Collaborative approaches to water management and planning: An institutional perspective

Ananda, Jayanath; Proctor, Wendy

doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.10.018

Cited by 63 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is not sufficient to involve local actors in the provision and management of water resources without adequate power and resources to carry out their legitimate mandate [38][39][40]. As experienced in our case study communities, the transfer of responsibilities and accountability through decentralised governance often fails to transfer the required power and resources for capacity-building and solid drinking water governance [19].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Rocky Path to Source Water Protection: A Cross-Case Analysis of Drinking Water Crises in Small Communities in Canada

Hanrahan

Dosu

2017

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Source water protection (SWP) is increasingly seen as effective in reducing the incidence and extent of drinking water crises, yet its facilitation requires certain measures. Canada has one of the most decentralized water governance systems in the world. We sought to understand the experience and impacts of drinking water crises at community and government levels in a decentralized context: the Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador through cross-case analysis. We selected our three study communities through a database of media reports in 2014 followed by invitations to community leaders. We used descriptive and qualitative methods, specifically structured interview schedules with both closed-and open-ended questions, and interviewed four community leaders and three provincial government officials. We used NVivo in data analysis, especially in the identification of themes. While government officials defined water crises largely in terms of SWP, this was not the same for communities, whose concern was mainly water access, specifically water shortages. Thus, while the prioritizing of SWP can be useful, the current focus on SWP has the potential to overlook aspects of water security, particularly in some rural and Indigenous communities in Canada. If we envision water security as a ladder representing a hierarchy of needs, some communities are too far down on the ladder to operationalize SWP because their water problems are more extreme.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Rocky Path to Source Water Protection: A Cross-Case Analysis of Drinking Water Crises in Small Communities in Canada

Hanrahan

Dosu

2017

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The nature of water and the environment in general is that it is constantly changing and evolving, and so are threats to drinking water. Threat identification and mechanisms for mitigation should be a collaborative effort [23,24]. Especially in rural areas, landowners and the general public are required to implement SWP through actions in ways such as reducing fertilizer use and ensuring septic systems within contributing areas are properly maintained.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, support for SWP efforts at the local level need to be complemented with legalized institutional arrangements, financial support, technical support and data, as well as social capacity building (e.g., awareness building campaigns and opportunities for public engagement) [9]. Capacity building in water management and planning at the local community level can provide opportunities for future collaboration, better integration of water plans and the creation of networks that further understandings of catchment issues [23,24]. Moreover, there must be acceptance of source protection plans at the local level if local actors are also expected to enforce these plans [25].…”

Section: Source Water Protection and Capacitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Ontario’s Clean Water Act and Capacity Building: Implications for Serviced Rural Municipalities

Minnes¹

2017

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research explores Ontario's Clean Water Act (S. O. 2006, c. 22) and its contribution to capacity building for rural municipalities impacted by source protection plans created under the Act. Source water protection (SWP) under the Clean Water Act (S. O. 2006, c. 22) is explored drawing from a capacity framework. A nested case study approach has been employed to allow for in depth exploration of the experience within the Cataraqui Source Protection Area and the North Bay-Mattawa Source Protection Area, where key informant interviews were conducted. Findings are outlined looking at four elements of capacity for SWP: institutional, financial, social, and technical/human. It was found that the process was successful for building capacity in the serviced rural municipalities involved, but did not provide any meaningful protection for areas reliant on private drinking water systems such as wells. Several improvements to the legislated process were suggested including greater flexibility for local circumstance and better methods for engagement of First Nations and the general public. It is unknown if this capacity will be sustained as the program continues and provincial funding is reduced. Reduced funding will particularly impact rural communities that lack the internal human and financial capacity to implement SWP policies without the assistance of provincial funding and conservation authority staff (who also rely on provincial/municipal funding sources). Ultimately, it was found that SWP in rural areas requires enforceable mandatory legislation; sustainable provincial funding and municipal fiscal frameworks to support ongoing SWP planning and implementation; technical aid at the regional level; and support and commitment to SWP at the local level (e.g., municipalities, local health units, landowners, residents and watershed users).

show abstract

“…The adopted definition of resilience straddles both the possibility of event disruptions, such as an earthquake or deliberate attack, and long-duration changes, such as landscape changes or sea level rise (Ayyub, 2014). For a system to be resilient to disruptions, the characteristics of the natural-engineered system are important, as are human dimensions of the system, which rely on governance, community outreach, and education (Ananda and Proctor, 2013;Bettini et al, 2013;O'Rourke, 2007). For event challenges, resilient systems have the following characteristics:…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technologic resilience assessment of coastal community water and wastewater service options

Schoen¹,

Hawkins²,

Xue

et al. 2015

Sustainability of Water Quality and Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collaborative approaches to water management and planning: An institutional perspective

Cited by 63 publications

References 18 publications

The Rocky Path to Source Water Protection: A Cross-Case Analysis of Drinking Water Crises in Small Communities in Canada

The Rocky Path to Source Water Protection: A Cross-Case Analysis of Drinking Water Crises in Small Communities in Canada

Ontario’s Clean Water Act and Capacity Building: Implications for Serviced Rural Municipalities

Technologic resilience assessment of coastal community water and wastewater service options

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About