Samenvatting
Summary literature Transitions In Water Management
- Instelling
- Rijksuniversiteit Groningen (RuG)
Summary articles Transitions In Water Management
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 4 van de 79 pagina's
Voorbeeld 4 van de 79 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Summary Articles of Transitions in Water ManagementLecture 1:
Schoeman, J., Allen, C. & Finlayson, C.M. (2014). A new paradigm for water? A comparative
review of integrated, adaptive and ecosystembased water management in the Anthropocene.
Introduction
- The ‘new paradigm’ reflects the recognition that human induced global change is so
persuasive that some argue the earth has entered a new geological epoch: the
Anthropocene. Key features of the Anthropocene are:
- Accelerated climate change
- Altered biogeochemical and hydrological cycles,
- Extensive loss of biodiversity
- These changes are driven by social changes, starting with expanding human settlements
and followed by industrialization. The expansion of communities with their need for water,
energy and other resources has led to degradation of ecosystems. Especially water
resources are threatened: while water needs are rising, threads to water security are
increasing.
- There are three related approaches that are emerging in the new water paradigm:
- Integrated water research management (IWRM),
- Ecosystem-based approaches (EBAs), and
- Adaptive management (AM)
Background: the rise of a new paradigm
- A paradigm is a shared pattern of seeing and thinking about the world, based on
assumptions, values and practices. Paradigms are rarely observed, since they are
unconscious, but the scale of the current change requires examination. Paradigms are
examined through observing:
- The nature of the systems being managed
- The goals of management
- The best approach to solve problems
- Conventional ‘command-and-control management’ assumes predictable change in
natural systems. The goal of water management in this paradigm was to maximize
resource exploitation and characterized by; central institutions, limited stakeholder
involvement, expert-led, and mechanical engineering solutions.
- The Anthropocene demands integrated water management approaches that perceive
people and ecosystems as interconnected entities.
- Features of the (still developing) new paradigm are:
- The conceptualization of social-ecological systems as complex, adaptive systems
that are unpredictable and difficult to control
- A shift in goals of water management to include sustainability, water security and
adaptive capacity
- The implementation of integrative and adaptive management approaches and
dialogic problem solving
1
, - The new paradigm aims for broader stakeholder participation to give attention to human
dimensions (needs, wants, values, behaviors)
- IWRM: Promotes sustainable social and economic development by providing a
governance platform for actors to negotiate at water basin scale
- EBAs: Directed toward conservation through strategies and valuation of ecosystem
services for improved decision making
- AM: Implements policies as ‘experiments’, following a cycle of planning, doing monitoring
and evaluating that encourages learning about the system that is being managed
- AM and EBAs have scientific foundation in complex adaptive systems theory. IWRM has
roots in the theory of communicative rationality.
Integrated water resources management
- IWRM aims to address two complex problems: sustainable development and cross-
sectoral planning.
- IWRM is a process that promotes co-ordinated development and management of water,
land and related resources to maximize economic and social welfare without
compromising sustainability of vital systems.
- IWRM has received criticism for:
- The ambiguities in defining IWRM and the science behind its development,
- Difficulty of reforming ingrained institutions,
- The ‘one size fits all’ approach
- IWRM encourages centralization and bureaucracy; it applies a version of rationality that
can be used to push political agendas and preserve the institutional barriers it is intended
to overcome.
- IWRM has a “schizophrenic/split character”: there is a tension between the normative
aspect (shared dialogue and inclusion of multiple views) and the descriptive aspect
(impossibility of true integration due to fundamental power differences of stakeholders).
- In addition, effective IWRM needs water management jurisdictions that are based on
catchment boundaries, but these can be considered inappropriate since catchment areas
are not economically or socially relevant units for society.
- IWRM may result in problems between water and other institutions (e.g. planning,
agriculture)
Ecosystem-based approaches
- EBAs is a collection of strategies that aim for the integrated management of land, water,
and societies as components of ecosystems.
- EBAs seek a balance of conservation on the one hand and human use on the other.
- EBAs have been widely applied for marine, wetland and terrestrial planning (e.g. Ramsar
Convention on Wetlands). More recently, ecosystem-based adaptation has gained
support as a critical response to climate change.
