Cooperative Management of

Urban Water Resources:

A Case Study of
Peterborough, ON

by

Timothy M. Shah

A thesis
presented to Trent University
in fulfillment of the
honours program for the degree of
Bachelor of Arts
in
Environmental and Resource Studies & Human Geography

Peterborough, Ontario, Canada, 2010

 Abstract

Planning for water resources is increasingly gaining significance in Canada. Municipalities

across the country are facing challenges in bringing about sustainable water resources
management initiatives in order to maintain adequate water quality and quantity for the future.
With constrained municipal budgets, the financing of large water infrastructural projects has
become even more difficult. A practical and cost-effective approach for dealing with current and
forthcoming challenges would be through the creation of an urban water committee that enables
the city to more holistically manage its water resources. This study explores whether or not the
City of Peterborough, Ontario could benefit from the creation of a committee composed of
stakeholders who have professional responsibilities related to water management/planning
including the distribution and treatment of water, public education and outreach, public
consultation, land use planning/policy and the protection of water resources. By cooperatively
discussing and planning water resource issues, the stakeholders can work towards advising city
council on preventative and practical solutions to the water resource management process. Using
a case study research method and semi-structured interviews, this project examined how the
various stakeholders in Peterborough are currently involved with water management/planning
and what they defined as some of the current challenges and opportunities. This project shows
their perceptions of an urban water committee and how they feel it might or might not work for
the city. The results explain how a committee can improve the efficiency of communication and
learning between relevant stakeholders across geographic space. Ultimately, the study found that
a committee can provide a valuable contribution to municipal water resources management,
especially in terms of facilitating the input of different stakeholders in the process.

i
 Acknowledgements

First and foremost, I would like to extend my deepest gratitude to those individuals participating
in this research, who generously offered their time and insights into my project. Without your
efforts, kindness and contributions, this research would not have been possible.

I am forever grateful to Professor Karen Morrison for her guidance and strong academic support.
Karen, your efforts in continuously challenging me to think critically provided a focus and
confidence in my research which was invaluable in completing this thesis. The entire project was
very academically enriching and our various meetings and discussions allowed me stay on top of
the project and remain focussed on my goals. Your intimate knowledge of policy and
management was also very helpful for me in articulating the academic significance of this study.
Professor Colin Taylor continuously provided suggestions and feedback to the project making it
more thorough and clear with its objectives. Colin has supervised numerous Physical Geography
theses and this was his first time supervising a Human Geography thesis. I again thank him for
being so kind and patient. Colin, I thank you for helping me develop my writing skills and in
structuring the various chapters. Your recommendations were always very insightful and helped
me significantly with preparing for the thesis seminar presentations.

I would also like to thank Professor Mark Skinner. Professor Skinner reviewed and approved my
research ethics document. Throughout the year he was always willing to sit down and discuss my
methodology and provide tips on how to conduct a good interview. Professor Stephen Hill was
also kind enough to do a mock interview with me to test my main research method, semi-
structured interviews. Thank you again Stephen for taking the time to do this.

I am indebted to a number of friends and family members for the numerous contributions that
they have made to assist me with this project. To my friends, I thank you for continuously asking
me questions about the project. This allowed me to constantly explain the project to you which
made my overall objectives clearer in my mind. To everyone who offered support, feedback and
edits throughout the project: I am extremely grateful and appreciative.

ii
 Table of Contents

Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………………... i
Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………………….... ii
Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………………... iii
List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………………. v
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………......1
1.1 Setting the Context……………………………………………………………………2
1.2 The History and Evolution of Peterborough‘s Water System………………………...5
1.3 Significant Water Management Issues for Peterborough……………………………..6
1.4 Urban Water Committee………………………………………………………………7
1.5 Peterborough Now…………………………………………………………………….8
Chapter 2 LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………………………………………….10
2.1 Cooperative Management in the Local Context………………………………………...11
2.1.1 Governance………………………………………………………………………...12
2.1.2 Bridging Organizations and Leadership…………………………………………...14
2.1.3 Social Learning…………………………………………………………………….15
2.2 Water Resources, Stakeholder Involvement and Councils……………………………...17
2.2.1 California Urban Water Conservation Council…………………………………….18
2.2.2 Guelph‘s Use of a Public Advisory Committee……………………………………19
2.2.3 The Otonabee-Peterborough Source Protection Committee……………………….19
2.2.4 Theoretical Underpinnings of Committees and Stakeholder Involvement………...20
2.3 The Evolution of Water Management: The Soft-Path Approach……………………….22
2.3.1 Water Metering…………………………………………………………………….24
2.3.2 The Rise of Public Education……………………………………………………...26
2.3.3 Water Efficiency & Density……………………………………………………….27
2.4 Research Implications………………………………………………………………….. 31
Chapter 3 RESEARCH METHODS…………………………………………………………….33
3.1 Research Objectives……………………………………………………………………..34
3.2 Research Instrument and Design………………………………………………………..35
3.2.1 Case Study Research Design………………………………………………………36
3.2.2 Literature Review: Primary and Secondary……………………………………….37
3.2.3 Semi-Structured Interviews………………………………………………………. 38
3.3 Coding Interview Data and Answering Research Question……………………………..42
3.4 Study‘s Limitations……………………………………………………………………....44
iii
Chapter 4 RESULTS……………………………………………………………………………. 46
4.1 Public Education and Environmental Stewardship………………………………………. 47
4.1.1 Water Metering…………………………………………………………………… 48
4.1.2 Environmental Stewardship through Public Education……………………………52
4.2 Water Supply, Quality and the Natural Environment……………………………………..53
4.2.1 Density, Intensification and Water Quality………………………………………. 53
4.2.2 Drinking Water Supply…………………………………………………………….55
4.2.3 Water Use…………………………………………………………………………. 56
4.2.4 Progress, Challenges & Opportunities……………………………………………..57
4.3 Water-based Activities, Recreation and Ecosystem Health……………………………….59
4.4 Cooperation and Governance……………………………………………………………...61
4.5 Transparency and Decision-Making……………………………………………………... 66
4.6 Other Information from Results………………………………………………………….. 68
Chapter 5 DISCUSSION………………………………………………………………………..70
5.1 An Opportunity for Enhancing Public Education on Water Resources…………………..71
5.2 The Need for Water Governance………………………………………………………….74
5.3 Transparency & the Urban Water Committee…………………………………………….83
Chapter 6 RECOMMENDATIONS…………………………………………………………….88
Chapter 7 CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………………96
Appendix A Key Informant Interview Guide…………………………………………………..100
Appendix B Human Research Consent Form…………………………………………………..103
Appendix C Information Letter………………………………………………………………...104
REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………………105

iv
 List of Figures
Figure 1- A Map of Peterborough as a Water City…………………………………………......... 3

Figure 2- Bridging Organization Model…………………………………………………………15

Figure 3- Particulars about the semi-structured interviews (n=7)……………………………… 47

Figure 4- Bridging Organization Model………………………………………………………... 77

Figure 5- Generic Water Planning Model………………………………………………………. 80

Figure 6- Water Planning Model applied to Little Lake…………………………………………81

Figure 7- Water Planning Model applied to Water Metering……………………………………86

Figure 8- The Urban Co-Management Model………………………………………………….. 88

v
 Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION

―Water is a pioneer which the settler follows, taking advantage of its improvements.‖
— Henry David Thoreau

The planning of water resources management is evolving into a more holistic process in cities
around the world. Peterborough, Ontario, the case study for this research, can be described as a
‗water city‘; a city where water is virtually ubiquitous. Citizens have the luxury of enjoying the
presence of three major bodies of water including the Otonabee River, Jackson Creek and Little
Lake. Water plays an indispensable role in the city through recreational activities, economic
development, hydro-electric production, tourism, and urban identity.

Given the current and future importance of water resources, it is critical that cities begin to have
a more formal dialogue about the state of their water resources. This will have to move beyond
the hard-path approach, where engineers, water managers and bureaucrats make all of the
decisions. Indeed, planning for water resources in Peterborough will require an integration of
stakeholders‘ interests including those with professional responsibilities in water management,
planning and education. The involvement of multiple stakeholders can bring more accountability
and transparency to the city‘s water management and provide a planning framework for
sustaining this resource.

One of the primary objectives of the thesis is to start a more formal dialogue among these
various stakeholders through the creation of an urban water committee (UWC). Given the lack of
federal and provincial leadership in promoting sound water policies, cities like Peterborough
have the opportunity to devise their own municipal water policies based on their own geography,
stakeholders, community interest and engagement and environmental and political agenda s.
Moreover, because water provides numerous benefits to the city, Peterborough can lead by
example for Ontario in showing how water management and planning is truly an integrative
process that consults and engages the community.

As Professor Chow (1972) argued, ―hydrologists and engineers could plan, construct and
develop water resource systems; however, the appropriate long-term utilization of rivers, lakes,
dams, reservoirs and groundwater require[s] experts from other disciplines such as lawyers,
contractors, environmentalists, social scientists, economists, chemical and biological experts‖ (as
cited in Stout, 2010, p. 2). Indeed, these issues need not only be analysed by bureaucrats and
engineers; they are highly complex and need some form of water governance and multi-
stakeholder involvement to respond to them in an open, transparent and collaborative way.

1.1 Setting the context

Water resources, whether in urban or rural environments, are indispensable to human life and
socio-economic processes (Bithas, 2008). Indeed, as a precious natural resource in urban
environments, water is often exploited by ever-increasing population and growing economic
production (Bithas, 2008). The question then, is, how management and planning can account for
such changes that society demands.

The City of Peterborough has approximately 80,000 people and grew by about 4.8 percent from
2001 to 2006 (Statistics Canada, 2006). The city draws its water supply from the Otonabee
River. Because water appears to be plentiful in the city, it can be hard for citizens to make the
connection between water availability and water consumption. In the Canadian context, the
dominant perception is that water is a limitless resource and any curtailment of the use of that
resource is an infringement on personal rights (Prince George, 2005). This is where water
management policies such as water metering can run into problems because on the one hand, it is
a water conservation solution but on the other, it may receive poor social acceptability because
water is now seen as virtually an economic good because a price is now attached to every unit of
water consumed.

Residential and commercial development around water resources such as Little Lake is
economically attractive for any municipality because it provides more tax revenue. However, if
improperly planned, it can compromise ecosystem health and recreational uses. Peterborough is
now complying with the Places to Grow Act where more residential development is slated for
the urban growth centre and built areas - being in close proximity to water resources.
Peterborough MP Dean Del Mastro‘s proposal to allow a private company to build on federal
land next to Little Lake stirred up a lot of contention from city‘s residents (Little Lake Master
2
Plan, 2009). This stimulated an interest for the city to hire a consulting group to carry out the
Little Lake Master Plan. Therefore, it is clear that Little Lake is a valuable natural asset for the
city given the public‘s concern for its protection.

Between 2006 and 2031, it is projected that 14,000 residents will be added to the city (City of
Peterborough, 2009). The urban growth centre (UGC) comprises a significant portion of the
Central Area of Peterborough. With plans to achieve 150 residents and jobs per hectare by 2031,
the UGC will witness increased intensification of under-developed parcels of land and re-
development (City of Peterborough, 2009). Therefore, 33 percent of the projected population
growth (14,000) will need to occur in the UGC to achieve the city‘s density targets. With
intensification of the land, new residential and commercial development will be erected or
renovated in the city‘s downtown. Intensification of land uses and increased population density
have a number of implications on water resources; they will be re-explored in Chapter 2.

Figure 1. A Map of Peterborough as a Water City

3
The map in Figure 1 shows the city boundary (grey line) of Peterborough by depicting its
geographical parameters. The city‘s total area (the area located inside the grey boundary) is 7100
hectares and the downtown or urban growth centre constitutes just 96 hectares of the city‘s total
area (City of Peterborough, 2009). As shown in the map, the Otonabee River runs through the
city and Little Lake is situated in the downtown core. Jackson Creek flows into the downtown
from the western part of the city. The London waterworks dam and the pump house on the river
use renewable hydraulic energy to pump the water through pipes to city residents (PUC, 2009).

The waterworks dam, owned by the Peterborough Utilities Commission, is situated directly south
of the London Street Bridge and is also a source of hydro-electric production. This hydro-electric
production creates renewable electricity that feeds into the local economy. While many large
cities in the world reap numerous benefits from their natural bodies of water, Peterborough is
fortunate to have its water provide inexpensive and green electricity, thereby reducing
dependence on dirtier sources of electricity including coal.

Little Lake is a critical natural feature in the city allowing for recreational uses, tourism and
economic development and providing an urban identity. The lake is primarily a recreational hot-
spot featuring beaches on the northern shore, campgrounds and Beavermead Park on the eastern
shore and Del Crary Park on the western shore. Little Lake also has trails for biking, walking and
running; citizens can skate on the lake in the winter and partake in boating activities in the
summer. Other large-scale events held on Little Lake include Peterborough‘s annual Dragon
Boat Festival; a fundraiser for the local hospital's Breast Assessment Centre. There is also a
Wakeboarding event held in August which draws young people from all over the county (Deeth,
2009). With the current Little Lake Master Plan, Little Lake‘s trails will be re-designed for
aesthetic reasons and for environmental and ecosystem considerations. These re-designed trails
will make Little Lake an even more popular natural feature for the enjoyment of city residents.

Millennium Park was constructed in 2001 under the leadership of former city mayor, Sylvia
Sutherland. It is a linear park along the shores of the Otonabee River (City of Peterborough,
2009). Located downtown, it provides people with an opportunity to enjoy the downtown area by
walking on a path next to the Otonabee River. It is a focal resting place on the trail system with
4
its variety of amenities (City of Peterborough, 2009). Del Crary Park on the western shore was
redeveloped in 1985 and has since become an important point for many tourists and residents
(City of Peterborough, 2009). The Summer Festival of Lights, Victoria Day Fireworks
Celebrations and the CIBC Run for the Cure are just some of the events that are held at the park.

The beaches on the north end of Little Lake provide residents with a chance to get closer to the
water for enjoyment and natural appreciation. The campgrounds provide an affordable camping
experience for both residents and visitors (Little Lake Master Plan, 2009). The public
campground generates revenue for the city and competes with the private sector (Little Lake
Master Plan, 2009). All of these recreational features allow the community to get closer to their
water resources and obtain natural benefits from them. The Trent Severn Hydraulic Lift lock
plays an important role for Peterborough and helps shape its urban identity. As the world‘s
highest hydraulic lift lock, the Trent Severn enhances tourism activities for the community. It
also permits boaters to travel through the lift lock on the waterway which extends 386 kilometres
through the heart of Ontario (Parks Canada, 2009).

1.2 The History and Evolution of Peterborough’s Water System

Peterborough has always had a rigid yet ambitious approach to water management. Around
1870, the ubiquity and recreational importance of water created an impetus to have a community
water system for Peterborough (PEO, 2009). The population was growing at this time and the
need for a water distribution system was vital. The city‘s water system began officially in 1882
(PEO, 2009). At this time, a private water company called the Peterborough Water Company
constructed the first of three dams and pump houses (PEO, 2009).

Eleven years later, the steady growth in population justified the need to build another dam. This
dam was accompanied with a pump house. Two large and powerful triple action plunger pumps
were installed, each with 2,500,000 gallons per day capacity (PEO, 2009?). The water pump and
dam were constructed not by the Peterborough Water Company, but by the William Hamilton
Manufacturing Company of Peterborough (PEO, 2009).

5
This new water pump house of 1893 doubled the pumping capacity of the 1882 pump house.
Both the pump house and dam were critical for Peterborough because they were the sole source
of water for the city. Around this time, the city recognized the importance of these two
engineering features and decided to purchase the entire water system from the Peterborough
Water Company for $230,000 (PEO, 2009). Some of the water wheels from the 1893 pump
house were transferred to the Water Street pump house in 1909. In 1916, Peterborough became
the first city in Canada to disinfect water with chlorine (PUC, 2001). It was also one of the first
to utilize rapid sand filtration to treat water (PUC, 2001).

The unique aspect of this engineering feat was that the pump house delivered the city‘s water
supply using water driven turbine pumps powered by the Otonabee River flow (PUC, 2001).
These high-lift pumps deliver water to about 75 percent of the city‘s residents (PEO, 2009). As
the years progressed, more water booster pumping stations were added around the city, pumping
water through 409 kilometres of water mains from lower pressure zones to higher pressure zones
(PUC, 2001).

Over time, water management in the city has become highly centralized. The current water
provider, the Peterborough Utilities Commission has a permit from the province to withdraw
water and distribute it to the city. In the past, Peterborough‘s water consumption was much
higher as city residents took advantage of the plentiful supply available to them. Water
consumption in the city has dropped since 1988 (PUC, 2009). The average day water demand on
the water distribution system is 39, 40, 000 litres or 487 litres of water per person per day (PUC,
2009). However, there is an increase in the summer months due to outdoor and recreational use
including lawn watering, car washes and direct irrigation of plants. Combined, the maximum day
demand in the summer months has reached as high as 69,020,000 litres, or 861 litres of water per
person per day (PUC, 2009).

1.3 Significant Water Management Issues for Peterborough

As the literature review will explain, water management is evolving into a more holistic process
in cities around the world. Historically, water management was exclusively the responsibility of
the water utility. These responsibilities included the delivery of water, the testing and treatment
6
of water and the distribution of water to residential homes, commercial units and industry. These
are still the principal responsibilities of the water utility; however, with current phenomena such
as population growth, climate change and decreased natural resource availability per person,
water management is evolving into a more integrated and inclusive process. Any new
proposition in water planning should include public participation, water metering and policies to
protect water quality and new development around bodies of water.

―The participatory approach involves raising awareness of the importance of water among
policy-makers and the general public. It means that decisions are taken at the lowest appropriate
level, with full public consultation and involvement of users in the planning and implementation
of water projects.‖
--Principle No. 2 of Dublin Statement on Water and Sustainable Development (1992).

This thesis aims to incorporate some level of principle No. 2 into a cooperative management
framework for water resources in the City of Peterborough. Cooperative management (co-
management) is the major theoretical framework for this thesis. Co-management of water
resources would allow various stakeholders to negotiate the authority and responsibility for the
management of a natural resource (Berkes, 2009). It is a process that aims to achieve more
effective and equitable systems of resource management.

In cooperative management, representatives of user groups, the scientific community, utility

companies and government agencies share knowledge, power and responsibility (Borrini-
Feyerabend et al. 2004). With more individuals and organizations involved in the process, there
is greater potential to allow for inclusion of the community and to ensure that policies are
transparent and inclusive. A review of cooperative management and its relevant themes will be
reviewed in Chapter 2.

1.4 Urban Water Committee

The thesis will investigate the proposition of an urban water committee for the City of
Peterborough. The study aims to understand if a proposed urban water committee can make a
valuable contribution to Peterborough‘s water management and planning process. The project
7
defines an urban water committee as a forum for discussion comprising stakeholders who have
professional responsibilities related to water management and planning.

The value in having a committee is that it could provide a forum for the public to seek
information regarding decisions around topics in water management and planning; such topics
might include water metering measures or development proposals around water resources. An
urban water committee could help in establishing a water governance structure in the City of
Peterborough. While there appear to be no burning issues surrounding water resources, this
project emphasizes the need for preventative, precautionary and practical measures around water
resources management.

As the thesis develops this idea of an ―urban water committee‖, it will become more evident
whether or not it is supported by stakeholders and whether or not it has any merit in a city like
Peterborough. It would, in theory, make environmental management more effective and efficient
through enabling stakeholders to comment on municipal policy decisions and allow for
innovation policy design, implementation and evaluation. However, perceptions and opinions
from the stakeholders may support or reject the proposition of an urban water committee. This
will be presented in Chapter 4 results.

1.5 Peterborough Now

In August of 2009, Peterborough City Council adopted Amendment number 142 to the City of
Peterborough Official Plan in order to comply with the growth plan for the Greater Golden
Horseshoe (City of Peterborough, 2009). This plan is required by the Places to Grow Act 2005.
The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe is a provincial plan that establishes a
planning policy framework to implement the Province‘s vision for managing population and
employment growth in the Greater Golden Horseshoe region to 2031 (City of Peterborough,
2009). There are five comprehensive objectives set out by the plan; all of these objectives apply
to Peterborough and include:
 Revitalize downtowns to become vibrant and convenient centres;

 Create complete communities that offer more opportunities for living, working, shopping
and playing;
8
  Provide greater choice in housing types to meet the needs of people at all stages in life;

 Curb urban sprawl and protect farmlands and green spaces; and,

 Reduce traffic gridlock by improving access to a greater range of transportation choices.

Residential units and subdivisions are being erected on the edges of the city. The city estimates
that approximately 5,300 residential units will be constructed in the Designated Greenfield Areas
(DGA) between 2006 and 2031 and accommodate 12,000 people (City of Peterborough, 2009).
Constructing more homes in the DGA has economic implications for water delivery, i.e. more
piping and water mains and implications regarding water quality. However, the intensification of
the downtown also has implications around stormwater management. Whether current and future
development account for adequate stormwater management plans remains to be seen. More
development and intensification in the urban core must require sound stormwater management
policy. This will be reviewed in Chapter 2 and in Chapter 5.

Despite Peterborough‘s water abundance and the relatively unproblematic state of its water
resources, the city has an opportunity to develop a sound governance process on water
management and planning. As a water city, it would be invaluable to incorporate a multi-
stakeholder process where various professionals collaborate with one another while being
transparent on new policies for the community. The next five chapters of the thesis will feature
analysis, synthesis and discussion around an urban water committee and cooperative
management as a theoretical framework for the project. The literature review provides scholarly
examples from other jurisdictions; the methods feature the design of the semi-structured
interviews and subsequent chapters provide the discussion and results of the interviews. The
thesis concludes with recommendations and a formal conclusion.

9
 Chapter 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
―If there is magic on this planet, it is contained in water.‖ - Loren Eiseley

The literature of fundamental importance pertains to multi-stakeholder involvement in local

water planning. As mentioned in Chapter 1, this study investigates the proposition that
cooperative management of water resources can be a beneficial process. As the literature will
explain, cooperative management can be integrative and involve various stakeholders. It would
seem to be particularly appropriate for a city like Peterborough, a water city that depends on its
bodies of water for recreation, tourism, urban identity and economic development (City of
Peterborough, 2009). As such, water resources such as Little Lake and the Otonabee River are an
important part of the community. As a city that values its water, it would be valuable to develop
a forum for people to come together and discuss how they see water as a resource in their
community. A review of the literature as it relates to the cooperative management (co-
management) of water resources is critical, and to understand its applicability in the city of
Peterborough would be advantageous.

This literature review comprises three sections. The first provides an overview of the theoretical
concept of co-management as it relates to the local urban context. Three main topics of co-
management from the literature are summarized. These three particular co-management topics
have been selected because of their overall relevance to the research. Section two provides case
studies to illustrate what other cities in North America have done to discuss their water issues
within their respective communities. The focus here is on water councils and committees at
different scales including local and regional. These councils have been influenced by voluntary
and regulatory schemes. The case studies set the tone for why it is valuable to have a committee
to discuss both problems and solutions to water resources management and planning.

