Search

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the hydrological imperative and engineering capacity for change, concrete storm water infrastructure remains obdurate in the urban waterscape. This obduracy manifests both as an unwillingness to remove existing infrastructure and the continuing construction of new infrastructure in locations previously free of these systems. This paper identifies four critical socio-political values underlying the obduracy of concrete storm water infrastructure and the resultant urban stream syndrome. Following a brief critique of reactive storm water management frameworks to manage this syndrome, this paper articulates four common values of Indigenous science(s) that are well placed can contribute to improve storm water management. Supporting this argument is an example of Indigenous science(s) changing the form and function of a reach of an extant concrete storm water channel in Canberra, Australia. While these interventions will be assessed primarily from water quality perspectives, they contribute to a greater range of environmental processes than purely hydrological. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intermediaries are actors who assist with sustainability transitions. Intermediaries connect, translate, and facilitate flows of information between different groups by positioning themselves between these groups. In this paper we focus on the roles of freshwater intermediaries who have been employed by local authorities and ask how these intermediaries help communities achieve freshwater quality improvements. To answer this question, we present three case studies of freshwater intermediaries working to improve freshwater quality in the Hawke's Bay region of Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ). Our results suggest that intermediaries can help communities improve freshwater quality if they are given the time and resources to establish long-term relationships with communities, and if they are able to synchronise freshwater intermediary work with regional and national freshwater policy objectives. We conclude by arguing that freshwater intermediary work has been undervalued in NZ land and water management, resulting in local and central government attempting to resolve freshwater quality concerns through increasingly prescriptive and complex policy in regulations. Some specific lessons for use of freshwater intermediaries in New Zealand conclude the paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Management of water resources in the Murray-Darling Basin has historically focussed on water security and the allocation of water for users with competing needs. This focus was reflected in the seminal paper on multiple risks to shared water across the basin by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation 15 years ago. That paper captured key concerns that were at the forefront for decision-makers, managers and policy-makers who were, at that time, experiencing the early impacts of the Millennium Drought. Water quality, then, was secondary to the issues of water security. Across the following years, new water quality risks have emerged along with a more nuanced understanding of the complex interplay between climate, floodplain/catchment vegetation, hydrology, and water quality. Critically, this improved understanding applies to the systemic shocks of extreme events, such as the 2020 bushfires and hypoxic blackwater events, as well as the variability, duration and volumes of natural and regulated river flows. In this paper, we explore the key water quality issues that currently face the Basin, and reframe water quality as an integral rather than incidental component of the risks to shared water in the Basin, with the associated implications for policy development that this implies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many water scientists aim for their work to inform water policy and management, and in pursuit of this objective, they often work alongside government water agencies to ensure their research is relevant, timely and communicated effectively. A paper in this issue, examining 'Science integrity, public policy and water governance in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia', suggests that a large group of scientists, who work on water management in the Murray- Darling Basin (MDB) including the Basin Plan, have been subject to possible 'administrative capture'. Specifically, it is suggested that they have advocated for policies favoured by government agencies with the objective of gaining personal benefit, such as increased research funding. We examine evidence for this claim and conclude that it is not justified. The efforts of scientists working alongside government water agencies appear to have been misinterpreted as possible administrative capture. Although unsubstantiated, this claim does indicate that the science used in basin water planning is increasingly caught up in the politics of water management. We suggest actions to improve science-policy engagement in basin planning, to promote constructive debate over contested views and avoid the over-politicisation of basin science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Australia's ability to address Indigenous claims for water rights and to advance both national Indigenous and water policy is hampered by a lack of information on Indigenous water entitlements and the communities that hold them. This paper contributes to the policy agenda of increasing Indigenous water rights by developing a method that quantifies and enables spatially explicit comparison of Indigenous-held water within and across Murray-Darling Basin jurisdictions. We construct baselines for (i) Indigenous population (ii) Indigenous holdings of surface water entitlements, and (iii) Indigenous holdings of groundwater entitlements across water management units in the Basin. We estimate that Indigenous surface water holdings constitute no more than 0.17% of the equivalent permitted take across the entire Basin. Groundwater entitlements held by Indigenous entities constitute 0.02% of all available groundwater. The approximate market value of these water entitlements