There is a lot of water around Portland. Sharing water resources among different entities and users poses formidable governance challenges. The course deals with governing fresh and sea waters, and also places Oregonian water issues in a broader comparative context. Using the Klamath river as a current water governance issue, course participants collaboratively explore this Oregonian case in a research seminar setting, including some field work. On a theoretical level, this course examines governing with and without the involvement of government.
This course is listed at the 400-level for a reason. This will be a collaborative research seminar to jointly explore water politics around the Klamath river basin. Each research paper will contribute to a collaborative effort to analyze water governance in this transboundary river system shared by Oregon, California, and native American nations.
Much of our research will be of primary nature including field work and interviews. Please expect to spend two weekends on group trips for research in the Klamath basin.
This could be a great way to get accustomed to research techniques that can be helpful in writing theses, but please do not try to tackle a thesis on a different subject AND research for this course simultaneously – this may be overwhelming, unless the course research directly ties in with your thesis.
Combining this course with Tamara Venit’s Hist 371 Environmental History of the American West and Noel Netusil’s Econ 352 Natural Resource Economics could provide you with three different disciplinary perspectives on a highly interesting issue area. A great way to pursue this in depth – especially if you consider it a potential thesis topic.
Books to purchase
Conca, Ken. 2006. Governing water: contentious transnational politics and global institution building. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Doremus, Holly D., and A. Dan Tarlock. 2008. Anatomy of a water war in the Klamath basin: macho law, combat biology, and dirty politics. Washington DC: Island Press.
Ostrom, Elinor. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Evera, Stephen. 1997. Guide to Methods for Students of Political Science. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Starting Bibliography for Individual Research
Finger, Matthias, Ludivine Tamiotti, and Jeremy Allouche, eds. 2006. The multi-governance of water: four case studies, SUNY series in global politics. Albany: State University of New York Press (available through Summit).
Harden, Blaine. 1996. A river lost: the life and death of the Columbia. New York: W.W. Norton.
Lang, William L., and Robert C. Carriker, eds. 1999. Great river of the West: essays on the Columbia River. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Most, Stephen. 2006. River of renewal: myth and history in the Klamath Basin. Portland: Oregon Historical Society Press in association with University of Washington Press Seattle & London.
Ostrom, Elinor. 1992. Crafting institutions for self-governing irrigation systems. San Francisco, Calif.; Lanham, Md.: ICS Press (Available through Summit)
Pierre, Jon, ed. 2000. Debating Governance: Authority, Steering, and Democracy. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
Thomas, Craig W. 2003. Bureaucratic landscapes: interagency cooperation and the preservation of biodiversity. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press (available through Summit).
Wohl, Ellen E. 2004. Disconnected rivers: linking rivers to landscapes. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Worster, Donald. 1985. Rivers of Empire: Water, Aridity, and the Growth of the American West. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Introduction to the course and its requirements (9/2).
Reading: Peace on the Klamath, High Country News, 23 June 2008 (on Moodle)
Nørgaard, Asbjørn S. 2008. Political Science: Witchcraft or Craftsmanship? Standards for Good Research. World Political Science Review 4 (1).
Research colloquium: human subjects review (9/4).
Most research involving human subjects - including our fieldwork - requires authorization from the institutional review board (IRB). Reed's own policies, procedures, and resources are available at: http://web.reed.edu/human_subjects/.
Reading: Hauck, Robert J. P. 2008. Protecting Human Research Participants, IRBs, and Political Science Redux: Editor's Introduction. PS: Political Science & Politics 41 (03):475-6.
Levine, Felice J., and Paula R. Skedsvold. 2008. Where the Rubber Meets the Road: Aligning IRBs and Research Practice. PS: Political Science & Politics 41 (03):501-5.
Porter, Tony. 2008. Research Ethics Governance and Political Science in Canada. PS: Political Science & Politics 41 (03):495-9.
Seligson, Mitchell A. 2008. Human Subjects Protection and Large-N Research: When Exempt is Non-Exempt and Research is Non-Research. PS: Political Science & Politics 41 (03):477-82.
Tolleson-Rinehart, Sue. 2008. A Collision of Noble Goals: Protecting Human Subjects, Improving Health Care, and a Research Agenda for Political Science. PS: Political Science & Politics 41 (03):507-11.
