Adaptation in the Water Sector: - IA de Investigación especializada en el MIT

Adaptation in the Water Sector:
Ciencia & Instituciones

Katharine L. Jacobs & Lester Snow

Abstracto: Water management activities involve a complex and interconnected web of science, infrastruc-
ture considerations, societal expectations, and institutional limitations that has evolved over time. Mucho
of the water management system’s current complexity developed in response to the interests of local water
users and land owners, historical water supply and demand issues, political demands, and water quali-
ty and environmental considerations. Climate change poses a new set of questions for water managers
and may require more flexible solutions than those that have evolved historically. Although the implica-
tions of changes in the climate on water supply and demand are recognized (if not well quanti½ed), ongoing
changes in temperature and precipitation, as well as the linkages between environmental and societal fac-
tores, lead to major uncertainties in future conditions. New tools, técnicas, and institutions will be needed
to sustain water supplies for communities and watersheds in the future.

People have been managing water and adapting to

surpluses and shortfalls since the dawn of civiliza-
ción, and especially since the early origins of agricul –
tura. There is evidence across the globe of thousands
of years of dam-building and canal construction to
direct water toward crops of various kinds. Though
the tools water managers use today are dramatically
more sophisticated than those used in the past and
the scale on which water managers work is much larg –
er in almost all cases, the activities are still very much
lo mismo: managing floods and shortages (droughts)
through harvesting and storing water above or un –
der ground, delivering water across long distances
through pipelines and canals, and using a variety of
technologies to increase water-use ef½ciency. Encima
the last one hundred and ½fty years, the invention
of turbine pumps and the development of multiple
sources of energy have led to increased pumping of
groundwater and the creation of signi½cant link-
ages between water availability and energy usage.

The story of adaptation to surpluses and shortages
is not new: climate and weather have always varied

KATHARINE L. JACOBS is the Di –
rec tor of the Center for Climate
Adap tation Science and Solutions
and Professor of Soil, Water and En –
vironmental Sciences at the Univer –
sity of Arizona.
LESTER SNOW is the Executive Di –
rector of the California Water Foun –
dación.

(*See endnotes for complete contributor
biographies.)

D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d

F
r
oh
metro
h

t
t

pag

:
/
/

d
i
r
mi
C
t
.

metro

i
t
.

mi
d
tu
d
a
mi
d
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d

F
/

1
4
4
3
5
9
1
8
3
0
6
3
6
d
a
mi
d
_
a
_
0
0
3
4
2
pag
d

b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t

oh
norte
0
8
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3

Adaptation
en el
Water
Sector:
Ciencia &
Instituciones

on timescales ranging from days to weeks
to decades and even centuries, y ahí
have always been “surprises” like the dust
bowl of the 1930s or the recently discovered
½fty-year megadroughts (documented
through tree ring studies) in the 1100s.1
But climate change and a variety of rapid-
ly evolving social factors add new dimen-
sions to the challenges of managing water
supplies. These challenges derive from the
fact that water managers must plan for a
future of increasing uncertainties, in clud –
ing potentially escalating storm intensity
and changes in flooding and droughts in –
teracting with natural variability on mul –
tiple timescales. Changes in the de mand
for water exacerbate the already com plex
water management picture, while other so –
cial, económico, and technological trends
also affect water demand across the United
Estados. Por ejemplo, rapid changes in
agua- use patterns are related to changes
in social values, such as recent decisions
to preserve instream water flows for the
ambiente, recreation, or the use of Na –
tive nations.

Underlying changes in land use and
shifts in both the location and type of water
demand are factors of great concern to
water managers in some regions. por ejemplo –
amplio, changes in agricultural irrigation
practices in the Great Plains and South-
eastern United States are seriously impact-
ing groundwater availability, as are new
practices to extract natural gas in Texas,
the Great Plains, and the Northeast. Alguno
of these changes in water demand may be
related to climate change, because recent
droughts have caused an increase in irri-
gated agriculture as opposed to dry-land
agriculture as farmers struggle to maintain
yields. But social factors have also impact –
ed water use in these regions in dramatic
maneras; consider, Por ejemplo, policy-driven
decisions to increase biofuel development.
It is clear, por lo tanto, that the challenges of
water management are multifaceted and

require a sophisticated understanding of
both natural and social processes.

Increases in emissions of greenhouse

gases (such as carbon dioxide and meth –
ane) are trapping more heat in the atmo –
sphere, leading to changes in the drivers of
the hydrologic cycle. These hydrologic
chang es are primarily due to higher air, sur –
rostro, and water temperatures. At higher
temperaturas, water evaporates more rap –
idly from plant leaves, soil, and the ocean’s
surface, and the atmosphere can hold more
water vapor. These changes af fect both the
demand for water (Por ejemplo, for urban
and agricultural irrigation) and the amount
of runoff in rivers. Be cause of the combi-
nation of higher temper atures and higher
water-vapor levels in the atmosphere, anuncio –
ditional escalation of the hy drologic cy cle
(including both in creased rainfall in ten –
sity and longer dry per iods) is expected over
time–even if glob al green house gas emis-
sions are re duced relatively soon. Re gard –
less of efforts to manage global emissions,
additional in creases in the average global
temperature due to emissions of carbon di –
oxide and other gases are a virtual certainty.
Even with ambitious reductions in car-
bon emissions (called “mitigation” by cli –
m ate scientists) it will take decades to slow
the pace of climate change. This is due in
part to the very slow rate of removal of car –
bon dioxide in the atmosphere: carbon
emis sions currently in the atmosphere will
be there for hundreds of years,2 so even
bajo- emissions scenarios used in climate
mod eling show an initial increase in total
carbon monoxide concentrations and con –
tinued warm ing through the middle of this
century.3

Changes in precipitation and runoff,
snow and ice melt, and sea-level rise are
associated with many of the observed and
expected impacts in regions and sectors.
The water-resources sector (comprising
en vi ronmental, económico, and water man –

Dédalo, la Revista de la Academia Estadounidense de las Artes & Ciencias

D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d

F
r
oh
metro
h

t
t

pag

:
/
/

d
i
r
mi
C
t
.

metro

i
t
.

mi
d
tu
d
a
mi
d
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d

F
/

1
4
4
3
5
9
1
8
3
0
6
3
6
d
a
mi
d
_
a
_
0
0
3
4
2
pag
d

b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t

oh
norte
0
8
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3

agement systems) is in turn impacted by
these changes. Water therefore has the po –
tential to play a fundamental role in both
contributing to and resolving problems
stemming from climate variability and
change in most economic sectors. por ejemplo –
amplio, water is a critical component of all
natural habitats and one of the most im –
portant inputs to agricultural systems. Él
sup ports municipal development, extrac –
t ive industries and manufacturing, en er gy
generación, and transportation systems
(particularly transportation via oceans and
inland waterways). Even relatively minor
changes in the hydrologic cycle can have
ma jor rami½cations that ripple across the
globe through energy and food systems
or manufacturing supply chains. Most as –
pects of hydrology and water man agement
institutions are extremely com plex, so it is
not surprising that there is still some de –
bate about which components of the ob –
served changes are related to climate
change and which are connected to other
underlying causes.

One source of uncertainty related to cli –
mate change is that certain categories of
impacts have no precedent in human ex –
experiencia. This means that the tools that
have historically been used to adapt to cli –
mate variability may no longer be suf½ –
cient to deal with the hydrology of the
future. Though there have been unusually
warm and cool periods in the Earth’s his-
conservador, they have not occurred since vast
cities were built along the coastlines of ev –
ery continent. We also now have an inter-
connected global energy, transportation,
económico, and communications infra –
struc ture that could be interrupted by ex –
treme and unprecedented weather events.
Water managers who have based their un –
derstanding of possible future floods on
the past thirty to one hundred years of re –
cords now know that their decisions must
take into account flooding outside of the
scope of those records. And although we

do have tree ring data that show the past
history of droughts, including droughts
more intense than anything in recent his-
conservador, it will be possible to exceed even the
megadroughts of the past in the coming era
of warmer temperatures.

For water managers, uncertainties come
from multiple sources, and not knowing
how much change to expect or how many
variables will be changing simultaneously
is challenging. Some of the uncertainty
relates to our limited ability to estimate
timing of the projected impacts, incluido
the challenge of predicting an event with
an understood probability (Por ejemplo, a
one-in-½ve-hundred-year event) cuando el
probability itself may be affected by un –
certainties that cannot yet be calculated.
Por otro lado, managers are used
to making decisions without perfect infor –
formación, so in some ways, they are very well
prepared for the challenges that lie ahead.
Navigating climate variability–the year-
to-year changes in conditions–requires
very sophisticated management tools and
practicas, including seasonal climate pro-
jections. Water managers know that the
envelope of the past century’s “normal”
climate variability is already being exceed-
ed in many regions, but it is dif½cult–if
not impossible–to project with accuracy
how much more the extremes (or the “tail
ends” of the statistical distribution of
events) will extend.4 Indeed, it is these ex –
tremes–long periods of severe drought,
or storm-related intense rainfall and flood –
ing–that are most disruptive to water sup –
ply systems. The customers of water man –
agement systems expect water to come out
of the tap on demand, but extreme events
such as floods, droughts, wild½res, y
coast al storm surges often interfere with
these expectations.

A lthough water problems are already a

major challenge in many parts of the world,
some experts contend that virtually any

Katharine L.
Jacobs &
Lester Snow

D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d

F
r
oh
metro
h

t
t

pag

:
/
/

d
i
r
mi
C
t
.

metro

i
t
.

mi
d
tu
d
a
mi
d
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d

F
/

1
4
4
3
5
9
1
8
3
0
6
3
6
d
a
mi
d
_
a
_
0
0
3
4
2
pag
d

b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t

oh
norte
0
8
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3

144 (3) Verano 2015

Adaptation
en el
Water
Sector:
Ciencia &
Instituciones

water management problem has a solution
and that implementing it is primarily a
question of how much money and energy
are available. Por ejemplo, it is possible to
desalinate seawater and pump it hundreds
or even thousands of miles to thirsty water
users in the deserts of Africa, or to tow ice –
bergs from the Arctic to island nations that
lack freshwater, but these solutions are
gen erally viewed as unsustainable on large
scales or over long distances because of
costo, energy requirements, and environ –
ment al impacts. It is also possible–and in
some regions, increasingly common–to
reuse municipal wastewater for irrigation
and even for drinking water. A relatively
cost-effective adaptation option in drier
areas is to store stormwater underground
to enhance groundwater supplies; allá
are multiple technologies available to ac –
complish this. Sin embargo, although tech no –
logical solutions to water-related problems
have improved health, sanitation, quality
de la vida, and access to food across the globe
in dramatic ways, there are limits to tech-
nological solutions and many con cerns
about the negative effects of wa ter man-
agement projects on biodiversity, cultural
valores, and other resources. For these rea –
hijos, ef½cient conservation practices are
among the most effective ways to manage
the increasing disparity between supply
and demand in some regions and gen erally
have fewer unintended consequences than
other options. But even con servation has
consequences. For ex am ple, an increase
in irrigation ef½ ciency may re duce return
flows (water re turned to the stream after
overapplications from agriculture) to riv –
ers or to groundwater aqui fers, or dry up
a riparian area with high hab itat value.

