Cooperative Management of

Urban Water Resources:

A Case Study of

Peterborough, ON

by

Timothy M. Shah

A thesis

presented to Trent University

in fulfillment of the

honours program for the degree of

Bachelor of Arts

in

Environmental and Resource Studies & Human Geography

Peterborough, Ontario, Canada, 2010

i

Abstract

Planning for water resources is increasingly gaining significance in Canada. Municipalities

across the country are facing challenges in bringing about sustainable water resources

management initiatives in order to maintain adequate water quality and quantity for the future.

With constrained municipal budgets, the financing of large water infrastructural projects has

become even more difficult. A practical and cost-effective approach for dealing with current and

forthcoming challenges would be through the creation of an urban water committee that enables

the city to more holistically manage its water resources. This study explores whether or not the

City of Peterborough, Ontario could benefit from the creation of a committee composed of

stakeholders who have professional responsibilities related to water management/planning

including the distribution and treatment of water, public education and outreach, public

consultation, land use planning/policy and the protection of water resources. By cooperatively

discussing and planning water resource issues, the stakeholders can work towards advising city

council on preventative and practical solutions to the water resource management process. Using

a case study research method and semi-structured interviews, this project examined how the

various stakeholders in Peterborough are currently involved with water management/planning

and what they defined as some of the current challenges and opportunities. This project shows

their perceptions of an urban water committee and how they feel it might or might not work for

the city. The results explain how a committee can improve the efficiency of communication and

learning between relevant stakeholders across geographic space. Ultimately, the study found that

a committee can provide a valuable contribution to municipal water resources management,

especially in terms of facilitating the input of different stakeholders in the process.

ii

Acknowledgements

First and foremost, I would like to extend my deepest gratitude to those individuals participating

in this research, who generously offered their time and insights into my project. Without your

efforts, kindness and contributions, this research would not have been possible.

I am forever grateful to Professor Karen Morrison for her guidance and strong academic support.

Karen, your efforts in continuously challenging me to think critically provided a focus and

confidence in my research which was invaluable in completing this thesis. The entire project was

very academically enriching and our various meetings and discussions allowed me stay on top of

the project and remain focussed on my goals. Your intimate knowledge of policy and

management was also very helpful for me in articulating the academic significance of this study.

Professor Colin Taylor continuously provided suggestions and feedback to the project making it

more thorough and clear with its objectives. Colin has supervised numerous Physical Geography

theses and this was his first time supervising a Human Geography thesis. I again thank him for

being so kind and patient. Colin, I thank you for helping me develop my writing skills and in

structuring the various chapters. Your recommendations were always very insightful and helped

me significantly with preparing for the thesis seminar presentations.

I would also like to thank Professor Mark Skinner. Professor Skinner reviewed and approved my

research ethics document. Throughout the year he was always willing to sit down and discuss my

methodology and provide tips on how to conduct a good interview. Professor Stephen Hill was

also kind enough to do a mock interview with me to test my main research method, semi-

structured interviews. Thank you again Stephen for taking the time to do this.

I am indebted to a number of friends and family members for the numerous contributions that

they have made to assist me with this project. To my friends, I thank you for continuously asking

me questions about the project. This allowed me to constantly explain the project to you which

made my overall objectives clearer in my mind. To everyone who offered support, feedback and

edits throughout the project: I am extremely grateful and appreciative.

iii

Table of Contents

Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………………... i

Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………………….... ii

Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………………... iii

List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………………. v

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………......1

1.1 Setting the Context……………………………………………………………………2

1.2 The History and Evolution of Peterborough‘s Water System………………………...5

1.3 Significant Water Management Issues for Peterborough……………………………..6

1.4 Urban Water Committee………………………………………………………………7

1.5 Peterborough Now…………………………………………………………………….8

Chapter 2 LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………………………………………….10

2.1 Cooperative Management in the Local Context………………………………………...11

2.1.1 Governance………………………………………………………………………...12

2.1.2 Bridging Organizations and Leadership…………………………………………...14

2.1.3 Social Learning…………………………………………………………………….15

2.2 Water Resources, Stakeholder Involvement and Councils……………………………...17

2.2.1 California Urban Water Conservation Council…………………………………….18

2.2.2 Guelph‘s Use of a Public Advisory Committee……………………………………19

2.2.3 The Otonabee-Peterborough Source Protection Committee……………………….19

2.2.4 Theoretical Underpinnings of Committees and Stakeholder Involvement………...20

2.3 The Evolution of Water Management: The Soft-Path Approach……………………….22

2.3.1 Water Metering…………………………………………………………………….24

2.3.2 The Rise of Public Education……………………………………………………...26

2.3.3 Water Efficiency & Density……………………………………………………….27

2.4 Research Implications………………………………………………………………….. 31

Chapter 3 RESEARCH METHODS…………………………………………………………….33

3.1 Research Objectives……………………………………………………………………..34

3.2 Research Instrument and Design………………………………………………………..35

3.2.1 Case Study Research Design………………………………………………………36

3.2.2 Literature Review: Primary and Secondary……………………………………….37

3.2.3 Semi-Structured Interviews………………………………………………………. 38

3.3 Coding Interview Data and Answering Research Question……………………………..42

3.4 Study‘s Limitations……………………………………………………………………....44

iv

Chapter 4 RESULTS……………………………………………………………………………. 46

4.1 Public Education and Environmental Stewardship………………………………………. 47

4.1.1 Water Metering…………………………………………………………………… 48

4.1.2 Environmental Stewardship through Public Education……………………………52

4.2 Water Supply, Quality and the Natural Environment……………………………………..53

4.2.1 Density, Intensification and Water Quality………………………………………. 53

4.2.2 Drinking Water Supply…………………………………………………………….55

4.2.3 Water Use…………………………………………………………………………. 56

4.2.4 Progress, Challenges & Opportunities……………………………………………..57

4.3 Water-based Activities, Recreation and Ecosystem Health……………………………….59

4.4 Cooperation and Governance……………………………………………………………...61

4.5 Transparency and Decision-Making……………………………………………………... 66

4.6 Other Information from Results………………………………………………………….. 68

Chapter 5 DISCUSSION………………………………………………………………………..70

5.1 An Opportunity for Enhancing Public Education on Water Resources…………………..71

5.2 The Need for Water Governance………………………………………………………….74

5.3 Transparency & the Urban Water Committee…………………………………………….83

Chapter 6 RECOMMENDATIONS…………………………………………………………….88

Chapter 7 CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………………96

Appendix A Key Informant Interview Guide…………………………………………………..100

Appendix B Human Research Consent Form…………………………………………………..103

Appendix C Information Letter………………………………………………………………...104

REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………………105

v

List of Figures

Figure 1- A Map of Peterborough as a Water City…………………………………………......... 3

Figure 2- Bridging Organization Model…………………………………………………………15

Figure 3- Particulars about the semi-structured interviews (n=7)……………………………… 47

Figure 4- Bridging Organization Model………………………………………………………... 77

Figure 5- Generic Water Planning Model………………………………………………………. 80

Figure 6- Water Planning Model applied to Little Lake…………………………………………81

Figure 7- Water Planning Model applied to Water Metering……………………………………86

Figure 8- The Urban Co-Management Model………………………………………………….. 88

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

―Water is a pioneer which the settler follows, taking advantage of its improvements.‖

— Henry David Thoreau

The planning of water resources management is evolving into a more holistic process in cities

around the world. Peterborough, Ontario, the case study for this research, can be described as a

‗water city‘; a city where water is virtually ubiquitous. Citizens have the luxury of enjoying the

presence of three major bodies of water including the Otonabee River, Jackson Creek and Little

Lake. Water plays an indispensable role in the city through recreational activities, economic

development, hydro-electric production, tourism, and urban identity.

Given the current and future importance of water resources, it is critical that cities begin to have

a more formal dialogue about the state of their water resources. This will have to move beyond

the hard-path approach, where engineers, water managers and bureaucrats make all of the

decisions. Indeed, planning for water resources in Peterborough will require an integration of

stakeholders‘ interests including those with professional responsibilities in water management,

planning and education. The involvement of multiple stakeholders can bring more accountability

and transparency to the city‘s water management and provide a planning framework for

sustaining this resource.

One of the primary objectives of the thesis is to start a more formal dialogue among these

various stakeholders through the creation of an urban water committee (UWC). Given the lack of

federal and provincial leadership in promoting sound water policies, cities like Peterborough

have the opportunity to devise their own municipal water policies based on their own geography,

stakeholders, community interest and engagement and environmental and political agendas.

Moreover, because water provides numerous benefits to the city, Peterborough can lead by

example for Ontario in showing how water management and planning is truly an integrative

process that consults and engages the community.

As Professor Chow (1972) argued, ―hydrologists and engineers could plan, construct and

develop water resource systems; however, the appropriate long-term utilization of rivers, lakes,

2

dams, reservoirs and groundwater require[s] experts from other disciplines such as lawyers,

contractors, environmentalists, social scientists, economists, chemical and biological experts‖ (as

cited in Stout, 2010, p. 2). Indeed, these issues need not only be analysed by bureaucrats and

engineers; they are highly complex and need some form of water governance and multi-

stakeholder involvement to respond to them in an open, transparent and collaborative way.

1.1 Setting the context

Water resources, whether in urban or rural environments, are indispensable to human life and

socio-economic processes (Bithas, 2008). Indeed, as a precious natural resource in urban

environments, water is often exploited by ever-increasing population and growing economic

production (Bithas, 2008). The question then, is, how management and planning can account for

such changes that society demands.

The City of Peterborough has approximately 80,000 people and grew by about 4.8 percent from

2001 to 2006 (Statistics Canada, 2006). The city draws its water supply from the Otonabee

River. Because water appears to be plentiful in the city, it can be hard for citizens to make the

connection between water availability and water consumption. In the Canadian context, the

dominant perception is that water is a limitless resource and any curtailment of the use of that

resource is an infringement on personal rights (Prince George, 2005). This is where water

management policies such as water metering can run into problems because on the one hand, it is

a water conservation solution but on the other, it may receive poor social acceptability because

water is now seen as virtually an economic good because a price is now attached to every unit of

water consumed.

Residential and commercial development around water resources such as Little Lake is

economically attractive for any municipality because it provides more tax revenue. However, if

improperly planned, it can compromise ecosystem health and recreational uses. Peterborough is

now complying with the Places to Grow Act where more residential development is slated for

the urban growth centre and built areas - being in close proximity to water resources.

Peterborough MP Dean Del Mastro‘s proposal to allow a private company to build on federal

land next to Little Lake stirred up a lot of contention from city‘s residents (Little Lake Master

3

Plan, 2009). This stimulated an interest for the city to hire a consulting group to carry out the

Little Lake Master Plan. Therefore, it is clear that Little Lake is a valuable natural asset for the

city given the public‘s concern for its protection.

Between 2006 and 2031, it is projected that 14,000 residents will be added to the city (City of

Peterborough, 2009). The urban growth centre (UGC) comprises a significant portion of the

Central Area of Peterborough. With plans to achieve 150 residents and jobs per hectare by 2031,

the UGC will witness increased intensification of under-developed parcels of land and re-

development (City of Peterborough, 2009). Therefore, 33 percent of the projected population

growth (14,000) will need to occur in the UGC to achieve the city‘s density targets. With

intensification of the land, new residential and commercial development will be erected or

renovated in the city‘s downtown. Intensification of land uses and increased population density

have a number of implications on water resources; they will be re-explored in Chapter 2.

Figure 1. A Map of Peterborough as a Water City

4

The map in Figure 1 shows the city boundary (grey line) of Peterborough by depicting its

geographical parameters. The city‘s total area (the area located inside the grey boundary) is 7100

hectares and the downtown or urban growth centre constitutes just 96 hectares of the city‘s total

area (City of Peterborough, 2009). As shown in the map, the Otonabee River runs through the

city and Little Lake is situated in the downtown core. Jackson Creek flows into the downtown

from the western part of the city. The London waterworks dam and the pump house on the river

use renewable hydraulic energy to pump the water through pipes to city residents (PUC, 2009).

The waterworks dam, owned by the Peterborough Utilities Commission, is situated directly south

of the London Street Bridge and is also a source of hydro-electric production. This hydro-electric

production creates renewable electricity that feeds into the local economy. While many large

cities in the world reap numerous benefits from their natural bodies of water, Peterborough is

fortunate to have its water provide inexpensive and green electricity, thereby reducing

dependence on dirtier sources of electricity including coal.

Little Lake is a critical natural feature in the city allowing for recreational uses, tourism and

economic development and providing an urban identity. The lake is primarily a recreational hot-

spot featuring beaches on the northern shore, campgrounds and Beavermead Park on the eastern

shore and Del Crary Park on the western shore. Little Lake also has trails for biking, walking and

running; citizens can skate on the lake in the winter and partake in boating activities in the

summer. Other large-scale events held on Little Lake include Peterborough‘s annual Dragon

Boat Festival; a fundraiser for the local hospital's Breast Assessment Centre. There is also a

Wakeboarding event held in August which draws young people from all over the county (Deeth,

2009). With the current Little Lake Master Plan, Little Lake‘s trails will be re-designed for

aesthetic reasons and for environmental and ecosystem considerations. These re-designed trails

will make Little Lake an even more popular natural feature for the enjoyment of city residents.

Millennium Park was constructed in 2001 under the leadership of former city mayor, Sylvia

Sutherland. It is a linear park along the shores of the Otonabee River (City of Peterborough,

2009). Located downtown, it provides people with an opportunity to enjoy the downtown area by

walking on a path next to the Otonabee River. It is a focal resting place on the trail system with

5

its variety of amenities (City of Peterborough, 2009). Del Crary Park on the western shore was

redeveloped in 1985 and has since become an important point for many tourists and residents

(City of Peterborough, 2009). The Summer Festival of Lights, Victoria Day Fireworks

Celebrations and the CIBC Run for the Cure are just some of the events that are held at the park.

The beaches on the north end of Little Lake provide residents with a chance to get closer to the

water for enjoyment and natural appreciation. The campgrounds provide an affordable camping

experience for both residents and visitors (Little Lake Master Plan, 2009). The public

campground generates revenue for the city and competes with the private sector (Little Lake

Master Plan, 2009). All of these recreational features allow the community to get closer to their

water resources and obtain natural benefits from them. The Trent Severn Hydraulic Lift lock

plays an important role for Peterborough and helps shape its urban identity. As the world‘s

highest hydraulic lift lock, the Trent Severn enhances tourism activities for the community. It

also permits boaters to travel through the lift lock on the waterway which extends 386 kilometres

through the heart of Ontario (Parks Canada, 2009).

1.2 The History and Evolution of Peterborough’s Water System

Peterborough has always had a rigid yet ambitious approach to water management. Around

1870, the ubiquity and recreational importance of water created an impetus to have a community

water system for Peterborough (PEO, 2009). The population was growing at this time and the

need for a water distribution system was vital. The city‘s water system began officially in 1882

(PEO, 2009). At this time, a private water company called the Peterborough Water Company

constructed the first of three dams and pump houses (PEO, 2009).

Eleven years later, the steady growth in population justified the need to build another dam. This

dam was accompanied with a pump house. Two large and powerful triple action plunger pumps

were installed, each with 2,500,000 gallons per day capacity (PEO, 2009?). The water pump and

dam were constructed not by the Peterborough Water Company, but by the William Hamilton

Manufacturing Company of Peterborough (PEO, 2009).

6

This new water pump house of 1893 doubled the pumping capacity of the 1882 pump house.

Both the pump house and dam were critical for Peterborough because they were the sole source

of water for the city. Around this time, the city recognized the importance of these two

engineering features and decided to purchase the entire water system from the Peterborough

Water Company for $230,000 (PEO, 2009). Some of the water wheels from the 1893 pump

house were transferred to the Water Street pump house in 1909. In 1916, Peterborough became

the first city in Canada to disinfect water with chlorine (PUC, 2001). It was also one of the first

to utilize rapid sand filtration to treat water (PUC, 2001).

The unique aspect of this engineering feat was that the pump house delivered the city‘s water

supply using water driven turbine pumps powered by the Otonabee River flow (PUC, 2001).

These high-lift pumps deliver water to about 75 percent of the city‘s residents (PEO, 2009). As

the years progressed, more water booster pumping stations were added around the city, pumping

water through 409 kilometres of water mains from lower pressure zones to higher pressure zones

(PUC, 2001).

Over time, water management in the city has become highly centralized. The current water

provider, the Peterborough Utilities Commission has a permit from the province to withdraw

water and distribute it to the city. In the past, Peterborough‘s water consumption was much

higher as city residents took advantage of the plentiful supply available to them. Water

consumption in the city has dropped since 1988 (PUC, 2009). The average day water demand on

the water distribution system is 39, 40, 000 litres or 487 litres of water per person per day (PUC,

2009). However, there is an increase in the summer months due to outdoor and recreational use

including lawn watering, car washes and direct irrigation of plants. Combined, the maximum day

demand in the summer months has reached as high as 69,020,000 litres, or 861 litres of water per

person per day (PUC, 2009).

1.3 Significant Water Management Issues for Peterborough

As the literature review will explain, water management is evolving into a more holistic process

in cities around the world. Historically, water management was exclusively the responsibility of

the water utility. These responsibilities included the delivery of water, the testing and treatment

7

of water and the distribution of water to residential homes, commercial units and industry. These

are still the principal responsibilities of the water utility; however, with current phenomena such

as population growth, climate change and decreased natural resource availability per person,

water management is evolving into a more integrated and inclusive process. Any new

proposition in water planning should include public participation, water metering and policies to

protect water quality and new development around bodies of water.

―The participatory approach involves raising awareness of the importance of water among

policy-makers and the general public. It means that decisions are taken at the lowest appropriate

level, with full public consultation and involvement of users in the planning and implementation

of water projects.‖

--Principle No. 2 of Dublin Statement on Water and Sustainable Development (1992).

This thesis aims to incorporate some level of principle No. 2 into a cooperative management

framework for water resources in the City of Peterborough. Cooperative management (co-

management) is the major theoretical framework for this thesis. Co-management of water

resources would allow various stakeholders to negotiate the authority and responsibility for the

management of a natural resource (Berkes, 2009). It is a process that aims to achieve more

effective and equitable systems of resource management.

In cooperative management, representatives of user groups, the scientific community, utility

companies and government agencies share knowledge, power and responsibility (Borrini-

Feyerabend et al. 2004). With more individuals and organizations involved in the process, there

is greater potential to allow for inclusion of the community and to ensure that policies are

transparent and inclusive. A review of cooperative management and its relevant themes will be

reviewed in Chapter 2.

1.4 Urban Water Committee

The thesis will investigate the proposition of an urban water committee for the City of

Peterborough. The study aims to understand if a proposed urban water committee can make a

valuable contribution to Peterborough‘s water management and planning process. The project

8

defines an urban water committee as a forum for discussion comprising stakeholders who have

professional responsibilities related to water management and planning.

The value in having a committee is that it could provide a forum for the public to seek

information regarding decisions around topics in water management and planning; such topics

might include water metering measures or development proposals around water resources. An

urban water committee could help in establishing a water governance structure in the City of

Peterborough. While there appear to be no burning issues surrounding water resources, this

project emphasizes the need for preventative, precautionary and practical measures around water

resources management.

As the thesis develops this idea of an ―urban water committee‖, it will become more evident

whether or not it is supported by stakeholders and whether or not it has any merit in a city like

Peterborough. It would, in theory, make environmental management more effective and efficient

through enabling stakeholders to comment on municipal policy decisions and allow for

innovation policy design, implementation and evaluation. However, perceptions and opinions

from the stakeholders may support or reject the proposition of an urban water committee. This

will be presented in Chapter 4 results.

1.5 Peterborough Now

In August of 2009, Peterborough City Council adopted Amendment number 142 to the City of

Peterborough Official Plan in order to comply with the growth plan for the Greater Golden

Horseshoe (City of Peterborough, 2009). This plan is required by the Places to Grow Act 2005.

The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe is a provincial plan that establishes a

planning policy framework to implement the Province‘s vision for managing population and

employment growth in the Greater Golden Horseshoe region to 2031 (City of Peterborough,

2009). There are five comprehensive objectives set out by the plan; all of these objectives apply

to Peterborough and include:

Revitalize downtowns to become vibrant and convenient centres;

Create complete communities that offer more opportunities for living, working, shopping

and playing;

9

Provide greater choice in housing types to meet the needs of people at all stages in life;

Curb urban sprawl and protect farmlands and green spaces; and,

Reduce traffic gridlock by improving access to a greater range of transportation choices.

Residential units and subdivisions are being erected on the edges of the city. The city estimates

that approximately 5,300 residential units will be constructed in the Designated Greenfield Areas

(DGA) between 2006 and 2031 and accommodate 12,000 people (City of Peterborough, 2009).

Constructing more homes in the DGA has economic implications for water delivery, i.e. more

piping and water mains and implications regarding water quality. However, the intensification of

the downtown also has implications around stormwater management. Whether current and future

development account for adequate stormwater management plans remains to be seen. More

development and intensification in the urban core must require sound stormwater management

policy. This will be reviewed in Chapter 2 and in Chapter 5.

Despite Peterborough‘s water abundance and the relatively unproblematic state of its water

resources, the city has an opportunity to develop a sound governance process on water

management and planning. As a water city, it would be invaluable to incorporate a multi-

stakeholder process where various professionals collaborate with one another while being

transparent on new policies for the community. The next five chapters of the thesis will feature

analysis, synthesis and discussion around an urban water committee and cooperative

management as a theoretical framework for the project. The literature review provides scholarly

examples from other jurisdictions; the methods feature the design of the semi-structured

interviews and subsequent chapters provide the discussion and results of the interviews. The

thesis concludes with recommendations and a formal conclusion.

10

Chapter 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

―If there is magic on this planet, it is contained in water.‖ - Loren Eiseley

The literature of fundamental importance pertains to multi-stakeholder involvement in local

water planning. As mentioned in Chapter 1, this study investigates the proposition that

cooperative management of water resources can be a beneficial process. As the literature will

explain, cooperative management can be integrative and involve various stakeholders. It would

seem to be particularly appropriate for a city like Peterborough, a water city that depends on its

bodies of water for recreation, tourism, urban identity and economic development (City of

Peterborough, 2009). As such, water resources such as Little Lake and the Otonabee River are an

important part of the community. As a city that values its water, it would be valuable to develop

a forum for people to come together and discuss how they see water as a resource in their

community. A review of the literature as it relates to the cooperative management (co-

management) of water resources is critical, and to understand its applicability in the city of

Peterborough would be advantageous.

This literature review comprises three sections. The first provides an overview of the theoretical

concept of co-management as it relates to the local urban context. Three main topics of co-

management from the literature are summarized. These three particular co-management topics

have been selected because of their overall relevance to the research. Section two provides case

studies to illustrate what other cities in North America have done to discuss their water issues

within their respective communities. The focus here is on water councils and committees at

different scales including local and regional. These councils have been influenced by voluntary

and regulatory schemes. The case studies set the tone for why it is valuable to have a committee

to discuss both problems and solutions to water resources management and planning.

