Water conflicts: Exploring how stakeholder behaviours influence conflict (de-)escalation in practice

IF 4.9 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Heather K. Anderson, Richard S. Quilliam, Heather Price
{"title":"Water conflicts: Exploring how stakeholder behaviours influence conflict (de-)escalation in practice","authors":"Heather K. Anderson,&nbsp;Richard S. Quilliam,&nbsp;Heather Price","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Social mobilisation to demand access to safe drinking water has led to increased water justice in many places across the world in recent years. Often, the impetus for change has relied on disempowered citizens taking action. In this study, we explored the experiences of residents (n = 22) in Aviemore (Scotland) who have been challenging the safety of their drinking water for over a decade. We also interviewed water company employees and drinking water regulator employees (n = 7) who were involved in the subsequent water quality investigations. Here we frame the events in Aviemore as a ‘water conflict’, which clarifies that movements for water justice involve multiple stakeholders all with capacity to act. We examined the relationship between behaviours adopted by different stakeholder groups and their consequences for conflict intensity (escalation/de-escalation). Using the Thomas-Kilmann conflict instrument to assign conflict behaviours to stakeholder actions, we found, as in other social movements for water justice, the progression and escalation of this conflict was mainly driven by the citizens taking some form of action. Furthermore, prolonged passive behaviours led to conflict escalation and conflict avoidance can lead to de-escalation, but not reconciliation. Here, we offer a new approach for evaluating water conflicts by assessing the relationship between stakeholder behaviours and conflict intensity. Using this approach, we propose that case-specific insights may be identified to support the prevention of, and intervention in, real-time conflict scenarios, as well as untangling the deeper structural and relational issues contributing to repeated conflict escalation to achieve constructive change.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"169 ","pages":"Article 104096"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Science & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901125001121","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Social mobilisation to demand access to safe drinking water has led to increased water justice in many places across the world in recent years. Often, the impetus for change has relied on disempowered citizens taking action. In this study, we explored the experiences of residents (n = 22) in Aviemore (Scotland) who have been challenging the safety of their drinking water for over a decade. We also interviewed water company employees and drinking water regulator employees (n = 7) who were involved in the subsequent water quality investigations. Here we frame the events in Aviemore as a ‘water conflict’, which clarifies that movements for water justice involve multiple stakeholders all with capacity to act. We examined the relationship between behaviours adopted by different stakeholder groups and their consequences for conflict intensity (escalation/de-escalation). Using the Thomas-Kilmann conflict instrument to assign conflict behaviours to stakeholder actions, we found, as in other social movements for water justice, the progression and escalation of this conflict was mainly driven by the citizens taking some form of action. Furthermore, prolonged passive behaviours led to conflict escalation and conflict avoidance can lead to de-escalation, but not reconciliation. Here, we offer a new approach for evaluating water conflicts by assessing the relationship between stakeholder behaviours and conflict intensity. Using this approach, we propose that case-specific insights may be identified to support the prevention of, and intervention in, real-time conflict scenarios, as well as untangling the deeper structural and relational issues contributing to repeated conflict escalation to achieve constructive change.
水资源冲突:探讨利益相关者行为在实践中如何影响冲突(降级)升级
近年来,要求获得安全饮用水的社会动员使世界许多地方的水正义得到加强。变革的动力往往依赖于被剥夺权力的公民采取行动。在这项研究中,我们探讨了苏格兰Aviemore居民(n = 22)的经历,他们十多年来一直在挑战饮用水的安全性。我们还采访了参与后续水质调查的自来水公司员工和饮用水监管机构员工(n = 7)。在这里,我们将阿维莫尔的事件描述为“水冲突”,这表明水正义运动涉及多个有能力采取行动的利益相关者。我们研究了不同利益相关者群体所采取的行为及其对冲突强度(升级/降级)的影响之间的关系。使用托马斯-基尔曼冲突工具将冲突行为分配给利益相关者的行动,我们发现,与其他水正义的社会运动一样,这种冲突的进展和升级主要是由公民采取某种形式的行动推动的。此外,长期的被动行为会导致冲突升级,而冲突回避会导致冲突降级,但不会导致和解。本文提出了一种评估水资源冲突的新方法,即评估利益相关者行为与冲突强度之间的关系。使用这种方法,我们建议可以确定具体案例的见解,以支持预防和干预实时冲突情景,以及解开导致冲突不断升级的更深层次的结构和关系问题,以实现建设性的变革。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Environmental Science & Policy
Environmental Science & Policy 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
332
审稿时长
68 days
期刊介绍: Environmental Science & Policy promotes communication among government, business and industry, academia, and non-governmental organisations who are instrumental in the solution of environmental problems. It also seeks to advance interdisciplinary research of policy relevance on environmental issues such as climate change, biodiversity, environmental pollution and wastes, renewable and non-renewable natural resources, sustainability, and the interactions among these issues. The journal emphasises the linkages between these environmental issues and social and economic issues such as production, transport, consumption, growth, demographic changes, well-being, and health. However, the subject coverage will not be restricted to these issues and the introduction of new dimensions will be encouraged.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信