Search for: All records

Abstract Although considerable research over the past two decades has examined collective learning in environmental governance, much of this scholarship has focused on cases where learning occurred, limiting our understanding of the drivers and barriers to learning. To advance knowledge of what we call the “collective learning continuum,” we compare cases of learning to cases where learning was not found to occur or its effects were “blocked.” Through semi‐structured interviews with key stakeholders in science‐policy forums in the Colorado River Basin, a large and complex river basin in western North America, we examine differences and patterns that explain moments of learning, blocked learning, or non‐learning, drawing insights from the collective learning framework. Our results find various factors that influence learning, blocked learning, and non‐learning. We discover technical and social factors as common drivers of both learning and blocked learning. In contrast, we find more structural factors associated with non‐learning. At the same time, the cases reveal insights about the role of political factors, such as timing, legal constraints, and priorities, which are underdeveloped in the collective learning framework. Overall, these findings advance theoretical knowledge of the collective learning continuum and offer practical insights that may strengthen the coordination of science and management for effective governance within the Basin. 

Abstract Collaborative governance has emerged as a promising approach for addressing complex water sustainability issues, with purported benefits from enhanced democracy to improved environmental outcomes. Collaborative processes are often assumed to be inherently more equitable than traditional governance approaches due to their goal of engaging diverse actors in the development of policy and management solutions. However, when collaborative water governance processes ignore issues of politics and power in their design, they risk creating or even exacerbating existing inequities. How, then, can collaborative water governance processes be designed to enhance, rather than undermine, equity? To answer this question, we first conduct an extensive review of the collaborative governance literature to identify common design features of collaborative processes, which each present potential benefits and challenges for actualizing equitable collaborative water governance. After critically discussing these design features, we explore how they are executed through two case studies of collaborative water governance in western North America: groundwater governance reform in California and transnational Colorado River Delta governance. In reflecting on these cases, we chart an agenda for future collaborative water governance research and practice that moves beyond engaging diverse actors to promoting equity among them. This article is categorized under:Human Water > Water GovernanceScience of Water > Water and Environmental ChangeEngineering Water > Planning Water