Loading…
Comparative analysis of institutions to govern the groundwater commons in California
The management of groundwater, a common-pool resource, is a fundamental collective action problem that can lead to over-exploitation. Our paper examines the management of two groundwater basins in California’s Central Coast region whose geographic proximity, land use patterns, socioeconomic characte...
Saved in:
Published in: | Water alternatives 2018-10, Vol.11 (3), p.481-510 |
---|---|
Main Author: | |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | |
---|---|
cites | |
container_end_page | 510 |
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 481 |
container_title | Water alternatives |
container_volume | 11 |
creator | Ruth Langridge and Christopher Ansell |
description | The management of groundwater, a common-pool resource, is a fundamental collective action problem that can lead to over-exploitation. Our paper examines the management of two groundwater basins in California’s Central Coast region whose geographic proximity, land use patterns, socioeconomic characteristics, and timing of institutional formation provide an ideal basis for comparative study. However, each basin is governed by a distinctive institutional configuration. The Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency is a legislatively created Special Act District with a collective public management focus, while the Santa Paula Groundwater Basin is managed through a court adjudication with a rights-based focus. We compare the legal and administrative foundations of these institutional arrangements and examine their implications for the polycentric regulation of sustainable groundwater use. We find that while adjudication may specify groundwater rights, an approach that scholars argue can be critical for achieving sustainability, it also promotes insularity with a wider polycentric system and this ultimately limits its management strategies. The Special Act District, by contrast, does not encourage as clear an allocation of water rights, but does encourage a broad sustainability mission and wider polycentric engagement, though it still struggles with declining groundwater levels. Ultimately, neither institutional arrangement fully addresses the problem of groundwater sustainability. This suggests the need for further research on how institutional configurations and developmental pathways impact resource outcomes. |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_650739ff7c0b4796be0c8be155f3e0fd</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_650739ff7c0b4796be0c8be155f3e0fd</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>2119922750</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-d249t-58028f5d15c1c8d081c70ee0b3f223859ada7a1ce49f78d5a843f0a4ab06fd8a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNkMtqwzAURE1poWnafxB0bbiyLEtaFtNHINBNujbXeqQKtpVKckr-vmnTRVYzDIezmKtiQVXDS6CCX1_02-IupR1A0yiQi2LThnGPEbM_WIITDsfkEwmO-Clln-fsw5RIDmQbDjZOJH9aso1hnsw3ZhuJDuP4S_iJtDh4F-Lk8b64cTgk-_Cfy-Lj5XnTvpXr99dV-7QuTVWrXHIJlXTcUK6plgYk1QKshZ65qmKSKzQokGpbKyek4Shr5gBr7KFxRiJbFquz1wTcdfvoR4zHLqDv_oYQtx3G7PVgu4aDYMo5oaGvhWp6C1r2lnLumAVnTq7Hs2sfw9dsU-52YY6nQ1JXUapUVQkO7AchnGf4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2119922750</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparative analysis of institutions to govern the groundwater commons in California</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</source><creator>Ruth Langridge and Christopher Ansell</creator><creatorcontrib>Ruth Langridge and Christopher Ansell</creatorcontrib><description>The management of groundwater, a common-pool resource, is a fundamental collective action problem that can lead to over-exploitation. Our paper examines the management of two groundwater basins in California’s Central Coast region whose geographic proximity, land use patterns, socioeconomic characteristics, and timing of institutional formation provide an ideal basis for comparative study. However, each basin is governed by a distinctive institutional configuration. The Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency is a legislatively created Special Act District with a collective public management focus, while the Santa Paula Groundwater Basin is managed through a court adjudication with a rights-based focus. We compare the legal and administrative foundations of these institutional arrangements and examine their implications for the polycentric regulation of sustainable groundwater use. We find that while adjudication may specify groundwater rights, an approach that scholars argue can be critical for achieving sustainability, it also promotes insularity with a wider polycentric system and this ultimately limits its management strategies. The Special Act District, by contrast, does not encourage as clear an allocation of water rights, but does encourage a broad sustainability mission and wider polycentric engagement, though it still struggles with declining groundwater levels. Ultimately, neither institutional arrangement fully addresses the problem of groundwater sustainability. This suggests the need for further research on how institutional configurations and developmental pathways impact resource outcomes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1965-0175</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1965-0175</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Montpellier: Water Alternatives Association</publisher><subject>adjudicated groundwater basins ; Adjudication ; Basins ; California ; Comparative analysis ; Comparative studies ; comparative study ; Configurations ; Exploitation ; facilitating conditions ; Groundwater ; Groundwater basins ; Groundwater levels ; Groundwater management ; Land use ; polycentric ; Resource management ; Socioeconomic factors ; special act groundwater districts ; Sustainability ; Sustainable use ; Water management ; Water rights</subject><ispartof>Water alternatives, 2018-10, Vol.11 (3), p.481-510</ispartof><rights>Copyright Water Alternatives Association Oct 2018</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2119922750?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,25752,37011,44589</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ruth Langridge and Christopher Ansell</creatorcontrib><title>Comparative analysis of institutions to govern the groundwater commons in California</title><title>Water alternatives</title><description>The management of groundwater, a common-pool resource, is a fundamental collective action problem that can lead to over-exploitation. Our paper examines the management of two groundwater basins in California’s Central Coast region whose geographic proximity, land use patterns, socioeconomic characteristics, and timing of institutional formation provide an ideal basis for comparative study. However, each basin is governed by a distinctive institutional configuration. The Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency is a legislatively created Special Act District with a collective public management focus, while the Santa Paula Groundwater Basin is managed through a court adjudication with a rights-based focus. We compare the legal and administrative foundations of these institutional arrangements and examine their implications for the polycentric regulation of sustainable groundwater use. We find that while adjudication may specify groundwater rights, an approach that scholars argue can be critical for achieving sustainability, it also promotes insularity with a wider polycentric system and this ultimately limits its management strategies. The Special Act District, by contrast, does not encourage as clear an allocation of water rights, but does encourage a broad sustainability mission and wider polycentric engagement, though it still struggles with declining groundwater levels. Ultimately, neither institutional arrangement fully addresses the problem of groundwater sustainability. This suggests the need for further research on how institutional configurations and developmental pathways impact resource outcomes.</description><subject>adjudicated groundwater basins</subject><subject>Adjudication</subject><subject>Basins</subject><subject>California</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Comparative studies</subject><subject>comparative study</subject><subject>Configurations</subject><subject>Exploitation</subject><subject>facilitating conditions</subject><subject>Groundwater</subject><subject>Groundwater basins</subject><subject>Groundwater levels</subject><subject>Groundwater management</subject><subject>Land use</subject><subject>polycentric</subject><subject>Resource management</subject><subject>Socioeconomic factors</subject><subject>special act groundwater districts</subject><subject>Sustainability</subject><subject>Sustainable use</subject><subject>Water management</subject><subject>Water rights</subject><issn>1965-0175</issn><issn>1965-0175</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNpNkMtqwzAURE1poWnafxB0bbiyLEtaFtNHINBNujbXeqQKtpVKckr-vmnTRVYzDIezmKtiQVXDS6CCX1_02-IupR1A0yiQi2LThnGPEbM_WIITDsfkEwmO-Clln-fsw5RIDmQbDjZOJH9aso1hnsw3ZhuJDuP4S_iJtDh4F-Lk8b64cTgk-_Cfy-Lj5XnTvpXr99dV-7QuTVWrXHIJlXTcUK6plgYk1QKshZ65qmKSKzQokGpbKyek4Shr5gBr7KFxRiJbFquz1wTcdfvoR4zHLqDv_oYQtx3G7PVgu4aDYMo5oaGvhWp6C1r2lnLumAVnTq7Hs2sfw9dsU-52YY6nQ1JXUapUVQkO7AchnGf4</recordid><startdate>20181001</startdate><enddate>20181001</enddate><creator>Ruth Langridge and Christopher Ansell</creator><general>Water Alternatives Association</general><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BFMQW</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20181001</creationdate><title>Comparative analysis of institutions to govern the groundwater commons in California</title><author>Ruth Langridge and Christopher