Though a wide array of adaptation op –
tions is available, ranging from changes in
behavior and the development of social
sup port networks to changes in technology
e instituciones, there are also several chal –
lenges to implementing them. One chal –

lenge for adaptation planning is that solu –
tions often must be individually tailored
to take into account the local hydrologic
and regulatory context, not to mention
cultural, political, and economic consid-
erations. A solution that works well in one
location or region is often completely un –
ten able in another, making great ideas dif –
½cult to transplant from one region to an –
oth er. The range of options available varies
dramatically based on economies of scale,
access to information, the quality of leader –
ship in the region or community, and avail –
ability of ½nancial resources, así como el
political and cultural history of the region.
Some water managers may have a host of
adaptation options available to them, mientras
others may be severely constrained.

Perhaps the most important barrier to

adaptation is the complexity of water man –
agement institutions, which are notorious –
ly impenetrable and seemingly nonsensi-
cal to external observers. Por ejemplo, en
many regions of the Western United States
there are both “wholesale” water supplies
coming from federal and state water proj-
ects and “retail” water supplies that are de –
livered to municipal, industrial, and agri-
cultural customers by both public and
private water companies. Many individu-
als and companies have their own ground –
water wells or surface-water diversions,
which are subject to different rules than
those that apply to the “water providers”
de livering water to retail customers. Con –
in a given area, there may be irrigation dis –
tricts serving agricultural users, doz ens of
private water companies, multiple muni –
cipal water suppliers, and a host of indivi –
dual well owners. Por ejemplo, in the great –
er Tucson, Arizona, metropolitan area (en –
cluding associated rural com munities in
the same watershed), there are over one
hundred and ½fty municipal wa ter com-
empresas, regulated under a variety of muni –
cipal, estado, tribal, and federal laws and pol –

Dédalo, la Revista de la Academia Estadounidense de las Artes & Ciencias

D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d

F
r
oh
metro
h

t
t

pag

:
/
/

d
i
r
mi
C
t
.

metro

i
t
.

mi
d
tu
d
a
mi
d
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d

F
/

1
4
4
3
5
9
1
8
3
0
6
3
6
d
a
mi
d
_
a
_
0
0
3
4
2
pag
d

b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t

oh
norte
0
8
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3

icies, as well as a host of internal policies
and operating constraints. Some suppliers
are also subject to oversight from the Ari-
zona Corporation Commission, which reg –
ulates for-pro½t utilities.

To add to all of this complexity, the legal
premise for establishing water rights is
different in every state, so solutions devel –
oped in one state are often not readily
transferable to another. Water-rights laws
restrict water withdrawals and use in mul –
tiple ways. This means, Por ejemplo, eso
the institutional capacity to solve water-
supply problems through transfers across
state lines, river-basin boundaries, or even
within the same watershed is often highly
constrained. In many cases there are re –
strictions associated with moving water
between sectors or from one type of use to
otro (Por ejemplo, agricultural to mu –
nicipal uses); and there are often limita-
tions associated with moving the “point
of diversion” of river flow from one place
along a river to another. Water rights in
some states are allocated based on historic
use–the “½rst in time, ½rst in right” prem-
ise–which is not conducive to a flexible re –
sponse to rapidly changing economic and
climate conditions. Others have used land
ownership in the vicinity of rivers as a
mode of allocating water rights: the “ripar-
ian” doctrine. In California, some surface-
water rights are more closely aligned with
this approach, but there are multiple allo-
cation systems depending on whether the
use and the right existed prior to the state
water rights system established in 1914,
whether the water comes from federal or
state water storage or distribution systems,
and whether the rights are within speci½c
basins whose water rights have been ad –
judicated through the courts. En general,
water-rights systems work to resolve dis-
putes and conflicts among users within a
sistema. Sin embargo, they are completely in –
adequate to respond to large-scale or rapid
changes in supply availability.

Some states manage their water rights
pri marily through administrative (gov ern –
mento) agencias, while others make most
of their water-rights decisions through
los tribunales. In Western states there are hun –
dreds of sovereign tribal nations with their
own water-rights and delivery mecha-
nisms, and their water-use practices com –
monly interact in both positive and nega-
tive ways with the interests of other land –
owners in the vicinity of reservations.

Más, while states allocate surface and
groundwater rights, the federal govern-
ment generally regulates water quality (y –
less the authority to manage water quality
has been speci½cally delegated to the
estado). This separation of water quantity
management from water quality regula-
tions results in multiple adaptation hur-
dles that might otherwise be avoided. Para
ejemplo, the use of municipal wastewater
or “effluent” has been emerging for de –
cades as a solution to water-supply prob-
lems in dry regions. But ef½cient use of
this source is controversial in some areas
despite evidence that careful treatment
and reuse, especially for outdoor irrigation
purposes, is possible without health ef fects
–so water quality management agen cies
are frequently operating at odds with
those who manage water-supply availabili-
ty. These institutional problems are often
viewed as barriers to adaptation to climate
cambiar. De hecho, these barriers to adapta-
tion are exceedingly well documented–
much more so than the opportunities that
may also result from adaptation to current
and projected changes in the climate.

