The Experts below are selected from a list of 318 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Sue Jackson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Collaborative Water Planning: Context and Practice Literature Review
2019Co-Authors: Sue Jackson, Peter Oliver, John Andrew Mackenzie, Wendy Proctor, Margaret AyreAbstract:This review outlines the biophysical characteristics of northern Australian rivers and catchments, their human history, current land and Water use, and development pressures to which they are subject. It chronicles the history of Water management in Australia, highlighting Water policy and Council of Australian Governments (CoAG) reform in this area. The discussion locates Water Planning within the broader field of collaborative natural resource management (NRM), and introduces concepts germane to this topic, including collaboration, power, citizen participation, social capital and social learning. The place of and limits to collaborative NRM are also discussed. Then it examines citizen participation in Water Planning processes from both international and Australian perspectives, particularly in light of current Australian Water reform and the National Water Initiative. Various paradigms in Water Planning ranging from ad hoc, opportunistic Planning; the development of large-scale, state-funded infrastructure development, through to the use of economic instruments and socio-economic assessments, nationally consistent entitlements, inclusion of environmental flow objectives and enhanced public participation are also summarised. The notion of a spectrum of increasing citizen participation is also discussed, as are the tensions evident in the National Water Initiative between regulatory, market-based and participatory Planning paradigms. It discusses the treatment of values in NRM and Water Planning. It addresses the different meanings of value, sociological theories of value and methods of valuation, particularly the way decision makers recognise and understand values of various participants in Water Planning. It focuses on issues of Indigenous participation in Water Planning in Australia. Several issues are identified including negotiating between the very different ways Indigenous and non-Indigenous people know, value and talk about Water; differences in social, geographical and temporal scales; appropriate representation and structures for Indigenous participation in Water Planning; the need for adequate resourcing to allow effective Indigenous participation; and the need to redress power imbalances that disadvantage Indigenous people in decision making. The lack of any systematic studies of the outcomes of Indigenous involvement in Water resource Planning in Australia and the need to develop ways to address the issues identified above are emphasised. It explores the notion of collaboration in Water and natural resource Planning and management, arguing that there is limited empirical evidence of the benefits of such an approach and an absence of an established framework from which to analyse and assess such evidence. A range of criteria, derived from the literature are presented as the basis for a monitoring and evaluation framework to assess collaboration in Water resource Planning.
-
Operationalising the ecosystem services approach in Water Planning: a case study of indigenous cultural values from the Murray–Darling Basin, Australia
International Journal of Biodiversity Science Ecosystems Services & Management, 2015Co-Authors: Rosalind H. Bark, Sue Jackson, Marcus Barber, Kirsten Maclean, Carmel Pollino, Bradley MoggridgeAbstract:Cultural ecosystem services (ES) are particularly challenging to value as well as to subsequently incorporate in scientific assessments and environmental management actions and programmes. In this paper, we apply a cultural ES typology to an Australian Water resources case at a location of major indigenous cultural significance, the Brewarrina Aboriginal fish traps, and consider the potential implications for Water Planning. Data from qualitative interviews with indigenous custodians demonstrates diverse cultural values and associated benefits with respect to the fish traps themselves and to their connectivity with another key Water site, an upstream lagoon. Supported by additional analyses of Water Planning legislation, flow requirements, and non-indigenous tourist values, we analyse the applicability of the typology and the implications for Water Planning. Key issues include: the distinction between values and benefits; whose values and which cultural ES benefits are identified and managed; the challeng...
-
Recognition of indigenous Water values in Australia’s Northern Territory: current progress and ongoing challenges for social justice in Water Planning
Planning Theory & Practice, 2013Co-Authors: Sue Jackson, Marcus BarberAbstract:This paper details indigenous Australian Water values and interests, highlights progress towards improved distributive outcomes from Water Planning and analyses the remaining challenges in meeting indigenous aspirations for cultural recognition. It describes the significance of Water to indigenous people living in the Roper River area of Australia's Northern Territory, reports on innovations in Water allocation Planning processes aimed at accommodating that significance, and analyses the implications of this case study for Water Planning generally. We describe rich cultural and historical connections with Water places, protocols governing human conduct towards Water, custodial assertions regarding the need for "Water for the country", distinctive values relating to riparian vegetation, and claims of ownership and economic rights in contemporary Water allocations. Current Water Planning objectives such as sustainable development, protection for groundWater-dependent ecosystems, and protection of indigenous values accord with contemporary indigenous perspectives in the Roper, and in a national first, the local Water plan specifically proposes reserving a significant Water allocation for commercial use by indigenous people. Yet that allocation is seen as unjust from a local perspective, and further analysis demonstrates a range of other limitations: the scale and boundedness of the demarcated plan area, the neglect of riparian vegetation management, insufficient resourcing of local indigenous capacity, mismatches in Planning and local governance structures, and the broader question of whether a rationalist Planning process can simultaneously advance indigenous claims for recognition, equity in distributions and parity in participation.
