Droughts are recurrent phenomena that are intrinsic to any climate. In Spain, as in many countries in the Mediterranean region, forecasts derived from climate change models predict an increase in the frequency and intensity of this type of phenomena. This makes even more necessary to focus efforts on strengthening social and institutional capacities through prevention, mitigation and adaptation strategies to mitigate the possible impacts of drought on the society and the environment. Despite the progress achieved at the scale of river basin districts and large municipalities, small and medium-sized towns often do not have drought risk management tools adapted to their specific needs. This study developed a participatory methodology for the elaboration of drought risk management plans in small and medium-sized towns. The methodology was tested and validated in three pilot municipalities: Madridejos (Toledo), Puente Genil (Córdoba) and Xàbia (Alicante). As a result, a methodological guide was developed to facilitate the preparation and adaptation of these plans to the different contexts, realities and needs of each municipality. The communication presents the key elements of this participatory methodology and the lessons learnt from the experience in the three pilot sites.

The European Water Framework Directive (WFD) mandates to incorporate the participation of stakeholders and the general public in the development and updating of the river basin management plans. So far, the WFD implementation has been mainly focused on perennial rivers without considering temporary rivers properly, neither in biomonitoring programs nor participatory processes. This paper aims at adapting participatory processes in river basin management to enhance the inclusion of ecosystems with poor or no social recognition such as temporary rivers. To do so, we examined previous experiences of participatory processes conducted in the WFD and adapted them to propose and implement an approach for promoting stakeholders’ engagement in temporary rivers. The approach is based on a collaborative leadership, includes multiple participatory engagement mechanisms, uses future global change scenarios and the concept of ecosystem services at different stages of the process, and aims at involving stakeholders not only in the proposal of measures stage but in the diagnosis of the ecological status. It also includes an evaluation of participants’ satisfaction on the process. We tested our approach in temporary rivers from the Mediterranean region. We found that the combination of environmental education and citizen science activities, together with the inclusion of the ecosystem services concept, was the most useful way to raise awareness on the biodiversity and ecological value of temporary rivers and to promote stakeholders’ engagement. Workshops conducted during the diagnosis stage played an important role in both including stakeholders’ suggestions and increasing their knowledge on temporary rivers. Further, envisaging climate-related future scenarios allowed participants to incorporate measures that could tackle new and emerging pressures on these ecosystems. As future environmental changes will increase the proportion of rivers with temporary flow regimes, our approach can contribute to adapt current participatory processes to future needs.

Water is traditionally a topic of extremely high importance in Spain. A river basin management approach has been employed since the 1920s through River Basin Organisations, so-called Hydrographic Confederations. The European Water Framework Directive (WFD) was transposed into Spanish law through adaptation of the Water Act in 2003, during a period in which water management was becoming a major area of political and social conflict in Spain. WFD implementation opened the door to the involvement of new groups in water policy, such as environmental groups, the scientific community, social movements and citizens. Interviewed participants reported having neither improved their knowledge about the WFD and sustainable water management, nor learned about new participative methodologies or the perspectives of different stakeholders. According to Oficína de Participación Hidrológica de Cantábria (OPHC), the majority of measures comprising their list are conducive to WFD aims and target the main water management issues within the sub-basins.

The benefits of public participation in water management are recognized by governments, scholars, and stakeholders. These benefits, however, do not result from all engagement endeavors. This leads to the question: What are the determinants for effective public participation? Given a list of criteria for achieving the transformational capacity of participation, we analyze the benefits (including the influence on public policies) gained through public participation and the determinant factors for obtaining these benefits in the Ebro River Basin in Spain and in the Tucson Basin in Arizona (U.S.). Furthermore, and considering that droughts and floods are major water management challenges in both case studies, we focus on the potential of participation to build adaptive capacity. Our analysis of these case studies concludes that influence on public policies is determined more by the context of the participatory process, i.e., legal framework, political leadership, and social awareness, whereas influence on adaptive capacity building depends more on the characteristics of the participatory process, particularly the existence of active on-site consultation and deliberation.

By the means of evaluating the planning process carried out in Catalonia (Spain) according to the requirements of the implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive, this article explores the relation between the characteristics of a deliberative process and its results. Our research examines the effects of a real deliberative process on river basin management planning, identifies its strengths and weakness and unveils those factors that explain the lights and the shadows of deliberation. Our evaluation shows that, although the deliberative process achieved significant outputs, most of the participants were unsatisfied with the results. The article concludes that the behaviour rules of the participants, the methodology used, the political engagement and the resources invested are crucial to understanding most of the deliberative processes' success. On the other hand, the lack of deliberative culture, the existence of weak governmental leadership and the absence of some key actors explain the participants' dissatisfaction with the results. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Los primeros planes de cuenca previstos en la Directiva Marco del Agua fueron aprobados en España muy recientemente, motivo por el cual todavía no disponemos de estudios que evalúen los resultados de los procesos participativos llevados a cabo. En este artículo se analiza una experiencia participativa que, por su carácter ejemplar y atípico, ha sido considerada una buena práctica: el proceso deliberativo del Distrito de Cuenca Fluvial de Cataluña. Nos interrogamos sobre las consecuencias de la deliberación y, más concretamente, sobre si un buen proceso de deliberación mejora la política de aguas. Es decir, investigamos la relación entre las características procedimentales de la deliberación y sus resultados. Para ello combinamos datos cuantitativos con información cualitativa obtenida a partir de análisis documental y treinta entrevistas en profundidad. Las limitaciones de la estrategia comunicativa, la poca integralidad con la que se planifica la política de aguas y la falta de una cultura política deliberativa son algunas de las debilidades identificadas en el caso estudiado. Concluimos que un buen proceso deliberativo es una condición necesaria pero no suficiente para garantizar un impacto significativo sobre la política de aguas.

Los procesos de participación pública implementados a raíz de la Directiva Marco del Agua (DMA) constituyen un importante salto adelante para la democratización de la gestión del agua en España. En el presente texto, a partir de un análisis documental y entrevistas exploratorias, se señalan algunas de las virtudes y debilidades de dichos procesos. En general, se observa que los puntos más problemáticos tienen que ver con la inercia institucional que conforma las relaciones entre los organismos de cuenca y los usuarios tradicionales del agua, así como con la falta de credibilidad que algunos de estos procesos han tenido para algunos de sus potenciales participantes. Como conclusión se advierte la necesidad de pensar nuevos diseños institucionales que respondan a la idea de gobernanza expresada por la DMA.

The Water Framework Directive establishes a common framework for EU water policy. One of its guiding principles is the promotion of public participation in water planning and management. In response to this requirement, River Basin Authorities are undertaking public participation and consultation processes as part of the elaboration of the Draft Basin Management Plans. This article describes and analyzes these processes, placing them in the context of wider public discussions and debates over water policy that have taken place in Spain over the past two decades. The paper argues that some of the strengths of Spanish WFD-related public participation processes derive from the significant improvement in the amount of information made available to the public, and from the relationships that are established between different stakeholder groups and between these and the water administration. On the other hand, the lack of credibility and legitimacy of some processes is related to the lack of political leadership and commitment to public participation, to insufficient inter-administrative cooperation, and to the persistence of parallel channels of communication between traditional water users and water managers. The paper also points to some potential areas of improvement such as the methodological design of public participation processes, a clarification of their impact on specific plans and proposals, and a search for tools to adequately inform and incorporate the wider public in water policy debates. Finally, the paper discusses the role that social networks, built around the ideas and goals of the New Water Culture, are playing in water policy debates by demanding more transparent and sustainable water policy decision making.

The public participation processes that are taking place in Spain as a result of the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) constitutes an important step forward toward the democratization of water management in Spain. Grounded on document analysis and exploratory interviews, this article highlights some of its strengths and weaknesses. In general, the most problematic aspects of these processes are related to their lack of credibility for some potential participants, as well the persistence of an institutional setup for water decision making that strongly favors the long-standing relationship between Basin Management Agencies and traditional water users. The article offers some concluding remarks on the need for a reformed institutional desing for the management of water resources, according to the idea of governance expressed by the WFD.