Charles Darwin University
Charles Darwin University's Institutional Digital RepositoryNot a member yet
143 research outputs found
Sort by
Assessment of the potential costs and benefits of water trading across northern Australia<br />
Full text linkSummaryThis report is the final of three reports and part of a two year project entitled Establishing water markets in northern Australia: a study to assess feasibility and consequences of market-based mechanisms of water delivery undertaken through the Australian National University’s Crawford School of Economics and Government. The Tropical Rivers and Coastal Knowledge (TRaCK) hub funded this project under Theme 6.1 “Sustainable Enterprises”. This research is also being done in collaboration with the North Australian Indigenous Land and Sea Management Alliance (NAILSMA).This third report provides an assessment of the potential costs and benefits of water markets across northern Australia with consideration of efficiency, equity and effectiveness criteria. The region under focus is the tropical belt of northern Australia which comprises the jurisdictions of Queensland, Northern Territory and Western Australia, (with attention on the Gulf, Timor and North East drainage divisions).Water trading is at a formative stage in northern Australia, with few (if any) recorded trades at the time of writing. Markets have been effective in southern Australia in providing flexibility to irrigators and supporting productivity through reallocation during drought. Markets under the National Water Initiative (NWI) are seen as an effective tool to optimise economic, social and ecological values associated with water.There are preconditions for a water market to be effective. Important is for there to be low to medium transactions costs. A transaction cost is the costs involved in executing a trade that are above and beyond the actual price paid for the water (they can include travel time, fees, title searches and other costs). The potential for high and increased transactions costs is significant across northern Australia. A key reason for this is uncertainty over Indigenous rights and interests to water, which if not resolved could impose constraints on water markets. This suggests that there must be greater certainty around Indigenous involvement in water markets.There are environmental costs associated with water markets. Experience in the Murray Darling Basin highlights there have been environmental impacts from water trading (though it is acknowledged that it is difficult to separate these impacts from the effects of drought and increased development). These impacts include increased salinity, and effects from the physical change in the timing and location of water use. One outcome of the development of water markets in southern Australia was the activation of sleeper and dozer entitlements- this meant more water was being used. Across northern Australia most rivers are not perennial, there is a reliance on groundwater and the expansion of storages is constrained There is the potential in northern Australia for environmental impacts from trade. These impacts include: increased salinity in-stream; water logging from more on-farm use; saltwater intrusion because of reduced flows; and during the dry increased nutrient loads could threaten the health of rivers. These issues can be addressed through management efforts. For example, in the Ord, water managers have increased dry season flows to disperse nutrients from agricultural activity.Efficiency is key aim of water markets. Economic efficiency arises when all the gains from trade have been exhausted and the costs imposed on others from water use have been fully accounted for in the decision making of water users. Any assessment of efficiency of water markets, however, requires more than simply a comparison of quantified private costs and benefits. This is because, typically, water markets have been implemented only for consumptive uses of water and the effects of water use on downstream users and the environment have typically been ignored or not fully considered. Any assessment of efficiency in the north must seek to integrate customary or ecological values, but it is acknowledged that this is complex as these values are intangible and difficult to quantify.Issues of equity are important in the transition to water access rights. In the north, equity should be given increased prominence because there is a significant Indigenous population in the region who are subject to chronic socioeconomic disadvantage. In allocating property rights to water there will need to be consideration of Indigenous Australians. Including Indigenous people in water markets through a structure that is appropriate will offer challenges to policy makers. Quantifying the amounts of water to be provided for consumptive purposes and non consumptive purposes (such as spiritual values) is also complex. There will need to be considerable Indigenous community consultation to ensure principles of equity are upheld. Water planning should provide important parameters to ensure Indigenous customary aspirations are not threatened by water trading. There will need to be consideration of surface and groundwater connectivity, and the effect of extraction on groundwater dependent ecosystems, which are of high importance to Indigenous people in the region. These parameters should be reflected in trading rules. Ongoing Indigenous collaboration and engagement in water allocation is essential- such efforts should be underpinned by capacity development.The concept of water markets can be politically contentious. In our first work for this project, community opposition was identified as a key barrier to the development of water markets by research participants. However, it is important to emphasise that a slender majority of all respondents in our second study agreed that water markets would be useful in their region. Indigenous respondents were more likely to agree that water markets would be useful. But respondents imposed conditions on how markets should operate. Respondents placed a high value on environmental and cultural assets, and Indigenous involvement in water markets was important. It was suggested by participants that there is required more community awareness on water reform and on water markets. There