Water, Water, Everywhere? - DiVA portal1112774/FULLTEXT01.pdfWater, Water, Everywhere? How Different...
Transcript of Water, Water, Everywhere? - DiVA portal1112774/FULLTEXT01.pdfWater, Water, Everywhere? How Different...
Uppsala Universitet – Campus Gotland
Department of Business Studies
Master Programme in
Sustainable Management
Water, Water, Everywhere?
How Different Stakeholders Perceive and Approach
the Water Shortage on Gotland, Sweden
Master Thesis
15 ECTS
Authors: Lena Bauer & Lucy Schulze
Supervisor: Jenny Helin
Date of submission: 2017-05-30
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
II
Abstract
“Vattenfrågan har alltid varit viktig på Gotland” (Bastani et al. 2015, p. 25)
- “Water questions have always been important on Gotland”. Contrary to the common
perception that water shortage does not pose a problem to northern European countries, the case
on Gotland provides the example that it is a real issue. Due to several factors, the Swedish island
faces severe water shortages during the summer and is in urgent need to address this in the light
of an expected growing number of people coming to Gotland. Since water is a topic affecting a
wide range of stakeholders, the water issue is already in the focus of attention and occasionally
passionately discussed on the island. The aim of this paper was to identify with the help of
qualitative research how relevant stakeholder groups perceive and address the water shortage
on Gotland. The identified stakeholder groups were from the administrative/political sectors,
industrial/business sectors, the research sector as well as engaged citizens. During the research
it became clear that the water shortage can be characterized as a wicked problem, which in its
nature is impossible to solve but only manageable due to its complexity. Yet, the majority of
stakeholders did not recognize the wicked problem as such which explains the multiplicity of
existent strategies for how to deal with it. The different approaches lead to outcomes that seem
to only address parts of the problem but fail to manage it in its entirety. The study suggests that
institutional voids, meaning a lack of clear responsibilities regarding who should manage the
problem and how seem to both arise from and contribute to the complexity of the problem. As
result of this research, it seems crucial to firstly gain a comprehensive understanding of the
situation and then work with multi stakeholder communication and cooperation against
prevailing institutional voids in order to address the water shortage effectively.
Keywords: Water shortage in Northern Europe, Wicked problems, Gotland, Institutional voids,
Multi-stakeholder perspective
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
III
Acknowledgements
To start this thesis we would like to express our deep gratitude to several people, without whom
neither the outcome of this paper would have been the same nor the process of writing, which
in this way has been a wonderful experience. First of all, ett stort Tack till alla intervjuade, som
vi hade nöjet att träffa och prata med. The insight, knowledge and inspiration we gained from
you exceed by far the borders of this thesis and the bed of the sea.
Moreover, we want to thank our supervisor Jenny, as well as Lovísa and David from
SWEDESD for their valuable feedback, an open ear and the unconditional helpful support.
This master thesis is written in cooperation with the Swedish International Centre of Education
for Sustainable Development (SWEDESD) in Uppsala University, Campus Gotland. It is
intended to be included in the project Wicked Problems and Educative Spaces for Urban
Sustainability Transition. However, the authors of this thesis are not influenced by SWEDESD
and chose freely to focus on the water situation on Gotland. The cooperation with SWEDESD
consist merely of receiving feedback regarding respective stages of the paper and later
providing the Centre with the results of this study.
We also want to thank our seminar group and all the smart and determined personalities in it
who helped us so much during the writing process.
We want to thank Bledar for his translation efforts when the (partly historical) Swedish
literature overwhelmed us, as well as all the other spontaneous translators in the library who
we consulted when needed. A special thank goes to Anders Johansson for helping to find
information about Gotland and Linda for establishing the contact, Karin for her car and
everyone in our class for the moral support and for everything we have learned from you during
our time together at Campus Gotland, Uppsala University, including the love and laughter.
Our gratitude is deeper than the groundwater level in summer on Gotland and the deepest
restored wetland we saw during our research.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
IV
Table of Content
Abstract ................................................................................................................................... II
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................ III
I. List of Abbreviations .......................................................................................................... V
II. Table of Figures ................................................................................................................ VI
III. List of Tables ................................................................................................................. VII
1. Introduction and relevance of the topic ............................................................................ 1
1.1 Definition of the research question and structure of the work ........................................ 2
1.2 Research design ............................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Aims of the work ............................................................................................................. 3
2. Being Northern Europe and short on water ..................................................................... 4
2.1 Sweden and its water situation ........................................................................................ 4
2.2 Testing the waters of Gotland ......................................................................................... 4
3. Theoretical background ...................................................................................................... 8
3.1 Water and its scarcity, a literature review ....................................................................... 8
3.2 Wicked problems ........................................................................................................... 10
3.3 Institutional voids .......................................................................................................... 11
3.4 Multi-stakeholder perspective ....................................................................................... 12
4. Research process ............................................................................................................... 15
4.1 Research approach and philosophy ............................................................................... 15
4.2 Data sources and collection ........................................................................................... 15
4.2.1 Semi-structured interviews ...................................................................................... 15
4.2.2 Secondary data ........................................................................................................ 17
4.3 Data analysis ................................................................................................................. 17
4.4 Reliability and validity, trustworthiness and credibility ............................................... 18
4.5 Ethics ............................................................................................................................. 19
5. Water, water for everyone? .............................................................................................. 20
5.1 Political and administrative sector (P/A): ..................................................................... 20
5.2 Industrial/Business sector (I/B): .................................................................................... 24
5.3 Research sector (R): ...................................................................................................... 27
5.4 Activists from society (A): ............................................................................................ 29
6. Discussion: Diving into the deep blue of the matter ....................................................... 33
6.1 Understanding of the complexity of the problem – A wicked problem ........................ 33
6.2 Addressing the water shortage on Gotland: like drinking a glass of water? ................. 34
6.3 Institutional voids .......................................................................................................... 35
6.4 Multi-stakeholder perspective and cooperation ............................................................ 37
6.5 Conflict sources and barriers for solving the problem .................................................. 38
7. Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 40
7.1 Wicked, but worth it – Implications and outlook .......................................................... 41
8. References .......................................................................................................................... 43
VI. Appendix ....................................................................................................................... VIII
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
V
I. List of Abbreviations
A: Activists from society
CAB: County Administrative Board
CSR: Corporate Social Responsibility
EU: European Union
I/B: Industrial/Business sector
MDGs: Millennium Development Goals
MSP: Multi-Stakeholder Perspective
P/A: Political and administrative sector
PNS: Post-Normal Science
R: Research sector
RG: Region Gotland
SDGs: Sustainable Development Goals
SGU: The Geological Survey of Sweden
SMHI: Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute
SPCC: The Swedish Portal for Climate Change
SWEDESD: Swedish International Centre of Education for Sustainable Development
UN: United Nations
UNDP: United Nations Development Department
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
VI
II. Table of Figures
Figure 1: Mechanisms within institutional voids. Own illustration based on Hajer 2003 ...... 12
Figure 2: Stakeholder map: overview of sectors and interviewees ......................................... 16
Figure 3: Research process and analysis ................................................................................. 18
Figure 4: Geographical location of selected stakeholders on Gotland and the Swedish
mainland .................................................................................................................. 20
Figure 5: Interviewed stakeholders Political/Administrative sector ....................................... 21
Figure 6: Interviewed stakeholders Industrial/Business sector ............................................... 24
Figure 7: Interviewed stakeholders Research sector ............................................................... 27
Figure 8: Interviewed stakeholders Activist sector ................................................................. 29
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
VII
III. List of Tables
Table 1: Already existing cooperations between different stakeholders on Gotland to better
the strained water situation ....................................................................................... 37
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
1
1. Introduction and relevance of the topic
Water is the source of life. Yet, it is mostly an undervalued resource (Jury & Vaux, 2007). At
the same time, it is the breeding ground of global conflicts and was already described as the
“defining crises of the 21st century” (Pearce, 2007: subtitle). According to the problematic
nature of water, its scarcity1 exceeds its mere availability and access, since it is often caused
by human interference (Jury & Vaux, 2007), mismanagement (Grin et al., 2010), and natural
disasters (Gleick, 1993; Gain et al., 2016). In recent years, however, it became more of a focus
that water scarcity can and does take place in developed countries and particularly in Northern
Europe, a region known for its lakes and abundance of water (Thompson, 1993; Wimmer et
al., 2014). Despite the fact that water scarcity assumes severe, life-threatening proportions in
other regions globally, the water situation in Sweden has become reason for concern over the
last years and cannot be neglected anymore (Widegren, 2017). Authorities have to consider
both more intensive rainfall and extreme droughts when planning a secure water supply for
society in the future (SMHI 2015). It is anticipated that in the course of climate change the
overall temperatures will increase in Sweden with more precipitation (SMHI 2017). Although
the last decades have been warm and wet in Sweden, and the vegetation period has increased
with a rise in both temperature and in precipitation causing floods, the groundwater level in
the southern part of the country is decreasing sharply (SMHI 2017; Persson, 2015). On the
southeastern Swedish island of Gotland this has led to a water scarcity. In combination with a
drop in the groundwater level, the island faces the challenge of historically caused run-offs of
freshwater in combination with an extreme peak of visitors during the summer, when the water
situation is already tensed (Gotlands Kommun, 2005; Johansson, 2003; SMGI SGU, 2017).
Consequently, the usage and management of water are important factors to look upon when
investigating the problem, in particular in the case of Gotland.
Because of its complexity, water related problems, such as water shortage or scarcity, are
emerging being characterized in literature as so-called wicked problems (Baird et al., 2016).
According to this understanding, complex and multifaceted issues related to water are to be
addressed preferably by comprehensively understanding them and by managing negative
effects, rather than with concrete solution approaches (Rittel & Webber, 1973). Wicked
problems can for instance be found in regard to equality, poverty, health, and resource
management (O’Lear, 2010). They are often linked to sustainability and are already addressed
in the global sustainability agenda, e.g. in the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals
(SDGs) and Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) (UN, 2015). In order to manage water
in an efficient way, in an increasingly complex world, it can be assumed that institutionalized
mechanisms are likely to be responsible for addressing water related issues (SMHI SGU, 2017).
However, if the infrastructure is not effective, the problem arises of who the responsible actor
or actors to deal with water scarcity ought to be. In this case of an absence of clear rules and
norms upon which politics can act, the literature talks about institutional voids (Hajer, 2003).
Since water is used in many ways and fields, such as for everyday needs of society, agriculture
and the industry and its wicked, complex character, water related problems affect a broad range
of different actors or stakeholders. These stakeholders have a vital interest in a sufficient supply
1 A definition of scarcity can be found in 3.1 Water and its scarcity, a literature review.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
2
of the flowing element and follow different solution strategies. The multiple stakeholders that
are directly linked to the water issue add another component to the present research (Gotlands
Kommun, 2005). Although water related problems are part of the global sustainability agenda
and addressed by various governmental institutions and organisations, water scarcity is still an
existent threatening issue and therefore needs enhanced attention. Consequently, there is the
need for new approaches and strategies in order to manage water related problems, especially
in the under researched area of water shortages in Northern Europe (Kovacic & Sousa-Poza,
2013).
This thesis will focus on the wicked problem of water shortage (scarcity) in the specific case
of Gotland, Sweden. Therefore, in the broader sense, this study will be done with consideration
of the derived assumption that it is crucial to take wicked problems seriously, such as water
shortage and scarcity, in order to prevent worldwide crisis (Grin et al., 2010). For this objective,
relevant stakeholder groups dealing with water on Gotland are included in this study.
Stakeholders that have an immediate interest in the water situation on Gotland are located
within the political sphere, the industrial sector, research institutions and among citizen
activists.
1.1 Definition of the research question and structure of the work
This paper aims to examine how relevant stakeholder groups perceive and address the wicked
problem of water shortage on Gotland, Sweden. The island of Gotland represents an intriguing
example of the interconnectedness of different stakeholders and water mismanagement.
Moreover, Gotland provides a feasible environment to investigate this topic since it has clearly
defined spatial boundaries and a rather manageable system in comparison to the Swedish
mainland. Furthermore, it is assumed that the interaction of different factors such as natural
circumstances and stakeholder interference resulted in the wicked problem of the hitherto worst
scenario of water shortage in the history of the island in the year 2016 (Sveriges Radio, 2016a).
Consequently, the focus has to be placed on the actions and interconnectedness between
different stakeholders.
In the scope of this research, the following three questions will be answered:
1. How do significant stakeholder groups perceive and understand the problem of water
shortage on Gotland?
2. What is their strategy to address and manage the water shortage?
3. What is the connection to wicked problems and institutional voids in regard to
managing the water situation on Gotland?
After this introductory first chapter, Chapter 2 gives a summative overview of the investigated
case of Gotland and its water shortage. Next, the main theories of this study, namely wicked
problems, institutional voids and multi-stakeholder perspective are presented and elaborated
in Chapter 3. Moreover, this chapter contains a literature review of water scarcity. In the
following Chapter 4, the methodology and research process are illustrated. Chapters 5 and 6
provide the frame for the interpretative analysis of the conducted data, whereby chapter 5
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
3
focuses on the statements and opinions of the interviewed stakeholders and Chapter 6
establishes a connection between the results of the interviews and the portrayed theory. In the
end, a conclusion is drawn and an outlook is presented.
1.2 Research design
For the purpose of this study, the theoretical part will consist of a review on literature about
water and its scarcity, respectively shortage or stress to highlight its importance. The theory
focusing on wicked problems will be the basis of this research. Moreover, institutional voids
and the multi-stakeholder perspective will find consideration in order to produce a coherent
picture of the water situation on Gotland with the different aspects and elements involved as
well as the methods applied for managing and solving the problem. For the empirical part of
the study, the methodological approach of qualitative stakeholder interviews was chosen and
used in combination with secondary data to draw a comprehensive, picture of the situation on
the island as it is perceived and addressed by different stakeholders.
1.3 Aims of the work
This study intends to enhance the understanding and highlight the importance of considering
wicked problems, their complexity and interrelatedness in connection with multiple
stakeholders, and the role of institutional voids in the case of water shortage on Gotland. The
scholarly justification of this research lays in a lack of academic literature about water scarcity
in Sweden and particularly on Gotland. Furthermore, it is justified by a lack of mechanisms to
deal with it within the frame of wicked problems, institutional voids and multi stakeholder
participation. This thesis aims to contribute to a further discussion or research within this field.
In a broader sense, the findings of this thesis might be transferred and used both on Gotland
and in other local contexts, to find strategies to address and manage wicked problems regarding
water scarcity.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
4
2. Being Northern Europe and short on water
In the following, the water situation in Sweden and particularly on Gotland will be
problematized in order to illustrate the importance of the topic and the case, therewith
providing a justification for the focus of this work. Sweden will be mentioned only briefly to
give a frame and overview over the situation from a national perspective, whereas the part
about Gotland will include the historical background of the water situation on the island and
the development until today.
2.1 Sweden and its water situation
Research done by the Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI), the
Geological Survey of Sweden (SGU) and Uppsala University suggests that rising temperatures
and more precipitation lead to higher groundwater levels in some parts of Sweden, while a
sharp decrease in the levels of the southeast is anticipated. This makes the water shortage
reality in the Scandinavian country (Sverige Radio, 2016). Besides the decline in available
drinking water, lower groundwater levels could also lead to problems with saltwater intrusion
into the groundwater, which is particularly the case by the coast of Sweden and its islands
(SMHI, 2017). According to future scenarios, there will be more precipitation in the form of
rain instead of snow during the winter time, which results in smaller spring floods and reduced
groundwater levels, when compared to spring and early summer (SPCC, 2016). Overall,
predictions suggest a decrease in water availability and access especially in large parts of
southern and eastern Sweden (ibid.). One area in southeast Sweden that faces water-shortage
for a long time is Gotland, the biggest Swedish island in the Baltic Sea (Akerman & Siltberg,
1991).
2.2 Testing the waters of Gotland2
“Vatten är vår viktigaste naturresurs och vårt viktigaste livsmedel” 3
(Länsstyrelsen Gotlands län, 2017).
