Suchergebnisse

AbstractIn this paper we describe how benefits are transferred from previous non-market valuation research to inform the public policy debate on the allocation of treated wastewater to Riparian Projects in the semi-arid city of Tucson, Arizona, United States. Specifically, we transfer property premiums associated with proximity to riparian habitat to two proposed, and one accidental, urban Riparian Project. The study demonstrates that nearby property owners would likely benefit from wastewater reuse in riparian corridor restoration projects. Furthermore, the variable costs of supplying supplementary treated wastewater to one of the Riparian Projects are covered by incremental property tax revenues. We conclude that there is a window of opportunity to utilize a portion of Tucson's treated wastewater, over half of which is currently discharged at the northern end of the city, for additional in-town riparian restoration projects. Such riparian restoration projects also provide a mechanism for Endangered Species Act compliance.

As climate change erodes current levels of flood protection in the UK and government investment in 'hard' flood risk management (hFRM) is rationed by cost-benefit ratios, the option for many communities at-risk is to implement local 'soft' FRM (sFRM). The frequency of widespread flooding generates an added urgency to understand how to support sFRM. Using a case study and qualitative analysis, we explore social processes (SPs), such as acculturation, that drive stakeholder adaptation to be more flood resilient. We conceptualise the status quo beleaguered by conflict and competition and propose practices of accommodation and cooperation that can support shared objectives and responsibility that strengthen sFRM. Our conceptual model is mapped on a stylised catchment to illustrate how SPs underpin sFRM interventions that join-up the catchment in wholescape thinking. The transferable learning is that there are group behaviours and inclusive practices that can initiate and support local sFRM.

Water allocation regimes that adjudicate between competing uses are in many countries under pressure to adapt to increasing demands, climate‐driven shortages, expectations for equity of access, as well as societal changes in values and priorities. International authorities expound standards for national allocation regimes that include robust processes for addressing the needs of 'new entrants' and for varying existing entitlements within sustainable limits. The claims of Indigenous peoples to water represents a newly recognised set of rights and interests that will test the ability of allocation regimes to address the global water governance goal of equity. No study has sought to identify public attitudes or willingness to pay for a fairer allocation of water rights between Indigenous and non‐Indigenous people. We surveyed households from the jurisdictions of Australia's Murray‐Darling Basin, a region undergoing a historic government‐led recovery of water, and found that 69.2% of respondents support the principle of reallocating a small amount of water from irrigators to Aboriginal people via the water market. Using contingent valuation, we estimated households are willing to pay A$21.78 in a one‐off levy. The aggregate value calculated for households in the basin's jurisdictions was A$74.5 million, which is almost double a recent government commitment to fund the acquisition of entitlements for Aboriginal nations of this basin. Results varied by state of residency and affinity with environmental groups. An information treatment that presented narrative accounts from Aboriginal people influenced the results. Insights from this study can inform water reallocation processes.

Increasing pressure on shared water resources has often been a driver for the development and utilisation of water resource models (WRMs) to inform planning and management decisions. With an increasing emphasis on regional decision-making among competing actors as opposed to top-down and authoritative directives, the need for integrated knowledge and water diplomacy efforts across federal and international rivers provides a test bed for the ability of WRMs to operate within complex historical, social, environmental, institutional and political contexts. This paper draws on theories of sustainability science to examine the role of WRMs to inform transboundary water resource governance in large river basins. We survey designers and users of WRMs in the Colorado River Basin in North America and the Murray-Darling Basin in southeastern Australia. Water governance in such federal rivers challenges inter-governmental and multi-level coordination and we explore these dynamics through the application of WRMs. The development pathways of WRMs are found to influence their uptake and acceptance as decision support tools. Furthermore, we find evidence that WRMs are used as boundary objects and perform the functions of 'boundary work' between scientists, decision-makers and stakeholders in the midst of regional environmental changes.

Understanding how to adapt to increasing risk under climate change is essential for governments wishing to mitigate harms and manage insurance and disaster assistance costs. An approach that values the public good of hazard mitigation provisioned by natural ecosystems could also incentivise government, beneficiaries and insurance companies to share responsibility and funding for targeted conservation and restoration. To illuminate this concept of the insurance value of ecosystems, it is important to map the relationship between the area(s) that benefit from and provide regulating ecosystem services and to identify what determines the level of protection. In the case of flood control regulation that benefits at-risk urban areas, upstream or inland peri-urban areas are key. We present steps to operationalise the insurance value in policy using spatial indicators of peri-urban biodiversity and vegetation and soil health for four Mexican cities. For Mexico City only, we identify at-risk areas and characterise upstream peri-urban areas and find this insurance value is already diminished. Combining spatial analysis with a damage cost function we estimate the expected damage costs of different flood events and the monetary value of enhancing this insurance value. This estimate could be compared to other policy interventions and integrated into hazard insurance.

Evaluating different environmental policy options requires extensive modelling of biophysical processes and attributes linked with metrics to measure the magnitude and distribution of societal impacts. An integrated ecosystem services assessment (IESA) has potential to provide salient, credible and legitimate information for environmental policy- and decision-makers. Here we present results of an IESA of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, an Australian Government initiative to restore aspects of river flow regimes to improve the ecological condition of floodplains, rivers and wetlands in south-eastern Australia. The main outcome from the IESA is that the supply of most ecosystem services (ES) improves under Basin Plan policy and that these improvements have considerable monetary value. An IESA can provide actionable ecological, economic and social information for policy- and decision-makers. In the Basin Plan case the IESA was underpinned by hydrological scenarios that were input into ecological models and interdisciplinary integration across scales, values and variables.

We are increasingly confronted with severe social and economic impacts of environmental degradation all over the world. From a valuation perspective, environmental problems and conflicts originate from trade-offs between values. The urgency and importance to integrate nature's diverse values in decisions and actions stand out more than ever. Valuation, in its broad sense of 'assigning importance', is inherently part of most decisions on natural resource and land use. Scholars from different traditions -while moving from heuristic interdisciplinary debate to applied transdisciplinary science- now acknowledge the need for combining multiple disciplines and methods to represent the diverse set of values of nature. This growing group of scientists and practitioners share the ambition to explore how combinations of ecological, socio-cultural and economic valuation tools can support real-life resource and land use decision-making. The current sustainability challenges and the ineffectiveness of single-value approaches to offer relief demonstrate that continuing along a single path is no option. We advocate for the adherence of a plural valuation culture and its establishment as a common practice, by contesting and complementing ineffective and discriminatory single-value approaches. In policy and decision contexts with a willingness to improve sustainability, integrated valuation approaches can be blended in existing processes, whereas in contexts of power asymmetries or environmental conflicts, integrated valuation can promote the inclusion of diverse values through action research and support the struggle for social and environmental justice. The special issue and this editorial synthesis paper bring together lessons from pioneer case studies and research papers, synthesizing main challenges and setting out priorities for the years to come for the field of integrated valuation. ; Peer reviewed