Integrated Water Resources Management and Policy Integration: Lessons from 169 Years of Flood Policies in Switzerland
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theory
2.1. IWRM—A Concept and its Roots
2.2. Cross-Fertilizing the Concept of IWRM with Public Policy Theories
2.3. Institutional Resources Regime and Path Dependency: Drawing Attention to the Temporal Dimension of IWRM
2.4. Scholarship on Policy Instruments and Design: Drawing Attention to the Calibration of Policies in IWRM
- 1.
- Policy integration, in the public policy literatures denotes the coordination of policies and actors across sectors [2,3,52]. The goal of policy coordination across sectors is to avoid contradictory or conflicting manifestations of political action in order to create coherent means to achieve an overarching objective.
- 2.
- Coercion or pressure on target groups: Coercion centers the role of the state, and the extent to which state intervention is necessary to successfully steer society [53]. One of the most influential policy typologies identifies three broad classes of policy instruments based on a decreasing extent of coercion [54]:
- ○
- Sticks: regulative/command-and-control instruments, e.g., prohibitions or standards
- ○
- Carrots: incentive-based financial policy instruments, e.g., charges or trading schemes
- ○
- Sermons: persuasive, information-based instruments, e.g., public campaigns or best environmental practices
- 3.
- Sanctions are a decisive element of policy designs as they limit target groups’ freedom to choose noncompliance by imposing a financial or social cost on defection [55]. Sanctions require enforcement capacities with defined agencies responsible (and sufficiently staffed and resourced) for controlling compliance, as well as for imposing and pursuing sanctions where necessary.
- 4.
- Inclusiveness to target groups: An essential element when designing public policies is the question of whom the policy targets [56,57,58,59]. A policy can be considered inclusive of many target groups when it addresses a maximum of societal groups or sectors (such as agriculture, industry, etc.) that contribute to a policy problem. However, the more inclusive policies are, the more difficult it may be to adopt, implement, or monitor them.
- 5.
- Proportionality of scale: The indicator refers to the scale (international, national, regional, or local) towards which a policy is calibrated [60,61]. Proportionality involves the idea of matching the scale of problems to the scale of solutions [51,59] whereby local problems deserve local solutions, while problems occurring at higher scales justify attention on a corresponding scale.
- 6.
- Directness or implementation: When designing policies, it is crucial to keep in mind who is responsible for implementation [62,63,64]. Salamon popularized the term directness, which refers to the concentration of implementation duties in the hands of one or a few authorities ([62], p. 1654). In direct policy designs, the decision-making authority is also involved in financing and implementing, or at least in supervising implementation.
- 7.
- Bindingness: Policy designs also vary with regard to their level of bindingness set by the hierarchy of norms in democracies. Constitutions are placed on the highest rung, followed by laws, ordinances, decrees, and, finally, oral agreements [63,64]. Constitutional or legal acts signify high bindingness, because they cannot be altered as easily or as quickly as decrees, ordinances, or plans.
- 8.
- Objectives: The level of specificity of formulating policy objectives represents a decisive element of policy design and can vary from precisely to broadly formulated policy goals [42]. When a government defines precise and ambitious objectives, it indicates that the government is dedicated and committed to that policy. It also provides a benchmark against which target groups’ behavioral changes or the government’s success can be evaluated. By contrast, broadly formulated goals offer the possibility to adapt to changing contexts.
- 9.
- Budget, i.e., whether a policy is equipped with (financial) resources for its implementation and from where to draw financial resources. These questions are decisive in policy design, because attributing costs to certain societal groups creates (re)distribution processes and winner-loser divides [56].
- 10.
- Monitoring: Evaluation of an implemented policy against its goals; it creates feedback mechanisms that induce policy learning in order to adapt policies to changing circumstances. Monitoring obligations can be obligatory (or voluntary), conducted regularly (or occasionally) by either external and independent organizations or the implementing agency itself [42].
3. Data and Methods
3.1. Policy Inventory
3.2. Actor Survey
3.3. Data on the Calibration of Policies over Time
3.4. Case: Flood Risk Management in Switzerland
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Flood Policies in Switzerland
4.2. Experts’ Perspective on Policy Design
4.2.1. Experts’ Highly Valued Policy Design Indicators Across Cases
4.2.2. Case Specificities
4.3. Policy Design Over Time
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Description of Ten Policy Design Indicators.
