No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Learning Together to Manage Together — Improving Participation in Water Management
Abstract
The project aimed to increase the understanding of participatory river basin management planning (RBMP) in Europe as required by the Water Framework Directive. RBMP is the integrated cross-sectoral planning and management of river basins if necessary across political and administrative borders. HarmoniCOP focused on public participation as a means to foster social learning in RBMP. An approach to social learning was developed in combination with tools and methods meant for supporting social learning processes in water management. The resulting handbook complements the guidance document on public participation that was prepared in context with the implementation strategy for the European Water Framework Directive. The presentation will introduce the handbook and its use in participatory processes.
... Developing policies that align private and public initiatives and support innovation often requires changing existing institutional arrangements and their governance (Godfrey-Wood, 2016). New policy options might emerge from social learning approaches in which actors learn from and with others, defined as 'learning together to manage together' by Ridder et al. (2005). A policy implication is that such social learning processes could provide valuable information and insights into the factors that influence personal preferences and could enrich the knowledge of potential investors so they can make better-informed investment decisions. ...
... Participants acknowledged differences within the group as an asset and this might influence future dialogues, future learning, and decision making. In addition, the attitude of participants seemed to have changed, acknowledging the perspectives of others, which is a strong indicator of learning from and with peers (Ridder et al., 2005). ...
... Such processes are influenced by their institutional, cultural and historical contexts (Lumosi et al., 2019;Van Bommel et al., 2009). Literature about social learning often focusses on natural resource management and thus the learning has a purpose of "learning together to better manage together" (Ridder et al., 2005). ...
Farmers are increasingly being called upon to help manage, invest and steer water systems towards a desirable state: farmers as water managers. Through on-farm soil and water management and investment decisions, farmers influence their own water availability but their local interventions also have system-level implications. Farmers influence water systems and are in turn influenced by the water system in which they operate. System-level implications of farmers as water managers are poorly understood.
This thesis explores approaches and provides insights for a better understanding of the ways in which farmers can contribute to achieving system-level objectives, such as agricultural intensification and freshwater retention capacity.
... Social learning is often recommended to deal with uncertainty, ambiguity and change in values, all typical characteristics of complex environmental problems (Pahl-Wostl et al., 2007). The literature on social learning in water management contains many case studies of learning processes designed to foster collective action among stakeholders, by "learning together to better manage together" (Ridder et al., 2005;Rodela, 2013). However, in the literature several issues are the subject of persistent debate (Gerlak, Heikkila, Smolinski, Huitema, & Armitage, 2018;Muro & Jeffrey, 2008). ...
... 1.2 | Deliberative dialogue as a driver in social learning processes As indicated above, social learning is based on dialogue (Ridder et al., 2005). A dialogue is defined by David Bohm (2004) to be a "stream of meaning" that flows between participants. ...
... On time taken for social learning to occur: Social learning processes are often referred to as long lasting, requiring multiple stages (e.g., Johannessen & Hahn, 2013;Ridder et al., 2005;Van Bommel et al., 2009). Some scholars have argued that only intensive, continuous processes lead to learning (Raadgever et al., 2012). ...
Participatory water valuation workshops are useful for their valuation outcomes, but can they also foster social learning? Social learning involves changes in understanding through social interactions between actors, which go beyond the individual to become situated within wider social units. Participatory water valuation workshops involve dialoguing about knowledge, perspectives, and preferences, which may be conducive to social learning. In this paper, we assess the social learning potential of a participatory valuation workshop, based on a case study in Tasmania, where farmers, water managers, and a policy maker shared their personal perspectives on the past, current and future values of irrigation water. To assess the social learning potential of a single participatory valuation workshop, we analyzed drivers—that is, factors positively influencing social learning—and outcomes—that is, indications that social learning occurred. Data were collected through an exit survey, in‐workshop reflections and semistructured interviews following 3 weeks and 6 months after the actual workshop. The results indicate that the workshop provided the drivers for social learning to occur. In addition, participants indicated to have learned from and with others, and that the workshop provided improved and extended networks. According to the participants, the workshop led to a shared concern about increasing prices for water licences and induced substantive outcomes related to the use, management, and governance of irrigation water. We conclude that participatory valuation workshops, such as the one analyzed here, can foster social learning.
... Este último principio implica que los nuevos planes hidrológicos de cuenca deben ser fruto de intensos procesos de participación ciudadana, desde el comienzo, no siendo ésta reducida a los periodos de consulta legalmente previstos. La DMA en su artículo 14 entiende la participación pública como aquel proceso que permite a las personas influir en el resultado de los planes y proyectos, con el propósito de mejorar los procedimientos de decisión y de tener en cuenta el conocimiento del usuario, la experiencia compartida y las evidencias científicas (Ridder et al, 2005). ...
... La DMA define como público interesado o afectado a cualquier persona física o jurídica que tiene un interés o una implicación en un problema bien porque está directamente afectado o porque su participación puede influir en el resultado. Todas las partes interesadas en la gestión del agua (usuarios, administraciones públicas, afectados en general) deberían ser partícipes del proceso de planificación, como también debe serlo el público en general y ello debido a que dicha implicación ciudadana mejora la administración de agua y ayuda a resolver conflictos a través del diálogo, consiguiendo un mayor apoyo social en la gestión de los recursos (CIS, 2003;Ridder et al, 2005), una mejor comprensión y confianza en las decisiones tomadas y todo ello a través de un beneficioso proceso de aprendizaje social (Luyet et al., 2012;Pahl-Wostl et al, 2007). ...
... Este último principio implica que os novos plans hidrolóxicos de conca deben ser froito de intensos procesos de participación cidadá, desde o comezo, non sendo esta reducida aos periodos de consulta legalmente previstos. A DMA no seu artigo 14 entende a participación pública como aquel proceso que permite ás persoas influir no resultado dos plans e proxectos, co propósito de mellorar os procedementos de decisión e de ter en conta o coñecemento do usuario, a experiencia compartida e as evidencias científicas (Ridder et al, 2005). ...
... Este último principio implica que os novos plans hidrolóxicos de conca deben ser froito de intensos procesos de participación cidadá, desde o comezo, non sendo esta reducida aos periodos de consulta legalmente previstos. A DMA no seu artigo 14 entende a participación pública como aquel proceso que permite ás persoas influir no resultado dos plans e proxectos, co propósito de mellorar os procedementos de decisión e de ter en conta o coñecemento do usuario, a experiencia compartida e as evidencias científicas (Ridder et al, 2005). ...
... A DMA define como público interesado ou afectado a calquera persoa física ou xurídica que ten un interese ou unha implicación nun problema ben porque está directamente afectado ou porque a súa participación pode influir no resultado. Todas as partes interesadas na xestión da auga (usuarios, administracións públicas, afectados en xeral) deberían ser partícipes do proceso de planificación, como tamén debe selo o público en xeral e iso debido a que a devandita implicación cidadá mellora a administración de auga e axuda a resolver conflitos a través do diálogo, conseguindo un maior apoio social na xestión dos recursos (CIS, 2003;Ridder et al, 2005), unha mellor comprensión e confianza nas decisións tomadas e todo iso a través dun beneficioso proceso de aprendizaxe social (Luyet et al., 2012;Pahl-Wostl et al, 2007). ...
... UNHA ANáLISE DOS PROCESOS PARTICIPATIVOS DESENVOLVIDOS SOBRE OS PLANS HIDROLÓXICOS DAS CONCAS GALEGAS apoio social á xestión pública (CIS, 2003). Consecuentemente, os xestores públicos deberían facer un maior esforzo por reformar as estruturas participativas actuais (consellos da auga e consellos de demarcación, principalmente) e involucrar á sociedade en xeral na xestión pública (Tippett et al., 2005;Ridder et al, 2005). ...
