River basins as socio-ecological systems: linking levels of societal and ecosystem metabolism in a Mediterranean watershed

Copyright © 2015 by the author(s). Published here under license by the Resilience Alliance. Cabello, V., B. Willaarts, M. Aguilar, and L. del Moral. 2015. River basins as social-ecological systems: linking levels of societal and ecosystem water metabolism in a semiarid watershed. Ecology and Society 20(3): 20. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-07778-200320 Research River basins as social-ecological systems: linking levels of societal and ecosystem water metabolism in a semiarid watershed Violeta Cabello 1, Barbara A. Willaarts 2, Monica Aguilar 3 and Leandro del Moral Ituarte 1 ABSTRACT. River basin modeling under complexity requires analytical frameworks capable of dealing with the multiple scales and dimensions of environmental problems as well as uncertainty in the evolution of social systems. Conceptual and methodological developments can now be framed using the wide socio-eco-hydrological approach. We add hierarchy theory into the mix to discuss the conceptualization of river basins as complex, holarchic social-ecological systems. We operationalize the social-ecological systems water metabolism framework in a semiarid watershed in Spain, and add the governance dimension that shapes human-environment reciprocity. To this purpose, we integrate an eco-hydrological model with the societal metabolism accounting scheme for land use, human activity, and water use. We explore four types of interactions: between societal organization and water uses/demands, between ecosystem organization and their water requirements/supplies, between societal metabolism and aquatic ecosystem health, and between water demand and availability. Our results reveal a metabolic pattern of a high mountain rural system striving to face exodus and agricultural land abandonment with a multifunctional economy. Centuries of social-ecological evolution shaping waterscapes through traditional water management practices have influenced the eco-hydrological functioning of the basin, enabling adaptation to aridity. We found a marked spatial gradient on water supply, use pattern, and impact on water bodies from the head to the mouth of the basin. Management challenges posed by the European water regulatory framework as a new driver of social-ecological change are highlighted. Key Words: holarchy; river basin; socio-eco-hydrology; social-ecological systems; water availability; water metabolism INTRODUCTION Water resources degradation is a complex environmental problem that involves multiple dimensions and scales of analysis. As the awareness over the human alteration of the global water system gained acceptance within the scientific community, the connections of local processes to global drivers and of human and environmental systems became key research objects (Vörösmarty et al. 2013). Watersheds have been the traditional observation system for hydrological studies focused on the reproducibility of water resources within the water cycle. Water basins are both a biophysical unit for hydrological modeling and a governance tool for water decision making in many countries (Cohen and Davison 2011, Del Moral and Do Ó 2014). As such, institutional performance and governance structures are drivers of change as much as biophysical and socioeconomic processes. Recent efforts of integrated river basin modeling strive to predict the effects of decision making on water allocation and land uses over the hydrological system under a range of scenarios (Jakeman and Letcher 2003, Henriques et al. 2008, Liu et al. 2008). Although these models are powerful in hydrological response forecasting, uncertainty in societal choice predictions is still a major challenge (Letcher et al. 2007). This is partially because of the local specificity of the complex organization of social systems as driver for environmental change, making extrapolation between contexts difficult. Nevertheless, water accounting methods, like virtual water (Allan 1998), water footprint (Hoekstra and Chapagain 2006), or social metabolism (Fischer-Kowalski 1998, Swyngedouw 2006) have engaged in trying to understand the socioeconomic and political drivers of water-use patterns, attempting to bridge scale mismatches with biophysical variables. Insights on the interactions between social, ecological, and hydrological processes have been proposed within analytical frameworks of social-ecological systems (SES; Madrid et al. 2013). Complexity theory deals with the epistemological implications of: (1) multiple scales and dimensions of analysis and (2) high stakes and uncertainty in decision making in coupled humanenvironmental systems (Liu et al. 2007). The representation and analysis of river basins as complex SES is still incipient, although some important works have been developed recently. Rathwell and Peterson 2012 addressed cross-scale interactions between water management and the provision of ecosystem services. Pahl- Wostl et al. (2010) proposed the management and transition framework for the analysis of water governance regimes, which they have later applied in at least 29 river basins all over the world (Pahl-Wostl et al. 2012). Mix et al. 2015 combined qualitative and quantitative methods to approach a diachronic analysis of multidimensional drivers of water-use change in an arid river basin. All these studies have two things in common: they depart from a networks approach to SES (Janssen et al. 2006), and they emphasize the role of policies and institutions shaping relations between social and ecological systems. However, none of them combine eco-hydrological modeling with socioeconomic quantitative analysis as integrated watershed modeling does, and none deal with the multiscale organization of SES. Hierarchy theory is another branch of complexity approaching the analysis of SES (Pattee 1973, Allen and Starr 1988, Giampietro 2003). Networks theory and hierarchy theory are not exclusive but rather complementary analytical lenses, each having strengths and purposes (Allen and Giampietro 2014). Although network approaches to SES gain analytical dynamism by focusing 1Department of Human Geography, University of Seville, 2Research Centre for the Management of Agricultural and Environmental Risks - CEIGRAM, Technical University of Madrid., 3Department of Physical Geography, University of Seville Ecology and Society 20(3): 20 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol20/iss3/art20/ on change with conceptual devices such as drivers, thresholds, and resilience, hierarchy theory is more robust on scaling issues and looking for principles of categorization of living systems organization by using concepts such as descriptive domain, surfaces, or holons. Madrid and Giampietro (2015) build on hierarchy theory to propose an analytical framework for complex SES based on the concept of water metabolism (SESWM). They strive to address the coexistence of multiple intertwined multilevel organizations of the different subsystems of a SES. According to the classification criteria for analytical frameworks of SES posed by Binder et al. (2013), the SESWM is an anthropocentric analysis-oriented framework that deals with the reciprocity among social and ecological systems by focusing on the feedbacks between their organization and their water exchange. Nonetheless, it does so through quantitative indicators without addressing the institutional layers of that reciprocity. We attempt to operationalize the SESWM framework to analyze the sustainability of water management in a semiarid Spanish watershed, the Upper Andarax. To this purpose, we integrate the eco-hydrological model BalanceMED (Willaarts et al. 2012) in the multiscale integrated analysis of societal and ecosystems metabolism (MuSIASEM) accounting scheme (Giampietro