Rescaling water governance - Governing Transboundary Waters: Canada, the United States, and Indigenous Communities - page 84

do you think you might be able to do for us in the future?”. . . And we thought,
well, you know, this kind of a [watershed] approach might actually be very
helpful because we now have many more State people on our boards, some
non-governmental folks. We see these relationships developing. We thought,
“This might work. We think we might have a role to play as well.” That was
part of our 21st Century Report , the Watershed Board Initiative.
In this quote, you see that the conceptualization of the IWI was both about keeping
the IJC relevant (i.e. the “dams are already built”) and also including more directly
sub-state actors. The conceptualization of a “politically neutral space” was
mentioned as a goal and continues to be run through affiliations that are bound
by either “Canadian” or “American” identities. Another IJC staffer stated:
Our Commissioners were thinking about, well, what really could we offer
our governments - other than just being available to solve problems when
asked? And some of our Commissioners were reflecting on our experience
and they said, “We think this is really a neat idea, and we think this could be
the wave of the future”. . . Our report, The IJC in the 21st Century , [shows
that] we're not talking about this week, or next week, we're talking about
the next century and something that would evolve over time . . . It was really
building on our own experience, with our own Boards.
The broad reference to study “the water-related issues of the 21st century”
provided an opportunity within the IJC to outline a new governance model that
would meet the needs of a changing socio-political-environmental climate, while
remaining true to the original purpose of the BWT. The Reference did not specify
the designation of a watershed approach. Rather, as the quotes above indicate, the
Commissioners and staff found the timing right to launch a governance model
with greater public participation, which operated at a regional watershed scale.
This design was consistent with what one IJC official called a “growing expectation
that the public would be generally involved in the work of government”. A key
understanding for this project is the long-term thinking in this change. Although
they were not explicit about adopting a “postcolonial framework”, in essence the
framing of the IWI can be considered an attempt to create a “politically neutral”
space in which jurisdictional hierarchies are flattened. Whether this is possible,
however, is another matter, and a central question of this topic. Can organizations
that are inherently grounded in a nation-state framework transition to a “borderless”
framework with room for equality in participation? Looking at the history of the
organization might help in understanding its potential and inherent limitations.
Understanding these limitations may, then, help locate priority areas for greater
inclusion of diverse worldviews in the governance of shared water.
The IJC and the 21st Century report
This International Watersheds Initiative was officially unveiled on 21 October 1997,
with the report, The IJC and the 21st Century . The report responded to the