-
principles and guidelines for good practice in indigenous engagement in Water Planning
Journal of Hydrology, 2012Co-Authors: Sue Jackson, Carla Joan Mooney, Suzanne Hoverman, Ian WhiteAbstract:Summary Indigenous rights, values and interests relating to Water have been identified by Australia’s National Water Commission as a national priority area, requiring greater understanding, research attention and government action. Yet Indigenous Water values are rarely addressed in Water Planning, despite objectives in national policy requiring Indigenous participation and the identification of Indigenous social, spiritual and customary values in Water plans. Water planners are presently equipped with a very limited number of engagement tools tailored to the Water resource management context to redress the historical neglect of Indigenous interests. In an Australian research project focused on Water Planning, seven participatory Planning tools were employed in three Australian case studies with different social and hydrological characteristics to improve the way in which Indigenous values are elicited and incorporated and to enhance the status of Indigenous knowledge in Water Planning. The results from the two Murray Darling Basin (MDB) case studies reveal the many ways in which Indigenous values have been adversely affected by recent Water resource developments and concomitant Water scarcity. In the third case on the Tiwi Islands in the Northern Territory, where land title to the entire Water Planning area is vested in Indigenous traditional owners, methods were refined to ensure engagement and generate capacity to manage the development of a solely Indigenous-owned, first-generation Water Management Strategy, in collaboration with a range of stakeholders. This paper describes the needs and aspirations of Indigenous people, the engagement strategies employed to elicit Indigenous knowledge, assess Indigenous values, and incorporate the results into three developing Water plans. In addition, it outlines a set of general principles to guide Water Planning in other regions and thereby to improve Indigenous access to Water.
-
exploring and evaluating scenarios for a river catchment in northern australia using scenario development multi criteria analysis and a deliberative process as a tool for Water Planning
Water Resources Management, 2011Co-Authors: Anna Straton, Sue Jackson, Wendy Proctor, Oswald Marinoni, Emma WoodwardAbstract:Water catchments worldwide are experiencing increasing pressure on the quantity and quality of ground and surface Water resources. Water managers are increasingly consulting community and stakeholder groups to ensure their decisions reflect the values and preferences of Water users. Growing tensions between different Water users require the use of techniques that can enable stakeholders to learn about each others’ positions and deliberate about the costs and benefits of alternative Water allocation scenarios. This paper describes the use of scenario development, a small group deliberative process (citizens’ jury) and multi-criteria analysis to assist in Water Planning for the Howard River catchment in the Northern Territory (NT) of Australia. Water Planning processes in the NT are in their infancy. As such, this research provides information about stakeholder preferences where none was previously available and demonstrates the use of a new Water Planning tool. The research found that the process in this case was most useful in providing information to stakeholders, dispelling some unhelpful myths about Water use in the catchment, and coalescing opinion about important criteria for assessing future options.
Craig W Kirkwood - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Watersim a simulation model for urban Water Planning in phoenix arizona usa
Environment and Planning B-planning & Design, 2011Co-Authors: Patricia Gober, Elizabeth A Wentz, Timothy Lant, Michael K Tschudi, Craig W KirkwoodAbstract:WaterSim, a simulation model, was built and implemented to investigate how alternative climate conditions, rates of population growth, and policy choices interact to affect future Water supply and demand conditions in Phoenix, AZ. WaterSim is a hierarchical model that represents supply from surface and groundWater sources and demand from residential, commercial, and agricultural user sectors, incorporating the rules that govern reservoirs, aquifer use, and land-use change. In this paper we: (1) report on the imperative for exploratory modeling in Water-resource management, given the deep uncertainties of climate change, (2) describe the geographic context for the Phoenix case study, (3) outline the objectives and structure of WaterSim, (4) report on testing the model with sensitivity analyses and history matching, (5) demonstrate the application of the model through a series of simulation experiments, and (6) discuss the model’s use for scenario Planning and climate adaptation. Simulation results show there are significant challenges to Phoenix’s Water sustainability from climate change and rapid growth. Policies to address these challenges require difficult tradeoffs among lifestyles, groundWater sustainability, the pace of growth, and what is considered to be an appropriate level of risk of climate-induced shortage.