et al. 2009, 2011, 2014), and we add the governance dimension. We aim to look at the following questions: how does the socio-eco- hydrological functioning of the Upper Andarax Watershed work? What are the main drivers of socioeconomic change and their impacts over aquatic ecosystems? What are the water management challenges in the context of the current European water regulatory framework? What are the trade-offs associated with water management decisions? STUDY AREA The Upper Andarax Watershed is located in the southeastern part of the Iberian Peninsula in Almeria Province. According to the nomenclature of the European Union Water Framework Directive (EC 2000), it is part of the Andarax River basin, water exploitation system IV of the Andalusian Mediterranean River Basin District (Fig. 1). The Upper Andarax is a genuine catchment because of its uneven topography and its striking hydraulic heritage. The narrow valley runs between two great elevations, the Sierra Nevada foothills, to the north, and Sierra de Gador to the south. Land occupation in the Upper Andarax is extremely constrained by topography, with agriculture occupying 14% of the territory. Vegetation series correspond to Quercus spp. in the meso-mediterranean zone (until 1280 m) and Juniperus spp. in the supra-mediterranean zone (up to 2000 m), but representatives of these species are now very limited. Pinus spp. plantations are the most extended forest form usually mixed with shrubs. The major vegetation cover includes different types of xerophytic shrubs, well-adapted to the prevailing arid conditions. Predominant species are Stipa tenacissima (esparto), Ulex parviflorus, and Festuca scariosa. A system of traditional irrigation infrastructure (infiltration channels called “acequias,” flood collection “turbias,” and subsurface water collection “galerias”) and their local management communities have long ensured water availability in this dry environment (Pulido-Bosch and Sbih 1995). The social-ecological interest of the basin has driven a large amount of rich historical studies in the area (the Martínez and Usero 2010 book is a good compilation), yet there is less scientific literature on current socio-eco-hydrological functioning of the basin (Sánchez-Martos et al. 2013). Fig. 1. Upper Andarax and its location within the Andarax River basin. Human-environmental relations in the Upper Andarax are described from the Neolithic. We focus on the period when the international economic and political arena became key drivers for regional change. Contrary to other regions in Spain, Almeria had, from the onset of 19th century, an export-based economy thanks to its important harbor (Sánchez-Picón et al. 2011; Table 1). This first globalization brought a flourishing lead mining activity lasting over a century until its international depreciation. The depression was succeeded by a second mining boom, the iron time, as well as the cultivation of grapes, oranges, and esparto grass, which were in high demand in England through much of the 20th century. These activities drove major land-use changes, including a massive process of deforestation, which forced the development of an impressive system of agricultural terraces on the riverbanks to reduce the risk to floods (Latorre et al. 2001). Miners excavated cisterns, which collected subsurface water flow for agriculture, leading to the creation of important water user communities to manage the new resources. Much of the mountainous areas were also terraced and reforested with Pinus spp. during the reforestation campaigns of the Franco’s dictatorship (Martínez et al. 2008). The second globalization begun at the end of 19th century and elicited the decline of this economy and the first emigration boom between 1980-2000 (Sánchez-Picón et al. 2011). Part of this boom followed an internal drift from upper mountain areas to the coast where the grape cultivation infrastructure was repurposed to introduce intensive vegetable production in plastic greenhouses for distribution in the European market (Mateo 2013). The northern Sierra Nevada is one of the most important hotspots for plant diversity and endemism in the Western Mediterranean region and includes an impressive geomorphological system with more than 15 peaks over 3000 meters at 50 km from the sea. It was declared a biosphere reserve in 1986 by UNESCO and a natural park, aimed at integrating sustainable human activities within conservation goals, by the Andalusian government in 1989. The most ecologically valued area, i.e., the higher peaks covered by snow in winter, was declared a national park in 1999, phasing out traditional human activities like agriculture, hunting, and gathering within its boundaries. Ecology and Society 20(3): 20 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol20/iss3/art20/ Table 1. Drivers of social-ecological change. International driver Regional driver Period Social-ecological changes First globalization Mining End of 18th - end of 19th Deforestation, floods, cisterns excavation Economic crisis Grape production End of 19th - end of 20th Terrace system Reforestations 1939-1975 Pine plantations extension Second globalization Emergence of greenhouse production in coastal area 1980-2000 Rural exodus, agricultural land abandonment United Nations Program Man and the Biosphere Sierra Nevada protection 1986-1999 Land uses regulation Water Framework Directive Environmental objectives achievement 2010-2027 Good ecological status of water bodies Common Agricultural Policy Competitiveness within international markets 2008-2014 Agricultural intensification The basin currently consists of an aged population of 8873 inhabitants distributed in 14 municipalities (INE 2011). However, the pictorial agricultural landscape is an identity element being gradually abandoned as agricultural productivity decreases. The main occupations in the upper municipalities closer to the national park are related to ecotourism, turning to agriculture in the central part until the last municipalities at the mouth of the basin, which are mainly working in the services sector. Current challenges posed by European water and agricultural policies derive from their planning objectives, which are usually conflicted (Cabello Villarejo and Madrid López 20142014). The European water governance strategy was set with the Water Framework Directive in the year 2000. As exemplary implementation of the integrated water resources management paradigm, each river basin in Europe had to establish a new adaptive management regime in planning cycles of six years. The overall objective is the recovery of “good ecological status” of all water bodies in Europe by 2015. The first river basin management plan for the Mediterranean Andalusian River Basin District was released in 2010. The plan assessed, for the first time, the ecological status of surface and groundwater bodies in the region and established environmental recovery objectives for the time horizons of 2015 and 2027. METHODS River basins as complex holarchic social-ecological systems River basins have been represented using different analytical lenses: hydrological, ecological, institutional, or socioeconomic (Fig. 2a). Each analytical dimension is a criterion for observation and can itself be approached as a hierarchy with multiple nested levels. Hierarchies have been described for ecosystems (Allen and Hoeckstra 1992, Jørgensen and Nielsen 2013), hydrological systems (MacLachlan and Moulton 2006, Li and Ren 2010), institutions (Gupta and Pahl-Wostl 2013), agro-ecosystems (Giampietro 2003, Ewert et al. 2011), and social systems (Scholz and Binder 2003, Giampietro et al. 2014). All of these criteria are relevant when conceptualizing the river basin as a socialecological system. The dual fuzzy identity of levels in a hierarchy, which are at the same time parts and wholes, structural