Social learning refers to the growing capacity of a social network to develop and perform collective actions. In promoting social learning in watershed management, use technical information in a way that supports local actors to explore and clarify their own understanding of the river basin. Beware of information or communication tools that are either poorly designed or used inadequately, for example with too much technical content. Those can act as a barrier by overwhelming actors with technical information which is not relevant or understandable for them. Continue reading →
Audience: Landowners
People who own property and use it for residential, recreational, forestry, or agricultural purposes. People who work the land, such as farmers or loggers, are described as separate target audiences.
Findings Navigation: Browse by Audience; Browse by Theme; Browse by Best Education Practice; Browse by multiple topics
Larson, S., Smith, K., Lewis, D., Harper, J., & George, M. (2005) Finding 2
Industry initiated voluntary pollution control programs, supported by education, can result in implementation of BMPs when course work involves participants developing a water quality management plan for their ranch that includes
ranch description, ranch goals, ranch maps, basin water quality status, nonpoint source self-assessments, existing and planned BMPs, and monitoring procedures. Continue reading →
Larson, S., Smith, K., Lewis, D., Harper, J., & George, M. (2005) Finding 1
For rangeland owners and managers, evaluation surveys of training outcomes are an alternative to formal reporting about implementation of nonpoint source water programs that protects confidentiality while documenting program success. Continue reading →
Lamoree, G. B., Garcia, L. E., Perez, R., & Castro, E. (2005) Finding 1
Capable institutions are an essential element of effective integrated water resource management. An institutional assessment process investigating policy, organizational and operational elements, are effective tools when designed and analyzed by stakeholders. Assessment criteria include:
- a decision-making capacity at the basin level that reflects the interests of different uses and users;
- a clear and administratively detailed regulatory framework with criteria for decision making;
- a monitoring and information system for water resources information;
- a system that allows development and analysis of different scenarios for water use and effluent discharges;
- effective and transparent accountability through a stakeholder participation mechanism;
- enforcement and sanctioning power;
- representation of water used interests and liaison with river basin management institutions;
- effective control of service providers;
- cost recovery by service providers and a system that allows market incentives for efficient allocation.
Kallis, G., Videira, N., Antunes, P., Pereira, A. G., Spash, C. L., Coccossis, H. et al. (2006) Finding 1
Watershed management participatory methods include, scenario workshops (develops ideas and actions based on visioning processes), mediated modeling (problem definition, conceptualization, specification, and policy analysis), and social multicriteria evaluation (compliments decision-making processes with social science techniques including institutional analysis, interviews,questionnaires, obeservation, polls, and focus groups). Scenario workshops and mediated modeling are well-suited to the early stages of the planning process (problem solving and identification of goals and alternatives) and good at educating participants and building capacity, but not as effective at resolving long-standing conflicts and achieving consensus. Social multicriteria evaluation is better able to address the evaluation of alternatives, reveal trade-offs, and aid convergence between divergent stakeholder’s views; however, implementation is heavily reliant on experts, and allows for less participation and deliberation than scenario workshops or mediated modeling in the goal-setting stage. A hybrid of participatory methods may be the best approach. Continue reading →
Ghanbarpour, M. R., Hipel, K. W., & Abbaspour, K. C. (2005) Finding 4
When implementing group decision analysis results in the long-term watershed planning process, facilitate development of awareness and cooperation of all stakeholders, especially governmental agencies and local communities. Continue reading →
Elmendorf, W. F., & Luloff, A. E. (2006) Finding 1
Use key informant interviews of local leaders to aid understanding for how to engage leaders in planning for conservation of open space. Consider attitudes, issues, and obstacles. Continue reading →
Elmendorf, W. F., & Luloff, A. E. (2006) Finding 2
Educate stakeholders to help them fully understand planning tools available to protect open space, the benefits of planning, and planning and collaborative techniques. Continue reading →
Elmendorf, W. F., & Luloff, A. E. (2006) Finding 3
To enhance local conservation planning, facilitate development of an organized public interest group who can speak on behalf of conservation initiatives. Continue reading →