The Expanding Institutional Context for Water Resources Management: The Case of the Grand River Watershed

Plummer, Ryan; FitzGibbon, John; Imhof, Jack

doi:10.4296/cwrj3003227

Cited by 18 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has a long history of water resource management via the GRCA which is considered one of the most active of the 36 member agencies of Conservation Ontario (Shrubsole 1996;Plummer et al 2005). Regionalscale CEA has been practised sporadically in the province (see for example the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (Government of Ontario 2002, McCarthy et al 2010, and the Niagara Escarpment Plan (Niagara Escarpment Commission 2012), but not necessarily under environmental assessment legislation.…”

Section: Institutional Arrangements For W-ceam In the Grwmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Act stipulates that conservation authorities should adopt a watershed as their management unit (Shrubsole 1996;Plummer et al 2005). This concept is one of six founding principles for conservation authorities.…”

Section: Institutional Arrangements For W-ceam In the Grwmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of Ontario's 36 conservation authorities, most are focused on areas within southern Ontario, an area in which 90% of the province's population resides (Plummer et al 2005). Early intentions of the GRCA were to make water and land management at a watershed scale more effective, and to manage the destructive impacts of flooding and pollution in populous areas of the watershed (Mitchell & Shrubsole 1992).…”

Section: Institutional Arrangements For W-ceam In the Grwmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, the reform of the Planning Act in 1992-1995, the introduction of the Ontario provincial policy statement as a new directive for municipalities to follow, and the formation of the region of Waterloo as a new form of government structure also compounded the now quite indistinguishable role of the GRCA and other authorities in watershed management. The changes specifically reduced the GRCA's legitimacy in decision-making about developments (Shrubsole 1996;Plummer et al 2005). Newly formed agencies and provincial government departments were not obligated to support GRCA decisions but only to consider them as recommendations (Watson 2004 Institutional arrangements in the GRW could potentially facilitate W-CEAM in that there is a range of existing legislative tools, myriad government mandates and a mature watershed conservation authority in place to support responsible water resources management.…”

Section: Institutional Arrangements For W-ceam In the Grwmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Institutional considerations in watershed cumulative effects assessment and management

Chilima

Gunn

Noble

et al. 2013

Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the role of institutional arrangements as either facilitating or constraining the practice of watershed cumulative effects assessment and management (W-CEAM) within the context of the Grand River watershed (GRW), Canada. The research is based on document review, a focus group and 29 interviews conducted with academic experts, project proponents, government and watershed agencies representatives, non-governmental organization researchers, First Nations, and others with interest in the GRW. Information was gathered on existing policy and planning instruments, and relationships among the authorities and other partners that enable water resource management. Key facilitating factors for W-CEAM in the GRW include established institutions, a mature conservation authority and an ecological focus to resource management strategies, while constraining factors include obfuscation of leadership roles and lack of multi-scalar approaches to watershed science. We conclude that it is useful to conceptualize W-CEAM as characterized by both a managerial and a scientific ethos -the former facilitating the latter -and that institutional goodwill, political will and institutional capacity for innovation and creativity are additional institutional core requisites to W-CEAM.

show abstract

Section: Institutional Arrangements For W-ceam In the Grwmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Institutional Arrangements For W-ceam In the Grwmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Institutional Arrangements For W-ceam In the Grwmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Institutional Arrangements For W-ceam In the Grwmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Institutional considerations in watershed cumulative effects assessment and management

Chilima

Gunn

Noble

et al. 2013

Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Traditional, topdown approaches to natural resources management have been challenged and criticized since the 1970s (Ludwig, 2001;Rittel and Webber, 1973). The 1980s saw a movement away from support for a single agency holding power to multiple centres of interaction when managing resources (Ferreyra and Beard, 2007;Plummer et al, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing Integrated Water Resources Management: The Importance of Cross-Scale Considerations and Local Conditions in Ontario and Nova Scotia

Cervoni¹,

Biro²,

Beazley³

2008

Canadian Water Resources Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Integrated water resources management (IWRM) is advocated by international and expert communities as the most viable approach to achieving sustainable freshwater management. Watersheds are often viewed as the preferred management units. There is increasing recognition, however, that socio-political and watershed boundaries do not coincide, and where they are used for management purposes, these boundaries are constructed through processes of political contestation. Key informants from various agencies and sectors associated with water resources management in Ontario (where watershed-based management has been in place for decades), Nova Scotia (currently developing a comprehensive water resources management strategy), and the Government of Canada were interviewed: to explore the links between IWRM and watershed management; barriers to IWRM; elements essential for IWRM to work effectively; the appropriate scale of watershed management units; and the degree of cross-scale interactions between agencies and stakeholders. Four main themes emerged around capacity, coordination and participation, scale of implementation, and education. To achieve IWRM, particular attention must be paid to existing local circumstances and resources, situated within formalized provincial and national frameworks.Resumé : La gestion intégrée des ressources hydriques (GIRH) est préconisée par les communautés internationaux et expertes comme étant l'approche la plus viable pour atteindre la gestion soutenable de l'eau douce. Les bassins hydrographiques sont fréquemment considérés comme les unités de gestion favorisées. Mais il y a une augmentation de reconnaissance que les frontières sociopolitiques et hydrographiques ne coïncident pas, et là où employées pour la gestion, les frontières hydrographiques sont construites à travers des processus de contestation politique. Des informateurs principaux de divers agences et secteurs associés avec la gestion des ressources hydriques en Ontario (où la gestion basée sur les bassins hydrographiques est en place depuis des décennies), la Nouvelle-Écosse (développe actuellement une stratégie compréhensive pour la gestion des ressources hydriques), et le gouvernement du Canada ont été interviewés pour obtenir une compréhension : des liens entre la GIRH et la gestion des bassins hydrographiques; les obstacles à la GIRH, les éléments essentiels pour le fonctionnement efficace de la GIRH, l'échelle convenable pour la gestion par bassin hydrographique; et l'étendue des interactions entre les agences et les parties prenantes. Quatre thèmes principaux ont fait surface sur la capacité, la

show abstract

Water Governance in the Face of Global Change

Pahl‐Wostl¹

2015

Water Governance - Concepts, Methods, and Practice

218

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This book series aims at providing a platform for developing an integrated perspective on major advances in the field of water governance. Contributions will build bridges across established fields of expertise, across disciplinary perspectives, across levels from global to local and across geographical regions. Topics to be covered include conceptual and methodological advances capturing the complexity of water governance systems, institutional settings, actor constellations, diagnostic approaches, and comparative studies of governance systems. The book series encompasses monographs, textbooks and edited, coordinated volumes addressing one theme from different perspectives. The book series will address mainly a wider scientific audience, but will also provide valuable knowledge to interested practitioners. The sustainable management of fresh water resources and the ecosystem services that they provide is one of the key challenges of the 21st century. Many water related problems can be attributed to governance failure at multiple levels of governance rather than to the resource base itself. At the same time our knowledge on water governance systems and conditions for success of water governance reform is still quite limited. The notion of water governance aims at capturing the complexity of processes that determine the delivery of water related services for societal needs and that provide the context within which water management operates. Water governance is a fast growing field of scholarly expertise which has largely developed over the past decade. The number of publications in peer reviewed journals has increased from less than 20 in the year 2000 to nearly 400 in the year 2013. The increasing popularity of the term in science and policy has not lead to conceptual convergence but rather to an increasing vagueness and competing interpretations of how the concept should be understood, studied, and analyzed; which disciplines are involved; and what methodological approaches are most suitable for the study and analysis of water governance. The time seems to be ripe for comprehensive synthesis and integration.More information about this series at

show abstract

The Expanding Institutional Context for Water Resources Management: The Case of the Grand River Watershed

Cited by 18 publications

References 26 publications

Institutional considerations in watershed cumulative effects assessment and management

Institutional considerations in watershed cumulative effects assessment and management

Implementing Integrated Water Resources Management: The Importance of Cross-Scale Considerations and Local Conditions in Ontario and Nova Scotia

Water Governance in the Face of Global Change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About