Melissa Beresford

Managed aquifer recharge using floodwater (Flood‐MAR) has emerged as a promising multi‐benefit strategy to mitigate drought, groundwater depletion, and flood risk by capturing high‐magnitude flows for aquifer recharge. However, widespread adoption is hindered by the lack of landscape‐scale screening tools to identify Flood‐MAR opportunities. In order to make Flood‐MAR more accessible as a flood mitigation alternative, this study presents the first national‐scale assessment of Flood‐MAR suitability in the United States, integrating hydrologic, geophysical, and land‐use datasets into a unified geospatial screening framework. Intended for use in regional planning frameworks, the study develops nationally consistent datasets representing high‐level components necessary for Flood‐MAR implementation: (1) availability of floodwater, (2) demand for recharge, and (3) presence of suitable lands. We demonstrate the assessment applications by screening Flood‐MAR suitability according to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers planning regions and their authorized project portfolio. The result is an explorable geospatial data viewer, through which regional planners can identify relative opportunities for further technical investigation. Given the consistent dataset, the results also support national assessment for furthering adoption of Flood‐MAR. Results reveal substantial spatial heterogeneity in Flood‐MAR potential across U.S. watersheds, with clusters of high suitability in the California Central Valley, the Gulf Coast, the South Atlantic, and along major alluvial rivers in the western United States. To illustrate how these data can be used, 743 dams owned by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers were screened for their Flood‐MAR suitability. Overall, this study presents a consistent framework for locating potential Flood‐MAR projects by integrating large‐scale hydrologic, hydrogeologic, and spatial modeling with multi‐criteria decision analysis.

California's efforts to advance the Human Right to Water are constrained by limited household‐level data on water insecurity. Using the 2021 CalSpeaks statewide probability survey ( n = 628) this study offers the first representative look at water insecurity across California households. Results reveal significant water‐related struggles: approximately 23% of respondents worried about having enough water to meet their household needs, 15% worried about perceived health impacts from water quality, and 7% struggled with affordability. Negative binomial regression models show that water insecurity is not randomly distributed: households with non‐white residents, households which rely on private or small water companies for water service or receive public assistance experience disproportionately higher water insecurity. Sensitivity analyses indicate that some predictors—such as household size and employment—are more strongly associated with frequent water insecurity experiences, underscoring the need for multidimensional monitoring. These findings highlight that system‐level compliance metrics substantially underestimate household‐level challenges and reinforce the need for policies that address affordability, quality, accessibility, worry, and trust to achieve California's Human Right to Water.

Graduate research programs are expected to deliver learning outcomes that enhance students’ abilities to conduct basic science research. By ‘science’ we mean the systematic collection and analysis ...

It is increasingly acknowledged that high income countries do not enjoy universal drinking water coverage, with pockets of water insecurity persisting close to areas that have had high-quality, centralized water provision for half a century or more. The reasons behind this are complex, and effective ways to improve water security in these areas defy simple prescriptions. Nuanced measures that disaggregate the different facets of water insecurity are especially important as we attempt to understand and, crucially, improve water security in high-income countries. In this paper, we describe a qualitative protocol for assessing water insecurity at the household level in a study conducted in rural and unincorporated settlements in the Southwestern United States. The study focuses on households connected to small, piped water systems; households that rely on hauled water, individual wells, and other sources; and those who are withdrawing from centralized systems. The goals of this study are: 1) to measure a baseline for individual households’ water security; 2) identify mechanisms for coping with poor water insecurity; 3) evaluate changes in water insecurity following co-designed interventions. We include in this protocol three codebooks for the coding and analysis of interview data, to make them available for use by other water insecurity researchers. The design embeds the interventions into the study without pre-supposing the nature of the interventions. The socio-technical interventions will be co-designed by the study team, project partners, and the communities themselves. By identifying and working with communities experiencing different water insecurity challenges the study aims to directly increase their water security and develop a deeper understanding of the drivers of and responses to water insecurity in the Southwestern United States.

Water system centralization and decentralization have variously been promoted as key to achieving household water security and Sustainable Development Goal 6.1. We argue that the lack of specificity with which scholars and practitioners use the terms centralization and decentralization limits our understanding of different water system configurations and their impacts. In this Primer, we provide a framework for thinking about levels of (de)centralization across three linked system dimensions: infrastructure, governance, and operations and maintenance. We encourage those analyzing water systems to characterize (de)centralization with respect to these multiple dimensions, as well as the system's broader political‐economic and hydro‐climatic contexts. Emphasizing the importance of delineating the scale of analysis, we highlight distinct system configurations and the prevalence of hybridity. Increased specificity about dimensions and scale can clarify how the character of, or changes to, a given system impact users, which is critical to assessing their implications for water security, sustainability, and equity. We conclude with recommendations for future research to analyze the opportunities and challenges associated with different water system configurations. This article is categorized under: Human Water > Water Governance

The U.S. has moved beyond peak water security. Infrastructural degradation, institutional inertia, and climate change are reducing the ability of households and communities to benefit from near-universal safe, adequate, affordable, sustainable water services. Yet, current supply-side research tools, that focus largely on system performance, are not equipped to measure the prevalence and lived experiences of household water insecurity, thus limiting the evidence available to policymakers, utilities, and communities to make decisions about water services. We discuss how demand-side metrics, such as household-level water insecurity scales validated for high-income contexts, such as the U.S., can help stakeholders to better identify local variation in user water issues, guide resource allocation, and improve hazard and disaster response. Targeted infrastructure investments informed by these metrics can enhance water security, reduce reliance on emergency social services, and promote public health and economic vitality. To address 21^st-century water challenges effectively, we must integrate experiential measures into local, regional, and national water assessments.