Finally, section three covers the evolution of water management and the soft-path approach. This

section reviews the literature on techniques that local governments are employing to increase

water efficiency for their respective municipality. Literature is reviewed on the conventional and

contentious approaches to water efficiency, especially water metering. Water metering is used to

11

set the context for the case study. As Peterborough is going to install them imminently, there

might be differences in opinion about their efficacy and place. Water metering is not the

ultimately focus of the thesis but provides a grounding for the urban water committee.

The other part of this section is a review how public education can be used for promote

stewardship around water resources. Last, there will be a review on density as a water efficiency

strategy. This topic has been gaining attention from local government and policy makers because

of population growth. The literature in this section notes that density is a new water efficiency

phenomenon and has the potential to generate significant savings to a municipality and its

residents. It is also important because it forces cities to critically examine where their population

is growing. But first, it will be necessary to put the research and literature into context, and

therefore necessary to look at how and why an urban water committee can be realized. Thus, the

theoretical concept of co-management will be reviewed.

2.1 Cooperative Management in the Local Context

Cooperative management, also known as ―co-management‖ or ―collaborative management‖ has

increasingly gained attention by scholars. Co-management efforts have become ubiquitous in a

range of fields of geographic endeavour including planning and management of parks and

protected areas, wildlife, water, tourism, recreation, fisheries and rural development (Plummer &

Armitage, 2007). Mitchell (2004) defines the concept as a partnership in which local

government, local communities, non-governmental organizations, utility groups and others

negotiate the authority and responsibility for the management of a natural resource.

One of the most respected scholars on cooperative management is Dr. Fikret Berkes from the

University of Manitoba. Berkes (2009) explains how co-management is a knowledge partnership

among these stakeholder groups. Berkes further explains that through partnerships and bridging

organizations/groups, a forum can be created to allow for the interaction of these different kinds

of knowledge (Berkes, 2009). Effective cooperation develops through time and relies on learning

as participation. This will be made more explicit in the section on social learning.

12

The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has published extensively on co-

management. Throughout the literature, co-management is cited as an effective model for

dealing with fisheries, transboundary water disputes and preserving species. Its application to

urban water resources has been limited. Therefore, the main ideas and concepts will be reviewed

to illustrate the great potential it has for other geographical settings dealing with natural

resources such as water. This section of the literature review will explain three main ideas of co-

management that are of relevance. These include ―governance‖, ―bridging organizations and

leadership‖ and ―social learning‖.

2.1.1 Governance

Managing natural resources is usually carried out by a government body, or a utility company

that is owned by the government, a private company or a public-private partnership. In the case

of water, the main operator will have control and governmental authority over the distribution,

treatment and operation of the resource. The physical management of the resource is only one

element however. The evolution of cooperative management has shown that managing one

resource can be complex as it is multidimensional (Berkes, 2009). Berkes (2009) discusses that

co-management has simultaneously evolved with notions of people-centred governance. In other

words, to increase overall efficiency, management responsibilities must be shared among

partners instead of just one entity.

Koontz et al. (2004) show how public agencies for years have attempted to implement policy

from the top down, however this process has been unpopular. Instead, through more holistic

governance methods, these agencies are now increasingly using collaboration with a broad range

of stakeholders to address environmental problems. Indeed, with this shift there is more

collaboration taking place among private and non-profit sectors with public agencies playing a

relatively minor role through mediation.

Berkes (2009) identifies ―good governance‖ as the direct involvement of people whose

livelihoods are affected by resource management decisions. Governance must include effective

user participation. Borrini-Feyerabend (2000) explains how good governance is not a formalized

process but an interaction among interested stakeholders. Because it is based on a process

13

involving stakeholder input, the local government is not the main leader or facilitator. There is an

abundance of knowledge brought to the table to help address concerns and uncertainties

identified by the stakeholders. Moreover, effective governance requires multiple links across

levels that overlap centres of authority (Berkes, 2009). Some co-management sceptics have

questioned whether government agencies would ever willingly give up power. Berkes writes that

governments are not monolithic, different agencies have different roles and approaches, and the

impact of individuals within organizations can be significant. Sometimes there are boundaries

and barriers that prevent organizations, individuals and the government from working together.

However, at the core of co-management is rethinking boundaries (real and constructed) among

people, institutions and environments and adopting novel governance arrangements to foster

sustainability (Plummer & Armitage, 2007).

Koontz et al. (2004) share a perspective on co-management or what they call ―collaborative

environmental management‖. The authors of this book suggest that collaborative environmental

management is inherently an evolving process. Government agencies and representatives

increasingly face new and emerging challenges. ―A great contemporary challenge is that such

collaboration requires governmental institutions and actors to share, and perhaps at times even

relinquish control over environmental management‖ (Koontz et al, 2004, p. 184).

With collaboration however, government institutions are becoming more flexible and can

encourage other actors to participate in these processes. This would effectively balance out the

power between government institutions and actors and can be viewed as a means of enhancing

the democratic practice. The authors argue that such collaborative management can serve in

different capacities and in different contexts establishing relationships with community

members. Last, ―the interaction and shared deliberation inherent in collaboration may enhance

relations both among and between nongovernment and government representatives by promoting

trust, network development, and participatory democracy‖ (Koontz et al. 2004, p. 184). These

particular arguments will help ground a basis for the collaboration amongst stakeholders in an

urban water committee.

14

As Berkes (2009) elaborates: resource systems are always changing due to population influxes

and higher demands placed on the natural resource. Because these systems undergo change, and

because there are many who use them, these individuals and groups from the community should

have a say in how they are managed. As Berkes further states, effective cooperative management

requires flexible multi-governance systems (Berkes, 2009). Borrini-Feyerabend (2000) explains

this multi-governance system. First, the conventional approach to dealing with an issue in natural

resource management involves the use of law, tools, projects and participation. If a resource is

facing depletion, the local government can institute a law to impose restrictions on using the

resource. It can use tools to control the demand of the resource such as pricing it. It can build

infrastructural projects to either increase the availability of the resource or protect it from

competing uses (Borrini-Feyerabend, 2000). Participation is the final element, though it is

nebulously defined in the conventional approach.

Borrini-Feyerabend (2000) presents a model that is not exclusively under the legal jurisdiction of

the local government. This process known as ―negotiated governance perspective‖ requires

multiple stakeholders to negotiate an agreement to resolve the natural resource issue. Long-term

objectives are set out; tools are jointly selected along with establishment of management

responsibilities (Borrini-Feyerabend, 2000).

2.1.2 Bridging Organizations and Leadership

Co-management is an effective way to build upon what people already have, know and do to

secure their identity, culture, livelihoods and the diversity of natural resources on which they

depend (Borrini-Feyerabend et al. 2004). Cash et al. (2006) write that ―successful co-

management often arises from the adaptive, self-organizing processes of learning-by-doing

rather than from an optimal power sharing across levels.‖ An environment that is conducive to

learning by doing must support collaborative learning and continuously build on new knowledge.

Different groups in the community will partner together and harness knowledge collectively.

This will occur only if the resource is being managed poorly and affecting their livelihoods as a

consequence of poor management (Cash et al., 2006).

15

Boundary and bridging organizations are important for co-management. As knowledge is co-

produced among stakeholders, differences may arise. This makes for a learning process and

allows stakeholders to adapt and find consensus among decisions. Having a boundary

organization is a way of mediating the generation of knowledge regarding the resource

management issue. Cash et al. (2006) define boundary/bridge organizations as organizations that

explicitly focus on the intermediary function of cross-level interactions. As mentioned, co-

management requires cross-level interactions instead of optimal power sharing. These cross-level

interactions or scales are usually between local and state levels. However, even within the local

scale there can be jurisdictional disputes.

Figure 2. Bridging organization model (Berkes, 2009).

As shown in the model, bridging organizations can respond to opportunities, serve as catalysts

and as facilitators among different levels of governance (Berkes, 2009). Again, there is this idea

of an on-going interaction among the groups to generate knowledge and foster participation. The

most critical aspect of governance as it relates to cooperative management is that there are

multiple local interests at play (Berkes, 2009). ―In all societies, the composition of decision-

making bodies is likely to reflect and reinforce imbalances of power, with the weaker and

underprivileged social groups being least represented in decision-making structures‖ (Borrini-

Feyerabend et al. 2004, p. 13). There is no one homogenous community or unitary state

dictating the nature of the resource. Instead, networking, building vision and goals allows

interested parties to come together and come up with practical plans and policy directions. Local

16

government is not the main authority and therefore cannot pass policies that reflect their own

interests (Berkes, 2009).

2.1.3 Social Learning

This is the final component of co-management that is of fundamental importance. While

theoretical, its implications for urban water committees are extensive. Pahl-Wostl & Hare (2004)

articulate that engaging critical actors in social learning can be difficult at first. Particularly, if

the actors do not see how their contributions will improve the overall resource management

process. Social learning locates learning outside of the individual; learning takes places through

the interaction. Building capacities is a diverse process; actors must learn to work together, they

must build trust, be aware of each other‘s different goals and perspectives and understand the

complexity of the management system (Pahl-Wostl & Hare, 2004). If there is a mutual problem

brought to the table, actors must agree to take on tasks in which they will be most effective.

These tasks can be as eclectic as data collection and quantitative analysis, public education and

information dissemination (Pahl-Wostl & Hare, 2004).

What is important, argue Pahl-Wostl & Hare, is that each task be fairly distributed to avoid

confrontation and allow for social learning. They conclude with a thoughtful statement:

―management is not a search for the optimal solution to one problem but an ongoing learning and

negotiation process where a high priority is given to questions of communication, perspective

sharing, and the development of adaptive group strategies for problem-solving‖ (Pahl-Wostl &

Hare, 2004, p. 193).

Berkes emphasizes this evolution of environmental management. He writes that group-centred

and multi-level social learning is critical for environmental management. Natural resources are

too complex to be managed by one single entity. Social learning as an element of co-

management is an on-going participation process aimed at working together for problem

resolution. Through involvement, knowledge is gained and the set of problems and solutions

become well defined (Berkes, 2009). He argues that co-management is a logical approach to

solving resource management problems by partnership (Plummer & Armitage, 2007).

17

According to the literature, co-management is used primarily to resolve disputes in fisheries,

forests, coastal resources, wildlife or local resources in indigenous communities. Its specific

application on natural resources such as water is not commonly reported. Nonetheless, the IUCN

(2004) explains that water has in fact been co-managed for centuries. The co-management of

water has been different depending on cultures and geographical conditions (Borrini-Feyerabend

et al. 2004). In essence, the co-management of water resources in places such as Argentina has

led to an effective utilization and has improved agricultural conditions, equitable use of water

and distribution of the resource (Borrini-Feyerabend et al. 2004). The IUCN further explains that

partnerships in water management not only ameliorate local ecosystem health, but also social

development. The focus of the thesis research is the co-management of water resources.

Therefore, while this literature acknowledges the importance of other natural resources, it will

not be discussed.

The Encadenadas lake watershed in Argentina demonstrates the use of successful co-

management particularly through social learning. Floods and droughts in this region have been

highly problematic for local residents. Approaches to dealing with these natural disasters have

favoured some groups over others. The main challenge was managing water as a common pool

resource for different local administrative units, each with its own ―socio-geographical

peculiarities and ecological/economic priorities‖ (Borrini-Feyerabend, 2004). Higher levels of

government proposed using water works and hydraulic works to deal with these problems.

The use of technical approaches like water and hydraulic works was seen as inadequate in the

eyes of the local community. Over time, the nature of water management shifted from technical

solutions to the local community acquiring social competence for discussing rights,

responsibilities and equity issues (Borrini-Feyerabend, 2004). Eventually, municipalities around

the watershed, political administrators and other interested parties established co-management

plans and formulated a Watershed Management Committee. Finally, the committee provided a

clearer definition of the water problems; brought in diverse social actors who were capable of co-

managing water rights. This process has brought about development and democracy to the region

(Borrini-Feyerabend, 2004). The author contends that democratic participation and citizen

18

empowerment are increasingly proving to be crucial for the design of supportive co-management

policies throughout the world (Borrini-Feyerabend, 2004).

2.2 Water Resources, Stakeholder Involvement and Councils

This section will briefly review three case studies that have had success with urban water

councils- both in Canada and the United States. These councils have been created in response to

water issues in their respective geographical areas. The councils/committees were established

through both regulatory measures and through voluntary means. These case studies are being

evaluated because of their content on stakeholder participation, public involvement and good

governance. More importantly however, their relevance to the thesis is that they show how

councils can be administered ranging from regulatory measures to voluntary means. The final

section will touch on the theoretical underpinnings of councils and stakeholder involvement,

attempting to make an assertion that they are indispensable for water resources management and

planning.

2.2.1 California Urban Water Conservation Council

The purpose of this council is to increase urban water use efficiency for the state of California.

The council was created as a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) regarding water

conservation; it was signed in 1991 by a group of urban water suppliers, environmental interest

groups, and other interested parties (CUWCC, 2007). Since it is a bilateral agreement, it is not

intended to be a legally enforceable agreement. Those who sign the MOU agree to develop and

bring about conservation Best Management Practices (BMPs). This literature review will not

discuss these BMPs in detail, but they generally address residential and commercial water loss,

school education, public information and pricing conservation practices (CUWCC, 2007). This

council has grown since 1991; over 200 urban water suppliers have signed the MOU,

representing about 75 percent of the state‘s urban water supply.

The implementation of water conservation programs in the state is more comprehensive with the

council. Having three groups involved with carrying out management practices has allowed for

better stakeholder participation. Their organization and strength has been recognized by the state

and federal governments. As such, the council receives funding from the State‘s Department of

19

Water Resources and federal U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (CUWCC, 2007). In sum, through an

MOU, the state‘s stakeholders are working together to increase urban water use efficiency.

2.2.2 Guelph’s Use of a Public Advisory Committee

In developing their water conservation and efficiency strategies, the City of Guelph has brought

about a Public Advisory Committee (PAC) (City of Guelph, 2009). There are numerous water

quantity issues that face the city and affect several stakeholders. The risk of Guelph depleting its

aquifer stimulated the motivation to hire a consultant group called Resource Management

Strategies Inc to undertake research methods for water efficiency and conservation (City of

Guelph, 2009). City Council voluntarily decided to add a PAC to the consultant group and pull in

several stakeholders from the community including industry and home builders, the public,

academia and conservation authorities (City of Guelph, 2009).

The purpose of having a PAC is to collectively devise strategies and new ideas for a given issue

in the community (City of Guelph, 2009). The major issue for the city is a depleting aquifer

which risks jeopardizing future water supply in Guelph. PAC members play an important role

and advise the city on new directions and feasible initiatives (City of Guelph, 2009). Koontz et

al. (2004) point out that these sorts of collaborations may be initiated by the government but are

not necessarily led by government (Koontz et al., 2004). Government actors will demonstrate a

willingness to forge partnerships with a diverse spectrum of other governmental and non-

governmental actors as a means to address challenges (Koontz et al., 2004). This is seen as

effective environmental management because the government is willing to engage relevant

actors but not necessarily dictate what they do (Koontz et al., 2004).

2.2.3 The Otonabee-Peterborough Source Protection Committee

The Clean Water Act of Ontario (2006) legally requires local multi-stakeholder source protection

committees (SPC) to prepare reports identifying threats to drinking water (Ministry of

Environment, 2009). The legislation acknowledges the risks and complexities with drinking

water supplies. As such, it brings members of the public together including municipalities,

community groups, conservation authorities, farmers and industry (Ministry of Environment,

20

2009). The major difference between the Otonabee-Peterborough SPC and Guelph‘s PAC is that

the SPC is regulatory in nature, while the PAC is voluntary.

The Otonabee-Peterborough Source Protection Committee shares its source protection planning

with other conservation authorities. The source protection planning process allows communities

to identify potential risks to local water quality and water supply (Trent Source Protection,

2009). After the identification phase, the community will create a plan to reduce or eliminate

these risks. Developing a plan principally involves watershed residents. These residents work

with municipalities, conservation authorities, property owners, farmers, industry, health officials,

community groups, and others (Trent Source Protection, 2009). This source protection

committee comprises several townships and municipalities all located within the county of

Peterborough.

In many cases, these councils play a valuable role in connecting people and brokering

knowledge, and bringing environmental agendas to the fore (Robins, 2007). Some councils

including Guelph‘s PAC, are intimately connected to municipalities and have highly

participative, democratic and transparent processes. With more decentralized forms of

governance, these sorts of committees/councils can be influential in promoting more effective

water management and planning.

2.2.4 Theoretical Underpinning of Committees and Stakeholder Involvement

The empirical and theoretical research on councils is analyzed by Warner (2005). Warner sees

councils and committees as multi-stakeholder platforms (MSPs) that attempt to integrate society

in water resource management (Warner, 2005). These MSPs comprise different stakeholders

who perceive the same resource management problem, realize their interdependence for solving

it and come together to agree on action strategies for solving the problem (Warner, 2005). An

MSP that comes together to discuss urban water use efficiency for instance, would theoretically

interact through collective decision-making, strategizing and negotiation (Warner, 2005). The

stakeholders involved should be affected by the policies, decisions and actions of the system. An

MSP would also help resolve issues as diverse as commercial development on water resources or

21

the construction of mixed use residential development on environmentally sensitive areas. It

gives people a chance to voice their opinions.

Finally, Warner explains the difference between primary and secondary stakeholders. A primary

stakeholder is ultimately affected or adversely affected by the intervention. A secondary

stakeholder has an intermediary role and assists with mediating and facilitating (Warner, 2005).

These platforms are inexpensive writes Warner; they are voluntary and need relatively low

investment. What is important about them is the government has the chance to learn about the

range of interests and positions involved and what policy aspects are likely to generate

opposition (Warner, 2005). Thus, the government is not inherently the leader of this process but

a regular stakeholder.

A publication in the Urban Water Journal touches on the significance of stakeholder involvement

in urban water management planning. Gerasidi et al. (2009) argue that urban water management

planning must be done through participatory processes including involvement and empowerment

of stakeholders in the management of water resources. The article explains how stakeholder

involvement is recognized as an important factor in the successful implementation of water

management plans. Moreover, involving stakeholders enables a better understanding of different

parties that have an interest in significant water management issues; the process of facilitating

this involvement can articulate more clearly the context of agreements and disagreements

(Gerasidi et al. 2009).

This deviates from the conventional approach write the authors. Water management plans have

traditionally developed and have been written by a central administrator that emphasizes clusters

of structural interventions mostly aimed at enhancing supply (Gerasidi et al. 2009). The

implementation of alternative options and tools such as allowing for stakeholder involvement

expanded a drive towards ―sustainable operation‖. This sustainable operation is achievable by

improving the provision of water services (governance), by encouraging efficient water use

(valuing) and by ensuring equitable distribution of water resources (sharing) (Gerasidi et al.

2009).

22

The literature on this subject is critical for informing an understanding of the mechanics of an

urban water committee. Both Warner (2005) and Gerasidi et al. (2009) promote sustainable

management of water and argue that such management should promote active cooperation

among such entities as government, civil society, services and resource providers. Two final

points by Gerasidi et al (2009) corroborate some of the major themes of cooperative management

including social learning and governance.

In allowing for stakeholder involvement in the creation of urban water management plans, it is

valuable to ensure public participation (Gerasidi et al. 2009). Public participation aims at

reaching consensus on the development of a cohesive and implementable water management

plan (Gerasidi et al. 2009). This is achieved through the gathering of information, expanded

knowledge, perceptions and experiences of different stakeholder groups. Further, the public and

each stakeholder would have a plethora of knowledge and information in their field of expertise,

their understanding of the present situation and their concerns and apprehensions (Gerasidi et al.

2009).

The overarching relevance of these articles to the thesis is the holistic approach to water

resources management and planning. Similar to the arguments put out by Fikret Berkes on social

learning, involving different stakeholders and the public at large allows for more interaction,

sharing of knowledge and expertise. This can ultimately lead to a holistic water resources

management plans. In promoting the active cooperation among stakeholders, roles and

responsibilities become clearer allowing for cohesion and a comprehensive water agenda.

2.3 The Evolution of Water Management: The Soft-Path Approach

In short, the soft-path approach to water management uses tools such as education, information

dissemination, awareness raising, water pricing and open forums (Brandes & Ferguson, 2003).

This contrasts with the hard-path or more conventional approach to water management which

focuses on supply management i.e. increasing water supply through the construction of concrete

dams, fixing pipes, desalination, water infrastructure expansion and other technical dimensions-

all of which are focused on the augmentation of supply to meet the demands of the water users

(Brooks et al., 2009). A general direction of many Canadian municipalities today is more

23

efficient use of water (Brandes & Ferguson, 2003). The impetus for water efficiency usually

comes from the community and government who have identified particular water problems. This

often means that water is being taken for granted and used profligately. Therefore, a local

government response is to use water efficiency strategies to lower overall urban water use

(Brandes & Ferguson, 2003). Maximizing water efficiency in a city or a community can only

happen if the local government truly knows the interests of the residents. Brandes & Ferguson

note the variation in urban water use among Canadian municipalities.

Every community addresses water efficiency differently, some through water metering, increased

density, rainwater harvesting and even deploying water efficient technology to cut down

consumption. Use by residents of rainwater harvesting systems or rain barrels, while a self-

motivated water efficiency solution, can be problematic in the eyes of the water utility. The

water utility may feel that they should be the only deliverers of water to the resident. This is just

an idea and will not be reviewed here.

This final section of the literature review is meant to discuss the community‘s role in water

management. It is critical to review the literature on water efficiency because communities can

either be influential or oppose new strategies put out by local government. The literature on

water efficiency will be summarized from the POLIS Project on Ecological Governance. The

POLIS projects draws on Canadian and local examples. POLIS along with other sources will be

synthesized here.

Justifying water efficiency in settings where there is an abundance of water can be difficult.

Citizens may vociferously condemn water efficiency because it affects their quality of life. They

have to use less water which cuts down on showers, less water for washing dishes, watering the

lawn and many more constraints. Or, they may be against water metering as a water efficiency

strategy because they are now paying for how much water they consume. Or, paying for new

water efficient technology, though cost-saving for the future, may be expensive initially for

residents and thus they may be disinclined to buy the product. This makes for an interesting case.

24

2.3.1 Water Metering

Water metering has historically been a common approach for promoting water efficiency

(Brandes & Ferguson, 2003). Brandes & Ferguson conducted a survey of 20 municipalities

across Canada to determine their water management strategies. One survey question dealt with

water metering. 11 of the 20 studied cities had full or near full domestic water metering (Brandes

& Ferguson, 2003). The general finding is that cities with installed meters have lower domestic

per capita water use. Statistically, cities with pricing structures had an average water utilization

of 269 litres per person per day. Conversely, those with flat or fixed water rates use 457 litres per

capita (Brandes & Ferguson, 2003). In Canada, the percentage of metered households served by

municipal water systems increased during the 1990s, from 52 percent in 1991, to 56 percent in

1999; but jumped to 61 percent in 2001 (Marbek Resource Consultants, 2008).

A research report prepared for the Federation of Canadian Municipalities writes that ―water

metering is a cornerstone of good water management because it begins to address water quantity

as well as public awareness issues. Installing meters is a necessary condition for financial

management, demand side management, public awareness and education‖ (Marbek Resource

Consultants, 2008). Complicating the water use issue in Canada is the high cost of maintaining,

replacing or adding new water and wastewater infrastructure (Environment Canada, 2007).

These complications are largely driven by increasing residential demands for water resources.

However, several municipalities have realized that water meters can be an optimal environmental

and economic strategy. By cutting overall water consumption for the residential sector, the

amount of wastewater entering the city‘s wastewater treatment plant will be reduced. This will

help lower the costs of wastewater treatment which means savings in the long-term (PUC, 2009).

Among these 20 cities, there is variation in population size- from 6,184 in Iqaluit to 2,503,281 in

Toronto. There is also variation in how much water these cities have- some have more than

others. Population size and water availability need not be the main considerations for water

metering. Instead, Brandes & Ferguson argue that water metering is becoming an omnipresent

phenomenon in Canada. The sustainability of water is greatly advanced with water metering

because of the price signals seen by residents (Policy Research Initiative, 2004). Cities in Canada

25

that have gone the water metering route have shown that reducing urban water use does not

necessarily affect the quality of urban life (Brandes & Ferguson, 2003).

There are attitudinal barriers to metering, pricing and water conservation because residents want

the luxury of a system that provides an abundance of water. When residents have to cut down

their consumption, and start paying for how much water they consume, the overall community

interest in water conservation programs are dampened (Marbek Resource Consultants, 2008).

Hanemann (1997) has been writing persuasively about water metering and pricing since the

1990s. While water metering has gained national attention since, he makes insightful arguments.

Some of these points include matching public education with water efficiency. Hanemann

suggests that when cities introduce pricing structures to replace the conventional fixed rate

system, guidance and education to residents must follow suit. Hanemann writes that guidance

and public education do not have to be provided by the water utility, but by community

organizations so that residents see the overall community support and understand its benefits.

One of the safest ways to ensure revenue stability for the water company is to raise revenues

through a fixed monthly service charge. Hanemann suggests that this insulates revenues from

fluctuations in the quantity of water delivered, but is counterproductive from an efficiency lens

because it provides no incentive to use water sparingly (Hanemann, 1997). Thus, Hanemann

concludes that water metering is strictly for the community‘s benefit, and where the utility

company does not profit. It costs the utility for installation of the meters and its maintenance.

These costs are thus reflected in higher water rates for the residents who can cut reduce overall

usage of water and save money; thus they have more control over their water use.

Lastly, Hanemann mentions that water metering has socio-economic implications in virtually any

municipality. Low-income families of five or six people may find it hard to pay for their water as

they are now paying based on units consumed. There are solutions to this which include life-line

rates that offer low-income customers some initial quantum of usage at a reduced price

(Hanemann, 1997). However, literature on this subject will not be discussed here.

26

The literature on water metering in Peterborough is limited. However, the Peterborough Utilities

Commission has announced that they are going to install water meters in the near future to create

a fair payment system (PUC, 2009). The exact date has not been officially confirmed but the

installation process will take a number of months. They are going to install 25,000 meters; this

will cost $10 million and the costs will be built into water rates (PUC, 2009). On average, a

Peterborough resident uses 100 litres of water per day more than the average Canadian. For the

whole city, this is almost three billion litres a year or approximately the same amount of water in

Little Lake (PUC, 2009). The PUC predicts that water metering will help reduce the city‘s water

demands by 15-20 percent (PUC, 2009).

2.3.2 The Rise of Public Education

Municipal governments across Canada are beginning to understand the value of educating water

users on stewardship and conservation. However, according to Brandes et al. (2006) the public is

not always receptive to these educational initiatives. The authors explain how there is a lack of

understanding about the need for and potential benefits of water conservation and how to

effectively put them into action. The authors elaborate ―because of our relative abundance of

water, conservation is seen as a well-intentioned activity, but not a necessity‖ (Brandes et al.

2006, p. 39). In a time of where water is becoming a more precious natural resource,

municipalities are going to have to implement outreach and education programs that go beyond

information dissemination. Indeed, the authors argue that local governments have to engage and

inspire their citizens to permanently change behaviours and attitudes towards water use.

A relevant aspect of their publication is their discussion of social marketing. Such an approach

differs from conventional techniques because more time and effort is invested up-front to

understand barriers to program design and implementation (Brandes et al. 2006). They identify

four steps to the process:

1) Identify the barriers and benefits to an activity by reviewing existing research and

conducting focus groups and randomized surveys

2) Develop a strategy that uses ―tools‖ such as communications and marketing techniques

and incentives that have proven effective at changing behaviour

3) Pilot the strategy using community test groups

27

4) Evaluate the strategy once it has been implemented across a community

This sort of educational technique goes beyond brochures and information to include

opportunities for community engagement. The authors argue that social marketing can heighten

public awareness of the need to conserve to the point where other measures such as volume-

based pricing and regulation become acceptable and can be implemented. The authors also stress

that ―increasing public education can motivate the public to demand their elected officials to

address water issues as a policy priority before a crisis is reached‖ (Brandes et al. 2006, p. 40).

Empirical evidence suggests that public education around water conservation is an

environmental, economic and political must. However, Brandes et al. (2006) explain that it is

crucial for governments to provide funding and training for stakeholders like NGOs so as to

ensure that a diverse community is involved in the process. Last, if a city has the goal to balance

its water budget, it can encourage many disparate organizations and individuals to work together

to develop more sustainable behaviours and practices. The literature on public education,

provided by Brandes et al (2006) will be discussed later on in the thesis. Their analysis can be

applied to the discussion and recommendations section of the project.

2.3.3 Water Efficiency & Density

The question of density in water policy and management is more important now than it ever has

been. Density in this context refers to ―urban density‖ which is the number of people inhabiting

an urban area/total area of urban land (EPA, 2009). In essence, increasing urban density means

more compact residential and commercial development in the urban centre- more people

concentrated in the urban centre means higher access to amenities, services and commerce.

Urban centres in many municipalities are full of commercial and industrial entities. Increasing

urban density in these municipalities would mean the construction of more multi-unit housing

complexes where more people are living together on a parcel of land.

Density considerations epitomize this evolution of water management and planning as

population growth gains more attention. Brugmann (2009) reported that higher density

neighbourhoods help lower the costs of piping installation and reduces the maintenance costs for

28

actually pumping the water through it. The water department loses money on low density

neighbourhoods thereby causing high density areas to bear the burden of this financial loss

through higher water rates and tax payments. This topic is gaining research focus across the

literature- the Environmental Protection Agency collaborated with the American Water Works

Association to make the argument that denser development allows for more efficient water use

and lower infrastructural costs for water utilities (EPA, 2006). Their study based on American

cities, points to topics that are gaining increased attention from policymakers and local

governments.

To begin, characteristics of new conventional growth include large lots, low density and

dispersed development- all of which increase the cost of delivering water (EPA, 2006). Lot size

is always an important consideration for piping costs. Neighbourhood water pipes fall into two

types: transmission mains that run under or along streets and distribution mains that connect each

house or building to the transmission pipes (EPA, 2006). The EPA explains that a house on a

smaller lot is closer to the transmission main and thus requires a shorter distribution main.

Neighbourhoods with smaller lots will have more houses per block of transmission main, so the

cost of that main will be less per house than in neighbourhoods with larger lots (EPA, 2006).

Dispersed development is another density aspect. Longer water main distribution systems leak

more than shorter ones (EPA, 2006). Further, systems in low density areas must use higher

pressure to push water through longer mains- this puts more pressures on the water infrastructure

over time. Statistically, low density areas tend to have higher demand for water for lawns, thus

water pressures must be increased even more during the dry summer months (EPA, 2006).

Generally, development that is more spread out and less dense needs a longer system than

development that is more compact. Therefore, water systems in less dense developments will

leak more than systems in compact developments. These leaks are a financial burden for

drinking water systems ultimately imposing costs on rate payers (EPA, 2006).

The geographical importance of this EPA study is the discussion of smart growth. Smart growth

principles can make density a more desirable urban solution. Some relevant principles include:

strengthen development and direct it toward existing communities, foster distinctive, attractive

29

communities with a strong sense of place, create a range of housing opportunities and choices,

focus on mixed land uses and finally the most important for this research – encourage

community and stakeholder collaboration in development decisions (EPA, 2006). The main idea

behind smart growth is compact development. Concentrating residential and commercial uses

together will require substantially less piping and water infrastructure.

The American Planning Association elaborates on the importance of compact development.

Their study shows that the annual cost of providing water and sewer service to a half-acre lot in a

centrally located dense development is $283 per household. Conversely, it is $472 for the same

lot in a highly dispersed development far from the water service centre (Speir et al. 2002). They

also point out the linear relationship between increased costs and increased distance from the

water service centre: for highly compact, small lot development, each additional mile from the

water service centre adds roughly $50,000 to the 30-year cost of service provision per household

(Speir et al. 2002). By contrast, in the low density large lot development, each additional mile

adds approximately $122,000 to the cost (Speir et al. 2002).

A more local example of population growth and density is illustrated in a report that was

published in April of 2009 from the Planning Division of Peterborough. The report is titled

―Planning Peterborough to 2031: How the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe will

affect the City of Peterborough‖. This report explains Peterborough‘s spatial separation from the

Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) and its slow population growth. The Planning division

predicts that the city‘s population will grow by 14,000 people from 2006 to 2031- this is not a

significant trend considering the rapid growth rates of other cities in the GGH (City of

Peterborough, 2009).

As the report identifies, a foreseeable issue that pertains to water is housing density. The report

explains how residential housing development in Peterborough is mostly single-detached

housing. Peterborough‘s designated Greenfield areas or sites which are the areas located on the

rural-urban fringe, have been used to satisfy the local housing market‘s demand for low density

single-detached housing (City of Peterborough, 2009).

30

Another paper published by the EPA in 2006 concluded that higher density development can

better protect water resources. Using a variety of models, their study shows how higher density

can generate less stormwater runoff per house at all scales (EPA, 2006). For the same amount of

development, higher density development produces less runoff and less impervious cover than

low-density development. More stormwater runoff can carry contaminated sediment, PCB and

other pollutants into a city‘s drinking water supply. Thus, the relevance of this to the thesis is

how higher densification can help minimize risks around a safe drinking water supply only

insofar as a stormwater management plan is in place.

The EPA explains that new residential development in any community must minimize

imperviousness which in turn can help maintain an adequate supply of drinking water for the

community. They argue that the planning solution is to preserve large, continuous areas of

absorbent open space (EPA, 2006). A relevant point from the EPA publication to the

Peterborough Planning report is the problem with constructing houses on Greenfield areas.

Developing land in Greenfield areas involves wholesale grading of the site and removal of

topsoil; this can lead to severe erosion during construction and soil compaction by heavy

equipment (EPA, 2006).

The findings of the report show that density, defined by the number of homes per parcel of land,

can greatly determine the impervious surface area which predicts runoff. For instance, on sites

with 2 homes per acre, impervious surfaces attributed to streets, driveways, and parking lots can

represent upwards of 75 percent of the total site imperviousness (EPA, 2006). By contrast, 8

homes per acre decreases the total site imperviousness to 56 percent because low densities often

require more off-site transportation related impervious infrastructure, which is not included when

calculating impervious cover (EPA, 2006). The study draws another scenario attempting to

show the difference between runoff measured by acre versus runoff measured by house. They

use low-density and high-density communities to illustrate their point.

For the low-density community, one house on one acre of land has a 20 percent impervious

cover. For the high-density community, eight houses on one acre have a 65 percent impervious

cover. The authors write that the more houses per acre have the greatest amount of impervious

31

surface cover and thus generate the most runoff at the acre level. For scenario A (one house on

one acre) the runoff rate per unit is 18,700 ft3/year. For scenario C (eight houses on one acre)

each house produces 4,950 ft3/year (EPA, 2006). Therefore, each home in the higher-density

community results in less stormwater runoff because they create less impervious surface per

house, not per acre.

When density is quadrupled from one house to four, stormwater runoff increases by 1/3 per acre,

but decreases by 2/3 per house (EPA, 2006). The results from the study indicate that when runoff

is measured by the acre, limiting density does minimize water quality impacts compared to the

higher-density scenarios. However, when measured by the house, higher densities produce less

stormwater runoff (EPA, 2006). Generally, the findings from this report are useful for framing

an understanding about how urban density relates to water resources, particularly how it can help

ensure a safer drinking water supply for the community.

2.4 Research Implications

A review of the empirical research on primarily co-management and water committees reveals a

number of implications. Co-management is a theoretical concept but has practical value for

establishing a water forum or committee. As identified through social learning and governance,

even minute resource management problems or differences can be resolved through co-

management. Most importantly, it demonstrates that there may be multiple interests at play. The

literature on co-management and water committees show the value of gathering input from

people living in the city or those who use the resource. For a city like Peterborough, a simple

water policy change like water metering can affect some socio-economic groups more than

others. Or, mixed use development around significant bodies of water such as Little Lake, can

enrage local residents who do feel properly consulted. Again, it should be the role of

stakeholders to address these issues and allow for participation. The spirit of public participation

in water issues is absolutely critical.

The empirical research on committees revealed that committees can be either voluntary or

regulatory. A regulatory committee may have a more rigid government process where legislation

or agreements dictate the requirements of the council. Voluntary councils, while not enforced by

32

the law, still deal with significant water issues. If a committee comes about for this particular

case study, it may have to be in the middle of this regulatory-voluntary spectrum. Ultimately, the

creation of the council must be influenced by those that are going to be a part of it. Overall, the

empirical literature on co-management, councils and the evolution of water management raises

some of the more salient questions around geographical location and how location can be a

crucial factor.

33

Chapter 3

RESEARCH METHODS

“Method is much, technique is much, but inspiration is even more.‖ –Benjamin Cardozo

The urban water committee will be composed of seven major stakeholders. It should be noted

that ―stakeholders‖ and ―interviewees‖ will be used interchangeably in this chapter. The

stakeholders include the Peterborough Utilities Company, Peterborough Green-Up, the Otonabee

Region Conservation Authority, a city planner from Peterborough‘s Planning Division, a

representative from the City Council, the Trent-Severn Waterway and the Wastewater Treatment

Plant. Examples described in previous chapters showed how the involvement of multiple

stakeholders in urban water management is critical for planning and policy formulation. I know

that other cities have had successes with their respective committees and councils. This has

stimulated an interest to learn about how an urban water committee would fit in a city like

Peterborough. The outcome of a committee will likely have an impact on policy and planning

decisions for the city for years to come.

In this chapter, I will begin with a brief outline of the research objectives followed by a

discussion of the research design and methodological tools. The first method explains how the

current literature on cooperative management and water councils can be used as a

methodological tool. The literature has informed my knowledge of the major themes, ideas and

theories on water resources management. As such, this is a valuable method that will help clarify

how Peterborough‘s water situation is different than other cities. The second major method is

the semi-structured interviews. This method produced the most results and thus is the primary

source of data analyzed.

Case study research design is the main research framework I will be using. I have selected case

study research design because it employs a mixed methods framework. Finally, the chapter will

close with a discussion of how I intend on coding the data, interpreting it and fitting it into the

larger research project.

34

3.1 Research Objectives

The objectives of the methodology are two-fold: to determine whether an urban water committee

is appropriate for the City of Peterborough. Second, this project seeks to understand how the

various stakeholders in Peterborough are currently involved with water management and

planning, or if they wish to be more involved by playing a more active role. As such, it is my

objective to formulate qualitative research questions that are unambiguous and easily understood

by the stakeholder. Qualitative research operates from the perspective that knowledge is situated

and contextual (Mason, 2002). Therefore, my objective is to ensure that the relevant contexts are

brought into focus so that situated knowledge can be produced (Mason, 2002). Determining a

stakeholder‘s level of interest in an urban water committee will only be clear if my question

allows them to be clear.

In writing these objectives, it is critical to revisit the main research question and other questions

that I intend on answering. The main research question is: would a cooperative management

framework make planning for water resources management a more interactive and multi-

stakeholder-based process? My objective was to answer this question in a neutral and non-

biased fashion. As previous chapters have explained, I have created the criteria for what

constitutes inclusive and comprehensive planning. Generally the use of cooperative management,

specifically governance, bridging organizations/leadership and social learning, is the criterion for

an inclusive and holistic planning process. All of these themes were made clear to the

interviewees to ensure that they were aware of my criteria. The criteria I established are

important for ensuring consistency across interviews and accuracy when coding my data.

My other research question is ―how could a water committee enable the city to more holistically

manage water?‖ Note that these research questions were in the form of interview questions with

the stakeholders. It was my objective to ask the stakeholders if they felt that urban water

management and planning could be better optimized through a committee. As I will explain, my

primary interest in using a case study research framework is its focus on interviews. Because I

am doing an exploratory study, the conventional case study interview questions are the ―how‖

and ―why‖ of what the researcher is interested in. At a basic level, I am interested in how an

urban water committee would work for Peterborough and why this would benefit the city.

35

However, I do not intend to limit my questions to ―how‖ and ―why‖; I will use them as a

guideline.

Before I conducted the interviews, I wanted to ensure that my preliminary phase was organized

and ready to be executed. First of all, the stakeholders had been chosen purposefully on the basis

of the issues and themes that emerged from the literature review. Chapter 2 outlined other case

studies that use councils or committees for some aspect of urban water management and

planning. The various case studies and the literature in general, consistently identified the

relevant actors and stakeholders who play a role or have the potential to play a role in water

management and planning. From the months of October to December 2009, I contacted all of the

informants via telephone and email. I indicated to them the significance of the research and

explained why the interviewees‘ views and experiences would be valued. The interviewees were

told about all of the particulars including an estimation of how long the interview would last,

along with how I would be conducting it.

As a part of good formal communication and research ethic, the interviewees were provided with

an information letter outlining the thesis context and research implications (see Appendix C). In

addition, I provided the stakeholders with the Human Research Consent Form, a copy of my

thesis abstract and the Key Informant Interview Guide which listed all of the questions that I was

going to ask in the interview (see Appendix B). I submitted these documents because I wanted

the interviewees to be completely aware of my thesis, its relevance and their involvement in it.

Above all, these preliminary components were essential for the success of the interviews

conducted.

3.2 Research instrument and design

Mason (2002) explains how interviewing is an appropriate way to get some of what qualitative

researchers see as the ―central ontological components of social reality‖. As such, we are

interested in the lived experiences of our stakeholder and real life situations and less on

hypothetical and abstract information (Mason, 2002). The first method is a discussion of the

primary and secondary literature. This section will touch specifically on the primary methods

which include city documents, reports and policies for the contextual information. Case study

36

research will be used as the main framework because of its mixed methods approach. Through

this mixed methods approach, semi-structured interviews will be the primary qualitative research

method for the fieldwork of this study. My intention is to complete seven semi-structured

interviews with the interviewees previously mentioned.

3.2.1 Case Study Research Design

Before moving on to discussion on how I am going to answer my research question and interpret

the data, I am going to touch on case study research as the major framework for my thesis. Single

case study design directly aligns with the research framework I am using. To begin, in using the

language of case study research design, this thesis is an exploratory study with formulated

criteria on which success will be judged. The quintessential characteristic of case study research

is that it strives towards holistic understanding of systems (Yin, 1994). Understanding holistic

systems requires the researcher to examine the interrelated activities engaged in by the actors-

whoever they may be (Yin, 1994). In this instance, I was interested in who carries out public

education on water, how stakeholders will be engaged in the forthcoming residential water

metering program and the level of concern regarding commercial and residential development

around significant bodies of water- given the implications of amendment 142 to the City‘s

Official Plan.

Single-case studies are meant to be selective, focusing on one or two issues that are fundamental

to understanding the system being examined (Tellis, 1997). As a part of doing case study

research, I understood that my case study site has geographical parameters, and thus it was not

my intention to provide a generalized conclusion that an urban water committee can be

successful in any jurisdiction using the criteria that I have established.

Since my main research question asks whether cooperative management, as a theory, would

make water resource planning more interactive and multi-stakeholder based, this design format

was applicable. As such, this required careful investigation to avoid misrepresentation and

corroborate whether the theory can work for the case study selected. For the case study research,

the interview questions had to be open-ended as interviewees were asked to comment about

certain topics, events or ideas. This was particularly important for the ―how‖ part of case study

37

research design. For example, ―how could other groups/individuals in the city help your

organization achieve its goals with respect to water resources management?‖ Peterborough

Green-Up is one of the main organizers of the Peterborough Children‘s Water Festival. This

festival is an excellent way to raise awareness of the value and importance of water in the

community. I was interested to know if there is potential for other organizations/individuals to

help with this event.

In determining the interviewees‘ opinion and interest in an urban water committee, my questions

were meant to allow them to provide solutions or provide insights. Because of the flexible nature

of the interview style I had selected, I was able to have a conversation with the interviewee about

other case studies as a reference point. For example, by referencing other cities that have

committees, I was able to briefly explain what the city is doing on urban water management and

planning. This allowed the interviewee to determine what is relevant and important and what is

extraneous and insignificant. In doing this, case study research explains how the researcher must

avoid becoming dependent on a single interviewee and should endeavour to seek the same data

from other sources to verify its authenticity (Tellis, 1997).

3.2.2 Literature Review: Primary and Secondary

Having completed a literature review, I have become well-informed about the literature on

cooperative management and water management more generally. The primary literature from the

review was a useful method that enhanced my understanding of the City of Peterborough. In

addition, reviewing the literature allowed me to appropriately identify all of the relevant

stakeholders. Other cities such as Guelph, which have developed their respective councils, have

included a range of stakeholders from the community including the water utility, conservation

authority, the pubic at large, City Council and even academia. Thus, I have identified the

stakeholders for my case study based on what other jurisdictions have done. However, my case

study differed as it includes a city planner, the Trent-Severn Waterway as a federal body, a not-

for-profit organization and the city‘s Wastewater Treatment Plant.

The primary literature comprised city reports such as the growth plan, documents and power

point presentations from the Peterborough Utilities Commission, the Little Lake Master Plan

38

from the city‘s website and my notes from the Little Lake Master Plan workshop. Combined,

these sources provided me with the contextual information and details regarding the history and

evolution of water management in Peterborough, current water supply, policy and local

government. In staying focused on the main idea, an urban water committee, I attempted to use

examples of existing water councils from the literature. In doing this, the stakeholders had the

chance to learn more about the purpose of an urban water committee and how I defined it in my

research.

Reviewing the primary literature was an on-going process. It was critical that I remained

informed about policy, programming and structural changes in the city. For example, I visited

the PUC‘s website on a continuous basis to learn about any updates concerning the residential

water metering program. The secondary sources in my literature review present examples of

water metering in various North American jurisdictions. This knowledge helped me in the semi-

structured interviews by illustrating the successes and challenges to water metering in other

jurisdictions. The purpose was to highlight my criteria which sees water metering as a complex

initiative and thus requires a holistic and multi-disciplinary approach; namely public education,

open communication and designing a sensible pricing structure that is in the best interest of the

city‘s residents. In sum, going through the literature continuously helped ensure that my

knowledge of the subject matter was current.

3.2.3 Semi-Structured interviews

The purpose of using semi-structured interviews was to learn about the various perceptions

regarding urban water management and planning for the City of Peterborough (see Appendix A).

