Browse by Attribute

Case Study > Natural, Societal & Political Domain Variables: Ecosystems & Land Use : rangeland or Other

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

Natural, Societal & Political Domain Variables: (Click arrow to add another value)

- Assets - Ecosystems - Governance - Values and Norms - Water Quality - Water Quantity - Other - None

Climate:

- Arid/desert (Köppen B-type) (12) - Continental (Köppen D-type) (7) - Dry-summer (9) - Humid mid-latitude (Köppen C-type) (7) - Moist (5) - Moist tropical (Köppen A-type) (6) - Monsoon (5) - Semi-arid/steppe (Köppen B-type) (9) - alpine (3) - cold-climate (permafrost, tundra, polar) (1) - temperate (5)

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 (27) - Domestic/Urban Supply (26) - Fisheries - farmed (3) - Fisheries - wild (11) - Hydropower Generation (17) - Industry - consumptive use (6) - Industry - non-consumptive use (7) - Livestock (5) - Mining/Extraction support (4) - Other Ecological Services (13) - Recreation or Tourism (7)

Stakeholder Type:

- Community or organized citizens (27) - Cultural Interest (8) - Development/humanitarian interest (12) - Environmental interest (28) - Federated state/territorial/provincial government (22) - Industry/Corporate Interest (22) - Local Government (24) - Non-legislative governmental agency (19) - Sovereign state/national/federal government (29) - Supranational union (4)

Key Question:

- How can consultation and cooperation among stakeholders and development partners be better facilitated/managed/fostered? (10) - How can government be dis/incentivized to offer an inclusive planning process? (3) - 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? (3) - How do national policies influence water use at the local level? (3) - How does asymmetry of power influence water negotiations and how can the negative effects be mitigated? (6) - 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? (5) - What calculations and considerations should be investigated by countries looking to harness additional hydropower? Which potential outcomes should be investigated or identified? (2) - 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 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? (4) - What mechanisms beyond simple allocation can be incorporated into transboundary water agreements to add value and facilitate resolution? (7) - What role(s) can hydropower play in a nation's energy strategy? (2) - What role can agricultural subsidies play in finding solutions to complex water management problems? (1) - Where does the benefit “flow” from a hydropower project and how does that affect implementation and sustainability of the project? (5)

Showing below up to 36 results in range #1 to #36.

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

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