compartments (a water mass) and functional types (a typology of water bodies), is captured by the concept of holon (Koestler 1972, Serrano-Tovar and Giampietro 2014). Feedback loops occur within holons and across levels and dimensions. The problem is how to operationalize the existence of these coexisting holons in a common frame of analysis and deal with the transfer of information between descriptive domains. In research practice, this has been tackled through the institutional analysis of environmental governance regimes in some of the most popular frameworks for SES analysis (Scholz and Binder 2003, Ostrom 2009, Pahl-Wostl et al. 2010). Fig. 2. (a) Descriptive domains for a river basin. Adapted from Ewert et al. (2011); (b) Multiaxes holarchy for a river basin as a social-ecological system (SES). Adapted from Madrid and Giampietro (2015). Madrid and Giampietro (2015) propose the combination of the two classical descriptive domains in hydrological studies: the “watershed” (eco-hydrology logic, “e”) and the “problemshed” (societal logic, “s”) in a holarchic basis (Fig. 2b). Any holon is composed of a physical part that exchanges biophysical flows to reproduce itself and a coded part that handles its information (Allen and Giampietro 2014). We add a transversal axis representing the “infoshed” (governance logic, “i”) produced at different levels that shape societal metabolic patterns and interaction with their contextual environment. Our focal level (e/ i/s) is the physical river basin and its society, linked through the river basin management plan (RBMP), which establishes water allocations. Upper and lower levels in the axes establish the external and internal constraints to the self-organization of the socio-ecosystem. We structure the multiaxes into the general analytical framework (Fig. 3) arranging analytical categories in four quadrants: ecosystem/societal metabolism and water exchange/organization. Ecology and Society 20(3): 20 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol20/iss3/art20/ Hydrological processes in a watershed sustain a wide range of ecosystem services. A great part of the rainfall within a basin is stored in the soils and evapotranspired by plants, providing services like microclimate regulation, rain-fed agriculture, or forest products. Another share of the annual rainfall flows into aquatic ecosystems and is often regulated to ensure human water supply through the development of infrastructures (technical capital). Water, land, and other environmental policies affect how much water is stored in soils and water bodies by normatively setting environmental objectives, aquatic ecosystem requirements, land-use changes, and new infrastructure developments. These policies are usually produced at higher governance levels than the basin itself, framing the strategies for river-basin management, which then have to encounter local realities. We represent four interfaces in which we can address different types of interactions between (1) the organization of social systems and water use/ demand (A), (2) water demand and water availability (B), (3) the organization of ecosystems and water supply (C), and (4) the organization of societal metabolism and ecosystem health (D). Fig. 3. Social-ecological system based on the concept of water metabolism (SESWM) analytical framework adapted from Madrid and Giampietro (2015) to the Upper Andarax basin. Water availability Water availability is a concept approached from multiple definitions and perspectives (Table 2). The most common one refers to the long-term average freshwater volume yearly supplied by the hydrological cycle, including runoff and aquifer recharge (see for instance Menzel and Matovelle 2010, Parish et al. 2012, Post et al. 2012). In this sense, it equates to the Falkenmark and Rockström (2004) concept of blue water. Other approaches encompass the environmental flows (e-flows) as a prior allocation to what is available for humans (Poff et al. 2010, Hoekstra et al. 2012) or focus on the reproducibility of specific end uses (Henriques et al. 2008, Molden et al. 2011, Padowski and Jawitz 2012). Availability, in a social-ecological sense, is a dynamic boundary concept between societal water uses, expectations on additional water requirements (demand), technical capital to regulate water bodies, and desired ecosystem integrity. Defining availability is the process of determining what is considered a resource for a specific, usually human end use, and what is not. For instance, on fined aquifers water “becomes available” when technological advances and energy prices allow deeper pumping, as long as there are no adverse effects that the social system using the groundwater is not willing to accept (del Moral 2005:16, Zhou 2009). As a normative category, water availability depends on which are the accepted trade-offs between water extraction and environmental, economic, and social consequences of this extraction. Because narratives on availability might differ depending on whom you ask, especially when water allocation implies uncertainties and high stakes, a normative definition of availability is usually set as a compromise to avoid conflicts, or as an imposition of a party, in the frequent case of existence of unbalanced power relations. Despite formal commitments or authoritarian impositions, the implementation of the resulting standards are often subjected to infringements, a not incidental but structural atmosphere of deviance or noncompliance with legal norms. This is the case of the region in which the Andarax is located (Sampedro and Del Moral 2014). Nonetheless, what is allocated as available at one scale for an end use will entail trade-offs, and thus, create winners and losers. Therefore, further negotiation with those affected is usually required. For instance e-flows established in European river basins are calculated first and negotiated afterwards (see for instance section 4.3.6 of the Spanish water legislation http://www. magrama.gob.es/es/agua/legislacion/iph_tcm7-207591.pdf). Table 2. Water availability definitions for different systems. System Water availability Trade-offs Whole socialecological system Total water inflow to the river basin including precipitation (minus evapotranspiration), inflow from other aquifers, and from external transfers With other river basins Land subsystem Soil water that can be used for plant transpiration Between productive and nonproductive uses Aquatic subsystem Ecosystem requirements of surface and groundwater (normatively established) With societal appropriation Human subsystem Total water available for human direct appropriation from different sources Between human demand and impact on ecosystems End users Water that can be used by each end user according to institutional regulation Between end users When moving from semantic to formal categories of water metabolism analysis, we need to make explicit the definition of water availability being considered. This definition is at the core of any water use sustainability assessment and introduces a value judgment into the scientific analysis, a preanalytical decision made by the analyst. Molle and Mollinga (2003) defined water scarcity in terms of scarcity of what and for what. When using normative concepts such as sustainability, scarcity, or availability, these questions become relevant: availability of which type of resource, for what type of end use, at what costs, and for whom. In the interface of society and ecosystem, the definition of available water (Box 1) deals with the trade-offs between allocation of water for productive uses or ecosystem conservation. Ecology and Society 20(3): 20 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol20/iss3/art20/ Box 1: Water availability at the ecosystems/society interface. Water availability for society = ∑ (surface + groundwater + produced + transferred + soil) available water Surface available water = Compromised diversion from the river and reservoirs within established environmental flow regime for aquatic ecosystems Groundwater available water = Compromised pumping rate within an established sustainable yield Reclaimed available water = Wastewater reuse + desalination capacity Transferred available water = Transfers from other basins Soil available water = Soil moisture appropriated for human use for plant growth and food production The water grammar in multiscale integrated analysis of societal and ecosystem metabolism (MuSIASEM) Our methodological purpose is the operationalization of SESWM to link the analysis of societal metabolism to variables of ecosystem metabolism that are relevant for river basin management. Our lenses are on the social scale of observation: we do not study the functioning of ecosystems themselves but the interactions between ecosystems and society as a consequence of societal organization. Therefore, as an ecosystem water metabolism analysis, we focus on the eco-hydrological processes that control water resource renewability (supply side), the impacts caused to ecosystem health (sink side), and the boundary concepts of water availability and ecosystem water requirements. To this purpose, water metabolism is quantified through the water grammar, tying the semantic representation of the system metabolism (Fig. 3) to the holarchic organization considered (Fig. 2b). A grammar is a formal system of rules for accounting metabolic flows, given a set of expected relationships between semantic categories of what we want to indicate (for instance sustainability) and formal categories (indicators, data, and rules for calculation). The MuSIASEM uses different interrelated grammars for the water, energy, land, and food nexus (see Giampietro et al. 2014), based on the flow-fund model of Georgescu-Roegen (1971). Fund variables are those remaining the same over the time duration of the representation (or those that we want to conserve) whereas flows are those that are consumed or produced to maintain and reproduce funds. Common societal funds used in MuSIASEM are human activity (measured in hours), technical capital, and land. Land is, at the same time, an ecological and societal fund. The specificity of water as a resource is important in that it changes its semantic definition from a fund in ecosystems (longterm patterns of water cycle change) to a flow in most societal uses (managed through year planning). Note that, although most approaches consider water bodies as stocks (see for instance Falkenmark and Rockström 2004), the difference between stocks and funds is essential in the metabolism approach (Giampietro and Lomas 2014). Stocks are nonrenewable resources at the time scale of the representation, like reservoirs or aquifer overdraft, which consumptive use diminishes availability for ecosystems or for future needs. Funds are resources consumed at a slower pace than their renewability rate during the representation, like aquifer sustainable yield or soil moisture. Ecosystems live on water fund limits. Water flows for human use can come from a stock or a fund because we can create artificial stocks to increase available water flows or overdraft funds from remaining stocks (fossil waters). The water grammar provides a set of useful semantic categories for multilevel accounting of ecosystems (e ± i) and societal (s ± i) water metabolism (Madrid and Giampietro 2014; Table 3). Flows and funds are classified in typologies explicitly tailored to each case study according to criteria defined at each level of observation. Water flows are typologies associated with provisioning ecosystem services that change water characteristics in its use. Water funds sustain ecosystem functions that supply all types of services. There are also human uses of water funds, like navigation or electrical generation, which are not relevant to this case study. Water funds are required all at once whereas flows are required at a specific pace. In addition, they are all required to have a specific set of useful attributes, i.e., quantity, quality, timing, and location (Brauman et al. 2007). The grammar is quantified through extensive variables (total flows and funds), and relational indicators (flow/flow, flow/fund) are summarized in Table 4. As shown in Figure 3, we consider four types of interactions between ecosystems and society. Relation A describes the intensity of water use required to maintain a human activity or land use. Relation B describes the degree of exploitation of water funds (supply side) for direct human uses. Relations type C are two-sided: on one hand, the generation of water funds (runoff, recharge, soil infiltration) per type of land cover; on the other, the ecosystem water requirements mediated by normative societal decisions on availability and land uses. The feedback D, environmental loading, refers to the impact of the societal metabolism over aquatic ecosystem health (sink side). Modeling To build up this grammar into formal categories several models/ tools have been integrated: . Climate: a series of monthly median precipitation and mean temperature measurements for the period 1970/1971-2000/2001 from 24 meteorological stations have been interpolated through inverse distance weighting (IDW) in ArcGIS 10.2 and used for potential evapotranspiration calculation with a Thornthwaite based Microsoft Excel macro. . Eco-hydrology: the BalanceMED model (Willaarts et al. 2012) is a semideterministic model able to quantify the mean hydrological functioning (i.e., partition of annual precipitation into runoff, aquifer recharge, and soil moisture) of Mediterranean basins using long time series of mean monthly rainfall and potential evapotranspiration. Because BalanceMED is a spatially explicit model, the Upper Andarax was divided into so-called hydrological units (HU), which are unique combinations of Land Use Land Cover (LULC) and soil types. Such divisions allow the identification of potential differences in the ecohydrological functioning across the basin. The model uses the APLIS equation (Andreo et al. 2004) to assess the soil percolation capacity (i.e., potential aquifer recharge). Ecology and Society 20(3): 20 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol20/iss3/art20/ Table 3. Water grammar for the Upper Andarax basin. Adapted from Madrid and Giampietro (2014). System definition Water Exchange Organization Role Semantic categories Types Role Semantic categories Types Water cycle e+2 Fund Climate Precipitation Fund Climate Potential Evapotranspiration Ecosystem functions e+1 Water funds turnover Runoff Recharge Infiltration Land covers Quercus and riparian forests Plantations Shrubs Pastures Irrigated agric. Rain-fed agric. Abandoned agric. Water funds Focal level e Available water for societal appropriation Surface Groundwater Soil moisture Water bodies Rivers Aquifers Society Focal level s Flow Gross water use Withdrawn Soil Fund Human activity Physiological overhead Social, Leisure, and Education Unpaid work Paid work Societal functions s-1 Net water use Urban supply Food production Forestry Esparto gathering Cattle Managed land uses Plantations Shrubs Pastures Irrigated agric. Rain-fed agric. i-1 Demand Withdrawals Technical capital Transport infrastructures Irrigation technology Flow Money Agricultural costs Gross added value water costs Municipal gross rent Table 4. Relational indicators. Relation Indicator Description A Water metabolic rate Gross water use per hour of human activity B Water extraction index Surface water: ratio of water withdrawals out of total runoff, eflows discounted Groundwater: ratio of water abstraction out of total recharge, discharges to springs discounted C Environmental impacts Surface and groundwater quality Water table level changes