Search

Analyzing collaborative practices among water governance institutions is key to generating timely information for stakeholders, policymakers, and researchers -as these are rethinking their goals and network structures to find the most productive avenues for collective work. This study draws on existing collaboration theories to characterize and analyze science-policy interactions between researchers, water managers, non-governmental organizations, and consultants who have participated or currently participate in water management and recharge projects in Mexico. We sampled 70 people that had worked or are working on water recharge projects in eight Mexican states in three broad regions: Baja California, Baja California Sur, Chihuahua, Sonora (northern); Estado de Mexico, San Luis Potosí, Mexico City (central); and Oaxaca (southern). Participants represented research institutions, non-governmental organizations, universities, federal, state, and municipal governments, and consultants. The data were collected using a mixed-methods approach (i.e., semi-structured interviews; online surveys). We identified science-policy interactions between researchers, policymakers, and non-governmental organizations critical to effectively developing and implementing water recharge projects. Our results find that trust and stakeholder participation are the most critical elements for building collaborative relationships. Finding ways to supersede structural challenges and promote science-policy collaboration among sectors and interagency with water management responsibilities will help achieve environmental and policy goals and increase water recharge development across Mexico. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the impacts of shrub encroachment on the ecosystem processes have been well-documented, little is known about the extent to which socio-cultural values and perceptions might influence actions undertaken to manage shrub proliferation. Understanding stakeholder values is important because the ecosystem's capacity to supply a given service or suite of services must be balanced against the value society places on them. Research to date has emphasized supply with little consideration of value, making it difficult to comprehensively or objectively evaluate trade-offs and set priorities, particularly when managing for one particular service or a suite of services that may adversely affect other services. To address this, we conducted a case study in Southern Arizona and New Mexico (USA) to evaluate stakeholder perceptions of and preferences for various ecosystem services provided on semi-arid rangelands where shrub proliferation has impacted traditional livestock grazing. Perceptions of rangeland ecosystem services were elicited via a visually based landscape interpretation while preferences were quantified using best-worst scaling (BWS). Our findings suggest that stakeholders familiar with rangelands and their management generally perceive low shrub cover as providing a wider range of valued ecosystem services compared to rangelands with high shrub cover. Contrary to expectations, ecosystem service preferences in the context of shrub encroachment were generally uniform across all stakeholder groups (e.g., ranchers, state/federal governmental employees, non-governmental land managers, academicians, recreationists), with habitat for biodiversity and erosion control being identified as the most preferred. Accordingly, our results indicate that the widespread perception/assumption that ranchers in this region undertake brush management to enhance livestock production solely for economic gain is seen as too narrow. Our results also suggest an opportunity for brush management to serve as a potential win-win management action if framed as a way to maintain or promote rangeland biodiversity and mitigate erosion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Forests play an important role with respect to water resources, and can be managed to increase surface- and groundwater recharge. With the creation of a forest water yield payment system, privately-owned forests, which comprise the majority of forest area in the Southeastern US, could become an important potential source of additional water supply. The economic tradeoffs between timber revenues and water yield are not well understood. To address this, we use the example case of slash pine production in Florida, and employ a forest stand-level optimal rotation model that incorporates forest management, and assessed a range of feasible water yield prices on forest profitability. Our analysis was limited to a range of water yield prices ($0.03, $0.07, and $0.30 kL-1) that would make water yield from slash pine economically competitive with water supply alternatives (e.g., reservoir construction). Even at relatively low water prices, we found that managing slash pine forests for both timber and water yield was preferred to managing just for timber when assuming an initial tree density less than 2200 trees.ha-1. However, with higher levels of initial tree planting density and low water prices, managing slash pine for timber production alone was more profitable unless stands are heavily-thinned, suggesting that even mid-rotation stands could be included in a forest water yield payments program. Compared to low-tree planting density and lightly thinned slash pine forests, an intensive approach of planting a lot of trees and then heavily thinning them generated 8% to 33% higher profits, and 11% more ($192 ha-1) on average. We conclude that payments for water yield are economically feasible for slash pine stands in Florida, and would benefit forest landowners, particularly with higher prices for water yield. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]