Full Journal of Contemporary Water Research and Education, Issue ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

124McKayTable 2. Corporate governance legal types (typologies) of major WSB.ACT NSW NT QLD SA TAS VIC WA TotalLocal Government Regional Council (LGRC) 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2Shire Council (LGSC) 0 46 0 92 0 17 0 14 169City/Council (LGCC) 0 0 0 15 0 5 0 0 20Local Government Owned corporations (LGOC) 0 14 0 4 0 0 0 0 18Joint Local Government Organization (JLGG) 0 5 0 1 0 3 0 0 9Water Board [includes Rural and Water Drainage] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2Government Departments Licenser (GD) 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 3Government Owned Corporation (GOC) 1 5 1 1 1 0 6 1 16Statutory Bodies (SB) 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 18Corporation Law Companies (CLC) 0 3 0 1 2 0 0 1 7Irrigation Trusts (IT) 0 2 0 0 4 0 0 0 6Undetermined 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 6Hybrid - (SB/CLC) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1Hybird - (IT/CLC) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1Total 1 74-79 1 115 7 29 24 22 278Source: 183 CEO Surveys CRF-IF006Table 3. Number of survey respondents by state and typology.CLG GD GOC JLGG LGCC LGOC LGRC LGSC SB UND WBACT (1) - - 1 - - - - - - - -NSW (38) - - - - 4 1 2 31 - - -NT (1) - - 1 - - - - - - - -QLD (86) - 1 - - 13 1 - 71 - - -TAS (24) - - - 3 5 - - 14 - 2 -VIC (13) - - 3 - - - - - 10 - -WA (20) 1 - 1 - - - - 14 - 2 21 1 5 3 22 2 2 130 10 4 2issues that concerned them. The results for all butthe first questions are reported by state (as thereis only a single authority in the Australian Capitaland Northern Territories, their responses will not bepublished to protect confidentiality) and corporategovernance type. This section will present theresponses to these 4 questions on EnvironmentallySustainable Development.1. Degree of effort put into each ESDprinciple2. Difficulty in achieving ESD principles intheir water supply businiesses3. The ESD process is transparent4. I am able to achieve sustainable watermanagementIt will then present three questions on water policyand intergovernmental integration1. There is a huge amount of trust between thisorganization and the state government.2. This organization is nested in a mutuallysupportive state government policy environment.3. All sectors of the community of this waterbusiness understand the viewpoint of othersin this area.Environmentally Sustainable DevelopmentThe first two questions reported here wereUCOWRJOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY WATER RESEARCH & EDUCATION
Implementation of Australian Water Laws125Table 4. Difficulty in achieving and degree of effort put into each Environmentally Sustainable Developmentguiding principle.CriterionDifficulty in achievingESD principlesDegree of effprt put intoeach ESD principleThe global dimension of environmental impacts ofactions should be recognized and considered.Lack of scientific certainty should not be usedas a reason for postponing measures to preventenvironmental degradation (Precautionary Principle).The need to develop a strong, growing, and diversifiedeconomy, which can enhance the capacity forenvironmental protection, should be recognized.The need to enhance and maintain international competitivenessin an environmentally sound manner shouldbe recognized.Decision-making processes should effectively integrateboth long and short-term economic, environmental,social, and equity considerations.896 728624 906795 1092772 714723 1261Cost-effective and flexible policy instruments should be524 1234adopted.Broad community involvement should be facilitated. 427 1232emailed to the respondents so they could see thefull text and they were asked to rate each one from1 not at all diffi cult to 10 extremely diffi cult. Inthe second question, they were asked to rate themaccording to the effort they have put in from 1 leasteffort to 10 most effort. In all the questions 11 wasdon’t know and refused but there were very few ofthese. The votes were then tallied. Responses to thefirst question indicate that the CEOs thought thatit was most difficult to achieve global dimensionsand least difficult to achieve broad communityinvolvement (Table 4). In relation to effort, mosteffort went into the three dimensions of broadcommunity involvement, cost effective policies,and integrated decision-making processes (Table4). In relation to the transparency of the ESDprocess, most organizations have a neutral view(Table 4). All had heard of the process. Hence theyare neutral as to whether the process in their state istransparent. The Water Boards perceive the processas transparent. Local governments are clearly ofthe neutral view (Figure 4). In relation to abilityto achieve ESD, the local governments were mostlikely to be