1. Australian Water Security
An evaluation of Australia’s current water security position and a
comparison to its security position in the next ten years.
Prepared by:
Brian Doyle
30 October 2015
S40493251

2. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
2
TABLES OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 3
1.2 Australian Context ........................................................................................................... 4
2. PROBLEM DEFINITION ............................................................................................... 5
2.1 Current reality .................................................................................................................. 5
2.1.1 Societal ....................................................................................................................... 5
2.1.2 Commercial ................................................................................................................ 6
2.1.3 Political ...................................................................................................................... 7
2.1.4 Environment .............................................................................................................. 8
2.2 Future reality ................................................................................................................... 9
2.3 Desired reality .................................................................................................................. 9
2.4 Problem identification ................................................................................................... 11
3. MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENT – PRESENT TO FUTURE ........................................... 13
4. PROBLEM CLUSTER EVOLUTION – PRESENT TO FUTURE ........................................... 17
5. OPTIONS TO ALLEVIATE THE PROBLEM – PRESENT TO FUTURE ................................ 18
6. CRITERIA EVALUATION AND MONITORING .............................................................. 20
REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 22

3. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
3
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Global context
Securing a consistent supply of clean, fresh water has been humanities most important issue
throughout history (Gleick, 1996). Considering that water makes up approximately 70% of
the human body it is not surprising that it is called the ‘elixir of life’ (Manabe, 1969) (Ball,
2005). Also, fresh water is precious, for while water covers three quarters of the earth’s
surface, only 1% is fresh water, the balance made up of 2% ice and 97% salt water (Manabe,
1996). Water’s importance can not be understated in that human existence and activity is
predicated on access to water.
Water is not only critical to sustain each individual life, but its “availability in sufficient
quantity and quality has broader implications for global sustainability in the terms of societal
justice, economic vitality and human health” (Hancock, 1993). Also, Kulshrestha (1998)
suggests “that there is a direct relationship between the access to safe water and gross
domestic product (GDP) performance”.
“Water supplies are forecast to be pushed passed sustainable levels by up to 40% by 2030”
(Rzepczynski, 2014). Currently, “approximately 70% of global water is consumed by
agriculture” (Rzepczynski, 2014). Global demand, due to population growth “estimated to
reach 9.2 billion by 2050” (Dadush and Stancil, 2010), is forecast to “increase water
consumption for energy generation by 85% and food production by 50% by 2035”
(Rzepczyski, 2014).
Water security is being impacted by climate change, where the unpredictability and volatility
of weather patterns and rainfall is playing havoc with traditional seasonal patterns, replacing
them with “either a feast or famine in relation to causing floods or droughts” (Abebe, Dlamini
and Doyle, 2015). The United Nations (UN) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) has suggested that “this uncertainty and weather volatility could potentially impact
crop yields by up to 25%” (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2014) (Abebe et al;
2015).
The critical nature of water security has in recent times flown under the radar while other
humanity related issues take global center stage. Water’s emerging relevance is evident in the

4. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
4
World Economic Forum’s (WEF) annual risk analysis. In the 2011 Global Risk report (World
Economic Forum, 2011), ‘Water Security’ as a risk, failed to make the top 10 in both the
‘most likelihood to occur’ and ‘most global impact’ categories. However, in the 2015 Global
Risk report (World Economic Forum, 2015), ‘Water Security’ had been renamed and
upgraded to ‘Water Crises’ and rated number eight as a risk ‘most likely to occur’, and ranked
at No. 1 as the risk that would have the ‘most global impact’.
1.2 Australian context
With an area of 7.692 million square kilometers, Australia makes up just five per cent of the
world’s land mass (Australian Government, 2015). Yet in size, Australia is 50% larger than
Europe, it is the smallest of the world’s continents (Australian Government, 2015). In
comparison to the rest of the world, “it is also the lowest, the flattest and (apart from
Antarctica) the driest” (Australian Government, 2015).
Within Australia’s constitutional framework water management is governed by a mix of State
and Commonwealth legislation, in addition to legal, institutional and regulatory frameworks
(Australian Water Commission, 2015). Action to establish a coherent national approach to
water management was not taken until 1994 with the development by the Council of
Australian Governments (COAG) of a national water reform framework (Australian Water
Commission, 2015). COAG’s principle policy agreement, within the Australian Water
Commission framework, is the National Water Initiative (NWI), which was signed at the June
2004 COAG meeting (Australian Water Commission, 2015). The NWI was designed to
establish a cohesive national approach to the measurement, planning, pricing, and trading of
national water resources (Australian Water Commission, 2015).
How Australia deals with water security is a double edge sword as it “involves both
opportunities and risks” (Grey and Sadoff, 2007). Given the complexity and importance of
this problem for Australia, the following sections of this paper will seek to first define the
problem through examining the current reality, a predicted future reality, and a desired reality.
Within this context, an analysis of both the management environments and problem clusters,
now and 10 years into the future will allow management options to be identified. This paper
will seek to identify the changes or evolution required of options to remain relevant to the
problem over the 10-year time line. In addition, the measurement methodologies applied to
option application and performance over the 10-year time line will be also discussed.

5. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
5
Background information on water security has been provided in this paper from a global
perspective. This global context provides a foundational understanding to the critical
importance of water security and its potential risk to Australia’s prosperity. It is within this
context that this paper will analyse the water security challenges faced by Australia. Also, this
paper will confine its exploration of Australia’s water security challenges to the macro level.
It is not this paper’s intention to delve into State and Territories specific water policies.
Comments and observations may be made on State and Territory policies from a holistic
perspective, where their contribution or impact are material to national water security policy
and programs.
2. PROBLEM DEFINITION
2.1 Current reality
Australia's average total annual rainfall 3,700,000 GL
Total annual renewable water resource 400,000 GL
Annual water extracted 70,000 GL
Annual water consumption 24,000 GL
Agriculture 50-70% (Irrigation water on 1% of agricultural land)
Urban 10-15% (50-100 KL per person per year)
Manufacturing 2-5%
Mining 1-4%
Other 15-30%
Annual water trading (entitlement water) 2000 GL
Annual water trading (allocation water) 2500 GL
AUSTRALIAN WATER STATISTICS (Indicative Values)
Figure 1. Australian Water Statistics (Indicative Values). (Source: Securing Australia’s future in a green
economy. Australian Academy of Technology, Sciences and Engineering (ATSE)).
2.1.1 Societal
Access to clean and reliable water is critical for Australian society as it underpins all social
and economic activity that contributes to our high standard of living (Australian Academy of
Technology, Sciences and Engineering, 2012). Its availability supports the level of national
health and hygiene enjoyed by Australian’s. Equally important is water’s interdependencies
with energy and food, which again feed into the standard of living that Australian’s have
come to expect (Australian Academy of Technology, Sciences and Engineering, 2012).
However, in the ‘current reality’ water’s critical nature, by enlarge, goes unnoticed by a

6. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
6
significant proportion of Australia’s population. The majority of the Australian public enjoys
ready and easy access to water. For urban dwellers, the hardship of droughts is something we
watch on the television nightly news. The closest most urban dwellers come to experiencing
water shortages are the water restrictions put in place by local authorities when storage
capacities fall to unsustainable levels. For the urban dweller that means gardens, lawns and
cars can not be washed as often as they would like, and that an individual’s shower times are
reduced to manage an individual’s water consumption.
To some degree, a cultural legacy is having a negative impact on Australia’s approach to
water management. While Australia is the driest continent on earth with the lowest rainfall,
Australian’s continues to persist with pursuing European aesthetics, in terms of homes and
gardens. The Australian dream is largely still to have a home with a swimming pool framed
by rolling lawns and gardens.
From a societal perspective there is a clear distinction between urban and country citizens in
the attitude and understanding of water security. Country citizens through experience value
water differently from an urban dweller where accessing water has always been achieved by
simply reaching for the nearest tap.
Unfortunately, country citizens are only a small percentage of the total population. As a
result, an informed understanding of the value of water within the context of water security
and the future challenge to maintain Australia’s standard of living against climate change,
population growth, energy and food needs, is generally absent from the minds of the majority
of Australians.
2.1.2 Commercial
Within Australian industry there is a similar disparity of understanding on water security as
with the societal context. Country based industries such as agriculture and live stock growers
are acutely aware of the impact that water availability has to their businesses. Whereas, urban
based industry generally sees water as a business cost to be managed, but readily available
from the local water utility. Only a small percentage of Australian businesses are sufficiently
forward thinking to tackle water security as a critical sustainability issue for their businesses.
The remainder, while they may pursue water efficiency initiatives to drive or manage water

7. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
7
cost in their businesses, they are more likely to rely on government initiatives and policy to
drive water security initiates.
2.1.3 Political
Figure 2. Australian Federal Government Water Management Structure
Australia’s water management structure can be characterised as a decentralised model. Water
management in the states and territories is the responsibility of numerous government
agencies, water authorities and water utilities (National Water Markets, 2015). At a local
government level, management lies with a variety of organisations, including local and rural
water utilities and catchment authorities (National Water Markets, 2015).
At a federal level the Australian government influences policy through the following
departments and organisations:
• Department of Agriculture and Water – Federal water responsibility had until recent
weeks been managed by the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the
Arts. As a result of the recent change in Coalition leadership the National party and
Liberal party renegotiated their coalition agreement. A concession made by the
incoming Prime Minister was to transfer water responsibility to a National party
Australian
Government
Department of
Environment, Water,
Heritage and the Arts
Murray Darling
Basin Authority
Bureau of
Meteorology
Australian Competition
and Consumer
Commission (ACCC)
Department of
Agriculture and
Water
Productivity
Commission
National Water
Commission
Responsible for planning
Basin management under
Water Act 2007
Responsible for water
information to enhance
understanding Australian water
resources
Monitoring compliance with
and enhancing water market
and water charge rules
Closed in 2014 - National Water
Initiative (NWI) and provides advice
to COAG and Australian government
on national policy
Water responsibility transferred to
National Party minister is recent
government leadership change as part of
renegotiating the coalition agreement
State, Territory and
Local Government
Water management in the State and
Territories is the responsibility of
various government agencies, water
authorities and water utilities
National Water
Market
Responsible for several water
markets across water systems
and administrative boundaries

8. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
8
minister (Hon Barnaby Joyce MP, Member for New England) under the Department
of Agriculture and Water. On face value this appointment would appear to be one of
self-interest for the National party. No policy statements or changes had been made at
the time of writing this paper to prove or disprove the observation of self-interest.
• Productivity Commission – Responsibility for the National Water Initiative (NWI)
was transferred to the Productivity commission in 2015 with the closure of the
National Water Commission in 2014 (Productivity Commission, 2015). The National
Water Commission’s primary responsibility was the monitoring and auditing of the
water reform policies within the NWI agreed to by states and territories in 2004 as a
way to increase the efficiency of Australia’s water use. NWI audit reports are
published triennially.
• Bureau of Meteorology – Responsible for water information to enhance understanding
of Australia’s water resources.
• Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) – Monitoring
compliance with and enhancing water market and water charge rules.
• Murray Darling Basin Authority – Responsible for planning Basin management under
the Water Act 2007, in addition to managing the water entitlements owned by the
federal government.
• National Water Market (NWM) – Consists of several water markets, differentiated by
administrative boundaries and water systems. The NWM ensures that scarce water
resources are utilised to the highest value use.
2.1.4 Environment
The Australian Government’s Department of the Environment recent State of the
Environment (SoE) Report 2011 concluded that Australia’s environment and heritage were in
relatively good shape and in some case improving (Department of the Environment, 2015).
Many of the existing environmental challenges had arisen from past decisions and practices,
“that have left an ongoing legacy of impact” (Department of the Environment, 2015). The
State of the Environment Report (SoE) concluded that “our changing climate, and growing
population and economy, are now confronting Australia with new challenges” (Department of
the Environment, 2015). While the report did not understate the challenges ahead, particularly
regarding water, there were a number of positive indicators. For example, national water
resources are no longer developed without any reference to the needs of the environment
(Department of the Environment, 2015). In addition, Australia is “making progress in

9. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
9
lowering per-person water use” as well as “generating more wealth per unit of water or
energy used” (Department of the Environment, 2015).
2.2 Future reality
In establishing a water security ‘future reality’ there is sufficient empirical evidence to argue
either a pessimistic or optimistic case. From an optimistic perspective the positive outcomes
indicated in the 2011 SoE Report would continue and result in another positive SoE Report in
2021 along similar lines with regard to positive outcomes. From a pessimistic perspective,
Australia may engage in similar bad decisions and practices as it did in the past, which
resulted in “an ongoing legacy of impact” (Department of the Environment, 2015). The recent
closure of the National Water Commission and the transfer of NWI responsibilities to the
Productivity Commission, in addition to the transfer of water responsibilities to the
Department of Agriculture under a National Party minister, may or may not be causes for
concern. However, given the importance of water to Australia, the world’s driest continent
and within the context of the unknown impacts from climate change, Illogical government
department and responsibility changes in addition to political self-interest and party political
posturing will likely negatively impact the leadership and action required to secure Australia’s
water future.
2.3 Desired reality
In a ‘desired reality’ it is logical to wish that water access and availability is not a security
issue. In this reality, Australia has established the mitigation, adaptive and resilience
strategies necessary to accommodate the impact of climate change. Governments at all levels
have demonstrated the leadership required to champion water management within industry
and the Australian community. The catalyst for this transformation has been the adoption of
the ‘Green Growth’ (GG) perspective (Australian Academy of Technology, Sciences and
Engineering, 2012). GG was first discussed at the United Nations ‘Earth Summit’ in 1992
(Australian Academy of Technology, Sciences and Engineering, 2012) and promotes “the
idea that positive environmental and social outcomes can be achieved in conjunction with the
pursuit of living standards, prosperity and productivity” (Australian Academy of Technology,
Sciences and Engineering, 2012). To achieve this, “GG provides a framework for sustainable
economic development while addressing environmental, technological and social aspects”
(Australian Academy of Technology, Sciences and Engineering, 2012). Fundamental to the
GG philosophy is that “economic advancement should not come at the cost of natural

10. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
10
resources, the environment or social well being” (Australian Academy of Technology,
Sciences and Engineering, 2012).
In this ‘reality’, for Australian water security, a balance between environmental and economic
factors has been achieved through the application of GG concepts to water management
strategies and government policy. These strategies and policies support the development of
new industries, bring innovations to market, and places Australia on the pathway to realising
the opportunities of pursuing a new hybrid economic model where environmental,
commercial and societal needs are integrated.
To support this ‘desired reality’ new hybrid economic model, within the context of water
security, the following actions have been initiated and embraced by all elements of water
management and policy.
• National protocol aligned to GG objectives is established for water management and
policy across all levels of government (Australian Academy of Technology, Sciences
and Engineering, 2012).
• Ongoing analysis of integrated Australian economic and environmental accounts to
manage the relationship and outcomes of economic and social needs to the natural
capital (water) (Australian Academy of Technology, Sciences and Engineering, 2012).
• All water decisions, policies and management to be founded on balanced economic,
environmental and social analysis, underpinned by scientific advice (Australian
Academy of Technology, Sciences and Engineering, 2012).
• All decisions, policies and management is implemented through contestable and
transparent practices (Australian Academy of Technology, Sciences and Engineering,
2012).
• Water innovation funding through a national research and development program to
support the commercialisation of new technologies to increase water efficiency
(Australian Academy of Technology, Sciences and Engineering, 2012).
• A transparent and efficient Australian water market to facilitate the transmission of
water cost and pricing signals to all users to reflect the value of water within the
context of its availability (Australian Academy of Technology, Sciences and
Engineering, 2012).

11. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
11
2.4 Problem identification
In seeking clarity to the key problem underpinning Australia’s water security the irony and
paradoxical nature of the present management environment and problem cluster must be
recognised and understood. Constitutionally, the responsibility for water management is
largely with the state governments, territories and local councils. The federal government is
not powerless, but its power is limited and principally restricted to an oversight role. This is
best demonstrated with the introduction of the Murray Darling Basin Authority. The federal
government does not have the legislative power to bring all state government’s and territory
stakeholders on board to the project and was unsuccessful in presenting a compelling
argument to break-down state government self-interest. Accordingly, a project that ideally
should have been a collaborative effort with federal, state government and territory
stakeholders because an exercise of the Federal government entering the water market to buy
back water allocations to the value of $9 billion dollars (The Australian, 2011).
The irony and paradox is that Australia’s water regulatory and management framework is
state and territory based with fixed boarders for a natural resource not constrained by
boarders. For example, the Murray Darling Basin encompasses four states, whereas the Great
Artesian Basin covers three states. In the Murray Darling Basin, management decisions,
practices and withdrawals made in Queensland impact New South Wales, Victoria and South
Australia. Unfortunately, South Australia being the last in line is generally impacted the most.
In recent years there have been numerous occasions when there has been so little water flow
left that the Murray River’s mouth has closed.
In commercial organisational terms Australia’s existing water management structure is silo-
based. The states and territories are silos isolated from the National water perspective who see
themselves have a multitude of local government and water authority silos. Queensland alone
has seventy-seven local councils, each with responsibility to water within their individual
communities.
Accordingly, if the goal is national water security, it is logical to view the existing fragmented
regulatory and management structure as an impediment to optimising Australia’s water
resources for community and industry needs, within the context of the evolving impacts of
climate change. Equally as logical, is the view that an integrated approach to water
management will yield positive outcomes. Whether this is achieved through the federal

12. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
12
government taking regulatory control or through a change in consciousness that leads to a
collaborative approach from all stakeholders is less important. Through the process of
problem definition and identification, the core issue is to establish an integrated, collaborative
and structured approach to water management, as opposed to the existing fragmented,
unstructured approach.

13. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
13
3. MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENT – PRESENT TO FUTURE
Figure 3. Australian water security management environment - Present
Figure 4. Australian water security management environment - Future
Not surprisingly, the present and future management environments presented in Figures 3 and
4 are representative of the discussion earlier in the problem definition section of this paper.
Figure 3, is a graphical representation demonstrating that all stakeholders are interested in
water security. However, in this representation individual stakeholders are operating in
isolation of other stakeholders. While all stakeholders have a shared goal and are legitimately
Water
Security
Community
Energy
Tasmanian
Government
Federal
Government
Environment
Queensland
Government
Local
Councils
Water
Authorities
Industry
Agriculture
South Australian
Government
New South Wales
Government
Victorian
Government
Northern
Territory
Australan Capital
Territory
Western Australian
Government
Water
Security
Community
Energy
Tasmanian
Government
Federal
Government
Environment
Queensland
Government
Local
Councils
Water
Authorities
Industry
Agriculture
South Australian
Government
New South Wales
Government
Victorian
Government
Northern
Territory
Australan Capital
Territory
Western Australian
Government

14. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
14
pursuing a solution in the interest of their own communities and industry, the model is
ineffective and inefficient due to duplication of processes and costs, in addition to the
confrontational nature of the model resulting from the competition between stakeholders for
scarce water resources.
Figure 4 is representative of the management environment 10 years into the future. In this
model the objective and stakeholders are the same, but the operation of management within
the environment and their approach to problem solving has altered. This model is
representative of an integrated and collaborative approach to water security. With this
approach, it is logical to expect that by taking duplication of processes and costs out of the
equation, as well as the confrontational interaction between stakeholders, positive outcomes
with regard to effectiveness and efficiency will result.
In the commercial world the ideas of integration, cost efficiencies, shared knowledge,
collaboration and removing conflict from the negotiation or engagement process is not new.
In theory the same approach can yield positive outcomes for Australia’s water security.
However, in this management environment, whether present or future, the elements of
politics, economic self-interest, and community expectations and demands are ever present. It
is unrealistic to expect these stakeholders drive would disappear in the pursuit of water
security. What can be expected is that all of the elements, problem clusters and motivation
drivers relevant to water security present a compelling argument for change that will
overcome these insular and irrational self-interests for the national good.

15. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
15
Figure 5. Australian water security problem cluster - Present
WATER
STOCK
Australian Federal
Government
Population
Water Cost
Accuracy
Transparency
Agriculture
Crop Choice
Water
Management
Wastage
Growth Rate
Usage per
Person
Lifestyle
expectation
Apathy
Party Politics
Self Interest
National
Leadership
State and Territory
Governments
Economic Self
Interest
Inter-State
Competition
Politics
Climate
Change
Impacts
Rainfall
Temperature
Evaporation
Environment
Biodiversity
Sustainability
Water Systems
Artesian Basin
Technology
Commercial industry
& resource mining
Water
Withdrawals
Colateral
damage
Unregulated
Withdrawals
Unauthorised
withdrawals
Energy
generation
Community
Knowledge
European style
home & gardens
Water wastage
Industry
sustainability
Innovation
culture
Capital costs
Development
time-lines
Skill levels
History
Pass decisions
Culture
Damaging
practices
Legacy of
mismanagement
Systems
coverage
Variability
Duplication
Inconsistent
regulatory regime
Attitude to recycled
water - potable
Swimming pool
mentality Water intense
generation
technology
Water recycling
Process water
wastage
Energy demand
Withdrawals

16. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
16
Figure 6. Australian water security problem cluster - Future
WATER
STOCK
Australian Federal
Government
Population
Water Cost
Accuracy
Transparency
Agriculture
Crop Choice
Water
Management
Wastage
Growth Rate
Usage per
Person
Lifestyle
expectation
Apathy
Party Politics
Self Interest
National
Leadership
State and Territory
Governments
Economic Self
Interest
Inter-State
Competition
Politics
Climate
Change
Impacts
Rainfall
Temperature
Evaporation
Environment
Biodiversity
Sustainability
Water Systems
Artesian Basin
Technology
Commercial industry
& resource mining
Water
Withdrawals
Colateral
damage
Unregulated
Withdrawals
Unauthorised
withdrawals
Energy
generation
Community
Knowledge
European style
home & gardens
Water wastage
Industry
sustainability
Innovation
culture
Capital costs
Development
time-lines
Skill levels
History
Pass decisions
Culture
Damaging
practices
Legacy of
mismanagement
Systems
coverage
Variability
Duplication
Inconsistent
regulatory regime
Attitude to recycled
water - potable
Swimming pool
mentality Water intense
generation
technology
Water recycling
Process water
wastage
Energy demand
Withdrawal
volumes

17. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
17
4. PROBLEM CLUSTER EVOLUTION – PRESENT TO FUTURE
Figures 5 and 6 represent the problem clusters for Australia’s water security both present and
future. Figure 5 is representative of the problem clusters for the present, associated with
Australia’s water security. Figure 6, the problem clusters for the future, is essentially the same
model. In figure 6 the graphical representation demonstrates that the same problems will exist
in 10-years time as they do now. However, the high-lighted (full colour) elements indicate a
change in impact or contribution to the problem clusters.
In this analysis, I have chosen not to conduct a sensitivity analysis to establish a priority
problem. My rationale for this decision is related to the earlier discussion with regard to an
integrated and collaborative regulatory approach to increasing water security. Within the
problem cluster model (Figure 5) all problems are legitimate in their casual contribution to
Australia’s water security problem. However, on closer examination it will reveal that the
majority of the problem elements are governed by the actions of the Australian Federal
Government and state and territory government problem clusters. For example, the outcomes
for the environment, and the actions of agriculture, commercial industry, energy, water costs
and population are controlled by government regulation. The remaining clusters can act
independently with technology chasing the needs of the other clusters. Climate change is a
cluster on its own, where the Australian government has little if any impact through it
contribution to a global reduction of green house gases. Paradoxically, climate change is the
most important. Australia is seeking water security, but with the severity of climate change
impacts being an unknown quantity, Australia has no defined target to work towards, only
forecasts, each more devastating and catastrophic than the one before it.
In essence, the high-lighted elements of Figure 6 mirrors the theme that has evolved through
the problem definition process and an examination of the management environment in the
present and future. The theme is that water security is an Australia wide problem dealing with
a natural resource that is not contained or constrained by boarders and specific jurisdictions.
Logically, a holistic approach will elicit better outcomes through integration and collaboration
as opposed to the alternative of silo management, duplication and confrontation.

18. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
18
For example, in Figure 6 population has ‘Usage per person’ and ‘Attitude to recycled water –
potable’ highlighted as well as others. The high-lighted elements for this problem and for all
the other problems is designed to indicate a positive improvement from the actions taken
against the original problem cluster analysis. It is not the intention nor the scope of this paper
to attempt to quantify these improvements, only to indicate that over the 10-year time-line a
positive outcome has been achieved. In the case of ‘Usage per person’ a collaborative
approach to communication and education by all government stakeholders has reduced the
apathy of the community, increased their knowledge and enhanced the community value of
water, which has resulted in lower usage of water per person. Likewise, a similar program
with changing community attitudes on recycled water will break down the stereotypes and
barriers blocking its use of potable water.
Water security problem clusters in Figure 6, for 10 years into the future are very much a work
in progress. As indicated in the ‘History’ cluster, Australia is still dealing with the legacy of
water decisions and management practices from many years ago. While it is realistic to expect
an improving trend within a 10-year time-line, it is unrealistic to expect miracles overnight.
With a determined and consistent program of collaboration and integration Australia can
establish the water security mitigation, adaptive and resilience strategies to support the
nations ongoing development.
5. OPTIONS TO ALLEVIATE THE PROBLEM – PRESENT TO
FUTURE
Australia has a number of options already in place that can continue to operate and be
enhanced to alleviate the risk to water security. In addition, the adoption of ‘Green Growth’
principles into the government stakeholders’ integrated and collaborative approach will
generate positive outcomes not only in relation to water security, but across a full spectrum of
environmental issues, such as;
• Department of Agriculture and Water – Until recently water responsibility at the
federal level was managed by the Department of Environment. An earlier observation
was made that this appointment was one of political self-interest. Whether that is the
case will unfold in time. Within the scope of achieving water security what department
is responsible is perhaps irrelevant, as long as decisions and management are made in

19. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
19
the interest of all Australian stakeholders. Over time key government bodies will need
to adopt a business methodology and rationalise, through take-over, merger, joint
venture, shared equity or whatever. What form this evolution takes is unknown at this
point in time. Ideally, this new collaborative and integrative management structure
will be the best to extract maximum outcomes.
• Productivity Commission – Responsibility for the National Water Initiative (NWI)
reports was transferred to the Productivity Commission in 2015 with the closure of the
National Water Commission in 2014. The National Water Commission’s primary
responsibility was the monitoring and auditing of the water reform policies within the
NWI agreed to by states and territories in 2004 which was to increase the efficiency of
Australia’s water use. NWI audit reports are published triennially. Presently, the NWI
is conducted as a ‘desk-top’ audit of the states and territories compliance to NWI
protocols. While, the NWI has increased the focus and made a positive contribution to
progress, over time resources must be provided to allow for a full and detailed audit
regime across the nation. The logic behind this recommendation is that ‘desk-top’
audits have inherent limitations that can only be addressed only through expanding the
program to a full audit process.
• Bureau of Meteorology – Charged with the responsibility to continue advancement of
water information systems to enhance understanding of Australia’s water resources.
• Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) – Resource and provide
with the necessary legislative powers to monitor compliance by enhancing water
market and water charge rules.
• Murray Darling Basin Authority – Responsible for planning Basin management under
the Water Act 2007, in addition to managing the water entitlements owned by the
federal government. Explore the opportunities to expand this program or initiate
similar programs in Australia’s other water systems.
• National Water Market (NWM) – Ensures that scarce water resources are utilised to
the highest value use.
• Green Growth Protocols – Introduce Green Growth protocols into the Australian
regulatory environment. These protocols promote “the idea that positive
environmental and social outcomes can be achieved in conjunction with the pursuit of
living standards, prosperity and productivity” (Australian Academy of Technology,
Sciences and Engineering, 2012).

20. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
20
With environmental problems establishing a time frame for action is critical when considering
initiating options. For example, the option of doing nothing is always considered. This may
well relate to waiting to see what will happen with a particular problem because it may well
by resolved on its own accord. Other problems need to have associated issues addressed first
before an option can be acted upon. With the majority of environmental problems, like stand-
up comedy, timing is everything. However, Australia’s challenge in pursuing water security is
unique in its critical nature. Global water supplies “are forecast to be pushed passed
sustainable levels by up to 40% by 2030” (Rzepczynski, 2014). Taking the global situation
into consideration, in addition to Australia being the driest (apart from Antarctica) continent
on earth (Australian Government, 2015), you only have to do the math. Australia does not
have the luxury to wait, action to improve water security must start immediately. Australia is
already playing catch-up, still dealing with legacy management and decision making mistakes
from decades past. Inaction by Australia’s government stakeholders will increase the degree
of difficultly of success and risk of putting Australia at a threshold or tipping point from
which it can not recover from.
6. CRITERIA EVALUATION AND MONITORING
An important element of initiating an option is evaluating its application and monitoring its
results. Monitoring is critical as it allows for modifications or changes to the option to
maintain its relevance to the objective. Monitoring is particularly important for programs that
operate over an extended time-line, as the longer the time, the larger the probability that
programs will stray from their objectives.
Through the process of problem definition and identification, the core issue is to establish an
integrated, collaborative and structured approach to water management, as opposed to the
existing fragmented, unstructured approach. The following tools are recommended to evaluate
and monitor the success of Australia’s pursuit of water security:
• Nation Water Initiative (NWI) – Established responsibility for monitoring and auditing all
federal, state and territory government agreed water reform policies. Existing reports are
conducted and published triennially. Australia’s water security is of such importance
reporting and publishing will be conducted biannually. Audit methodology is to be
extended to a full compliance audit from the existing desk-top audit conducted now.

21. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
21
• State of the Environment Report – A detailed analysis of the environment conducted by
the Department of the Environment at both a national, state and territory level on a five-
year cycle. Reporting cycle to be changed to a triennially publication.
• National Water Market (NWM) – Existing state based water markets to be rationised and
merged into a single national water market to ensure transparency and contestability. Its
primary purpose is to establish, evaluate and monitor the value of water to ensure that
scarce water resources are utilised to the highest value use.
• Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) – Monitoring compliance
with and enhancing water markets and water change regulations.
• Non Government Organisations Environmental Management System – Mandatory
requirements for all commercial industry, agriculture, resource and energy businesses to
operate with an accredited and third party certified management system. A mandatory
requirement of either a Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Non Government Organisation
(NGO) standard or a ISO 14001:2015 Environmental Management System accreditation.
The above recommended methodologies have been selected because of the comprehensive
coverage required in managing an integrated and collaborative water security program. An
important element in selecting these methodologies is that all are based on an audit
methodology. This methodology is founded on a regime of continuous self-assessment and
continuous improvement. In pursuing a complex program over an extended time-line it is
important to adjust the monitoring and evaluation to match changing circumstances. Audit
based monitoring systems are in essence a live management system that grows, develops,
changes, adds to, and evolves as audit results are generated. Audit non-compliances and
corrective actions are the tools used by an audit system to maintain relevance over time.
Accordingly, these recommended systems when applied to evaluating and monitoring the
integration and collaboration program for Australian water security will evolve to achieve
their objectives.

22. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
22
REFERENCES
Adebe, L., Dlamini, V., & Doyle, B., (2015). Water Security: The Water-Food-Energy-
Climate Nexus. Group Project Proposal: ENVM7523 – Systems Thinking for
Sustainability. University of Queensland. March 2015
Australian Academy of Technology, Sciences and Engineering, 2012. Sustainable Water
Management: Securing Australia’s Future in a Green Economy. Retrieved from:
http://www.atse.org.au/content/publications/reports/natural-resources/sustainable-
water-management.aspx?WebsiteKey=9cfd0302-4b41-4183-a5be-37628c955133
Australian Government, (2015). The Australian Continent. Retrieved from:
http://www.australia.gov.au/about-australia/our-country/the-australian-continent
Australian Government, (2015). Australian Water Commission. National Water Initiatives.
Retrieved from: http://www.nwc.gov.au/nwi
Australian Government, (2015). National Water Markets. Retrieved from:
http://www.nationalwatermarket.gov.au
Australian Government, (2015). Department of the Environment. State of the Environment
Report 2011. Retrieved from: https://www.environment.gov.au/science/soe/2011-
report/supplementary
Ball, P. (2005). Water and life: seeking the solution. Nature, 436(7054), 1084-1085.
Dadush, U., & Stancil, B. (2010). The world order in 2050. Policy outlook.
Gleick, P. H. (1996). Basic water requirements for human activities: Meeting basic needs.
Water international, 21(2), 83-92.
Grey, D., & Sadoff, C. W. (2007). Sink or swim? Water security for growth and development.
Water Policy, 9(6), 545.
Hancock, T. (1993). Health, human development and the community ecosystem: three
ecological models. Health promotion international, 8(1), 41-47.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climate Change, (2014): Mitigation of Climate
Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y.
Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P.
Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel
and J.C. Minx (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and
New York, NY, USA.
Kulshreshtha, S.N (1998). A Global Outlook for Water Resources to the Year 2025. Water
Resources Management 12 (3): 167–184.

23. ENVM7512 – Environmental Problem Solving
Brian Doyle - 40493251
23
Manabe, S. (1969). Climate And The Ocean Circulation 1: I. The Atmospheric Circulation
And The Hydrology Of The Earth's Surface. Monthly Weather Review, 97(11),
739-774.
Queensland Government, (2015). Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and
Planning. Local Government Directory. Retrieved from:
http://www.dilgp.qld.gov.au/local-government-directory/
Rzepczynski, M. S. (2014). Global Trends 2030: Alternative Worlds (a review). Book
Reviews, 9(1), 1-1
The Australian, (2011). $9 bn Murray Darling Basin buyback benefits will outweigh costs:
Labor. Retrieved from: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/bn-buyback-
benefits-will-outweigh-costs-labor/story-fn59niix-1226207562362
World Economic Forum (2011). World Economic Forum – Risk response network – Global
Risks, 2011
World Economic Forum (2015). World Economic Forum – Risk response network – Global
Risks, 2015