Catalyzing Change: Social Science for Water Resources Management

Managing water resources is becoming increasingly difficult as demographic, economic, institutional, technological, and climate changes manifest across the U.S. and around the world (Cosgrove and Louchs 2015). These extraordinarily complex water quality and quantity challenges facing water resource management are “wicked problems” (Gold et al. 2013). Wicked problems - those that are difficult to resolve because of complexity, uncertainty, and divergence and fragmentation in viewpoints, values, and intentions (Rittel and Webber 1973; Head 2008) - arise in numerous resource management contexts. The act of simply trying to define the problem illustrates the level of difficulty associated with resolution. For example, multiple perspectives on an issue, the level to which numerous social and natural systems are connected, and the overwhelming number of potential fixes that need to be understood to clearly define the issue make water management a wicked problem.

Historically, water problems have been regarded as requiring engineering or technological fixes. However, because most water problems are largely the result of human activity (Schultz 2011; Rockström et al. 2014), it is the social - not technical - complexity of these problems that overwhelms water management. Social factors (e.g., equity, water rights, norms, attitudes, values, beliefs, etc.) are often the primary determinants of management success or failure (Mascia et al. 2003; Floress et al. 2015). Thus, the resolution or mitigation of wicked water problems requires interdisciplinary collaboration, particularly from the social sciences, to foster new thinking, behavior, and innovative ideas for management of water resources under conditions of rapid change and uncertainty (Jury and Vaux 2005).

Despite the social complexity of water challenges, most people working in water resource management are trained in the bio-physical sciences, in turn limiting access to knowledge that could be gained from social sciences (Floress et al. 2015). Water resource professionals and the staffs of myriad water-related agencies tend to have backgrounds in engineering, hydrology, ecology, aquatic sciences, and so on. Thus, agencies and organizations may not have the necessary skills to effectively address the human dimensions of water resource management (Sexton et al. 2013). Many lack the capacity to deal with the social complexity and interdependencies of current water resource management. “The management of water resources is currently undergoing a paradigm shift toward a more integrated and participatory management style” (Pahl-Wostl et al. 2007, p. 1) in order to address “complex interdependencies, human behavior and social institutions” (Pahl-Wostl et al. 2012, p. 25). Future water management will require new and continuous learning, new patterns of behavior, and innovative thinking (Uhl-Bien et al. 2007; Berry 2017). This requires that water resource managers develop the capacity to catalyze change and advance innovative solutions within integrated and participatory management approaches.

Since most wicked water resource problems are caused by or concern human behavior, leaders in water resource management must understand and be capable of changing behavior to solve them (Schultz 2011; Faruqi 2012). Development of essential skills to catalyze change or respond to external catalysts (e.g. Prokopy et al. 2014) is paramount. Catalyzing change begins with new knowledge and readiness to change. The ability to create and transfer new knowledge is a foundational skill to effect change in others, communities, or policy (Schultz 2002; Kaiser and Fuhrer 2003).

However, those involved in water resource management must also be able to motivate change in others, develop the ability to assist others in sustaining the behavior change, and recognize and support the practice of the behavior change (Beer et al. 2016). They must facilitate others engagement with new concepts in the context of their own lives, critical reflection, and reinforcement for the new behavior to become enduring (Bandura 1977; Argyris and Schon 1978; Mezirow 1997).

To change behaviors, we have to understand how to train leaders in social science skills and evaluating success. This special issue uses case studies to demonstrate how social science concepts, theories, and methods are used to catalyze change across a range of water resource management issues and geographic scales. Supporting water management programs with information from the social sciences provides a framework for program design, implementation, and evaluation necessary for resolving wicked problems.

Through a series of case studies predominantly from the Midwestern United States, this issue provides those involved with water management - or students learning about it - a resource useful for understanding how social science research can help them achieve desired outcomes more effectively. The case studies range from using applied gaming to expand knowledge of water issues to evaluating statewide water leadership programs, and each includes practical applications and impacts related to using specific social science approaches (Table 1). Together, the cases accentuate the need for partnerships between social scientists and practitioners.

Burbach and Reimers-Hild use leadership theory to develop catalysts of change in a comprehensive water leadership academy in Nebraska. They describe how future water leadership programs must evolve to meet the increasing challenges facing water management. They use pre- and post-program skills assessment and other program evaluation methods to demonstrate how a process-based curriculum with developmental experiences can affect behavior change in participants. This article demonstrates how the social sciences can guide the construction, conduct, and assessment of a water leaders development program.

In the following article, Bonnell et al. used interviews with watershed professionals to develop a framework of effective watershed leadership that has three categories of skills: technical, administrative, and social. The results from these interviews inform understanding of collaborative watershed management in general. More specifically these results are used to improve programming in the Ohio Watershed Leadership Academy.

Kaufman et al. demonstrate how they used a mixed methods research approach to explore and explain eco-leadership in the context of community organizations that have the potential to engage in community watershed protection efforts. They demonstrate the value of both quantitative and qualitative strands to enrich our understanding of eco-leadership.

Moving away from leadership-related research, Bathke et al. describe the utility of applied games for public participation and expanding systems thinking regarding resource management issues. Within the context of an agricultural watershed, the authors develop, implement, and evaluate a Multi-Hazard Tournament requiring participants to collaboratively adapt to flooding, droughts, and water quality changes that stem from climate extremes. They show how the game improved participants’ knowledge of issues and potential actions; knowledge of and opportunities for collaboration with other participants; and feelings of empowerment to put their new knowledge and skills to work when making decisions.

Bentlage et al. describe how they developed a community-based social marketing campaign to influence the awareness, attitudes, and behaviors of riparian landowners and recreational users of a river in northwestern Indiana. Focusing on the role of freshwater mussels and their dependence on clean water, this social marketing campaign was informed by in-person and mail baseline surveys and a stakeholder input session. At the completion of the campaign, surveys were again used to evaluate overall success. This article illustrates how social science data can be used both before and after an outreach campaign.

A comprehensive evaluation of a collaborative watershed management process in North Central Indiana is presented by Church et al. Ongoing efforts to encourage farmers to adopt conservation practices in the predominantly agricultural Beargrass Watershed were enhanced in 2014 with an infusion of monetary and technical support to the local Soil and Water Conservation District. They discuss how surveys and interviews conducted at the beginning of this process helped to inform the subsequent messaging of practices to farmers and how participant observation during the outreach stage of the project was used to continue to refine messaging. Finally, they discuss how end-of-project surveys and interviews were used to evaluate the effectiveness of the watershed process.

Floress et al. describe an investigation of good water governance principles to support managing Lake Wausau, an impounded lake on the Wisconsin River. Intended to support the work of local leaders and resource management professionals, they used policy content analysis, semi-structured interviews, and a web-based survey to assess the extent to which the system of governance was transparent, effective, equitable, accountable, and appropriately scaled. They discuss barriers to and opportunities for a more effective system of governance, along with suggestions for projects considering similar endeavors.

Complex water resource management requires interdisciplinary collaboration. Those involved in water resource management are increasingly called upon to incorporate social science theories, concepts, and methods into their practice to solve wicked water problems involving human behaviors and institutions. It is our hope that the cases in this special issue highlight some of the ways in which social science has contributed to more effective water programs.

The inspiration for this special issue and the ideas in this overview article come from NC1190: Catalysts for Water Resources Protection and Restoration: Applied Social Science Research. This is a USDA Multistate Research Project supported by State Agricultural Experiment Stations (SAES) from the Hatch Multistate Research Fund (MRF) provided by the National Institute for Food and Agriculture (NIFA).

Mark Burbach (corresponding author) is an Environmental Scientist in the Conservation and Survey Division of the School of Natural Resources at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. His research interests are focused on the human dimensions of natural resource management, specifically leadership, collaborative management, environmental governance, and sustainable agricultural practices. He has a Ph.D. in Leadership Studies from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. He can be contacted at [email protected] or via mail at 623 Hardin Hall, 3310 Holdrege Street, Lincoln, NE 68583-0996.

Kristin Floress is a Research Social Scientist with the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Northern Research Station. She studies and models the relationships among social factors on natural resources planning, management, conservation, and restoration. Her work ranges from understanding conservation decisions on private lands to cross-boundary landscape scale conservation. In collaboration with land managers, scientists across disciplines, and non-governmental organizations, her work contributes to sustainable management of natural resources. She may be contacted at [email protected].

Linda Prokopy is a Professor of Natural Resources Social Science at Purdue University and directs the university’s Natural Resources Social Science Lab. Linda has mentored dozens of graduate students and post-doctoral research assistants. She also co-directs the Natural Resources and Environmental Science interdisciplinary undergraduate major. Linda teaches courses on topics such as social science research methods and climate change policy. Linda’s research and extension work focus on watershed management, adoption of conservation behaviors, sustainable agriculture, climate change, and public participation. She may be contacted at [email protected].