Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.

The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.

The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.

www.national-academies.org

This page intentionally left blank.

At the dawn of the 21st century the United States faces a panoply of water problems that are significantly more numerous, complex, and larger in scope than those of the past. Serious issues about how water resources are to be protected and managed are not confined to one or several regions; they are found nationwide. Increasingly, the science needed to resolve these water issues in workable ways is not available. Thus, for example, efforts to resolve water allocation problems that stem from the need to protect endangered species in the Klamath and Missouri River basins are being constrained by the lack of good scientific information upon which to base policies which will simultaneously protect biodiversity and minimize adverse economic consequences. Efforts to protect and enhance water quality are similarly hamstrung by the absence of scientific information which would allow water managers to respond proactively to both new and existing threats. And, despite the importance of aquatic ecosystems in generating both service and amenity values, our scientific understanding of how such systems function is rudimentary.

This report, which was undertaken at the request of Congress, illuminates the state of the water resources research enterprise in the United States. It is the logical sequel to an earlier volume entitled: Envisioning the Agenda for Water Resources Research in the Twenty-First Century, prepared by the Water Science and Technology Board of the National Research Council (NRC). The purpose of the present report is to:

• refine and enhance the findings of the Envisioning report

• examine current and historical patterns and magnitudes of investment in water resources research at the federal level and assess its adequacy

• address the need to better coordinate the nation’s water resources research enterprise

• identify institutional options for the improved coordination, prioritization and implementation of research on water resources

Thus, the report discusses the history of federal support of water resources research, it proposes a framework for prioritizing the research agenda, it reports the results of a survey which was intended to describe the characteristics of the current national research effort, and it addresses issues related to the future organization of water resources research at the federal level. Because the NRC committee assembled to conduct the study was charged with examining the water resources research enterprise in the United States, the report does not encompass international water resources research endeavors, including those research efforts funded by American agencies in foreign countries. The committee acknowledges that some future review might usefully take an international perspective.

The committee found that federal investment in water resources research has remained essentially static (in real terms) for more than 30 years. Moreover, water research is accomplished in a highly decentralized fashion with numerous federal agencies setting research agendas independently of each other. Much of that research is focused on operational and near-term problems, with less attention and fewer resources devoted to longer-term, more fundamental research. There are a number of circumstances that suggest a priori that the nation’s water resources research enterprise is not as well organized and financed as it will need to be if the science required to address the multiplying water problems confronting the United States is to be available.

In developing this report, the committee benefited greatly from the advice and input of a companion group of federal agency and non-governmental organization liaisons established for the purpose of assisting the committee. Individual liaisons are identified in Appendix F. The committee also benefited from discussions held with a group of state representatives at its second meeting in January 2003. The list of state representatives can be found in Appendix D. We thank all those who took time to share with us their perspectives and wisdom about the various issues affecting the water resources research enterprise.

The committee was ably served by the staff of the Water Science and Technology Board and its director, Stephen Parker. Study director Laura Ehlers kept the committee on task and on time and provided her own valuable insights which have improved the report immeasurably. Anita Hall provided the committee with all manner of support in a timely and cheerful way. This report would not have been possible without the help of these people.

This report has been reviewed by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with the procedures approved by

the NRC’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the authors and the NRC in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards of objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The reviews and draft manuscripts remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We thank the following individuals for their participation in the review of this report: John Boland, Johns Hopkins University; Patrick Brezonik, University of Minnesota; Robert A. Frosch, Harvard University; Gerald E. Galloway, Titan Corporation; Peter H. Gleick, Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment, and Security; Bernard Goldstein, University of Pittsburgh; George M. Hornberger, University of Virginia; Judy L. Meyer, University of Georgia; and James Westcoat, University of Illinois.

Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Floyd E. Bloom, The Scripps Research Institute, and Daniel P. Loucks, Cornell University. Appointed by the NRC, they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the committee.

Henry Vaux, Jr.

Chair

This page intentionally left blank.

This page intentionally left blank.