Suchergebnisse

This paper assesses the changing norms of water use known as the duty of water. It is a case study in historical socio-hydrology, or more precisely the history of socio-hydrologic ideas, a line of research that is useful for interpreting and anticipating changing social values with respect to water. The duty of water is currently defined as the amount of water reasonably required to irrigate a substantial crop with careful management and without waste on a given tract of land. The historical section of the paper traces this concept back to late 18th century analysis of steam engine efficiencies for mine dewatering in Britain. A half-century later, British irrigation engineers fundamentally altered the concept of duty to plan large-scale canal irrigation systems in northern India at an average duty of 218 acres per cubic foot per second (cfs). They justified this extensive irrigation standard (i.e., low water application rate over large areas) with a suite of social values that linked famine prevention with revenue generation and territorial control. The duty of water concept in this context articulated a form of political power, as did related irrigation engineering concepts such as "command" and "regime". Several decades later irrigation engineers in the western US adapted the duty of water concept to a different socio-hydrologic system and norms, using it to establish minimum standards for private water rights appropriation (e.g., only 40 to 80 acres per cfs). While both concepts of duty addressed socio-economic values associated with irrigation, the western US linked duty with justifications for, and limits of, water ownership. The final sections show that while the duty of water concept has been eclipsed in practice by other measures, standards, and values of water use efficiency, it has continuing relevance for examining ethical duties and for anticipating, if not predicting, emerging social values with respect to water.

This paper assesses the changing norms of water use known as the duty of water. It is a case study in historical socio-hydrology, or more precisely the history of socio-hydrologic ideas, a line of research that is useful for interpreting and anticipating changing social values with respect to water. The duty of water is currently defined as the amount of water reasonably required to irrigate a substantial crop with careful management and without waste on a given tract of land. The historical section of the paper traces this concept back to late 18th century analysis of steam engine efficiencies for mine dewatering in Britain. A half-century later, British irrigation engineers fundamentally altered the concept of duty to plan large-scale canal irrigation systems in northern India at an average duty of 218 acres per cubic foot per second (cfs). They justified this extensive irrigation standard (i.e., low water application rate over large areas) with a suite of social values that linked famine prevention with revenue generation and territorial control. The duty of water concept in this context articulated a form of political power, as did related irrigation engineering concepts such as "command" and "regime". Several decades later irrigation engineers in the western US adapted the duty of water concept to a different socio-hydrologic system and norms, using it to establish minimum standards for private water rights appropriation (e.g., only 40 to 80 acres per cfs). While both concepts of duty addressed socio-economic values associated with irrigation, the western US linked duty with justifications for, and limits of, water ownership. The final sections show that while the duty of water concept has been eclipsed in practice by other measures, standards, and values of water use efficiency, it has continuing relevance for examining ethical duties and for anticipating, if not predicting, emerging social values with respect to water.

This paper assesses the changing norms of water use known as the duty of water. It is a case study in historical socio-hydrology, or more precisely the history of socio-hydrologic ideas, a line of research that is useful for interpreting and anticipating changing social values with respect to water. The duty of water is currently defined as the amount of water reasonably required to irrigate a substantial crop with careful management and without waste on a given tract of land. The historical section of the paper traces this concept back to late 18th century analysis of steam engine efficiencies for mine dewatering in Britain. A half-century later, British irrigation engineers fundamentally altered the concept of duty to plan large-scale canal irrigation systems in northern India at an average duty of 218 acres per cubic foot per second (cfs). They justified this extensive irrigation standard (i.e., low water application rate over large areas) with a suite of social values that linked famine prevention with revenue generation and territorial control. The duty of water concept in this context articulated a form of political power, as did related irrigation engineering concepts such as "command" and "regime". Several decades later irrigation engineers in the western US adapted the duty of water concept to a different socio-hydrologic system and norms, using it to establish minimum standards for private water rights appropriation (e.g., only 40 to 80 acres per cfs). While both concepts of duty addressed socio-economic values associated with irrigation, the western US linked duty with justifications for, and limits of, water ownership. The final sections show that while the duty of water concept has been eclipsed in practice by other measures, standards, and values of water use efficiency, it has continuing relevance for examining ethical duties and for anticipating, if not predicting, emerging social values with respect to water.

