Deliberative tools for meeting the challenges of water planning in Australia
被引:24
|
作者:
Tan, Poh-Ling
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Griffith Univ, Griffith Law Sch, Nathan, Qld 4011, AustraliaGriffith Univ, Griffith Law Sch, Nathan, Qld 4011, Australia
Tan, Poh-Ling
[1
]
Bowmer, Kathleen H.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Charles Sturt Univ, Inst Land Water & Soc, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2678, Australia
Charles Sturt Univ, Sch Agr & Wine Sci, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2678, AustraliaGriffith Univ, Griffith Law Sch, Nathan, Qld 4011, Australia
Bowmer, Kathleen H.
[2
,3
]
Mackenzie, John
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Griffith Univ, Sociolegal Res Ctr, Nathan, Qld 4011, AustraliaGriffith Univ, Griffith Law Sch, Nathan, Qld 4011, Australia
Mackenzie, John
[4
]
机构:
[1] Griffith Univ, Griffith Law Sch, Nathan, Qld 4011, Australia
[2] Charles Sturt Univ, Inst Land Water & Soc, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2678, Australia
[3] Charles Sturt Univ, Sch Agr & Wine Sci, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2678, Australia
[4] Griffith Univ, Sociolegal Res Ctr, Nathan, Qld 4011, Australia
Sustainable management;
Water planning;
Water allocation;
Deliberative tools;
Australia;
PUBLIC-PARTICIPATION;
MANAGEMENT;
REGIMES;
D O I:
10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.02.032
中图分类号:
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号:
0813 ;
摘要:
Australian governments have set an ambitious policy agenda for reform. By 2010, water plans were to have provided for the return of all overallocated or overused systems to environmentally sustainable levels of extraction, however, many communities do not yet have full confidence in water plans or their processes. In two national research projects we developed practical tools for transparent and engaging processes to build confidence in water planning. We observe that inherent politicised risks in water planning mean that current methods of public participation, such as information giving and allowing written submissions, are 'safer' and more easily managed. The next article in this special issue sets out the methodology including performance indicators for the tools that we used in the research. To demonstrate their role in building community confidence using best available science we trialled tools which included agent-based participatory modelling, deliberative multi-criteria evaluation, social impact assessment, and groundwater visualisation models. The suite of 'good-practice' tools, including Indigenous engagement, is fully described in the following articles of this special issue. Evaluations show deliberative processes have much to offer when applied to questions that have been developed collaboratively and formulated carefully to allow implementation of findings. Interactive tools and those which have high visual impact are consistently rated highly by all sectors of the community, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous, and also by water planners. These results have implications for water planning internationally especially where science is contested, social values are uncertain, and communities are diverse. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
机构:
Univ Fed Rio de Janeiro, Programa Pos Grad Informat, Rio De Janeiro, RJ, BrazilUniv Fed Rio de Janeiro, Programa Pos Grad Informat, Rio De Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
Vivacqua, Adriana S.
Ferreira, Marcos S.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Univ Fed Rio de Janeiro, Programa Engn Sistemas & Comp, Rio De Janeiro, RJ, BrazilUniv Fed Rio de Janeiro, Programa Pos Grad Informat, Rio De Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
Ferreira, Marcos S.
De Souza, Jano M.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Univ Fed Rio de Janeiro, Programa Engn Sistemas & Comp, Rio De Janeiro, RJ, BrazilUniv Fed Rio de Janeiro, Programa Pos Grad Informat, Rio De Janeiro, RJ, Brazil