Browse by Attribute

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

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) (10) - Continental (Köppen D-type) (4) - Dry-summer (9) - Humid mid-latitude (Köppen C-type) (5) - Moist (5) - Moist tropical (Köppen A-type) (5) - Monsoon (4) - Semi-arid/steppe (Köppen B-type) (8) - alpine (3) - 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: (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 (19) - Cultural Interest (5) - Development/humanitarian interest (8) - Environmental interest (21) - Federated state/territorial/provincial government (15) - Industry/Corporate Interest (17) - Local Government (17) - Non-legislative governmental agency (15) - Sovereign state/national/federal government (21) - Supranational union (3)

Key Question:

- How can consultation and cooperation among stakeholders and development partners be better facilitated/managed/fostered? (8) - How can government be dis/incentivized to offer an inclusive planning process? (2) - How can mutual trust amongst riparians be nurtured? What actions erode that trust? (2) - 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? (2) - How do national policies influence water use at the local level? (2) - 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? (3) - 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? (3) - 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? (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? (4)

Showing below up to 27 results in range #1 to #27.

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

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