We propose representation justice as a theoretical lens for socio-hydrology and water governance studies. An exploratory survey of 496 water sector employees in the United States revealed that self-identifying females felt more strongly discriminated against due to their gender and other social factors, compared to self-identifying males. Responses unveiled how macro- and microaggressions impede career pathways to leadership positions and, therefore, representation. We identify ways in which socio-hydrology can benefit from a representation justice lens by considering the following: (1) how power and politics shape the composition of the water sector and decision-making processes; (2) how available quantitative data do not account for lived experiences of individuals in the water sector; and (3) how intersectionality cannot easily be accounted for in current socio-hydrological models. We offer a representation justice research and water management agenda that goes beyond quota filling to include meaningful engagement with diverse groups, lenses, and knowledge.

We focus on the appropriation, conflicting uses and meanings of water in a semi-arid environment marked by resource spatiotemporal variability. The Amboseli ecosystem, inhabited by semi-nomadic Maasai pastoralists and many wildlife species of the East African savanna, has likewise long been a stage for enacting a multitude of top-down governmental and non-governmental conservation policies. Agriculture has also taken hold in the rangelands as a result of development initiatives, thereby contributing, along with complex interactions between numerous other social, political, economic, and ecological factors, to the sedentarization of Ilkisongo pastoralists whose livelihoods have thus recently diversified. In a context where rains are erratic and groundwater reserves are poorly known, water is often a limiting resource for forage, agriculture, and wildlife, so thus often contentious in numerous dimensions regarding access, social relations and in human–wildlife interactions. Through a collection of narratives collected in the field we examine the challenges raised by water scarcity and analyse the situation through a postcolonial, marxist, and postdevelopmental approach. The ethnographic survey involved long immersion periods among Maasai stakeholders, interviews with farmers, conservation NGOs and other institutional leaders, and participatory events were generated around role-playing games focused on water, land use and land tenure. By articulating political, economic, cultural and gender dimensions this multi-pronged methodology showcases socio-hydrology as a situated science. Our participatory approach gauges how current tension around water management can be addressed by integrating the local population, environmental managers and outsiders, with consequences for decision making at individual and collective level and for the ecosystem.

Since April 2020, the Eyes on Earth Study has received significant media attention for considering the Chinese mainstream reservoirs as one of the main drivers for changing the natural water flow and compounding the severe droughts in the Lancang-Mekong Basin. Unlike other hydrological studies, the Eyes on Earth Study polarized the international research community and received unusual media attention. While the Eyes on Earth Study raised public awareness about upstream water operations and motivated civil society to co-develop the water knowledge, there can be found numerous shortcomings and other irregularities in the current research dialogue over the research conclusions. By drawing on the politicization of scientific theories and combining the socio-hydrology with critical political ecology, the presented paper (1) conceptualizes the human-water interaction in the context of the politicization of the EoE Study, (2) reviews current development pathways in contemporary research dialogue in the Lancang-Mekong Basin, and (3) examines contemporary challenges for water science. To re-define the politicization of water science, the constructivist discourse analysis has been applied to investigate the argumentation patterns over the Eyes on Earth Study in the last 18 months (April 2020–September 2021). In addition, we applied the adapted Baker's model to double-check the content of the EoE Study and degree of alignment with high-quality research inputs. Our data show that (i) benefits from ensuring the standard research procedures outweigh the benefits from using the alternative research procedures, (ii) gradual stratification of contemporary research channels and simplification of research findings contribute to political distrust towards the water science, and (iii) growing intervention of non-traditional actors in the research dialogue produce the gap in applied discourse practices and medialize the desirable water narratives. The topic is highly actual and beneficial for water experts and other interdisciplinary scientists who want to better understand the power of hydrological studies and clarify the incentives undermining the trust in science.