Finally, section three covers the evolution of water management and the soft-path approach. This
section reviews the literature on techniques that local governments are employing to increase
water efficiency for their respective municipality. Literature is reviewed on the conventional and
contentious approaches to water efficiency, especially water metering. Water metering is used to
10
set the context for the case study. As Peterborough is going to install them imminently, there
might be differences in opinion about their efficacy and place. Water metering is not the
ultimately focus of the thesis but provides a grounding for the urban water committee.

The other part of this section is a review how public education can be used for promote
stewardship around water resources. Last, there will be a review on density as a water efficiency
strategy. This topic has been gaining attention from local government and policy makers because
of population growth. The literature in this section notes that density is a new water efficiency
phenomenon and has the potential to generate significant savings to a municipality and its
residents. It is also important because it forces cities to critically examine where their population
is growing. But first, it will be necessary to put the research and literature into context, and
therefore necessary to look at how and why an urban water committee can be realized. Thus, the
theoretical concept of co-management will be reviewed.

2.1 Cooperative Management in the Local Context

Cooperative management, also known as ―co-management‖ or ―collaborative management‖ has
increasingly gained attention by scholars. Co-management efforts have become ubiquitous in a
range of fields of geographic endeavour including planning and management of parks and
protected areas, wildlife, water, tourism, recreation, fisheries and rural development (Plu mmer &
Armitage, 2007). Mitchell (2004) defines the concept as a partnership in which local
government, local communities, non-governmental organizations, utility groups and others
negotiate the authority and responsibility for the management of a natural resource.

One of the most respected scholars on cooperative management is Dr. Fikret Berkes from the
University of Manitoba. Berkes (2009) explains how co-management is a knowledge partnership
among these stakeholder groups. Berkes further explains that through partnerships and bridging
organizations/groups, a forum can be created to allow for the interaction of these different kinds
of knowledge (Berkes, 2009). Effective cooperation develops through time and relies on learning
as participation. This will be made more explicit in the section on social learning.

11
The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has published extensively on co-
management. Throughout the literature, co-management is cited as an effective model for
dealing with fisheries, transboundary water disputes and preserving species. Its application to
urban water resources has been limited. Therefore, the main ideas and concepts will be reviewed
to illustrate the great potential it has for other geographical settings dealing with natural
resources such as water. This section of the literature review will explain three main ideas of co-
management that are of relevance. These include ―governance‖, ―bridging organizations and
leadership‖ and ―social learning‖.

2.1.1 Governance
Managing natural resources is usually carried out by a government body, or a utility company
that is owned by the government, a private company or a public-private partnership. In the case
of water, the main operator will have control and governmental authority over the distribution,
treatment and operation of the resource. The physical management of the resource is only one
element however. The evolution of cooperative management has shown that managing one
resource can be complex as it is multidimensional (Berkes, 2009). Berkes (2009) discusses that
co-management has simultaneously evolved with notions of people-centred governance. In other
words, to increase overall efficiency, management responsibilities must be shared among
partners instead of just one entity.

Koontz et al. (2004) show how public agencies for years have attempted to implement policy
from the top down, however this process has been unpopular. Instead, through more holistic
governance methods, these agencies are now increasingly using collaboration with a broad range
of stakeholders to address environmental problems. Indeed, with this shift there is more
collaboration taking place among private and non-profit sectors with public agencies playing a
relatively minor role through mediation.

Berkes (2009) identifies ―good governance‖ as the direct involvement of people whose
livelihoods are affected by resource management decisions. Governance must include effective
user participation. Borrini-Feyerabend (2000) explains how good governance is not a formalized
process but an interaction among interested stakeholders. Because it is based on a process
12
involving stakeholder input, the local government is not the main leader or facilitator. There is an
abundance of knowledge brought to the table to help address concerns and uncertainties
identified by the stakeholders. Moreover, effective governance requires multiple links across
levels that overlap centres of authority (Berkes, 2009). Some co-management sceptics have
questioned whether government agencies would ever willingly give up power. Berkes writes that
governments are not monolithic, different agencies have different roles and approaches, and the
impact of individuals within organizations can be significant. Sometimes there are boundaries
and barriers that prevent organizations, individuals and the government from working together.
However, at the core of co-management is rethinking boundaries (real and constructed) among
people, institutions and environments and adopting novel governance arrangements to foster
sustainability (Plummer & Armitage, 2007).

Koontz et al. (2004) share a perspective on co-management or what they call ―collaborative
environmental management‖. The authors of this book suggest that collaborative environmental
management is inherently an evolving process. Government agencies and representatives
increasingly face new and emerging challenges. ―A great contemporary challenge is that such
collaboration requires governmental institutions and actors to share, and perhaps at times even
relinquish control over environmental management‖ (Koontz et al, 2004, p. 184).

With collaboration however, government institutions are becoming more flexible and can
encourage other actors to participate in these processes. This would effectively balance out the
power between government institutions and actors and can be viewed as a means of enhancing
the democratic practice. The authors argue that such collaborative management can serve in
different capacities and in different contexts establishing relationships with community
members. Last, ―the interaction and shared deliberation inherent in collaboration may enhance
relations both among and between nongovernment and government representatives by promoting
trust, network development, and participatory democracy‖ (Koontz et al. 2004, p. 184). These
particular arguments will help ground a basis for the collaboration amongst stakeholders in an
urban water committee.

13
As Berkes (2009) elaborates: resource systems are always changing due to population influxes
and higher demands placed on the natural resource. Because these systems undergo change, and
because there are many who use them, these individuals and groups from the community should
have a say in how they are managed. As Berkes further states, effective cooperative management
requires flexible multi-governance systems (Berkes, 2009). Borrini-Feyerabend (2000) explains
this multi-governance system. First, the conventional approach to dealing with an issue in natural
resource management involves the use of law, tools, projects and participation. If a resource is
facing depletion, the local government can institute a law to impose restrictions on using the
resource. It can use tools to control the demand of the resource such as pricing it. It can build
infrastructural projects to either increase the availability of the resource or protect it from
competing uses (Borrini-Feyerabend, 2000). Participation is the final element, though it is
nebulously defined in the conventional approach.

Borrini-Feyerabend (2000) presents a model that is not exclusively under the legal jurisdiction of
the local government. This process known as ―negotiated governance perspective‖ requires
multiple stakeholders to negotiate an agreement to resolve the natural resource issue. Long-term
objectives are set out; tools are jointly selected along with establishment of management
responsibilities (Borrini-Feyerabend, 2000).

2.1.2 Bridging Organizations and Leadership

Co-management is an effective way to build upon what people already have, know and do to
secure their identity, culture, livelihoods and the diversity of natural resources on which they
depend (Borrini-Feyerabend et al. 2004). Cash et al. (2006) write that ―successful co-
management often arises from the adaptive, self-organizing processes of learning-by-doing
rather than from an optimal power sharing across levels.‖ An environment that is conducive to
learning by doing must support collaborative learning and continuously build on new knowledge.
Different groups in the community will partner together and harness knowledge collectively.
This will occur only if the resource is being managed poorly and affecting their livelihoods as a
consequence of poor management (Cash et al., 2006).

14
Boundary and bridging organizations are important for co-management. As knowledge is co-
produced among stakeholders, differences may arise. This makes for a learning process and
allows stakeholders to adapt and find consensus among decisions. Having a boundary
organization is a way of mediating the generation of knowledge regarding the resource
management issue. Cash et al. (2006) define boundary/bridge organizations as organizations that
explicitly focus on the intermediary function of cross-level interactions. As mentioned, co-
management requires cross-level interactions instead of optimal power sharing. These cross-level
interactions or scales are usually between local and state levels. However, even within the local
scale there can be jurisdictional disputes.

Figure 2. Bridging organization model (Berkes, 2009).

As shown in the model, bridging organizations can respond to opportunities, serve as catalysts
and as facilitators among different levels of governance (Berkes, 2009). Again, there is this idea
of an on-going interaction among the groups to generate knowledge and foster participation. The
most critical aspect of governance as it relates to cooperative management is that there are
multiple local interests at play (Berkes, 2009). ―In all societies, the composition of decision-
making bodies is likely to reflect and reinforce imbalances of power, with the weaker and
underprivileged social groups being least represented in decision-making structures‖ (Borrini-
Feyerabend et al. 2004, p. 13). There is no one homogenous community or unitary state
dictating the nature of the resource. Instead, networking, building vision and goals allows
interested parties to come together and come up with practical plans and policy directions. Local

15
government is not the main authority and therefore cannot pass policies that reflect their own
interests (Berkes, 2009).

2.1.3 Social Learning

This is the final component of co-management that is of fundamental importance. While
theoretical, its implications for urban water committees are extensive. Pahl-Wostl & Hare (2004)
articulate that engaging critical actors in social learning can be difficult at first. Particularly, if
the actors do not see how their contributions will improve the overall resource management
process. Social learning locates learning outside of the individual; learning takes places through
the interaction. Building capacities is a diverse process; actors must learn to work together, they
must build trust, be aware of each other‘s different goals and perspectives and understand the
complexity of the management system (Pahl-Wostl & Hare, 2004). If there is a mutual problem
brought to the table, actors must agree to take on tasks in which they will be most effective.
These tasks can be as eclectic as data collection and quantitative analysis, public education and
information dissemination (Pahl-Wostl & Hare, 2004).

What is important, argue Pahl-Wostl & Hare, is that each task be fairly distributed to avoid
confrontation and allow for social learning. They conclude with a thoughtful statement:
―management is not a search for the optimal solution to one problem but an ongoing learning and
negotiation process where a high priority is given to questions of communication, perspective
sharing, and the development of adaptive group strategies for problem-solving‖ (Pahl-Wostl &
Hare, 2004, p. 193).

Berkes emphasizes this evolution of environmental management. He writes that group-centred

and multi-level social learning is critical for environmental management. Natural resources are
too complex to be managed by one single entity. Social learning as an element of co-
management is an on-going participation process aimed at working together for problem
resolution. Through involvement, knowledge is gained and the set of problems and solutions
become well defined (Berkes, 2009). He argues that co-management is a logical approach to
solving resource management problems by partnership (Plummer & Armitage, 2007).

16
According to the literature, co-management is used primarily to resolve disputes in fisheries,
forests, coastal resources, wildlife or local resources in indigenous communities. Its specific
application on natural resources such as water is not commonly reported. Nonetheless, the IUCN
(2004) explains that water has in fact been co-managed for centuries. The co-management of
water has been different depending on cultures and geographical conditions (Borrini-Feyerabend
et al. 2004). In essence, the co-management of water resources in places such as Argentina has
led to an effective utilization and has improved agricultural conditions, equitable use of water
and distribution of the resource (Borrini-Feyerabend et al. 2004). The IUCN further explains that
partnerships in water management not only ameliorate local ecosystem health, but also social
development. The focus of the thesis research is the co-management of water resources.
Therefore, while this literature acknowledges the importance of other natural resources, it will
not be discussed.

The Encadenadas lake watershed in Argentina demonstrates the use of successful co-
management particularly through social learning. Floods and droughts in this region have been
highly problematic for local residents. Approaches to dealing with these natural disasters have
favoured some groups over others. The main challenge was managing water as a common pool
resource for different local administrative units, each with its own ―socio-geographical
peculiarities and ecological/economic priorities‖ (Borrini-Feyerabend, 2004). Higher levels of
government proposed using water works and hydraulic works to deal with these problems.

The use of technical approaches like water and hydraulic works was seen as inadequate in the
eyes of the local community. Over time, the nature of water management shifted from technical
solutions to the local community acquiring social competence for discussing rights,
responsibilities and equity issues (Borrini-Feyerabend, 2004). Eventually, municipalities around
the watershed, political administrators and other interested parties established co-management
plans and formulated a Watershed Management Committee. Finally, the committee provided a
clearer definition of the water problems; brought in diverse social actors who were capable of co-
managing water rights. This process has brought about development and democracy to the region
(Borrini-Feyerabend, 2004). The author contends that democratic participation and citizen

17
empowerment are increasingly proving to be crucial for the design of supportive co-management
policies throughout the world (Borrini-Feyerabend, 2004).

2.2 Water Resources, Stakeholder Involvement and Councils

This section will briefly review three case studies that have had success with urban water
councils- both in Canada and the United States. These councils have been created in response to
water issues in their respective geographical areas. The councils/committees were established
through both regulatory measures and through voluntary means. These case studies are being
evaluated because of their content on stakeholder participation, public involvement and good
governance. More importantly however, their relevance to the thesis is that they show how
councils can be administered ranging from regulatory measures to voluntary means. The final
section will touch on the theoretical underpinnings of councils and stakeholder involvement,
attempting to make an assertion that they are indispensable for water resources management and
planning.

2.2.1 California Urban Water Conservation Council

The purpose of this council is to increase urban water use efficiency for the state of California.
The council was created as a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) regarding water
conservation; it was signed in 1991 by a group of urban water suppliers, environmental interest
groups, and other interested parties (CUWCC, 2007). Since it is a bilateral agreement, it is not
intended to be a legally enforceable agreement. Those who sign the MOU agree to develop and
bring about conservation Best Management Practices (BMPs). This literature review will not
discuss these BMPs in detail, but they generally address residential and commercial water loss,
school education, public information and pricing conservation practices (CUWCC, 2007). This
council has grown since 1991; over 200 urban water suppliers have signed the MOU,
representing about 75 percent of the state‘s urban water supply.

The implementation of water conservation programs in the state is more comprehensive with the
council. Having three groups involved with carrying out management practices has allowed for
better stakeholder participation. Their organization and strength has been recognized by the state
and federal governments. As such, the council receives funding from the State‘s Department of
18
Water Resources and federal U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (CUWCC, 2007). In sum, through an
MOU, the state‘s stakeholders are working together to increase urban water use efficiency.

2.2.2 Guelph’s Use of a Public Advisory Committee

In developing their water conservation and efficiency strategies, the City of Guelph has brought
about a Public Advisory Committee (PAC) (City of Guelph, 2009). There are numerous water
quantity issues that face the city and affect several stakeholders. The risk of Guelph depleting its
aquifer stimulated the motivation to hire a consultant group called Resource Management
Strategies Inc to undertake research methods for water efficiency and conservation (City of
Guelph, 2009). City Council voluntarily decided to add a PAC to the consultant group and pull in
several stakeholders from the community including industry and home builders, the public,
academia and conservation authorities (City of Guelph, 2009).

The purpose of having a PAC is to collectively devise strategies and new ideas for a given issue
in the community (City of Guelph, 2009). The major issue for the city is a depleting aquifer
which risks jeopardizing future water supply in Guelph. PAC members play an important role
and advise the city on new directions and feasible initiatives (City of Guelph, 2009). Koontz et
al. (2004) point out that these sorts of collaborations may be initiated by the government but are
not necessarily led by government (Koontz et al., 2004). Government actors will demonstrate a
willingness to forge partnerships with a diverse spectrum of other governmental and non-
governmental actors as a means to address challenges (Koontz et al., 2004). This is seen as
effective environmental management because the government is willing to engage relevant
actors but not necessarily dictate what they do (Koontz et al., 2004).

2.2.3 The Otonabee-Peterborough Source Protection Committee

The Clean Water Act of Ontario (2006) legally requires local multi-stakeholder source protection
committees (SPC) to prepare reports identifying threats to drinking water (Ministry of
Environment, 2009). The legislation acknowledges the risks and complexities with drinking
water supplies. As such, it brings members of the public together including municipalities,
community groups, conservation authorities, farmers and industry (Ministry of Environment,

19
2009). The major difference between the Otonabee-Peterborough SPC and Guelph‘s PAC is that
the SPC is regulatory in nature, while the PAC is voluntary.

The Otonabee-Peterborough Source Protection Committee shares its source protection planning
with other conservation authorities. The source protection planning process allows communities
to identify potential risks to local water quality and water supply (Trent Source Protection,
2009). After the identification phase, the community will create a plan to reduce or eliminate
these risks. Developing a plan principally involves watershed residents. These residents work
with municipalities, conservation authorities, property owners, farmers, industry, health officials,
community groups, and others (Trent Source Protection, 2009). This source protection
committee comprises several townships and municipalities all located within the county of
Peterborough.

In many cases, these councils play a valuable role in connecting people and brokering
knowledge, and bringing environmental agendas to the fore (Robins, 2007). Some councils
including Guelph‘s PAC, are intimately connected to municipalities and have highly
participative, democratic and transparent processes. With more decentralized forms of
governance, these sorts of committees/councils can be influential in promoting more effective
water management and planning.

2.2.4 Theoretical Underpinning of Committees and Stakeholder Involvement

The empirical and theoretical research on councils is analyzed by Warner (2005). Warner sees
councils and committees as multi-stakeholder platforms (MSPs) that attempt to integrate society
in water resource management (Warner, 2005). These MSPs comprise different stakeholders
who perceive the same resource management problem, realize their interdependence for solving
it and come together to agree on action strategies for solving the problem (Warner, 2005). An
MSP that comes together to discuss urban water use efficiency for instance, would theoretically
interact through collective decision-making, strategizing and negotiation (Warner, 2005). The
stakeholders involved should be affected by the policies, decisions and actions of the system. An
MSP would also help resolve issues as diverse as commercial development on water resources or

20
the construction of mixed use residential development on environmentally sensitive areas. It
gives people a chance to voice their opinions.

Finally, Warner explains the difference between primary and secondary stakeholders. A primary
stakeholder is ultimately affected or adversely affected by the intervention. A secondary
stakeholder has an intermediary role and assists with mediating and facilitating (Warner, 2005).
These platforms are inexpensive writes Warner; they are voluntary and need relatively low
investment. What is important about them is the government has the chance to learn about the
range of interests and positions involved and what policy aspects are likely to generate
opposition (Warner, 2005). Thus, the government is not inherently the leader of this process but
a regular stakeholder.

A publication in the Urban Water Journal touches on the significance of stakeholder involvement
in urban water management planning. Gerasidi et al. (2009) argue that urban water management
planning must be done through participatory processes including involvement and empowerment
of stakeholders in the management of water resources. The article explains how stakeholder
involvement is recognized as an important factor in the successful implementation of water
management plans. Moreover, involving stakeholders enables a better understanding of different
parties that have an interest in significant water management issues; the process of facilitating
this involvement can articulate more clearly the context of agreements and disagreements
(Gerasidi et al. 2009).

This deviates from the conventional approach write the authors. Water management plans have
traditionally developed and have been written by a central administrator that emphasizes clusters
of structural interventions mostly aimed at enhancing supply (Gerasidi et al. 2009). The
implementation of alternative options and tools such as allowing for stakeholder involvement
expanded a drive towards ―sustainable operation‖. This sustainable operation is achievable by
improving the provision of water services (governance), by encouraging efficient water use
(valuing) and by ensuring equitable distribution of water resources (sharing) (Gerasidi et al.
2009).

21
The literature on this subject is critical for informing an understanding of the mechanics of an
urban water committee. Both Warner (2005) and Gerasidi et al. (2009) promote sustainable
management of water and argue that such management should promote active cooperation
among such entities as government, civil society, services and resource providers. Two final
points by Gerasidi et al (2009) corroborate some of the major themes of cooperative management
including social learning and governance.

In allowing for stakeholder involvement in the creation of urban water management plans, it is
valuable to ensure public participation (Gerasidi et al. 2009). Public participation aims at
reaching consensus on the development of a cohesive and implementable water management
plan (Gerasidi et al. 2009). This is achieved through the gathering of information, expanded
knowledge, perceptions and experiences of different stakeholder groups. Further, the public and
each stakeholder would have a plethora of knowledge and information in their field of expertise,
their understanding of the present situation and their concerns and apprehensions (Gerasidi et al.
2009).

The overarching relevance of these articles to the thesis is the holistic approach to water
resources management and planning. Similar to the arguments put out by Fikret Berkes on social
learning, involving different stakeholders and the public at large allows for more interaction,
sharing of knowledge and expertise. This can ultimately lead to a holistic water resources
management plans. In promoting the active cooperation among stakeholders, roles and
responsibilities become clearer allowing for cohesion and a comprehensive water agenda.

2.3 The Evolution of Water Management: The Soft-Path Approach

In short, the soft-path approach to water management uses tools such as education, information
dissemination, awareness raising, water pricing and open forums (Brandes & Ferguson, 2003).
This contrasts with the hard-path or more conventional approach to water management which
focuses on supply management i.e. increasing water supply through the construction of concrete
dams, fixing pipes, desalination, water infrastructure expansion and other technical dimensions-
all of which are focused on the augmentation of supply to meet the demands of the water users
(Brooks et al., 2009). A general direction of many Canadian municipalities today is more
22
efficient use of water (Brandes & Ferguson, 2003). The impetus for water efficiency usually
comes from the community and government who have identified particular water problems. This
often means that water is being taken for granted and used profligately. Therefore, a local
government response is to use water efficiency strategies to lower overall urban water use
(Brandes & Ferguson, 2003). Maximizing water efficiency in a city or a community can only
happen if the local government truly knows the interests of the residents. Brandes & Ferguson
note the variation in urban water use among Canadian municipalities.

Every community addresses water efficiency differently, some through water metering, increased
density, rainwater harvesting and even deploying water efficient technology to cut down
consumption. Use by residents of rainwater harvesting systems or rain barrels, while a self-
motivated water efficiency solution, can be problematic in the eyes of the water utility. The
water utility may feel that they should be the only deliverers of water to the resident. This is just
an idea and will not be reviewed here.

This final section of the literature review is meant to discuss the community‘s role in water
management. It is critical to review the literature on water efficiency because communities can
either be influential or oppose new strategies put out by local government. The literature on
water efficiency will be summarized from the POLIS Project on Ecological Governance. The
POLIS projects draws on Canadian and local examples. POLIS along with other sources will be
synthesized here.

Justifying water efficiency in settings where there is an abundance of water can be difficult.
Citizens may vociferously condemn water efficiency because it affects their quality of life. They
have to use less water which cuts down on showers, less water for washing dishes, watering the
lawn and many more constraints. Or, they may be against water metering as a water efficiency
strategy because they are now paying for how much water they consume. Or, paying for new
water efficient technology, though cost-saving for the future, may be expensive initially for
residents and thus they may be disinclined to buy the product. This makes for an interesting case.

23
2.3.1 Water Metering
Water metering has historically been a common approach for promoting water efficiency
(Brandes & Ferguson, 2003). Brandes & Ferguson conducted a survey of 20 municipalities
across Canada to determine their water management strategies. One survey question dealt with
water metering. 11 of the 20 studied cities had full or near full domestic water metering (Brandes
& Ferguson, 2003). The general finding is that cities with installed meters have lower domestic
per capita water use. Statistically, cities with pricing structures had an average water utilization
of 269 litres per person per day. Conversely, those with flat or fixed water rates use 457 litres per
capita (Brandes & Ferguson, 2003). In Canada, the percentage of metered households served by
municipal water systems increased during the 1990s, from 52 percent in 1991, to 56 percent in
1999; but jumped to 61 percent in 2001 (Marbek Resource Consultants, 2008).

