Week 8: A Break in the Waters
Arwen H -
Welcome back guys! I feel as though I have reached the climax of my project as I have finished my data collection and document analysis and can finally move on to data analysis and finishing up my final paper and presentation needed for AP Research. So far, I have created the introduction, lit review, question, and methodology slides for my presentation and have written the introduction, lit review, and methodology sections of my paper and am in the middle of my results section. I have also sent what I have so far to my expert adviser to see if she can give me another set of eyes so I am excited to see what she says!
Since the rest of my project will mainly consist of me working on my paper, presentation, and end of year assignments for AP Research and my final product for the senior project aspect, I will be taking the remaining blog posts to go into detail on the results I am finding and analyzing and describing them for you. In this post, I will go over what I have found so far regarding sufficient funding, motivation for voluntary participation, and stakeholder involvement.
While many irrigation districts have noted receiving additional funding on top of their original $15M, as I mentioned last week, the stipulation that the funding cannot exceed the cost of the water-saving activity may limit farmers’ capability of participating. This however hasn’t seemed to be a problem for the districts as a whole however as many are putting the funding towards projects whose costs far exceed the grant money they are given and they are simply using alternate funding sources to pay for the rest. The individual farmers may not be able to do this however as many districts are saying that farmers already receiving funding for a project cannot receive additional WSC funds.
As for motivation for voluntary participation, I haven’t quite finished my full analysis yet, but I am seeing irrigation districts describe details of the program such as the fact that any water saved remains in the ownership of the water owner. It is details like these that would encourage participation since farmers wouldn’t be afraid of losing the water they have a right to.
Finally, in terms of stakeholder involvement, the fact that money has been set aside for acequias (community run irrigation districts) indicates that the public and farmers are being involved in the decision making progress. Additionally, farmers and irrigation districts choosing what they do with the funding is already a step towards further stakeholder involvement in comparison to if the federal government was deciding.
That’s all for this week! See you guys later!
Comments:
All viewpoints are welcome but profane, threatening, disrespectful, or harassing comments will not be tolerated and are subject to moderation up to, and including, full deletion.