Developing a water market readiness assessment framework

Water markets are increasingly proposed as a demand-management strategy to deal with water scarcity. Water trading arrangements, on their own, are not about setting bio-physical limits to water-use. Nevertheless, water trading that mitigates scarcity constraints can assist regulators of water resources to keep water-use within limits at the lowest possible cost, and may reduce the cost of restoring water system health. While theoretically attractive, many practitioners have, at best, only a limited understanding of the practical usefulness of markets and how they might be most appropriately deployed. Using lessons learned from jurisdictions around the world where water markets have been implemented, this study attempts to fill the existing water market development gap and provide an initial framework (the water market readiness assessment (WMRA)) to describe the policy and administrative conditions/reforms necessary to enable governments/jurisdictions to develop water trading arrangements that are efficient, equitable and within sustainable limits. Our proposed framework consists of three key steps: 1) an assessment of hydrological and institutional needs; 2) a market evaluation, including assessment of development and implementation issues; and 3) the monitoring, continuous/review and assessment of future needs; with a variety of questions needing assessment at each stage. We apply the framework to three examples: regions in Australia, the United States and Spain. These applications indicate that WMRA can provide key information for water planners to consider on the usefulness of water trading processes to better manage water scarcity; but further practical applications and tests of the framework are required to fully evaluate its effectiveness.This work was supported by the Australian Research Council [FF140100733, DE150100328 and DP140103946], and the Australian National Commission for UNESCO

Slime-mold beetles.

167 p. : ill., maps ; 26 cm.Includes bibliographical references (p. 166-167).The Agathidium concinnum, A. pulchrum, A. compressidens, A. iota, and A. oniscoides groups are revised. The following new species are described: A. akallebregma, n.sp., A. akrogeneios, n.sp., A. amae, n.sp., A. andersoni, n.sp., A. appalachium, n.sp., A. aztec, n.sp., A. bituberculum, n.sp., A. bushi, n.sp., A. carolinense, n.sp., A. chauliodoum, n.sp., A. cheneyi, n.sp., A. cortezi, n.sp., A. disgregum, n.sp., A. divaricatum, n.sp., A. erythromelas, n.sp., A. fawcettae, n.sp., A. framea, n.sp., A. gallititillo, n.sp., A. georgiaense, n.sp., A. gomezae, n.sp., A. grandidentatum, n.sp., A. grumum, n.sp., A. hamulum, n.sp., A. hidalgoense, n.sp., A. hirsutum, n.sp., A. hyle, n.sp., A. impensum, n.sp., A. invisitatum, n.sp., A. iota, n.sp., A. iridescens, n.sp., A. kimberlae, n.sp., A. lobosternum, n.sp., A. marae, n.sp., A. megoniscoides, n.sp., A. microphthalmum, n.sp., A. multidentatum, n.sp., A. nimbosilva, n.sp., A. oaxacaense, n.sp., A. oculeum, n.sp., A. oedema, n.sp., A. oregonense, n.sp., A. pocahontasae, n.sp., A. popocatepetlae, n.sp., A. potosii, n.sp., A. recurvatum, n.sp., A. rhamphastes, n.sp., A. rumsfeldi, n.sp., A. sejunctum, n.sp., A. skoliosternum, n.sp., A. stenomma, n.sp., A. stephani, n.sp., A. tenangoense, n.sp., A. triangularum, n.sp., A. tribulograndum, n.sp., A. tribulosum, n.sp., A. tumidiventre, n.sp., A. vaderi, n.sp., A. vesperpressidens, n.sp. The following new synonyms are proposed: A. assimile Fall, A. municeps Fall, and A. falli Hatch = A. angulare Mannerheim, new synonyms; A. alticola Fall = A. athabascanum Fall, new synonym; A. contiguum Fall, A. varipunctatum Hatch, and A. striolum Hatch = A. picipes Fall, new synonyms; and A. californicum Horn and A. alutaceum Fall; = A. exiguum Melsheimer, new synonyms. Lectotypes are designated for the following species: A. angulare, A. californicum, A. concinnum Mannerheim, A. dentigerum Horn, A. difficile Matthews, A. effluens Mannerheim, A. exiguum, A. globatile LeConte, A. laetum Fall, A. pulchrum LeConte, A. rotundulum Mannerheim, A. rubellum Fall, A. ruficorne LeConte, and Phalacrus difformis LeConte

The rebound effect on water extraction from subsidising irrigation infrastructure in Australia

Over the past decade, Australia has been buying water entitlements and subsidising irrigation infrastructure to reallocate water from consumptive to environmental purposes in the Murray-Darling Basin (MDB). There is considerable evidence that irrigation infrastructure subsidies are not cost-effective, as well as questions as to whether water extractions are increasing (rebounding) as a result. We used 2481 on-farm MDB irrigation surveys and identified a ‘rebound effect’ on water extractions, with irrigators who received an irrigation infrastructure subsidy significantly increasing (21-28%) their water extraction, relative to those who did not receive any grants. Although the precise hydrological impact of this rebound effect on catchment and Basin-wide extractions remains unknown, publicly available water data suggest that reductions in extractions from the MDB – supposedly commensurate with increases in environmental flows – may have been overestimated, particularly in the Northern MDB. This overestimation may in turn be linked to issues with water measurement and extractions at the catchment and Basin-scale, which occur due to: (1) water theft and poor enforcement; (2) inaccurate or absent water metering; (3) growth in unlicensed surface and groundwater extractions and on-farm storage capacity; (4) legal and practical uncertainties in compliance tools, processes and water accounting; and (5) complexity of floodplain, evaporation and groundwater interactions. To respond to these water governance challenges, MDB water and rural policy actions must: (1) improve measurement of diversions and develop transparent and robust water accounting, independently audited and accounting for uncertainty; (2) improve compliance, fines and regulation; (3) use multiple lines of evidence for water accounting and compliance; and (4) prioritise the cost and environmental effectiveness of water recovery

The Murray Darling Basin Plan is not delivering - there\u27s no more time to waste

More than five years after the Murray Darling Basin Plan was implemented, it\u27s clear that it is not delivering on its key objectives. The Basin Plan, at its core, is about reducing the amount of water that can be extracted from its streams, rivers and aquifers. It includes an environmental water strategy to improve the conditions of the wetlands and rivers of the basin. The Productivity Commission will conduct a five-yearly inquiry into the effectiveness of the Basin Plan in 2018. It is high time to explain what is really going on in the Basin and water recovery. For this reason we have all signed the Murray-Darling Basin Declaration to explain what has gone wrong, to call for a freeze on funding for new irrigation projects until the outcomes of water recovery has been fully and independently audited, and to call for the establishment of an independent, expert body to deliver on the key goals of the Water Act (2007)

Measuring Biodiversity and Extinction – Present and Past

How biodiversity is changing in our time represents a major concern for all organismal biologists. Anthropogenic changes to our planet are decreasing species diversity through the negative effects of pollution, habitat destruction, direct extirpation of species, and climate change. But major biotic changes – including those that have both increased and decreased species diversity – have happened before in Earth’s history. Biodiversity dynamics in past eras provide important context to understand ecological responses to current environmental change. The work of assessing biodiversity is woven into ecology, environmental science, conservation, paleontology, phylogenetics, evolutionary and developmental biology, and many other disciplines; yet, the absolute foundation of how we measure species diversity depends on taxonomy and systematics. The aspiration of this symposium, and complementary contributed talks, was to promote better understanding of our common goals and encourage future interdisciplinary discussion of biodiversity dynamics. The contributions in this collection of papers bring together a diverse group of speakers to confront several important themes. How can biologists best respond to the urgent need to identify and conserve diversity? How can we better communicate the nature of species across scientific disciplines? Where are the major gaps in knowledge about the diversity of living animal and plant groups, and what are the implications for understanding potential diversity loss? How can we effectively use the fossil record of past diversity and extinction to understand current biodiversity loss

