Search for: All records

Understanding inequality in groundwater access and cropland ownership is critical for assessing the sustainability and equity of agricultural systems, especially in regions facing climatic and socioeconomic patterns such as drought and cropland consolidation. These two forms of access are deeply interconnected: for instance, cropland ownership often determines who can access and control groundwater. Due to data challenges, however, few studies have quantified groundwater access inequality in the same ways that land ownership has been quantified. Similarly, the regional scale of most analyses to date limits our understanding of factors that shape and modify these interconnections. Our study aims to address this gap by constructing a novel geospatial dataset by matching groundwater wells with cropland parcels across California’s Central Valley. We quantify the magnitude and spatial patterns of groundwater and cropland inequality and examine how it scales with land ownership, crop types, and surface water access. Our results indicate substantial inequality in both groundwater access and land ownership, with the top decile of well owners possessing 46.4% of the region’s total well capacity. These well owners are more likely to allocate groundwater to high-revenue, water-intensive perennials such as almonds and walnuts. Furthermore, large landholders tend to have far more wells, deeper and higher-capacity wells, and greater access to surface water resources. However, we observe consistently wider inequality in land ownership than water access, and larger landowners possess less well depth and capacity per hectare. We discuss the implications of these findings in the context of California’s historical lack of regulation on groundwater, particularly with respect to inequality in open access vs private property resources. We also consider possible lessons for future groundwater regulation and distribution mechanisms for groundwater rights under California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. 

Abstract Despite the reality that advocates frequently expend significant resources to pass symbolic policies, this policy design has often been neglected by policy studies scholarship. We combine policy design and policy feedback theory to examine this oft overlooked policy design in practice using the case of California's human right to water law (Assembly Bill 685, or AB 685). Through semi‐structured interviews, archival research, and document analysis, we reveal how grassroots advocates deliberately and effectively pursued AB 685 to build power across the water justice movement and catalyze narrative change about drinking water access, while also building state responsiveness on the topic. These interpretive policy feedback effects then accelerated the policy's resource effects through formal policy changes in funding allocations, administrative structures, and regulatory systems. Collectively, feedbacks from AB 685 have transformed the sociopolitics of drinking water access. Contrary to prevailing wisdom, the policy's ambiguity proved key to building the broad coalition necessary to accomplish these changes, and it facilitated work across policy venues and governance scales through time, which is critical to enacting transformational change. Based on these findings, we argue that symbolic policies merit attention as a potentially advantageous policy design for social movements seeking social change and transformation.