Appendix B. Survey Questions (translated; survey language: German)
Question on flood risk management measures
Response options
Appendix C. Coding Scheme for Policy Design Indicators and Values
Indicators | Coding Question | Coding Values | |
Pressure on target groups | Likelihood that target groups take action | 1 | No policy instruments adopted |
2 | Policy instrument mix relying on persuasion/nodality/information at most | ||
3 | Policy instrument mix relying on economic incentives at most | ||
4 | Policy instrument mix combining economic incentives with some sort of control/state authority | ||
5 | Policy instrument mix mostly relying on state authority/sticks | ||
Sanctions | Portion of deterred target groups | 1 | No existing sanctions |
2 | Existing sanctions deter small parts (less than half) of the target group | ||
3 | Existing sanctions deter half of the target group | ||
4 | Existing sanctions are high enough to deter important parts (more than half) of the target group | ||
5 | Existing sanctions are high enough to deter the entire target group | ||
Inclusiveness/Scope | Ratio of target groups to causes | 1 | No defined target groups |
2 | Small parts (less than half) of the groups/individuals causing the problem are targeted by the policy | ||
3 | Half of the groups/individuals causing the problem are targeted by the policy | ||
4 | Important parts (more than half) of the groups/individuals causing the problem are targeted | ||
5 | The entirety of groups/individuals causing the problem are targeted | ||
Proportionality | Ratio of solution level to problem scale | 1 | No defined solution level |
2 | The defined solution level is much smaller/larger than the problem scale (e.g., less than half the size or more than 1.5 times the size) | ||
3 | The defined solution level is somewhat smaller/larger than the problem scale (e.g., less than quarter the size or more than 1.25 times the size) | ||
4 | The defined solution level is only slightly smaller/larger than the problem scale (e.g., less 0.125 times the size or more than 1.125 times the size) | ||
5 | The defined solution level corresponds exactly to the problem scale | ||
Directness/Implementation | Dispersion of implementation duties | 1 | No defined implementation duties |
2 | Implementation (and funding) is passed on to the private sector or to other levels of government without control by the authority deciding | ||
3 | Implementation is controlled by the authority deciding, implementation (and funding) is passed on to the private sector or other levels of government | ||
4 | Implementation is controlled and funded by the authority deciding, implementation is passed on to the private sector or other levels of government | ||
5 | Authority deciding is also (funding) and implementing | ||
Bindingness | Type of policy document | 1 | No existing legal document |
2 | Existing document, but nonbinding | ||
3 | Short-term binding (e.g., ordinance, degree, etc.) | ||
4 | Medium-term binding (e.g., law) | ||
5 | Long-term binding (e.g., constitution) | ||
Objectives | What is the policy objective with respect to policy performance? | 1 | No specific target formulated |
2 | Vague and not ambitious target formulated | ||
3 | Specific, but not ambitious target formulated | ||
4 | Ambitious targets, but vague target formulated (e.g., significant CO2 emission reductions, but not specified by how much/compared to which baseline) | ||
5 | Specific and ambitious target formulated | ||
Integration | Is the policy integrated in a package/framework? | 0 | Policy is not integrated in a package or framework |
3 | Policy is integrated in a package or references other policy instruments or sectors | ||
5 | Policy is a framework policy or refers to a framework policy | ||
Budget | Is there a specific budget for implementation? | 0 | No budget assigned to policy implementation |
3 | Budget assigned from Federal/state-tax revenue | ||
5 | Specific tax introduced to budget the policy | ||
Monitoring | Is there a specific monitoring process and by whom? | 1 | No monitoring |
2 | Monitoring but unclear by whom | ||
3 | Monitoring by the implementation agency | ||
4 | An existing, but external group is responsible for monitoring | ||
5 | A special group/institution is established for monitoring |
References
- Svendsen, M.; Wester, P.; Molle, F. Managing River Basins: An Institutional Perspective. In Irrigation and River Basin Management: Options for Governance and Institutions; CABI Pub: Wallingford, UK; Cambridge, MA, USA, 2005; pp. 1–18. [Google Scholar]
- Tosun, J.; Lang, A. Policy Integration: Mapping the Different Concepts. Policy Stud. 2017, 38, 553–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trein, P.; Meyer, I.; Maggetti, M. The Integration and Coordination of Public Policies: A Systematic Comparative Review. J. Comp. Policy Anal. Res. Pract. 2018, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jordan, A.; Lenschow, A. Environmental policy Integration: A State of the Art Review. In Environmental Policy and Governance; John Wiley & Sons Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2010; Volume 20, pp. 147–158. [Google Scholar]
