Micro-Pollutant Regulation in the River Rhine

Laura Mae J. Herzog is a postdoctoral fellow at the Chair of Resource Management (Prof. Dr. Claudia Pahl-Wostl) at the Institute of Environmental Systems Research at the University of Osnabrück. She is interested in the different uses and the sustainable management of common-pool resources (CPR), in particular the common-pool resources water and land. In her research, she investigates the interactions of humans with water and land resources as well as the influences of these interactions on the respective ecological system and the potential conflicts of interest emerging from such. She is interested in how such influences on nature can be shaped sustainably and how resource conflicts can be moderated and resolved. Taking into account the respective institutional framework, i.e. the laws and regulations that influence water and land management, and the state of the respective human-influenced ecosystem, Laura Herzog pursues an interdisciplinary approach, looking at the socio-ecological systems she examines from a socioscientific as well as a natural scientific perspective.

lt;p>Contents

Abbreviations

Illustrations

Tables

Annexes

Illustrations in the Annex

Tables in the Annex

Acknowledgements

Synopsis

1. Introduction

1.1 The CPR and the policy problem of micro-pollutants in surface water

1.2 Defining the key terms: management process, collaboration & cooperation

1.3 Theoretical background, methodological approach & findings

1.4 Societal relevance of the research

1.5 Structure of the dissertation

    2. Literature Review

2.1 Theories of non-cooperation

2.1.1 The prisoner's dilemma-a non-cooperative, nonzero-sum game

2.1.2 The tragedy of the commons

2.1.3 The theory of collective inaction

2.2 Theoretical concepts on collective action and common-pool resources

2.2.1 A theoretical concept of cooperation's core relationships

2.2.2 Preconditions for collective action in CPR settings

2.2.3 The IAD framework-an analytical tool to assess collective action

2.3 Governance and cooperation

2.3.1 A typology of the governance concept

2.3.2 Environmental and collaborative governance

    3. Theory & Hypotheses

3.1 A first driver for cooperation-recognizing the environmental problem

3.2 A second driver for cooperation-forums

3.3 A third driver for cooperation-actors' shared beliefs

3.4 Theoretical relevance of the research

    4. Research Design

4.1 Public policy analysis

4.1.1 The policy-making process

4.1.2 The policy problem

4.1.3 The solutions to a policy problem

4.1.4 Policy networks

4.2 The conceptual framework guiding the research design

4.2.1 The Social-Ecological System framework (SESF)

4.3 Operationalization of the dependent and independent variables along the

        SESF

4.3.1 The dependent variable cooperation

4.3.2 The independent variables

4.3.3 The control variables

4.4 Case study selection criteria & case study design

4.4.1 The case study selection criteria

4.4.2 A within- and across-unit case study design

4.5 Presentation of the three case studies

4.5.1 The micro-pollutant management process at the Rhine basin at Basel

4.5.2 The micro-pollutant management process in the Ruhr region

4.5.3 The micro-pollutant management process in the Moselle basin

4.5.4 Similarities and differences between the case studies

4.6 The data gathering methods

4.6.1 Document analysis

4.6.3 Expert interviews

4.6.4 The survey and the methodological operationalization of the variables

4.6.5 Response rates & handling missing data

4.7 The data analysis methods

4.7.1 Descriptive Social Network Analysis

4.7.2 Exponential random graph models

4.7.3 Qualitative Analysis-a case comparison

     5. Analysis I: What Defines Cooperation?

5.1 The constituting elements of cooperation

5.1.1 Aiming towards the same goal

5.1.2 Coordinating each other's actions-actors' collaboration

5.1.4 Relating the three elements

5.2 A network perspective on the main element of cooperation: collaboration

5.2.1 The macro-level: reciprocity, fragmentation & components

5.2.3 The micro-level: core, important, and peripheral actors

5.3 Actors' viewpoints on cooperation

5.3.1 ... in the Basel case study

5.3.2 ... in the Ruhr case study

5.3.3 ... in the Moselle case study

5.3.4 Summary of the actors' perspectives on cooperation

5.4 Comparison I: Cooperation across the cases

5.4.1 Different intensities of cooperation

5.4.2 The CPR management processses as types of governance

5.4.3 Cooperation at different stages

      6. Analysis II: What Explains Collaboration at the Dyadic Level?

6.1 The ERGMs' goodness of fit

6.2 Presenting the ERGM results

6.3 Model robustness checks

     7. Discussion: What Triggers Collaboration and Cooperation in a CPR Problem

                              Setting?

7.1 Discussion of the hypotheses

7.1.1 Hypotheses 1a & 1b: the impact of problem perception on cooperation

7.1.3 Hypothesis 3: the impact of actors' shared beliefs on cooperation

7.1.4 The control variables: the impact of actors' attributes on cooperation

7.1.5 Summary of the discussion

7.2.1 Problem perception as initial trigger (IV 1a)

7.2.2 Actors' similar viewpoint on the CPR problem (IV 1b)

7.2.3 Conclusion 1: The timing of actors' problem perception matters

7.2.5 Forums' bridging and bonding capital (IVs 2a & 2b)

7.2.6 Conclusion 2: Forums reinforce cooperation in CPR problem situations

7.2.7 Conclusion 3: Shared beliefs (IV 3) make no difference

7.3 Summary of the case comparison

     8. Conclusion

8.1 The findings-factors contributing to cooperation in a CPR problem setting

8.2 Explanatory strength of the results

8.3 Discussing the methods

8.4 Contributions to theory

     Bibliography

     Annex