2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2016.04.013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A table for five: Stakeholder perceptions of water governance in Alberta

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
(58 reference statements)
0
12
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…However, the three watershed plan outliers (in terms of keyword frequency and thematic diversity) challenged the spatial relationship found in the other plans, increasing the strength of some relationships while reducing others; further research is necessary to understand why. Interviews with planners, committee members, and community leaders may help to identify potential factors in the significant variation in documented evidence of Indigenous engagement across, and diversity of engagement within, plan documents (Montgomery et al, 2016;Morton et al, 2012). This will provide further insight into the barriers to and opportunities for Indigenous participation and inclusion in the planning process.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, the three watershed plan outliers (in terms of keyword frequency and thematic diversity) challenged the spatial relationship found in the other plans, increasing the strength of some relationships while reducing others; further research is necessary to understand why. Interviews with planners, committee members, and community leaders may help to identify potential factors in the significant variation in documented evidence of Indigenous engagement across, and diversity of engagement within, plan documents (Montgomery et al, 2016;Morton et al, 2012). This will provide further insight into the barriers to and opportunities for Indigenous participation and inclusion in the planning process.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition to that mentioned above, prior research into the participation and inclusion of Indigenous Peoples in Canadian resource management consistently identifies social factors such as financial and capacity constraints (Lebel & Reed, 2010;Morrison, Bradford, & Bharadwaj, 2015;Rizvi, Adamowski, & Patrick, 2013;Walters, Spence, Kuikman, & Singh, 2012). It also identifies fundamental political or structural issues that lead to institutionalized inequity and injustice (Basdeo & Bharadwaj, 2013), and the differing perspectives of those involved in planning and management (Ferreyra, de Loë, & Kreutzwiser, 2008;Montgomery, Xu, Bjornlund, & Edwards, 2016;Morton, Gunton, & Day, 2012). Other research has examined the impacts of land management and property classification on drinking water outcomes for on-reserve communities (Baijius & Patrick, 2019).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Successful engagement depends on understanding who to engage with (key stakeholders), for what reason (scope, purpose, challenge), from what perspective (culture, values), and with what methods (techniques and tools) [89,90]. Including a broader set of stakeholders provides decisionmakers with different kinds of knowledge which may be vital for a full assessment of a resource governance problem and for finding innovative solutions to it [91]. It has long been recognized that although planning is often represented as rational and objective, in reality it is inherently subjective and affected by social and political dimensions, as well as prone to unavoidable conflicts, famously described planning as "the science of muddling through" [92].…”
Section: Is Participation An Added Value For Managing Hydrosocial Sysmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Prior research on Indigenous participation in water governance and management on the prairies emphasizes improvements in the development, implementation, and evaluation of watershed plans and planning [31][32][33]. As part of the socio-political aspects of water, contestation and reflexivity in public debate in water governance have been given some attention, but this is exclusively focused on state-based water institutions and Western norms of deliberation [34].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%