Costs of Inaction, Benefits of Action, and Returns on Investment to Combat Agricultural Resource Degradation in Tunisia

Abstract

This study aimed at estimating the total economic costs of inaction, the benefits of action, and the returns on investment to combat agricultural resource degradation in Tunisia. The study’s scope covers all four biomes in agriculture, namely crop lands, pasturelands, forests, and irrigation water at both provincial and national levels. Using the Analysis Pack for Economics of Agricultural Resource Degradation (APEARD) tool and applying extremely conservative assumptions, we estimated that Tunisia is annually losing at least 1.9 million tons of potential production of different crops (cereals, legumes, vegetables, fruits, and cultivated forages), which represents 22% of current production and the associated crop residues in one season. Degradation also causes the loss of 431 thousand tons of forest and shrub biomass (1.09% of total stock), and 2.3 million tons (25.4%) of forage from natural pastures. Moreover, due to inaction or inadequate action to conserve water and reduce losses, the country is losing at least 884 million cubic meters of water including surface runoff (23.33% of total supply). Tunisia is also losing at least 142 million tons of soil (i.e., 8.68 ton/ha or 0.62% of total soil stock assuming an average 1,400 tons per ha of land) every year due to erosion, which is also associated with the release of at least 882 thousand tons of carbon into the atmosphere. The study estimated that if Tunisia implements recommended package of policy, institutional, and technological changes at a cost of US$611 million on 1.5 million ha of land that are prioritized for investment, it can reap time-discounted benefits valued at US$3.5 billion in ten years - leading to an average benefit:cost ratio of 5.97. The policy implication of our findings is that the government of Tunisia, its national and international development partners, civil society, and all citizens should join forces in raising awareness on the gravity of the problem and exert concerted efforts to prevent further degradation and loss of ecosystem services. Such efforts can be justified not only on social, biophysical, and environmental grounds, but also on economic rationale.