IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirc/v32y2014i1p20-38.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating Collaborative Institutions in Context: The Case of Regional Water Management in Southern California

Author

Listed:
  • Sara Hughes

    (University of California, Los Angeles, Institute for the Environment and Sustainability; current affiliation: National Center for Atmospheric Research, Research Applications Laboratory, PO Box 3000, Boulder, CO 80307, USA)

  • Stephanie Pincetl

    (University of California, Los Angeles, Institute for the Environment and Sustainability, La Kretz Hall, Suite 300, 619 Charles E. Young Dr. East, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA)

Abstract

Regional collaborative institutions are seen as tools for improving collaboration and for reducing the inefficiency of fragmented management and planning. However, recent research has shown that the ability of new regional institutions to achieve these aims is contingent upon their relationship to the existing institutional landscape. This paper uses network analyses of six newly created Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) subregions in southern California to examine how their introduction intersects existing water management systems and whether the patterns of interaction in water planning have changed as a result. The results further our understanding of collaborative governance and regionalism by showing that the ability of regional institutions to facilitate new interactions can vary widely across a given institutional landscape. Further, while IRWM has helped to strengthen the water management network in southern California, it has not replaced existing watershed planning efforts. Interviews with water managers reveal there is support for IRWM but it is still too early to evaluate its effectiveness. Further research should explore the drivers and consequences of heterogeneity in IRWM and whether the incentives for participation are sufficient.

Suggested Citation

  • Sara Hughes & Stephanie Pincetl, 2014. "Evaluating Collaborative Institutions in Context: The Case of Regional Water Management in Southern California," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 32(1), pages 20-38, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:32:y:2014:i:1:p:20-38
    DOI: 10.1068/c1210
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/c1210
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/c1210?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sarah Connick & Judith Innes, 2003. "Outcomes of Collaborative Water Policy Making: Applyxsing Complexity Thinking to Evaluation," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(2), pages 177-197.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Mark Lubell & Adam Douglas Henry & Mike McCoy, 2010. "Collaborative Institutions in an Ecology of Games," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(2), pages 287-300, April.
    2. Christopher Cvitanovic & Marie F Löf & Albert V Norström & Mark S Reed, 2018. "Building university-based boundary organisations that facilitate impacts on environmental policy and practice," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-19, September.
    3. Sangmin Kim, 2016. "The workings of collaborative governance: Evaluating collaborative community-building initiatives in Korea," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 53(16), pages 3547-3565, December.
    4. Eunok Im, 2015. "The Effects of Interlocal Collaboration on Local Economic Performance: Investigation of Korean Cases," ERSA conference papers ersa15p1391, European Regional Science Association.
    5. Roth, Alyssa P. & de Loë, Rob C., 2017. "Incorporating Outcomes from Collaborative Processes into Government Decision Making: A Case Study from Low Water Response Planning in Ontario, Canada," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 169-178.
    6. Abby Lindsay, 2018. "Social learning as an adaptive measure to prepare for climate change impacts on water provision in Peru," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 8(4), pages 477-487, December.
    7. Plummer, Ryan & Armitage, Derek, 2007. "A resilience-based framework for evaluating adaptive co-management: Linking ecology, economics and society in a complex world," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 62-74, February.
    8. Franco-Torres, Manuel & Kvålshaugen, Ragnhild & Ugarelli, Rita M., 2021. "Understanding the governance of urban water services from an institutional logics perspective," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    9. Kristan Cockerill & Lacy Daniel & Leonard Malczynski & Vincent Tidwell, 2009. "A fresh look at a policy sciences methodology: collaborative modeling for more effective policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(3), pages 211-225, August.
    10. Maria Cerretta & Lidia Diappi, 2014. "Adaptive Evaluations in Complex Contexts: Introduction," SCIENZE REGIONALI, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2014(1 Suppl.), pages 5-22.
    11. Nicola Ulibarri & Bruce E. Cain & Newsha K. Ajami, 2017. "A Framework for Building Efficient Environmental Permitting Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-17, January.
    12. Daniel Connell, 2010. "Managing Climate Variability in Australia, South Africa, United States and Spain," Centre for Water Economics, Environment and Policy Papers 1012, Centre for Water Economics, Environment and Policy, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    13. Osman, Taher & Shaw, David & Kenawy, Emad, 2018. "Examining the extent to which stakeholder collaboration during ecotourism planning processes could be applied within an Egyptian context," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 126-137.
    14. Rudy Vannevel & Peter L. M. Goethals, 2021. "Structural and Contentual Complexity in Water Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-46, August.
    15. Plummer, Ryan & Baird, Julia & Dzyundzyak, Angela & Armitage, Derek & Bodin, Örjan & Schultz, Lisen, 2017. "Is Adaptive Co-management Delivering? Examining Relationships Between Collaboration, Learning and Outcomes in UNESCO Biosphere Reserves," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 79-88.
    16. Reza Banai, 2013. "Plan vs Project Dilemma Revisited: A Progress Review of Urban and Regional Studies Literature," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(4), pages 807-824, March.

    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:sae:envirc:v:32:y:2014:i:1:p:20-38. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.