Abstract:

: Water resources are paramount for the maintenance of the Earth’s system equilibrium; however, they face various threats and need increased conservation and better management. To restore water resources, nature-based solutions can be applied. Nevertheless, it is unclear which solution promotes greater water supply resilience: restoring riparian vegetation, improving management practices in key areas for water recharge, or both? In addition, how significant are these results in the face of climate change effects? To answer this, we used the SWAT (Soil and Water Assessment Tool) model to simulate and compare four different land use scenarios under three climate conditions (i.e., observed climate and two of the IPCC’s future climate projections). Focusing on key areas contributed more to increasing water supply resilience than forest restoration. Applying both solutions, however, yielded the greatest increases in resilience and groundwater recharge and the greatest decreases in surface runoff and sediment loads. None of the solutions caused a significant difference in streamflow and water yield. Furthermore, according to both of the IPCC climate projections evaluated, by the end of this century, the average annual streamflow will be lower than the historical mean for the region. Climate adaptation strategies alone will be insufficient to ensure future water access, highlighting the need for implementing drastic mitigation actions.

Keywords: