ABSTRACT
The issues regarding funding in the Spencer case are primarily regarding the fragmented manner in which funds are available to projects and the timing disconnection that results in terms of providing landowners with subsidies. In general the situation in the Regge case is much more supporting, since the major actors are government actors that have few problems in supporting their own staff costs. The Water Board has the constitutional authority to impose water related taxes, which provides for its major source of income. Nevertheless, the sheer size of the investments in the Regge renaturalization makes it impossible to rely solely or even mostly on regular internal funding. The budget must be created by matching funds from different bodies (with different main priorities) and external sponsors, like EU programs.
