Del Plan General de 1902 a la planificación hidrológica

Abstract

El Avance de un Plan General de Pantanos y Canales de Riego de 1899, el Plan General de Canales de Riego y Pantanos de 1902, con sus aditamentos de 1909, 1916, 1919 y 1922, la actuación de las Confederaciones Sindicales Hidrográficas a partir de 1926, el I Plan Nacional de Obras Hidráulicas (1933) y el Plan General de Obras Hidráulicas, incluido en el Nacional de Obras Públicas de 1940, tienen en común, además de su carácter hidráulico, la impronta regeneracionista y su elaboración en el marco de la Ley de Aguas de 13 de junio de 1879, vigente por más de un siglo. Naturaleza hidráulica era también, a pesar de su calificativo, la del Anteproyecto del Plan Hidrológico de 1993, que, ampliamente deudor del legado regeneracionista, pretendía, a través del SIEHNA, una sustancial reestructuración hidrográfica del territorio español peninsular. Desechado este planteamiento, el 5 de septiembre pasado fue remitido al Consejo Nacional del Agua un nuevo Anteproyecto del Plan Hidrológico Nacional, con procedimiento de elaboración y contenido novedosos.

Implementation of the European Water Framework Directive: Integration of hydrological and regional planning at the Segura River Basin, southeast Spain

“…Nevertheless the diversion served to guarantee a plentiful urban and industrial supply of high quality water, contributing to alleviating the chronic droughts suffered by the region and generating a positive economic development (Gil Olcina, 2002;Morales et al, 2005). In fact after the first 20 years of the existence of MCT, the flows proceeding from the River Taibilla were insufficient, and water had to be taken from the Segura River.…”

“…For this reason, for the last thirty years water demand has surpassed the limited availability of this resource. As a consequence, the so-called "water deficit" is one of the great paradigms characterizing the territory around the Segura River (Morales, 2001;Gil Olcina, 2002). Thus intensive water resource exploitation has exacerbated the severe effects of the extreme hydrological phenomena and recurrent droughts (López-Bermúdez, 1990;Quiring and Papakryiakou, 2003;Ozturk and Aydin, 2004;Hlavinka et al, 2009).…”

Explaining path-dependent rigidity traps: increasing returns, power, discourses, and entrepreneurship intertwined in social-ecological systems

“…During this period, the overtly liberal HIR discourse played mainly a rhetorical role and utopian unifying symbol based on powerful logics (logos) and capacity to appeal to emotion (pathos; Table 1). During the II Republic (1931)(1932)(1933)(1934)(1935)(1936)(1937)(1938)(1939), there were reformist attempts at the agrarian level, but the National Plan of Hydraulic Works (NPHW) of 1933 inherited the hydraulic character and regenerationist mark of the Water Act of 1879 (repealed more than one century afterward, in 1985), the Restoration's NPHW of 1902, and the subsequent revisions of the latter (Ortega 1984, Moral-Ituarte 1991, Gil 2001. During Franco's dictatorship , the largely technical NPHW of 1933 was fully implemented through the (almost identical) NPHW of 1940 (Table A2.1).…”

“…First, at the constitutional, strategic level, was the interventionist character of both the Irrigation Act of 1932 and the NPHW of 1933, inherited by the NPHW of 1940. The state financially assumed, in full, the construction of primary and secondary irrigation hydraulic infrastructure, and took a main role in the colonization-and-development strategies (Sánchez 1997, Gil 2001, Moral-Ituarte 1991, Barciela and López 2003. Second, at an administrative level, there was the creation of the Water Union Confederations (precursor of the modern Water Authorities), semiautonomous organizations guaranteed financially by the Ministry of Public Works, in 1926 (Table A2.1).…”

Implicaciones territoriales de una gran obra hidráulica: el embalse del Tranco (cabecera del Guadalquivir)

“…Por distintas causas que ya han sido suficientemente estudiadas (Gil Olcina, 2001), la mayor parte de esas obras nunca llegaron a abordarse, o bien se abordaron mucho más tarde en coyunturas económicas menos críticas que la del tránsito de los siglos XIX al XX. Entre las excepciones se cuentan las dos obras que nos ocupan, seguramente porque ninguna de ellas formaba parte de lo que Manuel Lorenzo Pardo, al analizar aquel Plan, dio en calificar como «una copiosa cosecha de iniciativas de la más variada procedencia y la más variable garantía» (citado en Gil Olcina, 2001).…”