The Murray-Darling Basin (MDB) Plan in Australia legislated in 2012 represents the largest recovery of water, from consumptive use to environmental use in the world – with the aim of restoring rivers and ecosystems back to health. To date, although billions of dollars have been spent, the Plan's water recovery targets have not been achieved and will not meet their original target dates for full recovery, with governments needing to continue to make difficult water policy choices and trade-offs. This study explores a survey of Australian public preferences for five different water reallocation options in the MDB (and methods to be used for recovery) and identifies individual characteristics associated with various policy options. Almost a quarter of those surveyed did not support further water recovery; 17% favoured recovering water to current goals only; 22% favoured recovering environmental water beyond current goals; while 38% favoured recovering both environmental and cultural water beyond current goals. For those wanting further recovery, a third preferred using irrigation infrastructure subsidies as the main method, while the majority favoured buying water directly back from irrigators (either through voluntary buyback or compulsory acquisition). Trust levels, location, age, climate change perception and gender all played a part in influencing respondent preferences for various water recovery options.
ABSTRACTABSTRACTOver-allocation of water resources to irrigation, industry, and cities has severely impacted flow-dependent riverine ecosystems and led to growing interest in ways to restore water to the environment; one increasingly popular approach is water buybacks. This paper reviews US and Australian experiences in buying back water, focusing on the conditions which enable and inhibit environmental water acquisitions in each country. We also compare experiences with buyback efforts in fisheries, another natural resource sector. Lessons from these experiences provide important insights into how future water buyback programmes to acquire environmental water could be operated more effectively. The review suggests that the overall success of an environmental water buyback is likely to be enhanced by (1) legal and institutional settings which clearly define water rights and lower administrative and other barriers to water transfers, (2) non-governmental organizations and community groups which play a complementary role to government, (3) creation of a system that will fairly distribute future risk of water availability and provide choices for a variety of ways of obtaining water, and (4) efforts that minimize negative community impacts, thus helping to maximize irrigator participation.KEY WORDS: Buybacksenvironmental waterinstream flowsMurray–Darling basinwestern USAwater marketsfisheries AcknowledgementsThe authors would like to acknowledge Peter Söderbaum and two anonymous reviewers, whose helpful comments improved this paper. This research was funded by grants from the Australian-American Fulbright Commission and the Lois Roth Foundation, which enabled the lead author to spend a year researching in Australia. The research was also supported by a George Perkins Marsh Conservation Fellowship from Vermont Law School and an Australian Research Council linkage grant with partner organizations including the MDBA, Goulburn-Murray Water, NSW Department of Energy and Office of Water, Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment, CSIRO, and University of Lethbridge, Canada.
Irrigation has been promoted as a strategy to reduce poverty and improve livelihoods in southern Africa. Households' livelihood strategies within small-scale irrigation schemes have become increasingly complex and diversified. Strategies consist of farm income from rain-fed and irrigated cropping as well as livestock and an increasing dependence on off-farm income. The success of these strategies depends on the household's ability to make decisions about how to utilize its' financial, labour, land and water resources. This study explores the dynamics of decision-making in households on-farm household income within six small-scale irrigation schemes, across three southern African countries. Household survey data (n = 402) was analyzed using ordered probit and ordinary least squares regression. Focus group discussions and field observations provided qualitative data on decision-making in the six schemes. We found strong support for the notion that decision-making dynamics strongly influence total household income. Households make trade-offs between irrigation, dryland, livestock and off-farm work when they allocate their labour resources to maximize household income; as opposed to maximizing the income from any individual component of their livelihood strategy, such as irrigation. Combined with the impact of the small plot size of irrigated land, this is likely to result in sub-optimal benefits from expensive investments in irrigation infrastructure. Policy-makers must consider this when developing and implementing new policies.
Abstract Communities in Australia's Murray‐Darling Basin face the challenge of trying to achieve social, economic, and environmental sustainability; but experience entrenched conflict about the best way to achieve a sustainable future, especially for small rural communities. Integral ecology is a philosophical concept that seeks to address community, economic, social, and environmental sustainability simultaneously. Its inclusive processes are designed to reduce stakeholder conflict. However, to date the application of the integral ecology concept has been largely qualitative in nature. This study developed a quantitative integral ecology framework, and applied this framework to a case study of the Riverina, in the Murray‐Darling Basin. Seventy‐seven community‐focused initiatives were assessed, ranked, and quantified. The majority of the community‐focused ranked initiatives did not exhibit all aspects of integral ecology. Initiatives typically prioritized either (1) economic and community development or (2) environmental health; rarely both together. The integral ecology framework developed here enables recommendations on future community initiatives and may provide a pathway for community leaders and other policy‐makers to more readily apply integral ecology objectives. Further research refining the framework's operationalization, application and implementation to a wider‐scale may enhance communities' capacity to develop and grow sustainably.
Water availability and quality issues will only gain importance in the future, with climate change impacts putting increasing pressure on global water resources. Dealing with these challenges requires drawing on all available water management tools, including Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR). Although MAR has seen increasing global implementation during the last half a century, it is still often overlooked as a management tool. While technical, bio-physical, and hydrogeological aspects of MAR are well researched, this cannot be said for socio-economic and other governance factors. Where information is available, this study seeks to understand the conditions necessary for MAR success. We apply fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis on 313 world MAR applications, and also model separately for high- and low-middle-income countries. Results show that sophisticated hydrogeological site understanding and scheme operation is paramount for MAR success, as is utilizing natural water sources for high value end uses. High-income country MAR schemes tend to be large and utilize natural water sources and sophisticated water injection and treatment methods to augment potable water supply; while low-middle-income country schemes are not large, older than 20 years, and use gravity infiltration methods and (limited) no water treatment. These findings will help inform the future suitability of MAR application design and its likely success within various contexts.