A variety of federal laws have a direct im –

pact on adaptation opportunities in the
wa ter management sector. Among them
are the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking
Water Act, the Endangered Species Act,
and the Clean Air Act, along with multiple
federal agency–focused rules and regula –
tions that affect the activities of leading

Katharine L.
Jacobs &
Lester Snow

D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d

F
r
oh
metro
h

t
t

pag

:
/
/

d
i
r
mi
C
t
.

metro

i
t
.

mi
d
tu
d
a
mi
d
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d

F
/

1
4
4
3
5
9
1
8
3
0
6
3
6
d
a
mi
d
_
a
_
0
0
3
4
2
pag
d

b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t

oh
norte
0
8
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3

144 (3) Verano 2015

Adaptation
en el
Water
Sector:
Ciencia &
Instituciones

federal water management agencies such
as the Army Corps of Engineers and the Bu –
reau of Reclamation. In rivers that gen er ate
hydropower, the Federal Energy Regula-
tory Commission provides an addition al
over lay of regulatory consider ations. All of
these regulations protect the health and
safe ty of the nation’s drinking water sup-
plies for human use, as well as protecting
the environment and habitat of endan-
gered species, but in some cases they may
not in clude the degree of flexibility that
would be ideal for maximizing adaptive
capacity and achieving water manage ment
objectives.

Conflicts often arise when rules for pro –
tecting aquatic species (like the silvery min –
now in the Rio Grande or the salmonids
and Delta smelt at the mouth of the Sac ra –
mento–San Joaquin Rivers) run counter
to the interests of offstream water users.
It is instructive to look at the case of the
Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta in order
to truly appreciate how regulatory activi-
ties intersect with the local “decision con –
texto,” along with ongoing changes in land
use and climate, creating a series of unan-
ticipated consequences.

Climate-change uncertainty is only one

of a number of sources of uncertainty in
natural resource decision processes. El
en vironmental and water-supply conflict
within the Sacramento–San Joaquin Del ta
(the Bay Delta) provides a vivid case study
of the complexity and uncertainty in wa ter
management decisions and the compound –
ing effects of climate change. The Bay-Delta
system has seen nearly four de cades of in –
tense political, legislative, and le gal con-
conflicto, all centered on the tension be tween re –
liable water supplies for people and envi-
ronmental protection.5 In part, this conflict
stems from decades of using a symptom-
based approach (as opposed to a systems-
based approach) to natural re source man-
agement; it also provides an im portant les-

son in the need to understand the context
in which decisions about ad ap tation are
hecho. The management chal leng es in this
caso, like many others, are com plicated
by an array of overlapping le gal and insti-
tutional issues, including mul tiple federal
and state agencies with jurisdiction over
various components of the sys tem and no
effective institutional authority to coordi-
nate and manage the decision process.

Efforts to ½nd a solution to the Bay-Delta
conflict over the past few decades have fo –
cused on the most recent symptom of de –
teriorating environmental health: de clines
in populations of threatened and endan-
gered species and a reduction in water-sup –
ply reliability for both the state and feder-
al water projects. Sin embargo, the problems
in the Bay-Delta system have their origin in
one hundred and ½fty years of state and
fed eral policy decisions. In the 1850s, Estafa –
gress authorized a series of “Swamp Land
Acts,” providing land to those who would
com mit to draining and making use of the
region’s swampland. This policy and ensu-
ing implementation efforts paved the way
to the loss of more than 90 por ciento de la
wetlands in California’s Central Valley. En
the early 1900s, a flood-control levee sys –
tem was developed in the Central Valley,
not only to provide flood protection but al –
so in part to flush out sediment and de bris
from the destructive practice of hy drau lic
mining.6 These narrow, leveed chan nels
con trib uted to the loss of more than 95 por –
cent of the Central Valley’s riparian habitat.
Addi tionally, the system has been pop u –
lated over time, both intention ally and un –
in ten tionally, with a wide array of nonna-
tive plant and animal species. The net re sult
of these and many other fac tors is a high –
ly al tered resource system with little nat-
ural re silience. It is on this “nonre sil i ent”
sys tem that the effects of climate change
will be overlaid: higher flood peaks; mar-
level rise; more intense, warmer storms;
and warmer air and water temperatures.

Dédalo, la Revista de la Academia Estadounidense de las Artes & Ciencias

D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d

F
r
oh
metro
h

t
t

pag

:
/
/

d
i
r
mi
C
t
.

metro

i
t
.

