Pub Date : 2022-12-07DOI: 10.1080/13241583.2022.2151106
John F. Williams, M. Colloff, R. Grafton, Shahbaz Khan, Z. Paydar, Paul R. Wyrwoll
ABSTRACT Using a three-infrastructures (grey, soft, and green) framework, we examined key risks to water availability and quality in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia. These risks include increased irrigation efficiency, without a quantitative knowledge of the impact on water flow pathways, particularly return flows, growth in farm dams and floodplain harvesting, and unsustainable management of salinity. Critical to mitigating these risks are the metering, monitoring, and auditing of water flows, effective linkages between evidence and analysis, and accountability of decision-makers operating in the public interest. We contend that these approaches need to be supported by innovative risk assessments, which are fit-for-purpose under the MDB Plan, wherein the ‘who, what, when and where’ are assessed in relation to cumulative, systemic, and cascading risks from human actions.
{"title":"The three-infrastructures framework and water risks in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia","authors":"John F. Williams, M. Colloff, R. Grafton, Shahbaz Khan, Z. Paydar, Paul R. Wyrwoll","doi":"10.1080/13241583.2022.2151106","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13241583.2022.2151106","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Using a three-infrastructures (grey, soft, and green) framework, we examined key risks to water availability and quality in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia. These risks include increased irrigation efficiency, without a quantitative knowledge of the impact on water flow pathways, particularly return flows, growth in farm dams and floodplain harvesting, and unsustainable management of salinity. Critical to mitigating these risks are the metering, monitoring, and auditing of water flows, effective linkages between evidence and analysis, and accountability of decision-makers operating in the public interest. We contend that these approaches need to be supported by innovative risk assessments, which are fit-for-purpose under the MDB Plan, wherein the ‘who, what, when and where’ are assessed in relation to cumulative, systemic, and cascading risks from human actions.","PeriodicalId":51870,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Water Resources","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45622464","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-11DOI: 10.1080/13241583.2022.2141333
Michael L. Wine
{"title":"Irrigation water use driving desiccation of Earth’s endorheic lakes and seas","authors":"Michael L. Wine","doi":"10.1080/13241583.2022.2141333","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13241583.2022.2141333","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51870,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Water Resources","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2022-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42674277","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-09DOI: 10.1080/13241583.2022.2144115
D. Page, D. Gonzalez, T. Clune, Y. Colton, G. Bonnett
ABSTRACT Water banking in aquifers is an internationally proven, low-cost solution that could improve drought resilience across the Murray Darling Basin. While significant potential for water banking through managed aquifer recharge (MAR) or conjunctive use of surface and groundwater resources has been identified in the Murray Darling Basin Plan, there is a need to establish clear policy and institutional foundations to incentivise adoption. To provide appropriate incentives for schemes, the legal status of rights to recharge, store and recover water, and the rules and costs which apply to groundwater extraction need to be clear and transparent. This paper aims to clarify principles and frameworks to secure water rights for recharge, storage, and recovery within the sustainable limits of water resources currently set under law. The current Basin Plan supports water banking, and banking would be complementary with objective and outcomes sought by future Basin Plans. Existing water accounting systems would need to accommodate this new capacity. Institutional arrangements and financial structures of water banking in the USA provide guidance for Australia. Demonstration sites would enable concurrent policy development and institutional set-up and provide critical experience to serve as models for wider adoption as part of future Murray Darling Basin plans.