A research report prepared for the Federation of Canadian Municipalities writes that ―water
metering is a cornerstone of good water management because it begins to address water quantity
as well as public awareness issues. Installing meters is a necessary condition for financial
management, demand side management, public awareness and education‖ (Marbek Resource
Consultants, 2008). Complicating the water use issue in Canada is the high cost of maintaining,
replacing or adding new water and wastewater infrastructure (Environment Canada, 2007).
These complications are largely driven by increasing residential demands for water resources.
However, several municipalities have realized that water meters can be an optimal environmental
and economic strategy. By cutting overall water consumption for the residential sector, the
amount of wastewater entering the city‘s wastewater treatment plant will be reduced. This will
help lower the costs of wastewater treatment which means savings in the long-term (PUC, 2009).

Among these 20 cities, there is variation in population size- from 6,184 in Iqaluit to 2,503,281 in
Toronto. There is also variation in how much water these cities have- some have more than
others. Population size and water availability need not be the main considerations for water
metering. Instead, Brandes & Ferguson argue that water metering is becoming an omnipresent
phenomenon in Canada. The sustainability of water is greatly advanced with water metering
because of the price signals seen by residents (Policy Research Initiative, 2004). Cities in Canada

24
that have gone the water metering route have shown that reducing urban water use does not
necessarily affect the quality of urban life (Brandes & Ferguson, 2003).

There are attitudinal barriers to metering, pricing and water conservation because residents want
the luxury of a system that provides an abundance of water. When residents have to cut down
their consumption, and start paying for how much water they consume, the overall community
interest in water conservation programs are dampened (Marbek Resource Consultants, 2008).
Hanemann (1997) has been writing persuasively about water metering and pricing since the
1990s. While water metering has gained national attention since, he makes insightful arguments.
Some of these points include matching public education with water efficiency. Hanemann
suggests that when cities introduce pricing structures to replace the conventional fixed rate
system, guidance and education to residents must follow suit. Hanemann writes that guidance
and public education do not have to be provided by the water utility, but by community
organizations so that residents see the overall community support and understand its benefits.

One of the safest ways to ensure revenue stability for the water company is to raise revenues
through a fixed monthly service charge. Hanemann suggests that this insulates revenues from
fluctuations in the quantity of water delivered, but is counterproductive from an efficiency lens
because it provides no incentive to use water sparingly (Hanemann, 1997). Thus, Hanemann
concludes that water metering is strictly for the community‘s benefit, and where the utility
company does not profit. It costs the utility for installation of the meters and its maintenance.
These costs are thus reflected in higher water rates for the residents who can cut reduce overall
usage of water and save money; thus they have more control over their water use.

Lastly, Hanemann mentions that water metering has socio-economic implications in virtually any
municipality. Low-income families of five or six people may find it hard to pay for their water as
they are now paying based on units consumed. There are solutions to this which include life-line
rates that offer low-income customers some initial quantum of usage at a reduced price
(Hanemann, 1997). However, literature on this subject will not be discussed here.

25
The literature on water metering in Peterborough is limited. However, the Peterborough Utilities
Commission has announced that they are going to install water meters in the near future to create
a fair payment system (PUC, 2009). The exact date has not been officially confirmed but the
installation process will take a number of months. They are going to install 25,000 meters; this
will cost $10 million and the costs will be built into water rates (PUC, 2009). On average, a
Peterborough resident uses 100 litres of water per day more than the average Canadian. For the
whole city, this is almost three billion litres a year or approximately the same amount of water in
Little Lake (PUC, 2009). The PUC predicts that water metering will help reduce the city‘s water
demands by 15-20 percent (PUC, 2009).

2.3.2 The Rise of Public Education

Municipal governments across Canada are beginning to understand the value of educating water
users on stewardship and conservation. However, according to Brandes et al. (2006) the public is
not always receptive to these educational initiatives. The authors explain how there is a lack of
understanding about the need for and potential benefits of water conservation and how to
effectively put them into action. The authors elaborate ―because of our relative abundance of
water, conservation is seen as a well-intentioned activity, but not a necessity‖ (Brandes et al.
2006, p. 39). In a time of where water is becoming a more precious natural resource,
municipalities are going to have to implement outreach and education programs that go beyond
information dissemination. Indeed, the authors argue that local governments have to engage and
inspire their citizens to permanently change behaviours and attitudes towards water use.

A relevant aspect of their publication is their discussion of social marketing. Such an approach
differs from conventional techniques because more time and effort is invested up-front to
understand barriers to program design and implementation (Brandes et al. 2006). They identify
four steps to the process:
1) Identify the barriers and benefits to an activity by reviewing existing research and
conducting focus groups and randomized surveys
2) Develop a strategy that uses ―tools‖ such as communications and marketing techniques
and incentives that have proven effective at changing behaviour
3) Pilot the strategy using community test groups
26
 4) Evaluate the strategy once it has been implemented across a community

This sort of educational technique goes beyond brochures and information to include
opportunities for community engagement. The authors argue that social marketing can heighten
public awareness of the need to conserve to the point where other measures such as volume-
based pricing and regulation become acceptable and can be implemented. The authors also stress
that ―increasing public education can motivate the public to demand their elected officials to
address water issues as a policy priority before a crisis is reached‖ (Brandes et al. 2006, p. 40).

Empirical evidence suggests that public education around water conservation is an

environmental, economic and political must. However, Brandes et al. (2006) explain that it is
crucial for governments to provide funding and training for stakeholders like NGOs so as to
ensure that a diverse community is involved in the process. Last, if a city has the goal to balance
its water budget, it can encourage many disparate organizations and individuals to work together
to develop more sustainable behaviours and practices. The literature on public education,
provided by Brandes et al (2006) will be discussed later on in the thesis. Their analysis can be
applied to the discussion and recommendations section of the project.

2.3.3 Water Efficiency & Density

The question of density in water policy and management is more important now than it ever has
been. Density in this context refers to ―urban density‖ which is the number of people inhabiting
an urban area/total area of urban land (EPA, 2009). In essence, increasing urban density means
more compact residential and commercial development in the urban centre- more people
concentrated in the urban centre means higher access to amenities, services and commerce.
Urban centres in many municipalities are full of commercial and industrial entities. Increasing
urban density in these municipalities would mean the construction of more multi-unit housing
complexes where more people are living together on a parcel of land.

Density considerations epitomize this evolution of water management and planning as

population growth gains more attention. Brugmann (2009) reported that higher density
neighbourhoods help lower the costs of piping installation and reduces the maintenance costs for
27
actually pumping the water through it. The water department loses money on low density
neighbourhoods thereby causing high density areas to bear the burden of this financial loss
through higher water rates and tax payments. This topic is gaining research focus across the
literature- the Environmental Protection Agency collaborated with the American Water Works
Association to make the argument that denser development allows for more efficient water use
and lower infrastructural costs for water utilities (EPA, 2006). Their study based on American
cities, points to topics that are gaining increased attention from policymakers and local
governments.

To begin, characteristics of new conventional growth include large lots, low density and
dispersed development- all of which increase the cost of delivering water (EPA, 2006). Lot size
is always an important consideration for piping costs. Neighbourhood water pipes fall into two
types: transmission mains that run under or along streets and distribution mains that connect each
house or building to the transmission pipes (EPA, 2006). The EPA explains that a house on a
smaller lot is closer to the transmission main and thus requires a shorter distribution main.
Neighbourhoods with smaller lots will have more houses per block of transmission main, so the
cost of that main will be less per house than in neighbourhoods with larger lots (EPA, 2006).

Dispersed development is another density aspect. Longer water main distribution systems leak
more than shorter ones (EPA, 2006). Further, systems in low density areas must use higher
pressure to push water through longer mains- this puts more pressures on the water infrastructure
over time. Statistically, low density areas tend to have higher demand for water for lawns, thus
water pressures must be increased even more during the dry summer months (EPA, 2006).
Generally, development that is more spread out and less dense needs a longer system than
development that is more compact. Therefore, water systems in less dense developments will
leak more than systems in compact developments. These leaks are a financial burden for
drinking water systems ultimately imposing costs on rate payers (EPA, 2006).

The geographical importance of this EPA study is the discussion of smart growth. Smart growth
principles can make density a more desirable urban solution. Some relevant principles include:
strengthen development and direct it toward existing communities, foster distinctive, attractive
28
communities with a strong sense of place, create a range of housing opportunities and choices,
focus on mixed land uses and finally the most important for this research – encourage
community and stakeholder collaboration in development decisions (EPA, 2006). The main idea
behind smart growth is compact development. Concentrating residential and commercial uses
together will require substantially less piping and water infrastructure.

The American Planning Association elaborates on the importance of compact development.

Their study shows that the annual cost of providing water and sewer service to a half-acre lot in a
centrally located dense development is $283 per household. Conversely, it is $472 for the same
lot in a highly dispersed development far from the water service centre (Speir et al. 2002). They
also point out the linear relationship between increased costs and increased distance from the
water service centre: for highly compact, small lot development, each additional mile from the
water service centre adds roughly $50,000 to the 30-year cost of service provision per household
(Speir et al. 2002). By contrast, in the low density large lot development, each additional mile
adds approximately $122,000 to the cost (Speir et al. 2002).

A more local example of population growth and density is illustrated in a report that was
published in April of 2009 from the Planning Division of Peterborough. The report is titled
―Planning Peterborough to 2031: How the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe will
affect the City of Peterborough‖. This report explains Peterborough‘s spatial separation from the
Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) and its slow population growth. The Planning division
predicts that the city‘s population will grow by 14,000 people from 2006 to 2031- this is not a
significant trend considering the rapid growth rates of other cities in the GGH (City of
Peterborough, 2009).

As the report identifies, a foreseeable issue that pertains to water is housing density. The report
explains how residential housing development in Peterborough is mostly single-detached
housing. Peterborough‘s designated Greenfield areas or sites which are the areas located on the
rural-urban fringe, have been used to satisfy the local housing market‘s demand for low density
single-detached housing (City of Peterborough, 2009).

29
Another paper published by the EPA in 2006 concluded that higher density development can
better protect water resources. Using a variety of models, their study shows how higher density
can generate less stormwater runoff per house at all scales (EPA, 2006). For the same amount of
development, higher density development produces less runoff and less impervious cover than
low-density development. More stormwater runoff can carry contaminated sediment, PCB and
other pollutants into a city‘s drinking water supply. Thus, the relevance of this to the thesis is
how higher densification can help minimize risks around a safe drinking water supply only
insofar as a stormwater management plan is in place.

The EPA explains that new residential development in any community must minimize
imperviousness which in turn can help maintain an adequate supply of drinking water for the
community. They argue that the planning solution is to preserve large, continuous areas of
absorbent open space (EPA, 2006). A relevant point from the EPA publication to the
Peterborough Planning report is the problem with constructing houses on Greenfield areas.
Developing land in Greenfield areas involves wholesale grading of the site and removal of
topsoil; this can lead to severe erosion during construction and soil compaction by heavy
equipment (EPA, 2006).

The findings of the report show that density, defined by the number of homes per parcel of land,
can greatly determine the impervious surface area which predicts runoff. For instance, on sites
with 2 homes per acre, impervious surfaces attributed to streets, driveways, and parking lots can
represent upwards of 75 percent of the total site imperviousness (EPA, 2006). By contrast, 8
homes per acre decreases the total site imperviousness to 56 percent because low densities often
require more off-site transportation related impervious infrastructure, which is not included when
calculating impervious cover (EPA, 2006). The study draws another scenario attempting to
show the difference between runoff measured by acre versus runoff measured by house. They
use low-density and high-density communities to illustrate their point.

For the low-density community, one house on one acre of land has a 20 percent impervious
cover. For the high-density community, eight houses on one acre have a 65 percent impervious
cover. The authors write that the more houses per acre have the greatest amount of impervious
30
surface cover and thus generate the most runoff at the acre level. For scenario A (one house on
one acre) the runoff rate per unit is 18,700 ft3 /year. For scenario C (eight houses on one acre)
each house produces 4,950 ft3/year (EPA, 2006). Therefore, each home in the higher-density
community results in less stormwater runoff because they create less impervious surface per
house, not per acre.

When density is quadrupled from one house to four, stormwater runoff increases by 1/3 per acre,
but decreases by 2/3 per house (EPA, 2006). The results from the study indicate that when runoff
is measured by the acre, limiting density does minimize water quality impacts compared to the
higher-density scenarios. However, when measured by the house, higher densities produce less
stormwater runoff (EPA, 2006). Generally, the findings from this report are useful for framing
an understanding about how urban density relates to water resources, particularly how it can help
ensure a safer drinking water supply for the community.

2.4 Research Implications

A review of the empirical research on primarily co-management and water committees reveals a
number of implications. Co-management is a theoretical concept but has practical value for
establishing a water forum or committee. As identified through social learning and governance,
even minute resource management problems or differences can be resolved through co-
management. Most importantly, it demonstrates that there may be multiple interests at play. The
literature on co-management and water committees show the value of gathering input from
people living in the city or those who use the resource. For a city like Peterborough, a simple
water policy change like water metering can affect some socio-economic groups more than
others. Or, mixed use development around significant bodies of water such as Little Lake, can
enrage local residents who do feel properly consulted. Again, it should be the role of
stakeholders to address these issues and allow for participation. The spirit of public participation
in water issues is absolutely critical.

The empirical research on committees revealed that committees can be either voluntary or
regulatory. A regulatory committee may have a more rigid government process where legislation
or agreements dictate the requirements of the council. Voluntary councils, while not enforced by
31
the law, still deal with significant water issues. If a committee comes about for this particular
case study, it may have to be in the middle of this regulatory-voluntary spectrum. Ultimately, the
creation of the council must be influenced by those that are going to be a part of it. Overall, the
empirical literature on co-management, councils and the evolution of water management raises
some of the more salient questions around geographical location and how location can be a
crucial factor.

32
 Chapter 3
RESEARCH METHODS
“Method is much, technique is much, but inspiration is even more.‖ –Benjamin Cardozo

The urban water committee will be composed of seven major stakeholders. It should be noted
that ―stakeholders‖ and ―interviewees‖ will be used interchangeably in this chapter. The
stakeholders include the Peterborough Utilities Company, Peterborough Green-Up, the Otonabee
Region Conservation Authority, a city planner from Peterborough‘s Planning Division, a
representative from the City Council, the Trent-Severn Waterway and the Wastewater Treatment
Plant. Examples described in previous chapters showed how the involvement of multiple
stakeholders in urban water management is critical for planning and policy formulation. I know
that other cities have had successes with their respective committees and councils. This has
stimulated an interest to learn about how an urban water committee would fit in a city like
Peterborough. The outcome of a committee will likely have an impact on policy and planning
decisions for the city for years to come.

In this chapter, I will begin with a brief outline of the research objectives followed by a
discussion of the research design and methodological tools. The first method explains how the
current literature on cooperative management and water councils can be used as a
methodological tool. The literature has informed my knowledge of the major themes, ideas and
theories on water resources management. As such, this is a valuable method that will help clarify
how Peterborough‘s water situation is different than other cities. The second major method is
the semi-structured interviews. This method produced the most results and thus is the primary
source of data analyzed.

Case study research design is the main research framework I will be using. I have selected case
study research design because it employs a mixed methods framework. Finally, the chapter will
close with a discussion of how I intend on coding the data, interpreting it and fitting it into the
larger research project.

33
3.1 Research Objectives
The objectives of the methodology are two-fold: to determine whether an urban water committee
is appropriate for the City of Peterborough. Second, this project seeks to understand how the
various stakeholders in Peterborough are currently involved with water management and
planning, or if they wish to be more involved by playing a more active role. As such, it is my
objective to formulate qualitative research questions that are unambiguous and easily understood
by the stakeholder. Qualitative research operates from the perspective that knowledge is situated
and contextual (Mason, 2002). Therefore, my objective is to ensure that the relevant contexts are
brought into focus so that situated knowledge can be produced (Mason, 2002). Determining a
stakeholder‘s level of interest in an urban water committee will only be clear if my question
allows them to be clear.

In writing these objectives, it is critical to revisit the main research question and other questions
that I intend on answering. The main research question is: would a cooperative management
framework make planning for water resources management a more interactive and multi-
stakeholder-based process? My objective was to answer this question in a neutral and non-
biased fashion. As previous chapters have explained, I have created the criteria for what
constitutes inclusive and comprehensive planning. Generally the use of cooperative management,
specifically governance, bridging organizations/leadership and social learning, is the criterion for
an inclusive and holistic planning process. All of these themes were made clear to the
interviewees to ensure that they were aware of my criteria. The criteria I established are
important for ensuring consistency across interviews and accuracy when coding my data.

My other research question is ―how could a water committee enable the city to more holistically
manage water?‖ Note that these research questions were in the form of interview questions with
the stakeholders. It was my objective to ask the stakeholders if they felt that urban water
management and planning could be better optimized through a committee. As I will explain, my
primary interest in using a case study research framework is its focus on interviews. Because I
am doing an exploratory study, the conventional case study interview questions are the ―how‖
and ―why‖ of what the researcher is interested in. At a basic level, I am interested in how an
urban water committee would work for Peterborough and why this would benefit the city.
34
However, I do not intend to limit my questions to ―how‖ and ―why‖; I will use them as a
guideline.

Before I conducted the interviews, I wanted to ensure that my preliminary phase was organized
and ready to be executed. First of all, the stakeholders had been chosen purposefully on the basis
of the issues and themes that emerged from the literature review. Chapter 2 outlined other case
studies that use councils or committees for some aspect of urban water management and
planning. The various case studies and the literature in general, consistently identified the
relevant actors and stakeholders who play a role or have the potential to play a role in water
management and planning. From the months of October to December 2009, I contacted all of the
informants via telephone and email. I indicated to them the significance of the research and
explained why the interviewees‘ views and experiences would be valued. The interviewees were
told about all of the particulars including an estimation of how long the interview would last,
along with how I would be conducting it.

As a part of good formal communication and research ethic, the interviewees were provided with
an information letter outlining the thesis context and research implications (see Appendix C). In
addition, I provided the stakeholders with the Human Research Consent Form, a copy of my
thesis abstract and the Key Informant Interview Guide which listed all of the questions that I was
going to ask in the interview (see Appendix B). I submitted these documents because I wanted
the interviewees to be completely aware of my thesis, its relevance and their involvement in it.
Above all, these preliminary components were essential for the success of the interviews
conducted.

3.2 Research instrument and design

Mason (2002) explains how interviewing is an appropriate way to get some of what qualitative
researchers see as the ―central ontological components of social reality‖. As such, we are
interested in the lived experiences of our stakeholder and real life situations and less on
hypothetical and abstract information (Mason, 2002). The first method is a discussion of the
primary and secondary literature. This section will touch specifically on the primary methods
which include city documents, reports and policies for the contextual information. Case study
35
research will be used as the main framework because of its mixed methods approach. Through
this mixed methods approach, semi-structured interviews will be the primary qualitative research
method for the fieldwork of this study. My intention is to complete seven semi-structured
interviews with the interviewees previously mentioned.

3.2.1 Case Study Research Design

Before moving on to discussion on how I am going to answer my research question and interpret
the data, I am going to touch on case study research as the major framework for my thesis. Single
case study design directly aligns with the research framework I am using. To begin, in using the
language of case study research design, this thesis is an exploratory study with formulated
criteria on which success will be judged. The quintessential characteristic of case study research
is that it strives towards holistic understanding of systems (Yin, 1994). Understanding holistic
systems requires the researcher to examine the interrelated activities engaged in by the actors-
whoever they may be (Yin, 1994). In this instance, I was interested in who carries out public
education on water, how stakeholders will be engaged in the forthcoming residential water
metering program and the level of concern regarding commercial and residential development
around significant bodies of water- given the implications of amendment 142 to the City‘s
Official Plan.

Single-case studies are meant to be selective, focusing on one or two issues that are fundamental
to understanding the system being examined (Tellis, 1997). As a part of doing case study
research, I understood that my case study site has geographical parameters, and thus it was not
my intention to provide a generalized conclusion that an urban water committee can be
successful in any jurisdiction using the criteria that I have established.

Since my main research question asks whether cooperative management, as a theory, would
make water resource planning more interactive and multi-stakeholder based, this design format
was applicable. As such, this required careful investigation to avoid misrepresentation and
corroborate whether the theory can work for the case study selected. For the case study research,
the interview questions had to be open-ended as interviewees were asked to comment about
certain topics, events or ideas. This was particularly important for the ―how‖ part of case study
36
research design. For example, ―how could other groups/individuals in the city help your
organization achieve its goals with respect to water resources management?‖ Peterborough
Green-Up is one of the main organizers of the Peterborough Children‘s Water Festival. This
festival is an excellent way to raise awareness of the value and importance of water in the
community. I was interested to know if there is potential for other organizations/individuals to
help with this event.

In determining the interviewees‘ opinion and interest in an urban water committee, my questions
were meant to allow them to provide solutions or provide insights. Because of the flexible nature
of the interview style I had selected, I was able to have a conversation with the interviewee about
other case studies as a reference point. For example, by referencing other cities that have
committees, I was able to briefly explain what the city is doing on urban water management and
planning. This allowed the interviewee to determine what is relevant and important and what is
extraneous and insignificant. In doing this, case study research explains how the researcher must
avoid becoming dependent on a single interviewee and should endeavour to seek the same data
from other sources to verify its authenticity (Tellis, 1997).

3.2.2 Literature Review: Primary and Secondary

Having completed a literature review, I have become well-informed about the literature on
cooperative management and water management more generally. The primary literature from the
review was a useful method that enhanced my understanding of the City of Peterborough. In
addition, reviewing the literature allowed me to appropriately identify all of the relevant
stakeholders. Other cities such as Guelph, which have developed their respective councils, have
included a range of stakeholders from the community including the water utility, conservation
authority, the pubic at large, City Council and even academia. Thus, I have identified the
stakeholders for my case study based on what other jurisdictions have done. However, my case
study differed as it includes a city planner, the Trent-Severn Waterway as a federal body, a not-
for-profit organization and the city‘s Wastewater Treatment Plant.

The primary literature comprised city reports such as the growth plan, documents and power
point presentations from the Peterborough Utilities Commission, the Little Lake Master Plan
37
from the city‘s website and my notes from the Little Lake Master Plan workshop. Combined,
these sources provided me with the contextual information and details regarding the history and
evolution of water management in Peterborough, current water supply, policy and local
government. In staying focused on the main idea, an urban water committee, I attempted to use
examples of existing water councils from the literature. In doing this, the stakeholders had the
chance to learn more about the purpose of an urban water committee and how I defined it in my
research.

Reviewing the primary literature was an on-going process. It was critical that I remained
informed about policy, programming and structural changes in the city. For example, I visited
the PUC‘s website on a continuous basis to learn about any updates concerning the residential
water metering program. The secondary sources in my literature review present examples of
water metering in various North American jurisdictions. This knowledge helped me in the semi-
structured interviews by illustrating the successes and challenges to water metering in other
jurisdictions. The purpose was to highlight my criteria which sees water metering as a complex
initiative and thus requires a holistic and multi-disciplinary approach; namely public education,
open communication and designing a sensible pricing structure that is in the best interest of the
city‘s residents. In sum, going through the literature continuously helped ensure that my
knowledge of the subject matter was current.