Erosion rates D Soil: transpiration River: e-flows Ecosystems water requirements Groundwater: discharge to springs . Societal metabolism accounting: this includes water and monetary flows and land, human activity, and technical capital funds. We use the pie chart representation for ruralsystems analysis adapted from the Serrano-Tovar and Giampietro (2014) template. It includes their interactions with three types of contexts, i.e., urban system, external markets, and water funds. Associated land-cover uses and green water flows were estimated with a fuzzy approach of shares-use coefficients per type of cover (see Appendix 1). Fig. 4. Process overview. . Environmental impacts: annual rates for erosion and water table level changes have been averaged for available series between 1992 and 2006. Water-quality measurements in existing control points in the watershed were averaged for available series between 2002 and 2013. The process consisted of spatial processing of the physical variables in ArcGIS 10.2 to feed the eco-hydrological model on one side, and on secondary data processing to feed the societal metabolism accounting on the other (Fig. 4). Both were Ecology and Society 20(3): 20 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol20/iss3/art20/ conducted in R, and results were gathered in ArcGIS geodatabases. Results, analysis, and discussion were completed through two months of fieldwork observations and nine semistructured interviews of key informants in the basin (March- April 2014). For a detailed methodological description on data sources, model calibration, variables calculation, and links to databases and codes please refer to the methodology in Appendix 1. Note that the levels specified in the grammar follow an organizational scale of observation, i.e., holons in a socialecological system. Formal categories of the grammar and the spatial and temporal scales used for modeling are given in Table 1 and Figure 1 of the Appendix. How do we calculate water availability? As Del Moral (2005) and Zhou (2009) illustrated, water availability is almost impossible to calculate on a general basis because of its strong dependency on normative frameworks, technical capital, and accepted trade-offs of water withdrawal. The Spanish water management legislation only defines water availability for groundwater as “the average year-to-year value of total recharge of the water body minus the average year-to-year flow required to achieve environmental objectives, to prevent any further significant deterioration of the ecological status and significant damage of dependent terrestrial ecosystems” (MARM 2008). This complex definition is not complemented by a harmonized framework for its assessment, especially with regard to the connection of ground to surface water bodies, leaving the definition of “significant” damage open to interpretation. As a result, aquifers are usually treated as black boxes in the RBMPs, and the lack of spatially explicit aquifer modeling hinders their governance robustness (De Stefano et al. 2014). We calculate the year availability for societal appropriation based on available data as: (1) Where DSF are water diversions from the river, EF are the e-flows, RE is the annual recharge from rain, IRF the infiltration from runoff, IIR the infiltration from irrigation returns, IF the lateral inflow, and OF the lateral outflows to other aquifers. We assumed the regime of surface e-flows estimated in the RBMP as well as the average annual estimated discharge to the 58 natural springs as a proxy for groundwater ecosystem dependency. Modeling limitations The most important drawback of our study is the unavailability of a temporal series of water-use data hampering a diachronic analysis. In addition, the wide and diverse secondary data requirements for the social metabolism analysis forces the integration of data measured in different periods. For this reason, we can only get a snapshot of the average water metabolism in the region between 2000 and 2008. This is the same timeframe as the baseline measurements produced for the RBMP released in 2010. Regarding the eco-hydrological model, the surfacegroundwater interactions and the influence of the snow on the hydrological regime are not considered. In addition, one of the main limitations is the difficulty to model the pronounced human alteration of the basin hydrology. We only consider human terracing with regard to its effect on slope reduction but their explicit relation to erosion rates is not covered within our model. We decided to calibrate on a monthly average resolution because it is sufficient for our descriptive purposes given the constraints on social data. RESULTS Water funds (e+2/e+1) The Upper Andarax climate is representative of Mediterranean areas: high evapotranspiration and marked seasonal and interannual irregularity of precipitation. Nonetheless, the high elevations of both sides of the basin and its orientation shape a harsh gradient in the spatial distribution of precipitation and potential evapotranspiration (Figs. 5a, b). The Northwest, mountainous Sierra Nevada presents a subhumid 630 mm of annual precipitation and temperature of 11 °C. The lower, southeastern area is classified as semiarid with a range 200-300 mm of annual precipitation, mean temperatures of 16 °C, and potential evapotranspiration of up to 890 mm. The presence of arid zones, characterized by the alternation of extreme events (drought and torrential rainfall), is usually a more determining factor than the small fluctuations in the mean values of the climatological variables. This irregularity is revealed by annual Pearson’s coefficients of variation around 42%, increasing to over 200% for the driest months. Water bodies are classified in typologies in the RBMP. There are two surface water bodies: the Alto Andarax, which runs from the spring until the first urban area, and the Medio Andarax, which continues then flowing down until the outlet. The two main groundwater bodies extend far beyond the watershed to coastal areas in which major exploitation takes place. Gador Sierra is a huge karst aquifer composed of permeable and fractured limestone and dolomites. As observed in Figure 5c, the recharge model shows a recharge capacity of over 80% for this area whereas siliceous Sierra Nevada has low permeability, and the detritus aquifer of Low Andarax medium (70-80%). Total mean annual precipitation for the modeled period was 138.2 Hm3; of which 76.6 turns into soil moisture, 36.4 percolates for aquifer recharge, and 15.7 flows as runoff. Figures 5d-f show the spatial distribution of these water funds. The influence of the precipitation pattern is clear in that 80% of runoff generation is concentrated in the northeast corner whereas most of the recharge is distributed all along the eastern strip. Middle and lower parts of the basin show lower runoff and recharge generation but still hold an important fraction of the soil moisture. The average eco-hydrological indicators (Relations C) per landcover type are presented in Figure 6. Transpiration, as the share of soil water invested in biomass productivity, is shown along with the annual rate of water evaporation, i.e., nonproductive fraction of soil water. Although representative of a small fraction of the territory, Quercus spp. forests and its combination with other types of vegetation (shrubs or pastures) and riparian forests transpire the largest fraction of soil moisture, followed by Pinus spp. plantations. As expected, more densely vegetated areas are more efficient in terms of water used to produce a unit of biomass because they have less water losses from soil water evaporation. The ratio of transpiration out of total evapotranspiration decreases in lower covers, such as shrubs and pastures. The effect Ecology and Society 20(3): 20 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol20/iss3/art20/ Fig. 5. Spatial distribution of (a) median annual precipitation; (b) potential evapotranspiration; (c) recharge capacity; (d) soil infiltration; (e) runoff; (f) recharge. Fig. 6. Land ecosystem requirements and surface and groundwater recharge density per land use land cover (LULC) type (mm). of terracing in agriculture can be detected in the rather high productivity of rain-fed agriculture as compared to similar cover vegetation like shrubs and pastures. Abandoned agricultural areas are substituted by shrubs showing a similar productivity. Indeed, the analysis of variances showed significant differences in transpiration rates between all typologies (p < 0.05) except between plantations and rain-fed agriculture (both terraced), and between abandoned agricultural area shrubs and pastures. Irrigation significantly intensifies plant productivity in comparison with all other land uses. Recharge and runoff rates in this watershed are not so much determined by the land cover as they are by the geology, slope and spatial distribution of precipitation. For this reason, there are no clear statistical clusters based on LULC typologies. However, we found a significantly lower recharge rate on Quercus spp. forest compared to Pinus spp. plantations in both sierras, but no statistical difference with shrubs or pastures. Abandoned agricultural areas do not show statistical differences on their recharge rate with any other landcover type whereas both irrigation and rain-fed agriculture areas have significantly higher average recharge rates than Quercus spp. forest and shrubs. Societal metabolism (s/s-1) Figure 7 shows a representation of societal metabolism of the whole Upper Andarax. The human activity budget shows a low share of hours devoted to paid work activities (7%), which have to sustain the monetary requirements for the rest of the hours (93%). A relevant point is that unpaid work, 7 million hours, in households is higher than paid work hours, with 88% of these hours sustained by women (gender disaggregation of human activity can be found in Appendix 1). Main working activities are the services and government sectors (50%), building (18%), and mining and industrial activities (9%). All of these occupy only 2% Ecology and Society 20(3): 20 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol20/iss3/art20/ Fig. 7. Annual societal funds and interactions with main contexts. AG: agriculture; PW: paid work; M: millions; Mhr: million hours. of the total land used (urban areas), whereas most of human land uses are agriculture and other extensive land-cover exploitations (grazing, forestry, and esparto gathering) accounting for 23% of formal working hours. About 77% of the watershed’s agricultural production is traded in external markets, whereas the internal market sustains 33% of revenues obtained from agricultural products. The total municipal gross rent in 2006 was 73 million Euros, indicating an important contribution of agriculture to the local economy. Water costs represent 13% of agriculture expenditures and are very low for surface water (between 1-3 cents €/m3), and more fluctuating for groundwater (between 6-18 cents €/m3). The consequence of the emigration flow from the basin villages to downstream urban areas is an increasing input of working/leisure hours on weekends and the inflow of cash generated there. The region contains a diverse pattern of rain-fed and irrigated crops, with a predominance of almond trees typically found in mountain regions in Spain because of their high adaptability to extreme conditions, i.e., poor soils, low soil moisture, and cold winters. Table 5 presents the economic and technical indicators of the different crops. As observed, irrigation substantially increases monetary productivity. The highest economic labor productivity (gross €/hour) is shown by almond production, because it is low labor intensive, followed by horticulture because of high market prices. Water transport systems are primarily “acequias” and surface flooding represents the main irrigation technique. Only citrus production at the basin outlet has introduced drip irrigation. Table 5. Irrigated and rain-fed crops. LU = land use. LU (has) Gross €/ha Gross €/ hr Use of acequias Drip irrigation Irrigated Almonds 1100 6708 20.0 56% 32% Olive 847 4275 9.9 84% 15% Horticulture 661 7333 14.2 98% 1% Citrus 634 4773 9.1 62% 50% Rain-fed Almonds 1092 1699 Olive 333 1549 Extensive 326 176 Vineyards 312 2504 The ecosystems-society interface (e/i/s) Water exchange (e → s) Table 6 shows the water flows sustaining provisioning services in the watershed. Soil moisture use is 50% higher than water withdrawals and sustains a greater variety of extensive land uses and associated services. Because there are no major industries or Ecology and Society 20(3): 20 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol20/iss3/art20/ Verheijen, F. G. A., R. J. A. Jones, R. J. Rickson, and C. J. Smith. 2009. Tolerable versus actual soil erosion rates in Europe. Earth- Science Reviews 94:23-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. earscirev.2009.02.003 Vörösmarty, C. J., C. Pahl-Wostl, and A. Bhaduri. 2013. Water in the anthropocene: new perspectives for global sustainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. 5:535-538. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2013.11.011 Willaarts, B. A., M. Volk, and P. A. Aguilera. 2012. Assessing the ecosystem services supplied by freshwater flows in Mediterranean agroecosystems. Agricultural Water Management 105:21-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2011.12.019 Zhou, Y. 2009. A critical review of groundwater budget myth, safe yield and sustainability. Journal of Hydrology 370:207-213. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.03.009 Appendix 1 This appendix has the purpose of extending the methodological description including detailed calculation of variables and modeling validation. Scales Even though watersheds are the object of study of hydrology par excellence, they are not in societal metabolism of water. One of the main reasons is the scale mismatch on available data. Economic variables are crucial to study the self-organization of social systems. These are not usually available at the exact boundaries of a catchment and have either to be aggregated from lower administrative divisions (municipalities or similar), or disaggregated from upper ones. Focusing on the watershed level we gain connection with eco-hydrological processes and water governance but we lose the capacity to delve in the economic relations within the social system. To this purpose, administrative units are more appropriate as analytical extent (see for instance Madrid et al. 2014). Agriculture is commonly the main water consumer in a river basin and the societal metabolism approach to agro-ecosystems is the rural systems analysis (Ravera et al. 2014, Serrano and Giampietro 2014). It focuses on the allocation of land and human activity in terms of time use of rural households and the associated production and consumption of biophysical and monetary flows (Scheidel 2013). These studies are usually carried out at local scales, gathering data and building metabolic typologies on a bottom up basis through surveys to farmers and households. The size of a river basin and the necessary consideration of urban water require coarser modeling resolutions. River basins are always middle scales, between the social and hydrological, between the local and the regional, between the rural and the urban. Allen and Hoekstra, 1992:64 shed light on the problematic with middle scales: “these have too many parts to model each one separately, but not enough to allow averages that fully subsume the individuality of the part. Questions that cannot be answered imply a middle number system specification. They are