Participatory Methods for Water Resources Planning

Abstract

Introduction There is a growing policy emphasis on the involvement of stakeholders and the public in water resource planning and decisionmaking (Global Water Partnership, 2000). In Europe, participation in water resource planning gained a new institutional stature with the Water Framework Directive (WFD). This calls for the``active involvement'' of all interested parties in the implementation process and particularly in the production, revision, and updating of River Basin Management Plans (Article 14; Council of the European Communities, 2000). Planning methods that combine public participation with decisionmaking functions are therefore increasingly in demand (Commission of the European Communities, 2002).

Gestionar desde la territorialidad: ¿cómo integrar la multifuncionalidad y la participación social en la legitimación del regadío?

“…Se trata, por tanto, de un modelo que a partir de 1) la identificación, aproximación y caracterización de cada una de las partes interesadas en la gestión del canal de regadío desde su discurso, sus postulados y sus preocupaciones; y 2) el análisis de las relaciones de afinidad/confrontación entre discursos y, por tanto, los posicionamientos de los diferentes actores; tiene por finalidad contribuir a la identificación de los aspectos coincidentes/divergentes sobre la gestión del canal de regadío para, con ello, identificar las variables clave en la definición de acuerdos que beneficien al conjunto (Figura 2). En consecuencia, la existencia de un aprendizaje social, la resolución de conflictos latentes o enquistados o la prevención de disputas futuras, la promoción de un plan de acción integrado, la propuesta de soluciones innovadoras o la gestión de las diferencias requerirá de una complicidad entre intereses que en algunos casos comportará hacer compatibles visiones estereotipadas y/o estigmatizadas para poder desencallar un proyecto de regadío en perspectiva de mientras que en otras el foco de atención recaerá en la necesidad de legitimar la toma de decisiones entre una mayor representatividad de intereses (Kallis et al, 2006).…”

Catchments, sub-catchments and private spaces: Scale and process in managing microbial pollution from source to sea

“…It is hardly a novel observation that natural units cut across political and administrative boundaries and the primacy given to the 'natural' boundaries in the catchment approach is consistent with new cross-cutting forms of partnership governance (Edwards et al, 2001). The catchment approach gives rise to both new modes of political engagement within catchment governance (Kallis et al, 2006) and 7 new partnerships which may also serve to undermine pre-existing jurisdictions as has been shown, for example, in the US context by Maddock (2004).…”

Water Governance in Chile and Canada: a Comparison of Adaptive Characteristics

“…Thus, more flexible, participatory, experimental, collaborative, and learning-based designs and approaches to policy making and governance could increase the adaptive capacity of communities and improve sustainability of natural resources (Lee and Lawrence 1986, Walters 1986, Walters and Holling 1990, Tompkins and Adger 2004, Kallis et al 2006, Pahl-Wostl 2007a,b, 2010. This description is an ideal state of governance, able to effectively respond to complex environmental issues such as climate change, as well as the practices and characteristics of policy making and governance to achieve resilience, and it is referred to as adaptive governance, or adaptive management by some.…”