supportive or not. This can help the participants to concentrate on the substantive
matters while nevertheless all cells of the assessment tool get appropriate attention.
The governance expert can also help in the interpretation of the consequences of the
assessment and will develop experience in how to deal with such situations, creating learning from one case to another. The disadvantage however can be that the
participants are less actively involved and feel more like interviewees than like
discussants. A good balance between too much and too little guidance is important
for a productive process that provides the participants with learning experience.
A further way in which the tool can be applied is when not practical learning
experiences of practitioners, but scientific research is the main purpose. In such a
project all kind of sources are used to assess the cells and interviews with practitioners are just part of the data gathering. The Governance Assessment Tool will in
such studies often be used as a way to “measure” the dependent or independent
variable in the study. For this purpose normal approaches to methodology apply.
One more way in which the tool can be applied is the elaborate way it is done in
the DROP project (multiple analysts from multiple institutions, disciplines and
countries, in multiple rounds and various ways of interaction with practitioners).
This is a very special situation that requires much resources, but provided both
scientifically and practically a lot of new knowledge. About this ideal methodology
(and its risks and pitfalls!) the next subsection will elaborate further.
3.4.2 Diagnosing with the Governance Assessment Tool
in the DROP Project
In this section both experiences with using the GAT in the DROP project will be
shared and advices for potential users will be presented that are based on the lessons
learned while using the GAT. While the text contains a lot of advices on how to use
the GAT, it does not have the character of a manual. As regards to the implementation of the GAT in the case of the DROP project, a number of important
factors can be highlighted explaining the relative success of the project. Many of
them relate to the challenge of using the tool to assess a variety of cases with
different main policies and projects in various national and regional conditions. This
requires both a good common understanding of the concepts in the GAT and a good
common understanding of the empirical situation that can be supported by the items
listed below.
Continuous iteration between science and practice—A way to ensure the valid
and reliable assessment of the governance context of a particular region is through
liaising with those embedded strongly in the governance context and water management reality. In the DROP project, the governance assessment has been
developed by social scientists with the help of the practice partners (project partners
from the region such as water authorities and county councils) and other governmental and non-governmental stakeholders. This has allowed both for continuous
3 The Governance Assessment Tool and Its Use
59
matters while nevertheless all cells of the assessment tool get appropriate attention.
The governance expert can also help in the interpretation of the consequences of the
assessment and will develop experience in how to deal with such situations, creating learning from one case to another. The disadvantage however can be that the
participants are less actively involved and feel more like interviewees than like
discussants. A good balance between too much and too little guidance is important
for a productive process that provides the participants with learning experience.
A further way in which the tool can be applied is when not practical learning
experiences of practitioners, but scientific research is the main purpose. In such a
project all kind of sources are used to assess the cells and interviews with practitioners are just part of the data gathering. The Governance Assessment Tool will in
such studies often be used as a way to “measure” the dependent or independent
variable in the study. For this purpose normal approaches to methodology apply.
One more way in which the tool can be applied is the elaborate way it is done in
the DROP project (multiple analysts from multiple institutions, disciplines and
countries, in multiple rounds and various ways of interaction with practitioners).
This is a very special situation that requires much resources, but provided both
scientifically and practically a lot of new knowledge. About this ideal methodology
(and its risks and pitfalls!) the next subsection will elaborate further.
3.4.2 Diagnosing with the Governance Assessment Tool
in the DROP Project
In this section both experiences with using the GAT in the DROP project will be
shared and advices for potential users will be presented that are based on the lessons
learned while using the GAT. While the text contains a lot of advices on how to use
the GAT, it does not have the character of a manual. As regards to the implementation of the GAT in the case of the DROP project, a number of important
factors can be highlighted explaining the relative success of the project. Many of
them relate to the challenge of using the tool to assess a variety of cases with
different main policies and projects in various national and regional conditions. This
requires both a good common understanding of the concepts in the GAT and a good
common understanding of the empirical situation that can be supported by the items
listed below.
Continuous iteration between science and practice—A way to ensure the valid
and reliable assessment of the governance context of a particular region is through
liaising with those embedded strongly in the governance context and water management reality. In the DROP project, the governance assessment has been
developed by social scientists with the help of the practice partners (project partners
from the region such as water authorities and county councils) and other governmental and non-governmental stakeholders. This has allowed both for continuous
3 The Governance Assessment Tool and Its Use
59