1. Shared Vision Planning through Computer Aided Dispute Resolution Stacy Langsdale, P.E., Ph.D. Institute for Water Resources, USACE www.SharedVisionPlanning.us

2. Water resource planning & management is characterized by… Persistent conflict Complexity & uncertainty in natural systems (hydrology, ecology, climate change) Conflicting interests & values Interest groups and the public demanding involvement 1:50

3. Integrated Assessment (Rotmans and van Asselt 1996) Place problem in broader context Assist with trend analysis Assess alternatives Framework to structure knowledge Translate uncertainties into risk Identify research gaps 3:50

4. Participatory Integrated Assessment More science does not eliminate uncertainty Post-modernist view: science is subjective Participants define value-based parameters Involvement of the client helps to keep work relevant to their needs 6:35

5. Shared Vision Planning Researchers The Community 10:15

6. Shared Vision Planning builds: understanding of the system confidence in the analysis trust among parties 10:45

7. How is SVP unique? The use of a model sets SVP apart from other “collaborative” planning processes. The participation of stakeholders in developing and validating the model sets SVP apart from traditional technical analysis

8. Leading participatory planning & management requires: Technical Tools Understand basic hydrology, ecology, economics, etc Accurately represent the linkages between these areas Process Skills Understand institutional setting Determine ways to engage Stakeholders Build trust 10:55

10. Circles of Influence A: Model Building team B: Model Users, Validators C: All Interested Parties D: Decision Makers

11. Tier I: Conceptual Framework Tier II: Integrated Planning / Screening / Negotiating Model Tier III: Detailed Data Sets and Numerical Models Hydrology Quality Ecologic Economi c 12:55

12. Conventional ModelingCollaborative Modeling Source of Knowledge Scientific Studies Scientific Studies, Stakeholder Needs & Values BreadthNarrow & deepWide & deep Driver Planner/Modeler’s Understanding of Needs Stakeholders’ & Technical Experts Interests TransparencyBlack boxOpen FocusProductProcess & Product

13. System Dynamics Developed by Jay Forrester at MIT in 1950’s. Contrast to Reductionist approaches Applied to Business Mgt, Urban Planning, and Global Modeling (Limits to Growth) STELLA, ModSim, Vensim 14:50

14. 15:25

15. System Dynamics Principles (Richmond, 2004) 10,000-Metre View Dynamic Thinking –Events -> Patterns -> Causes System as Cause 15:35

16. System Dynamics Principles (Richmond, 2004) Operational Thinking Closed-Loop Thinking Non-Linear Thinking

17. SVP along the Rio Grande: process and products Jesse Roach Sandia National Labs 18:57

18. Snowmelt driven system Most water originates in the north Majority of demand in the south Human water use Surface water use by agriculture (senior) Groundwater use by municipalities (junior) Management challenges Fully allocated and limited supply Endangered species habitat Surface water deliveries to Texas Unsustainable groundwater use by cities Growing population Drought prone Established technical analysis tools URGWOM: Daily timestep RiverWare based operations, accounting, forecasting and planning surface water model ET Toolbox: USBoR product for ET estimation MODFLOW: 3 regional gw models Rio Grande system in New Mexico 20:20

19. SVP along Rio Grande system in New Mexico New Mexico water planning process: 16 planning regions Each tasked with developing a regional water plan 2002-2004 SVP used in “Middle Rio Grande” region: Model used to help develop regional water plan. Seeking low cost and sustainable sw and gw use. Annual timestep, spatially lumped. SVP process with non-technical group. 2004-2007 next generation of the model Desire among water managers for more spatial and temporal resolution in a rapid “screening” and public outreach tool. Monthly timestep, spatially resolved and extended SVP process with technical group in order to incorporate physical processes as represented by existing analysis tools.

20. Tier I: Conceptual Framework Tier II: Integrated Planning / Screening / Negotiating Models Tier III: Detailed Data Sets and Numerical Models Modflow Riverware ETToolbo x Population Annual timestep Middle Rio Grande model Monthly timestep Upper Rio Grande model: URGSIM Tier II: “Tier II” Rio Grande models

21. River Regional Aquifer Well Shallow Aquifer ET Recharge Cities along the river 1 2 3 1 2 3 Municipal water use has historically been supplied 100% from gw. Indoor municipal water use goes to wwtp and from there to river. Essentially all outdoor municipal water use is lost to atmosphere. Groundwater Supply, Surface Water Return 28:25