Linking Participation, Vulnerability & Sustainable Development

1. Linking Participation, Vulnerability & Sustainable Development Timothy Downs, D.Env. Professor and Coordinator Environmental Science & Policy Program Department of International Development, Community, & Environment (IDCE) George Perkins Marsh Research Institute Clark University, Worcester, Mass. USA. AIACC Workshop on Climate Change Vulnerability & Adaptation Trieste June 2002

2. 1. Participation Overview Topics covered in overview: Marginalization, poverty reduction strategies, participatory poverty assessment (PPA), costs/benefits of participation, levels of participation, participatory rural appraisal (PRA), stakeholder analysis, participatory diagnostic study (PDS), participatory monitoring and evaluation (PME), understanding resistance to change, stages of conflict, conflict mitigation. Major reference: IFAD , ANGOC and IIRR (2001). Enhancing ownership and sustainability: A resource book on participation. International Fund for Agricultural Development, Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development, and International Institute of Rural Reconstruction.

3. 2. Risk and Policy Analysisunder Uncertainty • multi-criteria decision making, qualitative and quantitative indicators, weighting • uncertainty, risk analysis and environmental impact assessment (EIA)

4. 3. Case StudyA Participatory Integrated Capacity Building Approach to Sustainable Environmental Management and Vulnerability Mitigation in MexicoWatershed ContextMarginalized Communities

5. Part 1.ContextSustainable Development “[Development which] meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Our Common Future, 1987 Long on rhetoric…..very short on practice. Our practical experience of sustainability is very limited. But we do have a good experience of unsustainable practices to draw on.

6. Prerequisites for a Sustainability Culture • Ethics that value ecological integrity and respond to intra- and inter-generational equity • Productive social interaction – facilitates ‘win-win’ and ‘mutual gains’ collaborations • Knowledge integration – all types are needed (anecdotal, indigenous, exogenous) (Source: Downs 2000)

7. Agenda 21 Components of Sustainable Development Compatible Trade & Environment Policies Poverty Reduction Policies Sustainable Consumption Management of Population Growth Improvement of Public Health Sustainable Development of Settlements Integrated Decision Making & Stakeholder Participation Sustainable Development of Energy Resources Sound Management of Solid Waste and Sewage indirect link Sustainability of Water Resources Supply & Sanitation strong direct link Marine & Coastal Zone Protection & Development Sound Management of Chemicals & Toxic Wastes Integrated Land Resources Planning & Management Reducing Deforestation / Sustainable Forest Development Managing Fragile Ecosystems Promoting Sustainable Agriculture & Rural Development Conserving Biodiversity & Ecosystem Health Atmosphere Protection Sound Development of Biotechnology Agenda 21 was descriptively strong but operationally weak (source: Downs 2001)

8. Global Water ContextAllocating and Managing Water for a Sustainable Future • Water is the most basic survival and prosperity need of organisms, including humans • Water access is a fundamental determinant of human and ecological health • Water is a primary driver and key factor to sustainable human development • Improving management of water resources is a global priority with half of the world’s 6 billion people population lacking adequate sanitation, 1.2 billion without safe water supply, and predictions that without improvement two of every three people will be under water stress by 2025. • There are ever- stronger calls for integrated approaches (knowledge and disciplines), participatory approaches (stakeholder interests) and capacity building to mitigate these imperatives.

9. Dublin Principles(International Conference on Water and the Environment, 1992) • Fresh water is a finite and vulnerable resource, essential to sustain life, development and the environment. • Water development and management should be based on a participatory approach, involving users, planners and policy-makers at all levels. • Women play a central part in the provision, management and safeguarding of water. • Water has an economic value in all its competing uses and should be recognized as an economic good.

10. An Evolving Method for More Sustainable Water Management: Integrated Watershed Management (IWM) • Seeks to combine interests, priorities, and disciplines as a multi-stakeholder planning and management process for natural resources within the watershed ecosystem, centered on water. • Driven bottom-up by local needs and priorities, and top-down by regulatory responsibilities. • Must be adaptive, and evolving dynamically with changing conditions. Note: we view sustainability as a relative dynamic state to be improved or degraded not an absolute one to be achieved

11. Heathcote (1998) Systems Approach: Develop comprehensive, accurate, thorough, and up to date Watershed Inventory Problem Definition and Scoping Consultation Developing Workable Management Options Planning and Implementation Integrated Watershed Management: Principles & Practice Reimoldet al. (1998) Ecological Approach: Stakeholder involvement Ecosystem management units Coordinated management activities Management schedule “Integrated Water Resource Management has neither been unambiguously defined nor has the question of how it is to be implemented been fully addressed. What has to be integrated and how is it best done? Can the broad principles of IWRM be operationalized in practice—and, if so, how?” United Nations Global Water Partnership, Technical Advisory Committee, 2000.

