Illuminating the Possibilities for Social Learning in the Management of Scotland's Water

Abstract

ABSTRACT. Our research explores the context of water management in Scotland as it existed in late 2003. We took as a key question: Is the Scottish policy context conducive to the emergence of "social learning" as a purposeful policy option in the future management of water, and in the implementation of the European Water Framework Directive in particular? Data generated by several means, including semistructured interviews with key stakeholders, tested the explanatory potential of a SLIM (Social Learning for the Integrated Management and sustainable use of water) heuristic concerned with how changes in understanding and practices can transform situations to produce social learning. Our research demonstrates how the historical context, including initial starting conditions; conducive institutions, especially political devolution, and policies; facilitation; building stakeholding; and the use of learning processes together can create the possibilities for social learning. The processes that went on through the development of the Scottish Water Bill exemplify how social learning as concerted action emerged, but it did not do so from any overall purposeful design. A major challenge is to create purposefully the conditions for social learning as a deliberate policy or governance mechanism.

Examining the assumptions of integrated coastal management: Stakeholder agendas and elite cooption in Babuyan Islands, Philippines

“…Social learning is an alternative policy instrument to environmental problems which views policy itself as a form of praxis, in that it does not exist in isolation from its implementation [34]. This is based on a growing recognition that efforts for sustainable development under conditions of complexity and uncertainty encounter a lack of agreement on what comprises the exact resource problem and its possible solutions.…”

Integrative learning for practicing adaptive resource management

“…Adaptive governance arrangements have been explored by Folke et al (2005), Gunderson and Light (2006), Pahl-Wostl (2009), andHerrfahrdt-Pahle (2013), while Fazey and Schultz (2009) define the requirements for learning centered organizations. In addition, the importance of social learning processes have been emphasized by Mostert et al (2007), Ison and Watson (2007), Pahl-Wostl (2009), andCundill et al (2012), and Rogers et al (2013) highlight a complexity "frame of reference" for adaptive decision making. In practice, applying three-mode learning has been difficult to achieve (Pahl-Wostl et http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol20/iss1/art34/ al.…”

Developing adaptive capacity in times of climate change in central rural Vietnam: exploring smallholders’ learning and governance

“…Moreover, social learning processes are highly dependent on contextual circumstances such as location, historical experiences, and associated cultures (Ison & Watson, 2007). Clearly, social learning requires conscious design and facilitation as it does not happen by accident (Woodhill, 2010).…”

“…5 Evaluation of the learning configuration -The design of the learning configuration (the appropriateness of promotion process; the sufficient and relevance of contents of interventions; the appropriateness of preparing the process) -The implementation of the learning configuration (the participation of participants and the facilitation skills of facilitators) -The outcomes of the learning configuration : + Social learning outcomes (ability to think systemically, appreciation of others' perspectives, new or deeper social relations, anticipated behavioural impacts and outcomes) + The potential of social learning outcomes (knowledge exchange, bridging social networks, institutional capacity and income and environmental sustainability) (Sen, 2014); (Sen, 2016). (Keen et al, 2005); (Ison & Watson, 2007); (Mostert et al, 2007); (Johnson et al, 2012). (Mezirow, 1996); (Daniels & Walker, 2001); (Schusler et al, 2003); (Muro & Jeffrey, 2008); (Johnson et al, 2012).…”

“…The evaluation component is necessary for finding out why a learning configuration works and which learning outcomes can improve adaptive capacity of participants (Akpo et al, 2015). The results of the evaluation phase can lead to improve learning outcomes (Ison & Watson, 2007;Mostert et al, 2007;Sen, 2014;Sen, 2016), modify the implementation process, celebrate the achievements, achieve long term effectiveness, and can provide the input for the upscaling phase. (Kristjanson et al, 2012); (Vermeulen et al, 2013).…”