Integrating aquatic science and policy for improved water management in Australia
Moya Tomlinson A and Richard Davis B
A Ecosystem Management, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2350, Australia.
B National Water Commission, Canberra, ACT 2600, Australia.
C Corresponding author. Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Marine and Freshwater Research 61(7) 808-813 http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/MF09224
Submitted: 7 September 2009 Accepted: 11 February 2010 Published: 23 July 2010
Worldwide, science–policy integration across jurisdictional boundaries is emerging as a major challenge to sustainable water management. The Australian national water reforms require statutory provision for environmental outcomes in water plans, informed by the best available science. Assessments of progress towards this goal of scientifically rigorous environmental water provision indicate that, despite a multiplicity of effort in aquatic research and management, the pace of reform has been too slow for adequate protection of aquatic ecosystems. Although there are significant knowledge gaps, these are not the only obstacles to effective application of aquatic science in water plans. Progress on environmental water reform can be enhanced by recognising the cultural differences between science and policy, and by integrating communication and policy development activities from the outset of every applied science research program. Cross-jurisdictional progress in sustainable water management requires a comprehensive water research and policy development strategy using a toolbox of techniques to harness the considerable expertise and knowledge of aquatic scientists, policy makers and water planners in an integrated program to deliver the aquatic science applications called for by the national water reforms.
ARMCANZ/ANZECC (1996). National principles for the provision of water for ecosystems. Sustainable Land and Water Resources Management Committee Subcommittee on Water Resources Occasional Paper SWR No 3, Canberra.
Banks G. (2009). Evidence-based policy making: What is it? How do we get it? ANU Public Lecture Series, presented by ANZSOG, 4 February. Productivity Commission, Canberra. Available at http://www.pc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/85836/20090204-evidence-based-policy.pdf [Verified 28 May 2010].
Bensaude-Vincent B.2009A historical perspective on science and its “others”.Isis100359368
Borowski I.Hare M.2007Exploring the gap between water managers and researchers: difficulties of model-based tools to support practical water management.Water Resources Management2110491074doi:10.1007/S11269-006-9098-Z
Briggs S. V.2006Integrating policy and science in natural resources: why so difficult?Ecological Management & Restoration73739doi:10.1111/J.1442-8903.2006.00245.X
Commonwealth of Australia (2004). Intergovernmental agreement on a national water initiative. National Water Commission, Canberra.
Council of Australian Governments (1994). Water resource policy – communiqué and report of the working group on water resource policy. Environment Australia, Canberra.
Cullen P.1990The turbulent boundary between water science and water management.Freshwater Biology24201209doi:10.1111/J.1365-2427.1990.TB00319.X
Cullen P. (2006a). Flying blind – the disconnect between groundwater and policy. Address at the 10th Murray–Darling Groundwater Workshop. Canberra, 18–20 September 2006. Available at http://www.wentworthgroup.org/docs/Flying_Blind_Groundwater_&_Policy.pdf [Verified 28 May 2010].
Cullen P. (2006b). Science and politics – speaking truth to power. North American Benthological Society Conference, Anchorage, Alaska. Available at http://www.wentworthgroup.org/docs/Speaking_Truth_To_Power1.pdf [Verified 28 May 2010].
Cullen P. W.Norris R. H.Resh V. H.Reynoldson T. B.Rosenberg D. M.et al.1999Collaboration in scientific research: a critical need for freshwater ecology.Freshwater Biology42131142doi:10.1046/J.1365-2427.1999.00447.X
Cullen P., Whittington J., and Fraser G. (2000). Likely outcomes of the COAG water reforms. CRC for Freshwater Ecology, University of Canberra.
European Commission (2002). Communication of the Commission on the collection and use of expertise by the Commission: principles and guidelines. COM(2002) 713 final EC, Brussels. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/governance/docs/comm_expertise_en.pdf [Verified 28 May 2010].
Gibbons P.Zammit C.Youngentob K.Possingham H. P.Lindenmayer D. B.et al.2009Some practical suggestions for improving engagement between researchers and policy-makers in natural resource management.Ecological Management & Restoration9182186doi:10.1111/J.1442-8903.2008.00416.X
Healy S.2001Privileging process over ‘fact’: the Sydney water scare as ‘organised irresponsibility’.Science & Public Policy28123129doi:10.3152/147154301781781534
Hillman M.Brierley G.2002Information needs for environmental-flow allocation: a case study from the Lachlan River, New South Wales, Australia.Annals of the Association of American Geographers92617630doi:10.1111/1467-8306.00307
Hoppe R.2005Rethinking the science–policy nexus: from knowledge utilization and science technology studies to types of boundary arrangements.Poiesis Prax3199215doi:10.1007/S10202-005-0074-0
Irwin A. (1995). ‘Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development.’ (Routledge: London.)