- Giessen, L. Horizontal Policy Integration. In Green Issues and Debates; Schiffman, H., Robbins, P., Eds.; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2011; pp. 293–296. [Google Scholar]
- Moss, T.; Newig, J. Multilevel Water Governance and Problems of Scale: Setting the Stage for a Broader Debate. Environ. Manag. 2010, 46, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Bodin, Ö. Collaborative environmental governance: Achieving collective action in social-ecological systems. Science 2017, 357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Guerrero, A.M.; Bodin, Ö.; McAllister, R.R.J.; Wilson, K.A. Achieving social-ecological fit through bottom-up collaborative governance: An empirical investigation. Ecol. Soc. 2015, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Varone, F.; Nahrath, S.; Aubin, D.; Gerber, J.-D. Functional regulatory spaces. Policy Sci. 2013, 46, 311–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Aubin, D.; Varone, F. The Evolution of European Water Policy; Towards Integrated Resource Management at EU Level; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Schreyögg, G.; Sydow, J. Understanding Institutional and Organizational Path Dependencies. In The Hidden Dynamics of Path Dependence; Macmillan, P., Ed.; Palgrave Macmillan: London, UK, 2010; pp. 3–12. [Google Scholar]
- Jordan, A.; Matt, E. Designing policies that intentionally stick: Policy feedback in a changing climate. Policy Sci. 2014, 47, 227–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gerber, J.-D.; Knoepfel, P.; Nahrath, S.; Varone, F. Institutional Resource Regimes: Towards sustainability through the combination of property-rights theory and policy analysis. Eco. Econ. 2009, 68, 798–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IPCC. Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC); Field, C.B., Barros, V.R., Mastrandrea, M.D., Mach, K.J., Abdrabo, M.A.-K., Adger, W.N., Anokhin, Y.A., Anisimov, O.A., Arent, D.J., Barnett, J., et al., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2014; 1132p. [Google Scholar]
- Lavell, A.; Oppenheimer, M.; Diop, C.; Hess, J.; Lempert, R.; Li, J.; Muir-Wood, R.; Myeong, S. Climate Change: New Dimensions in Disaster Risk, Exposure, Vulnerability, and Resilience. In Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation; A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC); Field, C.B., Barros, V., Stocker, T.F., Qin, D., Dokken, D.J., Ebi, K.L., Mastrandrea, M.D., Mach, K.J., Plattner, G.K., Allen, S.K., et al., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2012; pp. 25–64. [Google Scholar]
- Winsemius, H.C.; Aerts, J.C.J.H.; van Beek, L.P.H.; Bierkens, M.F.P.; Bouwman, A.; Jongman, B.; Kwadijk, J.C.J.; Ligtvoet, W.; Lucas, P.L.; van Vuuren, D.P.; et al. Global drivers of future river flood risk. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2015, 6, 381–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rothlisberger, V.; Zischg, A.P.; Keiler, M. Identifying spatial clusters of flood exposure to support decision making in risk management. Sci Total Environ 2017, 598, 593–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Grabs, W.; Tyagi, A.C.; Hyodo, M. Integrated flood management. Water Sci. Technol. 2007, 56, 97–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- FOWG. Die Geschichte des Hochwasserschutzes in der Schweiz in Serie Wasser; Federal Office for Water and Geology: Bern, Switzerland, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Hilker, N.; Badoux, A.; Hegg, C. The Swiss flood and landslide damage database 1972–2007. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2009, 9, 913–925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mostert, E.; Van Beek, E.; Bouman, N.W.M.; Hey, E.; Savenije, H.H.G.; Thissen, H.W.A. River Basin Management and Planning. In Proceedings of the Keynote Paper for International Workshop on River Basin Management, The Hague, The Netherlands, 27–29 October 1999; pp. 27–29. [Google Scholar]
- Biswas, A.K. Integrated water resources management: A reassessment: A water forum contribution. Water Int. 2004, 29, 248–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gain, A.K.; Rouillard, J.J.; Benson, D. Can integrated water resources management increase adaptive capacity to climate change adaptation? A critical review. J. Water Resour. Protect. 2013, 5, 11–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Warner, J.; Wester, P.; Bolding, A. Going with the flow: River basins as the natural units for water management? Water Policy 2008, 10, 121–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Molle, F. River-basin planning and management: The social life of a concept. Geoforum 2009, 40, 484–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gleick, P. The human right to water. Water Policy 1998, 1, 487–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mehta, L.; Allouche, J.; Nicol, A.; Walnycki, A. Global environmental justice and the right to water: The case of peri-urban Cochabamba and Delhi. Geoforum 2014, 54, 158–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yoder, J.; Adam, J.; Brady, M.; Cook, J.; Katz, S.; Johnston, S.; Malek, K.; McMillan, J.; Yang, Q. Benefit-Cost Analysis of Integrated Water Resource Management: Accounting for Interdependence in the Yakima Basin Integrated Plan. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 2017, 53, 456–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beveridge, R.; Monsees, J. Bridging parallel discourses of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM): Institutional and political challenges in developing and developed countries. Water Int. 2012, 37, 727–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Butterworth, J.; Warner, J.; Moriarty, P.; Smits, S.; Batchelor, C. Finding practical approaches to integrated water resources management. Water Altern. 2010, 3, 68–81. [Google Scholar]
- Muller, M. Fit for purpose: Taking integrated water resource management back to basics. Irrig. Drain. Syst. 2010, 24, 161–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wester, P.; Warner, J. River Basin Management Reconsidered. In Hydropolitics in the Developing World: A Southern African Perspective; Turton, A., Henwood, R., Eds.; African Water Issues Research Unit: Pretoria, South Africa, 2002; pp. 61–71. [Google Scholar]
- GWP. Integrated Water Resources Management; TAC Background Paper; Technical Advisory Committee, Ed.; G.W.P: Stockholm, Sweden, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Gerber, J.D.; Nahrath, S. Beitrag zur Entwicklung eines Ressourcenansatzes der Nachhaltigkeit; CRED Research Paper No. 3; Center for Regional Economic Development (CRED), University of Bern: Bern, Switzerland.
- Lieberherr, E.; Fischer, M.; Tschannen, A. Taking stock of institutional resource regime research: A meta-analysis. Environ. Sci. Policy 2019, 97, 81–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nahrath, S.; Brethaut, C. Coordination Between Institutional Resource Regimes as a Condition for Sustainable Management of Alpine Touristic Resources: The Case of Crans-Montana. Rev. Géogr. Alp. 2016, 104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Knoepfel, P.; Kissling-Näf, I.; Varone, F. Institutionelle Regime für Natürliche Ressourcen: Boden, Wasser und Wald im Vergleich—Régimes Institutionnels de Ressources Naturelles: ANALYSE Comparée du Sol, de L’eau et de la Forêt; Helbing & Lichtenhahn: Basel, Switzerland, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Peters, B.G.; Pierre, J.; King, D.S. The politics of path dependency: Political conflict in historical institutionalism. J. Political 2005, 67, 1275–1300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pierson, P. Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 2000, 94, 251–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Metz, F.; Angst, M.; Fischer, F. Policy integration: Do laws or actors integrate issues in Swiss flood risk management? Glob. Environ. Chang. 2019. accepted for publication. [Google Scholar]
- Knill, C.; Schulze, K.; Tosun, J. Regulatory policy outputs and impacts: Exploring a complex relationship. Regul. Gov. 2012, 6, 427–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schaffrin, A.; Sewerin, S.; Seubert, S. Toward a Comparative Measure of Climate Policy Output. Policy Stud. J. 2015, 43, 257–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lasswell, H. Politics: Who gets What, When, How. With Postscript (1958); Meridian Books: New York, NY, USA, 1958. [Google Scholar]
- Lasswell, H. The Decision Process: Seven Categories of Functional Analysis; University of Maryland Press: College Park, MD, USA, 1956. [Google Scholar]
- Sabatier, P.; Jenkins-Smith, H. Policy Change and Learning: An. Advocacy Coalition Approach; Westview Press: Boulder, CO, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Sabatier, P.; Weible, C. Theories of the Policy Process; Westview Press: Boulder, CO, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Del Rio, P.; Howlett, M. Beyond the ‘Tinbergen Rule’ in Policy Design: Matching Tools and Goals in Policy Portfolios. Annu. Rev. Policy Des. 2013, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Metz, F.; Fischer, M. Policy Diffusion in the Context of International River Basin Management. Environ. Policy Gov. 2016, 26, 257–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Maggetti, M.; Gilardi, F. Problems (and solutions) in the measurement of policy diffusion mechanisms. J. Public Policy 2015, 36, 87–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Harrington, W.; Morgenstern, R.D.; Sterner, T. (Eds.) Choosing Environmental Policy. Comparing Instruments and Outcomes in the United States and Europe; Resources for the Future: Washington, DC, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Metz, F. From Network Structure to Policy Design in Water Protection: A Comparative Perspective on Micropollutants in the Rhine River Riparian Countries; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 1–23. [Google Scholar]
- Visseren-Hamakers, I.J. Integrative environmental governance: Enhancing governance in the era of synergies. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2015, 14, 136–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dahl, R.; Lindblom, C. Politics, Economics and Welfare; The University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 1953. [Google Scholar]
- Vedung, E. Policy Instruments: Typologies and Theories. In Carrots, Sticks & Sermons: Policy Instruments and Their Evaluation; Bemelmans-Videc, M.-L., Rist, R., Vedung, E., Eds.; Transaction Publisher: New Brunswick, NJ, USA, 1998; pp. 21–58. [Google Scholar]
- Crawford, S.; Ostrom, E. A Grammar of Institutions. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 1995, 89, 582–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lowi, T. Four systems of policy, politics and choice. Public Adm. Rev. 1972, 32, 298–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Linder, S.; Peters, G. Instruments of Government: Perceptions and Contexts. J. Public Policy 1989, 9, 35–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Schneider, A.; Ingram, H. Social Construction of Target. Populations: Implications for Politics and Policy. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 1993, 87, 334–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bressers, H.; O’Toole, L. The Selection of Policy Instruments: A Network-Based Perspective. J. Public Policy 1998, 18, 213–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Knill, C.; Lenschow, A. Modes of Regulation in the Governance of the European Union: Towards a Comprehensive Evaluation. Eur. Integr. Online Pap. 2003, 7, 4–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Howlett, M. Beyond good and evil in policy implementation: Instrument mixes, implementation styles, and second generation theories of policy instrument choice. Policy Soc. 2004, 23, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salamon, L. The New Governance and the Tools of Public Action: An. Introduction. Fordham Urban Law J. 2000, 28, 1611–1674. [Google Scholar]
- Shelton, D. Normative Hierarchy in International Law. Am. J. Int. Law 2006, 100, 291–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rüthers, B.; Fischer, C.; Birk, A. Rechtstheorie mit Juristischer Methodenlehre, 6th ed.; C.H. Beck: München, Germany, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- FOWG. Hochwasserschutz an Fliessgewässern. Wegleitung des BWG; Federal Office for Water and Geology: Bern, Switzerland, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- FOWG. Hochwasserschutz. Mehr Raum für die Fliessgewässer. In Aquaterra; Federal Office for Water and Geology: Bern, Switzerland, 2002; pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- FOEN. Swiss Environmental Law. A Brief Guide; Federal Office for the Environment: Bern, Switzerland, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Schnitter, N. Die Geschichte des Wasserbaus in der Schweiz; Olynthus Verlag: Oberbözberg, Switzerland, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- Zaugg, M.; M.Stern, Z. Philosophiewandel im schweizerischen Wasserbau: Zur Vollzugspraxis des Nachhaltigen Hochwasserschutzes; Abteilung Humangeographie, Geographisches Institut, Univesity of Zürich: Zürich, Switzerland, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- OcCC and ProClim. Klimaänderung und die Schweiz 2050. Erwartete Auswirkungen auf Umwelt, Gesellschaft und Wirtschaft; Beratende Organ für Fragen der Klimaänderung (OcCC); ProClim—Forum für Klima und Global Change: Bern, Switzerland, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Schmocker-Fackel, P.; Naef, F. More frequent flooding? Changes in flood frequency in Switzerland since 1850. J. Hydrol. 2010, 381, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Howlett, M. Policy Instruments, Policy Styles, and Policy Implementation. Policy Stud. J. 1991, 19, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wasser-Agenda-21. Einzugsgebietsmanagement. Leitbild für die integrale Bewirtschaftung des Wassers in der Schweiz; Umwelt-Diverses; FOEN, Federal Office for the Environment: Bern, Switzerland, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Birkland, T. After Disaster: Agenda Setting, Public Policy, and Focusing Events; Georgetown University Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Mauch, C.; Reynard, E. The Evolution of the Water Regime in Switzerland. In The Evolution of National Water Regimes in Europe: Transitions in Water Rights and Water Policies; Kissling-Näf, I., Kuks, S., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2004; pp. 293–328. [Google Scholar]
- Stavins, R.N. Clean Profits: Using Economic Incentives to Protect the Environment. Policy Rev. 1989, 48, 58–63. [Google Scholar]
- Stavins, R.; Hahn, R. Incentive-based Environmental Regulation: A New Era For. an Old Idea? Ecol. Law Q. 1991, 18, 1–42. [Google Scholar]
