A comparison of integrated river basin management strategies: A global perspective |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Texas State University, Department of Geography, San Marcos 78666, United States;2. Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, School of Business Administration, Wuhan 430073, China;1. School of Environment, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand;2. Institute of Marine Science, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand;1. Department of Radiological Science, Division of Biomedical Information Sciences, Institute of Health Biosciences, The University of Tokushima, Tokushima 770-8509, Japan;2. Department of Laboratory, M&S Instruments Inc., Osaka 532-0005, Japan;3. Department of Inorganic Analysis, PerkinElmer Japan Co. Ltd., Yokohama 240-0005, Japan;4. Department of Nuclear Science, Institute of Socio-Arts and Sciences, The University of Tokushima, Tokushima 770-8502, Japan;1. Key Laboratory of Water and Sediment Sciences, Ministry of Education, College of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China;2. State Key Laboratory of Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering Science, School of Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China;3. Department of Hydrology, Faculty of Geography, Moscow State University, Moscow 119991, Russia;4. Institute of Infrastructure and Environment, School of Engineering, The University of Edinburgh, The King’s Buildings, Edinburgh EH9 3JL, UK;5. Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l’Environnement, IPSL, CEA, CNRS, UVSQ, Gif-sur-Yvette 91191, France;6. Beijing Innovation Center-Engineering Science & Advanced Technology, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China;7. School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen 518055, China;8. Department of Geography, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4RJ, UK;1. Arizona State University, School of Sustainable Engineering and the Built Environment, 660 College Ave, Tempe, AZ 85281, United States;2. Uppsala University, Department of Earth Sciences, 75236 Uppsala, Sweden;3. Centre of Natural Hazards and Disaster Science, CNDS, 75236 Uppsala, Sweden |
| |
| Abstract: | In order to achieve the integrated river basin management in the arid and rapid developing region, the Heihe River Basin (HRB) in Northwestern China, one of critical river basins were selected as a representative example, while the Murray–Darling Basin (MDB) in Australia and the Colorado River Basin (CRB) in the USA were selected for comparative analysis in this paper. Firstly, the comparable characters and hydrological contexts of these three watersheds were introduced in this paper. Then, based on comparative studies on the river basin challenges in terms of the drought, intensive irrigation, and rapid industrialization, the hydrological background of the MDB, the CRB and the HRB was presented. Subsequently, the river management strategies were compared in three aspects: water allocation, water organizations, and water act and scientific projects. Finally, we proposed recommendations for integrated river basin management for the HRB: (1) Water allocation strategies should be based on laws and markets on the whole basin; (2) Public participation should be stressed by the channels between governance organizations and local communities; (3) Scientific research should be integrated into river management to understand the interactions between the human and nature. |
| |
| Keywords: | River River basin River basin management Heihe River Basin Comparison |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
