...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>International journal of water resources development >What's the middle ground? Institutionalized vs. emerging water-related stakeholder engagement processes
【24h】

What's the middle ground? Institutionalized vs. emerging water-related stakeholder engagement processes

机译：什么中间立场？制度化与新兴的与水相关的利益相关者参与过程

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In this day and age, it is widely argued that stakeholder engagement in water-related decision-making processes yields many benefits, including legitimacy, acceptance and trust. Key legal frameworks, such as the European Water Framework Directive and the Aarhus Convention, have spurred the emergence of formal forms of stakeholder engagement. On the other hand, many engagement processes are spontaneous and self-organized. This article investigates the strategies used in formal (government-led) and informal (bottom-up) engagement processes in search of a middle ground. To this end, case studies in the Netherlands, the United States, Uganda and Ethiopia are analyzed using the OECD's stakeholder engagement checklist. We conclude with reflection on the ways forward to make formal and informal stakeholder engagement complementary.
机译：在当今时代，人们广泛认为，利益相关者参与与水有关的决策过程会产生许多好处，包括合法性，接受和信任。诸如欧洲水框架指令和《奥胡斯公约》之类的关键法律框架刺激了利益相关方参与的正式形式的出现。另一方面，许多参与过程是自发的和自组织的。本文研究了在正式（政府主导）和非正式（自下而上）参与过程中使用的策略，以寻求中间立场。为此，使用经合组织的利益相关方参与检查表分析了荷兰，美国，乌干达和埃塞俄比亚的案例研究。最后，我们对使正式和非正式的利益相关者参与互为补充的方法进行了总结。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号