Up until the interviews, my understanding of urban water management and planning was

constructed through reading the literature and case studies. On a more practical level, the semi-

structured interviews provided more of the context to urban water management and planning as

interviewees shared their own experiences and real life situations with management, policy,

planning, education and so forth. The use of a semi-structured interview style employed an open

framework allowing for focused, conversational two-way communication. I chose to use semi-

structured interviews because this method was appropriate for qualitative and exploratory

research of this kind.

39

My idea of an urban water committee was formulated through reading the literature and

experimenting with different models. I knew that my idea of the UWC would be different from

the stakeholders. As such, it was crucial to be flexible and adaptive in constructing appropriate

questions as the interview progressed. Importantly, the conversations generated meaningful

knowledge regarding the interviewee‘s perception of an urban water committee and whether they

saw any merit in having one for the city. In this study, the use of the semi-structured interviews

allowed stakeholders to respond to open-ended questions with a discussion of the issues they felt

were most important to them, thereby minimizing the biases and preconceptions of the researcher

(Schippling, 2007). However, because I defined the urban water committee in the Key Informant

Interview Guide, interviewees might have been biased as to what the purpose of it would be.

The flexible nature of semi-structured interviews can confirm what is already known but also

provide the opportunity for further learning (Mason, 2002). Mason explains that semi-structured

interviews are conversations with a purpose. My intention here was to construct or reconstruct

knowledge as opposed to excavating it. The overarching purpose of conducting the interviews

was to solicit the stakeholder‘s opinions and insights regarding the applicability of the idea of an

urban water committee as it relates to water resources planning and management in the City of

Peterborough. As such, to begin my interview I asked the stakeholders who they currently work

with in respect to water resources management in the city. Going along on the subject of

collaboration and committee, I was able to solicit their insights regarding how other

groups/individuals in the city can work with them to achieve their objectives with respect to

water resources management.

The focus of the thesis research is on governance and cooperative management. I designed a

variety of questions that pertained to my interests in water resource management and planning.

However, certain questions directly asked stakeholders about their interest in working more

closely with others. The second question of the interview guide was ―collaborating through a

water committee can lead to the sharing of knowledge and expertise among stakeholders. Also,

depending on the structure, the public could have access to this information through an open

forum and annual report. Do you think that such collaboration would help generate more

comprehensive policy and planning around water resources management? Why or why not?‖

40

With this question, I knew that I would immediately be able to ascertain the stakeholder‘s

interest in collaboration and working toward policy and planning initiatives. If they were not

interested in collaboration, I was able to ask them why. And if they seemed interested in further

collaboration, they would be able to tell me.

I used prompts in this question such as ―public education‖, ―including the public in policy

decisions‖, and ―Guelph‘s public advisory committee‖. With case study research design at the

back of my mind, these sorts of questions were able to produce meaningful data which in most

cases directly related to the main research question.

Discussion around water metering appeared to be appropriate for the interviews. Water meters

have not been installed yet, so I did not know if there were any issues surrounding them. Thus,

the purpose of these qualitative semi-structured interview questions was to construct or re-

construct their existing knowledge and discuss water metering in depth. Specifically, I asked

―what do you see as the potential benefits/controversies around residential water metering?‖ I

asked this question using keywords that emerged from the literature including ―social equity‖,

―water conservation‖ and ―socio-economic status‖ to direct the conversation in a way that would

produce data relevant to my research.

Another critical interview question addressed drinking water supply. A simple yet meaningful

question regarding drinking water supply was ―what are the major drinking water supply issues

for the city?‖ I expected there to be variation in the responses from the interviewees on this

question. However, I also anticipated that the interviewees would speak to the financial capital

and costs of maintaining and upgrading a water system so as to ensure a steady and safe supply

of drinking water for now and for the future.

A succeeding interview question is ―does your organization play a role in drinking water supply

management in the city?‖ While some interviewees are more suited and informed to answer this

question than others, their own thoughts about the issue were useful for informing my

understanding and allowing me to make connections to the original research question. All of

41

these questions were designed to allow the stakeholders to view the merits of a committee given

the variety of issues, factors and stakeholders in the city.

The interviews would provide the opportunity to re-construct the interviewee‘s existing

knowledge on the subject and allowed them to provide their perspective on how it may work for

the community. Qualitative research requires the researcher to pay close attention to perception,

context, interaction and the situation (Mason, 2002). No matter how the interviewees perceived

the idea of an urban water committee, it was the objective of the interview question to generate a

fairer and fuller representation of their perspectives.

While each interview was meant to be consistent with the questions asked, some questions had to

be adjusted. Because I looked at urban water management as a holistic, comprehensive and

multi-stakeholder process, certain questions were asked to engage the interviewee‘s perception

on something they have not thought about critically. For instance, my particular interest in how

increased residential density can improve water management and water protection had different

responses from the utility company and city planner. All of these stakeholders have different

professional responsibilities related to water resources management and planning; thus it was

expected that their responses to the interview questions would be different.

In trying to ascertain how each stakeholder would see their involvement in an urban water

committee, I tried to make reference to Little Lake during the interview. The city has hired a

consulting group called ―the Planning Partnership‖ to carry out a Master Plan for Little Lake.

The specifics of the plan are extraneous here; however, the Planning Partnership‘s open and

participatory process is of relevance. A practical interview question I asked in relation to this was

―how is the consultant group involving you or other stakeholders?‖ Whether the stakeholders

were involved in Little Lake‘s Master plan or not, I figured that they would be able to formulate

an opinion about it based on the discussion in the interview.

A succeeding question was meant to solicit their opinion on how they would structure a similar

consultative process. I asked stakeholders ―how would your organization go about structuring a

similar consultative process around water issues in the city?‖ This question was designed to hear

42

the stakeholders‘ input on community engagement, openness and transparency and working

collaboratively with others to produce results. I figured that this question would provide

meaningful data for answering the main research question.

The focus of the Little Lake Master plan on the importance of community involvement would

give the interviewees something to think about. Discussion of community involvement in urban

water management and planning was not a biased approach; it was a part of the criteria I

developed in what constitutes an interactive and multi-stakeholder based process.

To conclude the semi-structured interviews, I brought the focus back to the applicability of an

urban water committee. As shown in other jurisdictions, a water council can make a valuable

contribution to water resources management, especially in terms of facilitating the involvement

of different stakeholders in the municipal water process. With all of the questions asked to the

interviewees, I concluded with ―how would you see an urban water committee working for the

City of Peterborough. Two subsequent questions would be ―do you think that an urban water

committee is a good idea‖, and finally ―who do you think should be involved?‖ These questions

were designed to understand the stakeholders‘ perception on collaborative management, the

sharing of information and responsibility and ultimately, their overall interest in participating in

an urban water committee.

On December 9, 2009, I conducted a mock-interview with Environmental & Resources Studies

Professor Stephen Hill. Going through the interview with Professor Hill allowed me to test the

research instrument and ultimately gave me a better understanding of the clarity and direction of

my questions. Doing the draft interview with Professor Hill also gave me a sense of how

pertinent my interviews questions were which was useful for my research.

3.3 Coding Interview Data and Answering Research Question

The aim of data collection was analytical, not statistical. The data analysis took place after I

sufficiently transcribed the data. The interview transcripts were subsequently emailed to the

interviewee for vetting and authorising. This process is known as ―participant checking‖ which

continues the involvement of the interviewees in the research process and provides them with

43

their own record of the interview (Dunn, 2005). The interview transcripts are the major primary

source of data for analysis and synthesis.

The semi-structured interviews were the main method of research. While case study research

does not formally title it ―semi structured‖ it employs a similar form of interviewing called open-

ended interviews, where stakeholders are asked to comment on certain events (Tellis, 1997).

After the interviews took place, I developed a preliminary coding system with the key themes

from the research. The themes included public education and environmental stewardship, water

supply and quality, drinking water supply, water use, water-based activities, recreation and

ecosystem health, cooperation & governance and transparency and decision-making. These were

the key themes that emerged out of the literature review, especially the themes and ideas that

came from the cooperative management framework. I put the entire interview transcripts into

one file and started to code and categorize the relevant data from the transcript based on the key

themes from the literature review. I did a couple of iterations of coding the data which provided a

comprehensive list of the key themes and allowed me to understand and draw connections and

patterns between them.

I used analytic coding for the data analysis. For example, using a matrix of categories, I was able

to uncover the major themes, key ideas and phrases from the various interviews. This forced me

to refer back to Chapters 1 and 2 in terms of the criteria I have established. Those key research

themes I identified such as ―cooperative‖, ―governance‖, ―bridging organizations and

leadership‖, ―social learning‖, ―public participation‖, ―public education‖, ―inclusive‖ and

―collaboration‖ are the main criteria I identified for what constitutes an urban water committee. I

was able to code text from the interviews that reflected one of these themes. I was not expecting

the stakeholders to use academic language like social learning, but using prompts such as

―community consultation‖ or ―participation‖ I was able to emphasize the idea that social

interaction among stakeholders and the community is important for ensuring transparency with

decision-making and policy formulation.

Through identifying the key themes, ideas and words, this allowed me to place the evidence from

the interviews into a matrix of categories showing the relationship between my original

44

framework and the data I collected. Using analytic coding revealed some important themes and

pattern in the data allowing connections to be made. My main objective was to identify trends

and interpret them. Showing a clear relationship helped me determine whether I had answered

my original research question adequately.

My main research question was challenging to directly answer. However, the main ideas

surrounding social learning, governance and bridging organizations still generated some level of

discussion in the interviews. Some of the interviewees responded both well and poorly to these

themes and ideas; some of them provided their own personal recommendations on how a

committee would function. Because I am interested in water resource planning as an interactive

and multi-stakeholder driven process, the interviewees were able to articulate other ways on how

to achieve this.

All of the themes and keywords are embedded in the urban water committee. As such, answering

the question ―would an urban water committee enable the city to more holistically manage and

plan around urban water resources‖ required me to rigorously consult the key themes and match

them with the data provided. The conversations that I had with the stakeholders allowed me to

critically evaluate whether my idea of an urban water committee was at all similar to theirs given

the themes I had come up with.

The Study’s Limitations

This study is under the assumption that water resources are deemed critical from the public eye.

Water is abundant in the city and appears to have importance recreationally, economically,

socially and environmentally. However, it is not actually known what the public perceptions are

regarding water resources because this study did not capture those perceptions. Some residents

live in closer proximity to the Otonabee River and Little Lake; some live much farther away but

remain within the city‘s boundary. Their perceptions and attitudes towards water resources might

be drastically different and thus their interest and involvement in a committee could be different.

For the city to gain a more comprehensive understanding of how the public perceives water

resources management and planning will require a more thorough investigation.

45

Studies such as Larson & Santelmann (2007) have analyzed the relationship of residents‘

proximity to water and attitudes about resource protection. Their case study featured Portland,

Oregon. Their study used GIS to map residents‘ nearness to water and how this influenced their

attitudes and perceptions on resource protection, support for government regulations and

economics measures. Both authors explain how water resource planners should go beyond

traditional economic considerations and environmental impacts to further incorporate equity

criteria into decision-making processes. This study was initially interested in social and

economic equity but the results did not provide a lot of data on this subject. However, an urban

water committee would benefit greatly from a study that investigates public perceptions and

perceived inequity with regards to water resources management and planning.

This study did not investigate the public attitudes and perceptions regarding water resources and

as such, the public may not immediately understand the committee‘s purpose. How people relate

to water as a natural resource has the ability to reveal significant findings that can help influence

policymaking, decision-making and lead to more holistic water resource management and

planning. As the study did not evaluate the public perspective, it can be considered to be a

significant limitation.

Another limitation for this study comes for the main method of research, semi-structured

interviews. The interviewees (n=7) provided a lot insight and commentary regarding the urban

water committee and water resources management/planning more generally. However, a

limitation is that I only interviewed one or two representatives from the respective groups and

organizations. These stakeholders, as representatives from their groups responded to the

interview questions based on their own knowledge and opinion. For example, the City

Councillor provided a lot of enthusiastic support for the UWC and identified a number of

approaches that can be used to make it successful. He is also commissioner with the PUC and

thus his knowledge of water resources is probably greater than other councillors. Thus,

interviewing another councillor from the City Hall might have produced different results, either

not supporting the UWC or providing completely different thoughts and perceptions regarding

water management and planning for the city.

46

Chapter 4

RESULTS

―Water is the driver of Nature.‖ - Leonardo da Vinci

This chapter will mainly feature observations of the semi-structured interview data. Semi-

structured interviews with the stakeholders from the City of Peterborough provide the primary

source of data for analysis and synthesis. The interviews were conducted in the month of January

2010 at the offices of the stakeholders and by telephone. Figure 3 provides more information

about the details of the interview. While the sample of stakeholders is relatively small (n=7), it

is diverse in terms of their various responsibilities and expertise in the city.

The stakeholders interviewed have professional responsibilities related to water resources

management in the city, and were interviewed to seek their opinions and insights regarding the

applicability of establishing an Urban Water Committee (UWC). Their insights are quite diverse

ranging from opinions on the committee, current successes and challenges around water-based

activities and recreational uses, water and the environment including stormwater management,

and the prospect of collaborating with other stakeholders through an Urban Water Committee in

Peterborough.

This chapter will describe the results of the 7 semi-structured interviews as they apply to the

main topics related to the thesis. It will begin with a brief overview of the 5 key themes from the

research. These are the key themes used to code the data obtained from the interviews. Many of

the phrases, statements, words and direct quotes from the stakeholders have been placed into

categories that best relate to the key themes from the original framework. This chapter will also

feature some of the challenges, opportunities and threats that were identified by the stakeholders.

In addition, this chapter will feature many observations that were made about the trends and level

of interest in the UWC based on the questions asked. ―Representatives‖, ―stakeholders‖ and

―interviewees‖ will be used interchangeably throughout the chapter.

47

Figure 3. Particulars about the semi-structured interviews (n=7)

Type of stakeholder Date of the

Interview

Location of Interview Key themes emerging from

interview

City Planner,

Peterborough

January 6, 2010 City Hall Public education,

transparency of costs,

density, efficiency of land

use, stormwater

management

Water Department,

Peterborough Green-Up

January 7, 2010 Peterborough Green-

Up

Public education,

environmental stewardship,

collaboration, water

metering, communication

Water Utility Services,

Peterborough Utilities

Commission

January 8, 2010 Peterborough Utilities

Commission Main

Office

Water metering, density,

stormwater management

City Councillor,

Peterborough

January 11, 2010 City Hall Cooperation, transparency,

public education, public

participation, stormwater

management

Water Control Engineer,

Trent Severn Waterway

January 13, 2010 Trent Severn

Waterway

Peterborough Office

Water quality,

communication,

collaboration, public

education, stormwater

management

Two persons interviewed:

Manager of Planning and

Regulations & the

Manager of

Environmental Services,

Otonabee Region

Conservation Authority

January 15, 2010 Otonabee Region

Conservation Authority

main office

Concurrence, public

education, environmental

stewardship, stormwater

management,

communication

Chief Environmental

Officer, Wastewater

Treatment Plant, City of

Peterborough

January 25, 2010 By telephone Communication,

collaboration, information

sharing, public education

4.1 Public Education and Environmental Stewardship

The stakeholders were unanimous in saying that public education around water resources is

important. All of the stakeholders commented on how public education around use of water

resources and conservation can be improved for the city. However, some provided more insight

48

on public education than others. The results in this section comprise water metering, current

environmental stewardship efforts, perceptions on water efficient technology and other things

related to public education.

Throughout the interview process, all of the stakeholders with the exception of the TSW

Engineer and City Planner commented on the successes of the Peterborough Children‘s Water

Festival as an excellent public education event for the city. The festival has been creating

awareness around water related issues including conservation, protection, attitudes, technology

and science for over three years. As gathered from the interviews, the festival steering committee

is composed of a various individuals and groups.

Three of the stakeholders I interviewed including Green-Up, ORCA and the PUC are part of the

steering committee and commented on the success of the festival. The representative from

Green-Up‘s Water Department mentioned how the festival is important for the community. It

gives school children in grades two to five a chance to learn about source water protection,

groundwater and why water is a precious natural resource to preserve. The PUC representative

stated that ―the best way to educate people is through the children‖. All three interviewees stated

that the festival has been very successful in Peterborough and continues to draw in children from

both the county and city.

4.1.1 Water Metering

Several comments and insights about public education were concerning the forthcoming

residential water metering program. The interviewees commented on the program and cited

issues around the lack of public education around it. The City Planner explained that:

More education is required and transparency of the costs involved should be shared by the PUC

water service provider. Similar to smart power meters, an incentive program to save water should

be implemented that would reward water conservation measures and impose the true cost on

those who use water for commercial or recreational purposes.

49

The City Planner explained how public education would be valuable in terms of explaining water

metering and addressing its benefits and costs. However, many of the interviewees reported that

the benefits and costs to the program are not fully known yet because the meters have not been

installed. For these reasons alone, there may be some concern from residents about ―paying for

water‖. The PUC representative commented on how citizens often do not understand the true

value of water because they are not paying for every unit they consume. He explained that

―People can‘t picture how much it costs. People might understand water usage better with

meters, as they start assigning a value to that water. The leaking pipe cost me $10 and not the

community.‖

Both the PUC and Green-Up commented on leaking pipes and taps. With the leakage of water in

people‘s homes, a lot of water is being lost, especially through leaking toilets. People may not be

aware of this because it is currently not reflected in their water bills. Water will keep leaking and

be wasted in perpetuity unless the leakage is fixed. The PUC representative anticipates more

customer complaints with water metering. ―95% of the time people will blame the PUC about

water rates going up and not know that costs are increasing due to their toilets and taps leaking.‖

With meters, this will help tighten the system and find the problems. The PUC representative

seemed enthusiastic that metering by itself will provide the necessary impetus for households to

make those changes to save them money. The representative did not comment very much on

public education around water metering. ORCA, however, provided a meaningful statement

about education in regards to metering:

People need to know how much water they are using because right now, you don‘t know. I could

probably reduce my water consumption but I have nothing to gauge it on; I don‘t know how

much I am using. Should I wash my dishes in my sink or use my energy star dishwasher? Which

one is more water efficient? Hard to tell when you don‘t have water meters. It is a long way to go

in terms of education, but the ability to monitor your own water use is fantastic. That will help in

terms of promoting rain barrels, people will start to see the cost savings and conservation of water

on their bill.

50

The Green-Up Water Department said that we must ―dilute the fear‖ around water conservation.

People don‘t understand water use, so they don‘t think about it. The Green-Up representative

explained how they conducted a survey on perceptions regarding water meters. Some of the

survey participants reported that they did not feel adequately consulted on the water metering

program. The municipality made the decision but did not consult the public. Some people

responded by asking why we even need water meters because there is tonnes of water in the city.

On a similar note, one of the interview questions asked if the stakeholders feel that there is

enough public knowledge in Peterborough about water metering for residents to understand its

benefits and costs. The TSW representative was direct in explaining how there is simply not

enough public knowledge about water meters for Peterborough residents.

It was noted that the senior population is an important demographic to target for public

education. The Green-Up representative mentioned how public education could be carried out at

senior activity centres where seniors have their social life. The senior population may be

financially burdened by the metering program. Some residents might see it as another cost for

their household now that they are paying for it. The PUC interviewee stated that ―it is a

balancing act between economics and fairness, and revenues reflecting actual cost. It is tough to

establish rates.‖

Establishing rates for such a diverse socio-economic population can be a challenging as it may

benefit some, but can be a financial burden for others. There was no mention of how some sort of

equity criterion would be used for establishing water rates. In fact, the Green-Up Water

Department representative was the only stakeholder that touched on equity and water metering.

This is noteworthy because evidence suggests that public education should be in place to help

address equity among other things.

The City Councillor discussed how the metering program is primarily being installed for water

conservation. Financial savings are secondary and are totally dependent on the customer.

However, the Councillor recognizes that challenges might lie ahead especially in terms of getting

the information out to the public about why the city is doing this and the real benefits for water

management. The Councillor elaborated by saying:

51

We are going to have to offer a specific case example and situations where water metering has

come about, how they did it, the challenges encountered etc. Using the print media and video in

order to convey to people how certain aspects of metering can be worked to an advantage; there is

a lot of confusion around it and until they are installed and people start using them, we will have

to give as much information as possible. With our pre-installation information packages, the

public only knows a little about it or from what others have mentioned including their worries,

concerns, and costs. The more you can do the better.

The City Councillor also mentioned how the PUC commissioners could structure a similar

consultative process whereby they invite the public and get some additional perspectives and

ideas on it. This could bring opposition to water metering but could lead to greater knowledge

being generated on how to make it fairer. This will be discussed in Chapter 5. To conclude this

segment on water metering, the interviewees provided a number of recommendations concerning

public education on water metering.

To begin, the Councillor believes that many things will take off with water meters because there

will be reports about how much people are saving and the costs of wasting water. For example,

the flat rate system benefitting larger families may be reported. New ideas will develop as a

result of paying for what you use and the rain barrel program will definitely be one of them. On

another note, the City Councillor mentioned how the Children‘s Water Festival has been

incredibly successful. However, he proposed that a forum be created to illustrate water usage for

adults in the community. The adults could benefit from this knowledge.

ORCA talked about increasing transparency with water meters so as to ensure that people

actually understand the usage. ORCA commented on how metering needs to be translated into

what it means for the public. ―If you are running your dishwater 40 times a month and doing

laundry X number of times then it is costing you some amount of money.‖ Using cubic meters or

other units to measure water use may not be easily understood by the public.

52

The PUC representative supported the idea of the city providing incentives for low-flow toilets

while meters are installed, because it will save people money. Both the City Planner and City

Councillor spoke about how the city could recognize individuals who have cut down on water

use and offer them rewards for stewardship and conservation. An incentive program to save

water should be implemented according to the City Planner - this would reward water

conservation measures and impose a true cost on those who use water profligately. Companies

and individuals could have incentives through such a reward program and recognition could have

multiplier effects which can help societal change, as others learn and understand the benefits.

The PUC provided a statement and subsequent question: ―some people will water their lawns

when they really don‘t have to. How do you get to those people who are really wasteful with

water use?‖

4.1.2 Environmental Stewardship through Public Education

The representatives from ORCA and the wastewater treatment plant had other comments on the

use of public education. With ORCA, public education around water resources is a component in

all of their programs. They visit classrooms and educate children about watersheds and

ecosystems; they are usually at special events and participate in the Green Expo. They also have

plans to do outreach and provide education around source water protection. This would involve

tours of the Peterborough water treatment plant; however, they are waiting for confirmation of

funding from the Ministry of the Environment. ORCA is also committed to ensuring that there is

ongoing education around development proposals.

Another opportunity with public education was brought up by Green-Up. Green-Up is a partner

in the Lakeland Alliance, which is offering its Shoreline Advisor Program to shoreline property

owners in the Kawarthas. ―The Alliance is supporting its partners in shoreline and freshwater

stewardship by providing a one-on-one site visit program to lake associations interested in

raising awareness amongst property owners about shared concerns for the ecosystem health of

their lake‖ (Peterborough Green-Up, 2010).

