Impact of the Grain for Green Project on water resources and ecological water stress in the Yanhe River Basin.

Abstract

The Grain for Green project (GGP), initialized by the Chinese government in 1999, has achieved substantial achievements accompanied by a decrease in surface runoff on the Loess Plateau, but the impacts of large-scale afforestation on regional water resources are uncertain. Hence, the objective of this study was to explore the impact of land use change on generalized water resources and ecological water stress using the blue and green water concepts, taking the Yanhe River Basin as the case study. The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) was applied to quantify the green water and blue water, which are defined as generalized water resources. The ecological water requirement of vegetation (forest and grass), agricultural water footprint and virtual water flow are considered regional water requirements. The land use types of 1980 (Scenario I) and 2017 (Scenario II) were entered into the SWAT model while keeping the other parameters constant to isolate the influence of land use changes. The results show that the average annual differences in blue, green and generalized water resources were -72.08 million m3, 24.34 million m3, and -47.74 million m3, respectively, when the simulation results of Scenario II were subtracted from those of Scenario I, which shows that land use change caused by the GGP led to a decrease in blue and generalized water resources and an increase in green water resources. Surface runoff in Scenario I was more than that in Scenario II in all of the years of the study period from 1980–2017, and green water storage in Scenario I was more than that in Scenario II in all of the years of the study period except in 1998; although lateral flow in Scenario I was less than that in Scenario II except in 2000 and 2015, as was groundwater runoff in 1992, 2000 and 2015, and green water flow in 1998. Blue water flow, green water storage and green water flow in Scenario II were less than those in Scenario I in the whole basin, 12.89 percent of the basin and 99.21 percent of the basin, respectively. The total water footprint increased from 1995 to 2010 because the forest water footprint increased significantly in this period, although the agricultural water footprint and grass water footprint decreased. The ecological water stress index values had no obvious temporal change trends in either land use scenario, but the ecological water stress index in Scenario II was greater than that in Scenario I, which illustrates that the GGP led to an increase in ecological water stress from the perspective of generalized water resources.