is A$19.2 million in 2015-16 terms, which equates to 0.12% of the total $16.5 billion market value. In contrast, 5.3% of the Murray-Darling Basin population is Indigenous, a proportion that is rapidly increasing. The production of estimates of this type, and Indigenous control of the data needed to generate them, are first steps in a reparations process that can contribute towards Indigenous water justice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The dual nature of water – giver of life and massive disruptor – is not new. There is rarely one equilibrium state for a water system; there are multiple different states natural water systems cycle through. And human-induced changes to water systems, including through the use of technologies to modify and exploit them, and through climate change, further accentuate the opportunities for extreme disruptions to society. Human history is dotted with examples of challenges in managing water systems and disruptions. This year, parts of Australasia have seen widespread drought, massive fires, smoke pollution, ecological destruction, hail storms, cyclones and now a pandemic, COVID-19, protection from which requires adequate safe water and space for hygiene and limiting transmission. Our notions of time, space and connection to others and our environment, including water, have again come into focus as we search for a new equilibrium after this wave of disruptions – a 'new normal'. But is this just a very human desire for stability amid the seeming chaos? Instead, do we instead need to get better at managing more appropriately through the 'old abnormal': the continuous variability, change and increasingly extreme events due in part to human modification and societal expansion across the planet? This editorial paper provides a reflection on the moment we have found ourselves in at the beginning of 2020. It draws together insights from a range of water science and management challenges presented in the papers of this issue, in order to chart some positive ways for more appropriately navigating water systems and their future disruptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the decade following 2000, water management in the Canterbury region of Aotearoa New Zealand was characterised by irrigation expansion, agricultural intensification, and first-come-first-served water allocation. Some communities grew concerned about the impacts of intensive farming on water quality, river flows, and groundwater levels; others were concerned about a lack of meaningful reflection of Māori values in decision-making. In response, the Canterbury Water Management Strategy, published in 2009, promoted devolved collaborative governance of freshwater resources. A year later, regional councillors were dismissed by central government over concerns about water management and replaced by appointed commissioners through an Act of Parliament. The ensuing period of water management has been both praised and criticised. In this paper we examine water management in Canterbury through a case study in the Selwyn Waihora Zone. We use a causal framework to assess water management, focusing on the process that developed regulatory and non-regulatory recommendations and informed the Selwyn Waihora sub-regional section of the Canterbury Land and Water Regional Plan. We conclude that the collaborative process described is not a 'quick-fix' solution but a radical shift from previous approaches and, although it had some success, it might not be resilient to national political changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper positions legitimacy and trust within a post-colonial theoretical frame, challenging the fundamentals of Australia's water governance system as well as the presumptions of neutrality that underpin liberal water management principles of participation and inclusion. In a settler colonial society like Australia that until very recently excluded Indigenous people from all forms of water governance, there are significant questions to be asked about legitimacy and trust in its water regulatory regimes, guiding policy directions and the fairness of the outcomes generated by its institutions. The paper describes attempts to build cross-cultural collaborative research and management partnerships in the environmental water sector and points to formal agreements as a mechanism through which parties, including governments, can negotiate rules governing legitimacy. As an expression of self-determination and recognition of the legitimacy of Indigenous modes of governance, agreements represent a marked improvement on the exclusionary legal, policy and knowledge-production processes that have shaped our current arrangements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Australia, contestation over the use of water resources remains fierce and these contests extends into regional cities and urban capitals. The 2008 Echuca Declaration by the Murray Lower Darling Indigenous Nations called for a share of these water entitlements to be legally and beneficially owned by First Nations with an associated right to use such resources for economic liberation – termed as 'Cultural Flows'. This was necessary because of the inadequacies First Nations of the Murray–Darling Basin encountered when seeking legal recognition of their cultural rights to water; but as the literature has shown these difficulties are not unique to just First Nations of the Murray–Darling Basin. Similar problems confront First Nations throughout Australia, especially so in urban Australia. There is limited research into how Cultural Flows can be procured in cities, or how recycled water and treated urban stormwater runoff might have a part to play in the achievement of cultural water management objectives set by Indigenous communities. Centred on the Victorian planning scheme, this research aims to bridge this gap through a policy analysis of recycled water and urban stormwater runoff governance. From here, how this approach might be implemented is discussed.' [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For over two decades, Australia has sought to address the effects of the over allocation of water resources