mi
d
tu
d
a
mi
d
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d

F
/

1
4
4
3
5
9
1
8
3
0
6
3
6
d
a
mi
d
_
a
_
0
0
3
4
2
pag
d

b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t

oh
norte
0
8
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3

The Delta has been called “the lynchpin
in California’s water-supply system,” sup –
plying water from Northern California
reservoirs through the State Water Project
and the Central Valley Project to urban
Southern California, part of the Bay Area,
and the San Joaquin Valley. The water sup –
ply from these projects supports more
than $400 billion of the annual economic activity of the state and irrigates several million acres of highly productive agricul – tural land. The Delta is also the largest es – tuary on the West Coast of the western hemisphere, supporting vital West Coast salmon runs as well as a wide range of native plant and animal species. Additional risks are associated with sub – sidence (sinking) of the land surface of many of the islands in the Delta. Some is – lands are now twenty feet below sea level, partly as a result of decomposition of the peat soils. They are protected by levees that have a high probability of failing in an earth quake or storm surge, especially in the context of sea-level rise. Areas of the Delta and the Central Valley are at risk for catastrophic flooding, which could have dire economic consequences. The physical and biological management challenges are further complicated by multiple biologi- cal opinions related to endangered spe cies from separate federal agencies, federal court intervention regarding implemen- tation of these opinions, and increasingly heated partisan conflict. In light of all this complexity, it is nearly impossible to iden- tify problems that can be attributed to cli- mate change (or climate variability) solo. Sin embargo, it is clear that climate change is adding to the risk and uncertain ty in the natural resource and water management system. The climate change–related water man – age ment challenges in the Delta are not just about precipitation and runoff; they also relate to water temperature and the con – dition of the watershed. There are many unanswered questions about what Cal ifor – nia’s future water supply could look like. How do these factors interact? As hy dro – logic drivers change, vegetation changes, resulting in potentially unanticipated feed backs to the hydrologic cycle and the ecosystem. Is it possible to anticipate how these interacting factors will af fect Cali- fornia’s ecosystems? There is a crit ical need for this kind of integrated re search in de – cision processes. Water temperatures are going up, which could negate the habitat-management gains made through multiple other restor – ation efforts, because higher temperatures result in reduced oxygen and other chem- ical changes in the water, as well as more algae and bacteria. How can we know in advance when we are approaching thresh – olds beyond which endangered species can not survive? Can water management in California continue to function if en – dangered species are declining and the Endangered Species Act (esa) remains in its current con½guration? It appears that the relatively inflexible requirements of the esa and the needs associated with the water management system are in conflict –and not just in the Delta. Yet the esa is es sentially a proxy for environmental health, which makes it the most impor- tant tool currently available for promoting environmental sustainability objectives, even if the tool may be blunt and some- times poorly used. The esa is not designed to deal with changes in baseline climate conditions. Por ejemplo, until there are no more Delta smelt left, more and more restrictions on water management can be anticipated even if the smelt’s decline is not directly related to the actions of water users. Ocean condi – ciones, including the Paci½c Decadal Os cilla – ción,7 have been correlated with popula- tions of anadromous ½sh (½sh that mi grate from the oceans to the rivers to spawn). Fur ther, even after multiple de cades of Katharine L. Jacobs & Lester Snow l D o w n o a d e d f r o m h t t p : / / directo . mi t . / e d u d a e d a r t i c e – pd / l f / / / / / 1 4 4 3 5 9 1 8 3 0 6 3 6 d a e d _ a _ 0 0 3 4 2 pd . f por invitado 0 8 septiembre 2 0 2 3 144 (3) Verano 2015 65 Adaptation in the Water Sector: Ciencia & Institutions study, California water managers do not know how many smelt there are or spe – ci½cally where they are on a seasonal ba – hermana, which makes managing them very chal – lenging. How can the cause and ef fect of individual management options in the riv – ers be evaluated in such a dynamic environ – mento? Is adaptive management even possi – ble in the context of all of this complexity? How can California adjust to losing snow pack, prepare for potential levee fail – ures, manage ½sh decline with changing water temperature and salinity, and deal with increasing concerns about meeting en ergy and water demand for a growing population, all in the context of ongoing statewide economic issues? It is clear that existing institutions are not up to these chal lenges, let alone able to respond to sea- level rise and the potential for earth- quakes at the same time. In this era of multiple stresses, podemos- not afford to “strand investments” and spend money on infrastructure that may never be needed. Por ejemplo, the iconic “fortress approach” to protecting low-lying cities by building seawalls around ex isting infrastructure is likely to fail eventually and will certainly have dramatic en viron – mental effects. But facing the poten tial im – pacts of another Hurricane Katrina or Su – perstorm Sandy–like event, there is a need to ½nd robust solutions that solve multi- ple problems, particularly in urban areas where there is signi½cant investment. After decades of working to establish a state-federal collaboration to manage all of these issues and to establish institutions capable of collective decision-making, most of the Bay-Delta conflicts re main un – resolved. Sin embargo, a great deal has been learned about managing the boundary be – tween science and policy, as well as about adaptive management in complex decision contexts. And although water con flicts re – principal, scientists and decision-makers are ½nding ways to work together on environ – mental issues. California has been perhaps the most successful state in linking climate science to policy decisions, as evidenced by the passage of Assembly Bill 32, which limits future greenhouse gas emis sions in the state. The evolution of this linkage be – gan with an assessment pro cess (the “Sce – narios Project”) involving de ci sion-makers and scientists, which could serve as a mod – el for other states to ad dress, mitigate, and adapt to climate im pacts in the absence of other federal legislation.8 Given the scienti½c, environmental, registro – ulatory, and social context within which water managers operate and the associated barriers to adaptation, institutions clearly must innovate to manage risk and facilitate adaptation. The following section presents some institutional solutions that could help address water management challenges. Many who have studied water manage- ment institutions believe that market for – ces can resolve many of