This paper summarizes the main results of the HarmoniCOP project. The main focus of HarmoniCOP is the introduction of the concept of 'Social Learning' into water management. The concept of Social Learning is explained. A literature research on approaches and international experiences was conducted and is summarized. The applicability of IC-tools in Social Learning processes is investigated and guidelines for their use are provided. The main findings of the project were translated into practical guidelines in a Handbook for practitioners. The scope and goal of this Handbook is explained.

Finding a place for public participation in the policies and practices of European river basin management planning is a challenge for the authorities in the participating countries and territories. Understanding the relation between national culture, the historical and political differences in the respective countries, and their practical experience with participation is considered important to support the implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive. Knowledge and understanding of this relation is important to provide a context and basis from which new participatory practices can be designed and experiences evaluated and to identify conditions necessary for social learning. Within the context of the HarmoniCOP project, such a study was undertaken in the form of a National Approach and Background study, which examined and evaluated both historical and recent experiences that exist across Europe in relation to public participation and water management as it is today. We draw upon the findings of the HarmoniCOP national reports to identify common features and cultural differences. We depart from the traditional ideational concept of culture as a long-lasting system of perceptions, beliefs, norms, and values to provide a detailed discussion of the practices in four countries. We demonstrate that culture is just one of the factors that explain the differences in national approaches to public participation and argue that culture perceived as a more dynamic, integrated, adaptive socio-cultural system in which groups of actors create new frames, norms, and routines is a more promising road for further research.

Finding a place for public participation in the policies and practices of European river basin management planning is a challenge for the authorities in the participating countries and territories. Understanding the relation between national culture, the historical and political differences in the respective countries, and their practical experience with participation is considered important to support the implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive. Knowledge and understanding of this relation is important to provide a context and basis from which new participatory practices can be designed and experiences evaluated and to identify conditions necessary for social learning. Within the context of the HarmoniCOP project, such a study was undertaken in the form of a National Approach and Background study, which examined and evaluated both historical and recent experiences that exist across Europe in relation to public participation and water management as it is today. We draw upon the findings of the HarmoniCOP national reports to identify common features and cultural differences. We depart from the traditional ideational concept of culture as a long-lasting system of perceptions, beliefs, norms, and values to provide a detailed discussion of the practices in four countries. We demonstrate that culture is just one of the factors that explain the differences in national approaches to public participation and argue that culture perceived as a more dynamic, integrated, adaptive socio-cultural system in which groups of actors create new frames, norms, and routines is a more promising road for further research.

This paper deals with the development of multi-scale, participatory, qualitative scenarios, as were developed within a larger EC-financed project, MedAction. The main objective is to assess the (dis)advantages of using higher-level (Mediterranean) scenarios as boundary conditions during scenario development workshops in Spain, Italy, and Portugal. Three European scenarios were developed, by adapting three existing scenarios. Those were subsequently downscaled to the Mediterranean level, which served as an input in a series of one-day workshops. Local scenarios consisted of two parts, a collage of images portraying the situation in 2030 and an accompanying storyline. The three different Mediterranean scenarios were received similarly in the three local areas. Big is Beautiful was generally perceived as being (too) extreme; Convulsive Change was accepted almost without questioning and could therefore be considered not extreme enough; Knowledge is King exemplified the middle-ground of a scenario that is sufficiently surprising, yet close enough to present reality. Besides the type of scenarios that are presented to the stakeholders, it is also essential to consider how much information should be provided to the stakeholders beforehand, as they are likely to repeat part of what was presented to them. Using higher-level scenarios as boundary conditions during lower-level scenario workshops has important advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, we like to advocate the use of several methods to be able to check for inconsistencies, thus indicating the need for a scenario development toolkit in Integrated Assessment.