J. Hydrol. Hydromech., 66, 2, 189–201
DOI: 10.1515/johh-2017-0054

Can a change in cropping patterns produce water savings and social gains:
A case study from the Fergana Valley, Central Asia
Akmal Kh. Karimov1*, Munir A. Hanjra2, Jiří Šimůnek3, Botir Abdurakhmannov4
1

International Water Management Institute (IWMI), Central Asia Regional Office, Tashkent, Uzbekistan.
International Water Management Institute (IWMI), Southern Africa Regional Office, Pretoria, South Africa.
3
Department of Environmental Sciences, University of California Riverside, Riverside, CA, USA.
4
Tashkent Institute of Irrigation and Melioration, Tashkent, Uzbekistan.
*Corresponding author. E-mail: akmalkarimov040@gmail.com
2

Abstract: The study examines possible water savings by replacing alfalfa with winter wheat in the Fergana Valley,
located upstream of the Syrdarya River in Central Asia. Agricultural reforms since the 1990s have promoted this change
in cropping patterns in the Central Asian states to enhance food security and social benefits. The water use of alfalfa,
winter wheat/fallow, and winter wheat/green gram (double cropping) systems is compared for high-deficit, low-deficit,
and full irrigation scenarios using hydrological modeling with the HYDRUS-1D software package. Modeling results
indicate that replacing alfalfa with winter wheat in the Fergana Valley released significant water resources, mainly by
reducing productive crop transpiration when abandoning alfalfa in favor of alternative cropping systems. However, thewinter wheat/fallow cropping system caused high evaporation losses from fallow land after harvesting of winter wheat.
Double cropping (i.e., the cultivation of green gram as a short duration summer crop after winter wheat harvesting)
reduced evaporation losses, enhanced crop output and hence food security, while generating water savings that makemore water available for other productive uses. Beyond water savings, this paper also discusses the economic and social
gains that double cropping produces for the public within a broader developmental context.
Keywords: HYDRUS-1D; Food security; Crop evapotranspiration; Water budget; Syrdarya River.
INTRODUCTION
The population of Central Asia doubled during the last 30
years (from 1980 to 2010), thereby increasing the demand forfood crops with corresponding implications for water, land, andecosystem resources. Since the independence of the Central
Asian States in 1991, there have been various agricultural policy reforms that included the abolishment of state-planned crop
production as well as the implementation of various policies,
such as certain cropping patterns, to increase the operational
autonomy of farmers and to achieve a range of economic andnational political goals. For instance, as they moved from centrally-planned to market economies after the 1990s, the newly
independent states reoriented their national agricultural policies
toward “grain independency.” Ensuing changes in cropping
patterns were also thought to promote rural growth, increase
farmers’ incomes and national food security, as well as to build
community resilience against water scarcity and the risingdemand for water to grow more food crops. This was prioritized by the end of the 1990s by shifting from a cotton (6year)/alfalfa (3-year) crop rotation to a cotton (2-year)/winterwheat (2-year) sequence. Various studies showed that suchinterventions impacted food production and consumption, as
well as public welfare (Anderson, 2007) and ecosystem services (Spoor, 1998). The changes in cropping patterns fromalfalfa to wheat reduced the irrigation water demand. Reducing
water diversions for irrigation in the Fergana Valley also resulted in reduced return flow to the river system. In addition, thecompetition for water between upstream hydropower and irrigation caused an unpredictable inter-seasonal and long-term
variability of Syrdarya River flow rates. The many factors
involved made it difficult to precisely evaluate the impact ofchanges in the cropping pattern on water resources available fordownstream users.

Two aspects of the cropping changes require clarification:
the magnitude of water savings, and likely socioeconomic gainsof the changes to the public. In this paper, water savings aredefined as the reallocation of water from a current use that
produces low, negligible, or negative benefits, to those thatgenerate higher benefits (Molden, 1997; Seckler 1996). Managing the irrigation demand by reducing the beneficial use inagriculture may not always bring real water savings (Ward and
Pulido-Velazquez, 2008). It may result in lowering the
productivity of the use of thermal and land resources, affecting
instream use values (Ward and Booker, 2003), increasing
salinity (Khan and Hanjra, 2008), and negatively impacting
ecosystem health (Karimov et al., 2014), but it may also deliver
other socioeconomic benefits including incomes, employment,
revenue, and gains in food security (Molden et al., 2010) for
both rural and urban consumers. This highlights the necessity toquantitatively assess the impact of cropping changes beyond
land and water savings and to consider also other social gains to
the wider public. This paper thus analyzes the effect of watersavings and socioeconomic gains due to the replacement ofalfalfa by winter wheat within the context of agricultural policychanges that were implemented since 1992 in the Fergana Valley, upstream of the Syrdarya River basin in Uzbekistan.
Irrigated agriculture (0.9 million ha) in the Fergana Valley
represents an example of large-scale irrigation in Asia. The
valley has enormous potential for food crop production. For
instance, the valley receives thermal resources with a capacity
to evaporate about 10,000 Mm³ yr–1 of water (Karimov et al.,2012). Irrigated crops grown in the valley have the potential toutilize 70–80% of received solar energy if crop growth is notconstrained by water deficits or other agronomic and economic
factors. However, actual evapotranspiration is much less andranges from 5,500–6,500 Mm3yr–1, of which only 70% is transpired by crops (Karimov et al., 2012). While utilizing only 38–

189

Akmal Kh. Karimov, Munir A. Hanjra, Jiří Šimůnek, Botir Abdurakhmannov

45% of available energy, farmers of the Fergana Valley produce over 0.85 million tons (Mt) of cotton, 1.3 Mt of wheat,and 1 Mt of vegetables and other agricultural commodities.
Current production could be increased twofold if thermal, land,
and water resources are used in the most productive way. In
order to achieve this, it is important to reallocate water fromuses that produce low or no benefits to those that generatehigher benefits (Molden, 1997; Molden and Sakthivadivel,1999), and thus improve water productivity, achieve more
welfare per drop of water (Giordano et al., 2017; Molden et al.,2010), and contribute towards building community resilienceand enhancing water, food, and energy security (Hanjra andQureshi, 2010; Jalilov et al., 2013; Karimov et al., 2017).
A centerpiece of the applied agricultural policies was the replacement of cotton/alfalfa crop rotation, which dominated in
the Fergana Valley in the past, with a cotton/wheat sequencethat should increase grain production and reduce cotton-grownareas by allocating these lands to vegetables. Unfortunately,
additional opportunities for crop intensification through double
cropping, such as growing green gram or other food legume
crops on the fallow land after harvesting winter wheat, did notreceive state policy support.
Green gram (Vigna radiata L.) is an important food legume
in some parts of Central Asia, including the densely populated
Fergana Valley and the Tashkent region. Adoption of green
gram may offer important welfare benefits to rural areas(Mavlyanova and Sharma, 2015; Verkaart et al., 2017). The
green gram cropping season is short and ranges from 90-120
days, depending on the variety (Mavlyanova and Sharma,2015). Since the harvesting season of winter wheat in the study
area ends by June 20 and the next sowing season starts on October 1, short-duration varieties of green gram can be grown
between these dates during the summer season. However, due
to shortage of water for irrigation of cotton from June to August, policy makers restricted double cropping during the summer season to “save” water for irrigation of cotton. As a consequence, green gram prices in local markets have risen, in someyears reaching $1–2 per kg (U.S. Dollars). Gram is also a very
nutritious source of protein for human consumption and a key
ingredient of animal feed. It is a leguminous crop that can improve soil carbon and nitrogen fixation, enhance soil fertility(Gan et al., 2010), and reduce costs of nitrogen fertilizers andtheir negative impacts on waterways and the ecosystem (Evanset al., 2012; Huang et al., 2017). These multitudes of benefits
thus motivated our choice of modeling green gram (or otherpulse crops/legumes) as a second crop in order to contribute to
the discussion on sustainable crop intensification as well as
related policy and institutional support measures in the region.
The shift in cultivation from alfalfa to winter wheat was attractive to policy makers for several reasons, particularly as ameasure to achieve grain independency and as a low investment
strategy to bring rapid results by decreasing irrigation water
demands. However, real water savings due to a decrease in theirrigation water demand were often only assumed rather thanempirically demonstrated (Awan et al., 2017; Cai et al., 2002;
Nandalal and Hipel, 2007) in a post-policy implementation
context and with associated socioeconomic benefits such as
gains in national revenue, farmers income, employment, foodsecurity, and livelihood. Although further increases in crop
output via intensification through double cropping and corresponding social gains are possible through supportive policychanges, they have not been examined in the literature. Therefore, the objectives of this paper were twofold: 1) to estimate
water savings and socioeconomic gains from the replacement ofalfalfa with winter wheat, and 2) to test double cropping as a

