considering the implementation of drought forecasting and risk assessment tools.
This represents a necessary initial step towards local preparedness for drought and
local awareness (Richard 2013) of the possible impacts of climate change on
drought. It is also a first modelling phase before initiating a common adaptation
strategy resulting in adaptation measures.
IAV clearly has technical resources and responsibilities for the management of
the Arzal dam and its reservoir. The objectives of the two pilot measures
(Sect. 6.3.1) show the investment of resources by IAV towards the aim of managing
a multi-use reservoir. However, information about the responsibility of each
stakeholder remains unclear: the water users (especially farmers) are not always
fully aware of the quantity and the quality of the water they are using. Local
governments, who are responsible for various controls on water withdrawal, are not
often aware of their duties. Concerning drought management, the regulation from
the SDAGE indicates the priority to be given for various water uses in the event of
drought. However, it does so at a very local level, while water policy (e.g. policy on
pumping and pollution control) is clearly under the responsibility of the State
services (national level). Thus, the extent of resources and responsibilities is positive, but the distribution of resources and responsibilities could be more clearly
addressed.
6.4.2 Coherence: Agreement on the Priority to Give
to Drinking Water
IAV has a central role in terms of cohesion among stakeholders within the Vilaine
catchment. All interviewed actors agreed that having a single interlocutor, IAV,
works well and facilitates dialogue. However, as far as the drought management
issue is concerned, coherence between levels and scales has not been fully
achieved: some actions are implemented coherently (e.g. interconnection between
drinking water networks), but the integration of the climate change perspective lies
mainly in the hands of the State services and remains inside the IAV through the
coordination of the SAGE Vilaine.
Since the reform and decentralization of the role of the State in the 1990s, the
State has had little decision-making power over water management issues. The
decentralized services are managing water resources and making decisions within
the catchment scale. They are under the authority of the Prefect, who implements
the policy of the State under its regulatory and technical aspects. However, there is
a lack of consistency between these government services in the Vilaine territory.
Difficulties in coordinating interdepartmental relations have been cited during the
interviews. At the same time, the actors in the Vilaine catchment are clearly used to
working together, formally and informally. The Vilaine Committees (see
Sect. 6.3.2) have been very successful at making people collaborate, and their
126
I. La Jeunesse et al.
This represents a necessary initial step towards local preparedness for drought and
local awareness (Richard 2013) of the possible impacts of climate change on
drought. It is also a first modelling phase before initiating a common adaptation
strategy resulting in adaptation measures.
IAV clearly has technical resources and responsibilities for the management of
the Arzal dam and its reservoir. The objectives of the two pilot measures
(Sect. 6.3.1) show the investment of resources by IAV towards the aim of managing
a multi-use reservoir. However, information about the responsibility of each
stakeholder remains unclear: the water users (especially farmers) are not always
fully aware of the quantity and the quality of the water they are using. Local
governments, who are responsible for various controls on water withdrawal, are not
often aware of their duties. Concerning drought management, the regulation from
the SDAGE indicates the priority to be given for various water uses in the event of
drought. However, it does so at a very local level, while water policy (e.g. policy on
pumping and pollution control) is clearly under the responsibility of the State
services (national level). Thus, the extent of resources and responsibilities is positive, but the distribution of resources and responsibilities could be more clearly
addressed.
6.4.2 Coherence: Agreement on the Priority to Give
to Drinking Water
IAV has a central role in terms of cohesion among stakeholders within the Vilaine
catchment. All interviewed actors agreed that having a single interlocutor, IAV,
works well and facilitates dialogue. However, as far as the drought management
issue is concerned, coherence between levels and scales has not been fully
achieved: some actions are implemented coherently (e.g. interconnection between
drinking water networks), but the integration of the climate change perspective lies
mainly in the hands of the State services and remains inside the IAV through the
coordination of the SAGE Vilaine.
Since the reform and decentralization of the role of the State in the 1990s, the
State has had little decision-making power over water management issues. The
decentralized services are managing water resources and making decisions within
the catchment scale. They are under the authority of the Prefect, who implements
the policy of the State under its regulatory and technical aspects. However, there is
a lack of consistency between these government services in the Vilaine territory.
Difficulties in coordinating interdepartmental relations have been cited during the
interviews. At the same time, the actors in the Vilaine catchment are clearly used to
working together, formally and informally. The Vilaine Committees (see
Sect. 6.3.2) have been very successful at making people collaborate, and their
126
I. La Jeunesse et al.