Conflict Management in Participatory Approaches to Water Management: A Case Study of Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River Regulation
Abstract
:1. Conflict in Participatory Approaches
2. Background to the Lake Ontario St. Lawrence River Regulation
- 1
- Uses for domestic and sanitary purposes;
- 2
- Uses for navigation, including the service of canals for the purposes of navigation;
- 3
- Uses for power and for irrigation purposes.
3. Methodological Approach
- Stakeholders were identified and classified on a stakeholder chart;
- A snapshot of stakeholder positions at the time of the technical hearings was visualised through a stakeholder mapping exercise;
- iii.
- Undertaking a content analysis to identify where stakeholders held potentially conflicting needs, values, beliefs, or expectations relevant to the resolution process;
- iv.
- Content analysis of the statements made by stakeholder classes who remain opposed to Plan 2014 was undertaken with the goal of elucidating the root causes of opposition.
4. Results
4.1. Categorisation of Stakeholders into Classes
4.2. Stakeholder Mapping
4.3. Content Analysis
5. Discussion
5.1. Extent of Agreement Reached
5.2. Effectiveness of the IJC’s Resolution Process
5.3. Root Causes of Residual Conflict
5.4. Moving Forward
5.5. Broader Lessons
6. Conclusions
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
BWT | Boundary Waters Treaty |
IJC | International Joint Commission |
LOSLR | Lake Ontario & St. Lawrence River |
PIAG | Public Interest Advisory Group |
References
- Carr, C. Stakeholder and public participation in river basin management—An introduction. WIREs Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Water 2015, 2, 393–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Palmer, R.N.; Cardwell, H.E.; Lorie, M.A.; Werwick, W. Disciplined planning, structured participation, and collaborative modeling—Applying Shared Vision Planning to water resources. J. Am. Water Res. Assoc. 2013, 49, 614–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arnstein, S.R. A ladder in citizen participation. J. Am. Inst. Plan. 1969, 35, 216–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Von Korff, Y.; Daniell, K.A.; Moellenkamp, S.; Bots, P.; Bijlsma, R.M. Implementing participation water management: Recent advances in theory, practice and evaluation. Ecol. Soc. 2012, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Webler, T.; Tuler, S. Public participation in watershed management planning: Views on process from people in the field. Res. Hum. Ecol. 2001, 8, 29–39. [Google Scholar]
- Davies, K.K.; Fisher, K.T.; Dickson, M.E.; Thrush, S.F.; le Heron, R.L. Improving ecosystem service frameworks to address wicked problems. Ecol. Soc. 2015, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lange, A.; Siebert, R.; Barkmann, T. Incrementality and regional bridging: Instruments for promoting stakeholder participation in land use management in Northern Germany. Soc. Natl. Res. 2016, 29, 868–879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Institute for Water Resources (IWR). Managing Water for Drought; IWR Report 94-NDS-8; Institute for Water Resources: Alexandria, VA, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Mitchell, B. Resource and Environmental Management, 2nd ed.; Prentice Hall: Harlow, UK, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Peltonen, L.; Sairinen, R. Integrating impact assessment and conflict management in urban planning: Experiences from Finland. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2010, 30, 328–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stanghellini, P. Stakeholder involvement in water management: The role of the stakeholder analysis within participatory processes. Water Policy 2010, 12, 675–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elias, A.A. A systems dynamics model for stakeholder analysis in environmental conflicts. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2012, 55, 387–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andrew, J.S. Potential application of mediation to land use conflicts in small-scale mining. J. Clean. Prod. 2003, 11, 117–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- International Joint Commission (IJC). Guidance in Seeking Approval for Uses, Obstructions or Diversions of Waters under the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909. Available online: http://www.ijc.org/files/tinymce/uploaded/Guidance-in-Seeking-Approval-for-Uses_EN.pdf (accessed on 15 February 2016).
- International Joint Commission (IJC). Options for Managing Lake Ontario and St. Lawrence River Water Levels and Flows. Final Report by the International Lake Ontario–St. Lawrence River Study Board to the International Joint Commission. 2006. Website. Available online: http://www.ijc.org/loslr/en/library/LOSLR%20Study%20Reports/report-main-e-6KB.pdf (accessed on 15 February 2016).