- EBAs holistically encompasse links between wetland ecosystem services, drivers of
change, and human well-being and poverty reduction. → human-economy-nature
interactions.
- Ecosystem services can be grouped in four categories:
2
, - Provisioning: production of food and water
- Regulating: control of climate and disease
- Supporting: photosynthesis, nutrient and water cycling, crop pollination
- Cultural: encompassing spiritual and recreational benefits.
- EBAs create an incentive for conservation by making explicit the trade-offs in ecosystem
services associated with different resource-use options.
- EBA incorporating ecosystem services analysis would consider opportunity costs, which
in economics refers tot the value of the forgone alternative, when a good is harvested.
- For greener economies, environmental costs must be internalized into market economy.
- EBAs faced criticisms similar to IWRM: ambiguity in definitions and a disappointing
migration from theory to practice. In addition, the contribution of ecosystem services
valuation to ecosystem management has not been as convincing as imagined.
- Valuing nature based on how well it serves human wants (commodifying nature) erodes
nature's intrinsic value, creating a moral dilemma.
- While ecosystem services assessments provide information for decision making, moral
considerations can only be addressed by defining collective values through legislative
debate and participatory processes.
Adaptive management
- The integration that IWRM and EBAs aim for can, in theory, be achieved through AM.
- AM involves ‘learning by doing’, as adaptive practitioners treat management interventions
as experiments.
- AM uses a cycle of feedback mechanisms to shape policy, followed by further
experimentation.
- The approach enables decision making despite uncertainty, it recognizes the complexity
and unpredictability of ecosystems.
- AM, however, remains more an ideal than reality. It faces issues similar to IWRM and
EBAs; ambiguity of definition, complexity, institutional barriers and costs.
- The most significant obstacles to AM are cultural rather than technical: it leads to box-
ticking rather than learning and to competition rather than cooperation.
Managing water in the Anthropocene: the role of IWRM, EBAs and AM
- Despite the criticism on IWRM, EBAs and AM, each has particular strengths that can be
complementary. Combining these is desirable for effective water management in the
Anthropocene.
- Building adaptive capacity to respond to unforeseen changes has been advocated as a
key goal of water management, since diverse solutions that embrace multiple perspectives
are likely to be more effective than universal remedies.
- The combined strengths of IWRM, EBAs and AM may assist water management, since:
- Broad stakeholder participation builds adaptive capacity via sharing knowledge
- Institutions and monitoring based on hydrological boundaries may improve
cohesion
- The political process of IWRM is a platform for resolving conflicts
3
, - EBAs’ focus on conservation and restoration may slow environmental degradation
and biodiversity loss
- The systematic learning and improvement cycles of AM are critical for enabling
management action and rapid learning despite uncertain conditions
- The complexities of the Anthropocene require a strong focus on social learning.
- A number of tensions and trade-offs may arise in the new water paradigm when institutions
strive to be both integrative and adaptive (e.g., integration of a broad range of stakeholders
will be at the expense of flexibility)
- The integration of IWRM with AM and EBAs is also a source of tension in democratic
decision-making processes that use more than just scientific information.
- The “information deficit” model of science communication refers to the assumption that
people will change their opinions and behavior when presented with new information.
However, human behavior shows a more complex relationship between knowledge and
actions, since people also draw on religious beliefs, culture, history and personal
experiences.
- Therefore, genuine engagement through political processes that appeals to people’s
hopes, values and morals is essential for solving water management problems.
Conclusion
- This review has illustrated how the underlying philosophy of EBAs and IWRM is
remarkably similar in terms of their shared goals of equity, human well-being and
sustainability.
- Some researchers and practitioners view water management as a process where human
and environmental needs are traded off, while others argue that through participatory
processes and social learning, new understandings may emerge that are more beneficial
than the positions that result from a process of trading off.
- The political, ethical and moral considerations can only be addressed through deliberation
and the definition of a collective vision for society.
- Building on the strengths and managing the tensions between IWRM, EBAs, and AM could
lead to a more robust, systemic approach to water management as social and
environmental interactions become more complex in the Anthropocene
4
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper liekemijnheer. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €8,49. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 52355 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen