Global water crises are, finally, near the top of the agendas at the United Nations and at multilateral initiatives and organizations. A social sciences– and humanities-informed emerging literature that we call Heterodox Thinking offers alternatives to much of the current decision-making on water. Rooted in water economics, values, and governance, Heterodox Thinking comprises developments in nonmarket valuation, systems thinking, risk assessments and mitigation, infrastructure investments, and understanding injustices and relationality. It is characterized by the Three Ps: People (e.g., who has voice and power and who does not), Place (e.g., locally informed and justice-based), and Planet (e.g., system interconnections, risks, and ecological and nonhuman considerations). At its best, Heterodox Thinking is informed by on-the-ground evidence and multiple disciplines and knowledge, and it seeks to value water, expose power imbalances, support human rights and well-being, and mitigate systemic risks. If effectively operationalized, it can deliver more equitable, risk-mitigated, and sustainable responses to the many different and localized water crises.
Grafton et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: