Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen
A dominant form of integrated water resources management (IWRM) assumes that existing parochial path dependencies need to be overcome to transform fragmented, contested regimes into the integrative design of IWRM. This paper is an exploratory study of stakeholder perceptions around China’s Yellow River, which has been hailed as a successful case of IWRM. We find that while water reforms have ostensibly achieved a programme that adheres to the formal discourse of IWRM, subjective perceptions of the stakeholders, as revealed by the Q methodology, still display elements of a localized, fragmented narrative, requiring constant negotiation. Primary elements of the discourse include the following positions: (1) localized, contextual approaches to governance persist; (2) market efficiency and environmental protection are seen as competing goals; and (3) technology creates new gains, but constant negotiation is needed to distribute them fairly. These narratives show that rather than “overturning” old paths, the water reforms created a deliberatory arena in which old and new ideas meld into what we refer to as a “thick” institutional narrative. Our work provides a new perspective on policy change, as well as the persistence of institutional life.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Ang, P. H. (2007). Singapore media. Paper presented at the Hans Bedrow Media Institute, 31 August 2007.
Balfour, D. L., & Mesaros, W. (1994). Connecting the local narratives: Public administration as a hermeneutic science. Public Administration Review, 54, 559–564. CrossRef
Bhat, A., & Blomquist, W. (2004). Policy, politics, and water management in the Guadalquivir River Basin. Spain. Water Resources Research, 40, W08S07. doi: 10.1029/2003WR002726.
Blomquist, W., & Schlager, E. (2005). Political pitfalls of integrated watershed management. Society & Natural Resources: An International Journal, 18(2), 101–117. CrossRef
Blyth, M. (2002). Great transformations: Economic ideas and institutional change in the twentieth century. New York, USA: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
Boland, L. (1979). Knowledge and the role of institutions in economic theory. Journal of Economic Issues, 8, 957–972. CrossRef
Bressers, H., & Kuks, S. (2004). Governance of Water resources. In H. Bressers & S. Kuks (Eds.), Integrated governance and water basin management (pp. 1–21). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. CrossRef
Brunner, R., & Steelman, T. (2005). Beyond scientific management. In R. Brunner & T. Steelman (Eds.), Adaptive governance: Integrating science policy and decision making (pp. 1–46). New York, USA: Columbia University Press.
Campbell, J. L., & Pedersen, O. K. (Eds.). (2001). The rise of neoliberalism and institutional analysis. Princeton, USA: Princeton University Press.
David, P. A. (1985). Clio and the economics of QWERTY. American Economic Review, 75, 332–337.
Dodge, J., & J. Lee (2015). Framing dynamics and political gridlock: The curious case of hydraulic fracturing in New York. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning. doi: 10.1080/1523908X.2015.1116378.
Doukkali, M. R. (2005). Water institutional reforms in Morocco. Water Policy, 7, 71–88.
Durkheim, E. (1950). The rules of sociological method. Translated by S. A. Solovay and J. H. Mueller. New York, USA: The Free Press.
Durning, D. (1999). The transition from traditional to postpositive policy analysis: A role for Q-methodology. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 18, 389–410. CrossRef
Ellis, G., Barry, J., & Robinson, C. (2007). Many ways to say ‘no’, different ways to say ‘yes’: Applying Q-methodology to understand public acceptance of wind farm proposals. Journal of Environment Planning and Management, 50(4), 517–551. CrossRef
Fischhendler, I., & Heikkila, T. (2010). Does integrated water resources management support institutional change? The case of water policy reform in Israel. Ecology and Society, 15(1), 4. Retrieved from: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss1/art4/.
Gallego-Ayala, J., & Juizo, D. (2014). Integrating stakeholders’ preferences into water resources management planning in the Incomati river basin. Water Resources Management, 28(2), 527–540. CrossRef
Global Water Partnership (GWP). (2007). How IWRM will contribute to achieving the MDGs. Technical Committee Policy Brief No. 4, GWP Secretariat, Stockholm, Sweden.
Harris, E. (2011). The impact of institutional path dependence on water market efficiency in Victoria, Australia. Water Resource Management, 25(15), 4069–4080. CrossRef
Hay, C. (2001). The ‘crisis’ of Keynesianism and the rise of NeoLiberalism in Britain: An ideational institutionalist approach. In J. L. Campbell & O. Pedersen (Eds.), The rise of neoliberalism and institutional analysis (pp. 193–218). Princeton, USA: Princeton University Press.
Hay, C. (2006). Constructivist institutionalism. In S. A. Binder, R. A. W. Rhodes, & B. A. Rockman (Eds.), The oxford handbook of political institutions (pp. 56–74). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Hayek, F. (1960). The constitution of liberty. Chicago, USA: The University of Chicago Press.
Hijdra, A., Arts, J., & Woltjer, J. (2014). Do we need to rethink our waterways? Values of ageing waterways in current and future society. Water Resources Management, 29(9), 2599–2613. CrossRef
Hoppe, R. (2009). Scientific advice and public policy: Expert advisers’ and policymakers’ discourses on boundary work. Poiesis & Praxis, 6, 235–263. CrossRef
Ingram, H., & Fraser, L. (2006). Path dependency and adroit innovation: The case of California water. In R. C. Repetto (Ed.), Punctuated equilibrium and the dynamics of U. S. environmental policy (pp. 78–109). New Haven, USA: Yale University Press.
Ingram, H., & Lejano, R. (2009). Transitions: transcending multiple ways of knowing water resources in the United States. In D. Huitema, & S. Meijerink (Eds.), Water policy entrepreneurs: A research companion to water transitions around the globe (pp. 61–78). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Kemper, K., Blomquist, W., & Dinar, A. (2007). Integrated river basin management through decentralization. New York, USA: Springer. CrossRef
Kidd, S., & Shaw, D. (2007). Integrated water resource management and institutional integration: Realising the potential of spatial planning in England. The Geographical Journal, 173(4), 312–329. CrossRef
Lejano, R., & Leong, C. (2012). A hermeneutic approach to explaining and understanding public controversies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(4), 793–814. CrossRef
Lejano, R., & Shankar, S. (2013). The contextualist turn and schematics of institutional fit: Theory and a case study from Southern India. Policy Sciences, 46(1), 83–102. CrossRef
Lejano, R. P., Ingram, M., & Ingram, H. (2013). The power of narrative in environmental networks. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. CrossRef
Leong, C., & Mukherjee, M. (2015). Managing the socio-ecology of very large rivers: Collective choice rules in integrated water resources management narratives. Global Environmental Change, 34, 172–184. CrossRef
Liu, C., Wang, Z. Y., & Sui, J. Y. (2007). Analysis on variation of seagoing water and sediment load in main rivers of China. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 38, 1444–1452. (in Chinese with English abstract).
Lynn, L. E, Jr. (1999). A place at the table: Policy analysis, its postpositive critics, and the future of practice. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 18, 411–425. CrossRef
Mahoney, J. (2000). Path dependence in historical sociology. Theory and Society, 29(4), 507–548. CrossRef
Matondo, J. I. (2002). A comparison between conventional and integrated water resources planning and management. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 27, 831–838. CrossRef
Mukhtarov, F., & Gerlak, A. K. (2014). Epistemic forms of integrated water resources management: Towards knowledge versatility. Policy Sciences, 47(2), 101–120. CrossRef
Mumme, S. P., & Barajas, I. A. (2003). Managing border water to the year 2020: The challenge of sustainable. United States-Mexican Border Environment, 8, 51.
Newson, M. D. (2000). Science and sustainability: Addressing the world water crisis. Progress in Environmental Science, 2, 204–228.
Ohlson, D. W. (1999). Exploring the application of adaptive management and decision analysis to integrated watershed management. Thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Pelletier, D., Kraak, V., McCullum, C., Uusitalo, U., & Rich, R. (1999). The shaping of collective values through deliberative democracy: An empirical study from New York’s North Country. Policy Sciences, 32, 103–131. CrossRef
Raadgever, G. T., Mostert, E., & van de Giesen, N. C. (2012). Learning from collaborative research in water management practice. Water Resources Management, 26(11), 3251–3266. CrossRef
Ramesh, M., Araral, E., & Wu, X. (Eds.). (2010). Reasserting the public in public services: New public management reforms. New York: Routledge.
Roe, E., & van Eeten, M. (2002). Reconciling ecosystem rehabilitation and service reliability mandates in large technical systems: Findings and implications of three major US ecosystem management initiatives for managing human-dominated aquatic-terrestrial ecosystems. Ecosystems, 5(6), 509–528. CrossRef
Schmidt, C. W. (2008). From historical institutionalism to discursive institutionalism: Explaining change in Comparative Political Economy. Paper presented at the American Political Science Association Meetings, Boston, August 2008.
Schon, D. A., & Rein, M. (1995). Frame reflection: Toward the resolution of intractable policy controversies. New York: Basic Books.
Shomar, B., Darwish, M., & Rowell, C. (2014). What does integrated water resources management from local to global perspective mean? Qatar as a case study, the very rich country with no water. Water Resources Management, 28(10), 2781–2791. CrossRef
Steelman, T. A., & Maguire, L. A. (1999). Understanding participant perspectives: Q-methodology in national forest management. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 18(3), 361–388. CrossRef
Tang, S. (2010). Social evolution of international politics: From Mearsheimer to Jervis. European Journal of International Relations, 16(1), 31–55. CrossRef
UNEP. (2006). Human development report: Beyond scarcity—Power, poverty, and the global water crisis. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan for United Nations Development Program.
Van Cleve, F., Leschine, B. T., Klinger, T., & Simenstad, C. (2006). An evaluation of the influence of natural science in regional-scale restoration projects. Environmental Management, 37(3), 367–379. CrossRef
Wang, X., Liu, B., Wang, D., & Cai, J. (2001). On 10th FYP of the yellow river institutional reform (黄河流域水管理体制”十五‖改革初探). Yellow River, 23(8), 41–42.
Wilder, M., & Howlett, M. P. (2014). The politics of policy anomalies: Bricolage and the hermeneutics of paradigms. Critical Policy Studies, 8(2), 183–202. CrossRef
Xia, C., & Pahl-Wostl, C. (2012). The development of water allocation management in the Yellow River Basin. Water Resource Management, 26, 3395–3414. CrossRef
Yang, Z., Yan, Y., & Liu, Q. (2012). Assessment of the flow regime alterations in the Lower Yellow River, China. Ecological Informatics, 10, 56–64. CrossRef
Zhang, Q., Xu, C. Y., & Yang, T. (2009). Variability of water resource in the Yellow River Basin of past 50 years, China. Water Resource Management, 23, 1156–1170.
Zhao, J., Yang, Z., & Hu, Y. (2002). Solutions to realize the unified water resources management in the Yellow River Basin (实现黄河流域水资源统一管理的途径). In G. Sun (Ed.), Research papers of Yellow River water resources management (黄河水资源管理研究论文集) (pp. 54–56). Zhengzhou, China: Yellow River Conservancy Press.
- Thick narratives and the persistence of institutions: using the Q methodology to analyse IWRM reforms around the Yellow River
- Springer US
Neuer Inhalt/© Stellmach, Neuer Inhalt/© Maturus, Pluta Logo/© Pluta