unpredictable because the constraint structure is unreliable. […] At middle scales, each part of the landscape has its own individual explanation”. The multi-axes holarchic representation (Figure 2b of the paper) is an attempt to escape this middle scales dialectic. Any holon results from the composition between the observed system and the observer interests. We set the organizational levels for our system, and with them the relevant parts of the system that we want to observe. There is a tendency to augment the size of the system and thus its spatial extent with the level, but holons can be analyzed at any temporal and spatial scale (we can study a rock holding it with our hand or looking through a microscope). Main constraints are data availability and modelling capacity. Figure 1 shows the temporal and spatial levels used for the Upper Andarax grammar according to these constraints. We run the BalanceMED model on temporal monthly and spatial Hydrological Units (HU) resolutions. Results were aggregated to the extents of one year and land uses and covers types. Socioeconomic data are available for a variety of grains (see Table 1). Human activity is mapped for whole urban areas (municipal level) and agricultural land uses for irrigation communities and rain-fed agriculture polygons. Note that we could do a municipal level analysis (comparing each municipality Land-Human activity budgets) but this would enlarge the amount of results and loose the purpose of the study: the operationalization of the SESWM framework for the analysis of water management at river basin scale. As Schneiel 2013 explains “every kind of data collection is always a ‘heroic simplification’ of a complex rural system and the issue is rather to find the adequate simplification, which allows answering some relevant research question”. A more detailed hydrological resolution and, especially, temporal series of water use would clearly improve the method analytical potential. Figure 1- Temporal and spatial hierarchies in the Upper Andarax water grammar Conceptual model and formal categories The conceptual model for variables calculation is presented in Figure 2 and the formal categories of the grammar in Table 1. Codes and databases can be downloaded here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/45za6hqmnjelqoi/AAD-ObuilYtGzFwVKyJ_WzQ5a?dl=0 Figure 2 - Conceptual scheme for water grammar formalization Table 1- Formal categories of the water grammar Semantic categories Types Description Units Temporal resolution Spatial resolution Data sources Water exchange Climate Precipitation Average precipitation from the series 1970 - 71/2000-01 mm/Hm 3 Months Raster 10 m Seco ndary Climatic Stations National Network (8) Water funds turnover Runoff Total runoff to surface water bodies mm/ Hm 3 HU BalanceMED Recharge Infiltrated rain water that percolates to aquifers BalanceMED , APPLIS recharge model Soil Infiltration Infiltrated rain water that is evapotranspired or contributes to soil reserve BalanceMED Societal appropriation & Availability Surface Direct diversion from the river for human uses Hm 3 Year Municipalities &Irrigation communities (1), (2), (3) Groundwater Extractions from aquifer Hm 3 Soil water Soil moisture in land used by humans mm/ Hm 3 Months HU BalanceMED Gross water use Withdrawn Ground and surface water consumption Hm 3 Months Municipalities &Irrigation communities (1), (2), (3) Soil Evapotranspiration from land uses Months HU BalanceMED Net water use Urban supply Water supply*Efficiency in supply chain Hm 3 Year Municipalities (1), (2) Food production Water withdrawal for agriculture*Efficiency in supply chain*Efficiency of irrigation system + Transpiration from rain water Months Agricultural areas & Irrigation communities (1), (4), (5) Forestry &Esparto gathering Transpiration from rain water Year Land cover polygons BalanceMED Cattle Surface water requirements + transpiration from rain water Year Watershed, land cover (1), BalanceMED Loses Gross Water Use minus Net Water Use Year Municipalities & irrigation areas (1), (2), (3) Water demand Deficit for irrigation purposes in the RBMP Year Irrigation area s (1) Water rights Authorized withdrawals from each water Year Water bodies (1) body Organization Climate Temperature Average precipitation from the series 1970 - 2001 ºC Months Raster 10 m Secondary Climatic Stations Network (8) Water bodies Rivers Descriptive category: water bodies types considered in the RBMP - 6 years 6 years (1) Aquifers Land covers Surface occupied by land cover types Hectares 4 years Land c over polygons Map of Land Uses and Covers of Andalusia 2003 (9) Managed land uses Surface occupied by land uses types under managed land Hectares 4 years Land u se polygons Human activity Physiological overhead Hours devoted to personal care, eating, sleeping and dependent people time Hours Hours Municipalities Time Use Survey of Almeria province 2002/03 (10) Spanish Population and Households Census 2001 (11) Local population census 2005 and 2011 (10) Social, Leisure &Education Hours devoted to traveling, leisure activities, education and volunteering Unpaid work Hours devoted to households work Paid Work Hours devoted to each type of paid work sector by the working population Technical capital Hydraulic infrastructures % of surface of irrigation communities supplied by acequias % Year Crop types (3) Irrigation technology % of surface of irrigation communities with drip irrigation (3) Monetary exchange Agricultural inputs& Water costs Total expenditures of irrigated agriculture on water and other inputs € Crops types & Irrigation communities (3), (7) Gross Added Value Total income from local and external markets Crops types (3), (6) (1) CMAT 2012. Andalusia Mediterranean River Basins Management Plan 2009-2015. [online] URL: http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/medioambiente/site/portalweb/menuitem.7e1cf46ddf59bb227a9ebe205510e1ca/?vgnextoid=6d3173f 2c746a310VgnVCM2000000624e50aRCRD&vgnextchannel=0bb66af68bb96310VgnVCM1000001325e50aRCRD (2) Martinez, J. 2011. Energy Footprint of the urban water supply in Almeria province. (3) CA 2008. Inventory and characterization of irrigation in Andalusia. [online] URL: http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/agriculturaypesca/sigregadios/servlet/regadios (4) Fundación Cajamar. 2004. Irrigation doses for intensive horticulture in Almeria.[online] URL: http://www.publicacionescajamar.es/seriestematicas/centros-experimentales-las-palmerillas/ (5) CA 2011. System of technical assistance to farmers of the Andalusian government. [online] URL: http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/agriculturaypesca/ifapa/sar (6) CMAT 2006. Andalusia Multiterritorial Information System. [online] URL: http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/institutodeestadisticaycartografia/sima/index2.htm (7) CA 2005. Annual statistics on agriculture and fishing of Andalusia. [online] URL: http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/agriculturaypesca/portal/servicios/estadisticas/estadisticas/agrarias/resumen-anual.html (8) AEMET. Spanish State Agency of Meteorology. [online under payment] URL: http://www.aemet.es/es/serviciosclimaticos/datosclimatologicos (9) REDIAM. Andalusian Network for Environmental Information. [online] URL: http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/medioambiente/site/rediam (10) IECA. Andalusian Statistical and Cartography Office. [online] URL: http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/institutodeestadisticaycartografia (11) INE. Spanish Statistical Office. [online] URL: http://www.ine.es/jaxi/menu.do?type=pcaxis&path=%2Ft20%2Fe242&file=inebase&L=0 BalanceMED Precipitation and potential evapotranspiration GIS raster layers of average monthly precipitation and potential evapotranspiration (PE) variables were obtained from the Andalusian Network for Environmental Information (REDIAM) for the period 1971-2000. Monthly scale reflects better the normal Mediterranean environmental conditions due to the usual lack of rainfall in finer time scales generated by long periods of water deficit. This source of information was chosen because it is the same used by the River Basin Authority for hydrological modeling. We found hydrological variables (runoff and recharge) were greatly overestimated using this data source. Mean values are usually not representative when dealing with very irregular regimes with skewed precipitation density functions such as the ones in the Andarax. In arid and semiarid climates, the median as central statistic measure is more robust. For this reason, median monthly values of were obtained at the closer 24 meteorological stations with available data for the 1971-2000 period (within a buffer of 10 km). These stations belong to the Spanish State Agency of Meteorology and only provide temperature and rainfall data. PE was estimated using an excel macro based on Thornthwaite method (HydroBio3, Camara and Martinez 2002). All data series where then spatialized using the Inverse Weighted Distance interpolation in ArcGIS 10.2 to obtain continuous information to be entered in the model. Results significantly improved making estimates closer to real conditions. Hydrological units processing Hydrological units are obtained from the intersection of soil and land cover GIS layers. Previously, several parameters were calculated for each of them. Roots depth, Leaf Area Index and interception capacity were gathered for vegetation species through literature review. Weighted means per number of species were obtained for each land cover unit. Soil parameters are wilting point, field capacity and soil depth. These are calculated from data on lime, clay and organic matter fractions extracted from the soil cartography of the Desertification Prevention in the Mediterranean Project (LUCDEME) of the Spanish Ministry of Agriculture. Percolation The APLIS equation was proposed by Andreo et al. 2004 for determining the average rate of recharge in carbonate aquifers. This rate is expressed in BalanceMED as a percentage of drainage for each hydrological unit and calculated as: %=  +  + 3 + 2 + /90 Where A is the Altitude, S is the Slope, L is the Lithology, I the preferential Infiltration layers and S the Soil. Punctuation categories are established for each variable between one (minimal influence in recharge) and ten (maximum influence). In our study, slope was corrected to zero for agricultural land uses in order to introduce the leveling effect of terraces. These parameters are averaged for HU grain. Model calibration, validation and limitations A detail description of BalanceMED can be found in Willaarts et al. 2012. For this study, the model was translated from a Microsoft Excel macro to an R script to gain flexibility for future implementations. Model calibration was done through standard hydrograph plot (Figure 3). Monthly volumetric runoff rates are recorded at the only one available gauging station in the basin for the time series 1971-2000. Mean-monthly values of observed runoff were contrasted against model runoff. The peak of runoff in April responds to the monthly precipitation pattern but is not observed in the gauging station likely because it is the month were irrigation starts and pools are filled with diversions from river. Figure 3 - Plot of observed vs modeled runoff volumetric rates In order to validate results, the evaluation statistics recommended by Moriari et al. 2007 were used: (i) the Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) which indicates how well the plot of observed versus simulated data fits the 1:1 line, (ii) the Percent bias (PBIAS) which measures underestimation tendency of the model and (iii) the RMSE-observations standard deviation ratio (RSR), which is a standardized version of the root mean square error. The model performance can be judged as satisfactory according to these criteria (NSE > 0.50 and RSR < 0.70, and if PBIAS ≤25% for streamflow) (Table 2). The model efficiency shows a good plot fit between observed and simulated data. The PBIAS indicate a slight overestimation of runoff. Table 2 - Model evaluation of BalanceMED. Three metrics were calculated to validate modelresults: Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) (range =−∞/1, optimum 1); Percent bias (PBIAS) (range =−∞/+∞, optimum 0); and RMSE-observations standard deviation ratio (RSR)(range =0/+∞, optimum 0). Statistics Value NSE 0.80 PBIAS 12.00 RSR 0.44 Post processing water grammar variables Main results from BalanceMED are the volumetric variables of recharge, runoff, soil infiltration, transpiration and evaporation on a monthly and HU resolution. Intensive variables (mm or m 3 /ha) used for spatial analysis of ecosystems-water funds relation are obtained by weighted means per area for each type of LULC considered. Extensive volumetric variables (total Hm 3 ) were obtained by aggregation per HU area. 0 1 2 3 SEP OCT NOV DEC ENE FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AGO Hm3 Observed Modeled Societal metabolism Human activity A thorough description of human activity accounting can be found in Kovacic and Ramos-Martin 2014. The Total Human Activity in a given society is calculated in hours as:   =365 ∗ 24 ∗  !"#$  This total is disaggregated in subsequent hierarchical levels according to case-study objectives. In our case, the categories considered are explained in Table 1 and the equation to valid is:  %&&' =  () +  *+, +  -. +  (. Where PO is physiological overhead; SLE is social, leisure and education; UW is unpaid work; PW is paid work. These variables were calculated for each municipality with data on employment, occupation, education and demographic structure from Spanish Census of Population and Households 2001 and the Time Use Survey 2002-03 for Almeria province. This latter establishes shares of hours devoted to the different activities in a day per age ranges. Since that information is only available every ten years in Spain, the obtained human activity shares were then extrapolated to the population evolution until 2005. Considering there was not mayor societal changes those years (pre economic crisis 2008 scenario), it is a reasonable assumption. The new census 2011 collected data from 2011 to 2013 and did not reach the same detailed level of municipality for required data inputs. For this reason it is not possible to update the human activity budget. Land uses Two geographical layers were used for the land budget analysis: the Map of Land Uses and Covers of Andalusia 2003 (MLUCV03) and the Inventory and characterization of irrigation in Andalusia 2008 (ICIA08). This latter collected data through surveys to Irrigation Communities from 2002 to 2008 and is the baseline used for the RBMP. It contains crops surface per irrigation community. Categories of irrigated agriculture in the MLUCV03 were coerced to match those of the ICIA08. For the rest of land uses and covers, we broke the hierarchical structure of the MLUCV03 in order to group them in types and levels relevant our analysis. MLUCV03 was intersected with the parks boundaries to obtained categories of land management. For each type of LULC and protection category (High protection in the National Park, Medium protection in the Natural Park, no protection in the rest of the watershed) a land use ratio was assigned as shown in Table 3. Table 3 – Land and soil water use coefficients. High protection Medium protection Not protected Water uses Irrigated agriculture 1 1 1 Irrigated agriculture Rainfed agriculture 1 1 1 Rainfed agriculture Abandoned 0 0 0.2 Grazing Quercus forest 0 0.1 0.2 Forestry Pine plantations 0 0.1 0.2 Forestry Riparian forest 0 0 0 Shurbs 0 0.2 0.3 Grazing (2/3) and