Water Governance Regimes Research Articles

Managing water supply systems using free-market economy approaches: A detailed review of the implications for developing countries

Decision makers in developing countries are often confronted by difficult choices regarding the selection and deployment of appropriate water supply governance regimes that sufficiently take into account national socio-economic and political realities. Indeed, scholars and practitioners alike continue to grapple with the need to create the optimum water supply and allocation decision-making space applicable to specific developing countries. In this paper, we review documented case studies from various parts of the world to explore the utility of free-market economics approaches in water supply governance. This is one of the major paradigms that have emerged in the face of enduring questions regarding how best to govern water supply systems in developing countries. In the paper, we postulate that increasing pressure on available natural resources may have already rendered obsolete some of the water supply governance regimes that have served human societies very well for many decades. Our main findings show that national and municipal water supply governance paradigms tend to change in tandem with emerging national development frameworks and priorities. While many developing countries have adopted water management and governance policy prescriptions from the international arena, national and local socio-economic and political realities ultimately determine what works and what does not work on the ground. We thus, conclude that the choice of what constitutes an appropriate water supply governance regime in context is never simple. Indeed, the majority of case studies reviewed in the paper tend to rely on a mix of market economics and developmental statism to make their water governance regimes more realistic and workable on the ground.

Adaptation through Collaboration: Evaluating the Emergence of Institutional Arrangements for Catchment Management and Governance in England

Local-scale collaborative catchment management pilot projects were established in England in 2011 as part of an initiative to improve implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD), give more control to non-government groups and deliver multiple economic, social and environmental benefits. Local experiences were examined with respect to six criteria: motives and frames; focus and purpose; structures and niches; engagement, power and use of facilitation; deliberation and social learning; and cross-scale institutional linkage. The findings indicate that organisational histories and established power relations among the participants were important influences on the initiation, development and impacts of collaboration. Catchment-scale collaboration did strengthen inter-organisational relationships and did increase support for specific water management activities. However, the full potential of an integrated approach to resource planning and management was not realised during the piloting phase because institutional structures and mechanisms were not established to link collaborative catchment groups with key water and resource governance regimes, including the WFD planning process. Collaborative governance has not taken the place of government-based decision making. However, more limited arrangements are developing for collaborative water management at a catchment scale which are sanctioned by government and, to variable degrees, orchestrated by established and powerful local organisations and groups.

Urban Water Governance for More Inclusive Development: A Reflection on the ‘Waterscapes’ of Durban, South Africa

Post-apartheid policies have tasked Durban’s municipal actors with the responsibility of achieving both inclusiveness and economic growth. However, they are confronted with the deep spatial and socio-economic inequalities resulting from apartheid, as well as the pressure generated by rapid urbanisation. This article analyses Durban’s water governance regime and its spatial expression or ‘waterscape’. eThekwini Water and Sanitation Unit’s (EWS) approach to water and sanitation provision has gained international recognition for its inclusiveness. This article argues that the resulting ‘waterscape’ – understood as the outcome of the interaction of actor coalitions and their power relations, discourses and knowledges, technologies and infrastructures, which are embedded in multiple spaces that come together simultaneously – exemplifies and challenges the notion of inclusiveness. This article reveals that almost universal access to basic water and sanitation has been achieved through incremental transformation, but that this has produced a highly uneven waterscape in Durban.

Sustainability assessment of water governance alternatives: the case of Guanacaste Costa Rica

Many new forms of water governance are emerging in response to economic and social needs and wants, as well as water-related problems such as scarcity, injustice, and conflict. However, there is little evidence on how sustainable these governance regimes are, which would be critical for making progress toward sustainable and just water governance. In this article, we present the results of a transdisciplinary multi-criteria sustainability assessment of alternative governance regimes for Guanacaste Province, Costa Rica. The assessment specifies differences between sustainable and unsustainable governance regimes, while also pinpointing how the current water governance regime performs in comparison to those alternatives. The findings indicate that those governance regimes with just and deliberative stakeholder involvement, secure groundwater reserves, and healthy dry tropical ecosystems were considered sustainable and just. In contrast, the current state of water governance was found to be at high risk of digressing toward unsustainable systems where rural communities lack rights and influence, where economies favor agro-industry and high impact tourism at the expense of rural livelihoods, and where water scarcity overwhelms weak governance. This assessment study clarifies water sustainability goals, asserts the need for transformational change, and offers a pragmatic foundation for actions toward sustainable water governance.

