The Global Water Forum (GWF) has released a paper by Alice Cohen of Clark University, Massachussetts, US, which recommends considering watershed-based governance as a possible policy choice, rather than the scale at which good water governance necessarily takes place, noting that watershed-based models may be replacing electoral accountability with public participation.
2 December 2012: The Global Water Forum has released a paper, titled “Understanding the implications of rescaled water governance: From jurisdictional to watershed boundaries,” which argues for a more nuanced consideration of watersheds as natural units of management and governance.
The paper, authored by Alice Cohen of Clark University, Massachusetts, US, critically examines the view that decision making on a watershed scale will marshal more public participation and integrate a broader range of factors, such as urban and rural, and upstream and downstream uses, than decision making based on conventional administrative boundaries.
Her research, based on four Canadian provinces, recommends caution on several points. Cohen argues that while adopting a diversity of management strategies and practice may suit different hydrologic realities, this may occur at the expense of standards designed to safeguard public and environmental health. She further stresses that watersheds may lack the electoral accountability of municipalities, states, provinces or countries.
Cohen recommends considering watershed-based governance as a possible policy choice, rather than the scale at which good water governance necessarily takes place.
The Global Water Forum was established in 2010 as an initiative of the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Chair in Water Economics and Transboundary Water Governance in order to present knowledge and insight from water researchers and practitioners. [Publication: Understanding the Implications of Rescaled Water Governance: From Jurisdictional to Watershed Boundaries]