Metagovernance of Participatory water reform in NSW

Research output: Book chapter/Published conference paperConference paper

12 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This paper examines the metagovernance associated the NSW water reform process which started in 1998 and took almost a decade to implement. The process was promoted as a partnership between government and the community and used representative stakeholder forums to develop regional water sharing plans. However whether governments truly engage in participation or use it simply as a part of symbolic policy is a key question in the literature on participatory governance.This research found government took a top down approach to the process in that it strongly influenced decisions at a various scales. This led to considerable stakeholder frustration and anger as it made participation seem tokenistic. When agency oversight and influence are combined in this way it leads to high transaction costs because it encourages participants to try to take advantage of other policy windows. This, inturn, significantly increases the resources required by the agency to manage the process. It is concluded have clear goals and as well as a coherent participatory process are important issues in metagovernance of participatory processes.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationTASA 2008 conference
Subtitle of host publicationRe-imagining Sociology
EditorsT. Majoribanks, J. Barraket, J-S Chang, A. Dawson, M. Guillemin, M Henry- Henry-Waring, A. Kenyon, R. Kokanovic, J. Lewis, D. Lusher, D. Nolan, P. Pyett, R. Robins, D. Warr, J. Wyn
Place of PublicationMelbourne
PublisherTASA
Pages1-19
Number of pages19
ISBN (Electronic)9780734039842
Publication statusPublished - 2008
EventThe Australian Sociological Association (TASA) Conference - Melbourne, VIC, Australia
Duration: 02 Dec 200805 Dec 2008

Conference

ConferenceThe Australian Sociological Association (TASA) Conference
CountryAustralia
Period02/12/0805/12/08

Fingerprint

water
reform
stakeholder
participation
transaction costs
frustration
anger
governance
resources
community

Cite this

Howard, J. (2008). Metagovernance of Participatory water reform in NSW. In T. Majoribanks, J. Barraket, J-S. Chang, A. Dawson, M. Guillemin, M. H. Henry-Waring, A. Kenyon, R. Kokanovic, J. Lewis, D. Lusher, D. Nolan, P. Pyett, R. Robins, D. Warr, ... J. Wyn (Eds.), TASA 2008 conference: Re-imagining Sociology (pp. 1-19). Melbourne: TASA.
Howard, Jonathon. / Metagovernance of Participatory water reform in NSW. TASA 2008 conference: Re-imagining Sociology. editor / T. Majoribanks ; J. Barraket ; J-S Chang ; A. Dawson ; M. Guillemin ; M Henry- Henry-Waring ; A. Kenyon ; R. Kokanovic ; J. Lewis ; D. Lusher ; D. Nolan ; P. Pyett ; R. Robins ; D. Warr ; J. Wyn. Melbourne : TASA, 2008. pp. 1-19
@inproceedings{c057beebc13a4f24aac4aaa69019d523,
title = "Metagovernance of Participatory water reform in NSW",
abstract = "This paper examines the metagovernance associated the NSW water reform process which started in 1998 and took almost a decade to implement. The process was promoted as a partnership between government and the community and used representative stakeholder forums to develop regional water sharing plans. However whether governments truly engage in participation or use it simply as a part of symbolic policy is a key question in the literature on participatory governance.This research found government took a top down approach to the process in that it strongly influenced decisions at a various scales. This led to considerable stakeholder frustration and anger as it made participation seem tokenistic. When agency oversight and influence are combined in this way it leads to high transaction costs because it encourages participants to try to take advantage of other policy windows. This, inturn, significantly increases the resources required by the agency to manage the process. It is concluded have clear goals and as well as a coherent participatory process are important issues in metagovernance of participatory processes.",
keywords = "Open access version available, Water metagovernance",
author = "Jonathon Howard",
note = "Imported on 03 May 2017 - DigiTool details were: publisher = Melbourne: TASA, 2008. editor/s (773b) = Majoribanks, T; Barraket, J; Chang, J-S; Dawson, A; Guillemin, M; Henry-Waring, M; Kenyon, A; Kokanovic, R; Lewis, J; Lusher, D; Nolan, D; Pyett, P; Robins, R; Warr, D; Wyn, J ; Event dates (773o) = 2-5 December, 2008; Parent title (773t) = The Australian Sociological Association (TASA) Conference.",
year = "2008",
language = "English",
pages = "1--19",
editor = "T. Majoribanks and J. Barraket and J-S Chang and A. Dawson and M. Guillemin and Henry-Waring, {M Henry-} and A. Kenyon and R. Kokanovic and J. Lewis and D. Lusher and D. Nolan and P. Pyett and R. Robins and D. Warr and J. Wyn",
booktitle = "TASA 2008 conference",
publisher = "TASA",