neutral, Water Boards and GovernmentOwned Corporations were more likely to agree thatthey can achieve it (Figure 5). In relation to workon local government and participation in RegionalNatural Resources Management Plan development,it was reported that most councils were not activebecause of a lack of resources with 56 percent ofcouncils highlighting a lack of human or financialresources to effectively participate. Only 31percent of councils believe they have a good orcomprehensive capacity to develop and implementthe regional plans (Australian Local GovernmentAssociation 2005).Water Policy and IntergovernmentalIntegrationSocial capital theory in relation to environmentalmatters has often focussed on understandinghow various actors interact with one another inrelation to the water policy environment. Byunderstanding the social capital of differentenvironmental actors, for example water users andwater policy implementers, we can understandwhy policies end up being implemented and whynoble aims often fail. The question related to trustbetween the organization and the state governmentyielded results that differed markedly among thestates. Water supply businesses in Victoria weremost likely to trust and the lowest trust level wasJOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY WATER RESEARCH & EDUCATIONUCOWR
Page 3:
Journal of ContemporaryWater Resear
Page 6 and 7:
2Bruce Hooperinstitutional, and tem
Page 11 and 12:
IWRM: Governance, Best Practice, an
Page 13 and 14:
IWRM: Defi nitions and Conceptual M
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19:
Page 22 and 23:
18Cardwell. Cole, Cartwright, and M
Page 24 and 25:
20Mostert26 water boards responsibl
Page 26 and 27:
22MostertTable 1. Third National Wa
Page 28 and 29:
24MostertImplementationThe ambitiou
Page 30 and 31:
26MostertBiswas, A. K. 2004b. Respo
Page 32 and 33:
28UNIVERSITIES COUNCIL ON WATER RES
Page 34 and 35:
30Ashton, Turton, and Rouxresource
Page 36 and 37:
32Ashton, Turton, and Rouxassumptio
Page 38 and 39:
34Ashton, Turton, and RouxEffective
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
38Hussey and Doversin water policy
Page 44 and 45:
40Hussey and Dovers1994 Council of
Page 46 and 47:
42Hussey and Doversestablished Thes
Page 48 and 49:
44Hussey and DoversTable 1. Typolog
Page 50 and 51:
46Hussey and Doversassessment appro
Page 52 and 53:
48Hussey and Doverspolicy goals.Bey
Page 54 and 55:
50Hussey and DoversFrawley, K. 1994
Page 56 and 57:
52Mitchelloften took three to four
Page 58 and 59:
54Mitchelltree preservation plans;
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
58Genskow and Borna series of chall
Page 64 and 65:
60Genskow and BornTable 1. Watershe
Page 66 and 67:
62Genskow and Bornthe first Dungene
Page 68 and 69:
64Genskow and BornWashington, DC.Ko
Page 70 and 71:
66Green and Fernández-BilbaoWithin
Page 72 and 73:
68Green and Fernández-Bilbaosubjec
Page 74 and 75:
70Green and Fernández-Bilbaoinflue
Page 76 and 77:
72Green and Fernández-BilbaoBerbel
Page 78 and 79: 74UNIVERSITIES COUNCIL ON WATER RES
Page 80 and 81: 76BallweberEstablish AdvisoryCommit
Page 82 and 83: 78Ballweberattributes in others (Ch
Page 86 and 87: 82Barreiraand ground water. To this
Page 88 and 89: 84Barreirawith other states for int
Page 92 and 93: 88Davis and ThrelfallResource Manag
Page 94 and 95: 90Davis and ThrelfallTable 2. Thirt
Page 96 and 97: 92Davis and Threlfallby regional an
Page 98 and 99: 94Davis and Threlfallenforcement, a
Page 100 and 101: 96Davis and Threlfallhusbandry prac
Page 102 and 103: 98Davis and ThrelfallNew Zealand: T
Page 104 and 105: 100UNIVERSITIES COUNCIL ON WATER RE
Page 106 and 107: 102Lamoree and van SteenbergenIt is
Page 108 and 109: 104Lamoree and van Steenbergenand n
Page 110 and 111: 106Lamoree and van Steenbergeninter
Page 112 and 113: 108BourgetWorks Planner Capability
Page 114 and 115: 110Bourgetwith over 600 people resp
Page 116 and 117: 112Bourgetgovernment’s intrusion
Page 118 and 119: 114Bourget4.management, drought man
Page 120 and 121: 116McKayFigure 1. The four paradigm
Page 122 and 123: 118McKay4. Paradigm 4 (which commen
Page 124 and 125: 120McKaythree main functions:1. ass
Page 126 and 127: 122McKayState Implementation of the
Page 130 and 131: 126McKayFigure 4. Qu. 26 - The ESD
Page 132 and 133: 128McKayFigure 7. Qu.93- This organ
Page 134 and 135: 130McKayBrundtland Report. 1987. Ou
Page 136 and 137: 132UCOWR BOARD OF DIRECTORS/COMMITT
Page 138 and 139: 134BENEFITS OF UCOWR MEMBERSHIPThe
Page 140 and 141: 136Past Issues of the Journal of Co
Page 142 and 143: 138Academic Organizations Membershi
Page 144 and 145: 140Individual Membership Applicatio
Page 146 and 147: Universities Council on Water Resou
Page 148: Integrated Water Resources Manageme
show all

Full Journal of Contemporary Water Research and Education, Issue ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?