Assessing framing of uncertainties in water management practice

Dealing with uncertainties in water management is an important issue and is one which will only increase in light of global changes, particularly climate change. So far, uncertainties in water management have mostly been assessed from a scientific point of view, and in quantitative terms. In this paper, we focus on the perspectives from water management practice, adopting a qualitative approach. We consider it important to know how uncertainties are framed in water management practice in order to develop practice relevant strategies for dealing with uncertainties. Framing refers to how people make sense of the world. With the aim of identifying what are important parameters for the framing of uncertainties in water management practice, in this paper we analyze uncertainty situations described by decision-makers in water management. The analysis builds on a series of ¿Uncertainty Dialogues¿ carried out within the NeWater project with water managers in the Rhine, Elbe and Guadiana basins in 2006. During these dialogues, representatives of these river basins were asked what uncertainties they encountered in their professional work life and how they confronted them. Analysing these dialogues we identified several important parameters of how uncertainties get framed. Our assumption is that making framing of uncertainty explicit for water managers will allow for better dealing with the respective uncertainty situations. Keywords Framing - Uncertainty - Water management practic

Re-(Framing) Uncertainties in Water Management Practice

Management of water resources is afflicted with uncertainties. Nowadays it is facing more and new uncertainties since pace and dimension of changes (e.g. climatic, demographic) are accelerating and are likely to increase even more in the future. Hence it is crucial to find pragmatic ways to deal with these uncertainties in water management. This thesis argues for an analytical yet pragmatic approach to enable decision-makers to deal with uncertainties in a more explicit and systematic way and allow for better informed decisions. The approach is based on the concept of framing and mental models, referring to different ways in which people make sense of the world and of uncertainties. It is analysed how uncertainties are framed and dealt with in water management practice and strategies are elaborated how dealing with uncertainties can be improved in water management practice. The research for this thesis has been closely linked to the EU research project NeWater (New Approaches to Adaptive Water Management under Uncertainty, www.newater.uos.de) (2005-2009). It draws on practical experiences of water managers at local and regional level in river basin management in three case studies, i.e. the German Wupper, the Dutch Kromme Rijn, both sub basins of the river Rhine, and the Doñana region located in the Guadalquivir Estuary in Spain. For the assessment of framing of uncertainty two different methods were developed and applied in the three river basins. Both aim at identifying parameters of importance in the process of framing uncertainty in order to understand how uncertainties get framed. The empirical research confirmed that indeed water managers are faced with a range of uncertainties and that so far no systematic approaches are applied for dealing with those in management practice. The results in the case studies suggest that there are no universal findings as to how actors frame uncertainties but rather that framings are dependent on the respective uncertainty situation, on roles (e.g. project leader, public administration, scientist etc.), and most often on personal traits. The case study findings moreover suggest that there are no universally valid parameters of influence in the framing of uncertainties. Neither could a clear superiority of one approach over the other be discerned. Nonetheless, the parameters of framing of uncertainty proved to be a supportive tool for preparing and structuring decision-making in the case studies and developing improvement options for dealing with uncertainty. Beyond the results of the development of approaches for the assessment of framing of uncertainty in water management practice, processes of communication and learning turned out to be of major importance. Making framings of uncertainties explicit by help of parameters of framing proved to be useful in the case studies for revealing different points of views on the uncertainties and with regard to the strategies to deal with them. This is a first step in enabling dialogue among opposed framers and an important precondition for reframing and learning which is crucial for the long-term performance in management of natural resources

Facilitating Transitional Processes in Rigid Institutional Regimes for Water Management and Wetland Conservation: Experience from the Guadalquivir Estuary

Traditional policies for water resources management and wetland conservation are often based on command-and-control approaches. The latter tend to drive the human-wetland-water system into pathological states, characterized by more vulnerable ecosystems and rigid institutions for governance. The overcoming of these states may rest in the development of flexible and adaptive institutional regimes that rely on adaptive governance and management. Because past factors might constrain the implementation of more flexible adaptive approaches to management, it is important to understand the historical mechanisms underlying the genesis of institutional rigidity. We first present the results of a historical analysis of Doñana, which can be characterized as a pathological water socio-ecosystem governed through rigid institutional regimes for water resources management and wetland conservation. In a second step, we analyze the advances achieved during a recent, large-scale restoration program for the Doñana wetlands, which adhered explicitly to the tenets of adaptive management. Our analysis indicated that the historical persistence of command-and-control approaches has been a path-dependent process that led to the emergence of a rigid institutional regime and caused it to enter a rigidity trap. However, the achievements of the restoration program suggest that a more flexible and adaptive regime could be developed through the introduction of adaptive management at the operational levels, using specifically tailored action research programs. To conclude, we speculate that the research strategy outlined could be extended to comply with, or complement, the requirements of the EU's Water Framework Directive in other European water socio-ecosystems