Public participation in water resources management: Stakeholder voices on degree, scale, potential, and methods in future water management

Ambio

Volumn 34, Issue 7, 2005, Pages 495-500

  Jonsson, Anna ^a  

^a Campus Norrköping ^*  (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

LOCAL PARTICIPATION; PARTICIPATORY APPROACH; STAKEHOLDER; WATER MANAGEMENT;

EURASIA; EUROPE; NORTHERN EUROPE; SCANDINAVIA; SWEDEN;

EID: 28544435330     PISSN: 00447447     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1579/0044-7447-34.7.495     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Johnson, N., Munk Ravnborg, H., Westerman, O. and Probst, K. 2001. User participation in watershed management and research. Water Policy 3, 507-520.
2. Swallow, B.M., Johnson, N. and Meinzen-Dick, R.S. 2001. Working with people for watershed management. Water Policy 3, 449-455.
3. Blomqvist, A. 2004. How can stakeholder participation improve European watershed management? The Water Framework Directive, watercourse groups and Swedish contributions to Baltic Sea eutrophication. Water Policy 6, 39-52.
4. Andersson, L., Bonell, M. and Moody, D.W. 2004. Foreword to Special Thematic Issue: Hydrology for the Environment, Life and Policy (HELP) Programme. Water Resour. Dev. 20, 267-274.
5. Liedberg Jönsson, B. 2004. Stakeholder participation as a tool for sustainable development in the Em River basin. Water Resour. Dev. 20, 345-352.
6. Creighton, J.L., Dunning, C.M., Priscolli, J.D. and Ayres, D.B. 1998. Public Involvement and Dispute Resolution: A Reader on the Second Decade of Experience at the Institute for Water Resources. IWR Report 82-R-5. U.S. Corps of Engineers, Alexandria, Virginia, p. 471.
7. Montin, S. 1998. Local Experiments of Democracy: Examples and Analysis. Fritzes, Stockholm (In Swedish).
8. Lauber, T.B. and Knuth, B.A. 2000. Citizen Participation in Natural Resource Management: A Synthesis of HDRU Research. HDRU Series No 00-7. Department of Natural Resources, Human Dimensions Research Unit, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA, 32 pp.
9. Priscolli, J.D. 1998. Public involvement, conflict management, and dispute resolution in water resources and environmental decision making. In: Public Involvement and Dispute Resolution: A Reader on the Second Decade of Experience at the Institute for Water Resources. Creighton, J.L., Dunning, C.M., Priscolli, J.D. and Ayres, D.B. IWR Report 82-R-5. U.S. Corps of Engineers, Alexandria, Virginia, pp. 41-58.
10. Hanchey, J.R. 1998. The objectives of public participation. In: Public Involvement Techniques: A Reader of Ten Years Experience at the Institute for Water Resources. Creighton, J.L., Priscolli, J.D. and Dunning, C.M. (eds.). IWR Research Report 82-R-1. U.S. Corps of Engineers, Alexandria, Virginia, pp. 21-30.
11. Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing of the Commons - The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
12. Ostrom, E., Schroeder, L. and Wynne, S. 1993. Institutional Incentives and Sustainable Development. Infrastructure Policies in Perspective. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
13. Marshall, G.R. 1999. Economics of Incorporating Public Participation in Efforts to Redress Degradation of Agricultural Land. 43rd Annual Conference of the Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society and the 6th Annual Conference of the New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, Christchurch, New Zealand, 20-22 January.
14. Munch, P. 1998. Benefits and costs of the public involvement program Sanibel Island. In: Public Involvement Techniques: A Reader of Ten Years Experience at the Institute for Water Resources. Creighton, J.L., Priscolli, J.D. and Dunning, C.M. (eds.). IWR Research Report 82-R-1. U.S. Corps of Engineers, Alexandria, Virginia, pp. 407-418.
15. Olsson, J. and Montin, S. (eds). 1999. Democracy as Experiment: Endeavour and Renewal in Swedish Municipalities. Novemus, Örebro (In Swedish).
16. Beierle, T.C. 1998. Public Participation in Environmental Decisions: An Evaluation Framework Using Social Goals. Discussion Paper 99-06. Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C., 31 pp.
17. Kallis, G. and Butler, D. 2001. The EU water framework directive: measures and implications. Water Policy 3, 125-142.
18. Council of the European Communities 2000. Directive 2000/60/EG of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy. Official Journal of the European Communities, 12 December, L327/1.
19. European Commission. 2003. Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) Guidance Document no. 8. Public Participation in Relation to the Water Framework Directive. Working group 2.9 - Public Participation.
20. Ebbesson, J. 2003. Environmental Legislation. Iustus, Uppsala (In Swedish).
21. Government of Sweden, Ministry of Justice. 2000. Public Access to Information and Secrecy with Swedish Authorities: Information concerning Secrecy, Legislation etc. Stockholm, 31 pp.
22. Ministry of Environment. 1997. A New Administration of Water. Water Is Life! Committee on Catchment Districts. SOU 1997:99. Government of Sweden, Fritzes, Stockholm (In Swedish).
23. Ministry of Environment 1997. Collaboration in Water Management. Final Report of the Committee on Catchment Districts. SOU 1997:155. Government of Sweden, Fritzes, Stockholm (In Swedish).
24. Ministry of Environment. 2000. The Future Environment - Our Common Responsibility. Final Report of the Committee on Environmental Objectives, SOU 2000:52. Government of Sweden, Fritzes, Stockholm (In Swedish with English summary).
25. Ministry of Environment. 2002. Clear as Water. Final Report of the Committee on Swedish Water Administration, SOU 2002:105. Government of Sweden, Fritzes, Stockholm (In Swedish with English summary).
26. Eckerberg, K. and Brundin, P. 2000. Local Agenda 21 - A Study of 10 Swedish Municipalities. Kommentus, Stockholm (In Swedish with English summary).
27. Edström, C. and Eckerberg, K. 2002. Preceding Johannesburg: Agenda 21 - Work in Swedish Municipalities - A Comparison over Time. Umeå Universitet, National Committee for Agenda 21 and Habitat, Department of Political Science, 32 pp. (In Swedish).
28. Forsberg, B. 2002. Local Agenda 21 for Sustainable Development: A Study of the Environmental Issue in a Society of Growth. PhD Thesis, Umeå University (In Swedish with English summary).
29. See Jonsson, A., Danielsson, I. and Jöborn, A. 2005. Designing a multipurpose methodology for strategic environmental research: the Rönneå catchment dialogues. Ambio 34, 489-494.
30. The six methods were chosen so as to represent a wide range of different qualities in terms of target groups, flow of information (one way/two way), competencies and costs, and required effort from stakeholders (see Jonsson, A. 2004. Methods for increased public participation. In: Sustainable Water Management - Organisation, Participation, Influence, Economy. Lundqvist, L.J.(ed.). VASTRA, Gothenburg, pp. 87-103 ([In Swedish]). In the interpretation of results, it must be kept in mind that the popularity of a certain method should be interpreted as the popularity of the qualities of that and similar methods.
31. European Commission. 2002. Water Is Life. Water Framework Directive. Information leaflet, 4 pp.
32. Local authority: round I.
33. Local authority: round I.
34. See also Alkan-Olsson, J. and Berg, K. 2005. Local stakeholders' acceptance of model-generated data used as a communication tool in water management: the Rönneå Study. Ambio 34, 507-512.
35. Farmer: round I.
36. "Utbor."
37. Farmer: round II.
38. Point source: round II.
39. Andersson, L., Rosberg, J., Pers, L., Olsson, J. and Arheimer, B. 2005. Estimating catchment nutrient flow with the HBV-NP model: sensitivity to input data. Ambio 34, 507-512.
40. Recreational interest: round II.
41. Meadowcroft, J. 2004. Citizens, communities, organisations, and government: public participation in decision-making for sustainable development. In: Governance for Sustainable Development: The Challenge of Adapting Form to Function. Lafferty, W.M. (ed.). Edward Elgar, London, pp. 162-190.
42. For example, "Handla Miljövänligt-vecka," "Bonde på stan," "Möllans dag."
43. Farmer: round I.
44. Authority: round II.
45. Authority: round II.
46. Recreational interests: round I.
47. Farmer: round I.
48. This study was performed within the Swedish Water Management Research Program (VASTRA), which is financed by the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research (MISTRA).