Polycentricity (-)
- Highly hierarchical and mono-centric governmental system
- National agenda and limited local power: leadership and authority
claimed
- Little incentive to public actor interaction
- Official institutions meet and cooperate only when there is dependency
(especially resource dependency)
- Interinstitutional agreements are venues for interaction but used only in
situations of dependency
Participation (-)
- No tradition of participation, and decision making culture is not favorable
to it, although EU regulations changed this somewhat
- Participation as tokenism (Arnstein 1969): public is informed and consulted
but there is no follow-up, no mechanism to integrate public knowledge
- Limited venue for participation generates frustration that turns into court
cases
- Public is not organized: environmental groups and other groups often act
individually
Experimentation (+/-)
- Experimentation as research methodology has led to improvements in water and
environmental management(e.g., morphological restoration, mobile barriers)
- Policies are not considered as experiments
- Interpretation and use of scientific knowledge and experiments is often
politicized; validity and objectivity are questioned; knowledge is distrusted by
actors
Bioregional approach (+/-)
- Water management at bioregional scale existed in the past through the Venice
Water Authority; in the 1970s regions took over responsibilities; EU laws
re-establish river basin approach
- Issues of leadership and authority (region vs. Venice Water
Authority) hamper the transition to river basin management
|
Cognitive learning (+/-)
- Established in the scientific community within a normative paradigm of
essentially building infrastructure: well-developed scientific and technical
knowledge
- Not well established in the policy making and social community
because:
- No complete free flow of
information in the system
- Knowledge is not always
trusted
- Cases brought to court to stop
policy effects or works, not for learning
Normative learning
(-)
- Not well established in the scientific, policy making, and social community
because:
- No complete free flow of information in the system
- Knowledge is not always trusted
- Disputes brought to
court
- Institutional memory may be an obstacle to change
- Shift in policy agenda from physical and environmental protection to
economic development is opportunistic because it does not bring new ideas and
values but reuses old ideas to keep the system working
Relational
learning (+/-)
- Not well established in the scientific, policy making, and social community
until recent times because of stable governmental system, stable coalitions, and
networks that are not open to other actors
- In the last few years change of a number of leaders in public organizations
opened windows of opportunity for new coalitions; too soon to tell if it will
lead to relational learning
- No complete renovation, some instances of change of position, and no
arrival of new people
- Loss of institutional memory with people left
|
Polycentricity and learning
- Hierarchical mono-centric structure leads to overlooking of interdependency;
opportunities for interaction and cooperation are limited. This leads to limited
relational learning
- Existence of coalitions that are more influential than others, a national
agenda with a narrow mandate, closed networks hamper relational learning because
there is no interest in meeting among actors
- Lack of polycentricity leads to no reflection and no change of perspectives
therefore no normative learning
Participation and
learning
- The frustration generated by the low level of participation does not
incentivize relational and normative learning
- Going to court to suspend policy effects or works is a sign of unwillingness
to all forms of learning
- Because of limited flow of information in the system, cognitive learning of
societal actors is low
Experimentation and
learning
- Experimentation taking place within normative paradigm allows cognitive
learning but not normative and relational learning
- Experiments do not serve as boundary objects to draw multiple stakeholders
to the debate about the lagoon; there are no mechanisms to challenge values and
allow new ideas and people to enter the discussion
- The way experiments are designed and conducted affects how much they are
trusted and therefore policy change
Bioregional approach and
learning
- Past experience in river basin management led to building of institutional memory
as well as cognitive and relational learning to some extent because actors have
worked together and created relations and knowledge
- Institutional memory about past experience of bioregional management limits
normative learning because actors tend to act according to the memory they have about
the system; agencies that used to rule the system and had knowledge and control
of it still tend to act according to those values and beliefs
- Collaboration and learning at the bioregional scale occur if people expect it;
if there is memory of one agency having control and knowledge, relational and
normative learning cannot improve
- Dealing with existing coalitions and institutions become problematic when
new institutions are created over a bioregion
|