Co-engineering Participatory Water Management Processes: Theory and Insights from Australian and Bulgarian Interventions

Daniell, Katherine A.; White, Ian; Ferrand, Nils; Ribarova, Irina; Coad, Peter; Rougier, Jean Emmanuel; Hare, M.; Jones, Natalie A.; Popova, Albena; Rollin, Dominique; Perez, Pascal; Burn, Stewart

doi:10.5751/es-03567-150411

Cited by 69 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They argue that potential disappointment experienced by stakeholders, and eventually researchers and policy makers, can be avoided by being upfront and precise about how the process will be implemented, and what kind of involvement is expected from participants. Daniell et al (2010) reflect on the collective construction, or "co-engineering", of two multilevel participatory water management processes in Australia and Bulgaria. By doing so, they introduce a rarely discussed aspect of participation processes, namely the analysis of the social interactions, conflicts, and negotiations in the project team that designs and implements these processes.…”

Section: Discussion In This Featurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bots et al (2011) also illustrate the importance of information sharing, including on the limitations of existing models, e.g., uncertainties. Daniell et al (2010) deepen the work on determining who organizes and influences the modeling process, and what specific roles they play in the project team or "co-engineering" process that makes the organizational decisions related to participatory modeling processes. They show that predefined participatory modeling methodologies are unlikely to be directly applied in particular cases, but that they will likely be renegotiated with a variety of people, including stakeholders, both prior to and during their implementation.…”

Section: Discussion In This Featurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most author teams of this feature represent this hybrid: contributing to a participatory process and drawing lessons from it as well. For example Daniell et al (2010; Daniell et al (2010; for the Australian process), Lamers et al (2010), and Moellenkamp et al (2010) advised or co-constructed their respective processes with water managers or facilitated meetings through the processes. This raises questions, as, for example, addressed by Barreteau et al (2010), of how researchers need to clarify their objectives and roles in participation processes, as well as the potential benefits of research-driven versus management-driven participation processes for water management as discussed in Daniell et al (2010).…”

Section: Discussion In This Featurementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Implementing Participatory Water Management: Recent Advances in Theory, Practice, and Evaluation

Korff¹,

Daniell²,

Moellenkamp³

et al. 2012

E&S

Self Cite

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. 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. Key Words: adaptive management, collaborative decision making, evaluation, interactive planning, participatory modeling, participatory research, process design, public participation, social learning, stakeholder participation, water resources management FOCUS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE SPECIAL FEATUREMany current water planning and management problems are riddled with high levels of complexity, uncertainty, and conflict, so-called "messes" (Ackoff 1979) or "wicked problems" (Rittel and Webber 1973). These problems are increasingly encountered in the public policy sphere as resources become scarce, conflicts between water users and interest groups proliferate, and the ecological and social aspects of water planning become more prominent. As a result, it is increasingly rare that technical water managers have sufficient decision making authority and capacity to implement plans and water management actions by themselves. Furthermore, 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 managem...

show abstract

Section: Discussion In This Featurementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussion In This Featurementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussion In This Featurementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Implementing Participatory Water Management: Recent Advances in Theory, Practice, and Evaluation

Korff¹,

Daniell²,

Moellenkamp³

et al. 2012

E&S

Self Cite

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As Daniell et al (2010) and Daniell (2012) highlight, the prefix "co-" relates to activities undertaken together with others, providing the example of coengineering as the collective organization of participatory processes. The "co-" may not always represent collaboration, but could equally represent conflict or cooperation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning from collaborative research on sustainably managing fresh water: implications for ethical research–practice engagement

Ayre¹,

Wallis²,

Daniell³

2018

E&S

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. 2018. Learning from collaborative research on sustainably managing fresh water: implications for ethical research-practice engagement. Ecology and Society 23 (1) ABSTRACT. Since the mid-2000s, there has been increasing recognition of the promise of collaborative research and management for addressing complex issues in sustainably managing fresh water. A large variety of collaborative freshwater research and management processes is now evident around the world. However, how collective knowledge development, coproduction, or cocreation is carried out in an ethical manner is less well known. From the literature and our experiences as applied, transdisciplinary researchers and natural resource management practitioners, we seek to describe and explore these aspects of empirical cases of collaborative freshwater research and management. Drawing on cases from Indigenous community-based natural resource management in northern Australia, flood and drought risk management in Bulgaria, water management and climate change adaptation in the Pacific, and regional catchment and estuary management in Victoria and New South Wales in Australia, we identify lessons to support improved collaborative sustainable freshwater management research and practice. Cocreation represents an emerging approach to participation and collaboration in freshwater management research-practice and can be seen to constitute four interlinked and iterative phases: coinitiation, codesign, coimplementation, and coevaluation. For freshwater researchers and managers and their collaborators, paying attention to these phases and the ethical dilemmas that arise within each phase will support the cocreation of more effective and ethical research-practice through: sensitizing collaborators to the need for reflexivity in research-practice, proposing action research codesign as a method for managing emergent questions and outcomes, and supporting more equitable outcomes for collaborators through an emphasis on coevaluation and collaborative articulation of the links between research outputs and practice outcomes.

show abstract

“…notably in water governance), there has been little research explicitly examining the role and implications of participatory decision-making in flood risk management (but for a very early exception see Fordham et al 1991, and more recently Buchecker et al 2013;Daniell et al 2010;Fleischhauer et al 2012;Hedelin & Hjerpe 2015;Pahl-Wostl 2006;Rouillard et al 2014;Sinclair et al 2003;Tseng & Pening-Rowsell 2012). Many contributions have examined adaptive and integrative management prescriptions, which advocate stakeholder engagement and participation to varying degrees (e.g.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Participatory and collaborative governance for sustainable flood risk management: An emerging research agenda

Challies

Newig

Thaler

et al. 2016

Environmental Science & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Co-engineering Participatory Water Management Processes: Theory and Insights from Australian and Bulgarian Interventions

Cited by 69 publications

References 66 publications

Implementing Participatory Water Management: Recent Advances in Theory, Practice, and Evaluation

Implementing Participatory Water Management: Recent Advances in Theory, Practice, and Evaluation

Learning from collaborative research on sustainably managing fresh water: implications for ethical research–practice engagement

Participatory and collaborative governance for sustainable flood risk management: An emerging research agenda

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Co-engineering Participatory Water Management Processes: Theory and Insights from Australian and Bulgarian Interventions

Cited by 69 publications

References 66 publications

Implementing Participatory Water Management: Recent Advances in Theory, Practice, and Evaluation

Implementing Participatory Water Management: Recent Advances in Theory, Practice, and Evaluation

Learning from collaborative research on sustainably managing fresh water: implications for ethical research&#8211;practice engagement

Participatory and collaborative governance for sustainable flood risk management: An emerging research agenda

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Learning from collaborative research on sustainably managing fresh water: implications for ethical research–practice engagement