Tuesday, May 5, 2020

Establishing Environmental Water Requirements †MyAssignmenthelp

Question: Discuss about the Establishing Environmental Water Requirements. Answer: Introduction The Murray Darling Basin Plan helps in providing a coordinated approach for water supply in the four states of Australia. The basin plan has been providing balance among social, environmental demands and economic infrastructure of the basin (Crase et al., 2018). This project aims at the problems faced by people due to urbanization in the area. The water scarcity problem in the basin has been highlighted in the report. The use of various laws and acts have been explained that might help in maintaining the challenges in the Murray Darling Basin. The Murray and Murrumbidgee Rivers have been experiencing more precipitation in the basin. This has caused proper stream flow in the basin. The climatic change in the basin has been an important issue in the basin (Hart, 2016). Most of the rivers in the basin has been experiencing the overflow of water during heavy rain, as well as a scarcity of water during less rainfall. The inversion of water in the Snowy River Catchment into the Murray Syst em (Patil Kant, 2014). The role of the Australian Government in mitigating the challenges in the basin have been discussed properly. The Basin plan has been discussed in the report. Strategies discussed various knowledge management in the report that might help in maintaining and resolving the issues in the Murray Darling basin (Porter, Askarov Hilborn, 2015). The amendments in the basin plan have been discussed in the report. This report outlines the risk management strategies used in the Murray Darling basin plan. The knowledge management plan and strategies have been discussed in the report for mitigating the issues prevailing in the basin. There are several recommendations provided for enhancing the knowledge management strategies in order to resolve issues in the basin. The Murray Darling Basin covers 1 million square kilometres of Australia having the land mass of 500-600 million years old (Kandulu et al., 2017). This area varies in various geographically, climatically and ecologically condition. People living in the basin are controlled by the seasons and plenty of food and water is present over there. However, the scenario in the basin drastically changed over the years due to the impact of the Englishmen on the basin. The construction sector in the basin has constructed various buildings and dams on the rivers for the irrigation purpose. As commented by Abel et al., (2016), the Murray Darling Basin has been changed by the construction of various water storages on the rivers in last 100 years. The total volume of water storage capacity in the basin is approx. 35000 million litres (Fidel, Schlesinger Cervera, 2015). However, the limit of the construction has been crossed creating problems for the basin. The construction of railways, roads and tow nship areas have created various problems in the basin (Frizenschaf, Mosley, Daly Kotz, 2015). Natural resources have been extracted illegally from the Earth that has created the loss for the basin. The removal of the red weeds from the streams of the Murray Darling basin has caused irreversible damage the flora abs fauns of the area. The basin has been populated with an estimated 40000 years and cave painting and artefacts have been core attraction in the basin (Meihami Meihami, 2014). There are various wetlands in the basin that has been considered international significance. The basin has been providing various breeding habitats for many species of water birds, plants and fish. Various streams in the basin have been affected by the less flow of water through the basin. However, the removal of the vegetation from the natural wetlands has created a drought situation in the basin. The basin has been contributing 45% of the agriculture of the country (Authority, 2014). The basin ha s been representing 72% of irrigated crops and pastures of a total area of irrigated land. However, the overall rainfall in the basin varies from 1400mm per year to 300mm per year. According to Hart (2016), the ratio of maximum and the minimum flow of water has been varying from 300:1 to 1000:1. Therefore, there has been extreme variation in the water flow and rainfall. This has caused problems in the basin, as scarcity of water and overflow of water are frequent in the basin. These variations also create problems for the irrigation and crops in the basin. As the revenue of the basin depends upon the agriculture, the financial condition if the basin also gets affected by the climatic change (Masadeh et al., 2017). The aim of the Basin plan is to focus on the supply of water among all the users and farmers living in the basin. The Basin Plan Legislation helps in guiding governments and regional authorities for the development of the basin and sustainable growth in the supply of the water to the farmers if the basin. However, South Australian irrigators and farmers have faced waters problems in 2007-2008 summer due to the water scarcity and less rainfall (Pedro-Monzons et al., 2016). The problems related to drought has been prevailing in the basin. The uncertainty in the rainfall in the basin has been creating problems, as there is no backup strategy for the water supply in the basin. Therefore, there is a need for the proper strategy to maintain the vulnerabilities in the basin. Problems Statement The Murray Darling Basin Plan has not able to help farmers, regional communities, rural, environment and consumers in the basin. However, it has drastically failed basically, morally, ecologically and systematically (Grant, 2015). The policies drawn by the Murray Darling basin plan have been maintained and drawn up by the policies. The current Murray Darling Basin Plan is as follows: It is not in the interest of rural and regional communities. The plan is ecologically and environmentally unsustainable and dangerous It is economically and emotionally heartbreaking. However, the farmers involved in the industries and communities have been supplying clean and green food and fibre for a century. There has been a drastic change in the plan over the years. The plan has been a big failure for the Australian Government. However, under the present Basin Plan, the farmers are unable to maintain their daily needs and they have become beggars in the basin (Porter, Askarov Hilborn, 2015). The poverty has been killing many farmers in the basin due to the drought effect in the basin. The nutrients in the soil have been degrading causing the reduction in the fertility of the soil. The excessive use of the fertilizer has been creating problems for the farmers. Risk Assessment The Murray Darling Basin Plan has been facing through various risks and consistently working for the development of risk assessment strategies (Crase et al., 2018). The Risk Assessment Guidelines have been combined with the maintenance of several jurisdictions. There are various steps in the risk assessment process. Set Context Identify Risk Analyze RiskEvaluate risk In this context, several steps are taken by the MDB Water Access Entitlement (WAE) groups are the key assessment for the year. The risk assessment 2008 has been concerned with risk from a materialistic impact on the risks of water availability. The core set of values included in the MDB Ramsar sites and TLM sites. However, following environmental assets have been selected from the DECC for risk assessment. Valley/River Environmental Asset assessed Border Rivers Morella Watercourse, Boobera Lagoon, and Pungbougal Lagoon Complex Macintyre R. anabranches, billabongs wetlands from Goondiwindi to Mungindi Gwydir Gwydir Wetlands Ramsar site Namoi Namoi River billabongs and wetlands Wilgara Wetland Macquarie Macquarie Marshes Ramsar site Wilgara Wetland Upper Darling Talyawalka Anabranch Bourke Weir drown-out flow for fish passage Lower Darling Darling Anabranch Lakes Lachlan Booligal Wetlands Great Cumbung Swamp Murrumbidgee Fivebough and Tuckerbil Swamp Ramsar site Mid-Murrumbidgee Wetlands Lowbidgee Floodplain NSW Central Murray Forests Table 1: Environmental Asset of DECC (Source: Pittock, Williams Grafton, 2015) The Risk Assessment requires data and information in the basin-wide spatial and water availability. However, results from recent surveys have depicted that the water availability and use of streamline flow have resulted in six hazards. The water management plan for the basin has been the failure in the context. The current water management plan of the basin has been depended on the water flow in the river. Therefore, the climate change in the basin might affect the water management plan of the basin. The water management plan of the basin has focused on the upstream and downstream of the river in the basin (Grafton Horne, 2014). The climatic change in the Murray Darling basin has been one of the major problems, in the basin. The climate of the basin has been changing from dry, median and wet. Various changes in the rainfall density have been creating change in the water flow in rivers (Cohen Olsen, 2015). Scenario Change to mean annual rainfall (%)45 Change to mean annual runoff (%)15 Cory -13 -22 Cmid -3 -2 Cwet 13 50 Table 2: Impacts of climate change scenarios on mean annual runoff (Source: Grafton et al., 2014) The groundwater usage by GMU in the basin has been clarified in the table. The current usage is 10 GL.y-1. However, the MDBSY Project estimated by an additional; 37.1 GL.y-1 have affected 23% increase in the groundwater usage. Maximum usage of groundwater under the NSW Government Policy has been 13.3 GL.y-1 (Obeidat et al., 2016). GMU Current usage SY Future usage NOW future usage47 (GL/y) Lower Darling Alluvium 0.1 0.2 0.0 Upper Darling Alluvium 0.0 9.7 0.0 GAB Alluvial 4.6 91.8 5.8 GAB Intake Beds 0.2 1.6 0.4 Gunnedah Basin 0.0 0.4 0.0 Western Murray Porous Rock 0.1 20.6 0.2 GAB Cap Rocks 2.9 5.2 3.8 Lachlan Fold Belt 1.6 67.7 2.4 Warrambungle Tertiary Basalt 0.1 0.5 0.0 Kanmantoo Fold Belt 0.5 42.1 0.7 TOTAL USAGE 10.1 239.8 13.3 Streamflow Impact (GL/y) 1.3 37.1 1.7 Table 3: Current and future groundwater usage and stream flow impacts in the Darling River Catchments by Groundwater Management Unit (Source: Gale et al., 2014) The stream flow effect of increased ground water can be calculated by the MDBSY together with the farm dam effects of total impacts. The low reliability of the water products has been creating risks in the basin. The irregular flow of water in the basin have been creating challenges for irrigation and farming purposes (Hart, 2016). The use of the low availability of water in the basin has been the reason for the threat of drought in the basin. The basin has been facing several cases of drought in the basin that have caused various financial loss of people in the basin. Scenario % change in average diverted volume Consequence Likelihood Risk-level Climatic change Wet estimate +1.0 Negligible Probable Low Median estimate +2.0 Negligible Possible Low Dry estimate -3.0 Negligible Unlikely Low Groundwater Current use -0.1 Negligible Certain Low Future use (MDBSY estimate) -0.8 Negligible Possible Low Future use (NSW embargoes) -0.2 Negligible Probable Low Farm dams -0.2 Negligible Possible Low Afforestation -0.2 Negligible Probable Low Irrigation return flows 0.0 Negligible Possible Low Bushfires -0.1 Negligible Possible N/A CUMULATIVE -1.0 Negligible Possible Low Table 4: Risk Assessment for Combined Access Entitlement Holders (Source: Bark et al., 2015) The emissions of the greenhouse effect have been creating risks in the natural cycles in the basin. The carbon emission due to the burning of coal and fossils for generation of energy in the basin have been causing air pollution in the basin. As commented by Kirby et al., (2014), high-security holders has been engaged in the permanent transfer of water from different sources of water. The use of legislation has helped in maintaining the risk assessment policy in the basin. The private security stakeholders have been helping in providing funds to the authority of the basin. Legislation used in the Basin Plan Various legislations have been implemented in the plan that might help in monitoring the basin plan. The Water Act does not provide priority to the three outcomes including economic, social and environment. However, each provision in the act has to be provided with own terms in the context of the Water basin plan. These statements of objects are not in the form of traditionally enforceable rules (Todorovi? et al., 2015). They can perform the function with the system of governance. The use of the plan can help in maintaining the environment of the basin. However, these statements follow and inform how decisions can be approached by all the levels in the system including the SDLs and temporary divisions in the system (Neave et al., 2015). The Commission in the state and territories in several stages have been developing strategies for dealing with these issues in the basin. Therefore, a set of legislation has been included in the Water for Ecosystem plan for monitoring criticism in COA G water reform statements. The results of the ARMCANZ principles have been able to express goals for providing water in the environment for restoring the ecological nature of the basin (Becerra-Fernandez Sabherwal, 2014). The key components of the Water Management Act 2000 include separation of water rights from land, prioritization of water for the environment, Licenses issued in perpetuity and water sharing plans. Water sharing plans are developed for all water sources by NSW in respect to the Water Management Act 2000 (Martn-de Castro, 2015). Each water sharing plans is related to articulates and trading architecture in the basin. The development of the NSW policy for initiating the action has been regarded as less certain in the development of the next water-sharing plan. The NSW government has implemented risk management framework in order to national water use in the NSW. The Water Sharing plans can be extended for next 10 years (Horne, 2014). Ninety percent use of water use in the NSW has been maintained and managed by sharing water plan and reduction in the usability of water supply for complimentary use. The regional stakeholders of NSW have committed about the identification of environmental water needs and use in the basin. The scarcity of water has been reported by the stakeholders (Geisler Wickramasinghe, 2015). The basin plan describes the inflow of water through the dam and restricting access to supplementary flows in the environmental outcomes have been reached. However, NSW water sharing have helped in driving the water flow systems in the Murray Darling Basin (Webb, 2017). This sharing plan has been legislated by higher authorities of Australia. NSW River Bank has spent $101.5 million environmental funds that have been set by the NSW government for buying water for valuable inland water (Swirepik et al., 2016). Forrest Creek Stage 1 and 2 34.7 GL Barren Box Swamp reconfiguration 20.0 GL Bungunyah-Koraleigh pipeline 3.015 GL Coonancoocabill wetland 0.632 GL Deniliquin golf club 0.238 GL Hay Private Irrigation District 1.0 GL Coleambally supply automation 3.5 GL Purchase (includes in NSW and Vic.) 84.0 GL Table 5: Between 2002 and 2011, Water for Rivers projects within the Murray and Murrumbidgee valleys in NSW have recovered nearly 150 gigalitres (Source: Alston et al., 2016) The NSW Government and Commonwealth Government have jointly committed to the $7 million Pipeline NSW project under the Australian Water Smart program (Bharati, Zhang Chaudhury, 2015). The domestic irrigation program of the basin has been open channel stock and domestic in central inland rivers. According to Thompson, (2017), the recovery of water for meeting the sustainable diversion limits needs to be invested in projects for the development of the basin. The agreement includes the referral of state powers in water management plan. The strategical development of the basin has been depended on the water management plan in the basin (Donate, M. J., de Pablo, 2015). The agreement in the Commonwealth agreed to provide the fund of $1.358 billion to the NSW for development of various projects in the basin. The use of different legislation in the basin have helped in providing environmental water in the basin. The climatic change in the basin has been creating risks and threats in the Murray Darling Basin. Knowledge Management Issues There has been various challenges and issues in the knowledge management. The phases of deployment in the water basin have been maintained by the use of various long-term effects of knowledge management. Knowledge management has some core capabilities in order to maintain the data and information about the project involved in the particular area (Wang, Noe, Wang, 2014). In this context, the Murray Darling basin has been mentioned as the distinctive area with various capabilities although having some limitations in the management (MurrayDarling Basin). The use of the knowledge management has been concerned in the report. The use of knowledge management has been maintained in the project plan for determining the strength of resources of a project (Ross Connell, 2016). Therefore, these processes ensure the real-time protection of the project management in the basin. Water management has the major issue in the basin that has been creating several problems in the basin including irrigat ion issues. The significant cost of a transaction has been included in the international trade from the basin. The use of various techniques have been used in the basin include broker fees, and inter-state trade has helped in maintaining the issues in the basin. The water management plan in the basin has helped in providing the water supply to the basin. The rivers and water sources of the basin have been suffering from drought and scarcity of water. Therefore, the change in the climate has been affecting the irrigation system of the basin (Thompson, 2017). The climatic change has been creating major problems in the basin. The water management plan of the basin has been a failure in the context of mitigating these Water problems in the basin. The excessive use of the water in the basin for daily purposes has been leading to the scarcity of water. Therefore, the knowledge of people in the basin has been depleting related to the demographics and wastewater management project. The lack of knowledge among citizens in the basin has caused various problems in the progression of the project. The use of different management strategies in managing operations in the knowledge management projects. The cultural issues in the knowledge management strategies include management support, demonstrating management and business value, implications in the change management and keeping up with new technologies security. As commented by Hart, McLeod Neave, (2017), the water management plan of the basin has focused on the upstream and downstream of the river in the basin. The climatic change in the Murray Darling basin has been one of the major problems, in the basin. The climate of the basin has been changing from dry, median and wet. The Water Sharing plans can be extended for next 10 years (Hart Davidson, 2017). Ninety percent use of water use in the NSW has been maintained and managed by sharing water plan and reduction in the usability of water supply for complimentary use. The regional stakeholders of NSW have committed about the identification of environmental water needs and use in the basin. Technology has been another issue in the knowledge management plan. The lack of implementing integrated databases in the architecture of the plan, interoperability and navigating tools have been creating problems in the knowledge management. The business process model has been another issue in the knowledge management system (Alston, Clarke Whittenbury, 2018). Poor implementation of the business model in the business has been creating the problem in maintaining the operations in the project. Lack of proper documentation of planning systems has created financial problems in the project plan. The wastewater management project in the Murray Darling Basin has been a successful project for providing a proper and regular water supply to the basin. The utilization of IT in the basin plan might help in maintaining the record of the resources used in the project (Power, Shard., Burstein, 2015). The database of the project might help in tracking data and information in the basin. Various use s of the IT interventions have been developed in the empirical world that can be analyzed in order to maintain the wastewater management project in the basin (Kneebone Wilson, 2017). Knowledge Management Strategies The knowledge management strategy has a phased assessment and decision-making system for the next 10 years. This strategy includes following elements: Overarching principles for guiding the implementation of the strategy. Roles and responsibilities of governments and communities. A framework and timetable for the implementation of the Strategy including three broad phases including pre-feasibility, feasibility and implementation. Key steps in phase one that helps in outlining issues and methods to be used in completing the pre-feasibility analysis. An action plan of the seven focus areas in the basin has to properly function able. As commented by Qureshi et al., (2018) the strategy aims at maintaining and maximizing environmental outcomes. The affected communities including the stakeholders, landowners, management agencies and local government policies have been affecting the local benefits of the basin. The use of different strategies in order to maintain the convection in the basin has been implemented in the plan. The strategy looks for the positive impact on the community of the basin. Various risks in the basin have been included in the strategy in order to implement mitigation strategies in the basin. There have been potential changes in the plan (Tan Auty, 2017). The strategy aims at maximizing environmental outcomes for obtaining a managed water available for the environmental use. The affected communities including stakeholders, local government and management agencies need to involve in identifying potential effects and solutions. The water holders including existing users or environmental water holder need to maintain proper water efficient needs by not affecting other entitlements. However, potential changes are made in order to provide specific criteria for resolving issues in the basin (Guest, 2017). The water management plan of the basin has been provided in order to maintain the issues in various the basin. The constraint management strategy might help in maintaining the stakeholder access in the plan that might help in maintaining the use of plan in the basin. The unique strategies of the plan have involved the stakeholders for receiving the order of extra water in the basin. The wastewater management system can be properly implemen ted in the basin with the help of the stakeholders in the system (Grover Froese, 2016). Knowledge management needs to be integrated into the business: Knowledge management needs to be integrated with the business operations. The primary value of the knowledge needs to be related to the development the business. In this context, the water management plan of the Murray Darling basin needs to be integrated with the knowledge management strategy (Alston, Clarke Whittenbury, 2018). Knowledge related to the demographics of the basin needs to be known. The use of the knowledge management framework needs to be implemented in the plan. Knowledge management framework needs to be well designed related to the demographical factors of the basin. The use of knowledge supply chain has helped in providing resources for developing the water management plan in the basin. Knowledge management include collect data and information: This principle reflects the data collection method used in the knowledge management strategy. Data collection is an important aspect of the knowledge management. The knowledge management plan includes the data collection method in order to collect knowledge related to the business (Qureshi et al., 2018). In this context, data collection method used in the Murray Darling basin has played an important role in maintaining the management plan. Data collection in the basin has been initiated from online sources and surveying different parts of the basin. This data and information can be integrated as knowledge regarding the management plan (Grafton Wheeler, 2018). Knowledge management plan needs to fulfil the supply and demand criteria: The use of knowledge management in the Murray Darling Basin has been included in the wastewater management plan. This strategy has helped in exploring the demand and supply of the resources in the basin (Lyon, Lintermans Koehn, 2018). Change in the project requirements might create problems in the procedure of the project. The use of different processes and techniques in the knowledge management plan have helped in maintaining push and pull of the market tendency. The change in the project delivery system has created risks in the financial management of the project. The use of knowledge management in the basin has been able to maintain the requirements of the project in the basin. The wastewater management project in the basin has been being to provide variety. Conclusion From the above discussion, it can be concluded that the use knowledge management has been available to mitigate various challenges in the Murray Darling Basin. The challenges faced by the basin has been discussed in the report. The use of the factors and models in the report has been analyzed. The factors affecting the wastewater management project has been discussed. A proper management of the wastewater supply has been discussed in the report. Natural resources have been extracted illegally from the Earth that has created the loss for the basin. The removal of the red weeds from the streams of the Murray Darling basin has caused irreversible damage the flora abs fauns of the area. The overview of the Murray Darling Basin has been provided in the report that helps in understanding the demographics of the basin. The climatic change has been the major problem in the basin. The diversity in the rainfall has been creating the scarcity of water in the basin. Various risks and threats in the basin have been identified in the report. The use of risk assessment has helped in maintaining the risks in the basin. Therefore, the identification of the risks in the water management plan has helped in providing a proper analysis of the dependence of natural resources. The knowledge management plan has been developed in order to maintain the challenges in the Murray Darling Basin. The use of knowledge management plan has helped in resolving the issues in the water management plan in the basin. The use of natural resources has been initiated in order to reduce the pollution due to carbon emission in the air. Recommendations The Basin plan has been complex and diverse for understanding the core benefits of the plan. The use of the plan has been helping in maintaining the ecosystem of the basin. The climatic change if the basin cannot be controlled. However, steps have been taken to maintain the climatic change in the basin. The reduction in the use of the carbon particles has helped in reducing the carbon emission in the basin. The use of solar energy has been increased in the basin that helps in reducing the burning of coal or generation of energy. A proper maintenance of the basin is required by the Australian government. There are few recommendations that can be accounted in the basin for its development. Environmental outcomes: The outcomes of the strategies prepared in the basin has been committed to expectations. However, a government in the basin needs to continue the full implementation if the basin plan by 2024. The constraints in the management and implementations of different aspects of sustainable development in the basin. The mechanical adjustment in the basin for protection of environmental water has been critical for getting to the best possible outcomes in the environment. Water quality and salinity outcomes: The 2020 review of salinity targets needs to maintain and examine the appropriateness of the target. The export of salt from the basin needs to be increased that might help in increasing the financial condition if the basin. Various tool and techniques for refining salt from water need to be implemented in the basin. The technical expert in the basin needs to be motivated to improve the technology used in the basin for the production of the salt from seawater. The regional stakeholders of NSW have committed about the identification of environmental water needs and use in the basin. Technology has been another issue in the knowledge management plan. The lack of implementing integrated databases in the architecture of the plan, interoperability and navigating tools have been creating problems in the knowledge management. Recovering water for the environment: the government of the Basin needs to urgently complete the work for planning and designing the assumption attached to the basin plan. The factors associated with the development of the basin needs to be implemented in the basin that might help in the development of the basin. The use of recovery and the backup plan in the basin needs to be implanted in the plan that helps in maintaining development in the water basin. Managing environmental water: The government of the basin and the MDBA needs to review the basin report for analyzing environmental water management in the basin. Governmental policies in the basin need to be implemented in order to manage water management and planning. The use of various techniques in the basin might help in providing several enhancement in the machines and techniques used in the development of the projects in the basin. Maintaining water quality: The government of basin has been using their techniques for purifying water from rainwater. Therefore, the government needs to implement various tools and techniques that might help in maintaining and purifying the water. The quality of water needs to be improved in the basin that helps in increasing the health of people living in the basin. Investigation and collection of water samples as data for experiments needs to be done that helps in creating strategies for purifying water in the basin. SDL Adjustment mechanism: The government of the basin needs to be involved closely to the communities of the basin that might be in maintaining a close relationship with the people of the basin. The use of design implementation in the basin might help in providing a better approach to the development of the basin. The maintenance of the basin needs to be handled by the government of Australia. The implementation of operations and responsibilities of the people living in the basin might help in accessing the outer world. Water resource planning: The government of the basin needs to implement water resource planning project in the plan. This might help in maintaining the activity of the planning in the project. The use of the water resource plan in the project helps in monitoring the streamline flow in the river. The government of the basin needs to adopt strategies for improving the compliance review of the basin plan. The maintenance of the basin needs to be developed by the government in the basin. This legislation and policies of the basin need to be involved in the beneficiary for development on the basin. The basin government needs to support the decision-making model of the stakeholders in the basin that might help in developing and enhancing the irrigation sector of the basin. The shift of the basin plan with new strategies added in the plan needs to be implemented in the References Abel, N., Wise, R., Colloff, M., Walker, B., Butler, J., Ryan, P., ... Dunlop, M. (2016). Building resilient pathways to transformation when no one is in charge: insights from Australia's Murray-Darling Basin.Ecology and Society,21(2). Alston, M., Clarke, J., Whittenbury, K. (2018). Limits to adaptation: Reducing irrigation water in the Murray-Darling Basin dairy communities.Journal of Rural Studies,58, 93-102. Alston, M., Clarke, J., Whittenbury, K. (2018). Limits to adaptation: Reducing irrigation water in the Murray-Darling Basin dairy communities.Journal of Rural Studies,58, 93-102. Alston, M., Whittenbury, K., Western, D., Gosling, A. (2016). Water policy, trust and governance in the Murray-Darling Basin.Australian Geographer,47(1), 49-64. Authority, M. D. B. (2014). Appendix B: Changes made to the proposed Basin Plan-Chapter 9. Bark, R. H., Barber, M., Jackson, S., Maclean, K., Pollino, C., Moggridge, B. (2015). Operationalising the ecosystem services approach in water planning: a case study of indigenous cultural values from the MurrayDarling Basin, Australia.International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services Management,11(3), 239-249. Becerra-Fernandez, I., Sabherwal, R. (2014).Knowledge management: Systems and processes. Routledge. Bharati, P., Zhang, W., Chaudhury, A. (2015). Better knowledge with social media? Exploring the roles of social capital and organizational knowledge management.Journal of Knowledge Management,19(3), 456-475. Cohen, J. F., Olsen, K. (2015). Knowledge management capabilities and firm performance: A test of universalistic, contingency and complementarity perspectives.Expert Systems with Applications,42(3), 1178-1188. Crase, L., Cooper, B., Dollery, B., Marques, R. (2018). One Person's Drain Is another's Water Supply: Why Property Rights, Scope, Measurement and Hydrology Matter when it Comes to Integrated Water Resources Management.Ecological Economics,147, 436-441. Davies, S., Marshall, G., Ridges, M. (2017). Cultural flows: managing Aboriginal water as a Commons in the Murray Darling Basin, Australia. Donate, M. J., de Pablo, J. D. S. (2015). The role of knowledge-oriented leadership in knowledge management practices and innovation.Journal of Business Research,68(2), 360-370. Doody, T. M., Colloff, M. J., Davies, M., Koul, V., Benyon, R. G., Nagler, P. L. (2015). Quantifying water requirements of riparian river red gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) in the MurrayDarling Basin, Australiaimplications for the management of environmental flows.Ecohydrology,8(8), 1471-1487. Fidel, P., Schlesinger, W., Cervera, A. (2015). Collaborating to innovate: Effects on customer knowledge management and performance.Journal of business research,68(7), 1426-1428. Fisher, J. (2017). Basin plan blues: A Murray-Darling refresher.Irrigation Australia: The Official Journal of Irrigation Australia,33(1), 34. Frizenschaf, J., Mosley, L., Daly, R., Kotz, S. (2015). Securing drinking water supply during extreme droughtlearnings from South Australia.Drought: Research and Science-Policy Interfacing, 391. Gale, M., Edwards, M., Wilson, L., Greig, A. (2014). The Boomerang Effect: A Case Study of the Murray?Darling Basin Plan.Australian Journal of Public Administration,73(2), 153-163. Geisler, E., Wickramasinghe, N. (2015).Principles of knowledge management: Theory, practice, and cases. Routledge. Grafton, R. Q., Horne, J. (2014). Water markets in the Murray-Darling basin.Agricultural Water Management,145(C), 61-71. Grafton, R. Q., Wheeler, S. A. (2018). Economics of Water Recovery in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia.Annual Review of Resource Economics, (0). Grafton, R. Q., Horne, J., Wheeler, S. A. (2016). On the marketisation of water: evidence from the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia.Water resources management,30(3), 913-926. Grafton, R. Q., Pittock, J., Williams, J., Jiang, Q., Possingham, H., Quiggin, J. (2014). Water planning and hydro-climatic change in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia.Ambio,43(8), 1082-1092. Grant, K. (2015). Knowledge management: an enduring but confusing fashion.Leading Issues in Knowledge Management,2, 1-26. Grover, R., Froese, T. M. (2016). Knowledge management in construction using a SocioBIM platform: A case study of AYO smart home project.Procedia Engineering,145, 1283-1290. Guest, C. (2017). Managing the River Murray: One Hundred Years of Politics. InDecision Making in Water Resources Policy and Management(pp. 23-39). Hart, B. T. (2016). The Australian MurrayDarling basin plan: challenges in its implementation (part 1).International Journal of Water Resources Development,32(6), 819-834. Hart, B. T. (2016). The Australian MurrayDarling Basin Plan: challenges in its implementation (Part 2).International Journal of Water Resources Development,32(6), 835-852. Hart, B. T. (2016). The Australian Murray-Darling Basin Plan: factors leading to its successful development.Ecohydrology Hydrobiology,16(4), 229-241. Hart, B. T., Davidson, D. (2017). Case Study 1The Murray-Darling Basin Plan. InDecision Making in Water Resources Policy and Management(pp. 221-244). Hart, B. T., McLeod, A., Neave, I. (2017). The Murray-Darling Basin plan and climate change.Australasian Journal of Water Resources,[submitted]. Horne, J. (2014). The 2012 Murray-Darling Basin planissues to watch.International Journal of Water Resources Development,30(1), 152-163. Kandulu, J. M., MacDonald, D. H., Dandy, G., Marchi, A. (2017). Ecosystem Service Impacts of Urban Water Supply and Demand Management.Water Resources Management,31(15), 4785-4799. Kirby, M., Bark, R., Connor, J., Qureshi, M. E., Keyworth, S. (2014). Sustainable irrigation: how did irrigated agriculture in Australia's MurrayDarling Basin adapt in the Millennium Drought?.Agricultural Water Management,145, 154-162. Kneebone, J., Wilson, B. (2017). Design and early implementation of the MurrayDarling Basin plan.Water Economics and Policy,3(03), 1650041. Koehn, J. D. (2015). Managing people, water, food and fish in the MurrayDarling Basin, south?eastern Australia.Fisheries Management and Ecology,22(1), 25-32. Lyon, J. P., Lintermans, M., Koehn, J. D. (2018). Against the flow: the remarkable recovery of the trout cod in the MurrayDarling Basin.Recovering Australian Threatened Species: A Book of Hope, 199. Martn-de Castro, G. (2015). Knowledge management and innovation in knowledge-based and high-tech industrial markets: The role of openness and absorptive capacity.Industrial Marketing Management,47, 143-146. Masadeh, R. E., Shannak, R., Maqableh, M., Tarhini, A. (2017). The impact of knowledge management on job performance in higher education: the case of the University of Jordan.Journal of Enterprise Information Management,30(2), 244-262. Meihami, B., Meihami, H. (2014). Knowledge Management a way to gain a competitive advantage in firms (evidence of manufacturing companies).International letters of social and humanistic sciences,3, 80-91. Neave, I., McLeod, A., Raisin, G., Swirepik, J. (2015). Managing water in the Murray-Darling Basin under a variable and changing climate.Water: Journal of the Australian Water Association,42(2), 102. Obeidat, B. Y., Al-Suradi, M. M., Masadeh, R. E., Tarhini, A. (2016). The impact of knowledge management on innovation: An empirical study on Jordanian consultancy firms.Management Research Review,39(10), 1214-1238. Patil, S. K., Kant, R. (2014). A fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for ranking the solutions of Knowledge Management adoption in Supply Chain to overcome its barriers.Expert systems with applications,41(2), 679-693. Pedro-Monzons, M., Solera, A., Ferrer, J., Andreu, J., Estrela, T. (2016). Water accounting for stressed river basins based on water resources management models.Science of the Total Environment,565, 181-190. Pittock, J., Williams, J., Grafton, R. (2015). The Murray-Darling Basin plan fails to deal adequately with climate change.Water: Journal of the Australian Water Association,42(6), 28. Porter, M. G., Askarov, Z., Hilborn, S. (2015).Securing Unlimited Water Supply in Adelaide over the Next Century Balancing Desalinated and Murray-Darling Basin Water(No. 2015_3). Deakin University, Faculty of Business and Law, School of Accounting, Economics and Finance. Power, D. J., Sharda, R., Burstein, F. (2015).Decision support systems. John Wiley Sons, Ltd. Qureshi, M. E., Ahmad, M. D., Whitten, S. M., Reeson, A., Kirby, M. (2018). Impact of climate variability including drought on the residual value of irrigation water across the MurrayDarling Basin, Australia.Water Economics and Policy,4(01), 155. Qureshi, M. E., Ahmad, M. D., Whitten, S. M., Reeson, A., Kirby, M. (2018). Impact of climate variability including drought on the residual value of irrigation water across the MurrayDarling Ross, A., Connell, D. (2016). The evolution and performance of river basin management in the Murray-Darling Basin.Ecology and Society,21(3). Swirepik, J. L., Burns, I. C., Dyer, F. J., Neave, I. A., O'Brien, M. G., Pryde, G. M., Thompson, R. M. (2016). Establishing environmental water requirements for the MurrayDarling Basin, Australia's largest developed river system.River Research and Applications,32(6), 1153-1165. Tan, P. L., Auty, K. (2017). Finding diamonds in the dust: Community engagement in Murray-Darling Basin planning. InDecision Making in Water Resources Policy and Management(pp. 183-204). Thompson, R. M. (2017). Is the Murray-Darling basin plan broken?.Green Left Weekly, (1149), 12. Todorovi?, M. L., Petrovi?, D. ?., Mihi?, M. M., Obradovi?, V. L., Bushuyev, S. D. (2015). Project success analysis framework: A knowledge-based approach in project management.International Journal of Project Management,33(4), 772-783. Wang, S., Noe, R. A., Wang, Z. M. (2014). Motivating knowledge sharing in knowledge management systems: A quasifield experiment.Journal of Management,40(4), 978-1009. Webb, S. P. (2017).Knowledge management: Linchpin of change. Routledge.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.