{"title":"Water banking in aquifers as a tool for drought resilience in the Murray Darling Basin","authors":"D. Page, D. Gonzalez, T. Clune, Y. Colton, G. Bonnett","doi":"10.1080/13241583.2022.2144115","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13241583.2022.2144115","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Water banking in aquifers is an internationally proven, low-cost solution that could improve drought resilience across the Murray Darling Basin. While significant potential for water banking through managed aquifer recharge (MAR) or conjunctive use of surface and groundwater resources has been identified in the Murray Darling Basin Plan, there is a need to establish clear policy and institutional foundations to incentivise adoption. To provide appropriate incentives for schemes, the legal status of rights to recharge, store and recover water, and the rules and costs which apply to groundwater extraction need to be clear and transparent. This paper aims to clarify principles and frameworks to secure water rights for recharge, storage, and recovery within the sustainable limits of water resources currently set under law. The current Basin Plan supports water banking, and banking would be complementary with objective and outcomes sought by future Basin Plans. Existing water accounting systems would need to accommodate this new capacity. Institutional arrangements and financial structures of water banking in the USA provide guidance for Australia. Demonstration sites would enable concurrent policy development and institutional set-up and provide critical experience to serve as models for wider adoption as part of future Murray Darling Basin plans.","PeriodicalId":51870,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Water Resources","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2022-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49645861","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-08DOI: 10.1080/13241583.2022.2133665
Bryan Robert Jenkins
ABSTRACT The paper analyses sources of delay in developing environmental interventions to address overallocation of groundwater and water quality degradation for Te Waihora/Lake Ellesmere, a coastal lake in the Canterbury Region of New Zealand. The analysis highlighted the length of time required to collect the science to understand an issue and to formulate and implement policy responses. It also identified delays due to scientific uncertainty, scientific controversies, disregarding science, decision processes, and the response time of the natural system. The absence of clear policy approaches and environmental outcomes in order to implement environmental legislation was a significant source of delay. Delays in implementing environmental interventions led to loss of natural capital with groundwater overallocation reducing flows in groundwater-fed streams and freshwater inflows to the lake, and land use intensification degrading groundwater, groundwater-fed streams, and lake water quality. The extent of development beyond sustainable limits during these delays may have permanently compromised the ability to implement comprehensive environmental interventions.
{"title":"Science and policy delay leading to loss of natural capital: case study of Te Waihora/Lake Ellesmere","authors":"Bryan Robert Jenkins","doi":"10.1080/13241583.2022.2133665","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13241583.2022.2133665","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The paper analyses sources of delay in developing environmental interventions to address overallocation of groundwater and water quality degradation for Te Waihora/Lake Ellesmere, a coastal lake in the Canterbury Region of New Zealand. The analysis highlighted the length of time required to collect the science to understand an issue and to formulate and implement policy responses. It also identified delays due to scientific uncertainty, scientific controversies, disregarding science, decision processes, and the response time of the natural system. The absence of clear policy approaches and environmental outcomes in order to implement environmental legislation was a significant source of delay. Delays in implementing environmental interventions led to loss of natural capital with groundwater overallocation reducing flows in groundwater-fed streams and freshwater inflows to the lake, and land use intensification degrading groundwater, groundwater-fed streams, and lake water quality. The extent of development beyond sustainable limits during these delays may have permanently compromised the ability to implement comprehensive environmental interventions.","PeriodicalId":51870,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Water Resources","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2022-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59780013","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-30DOI: 10.1080/13241583.2022.2133643
J. Alexandra
ABSTRACT How water resources are defined, both conceptually and legally, is central to their efficient and equitable allocation. With climate change introducing significant uncertainties to water resources management, flexible allocation frameworks are needed that can adapt to changing conditions. This paper explores options for climate-adaptive water allocation in Australia’s Murray Darling Basin. The 2026 revision of the Basin Plan may provide significant opportunities for proactive climate risk mitigation, but this depends on rigorous evaluation of policy options. The Water Act requires that the Plan’s revisions use the best available science to inform strategies that minimise the impact of climate risks. The Act also enables the use of ratios and formulas as alternatives to using long-term averages as the basis of the Plan. However, there have been limited investigations into using these alternatives. Achieving more adaptive policies depends on rigorously assessing climate risk management options. Given the far-reaching consequences of climate change, rigorous investigations are needed into reforms to the established approaches to water resources planning and to existing water entitlements and allocation regimes. At minimum, this means reassessing the total resource pool and all subsidiary targets and investigating allocation frameworks that equitably share risks between extractive users and the environment.
