On the architecture of collaboration in inter-organizational natural resource management networks

This paper reviews the architecture of collaboration that exists within inter-organizational natural resource management (NRM) networks. It presents an integrative conceptual framework designed to help operationalize the multi-level interactions that occur between different dimensions of trust, risk perception, and control as key concepts in inter-organizational collaboration. The objective is to identify and justify a series of propositions considered suitable for assessing inter-organizational NRM network collaboration through empirical work. Such an integrative conceptualization goes beyond the existing trust scholarship related to collaborative NRM, and, we argue, offers a useful starting point for further exploring some of the ‘inner’ social dynamics affecting collaborative performance using complex systems thinking. To help establish the relevance of the conceptual framework to transboundary resource governance, a survey operationalizing different dimensions of trust, perceived risk, and control is piloted in the Salish Sea, an ecosystem that spans the Canada-US border between British Columbia and Washington State. Key challenges associated with operationalizing the framework and future research needs are identified

Het Nederlands waterbeheer:Publiek vertrouwen niet vanzelfsprekend

Nederlanders hebben veel vertrouwen in Rijkswaterstaat en de waterschappen, zo blijkt uit onderzoek van Wageningen University. Dit vertrouwen lijkt vooral gebaseerd op de goede reputatie van de waterbeheerders in de historische strijd tegen het water. Net iets minder vertrouwen is er dat deze organisaties tot succesvolle oplossingen komen voor uitdagingen rond verdroging, watervervuiling, en natuurbeheer. Maar het vertrouwen in de waterbeheerders is niet vanzelfsprekend, en kent verschillende bedreigingen. Zo laat het onderzoek zien dat het afgenomen vertrouwen in overheidsinstellingen en gezagsdragers in het algemeen ook negatieve effecten heeft voor vertrouwen in waterbeheerders. Daarnaast leidt meer kennis van waterbeheer niet vanzelfsprekend tot meer vertrouwen, terwijl dit wel werd verwacht. Dit kan worden verklaard doordat meer inzicht in beheer samengaat met meer inzicht in risico’s. Dit maakt burgers kritischer, waardoor zij geneigd zijn de lat voor het waterbeheer hoger te leggen. Van waterbeheerders wordt dan verwacht dat zij alle risico’s kunnen wegnemen. Een verwachting die moeilijk kan worden waargemaakt

Understanding public trust in water managers:Findings from the Netherlands

Public trust in water managers is often considered an important precondition for the effective implementation of sustainable water-management practices. Although it is well known that general public trust in government institutions is under pressure, much less is known in the literature on water governance whether such distrust also affects general and task-specific trust of the wider public in water managers. In addition, empirical studies on the determinants of such trust seem to be scarce. To fill those gaps, this study aims to measure general and task-specific public trust in water managers in the Netherlands and to assess how a selected group of potential determinants is related to general- and task-specific trust in water managers. To this end, we employ an original survey among a representative sample of the Dutch population (N = 2262). We find that trust in water managers in the Netherlands is generally high, but that it also comes with some task-specific variations. People have more trust in the flood-protection capacities of the water managers than in the capacities to successfully manage surface-water quality, nature conservation, and drought management. Using linear regression models, we subsequently find that individual-level variations in trust in water managers are best explained by one's general level of political trust. Additionally, we also show that both risk perceptions and self-evaluations of how informed people feel themselves about water management are important factors with (curvilinear) relations with trust in water managers. Overall, we conclude that water managers are under specific conditions able to build themselves well-established reputations and relatively high trust levels based on their performances. Nevertheless, trust development is far from entirely in the hands of the water managers themselves as we also conclude that trust evaluations of water managers are not immune from negative generalized political evaluations and public perceptions on water related risks

On the architecture of collaboration in inter-organizational natural resource management networks

This paper reviews the architecture of collaboration that exists within inter-organizational natural resource management (NRM) networks. It presents an integrative conceptual framework designed to help operationalize the multi-level interactions that occur between different dimensions of trust, risk perception, and control as key concepts in inter-organizational collaboration. The objective is to identify and justify a series of propositions considered suitable for assessing inter-organizational NRM network collaboration through empirical work. Such an integrative conceptualization goes beyond the existing trust scholarship related to collaborative NRM, and, we argue, offers a useful starting point for further exploring some of the ‘inner’ social dynamics affecting collaborative performance using complex systems thinking. To help establish the relevance of the conceptual framework to transboundary resource governance, a survey operationalizing different dimensions of trust, perceived risk, and control is piloted in the Salish Sea, an ecosystem that spans the Canada-US border between British Columbia and Washington State. Key challenges associated with operationalizing the framework and future research needs are identified

A systematic review on the role of trust in the water governance literature

Trust is generally considered to play a key enabling role in water governance. Despite this notion, there have been no systematic assessments examining the way in which the literature on water governance engages with ‘trust’. Our article fills this gap by providing an overview of the way in which this literature has engaged with trust as a conceptual lens, analytical device and empirical phenomenon. Through an explorative systematic literature review of N = 200, mainly peer-reviewed journal articles, our findings reveal that the knowledge base on the role of trust in water governance is fragmented, poorly conceptualized, and contextually dispersed. We also observe that the role of trust is often understudied, especially in the context of the global south and with regard to ethnic minorities and indigenous people as the subjects of trust. We recommend that future research should build on solid empirical evidence, diversify its foci, go beyond an instrumental approach to trust and rely on clear and transparent conceptualizations that acknowledge the context-specific and dynamic nature of trust relationships. The results of this review should serve to better systemize future research and to further the understanding on the role(s) of trust in varying contexts and related to different water governance issues