Microbial risk governance: challenges and opportunities in fresh water management in Canada

This paper analyzes the barriers and opportunities that decentralized water governance regimes pose to effective microbial risk assessment and management for drinking and recreational water quality. The paper presents a case study of Canada (a country whose approach to water governance is among the most decentralized in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD]) evaluating microbial governance approaches in British Columbia and Ontario. The analysis is timely for two reasons: (1) relatively little research has been conducted on microbial risk assessment and management from a governance perspective; the literature focuses largely on technical and methodological approaches (such as Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment [QMRA] or Water Safety Plans); (2) 15 years post Walkerton,– little research has examined the implementation of source water protection as a strategy to reduce microbial risk in recreational and drinking water in the context of decentralized water governance. A range of issues are considered, including how decentralized governance might enable or constrain microbial risk assessment and management practices, and how the relationships between decentralized and multi-level governance actors might further deepen the complexity of watershed management, particularly source water protection. The analysis indicates that decentralized water governance in Ontario and BC may contribute to difficulties in effectuating source water protection and other features of a multi-barrier approach. The most significant challenges, as identified by practitioners, relate to the fragmentation of land and water jurisdiction, regulation, institutions and mandates, particularly a lack of coordination (both regulatory and institutional) and limited clarity on roles and responsibilities. Building on this analysis, the paper suggests more effort is required to support proactive institutional arrangements, including: inter- and intra-agency communication across levels of government; master planning and other initiatives to move towards integrated policy development; flexible, responsive policy environments; a governance culture that fosters leadership and collaboration; and holistic problem framing and mobilization of interdisciplinary knowledge.

Linking stakeholder survey, scenario analysis, and simulation modeling to explore the long-term impacts of regional water governance regimes

Abstract Freshwater scarcity is a pivotal challenge for many cities, as resources are threatened by increasing demand, water quality concerns, and climate change impacts. Current governance approaches appear unable to respond effectively to these challenges, prompting calls for transitions to sustainable water governance. Scenarios are often used to explore narrow aspects of water systems, which is not a full realization of their potential to guide transitions in water governance. A transition-oriented approach to scenario construction needs to generate scenarios that (i) are governance focused, including the institutions, actors, and actions that will guide transitions; (ii) are normative, incorporating the values and preferences of those responsible for carrying out transition actions; (iii) are presented as a small set of distinct and identifiable scenarios, which stakeholders can comprehend and compare; and (iv) allow for interfacing with dynamic models to demonstrate the systemic impacts of different approaches to water governance. This research utilizes a participatory, mixed-method approach, including survey, scenario analysis, and simulation modeling to construct distinct, coherent, plausible, and normative governance scenarios of metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona in 2030. Four scenarios provide residents and policy makers with distinct options for future water governance regimes, indicating the future impacts of normative values and preferences that might or might not be aligned with ideas of sustainability.

Do good fences make good neighbours? Canada–United States transboundary water governance, the Boundary Waters Treaty, and twenty-first-century challenges

This article analyzes the rescaling of transboundary water governance and explores challenges and opportunities for the twenty-first century. The analysis is grounded in the example of the Canada–United States transboundary water governance regime, and asks two questions: What are the lessons learned since Canada and the United States first signed the Boundary Waters Treaty 100 years ago? And what is the potential of rescaling to influence the tension between the ‘sovereign rights’ of a nation and transboundary water governance protocols based on ‘good neighbourliness’?

Integrated and Participatory Analysis of Water Governance Regimes: The Case of the Costa Rican Dry Tropics

We present a comprehensive analysis of water governance in Guanacaste, Costa Rica. Methods included interviews, workshops, and participatory processes. The study zooms in on water-related rules and regulations, people’s actions, and the physical water system that people depend on. The results indicate complex governance problems and provide focal points for sustainable governance efforts. Focal points include: respecting scarcity and the limits of groundwater availability; building broad governance capacity; reconciling disenfranchised rural groups; and supporting creative local leadership. The study asserts the need for combining critical governance analysis with transformational and solution-oriented research in support of sustainable water governance efforts.

Sustainability appraisal of water governance regimes: the case of Guanacaste, Costa Rica.

