Scientist and policy-maker response types and times in suburban watersheds

Differences between scientist and policy-maker response types and times, or the “how” and “when” of action, constrain effective water resource management in suburbanizing watersheds. Policy-makers are often rushed to find a single policy that can be applied across an entire, homogeneous, geopolitical region, whereas scientists undertake multiyear research projects to appreciate the complex interactions occurring within heterogeneous catchments. As a result, watershed management is often practiced with science and policy out of synch. Meanwhile, development pressures in suburban watersheds create changes in the social and physical fabric and pose a moving target for science and policy. Recent and anticipated advances in the scientific understanding of urbanized catchment hydrology and pollutant transport suggest that management should become increasingly sensitive to spatial heterogeneities in watershed features, such as soil types, terrain slopes, and seasonal watertable profiles. Toward this end, policy-makers should encourage funding scientific research that characterizes the impacts of these watershed heterogeneities within a geopolitical zoning and development framework.     

STATE WATER PLANNING: A FORUM FOR PROACTWELY RESOLVING WATER POLICY DISPUTES1

ABSTRACT: In the arid West, the development and implementation of water policy often results in disputes among water users, resource managers, and policy makers. Although significant attempts have been made to improve public involvement and dispute resolution in water resources planning, the traditional planning process has not historically played this role for a variety of reasons. Water resources planning can become a forum for proactively resolving water policy disputes by employing the principles of environmental dispute resolution. The purpose of this article is to explore the role of collaborative, consensus-building planning processes in resolving water policy disputes. The Montana State Water Plan is evaluated as an example of such a process, and a model state water planning process is outlined.     

Scientist and Policy-Maker Response Types and Times in Suburban Watersheds

Differences between scientist and policy-maker response types and times, or the “how” and “when” of action, constrain effective water resource management in suburbanizing watersheds. Policy-makers are often rushed to find a single policy that can be applied across an entire, homogeneous, geopolitical region, whereas scientists undertake multiyear research projects to appreciate the complex interactions occurring within heterogeneous catchments. As a result, watershed management is often practiced with science and policy out of synch. Meanwhile, development pressures in suburban watersheds create changes in the social and physical fabric and pose a moving target for science and policy. Recent and anticipated advances in the scientific understanding of urbanized catchment hydrology and pollutant transport suggest that management should become increasingly sensitive to spatial heterogeneities in watershed features, such as soil types, terrain slopes, and seasonal watertable profiles. Toward this end, policy-makers should encourage funding scientific research that characterizes the impacts of these watershed heterogeneities within a geopolitical zoning and development framework.     

If Stationarity is Dead,What Do We Do Now?1

Galloway, Gerald E., 2011. If Stationarity Is Dead, What Do We Do Now? Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 47(3):563‐570. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752‐1688.2011.00550.x Abstract: In January 2010, hydrologists, climatologists, engineers, and scientists met in Boulder, Colorado, to discuss the report of the death of hydrologic stationarity and the implications this might have on water resources planning and operations in the United States and abroad. For decades planners have relied on design guidance from the Interagency Advisory Committee on Water Data Bulletin 17B that was based upon the concept of stationarity. After 2½ days of discussion it became clear that the assembled community had yet to reach an agreement on whether or not to replace the assumption of stationarity with an assumption of nonstationarity or something else. Hydrologists were skeptical that data gathered to this point in the 21st Century point to any significant change in river parameters. Climatologists, on the other hand, point to climate change and the predicted shift away from current conditions to a more turbulent flood and drought filled future. Both groups are challenged to provide immediate guidance to those individuals in and outside the water community who today must commit funds and efforts on projects that will require the best estimates of future conditions. The workshop surfaced many approaches to dealing with these challenges. While there is good reason to support additional study of the death of stationarity, its implications, and new approaches, there is also a great need to provide those in the field the information they require now to plan, design, and operate today’s projects.     