A Directiva Marco da auga (Directiva 2000/60/CE) é a norma básica que preside, desde o ano 2000, a xestión das augas da Unión Europea e supuxo, no momento da súa aprobación, un cambio de filosofía na tradicional xestión dos recursos hídricos. Dunha concepción “desenvolvista”, baseada no aproveitamento dos ríos para todo tipo de usos e demandas, pásase a unha visión “conservadora” cuxo obxectivo é a prevención, a conservación e a recuperación do bo estado ecolóxico das masas de auga así como o seu uso sostible. En segundo lugar, a Directiva Marco da auga (DMA) consagra a participación pública como un dos piares da nova política da auga.
A DMA diferencia tres formas de participación pública: o acceso á información; a consulta pública en todas as fases do proceso de planificación; e, en terceiro lugar, a implicación activa no proceso de planificación. Galicia conta con dúas demarcacións hidrolóxicas diferentes con sede na Comunidade Autónoma: Galicia-Costa, que abrangue as concas internas galegas (cuxa xestión é competencia da Xunta de Galicia que exerce a través do organismo autónomo Augas de Galicia) e a Miño-Sil, integrada polas concas internacionais dos ríos Miño e Limia (competencia estatal que asumea Confederación Hidrográfica do Miño-Sil).
Este artigo analiza as experiencias de participación pública desenvolvidas por ambas as dúas administracións durante a última fase do proceso de planificación, correspondente coa elaboración, consulta pública e aprobación dos documentos definitivos dos plans hidrolóxicos de ambas as dúas concas. Analízanse os obxectivos da participación pública establecidos pola DMA así como os métodos e as actividades desenvolvidas en ambas as dúas demarcacións para promover a información, consulta e participación pública sobre os plans hidrolóxicos de Galicia-Costa e Miño-Sil.
... Este último principio implica que los nuevos planes hidrológicos de cuenca deben ser fruto de intensos procesos de participación ciudadana, desde el comienzo, no siendo ésta reducida a los periodos de consulta legalmente previstos. La DMA en su artículo 14 entiende la participación pública como aquel proceso que permite a las personas influir en el resultado de los planes y proyectos, con el propósito de mejorar los procedimientos de decisión y de tener en cuenta el conocimiento del usuario, la experiencia compartida y las evidencias científicas (Ridder et al, 2005). ...
... La DMA define como público interesado o afectado a cualquier persona física o jurídica que tiene un interés o una implicación en un problema bien porque está directamente afectado o porque su participación puede influir en el resultado. Todas las partes interesadas en la gestión del agua (usuarios, administraciones públicas, afectados en general) deberían ser partícipes del proceso de planificación, como también debe serlo el público en general y ello debido a que dicha implicación ciudadana mejora la administración de agua y ayuda a resolver conflictos a través del diálogo, consiguiendo un mayor apoyo social en la gestión de los recursos (CIS, 2003;Ridder et al, 2005), una mejor comprensión y confianza en las decisiones tomadas y todo ello a través de un beneficioso proceso de aprendizaje social (Luyet et al., 2012;Pahl-Wostl et al, 2007). ...
... Consecuentemente, los gestores públicos deberían hacer un mayor esfuerzo por reformar las estructuras participativas PARTICIPACIÓN PÚBLICA EN LA GESTIÓN DEL AGUA. UN ANáLISIS DE LOS PROCESOS PARTICIPATIVOS DESARROLLADOS SOBRE LOS PLANES HIDROLÓGICOS DE LAS CUENCAS GALLEGAS actuales (consejos del agua y consejos de demarcación, principalmente) e involucrar a la sociedad en general en la gestión pública (Tippett et al., 2005;Ridder et al, 2005). ...
La Directiva Marco del agua (Directiva 2000/60/CE) es la norma básica que preside, desde el año 2000, la gestión de las aguas de la Unión Europea y supuso, en el momento de su aprobación, un cambio de filosofía en la tradicional gestión de los recursos hídricos. De una concepción “desarrollista”, basada en el aprovechamiento de los ríos para todo tipo de usos y demandas, se pasa a una visión “conservadora” cuyo objetivo es la prevención, la conservación y la recuperación del buen estado ecológico de las masas de agua así como su uso sostenible. En segundo lugar, la Directiva de Marco del Agua (DMA) consagra la participación pública como uno de los pilares de la nueva política del agua. La DMA diferencia tres formas de participación pública: el acceso a la acceso a información; la consulta pública en todas las fases del proceso de planificación; y, en tercer lugar, la implicación activa pública en el proceso de planificación.
Galicia cuenta con dos demarcaciones hidrológicas diferentes: Galicia-Costa, que abarca las cuencas internas gallegas (cuya gestión es competencia de la Xunta de Galicia que ejerce a través del organismo autónomo Augas de Galicia) y la Miño-Sil, integrada por las cuencas internacionales de los ríos Miño y Limia (competencia estatal que asume la Confederación Hidrográfica del Miño-Sil).
Este artículo analiza las experiencias de participación pública desarrolladas por ambas administraciones durante la última fase del proceso de planificación, correspondiente con la elaboración, consulta pública y aprobación de los documentos definitivos de los planes hidrológicos de ambas cuencas. Se analizan los objetivos de la participación pública establecidos por la DMA así como los métodos y las actividades desarrolladas en ambas demarcaciones para promover la información, consulta y participación pública sobre los planes hidrológicos de Galicia-Costa y Miño-Sil.
... Public participation can generally be defined as allowing people to influence the outcome of plans and working processes (Ridder et al, 2005). The Water Framework Directive (WFD) sets forth public participation as an integral part of the management process and requires Member States to base their actions on transparency and public participation. ...
... The European Union establishes that all parties interested in water issues (stakeholders, users, public authorities) should be involved in planning processes, together with the general public. Active participation improves water management and resolves conflicts through dialogue, achieving greater strength and social support water governance (CIS, 2003;Ridder et al, 2005). ...
... Only in this case are we able to involve citizenship in water management, trying to resolve conflicts through dialogue and achieving social support for water governance (CIS, 2003). Consequently, policy-makers should make stronger efforts to reform existing formal participatory structures, involving society in public policies and management debates (Tippett et al., 2005;Ridder et al, 2005). ...
The Water Framework Directive (Directive 2000/60/CE), which stablishes a common framework for EU water policy, sets up public participation as one of the basic principles of water management. The Water Framework Directive emphasizes the importance of informing the audience in order to ensure or rather facilitate their participation in the planning process. According to this, the Directive prescribes three main forms of public participation: access to background information; consultation in three steps of the planning process; and public active involvement in the planning process.
In Galicia (the region in the northwest of Spain) there are two different Basin districts, Galicia-Coast, which includes the intern basins in Galicia and the Minho-Sil River Basin, which integrates the international basins of the rivers Minho and Limia. This article describes the active involvement experiences developed in both Galicia-Coast and Miño-Sil River Basin, making a brief introduction to the objectives of public participation in water management plan and describing the methods and activities developed in information, consultation and public participation on both basin management plans. Finally, the article analyzes and evaluates the results of public participation, the impact of that process and purposes for future participative process.
Keywords: River basin management plans, public participation, water management, Water Framework Directive, social learning
... In the HarmoniCOP project, information and communication tools (IC-tools) are defined as artefacts, devices or software that can be seen and touched, and can be used in a participatory process to facilitate Social Learning ( Ridder et al., 2005). A method is a way, technique or process for doing something, but contrary to the tools does not have a material reality. ...
... Within these participatory phases IC-tools can be used to achieve/inform (co-knowing), consult (co-thinking) or actively involve (co-operate) stakeholders. The HarmoniCOP handbook ( Ridder et al., 2005) presents a way to analyse the applicability of IC-tools and methods for each participation phase and level. ...
