Graduate Thesis Or Dissertation

 

An investigation and analysis of the incentives and disincentives for conflict prevention and mitigation in the Bureau of Reclamation's water management Public Deposited

Downloadable Content

Download PDF
https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/graduate_thesis_or_dissertations/dj52w8063

Descriptions

Attribute NameValues
Creator
Abstract
  • This study addresses the question: "What are the incentives and disincentives for conflict prevention and mitigation in the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), and how do they factor into Reclamation's management of water in the western United States?" Incentives and disincentives for conflict prevention (i.e., actions taken to avoid conflict) and mitigation (i.e., actions taken to resolve, manage, or temper a conflictive situation after conflict has occurred) are identified through a survey and focus groups of Reclamation employees. The two dominant disincentives identified are a lack of resources and Reclamation's organizational culture--specifically its reliance on crisis management, water delivery tunnel vision, and being slow to change. Other disincentives include a lack of forward planning, the existence of an acceptable bandwidth or level of conflict, a perception that conflict is unavoidable or entrenched, politics, and limits on acceptable actions associated with the legal authorization of Reclamation projects. Fewer incentives for conflict prevention and mitigation were identified, but include, pressure from higher management, the promotion of collaboration within the Bureau, and a desire to avoid litigation. The institutional analysis and development (IAD) framework offers some insight into how these incentives and disincentives factored into the implementation of the Water2025 Initiative, and Reclamation’s experience with the Middle Rio Grande silvery minnow and the Endangered Species Act. As attributes of the community and rules-in-use, incentives and disincentives such as organizational culture, politics, funding availability, the desire to avoid litigation, the promotion of collaboration within the agency, and a lack of planning effort offer possible explanations of why Reclamation chose to act as it did.
Resource Type
Date Available
Date Copyright
Date Issued
Degree Level
Degree Name
Degree Field
Degree Grantor
Commencement Year
Advisor
Committee Member
Non-Academic Affiliation
Keyword
Subject
Rights Statement
Peer Reviewed
Language
Replaces
Additional Information
  • description.provenance : Made available in DSpace on 2012-06-25T18:47:12Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 KOgren_MSThesis_Final.pdf: 990947 bytes, checksum: eb8e97d7404b14550ac25fbd736b19a0 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012-05-11
  • description.provenance : Approved for entry into archive by Laura Wilson(laura.wilson@oregonstate.edu) on 2012-06-25T18:47:12Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 KOgren_MSThesis_Final.pdf: 990947 bytes, checksum: eb8e97d7404b14550ac25fbd736b19a0 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Submitted by Kimberly Ogren (ogrenk@onid.orst.edu) on 2012-06-02T00:18:19Z No. of bitstreams: 1 KOgren_MSThesis_Final.pdf: 990947 bytes, checksum: eb8e97d7404b14550ac25fbd736b19a0 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Approved for entry into archive by Julie Kurtz(julie.kurtz@oregonstate.edu) on 2012-06-21T17:01:18Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 KOgren_MSThesis_Final.pdf: 990947 bytes, checksum: eb8e97d7404b14550ac25fbd736b19a0 (MD5)

Relationships

Parents:

This work has no parents.

In Collection:

Items