No abstract

In the United States (US), interstate water compacts are used to ensure the equitable division of water resources. It is necessary to understand how interstate water compacts affect intrastate water management so that administrators of water resources can effectively manage state water resources and comply with the agreed-upon allocation schemes. Although interstate compacts are more prevalent in the western US, concerns surrounding changing climate conditions, as well as water scarcity issues, have increased disputes over the management of shared water resources throughout the US. Drawing upon a case study from Colorado, the question this article seeks to answer is, how effectively does Colorado implement compliance of interstate compacts? More specifically, this report assesses implementation at the local level of government: water divisions. Using a modified version of Denise Scheberle's implementation model, this article examines how Colorado's Water Division 2 ensures compliance by water users party to the Arkansas River Compact. This research provides useful lessons for both academics interested in implementation studies and practitioners who are responsible for managing state resources such as water effectively, equitably, and in line with state laws and regulations. Findings suggest that compact compliance is contingent upon the effective implementation of rules curtailing water use at the local level and includes water divisions having the capacity to communicate effectively with water users and other entities involved in the maintenance of compact compliance. Environmental Practice 16: 151-161 (2014)

Public policymaking in the American West, especially as it concerns the natural environment, is a process sometimes viewed as "messy, foolish, erratic, and inexplicable" (Stone 2012, 10). First there is the complexity (sometimes viewed as extreme complexity) of the policymaking process in general, where "problems are conceptualized and brought to government for solution; governmental institutions formulate alternatives and select policy solutions; and those solutions get implemented, evaluated, and revised" (Sabatier 2007, 3). Moreover, decisions made under the auspices of public policymaking are rarely permanent and very much representative of a fluid, dynamic, and malleable process (Gerston 2008)-a process said to be inclusive of all political activities and institutions, "from voting, political cultures, parties, legislatures, bureaucracies, international agencies, local governments, and back again to the citizens who implement and evaluate public policies" (John 2003, 483). When one adds environmental and energy issues to this public policy mix, things become even more entangled, especially with today's renewed sense

No abstract