Deliberative democracy in Canadian watershed governance

Bottom-up watershed governance that features citizen engagement in decision-making is touted as a panacea for better social and environmental outcomes. However, there is limited agreement on how exactly this engagement occurs, and how it can be assessed. Water decision-making may result in better...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Margot Hurlbert, Evan Andrews
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Water Alternatives Association 2018-02-01
Series:Water Alternatives
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.water-alternatives.org/index.php/alldoc/articles/vol11/v11issue1/426-a11-1-9/file
id doaj-d0e3fa225aaf49619e377f17baca3638
record_format Article
spelling doaj-d0e3fa225aaf49619e377f17baca36382020-11-24T22:08:35ZengWater Alternatives AssociationWater Alternatives1965-01751965-01752018-02-01111163186Deliberative democracy in Canadian watershed governance Margot Hurlbert0Evan Andrews1University of Regina, Regina, SK, Canada University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada; Bottom-up watershed governance that features citizen engagement in decision-making is touted as a panacea for better social and environmental outcomes. However, there is limited agreement on how exactly this engagement occurs, and how it can be assessed. Water decision-making may result in better social outcomes when decision-making is deliberative and democratic. This article brings together a cross-disciplinary framework to assess deliberative democratic practices in local water councils (LWCs) in the Prairie Provinces, Canada. We apply this framework to assess and compare LWCS, using data from a review of secondary sources and semistructured qualitative interviews with members of LWCs. Our framework was useful for identifying strengths and shortcomings of deliberative democracy within and across LWCs. The strengths of the Manitoba model are its significant mandate and stable tax funding. Alberta’s strengths are in the areas of community representation and significant contested deliberation. Saskatchewan’s strengths are its interconnectedness with other organisations, sectors, and governments. While LWCs have made important contributions to local watershed governance, a consideration and comparison of deliberative democratic practices offers options for policy change strengthening the deliberative democratic practices of LWCs.http://www.water-alternatives.org/index.php/alldoc/articles/vol11/v11issue1/426-a11-1-9/fileDeliberative democracywatershedwater governanceAlbertaSaskatchewanManitobaCanada
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Margot Hurlbert
Evan Andrews
spellingShingle Margot Hurlbert
Evan Andrews
Deliberative democracy in Canadian watershed governance
Water Alternatives
Deliberative democracy
watershed
water governance
Alberta
Saskatchewan
Manitoba
Canada
author_facet Margot Hurlbert
Evan Andrews
author_sort Margot Hurlbert
title Deliberative democracy in Canadian watershed governance
title_short Deliberative democracy in Canadian watershed governance
title_full Deliberative democracy in Canadian watershed governance
title_fullStr Deliberative democracy in Canadian watershed governance
title_full_unstemmed Deliberative democracy in Canadian watershed governance
title_sort deliberative democracy in canadian watershed governance
publisher Water Alternatives Association
series Water Alternatives
issn 1965-0175
1965-0175
publishDate 2018-02-01
description Bottom-up watershed governance that features citizen engagement in decision-making is touted as a panacea for better social and environmental outcomes. However, there is limited agreement on how exactly this engagement occurs, and how it can be assessed. Water decision-making may result in better social outcomes when decision-making is deliberative and democratic. This article brings together a cross-disciplinary framework to assess deliberative democratic practices in local water councils (LWCs) in the Prairie Provinces, Canada. We apply this framework to assess and compare LWCS, using data from a review of secondary sources and semistructured qualitative interviews with members of LWCs. Our framework was useful for identifying strengths and shortcomings of deliberative democracy within and across LWCs. The strengths of the Manitoba model are its significant mandate and stable tax funding. Alberta’s strengths are in the areas of community representation and significant contested deliberation. Saskatchewan’s strengths are its interconnectedness with other organisations, sectors, and governments. While LWCs have made important contributions to local watershed governance, a consideration and comparison of deliberative democratic practices offers options for policy change strengthening the deliberative democratic practices of LWCs.
topic Deliberative democracy
watershed
water governance
Alberta
Saskatchewan
Manitoba
Canada
url http://www.water-alternatives.org/index.php/alldoc/articles/vol11/v11issue1/426-a11-1-9/file
work_keys_str_mv AT margothurlbert deliberativedemocracyincanadianwatershedgovernance
AT evanandrews deliberativedemocracyincanadianwatershedgovernance
_version_ 1725815852096290816