in the Murray-Darling Basin through implementation of the Murray Darling Basin Plan (2012). It is increasingly apparent that the impacts of climate change on surface runoff and water demand will profoundly impact rivers, potentially negating the Basin Plan's achievements. It will be critical that we use the lessons from the last two decades to inform adaptation to climate change. Environmental water allocations over the last decade have focussed on providing base flows, freshes, and overbank flows, within a Natural Flow Regime paradigm. In a climate-changed world managers have three broad options. The first would be to continue to pursue single loop adaptive management making improvements within the existing framework. The second option would be to adapt the system approach to focus on a subset of sites, akin to maintaining aquatic reserves. The third option would be to move flow management away from the natural flow paradigm to a more functional regime. This approach would invoke the second adaptive management loop by evaluating options for adaptation and developing processes for navigating trade-offs among social, economic, cultural, and environmental values and between protection, restoration, and adaptation. Changes in water availability because of climate change will require more than incremental adaptation (first loop adaptive management) and will necessitate consideration of either protecting a smaller suite of spatial areas or a smaller set of functional outcomes. This requires profound change to some of the Basin Plan's approaches to environmental flow management. The review of the Basin Plan in 2026 provides a rare opportunity to adapt the Basin Plan from a foundation of protect and restore to one that includes adaptation, and this will require substantive changes to the Basin Plan (second loop adaptive management). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rivers of the south-eastern Murray-Darling Basin (MDB) and the associated irrigation areas of the southern riverine plain (SRP) in south-eastern Australia have undergone major hydrological changes over the last 30 years. These include a period of lower rainfall; a rebalance of surface water diversions between consumptive and environmental water uses under the MDB Basin Plan, improvements in water infrastructure; water trade out of the region; and falling groundwater levels. All these changes increase losses from streams to groundwater systems; potentially leading to the need for greater releases from dams to maintain baseflow in the major rivers. Baseflow is important for conveyance of water, water quality and baseflow-dependent ecosystems during dry periods. Hydrological changes in the SRP will reduce the streamflow by 2029–30 by an estimated 80 to 320 GL/yr. Further hydrological changes by 2029–30 will reduce the streamflow by another 50 GL/yr in the following decade. This is the first assessment of the cumulative stream impacts of the SRP and is relatively lower than previous assessments for single drivers. The current approach of mitigating unexpected losses is to increase conveyance loss budgets as required. This could be extended to mitigate the lower end of potential impacts; but further steps to reduce losses may be required towards the upper end. Further actions include a review of extraction limits for surface water and groundwater, trigger levels, and a greater shift towards conjunctive water management. Groundwater extraction, which has dominated impacts, is increasing from a relatively low proportion of the extraction limit in Goulburn-Murray Sedimentary Plain and shallow aquifers of the SRP. Over time, climate change will become more dominant as a driver. Most monitoring required to support mitigation already exists, but data is not collated or reported in a form relevant for stream impacts. Modelling also needs to be updated with reporting of more relevant outputs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Understanding long-term trends in streamflow is important for water resource management. In this study, we investigate the long-term streamflow trends at 47 gauging sites within the southern Murray-Darling Basin (MDB), Australia. This study aims to estimate regional streamflow trends while understanding the impact of catchment characteristics on the spatial variation in these trends. To achieve this, we applied a Bayesian hierarchical model (BHM) to make the best use of available streamflow records from multiple sites and catchment characteristics such as climate, terrain, geology, land use and vegetation. The results show that streamflow trends from tested sites are consistently negative, with magnitudes of up to 2.7% per year relative to the annual average flow. We also find that spatial variability in trends can be best linked to differences in average climatic and terrain conditions. This finding can be used to inform future water planning for consumptive and environmental uses in the MDB. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The level of water resource development was not at a critically high level when climate change dramatically reduced runoff and recharge in South-west Western Australia. This was because of the state's relatively low population for its size, a small irrigation industry (mainly based on self-supply groundwater) and the low level of secondary industry. Few resources were heavily over allocated despite the need to significantly de-rate water supply systems. The strong uni-directional drying signal in the south-west of WA has been an advantage in that new water supplies have been developed and/or demands reduced as conditions continued to dry, reinforcing the decisions made. Strong government leadership in adapting to a drying climate in the south-west, through accelerated and alternate water source developments has been extremely successful in mitigating dire impacts, especially in the Perth-Peel region. However, as drying and warming trends continue, there is less opportunity to develop new sources and a need to consider a wider array of sources, especially use in water resource planning. More nuanced planning requires stronger governance settings and increased engagement of stakeholders. A step change in the governance and sophistication of water planning and management could be achieved through new legislation in coming years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As urban populations expand globally, the associated increase in urban land cover directly impacts the social and environmental amenity of natural assets, including waterways. The primary driver of urban waterway degradation changes in land uses which results in altered hydrology - from stormwater runoff, and where present, wastewater treatment plant discharge. Whilst the impacts of pollutants are relatively well regulated via public policy, a gap remains for the management of flow regime modification. The Urban Streamflow Impact Assessment (USIA) was developed to fill this management and planning knowledge gap. The approach begins with the identification of waterway values (social, ecological and geomorphic) then explicitly links these values to streamflow characteristics using hydraulic and hydrologic metrics. USIA was applied to a case study in Western Sydney and demonstrated the loss of values associated with 'business-as-usual' approaches to stormwater and wastewater management. Conventional stormwater management approaches do not remove enough excess flow to meet reasonable outcomes for the waterway. This excess runoff is increasingly seen as a resource and opportunity for improving water security and liveability. USIA is consistent with regulatory frameworks and can be applied across developing and established urban catchments to provide explicit input to planning controls. The approach is appropriate at multiple scales, informing urban planning from a broad strategic level through to detailed design. By linking social and ecological values with geomorphic and flow requirements, the approach enables an understanding of which management approaches could allow desirable waterway outcomes to be met. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Water is a critical issue for governments and community in an Australian context, and internationally. First Peoples of Australia, its Indigenous peoples, have over 65,000 years of connection and understanding of water, held by more than 250 distinct Indigenous Nations that occur from the wet tropics, through desert country and south to the temperate zone, river lands and alpine regions. The value of water is central to Indigenous peoples' being and culture, but since European colonisation in 1788, water has been subject to pumping, storage, diversion, extraction and pollution and without Indigenous people's council. Most recently, water has been attributed a market value to sell and trade on a market that moves up and down with availability (drought, flood or in-between). Indigenous peoples have very small water entitlements despite the high value they place on water and the strong connection water has to their sense of identity, spirituality and culture. There is both a need and a great opportunity for Indigenous people to uphold and protect their water values through Indigenous-grounded methodologies or Indigenous-led water research, and so as to integrate Indigenous water knowledge into science and policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are various factors in Dili's water system responsible for the water scarcity problem in the city. Hence, there is a need for strategic plans which could be used as guidelines in improving its water system. The objective of this study was to formulate a strategic plan for water resource management in Dili. The process commenced with the identification of external and internal factors. The Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) was used to weight the score at the input stage. The alternative strategies were formulated with the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) matrix. Furthermore, the Quantitative Strategic Planning Matrix (QSPM) was used to select the priority strategy at the decision stage. Based on the results, a total of 13 internal and 13 external factors were identified, while five alternative strategies formulated. Moreover, the selected strategy as the priority for implementation has the capacity of developing the water resource management infrastructure in Dili, as well as improving the water supply system performance in meeting the urban water demand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Australia's water management futures are again under discussion as drought impacts and bushfires hit communities. Water and ecological system limits are being reached resulting in fish kills and dwindling water levels in storages. Awareness is also rising around the inequities in current water governance regimes for First Peoples across the Australian continent and beyond. Here we provide a brief overview and research on: the ingenuity of Indigenous waterscape and landscape knowledge and practices to care for country and community, including the development of agricultural systems and sophisticated fish and eel trapping systems that are thousands of years old; the devastating impacts of colonisation on First Peoples, their country and ability to maintain some cultural practices; and the ongoing contestation over water governance, right from Federation, including the eight waves of water reforms in the Murray-Darling Basin. Current challenges and needs for reform are also presented including: hydrological scientific uncertainties, such as around return flows and their adjustment due to irrigation infrastructure efficiency increases, and new design methodologies, such as for flood estimation inputs to hydraulic models; adjusting current governance regimes of sustainable diversion limits and water markets to provide alternative value to Australia, beyond economic value drivers, that better respond to the benefit of all basin communities in the face of ongoing extreme climate variability and climate change; and determining positive ways forward for truly valuing and allowing First Peoples' knowledge, practices, culture and law to provide a basis for developing the next waves of Australia's water management reform journey. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]