-
Water Planning under climatic uncertainty in phoenix why we need a new paradigm
Annals of The Association of American Geographers, 2010Co-Authors: Patricia Gober, Craig W Kirkwood, Robert C Balling, Andrew W Ellis, Stephanie DeitrickAbstract:The uncertainties associated with global climate models pose substantial hurdles for urban Water Planning. Despite growing consensus among climatologists that the American Southwest is headed for a warmer and drier future, Water planners in metropolitan Phoenix and elsewhere are reluctant to consider long-term climate change as a significant factor in increased risk of future Water scarcity. A new paradigm for climate research and Water Planning is needed—one that is based on an assumption of uncertainty and a vision of multiple plausible futures, managing risk, and adaptive behaviors. To this end, we downscaled global climate models from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Third and Fourth Assessment Reports for the Watersheds north of Phoenix and estimated changes in runoff using a hydrological model. Results then were used as inputs to WaterSim, an integrated simulation model of Water supply and demand in Phoenix. The model simulated “what if” scenarios under varying policy decisions and futu...
John Andrew Mackenzie - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Collaborative Water Planning: Context and Practice Literature Review
2019Co-Authors: Sue Jackson, Peter Oliver, John Andrew Mackenzie, Wendy Proctor, Margaret AyreAbstract:This review outlines the biophysical characteristics of northern Australian rivers and catchments, their human history, current land and Water use, and development pressures to which they are subject. It chronicles the history of Water management in Australia, highlighting Water policy and Council of Australian Governments (CoAG) reform in this area. The discussion locates Water Planning within the broader field of collaborative natural resource management (NRM), and introduces concepts germane to this topic, including collaboration, power, citizen participation, social capital and social learning. The place of and limits to collaborative NRM are also discussed. Then it examines citizen participation in Water Planning processes from both international and Australian perspectives, particularly in light of current Australian Water reform and the National Water Initiative. Various paradigms in Water Planning ranging from ad hoc, opportunistic Planning; the development of large-scale, state-funded infrastructure development, through to the use of economic instruments and socio-economic assessments, nationally consistent entitlements, inclusion of environmental flow objectives and enhanced public participation are also summarised. The notion of a spectrum of increasing citizen participation is also discussed, as are the tensions evident in the National Water Initiative between regulatory, market-based and participatory Planning paradigms. It discusses the treatment of values in NRM and Water Planning. It addresses the different meanings of value, sociological theories of value and methods of valuation, particularly the way decision makers recognise and understand values of various participants in Water Planning. It focuses on issues of Indigenous participation in Water Planning in Australia. Several issues are identified including negotiating between the very different ways Indigenous and non-Indigenous people know, value and talk about Water; differences in social, geographical and temporal scales; appropriate representation and structures for Indigenous participation in Water Planning; the need for adequate resourcing to allow effective Indigenous participation; and the need to redress power imbalances that disadvantage Indigenous people in decision making. The lack of any systematic studies of the outcomes of Indigenous involvement in Water resource Planning in Australia and the need to develop ways to address the issues identified above are emphasised. It explores the notion of collaboration in Water and natural resource Planning and management, arguing that there is limited empirical evidence of the benefits of such an approach and an absence of an established framework from which to analyse and assess such evidence. A range of criteria, derived from the literature are presented as the basis for a monitoring and evaluation framework to assess collaboration in Water resource Planning.
-
unwritten unsaid just known the role of indigenous knowledge s in Water Planning in australia
Local Environment, 2013Co-Authors: Margaret Ayre, John Andrew MackenzieAbstract:Water Planning processes in Australia have struggled to account for Indigenous interests and rights in Water, including the use of Indigenous knowledge in Water management. In exploring the role of Indigenous knowledge in government-led Water Planning processes, how might tensions between Western scientific and Indigenous knowledges be lessened? Drawing on two case studies from northern Australia we examine how Indigenous knowledge is represented and managed as a different social knowledge to that of Western science in a management context where legal and Planning conventions assume priority. The role of Indigenous (social) knowledges in developing options and strategies for sustainable Water management is contingent upon the participation of Indigenous people in Water Planning. We suggest that Water Planning processes must contain the possibility of an explicit approach to mutual recognition and consequent translation of the conceptual and pragmatic bases of Water management and Planning in both Western ...
-
Transparency and trade-offs in Water Planning
Journal of Hydrology, 2012Co-Authors: Carla Joan Mooney, Claudia Baldwin, John Andrew MackenzieAbstract:summary The building of robust and transparent trade-offs needs to be supported by a sound understanding of the Water Planning process, baseline conditions, and the range of interests and values that might be affected. To this end, several tools were tested for identifying interests and values and assessing how they might be impacted by change. These included a social impact study in South Australia and irrigator and stakeholder surveys in the Condamine, Queensland. A participatory approach to multiple criteria analysis was also trialled to assist understanding of preferences and values in Water allocation trade-off deliberations. Evaluations of the use of these tools demonstrate their functionality in eliciting stakeholder values and expectations and help in bringing transparency to the logic behind the Water Planning decision-making process.
