Institutional Distortion of Drainage Modeling in Arkansas River Basin

Cognitive mapping based on interviews with Colorado's water‐management officials indicates that institutional factors inhibit the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) from beneficially applying the so‐called Interactive Accounting Model (IAM) in the Arkansas River Basin. Modeling confuses the drainage problem and the design of remedial strategies by focusing attention solely on technical factors instead of the basin's central issues of economic viability and environmental regulation. The IAM is incapable of conceptualizing the relevant flow processes without support from a detailed model, which, however, the SCS has no plans for using. Finally, modeling cannot guide data collection or provide additional information for decision making because it is precisely the lack of interest by the SCS in pinpointing the sources of salinity in the basin that secures farmer support for on‐farm management projects. Institutional and modeling remedies are proposed to realize the potential benefits of modeling in the river basin.