Planning in democratizing river basins: The case for a co-productive model of decision making
© 2019 by the authors. We reflect on methodologies to support integrated river basin planning for the Ayeyarwady Basin in Myanmar, and the Kamala Basin in Nepal, to which we contributed from 2017 to 2019. The principles of Integrated Water Resources Management have been promoted across states and re...
Saved in:
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Journal |
Published: |
2020
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85076688427&origin=inward http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/67509 |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Institution: | Chiang Mai University |
id |
th-cmuir.6653943832-67509 |
---|---|
record_format |
dspace |
spelling |
th-cmuir.6653943832-675092020-04-02T15:20:00Z Planning in democratizing river basins: The case for a co-productive model of decision making Tira Foran David J. Penton Tarek Ketelsen Emily J. Barbour Nicola Grigg Maheswor Shrestha Louis Lebel Hemant Ojha Auro Almeida Neil Lazarow Agricultural and Biological Sciences Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology Environmental Science Social Sciences © 2019 by the authors. We reflect on methodologies to support integrated river basin planning for the Ayeyarwady Basin in Myanmar, and the Kamala Basin in Nepal, to which we contributed from 2017 to 2019. The principles of Integrated Water Resources Management have been promoted across states and regions with markedly different biophysical and political economic conditions. IWRM-based river basin planning is complex, resource intensive, and aspirational. It deserves scrutiny to improve process and outcome legitimacy. We focus on the value of co-production and deliberation in IWRM. Among our findings: (i) multi-stakeholder participation can be complicated by competition between actors for resources and legitimacy; (ii) despite such challenges, multi-stakeholder deliberative approaches can empower actors and can be an effective means for co-producing knowledge; (iii) tensions between (rational choice and co-productive) models of decision complicate participatory deliberative planning. Our experience suggests that a commitment to co-productive decision-making fosters socially legitimate IWRM outcomes. 2020-04-02T14:53:51Z 2020-04-02T14:53:51Z 2019-12-01 Journal 20734441 2-s2.0-85076688427 10.3390/w11122480 https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85076688427&origin=inward http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/67509 |
institution |
Chiang Mai University |
building |
Chiang Mai University Library |
country |
Thailand |
collection |
CMU Intellectual Repository |
topic |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology Environmental Science Social Sciences |
spellingShingle |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology Environmental Science Social Sciences Tira Foran David J. Penton Tarek Ketelsen Emily J. Barbour Nicola Grigg Maheswor Shrestha Louis Lebel Hemant Ojha Auro Almeida Neil Lazarow Planning in democratizing river basins: The case for a co-productive model of decision making |
description |
© 2019 by the authors. We reflect on methodologies to support integrated river basin planning for the Ayeyarwady Basin in Myanmar, and the Kamala Basin in Nepal, to which we contributed from 2017 to 2019. The principles of Integrated Water Resources Management have been promoted across states and regions with markedly different biophysical and political economic conditions. IWRM-based river basin planning is complex, resource intensive, and aspirational. It deserves scrutiny to improve process and outcome legitimacy. We focus on the value of co-production and deliberation in IWRM. Among our findings: (i) multi-stakeholder participation can be complicated by competition between actors for resources and legitimacy; (ii) despite such challenges, multi-stakeholder deliberative approaches can empower actors and can be an effective means for co-producing knowledge; (iii) tensions between (rational choice and co-productive) models of decision complicate participatory deliberative planning. Our experience suggests that a commitment to co-productive decision-making fosters socially legitimate IWRM outcomes. |
format |
Journal |
author |
Tira Foran David J. Penton Tarek Ketelsen Emily J. Barbour Nicola Grigg Maheswor Shrestha Louis Lebel Hemant Ojha Auro Almeida Neil Lazarow |
author_facet |
Tira Foran David J. Penton Tarek Ketelsen Emily J. Barbour Nicola Grigg Maheswor Shrestha Louis Lebel Hemant Ojha Auro Almeida Neil Lazarow |
author_sort |
Tira Foran |
title |
Planning in democratizing river basins: The case for a co-productive model of decision making |
title_short |
Planning in democratizing river basins: The case for a co-productive model of decision making |
title_full |
Planning in democratizing river basins: The case for a co-productive model of decision making |
title_fullStr |
Planning in democratizing river basins: The case for a co-productive model of decision making |
title_full_unstemmed |
Planning in democratizing river basins: The case for a co-productive model of decision making |
title_sort |
planning in democratizing river basins: the case for a co-productive model of decision making |
publishDate |
2020 |
url |
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85076688427&origin=inward http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/67509 |
_version_ |
1681426648573935616 |