Sustainability appraisals produce evidence for how well water governance regimes operate and where problems exist. This evidence is particularly relevant for regions that face water scarcity and conflicts. In this study, we present a criteria-based and participatory sustainability appraisal of water governance in a region with such characteristics-the dry tropics of NW Costa Rica. Data collection included 47 interviews and three stakeholder workshops. The appraisal was conducted through a collaborative and iterative process between researchers and stakeholders. Out of the 25 sustainability criteria used, seven posed a significant challenge for the governance regime. We found challenges faced by the governance regime primarily clustered around and were re-enforced by failing coordination related to the use, management, and protection of groundwater resources; and inadequate leadership to identify collective goals and to constructively deliberate alternative ways of governing water with diverse groups. The appraisal yielded some positive impact in the study area, yet we found its application provided only limited strategic information to support broader problem-solving efforts. Insights from this study suggest key starting points for sustainable water governance in the Central American dry tropics, including investing in increasingly influential collective organizations that are already active in water governance; and leveraging policy windows that can be used to build confidence and disperse more governing authority to regional and local governing actors that are in-tune with the challenges faced in the dry tropics. We conclude the article with reflections on how to produce research results that are actionable for sustainable water governance.

What Can Be Expected from International Frameworks to Regulate Large-Scale Land and Water Acquisitions in Sub-Saharan Africa?

AbstractThis paper explores the use of international governance frameworks as being one of the ways to regulate large-scale land acquisitions (LSLAs). LSLAs are currently flourishing in both developed and developing countries, in particular in the sub-Saharan Africa region. Although they can potentially have many positive impacts in rural areas, many LSLAs have been shown to mainly produce negative impacts in poor countries with weak national policy and institutional frameworks and poorly defined rights for rural people. To successfully regulate the occurrence of LSLAs and their impacts, it needs to be understood that LSLAs are more complex than they are usually portrayed as being. Some of the complexities pertain to water issues; provenience of investors; legality and legitimacy of acquisitions; as well as the diversity of actors and the people affected. Against this background, five international frameworks are looked at: human rights, voluntary international guidelines, international global water governance regimes and bi-/multilateral river treaties, and voluntary private standards and codes. The paper concludes that the frameworks reviewed provide valuable guidance regarding LSLAs, but no single approach can help in dealing with the multitude of actors, situations, and impacts of LSLAs. Even if they are considered collectively, they can tackle many but not all challenges. Yet, their implementation could substantially improve the process and the impact of LSLAs, including their refusal. A key question is how these frameworks are deployed at the local level. Some rely on translation into national laws and on their implementation, others try to establish a direct linkage between the international and the local level. It is of great interest to study how international frameworks trickle down to local policy arenas, how they are used by stakeholders, and how they are finally shaping conflicts at the local level and affecting their results. In particular, their potential for empowering poor stakeholders should be of interest for research and development.

Adaptive capacity in a Chilean context: A questionable model for Latin America

• We assess the governance related adaptive capacity of a river basin in Chile. • We examine governance indicators and adaptive responses to past drought events. • Present coping mechanisms may undermine long term resilience. • Governance barriers block transformative approaches to climate change. Climate change impacts are already being keenly observed in the Andes, with significant implications for water use due to alterations in both volumes and seasonality from changes in snow and ice. Concurrently, the style of water governance in Chile has long been held up by international institutions such as the World Bank as a potential model for other Latin American countries seeking to reform their own water governance frameworks. In light of both these issues, a closer inspection of the Chilean water governance context in relation to its adaptive capacity to climate change is warranted. To this end, a governance-related adaptive capacity assessment was applied to a Chilean river basin, the Aconcagua in Region V that focussed on both short and long term resilience, as well as proactive and reactive capacity. Results show that for the Aconcagua Region, the Chilean water governance regime demonstrates significant challenges in adapting to increasingly recurrent and intense periods of drought. Reactive coping techniques for climate variability can be quickly mobilised through the networks that exist. However, longer term preparations and transformative approaches for meeting the mounting challenges of climate change are blocked by lack of trust and cooperation, lack of agency at regional operational levels and lack of accessible and appropriate information on water resources.

