Jacobs Katharine, Lebel Louis, Buizer James, Addams Lee, Matson Pamela, McCullough Ellen, Garden Po, Saliba George, Finan Timothy
Department of Soil, Water and Environmental Science, Institute of the Environment, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721;
Unit for Social and Environmental Research, Faculty of Social Science, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand;
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016 Apr 26;113(17):4591-6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0813125107. Epub 2010 Jan 11.
Managing water for sustainable use and economic development is both a technical and a governance challenge in which knowledge production and sharing play a central role. This article evaluates and compares the role of participatory governance and scientific information in decision-making in four basins in Brazil, Mexico, Thailand, and the United States. Water management institutions in each of the basins have evolved during the last 10-20 years from a relatively centralized water-management structure at the state or national level to a decision structure that involves engaging water users within the basins and the development of participatory processes. This change is consistent with global trends in which states increasingly are expected to gain public acceptance for larger water projects and policy changes. In each case, expanded citizen engagement in identifying options and in decision-making processes has resulted in more complexity but also has expanded the culture of integrated learning. International funding for water infrastructure has been linked to requirements for participatory management processes, but, ironically, this study finds that participatory processes appear to work better in the context of decisions that are short-term and easily adjusted, such as water-allocation decisions, and do not work so well for longer-term, high-stakes decisions regarding infrastructure. A second important observation is that the costs of capacity building to allow meaningful stakeholder engagement in water-management decision processes are not widely recognized. Failure to appreciate the associated costs and complexities may contribute to the lack of successful engagement of citizens in decisions regarding infrastructure.
管理水资源以实现可持续利用和经济发展,既是一项技术挑战,也是一项治理挑战,其中知识的产生和共享起着核心作用。本文评估并比较了参与式治理和科学信息在巴西、墨西哥、泰国和美国四个流域决策中的作用。在过去10至20年中,每个流域的水资源管理机构都从国家或州层面相对集中的水资源管理结构,演变为一种涉及流域内用水户参与以及发展参与式流程的决策结构。这一变化与全球趋势一致,即各国越来越需要让公众接受大型水利项目和政策变革。在每种情况下,公民更多地参与确定方案和决策过程,虽导致了更多复杂性,但也扩展了综合学习的文化。国际对水利基础设施的资金投入与参与式管理流程的要求相关联,但具有讽刺意味的是,本研究发现,参与式流程在短期且易于调整的决策(如水分配决策)背景下似乎效果更好,而对于有关基础设施的长期、高风险决策则效果不佳。第二个重要观察结果是,让利益相关者有意义地参与水资源管理决策过程所需的能力建设成本并未得到广泛认可。未能认识到相关成本和复杂性,可能导致公民在基础设施决策中缺乏成功的参与。