- International Joint Commission (IJC). Plan of Study for Criteria Review in the Orders of Approval for the Regulation of Lake Ontario–St. Lawrence River Levels and Flows. Report by St. Lawrence River–Lake Ontario Plan of Study Team to the International Joint Commission. 1999. Available online: http://losl.org/PDF/PlanOfStudy_en.pdf (accessed on 15 February 2016).
- Langsdale, S.; Allyson, B.K.; Elizabeth, B.; Erik, H.; Scott, K.; Rick, P. Collaborative modelling for decision support in water resources: Principles and best practices. J. Am. Water Res. Assoc. 2013, 49, 629–638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- International Joint Commission (IJC). Lake Ontario–St. Lawrence River Plan 2014: Protecting against Extreme Water Levels, Restoring Wetlands and Preparing for Climate Change. A Report to the Governments of Canada and the United States by the International Joint Commission. IJC Website, 2014. Available online: http://www.ijc.org/files/tinymce/uploaded/LOSLR/IJC_LOSR_EN_Web.pdf (accessed on 15 February 2016).
- Carr, G.; Loucks, D.P.; Blöschl, G. An analysis of public participation in the Lake Ontario–St. Lawrence River study, Chapter. In Water Co-Management; Grover, V.I., Krantzberg, G., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2013; pp. 48–77. [Google Scholar]
- Freeman, R.E. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach; Pitman: Boston, MA, USA, 1984. [Google Scholar]
- Mendelow, A. Stakeholder mapping. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Information Systems, Cambridge, MA, USA, 7–9 December 1991.
- Mitchell, R.; Agle, B.; Wood, D. Towards a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1997, 22, 853–886. [Google Scholar]
- Elias, A.A.; Cavana, R.Y.; Jackson, L.S. Stakeholder analysis for R & D project management. R D Manag. 2002, 32, 301–310. [Google Scholar]
Timeline | Event |
---|---|
1909 | Boundary Waters Treaty signed International Joint Commission Created |
1952 | Order of Approval for the construction of the St. Lawrence River Hydropower Project |
1954–1958 | Construction of the Moses-Saunders Dam |
1999 | The International Lake Ontario St. Lawrence River Study Board Created |
2000–2006 | Lake Ontario St. Lawrence River Study Conducted |
2007 | Plan 2007 Backed by the IJC as the Preferred Regulation Option |
2008 | Plan 2007 Widely Opposed during Public Hearings |
2013 | Hearings on Plan 2014 |
Environmental | Political South Shore | Riverine Public South Shore |
---|---|---|
|
|
|
Non-Riverine Public South Shore | Public St. Lawrence | First Nations |
|
|
|
Political St. Lawrence | Shipping and Navigation | Fishing, Recreational Boating and Tourism |
|
|
|
Scientific Community | Hydropower | Municipality and Domestic Water Supply |
|
|
|
Organisation | Category | Position | Evidence |
---|---|---|---|
Mohawks of Akwesasne | First Nations | Strongly Supportive | “We strongly support the effort to mimic the natural flows of the River versus the Lake environment model that we have… I feel this Plan does give us the best approach forward… we fully support this new regulation Plan 2014” |
Shipping Federation of Canada | Shipping | Supportive/ Strongly Supportive | “We fully support the IJC’s effort through Plan 2014 to protect and enhance the environment” but they have some lingering concerns, “we’re concerned with the possibility of continued low water…” |
St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation (RSMC) | Shipping | Neutral | “The RSMC is not opposed to the prospect of refining the water management plan” but “given the above concerns, the implementation of the Plan in its current state will have significant negative impact to commercial navigation” |
Canadian Shipowners Association | Shipping | Supportive | “The CSA recognizes and supports the intent of Plan 2014”… “we believe that Plan 2014 can be achieved and support both increased benefits to the environment and the economy through the efficient and predictable control of water levels but it still requires certain specific amendments” |
Montreal Port Authority | Shipping | Supportive/ Strongly Supportive | “the proposal generally seems good to us” |
Hydro Quebec | Hydro | Supportive | “so this was done partly in the plan but not necessarily as we would have liked”, “the present Plan is progressively good… the Plan should be improved before it is implemented” |
Conservation Ontario | Environment | Strongly supportive | “Conservation Authorities applaud the IJC for Plan 2014, proposing a more balanced approach to flow management that seeks to create more natural levels in the Lake and River while continuing to provide the basin’s community with substantial benefits. It is a major step forward…” “In conclusion, Conservation Ontario and its members support the implementation of Plan 2014” |
