Maurel, P., Craps, M., Cemesson, F., Raymond, R., Valkering, P., & Ferrand, N. (2007) Finding 2

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 →

Maurel, P., Craps, M., Cemesson, F., Raymond, R., Valkering, P., & Ferrand, N. (2007) Finding 1

Social learning refers to the growing capacity of a social network to develop and perform collective actions. In promoting social learning in watershed management, it is important to frame information in such a way that a convergence of views becomes possible through interaction and collective learning processes, e.g. maps illustrating the impacts of water releases, as perceived by the users; graphs showing flow/time relationship and details of the hydrological regime; and field trips and video sessions to allow participants to see the impact of water releases on fish reproduction. Other useful tools include, for example, tools to communicate a vision about water management such as might be accomplished with a 3D model of a hydro-electric dam, a3D chart localizing all the dams on the river, video cassettes and measuring instruments, which testify that the water management authority cares about people’s safety, and stakeholder involvement in data gathering. Continue reading →

Margerum, R. D., & Whitall, D. (2004) Finding 1

In advising watershed councils and technical teams, provide training to enhance quality efforts in the following parameters of the collaborative process: centralization vs decentralization of the decision-making process; the tension between local/lay knowledge and expert knowledge; scale and inclusiveness of collaborative decision-making; tensions between ecological/scientific time frames and management/constituent time frames; expenses and agency resources required for collaborative decision making. Continue reading →

Leach, W. D. (2006) Finding 1

Assess the democracy merits of collaborative public management by watershed partnerships in terms of: inclusiveness, representativeness, impartiality, transparency, deliberativeness, lawfulness, and empowerment. 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.

Continue reading →

Hayward, G., A. Diduck, & B. Mitchell. (2007) Finding 2

To address problems characterized by high degrees of ecological and social complexity, uncertainty and indeterminacy, as well as conflicts over values and interests; and to generate positive change in dynamic social-ecological systems, compliment public involvement processes, e.g., public comment periods, public registries, open houses, and public hearings — with a focus on inclusive and integrated efforts that can be aligned with environmental and social objectives of sustainability, and which may include such processes as visioning practices, information flows, and leadership styles. Continue reading →

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 →

Ferreyra, C., & Beard, P. (2007) Finding 8

In watershed partnerships, negotiate indicators of evaluation among stakeholders. Watershed partnerships bring together multiple stakeholders with a diversity of goals, values and expectations, and each may bring different perspectives regarding what a ‘successful’ partnership entails, what type of scientific knowledge is ‘valid’, and how ‘progress’ should be measured. Continue reading →