Axelrod, Joshua

English

Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law

Sustainable Development Law & PolicyVolume 12Issue 1 Fall 2011: Natural Resource Conflicts Article 13Water Crisis in the Murray-Darling Basin: AustraliaAttempts to Balance Agricultural Need withEnvironmental RealityJoshua AxelrodAmerican University Washington College of LawFollow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/sdlpPart of the Environmental Law CommonsThis Feature is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ AmericanUniversity Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Sustainable Development Law & Policy by an authorized administrator ofDigital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact fbrown@wcl.american.edu.Recommended CitationAxelrod, Joshua. "Water Crisis in the Murray-Darling Basin: Australia Attempts to Balance Agricultural Need with EnvironmentalReality." Sustainable Development Law & Policy 12, no. 1 (2011): 12, 51, 53.12 SuStainable Development law & policywater crisis iN the murray-darliNg BasiN: australia attemPts to BalaNce agricultural Need with eNviroNmeNtal realityby Joshua Axelrod*Overuse, pollution, increased salinity, and drought are threatening the water resources of Australia’s Murray-Darling River Basin (“MDB”), a drainage of twenty-three rivers that is home to more than two million people1 and generates nearly forty percent of Australia’s agri-cultural revenue.2 To address these threats, the Murray-Darling Basin Authority (“MDBA”) submitted the Guide to the Basin Plan (“Guide”) for public comment in October 2010, sparking controversy between the government and MDB’s agricultural communities.3 The Guide’s comprehensive sustainable water management strategies seek to balance human and environmental water needs.4 In an attempt to minimize the socio-economic impact of policy changes, the Australian government is buy-ing water allocations from farmers and investing in irrigation infrastructure improvements.5 Despite public opposition to these actions, aggressive sustainable water management strategies must nonetheless be implemented, and tied to environmental outcomes, if the MDB is to remain a key agricultural producer in the future.6Efforts to implement sustainable water use policies are recent innovations in Australia.7 The Australian states and territorial governments took significant steps to reform the management of overused rivers in 2004 with the ratification of the National Water Initiative.8 Since the Initiative, the Australian government has moved quickly to preserve scarce water resources. The 2007 passage of the Water Act gave Australia’s national government the legal authorization to create a centralized, independent agency9 to draft, implement, and enforce water use policy for the MDB.10 Soon after, the newly created MDBA began its work on the Guide.11 The Guide provides the scientific,12 economic,13 and sociologic14 rationale for a proposed Basin Plan that will be released in late 2011.15The Guide sets forth comprehensive and aggressive water use policies with the goal of stabilizing and improving the health of the MDB’s critical natural resources.16 To accomplish this goal, the Guide proposes four key management policies: sustainable diversion limits (“SDLs”), environmental quality benchmarks, state-level SDL compliance, and an efficient water market.17 SDLs will limit the volume of water that may be taken from a given river or aquifer;18 environmental benchmarks will measure river salinity, overall water quality,19 and wetland health;20 monitoring state-level SDL compliance will localize enforcement of water resource allocation;21 and an efficient water market will allow farmers to buy and sell allocated water resources to ensure a reliable revenue stream or increased water needs.22Critics of the Guide argue that there was a lack of public input during the planning process and that the proposed plan will have a disproportionate impact on the communities most dependent on the MDB’s water resources.23 Food processers,24 farmers,25 and irrigation organizations26 contest the MDBA’s reliance on economic models that show that the proposed water management changes will have minimal impacts on the overall MDB economy.27 They argue that economic assessments should have focused on short-term impacts to local and regional com-munities instead of nation-wide impacts.28 Individual citizens, meanwhile, suggest that the Guide’s proposals will lead to the continued economic and cultural decay of MDB cities and towns as residents relocate and abandon the MDB in search of eco-nomic stability.29However, the fundamental issue remains: Action is required if Australia’s scarce water resources are to be preserved. The MDB recently suffered the longest drought in recorded history and faces a predicted eleven percent decline in surface water availability by 2030.30 At the same time, water use in the MDB has increased from 2,000 gigaliters annually in the early 1900s to more than 10,000 gigaliters in 2010.31 The escalation of human water use coupled with historic drought illustrates the need for Basin-wide adaptation to diminished water resources if these resources are to remain viable in the future.32 Decision-makers must implement policies that require adaptation to declining water availability without compromising the overall economic vitality of the region.33 Though irrigated agriculture in the MDB is vital to Australia’s agricultural sec-tor,34 it represents only seven percent of the MDB’s economy.35 Thus, while reports to the MDBA suggest that there will likely be significant socio-economic impact on irrigation-dependent farmers36 and communities,37 actions can be taken to transition these communities to a more stable economic foundation.38 Eco-nomic diversification of local communities39 through flexible labor and capital markets seems to be the most viable option.40 Delaying reform because of community disappointment and apprehension presents a risk that the Australian government and local communities cannot afford to take.41 Still, it is important for the MDBA to consider community input in order to ensure * Joshua Axelrod is a J.D. candidate, May 2014, at American University Washington College of Law.continued on page 5151Fall 2011adoption of the forthcoming Basin Plan and eventual compliance with its standards.42 The MDBA faces the challenge of redirecting policy toward a future of sustainable water use that recognizes the vulnerability of the communities that will be affected most.43 As the Guide’s proposals are integrated into the forthcoming Basin Plan, the MDBA must show MDB communities how their input has been incorporated and how the central government’s policy decisions have the communities’ interests at heart.44 As proposed by the Guide, the Basin Plan, and its implementation, must provide a viable framework for balancing these considerations in order to ensure future water resource security, economic stability, and nec-essary environmental rehabilitation.45water crisis iN the murray-darliNg BasiN: australia attemPts to BalaNce agricultural Need with eNviroNmeNtal reality by Joshua Axelrod  continued from page 12the development of an island-wide master plan has been in the works for many years, but has been repeatedly delayed.21 This legacy of poor planning has fostered the island’s chronic sprawl, causing increased consumption of land even as population growth has slowed.22 By drafting and enacting a long-range master plan focused on resolving the island’s inefficient land use patterns and prioritizing natural resource conservation, policymakers have an opportunity to reverse this trend. Accompanied by transpar-ency, public participation and gubernatorial accountability, the approval of a comprehensive master plan could represent the best hope of protecting finite natural resources and promoting sustain-able economic development on one of the world’s most densely populated islands.23weak PlaNNiNg Process frustrates ProtectioN of Puerto rico’s threateNed coastliNe by Mark Borak  continued from page 23member-nations to establish the organization’s binding powers. The permanent-observer nations should argue that the impacts of fossil fuel development are of global concern and affect all nations.31 Therefore, proper safety and environmental standards are needed to ensure stable and sustainable development of the Arctic’s natu-ral resources, a goal to which the AC is already committed. The permanent-observer nations should also seek more influ-ence on the affairs of the AC in relation to fossil fuel develop-ment. Without usurping the position of the member-nations, the permanent-observer nations should demand some limited voting rights when the AC wishes to enact binding resolutions. Providing the permanent-observer nations with voting