Helen Ingram’s contributions both to the integrated fields of water resources and to the careers of individual scientists working in these fields are hard to overstate. I am a scientist by training, with backgrounds in engineering, hydrology, and climatology. As my education and career advanced, I received real world lessons, over and over, that reinforced the idea that while freshwater challenges have deep scientific roots, they will never be solved solely with scientific and technological answers. And every time I received these lessons, worked to expand my knowledge and background on the social, political, and cultural factors at the core of the freshwater challenge, and sought out experts in these fields, I ran into Helen Ingram, who was there first. Helen’s contributions to the field, at its heart, were to bring a moral and ethical voice into the discussions around water while incorporating first-class scholarship around the concepts of social justice, equity, and culture. As such, she has long been an inspiration to me. My own graduate training in the late 1970s and early 1980s came from the Energy and Resources Group at the University of California, Berkeley, which was uniquely designed to explicitly acknowledge and integrate multidisciplinary education in the context of global resource sustainability issues. This was a fertile time for scholars seeking new insights into environmental and resource challenges. The nation had recently experienced the energy crises of the 1970s, new discussions on limits to growth, public awareness of environmental problems and growing political support for solutions, and a rethinking of educational strategies and priorities away from narrow disciplinary approaches toward more integrated thinking. The prevailing paradigm in water governance was one of a “hard path” approach. The “hard path/soft path” distinction was first clearly enunciated by Lovins in the context of energy resources (Lovins 1977).

中文翻译：

---

海伦英格拉姆对围绕美国水治理的批判性概念的贡献

海伦英格拉姆对水资源综合领域和在这些领域工作的个别科学家的职业生涯的贡献怎么强调都不为过。我是一名受过培训的科学家，拥有工程、水文学和气候学背景。随着我的教育和职业的发展，我一遍又一遍地接受现实世界的课程，这强化了这样一种想法，即虽然淡水挑战具有深厚的科学根源，但仅靠科学和技术答案永远无法解决。每次我接受这些课程，努力扩展我对处于淡水挑战核心的社会、政治和文化因素的知识和背景，并寻找这些领域的专家时，我遇到了海伦英格拉姆，她是第一个. 海伦对该领域的贡献，在其核心，将道德和伦理的声音带入围绕水的讨论中，同时融入围绕社会正义、公平和文化概念的一流学术。因此，她长期以来一直是我的灵感来源。我自己在 1970 年代末和 1980 年代初的研究生培训来自加州大学伯克利分校的能源与资源小组，该小组的设计独特，旨在明确承认和整合全球资源可持续性问题背景下的多学科教育。对于寻求对环境和资源挑战的新见解的学者来说，这是一个肥沃的时期。该国最近经历了 1970 年代的能源危机、关于增长限制的新讨论、公众对环境问题的认识以及对解决方案日益增长的政治支持，重新思考教育策略和优先事项，从狭隘的学科方法转向更综合的思维。水治理的普遍范式是一种“艰难的道路”方法。“硬路径/软路径”的区别首先由 Lovins 在能源方面明确阐述（Lovins 1977）。