the inef½ciencies in water distribution and lead to major im – provements in matching supply and de – mand in an era of increasing pressure on ½nite water supplies. There is evidence in Australia, Por ejemplo, that establishing well- de½ned water rights that are tradable on an open market can actually increase the net value of agriculture, even under drought conditions.9 Environmental policy re – search er Bonnie Colby and others have analyzed the degree to which water mar- kets have developed in the Western United States and market systems’ utility for ad – dressing climate change and related short – age issues.10 Although water banks and other kinds of water markets have em erged in speci½c watersheds–and have in many cases achieved their desired objectives– their utility is limited. Multiple authors have suggested that pric ing mechanisms are underutilized, not ing the direct relationship between in – creases in water cost and increases in ef – 66 Dédalo, la Revista de la Academia Estadounidense de las Artes & Sciences l D o w n o a d e d f r o m h t t p : / / directo . mi t . / e d u d a e d a r t i c e – pd / l f / / / / / 1 4 4 3 5 9 1 8 3 0 6 3 6 d a e d _ a _ 0 0 3 4 2 pd . f por invitado 0 8 septiembre 2 0 2 3 ½ciency of water use. Sin embargo, others have noted the limitations of markets and pric – ing mechanisms in protecting environmen – tal interests and the interests of those who are economically disadvantaged. Uncon- strained markets can in theory lead to “eco – nomically ef½cient” outcomes, but eco – nom ically ef½cient solutions are not the same as socially acceptable, environmen- tally sensitive, or sustainable solutions. Clear ly, water pricing is an important tool in the water management toolbox and wa ter markets can enhance flexibility in water- rights systems, but water markets and pricing mechanisms alone will not re – sult in socially acceptable outcomes. There is signi½cant inertia in existing wa ter management systems, at least in part because many economic and social deci- sions have been made within the existing regulatory framework. Businesses, munici – pal water companies, and farmers have all made capital investments based on expec – tations about the availability of water sup – capas, and these investments are often de – pendent on the assumption that water management institutions will remain sta- ble. Major changes in regulations, even if they are broadly supported, are extremely dif½cult to implement, because there are always winners and losers, and those who anticipate becoming the “losers” in the con text of proposed institutional changes are often vocal and litigious. History shows that major changes in water management systems often occur in response to emer- gencies rather than through farsighted in – vestments in preparedness. A critical ques – tion is how we can increase the flexibility of existing water management systems in the face of growing challenges be fore the system fails. We must also ½nd a way to flesh out the role of science and sci entists in helping managers with adaptation. A critical issue in climate adaptation is helping managers understand what pos- sible future conditions they may need to be prepared for, and how they can wade through the torrent of available data and projections to get to truly useful informa- ción. The need to close the gap between sci – ence and decision-making in the climate arena has generated a number of experi- ments in adaptive management. In all of the successful cases, it is clear that a focus on building trusted relationships between those who generate scienti½c information and those who use it is a critical founda- tion for decision-making. Yet it is also clear that it is dif½cult to scale up these indi- vidual relationships and successful prac- tices to the level required for adaptation across the water management sector. In many ½elds, “science translators” are emerging to help connect scientists and decision-makers as they navigate differ- ences in language, training, and context. Science translators help to identify scien – ti ½c information that is truly useful for spe – ci½c decisions and help stakeholders get access to appropriate data and tools for speci½c sectoral applications. Por ejemplo, in California, support for water- and cli- mate-related decisions has been provided through the California Applications Proj- etc. (gorra), which is a National Oceano- graphic and Atmospheric Administration (noaa)–funded effort to link university re search ers and federal data sources to spe ci½c needs of decision-makers within regions. cap includes researchers from Scripps In stitute of Oceanography, Estados Unidos. Geolog ical Survey, and noaa’s Western Regional Climate Center. Science transla- tors are often found in universities and con sulting ½rms, but recently a number of nongovernmental organizations (ngos) have also been de veloping climate-related adaptation tools for managers and trying to assist by building training programs. There have been several deliberate at – tempts to expand the cadre of science trans – lators: Por ejemplo, through cooperative Katharine L. Jacobs & Lester Snow l D o w n o a d e d f r o m h t t p : / / directo . mi t . / e d u d a e d a r t i c e – pd / l f / / / / / 1 4 4 3 5 9 1 8 3 0 6 3 6 d a e d _ a _ 0 0 3 4 2 pd . f por invitado 0 8 septiembre 2 0 2 3 144 (3) Verano 2015 67 Adaptation in the Water Sector: Ciencia & Institutions funding programs to train postdoctoral stu dents and to enhance the function of “boundary organizations” that help man – age the interface between these very dif – fer ent cultures.11 “Decision-relevant” sci – ence has become much more visible in the bud gets of federal science agencies as they re cognize the importance of informing their own adaptation activities as well as those of communities and businesses across the United States. This is quite evi- dent in the U.S. Global Change Research Program’s (usgcrp) Strategic Plan for 2012–2021, which emphasizes “informing decisions,” “sustained assessments,” and “com munica tion and education” as im por – tant pillars of their thirteen-agency climate research agenda. A (muy) small portion of the usgcrp’s $2.6 billion investment in climate obser-
vations and research now goes to building
climate science translation capacity, ambos
within the usgcrp coordination of½ce it –
self and within speci½c federal agencies–
notably the National Oceanic and Atmos –
pheric Administration; the De part ment of
the Interior (doi); and most recently the
A NOSOTROS. Department of Agriculture (usda).
noaa’s Regional Integrated Sciences and
Assessments (risa) program is the most
mature of these investments, with eleven
centers across the country; the cap is one
of the noaa risas. Stakeholders who have
worked with the program of ten note that
the support of risa staff has been critical
to building awareness of climate issues as
well as implementing solutions, y
there are now several publications evalu-
ating the effectiveness of the risa ef –
forts. But rising concerns about the need
to ramp up adaptation capacity has re –
sulted in building new Climate Science
Centros, Landscape Conservation Cooper –
atives, and Climate Hubs within the doi
and usda as well. Despite the expansion
of these programs, the demand for “cli-
mate services” and for help from science

