The social learning potential of participatory water valuation workshops: A case study in Tasmania, Australia

Melle J Nikkels,Art Dewulf,Saideepa Kumar,Peat Leith,Neville Mendham

doi:10.1002/eet.1939

Abstract

AbstractParticipatory water valuation workshops are useful for their valuation outcomes, but can they also foster social learning? Social learning involves changes in understanding through social interactions between actors, which go beyond the individual to become situated within wider social units. Participatory water valuation workshops involve dialoguing about knowledge, perspectives, and preferences, which may be conducive to social learning. In this paper, we assess the social learning potential of a participatory valuation workshop, based on a case study in Tasmania, where farmers, water managers, and a policy maker shared their personal perspectives on the past, current and future values of irrigation water. To assess the social learning potential of a single participatory valuation workshop, we analyzed drivers—that is, factors positively influencing social learning—and outcomes—that is, indications that social learning occurred. Data were collected through an exit survey, in‐workshop reflections and semistructured interviews following 3 weeks and 6 months after the actual workshop. The results indicate that the workshop provided the drivers for social learning to occur. In addition, participants indicated to have learned from and with others, and that the workshop provided improved and extended networks. According to the participants, the workshop led to a shared concern about increasing prices for water licences and induced substantive outcomes related to the use, management, and governance of irrigation water. We conclude that participatory valuation workshops, such as the one analyzed here, can foster social learning.

Highlights

Water management and governance has traditionally been characterized by top down command-and-control decision-making with limited attention afforded to approaches based on learning or adaptive management (Gleick, 2003; Pahl-Wostl et al, 2007; Pahl-Wostl, Mostert, & Tàbara, 2008)
One form of learning that is commonly associated with adaptive water management is “social learning” or learning that is based on dialogue and operates through social interactions (Muro & Jeffrey, 2008)
We examine this proposition through a case study of a participatory water valuation workshop held in Tasmania, Australia

Summary

Introduction

Water management and governance has traditionally been characterized by top down command-and-control decision-making with limited attention afforded to approaches based on learning or adaptive management (Gleick, 2003; Pahl-Wostl et al, 2007; Pahl-Wostl, Mostert, & Tàbara, 2008). The literature on social learning in water management contains many case studies of learning processes designed to foster collective action among stakeholders, by “learning together to better manage together” (Ridder et al, 2005; Rodela, 2013). Social learning processes often aim to support decision-making by enabling participants to develop a shared understanding and identify common interests that can be pursued through collective action. In the absence of longitudinal studies, evaluation of social learning has mostly been limited to assessing personal perspectives and relational outcomes, see for example, (Sol, Beers, & Wals, 2013; van der Wal et al, 2014) with few studies able to attribute more substantive outcomes or collective action to social learning as it is difficult to detect whether and how learning catalyzes action (Suškevics, Hahn, Rodela, Macura, & Pahl-Wostl, 2018). A better understanding of ways to foster and assess social learning processes is necessary to increase acknowledgment, adoption, and funding of social learning processes

Objectives

Discussion

Conclusion