In former times, Gotland was characterised by a natural abundance of water as to its
geographical position in the northern hemisphere, given conditions and many bogs. This was
true for many parts of Northern Europe, which led to a drainage movement in the 18th and
19th century because the landscape was considered to be too wet in an agriculture-focused
society. To make Gotland’s landscape more suitable for farming and within a time of
agricultural transition, bogs and wetlands were cultivated in large scale projects. They were
dug out in the 19th till early 20th century and canals were constructed, which caused a run-off
of water into the Baltic Sea (Akerman & Siltberg, 1991; Johansson, 2003). The scenic
transformation also led to an increased harvest yield and animal husbandry and was
accompanied by the emergence of dairy farms, butcheries, canning industries and sugar beet
farming that led Gotland into the age of industrialization (Öhrman, 1991). In addition, due to
2 The phrase “testing the waters” means trying to discover a little more about a situation before you go ahead and
become very involved. 3 Translation to English: “Water is our most important natural resource and our most important aliment”.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
5
the drainage, several brooks and rivers dry out in the drier time of the year which has in turn
negative consequences for plants and wildlife as well as for household consumer needs (Olsson
& Öhrman, 1996). It can be concluded that the historical drainage is one of the main causes of
water loss from the island nowadays. This shortage of water often leads to water rationings and
bans on irrigation during summertime (ibid.).
Moreover, since 1900 Gotland has witnessed the establishment of several businesses, including
water intensive industries like the limestone industry, dairy companies, breweries, distilleries,
butcheries, a sugar factory and the tourist industry. This was accompanied by an increase in
population from about 30,000 (Olsson & Öhrman, 1996) to nowadays nearly 60,000 citizens
(Region Gotland, 2015). While these industries provide necessary employment opportunities
to Gotland they also threaten the island’s water supply. A special challenge is the rise in usage
of water for the tourist industry with the rising amount of tourists coming to the island
especially during the summer months4 (Region Gotland, 2017).
The historical development in combination with current challenges let various stakeholders
take measures in order to secure their water supply. For instance, farmers in several places
constructed artificial irrigation dams to ensure a stable water supply during the dry summer
months, since the winter precipitation can no longer be stored in the wetlands. Also, the
municipality encourages water saving measures (Region Gotland, 2017) and citizen initiatives
restore wetlands for a self-sufficient water supply (SMHI, 2016). Even examples from the
industry can be found where measures optimizing water related processes are taken (Arla,
2017).
Regarding measures for agriculture, Olofsson (1992) mentions that with the help of irrigation
dams water is collected during the water rich time of the year where the water runs in canals
alongside on its way to the harbour, helping the water to stay on the island and avoid creating
another source of groundwater loss. In addition, Gotland is rich in limestone, whose
precipitation can be found in the water and which in some cases poses further challenges to
stakeholders regarding water quality (Gotlands Kommun, 2005). In connection to institutional
actions, the municipality has also been working with and addressing the topic for some time
now (Gotlands Kommun, 2005; Länsstyrelsen Gotlands län, 2017; Region Gotland, 2017). For
instance, there are campaigns run by the municipality to raise awareness of the citizens to save
water and regulations regarding water usage in the water scarce months in the tourist season
from June-September (Region Gotland, 2017). Additionally, information and reflections about
the water situation are already incorporated into planning for e.g. water supply and sewage
systems (ibid.).
Historically, Gotland always had restricted water accesss and faced repeated dry periods
(Ericson I Ubbholt, 2017). Yet, according to Olsson & Öhrman (1996) the overall water supply
on Gotland can be considered satisfactory despite the fact that the groundwater level might
sink after dry winters with little snow and dry summers with water shortages. However, the
4 Every year, over 2,1 million visitors travel to Gotland (Number from 2015; Ask, J. & Ronstrom, O.,
forthcoming).
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
6
water consumption on Gotland is not evenly distributed over the year since it reaches a peak
in the driest months of the year (MittResVader, 2017) with the most people residing on the
island simultaneously. At present, the lake supplying Visby with fresh drinking water,
Tingstädeträsk, is decreasing in volume and therefore tightening the water situation on the
island (Sverige Radio, 2017). Since 2014 the lake has not been filled up completely, also
because of less precipitation, which resulted in a sharp decline in water available and a watering
ban starting April 1, 2016 for that particular year (Widegren, 2017). Therefore, it is under
consideration to take water from Gotland’s biggest lake Bäste Träsk or to use expensive
technology to desalinate5 Baltic Sea water in order to provide sufficient fresh water (Olsson &
Öhrman, 1996). Although further water reserves are suggested to be available for drilling in
the bedrock and in the boulder ridges in several areas on the island, it is not always easy or
economically feasible, as different stakeholders might disagree with the drilling. For example,
some farmers might fear their fields will dry up, house owners worry their wells will run dry
or conservationists might step in to safeguard wildlife and vegetation (ibid.). Even though there
are occurrences of groundwater in the hilly ground on Gotland, the transportation has to be
considered as well as the fact that the deposit assets there are relatively low which restricts the
extraction possibilities. In the report about the mapping of groundwater on Gotland, the SGU
quotes the human influence on the island and the groundwater as a considerable risk since the
natural geological conditions are sensitive to changes in the environment. Additionally, the
susceptible environment is a reason for another water quality problem, namely bacteria.
Because of microbiological contamination due to drain, fecaloid or fertilizer handling the water
in every third to fourth well is not suitable for drinking. Furthermore, salty groundwater poses
one of the main reasons for poor quality in wells as well as an increased nitrate content. These
factors have to be taken into consideration in regard to the water issue on Gotland. Furthermore,
the agricultural sector on Gotland as well as the industry are important sectors to consider as
both surface- and groundwater is used in agriculture and the limestone industry influences the
hydrogeological circumstances and its surrounding with its quarries (Bastani et al., 2015).
In addition to new approaches in managing the available water on the island, there are several
individual-driven projects that address the water situation on Gotland. For instance, in 2016
six landowners started a water study circle to better understand the situation and the
prerequisites necessary to improve the situation. Natural growing back of nature as well as
planned restoration of wetlands were also part of the project. In the restoration process, the
existing wetlands were connected with ditches to slow down the run-off of water which
contributed to the existence of open surface water and helped prevent the groundwater level
from continued sinking. The project resulted in the attainment of a groundwater level
comparable with past levels in wells of the people involved (SMHI, 2016).
To provide an overview of the water management from official side the following quote was
chosen:
5 Desalination plants win fresh water from sea water through the removal of salt and other minerals using technical
processes to make it suitable for human and industrial use. In combination with a search for further groundwater
sources it is expected to contribute to the economic feasibility of providing the citizens with water. On Gotland
three plants are planned, and one has already been built (Region Gotland, 2017).
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
7
“In March 2004, the Swedish Parliament decided that Sweden should be divided
into five water districts with a water authority in each district. A County
Administrative Board in each water district has been designated as a water
authority with the responsibility of dealing with the quality of the water
environment within the district. The water authorities have overall responsibility
for ensuring that the EU Water Framework Directive is implemented in Sweden.
Each County Administrative Board in each district has a planning secretariat with
the task of assisting the water authority with the implementation of the Water
Framework Directive. Work is carried out in consultation with municipalities,
water quality associations and other local water stakeholders” (Länsstyrelsen
Gotlands Län, 2017).
Thus, the Water Department within Region Gotland (RG) is responsible for the strategic
planning of the water supply and the sewage system whereas from the County Administrative
Board (Länsstyrelsen Gotlands län) different departments (eg. Miljö- och vattenenheten6) work
with coordinating the process of dealing with the water situation and are supported by the water
authority responsible for the water district in which Gotland lays (Vattenmyndighetens kansli
Södra Östersjöns vattendistrikt7).
In the rural countryside it is still common for households to have their own water and sewage
system with private wells and special septic tanks which the sewage water goes through before
being infiltrated into the groundwater. In the urban areas the municipality is responsible for the
water supply and sewage system, taking the water from gravel filter wells, or drilled
groundwater and from the lake Tingstädeträsk. The sewage is treated directly in sewage plants
(ibid.).
In summary, the geological and hydrogeological conditions on the island, the inhabitants, the
producing main industries as well as the tourism industry are directly contributing to the water
stress (Gotlands Kommun, 2005). Concurrently, the agricultural sector, the producing
industries, the tourism industry as well as the inhabitants as the main water consuming
stakeholders are directly affected by the limited water availability (ibid.). Besides the
municipal and business side of the issue, there have been long and intense protests about water:
Johansson (2003) points out a strong engagement among local citizens and organization for
fighting for their rights from early 1900 onwards, which can still be witnessed among the
Gotlandic citizens (Grimstedt, 2012). A prominent case took place around a planned limestone
quarry by Nordkalk in the North of Gotland which opponents to the project feared would
pollute the water supply in that area. After heavy protests on the island that gained attention
all over Sweden, as well as a number of legal appeals against the planned quarry the
environment minister stepped in and declared the projected area of the Ojnare forest to turn
into a 'Natura 2000' area – a European Union (EU) nature protection designation (TT/The Local,
2015). Therewith, the citizens also play a vital role in the water conflict on Gotland.
6 Translation to English: “Environment and Water Unit”. 7 Translation to English: “Water Authority Kansli South Baltic Sea Water District”.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
8
3. Theoretical background
In the following the theories on which this paper is based will be introduced and elaborated.
To start, firstly a focus will be placed upon water and its scarcity as presented in relevant
literature. Secondly, the concept of wicked problems, which serves as a starting point and
mainstay in this research, will be explained. This will be related to institutional voids, shedding
a light on the lack of predefined measures within official institutions to deal with wicked
problems. Moreover, the importance of the involvement of different stakeholders will be
expressed by drawing on the multi-stakeholder perspective, providing a connecting tool
between theory and empiricism. As the aim of this paper is to investigate how relevant
stakeholder groups perceive and address the water shortage on Gotland, the multi-stakeholder
perspective plays a vital role for the theoretical part of this research and will be considered
subsequently.
3.1 Water and its scarcity, a literature review
Water is a resource that is naturally circulating and constantly renewing itself. The global water
cycle involves approximately 1.4 billion km³ of total water, of which only approximately 3%
(50 million km³) is freshwater. From this amount of freshwater, only 0,002% (100,000 km³)
are available as surface or groundwater sources. (Gleick, 1996; Staddon, 2010).
Over the last decades, a combination of different developments, which will be described further
in this section, lead to an increasing problem of freshwater availability and access and
represents a new set of challenges for the world (Falkenmark et al., 1989; Postel et al., 1996;
Gleick 2003, Gleick & Palaniappan 2010; Oki & Kanae 2006; Jury & Vaux, 2007). Some
scholars even argue that water scarcity and security will be one of the biggest global
environmental problems of the 21st century (Jury & Vaux, 2005; Vörösmarty et al., 2010).
Since there is no common understanding of the terms water scarcity, shortage and stress, the
following section will give an understanding of how the terms will be applied for the purpose
of this study: Water scarcity is a serious unavailability of freshwater in a certain region, a
problem that can be both a natural and a human-made phenomenon (Gleick, 1993; UNDP,
2006). This physical water scarcity can be further divided into two main concepts: Firstly,
demand-driven scarcity (water stress) that can be measured by examining how much water is
being withdrawn from surface water and groundwater aquifers (e.g. Vörösmarty et al. 2000;
Alcamo et al., 2003; Oki & Kanae, 2006; Falkenmark et al., 2007; Gunda et al., 2015). In
general, the main water demands come from the industrial sector, municipal water supply and
agriculture (Feldmann, 2012). Secondly, population-driven scarcity (water shortage) is related
to the number of people that have to share each unit of water resources (Falkenmark et al.,
1989; 2007). It should be noted that water scarcity is not only restricted to the quantity of
available freshwater, but also to the quality (Staddon, 2010).
One of the main drivers of the current problem is the fact that the global population has doubled
over the last 50 years. Simultaneously, the total amount of water withdrawn for human use has
almost tripled, while the planet’s accessible renewable freshwater sources will remain
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
9
approximately the same or shrink (Srinivasan et al., 2012; Padowski et al., 2015; Alcamo et
al., 2007). Another cause is the overuse of surface water and groundwater resources worldwide,
mainly for industrial purposes. This overuse has not only lead to concerns of availability in this
area, but also endangers future food security, ecosystem function, and urban supply (Gleick
2003; Jury & Vaux, 2007). There is a continually growing demand for water among an
increasing diversity of usage options (Staddon, 2010). This development was accelerated by
the extending globalisation and privatisation of water rights, which often lead to an uneven
distribution of freshwater, unbalanced power relations and inequality (Staddon, 2010;
Srinivasan et. al, 2012; Kanae & Oki, 2006; UNPD, 2006). Furthermore, Oki and Kanae (2006)
state that the more water has been allocated for human use, the more deficient management
systems have lead to regional water scarcity threats. Subsequently, the problem of water
scarcity also seems to be caused by mismanagement. Last but not least, global water shortage
is also caused by climate change, which influences the natural flow and availability of this
resource, the consequences and threats of which can still not be estimated (Rockström, 2009;
Lehner et al., 2006; Alcamo et al., 2007).
Although research focuses primarily on regions with a high level of water scarcity, water
shortage is a problem that occurs on every continent, even in water-rich countries in Europe:
In 2003, almost half of the European countries, which represent approximately 70% of the
European population, were experiencing water stress (Bixio et al., 2006; Hochstrat & Wintgens,
2003, Staddon, 2010; Feldmann, 2012). Furthermore, the increasing number of extreme
weather conditions such as summer droughts or floods have serious effects on the natural
environment, agriculture and water supply (Thompson, 1993). Additionally, over the last
decades, aquifer related issues increased and gained in importance, since groundwater is the
most important freshwater resource for public water supply and industry in Europe (ibid.).
Since water scarcity affects many different actors, a broad range of water management and
governance approaches arose over the last decades (Jury & Vaux, 2005, Vörösmarty et al.,
2000; Staddon, 2010; UN-Water, 2014). In this context, the term sustainability is gaining
relevance: Global water issues have been defined as the priority of many national, international
and global governance initiatives. Above all, the United Nations (UN) declared the decade of
2005-15 as the water for life decade, as well as the years 2018-28 as the water for sustainable
development decade (UN-Water, 2014). Moreover, ensuring water security is one of the
seventeen sustainable development goals (SDGs) (UN, 2016). In political realms, so-called
hydropolitics have emerged onto both global, international and regional level, since most water
is abstracted, managed, and used at the regional to local scale (Staddon, 2010; Srinivasan et al.,
2012). In the economical sector, a shift to sustainable and effective water management
practices has become more prevalent (Ziolkowska & Ziolkowski, 2016). As Gleick (2003)
argues,“[w]ater managers and planners are slowly beginning to change their perspective and
perceptions about how best to meet human needs for water; they are shifting from a focus on
building supply infrastructure to improving their understanding of how water is used and how
those uses can best be met.” (Gleick, 2003, p.275).
It should be mentioned that water scarcity is also an issue of values, justice and ethics. Over
the last years, many water disputes and conflicts arose worldwide and lead to questions like
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
10
who is to benefit or lose from the current water structure, and what can be considered fair
(Feldmann, 2012). In a more philosophical approach, some scholars focus on the value of water
as a resource, which is again closely linked to environmental justice (Ostrom, 1990; 1999;
2000; Salman & McInerney-Lankford, 2004; Wouters, 1997). Also, Staddon (2010) states that
since water is perceived as a common resource, it is to be questioned how private individuals
and groups can be held responsible for their impacts on this resource. Furthermore, Smith
(1990) noted, that water is perceived as both value-less and invaluable, which makes it
extremely difficult or even impossible to manage: How can a good, that belongs
simultaneously to everyone and to no-one, be managed best? Can a global “right” to water be
proclaimed? (Salman & McInerney-Lankford, 2004; Wouters, 1997). Besides, since water is
not always tangible and moves across landscapes, borders and physical properties, the
specification to whom certain water resources belong is impeded (Staddon, 2010). To give an
opposite viewpoint, water is today also seen as just another factor in modern economy based
on neoliberal concepts of private property and free markets (ibid.).