translators in these centers far outpaces
these programs’ capacity to meet it.

One example of an innovative water
man agement solution is the Arizona Wa –
ter Institute (awi). An entirely different set
of water supply and regulatory challenges
faces the state of Arizona, where an inno-
vative science-translation organization was
created to support water management ob –
jectives. Although funding and political
is sues led to its closure in 2009, the awi
showed signi½cant promise in bridging the
gaps between water managers, regulators,
and scientists at Arizona’s three universi-
corbatas. It was an important experiment in in –
sti tution-building in support of adaptation
that can serve as a model for others aiming
to enhance adaptation capacity.

Arizona has been known for decades for
its innovative water management activi-
corbatas. Although water issues facing the state
are daunting and challenges continue to
increase in the face of population growth
and climate change, the state’s commit-
ment to long-term water supply availability
has resulted in billions of dollars of invest –
ment in renewable supplies through the
Central Arizona Project (bringing surface
water from the Colorado River), ground-
water recharge and recovery programs,
and municipal effluent reuse. Arizona has
also developed innovative regulatory pro –
gramos, including the 1980 Groundwater
Management Act (which requires sustain –
able groundwater use within ½ve “active
management areas”) and the Arizona Wa –
ter Banking Authority (which incentivizes
augmentation of groundwater supplies).
Sin embargo, despite the existence of hun-
dreds of water specialists and climatolo-
gists across the three state universities, Ari –
zona’s water managers were not taking ad –
vantage of their scienti½c capacity prior to
the establishment of the awi. The awi was
formed through a governor’s initiative in
January of 2006 and included Arizona

Dédalo, la Revista de la Academia Estadounidense de las Artes & Ciencias

D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d

F
r
oh
metro
h

t
t

pag

:
/
/

d
i
r
mi
C
t
.

metro

i
t
.

mi
d
tu
d
a
mi
d
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d

F
/

1
4
4
3
5
9
1
8
3
0
6
3
6
d
a
mi
d
_
a
_
0
0
3
4
2
pag
d

b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t

oh
norte
0
8
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3

State University, Northern Arizona Uni-
versity, and the University of Arizona. El
primary driver for this initiative was sus-
taining Arizona’s water supply, but other
incentives for creating awi also included
the development of technologies and prac –
tices that could support water sustaina –
bility in arid regions more generally. Este
unique partnership, which also included
three state agencies–Water Resources,
En vi ronmental Quality, and Commerce
–pro vided access to hydrologic informa-
tion for water managers, supported com-
munities, and developed technologies to
promote water sustainability. To ensure
rel evance to the private sector and other
government interests, the Salt River Proj-
etc. (the state’s largest water and electric
utility) and the Governor’s Of½ce were also
engaged in the awi’s leadership.

Managing relationships between the uni –
versities and the state agencies was prob-
ably the most challenging aspect of the awi
acercarse, but building the institu tion al
con nections proved to be an im por tant
asset in creating useful partnerships that
were focused on real-world solutions.
De nuevo, building long-term relationships
of trust within the science community
and between scientists and stakeholders
is a serious challenge but also a necessary
pre requisite to successful climate adapta-
tion efforts.

The awi conducted a survey of local,
coun ty, estado, and federal governments, En –
dian tribes, watershed alliances, farmers,
water companies, ngos, and private in –
dus tries in order to establish research
themes. This survey demonstrated strong
interest from multi ple sectors in collabo-
rating with the awi and resulted in six ma –
jor focal areas that are likely to be useful
topics for any water sus tainability or ad –
aptation program:

• Building a hydrologic information sys-
tem to enhance access to water informa –
tion in the state;

144 (3) Verano 2015

• Advancing water quality and treatment

tecnologías;

Katharine L.
Jacobs &
Lester Snow

• Promoting aquifer management and

sus tainability;

• Providing watershed and regional tech-

nical assistance and facilitation;

• Studying the expected impacts of climate

variability and change; y

• Studying the interconnections between

energy and water systems.

The awi built strong relationships be –
tween the universities and water managers
across the state, and thirty “real world” re –
search projects were initiated within three
años, each involving at least two univer-
sities and a minimum of one external stake –
holder. awi staff managed each project
to ensure that the expectations of scien-
tists and stake holders were realistic and
the outcomes were both useful and deliv-
ered in a timely way.

Although the awi did not change either
the underlying challenges of limited water
supplies and population growth, or a wide
range of institutional challenges, it did pro –
vide a hopeful and relatively inexpensive
approach to adaptation through building
networks that connected social and phys-
ical scientists within existing academic in –
stitutions with public- and private-sector
decision-makers. Given the magnitude
and complexity of the issues water man-
agers face, networks of climate experts and
adaptation professionals such as the awi
are emerging as a leading model for solv-
ing current and future challenges.

With the intent to help resolve many of
the same science translation issues, ngos
have been step ping in to ½ll gaps in the
knowledge system in regions and sectors
across the country, incluido, Por ejemplo,
the Public Policy Institute of California
(ppic) and the California Water Founda-
ción (cwf). The ppic’s water program

D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d

F
r
oh
metro
h

t
t

pag

:
/
/

d
i
r
mi
C
t
.

metro

i
t
.

mi
d
tu
d
a
mi
d
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d

F
/

1
4
4
3
5
9
1
8
3
0
6
3
6
d
a
mi
d
_
a
_
0
0
3
4
2
pag
d

b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t

oh
norte
0
8
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3

Adaptation
en el
Water
Sector:
Ciencia &
Instituciones

forms teams of in terdisciplinary research –
ers to focus on cur rent water problems
and bring the best available information
to decision-mak ers.12 The cwf’s efforts
are aimed at translating in formation into
speci½c policy action; re cent activities of
the cwf in clude de veloping statewide
groundwater man age ment policies and
leg islation (adopted in 2014) responding
to rapidly changing water-supply condi-
tions.13 Particularly as the re sources avail –
able from federal and state agencies shrink,
the role of foundations and ngos in pro-
moting environmental pro tection and
more adap tive water man agement prac-
tices is ex panding.

