Contemporary Water Governance: Navigating Crisis Response and Institutional Constraints through Pragmatism

Abstract

Water has often been the source of crises and their frequency will intensify due to climate change impacts. The Niagara River Watershed provides an ideal case to study water crises as it is an international transboundary system (Canada-United States) and has both historical and current challenges associated with water quantity and quality, which resonates broadly in water basins throughout the world. The aim of this study was to understand how stakeholders perceive ecosystems and the relationship with preferences for governance approaches in the context of water governance. An online survey instrument was employed to assess perceptions of the system in terms of resilience (engineering, ecological, social-ecological, or epistemic), preferences for governance approaches (state, citizen, market, and hybrid forms), and the most pressing issues in the watershed. Responses showed that, despite demographic differences and adherence to different resilience perspectives, support was strongest for governance approaches that focused on state or state-citizen hybrid forms. The validity of the resilience typology as a grouping variable is discussed. The roles of institutional constraints, pragmatism in governance approach preferences, and the influence of multiple crises are explored in relation to the context of the study site, as well as to water governance scholarship more broadly.

Ecosystem Perceptions in Flood Prone Areas: A Typology and Its Relationship to Preferences for Governance

“…The construct of resilience, given prominence through distinct ways of thinking about floods, was central to gaining insights about foundational internal representations as to how ecosystems operate in relation to flood disturbances and how they should be managed. Use of resilience in this manner and the specific questions were arrived at through a multi-year, iterative process of revision-drawing extensively on scholarly literature [34], applying the developed typology in multiple contexts using context analysis and survey approaches [21,35], and making refinements. While conceptually sound and intuitively appealing, individuals in this research appeared to find particular aspects heuristic, as opposed to a comprehensive view.…”

“…Four criteria were initially selected that represented the key ways in which representations of the ecosystem could be distinguished in documents typifying water dilemmas via content analysis [35]. These criteria (how the system operates, connectedness of the system, how the system responds to disturbances, how the system should be managed) were tested for their suitability in elucidating internal representations of the ecosystem using a survey instrument in the Niagara River Watershed in Canada [21]. The criteria were subsequently critically assessed and revised criteria were developed for the survey in this study.…”

“…Water 2016, 8,191 4 of 17 suitability in elucidating internal representations of the ecosystem using a survey instrument in the Niagara River Watershed in Canada [21]. The criteria were subsequently critically assessed and revised criteria were developed for the survey in this study.…”

“…Comparable connections have been made in specific regards to natural hazards where human perception and understanding are essential to vulnerability [4] and psychological mechanisms and mental models are identified as more accurate depictions of risk perceptions compared to human senses [20]. While there are several influences that affect thinking about flooding (e.g., economic realities, institutional constraints, and pragmatic approaches [21], unfortunately " . .…”

Groundwater Governance and the Growth of Center Pivot Irrigation in Cimarron County, OK and Union County, NM: Implications for Community Vulnerability to Drought

“…A water governance framework does not simply look at government or policy to understand the management and regulation of water resources. Instead, focusing on water governance, as relationships and power dynamics between actors and resources, can help to reveal the implications of policies from multiple levels of actors and institutions on local water users [8,[11][12][13].…”