Basin Futures Water reform in the Murray-Darling Basin
List of tables and boxes
|
Table 3.1 |
Ecologically dependent functions, goods and services of rivers |
|
Table 4.1 |
Summary of observations of climate change in the MDB |
|
Table 4.2 |
Summary of future climate-change projections in the MDB |
|
Table 4.3 |
Recent synthesis studies funded by the MDBA |
|
Table 8.1 |
Perceptions of injustice in the NSW study |
|
Table 8.2 |
Perceptions of injustice in the Victorian study |
|
Table 8.3 |
Community injustice framework: some emerging themes from the NSW study |
|
Table 15.1 |
Plan implementation elements with responsible party |
|
Table 17.1 |
Trade attitudes by GMID and NSW Murray in 1998–99 (per cent) |
|
Table 17.2 |
Trade attitudes in GMID in 2003–06 (per cent) |
|
Table 17.3 |
Trade attitudes in GMID and Riverland in 2008–09 (per cent) |
|
Table 17.4 |
Trade attitudes in New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia, 2010–11 (per cent) |
|
Table 18.1 |
Share of interception activities in consumptive water use and its impact on the cuts to diversions required for SDLs (per cent) |
|
Table 18.2 |
Local environmental water needs and the contribution to downstream uses |
|
Table 18.3 |
Rules governing inter-regional trade in the southern Murray |
|
Table 18.4 |
Modelled and actual market prices over the period 1999–2009 |
|
Table 18.5 |
Expected market prices for water allocations, 2008 baseline, 3000 GL and 4000 GL SDL scenarios |
|
Table 18.6 |
An example analysis of the economic impact of spring flows if reliability is accounted for |
|
Table 23.1 |
Physical and institutional dimensions |
|
Table 23.2 |
Comparative perspective on the Murray–Darling Basin from the western United States: scope for mutual learning |
|
Table 25.1 |
Some of the main metaphors employed by Gittins in his article entitled: ‘Don’t think you can keep on neglecting me, Darling’ |
|
Table 26.1 |
Two sets of questions to investigate for collaborative water management |
|
Table 26.2 |
Potential objectives, resources and decision-making phases that can impact on appropriate choice of methods and participants |
|
Table 26.3 |
Common ‘less interactive’ and ‘more interactive’ stakeholder engagement methods with some of their properties |
|
Table 26.4 |
Barriers to stakeholder engagement and collaborative approaches |
Boxes
|
Box 26.1 |
Principles underpinning the MDBA’s approach to stakeholder engagement |
Previous Next


menu


