Knowledge - assessment, practice and communication

The working group is led by Antonio Contreras from De La Salle University, Philippines Email: contrerasa@dlsu.edu.ph

Purpose and Approach

This theme addresses how different forms of knowledge inform decision-making and action-taking. It aims to span and integrate understanding from formal assessment processes established by government and inter-governmental agencies, through to the diverse kinds of local and organisational knowledge that is often embedded in practices. Because the media can be very important in raising public awareness, shaping public opinion, and propagating myths we directly address the role of media and communication in development. Furthermore, we also look at science itself, as well as its practitioners. Of particular concern is the ability of the scientific community to engage policy actors and processes.

Water resources management has a major technical component, whether it is forecasting growth in energy demand, anticipating the effects of climate change, modeling the impacts of diversions, in-stream structures, and land-uses in surrounding watersheds or exploring through scenarios the future of economic and social relations. Access to, and the capacity for analysis, are highly differentiated in Mekong societies. This places a high social responsibility on technical experts and their managers given that they sit in bureaucracies with often strong organisational interests for particular types of rationales and findings. The science-policy interface must therefore be negotiated and neither side can ever be completely independent of the other.

Our thesis is that the social learning with respect to water governance in the Mekong region has been far slower and weaker than is required to secure sustainable livelihoods for socially vulnerable groups and for continuing to meet overall needs in the region for further social development and economic growth. Assessments are rarely perceived as credible and even fewer as legitimate. The analyses of research and policy groups lack saliency. The media uncritically reproduces myths and misinformation without critical analysis. A significant sector of the scientific community are unfamiliar with, or unwilling to engage the various policy actors and processes. The result is that fact and fiction are intertwined in ways that hinder negotiations, dialogues and effective policy-making, and science fails to become an important resource for water governance.

Knowledge questions

1. Which bodies of knowledge are appealed to in the rationales for water supply enhancement or demand management, and which are the basis of decisions and actions?
2. Which actors and which institutional arrangements have the largest bearing on what kinds of water management-related research gets done? What are their interests? What resources do they control? To whom and how are they accountable?
3. How is water-management related knowledge organised? Are there specific partnerships between research and practitioners aimed at improving sustainability? Do these co-produce relevant knowledge? How are boundaries between water science and policy negotiated and managed? 

Selected Briefings

Selected Websites

Public Documents