Advertisement

Water Mismanagement as a Wicked Problem in Nauli City, Indonesia: A Mixed-Method Approach

  • Jackwin Simbolan
  • Janet McIntyre-MillsEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Contemporary Systems Thinking book series (CST)

Abstract

The paper discusses the water management problem in Nauli City, Indonesia as a wicked problem that needs to be addressed by applying a critical systemic approach to the area of concern. Mixed methods will be applied to examine the wicked problem by using sequential stages of qualitative method followed by a quantitative method. Interviews with water providers and water users showed that water management conflicts have occurred and water has been used as a commodity while neglecting the quality of service. The hypothesis test through a quantitative method revealed that current condition is significantly worse than the previous (10 years ago) condition. This paper recommends that the wicked problem should be addressed by considering at least three aspects: governance, demand management, and preserving the environment.

Keywords

Mixed methods Wicked problem Water management 

References

  1. Aberbach, J. D., & Christensen, T. (2005). Citizens and consumers. Public Management Review, 7(2), 225–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abidin, H. Z., Djaja, R., Darmawan, D., Hadi, S., Akbar, A., Rajiyowiryono, H., Sudibyo, Y., Meilano, I., Kasuma, M., & Kahar, J. (2001). Land subsidence of Jakarta (Indonesia) and its geodetic monitoring system. Natural Hazards, 23(2), 365–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ackoff, R. L. (1974). Redesigning the future (p. 29). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  4. Arsovska, J. (2012). Researching difficult populations: Interviewing techniques and methodological issues in face-to-face interviews in the study of organized crime. In L. Gideon (Ed.), Handbook of survey methodology for the social sciences (pp. 397–415). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Australian Public Service Commission. (2007). Tackling wicked problems: A public policy perspective. Canberra: Australian Public Service Commission.Google Scholar
  6. Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Bethea, N. B. (2011). Science foundations: The water cycle. New York: Chelsea House, 978-1-4381-3885-5.Google Scholar
  8. Biswas, A. K. (1999). Water crisis: Current perceptions and future realities. Water International, 24(4), 363–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Biswas, A. K. (2001). Water policies in the developing world. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 17(4), 11.Google Scholar
  10. Biswas, A. K., & Tortajada, C. (2001). Development and large dams: A global perspective. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 17(1), 9–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Biswas, A. K., & Tortajada, C. (2010). Future water governance: Problems and perspectives. Water Resources Development, 26(2), 129–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. BPPSPAM. (2014). Kinerja PDAM 2013 Wilayah IV (PDAM Performance 2013 Region IV). Jakarta: Badan Pendukung Sistem Penyediaan Air Minum.Google Scholar
  13. BPS Nauli City. (2006). Nauli city in figures 2005. Nauli: BPS of Nauli City.Google Scholar
  14. BPS Nauli City. (2015). Nauli City in figures 2014, BPS of Nauli City, Nauli.Google Scholar
  15. BPS Nauli City. (2016). Nauli city in figures 2015. Nauli: BPS of Nauli City.Google Scholar
  16. Bricki, N., & Green, J. (2007). A guide to using qualitative research methodology. Geneva: Médecins Sans Frontières.Google Scholar
  17. Chahine, M. T. (1992). The hydrological cycle and its influence on climate. Nature, 359(6394), 373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chea, V. (2007). From bad service to outstanding water utility: Phnom Penh’s experience. In Going public: Southern solutions to the global water crisis. London: World Development Movement.Google Scholar
  19. Christakis, A. (2006). A retrospective Structural Inquiry into the predicament of Humankind: Prospectus of the Club of Rome. In McIntyre-Mills, J. Ed. Rescuing the Enlightenment from Itself. Critical and Systemic Implications of Democracy, Volume 1 of the ‘C. West Churchman and Related Works Series’. Van Gigch, J (series editor), Springer, London.Google Scholar
  20. Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2002). New public management: Puzzles of democracy and the influence of citizens. Journal of Political Philosophy, 10(3), 267–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Churchman, C. W. (1967). Guest editorial: Wicked problems. Management Science, 14(4), B141–B142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Churchman, C. W. (1979). The systems approach (Rev. and updated ed.). New York: Dell Publishing.Google Scholar
  23. Cleary, M., Horsfall, J., & Hayter, M. (2014). Data collection and sampling in qualitative research: Does size matter? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 70(3), 473–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2013). Research methods in education. Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  26. Creswell, J. W., Klassen, A. C., Plano Clark, V. L., & Smith, K. C. (2011). Best practices for mixed methods research in the health sciences (pp. 2094–2103). Bethesda: National Institutes of Health.Google Scholar
  27. Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  28. Davis, J. M. (2015). Young children and the environment: Early education for sustainability. In Early education for sustainability (2nd ed.). Port Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Denhardt, R. B., & Denhardt, J. V. (2000). The new public service: Serving rather than steering. Public Administration Review, 60(6), 549–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Dombro, D. B. (2011). How much carbon does a tropical tree sequester. United Nations Environment Programme. Retrieved from http://www.tree-nation.com