Kroon F. J.Robinson C. J.Dale A. P.2009Integrating knowledge to inform water quality planning in the Tully-Murray basin, Australia.Marine and Freshwater Research6011831188doi:10.1071/MF08349
Lagacé E.Holmes J.McDonnell R.2008Science–policy guidelines as a benchmark: making the European Water Framework Directive.Area40421434doi:10.1111/J.1475-4762.2008.00836.X
Lake P. S.Bond N.Reich P.2007Linking ecological theory with stream restoration.Freshwater Biology52597615doi:10.1111/J.1365-2427.2006.01709.X
Lane M. B.Robinson C. J.2009Institutional complexity and environmental management: the challenge of integration and the promise of large-scale collaboration.Australasian Journal of Environmental Management161624
Likens G. E.Walker K. F.Davies P. E.Brookes J.Olley O.et al.2009Ecosystem science: toward a new paradigm for managing Australia’s inland aquatic ecosystems.Marine and Freshwater Research60271279doi:10.1071/MF08188
Macleod C. J. A.Blackstock K. L.Haygarth P. M.2008Mechanisms to improve integrative research at the science–policy interface for sustainable catchment management.Ecology and Society1348
Michaels S.2009Matching knowledge brokering strategies to environmental policy problems and settings.Environmental Science & Policy129941011doi:10.1016/J.ENVSCI.2009.05.002
Morton S. R.Hoegh-Guldberg O.Lindenmayer D. B.Hariss Olson M.Hughes L.et al.2009The big ecological questions inhibiting effective environmental management in Australia.Austral Ecology3419doi:10.1111/J.1442-9993.2008.01938.X
National Groundwater Committee (2004). Knowledge gaps for groundwater reforms. A strategic directions paper for water researchers, based on the outcomes of a national workshop held in Canberra 12–13 November 2003, hosted by the National Groundwater Committee. Available at http://www.environment.gov.au/water/publications/agriculture/pubs/ngc-knowledge-gaps-report.pdf [Verified 28 May 2010].
National Water Commission (2007). National water initiative: first biennial assessment of progress in implementation. National Water Commission, Canberra.
National Water Commission (2009). Australian Water Reform 2009: second biennial assessment of progress in implementation of the National Water Initiative. National Water Commission, Canberra.
Poff N. L.Richter B. D.Arthington A. A.Bunn S. E.Naiman R. J.et al.2010The ecological limits of hydrologic alteration (ELOHA): a new framework for developing regional environmental flow standards.Freshwater Biology55147170doi:10.1111/J.1365-2427.2009.02204.X
Quevauviller P.2006Science–policy interfacing in the context of the WFD implementation.Journal of Soils and Sediments6259261doi:10.1065/JSS2006.10.189
Redfield G. W.2000Ecological research for aquatic science and environmental restoration in south Florida.Ecological Applications109901005doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[0990:ERFASA]2.0.CO;2
Richter B. D.Warner A. T.Meyer J. L.Lutz K.2006A collaborative and adaptive process for developing environmental flow recommendations.River Research and Applications22297318doi:10.1002/RRA.892
Rogers K. H.2006The real river management challenge: integrating scientists, stakeholders and service agencies.River Research and Applications22269280doi:10.1002/RRA.910
Sutherland W. J.Armstrong-Brown S.Armsworth P. R.Brereton T.Brickland J.et al.2006The identification of 100 ecological questions of high policy relevance in the UK.Journal of Applied Ecology43617627doi:10.1111/J.1365-2664.2006.01188.X
Thoms M. C.Sheldon F.2002An ecosystem approach to determining environmental water allocations in Australian dryland river systems: the role of geomorphology.Geomorphology47153168doi:10.1016/S0169-555X(02)00085-5
van Wyk E.Breen C. M.Roux D. J.Rogers K. H.Sherwill T.et al.2006The Ecological Reserve: towards a common understanding for river management in South Africa.Water S.A.32403409
Webb J. A.Stewardson M. J.Chee Y. E.Schreiber E. S. G.Sharpe A. K.et al.2010Negotiating the turbulent boundary: the challenges of building a science–management collaboration for landscape-scale monitoring of environmental flows.Marine and Freshwater Research61798807
Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists (2003). ‘Blueprint for a National Water Plan.’ (WWF: Sydney.)
Winter T. C., Harvey J. W., Franke O. L., and Alley W. M. (1998). Ground water and surface water – a single resource. United States Geological Survey Circular 1139, Denver.
Young W. J., Scott A. C., Cuddy S. M., and Rennie B. A. (2003). Murray flow assessment tool – a technical description. Client Report, 2003. CSIRO Land and Water, Canberra. Available at http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/consultancy/2003/mfat_technical_description.pdf [Verified 28 May 2010].