Elsevier

Journal of Hydrology

Volume 474, 12 December 2012, Pages 22-28
Journal of Hydrology

Tools to enhance public participation and confidence in the development of the Howard East aquifer water plan, Northern Territory

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.02.007Get rights and content

Summary

For the first time in the Northern Territory’s water management history it is facing the challenge of managing an over-allocated groundwater resource. Rapid rural residential and agricultural development in the Howard River catchment of Darwin’s hinterland has increased competition for groundwater from the bore-field that supplements the capital’s metropolitan water supply. This has generated tensions between different water users and precipitated a water allocation plan for the Howard East aquifer. Initial context analysis indicated a widespread lack of public understanding of groundwater systems and processes, leading to misconceptions about the origin of local groundwater resources, groundwater–surface water interactions, extraction rates and impacts. In addition there is a legacy of mistrust by some peri-urban community members of government-driven planning processes to manage groundwater resources. The main objective of this study was therefore to trial two planning tools suited to this context over a 15 month period: (i) an extended stakeholder analysis and (ii) the participatory development of a 3D visualisation model, via a process described as the participatory Groundwater Visualisation Tool (GVT). The tools assisted the water planning agency to better understand stakeholder needs and interests, contributed to popular scientific understandings of hydro-geological conditions and processes, as well as captured local knowledge and values in preparation for an open and effective planning process.

Highlights

► Participatory planning tools contributed to social learning. ► Stakeholder analysis improved understanding of the needs of water users. ► Visualisation tool improved water user understanding of hydrogeology and limits to extraction. ► Local knowledge and independent expertise built confidence in planning process.

Introduction

Water management institutions are evolving in north Australia in the face of national-scale legal and economic reforms and in the context of variable hydrological systems (Straton et al., 2010, Tan, 2008). Several drivers are influencing the course of water management in Australia’s tropics including increasing awareness of the full range of social, economic, environmental and cultural values for water, institutional changes to water allocation systems, intensifying land use and concomitant growing demand for water for irrigated agriculture and increasing uncertainty about water supplies in the face of climate change (Gehrke, 2005, Jackson et al., 2008). As demand for water grows, north Australian jurisdictions are progressing slowly towards compliance with the National Water Initiative (NWI) directives, yet water planning has been undertaken in only a relatively small number of catchments (Jackson and Altman, 2009, Tan, 2008). In the Northern Territory three water allocation plans have been completed.

Section snippets

Planning context

The Northern Territory’s Howard River catchment covers approximately 1500 km2 immediately adjacent to the capital city of Darwin (Fig. 1). The catchment has a mixture of land tenures, including leasehold for pastoral activities, mineral leases and permits for extraction and exploration, and freehold title. Land use within the catchment provides for peri-urban townships, Aboriginal and recreation sites, and horticultural and pastoral production. Water is sourced from private bore-fields and two

Planning problem

The rights of stakeholders to participate in water use decisions are now widely recognised and often enshrined in policy frameworks, such as the Australian National Water Initiative (COAG, 2004) and the European Union Water Framework Directive (Commission of the European Communities, 2002), which urges states to involve interested parties as early as possible in planning processes (Straton et al., 2010). According to Straton et al. (2010), there is demand for tools that can (i) effectively

Extended stakeholder analysis

Considering the limited experience in water planning in the case study area, a stakeholder analysis was considered to be an important first step for ‘setting the scene’ for future community and stakeholder engagement (Nolan, 2009). In most water planning processes in Northern Australia, this is a quick, informal exercise. A more comprehensive stakeholder analysis (Brugha and Varvasovszky, 2000, Grimble, 1998) would identify the actors that needed to be involved in local water planning, examine

Results and outcomes

The Stakeholder Analysis was found to be of significant value to the water agency (Chris Wicks, pers. com.). It was first used to select representatives for the Water Advisory Committee formed in late 2010 (NRETAS relied heavily on the Analysis for a submission to the Northern Territory Cabinet). Excerpts from the document usefully contributed to a community engagement plan, and an agency issues paper to generate discussions about key issues of concern to be discussed by the Water Advisory

Discussion and conclusion

The participatory process that underpinned this research proved to be a source of strength as well as a challenge. On commencement of the project, researchers were expecting to work with a water advisory committee, in an active drafting phase for a water plan. Due to a delay to the start of the planning process beyond the control of NRETAS, we were compelled to redesign our research methods. On reflection, three observations may be drawn.

First, it was essential that there was adequate time to

Acknowledgements

The Water Planning Tools Project would like to acknowledge the extensive contribution of time, effort, and expertise in building the GVS provided by Associate Professor Mal Cox and his team from the Faculty of Science and Technology, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia. Acknowledgement is also due to the Queensland water agency (DERM) for co-funding the project in the Condamine, to DERM and NRETAs for provision of data, and to stakeholders in the Howard East for sharing

References (30)

  • Gehrke, P., 2005. Sustainable futures for Australia’s tropical rivers: introduction to current research and information...
  • R. Grimble

    Stakeholder Methodologies in Natural Resource Management. Socio-Economic Methodologies Best Practice Guidelines

    (1998)
  • J. Habermas

    The Theory of Communicative Action

    (1984)
  • Hawke, A., James, A., Cox, M., Young, J., 2009. Approach to developing a 3D conceptual hydrogeology model, in a system...
  • S. Jackson et al.

    Indigenous rights and water policy: perspectives from tropical north Australia

    Aust. Indigen. Law Rev.

    (2009)
  • Cited by (17)

    • Groundwater Visualisation System (GVS): A software framework for integrated display and interrogation of conceptual hydrogeological models, data and time-series animation

      2013, Journal of Hydrology
      Citation Excerpt :

      However, they are often only approximate, or even erroneous, due to being based on limited or poor data, or an inadequate, or overly complex, conceptual hydrogeological model (e.g. Bredehoeft, 2005; Voss, 2011; Gillespie et al., 2012). In addition, within management procedures these numerical models are usually not available to most stakeholders, or are presented in report form only, and in many cases of policy implementation are not trusted by communities (e.g. Jackson et al., 2012; Tan et al., 2012). This latter observation is also supported by our own experience (Todd et al., 2010).

    • Deliberative tools for meeting the challenges of water planning in Australia

      2012, Journal of Hydrology
      Citation Excerpt :

      A case study on groundwater provides evidence (Baldwin et al., 2012, this issue). Evaluations in the Howard East study show one example of confidence building and how this was measured (Jackson et al., 2012a, this issue). Historical distrust of government data and processes existed in the study area, constituting major hurdles for the planning process of a groundwater resource.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text