An Analysis of the Effects of Sociodemographic Factors on Daily Per Capita Residential Water Use in Texas Cities

Water is a key resource of concern to residents and decision makers in the State of Texas and in many other parts of the United States. Careful planning for its use is of utmost importance for the State and the Nation. Such planning requires careful consideration of numerous factors including hydrologic and physiographic factors, engineering feasibility and economic feasibility. At the same time, it is increasingly evident that water needs are closely tied to population growth and to the social, economic and demographic characteristics of the population (Murdock et al., 1985). Thus, attempts to plan for the use of water resources have become increasingly inclusive of socioeconomic as well as physical variables as the costs of incorrectly projecting water demand and misallocating funds for facility construction and management have become apparent (Stees et al., 1976; McFarland and Hyatt, 1973; Reid, 1971; Texas Department of Water Resources, 1984). To date, however, water-related socioeconomic research has concentrated on: 1. water use policy and water use planning 2. the demographic and social correlates of water and other resource use 3. the effects of water use and availability on demographic and social patterns 4. methodologies for projecting demands for resources and the implications of the use of resources An extensive body of research addresses both the need for, and the dimensions that must be considered in, water use policy formation and planning (Markusen, 1978; U.S. Water Resources Council, 1978; Council for Agriculture Science and Technology, 1982; National Water Commission, 1973; Office of Technology Assessment, 1983; Texas Department of Water Resources, 1984). Such analyses persuasively argue for the use of comprehensive, multidisciplinary planning formats, but as several recent reviews of water resources research efforts have noted (Francis, 1982; Napier et al., 1983), much of the basic research necessary to establish the relationships that should form the bases of the information used in such planning has not been completed. The demographic and social correlates of water use have not been sufficiently established. Although total population and demographic structure characteristics are often used in projecting demands for water resources (Mercer and Morgan, 1978; Texas Department of Water Resources, 1984), several recent efforts evaluating the use of demographic and social variables in water use planning have noted that few of the relationships between demographic and social factors and water use have been established empirically (Murdock et al., 1985; Korsching and Nowak, 1983; Francis, 1982). Thus, it is unclear what effects differences in household or family composition patterns or the age structure of a population have on usage of water and related resources. In like manner, although given some attention in the literature (Larson and Hudson, 1951; Bogue, 1963; Kubat et al., 1968; Francis, 1982; Napier et al., 1983), the relationships between such crucial social variables as socioeconomic status, ethnic status and perceptions of water conservation requirements and water use have not been adequately examined. Since other resource uses, such as energy use (Morrison, 1976), show substantial variation across demographic, social and cultural variables, similar effects are likely to be found between demographic, social and cultural variables and water use. The effects of water use and availability on population and social patterns have been given considerable attention (Williford et al., 1976; Doeksen and Pierce, 1976; Albrecht et al., 1984; Murdock et al., 1984; Albrecht and Hurdock, 1985). Such analyses suggest that changes in water resource availability or in the use of water-related forms of technology may lead to substantial changes in the population bases of areas (Albrecht and Murdock, 1985; Fitzsimmons and Salama, 1977) and may lead to related economic and community service changes (Williford et al., 1976). However, such analyses have tended to use only general and very unrefined assumptions concerning the relationships between water availability, use and technology and demographic and social factors. An extensive body of research has also developed related to the modeling of economic and demographic factors associated with resource use and development (Leistritz and Murdock, 1981; Murdock and Leistritz, 1980; Ford, 1976; Stenehjem and Metzger, 1976; Dunn and Larson, 1963; Nercer and Morgan, 1978). Although such models have become increasingly complex, several recent reviews of these models suggest that validation of the parameter assumptions underlying them is needed (Leistritz and Murdock, 1981; Markusen, 1978). In particular, most such models project water demand and use on the basis of per capita or per population unit factors. Population composition is not taken into account. Overall, then, although a few studies have attempted to include demographic variables--age, household size and patterns, race/ethnicity-and social, cultural and behavioral variables--such as water use preferences and cultural patterns of water use--in planning and projection efforts (Kubat et al., 1968; Dunn and Larson, 1963; Korsching and Nowak, 1983; Portney, 1982), water planning and analyses efforts have largely ignored the effects of demographic factors (other than total population size) and social factors in planning for water use and facility construction. Such neglect is particularly unfortunate in states, such as Texas, where populations display wide demographic and social diversity (Skrabanek et al., 1985) and where per capita water use varies widely from one area to another (Texas Department of Water Resources, 1984). Only if analyses of the relationships between demographic and social variables and water use and demand are completed, will it be possible to adequately employ such variables in projections of water demand. Because the inclusion of such variables in projection models should increase the accuracy of projections and improve our understanding of the numerous factors that determine patterns of water use, studies of the effects of demographic and social factors on water use and on projections of water demand deserve additional consideration. This report presents the results of one such study sponsored by the Texas Water Resources Institute. The study has two major objectives: 1. to determine the relationships between key demographic, social and cultural variables and water use in Texas 2. to analyze the implications of the relationships between demographic, social and cultural variables and water use and demand for projections of water use and demand in Texas Specifically, this report presents the results of an analysis of secondary and primary data in which the relationships between water use and other sociodemographic variables are examined, and it reports the effects of using sociodemographic characteristics to project water use. These relationships are of intrinsic interest to professionals involved in water planning and policy formulation, and the results will hopefully be of utility to a wide range of policy and decision makers. The report is organized into five sections. Section I describes the data and methodologies employed in the analysis. Section II presents and discusses the results of the secondary analysis. Section III examines the results of our analysis of survey data from over 800 respondents from 8 communities selected from across the State of Texas. Section IV describes the implications of using demographic and social factors in projecting water use. The final section, Section V, presents generalizations regarding the overall effects of demographic and social factors on water use and demand ant presents our preliminary recommendations regarding the use of such variables in formulating water use and demand projections. Throughout the report, it should be recognized that the fact that the study is limited to one period of time and to only selected areas of the Stste, clearly limits the ability to formulate generalizations that have statewide applicability. The fact that the study is limited in several regards must be recognized

