Office for Environmental Programs - Theses

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Modelling the effect of environmental flows on riparian vegetation
    Wand, Joanna Elizabeth Marion ( 2012)
    The anthropogenic alteration of flow regimes through river regulation is having profound negative effects on riparian ecosystems worldwide (Webb et al. 2010b). Maintaining the integrity of river ecosystems is essential for the continual provision of ecological services to benefit the natural environmental and human uses. In South-East Australia, alterations to flow frequency for irrigation and water supply have disrupted native biota and resulted in a decline in ecosystem health. Riparian vegetation, in particular, supplies key ecosystem services and is sensitive to alterations in the natural hydrological regime. Managers are attempting to balance ecological needs through 'environmental flows'. However, there is little evidence supporting the effectiveness of this river restoration method (Lake 2001). Sound decision making for allocating flows is dependent on strong scientific evidence describing the causal relationships in the ecological system (de Little et al. 2012). This project used a rigourous process to promote the use of evidence-based synthesis and build evidence for causality between 'environmental flows' and native riparian vegetation abundance. This project aimed to build a Bayesian belief Network (BBN) to assist in the management of riparian systems in South-East Australia. Initially, causal linkages in a conceptual model, which described the relationships between flow and vegetation response, were defined through a causal criteria analysis in the form of a systematic literature review. The review found support for causal links between the frequency of high flow and an increase in condition. In addition, the review found an increase in over bank flows and an increase in germination, a decrease in woody adult mortality and an increase in herbaceous vegetation and woody seedling mortality. Some linkages showed support
  • Item
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    A systematic assessment of major water institutional mechanisms in the Murray Darling Basin during 1905 to 2011
    Ye, Fengya ( 2012)
    Murray-Darling Basin (MDB) is located in south-east Australia. The basin has significant agricultural and ecological value and is considered as the food bawl of Australia. However because of over allocation of water for irrigation, the basin is now suffering many environmental problems including salinity and change of flow regime. Climate change adds more threats to the basin. The crisis of MDB is attributed to the failure of river governance. Efforts have been taken by Australian governments. Many reform of water governance in MDB have been carried out since year 1905 trying to manage MDB in a better way. However, little progress has been made. Assessments of the governance mechanisms have been taken by scholars to find the reason of governance failure. These studies successfully identified some flaws in previous governance mechanisms. However most of the studies lack comprehensive assessment of the problem and the results provided are not comparable. The assessments thus provide limited understanding of the governance in the basin. In this research, a quantitative and comprehensive assessment of some major basin level water governance mechanisms from 1905 to 2011 has been carried out. The information for of the governance was collected through an intensive literature review. A set of indicators which support the good river governance has been adopted to assess the governance mechanisms and a scoring system was used to convert the narrative assessment to quantitative data. Then the assessment of governance in different period has been conducted. An analysis of the availability of information has also been carried out to analysis the type of information available in the reviewed literatures. Thirteen governance mechanisms has been assessed in this research, which includes: 1905 VSRWSC, 1915 River Murray Waters Agreement, 1915 River Murray Commission/Murray-Darling Basin Commission (MDBC), 1989 Water Act, 1992 MDBMC, 1994 CoAG water reform framework , 1995 Water Cap, 2000 National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality, 2004 NWI, 2004 Living Murray First Step, 2007 MDBA, 2008 Return to Balance, 2011 Murray Darling Basin Plan. The result shows that there is an uneven development of each indicator during the time. Two different pressures have been identified which contribute to the uneven development. The first is environmental problems and the change of understanding. The second pressure is the tension and complexity of federation government in Australia. The availability of information in literatures reveals the interests of scholars for the federal level water governance mechanism assessment, researchers have less interest in assessing management method which is partly due to the federation tension in the basin governance. There are some limitations of this research, first is the information been analysis is limited. Also the scoring system ignored the time scale of governance mechanism and the possible institutional path dependence of the governance mechanisms. The lack of the understanding of the relationships among the indicators and the success of governance mechanisms is still not clear.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Determining the benefits of community engagement at South East Water and ways to evaluate them
    Iskandar, Joanna ( 2012)
    Community engagement is increasingly being adopted by government organisations in western democracies, such as Australia. While there are numerous examples of literature highlighting lessons learned and golden rules for practising community engagement, there is less evidence illustrating the value of engaging community. South East Water, a Victorian water authority, identify 'customer and community' as one of their four key values and employ a dedicated community engagement team. A independent review of the South East Water community engagement program in 2011 revealed there was an expectation from senior management that the value of community engagement be evaluated. This led the author, who is a South East Water employee, to undertake this research project with the view of providing insight into the development of an evaluation framework that meets South East Water's needs. The first step in developing a framework is to define success as this differs for each organisation depending on their values and drivers. Hence, the purpose of this study was to determine the benefits of community engagement for South East Water and identify ways these could be evaluated. A qualitative design was employed, using semi-structured interviews to obtain viewpoints from seven South East Water decision-makers and two community leaders involved in South East Water engagement projects. Participants were asked to provide an example of a positive community engagement experience, with benefits of community engagement and ideas on how to evaluate these benefits being drawn out as part of the interview process. The data obtained from the interviews was categorised into themes with five main benefits emerging: innovation and creativity, trust, efficiency, fairness and legitimacy and water literacy. Less clarity was obtained about how to evaluate these benefits. While a handful of participants promoted the value of qualitative evidence including stories and case-studies, other participants suggested a need for more quantitative evidence, including attitudinal satisfaction questionnaires and an economic model that puts a monetary value on the value of community engagement. This study highlighted the complexities of evaluating community engagement including the difficulty in justifying outcomes that are often intangible, indirect and/or interrelated. It also illustrated the importance of selecting the right tool and applying a balance of positivist and constructionist approaches depending on the purpose of the evaluation. Being explicit about the underlying assumption of the proposed approach was also identified as key to ensure complexities of evaluating community engagement are not forgotten. This study has been useful as a starting point for South East Water to develop an evaluation framework. The challenge for South East Water now is continue with this momentum; that is, develop the framework and implement it in practice. This next step is critical as there is limited literature on the outcomes of evaluations, particularly for a program of works over an extended period of time.