... Within these participatory phases IC-tools can be used to achieve/inform (co-knowing), consult (co-thinking) or actively involve (co-operate) stakeholders. The HarmoniCOP handbook (Ridder et al., 2005) presents a way to analyse the applicability of IC-tools and methods for each participation phase and level. Concerning the perceived usability of tools, some lessons learned in the HarmoniCOP case studies concerned the required degree of sophistication of the tools. ...
This paper summarizes the main results of the HarmoniCOP project. The main focus of HarmoniCOP is the introduction of the concept of 'Social Learning' into water management. The concept of Social Learning is explained. A literature research on approaches and international experiences was conducted and is summarized. The applicability of IC-tools in Social Learning processes is investigated and guidelines for their use are provided. The main findings of the project were translated into practical guidelines in a Handbook for practitioners. The scope and goal of this Handbook is explained.
... To date, much research has been conducted on the concept of ESS and the multiple aspects concerning its potential as a support tool for policy-and decision-making, e.g. the Millennium Assessment (MA, 2003;2005), The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB, 2008;, initiatives in this field through the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES, 2014;Díaz et al., 2015) and the EU-Working Group MAES (Maes et al., 2013(Maes et al., , 2016, as well as research projects such as GLOBAQUA (Navarro-Ortega et al., 2015), AQUA-CROSS (Gómez et al., 2016), MARS (Hering et al., 2015), OpenNESS (Potschin et al., 2014), OPERAS (Kettunen and Brink 2015) and POL-ICYMIX (Barton et al., 2014). However, and despite the progress achieved so far, the practical application of the ESA continues to be hindered by its highly theoretical nature and by the fact that those involved in such applications are required to transgress disciplinary boundaries if they want to exploit the approach to its fullest extent. ...
... While these issues at times seemed to stall progress, the collaborative experiment of developing the DESSIN framework ultimately evidenced that successful application of the ESS concept in practice requires an openness and willingness of the participants to embark on mutual learning and to move beyond traditional disciplinary boundaries. Spending the extra effort on breaking the 4 In the context of an evaluation, stakeholders are defined as persons, groups or organisations that may be affected by or may have an influence on the outcome of an intervention taking place in the study area (adapted from Ridder et al., 2005). Notice that the framework distinguishes between stakeholders and beneficiaries on the basis of actual ESS use. ...
Driven by Europe’s pressing need to overcome its water quality and water scarcity challenges, the speed of innovation in the water sector is outpacing that of science. The methodologies available to assess the impact of innovative solutions to water-related challenges remain limited and highly theoretical, which sets boundaries on their application and usefulness to water practitioners. This hampers the uptake of new technologies and innovative management practices, thus foregoing potential gains in resource efficiency and nature protection, as well as wider benefits to society and the economy. To address this gap, the DESSIN project developed a framework to evaluate the changes in ecosystem services (ESS) associated
with technical or management solutions implemented at the water body, sub-catchment or catchment level. The framework was developed with a specific focus on freshwater ecosystems to allow for a more detailed exploration of practical implementation issues. Its development, testing and validation was carried out by conducting ESS evaluations in three different urban case study settings. The framework builds upon existing classification systems for ESS (CICES and FEGS-CS) and incorporates the DPSIR adaptive management scheme as its main structural element. This enables compatibility with other international initiatives on ESS assessments and establishes a direct link to the EU Water Framework Directive, respectively.
This work furthers research on practical implementation of the Ecosystem Services Approach, while pushing the discussion on how to promote more informed decision-making and support innovation
uptake to address Europe’s current water-related challenges.
... It is argued that managing water requires the involvement of all interests. They can, and must, " learn together to manage together " (Ridder et al. 2005), which implies that high levels of public participation are required. ...
... Typical advantages associated with public participation are almost all—directly or indirectly—associated with various forms of learning. Public participation is expected to: q contribute to a better understanding of the social–ecological system, as all relevant sources of information are used; q contribute to greater reflexivity, as actors learn to understand how others understand the issues; q result in increased legitimacy and support for decisions taken, as actors are less likely to oppose decisions they have taken themselves; and q result in greater accountability and transparency, as decisions need to be publicly explained and motivated (see, e.g., Renn et al. 1995, Coenen et al. 1998, Ridder et al. 2005, Mostert et al. 2007). ...
This article discusses the potential for policy learning offered by participatory processes, specifically so-called citizens' juries. We establish the need for policy learning by pointing to the increased complexity of water management tasks and challenges. A conceptual discussion subsequently distinguishes between cognitive, normative, and relational learning. The public participation literature suggests that participatory processes will contribute to various forms of learning. We assess the truth of this assumption on the basis of three case studies: citizens' juries on water management in the Dutch part of Rhine basin. We analyze whether the three forms of learning have occurred among jurors, and among policy makers. We find high levels of cognitive, normative, and relational levels of learning for the jurors, but relatively low levels of learning for policy makers. We analyze the reason for this divergence.
... It is argued that managing water requires the involvement of all interests. They can, and must, " learn together to manage together " (Ridder et al. 2005), which implies that high levels of public participation are required. ...
... Typical advantages associated with public participation are almost all—directly or indirectly—associated with various forms of learning. Public participation is expected to: q contribute to a better understanding of the social–ecological system, as all relevant sources of information are used; q contribute to greater reflexivity, as actors learn to understand how others understand the issues; q result in increased legitimacy and support for decisions taken, as actors are less likely to oppose decisions they have taken themselves; and q result in greater accountability and transparency, as decisions need to be publicly explained and motivated (see, e.g., Renn et al. 1995, Coenen et al. 1998, Ridder et al. 2005, Mostert et al. 2007). ...
... The first is pragmatic; engagement is widely acknowledged as having the potential to enhance the quality of environmental decisions. The involvement of local stakeholders can provide useful local knowledge (Tan et al. 2012), make interventions more effective by taking into consideration local conditions (Creighton 2005), enable compromises and cooperation among disparate stakeholders (Ridder et al. 2005), meet the needs and expectations of local stakeholders (Dougill et al. 2006), facilitate the implementation of decisions by engendering local support (Curtis and Lockwood 2000), and enable social learning (Pahl-Wostl et al. 2008). ...
... The field of public engagement has been widely studied since Arnstein's ground-breaking article proposing a ladder of citizen participation in planning decisions (Arnstein 1969) and a social psychology focus on issues of procedural fairness (Thibaut and Walker 1975). Today, there exist many useful guidelines on what constitutes best practice (Webler 2001, Mackenzie et al. 2009), how to design decision-making processes (Creighton 2005, Ridder et al. 2005, Allan 2007, von Korff et al. 2010, and how to engage minority groups such as indigenous people (Jackson et al. 2012). Various authors Cayford 2002, Ö zerol andNewig 2008) prescribe criteria for successful processes including, among many, participant representation, timing and financing of participation, dispute resolution skills, and trust among parties. ...
Public participation in water decision-making is an accepted and expected practice. It is expected to lead to better decisions and ensure fairness by satisfying peoples' understanding of democracy and their “right” to participate in decisions that affect them. However, despite years of experience and “best practices”, governing bodies at all levels struggle to implement successful, genuine participation that leads to fair decisions. Ultimately, decision-making about natural resources such as water is a process that takes place in a wider power context where some groups have greater access to sources of power and entitlements. This research applies a “Social Justice Framework” (SJF) to examine the experiences of different stakeholder groups in making their voices heard during water reform processes in the Murray–Darling Basin in Australia. The experiences of croppers and graziers in two different floodplains show how historical advantages and disadvantages affect the power balance between different stakeholder groups and their ability to participate in and influence water decision-making. Applying the three components of the SJF, distributive, procedural and interactive justice, in water decision-making should lead to greater equity in distribution and underline the importance of good governance in decision-making processes.
... Water management in literature is currently described in terms of complexity where problems are termed wicked (Rittel and Webber, 1973 ) or persistent (Van der Brugge et al., 2004). In complex water management issues, a wide range of governmental and non-governmental stakeholders should be actively involved (Ridder et al., 2005 ). All stakeholders in this approach should be invited to share and discuss their perspectives in the subsequent stages of the policy process and develop a process of active learning. ...
... Only then can information production and exchange result in the use of information in policy debates, and influence water management decisions (Timmerman and Langaas, 2004). This also requires clear communication about the interpretations and assumptions used to produce the information and critical (self-)reflection by the producers (Ridder et al., 2005 ). Especially in the transboundary context, information management faces the challenge of exchanging comparable information of sufficient quality. ...
Perspectives on water and climate change adaptation This Perspective Document is part of a series of 16 papers on «Water and Climate Change Adaptation» 'Climate change and adaptation' is a central topic on the 5 th World Water Forum. It is the lead theme for the political and thematic processes, the topic of a High Level Panel session, and a focus in several docu-ments and sessions of the regional processes. To provide background and depth to the political process, thematic sessions and the regions, and to ensure that viewpoints of a variety of stakeholders are shared, dozens of experts were invited on a volun-tary basis to provide their perspective on critical issues relating to climate change and water in the form of a Perspective Document. Led by a consortium comprising the Co-operative Programme on Water and Climate (CPWC), the Inter-national Water Association (IWA), IUCN and the World Water Council, the initiative resulted in this series comprising 16 perspectives on water, climate change and adaptation. Participants were invited to contribute perspectives from three categories: 1 Hot spots – These papers are mainly concerned with specific locations where climate change effects are felt or will be felt within the next years and where urgent action is needed within the water sector. The hotspots selected are: Mountains (number 1), Small islands (3), Arid regions (9) and 'Deltas and coastal cities' (13). 2 Sub-sectoral perspectives – Specific papers were prepared from a water-user perspective taking into account the impacts on the sub-sector and describing how the sub-sector can deal with the issues. The sectors selected are: Environment (2), Food (5), 'Water supply and sanitation: the urban poor' (7), Business (8), Water industry (10), Energy (12) and 'Water supply and sanitation' (14).
... Moreover, one learns that the three main reasons to be involved are to 'give my opinion to the public authority about future plans', to 'exchange views with other citizens and stakeholders' and to 'receive some information about future plans the public authority will implement'. These results reinforced earlier work conducted in Europe and Northern America highlighting the importance for interactive communication between competent authorities organising participative activities and participants (English et al., 1993; Glass, 1979; Mostert et al., 2007; Pahl-Wostl, 2002; Pahl-Wostl et al., 2007; Ridder et al., 2005; Rowe & Frewer, 2004, 2005). Also one might start to strongly challenge the normative claims that 'actual', 'real', or 'meaningful' public participation is related to the pursue of power over decisions (Arnstein, 1969; House, 1999; Kessler, 2004; Pirk, 2002). ...
... Consequently, from a bottom-up perspective (grounded in an exploratory medium-scale survey of the wider public) the reasons for participating in environmental debate are not related to the pursuit of power over the decision neither to 'define a common solution'or to 'resolve conflict'. These evidence challenges normative justification of participation from academics and experts based on empowerment (ADB, 2003; Beierle & Cayford, 2002; Deleon, 1995; Eidsvik, 1979; Fishhoff, 1998; Kessler, 2004; Parenteau, 1988; Ridder et al., 2005; UNDP, 1997; Wilcox, 1994). These grounded insights illustrate that the prime objective of PP for the public is not to have power over a decision, but to have power to communicate and to exchange personal understanding of the situation one lives. ...
Summary Although public participation aroused much attention in the transition towards integrated water management little is know on the wider public readiness and willingness to participate in environmental governance. A barrier for implementation is the top-down perception that the wider public is not sufficiently well organised with limited knowledge on water management challenges. We illustrate through four medium scale surveys in the Levant that the potential for public participation as explicated in this analysis is not reflected in the human development or governance indexes. Even in countries with limited exercise of democracy the public is willing to participate and knowledgeable about environmental and governance challenges.
... Moreover, there are often legal prerequisites to decision making that require public participation in the decision making process, e.g. the European Union Water Framework Directive and similar legislation. Participatory processes with public and stakeholder participation in complex decision making can have three levels of involvement: (1) being informed, (2) being consulted and (3) active involvement, i.e. discussions, influence on the policy agenda, participatory design of solutions, involvement in decision making and participating in implementation [20,21,22,25]. In response to these changing requirements we introduced the concept of New Modelling to support decision making by multidisciplinary modelling teams, working across multi-application domains, using methodology from a variety of modelling paradigms 1 and adopting participatory involvement. ...
... If members of these groups are added to the problem solving team in MoST or ProST, they can read or write parts of the project journal within the limits of their authorization. The third level of participation is more active as it consists of discussions, influence on the policy agenda, participatory design of solutions, involvement in decision making and participating in implementation [20,21,22,25]. To facilitate the latter, most intensive, type of participatory involvement, the guidelines in the process-KB have to be adapted. ...
Multidisciplinary projects to solve real world problems of increasing complexity are more and more plagued by obstacles such as miscommunication between modellers with different disciplinary backgrounds and bad modelling practices. To tackle these difficulties, a body of knowledge on problems, on modelling and on models to solve problems, has been made explicit and organised in ontological knowledge bases, which are structured in layers, ranging from generic to detailed and specific. This approach facilitates the solution of the ‘language’ and communication problem between team members from different disciplines, between the project team and its commissioner and other stakeholders and also makes parts of the knowledge reusable. Finally, we developed tools, available as Web-based services, that enable to fill the knowledge bases and support modelling projects (guidance from the knowledge base, logbook and project management). The modelling approach, the ontologies and the tools together constitute a more complete and better modelling framework.
... In the past, river basin management was looked after by hydraulic engineers, who managed the river for a single purpose only, such as navigation or hydropower. Nowadays, river basin management is often based on multi-purpose uses and basin-wide approach and involves many more actors (Ridder et al., 2005). Coordinated development of the Teesta river basin can change the present scenarios and reduce tension for both Bangladesh and India by reducing water-related tension, increasing irrigation, food security and energy security that could also potentially open a new path of broader water cooperation in other river basins in South Asia. ...
The aim of this research is to examine the hydropower development potentials and identifying major hydropower projects along the Teesta river basin that is shared by Bangladesh and India. The upstream of Teesta river basin is located mostly in hilly areas of Sikkim where India plans to produce electricity of over 6,500 MW by developing hydropower potential of the basin. The downstream basin is densely populated, mostly flat land and has no hydropower potential. As of today, Bangladesh and India have been unable to agree on an integrated development plan for the Teesta river basin. Previous negotiations on Teesta river basin management have focused only on sharing water rather than sharing the wide range of benefits from water resources including hydropower. This paper identified the existing, ongoing and upcoming hydropower development projects. The hydropower sharing opportunity exists between the two riparian countries and this type of natural resource development could reduce economic tensions and provide a platform for sustainable agreements.
... Consensus decision making runs the risk of gridlock, whereas elite decision making may result, among other things, in the oppression of minorities (Schlager and Blomquist 2008) or in nonimplementation of decisions when influential stakeholders have not been involved (cf. Ridder et al. 2005). In practice, decision-making arrangements are a mixture of these two basic options, which are perhaps at the extremes of a spectrum. ...