A lthough adaptation in the water sector

is associated with innumerable challenges,
there are just as many opportunities for

innovation. In light of the expanding un –
certainties associated with climate change,
it is critical to develop better pathways for
scienti½c information to reach decision-
fabricantes. The efforts of federally supported
investments in climate science translation
(such as the risa program) and institu-
tions that are designed to connect science
and decision-making (such as the awi)
pro vide reasons to be optimistic that solu –
tions to water management challenges are
achievable. Studying lessons learned in
Cal ifornia and Arizona in managing major
water-supply problems is one source of
useful knowledge in preparing for an un –
certain future. Institutional flexibility and
relationship-building are at least as critical
to building sustainable water management
systems as improvements in scienti½c un –
derstanding.

notas finales
* Contributor Biographies: KATHARINE L. JACOBS is the Director of the Center for Climate
Adapta tion Science and Solutions and Professor of Soil, Water and Environmental Sciences
at the University of Arizona. Previously, she served as Director of National Climate Assess-
ment and Water Advisor in the Executive Of½ce of the President. From 2006–2009, Jacobs
was the Executive Di rector of the Arizona Water Institute. She has more than twenty years
of experience as a water manager for the State of Arizona. Her research has been published
in such journals as Nature Climate Change, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
Water Resources Research, and Journal of the American Water Resources Association.
LESTER SNOW is the Executive Director of the California Water Foundation. He recently
served as the California Secretary for Natural Resources. Previously, he was Director of the
California Department of Water Resources, Regional Director of the Bureau of Reclamation,
and Executive Director of the calfed Bay-Delta Program.

1 David M.. Meko, Connie A. Woodhouse, Christopher A. Baisan, Troy Knight, Jeffrey J. Lukas,
Malcolm K. abrazos, and Matthew W. Salzer, “Medieval Drought in the Upper Colorado
River Basin,” Cartas de investigación geofísica 34 (10) (2007), doi:10.1029/2007GL029988.

2 Susan Solomon, Gian-Kasper Plattner, Reto Knutti, and Pierre Friedlingstein, “Irreversible
Climate Change Due to Carbon Dioxide Emissions,” Proceedings of the National Academy of
Ciencias 106 (2009), doi:10.1073/pnas.-9128211-6.

3 Richard H. Moss, Jae A. Edmonds, Kathy A. Hibbard, Martin R. Manning, Steven K. Rose,
Det lef P. van Vuuren, Timothy R. Carretero, Seita Emori, Mikiko Kainuma, Tom Kram, Gerald A.
Meehl, John F. B. mitchell, Nebojsa Nakicenovic, Keywan Riahi, Steven J. Herrero, Ronald J.
Stouffer, Allison M. Thomson, John P. Weyant, y Tomás J.. Wilbanks, “The Next Gener –
ation of Scenarios for Climate Change Research and Assessment," Naturaleza 463 (7282): 747–756,
doi:10.1038/nature08823.

Dédalo, la Revista de la Academia Estadounidense de las Artes & Ciencias

D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d

F
r
oh
metro
h

t
t

pag

:
/
/

d
i
r
mi
C
t
.

metro

i
t
.

mi
d
tu
d
a
mi
d
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d

F
/

1
4
4
3
5
9
1
8
3
0
6
3
6
d
a
mi
d
_
a
_
0
0
3
4
2
pag
d

b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t

oh
norte
0
8
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3

4 PAG. C. D. Milly, Julio Betancourt, Malin Falkenmark, Robert M. Hirsch, Zbigniew W.
Kundzewicz, Dennis P.. Lettenmaier, and Ronald J. Stouffer, “Stationarity Is Dead: Whither
Water Management?" Ciencia 319 (2008): 573–574.

Katharine L.
Jacobs &
Lester Snow

5 Gary Pitzer, “Delta Conveyance: The Debate Continues,” Western Water (March/April 2009):

4–17.

6 Hydraulic mining was a popular gold mining technique in California from the 1860s through the
1880s. The process involved directing high-pressure streams of water at gold-bearing for ma –
ciones, washing away entire hillsides into downstream sluices to recover gold. The technique
had dramatic effects on downstream riverbeds, increasing sedimentation and flooding, y
permanently affecting the hydrology and ecology of the system.

7 Nathan J. Mantua, Steven R. Hare, Yuan Zhang, John M. Wallace, and Robert C. Francisco, “A
Paci½c Interdecadal Climate Oscillation with Impacts on Salmon Production,” Bulletin of the
American Meteorological Society 78 (1997): 1069–1079.

8 Guido Franco, Dan Cayan, Amy Luers, Michael Hanemann, and Bart Croes, “Linking Climate
Change Science with Policy in California,“Cambio Climático (2007), doi:10.1007/x10584-007
-9359-8.

9 Mike Young and Jim McColl, “De½ning Tradable Water Entitlements and Allocations: A

Robust System,” Canadian Water Resources Journal 30 (1) (2005): 65–72.

10 B. Colby, “Innovative Water Transactions to Meet Urban and Environmental Demands in the
Face of Climate Change,” in Innovations in Water Markets, ed. k. William Easter (Nueva York:
Saltador, próximo).

11 David H. Guston, “Boundary Organizations in Environmental Policy and Science: An Introduc –
ción," Ciencia, Tecnología, & Human Values 16 (4) (2001): 399–408; and James Buizer, Katharine
Jacobs, and David Cash, “Making Short-Term Climate Forecasts Useful: Linking Science and
Acción,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (Early Edition, 2010), http://www.pnas
.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.0900518107.

12 See http://www.ppic.org/main/policyarea.asp?i=15.
13 See http://www.californiawaterfoundation.org/.

D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d

F
r
oh
metro
h

t
t

pag

:
/
/

d
i
r
mi
C
t
.

metro

i
t
.

mi
d
tu
d
a
mi
d
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d

F
/

1
4
4
3
5
9
1
8
3
0
6
3
6
d
a
mi
d
_
a
_
0
0
3
4
2
pag
d

b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t

oh
norte
0
8
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3

144 (3) Verano 2015

71
Descargar PDF