Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Working across scales in integrated catchment management: lessons learned for adaptive water governance from regional experiences

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Regional Environmental Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Integrated Catchment Management (ICM) has in recent years been promoted by a wealth of “top-down” government policies, while a number of “bottom-up” community-based initiatives have also been set up. At the same time, adaptive water governance, built around multi-level, integrative and participatory institutional arrangements, is called for in order to enhance adaptive capacity of social–ecological systems to global changes. Working across scales, aligning planning processes, and multi-actor collaboration are key issues in the linking of top-down and bottom-up ICM, hence providing insights into how adaptive water governance can work in practice. The paper presents a study of how ICM actors work across scales and reconcile national and local priorities in 15 regional experiences chosen to reflect a diversity of scales, histories and governance arrangements. It is complemented with an in-depth, illustrative example, taken from the Tweed River Basin in Scotland, where a local charity has gradually developed and helped bridge gaps between local communities and government. Research results present the ways in which “trusted intermediaries” can successfully close the gap across levels of governance, i.e. between communities, business, and governmental interests at multiple scales. Local “trusted intermediaries” perform well, with their local knowledge, at building rapport with key actors and effectuate change on the ground. The research also indicates the need for a legal framework, or at least an established policy structure, that acts to harness the good will and interests of local actors while improving implementation of broader, national objectives. There appears to be no specific mechanism for multi-level collaboration, although results indicate that more formal and coercive forms of partnership are necessary at later stages to ensure implementation, for example, via the establishment of formal duties on public bodies or legally binding agreements between ICM stakeholders.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen W, Fenemor A, Kilvington M, Harmsworth G, Young RG, Deans N, Horn C, Phillips C, Montes de Oca O, Ataria J, Smith R (2011) Building collaboration and learning in integrated catchment management: the importance of social process and multiple engagement approaches. N Z J Mar Fresh 45:525–539. doi:10.1080/00288330.2011.592197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barwick CH (2008) A history of landcare in the Goulburn broken catchment. Milestones, Memories and Messages. http://goulburnbroken.landcarevic.net.au. Accessed 10 Apr 2015

  • Benson D, Jordan A, Huitema D (2012) Involving the public in catchment management: an analysis of the scope for learning lessons from abroad. Environ Policy Gov 22:42–54. doi:10.1002/eet.593

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benson D, Jordan A, Cook H, Smith L (2013) Collaborative environmental governance: are watershed partnerships swimming or are they sinking? Land Use Policy 30:748–757. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.05.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biswas AK (2004) Integrated water resources management: a reassessment. Water Int 29:248–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackstock KL, Richards C (2007) Evaluating stakeholder involvement in river basin planning: a Scottish case study. Water policy 9:493. doi:10.2166/wp.2007.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheviot Futures (2015) www.cheviotfutures.co.uk. Accessed 10 Apr 2015

  • Clarvis MH, Engle NL (2015) Adaptive capacity of water governance arrangements: a comparative study of barriers and opportunities in Swiss and US states. Reg Environ Change 15:517–527. doi:10.1007/s10113-013-0547-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook H, Benson D, Inman A, Jordan A, Smith L (2012) Catchment management groups in England and Wales: extent, roles and influences. Water Environ J 26:47–55. doi:10.1111/j.1747-6593.2011.00262.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook BR, Atkinson M, Chalmers H, Comins L, Cooksley S, Deans N, Fazey I, Fenemor A, Kesby M, Litke S, Marshall D, Spray C (2013) Interrogating participatory catchment organisations: cases from Canada, New Zealand, Scotland and the Scottish-English Borderlands. Geogr J 179:234–247. doi:10.1111/j.1475-4959.2012.00492.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cosens B, Gunderson L, Chaffin B (2014) The adaptive governance project: assessing law, resilience and governance in regional socio-ecological water systems facing a changing climate. Idaho Law Review, Natural Resources and Environmental Law Edition, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2519236

  • CREW (2015) Centre of expertise for water. www.crew.ac.uk. Accessed last 10 Apr 2015

  • Defra (2013) Catchment Based Approach: Improving the quality of our water environment. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Duit A, Galaz V, Ebbesson J (2010) Governance, complexity, and resilience. Glob Environ Change 20:363–368. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.04.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falkenmark M, Gottschalk L, Lundqvist J, Wouters P (2004) Towards integrated catchment management: increasing the dialogue between scientists, policy-makers and stakeholders. J Water Resour Dev 20:297–309. doi:10.1080/0790062042000248619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folke C, Hahn T, Olsson P, Norberg J (2005) Adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Annu Rev Env Resour 30:441–473. doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.144511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendry S (2014) Frameworks for water law reform. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS (1978) Adaptive environmental assessment and management. Wiley, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Huitema D, Meijerink S (2010) Realising water transitions: the role of policy entrepreneurs in water policy change. Ecol Soc 15(2): 26. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss2/art26/

  • Huitema D, Mostert E, Egas W, Moellenkamp S, Pahl-Wostl C, Yalcin R (2009) Adaptive water governance: assessing the institutional prescriptions of adaptive (co-) management from a governance perspective and defining a research agenda. Ecol Soc 14(1):26. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss1/art26/

  • Huntjens P, Pahl-Wostl C, Rihoux B, Schluter M, Flachner Z, Neto S, Koskova R, Fickens C, Nabide Kiti I (2011) Adaptive water management and policy learning in a changing climate: a formal comparative analysis of eight water management regimes in Europe, Africa, and Asia. Environ Policy Gov 21:145–163. doi:10.1002/eet.571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Imperial MT (2005) Using collaboration as a governance strategy: lessons from six watershed management programs. Adm Soc 37:281–320. doi:10.1177/0095399705276111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ison R, Roling N, Watson D (2007) Challenges to science and society in the sustainable management and use of water: investigating the role of social learning. Environ Sci Policy 10:499–511. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2007.02.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keessen AM, van Kempen JJ, van Rijswick M, Robbe J, Backes CW (2010) European river basin districts: are they swimming in the same implementation pool? J Environ Law 22:197–221. doi:10.1093/jel/eqq003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leach WD, Pelkey NW (2001) Making watershed partnerships work: a review of the empirical literature. J Water Res Pl–ASCE 127:378–385. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(2001)127:6(378)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockwood M, Davidson J, Curtis A, Stratford E, Griffith R (2009) Multi-level environmental governance: lessons from Australian natural resource management. Aust Geogr 40:169–186. doi:10.1080/00049180902964926

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lubell M (2004) Collaborative environmental institutions: all talk and no action? J Policy Anal Manag 23:549–573. doi:10.1002/pam.20026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maltby E, Ormerod S, Acreman M, Blackwell M, Durance I, Everard M, Morris J, Spray C (2011) Freshwaters: openwaters, wetlands and floodplains ‘. The UK national ecosystem assessment technical report. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, pp 295–360

    Google Scholar 

  • Medema W, McIntosh BS, Jeffrey PJ (2008) From premise to practice: a critical assessment of integrated water resources management and adaptive management approaches in the water sector. Ecol Soc 13(2): 29http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss2/art29/

  • Memon A, Painter B, Weber E (2010) Enhancing potential for integrated catchment management in New Zealand: a multi-scalar, strategic perspective. Australas J Environ 17:35–44. doi:10.1080/14486563.2010.9725247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell B, Hollick M (1993) Integrated catchment management in Western Australia: transition from concept to implementation. Environ Manag 17:735–743. doi:10.1007/BF02393894

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molle F (2006) Planning and Managing Water Resources at the River Basin Level: Emergence and Evolution of a Concept. IWMI Comprehensive Assessment Research Report 16. International Water Management Institute, Colombo, Sri Lanka

  • Mostert E, Pahl-Wostl C (2010) Social learning: the key to integrated water resources management? Water Int 33(3):293–304. doi:10.1080/02508060802275757

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson DR, Adger WN, Brown K (2007) Adaptation to environmental change: contributions of a resilient framework. Ann R Environ Resour 32:395–419. doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.32.051807.090348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pahl-Wostl C (2007a) The implications of complexity for integrated resources management. Environ Model Softw 22:561–569. doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2005.12.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pahl-Wostl C (2007b) Transitions towards adaptive management of water facing climate and global change. Water Resour Manag 21:49–62. doi:10.1007/s11269-006-9040-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pahl-Wostl C (2009) A conceptual framework for analysing adaptive capacity and multi-level learning processes in resource governance regimes. Glob Environ Change 19:354–365. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.06.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pahl-Wostl C, Lebel L, Knieper C, Nikitina E (2012) From applying panaceas to mastering complexity: toward adaptive water governance in river basins. Environ Sci Policy 23:24–34. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2012.07.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richard-Ferroudji A (2008) L’animateur de bassin versant: Insuffler vie à une communauté de l’eau. Cosmopolitiques 17:I

  • Rouillard JJ, Reeves AD, Heal KV, Ball T (2014) The role of public participation in encouraging changes in rural land use to reduce flood risk. Land Use Policy 38:637–645

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier PA, Weible C, Ficker J (2005) Eras of water management in the United States: implications for collaborative watershed approaches. In: Sabatier P, Focht W, Lubell M, Trachtenberg Z, Vedlitz A, Matlock M (eds) Swimming upstream: collaborative approaches to watershed management. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 23–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith L, Porter K, Hiscock K, Porter MJ, Benson D (eds) (2015) Catchment and river basin management: integrating science and governance. Routledge, Abingdon

    Google Scholar 

  • Spray C, Comins L (2011) Governance structures for effective Integrated Catchment Management—lessons and experiences from the Tweed HELP Basin, UK. Proceedings of the second international symposium on building knowledge bridges for a sustainable water future, Panama, Republic of Panama, 21–24 November 2011 pp 78–82

  • Spray C, Tharme A, Robeson D (2014) Scottish borders land use pilot draft framework. Scottish Borders Council, Melrose

    Google Scholar 

  • Tweed Forum (2015). http://www.tweedforum.org/projects/current-projects/eddleston. Accessed 10 Apr 2015

  • Watson N (2015) Factors influencing the frames and approaches of host organizations for collaborative catchment management in England. Soc Nat Resour 28:360–376. doi:10.1080/08941920.2014.945059

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by the Centre for Expertise for Waters (CREW). We wish to thank our interviewees for their time and interest in our study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UNESCO IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science, University of Dundee, Dundee, DD1 4HN, Scotland, UK

    Josselin J. Rouillard & Christopher J. Spray

  2. Ecologic Institute GmbH, Pfalzburger Straße 43, 10717, Berlin, Germany

    Josselin J. Rouillard

Authors
  1. Josselin J. Rouillard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christopher J. Spray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Josselin J. Rouillard.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rouillard, J.J., Spray, C.J. Working across scales in integrated catchment management: lessons learned for adaptive water governance from regional experiences. Reg Environ Change 17, 1869–1880 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-016-0988-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-016-0988-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation