Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
complicated by different legislative and administrative arrangements between states,
and by the different character of hydrological systems and water dependent ecosystems
between states (and within states).
Water is used predominantly by the private sector, while ownership and service
provision for water is predominantly in public hands - hence a clash between public
stewardship and private extraction. Historically in Australia, public and private
interests have coalesced around a common desire to develop the water resource for
economic return. However, the absence of scarcity pricing for water in rural settings
(for historic and practical reasons), combined with the immaturity of water markets,
leaves unanswered questions about water moving to its highest value uses, and whether
governments are extracting adequate rents from water as a scarce resource.
There is a need for adaptive management of a highly variable resource versus the need
for entitlement security for those investing in the resource for production.
Policy settings which are possibly ahead of the scientific understanding of the resource.
In Australia, policy has largely moved from a 'develop the water resource' through to a
'manage for the environment' mindset. However, the science and practice of managing
for freshwater dependent ecosystems is not as sophisticated as the policy requires, or
that the scientific understanding has not answered important policy questions. Hence
there is a risk that the policy will be inadequately implemented, for example that
productive values will continue to dominate over ecosystem needs because commercial
imperatives can be articulated in practice more readily than ecological needs.
The disparity in water management practices between urban and rural sectors, and the
emerging competition between these sectors for water. It is true that such competition
could have some significant local effects, although the effect will be small in aggregate.
The increasing reuse of waste water in rural and industrial settings as a substitute for
potable supply will also mean that competition between urban and rural use is unlikely
to be a zero sum gain for rural uses. Competition for the resource is complicated by
disparate approaches to water management in rural Australia compared with the cities,
in areas such as pricing, water accounting (almost universal metering in cities versus
less accurate/comprehensive measurement for rural uses), and differing notions of
integrated water cycle management.
Catchment scale planning and water management versus centralised policy setting and
regulation. There is an undeniable need for engagement at catchment level (through
water planning and, in some states, managing water for the environment), combined
with a sizeable need to grow people's and institutions' capacity at this scale to
understand and manage water resources. At the same time, governments are seeking to
ensure consistent policy settings and regulatory compliance across the state, across
large-scale river/artesian basins, or even nationally.
The use of markets, planning and regulation to manage water. The mix of these three
types of instruments will be discussed further in this paper as one of the major issues
facing Australia's water management at present.
Search WWH ::




Custom Search