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...
Main Authors: | , |
---|---|
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 |