the workshops. One
participant stated “the whole process took place
within an acceptable time frame, required an
acceptable effort, and led to a good result” [6].
Achieving both tangible outputs and learning
processes
The third challenge concerns the possible outcomes
of the participatory process. Outcomes depend on
the respective goals of the process, and are
influenced by both contextual and procedural
/media/loftslag/Daniell_etal-2010.pdf
water management.
Thus, as stated previously, perceptions among stakeholders may diverge considerably about
what really is at stake, i.e. there exists ambiguity on how to frame the problem. The second
feedback between the blocks ‘Prepare Strategy and Action Plan’ and ‘Build Commitment to
Action’ deals with the process of preparing the strategy and the action plan after the gap
analysis. Also
/media/loftslag/VanderKeur_etal-2008-Uncertainty_IWRM-WARM.pdf
of greenhouse-gas-
induced climate change becomes stronger. The sensitivity of the findings to the evolution of
greenhouse gas emissions was also studied, by comparing forecasts derived for the SRES B1,
A1B and A2 scenarios. However, due to the relatively short time frame considered, this
source of uncertainty proved to be smaller than the uncertainties arising from natural climate
variability
/media/ces/raisanen_ruosteenoja_CES_D2.2.pdf
adaptation at the local level has, lacking national funding, largely been
reliant on funding in EU projects, whereas such projects for the Swedish case of Gothenburg
constituted an incentive for a relatively early start in the framing of frame flood risk as an
adaptation issue.
14
The capacities of different actors as illustrated above is dependent on how they are situated
within types
/media/loftslag/Keskitalo_et_al-MLG_and_adaptation_FINAL.pdf
‐ stakeholder experts
Frame problem
‐ trp service (quality) levels
‐ types of scenarios
Analyze problem
Technical input from own
experts and stakeholders
Framing
OK
Mandate from stakeholders
after deliberation
Elaborate & detail
scenarios
Technical input
‐ Internal experts
‐ stakeholder experts
Analyze scenarios – aspired
vs. achievable service
levels (incl. basis for
prioritzation)
External
/media/vedurstofan/NONAM_1st_workshop_summary_v3.pdf
to be adjusted, reconstructed
and validated during the process of integrating different
domains and issues e.g. hydrology, ecology, economy and
social. This action was based on meaning, which was
socially defined.
We have to keep the ‘action frame of reference’ (Silver-
man, 1971; Fuglsang and Olsen, 2005) in mind which
assumes that researchers, as well as those they study, are
human actors. If we do
/media/loftslag/Henriksen_Barlebo-2008-AWM_BBN-Journ_Env_Management.pdf
Australia and Bulgaria
to gather as much data as possible on these
processes.
Theoretical frame
Here, we focus on negotiation episodes that are
specific co-engineering events where operational
preferences and relations between co-engineers can
undergo the most rapid changes. They are typically
decision-making episodes where divergent or
common objectives, interests, and conflicts are also
more
/media/loftslag/Moellenkampetal_etal-2010.pdf
exist that reach
back to early 19th century but most series are much shorter (Hamlington and Thompson, 2016). In
contrast, satellite altimetry has only been available since the early 1990’s. Satellite altimetry mea-
sures the sea surface height, namely the sea level compared to a fixed reference frame (the center of
the earth, the geoid or a reference ellipsoid) for latitudes up to 66 N and S (ESA
/media/vedurstofan-utgafa-2020/VI_2020_005.pdf
the location of the mass balance
stakes at Breiðamerkurjökull (Bre). The red box indicates the posi-
tion of the frame to the right. (C) Hoffellsjökull surface topography
in 2001. The ice divide and the model domain are indicated with the
red curve enclosing a glaciated area of ∼212 km2 in 2001. Black
triangles show the locations of automatic weather stations on the
glacier. N is the location
/media/ces/Adalgeirsdottir-etal-tc-5-961-2011.pdf