Water scarcity and institutional change: lessons in adaptive governance from the drought experience of Perth, Western Australia

Bettini, Yvette; Brown, Rebekah Ruth; Haan, Fjalar J. de

doi:10.2166/wst.2013.127

Cited by 22 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The three different forms of agency (institutional work) manifest within this setting. This conceptual framework is detailed in Bettini et al 2013 [32].…”

Section: The Institutional Context Of Transitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding institutional capacity for urban water transitions

Bettini

Brown

Haan

et al. 2015

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transitions management (TM) is emerging as an approach to governing complex sustainability problems. Critiques point to the need to understand dynamics of system change, particularly, with regard to actor agency at micro and meso scales. This paper begins to address this scholarly gap by first, developing an analytical framework of the institutional context of a transition that recognizes forms of agency. Second, a method to apply the framework to empirical cases of urban water socio-technical systems to map their institutional context is developed. The results revealed: i) ways to identify problematic features of current systems and underlying cognitive and normative frames, to assist with envisioning and transition pathway development, ii) a method of system analysis that can target leverage points for strategizing transitions agendas and experiments, and iii) a dynamic description of the system to assist with evaluating TM interventions and monitoring transitions. By providing a systems analysis cognizant of contextual dynamics and targeted to the knowledge needs of TM activities, this analytical tool shows promise for improving TM through further empirical application and research.

show abstract

“…The three different forms of agency (institutional work) manifest within this setting. This conceptual framework is detailed in Bettini et al 2013 [32].…”

Section: The Institutional Context Of Transitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding institutional capacity for urban water transitions

Bettini

Brown

Haan

et al. 2015

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Setting new, stricter, water quality standards or performance metrics can help stakeholders recognise the advantage of working together, especially when deadlines for compliance are tight. Related to this, if a culture of risk-taking is encouraged stakeholders may feel more comfortable experimenting without fear of the political ramifications if a new technology/service failed (Dobbie et al, 2016;Desportes et al, 2015;Bettini et al, 2013).…”

Section: How To Initiate Collaborative-innovations?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In other words, establish clear decision and process rules. Everyone also needs to be clear about his or her role and responsibilities within the process to avoid overlaps and fragmentation over who does what, or what is expected, as this can erode ownership of the problem (Dobbie et al, 2016;Erickson, 2015;Bettini et al, 2013). Clear methods for evaluating and measuring outcomes are also important to assess the extent to which actions undertaken have been successful and therefore what has changed (Biddle and Koontz, 2014;Mandarano and Paulsen, 2011).…”

Section: How To Design the Process?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But if we are to break away from the conventional approaches, technologies, infrastructures, and governance arrangements for managing water (Bettini et al, 2013;Dobbie et al, 2016;Huntjens et al, 2010), our review shows that we need a much deeper empirical understanding of: (i) how we can support and enhance stakeholder capacity/learning; (ii) how the design of collaborative processes affects its outcomes; and (iii) which themes should, or at the very least can be, prioritised to effectively collaborate. These are the challenges we urgently need answers to and where future studies should start.…”

Section: Jj Porter K Birdi E N V Ir O N M E N T a L S C Ie N C E mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

22 reasons why collaborations fail: Lessons from water innovation research

Porter

Birdi

2018

Environmental Science & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ReuseThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence. This licence allows you to distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon the work, even commercially, as long as you credit the authors for the original work. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing eprints@whiterose.ac.uk including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. Bold and inventive solutions are urgently needed to safeguard the future use of water. In response, collaborativeinnovation is increasingly championed. If stakeholders including water utilities, supply-chain companies, research institutions and local communities work together, share their experiences and pool ideas, meaningful change could happen, it's argued. But effective collaboration is far from easy. For every incentive that drives collaboration forward, another barrier blocks its path. Whilst the literature offers many possible factors that influence the success (or failure) of collaborative-innovations, it remains unclear which factors are most important, where the highest agreement and disagreement exists, and if accommodating one factor creates problems for another. This is important because its not always practical, nor necessary, to apply everything from the academic literature. In this paper, we report findings from an international systematic literature review that brings together a range of studies that cross the water collaboration and water innovation divide. We identify 22 broad themes that are spread (unevenly) across the entire collaborative-innovation process; highlight how the level of attention given to each theme varies greatly; and where disagreement exists. Our research provides practical insights on how to create more effective collaborative-innovations in water and where future research should be directed.

show abstract

“…The cost of reconstruction after a major catastrophic event is also staggering, such as the $2.6 billion bill to repair, rebuild, and make the water and wastewater infrastructure systems more resilient in New Jersey following Hurricane Sandy (Johnson, 2013). The selection of the next-generation water system should consider possible future challenges upfront to both protect the enormous investment and minimize additional costs from reconstruction and adaptive measures (Bettini et al, 2013;Kingsborough, 2013). The aim of the present work was to conduct a comparative technological resilience assessment for the selection of the next-generation water system.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%