The role of accountability in the emergence of adaptive water governance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article we examine the role of accountability in the emergence of adaptive water governance drawing on a case study of shifts in governance on the Pongola River Floodplain in South Africa. The case study illustrates how lack of accountability by decision makers over the years inhibited the emergence of adaptive water governance on the floodplain. An important lesson to be drawn from the case study is that although adaptive governance can offer decision makers the capacity to confront change and uncertainty, this capacity is diminished when accountability is lacking or blurred because of conflicting interests. We demonstrate the need for accountable entities (such as government and NGOs) in contextualized situations to augment the emergence of adaptive water governance. Importantly, this research demonstrates how the emergence of adaptive water governance in part depends on the capacity of other stakeholders to hold decision makers accountable for the consideration and resolution of governance trade-offs. The role of accountability in this case is broadly based on the need to sustain delivery of aquatic ecosystem services so that generations can continue to enjoy them in the present and into the future. This case analysis is aimed at informing environmental governance scholarship and policies regarding the conditions that promote or inhibit the emergence of adaptive water governance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".