Whitewater: Decentralization of river basin water resource management

Dinar, Ariel; Kemper, Karin; Blomquist, William; Kurukulasuriya, Pradeep

doi:10.1016/j.jpolmod.2007.06.013

Cited by 30 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The effect of environmental change on intermediary outcomes is likely to be complex. For example, water stress has been shown to strengthen social capital [Uphoff and Wijayaratna, 2000] and stimulate institutional change [Dinar et al, 2007]. Further work that explores the interactions between processes, intermediary outcomes and resource management outcomes and identifies the factors that turn good processes into good outcomes is essential.…”

Section: Arguments For Intermediary Outcome Evaluation In the Water Smentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating participation in water resource management: A review

Carr

Blöschl

Loucks

2012

Water Resources Research

135

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

.[1] Key documents such as the European Water Framework Directive and the U.S. Clean Water Act state that public and stakeholder participation in water resource management is required. Participation aims to enhance resource management and involve individuals and groups in a democratic way. Evaluation of participatory programs and projects is necessary to assess whether these objectives are being achieved and to identify how participatory programs and projects can be improved. The different methods of evaluation can be classified into three groups: (i) process evaluation assesses the quality of participation process, for example, whether it is legitimate and promotes equal power between participants, (ii) intermediary outcome evaluation assesses the achievement of mainly nontangible outcomes, such as trust and communication, as well as short-to medium-term tangible outcomes, such as agreements and institutional change, and (iii) resource management outcome evaluation assesses the achievement of changes in resource management, such as water quality improvements. Process evaluation forms a major component of the literature but can rarely indicate whether a participation program improves water resource management. Resource management outcome evaluation is challenging because resource changes often emerge beyond the typical period covered by the evaluation and because changes cannot always be clearly related to participation activities. Intermediary outcome evaluation has been given less attention than process evaluation but can identify some real achievements and side benefits that emerge through participation. This review suggests that intermediary outcome evaluation should play a more important role in evaluating participation in water resource management.

show abstract

Section: Arguments For Intermediary Outcome Evaluation In the Water Smentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating participation in water resource management: A review

Carr

Blöschl

Loucks

2012

Water Resources Research

135

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…And while there are numerous accounts for and against economics as a tool for integration (Dinar 2000;Swyngedouw 2004), one of the strongest inhibitors to its uptake has been the ways in which the rights and practices of existing water governance programs form initial conditions for decentralization that may exacerbate, rather than resolve, policy gaps (cf. Dinar et al 2007). For instance, economic tools and associated institutional changes, such as the private rights required for many versions of market transfers of water, often do not fit with certain cultural considerations or communal forms of tenure (Boelens et al 2010).…”

Section: Failure 2: Economic Decentralizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating Water Management in the Anthropocene

Schmidt

2013

Society & Natural Resources

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Certainly, the design of institutions for implementing IWRM has been an iterative and debatable topic in the IWRM researches field over the last decade (Gallego-Ayala, 2013). Within the context of implementing "the lowest level" concept efficiently, the river basin unit is a preferred geographical scale (Bath & Blomquist, 2004;Dinar et al, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementation of Decentralized Water Resources Management Based on Integrated Water Resources Management in Indonesia (A Case Study of Cisadane River Basin)

Djamres

Suhadak

Wike

2018

JIAP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the last two decades, Indonesia has been performed decentralization for managing water resources. However, some problems related to water management still exist such as flood, drought, and ego sectoral among stakeholders. Cisadane river basin was used as a study area due to this river basin is one of the national strategic river basin and faced the fastest growing population and land conversion function in Indonesia. Using Grindle model (1980), we analyzed the performance of the policy and figure out its supporting and constraining factors. As a result, in general, implementation of decentralized water resources management based on "Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM)" principles at Cisadane river basin has been running well. Nevertheless, some problems related communication among stakeholders, public participation, and limited resources are the main issues of decentralized water resources management in Indonesia and can hamper the policy to reach its goals. INTISARISejak dua dekade terakhir, pengelolaan sumber daya air di Indonesia telah didesentralisasikan. Akan tetapi dalam sejumlah masalah seperti banjir, kekeringan, dan ego sektoral di antara para pemangku kepentingan masih terjadi di lapangan. Daerah Aliran Sungai (DAS) Cisadane kami gunakan sebagai studi area karena DAS tersebut merupakan salah satu DAS strategis nasional dan menghadapi pertumbuhan populasi serta perubahan fungsi konversi lahan yang paling cepat di Indonesia. Dengan menggunakan model analisis Grindle (1980), kami menganalisis kinerja kebijakan tersebut dan menganalisa apa saja faktor pendukung dan penghambatnya. Sebagai kesimpulan, secara umum, implementasi desentralisasi pengelolaan sumber daya air berdasarkan prinsip-prinsip "Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM)"di DAS Cisadane telah berjalan dengan baik. Namun demikian, beberapa masalah seperti komunikasi di antara para pemangku kepentingan, partisipasi masyarakat, dan sumber daya yang terbatas merupakan isu utama dari sistem pengelolaan sumber daya air tersebut dan dapat menghambat kebijakan tersebut untuk mencapai tujuannya.2018 FIA UB. All rights reserved.

show abstract

Whitewater: Decentralization of river basin water resource management

Cited by 30 publications

References 14 publications

Evaluating participation in water resource management: A review

Evaluating participation in water resource management: A review

Integrating Water Management in the Anthropocene

Implementation of Decentralized Water Resources Management Based on Integrated Water Resources Management in Indonesia (A Case Study of Cisadane River Basin)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About