The Murray–Darling Basin (MDB) Plan is held up by some as an exemplar for world‐leading water policy, whilst others have called it a failure. Total proposed recovery was to return 3200 GL of consumptive (e.g. namely irrigation) water use to non‐consumptive (e.g. environmental) use in the MDB, making it one of the largest planned reallocations of water resources in the world. As of June 2023, over AUD$13 billion was committed financially from the Australian government to Basin water reform, with AUD$7.7 billion spent to date on water recovery programs. The implementation of the Plan has been mired in controversy, and it missed its first water recovery targets that had been set for 2024, requiring substantial legislation amendments. This study provides a qualitative policy overview comparison of the success and failure of the two main water recovery programs implemented—buyback of water entitlements from willing sellers and subsidising irrigation infrastructure (on and off‐farm) projects. It concludes that contrary to the popular view held by many, the buyback water recovery program has been a success—achieving the majority of the water recovered to date, at the least cost, with the least negative externalities—in comparison to infrastructure programs.Points for practitioners
Assessing success and failure of MDB water recovery programs requires establishing effectiveness, efficiency and equity criteria. Greater work on the benefits of water reallocation downstream and cultural water is needed.
A comparison of MDB buyback water recovery programs with irrigation infrastructure programs found higher net benefits for buyback programs.
Use first‐best policy to address each water policy objective, not one policy aimed at addressing multi‐objectives.
Overall, the Plan.s overall success is still to be determined, given the difficulty in judging environmental outcome success that is intrinsically linked with other external factors.
