1. Background

2. Conceptual framework

3. Materials and Methods

Figure 1. Map of the study provinces.

Figure 1. Map of the study provinces.

4. Results and Discussion

4.4. Fish and Fishery Resource Management

The areas under study are rich in fishery resources, with connections to a variety of water bodies including rivers, streams, and lakes. The TSIS was once a fishing lot numbered 20 in Takeo Province, and is now connected to PAR, a tributary of the Bassac River. Similarly, the BSL is linked to the Mekong River, which is home to a diverse array of fish that people from 44 villages depend on for their livelihoods. Beung Ream, located in the Tonle Sap Floodplain, serves as a migration route for fish between Tonle Sap Lake and Beung Ream during the rainy season. Despite this, only 24% of households in the studied areas rely on fishing, with Prey Kabbas District having the highest percentage of fishing households at 33%. Around 30% of households in Kampong Thom's Beung Ream still rely on fishing, while BSL in Prey Veng Province has a significantly lower percentage of fishing households at just 19%.

To promote the sustainable management of fishery resources, the Fishery Administration (FiA) has established eight Community Fisheries (CFis) and two Community Fishery Reserves (CFRs) in the studied areas. The CFR is linked to the rice fishery, which accounts for 30% of fish production in Cambodia [31]. According to the CFi Effectiveness Assessment 2018, CFis are responsible for 15% of the total inland fish production [32].

Table 4. The characteristics of the studied CFis and CFRs.

Table 4. The characteristics of the studied CFis and CFRs.

Studied Sites	CFis				CFRs
	No	Area (ha)	No. of villages	Membership	No	Area (ha)	No. of Villages	Membership
Beung Phlang	-	-	-	-	1	27	3	4,981
Ta Soung	4	844,793	17	1016	-	-	-	-
Beung Ream	-	-	-	-	1	13	2	572
Beung Sneh	4	85,236	26	11,034	-	-	-	-
Total	8	930,029	43	12,050	2	40	5	5,553

4.6. Community Fish Refuges

This study delves into two CFRs, namely the BRC in Kampong Thom and the BPC in Prey Veng Provinces. The BRC was established in 2021 by two villages in the Kakoh Commune, Santuk District, Kampong Thom Province. It covers a vast area of 13 hectares, with a 2-hectare core protected region and an average water depth of 2.5 meters during the dry spell. The CFR area is equipped with a water level monitoring system that triggers an alarm to prevent any further water extraction from the lake. It is marked with pillars, a security guard post, and a signboard that explicitly states the prohibition of illegal fishing within the BRC area.

Table 5. Framework for analyzing water governance in the studied areas.

Table 5. Framework for analyzing water governance in the studied areas.

