Influences on Stakeholder Participation in Water Negotiations: A Case Study from the Klamath Basin
Name:
Klamath_Article_Final.pdf
Size:
294.0Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Accepted Manuscript
Affiliation
Univ Arizona, Inst EnvironmIssue Date
2016-03-15Keywords
Environmental conflictKlamath Basin
natural resources collaboration
stakeholder participation
water governance
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
TAYLOR & FRANCIS INCCitation
Influences on Stakeholder Participation in Water Negotiations: A Case Study from the Klamath Basin 2016, 29 (12):1421 Society & Natural ResourcesJournal
Society & Natural ResourcesRights
© 2016 Taylor & Francis.Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
In water governance, where problems are controversial and value laden, different forms of stakeholder involvement have become common and are frequently required. Stakeholder participation is often recognized as fundamental to the legitimacy and success of negotiated environmental decisions, but the intricacies of why stakeholders participate has received less attention. We examine factors that influenced stakeholder participation in the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement and Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement of 2010. The research draws on in-depth, semistructured interviews of a sample recruited from stakeholder organizations in the Klamath River Basin. Results indicate that previous negative experiences did not translate into nonparticipation; divisions within seemingly aligned stakeholder organizations encouraged some stakeholders to participate and others to actively oppose negotiations; stakeholders' perceptions of power differentials encouraged both stakeholder participation and exclusion in negotiations; and concerns about relationship development during negotiations suggest that relationship building may be viewed as part of the negotiation process.Note
Published online: 15 Mar 2016; 18 month embargo.ISSN
0894-19201521-0723
Version
Final accepted manuscriptAdditional Links
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08941920.2016.1144837ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1080/08941920.2016.1144837