THE SOCIAL CONTEXT OF WESTERN WATER DEVELOPMENT1

ABSTRACT: Social scientists were included in the planning and design for an integrated, trans-basin water resource project. Within this complex project, a socioeconomic impact assessment (SIA) concentrated on identifying the social, political, and economic issues and potential impacts inherent in developing a city's water rights. Before the SIA began, some of the development alternatives had already generated widespread hostility and organized opposition from communities within the watershed. The SIA involved residents of affected communities in the study design and project planning. The study found a number of components that constituted the concerns, beliefs, and expectations about perceived, potential impacts that might result from the different alternatives. In most cases these issues constituted threats to valued environmental resources, valued community resources, the social environment, the economic base, and a secure future. The social science component was a key factor in the ultimate decision to pursue a particular alternative which was sensitive to the social and political issues, minimized environmental and socioeconomic impacts, and ultimately had support among the communities potentially affected. The experience from this case study suggests that the approach used can be applied successfully in the planning of other water development projects and result in cooperation from the wide range of interest groups that often present costly obstacles to such projects.     

SCIENCE AND POLICY IN INTEGRATED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT: A CASE STUDY1

ABSTRACT: Policy and management plans can be enhanced through effective communication between researchers and decision makers. Differences in understanding can come from differences in professional cultures. Scientists deal with facts, proof and incremental progress whereas the decision makers are often faced with perceptions, emotions and deadlines. A case study is presented illustrating the interaction between the political system and science on a water management issue. Irrigation projects in the western San Joaquin Valley of California lead to a situation requiring subsurface drainage and disposal of the drainage water. The original plan was to discharge the drainage water in the Suisun Bay east of the San Francisco Bay. Severe damage to birds associated with selenium in the water led to a reevaluation of irrigation and drainage management options. Federal and state agencies cooperated to establish a San Joaquin Valley Drainage Program (SJVDP) which was to develop plans for solving the problem. Discharge to the Bay was politically eliminated as an option for evaluation, an action criticized by a National Research Council Committee as not being scientifically based. The SJVDP published a Management Plan in 1990 which contained proposals viewed by the scientific community as not necessarily incorrect but not completely justified based on the scientific knowledge at the time. A segment of the Citizens Advisory Committee that was part of the SJVDP consisting of representatives from the interest groups viewed the Management Plan as a negotiated agreement between the environmental and agricultural interests. Presently, an Activity Plan exists, consisting of technical committees to evaluate the current technical and economic evaluation of the management options proposed in the Management Plan. This case study illustrates that factors other than scientific facts have bearing on decisions. Successful management plans must be technically sound, economically viable and socially acceptable. The scientific community needs to evaluate its role in the policy making arena and to focus research on questions of greatest value to decision makers, as well as to scientific peers.     

Getting to the First Handshake: Enhancing Security by Initiating Cooperation in Transboundary River Basins

How does transboundary water cooperation begin at the initial stages, and how can third parties help to foster said cooperation? Many nations with transboundary waters do not cooperate or have ceased cooperation. Yet cooperation often prevails, resulting in 688 water‐related treaties signed from 1820 to 2007. We address the following: by which practices can development partners best design and implement cooperative projects at the state level to enhance basin water security in the earliest stages? This article identifies strategies for initiating cooperation and lessons drawn from reviewing select cases. We compiled from the Oregon State University Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database all transboundary water resources projects over the last decade with multinational participation. We selected 10 case studies that enhance water security that fit the following filtering criteria: (1) Funding exclusively/primarily from outside sources, (2) Including nonofficial stakeholders in project design/implementation, (3) Absence of formal relations around water resources between or among the riparian nations before the project was discussed, (4) Project design possibly enhancing hydropolitical relations. Findings suggest that to enhance water security, project designs should respect participating riparians' autonomies, create basin‐wide networks of scientists, allow for each partner to garner responsibility for project activities, and consult a diverse group of stakeholders.     

Compensatory Mitigation for Streams Under the Clean Water Act: Reassessing Science and Redirecting Policy1