53

The interviewee talked about how this program runs only in the county. She mentioned how the

same principles could be applied to the city especially around Little Lake. The program could

provide advice to city planners about maintaining ecosystem health protection, developing good

recreational practices and in environmental stewardship. This sort of program would be too

onerous for Green-Up to take on individually. However, by collaborating with others, such a

program could advise those living near water about issues including shoreline naturalization,

pollution prevention, and best management practices for septic systems.

4.2 Water supply, quality and the natural environment

This section will be a presentation of the interview data that related to water quality, water use

and the state of water. It features information that stakeholders provided on drinking water

supply, ambient water quality policy, contaminated sediment, and ecosystem protection.

Ultimately, the data in this section provides an understanding of how the stakeholders are

currently addressing drinking water supply and water quality protection matters. This may

include stormwater management, bio-engineering of riparian buffers or trails around Little Lake.

The stakeholders contribute to water quality programs differently, with limited collaboration.

While the focus of the thesis is governance and co-management, the data covers a range of issues

that could be discussed and analyzed in a committee format. In this section, the interviewees

provided information regarding the theme, and in addition some of the challenges and

opportunities.

4.2.1 Density, Intensification and Water quality

From the beginning of this research project, I was curious about the relationship between new

urban development and its impact on water quality. In August 2009, Peterborough signed

amendment 142 into its Official Plan which meant that the city is now in compliance with the

Places to Grow Act. In the interview with the City Planner, I learned more about the implications

of urban growth on water resources including some challenges and opportunities within the

policy arena. The information on water quality and stormwater management directly relate to the

themes that were discussed in the literature review. According to the City Planner:

54

Increasing the density of new development projects improves the efficiency of land use and the

engineering of storm water management should incorporate design that would mitigate the impact

on water quality and quantity.

The planner seemed optimistic about intensification and new growth. He explained how

intensification of residential density within developed areas can ―provide the opportunity to

make more efficient use of developed land that already has an impact on water quality‖. In

addition, the planner believes that redevelopment can provide the opportunity to improve

circumstances as a part of the design of the redevelopment project. The representative from the

PUC also had a thought to share on intensification and water quality:

The more concentrated you are from the water treatment plant in, the cheaper it is on a per capita

basis to deliver the service; you don‘t want urban sprawl when you are building water mains

because it is not cost-effective. For instance, it costs $1200- $1500 per meter of water main, so it

is very impractical economically speaking if the area is spread out. However, when you intensify,

you need to look at storm runoff, and how you treat it. Also, issues such as dealing with real

degradation of the river, also the capacity of sanitary sewer systems should be addressed, to

ensure that intensification does not compound the problem.

The City Councillor also addressed intensification and water quality matters. He talked about the

importance of ensuring new development in the core that is supported by good water

infrastructure to ensure that runoff does not cause contamination of water supply. Good

wastewater management can sustain overflow. Sprawling of communities with single-family

dwellings can be expensive and not sustainable. He reiterated that ―the more we infringe on the

suburban area, the more costly it is to put in those services‖. He acknowledged that we can

reduce unit costs with intensification, and concluded by saying that the City Council will try to

ensure that density targets are in accordance with the Places to Grow Act.

ORCA brought a different perspective on intensification and water quality. One of the

representatives from ORCA said that the province is encouraging intensification which would

mean more development in the downtown core. The irony is that many of the downtowns in a

variety of municipalities including Peterborough sit on a floodplain. Development and

55

intensification should be encouraged with caution and attention to the landscape. She explained

how the downtown is already totally impervious so from a water perspective, it is sound to start

intensifying there instead of paving pervious areas that are currently green spaces. In

Peterborough, land is cheaper the farther you go from the core, thereby provided more

justification for developers to build sub-divisions. Developers are selling larger lot size homes in

the suburbs because land is cheaper and there is demand for single detached houses.

The second interviewee from ORCA said that the Province should focus on encouraging multi-

unit housing and mixed-land uses because much of the commercial development in the suburban

area is single storey. It is more about looking at, and changing those policies to help meet your

density targets- not by developing in the floodplain. The ORCA interviewee explained that:

When you want to deal with higher densification you have to deal with the infrastructure

question; there are lots of opportunities to embrace new technologies which can lead to more

sustainable types of development. The development community is a little more conservative in

Peterborough.

The wastewater treatment plant representative explained that ―increased population density in the

urban core will increase the stresses on our urban waterways but will also provide the necessary

infrastructure to control the stresses more economically viable and sustainable‖. He elaborated

by saying that it is cheaper to build and maintain 100 meters of sanitary sewer pipes than build

400 meters of sanitary sewer pipes.

4.2.2 Drinking Water Supply

In terms of drinking water supply, the Planning Division is responsible for designing zoning

regulations that affect land use development. With the prospect of more urban growth in the

built-up areas, it is critical that the city ensures a balance between urban development and open

green space. The planner discussed how ―the balance between urban development, density and

intensity in terms of permeable surface area and Major Open Space, does affect permeable

surface area, urban forestry and groundwater recharging within the urban land base, that

ultimately affects the water table‖. The planner commented on the significance of storm water

56

management plans explaining how they impact runoff that can affect surface water quality

during major storm events.

The PUC representative talked about how source water protection is becoming more of a land

use planning issue. Water quality changes will have a bigger impact from a planning perspective

because of land use considerations. From a regulatory point of view, the PUC representative said

that there should be mandatory inspections of septic systems which are one of the bigger

contributors of contamination around lakes, rivers, streams and creeks.

All of the stakeholders with the exception of the City Planner reported that there are no real

issues in drinking water supply. The taste and odour of the water is a common complaint made

by newcomers to the City. The City Planner reported that the major water supply issue for the

City would be the cost of ensuring a high quality supply of drinking water. Other than this, the

drinking water is held to high treatment and purification standards to ensure that the water is safe

when delivered to residents.

4.2.3 Water use

The responses on water use were more on the technical side. I asked stakeholders to comment on

Peterborough‘s per capita water use of 487 litres per day, which is 144 litres over the national

average. Both the PUC and the Water Department at Green-Up reported that leakage of water in

people‘s homes is a problem, resulting in a lot of wasted water. Presently, the leakage of water

does not directly cost the resident any money; however, it is reflected in their water bills.

The PUC talked about how current water consumption in the City of Peterborough is not a major

concern because consumption has been decreasing since the late 1980s. The PUC indicated that

we need people to think more about water resources and not take it for granted. As previously

stated, it is expected that the meters will reduce water demand by 10-15 percent thereby reducing

pressure on the city‘s wastewater treatment plant. The PUC mentioned how new houses have

newer and better water technology like low-flow toilets, efficient shower heads and washing

machines. ―We will see lower water consumption through technology and with rising water costs

it will force industry to be more resourceful and innovative.‖

57

The TSW representative explained that high per capita use of water is not a major concern. He

remarked that the water usage of such magnitude (487 litres per person per day) is insignificant

to the volume of water available for the city. The city pumps out about two cubic meters of water

per second. There is a lot of water in the city so high per capita usage of water is not really

critical. Finally, the amount of water consumed by the city of 80,000 people is not sufficient

enough to justify water conservation measures. From a technical standpoint, the PUC and the

TSW viewed current water usage patterns as sustainable, and not a concern. The TSW elaborated

by saying that the water system does not have the capacity to pump and treat water at an efficient

rate, thus the PUC had imposed bans and restrictions to limit water use in the summer months. If

pumping and treatment capacity increased, then residents would be able to use more water and

not be subjected to bans and restrictions on water use.

The comments on water use from the TSW representative were intriguing. When it came to the

question of ambient water quality, the TSW indicated that water quality will be downgraded over

the next 20 years due to increased phosphorus and nitrogen contents in the water supply. From a

suspended sediment point of view, water quality has got better. The zebra mussels have been

problematic but have also helped to clean the water. The zebra mussel population has reached a

plateau, so they do not pose any further perceived risks. Overall, water quality will go down

according to the TSW representative. The interviewee commented that his outlook on water

quality is purely based on speculation:

Typically, as populations grow, the water quality trend will degrade. I'm not sure how city policy

can be changed in order to prevent this because the majority of contributing factors will be due to

the watershed upstream, beyond the jurisdiction of the city.

4.2.4 Progress, Challenges and Opportunities

The interview with the representative from the wastewater treatment plant revealed a significant

issue of concern with regards to water quality. The representative explained:

In wastewater treatment, the challenges relate to a number contaminants that have been called

emerging contaminants of concern. Things such as pharmaceuticals, personal care products

58

(deodorant, soap, shampoo, perfume etc.) and illicit drugs are starting to be studied. The fate and

impact of these products on wastewater treatment plants and urban waterways is still to be

determined.

The stakeholder explained how a committee can be a vehicle to educate the public about proper

care and use of these products. For instance, the committee could provide education about ways

to minimize the disposal of these products into the sewer system. ORCA also noted that there are

emerging concerns like pharmaceuticals contaminants in the water. The water treatment and

wastewater plants do not have the ability to study or treat these contaminants because they are

not designed to; they are designed mainly to remove sediments and bacteria.

There were many positive responses to questions about the Peterborough flood of 2004. The

city‘s approach to creek management and stormwater management has been more

comprehensive since the flood. As one of the ORCA representatives said, ―We have the luxury

of applied knowledge; some of our floodplain understanding is not theoretical‖. The Flood

Damage Reduction Study was a comprehensive study that provided the city with a greater

understanding of the troubled spots and flood prone areas. It involved a series of studies on all of

the major water courses in the city and documented where the flooding occurred and provided

recommendations about how to improve drainage or infrastructure to avoid some of the flood

damages in the future. The Councillor explains further:

The City has significantly enhanced its sewer system with complete photographing of every

single underground pipe to help detect leaks and identify the weaker sections of the pipes. A re-

lining program has been introduced to protect the pipes- tonnes of money have been spent on

infrastructural improvements; we are building a system so it can be a sustainable one and prevent

disasters like this from happening in the future.

From a design perspective, the City Planner thought that bio-engineered riparian zones should be

part of the design of municipal owned property wherever possible, as well as private property,

whenever subject to site plan approval. The planner talked about the enormous potential that

design could have when it comes to stormwater management and protecting water quality:

59

The planning department currently encourages LEED construction standards that often

incorporate rainwater harvesting and water conservation design measures for domestic and

irrigation purposes.

The planning division will attempt to develop new policies that would advance such measures.

The planner elaborated and discussed how Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design

(LEED) can become a policy in the Official Plan so any new development in the urban growth

centre or built area is legally obliged to incorporate LEED design into the construction of the

building. Any new municipal buildings must have LEED design to set an example such as a

firefighter station. LEED can help with conserving water, recycling water and harvesting water.

―All these things we can do, but they are expensive‖. The planner said optimistically that the

City and developers need to spend more money on advanced engineering techniques like

detention facilities, green roofs, storage tanks, rainwater harvesting systems and so on. These

policies could be in place to consider all of these alternatives- however, presently there is

virtually nothing.

4.3 Water-based activities, recreation and ecosystem health

This section is the smallest in terms of data presentation. For example, there are a couple of

questions in the interview guide that directly relate to recreational uses of water. To reiterate,

recreational uses around water and water-based activities for Peterborough include Millennium

Park, Little Lake‘s beaches, parks trails and Marina, motor boat events and other activities on the

lake. Millennium Park and the trails can influence public perceptions and attitudes toward water

resource protection and value of the resource. Not all of the stakeholders commented on

recreation and water-based activities in great detail. However, the data provide a sense of how

recreational activities around water are presently being managed in the city. It features

information about public access to recreational uses and maintenance of the health of the

ecosystem.

The City Planner explained that in order to better understand ecosystem health of Little Lake, it

would be necessary to conduct a comprehensive study of the system. Such a study would inform

the city about the state of the ecosystem and forming an understanding of the balance between

60

development and the carrying capacity of the Little Lake segment of the waterway. This could

lead to an understanding of the current state of land use, development activities around the lake,

the quality of the water, the flushing rate, and finally the residual carrying capacity of the

waterway in order to discover what and how development, if any, may be accommodated on the

waterway without detriment to the quality of the water resource. The study should recommend

remedial measures required in mitigating negative impacts of existing development, new

development or whether further development be permitted until these measures are implemented.

The City Councillor discussed some of the challenges and opportunities regarding water-based

activities and recreational uses. He talked about how it is critical to look after the Trent Severn

which is a recreational waterway. The City is presently encouraging tourism and recreational

activities without too many restrictions in place. For example, there are very few restrictions in

the system regarding motor boat usage and water skiing. He explained how the number of docks

at the Marina dictates how many boats Little Lake can accommodate in the system. It runs as a

tourist facility primarily encouraging people to use the waterway; availability of dock space and

gasoline prices are the only controls at any given time.

The City Planner and the City Councillor spoke in detail about the importance of stormwater

management plans. The planner mentioned how Coliform bacteria have been found at the

beaches at Little Lake in the past. Stormwater runoff has carried these bacteria into the water

making the beach less appealing for recreational use. The City Councillor talked about how

stormwater management issues cause contamination of water. If stormwater management

systems are lacking in the first place, then contamination will flow into the water which would

deter people from using recreational and water-based activities. Deterring runoff through sound

stormwater management plans would among others things, provide citizens with more of an

inclination to use the beaches around Little Lake for recreation and enjoyment.

The Councillor recognized the valuable role of Little Lake and its ability to provide recreational

amenities. Given its importance to the City, he said:

61

We should analyze recreational uses and look at what other cities have done in terms of best

practices. If there are examples of polluted systems, how are they dealing with unpolluting them?

What restrictions are applicable? Recreationally, we want people to use the system and want the

system to be available, for as long as possible. For instance, we use it for recreational skating in

the winter time, boating in the summer time, and swimming in areas which we supervise and

maintain.

The TSW representative reported that there are no real concerns regarding recreation. However,

the interviewee noted that bigger problems have been associated with the commercialization and

industrial uses around water resources that have posed threats to ecosystem health. Recreational

uses have not posed any real issues.

4.4 Cooperation and Governance

Governance through co-management is a dynamic distribution of power, learning and benefits

that are accrued from the involvement of stakeholders. Governance is a central component of

cooperative management as seeking cooperation requires input, and diversity of opinions and

thought. This section constitutes a major part of the data collection as stakeholders shared their

opinions and insights that would relate to serving on a committee. As mentioned in Chapter 2,

different structures are used to facilitate the co-management process including committees,

boards and working groups.

The City Planner talked about how there used to be a Natural Areas Advisory Committee

(NAAC) in the city. While its mandate was different than a proposed UWC, it would ultimately

make recommendations in planning reports about environmental stewardship, conservation of

natural areas and the maintenance of biological diversity. Environmental studies of development

sites were usually put forward by the committee.

Members of the committee would be consulted by planners and councillors for their input

regarding development and natural areas. The proposition of a UWC reminded the planner of the

natural areas advisory committee. The NAAC eventually became non-operational because it

impeded development in the city. The planner commented on the lack of political will at the

62

time. However, the planner mentioned that public participation and citizen engagement will

become increasingly popular in policy and management decisions within local government.

On the question of the Peterborough flood of 2004, the City Planner commented that on

reflection, a UWC may have been useful in the aftermath of the flood. It may have been useful in

citing the problems that could have been dealt with through instituting management measures.

He said a committee could be:

A forum for discussion and review of any development proposal that may be proposed adjacent to

waterways or that may have an impact on surface water runoff. The committee would bring

forward issues raised by stakeholders and ensure that the issues are advanced in the form of a

recommendation provided through the Staff Report to Council for consideration. It is a good idea

and would help contribute toward proper planning and design. I also see how it may slow down

the development process and may not be embraced by politicians representing the interests of the

development community.

The Water Department of Green-Up discussed how a committee could be useful because it could

focus the needs of the city on the so-called burning issues. For instance, through public education

issues about water use and water consumption could be discussed. In addition, the interviewee

explained how issues would have to be focussed and engage people through discussion. ―It could

be a collaboration of ideas from different levels. You have the engineering, the science people

and people who deal with the public. Bringing all of the ideas together would be great‖. The

interviewee indicated that if a committee was to be established, it should include the PUC,

Green-Up, ORCA, the TSW, a city planner, university and college representatives. She

concluded by saying that the water department would like to get their hands dirtier but not

having the required time and resources makes the process challenging.

The representative from the PUC seemed less enthusiastic about the idea. Regarding the flood

issue, he remarked that a committee would not have made a difference at all because all of the

issues are technical: ―you can‘t have two bosses‖. Above all, the representative said that there are

no burning issues that would help justify the need for a committee. The PUC has tried to engage

people on things like this before but has got very little feedback. It would be tough to implement

63

because there are too many stakeholders. The PUC representative thought it was a good idea, but

mentioned how people are so busy now; they only go after the big burning issues. However, the

PUC representative did mention that collaboration with the wastewater treatment plant will be

needed, especially with the residential water metering program. The PUC representative said that

wastewater staff can work more closely with them.

The PUC elaborated by discussing how the public does not see a lot of issues; so it can be done

but is hard to do. He believed that people should stick to their own business. He said that if a

committee were to come about, we would need involvement from a greater number of large

water users. Special interest groups can be dangerous because they are interested in promoting

their own cause. It appeared that the PUC representative had little interest in collaborating with

others in a committee setting. He seemed more enthusiastic about the source water protection

committee because it is ―diverse but really focused and why it is successful‖.

Speaking with the City Councillor provided a real municipal and political perspective on the

topic. He identified challenges to a committee but also referred to opportunities. For the question

regarding the flood, he thought that a committee would have brought an understanding of

identifying the troubled areas in the city. ―This would be an opportunity for people (stakeholders

in Peterborough) to work together and find solutions. They could work in a collaborative fashion

outlining risk areas and planning for more open space to allow water to adequately drain and

minimize the prospect of flooding again. Mainly though, it would identify where the trouble

spots are in the city.‖

The Councillor thought it would be a good idea to have something put together to make

recommendations to the planning department on the basis of a variety of information coming

forward from naturalists, fisheries, and land conservation people. ―An urban water committee

would be a consolidated effort allowing stakeholders to join together and provide

recommendations that are practical and implementable.‖

The Councillor said that we need to break down the silos that exist right now; there is a planning

department, the PUC, and wastewater management. ―You need a break down of these silos so

64

people come together and share ideas‖. The committee would require a chair and report to the

Council. It should be undertaken mainly by professionals working in the area who are quite

competent; they would benefit from having the chance to bring all of the ideas together, perhaps

four times a year, to analyze issues and present them from their perspectives and to have them

commented by the different agencies.

The Councillor also identified fundamental challenges to the formation of a committee:

―There is not a recognized problem in Peterborough right now, and until you have a recognized

problem, you are not likely to act on it unfortunately. The representative from the Trent Severn

Waterway provided insight on the committee. While the TSW is under federal jurisdiction, the

waterway runs through the City of Peterborough and thus their involvement in an urban water

committee would be vital. The TSW interviewee shared his perspective on a committee:

It would help as long as committee members are well informed and equipped with the expertise

and know-how. Stakeholders would have to be aware of the situation and the risks involved. It

would help give the public a voice as well.

He also shared his opinion on the source water protection committee. He thinks it is not very

effective because many stakeholders who attend the meetings are not well informed about the

issues related to water quality and drinking water supply. Consequently, the interviewee stressed

that those involved in an urban water committee must be knowledgeable. Overall, the

interviewee thinks a UWC would be beneficial; ―it is a wise thing to have. The TSW is and

would be worried about anything related to Little Lake (water levels, contamination) and the

dam at Trent University. The TSW would not be overly involved but could provide technical

advice and input. It would help explain management and flow issues with the Otonabee River

and what is happening with it.‖

ORCA, like the PUC, said that the source water protection committee is already in place. Reports

are produced and a bunch of other committees branch out of the SPC. It appeared that ORCA

had interest but cautioned about overlapping functions with the SPC. The other representative

form ORCA talked about how a committee could provide agreement on an issue:

65

It is harder to ignore when you have ―concurrence‖, everyone is coming at the same issue from

different perspectives, and the committee could provide opportunity to hear that perspective, and

then make a recommendation and decision- the opportunity does not always happen.

Both representatives explained how the committee would have to include stakeholders other than

just the PUC, Green-Up and ORCA. Other stakeholders should include MOE, Peterborough

Health Unit, DFO, TSW, and Trent University‘s water quality centre, so that if issues come up,

they would have the ability to bring the science. Also, they mentioned that it would be a good

idea to bring in the Social Planning Council for social equity purposes.

The representative from the wastewater treatment plant identified more opportunities than

challenges in regards to a committee:

With a proper mandate and focus, the committee you describe could address areas where gaps

exist. The committee could also serve as an information clearinghouse and provide liaison for the

stakeholders. It gives you a chance to connect with someone; if an issue arises down the road, you

would know who to connect with- making one phone call instead of 10 phone calls.

On the question of the flood, the interviewee said that if a committee was established, it may

have helped. Measuring in-takes, installing upgrades and monitoring changes in the system

would have helped to mitigate some of the problems we had in the flood. ―Get better input from

the public regularly. How did the people feel about the provisions that were made for them?‖ It

could be information flowing on both sides. The interviewee spoke as if he works independently

in the city and has not taken the time to work with other individuals and organizations in

Peterborough.

Other things raised by the interviewee were mostly about increasing the communication amongst

stakeholders. He mentioned how the committee could have influence and input in regard to land

uses and the planning department. It could be a point of contact to direct people; people who

have information can share it with the committee. Once established, there will be a profile which

gives people an idea of what they do and what the specific stakeholders do such as ORCA,

66

Wastewater, City Planning, PUC, Parks and Recreation. The interviewee‘s response was similar

to ORCA, when he talked about involving the MOE, DFO, TSW and Quaker Oats from an

industry perspective.

4.5 Transparency and Decision-Making

Transparency and decision-making is the final key theme from the research. Having

collaboration from the stakeholders is a crucial first step; influencing decision-making in local

government is the second crucial step. In the interviews, four of the stakeholders commented on

the theme of transparency and decision-making. The City Councillor and the Green-Up Water

Department commented on transparency and increasing communication. The City Planner also

shared insights on transparency within the municipal decision-making process. Third, ORCA

explained how the committee could be a policy coordination tool. Examples of each are provided

in this section. Transparency and decision-making is a theme that emerged from the literature

review. In particular, the literature on cooperative management and the theoretical underpinnings

of councils/committees revealed important information regarding structure, transparency of

stakeholders and comprehensive decision-making which would account for the interests of the

stakeholders.

The City Planner worked closely with the natural areas advisory committee. His experience with

the committee and working with other stakeholders proved to be useful for my understanding of

how committees work:

A committee could have a positive effect by ensuring transparency of decisions regarding water

management. It may be a benefit in emphasizing the requirement for sound decisions regarding

water management and land use in proximity to water, where human health welfare and the

cumulative effects on water quality and quantity is involved.

In the interview with the planner, he seemed enthusiastic about the committee insofar as the

political will was in place. His optimism for the committee seemed contingent upon commitment

by the City Council and local government. He explained how the private sector and developers

have a strong voice and influence in the decision-making process. If the City Council endorses

such a committee, it could force transparency on the private sector and developers and provide

67

more clarity on issues. Without endorsement from the Council, the political will is not there, and

thus the UWC would be nullified like the natural areas advisory committee.