3.2.3 Semi-Structured interviews

The purpose of using semi-structured interviews was to learn about the various perceptions
regarding urban water management and planning for the City of Peterborough (see Appendix A).
Up until the interviews, my understanding of urban water management and planning was
constructed through reading the literature and case studies. On a more practical level, the semi-
structured interviews provided more of the context to urban water management and planning as
interviewees shared their own experiences and real life situations with management, policy,
planning, education and so forth. The use of a semi-structured interview style employed an open
framework allowing for focused, conversational two-way communication. I chose to use semi-
structured interviews because this method was appropriate for qualitative and exploratory
research of this kind.
38
My idea of an urban water committee was formulated through reading the literature and
experimenting with different models. I knew that my idea of the UWC would be different from
the stakeholders. As such, it was crucial to be flexible and adaptive in constructing appropriate
questions as the interview progressed. Importantly, the conversations generated meaningful
knowledge regarding the interviewee‘s perception of an urban water committee and whether they
saw any merit in having one for the city. In this study, the use of the semi-structured interviews
allowed stakeholders to respond to open-ended questions with a discussion of the issues they felt
were most important to them, thereby minimizing the biases and preconceptions of the researcher
(Schippling, 2007). However, because I defined the urban water committee in the Key Informant
Interview Guide, interviewees might have been biased as to what the purpose of it would be.

The flexible nature of semi-structured interviews can confirm what is already known but also
provide the opportunity for further learning (Mason, 2002). Mason explains that semi-structured
interviews are conversations with a purpose. My intention here was to construct or reconstruct
knowledge as opposed to excavating it. The overarching purpose of conducting the interviews
was to solicit the stakeholder‘s opinions and insights regarding the applicability of the idea of an
urban water committee as it relates to water resources planning and management in the City of
Peterborough. As such, to begin my interview I asked the stakeholders who they currently work
with in respect to water resources management in the city. Going along on the subject of
collaboration and committee, I was able to solicit their insights regarding how other
groups/individuals in the city can work with them to achieve their objectives with respect to
water resources management.

The focus of the thesis research is on governance and cooperative management. I designed a
variety of questions that pertained to my interests in water resource management and planning.
However, certain questions directly asked stakeholders about their interest in working more
closely with others. The second question of the interview guide was ―collaborating through a
water committee can lead to the sharing of knowledge and expertise among stakeholders. Also,
depending on the structure, the public could have access to this information through an open
forum and annual report. Do you think that such collaboration would help generate more
comprehensive policy and planning around water resources management? Why or why not?‖
39
With this question, I knew that I would immediately be able to ascertain the stakeholder‘s
interest in collaboration and working toward policy and planning initiatives. If they were not
interested in collaboration, I was able to ask them why. And if they seemed interested in further
collaboration, they would be able to tell me.

I used prompts in this question such as ―public education‖, ―including the public in policy
decisions‖, and ―Guelph‘s public advisory committee‖. With case study research design at the
back of my mind, these sorts of questions were able to produce meaningful data which in most
cases directly related to the main research question.

Discussion around water metering appeared to be appropriate for the interviews. Water meters
have not been installed yet, so I did not know if there were any issues surrounding them. Thus,
the purpose of these qualitative semi-structured interview questions was to construct or re-
construct their existing knowledge and discuss water metering in depth. Specifically, I asked
―what do you see as the potential benefits/controversies around residential water metering?‖ I
asked this question using keywords that emerged from the literature including ―social equity‖,
―water conservation‖ and ―socio-economic status‖ to direct the conversation in a way that would
produce data relevant to my research.

Another critical interview question addressed drinking water supply. A simple yet meaningful
question regarding drinking water supply was ―what are the major drinking water supply issues
for the city?‖ I expected there to be variation in the responses from the interviewees on this
question. However, I also anticipated that the interviewees would speak to the financial capital
and costs of maintaining and upgrading a water system so as to ensure a steady and safe supply
of drinking water for now and for the future.

A succeeding interview question is ―does your organization play a role in drinking water supply
management in the city?‖ While some interviewees are more suited and informed to answer this
question than others, their own thoughts about the issue were useful for informing my
understanding and allowing me to make connections to the original research question. All of

40
these questions were designed to allow the stakeholders to view the merits of a committee given
the variety of issues, factors and stakeholders in the city.

The interviews would provide the opportunity to re-construct the interviewee‘s existing
knowledge on the subject and allowed them to provide their perspective on how it may work for
the community. Qualitative research requires the researcher to pay close attention to perception,
context, interaction and the situation (Mason, 2002). No matter how the interviewees perceived
the idea of an urban water committee, it was the objective of the interview question to generate a
fairer and fuller representation of their perspectives.

While each interview was meant to be consistent with the questions asked, some questions had to
be adjusted. Because I looked at urban water management as a holistic, comprehensive and
multi-stakeholder process, certain questions were asked to engage the interviewee‘s perception
on something they have not thought about critically. For instance, my particular interest in how
increased residential density can improve water management and water protection had different
responses from the utility company and city planner. All of these stakeholders have different
professional responsibilities related to water resources management and planning; thus it was
expected that their responses to the interview questions would be different.

In trying to ascertain how each stakeholder would see their involvement in an urban water
committee, I tried to make reference to Little Lake during the interview. The city has hired a
consulting group called ―the Planning Partnership‖ to carry out a Master Plan for Little Lake.
The specifics of the plan are extraneous here; however, the Planning Partnership‘s open and
participatory process is of relevance. A practical interview question I asked in relation to this was
―how is the consultant group involving you or other stakeholders?‖ Whether the stakeholders
were involved in Little Lake‘s Master plan or not, I figured that they would be able to formulate
an opinion about it based on the discussion in the interview.

A succeeding question was meant to solicit their opinion on how they would structure a similar
consultative process. I asked stakeholders ―how would your organization go about structuring a
similar consultative process around water issues in the city?‖ This question was designed to hear
41
the stakeholders‘ input on community engagement, openness and transparency and working
collaboratively with others to produce results. I figured that this question would provide
meaningful data for answering the main research question.

The focus of the Little Lake Master plan on the importance of community involvement would
give the interviewees something to think about. Discussion of community involvement in urban
water management and planning was not a biased approach; it was a part of the criteria I
developed in what constitutes an interactive and multi-stakeholder based process.

To conclude the semi-structured interviews, I brought the focus back to the applicability of an
urban water committee. As shown in other jurisdictions, a water council can make a valuable
contribution to water resources management, especially in terms of facilitating the involvement
of different stakeholders in the municipal water process. With all of the questions asked to the
interviewees, I concluded with ―how would you see an urban water committee working for the
City of Peterborough. Two subsequent questions would be ―do you think that an urban water
committee is a good idea‖, and finally ―who do you think should be involved?‖ These questions
were designed to understand the stakeholders‘ perception on collaborative management, the
sharing of information and responsibility and ultimately, their overall interest in participating in
an urban water committee.

On December 9, 2009, I conducted a mock-interview with Environmental & Resources Studies

Professor Stephen Hill. Going through the interview with Professor Hill allowed me to test the
research instrument and ultimately gave me a better understanding of the clarity and direction of
my questions. Doing the draft interview with Professor Hill also gave me a sense of how
pertinent my interviews questions were which was useful for my research.

3.3 Coding Interview Data and Answering Research Question

The aim of data collection was analytical, not statistical. The data analysis took place after I
sufficiently transcribed the data. The interview transcripts were subsequently emailed to the
interviewee for vetting and authorising. This process is known as ―participant checking‖ which
continues the involvement of the interviewees in the research process and provides them with
42
their own record of the interview (Dunn, 2005). The interview transcripts are the major primary
source of data for analysis and synthesis.

The semi-structured interviews were the main method of research. While case study research
does not formally title it ―semi structured‖ it employs a similar form of interviewing called open-
ended interviews, where stakeholders are asked to comment on certain events (Tellis, 1997).
After the interviews took place, I developed a preliminary coding system with the key themes
from the research. The themes included public education and environmental stewardship, water
supply and quality, drinking water supply, water use, water-based activities, recreation and
ecosystem health, cooperation & governance and transparency and decision-making. These were
the key themes that emerged out of the literature review, especially the themes and ideas that
came from the cooperative management framework. I put the entire interview transcripts into
one file and started to code and categorize the relevant data from the transcript based on the key
themes from the literature review. I did a couple of iterations of coding the data which provided a
comprehensive list of the key themes and allowed me to understand and draw connections and
patterns between them.

I used analytic coding for the data analysis. For example, using a matrix of categories, I was able
to uncover the major themes, key ideas and phrases from the various interviews. This forced me
to refer back to Chapters 1 and 2 in terms of the criteria I have established. Those key research
themes I identified such as ―cooperative‖, ―governance‖, ―bridging organizations and
leadership‖, ―social learning‖, ―public participation‖, ―public education‖, ―inclusive‖ and
―collaboration‖ are the main criteria I identified for what constitutes an urban water committee. I
was able to code text from the interviews that reflected one of these themes. I was not expecting
the stakeholders to use academic language like social learning, but using prompts such as
―community consultation‖ or ―participation‖ I was able to emphasize the idea that social
interaction among stakeholders and the community is important for ensuring transparency with
decision-making and policy formulation.

Through identifying the key themes, ideas and words, this allowed me to place the evidence from
the interviews into a matrix of categories showing the relationship between my original
43
framework and the data I collected. Using analytic coding revealed some important themes and
pattern in the data allowing connections to be made. My main objective was to identify trends
and interpret them. Showing a clear relationship helped me determine whether I had answered
my original research question adequately.

My main research question was challenging to directly answer. However, the main ideas
surrounding social learning, governance and bridging organizations still generated some level of
discussion in the interviews. Some of the interviewees responded both well and poorly to these
themes and ideas; some of them provided their own personal recommendations on how a
committee would function. Because I am interested in water resource planning as an interactive
and multi-stakeholder driven process, the interviewees were able to articulate other ways on how
to achieve this.

All of the themes and keywords are embedded in the urban water committee. As such, answering
the question ―would an urban water committee enable the city to more holistically manage and
plan around urban water resources‖ required me to rigorously consult the key themes and match
them with the data provided. The conversations that I had with the stakeholders allowed me to
critically evaluate whether my idea of an urban water committee was at all similar to theirs given
the themes I had come up with.

The Study’s Limitations

This study is under the assumption that water resources are deemed critical from the public eye.
Water is abundant in the city and appears to have importance recreationally, economically,
socially and environmentally. However, it is not actually known what the public perceptions are
regarding water resources because this study did not capture those perceptions. Some residents
live in closer proximity to the Otonabee River and Little Lake; some live much farther away but
remain within the city‘s boundary. Their perceptions and attitudes towards water resources might
be drastically different and thus their interest and involvement in a committee could be different.
For the city to gain a more comprehensive understanding of how the public perceives water
resources management and planning will require a more thorough investigation.

44
Studies such as Larson & Santelmann (2007) have analyzed the relationship of residents‘
proximity to water and attitudes about resource protection. Their case study featured Portland,
Oregon. Their study used GIS to map residents‘ nearness to water and how this influenced their
attitudes and perceptions on resource protection, support for government regulations and
economics measures. Both authors explain how water resource planners should go beyond
traditional economic considerations and environmental impacts to further incorporate equity
criteria into decision-making processes. This study was initially interested in social and
economic equity but the results did not provide a lot of data on this subject. However, an urban
water committee would benefit greatly from a study that investigates public perceptions and
perceived inequity with regards to water resources management and planning.

This study did not investigate the public attitudes and perceptions regarding water resources and
as such, the public may not immediately understand the committee‘s purpose. How people relate
to water as a natural resource has the ability to reveal significant findings that can help influence
policymaking, decision-making and lead to more holistic water resource management and
planning. As the study did not evaluate the public perspective, it can be considered to be a
significant limitation.

Another limitation for this study comes for the main method of research, semi-structured
interviews. The interviewees (n=7) provided a lot insight and commentary regarding the urban
water committee and water resources management/planning more generally. However, a
limitation is that I only interviewed one or two representatives from the respective groups and
organizations. These stakeholders, as representatives from their groups responded to the
interview questions based on their own knowledge and opinion. For example, the City
Councillor provided a lot of enthusiastic support for the UWC and identified a number of
approaches that can be used to make it successful. He is also commissioner with the PUC and
thus his knowledge of water resources is probably greater than other councillors. Thus,
interviewing another councillor from the City Hall might have produced different results, either
not supporting the UWC or providing completely different thoughts and perceptions regarding
water management and planning for the city.

45
 Chapter 4
RESULTS
―Water is the driver of Nature.‖ - Leonardo da Vinci

This chapter will mainly feature observations of the semi-structured interview data. Semi-
structured interviews with the stakeholders from the City of Peterborough provide the primary
source of data for analysis and synthesis. The interviews were conducted in the month of January
2010 at the offices of the stakeholders and by telephone. Figure 3 provides more information
about the details of the interview. While the sample of stakeholders is relatively small (n=7), it
is diverse in terms of their various responsibilities and expertise in the city.

The stakeholders interviewed have professional responsibilities related to water resources

management in the city, and were interviewed to seek their opinions and insights regarding the
applicability of establishing an Urban Water Committee (UWC). Their insights are quite diverse
ranging from opinions on the committee, current successes and challenges around water-based
activities and recreational uses, water and the environment including stormwater management,
and the prospect of collaborating with other stakeholders through an Urban Water Committee in
Peterborough.

This chapter will describe the results of the 7 semi-structured interviews as they apply to the
main topics related to the thesis. It will begin with a brief overview of the 5 key themes from the
research. These are the key themes used to code the data obtained from the interviews. Many of
the phrases, statements, words and direct quotes from the stakeholders have been placed into
categories that best relate to the key themes from the original framework. This chapter will also
feature some of the challenges, opportunities and threats that were identified by the stakeholders.
In addition, this chapter will feature many observations that were made about the trends and level
of interest in the UWC based on the questions asked. ―Representatives‖, ―stakeholders‖ and
―interviewees‖ will be used interchangeably throughout the chapter.

46
Figure 3. Particulars about the semi-structured interviews (n=7)
Type of stakeholder Date of the Location of Interview Key themes emerging from
Interview interview

City Planner, January 6, 2010 City Hall Public education,

Peterborough transparency of costs,
density, efficiency of land
use, stormwater
management
Water Department, January 7, 2010 Peterborough Green- Public education,
Peterborough Green-Up Up environmental stewardship,
collaboration, water
metering, communication
Water Utility Services, January 8, 2010 Peterborough Utilities Water metering, density,
Peterborough Utilities Commission Main stormwater management
Commission Office
City Councillor, January 11, 2010 City Hall Cooperation, transparency,
Peterborough public education, public
participation, stormwater
management
Water Control Engineer, January 13, 2010 Trent Severn Water quality,
Trent Severn Waterway Waterway communication,
Peterborough Office collaboration, public
education, stormwater
management
Two persons interviewed: January 15, 2010 Otonabee Region Concurrence, public
Manager of Planning and Conservation Authority education, environmental
Regulations & the main office stewardship, stormwater
Manager of management,
Environmental Services, communication
Otonabee Region
Conservation Authority
Chief Environmental January 25, 2010 By telephone Communication,
Officer, Wastewater collaboration, information
Treatment Plant, City of sharing, public education
Peterborough

4.1 Public Education and Environmental Stewardship

The stakeholders were unanimous in saying that public education around water resources is
important. All of the stakeholders commented on how public education around use of water
resources and conservation can be improved for the city. However, some provided more insight
47
on public education than others. The results in this section comprise water metering, current
environmental stewardship efforts, perceptions on water efficient technology and other things
related to public education.

Throughout the interview process, all of the stakeholders with the exception of the TSW
Engineer and City Planner commented on the successes of the Peterborough Children‘s Water
Festival as an excellent public education event for the city. The festival has been creating
awareness around water related issues including conservation, protection, attitudes, technology
and science for over three years. As gathered from the interviews, the festival steering committee
is composed of a various individuals and groups.

Three of the stakeholders I interviewed including Green-Up, ORCA and the PUC are part of the
steering committee and commented on the success of the festival. The representative from
Green-Up‘s Water Department mentioned how the festival is important for the community. It
gives school children in grades two to five a chance to learn about source water protection,
groundwater and why water is a precious natural resource to preserve. The PUC representative
stated that ―the best way to educate people is through the children‖. All three interviewees stated
that the festival has been very successful in Peterborough and continues to draw in children from
both the county and city.

4.1.1 Water Metering

Several comments and insights about public education were concerning the forthcoming
residential water metering program. The interviewees commented on the program and cited
issues around the lack of public education around it. The City Planner explained that:

More education is required and transparency of the costs involved should be shared by the PUC
water service provider. Similar to smart power meters, an incentive program to save water should
be implemented that would reward water conservation measures and impose the true cost on
those who use water for commercial or recreational purposes.

48
The City Planner explained how public education would be valuable in terms of explaining water
metering and addressing its benefits and costs. However, many of the interviewees reported that
the benefits and costs to the program are not fully known yet because the meters have not been
installed. For these reasons alone, there may be some concern from residents about ―paying for
water‖. The PUC representative commented on how citizens often do not understand the true
value of water because they are not paying for every unit they consume. He explained that
―People can‘t picture how much it costs. People might understand water usage better with
meters, as they start assigning a value to that water. The leaking pipe cost me $10 and not the
community.‖

Both the PUC and Green-Up commented on leaking pipes and taps. With the leakage of water in
people‘s homes, a lot of water is being lost, especially through leaking toilets. People may not be
aware of this because it is currently not reflected in their water bills. Water will keep leaking and
be wasted in perpetuity unless the leakage is fixed. The PUC representative anticipates more
customer complaints with water metering. ―95% of the time people will blame the PUC about
water rates going up and not know that costs are increasing due to their toilets and taps leaking.‖
With meters, this will help tighten the system and find the problems. The PUC representative
seemed enthusiastic that metering by itself will provide the necessary impetus for households to
make those changes to save them money. The representative did not comment very much on
public education around water metering. ORCA, however, provided a meaningful statement
about education in regards to metering:

People need to know how much water they are using because right now, you don‘t know. I could
probably reduce my water consumption but I have nothing to gauge it on; I don‘t know how
much I am using. Should I wash my dishes in my sink or use my energy star dishwasher? Which
one is more water efficient? Hard to tell when you don‘t have water meters. It is a long way to go
in terms of education, but the ability to monitor your own water use is fantastic. That will help in
terms of promoting rain barrels, people will start to see the cost savings and conservation of water
on their bill.

49
The Green-Up Water Department said that we must ―dilute the fear‖ around water conservation.
People don‘t understand water use, so they don‘t think about it. The Green-Up representative
explained how they conducted a survey on perceptions regarding water meters. Some of the
survey participants reported that they did not feel adequately consulted on the water metering
program. The municipality made the decision but did not consult the public. Some people
responded by asking why we even need water meters because there is tonnes of water in the city.
On a similar note, one of the interview questions asked if the stakeholders feel that there is
enough public knowledge in Peterborough about water metering for residents to understand its
benefits and costs. The TSW representative was direct in explaining how there is simply not
enough public knowledge about water meters for Peterborough residents.

It was noted that the senior population is an important demographic to target for public
education. The Green-Up representative mentioned how public education could be carried out at
senior activity centres where seniors have their social life. The senior population may be
financially burdened by the metering program. Some residents might see it as another cost for
their household now that they are paying for it. The PUC interviewee stated that ―it is a
balancing act between economics and fairness, and revenues reflecting actual cost. It is tough to
establish rates.‖

Establishing rates for such a diverse socio-economic population can be a challenging as it may
benefit some, but can be a financial burden for others. There was no mention of how some sort of
equity criterion would be used for establishing water rates. In fact, the Green-Up Water
Department representative was the only stakeholder that touched on equity and water metering.
This is noteworthy because evidence suggests that public education should be in place to help
address equity among other things.

The City Councillor discussed how the metering program is primarily being installed for water
conservation. Financial savings are secondary and are totally dependent on the customer.
However, the Councillor recognizes that challenges might lie ahead especially in terms of getting
the information out to the public about why the city is doing this and the real benefits for water
management. The Councillor elaborated by saying:
50
 We are going to have to offer a specific case example and situations where water metering has
come about, how they did it, the challenges encountered etc. Using the print media and video in
order to convey to people how certain aspects of metering can be worked to an advantage; there is
a lot of confusion around it and until they are installed and people start using them, we will have
to give as much information as possible. With our pre-installation information packages, the
public only knows a little about it or from what others have mentioned including their worries,
concerns, and costs. The more you can do the better.

The City Councillor also mentioned how the PUC commissioners could structure a similar
consultative process whereby they invite the public and get some additional perspectives and
ideas on it. This could bring opposition to water metering but could lead to greater knowledge
being generated on how to make it fairer. This will be discussed in Chapter 5. To conclude this
segment on water metering, the interviewees provided a number of recommendations concerning
public education on water metering.

To begin, the Councillor believes that many things will take off with water meters because there
will be reports about how much people are saving and the costs of wasting water. For example,
the flat rate system benefitting larger families may be reported. New ideas will develop as a
result of paying for what you use and the rain barrel program will definitely be one of them. On
another note, the City Councillor mentioned how the Children‘s Water Festival has been
incredibly successful. However, he proposed that a forum be created to illustrate water usage for
adults in the community. The adults could benefit from this knowledge.

ORCA talked about increasing transparency with water meters so as to ensure that people
actually understand the usage. ORCA commented on how metering needs to be translated into
what it means for the public. ―If you are running your dishwater 40 times a month and doing
laundry X number of times then it is costing you some amount of money.‖ Using cubic meters or
other units to measure water use may not be easily understood by the public.

51
The PUC representative supported the idea of the city providing incentives for low-flow toilets
while meters are installed, because it will save people money. Both the City Planner and City
Councillor spoke about how the city could recognize individuals who have cut down on water
use and offer them rewards for stewardship and conservation. An incentive program to save
water should be implemented according to the City Planner - this would reward water
conservation measures and impose a true cost on those who use water profligately. Companies
and individuals could have incentives through such a reward program and recognition could have
multiplier effects which can help societal change, as others learn and understand the benefits.

The PUC provided a statement and subsequent question: ―some people will water their lawns
when they really don‘t have to. How do you get to those people who are really wasteful with
water use?‖

4.1.2 Environmental Stewardship through Public Education

The representatives from ORCA and the wastewater treatment plant had other comments on the
use of public education. With ORCA, public education around water resources is a component in
all of their programs. They visit classrooms and educate children about watersheds and
ecosystems; they are usually at special events and participate in the Green Expo. They also have
plans to do outreach and provide education around source water protection. This would involve
tours of the Peterborough water treatment plant; however, they are waiting for confirmation of
funding from the Ministry of the Environment. ORCA is also committed to ensuring that there is
ongoing education around development proposals.

Another opportunity with public education was brought up by Green-Up. Green-Up is a partner
in the Lakeland Alliance, which is offering its Shoreline Advisor Program to shoreline property
owners in the Kawarthas. ―The Alliance is supporting its partners in shoreline and freshwater
stewardship by providing a one-on-one site visit program to lake associations interested in
raising awareness amongst property owners about shared concerns for the ecosystem health of
their lake‖ (Peterborough Green-Up, 2010).

52
The interviewee talked about how this program runs only in the county. She mentioned how the
same principles could be applied to the city especially around Little Lake. The program could
provide advice to city planners about maintaining ecosystem health protection, developing good
recreational practices and in environmental stewardship. This sort of program would be too
onerous for Green-Up to take on individually. However, by collaborating with others, such a
program could advise those living near water about issues including shoreline naturalization,
pollution prevention, and best management practices for septic systems.

4.2 Water supply, quality and the natural environment

This section will be a presentation of the interview data that related to water quality, water use
and the state of water. It features information that stakeholders provided on drinking water
supply, ambient water quality policy, contaminated sediment, and ecosystem protection.
Ultimately, the data in this section provides an understanding of how the stakeholders are
currently addressing drinking water supply and water quality protection matters. This may
include stormwater management, bio-engineering of riparian buffers or trails around Little Lake.
The stakeholders contribute to water quality programs differently, with limited collaboration.
While the focus of the thesis is governance and co-management, the data covers a range of issues
that could be discussed and analyzed in a committee format. In this section, the interviewees
provided information regarding the theme, and in addition some of the challenges and
opportunities.

4.2.1 Density, Intensification and Water quality

From the beginning of this research project, I was curious about the relationship between new
urban development and its impact on water quality. In August 2009, Peterborough signed
amendment 142 into its Official Plan which meant that the city is now in compliance with the
Places to Grow Act. In the interview with the City Planner, I learned more about the implications
of urban growth on water resources including some challenges and opportunities within the
policy arena. The information on water quality and stormwater management directly relate to the
themes that were discussed in the literature review. According to the City Planner:

53
 Increasing the density of new development projects improves the efficiency of land use and the
engineering of storm water management should incorporate design that would mitigate the impact
on water quality and quantity.

The planner seemed optimistic about intensification and new growth. He explained how
intensification of residential density within developed areas can ―provide the opportunity to
make more efficient use of developed land that already has an impact on water quality‖. In
addition, the planner believes that redevelopment can provide the opportunity to improve
circumstances as a part of the design of the redevelopment project. The representative from the
PUC also had a thought to share on intensification and water quality:

The more concentrated you are from the water treatment plant in, the cheaper it is on a per capita
basis to deliver the service; you don‘t want urban sprawl when you are building water mains
because it is not cost-effective. For instance, it costs $1200- $1500 per meter of water main, so it
is very impractical economically speaking if the area is spread out. However, when you intensify,
you need to look at storm runoff, and how you treat it. Also, issues such as dealing with real
degradation of the river, also the capacity of sanitary sewer systems should be addressed, to
ensure that intensification does not compound the problem.

The City Councillor also addressed intensification and water quality matters. He talked about the
importance of ensuring new development in the core that is supported by good water
infrastructure to ensure that runoff does not cause contamination of water supply. Good
wastewater management can sustain overflow. Sprawling of communities with single-family
dwellings can be expensive and not sustainable. He reiterated that ―the more we infringe on the
suburban area, the more costly it is to put in those services‖. He acknowledged that we can
reduce unit costs with intensification, and concluded by saying that the City Council will try to
ensure that density targets are in accordance with the Places to Grow Act.

ORCA brought a different perspective on intensification and water quality. One of the
representatives from ORCA said that the province is encouraging intensification which would
mean more development in the downtown core. The irony is that many of the downtowns in a
variety of municipalities including Peterborough sit on a floodplain. Development and
54
intensification should be encouraged with caution and attention to the landscape. She explained
how the downtown is already totally impervious so from a water perspective, it is sound to start
intensifying there instead of paving pervious areas that are currently green spaces. In
Peterborough, land is cheaper the farther you go from the core, thereby provided more
justification for developers to build sub-divisions. Developers are selling larger lot size homes in
the suburbs because land is cheaper and there is demand for single detached houses.

The second interviewee from ORCA said that the Province should focus on encouraging multi-
unit housing and mixed-land uses because much of the commercial development in the suburban
area is single storey. It is more about looking at, and changing those policies to help meet your
density targets- not by developing in the floodplain. The ORCA interviewee explained that:

When you want to deal with higher densification you have to deal with the infrastructure
question; there are lots of opportunities to embrace new technologies which can lead to more
sustainable types of development. The development community is a little more conservative in
Peterborough.

The wastewater treatment plant representative explained that ―increased population density in the
urban core will increase the stresses on our urban waterways but will also provide the necessary
infrastructure to control the stresses more economically viable and sustainable‖. He elaborated
by saying that it is cheaper to build and maintain 100 meters of sanitary sewer pipes than build
400 meters of sanitary sewer pipes.

4.2.2 Drinking Water Supply

In terms of drinking water supply, the Planning Division is responsible for designing zoning
regulations that affect land use development. With the prospect of more urban growth in the
built-up areas, it is critical that the city ensures a balance between urban development and open
green space. The planner discussed how ―the balance between urban development, density and
intensity in terms of permeable surface area and Major Open Space, does affect permeable
surface area, urban forestry and groundwater recharging within the urban land base, that
ultimately affects the water table‖. The planner commented on the significance of storm water

55
management plans explaining how they impact runoff that can affect surface water quality
during major storm events.

The PUC representative talked about how source water protection is becoming more of a land
use planning issue. Water quality changes will have a bigger impact from a planning perspective
because of land use considerations. From a regulatory point of view, the PUC representative said
that there should be mandatory inspections of septic systems which are one of the bigger
contributors of contamination around lakes, rivers, streams and creeks.

All of the stakeholders with the exception of the City Planner reported that there are no real
issues in drinking water supply. The taste and odour of the water is a common complaint made
by newcomers to the City. The City Planner reported that the major water supply issue for the
City would be the cost of ensuring a high quality supply of drinking water. Other than this, the
drinking water is held to high treatment and purification standards to ensure that the water is safe
when delivered to residents.

4.2.3 Water use

The responses on water use were more on the technical side. I asked stakeholders to comment on
Peterborough‘s per capita water use of 487 litres per day, which is 144 litres over the national
average. Both the PUC and the Water Department at Green-Up reported that leakage of water in
people‘s homes is a problem, resulting in a lot of wasted water. Presently, the leakage of water
does not directly cost the resident any money; however, it is reflected in their water bills.

The PUC talked about how current water consumption in the City of Peterborough is not a major
concern because consumption has been decreasing since the late 1980s. The PUC indicated that
we need people to think more about water resources and not take it for granted. As previously
stated, it is expected that the meters will reduce water demand by 10-15 percent thereby reducing
pressure on the city‘s wastewater treatment plant. The PUC mentioned how new houses have
newer and better water technology like low-flow toilets, efficient shower heads and washing
machines. ―We will see lower water consumption through technology and with rising water costs
it will force industry to be more resourceful and innovative.‖
56
The TSW representative explained that high per capita use of water is not a major concern. He
remarked that the water usage of such magnitude (487 litres per person per day) is insignificant
to the volume of water available for the city. The city pumps out about two cubic meters of water
per second. There is a lot of water in the city so high per capita usage of water is not really
critical. Finally, the amount of water consumed by the city of 80,000 people is not sufficient
enough to justify water conservation measures. From a technical standpoint, the PUC and the
TSW viewed current water usage patterns as sustainable, and not a concern. The TSW elaborated
by saying that the water system does not have the capacity to pump and treat water at an efficient
rate, thus the PUC had imposed bans and restrictions to limit water use in the summer months. If
pumping and treatment capacity increased, then residents would be able to use more water and
not be subjected to bans and restrictions on water use.

The comments on water use from the TSW representative were intriguing. When it came to the
question of ambient water quality, the TSW indicated that water quality will be downgraded over
the next 20 years due to increased phosphorus and nitrogen contents in the water supply. From a
suspended sediment point of view, water quality has got better. The zebra mussels have been
problematic but have also helped to clean the water. The zebra mussel population has reached a
plateau, so they do not pose any further perceived risks. Overall, water quality will go down
according to the TSW representative. The interviewee commented that his outlook on water
quality is purely based on speculation:

Typically, as populations grow, the water quality trend will degrade. I'm not sure how city policy
can be changed in order to prevent this because the majority of contributing factors will be due to
the watershed upstream, beyond the jurisdiction of the city.

4.2.4 Progress, Challenges and Opportunities

The interview with the representative from the wastewater treatment plant revealed a significant
issue of concern with regards to water quality. The representative explained:
In wastewater treatment, the challenges relate to a number contaminants that have been called
emerging contaminants of concern. Things such as pharmaceuticals, personal care products

57
 (deodorant, soap, shampoo, perfume etc.) and illicit drugs are starting to be studied. The fate and
impact of these products on wastewater treatment plants and urban waterways is still to be
determined.

The stakeholder explained how a committee can be a vehicle to educate the public about proper
care and use of these products. For instance, the committee could provide education about ways
to minimize the disposal of these products into the sewer system. ORCA also noted that there are
emerging concerns like pharmaceuticals contaminants in the water. The water treatment and
wastewater plants do not have the ability to study or treat these contaminants because they are
not designed to; they are designed mainly to remove sediments and bacteria.

There were many positive responses to questions about the Peterborough flood of 2004. The
city‘s approach to creek management and stormwater management has been more
comprehensive since the flood. As one of the ORCA representatives said, ―We have the luxury
of applied knowledge; some of our floodplain understanding is not theoretical‖. The Flood
Damage Reduction Study was a comprehensive study that provided the city with a greater
understanding of the troubled spots and flood prone areas. It involved a series of studies on all of
the major water courses in the city and documented where the flooding occurred and provided
recommendations about how to improve drainage or infrastructure to avoid some of the flood
damages in the future. The Councillor explains further:

The City has significantly enhanced its sewer system with complete photographing of every
single underground pipe to help detect leaks and identify the weaker sections of the pipes. A re-
lining program has been introduced to protect the pipes- tonnes of money have been spent on
infrastructural improvements; we are building a system so it can be a sustainable one and prevent
disasters like this from happening in the future.

From a design perspective, the City Planner thought that bio-engineered riparian zones should be
part of the design of municipal owned property wherever possible, as well as private property,
whenever subject to site plan approval. The planner talked about the enormous potential that
design could have when it comes to stormwater management and protecting water quality:

58
 The planning department currently encourages LEED construction standards that often
incorporate rainwater harvesting and water conservation design measures for domestic and
irrigation purposes.

The planning division will attempt to develop new policies that would advance such measures.
The planner elaborated and discussed how Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
(LEED) can become a policy in the Official Plan so any new development in the urban growth
centre or built area is legally obliged to incorporate LEED design into the construction of the
building. Any new municipal buildings must have LEED design to set an example such as a
firefighter station. LEED can help with conserving water, recycling water and harvesting water.
―All these things we can do, but they are expensive‖. The planner said optimistically that the
City and developers need to spend more money on advanced engineering techniques like
detention facilities, green roofs, storage tanks, rainwater harvesting systems and so on. These
policies could be in place to consider all of these alternatives- however, presently there is
virtually nothing.

4.3 Water-based activities, recreation and ecosystem health

This section is the smallest in terms of data presentation. For example, there are a couple of
questions in the interview guide that directly relate to recreational uses of water. To reiterate,
recreational uses around water and water-based activities for Peterborough include Millennium
Park, Little Lake‘s beaches, parks trails and Marina, motor boat events and other activities on the
lake. Millennium Park and the trails can influence public perceptions and attitudes toward water
resource protection and value of the resource. Not all of the stakeholders commented on
recreation and water-based activities in great detail. However, the data provide a sense of how
recreational activities around water are presently being managed in the city. It features
information about public access to recreational uses and maintenance of the health of the
ecosystem.

The City Planner explained that in order to better understand ecosystem health of Little Lake, it
would be necessary to conduct a comprehensive study of the system. Such a study would inform
the city about the state of the ecosystem and forming an understanding of the balance between

59
development and the carrying capacity of the Little Lake segment of the waterway. This could
lead to an understanding of the current state of land use, development activities around the lake,
the quality of the water, the flushing rate, and finally the residual carrying capacity of the
waterway in order to discover what and how development, if any, may be accommodated on the
waterway without detriment to the quality of the water resource. The study should recommend
remedial measures required in mitigating negative impacts of existing development, new
development or whether further development be permitted until these measures are implemented.

The City Councillor discussed some of the challenges and opportunities regarding water-based
activities and recreational uses. He talked about how it is critical to look after the Trent Severn
which is a recreational waterway. The City is presently encouraging tourism and recreational
activities without too many restrictions in place. For example, there are very few restrictions in
the system regarding motor boat usage and water skiing. He explained how the number of docks
at the Marina dictates how many boats Little Lake can accommodate in the system. It runs as a
tourist facility primarily encouraging people to use the waterway; availability of dock space and
gasoline prices are the only controls at any given time.

The City Planner and the City Councillor spoke in detail about the importance of stormwater
management plans. The planner mentioned how Coliform bacteria have been found at the
beaches at Little Lake in the past. Stormwater runoff has carried these bacteria into the water
making the beach less appealing for recreational use. The City Councillor talked about how
stormwater management issues cause contamination of water. If stormwater management
systems are lacking in the first place, then contamination will flow into the water which would
deter people from using recreational and water-based activities. Deterring runoff through sound
stormwater management plans would among others things, provide citizens with more of an
inclination to use the beaches around Little Lake for recreation and enjoyment.

The Councillor recognized the valuable role of Little Lake and its ability to provide recreational
amenities. Given its importance to the City, he said:

60
 We should analyze recreational uses and look at what other cities have done in terms of best
practices. If there are examples of polluted systems, how are they dealing with unpolluting them?
What restrictions are applicable? Recreationally, we want people to use the system and want the
system to be available, for as long as possible. For instance, we use it for recreational skating in
the winter time, boating in the summer time, and swimming in areas which we supervise and
maintain.

The TSW representative reported that there are no real concerns regarding recreation. However,
the interviewee noted that bigger problems have been associated with the commercialization and
industrial uses around water resources that have posed threats to ecosystem health. Recreational
uses have not posed any real issues.

4.4 Cooperation and Governance

Governance through co-management is a dynamic distribution of power, learning and benefits
that are accrued from the involvement of stakeholders. Governance is a central component of
cooperative management as seeking cooperation requires input, and diversity of opinions and
thought. This section constitutes a major part of the data collection as stakeholders shared their
opinions and insights that would relate to serving on a committee. As mentioned in Chapter 2,
different structures are used to facilitate the co-management process including committees,
boards and working groups.

The City Planner talked about how there used to be a Natural Areas Advisory Committee
(NAAC) in the city. While its mandate was different than a proposed UWC, it would ultimately
make recommendations in planning reports about environmental stewardship, conservation of
natural areas and the maintenance of biological diversity. Environmental studies of development
sites were usually put forward by the committee.

Members of the committee would be consulted by planners and councillors for their input
regarding development and natural areas. The proposition of a UWC reminded the planner of the
natural areas advisory committee. The NAAC eventually became non-operational because it
impeded development in the city. The planner commented on the lack of political will at the

61
time. However, the planner mentioned that public participation and citizen engagement will
become increasingly popular in policy and management decisions within local government.

On the question of the Peterborough flood of 2004, the City Planner commented that on
reflection, a UWC may have been useful in the aftermath of the flood. It may have been useful in
citing the problems that could have been dealt with through instituting management measures.
He said a committee could be:

A forum for discussion and review of any development proposal that may be proposed adjacent to
waterways or that may have an impact on surface water runoff. The committee would bring
forward issues raised by stakeholders and ensure that the issues are advanced in the form of a
recommendation provided through the Staff Report to Council for consideration. It is a good idea
and would help contribute toward proper planning and design. I also see how it may slow down
the development process and may not be embraced by politicians representing the interests of the
development community.

The Water Department of Green-Up discussed how a committee could be useful because it could
focus the needs of the city on the so-called burning issues. For instance, through public education
issues about water use and water consumption could be discussed. In addition, the interviewee
explained how issues would have to be focussed and engage people through discussion. ―It could
be a collaboration of ideas from different levels. You have the engineering, the science people
and people who deal with the public. Bringing all of the ideas together would be great‖. The
interviewee indicated that if a committee was to be established, it should include the PUC,
Green-Up, ORCA, the TSW, a city planner, university and college representatives. She
concluded by saying that the water department would like to get their hands dirtier but not
having the required time and resources makes the process challenging.

The representative from the PUC seemed less enthusiastic about the idea. Regarding the flood
issue, he remarked that a committee would not have made a difference at all because all of the
issues are technical: ―you can‘t have two bosses‖. Above all, the representative said that there are
no burning issues that would help justify the need for a committee. The PUC has tried to engage
people on things like this before but has got very little feedback. It would be tough to implement
62
because there are too many stakeholders. The PUC representative thought it was a good idea, but
mentioned how people are so busy now; they only go after the big burning issues. However, the
PUC representative did mention that collaboration with the wastewater treatment plant will be
needed, especially with the residential water metering program. The PUC representative said that
wastewater staff can work more closely with them.

The PUC elaborated by discussing how the public does not see a lot of issues; so it can be done
but is hard to do. He believed that people should stick to their own business. He said that if a
committee were to come about, we would need involvement from a greater number of large
water users. Special interest groups can be dangerous because they are interested in promoting
their own cause. It appeared that the PUC representative had little interest in collaborating with
others in a committee setting. He seemed more enthusiastic about the source water protection
committee because it is ―diverse but really focused and why it is successful‖.

Speaking with the City Councillor provided a real municipal and political perspective on the
topic. He identified challenges to a committee but also referred to opportunities. For the question
regarding the flood, he thought that a committee would have brought an understanding of
identifying the troubled areas in the city. ―This would be an opportunity for people (stakeholders
in Peterborough) to work together and find solutions. They could work in a collaborative fashion
outlining risk areas and planning for more open space to allow water to adequately drain and
minimize the prospect of flooding again. Mainly though, it would identify where the trouble
spots are in the city.‖

The Councillor thought it would be a good idea to have something put together to make
recommendations to the planning department on the basis of a variety of information coming
forward from naturalists, fisheries, and land conservation people. ―An urban water committee
would be a consolidated effort allowing stakeholders to join together and provide
recommendations that are practical and implementable.‖

The Councillor said that we need to break down the silos that exist right now; there is a planning
department, the PUC, and wastewater management. ―You need a break down of these silos so
63
people come together and share ideas‖. The committee would require a chair and report to the
Council. It should be undertaken mainly by professionals working in the area who are quite
competent; they would benefit from having the chance to bring all of the ideas together, perhaps
four times a year, to analyze issues and present them from their perspectives and to have them
commented by the different agencies.

The Councillor also identified fundamental challenges to the formation of a committee:

―There is not a recognized problem in Peterborough right now, and until you have a recognized
problem, you are not likely to act on it unfortunately. The representative from the Trent Severn
Waterway provided insight on the committee. While the TSW is under federal jurisdiction, the
waterway runs through the City of Peterborough and thus their involvement in an urban water
committee would be vital. The TSW interviewee shared his perspective on a committee:

It would help as long as committee members are well informed and equipped with the expertise
and know-how. Stakeholders would have to be aware of the situation and the risks involved. It
would help give the public a voice as well.

He also shared his opinion on the source water protection committee. He thinks it is not very
effective because many stakeholders who attend the meetings are not well informed about the
issues related to water quality and drinking water supply. Consequently, the interviewee stressed
that those involved in an urban water committee must be knowledgeable. Overall, the
interviewee thinks a UWC would be beneficial; ―it is a wise thing to have. The TSW is and
would be worried about anything related to Little Lake (water levels, contamination) and the
dam at Trent University. The TSW would not be overly involved but could provide technical
advice and input. It would help explain management and flow issues with the Otonabee River
and what is happening with it.‖

ORCA, like the PUC, said that the source water protection committee is already in place. Reports
are produced and a bunch of other committees branch out of the SPC. It appeared that ORCA
had interest but cautioned about overlapping functions with the SPC. The other representative
form ORCA talked about how a committee could provide agreement on an issue:

64
 It is harder to ignore when you have ―concurrence‖, everyone is coming at the same issue from
different perspectives, and the committee could provide opportunity to hear that perspective, and
then make a recommendation and decision- the opportunity does not always happen.

Both representatives explained how the committee would have to include stakeholders other than
just the PUC, Green-Up and ORCA. Other stakeholders should include MOE, Peterborough
Health Unit, DFO, TSW, and Trent University‘s water quality centre, so that if issues come up,
they would have the ability to bring the science. Also, they mentioned that it would be a good
idea to bring in the Social Planning Council for social equity purposes.
The representative from the wastewater treatment plant identified more opportunities than
challenges in regards to a committee:

With a proper mandate and focus, the committee you describe could address areas where gaps
exist. The committee could also serve as an information clearinghouse and provide liaison for the
stakeholders. It gives you a chance to connect with someone; if an issue arises down the road, you
would know who to connect with- making one phone call instead of 10 phone calls.

On the question of the flood, the interviewee said that if a committee was established, it may
have helped. Measuring in-takes, installing upgrades and monitoring changes in the system
would have helped to mitigate some of the problems we had in the flood. ―Get better input from
the public regularly. How did the people feel about the provisions that were made for them?‖ It
could be information flowing on both sides. The interviewee spoke as if he works independently
in the city and has not taken the time to work with other individuals and organizations in
Peterborough.

Other things raised by the interviewee were mostly about increasing the communication amongst
stakeholders. He mentioned how the committee could have influence and input in regard to land
uses and the planning department. It could be a point of contact to direct people; people who
have information can share it with the committee. Once established, there will be a profile which
gives people an idea of what they do and what the specific stakeholders do such as ORCA,

65
Wastewater, City Planning, PUC, Parks and Recreation. The interviewee‘s response was similar
to ORCA, when he talked about involving the MOE, DFO, TSW and Quaker Oats from an
industry perspective.

4.5 Transparency and Decision-Making

Transparency and decision-making is the final key theme from the research. Having
collaboration from the stakeholders is a crucial first step; influencing decision-making in local
government is the second crucial step. In the interviews, four of the stakeholders commented on
the theme of transparency and decision-making. The City Councillor and the Green-Up Water
Department commented on transparency and increasing communication. The City Planner also
shared insights on transparency within the municipal decision-making process. Third, ORCA
explained how the committee could be a policy coordination tool. Examples of each are provided
in this section. Transparency and decision-making is a theme that emerged from the literature
review. In particular, the literature on cooperative management and the theoretical underpinnings
of councils/committees revealed important information regarding structure, transparency of
stakeholders and comprehensive decision-making which would account for the interests of the
stakeholders.

The City Planner worked closely with the natural areas advisory committee. His experience with
the committee and working with other stakeholders proved to be useful for my understanding of
how committees work:

A committee could have a positive effect by ensuring transparency of decisions regarding water
management. It may be a benefit in emphasizing the requirement for sound decisions regarding
water management and land use in proximity to water, where human health welfare and the
cumulative effects on water quality and quantity is involved.

In the interview with the planner, he seemed enthusiastic about the committee insofar as the
political will was in place. His optimism for the committee seemed contingent upon commitment
by the City Council and local government. He explained how the private sector and developers
have a strong voice and influence in the decision-making process. If the City Council endorses
such a committee, it could force transparency on the private sector and developers and provide
66
more clarity on issues. Without endorsement from the Council, the political will is not there, and
thus the UWC would be nullified like the natural areas advisory committee.

