Political pitfalls of integrated watershed management
Political pitfalls of integrated watershed management
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/08941920590894435
复制
发表时间：
2005-02-01
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Schlager, E
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Blomquist, W;Schlager, E
几十年来，水政策文献和其他方面一直规定最好在流域或流域管理机构的指导下进行流域综合管理。这一建议很少得到执行。处方和实践之间的这种差距有时被归因于政治，作为一种通过理性，全面，基于共识的决策来克服或避免的麻烦。然而，基本的政治考虑是水资源管理中固有的，即使实现了流域规模决策机构的愿望，也是不可避免的。边界的定义，决策安排的选择，以及问责问题将出现在任何流域，并可能有助于解释为什么流域管理往往采取多中心的组织形式组成的利益亚流域社区。一个小的南加州流域的例子是用来强调在流域管理的尝试固有的政治问题。
Integrated watershed management, preferably under the direction of a watershed or basin management body, has been prescribed in the water policy literature and from other quarters for decades. Few instances may be found where this recommendation has been implemented. This gap between prescription and practice is sometimes attributed to politics, as a sort of nuisance to he overcome or avoided through rational, comprehensive, consensus-based decision making. Fundamental political considerations are inherent in water resources management, however, and are unavoidable even if the desire,for watershed-scale decision-snaking bodies were realized. Boundary definition, choices about decision-making arrangements, and issues of accountability will arise in any watershed and may help to explain why watershed management has more often taken polycentric organizational forms composed of subwatershed communities of interest. An example of a small Southern California watershed is used to highlight the political issues inherent in attempts at watershed management.