WWF Canada | Environment | Strongly supportive | “We feel that Plan 2014 really does have the potential to have a national and global impact… We’re very pleased with plan 2014…” |
Nature Conservancy | Environment | Strongly supportive | “I’m speaking today in support of Plan 2014” |
Antique Classic Boat Society | Fishing, Recreational Boating & Tourism | Strongly Supportive | “I would definitely appreciate you accepting Plan 2014” |
Lake Ontario Fishing Coalition | Fishing, Recreational Boating & Tourism | Strongly Supportive | “I really hope we can move forward with this” |
Alexandria Bay Fishing Guides | Fishing, Recreational Boating & Tourism | Strongly Supportive | “I support Plan 2014 because I believe it will benefit the wetlands and the fish and the wildlife that live there” |
Fédération Québécoise des Chasseurs et Pêcheurs | Fishing, Recreational Boating & Tourism | Strongly Supportive | “The Fédération Québécoise des Chasseurs et Pêcheurs is very happy with the main objectives of getting as close to a natural flow as possible. We strongly support this idea.” If anything the speaker is suggesting that the plan should go further. |
State University of New York | Scientific Community | Strongly Supportive | “I will point out every one of the damages that have been complained about happened under 1958DD. 1958DD never allows a low lake level to occur. I want to point out that low lake levels are really, really needed and critical” |
Stakeholder | Needs/Wants |
---|---|
First Nations | Inclusion in decision making To be able to live off the environment both now and in the future |
Shipping and Navigation | Predictability in water level Minimum water levels |
Environmental Groups | Increased biodiversity and ecological integrity through protection of environmentally significant areas and enhanced aquatic and terrestrial habitat |
Scientific Community | Increased biodiversity and ecological integrity through protection of environmentally significant areas and enhanced aquatic and terrestrial habitat |
Hydropower | Consistent flow Predictable flow |
Recreational Fishing, Boating and Tourism | Abundant fish, extended boating season through higher water levels at end of season (which also makes removing boats from the water easier) and beautiful environment to attract tourists |
Municipal and Domestic Water Supply | Problems arise for water treatment plants at very low water levels if water becomes difficult to draw or requires additional treatment due to more concentrated pollutants, and for water and wastewater treatment plants at high water levels due to potential flood damage to facilities and shoreline protection structures |
Opposed South Shore | Property security and protection from water damage and erosion Protection from emotional devastation caused by disasters Water Access Building regulation changes Consistent water levels |
There Is No Problem with the Current Management Regime: |
---|
“Why fix something that is not broken” (RK, Ontario NY) |
Data Used in Shared Visioning Models Are Not Accurate: |
“While this Plan reportedly reduces damages for home owners and recreational boaters, this remains an issue of great contention due to the fact that the data used remains old, outdated and inaccurate… At no time has the assessment value decreased and since this was a critical feature for the development of coastal damage projections, we believe it clearly documents the cost for coastal shoreline protection is significantly undervalued in this Plan” (DE, Niagara County) |
“We feel that this plan does not show improvement to the environment due to its assumptions and out-dated data” (LC, Huron) |
No Environmental Review Took Place: |
“I don’t see any environmental review. In New York State there’s a thing called a ‘seeker’; it’s anytime you do anything with wetlands; it’s an extremely detailed process which is justified, that you evaluate the environmental impact. I don’t see anything like that in this Plan that I am aware of” (JH, Williamson) |
Review Comments Were Not Adequately Addressed: |
“The study had as part of it a funding mechanism to bring in the National Resource Council on the American side and the Royal Society of Canada on the Canadian side to Peer Review the environmental science... The Peer Review did not come out well for the environmental science. As a matter of fact, page 65 of the Peer Review says: “Do not use those models as a decision-making mechanism” (TM, Niagara County) |
Lack of Emergency Response Maps: |
“Last year the town of Greece…asked how any plan can be considered when there are no FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Act) risk maps detailing the effects of these proposals on our lakefront properties” (JA, Greece) |
Outcomes Are Biased Towards Hydropower Production and/or Shipping Concerns: |