WaterUser Community	No. of FWUCs	Source of Water--Upstream vs downstream	Policy	Institution	Water Conflict & cooperation—Power, politics, & position	Dialogue/negotiation
FWUCs	01 FWUCs in TSIS 01 FWUC in TKIS 02 FWUCs in BSL—One is not active 01 FWUC in Beung Phlang, not active.	∙ BSL,∙ PAR in Takeo,∙ Taing Krasaing River, and∙ Mekong River (Vaiko Irrigation Scheme)	The Constitution 1993-- Article 58 & 59. Water policy (2004), Water Law (2007). Sub-decree for effective and sustainable management, protection, and development of surface water and groundwater in 39 river basins (July 2015). FWUC Sub-decree (2015)	MOWRAM was established in 1999, managing water & irrigation management--the operation of the irrigation system. MAFF is responsible for rice farming and seems to have no roles in irrigated areas provided by MOWRAM. Commune Authority plays in water management in their communes only when water conflicts occur. The District Office of Agriculture, Environment, and Water coordinates activity concerning water uses, agriculture, and the environment	Water is pumped from water sources through irrigation to irrigate three rice crops annually. Water shortages lead to competition and conflict among farmers between farming, fishing & domestic uses. Irrigation is a weapon for fighting water shortage at the community level, and water pumping generators are weapons for fighting water shortage at the household level. Competing between upstream and downstream communities: communities with and without irrigation schemes. Rice farming and in-datedness and migration.	At the regional level, there are regional dialogues on water sharing in the Mekong River Basin. At the national level, Coordination between MOWRAM and MAFF remains challenging over water management and water uses for rice farming. At the local level, there is a weak conflict between FWUCs and CFis over water use.
CFis	04 CFis in PAR 04 CFis in BSL	BSL in Prey Veng. PAR in Takeo.	Fishery Law, Sub-decree on CFis. Strategic Planning Framework for Fisheries. Planning Framework	FiA/FiAC, The Fishery Sector has been decentralized, and FiAC is not under FiA, but under the PDAFF. FiA/FiACs organize the election to set up the CFi Committee to manage CFis. CFis are weak and lack funding and technical support. Many CFis are not organizing re-elections and developments of the management plans. Commune Administrations do not have a mandate in fishery management and CFis.	CFis protect water at 3-4m deep to keep the fish habitat productive—below that will affect fish, increased fish catch, and encroach the wetlands in the lake to cultivate rice farming. The irrigation scheme has blocked the river flow and fish migration, changing landscapes. The irrigation management has no fishery management system included. The increased water pumping resulted in lower water, affecting the fishery. The increased rice farming leads to the use of pesticides and fertilizers, affecting fishery and aquatic animals.	CFis and FWUCs are in the same villages and communes, but water conflicts remain unresolved. Communes facilitate the CFis and FWUCs in the monthly commune meeting but cannot resolve the tensions between CFis and FWUC. FiA has decentralized to FiACs, but FiACs have limited resources and capacity to resolve these conflicts at local levels. CFis—no fishery officers at the district level. The fishery has not been integrated into the District Office of Agriculture, Environment, and Water.
CFRs	01 BRC 01 BPC	Taing Krasaing River, and Mekong River (Vaiko Irrigation canals)	Legal framework is being developed Sub-decree on CFR is being drafted.	FiA is the leading Institution. The Department of Aquaculture Department (DAD) is mandated to manage CFRs. FiA/DAD organized the election to set up the CFR Committee to manage CFRs. Commune Administration has no knowledge and mandates in CFR management. NGOs and Donors support CFRs financially.	CFRs protect water sources to provide habitats to fishery and aquatic animals to seek refuge in the dry seasons in order for them to keep breeding so that in the wet season these fish and aquatic animals will migrate to rice fields and water bodies. CFRs are often pumped by farmers, who are members of FWUCs and CFRs, to save their rice farming in the dry season when water is critically low in the CFRs and shortage.	No mechanism in place to support the CFRs at the ground, only through donors/NGOs. Commune Administration often facilitates CFRs and FWUCs in the monthly meetings of the Communes.

In the vicinity of BRC, three canals are present: O' Praing, Beung Karav, and irrigation canals constructed by MoWRAM. O' Praing underwent rehabilitation through a private company that utilized the soil to construct roads. Since then, it has ensured a year-long water supply to BRC. The Kakoh irrigation canal enters BRC via a water gate that regulates water supply to CFR areas. The Kakoh irrigation system is part of the TKIS. Farmers have been irrigating 995 hectares of rice fields surrounding BRC with water from the Kakoh irrigation canals and BRC, enabling them to cultivate 2-3 crops of rice. Approximately 572 households are actively involved in fishing and harvesting fish and OAAs from the floodplain area and rice fields surrounding BRC, which gets flooded during the rainy season. Besides, around 294 households fish within the BRC area for approximately five months a year. Fishing benefits approximately 716 families, of which 20 percent are impoverished households. The estimated annual fish catch per household is about 88kg, and the estimated annual catch of OAAs is about 48kg per household.

The BPC, situated in the Ampil Krau Commune, is home to 17,572 individuals from 2112 households across five villages. The majority of the population, approximately 85%, is engaged in farming, while about 20% are involved in fishing. Established in 2008 by Peanea, Kbal Beung, and Svay Teap villages, the BPC was created to protect land, fish, and biodiversity for the community's benefit. Covering an area of roughly 27 hectares, the BPC boasts a length of 1,800 meters and a width of 200 meters. It holds water all year round, with a depth of 6 meters in the wet season and 2 meters in the dry season. The core area, spanning 12 hectares, is managed as a conservation zone, with poles marking its boundaries. The release of indigenous fish fingerlings 2-3 times has resulted in an increase in fish stock. While villagers from these villages can fish within the CFR, they are not permitted to do so in the conservation areas. The VIS encircles the BPC and includes two primary canals, one pumping station, two vertical sub-canals, and four horizontal sub-canals. One vertical and one horizontal sub-canal link the BPC to the main canals. The canal system is observed to be shallow and poorly maintained, and villagers have not utilized much of the water. Nonetheless, the connectivity allows fish to move between the sub-canals and BPC to rice fields, with an estimated fish catch at about 25kg/ha.

