Suchergebnisse

Intro -- Foreword -- Overcoming Drought and Water Shortages with Good Governance -- Contents -- 1 Introduction -- 1.1 Introduction: Why Governance for Drought Resilience? -- 1.2 Defining Governance -- 1.3 A Short Overview on Existing Governance Assessment Methods and How We Relate to Them -- 1.4 Towards Constructing Our Own Governance Assessment Model -- 1.5 Outlook and Reader Guidance -- References -- 2 European Drought and Water Scarcity Policies -- 2.1 Introduction: Drought Events and the Importance of Policy Responses on the European Level -- 2.2 Policy Frameworks for the European Governance Structure -- 2.2.1 Drought Policy Context -- 2.2.2 EU Drought Policy Objectives -- 2.2.3 Policy Instrument, Measures and Strategies -- 2.3 European Drought Policy: Policy Relations Between Flooding, Drought, Agriculture and Nature -- 2.3.1 EC Communication on Water Scarcity and Drought -- 2.3.1.1 History, Aims and Objectives -- 2.3.1.2 Structure, Components and Implementation -- 2.3.1.3 Relevance to Drought Policy Implementation -- 2.3.2 EC Communication 'Blueprint to Safeguard Europe's Water Resources' -- 2.3.2.1 History, Aims and Objectives -- 2.3.2.2 Structure, Components and Implementation -- 2.3.2.3 Relevance to Drought Policy Implementation -- 2.3.3 EU Water Framework Directive -- 2.3.3.1 History, Aims and Objectives -- 2.3.3.2 Structure, Components and Implementation -- 2.3.3.3 Relevance to Drought Policy Implementation -- 2.3.4 EU Floods Directive -- 2.3.4.1 History, Aims and Objectives -- 2.3.4.2 Structure, Components and Implementation -- 2.3.4.3 Relevance to Drought Policy Implementation -- 2.3.5 EU Habitats Directive and EU Birds Directive -- 2.3.5.1 History, Aims and Objectives -- 2.3.5.2 Structure, Components and Implementation -- 2.3.5.3 Relevance to Drought Policy Implementation -- 2.3.6 EU Groundwater Directive.

Climate Change Management and Policy; Water Policy/Water Governance/Water Management

This chapter proposes a comparative approach of the drought governance context in the six regions studied. In sum, the governance context for drought resilience policies and measures in most of the regions studied can be regarded to currently be "intermediate". The implementation of the governance assessment tool does not allow a clear picture of the drought and water scarcity governance context in those NW regions. The governance appears to be half capable of providing a favourable context in terms of the actors and decision levels involved in all of the regions, but does not provide a favourable context to develop and implement a coherent drought policy. The chapter also outlines the specificities of the regions for each of the cross cutting issues (i.e., nature, fresh water and agriculture). Three main issues can be pointed out in order to characterise the way the sectors needs are taken into account: A water governance in general which gives more weight to representatives of economic interests than to environmental ones; a hierarchy as regards water uses in case of water scarcity which favours water supplies and contrasted initiatives which try to better take into account drought in/for all sectors.

This article explores the time dimension in policy evaluation studies. We argue that time has been given little attention in policy evaluation studies, despite it being very important for the occurrence and assessment of policy success or failure. We therefore propose to make time a central element of policy evaluation. First, we explore the theoretical foundations behind the concept of time. Second, we present a case study to investigate the presence of time in that specific case and the evaluation thereof. We conclude with recommendations for policy evaluation studies. Adapted from the source document.

This chapter introduces the Governance Assessment Tool that has been used in the DROP project and forms the analytical basis of this book. We start with the origins of the tool in Contextual Interaction Theory, and proceed with the dimensions and criteria that form the backbone of the tool, and form a matrix. In these matrix evaluative questions are formulated that can be discussed with local and regional stakeholders. Based on their answers and further information and insights a judgment can be reached to what extent the governance circumstances are supportive, restrictive or neutral for the implementation of measures. A visualization with coloured cells of the matrix can show in one quick glance the governance state of affairs in that region. To create more precise visualization arrows can be added to each box indicating upward or downward trends for that box. The chapter ends with a discussion on the application of the GAT. The tool can both be used in relatively simple ways and as in the DROP-project in a very elaborate way.