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

IWRM: Defi nitions and Conceptual Musings13interests might be incorporated into planningand implementation to improve efficiency andeffectiveness? What are the cumulative long-termimpacts of management in a dynamic environmentand how might they be controlled through moreintegrated long-term planning? Whereas activitieswill differ in the degree of integration that isappropriate over each of these axes, the axes seta context to consider the appropriate degree ofintegration.Spatial Integration – The need to scope aproblem in a geographic or spatial manner is ascommon to project planners as it would be tooperators and regulators. Critical connectionscan be overlooked if a project plan, operatingplan, or regulatory decision limits considerationto interactions immediately upstream anddownstream. Conversely, it would be folly toanalyze interactions 1000 miles upstream ifthey were known not to affect the activity underconsideration. Thus a basic analytical challengefor IWRM is to scope the analysis broadly enoughspatially to consider all important consequencesof all interactions, but narrowly enough to beefficient in making decisions about planning,operations, regulations, and other considerations.In the realm of water resources management, planformulation is most often scoped in a geographydefined by the reach of watershed or coastalprocess into the planning environment, but planevaluation of the economic and environmentalconsequences considers a spatial context definedby business-system interactions that may notalign with the hydrology.Integration of Objectives – Objectives abound inwater resources management, so how do we considerwhich objectives to integrate? The significance ofthe effects on resource condition is a good guide.The effect can be positive or negative. A positiveeffect on resources produces significant benefits,that is, benefits that exceed costs. A negative effectresults in unacceptable environmental or othercosts. If the environmental effect is expected to benegative and significant, National EnvironmentalPolicy Act guidelines require an assessment ofenvironmental impacts and incorporation of thecosts of avoiding, minimizing, and compensatingfor the negative effect in project plans. In this way,environmental and national economic developmentobjectives are integrated for optimal societal result.Environmental assessment under the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act details how proposedmanagement activities affect a larger number ofobjectives. As with scoping spatially, if impactsof the proposed management activity on variousobjectives are not “significant,” then the scope ofintegration over objectives can be narrower. Inaddition to national objectives, water managementmust consider local or regional objectives, whichmay conflict with national objectives. This tensionbetween local and national interests in watermanagement has a long history and helped spurthe development of the Principles and Guidelinesto ensure that Federal water expenditures servednational as well as local objectives.Institutional Integration – Many institutionshave unique authorities and mandates thataffect water resources; hence the commonplaceinvolvement of multiple governmental and nongovernmentalinstitutions in water management.Yet what institutions need to be involved? Againthe issue is one of scope and degree – of whichorganizations to involve and how to involvethem. A rule of thumb would be if the plannedaction may significantly affect (or be affectedby) other institutions, then activities should beintegrated or at least coordinated. Institutions arealso hierarchically organized—internationallyto locally, for example. Generally, broad publicservice goals and objectives, established in lawsand executive orders originating in the top layer ofgovernment, are served via integration of agency,program, and project levels of execution. This interorganizationalvertical integration often shows upmost clearly in annual budget allocation decisions.An organizational strategic plan can facilitate thisintegration or confuse it.Integration over Time – Time pervades theconsideration of the degree of integration overthe other three axes. For example, communitywater-supply planners must consider long-termdemographic, economic or land use trends inthe immediate service area, but also coordinatedoperation of basin-wide infrastructure on a dailyor finer time scale. Objectives also may bedefined on differing time scales—acute waterquality conditions versus flow regimes that woulddepend on rainfall that year, or may change overJOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY WATER RESEARCH & EDUCATIONUCOWR