California's Future

Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) | January 18th, 2018

Water management in California has always been challenging. The state’s variable climate is marked by long droughts and severe floods, with stark regional differences i

Water management in California has always been challenging. The state’s variable climate is marked by long droughts and severe floods, with stark regional differences in water availability and demand. California has adapted by building a vast network of storage and conveyance facilities to deliver water from the wetter parts of the state to population and farming centers in the Bay Area, the San Joaquin Valley, and Southern California. The Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta is a fragile link in the state’s water supply network, and a plan to address supply reliability, known as California WaterFix, faces many hurdles. California’s extensive network of dams is aging. Agricultural demand is becoming less flexible, as farmers are increasing tree crops (especially nuts), which must be watered every year. Conflicts are growing between human water use and water needed to support fish and other wildlife. And the latest cycle of droughts and floods provides a glimpse of an uncertain future under climate change. California’s water management challenges are complex, but they can be addressed. Solutions will involve difficult and sometimes costly trade-offs, as well as contentious legal and political changes.

Challenges Facing the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta: Complex, Chaotic, or Simply Cantankerous?

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | September 17th, 2015

Freshwater is a scarce and precious resource in California; its overall value is being made clear by the current severe drought. The Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta is a c

Freshwater is a scarce and precious resource in California; its overall value is being made clear by the current severe drought. The Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta is a critical node in a complex water supply system that extends throughout much of the western U.S. wherein demand is exceeding supply. The Delta also underpins a major component of the U.S. economy, helps feed a substantial part of the country, is a unique and valuable ecological resource, and is a place with a rich cultural heritage. Sustaining the Delta is a problem that manifests itself in many dimensions including the physical structure of the Delta, the conflicting demands for water, changing water quality, rapidly evolving ecological character, and high institutional complexity. The problems of the California Delta are increasingly complex, sometimes chaotic, and always contentious. There is general agreement that current management will sustain neither the Delta ecosystem nor high-quality water exports, as required under the Delta Reform Act, so there is a renewed urgency to address all dimensions of the problem aggressively. Sustainable management of the Delta ecosystem and California’s highly variable water supply, in the face of global climate change, will require bold political decisions that include adjustments to the infrastructure but give equal emphasis to chronic overuse and misuse of water, promote enhanced efficiency of water use, and facilitate new initiatives for ecosystem recovery. This new approach will need to be underpinned by collaborative science that supports ongoing evaluation and re-adjustment of actions. Problems like the Delta are formally “wicked" problems that cannot be “solved” in the traditional sense, but they can be managed with appropriate knowledge and flexible institutions. Where possible, it is advisable to approach major actions incrementally, with an eye toward avoiding catastrophic unexpected outcomes. Collaborative analyses of risks and benefits that consider all dimensions of the problem are essential. Difficult as the problems are, California has the tools and the intellectual resources to manage the Delta problem and achieve the twin goals of a reliable water supply and an ecologically diverse Delta ecosystem.

Changes in water consumption linked to heavy news media coverage of extreme climatic events

American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) | October 25th, 2017

Public awareness of water- and drought-related issues is an important yet relatively unexplored component of water use behavior. To examine this relationship, w

Public awareness of water- and drought-related issues is an important yet relatively unexplored component of water use behavior. To examine this relationship, we first quantified news media coverage of drought in California from 2005 to 2015, a period with two distinct droughts; the later drought received unprecedentedly high media coverage, whereas the earlier drought did not, as the United States was experiencing an economic downturn coinciding with a historic presidential election. Comparing this coverage to Google search frequency confirmed that public attention followed news media trends. We then modeled single-family residential water consumption in 20 service areas in the San Francisco Bay Area during the same period using geospatially explicit data and including news media coverage as a covariate. Model outputs revealed the factors affecting water use for populations of varying demographics. Importantly, the models estimated that an increase of 100 drought-related articles in a bimonthly period was associated with an 11 to 18% reduction in water use. Then, we evaluated high-resolution water consumption data from smart meters, known as advanced metering infrastructure, in one of the previously modeled service areas to evaluate breakpoints in water use trends. Results demonstrated that whereas nonresidential commercial irrigation customers responded to changes in climate, single-family residential customers decreased water use at the fastest rate following heavy drought-related news media coverage. These results highlight the need for water resource planners and decision makers to further consider the importance of effective, internally and externally driven, public awareness and education in water demand behavior and management.

Citizen's Guide to Working with the California Water Boards

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | July 8th, 2011

The Guide provides an overview of the Water Boards and the many opportunities that all Californians have to participate with the Water Boards in decisions and activities

The Guide provides an overview of the Water Boards and the many opportunities that all Californians have to participate with the Water Boards in decisions and activities that affect the state’s water resources. While some of the public participation opportunities are formal, e.g., at a Water Board hearing, others are less formal, but just as important, e.g., a stakeholder process implemented by a Regional Board. Although the Guide doesn’t contain information about specific water quality decisions that are before the Boards, it will direct you where you can find that information. We look forward to updating this Guide periodically to assure its continuing usefulness to you, the public.

Clear Lake Watershed and Lake Remediation

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | December 9th, 2024

The main goal of this joint effort between the University of California Davis, Tahoe Environmental Research Center (UCD-TERC), and the United States Geological Survey (US

The main goal of this joint effort between the University of California Davis, Tahoe Environmental Research Center (UCD-TERC), and the United States Geological Survey (USGS), is to develop the watershed and in-lake monitoring and modeling needed to:  Better understanding of the processes contributing to poor water quality;  Predict watershed and lake responses to changing environmental conditions; and,  Evaluate the impacts and unintended consequences of potential management and restoration activities. 

Climate Change and Future Water Availability in the United States, Chapter E of U.S. Geological Survey Integrated Water Availability Assessment—2010–20

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | January 15th, 2025

The following are the key points of this chapter:  The steady rise in global temperature as a result of human activity is causing changes in Earth’s water cycle.

The following are the key points of this chapter:  The steady rise in global temperature as a result of human activity is causing changes in Earth’s water cycle. The amount of water stored within and moving between vapor, liquid and frozen components of the water cycle is shifting, with significant consequences for water availability. Climatic drivers underlie regional or local changes in water supply and their socioeconomic impacts. Threats to the quantity and quality of water available for humans and ecosystems in North America include increases in drought, aridification, and fire weather; heavy precipitation and flooding; cryosphere decline; rising surface-water temperatures; and saltwater intrusion in coastal areas. An understanding of how changes in the major climatic drivers impact the water cycle and the accurate simulation of impacts in hydrological models are crucial to predicting future water availability and developing adaptation strategies to ensure human and ecosystem water supplies. Companion chapters: U.S. Geological Survey Integrated Water Availability Assessment—2010–20, Chapter A Water Supply in the Conterminous United States, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico, Water Years 2010–20, Chapter B Status of Water-Quality Conditions in the United States, 2010–20, Chapter C  Water Use Across the Conterminous United States, Water Years 2010–20, Chapter D  Integrated Water Availability in the Conterminous United States, 2010–20, Chapter F 

Climate change scenarios forecast increased drought exposure for terrestrial vertebrates in the contiguous United States

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | November 15th, 2024

Climate information? Embedding climate futures within temporalities of California water management

Environmental Sociology (Taylor & Francis) | March 27th, 2018

This article uses the case of drinking water utility managers in California to understand uses of climate-change information in resource management. A dominant

This article uses the case of drinking water utility managers in California to understand uses of climate-change information in resource management. A dominant narrative suggests that producing management practices best adapted to climate-change impacts is a matter of reconciling the supply of scientific knowledge with the demand signals of resource managers. We question this narrative with reference to the diverse cultural and socio-technical structures in which the future climate takes on meaning in water management. Using interviews (n = 61), we analyze three ideal-typical ‘social temporalities’ of climate change: modeled futures, whose future?, and truncated futures. We define social temporalities as alternative constructions of the future built into socio-technical engagement with water and into collective orientations to climate change. Of the three ideal types, we found that only one (modeled futures) closely aligns with the supply-demand relationship as constructed in scholarly literature and climate adaptation-related policy. This leaves nonconforming types without guidance that resonates with their relationship to climate change information. Consideration of sociological dimensions of climate knowledge may warrant a revised or additional approach to climate service programs or related assistance efforts.

Collaborative Governance and Environmental Justice: Disadvantaged Community Representation in California Sustainable Groundwater Management

Western Political Science Association | April 18th, 2019

A consistent critique of the theory and empirical research on collaborative governance is a lack of conceptualization and analysis of the role of political power and ine

A consistent critique of the theory and empirical research on collaborative governance is a lack of conceptualization and analysis of the role of political power and inequality (Foster 2002; Franks and Cleaver 2007; Morrison et al. 2017; Purdy 2012). The critique is more broadly applied to public policy and institutional analysis in general (Knight 1992; Moe 2005), and has implications the democratic legitimacy of governance arrangements (Alexander, Doorn, and Priest 2018). Political institutions provide differential access to decision-making (Besley and Case 2003), while political groups and individuals have higher or lower capacity to participate in governance systems and influence the outcomes (Olson 2009; Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith 1993; Stigler 1971). Thus, there continues to be a need for empirical research focused on the crucial issue of how these factors affect the structure and function of governance institutions. This article contributes to this discussion by analyzing the representation of disadvantaged communities in the 2014 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) in California.

Community Perspectives on SGMA Implementation

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | June 13th, 2019

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) of 2014 represents a historic opportunity to achieve long-term sustainable groundwater management and protect th

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) of 2014 represents a historic opportunity to achieve long-term sustainable groundwater management and protect the drinking water supplies of hundreds of small and rural low-income communities that rely on this shared resource, especially in the San Joaquin Valley. Prior research, however, indicates that few of these communities are represented in the Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) formed to implement the new law. This raises questions about other forms of community involvement, and concerns about the extent to which small and rural drinking-water interests are being incorporated into the process. This report details the results of twenty-three interviews with thirty-one representatives of small, low-income communities who rely on groundwater for their drinking-water supplies. The findings suggest community stakeholders are highly interested in SGMA and desire to be involved in its implementation, which many deemed indispensable for the future of their communities. Many are actively participating or following the process, including by serving on boards and committees, attending meetings and workshops, and monitoring meeting minutes and agendas. The experience of small and rural communities with SGMA is predictably diverse. Some interviewees have had very positive experiences thus far and are hopeful about the ways SGMA could benefit their communities and regions in the future. Others have felt overlooked or intentionally excluded. Yet many similarities also arose across the interviews including six common challenges and concerns about SGMA implementation: 1. Resource constraints to participation: Lack of staff, small budgets, in-house experts and an inability to pay for outside services/support limited communities’ formal participation in GSA governance and attendance and involvement in SGMA meetings. 2. Accessibility: Additional factors limiting the accessibility of the SGMA process included day-time meetings, language barriers, the proliferation of board and committee meetings, and irregular and unclear meeting schedules and notices. 3. Transparency: A lack of transparency in GSA decision-making as well as limited access to the data and information being used to develop Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) were common concerns for interviewees. 4. Lack of formal representation: The relegation of communities to advisory, rather than decision-making, roles in the SGMA process was also a common concern. 5. Limited opportunities to provide meaningful input and feedback: Whether participating as a decision-maker, committee member or as a member of the public attending meetings, many were frustrated at the lack of opportunities to provide meaningful input into decisions or on draft documents due to short turnaround times, not being provided necessary background or materials, and limited opportunities for public comment and open discussion. 6. Lack of addressing drinking water interests and priorities: Overwhelmingly, interviewees reported that drinking water interests, especially water quality and domestic wells, were not part of their local SGMA conversations, leading many to be skeptical that SGMA would have drinking-water benefits. Best practices detailed by interviewees with particularly positive experiences and suggestions and recommendations from all of the interviewees, however, demonstrate ample opportunities to address these issues and increase the integration of drinking-water stakeholders and interests into sustainable groundwater management. Targeted efforts to reduce barriers to participation, improve communication and transparency, and promote diverse representation could go a long way to ensuring the “consideration” and “active involvement” of this important, historically marginalized, stakeholder group. For example, communities can educate their GSA about drinking-water priorities and the variety of regulations and requirements public water systems must comply with and coordinate with other small and rural communities to elevate and advocate for drinking water needs. GSAs should incorporate available public data into Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) while developing plans to fill data gaps, provide ample time for feedback on staggered and sequential GSP sections and streamline and increase interaction with stakeholders in meetings. State agencies should consider requiring or incentivizing collaborative community projects be included in GSPs, and community representation in GSP development and implementation as well as provide funding to support meaningful community involvement in all phases of SGMA implementation.