IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enscpo/v69y2017icp124-135.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Informing watershed planning and policy in the Truckee River basin through stakeholder engagement, scenario development, and impact evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Podolak, Kristen
  • Lowe, Erik
  • Wolny, Stacie
  • Nickel, Barry
  • Kelsey, Rodd

Abstract

In this study, we evaluated the water quality and quantity impacts of five restoration and land protection scenarios in the Truckee River watershed, in the context of regulatory goals. We used spatially explicit biophysical models to create scenarios with targeted places where the greatest water quality and supply benefits could be realized. We quantified how these scenarios would impact the sediment load, nitrogen load, phosphorous load, and annual water yield with hydrologic models. The scenarios included a “Business as usual” based on existing conservation plans (2015–2020) and four additional model-generated scenarios: a “Targeted” scenario using the “Business as usual” budget, two targeted “Increased budget” scenarios, and a “Targeted-climate smart” scenario adjusted based on climate change. We expected the model-generated scenarios to have a greater impact on biophysical factors than “Business as Usual,” and that the “Increased budget” scenarios would reach water quality regulatory goals. The “Targeted” scenario produced a small improvement in water quality over “Business as usual,” but did not meet regulatory goals. The “Increased budget” scenarios could meet water quality goals in one additional subwatershed if the budget is allocated to the most cost-effective activities to reduce sediment. Incorporating climate change caused the targeted locations of activities to shift in space, but the overall impact on biophysical factors was similar. This study demonstrates how science-based planning with stakeholder input can inform conservation investments across existing boundaries and lead to greater water quality improvements. By identifying where to implement different types of conservation activities and how much to invest, as well as revealing shortcomings in current assumptions about which activities to implement, this study can enable smarter and more effective land management investments.

Suggested Citation

  • Podolak, Kristen & Lowe, Erik & Wolny, Stacie & Nickel, Barry & Kelsey, Rodd, 2017. "Informing watershed planning and policy in the Truckee River basin through stakeholder engagement, scenario development, and impact evaluation," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 124-135.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:69:y:2017:i:c:p:124-135
    DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2016.12.015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901116305640
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.12.015?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kaiser, Nina N. & Feld, Christian K. & Stoll, Stefan, 2020. "Does river restoration increase ecosystem services?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    2. Mayer, Alex & Jones, Kelly & Hunt, David & Manson, Robert & Carter Berry, Z. & Asbjornsen, Heidi & Wright, Timothy Max & Salcone, Jacob & Lopez Ramirez, Sergio & Ávila-Foucat, Sophie & Von Thaden Ugal, 2022. "Assessing ecosystem service outcomes from payments for hydrological services programs in Veracruz, Mexico: Future deforestation threats and spatial targeting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    3. Sandhu, Harpinder & Clarke, Beverley & Baring, Ryan & Anderson, Sharolyn & Fisk, Claire & Dittmann, Sabine & Walker, Stewart & Sutton, Paul & Kubiszewski, Ida & Costanza, Robert, 2018. "Scenario planning including ecosystem services for a coastal region in South Australia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 194-207.
    4. Ram Prasad Acharya & Tek Narayan Maraseni & Geoff Cockfield, 2020. "An Ecosystem Services Valuation Research Framework for Policy Integration in Developing Countries: A Case Study from Nepal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-15, October.
    5. Jiyoung Choi & Sangdon Lee, 2023. "Analysis of the Spatiotemporal Changes in Selected Ecosystem Services Caused by Free Trade Initiatives in Incheon, Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-16, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:69:y:2017:i:c:p:124-135. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/environmental-science-and-policy/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.