Browse by Attribute

Case Study > Land Use : conservation lands or mining operations or rangeland

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

Natural, Societal & Political Domain Variables:

- Assets (18) - Ecosystems (15) - Governance (23) - Values and Norms (12) - Water Quality (19) - Water Quantity (21)

Climate:

- Arid/desert (Köppen B-type) (13) - Continental (Köppen D-type) (9) - Dry-summer (11) - Dry-winter (7) - Humid mid-latitude (Köppen C-type) (5) - Moist (5) - Moist tropical (Köppen A-type) (8) - Monsoon (7) - Semi-arid/steppe (Köppen B-type) (15) - alpine (5) - cold-climate (permafrost, tundra, polar) (2) - temperate (9)

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 (30) - Domestic/Urban Supply (25) - Fisheries - farmed (2) - Fisheries - wild (8) - Hydropower Generation (18) - Industry - consumptive use (8) - Industry - non-consumptive use (7) - Livestock (6) - Mining/Extraction support (6) - Other Ecological Services (12) - Recreation or Tourism (10)

Stakeholder Type:

- Community or organized citizens (17) - Cultural Interest (7) - Development/humanitarian interest (6) - Environmental interest (17) - Federated state/territorial/provincial government (10) - Industry/Corporate Interest (16) - Local Government (14) - Non-legislative governmental agency (19) - Sovereign state/national/federal government (25) - Supranational union (7)

Key Question:

- How can consultation and cooperation among stakeholders and development partners be better facilitated/managed/fostered? (6) - How can costs for water quality projects be distributed between polluters and beneficiaries? (1) - How can increasing urban water demand be balanced between the needs of the urban population and industry? (1) - How can mutual trust amongst riparians be nurtured? What actions erode that trust? (3) - How can packages or options that link issues creatively or build on possible technology innovations be employed to create non-zero sum choices within negotiations that include water resources? (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? (2) - 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 considerations can be given to incorporating collaborative adaptive management (CAM)? What efforts have the parties made to review and adjust a solution or decision over time in light of changing conditions? (5) - What effective mechanisms can downstream states/countries use to protect their water related interests/rights? (2) - What kinds of water treaties or agreements between countries can provide sufficient structure and stability to ensure enforceability but also be flexible and adaptable given future uncertainties? (5) - What mechanisms beyond simple allocation can be incorporated into transboundary water agreements to add value and facilitate resolution? (10) - What role(s) can hydropower play in a nation's energy strategy? (1) - Where does the benefit “flow” from a hydropower project and how does that affect implementation and sustainability of the project? (2)

Showing below up to 33 results in range #1 to #33.

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

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