water, water, everywhere? - diva portal1112774/fulltext01.pdfwater, water, everywhere? how different...

Uppsala Universitet – Campus Gotland

Department of Business Studies

Master Programme in

Sustainable Management

Water, Water, Everywhere?

How Different Stakeholders Perceive and Approach

the Water Shortage on Gotland, Sweden

Master Thesis

15 ECTS

Authors: Lena Bauer & Lucy Schulze

Supervisor: Jenny Helin

Date of submission: 2017-05-30

Water Shortage on Gotland Bauer & Schulze 2017

II

Abstract

“Vattenfrågan har alltid varit viktig på Gotland” (Bastani et al. 2015, p. 25)

- “Water questions have always been important on Gotland”. Contrary to the common

perception that water shortage does not pose a problem to northern European countries, the case

on Gotland provides the example that it is a real issue. Due to several factors, the Swedish island

faces severe water shortages during the summer and is in urgent need to address this in the light

of an expected growing number of people coming to Gotland. Since water is a topic affecting a

wide range of stakeholders, the water issue is already in the focus of attention and occasionally

passionately discussed on the island. The aim of this paper was to identify with the help of

qualitative research how relevant stakeholder groups perceive and address the water shortage

on Gotland. The identified stakeholder groups were from the administrative/political sectors,

industrial/business sectors, the research sector as well as engaged citizens. During the research

it became clear that the water shortage can be characterized as a wicked problem, which in its

nature is impossible to solve but only manageable due to its complexity. Yet, the majority of

stakeholders did not recognize the wicked problem as such which explains the multiplicity of

existent strategies for how to deal with it. The different approaches lead to outcomes that seem

to only address parts of the problem but fail to manage it in its entirety. The study suggests that

institutional voids, meaning a lack of clear responsibilities regarding who should manage the

problem and how seem to both arise from and contribute to the complexity of the problem. As

result of this research, it seems crucial to firstly gain a comprehensive understanding of the

situation and then work with multi stakeholder communication and cooperation against

prevailing institutional voids in order to address the water shortage effectively.

Keywords: Water shortage in Northern Europe, Wicked problems, Gotland, Institutional voids,

Multi-stakeholder perspective


III

Acknowledgements

To start this thesis we would like to express our deep gratitude to several people, without whom

neither the outcome of this paper would have been the same nor the process of writing, which

in this way has been a wonderful experience. First of all, ett stort Tack till alla intervjuade, som

vi hade nöjet att träffa och prata med. The insight, knowledge and inspiration we gained from

you exceed by far the borders of this thesis and the bed of the sea.

Moreover, we want to thank our supervisor Jenny, as well as Lovísa and David from

SWEDESD for their valuable feedback, an open ear and the unconditional helpful support.

This master thesis is written in cooperation with the Swedish International Centre of Education

for Sustainable Development (SWEDESD) in Uppsala University, Campus Gotland. It is

intended to be included in the project Wicked Problems and Educative Spaces for Urban

Sustainability Transition. However, the authors of this thesis are not influenced by SWEDESD

and chose freely to focus on the water situation on Gotland. The cooperation with SWEDESD

consist merely of receiving feedback regarding respective stages of the paper and later

providing the Centre with the results of this study.

We also want to thank our seminar group and all the smart and determined personalities in it

who helped us so much during the writing process.

We want to thank Bledar for his translation efforts when the (partly historical) Swedish

literature overwhelmed us, as well as all the other spontaneous translators in the library who

we consulted when needed. A special thank goes to Anders Johansson for helping to find

information about Gotland and Linda for establishing the contact, Karin for her car and

everyone in our class for the moral support and for everything we have learned from you during

our time together at Campus Gotland, Uppsala University, including the love and laughter.

Our gratitude is deeper than the groundwater level in summer on Gotland and the deepest

restored wetland we saw during our research.


IV

Table of Content

Abstract ................................................................................................................................... II

Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................ III

I. List of Abbreviations .......................................................................................................... V

II. Table of Figures ................................................................................................................ VI

III. List of Tables ................................................................................................................. VII

1. Introduction and relevance of the topic ............................................................................ 1

1.1 Definition of the research question and structure of the work ........................................ 2

1.2 Research design ............................................................................................................... 3

1.3 Aims of the work ............................................................................................................. 3

2. Being Northern Europe and short on water ..................................................................... 4

2.1 Sweden and its water situation ........................................................................................ 4

2.2 Testing the waters of Gotland ......................................................................................... 4

3. Theoretical background ...................................................................................................... 8

3.1 Water and its scarcity, a literature review ....................................................................... 8

3.2 Wicked problems ........................................................................................................... 10

3.3 Institutional voids .......................................................................................................... 11

3.4 Multi-stakeholder perspective ....................................................................................... 12

4. Research process ............................................................................................................... 15

4.1 Research approach and philosophy ............................................................................... 15

4.2 Data sources and collection ........................................................................................... 15

4.2.1 Semi-structured interviews ...................................................................................... 15

4.2.2 Secondary data ........................................................................................................ 17

4.3 Data analysis ................................................................................................................. 17

4.4 Reliability and validity, trustworthiness and credibility ............................................... 18

4.5 Ethics ............................................................................................................................. 19

5. Water, water for everyone? .............................................................................................. 20

5.1 Political and administrative sector (P/A): ..................................................................... 20

5.2 Industrial/Business sector (I/B): .................................................................................... 24

5.3 Research sector (R): ...................................................................................................... 27

5.4 Activists from society (A): ............................................................................................ 29

6. Discussion: Diving into the deep blue of the matter ....................................................... 33

6.1 Understanding of the complexity of the problem – A wicked problem ........................ 33

6.2 Addressing the water shortage on Gotland: like drinking a glass of water? ................. 34

6.3 Institutional voids .......................................................................................................... 35

6.4 Multi-stakeholder perspective and cooperation ............................................................ 37

6.5 Conflict sources and barriers for solving the problem .................................................. 38

7. Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 40

7.1 Wicked, but worth it – Implications and outlook .......................................................... 41

8. References .......................................................................................................................... 43

VI. Appendix ....................................................................................................................... VIII


V

I. List of Abbreviations

A: Activists from society

CAB: County Administrative Board

CSR: Corporate Social Responsibility

EU: European Union

I/B: Industrial/Business sector

MDGs: Millennium Development Goals

MSP: Multi-Stakeholder Perspective

P/A: Political and administrative sector

PNS: Post-Normal Science

R: Research sector

RG: Region Gotland

SDGs: Sustainable Development Goals

SGU: The Geological Survey of Sweden

SMHI: Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute

SPCC: The Swedish Portal for Climate Change

SWEDESD: Swedish International Centre of Education for Sustainable Development

UN: United Nations

UNDP: United Nations Development Department


VI

II. Table of Figures

Figure 1: Mechanisms within institutional voids. Own illustration based on Hajer 2003 ...... 12

Figure 2: Stakeholder map: overview of sectors and interviewees ......................................... 16

Figure 3: Research process and analysis ................................................................................. 18

Figure 4: Geographical location of selected stakeholders on Gotland and the Swedish

mainland .................................................................................................................. 20

Figure 5: Interviewed stakeholders Political/Administrative sector ....................................... 21

Figure 6: Interviewed stakeholders Industrial/Business sector ............................................... 24

Figure 7: Interviewed stakeholders Research sector ............................................................... 27

Figure 8: Interviewed stakeholders Activist sector ................................................................. 29


VII

III. List of Tables

Table 1: Already existing cooperations between different stakeholders on Gotland to better

the strained water situation ....................................................................................... 37


1

1. Introduction and relevance of the topic

Water is the source of life. Yet, it is mostly an undervalued resource (Jury & Vaux, 2007). At

the same time, it is the breeding ground of global conflicts and was already described as the

“defining crises of the 21st century” (Pearce, 2007: subtitle). According to the problematic

nature of water, its scarcity1 exceeds its mere availability and access, since it is often caused

by human interference (Jury & Vaux, 2007), mismanagement (Grin et al., 2010), and natural

disasters (Gleick, 1993; Gain et al., 2016). In recent years, however, it became more of a focus

that water scarcity can and does take place in developed countries and particularly in Northern

Europe, a region known for its lakes and abundance of water (Thompson, 1993; Wimmer et

al., 2014). Despite the fact that water scarcity assumes severe, life-threatening proportions in

other regions globally, the water situation in Sweden has become reason for concern over the

last years and cannot be neglected anymore (Widegren, 2017). Authorities have to consider

both more intensive rainfall and extreme droughts when planning a secure water supply for

society in the future (SMHI 2015). It is anticipated that in the course of climate change the

overall temperatures will increase in Sweden with more precipitation (SMHI 2017). Although

the last decades have been warm and wet in Sweden, and the vegetation period has increased

with a rise in both temperature and in precipitation causing floods, the groundwater level in

the southern part of the country is decreasing sharply (SMHI 2017; Persson, 2015). On the

southeastern Swedish island of Gotland this has led to a water scarcity. In combination with a

drop in the groundwater level, the island faces the challenge of historically caused run-offs of

freshwater in combination with an extreme peak of visitors during the summer, when the water

situation is already tensed (Gotlands Kommun, 2005; Johansson, 2003; SMGI SGU, 2017).

Consequently, the usage and management of water are important factors to look upon when

investigating the problem, in particular in the case of Gotland.

Because of its complexity, water related problems, such as water shortage or scarcity, are

emerging being characterized in literature as so-called wicked problems (Baird et al., 2016).

According to this understanding, complex and multifaceted issues related to water are to be

addressed preferably by comprehensively understanding them and by managing negative

effects, rather than with concrete solution approaches (Rittel & Webber, 1973). Wicked

problems can for instance be found in regard to equality, poverty, health, and resource

management (O’Lear, 2010). They are often linked to sustainability and are already addressed

in the global sustainability agenda, e.g. in the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals

(SDGs) and Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) (UN, 2015). In order to manage water

in an efficient way, in an increasingly complex world, it can be assumed that institutionalized

mechanisms are likely to be responsible for addressing water related issues (SMHI SGU, 2017).

However, if the infrastructure is not effective, the problem arises of who the responsible actor

or actors to deal with water scarcity ought to be. In this case of an absence of clear rules and

norms upon which politics can act, the literature talks about institutional voids (Hajer, 2003).

Since water is used in many ways and fields, such as for everyday needs of society, agriculture

and the industry and its wicked, complex character, water related problems affect a broad range

of different actors or stakeholders. These stakeholders have a vital interest in a sufficient supply

1 A definition of scarcity can be found in 3.1 Water and its scarcity, a literature review.


2

of the flowing element and follow different solution strategies. The multiple stakeholders that

are directly linked to the water issue add another component to the present research (Gotlands

Kommun, 2005). Although water related problems are part of the global sustainability agenda

and addressed by various governmental institutions and organisations, water scarcity is still an

existent threatening issue and therefore needs enhanced attention. Consequently, there is the

need for new approaches and strategies in order to manage water related problems, especially

in the under researched area of water shortages in Northern Europe (Kovacic & Sousa-Poza,

2013).

This thesis will focus on the wicked problem of water shortage (scarcity) in the specific case

of Gotland, Sweden. Therefore, in the broader sense, this study will be done with consideration

of the derived assumption that it is crucial to take wicked problems seriously, such as water

shortage and scarcity, in order to prevent worldwide crisis (Grin et al., 2010). For this objective,

relevant stakeholder groups dealing with water on Gotland are included in this study.

Stakeholders that have an immediate interest in the water situation on Gotland are located

within the political sphere, the industrial sector, research institutions and among citizen

activists.

1.1 Definition of the research question and structure of the work

This paper aims to examine how relevant stakeholder groups perceive and address the wicked

problem of water shortage on Gotland, Sweden. The island of Gotland represents an intriguing

example of the interconnectedness of different stakeholders and water mismanagement.

Moreover, Gotland provides a feasible environment to investigate this topic since it has clearly

defined spatial boundaries and a rather manageable system in comparison to the Swedish

mainland. Furthermore, it is assumed that the interaction of different factors such as natural

circumstances and stakeholder interference resulted in the wicked problem of the hitherto worst

scenario of water shortage in the history of the island in the year 2016 (Sveriges Radio, 2016a).

Consequently, the focus has to be placed on the actions and interconnectedness between

different stakeholders.

In the scope of this research, the following three questions will be answered:

1. How do significant stakeholder groups perceive and understand the problem of water

shortage on Gotland?

2. What is their strategy to address and manage the water shortage?

3. What is the connection to wicked problems and institutional voids in regard to

managing the water situation on Gotland?

After this introductory first chapter, Chapter 2 gives a summative overview of the investigated

case of Gotland and its water shortage. Next, the main theories of this study, namely wicked

problems, institutional voids and multi-stakeholder perspective are presented and elaborated

in Chapter 3. Moreover, this chapter contains a literature review of water scarcity. In the

following Chapter 4, the methodology and research process are illustrated. Chapters 5 and 6

provide the frame for the interpretative analysis of the conducted data, whereby chapter 5


3

focuses on the statements and opinions of the interviewed stakeholders and Chapter 6

establishes a connection between the results of the interviews and the portrayed theory. In the

end, a conclusion is drawn and an outlook is presented.

1.2 Research design

For the purpose of this study, the theoretical part will consist of a review on literature about

water and its scarcity, respectively shortage or stress to highlight its importance. The theory

focusing on wicked problems will be the basis of this research. Moreover, institutional voids

and the multi-stakeholder perspective will find consideration in order to produce a coherent

picture of the water situation on Gotland with the different aspects and elements involved as

well as the methods applied for managing and solving the problem. For the empirical part of

the study, the methodological approach of qualitative stakeholder interviews was chosen and

used in combination with secondary data to draw a comprehensive, picture of the situation on

the island as it is perceived and addressed by different stakeholders.

1.3 Aims of the work

This study intends to enhance the understanding and highlight the importance of considering

wicked problems, their complexity and interrelatedness in connection with multiple

stakeholders, and the role of institutional voids in the case of water shortage on Gotland. The

scholarly justification of this research lays in a lack of academic literature about water scarcity

in Sweden and particularly on Gotland. Furthermore, it is justified by a lack of mechanisms to

deal with it within the frame of wicked problems, institutional voids and multi stakeholder

participation. This thesis aims to contribute to a further discussion or research within this field.

In a broader sense, the findings of this thesis might be transferred and used both on Gotland

and in other local contexts, to find strategies to address and manage wicked problems regarding

water scarcity.


4

2. Being Northern Europe and short on water

In the following, the water situation in Sweden and particularly on Gotland will be

problematized in order to illustrate the importance of the topic and the case, therewith

providing a justification for the focus of this work. Sweden will be mentioned only briefly to

give a frame and overview over the situation from a national perspective, whereas the part

about Gotland will include the historical background of the water situation on the island and

the development until today.

2.1 Sweden and its water situation

Research done by the Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI), the

Geological Survey of Sweden (SGU) and Uppsala University suggests that rising temperatures

and more precipitation lead to higher groundwater levels in some parts of Sweden, while a

sharp decrease in the levels of the southeast is anticipated. This makes the water shortage

reality in the Scandinavian country (Sverige Radio, 2016). Besides the decline in available

drinking water, lower groundwater levels could also lead to problems with saltwater intrusion

into the groundwater, which is particularly the case by the coast of Sweden and its islands

(SMHI, 2017). According to future scenarios, there will be more precipitation in the form of

rain instead of snow during the winter time, which results in smaller spring floods and reduced

groundwater levels, when compared to spring and early summer (SPCC, 2016). Overall,

predictions suggest a decrease in water availability and access especially in large parts of

southern and eastern Sweden (ibid.). One area in southeast Sweden that faces water-shortage

for a long time is Gotland, the biggest Swedish island in the Baltic Sea (Akerman & Siltberg,

1991).

2.2 Testing the waters of Gotland2

“Vatten är vår viktigaste naturresurs och vårt viktigaste livsmedel” 3

(Länsstyrelsen Gotlands län, 2017).

