Suchergebnisse

L'objectif de cette communication est d'étudier les modalités de gestion des services publics de l'eau dans le cadre de stations touristiques de montagne selon les dimensions de durabilité environnementale, sociale, économique et technique. Nous considérons que ce type d'espaces urbains, caractérisé par de fortes fluctuations de la population et par de fortes rivalités d'usages (le plus souvent très hétérogènes) de la ressource en eau, représente un laboratoire particulièrement intéressant pour l'étude des services publics de l'eau en termes de durabilité. Nous postulons également que la durabilité des services publics de l'eau dépend en grande partie des dispositions juridiques définies par le cadre réglementaire national et régional, soit par le type de régime institutionnel des services urbains de l'eau en vigueur (tels que : régie directe, gestion délégué ou encore gestion privée), de même que par les pratiques localisées des usagers ou des gestionnaires de ces services dans le cadre de la mise en œuvre de ces règles (i.e. du régime institutionnel). Ceci est d'autant plus le cas lorsque les dispositions juridiques encadrant les services publics de l'eau sont majoritairement définies à un niveau institutionnel supra-communal ne tenant pas forcément compte des besoins ou des particularités d'une gestion localisée de ces services. Cette communication est structurée selon trois étapes. En nous appuyant sur deux études de cas réalisées à Crans-Montana (Suisse) et Morzine-Avoriaz (France), il s'agira d'abord (1) d'analyser le degré d'intégration des dispositions juridiques en présence pour la gestion des services publics de l'eau. Pour ce faire, nous nous baserons sur le cadre des Régimes Institutionnels de Ressource (Knoepfel et al. 2007) permettant une analyse conjointe des droits de propriété et des politiques publiques impliquées pour la gestion de ces services publics. Nous porterons ensuite (2) notre attention sur les modalités de gestion localisée de ces services et sur les enjeux liés à la concrétisation des dispositions juridiques par les acteurs. Il s'agira ainsi d'analyser dans quelles mesures ces dispositions sont appliquées, complétées, contournées ou détournées par les acteurs dans le cadre de la gestion des services urbains de l'eau dans ces deux stations touristiques. Enfin (3), nous porterons notre attention sur les effets de cette concrétisation locale de la législation sur la durabilité des services publics de l'eau et de leur inscription au sein du réseau hydrographique naturel.

We are witnessing blooming initiatives for the measuring and monitoring of hydropolitical tensions. The rationale is straightforward: to get ahead of the crises curve, we need to identify potential water conflict hotspots. This, in turn, is achieved by using a wide range of quantitative indicators – from precipitation patterns and water use to demographic trends – and new data analytic techniques such as machine learning and remote sensing. Yet, the likelihood and intensity of tensions related to water resources rise as the rate of change within a basin exceeds the institutional capacity to absorb that change. In other words, hydropolitics is also about institutional arrangements, actors and agendas, and thus qualitative analysis should remain a major component for hydropolitics research. We build on recent calls for more research on the role of discourses in shaping hydropolitics and propose a new conceptual framework, inspired by critical discourse theory, for a systematic discursive approach to hydropolitics. The added value of our framework is two-fold. First, our framework identifies four categories of discourses – dominant, institutionalized, hegemonic, and sanctioned – and their underlying processes, enabling a more structured and systematic analysis of the dynamics shaping hydropolitics. Second, we embed our framework in a broader research approach combining global and in-depth analysis to better understand the key triggers leading to cooperation and tensions over transboundary waters.

Cet article propose une analyse originale, fondée sur le cadre d'analyse des régimes institutionnels de ressources (RIR), des enjeux de gestion des ressources au sein d'un espace touristique alpin (Crans-Montana en Suisse). Il montre en particulier comment une approche en termes de RIR permet d'identifier les conditions institutionnelles et politiques d'une gestion durable, non seulement des activités touristiques en tant que telles, mais également d'un système territorial de ressources dans son ensemble. Sur la base de cette analyse, l'article plaide pour le développement d'une stratégie de « géopolitique ressourcielle » qui soit capable de coordonner les différents régimes de ressources à l'échelle de l'espace fonctionnel de la station touristique.

This article, drawing on the analytical approach of institutional resource regimes (IRR), offers an original analysis of the challenges of resource management in an Alpine touristic space (Crans-Montana in Switzerland). Particularly, it shows how an approach in terms of IRR allows identifying the institutional and political conditions for sustainable management, not only for touristic activities as such, but also for a territorial system of resources as a whole. Based on this analysis, the article advocates the development of a "resource geopolitics" strategy capable of coordinating the different resource regimes at the scale of the functional space of the tourist resort.

The Organisation pour la mise en valeur du fleuve Sénégal (OMVS) and the Autorité du bassin du Niger (ABN) are recognised for their good practices in transboundary cooperation. Both institutions are characterized by robust cooperative frameworks on political and financial dimensions, information exchange, coordination mechanisms and public participation. As highlighted by the following visuals, the proper functioning of these institutions is tributary to multiple factors, but the level of uniformity between the parties seems to be a key facilitator of effective coordination. The illustrations bring a visual insight of the differences between the Senegal and the Niger River Basins' components and contexts.

The Rhone River has long been regarded upon its productive capacities. Shared between two Nation-States, Switzerland and France, the River has been a major development factor for the two countries and the regions situated along its banks. The Swiss part of the Rhone is characterised by the great diversity of its uses. It flows from the Rhone glacier through the agriculture plains of Valais, into the Lake Geneva and then through the city of Geneva. The River has always produced numerous goods and services. It is mainly used for agriculture in its upper part and for hydropower production in Geneva where management of the Rhone is delegated to a semi-public company, the SIG (Services Industriels de Genève). The River has long been canalised and its natural flow massively modified. On the French side, since the 1933, the CNR (Compagnie Nationale du Rhone) is in charge of the river management from the Swiss border to the Mediterranean Sea. The company has three missions: hydropower production, navigation and irrigation. Later on, in a post-war context, the French central State canalised the River considering the Rhone first of all as an industrial tool of Nation's reconstruction (Pritchard, 2011). This phase greatly modified the state of the River with the construction of 19 infrastructures of hydropower production. The emergence of new water management perspectives (IWRM for example), the implementation of the water framework directive and the increase of environmental legislations and concerns modified the very nature of the Rhone. If, on both sides of the border, the management of the river has been partly delegated to hydropower companies, public stakeholders tend to look for new ways of managing the river basin. Thoughts emerge to reconsider the scale of governance of the river and its actors' configuration. This communication concerns the current debates and shift in the management of the Rhone river. It aims to show the issues related to a River when its flow is essentially governed through Hydropower companies. It shows what are the constraints of shifting from a sectorial and industrial management of the river to a more integrated water governance perspective. It analyses how the integration of a basin management could be achieved in a River mainly governed by private arrangements, between hydropower companies, benefiting from strong use rights. Our communication has several objectives. Firstly, we analyse the existing management arrangements of the Rhone River. We look at the actors' configuration and try to understand the rivalries emerging among the different uses of the Rhone, focusing on the central function of hydropower companies and their multiple scales of intervention. Secondly, we concentrate ourselves on the actual new phase of River management and look at how public actors attempt to tackle the central issue of increasing coordination at the basin scale. Finally, we discuss different questions such as which scale to adopt to achieve an IWRM in a transborder context? To what extent could it be done in an intersectoral perspective (Nahrath et al. 2009) while hydropower producers have such a central function in the regulation of the River? Should it be based on the river basin scale (Hering & Ingold, 2012) or on more flexible and multi-scalar arrangements? What kind of institutional and governance structures could match with those scale rearrangements?

Much has been written on hydropolitics, or on the interplays between transboundary water resource issues and politics. This arti- cle builds on recent calls for more research on the role of discourses in shaping hydropolitics. We propose a conceptual framework, inspired by critical discourse analysis, for the systematic investigation of how discursive practices construct and enact actors' power posi- tions in transboundary basin governance. Our framework's added value lies in the typology of discourses we develop – that is, domi- nant, institutionalized, hegemonic and sanctioned – for a more pre- cise analysis of discursive hydropolitics. We formulate a research agenda to operationalize our perspective on discursive hydropolitics and lay the groundwork for future empirical research.

Participatory modeling is a potentially high‐impact approach for catalyzing fundamental sustainability transformations. We test if participation in a group system dynamics modeling exercise increases participants' agency through a novel method to evaluate potential behavioral change using expectations measures. A water‐energy‐food nexus a functionally interdependent but under‐conceptualised system with low consensus and high scientific uncertainty –– was mapped and its evolution simulated by 46 participants in three interventions in a region undergoing hydropower infrastructure development in North‐eastern Cambodia. Participants' system‐related expectations were measured before and after the interventions. Our results suggest that participants became significantly more optimistic about their individual agency to increase agricultural and fishing income, and interestingly, less likely to participate in local government development planning procedures. Findings also reveal how some uncertainties for multiple variables were reduced within and across the groups. Such converging expectations suggest that participatory modelling could contribute to making collective solutions and institutionalised agreements more likely. This research contributes to innovation in sustainability because it unpacks some underlying mechanics of how participatory processes can lead to new adaptive capacities, shared perspectives and collective actions.

The sustainable development goals (SDGs) challenge markets, regulators and practitioners to achieve multiple objectives on water, food and energy. This calls for responses that are coordinated and scaled appropriately. Learning from water–energy–food nexus could support much-needed building of links between the separate SDGs. The concept has highlighted how risks manifest when blinkered development and management of water, food and energy reduce resource security across sectors and far-reaching scales. However, three under-studied dimensions of these risks must be better considered in order to identify leverage points for sustainable development: first, externalities and shared risks across multiple scales; second, innovative government mechanisms for shared risks; and third, negotiating the balance between silos, politics and power in addressing shared risks.