**1. Introduction**

Common pool resource (CPR) institutions have been the subject of extensive research for several decades. A CPR is defined as a consumable resource where it is difficult to exclude users and where one person's use depletes the pool for others [1]. Much of this commentary has focused on what the literature calls the collective action dilemma, defined as the tendency for actors to overexploit natural resources such as water, fisheries, and grazing forage in the absence of norms and rules developed by users to govern sustainable use [1,2] and her colleagues argued that while regulation by an external authority is necessary in some circumstances, empirical evidence shows that individual users can overcome self-interest and avert a "tragedy of the commons" through collective action [3]. Based on field research in settings such as small irrigation districts, [2] identified a framework of design principles which demonstrated that users in multiple, small-scale environments have successfully created and used CPR arrangements that work to their mutual benefit.

This study adds to that research by examining integrated surface and ground water managemen<sup>t</sup> plans (IMP) in the Upper Platte River Basin, where Nebraska employs a statutorily enacted framework for state and local governmen<sup>t</sup> cooperation in the integrated managemen<sup>t</sup> of surface and ground water—the Ground Water Management and Protection Act (GWMPA) (Neb. Rev. Stat. §46-701 et seq.). In examining this framework, we

**Citation:** Muñoz-Arriola, F.; Abdel-Monem, T.; Amaranto, A. Common Pool Resource Management: Assessing Water Resources Planning for Hydrologically Connected Surface and Groundwater Systems. *Hydrology* **2021**, *8*, 51. https://doi.org/10.3390/ hydrology8010051

Received: 29 January 2021 Accepted: 17 March 2021 Published: 19 March 2021

**Publisher's Note:** MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

**Copyright:** © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).

relied on Ostrom's design principles for common pool resource institutions, because of its "bottom-up" perspective. Nebraska's unique system can represent an alternative to manage common pool of water resources worldwide. Water managemen<sup>t</sup> in Nebraska includes a statewide agency, Nebraska Department of Natural Resources (NeDNR), with primary statewide authority over surface water, and 23 Natural Resource Districts (NRDs), public entities with taxing authority and primary responsibility for regulatory control over ground water (Figure 1). When state lawmakers established the NRD framework in 1972 there was a consensus that boundaries should follow surface watersheds and that local control was important to the citizens of Nebraska [4]. NeDNR and the NRDs are jointly responsible for facilitating the development of integrated water managemen<sup>t</sup> plans.

**Figure 1.** Platte River Basin (PRB) and Nebraska's natural resources. The deep blue tones evidence the main topographic features and PRB's sub basins. The light blue area is the High Plains Aquifer. At the bottom, it can be seen the state of Nebraska and its 23 Natural Resources Districts.

Examining Nebraska's approach is important for several reasons. Globally, water use for irrigation is the largest and key to develop sustainable water planning and managemen<sup>t</sup> for food and energy production [5]. In the USA irrigation accounts for 62% of water withdrawals, being Nebraska the top state in irrigated acreage. Additionally, along with many other western states of the USA, Nebraska faces challenges in meeting competing demands for water by multiple in-state users and various interstate obligations. These challenges are exacerbated by episodes of severe drought and floods [6,7], the increasing likelihood of long-term changes in climate [8], the inherent risks to water supplies, and volatile crop markets driving resources' tradeoffs [9]. State policymakers are sensitive to the importance of managing water for its agricultural economy; however, its political culture values local control of natural resources, especially ground water, and the state has also experienced a history of conflict over water policy. These discrepancies in policies for CPR design and managemen<sup>t</sup> water can also be evident in integrated water resources managemen<sup>t</sup> frameworks and water governance across the globe [10–15]. CPR design principles based on principles of "bottom-up" governance are therefore a valuable lens through which to view the challenge of managing surface and ground water with a hydrological connection that can be exacerbated by a changing climate.

### **2. Building-Blocks for a Common Pool of Water Resources**

*Water Resources Management and Policy in Nebraska*

The Ground Water Management Protection Act (GWMPA) was enacted in 2004 as a result of a growing recognition that Nebraska needed a strong proactive framework to

manage integrated surface and ground water. The statute was passed with widespread support in the unicameral legislature, with 44 lawmakers voting in support of the bill and only two opposed [16]. The GWMPA was the result of a consensus recommendation of a gubernatorial task force representing a diverse range of water users across the state. The task force recognized that a major issue facing the state was harm to surface water appropriations from ground water irrigation [17]. The GWMPA requires development of IMPs in areas designated as fully or over appropriated through a joint process between the NeDNR and the applicable NRD. The NeDNR designated the Upper Platte Basin (UPB) as "over-appropriated," triggering a statutory requirement for NRDs in that basin to develop individual IMPs in their jurisdictions as well as a Basin Wide Plan across the five NRDs in the UPB (Figure 2).

**Figure 2.** Nebraska's fully and over appropriated surface water boundaries in the Upper Platte Basin.

The IMP process creates a partnership between NRDs and NeDNR to maintain a sustainable balance between water supply and use, and to roll back over-appropriated usage to sustainable levels. Goals and objectives of the IMP are jointly determined by the NRD and NeDNR, including consultation and collaboration with stakeholders (Neb. Rev. Stat. §46-715 et seq.) Only NeDNR and NRDs have decision-making authority; however, the GWMPA requires them to consult and collaborate with public power and irrigation districts and other major stakeholders in development of an IMP. For example, the Central Nebraska Public Power and Irrigation District (CNPPID) uses surface water to generate electricity at a federally licensed hydropower dam in the UPB and delivers surface water for irrigation to over 400,000 hectares along the North Platte and Platte River sub-basins. Its service area cuts across several NRDs in the basin, and ground water use affects the delivery of surface water to irrigators served by CNPPID. The drafters of the GWMPA recognized that depletions to surface water appropriations from ground water use are a major challenge to integrated management, and that offsets to new depletions by NRDs are the primary solution to achieving a balance between water supply and use in areas with a hydrological connection [17].

NRDs are locally elected political entities whose boundaries follow the watersheds of the state's major river systems, and that develop their own priorities and programs for natural resources managemen<sup>t</sup> based on local preferences and needs [4]. Nebraska's water governance system is unique among the fifty states. Some western states employ a highly

centralized orientation, albeit with significant consultation from local entities [18–20]. Other states—like Texas—have historically taken a much more decentralized approach, with local entities driving water use and managemen<sup>t</sup> [21]. In Nebraska, rules for managing ground water are formally nested within a system of state-wide facilitation by NeDNR and NRDs. The approach provides for local autonomy but situates local decision-making within a vertical structure of joint decision-making with the state's NeDNR that resembles a federal system—defined by [22] as jurisdictions that are nested across levels, e.g., counties within a state.

Following the adoption of an IMP, the Nebraska GWMPA requires the NeDNR to annually evaluate the expected long-term availability of water supplies. The ultimate test of the impact of the GWMPA will be sufficiency of the water supply in the long term for beneficial uses (Neb. Rev. Statute §46-713). This test is especially important in the UPB where a significant area is over-appropriated. While the GWMPA requires the five NRDs in the UPB to develop a basin-wide plan, there are distinct differences within each district. [23] also applied Ostrom's design principles to the Platte River Basin in their study of the perspectives of water users. In the present study, the Ostrom's eight principles listed and defined below represent an opportunity to identify the interdependency between water governance and distributed ground water-surface water interactions.