4.7. Water Governance for Rice Farming, CFis, and CFRs

Water is a crucial component for both rice farming and fishery production. However, the extensive nature of commercial rice farming requires a larger amount of water for rice intensification, which leads to a rise in demand for irrigation development. Rice farming involves three crops each year: wet season rice farming from May to October, first dry season rice farming from November to January, and second dry season rice farming from February to April. Farmers extract more water from irrigation canals and, in some cases, from rivers, lakes, and ponds to irrigate dry season rice farming. This often causes conflicts among farmers and between upstream and downstream communities along rivers and around lakes. With the expansion of the rice farming industry, the use of pesticides, fertilizers, and other chemical inputs has increased to improve rice production. Unfortunately, the use of these inputs, pumping of water, water conflicts, climate change, and other factors have led to the degradation of aquatic resources, resulting in a decline in fishery resources. In this article, we will delve into the competition between rice farming and fishery management for water resources and the resulting consequences.

Figure 2. Water Governance.

Figure 2. Water Governance.

4.10. Pesticides and Fertilizers Affecting Fishery

The rise in rice farming has led to an increase in the use of agro-chemical inputs to enhance rice yields. In the areas under study, fertilizers were commonly used by around 73% of households during both wet and dry farming seasons. Prey Veng Province saw the highest percentage of households using fertilizers, with 80% of them using it, compared to 67% in Takeo and 31% in Kampong Thom Provinces. In Prey Veng Province, farming households in Samraong, Tuek Thla, and Damrei Puong communes used fertilizers the most, accounting for 88%, 87%, and 85%, respectively. In Takeo Province, around 82% and 85% of farming households in Kan Kam and Pou Rumchak Communes applied fertilizers on their rice crops. Farmers usually used 5-7 bags (50kg/bag)/ha of fertilizers for a farming season, from the time they sowed the rice seeds until harvest. They used various types of fertilizers, including DAP, Urea, and others, which cost approximately 120,000 riel (USD30)/bag. The total cost of fertilizers per hectare ranged between USD150-210. These fertilizers were mainly imported from Vietnam and sold publicly. Based on the interviews conducted, farmers had limited knowledge about fertilizer indications and how to use them.

Pesticides are commonly used by farmers to protect their crops, but this practice can negatively impact rice yield. Research indicates that around 70% of agricultural households in the studied areas use pesticides during the rice farming season. Prey Veng Province has the highest percentage of pesticide use at 78%, followed by Takeo at 69%. Notably, the communes of Damrei Puon, Samraong, Ampil Krav, and Prey Kandieng located far from the BSL, which experiences water shortages during the rainy season, have the highest percentage of pesticide use at 90%, 83%, 81%, and 80%, respectively. In Takeo, Pou Rumchak and Ban Kam Communes have the highest percentages of pesticide use in rice farming, accounting for 83% and 80%, respectively.

Based on data provided by farmers, each hectare of land requires approximately nine containers of pesticides, each priced at 15,000 riels (USD3.75), resulting in a total pesticide cost of USD33.75. To ensure maximum effectiveness, farmers spray their crops with pesticides 3-4 times per hectare until harvest, at a cost of USD1.25 (5,000 riels) per spray. As a result, they spend around USD105-140 per hectare on pesticides alone. On top of this, farmers also use other chemical treatments to combat weeds and invasive species such as snails, which have been causing damage to their rice fields. Unfortunately, the use of pesticides can also have negative effects on aquatic life. The pesticide use kills aquatic animals, including fish, and thus, not many fish are reported by farmers in the rice fields. However, the percentage of households using organic pesticides and fertilizers is relatively low, 2% and 5% respectively. Farmers no longer use organic fertilizers and pesticides in some villages, such as in the Prey Kandieng Commune.

