What is the difference between the fast, advanced and research track?
To account for different levels of expert knowledge and time to invest for the tool, the user can choose between three different entry modes: the fast, advanced and research track.
- In the fast track, the analysis provided through the tool will be the least complex one as it is based on the smallest amount of data. Resulting from this, the recommendations made by the tool cannot replace in-depth analyses of the systems at stake but can provide helpful recommendations and provide new impulses on how to tackle coordination deficits.
- The advanced track, in turn, aims at users that wish to receive an in-depth diagnosis and a comprehensive therapy proposal that is based on detailed and exhaustive information of the respective river basin to be analyzed. The advanced track is designed primarily for governance experts or those that are also interested in the methodology behind the tool. The advanced track includes additional questions and filter functions that allow users to receive more -specific instrument recommendations.
- The research track is the most comprehensive mode and, compared to the advanced track, contains additional questions, the answers to which should help to broaden the data basis for future research. This mode is primarily aimed at users who are also interested in the methodological background of the tool and wish to make a decisive contribution to research.
How can I cite this tool?
You can cite the STEER Tool as follows:
Stein, Ulf; Bueb, Benedict; Tröltzsch, Jenny; Vidaurre, Rodrigo; Knieper, Christian (2020). STEER Water Tool. www.watergovernancetool.eu
What is the scientific and methodological background of the STEER Tool?
The functional logic of the tool is based on the transdisciplinary diagnostic approach of the STEER project. As described by Pahl-Wostl et al., this approach aims to address some of the challenges identified in scientific scholarship and water practice by:
- developing and testing a diagnostic, solution-oriented approach,
- combining -specific participatory assessments of individual cases with comparative case analysis guided by a generic conceptual framework,
- focusing on implementation at regional and local scale and their embedding in a multi-level system and an environmental and societal context.
What this diagnostic approach does for the case studies is being replicated by the tool in a simplified form. The STEER Governance Tool follows the workflow that moves from data entry to "diagnosis" (case-study-specific coordination deficits) and "therapy" (case-study-specific action strategies).
The development of the STEER approach guided by the conceptual framework builds on the current state of research in a number of disciplines. In doing so, the STEER approach aims at advancing water governance as a transdisciplinary field of scholarship.
What is the empirical basis for the calculations of the Tool?
Variables and causal relations between variables that facilitate or hindering coordination have been identified through a Quantitative Content Analysis (QCA) as part of the STEER project. The empirical data and results of this QCA are described in a forthcoming paper by Knieper, C. and Pahl-Wostl, C. (in preparation). Which conditions are associated with effective coordination in ? Insights from a comparative analysis. To be submitted to Environmental Science & Policy.
The identified causal relationships between different variables either confirmed or rejected hypotheses formulated at the beginning of the project (WP1). Only verified causal relationships were integrated in the tool and form the basis of its underlying algorithm.
To arrive at a diagnosis, the entered variables are evaluated individually and then be combined using this specific algorithm. An individual evaluation is made for the following variables: in practice, Vertical coordination in practice, Horizontal coordination in practice, Modes: Synergistic interplay, Coherence of responsibilities.These variables are those that showed a significant direct influence on the Variable Coordination in Practice in the QCA.
In addition, further variables that did not show a direct effect on O1 but came out to be important contextual factors have been integrated in the tool as additional filters. This include, among others, the institutional and state capacity or the degree of democracy on the national level.