Bridges and Barriers to Adaptive Capacity - Climate Change and Water Governance: Adaptive Capacity in Chile and Switzerland - page 217

water managers who need to use the data in periods of extreme events. In particular,
stakeholders pointed to the relative lack of data and transparency on groundwater
and water provision in comparison to hydrological hazards.
In Chile, the legislative framework provides for the formation of basin user
groups in order to manage the allocation of user rights for surface water. These bod-
ies do not encompass groundwater user rights and tend to be comprised of a single
sector, i.e. farmers, 2 which local stakeholders found to be a challenge to resolving
allocation and pollution issues, particularly in periods of drought. Furthermore, low
levels of trust between different actors (across governance scales, sectors and sec-
tions of the river) negatively impacted the consistency in privately negotiated agree-
ments and informal collaborations that govern ad hoc adaptations for coping with
extreme drought.
Another issue that is linked to information, but related to behavioural and cul-
tural aspects of that theme is the openness of actors to learning from other experi-
ences or contemplating other solutions. This is a challenge that has been touched
upon in other studies. For example Dovers and Hezri ( 2010 ) use Smithson's catego-
ries of ignorance or irrelevance, which refer to issues that are left un-discussed since
they are seen as taboo, or even not requiring verification (Smithson 1989 in Dovers
and Hezri 2010 ) to explain the unwillingness of actors to accept and organise to
adapt to potential climate change impacts. In Chile, despite there being an accep-
tance and awareness of climate change impacts, there is very little reference to
comparative experience to guide learning towards developing better governance
(including market based) mechanisms to cope with it. There is a strong notion that
Chile is too unique to learn from other markets or country experiences. This isola-
tion and strong ideology of one form of water governance hampers openness to
innovation to adapt to current and future challenges in relation to increasing pres-
sure on the resource. Related to the openness to learning, is the role that experience
and perceptions of change play in developing or hindering mechanisms for coping
with change. For instance, in the Swiss case, the lack of experience in coping with
intense precipitation events that came as regularly and intensely from 1987 to 2000
has led to a loss of expertise in that fewer farmers were maintaining the infrastruc-
ture that could have reduced impacts, thus increasing vulnerability to these events.
Leadership and trust across different scales and institutions was a common barrier
in both case areas. In Chile, trust was highlighted as an issue across multiple scales
and sectors but the limiting forces on leadership were also seen to be an issue. For
example, one stakeholder highlighted how politicians, who wished to strengthen
provisions for environmental and societal protection in a more integrated vision of
2 In other basins, such as the Copiapo, Mesa del Agua were piloted in an attempt to resolve the
water management issues. 'The Mesa del Agua originally had no rules, no power, and no standards.
It was not a place to take decisions, but just a place where the different interested parties could
come to, in order to hear about the plans for different actors, and see presentations. They therefore
created a Mesa Tecnica de Agua, and asked the Regional DGA to create a technical group. The
members of this group are comprised of 1/3 Government, 1/3 Organised Society, 1/3 Users:
Regional DGA, Regional CONAMA, Mining, Water Provision, and Agriculture.' (Interview,
MMA, November 2010).