190

strategy for increasing water savings and socioeconomic gains
due to changes in the cropping pattern through further agricultural reforms.
This study uses the HYDRUS-1D (Šimůnek et al., 2008)
software to simulate crop transpiration and evaporation fromthe alfalfa, winter wheat/fallow and winter wheat/green gram
double cropping fields. The central thrust of our analysis is to
examine double cropping by using the winter wheat/green gram
cropping system as an example, thus contributing to the discussion on further reforms and liberalization of the agricultural
policies. We analyzed three alternative irrigation regimes: full
irrigation (FI), high-deficit irrigation (HDI), and low-deficit
irrigation (LDI), all under deep and shallow water table conditions in the Fergana Valley. Silt loam soils, which dominate in
the central part of the valley, were selected for this analysis.
The results of this modeling exercise could contribute to thediscussion on policy options available for enhancing the foodsecurity and social gains in other large irrigation systems andriver basins that are prone to water scarcity and are facing
resilience and sustainability challenges similar to the Fergana
Valley.
METHODS AND DATA
Study area
The Fergana Valley is located upstream of the Syrdarya River and is a part of three countries of Central Asia: Kyrgyzstan,
Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. The climate is semi-arid with a low
quantity of precipitation and high summer temperatures. Annual precipitation varies from 100 to 250 mm in the central part ofthe valley and increases to 300 mm in the piedmont areas. The
mean average temperature is 14°C, the average minimum temperature –18°C, and the average maximum temperature +45°C.
The altitude increases from west to east from 330 m above sea
level (a.s.l.) to 600 m a.s.l. The valley is filled with alluvial
deposits washed out by multiple rivers in the mountain zone.
Rivers in the Fergana Valley are divided into four types according to the source of water: glacier-snow, snow-glacier, snow,
and snow-rain (Shultsc, 1949). The glacier and snow-fed river
systems have maximum high flows from July through August,the snow and glacier-fed river systems from May through June,
the snow-fed river systems from April through May, and thesnow and rain-fed river systems in April. Three zones representing hydrogeological conditions of the Fergana Valley are agroundwater natural-recharge zone (Zone A), a groundwater
springs zone dominated by upward fluxes (Zone B), and agroundwater discharge zone (Zone C), as shown in Fig. 1(Borisov, 2007; Mirzaev, 1974). These hydrogeological conditions favor the use of fresh groundwater. However, groundwater is used in a few areas only to supplement canal irrigation.
As a consequence of underutilization of groundwater, about
200,000 ha of the irrigated land have a relatively shallow watertable (less than 2 m below the soil surface), which causes attimes secondary salinization. As a result, over 55% of irrigatedsoils are prone to salinity, including 71,922 ha of highly salinelands in the hydrogeological Zone C. A detailed description ofsoils of the study area is given by Shreder et al., (1977) andTalipov (1992).
Two main time periods can be identified in the recent historyof crop cultivation in the Fergana Valley. Until the early 1990s,
cotton/alfalfa crop rotation dominated the irrigated lands. Fig. 2
shows that in 1992, the areas under cotton and alfalfa were 39%
and 20% of the total irrigated area, respectively, while winterwheat was grown only on 8% of the irrigated area. The
irrigation demand of the Fergana Valley at the time was about

Can a change in cropping patterns produce water savings and social gains: A case study from the Fergana Valley, Central Asia

Fig. 1. (a) The Aral Sea basin and (b) hydrogeological zones of the Fergana Valley.

HYDRUS-1D simulations

Fig. 2. Changes in the cropping patterns in the Fergana Valley.

12,000 Mm3 yr–1, with plentiful water available for crop
production. As the Central Asian States moved from centrally
planned to market economies, various agricultural reforms,
including changes in cropping patterns, were implemented.
After 1995, the dominant cotton/alfalfa crop rotation in theregion was replaced by a cotton/wheat sequence due to thenational policy of increasing grain production and enhancing
food security. The area under irrigated winter wheat wasincreased to 27%, while the area under alfalfa was reduced tojust 1% of the total irrigated area. Also, the cotton-grown area
was reduced by another 47,348 ha, mostly replaced by thecultivation of vegetables. Currently, two main crops, cotton andwinter wheat, occupy about 54% of the irrigated lands of
900,000 ha. Farmers sow winter wheat in early October andharvest it in June, and sow cotton in April and harvest it in
September-October. As a result of the cropping changes, theirrigation demand in the Fergana Valley was reduced by about
800 Mm3yr–1.
The changes in the cropping pattern had two main national
policy goals: (1) to increase the production of grain crops andtherefore to gain independency and national food security, and(2) to reduce the consumption of water per unit of crop production (i.e., to increase water productivity and address water
scarcity). The first objective was easily achieved thanks to the
expansion of the area allocated to winter wheat, coupled withan increase in average wheat yield from 2 to 5 t/ha. The
achievement of the second objective (i.e., increasing waterproductivity) was not straightforward due to the wide extent ofshallow groundwater, which resulted in upward fluxes into thecrop root zone, and consequently non-consumptive evapotranspiration and water losses from fallow land after winter wheat
harvesting. Sustainable management of the shallow water table
and cropping changes are thus key to improving water productivity and food security.

The HYDRUS-1D software package (Šimůnek et al., 2008;2016) was used to estimate crop transpiration and soil evaporation, as well as to examine the effects of policy/crop changes on
potential water savings. HYDRUS-1D is a finite-element numerical model that simulates the one-dimensional movement ofwater, heat and multiple solutes in variably-saturated porous
media. The model has been previously used and verified in a
number of studies modeling the contribution of shallow
groundwater to root water uptake and crop evapotranspiration(e.g., Forkutsa et al., 2009; He et al., 2017; Hernandez, 2001; Liet al., 2015; Sanchez et al., 2003; Shouse et al., 2011; Soylu etal., 2011). For instance, Forkutsa et al. (2009) simulated soil
water dynamics and transport of salts in plots with irrigatedcotton influenced by a shallow groundwater, while Shouse et al.
(2011) analyzed root water uptake from a shallow saline
groundwater. Li et al. (2015) similarly studied the dynamics ofsoil water, soil salinity, and depths to the groundwater table asaffected by root water uptake of Chinese tamarisk. He et al.
(2017) further used HYDRUS-1D to simulate the irrigatedwinter wheat/summer maize rotation system in the North China
Plain for a total of 15 years. One of the advantages of the modelfor our study is that it provides estimates of upward fluxes froma shallow groundwater table during deficit irrigation (e.g.,
Karimov et al., 2014).
The HYDRUS-1D model simulates variably-saturated waterflow by solving the Richards equation written as:∂θ ∂  ∂h 
= K  + 1 − S∂t ∂z  ∂z 

(1)where θ is the volumetric water content (cm3/cm3), t represents
time (day), z is the vertical coordinate (positive upward) (cm), hdenotes the pressure head (cm), K is the unsaturated hydraulicconductivity (cm/day), and S is the soil water extraction rate byplant roots (cm3/cm3/day).
HYDRUS-1D used the Penman-Monteith equation (Allen etal., 1998) to estimate evapotranspiration rates. We used themodel to first estimate evapotranspiration, soil evaporation, andcrop transpiration for alternative cropping systems for different
irrigation scenarios. Then, based on the results of these simulations, we compared water savings, crop yield, and waterproductivity of alternative cropping systems. The following
indicators were evaluated for each cropping pattern: water
resources available for reallocation (WR), water savings (WS),and changes in productive water use (PW), all given in mm
over the cropping season. Water resources available for reallocation, WRa, were estimated as follows:

191

Akmal Kh. Karimov, Munir A. Hanjra, Jiří Šimůnek, Botir Abdurakhmannov

WRa = ETa.a − ETa.w(2)where ETa.a is the estimated actual evapotranspiration from thealfalfa field, and ETa.w the estimated actual evapotranspiration
for the alternative cropping system.
Water savings, WS, were estimated as follows:

WSa.wf = Ea − Ewf
WSa.wg = Ea − Ewg,(3)where WSa.wf are water savings obtained by replacing alfalfa
with the winter wheat/fallow system, WSa.wg are water savings
obtained by replacing alfalfa with winter wheat/green gram
double cropping, Ea is soil evaporation from the alfalfa field,
Ewf is soil evaporation from the winter wheat/fallow field, andEwg is soil evaporation from the winter wheat/green gram double cropping field.
Water resources, gained by shifting from alfalfa toalternative cropping systems, represent a sum of changes in
non-productive evaporation and productive crop transpiration.
Water savings account for only a fraction of released water
resources (i.e., non-productive evaporation) and ignore thereduction in productive water use. Changes in productive water
use were estimated as the difference in transpiration between
alfalfa and the alternative crop fields:

PW= T −T
a.wf
a wf
,
PW
= T −T
a.wg
a wg

(4)

where PWa.wf and PWa.wg are the productive water reductions as
a result of replacing alfalfa with the winter wheat/fallow andwinter wheat/green gram double cropping systems, respectively, while Ta, Twf and Twg represent crop transpiration from thealfalfa, winter wheat/fallow and winter wheat/green gram cropping systems, respectively.
The yield of alternative cropping systems was estimated using FAO’s expression for the yield response to ET (Doorenbos
and Kassam, 1979):
1 − Ya  = k  1 − ETa y ET 


 Y 
x 

x 


(5)

where Yx and Ya are the maximum and actual yields (kg/ha),respectively, ETx and ETa are crop evapotranspiration for nowater stress conditions and actual evapotranspiration (mm),respectively, and ky is a yield response factor representing theeffect of a reduction in evapotranspiration on yield losses. For
winter wheat/green gram double cropping, the wheat equivalentyield of green gram was calculated on the basis of average
prices of green gram and wheat grain. The yield response factor
was adopted as follows: 1.1 for alfalfa, 1.0 for winter wheat,and 1.15 for green gram (Doorenbos and Kassam, 1979). The
water productivity (WP) was then calculated using the following relationship:
WP =

Y
a
ET
a

(6)

The revenue from the cultivation of alfalfa was computed bymultiplying the average local price with the yield of alfalfa hay,
while the same was done for wheat/green gram. The economic

192

water productivity of alfalfa was calculated by multiplying thewater productivity with the average local price of alfalfa hay,with again the same procedure applied to wheat/green gram.
HYDRUS-1D input parameters
The soil profile was assumed to be 300 cm deep. Soil textures and soil bulk densities were determined on soil samples
collected in 2006 from a field in the Kuva district at soil depthsof 0–30, 30–60, 60–90, 90–120, 120–180, and 180–300 cm.
Soil water contents were determined before sowing of winterwheat in the same soil profile. The soil texture throughout theentire soil profile was found to be silt loam according to the
USDA classification. For the purpose of numerical modeling,
the soil profile was divided into six soil horizons that werecharacterized by four soil materials, determined based on thesoil description.
The van Genuchten-Mualem model (van Genuchten, 1980)
was selected for the soil water retention curves and unsaturated
hydraulic conductivity functions. Simulations were run without
considering hysteresis. Initial values of the van Genuchten–
Mualem parameters of each soil layer were taken from the
HYDRUS-1D database for silt loam. These parameters werethen calibrated using an inverse analysis of data from the lysimeter study carried out earlier in the same area by Ganiev(1979). The lysimeters, having a 1.44 m2 surface area, were
packed with a monolithic silt loam soil, and sown with cotton.
The groundwater table in the lysimeters was kept at constantdepths of 1.5, 2, 2.5, and 3 m below the soil surface. Soil watercontents before the growing season, along with the climate andcotton phenology parameters, were used as input to the model.
Daily estimates of upward fluxes from the groundwater table
and soil water contents during the growing season, found in thelysimeter study, were used to define the objective function for
the inverse analysis. The inverse simulation period spanned 365
days and the model calibration consisted of several steps. First,
the van Genuchten-Mualem parameters of the two upper soil
layers were optimized while they were kept constant for the twolower soil layers. Then, parameters of the upper two soil layers
were updated and kept constant, while they were optimized forthe lower two soil layers. This procedure was repeated several
times until differences between measured and simulated values
stopped decreasing. The final root mean square errors (RMSE)
and the relative mean absolute errors (RMAE) between measured and simulated values were relatively low and equal to0.0199 cm and 1.48%, respectively. The correlation coefficient
between simulated and measured values (r) was 0.927. The
final inversely estimated van Genuchten-Mualem parametervalues of each soil layer are presented in Table 1, in which θresis the residual water content, θsat is the saturated soil watercontent, a and n are shape parameters, Ks is the saturated hydraulic conductivity, and l is the pore-connectivity parameter.
The upper boundary condition was defined using the atmospheric boundary condition at the soil surface in terms of observed daily precipitation (Fig. 3) and calculated potential
evapotranspiration rates, the later depending upon the selected
cropping system. The lower boundary condition consisted oftime-variable daily pressure head values representing the position of the groundwater table. Root water uptake was simulatedusing the approach of Feddes et al. (1978), with water stressparameters for the crops (Table 2) taken from the HYDRUS-1D
database (Taylor and Ashcroft, 1972; Wesseling et al., 1991).
Our analysis did not consider the effects of solute stress on root
water uptake. While dissolved solids in groundwater within theirrigated zone were about 3000 mg/l, and some salt accumulation

Can a change in cropping patterns produce water savings and social gains: A case study from the Fergana Valley, Central Asia
Table 1. van Genuchten-Mualem parameters for soil hydraulicproperties.
Soil layer, cm
Soil type/Parametersθres [cm3/cm3]
θsat [cm3/cm3]
α [1/cm]n [–]Ks [cm/d]
l [–]

0–60
Silt loam
0.038
0.407
0.024
1.43
11.4
0.00055

60–120Silt loam
0.0010
0.250
0.014
5.16
1.08
0.054

120–180
Silt loam
0.00120.301
0.00161.65
27.6
0.0098

180–300
Silt loam
0.00100.336
0.01571.73
4.48
0.0065

Table 2. Root water uptake: water stress response parameters(Feddes et al., 1978; Šejna et al., 2012) used in the HYDRUS
model.
Root water uptake
parameters
PO
POpt
P2H
P2L
P3
r2H
r2L

Unit

Alfalfa

[cm]
[cm]
[cm]
[cm]
[cm]
[cm/day][cm/day]

0
–1
–1500
–1500
–160000.5
0.1

Winter
wheat
0
–1
–500
–900
–16000
0.5
0.1

Green
gram
–15
–30
–750
–2000
–8000
0.5
0.1

30

Precipitation, mm

25

20

15

10

5

0
Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

June

July

Aug

Sep

Fig. 3. Precipitation in the Fergana Valley from 1 October,
1994 to 1 October, 1995.
must have occurred in the soil as a result of upward flow fromthe water table, we decided to focus in our current study only
on water stress effects. The effects of salinity stress likely
would not change the main conclusions of this study, at least
qualitatively, while we recognize that follow-up studies could
benefit from a more precise analysis that considers the combined effects of water and salinity stress on root water uptake.
Crop development was accounted for in the model using adaily crop height, a rooting depth, and a soil cover fraction.
(Table 3). These parameters, especially the maximum rooting
depth, may vary for different scenarios with different irrigation
regimes and groundwater depths (Foxx et al., 1982; Grismer,2015). Unfortunately, little data are available about root development in the presence of shallow groundwater. Considering
these limitations, the parameters were selected to be conservative and assumed applicable for the range of conditions simulated by the model.
Climate data, including daily maximum and minimum temperatures, relative humidity, sunshine hours, rainfall, and windspeed, were measured at the Fergana weather station located ata longitude of 71.75o, a latitude of 40.38o, and an elevation of
547 m a.s.l. Climate data were used from March 1994 to October 1995 with crop growing seasonal totals, representing longterm average. Using these parameters, simulations were carriedout for periods of 365 days consistent with the cropping seasons.
Simulated scenarios
Three following scenarios were analyzed:
Scenario A: Cultivation of alfalfa. Four irrigation regimes
were considered: full irrigation (FI) with pre-irrigation soil
moisture contents at 70% of soil field capacity (Shreder et al.,1977); low deficit irrigation (LDI) by reducing irrigations by25%; high deficit irrigation (HDI) by reducing irrigations by50%; and rainfed conditions without supplemental irrigation.
Four groundwater table depths (of 3, 2.5, 2, and 1.5 m) wereconsidered further for each irrigation regime to examine theeffects of water table depth on water use of alfalfa. Irrigation
applications (including precipitation) were 722–929 mm underfull irrigation, 600–757 mm under LDI, 477–582 mm under
HDI, and 232 mm under rainfed conditions. The selected irrigation rates for shallow groundwater conditions took into consideration upward fluxes as determined in the lysimeter study ofGaniev (1979). Higher irrigation rates were chosen for the deep
groundwater conditions having small upward fluxes and lower
rates for shallow groundwater conditions with their large upward fluxes. The simulated period for alfalfa was from March 1
to February 28 of the following year.
Scenario B: Winter wheat and land fallowing. After harvesting winter wheat in mid-June, the field was kept fallow
until October. The same four irrigation regimes and groundwater table depths as for alfalfa were considered also for winterwheat. Irrigation applications were again reduced for the higher
water tables. Irrigation applications were 419–609 mm underFI, 349–524 mm under LDI, 265–434 mm under HDI, and 185
mm rainfall for rainfed conditions. Simulations for winterwheat covered the period from October 1 to September 30 of
the following year. Daily precipitation and potential evaporation rates (the latter when precipitation was zero) were used as
an atmospheric boundary condition for land fallowing from
June 15 to September 30.
Scenario C: Winter wheat followed by green gram (double cropping). The irrigation regime for winter wheat was thesame as for the previous scenario, while for green gram we
implemented the irrigation scheme considered by Webber (2008).

Table 3. Main crop parameters for alfalfa, winter wheat, and green gram cultivated in the Fergana Valley*.
Crop parameters
Crop height, max
Root depth, max
LAI/Crop cover, max
Crop vegetation season
Crop harvesting
Yield, max

Unit
cm
cm

t/ha

Alfalfa
68
120
–/1.0
6/03–1/11
17/05; 28/06; 19/08; 1/10
33

Winter wheat
100
100–/0.98
4/10–10/06
10/06
5.5

Green gram
40
60
4.2/–
14/06–1/10
24/09–1/10
2*Data compiled from Edgorov et al. (2006), Sumochkina et al. (1977), Webber (2008), Allen et al. (1998, 2005), Smeal et al. (1991), and Sommer et al.
(2013).

