Browse by Attribute

Case Study > Land Use : religious/cultural sites or urban & Water Use: Hydropower Generation

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

Natural, Societal & Political Domain Variables:

- Assets (12) - Ecosystems (6) - Governance (16) - Values and Norms (8) - Water Quality (10) - Water Quantity (16)

Climate:

- Arid/desert (Köppen B-type) (6) - Continental (Köppen D-type) (7) - Dry-summer (6) - Dry-winter (4) - Humid mid-latitude (Köppen C-type) (7) - Moist (5) - Moist tropical (Köppen A-type) (6) - Monsoon (7) - Semi-arid/steppe (Köppen B-type) (8) - alpine (3) - cold-climate (permafrost, tundra, polar) (1) - temperate (3)

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: (Click arrow to add another value)

- Agriculture or Irrigation - Domestic/Urban Supply - Fisheries - farmed - Fisheries - wild - Hydropower Generation - Industry - consumptive use - Industry - non-consumptive use - Livestock - Mining/Extraction support - Other Ecological Services - Recreation or Tourism - Other - None

Stakeholder Type:

- Community or organized citizens (12) - Cultural Interest (2) - Development/humanitarian interest (4) - Environmental interest (8) - Federated state/territorial/provincial government (8) - Industry/Corporate Interest (10) - Local Government (9) - Non-legislative governmental agency (13) - Sovereign state/national/federal government (15) - Supranational union (3)

Key Question:

- How can government be dis/incentivized to offer an inclusive planning process? (1) - How can mutual trust amongst riparians be nurtured? What actions erode that trust? (1) - How do issues of equity and development impact the identification of stakeholders in cases involving hydropower or other revenue generating water infrastructure? (4) - How does asymmetry of power influence water negotiations and how can the negative effects be mitigated? (5) - 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 approaches are most beneficial for rapidly growing cities in the developing world to link water management to sustainable urban growth strategy? (1) - What calculations and considerations should be investigated by countries looking to harness additional hydropower? Which potential outcomes should be investigated or identified? (1) - 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? (3) - 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? (3) - What mechanisms beyond simple allocation can be incorporated into transboundary water agreements to add value and facilitate resolution? (8) - 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 21 results in range #1 to #21.

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

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