Given past failures to secure the wider range of eco system services, we highlight the need for tools that can be used in striking tradeoffs between water for different eco system services
planting trees in particular parts of the landscape can reduce vulnerability to waterlogging and salinization in other parts of the landscape (Andreis 2005).
Other chapters in this volume propose multifunctional agriculture as a response to the environmental degradation resulting from more narrowly based agricultural practices. For example, chapter 14 on rice illustrates the different ecosystem services generated in rice fields. Chapter 8 on rainfed agriculture illustrates how modifications to the water balance and erosion control can increase crop production. And chapter 9 on irrigation emphasizes multifunctionality in large-scale public irrigation systems that are dependent on surface water. Chapter 15 on land also presents a comprehensive overview of multifunctional agriculture and landscapes, including resource-conserving agriculture and emphasizes the synergies that arise between multiple users of ecosystem services when agriculture is treated as an integral part of the broader landscape. ese chapters also illustrate the close links between environmental change and well-being and highlight the different roles and re- sponsibilities of women and men in agriculture, the economy, and the household, and their different effects on the environment, issues requiring further study.
Assessing tradeoffs and tools for dealing with them Scientists are increasingly questioning the wisdom of seeking economic development, in- cluding further development of agriculture and fisheries, at the expense of wider envi- ronmental and social consequences (International Council for Science 2002; SIWI and others 2005; Foley and others 2005; Kura and others 2004). Arrow and others (1995) have shown convincingly that economic development without due consideration of the ecological consequences may not provide the economic means to overcome environmental concerns in the future, particularly if the ecological resilience of the wider environment is undermined. e consequences of losing ecological resilience, especially when it re- sults in irreversible change, have not been fully considered alongside the expected benefits (MEA 2005c).
It is anticipated that the management of water for agroecosystems alone will be subject to competition from wider environmental requirements (Lemly, Kingsford, and
ompson 2000; Molden and de Fraiture 2004) and may require further tradeoffs and
the adoption of wider and more inclusive mechanisms. For example, the public sector is starting to buy back irrigation water from farmers to sustain or rehabilitate ecosystems or ecosystem services, sometimes even paying farmers not to irrigate. Governments may be able to buy the rights to water (whether the rights had previously been given away or obtained through the market), or nongovernmental organizations may be able to lease the water during dry years to support valued aquatic ecosystems. Water for the environment can thus be seen as a new driving force to which agriculture needs to adapt.
Ecosystem management is increasingly undertaken through collaborative planning and consultation processes, following past failures to transparently consider tradeoffs and wider societal interests (Carbonell, Nathai-Gyan, and Finlayson 2001). e Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA 2005b,c) emphasizes the importance of overcoming sectoral divides and encompassing wider stakeholder participation in planning and development. Some of the people most vulnerable to ecosystem change depend directly on ecosystem