Yanow, Dvora, and Peregrine Schwartz-Shea. 2008. Reforming Institutional Review Board Policy: Issues in Implementation and Field Research. PS: Political Science & Politics 41 (03):483-94.
Assignment: Meet as a group and prepare all paperwork required by Reed's Human Subjects Research Committee. Establish contact with the committee (Tamara Metz is a member …) and submit in time for authorization in time for our first field trip (9/19).
Case study background: Klamath River Basin I (9/9)
Reading: Doremus and Tarlock, chapters 1-4
Assignment: Start mapping the stakeholders involved in the Klamath Basin water disputes. Consider not only directly affected parties (farmers, tribes, recreational users etc.), but also third parties (experts, interest groups etc.). Gather as many names and contact information of individuals and organizations as you can. We will share and consolidate our lists on Thursday.
Research colloquium: identifying stakeholders (9/11)
Reading: Hare, Matt. 2003. A Guide to Group Model Building: How to help stakeholders participate in building and discussing models in order to improve understanding of resource management. Seecon Deutschland. (This text is meant for assessment processes involving stakeholders. However, the various models can be helpful for any kind of [group] model building. These can be helpful when thinking about stakeholders, issues, and their linkages.)
Case study background: Klamath River Basin II (9/16)
Reading: Doremus and Tarlock, chapters 5- 8
Assignment: Map the issues and their linkages affecting Klamath River water governance. We will compare our notes on Thursday to define the scope of our research project.
Research colloquium: Defining the issue at stake (9/18)
Field trip to the Klamath Basin (9/19-9/21)
Meet at the vans behind the sports center at 1 PM. We will be camping at the Keno reservoir right on the Klamath river. Get your camping gear from the Outdoor Co-Op prior to our departure.
A good historical read for the road: Worster, Donald. 1982. Hydraulic Society in California: An Ecological Interpretation. Agricultural History 56 (3):503-15 (short).
———. 1985. Rivers of Empire: Water, Aridity, and the Growth of the American West. Oxford: Oxford University Press (book-length).
Governing the Commons I (9/23)
Reading: Ostrom, chapters 1-3
Defining the research question (9/25)
Reading: Baglione, Lisa A. 2006. Writing a Research Paper in Political Science: A Practical Guide to Inquiry, Structure, and Methods. Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Education, ch. 1-2, p. 1-30 (on Moodle).
Laurence F. Jones and Edward C. Olson (1996): Political Science Research: A Handbook of Scope and Methods. Chapter 2: The Problem: Essence of the Research Project, p.22-29 (on Moodle).
Assignment: Suggest a causal research question for our research project. Start researching it. Draft a proposal, consisting of the question, its significance, and brief overview of existing research on the topic (if any). No more than two pages. Be prepared to present and discuss your suggestions the following week.
Governing the Commons II (9/30)
Reading: Ostrom, chapters 4 - 6
Writing a literature review and assembling a theoretical framework (10/2)
A review of the existing literature is a key component of a research paper. Researching the literature shows you what has already been written on the subject and provides you with an idea of the theoretical and methodological approaches taken by other researchers.
Reading: Baglione, ch. 3: Adressing the Scholarly Debate: The Literature Review, p.31-58
John W. Cresswell (2003): Research Design - Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, Second Edition. Chapter 2: Review of the Literature, p. 27-48 (on Moodle).
Assignment: Assemble a bibliography of relevant literature (both theoretical and topical); start drafting a review of existing scholarship and analyses. Coordinate individual contributions to the review among seminar participants to minimize overlap.
Optional: Research Boot-Camp: library research, literature review with the Comparative Politics POL220 course (10/3; 3 - 6 PM: meet in Eliot 314).
Field work planning (10/7)
Assignment: Draft questions to ask in your field work. We will discuss your questions and interview strategies on Thursday.
Field work and interviewing (10/9)
Reading: Aberbach, Joel D., and Bert A. Rockman. 2002. Conducting and Coding Elite Interviews. PS: Political Science and Politics 35 (4):673-6.
Berry, Jeffrey M. 2002. Validity and Reliability Issues in Elite Interviewing. PS: Political Science and Politics 35 (4):679-82.
Goldstein, Kenneth. 2002. Getting in the Door: Sampling and Completing Elite Interviews. PS: Political Science and Politics 35 (4):669-72.
Leech, Beth L. 2002. Interview Methods in Political Science. PS: Political Science and Politics 35 (4):663-4.
———. 2002. Asking Questions: Techniques for Semistructured Interviews. PS: Political Science and Politics 35 (4):665-8.
Rivera, Sharon Werning, Polina M. Kozyreva, and Eduard G. Sarovskii. 2002. Interviewing Political Elites: Lessons from Russia. PS: Political Science and Politics 35 (4):683-8.
Woliver, Laura R. 2002. Ethical Dilemmas in Personal Interviewing. PS: Political Science and Politics 35 (4):677-8.
Assignment: Practice by interviewing seminar participants and friends. You want to be ready for "real" interviews over the weekend. Confirm scheduled interview appointments.
Field work in the Klamath Basin (10/10-10/12)
Meet at the vans behind the sports center at 1 PM. Check out camping gear from the Outdoor Co-Op.
Field work de-briefing (10/14)
Qualitative data analysis (10/16)
Reading: McNabb, David E. 2004. Research methods for political science: quantitative and qualitative methods. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe, ch. 29: Analysis Methods for Qualitative Data, p. 433-450.
Fall Break (great opportunity for more field work)
Governing Water I (10/28)
Reading: Conca, chapters 1-3
In-Depth preparation: Devin (chapters 1-2), Angie (chapter 3)
Policy Networks (10/30)
Reading: Waarden, Frans van. "Dimensions and Types of Policy Networks." European Journal of Political Research 21, no. 1-2 (1992): 29-52.
Baumgartner, Frank R., and Bryan D. Jones. "Agenda Dynamics and Policy Subsystems." The Journal of Politics 53, no. 4 (1991): 1044-74.
Weible, Christopher M. "An Advocacy Coalition Framework Approach to Stakeholder Analysis: Understanding the Political Context of California Marine Protected Area Policy." J Public Adm Res Theory 17, no. 1 (2007): 95-117.
Governing Water II (11/4)
Reading: Conca, chapters 4-7
In-Depth preparation: Xeno (chapter 4), Sam (chapter 5), Melati (chapter 6), Adrienne (chapter 7)
Writing up qualitative research (11/6)
Reading: Wolcott, Harry F. Writing up Qualitative Research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications, 2001. Library: T11 .W65 2001
Governing Water III (11/11)
Reading: Conca, chapters 8-10
In-Depth preparation: Bailey (chapte 8), Marcus (chapters 9-10)
Workshop: Computer-based qualitative data analysis (11/13)
Reading: Cousins, Ken, and Wayne McIntosh. "More Than Typewriters, More Than Adding Machines: Integrating Information Technology into Political Research." Quality and Quantity 39, no. 5 (2005): 581-614.
Science and policy: Epistemic Communities (11/18)
Reading: Haas, Peter M. "Do Regimes Matter? Epistemic Communities and Mediterranean Pollution Control." International Organization 43 (1989): 377-403.
———. "Introduction: Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination." International Organization 46, no. 1 (1992): 1-35.
Science, Framing, and Power on the Klamath (11/20)
The wider literature: Watershed governance elsewhere (11/25)
Rieke, Elizabeth Ann. "The Bay-Delta Accord: A Stride toward Sustainability." University of Colorado Law Review 67, no. Spring (1996): 341-69.
Huffman, James L. "Comprehensive River Basin Management: The Limits of Collaborative, Stakeholder-Based, Water Governance." Portland, OR: Lewis & Clark Law School, 2008.
Lubell, Mark, Mark Schneider, John T. Scholz, and Mihriye Mete. "Watershed Partnerships and the Emergence of Collective Action Institutions." American Journal of Political Science 46, no. 1 (2002): 148-63.
Watershed governance in Europe (12/2)
Reading: Hoornbeek, John A. "Policy-Making Institutions and Water Policy Outputs in the European Union and the United States: A Comparative Analysis." Journal of European Public Policy 11, no. 3 (2004): 461-96.