Bridges and Barriers to Adaptive Capacity - Climate Change and Water Governance: Adaptive Capacity in Chile and Switzerland - page 218

water management, tend to feel impotent to effect change due to the strength and
power of stronger economic actors. The ideology of the market has already been
mentioned, but it is equally relevant here, since the pure focus on the water market
limits the flexibility to change course and open up new options in the face of new
challenges (e.g. climate change, increased uncertainty). The focus of research tends
to be on the technicalities of the water market, with little interest in the challenges
of public policy making and the ability of the legal or governance framework (rather
than just the market) to support and absorb issues that will manifest from climate
change and other future hydrological challenges.
In Switzerland, stakeholders repeatedly pointed to the lack of leadership across
the canton and federal levels, despite the policy guidance provided by the federal
administrations for water and environment on integrated risk management, climate
impacts and integrated water management amongst other topics. This perhaps high-
lights the hands off approach that is taken in the decentralised system, where tech-
nocrats at the federal level can provide insights into thought leadership on water
adaptation, but there is an aversion at lower levels to their leadership or authority to
match research innovations with provisions for implementation at local levels.

11.4 Common Bridges Across the Cases

In Chile, the majority of stakeholders across all levels deemed the water rights system
to be flexible and adaptive, allowing for re-evaluation and revision, but protecting
those with rights and allowing water to be provided for development and economic
opportunities. One can argue against both aspects of this statement (see later discus-
sion), but it is included here simply to present the perception of a number of stake-
holders interviewed. Notably, more recently, there has been a concerted effort to
readjust the balance between economic and environmental priorities, as can be seen
through the transition of CONAMA to the MMA, the establishment of environmen-
tal courts, combined with a stronger focus on climate change impacts and adapta-
tion. Likewise, the DGA Director recognises the need to promote efficiency and
improve environmental aspects of water management and to achieve a better use of
the resource, in order to reduce associated vulnerabilities to climate change impacts.
The DGA has thus prioritised improving the robustness of the water rights informa-
tion system ( Cadaster Public de Agua ) as well as transparency by putting it online.
Information concerning water availability, hydraulic works and user organisations
are also a top priority. While the DGA has detailed plans to direct increasing amounts
of resources to update and modernise the water information system, these were
nascent plans in late 2010 and early 2011 and so their implementation has not yet
been con fi rmed.
In Switzerland, authorities highlighted the importance of provisions for financial
incentives associated with ecological and social benefits, as a vital means of
addressing intra-jurisdictional challenges (as was discussed in the background
chapters on governance) but also was cited as a being very important for pushing