A preliminary exploration of two approaches for documenting 'mental models' held by stakeholders in the crocodile catchment, South africa

The ARDI method focuses on developing a schematic representation of individual or group understanding of key elements of the social ecological system. Ten individual mental models were elicited from water resource users and managers; the collective mental model process could not be completed in the time available. The ARDI assessment’s systems diagrams provide insight into sustainability through showing how stakeholders and resources interact. It also illuminates drivers of the system, as understood by different stakeholders and the way in which these stakeholders understand the system to function. This research found that with respect to sustainability, the Reserve and compliance with the Reserve, both methods suggested that the Reserve is a concept that is not well understood: if people were familiar with the Reserve as a tool then more detailed understanding was often lacking or limited. In addition, both the CA and ARDI methods identified noncompliance as an important issue for stakeholders in the catchment. However additional work would be required to explore the actual nature and intent of the non compliance as this was beyond the scope of the current application of the two methods. In many ways, CA could be seen as a screening technique to, for instance, define specific thematic areas that water management needs to address within the catchment. What is valuable is that both methods highlight the nature and extent to which stakeholders perceive problems relating to WRM in the catchment. This information is useful in engaging water managers and broader stakeholder groups in subsequent stages of collaborative work as it provides a basis from which to tackle problems. This research found that with respect to the techniques for eliciting mental models, both methods accommodate high levels of representation and inclusivity and are therefore in accordance with participatory water resources management as required by the NWA. They both generate a sense of involvement and ‘buy-in’ in that they draw information and engagement from a broad spectrum of stakeholders. The demands of the methods for time and funds need to be carefully considered. Issues of resources and finances need to be factored into the broad application of the techniques so as to derive a clear picture of the costs and benefits. As far as application of mental models in the South African catchment management context, clearly in the multiple-stakeholder arena called for by IWRM under the NWA it would be valuable to employ tools that set out to understand how, why and where differences in conceptual understanding, language use, meaning and practices might arise. It may be useful to identify a process that would contribute to the development of CMS and that built on the results of this work. We identified four processes that could contribute to the development of sustainable CMS, including 1. Stakeholder analysis to identify major stakeholder groups and power relationships using social network analysis. . This could be followed by Consensus Analysis of key questions and actions related to the social, economic and ecological sustainability of water use. 2. Participatory modelling to explore action, outcome relationships using ARDI-like techniques to identify pathways to sustainability and a broadly acceptable vision. 3. Monitoring and learning to support progress to goals through techniques such as: Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) modelling to support ongoing monitoring and evaluation of key factors nad progress towards goal