{"title":"Climate adaptation options for the 2026 MDB Plan: opportunities for managing climate risk","authors":"J. Alexandra","doi":"10.1080/13241583.2022.2133643","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13241583.2022.2133643","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT How water resources are defined, both conceptually and legally, is central to their efficient and equitable allocation. With climate change introducing significant uncertainties to water resources management, flexible allocation frameworks are needed that can adapt to changing conditions. This paper explores options for climate-adaptive water allocation in Australia’s Murray Darling Basin. The 2026 revision of the Basin Plan may provide significant opportunities for proactive climate risk mitigation, but this depends on rigorous evaluation of policy options. The Water Act requires that the Plan’s revisions use the best available science to inform strategies that minimise the impact of climate risks. The Act also enables the use of ratios and formulas as alternatives to using long-term averages as the basis of the Plan. However, there have been limited investigations into using these alternatives. Achieving more adaptive policies depends on rigorously assessing climate risk management options. Given the far-reaching consequences of climate change, rigorous investigations are needed into reforms to the established approaches to water resources planning and to existing water entitlements and allocation regimes. At minimum, this means reassessing the total resource pool and all subsidiary targets and investigating allocation frameworks that equitably share risks between extractive users and the environment.","PeriodicalId":51870,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Water Resources","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2022-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41880240","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-30DOI: 10.1080/13241583.2022.2140904
A. Ross, R. Evans, R. Nelson
ABSTRACT Over the past 20 years, the consideration of risk related to groundwater in the Murray-Darling Basin has evolved from concerns about the impact of groundwater extraction on surface water resources to an integrated assessment of risks to connected Basin water resources. The Murray-Darling Basin Plan includes a comprehensive framework for assessing risks to Basin water resources. This assessment emphasises risks to surface water resources and does not fully consider or account for risks of depletion and degradation of groundwater resources and groundwater-dependent ecosystems. There are also risks relating to gaps in the implementation of integrated management of connected groundwater and surface water resources and storage. Consistent definition of hydrological connectivity is required together with longer planning timeframes. Multi-year planning rules and policies need to be further developed to exploit the full potential of integrated management of aquifer and surface water resources and storage to manage the risks of droughts and floods. The assessment in water resource plans of risks to subterranean groundwater-dependent ecosystems and terrestrial vegetation should be strengthened. Risks to groundwater quality must be adequately monitored and assessed to avoid harm to groundwater users. Further improvements can be made in the assessment of cumulative risks owing to coal seam gas and coal mining. Effective risk management requires collective scientific and policy efforts. Additional research can be targeted towards knowledge gaps and uncertainties that pose the greatest risk to groundwater resources and their use, and ecosystem viability. Most importantly, further training and capacity building in water management agencies is a critical requirement to enable effective and transparent monitoring and management of Basin water resources.
