Stakeholder Engagement in Environmental Water Management

Conallin, John; Dickens, Chris; Hearne, Declan; Allan, Catherine

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-803907-6.00007-3

Cited by 35 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Holistic frameworks facilitate input from diverse stakeholders (e.g. Conallin, Dickens, Hearne, & Allan, ; King & Brown, ; Poff et al., ) and increasingly evaluate the social and cultural implications of environmental flows and water management alternatives (e.g. Finn & Jackson, ; Martin et al., ; Novak et al., ; O'Brien et al., ).…”

Section: Advancing the Management Of Environmental Watermentioning

confidence: 99%

Recent advances in environmental flows science and water management—Innovation in the Anthropocene

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The implementation of environmental flow regimes offers a promising means to protect and restore riverine, wetland and estuarine ecosystems, their critical environmental services and cultural/societal values. This Special Issue expands the scope of environmental flows and water science in theory and practice, offering 20 papers from academics, agency researchers and non‐governmental organisations, each with fresh perspectives on the science and management of environmental water allocations. Contributions confront the grand challenge for environmental flows and water management in the Anthropocene—the urgent need for innovations that will help to sustain the innate resilience of social–ecological systems under dynamic and uncertain environmental and societal futures. Basin‐scale and regional assessments of flow requirements mark a necessary advance in environmental water science in the face of rapid changes in water‐resource management activities worldwide (e.g. increases in dams, diversions, retention and reuse). Techniques for regional‐scale hydrological and ecohydrological modelling support ecological risk assessment and identification of priority flow management and river restoration actions. Changing flood–drought cycles, long‐term climatic shifts and associated effects on hydrological, thermal and water quality regimes add enormous uncertainty to the prediction of future ecological outcomes, regardless of environmental water allocations. An improved capacity to predict the trajectories of ecological change in rivers degraded by legacies of past impact interacting with current conditions and future climate change is essential. Otherwise, we risk unrealistic expectations from restoration of river and estuarine flow regimes. A more robust, dynamic and predictive approach to environmental water science is emerging. It encourages the measurement of process rates (e.g. birth rate, colonisation rate) and species traits (e.g. physiological requirements, morphological adaptations) as well as ecosystem states (e.g. species richness, assemblage structure), as the variables representing ecological responses to flow variability and environmental water allocations. Another necessary development is the incorporation of other environmental variables such as water temperature and sedimentary processes in flow–ecological response models. Based on contributions to this Special Issue, several recent compilations and the wider literature, we identify six major scientific challenges for further exploration, and seven themes for advancing the management of environmental water. We see the emerging frontier of environmental flows and water science as urgent and challenging, with numerous opportunities for reinvigorated science and methodological innovation in the expanding enterprise of environmental water linked to ecological sustainability and social well‐being.

show abstract

Section: Advancing the Management Of Environmental Watermentioning

confidence: 99%

Recent advances in environmental flows science and water management—Innovation in the Anthropocene

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Partnership arrangements with water management agencies can help to guide and monitor environmental flow assessments, and working with NGOs, citizens and indigenous decision-makers is important to integrate scientific and local cultural knowledge of aquatic ecosystems. Models that inform such partnership arrangements abound, each with individual scope, structure and promise of successful outcomes (Jackson et al, 2014;Conallin et al, 2017;Harwood et al, 2017;Stoffels et al, 2018).…”

Section: Actionable Recommendations On Environmental Flowsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Reflecting these developments, investments in large scale, collaborative e-flow strategies and experiments are increasing across developed and developing regions (e.g., Hirji and Davis, 2009;Konrad et al, 2011;Olden et al, 2014;Hart, 2016a,b;Kendy et al, 2017;Kennen et al, 2018). Parallel efforts have revitalized governance and management arrangements (Foerster, 2011;Pahl-Wostl et al, 2013;Garrick et al, 2017), and promoted multi-stakeholder alliances across researchers, water management agencies, industry, non-government organizations (NGOs), civil society and indigenous groups (Le Quesne et al, 2010;Conallin et al, 2017). Furthermore, environmental water requirements have been incorporated into high-level policies and platforms for river health and catchment management, such as Motion M087 (IUCN, 2012), Resolution XII.12 (Ramsar, 2015) and the European Union Water Framework Directive (European Commission, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Brisbane Declaration and Global Action Agenda on Environmental Flows (2018)

Arthington

Bhaduri

Bunn

et al. 2018

Front. Environ. Sci.

316

225

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Thus, triple‐loop learning at SRLF Level 3 includes evaluation of stakeholder network systems because increasing participation is important in promoting flexible and informal interactions within stakeholder networks (Table ). With the review of environmental objectives and individual TPCs in the Murray and Lower Darling WRPA, new ways to monitor fish emerged and there was increased participation at stakeholder meetings and workshops (Conallin et al, ; Conallin, Dickens, Hearne, & Allan, ). The latter led to discussions about issues pertinent to foster social learning outcomes associated with water management in the system at SRLF Level‐3.…”

Section: The Sam Reflexive Learning Framework and Environmental Watermentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflexive learning in adaptive management: A case study of environmental water management in the Murray Darling Basin, Australia

McLoughlin

Thoms

Parsons

2020

River Research & Apps

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adaptive management is a structured approach for people who must act despite uncertainty and complexity about what they are managing and the impacts of their actions. It is learning-by-doing through deliberate cycles of experimentation, review, and synthesis. However, understanding the processes of learning and how they relate to achieving resource management goals is in its infancy. Reflexive learning-a process of identifying and critically examining assumptions, values, and actions that frame knowledge-is critical to the effectiveness of adaptive management. It involves adaptive feedbacks between stakeholders as they examine assumptions, values, and actions. Adaptive management has been applied to environmental flows because it offers a system for making decisions about tradeoffs. In the Murray Darling Basin (MDB), Australia, adaptive management is applied as a cycle of plan, do, monitor, and learn, facilitated by short-and long-term learning among stakeholders. An alternative conceptualization of adaptive management as an integration of single-, double-, and triple-loop learning across multiple levels of governance is presented. This is applied to environmental flows in the MDB to map adaptive feedbacks of reflexive learning. At the lowest level of governance (Water Resource Planning Area), goals are assessed as Thresholds of Potential Concern related to flow-ecology responses, which are reviewed every 3-6 years. At the second level of governance (Basin-States), Water Management Targets are the key goals; reviewed and reframed every 6-10 years. The highest level of governance (the MDB) is concerned with policy targets, with review and reframing over 8-15 years. Feedbacks that generate reflexive learning are complex and require commitment to move through the modes of single-, double-, and triple-loop learning. Effective adaptive management of environmental water requires practitioners to situate themselves within a matrix of information flow across modes of learning, levels of governance, and components of a social-ecological system, where reflexive learning drives the achievement of management goals. K E Y W O R D S

show abstract

Stakeholder Engagement in Environmental Water Management

Cited by 35 publications

References 37 publications

Recent advances in environmental flows science and water management—Innovation in the Anthropocene

Recent advances in environmental flows science and water management—Innovation in the Anthropocene

The Brisbane Declaration and Global Action Agenda on Environmental Flows (2018)

Reflexive learning in adaptive management: A case study of environmental water management in the Murray Darling Basin, Australia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About