Search

Abstract Managing transboundary river basins requires balancing tradeoffs of sustainable water use and coping with climate uncertainty. We demonstrate an integrated approach to exploring these issues through the lens of a social-ecological system, combining remote and in-situ earth observations, hydrologic and climate models, and social surveys. Specifically, we examine how climate change and dam development could impact the Se Kong, Se San and Sre Pok rivers in the Mekong region. We find that climate change will lead to increased precipitation, necessitating a shift in dam operations, from maintaining low flows to reducing flood hazards. We also find that existing water governance systems in Laos, Vietnam, and Cambodia are ill-prepared to address the problem. We conclude that the solution space for addressing these complex issues will be highly constrained unless major deficiencies in transboundary water governance, strategic planning, financial capacity, information sharing, and law enforcement are remedied in the next decades.

Sustainable watershed management requires effective stakeholder engagement and knowledge co-production. Currently, most methods for stakeholder engagement and knowledge co-production in the field are case-specific, applied in an ad hoc manner, and not tested across various spatial scales or water management contexts. Moreover, these methods are not often evaluated, limiting our ability to learn from and adapt them. We critically assess the Freshwater Health Index (FHI), an indicator-based platform for stakeholder engagement and knowledge co-production, which has been applied in a variety of social-ecological systems. Using an ex-post analysis, we examined nine FHI case studies against an evaluative framework based on Talley et al.'s. (2016) five pillars for effective stakeholder engagement and Norström et al.'s. (2020) four principles for knowledge co-production, from which we derived six principles (Context-based, Clear objectives/Goal-oriented, Systematic representation/Pluralistic, Use relevant methods, Create opportunities for co-ownership, Interactive/Reflective). We first identified activities in the FHI process that aligned with the six principles, then used narrative descriptions and guiding questions to evaluate individual case studies. Although we demonstrate that the FHI supports stakeholder engagement and knowledge co-production in a variety of contexts, the FHI process seldom fulfilled all six principles due to differences in watersheds. Key takeaways include the importance of aligning projects with existing water management schemes, and the need to establish a sustainability plan that empowers stakeholders to stay engaged beyond a single project timeline. Our evaluative framework can serve as a checklist in both the design and monitoring of place-based sustainability research projects more generally.