Adaptive basin governance and the prospects for meeting Indigenous water claims Rosalind H. Bark a, *, Dustin E. Garrick b , Catherine J. Robinson a , Sue Jackson a a CES CSIRO, Australia b Oxford Water Futures Programme, The University of Oxford, England, United Kingdom 1. Introduction Efforts to effectively manage water resources are often frustrated by the absence of planning mechanisms to enable water decision-makers to work across jurisdictions, and the need to consider a range of environmental and social values (Connell et al., 2007; Robinson et al., 2011). This challenge has led to conditions that create ‘wicked’ planning problems (Freeman, 2000) and planning regimes that are vulnerable to surprise and crisis because management institutions become rigid (Folke et al., 2005; Olsson et al., 2006). A growing scholarship promotes the development of adaptive governance regimes to enhance institutional capaci- ty and improve water management policies and practices (Robinson et al., 2009; Pahl-Wostl, 2007, 2009; Akamani and Wilson, 2011). Adaptive basin governance regimes can deal with uncertainty and change through planning mechanisms that integrate science and other types of knowledge and institutions that have the capacity to facilitate institutional, technical and social learning (Lynch, 2009). A significant new challenge to water governance in many countries is Indigenous peoples’ contemporary claims to access water (Rangan and Lane, 2001) and participate effectively in water use decisions (Jackson et al., 2012; Getches, 2005). While water planning now places a greater reliance on decentralised arrangements and processes, these regimes have struggled to reflect that water claims are vested with religious, cultural, and economic significance for Indigenous societies (Weir, 2009; Osborn, 2009; Bark and Jacobs, 2009) and e n v i r o n m e n t a l s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 9 – 2 0 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 1 6 9 – 1 7 7 a r t i c l e i n f o Keywords: Indigenous water requirements Adaptive governance a b s t r a c t The United States and Australia confront the challenge of meeting multi-faceted Indigenous water requirements within the wider context of intensified competition for freshwater supplies and expiation of historic inequality of access. Fulfilment of Indigenous water claims requires acceptance of currently unrecognised uses that may be in conflict with water planning in irrigation-dominated basins. Adaptive governance regimes have been applied to deal with uncertainly and change in water planning and allocation decisions, including changes related to the recognition of Indigenous water claims, values, and knowledge. This paper examines the prospects of adaptive governance regimes to combine: (a) insights into decision-making and policy learning in contexts of high levels of uncer- tainty over the information base and legal and policy arrangements; with (b) institutional arrangements to coordinate decision-making and accountability across multiple decision- making units, values and jurisdictions, to accommodate Indigenous water claims. In both countries, efforts have involved (re)allocation of water entitlements and greater participa- tion in multi-stakeholder basin planning. In this paper we find that a mix of these adaptive governance mechanisms shows greatest promise for overcoming resistance to the recogni- tion of Indigenous water claims. # 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. * Corresponding author at: CSIRO CES, PMB 2, Glen Osmond, SA 5064, Australia. Tel.: +64 8 83038453; fax: +64 8 83038601. E-mail address: Rosalind.bark@csiro.au (R.H. Bark). Available online at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envsci 1462-9011/$ – see front matter # 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2012.03.005