Vernacular Knowledge and Water Management - Towards the Integration of Expert Science and Local Knowledge in Ontario, Canada

Complex environmental problems cannot be solved using expert science alone. Rather, these kinds of problems benefit from problem-solving processes that draw on ‘vernacular’ knowledge. Vernacular knowledge integrates expert science and local knowledge with community beliefs and values. Collaborative approaches to water problem-solving can provide forums for bringing together diverse, and often competing, interests to produce vernacular knowledge through deliberation and negotiation of solutions. Organised stakeholder groups are participating increasingly in such forums, often through involvement of networks, but it is unclear what roles these networks play in the creation and sharing of vernacular knowledge. A case-study approach was used to evaluate the involvement of a key stakeholder group, the agricultural community in Ontario, Canada, in creating vernacular knowledge during a prescribed multi-stakeholder problem-solving process for source water protection for municipal supplies. Data sources – including survey questionnaire responses, participant observation, and publicly available documents – illustrate how respondents supported and participated in the creation of vernacular knowledge. The results of the evaluation indicate that the respondents recognised and valued agricultural knowledge as an information source for resolving complex problems. The research also provided insight concerning the complementary roles and effectiveness of the agricultural community in sharing knowledge within a prescribed problem-solving process

Bioengineering horizon scan 2020.

Horizon scanning is intended to identify the opportunities and threats associated with technological, regulatory and social change. In 2017 some of the present authors conducted a horizon scan for bioengineering (Wintle et al., 2017). Here we report the results of a new horizon scan that is based on inputs from a larger and more international group of 38 participants. The final list of 20 issues includes topics spanning from the political (the regulation of genomic data, increased philanthropic funding and malicious uses of neurochemicals) to the environmental (crops for changing climates and agricultural gene drives). The early identification of such issues is relevant to researchers, policy-makers and the wider public

The Achievement of a Decentralized Water Management Through Stakeholder Participation: An Example from the Drôme River Catchment Area in France (1981–2008)

International audienceDifferent water Acts (e.g., the European Water Framework Directive) and stakeholders involved in aquatic affairs have promoted integrated river basin management (IRBM) over recent decades. However, few studies have provided feedback on these policies. The aim of the current article is to fill this gap by exploring how local newspapers reflect the implementation of a broad public participation within a catchment of France known for its innovation with regard to this domain. The media coverage of a water management strategy in the Drôme watershed from 1981 to 2008 was investigated using a content analysis and a geographic information system (GIS). We sought to determine what public participation and decentralized decision-making can be in practice. The results showed that this policy was integrated because of its social perspective, the high number of involved stakeholders, the willingness to handle water issues, and the local scale suitable for participation. We emphasized the prominence of the watershed scale guaranteed by the local water authority. This area was also characterized by compromise, arrangements, and power dynamics on a fine scale. We examined the most politically engaged writings regarding water management, which topics each group emphasized, and how the groups agreed and disagreed on issues based on their values and context. The temporal pattern of participation implementation was progressive but worked by fits and starts

Rethinking water governance: moving beyond water-centric perspectives in a connected and changing world

From the “water-centric” perspective that is common within the world’s large and diverse water community, water is of central importance, and improving water governance is self-evidently essential. Some water problems can be addressed using water-centric approaches such as watershed management. Unfortunately, evidence is mounting that suggests that many other water problems cannot because their causes and drivers, at scales from local to global, are partly or wholly external to those traditionally considered within the water sector. Water governance in these cases needs to better account for a range of external connections that strongly influence water-related outcomes of concern and contribute to governance failures. These connections frequently manifest through external actors, drivers, and institutions. We address this issue by critically reflecting on the limitations of water-centric perspectives; surveying the water governance literature to identify external connections that can influence water governance; examining the extent to which four major approaches address actors, drivers, and institutions that connect water governance to other sectors and decision making situations (Integrated Water Resources Management, water security, water-energy-food nexus, water resilience); and considering key conceptual and practical challenges of moving beyond water-centric approaches where this is warranted. Building on emerging thinking within the water community, we propose that key open questions requiring urgent attention relate to reconciling water-centric and non-water-centric approaches, thinking critically about boundary judgments, and re-thinking conceptual and practical approaches to water governance to better account for external connections. The article contributes to emerging conversations about the future of water governance in an increasingly complex, connected and rapidly changing world