River contracts in north-east Italy: Water management or participatory processes?

IF 3.6 3区 社会学 Q1 GEOGRAPHY
Federico Venturini, Francesco Visentin
{"title":"River contracts in north-east Italy: Water management or participatory processes?","authors":"Federico Venturini,&nbsp;Francesco Visentin","doi":"10.1111/geoj.12473","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>River contracts (RCs) are voluntary agreements between stakeholders for managing water bodies and involve participatory, evidence-based action plans. Increasingly, European authorities recognise that effective water policies require bottom-up, inclusive decision-making. Despite widely held assumptions about the benefits of including stakeholders in river basin management and encouraging participatory mechanisms of decision-making, the growing rhetoric about the need for public engagement implies that this ‘new’ paradigm of water management remains filled with ambiguities. Adopting ethnographic methods and drawing on a variety of primary and secondary sources, this paper analyses three RCs in the Friuli Venezia Giulia region of Italy. These case studies reveal the potential for RCs as tools not only for water management, but also for increasing stakeholder involvement through place-making activities conceived as potential hydrophilic encounters. In order to understand whether RCs contribute to a fluvial sense of place, we looked at the effects of top-down versus participatory processes. We asked whether RCs were considered participatory processes designed to achieve a co-designed outcome or simply territorial management projects that objectify the river as something to be developed. We found that ratifying an RC was not, in itself, proof of an effective process; rather the nature and quality of an RC was determined by the degree and type of participation. We contend that participatory events and sharing information are not sufficient in themselves to achieve the active involvement of all stakeholders. We argue that the best framework for enabling place-making and enhancing a sense of place is to develop RCs within a process that includes a high degree of participation. This enables citizens to shift from simply being passive recipients of plans to becoming effective territorial actors.</p>","PeriodicalId":48023,"journal":{"name":"Geographical Journal","volume":"190 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/geoj.12473","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geographical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/geoj.12473","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

River contracts (RCs) are voluntary agreements between stakeholders for managing water bodies and involve participatory, evidence-based action plans. Increasingly, European authorities recognise that effective water policies require bottom-up, inclusive decision-making. Despite widely held assumptions about the benefits of including stakeholders in river basin management and encouraging participatory mechanisms of decision-making, the growing rhetoric about the need for public engagement implies that this ‘new’ paradigm of water management remains filled with ambiguities. Adopting ethnographic methods and drawing on a variety of primary and secondary sources, this paper analyses three RCs in the Friuli Venezia Giulia region of Italy. These case studies reveal the potential for RCs as tools not only for water management, but also for increasing stakeholder involvement through place-making activities conceived as potential hydrophilic encounters. In order to understand whether RCs contribute to a fluvial sense of place, we looked at the effects of top-down versus participatory processes. We asked whether RCs were considered participatory processes designed to achieve a co-designed outcome or simply territorial management projects that objectify the river as something to be developed. We found that ratifying an RC was not, in itself, proof of an effective process; rather the nature and quality of an RC was determined by the degree and type of participation. We contend that participatory events and sharing information are not sufficient in themselves to achieve the active involvement of all stakeholders. We argue that the best framework for enabling place-making and enhancing a sense of place is to develop RCs within a process that includes a high degree of participation. This enables citizens to shift from simply being passive recipients of plans to becoming effective territorial actors.

Abstract Image

意大利东北部的河流合同:水资源管理还是参与进程?
河流契约 (RC) 是利益相关者之间就水体管理达成的自愿协议,涉及参与式、基于证据的行动计划。欧洲当局越来越认识到,有效的水资源政策需要自下而上、具有包容性的决策。尽管人们普遍认为将利益相关者纳入流域管理并鼓励参与式决策机制有很多好处,但关于公众参与必要性的言论越来越多,这意味着这种 "新 "的水资源管理模式仍然充满了不确定性。本文采用人种学方法,利用各种原始和二手资料,分析了意大利弗留利-威尼斯-朱利亚地区的三个区域协调中心。这些案例研究揭示了区域协调中心的潜力,它不仅是水资源管理的工具,而且还能通过被视为潜在亲水接触的地方建设活动提高利益相关者的参与度。为了了解区域协调中心是否有助于形成河流地方感,我们研究了自上而下与参与式过程的效果。我们询问,区域协调是否被视为旨在实现共同设计成果的参与性过程,或者仅仅是将河流作为需要开发的对象的领土管理项目。我们发现,批准区域协调机制本身并不能证明该过程是有效的;区域协调机制的性质和质量取决于参与的程度和类型。我们认为,参与性活动和信息共享本身并不足以实现所有利益相关方的积极参与。我们认为,促进地方建设和增强地方感的最佳框架是在一个包含高度参与的过程中发展区域协调机制。这将使公民从计划的被动接受者转变为有效的地方行动者。
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
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
3.30%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: The Geographical Journal has been the academic journal of the Royal Geographical Society, under the terms of the Royal Charter, since 1893. It publishes papers from across the entire subject of geography, with particular reference to public debates, policy-orientated agendas.
×
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