As highlighted in this section, water is a relevant, multi-faceted and disputed resource.
Consequently, water resource management can be categorized as complex and influenced by
different perspectives and interests. Due to this complexity, water shortage is understood as a
wicked problem, a problem that is characterized as highly complex and that can only be
subjected to management approaches.
3.2 Wicked problems
Most issues of sustainability, and therefore also water related problems, are determined as
wicked problems (Pryshlakivsky & Searcy, 2013; Gupta et al., 2009; Weber et al., 2011; Baird
et al., 2016).
The term, originally coined by Rittel and Webber in 1973, describes a class of social system
problems that are highly difficult to define, resistant to solutions and can therefore be labelled
as wicked. Shindler and Cramer (1991) added, that it is impossible to find optimal solutions
because of both uncertainty about future conditions and intractable differences in social values
(Shindler & Cramer, 1999). In addition, wicked problems are characterized as complex,
unpredictable and open ended (Head & Alford, 2015).
Since wicked problems interact with other problems and are therefore part of a system of
interrelated problems with mosaic interdependencies, the attempt of solving one aspect of a
wicked problem often reveals or creates other problems (Ackoff, 1974). Rittel and Webber
(1973) classified most modern problems in society and politics as wicked ones, since they
comply with their proposed ten characteristics (see Appendix I).
Solutions to wicked problems can only be good-or-bad but not true-or-false (Rittel & Webber,
1973). As an example, there are different value judgments and no party has the power to
determine correctness, which means that there is not just one approach to address wicked
problems, but many (ibid.). Additionally, a solution to a wicked problem cannot be tested,
neither immediately nor ultimately since every solution-attempt is unique and can merely be
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
11
inquired by trial-and-error (ibid.). This implies that there cannot be a standard solution and the
level of correctness of a solution-attempt is hard to measure. However, it also indicates that
there is no right or wrong for developing a solution to a wicked problem. Since wicked
problems cannot be solved, but only managed, in order to achieve an acceptable state for the
life on this planet, institutionalized or effectively organized power structures are needed to
effectively deal with them (ibid.).
Since its first reference in 1973, a wealth of strategies to tackle wicked problems has been
developed (e.g. Balint et al., 2011; Brown et al., 2010). Many approaches include post-normal
science8 (Sardar, 2010; Healy, 2011; Ravetz, 2011) or other mixed method approaches that
incorporate adaptive, participatory and transdisciplinary elements (O’Connor, 1999; Frame &
Brown, 2007; Innes & Booher, 2010; McConell, 2016). Examples provided by the literature
name more creative, inclusive and ongoing engagement processes that can open up problem
solving possibilities in contrast to normal science-based approaches. One concrete example
would be scenario planning techniques (Carlsson-Kanyama et al., 2008). Some of these
theoretical concepts are already applied in practice, but face numerous difficulties or fail to
tackle wicked problems effectively (Duckett, 2016). Many attempts do not even overcome the
first stage, when a wicked problem is not recognized as such (APSC, 2007). Other obstacles in
this context are inter alia that many plans are overly optimistic, still strive to find overly
simplistic and quick solutions or fail to understand the actual complexity of wicked problems
and therefore only address a part of the problem (Duckett, 2016). In addition, two of the main
tasks with wicked problems are irreconcilable stakeholders and policy failures, such as missing
institutional structures, so-called institutional voids (Hajer, 2003; Duckett, 2016; Dorado &
Ventresca, 2010). Therefore, these two aspects, the concept of institutional voids and the multi-
stakeholders perspective, will find consideration in this present study about water shortage on
Gotland in the following section.
3.3 Institutional voids
When sovereign polities cannot provide solutions for pressing problems and there is further a
lack of generally accepted rules and norms according to which politics is to be conducted, one
speaks of an institutional void (Hajer, 2003; North, 1990). As a consequence, established
institutional arrangements are not able to fulfill their policy obligations. To deal with the
existent institutional void, they have to participate in “transnational, polycentric networks of
governance in which power is dispersed” (ibid, p. 175), referring to any other actor outside of
institutional arrangements. As a result of this, the government does not represent the only actor
in the process of policy making and neither the political setting can be taken as given anymore.
Therefore, all actions end up taking place in an institutional void which means that several
institutional and non-institutional actors, each with their own set of rules and norms, still
engage in solution approaches but with a lack of clearly defined responsibilities. Hajer (2003)
argues that due to existing institutional voids, there is a new orientation among affected parties
8 Post-Normal Science (PNS) deals with the management of complex science-related issues. The aspects of
problem solving it focuses on and that tend to be neglected in traditional scientific practice are uncertainty, value
loading, and a plurality of legitimate perspectives. PNS considers these elements as integral to science (Funtowiczi
and Ravetzii, 2003).
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
12
to solve problems through processes. Simultaneously, new citizen-actors emerge, alongside
with other new forms of mobilization, challenging the rules and norms of the corresponding
participants (ibid.). Likewise the question is raised how to assess these new practices and
whether they are a threat to classical-modernist institutions (ibid.). As a result to this, studies
show that policy initiatives become basis of a “truly political debate in which people reflect
on their identities, exchange views with others and can indeed come to some sort of collective
will formation” (compare figure 1; ibid, p. 190).
Figure 1: Mechanisms within institutional voids. Own illustration based on Hajer, 2003
These illustrated aspects give reason to include the multi-stakeholder perspective into the
theoretical part of this paper since various stakeholders are actively involved in dealing within
the institutional voids of how to address the water scarcity on Gotland and interact with each
other on a democratic basis.
3.4 Multi-stakeholder perspective
Since wicked problems affect a broad range of stakeholders that inter alia have to interact
within an institutional void, the Multi-stakeholder perspective (MSP) will be considered. MSP
looks upon the way people from various backgrounds work together to address complex issues
in an increasingly entangled political, social and economic environment, and goes beyond
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
13
traditional concepts of power hierarchies. It describes, that each stakeholder’s unique
perspective and expertise gives reason for a justified influence and the right to be heard. Further,
Baird et al. (2016) argue that when multiple perspectives are present, as it is typical of a wicked
problem, one result can be competing problem definitions, so that stakeholders cannot even
agree on the problems that are to be addressed. Consequently, they can barely find consensus
about appropriate solutions. In addition to this, the MSP acknowledges that the current
democratic paradigm does not necessarily give birth to actors that generate the best solutions
for existing problems (Hemmati, 2002).
Moreover, the MSP can be seen as a tool of sustainable development. However, this requires
a deepened understanding of the way the MSP can be used in the frame of multi-stakeholder
processes (ibid.). Is this context, it is suggested that “traditional processes of coordination
need to be supplemented by a series of practical arrangements which provide for more active,
cooperative management” (Müller, 2001, p. 443). However, it seems to be the prevailing case
that stakeholder dialogues, incorporating them into decision-making and concrete follow-ups
are organized and prepared in an impromptu way. This is supported by research about
participation at community levels, as well as national and global levels (Hemmati, 2002). Yet,
the relationship between stakeholder participation and decision-making remains often unclear
(ibid.), adding an aspect of uncertainty and complexity to the outcome of MSP.
Still, this perspective provides useful insight opportunities for the empirical study. By using
this perspective, it is intended to gain an understanding of how relevant stakeholders perceive
the water shortage on Gotland, how they see each other, how they interact and address the
situation. Furthermore, it aims to reveal what this implies for the water situation, the
management of wicked problems and institutional voids. Stakeholders mired in a wicked
problem usually have difficulty getting analytical traction on the problem, are frequently
frustrated in their efforts to develop solutions, and are often disappointed in the results from
solutions that are implemented (Baird et al., 2016). Conklin (2005) concludes that recognizing
the nature of wicked problems and understanding that one is dealing with a wicked problem is
necessary to find ways to collaborate effectively to address the problem.
The previously mentioned theories will be used as the basis for the collection and analyses of
the empirical data. The theoretical part about wicked problems will help to understand the
complexity of the water situation and its management on Gotland and functions as a basis on
which the other theories and empirical findings will be built. In addition, research on how to
perceive and address wicked problems is still an underdeveloped field, especially in the context
of sustainability, since this field has only taken hold in the last few years and some
sustainability issues are still very new and only marginally addressed. The importance of
extended research in this particular research field is underlined by the fact that many
sustainability problems are essential for society's well-being e.g. poverty, food security or
water shortage, and therefore demand solution approaches.
Within the basic structure of wicked problems, the theory about institutional voids is expected
to contribute to an understanding of the lack of knowledge and proficiency within established
institutions and structures of how to deal with such a wicked situation especially in light of the
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
14
involvement of multiple actors and stakeholders, for which the MSP will be useful. An
expected beneficial outcome of this combination of selected theories is a deepened and more
comprehensive understanding of the water situation on Gotland in order to show possible ways
for future improvements.
To conclude, the here presented theories will be used in the upcoming discussion to connect
the empirical findings to academically based foundations and therewith illustrating the way
different stakeholders are affected by the water shortage on Gotland and how they further deal
with it in the light of wicked problems, institutional voids and MSP. The connection between
theory and empirical study is expected to help understanding Gotland’s water situation with
the aim to contribute positively to further discussions and solutions finding in regard to this
topic and answering the research question.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
15
4. Research process
The following chapter gives an overview of the chosen research philosophy, approach and
methodology of this study. Moreover, the research and data collection process, as well as the
analysis strategies will be elaborated.
4.1 Research approach and philosophy
To answer the research questions, a qualitative research design with semi-structured interviews
in combination with selected secondary data and notes was chosen to obtain a wide range of
authentic stakeholder views and to receive deeper insights in this under-researched area.
Following the assumptions that (1) there is not one objective reality, (2) people create and
associate their own subjective and intersubjective reality as they interact with the world around
them and (3) people cannot separate themselves from what they know; researchers and research
objects are not separable from each other (Saunders et al., 2012; Walsham, 1993).
Subsequently, this research is conducted from an interpretive stance, including a relativist
ontology and a subjectivist epistemology and axiology (Ponterotto, 2005; Saunders et al.,
2012). In order to gain a more profound understanding of the complex research topic and since
relatively little is known about stakeholder perception and addressing of water shortage, an
abductive approach was chosen (Saunders et al., 2012). This chosen approach allows to apply
the existing theories and literature and simultaneously contributes new finding to the existing
theory (ibid.). Furthermore, it goes in line with the adopted philosophy and data collection
methods and aims to bring structure to the chaotic nature of wicked problems. Finally, this
study aims to provide new insights of this existing phenomenon.
4.2 Data sources and collection
In order to reach the research objective, semi-structured interviews were conducted. To
supplement this, secondary data was collected and notes taken during the interviews taken into
account. All three methods will be described in the following sections.
4.2.1 Semi-structured interviews
This study examines the views of different stakeholders on Gotland, therefore a first step was
to identify relevant stakeholder groups that affect or are affected by the water situation.
Following Bryson and Crosby’s (1992) definition, a stakeholder is “any person, group, or
organisation that is affected by the causes or consequences of an issue” (p. 65). By establishing
a stakeholder map, all parties with a ‘stake’ in an issue were identified (Robson & Robson,
1996). This mapping process depends on how the issue is conceived, who is perceived as
having a legitimate interest and how its boundaries of the researched topic are drawn. The
position adopted in this research context is to draw a relatively broad stakeholder map that is
derived from the stakeholders’ relevance to the topic and natural involvement in the studied
field (Healey, 1998). After a review of local sources, four main stakeholder groups were
identified of which representatives of all groups were contacted and interviewed. The groups
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
16
are (1) Political and administrative sector, (2) Industrial and business sector, (3) Research
sector and (4) Activists from society (compare Figure 2).
Figure 2: Stakeholder map: overview of sectors and interviewees
All interviewees were selected using a mix of purposive and snowball sample. In March and
April 2017, nine individual semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted on Gotland;
one interview was hold via Skype since the person interviewed is located on the Swedish
mainland. Preliminary to the interviews, correspondence via email and individual face-to-face
talks took place. This aimed at gaining a personal impression of the interviewees and further
to answer any questions of the interviewees before the interviews started. The interviews lasted
between approximately 30-70 minutes and were audio-recorded, for which permission was
sought beforehand. Afterwards all interviews were transcribed. The interviews were held in
English with only non-native English speakers as the authors are not proficient in Swedish and
all interviewees being Swedish. During the interviews, the compiled questions were only used
as a guideline and allowed the interviewee to talk freely and elaborate, deviate and accentuate
at any time (Crotty, 2012; Saunders et al., 2012). This led to flexible discussions and was a
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
17
crucial factor for a successful comprehensive data collection. Further, this constitutes the main
reason for single interviews, as the interviewee should not feel obliged to act in a certain way
or be influenced by the opinion or statements from others. The questions asked covered four
fields, namely (1) how the stakeholders understand and define the water shortage on Gotland,
(2) how the stakeholders perceive other stakeholders involved, (3) what the stakeholders’
strategy is to address the water shortage, (4) which strategies are assumed to be successful in
the eyes of the stakeholders (see Appendix II). The purpose of the questions was also to
investigate if the chosen stakeholders draw a connection to wicked problems, institutional
voids and the MSP.
Besides the recorded interviews, handwritten notes were taken by the authors during the whole
research process to generate a more holistic picture of this study and the interviewed
stakeholders. Further, these notes were analysed and interpreted in combination with the
transcribed interviews and the secondary data.
4.2.2 Secondary data
For the purpose of this study, secondary data from multiple sources was collected in order to
gain a comprehensive understanding of the specific phenomenon of water shortage on Gotland.
Besides, the use of secondary data creates the opportunity to reach a far greater set of data and
allows therefore more time and effort for analysing and interpreting the information (Saunders
et al., 2012). The data used in this context consisted of books, magazines, newspaper articles,
radio reports, information brochures of the municipality and social activists, company
homepages and material provided by the stakeholders. The data was collected by the
researchers or provided by stakeholders. Since researchers have only little control over the
quality, validity, reliability and suitability of secondary data, and the authors are aware of this,
the chosen material was evaluated carefully before using it in the present research context.
4.3 Data analysis
To analyse the collected data an abductive approach, meaning a mixed inductive and deductive
content analysis, was chosen (Saunders et al., 2012; Mayring, 2000). Therefore, in a first step
the recorded interviews were transcribed. Then, all transcripts were scanned for research
relevant quotes according to theory derived categories which reflects the deductive content
analysis part (see Appendix III, Chosen deductive categories). Through this step, paragraphs
were either assigned into one of the theory based categories or sorted into a residual category
(Mayring, 2000). All text units in the residual category were in a second step analysed in an
inductive procedure (see Appendix III, Chosen inductive categories).
After the content analysis, the findings of all 12 categories were prepared, processed and due
to the focus and scope of this work reduced, combined and interpreted. This resulted in two
analysis and discussion chapters: (1) Chapter 5. Water, water for everyone?, which constitutes
an interpretive presentation of the four relevant stakeholder groups and (2) Chapter 6.
Discussion: Diving into the deep blue matter, an analysis of the stakeholders’ statements in
relation to the theoretical framework of this research (compare Figure 3).
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
18
Figure 3: Research process and analysis
During the process of the current study, the research strategy stayed flexible and was modified
several times in order to guarantee a satisfactory quality of the results. This adjustable approach
was chosen to generate a clearer, more realistic and holistic picture of the stakeholders’
perception of Gotland’s water shortage. In this way, the authors aim to provide more reliable
results.
