Sharing Reasoning Behind Individual Decisions to Invest in Joint Infrastructure

Abstract

Development of joint irrigation infrastructure increasingly depends on investment decisions made by individual farmers. Farmers base their decisions to invest on their current knowledge and understanding. As irrigation infrastructure development is ultimately a group decision, it is beneficial if individuals have a common understanding of the various values at stake. Sharing the personal reasoning behind individual decisions is a promising approach to build such common understanding. This study demonstrates application of participatory crossover analysis at a workshop in Tasmania, Australia. The workshop gave farmers the opportunity to discuss their broader considerations in investment decisions, beyond just financial or monetary factors. It centered on the question, “In what conditions would you—the individual farmer—invest?” The participants’ willingness to pay, in the form of crossover points, was presented as a set of scenarios to start an explorative discussion between irrigators and non-irrigators. Evaluation feedback indicates that the workshop enabled participants to share new information, improved understanding of differences between neighbors, and generated more respect for others and their decisions. As expected, reasoning went beyond economic concerns, and changed over time. Lifestyle choices, long-term intergenerational planning, perceived risks, and intrinsic motivations emerged as factors influencing water valuation. Simply having a facilitated discussion about the reasons underlying individuals’ willingness to pay seems to be a useful tool for better informed decision-making about joint irrigation infrastructure, and is worth testing in further case studies.

Adaptive irrigation infrastructure — linking insights from human-water interactions and adaptive pathways

“…Diverse and plural knowledges are a key ingredient to such learning [59]. In the Tasmanian research study described above (see [14], further research is in progress), we found that such processes can also be useful in appreciating social change induced by changes to water systems and vice versa. Facilitated discussions between key stakeholders can create opportunities to appreciate diversity, learn from each other, and enable the identification of potential future pathways.…”

“…As such, the long-term water availability delivered through the scheme is determined by the current willingness of farmers to invest. In research carried out by the authors, farmers with no previous experience in irrigation described how their perceptions changed as they learned what they could do with water [14]. Not only their demand for water, but also their willingness to pay for water has increased in the last few years.…”

A Literature Review of the Concepts of Resilience and Sustainability in Group Decision-Making

“…The "make" decision is based on their current knowledge and understanding. However, researchers claim that it is ultimately a group decision [87].…”

Participatory Crossover Analysis to Support Discussions about Investments in Irrigation Water Sources

“…Proceed to step 3 only if all the conditions in Table 2 are satisfied. This may require taking actions that establish suitable conditions, as was done in a follow-up case study [21]. Table 2.…”

“…We then explore the implications of the participatory crossover exercise and evaluate the framework. We note that this framework was subsequently applied in a second case study in the nearby South-East Irrigation Scheme district, with a more diverse group of participants and a greater focus on crossover points related to willingness to pay for water [21].…”