What’s the middle ground? Institutionalized vs. emerging water-related stakeholder engagement processes

Abstract

In this day and age, it is widely argued that stakeholder engagement in water-related decision-making processes yields many benefits, including legitimacy, acceptance and trust. Key legal frameworks, such as the European Water Framework Directive and the Aarhus Convention, have spurred the emergence of formal forms of stakeholder engagement. On the other hand, many engagement processes are spontaneous and self-organized. This article investigates the strategies used in formal (government-led) and informal (bottom-up) engagement processes in search of a middle ground. To this end, case studies in the Netherlands, the United States, Uganda and Ethiopia are analyzed using the OECD’s stakeholder engagement checklist. We conclude with reflection on the ways forward to make formal and informal stakeholder engagement complementary.

Keywords:

• Stakeholder engagement
• governance
• public participation
• institutional analysis
• water policies

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the editors of the International Journal of Water Resources Development for editing this special issue on Understanding Emergent Participation Practices in Water Governance. Engagement, participation and inclusiveness are key aspects of water governance, and such a special issue helps give them the credit they deserve. The authors also thank all the people who contributed to collecting data on the four case studies, especially the teams from the Dutch Delta Programme, the US Environmental Protection Agency, Mountains of the Moon University, the Sustainable Agricultural Trainers Network, the International Water Management Institute and the International Livestock Research Institute. Thanks also go to Erika Ferrand Cooper for proof-reading the article. This article is based on the OECD report, Stakeholder engagement for inclusive water governance, OECD Publishing, Paris, doi: 10.1787/9789264231122-en. Any additional opinions expressed or arguments employed herein are solely those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official views of the OECD or its member countries.