The idea that ecosystem management should be approached at the bioregional scale is central to the thinking on adaptive governance. Taken to the domain of water management, a bioregional approach implies the foundation of river basin organizations (RBOs), a notion that has been warmly welcomed by scholars and practitioners alike. However, it appears that river basin organizations come in various shapes and sizes, their intended foundation often leads to resistance, and their actual performance is understudied. Through this special feature we seek to advance the state of our knowledge in this respect. Through this introduction we lay the foundation for the case studies that follow in the special feature and for the conclusions. We do so by presenting a worked typology of river basin organizations. This typology helps us differentiate between various kinds of proposals that are all referred to as river basin organizations, but that are actually quite different in nature. In addition, in this introduction we present an approach to dissecting the inevitable political debates that ensue once a proposal to found a river basin organization is made, something that is often ill understood by the proponents of river basin organizations. After this, we explain the criteria that one could use to assess the performance of river basin organizations that actually come into being. Although the thinking in adaptive governance is strongly concerned with ecological effectiveness, we do show that other criteria can be applied too. Finally, we briefly introduce the various contributions to the special feature.
... Participation in such projects could improve communication and knowledge-sharing between the different groups with regards to the weight that different variables have in affecting raw water quality; there were multiple opportunities for information sharing, through workshops and repeated rounds of consultation during the model development. It is accepted that participatory modelling can be a support tool for the type of social learning currently being promoted for water resources management (Ridder et al., 2005). ...
The occurrence of extreme events can challenge the capacity of water utilities to deliver potable water of sufficient quality with respect to minimising health risks to consumers. As a consequence, proactive risk-assessment and decision support tools are necessary to assist in managing and mitigating such critical events effectively. However, the utility of these tools can be limited due to the lack of comprehensive data and a high degree of epistemic and stochastic uncertainty.
In the present project, a combination of Bayesian Network (BN), System Dynamics (SD) and participatory modelling was used to develop a risk assessment tool for managing water-related health risks associated with extreme weather events. The combination of BN and SD modelling offers a number of advantages over other environmental modelling techniques; the capacity for dealing with a high degree of uncertainty, the use of feedback loops (SD only) and the ability to elicit and integrate quantitative and qualitative data (including expert opinion).
The risk assessment tool developed is applied to the raw water delivery system from Warragamba Dam (Sydney, Australia), which is the main source of potable water for the Sydney metropolitan region. Key-stakeholders were engaged in developing and populating the conceptual models that form the basis of developing the BN and SD models. Conceptual models were developed by the stakeholders around the key indicator parameters of turbidity, water colour and Cryptosporidium sp. levels. These three conceptual models were combined into a single risk model and used for developing separate BN and SD models. Additional stakeholder workshops were conducted to refine the models (structure and parameter values) and to provide validation of the model outputs. Empirical data, wherever available, were used and combined with experts’ opinions.
The completed models highlight the sensitivity of the Warragamba raw water quality to different types and combinations of extreme events (both natural and anthropogenic). The model was designed to challenge the system by exploring the impact of different hypothetical combinations of extreme climatic events and management responses. As such, the exercise was not constrained by and did not reflect the current risk profile or management practices. Specifically, the BN model provides a risk assessment and management tool for estimating the probability of (top-down modelling), and requirements for (bottom-up modelling), meeting the Bulk Water Supply Agreement values. The BN model was used to rank a number of extreme events and the results differed based on the input from different groups of stakeholders. The SD model has the power of modelling nonlinear behaviours when quantifying the risk over the long-term due the combined effects of multiple weather variable trends. Although, due to the scope of the project, it was not possible to model water availability and quality of the interconnected reservoirs, the flexibility of the SD would allow it to be linked to existing stochastic models of the full system in order to provide a more realistic depiction of potential future hazards.
Overall, these complementary modelling methodologies can assist water treatment operators, water managers and other stakeholders in developing evidence-based mitigation strategies leading to enhanced resilience of the system.
... As suggested by Hukkinen (1993), the presence of such inconsistencies among different experts can be a direct indicator of potential remedies: thus, better communication and knowledge-sharing between different stakeholders is recommended to improve the consistency of water treatment and decision-making, and to eventually devise more specific, targeted intervention strategies. It is in fact accepted that participatory modelling can be a support tool for the type of social learning currently being promoted for water resources management (Ridder et al., 2005). Moreover, a benefit of such process is the enhancement of communication between different stakeholders, researchers and the broader community (Jakeman et al., 2006). ...
Extreme weather events pose major challenges for the delivery of safe drinking water, especially in a country like Australia. As a consequence, a participatory Bayesian Network modelling approach was used to develop a risk assessment tool for estimating, and ranking, water quality-related health risks associated with extreme weather events. The model was developed for a large dam supplying a water treatment plant in New South Wales, Australia. This methodological approach addresses challenges associated with fragmented data (for model parameterisation) and parameter uncertainty by eliciting and integrating quantitative and qualitative data (including expert opinions) into a single framework. Key-stakeholders were engaged in developing and then refining separate conceptual models around the three critical parameters of turbidity, water colour and Cryptosporidium sp. These three conceptual models were then combined into a single conceptual model, which then formed the basis for the Bayesian Network model. The final risk assessment tool was able to quantify the sensitivity of the water treatment plant's efficacy (ability to supply high quality potable water) in response to different extreme event scenarios. Overall, landslip-related events were the most concerning for water quality-related health risks, but an emergent outcome was how the scenarios were ranked quite differently depending on the group, and expertise of the stakeholders' opinions used to run the model. Such tool can assist stakeholders for an effective long-term water resource management.
... In the same line, a less theoretical but all the more relevant literature comes from practitioners' experience in evaluating participatory planning processes. Research projects and efforts especially provide very useful guidelines on how to build a M&E framework tailored to a specific participatory planning process and research question ("Better Evaluation", 2014;CDI, 2013;Lefevre et al, 2000;Ridder et al., 2005;UN Habitat, 2001). The six phases of the MEPPP framework are drawn from this literature. ...
Evaluating participatory processes, participatory planning processes especially, can be challenging. Due to their complexity, these processes require a specific approach to evaluation. This paper proposes a framework for evaluating projects that have adopted a participatory planning approach: the monitoring and evaluation of participatory planning processes (MEPPP) framework. The MEPPP framework is applied to one case study, a participatory planning process in the Rwenzori region in Uganda. We suggest that this example can serve as a guideline for researchers and practitioners to set up the monitoring and evaluation of their participatory planning process of interest by following six main phases: (1) description of the case, (2) clarification of the M&E viewpoint(s) and definition of the M&E objective(s), (3) identification of the context, process and outputs/outcomes analytical variables, (4) development of the M&E methods and data collection, (5) data analysis, and (6) sharing of the M&E results. Results of the application of the MEPPP framework in Uganda demonstrate the ability of the framework to tackle the complexity of participatory planning processes. Strengths and limitations of the MEPPP framework are also discussed.
... Direct involvement of stakeholders in the planning and management processes required another approach. This became clear in river catchment planning where stakeholders, economic and public interest groups, government bodies and experts worked together to achieve an integrated valley development plan that could be the start for appropriate flood prevention measures and accompanying nature conservation and development (Ridder et al. 2005;Tàbara, 2005). ...
Integrating biodiversity conservation objectives to local level practices takes place in rural areas where land and natural resources are managed for multiple functions. Institutional arrangements in these local contexts will necessarily need to adapt to respond to evolving environmental conditions as well as social expectations and opportunities. Institutional capabilities to deliberate across policy sectors and levels include open communication channels, systems of learning, facilitation of actors and technical interfaces as well as ability to communicate across borders. Cross-sectoral communication that serves the identification and integration of the multiple functions of natural resources and land is enhanced when different actors trust each other, learn and work together, and share targets. In this article, we draw on experiences from three empirical cases in which different kinds of institutional arrangements have been developed to address the challenge of multifunctionality in rural land use, agriculture and forestry. In studying these cases, we make an effort to identify the institutional contexts where the case processes developed, as well as the development and application of shared capabilities to deal with multifunctionality and biodiversity across policy sectors and levels. We conclude by making the statement that while we can identify successful trails of crossing sectoral borders and integrating biodiversity conservation to land and natural resource management, greater attention to multifunctionality is required when planning and participating in natural resource management and biodiversity conservation decisions.