193

Akmal Kh. Karimov, Munir A. Hanjra, Jiří Šimůnek, Botir Abdurakhmannov

Total irrigation applications for the winter wheat/green gramsystem were 652–847 mm under FI, 587–762 mm under LDI,
503–672 mm under HDI, and 423 mm for rainfed winter wheat
followed by the irrigated green gram. Higher irrigation rates
were used again for deep groundwater conditions with low
values of upward fluxes and lower rates for shallow groundwater conditions with their higher upward fluxes. The calculated
period for the winter wheat/green gram system was from October 1 to September 30 of the following calendar year.
The FAO Excel sheet (Allen et al., 1998) was used for specifying irrigation schedules, dates, and application rates for eachcrop and simulated groundwater depth using values of the upward fluxes obtained from the lysimeter study discussed above(Ganiev, 1979). Upward fluxes in the lysimeter studies wereavailable only for rainfed conditions. HYDRUS-1D hence useddaily irrigation rates from the FAO Excel sheet as input, andthen estimated upward fluxes, crop transpiration and evaporation for each irrigation regime and groundwater depth. This is amore accurate approach than the FAO approach since the HYDRUS-1D simulations consider soil texture and soil moisturechanges with depth.
The simulation period was the same for all scenarios, i.e.,
365 days. However, wheat is sown in the region at the beginning of October and harvested in mid-June, while alfalfa issown at the beginning of March. We thus followed local farming practices in the region. Values of total irrigation, taken for
conditions with a deep groundwater level, were reduced forshallower groundwater tables following locally adopted recommendations. Farmers often irrigate crops based on water
availability, which may deviate from crop irrigation requirements (Reddy et al., 2012) and indicate the need for revising
current irrigation scheduling practices.
Within the context of policy/crop changes, the following
scenarios were conceptualized:• Scenario A represents policy conditions before the mid
1990s when alfalfa was cultivated in rotation with cotton.
• Scenario B represents policy conditions after the 1990s
when winter wheat replaced alfalfa and double cropping wasrestricted by the policy to “save” irrigation water for the cultivation of cotton.
• Scenario C analyzes the potential future water use of a double cropping system, i.e., a policy option currently underconsideration, but still inactive in the region.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
We modeled three cropping scenarios, three alternative irrigation water management regimes and rainfed cropping conditions, and four positions of the groundwater table, as outlined
above. Our goal was to evaluate the impact of different cropping scenarios on irrigation water requirements and water use
in order to identify the pathways and policy options for improving water productivity and enhancing food security. The resultsfor various cropping scenarios are discussed below.
Water resources available for reallocation
Estimates of actual evapotranspiration (ETa) as affected by
the alternative cropping systems are given in Table 4. The
estimates for alfalfa show that actual evapotranspiration (ETa,a)is in the range of 792–905 mm under FI, 760–880 mm under
LDI, 690–837 mm under HDI, and 444–654 mm for rainfed
conditions. Higher values of ETa,a were obtained for shallow
water table conditions and lower values for deep water tableconditions (Scenario A). Under shallow groundwaterconditions, crop roots are expected to obtain more water due tocapillary rise. This is supported by, among others, a lysimeter
study by Soppe and Ayars (2002) who found that a small
portion of the root zone of safflower closest to the water table
extracted a significant amount of groundwater. Higher soil
moisture contents in the crop root zone under shallow watertable conditions, as compared to deep groundwater conditions,lead hence to higher transpiration and evapotranspiration rates,
especially for alfalfa with their deep dense rooting system.
For the winter wheat/fallow system, differences in cropETa,wf for different groundwater depths were less obvious underfull irrigation, but increased with more deficit irrigation.
Changes in ETa were the result of increasing evaporation fromthe fallowed land after winter wheat harvesting. From June 15
through September 30, higher evaporation losses were estimated under shallow groundwater conditions than for deep watertables. Liu and Luo (2011) similarly found that ETa of winterwheat declined with a lowering of the water table. Differencesin ETa for different water table depths were due to the contributions of groundwater to evapotranspiration.
Overall, the shift from alfalfa to the winter wheat/fallow system (Scenario B) reduced ETa by 216–283 mm under FI, by

Table 4. Released water resources available for reallocation.
GWL1
ETa,a2ETa,wf3
ETa,wg4
WAa.wf5
WAa.wg6
m
mm
mm
mm
Mm
mm
Full irrigation
3
792
576
647
216
145
2.5
787
592
668
195
119
2
888
592
674
297
214
1.5
905
622
705
283
200
Low deficit irrigation
3
760
529
618
231
142
2.5
760
551
636
209
124
2
855
558
647
297
208
1.5
880
624
714
256
166
High deficit irrigation
3
690
496
599
194
91
2.5
708
530
633
178
75
2
797
547
642
250
155
1.5
837
599
697
238
140
Rainfed
3
444
371
475
73
–31
2.5
515
437
540
78
–25
2
572
496
600
76
–28
1.5
654
601
700
53
–46
1
Groundwater table depth, 2actual evapotranspiration from the alfalfa field, 3actual evapotranspiration from the winter wheat/fallow field, 4actual
evapotranspiration from the winter wheat/green gram double cropping field, 5water resources released by shifting from alfalfa to the winterwheat/fallow system, 6water resources released by shifting from alfalfa to the winter wheat/green gram double cropping.
Scenario194

Can a change in cropping patterns produce water savings and social gains: A case study from the Fergana Valley, Central Asia
Table 5. Water savings and changes in productive water use achieved by replacing alfalfa with the winter wheat/fallow system or the winter wheat/green gram double cropping.
Scenario
Full irrigation

Low deficit irrigation

High deficit irrigation

Rainfed

GWL1
m
3
2.5
2
1.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
3
2.5
2
1.5

Ea2
mm
341
338
258
253
327
319
248
246
304
297
231
226
195
206
223
235

WSa.wf3
mm
101
85
0
–30
130
86
14
–40
116
82
2
–60
27
13
4
–53

WSa.wg4
mm
120
116
50
59
131
108
57
43
100
86
40
14
10
17
32
20

Ta5
mm
451
449
630
652
433
441
607
634
386
411
566
611
249
309
349
419

PWa.wf6
mm
116
110
297
313
100
123
283
295
78
96
248
298
46
66
72
106

PWa.wg7
mm
25
2
164
141
10
16
150
123
–10
–11
115
126
–41
–41
–60
–66

1

Groundwater table depth, 2evaporation from the alfalfa field, 3water savings achieved by replacing alfalfa with the winter wheat/fallow system,
water saving achieved by replacing alfalfa with winter wheat/green gram double cropping, 5crop transpiration from the alfalfa field, 6productive
water use change after replacing alfalfa with the winter wheat/fallow system, 7productive water use change after replacing alfalfa with winterwheat/green gram double cropping.
4

4

231–256 mm under LDI, by 192–235 mm under HDI, and 53–
73 mm under rainfed conditions. Higher reductions in ETa were
estimated again for shallow groundwater conditions. Total
water resources released in the Fergana Valley by shifting fromalfalfa to winter wheat/fallow were estimated at 468, 470, 396,
and 132 million m3/yr for FI, LDI, HDI, and rainfed conditions,
respectively, with the released amounts then becoming available for instream and downstream users.
For winter wheat/green gram double cropping, crop ETa.wg
gradually increased with an increase in the water table depth
from 3 m to 1.5 m below the soil surface and gradually
decreased with an increase in the irrigation water deficit. As
compared to winter wheat/fallow system, these ETa changes
were associated mainly with an increase in crop transpiration.
Overall, the shift from alfalfa to winter wheat/green gram
double cropping (Scenario C) reduced ETa by 119–214 mm
under FI, by 124–208 mm under LDI, and by 75–155 mm
under HDI. More substantial reductions in ETa were obtained
again for shallow water table conditions. ETa was found toincrease by 25–46 mm under rainfed conditions. Total water
resources of the Fergana Valley, which can be released byshifting from alfalfa to winter wheat/green gram double
cropping, were estimated at 320, 302, and 218 million m3/yr for
FI, LDI, and HDI regimes. Reducing both evaporation losses(E) and crop transpiration under the studied irrigation regimes
releases water resources for other uses. No water was available
for reallocation under rainfed conditions.
Water savings
Estimates of changes in non-productive evaporation (E) as
affected by the alternative cropping systems are given in Table
5. The estimates for alfalfa show that non-productive evaporation is 253–341 mm under full irrigation, 246–327 mm under
LDI, 226–304 mm under HDI, and 235–195 mm under rainfed
conditions. Higher irrigation applications for deep groundwaterconditions resulted in higher water contents in the topsoil andhigher evaporation losses. Lower irrigation applications forshallow groundwater conditions and a higher crop soil coverproduced lower values of E for all irrigation conditions.

The shift from alfalfa to winter wheat/fallow for deep
groundwater table conditions (2.5–3 m below the soil surface)
reduced E by 85–101 mm under FI, by 89–130 mm under LDI,
by 77–114 mm under HDI, and by 13–27 mm under rainfed
conditions. There were no significant water savings under shallow groundwater table conditions for the considered irrigation
options. Under shallow groundwater conditions, evaporation
losses had the same magnitudes for the alfalfa field and winterwheat/fallow systems. In the case of alfalfa, evaporation losses
occurred mainly during the irrigations, and in the case of thewinter wheat/fallow system when the land was fallowed. Total
water savings due to shifting from alfalfa to the winterwheat/fallow system in the Fergana Valley were estimated at
74, 90, and 66 million m3/yr for FI, LDI, and HDI scenarios,
respectively, which is enough for irrigation of 8,000–10,000 haof the irrigated land. These water savings comprise a minor partof water resources available for reallocation, while a major partis associated with reductions in productive water use (i.e., croptranspiration).
The shift from alfalfa to the winter wheat/green gram double
cropping for deep groundwater table conditions (2.5–3 m below
the soil surface) reduced E by 116–120 mm under FI, by 108–131 mm under LDI, by 86–100 mm under HDI, and by 10–17mm under rainfed conditions, respectively. There were lesssignificant water savings under shallow groundwater tableconditions for all considered irrigation regimes. Total watersavings due to shifting from alfalfa to winter wheat/green gram
double cropping in the Fergana Valley were estimated at 163,
160, 114, and 38 million m3/yr for the FI, LDI, HDI and rainfed
regimes, respectively. These water savings are enough for crop
production on 14,000–20,000 ha of irrigated land. The estimates indicate that water savings with wheat/green gram double
cropping are higher than for the winter wheat/fallow system for
all irrigation scenarios. Water savings with winter wheat/green
gram double cropping make up most of the water resources
available for reallocation as compared to the winterwheat/fallow system, where water available for reallocation
originates mainly from reductions in productive water use.

195

Akmal Kh. Karimov, Munir A. Hanjra, Jiří Šimůnek, Botir Abdurakhmannov

Productive water use
Estimates of changes in productive water use (PW) as affected by alternative cropping systems are given in Table 5. The
estimates for alfalfa show that productive transpiration was
451–652 mm for FI, 433–634 mm for LDI, 386–611 mm for
HDI, and 249–419 mm for the rainfed conditions. Higher values of Tc were obtained for shallow groundwater tables as compared to deep groundwater conditions. Modeling results indicate that the shift from alfalfa to the winter wheat/fallow systemcauses a significant decrease in crop transpiration for all irrigation regimes, irrespective of the water table location. Croptranspiration was reduced by 110–313 mm for FI, 100–295 mm
for LDI, 78–298 mm for HDI, and 46–106 mm for the rainfed
system, respectively, indicating ineffective water use. Higher
reductions in Tc were estimated for shallow groundwater conditions as compared to deeper water tables. Total reductions in
productive water use, as a result of the shifts from alfalfa to thewinter wheat/fallow system, were estimated to be 395, 379, 340
and 139 million m3/yr for FI, LDI, HDI, and the rainfed conditions, respectively.
The shift from alfalfa to the winter wheat/green gram double
cropping reduced productive water use by 141–164 mm for FI,
123–150 mm for LDI, and 115–126 mm for HDI for shallow
groundwater conditions. Crop transpiration was reduced by 2–
25 mm for FI and 10–16 mm for LDI, but increased by 10–11mm for HDI under deep groundwater conditions. Crop transpiration was increased by 41 and 60–66 mm under rainfed conditions for shallow and deep groundwater conditions, respectively. Total reductions in productive water use in the Fergana
Valley as a result of the shift from alfalfa to winter wheat/green
gram double cropping were found to be 156, 141, and 104
million m3/yr for the FI, LDI, and HDI scenarios, respectively.
There are potential gains in productive water use of 99 million
m3/yr for the rainfed scenario. Thus, double cropping for all
irrigation scenarios promoted more productive water use instead of unproductive losses from fallow lands.
Table 6 compares estimates of water available for reallocation, water savings, and changes in productive water use as aresult of shifting from alfalfa to the winter wheat/fallow andwinter wheat/green gram double cropping systems. The estimates show that in areas with shallow groundwater, the shift

from alfalfa to the winter wheat/fallow system releases water
resources mainly by reducing productive water use. In areas
with deep groundwater, free water resources become available
thanks to both water savings and reductions in productive wateruse. These findings indicate that the winter wheat/fallow system is not a suitable water saving alternative for alfalfa forareas with shallow and deep groundwater tables. However, thewinter wheat/fallow system might be a suitable alternative
cropping system for areas with deep groundwater and highdeficit irrigation conditions.
Water resources available for reallocation as a result of shifting from alfalfa to winter wheat/green gram double cropping
are smaller as compared to the winter wheat/fallow system.
Free water resources originate in areas with deep groundwater
mainly as a result of reducing evaporation, and in areas withshallow groundwater mainly as a result of reducing productive
transpiration. Our results show that winter wheat/green gram
double cropping is a less suitable cropping system compared toalfalfa in areas with shallow groundwater, while it is a suitable
alternative to alfalfa for areas with deep groundwater tables
subject to full (FI) and low deficit (LDI) irrigations. The winterwheat/fallow system may be a more suitable cropping system
for areas having deep groundwater tables and subject to highdeficit irrigation (HDI).
Water productivity
Estimated alfalfa yields (the above ground biomass) was
found to be in the range of 28.5 to 33.0 t/ha for full irrigation,
27.2–32.0 t/ha for LDI, 24.4–30.3 t/ha for HDI, and 7.3–11.5
t/ha for rainfed conditions for deep and shallow water tableconditions, respectively (Table 7). As expected, higher valuesof the biomass were obtained for shallow water table conditions. For the winter wheat/fallow system, the yield of winterwheat was in the range of 5.08–5.5 t/ha for full irrigation, 4.96–
5.18 t/ha for LDI, 4.91–5.13 t/ha for HDI, and 1.81–2.52 t/ha
for rainfed conditions. These estimates did not account for theeffects of soil and groundwater salinity, which may affect theyield of winter wheat. The yield of the winter wheat/green gramsystem, in wheat equivalents, was 8.3–10.1 t/ha for full irrigation, 8.0–10.2 t/ha for LDI, 7.7–10.0 t/ha for HDI, and 3.2–5.0
t/ha for rainfed conditions, respectively.

Table 6. Water available for reallocation, water savings, and changes in productive water use after replacing alfalfa by the winterwheat/fallow system or the winter wheat/green gram double cropping.
Scenario
Full irrigation

Low deficit irrigation

High deficit irrigation

Rainfed

GWL1
m
3
2.5
2
1.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
3
2.5
2
1.5

WAa.wf2
mm
216
195
297
283
231
209
297
256
194
178
250
238
73
78
76
53

WSa.wf3
mm
101
85
0
–30
130
86
14
–40
116
82
2
–60
27
13
4
–53

PWa.wf4
mm
116
110
297
313
100
123
283
295
78
96
248
298
46
66
72
106

WAa.wg5
mm
145
119
214
200
142
124
208
166
91
75
155
140
–31
–25
–28
–46

WSa.wg6
mm
120
116
50
59
131
108
57
43
100
86
40
14
10
17
32
20

PWa.wg7
mm
25
2
164
141
10
16
150
123
–10
–11
115
126
–41
–41
–60
–66

1
Groundwater table depth, 2water resources released by shifting from alfalfa to the winter wheat/fallow system, 3water savings achieved by replacing alfalfa
with the winter wheat/fallow system, 4productive water use change after replacing alfalfa with the winter wheat/fallow system, 5water resources released byshifting from alfalfa to the winter wheat/green gram double cropping, 6water saving achieved by replacing alfalfa with winter wheat/green gram double
cropping, and 7productive water use change after replacing alfalfa with winter wheat/green gram double cropping.

196

Can a change in cropping patterns produce water savings and social gains: A case study from the Fergana Valley, Central Asia
Table 7. Revenue and water productivity for the alfalfa, winter wheat/fallow and winter wheat/green gram double cropping systems.
Scenario

Groundwater
depth

Yield
Alfalfa

FI

LDI

HDI

RF

1

m
3
2.5
2
1.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
3
2.5
2
1.5

28.5
28.3
32.3
33
27.2
27.2
31
32
24.4
25.1
28.7
30.3
7.3
8.7
9.8
11.5

WWF1
kg/ha
5.45
5.50
5.25
5.08
5.17
5.15
4.96
5.18
5.00
5.13
4.91
5.01
1.81
2.04
2.22
2.52

Revenue
WWGG2

Alfalfa

8.33
8.78
9.18
10.08
7.98
8.41
8.87
10.17
7.72
8.36
8.80
9.96
3.16
3.66
4.16
5.00

1838
1825
2083
2129
1754
1754
2000
2064
1574
1619
1851
1954
471
561
632
742

WWF
$/ha
900
908
866
838
853
850
818
855
825
846
809
826
299
337
367
416

Economic water productivity
WWGG

Alfalfa

1375
1449
1514
1663
1317
1388
1464
1678
1274
1379
1453
1643
521
604
687
824

0.23
0.23
0.23
0.24
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.11

WWF
$/m3
0.16
0.15
0.15
0.13
0.16
0.15
0.15
0.14
0.17
0.16
0.15
0.14
0.08
0.08
0.07
0.07

WWGG
0.21
0.22
0.22
0.24
0.21
0.22
0.23
0.23
0.21
0.22
0.23
0.24
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.12

