Institutional Importance Of WCEAM

1022 Words null Page
This paper sought to determine the importance of institutional arrangements with regard to WCEAM (watershed cumulative effects assessment and management), because it plays a vital role in the field of CEA (cumulative effects assessment). The authors identifie that there is a gap in cumulative effects assessment procedure and development activity in watersheds and should be addressed what Schindler & Donahue (2006) refer to as ‘holistically’ and place emphasis on integrating and improving the concept and practice on WCEAM. The methods applied in the paper (i.e. document review, observational studies-interview, qualitative analysis) intent to answer the questions asked about the relevance of institutional authorities with WCEAM in the largest …show more content…
While the authors discuss the technical and scientific approaches of WCEAM, their core argument asserts that whether institutional arrangements facilitating or inhibiting WCEAM. This research illustrates the key factors of institutional arrangements that can enable the advancement of WCEAM by providing a clear description of the major challenges faced in CEAM practice of a real life example from the Grand River watershed (GRW), Canada, as well as, the main methods and important results found to fill the research gap in WCEAM practice. The authors elucidate that since the land use in Canadian watersheds are drastically changing, and the uncertainty about the impacts of cumulative effects is accelerating, there is a critical need to examine the institutional governance concerns to fill the gap presented in this paper.

The authors provide background
…show more content…
2013), it does not construe what explicit role institutional arrangements play for CEAM in a particular watershed. This text provides sufficient novelty, giving the research rationality considering their findings on the primary roles of institutional authority that can contribute to the regional and international practice of WCEAM. According to Chilima et al. (2013), ‘goodwill’ (i.e. good relationships among authorities), ‘political will’ (i.e. funding authority, decision makers on financial issues) and ‘institutional innovation capacity’ (aptitude for creativity) are prerequisites for the development of institutional practice. This paper demonstrates a sound justification for the application of managerial ethos first for watershed cumulative effects assessment and management, and later scientific ethos to facilitate WCEAM in by providing real life example (i.e. Lake Erie Region Source Water Protection initiative, etc.). Moreover, a vast array of constrains (i.e. lack of collaborations among various stakeholders in the water recourse management, confusing leadership roles, scarcity of clarity in decision making) and facilitators (i.e. dedicated plans, a mature conservation management, strategies that incorporate ecological and regional aspects in

Related Documents