Water conflicts open windows of opportunity for grassroots movements to transform water systems. However, academic fields studying social movements in socio-environmental conflicts are not well equipped to deal with complexity, non-linear dynamics, and emergent properties. Therefore, these fields rarely engage with long-term complex social processes and dynamics leading to systemic socio-technical changes. Researching water conflicts driven by grassroots movements, we ask whether and how the latter can influence a socio-technical transition of a water management regime. Through an emblematic water conflict in Mexico, we analyse the grassroots movement's trajectory since the conflict´s inception by following the dynamic process of developing agency. Our findings show that throughout the conflict, the grassroots movement accumulated and mobilized diverse capitals to initiate water management strategies and practices that catalysed change in the water management regime by stalling the implementation of large infrastructures. Eventually, this led to the inception of a sustainable and just transition.

@en

This paper explores the concept of “institutional readiness” (IR) applied to the adoption and mainstreaming of Nature-based solutions (NBS) to deal with climate related risks. We argue that barriers towards up-scaling and mainstreaming of NBS are a manifestation of uncertainty, and are often associated with the ‘readiness’ of the institutional setting rather than with the readiness of the NBS technology itself. We align the concepts of Institutional Readiness (IR) to the more widely used concept of Technology Readiness Level (TRL) to understand drivers and barriers for adoption of NBS and analyse the role of institutional capacity. We illustrate this with the case study of the Urban Water Buffer Spangen in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, which is an NBS with high TRL. To do so, we constructed a timeline of the design and implementation process of the NBS, identifying and classifying key uncertainties as well as the strategies applied to deal with these uncertainties, particularly in the institutional context. Our results indicate that for mainstreaming of NBS, Institutional Readiness (IR) should be at a degree where strategies to deal with uncertainties in institutional, organizational and governance contexts can be integrated in the design and planning process. We claim that the concept of IR should be considered in its role to deal with uncertainty, in order to close the documented gap of NBS implementation and mainstreaming.

@en

Managers of urban water systems constantly make decisions to guarantee water services by overcoming problems related to supply–demand imbalances. A preferred strategy has been supply augmentation through hydraulic infrastructure development. However, despite considerable investments, many systems seem to be trapped in lacklustre development pathways making some problems seem like an enduring, almost stubborn, characteristic of the systems: overexploitation and pollution of water sources, distribution networks overwhelmed by leakages and non-revenue water, and unequal water insecurity. Because of these strategies and persistent problems, water conflicts have emerged, whereby social actors oppose these strategies and propose alternative technologies and strategies. This can create development pathway crossroads of the urban water system, defined as a critical point whereby actors in conflict will either reinforce the current business-as-usual pathway based on large supply augmentation or implement alternative solutions for the urban water system. To study this development pathway crossroads, we selected the Zapotillo conflict in Mexico where a large supply augmentation project for two cities experiencing water shortages is at stake. The paper concludes that urban water systems that are engaged in a trajectory characterized by supply-side strategies may experience a temporal relief but neglect equally pressing issues that stymie the human right to water in the medium and long run. However, there is not a straightforward, self-evident development pathway to choose from, only a range of multiple alternatives with multiple trade-offs that need to be thoroughly discussed and negotiated between the stakeholders. We argue that this development pathway crossroads can cross-fertilize contrasting disciplines such as socio-hydrology and critical studies on water because both can complement technical and socio-political analyses to make their knowledge actionable and relevant.@en

