A correction in a research partner organization name Eco-Valley (correct name Valley Eco) has been made to the section 2 Materials, data sources, and participatory design, paragraph 2:
“Our participatory design process (Supplementary Figure S2) leveraged the MLRP governance structures (Supplementary Table S2) adopted by the Tule and Kaweah MLRP projects to iteratively develop the form and features of the toolkit. Both MLRP project teams included Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs), conservation and land trust organizations, disadvantaged community representatives, an educational organization, and academic researchers. All MLRP grants were overseen by the California Department of Conservation, which created a Statewide Support Entity to observe and advise the grantees. The more complex Tule MLRP governance structure included a project manager, initially a conservation organization (The Nature Conservancy) and later a water agency (Lower Tule River Irrigation District), overseeing a Steering Committee, an Implementation Committee, and an Outreach and Engagement Committee. These partner-constituted committees met virtually on a monthly basis during the toolkit development. Two stakeholder committees (General Stakeholders Committee and Agricultural Advisory Committee) were constituted using calls for participation and met on a roughly quarterly basis, with in-person and hybrid meetings organized and facilitated by the Outreach and Engagement Committee. The Kaweah MLRP engaged a consulting firm (Valley Eco) as the project manager, and similar partner types as with the Tule MLRP. Governance was simpler in the Kaweah case, involving a Stakeholder Advisory Committee, general stakeholder meetings, and periodic meetings with the grantee institution (Kaweah Delta Water Conservation District). Kaweah meetings were held on a roughly quarterly basis. Overall, the governance structures and meeting schedules allowed toolkit developers ample opportunities to design, demonstrate, collect feedback, and modify the toolkit versions for the respective subbasins.”
The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.
Statements
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Summary
Keywords
multibenefit, land repurposing, decision-making, groundwater, sustainability
Citation
Nuñez-Bolaño Y, Flores-Landeros H, Rodríguez-Flores JM, Fernandez-Bou AS, Medellín-Azuara J and Harmon TC (2025) Corrigendum: A participatory approach for developing a geospatial toolkit for mapping the suitability of California's Multibenefit Land Repurposing Program (MLRP) in support of groundwater sustainability. Front. Water 7:1645532. doi: 10.3389/frwa.2025.1645532
Received
11 June 2025
Accepted
12 June 2025
Published
24 June 2025
Approved by
Frontiers Editorial Office, Frontiers Media SA, Switzerland
Volume
7 - 2025
Updates
Copyright
© 2025 Nuñez-Bolaño, Flores-Landeros, Rodríguez-Flores, Fernandez-Bou, Medellín-Azuara and Harmon.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Yelenka Nuñez-Bolaño ynunezbolano@ucmerced.edu
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.