H34F-02
Cooperative Drought Adaptation: Integrating Infrastructure Development, Conservation, and Water Transfers into Adaptive Policy Pathways

Wednesday, 16 December 2015: 16:15
3011 (Moscone West)
Harrison Bray Zeff1, Gregory W Characklis1, Patrick M Reed2 and Jonathan D. Herman3, (1)University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States, (2)Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, United States, (3)University of California Davis, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Davis, CA, United States
Abstract:
Water supply policies that integrate portfolios of short-term management decisions with long-term infrastructure development enable utilities to adapt to a range of future scenarios. An effective mix of short-term management actions can augment existing infrastructure, potentially forestalling new development. Likewise, coordinated expansion of infrastructure such as regional interconnections and shared treatment capacity can increase the effectiveness of some management actions like water transfers. Highly adaptable decision pathways that mix long-term infrastructure options and short-term management actions require decision triggers capable of incorporating the impact of these time-evolving decisions on growing water supply needs. Here, we adapt risk-based triggers to sequence a set of potential infrastructure options in combination with utility-specific conservation actions and inter-utility water transfers. Individual infrastructure pathways can be augmented with conservation or water transfers to reduce the cost of meeting utility objectives, but they can also include cooperatively developed, shared infrastructure that expands regional capacity to transfer water. This analysis explores the role of cooperation among four water utilities in the ‘Research Triangle’ region of North Carolina by formulating three distinct categories of adaptive policy pathways: independent action (utility-specific conservation and supply infrastructure only), weak cooperation (utility-specific conservation and infrastructure development with regional transfers), and strong cooperation (utility specific conservation and jointly developed of regional infrastructure that supports transfers). Results suggest that strong cooperation aids the utilities in meeting their individual objections at substantially lower costs and with fewer irreversible infrastructure options.