The representative from the Green-Up Water Department also elaborated on the importance of
transparency and communication:

Hearing the communication and knowing what is happening in the community. Green-Up is
sometimes last to know. Sit down with everybody and hearing what is going on; hearing right
from the horse‘s mouth is important. Getting a bigger picture of what is going on from different
levels and stakeholders helps in understanding the priorities. More open forums would be great.
Having some way where the public can know more about what is going on.

She explained how members of the community may not read an annual report on water resources
because annual reports are boring. She concluded by saying that the public need to have a better
idea of what the city is doing.

The City Councillor talked about how the committee can be a collection of a group of people
working together who can give you an idea of what would happen if you developed, but did not
follow the natural ways in which water is purified. The Councillor explained that it would have
to be properly aligned with the mandates of the PUC, Green-Up and ORCA. The committee
would bring forward the issues that need to be investigated. ―The city does not have awareness
over all of the water management issues‖.

The City Councillor also commented on the dynamics of decision-making and a committee. The
Councillor suggested that the UWC have a similar structure and function to the natural areas
advisory committee. Community members would be appointed by the City Council which could
bring forward any issues concerning water management that surround the city and development
that encroaches on environmentally sensitive sites.

ORCA said that there is always more room for communication and integration because you have
so many people involved in water management. So to have the opportunity for ongoing dialogue

67
is always good. Specifically on transparency and decision-making, one of the representatives
discussed how an urban water committee can be a policy coordination tool identifying various
tasks that have to be done with respect to water resources management. ORCA reported that
there is a transparency issue over things like where to buy a property and zoning by-laws. This
information should be readily accessible to the public. There are 9 water courses in the city, with
most water courses falling under public ownership. Does the public know this? The water
committee could work towards easements. When you are developing in an area with a water
course it is important to communicate that it might be public land. It is vitally important that
people understand that, even though it is public, they are still building on it.

ORCA further commented that ―an urban water committee could provide an educational
opportunity‖. A committee can create a unified voice; we all have our concerns but we discuss
them to find common ground for resolution. It is not uncommon for developers or other
agencies to pay attention and listen to a unified voice.

4.6 Other information that emerged from the interviews but was not captured in the
categories

This is a brief section with information that emerged from the interviews but was not captured in
the categories that I pre-selected for coding.

ORCA commented on the improvements to recreational uses in the city. Last year, the Holiday
Inn had a reconstruction of its waterfront with the goal of providing a permanent linkage from
downtown to Del Crary Park. The city has made enhancements to Beavermead Park and Roger‘s
Cove beaches.

In the interview with the TSW, it seemed appropriate to ask about how the lowering of water
levels on the Otonabee River affect ecosystem health and native species. The TSW is a
recreational waterway and controlling water levels might have an impact on ecosystem health.
The interviewee explained:

68
 While lowering levels is likely not the best condition for ecosystem health, it is an operational
reality of the Trent-Severn Waterway. Most species have the capability to mobilize into deeper
pools, i.e. fish, turtles, frogs etc.. I suspect that those without this ability are at the greatest risk.

ORCA has also been involved with shoreline construction projects at the Riverview Park and
Zoo. In the Fall, they did a project and allowed the public to notice the difference. In the spring,
there will be interpretive signage explaining why it is better now, and ―taking the opportunity to
provide education because people don‘t always make that link". Mainly though, ORCA has been
trying to educate people about the best practices that they can implement on their property,
which are cost-effective and have a good impact on water quality.

One of the representatives talked about how enthusiasm for development can be a problem if
developers are not getting the correct messages about what is actually feasible. Some developers
will start to spend money on studies; they start investing in impact assessments and they come to
ORCA at the end, and ORCA has to tell them that they cannot develop. It is very important to
ORCA that people get an accurate portrayal of what they can and cannot do. ―Some people have
a conviction that they can overcome the rules, they are convinced that rules are there to be
broken.‖ So there is room from the development community to move towards low-impact
development and stormwater management. ORCA said that if you can deal with water quality on
site then that is a perfect situation. This would include filtering of sediments so that the runoff is
not as filthy.

69
 Chapter 5
DISCUSSION
―Humans are a social species, and our greatest achievements are all collaborative.‖
–Edward Glaeser

In its broadest description, this study aims to address the applicability of an urban water
committee as it relates to water resources planning and management for the City of
Peterborough. The results show a wide range of perceptions regarding the urban water
committee including thoughts about what it should entail and possible problems. The results also
include what the stakeholders reported as significant water issues for the city that would help
justify the committee‘s purpose. Finding a plausible governance structure for the committee can
prove to be a challenge given the diverse interests of the stakeholders. Nonetheless, the results
demonstrate that there is an opportunity for these stakeholders to work more closely in a forum.
While Peterborough does not have any major issues in regards to water management, the
creation of a committee would prove to be a valuable contribution to the city‘s governance
process on water resources.

This study sheds light on the key themes that were described in the results section including
governance, cooperation, public education, water use, drinking water supply, water-based
activities/recreation, transparency and decision-making. An urban water committee would
require the combination of these themes with governance being the overarching method, so as to
ensure that influence and responsibilities are equally distributed amongst the stakeholders on a
local level.

The results of this study are based primarily on the semi-structured interviews with the research
participants. The relatively small sample limits the opportunity to generalize the results, but the
data from this diverse group of stakeholders provides salient perceptions and some understanding
of the importance of an urban water committee for Peterborough. In particular, these interviews
shed light on the role of public education around such topics as water metering. The interviews
also provide information about current gaps in communication and the need for more
collaboration among stakeholders. These gaps include limited information available to the
public, or in some cases, residents being misinformed about these issues. Finally, the interviews

70
reveal important perceptions regarding the transparency of water management and planning and
the current state of decision-making within local government.

5.1 An Opportunity for Enhancing Public Education on Water Resources

All the stakeholders recognized the value and importance of public education. Public education
on water resources can lead to more structured and organized water planning for the future.
Indeed, any changes in water management or policy around water quality, drinking water supply
or new storm water management practices, must be communicated to the public so they are
aware of what is being done on the state of their water resources. Public education is principally
about the sharing of information with the city‘s residents, industries and commercial units. If
there is a decision being made in Council about topics such as a stormwater management plan or
about new residential/commercial development near a body of water, the public has the right to
know. Moreover, the public should be adequately informed about the decision-making process
including factors and perspectives on the decision, and ultimately how it may affect them.

The major findings on public education came from considering the deployment of water
metering and water efficient technology- both of which have ample room for improvement in
terms of communicating their benefits to the public. The City Councillor talked about the merits
in looking at what other cities have done for public education on water meters. For instance, how
they did it and the challenges encountered. As learned from the interviews, the PUC and Green-
Up are working together on public education for meters but this process has been moving slowly.

Holistic efforts for public education will require print media, open houses and information
sessions that provide all of the necessary information for Peterborough residents. To minimize
conflict and encourage cooperation on such a program will require collaboration from
stakeholders to introduce the public education initiatives and make the program‘s
implementation successful for the city. As the representative from the Green-Up Water
department said, ―diluting the fear‖ around water metering and water conservation is absolutely
critical. As reported in the literature review, justifying water efficiency in settings where there is
an abundance of water can be difficult. Citizens may vociferously condemn water efficiency and
conservation measures because it affects their quality of life.

71
There may not be one optimal way of diluting the fear around water conservation, but wide scale
public education from various stakeholders has the potential to reassure residents about the
benefits and advantages of adopting the water metering path. Stakeholders such as the Green-Up
Water Department, the City Planner and ORCA stated that water is simply taken for granted in
this city. Water metering will provide a water efficiency solution because overall water demand
will drop. However, maximizing water efficiency in a city or a community can only happen if the
local government truly knows the interests of the residents. At this point, it is hard to ascertain if
the city knows what those interests are.

Stakeholders such as the PUC, Green-Up and the City Councillor reported that there are
opportunities to embrace water efficient technology when water metering comes about. The city
could provide financial incentives for households who wish to buy low-flush toilets (6 litres) or
low-flow showerheads. Rain barrels for example, are sold at Green-Up at a discounted price and
many residents are unaware of this according to the Green-Up Water Department. The PUC
representative envisions that rain barrels will be more popular with the introduction of the water
metering program. Thus, the promotion of water efficiency and conservation will be more
justified in an era of water metering, but without public education, financial incentives and
information sharing, the city is effectively creating more room for contestation and conflict.

The PUC representative said ―some people will water their lawns when they really don‘t have to.
How do you get to those people who are really wasteful with water use?‖ This statement is an
interesting finding considering the limited information the PUC shared on public education in
regards to metering. With the introduction of water restrictions in the late 1980s, water
consumption in aggregate has dropped in Peterborough. These restrictions have helped but have
not focused on public education and articulating why water conservation is actually important.
Water restrictions are not completely successful without promotion and publicity (Hanemann,
1997). Thus, the answer to the PUC representative‘s question lies more on the public education
front than simply resorting to municipal by-laws which restrict excess water use.

Zetland (2010) says that cities need to use a price mechanism to really induce residents to change
behaviour and use less water. Getting people to use less water for their lawns or car washes
72
requires a pricing system. Command and control mechanisms such as restrictions are not very
effective because they require a lot of enforcement, and enforcement does not always happen
(Zetland, 2010).

These are the sorts of questions and tasks that a committee could work towards in terms of
strategies, information sharing and incentives for people. As identified by the representative from
the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), a committee could be an information clearinghouse
for stakeholders, providing them with the opportunity to discuss approaches that can be used for
public education in the community. A committee would have the capacity to gather the resources
and information that could be shared with the public. Multiple sources of expertise at the table
would provide a variety of information; this information could be produced by the committee for
the community. Overall, through public education, the committee would be responsible for
delivering those important messages so as to ensure communication to the public, minimizing
uncertainty and promoting the benefits of programs such as water metering.

Emerging contaminants in water supply is another major finding from the results. Both ORCA
and the WWTP representatives commented on this as well. Those emerging contaminants of
concern include pharmaceuticals, personal care products and illicit drugs. The WWTP
interviewee said ―The fate and impact of these products on wastewater treatment plants and
urban waterways is still to be determined‖. Work by Metcalfe et al. (2000) has explained how
pharmaceutical drugs are excreted and/or discarded into urban waste waters and eventually make
their way into WWTPs, where there is potential for these chemicals to be discharged in effluents
or to be spread on agricultural land for soil amendment.

The main source of these contaminants is from human excretion; however, drugs are sometimes
directly flushed into sewage systems from homes or health care facilities (Metcalfe et al., 2000).
What is problematic is that the drugs and their metabolites enter WWTPs, where there can be
microbial metabolism, and the drugs and metabolites are carried with WWTP effluents into
surface water. If these surface waters are used as a source of potable water, there is potential for
these compounds to contaminate drinking water (Metcalfe et al., 2000).

73
Trent University has a research lab called the Water Quality Centre. Professor Chris Metcalfe
has pioneered work in the analysis of pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) in the
environment. As a part of bridging academia with real life public education, it would be
advantageous to engage the Water Quality Centre as a stakeholder in the UWC. A representative
from the centre could attend the meetings of the UWC and provide updates on PPCP research.
The UWC could use this opportunity to put together a list of pharmaceutical and personal care
products that have negative effects on urban waterways. This list can take the form of a pamphlet
or guide which can be distributed to the public.

The WWTP representative explained how a committee can be a vehicle to educate the public
about care and use of these products. For instance, the committee could provide education about
ways to minimize the entrance of these products into the sewer system. This sentiment has a lot
of value in terms of how education can be used to inform and equip the community with the
knowledge they need to deal with these dangers. The amount of uncertainty concerning these
contaminants will require constant communication between the WWTP and the city. However,
as shown in the results, the WWTP operates autonomously in the city; the committee would
provide an opportunity for them to be engaged.

5.2 The Need for Water Governance

Good governance is central to the co-management process. As indicated, different structures are
used to facilitate co-management including committees or working groups. As reported in the
literature review, trends in public policy and water management/planning are leading to
increased interest and emphasis on collaboration. The major findings from the results suggest
that there is an opportunity to use a committee in order to bring about agreement, collaboration
and public input for water resources management. One of the major findings on governance was
an issue reported by the City Councillor. The City Councillor talked about the current silos that
exist in the city that isolate the stakeholders from working more closely together. The Councillor
emphasized the need to break down those silos so people can come together and share ideas.
Stakeholders would benefit from the sharing of ideas and information and could also analyze
issues and present them from their perspectives to stimulate further discussion and debate in a
committee setting.
74
Governance through co-management is a dynamic distribution of power; it encourages learning
and generates benefits from the involvement of stakeholders. As such, the Councillor‘s comment
about breaking down those silos is crucial for allowing the process to take place. This major
finding also speaks to co-management more generally; with the breaking down of the existing
silos, there is the opportunity to improve the efficiency of communication and learning between
these stakeholders. Indeed, co-management can allow City Council to rethink the existing
boundaries (or silos) among people, institutions and environments and adopt novel governance
arrangements to foster sustainability. Co-management could break down the functional
boundaries traditionally associated with particular actors and agencies; this could lead a renewed
focus on pluralistic knowledge creation, shared learned and institutional flexibility (Plummer &
Armitage, 2005). This process would undoubtedly lead to a better understanding of the issues
and allow for more robust decision-making.

ORCA said ―there is a lot of value in having those opportunities for people to get together for
looking at water in the big picture‖, this would also include perspectives from the public. Indeed,
the literature on co-management confirms this. Increasing the amount of involvement of resource
users, local people and the general public coincides with the spirit of sustainable development
and Agenda 21 as well as community-based natural resource management.

ORCA‘s comment about concurrence is another major finding from the results. On the note of
governance and the committee, ORCA explained how it is harder to ignore something when you
have concurrence. ―Everyone is coming at the same issue from different perspectives, and the
committee could provide the opportunity to hear that perspective, and then make a
recommendation and decision‖. This comment speaks to both governance and social learning
which emerged from the literature. For example, if a committee was endorsed by local
government, it would allow for an environment that is conducive to collaborative learning and
continuously building on new knowledge.

Building capacities within a committee is a diverse process; stakeholders would learn to work
together, they would have to build trust, be aware of each other‘s different goals and perspectives
and understand the complexity of the management system. If there is a mutual problem brought
75
to the table, stakeholders must agree to take on tasks in which they will be most effective. This
could eventually lead to agreement on the issue reported which can provide more of an impetus
for municipal action and subsequent development of policies. When there is more agreement on
the issues, it is more likely to be supported by the Council.

Another example from the literature review can be related to ORCA‘s comment on concurrence.
Social learning, as a co-management tactic explains how ―water management is not in search for
the optimal solution to one problem but an ongoing learning and negotiation process, where a
high priority is given to questions of communication, perspective sharing, and the development
of adaptive group strategies for problem-solving‖ (Berkes, 2009, p. 1696). Collectively, these
tasks can bring about agreement on complex issues because ultimately, the issue is being more
comprehensively analysed.

An example of ―concurrence‖ can be supported by the City Planner‘s Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED) proposition. The City Planner talked about the possibility to
better embrace LEED standards in new development. In fact, he went on further to suggest that
LEED standards can become a policy in Peterborough‘s Official Plan; this would stipulate that
any new development in the urban growth centre or built area is legally obliged to incorporate
LEED into the construction of the building.

LEED can help with conserving, recycling and harvesting water. The planner said that the city
and developers need to spend more money on advanced engineering techniques like detention
facilities, green roofs, storage tanks and rainwater harvesting systems. He mentioned that the
planning division will ―attempt to develop new policies that would advance such measures‖ but
recognized the challenges in doing so. For example, it may not be supported politically or from
the developer‘s community. He reported that these things are doable but can be expensive.

Many of the stakeholders with the exception of Green-Up and the TSW spoke to the importance
of stormwater management plans which are a component of LEED standards. There appears to
be support from the five stakeholders for better stormwater management to protect water quality.
With agreement on these techniques and standards, the possibility of actually becoming policy in
76
Peterborough‘s Official Plan is enhanced. This would force developers to incorporate stormwater
management techniques, thus transferring the onus and costs to the developer from the city.
These techniques can include rain gardens, absorbent soils, pervious paving around new
development and/or intensive and extensive green roofs.

Five of the stakeholders mentioned the importance of stormwater management. Each would be
able to articulate its economic and environmental benefits through using current examples. These
examples would presumably highlight the challenges of not having adequate stormwater
management. For example, outlining areas in the city with pollutant and contaminant
concentrations and the impact of more impervious surface cover. Thus, the committee would
provide the opportunity for stakeholders to work with government decision-makers and
collectively, they could communicate and influence decision-making on topics of mutual
interest. Furthermore, because each stakeholder has their own expertise, the possibility of
enriching the information is maximized.

Figure 4. Bridging Organization Model (Berkes, 2009).

The Bridging Organization model was used in the literature review and has some relevance here.
This particular model is used to illustrate ―collaboration‖ between governmental agencies and
user-groups such as indigenous people or local users of a natural resource. Berkes‘s study of co-
management focuses more on the interaction between these groups and how the model can be
used to find some level of compromise or consensus. While his study differs from this one, the
model shows how a committee can be used to bridge knowledge among the various stakeholders
77
in the community. In essence, knowledge on stormwater management and LEED standards can
be co-produced allowing for social learning, networking, building vision and goals ultimately
accessing information and sharing resources. This sort of model would be useful for bridging all
of the knowledge and enhancing the possibility of finding agreement on a topic whether it is
LEED standards or shoreline naturalization projects.

The PUC was the only stakeholder from the interviews that seemed less enthusiastic about the
prospect of an urban water committee. The stakeholder discussed how the public does not see a
lot of issues; so it can be done but is hard to do. In addition, he mentioned that people should
―stick to their own business‖. This was an important finding from the results because it brought
some uncertainty to the idea of a committee. The PUC mentioned how there are no burning
issues in the city right now so it would be hard to justify having one.

The PUC representative might have seemed less excited about the prospect of the committee
because the PUC is the main supplier of water for the city and they may worry about interference
and criticisms from others. He seemed more enthusiastic about the source water protection
committee because it is ―diverse but really focused and why it is successful‖. However, the
source water protection committee is mandated by the Clean Water Act and focuses on
Peterborough County. By contrast, an urban water committee would be a voluntary group
working within the specific jurisdiction of the city.

The literature review identified the major difference between a source protection committee and
Guelph‘s Public Advisory Committee (PAC), a committee that would resemble an urban water
committee for Peterborough. The major difference between the Otonabee-Peterborough SPC and
Guelph‘s PAC is that the SPC is regulatory in nature, while the PAC is voluntary. Thus, these
sorts of voluntary committees are inexpensive and need relatively low investment. What is
important about them is that the government has the chance to learn about the range of interests
and positions involved within the city jurisdiction and what policy aspects are likely to generate
opposition (Warner, 2005). Having this voluntary committee could save the government money
in the end because of the level of analysis and interpretation brought to an issue, thus minimizing

78
the prospect of uncertainty. The critical aspect here is prevention of issues through a more open
governance process.

There are two other examples of how co-management can be used to enhance the city‘s
understanding of water resources. Both examples relate to recreation and ecosystem health. The
City Councillor recognized the importance of recreation but also acknowledged that the city is
not doing a good job in managing recreational activities around Little Lake and the Otonabee
River. The Councillor mentioned how the city is encouraging tourism but not really looking at
the most optimal ways of managing recreational activities.

The results indicate that the Councillor is in support of analyzing recreational uses of water to
gain a better understanding of the challenges. Doing this recreational analysis would have to be
quite comprehensive and thus might be too onerous for any one entity or an individual. With the
range of interests and expertise that a committee would have, analyzing a system‘s recreational
uses and capacity can be a project under-taken by a group. With the sharing of knowledge and
information, the stakeholders would provide analysis of the issues and report back to the City
Council.

The City Planner said that the city needs to develop a more comprehensive understanding of
Little Lake‘s ecosystem. Creating that understanding helps land uses, development potential and
carrying capacity of the lake. This would additionally inform the city about recreational uses and
their potential harm on the ecosystem. The planner posed the question: what would motivate a
political decision-maker to risk the allocation of money toward such a study considering the
possible results? The answer to this question would ultimately be answered by an urban water
committee. The committee can do the preliminary investigation and research and report their
findings to the City Council. If there are significant findings, then the city could hire a consulting
group to under-take more expensive research.

With population growth in Peterborough‘s built area and urban growth centre, there could be
more residential and commercial development closer to Little Lake and the Otonabee River. The

79
results indicate that the Councillor is in support of analyzing recreational uses of water to gain a
better understanding of the challenges.

Figure 5 is a generic water planning model that illustrates a process that can be used for reaching
a decision around water resources. It attempts to show how complex decisions can be due to the
multiplicity of issues and considerations. However, by using an integrative approach and by
consulting the UWC, the city has a chance to learn about different options put forward by the
public and the UWC stakeholders.

Figure 5. Generic Water Planning Model

80
Figure 6. Water planning model applied to Little Lake

All of these issues must be considered in the decision-making process so that water resources are
not compromised and can be used for recreational purposes and for the protection of ecosystem
health. Little Lake is a significant body of water for the city and is used by a variety of
individuals and stakeholders. The city is encouraging tourism and water-based activities such as
boating to promote economic development and community well-being. With the proposed water
planning model, the local government has the chance to approach the issue in a comprehensive
and more inclusive manner.

The model provides two additional advantages including the use of a transformative process and
increased capacity of stakeholders. Co-management is an interactive social process by which
multiple actors communicate and negotiate to solve problems. Differences may arise among
actors and the public but the model allows for conflict-resolution. Due to the open and
81
transparent nature of this consultation process, those involved could approach the problems in a
more collaborative way. They may be more aware of each other‘s problem domain and thus can
find workable solutions. The model also accounts for integration in the co-management process.
This integration allows the resource interests to be more thoroughly connected and strengthened.

Second, the model focuses on developing and strengthening the capacity of users to participate in
all aspects of the resource management process (Plummer & Armitage, 2007). Further, by using
a co-management approach, it can enhance the capacity of the collective. The collective would
respond to threats facing a common resource through learning, power-sharing and institutional
flexibility (Plummer & Armitage, 2007).

By having a committee place, it can allow for the re-examination of objectives and methods
relating water planning to citizens‘ interests and preferences. As the TSW representative
mentioned, with a committee in place, people will have an opportunity to voice their opinions on
certain issues that they feel are most relevant to them. He did not have too much insight into
what a committee can do for the city, but emphasized that it would help provide a public voice.
Advancing planning requires improving information inputs and achieving broader support and
understanding for goals and public purposes.

In essence, the committee would be able to make the argument and justify whether the allocation
of funds is necessary for the potential study. This form of consultation can bring more clarity
and accountability to the local government which would effectively draw on the expertise and
knowledge of the committee regarding complex issues. The literature review identified how the
promotion of sustainable water management and governance requires active cooperation among
such entities as government, civil society, services and resource providers. Little Lake is a
significant body of water for the city and is used by a variety of individuals and stakeholders.
The city is encouraging tourism and water-based activities such as boating to promote economic
development and community well-being.

