Search

We consider the connection between water marketing and the modification of property rights to water in Australia, highlighting the Australian's distinctiveness through a contrast with water rights in the western US (especially California). Australia started out the same as California, but in the 1880s it abandoned California's system and adopted a new approach, ending the common law property right to water and creating a statutory right that could be modified by administrative fiat. This shifted the arena for dispute resolution from courts to parliaments. It eliminated the seniority inherent in appropriative water rights and it sidelined issues of third-party impacts. Another difference was the tight control of irrigation institutions by state governments and the national government's willingness to intervene in state and local water management. Australian water reform was wrapped in politics. When there were successes, this is because the politics were managed adroitly; when political challenges proved insurmountable, reform stalled. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Downscaled climate change projections for California, when translated into changes in irrigation water delivery and then into profit from agriculture in the Central Valley, show an increase in conventional measures of variability such as the variance. However, these increases are modest and mask a more pronounced increase in downside risk, defined as the probability of unfavorable outcomes of water supply or profit. This paper describes the concept of downside risk and measures it as it applies to outcomes for Central Valley agriculture projected under four climate change scenarios. We compare the effect of downside risk aversion versus conventional risk aversion or risk neutrality when assessing the impact of climate change on the profitability of Central Valley agriculture. We find that, when downside risk is considered, the assessment of losses due to climate change increases substantially. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Climate change will affect the demand of many resources that households consume, including electricity and natural gas. Although price is considered an effective tool for controlling demand for many resources that households consume, including electricity and natural gas, there is disagreement about the exact magnitude of the price elasticity. Part of the problem is that demand is confounded by block pricing and the interrelated consumption of electricity and natural gas, which prevent easy estimation of price impacts. Block pricing suggests that the purchaser controls the marginal price of a commodity by the quantity purchased, turning price into an endogenous variable. Interrelated consumption indicates that demand for one resource is affected by the price of another. These complications have made difficult the estimation of the price elasticity of demand for resources and consequently the household-level impact of climate change, which will affect resource supplies. This paper evaluates statistical tools for estimating the joint demand for natural gas and electricity when both resources face a block price setting and develops estimates of own and cross price elasticity. We use data from the Federal Residential Energy Consumption Survey, along with utility price data, to estimate the household demand for electricity and natural gas in California as separate commodities. We then use a joint estimation procedure to evaluate the household demand for natural gas and electricity. Finally, we evaluate the degree to which block pricing and interrelated demand affect the price elasticity of demand for the two resources. The paper ends by noting the continuing uncertainty surrounding the use of price to manage household demand for electricity and natural gas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since 2006 the scientific community in California, in cooperation with resource managers, has been conducting periodic statewide studies about the potential impacts of climate change on natural and managed systems. This Special Issue is a compilation of revised papers that originate from the most recent assessment that concluded in 2009. As with the 2006 studies that influenced the passage of California's landmark Global Warming Solutions Act (AB32), these papers have informed policy formulation at the state level, helping bring climate adaptation as a complementary measure to mitigation. We provide here a brief introduction to the papers included in this Special Issue focusing on how they are coordinated and support each other. We describe the common set of downscaled climate and sea-level rise scenarios used in this assessment that came from six different global climate models (GCMs) run under two greenhouse gas emissions scenarios: B1 (low emissions) and A2 (a medium-high emissions). Recommendations for future state assessments, some of which are being implemented in an on-going new assessment that will be completed in 2012, are offered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Climate change impacts and potential adaptation strategies were assessed using an application of the Water Evaluation and Planning (WEAP) system developed for the Sacramento River basin and Delta export region of the San Joaquin Valley. WEAP is an integrated rainfall/runoff, water resources systems modeling framework that can be forced directly from time series of climatic input to estimate water supplies (watershed runoff) and demands (crop evapotranspiration). We applied the model to evaluate the hydrologic implications of 12 climate change scenarios as well as the water management ramifications of the implied hydrologic changes. In addition to evaluating the impacts of climate change with current operations, the model also assessed the impacts of changing agricultural management strategies in response to a changing climate. These adaptation strategies included improvements in irrigation technology and shifts in cropping patterns towards higher valued crops. Model simulations suggested that increasing agricultural demand under climate change brought on by increasing temperature will place additional stress on the water system, such that some water users will experience a decrease in water supply reliability. The study indicated that adaptation strategies may ease the burden on the water management system. However, offsetting water demands through these approaches will not be enough to fully combat the impacts of climate change on water management. To adequately address the impacts of climate change, adaptation strategies will have to include fundamental changes in the ways in which the water management system is operated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The paper reviews the history of Bay-Delta decision-making in California in order to highlight the continuity between what happened with CALFED and what happened in the preceding decades since water project deliveries began in 1949. Throughout this period, there has been intense conflict about whether and how to transfer water from the Bay-Delta to users elsewhere—a conflict marked by a fundamental opposition of interests among stakeholders. We document how the State of California has failed to organize itself effectively to resolve this conflict and make a decision on how to manage the Delta. The strategy consistently adopted by the State was to encourage the main parties – agricultural and urban water diverters, and fisheries and other instream-protection interests – to work out a solution among themselves, rather than imposing one externally. However, economic theory suggests that a bargaining solution is unlikely to exist because of the extreme opposition of interest among the parties. The Bay-Delta history amply confirms this theoretical prediction. Thus, the State''s strategy of relying on voluntary agreement to resolve the issue is fundamentally misconceived and is, at some level, an abdication of its responsibility. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Over the last few years, California has passed some of the strongest climate policies in the USA. These new policies have been motivated in part by increasing concerns over the risk of climate-related impacts and facilitated by the state's existing framework of energy and air quality policies. This paper presents an overview of the evolution of this increased awareness of climate change issues by policy makers brought about by the strong link between climate science and policy in the state. The State Legislature initiated this link in 1988 with the mandate to prepare an assessment of the potential consequences of climate change to California. Further interactions between science and policy has more recently resulted, in summer of 2006, in the passage of Assembly Bill 32, a law that limits future greenhouse gas emissions in California. This paper discusses the important role played by a series of state and regional climate assessments beginning in 1988 and, in particular, the lessons learned from a recently completed study known as the Scenarios Project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to an Executive Order by California Governor Schwarzenegger, an evaluation of the implications to California of possible climate changes was undertaken using a scenario-based approach. The "Scenarios Project" investigated projected impacts of climate change on six sectors in the California region. The investigation considered the early, middle and later portions of the twenty-first century, guided by a set of IPCC Fourth Assessment global climate model runs forced by higher and lower greenhouse gas emission scenarios. Each of these climate simulations produce substantial impacts in California that would require adaptations from present practices or status. The most severe impacts could be avoided, however, if emissions can be held near the lower end of global greenhouse gas emissions scenarios. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on how California's Green House Gas (GHG) laws were enacted and their difference in context with the pollution control strategies under the 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA) amendments, adopted by the federal government. Among several differences noted, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) focuses on CO2 emissions from electricity generation, while California focuses on all GHG emissions from all sources.

There is an emerging consensus in the scientific community that climate change has the potential to significantly alter prevailing hydrologic patterns in California over the course of the 21st Century. This is of profound importance for a system where large investments have been made in hydraulic infrastructure that has been designed and is operated to harmonize dramatic temporal and spatial water supply and water demand variability. Recent work by the authors led to the creation of an integrated hydrology/water management climate change impact assessment framework that can be used to identify tradeoffs between important ecosystem services provided by the California water system associated with future climate change and to evaluate possible adaptation strategies. In spite of the potential impact of climate change, and the availability of a tool for investigating its dimensions, actual water management decision-making processes in California have yet to fully integrate climate change analysis into their planning dialogues. This paper presents an overview of decision-making processes ranked based on the application of a 3S: Sensitivity, Significance, and Stakeholder support, standard, which demonstrates that while climate change is a crucial factor in virtually all water-related decision making in California, it has not typically been considered, at least in any analytical sense. The three highest ranked processes are described in more detail, in particular the role that the new analytical framework could play in arriving at more resilient water management decisions. The authors will engage with stakeholders in these three processes, in hope of moving climate change research from the academic to the policy making arena. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]