Winter wheat/fallow system; 2winter wheat/green gram double cropping

The cultivation of alfalfa ensures high revenues for farmers,
at $1838–2129/ha under FI, $1754–2064/ha under LDI, $1574–
1974/ha under HDI, and $471–742/ha under rainfed conditions.
Lower revenues were obtained for deep groundwater conditions
and higher revenues for shallow groundwater conditions. The
shift from alfalfa to winter wheat, with an aim toward foodindependency and social benefits, reduced the revenues of local
farmer communities but enhanced food security. For the winterwheat/fallow scenario, revenues of farmers were estimated at$838–908/ha for FI, $818–855/ha for LDI, $809–846/ha for
HDI, and $299–416/ha for rainfed conditions. The cultivationof green gram after winter wheat harvesting significantly adds
to the revenues of farmers by generating new income from land
and water resources that would otherwise remain underutilized
during fallow periods. The revenues were estimated at $1375–
1663/ha for FI, $1317–1678/ha for LDI, $1274–1643/ha for
HDI, and $521–824/ha for rainfed conditions.
The economic water productivity for alfalfa is estimated tobe $0.23–0.24/m3 under irrigation and $0.11/m3 under rainfed
conditions. The economic water productivity for the winterwheat/fallow system is appraised at $0.13–0.16/m3, $0.14–
0.16/m3, $0.14–0.17/m3 for FI, LDI, and HDI, respectively, and$0.07–0.08/m3 for rainfed conditions. The economic waterproductivity for winter wheat/green gram double cropping isestimated to be $0.21–0.24/m3 for irrigation and $0.11–0.12/m3
for rainfed conditions.
It is expected that with adjustments to the area under alfalfa
and winter wheat/green gram double cropping, in accordancewith the market opportunities and economics that capture relative commodity prices, the yield stability and effects of legume
double cropping on subsequent crop performance will bring
together higher revenues to farmers cultivating these two alternative crops. This will also improve the economic productivityof winter wheat/green gram double cropping. However, from a
broader perspective, public policies should also provide incentives for value chain development and risk management, andfor the establishment of multi-commodity farmer groups andrelated support measures.
SOCIOECONOMIC GAINS FROM CROPPING POLICYCHANGESOur HYDRUS-1D modeling results show that Scenario C
pertaining to the potential future water use of a double cropping

system produces notable water savings by transforming nonproductive evaporation into productive transpiration and enhancing crop water productivity. Indeed, double cropping by
growing green gram/food legumes after harvesting winterwheat instead of leaving crop fields fallow, also improves the
economic water productivity ($/m3) and crop revenue ($/ha) for
all irrigation regimes. The HYDRUS simulations indicate thatthe more productive water use leads to gains in water productivity and generates new income and higher economic benefits
for farmers, thus clearly offering incentives to support double
cropping through policy reforms. However, the successful integration of gram/pulse crops into wheat-based systems depends
upon economic, social, and policy drivers (Maaz et al., 2017).
Apart from gains in water savings, shifting from alfalfa towinter wheat-green gram double cropping has several socioeconomic benefits and implications, including gains in income,consumption, employment, and rural livelihoods, and contributions to national and regional food security. For example, consider Scenario B that represents the policy conditions after the
1990s when winter wheat replaced alfalfa. While shifting towheat cultivation by itself did not bring higher income to farmers of the Fergana Valley, there were several socioeconomic
benefits for the wider population and the national economy.
First, major benefits were associated with an increase in foodproduction and improvements in consumption patterns in theregion. Based on data from the food balance sheets of the Foodand Agricultural Organization (FAO) of the United Nations,
wheat provides about 53% of the dietary caloric intake in
Uzbekistan, and thus is a major source of calorie consumption
by the population. In Central Asia, in general, the consumptionof wheat-based food is higher compared to other regions of theworld. The wheat-equivalent consumption across Central Asian
countries ranges from 138 to 174 kg capita–1 year–1 as comparedto 66 kg capita–1 year–1 for Asian region as a whole (Chabot andTondel, 2011). The additional 14,000–20,000 ha of irrigatedarea and the production of winter wheat under Scenario C canmake a significant contribution to food security.
Increasing gram/legume production may also contribute tomore balanced nutrition of the population in rural and urban
areas and thus improve food security and nutrition outcomes(Pingali, 2015; Verkaart et al., 2017). For example, the potential future double cropping green gram option in areas wherealfalfa was replaced by winter wheat on 189,000 ha can produce about 250–280 thousand tons of green gram. Although197

Akmal Kh. Karimov, Munir A. Hanjra, Jiří Šimůnek, Botir Abdurakhmannov

data on green gram consumption are lacking, FAO Stat (2017)shows that the annual pulse consumption per capita in Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan is quite low (less than 3 kg),
while the pulse consumption is higher in neighboring countries,
including Bangladesh (5.3 kg), China (9.4 kg), India (13.6 kg),
Pakistan (6.2 kg), and Sri Lanka (9.3 kg), which all have unmet
local demand for pulses. Using an average annual gross pulse
consumption at 10 kg per capita, this gram production may
serve the pulse consumption needs of about 20 million people
in these countries, while generating millions of dollars in export
earnings.
The consumption norm recommended by the Ministry of
Health of Uzbekistan for meat and meat products is around 46.1
kg, whereas the actual meat consumption was about 28.4 kg per
capita per annum in 2009, indicating a deficit in the meat consumption of about 17.7 kg per capita. Green gram has only aslightly lower protein content (24%) than meat (26%), whichsuggests that gram production could supplement the meat consumption deficit for about 10 million people in Uzbekistan. In
terms of supplying the daily protein needs solely from nonmeat alternative sources of protein, this gram production may
be sufficient to serve the meat/protein needs of about 6 million
people. However, since meat is a high quality complete protein,while gram is an incomplete protein, the meat/protein equivalent estimate should be interpreted cautiously. Also, people tend
to substitute pulse-based protein with meat as incomes grow
(Stokstad et al., 2010). However, green gram can supply vegetable-based protein at a much lower unit cost ($3.6/kg protein)than meat-based protein ($12.4/kg), and is a lean source ofprotein with a high fiber and nutrient content that offers multiple health benefits.
The higher food production will help stabilize the food supply and market prices to benefit both farmers and consumers.
One of the important issues for the wheat supply in Uzbekistan
is that trainfed wheat production in neighboring Kazakhstan
shows a considerable degree of inter-annual variability. Exportof wheat varies from 4% to 22% of total wheat available for
consumption. In poor wheat-production years, such as in 20082009 during the global food, wheat export from Kazakhstan
dropped by 30% (Chabot and Tondel, 2011). In spite of this,prices remained low in the local market of Uzbekistan, even as
prices on the international market increased substantially.
Therefore, due to the increased wheat and legume production in
the valley, farmers may benefit from the higher output andadditional economic activity in rural areas, while consumers
benefit from increased food consumption and lower food prices(Hussain et al., 2004). The increased food production makes
food available and affordable for millions of consumers, thus
improving their dietary intake, nutrition, and cognitive skills,
and contributing towards sustainable human development(Conceiçao et al., 2016). There are also wider benefits in
irrigation value chains (agro-processing, cereal products, value
addition) and markets (domestic, urban, export) since wheat
and green gram can economically support nutritional changes
since feeding humans on a cereal- and legumes-based dietrequires far fewer resources in terms of water, energy, and land,
than meat based diets (Hanjra and Qureshi, 2010; Keyzer et al.,2005; Stokstad, 2010).
The second major impact is a gain in employment. Labor
requirements for wheat production in the Fergana Valley arehigh at 24 person-day ha–1 as compared to 5 person-day ha–1 foralfalfa (World Bank, 2009). Increasing employment is
especially important for the region where the rural population
comprises 80% to 90% of the total, and district-wise out-

198

migration for job opportunities is quite high and ranges from
2.5–4.5% (World Bank, 2009).
Farmers’ incomes can grow by adopting a double cropping
system combining winter wheat with gram/legumes andvegetables. Year-round production with a higher cropping
intensity and a more diversified cropping pattern helps toattenuate intra-seasonal variability in employment, output,
income, and prices while improving livelihoods and reducing
the risks that are so pervasive in agriculture. For example, theproduction of vegetables can provide much higher incomes forfarmers as compared to alfalfa, while employment will increase
from 5 to 200–286 person-day ha–1 (World Bank, 2009), i.e., toan almost full-time and year-round employment. Roughestimates indicate that the production of vegetables after
harvesting winter wheat on the entire wheat production area
may create full-time employment for 200,000 people in the
Fergana Valley. Vegetables have a higher water productivity(Al-Said et al., 2012) and are also an important part of anutritious and healthy diet and contribute to export earnings;
public policies and investments that support double cropping
hence offer high social benefits.
The proposed crop and water management practices alsoenhance the sustainability of irrigation systems and benefit
instream and downstream users. Reduced irrigation water
diversions from the Syrdarya River and its tributaries in the
Fergana Valley will reduce groundwater recharge and gradually
lower the groundwater table, thereby reducing the return flow
to the river. This may improve the quality of both groundwaterand river flow. Lowering the water table often results in gradualreductions in the area of salt-affected soils and enhance thesustainability of irrigated agriculture (Kijne, 2006).
However, the main socioeconomic gains of water savings in
the Fergana Valley are expected to be in downstream subregions, such as the Mirzachul and Djizak steppes of the
Syrdarya River basin. Irrigation in these semi-desert zones fully
relies on water from the river. Between 1990 and 2000, cottonyields in the Mirzachul steppe located on the left bankdownstream of the river plummeted by 46%, while some of theland was taken out of production due to irrigation water
shortages and increasing salinity (Kushiev et al., 2005). This
had a direct impact on agricultural production, with estimatedlosses of around $90.4 million on 555,000 ha (Keith and
McKinney, 1997). Cotton yields declined in this area below 2t
ha–1 due to a shortage of irrigation water and salinity buildup in
the topsoil. A sustainable water supply is a precondition inthese areas to arrest soil salinization, which is the main
limitation for crop production. Reduced water diversions for
irrigation also offer major energy cost savings, for example inlift irrigation schemes (Karimov et al., 2017), with associatedreductions in carbon emissions.
In addition to guaranteeing the continued buildup of thenational revenue of the newly independent states, the double
cropping policy change could be an approach for increasing
rural incomes and enhancing food security. The cotton policychanges increased food production. Increasing green gramproduction in Uzbekistan may also enhance the export ofagricultural products to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. The
implications of increasing wheat and legumes production andpolicy changes extend hence well beyond irrigated agriculturein the Fergana Valley to countries in the region facing similarwater scarcity and agricultural policy reform challenges. Since
the benefit accrues to the public at large and even beyond thenational boundaries, the incidence analysis of costs and benefits
is quite complex, and benefit-sharing models and policy
reforms also require further research.

