Rescaling water governance - Governing Transboundary Waters: Canada, the United States, and Indigenous Communities - page 81

realities of the political borders may impede such approaches. Fischhendler and
Feitelson (2005) make an interesting case that reducing the scope of transboundary
management of water to include just the border waters, rather than encompassing
the whole river basin, is more effective because it minimizes external players and
lowers political costs. The recent data harmonization project coordinated by the
United States Geological Survey (USGS), the International Joint Commission, and
Environment Canada exemplifies this “border focus” approach (Figure 4.2). The
IJC describes the importance of the data harmonization project on their website:
When data stewards are able to “sing from the same songbook” they can paint
a seamless portrait of what we know on the landscape. Having different data
protocols and standards in the US and Canada made the reaching the potential
of applying GIS to local transboundary watersheds especially challenging. Not
only do the two countries use different data collection methods, they use
different measurement standards - like “feet” instead of “metres” - and may
also use different names for the same rivers.
A strategic priority for the IWI, IJC's Transboundary Data Harmonization (TDH)
Task Force, has worked with federal, provincial, state, and local agencies to
Figure 4.2 Map of Canada-U.S. Transboundary Hydrographic Data Harmonization
project.
Source: IJC, used with permission.