View
2
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
© WeSenseIt Consortium
Uta Wehn de Montalvo (UNESCO-IHE)
J. Evers, M. Rusca, A. Onencan, V. Lanfranchi, F. Ciravegna
Citizen observatories of water = participatory + improved governance?
© WeSenseIt Consortium
Content
• Citizen participation in water governance - concepts • Current institutional set up – empirical results for WeSenseIt UK & NL case studies
• Potential for citizen participation
• Implications for water governance
© WeSenseIt Consortium
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN WATER GOVERNANCE - CONCEPTS
© WeSenseIt Consortium
FEEDBACK
Delivered services
PLANNING & DECISION MAKING
Opinions & concerns
KNOWLEDGE & EXPERIENCE
SHARING
Community of stakeholders
© WeSenseIt Consortium
Water Governance
Leve
l
Private sector
Public sector/ government
Civil society
National
Local
Global Institutions & policies
Water governance …. the processes and institutions through which decisions are made related to water (Lautze et al. (2011))
© WeSenseIt Consortium
Participants in decision making
national organisation citizen •N
atio
nal
org
anis
atio
n
•R
egio
nal
org
anis
atio
n
•Lo
cal a
uth
ori
ties
•Em
erg
ency
ser
vice
s
•P
riva
te s
ecto
r
•(S
cien
tifi
c) E
xper
ts
•Tr
ain
ed v
olu
nte
ers
•V
olu
nte
ers
•C
itiz
en s
cien
tist
s
•C
itiz
ens
• National organisation
• Regional organisation
• Local authorities
• Emergency services
• Private sector
• (Scientific) Experts
• Trained volunteers
• Volunteers
• Citizen scientists
• Citizens
© WeSenseIt Consortium
Communication & decision mode
social sensor technical expertise
•So
cial
sen
sor
•Li
sten
as
spec
tato
r
•H
um
an s
enso
r
•Ex
pre
ss p
refe
ren
ces
•D
evel
op
pre
fere
nce
s
•A
ggre
gate
& b
arga
in
•D
elib
erat
e &
neg
oti
ate
•Te
chn
ical
exp
ert
ise
• Social sensor
• Listen as spectator
• Human sensor
• Express preferences
• Develop preferences
• Aggregate & bargain
• Deliberate & negotiate
• Technical expertise
© WeSenseIt Consortium
Authority & Power
• Individual education
• Communicative influence
• Advise/Consult
• Co-govern
• Direct authority
individual education direct authority •In
div
idu
al e
du
cati
on
•C
om
mu
nic
ativ
e in
flu
ence
•A
dvi
se/C
on
sult
•C
o-g
ove
rn
•D
irec
t au
tho
rity
© WeSenseIt Consortium 9
Democracy Cube: citizen participation in decision making on flood risk management
Based on Fung (2006)
national organisation citizen
individ. education
direct authority
© WeSenseIt Consortium
The disaster cycle
Source: Alexander (2002)
(Prevention/protection)
© WeSenseIt Consortium
CURRENT INSTITUTIONAL SET UP - EMPIRICAL RESULTS FOR UK & NL CASE STUDIES
© WeSenseIt Consortium
Research results
Methodology • Desk research & empirical research (spring 2013) • Face-2-face, semi-structured interviews: UK (9), NL (6) preliminary; Italy pending • Interviewee groups: Local authorities, elected council members, water authorities,
emergency services, environment protection agencies, (citizens)*
* Part of separate research activity on stakeholder engagement and requirements analysis
© WeSenseIt Consortium
Citizen participation during mitigation (Doncaster) Awareness raising (schools,
communities) Community meetings: • set agenda/learn from communities • change values /manage expectations (flood causes & response) Strategy consultations
Implementation of flood risk schemes: • citizens provide supporting info on location for implementation schemes (flood w. walk about & reporting)
© WeSenseIt Consortium
Citizen participation during response (Doncaster)
Command along well-establihsed route, multi-agency effort & coordination Role for citizen participation in DM this phase: limited; Own home evacuation: citizens’ own decision Social media use by authorities: emergency services to counter rumours
© WeSenseIt Consortium 15
Adjusted democracy cube: citizen participation in decision making on flood risk management (Doncaster)
© WeSenseIt Consortium
POTENTIAL FOR CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
© WeSenseIt Consortium
Potential to improve citizen particiption?
Drivers for citizen participation in decision making
1. Formal requirements
Legislation (UK, NL) & changes in funding structure (UK, projects to benefit multiple stakeholder)
UK: Citizens involved in problem identification/agenda setting, but not decision making
NL: Citizens role indirect, via (non)-election of officials (accountability & responsibility); consulted if directly affected
2. Authorities’ views on community knowledge & needs
UK: appreciation by local authority (LA) & emergency services
Strong role of meetings and F2F contact with/among communities/stakeholders
Citizen observatory features to support this?
NL: more passive role (will be informed about plans and decisions)
Water Framework Directive (WRM, citizen involvement) Flood Risk Directive (FRA; info availability) Aarhus Convention (access to info, public particip.)
© WeSenseIt Consortium
3. Citizens´ risk perception – perceived by authorities
UK case study
Flood wardens (senior citizens) & school children: engaged; aware of risks
LA aiming for change re. citizens’ role (‘customer care’, LA as corporate parent)
But citizens’ behavioural change:
Possible via citizen observatories? How?
Impact: importance of peer decisions during evacuation
NL case study
Low risk awareness among citizens (policy focus on prevention rather than preparation)
Paternalistic governance style of authorities, lack of trust in citizens´ resilience (impact phase)
Potential to improve citizen particiption?
© WeSenseIt Consortium
IMPLICATIONS FOR WATER GOVERNANCE
© WeSenseIt Consortium
Implications for Water Governance
• Citizen observatory = greater participation? It depends... Degrees of improved participation possible; Local /water authorities want to control communication paradigm with citizens within observatory • Differences in citizens’ risk perception (within/across cases)
Influence degree of participation sought by them
• Challenge to filter between voiced concerns and interests Citizen observatory not a representative mechanism
• Citizen observatory = improved governance? Possible; likely to stem from improved data collection and greater
collaboration for problem identification and policy consultation
© WeSenseIt Consortium
Conclusions
• WeSenseIt citizen observatories are not a panacea for ‘good’ water governance
• They can serve to support locally-defined governance goals and objectives – and to change those goals by....
• …providing a platform a) to increase citizens’ awareness about water-related risks b) for citizens to demand and take on a stronger role in managing
water-related risks
© WeSenseIt Consortium
Thank you for your attention
Dr. Uta Wehn de Montalvo
UNESCO-IHE
u.wehndemontalvo@unesco-ihe.org
Recommended