Ansell</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-d249t-58028f5d15c1c8d081c70ee0b3f223859ada7a1ce49f78d5a843f0a4ab06fd8a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>adjudicated groundwater basins</topic><topic>Adjudication</topic><topic>Basins</topic><topic>California</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Comparative studies</topic><topic>comparative study</topic><topic>Configurations</topic><topic>Exploitation</topic><topic>facilitating conditions</topic><topic>Groundwater</topic><topic>Groundwater basins</topic><topic>Groundwater levels</topic><topic>Groundwater management</topic><topic>Land use</topic><topic>polycentric</topic><topic>Resource management</topic><topic>Socioeconomic factors</topic><topic>special act groundwater districts</topic><topic>Sustainability</topic><topic>Sustainable use</topic><topic>Water management</topic><topic>Water rights</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ruth Langridge and Christopher Ansell</creatorcontrib><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Continental Europe Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution & Environmental Quality</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Water alternatives</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ruth Langridge and Christopher Ansell</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparative analysis of institutions to govern the groundwater commons in California</atitle><jtitle>Water alternatives</jtitle><date>2018-10-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>481</spage><epage>510</epage><pages>481-510</pages><issn>1965-0175</issn><eissn>1965-0175</eissn><abstract>The management of groundwater, a common-pool resource, is a fundamental collective action problem that can lead to over-exploitation. Our paper examines the management of two groundwater basins in California’s Central Coast region whose geographic proximity, land use patterns, socioeconomic characteristics, and timing of institutional formation provide an ideal basis for comparative study. However, each basin is governed by a distinctive institutional configuration. The Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency is a legislatively created Special Act District with a collective public management focus, while the Santa Paula Groundwater Basin is managed through a court adjudication with a rights-based focus. We compare the legal and administrative foundations of these institutional arrangements and examine their implications for the polycentric regulation of sustainable groundwater use. We find that while adjudication may specify groundwater rights, an approach that scholars argue can be critical for achieving sustainability, it also promotes insularity with a wider polycentric system and this ultimately limits its management strategies. The Special Act District, by contrast, does not encourage as clear an allocation of water rights, but does encourage a broad sustainability mission and wider polycentric engagement, though it still struggles with declining groundwater levels. Ultimately, neither institutional arrangement fully addresses the problem of groundwater sustainability. This suggests the need for further research on how institutional configurations and developmental pathways impact resource outcomes.</abstract><cop>Montpellier</cop><pub>Water Alternatives Association</pub><tpages>30</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1965-0175 |
ispartof | Water alternatives, 2018-10, Vol.11 (3), p.481-510 |
issn | 1965-0175 1965-0175 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_650739ff7c0b4796be0c8be155f3e0fd |
source | Publicly Available Content Database (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3) |
subjects | adjudicated groundwater basins Adjudication Basins California Comparative analysis Comparative studies comparative study Configurations Exploitation facilitating conditions Groundwater Groundwater basins Groundwater levels Groundwater management Land use polycentric Resource management Socioeconomic factors special act groundwater districts Sustainability Sustainable use Water management Water rights |
title | Comparative analysis of institutions to govern the groundwater commons in California |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T17%3A59%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparative%20analysis%20of%20institutions%20to%20govern%20the%20groundwater%20commons%20in%20California&rft.jtitle=Water%20alternatives&rft.au=Ruth%20Langridge%20and%20Christopher%20Ansell&rft.date=2018-10-01&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=481&rft.epage=510&rft.pages=481-510&rft.issn=1965-0175&rft.eissn=1965-0175&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E2119922750%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-d249t-58028f5d15c1c8d081c70ee0b3f223859ada7a1ce49f78d5a843f0a4ab06fd8a3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2119922750&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |