Next Article in Journal
Climate Variability and Groundwater Response: A Case Study in Burkina Faso (West Africa)
Next Article in Special Issue
Exploring the Potential Impact of Serious Games on Social Learning and Stakeholder Collaborations for Transboundary Watershed Management of the St. Lawrence River Basin
Previous Article in Journal
Irrigation Water Quality Standards for Indirect Wastewater Reuse in Agriculture: A Contribution toward Sustainable Wastewater Reuse in South Korea
Previous Article in Special Issue
Undermining Demand Management with Supply Management: Moral Hazard in Israeli Water Policies
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Water 2016, 8(5), 170; doi:10.3390/w8050170

Community Perspective on Consultation on Urban Stormwater Management: Lessons from Brownhill Creek, South Australia

1
Brownhill Creek Association, Torrens Park, SA 5062, Australia
2
School of Civil, Environmental and Mining Engineering, University of Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia
3
School of the Environment, Flinders University, Bedford Park, SA 5042, Australia
4
CSIRO Land and Water, Glen Osmond, SA 5064, Australia
5
School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editors: Sharon B. Megdal, Susanna Eden and Eylon Shamir
Received: 21 February 2016 / Revised: 14 April 2016 / Accepted: 18 April 2016 / Published: 25 April 2016
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [4040 KB, uploaded 25 April 2016]   |  

Abstract

There are salutary lessons from contrasting community consultation efforts in 2011 and 2015 to develop and gain support for an urban stormwater management plan for the Brownhill Creek catchment in Adelaide, South Australia. The 2011 process was a failure in the human dimension, precipitating loss of community confidence, unnecessarily entrained thousands of hours of time of residents who initiated a community action group for environmental conservation and caused a three-year delay to decision making. By contrast, the 2015 process was vastly improved, resulted in a landslide level of support for an obvious option not previously offered, achieved the required level of flood protection, saved Aus$5 million (14%) on the previously proposed option and protected a highly valued natural environment from an unnecessary dam. This paper presents a rarely heard perspective on these community consultation processes from a participating community environmental and heritage conservation action group (the Brownhill Creek Association) that was deeply engaged in reforming the Draft Brown Hill Keswick Creek Stormwater Management Plan. This reveals that the community needs to see that all options are considered and to have access to accurate information with which to assess them. It is also necessary that the proposed plan is consistent with existing agreed plans and policies developed through public consultation. Community concerns need to be heard, acknowledged and acted upon or responded to, and the consultation process needs to be transparently fair and democratic to win community support. A major contributor to success in the second consultation was that all community action groups were invited to meetings to discuss the purpose of the consultation and the methods to be used. Feedback was subsequently received before the process commenced to show what had changed and why any suggestions concerning the consultation process were not being adopted. This openness helped to mend the distrust of the first consultation process and is recommended as an essential early step in any public consultation process. View Full-Text
Keywords: public consultation; community engagement; urban water management; flood protection; conflict public consultation; community engagement; urban water management; flood protection; conflict
Figures

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Dillon, P.; Bellchambers, R.; Meyer, W.; Ellis, R. Community Perspective on Consultation on Urban Stormwater Management: Lessons from Brownhill Creek, South Australia. Water 2016, 8, 170.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Water EISSN 2073-4441 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top