... 3-5) argues that the multifaceted nature of climate change demands institutional innovation and learning to forge partnerships and collaboration amongst Climate and Development 307 diverse actors and agencies and to leverage the huge requirement for financial and technological resources. Similarly, Ridder and Team (2006) and Lobo (2011) argue that due to the complex nature of and uncertainty relating to climate change, stakeholders should learn together and forge strong alliances for knowledge and resource sharing. This study examines progress in mainstreaming by looking at two specific case studies in Nepal. ...
Mainstreaming is a feasible and viable option for scaling up initiatives on community-based adaptation (CBA) to climate change. However, there is little evidence on how to get CBA mainstreaming feasible and to work effectively. This paper aims to investigate two major questions: (1) what kind of policies favour mainstreaming CBA; and (2) what kinds of approaches or practices are required to operationalize CBA mainstreaming in the case of Nepal? The field research for this paper was conducted in the Dhading, Nawalparasi and Pyuthan districts of Nepal. The research used a mix of approaches and methods for data generation and analysis. The findings reveal that policies to operationalize CBA mainstreaming should build on past policy successes and include community-centric provisions that empower local institutions and encourage them to practice inclusive decision-making and benefit-sharing mechanisms. One lesson from this analysis of the practices of mainstreaming in Nepal is that an integrated co-management approach to mainstreaming is necessary to overcome the barriers related to knowledge, finance and technology. It is concluded that the operational mechanisms of mainstreaming CBA in development should have an inclusive local structure and be responsive to national policies and governance arrangements.
... An overview of communication techniques, their characteristics, target public and objectives are given in Jain and others [299] . A clear description of various ways of how stakeholders can be involved is provided by Ridder and others [300] . This book will not go further into detail on stakeholder involvement. ...
This book provides the necessary elements to determine exactly what information should be collected to make the collected information relevant for policy makers. It highlights the dissatisfaction of information users about the information they get and the reasons for this dissatisfaction. It also discusses general issues around the role and use of information in policy making. The book then describes how to develop a full understanding of the policy makers’ information needs and will describe how policy makers can be included in the process. Finally, the book describes how the results from this process are input for the information production process.
... Public participation is expected to contribute to a better understanding of the social-ecological system -as all relevant sources of information are used, to greater reflexivity -as actors learn to understand how others understand the issues, to result in increased legitimacy and support for decisions taken -as actors are less likely to oppose decisions they have taken themselves, and in greater accountability and transparency -as decisions need to be publicly explained and motivated (see e.g. Renn et al. 1995;Coenen et al. 1998;Huitema 2002;Ridder et al. 2005;Mostert et al. 2007). ...
Adaptive comanagement (ACM) is often suggested as a way of handling the modern challenges of environmental governance, which include uncertainty and complexity. ACM is a novel combination of the learning dimension of adaptive management and the linkage dimension of comanagement. As has been suggested, there is a need for more insight on enabling policy environments for ACM success and failure. Picking up on this agenda we provide a case study of the world famous Venice lagoon in Italy. We address the following questions: first, to what extent are four institutional prescriptions typically associated with ACM currently practiced in the Venice system? Second, to what extent is learning taking place in the Venice system? Third, how is learning related to the implementation or nonimplementation of the prescriptions of ACM in the Venice system?
Our analysis is based on interviews with stakeholders, participatory observation, and archive data. This paper demonstrates that the prescriptions of ACM are hardly followed in the Venice lagoon, but some levels of cognitive learning do take place, albeit very much within established management paradigms. Normative and relational learning are much rarer and when they do occur, they seem to have a relatively opportunistic reason. We propose that in particular the low levels of collaboration, because the governance system was deliberately set up in a hierarchical and mono-centric way, and the limited possibilities for stakeholder participation are implicated in this finding because they cause low levels of social capital and an incapacity to handle disagreements and uncertainty very well.
... During the last decades, there were various efforts on increasing the awareness for integrated management and protection of transboundary waters (Ridder et al., 2005), and various conventions and directives, such as the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes (Water Convention) and the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC (WFD), were put in force. Both initiatives promoted cooperation among countries for the protection and the sustainable management of transboundary surface and ground waters, but espe-cially the WFD requires water quality to be defined by using several biological communities, such as phytoplankton, benthos and fishes, in combination with abiotic factors (Borja et al., 2009), which will result in the assessment of the ecological status at ecosystem le vel (Borja, 2005(Borja, , 2006Borja et al., 2008). ...
Nestos/Mesta river is a typical transboundary river located in the Eastern Balkans, flowing through
Bul garia and Greece. During the last decades, various efforts have been undertaken on promoting
the awareness for integrated management and protection within the framework of international
le gislation and thus directly contributing to the evaluation of river’s ecosystem status through fish
bio-indicators. This study presents an integrated and update list of Nestos/Mesta fish fauna
throughout the whole river course and its tributaries. A total number of 25 freshwater fish species
were recorded. Thirteen species were characterized as native or endemic for the broader river
ba sin. Furthermore, seven species were characterized as translocated and another five as exotic.
These latter species found a favorable environment in the two dam lakes, created for hydropower
pro duction, consisting the 28.66% of the total catches. On the contrary, along Nestos/Mesta river
cour se, the autochthonous species dominate.
... In our future work, we will improve the method with more case studies. The collaborative part will be quite challenging, but a robust work on collaborative methods used in water management (Ridder et al., 2005) or land use should ensure the effectiveness of the workshops. We have focused here on general methods to meet the reluctance or lack of information from managers; we remain convinced that a geographical tool to locate and quantify interdependencies is needed. ...
Natural hazards threaten the urban system and its components that are
likely to fail. With their high degree of interdependency, urban
networks and services are critical issues for the resilience of a city.
And yet, network managers are scarcely aware of their flaws and
dependencies and they are reluctant to take them into account. In order
to develop an operational tool to improve urban resilience, we propose
here an auto-diagnosis method to be completed by network managers. The
subsequent confrontation of all diagnoses is the basis of collaborative
research for problem identification and solution design. The tool is
experimented with the Parisian urban transport society.
... Due to PO age structure this could be worrisome for PO adaptability in the future as elder fishers memory of past events, i.e. environmental fluctuations, might provide a basis for adaptability through modification of rules in periods of change and crisis [50]. Our findings also reveal that 'ensuring the best marketing conditions for their products' is still by far the most important incentive for PO membership, as 'learning together to manage together' [51] sometimes works against their interest ('might earn less') and mentality ('want to earn everything today'). This decreases members' ability to agree and act collectively on resource related problems. ...
... Hence, first a proper stakeholder analysis should be conducted. All stakeholders should perceive that their participation will be an opportunity for them to fulfill some of their own interests and that they can benefit from participation (e.g., Ridder et al. 2005). In order to keep the participants motivated throughout the process, we recommend that all stakeholders involved should have equal input in and influence on the research process. ...
In order to deal with complex water management problems, it is increasingly claimed that researchers should collaborate with authorities and other stakeholders. According to the literature, such collaboration can enhance cognitive learning about the issues at stake, but there is little empirical evidence for this. In this paper, we assess whether collaborative research leads to more cognitive learning, and which factors may influence this. We first develop a structured methodology for assessing cognitive learning and identifying potential factors. Next, we apply this methodology in a case study on groundwater management in Delft (The Netherlands) and one on long-term flood management in the Lower Rhine area (Germany and The
Netherlands). Contrary to some of the literature, our findings indicate that only intensive collaboration enhances cognitive learning. Therefore, we recommend organizing collaborative research only when all intended participants are sufficiently motivated to collaborate and learn. For these cases, we recommend to organise 1) many meetings, 2) intensive discussion of perspectives, 3) active participation in the research, and 4) an equal input in and influence on the research process by all involved actors.