Adaptive Capacity of Water Governance: Cases From the Alps and the Andes

The Alps and the Andes are both considered water towers in their respective continents and are thus significant not only for their own water needs but also for those of lowland regions farther downstream. As climate change impacts on the hydrology of mountain regions are increasingly observed, attention is turning to the adaptive capacity of the water governance regimes in mountain communities. This paper explores the adaptive capacity of two contrasting water governance regimes in the Swiss Alps and the Chilean Andes. It assesses adaptive capacity by analyzing a set of governance-related adaptive capacity indicators in the context of recent extreme events, which serve as proxies for future climate change. Across these highly contrasted governance contexts, analysis reveals both similar and distinct institutional challenges for developing and mobilizing adaptive capacity in relation to climatic uncertainty and change. It also identifies emergent tensions related to temporal and spatial scales. Conclusions point to the need to focus on challenges relating to trust, integration of hydroclimatic information, and flexibility and iterativity of rules and plans across governance scales to better manage the exacerbating impacts of both climate variability and climate change.

Water Governance in Chile and Canada: a Comparison of Adaptive Characteristics

We compare the structures and adaptive capacities of water governance regimes that respond to water scarcity or drought in the South Saskatchewan River Basin (SSRB) of western Canada and the Elqui River Basin (EB) in Chile. Both regions anticipate climate change that will result in more extreme weather events including increasing droughts. The SSRB and the EB represent two large, regional, dryland water basins with significant irrigated agricultural production but with significantly different governance structures. The Canadian governance situation is characterized as decentralized multilevel governance with assigned water licenses; the Chilean is characterized as centralized governance with privatized water rights. Both countries have action at all levels in relation to water scarcity or drought. This structural comparison is based on studies carried out in each region assessing the adaptive capacity of each region to climate variability in the respective communities and applicable governance institutions through semistructured qualitative interviews. Based on this comparison, conclusions are drawn on the adaptive capacity of the respective water governance regimes based on four dimensions of adaptive governance that include: responsiveness, learning, capacity, including information, leadership, and equity. The result of the assessment allows discussion of the significant differences in terms of ability of distinct governance structures to foster adaptive capacity in the rural sector, highlights the need for a better understanding of the relationship of adaptive governance and good governance, and the need for more conceptual work on the interconnections of the dimensions of adaptive governance.

Water governance regimes

The concept of water governance is distinctive through its focus on not only public in- tervention, but also on self-organisation as a way to deal with water issues. This article first elaborates a framework with five dimensions to describe governance regimes. Thereafter it illustrates and uses this analytical framework with a cross country comparison of the evolu- tion towards more integrated water governance regimes. Furthermore four qualities of such regimes are introduced and used to assess the degree to which a governance regime is support- ive for integral and adaptive water management. Lastly the article explores how governance regimes evolve over time and what forces shape this combination of stability and dynamics.

Institutional Fit and River Basin Governance: a New Approach Using Multiple Composite Measures

The notion that effective environmental governance depends in part on achieving a reasonable fit between institutional arrangements and the features of ecosystems and their interconnections with users has been central to much thinking about social-ecological systems for more than a decade. Based on expert consultations this study proposes a set of six dimensions of fit for water governance regimes and then empirically explores variation in measures of these in 28 case studies of national parts of river basins in Europe, Asia, Latin America, and Africa drawing on a database compiled by the Twin2Go project. The six measures capture different but potentially important dimensions of fit: allocation, integration, conservation, basinization, participation, and adaptation. Based on combinations of responses to a standard questionnaire filled in by groups of experts in each basin we derived quantitative measures for each indicator. Substantial variation in these measures of fit was apparent among basins in developing and developed countries. Geographical location is not a barrier to high institutional fit; but within basins different measures of fit often diverge. This suggests it is difficult, but not impossible, to simultaneously achieve a high fit against multiple challenging conditions. Comparing multidimensional fit profiles give a sense of how well water governance regimes are equipped for dealing with a range of natural resource and use-related conditions and suggests areas for priority intervention. The findings of this study thus confirm and help explain previous work that has concluded that context is important for understanding the variable consequences of institutional reform on water governance practices as well as on social and environmental outcomes.

Critiquing Cooperation: Transboundary Water Governance and Adaptive Capacity in the Orange‐Senqu Basin

Abstract:This article analyzes the effects of the Orange‐Senqu transboundary water governance regime on adaptive capacity by examining the influence of international water management institutions and interstate interactions on treaty flexibility, information management, actor networks, and financial resources. This study provides fresh insights into the dynamic effects of transboundary water governance. This is done by tracing changes in the components of adaptive capacity and the patterns of resource use and allocation over the regime's life and by determining the extent to which observed changes are caused by regime performance or other factors. Drawing on document analysis and in‐depth interviews, this article examines the assumption that cooperation between riparian states will enhance the ability of parties to recognize and respond to changing circumstances. It also examines the factors enabling and constraining reflexivity and joint planning in the basin.

