Browse by Attribute

Case Study > Stakeholder Type: Supranational union

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

Natural, Societal & Political Domain Variables:

- Assets (8) - Ecosystems (6) - Governance (10) - Values and Norms (6) - Water Quality (5) - Water Quantity (6)

Climate:

- Arid/desert (Köppen B-type) (3) - Continental (Köppen D-type) (2) - Dry-summer (4) - Dry-winter (2) - Humid mid-latitude (Köppen C-type) (1) - Moist (1) - Moist tropical (Köppen A-type) (2) - Monsoon (2) - Semi-arid/steppe (Köppen B-type) (2) - alpine (1) - cold-climate (permafrost, tundra, polar) (3) - temperate (1)

Land Use:

- agricultural- confined livestock operations (2) - agricultural- cropland and pasture (6) - conservation lands (5) - forest land (1) - industrial use (4) - mining operations (2) - rangeland (1) - religious/cultural sites (1) - urban (4) - urban- high density (3)

Water Use:

- Agriculture or Irrigation (6) - Domestic/Urban Supply (6) - Fisheries - farmed (1) - Fisheries - wild (3) - Hydropower Generation (5) - Industry - consumptive use (2) - Industry - non-consumptive use (4) - Livestock (2) - Mining/Extraction support (2) - Other Ecological Services (6) - Recreation or Tourism (2)

Stakeholder Type: (Click arrow to add another value)

- Community or organized citizens - Cultural Interest - Development/humanitarian interest - Environmental interest - Federated state/territorial/provincial government - Industry/Corporate Interest - Local Government - Non-legislative governmental agency - Sovereign state/national/federal government - Supranational union - Other - None

Key Question:

- How can consultation and cooperation among stakeholders and development partners be better facilitated/managed/fostered? (1) - 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) - 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? (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? (4) - 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? (3)

Showing below up to 10 results in range #1 to #10.

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

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