Complement or competition in water governance? Analysing two collaborative water management arrangements in one river basin
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21697030 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Irina Mancheva (0000-0001-5582-9877, Umeå University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2020 |
| Volume | 22 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 1-18 |
| Publication date | 2020-02-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Water Policy (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1366-7017 • E-ISSN: 1996-9759 |
| Publisher | IWA Publishing (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.2166/wp.2020.202 |
| OpenAlex | W2997855998 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 37 |
This study aims at advancing collaborative governance theory by investigating the interaction between two different collaborative arrangements within the same forested area of high ecological and social value in the Vindel River basin. Semi-structured interviews, policy documents and observations of board meetings were analysed based on analytical typologies of collaborative arrangements to answer the following questions: which factors can explain why a new collaborative arrangement was established within an area where one already existed? In what way do the two arrangements compete with or complement each other? And, to what extent do they address the effects of forestry on water? The analysis shows that a new collaborative arrangement was formed because the existing arrangement did not materialise certain stakeholders' expectations. Moreover, the two collaborative arrangements do not compete but rather complement each other. The newly established organisational/action collaborative arrangement presented those stakeholders most interested in on-the-ground action with the appropriate venue while freeing them from the organisational/policy arrangement that did not match their aims. However, both arrangements experienced power misbalances as certain stakeholders were perceived as having more influence on their agenda. Collaboration at this local-regional level was found to focus on limited problems with concrete and feasible solutions, such as fish migration, rather than on the complex problems with solutions marked by ecological uncertainty and power asymmetries, e.g. diffuse pollution from forestry
Business · Collaborative governance · Corporate governance · Political science · Policy Transfer and Learning · Public Policy and Administration Research · Sustainability and Climate Change Governance · Ecology
Resolving environmental disputes
Constructing social research
A Typology of Collaboration Efforts in Environmental Management
Environmental governance
Beyond Markets and States
The black box of power in polycentric environmental governance
Power in Collaborative Approaches to Governance for Water
Incentives for Collaborative Governance
Adaptive institutions in social-ecological systems governance
Which factors spur forest owners' collaboration over forest waters
Rising policy conflicts in Europe over bioenergy and forestry
From wicked problem to governable entity? The effects of forestry on mercury in aquatic ecosystems
Public-private partnerships in a Swedish rural context - A policy tool for the authorities to achieve sustainable rural development
Does Collaboration Make Any Difference? Linking Collaborative Governance to Environmental Outcomes
Policy change implications for forest water protection in Sweden over the last 50 years
The Design and Implementation of Cross‐Sector Collaborations
Citizen, Customer, Partner
The Institutional Collective Action Framework
The Implementation of Public Policy
From Planning to Implementation
Collaborative Institutions in an Ecology of Games
| Citations per year | 0.67 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2020 - 2026 (7) |
| Highly cited | No |