With the proposed water planning model, the local government has the chance to approach the
issue in a comprehensive and more inclusive manner. ―Thoughtful evaluation of the
82
effectiveness of different collaborative processes is central to understanding what can and cannot
be expected of such processes and how they can be integrated with existing institutions‖
(Plummer & Armitage, 2005, p 841). Thus, going through this collaborative process will allow
the stakeholders and local government to critically evaluate and monitor their changes. If it is
proving to be helpful and practical in its application, then the group can learn about how to
integrate this approach into the government‘s existing structure. This would be a good example
of achieving collaborative environmental planning for water resources.

5.3 Transparency & the Urban Water Committee

The findings from this theme provide strong evidence that communication and transparency on
water resources management/planning can be improved. The WWTP representative talked about
how a committee, with a proper mandate and focus could address areas where gaps exist in the
city. The representative said that the committee could serve as an information clearinghouse and
liaison for the stakeholders. It would give stakeholders a chance to connect with someone; if an
issue were to arise down the road, you would know who to connect with- making one phone call
instead of ten phone calls. This finding points to the need to address the communication loop.

The WWTP representative did mention that the plant is somewhat autonomous and does not
interact directly with other stakeholders. Nonetheless, he recognized the merit in having more
communication and how a committee could serve that role as an information clearinghouse and
liaison. Social learning helps corroborate points made, such as the one from the WWTP
interviewee. Social learning, as a tool of co-management, allows for group-centred and multi-
level learning which is central to the environmental management process. Communication is
constantly being developed as actors are actively engaged and participating in the forum. In
addition, actors know directly who to contact and have the luxury of learning more about another
actor‘s perspective or opinion on a matter because it is a conducive forum.

Another significant finding came from the WWTP interviewee. He mentioned how the
committee could have influence and input in regard to land uses and the planning department. It
could be a point of contact to direct people; people who have information can share with the
committee. Once the committee is established, there will be a profile which gives people an idea
83
of what they do, and what the specific stakeholders do such as ORCA, Wastewater, City
Planning, PUC, and Parks and Recreation. Communication and transparency among stakeholders
can be greatly enhanced through establishing clearer profiles.

The representative from the Green-Up Water Department spoke about the communication loop.
Similar to the WWTP representative, the Water Department said that increased communication
and information sharing would be useful because you know what others are doing. There would
be benefit of hearing the communication and to know what is going on in the community. The
interviewee also mentioned how Green-Up is usually ―last to know‖ about matters in the
community. These comments were also in direct relation to the water metering program.

As an example, if all of these main actors were to come together and speak about their
perceptions of water metering, not only would the level of communication increase, but this
would equip actors with more knowledge and report that to members of the community. With
increased communication to the community, it provides more impetus for public participation
and involvement. This circular communication cycle keeps everyone updated and informed
about water resource management/planning. Thus, when the Council needs to make a decision, it
will be made based on widespread input and opinions from the community.

Co-management is a participatory process and provides a more comprehensive solution to local

governance issues. Indeed, increasingly in water planning, emphasis is placed on public
participation and access to information because both are recognized for enhancing the quality
and implementation of decision-making. Water planning places emphasis on listening to citizens,
which has meant providing opportunities for influentials to express their views and preferences
(Wengert, 1971). One of the functions of an urban water committee is to ensure the involvement
of the community through a public forum. The public could attend these committee meetings and
provide recommendations or suggestions to the stakeholders. Moreover, the public could report
what they deem critical providing the stakeholders with the motivation to carry out a study or
investigation.

84
An example of public participation is reported by the City Councillor. He mentioned how the
commissioners of the PUC could structure a consultative process whereby they invite the public
and get some additional perspectives and ideas on water metering. This could bring opposition to
water metering but could lead to greater knowledge being produced on how to make it fairer. As
reported in the literature review, allowing for such public participation must include all groups of
society.

According to Koontz et al (2004) it is usually the privileged, directly affected and well-organized
groups that are disproportionately involved in environmental policymaking. In this case study,
those marginalized or more disadvantaged groups such as seniors or low-income citizens need
not be excluded from this consultative process because it is these groups that are going to be
most affected by the decisions made. The interviews did not produce a lot of data on equity
nonetheless; it is an important criterion for decision-making.

The water planning model is applied to water metering in figure 7. The model depicts how a
decision can be made allowing for input and the involvement of stakeholders and the public. In
essence, a successful water metering program must be multi-faceted and incorporate the
elements described in the model; otherwise there might be more disagreement, contestation and
poor support. Residents will be paying for every unit of water consumed, thus they may have
more of an inclination to purchase low-flush toilets, low-flow showerheads and other water
efficient technology. However, the city would have to make this possible by creating financial
incentives and rewards in order to seek greater support of the program.

85
Figure 7. Water Planning Model applied to water metering

The water planning model can slow down the decision-making process and lead to bickering
among those participating. However, efficiency may result from participation by all affected
parties and the strengthening of interpersonal relationships, and building social capital through
multilevel interactions (Plummer & Armitage, 2007).

Ultimately, the residents are customers of the system and might have ideas about how to make
water metering more efficient and equitable for the community. Using this model would allow
for community input thereby making the water metering program more successful. As described,
in water planning, emphasis is placed on public participation and access to information because
both are recognized for enhancing the quality and implementation of decision-making. By using
this model, the city has a chance to learn about the key equity considerations and best
86
conservation practices i.e. how the city can promote water saving technology while establishing
a fair pricing scheme. Also, the model shows public education and how it can be a viable
response to help explain the water metering program and its rationale. It would also minimize
any institutional barriers to policy cooperation and allow for coordinated and integrated decisions
to be made.

87
 Chapter 6
RECOMMENDATIONS
―If everyone is moving forward together, then success takes care of itself.‖ – Henry Ford

Results from this study indicate that some degree of collaboration is needed for water resources
planning and management in the City of Peterborough. The stakeholders identified a number of
areas where collaboration would be beneficial, and they recognized the merit in having an urban
water committee. The following five recommendations are based on the research findings and
demonstrate how an urban water committee can provide a valuable contribution to
Peterborough‘s water governance process. In addition, they describe the relevant water planning
models and illustrate examples of how a committee could develop water planning functioning in
a more interactive, transparent and multi-stakeholder-based process. A forum is needed to
promote communication between professionals of diverse backgrounds and which could
encompass the entire range of water resource related topics. Other recommendations include a
policy amendment to the city‘s Official Plan, strengthening public education through World
Water Day, and an annual report on the state of water resources for the city.

1. Create an Urban Water Committee to advise City Council on water

management/planning
The first recommendation is to establish a multi-stakeholder committee to advise the City
Council on water management and planning. As shown in Model 1, the committee involves the
various stakeholders working on behalf of the public.
Figure 8. The Urban Co-Management Model

88
The public is positioned in the middle of the diagram because the stakeholders are ultimately
working together to ensure transparency to the public. The major objective of the committee is to
provide the opportunity for stakeholders to work with local government decision-makers and
collectively they could communicate and influence decision-making on topics of mutual interest.
The second mandate of this committee is to establish a forum for the public to seek information
regarding water management and planning decisions.

The committee would bring forward issues raised by stakeholders and ensure that the issues are
considered and recommended through the Staff Report to Council. These recommendations
would be presented to the public, allowing for their input and a chance to critique the
recommendations. The recommendations would be presented to the public by inviting them to
the meetings and through an annual report on the state of water resources (see Recommendation
five). This process would keep the public informed on the city‘s water governance process. The
UWC would be funded through the City Council and they would meet four times a year. While
the various stakeholders may currently work together, the committee would create a structure
allowing for more dialogue and cohesion. The UWC could apply to the Ontario government for
funding support based on a work plan. A work plan should include a summary of the UWC‘s
mission, vision and goals, a three-year Action Plan and its current budget.

The committee is strictly urban, providing support and recommendations within the city
boundaries. Thus it would not interfere with the source protection committee which is primarily
concerned with the County of Peterborough. One of the functions of an urban water committee is
to ensure the involvement of the community and provide an integrative forum for the public. By
having one in place, it can allow for the re-examination of objectives and methods, and relate
water planning to residents‘ interests and preferences. The public will have an opportunity to
voice their opinions on certain issues that they feel are most relevant to them. Inherent in the co-
management process is the benefit of collaboration. Partnerships are formed among stakeholders
to find practical solutions and implement tenable ideas. With a committee, involving
stakeholders can improve the transparency and accountability of water governance for the city.

89
2. Implement LEED Stormwater management as a policy requirement into the Official
Plan
The results demonstrate the widespread support for adequate stormwater management. The City
Planner explained how Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, specifically stormwater
design, could be incorporated into the City‘s Official plan thereby ensuring adequate stormwater
management practices for any new development. Given the implications of the Places to Grow
Act, Peterborough will see more population growth and intensification in its built area and urban
growth centre. Intensification would mean more concentrated residential units in the urban
growth centre, thereby increasing the residential density of the city. An increase in density
provides the justification to meticulously consider LEED stormwater management design
standards. Indeed, amendment 142 can be used to support this policy especially considering the
importance of sound stormwater management.

As the results indicated, the PUC interviewee said that when a city intensifies it must carefully
look at storm runoff and ways to treat it. Implementing LEED as a policy could ensure that
stormwater runoff is being looked after and this would allow the city to enforce such a policy.
Successful water-efficient landscaping depends on site location and design. For example,
developments would have to couple landscape improvements with water use reduction strategies.

As explained earlier, increasing density can influence water quality and improve the efficiency of
water delivery, leading to a reduction in costs for the city‘s public services. However, with
projected growth in the urban area, it is critical to include factors like LEED stormwater
management design which put the onus on the developer to be responsible for their stormwater
management practices. LEED standards as a policy in the Official Plan can significantly improve
the city‘s stormwater management practices. Implementing such as policy might seem ambitious
at first, however, with adequate support from the urban water committee, such a policy would be
well justified.

90
3. Consider using the water planning model for decision-making around water resources
planning
Having a decision-making model for water resources planning is critical. In essence, the
proposed water planning models in Chapter 5 depict a consultation process which relies on
stakeholder and public input; input that is received by City Council. As an example, by using the
water planning model, the city can learn more about the public‘s perception on water metering.
The City Council discussed how the PUC commissioners could structure a consultative process
whereby they invite the public and get some additional perspectives and ideas on water metering.

The meters will be imminently installed. The committee could use this model for the water
metering program; such a process could make the program more inclusive, interactive and
effective in its operation. Taken further, the committee could use an open and transparent process
illustrating the advantages of water metering. Any successful water metering program should
include financial incentives for water saving technology, financial rewards for conservation,
public education, and an open forum for the public to provide ideas on how to make water
metering more effective.

The water planning model is meant to address the ―socio-economic constraints‖, and equity is
one of the components of. While equity was not a significant finding from the analysis, the
literature review identified that the most successful metering programs are ones with pricing
structures that account for social-equity so as not to burden low-income groups. Also, co-
management promotes equity in representation, decision-making, and distribution in resource
related costs and benefits (Plummer & Armitage, 2007). Further, those who have a claim and/or
interest in the resource (stakeholders) are encouraged to participate in a decision-making process
that is based on pluralistic inputs (Plummer & Armitage, 2007).

Thus, as a part of this consultation model, the UWC can consult and involve groups in the city
that push the social and economic equity agenda. These groups can include the Peterborough
Coalition Against Poverty and the Peterborough Social Planning Council. Due to the significant
impacts of water governance decisions on social equity, low-income groups must be a part of this
process.
91
While these groups do not have any professional responsibilities related to water resource
management and planning, they can provide input on a pricing structure that would minimize the
financial burden of water metering. Such input can help in the decision-making process and
provide direction on what kind of pricing mechanisms would work best to accommodate all
income groups in the city.

A notable strength in using this model is the enhanced legitimization of objectives and actions.
With the involvement of the UWC and the public, the inputs can be more comprehensive and
thus legitimate. Going through this consultation process of interaction and collaboration could
lead to achieving municipal objectives around protecting and promoting Little Lake. The
literature explains how policy implications of enhanced legitimization have focused on greater
compliance or enforcement of regulations (Plummer & Armitage, 2007). These objectives are
usually oriented toward conservation. The UWC could be instrumental in increasing the
legitimization of objectives, this in turn could lead to the city adopting more environmental
regulations that promote development that minimizes harm on Little Lake‘s ecosystem, and
could allow for stormwater management and risk assessment plans.

The model provides two additional advantages including the use of a transformative process and
increased capacity of stakeholders. Co-management is an interactive social process by which
multiple actors communicate and negotiate to solve problems. Differences may arise among
actors and the public but the model allows for conflict-resolution. Due to the open and
transparent nature of this consultation process, those involved could approach the problems in a
more collaborative way.

Second, the model focuses on developing and strengthening the capacity of users to participate in
all aspects of the resource management process (Plummer & Armitage, 2007). Further, by using
a co-management approach, it can enhance the capacity of the collective. The collective would
respond to threats facing a common resource through learning, power-sharing and institutional
flexibility (Plummer & Armitage, 2007).

92
4. Strengthen public education efforts through a World Water Day
This recommendation is premised on how World Water Day (spread out over three days) can
increase the community‘s knowledge around water resources. Peterborough‘s Children Water
Festival is a highly popular and successful event. A World Water Day for a city like
Peterborough would demonstrate its commitment to education and protection of water resources.
It would also showcase Peterborough‘s leadership on water education and engagement with the
community. The Peterborough‘s Children Water Festival is very successful for the community
but it is currently overly focused on children.

There are a number of events that could run over a three day period. Stockholm, Sweden has an
World Water Week that has been very popular and successful (Stockholm International Water
Institute, 2010). The UWC could play a lead role through organizing and facilitating the event.
This would provide Peterborough Green-Up with an opportunity to showcase its rain barrels and
promote other water saving technology. Stores such as Home Depot, Home Hardware and
Canadian Tire would also have a chance to present their latest water efficient technology
solutions and encourage city residents to consider purchasing these products. The Peterborough
Utilities Commission could explain water treatment practices and provide additional information
about the water metering program. Also, the event could feature a ―beach cleanup‖ campaign
where interested citizens and organizations collectively clean up the beach and promote it as a
vibrant recreational feature of Little Lake.

World Water Day is all about raising awareness of the global water crisis. While Peterborough is
fortunate to have an abundant supply of clean and affordable water, the event could raise funds
to provide water to some of the most vulnerable populations on the earth. Therefore, the event
would raise awareness of water resources both locally and globally. There can also be tours of
the wastewater and water treatment plants. Such an opportunity may not be always available. It
would provide the public with a much better understanding of the technical dimensions and
challenges of water management in the city.

World Water Day is an opportunity for local groups and schools to shine the spotlight on their
own water-related projects. Projects on water technology, water governance and water
93
management from Fleming College and Trent University students can provide a post-secondary
educational appeal. These projects would thus be accessible and available to the community.
Also, the event can be used as a vehicle to educate the public about the so-called emerging
contaminants of concern. WWTP representatives and public health officials can educate the
public about care and use of pharmaceuticals, personal care products (deodorant, soap, shampoo,
perfume etc.). In addition, the Water Quality Centre at Trent University can participate and
collaborate with WWTP staff to inform residents about the emerging contaminants. This would
provide the Water Quality Centre with the chance to explain their intimate knowledge of the
contaminants and why the public should care. World Water Day could be a platform to provide
education about ways to minimize the entrance of these contaminants into the sewer system.
Overall, there is a lot of value in using education to inform and equip the community with the
knowledge they need to deal with these dangers.

Finally, the development of partnerships is integral to the success of World Water Day. With the
presence of Fleming College, Trent University, businesses, water-related stakeholders and other
groups, there is great potential to form partnerships in promoting sound water practices. These
partnerships may promote more effective water management and governance; provide education
on bottled water and use of current technology in the area of water resources. Above all, it would
present a networking opportunity for water professionals and student groups wishing to
collaborate in a more fruitful and productive way.

5. Consider an Annual Report on the State of Water Resources

Similar to the sourcewater protection committee, the UWC could publish an annual report on the
state of water resources for the city. This report could include progress and updates on the water
metering program, information about stormwater management, and the different financial
incentives available to residents for purchasing water saving technology. The report would
articulate the importance of sustaining water quality and developing this precious resource for
economic activity. It would provide guidelines, policy recommendations, and practices that could
be adopted by the city. The report can outline strategies for effective and efficient management
and planning of water resources in a sustainable fashion, it could be co-produced by the
committee for City Council and available to the public.
94
There are two significant advantages of putting an annual report together. One, it forces the
committee to do a comprehensive analysis on the state of water resources, i.e. what is working
well, and what can be improved. Second, it can serve as a guide for the community to understand
what their government is doing on water resources management and planning. The public would
learn about how they can benefit from such improvements and the various ways that they can
personally get involved. While such a committee is a voluntary initiative, the City Council
would have to provide funds to pay for resources required by the committee, publishing the
report, and even mounting an educational campaign.

The report could be divided into various themes, such as the ones discussed in this research.
There can be a section on the city‘s water availability; explaining the trends of the city‘s water
resources over the years. This would present an opportunity to explain why water use increases
in the summer months and decreases in the winter months. The public would have a chance to
learn about the pressures that they unknowingly place on the city‘s water system.

In terms of water use, the report could feature which sectors use the most water and which ones
use the least. This section of the report could provide some data and statistics about the city‘s
total water demand on a yearly basis; this information could put water consumption in some kind
of context illustrating how water demand differs among sectors.

The report could also feature information about recreation and water-based activities. In
particular, any updates on trails, beaches, and parks can be included in the report. These updates
could discuss the importance of human recreation and protecting ecosystem health. In summary,
a combination of these recommendations can be a valuable contribution to Peterborough‘s water
governance, management and planning processes. The use of the water planning model provides
examples of how a committee can develop water planning functions into a more transparent and
multi-stakeholder-based process. The combination of education, the publication of an annual
report, and LEED for stormwater management provides a holistic approach to water resources
that can lead the city into the right direction for the future.

95
 Chapter 7
CONCLUSION
―Water is a natural asset irrevocably and irrefutably indispensable for the biological existence of
human beings.‖ –Kostas Bithas

Planning for water resources management is very much an integrative process. An integrative
process moves beyond just the involvement of water bureaucrats, water managers and engineers.
As this thesis has endeavoured to argue, water management is evolving beyond simply the hard-
path approach. With current phenomenon such as population growth and the uncertainties around
climate change, there is more pressure for cities to implement water metering programs and to
intensify land uses. Intensification and water metering are justified by the need to address
sustainable development. These two topics were discussed extensively in this project as they are
current examples in the Peterborough context. The overarching objective of the project was to
articulate the need for establishing and developing a water governance process.

This thesis was not meant to focus on particular ―issues‖ around urban water resources. Indeed,
as shown in the project, there are no burning issues in the city around water management and
planning. However, this does not eliminate the need for developing a water governance structure
involving multiple stakeholders. A water governance structure would indeed be a valuable
contribution to the City of Peterborough. As shown in this study, such a process would involved
a number of important themes such as public education, community engagement, reviewing the
city‘s population growth patterns as it relates to density, stormwater management, cooperation
and collaboration.

A water governance structure would be in the form of an urban water committee and involve the
stakeholders identified in this project. When we think about water governance in this project we
need to think about how society organises itself around water resources and its uses. As
discussed in the study‘s limitations, this project did not investigate what the public perceptions
are regarding water resources. Therefore, how society organizes itself around water resources is
hard to ascertain. However, what is easier to determine is the widespread importance of water to
the city given the multiple features and uses it provides. I defined Peterborough as a water city
96
because it is a city where water has multiple uses and multiple roles. The methodology,
specifically the semi-structured interview questions were designed to capture and illustrate
Peterborough as a water city- a city where water allows for hydro-electric production, recreation
and water-based activities around Little Lake, economic development and tourism, half of the
city‘s water is pumped using river-driven turbine pumps, finally it provides an urban identity
with the Trent Severn Lift lock being a prominent water feature.

The results show that no formal water governance process exists in the city. As discussed in the
literature review, cities such as Guelph, Ontario and states like California have clearly developed
a water governance structure through the use of multi-stakeholder committees and councils.
Indeed, Guelph‘s public advisory committee (PAC) has hitherto been successful and widely
popular in the city. It was Guelph‘s public advisory committee that stimulated an interest in
carrying out this project and in investigating the proposition of an urban water committee.
Because this project used a case study research approach, the findings are not meant to be
generalized in assuming that an urban water committee could function in any jurisdiction. The
committee that was proposed, commented on and analyzed in this project would only be
applicable to the City of Peterborough.

Stakeholders provided insight into the committee based on its potential benefits but also how it
may not be supported because there are no burning issues. Also, some cautioned how it could
overlap with the Otonabee-Peterborough Source Protection Committee. However, a major
motivation for this study was to articulate the importance of preventative and precautionary
measures in the water resource management and planning process. Having a committee in place
would provide a water governance structure that would have the capacity to address problems if
they did arise.

Jurisdictions such as Guelph and California implemented their respective committees/councils

due to reactionary measures. In both examples dwindling water supplies and population growth
provided the impetus to gather stakeholder expertise and provide analysis and strategies on how
to protect and conserve water resources. For Peterborough, the UWC could structure discussion;

97
it could visualize the influence and behaviour of the stakeholders and stimulate their intuition
and awareness of future developments.

As the results show, there are presently no burning issues regarding water management and
planning. The provision of drinking water supply appears to be adequate and the quantity of
water resources is plentiful for the city‘s 80,000 residents. However, as part of comprehensive
and pro-active planning, it would be imperative for the city to consider areas of potential work.

The results demonstrate that there are currently gaps in communication between stakeholders.
There are limited public education initiatives around the forthcoming water metering program
and there is virtually no discussion around the implications of urban intensification on water
resources. These are just examples that emerged from the results that could be addressed through
water governance and multi-stakeholder participation. By and large, there is support from all of
the interviewed stakeholders for an urban water committee. The only stakeholder that did not
express support or enthusiasm for the proposed committee was the PUC representative.

While the results demonstrate how the committee could be used in a city like Peterborough, it is
important to note the potential bias in this study. Stakeholders received the Key Informant
Interview Guide (see Appendix A) which had my own definition of an urban water committee
and its ultimate purpose. My own definition of the concept might have influenced their responses
and perceptions regarding it and therefore this can be seen as a methodological weakness. The
proposed committee allowed the interviewees to comment directly on how they felt it would
work for the city. I knew how it would operate and function prior to the interviews. Thus, some
of their comments corroborated what I already knew and thus the outcomes were partially
influenced by my pre-conceived objectives. However, their comments and insights led to a
clearer focus with the committee‘s objective and this was shown in the discussion section.

A number of ideas and concepts were shared in this thesis including cooperative management as
the major theoretical framework for the project. Co-management efforts have become ubiquitous
in a range of fields of geographic endeavour including planning and management of parks and
protected areas, wildlife, water, tourism, recreation, fisheries and rural development. This project
98
attempted to show its value and application to urban water resources, a relatively new idea with
great potential. Pluralistic knowledge creation and continuously engaging and collaborating with
stakeholders can influence decisions and policies set out by the City Council. The theoretical
implications of co-management suggest that such collaboration can also make policy more
transparent and more accessible to the public. As shown in the water planning models, there is a
lot of value in using an integrated approach for reaching a decision. Water metering, as a current
topic, is an area where the city could test the proposed model to see how effective it can be.