Doyle, Martin W. and F. Douglas Shields, 2012. Compensatory Mitigation for Streams Under the Clean Water Act: Reassessing Science and Redirecting Policy. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 48(3): 494-509. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2011.00631.x Abstract: Current stream restoration science is not adequate to assume high rates of success in recovering ecosystem functional integrity. The physical scale of most stream restoration projects is insufficient because watershed land use controls ambient water quality and hydrology, and land use surrounding many restoration projects at the time of their construction, or in the future, do not provide sufficient conditions for functional integrity recovery. Reach scale channel restoration or modification has limited benefits within the broader landscape context. Physical habitat variables are often the basis for indicating success, but are now increasingly seen as poor surrogates for actual biological function; the assumption “if you build it they will come” lacks support of empirical studies. If stream restoration is to play a continued role in compensatory mitigation under the United States Clean Water Act, then significant policy changes are needed to adapt to the limitations of restoration science and the social environment under which most projects are constructed. When used for compensatory mitigation, stream restoration should be held to effectiveness standards for actual and measurable physical, chemical, or biological functional improvement. To achieve improved mitigation results, greater flexibility may be required for the location and funding of restoration projects, the size of projects, and the restoration process itself.     

WATER AND WATER RIGHTS TRANSFERS: A NEW POLICY FOR NEBRASKA1

ABSTRACT: Nebraska has abundant supplies of high quality surface and ground water. The U.S. Supreme Court decision in 1982, declaring ground water to be an article of commerce, is widely perceived as giving neighboring states easier access to Nebraska water. Some neighboring states, particularly Colorado and Wyoming, are in water short situations. Additionally, current legal restrictions on certain types of transfers within the State could be inhibiting the “highest and best use” of Nebraska's water. Thus, in 1987 the Nebraska Legislature called for the development of a new water policy for Nebraska that would promote the economically efficient use of water, yet protect the environment as well as the rights of individuals (for example, third parties) and the public. Through an interagency study employing an extensive public involvement process, a policy to be recommended to the Legislature in 1989 emerged. The policy revises the basic definition of water rights and transfers and eliminates most of the inconsistencies in the water allocation system by treating most types of water resources, most types of water users, and most locations of use similarly in the permitting process. (The principal exception is the individual irrigator using ground water on the overlying land where overlying land is one government surveyed section; such use is not defined to be a transfer nor is a permit required.) An impact assessment would be required of most new water uses except on site uses of ground water. Compensation measures could be specified as a condition of the permit where appropriate. The permit would be issued only if the benefits of the proposed transfer clearly outweigh adverse effects that could not be avoided or effectively compensated. The policy allows for the sale or lease of “salvaged” water. It calls for the State to facilitate transfers by acting as a clearinghouse for potential buyers and sellers, and it allows the State to sponsor water projects. An annual fee to be paid by many water users, in order to provide a fund for compensation and for state sponsored water projects, was proposed. However, it met with extensive opposition. Thus, the policy recommends only that the Legislature examine potential funding programs and equitable user fees.     

The acceptability of wind farms: the impact of public participation

The planning process for wind farm projects appears to be a complicated matter in many cases. Despite the positive attitude towards wind power in general, local wind farm projects often face strong opposition. The aim of this study is to shed more light on residents’ perceptions of participation in the planning process of wind farms. This study is based on interview data (N?=?22) and survey data (N?=?291) collected from residents living near two Finnish large-scale onshore wind farms built about 1.5 years before the data were collected. The results indicate that residents’ participation in the planning process was rather passive and the vast majority of the respondents perceived that they did not have an opportunity to participate. Quite interestingly, perceived participation in the planning process resulted in a decrease in acceptability in terms of perceived well-being. Furthermore, the results indicate that the need for participation does not expire after the planning process for a wind farm has concluded. Thus, project developers should be prepared to continue communication with residents after the planning phase.     

SOCIAL FEASIBILITY AS AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO WATER RESOURCE PLANNING1

ABSTRACT: Research suggests that conflict over public participation in water resource planning is due, in part, to confusion over the nature of the policies involved. This article examines the roadblocks to citizen involvement in water resource planning in terms of two policy models: (1) the Social Feasibility Model and (2) the Political Feasibility Model. Each model posits a different role for public participation. Although the Political Feasibility Model has been widely accepted in water resource planning, changes in the nature of the policies involved in water resource management have weakened its appropriateness. Currently, social and redistributive policies involving value conflicts often dominate water planning and these policies are best chosen through the Social Feasibility Model. The article discusses the nature of the social feasibility model, the new types of policy decisions facing water resource managers, and how the social feasibility model can help overcome the roadblocks to increased public participation in water resource policy making.     