At the market, there was a diverse range of fertilizers offered by different importers and distributors. Urea and Muriate of Potash (KCl) were single-nutrient options, while di-ammonium phosphate (DAP) (18-46-0) and ammonium sulfate (16-20-0) were available as compound nitrogen-based fertilizers. Farmers could also find compound nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium (NPK) products with ratios of 15-15-15, 16-16-8-(13S), and 20-20-15. Fertilizers could be purchased by the kilogram or in 50 kg bags. Most of the products were labeled in Khmer, with the exception of the 16-16-8-13 fertilizer from the Philippines and the urea from China and Vietnam, which had small Khmer stickers.

Table 7. The Uses of Chemical Inputs in rice farming.

Table 7. The Uses of Chemical Inputs in rice farming.

Site	Commune	No. of HHs	HHs using chemical fertilizers		HHs using organic fertilizers		HHs using pesticides		HHs using organic pesticides (nature) to kill pests and grass
			No	%	No	%	No	%	No	%
Beung Phlang	Ampil Krau	1981	1610	81	77	4	1606	81	71	4
Beung Sneh	Theay	2964	2240	76	186	6	2170	73	157	5
	Damrei Puon	2679	2284	85	32	1	2402	90	16	1
	Samraong	2482	2179	88	43	2	2060	83	25	1
	Tuek Thla	2820	2457	87	23	1	2107	75	15	1
	Me Bon	2109	1531	73	67	3	1521	72	0	0
	Baray	1655	1256	76	27	2	1256	76	0	0
	Ta Kao	3739	2752	74	50	1	2754	74	4	0
	Prey Kandieng	2887	2308	80	60	2	2308	80	6	0
Sub-total	9	23316	18617	80	565	2	18184	78	294	1
Boeung Ream	Kakoh	3325	1023	31	536	16	609	18	81	2
Ta Soung	Ban Kam	1607	1320	82	111	7	1290	80	0	0
	Kampong Reab	532	220	41	100	19	220	41	100	19
	Pou Rumchak	778	662	85	25	3	648	83	55	7
	Prey Lvea	814	307	38	53	7	416	51	27	3
Sub-total	4	3731	2509	67	289	8	2574	69	182	5
Grant total	14	30372	22149	73	1390	5	21367	70	557	2
Source: Commune Database 2021

4.11. Level and Scale of Water Governance

Enhancing rice farming and fishery production requires improving water governance through the promotion and decentralization of integrated approaches to institutions and policies. In natural resource management, decentralization has been implemented through Community Fisheries (CFis) and Community Fisheries Resources (CFRs) to empower local communities to manage their own resources. Similarly, Local Water User Communities (FWUCs) enable local communities to decentralize water resources. However, centralized control of technical and financial resources presents challenges for sectoral decentralization. To address this, MOWRAM established two FWUCs while FiA/FiAC established four CFis in the BSL, and MoE established one Community-based Eco-tourism (CBET). Despite these efforts, decentralized practices remain unintegrated as each community organization is institutionalized by their respective line ministries, resulting in unintegrated CFis, CBET, and FWUCs. In TSIS, village communities are separated by CFis/CFRs or FWUCs, despite being from the same village. CFis are supervised by FiA and FiACs, while FWUCs are supervised by MOWRAM/PDOWRAM.

Furthermore, in BSL, different Communes tend to manage the BSL from the geographical locations of the Communes in the lake, not from the integrated approaches. Competitions between communes in the lake have led to the uncertainty of the lake in the future. In the TISIS, CFis and FWUCs are two different entities in the same Communes, but FWUC extracts water from the CFis to sustain rice farming and collect water fees from farmers. At the same time, CFis protect the water sources and do not charge any water fees to farmers or fishers to support their protection of the water sources. The lack of integration and connection between FWUCs and CFis leaves them uncertain about the system's future. Also, the Beung Ream and the Kakoh Irrigation Canal are connected in one integrated system, but they operate independently, one under the FiA and another under MOWRAM/PDOWRAM.

However, FWUCs in TKIS, TSIS, and CKIS are managed under the District Agriculture, Environment, and Water Resource Office (DAEW), in which District Officers in charge of water resources are responsible for managing FWUCs. Also, District Agriculture Officers are responsible for fishery management and agriculture. DAEW coordinates the agriculture, environment, and water management at the district level, and they report to District Governors and the Provincial Departments of Agriculture, Water Resources and Meteorology, and Environment.

