Search results

Assessments of environmental issues are often expected to tackle the perceived disconnect between scientific knowledge and environmental policy making. However, their actual influence on processes of knowledge communication and use remains understudied. We provide one of the first studies of the UK National Ecosystem Assessment (NEA), itself one of the first national-level assessments of ecosystem services. We explore expectations, early experiences, and implications for its role in promoting knowledge use, drawing on both documentary evidence and qualitative analysis of interviews with NEA authors and potential users. Many interviewees expected instrumental use; that is, facts directly assisting problem solving. This matches the rhetoric surrounding the NEA's creation. However, we found more early evidence of interacting conceptual uses (learning), and strategic uses (sometimes deemed misuse). Such uses depend not only on assessment outputs, such as reports, but also on the processes of communication and interaction by which these are created. Thus, planning and analysis of such assessments should deemphasise instrumental use and instead focus on the complex knowledge 'coproduction' processes by which diverse and interacting forms of knowledge use may be realised.

Funding: This research was funded by the Scottish Government Hydro Nation Scholars Programme. ; We explore the activities of frontline workers situated in public bodies responsible for water service provision. We use Scotland as a case study. Here, like in other parts of Europe, communities there are greater expectations and responsibilities placed on communities to tackle water concerns. In this context, frontline workers are required to collaborate closely with communities to encourage their involvement in public services whilst being more attentive to their needs and concerns. Doing so brings the relationship between the frontline workers and communities into focus. In water services, a research gap exists as to how frontline workers interact with communities and influence engagement. Although frontline workers in water services have a highly influential role, evidence of how they perform their daily duties remains limited. This gap hinders understanding the challenges that frontline workers experience and how they can be overcome. Responding to this gap, we look to administration and policy studies, where a tradition of studying frontline workers exists in diverse public policy areas. Using the concepts of biasing, aligning and negotiating, we explore the activities of frontline workers. Using interview and observational data, we demonstrate how they (i) bias services to limit and control engagement, (ii) align resources and people to enhance opportunities for engagement and (iii) negotiate with colleagues and communities to deliver goals. We unpack the role of frontline workers and explore their pertinent position in water governance as they work inside and outside their organisations. We finish with conclusions and future avenues for research. ; Publisher PDF ; Peer reviewed

Whether pursuing the breadth of the UN's Sustainable Development Goals or delivering joined-up approaches within a single environmental domain, policy objectives, policy design and policy implementation should cohere vertically and horizontally. However, policy coherence remains a challenge to implement. The limited empirical scholarship on policy coherence tends to focus on policy documentation and/or the outcomes, with little attention to individual agency or social processes involved. Furthermore, there is little discussion of the normative dimensions of policy coherence and the political aspects of individual agency, indicating the need for political ecology. We conducted an empirical study within four UK catchment (watershed) partnerships, using critical interpretive policy analysis to enrich the interface between political ecology and environmental policy. We explored who practices policy coherence and how; what motivates those investing their energy into these practices; their constraints and the contradictions arising. We found that the appetite and ability to support policy coherence depends on individual agency as much as partnership structures, which are themselves situated in technocratic regimes of policy implementation. Within these regimes, agents presented as apolitical and enabling, making it challenging to research the political and social processes of policy coherence. A political ecology lens highlights how power is involved in these voluntary initiatives, potentially shoring up existing privilege inscribed into riparian habitats and their resources. Our contribution therefore responds to and amplifies the critique of traditional presentations of integrated water resource management devoid of politics.

The relationship between governance and representation is examined using the development of river basin management plans (RBMPs) in Scotland as a case study. We used a longitudinal ethnographic approach to explore the (1) remit and rationale for representation choices; (2) representative characteristics and claims; and (3) influence of nonparticipating interests on representatives. The invite-only 'advisory group' members represent a network of state, private, and third-sector interests. The members make claims to represent others on the basis of authority, accountability, shared identity, and epistemic values. These claims are made for specific although often multiple and overlapping constituencies. These representation claims suggest that representative, rather than traditional, legitimacy is being defended. However, members were also concerned about how the RBMP advisory groups coexisted with traditional and direct democratic processes. The results need to be considered within the overall system of environmental governance within Scotland, the UK, and Europe. The findings are relevant to multiple fields of environmental management, including protected area management and coastal management.

Abstract Recent years have witnessed a growing interest in the water-energy-food (WEF) nexus in both academia and policy. This concept draws attention to the link between different environmental and societal domains, and potentially entails substantive shifts in governance processes. As a consequence, policy-makers and scientists have started to develop metrics to make these interactions and 'trade-offs' visible. However, it is unknown if current framings of the nexus and relevant quantified metrics either reinforce or challenge existing governance structures. This paper explores relationships between framings of the nexus, metrics and models of governance based on discussions with staff within the European Commission. Although narratives around the need for new metrics are situated in a conventional script about the use of evidence to change policy, our data indicate processes of co-production, by which the use (or non-use) of any new metrics is dependent on existing institutional practices; and will reflect dominant political orderings. In doing so we provide a critical analysis of the role of metrics in environmental governance, and direct attention to the discursive, institutional and political arrangements in which they are embedded and with which they are co-constitutive. Focusing on the cultural and institutional settings in which they are established and used, our study suggests that the question of metrics in the water-energy-food nexus needs to be explored as a problem of establishing a legitimate policy objective in the European Commission and EU policy-making more broadly. ; publishedVersion

Recent years have witnessed a growing interest in the water-energy-food (WEF) nexus in both academia and policy. This concept draws attention to the link between different environmental and societal domains, and potentially entails substantive shifts in governance processes. As a consequence, policy-makers and scientists have started to develop metrics to make these interactions and 'trade-offs' visible. However, it is unknown if current framings of the nexus and relevant quantified metrics either reinforce or challenge existing governance structures. This paper explores relationships between framings of the nexus, metrics and models of governance based on discussions with staff within the European Commission. Although narratives around the need for new metrics are situated in a conventional script about the use of evidence to change policy, our data indicate processes of co-production, by which the use (or non-use) of any new metrics is dependent on existing institutional practices; and will reflect dominant political orderings. In doing so we provide a critical analysis of the role of metrics in environmental governance, and direct attention to the discursive, institutional and political arrangements in which they are embedded and with which they are co-constitutive. Focusing on the cultural and institutional settings in which they are established and used, our study suggests that the question of metrics in the water-energy-food nexus needs to be explored as a problem of establishing a legitimate policy objective in the European Commission and EU policy-making more broadly.