Browse by Attribute

Case Study > Climate: Moist & Land Use : rangeland or urban- high density

Click on one or more items below to narrow your results.

Natural, Societal & Political Domain Variables:

- Assets (6) - Ecosystems (2) - Governance (6) - Values and Norms (2) - Water Quality (4) - Water Quantity (6)

Climate: (Click arrow to add another value)

- Arid/desert (Köppen B-type) - Continental (Köppen D-type) - Dry-summer - Dry-winter - Humid mid-latitude (Köppen C-type) - Moist - Moist tropical (Köppen A-type) - Monsoon - Semi-arid/steppe (Köppen B-type) - alpine - cold-climate (permafrost, tundra, polar) - temperate - Other - None

Land Use: (Click arrow to add another value)

- agricultural- confined livestock operations - agricultural- cropland and pasture - conservation lands - forest land - industrial use - mining operations - rangeland - religious/cultural sites - urban - urban- high density - Other - None

Water Use:

- Agriculture or Irrigation (6) - Domestic/Urban Supply (5) - Fisheries - farmed (2) - Fisheries - wild (2) - Hydropower Generation (7) - Industry - consumptive use (2) - Industry - non-consumptive use (2) - Livestock (3) - Mining/Extraction support (1) - Other Ecological Services (1) - Recreation or Tourism (2)

Stakeholder Type:

- Community or organized citizens (4) - Cultural Interest (1) - Development/humanitarian interest (1) - Environmental interest (2) - Industry/Corporate Interest (2) - Local Government (4) - Non-legislative governmental agency (5) - Sovereign state/national/federal government (5) - Supranational union (1)

Key Question:

- How can consultation and cooperation among stakeholders and development partners be better facilitated/managed/fostered? (2) - How can government be dis/incentivized to offer an inclusive planning process? (1) - How do issues of equity and development impact the identification of stakeholders in cases involving hydropower or other revenue generating water infrastructure? (1) - How does asymmetry of power influence water negotiations and how can the negative effects be mitigated? (1) - To what extent can international actors and movements from civil society influence water management? How and when is this beneficial/detrimental and how can these effects be supported/mitigated? (4) - What calculations and considerations should be investigated by countries looking to harness additional hydropower? Which potential outcomes should be investigated or identified? (1) - What mechanisms beyond simple allocation can be incorporated into transboundary water agreements to add value and facilitate resolution? (3) - Where does the benefit “flow” from a hydropower project and how does that affect implementation and sustainability of the project? (1)

Showing below up to 7 results in range #1 to #7.

View (previous 250 | next 250) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

View (previous 250 | next 250) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)