Institutions for Interstate Water Resources Management
Lynn Mandarano
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Abstract
This paper evaluates alternative approaches to management of interstate water resources in the United States (U.S.), including interstate compacts, interstate associations, federal-state partnerships, and federal-interstate compacts. These governance structures provide alternatives to traditional federalism or U.S. Supreme Court litigation for addressing problems that transcend political boundaries and functional responsibilities. Interstate compacts can provide a forum for ongoing collaboration and are popular mechanisms for allocating water rights among the states. Federal-interstate compacts, such as the Delaware River Basin Compact and federal-state partnerships, such as the National Estuary Program, are also effective and complementary approaches to managing water resources. However, all of these approaches can only make modest improvements in managing water resources given the complicated and fragmented nature of our federalist system of government.
Related papers
Institutions for Interstate Water Resources Management 1
JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 2008
This paper evaluates alternative approaches to management of interstate water resources in the United States (U.S.), including interstate compacts, interstate associations, federal-state partnerships, and federal-interstate compacts. These governance structures provide alternatives to traditional federalism or U.S. Supreme Court litigation for addressing problems that transcend political boundaries and functional responsibilities. Interstate compacts can provide a forum for ongoing collaboration and are popular mechanisms for allocating water rights among the states. Federal-interstate compacts, such as the Delaware River Basin Compact and federal-state partnerships, such as the National Estuary Program, are also effective and complementary approaches to managing water resources. However, all of these approaches can only make modest improvements in managing water resources given the complicated and fragmented nature of our federalist system of government.
Federalism and U.S. Water Policy: Lessons for the Twenty-First Century
Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 2005
This article traces five historical streams of water policy in the United States, revealing the strain and stresses of intergovernmental relations pertaining to water resource management. It finds that water policy is increasingly characterized by pragmatic federalism emphasizing collaborative partnerships, adaptable management strategies, and problem and process orientation. The evolving nature of federal-state relations, characterized by expanding federal authorities and increased state capacity, coupled with a rise of local watershed groups and greater ecological concern, calls for improved coordination. Yet challenges resulting from policy fragmentation and ecosystem complexity remain. Continued calls for greater integration will likely be heard as federal-state relations continue to evolve. Water policy is increasingly complex today, with multiple decision forums, institutional arrangements, policy tools-and an ever-increasing number of stakeholders. There is no real national water policy in the United States but rather fragmented, incremental crisis-driven policy. The federal-state relationship is at the heart of this conflict. A struggle between national supremacy and local autonomy pervades water management. For well over fifty years, scientific and legal experts alike have called for a comprehensive national water policy. 1 But any attempt to develop a cohesive and fair water policy for the twenty-first century without a clear understanding of the history of U.S. water policy would be folly. A study of the past 250 years of U.S. water policy reveals important patterns, themes, and behaviors. Lessons from the past can and should inform the future and guide policymakers today. To presume a tabula rasa and ignore the layers of history from which the current flawed U.S. water policy has been built only dooms us to repeat the same mistakes. One such way to view the past is through the lens of federalism. As in many political arenas, the historical role that the federal government has played with regard to water policy is at once informative, fascinating, and schizophrenic. Analogous to a river or stream, the relationship of the federal government to other interested parties,
Transboundary Water Governance in New England: A Case Study of the New England Interstate Water Compact Commission
This thesis presents a case study of an interstate water pollution control compact. An interstate compact is an agreement aimed at improving cooperation and conflict resolution between two or more states. 1 The legal basis for interstate compacts is found in the United States Constitution, Article I, Section 10. 2 In this thesis, I establish three research questions. First, I examine the approaches and institutions associated with regulating and protecting interstate waters of the United States. I then focus on interstate river and water quality commissions, looking to ascertain their actual and potential roles in improving transboundary coordination of water pollution control and management. Finally, I focus on the New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission, (NEIWPCC), to assess if it effectively achieves interstate coordination, and the ways in which its role, structure, and activities could be improved.