Assessing the Cost of Global Biodiversity and Conservation Knowledge

Knowledge products comprise assessments of authoritative information supported by standards, governance, quality control, data, tools, and capacity building mechanisms. Considerable resources are dedicated to developing and maintaining knowledge products for biodiversity conservation, and they are widely used to inform policy and advise decision makers and practitioners. However, the financial cost of delivering this information is largely undocumented. We evaluated the costs and funding sources for developing and maintaining four global biodiversity and conservation knowledge products: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems, Protected Planet, and the World Database of Key Biodiversity Areas. These are secondary data sets, built on primary data collected by extensive networks of expert contributors worldwide. We estimate that US$160 million (range: US$116–204 million), plus 293 person-years of volunteer time (range: 278–308 person-years) valued at US$14 million (range US$12–16 million), were invested in these four knowledge products between 1979 and 2013. More than half of this financing was provided through philanthropy, and nearly three-quarters was spent on personnel costs. The estimated annual cost of maintaining data and platforms for three of these knowledge products (excluding the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems for which annual costs were not possible to estimate for 2013) is US$6.5 million in total (range: US$6.2–6.7 million). We estimated that an additional US$114 million will be needed to reach pre-defined baselines of data coverage for all the four knowledge products, and that once achieved, annual maintenance costs will be approximately US$12 million. These costs are much lower than those to maintain many other, similarly important, global knowledge products. Ensuring that biodiversity and conservation knowledge products are sufficiently up to date, comprehensive and accurate is fundamental to inform decision-making for biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. Thus, the development and implementation of plans for sustainable long-term financing for them is critical

