Abstract
Research in water governance and management is a complex subject that involves the appraisal of social, economic, and environmental–biophysical aspects. Cultural and social values are regarded as key drivers in decision-making processes in both domains. Identifying relevant cultural values however is difficult given the interdisciplinary nature of theoretical frameworks and the implementation and operational needs of water governance/management research. In this work, we conduct a systematic literature review and thematic analysis of existing theories of culture (ToC) to identify common cultural values, theoretical frameworks, disciplinary trajectories and implementation trends relevant to water management and governance. Results indicate that the dominant ToC corresponds to Cultural Theory with its four defined categories (Egalitarian–Hierarchist–Individualist–Fatalist). In addition, results show emergent cultural values linked to “local” place-based knowledge perspectives indicating a more pluriversal understanding of cultural values. Cultural values associated with water management revolve around anthropocentrism, whereas values associated with water governance revolve around concepts of provenance/places. Implementation of ToC/cultural values is limited in practical applications, and we provide an example on how to improve on that. We suggest a succinct theory of culture such as Schwartz’s cultural values be considered to be an alternative to capture a greater heterogeneity across the breadth of water governance/management-related and basin-specific contexts.
Highlights
Water is a fundamental resource for ecological and economic imperatives across the globe, contributing to the sustenance of livelihoods, food production and energy generation [1]
We focused on the information from the data set coded to country/countries in the study, cultural theory, cultural values, and potential application e.g., implementation strategies
In this research we found that the four groups of Cultural Theory, i.e., Egalitarian, Hierarchist, Fatalist, Individualist, proposed by Douglas [38] dominated the literature analyzed in both water management and water governance domains
Summary
Water is a fundamental resource for ecological and economic imperatives across the globe, contributing to the sustenance of livelihoods, food production and energy generation [1]. Water resources are increasingly under threat due to overexploitation [2], pollution [3], scarcity [4], depletion [5] and issues of accessibility/affordability [6] In addition to these threats, competitive water uses and strong interdependencies across different productive sectors (e.g., water–energy–food nexus) challenge the way water resources have traditionally been managed [7,8]. Water governance is defined as “the set of rules, practices and processes (formal and informal) through which decisions for the management of water resources and services are taken, implemented, stakeholders articulate their interest, and decision-makers are held accountable” [14]. This definition makes water governance seemingly more amenable to collective and collaborative decision-making processes [15]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