  31. Ernst, C., Gullick, R., & Nixon, K. (2004). Conserving forests to protect water. American Water Works Association, 30, 1–7.Google Scholar
  32. FGS. (2010). Water democracy: Reclaiming public water in Asia. IDEAS Working Paper Series from RePEc.Google Scholar
  33. Gadkari, S. S. (2010). New public management (2nd ed.). New Delhi: Himalaya Publishing House.Google Scholar
  34. Gideon, L. (2012). Handbook of survey methodology for the social sciences. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Gleick, P. H. (1993). Water in crisis (Vol. 9, p. 473). Oxford: Pacific Institute for Studies in Dev., Environment & Security. Stockholm Env. Institute, Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  36. Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597–607.Google Scholar
  37. Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Guba, E. G. (1990). The paradigm dialog. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  39. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105–117). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  40. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 191–216). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  41. Hall, D. & Lobina, E. (2006). Water as a public service. PSIRU reports.Google Scholar
  42. Hall, D., Lobina, E., Corral, V., Hoedeman, O., Terhorst, P., Pigeon, M. & Kishimoto, S. (2009). Public-public partnerships (PUPs) in water.Google Scholar
  43. Hardin, G. (1968). The Tragedy of the Commons. Science, 162, 1243–1248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Harper, S. (2013). Population–environment interactions: European migration, population composition and climate change. Environmental and Resource Economics, 55(4), 525–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Harvey and Miceli. (1999). Antisocial Behavior and the Continuing “Tragedy of the Commons”. Jounal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(1), 109–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Head, B. (2010). Wicked problems in water governance: Paradigm changes to promote water sustainability and address planning uncertainty. Urban Water Security Research Alliance.Google Scholar
  47. Hesse-Biber, S. (2010). Qualitative approaches to mixed methods practice. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(6), 455–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hibberts, M., Johnson, R. B., & Hudson, K. (2012). Common survey sampling techniques. In L. Gideon (Ed.), Handbook of survey methodology for the social sciences (pp. 53–74). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Hoekstra, A. Y., & Chapagain, A. K. (2006). Water footprints of nations: Water use by people as a function of their consumption pattern. Water Resources Management, 21(1), 35–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Hopkins, W.G. (2008). Quantitative research design.Google Scholar
  52. Jandl, R., Lindner, M., Vesterdal, L., Bauwens, B., Baritz, R., Hagedorn, F., Johnson, D. W., Minkkinen, K., & Byrne, K. A. (2007). How strongly can forest management influence soil carbon sequestration? Geoderma, 137(3), 253–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Jorgensen, B., Graymore, M., & Toole, K. (2009). Household water use behavior: An integrated model. Journal of Environmental Management, 91(1), 227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. King, C. S., Stivers, C., & Box, R. C. (1998). Government is US: Strategies for an anti-government era. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  56. Kingsford, R. T. (2000). Ecological impacts of dams, water diversions and river management on floodplain wetlands in Australia. Austral Ecology, 25(2), 109–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Mackenzie, N., & Knipe, S. (2006). Research dilemmas: Paradigms, methods and methodology. Issues in Educational Research, 16(2), 193–205.Google Scholar
  59. Marlistiyati, M., Mahayasa, M., & Pelokila, M. R. (2016). Pemanfaatan dan Ekonomi Lontar Bagi Masyarakat Di Kota Kupang. Bumi Lestari, 16(2), 139–154.Google Scholar
  60. Marshall, T. H. (1950). Citizenship and social class, and other essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  61. McCarl, B. A., Metting, F. B., & Rice, C. (2007). Soil carbon sequestration. Climatic Change, 80(1), 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Mcdonnell, R. A. (2008). Challenges for integrated water resources management: How do we provide the knowledge to support truly integrated thinking? Water Resources Development, 24(1), 131–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. McIntyre-Mills, J. (2000). Global Citizenship and Social Movements: Creating Transcultural Webs of Meaning for the New Millennium. Amsterdam: Harwood/Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  64. McIntyre-Mills, J. (2002). ‘Addressing complexity through critical systemic praxis for design, problem solving and governance’. International Society for the Systems Sciences (ISSS) 46th Annual Meeting, July Shanghai. ISBN 09664183-8-7.Google Scholar
  65. McIntyre-Mills, J. (2003). Critical systemic praxis for social and environmental justice: Participatory policy design and governance for a global age. New York: Springer Science & Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. McIntyre-Mills, J. (2006). Systemic governance and accountability working and re-working the conceptual and spatial boundaries. New York: Springer Science + Business Media, New York.Google Scholar