The representative from the Green-Up Water Department also elaborated on the importance of

transparency and communication:

Hearing the communication and knowing what is happening in the community. Green-Up is

sometimes last to know. Sit down with everybody and hearing what is going on; hearing right

from the horse‘s mouth is important. Getting a bigger picture of what is going on from different

levels and stakeholders helps in understanding the priorities. More open forums would be great.

Having some way where the public can know more about what is going on.

She explained how members of the community may not read an annual report on water resources

because annual reports are boring. She concluded by saying that the public need to have a better

idea of what the city is doing.

The City Councillor talked about how the committee can be a collection of a group of people

working together who can give you an idea of what would happen if you developed, but did not

follow the natural ways in which water is purified. The Councillor explained that it would have

to be properly aligned with the mandates of the PUC, Green-Up and ORCA. The committee

would bring forward the issues that need to be investigated. ―The city does not have awareness

over all of the water management issues‖.

The City Councillor also commented on the dynamics of decision-making and a committee. The

Councillor suggested that the UWC have a similar structure and function to the natural areas

advisory committee. Community members would be appointed by the City Council which could

bring forward any issues concerning water management that surround the city and development

that encroaches on environmentally sensitive sites.

ORCA said that there is always more room for communication and integration because you have

so many people involved in water management. So to have the opportunity for ongoing dialogue

68

is always good. Specifically on transparency and decision-making, one of the representatives

discussed how an urban water committee can be a policy coordination tool identifying various

tasks that have to be done with respect to water resources management. ORCA reported that

there is a transparency issue over things like where to buy a property and zoning by-laws. This

information should be readily accessible to the public. There are 9 water courses in the city, with

most water courses falling under public ownership. Does the public know this? The water

committee could work towards easements. When you are developing in an area with a water

course it is important to communicate that it might be public land. It is vitally important that

people understand that, even though it is public, they are still building on it.

ORCA further commented that ―an urban water committee could provide an educational

opportunity‖. A committee can create a unified voice; we all have our concerns but we discuss

them to find common ground for resolution. It is not uncommon for developers or other

agencies to pay attention and listen to a unified voice.

4.6 Other information that emerged from the interviews but was not captured in the

categories

This is a brief section with information that emerged from the interviews but was not captured in

the categories that I pre-selected for coding.

ORCA commented on the improvements to recreational uses in the city. Last year, the Holiday

Inn had a reconstruction of its waterfront with the goal of providing a permanent linkage from

downtown to Del Crary Park. The city has made enhancements to Beavermead Park and Roger‘s

Cove beaches.

In the interview with the TSW, it seemed appropriate to ask about how the lowering of water

levels on the Otonabee River affect ecosystem health and native species. The TSW is a

recreational waterway and controlling water levels might have an impact on ecosystem health.

The interviewee explained:

69

While lowering levels is likely not the best condition for ecosystem health, it is an operational

reality of the Trent-Severn Waterway. Most species have the capability to mobilize into deeper

pools, i.e. fish, turtles, frogs etc.. I suspect that those without this ability are at the greatest risk.

ORCA has also been involved with shoreline construction projects at the Riverview Park and

Zoo. In the Fall, they did a project and allowed the public to notice the difference. In the spring,

there will be interpretive signage explaining why it is better now, and ―taking the opportunity to

provide education because people don‘t always make that link". Mainly though, ORCA has been

trying to educate people about the best practices that they can implement on their property,

which are cost-effective and have a good impact on water quality.

One of the representatives talked about how enthusiasm for development can be a problem if

developers are not getting the correct messages about what is actually feasible. Some developers

will start to spend money on studies; they start investing in impact assessments and they come to

ORCA at the end, and ORCA has to tell them that they cannot develop. It is very important to

ORCA that people get an accurate portrayal of what they can and cannot do. ―Some people have

a conviction that they can overcome the rules, they are convinced that rules are there to be

broken.‖ So there is room from the development community to move towards low-impact

development and stormwater management. ORCA said that if you can deal with water quality on

site then that is a perfect situation. This would include filtering of sediments so that the runoff is

not as filthy.

70

Chapter 5

DISCUSSION

―Humans are a social species, and our greatest achievements are all collaborative.‖

–Edward Glaeser

In its broadest description, this study aims to address the applicability of an urban water

committee as it relates to water resources planning and management for the City of

Peterborough. The results show a wide range of perceptions regarding the urban water

committee including thoughts about what it should entail and possible problems. The results also

include what the stakeholders reported as significant water issues for the city that would help

justify the committee‘s purpose. Finding a plausible governance structure for the committee can

prove to be a challenge given the diverse interests of the stakeholders. Nonetheless, the results

demonstrate that there is an opportunity for these stakeholders to work more closely in a forum.

While Peterborough does not have any major issues in regards to water management, the

creation of a committee would prove to be a valuable contribution to the city‘s governance

process on water resources.

This study sheds light on the key themes that were described in the results section including

governance, cooperation, public education, water use, drinking water supply, water-based

activities/recreation, transparency and decision-making. An urban water committee would

require the combination of these themes with governance being the overarching method, so as to

ensure that influence and responsibilities are equally distributed amongst the stakeholders on a

local level.

The results of this study are based primarily on the semi-structured interviews with the research

participants. The relatively small sample limits the opportunity to generalize the results, but the

data from this diverse group of stakeholders provides salient perceptions and some understanding

of the importance of an urban water committee for Peterborough. In particular, these interviews

shed light on the role of public education around such topics as water metering. The interviews

also provide information about current gaps in communication and the need for more

collaboration among stakeholders. These gaps include limited information available to the

public, or in some cases, residents being misinformed about these issues. Finally, the interviews

71

reveal important perceptions regarding the transparency of water management and planning and

the current state of decision-making within local government.

5.1 An Opportunity for Enhancing Public Education on Water Resources

All the stakeholders recognized the value and importance of public education. Public education

on water resources can lead to more structured and organized water planning for the future.

Indeed, any changes in water management or policy around water quality, drinking water supply

or new storm water management practices, must be communicated to the public so they are

aware of what is being done on the state of their water resources. Public education is principally

about the sharing of information with the city‘s residents, industries and commercial units. If

there is a decision being made in Council about topics such as a stormwater management plan or

about new residential/commercial development near a body of water, the public has the right to

know. Moreover, the public should be adequately informed about the decision-making process

including factors and perspectives on the decision, and ultimately how it may affect them.

The major findings on public education came from considering the deployment of water

metering and water efficient technology- both of which have ample room for improvement in

terms of communicating their benefits to the public. The City Councillor talked about the merits

in looking at what other cities have done for public education on water meters. For instance, how

they did it and the challenges encountered. As learned from the interviews, the PUC and Green-

Up are working together on public education for meters but this process has been moving slowly.

Holistic efforts for public education will require print media, open houses and information

sessions that provide all of the necessary information for Peterborough residents. To minimize

conflict and encourage cooperation on such a program will require collaboration from

stakeholders to introduce the public education initiatives and make the program‘s

implementation successful for the city. As the representative from the Green-Up Water

department said, ―diluting the fear‖ around water metering and water conservation is absolutely

critical. As reported in the literature review, justifying water efficiency in settings where there is

an abundance of water can be difficult. Citizens may vociferously condemn water efficiency and

conservation measures because it affects their quality of life.

72

There may not be one optimal way of diluting the fear around water conservation, but wide scale

public education from various stakeholders has the potential to reassure residents about the

benefits and advantages of adopting the water metering path. Stakeholders such as the Green-Up

Water Department, the City Planner and ORCA stated that water is simply taken for granted in

this city. Water metering will provide a water efficiency solution because overall water demand

will drop. However, maximizing water efficiency in a city or a community can only happen if the

local government truly knows the interests of the residents. At this point, it is hard to ascertain if

the city knows what those interests are.

Stakeholders such as the PUC, Green-Up and the City Councillor reported that there are

opportunities to embrace water efficient technology when water metering comes about. The city

could provide financial incentives for households who wish to buy low-flush toilets (6 litres) or

low-flow showerheads. Rain barrels for example, are sold at Green-Up at a discounted price and

many residents are unaware of this according to the Green-Up Water Department. The PUC

representative envisions that rain barrels will be more popular with the introduction of the water

metering program. Thus, the promotion of water efficiency and conservation will be more

justified in an era of water metering, but without public education, financial incentives and

information sharing, the city is effectively creating more room for contestation and conflict.

The PUC representative said ―some people will water their lawns when they really don‘t have to.

How do you get to those people who are really wasteful with water use?‖ This statement is an

interesting finding considering the limited information the PUC shared on public education in

regards to metering. With the introduction of water restrictions in the late 1980s, water

consumption in aggregate has dropped in Peterborough. These restrictions have helped but have

not focused on public education and articulating why water conservation is actually important.

Water restrictions are not completely successful without promotion and publicity (Hanemann,

1997). Thus, the answer to the PUC representative‘s question lies more on the public education

front than simply resorting to municipal by-laws which restrict excess water use.

Zetland (2010) says that cities need to use a price mechanism to really induce residents to change

behaviour and use less water. Getting people to use less water for their lawns or car washes

73

requires a pricing system. Command and control mechanisms such as restrictions are not very

effective because they require a lot of enforcement, and enforcement does not always happen

(Zetland, 2010).

These are the sorts of questions and tasks that a committee could work towards in terms of

strategies, information sharing and incentives for people. As identified by the representative from

the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), a committee could be an information clearinghouse

for stakeholders, providing them with the opportunity to discuss approaches that can be used for

public education in the community. A committee would have the capacity to gather the resources

and information that could be shared with the public. Multiple sources of expertise at the table

would provide a variety of information; this information could be produced by the committee for

the community. Overall, through public education, the committee would be responsible for

delivering those important messages so as to ensure communication to the public, minimizing

uncertainty and promoting the benefits of programs such as water metering.

Emerging contaminants in water supply is another major finding from the results. Both ORCA

and the WWTP representatives commented on this as well. Those emerging contaminants of

concern include pharmaceuticals, personal care products and illicit drugs. The WWTP

interviewee said ―The fate and impact of these products on wastewater treatment plants and

urban waterways is still to be determined‖. Work by Metcalfe et al. (2000) has explained how

pharmaceutical drugs are excreted and/or discarded into urban waste waters and eventually make

their way into WWTPs, where there is potential for these chemicals to be discharged in effluents

or to be spread on agricultural land for soil amendment.

The main source of these contaminants is from human excretion; however, drugs are sometimes

directly flushed into sewage systems from homes or health care facilities (Metcalfe et al., 2000).

What is problematic is that the drugs and their metabolites enter WWTPs, where there can be

microbial metabolism, and the drugs and metabolites are carried with WWTP effluents into

surface water. If these surface waters are used as a source of potable water, there is potential for

these compounds to contaminate drinking water (Metcalfe et al., 2000).

74

Trent University has a research lab called the Water Quality Centre. Professor Chris Metcalfe

has pioneered work in the analysis of pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) in the

environment. As a part of bridging academia with real life public education, it would be

advantageous to engage the Water Quality Centre as a stakeholder in the UWC. A representative

from the centre could attend the meetings of the UWC and provide updates on PPCP research.

The UWC could use this opportunity to put together a list of pharmaceutical and personal care

products that have negative effects on urban waterways. This list can take the form of a pamphlet

or guide which can be distributed to the public.

The WWTP representative explained how a committee can be a vehicle to educate the public

about care and use of these products. For instance, the committee could provide education about

ways to minimize the entrance of these products into the sewer system. This sentiment has a lot

of value in terms of how education can be used to inform and equip the community with the

knowledge they need to deal with these dangers. The amount of uncertainty concerning these

contaminants will require constant communication between the WWTP and the city. However,

as shown in the results, the WWTP operates autonomously in the city; the committee would

provide an opportunity for them to be engaged.

5.2 The Need for Water Governance

Good governance is central to the co-management process. As indicated, different structures are

used to facilitate co-management including committees or working groups. As reported in the

literature review, trends in public policy and water management/planning are leading to

increased interest and emphasis on collaboration. The major findings from the results suggest

that there is an opportunity to use a committee in order to bring about agreement, collaboration

and public input for water resources management. One of the major findings on governance was

an issue reported by the City Councillor. The City Councillor talked about the current silos that

exist in the city that isolate the stakeholders from working more closely together. The Councillor

emphasized the need to break down those silos so people can come together and share ideas.

Stakeholders would benefit from the sharing of ideas and information and could also analyze

issues and present them from their perspectives to stimulate further discussion and debate in a

committee setting.

75

Governance through co-management is a dynamic distribution of power; it encourages learning

and generates benefits from the involvement of stakeholders. As such, the Councillor‘s comment

about breaking down those silos is crucial for allowing the process to take place. This major

finding also speaks to co-management more generally; with the breaking down of the existing

silos, there is the opportunity to improve the efficiency of communication and learning between

these stakeholders. Indeed, co-management can allow City Council to rethink the existing

boundaries (or silos) among people, institutions and environments and adopt novel governance

arrangements to foster sustainability. Co-management could break down the functional

boundaries traditionally associated with particular actors and agencies; this could lead a renewed

focus on pluralistic knowledge creation, shared learned and institutional flexibility (Plummer &

Armitage, 2005). This process would undoubtedly lead to a better understanding of the issues

and allow for more robust decision-making.

ORCA said ―there is a lot of value in having those opportunities for people to get together for

looking at water in the big picture‖, this would also include perspectives from the public. Indeed,

the literature on co-management confirms this. Increasing the amount of involvement of resource

users, local people and the general public coincides with the spirit of sustainable development

and Agenda 21 as well as community-based natural resource management.

ORCA‘s comment about concurrence is another major finding from the results. On the note of

governance and the committee, ORCA explained how it is harder to ignore something when you

have concurrence. ―Everyone is coming at the same issue from different perspectives, and the

committee could provide the opportunity to hear that perspective, and then make a

recommendation and decision‖. This comment speaks to both governance and social learning

which emerged from the literature. For example, if a committee was endorsed by local

government, it would allow for an environment that is conducive to collaborative learning and

continuously building on new knowledge.

Building capacities within a committee is a diverse process; stakeholders would learn to work

together, they would have to build trust, be aware of each other‘s different goals and perspectives

and understand the complexity of the management system. If there is a mutual problem brought

76

to the table, stakeholders must agree to take on tasks in which they will be most effective. This

could eventually lead to agreement on the issue reported which can provide more of an impetus

for municipal action and subsequent development of policies. When there is more agreement on

the issues, it is more likely to be supported by the Council.

Another example from the literature review can be related to ORCA‘s comment on concurrence.

Social learning, as a co-management tactic explains how ―water management is not in search for

the optimal solution to one problem but an ongoing learning and negotiation process, where a

high priority is given to questions of communication, perspective sharing, and the development

of adaptive group strategies for problem-solving‖ (Berkes, 2009, p. 1696). Collectively, these

tasks can bring about agreement on complex issues because ultimately, the issue is being more

comprehensively analysed.

An example of ―concurrence‖ can be supported by the City Planner‘s Leadership in Energy and

Environmental Design (LEED) proposition. The City Planner talked about the possibility to

better embrace LEED standards in new development. In fact, he went on further to suggest that

LEED standards can become a policy in Peterborough‘s Official Plan; this would stipulate that

any new development in the urban growth centre or built area is legally obliged to incorporate

LEED into the construction of the building.

LEED can help with conserving, recycling and harvesting water. The planner said that the city

and developers need to spend more money on advanced engineering techniques like detention

facilities, green roofs, storage tanks and rainwater harvesting systems. He mentioned that the

planning division will ―attempt to develop new policies that would advance such measures‖ but

recognized the challenges in doing so. For example, it may not be supported politically or from

the developer‘s community. He reported that these things are doable but can be expensive.

Many of the stakeholders with the exception of Green-Up and the TSW spoke to the importance

of stormwater management plans which are a component of LEED standards. There appears to

be support from the five stakeholders for better stormwater management to protect water quality.

With agreement on these techniques and standards, the possibility of actually becoming policy in

77

Peterborough‘s Official Plan is enhanced. This would force developers to incorporate stormwater

management techniques, thus transferring the onus and costs to the developer from the city.

These techniques can include rain gardens, absorbent soils, pervious paving around new

development and/or intensive and extensive green roofs.

Five of the stakeholders mentioned the importance of stormwater management. Each would be

able to articulate its economic and environmental benefits through using current examples. These

examples would presumably highlight the challenges of not having adequate stormwater

management. For example, outlining areas in the city with pollutant and contaminant

concentrations and the impact of more impervious surface cover. Thus, the committee would

provide the opportunity for stakeholders to work with government decision-makers and

collectively, they could communicate and influence decision-making on topics of mutual

interest. Furthermore, because each stakeholder has their own expertise, the possibility of

enriching the information is maximized.

Figure 4. Bridging Organization Model (Berkes, 2009).

The Bridging Organization model was used in the literature review and has some relevance here.

This particular model is used to illustrate ―collaboration‖ between governmental agencies and

user-groups such as indigenous people or local users of a natural resource. Berkes‘s study of co-

management focuses more on the interaction between these groups and how the model can be

used to find some level of compromise or consensus. While his study differs from this one, the

model shows how a committee can be used to bridge knowledge among the various stakeholders

78

in the community. In essence, knowledge on stormwater management and LEED standards can

be co-produced allowing for social learning, networking, building vision and goals ultimately

accessing information and sharing resources. This sort of model would be useful for bridging all

of the knowledge and enhancing the possibility of finding agreement on a topic whether it is

LEED standards or shoreline naturalization projects.

The PUC was the only stakeholder from the interviews that seemed less enthusiastic about the

prospect of an urban water committee. The stakeholder discussed how the public does not see a

lot of issues; so it can be done but is hard to do. In addition, he mentioned that people should

―stick to their own business‖. This was an important finding from the results because it brought

some uncertainty to the idea of a committee. The PUC mentioned how there are no burning

issues in the city right now so it would be hard to justify having one.

The PUC representative might have seemed less excited about the prospect of the committee

because the PUC is the main supplier of water for the city and they may worry about interference

and criticisms from others. He seemed more enthusiastic about the source water protection

committee because it is ―diverse but really focused and why it is successful‖. However, the

source water protection committee is mandated by the Clean Water Act and focuses on

Peterborough County. By contrast, an urban water committee would be a voluntary group

working within the specific jurisdiction of the city.

The literature review identified the major difference between a source protection committee and

Guelph‘s Public Advisory Committee (PAC), a committee that would resemble an urban water

committee for Peterborough. The major difference between the Otonabee-Peterborough SPC and

Guelph‘s PAC is that the SPC is regulatory in nature, while the PAC is voluntary. Thus, these

sorts of voluntary committees are inexpensive and need relatively low investment. What is

important about them is that the government has the chance to learn about the range of interests

and positions involved within the city jurisdiction and what policy aspects are likely to generate

opposition (Warner, 2005). Having this voluntary committee could save the government money

in the end because of the level of analysis and interpretation brought to an issue, thus minimizing

79

the prospect of uncertainty. The critical aspect here is prevention of issues through a more open

governance process.

There are two other examples of how co-management can be used to enhance the city‘s

understanding of water resources. Both examples relate to recreation and ecosystem health. The

City Councillor recognized the importance of recreation but also acknowledged that the city is

not doing a good job in managing recreational activities around Little Lake and the Otonabee

River. The Councillor mentioned how the city is encouraging tourism but not really looking at

the most optimal ways of managing recreational activities.

The results indicate that the Councillor is in support of analyzing recreational uses of water to

gain a better understanding of the challenges. Doing this recreational analysis would have to be

quite comprehensive and thus might be too onerous for any one entity or an individual. With the

range of interests and expertise that a committee would have, analyzing a system‘s recreational

uses and capacity can be a project under-taken by a group. With the sharing of knowledge and

information, the stakeholders would provide analysis of the issues and report back to the City

Council.

The City Planner said that the city needs to develop a more comprehensive understanding of

Little Lake‘s ecosystem. Creating that understanding helps land uses, development potential and

carrying capacity of the lake. This would additionally inform the city about recreational uses and

their potential harm on the ecosystem. The planner posed the question: what would motivate a

political decision-maker to risk the allocation of money toward such a study considering the

possible results? The answer to this question would ultimately be answered by an urban water

committee. The committee can do the preliminary investigation and research and report their

findings to the City Council. If there are significant findings, then the city could hire a consulting

group to under-take more expensive research.

With population growth in Peterborough‘s built area and urban growth centre, there could be

more residential and commercial development closer to Little Lake and the Otonabee River. The

80

results indicate that the Councillor is in support of analyzing recreational uses of water to gain a

better understanding of the challenges.

Figure 5 is a generic water planning model that illustrates a process that can be used for reaching

a decision around water resources. It attempts to show how complex decisions can be due to the

multiplicity of issues and considerations. However, by using an integrative approach and by

consulting the UWC, the city has a chance to learn about different options put forward by the

public and the UWC stakeholders.

Figure 5. Generic Water Planning Model

81

Figure 6. Water planning model applied to Little Lake

All of these issues must be considered in the decision-making process so that water resources are

not compromised and can be used for recreational purposes and for the protection of ecosystem

health. Little Lake is a significant body of water for the city and is used by a variety of

individuals and stakeholders. The city is encouraging tourism and water-based activities such as

boating to promote economic development and community well-being. With the proposed water

planning model, the local government has the chance to approach the issue in a comprehensive

and more inclusive manner.

The model provides two additional advantages including the use of a transformative process and

increased capacity of stakeholders. Co-management is an interactive social process by which

multiple actors communicate and negotiate to solve problems. Differences may arise among

actors and the public but the model allows for conflict-resolution. Due to the open and

82

transparent nature of this consultation process, those involved could approach the problems in a

more collaborative way. They may be more aware of each other‘s problem domain and thus can

find workable solutions. The model also accounts for integration in the co-management process.

This integration allows the resource interests to be more thoroughly connected and strengthened.

Second, the model focuses on developing and strengthening the capacity of users to participate in

all aspects of the resource management process (Plummer & Armitage, 2007). Further, by using

a co-management approach, it can enhance the capacity of the collective. The collective would

respond to threats facing a common resource through learning, power-sharing and institutional

flexibility (Plummer & Armitage, 2007).

By having a committee place, it can allow for the re-examination of objectives and methods

relating water planning to citizens‘ interests and preferences. As the TSW representative

mentioned, with a committee in place, people will have an opportunity to voice their opinions on

certain issues that they feel are most relevant to them. He did not have too much insight into

what a committee can do for the city, but emphasized that it would help provide a public voice.

Advancing planning requires improving information inputs and achieving broader support and

understanding for goals and public purposes.

In essence, the committee would be able to make the argument and justify whether the allocation

of funds is necessary for the potential study. This form of consultation can bring more clarity

and accountability to the local government which would effectively draw on the expertise and

knowledge of the committee regarding complex issues. The literature review identified how the

promotion of sustainable water management and governance requires active cooperation among

such entities as government, civil society, services and resource providers. Little Lake is a

significant body of water for the city and is used by a variety of individuals and stakeholders.

The city is encouraging tourism and water-based activities such as boating to promote economic

development and community well-being.

