Search

Alaska possesses a diversity and magnitude of water resources unmatched in any other state. With over 15% of the area of the whole United States, and 40% of the nation's total fresh water supply, but an extreme lack of basic hydrologic and climatologic data, cooperation among agencies and individuals concerned with evaluating, planning, and carrying out water resources programs is essential. Toward this end, the Inter-Agency Technical Committee for Alaska (IATCA) was established under charter from the Water Resources Council. Representation in IATCA includes virtually all Federal, State, and academic entities in Alaska having an interest in the water resources of the State. Existence of IATCA has permitted or facilitated numerous Alaskan water resources programs. Several are described briefly in this paper: A flood warning network in the Chena River basin; establishment of the Caribou-Poker Creeks Research Watershed in Central Alaska; preparation and periodic updating of the “Ten-Year Plan for Water Resources Data Acquisition”; current planning for an integrated “real-time reporting network” for hydrometeorological data within the State; and a framework for implementation of the Alaskan phase of the National Water Resources Assessment, currently in the initial phases. Accomplishments to date testify that it is indeed possible to “get it all together” in the broad field of “Water Resources” in the largest of our 50 states.

A water rights controversy involving the Bureau of Reclamation illustrates that public water projects may be built to eliminate ownership externalities (non-enforceable water rights) that were created by existing legal institutions. The controversy followed the construction of the Shasta Dam in California and arose out of the use of the Sacramento River as a conduit for the projects water. Diverters along the river claimed rights to all water in excess of the “natural flow.” As the Bureau had built the project without determining the rights involved, 20 years elapsed and $3 million was expended to resolve the controversy. The Bureau's attempts at legal adjudication were thwarted by political pressures placed on the Secretary of the Interior who ordered a settlement that considerably deprived the Bureau of revenue and of water rights. The “shortages” created helped give impetus to the construction of the Trinity Project. The description of the controversy is followed by numerical estimates of the wealth losses to the general public caused by the controversy itself in loss of revenues as well as the losses occasioned by the Bureau's permanent loss of water rights.

By addressing water, one will also address human development. People’s lack of access to safe and secure water is not due to the quantity of water available on the earth but rather because the institutions set up to manage the issues are not up to the challenge. In Nepal Muluki Ain (Laws of Land) did not regulate water much in detail because water was not considered an important resource and a source of major revenue. Water rights are based on practices legitimized by law and they are related to political, economic and social relationship and to other rights such as land rights Muluki Ain (1854, 1952 and 1963),which regulates priority in acquiring water from water sources, and allocation of water. Acts promulgated between 1961 and 1992 reflect the growing importance of water resources in Nepalese political economy and not only empower the state to regulate water use, they also vested ownership of all water resources with the state. Although various Acts gave water rights to every citizen of Nepal, there are gender bias in executing power and rights to use water sources. Water scarcity problem can perhaps be due to geographical reality, climate change or to the excessive use of water resource in one sector and a resulting loss of raw water available for other uses. Issues such as good water governance, negotiation and collaboration for water sharing, awareness on values of water, management of water induced disasters etc needs specific attention.Keywords: muluki Ain (laws of land); Bhupati (land lords)DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/jhm.v6i1.5486Journal of Hydrology and Meteorology, Vol. 6, No. 1 37-43

This paper is about Ontario’s fresh water resources and the current policy context promoting the sustainability of this resource. Originally, management of water resources in Ontario was heavily influenced through well-defined private property rights and a common law tradition originating in England, known as riparian rights. However, in recent history, a series of legislation has emerged out of concern over water management following the Walkerton tragedy, in which several members of the community died from E. coli poisoning discovered in the region’s drinking water. The free market approach endorses the abolition of direct government intervention in the management of the water resources. Riparian rights can provide protection from exploitation of water resources, and has historically proven to hold damaging parties accountable for harmful behaviour. This report intends to endorse this approach and the exercise of individual’s riparian rights to successfully manage Ontario’s fresh water resources.

The estimated water needs of a decentralized city of 100,000 people in New South Wales are related to the adequacy of ten different locations in meeting those needs. Catchment size and the volume and variability of mean annual stream discharge indicate that coastal streams will provide the best water availability potential for decentralized urban development.

policy or convert it into action unless there appears to be not only a reason for doing so, but a dramatic reason for doing so." Only a dramatic challenge will produce a dramatic response. Such a challenge has developed in Israel over the last few years and has been met by an adequate policy response. It will therefore be of interest to study the Israeli situation, and the technical, economic, and legal procedures that have been evolved.

A research project “Hydrologic and Other Aspects of Water Laws in Minnesota,” was conducted by the authors during the period July 1, 1967 through June 30, 1969 (see Walton and others, 1968, and Haik and others, 1969). The project was supported by funds provided by the U. S. Department of the Interior as authorized under the Water Resources Research Act of 1964 (Public Law 88–379). The project was concerned with: a compilation and analysis of the numerous codified and uncodified legislative laws, major court decisions, federal legislation, and ordinances of villages and cities bearing on water and related land resources in Minnesota. This paper briefly summarizes, without citation, the results of the research and presents the authors' views on the following subjects: state water resources administration, water policies as expressed in Minnesota's laws, problems associated with differing scientific and legal classifications of water, conflicting objectives of major resource agencies, provincialism and precedent in court decisions, insecurity of existing water rights, the adequacy of current legislation regulating water permits, the adequacy of the existing riparian doctrine of water rights, conflicts of federal-state jurisdiction, and constraints on development and management of water and related land resources in Minnesota.

PATTERNS OF WATER PLENTY AND WATER SHORTAGE IN VARIOUS STATES ARE DISCUSSED. THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN PROJECT ACT IS DESCRIBED. THE ACT'S PRIMARY PURPOSES ARE COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT OF THE WATER RESOURCES OF THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN, AND ADDITIONAL SUPPLIES FOR BOTH THE UPPER AND LOWER BASINS, IT PROVIDES FOR FLOOD CONTROL, RECLAMATION OF WATER FOR MUNICIPAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND OTHER BENEFICIAL PURPOSES, WATER QUALITY CONTROL, OUTDOOR RECREATION FACILITIES, IMPROVEMENT OF CONDITIONS FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE, AND THE GENERATION AND SALE OF HYDROELECTRIC POWER, AND IT SEEKS TO FILL LAKE MEAD AND THE COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT RESERVOIRS IN THE UPPER BASIN TO OPTIMUM OPERATING LEVELS. TWENTY-ONE WESTERN STATES - A GROUP RECENTLY JOINED BY ALASKA AND HAWAII - HAVE ADOPTED A LEGISLATIVE POLICY THAT RECOGNIZES THAT THEIR PEOPLE ENJOY A PARAMOUNT INTEREST IN THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF WATER, BOTH SURFACE AND UNDERGROUND, AND THAT STATES THAT THIS INTEREST SHOULD BE PROTECTED BY THE STATE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST. CASES AND PATTERNS OF STATE WATER LAW ARE REVIEWED. THREE FRAMEWORKS OF WATER RIGHTS LAWS HAVE EMERGED THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES: (1) THE COMMON LAW RIPARIAN DOCTRINE, (2) RIGHTS BY STATUTORY DECREE, AND (3) PRIOR APPROPRIATION, OFTEN CALLED THE PERMIT SYSTEM. WATER RIGHTS LAWS AND LITIGATIONS ARE DISCUSSED IN THE FOLLOWING STATES: MINNESOTA, NEW MEXICO, TEXAS, WYOMING, KANSAS, ARIZONA AND CALIFORNIA.

OREGON good supply has lots of of water, room, excellent a fairly g ly of water, excellent schools and colleges, a milder climate than most areas, scenery beyond compare, outstanding recreational opportunities, and all the other things a person should have to enjoy life. We are happy to share our treasures with all, with one exception those who cast covetous eyes on our seemingly abundant water resources. As I have often said to Governor Pat Brown of California, when he discusses the possibility that some of his constituents in that parched land to the south might like to tap the Columbia, Willamette, or other Oregon rivers in order to grow crops, "Simply send us your grocery orders and we will be happy to supply the goods. Better still send us your people." This of course is a rather facetious reference to what is becoming an increasingly important problem that of providing adequate quantities of sufficierltly high-quality water to meet the needs of irrigation, livestock, human consumption, industry, navigation, mining, power development, fish, wildlife, recreation, pollution abatement, and other beneficial uses.

A proposal to divert stream flow out of the basin of origin is not normally greeted with wholehearted enthusiasm by the population of the basin. Opposition to such diversion, which represents an historic determinant of regional growth in western United States, is increasing even in the water-rich New England area. Here, the water resources planner has in recent years encountered strong contention in his efforts to transfer water our-of-basin. It has become clear that the justification for such transfer must be unassailable, and that the water rights and future requirements of the basin population must be carefully considered and protected in the water transfer transaction. The planning process, once considered an essentially engineering enterprise, has in consequence become exceedingly complex and, for the engineer, a challenging, multidimensional planning operation. Presented is an illuminating case study of this type of interbasin water transfer problem, the proposal to divert floodwaters from the Connecticut River at Northfield, MA, to Quabbin Reservoir, the major source of drinking water for Boston.

Comprehensive water resources management includes a variety of factors, among which are water quantity and quality, institutional and legal aspects, and economics. Even though water quality has begun to attain some prominence, its relation to water quantity and to water system operation has been largely overlooked. The Colorado River system in the United States is a case in point. The river basin encompasses an area which is one-twelfth the size of the continental United States. The water is utilized mainly for irrigation of semi-arid areas in the southwestern part of the United States and in northwestern Mexico. Despite its importance, the river system operates under laws and regulations that are not condusive to efficiency. Consequently water is used wastefully and a progressive deterioration in the quality of the river water is evident. Changes in water management are recommended. The pricing of supplied water according to its quality as well as charges for pollution are suggested.

THE use of water in the United States is expanding at a rapid rate. Between 1946 and 1955 total withdrawals, estimated by Picton, increased from 167.84 billion gallons per day to 262.04 billion gallons per day, an increase of 56 per cent. This increase is expected to continue, reaching an estimated 453 billion gallons per day by 1975, 75 per cent more than in 1955. Of the total amount withdrawn in 1946, 24.8 billion gallons per day, more than 14 per cent of the total, was ground water. Ground water withdrawals increased to 41.2 billion gallons per day in 1955, comprising nearly 16 per cent of total withdrawals.'

Drinking water for more than 50 million Americans is supplied from individual wells, springs, rain-water catchments or unprotected surface-water sources. The choice of water source is usually controlled by individual economic factors, and climatic, geologic and geographic considerations. This segment of the nation's population lives in the rural and suburban areas of the United States remote from existing community water supply distribution lines. The United States Public Health Service has shared, for many years, the concern of the various State Health Departments regarding the sanitary quality of individual water supplies. It has been generally concluded by public health officials, both Federal and State, that safe water supplies are not available to many homes in the United States. The rapid technological advances in industry, agriculture and transportation in recent years have intensified the potential of pollution of the environment, both chemically and biologically. The spread of pollution is accompanied by the increased hazard of water-borne disease and associated illnesses. During the summer of 1969 the Bureau of Water Hygiene*, Environmental Health Service, with the cooperation of the Georgia State Health Department, conducted a systematic survey of individual water supplies in 4 counties in the State of Georgia. The results of the survey indicate that more than ⅓ of the water supplies sampled are potentially hazardous to the users, and that there is a definite relationship of the geologic environment and type of water supply to the nature of the contamination.

Mathematical programming models were used to determine optimal water and land allocation and agricultural water needs in the year 2000. The models encompassed the whole of the nation's agriculture but included restraints and detail for 223 producing areas and 51 water regions. With elimination of farm programs withholding land from production, the nation could free water from agriculture for other uses in 2000. Total agricultural water use could be less than in 1964. Pricing policies could be an important means to lessen water demand in western states. These possibilities exist as land and technology is substituted for water. Without farm programs and with a population of 300,000,000 in the year 2000, irrigated acreage could decline by 13% over 1964. The problem facing the nation is not a water shortage for agriculture but an improved allocation of this resource.

Japanese industry has remarkably increased its demand for water these several years. Our government and monopolistic capitalist forces are going to reduce the water rights of farmers for irrigation in order to meet this demand. Such a situation will bring a drastic reorganization of the systems of water use which have been built up mainly on the basis of water rights for irrigation. Above-mentioned reorganization will cause various problems on the water use in various rivers. In order to forecast these future problems, we must get a exact image of socio-economic relations among users of river-water all over our country. In this article, author tried to classify Japanese rivers (except those of Hokkaido) according to the types of socio-economic relations on the use of their water. Such relations are represented by (1) number and areal scale of main facilities for drawing water for irrigation, (2) adjustment for how to distribute river-water among the facilities, (3) historic origins of water rights belonging to each facility, and (4) rules for drawing water to each facility. Assorting such items, we can classify the facilities as follows :— A) Facilities which take part in forming social relations on the use of river-water for irrigation, 1) facilities whose water rights come from administrative recognition and whose manners of water-drawing are regulated in relation to the other agricultural facilities for drawing river-water, 2) facilities whose rights come from contracts with nonagricultural users of river water (such as electric power stations) and whose manners of water-drawing are regulated in relation to the other facil-ities for drawing river-water, 3) facilities whose manners of drawing river-water are regutated according to customs originated premodern era, 4) facilities whose preferential and unrestricted rights for drawing river-water are recognized according to customs, B) Facilities whose rights and manners of water-drawing are not adjusted with other facilities for irrigation, 5) facilities whose water rights come from administrative recognition, 6) facilities whose water rights come from contracts with nonagricultural users of river-water, 7) facilities drawing water without recognized rights and relation to the others. Considerating (1) the ratio of the area irrigated by each group classified as above in the whole area irrigated with river-water, (2) the number and areal scale of main facilities for drawing river water and (3) the relations between agricultural water rights and non-agricultural ones, we can classify Japanese rivers into regional types shown in the following table : — Generally speaking, social relations on the use of river-water have been more developed and fixed in the rivers of (B) region than in the rivers of (A) or (C). In the rivers of (A) region, the water rights for irrigation have been much influenced by electric power development and administrative investment for the improvement of farming land. Authur thinks that such regional defferences have been brought mainly by regionality of Japanese agriculture itself.

One of a series of three papers discussing the East-West Water Controversy, this paper presents the East’s view point, expressing dissatisfaction with regard to the regional imbalance of Federal funding for water resources development. The urgent need for a larger share of such funds to meet growing Eastern problems is stressed.

The United States Supreme Court has placed the federal government in a paramount position as regards ownership and control of much of the nation's water resources. State administration of water rights and water rights acquired under state water laws are in jeopardy. Persistent attempts to obtain corrective action by Congress have failed. Unless federal-state-local relationships are put on a sound basis, the lower echelons of government must be forced out of the water development field as competition for water resources and cost of water development increases. Congressional action is urgently needed. Enactment by Congress of a specific policy (1) defining the amount of water reserved for federal purposes at the time public lands were reserved or withdrawn as that amount reasonably needed for the purpose of the reservation or withdrawal of the lands involved, (2) providing for compensation for water rights on non-federal interests taken for federal purposes, and (3) providing for creation of regional water commissions with equitable federal-state representation and adequate authority, is recommended.

There are six major types of water problems that plague major geographic regions of the nation : pollution, inadequate supply, uneven distribution, floods, variability of supply and demand, and water treatment. Every part of the US has at least one of these problems; most of the states and all of the regions have several. The main problem is not a shortage of water, but a shortage of ideas, technology, and management abilities to utilize the available supplies more effectively. The dilemma is how to obtain the right quantity of water, of the right quality, at the right time and place, at a reasonable cost.

THERE the water is a problems temptation of to Texas say that all the water problems of Texas a have Christian names, usually preceded by titles like mayor, judge, senator, representative, colonel, commissioner, executive director, and the like. This would, of course, be an over-simplification, and a little too broad to be quite accurate, but it would contain a recognizable germ of truth. There is general agreement that Texas has enough water in its underground deposits, in intrastate rivers, and in boundary rivers to take care of every legitimate need well beyond the next half century. And it is acknowledged that the means are at hand to capture and conserve these supplies, maintain their quality, and deliver them to the point of consumption or use. All this can be done within acceptable economic standards. The barriers to accomplishment are primarily people (or political) and the legal barricades that they erect around their personal, economic, or regional interests.

Experience in administrating state water laws has shown that laws that are based on the appropriation doctrine and that do not recognize any claimed riparian rights are most desirable from the viewpoint of an administrator. The law should declare that all waters of the state are public and are subject to appropriation and use as provided by law. One central state agency should have authority to grant water rights, to police the streams, to enforce said rights, and to cancel rights when the appropriator ceases to use water for the purpose for which the appropriation was granted. The decisions of the administrator should be appealable directly to the Supreme Court. Preferential uses of water should be spelled out in the law, and the use of water for a purpose with a high preference should be permitted if a prior appropriator for an inferior purpose is justly compensated for any interference resulting therefrom. A water rights law should apply equally to all of those who desire to use the public waters, including agencies of the United States.

It has been predicted that consumption of water for all purposes will be over twice as great in 1975 as it was in 1950, a fact that should be construed as a warning to water works management in districts experiencing rapid urban and industrial expansion. The experience of Houston may be cited as an example of the demand for water outstripping projected needs. A 1943 survey forecast a requirement of 268 mgd by 1970 for the city, but recent estimates have raised this figure to 700 mgd (I). W. W. Horner, chairman of the National Water Policy Panel, has listed (2) these reasons for water shortages: 1. Failure to provide for equalization of surface water runoff

This article describes several of the salient problems about water and the administration of water programs in West Pakistan. The separation of India and Pakistan in 1947 divided the Indus Basin, leaving three major tributaries in India and most of the irrigated lands in Pakistan. The 1960 Indus Waters Treaty provides for a series of waterworks, financed primarily by Western countries, that will reroute much of the surface water in the Basin. Part of the water allotted to India will be replaced, and hopefully there will be a more dependable water supply for the 20 million acres of land in the Province's agricultural base. There and elsewhere severe waterlogging and salinity conditions have been growing rapidly, and other water problems abound. Since 1958 a semi-autonomous government corporation has managed these water programs, as well as generating and wholesaling most of the electric power. The corporation currently spends well over a quarter of the total provincial budget for economic development purposes. Allowing such an agency to play so predominant a role is of course a matter of conscious policy choice. It may be argued that thus far this Pakistan corporation has performed constructively in the field of water and power, resource administration. (Key words: Agriculture; economics; planning; water management; water resources)

Since time began, riverbank and lakeshore people have enjoyed abundant fresh water, although the inlanders have had to search for it in order to sustain life. Even today, the nomads of the Arab world, and the primitive peoples of Africa and Australia still do. The World Health Organization, in December, 1963, stated officially that, . . .in 75 countries of the world, only five percent of the urban population is provided with good water. This symposium does not attempt to resolve these problems; it has been organized as a compendium of guideposts to, and indices on, where the problems lie, and how some of them may be approached. It includes the needs and possible solutions of water resource problems in various world regions. Most aspects of the subject of ground water are covered as well as the specialized topics of water flow in tectalinears (cracks), and possible other sources such as desalinization of sea water and chemical cloud seeding. The impounding, treatment, and distribution of surface water in both undeveloped areas and in New York City are also reviewed.

To make the land productive and habitable, private interbasin water transfer has been practiced for many years in Australia and in the western United States. Recently, however, the Federal governments of both countries built the first large, precedent-setting multiple-purpose water transfer projects. Water transfer principles, technology, construction skills and experience, and amortization schemes that were developed in building the Colorado-Big Thompson Project in the western United States were adopted and adapted to building the Snowy Mountains Project in Australia. In bringing these two projects to fruition, those critical decisions that were made in the social arena, at the political, economic, fiscal, and planning levels, are the dynamic aspects of water transfer that determine the value of additional water and its impact on the landscape.

The paper defines a water right and discusses the origin, description and relationship of riparian rights, appropriative rights, overlying rights, pueblo rights, prescriptive rights and rights to spring water and return flows as recognized in California. It reviews the objectives and physical criteria on which administration of water rights in California is based and describes the administrative body, then outlines the procedures in regard to appropriation of water and determination of existing rights. It discusses watermaster service and water use recordation as practiced in California, and mentions Federal-State relationships, including the “reservation principle” asserted by the Federal Government. It concludes with observations of the deficiencies in the California system.

Among the many institutional factors that complicate land and water development in the lower Rio Grande valley are (1) uncertainties in water rights, (2) a proliferation of special districts, (3) inappropriate water management policies among districts, and (4)numerous governmental entities involved in planning and administering water resources. It is recommended that the people of the valley urge and facilitate an early adjudication of rights. Certainty in water rights will encourage investments in the resource and help to implement needed facilities. Improvements in irrigation and drainage could be achieved by reorganizing the special districts. A master district for the three-county area may be a logical alternative to the many districts that now exist. Rehabilitation of irrigation systems, including installation of water meters, will contribute to the management of water supplies.

The need for a Federal role in the water resources development of the United States was recognized early in its history. The 20th century has seen a dramatic acceleration of activity in the water resources development field, with a concomitant increase in Federal participation. By 1960 the need for coordinating the many Federal programs in water planning and related resources development became apparent. A Senate Select Committee on National Water Resources was formed. The Committee's report was the basis for the Water Resources Research Act of 1964 and the Water Resources Planning Act of 1965. The objective of the Water Resources Planning Act is to provide for optimum development of water resources through the Water Resources Council and several River Basin Commissions, and by providing financial assistance to the States in order to increase State participation in water resources planning. A Council report on the Ohio River Basin will be published soon; this should be followed by the Missouri Rivet Basin report before 1970. The completion of reports for all major river basins has been scheduled for the mid 1970's. These framework studies include population, economic development, and water supply and water use data projected as far as the year 2020. The Water Resources Council also prepares a biennial assessment of the adequacy of supplies of water necessary to meet the requirements in each water resource region in the United States. For this purpose a river basin model is being prepared to determine probabilities of deficiencies and quality requirements in 300 basins, and economic concepts for determination of optimum water use alternatives are being incorporated in the model. Another assignment to the Council under Title I of the Water Resources Planning Act is the preparation of guidelines for all Federal participants in comprehensive regional water planning, and for the formulation and evaluation of Federal water resources projects of all types. The Council also is working on specific proposals for improved floodplain management. Title II of the Act authorizes the President to establish river basin commissions at the request of one or more States and with concurrence by the Council. Title III provides a basis for increased participation by the States in water planning by granting of matching funds. All but two States are now taking part in the State Grant program.

I would like to congratulate the Royal Society on the choice of subject for this symposium, and hope that it will provide a sufficient development of a consensus to have influence on the solution to the problems now being widely canvassed. I read ‘industry’ in its widest sense, including local authorities and farmers among those who influence the quality of water in rivers and estuaries. It would be impossible to split the problem between the various component activators. In the overall management of the water pollution and water resources problem a large number of Government Departments are involved: The Department of Education and Science, with its responsibility for the Natural Environment Research Council; the Department of the Environment, with its own special Water and Sewerage Division, and its responsibility for the Water Resources Board, Water Pollution Research Laboratory, Hydraulics Research Station and the Water Research Association in partnership with the water supply industry; the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food is interested in the land drainage and both fresh- and sea-water fisheries; and the Minister of Power through the Central Electricity Generating Board is the largest user of water, having a considerable impact on the flow régime of rivers and the temperature of the water. In due course, when the problems of the pollution of the sea are studied in more detail, the impact of river and estuary pollution on the adjacent seas will need quantitative study. In this case, there are grave dangers at present of over-stating the problems and the distinction between awareness and need for action needs to be borne carefully in mind.

A commentary on the rights of states over the federal government to control non-navigable waters within their borders.

water is abundant, as in some parts of the Pacific Northwest, man has an unfortunate tendency to misuse it. Washington has a great variety of terrain ocean beaches, towering mountains, and flat, level areas. In this state are located serene mountain lakes, streams that sometimes become torrents, and one of the greatest rivers in the world. In some parts snowfall is unusual, in others, snow is ever present. One section of eastern Washington has one of the lowest annual rainfalls in the nation, while the rain forest area of the Olympic Peninsula has the nation's heaviest annual precipitation. Washington as a whole has a great deal of water, but it is badly distributed. The consumptive use of water is constantly becoming greater because of increasing population and new applications. This comparatively young area of the United States has an opportunity to profit by errors, primarily of inaction, made in older states. It is easier, less expensive, and wiser to keep the water in good condition as it is developed than to clean it up after pollution has taken place. It is also more prudent to make the best use of water as the state grows, rather than to make corrections later. Need for Water Policy