In former times, Gotland was characterised by a natural abundance of water as to its

geographical position in the northern hemisphere, given conditions and many bogs. This was

true for many parts of Northern Europe, which led to a drainage movement in the 18th and

19th century because the landscape was considered to be too wet in an agriculture-focused

society. To make Gotland’s landscape more suitable for farming and within a time of

agricultural transition, bogs and wetlands were cultivated in large scale projects. They were

dug out in the 19th till early 20th century and canals were constructed, which caused a run-off

of water into the Baltic Sea (Akerman & Siltberg, 1991; Johansson, 2003). The scenic

transformation also led to an increased harvest yield and animal husbandry and was

accompanied by the emergence of dairy farms, butcheries, canning industries and sugar beet

farming that led Gotland into the age of industrialization (Öhrman, 1991). In addition, due to

2 The phrase “testing the waters” means trying to discover a little more about a situation before you go ahead and

become very involved. 3 Translation to English: “Water is our most important natural resource and our most important aliment”.


5

the drainage, several brooks and rivers dry out in the drier time of the year which has in turn

negative consequences for plants and wildlife as well as for household consumer needs (Olsson

& Öhrman, 1996). It can be concluded that the historical drainage is one of the main causes of

water loss from the island nowadays. This shortage of water often leads to water rationings and

bans on irrigation during summertime (ibid.).

Moreover, since 1900 Gotland has witnessed the establishment of several businesses, including

water intensive industries like the limestone industry, dairy companies, breweries, distilleries,

butcheries, a sugar factory and the tourist industry. This was accompanied by an increase in

population from about 30,000 (Olsson & Öhrman, 1996) to nowadays nearly 60,000 citizens

(Region Gotland, 2015). While these industries provide necessary employment opportunities

to Gotland they also threaten the island’s water supply. A special challenge is the rise in usage

of water for the tourist industry with the rising amount of tourists coming to the island

especially during the summer months4 (Region Gotland, 2017).

The historical development in combination with current challenges let various stakeholders

take measures in order to secure their water supply. For instance, farmers in several places

constructed artificial irrigation dams to ensure a stable water supply during the dry summer

months, since the winter precipitation can no longer be stored in the wetlands. Also, the

municipality encourages water saving measures (Region Gotland, 2017) and citizen initiatives

restore wetlands for a self-sufficient water supply (SMHI, 2016). Even examples from the

industry can be found where measures optimizing water related processes are taken (Arla,

2017).

Regarding measures for agriculture, Olofsson (1992) mentions that with the help of irrigation

dams water is collected during the water rich time of the year where the water runs in canals

alongside on its way to the harbour, helping the water to stay on the island and avoid creating

another source of groundwater loss. In addition, Gotland is rich in limestone, whose

precipitation can be found in the water and which in some cases poses further challenges to

stakeholders regarding water quality (Gotlands Kommun, 2005). In connection to institutional

actions, the municipality has also been working with and addressing the topic for some time

now (Gotlands Kommun, 2005; Länsstyrelsen Gotlands län, 2017; Region Gotland, 2017). For

instance, there are campaigns run by the municipality to raise awareness of the citizens to save

water and regulations regarding water usage in the water scarce months in the tourist season

from June-September (Region Gotland, 2017). Additionally, information and reflections about

the water situation are already incorporated into planning for e.g. water supply and sewage

systems (ibid.).

Historically, Gotland always had restricted water accesss and faced repeated dry periods

(Ericson I Ubbholt, 2017). Yet, according to Olsson & Öhrman (1996) the overall water supply

on Gotland can be considered satisfactory despite the fact that the groundwater level might

sink after dry winters with little snow and dry summers with water shortages. However, the

4 Every year, over 2,1 million visitors travel to Gotland (Number from 2015; Ask, J. & Ronstrom, O.,

forthcoming).


6

water consumption on Gotland is not evenly distributed over the year since it reaches a peak

in the driest months of the year (MittResVader, 2017) with the most people residing on the

island simultaneously. At present, the lake supplying Visby with fresh drinking water,

Tingstädeträsk, is decreasing in volume and therefore tightening the water situation on the

island (Sverige Radio, 2017). Since 2014 the lake has not been filled up completely, also

because of less precipitation, which resulted in a sharp decline in water available and a watering

ban starting April 1, 2016 for that particular year (Widegren, 2017). Therefore, it is under

consideration to take water from Gotland’s biggest lake Bäste Träsk or to use expensive

technology to desalinate5 Baltic Sea water in order to provide sufficient fresh water (Olsson &

Öhrman, 1996). Although further water reserves are suggested to be available for drilling in

the bedrock and in the boulder ridges in several areas on the island, it is not always easy or

economically feasible, as different stakeholders might disagree with the drilling. For example,

some farmers might fear their fields will dry up, house owners worry their wells will run dry

or conservationists might step in to safeguard wildlife and vegetation (ibid.). Even though there

are occurrences of groundwater in the hilly ground on Gotland, the transportation has to be

considered as well as the fact that the deposit assets there are relatively low which restricts the

extraction possibilities. In the report about the mapping of groundwater on Gotland, the SGU

quotes the human influence on the island and the groundwater as a considerable risk since the

natural geological conditions are sensitive to changes in the environment. Additionally, the

susceptible environment is a reason for another water quality problem, namely bacteria.

Because of microbiological contamination due to drain, fecaloid or fertilizer handling the water

in every third to fourth well is not suitable for drinking. Furthermore, salty groundwater poses

one of the main reasons for poor quality in wells as well as an increased nitrate content. These

factors have to be taken into consideration in regard to the water issue on Gotland. Furthermore,

the agricultural sector on Gotland as well as the industry are important sectors to consider as

both surface- and groundwater is used in agriculture and the limestone industry influences the

hydrogeological circumstances and its surrounding with its quarries (Bastani et al., 2015).

In addition to new approaches in managing the available water on the island, there are several

individual-driven projects that address the water situation on Gotland. For instance, in 2016

six landowners started a water study circle to better understand the situation and the

prerequisites necessary to improve the situation. Natural growing back of nature as well as

planned restoration of wetlands were also part of the project. In the restoration process, the

existing wetlands were connected with ditches to slow down the run-off of water which

contributed to the existence of open surface water and helped prevent the groundwater level

from continued sinking. The project resulted in the attainment of a groundwater level

comparable with past levels in wells of the people involved (SMHI, 2016).

To provide an overview of the water management from official side the following quote was

chosen:

5 Desalination plants win fresh water from sea water through the removal of salt and other minerals using technical

processes to make it suitable for human and industrial use. In combination with a search for further groundwater

sources it is expected to contribute to the economic feasibility of providing the citizens with water. On Gotland

three plants are planned, and one has already been built (Region Gotland, 2017).


7

“In March 2004, the Swedish Parliament decided that Sweden should be divided

into five water districts with a water authority in each district. A County

Administrative Board in each water district has been designated as a water

authority with the responsibility of dealing with the quality of the water

environment within the district. The water authorities have overall responsibility

for ensuring that the EU Water Framework Directive is implemented in Sweden.

Each County Administrative Board in each district has a planning secretariat with

the task of assisting the water authority with the implementation of the Water

Framework Directive. Work is carried out in consultation with municipalities,

water quality associations and other local water stakeholders” (Länsstyrelsen

Gotlands Län, 2017).

Thus, the Water Department within Region Gotland (RG) is responsible for the strategic

planning of the water supply and the sewage system whereas from the County Administrative

Board (Länsstyrelsen Gotlands län) different departments (eg. Miljö- och vattenenheten6) work

with coordinating the process of dealing with the water situation and are supported by the water

authority responsible for the water district in which Gotland lays (Vattenmyndighetens kansli

Södra Östersjöns vattendistrikt7).

In the rural countryside it is still common for households to have their own water and sewage

system with private wells and special septic tanks which the sewage water goes through before

being infiltrated into the groundwater. In the urban areas the municipality is responsible for the

water supply and sewage system, taking the water from gravel filter wells, or drilled

groundwater and from the lake Tingstädeträsk. The sewage is treated directly in sewage plants

(ibid.).

In summary, the geological and hydrogeological conditions on the island, the inhabitants, the

producing main industries as well as the tourism industry are directly contributing to the water

stress (Gotlands Kommun, 2005). Concurrently, the agricultural sector, the producing

industries, the tourism industry as well as the inhabitants as the main water consuming

stakeholders are directly affected by the limited water availability (ibid.). Besides the

municipal and business side of the issue, there have been long and intense protests about water:

Johansson (2003) points out a strong engagement among local citizens and organization for

fighting for their rights from early 1900 onwards, which can still be witnessed among the

Gotlandic citizens (Grimstedt, 2012). A prominent case took place around a planned limestone

quarry by Nordkalk in the North of Gotland which opponents to the project feared would

pollute the water supply in that area. After heavy protests on the island that gained attention

all over Sweden, as well as a number of legal appeals against the planned quarry the

environment minister stepped in and declared the projected area of the Ojnare forest to turn

into a 'Natura 2000' area – a European Union (EU) nature protection designation (TT/The Local,

2015). Therewith, the citizens also play a vital role in the water conflict on Gotland.

6 Translation to English: “Environment and Water Unit”. 7 Translation to English: “Water Authority Kansli South Baltic Sea Water District”.


8

3. Theoretical background

In the following the theories on which this paper is based will be introduced and elaborated.

To start, firstly a focus will be placed upon water and its scarcity as presented in relevant

literature. Secondly, the concept of wicked problems, which serves as a starting point and

mainstay in this research, will be explained. This will be related to institutional voids, shedding

a light on the lack of predefined measures within official institutions to deal with wicked

problems. Moreover, the importance of the involvement of different stakeholders will be

expressed by drawing on the multi-stakeholder perspective, providing a connecting tool

between theory and empiricism. As the aim of this paper is to investigate how relevant

stakeholder groups perceive and address the water shortage on Gotland, the multi-stakeholder

perspective plays a vital role for the theoretical part of this research and will be considered

subsequently.

3.1 Water and its scarcity, a literature review

Water is a resource that is naturally circulating and constantly renewing itself. The global water

cycle involves approximately 1.4 billion km³ of total water, of which only approximately 3%

(50 million km³) is freshwater. From this amount of freshwater, only 0,002% (100,000 km³)

are available as surface or groundwater sources. (Gleick, 1996; Staddon, 2010).

Over the last decades, a combination of different developments, which will be described further

in this section, lead to an increasing problem of freshwater availability and access and

represents a new set of challenges for the world (Falkenmark et al., 1989; Postel et al., 1996;

Gleick 2003, Gleick & Palaniappan 2010; Oki & Kanae 2006; Jury & Vaux, 2007). Some

scholars even argue that water scarcity and security will be one of the biggest global

environmental problems of the 21st century (Jury & Vaux, 2005; Vörösmarty et al., 2010).

Since there is no common understanding of the terms water scarcity, shortage and stress, the

following section will give an understanding of how the terms will be applied for the purpose

of this study: Water scarcity is a serious unavailability of freshwater in a certain region, a

problem that can be both a natural and a human-made phenomenon (Gleick, 1993; UNDP,

2006). This physical water scarcity can be further divided into two main concepts: Firstly,

demand-driven scarcity (water stress) that can be measured by examining how much water is

being withdrawn from surface water and groundwater aquifers (e.g. Vörösmarty et al. 2000;

Alcamo et al., 2003; Oki & Kanae, 2006; Falkenmark et al., 2007; Gunda et al., 2015). In

general, the main water demands come from the industrial sector, municipal water supply and

agriculture (Feldmann, 2012). Secondly, population-driven scarcity (water shortage) is related

to the number of people that have to share each unit of water resources (Falkenmark et al.,

1989; 2007). It should be noted that water scarcity is not only restricted to the quantity of

available freshwater, but also to the quality (Staddon, 2010).

One of the main drivers of the current problem is the fact that the global population has doubled

over the last 50 years. Simultaneously, the total amount of water withdrawn for human use has

almost tripled, while the planet’s accessible renewable freshwater sources will remain


9

approximately the same or shrink (Srinivasan et al., 2012; Padowski et al., 2015; Alcamo et

al., 2007). Another cause is the overuse of surface water and groundwater resources worldwide,

mainly for industrial purposes. This overuse has not only lead to concerns of availability in this

area, but also endangers future food security, ecosystem function, and urban supply (Gleick

2003; Jury & Vaux, 2007). There is a continually growing demand for water among an

increasing diversity of usage options (Staddon, 2010). This development was accelerated by

the extending globalisation and privatisation of water rights, which often lead to an uneven

distribution of freshwater, unbalanced power relations and inequality (Staddon, 2010;

Srinivasan et. al, 2012; Kanae & Oki, 2006; UNPD, 2006). Furthermore, Oki and Kanae (2006)

state that the more water has been allocated for human use, the more deficient management

systems have lead to regional water scarcity threats. Subsequently, the problem of water

scarcity also seems to be caused by mismanagement. Last but not least, global water shortage

is also caused by climate change, which influences the natural flow and availability of this

resource, the consequences and threats of which can still not be estimated (Rockström, 2009;

Lehner et al., 2006; Alcamo et al., 2007).

Although research focuses primarily on regions with a high level of water scarcity, water

shortage is a problem that occurs on every continent, even in water-rich countries in Europe:

In 2003, almost half of the European countries, which represent approximately 70% of the

European population, were experiencing water stress (Bixio et al., 2006; Hochstrat & Wintgens,

2003, Staddon, 2010; Feldmann, 2012). Furthermore, the increasing number of extreme

weather conditions such as summer droughts or floods have serious effects on the natural

environment, agriculture and water supply (Thompson, 1993). Additionally, over the last

decades, aquifer related issues increased and gained in importance, since groundwater is the

most important freshwater resource for public water supply and industry in Europe (ibid.).

Since water scarcity affects many different actors, a broad range of water management and

governance approaches arose over the last decades (Jury & Vaux, 2005, Vörösmarty et al.,

2000; Staddon, 2010; UN-Water, 2014). In this context, the term sustainability is gaining

relevance: Global water issues have been defined as the priority of many national, international

and global governance initiatives. Above all, the United Nations (UN) declared the decade of

2005-15 as the water for life decade, as well as the years 2018-28 as the water for sustainable

development decade (UN-Water, 2014). Moreover, ensuring water security is one of the

seventeen sustainable development goals (SDGs) (UN, 2016). In political realms, so-called

hydropolitics have emerged onto both global, international and regional level, since most water

is abstracted, managed, and used at the regional to local scale (Staddon, 2010; Srinivasan et al.,

2012). In the economical sector, a shift to sustainable and effective water management

practices has become more prevalent (Ziolkowska & Ziolkowski, 2016). As Gleick (2003)

argues,“[w]ater managers and planners are slowly beginning to change their perspective and

perceptions about how best to meet human needs for water; they are shifting from a focus on

building supply infrastructure to improving their understanding of how water is used and how

those uses can best be met.” (Gleick, 2003, p.275).

It should be mentioned that water scarcity is also an issue of values, justice and ethics. Over

the last years, many water disputes and conflicts arose worldwide and lead to questions like


10

who is to benefit or lose from the current water structure, and what can be considered fair

(Feldmann, 2012). In a more philosophical approach, some scholars focus on the value of water

as a resource, which is again closely linked to environmental justice (Ostrom, 1990; 1999;

2000; Salman & McInerney-Lankford, 2004; Wouters, 1997). Also, Staddon (2010) states that

since water is perceived as a common resource, it is to be questioned how private individuals

and groups can be held responsible for their impacts on this resource. Furthermore, Smith

(1990) noted, that water is perceived as both value-less and invaluable, which makes it

extremely difficult or even impossible to manage: How can a good, that belongs

simultaneously to everyone and to no-one, be managed best? Can a global “right” to water be

proclaimed? (Salman & McInerney-Lankford, 2004; Wouters, 1997). Besides, since water is

not always tangible and moves across landscapes, borders and physical properties, the

specification to whom certain water resources belong is impeded (Staddon, 2010). To give an

opposite viewpoint, water is today also seen as just another factor in modern economy based

on neoliberal concepts of private property and free markets (ibid.).

As highlighted in this section, water is a relevant, multi-faceted and disputed resource.

Consequently, water resource management can be categorized as complex and influenced by

different perspectives and interests. Due to this complexity, water shortage is understood as a

wicked problem, a problem that is characterized as highly complex and that can only be

subjected to management approaches.

3.2 Wicked problems

Most issues of sustainability, and therefore also water related problems, are determined as

wicked problems (Pryshlakivsky & Searcy, 2013; Gupta et al., 2009; Weber et al., 2011; Baird

et al., 2016).

The term, originally coined by Rittel and Webber in 1973, describes a class of social system

problems that are highly difficult to define, resistant to solutions and can therefore be labelled

as wicked. Shindler and Cramer (1991) added, that it is impossible to find optimal solutions

because of both uncertainty about future conditions and intractable differences in social values

(Shindler & Cramer, 1999). In addition, wicked problems are characterized as complex,

unpredictable and open ended (Head & Alford, 2015).

Since wicked problems interact with other problems and are therefore part of a system of

interrelated problems with mosaic interdependencies, the attempt of solving one aspect of a

wicked problem often reveals or creates other problems (Ackoff, 1974). Rittel and Webber

(1973) classified most modern problems in society and politics as wicked ones, since they

comply with their proposed ten characteristics (see Appendix I).

Solutions to wicked problems can only be good-or-bad but not true-or-false (Rittel & Webber,

1973). As an example, there are different value judgments and no party has the power to

determine correctness, which means that there is not just one approach to address wicked

problems, but many (ibid.). Additionally, a solution to a wicked problem cannot be tested,

neither immediately nor ultimately since every solution-attempt is unique and can merely be


11

inquired by trial-and-error (ibid.). This implies that there cannot be a standard solution and the

level of correctness of a solution-attempt is hard to measure. However, it also indicates that

there is no right or wrong for developing a solution to a wicked problem. Since wicked

problems cannot be solved, but only managed, in order to achieve an acceptable state for the

life on this planet, institutionalized or effectively organized power structures are needed to

effectively deal with them (ibid.).

Since its first reference in 1973, a wealth of strategies to tackle wicked problems has been

developed (e.g. Balint et al., 2011; Brown et al., 2010). Many approaches include post-normal

science8 (Sardar, 2010; Healy, 2011; Ravetz, 2011) or other mixed method approaches that

incorporate adaptive, participatory and transdisciplinary elements (O’Connor, 1999; Frame &

Brown, 2007; Innes & Booher, 2010; McConell, 2016). Examples provided by the literature

name more creative, inclusive and ongoing engagement processes that can open up problem

solving possibilities in contrast to normal science-based approaches. One concrete example

would be scenario planning techniques (Carlsson-Kanyama et al., 2008). Some of these

theoretical concepts are already applied in practice, but face numerous difficulties or fail to

tackle wicked problems effectively (Duckett, 2016). Many attempts do not even overcome the

first stage, when a wicked problem is not recognized as such (APSC, 2007). Other obstacles in

this context are inter alia that many plans are overly optimistic, still strive to find overly

simplistic and quick solutions or fail to understand the actual complexity of wicked problems

and therefore only address a part of the problem (Duckett, 2016). In addition, two of the main

tasks with wicked problems are irreconcilable stakeholders and policy failures, such as missing

institutional structures, so-called institutional voids (Hajer, 2003; Duckett, 2016; Dorado &

Ventresca, 2010). Therefore, these two aspects, the concept of institutional voids and the multi-

stakeholders perspective, will find consideration in this present study about water shortage on

Gotland in the following section.

3.3 Institutional voids

When sovereign polities cannot provide solutions for pressing problems and there is further a

lack of generally accepted rules and norms according to which politics is to be conducted, one

speaks of an institutional void (Hajer, 2003; North, 1990). As a consequence, established

institutional arrangements are not able to fulfill their policy obligations. To deal with the

existent institutional void, they have to participate in “transnational, polycentric networks of

governance in which power is dispersed” (ibid, p. 175), referring to any other actor outside of

institutional arrangements. As a result of this, the government does not represent the only actor

in the process of policy making and neither the political setting can be taken as given anymore.

Therefore, all actions end up taking place in an institutional void which means that several

institutional and non-institutional actors, each with their own set of rules and norms, still

engage in solution approaches but with a lack of clearly defined responsibilities. Hajer (2003)

argues that due to existing institutional voids, there is a new orientation among affected parties

8 Post-Normal Science (PNS) deals with the management of complex science-related issues. The aspects of

problem solving it focuses on and that tend to be neglected in traditional scientific practice are uncertainty, value

loading, and a plurality of legitimate perspectives. PNS considers these elements as integral to science (Funtowiczi

and Ravetzii, 2003).


12

to solve problems through processes. Simultaneously, new citizen-actors emerge, alongside

with other new forms of mobilization, challenging the rules and norms of the corresponding

participants (ibid.). Likewise the question is raised how to assess these new practices and

whether they are a threat to classical-modernist institutions (ibid.). As a result to this, studies

show that policy initiatives become basis of a “truly political debate in which people reflect

on their identities, exchange views with others and can indeed come to some sort of collective

will formation” (compare figure 1; ibid, p. 190).

Figure 1: Mechanisms within institutional voids. Own illustration based on Hajer, 2003

These illustrated aspects give reason to include the multi-stakeholder perspective into the

theoretical part of this paper since various stakeholders are actively involved in dealing within

the institutional voids of how to address the water scarcity on Gotland and interact with each

other on a democratic basis.

3.4 Multi-stakeholder perspective

Since wicked problems affect a broad range of stakeholders that inter alia have to interact

within an institutional void, the Multi-stakeholder perspective (MSP) will be considered. MSP

looks upon the way people from various backgrounds work together to address complex issues

in an increasingly entangled political, social and economic environment, and goes beyond


13

traditional concepts of power hierarchies. It describes, that each stakeholder’s unique

perspective and expertise gives reason for a justified influence and the right to be heard. Further,

Baird et al. (2016) argue that when multiple perspectives are present, as it is typical of a wicked

problem, one result can be competing problem definitions, so that stakeholders cannot even

agree on the problems that are to be addressed. Consequently, they can barely find consensus

about appropriate solutions. In addition to this, the MSP acknowledges that the current

democratic paradigm does not necessarily give birth to actors that generate the best solutions

for existing problems (Hemmati, 2002).

Moreover, the MSP can be seen as a tool of sustainable development. However, this requires

a deepened understanding of the way the MSP can be used in the frame of multi-stakeholder

processes (ibid.). Is this context, it is suggested that “traditional processes of coordination

need to be supplemented by a series of practical arrangements which provide for more active,

cooperative management” (Müller, 2001, p. 443). However, it seems to be the prevailing case

that stakeholder dialogues, incorporating them into decision-making and concrete follow-ups

are organized and prepared in an impromptu way. This is supported by research about

participation at community levels, as well as national and global levels (Hemmati, 2002). Yet,

the relationship between stakeholder participation and decision-making remains often unclear

(ibid.), adding an aspect of uncertainty and complexity to the outcome of MSP.

Still, this perspective provides useful insight opportunities for the empirical study. By using

this perspective, it is intended to gain an understanding of how relevant stakeholders perceive

the water shortage on Gotland, how they see each other, how they interact and address the

situation. Furthermore, it aims to reveal what this implies for the water situation, the

management of wicked problems and institutional voids. Stakeholders mired in a wicked

problem usually have difficulty getting analytical traction on the problem, are frequently

frustrated in their efforts to develop solutions, and are often disappointed in the results from

solutions that are implemented (Baird et al., 2016). Conklin (2005) concludes that recognizing

the nature of wicked problems and understanding that one is dealing with a wicked problem is

necessary to find ways to collaborate effectively to address the problem.

The previously mentioned theories will be used as the basis for the collection and analyses of

the empirical data. The theoretical part about wicked problems will help to understand the

complexity of the water situation and its management on Gotland and functions as a basis on

which the other theories and empirical findings will be built. In addition, research on how to

perceive and address wicked problems is still an underdeveloped field, especially in the context

of sustainability, since this field has only taken hold in the last few years and some

sustainability issues are still very new and only marginally addressed. The importance of

extended research in this particular research field is underlined by the fact that many

sustainability problems are essential for society's well-being e.g. poverty, food security or

water shortage, and therefore demand solution approaches.

Within the basic structure of wicked problems, the theory about institutional voids is expected

to contribute to an understanding of the lack of knowledge and proficiency within established

institutions and structures of how to deal with such a wicked situation especially in light of the


14

involvement of multiple actors and stakeholders, for which the MSP will be useful. An

expected beneficial outcome of this combination of selected theories is a deepened and more

comprehensive understanding of the water situation on Gotland in order to show possible ways

for future improvements.

To conclude, the here presented theories will be used in the upcoming discussion to connect

the empirical findings to academically based foundations and therewith illustrating the way

different stakeholders are affected by the water shortage on Gotland and how they further deal

with it in the light of wicked problems, institutional voids and MSP. The connection between

theory and empirical study is expected to help understanding Gotland’s water situation with

the aim to contribute positively to further discussions and solutions finding in regard to this

topic and answering the research question.


15

4. Research process

The following chapter gives an overview of the chosen research philosophy, approach and

methodology of this study. Moreover, the research and data collection process, as well as the

analysis strategies will be elaborated.

4.1 Research approach and philosophy

To answer the research questions, a qualitative research design with semi-structured interviews

in combination with selected secondary data and notes was chosen to obtain a wide range of

authentic stakeholder views and to receive deeper insights in this under-researched area.

Following the assumptions that (1) there is not one objective reality, (2) people create and

associate their own subjective and intersubjective reality as they interact with the world around

them and (3) people cannot separate themselves from what they know; researchers and research

objects are not separable from each other (Saunders et al., 2012; Walsham, 1993).

Subsequently, this research is conducted from an interpretive stance, including a relativist

ontology and a subjectivist epistemology and axiology (Ponterotto, 2005; Saunders et al.,

2012). In order to gain a more profound understanding of the complex research topic and since

relatively little is known about stakeholder perception and addressing of water shortage, an

abductive approach was chosen (Saunders et al., 2012). This chosen approach allows to apply

the existing theories and literature and simultaneously contributes new finding to the existing

theory (ibid.). Furthermore, it goes in line with the adopted philosophy and data collection

methods and aims to bring structure to the chaotic nature of wicked problems. Finally, this

study aims to provide new insights of this existing phenomenon.

4.2 Data sources and collection

In order to reach the research objective, semi-structured interviews were conducted. To

supplement this, secondary data was collected and notes taken during the interviews taken into

account. All three methods will be described in the following sections.

4.2.1 Semi-structured interviews

This study examines the views of different stakeholders on Gotland, therefore a first step was

to identify relevant stakeholder groups that affect or are affected by the water situation.

Following Bryson and Crosby’s (1992) definition, a stakeholder is “any person, group, or

organisation that is affected by the causes or consequences of an issue” (p. 65). By establishing

a stakeholder map, all parties with a ‘stake’ in an issue were identified (Robson & Robson,

1996). This mapping process depends on how the issue is conceived, who is perceived as

having a legitimate interest and how its boundaries of the researched topic are drawn. The

position adopted in this research context is to draw a relatively broad stakeholder map that is

derived from the stakeholders’ relevance to the topic and natural involvement in the studied

field (Healey, 1998). After a review of local sources, four main stakeholder groups were

identified of which representatives of all groups were contacted and interviewed. The groups


16

are (1) Political and administrative sector, (2) Industrial and business sector, (3) Research

sector and (4) Activists from society (compare Figure 2).

Figure 2: Stakeholder map: overview of sectors and interviewees

All interviewees were selected using a mix of purposive and snowball sample. In March and

April 2017, nine individual semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted on Gotland;

one interview was hold via Skype since the person interviewed is located on the Swedish

mainland. Preliminary to the interviews, correspondence via email and individual face-to-face

talks took place. This aimed at gaining a personal impression of the interviewees and further

to answer any questions of the interviewees before the interviews started. The interviews lasted

between approximately 30-70 minutes and were audio-recorded, for which permission was

sought beforehand. Afterwards all interviews were transcribed. The interviews were held in

English with only non-native English speakers as the authors are not proficient in Swedish and

all interviewees being Swedish. During the interviews, the compiled questions were only used

as a guideline and allowed the interviewee to talk freely and elaborate, deviate and accentuate

at any time (Crotty, 2012; Saunders et al., 2012). This led to flexible discussions and was a


17

crucial factor for a successful comprehensive data collection. Further, this constitutes the main

reason for single interviews, as the interviewee should not feel obliged to act in a certain way

or be influenced by the opinion or statements from others. The questions asked covered four

fields, namely (1) how the stakeholders understand and define the water shortage on Gotland,

(2) how the stakeholders perceive other stakeholders involved, (3) what the stakeholders’

strategy is to address the water shortage, (4) which strategies are assumed to be successful in

the eyes of the stakeholders (see Appendix II). The purpose of the questions was also to

investigate if the chosen stakeholders draw a connection to wicked problems, institutional

voids and the MSP.

Besides the recorded interviews, handwritten notes were taken by the authors during the whole

research process to generate a more holistic picture of this study and the interviewed

stakeholders. Further, these notes were analysed and interpreted in combination with the

transcribed interviews and the secondary data.

4.2.2 Secondary data

For the purpose of this study, secondary data from multiple sources was collected in order to

gain a comprehensive understanding of the specific phenomenon of water shortage on Gotland.

Besides, the use of secondary data creates the opportunity to reach a far greater set of data and

allows therefore more time and effort for analysing and interpreting the information (Saunders

et al., 2012). The data used in this context consisted of books, magazines, newspaper articles,

radio reports, information brochures of the municipality and social activists, company

homepages and material provided by the stakeholders. The data was collected by the

researchers or provided by stakeholders. Since researchers have only little control over the

quality, validity, reliability and suitability of secondary data, and the authors are aware of this,

the chosen material was evaluated carefully before using it in the present research context.

4.3 Data analysis

To analyse the collected data an abductive approach, meaning a mixed inductive and deductive

content analysis, was chosen (Saunders et al., 2012; Mayring, 2000). Therefore, in a first step

the recorded interviews were transcribed. Then, all transcripts were scanned for research

relevant quotes according to theory derived categories which reflects the deductive content

analysis part (see Appendix III, Chosen deductive categories). Through this step, paragraphs

were either assigned into one of the theory based categories or sorted into a residual category

(Mayring, 2000). All text units in the residual category were in a second step analysed in an

inductive procedure (see Appendix III, Chosen inductive categories).

After the content analysis, the findings of all 12 categories were prepared, processed and due

to the focus and scope of this work reduced, combined and interpreted. This resulted in two

analysis and discussion chapters: (1) Chapter 5. Water, water for everyone?, which constitutes

an interpretive presentation of the four relevant stakeholder groups and (2) Chapter 6.

Discussion: Diving into the deep blue matter, an analysis of the stakeholders’ statements in

relation to the theoretical framework of this research (compare Figure 3).


18

Figure 3: Research process and analysis

During the process of the current study, the research strategy stayed flexible and was modified

several times in order to guarantee a satisfactory quality of the results. This adjustable approach

was chosen to generate a clearer, more realistic and holistic picture of the stakeholders’

perception of Gotland’s water shortage. In this way, the authors aim to provide more reliable

results.

