An official website of the United States government
Project Overview Jurisdictional boundaries of governmental agencies often do not align with the geographic or social boundaries of the policy issues they are tasked with addressing. This spatial mismatch is especially common in relation to natural resources and the environment. Where it occurs, achievement of policy goals may require coordination across jurisdictions, which can lead to mutual benefits. Yet, governmental agencies may view coordination as costly or as leading to a loss of autonomy. This project examined coordination decisions made by local level governmental agencies in California, as they formed Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) and subsequently coordinated development of their first groundwater sustainability plans (GSPs) under California's Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). The project addresses the question of how agencies make decisions and manage interactions when under a coordination mandate that allots agencies the discretion to decide how to coordinate. More specifically, it investigates:What factors influence decisions regarding the geographic extent of and parties involved in development of new formal agencies for groundwater management,How do concerns about the potential risks of coordination affect the choice of coordination mechanisms,How does the structure of agency interactions affect their achievement of the objectives of the coordination mandate, andHow do agencies make sense of a coordination mandate and how does that sense-making process influence the decisions agencies make when deciding how to respond to the mandate?
more »
« less
Establishment of agencies for local groundwater governance under California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
With the passage of its 'Sustainable Groundwater Management Act' (SGMA), California devolved both authority and responsibility for achieving sustainable groundwater management to the local level, with state-level oversight. The passage of SGMA created a new political situation within each groundwater basin covered by the law, as public agencies were tasked with self-organizing to establish local Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs). This research examines GSA formation decisions to determine where GSAs formed, whether they were formed by a single agency or a partnership, and whether agencies chose to pursue sustainable groundwater management by way of a single basin-wide organization or by coordinating across multiple organizational structures. The research then tests hypotheses regarding the relative influence of control over the resource, control over decision making, transaction costs, heterogeneity and institutional bricolage on GSA formation decisions. Results indicate mixed preferences for GSA structure, though a majority of public water agencies preferred to independently form a GSA rather than to partner in forming a GSA. Results also suggest GSA formation decisions are the result of overlapping and interacting concerns about control, heterogeneity, and transaction costs. Future research should examine how GSA formation choices serve to influence achievement of groundwater sustainability at the basin scale.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1824066
- PAR ID:
- 10096167
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Water alternatives
- Volume:
- 11
- Issue:
- 3
- ISSN:
- 1965-0175
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 458-480
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) is a landmark policy that requires achievement of sustainability at the groundwater basin level. In this policy review and analysis, we describe the horizontal, vertical, and network governance processes occurring under SGMA and discuss how they interact with one another. In doing so, we review existing governance theories that can help to shed light on how each governance process may unfold. Depicting SGMA as a complex system of simultaneous and interacting governance processes provides a useful platform for future evaluations of SGMA successes and failures as well as for transferring lessons learned from California’s implementation of SGMA to groundwater governance in other locations.more » « less
-
Path Dependence, Evolution of a Mandate and the Road to Statewide Sustainable Groundwater ManagementSGMA is a landmark transition in California water policy. For local governments engaged in managing at-risk groundwater basins, SGMA brought a transformation of responsibility and authority. These changes reflect a continuation of California water policy, rather than a disjuncture. This policy analysis describes the changing role of state government in groundwater management in California, explaining that role, including the passage of SGMA, through the lens of path-dependent policy evolution. We identify three phases in state groundwater policy: initially the State enabled, subsequently the State incentivized, and with SGMA the State mandated local action. Later phases built upon previous ones and added to existing state policies rather than replacing them, resembling an evolution within the constraints established by earlier decisions. The changing role of the State in California groundwater management demonstrates how initial decisions can push policy along a trajectory, within which there remain opportunities for adjustment and change.more » « less
-
Abstract Coordination mandates are used to steer collective action between local government agencies. When higher levels of government allow agencies to choose how to work together, the organizational forms and institutional arrangements they adopt likely influences their ability to achieve mandated coordinated outcomes. How group-level interactions influence achievement of coordinated outcomes is not well understood. California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) provides opportunity to shed light on this topic. SGMA is a state-legislative mandate that requires local agencies who share groundwater basins to undertake groundwater sustainability planning. The mandate affords agencies leeway in deciding how they engage with one another so long as they meet multiple requirements for coordinated outcomes. Drawing on institutional theories of collective action and ethnographic data collected from 2018 to 2022, we employ multi-value Qualitative Comparative Analysis to examine how configurations of organizational forms and institutional arrangements adopted by agencies in eighteen groundwater basins influenced their achievement of coordinated outcomes. Our findings highlight the importance of adopting collaborative institutional arrangements. Yet, the specific configuration of collaborative institutional arrangements varies depending on the type of coordinated outcomes agencies are mandated to achieve. These findings point to the need for mandates to require adoption of collaborative institutional arrangements, the specific configurations of which will be dictated by the requirements of the mandate.more » « less
-
The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requires stakeholder participation in developing groundwater sustainability plans (GSPs) to ensure the reliability of groundwater resources. Groundwater models became widely used in GSP development (e.g., to evaluate management actions). This study explores stakeholder perceptions of the benefits and challenges of using these models in GSP development and of models’ abilities to deal with uncertainties arising from existing data gaps. Qualitative interviews and minutes from groundwater advisory committee meetings from three groundwater basins reveal that groundwater models can improve stakeholders’ understanding of the groundwater system and help stakeholders identify management actions. However, model complexity and uncertainty in terms of hydrogeological processes and data gaps hinder stakeholders’ full understanding of the model development and results. Modelers should leverage stakeholder knowledge to build trust and collaboratively improve model accuracy through active participation in the modeling process. To prevent misunderstanding, future and ongoing processes should prioritize transparent communication about the model design, assumptions, and limitations. In general, SGMA’s regulatory process facilitates decision-making amid uncertainty and ensures lasting collaboration between modelers and stakeholders.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- The DOI is not currently available.