is little awareness that markets can support the optimisation of environmental, economic and social values to water (which is an overarching objective of the NWI).Non market approaches may be more appropriate in some areas than markets. Markets are efficient in optimising the allocation of water where scarcity and competition exist. Markets may by themselves be incapable of achieving ecological or equity outcomes. A blend of approaches to allocating water may be more suitable. There is a growing trend in water management for increased collaboration and stakeholder driven governance approaches. Central to these approaches are inclusivity and capacity building. Collaborative efforts provide a structure for stakeholders to develop rules over allocation and management of water, as well rules for enforcement and compliance. Efforts will be required to include Indigenous interests in collaborative approaches. A key barrier in the experience of collaborative approaches in New Zealand is uncertainty around customary rights to water. Uncertainty over customary rights exists across northern Australia, and has the potential to reduce collaboration between stakeholders and constrain water planning and management efforts. Resolving Indigenous rights to water through creation of Indigenous property rights may address this uncertainty
Stakeholder values and attitudes towards water markets across northern Australia<br />
Full text linkSummaryThis report is the second of three reports and part of a two year project entitled Establishing water markets in northern Australia: a study to assess feasibility and consequences of market-based mechanisms of water delivery undertaken through the Australian National University’s Crawford School of Economics and Government. The Tropical Rivers and Coastal Knowledge (TRaCK) hub funded this project under Theme 6.1 “Sustainable Enterprises”. This research is also being done in collaboration with the North Australian Indigenous Land and Sea Management Alliance (NAILSMA). This second report provides analysis of stakeholder attitudes and values and their implications for the design of water markets across tropical Queensland, Northern Territory and Western Australia, (with focus on the Gulf, Timor and North East drainage divisions). The study utilised a mixed qualitative and quantitative approach, employing a survey with closed ended (5 point Likert scales and multiple choice) and open ended measures.In Task 2 we surveyed 120 people from government, Indigenous, industry and recreational user groups and present a range of values and attitudes related to markets and we discuss the general implications for market design in the north. Analysing data from open ended measures involved coding and grouping data into categories, then identifying patterns and themes. While statistical analysis involved ordered probit models, using robust standard errors and also controlling for lack of independence within each group using cluster. Preliminary findings were sent out to respondents for their feedback and where appropriate changes made. From this the final report was produced.Our findings highlight that sustainability; environmental protection; social justice and equity; and economic development were important values to respondents in relation to water markets. Respondents emphasised the importance of robust water planning frameworks that support ecological values and irrigator and Indigenous livelihoods, and respondents overwhelmingly disagreed with the trade of environmental and cultural flows. There was also significant support for the preservation of certain catchments and aquifers for their unique values (particularly among Indigenous respondents). Social justice and equity were important to respondents, with a sentiment to include Indigenous people in water reform and in water markets. Indigenous respondents felt that current arrangements were not equitable. As well, respondents from government, Indigenous and recreational groups felt that consultation and water policy fail to adequately address the needs and interests of Indigenous Australians. Indigenous respondents showed support for water markets, the development of water based enterprise (such as agriculture and horticulture) and believe strongly that the benefits of water trading will be significant. These views were tempered by some concerns that Indigenous people may be alienated from markets and that the ecological impacts from markets could be significant.Respondents felt that water management was sustainable in their region, but at the same time they did not believe water management to be efficient. This may be related to perceptions that certain systems are not over-allocated to consumptive users. A little over half of respondents agreed that water markets help sustainable water management and that water should be a tradable commodity, and respondents that were male and had a higher education were more likely to agree to these statements. Support for separating land and water title (unbundling) was mixed, with Indigenous respondents less likely to agree to a separation. There is a level of understanding of water management in their jurisdictions were more likely to agree to water transfers. There was unanimous support for government involvement in water markets, with overwhelming support for government as regulator.Literature highlights that importance of integrating values and attitudes in resource management frameworks. We identify four general implications for the design of water markets from our findings. The first is that Indigenous involvement in water markets and reform is important as one way to address Indigenous disadvantage and to support Indigenous livelihoods. This involvement could range from water management and planning, to the recognition of customary and commercial rights. Second, respondents thought that the general community should have greater involvement in water management and planning. This would require education programs to improve awareness of reform and increased support for stakeholder input into reform, particularly where language barriers and cultural differences exist. Third, given the importance of sustainability and environmental protection, it is recommended that markets develop within a planning framework, with robust but simple trading rules to protect ecological and customary values. Fourth it was emphasised by some respondents that there should be minimal red tape and costs associated with markets given the marginal operating conditions for producers across the north.Further research could build on this exploratory work to improve understanding of how to involve Indigenous interests in water markets, and examine the attitudes and values of a broader range of stakeholders across the north (such as examining women’s attitudes and values to water markets across the north)
