Water Policy

Findings from a prospective study of project-induced migration along the middle route of the South-to-North Water Diversion Project in China are reported. The study seeks to identify the key factors influencing differences in immigrants’ satisfaction, from their own characteristics, family income, production conditions, living conditions, social conditions, resource conditions, and environment, using Danjiangkou Reservoir as the case study area. A questionnaire survey data with a large sample (1,031 immigrant households in the Danjiangkou Reservoir) was used for the logistic model. Analysis indicated that variables such as immigrants’ family income, as in ‘per capita net income’; immigrants’ production conditions, such as ‘quality of cultivated land’; immigrants’ living conditions, such as ‘infrastructure’; and immigrants’ social conditions, such as ‘the implementation of immigration policy’ in the case reservoir model are the most important factors that affect the immigrants’ satisfaction. The degree of importance of ‘per capita net income’, ‘quality of cultivated land’, ‘infrastructure’, and ‘the implementation of immigration policy’ was 14.8%, 16.0%, 9.2%, and 8.1%, respectively. Considering the practical implications of this research, identifying factors affecting immigrants’ satisfaction with the reservoir resettlement relocation experience could be useful for policymakers designing immigration programs.

Integrated management of surface water and groundwater can provide efficient and flexible use of water through wet and dry periods, and address the impacts of water use on other users and the environment. It can also help adaptation to climate variation and uncertainty by means of supply diversification, storage and exchange. Integrated water management is affected by surface water and groundwater resources and their connections, water use, infrastructure, governance arrangements and interactions. Although the Murray–Darling Basin is considered to be a leading example of integrated water management, surface water and groundwater resources are generally managed separately. Key reasons for this separation include the historical priority given to surface water development, the relative neglect of groundwater management, shortfalls in information about connections between groundwater and surface water and their impacts, gaps and exemptions in surface water and groundwater use entitlements and rules, coordination problems, and limited stakeholder engagement. Integration of surface water and groundwater management can be improved by the establishment of more comprehensive water use entitlements and rules, with extended carry-over periods and legislated rules for aquifer storage and recovery. Collective surface water and groundwater management offers greater efficiency and better risk management than uncoordinated individual action. There are opportunities for more effective engagement of stakeholders in planning and implementation through decentralized catchment scale organizations.