Actors' feedback on practices for improvement of water quality in FAIRWAY case studies and interim project results
|Main authors:||Janja Rudolf, Špela Železnikar, Matjaž Glavan, Andrej Udovč, Sindre Langaas, Marina Pintar|
|FAIRWAYiS Editor:||Jane Brandt|
|Source document:||Rudolf, J. et al. (2019) Actor's feedback on practices for improvement of water quality in FAIRWAY case studies and interim project results. FAIRWAY Project Deliverable 7.2 52 pp|
In this section of FAIRWAYiS we present the feedback obtained on the evidence-based practices in the different FAIRWAY case studies to improve water quality, building on the work described in »Barriers and issues in providing integrated scientific support for EU policy
We summarise and discuss feedback obtained from members of the multi-actor platforms on the evidence-based practices for water quality improvement of the different FAIRWAY case studies. The questionnaire we used aimed to evaluate possible correlations between the EU and local level on barriers and issues in providing integrated scientific support for policy regulations related to drinking water resource protection against diffuse pollution of nitrates and pesticides from agriculture.
There was general agreement among the MAPs that stronger involvement of all actors in the science-policy interface is a solution for science integration into policy. Most respondents also agree or strongly agree that it is good that member states have a voice in solving problems on local level relating agricultural pollution of drinking water resources and that MAPs are the right way to engage stakeholders in this issue closely. However, the idea of separation of pesticides and nitrates in projects and policy communications has considerably lower support in the MAPs as on EU level.
»Actors' feedback on practices for the improvement of water quality in case studies
Secondly we presented interim results from FAIRWAY's research programme to a Joint Policy Conference meeting held in Brussels on 7th December 2018 and asked the participants their opinions on the usefulness of the results to different stakeholder groups, such as researchers, local, regional and national authorities, agro-industry, SMEs, NGOs and farmers.
The respondents stressed that there is an absolute need to have the key and essential final project results presented shorter and in a language understandable to policymakers. The idea of possible long-term relationship/communication flows between research projects and political agenda, including Taskforce water intending to design project clusters seems very useful to the vast majority of respondents. The respondents agreed that the most effective ways to receive interim project results are presentations at conferences and workshops or via executive summaries of deliverables. The final results of the project can be best communicated via executive summaries of deliverables, and by conferences/workshops, articles in scientific journals and YouTube videos.
»Actors' feedback on practices for water quality improvement in interim project results