... Moreover, strategies to enhance the sciencepolicy interface aspect in decision processes raise new concerns on how this is reconcilable with public deliberation (Fischer 2000; van den Hove and Sharman 2006). Evaluation of participatory processes depends on the theoretical conceptions used to promote them (Luhmann 1989; Dryzek 1990; Habermas 1994; Raiffa 1994) and on the different methods which have been used to enhance public and/or stakeholder participation (Renn et al. 1995; Lafferty and Meadowcroft 1996; van den Hove 2006; Steyaert and Lisoir 2005; Ridder et al. 2005). GoverNat compares these methods and, in co-operation with praxis hosts, adapts the most promising ones to each case study and combine them with the most appropriate decision tools. ...
... « La modélisation participative est une méthode qui favorise l'implication d'un groupe d'individus dans le développement d'un modèle dans le but d'améliorer la compréhension du groupe à propos d'un système particulier, de ses problèmes et de ses solutions possibles, qui va directement ou indirectement conduire à de meilleures décisions de gestion. Le produit de cette méthode est la génération d'une compréhension collective parmi les constructeurs du modèle, pendant le processus, plutôt que le modèle lui-même ». (HarmoniCOP, 2003). ...
... At the largest scale, the earth is a global ecosystem, composed of many smaller SESs that are interlinked, have more or less permeable boundaries, and are divisible into a myriad of minor connected systems. Recent literature on naturalresources governance has focused on multistakeholder involvement and participatory management ( Ridder et al. 2005). Arguments for collaborative resource management focus on a process that generates mutual understanding and trust that, in turn, create a sense of legitimacy ( Bingham 1986, Born and Genskow 2001, O'Leary and Bingham 2003, http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss1/art37/ ...
We have analyzed how the collaborative development process of a decision-support system
(DSS) model can effectively contribute to increasing the resilience of regional social–ecological systems.
In particular, we have focused on the case study of the transboundary San Pedro Basin, in the Arizona-
Sonora desert region. This is a semi-arid watershed where water is a scarce resource used to cover competing human and environmental needs. We have outlined the essential traits in the development of the decisionsupport process that contributed to an improvement of water-resources management capabilities while increasing the potential for consensual problem solving. Comments and feedback from the stakeholders
benefiting from the DSS in the San Pedro Basin are presented and analyzed within the regional (United
States–Mexico boundary), social, and institutional context. We have indicated how multidisciplinary
collaboration between academia and stakeholders can be an effective step toward collaborative
management. Such technology transfer and capacity building provides a common arena for testing water management policies and evaluating future scenarios. Putting science at the service of a participatory
decision-making process can provide adaptive capacity to accommodate future change (i.e., building
resilience in the management system).
The regional effects of local water storage are largely unknown. This study identifies, categorizes and discusses the challenges in assessing the potential of local water storage. These are illustrated using a structured method applied to a Dutch case. We conclude that the focus must shift from storage 'potential' (the quantity of water that can be stored) to storage 'feasibility', which depends on exploitability, purpose and interactions between storage alternatives. Spatial and temporal scale also influence feasibility. Finally, farmers' investment preferences are a factor, though these are shrouded in uncertainty. This overview is a first step towards improving storage assessment tools and processes.
This chapter introduces the Governance Assessment Tool that has been used in the DROP project and forms the analytical basis of this book. We start with the origins of the tool in Contextual Interaction Theory, and proceed with the dimensions and criteria that form the backbone of the tool, and form a matrix. In these matrix evaluative questions are formulated that can be discussed with local and regional stakeholders. Based on their answers and further information and insights a judgment can be reached to what extent the governance circumstances are supportive, restrictive or neutral for the implementation of measures. A visualization with coloured cells of the matrix can show in one quick glance the governance state of affairs in that region. To create more precise visualization arrows can be added to each box indicating upward or downward trends for that box. The chapter ends with a discussion on the application of the GAT. The tool can both be used in relatively simple ways and as in the DROP-project in a very elaborate way.
Policy learning is essential for the management of complex and changing water resources systems. However, the lack of genuine interest in policy evaluations suggests that at best a partial effort is made to enable such learning. This paper explores this discrepancy, based on a review of current evaluation practice and literature. This indicates that there is a need for more and for better evaluations of water policies. Current evaluations are generally limited to the efficiency and effectiveness of water policy implementation, ignoring the importance of reviewing the theories underlying the original policies. The contours of two avenues to deal with limitations and facilitate more innovative learning in water resources management are identified and discussed.
This chapter discusses the importance of public engagement and wider collaboration between environmental and social scientists in river rehabilitation work. Results are presented from public perception surveys of rehabilitation schemes on an urban river in northern England and a rural river in southern England. They show how public engagement and the inclusion of social sciences can improve public understanding of the reasons for rehabilitation work and also provide river managers with insight of people's attitudes, perceptions and preferences. This approach improves the content and outcomes of schemes and increases the chances for broad public support of future river rehabilitation work. Since river rehabilitation is often funded by public money, it is important to understand what affects the attitudes and perceptions of local communities. These results show that active participation influences the perception, satisfaction and appreciation of river rehabilitation by local residents. If the rehabilitation work is understood and supported by the public, further schemes will be more easily justified because of greater public demand for this type of environmental improvement.
This background study on institutional and management frameworks in the Biosphere Reserves Aggtelek (Hungary), Šumava (Czech Republic) and Babia Góra (Poland) aims at identifying opportunities and challenges for an improved visibility of the Biosphere Reserves as a basis for sound tourism development in the respective regions.
Key objective of the study is the identification of current and potential partners supporting the objectives of the overall project “Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biodiversity through Sound Tourism Development in Biosphere Reserves in Central and Eastern Europe“.
This publication provides step guidance and case studies to help authorities:
1. Building engagement and awareness
2. Preparation of local flood risk management strategy or a surface water management plan
3. Recovery after an event
4. When a project or scheme is being planned
5. When a new development is planned that might influence flood risk
6. Partnership working situations to provide commonality and fairness of approach
7. Benchmarking activities
This paper studies to what extent public policy evaluation practices need to be revised whilst considering sustainable development as a system of references regarding transversality, the long-run as well as public participation. We focus on Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) that takes into account sustainable development in costal management. We analyze the institutional part of sustainable development and governance processes in ICZM implementation schemes, and we show new insights in planning policy evaluation.
Local and regional food systems continue to emerge, despite daunting challenges. This article argues that such challenges can only be successfully confronted through the adoption of a more systematic approach and adequate governance. A new paradigm of “sustainable food security” is presented, alongside a classification scheme and clear definitions for the varieties of local and regional food systems. A discussion concerning the (multi) governance of local and regional food systems is supported through the presentation of examples from around the world.
Ein integrativer Bestandteil der Entwicklung intelligenter Netzstrukturen sollte
auch die zukünftige (optimierte) Nutzung erneuerbarer Energien sein. Dazu
gehören die Abschätzung von Potenzialen zur Energiegewinnung, die Berück-
sichtigung von Umweltaspekten sowie eine Beteiligung der interessierten und
betroffenen Akteure zu den resultierenden Netzstrukturen (vgl. Bosch/Peyke
2011).
Im Rahmen des Verbundprojekts SmartNord (koordiniert von Prof. Dr.
