Abstract
The Water-Energy-Food Nexus has emerged over the past decade as a useful concept to reduce trade-offs and increase synergies in promoting goals of water, energy and food securities. While WEF scholarship substantiates the biophysical interlinkages and calls for increased and effective coordination across sectors and levels, knowledge on conditions for effective coordination is still lacking. Analysing WEF nexus governance from a polycentricity perspective may contribute to better understanding coordination. In this paper, we propose a conceptual framework for analysing WEF nexus governance based on the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework and the concept of Networks of Adjacent Action Situations (NAAS). The interdependence among transactions for pursuing WEF securities by actors in different action situations generates the need for coordination for changing or sustaining institutions, policy goals and policy instruments that guide actions leading to sustainable outcomes. Coordination is attained through arrangements based on cooperation, coercion or competition. Coordination in complex social-ecological systems is unlikely to be achieved by a single governance mode but rather by synergistic combinations of governance modes. Particular coordination arrangements that emerge in a context depend on the distribution of authority, information and resources within and across interlinked decision-making centres. Further, integrating the political ecology based conceptualisations of power into the analytical framework extends the governance analysis to include the influence of power relations on coordination. Methodological innovation in delineating action situations and identifying the unit of analysis as well as integrating different sources and types of data is required to operationalise the conceptual framework.
Highlights
WATER-ENERGY-FOOD NEXUSThe water-energy-food (WEF) nexus is promoted as a governance solution to complex resource management challenges
We propose a conceptual framework for analysing WEF nexus governance based on the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework and the concept of Networks of Adjacent Action Situations (NAAS)
The underlying question we pursue is: how can we analyse the governance of interdependencies in polycentric WEF nexus systems? After conceptualising a polycentric WEF nexus governance system, we present a generic adaptation of Ostrom (1990) Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework and the concept of “networks of action situations” (McGinnis, 2011) and a suggestion how to include power for studying governance of WEF nexus
Summary
The water-energy-food (WEF) nexus is promoted as a governance solution to complex resource management challenges. In contrast to the broad conceptualisation of WEF nexus, Albrecht et al (2018) contend that methods and tools to quantify and assess WEF interlinkages have not been sufficiently developed and have mostly been “borrowed or adapted from the conventional disciplinary approaches.” With their limited ability to capture the interconnections and interdependencies among the subsystems, these tools and methods mostly provide a narrow and fractured perspective of the nexus, which is not in line with the goals of the nexus (ibid.). In their study of nexus projects which link science and policy, Yung et al (2019) found that combining modelling efforts with the approaches of qualitative futures thinking were helpful in including more contextual variables, especially relating to uncertainty These methods can be challenging for both researchers as well as stakeholders, the authors acknowledged that this process led to a “more holistic framing of [the] problem and an acceptance of different types of uncertainties, beyond simple data gaps that are usually included in modelling” (ibid., 13–14). In the following: we first provide a brief review of the existing literature on WEF nexus governance and their shortcomings (Section 2); elaborate our conceptual framework of WEF nexus governance based on the polycentricity approach (Section 3); a brief discussion on suitable methods to operationalise the concept is presented (Section 4), followed by conclusions (Section 5)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
