4.7 Article

Can we manage groundwater? A method to determine the quantitative testability of groundwater management plans

期刊

WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH
卷 52, 期 6, 页码 4863-4882

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/2015WR018474

关键词

groundwater; management; control theory; effective management

资金

  1. Australian Research Council [LP130100958]
  2. Bureau of Meteorology (BoM)
  3. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP)
  4. Australian Research Council [LP130100958] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Groundwater is the world's largest freshwater resource and due to overextraction, levels have declined in many regions causing extensive social and environmental impacts. Groundwater management seeks to balance and mitigate the detrimental impacts of development, with plans commonly used to outline management pathways. Thus, plan efficiency is crucial, but seldom are plans systematically and quantitatively assessed for effectiveness. This study frames groundwater management as a system control problem in order to develop a novel testability assessment rubric to determine if plans meet the requirements of a control loop, and subsequently, whether they can be quantitatively tested. Seven components of a management plan equivalent to basic components of a control loop were determined, and requirements of each component necessary to enable testability were defined. Each component was weighted based upon proposed relative importance, then segmented into rated categories depending on the degree the requirements were met. Component importance varied but, a defined objective or acceptable impact was necessary for plans to be testable. The rubric was developed within the context of the Australian groundwater management industry, and while use of the rubric is not limited to Australia, it was applied to 15 Australian groundwater management plans and approximately 47% were found to be testable. Considering the importance of effective groundwater management, and the central role of plans, our lack of ability to test many plans is concerning.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据