Michael Sonnenschein, Universität Oldenburg) ist das Ziel des Teilprojekts
SmartSpatial, anhand eines Fallbeispiels (Region Hannover) die Potenziale und
möglichen Auswirkungen von Szenarien zur Gewinnung erneuerbarer Energien räumlich zu analysieren und auf dieser Grundlage das System der Gewinnung
erneuerbarer Energien und resultierender Netzstrukturen zu optimieren. Dazu
wird zum einen die geographische Verteilung der Potenziale zur Nutzung erneu-
erbarer Energien kartographisch dargestellt und quantifiziert. Zum anderen
werden alternative Szenarien zur Entwicklung neuer intelligenten Netzten
definiert, die mögliche Allokation von Energieerzeugungsanlagen- und Netz-
strukturen simuliert sowie potentielle ökologische, ökonomische und soziale
Auswirkungen abgeschätzt. Daraus kann unter Beteiligung relevanter Akteure
eine Optimierungsstrategie entwickelt werden.
Ergebnisse des Teilprojekts SmartSpatial umfassen ein ergänztes Set an
Methoden zur räumlichen Potenzial- und Szenarienanalyse, ein halbautoma-
tisiertes Optimierungsmodell sowie die Erkenntnisse aus den Potenzial- und
Szenarienanalysen einschließlich der Berücksichtigung von Interessen lokaler
Akteure. Damit wird das Teilprojekt einen substantiellen Beitrag zur geforderten
Einbindung der Gesellschaftswissenschaften leisten. Die erstellten Werkzeuge
sollen, im Verbund mit den Ergebnissen der übrigen Teilprojekte, auch in ande-
ren Räumen zur Entwicklung intelligenter Netze einsetzbar sein.
Environmental risk analyses (ERAs) can benefit from participatory methods that enhance social learning, whereby diverse participants share knowledge and perspectives to learn about complex socio-ecological systems, develop a collective understanding of the risk problem and build support for specific solutions. We used surveys and interviews to investigate social learning among 22 stakeholders during a participatory ERA workshop to evaluate risks of genetically modified maize to South African biodiversity. The ERA process incorporated methodologies designed to enhance social learning, such as open communication, constructive conflict and extended engagement. We observed that social learning occurred as participants understood new information and perspectives, began thinking systemically and transformed their impressions of other participants. In this workshop, they did not develop a shared understanding of the ERA process or priority risks. However, the ERA workshop did engender social learning about other stakeholders, socio-ecological systems and risk, creating a foundation for longer, iterative engagement needed to build shared understanding of complex problems and solutions related to biodiversity governance. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment
Maatschappelijke problemen en beleidsopgaven laten zich niet zomaar doorgronden. Zij zijn veelal geworteld in verscheidende domeinen, er zijn meerdere waarheden, en er staan verschillende en soms tegenstrijdige belangen op het spel. Steeds vaker wordt erkend dat interactie tussen verschillende vormen van kennis nodig is om problemen het hoofd te bieden. Dat betekent dat mensen met verschillende achtergronden moeten samenwerken, wat niet makkelijk is.
Dit boek gaat over dergelijke kenniscocreatie tussen beleidsmakers en wetenschappers. Het doet verslag van een zoektocht naar wat kenniscocreatie precies inhoudt, waarom en wanneer kenniscocreatie kan worden ingezet, en wat kenniscocreatie lastig of juist succesvol maakt.
Ook geeft het praktische handvatten aan wie met kenniscocreatie aan de slag wil. Het boek stoelt op recente wetenschappelijke literatuur en op empirisch onderzoek van concrete kenniscocreatieprojecten.
Australian governments have set an ambitious policy agenda for reform. By 2010, water plans were to have provided for the return of all overallocated or overused systems to environmentally sustainable levels of extraction, however, many communities do not yet have full confidence in water plans or their processes. In two national research projects we developed practical tools for transparent and engaging processes to build confidence in water planning. We observe that inherent politicised risks in water planning mean that current methods of public participation, such as information giving and allowing written submissions, are 'safer' and more easily managed. The next article in this special issue sets out the methodology including performance indicators for the tools that we used in the research. To demonstrate their role in building community confidence using best available science we trialled tools which included agent-based participatory modelling, deliberative multi-criteria evaluation, social impact assessment, and groundwater visualisation models. The suite of 'good-practice' tools, including Indigenous engagement, is fully described in the following articles of this special issue. Evaluations show deliberative processes have much to offer when applied to questions that have been developed collaboratively and formulated carefully to allow implementation of findings. Interactive tools and those which have high visual impact are consistently rated highly by all sectors of the community, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous, and also by water planners. These results have implications for water planning internationally especially where science is contested, social values are uncertain, and communities are diverse.
The first institution that systematically stimulate d information and consultation process within the preparation of the first river basin management pla ns in Slovenia was the Institute for Water of the Republic of Slovenia with expert assistance of the Geological Survey of the Republic of Slovenia and addtitionally of company Consensus, specialized consultancy for communication and public participaton. Although appointed to prepare backgro und documents on expert level, the involved institutions planned and started the consultation p rocess based on principles of holistic approach as laid down in the Water Framework Directive also. The paper exposes a wide range of challenges that institutions had to face when planning the process. It emphasizes the capacity building process among two expert institutions as the first, necessary pha se for planning and performing any kind of informat ion and consultation activities. The paper also present s the consultation process and description of consultation activities in 2007 with outputs and fi ndings that served as the background to continue an d improve the process in the following years.
This article assesses the institutional prescriptions of adaptive (co-)management based on a literature review of the (water) governance literature. The adaptive (co-)management literature contains four institutional prescriptions: collaboration in a polycentric governance system, public participation, an experimental approach to resource management, and management at the bioregional scale. These prescriptions largely resonate with the theoretical and empirical insights embedded in the (water) governance literature. However, this literature also predicts various problems. In particular, attention is called to the complexities associated with participation and collaboration, the difficulty of experimenting in a real-world setting, and the politicized nature of discussion on governance at the bioregional scale. We conclude this article by outlining a common research agenda that invites the collaborative efforts of adaptive (co-)management and governance scholars.
Many current water planning and management problems are riddled with high levels of complexity, uncertainty, and conflict, so-called “messes” or “wicked problems.” The realization that there is a need to consider a wide variety of values, knowledge, and perspectives in a collaborative decision making process has led to a multitude of new methods and processes being proposed to aid water planning and management, which include participatory forms of modeling, planning, and decision aiding processes. However, despite extensive scientific discussions, scholars have largely been unable to provide satisfactory responses to two pivotal questions: (1) What are the benefits of using participatory approaches?; (2) How exactly should these approaches be implemented in complex social-ecological settings to realize these potential benefits? In the study of developing social-ecological system sustainability, the first two questions lead to a third one that extends beyond the one-time application of participatory approaches for water management: (3) How can participatory approaches be most appropriately used to encourage transition to more sustainable ecological, social, and political regimes in different cultural and spatial contexts? The answer to this question is equally open. This special feature on participatory water management attempts to propose responses to these three questions by outlining recent advances in theory, practice, and evaluation related to the implementation of participatory water management. The feature is largely based on an extensive range of case studies that have been implemented and analyzed by cross-disciplinary research teams in collaboration with practitioners, and in a number of cases in close cooperation with policy makers and other interested parties such as farmers, fishermen, environmentalists, and the wider public.
This article discusses social learning as a means to implement integrated water resources management (IWRM). Implementing IWRM requires cooperation between policy sectors, countries, government bodies, the civic sector and scientific disciplines. The social learning approach suggests several ingredients for such cooperation. First, water managers and the other stakeholders need to realize their dependence on each other. Second, they need to start interacting, share their problem perceptions and develop different potential solutions. This requires the development of mutual trust, recognition of diversity and critical self-reflection. Finally, the stakeholders need to make joint decisions and arrangements for implementation. Often, an external facilitator can be helpful. The social learning approach to IWRM has several implications for the IWRM ToolBox of the GWP. Social learning is not a magic solution for all problems, but there is sufficient evidence that it can work.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.