The Handbook aims to provide decision-makers with a comprehensive NBS impact assessment framework, and a robust set of indicators and methodologies to assess impacts of nature-based solutions across 12 societal challenge areas: Climate Resilience; Water Management; Natural and Climate Hazards; Green Space Management; Biodiversity; Air Quality; Place Regeneration; Knowledge and Social Capacity Building for Sustainable Urban Transformation; Participatory Planning and Governance; Social Justice and Social Cohesion; Health and Well-being; New Economic Opportunities and Green Jobs. Indicators have been developed collaboratively by representatives of 17 individual EU-funded NBS projects and collaborating institutions such as the EEA and JRC, as part of the European Taskforce for NBS Impact Assessment, with the four-fold objective of: serving as a reference for relevant EU policies and activities; orient urban practitioners in developing robust impact evaluation frameworks for nature-based solutions at different scales; expand upon the pioneering work of the EKLIPSE framework by providing a comprehensive set of indicators and methodologies; and build the European evidence base regarding NBS impacts. They reflect the state of the art in current scientific research on impacts of nature-based solutions and valid and standardized methods of assessment, as well as the state of play in urban implementation of evaluation frameworks.@en

The development of large infrastructure to address the water challenges of cities around the world can be a financial and social burden for many cities because of the hidden costs these works entail and social conflicts they often trigger. When conflicts erupt, science is often expected to play a key role in informing policymakers and social actors to clarify controversies surrounding policy responses to water scarcity. However, managing conflicts is a sociopolitical process, and often quantitative models are used as an attempt to depoliticize such processes, conveying the idea that optimal solutions can be objectively identified despite the many perspectives and interests at play. This raises the question as to whether science depoliticizes water conflicts or whether instead conflicts politicize science-policy processes. We use the Zapotillo dam and water transfer project in Mexico to analyze the role of science-policy processes in water conflicts. The Zapotillo project aims at augmenting urban water supply to Guadalajara and León, two large cities in western Mexico, but a social and legal conflict has stalled the project until today. To analyze the conflict and how stakeholders make sense of it, we interviewed the most relevant actors and studied the negotiations between different interest groups through participant observation. To examine the role of science-policy processes in the conflict, we mobilized concepts of epistemic uncertainty and ambiguity and analyzed the design and use of water resources models produced by key actors aiming to resolve the conflict. While the use of models is a proven method to construct future scenarios and test different strategies, the parameterization of scenarios and their results are influenced by the knowledge and/or interests of actors behind the model. We found that in the Zapotillo case, scenarios reflected the interests and strategies of actors on one side of the conflict, resulting in increased distrust of the opposing actors. We conclude that the dilemma of achieving urban water security through investing in either large infrastructure (supply augmentation) or alternative strategies (demand-side management) cannot be resolved if some key interested parties have not been involved in the scientific processes framing the problem and solution space.

@en

Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) is an approach that aims to change conventional water management. International agencies and organizations have promoted IWRM across the globe. The Lerma-Chapala Basin in Mexico is an archetypal case study on basin closure, where IWRM principles were said to have been applied in the early 2000s to help solve a serious water crisis. This paper analyses the controversies around socio-hydrological uncertainties that were raised during this and an earlier crisis of Lake Chapala, whose resolution defined the water management policies of the basin. We interviewed key stakeholders, analysed different hydrological models, and reviewed the most important literature assessing the case. Then, we analysed how stakeholders understood the functioning of the socio-hydrological system, and how that determined their perception of what the root causes of the crisis were, and ways to resolve it. We found that the modelling efforts by two stakeholders to understand the root causes of the crisis could not clarify important socio-hydrological uncertainties, which limited the scope of their conclusions. From the proposed responses, only those based on the existing institutional and regulatory framework were implemented. Our results question the assertion that IWRM principles of public participation, sound knowledge, and river basin institutions, actually changed the traditional water management paradigm. We conclude that economic and political interests, more than IWRM principles, influenced the decision-making process to solve the water crisis in the Lerma-Chapala basin.@en

Mexico is considered a regional economic and political powerhouse because of the size of its economy, and a large population in constant growth. However, this same growth accompanied by management and governance failures are causing several water crises across the country. The paper aims at identifying and analyzing the drivers of water crises. Water authorities seem to focus solely on large infrastructural schemes to counter the looming water crises, but fail to structure a set of policies for the improvement of management and governance institutions. The paper concludes with the implications of a business-as-usual policy based on infrastructure for solving water problems, which include a non-compliance to the human right to water and sanitation, ecosystem collapses and water conflicts.

@en