Watergovernance Tool FAQ

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

  Governance can be defined as the various institutionalised modes of social coordination to produce and implement collectively binding rules, or to provide collective goods (Börzel & Risse, 2010,p. 114).

  Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2010). Governance Without a State: Can It Work? Regulation & Governance, 4(2), 113–134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01076.x

  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 can be defined as the various institutionalised modes of social coordination to produce and implement collectively binding rules, or to provide collective goods (Börzel & Risse, 2010,p. 114).

  Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2010). Governance Without a State: Can It Work? Regulation & Governance, 4(2), 113–134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01076.x

  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

  The context comprises all overarching societal and environmental factors that may influence but can hardly be influenced by the water governance and management system.

  -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.

You can cite the STEER Tool as follows:
 

• Stein, Ulf; Bueb, Benedict; Tröltzsch, Jenny; Vidaurre, Rodrigo;  Knieper, Christian (2020). STEER Water

  Governance can be defined as the various institutionalised modes of social coordination to produce and implement collectively binding rules, or to provide collective goods (Börzel & Risse, 2010,p. 114).

  Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2010). Governance Without a State: Can It Work? Regulation & Governance, 4(2), 113–134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01076.x

  Tool. www.watergovernancetool.eu

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

Governance can be defined as the various institutionalised modes of social coordination to produce and implement collectively binding rules, or to provide collective goods (Börzel & Risse, 2010,p. 114).

Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2010). Governance Without a State: Can It Work? Regulation & Governance, 4(2), 113–134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01076.x

practice by:
 

• developing and testing a diagnostic, solution-oriented approach,
• combining

  The context comprises all overarching societal and environmental factors that may influence but can hardly be influenced by the water governance and management system.

  -specific participatory assessments of individual cases with comparative case analysis guided by a generic conceptual framework,
• focusing on implementation

  Processes describe policy implementation rather than the development of formal institutions. This focus takes into account that the bottleneck for policy effectiveness is often implementation rather than policy development.

  at regional and local scale and their embedding in a multi-level water

  Governance can be defined as the various institutionalised modes of social coordination to produce and implement collectively binding rules, or to provide collective goods (Börzel & Risse, 2010,p. 114).

  Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2010). Governance Without a State: Can It Work? Regulation & Governance, 4(2), 113–134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01076.x

  system and an environmental and societal

  The context comprises all overarching societal and environmental factors that may influence but can hardly be influenced by the water governance and management system.

  .

What this diagnostic approach does for the case studies is being replicated by the tool in a simplified form. The STEER

Governance can be defined as the various institutionalised modes of social coordination to produce and implement collectively binding rules, or to provide collective goods (Börzel & Risse, 2010,p. 114).

Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2010). Governance Without a State: Can It Work? Regulation & Governance, 4(2), 113–134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01076.x

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 can be defined as the various institutionalised modes of social coordination to produce and implement collectively binding rules, or to provide collective goods (Börzel & Risse, 2010,p. 114).

Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2010). Governance Without a State: Can It Work? Regulation & Governance, 4(2), 113–134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01076.x

as a transdisciplinary field of scholarship.

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

Water management refers to the activities of analysing and monitoring water resources, as well as developing and implementing measures to keep the state of a water resource within what has been negotiated as desirable bounds (Pahl-Wostl, 2015).

Pahl-Wostl, C. (2015). Water Governance in the Face of Global Change—From Understanding to Transformation. Wiesbaden: Springer International Publishing.

? 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:

Decentralization describes the extent to which power over decision-making in a system is dispersed among its members (Mintzberg, 1980). Vertical decentralisation refers to the extent to which formal decision-making power is delegated down to the chain of line authority while horizontal decentralisation designates the extent to which power flows informally outside this chain of line authority (Mintzberg, 1980). A system, in which decision-making authority lies exclusively with the central government, is thus centralised to a maximal extent. A system, in which governments on subnational levels have all decision-making authority, is, in turn, maximally decentralised.

Importantly, vertical and horizontal decentralisation are not mutually exclusive. Digital water governance, in this sense, features a combination of both. Decision-making powers in the water and in the digital domain have both been devolved vertically, for instance, from national ministries to local authorities, and horizontally: due to the cross-cutting nature of digital water governance, a multitude of stakeholders has been increasingly involved in consultation and decision-making.

Mintzberg, H. (1980). Structure in 5’s: A Synthesis of the Research on Organization Design. Management Science, 26(3), 322–341. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.26.3.322

in practice, Vertical coordination in practice, Horizontal coordination in practice,

Governance can be defined as the various institutionalised modes of social coordination to produce and implement collectively binding rules, or to provide collective goods (Börzel & Risse, 2010,p. 114).

Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2010). Governance Without a State: Can It Work? Regulation & Governance, 4(2), 113–134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01076.x

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.