首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Contemporary Water Research and Education >Developing T‐Shaped Water Professionals: Building Capacity in Collaboration, Learning, and Leadership to Drive Innovation
【24h】

Developing T‐Shaped Water Professionals: Building Capacity in Collaboration, Learning, and Leadership to Drive Innovation

机译:培养T型水专业人员:建立协作,学习和领导能力以推动创新

获取原文
           

摘要

Change has been an increasingly central theme in water management since the 1980's and early 1990's. During this period the need to integrate different aspects of water resources management to effectively provide benefits and avoid problematic trade-offs across sectors, across different groups of peoples or environmentally became a significant focus of concern. The concern resulted in the Dublin Principles of 1992 and much subsequent research and action under the banner of integrated water resources management (IWRM) (Lenton and Muller 2009). IWRM can be interpreted as a movement focused on change – change in the way that water policy and management decisions are coordinated, undertaken and implemented, either institutionally, sectorally, or geographically. In this sense integration in water (resources) management isn't a state of being, rather it is a process of changing states of being (J?nsch-Clausen and Fugl 2001).Focus on change in the water sector has continued to grow since the 1990's. Since then significant trade-offs between water uses (supply, ecological support, food, energy) for limited resources have become apparent and are now well recognized. These trade-offs include limits to electricity generation from a lack of available water for evaporative cooling power stations (PMSEIC 2010) and substantial increases in the water required to produce a unit of energy for transport as a consequence of crop-based biofuels being substituted for increasingly scarce and costly oil (World Economic Forum 2011). Our water systems require energy, our energy generation systems require water, our food systems require both water and energy for production and transport, and we (the world) seem to be reaching limiting trade-offs between these systems in terms of the underlying water resource – the so-called water-food-energy nexus. Water supply and food shortage crises are now ranked as the highest likelihood and highest impact social risks facing the world (World Economic Forum 2012). In an increasingly water- limited world as a consequence of population growth and changing rainfall patterns, the need to radically change the way in which essential services – water, wastewater, food, energy – are managed and delivered in a more integrated way has been argued for strongly (World Economic Forum 2011).Beyond the details of the water-food-energy nexus, a growing body of literature in water management highlights the need to focus on better understanding and consequently managing processes of institutional and organizational change rather than focusing on technological improvement as one key to realizing sustainability goals (Brown and Farrelly 2009; Spiller et al. 2012; 2013; Thomas and Ford 2005). The broader sustainability literature has also focused on the need to better understand and manage the processes of change, or innovation, which are required to bring human activity into alignment with the “safe operating” bounds of planetary biogeochemical cycles and processes (Doppelt 2003; Leach et al. 2012).For the ambitions of these writers, and more generally, of integration in water management to be realized, education forms a natural focus. Education constitutes an essential process for building the capacity of water sector professionals, and of professionals in sectors where water is either a major input (e.g., food or energy) or potentially subject to major negative impact (e.g., the ecological impact of urban stormwater runoff – see Walsh et al. 2005), to: Recognize the need for innovation.Develop innovative ways of changing that avoid creating problems elsewhere (geographically, sectorally, or to other groups of people).Stimulate and drive processes of change.But what should education programs for building such capacities focus on? Although innovation is a relatively new scientific field, with the first papers traceable to the work of Schumpeter in 1936 and 1942, the field has grown quickly, particularly since 1990 and now has an activ
机译:自1980年代和1990年代初期以来,变化一直是水管理中越来越重要的主题。在此期间,需要整合水资源管理的各个方面,以有效地提供收益并避免跨部门,跨不同民族的群体或在环境上进行权衡取舍,这已成为人们关注的重点。这种担忧导致了1992年《都柏林原则》的产生以及随后在综合水资源管理(IWRM)的旗帜下进行的大量研究和行动(Lenton and Muller 2009)。 IWRM可以解释为关注变化的运动-改变水资源政策和管理决策的方式,无论是在机构,部门还是在地理上。从这个意义上讲,水(资源)管理的整合不是存在状态,而是一个改变存在状态的过程(J?nsch-Clausen and Fugl 2001)。对水部门变化的关注持续增长自1990年代以来。从那时起,水资源有限(资源,生态支持,粮食,能源)之间的重大权衡就变得显而易见,并且现在已经得到公认。这些折衷包括由于蒸发冷却电站缺少可用水而导致的发电限制(PMSEIC,2010年),以及由于以作物为基础的生物燃料替代了生产用于运输的能量单位所需要的水的大量增加。日益稀少和昂贵的石油(世界经济论坛2011)。我们的水系统需要能源,我们的发电系统需要水,我们的食品系统需要水和能源来生产和运输,而且我们(世界)似乎在潜在水资源方面达到了这些系统之间的权衡取舍–所谓的水-食物-能量联系。如今,供水和粮食短缺危机被列为世界面临的最高可能性和最大影响的社会风险(世界经济论坛,2012)。在由于人口增长和降雨模式变化而日益缺水的世界中,人们提出了从根本上改变以更综合的方式管理和提供基本服务(水,废水,食物,能源)的方式的需求除了水-食物-能源之间的联系之外,水管理方面越来越多的文献强调,需要着重于更好地理解和管理制度和组织变革的过程,而不是着重于技术进步是实现可持续发展目标的关键之一(Brown和Farrelly 2009; Spiller等人2012; 2013; Thomas and Ford 2005)。更广泛的可持续性文献还集中在更好地理解和管理变化或创新过程的需求上,这是使人类活动与行星生物地球化学循环和过程的“安全运行”界限保持一致的必要条件(Doppelt 2003; Leach等人(2012)。对于这些作家的抱负,乃至更普遍的是要实现水资源管理一体化,教育成为自然的重点。教育是建设水务部门专业人员以及水是主要投入(例如粮食或能源)或可能受到重大负面影响(例如城市雨水径流的生态影响)的部门的专业人员能力建设的重要过程。 –参见Walsh等人,2005年),要:认识到创新的必要性。开发创新的变革方式,避免在其他地方(地理,部门或其他人群)造成问题。刺激和推动变革的过程。建立这种能力的教育计划的重点是什么?尽管创新是一个相对较新的科学领域,其第一篇论文可追溯到熊彼特在1936年和1942年的工作,但该领域发展迅速,尤其是自1990年以来,现在已活跃起来。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号