Search

Our ability to develop reliable, cost effective solutions for remediation and protection of water resources has matured in recent decades due to various factors, including advances in engineering techniques, improved monitoring capabilities, and access to numerous case studies, historical datasets, and research to aid in the selection and evaluation of mitigation/remediation approaches. Traditionally, historical baseline conditions, and reasonable projections of future conditions provide significant input into the decision-making process. The variability, and unpredictable nature of climate change now requires that the inherent uncertainty of future conditions (both short- and long-term) be incorporated in our remedial decision-making. From an engineering perspective, this may include more flexible (and likely more costly) remedial designs, or a shift from current preferences for longer-term passive approaches to consecutive, shorter-term active alternatives. Incorporating an economic decision-making tool provides a means to parametrize the uncertainties associated with climate change, and may identify “tipping points” where our decisions may change. Different communities, whose interpretations of and costs of resource protection may acutely reflect their own unique cultural values, incomes, or beliefs in the future, can evaluate feasible engineering/water resource protection strategies even in the absence of certainty about future climate conditions. The combined approach merges evaluation of traditional engineering/performance metrics with an economic model that we anticipate will improve the success of water management strategies.