Can a change in cropping patterns produce water savings and social gains: A case study from the Fergana Valley, Central Asia

CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONSThis paper showed that national policy reforms in
Uzbekistan since the 1990s led to changes in the cropping
pattern that aimed for greater food security, social benefits, andwater savings. A case in point was the analysis of replacing
alfalfa with a winter wheat/fallow system and then transitioning
to wheat-gram double cropping that currently remains inactivein the agricultural policy. Modeling estimates using HYDRUS1D suggest that:- The shift from alfalfa to the winter wheat/fallow systemreleased about 400–470 million m3/yr of water resources in the
Fergana Valley for instream and downstream uses. However,these water resources became available mainly as a result of
reducing productive crop transpiration. Water savings
associated with reductions in nonproduction evaporation fromthe change in the cropping pattern are estimated to be only
about 66–90 million m3/yr.
- Winter wheat is not a suitable water-saving alternative crop
to replace alfalfa under shallow groundwater conditions due tosignificant upward fluxes from the water table. As a result, total
evaporation losses are of the same magnitude for the alfalfa andwinter wheat/fallow systems at different levels of deficit
irrigation, while productive transpiration is significantly higher
for alfalfa as compared to winter wheat. Shifting from alfalfa towinter wheat on 200,000 ha (or 22% of the irrigated land in the
Fergana Valley with a shallow water table) did not produce
water savings but enhanced the wheat output and food security.
Yet, the current practice of restricting double cropping undershallow groundwater conditions causes additional evaporation
losses from land fallowed after winter wheat harvesting. Thisimplies that further policy reforms and liberalizations thatincentivize better land and water management practices could
produce water savings and socioeconomic gains for the nation.
- Shifting from alfalfa to winter wheat followed by green
gram in areas with groundwater deeper than 2 m below the land
surface can reduce evaporation losses without changes in crop
productive transpiration. This double cropping in the Fergana
Valley can produce water savings of 114–163 million m3/yr
compared to alfalfa at different levels of deficit irrigation, andcan increase green gram grain production by 250–280 thousand
tons.
- When only the use of water in agriculture is considered,
free water resources gained through the change in the cropping
pattern can be reallocated within the Fergana Valley, which has
a more productive agriculture as compared to downstream
systems. Improving the water supply downstream, which faces
water shortages, may be possible through a set of water saving
technologies which do not affect crop productive transpiration.
When other uses, including environmental, industrial, andinstream users, are considered, then water released through thechange in the cropping pattern can be considered forreallocation within the river system.
To conclude, double cropping with summer green gram
represents an advantageous option for crop intensification andwidely-shared socioeconomic gains that may justify public
policy support. The cultivation of alfalfa in areas with a shallow
groundwater table can be continued, or the ground water table
can be lowered in areas with winter wheat/green gram, byextracting groundwater for irrigation of the second crop andpromoting the conjunctive use of surface water andgroundwater.

Acknowledgements.The authors would like to express their
thanks to the OPEC Fund for International Development andthe CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems
for financing this work and Dr. Ravza Mavlyanova, Regional
Coordinator of the World Vegetable Center for Central Asia forpromoting the adoption of green gram among farming
communities.
REFERENCES
Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D., Smith, M., 1998. Cropevapotranspiration. Guidelines for computing crop waterrequirements. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56. FAO,
Rome, 300 p.
Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Smith, M., Raes, D., Wright, J.L.,
2005. FAO-56 dual crop coefficient method for estimating
evaporation from soil and application extensions. J. Irrig.
Drain. Eng., 131, 2–13.
Al-Said, F.A., Ashfaq, M., Al-Barhi, M., Hanjra, M.A., Khan,
I. A., 2012. Water productivity of vegetables under modern
irrigation methods in Oman. Irrigation and Drainage (ICID
Journal), 61, 4, 477–489.
Anderson, K., 2007. Agricultural trade liberalisation and theenvironment: a global perspective. World Economy, 15,
153–172.
Awan, U.K., Ibrakhimov, M., Benli, B., Lamers, J.P.A., Liaqat,
U.W., 2017. A new concept of irrigation response units for
effective management of surface and groundwater resources:a case study from the multi-country Fergana Valley, Central
Asia. Irrigation Science, 35, 1, 55–68.
Borisov, V.A., 2007. Groundwater Resources and Their Use in
Uzbekistan. Fan, Tashkent, Uzbekistan. (In Russian.)Cai, X., McKinney, D.C., Rosegrant, M.W., 2002.
Sustainability analysis for irrigation water management in
the Aral Sea region. Agricultural Systems, 76, 1–24.
Chabot, Ph.,Tondel, F., 2011. A regional view of wheat markets
and food security in Central Asia with a focus on
Afghanistan and Tajikistan. USAID. http://www.fews.net/
docs/Publications/Regional View of Wheat... (Accessed on
25.12.14).
Conceiçao, P., Levine, S., Lipton, M., Warren-Rodríguez, A.,
2016. Toward a food secure future: Ensuring food security
for sustainable human development in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Food Policy, 60, 1–9.
Doorenbos, J., Kassam, A.H., 1979. Yield response to water.
FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 33. FAO, Rome.
Edgorov, D., Ikramova, M., Azimov, S., 2006. Crop rotation
and role of alfalfa on salinity control. Bukhara Branch of the
Uzbek Research Institute of Cotton Growing. Bukhara. 64 p.
Evans, A.E. V., Hanjra, M.A., Jiang, Y., Qadir, M., Drechsel,
P., 2012. Water quality: assessment of the current situationin Asia. International Journal of Water Resources
Development, 28, 195–216.
Feddes, R.A., Kowalik, P.J., Zaradny, H., 1978. Simulation of
Field Water Use and Crop Yield. John Wiley & Sons, NewYork.
Forkutsa, I., Sommer, R., Shirokova, Y.I., Lamers, J.P.,
Kienzler, K., Tischbein, B., Martius, C., Vlek, P.L.G., 2009.
Modeling irrigated cotton with shallow groundwater in theAral Sea Basin of Uzbekistan: I. Water dynamics. Irrig. Sci.,
27, 331–346. DOI: 10.1007/s00271-009-0148-1.
Foxx, T.S., Tierney, G.D., Williams, J.M., 1982. Rooting
depths of plants relative to biological and environmental
factors. Los Alamos National Laboratory, 28 p.

199

Akmal Kh. Karimov, Munir A. Hanjra, Jiří Šimůnek, Botir Abdurakhmannov

https://www.iaea.prg/inis/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_P
ublic/16/061/16061888.pdf.
Grismer, M.E., 2015. Use of shallow groundwater for crop
production.
ANR
Publication.,
6p.
http://anrcatalog.ucanr.edu.
Gan, Y.T., Warkentin, T.D., Bing, D.J., Stevenson, F.C.,
McDonald, C.L., 2010. Chickpea water use efficiency inrelation to cropping system, cultivar, soil nitrogen andRhizobial inoculation in semiarid environments. Agricultural
Water Management, 97, 1375–1381.
Ganiev, K.G., 1979. Evaporation and Infiltration Recharge ofGroundwater. Fan, Tashkent, Uzbekistan (In Russian.)
Giordano, M., Turral, H., Scheierling, S.M., Tréguer, D.O.,
McCornick, P.G., 2017. Beyond 'More Crop per Drop'.
Research Report 169. International Water Management
Institute (IWMI), Colombo, Sri Lanka; The World Bank,
Washington, DC, USA.
Hanjra, M.A., Qureshi, M.E., 2010. Global water crisis andfuture food security in an era of climate change. Food Policy
35, 2, 365–377.
He, K., Yang, Y., Yang, Y., Chen, S., Hu, Q., Liu, X., Gao, F.,
2017. HYDRUS simulation of sustainable brackish water
irrigation in a winter wheat-summer maize rotation systemin the North China Plain. Water, 9, 536.
Hernandez, T.X., 2001. Rainfall-runoff modeling in humid
shallow water table environments. MSc Thesis. Universityof South Florida.
Hussain, I., Mudasser, M., Hanjra, M.A., Amrasinghe, U.,
Molden, D., 2004. Improving wheat productivity in
Pakistan: econometric analysis using panel data from Chaj inthe upper Indus Basin. Water International, 29, 189–200.
Huang, J., Xu, C., Ridoutt, B.G., Wang, X., Ren, P., 2017.
Nitrogen and phosphorus losses and eutrophication potential
associated with fertilizer application to cropland in China.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 159, 171–179.
Jalilov, S.M., Amer, S.A., Ward, F.A., 2013. Water, food, andenergy security: an elusive search for balance in Central
Asia. Water Resources Management, 27, 11, 3959–3979.
Karimov, A., Molden, D., Khamzina, T., Platonov, A., Ivanov,Y., 2012. A water accounting procedure to determine thewater savings potential of the Fergana Valley. Agricultural
Water Management, 108, 61–72.
Karimov, A.K., Šimůnek, J., Hanjra, M.A., Avliyakulov, M.,
Forkutsa, I., 2014. Effects of the shallow water table onwater use of winter wheat and ecosystem health:Implications for unlocking the potential of groundwater in
the Fergana Valley (Central Asia). Agricultural Water
Management, 131, 0, 57–69.
Karimov, A.K., Smakhtin, V., Karimov, A.A., Khodjiev, Kh.,
Yakubov, S., Platonov, A., Avliyakulov, M., 2017.
Reducing the energy intensity of lift irrigation schemes ofNorthern Tajikistan- potential options. Renewable andSustainable
EnergyReviews.
doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.107
Keith, J.E., McKinney, D.C., 1997. Option analysis of theoperation of the Toktogul reservoir. Issue Paper No. 7.
www.ce.utexas.edu/prof/mckinney/ce397/Topics/Options
Toktogul 3.pdf. (Accessed on 20.02.2014).
Keyzer, M.A., Merbis, M.D., Pavel, I.F.P.W., van Wesenbeeck,
C.F.A., 2005. Diet shifts towards meat and the effects on
cereal use: can we feed the animals in 2030? Ecological
Economics, 55, 187–202.
Khan, S., Hanjra, M. A. 2008. Sustainable land and water
management policies and practices: A pathway to200