The City of Peterborough has a number of stakeholders who have professional responsibilities
related to water management and planning. These stakeholders possess their own knowledge and
expertise. As the results show, there can be a lot of value in gathering and combining this
expertise and knowledge through a forum known as an urban water committee in this study.
Indeed, Peterborough is presented with an opportunity to develop a sound water governance
structure that is inclusive, collaborative and integrative.

While there might be initial challenges in establishing such a committee, the advantages will
soon be clear insofar as Council is receptive and supportive of it. Peterborough is fortunate to
have abundant freshwater resources and is presented with an opportunity to demonstrate its
leadership as a water city. The growing challenge and test for cities of the 21 st century will be
how they establish planning and management measures around environmental and natural
resource protection. As argued, population growth, aging infrastructure and the uncertainties
surrounding climate change are all daunting especially for water resources.

For the purposes of this research, those cities that develop a water governance structure will be
able to educate, inform and engage their citizens on policy decisions and the importance of
protecting, conserving and valuing urban water resources. Given the results of this study and its
potential implications, it is time for the City of Peterborough to recognize the merits in
developing water governance and in starting a multi-stakeholder and interactive process for
planning for water resources management.

99
 Appendix A
Key Informant Interview Guide

Introduction: This interview is interested in soliciting your opinions and insights regarding the
applicability of the idea of an urban water committee as it relates to water resources planning and
management in the City of Peterborough. I am interested in your own thoughts- there are no right
or wrong answers. Please feel free to decline to answer any questions or parts of questions you
do not wish to answer. And please add any comments or information that you think would
advance my understanding of the city‘s water resources whether it is recreational uses, water
consumption, hydro-electric production, drinking water supply and others. This interview should
take between 30 to 60 minutes to complete.

Urban Water Committee: In my research I am defining an urban water committee as a group

composed of stakeholders who play a role in water resources management and planning. The
objective and mandate of the urban water committee is to bring members of the community
together to work towards practical solutions to water resources management/planning issues in a
comprehensive, holistic and inclusive manner. This committee, through a governance structure,
would work towards improving public access to water resources management through
consultation and information sessions. A committee brings all of the significant water issues to
the table and gives stakeholders a chance to work on resolving them through policy and planning
solutions. Ultimately, an urban water committee allows for organizations and groups to interact,
collaborate, and share knowledge to advance water resources management and planning.

1. A) In the City of Peterborough, who do you currently work with in respect to water
resources management?
Prompt: Drinking water, maintaining trails/beaches around Little Lake, public
education (Children‘s Water Festival), and water conservation
B) How could other groups/individuals in the city help your organization achieve its
goals with respect to water resources management?

2. Collaborating through a water committee can lead to the sharing of knowledge and
expertise among stakeholders. Also, depending on the structure, the public could have
access to this information through an open forum and annual report. Do you think that
such collaboration would help generate more comprehensive policy and planning
around water resources management? Why or why not?
Prompt: Increasing public education, including the public in policy decisions,
Guelph‘s public advisory committee

100
3. A) Do you presently do anything on World Water Day or administer other programs
that promote water as a valuable natural resource? Do these programs target the
residents of Peterborough?
B) How would you work with other organizations to mobilize the community to think
about water on ―World Water Day‖ in March 2010? Is there another annual ‗Day‘ or
‗Event‘ that would be appropriate for an urban water committee to target?
Prompt: inclusion of community, environmental education, water as a finite resource,
relating water to citizens and making important connections

4. Peterborough residents have very high per capita rates of water use; 144 litres over
the national average.
A) What are your thoughts about this?
B) How does or should your organization encourage best practices in water
conservation?
Prompts: Public education, water efficiency> rain barrel program, retrofit plumbing
fixtures, incentives from local government

5. A) The consultant group responsible for the Little Lake Master Plan has been very
pro-active with public consultation and keeping the community informed. Ultimately,
their purpose is to determine the recreational and tourism capacity for Little Lake.
B) How is this consultant group involving you or other stakeholders?
C) How would your organization go about structuring a similar consultative process
around water issues in the city?

6. Ensuring public access to recreational uses around the water is important (beaches,
campgrounds and parks). However, maintaining ecosystem health in and near water
bodies is critical for the sustainability of the resource. How can your organization or
the city play a role in working towards finding a balance between the two in the City
of Peterborough?
Prompt: Zones, environmental stewardship through signage, awareness and
education, providing information on effects of invasive species

7. According to the City‘s Official Plan, more residential growth will be targeted
towards the urban centre from now until 2031. This will include the compaction of
the urban core including new residential and commercial development near the river.
How do you feel about this new growth and its implications on the quality and
quantity of water resources in Peterborough?
Prompt: Urban density, piping installation cost for sub-divisions, density and
stormwater runoff, water quality, compact development

101
8. What are the major drinking water supply issues for the city?
Prompt: which is the most important?

9. Does your organization play a role in drinking water supply management in the city?
10. How do you see policy around ambient water quality changing over the next 20
years?
Prompt: drinking water in-takes, addressing contaminated sediment, PCB,
pollution from motor boats

11. What do you see as the potential benefits/controversies around residential water
metering?
Prompt: Social equity, privatization of water, water conservation

12. Introducing water metering to the community can be challenging. Do you think there
is enough public knowledge in Peterborough about water metering for residents to
understand its benefits and costs? Who is responsible for this program?
Prompt: Cost of implementing them, monitoring expenses, public information
sessions about metering, social acceptability, socio-economic groups

13. How is the city managing recreational activities around Little Lake and the Otonabee
River?
Prompt: Is your group involved? Or how could it be more involved?

14. A) How did your group respond to the Peterborough flood of 2004?
B) Was there an organized committee at the time which collectively managed the
situation?
C) Do you think an urban water committee would have been an asset during the
emergency? Why or why not?
Prompt: Preparing for future events, collaboration, and division of responsibility to
increase efficiency of flood response

15. A) As shown in other jurisdictions, a water committee can make a valuable

contribution to water resources management, especially in terms of facilitating the
involvement of different stakeholders in the municipal water process. After reviewing
these questions, how would you see an urban water committee working for the City of
Peterborough?
B) Do you think that an urban water committee is a good idea? Why or why not?
C) Who do you think should be involved?

102
 Appendix B
Human Research Consent Form

Nature of the Project: As a major part of my Honours thesis at Trent University, I am

researching the applicability of an urban water committee as it relates to water resources
planning and management for the City of Peterborough. Part of the study involves a series of
semi-structured interviews with individuals and organizations in the city which appear to play a
role in water resources planning and management. This study seeks to understand what the
participants feel are the significant water issues for the city. Importantly, participants will be
asked about their opinions and insights regarding the applicability of the idea of an urban water
committee.

Researcher: Timothy M. Shah, 4th year Honours student in the Environmental Resources
Studies (ERS) and Human Geography Programs.

Researcher Contact Information: timothy.shah@gmail.com, 705-755-1042. I could also be

reached through Trent University‘s Geography and ERS Departments.

As a participant in the above project, I understand the following:

1. I have been fully informed by the interviewer about the nature of the research and my
participation in the project;
2. My participation is entirely voluntary. I may refuse to answer any or all questions and
end the interview at any time;
3. The data resulting from the interview will not be used for any commercial purposes and
will be strictly used for the advancement of research and social policy applications;
4. The information supplied during the interview will be kept confidential and my identity
will not be used in any reports or other publications;
5. The information will be stored responsibly and my participation in the project will be
known only to the researchers;
6. Any risks to my participation in the project are unforeseen by the researcher;
7. I have been provided with a copy of this participant consent form for my own records;
and
8. I understand that this project has been approved by Trent University‘s Department of
Geography‘s Research Ethics Committee.

Participant Name: _____________________ Participant Signature:_____________________

Interviewer Name:______________________ Interviewer Signature:____________________

Date: __________________________________

103
 Appendix C
Information Letter

December 2009

Dear Research Participants:

This letter is being sent to you to seek the participation of you and/or your organization, in a
study of water resources planning and management in the City of Peterborough. As a major part
of my Honours thesis at Trent University, I am researching the applicability of an urban water
committee as it relates to water resources planning and management for the City of
Peterborough. Part of the study involves a series of semi-structured interviews with individuals
and organizations in the city that appear to have professional responsibilities related to water
resources planning and management.

Peterborough is a water city; a city where water is virtually ubiquitous. Its major bodies of water
include the Otonabee River, Jackson Creek and Little Lake. Water plays an indispensable role in
the city through recreation, economic development, tourism, public education/awareness and
urban identity. Using a case study research method and semi-structured interviews, this project
seeks to understand how the various stakeholders in Peterborough are currently involved with
water resources management and planning. This study seeks to understand what the participants
feel are the significant water issues for the city. Importantly, participants will be asked about
their opinions and insights regarding the applicability of an urban water committee.

Participation in this study is voluntary. It will involve an interview of approximately 60 minutes

in length and time and place of your convenience. With your permission, the interview will be
audio taped to assist the researcher in the collection of data. In all cases, your anonymity and all
information you provide are considered completely confidential.

If you would like further information regarding participation in this study, please contact me,
Timothy Shah, at 705-755-1042 or by email at timothy.shah@gmail.com. I hope that the results
of my study will be of interest and benefit to those involved with water resources management
and planning for the City of Peterborough, and for the public at large. I very much look forward
to speaking with you and thank you in advance for considering this request.

Yours Sincerely,

Timothy Shah

104
 REFERENCES

Adams, Peter, and Colin Taylor. (2009). Peterborough and the Kawarthas, 3rd edition,
Department of Geography, Trent University: Peterborough, Ontario, 252 pp.

Bithas, K. (2008). The sustainable residential water use: Sustainability, efficiency and social
equity. The European experience. Ecological Economics, 68, 221-229.

Berkes, F. (2009). Evolution of co-management: Role of knowledge generation, bridging

organizations and social learning. Journal of Environmental Management, December
2009, (90), 1692-1702.

Borrini-Feyerabend, G. (2000). Co-management of Natural Resources: Organising,

Negotiating and Learning by Doing, IUCN, Yaoundé, Cameroon.

Borrini-Feyerabend, G., M. Pimbert, M. T. Farvar, A. Kothari and Y. Renard. (2004). Sharing

Power. Learning by doing in co-management of natural resources throughout the
world. IIED and IUCN/ CEESP/ CMWG, Cenesta, Tehran.

Bradshaw, M., Stratford, E. (2005). Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography (2 nd

ed.). In I. Hay, Qualitative Research Design and Rigour. (67-76). Australia: Oxford
University Press.

Brandes, O.M., Ferguson, K. (2003). Flushing the Future? Examining Urban Water Use in
Canada. Polis Project on Ecological Governance, University of Victoria. Retrieved
September 12, 2009 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.polisproject.org/files/flushing.pdf

105
Brooks, D.B., Brandes, O.M., Gurman, S. (2009). Making the Most of the Water We Have: The
Soft Path Approach to Water Management. Washington D.C: Resources for the Future
Press.

Brugmann, J., 2009. Welcome to the Urban Revolution: How Cities are Changing the World.
Toronto: The Penguin Group.

Bulkeley, H., Betsill, M.M. (2005). Rethinking Sustainable Cities: Multilevel Governance and
the ‗Urban‘ Politics of Climate Change. Environmental Politics, 14, 42-63.

California Urban Water Conservation Council. (2006). Partners for a Water-Efficient California:
Annual Report 2006. Retrieved August 10, 2009 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.cuwcc.org/resourcecenter/publication.aspx?id=128&ekmensel=b86195de_24
_0_1 28_4

Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation. (2005). Brownfield Redevelopment for Housing:
Literature Review and Analysis. Research highlight: Socio-economic Series. Retrieved
November 26, 2009 from the World Wide Web:
www.cmhc.ca/en/inpr/rehi/index.cfm

Carter, T., Fowler, L. (2008). Establishing Green Roof Infrastructure Through Environmental
Policy Instruments. Environmental Management, 42, 151-164.

Cash D.W., Adger, W.N., Berkes, F., Garden, P., Lebel, L., Olsson, P., Pritchard, L.,
Young, O. (2006). Scale and Cross-Scale Dynamics: Governance and Information in
a Multilevel World. Ecology and Society, 11 (2), 1-12.

Cech, T.V. (2005). Principles of Water Resources: History, Development, Management, and
Policy. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

106
City of Guelph. (2009). Water Conservation and Efficiency Strategy Update: Executive
Summary. Resource Management Strategies Inc. Retrieved August 10, 2009 from the
World Wide Web:
http://guelph.ca/uploads/ET_Group/waterworks/WCE%20Study/WCES%20Final%20Ex
ecutive%20Summary.pdf

City of Peterborough Planning Division. (2009). Planning Peterborough to 2031: How the
Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe will affect the City of Peterborough.
Retrieved September 11, 2009 from the World Wide Web:
http://eagenda.city.peterborough.on.ca/sirepub/cache/2/nepazn55ovljenqgpgz14z55/5119
05192009021525545.PDF

Clapp, J., Dauvergne, P. (2005). Paths to a Green World: The Political Economy of the Global
Environment. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Cope, M. (2005). Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography (2 nd ed.). In I. Hay,

Coding Qualitative Data. (223-233). Australia: Oxford University Press.

Cunningham, W.P., Cunningham, M.A., Saigo, B.W., Bailey, R., Shrubsole, D. (2005).
Environmental Science: A Global Concern (Canadian Edition). Toronto: McGraw-Hill
Ryerson.

Drinking Water Source Protection. (2009). An Overview of the Otonabee-Peterborough Source

Protection Area. Retrieved October 3, 2009 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.trentsourceprotection.on.ca/cms_lib/otonabee_overview.pdf

Dunn, K. (2005). Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography (2 nd ed.). In I. Hay,

Interviewing. (pp. 79-105). Australia: Oxford University Press.

Dwivedi, O.P., Kyba, P., Stoett, P.J., Tiessen, R. (2001). Sustainable Development and Canada:
National & International Perspectives. Peterborough: Broadview Press.
107
Environmental Protection Agency. (2006). Growing Toward More Efficient Water Use: Linking
Development, Infrastructure and Drinking Water Policies. United States EPA. Retrieved
October 1, 2009 from the World Wide Web:
www.epa.gov/dced/pdf/growing_water_use_efficiency.pdf

Environmental Protection Agency. (2006). Protecting Water Resources with Higher-Density

Development. United States EPA. Retrieved September 9, 2009 from the
World Wide Web:
http://www.epa.gov/dced/pdf/protect_water_higher_density.pdf

Feeny, D., Berkes, F., McCay, B.M., Acheson, J.M. (1990). The Tragedy of the Commons:
Twenty-two Years Later. Human Ecology, 18 (1), 1-19.

Gerasidi, A., Apostolaki, S., Manoli, E., Assimacopoulos, D., Vlachos, E. (2009). Towards the
formation of a new strategy of water resource management for urban areas achieved
through participatory processes. Urban Water Journal, 6, 209-219.

Gerlak, A.K. (2008). Today‘s Pragmatic Water Policy: Restoration, Collaboration, and Adaptive
Management Along U.S. Rivers. Society and Natural Resources, 21, 538-545.

Hanemann, W.M. (1997). Urban Water Demand Management and Planning. In D. Baumann, J.
Boland and M. Hanemann, Price and Rate Structures. (pp. 5-2-5-53). New York:
McGraw Hill.

Hawken, P., Lovins, A., Hunter, L. (1999). Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial
Revolution. Boston: Little, Brown.

Hayden, D. (2003). ―Chapter 9: Rural Fringes‖ in Building Suburbia: Green Fields and Urban
Growth (1820-2000). Pp. 181-197.New York: Vintage.

108
Helmle, S.F. (2005). Water Conservation Planning: Developing a Strategic Plan for Socially
Acceptable Demand Control Programs. Public Administration Program, Texas State
University. Retrieved October 1, 2009 from the World Wide Web:
http://ecommons.txstate.edu/arp/2/

Hemmati, M. (2002). Multi-stakeholder Processes for Governance and Sustainability: Beyond

Deadlock and Conflict. Earthscan, London.

Hodge, G., Gordon, D. (2008). Planning Canadian Communities: An Introduction to the

Principles, Practice and Participants (5th Ed), Toronto: Thomson Nelson.

Jabareen, Y.R. (2006). Sustainable Urban Forms: Their Typologies, Models, and Concepts.
Journal of Planning Education and Research, 26, 38-52.

Johnston R, Gregory D, Pratt G, Watts MJ and Whatmore, S. (2000). The Dictionary of Human
Geography, 4th Edition, Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

Kahn, M.E. (2006). Green Cities: Urban Growth and the Environment. Washington D.C:
Brookings Institution Press.

Koontz, T.M., Steelman, T.A., Carmin, J., Korfmacher, K.S., Moseley, C., Thomas, C.W.
(2004). Collaborative Environmental Management: What Roles for Government?
Washington D.C: Resources for the Future Press.

Larson, K.L., Santelmann, M.V. (2007). An Analysis of the Relationship between Residents‘
Proximity to Water and Attitudes about Resource Protection. The Professional
Geographer, 59(3), 316-333.

109
Little Lake Master Plan. (2009). Little Lake Master Plan: Draft Master Plan. Retrieved
December 7, 2009 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.peterborough.ca/Assets/Documents/Planning/Ongoing+Planning+Studies/Litt
le+Lake+Master+Plan/October+21+Draft+Master+Plan.pdf

Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative Researching. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

McCarthy J., Prudham, W.S. (2003). Neoliberal nature and the nature of neoliberalism.
Geoforum, December 2003, 1-9.

Mentens, J., Raes, D., Hermy, M. (2006). Green roofs as a tool for solving the rainwater runoff
problem in the urbanized 21 st century? Landscape and Urban Planning, 77, 217-226.

Metcalfe, C., Koenig, B., Ternes T., Hirsch, R. (2000). Drugs in Sewage Treatment Plant
Effluents in Canada. Symposia Papers Presented Before the Division of Environmental
Chemistry American Chemical Society, 32, 188-192.

Mitchell, B. (2004). Resource and Environmental Management in Canada: Addressing

Conflict and Uncertainty (3 rd ed.) Toronto, Oxford University Press.

Mitchell, B. (2004). Resource and Environmental Management in Canada: Addressing

Conflict and Uncertainty (3 rd ed.). In B. Mitchell, Incorporating Environmental Justice.
(pp. 555-578). Toronto: Oxford University Press.

Morrison, K.E. (2002). Stakeholder involvement in water management: necessity or luxury?

In Water Science & Technology, Balancing Competing Water Uses- Present Status and
New Prospects. The 12 th Stockholm Water Symposium (pp. 43-51). London: IWA
Publishing.

Nicol H, M Skinner & S Wurtele, with R Dobbin (2009) ‗Planning issues in Peterborough and
the Kawarthas‘ in P Adams and C Taylor (eds), Peterborough and the Kawarthas, 3rd
edition, Peterborough: Department of Geography, Trent University, 177-194.

110
Pahl-Wostl, C., Hare., M. (2004). Processes of Learning in Integrated Resources Management.
Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, (14): 193-206.

Plummer, R., Arai S.M. (2005). Co-Management of Natural Resources: Opportunities for and
Barriers to Working with Citizen Volunteers. Environmental Practice, 7, 221-234.

Plummer, R., Armitage, D. (2007). Crossing Boundaries, Crossing Scales: The Evolution of
Environment and Resource Co-Management. Geography Compass, 1/4, 834-849.

Policy Research Initiative. (2004). Economic Instruments for Water Demand Management in an
Integrated Water Resources Management Framework. PRI Project Synthesis Report.
Retrieved September 12, 2009 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.policyresearch.gc.ca/doclib/SR_SD_EconomicInstruments_200502_e.pdf

Polsky, C., Cash., D.W. (2005). Drought, climate change, and vulnerability: the role of science
and technology in a multi-scale, multi-stressor world. In D. Wilhite, Drought and water
crises: science, technology and management issues. New York: Marcel Dekker.

Poolman, M., Van De Giesen, N. (2006). Participation: Rhetoric and Reality. The Importance of
Understanding Stakeholders Based on a Case Study in Upper East Ghana. Water
Resources Development, 22(4), 561-573.

Prince George Utilities Division. (2005). City of Prince George Water Conservation Plan. City
of Prince George Water Conservation Program. Prince George: British Columbia.
Retrieved October 1, 2009 from the World Wide Web:
www.city.pg.bc.ca/city.../waterconservation/water_conservation_plan.pdf -

Professional Engineers of Ontario. (2009). 1893 Waterworks Pump House. Retrieved September
4, 2009 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.peterborough.peo.on.ca/Engineering%20Feats/Pump%20House/Pump%20ho
use.html
111
Robins, L. (2007). Nation-wide decentralized governance arrangements and capacities for
integrated watershed management: Issues and insights from Canada. Environment
Journal, 35(2), 1-47.

Schippling, R.M. (2007). Public Housing Redevelopment: Residents’ Experiences with

Relocation from Phase 1 of Toronto’s Regent Park Revitalization. Unpublished master‘s
Thesis, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON.

Speir, C., Stephenson, K. (2002). Does Sprawl Cost Us All? Isolating the Effects of Housing
Patterns on Public Water and Sewer Costs. Journal of the American
Planning Association, 68(1): 56-70.

Statistics Canada (2006). 2006 Census of Peterborough. Statistics Canada, Ottawa.

Stilwell, F. (2000). Towards Sustainable Cities. Urban Policy and Research,

18, 205-217.

Stiver, W. (2009). Municipal Drinking Water Management Issues. Peterborough Utilities Group
of Companies. Peterborough: Ontario.

Stockholm International Water Institute. (2010). World Water Week. Retrieved April 15, 2010
from the World Wide Web:
http://www.worldwaterweek.org/

Stout, G.E. (1998). Sustainable Development Requires the Full Cooperation of Water Users.
Water International, 23(1), 3-7.

Tellis, W. (1997, July). Introduction to Case Study: The Qualitative Report. Retrieved November
2, 2009 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-2/tellis1.html

112
Urban Metrics Inc. (2009). City of Peterborough, Retail Market Analysis. Retrieved November
12, 2009 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.peterborough.ca/Assets/Documents/Planning/Ongoing+Planning+Studies/Ret
ail+Market+Analysis/Retail+Market+Analysis+Report.pdf

Warner, J. (2005). Multi-Stakeholder Platforms for Integrated Water Management. Wageningen

University and Research Centre, The Netherlands. Retrieved September 15, 2009 from
the World Wide Web:
http://www.scielo.br/pdf/asoc/v8n2/28602.pdf

Wengert, N. (1971). Public Participation in Water Planning: A Critique of Theory, Doctrine and
Practice. Water Resources Bulletin, 7(1), 26-32.

Winz, I., Brierley, G., Trowsdale, S. (2009). The Use of System Dynamics Simulation in Water
Resources Management. Water Resources Management, 23, 1301-1323.

Yin, R. (1994). Discovering the Future of the Case Study. Method in Evaluation Research.
American Journal of Evaluation, 15(3), 283-290.

Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
Publishing.

Zetland, D. (2010). Water Rights and Human Rights: The Poor will not need our charity if we
need their water. UC Berkley‘s Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
Retrieved March 1, 2010 from the World Wide Web:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1549570

Zetland, D. (2008). Conflict and Cooperation within an Organization: A Case Study of the
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. Retrieved October 1, 2009 from the
World Wide Web:
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1129046
113