The roles of capitals in building capacity to address urban flooding in the shift to a new water management approach

Abstract

Stresses on water resources are considerable and will intensify in the future due to climatic and non-climatic drivers. The emerging shift from science-based command and control 'old' water management approach to a dynamic and integrative systems view of water-a 'new' water management approach-was explored using the concept of capacity, operationalized using the livelihoods capitals approach (i.e. physical, natural, financial, human and social capitals), as a conceptual lens in a multiple case study of notable cases of urban flooding from Canada and Australia. The findings show that there are changing conceptualizations of capacity in both cases over time. Physical and financial capitals have been emphasized for decades and are associated with the old water management approach, responding to major flood events with the construction of large control structures. While the importance of these capital inputs persists, the approach to building capacity under the emergence of the new water management approach places an increasing relative emphasis on social and human capitals. The lack of emphasis on natural capital persisted over time and should be considered explicitly in flood management. This study demonstrates how the capitals approach contributes to the very much needed understanding of how the shift from the old to a new water management approach is being expressed for both present-day decisions and long-term trajectories.

Local impacts of federal forest policy changes on Canadian model forests: An institutional capacity perspective

“…We conducted a structured comparative analysis of the same types of documents for all three cases. Our analytic approach was informed by previously published document-based comparative case studies that were effective at illustrating policy decisions and programme and capacity changes (see, e.g., Plummer et al, 2017). As such, our approach looked to changes reported in organizational and government documents, which is important because these documents consistently reported on activities shared across Canada's model forests.…”

The emerging scientific water paradigm: Precursors, hallmarks, and trajectories

“…In the context of water scholarship, we specifically focus on governance (strategic decisions and direction setting) and management (actions and day‐to‐day decisions that enact governance). We use the term “scientific paradigm” to encompass assumptions about the nature of the system that underlie governance and management, the intentions of management, and the ideal approach(es) for achieving those aims/addressing challenges (Pahl‐Wostl, Jeffrey, Isendahl, & Brugnach, 2011; Plummer et al, 2018; Schoeman, Allan, & Finlayson, 2014). The issue of paradigms and paradigm shifts are not new to water scholars.…”

“…There are several reasons for considering the emergence of a “new water paradigm” (Plummer et al, 2018). First, water challenges persist and conventional command and control approaches have failed to adequately address these challenges (Pahl‐Wostl et al, 2011; Schoeman et al, 2014).…”

Global Water Governance and Climate Change: Identifying Innovative Arrangements for Adaptive Transformation

“…Legacy is also reflected in methodologies-scientific ones-mainly used to gather data and build instruments to define a certain dilemma (e.g., ocean eutrophication). The South East Queensland Case Study is an example of this: historically engineering approaches have been privileged for disaster mitigation work and while there are shifts towards more social-focused approaches, the engineering one still maintains a strong influence [85,86].…”