Beyond the surface: Understanding problem context in water governance

How water governance paradigms perceive problem context

As influential drivers of political actions across various levels, paradigms in water governance hold substantial influence in defining problems and offering solutions (Challies & Newig, 2022). The interpretive frameworks embedded within paradigms play a crucial role in shaping decisions regarding the appropriate policy objectives based on the perceived problems and the selection of instruments to achieve these objectives (Hall, 1993). Consequently, different paradigms offer distinct perspectives on problems, influencing not only the proposed solutions but also the types of governance structures they advocate for. For instance, the adaptive water governance paradigm focuses on addressing the challenges of managing water resources in the context of complexity and high uncertainty (Chaffin et al., 2014), while the hydraulic mission paradigm centers on the idea of exerting control over nature (Molle et al., 2009). It is noteworthy that water governance paradigms sometimes place greater emphasis on water-related problems and their underlying causes than on proposing governance solutions (Bilalova, Jager, et al., n.d.). Having problem context in the heart of paradigms also reflects itself in the patterns in the observation of paradigms across different water-related problématiques (e.g., prominence of “community-based management” paradigm across the cases with “groundwater exploitation in agriculture” problématique, while none across no cases “surface-water pollution” (Bilalova, Newig et al., n.d.) (Figure 1; Bilalova, Newig  et al., n.d.).

Water-related problématiques
Based on the archetype analysis of 160 cases, we identified five distinct water-related problématiques “groundwater exploitation in agriculture,” “land and water systems sustainability,” “surface water pollution,” “industrial and household water security,” and “hydropower vs. water ecology” (Bilalova, Villamayor-Tomas et al., n.d). The analysis of the problématiques shows that they often exhibit geographical patterns and regional associations. Another interesting observation is related to varying complexity levels among these problématiques. As such, certain problématiques, such as “land and water systems sustainability” and “industrial and household water security,” appear to be more complex and internally diverse than others encompassing a wider array of uses and sustainability issues. Some water-related issues within these problématiques, particularly those addressing diffuse pollution or the indirect repercussions of changes in land use, can also be categorized as "wicked problems," characterized by their high degree of uncertainty, complex systems, and divergent values (Head, 2022; Kirschke et al., 2019).

Groundwater exploitation for agriculture

Number of cases: 56 (35% of total cases)

Main characteristics: Cases addressing the quantity aspect of groundwater withdrawal for agricultural activities.

Three most dominant geographical region among cases: Europe (12), Northern America (11), and Southern Asia (10).  

Case example: In the case study, Ratna Reddy et al. (2014)examine the functioning and efficacy of groundwater management institutions operating in Andhra Pradesh state in South India. In this region, groundwater resources are scarce but crucial for supporting agricultural activities (Ratna Reddy et al., 2014). The authors discuss how a farmer-managed groundwater system, implementing water-saving techniques, has resulted in a reduction in groundwater pumping (Ratna Reddy et al., 2014).

Land and water systems sustainability

Number of cases: 38 (24% of total cases)

Main characteristics: Cases addressing landscape development as well as ecosystem conservation linked to sustainable management of land and water systems. Encompasses a wider scope of sustainability issues and water uses.

Three most dominant geographical region among cases: Northern America (12), Eastern Africa (7), and Eastern Asia (5)

Case example: In this case, the Lynnhaven watershed, situated in a densely populated and urbanized region, faced challenges related to non-point source pollution from residential runoff (J. C. Morris et al., 2014). The study explored how local grassroots environmental organizations played a crucial role in enhancing water quality in this area (J. C. Morris et al., 2014).

Surface water pollution

Number of cases: 30 (19% of total cases)

Main characteristics: Cases dealing with water quality issues related to pollutant discharge into surface water resources. 

Three most dominant geographical region among cases: Europe (8), Eastern Asia (7), and South-eastern Asia (5)

Case example: In the case study, Namara et al. (2018) investigate water quality governance in the Cisadane watershed located in Tangerang. The watershed plays a critical role as a primary source of drinking water supply for the local community (Namara et al., 2018). However, it faces significant challenges in terms of water pollution, largely stemming from domestic wastewater and waste disposal into rivers (Namara et al., 2018).

Industrial and household water supply

Number of cases: 30 (19% of total cases)

Main characteristics: The main focus being on water quantity and quality issues linked to domestic and industrial water uses. Cases being most diverse in terms of resources (mainly groundwater and unconventional water resources, such as harvested rainfall-runoff water and [reclaimed] wastewater), their uses (such as domestic and industrial uses), and sustainability issues (mainly water quantity and quality). 

Three most dominant geographical region among cases: Northern America (5), South America (4), and Europe (4).

Case example: The case study by L. Morris and Cabrera (2003) delves into the intricate challenge faced by the city of Aguascalientes, which experienced a significant decline in groundwater supply due to the escalating demands for water across industry, agriculture, and household. They examine the role of the private sector in providing water services, particularly in addressing the water needs of the urban poor in Aguascalientes (L. Morris & Cabrera, 2003).

Hydropower vs. water ecology

Number of cases: 13 (8% of total cases)

Main characteristics: Cases addressing the implications of hydropower production on sustainably, mainly on water quantity and aquatic biodiversity. 

Three most dominant geographical region among cases: South-eastern Asia (5), Northern America (4), and Eastern Asia (1). 

Case example: In their study, Yang et al. (2016) examine the implications of river developments in China's river management system, associated with hydropower generation, acquisition of freshwater and other resources. Importantly, they focus on the ecological impacts stemming from these developments (Yang et al., 2016).

Water-related problématiques and governance arrangements

In regards to the characteristics of different governance arrangements put in place to address certain water-related issue, some of the results from the review we conducted (Bilalova, Newig et al., n.d.) are quite interesting (see Figure 2; Bilalova, Newig et al., n.d.). For instance, water governance in the case of "hydropower vs. water ecology" is usually distinct, mainly characterized by capacity, governance being on a basin or catchment scale, and multi-level governance. Meanwhile, we cannot observe characteristics, such as water rights or sectoral integration in this specific problématique. Another interesting result was in the case of “land and water systems sustainability”, as the problématiques accommodated most cases of governance on the basin and catchment scale across all problématiques. 

In this vignette, I have presented five water-related problématiques drawn from our study (Bilalova, Villamayor-Tomas et al., n.d.) and discussed the role of problem context in water governance. Integrating problem context into the analysis of water governance holds great value, particularly in advancing the diagnostic approach. As such, water-related problématiques encompass several similarities and differences, creating an opportunity to examine the governance arrangements established to address specific problems and explore the combination of variables that lead to particular outcomes. Furthermore, cases that share common problématiques can also provide insights into which policy instruments have proven effective in addressing a specific problem, thereby guiding the design of evidence-based policies.