{"title":"Risks related to groundwater in the Murray Darling Basin","authors":"A. Ross, R. Evans, R. Nelson","doi":"10.1080/13241583.2022.2140904","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13241583.2022.2140904","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Over the past 20 years, the consideration of risk related to groundwater in the Murray-Darling Basin has evolved from concerns about the impact of groundwater extraction on surface water resources to an integrated assessment of risks to connected Basin water resources. The Murray-Darling Basin Plan includes a comprehensive framework for assessing risks to Basin water resources. This assessment emphasises risks to surface water resources and does not fully consider or account for risks of depletion and degradation of groundwater resources and groundwater-dependent ecosystems. There are also risks relating to gaps in the implementation of integrated management of connected groundwater and surface water resources and storage. Consistent definition of hydrological connectivity is required together with longer planning timeframes. Multi-year planning rules and policies need to be further developed to exploit the full potential of integrated management of aquifer and surface water resources and storage to manage the risks of droughts and floods. The assessment in water resource plans of risks to subterranean groundwater-dependent ecosystems and terrestrial vegetation should be strengthened. Risks to groundwater quality must be adequately monitored and assessed to avoid harm to groundwater users. Further improvements can be made in the assessment of cumulative risks owing to coal seam gas and coal mining. Effective risk management requires collective scientific and policy efforts. Additional research can be targeted towards knowledge gaps and uncertainties that pose the greatest risk to groundwater resources and their use, and ecosystem viability. Most importantly, further training and capacity building in water management agencies is a critical requirement to enable effective and transparent monitoring and management of Basin water resources.","PeriodicalId":51870,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Water Resources","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2022-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42455813","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-09DOI: 10.1080/13241583.2022.2118808
N. Samnakay
ABSTRACT The sustainable management of Australia’s natural resources has increasingly attracted policy interventions by the Australian government. Drought policy represents one sector where the Australian government is a signatory to sustainable use of natural resources, cognisant of the nexus between agricultural production practices and environmental condition. A strategic sustainability policy evaluation framework is applied to drought policy to analyse policy design and process relationships with a view to informing improvements in these policy facets. The analysis finds that at the national level, the nature of the policy problem is inadequately defined, giving rise to generic objectives and overly narrow policy instrument choices that are inconsistent with the complex nature of drought and resilience objectives. Policy instrument choice is focussed on farm financial viability, with simplistic correlations drawn between farm profitability and improved social and environmental wellbeing. The appetite for broader structural reforms to agricultural and rural community development are lacking politically and by industry, but necessary given emerging social, economic and environmental challenges to agriculture. Structural reforms will be inevitable if the complexities between production and sustainable natural resource management are to be reconciled. More systemic and nuanced understandings of resilience and drought risk are needed to deliver on the policy ambition of drought resilience.
{"title":"Evaluating Australian drought policy from the perspective of good-practice strategic policymaking","authors":"N. Samnakay","doi":"10.1080/13241583.2022.2118808","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13241583.2022.2118808","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The sustainable management of Australia’s natural resources has increasingly attracted policy interventions by the Australian government. Drought policy represents one sector where the Australian government is a signatory to sustainable use of natural resources, cognisant of the nexus between agricultural production practices and environmental condition. A strategic sustainability policy evaluation framework is applied to drought policy to analyse policy design and process relationships with a view to informing improvements in these policy facets. The analysis finds that at the national level, the nature of the policy problem is inadequately defined, giving rise to generic objectives and overly narrow policy instrument choices that are inconsistent with the complex nature of drought and resilience objectives. Policy instrument choice is focussed on farm financial viability, with simplistic correlations drawn between farm profitability and improved social and environmental wellbeing. The appetite for broader structural reforms to agricultural and rural community development are lacking politically and by industry, but necessary given emerging social, economic and environmental challenges to agriculture. Structural reforms will be inevitable if the complexities between production and sustainable natural resource management are to be reconciled. More systemic and nuanced understandings of resilience and drought risk are needed to deliver on the policy ambition of drought resilience.","PeriodicalId":51870,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Water Resources","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2022-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43151470","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-26DOI: 10.1080/13241583.2022.2103896
B. Hart, M. Francey, C. Chesterfield, D. Blackham, Neil McCarthy
{"title":"Management of urban waterways in Melbourne, Australia: 2 – integration and future directions","authors":"B. Hart, M. Francey, C. Chesterfield, D. Blackham, Neil McCarthy","doi":"10.1080/13241583.2022.2103896","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13241583.2022.2103896","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51870,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Water Resources","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2022-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42992081","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-14DOI: 10.1080/13241583.2022.2083051
Jack Grentell, R. Adhikary, Aparna Lal
ABSTRACT Cyanobacteria pose a significant threat to human health. Knowledge of the most prominent physical parameters related with cyanobacterial growth not only aids water monitoring but public health risk management, to enable rapid local responses to changing water quality conditions. This paper is a systematic scoping review of Australian environmental studies that examined a link between cyanobacterial growth and one or more specific physical water quality parameters. The 34 included articles showed a consistent correlation between water quality parameters and cyanobacterial growth. Temperature and light exposure were positively correlated with cyanobacteria in all studies. Salinity, flow, wind speed and turbidity were negatively correlated with cyanobacteria in all studies. Geographically, majority of the studies focussed on the Murray-Darling Basin. The consistency across studies indicates a potential for broader environmental monitoring criteria to aid in both water quality management and public health response to cyanobacterial bloom formation.
{"title":"Cyanobacteria, water quality and public health implications: a systematic scoping review","authors":"Jack Grentell, R. Adhikary, Aparna Lal","doi":"10.1080/13241583.2022.2083051","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13241583.2022.2083051","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Cyanobacteria pose a significant threat to human health. Knowledge of the most prominent physical parameters related with cyanobacterial growth not only aids water monitoring but public health risk management, to enable rapid local responses to changing water quality conditions. This paper is a systematic scoping review of Australian environmental studies that examined a link between cyanobacterial growth and one or more specific physical water quality parameters. The 34 included articles showed a consistent correlation between water quality parameters and cyanobacterial growth. Temperature and light exposure were positively correlated with cyanobacteria in all studies. Salinity, flow, wind speed and turbidity were negatively correlated with cyanobacteria in all studies. Geographically, majority of the studies focussed on the Murray-Darling Basin. The consistency across studies indicates a potential for broader environmental monitoring criteria to aid in both water quality management and public health response to cyanobacterial bloom formation.","PeriodicalId":51870,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Water Resources","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2022-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42727605","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-08DOI: 10.1080/13241583.2022.2097365
Christine Freak, J. Mcleod, K. Thompson, L. Christesen, Claire Miller
ABSTRACT The Murray-Darling Basin Plan is generally applauded globally for ‘best-practice’ water management. The notion of ‘best practice’ is fluid, informed by constant learning from what works and what does not. The Plan’s 10-year anniversary in 2022 provides a pivotal point to reflect on practical lessons learnt throughout its implementation and incorporate those into contemporised ‘best practice’. This paper explores the emerging paradigm of participatory approaches with private landholders in the conservation and biodiversity fields, and its applicability to water management ‘best practice’. Through an original framework and case studies, we explore the opportunity that these practical exemplars offer to refine contemporary theoretical notions of best practice. A case is ultimately presented in which a contemporised paradigm – based on co-operation, co-benefit outcomes and participatory partnerships – offers significant potential for future management in the Basin, especially to overcome deeply entrenched trust deficits among communities.
{"title":"Contemporising best practice water management: lessons from the Murray-Darling Basin on participatory water management in a mosaiced landscape","authors":"Christine Freak, J. Mcleod, K. Thompson, L. Christesen, Claire Miller","doi":"10.1080/13241583.2022.2097365","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13241583.2022.2097365","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Murray-Darling Basin Plan is generally applauded globally for ‘best-practice’ water management. The notion of ‘best practice’ is fluid, informed by constant learning from what works and what does not. The Plan’s 10-year anniversary in 2022 provides a pivotal point to reflect on practical lessons learnt throughout its implementation and incorporate those into contemporised ‘best practice’. This paper explores the emerging paradigm of participatory approaches with private landholders in the conservation and biodiversity fields, and its applicability to water management ‘best practice’. Through an original framework and case studies, we explore the opportunity that these practical exemplars offer to refine contemporary theoretical notions of best practice. A case is ultimately presented in which a contemporised paradigm – based on co-operation, co-benefit outcomes and participatory partnerships – offers significant potential for future management in the Basin, especially to overcome deeply entrenched trust deficits among communities.","PeriodicalId":51870,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Water Resources","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2022-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47134450","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：