of adapting to water availability declination was calculated. Two information treatment groups were implemented in order to assess water allocation decisions when: (i) the amount of water was reduced and (ii) time before aquifer exhaustion was announced. Extant literature on cooperation in common-pool resources (CPR) has focused on demonstrating to what extent resource users depart from egoistic attitudes. Alternatively, the sustainability of water resources requires more research to further understand cooperative behavior. Since the literature on water scarcity is classified in three orders, namely physical, institutional, and socio-political, behavioral dimensions are suggested as a subdivision of the social order. This, in turn, may help to operationalize strategies aimed at improving adaptation to all orders of scarcity. The quantitative results suggest that farmers are inclined to follow the cap. The main difference between the quantity and time treatments differs in that in the time treatments farmers allocate much more water to be consumed in the future, whereas in the former, they prefer to allocate more water to be consumed in the present. Adaptation options provide favorable inputs for implementing the Sustainable Development Goals, especially SDG 6, which is related to water use efficiency. Target 6.4 establishes that, by 2030, water efficiency and extraction sustainability should be accomplished. Thus, water policy interventions might benefit from this contribution. However, since success in water conservation programs might be difficult to achieve due to complexity in human-decision making, more research is needed to deepen our understanding of cooperation drivers in aquifer conservation.

Introduction

Despite the abundance and precision of current information on aquifers status ( van der Gun, 2022 ), this type of data – commonly managed by governmental institutions – rarely flows to the communities that depend upon them ( Margat & van der Gun, 2013 ). In effect, underground water availability data is currently assessed through satellite and underground monitoring of aquifer levels, but farmers´ communities do not have access to this information in a format they can readily use. Climate change is entering the aquifer overexploitation game as a new player ( Damania et al., 2017 ), since droughts are becoming more frequent than in the past ( UNWATER, 2023; Yuan et al., 2023 ); therefore, public environmental and water entities promote water conservation during droughts. Public entities usually stimulate the reduction of water extraction volumes by instructing users to consume less or save the resource. This information, however, lacks the necessary context and specificity, two features that play an important role in water extraction curbing adapted to ensuing water scarcity.

Although water scarcity has an important political dimension ( Metha, 2007 ), from the perspective of its physical and social dimensions, it can be observed how climate change is motivating farmers towards strategies to face the challenge. In spite of the complexity of hydrogeological information, farmers certainly want to know more about the status of the aquifers they are exploiting. They need information not only about the effects of their extraction decisions, but also about the way to moderate these decisions as an adaptation to scarcity according to aquifers’ statuses.

Conclusions

This article was designed for presenting the results on how farmers adapt to water scarcity. Framed field experiments were run to collect quantitative data on the decisions made by farmers when they were exposed to reductions in water availability. Time and water quantity treatment groups were prepared to test their effects on water allocation as limited by suggested extraction caps. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of data and information were carried out. Behavioral regularities and social institutions were drawn from the quantitative data and graphics and the narratives expressed by the players after the experiments.

The setting for the understanding of adaptation strategies was demarcated by the limits imposed by nature. For this reason, water availability as a physical limiting factor for water extraction was used as an instrument to connect allocation, decision-making and intertemporal consequences for adaptation. Thus, limited availability under time and quantity limits pushed the farmers (players) to decide whether to cooperate or not in water conservation. Thus, the individuals who cooperated better were adapting to water scarcity. More precisely, the farmers informed on time before aquifer exhaustion, revealed greater awareness about the possibilities of cooperation. Contrarily, in the control group situation, farmers allocated much more water to all uses and the cap volume was reached in most of the rounds. While in the time and quantity treatment groups, the aggregated water volumes declined through the time (rounds), in the control group this amount averaged 1800 m3 (close to the cap). It can be said that the communication amongst farmers on how to manage remaining stocks, and, similarly the hydrogeological information play a key role in incentivizing the cooperative behavior under extraction caps contexts. Since the stability of cooperation was part of the research aims, providing quantitative information to farmers on extraction decisions and the remaining time of aquifer availability is suggested as a key factor to more effectively address the adaptation to water scarcity.