rights would allow more countries to voice their priorities and concerns, which may force the AC member-nations to consider the implications of their fossil fuel development plans on the global community. If the AC member-states wish to take advantage of the ben-efits of climate change in the Arctic, they should do so in a manner that also honors their Ottawa commitments and the AEPS. The international community, then, should pressure the AC to make changes to its structure and provide effective oversight of fossil fuel extraction in the Arctic. In turn, the AC should respond by making the Ottawa Declaration binding and enforceable upon member-nations, allocating voting power to the permanent-observer nations, and effectuating the needed regulations. the arctic couNcil: gatekeePer or doormat to the world’s Next maJor resource Battle?  by Oded Cedar  continued from page 4053Fall 2011115 See IPIS, supra note 19, at 71-72.116 See meike westerkamP et al., regioNal cooPeratioN iN the great lakes: a coNtriButioN to PeaceBuildiNg? (2009), http://www.initiativeforpeace building.eu/pdf/Regional_Cooperation_in_the_Great_Lakes_region.pdf.117 See generally IPIS, supra note 19, at 53 (describing a dispute between arti-sanal miners and a Canadian corporation’s rights under an exploration permit).118 Stephanie Matti, The Democratic Republic of Congo? Corruption, Patronage, and Competitive Authoritarianism in the DRC, 56 afr. today No.4 (2010).119 Id.Endnotes water crisis iN the murray-darliNg BasiN: australia attemPts to BalaNce agricultural Need with eNviroNmeNtal reality  continued from page 121 Fact Sheet: Managing Australia’s Water Resources, the murray-darliNg BasiN auth., http://mdba.gov.au/services/publications/managing-water-resources  (last visited Oct. 31, 2011) [hereinafter Fact Sheet].2 About the Basin, the murray-darliNg BasiN auth., http://www.mdba.gov.au/explore-the-basin/about-the-basin (last visited Oct. 31, 2011) [hereinafter About the Basin].3 See generally View Feedback Received in 2009 and 2010, the murray-darliNg BasiN auth., http://www.mdba.gov.au/have-your-say/view-feedback/feedback-received-2009-2010 (last visited Nov. 2, 2011).4 Fact Sheet, supra note 1.5 See Fact Sheet, supra note 1 (specifically the Water for the Future program which includes $9 billion (Aust.) for the Australian government to invest in the Restoring the Balance in the Murray-Darling Basin program and the Sustain-able Rural Water Use and Infrastructure program).6 See generally Brian D. Richter et al., Ecologically Sustainable Water Mgmt.: Managing River Flows for Ecological Integrity, 13 ecological aPPlicatioNs 206, 206-224 (2003) (advocating for the important benefits that healthy fresh-water ecosystems confer upon human society and the need for water manage-ment solutions that balance quantitative human water needs with the needs of the ecosystem the water is being taken from).7 deNis flett et al., the murray-darliNg BasiN auth., review of caP imPlemeNtatioN 2008-09 8 (2009), http://www.mdba.gov.au/files/publications/MDBA-REVIEW-OF-CAP-08-09-Nov09-web.pdf.8 Fact Sheet, supra note 1.9 Water Act 2007 (Austl.), http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2011C00621.10 Id.11 See About the Murray-Darling Basin Authority, the murray-darliNg BasiN auth., http://www.mdba.gov.au/about (last visited Oct. 31, 2011)  [hereinafter Murray-Darling Basin Authority].12 See The Science Used in Developing Water Requirements for the Basin Plan, the murray-darliNg BasiN auth., http://mdba.gov.au/draft-basin-plan/science-draft-basin-plan/science-used-water (last visited Oct. 31, 2011). 13 aBare, eNviroNmeNtally sustaiNaBle diversioN limits iN the murray-darliNg BasiN: socioecoNomic aNalysis 3-4 (2010), http://www.mdba.gov.au/files/bp-kid/1071_Eviron_MDBA_2010_report.pdf.14 See generally marsdeN JacoB associates et al., ecoNomic aNd social  Profiles aNd imPact assessmeNts for the murray-darliNg BasiN PlaN x (2010) http://www.mdba.gov.au/files/bp-kid/1074-Marsden-synthesis.pdf.15 See Draft Basin Plan, the murray-darliNg BasiN auth., http://mdba.gov.au/draft-basin-plan.16 Murray-Darling Basin Authority, supra note 11.17 Fact Sheet, supra note 1.18 mark hamstead et al., water PlaNNiNg iN the murray-darliNg BasiN: curreNt Practices aNd oPtioNs for diversioN limits 4 (2009), http://www.mdba.gov.au/files/bp-kid/1205-water-planning-mdba.pdf.19 Fact Sheet, supra note 1.20 alluvium, key