DROUGHT POLICY IN THE U.S. AND AUSTRALIA: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS1

ABSTRACT: Federal and state governments in the United States and Australia have come to play a key role in attempts to mitigate the impact of drought. Government actions have usually taken the form of loans and grants to individual citizens, businesses and municipalities experiencing the hardship of drought. Most of these actions have occurred in an environment of crisis management, rather than as a result of clearly stated policy objectives. Based on a review and evaluation of recent drought policy in the United States and Australia, recommendations are offered on ways to improve the United States’approach. A national drought plan is suggested as an efficient mechanism through which these recommendations could be implemented. States should also become more actively involved in drought assessment and response, but these actions must be coordinated with federal actions.     

A Question of Boundaries: The Importance of “Revenuesheds” for Watershed Protection1

Patterson, Lauren A., Jeffrey Hughes, Glenn Barnes, and Stacey I. Berahzer, 2012. A Question of Boundaries: The Importance of “Revenuesheds” for Watershed Protection. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 48(4): 838‐848. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752‐1688.2012.00655.x Abstract: Watersheds transcend jurisdictional boundaries; raising important questions of who should pay for watershed protection, and how can watershed governance be funded? The responsibility and cost for watershed protection has progressively devolved to local governments, resulting in additional negative externalities and financing challenges. Watershed governance structures have formed at the scale of the watershed, but they often lack the financing mechanisms needed to achieve policy goals. Financing mechanisms via local governments provide a reliable source of revenue and the flexibility to address watershed specific issues. We develop a “revenueshed” approach to access the initial challenges local governments face when seeking to finance trans‐jurisdictional watershed governance. The revenueshed approach engages local governments into discussion and implementation of financial strategies for collaborative watershed governance. Legislation places water quality regulations primarily on local governments inside the watershed. The revenueshed approach extends the financial and stewardship discussion to include local governments outside the watershed that benefit from the watershed. We applied the revenueshed approach to the Mills River and Upper Neuse watersheds in North Carolina. Mills River had a partnership governance seeking revenue for specific projects, whereas the Upper Neuse sought long‐term financial stability to meet new water quality legislation.     

MANAGING GROUND WATER QUALITY IN RELATION TO AGRICULTURAL ACTiVITIES1

ABSTRACT: Ground water quality is an environmental issue of national concern. Agricultural activities, because they involve large land areas, often are cited as a major contributor of ground water contaminants. It appears that some degree of ground water contamination from agricultural land use is inevitable, especially where precipitation exceeds evapotranspiration. For this reason, and because agriculture differs significantly from point sources of pollution, farmers, policymakers, and scientists need alternative management strategies by which to protect ground water. Mathematical models coupled to geographic information systems to form expert systems can be important management tools for both policymakers and agricultural producers. An expert system can provide farmers, researchers, and environmental managers with information by which to better manage agricultural production systems to minimize ground water contamination. Significant research is necessary to perfect such a system, necessitating interim ground water management strategies that include not only a strong research program, but educational and public policy components as well.     

A PROPOSED APPROACH TO COORDINATION OF WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS1

ABSTRACT: The planning and developing of water resources to meet the country's needs for water supply, flood control, hydroelectric power, irrigation, and navigation now needs to take more account of environmental needs and regulations. Water resource development is often beneficial to the environment, but may also be harmful, as in cases involving salmon and various other endangered species. As a national objective, the environment must be preserved and in some cases restored; but how can this be done consistent with other national objectives, relating to life and welfare of human beings? This problem has aroused the concern of many engineers and water scientists. As a result, a national conference on this subject was held in Chicago in June 1998, as an integral part of ASCE's Annual Conference on Water Resources Planning and Management and the Annual Conference on Environmental Engineering. At the conclusion of that conference, a post-conference meeting was held by a group of prominent water resource practitioners. It was concluded at this meeting that action should be taken by our government to establish a new form of interagency approach, involving the states, as a means of coordination in cases of national importance.     