Nonetheless, DAEW is still new and has limited capacity and resources to deal with the growing water, fishery, and agriculture issues. Given the limited capacity and staff, they still have not been given the full power to implement their roles and responsibilities. They need at large the capacity building and orientations to improve water governance, fishery management, and agricultural development. In the future, working with DAEW would address integrating water, fishery, and agriculture and decentralizing natural resource management.

Figure 5. Level and scale of water governance.

Figure 5. Level and scale of water governance.

5. Conclusions

References

1. Sithirith, M. Downstream state and water security in the Mekong region: a case of Cambodia between too much and too little water. Water 2021, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
2. Sithirith, M. Water governance in Cambodia: From centralized water governance to farmer water user community. Resources 2017, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
3. Sokhem P, Sunada K. The governance of the Tonle Sap Lake, Cambodia: integration of local, national and international levels. International Journal of Water Resources Development 2006, 22, 3, 399-416. [CrossRef]
4. Ojendal, J. Sharing the Good: Modes of Managing Water Resources in the Lower Mekong River Basin; Göteborg University Department of Peace and Development Research: Goteborg, Sweden, 2000. [Google Scholar]
5. Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC). Sub-Decree on Farmer Water User Community. RGC 2015, no. 73.
6. Center for Agriculture Development Study. Inventory of Irrigation Schemes and Famer Water User Communities in Cambodia; CEDAC and Water Program; CEDAC: Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 2009. [Google Scholar]
7. Cambodian Development Research Institute. Hydrological Analysis in Support of Irrigation Management: A Case Study of Stung Chrey Bak Catchment, Cambodia; CDRI Working Paper Series No. 59; CDRI: Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 2011; p. 55. [Google Scholar]
8. Nang, P.; Khiev, D.; Hirsch, P.; Whitehead, I. Improving the Governance of Water Resources in Cambodia: A Stakeholder Analysis—Understanding Stakeholders’ Roles, Perceptions and Constraints for Effective Irrigation and Catchment Management and Development; Working Paper Series No. 54; Cambodia Development Research Institute: Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 2011. [Google Scholar]
9. Nang, P.; Ouch, C. Gender and Water Governance: Women’s Role in Irrigation Management and Development in the Context of Climate Change; Working Paper Series No. 89; Cambodia Development Research Institute: Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 2014. [Google Scholar]
10. Ly, V. The Baseline Assessment of the Effectiveness of Community Fisheries in Cambodia; The Community Fisheries Development Department (CFDD), Fisheries Administration (FiA): Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 2018. [Google Scholar]
11. Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC). Sub-decree on community fisheries. No 25 OrNor Kror BorKor. Royal Government of Cambodia, 2005.
12. Ostrom, E. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action; Cambridge University: New York, NY, USA, 1990. [Google Scholar]
13. Rogers, P.; Alan, W.H. Effective Water Governance; TEC Background Papers No. 7; Global Water Partnership/Swedish International Development Agency: Stockholm, Sweden, 2003. [Google Scholar]
14. Tortajada, C. Water Governance: A Research Agenda. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 2010, 26, 309–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
15. M. E. Arias, M.E., Piman, T., Lauri, H., Cochrane, T.A. and Kummu, M 2014. Dams on Mekong tributaries as significant contributors of hydrological alterations to the Tonle Sap Floodplain in Cambodia. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 2014, 18, 5303–5315. www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/18/5303/2014/. [CrossRef]
16. Dore, J.; Lebel, L.; Molle, F. A framework for analysing transboundary water governance com-plexes, illustrated in the Mekong Region. J. Hydrol. 2012, 466–467, 23–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
17. Grundy-Warr C, Sithirith M, Li YM. Volumes, fluidity and flows: Rethinking the nature of political geography. Political Geography 2015, 45, 93-5. [CrossRef]
