Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Collective action arrangements have been successful in allocating scarce resources in small communities around the world. As these arrangements are being used to address broader resource allocation issues, it is critical to understand the context and factors impacting outcomes in larger institutional settings. South Carolina historically has benefited from abundant water supplies, but disputes between various water interests have become more common due to increasing demand for water resources. To address projected demand, the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR) initiated a process of river basin water management planning, facilitated through formal institutions referred to as River Basin Councils (RBCs), for the eight major river basins of South Carolina. RBCs are tasked with reviewing surface and ground water availability and formulating an implementable consensus-based river basin plan and identifying possible policy recommendations for an updated state water plan. Thirteen of 22 representative stakeholders of the Edisto RBC, the first RBC to start the planning process, participated in semistructured interviews. We found that as stakeholders transitioned to the Edisto RBC, stakeholder goals were informed largely by beliefs about water problems and solutions that originate from large subsystem coalition groups. Furthermore, we found that stakeholders are motivated to compromise with opposing coalition members in an effort to minimize stakeholder sector losses and/or maximize coalition group policy gains.
Guerrero et al. (Tue,) studied this question.