Converting Community Knowledge into Catchment Nutrient Limits: A Constructivist Analysis of a New Zealand Collaborative Approach to Water Management

Duncan, Ronlyn

doi:10.3167/nc.2013.080205

Cited by 20 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The group included one recreationalist and four farmers. Three farmers had participated in stakeholder workshops run by the regional council to assist in setting water quality limits and were an attempt to coproduce knowledge between scientists and stakeholders (see Duncan, 2013). Through the workshops, SW farmers interacted with scientists and the science used to quantify nutrient losses at the farm and catchment scales (i.e.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ways of knowing – out-of-sync or incompatible? Framing water quality and farmers’ encounters with science in the regulation of non-point source pollution in the Canterbury region of New Zealand

Duncan

2016

Environmental Science & Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines farmers' ways of knowing water quality and their encounters with the science used in policy to address the cumulative effects of agriculture. Drawing on constructivist theories of knowledge and discussions with farmers in two locations of New Zealand's South Island region of Canterbury, the research identifies a significant divergence between farmers' conception of the water quality problem compared to the issue's policy framing. In theory, and increasingly in practice, ways of knowing are assumed merely outof-sync and their integration or coproduction possible and necessary. This paper poses the question: what if the ways of knowing of farmers and science have become incompatible? The presented research indicates incompatibility that derives from epistemic practices that mobilise different ontologies at different scales. It is shown how the predictive practices of science present what appear to be insurmountable obstacles to integration or coproduction. It is argued that collaborative governance needs to find ways to work with divergent ways of knowing -not for the purpose of integration or coproduction but co-existence.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ways of knowing – out-of-sync or incompatible? Framing water quality and farmers’ encounters with science in the regulation of non-point source pollution in the Canterbury region of New Zealand

Duncan

2016

Environmental Science & Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…163-187). Shifts to collaborative governance have not markedly changed this situation (Duncan, 2013a;Scholz and Stiftel, 2005).…”

Section: Anticipatory Knowledge For the Preventive Paradigmmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The CNL has been determined via a collaborative process (under the CWMS) whereby the community has established future water quality objectives for the lake that align with its social, environmental, cultural and economic needs and aspirations (CRC, 2013;Duncan, 2013a). As the modelling stands, having established the CNL, depending on how far the science shifts in Overseer ® , the NDAs are likely to require adjustment in the future.…”

Section: Linking the Catchment And The Farmmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regulating agricultural land use to manage water quality: The challenges for science and policy in enforcing limits on non-point source pollution in New Zealand

Duncan

2014

Land Use Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The management of non-point source pollution from agricultural land use is a complex issue for the management of freshwater worldwide. This paper presents a case study from New Zealand to examine how predictive modelling and land use rules are being used to regulate diffuse pollution to manage water quality. Drawing on a science studies conceptual framework, the research evaluates the deployment of a numeric regime to enforce compliance with resource limits. It shows that in contrast to claims that a quantitative modelled 'outputsbased' approach would provide certainty and clarity and remove ambiguity in the implementation of resource limits at the farm scale, the opposite is unfolding. It is argued from the case study that in the development of land use policy greater recognition and understanding is needed of the social and political dimensions of numbers and predictive models. This research highlights epistemological, institutional and practical challenges for the workability and enforceability of policy regimes seeking to regulate diffuse pollution that tightly link numbers derived from predictive models to compliance and enforcement mechanisms.Keywords: New Zealand, non-point source pollution, resource limits, water quality, predictive modelling, science policy, knowledge governance Highlights  In contrast to assertions that numbers and models would provide clarity and remove ambiguity, the opposite is unfolding  Seeking to resolve 'upstream' effects presents a range of challenges that centre on credibility and accountability  While the need for credibility is shared, criteria to achieve it differ across the science policy interface  Regulating diffuse pollution is not just a scientific and technical endeavour -it is also a social-political one 2  Relying on numbers presents epistemological, institutional and practical challenges for implementing resource limits IntroductionWorldwide, non-point source pollution from agricultural production is contributing to the nutrient enrichment of freshwater and the diminishment of water quality. Management efforts are exacerbated by lag effects. In New Zealand, the erosion and nutrient leaching legacies of past and current land use change from sheep and beef to dairy farming are merging with challenging implications for science and policy (PCE, 2013). Even with extensive improvements in land use practices and expensive mitigation, authorities have to explain to communities that water quality is likely to get worse before it gets better. This is due to nutrient losses from past land practices still moving through the system into waterways and contributing to the growth of nuisance algae and eutrophication (Goolsby et al., 2001;Howden et al., 2013; PCE, 2012 PCE, , 2013Sanford and Pope, 2013;Sims and Volk, 2013;Skelton and Caygill, 2013 The starting point for this research are assertions that certainty and clarity and the removal of ambiguity would be achieved under a water quality management regime that creates enforceable quantitative limits and a regula...

show abstract

“…They highlight the ways in which a shift from a 'vertical' knowledge governance structure to a more 'horizontal' network arrangement increased the knowledge flows around no-till agriculture, and suggest that the development of effective public-private partnerships to facilitate these knowledge flows were crucial. The second sustainability-related study [58] examined how collaborative sustainability research approaches sought to include local knowledge on water management, but prevailing academic conventions led to that knowledge being aggregated and standardised to conform to conventional standards of "epistemic authority", thereby losing its complexity and nuance.…”

Section: Public Sector Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge Governance for Sustainable Development: A Review

Kerkhoff

2014

CiS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainable development is a knowledge intensive process, but plagued by persistent concerns over our apparent inability to connect what we know with more sustainable practices and outcomes. While considerable attention has been given to ways we may better understand and enhance the knowledge-based processes that support the governance of social-ecological systems, relatively few have examined the governance of knowledge itself. The institutions-rules and norms-that govern knowledge may shed light on the persistence of 'gaps' between knowledge and action. In this review I seek to answer the question: can interdisciplinary knowledge governance literature contribute to understanding and analysing the institutional knowledge-based dimensions of sustainable development? I present and analyse the concept of knowledge governance as it is emerging in a range of disciplines and practice areas, including private sector management literature and public regulation theory and practice. I then integrate the findings from this review into a model of sustainable development proposed by Nilsson et al. [1]. I show that knowledge governance (as a scale above knowledge management) can inform Nilsson et al.'s three "nested" dimensions of sustainability: human wellbeing (through access to knowledge and freedom to exercise informed choice); resourcebase management (though enhancing regulation and innovation and transitions from exclusive to inclusive knowledge systems); and global public goods (by balancing public and private interests and fostering global innovation systems). This review concludes by presenting a framework that places sustainable development in the context of broader socio-political struggles towards more open, inclusive knowledge systems.

show abstract

Converting Community Knowledge into Catchment Nutrient Limits: A Constructivist Analysis of a New Zealand Collaborative Approach to Water Management

Cited by 20 publications

References 11 publications

Ways of knowing – out-of-sync or incompatible? Framing water quality and farmers’ encounters with science in the regulation of non-point source pollution in the Canterbury region of New Zealand

Ways of knowing – out-of-sync or incompatible? Framing water quality and farmers’ encounters with science in the regulation of non-point source pollution in the Canterbury region of New Zealand

Regulating agricultural land use to manage water quality: The challenges for science and policy in enforcing limits on non-point source pollution in New Zealand

Knowledge Governance for Sustainable Development: A Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About