- Coase, R. The problem of social cost. J. Law Econ. 1960, 3, 1–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gough, I. Heat, Greed and Human Need: Climate Change, Capitalism and Sustainable Wellbeing; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Knill, C.; Lenschow, A. Compliance, Competition and Communication: Different Approaches of European Governance and their Impact on National Institutions. J. Common Mark. Stud. 2005, 43, 583–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bressers, H.; O’Toole, L. Instrument Selection and Implementation in a Networked Context. In Designing Government: From Instruments to Governance; Eliadis, P., Hill, M., Howlett, M., Eds.; McGill-Queen’s University Press: Montreal, QC, Canada, 2005; pp. 132–153. [Google Scholar]
- Jordan, A.; Wurzel, R.; Zito, A. The Rise of ‘New’ Policy Instruments in Comparative Perspective: Has Governance Eclipsed Government? Political Stud. 2005, 53, 477–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hupe, P. The Thesis of Incongruent Implementation: Revisiting Pressman and Wildavsky. Public Policy Adm. 2011, 26, 63–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pressman, J.; Wildavsky, A. Implementation, 3rd ed.; University of California Press: Berkeley, CA, USA; Los Angeles, CA, USA, 1984. [Google Scholar]
- Peters, G. American Public Policy: Promise and Performance, 9th ed.; CQ Press: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Christensen, T.; Lægreid, P. The Whole-of-Government Approach to Public Sector Reform. Public Adm. Rev. 2007, 67, 1059–1066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oates, W.E.; Portney, P.R. The Political Economy of Environmental Policy. In Handbook of Environmental Economics; Mäler, K.-G., Vincent, J.R., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2003; pp. 325–354. [Google Scholar] [Green Version]
- Metz, F.; Ingold, K. Politics of the precautionary principle: Assessing actors’ preferences in water protection policy. Policy Sci. 2017, 50, 721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Actor Type | Number of Responses | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Aare | Thur | Kander | Total | |
Federal government | 4 | 4 | 4 | 12 |
Canton | 11 | 7 | 8 | 26 |
Municipality | 18 | 6 | 5 | 29 |
Commission | 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 |
Regional association | 8 | 1 | 3 | 12 |
Nature conservation & sports/leisure organization | 14 | 11 | 7 | 32 |
Economy & infrastructure | 6 | 2 | 5 | 13 |
Engineering office | 4 | 1 | 5 | 10 |
Science | 3 | 1 | 2 | 6 |
Total | 68 | 35 | 43 | 146 |
Indicators | Coding Question | Coding Values | |
---|---|---|---|
Integration | Is the policy integrated in a package/framework? | 0 | Policy is not integrated in a package or framework |
3 | Policy is integrated in a package or references other policy instruments or sectors | ||
5 | Policy is a framework policy or refers to a framework policy | ||
Pressure on target groups | Likelihood that target groups take action | 1 | No policy instruments adopted |
2 | Policy instrument mix relying on persuasion/nodality/information at most | ||
3 | Policy instrument mix relying on economic incentives at most | ||
4 | Policy instrument mix combining economic incentives with some sort of control/state authority | ||
5 | Policy instrument mix mostly relying on state authority/sticks | ||
Sanctions | Portion of deterred target groups | 1 | No existing sanctions |
2 | Existing sanctions deter small parts (less than half) of the target group | ||
3 | Existing sanctions deter half of the target group | ||
4 | Existing sanctions are high enough to deter important parts (more than half) of the target group | ||
5 | Existing sanctions are high enough to deter the entire target group | ||
Budget | Is there a specific budget for implementation? | 0 | No budget assigned to policy implementation |
3 | Budget assigned from Federal/state-tax revenue | ||
5 | Specific tax introduced to budget the policy |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Metz, F.; Glaus, A. Integrated Water Resources Management and Policy Integration: Lessons from 169 Years of Flood Policies in Switzerland. Water 2019, 11, 1173. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11061173
Metz F, Glaus A. Integrated Water Resources Management and Policy Integration: Lessons from 169 Years of Flood Policies in Switzerland. Water. 2019; 11(6):1173. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11061173
Chicago/Turabian StyleMetz, Florence, and Anik Glaus. 2019. "Integrated Water Resources Management and Policy Integration: Lessons from 169 Years of Flood Policies in Switzerland" Water 11, no. 6: 1173. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11061173
APA StyleMetz, F., & Glaus, A. (2019). Integrated Water Resources Management and Policy Integration: Lessons from 169 Years of Flood Policies in Switzerland. Water, 11(6), 1173. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11061173