}

Howard, J 2008, Metagovernance of Participatory water reform in NSW. in T Majoribanks, J Barraket, J-S Chang, A Dawson, M Guillemin, MH Henry-Waring, A Kenyon, R Kokanovic, J Lewis, D Lusher, D Nolan, P Pyett, R Robins, D Warr & J Wyn (eds), TASA 2008 conference: Re-imagining Sociology. TASA, Melbourne, pp. 1-19, The Australian Sociological Association (TASA) Conference, Australia, 02/12/08.

Metagovernance of Participatory water reform in NSW. / Howard, Jonathon.

TASA 2008 conference: Re-imagining Sociology. ed. / T. Majoribanks; J. Barraket; J-S Chang; A. Dawson; M. Guillemin; M Henry- Henry-Waring; A. Kenyon; R. Kokanovic; J. Lewis; D. Lusher; D. Nolan; P. Pyett; R. Robins; D. Warr; J. Wyn. Melbourne : TASA, 2008. p. 1-19.

Research output: Book chapter/Published conference paperConference paper

TY - GEN

T1 - Metagovernance of Participatory water reform in NSW

AU - Howard, Jonathon

N1 - Imported on 03 May 2017 - DigiTool details were: publisher = Melbourne: TASA, 2008. editor/s (773b) = Majoribanks, T; Barraket, J; Chang, J-S; Dawson, A; Guillemin, M; Henry-Waring, M; Kenyon, A; Kokanovic, R; Lewis, J; Lusher, D; Nolan, D; Pyett, P; Robins, R; Warr, D; Wyn, J ; Event dates (773o) = 2-5 December, 2008; Parent title (773t) = The Australian Sociological Association (TASA) Conference.

PY - 2008

Y1 - 2008

N2 - This paper examines the metagovernance associated the NSW water reform process which started in 1998 and took almost a decade to implement. The process was promoted as a partnership between government and the community and used representative stakeholder forums to develop regional water sharing plans. However whether governments truly engage in participation or use it simply as a part of symbolic policy is a key question in the literature on participatory governance.This research found government took a top down approach to the process in that it strongly influenced decisions at a various scales. This led to considerable stakeholder frustration and anger as it made participation seem tokenistic. When agency oversight and influence are combined in this way it leads to high transaction costs because it encourages participants to try to take advantage of other policy windows. This, inturn, significantly increases the resources required by the agency to manage the process. It is concluded have clear goals and as well as a coherent participatory process are important issues in metagovernance of participatory processes.

AB - This paper examines the metagovernance associated the NSW water reform process which started in 1998 and took almost a decade to implement. The process was promoted as a partnership between government and the community and used representative stakeholder forums to develop regional water sharing plans. However whether governments truly engage in participation or use it simply as a part of symbolic policy is a key question in the literature on participatory governance.This research found government took a top down approach to the process in that it strongly influenced decisions at a various scales. This led to considerable stakeholder frustration and anger as it made participation seem tokenistic. When agency oversight and influence are combined in this way it leads to high transaction costs because it encourages participants to try to take advantage of other policy windows. This, inturn, significantly increases the resources required by the agency to manage the process. It is concluded have clear goals and as well as a coherent participatory process are important issues in metagovernance of participatory processes.

KW - Open access version available

KW - Water metagovernance

M3 - Conference paper

SP - 1

EP - 19

BT - TASA 2008 conference

A2 - Majoribanks, T.

A2 - Barraket, J.

A2 - Chang, J-S

A2 - Dawson, A.

A2 - Guillemin, M.

A2 - Henry-Waring, M Henry-

A2 - Kenyon, A.

A2 - Kokanovic, R.

A2 - Lewis, J.

A2 - Lusher, D.

A2 - Nolan, D.

A2 - Pyett, P.

A2 - Robins, R.

A2 - Warr, D.

A2 - Wyn, J.

PB - TASA

CY - Melbourne

ER -

Howard J. Metagovernance of Participatory water reform in NSW. In Majoribanks T, Barraket J, Chang J-S, Dawson A, Guillemin M, Henry-Waring MH, Kenyon A, Kokanovic R, Lewis J, Lusher D, Nolan D, Pyett P, Robins R, Warr D, Wyn J, editors, TASA 2008 conference: Re-imagining Sociology. Melbourne: TASA. 2008. p. 1-19