Flow and fisheries: River flow impacts on estuarine prawns in the Gulf of Carpentaria<br />
Full text link
Collaborative Water Planning: Groundwater Visualisation Tool Guide<br />
Full text linkExecutive SummaryThe ‘Howard East’ Groundwater Visualisation Tool (GVT) was developed in 2009 as part of the Tropical Rivers and Coastal Knowledge (TRaCK) ‘Collaborative Water Planning’ project. The Project aimed to support water planning processes by providing best practice guidelines for collaborative planning, based on lessons learned from the trial of various planning tools. These guidelines also drew upon previous work undertaken through retrospective case studies in Queensland and Western Australia.This is a companion guide to the general case-study report (Nolan 2010). It specifically presents information for water planners considering the use of a GVT for the communities where they work. Based on the experience of a participatory process developed for the Howard East aquifer in rural Darwin, Australia, it provides an overview of the Howard East GVT, the process of development and financial resources that were required. In doing so, this guide aims to give planners the confidence to assess whether a similar application would be useful for their planning situation. The structure adopted for this guide is as follows: why developing a participatory groundwater visualisation model was considered useful; the steps taken for developing that model with community input; the outcomes achieved in the short term; finally a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the process.This GVT addresses stakeholder concerns identified in an extended stakeholder analysis (Nolan 2009). Within community groups there was a widespread lack of understanding of groundwater systems and processes, leading to misconceptions about the management, extraction amounts and origins of local groundwater resources. Findings also showed that there was a legacy of mistrust of government-driven planning processes as rural residents were concerned that water planning would lead to new charges for domestic bore water. Coupled together, these attitudes had a potential detrimental impact on the willingness and ability of local stakeholders to engage in forthcoming water planning processes.In response to the analysis the GVT was constructed to communicate hydrogeological dynamics, allowing stakeholders access to common information and aiding mutual understanding in the planning process. The visualisation tool was built on an in-house software package, Groundwater Visualisation System (GVS), developed by the Groundwater Systems Research Group of the Queensland University of Technology (QUT).The Groundwater Visualisation System software uses agency bore-monitoring data, bore drillers’ logs and a range of data sourced from within the local community to construct a visualisation model. Community information used in Howard East was generated through an engagement strategy which encouraged community, stakeholder and agency input into the model at key stages of its development. Stakeholder feedback sourced during the GVT’s development also enabled the tool to be tailored to meet local educational needs, and give stakeholders a sense of ownership of the final product. To facilitate stakeholder and community involvement, project researchers adopted a ‘joint fact finding’ approach that led to the development of a number of activities capable of generating a wide range of community data. Activities included local rainfall data collection by Landcare groups, participatory mapping exercises and interviews held with local bore drillers and community ‘experts’, individual bore surveys, and stakeholder and agency workshops generating feedback. Key stakeholders were also invited to review and give feedback on the accuracy and useability of the model when it was three quarters completed in a series of half-day workshops held at CSIRO, Darwin.The modelling component took seven months to complete. Updates and project information were disseminated widely through two public meetings, regular electronic newsletters, project information sheets, a dedicated project website, local print and radio channels and information posters displayed in public areas and events. Stakeholder groups were kept informed through personal communication and meetings which sought specific input. The community information strategy was a real strength of this project, drawing high levels of community engagement in local water planning processes.A final visualisation model was presented to the Howard East community in a public forum held in early September 2009. Training sessions were also held for invited stakeholders and agency staff in a ‘Training of the trainers’ format, attended by representatives of the Department of Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sport (NRETAS), local government, Shire Councils, Landcare groups, Power & Water, local school teachers and bore-drilling representatives. Compact discs housing both the GVT application and training manuals were distributed to trainees for uploading onto community and local government websites. In all cases, trainees nominated themselves as volunteers to assist other community members in learning to use the GVT application, potentially increasing its impact.Finally, the GVT approach was evaluated with stakeholders and agency staff through staged surveys and a focus group. Results showed that the vast majority of participants considered the model to be a useful educational tool that could improve the ability of the community to make informed decisions about groundwater management. The independence of the model construction by Queensland University of Technology, the treatment of NRETAS as equal to other stakeholders