Trends and issues in land and water resources management: Setting the agenda for change

Abstract

/ The classical model of a paradigm shift is used to explore changes that are occurring in public lands and water resources management. Recent policy developments suggest that the traditional paradigm, which is characterized by sustained yield, is in the process of being invalidated. While no new paradigm has been fully accepted, the emerging paradigm does appear to be based on two principles: ecosystem management and collaborative decision making. Implementation of these two principles is likely to require extensive revision of traditional management practices and institutions. Failure to address these issues could result in adoption of the rhetoric of change without any lasting shift in management practices or professional attitudes.In the United States, the land and water resources professions first developed during the progressive era, when rational neutral, fact-based science was being advanced as the appropriate basis for agency administration. This coincided with the promotion of positivistic thought throughout the sciences, in which empirical measurements were the mark of "good science." Professionalism, since the progressive era, has been epitomized by the neutral expert who bases decisions solely on these empirical measurements and methods and who is in no way tainted by political ideology.During the past three decades, and largely as a response to increased demands placed on natural resources during the postwar years, the progressive ideals of neutral public administration and positive science have both come under attack (Reich 1985). This has been a period of growing environmental awareness and decreasing trust in administrative neutrality, characterized by cries for public choice, administrative accountability, and environmental protection. Traditional public support for the natural resources agencies rapidly eroded during the 1970s as public involvement in science and government grew.Several researchers have suggested that what is now required in public lands and water resources management is a radical revision of professional perspectives, values, and management practices, in other KEY WORDS: Decision making; Ecosystem management; Institutional change; Paradigm; Policy; Public lands management; Water resources *Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.words, a paradigm shift (Behan 1990, Brooks and Grant 1992, Kessler and others 1992, This paper utilizes the classical model of a paradigm shift to explore the changes that are occurring in the area of public lands and water resources management. The key features of scientific paradigms and paradigm shifts are indicated and compared to current trends in land and water resources management. We found that the body of information contradictory to the rational, scientific model of resource management has accumulated to a point that the traditional paradigm appears to have been invalidated. While a new paradigm has yet to be accepted, tile emerging paradigm appears to be based on two principles: ecosystem managenmnt and collaborative deci...

A Systematic Review of Water Vulnerability Assessment Tools

“…IWRM further intends to bring together and broaden the range of environmental and social values (e.g. biodiversity, social and cultural) and highlights the importance of institutions relating to water (Bellamy and Johnson 2000;Chenoweth et al 2001;Cortner and Moote 1994). Adaptive management is closely aligned with IWRM as a means of addressing resource complexity and uncertainty in management by highlighting the roles of experimentation, action and learning (e.g., Jeffrey 2006;Jeffrey and Gearey 2006;Galaz 2007;Ingram 2008;Timmerman et al 2008).…”

Staying the Course: Collaborative Modeling to Support Adaptive and Resilient Water Resource Governance in the Inland Northwest

“…We use the term adaptive to describe an approach that adjusts in response to emerging knowledge and has the capacity to support system resilience [1,2]. The foundations for adaptive and resilient management are rooted in the social, legal and scientific recognition that it is crucial to integrate the values and worldviews of diverse stakeholders into decision processes for resource management that utilizes best available science [3][4][5]. These decision processes must be iterative, ongoing, and capable of dealing with scientific uncertainty within a constantly changing social and biophysical system.…”

Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM): A Case Study of Durlung Watershed, Bagmati Zone, Nepal

“…IWRM further intends to bring together and broaden the range of environmental and social values (e.g. biodiversity, social and cultural) and highlights the importance of institutions relating to water (Bellamy and Johnson 2000;Chenoweth et al 2001;Cortner and Moote 1994). Adaptive management is closely aligned to IWRM as a means of addressing resource complexity and uncertainty in management by highlighting the roles of experimentation, action and learning (e.g.…”