With the proposed water planning model, the local government has the chance to approach the

issue in a comprehensive and more inclusive manner. ―Thoughtful evaluation of the

83

effectiveness of different collaborative processes is central to understanding what can and cannot

be expected of such processes and how they can be integrated with existing institutions‖

(Plummer & Armitage, 2005, p 841). Thus, going through this collaborative process will allow

the stakeholders and local government to critically evaluate and monitor their changes. If it is

proving to be helpful and practical in its application, then the group can learn about how to

integrate this approach into the government‘s existing structure. This would be a good example

of achieving collaborative environmental planning for water resources.

5.3 Transparency & the Urban Water Committee

The findings from this theme provide strong evidence that communication and transparency on

water resources management/planning can be improved. The WWTP representative talked about

how a committee, with a proper mandate and focus could address areas where gaps exist in the

city. The representative said that the committee could serve as an information clearinghouse and

liaison for the stakeholders. It would give stakeholders a chance to connect with someone; if an

issue were to arise down the road, you would know who to connect with- making one phone call

instead of ten phone calls. This finding points to the need to address the communication loop.

The WWTP representative did mention that the plant is somewhat autonomous and does not

interact directly with other stakeholders. Nonetheless, he recognized the merit in having more

communication and how a committee could serve that role as an information clearinghouse and

liaison. Social learning helps corroborate points made, such as the one from the WWTP

interviewee. Social learning, as a tool of co-management, allows for group-centred and multi-

level learning which is central to the environmental management process. Communication is

constantly being developed as actors are actively engaged and participating in the forum. In

addition, actors know directly who to contact and have the luxury of learning more about another

actor‘s perspective or opinion on a matter because it is a conducive forum.

Another significant finding came from the WWTP interviewee. He mentioned how the

committee could have influence and input in regard to land uses and the planning department. It

could be a point of contact to direct people; people who have information can share with the

committee. Once the committee is established, there will be a profile which gives people an idea

84

of what they do, and what the specific stakeholders do such as ORCA, Wastewater, City

Planning, PUC, and Parks and Recreation. Communication and transparency among stakeholders

can be greatly enhanced through establishing clearer profiles.

The representative from the Green-Up Water Department spoke about the communication loop.

Similar to the WWTP representative, the Water Department said that increased communication

and information sharing would be useful because you know what others are doing. There would

be benefit of hearing the communication and to know what is going on in the community. The

interviewee also mentioned how Green-Up is usually ―last to know‖ about matters in the

community. These comments were also in direct relation to the water metering program.

As an example, if all of these main actors were to come together and speak about their

perceptions of water metering, not only would the level of communication increase, but this

would equip actors with more knowledge and report that to members of the community. With

increased communication to the community, it provides more impetus for public participation

and involvement. This circular communication cycle keeps everyone updated and informed

about water resource management/planning. Thus, when the Council needs to make a decision, it

will be made based on widespread input and opinions from the community.

Co-management is a participatory process and provides a more comprehensive solution to local

governance issues. Indeed, increasingly in water planning, emphasis is placed on public

participation and access to information because both are recognized for enhancing the quality

and implementation of decision-making. Water planning places emphasis on listening to citizens,

which has meant providing opportunities for influentials to express their views and preferences

(Wengert, 1971). One of the functions of an urban water committee is to ensure the involvement

of the community through a public forum. The public could attend these committee meetings and

provide recommendations or suggestions to the stakeholders. Moreover, the public could report

what they deem critical providing the stakeholders with the motivation to carry out a study or

investigation.

85

An example of public participation is reported by the City Councillor. He mentioned how the

commissioners of the PUC could structure a consultative process whereby they invite the public

and get some additional perspectives and ideas on water metering. This could bring opposition to

water metering but could lead to greater knowledge being produced on how to make it fairer. As

reported in the literature review, allowing for such public participation must include all groups of

society.

According to Koontz et al (2004) it is usually the privileged, directly affected and well-organized

groups that are disproportionately involved in environmental policymaking. In this case study,

those marginalized or more disadvantaged groups such as seniors or low-income citizens need

not be excluded from this consultative process because it is these groups that are going to be

most affected by the decisions made. The interviews did not produce a lot of data on equity

nonetheless; it is an important criterion for decision-making.

The water planning model is applied to water metering in figure 7. The model depicts how a

decision can be made allowing for input and the involvement of stakeholders and the public. In

essence, a successful water metering program must be multi-faceted and incorporate the

elements described in the model; otherwise there might be more disagreement, contestation and

poor support. Residents will be paying for every unit of water consumed, thus they may have

more of an inclination to purchase low-flush toilets, low-flow showerheads and other water

efficient technology. However, the city would have to make this possible by creating financial

incentives and rewards in order to seek greater support of the program.

86

Figure 7. Water Planning Model applied to water metering

The water planning model can slow down the decision-making process and lead to bickering

among those participating. However, efficiency may result from participation by all affected

parties and the strengthening of interpersonal relationships, and building social capital through

multilevel interactions (Plummer & Armitage, 2007).

Ultimately, the residents are customers of the system and might have ideas about how to make

water metering more efficient and equitable for the community. Using this model would allow

for community input thereby making the water metering program more successful. As described,

in water planning, emphasis is placed on public participation and access to information because

both are recognized for enhancing the quality and implementation of decision-making. By using

this model, the city has a chance to learn about the key equity considerations and best

87

conservation practices i.e. how the city can promote water saving technology while establishing

a fair pricing scheme. Also, the model shows public education and how it can be a viable

response to help explain the water metering program and its rationale. It would also minimize

any institutional barriers to policy cooperation and allow for coordinated and integrated decisions

to be made.

88

Chapter 6

RECOMMENDATIONS

―If everyone is moving forward together, then success takes care of itself.‖ – Henry Ford

Results from this study indicate that some degree of collaboration is needed for water resources

planning and management in the City of Peterborough. The stakeholders identified a number of

areas where collaboration would be beneficial, and they recognized the merit in having an urban

water committee. The following five recommendations are based on the research findings and

demonstrate how an urban water committee can provide a valuable contribution to

Peterborough‘s water governance process. In addition, they describe the relevant water planning

models and illustrate examples of how a committee could develop water planning functioning in

a more interactive, transparent and multi-stakeholder-based process. A forum is needed to

promote communication between professionals of diverse backgrounds and which could

encompass the entire range of water resource related topics. Other recommendations include a

policy amendment to the city‘s Official Plan, strengthening public education through World

Water Day, and an annual report on the state of water resources for the city.

1. Create an Urban Water Committee to advise City Council on water

management/planning

The first recommendation is to establish a multi-stakeholder committee to advise the City

Council on water management and planning. As shown in Model 1, the committee involves the

various stakeholders working on behalf of the public.

Figure 8. The Urban Co-Management Model

89

The public is positioned in the middle of the diagram because the stakeholders are ultimately

working together to ensure transparency to the public. The major objective of the committee is to

provide the opportunity for stakeholders to work with local government decision-makers and

collectively they could communicate and influence decision-making on topics of mutual interest.

The second mandate of this committee is to establish a forum for the public to seek information

regarding water management and planning decisions.

The committee would bring forward issues raised by stakeholders and ensure that the issues are

considered and recommended through the Staff Report to Council. These recommendations

would be presented to the public, allowing for their input and a chance to critique the

recommendations. The recommendations would be presented to the public by inviting them to

the meetings and through an annual report on the state of water resources (see Recommendation

five). This process would keep the public informed on the city‘s water governance process. The

UWC would be funded through the City Council and they would meet four times a year. While

the various stakeholders may currently work together, the committee would create a structure

allowing for more dialogue and cohesion. The UWC could apply to the Ontario government for

funding support based on a work plan. A work plan should include a summary of the UWC‘s

mission, vision and goals, a three-year Action Plan and its current budget.

The committee is strictly urban, providing support and recommendations within the city

boundaries. Thus it would not interfere with the source protection committee which is primarily

concerned with the County of Peterborough. One of the functions of an urban water committee is

to ensure the involvement of the community and provide an integrative forum for the public. By

having one in place, it can allow for the re-examination of objectives and methods, and relate

water planning to residents‘ interests and preferences. The public will have an opportunity to

voice their opinions on certain issues that they feel are most relevant to them. Inherent in the co-

management process is the benefit of collaboration. Partnerships are formed among stakeholders

to find practical solutions and implement tenable ideas. With a committee, involving

stakeholders can improve the transparency and accountability of water governance for the city.

90

2. Implement LEED Stormwater management as a policy requirement into the Official

Plan

The results demonstrate the widespread support for adequate stormwater management. The City

Planner explained how Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, specifically stormwater

design, could be incorporated into the City‘s Official plan thereby ensuring adequate stormwater

management practices for any new development. Given the implications of the Places to Grow

Act, Peterborough will see more population growth and intensification in its built area and urban

growth centre. Intensification would mean more concentrated residential units in the urban

growth centre, thereby increasing the residential density of the city. An increase in density

provides the justification to meticulously consider LEED stormwater management design

standards. Indeed, amendment 142 can be used to support this policy especially considering the

importance of sound stormwater management.

As the results indicated, the PUC interviewee said that when a city intensifies it must carefully

look at storm runoff and ways to treat it. Implementing LEED as a policy could ensure that

stormwater runoff is being looked after and this would allow the city to enforce such a policy.

Successful water-efficient landscaping depends on site location and design. For example,

developments would have to couple landscape improvements with water use reduction strategies.

As explained earlier, increasing density can influence water quality and improve the efficiency of

water delivery, leading to a reduction in costs for the city‘s public services. However, with

projected growth in the urban area, it is critical to include factors like LEED stormwater

management design which put the onus on the developer to be responsible for their stormwater

management practices. LEED standards as a policy in the Official Plan can significantly improve

the city‘s stormwater management practices. Implementing such as policy might seem ambitious

at first, however, with adequate support from the urban water committee, such a policy would be

well justified.

91

3. Consider using the water planning model for decision-making around water resources

planning

Having a decision-making model for water resources planning is critical. In essence, the

proposed water planning models in Chapter 5 depict a consultation process which relies on

stakeholder and public input; input that is received by City Council. As an example, by using the

water planning model, the city can learn more about the public‘s perception on water metering.

The City Council discussed how the PUC commissioners could structure a consultative process

whereby they invite the public and get some additional perspectives and ideas on water metering.

The meters will be imminently installed. The committee could use this model for the water

metering program; such a process could make the program more inclusive, interactive and

effective in its operation. Taken further, the committee could use an open and transparent process

illustrating the advantages of water metering. Any successful water metering program should

include financial incentives for water saving technology, financial rewards for conservation,

public education, and an open forum for the public to provide ideas on how to make water

metering more effective.

The water planning model is meant to address the ―socio-economic constraints‖, and equity is

one of the components of. While equity was not a significant finding from the analysis, the

literature review identified that the most successful metering programs are ones with pricing

structures that account for social-equity so as not to burden low-income groups. Also, co-

management promotes equity in representation, decision-making, and distribution in resource

related costs and benefits (Plummer & Armitage, 2007). Further, those who have a claim and/or

interest in the resource (stakeholders) are encouraged to participate in a decision-making process

that is based on pluralistic inputs (Plummer & Armitage, 2007).

Thus, as a part of this consultation model, the UWC can consult and involve groups in the city

that push the social and economic equity agenda. These groups can include the Peterborough

Coalition Against Poverty and the Peterborough Social Planning Council. Due to the significant

impacts of water governance decisions on social equity, low-income groups must be a part of this

process.

92

While these groups do not have any professional responsibilities related to water resource

management and planning, they can provide input on a pricing structure that would minimize the

financial burden of water metering. Such input can help in the decision-making process and

provide direction on what kind of pricing mechanisms would work best to accommodate all

income groups in the city.

A notable strength in using this model is the enhanced legitimization of objectives and actions.

With the involvement of the UWC and the public, the inputs can be more comprehensive and

thus legitimate. Going through this consultation process of interaction and collaboration could

lead to achieving municipal objectives around protecting and promoting Little Lake. The

literature explains how policy implications of enhanced legitimization have focused on greater

compliance or enforcement of regulations (Plummer & Armitage, 2007). These objectives are

usually oriented toward conservation. The UWC could be instrumental in increasing the

legitimization of objectives, this in turn could lead to the city adopting more environmental

regulations that promote development that minimizes harm on Little Lake‘s ecosystem, and

could allow for stormwater management and risk assessment plans.

The model provides two additional advantages including the use of a transformative process and

increased capacity of stakeholders. Co-management is an interactive social process by which

multiple actors communicate and negotiate to solve problems. Differences may arise among

actors and the public but the model allows for conflict-resolution. Due to the open and

transparent nature of this consultation process, those involved could approach the problems in a

more collaborative way.

Second, the model focuses on developing and strengthening the capacity of users to participate in

all aspects of the resource management process (Plummer & Armitage, 2007). Further, by using

a co-management approach, it can enhance the capacity of the collective. The collective would

respond to threats facing a common resource through learning, power-sharing and institutional

flexibility (Plummer & Armitage, 2007).

93

4. Strengthen public education efforts through a World Water Day

This recommendation is premised on how World Water Day (spread out over three days) can

increase the community‘s knowledge around water resources. Peterborough‘s Children Water

Festival is a highly popular and successful event. A World Water Day for a city like

Peterborough would demonstrate its commitment to education and protection of water resources.

It would also showcase Peterborough‘s leadership on water education and engagement with the

community. The Peterborough‘s Children Water Festival is very successful for the community

but it is currently overly focused on children.

There are a number of events that could run over a three day period. Stockholm, Sweden has an

World Water Week that has been very popular and successful (Stockholm International Water

Institute, 2010). The UWC could play a lead role through organizing and facilitating the event.

This would provide Peterborough Green-Up with an opportunity to showcase its rain barrels and

promote other water saving technology. Stores such as Home Depot, Home Hardware and

Canadian Tire would also have a chance to present their latest water efficient technology

solutions and encourage city residents to consider purchasing these products. The Peterborough

Utilities Commission could explain water treatment practices and provide additional information

about the water metering program. Also, the event could feature a ―beach cleanup‖ campaign

where interested citizens and organizations collectively clean up the beach and promote it as a

vibrant recreational feature of Little Lake.

World Water Day is all about raising awareness of the global water crisis. While Peterborough is

fortunate to have an abundant supply of clean and affordable water, the event could raise funds

to provide water to some of the most vulnerable populations on the earth. Therefore, the event

would raise awareness of water resources both locally and globally. There can also be tours of

the wastewater and water treatment plants. Such an opportunity may not be always available. It

would provide the public with a much better understanding of the technical dimensions and

challenges of water management in the city.

World Water Day is an opportunity for local groups and schools to shine the spotlight on their

own water-related projects. Projects on water technology, water governance and water

94

management from Fleming College and Trent University students can provide a post-secondary

educational appeal. These projects would thus be accessible and available to the community.

Also, the event can be used as a vehicle to educate the public about the so-called emerging

contaminants of concern. WWTP representatives and public health officials can educate the

public about care and use of pharmaceuticals, personal care products (deodorant, soap, shampoo,

perfume etc.). In addition, the Water Quality Centre at Trent University can participate and

collaborate with WWTP staff to inform residents about the emerging contaminants. This would

provide the Water Quality Centre with the chance to explain their intimate knowledge of the

contaminants and why the public should care. World Water Day could be a platform to provide

education about ways to minimize the entrance of these contaminants into the sewer system.

Overall, there is a lot of value in using education to inform and equip the community with the

knowledge they need to deal with these dangers.

Finally, the development of partnerships is integral to the success of World Water Day. With the

presence of Fleming College, Trent University, businesses, water-related stakeholders and other

groups, there is great potential to form partnerships in promoting sound water practices. These

partnerships may promote more effective water management and governance; provide education

on bottled water and use of current technology in the area of water resources. Above all, it would

present a networking opportunity for water professionals and student groups wishing to

collaborate in a more fruitful and productive way.

5. Consider an Annual Report on the State of Water Resources

Similar to the sourcewater protection committee, the UWC could publish an annual report on the

state of water resources for the city. This report could include progress and updates on the water

metering program, information about stormwater management, and the different financial

incentives available to residents for purchasing water saving technology. The report would

articulate the importance of sustaining water quality and developing this precious resource for

economic activity. It would provide guidelines, policy recommendations, and practices that could

be adopted by the city. The report can outline strategies for effective and efficient management

and planning of water resources in a sustainable fashion, it could be co-produced by the

committee for City Council and available to the public.

95

There are two significant advantages of putting an annual report together. One, it forces the

committee to do a comprehensive analysis on the state of water resources, i.e. what is working

well, and what can be improved. Second, it can serve as a guide for the community to understand

what their government is doing on water resources management and planning. The public would

learn about how they can benefit from such improvements and the various ways that they can

personally get involved. While such a committee is a voluntary initiative, the City Council

would have to provide funds to pay for resources required by the committee, publishing the

report, and even mounting an educational campaign.

The report could be divided into various themes, such as the ones discussed in this research.

There can be a section on the city‘s water availability; explaining the trends of the city‘s water

resources over the years. This would present an opportunity to explain why water use increases

in the summer months and decreases in the winter months. The public would have a chance to

learn about the pressures that they unknowingly place on the city‘s water system.

In terms of water use, the report could feature which sectors use the most water and which ones

use the least. This section of the report could provide some data and statistics about the city‘s

total water demand on a yearly basis; this information could put water consumption in some kind

of context illustrating how water demand differs among sectors.

The report could also feature information about recreation and water-based activities. In

particular, any updates on trails, beaches, and parks can be included in the report. These updates

could discuss the importance of human recreation and protecting ecosystem health. In summary,

a combination of these recommendations can be a valuable contribution to Peterborough‘s water

governance, management and planning processes. The use of the water planning model provides

examples of how a committee can develop water planning functions into a more transparent and

multi-stakeholder-based process. The combination of education, the publication of an annual

report, and LEED for stormwater management provides a holistic approach to water resources

that can lead the city into the right direction for the future.

96

Chapter 7

CONCLUSION

―Water is a natural asset irrevocably and irrefutably indispensable for the biological existence of

human beings.‖ –Kostas Bithas

Planning for water resources management is very much an integrative process. An integrative

process moves beyond just the involvement of water bureaucrats, water managers and engineers.

As this thesis has endeavoured to argue, water management is evolving beyond simply the hard-

path approach. With current phenomenon such as population growth and the uncertainties around

climate change, there is more pressure for cities to implement water metering programs and to

intensify land uses. Intensification and water metering are justified by the need to address

sustainable development. These two topics were discussed extensively in this project as they are

current examples in the Peterborough context. The overarching objective of the project was to

articulate the need for establishing and developing a water governance process.

This thesis was not meant to focus on particular ―issues‖ around urban water resources. Indeed,

as shown in the project, there are no burning issues in the city around water management and

planning. However, this does not eliminate the need for developing a water governance structure

involving multiple stakeholders. A water governance structure would indeed be a valuable

contribution to the City of Peterborough. As shown in this study, such a process would involved

a number of important themes such as public education, community engagement, reviewing the

city‘s population growth patterns as it relates to density, stormwater management, cooperation

and collaboration.

A water governance structure would be in the form of an urban water committee and involve the

stakeholders identified in this project. When we think about water governance in this project we

need to think about how society organises itself around water resources and its uses. As

discussed in the study‘s limitations, this project did not investigate what the publ ic perceptions

are regarding water resources. Therefore, how society organizes itself around water resources is

hard to ascertain. However, what is easier to determine is the widespread importance of water to

the city given the multiple features and uses it provides. I defined Peterborough as a water city

97

because it is a city where water has multiple uses and multiple roles. The methodology,

specifically the semi-structured interview questions were designed to capture and illustrate

Peterborough as a water city- a city where water allows for hydro-electric production, recreation

and water-based activities around Little Lake, economic development and tourism, half of the

city‘s water is pumped using river-driven turbine pumps, finally it provides an urban identity

with the Trent Severn Lift lock being a prominent water feature.

The results show that no formal water governance process exists in the city. As discussed in the

literature review, cities such as Guelph, Ontario and states like California have clearly developed

a water governance structure through the use of multi-stakeholder committees and councils.

Indeed, Guelph‘s public advisory committee (PAC) has hitherto been successful and widely

popular in the city. It was Guelph‘s public advisory committee that stimulated an interest in

carrying out this project and in investigating the proposition of an urban water committee.

Because this project used a case study research approach, the findings are not meant to be

generalized in assuming that an urban water committee could function in any jurisdiction. The

committee that was proposed, commented on and analyzed in this project would only be

applicable to the City of Peterborough.

Stakeholders provided insight into the committee based on its potential benefits but also how it

may not be supported because there are no burning issues. Also, some cautioned how it could

overlap with the Otonabee-Peterborough Source Protection Committee. However, a major

motivation for this study was to articulate the importance of preventative and precautionary

measures in the water resource management and planning process. Having a committee in place

would provide a water governance structure that would have the capacity to address problems if

they did arise.

Jurisdictions such as Guelph and California implemented their respective committees/councils

due to reactionary measures. In both examples dwindling water supplies and population growth

provided the impetus to gather stakeholder expertise and provide analysis and strategies on how

to protect and conserve water resources. For Peterborough, the UWC could structure discussion;

98

it could visualize the influence and behaviour of the stakeholders and stimulate their intuition

and awareness of future developments.

As the results show, there are presently no burning issues regarding water management and

planning. The provision of drinking water supply appears to be adequate and the quantity of

water resources is plentiful for the city‘s 80,000 residents. However, as part of comprehensive

and pro-active planning, it would be imperative for the city to consider areas of potential work.

The results demonstrate that there are currently gaps in communication between stakeholders.

There are limited public education initiatives around the forthcoming water metering program

and there is virtually no discussion around the implications of urban intensification on water

resources. These are just examples that emerged from the results that could be addressed through

water governance and multi-stakeholder participation. By and large, there is support from all of

the interviewed stakeholders for an urban water committee. The only stakeholder that did not

express support or enthusiasm for the proposed committee was the PUC representative.

While the results demonstrate how the committee could be used in a city like Peterborough, it is

important to note the potential bias in this study. Stakeholders received the Key Informant

Interview Guide (see Appendix A) which had my own definition of an urban water committee

and its ultimate purpose. My own definition of the concept might have influenced their responses

and perceptions regarding it and therefore this can be seen as a methodological weakness. The

proposed committee allowed the interviewees to comment directly on how they felt it would

work for the city. I knew how it would operate and function prior to the interviews. Thus, some

of their comments corroborated what I already knew and thus the outcomes were partially

influenced by my pre-conceived objectives. However, their comments and insights led to a

clearer focus with the committee‘s objective and this was shown in the discussion section.

A number of ideas and concepts were shared in this thesis including cooperative management as

the major theoretical framework for the project. Co-management efforts have become ubiquitous

in a range of fields of geographic endeavour including planning and management of parks and

protected areas, wildlife, water, tourism, recreation, fisheries and rural development. This project

99

attempted to show its value and application to urban water resources, a relatively new idea with

great potential. Pluralistic knowledge creation and continuously engaging and collaborating with

stakeholders can influence decisions and policies set out by the City Council. The theoretical

implications of co-management suggest that such collaboration can also make policy more

transparent and more accessible to the public. As shown in the water planning models, there is a

lot of value in using an integrated approach for reaching a decision. Water metering, as a current

topic, is an area where the city could test the proposed model to see how effective it can be.

The City of Peterborough has a number of stakeholders who have professional responsibilities

related to water management and planning. These stakeholders possess their own knowledge and

expertise. As the results show, there can be a lot of value in gathering and combining this

expertise and knowledge through a forum known as an urban water committee in this study.

Indeed, Peterborough is presented with an opportunity to develop a sound water governance

structure that is inclusive, collaborative and integrative.

While there might be initial challenges in establishing such a committee, the advantages will

soon be clear insofar as Council is receptive and supportive of it. Peterborough is fortunate to

have abundant freshwater resources and is presented with an opportunity to demonstrate its

leadership as a water city. The growing challenge and test for cities of the 21st century will be

how they establish planning and management measures around environmental and natural

resource protection. As argued, population growth, aging infrastructure and the uncertainties

surrounding climate change are all daunting especially for water resources.

For the purposes of this research, those cities that develop a water governance structure will be

able to educate, inform and engage their citizens on policy decisions and the importance of

protecting, conserving and valuing urban water resources. Given the results of this study and its

potential implications, it is time for the City of Peterborough to recognize the merits in

developing water governance and in starting a multi-stakeholder and interactive process for

planning for water resources management.

100

Appendix A

Key Informant Interview Guide

Introduction: This interview is interested in soliciting your opinions and insights regarding the

applicability of the idea of an urban water committee as it relates to water resources planning and

management in the City of Peterborough. I am interested in your own thoughts- there are no right

or wrong answers. Please feel free to decline to answer any questions or parts of questions you

do not wish to answer. And please add any comments or information that you think would

advance my understanding of the city‘s water resources whether it is recreational uses, water

consumption, hydro-electric production, drinking water supply and others. This interview should

take between 30 to 60 minutes to complete.

Urban Water Committee: In my research I am defining an urban water committee as a group

composed of stakeholders who play a role in water resources management and planning. The

objective and mandate of the urban water committee is to bring members of the community

together to work towards practical solutions to water resources management/planning issues in a

comprehensive, holistic and inclusive manner. This committee, through a governance structure,

would work towards improving public access to water resources management through

consultation and information sessions. A committee brings all of the significant water issues to

the table and gives stakeholders a chance to work on resolving them through policy and planning

solutions. Ultimately, an urban water committee allows for organizations and groups to interact,

collaborate, and share knowledge to advance water resources management and planning.

1. A) In the City of Peterborough, who do you currently work with in respect to water

resources management?

Prompt: Drinking water, maintaining trails/beaches around Little Lake, public

education (Children‘s Water Festival), and water conservation

B) How could other groups/individuals in the city help your organization achieve its

goals with respect to water resources management?

2. Collaborating through a water committee can lead to the sharing of knowledge and

expertise among stakeholders. Also, depending on the structure, the public could have

access to this information through an open forum and annual report. Do you think that

such collaboration would help generate more comprehensive policy and planning

around water resources management? Why or why not?

Prompt: Increasing public education, including the public in policy decisions,

Guelph‘s public advisory committee

101

3. A) Do you presently do anything on World Water Day or administer other programs

that promote water as a valuable natural resource? Do these programs target the

residents of Peterborough?

B) How would you work with other organizations to mobilize the community to think

about water on ―World Water Day‖ in March 2010? Is there another annual ‗Day‘ or

‗Event‘ that would be appropriate for an urban water committee to target?

Prompt: inclusion of community, environmental education, water as a finite resource,

relating water to citizens and making important connections

4. Peterborough residents have very high per capita rates of water use; 144 litres over

the national average.

A) What are your thoughts about this?

B) How does or should your organization encourage best practices in water

conservation?

Prompts: Public education, water efficiency> rain barrel program, retrofit plumbing

fixtures, incentives from local government

5. A) The consultant group responsible for the Little Lake Master Plan has been very

pro-active with public consultation and keeping the community informed. Ultimately,

their purpose is to determine the recreational and tourism capacity for Little Lake.

B) How is this consultant group involving you or other stakeholders?

C) How would your organization go about structuring a similar consultative process

around water issues in the city?

6. Ensuring public access to recreational uses around the water is important (beaches,

campgrounds and parks). However, maintaining ecosystem health in and near water

bodies is critical for the sustainability of the resource. How can your organization or

the city play a role in working towards finding a balance between the two in the City

of Peterborough?

Prompt: Zones, environmental stewardship through signage, awareness and

education, providing information on effects of invasive species

7. According to the City‘s Official Plan, more residential growth will be targeted

towards the urban centre from now until 2031. This will include the compaction of

the urban core including new residential and commercial development near the river.

How do you feel about this new growth and its implications on the quality and

quantity of water resources in Peterborough?

Prompt: Urban density, piping installation cost for sub-divisions, density and

stormwater runoff, water quality, compact development

102

8. What are the major drinking water supply issues for the city?

Prompt: which is the most important?

9. Does your organization play a role in drinking water supply management in the city?

10. How do you see policy around ambient water quality changing over the next 20

years?

Prompt: drinking water in-takes, addressing contaminated sediment, PCB,

pollution from motor boats

11. What do you see as the potential benefits/controversies around residential water

metering?

Prompt: Social equity, privatization of water, water conservation

12. Introducing water metering to the community can be challenging. Do you think there

is enough public knowledge in Peterborough about water metering for residents to

understand its benefits and costs? Who is responsible for this program?

Prompt: Cost of implementing them, monitoring expenses, public information

sessions about metering, social acceptability, socio-economic groups

13. How is the city managing recreational activities around Little Lake and the Otonabee

River?

Prompt: Is your group involved? Or how could it be more involved?

14. A) How did your group respond to the Peterborough flood of 2004?

B) Was there an organized committee at the time which collectively managed the

situation?

C) Do you think an urban water committee would have been an asset during the

emergency? Why or why not?

Prompt: Preparing for future events, collaboration, and division of responsibility to

increase efficiency of flood response

15. A) As shown in other jurisdictions, a water committee can make a valuable

contribution to water resources management, especially in terms of facilitating the

involvement of different stakeholders in the municipal water process. After reviewing

these questions, how would you see an urban water committee working for the City of

Peterborough?

B) Do you think that an urban water committee is a good idea? Why or why not?

C) Who do you think should be involved?

103

Appendix B

Human Research Consent Form

Nature of the Project: As a major part of my Honours thesis at Trent University, I am

researching the applicability of an urban water committee as it relates to water resources

planning and management for the City of Peterborough. Part of the study involves a series of

semi-structured interviews with individuals and organizations in the city which appear to play a

role in water resources planning and management. This study seeks to understand what the

participants feel are the significant water issues for the city. Importantly, participants will be

asked about their opinions and insights regarding the applicability of the idea of an urban water

committee.

Researcher: Timothy M. Shah, 4th

year Honours student in the Environmental Resources

Studies (ERS) and Human Geography Programs.

Researcher Contact Information: timothy.shah@gmail.com, 705-755-1042. I could also be

reached through Trent University‘s Geography and ERS Departments.

As a participant in the above project, I understand the following:

1. I have been fully informed by the interviewer about the nature of the research and my

participation in the project;

2. My participation is entirely voluntary. I may refuse to answer any or all questions and

end the interview at any time;

3. The data resulting from the interview will not be used for any commercial purposes and

will be strictly used for the advancement of research and social policy applications;

4. The information supplied during the interview will be kept confidential and my identity

will not be used in any reports or other publications;

5. The information will be stored responsibly and my participation in the project will be

known only to the researchers;

6. Any risks to my participation in the project are unforeseen by the researcher;

7. I have been provided with a copy of this participant consent form for my own records;

and

8. I understand that this project has been approved by Trent University‘s Department of

Geography‘s Research Ethics Committee.

Participant Name: _____________________ Participant Signature:_____________________

Interviewer Name:______________________ Interviewer Signature:____________________

Date: __________________________________

104

Appendix C

Information Letter

December 2009

Dear Research Participants:

This letter is being sent to you to seek the participation of you and/or your organization, in a

study of water resources planning and management in the City of Peterborough. As a major part

of my Honours thesis at Trent University, I am researching the applicability of an urban water

committee as it relates to water resources planning and management for the City of

Peterborough. Part of the study involves a series of semi-structured interviews with individuals

and organizations in the city that appear to have professional responsibilities related to water

resources planning and management.

Peterborough is a water city; a city where water is virtually ubiquitous. Its major bodies of water

include the Otonabee River, Jackson Creek and Little Lake. Water plays an indispensable role in

the city through recreation, economic development, tourism, public education/awareness and

urban identity. Using a case study research method and semi-structured interviews, this project

seeks to understand how the various stakeholders in Peterborough are currently involved with

water resources management and planning. This study seeks to understand what the participants

feel are the significant water issues for the city. Importantly, participants will be asked about

their opinions and insights regarding the applicability of an urban water committee.

Participation in this study is voluntary. It will involve an interview of approximately 60 minutes

in length and time and place of your convenience. With your permission, the interview will be

audio taped to assist the researcher in the collection of data. In all cases, your anonymity and all

information you provide are considered completely confidential.

If you would like further information regarding participation in this study, please contact me,

Timothy Shah, at 705-755-1042 or by email at timothy.shah@gmail.com. I hope that the results

of my study will be of interest and benefit to those involved with water resources management

and planning for the City of Peterborough, and for the public at large. I very much look forward

to speaking with you and thank you in advance for considering this request.

Yours Sincerely,

Timothy Shah

105

REFERENCES

Adams, Peter, and Colin Taylor. (2009). Peterborough and the Kawarthas, 3rd edition,

Department of Geography, Trent University: Peterborough, Ontario, 252 pp.

Bithas, K. (2008). The sustainable residential water use: Sustainability, efficiency and social

equity. The European experience. Ecological Economics, 68, 221-229.

Berkes, F. (2009). Evolution of co-management: Role of knowledge generation, bridging

organizations and social learning. Journal of Environmental Management, December

2009, (90), 1692-1702.

Borrini-Feyerabend, G. (2000). Co-management of Natural Resources: Organising,

Negotiating and Learning by Doing, IUCN, Yaoundé, Cameroon.

Borrini-Feyerabend, G., M. Pimbert, M. T. Farvar, A. Kothari and Y. Renard. (2004). Sharing

Power. Learning by doing in co-management of natural resources throughout the

world. IIED and IUCN/ CEESP/ CMWG, Cenesta, Tehran.

Bradshaw, M., Stratford, E. (2005). Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography (2nd

ed.). In I. Hay, Qualitative Research Design and Rigour. (67-76). Australia: Oxford

University Press.

Brandes, O.M., Ferguson, K. (2003). Flushing the Future? Examining Urban Water Use in

Canada. Polis Project on Ecological Governance, University of Victoria. Retrieved

September 12, 2009 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.polisproject.org/files/flushing.pdf

106

Brooks, D.B., Brandes, O.M., Gurman, S. (2009). Making the Most of the Water We Have: The

Soft Path Approach to Water Management. Washington D.C: Resources for the Future

Press.

Brugmann, J., 2009. Welcome to the Urban Revolution: How Cities are Changing the World.

Toronto: The Penguin Group.

Bulkeley, H., Betsill, M.M. (2005). Rethinking Sustainable Cities: Multilevel Governance and

the ‗Urban‘ Politics of Climate Change. Environmental Politics, 14, 42-63.

California Urban Water Conservation Council. (2006). Partners for a Water-Efficient California:

Annual Report 2006. Retrieved August 10, 2009 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.cuwcc.org/resourcecenter/publication.aspx?id=128&ekmensel=b86195de_24

_0_1 28_4

Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation. (2005). Brownfield Redevelopment for Housing:

Literature Review and Analysis. Research highlight: Socio-economic Series. Retrieved

November 26, 2009 from the World Wide Web:

www.cmhc.ca/en/inpr/rehi/index.cfm

Carter, T., Fowler, L. (2008). Establishing Green Roof Infrastructure Through Environmental

Policy Instruments. Environmental Management, 42, 151-164.

Cash D.W., Adger, W.N., Berkes, F., Garden, P., Lebel, L., Olsson, P., Pritchard, L.,

Young, O. (2006). Scale and Cross-Scale Dynamics: Governance and Information in

a Multilevel World. Ecology and Society, 11 (2), 1-12.

Cech, T.V. (2005). Principles of Water Resources: History, Development, Management, and

Policy. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

107

City of Guelph. (2009). Water Conservation and Efficiency Strategy Update: Executive

Summary. Resource Management Strategies Inc. Retrieved August 10, 2009 from the

World Wide Web:

http://guelph.ca/uploads/ET_Group/waterworks/WCE%20Study/WCES%20Final%20Ex

ecutive%20Summary.pdf

City of Peterborough Planning Division. (2009). Planning Peterborough to 2031: How the

Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe will affect the City of Peterborough.

Retrieved September 11, 2009 from the World Wide Web:

http://eagenda.city.peterborough.on.ca/sirepub/cache/2/nepazn55ovljenqgpgz14z55/5119

05192009021525545.PDF

Clapp, J., Dauvergne, P. (2005). Paths to a Green World: The Political Economy of the Global

Environment. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Cope, M. (2005). Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography (2nd

ed.). In I. Hay,

Coding Qualitative Data. (223-233). Australia: Oxford University Press.

Cunningham, W.P., Cunningham, M.A., Saigo, B.W., Bailey, R., Shrubsole, D. (2005).

Environmental Science: A Global Concern (Canadian Edition). Toronto: McGraw-Hill

Ryerson.

Drinking Water Source Protection. (2009). An Overview of the Otonabee-Peterborough Source

Protection Area. Retrieved October 3, 2009 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.trentsourceprotection.on.ca/cms_lib/otonabee_overview.pdf

Dunn, K. (2005). Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography (2nd

ed.). In I. Hay,

Interviewing. (pp. 79-105). Australia: Oxford University Press.

Dwivedi, O.P., Kyba, P., Stoett, P.J., Tiessen, R. (2001). Sustainable Development and Canada:

National & International Perspectives. Peterborough: Broadview Press.

108

Environmental Protection Agency. (2006). Growing Toward More Efficient Water Use: Linking

Development, Infrastructure and Drinking Water Policies. United States EPA. Retrieved

October 1, 2009 from the World Wide Web:

www.epa.gov/dced/pdf/growing_water_use_efficiency.pdf

Environmental Protection Agency. (2006). Protecting Water Resources with Higher-Density

Development. United States EPA. Retrieved September 9, 2009 from the

World Wide Web:

http://www.epa.gov/dced/pdf/protect_water_higher_density.pdf

Feeny, D., Berkes, F., McCay, B.M., Acheson, J.M. (1990). The Tragedy of the Commons:

Twenty-two Years Later. Human Ecology, 18 (1), 1-19.

Gerasidi, A., Apostolaki, S., Manoli, E., Assimacopoulos, D., Vlachos, E. (2009). Towards the

formation of a new strategy of water resource management for urban areas achieved

through participatory processes. Urban Water Journal, 6, 209-219.

Gerlak, A.K. (2008). Today‘s Pragmatic Water Policy: Restoration, Collaboration, and Adaptive

Management Along U.S. Rivers. Society and Natural Resources, 21, 538-545.

Hanemann, W.M. (1997). Urban Water Demand Management and Planning. In D. Baumann, J.

Boland and M. Hanemann, Price and Rate Structures. (pp. 5-2-5-53). New York:

McGraw Hill.

Hawken, P., Lovins, A., Hunter, L. (1999). Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial

Revolution. Boston: Little, Brown.

Hayden, D. (2003). ―Chapter 9: Rural Fringes‖ in Building Suburbia: Green Fields and Urban

Growth (1820-2000). Pp. 181-197.New York: Vintage.

109

Helmle, S.F. (2005). Water Conservation Planning: Developing a Strategic Plan for Socially

Acceptable Demand Control Programs. Public Administration Program, Texas State

University. Retrieved October 1, 2009 from the World Wide Web:

http://ecommons.txstate.edu/arp/2/

Hemmati, M. (2002). Multi-stakeholder Processes for Governance and Sustainability: Beyond

Deadlock and Conflict. Earthscan, London.

Hodge, G., Gordon, D. (2008). Planning Canadian Communities: An Introduction to the

Principles, Practice and Participants (5th Ed), Toronto: Thomson Nelson.

Jabareen, Y.R. (2006). Sustainable Urban Forms: Their Typologies, Models, and Concepts.

Journal of Planning Education and Research, 26, 38-52.

Johnston R, Gregory D, Pratt G, Watts MJ and Whatmore, S. (2000). The Dictionary of Human

Geography, 4th Edition, Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

Kahn, M.E. (2006). Green Cities: Urban Growth and the Environment. Washington D.C:

Brookings Institution Press.

Koontz, T.M., Steelman, T.A., Carmin, J., Korfmacher, K.S., Moseley, C., Thomas, C.W.

(2004). Collaborative Environmental Management: What Roles for Government?

Washington D.C: Resources for the Future Press.

Larson, K.L., Santelmann, M.V. (2007). An Analysis of the Relationship between Residents‘

Proximity to Water and Attitudes about Resource Protection. The Professional

Geographer, 59(3), 316-333.

110

Little Lake Master Plan. (2009). Little Lake Master Plan: Draft Master Plan. Retrieved

December 7, 2009 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.peterborough.ca/Assets/Documents/Planning/Ongoing+Planning+Studies/Litt

le+Lake+Master+Plan/October+21+Draft+Master+Plan.pdf

Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative Researching. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

McCarthy J., Prudham, W.S. (2003). Neoliberal nature and the nature of neoliberalism.

Geoforum, December 2003, 1-9.

Mentens, J., Raes, D., Hermy, M. (2006). Green roofs as a tool for solving the rainwater runoff

problem in the urbanized 21st century? Landscape and Urban Planning, 77, 217-226.

Metcalfe, C., Koenig, B., Ternes T., Hirsch, R. (2000). Drugs in Sewage Treatment Plant

Effluents in Canada. Symposia Papers Presented Before the Division of Environmental

Chemistry American Chemical Society, 32, 188-192.

Mitchell, B. (2004). Resource and Environmental Management in Canada: Addressing

Conflict and Uncertainty (3rd

ed.) Toronto, Oxford University Press.

Mitchell, B. (2004). Resource and Environmental Management in Canada: Addressing

Conflict and Uncertainty (3rd

ed.). In B. Mitchell, Incorporating Environmental Justice.

(pp. 555-578). Toronto: Oxford University Press.

Morrison, K.E. (2002). Stakeholder involvement in water management: necessity or luxury?

In Water Science & Technology, Balancing Competing Water Uses- Present Status and

New Prospects. The 12th Stockholm Water Symposium (pp. 43-51). London: IWA

Publishing.

Nicol H, M Skinner & S Wurtele, with R Dobbin (2009) ‗Planning issues in Peterborough and

the Kawarthas‘ in P Adams and C Taylor (eds), Peterborough and the Kawarthas, 3rd

edition, Peterborough: Department of Geography, Trent University, 177-194.

111

Pahl-Wostl, C., Hare., M. (2004). Processes of Learning in Integrated Resources Management.

Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, (14): 193-206.

Plummer, R., Arai S.M. (2005). Co-Management of Natural Resources: Opportunities for and

Barriers to Working with Citizen Volunteers. Environmental Practice, 7, 221-234.

Plummer, R., Armitage, D. (2007). Crossing Boundaries, Crossing Scales: The Evolution of

Environment and Resource Co-Management. Geography Compass, 1/4, 834-849.

Policy Research Initiative. (2004). Economic Instruments for Water Demand Management in an

Integrated Water Resources Management Framework. PRI Project Synthesis Report.

Retrieved September 12, 2009 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.policyresearch.gc.ca/doclib/SR_SD_EconomicInstruments_200502_e.pdf

Polsky, C., Cash., D.W. (2005). Drought, climate change, and vulnerability: the role of science

and technology in a multi-scale, multi-stressor world. In D. Wilhite, Drought and water

crises: science, technology and management issues. New York: Marcel Dekker.

Poolman, M., Van De Giesen, N. (2006). Participation: Rhetoric and Reality. The Importance of

Understanding Stakeholders Based on a Case Study in Upper East Ghana. Water

Resources Development, 22(4), 561-573.

Prince George Utilities Division. (2005). City of Prince George Water Conservation Plan. City

of Prince George Water Conservation Program. Prince George: British Columbia.

Retrieved October 1, 2009 from the World Wide Web:

www.city.pg.bc.ca/city.../waterconservation/water_conservation_plan.pdf -

Professional Engineers of Ontario. (2009). 1893 Waterworks Pump House. Retrieved September

4, 2009 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.peterborough.peo.on.ca/Engineering%20Feats/Pump%20House/Pump%20ho

use.html

112

Robins, L. (2007). Nation-wide decentralized governance arrangements and capacities for

integrated watershed management: Issues and insights from Canada. Environment

Journal, 35(2), 1-47.

Schippling, R.M. (2007). Public Housing Redevelopment: Residents’ Experiences with

Relocation from Phase 1 of Toronto’s Regent Park Revitalization. Unpublished master‘s

Thesis, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON.

Speir, C., Stephenson, K. (2002). Does Sprawl Cost Us All? Isolating the Effects of Housing

Patterns on Public Water and Sewer Costs. Journal of the American

Planning Association, 68(1): 56-70.

Statistics Canada (2006). 2006 Census of Peterborough. Statistics Canada, Ottawa.

Stilwell, F. (2000). Towards Sustainable Cities. Urban Policy and Research,

18, 205-217.

Stiver, W. (2009). Municipal Drinking Water Management Issues. Peterborough Utilities Group

of Companies. Peterborough: Ontario.

Stockholm International Water Institute. (2010). World Water Week. Retrieved April 15, 2010

from the World Wide Web:

http://www.worldwaterweek.org/

Stout, G.E. (1998). Sustainable Development Requires the Full Cooperation of Water Users.

Water International, 23(1), 3-7.

Tellis, W. (1997, July). Introduction to Case Study: The Qualitative Report. Retrieved November

2, 2009 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-2/tellis1.html

113

Urban Metrics Inc. (2009). City of Peterborough, Retail Market Analysis. Retrieved November

12, 2009 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.peterborough.ca/Assets/Documents/Planning/Ongoing+Planning+Studies/Ret

ail+Market+Analysis/Retail+Market+Analysis+Report.pdf

Warner, J. (2005). Multi-Stakeholder Platforms for Integrated Water Management. Wageningen

University and Research Centre, The Netherlands. Retrieved September 15, 2009 from

the World Wide Web:

http://www.scielo.br/pdf/asoc/v8n2/28602.pdf

Wengert, N. (1971). Public Participation in Water Planning: A Critique of Theory, Doctrine and

Practice. Water Resources Bulletin, 7(1), 26-32.

Winz, I., Brierley, G., Trowsdale, S. (2009). The Use of System Dynamics Simulation in Water

Resources Management. Water Resources Management, 23, 1301-1323.

Yin, R. (1994). Discovering the Future of the Case Study. Method in Evaluation Research.

American Journal of Evaluation, 15(3), 283-290.

Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage

Publishing.

Zetland, D. (2010). Water Rights and Human Rights: The Poor will not need our charity if we

need their water. UC Berkley‘s Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.

Retrieved March 1, 2010 from the World Wide Web:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1549570

Zetland, D. (2008). Conflict and Cooperation within an Organization: A Case Study of the

Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. Retrieved October 1, 2009 from the

World Wide Web:

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1129046