“What does make sense however, after six years of reviewing the data released by the IJC, the biggest winner with Plan 2014 just like with the other proposed plans, might not be the environment at all; it’s hydro power” (SL, Sodus) |
“I read an article in yesterday’s Buffalo News that talked about the hydro-electric plants during the peak demand times, they can make more electricity when the water levels are higher. The difference there results in millions of dollars. I don’t believe that it’s only just about the wetlands and the muskrats; I also believe that it also has to do with hydro-electric plants, the money that is involved and the shipping industry as well” (TH, South Shore) |
“Hydro power gets I calculated four times the benefit than the environment…I would submit that the Plan is non-balanced in terms of impact, in terms of damage” (JH, Williamson) |
“What I’m hearing, what the real issue is here, is that hydro power and shipping take priority over infrastructure concerns” (MR, Bailey Beach) |
The Cost Is Unfairly Distributed: |
“This Plan, as did previous, concentrates large disproportionate loss on five South Shore counties including Niagara” (DE, Niagara County) |
“The International Joint Commission prefers Montreal interests over the South Shore’s problems with flooding” (CS, Hamlin) |
“I see that what we are doing here is creating damages for a very small group of people in a very localised area. When we started the study, one of the basic tenants of the study was that there would be no disproportionate losses; no one would gain from someone else’s loss. Well that has not happened” (TM, Niagara County) |
It’s Unfair to ‘Change the Rules of the Game’: |
“The Moses-Saunders Dam was built with the South Shore residents permission and the agreement included a 4-foot level for lows and highs…now the IJC wants a Plan that will let the waters go 5 times higher than the original plan, they don’t want to hear from the South Shore and the problems that would incur” (CS, Hamlin) |
“So for the past 40 years, homeowners, municipalities and private businesses have engineered and built marina and water treatment infrastructure to that roughly 4 foot like variation” (LS, Wilson) |
“Our marina, our structures, everything we have was built according to the existing plan. If we deviate from that, you’re going to devastate our community” (TH, Newfane) |
“much commercial, residential and municipal development along the lakeshore; it was done based on the belief that to the best of human ability the lake would remain as promised in plan 1958 DD” (RK, Ontario NY) |
There Is an Alternative Agenda to the Process: |
“I had the pleasure of observing muskrats this year in my pond because I got a wetland in there that I can’t touch; it’s about a quarter of an acre. Guess what muskrats eat? Cattails, yes. Well, when they were done eating every bit of cattails and completely defoliating the entire pond, they’re gone... It’s a dichotomy that makes me question the agendas” (DC, South Shore) |
Meetings Are Being Held in Secret/behind Closed Doors: |
“We fast forward to 2013, and by the way this is rumors, but the neighborhood, IJC and other groups have had closed door meetings. Is this true?” (SD, Crescent Beach) |
“As required by the [Boundary Waters] Treaty, the IJC is to involve the public in all of its activities, yet after B+ the meetings have been behind closed doors with input by environmental groups only” (LC, Huron) |
Not All Data Are Being Shared with the Public: |
“Also a rumor is there is a map and it shows how many homes will be affected; possible up to 2000. Rumor is this is not going to be presented to the public” (SD, Crescent Beach) |
The Canadian and U.S. Governments Are Unable to Work Together Effectively: |
“My concern is your triggering points and how they get triggered. I have people here from the United States and people from Canada. I know our Congress can’t work together because they’re Republicans and Democrats” (RK, Grandview) |
© 2016 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
Furber, A.; Medema, W.; Adamowski, J.; Clamen, M.; Vijay, M. Conflict Management in Participatory Approaches to Water Management: A Case Study of Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River Regulation. Water 2016, 8, 280. https://doi.org/10.3390/w8070280
Furber A, Medema W, Adamowski J, Clamen M, Vijay M. Conflict Management in Participatory Approaches to Water Management: A Case Study of Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River Regulation. Water. 2016; 8(7):280. https://doi.org/10.3390/w8070280
Chicago/Turabian StyleFurber, Alison, Wietske Medema, Jan Adamowski, Murray Clamen, and Meetu Vijay. 2016. "Conflict Management in Participatory Approaches to Water Management: A Case Study of Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River Regulation" Water 8, no. 7: 280. https://doi.org/10.3390/w8070280