Author
Listed:
- ROB C. DE LOË
(Department of Geography, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada, NIG 2W1)
- SANDRA E. DI GIANTOMASSO
(Department of Geography, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada, NIG 2W1)
- REID D. KREUTZWISER
(Department of Geography, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada, NIG 2W1)
Abstract
Preventing groundwater contamination is vastly cheaper than remediation. Recognizing this, attention in water and land management agencies in North America increasingly turn to groundwater protection. Local agencies, such as municipalities and watershed management districts, are vital to successful groundwater protection, but they face daunting challenges. In the United States, senior governments have recognized these challenges and provide considerable support for local agencies. In Ontario, Canada, local agencies are, to a much greater extent, on their own. The aims in this paper are to analyze factors that shape local capacity for groundwater protection, focusing on Ontario, and to recommend avenues for capacity building. Interrelationships among five dimensions of capacity (technical, financial, institutional, social, and political) are explored through an analysis of three smaller Ontario communities: City of Guelph (population 93,400), Town of Orangeville (population 22,188), and Town of Erin (population 11,000). Size clearly influences capacity for groundwater protection. However, other considerations unrelated to size appear to be as important. These other factors include the ability to form horizontal and vertical linkages with external agencies, political leadership and commitment, and citizen involvement. Thus, smaller communities in Ontario (and other jurisdictions with limited senior government support) would do well to focus on these areas at the same time as they develop their technical, financial, and institutional capacity.
Suggested Citation
Rob C. De Loë & Sandra E. Di Giantomasso & Reid D. Kreutzwiser, 2002.
"Local Capacity for Groundwater Protection in Ontario,"
Environmental Management, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 217-233, February.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:envman:v:29:y:2002:i:2:d:10.1007_s00267-001-0026-7
DOI: 10.1007/s00267-001-0026-7
Download full text from publisher
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:spr:envman:v:29:y:2002:i:2:d:10.1007_s00267-001-0026-7. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.