ecosystem fuNctioNs aNd their eNvtl. water reQuire-meNts 92 (2010), http://www.mdba.gov.au/files/bp-kid/1187-Alluvium-2010- final-published-report.pdf.21 See froNtier ecoNomics, structural adJustmeNt Pressures iN the  irrigated agriculture sector iN the murray-darliNg BasiN vi (2010),  http://www.mdba.gov.au/files/bp-kid/392-Frontier-Economics-2010-adjustment-report-Final-for-public-release.pdf.22 Id.23 See eBc et al., cmty. imPacts of the guide to the ProPosed murray- darliNg BasiN PlaN. volume 1: executive summary 5 (2011), http://www.mdba.gov.au/files/bp-kid/257-EBC-Vol1-exec-summary.pdf.24 See generally macQuarie river food & fiBre, suBmissioN to the murray-darliNg BasiN auth. oN the guide to the ProPosed BasiN PlaN 3 (2010), http://www.mdba.gov.au/files/submissions/Macquarie%20River%20Food%20and%20Fibre%201%20of%202.pdf. 25 Nat’l farmers’ fed’N, Nff suBmissioN to guide to the ProPosed BasiN PlaN 6 (2010), http://www.mdba.gov.au/files/submissions/National_Farmers _Federation.pdf.26 See macQuarie river food & fiBre, supra note 21, at 3; Nat’l farmers’  fed’N, supra note 23, at 6; Nat’l irrigators’ couNcil, suBmissioN to the “guide to the ProPosed murray-darliNg BasiN PlaN” 4 (2010), http://www.mdba.gov.au/files/submissions/National_Irrigators_Council.pdf.27 aBare, supra note 12, at 25-28.28 macQuarie, supra note 25, at 4.29 See kareN roBertsoN, oPiNioN suBmissioN letter oN mdBa PlaN, http://www.mdba.gov.au/files/submissions/Karen%20Robertson.pdf (last visited  Nov. 6, 2011).30 aBare, supra note 12, at 6.31 aBare, supra note 12, at 632 See generally Janet C. Neuman, Drought Proofing Water Law, 7 u. deNv. water l. rev. 92, 92-110 (2003) (discussing the impact of current water use law and policy on drought-prone western states and the need for a rethinking of water use policy that addresses water allocation rights, crop planning, subsidies, efficiency, conservation, data collection and monitoring, with a goal of “greater appreciation of water as a precious and finite resource”).33 eBc et al., supra note 20, at 4-5.34 About the Basin, supra note 2.35 eBc et al., supra note 20, at 7.36 marsdeN JacoB assocs. et al., supra note 13, at xv.37 eBc et al., supra note 20, at 4.38 Id. at 11.39 Id. at 4.40 Id. at 11.41 See generally Alon Tal, Seeking Sustainability: Israel’s Evolving Water Management Strategy, 313 scieNce 1081, 1081-1084 (2006) (examining Israel’s ongoing water use management challenges due to a fundamental lack of water resources and the innovations and policies that have allowed per capita water usage to remain flat for forty years despite a continuing rise in the standard of living).42 eBc et al., supra note 20, at 12.43 See generally weNtworth grouP of coNcerNed scieNtists, the urgeNt ProvisioN of water to the cooroNg aNd lower lakes (2008), http://www. wentworthgroup.org/uploads/1.%20Urgent_Provision_of_Water.pdf (urging  significant reductions in water usage within the Murray-Darling Basin to minimize the environmental and economic damage from overuse of water resources).44 See generally Robin Gregory et al., Bringing Stakeholder Values into Environmental Policy Choices: A Community-based Estuary Study Case, 39 ecological ecoNomics 37, 37-52 (2001) (examining past environmental policy failures due to a lack of community input or involvement, controversial science, and the promise to use minimal funding wisely and proposing a model for future success in community involvement in development and implementation of water management policy).45 See Generally Dan A. Tarlock & Lora A. Lucero, Connecting Land, Water, and Growth, 34 urB. law. 971, 971-980 (2002) (discussing the need for future water management policies that recognize that the limits of water resource usage have been reached and that future planning will require a comprehensive water use policy that includes a centralized planning and enforcement scheme, greater community input, informed decision-making, and constant monitoring with the goal of improving water resource allocation, land-use policy, and water conservation).

Water Crisis in the Murray-Darling Basin:
Australia Attempts to Balance Agricultural
Need with Environmental Reality

https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1500&amp;context=sdlp

Water Crisis in the Murray-Darling Basin: Australia Attempts to Balance Agricultural Need with Environmental Reality

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law