Polycentric governance compensates for incoherence of resource regimes: The case of water uses under climate change in Oberhasli, Switzerland

Reservoir Governance in World's Water Towers Needs to Anticipate Multi‐purpose Use

“…Various institutional conditions including national and cantonal laws and regulations are relevant for the construction and operation of water reservoirs (Supplementary Material Tables 2 and 3). In the case of the Trift reservoir, these regulations led to contradictory incentives, responsibilities, and procedures in the decision-making process because of their low coherence introduced during their evolution following a sectoral logic (Kellner et al, 2019).…”

“…The results of the water resources analysis show that the water available in the Trift reservoir would be sufficient to cover a substantial part of current and future downstream water shortages, partly, even under extreme conditions. Still, the actors involved in the participatory process leading to the draft concession did not consider downstream water needs in their decision-making even though the concession constitutes a property right und could not be adapted before its expiration in 80 years (Kellner et al, 2019).…”

“…Incoherence could exist between different sectors, between climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies, and across administrative borders (Gupta et al., 2013; Shrestha & Dhakal, 2019; Sosa et al., 2018). Such incoherencies can lead to contradictory incentives, responsibilities, and use rights (Kellner et al., 2019). Other obstacles to coordination reside in sectoral planning and implementation procedures (Pahl‐Wostl, 2019a, 2019b); the levels and spatial scales of governance not being adapted to the affected catchment (Newig & Fritsch, 2009; Udall & Overpeck, 2017); the absence of non‐state actors in decision‐making (Benson et al., 2012; McNeill, 2016; Parés et al., 2015); power imbalances between upstream and downstream water users (Anghileri et al., 2013; Cody, 2018; Denaro et al., 2018) as well as between influential, powerful elites and the rural poor (Kuenzer et al., 2013); a lack of or disputed data records (Dombrowsky & Hensengerth, 2018; Never & Stepping, 2018); and a lack of institutional capacity to govern across sectoral boundaries (Benson et al., 2015; OECD, 2011).…”

Social Acceptance of a Multi-Purpose Reservoir in a Recently Deglaciated Landscape in the Swiss Alps

“…This includes the processes related to the inclusion and exclusion of actors and the starting time. It is also important to ensure that actors in a process have the room to build trust over time [51][52][53]. Furthermore, there must also be trust in responsible actors such as the hydropower company that must implement the negotiated compensatory measures [54] or the actors who are responsible for (risky) technologies, as these actors influence the citizens' perceptions of the risks [55].…”

“…There must also be trust among actors with different perspectives. Trust is a precondition for successful negotiations in a participatory process and for the effective coordination of resource claims, especially whenever rules are not yet formalized [51]. Consequently, processes, actors, their roles, and (in)formal decision-making should be integrated in studies on social acceptance [15].…”