The Uneasy Hierarchy of Federal and State Water Laws and Policies
… Water Research and …, 2011
Water allocation in the West is regulated by a volcanic hierarchy of federal and state laws and policies. Eruptions have increased in frequency as states and their citizens lament the increasing control that the federal government has begun to exert over several western river basins pursuant to federal statutes such as the Endangered Species Act. 1 For example, at a recent conference investigating how Columbia and Snake River irrigators can improve habitat for endangered and threatened anadromous fish species, Washington Senator Marilyn Rasmussen, chairwoman of the Senate Agriculture and Rural Economic Development Committee, bluntly asserted that "[t]he federal government needs to butt out-this is our state." 2 Such assertions deserve profound scrutiny because of the frequency with which they are expressed in regional public water policy meetings; the influential positions of state officials who adhere to them; and most importantly, the barriers they create between federal and state officials in several ongoing cooperative attempts to resolve the serious environmental problems vexing the region. Accordingly, we consider why the federal government has intervened in water policy (an area typically perceived to be within the purview of states), and explore the parameters of actual and potential federal intervention. We also examine the problems with relying on traditional state policy to allocate water among competing private and public uses in the modern era without continued federal intervention. FEDERAL INTERVENTION IN STATE WATER ALLOCATION POLICY The federal government has intervened in state water policy to finance large-scale water projects, secure water legislatively earmarked for Indian reservations, protect public water uses, determine the constitutionality of state restrictions on interstate water transfers, and resolve interstate water disputes. These functions often have been undertaken in response to either a state request or a federal obligation to protect public interests neglected in state water allocations. Federal Water Development States traditionally accommodated increased demands for water by expanding supplies (Gould 1988). Water development took the form of dams, associated water impoundment reservoirs, and long-distance canal systems. The expense of such major development went beyond the financial capabilities of individual farmers, cooperative associations of farmers, and the governments of small western states and territories. Moreover, private investment companies generally viewed such projects as overly risky and capital-intensive. Consequently, western brought to you by CORE View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk
Developing a More Holistic Approach to Water Management in the United States
Social Science Research Network, 2006
the states, and local governments all have different roles to play in relation to water rights, the protection of water-based ecosystems, and land use in the United States. In this Article, Prof William Andreen argues that a better understanding of the relationship between land use and water and an improved institutional ability to act on that understanding, is needed in order to truly improve our aquatic resources. He also presents several reforms that could be made within the existing legal structure to better integrate U.S. land and water policy. 3. For a thorough discussion of the services supplied by freshwater systems, see Sandra Postel & Stephen Carpenter, Freshwater Ecosystem Services, in NATURE'S SERVICES: SOCIETAL DEPENDENCE ON NATURAL ECOSYSTEMS 195 (Gretchen C. Daily ed.
America's water. Federal roles and responsibilities
Environment International, 1994
Water Federalism
The existing Constitutional, as well as the institutional frameworks for sharing of water between the Cente and the states, leave many gaps that must be addressed effectively. Citizens must also use this precious resource responsibly, with heavy penalties for wastage or negligent preservation and conservation. These challenges can only be addressed only through effective horizontal and vertical coordination among governments in a true spirit of cooperative federalism.
Groundwater governance in the United States: a mosaic of approaches
2017
Groundwater is an important water supply for meeting municipal, industrial, and agricultural water demands and for supporting riparian and other ecological systems in the United States (U.S.). Effective groundwater governance is therefore crucial to the wise use of this largely non-renewable resource (recharge rates are slower than extraction rates). While minimum, federally-established drinking-water quality and water-discharge regulations do exist, the framework of the laws and regulations governing groundwater use in this country is highly decentralized. Each state determines its own groundwater priorities and governance approaches, with the further potential for states to delegate significant responsibilities to sub-state jurisdictions. Painting the groundwater governance picture in the U.S. with a single brushstroke is therefore impossible; a more refined analysis is required to characterize the mosaic of groundwater governance priorities and approaches. In this chapter, we rep...
The Walla Walla Way: Reevaluating the Role of State and Local Stakeholders in an Integrated Water Resource Management Approach
Water Resources Management, 2007
Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) has been touted as an innovative solution to water management problems, and yet it lacks a clear definition or executable framework. IWRM is best understood by examining how it has been conceptualized and successfully implemented in watersheds throughout the world. Case studies provide tangible models that can inform the efforts of water managers as they seek to coordinate diverse conservation efforts and balance competing demands placed on depleted water supplies. This paper presents a case study of a water management initiative in the Walla Walla watershed that seeks to integrate the interests and resources of the state with the needs of local entities to better manage water resources. Traditional approaches to water resource management under Washington water law have divided citizens and created an adversarial relationship between water users and the government agencies that regulate them. This paper outlines the problems posed by Washington water law as it currently exists, explains the problems that have emerged in the Walla Walla watershed under this system, and discusses state and local initiatives that have the potential to resolve these problems and revise water law and water management in the state consistent with IWRM principles.