and the involvement of stakeholders throughout the modelling process increased the perceived public ‘trust’ of the model accuracy and increased the willingness of the public to utilise it.Between August and October 2009, the Howard East GVT was distributed to 15 leading community and local government stakeholders, presented on five local radio programs and uploaded onto four community websites. The model was presented in three public meetings, a water planners’ conference and three half-day stakeholder participation and training sessions. Overall, the research team spent over 120 hours conducting meetings, undertaking mapping exercises with government water planners and community experts and interviewing leading stakeholders. The results of the evaluation suggest that the GVT was useful in bridging gaps in the consultation process, and advanced the planning process through a common understanding of groundwater dynamics, limits to development, and specifically how the drawdown and aquifer recharge interplay over time
Collaborative Water Planning: Howard East Water Planning Project - Final Report<br />
Full text linkExecutive SummaryThe ‘Collaborative Planning Tools’ project was undertaken in rural Darwin, Northern Territory between August 2008 and October 2009, as one of two prospective case studies for the Tropical Rivers and Coastal Knowledge (TRaCK) research hub. This case study, trialled two planning tools: an extended stakeholder analysis and a participatory Groundwater Visualisation Tool (GVT), in full consultation with the rural Darwin community. It contributes to best practice guidelines for national collaborative water planning drawn from the outputs of a desktop review and two retrospective case studies conducted in Queensland and Western Australia.The case study aimed to supporting the Howard East water allocation planning process in rural Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia. The main objective of this study was to develop planning tools to assist the government agency responsible for water planning, the Department of Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sport (NRETAS), to identify local stakeholders directly impacted by local planning processes and to better understand their needs and interests. A further aim was to develop a collaborative planning tool to prepare and engage stakeholders to participate in the public planning process. This report is therefore useful for water planners and researchers interested in the design and application of collaborative planning tools in local communities new to water allocation planning. Its findings are also relevant for water planners and researchers interested in community engagement, as a number of strategies for engagement are trialled and evaluated.Five main activities were undertaken in the Howard East. Broadly, these were:1. Determining which stakeholders were directly and indirectly affected by local water planning processes.2. Identifying stakeholder issues of concern, knowledge about groundwater resources, capacity to participate in a public water planning process and preferences for engagement and communication. (Stakeholder analysis).3. Testing and adapting findings from the Extended Stakeholder Analysis.4. Selecting a tool to facilitate public participation in local water planning processes.5. Developing a groundwater visualisation tool of the Howard East Aquifer in full consultation with the Howard Springs community.Each step involved extensive consultation and community participation to maximise social learning outcomes and ensure that local hydrological knowledge contributed to the project aims. An extended stakeholder analysis was undertaken firstly to identify local stakeholder groups affected by planning and secondly to articulate their needs for participating in planning processes, their concerns about groundwater management and preferences for ongoing agency engagement. Findings showed that the preferred modes of communication within the community were face to face, such as public meetings, workshops and participatory mapping exercises, or web based being dedicated websites, electronic project newsletters, posters and information packages. Local media were also very useful for promoting case study findings to the broader public. Information obtained from the extended stakeholder analysis was used in the selection of the second tool.The GVT was developed through a research collaboration between NRETAS, Power and Water Corporation, CSIRO, Griffith University and the Queensland University of Technology between February and September 2009. The GVT was selected to address a number of stakeholder needs that were identified in the stakeholder analysis. These needs reflected a widespread lack of understanding of groundwater systems and processes within the community, leading to misconceptions about the management, extraction amounts and origins of local groundwater resources. When coupled with other findings, such as a legacy of mistrust of government-driven planning processes to manage groundwater resources, these attitudes were found to impact on the willingness of local stakeholders to engage in forthcoming water planning processes.The GVT was developed to become an educational tool with full consultation with the Howard Springs community who rely on the Howard East aquifer. Through community meetings, stakeholder workshops, bore surveys and participatory mapping exercises, members of the community were encouraged to contribute information for the visualisation tool and participate in several meetings with researchers. As a result, the GVT contained information from a wide range of sources, drawing on bore monitoring data from NRETAS, industry groups as well as local land care groups, bore drillers, council members and community members with significant expertise. Project newsletters, information kits and community meetings kept the broader community informed of progress at all stages of the tool development. In addition, selected stakeholders were also offered an opportunity to give feedback on the utility of the visualisation in workshops held at CSIRO when it was 70% complete.The final GVT was presented to the Howard East community in a public forum in early September 2009. At this meeting, the GVT was made freely available to the community. A training session was also offered to NRETAS agency staff and representatives from local government, Shire Councils, Landcare groups, industry groups, schools, universities and bore drillers. CDs housing the GVT application and training manuals were given to participants and made available for uploading onto community websites. In all cases, trainees nominated themselves as community volunteer focal points for others to seek assistance while learning to use the application.Finally, the extended stakeholder analysis and GVT was evaluated with stakeholders and NRETAS staff through staged evaluative surveys, specialised meetings and a focus group. Results showed that the majority of participants considered the GVT to be of use in improving the ability of the community to make informed decisions about groundwater management. Further, the independence of the GVT constructed by Queensland University of Technology, the treatment of NRETAS staff as equal to other stakeholders and the involvement of stakeholders throughout its development increased the perceived public ‘trust’ of the model accuracy and improved the willingness of the public to utilise it
Analysis of institutional arrangements and constraints affecting the establishment of water markets across northern Australia<br />
Full text linkThis report is the first of three reports and part of a two year project entitled Establishing water markets in northern Australia: a study to assess feasibility and consequences of market-based mechanisms of water delivery undertaken through the Australian National University’s Crawford School of Economics and Government. The Tropical Rivers and Coastal Knowledge (TRaCK) hub funded this project under Theme 6.1 “Sustainable Enterprises”. This research is being undertaken in collaboration with the North Australian Indigenous Land and Sea Management Alliance (NAILSMA). This first report provides analysis of current institutional arrangements and constraints affecting the establishment of water markets across tropical Queensland, Northern Territory and Western Australia, (with focus on the Gulf, Timor and North East drainage divisions).Research needs were identified by TRaCK and NAILSMA (and the Indigenous Water Policy Group), and from this structured interview questions were developed. Data collection involved a review of literature from a number of different sources (government, media and scholarly articles) and utilised qualitative interviews with 42 State, Territory, Commonwealth government officials, land council representatives and experts. Data was collected through structured personal interviews using an open ended format; telephone interviews were undertaken when face-to-face interviews were not possible. Most interviews were audio recorded, with transcripts sent back to all interviewees for confirmation. Findings were developed comparing multiple data sources, and sent out to interviewees for their feedback. Changes were made where appropriate and from this the final report was then produced.The research findings highlight that the jurisdictions analysed have the framework in place to support water markets, but some States have more robust frameworks in place (such as Queensland)— however, it is emphasised that the development and importance of water markets is influenced by the demand for water in each of the jurisdictions. This study found that all jurisdictions have focused on planning in the north and have taken a precautionary approach to implementing water reform. This approach has been implemented using best available knowledge, but it is informed by a recognition that generally there is a limited understanding of the characteristics of water resources across the north, as well as related ecological and cultural values. Several features are shared across jurisdictions including a desire to support Indigenous access to water that may be accommodated through an Indigenous reserve (which may include water for drinking, customary and consumptive purposes) or through an entitlement, or ablend of both. Including Indigenous people in water planning has been hampered by community capacity in the north and relevant governments are constrained in overcoming this challenge by limited resources. A key finding of the study is that inter-basin transfers are not, in general, supported by interviewees and, at present, cross border trading is highly circumscribed. Some concern was also raised about inclusion of mining activities in water markets.Various constraints were identified to the establishment of water markets across northern Australia. The key constraints identified generally across the north include physical limits to trade, knowledge gaps and legislative and institutional frameworks. In the Northern Territory, interviewees identified community attitude and values as being a major limitation on the establishment of water markets. In Queensland, the Wild Rivers Act 2005 which prescribes the intensity of water-based development in the north was viewed as a significant barrier to water trading. In Western Australia, land tenure issues, particularly native title processes were seen as being the most significant limitation (albeit indirect) to the establishment of water markets in the north. Despite these constraints, many respondents recognised that establishing a robust and cost effective water management framework has the potential to support sustainable development outcomes across the north
A statistical analysis of flood hydrology and bankfull discharge for the Daly River catchment, Northern Territory, Australia<br />
Full text linkExecutive SummaryThis report presents a flood frequency analysis for ten gauging stations within the Daly River catchment. A flood frequency analysis allows the estimation of the magnitude of selected flood quantiles, such as a 1 in 20 year flood, at particular gauging stations. A series of statistical relationships were developed to allow flood quantile estimation at ungauged locations. Finally, estimates of bankfull discharge and its corresponding recurrence interval were obtained from gauging station cross section, direct stream gaugings and rating curve data. Bankfull discharge in the Daly River catchment has a recurrence interval from less than two to more than eight years on average at the stations examined here