From applying panaceas to mastering complexity: Toward adaptive water governance in river basins

Abstract The most persistent obstacles for the sustainable management of water resources lie in the realm of water governance. Numerous recommendations often relying on simplistic ‘standard’ panaceas have been put forward for water governance reform without testing of appropriateness in diverse contexts. Here we present the first comprehensive comparative analysis of complex water governance and management systems in national river basins, compiling insights from 29 basins in developed and developing/emerging countries. To support a generic but contextual diagnostic approach an analytical framework was developed that makes a distinction between water governance regime, regime performance and environmental and socio-economic context. Results provide evidence that polycentric governance regimes characterized by a distribution of power but effective coordination structures have higher performance. This finding is valid for diverse contexts. The results show a weaker and more context dependent influence of legal frameworks on performance. The ability to respond to challenges from climate change is strongly related to polycentric governance and innovative ways for dealing with uncertainty. Furthermore, our results support findings that economic and institutional development often focuses on and leads to fulfilling needs of the human population at the expense of the environment. Rivers in comparatively good condition in countries with poor governance regimes highlight the urgent need to develop effective water governance structures in parallel to economic development. These exploratory analyses provide valuable methodological and conceptual insights and pave the way for follow-up studies to build a comprehensive knowledge base on complex resource governance systems and diverse management practices worldwide.

What influences climate information use in water management? The role of boundary organizations and governance regimes in Brazil and the U.S.

Managing water resources to be resilient to climate-related risks calls for more adaptive and integrative water management with improved accessibility and use of climate information. However, there is relatively limited understanding of the mechanisms that promote information uptake and use in decision-making and planning across a range of water management approaches. We use qualitative and quantitative data to explore the role of different (1) institutions and water governance regimes and (2) knowledge support systems in shaping climate information use in the United States (U.S.) and Brazil. We argue that climate knowledge use among water managers is critically influenced by both the kind of water regime shaping governance—in this case IWRM and conventional approaches—and by the presence and character of knowledge systems producing and brokering climate information. In the cases studied, this research finds that, despite the positive influence of IWRM institutions in pushing for climate information use, other factors such as decision-makers’ culture, level of risk averseness and management priorities might be more influential in shaping climate information uptake. Similarly, for conventional management, results suggest that, in Arizona, state planning policies may have played a limited role in advancing climate information use. Overwhelmingly, individual water manager behavior (e.g., information seeking) and risk perception spur consideration of climate information in planning and decision-making. The cases also suggest that more than institutions, it is interaction in the context of an integrated boundary organization that best predicts higher use of climate information by water managers.

Turmoil in the Nile River Basin: Back to the Future?

Since the end of the Cold War, the Nile co-basin states have been moving towards constructing a regional water governance regime. The focus has been on how to promote cooperative harmonization of the water needs and growth priorities of all basin countries. Unfortunately, the effort appears to have come to a screeching halt, resuscitating old fears of potential inter-riparian conflicts. This paper examines the evolution of contentious politics of hydrology in the Nile basin in light of the regional and international approaches that have hitherto been employed to bring the co-basin states together on the importance of peaceful utilization of Nile waters.

Water, People, and Sustainability—A Systems Framework for Analyzing and Assessing Water Governance Regimes

Freshwater resources might become the most limited resource in the future due to rising demands, climate change, and the degradation of aquatic ecosystems. While the urgency of this challenge is uncontested, water governance regimes still struggle to employ suitable responses. They lack of: taking a comprehensive perspective on water systems; focusing on social actors, their actions, needs, intentions, and norms as drivers of water systems; engaging in a discourse on tangible goals to provide direction for governance efforts; and promoting a comprehensive perspective on water sustainability that equally recognizes depletion, justice, and livelihood issues in the long-term. We present an approach that intends to overcome these limitations by putting the focus on what people do with water, and why, along with the impacts of these doings. First, we outline an integrated approach to water governance regimes, and then, we present a holistic set of principles by which to evaluate sustainable water governance. Solution-oriented research applying this approach integrates natural sciences and engineering perspectives on water systems with social science studies on water governance, while also specifying and applying normative principles for water sustainability. The approach we develop herein can be used to reform and innovate existing water governance regimes as well as stimulate transformative governance research.