environmental sustainability in large irrigation systems.
Land Degradation and Development, 19, 469–487.
Kijne, J.W., 2006. Salinisation in irrigated agriculture in
Pakistan: mistaken predictions. Water Policy, 8, 325–38.
Kushiev, K., Noble, A.D., Abdullaev, I., Toshbekov, U., 2005.
Remediation of abandoned saline soils using Glycyrrhiza
glabra: A study from the Hungry Steppes of Central Asia.
Int. J. Agric. Sustain., 3, 2, 102–113.
Li, H., Yi, J., Zhang, J., Zhao, Y., Si, B., Lee, R., Cui, L., Liu,X., 2015. Modeling of soil water and salt dynamics and its
effects on root water uptake in Heihe Arid Wetland, Gansu,
China. Water, 7, 2382–2401. DOI: 10.3390/w7052382.
Liu, T., Luo, Y., 2011. Effect of shallow water tables on thewater use and yield of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.).
AJCS, 5, 13, 1692–1697.
Maaz, T., Wulfhorst, J.D., McCracken, V., Kirkegaard, J.,
Huggins, D.R., Roth, I., Kaur, H., Pan, W., 2017. Economic,
policy, and social trends and challenges of introducing
oilseed and pulse crops into dryland wheat cropping
systems. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment,
doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.03.018.
Mavlyanova, R., Sharma, R.C., 2015. High quality seedproduction of wheat and mungbean in Kuva, Fergana.
Report. ICARDA, Tashkent. www.cac-program.org/files/
ec9f7aca08a1460f0debbbab0399c61c.pdf
Mirzaev, S.Sh., 1974. Groundwater Storages of Uzbekistan .
Fan, Tashkent, Uzbekistan. (In Russian.)
Molden, D., 1997. Accounting for water use and productivity.
SWIM Paper 1. International Water Management Institute,
Sri Lanka.
Molden, D., Sakthivadivel, R., 1999. Water accounting toassess use and productivity of water. International Journal of
Water Resources Development, 15, 1&2, 55–71.
Molden, D., Oweis, T., Steduto, P., Bindraban, P., Hanjra,
M.A., Kijne, J., 2010. Improving agricultural waterproductivity: Between optimism. Agric. Water Manage., 97,
4, 528–535.
Nandalal, W., Hipel, W., 2007. Strategic decision support forresolving conflict over water sharing among countries along
the Syr Darya River in the Aral Sea Basin. Journal of Water
Resources Planning and Management, 133, 289–299.
Pingali, P., 2015. Agricultural policy and nutrition outcomes –getting beyond the preoccupation with staple grains. Food
Security, 7, 3, 583–591.
Reddy, J.M., Muhammedjanov, Sh., Jumaboev, K.,
Eshmuratov, D., 2012. Analysis of cotton water productivity
in Fergana Valley. Agricultural Science, 3, 6, 822–834.
Sanchez, C.A., Zerihun, N.I., Warrick, A.W., Furman, A.,
2003. Efficient surface fertigation of high value horticulture
crops. In: Western Nutrient Management Conference, Salt
Lake City, UT, pp. 77–82.
Seckler, D., 1996. The New Era of Water Resources
Management: From “Dry” To “Wet” Water Savings.
Research Report 1. International Irrigation Management
Institute (IIMI), Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Šejna, M., Šimůnek, J., van Genuchten, M.Th., 2012. The
Hydrus software package for simulating the two- and threedimensional movement of water, heat, and multiple solutes
in variably-saturated media. HYDRUS User manual,
Version 2. PC-Progress, Prague, Czech Republic. 287 p.
Shouse, P.J., Ayars, E., Šimůnek, J., 2011. Simulating root
uptake from a shallow saline groundwater resource.
Agricultural Water Management, 98, 784–790.
Shreder, V.R., Vasiliev, I.K., Trunova, T.A., 1977.
Hydromodul zoning for calculation of the irrigation rates forCan a change in cropping patterns produce water savings and social gains: A case study from the Fergana Valley, Central Asia

cotton under arid environments. In: Proceedings of the MidMiddle Asia Research Institute of Irrigation. No. 8. Middle
Asia Research Institute of Irrigation, Tashkent, pp. 28–41.
Shultsc, V.L., 1949. Rivers of Middle Asia. State Publishing
House of Geographic Literature, Moscow, 196 p. (In Russian.)Šimůnek, J., Šejna, M., Saito, H., Sakai, M., van Genuchten
M.Th., 2008. The HYDRUS-1D Software Package forSimulating the Movement of Water, Heat, and Multiple
Solutes in Variably Saturated Media, Version 4.0, HYDRUS
Software Series 3. Department of Environmental Sciences,
University of California Riverside, Riverside, California,
USA, 315 p.
Šimůnek, J., van Genuchten, M.Th., Šejna, M., 2016. Recent
developments and applications of the HYDRUS computer
software packages. Vadose Zone Journal, 15, 7, 25 p., DOI:
10.2136/vzj2016.04.0033.
Smeal, D., Kallsen, C.E., Sammis, T.W., 1991. Alfalfa yield as
related to transpiration, growth stage and environment. Irrig.
Sci., 12, 79–86.
Sommer, R., Glazirina, M., Yuldashev, T., Otarov, A., Ibraeva,
M., Martynova, L., Bekenov, M., Kholov, B., Ibragimov, N.,
Kobilov, R., Karaev, S., Sultonov, M., Khasanova, F.,
Esanbekov, M., Mavlyanov, D., Isaev, S., Abdurahimov, S.,
Ikramov, R., Shezdyukova, L., de Pauw, E., 2013. Impact ofclimate change on wheat productivity in Central Asia.
Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 178, 78–99.
Soppe, R.W., Ayars, J.E., 2002. Crop water use by safflower inweighing lysimeters. Agricultural water management, 69,
59–71.
Soylu, M.E., Istanbulluoglu, E., Lenters, J.D., Wang, T., 2011.
Quantifying the impact of groundwater depth onevapotranspiration in a semi-arid grassland region. Hydrol.
Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 787–806. www.hydrol-earth-systsci.net/15/787/2011/doi:10.5194/hess-15-787-2011.
Spoor, M., 1998. The Aral Sea Basin crisis: Transition andenvironment in former Soviet Central Asia. Development
and Change, 29, 409–435.
Stokstad, E., 2010. Could less meat mean more food? Science,
327, 810–811.

Sumochkina, T.E., Konovalova, N.S., Ivanova, D.A., Kapner,
D.Ya., Muminov, F.A., Reizvih, O.N., Abdullaev, Kh.M.,
Gorelysheva, Z.M., Titova, M.M., 1977. Agroclimatic
resources of Namangan, Andijan and Fergana provinces(Fergana Valley) of Uzbekistan. Gidrometeoizdat,
Leningrad, 194 p. (In Russian.)
Talipov, G.A., 1992. Land resources of Uzebkistan andproblems of their rational use. Uzbek Research Institute of
Cotton Growing, Tashkent, 232 p. (In Russian.)
Taylor, S.A., Ashcroft, G.M., 1972. Physical Edaphology.
W.H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco, pp. 434–435.
Verkaart, S., Munyua, B.G., Mausch, K., Michler, J.D. 2017.
Welfare impacts of improved chickpea adoption: A pathway
for rural development in Ethiopia? Food Policy, 66, 50–61.
van Genuchten, M.Th., 1980. A closed-form equation forpredicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils.
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 44, 5, 892–898.
Ward, F.A., Booker, J.F., 2003. Economic costs and benefits of
instream flow protection for endangered species in aninternational basin. Journal of the American Water
Resources Association, 427–440.
Ward, F.A., Pulido-Velazquez, M., 2008. Water conservation in
irrigation can increase water use. PNAS 105, 18215–18220.
Webber, H.A., 2008. Improving irrigated agriculture in the
Fergana Valley, Uzbekistan. PhD Thesis. McGill University.
188 p.
Wesseling, J.G., Elbers, J.A., Kabat, P., van den Broek, B.J.,
1991. SWATRE; Instructions for Input. Internal Note.
Winand Staring Centre, Wageningen.
World Bank, 2009. Uzbekistan - First phase of the Ferghana
Valley Water Resources Management Project: Resettlement
policy framework and specific resettlement action plan.
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2009/07/108492
23/uzbekistan-first-phase-ferghana-valley-water-resourcesmanagement-project-resettlement-policy-frameworkspecific-resettlement-action-plan. (Accessed on 18.12.2014).
Received 7 August 2017
Accepted 20 October 2017

Note: Colour version of Figures can be found in the web version of this article.

201