Governance, Policy, and Economics of Intergovernmental River Basin Management G. J. Kauffman 2015
This article examines governance, policy, and economic complexities of intergovernmental river basin management. The watershed or river basin approach is examined within the context of integrated water resources management as a means to efficiently manage interstate river systems. Organizational, institutional, and budget structures of watershed management models are explored and benchmarked with economic performance measures of prototypical river basin commissions in the United States. River basin organizations such as the Delaware River Basin Commission have the requisite authority under Federal/state compact to manage a river as a single entity provided financial structures are in place to sustainably fund water resources programs in interstate basins. To sustainably finance watershed programs, river basin governance organizations would benefit from revisiting the economic user pays principles long practiced in Europe, Latin America, and Oceania and advocated by the continental-scale European Union Water Framework Directive.
Water Law as Watershed Endeavour: Federal Inactivity as an Opportunity for Local
Initiative
Journal of Environmental Law and Practice, 2015
While the federal government has steadily lightened its regulatory role over aspects of federal jurisdiction that influence provincial water management, this jurisdictional space has provided opportunities for sub-national arrangements that address environmental protection. First Nations, provincial and local governments are creating collaborative ecosystem-based management regulations and initiatives that respond to the ecological governance imperatives of planning at a watershed scale, protecting environmental flows, linking decisions about land and water, and adaptive management. Ecological monitoring, watershed-scale planning, decision-making resulting from treaties, protection of riparian areas and watersheds, and water law reform in the west all feature prominently in these sub-national approaches. Any federal action in the future that affects water will be challenged to support these appropriately scaled regulations and decision-making.
Institutional Innovations to Govern Environmental Water in the Western United States: Lessons for Australia’s Murray-Darling Basin
Economic Papers: A journal of applied economics and policy, 2011
Governance Arrangements for Integrated Water Resources Management in Ontario, Canada, and Oregon, USA: Evolution and Lessons
Water
Guidelines produced by some major international organisations create a misleading impression that Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) can be implemented in a standardized fashion. However, contextual conditions vary from place to place, and differences in beliefs, attitudes, customs, and norms sensibly influence interpretation and implementation. Experiences with IWRM in Oregon (USA) and Ontario (Canada) are examined with regard to scope, scale, responsibility, engagement, finances and financing, and review processes and mechanisms. Development of IWRM and the evolution of governance have been shaped by different concerns and beliefs. Oregon has adopted a locally-driven and entrepreneurial approach, whereas Ontario developed a co-operative inter-governmental approach. In both cases, IWRM governance has also evolved due to changes in funding and priorities, which have benefitted some catchments and communities more than others. Both cases provide positive examples of reflexi...
Groundwater Governance in the United States: Common Priorities and Challenges
Groundwater, 2014
Groundwater is a critical component of the water supply for agriculture, urban areas, industry, and ecosystems, but managing it is a challenge because groundwater is difficult to map, quantify, and evaluate. Until recently, study and assessment of governance of this water resource has been largely neglected. A survey was developed to query state agency officials about the extent and scope of groundwater use, groundwater laws and regulations, and groundwater tools and strategies. Survey responses revealed key findings: states' legal frameworks for groundwater differ widely in recognizing the hydrologic connection between surface water and groundwater, the needs of groundwater‐dependent ecosystems, and the protection of groundwater quality; states reported a range in capacity to enforce groundwater responsibilities; and states have also experienced substantial changes in groundwater governance in the past few decades. Overall, groundwater governance across the United States is fra...
Complementary safeguards for robust regional watershed governance in a federation: New York City and its municipal water supply
A B S T R A C T In federations such as the United States, governments at various levels are experimenting with new watershed governance arrangements to protect water quality for both ecosystem health and human consumption. Such arrangements may bring previously uncooperative governments together to credibly commit to resource protection under the auspices of new and intricate formal institutions. Given the risks of cooperation, theory indicates that a robust arrangement will contain means of holding governing actors accountable to each other. This paper examines a purportedly successful case, the New York City watershed governance arrangement, to identify how safeguards against intergovernmental opportunism promote lasting cooperation. Using the qualitative method of process tracing, this paper finds that the New York City watershed governance arrangement uses structural, judicial, and popular safeguards against opportunistic behaviors by governing actors that might threaten the resource or the arrangement. The results indicate that such safeguards are present and interact with other safeguards and rule institutions at the state and federal level to maintain compliance.
Related topics
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.