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, Richard S. Quilliam, 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.
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.