2012
DOI: 10.2307/vermjenvilaw.13.4.705
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Water Pollution in the Green Mountain State: A Case Study of Law, Science, and Culture in the Management of Public Water Resources

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(2 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Where the general governance network literature tends to examine conceptual or theoretical networks, the literature on watershed governance networks is able to examine specific governance networks (Imperial, 2005;Schneider, Scholz, Lubell, Mindruta, & Edwardsen, 2003;Weible & Sabatier, 2005). The research on watershed networks includes a wide body of literature on the benefits and requirements of cooperation and coordination in networks (Hirschi, 2010;Imperial, 2005;Jost & Jacob, 2004;Lubell & Fulton, 2008;Schneider et al, 2003;Scholz, Berardo, & Kile, 2008;Weible & Sabatier, 2005), planning (Dutcher & Blythe, 2012;Koontz & Johnson, 2004;Lienert, Schnetzer, & Ingold, 2013), knowledge diffusion and learning (Betsill & Bulkeley, 2004;Cash et al, 2003;Newig, Guenther, & Pahl-Wostl, 2010;Vignola, McDaniels, & Scholz, 2013), and system scaling (Cohen & Davidson, 2011;Norman & Bakker, 2009;Vignola et al, 2013), all of which are harnessed to build theories that apply to all governance networks. What the watershed governance literature continues to miss is a focus on implementation networks and the network reactions to policy decisions (Rykkja, Neby, & Hope, 2014).…”
Section: Network In Watershed Governance and Climate Change Policymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Where the general governance network literature tends to examine conceptual or theoretical networks, the literature on watershed governance networks is able to examine specific governance networks (Imperial, 2005;Schneider, Scholz, Lubell, Mindruta, & Edwardsen, 2003;Weible & Sabatier, 2005). The research on watershed networks includes a wide body of literature on the benefits and requirements of cooperation and coordination in networks (Hirschi, 2010;Imperial, 2005;Jost & Jacob, 2004;Lubell & Fulton, 2008;Schneider et al, 2003;Scholz, Berardo, & Kile, 2008;Weible & Sabatier, 2005), planning (Dutcher & Blythe, 2012;Koontz & Johnson, 2004;Lienert, Schnetzer, & Ingold, 2013), knowledge diffusion and learning (Betsill & Bulkeley, 2004;Cash et al, 2003;Newig, Guenther, & Pahl-Wostl, 2010;Vignola, McDaniels, & Scholz, 2013), and system scaling (Cohen & Davidson, 2011;Norman & Bakker, 2009;Vignola et al, 2013), all of which are harnessed to build theories that apply to all governance networks. What the watershed governance literature continues to miss is a focus on implementation networks and the network reactions to policy decisions (Rykkja, Neby, & Hope, 2014).…”
Section: Network In Watershed Governance and Climate Change Policymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The basin is the site of farming communities, particularly in Vermont and Quebec, and has struggled to meet its water quality requirements under the Clean Water Act. The arrangements made to govern the LCB and its sub-basins (Dutcher & Blythe, 2012;Osherenko, 2014) require interaction and collaboration across state and national borders in order to expand governance structures throughout the watershed. Vermont, with limited state budgets and producing the largest share of pollution, particularly from non-point sources (Lake Champlain Basin Program [LCBP], 2012; Osherenko, 2014), has relied on public-private partnerships for pursuing its water quality goals.…”
Section: Case Study Focusmentioning
confidence: 99%