Collaboration in Watershed Management

Water quality problems caused by nonpoint pollution sources are by definition complex. Pollutants come from multiple, often unrecognized, sources; their transport across the landscape is affected by soil characteristics, hydrologic characteristics, topography, vegetation, and weather, among other factors. Given this complexity and locally-unique sets of issues, the movement within environmental management in the last few decades has been away from top-down approaches toward locally-based, collaborative management. 

Collaborative watershed management addresses water quality problems by bringing together all local stakeholders (organizations, agencies, nonprofits, landowners) to develop and implement plans for local action. The key term is collaborative, meaning that the processes used to create these plans are consensus-based, and are meant to incorporate and reflect the needs and interests of all stakeholders. This kind of approach has some key advantages: 

• planning and implementation can take advantage of local knowledge about the resource, the pollutant sources, and the social, political and economic context;
• because stakeholders participate in the development of the plan from the beginning, they are more likely to endorse the final plans and take action to implement them;
• through the consensus-building processes, participants are more likely to develop shared understanding of each others’ interests and constraints, building relationships to address both current and future problems;

• the relationships built through these collaborative processes can lead to sustained efforts to work on environmental problems.

 Collaborative watershed management efforts can have differing goals, with related differences in form and participants. Recent research has described three different types of collaborative watershed management groups:

• Action collaboratives focus on ‘on-the-ground’ activities (monitoring, restoration, landowner education), usually at a smaller scale (such as a single watershed). Participants in watershed groups are often a mix of local volunteers and representatives of local government and conservation agencies. Watershed groups work closely with landowners and municipalities to address water quality issues, to monitor water quality, and to develop the resources (both financial and human) to restore water quality (e.g., streambank restoration, habitat improvement).  Pennsylvania has hundreds of watershed groups that fit this type, such as the Spring Creek Watershed Association, Emigh Run Lakeside Watershed Association, etc.
• Organizational collaboratives coordinate activities among conservation-oriented organizations to improve policies and programs for a specific watershed or basin. Water quality improvement occurs through changing priorities or budgets of participating organizations and coordinating resources. Examples of organizational collaboratives in Pennsylvania include regional partnerships and alliances as well as county-based task forces or other committees that coordinate environmental activities across municipalities.
• Policy collaboratives create or change policies or regulations to improve a water resource. They usually cover a larger area and population (such as an estuary, basin, or metropolitan area) with multiple jurisdictions, authorities or interest groups.

Why care about distinguishing among these types of groups? Regardless of the type, matching goals to organizational form and the participants is essential to success. If the main intent of an organizational collaborative is to coordinate among the participating agencies and organizations, changes on the landscape will need to happen through the participating organizations, not by direct action of the collaborative. Similarly, organizational or policy oriented collaboratives need to recruit participation among the affected organizations and agencies and less so individual landowners.

What makes collaborative watershed management work well? A future article will focus on keys to success in collaborative watershed management. Here we will just emphasize that one key to success lies in the process – ensuring that the range of affected stakeholders are brought into the collaborative at an early stage, that the processes are transparent, that there is commitment to good-faith participation from all, and there is sufficient financial and administrative support to ensure good communication processes.

Reference: Margerum, Richard. 2008. A Typology of Collaboration Efforts in Environmental Management. Environmental Management 41:487-500.