4.4 Reliability and validity, trustworthiness and credibility
According to Silverman (1997), the aim of social science is to produce descriptions of a social
world through research. Even though this social world is perceived subjectively by anyone,
including researchers, there are several techniques to provide reliable and valid data within
qualitative research (Silvermann, 1997; Saunders et al., 2012). Since reliability and validity are
concepts used for testing quality in quantitative research, many scholars mention credibility
and trustworthiness as two quality criteria in qualitative research. (Lincoln & Guba, 1985;
Saldana et al., 2009; Golafshani, 2003). Both terms refer to the believability of the data, which
in this case are the subjective experiences and reality of the interviewees, and the interpretation
and representation of the results by the researchers (Polit & Beck, 2012). In the context of this
study and in order to ensure credibility and trustworthiness, every step in the research process
was carefully generated and evaluated at several stages during the whole research (Golafshani,
2003; Polit & Beck, 2012). Moreover, every step was recorded in sufficient detail to provide a
transparent research process (Saldana et al., 2009; Silvermann, 1997). Through the methods
triangulation of collected data through interviews, secondary data and notes, this research
attempts to gain an articulate, comprehensive view of the water shortage on Gotland (Casey &
Murphy, 2009). These measures add to the trustworthiness and credibility of the present study.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
19
4.5 Ethics
All participants were informed about the objective of this study and that they were free to
participate or withdraw at any point. Each interviewee was asked for permission to record the
interview. Further it was inquired whether a synonym was preferred or their real names could
be used for the sake of their anonymity. All interlocuteurs agreed to be mentioned by name.
This has primarily practical reasons, since many interviewed stakeholders mentioned their
intention to use this master thesis to promote stakeholder dialogues and discussions.
Consequently, using real names helps to allow recognition or even the possibility of being
contacted in the future. All interviewees were sent the transcribed interview for individual
checking regarding the researchers having caught the right wording and understanding. All
stakeholders’ annotations were taken into account.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
20
5. Water, water for everyone?
The following chapter will give an overview of all twelve interviewees that were consulted in
the present study and their particular perspectives. This will be done according to the identified
stakeholder groups (1) Political and administrative sector, (2) Industrial//business sector, (3)
Research sector and (4) Activists from society. The attempt was made to illustrate the typical
characteristics of a group as well as their differences. To give a geographic overview of the
interviewed stakeholders, the following map shows their location: Ten respondents are situated
in Visby, the biggest city on Gotland, located on the west coast. The remaining three
interlocuteurs are located either in Slite, in Katthammarsvik or on the mainland in Kalmar
(compare Figure 4).
Figure 4: Geographical location of selected stakeholders on Gotland and the Swedish mainland
5.1 Political and administrative sector (P/A):
To shed light on the institutionalized perspective and strategies, five representatives from
different political departments were interviewed. They were either from RG which as the
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
21
municipality is responsible for the water supply and sewage system, the water authority or
Länsstyrelsen, the County Administrative Board (CAB). The CAB is the representative of the
government in the region and a coordinating and administrative body for state activities in the
county (Länsstyrelsen, Gotlands län 2017).
Figure 5: Interviewed stakeholders Political/Administrative sector
The first persons to be interviewed were Magnus Hallberg, head of unit of the Water and
Sewage Department Region Gotland and Lars Westerlund, mechanical engineer from the the
same department (Teknikförvaltningen, VA-avdelningen). The interview was held at their
workplace in Färjeleden next to Visby harbour, where both respondents were interviewed
together in a cozy conference room furnished like a ship’s cabin. The municipal water and
wastewater services can be located in between the industrial and political sector 9 . Their
described strategy regarding the water shortage is to look ahead to not be forced to emergency
actions with the help of “technical approaches that are best cost-efficient” (Magnus, Water &
Sewerage Department). Consequently, they focus on a realistic and workable approach that
meets an optimized solution. Summed up it was phrased as “practical lagom” (Lars, Water &
Sewerage department), meaning that everybody has access to enough water, derived from a
practical way of addressing the issues. One of these practical approaches so far has been to
build desalination plants, which has in Lars and Magnus’ opinion solved the water situation in
the South of Gotland. A further step towards managing the water situation is evaluating and
determining the amount of water and sewage allowed to be used and produced by businesses
and households. Yet, the two admitted that their responsibility is limited because of an existing
separation between municipality and private water supply on the countryside. All in all, Magnus
and Lars are confident that a practical solution that considers different aspects equally will be
found regarding the water situation. In general, both interviewees based their arguments and
opinions strongly on scientific findings and analyses.
9 The sewage and wastewater department is located between two sectors. As a public company within the
municipal sector, it is financed by fees but has the duties to provide water services which gives the appearance to
be more a business than a political department. However, since it is not allowed to make any profit nor loss, thus
being obliged to break even, creates the impression that it is part of the municipality. Its future strategies are
decided by politics and the elected representatives of RG. The water and sewage department in RG therefore looks
at the parameters given in order to find a suitable solution to the water problem, taking both the necessary processes
and economics into consideration.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
22
Secondly, Mats Jansson, Business Development Strategist (Delprojektledare Besöka och mötas)
at RG was interviewed. Mats is one of six people working in the business development sector
in RG. He focuses on developing the tourism sector sustainably and is of the opinion that with
the help of a newly started long-term strategy and cooperation between different sectors it is
possible to combine tourism growth and sustainable water usage. Mats stated that the water
shortage has not been of relevance up until now and that “the problem is that we haven’t been
used to discussing this issue” (Mats, RG) but that now it should be addressed rather quickly.
He described that the tourism development department from RG addresses the water shortage
in the way that it provides information to their customers via different channels e.g. with leaflets
and information material on the ferries to Gotland and at Visby airport. This strategy, which
was also followed by other departments in RG and Länsstyrelsen, apparently resulted in a 30%
decrease of water consumption in the year 2016. Further, Mats mentioned different strategies
to lower the water consumption within the tourism industry that are currently under
consideration10. According to him the problem has to be addressed both with technology and a
change in behaviour. Regarding the latter he wants to motivate the tourists to become more
sustainable.
Another interviewee was from the state area, Frida Eklund, who works for the Environment
and water unit (projektledare för delprojektet Dialogprocess för vattenskyddsområden, Miljö-
och vattenenheten) within Länsstyrelsen Gotland Län (CAB). From her point of view the water
problem will be solved with the means RG and Länsstyrelsen introduce as well as with the
water supply plan, she is currently working on. Although from the politicians’ side master plans
and strategies are worked out in cooperation with the industry and other political institutions
with the aim to better the water situation, Frida perceives it as more needs to be done. Her
chosen approach can be described as to focus on stakeholder communication and cooperation.
As is was illustrated by detailed information that was provided by her in the form of existing
material on workshops, presentations and water supply plans there are already steps taken in
addressing the water issue. During the interview the impression was received that she is steadily
working with the water issue and with developing plans and strategies. She seems to trust the
outcomes of her work as well as the official information by RG about the water situation and
proposed solutions.
Moreover, an interview with Sylvia Kinberg, Coordinator of the Vattenmyndighetens kansli
Södra Östersjöns vattendistrikt was conducted via skype. This authority for water in the water
district South Baltic Sea is responsible for the overall coordination of water related topics within
this area. Sylvia’s work is to provide a program of measures that will address the whole water
management system and water scarcity issue in the South Baltic Sea district since similar water
shortages are witnessed there, too. Additionally, she pointed out that her department and work
affects different stakeholders since vattenmyndigheten sets the water quality norms regarding
the environment (miljökvalitetsnorm). Although she just started her job in the department when
interviewed, she showed great interest in the topic and commitment since she contacted a
10 These are for instance benchmarking strategies for hotels in regard to using less water, promotion of good
approaches and ecological footprints, and the increase of knowledge about the situation. To be able to evaluate
current patterns of water usage in hotels, a system where hotels provide data (like numbers of tourists or profit
made) to the department on a daily basis is to be extended to the water consumption (Mats, RG).
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
23
colleague from within the authorities for background information to the topic. She is of the
opinion that there will be measures that will improve the situation but that still more needs to
be done.
The most obvious similarity of this group is that they all seem to understand the specific water
problem on Gotland and have started to address the situation with different plans and strategies.
However, only one representative of this sector, Sylvia from Vattenmyndigheten, labelled it as
a wicked problem. Despite that the other stakeholders were not of the opinion that it is a wicked
problem, they are aware of its complexity. In this regard, Frida understands that water supply
“is not that simple” (Frida, Länsstyrelsen) and that working “with a lot of things” (ibid.) is
necessary in order to “solve” (ibid.) the water problem on Gotland. Moreover, all interviewees
mentioned newly introduced plans, strategies or projects that deal with water on Gotland.
Overall, they see practical technical solutions (e.g. process optimization and desalination plants)
and management approaches as the best way to deal with the situation. They share their support
for the desalination plant and state it as a solution without questioning it. Moreover, every actor
interviewed highlighted the great influence of the tourist industry and that the increasing
number of tourists affects the water situation. However, there is a disagreement about how the
tourism sector on the island should develop best. Some representatives support the expansion
of the tourism business and are confident that with communication and cooperation sustainable
growth in tourism is possible. For instance, Frida joined Mats position and pointed out that
Gotland “cannot live without water and [Gotland] cannot say less tourists, that is not solving
[the problem]” (Frida, Länsstyrelsen). On the other hand, it was hinted with a critical tone that
it should be reconsidered if a growing number of tourists is what Gotland really wants and
needs. Lars (RG) critically questioned the proposed increase of tourism on the island. Besides,
most interviewees perceive the tourist industry's’ reaction, interest and activity in this issue as
very low while only Mats (RG) sees the tourism industry as engaged in the topic.
Yet, all agreed that more needs to be done for an improvement of the situation. Mostly, it was
referred to the politicians as being responsible for the water situation on Gotland although all
interviewees from the P/A-sector could be located in this particular sector themselves. A
conflict potential was identified when several stakeholders talked about financial risks and in
particular of who should take on the initial investment for improving the situation. All
stakeholders think that multi-stakeholder corporations are the right approach to tackle the
problem. As it was stated by multiple interviewees, it is important to involve more stakeholders;
and to make everybody aware of the situation is an important tool for achieving this. Further,
the interlocuteurs are of the opinion that the willingness to cooperate will increase within the
next years. A reason for this could be a worsening of the water shortage or the fact that new
cooperations seem to be necessary to better the situation since the already existing ones do not
work well or well enough. It was illustrated that there is a lot of potential left and that there is
the “need to work more together” (Sylvia, Vattenmyndigheten). However, the stakeholders
differed in their favoured approaches to manage the situation. While Sylvia for example takes
the position to coordinate, Mats advocated for more tourism and Frida was absorbed by her
water supply plan. Lars and Magnus focused on rational, technical solutions that are
economically feasible.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
24
In conclusion, the interviewees working in the P/A-sector perceive themselves in general as
having a key role in finding solutions. A closer examination, however, reveals that clear
structures of specific areas of responsibility are not present. The interviewees were unsure about
concrete tasks of the municipality, RG or Länsstyrelsen, yet supported the official description
of the problem and the accordingly proposed solutions.
5.2 Industrial/Business sector (I/B):
During the research process the term “big five” was repeatedly mentioned. The big five
constitute of the five biggest companies and heavy water users on the island. They are
reportedly Arla (dairy products), Foodmark (food industry), Cementa (limestone factory),
Slagteriet (butchery) and Bryggeriet (brewery). Those companies get water from the
municipality and partly have their own water sources. Two the big five companies which are
contributing to the water situation, namely the cement industry Cementa and Arla, the dairy
company could be included into this present study. Both companies highlight on their website
their focus on an environmental friendly production (Cementa, 2017; Arla, 2017). In 2014, Arla
was even awarded as "Gotlands bästa miljöföretag11" (Arla, 2017).
Figure 6: Interviewed stakeholders Industrial/Business sector
After the limestone industry on Gotland was repeatedly mentioned both by several interviewees
and in literature, it was of particular importance to include this perspective in the present study.
Cementa AB was founded in 1869 and is one of Sweden's largest building material companies
whose production takes place in three places in Sweden. Since 1887, the company has a
production site on Gotland, namely in Slite in the north of the island where Cementa has one
of the most modern cement factories in Europe12. Jon Hallgren, who works as an environmental
engineer for Cementa, responded immediately on an interview request. He showed interest in
the present research and was willing to answer the questions. First, it was planned to hold the
interview in Slite at the production site, but then Jon proposed to come to the university campus
and talk to the authors there. During the conversation, a positive atmosphere prevailed and an
open and relaxed dialogue with many jokes and anecdotes took place rather than a strict
question - answer dialogue. His appearance and statements appeared very professional and well
thought out from an industry's angle and consequently convincing without further background
knowledge. This professional impression was created inter alia when Jon talked about
Cementa’s strategy in regard to the water shortage, since he used fashionable words like
corporate social responsibility (CSR) and already well-known and often heard phrases like:
11 Translation to English: “Gotland’s best environmental friendly company”. 12 On Gotland, approximately 700 employers work for Cementa, either in the factory or as subcontractor or carrier.
Every day, 7000 tonnes of cement are produced in Slite, which corresponds to an annual production volume of 2.5
million tonnes (Cementa, 2017).
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
25
“In this day and age, an industry has to be a part of society and that includes being a
frontrunner in these issues. (…) of course we don’t help the whole island” (Jon, Cementa).
The last part of this statement created furthermore the impression that Cementa could use their
CSR measures as a cosmetic tool to present the company outwardly in a better light. This feeling
was strengthened when Jon insisted several times that Cementa does not produce waste water
as the company avoids to use that term13. Jon mentioned that one CSR measure is to give the
municipality a pond of freshwater, without obtaining anything in return. However, he stated
that this measure was part of Cementa’s permit application, since the political authorities will
decide in a few years if Cementa will get a permit to continue its production. Without this
permit, “the factory will most likely close down, [... since] the profit will sort of disappear”
(Jon, Cementa). While Jon pointed out that Cementa tries to optimise its water use and has
enough water, which the company has partly to pump to the Baltic Sea, he thinks that the water
problem can be solved with new pipelines to existing water sources or dams that can be built.
Yet, he sees the controversy around the limestone industry as hindering the solution finding
process. He perceives especially the citizen activists as emotionally driven and irrational,
impeding in his opinion a fruitful stakeholder dialogue.
Talking to Jon was perceived as very interesting since he is a representative of one of the most
disputed industries on the island, while simultaneously having his personal background on
Gotland. In this context, he acknowledged how difficult it can be sometimes for him when he
mentions that he works for Cementa, since it is such a polarized topic among the islanders.
Therewith, Jon illustrated the special circumstances in the case of Gotland, as it can be a source
of social conflicts among families and friends.
Besides the limestone industry, it was attempted to include the voice of one of the big
companies from the tourist sector, since the special role of the tourist industry was mentioned
repeatedly from several sides. Therefore, it was intended to interview a representative from the
cruising ship company Destination Gotland, one of the biggest tourist affiliated players on the
island. Unfortunately, after several tries to find an interviewee, this attempt remained
unsuccessful. The only answer received via email was a response on the proposed questions
stating that most issues should be addressed to RG and other political authorities. This reaction
contributed further to the overall impression that the tourist industry does not show any great
interest nor feels responsible, at least in comparison to the other bigger players in this sector.
Apart from the limestone and tourist industry, Visby is the location of some companies that
export their products all over the world. One of these companies is Arla (Arla Foods), the
biggest dairy industry player on Gotland that was established in 198414. After reaching Magnus
13 In this context, Jon explained during the Interview, that the water used by Cementa which is pumped out of the
quarries into the Baltic Sea is not comtaminated with chemicals and can therefore not be qualified as waste water.
However, he admitted upon request that the water shows after production processes a slightly increased nitrogen
level (Jon, Cementa). In contrast to this, the intervieweed activists were of the opinion that this statement was
understated and that due to the fact that the water is contaminated in the production process it has to be labelled
wastewater (Daniel, Activist). 14 Each year, the company produces 140 million kg of milk, cream and milk powder, which the company exports
globally. Arla on Gotland employs ca. 55 workers (Arla, 2017).
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
26
Dahlblom, site manager at Arla Gotland, an interview appointment was scheduled at the
production site in Visby to inquire Arla’s role in the water situation. The atmosphere in the
production plant seemed relaxed and friendly, workers were sitting and talking together in a
common room and it appeared as if they could chose from an endless variety of milk products
for their coffee breaks. All office doors stood open, even during the interview, and Magnus
commented on this with the statement that he has absolutely nothing to hide when giving the
interview.
Magnus mentioned that Arla already introduced several actions in reaction to the existing water
shortage on Gotland. One example is the company’s program for farmers to support them with
knowledge about environmental topics. Besides, he referred to already implemented changes
in the company’s day-to-day business: Sustainability goals have been incorporated in the
company’s strategies, and production processes have been optimized in order to decrease their
freshwater usage and to reuse water. So far, the company has achieved a decrease in water
consumption by 40-50% in the last five years with optimizing its equipment15. On top of that,
Arla plans to decrease its water usage further by 10-20%. Nevertheless, the site manager is
aware that the company is consuming a lot of water. In addition to these actions, Arla is part of
the group Frida at Länsstyrelsen mentioned and coordinates that meets and discusses the water
situation and how to address it from an industrial site.
Both interviewed representatives communicated that they are already doing substantial work in
order to address the problem. They are of the opinion that the water shortage on Gotland is
definitely solvable and are therefore very optimistic that it will be solved – mainly by attempts
of the political sector since they are perceived as having the main responsibility in this regard.
Although they would not phrase it as a wicked problem, Jon calls it a messy and complex
situation and therewith describes it with some characteristics of a wicked problem. Both
companies have in common that they mainly focus on ways to optimize their production
processes in regard to not worsen the water situation. Nevertheless, these optimisation attempts
will eventually stagnate, since the point will be reached where it is not possible to reduce the
water use any further. Therefore, their solution approaches appear to a certain degree still short-
term oriented and seem to include only those measures that go in line with the companies’
strategies, goals and business models. Both respondents concurred that heavy investments are
hindrances to do more regarding the water issue, since classical business objectives are still of
greater importance than sustainability issues.
However, the present research left the impression that Arla seems to be to a higher degree
motivated to be part of a solution and gives the impression that the company is willing to do
more than necessary. For instance, Magnus mentioned the importance of education as Arla is
involved in a primary school project where it provides school material promoting sustainable
development. Still, he is absolutely aware that there is a problem regarding the water situation
and stated: “if you don’t have a problem, you don’t have to solve a problem. Now we have a
15 The bigest part of Arla’s water consumption is used for its equipment. This is due to the strict regulations for
food producing companies (Magnus, Arla).
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
27
problem that we have to solve [...]. And then you have to come up with how to solve it and there
is a number of ways to solve it” (Magnus, Arla). In contrast to this statement, Jon perceives the
shortage as based on rain patterns and explained that since Cementa uses to a large extent its
own water ponds in the production process, the company does not have to deal with a strained
water situation16.
5.3 Research sector (R):
In order to look from an academic angle at the perception of the prevalent water situation, two
apt representatives from Uppsala University were interviewed.
Figure 7: Interviewed stakeholders Research sector
The first interviewee was Tom Mels, PhD human geographer and lecturer at Uppsala University,
Campus Gotland at the Department of social and economic Geography. Tom possesses an
extensive background knowledge regarding environmental justice and the historical
development of Gotland. Within his research he focuses on natural circumstances, mainly on
changes in society that affect landscapes. During the preliminary talk and the actual interview,
which both took place in his office at Campus Gotland, it became clear that Tom not only has
a professional and deep understanding of the water situation on Gotland; but also a private
connection to this issue since he lives on the island. During two conversations regarding this
paper, Tom shared his knowledge with a lot of details, explained social, geological and natural
connections and made these clear by using various maps of the island from different times and
development stages. It became apparent that he really cares about the island, its future and its
unique landscape and nature. Furthermore, he is informed about recent developments in all
sectors regarding the water issue. He seems to be very engaged in this topic and questions
critically all decisions and actions of every stakeholder; especially the effects that these actions
have on the island’s landscape. Nevertheless, his view on the situation implies an academic and
reflective stance that does neither generalize actors nor sectors and recognizes the complexity
of the problem. He also sees the issue in a broader international and global context and
comprehends many different positions and interests. In general, it became evident that Tom is
critical in regard to technical approaches for solving a problem that is created by technique in
the first place. In his opinion, there is a current over-reliance to technical solutions. Besides his
drawn connection of water to ecological and environmental issues, Tom related the issue to a
social and philosophical perspective and mentioned that eventually it comes down to the
individual. It would therewith become a lifestyle issue:
16 Jon stated, that only approximately 5% of the water used by Cementa are supplied by the municipality. Even
though this number appears to be marginal, Cementa is one of the top five municipal water consumers on Gotland,
meaning that this mentioned 5% is still an extreme high amount of actual used water (Jon, Cementa; Magnus, RG).
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
28
“Taking everything (water) for granted is not a good way to create environmental
consciousness” (Tom, Researcher).
This philosophical perspective was also mentioned by the second interviewed researcher,
Ulrika Persson-Fischier, who illustrated the viewpoint of the commoners’ dilemma in this
particular research context: “no one is responsible, but everyone is responsible” (Ulrika,
Researcher). Ulrika is a PhD anthropologist researcher and lecturer from Uppsala University.
She was approached and interviewed on Campus Gotland regarding her involvement in the
research project about Hållbara Besök (sustainable visits) on Gotland. Currently, Ulrika is
involved in establishing the new Master Program Sustainable Regional Destination
Development, which will focus on Gotland as a tourist destination. During the interview, Ulrika
seemed in comparison to Tom less personally involved in Gotland’s water situation. This could
be the case since she focuses in her research not on water shortage in particular. Further, she
could be less personally involved since she does not live on the island and has therefore never
personally been affected by the water shortage. Ulrika answered often in behalf of the citizens
she does research about. One example she mentioned was that the tourism industry feels being
made responsible for a problem it did not cause, which can lead to frustration among all
stakeholders. Another example was that local businesses tend to distinguish between small
regional businesses who are motivated and engaged to better the situation and bigger players,
who worsen it. Moreover, Ulrika was the only interviewed person, who classified the
investigated water shortage clearly and without doubt as a wicked problem, that needs to be
understood more thoroughly. Ulrika added a more general and sustainability related perspective
to this research. She rose the question whether simple water reducing measures are really in the
sense of becoming sustainable: “I mean the system as it is, is pretty unsustainable. So how can
you transform the system?” (Ulrika, Researcher). She pointed out that an understanding of
sustainability issues’ complexity is the key of all sustainability challenges:
“The reason why sustainability challenges have arisen is partly because we think
that problems are complicated rather than complex. And then we try to solve them
by complicated solutions rather than by complex solutions (…). So I think this is
part of the problem” (Ulrika, Researcher).
Therefore, she sees a “transformation in worldview necessary” (Ulrika, Researcher) within the
course of a “long term process” (ibid.). At the same time, she points out that “you can’t have
a win-win situation in the sense of more more more more” (Interview Ulrika) which also has
to be considered in the frame of water and sustainability.
From an academic perspective, a clear, deep understanding is given that highlights the
complexity of the problem which makes it impossible to find easy solutions. Even though both
researchers convey the impression to view the water situation from different backgrounds, they
still seem to be on a common ground, since many attitudes and opinions are in accord. Hence,
the two interlocuteurs declined short-term solution approaches and seemed more interested in
a complete understanding of this prevalent complex phenomena. Both highlighted the
importance of stakeholder cooperations and that an open and fruitful dialogue is a first step to
address the wicked problem of water shortage:
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
29
“It is kind of the assumptions that to solve tricky problems, the business, university
and society needs to cooperate. [...] And that’s what we want to do, but this [, the
water situation on Gotland,] is also an example of how difficult this is to actually
create” (Ulrika, Researcher).
Furthermore, the academics see their role and responsibility primarily to create awareness and
to enable discussions to better the situation.
Both perceive the island’s citizens as extremely aware and engaged in the situation and
emphasized how special the case of Gotland is due to his long history of water shortage and its
isolated geographical position. The different backgrounds and foci of the chosen stakeholders
make again clear how complex and manifold the water shortage on Gotland really is. It further
illustrates from how many perspectives this can be looked at as well as how many fields are
actually impacted.
5.4 Activists from society (A):
In order to gain insight from the people’s perspective, water activists were identified as a group
of stakeholders and therefore included into this study. Three engaged activists, Daniel Heilborn,
Katharina Bjerke and Eva Frölander were contacted and interviewed.
Figure 8: Interviewed stakeholders Activist sector
Daniel works as an architect and is also involved in educating the public about planned water
related projects on the island. Katharina, to whom he is married, is also engaged actively in
water protests. Both hope for a more long-term and environmental-health oriented perspective
from all stakeholders:
“We have to take care of what we have and use it with knowledge and […] lower
our usage of water” (Daniel, Activist).
Eva is privately active since her groundwater supply in the countryside was severely threatened.
In the course of her activism she initiated restoring several wetlands in east Gotland. She tries
to function as a positive role model and to encourage people to take actions with what she has
done. She further works for spreading the word and information about the water situation and
sees a solution approach in enhanced stakeholder cooperations.
Overall, the citizen activists that have been interviewed see their role in getting active in order
to counter decisions made in politics and the industry that affect the water situation and would
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
30
– in their perception – exacerbate the water situation. So far, their protests and activism have
been successful. As an example, with protests in 2012 in the North of ot the island17, activists
prevented the exploitation of limestone by a big company that would have ultimately threatened
the groundwater. The activists have the impression that during the last years, people are getting
increasingly interested and active in water related topics.
The interviews with the three activists took place on the same day. In the morning Daniel and
Katharina were interviewed together in their home in the old town of Visby and provided a
warm welcome on a cold Friday. Both seemed friendly and open during the whole interview
which was underlined by tea and the setting in the small kitchen, including a small greenhouse
construction in the corner next to the window. It quickly became clear that an important factor
in Daniel and Katharina’s activism is spreading knowledge and awareness and highlighted that
it is essential and prerequisite for changing the status-quo. For now, Daniel’s main strategy is
to inform himself, promote this knowledge so that it reaches a broader audience and to be an
active member in the Swedish environmental party miljö partiet.
In this context, it shall be mentioned that the citizen activists made references to existing uneven
power dimensions and related controversies: specifically to the industry as an actor with
relations to politics and media and with financial means for PR and lawyer. This stands in sharp
contrast to citizen activists who have most often neither funds nor power. Therefore, the
activists emphasized the connection of the investigated matter to power, politics and influence:
“The politicians should take a lead and base their decision on facts [...] Not on whom they are
friends with.” (Daniel & Katharina, Activists). Another conflict source seems to be the
involvement from companies into water related measures as well as the municipality’s
entanglement, and conflicts caused by political and economic collaboration. Therefore, the
impression is created, that certain stakeholders work under water18. Moreover, the two citizen
activists question the relation between the value of water and the value of money: with their
example of a limestone industry, which paid money to the municipality to get access to a
groundwater reservoir, the activists got the impression that money seems nowadays to have a
higher value than the right of the public to a natural resource.
As a result to this, miscommunication and mistrust are another identified conflict source.
According to Katharina and Daniel the limestone company withheld information from the
public. They criticized that from official side discussion rounds were sometimes impeded by
instructions to Daniel like “that kind of questions we are not answering today, it doesn’t belong
to discussion” (Daniel, Activist). Consequently, the impression was conveyed that from official
side it would be preferred that activists do not make waves19. Also, the perceived interrelation
between media and industry as well as their connection to politics contributes to mistrust.
The communication problem where people of opposing opinion refuse to talk to each other
leads to the next conflict line that according to Katharina and Daniel lies between different
groups in society that support opposing goals related to water topics.
17 Ojnare forest protests that sparked nationwide interest and in the end stopped the intended exploitation of
limestone in the region. 18 The phrase “to work under water” is used when somebody is hiding one's real intentions. 19 The saying “do not make waves” means to not make make trouble and to do what others are doing.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
31
To interview Eva, the researchers drove to her house in the remote countryside in
Katthammarsvik where they were greeted by Eva’s cow strolling around the house in eternal
peace. Eva started becoming active after she faced repeatedly several months of water shortage
in her home, making it unbearable for her to continue living with a severely restricted water
supply. She highlighted her frustration of not being understood and being left alone with the
water situation. Furthermore, she criticizes that people still do not understand the extent of the
water problem on Gotland. From her perspective the solution approach has to be at eye level
and not from top to bottom. When asked about her ideal approach, she is of the opinion that
stakeholder cooperation and communication are crucial to improve the situation. After several
aborted tries to get in contact with various authorities, she and other affected neighbours
initiated a water study circle. In the following, the circle educated itself about water and related
issues and restored over the last decade five wetlands and therewith improved the availability
of water in the countryside20.
She shows courage and takes her activism seriously. Further, she seemed very content and
proud when she showed the researchers her five restored wetlands as well as footage of the
process. Now she has been active for 14 years and has a very distinct focus on continuing her
work. Lastly she highlighted the importance of water and understanding its value:
“So water is everything. It never stops” (Eva, Activist).
According to her, understanding cannot be achieved immediately but “is a process” (Eva,
Activist).
What all activists have in common is that their activism for improving the water situation and
raising awareness is intrinsically motivated, completely voluntarily and within their free time.
Their approaches focus on understanding, communication and cooperation. They are personally
involved and were directly affected by success or failure of their activism related actions. This
became clear when Eva talked about her frustration and Daniel being arrested while protesting.
Further, they are united by their vision to fight for freshwater and do not take it for granted. The
three interviewed citizens pointed out how major the industry's influence is in the context of
water shortage, and how comparatively little, in contrast to that, the industry does. Furthermore,
they consider the interrelations between politics, industry and media as predominantly negative
and as a hindrance for a sustainable good solution regarding the water situation. All three
oppose the desalination plant and Eva explained that the people supplied with that desalinated
water do not want to drink it and prefer water from their own wells. Daniel and Katharina hinted
that considerable parts of the population oppose those plants and criticise the lack of
transparency and communication in this regard. This is reportedly due to the poor water quality
of desalinated water and risks to people’s health. As an alternative Daniel advocated for being
open for other solutions as to “look more at recycling water and […] to protect the supplies we
have as far as we can go” (Daniel, Activist).
20 The mentioned wetlands were financed with funds from the EU.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
32
However, within the activist sector, perceptions differ, too: while Daniel considers the
politician’s solution approach messy, but slowly improving, Eva was frustrated and
disappointed about the politicians work in regard to Gotland’s water problem. She stated that
no authority feels responsible for groundwater issues and that the political sector is only
discussing, but takes no real actions. Also, Daniel and Katharina see rather the bigger picture
with the conflict of interests while Eva cares mostly about the groundwater in the countryside
and the restoration of wetlands.
Concluding, the activists have their own strategy to better the water situation for their own lives
and people’s future on Gotland. When it comes to the question of who all should take
responsibility in regard to the current water situation, it became clear that without the activists
and their involvement the water situation would not have improved in the way it did and might
even have gotten worse.
Generally speaking, all interviewed groups understood that “the water supply doesn’t stand up
to the use, so we are kind of over-using the water supply“(Daniel, Activist). Moreover, some
interviewees alluded that problems related to Gotland are not only in connection with the water
quantity, but also in connection with its quality. Besides, many stakeholders did mention the
climate change as another factor that worsens the overall water situation and understand that
the problem is caused by a combination of factors. Most respondents are aware of the fact that
the water situation differs among the island and perceived that the situation got worse over the
last years. Furthermore, almost all interviewees referred to that the problematic water situation
is not caused by too little water resources, but a problem of mismanagement.
Since there is not one universal definition and understanding given in literature about water
shortage and water scarcity, all interviewed stakeholders on Gotland seem also to have different
understandings and difficulties to grasp what phenomena they are dealing with on the island.
Consequently, the perceptions about the situation differ a lot and there is an unclear use of
terminologies. Further, many respondents admitted that they also do not have the knowledge
about what the different terms mean and that they are used as synonyms. Nevertheless, the most
commonly used term among the affected parties on Gotland is water shortage. This term was
also most often chosen after the researchers provided the interviewees with further information
about the different definitions as it is understood in this research context and will therefore also
be used in the following chapters.
Besides the mentioned aspects, the stakeholders were asked questiones that stand in connection
the theoretical background of this study. A discussion addressing the empirical findings with
regard to the theory will be presented in the following chapter.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
33
6. Discussion: Diving into the deep blue of the matter Following the overview of the stakeholders represented in this study, the coming chapter will
focus on the categories that stand in direct relation to the theoretical background of this paper.
They will be addressed chronologically as in the theory chapter. First, the wicked problems will
find consideration which is divided into stakeholders’ understanding and proposed ways to
address it. The problem itself and how it is understood turned out to be of great importance,
and since the theory of wicked problems plays a substantial role in this research it will find
comprehensive consideration in the following. Then a fluent transition will be made to
institutional voids which will be succeeded by a discussion about the MSP and stakeholder
cooperations. This will be concluded by a discussion of identified conflict sources and barriers
for solving the water shortage on Gotland.
6.1 Understanding of the complexity of the problem – A wicked problem
As described in the theoretical part, water shortage can be labelled as a wicked problem which
is not solvable but only manageable. Yet, just two interviewees, Ulrika (R) and Sylvia (P/A)
were aware of using the term correctly. All other stakeholders characterized the prevalent
phenomena as complex, messy and manyfold21, therefore used adjectives that are perfectly
aligned with the definition of wicked problems. However, they failed to recognize it as such. It
was particularly interesting that even before the term wicked problem occurred, or was further
explained during the interviews, this unintended characterisation of wicked problems took place
by almost all stakeholders. Also, they did not connect their perception of the water situation
with the theoretical concept even after being provided with its definition. Besides that, almost
all stakeholders are of the opinion that since the problem is not wicked, it can be solved with
simple solution approaches and that is is not “rocket science” (Tom, Researcher).
Yet, the question “why is there then still a problem, if it’s so easy to solve?” (Ulrika, Researcher)
does clearly underline the assumption that the situation on Gotland must be to a certain degree
wicked.
Consequently, the questions arise why it is not defined as one and what the consequences of
this misperception are. One suggestion could be that this false understanding or the stakeholders’
hesitation to label it as wicked exists due to a lack of understanding the term itself. All
stakeholder are of the view that in order to solve a problem, it must first be fully understood.
This applies not only for managing water shortage, but also for a broader context of shifting
towards sustainability. Consequently, a first step in order to better the water situation on
Gotland and to be able to develop effective solution approaches, stakeholders have to first
recognize that it is a wicked phenomena that can not be solved with short-term and quick
solutions.
21 The multidimensional and complex nature of the problem has been in particular illustrated when all stakeholders
recognized that the examined phenomena goes far beyond the borders of only water related problems. For example,
a connection was drawn between water affiliated environmental problems on the island, inter alia the threat of
vanishing biodiversity, flora and fauna or irreversible changes in nature landscape. On top of that, the connection
between water security and food security was emphasized. Last, it was pointed out that water shortage is a problem
that extends to economic scales and dimensions and therefore affects the way industries can do business on Gotland.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
34
To summarize, due to the described complex and messy nature of the water problem as well as
the difficulty to predict or even define it, as it could be caused by a lack of understanding among
the interlocuteurs, it is justified to characterize the water situation on Gotland as a wicked
problem. Moreover, it seems to be resistant to easy solutions where every attempt of solving
one aspect of the problem often reveals or creates other problems. For instance, trying to solve
the water shortage with building desalination plants causes rejection and resistance from
substantial parts of the society. As management approaches to wicked problems are always a
try and can only be good-or-bad but not true-or-false according to the literature, an
understanding that it is a wicked problem is needed. The lack of this understanding among the
stakeholders leads to the assumption that the problem is addressed incorrectly with many
attempts failing already in a first stage, when a wicked problem is not recognized as such.
Especially the stakeholders from the I/B- as well as P/A-sector were sure about the solvability
of the problem with either technical or administrative solutions. This goes hand in hand with
the description of wicked problems where stakeholders are very optimistic about the solvability
of the problem with seemingly too simple and quick solutions. This again portrays a lack in
understanding the complexity of the problem which was predominantly the case with the
interviewed stakeholders. However, different stakeholders had different approaches to solve
the problem, which displays the wicked problem-characteristic of irreconcilable stakeholders.
6.2 Addressing the water shortage on Gotland: like drinking a glass of
water22?
Another focus of this work is placed upon perceived ideal ways of dealing with the water
shortage on Gotland by the interviewed stakeholders in order to understand their
comprehension of the topic and thereof following management approaches. This chapter does
not analyse what stakeholders currently do but what they see as an ideal way to deal with the
water situation.
During the research process it became clear that there are differences recognizable of how the
interviewed stakeholders address this issue. All stakeholders have strategic approaches
developed to tackle the problem, but so far only little improvements to better the situation could
be realized. Further, most approaches take only one or very few aspects of the complex problem
into account.
As it seems already to be a challenge to know exactly where the problem lays since it cannot
be found in one place or by one actor only, to start addressing it in an effective way is impeded.
Furthermore, the fact that solutions to wicked problems cannot be tested since every solution
attempt is unique, the process of developing adequate solutions is hampered and can also lead
to a hesitating behavior among relevant stakeholder groups. For this very reason, Ulrika stated
that “you cannot just sit paralyzed and say ok we can’t do anything [...]. It is a wicked problem,
but still, we have to do things, we have to act” (Ulrika, Researcher). Therefore, even if many
solution approaches do not achieve long-term solutions yet, theses initiatives can be seen as a
22 The phrase “drinking a glass of water” is generally used when something is very easy to do.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
35
first step of a long course of finding the right track to manage the current water problem on
Gotland.
Against this background, all interviewees perceived solution approaches shifting towards more
sustainability as to be on the right track when it comes to find solutions. However, the ideas of
sustainable solutions differed even though it was understood that communication and
cooperation are crucial for achieving a sustainable outcome. As Tom mentioned, it might be
time to create solutions that are a“smart investment for the future” (Tom, Researcher).
Therefore, to manage wicked problems, a process of transformation seems to be indispensable,
and requires a combination of long-term strategies as well as “for in the short run good enough
solutions” (Ulrika, Researcher) in everyday processes. Besides, the chosen approaches have to
“allow for flexibility” (ibid.).
In regard to already existing approaches, Ulrika mentioned that in order to become sustainable,
someone has “to reduce something, somewhere” (ibid.) since she suggested that there cannot
be a “win-win situation in the sense of more more more more” (ibid.). Consequently, the
question arises how this can be realized, especially with regard to the tourism industry, but also
other relevant industries that intent to grow. Will it be possible to open the island for a
continuously growing number of tourists while simultaneously finding sustainable solutions to
manage the water situation? How much can settled industries such as Arla and Cementa grow
and increase their production without worsening the water shortage? These questions need to
be addressed at a certain point if a sustainable future shall be achieved. Since the study showed
that a discrepancy prevails among the interviewees regarding the responsible actors, authorities
and concrete methods, this will find consideration in the following chapter addressing
institutional voids.
6.3 Institutional voids
As both suggested by the theory as well as by multiple stakeholders, the problem of water
shortage seems to be partly caused by a lack of clear defined responsibilities and
mismanagement.
This became evident when regarding supposed institutional voids the interviewees either passed
on responsibility to other stakeholders or are clear about that the problem is caused by
mismanagement: For instance, Jon from Cementa referred to RG concerning the task to build
infrastructure for storing water or connecting water sources and people. Yet, Lars and Magnus
from RG admitted that their responsibility is limited due to the distinction between private and
municipality water supply: “it is a problem to discuss also, not for us but for the politicians”
(Lars, Water & Sewerage Department). Also Frida explained that Länsstyrelsen is not
responsible and referred to the politicians. On the other hand, Ulrika said that she can
understand when businesses refer to the Region to “make the situation work” (Ulrika,
Researcher) as they see their task done with paying taxes. Eva (A) explained the institutional
void of managing groundwater clearly when she stated that the government has no
responsibility and that the commune can decide how much responsibility they want to take
regarding groundwater and that RG has decided to not take responsibility. What caught the
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
36
attention of the researchers was the impression that especially the interviewed actors from RG
and Länsstyrelsen cross-referred to each other when confronted with the question of the
responsibility. However, as Ulrika summed it up, it is a “circular argument going on forever
and ever” (Ulrika, Researcher) that does not contribute to a solution finding oriented process
but rather its wickedness.
Another institutional void that was revealed is that Frida, as a representative of the CAB “didn’t
get to talk to the tourist industry” (Frida, Länsstyrelsen). The importance of including this
particular industry was mentioned by all stakeholders as substantially contributing to the
strained water situation. It can further be argued that an institutional void prevails in regard to
distributing competences of deciding suitable measures since all stakeholders interviewed have
different ideas about that. This seems to be the case when Daniel (A) speaks about him being
contacted by municipality employees for information and support although they are classified
as responsible. The activists as well as Jon from Cementa agreed upon that it is a problem of
mismanagement. Especially Eva supported that point strongly with saying “Yes, it is only the
management, nothing happens. We have a lot of water, a lot of water” (Eva, Activist).
Moreover, a lack of financial resources seems to add a financial dimension to the issue of
institutional voids since this hinders the work processes related to addressing the water shortage
as mentioned by several interviewees.
As supposed by the wicked problem theory, sovereign policy failing to provide solutions for
pressing problems is another aspect adding to the water issue on Gotland. As described by
Sylvia (P/A), there is a lack of means how to manage the problem since it is an unprecedented
case to deal with. Therefore, the literature stating a lack of generally accepted rules and norms
according to which politics is to be conducted is proven. Because of this lack and failure to
address the problem, the institutional arrangements have to participate in polycentric networks
of governance – as illustrated by Frida’s (P/A) water supply plan group, the vattenråd23, RG-
tourism industry as well as RG-university cooperations, and Eva’s wetlands restoration. The
further in the literature mentioned simultaneously emerging new citizen-actors and other new
forms of mobilization, which are challenging the rules and norms of the corresponding
participants are exemplified by Eva’s, Daniel’s and Katharina’s activism. Therewith, this
research shows that actions take place in an institutional void and the government does not
represent the only actor in the process of policy making nor can the political setting be taken as
given anymore. This was further the case with the industrial and business actors and their
initiatives with optimizing processes related to water usage. Also the argumentation of a new
orientation to use processes to solve problems was confirmed by the stakeholders talking about
preferred cooperation and communication in regard to solution approaches. The newly emerged
sort of collective will formation as described by the literature is illustrated by the stakeholders
addressing the water shortage united by the same aim to secure future freshwater supply.
In addition to the just discussed obstacle of missing clearly defined responsibilities it was often
mentioned that stakeholders have to come together in order to discuss and elaborate a solution
in cooperation. Therefore, the MSP seems to provide a feasible approach in regard to both
23 Swedish for “water board”, it deals with water related questions on Gotland.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
37
helping to manage the water problem as well as to do justice to its insolvability, as it will be
discussed in the following.
6.4 Multi-stakeholder perspective and cooperation
Applying the MSP that looks upon the way people from various backgrounds work together to
address complex issues and goes beyond traditional concepts of hierarchies of power made
clear that each stakeholder has a unique perspective and expertise that needs to be recognized.
However, it was also shown by the field study that the multiple perspectives present, as is
typical for a wicked problem, can result in competing problem definitions. This was the case
when some stakeholders spoke of increasing numbers of tourists, industries and desalination
plants as problems while others saw the issue rather in limited financial means, rain patterns
and controversies around the topic. The inability of the stakeholders to agree on the problems
to be addressed, which makes it difficult to find suitable and sustainable solutions, can therefore
be stated to be prevalent to the Gotland case. However, almost all stakeholders perceive
communication and cooperation as extremely important in the context of the water situation on
the island. Furthermore, in regard to the question of who all should take responsibility, all
stakeholders agreed that the problem does not lay in one place or by one actor although it was
striking that several interviewees referred to the politicians as responsible.
As many interlocuteurs mentioned there are already many existing cooperations between
different stakeholder groups. However, these existing alliances are mostly between only two
and not multiple stakeholder groups (compare table 1):
Table 1: Already existing cooperations between different stakeholders on Gotland to better the
strained water situation
In the light of the importance of stakeholder cooperation, a wide range of problems regarding
existing collaborations were pointed out: First of all, the polarized character of the water
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
38
problem was mentioned by Jon (I/B), Daniel and Katharina (A), a circumstance that
complicates often the communication or is seen as a hindrance factor to enable new
cooperations. Secondly, different interests of the different stakeholder groups seem to bear the
possibility to make it extremely difficult to find a starting point and common ground. Then,
different expectations of cooperating partners were mentioned as a problem. Ulrika also added
referring to her research project that the scientists “are kind of struggling with what
corporations can really be, and we have so far, no real answer to that” (Ulrika, Researcher).
It was further shown that the current democratic paradigm does not necessarily give birth to
actors that generate the best solutions for existing problems, as acknowledged by the MSP. Yet,
Ulrika emphasized that it is important“to have an open, democratic process in decision making,
otherwise it will go bad” (Ulrika, Researcher).
What is suggested by the theory, namely to have more practical arrangements with more active,
cooperative management, was also supported by all the interviewees. Also, the relationship
between stakeholder participation and decision-making remained often unclear. This
uncertainty results in the stakeholders being frequently frustrated in their efforts to develop
solutions, as well as disappointed by the outcomes, as it is typical for stakeholders in a wicked
problem. In this regard, being frustrated by the lack of understanding from official side was
portrayed by Daniel and Eva (A). Also, the industrial sector showed traces of disappointment
that their worked out solutions were not fully appreciated or intentionally opposed. This
discontentment can be related to ineffective addressing of the problem which again is the result
of an insufficient and incomplete understanding of the extent and complexity of the water
shortage. This leads to the last category of conflict sources and identified barriers to solve the
water problem on Gotland.
6.5 Conflict sources and barriers for solving the problem
The fundamental conflict potential in the examined case lies within the various ways the water
situation is understood, perceived and addressed by the different stakeholders. The fact that it
is not seen as a wicked problem leads particularly to a misperception of the situation and
consequently to the perceived problem customized solution approaches. The study revealed that
the water situation and its handling can also happen to be a conflict source. In this connection
several barriers were mentioned that hinder the finding of suitable approaches. The conflict
source of referring with the responsibility to deal with the water shortage to other stakeholders
was already discussed beforehand. In addition, the lack of established and inclusive
cooperations can be understood as a barrier for solving the issue and a potential cause for
conflicts.
Another source of conflict identified was that citizens can have the feeling to be left out and
ignored when striving for solutions. In many cases solution approaches involve only one or few
actors. Consequently, the perspectives and efforts of some stakeholders do not find recognition
which can result either in frustration or rejection of suggested solutions (e.g. desalination plants).
This leads to the next identified conflict that revolves around proposed solutions: while some
see them in technical, calculated quick-fixes, like the desalination plant and optimized
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
39
production processes, others opt for long-term changes in the lifestyle, such as saving water,
restoration of wetlands, connecting the water supply to other yet unexploited water sources and
water recycling-systems. Yet, this is to be put in relation to financial issues that are still an
obstacle when it comes to the realization of strategies tackling the water shortage as it was
mentioned by several stakeholders interviewed. Another barrier for implementing a sustainable
water management is the very economic strategy for the future on Gotland, namely to increase
tourism since more tourists result in a higher water need. As stated by Ulrika (R), tourism is the
opposite of sustainability which results in a fundamental conflict.
To conclude this section, the main barriers identified for solving the water problem on Gotland
are of responsibility-taking, cooperative and financial nature. Yet, they show the characteristic
of manyfold, complex obstacles which builds the bridge to wicked problems and a lack of
functioning stakeholder communication and cooperation.
