|
<br />Comments to swsr, November 3, 2003t by John Wiener
<br />
<br />30
<br />
<br />And, based on that assessment, what is the relevant research agenda for deveropment of the
<br />expert systems which are most rikely to support public use and acceptance of the increased
<br />opportunities for flexibifity in water management?
<br />
<br />A final note: future values
<br />
<br />One need not accept cJimate modeling or claims of any particular change either forecast or used
<br />for study purposes to find valuable reviews of current agricultural trends in the reports
<br />commissioned for the US Global Change Research Program. Those for the Great Plains and for
<br />the Rocky Mountain--Great Basin Regionst and the Agriculture and Water Sectors incJude
<br />careful reviews of trends in the area which are often driven by forces not much related to climate,
<br />including the national agricuJtural situation and agricufturaf poncies~ With those trends in mind,
<br />and the changes in land use already under way, it is almost certain that the value of water for
<br />purposes such as maintenance of environmental qualities and buffers will increase in the near
<br />future. The suite of changes already underway presents a threatening prospect for all water
<br />users~ under current policy and shifts in pUblic preferences (see Feather at al. 1999t McGranahan
<br />1999. and Heimlich and Anderson 2001; and see also Kansas City Federal Reserve Bank. 2001
<br />symposium on forces shaping the heartland; availabfe on...Une). Low-yielding agriculture may
<br />have water to transfer for other purposes not yet being funded as much as in the future. Also in
<br />the wind tS inoreased recognition of the environmental amenity and benefits in urban as weU as
<br />rural areas from the so-called lIinefficiencies.. of traditionar water use which supports habitat and
<br />wetlands throughout the areas served by the water distribution system (see Heimlich 1998).
<br />
<br />DISCLAIMER AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: This memorandum reflects countless helpfuJ
<br />conversations from many people, but the author is responsibJe for misunderstandings and errors.
<br />The approach of working with a simplified example, and this example, was used by Division
<br />EngJneer Steve WitteJ who is not responsibfe for the author's elaboration, commentary and
<br />recommendations.
<br />
<br />Thanks are due especially to Bob Appelt MarshaU Frasier, Luis Garcia, Tim Gates, Chris
<br />Goemans, Bob Hamilton, Chuck Hanagan. Donny Hanson, Birl Hancock, Bert Hartman, Charles
<br />Howe, John Knapp, Bill MiJenski, Tom Musgrove. Jim Phene, Joel SChneekloth, Tom Simpsont
<br />Lorenz Sutherland, Jim Valliant, Robert Wardt Reagan Waskom, Ken Weber, and Wayne
<br />Whittaker; they may not agree with any of this.
<br />
<br />References for Memorandum on Agricultural Efficiency Problem:
<br />
<br />Adams, D.8., Ed.J 1999, Potential Conseauences of Cfimate Variabilitv and Chance to Water Resources of
<br />the United States. Herndon, VA: American Water Resources Association.
<br />Archibald, S.D. and M.E. Renwick, 1998. Expected transactions costs and incentives for water market
<br />development. Pp 95-117 in Easter ~ W.K., M. W. Rosegrant and A~ Dinar, Eds., Markets for Water:
<br />Potential and Performance. Boston~ Kluwer Academic Publishers.
<br />Arndt. H.W., 1987t Economic Develooment: the Historv of an Idea. Chicago: Unjvers;ty of Chicago.
<br />Berkes, F.1 2002. Cross-scale Institutional Linkages~ Perspectives from the Bottom Up. Pp 293-321 in
<br />Ostromt E., T~ Dietz, N~ Dolsakj P,C. Stern~ s. Stanich, and E4U. Weber, Eds., The Drama of the
<br />Commons. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
<br />Blaikie, P., T. Ca.nnonJ I. Davies, and B~ Wisner, 1994~ At Risk: Natural Hazards, Peoo!e1s Vulnerabilitv. and
<br />Disasters. London~ Routledge.
<br />Cernea, M.t Ed.~ 1991, Putting Peoofe First - Sociological Variables in Rura' Develooment 2d4 Ed. Oxford
<br />University Press for the World Bank.
<br />Chambers, R., 1997, Whose Reatitv Counts? Putting the first last London: 'ntermediate Technology~
<br />Colby, B.G., 1998, Negotiated Transactions as Confric! Resolution Mechanisms: Water Bargaining in the
<br />U.S. West Pp 77-94 in Easter, W ~K.. M.W. Rosegrant and A. Dinar1 Eds., Markets for Water:
<br />Potentia.l and Performance. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
<br />
|