-
Deliberative tools for meeting the challenges of Water Planning in Australia
Journal of Hydrology, 2012Co-Authors: Kathleen H. Bowmer, John Andrew MackenzieAbstract:Australian governments have set an ambitious policy agenda for reform. By 2010, Water plans were to have provided for the return of all overallocated or overused systems to environmentally sustainable levels of extraction, however, many communities do not yet have full confidence in Water plans or their processes. In two national research projects we developed practical tools for transparent and engaging processes to build confidence in Water Planning. We observe that inherent politicised risks in Water Planning mean that current methods of public participation, such as information giving and allowing written submissions, are ‘safer’ and more easily managed. The next article in this special issue sets out the methodology including performance indicators for the tools that we used in the research. To demonstrate their role in building community confidence using best available science we trialled tools which included agent-based participatory modelling, deliberative multi-criteria evaluation, social impact assessment, and groundWater visualisation models. The suite of ‘good-practice’ tools, including Indigenous engagement, is fully described in the following articles of this special issue. Evaluations show deliberative processes have much to offer when applied to questions that have been developed collaboratively and formulated carefully to allow implementation of findings. Interactive tools and those which have high visual impact are consistently rated highly by all sectors of the community, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous, and also by Water planners. These results have implications for Water Planning internationally especially where science is contested, social values are uncertain, and communities are diverse.
Patricia Gober - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Watersim a simulation model for urban Water Planning in phoenix arizona usa
Environment and Planning B-planning & Design, 2011Co-Authors: Patricia Gober, Elizabeth A Wentz, Timothy Lant, Michael K Tschudi, Craig W KirkwoodAbstract:WaterSim, a simulation model, was built and implemented to investigate how alternative climate conditions, rates of population growth, and policy choices interact to affect future Water supply and demand conditions in Phoenix, AZ. WaterSim is a hierarchical model that represents supply from surface and groundWater sources and demand from residential, commercial, and agricultural user sectors, incorporating the rules that govern reservoirs, aquifer use, and land-use change. In this paper we: (1) report on the imperative for exploratory modeling in Water-resource management, given the deep uncertainties of climate change, (2) describe the geographic context for the Phoenix case study, (3) outline the objectives and structure of WaterSim, (4) report on testing the model with sensitivity analyses and history matching, (5) demonstrate the application of the model through a series of simulation experiments, and (6) discuss the model’s use for scenario Planning and climate adaptation. Simulation results show there are significant challenges to Phoenix’s Water sustainability from climate change and rapid growth. Policies to address these challenges require difficult tradeoffs among lifestyles, groundWater sustainability, the pace of growth, and what is considered to be an appropriate level of risk of climate-induced shortage.
-
Water Planning under climatic uncertainty in phoenix why we need a new paradigm
Annals of The Association of American Geographers, 2010Co-Authors: Patricia Gober, Craig W Kirkwood, Robert C Balling, Andrew W Ellis, Stephanie DeitrickAbstract:The uncertainties associated with global climate models pose substantial hurdles for urban Water Planning. Despite growing consensus among climatologists that the American Southwest is headed for a warmer and drier future, Water planners in metropolitan Phoenix and elsewhere are reluctant to consider long-term climate change as a significant factor in increased risk of future Water scarcity. A new paradigm for climate research and Water Planning is needed—one that is based on an assumption of uncertainty and a vision of multiple plausible futures, managing risk, and adaptive behaviors. To this end, we downscaled global climate models from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Third and Fourth Assessment Reports for the Watersheds north of Phoenix and estimated changes in runoff using a hydrological model. Results then were used as inputs to WaterSim, an integrated simulation model of Water supply and demand in Phoenix. The model simulated “what if” scenarios under varying policy decisions and futu...
Emma Woodward - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
exploring and evaluating scenarios for a river catchment in northern australia using scenario development multi criteria analysis and a deliberative process as a tool for Water Planning
Water Resources Management, 2011Co-Authors: Anna Straton, Sue Jackson, Wendy Proctor, Oswald Marinoni, Emma WoodwardAbstract:Water catchments worldwide are experiencing increasing pressure on the quantity and quality of ground and surface Water resources. Water managers are increasingly consulting community and stakeholder groups to ensure their decisions reflect the values and preferences of Water users. Growing tensions between different Water users require the use of techniques that can enable stakeholders to learn about each others’ positions and deliberate about the costs and benefits of alternative Water allocation scenarios. This paper describes the use of scenario development, a small group deliberative process (citizens’ jury) and multi-criteria analysis to assist in Water Planning for the Howard River catchment in the Northern Territory (NT) of Australia. Water Planning processes in the NT are in their infancy. As such, this research provides information about stakeholder preferences where none was previously available and demonstrates the use of a new Water Planning tool. The research found that the process in this case was most useful in providing information to stakeholders, dispelling some unhelpful myths about Water use in the catchment, and coalescing opinion about important criteria for assessing future options.
