The iGains4Gains model guides irrigation water conservation and allocation to enhance nexus gains across water, food, carbon emissions, and nature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper introduces and applies iGain4Gains, an Excel-based model, to reveal how changes to water conservation and allocation, and irrigation technology, can produce four nexus gains. These gains are; reduced aggregate water consumption, sustained crop production, lower carbon emissions, and enhanced water availability for nature. We developed the model with limited data and hypothetical future scenarios from the Amman-Zarqa basin in Jordan. Given its significant irrigation and urban water demands and difficult decisions regarding future water allocation and nexus choices, this basin is a highly appropriate case study. The paper's primary aim is to demonstrate the iGains4Gains nexus model rather than to build an accurate hydrological model of the basin's water resources. The model addresses two critical questions regarding increased irrigation efficiency. First, can irrigation efficiency and other factors, such as irrigated area, be applied to achieve real water savings while maintaining crop production, ensuring greenhouse gas emission reductions, and 'freeing' water for nature? Second, with the insight that water conservation is a distributive/allocative act, we ask who between four paracommoners (the proprietor irrigation system, neighbouring irrigation systems, society, and nature) benefits hydrologically from changes in irrigation efficiency? Recognising nexus gains are not always linear, positive and predictable, the model reveals that achieving all four gains simultaneously is difficult, likely leading to trade-offs such as water consumption rebounds or increased carbon emissions. Demonstrated by its use at a workshop in Jordan in February 2024, iGains4Gains can be used by students, scientists and decision-makers, to explore and understand nexus trade-offs connected to changes in irrigation management. The paper concludes with recommendations for governing water and irrigated agriculture in basins where large volumes of water are withdrawn and depleted by irrigation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".