In summary, this chapter discussed the main findings of this present work in connection with
the theories used for answering the research questions. In this regard it became clear that all
interviewed stakeholders describe the water situation with the characteristics of a wicked
problem but do not clearly recognise it as such. Consequently, the methods and strategies they
utilize for addressing the problem differ widely which is also a result of the identified lack of
clear responsibilities, namely identified institutional voids. In its combination this gives
potential rise to conflict among stakeholders which can affect the solution finding process
negatively.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
40
7. Conclusion
In the following, a clear conclusion will be drawn; clearer than the water in the Baltic Sea on
a bright summer day in June. In addition, implications will be addressed and an outlook
presented.
During the study it became apparent that a combination of different stakeholders are variously
affected by the water shortage on Gotland, which is caused by a combination of manifold
factors. Yet, the problem is not perceived or understood uniformly. The interviewed
stakeholders address and manage the water issue regarding their individual understanding of
the situation which was proven to not immediately improve the case.
While in theory the conceptualisation of the water shortage on Gotland as a wicked problem is
recognized by the stakeholders, they lack a practical comprehension. Since wicked problems
can only be managed but not solved, the comprehensive understanding of the stakeholders
involved is essential in order to address it effectively. To add to the complexity of the matter,
the political institutions are expressively expected to solve the problem, which due to the nature
of wicked problems cannot be achieved. Consequently, the water shortage on the island faces
institutional voids in regard to the responsibility of managing it.
It can be assumed that due to a lack of understanding of current cooperations and finding
comprehensive solution approaches are hindered. Thus, the present case reveals many
challenges and obstacles that could be overcome, but in order to do so, the problem first needs
to be recognized as such, understood and finally overcome in order to better the situation.
Consequently, an understanding of the complexity as well as interconnectedness and therewith
wicked problems is a prerequisite for a solution-finding process. Following a deep
understanding, the two components communication and cooperation were identified as
essential for addressing the problem, which can due to its nature only be managed but not
solved. The present research showed that the relevant stakeholders are only beginning to
address the water shortage. This could be partly due to the fact that the water issue has not
reached extreme proportions on Gotland yet and therefore lacks urgency. It can be seen as a
positive starting point that all stakeholders were highly motivated in relation to the case and
emphasised their interest in communication and cooperation. However, although all
stakeholders understood the situation and advocated for a more active exchange, it became
clear during some interviews that some stakeholders have reservations to talk to each other as
they seem to have a biased opinion about one another. Nonetheless, several stakeholders are
already involved in addressing the water shortage on Gotland and cooperating with each other
though the results are not yet clearly improving the situation. Yet, the involvement of multiple
stakeholders can be seen as a positive development.
Since the political sector plays an important role in creating an administrative frame for finding
solution approaches, another relevant step is to create structures, distribute and take
responsibilities in order to eliminate the existing institutional voids. This might be an important
step in order to not only discuss the problem, but to start taking action. Instead of highlighting
the differences in backgrounds and points of views, it is proposed to rather focus on mutual
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
41
strengths, finding common ground as well as use the various specific knowledges available.
Only resolutions that are developed with regard to all parties affected have the capacity to
satisfy all. Especially the example of the desalination plants show that one side-oriented
solution approaches do not necessarily provide the outcomes hoped for by all stakeholders.
In summary, the main findings of this research are thus that in order to address a wicked
situation accordingly three elements are essential: comprehensive understanding, as well as
multi-stakeholder communication and cooperation.
To conclude this thesis and to give an outlook to what needs to be done the authors recommend
to consider the strategy of“the problem is the plan” (Ulrika, Researcher). This implies that
every plan needs to be customized and fitting to the individual problem that due to its wicked
nature cannot be generalized and needs to be addressed by unprecedented management
approaches rather than ready made solutions. Subsequently, this necessarily open-minded and
flexible approach to handle this kind of problems can serve as a model for the art of managing,
but not solving the problem.
7.1 Wicked, but worth it – Implications and outlook
By dealing with the water situation on Gotland it became clear that it is not only necessary to
address wicked problems like the discussed water shortage but also rewarding. This will be
elaborated in the following and last chapter with regards to limitations of this thesis and
recommendations for future research. Research implications will be addressed before
proceeding to theoretical and practical implications.
Firstly, in regard to research implications, it is important to mention that in connection to water
shortage in perceived water rich areas, the present study is one of the first that sets its focus on
such a geographical area. Therefore, further research is suggested regarding this field. In
addition, there is ample room for further investigation of Northern Europe’s water shortage, as
well as the related value, justice and ethics conflicts in the shadow of political and industrial
interests. In direct connection to the paper at hand it can be fruitful to evaluate the described
approaches of tackling the water shortage on Gotland. In this regard, the water shortage on
Gotland is a chance because it has been identified and addressed as a problem, which is
accompanied by an available knowledge and resource base enhancing the chances for success.
Yet, future studies could investigate ways to enhance the understanding of wicked problems in
institutions and among stakeholders. Furthermore, since a limitation of this work is that it was
restricted to a geographically cut-off region with a limited selection of relevant stakeholder
groups, it is recommended that future research focus on other regions and stakeholders when
investigating water shortages in connection with wicked problems, institutional voids and MSP.
However, the presented case set on an island could in its exclusiveness find application in other
similar settings.
Secondly, in regard to theoretical implications of this work it could be shown that Gotland’s
water shortage was not understood as such by relevant stakeholder groups thus giving reason
to take a closer look at the theory of wicked problems. The identified problem of understanding
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
42
the theory could be due to a shortcoming in the theoretical background or knowledge of most
stakeholders. On the other hand, it could be assumed that many stakeholders face difficulties
in understanding the wickedness of the water shortage since the theory of wicked problems
does not provide an optimal definition of the presented case. Therefore, it may be supposed
that there are some gaps in this particular theory in regard to sustainability challenges, such as
water shortage, and that the current state of the theory does not hold water24. The examination
of the literature on wicked problems revealed that most research builds on the original work of
Rittel and Webber (1973), developed almost 50 years ago. This applies also to studies that
combine sustainability issues and wicked problems. However, problems like water shortage in
water rich countries and other current sustainability challenges have become significantly more
important during the last few years, and could be regarded as the most relevant ones of our
time (Brundtland, 1989) therewith making it a current issue. In regard to this topicality, it may
seem contradictory to connect these challenges to a framework developed in 1973. The matter
of wicked problems appears more relevant than ever, since the dimension of globalization
nowadays leads to unpredictable and complex wicked problems. Moreover, the original ten
characteristics of wicked problems by Rittel and Webber (1973) have been developed for a
class of social system problems. Sustainability issues, however, involve social, environmental
and economic issues (Elkington, 1990). Consequently, it is evident that in the context of
wicked, sustainable problems it might be time to rework the originally constructed framework.
A first attempt of such a revision was done by Duckett et al. (2016) who reframed the original
ten characteristics by condensing them into six descriptive categories for wicked
environmental problems. However, this first trial created in the researchers’ opinion six
complicated, abstract and incomprehensible categories and is consequently of limited practical
use. Therefore, one additional attempt for further research could be to further develop the
theory of wicked problems and make it applicable to a class of sustainability problems. In this
connection, the key findings of this work (comprehensive understanding of wicked problems,
communication and cooperation of stakeholders) could be a first contribution to this
amplification.
To conclude this work with practical implications, it is to mention that a further development
of the research field of wicked problems could enhance the development of long-term solution
approaches for the potentially most substantial and threatening challenges of our time:
sustainability issues. Consequently, an extension in this field seems required, since without a
shift into a more sustainable future the planet could face disastrous and irreversible
consequences that could jeopardize the wellbeing of all living on earth. In the context of water
and other resources, there needs to be a change of mindsets since the current unsustainable
attitude of “after us the deluge” is no longer tenable if this precious earth is to be preserved
for future generations. Therefore, despite all their complexity, messiness and difficulty in
addressing them, attempts to manage sustainable problems might be wicked, but absolutely
worth it.
24 The phrase “not hold water” is used when a statement or belief doesn’t hold water, it means it has some flaws
and is probably not completely true or correct.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
43
8. References
Ackoff, R. 1974. Redesigning the Future. New York: Wiley.
Akerman, S. and Siltberg, T. 1991. “Dynamik och konstans i den gotländska
befolkningsutvecklingen pa 1800-talet-Resurser och människor i en brytningstid.
Landsbygd i förvandling. Gotländsk odling och bebyggelse under 1800-talet”.
Bebyggelsehistorisk Tidskrift, vol. 21, pp. 75-112.
Alcamo, J., Döll P., Henrichs, T., Kaspar, F., Lehner, B., Rösch, T. and Siebert, S. 2003.
“Global estimates of water withdrawals and availability under current and future
‘business-as-usual’ conditions”. Hydrolgical Science Journal, vol. 48, no. 1, pp 339-48.
Alcamo, J., Flörke, M. and Märker, M. 2007. “Future long-term changes in global water
resources driven by socio-economic and climatic changes”. Hydrological Science
Journal, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 247-75.
Arla Foods 2017. Visby Mejeri. Retrieved May 16, 2017, from
https://www.arla.se/bondeagda-arla/om-oss/mejerier/visby-mejeri/
Ask, J. and Ronstrom, O. (forthcoming). “Producing islandness. Visitors, visited and
destinations in tourist brochures”.
Australian Public Service Commission (APSC) 2007. “Tackling wicked problems: a public
policy perspective.” Retrieved April 29, 2017, from
http://www.apsc.gov.au/ data/assets/pdf file/ 0005/6386/wickedproblems.pdf
Baird, J., Plummer, R., Bullock, R., Dupont, D., Heinmiller, T., Jollineau, M., Kubik, W.,
Renzetti, S. and Vasseur, L. 2016. “Contemporary Water Governance: Navigating Crisis
Response and Institutional Constraints”, Water, vol. 8, no. 224.
Balint, P. J., Stewart, R. E., Desai, A., and Walters, L. C. 2011. Wicked environmental
problems: managing uncertainty and conflict. Washington: Island Press.
Bastani, M., Curtis, P. Dahlqvist, P., Erlström, M., Gustafsson, M., Jorgensen, F., Olander,
H., Persson, L., Schoning, K., Thorsbrink, M. and Triump, C. A. 2015. “SkyTEM-
undersökningar pa Gotland.” Sveriges geologiska undersökning - Geological Survey of
Sweden Rapporter och meddelanden, vol. 136, pp. 3-106.
Bixio, D., Thoeye C., De Koning J., Joksimovic D., Savic D., Wintgens T. and Melin T.
2006. “Wastewater reuse in Europe”. Desalination, vol. 18, no.1, pp. 89-101.
Brown, H. S., Vergragt, P., Green, K. and Berchicci, L. 2003, “Learning for sustainability
transition through bounded socio-technical experiments in personal mobility”, Technology
Analysis & Strategic Management, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 291-315.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
44
Brown, V. A., Harris, J. A., and Russell, J. Y. 2010. Tackling wicked problems through the
transdisciplinary imagination. London: Earthscan.
Brundtland, G.H. 1987. “Our Common Future, Chairman's Foreword”. Our Common Future:
Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. UN Documents.
Retrieved March 02, 2017, from
http://www.un-documents.net/ocf-cf.htm
Bryson, J. M., and Crosby, B. C. 1992. Leadership for the common good. 1ackling public
problems in a shared-power world. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Carlsson-Kanyama, A. K., Dreborg, H., Moll, H., and Padovan, D. 2008. “Participative
Backcasting: A tool for involving stakeholders in local sustainability planning”. Futures,
vol. 40, pp. 34-46.
Casey, D. and Murphy, K. 2009. “Issues in using methodological triangulation in
research”. Nurse Researcher, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 40-55.
Cementa 2017. Hållbarhet. Retrieved April 17, 2017, from
http://www.cementa.se/sv/hallbarhet
Conklin, J. 2005. Wicked problems and social complexity, in dialogue mapping: Building
shared understanding of wicked problems. Wiley: West Sussex.
Crotty, J. 2012. Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: SAGE Publications.
Dorado, S. and Ventresca, M.J. 2013. “Crescive entrepreneurship in complex social
problems: Institutional conditions for entrepreneurial engagement”. Journal of Business
Venturing, vol. 28, pp. 69-82.
Duckett, D., Feliciano, D., Martin-Ortega, J. and Munoz-Rojas, J. 2016. “Tackling wicked
environmental problems: The discourse and its influence on praxis in Scotland”.
Landscape Urban Planning. Retrieved April 25, 2017, from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.03.015
Elkington, J. 1999. Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business,
Oxford: Capstone.
Ericson I Ubbholt. 2017. “Historielöshet genomsyrar klimatdebatten nu om vattenbrist.”
Miljö- energi- och klimatblogg. Retrieved March 15, 2017, from
http://www.ericsoniubbhult.se/visa.lasso?ukat_id=8000000000065215&kat_id=8450000000
0010197&mall=1-spalt.lasso
Falkenmark M., Berntell A., Jägerskog A., Lundqvist J., Matz M., and Tropp H. 2007. “On
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
45
the verge of a new water scarcity: a call for good governance and human ingenuity”.
Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI.) Retrieved March 03, 2017, from
http://www.siwi.org/publications/on-the-verge-of-a-new-water-scarcity/
Falkenmark M., Lundqvist J. and Widstrand C. 1989. “Macro-scale water scarcity requires
micro-scale approaches”, Natural Resources Forum, vol. 13, no. 1 pp. 258-67.
Feldmann, L. F. 2012. Water. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Frame, B. and Brown, J. 2007. “Developing post-normal technologies for sustainability”.
Ecological Economics, vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 225-241.
Funtowiczi, S. and Ravetzii, J. 2003. “Post-Normal Science”. International Society for
Ecological Economics. Internet Encyclopaedia of Ecological. Institute for the Protection
and Security of the Citizen (IPSC), European Commission. Research Methods
Consultancy, London, England. Economics. Retrieved April 22, 2017, from
http://isecoeco.org/pdf/pstnormsc.pdf
Gain, A. K., Giupponi, C. and Wada, Y. 2016. “Measuring global water security towards
sustainable development goals”. Environmental Research Letters, vol. 11, no.1.
Gleick, P.H. 1993. Water in Crisis: A Guide to the World’s Fresh Water Resources.
Oxford New York: University Press.
Gleick, P. H. 1996. Basic water requirements for human activities: Meeting basic needs.
Water international, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 83-92.
Gleick P. H. 2003. “Water use”. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, vol. 28, no.
1, pp. 275-314.
Gleick, P. H., and Palaniappan, M. 2010. “Peak water limits to freshwater withdrawal and
use”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 107, no.1, pp. 11155-11162.
Golafshani, N. 2003. “Understanding Reliability and Validity in Qualitative
Research”. Qualitative Report, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 597-606.
Gotlands Kommun 2005. “Vattenplan för Gotlands Kommun. 2005”. Ledningskontoret,
Miljö- och hälsoskyddskontoret, Stadsarkitektkontoret, Tekniska förvaltningen. Retrieved
March 02, 2017, from
http://www.gotland.se/41892
Grimstedt, L. 2012. “Aktivister och polis i sammandrabbning vid avverkning på Gotland”.
Verbunduk & Skogsland. Land. Retrieved April 06, 2017, from
http://www.lantbruk.com/skog/aktivister-och-polis-i-sammandrabbning-vid-avverkning-
pa-gotland
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
46
Grin, J., Rotmans, J., and Schot, J. 2010. Transitions to Sustainable Development, New
Directions in the Study of Long Term Transformative Change. New York: Routledge.
Gunda, T., Benneyworth, L. and Burchfield, E. 2015. “Exploring water indices and
associated parameters: a case study approach”. Water Policy, vol. 17, no. 1, p. 98.
Gupta, J., Akhmouch, A., Cosgrove, W., Hurwitz, Z., Maestu, J. and Ünver, O. 2013.
“Policymakers’ reflections on water governance issues”. Ecology and Society, vol. 18,
no. 1. Retreived April 13, 2017, from
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol18/iss1/art35/
Hajer, M. 2003. “Policy without polity? Policy analysis and the institutional void”.
Department of Political Science, University of Amsterdam. Policy Sciences, vol. 36, pp.
175-195.
Head, B. W. and Alford, J. 2015. “Wicked problems: Implications for public policy and
management”. Administration and Society, vol. 47, no. 6, pp. 711-739.
Healey, P. 1998. “Collaborative planning in a stakeholder society”. Town Planning Review,
vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 1-21.
Healy, S. 2011. “Post-normal science in postnormal times”. Futures, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 202-
220.
Hemmati, M. with contributions from Dodds, F., Enyati, J., and McHarry, J. 2002. Multi-
Stakeholder processes for governance and sustainability: beyond deadlock and conflict.
London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.
Hochstrat, R. and Wintgens, T. 2003. “AQUAREC”, Report on Milestone M3I, Draft of
wastewater reuse potential estimation, Interim report. Retrieved March 19, 2017 from:
http://www.gotland.se/89983
Innes, J., and Booher, D. E. 2010. Planning with complexity: an introduction to collaborative
rationality for public policy. New York: Routledge.
Johansson, A. R., 2003. Arbetarrörelse på en ö. Del 1. Pa Gotland fram till 1914. Gotland:
Haimdagars Förlag.
Jury, W. A. and Vaux, H. J. Jr. 2005. “The role of science in solving the world’s emerging
water problems”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 102, no. 44, pp.
15715–15720.
Jury, W. A. and Vaux, H. J. Jr. 2007. “The emerging global water crisis: managing scarcity
and conflict between water users Advances”. Agronomy, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 1-76.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
47
Kanae, S. and Oki, T. 2006. “Global Hydrological Cycles and World Water Resources”.
Science, vol. 313, no. 1, pp. 1068-1072.
Kovacic, S. F. and Sousa-Poza, A. 2013. Managing and Engineering in Complex
Situations. Heidelberg: Springer Dordrecht.
Länsstyrelsen Gotlands Län, 2017. “Vatten och vattenanvändning”. Startsida. Miljö &
klimat. Vatten och vattenanvändning. Retrieved March 03, 2017, from
http://www.lansstyrelsen.se/Gotland/Sv/miljo-och-klimat/vatten-och
vattenanvandning/Pages/ default.aspx
Länsstyrelsen Gotlands Län. 2017. “Water and water usage”. Home page. Environment &
climate. Water and water usage. Retrieved April 03, 2017 from
http://www.lansstyrelsen.se/Gotland/En/miljo-och-klimat/vatten-och-
vattenanvandning/Pages/default.aspx
Länsstyrelsen Gotlands län 2017. “The County Administrative Board”. Retrieved 17. May
2017, from
http://www.lansstyrelsen.se/Gotland/En/Pages/default.aspx
Lehner B., Döll P., Alcamo J., Henrichs T. and Kasper F. 2006. “Estimating the impact of
global change on flood and drought risks in Europe: a continental integrated analysis”.
Climate Change, vol. 75, no. 1, pp. 273-99.
Lincoln, Y. S., and Guba, E.G. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE
Publications.
Lindegren, E. and K. 1976. Människor och miljöer. Gotland: Gotlands Konst AB.
Mayring, P. 2000. “Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse”, Qualitative Social Research, vol. 1, no. 2.
McConell, A. 2016. “Reappraising Wicked Problems: Wicked Policy vs. Simple Politics”.
Paper Presented at Political Studies Association (PSA). Department of Government and
International Relations School of Social and Political Sciences University of Sydney.
Retrieved April 30, 2017, from
https://www.psa.ac.uk/sites/default/files/conference/papers/2016/PSA%202016%20McCo
nnell%20WIcked%20Problems%20COMPLETE.pdf
MittResVader 2017. “Gotland: Klimat och historiskt väder”. Klima på Gotland. Retrieved
March 31, 2017, from
http://www.mittresvader.se/l/sverige/klimat-gotland-temperaturer-vattentemperatur.php
Müller, J.M., 2001. Reforming the United Nations: The Quiet Revolution. The Hague:
Kluwer Law International.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
48
North, D. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
O’Connor, M. 1999. “Dialogue and debate in a post-normal practice of science: a reflexion.
Futures”, Futures, vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 671-687.
O’Lear, S. 2010. Environmental politics: Scale and power. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Öhrman, R. 1991. “Bonden här gör vad han vill - om gotländskt jordbruk under 1800-talet.
Landsbygd i förvandling. Gotländsk odling och bebyggelse under 1800-talet”.
Bebyggelsehistorisk Tidskrift, vol. 21, pp. 113-138.
Oki, T. and Kanae, S. 2006. “Global hydrological cycles and world water resources”.
Science, vol. 313, no. 1, pp. 1068-1072.
Olofsson, R. 1992. Gård och bygd i förändring. Omlag: Harald Norrby.
Olsson, L. and Öhrman, R. 1996. Gotland Past and present. Gotland: Gotlands
Lämmedelscentra.
Ostrom E. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective
Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ostrom E. 1999. “Revisiting the Commons: Local Lessons, Global Challenges”, Science.
vol. 284, no. 1, pp. 278-282.
Ostrom E., 2000. “Reformulating the Commons”. Swiss Political Science Review, vol. 6, no.
1, pp. 29-52.
Padowski, J. C., Gorelick S. M, Thompson, B. H., Rozelle S. and Fendorf, S. 2015.
“Assessment of human–natural system characteristics influencing global freshwater
supply vulnerability”. Environmental Research Letters, vol. 10, no. 1.
Pearce, F. 2007. When the rivers run dry: Water - the defining crisis of the twenty-first
century. Boston: Beacon Press.
Persson, G. 2015. “Climate in Sweden 1860-2014. Klimatologi.” Swedish Meteorological
and Hydrological Institute. Retrieved March 25, 2017, from
http://www.smhi.se/en/publications/climate-in-sweden-1860-2014-1.89804
Polit, D. F. and Beck, C. T. 2012. Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for
nursing practice. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
49
Ponterotto, J. G. 2005. “Qualitative research in counseling psychology: A primer on research
paradigms and philosophy of science”. Journal of counseling psychology, vol. 52, no. 2,
p. 126.
Postel, S., Daily, G. C. and Ehrlich, P. R. 1996. “Human appropriation of renewable fresh
water”. Science, vol. 271, no. 1, pp. 785-788.
Pryshlakivsky, J. and Searcy, C. 2013. “Sustainable Development as a Wicked Problem”, in
S. F. Kovacic and A. Sousa-Poza (eds.), Managing and Engineering in Complex
Situations. Heiderberg: Springer Dordrecht, pp. 109-128.
Radio Sweden 2016. “Sweden: Gotland & Öland could face severe water shortage.” Eye on
the article. Retrieved March 12, 2017, from
http://www.rcinet.ca/eye-on-the-arctic/2016/03/17/sweden-gotland-oland-could-face-
severe-water-shortage/
Ravetz, J. 2011. “Postnormal Science and the maturing of the structural contradictions of
modern European science”. Futures, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 142-148.
Region Gotland 2015. “Gotland in Figures 2015”. Facts and Statistics. Region Gotland.
Region Gotland, 2017. “Spara Vatten”. Retrieved May 16, 2017, from
http://www.gotland.se/sparavatten
Rittel, H. W. J. and Webber, M. M. 1973. “Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning”,
Policy Sciences, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 155-169
Robson, J. and Robson I. 1996. “From shareholders to stakeholders: critical issues from
tourism marketers”. Tourism Management, vol. 17, pp. 7, pp. 533-540.
Rockström 2009. “A safe operating space for humanity”. Nature, vol. 461, no.1, pp. 472-475.
Saldana, J., Leavy, P., and Beretvas, N. 2011. Fundamentals of Qualitative Research.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Salman A. M. S. and McInerney-Lankford S. 2004. “The Human Right to Water: Legal and
Policy Dimensions”, Washington, DC: World Bank Documents. Retrieved March 16,
2017, from
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/219811468157522364/The-human-right-to-
water-legal-and-policy-dimensions
Sardar, Z. 2010. Welcome to postnormal times. Futures, vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 435-444.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
50
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. 2012. Research Methods for Business Students. 6th
Edition. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
Shindler, B. A. and Cramer, L. A. 1999. “Shifting public values for forest management:
Making sense of wicked problems”. Western Journal of Applied Forestry, vol. 14, no. 1,
pp. 28-34.
Silvermann, D. 1997. Qualitative Research – Theory, Method and Practice. London: SAGE
Publications Ltd.
Smith A.L. and Rogers D.V. 1990. “Isle of Wight water metering trial”. Journal – Institution
of Water and Environmental Management, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 403-409.
Srinivasan V., Lambin E. F., Gorelick S. M., Thompson, B. H. and Rozelle, S. 2012. “The
nature and causes of the global water crisis: syndromes from a meta-analysis of coupled
human – water studies”. Water Resource Research, vol. 48, no. 1.
Staddon, C. 2010. Managing Europe's Water Resources: twenty-first century challenges.
London: Taylor and Francis.
Suleiman, L. and Khakee, A. 2017. “Rethinking water reform policies as a ‘wicked problem’
the case of urban water supply in Ghana”, International Planning Studies. Retrieved April
03, 2017, from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313812316_Rethinking_water_reform_policies_
as_a_%27wicked_problem%27_the_case_of_urban_water_supply_in_Ghana
Sveriges Radio 2016. “Farmers in southeast struggle with dry spell”. Radio Sweden.
Retrieved April 10, 2017, from
http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&artikel=6535006
Sveriges Radio 2016a. “Water shortage in southern Sweden spreads”. Radio Sweden.
Retrieved March 02, 2017, from
http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&artikel=6483645
Sveriges Radio 2017. “Regionen får sänka vattennivån i Tingstäde träsk”. Radio Sweden.
Retrieved May 16, 2017, from
http://sverigesradio.se/sida/gruppsida.aspx?programid=94&grupp=22974&artikel=
6690471
Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI) 2015. “Urban Water Vision”.
Retrieved March 25, 2017, from
https://www.smhi.se/en/research/research-departments/hydrology/urban-water-vision-eng-
1.22093
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
51
Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI) 2016. “Markägare samlar vatten
på Gotland. Start. Nyhetsarkiv. Markägare samlar vatten på Gotland”. Retrieved March
31, 2017, from
https://www.smhi.se/nyhetsarkiv/markagare-samlar-vatten-pa-gotland-1.111631
Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI) 2017. “Climate impacts – water
in the future”. Retrieved March 25, 2017, from
https://www.smhi.se/en/research/research-departments/hydrology/climate-impacts-
water-in-the-future-1.7897
Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute - The Geological Survey of Sweden
(SMHI SGU) 2017. “Beräknade grundvattennivåer. Diagram. Valt område: välj område i
kartan”. Retrieved March 25, 2017, from
http://grundvatten.nu/modelgroundwater/client-sgu/index.html
The Swedish Portal for Climate Change (SPCC), 2016. “Groundwater. Climate Change.
Precipitation. Groundwater 2016”. Retrieved March 27, 2017, from
http://www.klimatanpassning.se/en/climate-change-in-sweden/precipitation/groundwater-
1.97810
Thompson, R. 1993. “Future Droughts, Water Shortages in Parts of Western Europe”. EOS,
vol. 74, no. 14, pp. 161-165.
TT/The Local 2015. “Sweden moves to save disputed Gotland forest”. The local SE.
Retrieved April 03, 2017, from
https://www.thelocal.se/20150831/government-moves-to-save-disputed-gotland-forest-
ojnare-mining
UN-Water (2014). “UN-Water: Home.” Retrieved March 20, 2017, from
http://www.unwater.org/
United Nations (UN) 2015. “Sustainable Development Goals”. Retrieved February 1, 2017,
from
http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/
United Nations (UN) 2016. “Sustainable Development Goals”. Retrieved March 20, 2017,
from
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/?menu=1300
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) 2006. “Human development report 2006:
Beyond scarcity: Power, poverty and the global water crisis”. Retrieved March 22, 2017,
from
http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/267/hdr06-complete.pdf
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
52
Vörösmarty C. J., Green, P., Salisbury, J. and Lammers, R. B. 2000. “Global water resources:
vulnerability from climate change and population growth”. Science, vol. 289, pp. 284-
288.
Walsham, G. 1993. Interpreting Information Systems in Organizations. Wiley: Chichester.
Weber, E., Memon, A., and Painter, B. 2011. “Science society and water resources in New
Zealand: Recognizing and overcoming a societal impasse”. Journal of Environmental
Policy and Planning, vol. 13, pp. 49-69.
Widegren, P. 2017. “Allvarlig vattenbrist på Gotland”. SVT Nyheter. Retrieved April 07,
2017, from
http://www.svt.se/nyheter/lokalt/ost/vattenbrist-pa-gotland-1
Wimmer F., Audsley E., Malsy M., Savin C., Dunford R., Harrison P. A., Schaldach R. and
Floerke M. 2014. “Modelling the effects of cross-sectoral water allocation schemes in
Europe”. Europe Climate Change, vol. 128, pp. 229-44.
Wouters P. 1997. International Water Law: Selected Writings of Professor Charles B.
London: Kluwer Law International.
Ziolkowska, J. R. and Ziolkowski, B. 2016. “Effectiveness of Water Management in Europe
in the 21st Century”. Water Resour Management vol. 30, pp. 2261-2274.
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
VIII
VI. Appendix
Appendix I: Ten Characteristics of wicked problems (Rittel & Webber, 1973):
1. There is no definitive formulation of a wicked problem.
2. Wicked problems have no “stopping rule” (i.e., no definitive solution).
3. Solutions to wicked problems are not true or false, but good or bad.
4. There is no immediate and no ultimate test of a solution to a wicked problem.
5. Every (attempted) solution to a wicked problem is a “one-shot operation”; the results
cannot be readily undone, and there is no opportunity to learn by trial and error.
6. Wicked problems do not have an enumerable (or an exhaustively describable) set of
potential solutions, nor is there a well-described set of permissible operations that may
be incorporated into the plan.
7. Every wicked problem is essentially unique.
8. Every wicked problem can be considered to be a symptom of another problem.
9. The existence of a discrepancy representing a wicked problem can be explained in
numerous ways.
10. The planner has no “right to be wrong” (i.e., there is no public tolerance of experiments
that fail)
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
IX
Appendix II: Questionaire master thesis water shotage on Gotland:
1. Could you please describe the current issue regarding the availability of water on
Gotland
2. Would you categorize the situation on Gotland rather as water scarcity or water
shortage? (further information about the terms will be provided by the authors if the
interviewee is not aware of the distingtions)
3. How do you see your role in contributing to this situation?
4. A wicked problem is characterized as an extremely complex, not solvable but only
manageable problem. This means, one has to find ways to manage those wicked
problems in order to not worsening the outcomes for al life on the planet caused by
them. How do you see the connection between wicked problems and the water
situation on Gotland?
5. Who do you think are the main actors causing the water shortage/scarcity on Gotland?
What responsibility do they have?
6. What do you do in order to address and manage water shortage/scarcity on Gotland?
7. What would be, in your opinion, the ideal way to manage the current water situation
on Gotland?
8. What would be the ideal outcome when addressing water scarcity/shortage correctly?
9. What needs to be done in order to achieve this in the specific case of Gotland?
Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017
X
Appendix III: Deductive and inductive categories derived from the theories and used
for analysing the stakeholder interviews:
Chosen deductive categories, grouped:
Understanding of the situation:
Category 1: Stakeholders’ understanding of the current situation on Gotland
Category 2: Terminology: water shortage vs. water scarcity
Stakeholders:
Category 3: Perception of involved actors and stakeholder responsibility
Category 5: Stakeholder cooperation
Category 8: Stakeholders’ strategies and solution approaches
Institutional voids:
Category 4: Institutional voids
Water:
Category 6: Value of Water
Category 7: Water and Sustainability
Wicked Problems:
Category 9: Understanding of the complexity of the problem – a wicked problem?
Category 10: Management of the wicked problem water shortage in the light of sustainability
Chosen inductive categories:
Category 11: Conflict sources and barriers
Category 12: Connection to related problems