18. Öjendal J, Mathur V, Sithirith M. Environmental governance in the Mekong. Hydropower site selection processes in the Se Son and Sre Pok basins. Stockholm Environment Institute: Bangkok, Thailand, 2002.
19. Ratner, B.D.; Cohen, P.; Barman, B.; Mam, K.; Nagoli, J.; Allison, E.H. Governance of aquatic agricultural systems: Analyzing representation, power, and accountability. Ecol. Soc. 2013, 18, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
20. Savenije, H.H.G.; van der Zaag, P. Water as an economic good and demand management: Paradigms with pitfalls. Water Int. 2002, 27, 98–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
21. Lebel, L.; Bastakoti, R.C.; Daniel, R. CPWF Project Report: Enhancing Multi-Scale Mekong Water Governance; Project Number PN50; CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food: Chiang Mai, Thailand, 2010. [Google Scholar]
22. Jones M, Jones R, Woods M, Whitehead M, Dixon D, Hannah M. An introduction to political geography: space, place and politics. Routledge, 2014. [CrossRef]
23. Lefebvre H. The social production of space. Malden, MA, Blackwell Publishing, 1991.
24. Dore, J. An agenda for deliberative water governance arenas in the Mekong. Water Policy 2014, 16, 194–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
25. Perry, C.; Rock, M.; Seckler, D. Water as an Economic Good: A Solution, or a Problem? International Water Management Institute: Colombo, Sri Lanka, 1997.
26. Asian Development Bank (ADB). Proposed Revision of the Water Policy of the Asian Development Bank; Asian Development Bank: Manila, Philippines, 2004. [Google Scholar]
27. Global Water Partnership. GWP in Action; Global Water Partnership: Stockholm, Sweden, 2002. [Google Scholar]
28. Rogers, P.; Alan, W.H. Effective Water Governance; TEC Background Papers No. 7; Global Water Partnership/Swedish International Development Agency: Stockholm, Sweden, 2003. [Google Scholar]
29. FAO. 2021. FAO Database. Available online: http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/data/query/results.html (accessed on 12 October 202).
30. MOWRAM, Water Strategic Development Plan, 2019-2023. MOWRAM: Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 2019.
31. Bann C. and Sopha L. Fish Counts: increasing the visibility of small-scale fisheries in Cambodia’s national planning. IIED Working Paper. http://pubs. iied. org; 2020.
32. Fisheries Administration. Report on Status of Community Fisheries Assessment in 2018. Community Fisheries Development Department (CFDD), Fisheries Administration (FiA): Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 2022.
33. Arias ME, Cochrane TA, Piman T, Kummu M, Caruso BS, Killeen TJ. Quantifying changes in flooding and habitats in the Tonle Sap Lake (Cambodia) caused by water infrastructure development and climate change in the Mekong Basin. Journal of Environmental Management 2012, 112, 53-66. [CrossRef]
34. Chen A, Liu J, Kummu M, Varis O, Tang Q, Mao G, Wang J, Chen D. Multidecadal variability of the Tonle Sap Lake flood pulse regime. Hydrological Processes 2021, 35, 9, e14327.
35. Chua SD, Lu XX, Oeurng C, Sok T, Grundy-Warr C. Drastic decline of flood pulse in the Cambodian floodplains (Mekong River and Tonle Sap system). Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 2022, 26, 3, 609-25. [CrossRef]
36. Frenken K, editor. Irrigation in Southern and Eastern Asia in figures. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2011. [CrossRef]
37. Liu J, Chen D, Mao G, Irannezhad M, Pokhrel Y. Past and future changes in climate and water resources in the lancang–mekong River Basin: Current understanding and future research directions. Engineering 2022, 13, 144-52. [CrossRef]
38. Hoang LP, van Vliet MT, Kummu M, Lauri H, Koponen J, Supit I, Leemans R, Kabat P, Ludwig F. The Mekong's future flows under multiple drivers: How climate change, hydropower developments, and irrigation expansions drive hydrological changes. Science of the Total Environment 2019, 649, 601-9.
39. National Institute of Statistics (NIS). Cambodia Agriculture Survey (CAS) 2020. Ministry of Planning: Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 2022.
40. Wokker C, Santos P, Bansok R. Irrigation water productivity in Cambodian rice systems. Agricultural Economics 2014, 45, 4, 421-30. [CrossRef]
41. Asian Development Bank (ADB). Cambodia Agriculture, Natural Resources, and Rural Development Sector Assessment, Strategy, And Road Map. Manila, Phillippines, 2021.