43
Alec Rolston Towards Integrated Water Management (TIMe) Project Water Management and Community Engagement Workshop 25 November 2015
Alec Rolston
Towards Integrated Water Management (TIMe) Project
Water Management and Community Engagement Workshop
25 November 2015
Opening Take-Home Messages
95 % of survey respondents believe local communities should have a say in how the water environment is managed
81 % of survey respondents do not feel included in decisions about their water environment
Opening Take-Home Messages
www.globalwaterfund.com www.nocamels.com
TIMe Project Overarching Objective
To connect science, policy, managers and local communities for the integrated management of Ireland’s water resources to assist in delivering improvements in environmental status, water quality and water management
Analysing sound, robust international methodologies and assessing their potential application in Ireland
Examining solutions to promote integrated water management in Ireland, focussing on “bottom-up” approaches to engage and motivate local communities with regards to water management
TIMe Project Outline
6. Organisation of best practice IWRM/ICM and CE workshop
Work Package
Process
1. Review Integrated Water Resources Management and Integrated Catchment Management practices
2. Review international community engagement practices
3. Gap, risk and cost-benefit analyses
4. Survey of opinions of water managers and local communities in Ireland and the UK regarding current and future IWRM/ICM and community engagement theory and practices
5. Feasibility of Source Protection Planning at the larger catchment scale
TIMe Project - Establishment
• Active webpage, Facebook and Twitter pages
– 115 Twitter followers
– 468 Tweets
– 48,000 impressions (c. 2 % engagement rate)
www.dreamstime.com
Reviewing IWRM, ICM and Community Engagement
Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM)
“A process which promotes the coordinated development and management of water, land and related resources, in order to maximise the resultant economic and social welfare in an equitable manner without compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems”. (Global Water Partnership, 2000)
www.gwp.org
Reviewing IWRM, ICM and Community Engagement
Integrated Catchment Management
A subset of IWRM, based on the concept of catchments as biophysical units and integration of local community and scientific involvement, with appropriate organisational structures and policy objectives. (Daly, 2015)
www.esinternational.com
Reviewing IWRM, ICM and Community Engagement
Community
• Umbrella term, defined and used in a myriad of ways
• Used broadly to define groups of people; whether they are stakeholders, interest groups, citizen groups etc.
• Often implies a (false and misleading) sense of identity, harmony, cooperation and inclusiveness
www.gwp.org
Reviewing IWRM, ICM and Community Engagement
Engagement
• Generic term to describe broad interactions between people
• Includes a variety of approaches
– One-way communication
– Involvement and collaboration in decision-making
– Empowered action in informal groups or formal partnerships
Reviewing IWRM, ICM and Community Engagement
Community Engagement is a planned process with the specific purpose of working with identified groups of people, whether they are connected by geographic location, special interest or affiliation, to address issues affecting their well-being (QDES, 2001). Effective engagement leads to decisions, delivery and evaluation of services that have been shaped by the relevant people and communities.
NO MAGIC FORMULA!
Top down vs Bottom up engagement
Top-down engagement
• Typically driven by organisations (e.g. government agency)
• Often looking to fulfil ‘engagement obligations’
• Community input into project development is typically low
• Primary decision makers: Agency representatives, business leaders, appointed community reps
Top-down vs Bottom-up engagement
Bottom-up engagement
• Often driven by both organisations (e.g. government agency) AND communities
• Aim to rectify issues identified by communities
• Community ownership is high
• Primary decision makers: Community-appointed leaders, often in partnership with Agency representatives
Name of Method Brief Description
Brainstorming Workshop setting focussed on the collection of a large number of ideas on a specific
subject.
Citizen’s Jury A series of meetings, attended by a group of randomly selected people who represent the
public to learn about and discuss a specific issue and draw conclusions.
Focus Group Group interviews with 6-10 people at the same time.
Group Model Building Facilitated session in which participants build a model to improve their understanding of
the issue.
Interviews Discussions, usually with open questions and the possibility of extensive answers.
Problem/Cause Analysis In-depth analysis of causal network which is behind a problem.
Public Audience/Public
Hearing
Meeting which presents the public with information and provides a forum for answering
questions and collecting opinions.
Reframing Workshop Workshop setting which allows participants to explore different analytical frameworks and
refine their problem perception.
Review Sessions Workshop setting to monitor progress, keep momentum, discuss lessons learnt and
evaluate steps taken so far.
Role Playing Game Gaming situation in which players play roles in a real or imaginary context.
Round Table Conference Facilitated and reported open discussion between participants.
Scenario Building Workshop setting in which policy options for the present and the immediate future are
debated and their possible future consequences are explored.
Reviewing IWRM, ICM and Community Engagement
• Mainstream discourse regarding collaborative, integrated water management has evolved over the past 40 years (Ferreyra and Beard, 2007)
Characteristics 1980s 1990s 2000s onwards
Purpose Protection of groundwater and aquatic ecosystems.
Protection of groundwater and aquatic ecosystems.
Maximisation of economic welfare and social equity without compromising vital ecosystems.
Emphasis for integration
Land and water resources.
Land and water interests. Water and national policy sectors.
Rationale Interdependent nature of land and water resources within ecosystems requires a holistic approach to public administration.
Interdependent nature of social and ecological systems requires meaningful stakeholder involvement to encourage community ownership of problems and their solutions.
Interdependent nature of poverty and environmental degradation requires mainstreaming water in national economies by linking water resources planning to poverty, national security and trade policies.
Institutional focus
Intra- and inter-agency coordination at the catchment level.
Multi-stakeholder collaboration at the catchment level.
Cross-sectoral policy integration at the national level plus coordination and collaboration at the catchment level.
Reviewing IWRM, ICM and Community Engagement
Ireland • LIFE Projects – e.g.
Duhallow LIFE • An Taisce’s Green Schools
and Clean Coasts • Streamscapes • Kilmeena GWS and St
Brendan’s National School • Source protection – GSI,
DkIT, NFGWS
Examples of successful local water management community engagement programmes
Reviewing IWRM, ICM and Community Engagement
UK • River Trusts • Riverfly Partnership • Catchment Based
Approach (CaBa) • Water utility
partnerships – e.g. Upstream Thinking
• Love Your River Telford Project
Examples of successful local water management community engagement programmes
Reviewing IWRM, ICM and Community Engagement
Australia
• Landcare
• Catchment Management Authorities/NRM Boards
• CLLMM Programme – especially Community Hubs and Community Revegetation Programme
Examples of successful local water management community engagement programmes
Source Protection Planning
Source Protection Planning
• Undertake feasibility assessment of current source protection planning best practice for large urban areas with large surface water catchments
Source Protection Planning
Catchment Characteristics
Identification of water sources
(surface & groundwater)
Catchment characterisation
(topography, soils, land use etc.)
Assessment of vulnerability to
contamination
Source Protection Zones
Co
mm
un
ity
bu
y-in
Protection Responses
Characterisation of risk from point
and diffuse sources of pollution
Specific response dependent on
degree of risk
Co
mm
un
ity
bu
y-in
Source Protection Strategy
Source Protection Planning
Assessing current opinion on IWRM, ICM and Community
Engagement
Assessing current opinion on IWRM, ICM and Community
Engagement
• Survey released for public participation from 23 March – 30 April.
• Three sections:
– Demographics
– Water and the environment
– Water management and community engagement
Assessing current opinion on IWRM, ICM and Community
Engagement
• Opportunity to assess opinions in both Republic of Ireland and the UK
• Survey promoted through social media, targeted emails and an article in Rural Water News (circulation c. 3,000).
• Total of 520 responses received (415 from Republic of Ireland; 105 from UK)
Survey Key Results
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
Water manager Member of the public Environmentalprofessional
Group Water Schememember
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f R
esp
on
den
ts
Societal Group
RoI
UK
Societal Groupings
Survey Key Results
• In Ireland: 59% respondents receive drinking water from Irish Water (GWS: 25%; Private well 15%).
• 79 % of Irish respondents satisfied with drinking water supply (UK: 84%). Reason for
dissatisfaction
Proportion of Respondents (%)
Overall Republic of Ireland United Kingdom
The water doesn’t taste
good
40.7 42.9 28.6
The water doesn’t look
good
17.9 20.4 7.1
Too expensive 16.3 8.2 50
Poor supply pressure 8.9 9.2 7.1
Other (16.3) (19.4) (7.1)
Hardness 8.9 8.2 7.1
Addition of fluoride 4.1 5.1 0
High chlorine levels 2.4 5.1 0
High trihalomethane
levels
0.8 1.0 0
Survey Key Results
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f R
esp
on
ses
Value
Unimportant
Neither Importantnor Unimportant
Important
The perceived importance of values of local waterbodies
Survey Key Results
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f R
esp
on
ses
Pressure
Bad Effect
No Effect
Good Effect
The overall perception of pressures having good, bad or no effect on local water bodies.
Survey Key Results
Awareness of the terms IWRM, ICM and Community Engagement
Survey Key Results
• 81% of respondents do not currently feel included in the decisions about their water environment (RoI: 83%; UK: 77%)
• 95% of respondents believe local communities should have a say in how the water environment is managed.
• Only 32% of respondents had been invited to attend a community event regarding local water issues.
• Community days and public meetings in a local venue identified as most effective events to engage local communities.
• People typically not willing to travel more than 20 km to attend an event
Survey Key Results
Potential incentives that may increase community involvement in water management issues.
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
Individual financialincentive
Financial incentivefor community
projects
Commitment tomore water
managementactivities in local
area
Improvedengagement
regarding localwater
managementactivities
Reduced waterbills following
local volunteering
None of the above Other
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f R
esp
on
de
nts
Incentive
Overall
RoI
UK
Reviewing IWRM, ICM and Community Engagement
Types of activities communities can become involved in
Example of activity Likely organising body
Organised litter picking events along local water bodies
NGO, Local Authority, Angling Group, Group Water Scheme, Tidy Towns
Contributing to water-related public participation calls – e.g. Significant Water Management Issues for Ireland (SWMI: www.environ.ie)
Government Agency, Local Authority
Assisting in removal of invasive species NGO, Local Authority
Arranging community discussions on local water issues
NGO, Local Authority, Group Water Scheme, Angling Group, Tidy Towns
Undertaking water quality monitoring Academic institutions (e.g. UCD’s ‘Freshwater Detective’ course), Group Water Scheme, NGO
Assisting in local water body restoration NGO, Local Authority
Involvement with local Group Water Scheme Group Water Scheme, NFWGS
Points to Consider (Courtesy: Sean Corrigan)
• Localise the issue
• Make the key messages relevant to the local community
• Identify respected local stakeholders
• Pitch projects in an engaging way
• Ensure sufficient resources and tools to complete the project
• Provide a localised platform for local stakeholders to show off their work or project
Gap, Risk and Cost Benefit Analysis
Gap, Risk and Cost Benefit Analysis
• Communication and engagement activities of EPA Catchments, Septic Tanks and Radon Units, WFD River Basin Management Districts, Local Authorities and Irish Water assessed.
• Nine key gaps between research, policy and on-ground implementation currently identified.
• Risk assessment of implications of both filling and not filling key gaps undertaken.
• Qualitative Cost Benefit Analysis undertaken.
ICM Gap Analysis
Gap 1
Presence of a national water/ICM focussed community engagement framework, supported by policy, which encompasses the National Framework-Local Delivery Model to ensure consistency of engagement practices throughout Ireland.
Gap 2
Community managed hubs as focal points for community access to water management/ICM resources.
Gap 3
Strategic initiatives which encourage local business to support local water management initiatives.
Gap 4
National Integrated Catchment Management-focussed primary and secondary school educational initiatives.
Progress to date – Gap Analysis
Gap 5
Integrated Catchment Management-centred citizen science initiatives that focus on local water management and water quality issues.
Gap 6
Local Integrated Catchment Management-focussed initiatives that communities can become involved in.
Gap 7
Awareness raising of local water management issues
Gap 8
Appropriate monitoring and evaluation of community engagement initiatives
Gap 9
One-stop website providing guidance and advice on ICM (e.g. CaBA)
Launching March 2015
Extra TIMe
‘Developing the Concept of Catchment Services for Progress
Towards Integrated Water Management (Extra TIMe)’
‘Extra TIMe’ Project COMING SOON!