4.4 Reliability and validity, trustworthiness and credibility

According to Silverman (1997), the aim of social science is to produce descriptions of a social

world through research. Even though this social world is perceived subjectively by anyone,

including researchers, there are several techniques to provide reliable and valid data within

qualitative research (Silvermann, 1997; Saunders et al., 2012). Since reliability and validity are

concepts used for testing quality in quantitative research, many scholars mention credibility

and trustworthiness as two quality criteria in qualitative research. (Lincoln & Guba, 1985;

Saldana et al., 2009; Golafshani, 2003). Both terms refer to the believability of the data, which

in this case are the subjective experiences and reality of the interviewees, and the interpretation

and representation of the results by the researchers (Polit & Beck, 2012). In the context of this

study and in order to ensure credibility and trustworthiness, every step in the research process

was carefully generated and evaluated at several stages during the whole research (Golafshani,

2003; Polit & Beck, 2012). Moreover, every step was recorded in sufficient detail to provide a

transparent research process (Saldana et al., 2009; Silvermann, 1997). Through the methods

triangulation of collected data through interviews, secondary data and notes, this research

attempts to gain an articulate, comprehensive view of the water shortage on Gotland (Casey &

Murphy, 2009). These measures add to the trustworthiness and credibility of the present study.


19

4.5 Ethics

All participants were informed about the objective of this study and that they were free to

participate or withdraw at any point. Each interviewee was asked for permission to record the

interview. Further it was inquired whether a synonym was preferred or their real names could

be used for the sake of their anonymity. All interlocuteurs agreed to be mentioned by name.

This has primarily practical reasons, since many interviewed stakeholders mentioned their

intention to use this master thesis to promote stakeholder dialogues and discussions.

Consequently, using real names helps to allow recognition or even the possibility of being

contacted in the future. All interviewees were sent the transcribed interview for individual

checking regarding the researchers having caught the right wording and understanding. All

stakeholders’ annotations were taken into account.


20

5. Water, water for everyone?

The following chapter will give an overview of all twelve interviewees that were consulted in

the present study and their particular perspectives. This will be done according to the identified

stakeholder groups (1) Political and administrative sector, (2) Industrial//business sector, (3)

Research sector and (4) Activists from society. The attempt was made to illustrate the typical

characteristics of a group as well as their differences. To give a geographic overview of the

interviewed stakeholders, the following map shows their location: Ten respondents are situated

in Visby, the biggest city on Gotland, located on the west coast. The remaining three

interlocuteurs are located either in Slite, in Katthammarsvik or on the mainland in Kalmar

(compare Figure 4).

Figure 4: Geographical location of selected stakeholders on Gotland and the Swedish mainland

5.1 Political and administrative sector (P/A):

To shed light on the institutionalized perspective and strategies, five representatives from

different political departments were interviewed. They were either from RG which as the


21

municipality is responsible for the water supply and sewage system, the water authority or

Länsstyrelsen, the County Administrative Board (CAB). The CAB is the representative of the

government in the region and a coordinating and administrative body for state activities in the

county (Länsstyrelsen, Gotlands län 2017).

Figure 5: Interviewed stakeholders Political/Administrative sector

The first persons to be interviewed were Magnus Hallberg, head of unit of the Water and

Sewage Department Region Gotland and Lars Westerlund, mechanical engineer from the the

same department (Teknikförvaltningen, VA-avdelningen). The interview was held at their

workplace in Färjeleden next to Visby harbour, where both respondents were interviewed

together in a cozy conference room furnished like a ship’s cabin. The municipal water and

wastewater services can be located in between the industrial and political sector 9 . Their

described strategy regarding the water shortage is to look ahead to not be forced to emergency

actions with the help of “technical approaches that are best cost-efficient” (Magnus, Water &

Sewerage Department). Consequently, they focus on a realistic and workable approach that

meets an optimized solution. Summed up it was phrased as “practical lagom” (Lars, Water &

Sewerage department), meaning that everybody has access to enough water, derived from a

practical way of addressing the issues. One of these practical approaches so far has been to

build desalination plants, which has in Lars and Magnus’ opinion solved the water situation in

the South of Gotland. A further step towards managing the water situation is evaluating and

determining the amount of water and sewage allowed to be used and produced by businesses

and households. Yet, the two admitted that their responsibility is limited because of an existing

separation between municipality and private water supply on the countryside. All in all, Magnus

and Lars are confident that a practical solution that considers different aspects equally will be

found regarding the water situation. In general, both interviewees based their arguments and

opinions strongly on scientific findings and analyses.

9 The sewage and wastewater department is located between two sectors. As a public company within the

municipal sector, it is financed by fees but has the duties to provide water services which gives the appearance to

be more a business than a political department. However, since it is not allowed to make any profit nor loss, thus

being obliged to break even, creates the impression that it is part of the municipality. Its future strategies are

decided by politics and the elected representatives of RG. The water and sewage department in RG therefore looks

at the parameters given in order to find a suitable solution to the water problem, taking both the necessary processes

and economics into consideration.


22

Secondly, Mats Jansson, Business Development Strategist (Delprojektledare Besöka och mötas)

at RG was interviewed. Mats is one of six people working in the business development sector

in RG. He focuses on developing the tourism sector sustainably and is of the opinion that with

the help of a newly started long-term strategy and cooperation between different sectors it is

possible to combine tourism growth and sustainable water usage. Mats stated that the water

shortage has not been of relevance up until now and that “the problem is that we haven’t been

used to discussing this issue” (Mats, RG) but that now it should be addressed rather quickly.

He described that the tourism development department from RG addresses the water shortage

in the way that it provides information to their customers via different channels e.g. with leaflets

and information material on the ferries to Gotland and at Visby airport. This strategy, which

was also followed by other departments in RG and Länsstyrelsen, apparently resulted in a 30%

decrease of water consumption in the year 2016. Further, Mats mentioned different strategies

to lower the water consumption within the tourism industry that are currently under

consideration10. According to him the problem has to be addressed both with technology and a

change in behaviour. Regarding the latter he wants to motivate the tourists to become more

sustainable.

Another interviewee was from the state area, Frida Eklund, who works for the Environment

and water unit (projektledare för delprojektet Dialogprocess för vattenskyddsområden, Miljö-

och vattenenheten) within Länsstyrelsen Gotland Län (CAB). From her point of view the water

problem will be solved with the means RG and Länsstyrelsen introduce as well as with the

water supply plan, she is currently working on. Although from the politicians’ side master plans

and strategies are worked out in cooperation with the industry and other political institutions

with the aim to better the water situation, Frida perceives it as more needs to be done. Her

chosen approach can be described as to focus on stakeholder communication and cooperation.

As is was illustrated by detailed information that was provided by her in the form of existing

material on workshops, presentations and water supply plans there are already steps taken in

addressing the water issue. During the interview the impression was received that she is steadily

working with the water issue and with developing plans and strategies. She seems to trust the

outcomes of her work as well as the official information by RG about the water situation and

proposed solutions.

Moreover, an interview with Sylvia Kinberg, Coordinator of the Vattenmyndighetens kansli

Södra Östersjöns vattendistrikt was conducted via skype. This authority for water in the water

district South Baltic Sea is responsible for the overall coordination of water related topics within

this area. Sylvia’s work is to provide a program of measures that will address the whole water

management system and water scarcity issue in the South Baltic Sea district since similar water

shortages are witnessed there, too. Additionally, she pointed out that her department and work

affects different stakeholders since vattenmyndigheten sets the water quality norms regarding

the environment (miljökvalitetsnorm). Although she just started her job in the department when

interviewed, she showed great interest in the topic and commitment since she contacted a

10 These are for instance benchmarking strategies for hotels in regard to using less water, promotion of good

approaches and ecological footprints, and the increase of knowledge about the situation. To be able to evaluate

current patterns of water usage in hotels, a system where hotels provide data (like numbers of tourists or profit

made) to the department on a daily basis is to be extended to the water consumption (Mats, RG).


23

colleague from within the authorities for background information to the topic. She is of the

opinion that there will be measures that will improve the situation but that still more needs to

be done.

The most obvious similarity of this group is that they all seem to understand the specific water

problem on Gotland and have started to address the situation with different plans and strategies.

However, only one representative of this sector, Sylvia from Vattenmyndigheten, labelled it as

a wicked problem. Despite that the other stakeholders were not of the opinion that it is a wicked

problem, they are aware of its complexity. In this regard, Frida understands that water supply

“is not that simple” (Frida, Länsstyrelsen) and that working “with a lot of things” (ibid.) is

necessary in order to “solve” (ibid.) the water problem on Gotland. Moreover, all interviewees

mentioned newly introduced plans, strategies or projects that deal with water on Gotland.

Overall, they see practical technical solutions (e.g. process optimization and desalination plants)

and management approaches as the best way to deal with the situation. They share their support

for the desalination plant and state it as a solution without questioning it. Moreover, every actor

interviewed highlighted the great influence of the tourist industry and that the increasing

number of tourists affects the water situation. However, there is a disagreement about how the

tourism sector on the island should develop best. Some representatives support the expansion

of the tourism business and are confident that with communication and cooperation sustainable

growth in tourism is possible. For instance, Frida joined Mats position and pointed out that

Gotland “cannot live without water and [Gotland] cannot say less tourists, that is not solving

[the problem]” (Frida, Länsstyrelsen). On the other hand, it was hinted with a critical tone that

it should be reconsidered if a growing number of tourists is what Gotland really wants and

needs. Lars (RG) critically questioned the proposed increase of tourism on the island. Besides,

most interviewees perceive the tourist industry's’ reaction, interest and activity in this issue as

very low while only Mats (RG) sees the tourism industry as engaged in the topic.

Yet, all agreed that more needs to be done for an improvement of the situation. Mostly, it was

referred to the politicians as being responsible for the water situation on Gotland although all

interviewees from the P/A-sector could be located in this particular sector themselves. A

conflict potential was identified when several stakeholders talked about financial risks and in

particular of who should take on the initial investment for improving the situation. All

stakeholders think that multi-stakeholder corporations are the right approach to tackle the

problem. As it was stated by multiple interviewees, it is important to involve more stakeholders;

and to make everybody aware of the situation is an important tool for achieving this. Further,

the interlocuteurs are of the opinion that the willingness to cooperate will increase within the

next years. A reason for this could be a worsening of the water shortage or the fact that new

cooperations seem to be necessary to better the situation since the already existing ones do not

work well or well enough. It was illustrated that there is a lot of potential left and that there is

the “need to work more together” (Sylvia, Vattenmyndigheten). However, the stakeholders

differed in their favoured approaches to manage the situation. While Sylvia for example takes

the position to coordinate, Mats advocated for more tourism and Frida was absorbed by her

water supply plan. Lars and Magnus focused on rational, technical solutions that are

economically feasible.


24

In conclusion, the interviewees working in the P/A-sector perceive themselves in general as

having a key role in finding solutions. A closer examination, however, reveals that clear

structures of specific areas of responsibility are not present. The interviewees were unsure about

concrete tasks of the municipality, RG or Länsstyrelsen, yet supported the official description

of the problem and the accordingly proposed solutions.

5.2 Industrial/Business sector (I/B):

During the research process the term “big five” was repeatedly mentioned. The big five

constitute of the five biggest companies and heavy water users on the island. They are

reportedly Arla (dairy products), Foodmark (food industry), Cementa (limestone factory),

Slagteriet (butchery) and Bryggeriet (brewery). Those companies get water from the

municipality and partly have their own water sources. Two the big five companies which are

contributing to the water situation, namely the cement industry Cementa and Arla, the dairy

company could be included into this present study. Both companies highlight on their website

their focus on an environmental friendly production (Cementa, 2017; Arla, 2017). In 2014, Arla

was even awarded as "Gotlands bästa miljöföretag11" (Arla, 2017).

Figure 6: Interviewed stakeholders Industrial/Business sector

After the limestone industry on Gotland was repeatedly mentioned both by several interviewees

and in literature, it was of particular importance to include this perspective in the present study.

Cementa AB was founded in 1869 and is one of Sweden's largest building material companies

whose production takes place in three places in Sweden. Since 1887, the company has a

production site on Gotland, namely in Slite in the north of the island where Cementa has one

of the most modern cement factories in Europe12. Jon Hallgren, who works as an environmental

engineer for Cementa, responded immediately on an interview request. He showed interest in

the present research and was willing to answer the questions. First, it was planned to hold the

interview in Slite at the production site, but then Jon proposed to come to the university campus

and talk to the authors there. During the conversation, a positive atmosphere prevailed and an

open and relaxed dialogue with many jokes and anecdotes took place rather than a strict

question - answer dialogue. His appearance and statements appeared very professional and well

thought out from an industry's angle and consequently convincing without further background

knowledge. This professional impression was created inter alia when Jon talked about

Cementa’s strategy in regard to the water shortage, since he used fashionable words like

corporate social responsibility (CSR) and already well-known and often heard phrases like:

11 Translation to English: “Gotland’s best environmental friendly company”. 12 On Gotland, approximately 700 employers work for Cementa, either in the factory or as subcontractor or carrier.

Every day, 7000 tonnes of cement are produced in Slite, which corresponds to an annual production volume of 2.5

million tonnes (Cementa, 2017).


25

“In this day and age, an industry has to be a part of society and that includes being a

frontrunner in these issues. (…) of course we don’t help the whole island” (Jon, Cementa).

The last part of this statement created furthermore the impression that Cementa could use their

CSR measures as a cosmetic tool to present the company outwardly in a better light. This feeling

was strengthened when Jon insisted several times that Cementa does not produce waste water

as the company avoids to use that term13. Jon mentioned that one CSR measure is to give the

municipality a pond of freshwater, without obtaining anything in return. However, he stated

that this measure was part of Cementa’s permit application, since the political authorities will

decide in a few years if Cementa will get a permit to continue its production. Without this

permit, “the factory will most likely close down, [... since] the profit will sort of disappear”

(Jon, Cementa). While Jon pointed out that Cementa tries to optimise its water use and has

enough water, which the company has partly to pump to the Baltic Sea, he thinks that the water

problem can be solved with new pipelines to existing water sources or dams that can be built.

Yet, he sees the controversy around the limestone industry as hindering the solution finding

process. He perceives especially the citizen activists as emotionally driven and irrational,

impeding in his opinion a fruitful stakeholder dialogue.

Talking to Jon was perceived as very interesting since he is a representative of one of the most

disputed industries on the island, while simultaneously having his personal background on

Gotland. In this context, he acknowledged how difficult it can be sometimes for him when he

mentions that he works for Cementa, since it is such a polarized topic among the islanders.

Therewith, Jon illustrated the special circumstances in the case of Gotland, as it can be a source

of social conflicts among families and friends.

Besides the limestone industry, it was attempted to include the voice of one of the big

companies from the tourist sector, since the special role of the tourist industry was mentioned

repeatedly from several sides. Therefore, it was intended to interview a representative from the

cruising ship company Destination Gotland, one of the biggest tourist affiliated players on the

island. Unfortunately, after several tries to find an interviewee, this attempt remained

unsuccessful. The only answer received via email was a response on the proposed questions

stating that most issues should be addressed to RG and other political authorities. This reaction

contributed further to the overall impression that the tourist industry does not show any great

interest nor feels responsible, at least in comparison to the other bigger players in this sector.

Apart from the limestone and tourist industry, Visby is the location of some companies that

export their products all over the world. One of these companies is Arla (Arla Foods), the

biggest dairy industry player on Gotland that was established in 198414. After reaching Magnus

13 In this context, Jon explained during the Interview, that the water used by Cementa which is pumped out of the

quarries into the Baltic Sea is not comtaminated with chemicals and can therefore not be qualified as waste water.

However, he admitted upon request that the water shows after production processes a slightly increased nitrogen

level (Jon, Cementa). In contrast to this, the intervieweed activists were of the opinion that this statement was

understated and that due to the fact that the water is contaminated in the production process it has to be labelled

wastewater (Daniel, Activist). 14 Each year, the company produces 140 million kg of milk, cream and milk powder, which the company exports

globally. Arla on Gotland employs ca. 55 workers (Arla, 2017).


26

Dahlblom, site manager at Arla Gotland, an interview appointment was scheduled at the

production site in Visby to inquire Arla’s role in the water situation. The atmosphere in the

production plant seemed relaxed and friendly, workers were sitting and talking together in a

common room and it appeared as if they could chose from an endless variety of milk products

for their coffee breaks. All office doors stood open, even during the interview, and Magnus

commented on this with the statement that he has absolutely nothing to hide when giving the

interview.