12. New ThinkingSocio-economic dimensions of Sustainable Development Practice Subject to physical and ecological constraints Subject to economic constraints Z. Development sector interaction: water resources management and sanitation, soil resources management, biodiversity resources management, agricultural production, energy production, health care, education, industrial production Development Sectors Subject to political will • X. Socio-political interaction “multi-stakeholders”: • “Community”, citizens, taxpayers, users, customers; • Public providers of goods, services and resources; • Private providers of goods services and resources; • Academic providers of new knowledge and information. Ethical and practical imperative stimulates XYZ dynamics Y. Technical discipline interaction – e.g. doctors and nurses, engineers, architects and urban planners, social scientists and natural scientists, lawyers, politicians, teachers, researchers. Subject to knowledge, information and communication constraints

13. Any innovative IWM process must be mapped onto a typical project cycle 1. Pre-planning. Concepts and social organization 2. Strategic Analysis. Needs and baseline conditions 3. Planning and Design. Management options and work plans 4. Implementation. Priority actions first then others follow 5. Operation & Maintenance. Performance monitoring and adaptation to changes Strong analysis and planning is evident in IWM but…. Weak implementation and monitoring experience to date But some sustainability energy is missing……What makes IWM sustainable?

14. Capacity building “the sum of the efforts needed to develop, enhance and utilize the skills of people and institutions to follow a path of sustainable development.” (UNDP 2001)

15. Critical capacity building components necessary to for sustainable water supply and sanitation: • strengthening political and financial support • strengthening human resources: education, training and awareness building • strengthening information resources: monitoring, data integration and interpretation for informed decision-making; • strengthening regulations and compliance; • strengthening basic infrastructure for water supply and sanitation; • strengthening the market for water and sanitation products and services (water as an economic good, equitably priced, subsidized for the poor). (Downs 2001)

16. Synergistic, interdependent components must become integrated – integrated capacity building (ICB) VI. Local enterprise development V. Infrastructure and technology IV. Policy making and regulation III. Information resources II. Education and awareness-raising I. Political and financial support Still something missing……………….

17. Stakeholder ParticipationWho? • Community/Residential water users • Community/Industrial water users • Community/Agricultural water users • Government regulators (local, state, federal) • Scientists and engineers • Providers of products and services • NGOs (rep. biodiversity interests)

18. Participation – Why? • Those directly affected by water problems must become owners of those problems and owners of the solutions • Integrated approaches – IWM + ICB – depend on the infusion of different perspectives, priorities, interests, skills, disciplines So ICB becomes PICB, ‘P” for participatory

19. How? – Community-based PICB Federal Government needs, policies Bottom-up meets top-down dynamics Government as advisor for, and facilitator of, PICB Local needs and policies • Community-based approaches – center of gravity at center of needs, interests • Nexus of local knowledge and existing capacities • Community-based approaches weather political change

20. Ways forward in the field • A PICB pilot project is being developed in Mexico to co-manage five priority topics of hydo-ecological vulnerability: • Safe water supply • Wastewater (and solid waste) sanitation • Water-related health risk mitigation (control source and exposure) • Soil erosion by runoff • Inefficient irrigation • Economies of scale and common capacity building needs across topics are exploited. • Rural and peri-urban subsistence communities under semi-arid and humid conditions are target populations. • The researchers/practitioners and federal government partners are advisors and facilitators: the community becomes the executive.

21. Wrap-up Combining IWM with PICB has great potential, plus it’s logical • So this new process again reveals the challenges are mainly cultural: • Ethical core – values and attitudes respectful of intra- and inter-generational equity and biodiversity conservation • Participatory culture – swapping ‘win-lose’ for ‘win-win’; choosing the philosophy of collaboration and mutual gains over conflict negotiation and tradeoffs