Abstract
Over the past decade, the policy and scholarly communities have increasingly recognized the need for governance of water-related issues at the global level. There has been major progress in the achievement of international goals related to the provision of basic water and some progress on sanitation services. However, the water challenge is much broader than securing supply. Doubts have been raised about the effectiveness of some of the existing governance processes, in the face of trends such as the unsustainable use of water resources, the increasing pressure imposed by climate change, or the implications of population growth for water use in food and energy production. Conflicts between different water uses and users are increasing, and the state of the aquatic environment is further declining. Inequity in access to basic water and sanitation services is still an issue. We argue that missing links in the trajectories of policy development are one major reason for the relative ineffectiveness of global water governance. To identify these critical links, a framework is used to examine how core governance processes are performed and linked. Special attention is given to the role of leadership, representativeness, legitimacy, and comprehensiveness, which we take to be critical characteristics of the processes that underpin effective trajectories of policy development and implementation. The relevance of the identified categories is illustrated with examples from three important policy arenas in global water governance: the effort to address access to water and sanitation, currently through the Millennium Development Goals; the controversy over large dams; and the links between climate change and water resources management. Exploratory analyses of successes and failures in each domain are used to identify implications and propose improvements for more effective and legitimate action.
Highlights
Over the past decade the policy and scholarly communities have increasingly recognized the need for governance of water-related issues at the global level (Conca 2006, PahlWostl et al 2008)
Doubts have been raised about the effectiveness of some of the existing governance processes, in the face of trends such as the unsustainable use of water resources, the increasing pressure imposed by climate change, or the implications of population growth for water use in food and energy production
The relevance of the identified categories is illustrated with examples from three important policy arenas in global water governance: the effort to address access to water and sanitation, currently through the Millennium Development Goals; the controversy over large dams; and the links between climate change and water resources management
Summary
Over the past decade the policy and scholarly communities have increasingly recognized the need for governance of water-related issues at the global level (Conca 2006, PahlWostl et al 2008). Q the knowledge base is incomplete, characterized by uncertainties, and often contested, q the perceptions about the nature of the problem and about potential solutions diverge, q an institutional setting with well-defined procedures is absent or is not comprehensive, q the resources to develop and implement policy responses (financial, human, institutional) are insufficient or lacking entirely, q a wide array of actors may wield effective veto power over policy initiatives, and q potential conflicts of interest among different stakeholder groups are abundant These characteristics, in turn, draw our attention to a specific set of necessary elements if policy trajectories are to navigate this terrain effectively: Knowledge generation and knowledge stabilization Knowledge generation may encompass the collection of new information and/or the integration of available, fragmented evidence from different sources. We base these observations on our reading of the scholarly literature, our own prior research, and our observation of the three policy trajectories of water access, large dams, and water and climate. This allows us to identify two types of missing links that influence the effectiveness of policy trajectories: 1. Type I: Performance gap—the lack of a requisite property of an element
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.