Magnus mentioned that Arla already introduced several actions in reaction to the existing water

shortage on Gotland. One example is the company’s program for farmers to support them with

knowledge about environmental topics. Besides, he referred to already implemented changes

in the company’s day-to-day business: Sustainability goals have been incorporated in the

company’s strategies, and production processes have been optimized in order to decrease their

freshwater usage and to reuse water. So far, the company has achieved a decrease in water

consumption by 40-50% in the last five years with optimizing its equipment15. On top of that,

Arla plans to decrease its water usage further by 10-20%. Nevertheless, the site manager is

aware that the company is consuming a lot of water. In addition to these actions, Arla is part of

the group Frida at Länsstyrelsen mentioned and coordinates that meets and discusses the water

situation and how to address it from an industrial site.

Both interviewed representatives communicated that they are already doing substantial work in

order to address the problem. They are of the opinion that the water shortage on Gotland is

definitely solvable and are therefore very optimistic that it will be solved – mainly by attempts

of the political sector since they are perceived as having the main responsibility in this regard.

Although they would not phrase it as a wicked problem, Jon calls it a messy and complex

situation and therewith describes it with some characteristics of a wicked problem. Both

companies have in common that they mainly focus on ways to optimize their production

processes in regard to not worsen the water situation. Nevertheless, these optimisation attempts

will eventually stagnate, since the point will be reached where it is not possible to reduce the

water use any further. Therefore, their solution approaches appear to a certain degree still short-

term oriented and seem to include only those measures that go in line with the companies’

strategies, goals and business models. Both respondents concurred that heavy investments are

hindrances to do more regarding the water issue, since classical business objectives are still of

greater importance than sustainability issues.

However, the present research left the impression that Arla seems to be to a higher degree

motivated to be part of a solution and gives the impression that the company is willing to do

more than necessary. For instance, Magnus mentioned the importance of education as Arla is

involved in a primary school project where it provides school material promoting sustainable

development. Still, he is absolutely aware that there is a problem regarding the water situation

and stated: “if you don’t have a problem, you don’t have to solve a problem. Now we have a

15 The bigest part of Arla’s water consumption is used for its equipment. This is due to the strict regulations for

food producing companies (Magnus, Arla).


27

problem that we have to solve [...]. And then you have to come up with how to solve it and there

is a number of ways to solve it” (Magnus, Arla). In contrast to this statement, Jon perceives the

shortage as based on rain patterns and explained that since Cementa uses to a large extent its

own water ponds in the production process, the company does not have to deal with a strained

water situation16.

5.3 Research sector (R):

In order to look from an academic angle at the perception of the prevalent water situation, two

apt representatives from Uppsala University were interviewed.

Figure 7: Interviewed stakeholders Research sector

The first interviewee was Tom Mels, PhD human geographer and lecturer at Uppsala University,

Campus Gotland at the Department of social and economic Geography. Tom possesses an

extensive background knowledge regarding environmental justice and the historical

development of Gotland. Within his research he focuses on natural circumstances, mainly on

changes in society that affect landscapes. During the preliminary talk and the actual interview,

which both took place in his office at Campus Gotland, it became clear that Tom not only has

a professional and deep understanding of the water situation on Gotland; but also a private

connection to this issue since he lives on the island. During two conversations regarding this

paper, Tom shared his knowledge with a lot of details, explained social, geological and natural

connections and made these clear by using various maps of the island from different times and

development stages. It became apparent that he really cares about the island, its future and its

unique landscape and nature. Furthermore, he is informed about recent developments in all

sectors regarding the water issue. He seems to be very engaged in this topic and questions

critically all decisions and actions of every stakeholder; especially the effects that these actions

have on the island’s landscape. Nevertheless, his view on the situation implies an academic and

reflective stance that does neither generalize actors nor sectors and recognizes the complexity

of the problem. He also sees the issue in a broader international and global context and

comprehends many different positions and interests. In general, it became evident that Tom is

critical in regard to technical approaches for solving a problem that is created by technique in

the first place. In his opinion, there is a current over-reliance to technical solutions. Besides his

drawn connection of water to ecological and environmental issues, Tom related the issue to a

social and philosophical perspective and mentioned that eventually it comes down to the

individual. It would therewith become a lifestyle issue:

16 Jon stated, that only approximately 5% of the water used by Cementa are supplied by the municipality. Even

though this number appears to be marginal, Cementa is one of the top five municipal water consumers on Gotland,

meaning that this mentioned 5% is still an extreme high amount of actual used water (Jon, Cementa; Magnus, RG).


28

“Taking everything (water) for granted is not a good way to create environmental

consciousness” (Tom, Researcher).

This philosophical perspective was also mentioned by the second interviewed researcher,

Ulrika Persson-Fischier, who illustrated the viewpoint of the commoners’ dilemma in this

particular research context: “no one is responsible, but everyone is responsible” (Ulrika,

Researcher). Ulrika is a PhD anthropologist researcher and lecturer from Uppsala University.

She was approached and interviewed on Campus Gotland regarding her involvement in the

research project about Hållbara Besök (sustainable visits) on Gotland. Currently, Ulrika is

involved in establishing the new Master Program Sustainable Regional Destination

Development, which will focus on Gotland as a tourist destination. During the interview, Ulrika

seemed in comparison to Tom less personally involved in Gotland’s water situation. This could

be the case since she focuses in her research not on water shortage in particular. Further, she

could be less personally involved since she does not live on the island and has therefore never

personally been affected by the water shortage. Ulrika answered often in behalf of the citizens

she does research about. One example she mentioned was that the tourism industry feels being

made responsible for a problem it did not cause, which can lead to frustration among all

stakeholders. Another example was that local businesses tend to distinguish between small

regional businesses who are motivated and engaged to better the situation and bigger players,

who worsen it. Moreover, Ulrika was the only interviewed person, who classified the

investigated water shortage clearly and without doubt as a wicked problem, that needs to be

understood more thoroughly. Ulrika added a more general and sustainability related perspective

to this research. She rose the question whether simple water reducing measures are really in the

sense of becoming sustainable: “I mean the system as it is, is pretty unsustainable. So how can

you transform the system?” (Ulrika, Researcher). She pointed out that an understanding of

sustainability issues’ complexity is the key of all sustainability challenges:

“The reason why sustainability challenges have arisen is partly because we think

that problems are complicated rather than complex. And then we try to solve them

by complicated solutions rather than by complex solutions (…). So I think this is

part of the problem” (Ulrika, Researcher).

Therefore, she sees a “transformation in worldview necessary” (Ulrika, Researcher) within the

course of a “long term process” (ibid.). At the same time, she points out that “you can’t have

a win-win situation in the sense of more more more more” (Interview Ulrika) which also has

to be considered in the frame of water and sustainability.

From an academic perspective, a clear, deep understanding is given that highlights the

complexity of the problem which makes it impossible to find easy solutions. Even though both

researchers convey the impression to view the water situation from different backgrounds, they

still seem to be on a common ground, since many attitudes and opinions are in accord. Hence,

the two interlocuteurs declined short-term solution approaches and seemed more interested in

a complete understanding of this prevalent complex phenomena. Both highlighted the

importance of stakeholder cooperations and that an open and fruitful dialogue is a first step to

address the wicked problem of water shortage:


29

“It is kind of the assumptions that to solve tricky problems, the business, university

and society needs to cooperate. [...] And that’s what we want to do, but this [, the

water situation on Gotland,] is also an example of how difficult this is to actually

create” (Ulrika, Researcher).

Furthermore, the academics see their role and responsibility primarily to create awareness and

to enable discussions to better the situation.

Both perceive the island’s citizens as extremely aware and engaged in the situation and

emphasized how special the case of Gotland is due to his long history of water shortage and its

isolated geographical position. The different backgrounds and foci of the chosen stakeholders

make again clear how complex and manifold the water shortage on Gotland really is. It further

illustrates from how many perspectives this can be looked at as well as how many fields are

actually impacted.

5.4 Activists from society (A):

In order to gain insight from the people’s perspective, water activists were identified as a group

of stakeholders and therefore included into this study. Three engaged activists, Daniel Heilborn,

Katharina Bjerke and Eva Frölander were contacted and interviewed.

Figure 8: Interviewed stakeholders Activist sector

Daniel works as an architect and is also involved in educating the public about planned water

related projects on the island. Katharina, to whom he is married, is also engaged actively in

water protests. Both hope for a more long-term and environmental-health oriented perspective

from all stakeholders:

“We have to take care of what we have and use it with knowledge and […] lower

our usage of water” (Daniel, Activist).

Eva is privately active since her groundwater supply in the countryside was severely threatened.

In the course of her activism she initiated restoring several wetlands in east Gotland. She tries

to function as a positive role model and to encourage people to take actions with what she has

done. She further works for spreading the word and information about the water situation and

sees a solution approach in enhanced stakeholder cooperations.

Overall, the citizen activists that have been interviewed see their role in getting active in order

to counter decisions made in politics and the industry that affect the water situation and would


30

– in their perception – exacerbate the water situation. So far, their protests and activism have

been successful. As an example, with protests in 2012 in the North of ot the island17, activists

prevented the exploitation of limestone by a big company that would have ultimately threatened

the groundwater. The activists have the impression that during the last years, people are getting

increasingly interested and active in water related topics.

The interviews with the three activists took place on the same day. In the morning Daniel and

Katharina were interviewed together in their home in the old town of Visby and provided a

warm welcome on a cold Friday. Both seemed friendly and open during the whole interview

which was underlined by tea and the setting in the small kitchen, including a small greenhouse

construction in the corner next to the window. It quickly became clear that an important factor

in Daniel and Katharina’s activism is spreading knowledge and awareness and highlighted that

it is essential and prerequisite for changing the status-quo. For now, Daniel’s main strategy is

to inform himself, promote this knowledge so that it reaches a broader audience and to be an

active member in the Swedish environmental party miljö partiet.

In this context, it shall be mentioned that the citizen activists made references to existing uneven

power dimensions and related controversies: specifically to the industry as an actor with

relations to politics and media and with financial means for PR and lawyer. This stands in sharp

contrast to citizen activists who have most often neither funds nor power. Therefore, the

activists emphasized the connection of the investigated matter to power, politics and influence:

“The politicians should take a lead and base their decision on facts [...] Not on whom they are

friends with.” (Daniel & Katharina, Activists). Another conflict source seems to be the

involvement from companies into water related measures as well as the municipality’s

entanglement, and conflicts caused by political and economic collaboration. Therefore, the

impression is created, that certain stakeholders work under water18. Moreover, the two citizen

activists question the relation between the value of water and the value of money: with their

example of a limestone industry, which paid money to the municipality to get access to a

groundwater reservoir, the activists got the impression that money seems nowadays to have a

higher value than the right of the public to a natural resource.

As a result to this, miscommunication and mistrust are another identified conflict source.

According to Katharina and Daniel the limestone company withheld information from the

public. They criticized that from official side discussion rounds were sometimes impeded by

instructions to Daniel like “that kind of questions we are not answering today, it doesn’t belong

to discussion” (Daniel, Activist). Consequently, the impression was conveyed that from official

side it would be preferred that activists do not make waves19. Also, the perceived interrelation

between media and industry as well as their connection to politics contributes to mistrust.

The communication problem where people of opposing opinion refuse to talk to each other

leads to the next conflict line that according to Katharina and Daniel lies between different

groups in society that support opposing goals related to water topics.

17 Ojnare forest protests that sparked nationwide interest and in the end stopped the intended exploitation of

limestone in the region. 18 The phrase “to work under water” is used when somebody is hiding one's real intentions. 19 The saying “do not make waves” means to not make make trouble and to do what others are doing.


31

To interview Eva, the researchers drove to her house in the remote countryside in

Katthammarsvik where they were greeted by Eva’s cow strolling around the house in eternal

peace. Eva started becoming active after she faced repeatedly several months of water shortage

in her home, making it unbearable for her to continue living with a severely restricted water

supply. She highlighted her frustration of not being understood and being left alone with the

water situation. Furthermore, she criticizes that people still do not understand the extent of the

water problem on Gotland. From her perspective the solution approach has to be at eye level

and not from top to bottom. When asked about her ideal approach, she is of the opinion that

stakeholder cooperation and communication are crucial to improve the situation. After several

aborted tries to get in contact with various authorities, she and other affected neighbours

initiated a water study circle. In the following, the circle educated itself about water and related

issues and restored over the last decade five wetlands and therewith improved the availability

of water in the countryside20.

She shows courage and takes her activism seriously. Further, she seemed very content and

proud when she showed the researchers her five restored wetlands as well as footage of the

process. Now she has been active for 14 years and has a very distinct focus on continuing her

work. Lastly she highlighted the importance of water and understanding its value:

“So water is everything. It never stops” (Eva, Activist).

According to her, understanding cannot be achieved immediately but “is a process” (Eva,

Activist).

What all activists have in common is that their activism for improving the water situation and

raising awareness is intrinsically motivated, completely voluntarily and within their free time.

Their approaches focus on understanding, communication and cooperation. They are personally

involved and were directly affected by success or failure of their activism related actions. This

became clear when Eva talked about her frustration and Daniel being arrested while protesting.

Further, they are united by their vision to fight for freshwater and do not take it for granted. The

three interviewed citizens pointed out how major the industry's influence is in the context of

water shortage, and how comparatively little, in contrast to that, the industry does. Furthermore,

they consider the interrelations between politics, industry and media as predominantly negative

and as a hindrance for a sustainable good solution regarding the water situation. All three

oppose the desalination plant and Eva explained that the people supplied with that desalinated

water do not want to drink it and prefer water from their own wells. Daniel and Katharina hinted

that considerable parts of the population oppose those plants and criticise the lack of

transparency and communication in this regard. This is reportedly due to the poor water quality

of desalinated water and risks to people’s health. As an alternative Daniel advocated for being

open for other solutions as to “look more at recycling water and […] to protect the supplies we

have as far as we can go” (Daniel, Activist).

20 The mentioned wetlands were financed with funds from the EU.


32

However, within the activist sector, perceptions differ, too: while Daniel considers the

politician’s solution approach messy, but slowly improving, Eva was frustrated and

disappointed about the politicians work in regard to Gotland’s water problem. She stated that

no authority feels responsible for groundwater issues and that the political sector is only

discussing, but takes no real actions. Also, Daniel and Katharina see rather the bigger picture

with the conflict of interests while Eva cares mostly about the groundwater in the countryside

and the restoration of wetlands.

Concluding, the activists have their own strategy to better the water situation for their own lives

and people’s future on Gotland. When it comes to the question of who all should take

responsibility in regard to the current water situation, it became clear that without the activists

and their involvement the water situation would not have improved in the way it did and might

even have gotten worse.

Generally speaking, all interviewed groups understood that “the water supply doesn’t stand up

to the use, so we are kind of over-using the water supply“(Daniel, Activist). Moreover, some

interviewees alluded that problems related to Gotland are not only in connection with the water

quantity, but also in connection with its quality. Besides, many stakeholders did mention the

climate change as another factor that worsens the overall water situation and understand that

the problem is caused by a combination of factors. Most respondents are aware of the fact that

the water situation differs among the island and perceived that the situation got worse over the

last years. Furthermore, almost all interviewees referred to that the problematic water situation

is not caused by too little water resources, but a problem of mismanagement.

Since there is not one universal definition and understanding given in literature about water

shortage and water scarcity, all interviewed stakeholders on Gotland seem also to have different

understandings and difficulties to grasp what phenomena they are dealing with on the island.

Consequently, the perceptions about the situation differ a lot and there is an unclear use of

terminologies. Further, many respondents admitted that they also do not have the knowledge

about what the different terms mean and that they are used as synonyms. Nevertheless, the most

commonly used term among the affected parties on Gotland is water shortage. This term was

also most often chosen after the researchers provided the interviewees with further information

about the different definitions as it is understood in this research context and will therefore also

be used in the following chapters.

Besides the mentioned aspects, the stakeholders were asked questiones that stand in connection

the theoretical background of this study. A discussion addressing the empirical findings with

regard to the theory will be presented in the following chapter.


33

6. Discussion: Diving into the deep blue of the matter Following the overview of the stakeholders represented in this study, the coming chapter will

focus on the categories that stand in direct relation to the theoretical background of this paper.

They will be addressed chronologically as in the theory chapter. First, the wicked problems will

find consideration which is divided into stakeholders’ understanding and proposed ways to

address it. The problem itself and how it is understood turned out to be of great importance,

and since the theory of wicked problems plays a substantial role in this research it will find

comprehensive consideration in the following. Then a fluent transition will be made to

institutional voids which will be succeeded by a discussion about the MSP and stakeholder

cooperations. This will be concluded by a discussion of identified conflict sources and barriers

for solving the water shortage on Gotland.

6.1 Understanding of the complexity of the problem – A wicked problem

As described in the theoretical part, water shortage can be labelled as a wicked problem which

is not solvable but only manageable. Yet, just two interviewees, Ulrika (R) and Sylvia (P/A)

were aware of using the term correctly. All other stakeholders characterized the prevalent

phenomena as complex, messy and manyfold21, therefore used adjectives that are perfectly

aligned with the definition of wicked problems. However, they failed to recognize it as such. It

was particularly interesting that even before the term wicked problem occurred, or was further

explained during the interviews, this unintended characterisation of wicked problems took place

by almost all stakeholders. Also, they did not connect their perception of the water situation

with the theoretical concept even after being provided with its definition. Besides that, almost

all stakeholders are of the opinion that since the problem is not wicked, it can be solved with

simple solution approaches and that is is not “rocket science” (Tom, Researcher).

Yet, the question “why is there then still a problem, if it’s so easy to solve?” (Ulrika, Researcher)

does clearly underline the assumption that the situation on Gotland must be to a certain degree

wicked.

Consequently, the questions arise why it is not defined as one and what the consequences of

this misperception are. One suggestion could be that this false understanding or the stakeholders’

hesitation to label it as wicked exists due to a lack of understanding the term itself. All

stakeholder are of the view that in order to solve a problem, it must first be fully understood.

This applies not only for managing water shortage, but also for a broader context of shifting

towards sustainability. Consequently, a first step in order to better the water situation on

Gotland and to be able to develop effective solution approaches, stakeholders have to first

recognize that it is a wicked phenomena that can not be solved with short-term and quick

solutions.

21 The multidimensional and complex nature of the problem has been in particular illustrated when all stakeholders

recognized that the examined phenomena goes far beyond the borders of only water related problems. For example,

a connection was drawn between water affiliated environmental problems on the island, inter alia the threat of

vanishing biodiversity, flora and fauna or irreversible changes in nature landscape. On top of that, the connection

between water security and food security was emphasized. Last, it was pointed out that water shortage is a problem

that extends to economic scales and dimensions and therefore affects the way industries can do business on Gotland.


34

To summarize, due to the described complex and messy nature of the water problem as well as

the difficulty to predict or even define it, as it could be caused by a lack of understanding among

the interlocuteurs, it is justified to characterize the water situation on Gotland as a wicked

problem. Moreover, it seems to be resistant to easy solutions where every attempt of solving

one aspect of the problem often reveals or creates other problems. For instance, trying to solve

the water shortage with building desalination plants causes rejection and resistance from

substantial parts of the society. As management approaches to wicked problems are always a

try and can only be good-or-bad but not true-or-false according to the literature, an

understanding that it is a wicked problem is needed. The lack of this understanding among the

stakeholders leads to the assumption that the problem is addressed incorrectly with many

attempts failing already in a first stage, when a wicked problem is not recognized as such.

Especially the stakeholders from the I/B- as well as P/A-sector were sure about the solvability

of the problem with either technical or administrative solutions. This goes hand in hand with

the description of wicked problems where stakeholders are very optimistic about the solvability

of the problem with seemingly too simple and quick solutions. This again portrays a lack in

understanding the complexity of the problem which was predominantly the case with the

interviewed stakeholders. However, different stakeholders had different approaches to solve

the problem, which displays the wicked problem-characteristic of irreconcilable stakeholders.

6.2 Addressing the water shortage on Gotland: like drinking a glass of

water22?

Another focus of this work is placed upon perceived ideal ways of dealing with the water

shortage on Gotland by the interviewed stakeholders in order to understand their

comprehension of the topic and thereof following management approaches. This chapter does

not analyse what stakeholders currently do but what they see as an ideal way to deal with the

water situation.

During the research process it became clear that there are differences recognizable of how the

interviewed stakeholders address this issue. All stakeholders have strategic approaches

developed to tackle the problem, but so far only little improvements to better the situation could

be realized. Further, most approaches take only one or very few aspects of the complex problem

into account.

As it seems already to be a challenge to know exactly where the problem lays since it cannot

be found in one place or by one actor only, to start addressing it in an effective way is impeded.

Furthermore, the fact that solutions to wicked problems cannot be tested since every solution

attempt is unique, the process of developing adequate solutions is hampered and can also lead

to a hesitating behavior among relevant stakeholder groups. For this very reason, Ulrika stated

that “you cannot just sit paralyzed and say ok we can’t do anything [...]. It is a wicked problem,

but still, we have to do things, we have to act” (Ulrika, Researcher). Therefore, even if many

solution approaches do not achieve long-term solutions yet, theses initiatives can be seen as a

22 The phrase “drinking a glass of water” is generally used when something is very easy to do.


35

first step of a long course of finding the right track to manage the current water problem on

Gotland.

Against this background, all interviewees perceived solution approaches shifting towards more

sustainability as to be on the right track when it comes to find solutions. However, the ideas of

sustainable solutions differed even though it was understood that communication and

cooperation are crucial for achieving a sustainable outcome. As Tom mentioned, it might be

time to create solutions that are a“smart investment for the future” (Tom, Researcher).

Therefore, to manage wicked problems, a process of transformation seems to be indispensable,

and requires a combination of long-term strategies as well as “for in the short run good enough

solutions” (Ulrika, Researcher) in everyday processes. Besides, the chosen approaches have to

“allow for flexibility” (ibid.).

In regard to already existing approaches, Ulrika mentioned that in order to become sustainable,

someone has “to reduce something, somewhere” (ibid.) since she suggested that there cannot

be a “win-win situation in the sense of more more more more” (ibid.). Consequently, the

question arises how this can be realized, especially with regard to the tourism industry, but also

other relevant industries that intent to grow. Will it be possible to open the island for a

continuously growing number of tourists while simultaneously finding sustainable solutions to

manage the water situation? How much can settled industries such as Arla and Cementa grow

and increase their production without worsening the water shortage? These questions need to

be addressed at a certain point if a sustainable future shall be achieved. Since the study showed

that a discrepancy prevails among the interviewees regarding the responsible actors, authorities

and concrete methods, this will find consideration in the following chapter addressing

institutional voids.

6.3 Institutional voids

As both suggested by the theory as well as by multiple stakeholders, the problem of water

shortage seems to be partly caused by a lack of clear defined responsibilities and

mismanagement.

This became evident when regarding supposed institutional voids the interviewees either passed

on responsibility to other stakeholders or are clear about that the problem is caused by

mismanagement: For instance, Jon from Cementa referred to RG concerning the task to build

infrastructure for storing water or connecting water sources and people. Yet, Lars and Magnus

from RG admitted that their responsibility is limited due to the distinction between private and

municipality water supply: “it is a problem to discuss also, not for us but for the politicians”

(Lars, Water & Sewerage Department). Also Frida explained that Länsstyrelsen is not

responsible and referred to the politicians. On the other hand, Ulrika said that she can

understand when businesses refer to the Region to “make the situation work” (Ulrika,

Researcher) as they see their task done with paying taxes. Eva (A) explained the institutional

void of managing groundwater clearly when she stated that the government has no

responsibility and that the commune can decide how much responsibility they want to take

regarding groundwater and that RG has decided to not take responsibility. What caught the


36

attention of the researchers was the impression that especially the interviewed actors from RG

and Länsstyrelsen cross-referred to each other when confronted with the question of the

responsibility. However, as Ulrika summed it up, it is a “circular argument going on forever

and ever” (Ulrika, Researcher) that does not contribute to a solution finding oriented process

but rather its wickedness.

Another institutional void that was revealed is that Frida, as a representative of the CAB “didn’t

get to talk to the tourist industry” (Frida, Länsstyrelsen). The importance of including this

particular industry was mentioned by all stakeholders as substantially contributing to the

strained water situation. It can further be argued that an institutional void prevails in regard to

distributing competences of deciding suitable measures since all stakeholders interviewed have

different ideas about that. This seems to be the case when Daniel (A) speaks about him being

contacted by municipality employees for information and support although they are classified

as responsible. The activists as well as Jon from Cementa agreed upon that it is a problem of

mismanagement. Especially Eva supported that point strongly with saying “Yes, it is only the

management, nothing happens. We have a lot of water, a lot of water” (Eva, Activist).

Moreover, a lack of financial resources seems to add a financial dimension to the issue of

institutional voids since this hinders the work processes related to addressing the water shortage

as mentioned by several interviewees.

As supposed by the wicked problem theory, sovereign policy failing to provide solutions for

pressing problems is another aspect adding to the water issue on Gotland. As described by

Sylvia (P/A), there is a lack of means how to manage the problem since it is an unprecedented

case to deal with. Therefore, the literature stating a lack of generally accepted rules and norms

according to which politics is to be conducted is proven. Because of this lack and failure to

address the problem, the institutional arrangements have to participate in polycentric networks

of governance – as illustrated by Frida’s (P/A) water supply plan group, the vattenråd23, RG-

tourism industry as well as RG-university cooperations, and Eva’s wetlands restoration. The

further in the literature mentioned simultaneously emerging new citizen-actors and other new

forms of mobilization, which are challenging the rules and norms of the corresponding

participants are exemplified by Eva’s, Daniel’s and Katharina’s activism. Therewith, this

research shows that actions take place in an institutional void and the government does not

represent the only actor in the process of policy making nor can the political setting be taken as

given anymore. This was further the case with the industrial and business actors and their

initiatives with optimizing processes related to water usage. Also the argumentation of a new

orientation to use processes to solve problems was confirmed by the stakeholders talking about

preferred cooperation and communication in regard to solution approaches. The newly emerged

sort of collective will formation as described by the literature is illustrated by the stakeholders

addressing the water shortage united by the same aim to secure future freshwater supply.

In addition to the just discussed obstacle of missing clearly defined responsibilities it was often

mentioned that stakeholders have to come together in order to discuss and elaborate a solution

in cooperation. Therefore, the MSP seems to provide a feasible approach in regard to both

23 Swedish for “water board”, it deals with water related questions on Gotland.


37

helping to manage the water problem as well as to do justice to its insolvability, as it will be

discussed in the following.

6.4 Multi-stakeholder perspective and cooperation

Applying the MSP that looks upon the way people from various backgrounds work together to

address complex issues and goes beyond traditional concepts of hierarchies of power made

clear that each stakeholder has a unique perspective and expertise that needs to be recognized.

However, it was also shown by the field study that the multiple perspectives present, as is

typical for a wicked problem, can result in competing problem definitions. This was the case

when some stakeholders spoke of increasing numbers of tourists, industries and desalination

plants as problems while others saw the issue rather in limited financial means, rain patterns

and controversies around the topic. The inability of the stakeholders to agree on the problems

to be addressed, which makes it difficult to find suitable and sustainable solutions, can therefore

be stated to be prevalent to the Gotland case. However, almost all stakeholders perceive

communication and cooperation as extremely important in the context of the water situation on

the island. Furthermore, in regard to the question of who all should take responsibility, all

stakeholders agreed that the problem does not lay in one place or by one actor although it was

striking that several interviewees referred to the politicians as responsible.

As many interlocuteurs mentioned there are already many existing cooperations between

different stakeholder groups. However, these existing alliances are mostly between only two

and not multiple stakeholder groups (compare table 1):

Table 1: Already existing cooperations between different stakeholders on Gotland to better the

strained water situation

In the light of the importance of stakeholder cooperation, a wide range of problems regarding

existing collaborations were pointed out: First of all, the polarized character of the water


38

problem was mentioned by Jon (I/B), Daniel and Katharina (A), a circumstance that

complicates often the communication or is seen as a hindrance factor to enable new

cooperations. Secondly, different interests of the different stakeholder groups seem to bear the

possibility to make it extremely difficult to find a starting point and common ground. Then,

different expectations of cooperating partners were mentioned as a problem. Ulrika also added

referring to her research project that the scientists “are kind of struggling with what

corporations can really be, and we have so far, no real answer to that” (Ulrika, Researcher).

It was further shown that the current democratic paradigm does not necessarily give birth to

actors that generate the best solutions for existing problems, as acknowledged by the MSP. Yet,

Ulrika emphasized that it is important“to have an open, democratic process in decision making,

otherwise it will go bad” (Ulrika, Researcher).

What is suggested by the theory, namely to have more practical arrangements with more active,

cooperative management, was also supported by all the interviewees. Also, the relationship

between stakeholder participation and decision-making remained often unclear. This

uncertainty results in the stakeholders being frequently frustrated in their efforts to develop

solutions, as well as disappointed by the outcomes, as it is typical for stakeholders in a wicked

problem. In this regard, being frustrated by the lack of understanding from official side was

portrayed by Daniel and Eva (A). Also, the industrial sector showed traces of disappointment

that their worked out solutions were not fully appreciated or intentionally opposed. This

discontentment can be related to ineffective addressing of the problem which again is the result

of an insufficient and incomplete understanding of the extent and complexity of the water

shortage. This leads to the last category of conflict sources and identified barriers to solve the

water problem on Gotland.

6.5 Conflict sources and barriers for solving the problem

The fundamental conflict potential in the examined case lies within the various ways the water

situation is understood, perceived and addressed by the different stakeholders. The fact that it

is not seen as a wicked problem leads particularly to a misperception of the situation and

consequently to the perceived problem customized solution approaches. The study revealed that

the water situation and its handling can also happen to be a conflict source. In this connection

several barriers were mentioned that hinder the finding of suitable approaches. The conflict

source of referring with the responsibility to deal with the water shortage to other stakeholders

was already discussed beforehand. In addition, the lack of established and inclusive

cooperations can be understood as a barrier for solving the issue and a potential cause for

conflicts.

Another source of conflict identified was that citizens can have the feeling to be left out and

ignored when striving for solutions. In many cases solution approaches involve only one or few

actors. Consequently, the perspectives and efforts of some stakeholders do not find recognition

which can result either in frustration or rejection of suggested solutions (e.g. desalination plants).

This leads to the next identified conflict that revolves around proposed solutions: while some

see them in technical, calculated quick-fixes, like the desalination plant and optimized


39

production processes, others opt for long-term changes in the lifestyle, such as saving water,

restoration of wetlands, connecting the water supply to other yet unexploited water sources and

water recycling-systems. Yet, this is to be put in relation to financial issues that are still an

obstacle when it comes to the realization of strategies tackling the water shortage as it was

mentioned by several stakeholders interviewed. Another barrier for implementing a sustainable

water management is the very economic strategy for the future on Gotland, namely to increase

tourism since more tourists result in a higher water need. As stated by Ulrika (R), tourism is the

opposite of sustainability which results in a fundamental conflict.

To conclude this section, the main barriers identified for solving the water problem on Gotland

are of responsibility-taking, cooperative and financial nature. Yet, they show the characteristic

of manyfold, complex obstacles which builds the bridge to wicked problems and a lack of

functioning stakeholder communication and cooperation.

In summary, this chapter discussed the main findings of this present work in connection with

the theories used for answering the research questions. In this regard it became clear that all

interviewed stakeholders describe the water situation with the characteristics of a wicked

problem but do not clearly recognise it as such. Consequently, the methods and strategies they

utilize for addressing the problem differ widely which is also a result of the identified lack of

clear responsibilities, namely identified institutional voids. In its combination this gives

potential rise to conflict among stakeholders which can affect the solution finding process

negatively.


40

7. Conclusion

In the following, a clear conclusion will be drawn; clearer than the water in the Baltic Sea on

a bright summer day in June. In addition, implications will be addressed and an outlook

presented.

During the study it became apparent that a combination of different stakeholders are variously

affected by the water shortage on Gotland, which is caused by a combination of manifold

factors. Yet, the problem is not perceived or understood uniformly. The interviewed

stakeholders address and manage the water issue regarding their individual understanding of

the situation which was proven to not immediately improve the case.

While in theory the conceptualisation of the water shortage on Gotland as a wicked problem is

recognized by the stakeholders, they lack a practical comprehension. Since wicked problems

can only be managed but not solved, the comprehensive understanding of the stakeholders

involved is essential in order to address it effectively. To add to the complexity of the matter,

the political institutions are expressively expected to solve the problem, which due to the nature

of wicked problems cannot be achieved. Consequently, the water shortage on the island faces

institutional voids in regard to the responsibility of managing it.

It can be assumed that due to a lack of understanding of current cooperations and finding

comprehensive solution approaches are hindered. Thus, the present case reveals many

challenges and obstacles that could be overcome, but in order to do so, the problem first needs

to be recognized as such, understood and finally overcome in order to better the situation.

Consequently, an understanding of the complexity as well as interconnectedness and therewith

wicked problems is a prerequisite for a solution-finding process. Following a deep

understanding, the two components communication and cooperation were identified as

essential for addressing the problem, which can due to its nature only be managed but not

solved. The present research showed that the relevant stakeholders are only beginning to

address the water shortage. This could be partly due to the fact that the water issue has not

reached extreme proportions on Gotland yet and therefore lacks urgency. It can be seen as a

positive starting point that all stakeholders were highly motivated in relation to the case and

emphasised their interest in communication and cooperation. However, although all

stakeholders understood the situation and advocated for a more active exchange, it became

clear during some interviews that some stakeholders have reservations to talk to each other as

they seem to have a biased opinion about one another. Nonetheless, several stakeholders are

already involved in addressing the water shortage on Gotland and cooperating with each other

though the results are not yet clearly improving the situation. Yet, the involvement of multiple

stakeholders can be seen as a positive development.

Since the political sector plays an important role in creating an administrative frame for finding

solution approaches, another relevant step is to create structures, distribute and take

responsibilities in order to eliminate the existing institutional voids. This might be an important

step in order to not only discuss the problem, but to start taking action. Instead of highlighting

the differences in backgrounds and points of views, it is proposed to rather focus on mutual


41

strengths, finding common ground as well as use the various specific knowledges available.

Only resolutions that are developed with regard to all parties affected have the capacity to

satisfy all. Especially the example of the desalination plants show that one side-oriented

solution approaches do not necessarily provide the outcomes hoped for by all stakeholders.

In summary, the main findings of this research are thus that in order to address a wicked

situation accordingly three elements are essential: comprehensive understanding, as well as

multi-stakeholder communication and cooperation.

To conclude this thesis and to give an outlook to what needs to be done the authors recommend

to consider the strategy of“the problem is the plan” (Ulrika, Researcher). This implies that

every plan needs to be customized and fitting to the individual problem that due to its wicked

nature cannot be generalized and needs to be addressed by unprecedented management

approaches rather than ready made solutions. Subsequently, this necessarily open-minded and

flexible approach to handle this kind of problems can serve as a model for the art of managing,

but not solving the problem.

7.1 Wicked, but worth it – Implications and outlook

By dealing with the water situation on Gotland it became clear that it is not only necessary to

address wicked problems like the discussed water shortage but also rewarding. This will be

elaborated in the following and last chapter with regards to limitations of this thesis and

recommendations for future research. Research implications will be addressed before

proceeding to theoretical and practical implications.

Firstly, in regard to research implications, it is important to mention that in connection to water

shortage in perceived water rich areas, the present study is one of the first that sets its focus on

such a geographical area. Therefore, further research is suggested regarding this field. In

addition, there is ample room for further investigation of Northern Europe’s water shortage, as

well as the related value, justice and ethics conflicts in the shadow of political and industrial

interests. In direct connection to the paper at hand it can be fruitful to evaluate the described

approaches of tackling the water shortage on Gotland. In this regard, the water shortage on

Gotland is a chance because it has been identified and addressed as a problem, which is

accompanied by an available knowledge and resource base enhancing the chances for success.

Yet, future studies could investigate ways to enhance the understanding of wicked problems in

institutions and among stakeholders. Furthermore, since a limitation of this work is that it was

restricted to a geographically cut-off region with a limited selection of relevant stakeholder

groups, it is recommended that future research focus on other regions and stakeholders when

investigating water shortages in connection with wicked problems, institutional voids and MSP.

However, the presented case set on an island could in its exclusiveness find application in other

similar settings.

Secondly, in regard to theoretical implications of this work it could be shown that Gotland’s

water shortage was not understood as such by relevant stakeholder groups thus giving reason

to take a closer look at the theory of wicked problems. The identified problem of understanding


42

the theory could be due to a shortcoming in the theoretical background or knowledge of most

stakeholders. On the other hand, it could be assumed that many stakeholders face difficulties

in understanding the wickedness of the water shortage since the theory of wicked problems

does not provide an optimal definition of the presented case. Therefore, it may be supposed

that there are some gaps in this particular theory in regard to sustainability challenges, such as

water shortage, and that the current state of the theory does not hold water24. The examination

of the literature on wicked problems revealed that most research builds on the original work of

Rittel and Webber (1973), developed almost 50 years ago. This applies also to studies that

combine sustainability issues and wicked problems. However, problems like water shortage in

water rich countries and other current sustainability challenges have become significantly more

important during the last few years, and could be regarded as the most relevant ones of our

time (Brundtland, 1989) therewith making it a current issue. In regard to this topicality, it may

seem contradictory to connect these challenges to a framework developed in 1973. The matter

of wicked problems appears more relevant than ever, since the dimension of globalization

nowadays leads to unpredictable and complex wicked problems. Moreover, the original ten

characteristics of wicked problems by Rittel and Webber (1973) have been developed for a

class of social system problems. Sustainability issues, however, involve social, environmental

and economic issues (Elkington, 1990). Consequently, it is evident that in the context of

wicked, sustainable problems it might be time to rework the originally constructed framework.

A first attempt of such a revision was done by Duckett et al. (2016) who reframed the original

ten characteristics by condensing them into six descriptive categories for wicked

environmental problems. However, this first trial created in the researchers’ opinion six

complicated, abstract and incomprehensible categories and is consequently of limited practical

use. Therefore, one additional attempt for further research could be to further develop the

theory of wicked problems and make it applicable to a class of sustainability problems. In this

connection, the key findings of this work (comprehensive understanding of wicked problems,

communication and cooperation of stakeholders) could be a first contribution to this

amplification.

To conclude this work with practical implications, it is to mention that a further development

of the research field of wicked problems could enhance the development of long-term solution

approaches for the potentially most substantial and threatening challenges of our time:

sustainability issues. Consequently, an extension in this field seems required, since without a

shift into a more sustainable future the planet could face disastrous and irreversible

consequences that could jeopardize the wellbeing of all living on earth. In the context of water

and other resources, there needs to be a change of mindsets since the current unsustainable

attitude of “after us the deluge” is no longer tenable if this precious earth is to be preserved

for future generations. Therefore, despite all their complexity, messiness and difficulty in

addressing them, attempts to manage sustainable problems might be wicked, but absolutely

worth it.

24 The phrase “not hold water” is used when a statement or belief doesn’t hold water, it means it has some flaws

and is probably not completely true or correct.


43

8. References

Ackoff, R. 1974. Redesigning the Future. New York: Wiley.

Akerman, S. and Siltberg, T. 1991. “Dynamik och konstans i den gotländska

befolkningsutvecklingen pa 1800-talet-Resurser och människor i en brytningstid.

Landsbygd i förvandling. Gotländsk odling och bebyggelse under 1800-talet”.

Bebyggelsehistorisk Tidskrift, vol. 21, pp. 75-112.

Alcamo, J., Döll P., Henrichs, T., Kaspar, F., Lehner, B., Rösch, T. and Siebert, S. 2003.

“Global estimates of water withdrawals and availability under current and future

‘business-as-usual’ conditions”. Hydrolgical Science Journal, vol. 48, no. 1, pp 339-48.

Alcamo, J., Flörke, M. and Märker, M. 2007. “Future long-term changes in global water

resources driven by socio-economic and climatic changes”. Hydrological Science

Journal, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 247-75.

Arla Foods 2017. Visby Mejeri. Retrieved May 16, 2017, from

https://www.arla.se/bondeagda-arla/om-oss/mejerier/visby-mejeri/

Ask, J. and Ronstrom, O. (forthcoming). “Producing islandness. Visitors, visited and

destinations in tourist brochures”.

Australian Public Service Commission (APSC) 2007. “Tackling wicked problems: a public

policy perspective.” Retrieved April 29, 2017, from

http://www.apsc.gov.au/ data/assets/pdf file/ 0005/6386/wickedproblems.pdf

Baird, J., Plummer, R., Bullock, R., Dupont, D., Heinmiller, T., Jollineau, M., Kubik, W.,

Renzetti, S. and Vasseur, L. 2016. “Contemporary Water Governance: Navigating Crisis

Response and Institutional Constraints”, Water, vol. 8, no. 224.

Balint, P. J., Stewart, R. E., Desai, A., and Walters, L. C. 2011. Wicked environmental

problems: managing uncertainty and conflict. Washington: Island Press.

Bastani, M., Curtis, P. Dahlqvist, P., Erlström, M., Gustafsson, M., Jorgensen, F., Olander,

H., Persson, L., Schoning, K., Thorsbrink, M. and Triump, C. A. 2015. “SkyTEM-

undersökningar pa Gotland.” Sveriges geologiska undersökning - Geological Survey of

Sweden Rapporter och meddelanden, vol. 136, pp. 3-106.

Bixio, D., Thoeye C., De Koning J., Joksimovic D., Savic D., Wintgens T. and Melin T.

2006. “Wastewater reuse in Europe”. Desalination, vol. 18, no.1, pp. 89-101.

Brown, H. S., Vergragt, P., Green, K. and Berchicci, L. 2003, “Learning for sustainability

transition through bounded socio-technical experiments in personal mobility”, Technology

Analysis & Strategic Management, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 291-315.


44

Brown, V. A., Harris, J. A., and Russell, J. Y. 2010. Tackling wicked problems through the

transdisciplinary imagination. London: Earthscan.

Brundtland, G.H. 1987. “Our Common Future, Chairman's Foreword”. Our Common Future:

Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. UN Documents.

Retrieved March 02, 2017, from

http://www.un-documents.net/ocf-cf.htm

Bryson, J. M., and Crosby, B. C. 1992. Leadership for the common good. 1ackling public

problems in a shared-power world. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Carlsson-Kanyama, A. K., Dreborg, H., Moll, H., and Padovan, D. 2008. “Participative

Backcasting: A tool for involving stakeholders in local sustainability planning”. Futures,

vol. 40, pp. 34-46.

Casey, D. and Murphy, K. 2009. “Issues in using methodological triangulation in

research”. Nurse Researcher, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 40-55.

Cementa 2017. Hållbarhet. Retrieved April 17, 2017, from

http://www.cementa.se/sv/hallbarhet

Conklin, J. 2005. Wicked problems and social complexity, in dialogue mapping: Building

shared understanding of wicked problems. Wiley: West Sussex.

Crotty, J. 2012. Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: SAGE Publications.

Dorado, S. and Ventresca, M.J. 2013. “Crescive entrepreneurship in complex social

problems: Institutional conditions for entrepreneurial engagement”. Journal of Business

Venturing, vol. 28, pp. 69-82.

Duckett, D., Feliciano, D., Martin-Ortega, J. and Munoz-Rojas, J. 2016. “Tackling wicked

environmental problems: The discourse and its influence on praxis in Scotland”.

Landscape Urban Planning. Retrieved April 25, 2017, from

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.03.015

Elkington, J. 1999. Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business,

Oxford: Capstone.

Ericson I Ubbholt. 2017. “Historielöshet genomsyrar klimatdebatten nu om vattenbrist.”

Miljö- energi- och klimatblogg. Retrieved March 15, 2017, from

http://www.ericsoniubbhult.se/visa.lasso?ukat_id=8000000000065215&kat_id=8450000000

0010197&mall=1-spalt.lasso

Falkenmark M., Berntell A., Jägerskog A., Lundqvist J., Matz M., and Tropp H. 2007. “On


45

the verge of a new water scarcity: a call for good governance and human ingenuity”.

Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI.) Retrieved March 03, 2017, from

http://www.siwi.org/publications/on-the-verge-of-a-new-water-scarcity/

Falkenmark M., Lundqvist J. and Widstrand C. 1989. “Macro-scale water scarcity requires

micro-scale approaches”, Natural Resources Forum, vol. 13, no. 1 pp. 258-67.

Feldmann, L. F. 2012. Water. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Frame, B. and Brown, J. 2007. “Developing post-normal technologies for sustainability”.

Ecological Economics, vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 225-241.

Funtowiczi, S. and Ravetzii, J. 2003. “Post-Normal Science”. International Society for

Ecological Economics. Internet Encyclopaedia of Ecological. Institute for the Protection

and Security of the Citizen (IPSC), European Commission. Research Methods

Consultancy, London, England. Economics. Retrieved April 22, 2017, from

http://isecoeco.org/pdf/pstnormsc.pdf

Gain, A. K., Giupponi, C. and Wada, Y. 2016. “Measuring global water security towards

sustainable development goals”. Environmental Research Letters, vol. 11, no.1.

Gleick, P.H. 1993. Water in Crisis: A Guide to the World’s Fresh Water Resources.

Oxford New York: University Press.

Gleick, P. H. 1996. Basic water requirements for human activities: Meeting basic needs.

Water international, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 83-92.

Gleick P. H. 2003. “Water use”. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, vol. 28, no.

1, pp. 275-314.

Gleick, P. H., and Palaniappan, M. 2010. “Peak water limits to freshwater withdrawal and

use”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 107, no.1, pp. 11155-11162.

Golafshani, N. 2003. “Understanding Reliability and Validity in Qualitative

Research”. Qualitative Report, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 597-606.

Gotlands Kommun 2005. “Vattenplan för Gotlands Kommun. 2005”. Ledningskontoret,

Miljö- och hälsoskyddskontoret, Stadsarkitektkontoret, Tekniska förvaltningen. Retrieved

March 02, 2017, from

http://www.gotland.se/41892

Grimstedt, L. 2012. “Aktivister och polis i sammandrabbning vid avverkning på Gotland”.

Verbunduk & Skogsland. Land. Retrieved April 06, 2017, from

http://www.lantbruk.com/skog/aktivister-och-polis-i-sammandrabbning-vid-avverkning-

pa-gotland


46

Grin, J., Rotmans, J., and Schot, J. 2010. Transitions to Sustainable Development, New

Directions in the Study of Long Term Transformative Change. New York: Routledge.

Gunda, T., Benneyworth, L. and Burchfield, E. 2015. “Exploring water indices and

associated parameters: a case study approach”. Water Policy, vol. 17, no. 1, p. 98.

Gupta, J., Akhmouch, A., Cosgrove, W., Hurwitz, Z., Maestu, J. and Ünver, O. 2013.

“Policymakers’ reflections on water governance issues”. Ecology and Society, vol. 18,

no. 1. Retreived April 13, 2017, from

http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol18/iss1/art35/

Hajer, M. 2003. “Policy without polity? Policy analysis and the institutional void”.

Department of Political Science, University of Amsterdam. Policy Sciences, vol. 36, pp.

175-195.

Head, B. W. and Alford, J. 2015. “Wicked problems: Implications for public policy and

management”. Administration and Society, vol. 47, no. 6, pp. 711-739.

Healey, P. 1998. “Collaborative planning in a stakeholder society”. Town Planning Review,

vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 1-21.

Healy, S. 2011. “Post-normal science in postnormal times”. Futures, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 202-

220.

Hemmati, M. with contributions from Dodds, F., Enyati, J., and McHarry, J. 2002. Multi-

Stakeholder processes for governance and sustainability: beyond deadlock and conflict.

London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.

Hochstrat, R. and Wintgens, T. 2003. “AQUAREC”, Report on Milestone M3I, Draft of

wastewater reuse potential estimation, Interim report. Retrieved March 19, 2017 from:

http://www.gotland.se/89983

Innes, J., and Booher, D. E. 2010. Planning with complexity: an introduction to collaborative

rationality for public policy. New York: Routledge.

Johansson, A. R., 2003. Arbetarrörelse på en ö. Del 1. Pa Gotland fram till 1914. Gotland:

Haimdagars Förlag.

Jury, W. A. and Vaux, H. J. Jr. 2005. “The role of science in solving the world’s emerging

water problems”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 102, no. 44, pp.

15715–15720.

Jury, W. A. and Vaux, H. J. Jr. 2007. “The emerging global water crisis: managing scarcity

and conflict between water users Advances”. Agronomy, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 1-76.


47

Kanae, S. and Oki, T. 2006. “Global Hydrological Cycles and World Water Resources”.

Science, vol. 313, no. 1, pp. 1068-1072.

Kovacic, S. F. and Sousa-Poza, A. 2013. Managing and Engineering in Complex

Situations. Heidelberg: Springer Dordrecht.

Länsstyrelsen Gotlands Län, 2017. “Vatten och vattenanvändning”. Startsida. Miljö &

klimat. Vatten och vattenanvändning. Retrieved March 03, 2017, from

http://www.lansstyrelsen.se/Gotland/Sv/miljo-och-klimat/vatten-och

vattenanvandning/Pages/ default.aspx

Länsstyrelsen Gotlands Län. 2017. “Water and water usage”. Home page. Environment &

climate. Water and water usage. Retrieved April 03, 2017 from

http://www.lansstyrelsen.se/Gotland/En/miljo-och-klimat/vatten-och-

vattenanvandning/Pages/default.aspx

Länsstyrelsen Gotlands län 2017. “The County Administrative Board”. Retrieved 17. May

2017, from

http://www.lansstyrelsen.se/Gotland/En/Pages/default.aspx

Lehner B., Döll P., Alcamo J., Henrichs T. and Kasper F. 2006. “Estimating the impact of

global change on flood and drought risks in Europe: a continental integrated analysis”.

Climate Change, vol. 75, no. 1, pp. 273-99.

Lincoln, Y. S., and Guba, E.G. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE

Publications.

Lindegren, E. and K. 1976. Människor och miljöer. Gotland: Gotlands Konst AB.

Mayring, P. 2000. “Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse”, Qualitative Social Research, vol. 1, no. 2.

McConell, A. 2016. “Reappraising Wicked Problems: Wicked Policy vs. Simple Politics”.

Paper Presented at Political Studies Association (PSA). Department of Government and

International Relations School of Social and Political Sciences University of Sydney.

Retrieved April 30, 2017, from

https://www.psa.ac.uk/sites/default/files/conference/papers/2016/PSA%202016%20McCo

nnell%20WIcked%20Problems%20COMPLETE.pdf

MittResVader 2017. “Gotland: Klimat och historiskt väder”. Klima på Gotland. Retrieved

March 31, 2017, from

http://www.mittresvader.se/l/sverige/klimat-gotland-temperaturer-vattentemperatur.php

Müller, J.M., 2001. Reforming the United Nations: The Quiet Revolution. The Hague:

Kluwer Law International.


48

North, D. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

O’Connor, M. 1999. “Dialogue and debate in a post-normal practice of science: a reflexion.

Futures”, Futures, vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 671-687.

O’Lear, S. 2010. Environmental politics: Scale and power. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Öhrman, R. 1991. “Bonden här gör vad han vill - om gotländskt jordbruk under 1800-talet.

Landsbygd i förvandling. Gotländsk odling och bebyggelse under 1800-talet”.

Bebyggelsehistorisk Tidskrift, vol. 21, pp. 113-138.

Oki, T. and Kanae, S. 2006. “Global hydrological cycles and world water resources”.

Science, vol. 313, no. 1, pp. 1068-1072.

Olofsson, R. 1992. Gård och bygd i förändring. Omlag: Harald Norrby.

Olsson, L. and Öhrman, R. 1996. Gotland Past and present. Gotland: Gotlands

Lämmedelscentra.

Ostrom E. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective

Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ostrom E. 1999. “Revisiting the Commons: Local Lessons, Global Challenges”, Science.

vol. 284, no. 1, pp. 278-282.

Ostrom E., 2000. “Reformulating the Commons”. Swiss Political Science Review, vol. 6, no.

1, pp. 29-52.

Padowski, J. C., Gorelick S. M, Thompson, B. H., Rozelle S. and Fendorf, S. 2015.

“Assessment of human–natural system characteristics influencing global freshwater

supply vulnerability”. Environmental Research Letters, vol. 10, no. 1.

Pearce, F. 2007. When the rivers run dry: Water - the defining crisis of the twenty-first

century. Boston: Beacon Press.

Persson, G. 2015. “Climate in Sweden 1860-2014. Klimatologi.” Swedish Meteorological

and Hydrological Institute. Retrieved March 25, 2017, from

http://www.smhi.se/en/publications/climate-in-sweden-1860-2014-1.89804

Polit, D. F. and Beck, C. T. 2012. Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for

nursing practice. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.


49

Ponterotto, J. G. 2005. “Qualitative research in counseling psychology: A primer on research

paradigms and philosophy of science”. Journal of counseling psychology, vol. 52, no. 2,

p. 126.

Postel, S., Daily, G. C. and Ehrlich, P. R. 1996. “Human appropriation of renewable fresh

water”. Science, vol. 271, no. 1, pp. 785-788.

Pryshlakivsky, J. and Searcy, C. 2013. “Sustainable Development as a Wicked Problem”, in

S. F. Kovacic and A. Sousa-Poza (eds.), Managing and Engineering in Complex

Situations. Heiderberg: Springer Dordrecht, pp. 109-128.

Radio Sweden 2016. “Sweden: Gotland & Öland could face severe water shortage.” Eye on

the article. Retrieved March 12, 2017, from

http://www.rcinet.ca/eye-on-the-arctic/2016/03/17/sweden-gotland-oland-could-face-

severe-water-shortage/

Ravetz, J. 2011. “Postnormal Science and the maturing of the structural contradictions of

modern European science”. Futures, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 142-148.

Region Gotland 2015. “Gotland in Figures 2015”. Facts and Statistics. Region Gotland.

Region Gotland, 2017. “Spara Vatten”. Retrieved May 16, 2017, from

http://www.gotland.se/sparavatten

Rittel, H. W. J. and Webber, M. M. 1973. “Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning”,

Policy Sciences, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 155-169

Robson, J. and Robson I. 1996. “From shareholders to stakeholders: critical issues from

tourism marketers”. Tourism Management, vol. 17, pp. 7, pp. 533-540.

Rockström 2009. “A safe operating space for humanity”. Nature, vol. 461, no.1, pp. 472-475.

Saldana, J., Leavy, P., and Beretvas, N. 2011. Fundamentals of Qualitative Research.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Salman A. M. S. and McInerney-Lankford S. 2004. “The Human Right to Water: Legal and

Policy Dimensions”, Washington, DC: World Bank Documents. Retrieved March 16,

2017, from

http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/219811468157522364/The-human-right-to-

water-legal-and-policy-dimensions

Sardar, Z. 2010. Welcome to postnormal times. Futures, vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 435-444.


50

Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. 2012. Research Methods for Business Students. 6th

Edition. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.

Shindler, B. A. and Cramer, L. A. 1999. “Shifting public values for forest management:

Making sense of wicked problems”. Western Journal of Applied Forestry, vol. 14, no. 1,

pp. 28-34.

Silvermann, D. 1997. Qualitative Research – Theory, Method and Practice. London: SAGE

Publications Ltd.

Smith A.L. and Rogers D.V. 1990. “Isle of Wight water metering trial”. Journal – Institution

of Water and Environmental Management, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 403-409.

Srinivasan V., Lambin E. F., Gorelick S. M., Thompson, B. H. and Rozelle, S. 2012. “The

nature and causes of the global water crisis: syndromes from a meta-analysis of coupled

human – water studies”. Water Resource Research, vol. 48, no. 1.

Staddon, C. 2010. Managing Europe's Water Resources: twenty-first century challenges.

London: Taylor and Francis.

Suleiman, L. and Khakee, A. 2017. “Rethinking water reform policies as a ‘wicked problem’

the case of urban water supply in Ghana”, International Planning Studies. Retrieved April

03, 2017, from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313812316_Rethinking_water_reform_policies_

as_a_%27wicked_problem%27_the_case_of_urban_water_supply_in_Ghana

Sveriges Radio 2016. “Farmers in southeast struggle with dry spell”. Radio Sweden.


http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&artikel=6535006

Sveriges Radio 2016a. “Water shortage in southern Sweden spreads”. Radio Sweden.


http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&artikel=6483645

Sveriges Radio 2017. “Regionen får sänka vattennivån i Tingstäde träsk”. Radio Sweden.

Retrieved May 16, 2017, from

http://sverigesradio.se/sida/gruppsida.aspx?programid=94&grupp=22974&artikel=

6690471

Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI) 2015. “Urban Water Vision”.


https://www.smhi.se/en/research/research-departments/hydrology/urban-water-vision-eng-

1.22093

http://sverigesradio.se/sida/gruppsida.aspx?programid=94&grupp=22974&artikel=6690471

http://sverigesradio.se/sida/gruppsida.aspx?programid=94&grupp=22974&artikel=6690471


51

Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI) 2016. “Markägare samlar vatten

på Gotland. Start. Nyhetsarkiv. Markägare samlar vatten på Gotland”. Retrieved March

31, 2017, from

https://www.smhi.se/nyhetsarkiv/markagare-samlar-vatten-pa-gotland-1.111631

Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI) 2017. “Climate impacts – water

in the future”. Retrieved March 25, 2017, from

https://www.smhi.se/en/research/research-departments/hydrology/climate-impacts-

water-in-the-future-1.7897

Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute - The Geological Survey of Sweden

(SMHI SGU) 2017. “Beräknade grundvattennivåer. Diagram. Valt område: välj område i

kartan”. Retrieved March 25, 2017, from

http://grundvatten.nu/modelgroundwater/client-sgu/index.html

The Swedish Portal for Climate Change (SPCC), 2016. “Groundwater. Climate Change.

Precipitation. Groundwater 2016”. Retrieved March 27, 2017, from

http://www.klimatanpassning.se/en/climate-change-in-sweden/precipitation/groundwater-

1.97810

Thompson, R. 1993. “Future Droughts, Water Shortages in Parts of Western Europe”. EOS,

vol. 74, no. 14, pp. 161-165.

TT/The Local 2015. “Sweden moves to save disputed Gotland forest”. The local SE.


https://www.thelocal.se/20150831/government-moves-to-save-disputed-gotland-forest-

ojnare-mining

UN-Water (2014). “UN-Water: Home.” Retrieved March 20, 2017, from

http://www.unwater.org/

United Nations (UN) 2015. “Sustainable Development Goals”. Retrieved February 1, 2017,

from

http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/

United Nations (UN) 2016. “Sustainable Development Goals”. Retrieved March 20, 2017,

from

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/?menu=1300

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) 2006. “Human development report 2006:

Beyond scarcity: Power, poverty and the global water crisis”. Retrieved March 22, 2017,

from

http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/267/hdr06-complete.pdf


52

Vörösmarty C. J., Green, P., Salisbury, J. and Lammers, R. B. 2000. “Global water resources:

vulnerability from climate change and population growth”. Science, vol. 289, pp. 284-

288.

Walsham, G. 1993. Interpreting Information Systems in Organizations. Wiley: Chichester.

Weber, E., Memon, A., and Painter, B. 2011. “Science society and water resources in New

Zealand: Recognizing and overcoming a societal impasse”. Journal of Environmental

Policy and Planning, vol. 13, pp. 49-69.

Widegren, P. 2017. “Allvarlig vattenbrist på Gotland”. SVT Nyheter. Retrieved April 07,

2017, from

http://www.svt.se/nyheter/lokalt/ost/vattenbrist-pa-gotland-1

Wimmer F., Audsley E., Malsy M., Savin C., Dunford R., Harrison P. A., Schaldach R. and

Floerke M. 2014. “Modelling the effects of cross-sectoral water allocation schemes in

Europe”. Europe Climate Change, vol. 128, pp. 229-44.

Wouters P. 1997. International Water Law: Selected Writings of Professor Charles B.

London: Kluwer Law International.

Ziolkowska, J. R. and Ziolkowski, B. 2016. “Effectiveness of Water Management in Europe

in the 21st Century”. Water Resour Management vol. 30, pp. 2261-2274.


VIII

VI. Appendix

Appendix I: Ten Characteristics of wicked problems (Rittel & Webber, 1973):

1. There is no definitive formulation of a wicked problem.

2. Wicked problems have no “stopping rule” (i.e., no definitive solution).

3. Solutions to wicked problems are not true or false, but good or bad.

4. There is no immediate and no ultimate test of a solution to a wicked problem.

5. Every (attempted) solution to a wicked problem is a “one-shot operation”; the results

cannot be readily undone, and there is no opportunity to learn by trial and error.

6. Wicked problems do not have an enumerable (or an exhaustively describable) set of

potential solutions, nor is there a well-described set of permissible operations that may

be incorporated into the plan.

7. Every wicked problem is essentially unique.

8. Every wicked problem can be considered to be a symptom of another problem.

9. The existence of a discrepancy representing a wicked problem can be explained in

numerous ways.

10. The planner has no “right to be wrong” (i.e., there is no public tolerance of experiments

that fail)


IX

Appendix II: Questionaire master thesis water shotage on Gotland:

1. Could you please describe the current issue regarding the availability of water on

Gotland

2. Would you categorize the situation on Gotland rather as water scarcity or water

shortage? (further information about the terms will be provided by the authors if the

interviewee is not aware of the distingtions)

3. How do you see your role in contributing to this situation?

4. A wicked problem is characterized as an extremely complex, not solvable but only

manageable problem. This means, one has to find ways to manage those wicked

problems in order to not worsening the outcomes for al life on the planet caused by

them. How do you see the connection between wicked problems and the water

situation on Gotland?

5. Who do you think are the main actors causing the water shortage/scarcity on Gotland?

What responsibility do they have?

6. What do you do in order to address and manage water shortage/scarcity on Gotland?

7. What would be, in your opinion, the ideal way to manage the current water situation

on Gotland?

8. What would be the ideal outcome when addressing water scarcity/shortage correctly?

9. What needs to be done in order to achieve this in the specific case of Gotland?


X

Appendix III: Deductive and inductive categories derived from the theories and used

for analysing the stakeholder interviews:

Chosen deductive categories, grouped:

Understanding of the situation:

Category 1: Stakeholders’ understanding of the current situation on Gotland

Category 2: Terminology: water shortage vs. water scarcity

Stakeholders:

Category 3: Perception of involved actors and stakeholder responsibility

Category 5: Stakeholder cooperation

Category 8: Stakeholders’ strategies and solution approaches

Institutional voids:

Category 4: Institutional voids

Water:

Category 6: Value of Water

Category 7: Water and Sustainability

Wicked Problems:

Category 9: Understanding of the complexity of the problem – a wicked problem?

Category 10: Management of the wicked problem water shortage in the light of sustainability

Chosen inductive categories:

Category 11: Conflict sources and barriers

Category 12: Connection to related problems