  67. McIntyre-Mills, J. (2014). Systemic ethics and non-anthropocentric stewardship: Implications for transdisciplinarity and cosmopolitan politics. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. McIntyre-Mills, J. (2017). Planetary Passport: Re-presentation, Accountability and Re-Generation, Springer.Google Scholar
  69. McIntyre-Mills, J., De Vries, D. (2008). User Centric Policy design to address complex needs. New York. Nova Science.Google Scholar
  70. Mekonnen, M. M., & Hoekstra, A. Y. (2011). National water footprint accounts: The green, blue and grey water footprint of production and consumption. Delft: Unesco-IHE Institute for Water Education.Google Scholar
  71. Mertens, D. M. (2012). Transformative mixed methods addressing inequities. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(6), 802–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Mertens, D. M. (2014). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Thousands Oak: Sage.Google Scholar
  73. Mertens, D. M. (2015). Mixed methods and wicked problems. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 9(1), 3–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Milliman, J. D. (1997). Blessed dams or damned dams? Nature, 386(6623), 325–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Noy, C. (2008). Sampling knowledge: The hermeneutics of snowball sampling in qualitative research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11(4), 327–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. O’Leary, Z. (2004). The essential guide to doing research, guide to doing research. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  77. OECD. (2010). Sustainable management of water resources in agriculture. Paris: OECD Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. New York: Plume.Google Scholar
  79. Pape, J. (2001). Poised to succeed or set up to fail? A case study of South Africa’s first public-public partnership in water delivery.Google Scholar
  80. Patel, A. S., & Shah, D. L. (2008). Water management. Daryaganj: New Age International Pvt. Ltd..Google Scholar
  81. Rees, W. E. (1992). Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: What urban economics leaves out. Environment and Urbanisation, 4(2), 121–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Rey, D., & Neuhäuser, M. (2011). Wilcoxon-signed-rank test. In M. Lovric (Ed.), International encyclopedia of statistical science (pp. 1658–1659). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Rogers, P., Bhatia, R., & Huber, A. (1998). Water as a social and economic good: How to put the principle into practice. Stockholm: Global Water Partnership/Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency.Google Scholar
  85. Romm, N. (2001). Accountability in Social Research: Issues and Debates. London: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  86. Samuelsson, I. P., & Kaga, Y. (2008). The contribution of early childhood education to a sustainable society. Paris: Unesco.Google Scholar
  87. Savenije, H. H. G., & Van Der Zaag, P. (2002). Water as an economic good and demand management paradigms with pitfalls. Water International, 27(1), 98–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Segerfeldt, F. (2005). Water for sale: How business and the market can resolve the world’s water crisis. Washington, DC: Cato Institute.Google Scholar
  89. Serageldin, I., Borlaug, N., Kendall, H., Carlsson, I., Gorbachev, M., Masire, K., Ramos, F., Abdullah, S. B., Agarwal, A., Al-Hamad, A. L., & Asmal, K. (2000). A report of the world commission on water for the 21st century. Water International, 25(2), 284–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Shiklomanov, I. A. (1993). World water resources, water in crisis. New York: Oxford.Google Scholar
  91. Shiva, V. (2008). From water crisis to water culture. Cultural Studies, 22(3–4), 498–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Simbolon, J. (2016). Improving water management in Nauli City, Indonesia. In: Paper presented to 2016 Annual Conference of the International Society for the Systems Sciences (ISSS), Boulder, Colorado, USA.Google Scholar
  93. Sugiyono. (2012). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D (16th ed.). Bandung: Alfabeta.Google Scholar
  94. Thangarajan, M. (2007). Groundwater: Resource evaluation, augmentation, contamination, restoration, modeling and management. New York: Springer Science & Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Tongco, M. D. C. (2007). Purposive sampling as a tool for informant selection. Ethnobotany Research and Applications, 5, 147–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Ulrich, W. (2003). A brief introduction to critical systems thinking for professionals and citizens. Retrieved March 21, 2015, from http://www.wulrich.com/cst_brief.html
  97. USGS Water Science School. (2017). The USGS Water Science School, Ground Water Depletion, https://water.usgs.gov/edu/gwdepletion.html, retrieved 17 September 2017.
  98. Wackernagel, M., & Rees, W. (1998). Our ecological footprint: Reducing human impact on the earth. Gabriola: New Society Publishers.Google Scholar
  99. Walker, R. M., Brewer, G. A., Boyne, G. A., & Avellaneda, C. N. (2011). Market orientation and public service performance: New public management gone mad? Public Administration Review, 71(5), 707–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. WHO. (2011). Guidelines for drinking-water quality. Geneva: World Health Organisation.Google Scholar
  101. World Bank. (2005). Philippines: Meeting infrastructure challenges. Washington, DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Flinders UniversityAdelaideAustralia
  2. 2.Ministry of FinanceJakartaIndonesia

Personalised recommendations