APPLICATION OF CRITICAL PATH METHOD TO WATER RESOURCES PLANNING1

ABSTRACT. The task of resource management, in this case water resources, is rapidly becoming more complex, particularly because decision making is often contingent upon various prior activities and sets of data. Comprehensive planning is required in order to prevent misallocation of resources or mismanagement in resource development. Such planning involves five general phases which are applicable to any problem faced by society: (1) problem identification; (2) formulation of alternatives; (3) evaluation of alternatives; (4) implementation; (5) review. There have been many attempts to simplify the planning process and effectively carry out these five phases. The experience of the Alberta Water Resources Division has been that the Critical Path Method is one of the most useful tools available today for planning. It involves two basic steps: (1) preparation of a network diagram which (a) identifies all the activities necessary for the completion of a project, (b) correctly sequences these activities, (c) allocates resources; and (2) mathematical computations for scheduling the activities. In other words, this approach breaks a task down into smaller units or activities for easier organization, scheduling, and performance for eventual completion of the project. This paper will illustrate the effectiveness of the Critical Path Method by discussing its application to actual water resources projects.     

Climate engineering and climate tipping-point scenarios

Many scientists fear that anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases have set the Earth on a path of significant, possibly catastrophic, changes. This includes the possibility of exceeding particular thresholds or tipping points in the climate system. In response, governments have proposed emissions reduction targets, but no agreement has been reached. These facts have led some scientists and economists to suggest research into climate engineering. In this paper, we analyze the potential value of one climate engineering technology family, known as solar radiation management (SRM) to manage the risk of differing tipping-point scenarios. We find that adding SRM to a policy of emissions controls may be able to help manage the risk of climate tipping points and that its potential benefits are large. However, the technology does not exist and important indirect costs (e.g., change in precipitation) are not well understood. Thus, we conclude the SRM merits a serious research effort to better understand its efficiency and safety.     

Evaluation by policy makers of a procedure to describe perceived landscape openness

In the last decade policy makers have increasingly recognized the need to include people's perceptions in methods for describing landscape quality. At the same time, a third wave of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) has become available that make it technically possible to model landscape quality in a realistic manner. However, as there is often a mismatch between science and policy, it remains unclear to what extent perception-based models developed by scientists can be useful to policy makers. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the usefulness to policy making of a GIS-based procedure for describing perceived landscape openness. To this end, a workshop was organized which was attended by eight Dutch policy makers who acted as representatives of their province (region). The Group Decision Room (GDR) technique was used to elicit the policy makers' evaluations of the procedure in an anonymous and reliable manner. The procedure was presented to the policy makers using cases from their own province, which they assessed using a mixture of qualitative and quantitative methods. The results show that policy makers rated the procedure as being highly relevant to policy making, scientifically credible, usable by policy makers and feasible to implement in the policy making process. They especially appreciated the flexibility and transparency of the procedure. The policy makers concluded that the procedure would be of most value for monitoring landscape changes and for analysing impacts on landscape openness in land use scenario studies. However, they requested guidelines for proper implementation of the various options in the procedure. In general, the current study shows that explicit and transparent evaluation of the usefulness of GIS-based tools can aid integration at the science-policy interface and help to ensure that both scientists and policy makers are informed of interrelated options and requirements.     

Can you tell a green field from a cold steel rail? Examining the “green” of Green Infrastructure development

The rapid development of Green Infrastructure as an approach to planning has enabled landscape practitioners to implement a range of projects utilising its principles. Discussions though exist examining what Green Infrastructure is, how it should be planned, and whether it can be identified as only those elements of the landscape that are green. A further element of this argument examines the use of water within this process. Therefore, as planners, we can ask: can we tell a green field from a cold steel rail? Both may have a green or sustainable function with only the visual appearance differing. Debates, however, focus on practitioner selectivity of the interpretation of “green” infrastructure planning exploring whether physical landscape characteristics or the function of an investment is the main focus of discussion. Using the grey–green continuum developed by Davies et al. [2006. Green infrastructure planning guide project: Final report. Annfield Plain: NECF], this paper examines whether geographical differences exist in the application of the Green Infrastructure and examine how practitioners use the ambiguity of Green Infrastructure planning to guide investment. Drawing on academic and practitioner literature provides this paper with a balance of conceptual and process-based assessments evaluations of global Green Infrastructure focusing on the design and implementation of terrestrial and marine resources. This paper also examines whether the dominant landscape planning framework in each region could be considered contradictory to the wider application of Green Infrastructure principles.