IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i9p3647-d1383741.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exogenous, Endogenous, and Peripheral Actors: A Situational Analysis of Stakeholder Inclusion within Transboundary Water Governance

Author

Listed:
  • Hannah Whitley

    (Occoquan Watershed Monitoring Laboratory, Virginia Tech, Manassas, VA 20110, USA)

Abstract

Transboundary water governance involves collaborative decision-making across geopolitical boundaries to manage shared water resources sustainably. While this approach integrates public, private, and community efforts, little scrutiny has been directed toward the involvement of non-institutionally affiliated stakeholders. This study critically examines stakeholder participation in Upper Klamath Basin water governance by investigating how deficiencies in stakeholder inclusion impede transboundary water management processes by favoring institutionally affiliated actors. Findings reveal the differential influence of “endogenous” (directly involved), “exogenous” (indirectly involved), and “peripheral” (limited engagement and influence) actors. While endogenous and exogenous actors have formal or informal ties to institutions, peripheral actors lack institutional affiliation(s), making it difficult for them to participate in and ultimately influence water governance decision-making processes. Their limited access to financial, natural, and social capital further restricts their engagement with governance efforts. This imbalance underscores challenges to equity and inclusion in transboundary water governance processes. Addressing the exclusion of peripheral actors from transboundary water governance requires that governance institutions prioritize equity and inclusivity, fostering transparency, incentivizing inclusive practices, and comparing engagement processes to enhance effectiveness and equity in transboundary water management.

Suggested Citation

  • Hannah Whitley, 2024. "Exogenous, Endogenous, and Peripheral Actors: A Situational Analysis of Stakeholder Inclusion within Transboundary Water Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-28, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:9:p:3647-:d:1383741
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/9/3647/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/9/3647/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Román-Chaverra & Yolanda Teresa Hernández-Peña & Carlos Alfonso Zafra-Mejía, 2023. "Ancestral Practices for Water and Land Management: Experiences in a Latin American Indigenous Reserve," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-15, June.
    2. Arnim Wiek & Kelli Larson, 2012. "Water, People, and Sustainability—A Systems Framework for Analyzing and Assessing Water Governance Regimes," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(11), pages 3153-3171, September.
    3. Simon Birnbaum & Örjan Bodin & Annica Sandström, 2015. "Tracing the sources of legitimacy: the impact of deliberation in participatory natural resource management," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(4), pages 443-461, December.
    4. Bruce Tonn & Mary English & Cheryl Travis, 2000. "A Framework for Understanding and Improving Environmental Decision Making," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(2), pages 163-183.
    5. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    6. Bryan Leonard & Gary D. Libecap, 2019. "Collective Action by Contract: Prior Appropriation and the Development of Irrigation in the Western United States," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 62(1), pages 67-115.
    7. Abdullah Alodah, 2023. "Towards Sustainable Water Resources Management Considering Climate Change in the Case of Saudi Arabia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-29, October.
    8. Andrew L. Friedman & Samantha Miles, 2002. "Developing Stakeholder Theory," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 1-21, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mahoney, Joseph & Asher, Cheryl Carleton & Mahoney, James, 2004. "Towards a Property Rights Foundation for a Stakeholder Theory of the Firm," Working Papers 04-0116, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    2. Ellen M. Bruno & Nick Hagerty & Arthur R. Wardle, 2022. "The Political Economy of Groundwater Management: Descriptive Evidence from California," NBER Chapters, in: American Agriculture, Water Resources, and Climate Change, pages 343-365, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Browne, Oliver R. & Ji, Xinde James, 2023. "The Economic Value of Clarifying Property Rights: Evidence from Water in Idaho’s Snake River Basin," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    4. Eduardo Araral & Yahua Wang, 2013. "Water Governance 2.0: A Review and Second Generation Research Agenda," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 27(11), pages 3945-3957, September.
    5. Smith, Steven M., 2021. "The relative economic merits of alternative water right systems," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    6. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 2002. "Political economics and public finance," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 24, pages 1549-1659, Elsevier.
    7. Qiuyue Xia & Lu Li & Jie Dong & Bin Zhang, 2021. "Reduction Effect and Mechanism Analysis of Carbon Trading Policy on Carbon Emissions from Land Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-22, August.
    8. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    9. Usher, Dan, 2001. "Personal goods, efficiency and the law," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 673-703, November.
    10. George Tridimas & Stanley L. Winer, 2018. "On the Definition and Nature of Fiscal Coercion," Carleton Economic Papers 18-09, Carleton University, Department of Economics.
    11. Mario Jametti & Thomas von Ungern-Sternberg, 2005. "Assessing the Efficiency of an Insurance Provider—A Measurement Error Approach," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 30(1), pages 15-34, June.
    12. Stephanie Rosenkranz & Patrick W. Schmitz, 2007. "Can Coasean Bargaining Justify Pigouvian Taxation?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 74(296), pages 573-585, November.
    13. Stefan Ambec & Yann Kervinio, 2016. "Cooperative decision-making for the provision of a locally undesirable facility," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(1), pages 119-155, January.
    14. Liu, Duan & Yu, Nizhou & Wan, Hong, 2022. "Does water rights trading affect corporate investment? The role of resource allocation and risk mitigation channels," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    15. Valcu-Lisman, Adriana & Weninger, Quinn, 2012. "Markov-Perfect rent dissipation in rights-based fisheries," ISU General Staff Papers 201209260700001037, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    16. Hausknost, Daniel & Grima, Nelson & Singh, Simron Jit, 2017. "The political dimensions of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES): Cascade or stairway?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 109-118.
    17. Kurtis Swope & Ryan Wielgus & Pamela Schmitt & John Cadigan, 2011. "Contracts, Behavior, and the Land-assembly Problem: An Experimental Study," Research in Experimental Economics, in: Experiments on Energy, the Environment, and Sustainability, pages 151-180, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    18. Ralph E. Townsend, 2010. "Transactions costs as an obstacle to fisheries self-governance in New Zealand," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 54(3), pages 301-320, July.
    19. Simon Levin & Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2021. "On the Coevolution of Economic and Ecological Systems," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 13(1), pages 355-377, October.
    20. Whitten, Stuart M. & Salzman, James & Shelton, Dave & Procter, Wendy, 2003. "Markets for ecosystem services: Applying the concepts," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 58269, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:9:p:3647-:d:1383741. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.