Temperature–time evolution of the Assynt Terrane of the Lewisian Gneiss Complex of Northwest Scotland from zircon U-Pb dating and Ti thermometry

The Lewisian Gneiss Complex of Northwest Scotland is a classic Precambrian basement gneiss complex. The Lewisian is divided into a number of terranes on the basis of structural, metamorphic and geochronological evidence. The most well-studied of these is the Assynt Terrane, which forms the central part of the Lewisian outcrop on the Scottish mainland. Field evidence shows that it has a complex tectonothermal history, the early stages of which remain poorly constrained. This paper sets out to better understand the chronology and thermal evolution of the Assynt Terrane through zircon U-Pb dating and Ti-in-zircon thermometry, the latter applied to the Lewisian for the first time. This is placed in context by integration with detailed field mapping, sample petrography, zircon cathodoluminescence (CL) imaging and rare earth element (REE) analysis. Zircons from six tonalite-trondhjemite-granodiorite (TTG) gneiss samples and two metasedimentary gneiss samples were analysed. The TTG gneisses were predominantly retrogressed to amphibolite-facies; zircons showed a range of CL zoning patterns and REE profiles were similar to those expected for magmatic zircon grains. Zircons from the metasedimentary gneisses also displayed a range of CL zoning patterns and are depleted relative to chondrite in heavy REEs due to the presence of garnet. Zircon analysis records a spread of concordant U-Pb ages from ∼2500 to 3000 Ma. There is no evident correlation of ages with location in the crystal or with CL zoning pattern. A weighted average of 207Pb/206Pb ages from the oldest igneous zircon cores from the TTG gneiss samples gives an age of 2958 ± 7 Ma, interpreted to be a magmatic protolith crystallisation age. A weighted average of 207Pb/206Pb ages of the youngest metamorphic rims yields an age of 2482 ± 6 Ma, interpreted to represent the last high-grade metamorphism to affect these rocks. Ti-in-zircon thermometry records minimum temperatures of 710–834 °C, interpreted to reflect magmatic crystallisation. REE profiling enabled the zircons in the metasedimentary rocks to be linked to the presence of metamorphic garnet, but resetting of U-Pb systematics precluded the determination of either protolith or metamorphic ages. Zircons from the metasedimentary gneisses generally record higher minimum temperatures (803–847 °C) than the TTG gneisses, interpreted to record zircon crystallisation in an unknown protolith

Responding to global challenges in food, energy, environment and water: Risks and options assessment for decision-Making

We analyse the threats of global environmental change, as they relate to food security. First, we review three discourses: (i) ‘sustainable intensification’, or the increase of food supplies without compromising food producing inputs, such as soils and water; (ii) the ‘nexus’ that seeks to understand links across food, energy, environment and water systems; and (iii) ‘resilience thinking’ that focuses on how to ensure the critical capacities of food, energy and water systems are maintained in the presence of uncertainties and threats. Second, we build on these discourses to present the causal, risks and options assessment for decision-making process to improve decision-making in the presence of risks. The process provides a structured, but flexible, approach that moves from problem diagnosis to better risk-based decision-making and outcomes by responding to causal risks within and across food, energy, environment and water systems

Realizing resilience for decision-making

Researchers and decision-makers lack a shared understanding of resilience, and practical applications in environmental resource management are rare. Here, we define social-ecological resilience as a property of social-ecological systems that includes at least three main characteristics — resistance, recovery and robustness (the ‘three Rs’). We define socio-economic resilience management as planning, adaptation and transformational actions that may influence these system characteristics. We integrate the three Rs into a heuristic for resilience management that we apply in multiple management contexts to offer practical, systematic guidance about how to realize resilience