Session 3: How to Do Action Research?

1. Session 3: How to Do Action Research?

2. Formulation of overall Research Question • Formulation of specific RQs • Formulation of sensitizing concepts • Selection of research groups on which to study the questions • Selection of appropriate design & methods • Evaluation and reformulation of specific research questions • Collection of data • Evaluation and reformulation of specific research questions • Analyzing the data • Generalization and evaluation of the analyses • Formulation of the findings Place of Research Q in the Research Process Source: Uwe Flick, Introduction to Qualitative Research (2011)

3. Action Research and Capacity-Building Program analyzing the rescaling of watershed & river governance Prospects, constraints and possibilities of introducing collaborative governance in multi-jurisdictional watersheds and river basins in a developing country context, highly vulnerable to environmental collapse and climate risks like Angat What is the Action Project About?

4. Advance knowledge on the ecology, climate risks and adaptation strategies for Angat River collaborative governance & watershed management (Research)Identifyand address governance and institutional challengesfor Angat collaborative governance (Action)Designcapacity-building programs connected to the research and action components Action Research and Capacity-Building Objectives

5. IWRM is a process that promotes the coordinated development and management of water, land and related resources in order to maximize economic and social welfare in an equitable manner without comprising the sustainability of vital ecosystem and the environment ANGAT RIVER BASIN AS A COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEM Integrated Land and Water Resource Mgt. SOLUTIONS COLLABORATIVE GOVERNANCE TRAGEDY OF THE COMMONS Collaborative governance involves state and non-state stakeholders engaging in a collaborative decision making process in order to address public policy problems that may not be easily addressed by one organization or sector Conceptual Framework

6. Tragedy of the Commons - describes the dilemma arising from multiple individuals acting independently in their own self-interest in the use of a finite, common resource (Hardin 1968) • Adaptive Complex Systems - considers nature as an evolutionary process made distinguishable by adaptive cycles that are nested at scales of increasing size which result in uncertainty, non-linearity and self-organization. Learning occurs when individual agents or components of the system are networked and experiment with various responses to its environment. Definition of Key Terms

7. a recursive process where people, organizations and institutions work together towards the common goal of putting in place a range of political, social, economic, and administrative and educational systems that will sustain civic capacity and allocate, develop, and manage water resources. Collaborative Governance

8. refers to “the ingredients that can make the machinery of governance effective: institutions that combine learning and bargaining effectively and constantly…; multiple forms of accountability – pressure politics, markets, negotiated compacts, codified rights, and more – to make ‘solutions’ more broadly legitimate and sustainable; and space for the ‘grassroots’ or the ‘grasstops’ (authority figures and other influentials) to initiate important thingsregardless of how broad participation becomes over time” (Briggs, 2008) Civic Capacity

9. What institutions and capacity-building for collaborative governance can work effectively in Angat River and Watershed? • How can we integrate climate risk adaptation effectively in integrated watershed management and collaborative watershed governance? • How can universities enable civic capacity for collaborative watershed governance? Action Research Questions

10. (1) Ecology, Risks, Climate Scenarios, and Alternatives • (2) Governance and Institutional Design Alternatives • (3) Capacity Building Needs, Processes and Outcomes of Collaborative Governance Three Research Teams:

12. What is known about the current state of health of hydrology and ecology of Angat watershed, including levels of water and soil quality, and what are the implications for on-going policy-relevant monitoring by local, provincial and national agencies in the future? • What are the levels, sources and impacts of the ongoing environmental changes, including resource depletion and degradation in Angat? (1) Ecology, Risks, Climate Scenarios, and Alternatives:

13. What are the climate-related risks (e.g. flooding, drought, etc.), given various scenarios, that face the watershed and Bulacan that affect sustainable resource use? • What alternative pathways for climate change adaptation and watershed governance may be incorporated in local, provincial, regional and national implementation plans, such as flood control, soil quality improvement, cleaner production and industrial ecology? (1) Ecology, Risks, Climate Scenarios, and Alternatives:

14. What knowledge capabilities in the realm of technical expertise (e.g. water and soil sample analysis; site and land use planning), risk management (e.g. flood preparedness, risk communication) and planning capabilities (e.g. implementation of local-regional economic development) need to be developed at the local, municipal and provincial scales? (1) Ecology, Risks, Climate Scenarios, and Alternatives:

15. What is the current state of governance in Angat at various scales, and what rescaling processes have occurred overtime? • What are the roles and mandates of different governance institutions at various scales, and how did they change in the last three decades? (2) Governance and Institutional Design Alternatives:

16. What are the starting conditions that might influence the shift to more collaborative ways of governing and working together (e.g. fragmented policy landscape; policy and institutional gaps; asymmetry in power, knowledge and resources; levels of trust; stakeholder participation constraints and incentives; prehistory of conflict and cooperation)? (2) Governance and Institutional Design Alternatives:

17. What are the various models in collaborative watershed governance developed elsewhere that Angat can adapt to its own situation for sustainability and climate change adaptation? • Partly answered by a MA Planning project (T Fresco 2012) but requires more lessons from other Philippine modelsbesides Tigum-Aganan, Iloilo (2) Governance and Institutional Design Alternatives

18. What alternative institutional designs can be proposed for Angat, including modeling each design’s transaction costs, appropriate incentives and rewards systems,and trajectory of institutional change that allow comparisons of efficiency and effectiveness between different institutions (e.g. Councils, Trusts, Commissions)? • How can these designs establish clear ground rules and procedures for decision-making, ensure participatory inclusiveness, and become more transparent in its processes and dissemination of decisions, and what capacities are neededto produce these outcomes? (2) Governance and Institutional Design Alternatives

19. What are the various knowledge bases, skills, attitudes and capacities for collaborative governancethat are needed to be developed at various scales of governance – local, municipal, provincial, regional, national? • How can these be established and built overtime? (3) Capacity Building Needs, Processes and Outcomes of Collaborative Governance

20. What are the necessary inputs and processes for greater face-to-face dialogues and good-faith negotiations to take place, leading to greater trust-building, heightened commitment to process, greater ownership of the process, greater recognition of mutual interdependence, and exploration of mutual gains? (3) Capacity Building Needs, Processes and Outcomes of Collaborative Governance:

21. What are the conditions under which a shared understanding of the issues and problems, including common mission, core shared values, problem identification and search for solutions, could lead to some immediate outcomes, such as “small wins,” joint fact-finding, and strategic plans (see Ansell & Gash 2008: 550)? (3) Capacity Building Needs, Processes and Outcomes of Collaborative Governance

22. What data collection, monitoring, and evaluation systems and tools can be put in place to monitor outcomes, allow for feedbackmechanism, and ensure longevityof chosen institutional and policy frameworks? (3) Capacity Building Needs, Processes and Outcomes of Collaborative Governance: