The Murray–Darling Basin is large and complex. The water resources and the communities that depend on them are diverse.
Transparency
The Murray–Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) engages widely to understand the issues and concerns of stakeholders and how they can contribute to the implementation of the Basin Plan.
The MDBA routinely seeks advice and critical reviews from the independent scientists appointed to its multi-disciplinary Advisory Committee on Social, Economic and Environmental Sciences (ACSEES). This committee was established to provide strategic advice on science and knowledge to underpin the implementation of an adaptive Basin Plan.
The MDBA exposes its work to peer review as a matter of standard practice. Reviews are carried out by external subject-matter experts, such as an expert panel, academic or other technical experts within other government agencies. The reviews are undertaken by an independent party.
We ensure our work is accessible to interested stakeholders by publishing our findings on the MDBA website – this includes science reports (across a range of subjects), compliance activities and independent reviews of our work.
The Basin Plan 2012 (the Basin Plan) requires an understanding of the ecology, hydrology, social and economic factors, and the consequences of different management scenarios for both surface and groundwater systems.
The Basin is a complex biophysical system, and as such there is no single best solution to manage the Basin’s water. In setting the Basin Plan, the Authority applied expert science and knowledge, along with the views and preferences of communities and key stakeholders.
The scientific work undertaken to inform the development of the Basin Plan was the best available at the time, however, new work is always becoming available.
The Advisory Committee on Social, Economic and Environmental Sciences
The Advisory Committee on Social, Economic and Environmental Sciences (ACSEES) is an important part of the MDBA’s science review process.
Northern Basin Review
The Northern Basin Review drew together hydrological, social, cultural, economic and environmental investigations over 4 years. The MDBA did this review with the assistance of a consultative body, the Northern Basin Advisory Committee (NBAC). The work also involved collaboration with the New South Wales and Queensland governments.
The responsibility for river operating arrangements in the northern Basin rests with state governments. As a result of the integrated analysis of multiple lines of evidence in the Northern Basin Review, the MDBA sought commitments from the New South Wales and Queensland governments to implement a range of measures to complement environmental water recovery.
Sustainable diversion limit adjustment mechanism
The Basin Plan sets sustainable diversion limits, which indicate how much water can be used in the Murray–Darling Basin, while leaving enough water to sustain natural ecosystems.
To provide flexibility, the Basin Plan includes the option to adjust the sustainable diversion limits in the southern Basin. Over the coming years, a suite of projects nominated by Basin state governments will be implemented in the southern Basin. The assessment of projects has determined that 605 gigalitres (GL) of water can remain available for communities.
The MDBA administered the assessment framework, designed in collaboration with Basin governments, to assess the state projects and calculate how much water these projects will contribute towards any change in sustainable diversion limits. The methodology to assess the projects had been previously agreed by Basin governments.
The assessment framework includes technical components such as hydrological models, hydrological indicator sites, ecological elements and ecological equivalence scoring. However, the assessment includes much more than modelling – modelling is just one part of the assessment process.
The framework has been trialled and thoroughly reviewed by independent experts and all Basin governments – it was found to be scientifically rigorous and suitable for use in the operation of the adjustment mechanism.
Examples of independent reviews
Sustainable diversion limit adjustment assessment framework
The framework includes the use of a method independently developed by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation based on scientifically-robust scoring, to test for environmental equivalence of proposed measures relative to benchmark conditions. An Independent Review Panel found the framework and test to be fit-for-purpose.
Independent expert panel Murray–Darling Basin Plan sustainable diversion limit of change review
In preparation for the sustainable diversion limit adjustment determination, early MDBA modelling indicated the potential for breaches of a number of ‘change rules’. An expert review panel was commissioned to do an independent ecological analysis and found no material or significant breaches in terms of their likely impact on ecology.
Independent review of social and economic modelling for the Northern Basin Review
This review by the University of New England confirmed the appropriateness and robustness of the socio-economic modelling of Basin Plan impacts in the northern Basin.
Expert panel review of the hydrological modelling framework for the sustainable diversion limit adjustment mechanism and the Northern Basin Review
This review endorsed the use of the modelling frameworks to support each project.
