IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/waterr/v32y2018i12d10.1007_s11269-018-2039-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cross-Border Collaboration in River Management: Views on Participation in a Dutch-German Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Katharina Panten

    (Radboud University)

  • Bernadette F. Heel

    (Radboud University)

  • Jan M. Fliervoet

    (Radboud University
    Van Hall Larenstein University of Applied Sciences)

  • Riyan J. G. Born

    (Radboud University)

Abstract

Integrated river basin management (IRBM) calls for participatory practices involving stakeholders along transnational river landscapes. Understanding the complex and diverse views regarding participation is a prerequisite for meaningful involvement of civil actors, especially in a transnational context. In a case study along the Lower Rhine river, we assessed and compared cognitive perceptions towards IRBM of citizen initiatives and nature organizations from Germany and the Netherlands and their previous experiences with participation processes. We found large differences between the four actor groups in motivations to participate as well as in levels of trust towards institutions. This study also showed different views on participation between the two countries with regard to the problem definition, nature images and the perceived relationships between government organisations on the one hand and citizen initiatives and nature organisations on the other hand. The findings suggest that views vary between citizen initiatives and nature organizations within a country and that cultural notions add to the complexity of transnational participation. In transnational participation processes, the varying views between actor groups should be taken into account, as well as the complexities among countries even within actor groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Katharina Panten & Bernadette F. Heel & Jan M. Fliervoet & Riyan J. G. Born, 2018. "Cross-Border Collaboration in River Management: Views on Participation in a Dutch-German Case Study," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 32(12), pages 4063-4078, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:waterr:v:32:y:2018:i:12:d:10.1007_s11269-018-2039-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11269-018-2039-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11269-018-2039-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11269-018-2039-9?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pahl-Wostl, Claudia & Tabara, David & Bouwen, Rene & Craps, Marc & Dewulf, Art & Mostert, Erik & Ridder, Dagmar & Taillieu, Tharsi, 2008. "The importance of social learning and culture for sustainable water management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 484-495, January.
    2. Marjolein C.J. Van Eerd & Mark A. Wiering & Carel Dieperink, 2017. "Solidarity in transboundary flood risk management: A view from the Dutch North Rhine–Westphalian catchment area," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 261-279, April.
    3. Mark Wiering & Joris Verwijmeren & Kris Lulofs & Christian Feld, 2010. "Experiences in Regional Cross Border Co-operation in River Management. Comparing Three Cases at the Dutch–German Border," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(11), pages 2647-2672, September.
    4. Jan M. Fliervoet & Riyan J. G. van den Born, 2017. "From implementation towards maintenance: sustaining collaborative initiatives for integrated floodplain management in the Netherlands," International Journal of Water Resources Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(4), pages 570-590, July.
    5. Paul Slovic, 1999. "Trust, Emotion, Sex, Politics, and Science: Surveying the Risk‐Assessment Battlefield," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 689-701, August.
    6. Fabian Thomas & Kathrin Knüppe, 2016. "From Flood Protection to Flood Risk Management: Insights from the Rhine River in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(8), pages 2785-2800, June.
    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. Zorica Srdjevic & Naoyuki Funamizu & Bojan Srdjevic & Ratko Bajčetić, 2018. "Public Participation in Water Management of Krivaja River, Serbia: Understanding the Problem through Grounded Theory Methodology," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 32(15), pages 5081-5092, December.

    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. Roxanne E. Lewis & Michael G. Tyshenko, 2009. "The Impact of Social Amplification and Attenuation of Risk and the Public Reaction to Mad Cow Disease in Canada," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 714-728, May.
    2. Wang, Fei & Yuan, Yu & Lu, Liangdong, 2021. "Dynamical prediction model of consumers’ purchase intentions regarding anti-smog products during smog risk: Taking the information flow perspective," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 563(C).
    3. Ma, Jie & Tse, Ying Kei & Wang, Xiaojun & Zhang, Minhao, 2019. "Examining customer perception and behaviour through social media research – An empirical study of the United Airlines overbooking crisis," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 192-205.
    4. Pam A. Mueller & Lawrence M. Solan & John M. Darley, 2012. "When Does Knowledge Become Intent? Perceiving the Minds of Wrongdoers," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(4), pages 859-892, December.
    5. Yan, Jubo & Kniffin, Kevin M. & Kunreuther, Howard C. & Schulze, William D., 2020. "The roles of reason and emotion in private and public responses to terrorism," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 778-796.
    6. Patrick Krieger & Carsten Lausberg, 2021. "Entscheidungen, Entscheidungsfindung und Entscheidungsunterstützung in der Immobilienwirtschaft: Eine systematische Literaturübersicht [Decisions, decision-making and decisions support systems in r," Zeitschrift für Immobilienökonomie (German Journal of Real Estate Research), Springer;Gesellschaft für Immobilienwirtschaftliche Forschung e. V., vol. 7(1), pages 1-33, April.
    7. Jared LeClerc & Susan Joslyn, 2015. "The Cry Wolf Effect and Weather‐Related Decision Making," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(3), pages 385-395, March.
    8. B. J. M. Ale, 2005. "Tolerable or Acceptable: A Comparison of Risk Regulation in the United Kingdom and in the Netherlands," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(2), pages 231-241, April.
    9. Vivianne H. M. Visschers & Ree M. Meertens & Wim F. Passchier & Nanne K. DeVries, 2007. "How Does the General Public Evaluate Risk Information? The Impact of Associations with Other Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 715-727, June.
    10. Agustin Robles Morua & Kathleen E. Halvorsen & Alex S. Mayer, 2011. "Waterborne Disease‐Related Risk Perceptions in the Sonora River Basin, Mexico," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(5), pages 866-878, May.
    11. Tim Slack & Vanessa Parks & Lynsay Ayer & Andrew M. Parker & Melissa L. Finucane & Rajeev Ramchand, 2020. "Natech or natural? An analysis of hazard perceptions, institutional trust, and future storm worry following Hurricane Harvey," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 102(3), pages 1207-1224, July.
    12. John D. Graham & John A. Rupp & Olga Schenk, 2015. "Unconventional Gas Development in the USA: Exploring the Risk Perception Issues," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(10), pages 1770-1788, October.
    13. William J. Burns & Ellen Peters & Paul Slovic, 2012. "Risk Perception and the Economic Crisis: A Longitudinal Study of the Trajectory of Perceived Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 659-677, April.
    14. Liu, Peng & Xu, Zhigang & Zhao, Xiangmo, 2019. "Road tests of self-driving vehicles: Affective and cognitive pathways in acceptance formation," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 354-369.
    15. Joseph Conti & Terre Satterfield & Barbara Herr Harthorn, 2011. "Vulnerability and Social Justice as Factors in Emergent U.S. Nanotechnology Risk Perceptions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(11), pages 1734-1748, November.
    16. Sandra Ricart & Anna Ribas & David Pavón, 2016. "Qualifying irrigation system sustainability by means of stakeholder perceptions and concerns: lessons from the Segarra‐Garrigues Canal, Spain," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 40(1-2), pages 77-90, February.
    17. Jocelyn Raude & Patrick Peretti-Watel & Jeremy Ward & Claude Flamand & Pierre Verger, 2018. "Are Perceived Prevalences of Infection also Biased and How? Lessons from Large Epidemics of Mosquito-Borne Diseases in Tropical Regions," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 38(3), pages 377-389, April.
    18. Alison Shaw & Patti Kristjanson, 2014. "A Catalyst toward Sustainability? Exploring Social Learning and Social Differentiation Approaches with the Agricultural Poor," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(5), pages 1-33, May.
    19. Peng Liu & Run Yang & Zhigang Xu, 2019. "How Safe Is Safe Enough for Self‐Driving Vehicles?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 315-325, February.
    20. Banik, Shanta & Gao, Yongqiang & Rabbanee, Fazlul K., 2019. "Status demotion in hierarchical loyalty programs and its effects on switching: Identifying mediators and moderators in the Chinese context," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 125-134.

    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:waterr:v:32:y:2018:i:12:d:10.1007_s11269-018-2039-9. 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: 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.

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