Rapid forest inventory and mapping: Monitoring forest cover and land use change

This paper discusses the research tools used to create baseline data for carbon offset mechanisms. The paper explains vegetation survey methodologies with examples of their application in a variety of contexts. These range from rapid studies using remote sensing imagery, to full multiphase survey methods. The paper gives specific examples of how these methods are used to monitor deforestation and forest regeneration

Gymnosperms on the EDGE

Driven by limited resources and a sense of urgency, the prioritization of species for conservation has been a persistent concern in conservation science. Gymnosperms (comprising ginkgo, conifers, cycads, and gnetophytes) are one of the most threatened groups of living organisms, with 40% of the species at high risk of extinction, about twice as many as the most recent estimates for all plants (i.e. 21.4%). This high proportion of species facing extinction highlights the urgent action required to secure their future through an objective prioritization approach. The Evolutionary Distinct and Globally Endangered (EDGE) method rapidly ranks species based on their evolutionary distinctiveness and the extinction risks they face. EDGE is applied to gymnosperms using a phylogenetic tree comprising DNA sequence data for 85% of gymnosperm species (923 out of 1090 species), to which the 167 missing species were added, and IUCN Red List assessments available for 92% of species. The effect of different extinction probability transformations and the handling of IUCN data deficient species on the resulting rankings is investigated. Although top entries in our ranking comprise species that were expected to score well (e.g. Wollemia nobilis, Ginkgo biloba), many were unexpected (e.g. Araucaria araucana). These results highlight the necessity of using approaches that integrate evolutionary information in conservation science

Assessing the cost of global biodiversity and conservation knowledge

Knowledge products comprise assessments of authoritative information supported by stan-dards, governance, quality control, data, tools, and capacity building mechanisms. Considerable resources are dedicated to developing and maintaining knowledge productsfor biodiversity conservation, and they are widely used to inform policy and advise decisionmakers and practitioners. However, the financial cost of delivering this information is largelyundocumented. We evaluated the costs and funding sources for developing and maintain-ing four global biodiversity and conservation knowledge products: The IUCN Red List ofThreatened Species, the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems, Protected Planet, and the WorldDatabase of Key Biodiversity Areas. These are secondary data sets, built on primary datacollected by extensive networks of expert contributors worldwide. We estimate that US$160million (range: US$116–204 million), plus 293 person-years of volunteer time (range: 278–308 person-years) valued at US$14 million (range US$12–16 million), were invested inthese four knowledge products between 1979 and 2013. More than half of this financingwas provided through philanthropy, and nearly three-quarters was spent on personnelcosts. The estimated annual cost of maintaining data and platforms for three of these knowl-edge products (excluding the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems for which annual costs were notpossible to estimate for 2013) is US$6.5 million in total (range: US$6.2–6.7 million). We esti-mated that an additional US$114 million will be needed to reach pre-defined baselines ofdata coverage for all the four knowledge products, and that once achieved, annual mainte-nance costs will be approximately US$12 million. These costs are much lower than those tomaintain many other, similarly important, global knowledge products. Ensuring that biodi-versity and conservation knowledge products are sufficiently up to date, comprehensiveand accurate is fundamental to inform decision-making for biodiversity conservation andsustainable development. Thus, the development and implementation of plans for sustain-able long-term financing for them is critical

The genetic architecture of the human cerebral cortex

The cerebral cortex underlies our complex cognitive capabilities, yet little is known about the specific genetic loci that influence human cortical structure. To identify genetic variants that affect cortical structure, we conducted a genome-wide association meta-analysis of brain magnetic resonance imaging data from 51,665 individuals. We analyzed the surface area and average thickness of the whole cortex and 34 regions with known functional specializations. We identified 199 significant loci and found significant enrichment for loci influencing total surface area within regulatory elements that are active during prenatal cortical development, supporting the radial unit hypothesis. Loci that affect regional surface area cluster near genes in Wnt signaling pathways, which influence progenitor expansion and areal identity. Variation in cortical structure is genetically correlated with cognitive function, Parkinson's disease, insomnia, depression, neuroticism, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder