Search

Risks to shared water resources in the Murray–Darling Basin are reviewed after the report by CSIRO on the same topic in 2006. CSIRO outlined six major risks to shared water resources in the Basin. Herein, six groups of researchers have reviewed the risks of climate change, forest growth, groundwater, water infrastructure, water quality, and governance. These reviews bring an updated understanding of risk assessment and management that can contribute to the forthcoming reviews of the Water Act and Basin Plan in 2024–26. Drawing on these six papers, the authors synthesise knowledge of the risks to shared water resources and identify policy and management options and information gaps. We find that few risk factors have decreased in significance. Most risks remain and new risks are identified. Water managers must plan for a significant decrease in water availability and governments need to actively manage these risks under conditions of increasing uncertainty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Murray–Darling Basin Plan, a major initiative to return water from irrigators to the environment, has been lauded as world-class water reform. The enabling legislation for the Basin Plan, the Water Act, gains its constitutional legitimacy from international treaties such as the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. This Act mandated that water be returned from consumptive uses to the environment. An allocation of 2,750 GL/yr was set but has been reduced by the 'Sustainable Diversion Limit Adjustment Mechanism' (SDLAM), intended to achieve equivalent environmental benefits with less water. We present a synthesis of changes in decision contexts that have led to water reforms being 'watered down'. We analysed the policy discourse of water reform to assess whether SDLAM projects will achieve outcomes congruent with Australia's international treaty obligations. We found little or no alignment between the purpose of the SDLAM projects and the principles of the treaties and the Water Act. As water scarcity increases under climate change, attempting to conserve wetlands (including rivers) with less water while maintaining or increasing irrigation diversions is likely to prove maladaptive. A major reframing of environmental water policy and management is required to enable meaningful and effective adaptation to climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2007, then Australian Prime Minister Howard said of the Murray-Darling Basin's rivers that action was required to end the 'The tyranny of incrementalism and the lowest common denominator' governance to prevent 'economic and environmental decline'. This paper explores the management of these rivers as an epicentre for three key debates for the future of Australia. Information on biodiversity, analyses of the socioecological system, and climate change projections are presented to illustrate the disjunction between trends in environmental health and the institutions established to manage the Basin sustainably. Three key debates are considered: (1) conflict over the allocation of water between irrigated agriculture versus a range of other ecosystem services as the latest manifestation of the debate between adherents of the pioneering myth versus advocates of limits to growth in Australia; (2) cyclical crises as a driver of reactive policy reform and the prospects of the 2008 Water Act forming the basis of proactive, adaptive management of emerging threats and opportunities; and (3) subsidiarity in governance of the environment and natural resources in the Australian federation. Implementation of the 2012 Basin Plan as promised by the Federal Government 'in full and on time' is a key sustainability test for Australia. Despite Australian claims of exceptionalism, the Murray-Darling Basin experience mirrors the challenges faced in managing rivers sustainably and across governance scales in federations around the world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Significant expansion of irrigated agriculture is planned in Africa, though existing smallholder schemes perform poorly. Research at six schemes in Mozambique, Tanzania and Zimbabwe shows that a range of problems are exacerbated by poor management, with limited market linkages leading to underutilization and a lack of profit. Improving sustainability of these complex systems will require: multiple interventions at different scales; investing in people and institutions as much as hardware; clarity in governments’ objectives for their smallholder irrigation schemes; appropriate business models to enable farmers; and better market linkages. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article discusses on the productivity and profitability of small-scale communal irrigation systems in Sub-Saharan Africa. It explores the six irrigation schemes of Mozambique, Tanzania and Zimbabwe in south-eastern Africa that provide tools to farmers which enables them to measure soil water and fertility and develop their own agronomic practices.

The Murray–Darling Basin Plan is a $AU 13 billion program to return water from irrigation use to the environment. Central to the success of the Plan, commenced in 2012, is the implementation of an Environmentally Sustainable Level of Take (ESLT) and a Sustainable Diversion Limit (SDL) on the volume of water that can be taken for consumptive use. Under the enabling legislation, the Water Act (2007), the ESLT and SDL must be set by the "best available science." In 2009, the volume of water to maintain wetlands and rivers of the Basin was estimated at 3000–7600 GL per year. Since then, there has been a steady step-down in this volume to 2075 GL year due to repeated policy adjustments, including "supply measures projects," building of infrastructure to obtain the same environmental outcomes with less water. Since implementation of the Plan, return of water to the environment is falling far short of targets. The gap between the volume required to maintain wetlands and rivers and what is available is increasing with climate change and other risks, but the Plan makes no direct allowance for climate change. We present policy options that address the need to adapt to less water and re-frame the decision context from contestation between water for irrigation versus the environment. Options include best use of water for adaptation and structural adjustment packages for irrigation communities integrated with environmental triage of those wetlands likely to transition to dryland ecosystems under climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]