Who Governs at What Price? Technocratic Dominance, Ways of Knowing, and Long-Term Resilience of Brazil's Water System

Technocratic decision making has been long criticized for dampening participation and limiting the range of adaptive choices through its overreliance on infrastructure-based solutions. There has been growing attention to how technocratic approaches shape long-term resilience of water systems, especially under the threat of climatic change impacts. In Brazil, even under its highly decentralized and participatory water management system, technical expertise and science-based decisions have been often promoted as a desirable mechanism to insulate governance outcomes from the country's prevailing clientelistic and rent-seeking politics. Yet, Brazilian river basins continue to struggle with long-standing problems (such as universal access to sanitation) and increasing challenges for guaranteeing water provision under recurrent drought. In this study, we examine how technocratic insulation, different ways of knowing (WoKs), and participatory governance shape long-term resilience in one of Brazil's most important river basins, the Piracicaba-Capivari-Jundiaí (PCJ). By taking an in-depth look at how the PCJ River Basin's governance system responded to the 2014 Brazilian water crisis, we seek to understand how planning decisions in the aftermath of the crisis were influenced by different actors, and how the outcomes of those decisions are likely to shape long term resilience. Based on 27 in-depth interviews with members of the PCJ River Basin Committees, we show how a distinct preference for infrastructure-based solutions to deal with on-going and upcoming challenges may be unsustainable under climate change as the basin's traditional technocratic approach failed both to insulate its decisions from politics and to explore adaptive water management solutions that might be key to shape long-term resilience.

Assessing the societal adoptability of participatory water management: an application of the Motivation and Ability (MOTA) framework

Exploring whether society is sufficiently equipped and motivated to adopt planned interventions is vital for modern plan development trajectories. The Motivation and Ability (MOTA) framework offers a tool to assess the societal adoptability of plans by exploring stakeholders' motivations and abilities. It was originally developed to assess plan implementation feasibility for structural measures of flood management in the Mekong Delta. Further development is necessary before applying the tool in other contexts and for other types of planning interventions. Institutional measures like participatory water management (PWM) have long been recognized as essential elements for water management, but have so far also remained out of the reach of conventional planning assessment tools such as cost–benefit or cost-effectiveness analyses. This research, therefore, aims at extending the MOTA tool in the context of PWM reforms in Bangladesh. It does this by, first, further detailing the MOTA components and identifying indicators for quantification and, second, an expert validation and application of this framework for coastal communities in Bangladesh. Our results suggest that the MOTA framework is capable of informing policymakers and implementing agencies about how to enhance the stakeholders' motivation and ability to ensure an enduring implementation of PWM reforms. HIGHLIGHTS The Motivation and Ability (MOTA) framework appeared recently to capture the societal and institutional dimensions in assessing the implementation feasibility of structural measures. This research further extends the MOTA framework and tests whether this can be applicable in case of assessing the implementation feasibility of soft measures like participatory water management.

Overview of participatory water management to overcome drought towards agricultural sector

Drought gives severe impact on agricultural system on fulfilling global food demands. Addressing the root causes of drought related to the community as water users can be done by combating illegal water extraction and controlling water supply. The discussion is based on information obtained from scientific literatures, such as Science Direct, Google Scholar and Scopus. From literature survey, participatory water management engage stakeholders harmonizing water supply and demand to tackle drought through water resources protection and efficient water use. Giving more power of people in the system impacts their better involvement in planning and decision-making processes. Top-down and bottomup participation models have different dynamics in water governance and both can be implemented based on the local contexts. Trade-offs and dilemmas should be considered in order to produce an effective participation. Collaboration and good communication among water users result in a better water management.

Can participatory water management improve residents' subjective life quality? A case study from China

Public participation is practiced widely in modern water management, but its effect on residents' subjective quality of life (QOL) or happiness has not been revealed. In this research, using the difference-in-difference (DID) model, the effect of participation in water management on residents' subjective QOL or happiness is empirically researched based on data from China. The results show that the positive effect of participatory water management on residents' happiness is quite significant and the extra effect of participation behavior on the participant's happiness is outstanding with the coefficients 0.073 and 0.036 respectively which pass the significance test. In addition, according to the regression coefficients of controlled variables, four demographic variables, namely the age, health, education and income, also produce significant effects on residents' happiness. It is concluded that both the result and procedure of participatory water management can really improve the participants' happiness. Extensive participation should be enhanced actively so as to increase residents' happiness.

Arguments for involving the public in water management: evidence from local and regional water plans in the Netherlands

Public participation has become increasingly important in the water sector. However, the question remains as to what exactly is meant by participation. This paper explores the different ways that participation is understood in local and regional water plans and visions in the Dutch water sector. Partly driven by the key role played by participatory water management under the European Water Framework Directive, citizens’ engagement has become an important aspect in the plans of authorities across the board that are involved in water management. The study concludes that the most dominant view on participation is very narrow, with a strong focus on clarification and on raising awareness. According to a second, less dominant view on participation, it is stressed that the role of participation is to produce information, knowledge, and expertise to support policy making. As a consequence, power relations between government and the public remain very much top down, with very little room for bottom-up ideas.