IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i12p4405-d185413.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From Collaborative to Hegemonic Water Resource Governance through Dualism and Jeong : Lessons Learned from the Daegu-Gumi Water Intake Source Conflict in Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Ki Woong Cho

    (Department of Public Administration and New Publicness Education and Research in the New Normal Era, Brain Korea 21 Plus, Korea University, Seoul 02841, Korea)

  • Kyujin Jung

    (Department of Public Administration and the Graduate School of Governance, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul 03063, Korea)

Abstract

Recently, water supplies have been insufficient in some areas. In South Korea, using dualism and Jeong ish citizenship, we will demonstrate why collaborative governance of the Daegu–Gumi Water Commission has not worked and how it has been mismanaged by its stakeholders. We discuss the conflict between the Daegu Metropolitan City (hereafter referred to as City of Daegu) and the City of Gumi regarding the relocation of the water intake source. In response to many water pollution accidents, the City of Daegu decided to move the water intake source to near the City of Gumi. Due to a conflict between the cities on this issue, the city established a collaborative governance entity, the Daegu–Gumi Water Commission. However, this form of governance was not successful, and eventually, the Daegu–Gumi Water Commission moved from collaborative governance to hegemonic governance. This was due to dualism and Jeong ish citizenship with weak membership, participation, experience, and social capital on the local level as South Korean civil societies tend to have insufficient power and experience to fulfill their intentions or negotiate successfully. The Daegu–Gumi Water Commission failed to reach a consensus and to realize a truly collaborative governance process.

Suggested Citation

  • Ki Woong Cho & Kyujin Jung, 2018. "From Collaborative to Hegemonic Water Resource Governance through Dualism and Jeong : Lessons Learned from the Daegu-Gumi Water Intake Source Conflict in Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-18, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:12:p:4405-:d:185413
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/12/4405/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/12/4405/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas C Beierle & David M Konisky, 2001. "What are we Gaining from Stakeholder Involvement? Observations from Environmental Planning in the Great Lakes," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 19(4), pages 515-527, August.
    2. Elinor Ostrom, 2010. "Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(3), pages 641-672, June.
    3. Pieter Glasbergen & Peter P J Driessen, 2005. "Interactive Planning of Infrastructure: The Changing Role of Dutch Project Management," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 23(2), pages 263-277, April.
    4. Erik Swyngedouw, 2005. "Governance Innovation and the Citizen: The Janus Face of Governance-beyond-the-State," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 42(11), pages 1991-2006, October.
    5. Shashi Kolavalli & John Kerr, 2002. "Scaling up Participatory Watershed Development in India," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 33(2), pages 213-235, April.
    6. Ismael Blanco, 2013. "Analysing Urban Governance Networks: Bringing Regime Theory Back in," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 31(2), pages 276-291, April.
    7. Jen Nelles, 2013. "Cooperation and Capacity? Exploring the Sources and Limits of City-Region Governance Partnerships," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 1349-1367, July.
    8. Lennox, James & Proctor, Wendy & Russell, Shona, 2011. "Structuring stakeholder participation in New Zealand's water resource governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1381-1394, May.
    9. Peter North, 2000. "Is There Space for Organisation from Below within the UK Government's Action Zones? A Test of 'Collaborative Planning'," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 37(8), pages 1261-1278, July.
    10. Chris Huxham, 2003. "Theorizing collaboration practice," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(3), pages 401-423, September.
    11. Christopher Short & Michael Winter, 1999. "The Problem of Common Land: Towards Stakeholder Governance," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(5), pages 613-630.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yuki Arai & Maswadi & Shenny Oktoriana & Anita Suharyani & Didik & Makoto Inoue, 2021. "How Can We Mitigate Power Imbalances in Collaborative Environmental Governance? Examining the Role of the Village Facilitation Team Approach Observed in West Kalimantan, Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-24, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Robert Hrelja & Fredrik Pettersson & Stig Westerdahl, 2016. "The Qualities Needed for a Successful Collaboration: A Contribution to the Conceptual Understanding of Collaboration for Efficient Public Transport," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-15, June.
    2. Fabien Martinez, 2015. "A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Framework of Corporate Water Responsibility," Post-Print hal-02887624, HAL.
    3. Thomas J.M. Mattijssen & Arjen A.E. Buijs & Birgit H.M. Elands & Bas J.M. Arts & Rosalie I. van Dam & Josine L.M. Donders, 2019. "The Transformative Potential of Active Citizenship: Understanding Changes in Local Governance Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-16, October.
    4. Eloi Laurent & Jean Jouzel, 2018. "The Well-being Transition: Measuring what counts to protect what matters," Sciences Po publications 35, Sciences Po.
    5. Moeliono, Moira & Brockhaus, Maria & Gallemore, Caleb & Dwisatrio, Bimo & Maharani, Cynthia D. & Muharrom, Efrian & Pham, Thuy Thu, 2020. "REDD+ in Indonesia: A new mode of governance or just another project?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    6. Górriz-Mifsud, Elena & Olza Donazar, Luis & Montero Eseverri, Eduardo & Marini Govigli, Valentino, 2019. "The challenges of coordinating forest owners for joint management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 100-109.
    7. Georgina Blakeley, 2010. "Governing Ourselves: Citizen Participation and Governance in Barcelona and Manchester," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(1), pages 130-145, March.
    8. McCloskey Deirdre Nansen, 2018. "The Two Movements in Economic Thought, 1700–2000: Empty Economic Boxes Revisited," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-20, December.
    9. Martin G. Kocher & Fangfang Tan & Jing Yu, 2018. "Providing Global Public Goods: Electoral Delegation And Cooperation," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(1), pages 381-397, January.
    10. Anders Melander & Tomas Mullern & David Anderssson & Fredrik Elgh & Malin Löfving, 2022. "Bridging the Knowledge Gap in Collaborative Research—in Dialogues We Trust," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(5), pages 655-677, October.
    11. Jorge M. Streb & Gustavo Torrens, 2011. "Meaningful talk," CEMA Working Papers: Serie Documentos de Trabajo. 443, Universidad del CEMA, revised May 2017.
    12. Carmelina Bevilacqua & Yapeng Ou & Pasquale Pizzimenti & Guglielmo Minervino, 2019. "New Public Institutional Forms and Social Innovation in Urban Governance: Insights from the “Mayor’s Office of New Urban Mechanics” (MONUM) in Boston," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-24, December.
    13. Andy Gouldson & Rory Sullivan, 2014. "Understanding the Governance of Corporations: An Examination of the Factors Shaping UK Supermarket Strategies on Climate Change," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(12), pages 2972-2990, December.
    14. Esin Özdemir & Ayda Eraydin, 2017. "Fragmentation in Urban Movements: The Role of Urban Planning Processes," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(5), pages 727-748, September.
    15. Sonal Shree & Yogesh Brahmankar & Ardhendu Shekhar Singh, 2020. "Inmates as Labour Pool: A Case of Inter-organizational Collaboration," South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases, , vol. 9(2), pages 259-272, August.
    16. David Klenert & Franziska Funke & Linus Mattauch & Brian O’Callaghan, 2020. "Five Lessons from COVID-19 for Advancing Climate Change Mitigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(4), pages 751-778, August.
    17. Thomas Vendryes, 2014. "Peasants Against Private Property Rights: A Review Of The Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 971-995, December.
    18. Michael Peneder & Spyros Arvanitis & Christian Rammer & Tobias Stucki & Martin Wörter, 2022. "Policy instruments and self-reported impacts of the adoption of energy saving technologies in the DACH region," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 49(2), pages 369-404, May.
    19. McNamara Madeleine W., 2011. "Processes of Cross-Sector Collaboration: A Case Study of the Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program," Nonprofit Policy Forum, De Gruyter, vol. 2(2), pages 1-22, November.
    20. Meyer, Camille, 2020. "The commons: A model for understanding collective action and entrepreneurship in communities," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 35(5).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:12:p:4405-:d:185413. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.