TY - JOUR
T1 - Constructing ashared governance logic
T2 - The role of emotions in enabling dually embedded agency
AU - Fan, Grace H.
AU - Zietsma, Charlene
N1 - Funding Information:
1968 First Okanagan Basin Water Board (OBWB) meeting in Penticton (July) 1969 MEVA legislation enabled the formation of OBWB and a liaison committee 1970 Regional District of Central Okanagan, Regional District of Osoyoos-Similkemean, Regional District of North Okanagan joined OBWB 1974 Okanagan Basin Study completed. OBWB appointed to be the regional authority and coordinating agency for implementing recommendations. Letters Patent was updated to reflect this (1975). 1976 OBWB given authority to establish sewage grants program 1980 Last mention of a liaison committee in OBWB minutes 1981 OBWB given authority for milfoil control in Letters Patent 1993 Westland report recommended OBWB take greater leadership role 2000 Summit Environmental report recommended OBWB take greater leadership role 2003 Okanagan Mountain fire, historical drought 2004 – White Paper of the Okanagan Partnership presented – First assessment of climate change impacts on Okanagan water completed – “Running on Empty” conference organized by the OBWB 2005 – “Water—Our Limiting Resource” conference organized by the BC Branch of the Canadian Water Resources Association (BC CWRA), and the OBWB – OBWB began development of Water Management Program, received approval by regional districts – Ministry of Environment initiated Phase One of Okanagan Water Supply and Demand Study 2006 – OBWB Water Management Program initiated, OBWB expanded to include the Okanagan Nation Alliance, Okanagan Water Stewardship Council, and Water Supply Association of BC; Council formed; small grant program began – Council advocated opposition to the sale of leased lot on drinking reservoir, endorsed by the OBWB 2007 – Ministry of Environment and OBWB initiated Phased Two of Okanagan Water Supply and Demand Study; Okanagan Water Demand Modeling began – Workshop and recommendations to access feasibility of hydrometric monitoring 2008 – “Okanagan Sustainable Water Strategy (Action Plan 1.0)” published by the Council – “One Watershed, One Water” conference organized by BC CWRA and the OBWB – Endocrine disrupter study initiated – Council published position statements on protection of lands around drinking water sources 2009 – “Groundwater Bylaws Toolkit” published 2010 – Permanent moratorium on sale of reservoir lots requested, granted by the province – Okanagan Water Wise public communication program initiated 2011 – Phase Three of Okanagan Water Supply and Demand Project began with new climate scenarios – BC Water Use Reporting Centre launched – Recommendations to International Joint Commission for renewal of Osoyoos Lake Operating Orders – “Slow it, Spread it, Sink it! An Okanagan Homeowners Guide to Stormwater Management” published – “Make Water Work” communication and public outreach program launched – Groundwater monitoring project initiated, with a goal to drill 15 monitoring wells in at-risk aquifers 2012 – Council published position papers on irrigation efficiency in the Okanagan – Topsoil Bylaws Toolkit published 2013 – Council received Excellence in Water Stewardship Award by the Council of the Federation
Funding Information:
When you can get experts from the private sector and government discussing water with user groups, nonprofits, professional groups, and First Nations, sometimes sparks fly. Those sparks cause an idea or a concept to catch fire. This Council has run with some of those, creating a wildfire of knowledge and thoughts that has We are very grateful to the associate editor, Scott Sonenshein, and three anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful guidance and insightful comments. We appreciate the detailed feedback from Roger Friedland, Frank Wijen, Aegean Leung, Mike Valente, Angelique Slade-Shantz, Nelson Phillips, Wendy Smith, Matt Kraatz, Amit Nigam, April Wright, Madeline Toubiana, Itziar Castello, and participants at OTREG at Imperial College in London during the course of writing this paper. The first author acknowledges the financial support of University of British Columbia, and Zoë Cunliffe and Russel Jarvis for their assistance in data analysis. The second author thanks Universidad Carlos III de Madrid for its support during the writing of this paper. Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management in Philadelphia, the Emotions and Institutions Workshop in Toronto, and IESE in Barcelona and at the University of Victoria. We thank the participants for their comments and suggestions. We regret that we cannot thank by name the numerous people in the Okanagan who shared their time and perspectives with us. Any inaccuracies or omissions are entirely our own.
Funding Information:
Current members: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of BC (since 2012), BC Agriculture Council, BC Cattlemen’s Association, BC Fruit Growers Association, BC Groundwater Association, BC Wildlife Federation, Canadian Water Resource Association, City of Kelowna, Environment Canada, Interior Health, Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Environment, Ministry of FLNRO, Okanagan Collaborative Conservation Program (since 2011), Okanagan Chamber of Commerce (since 2013), Okanagan College, Okanagan Real Estate Boards (since 2011), Okanagan Nation Alliance, Regional District of Central Okanagan, Regional District of North Okanagan, Regional District of Okanagan-Similkameen, Shuswap Okanagan Forestry Assocation, UBC Okanagan, Water Supply Association.
Publisher Copyright:
© Academy of Management Journal 2017.
PY - 2017/12/1
Y1 - 2017/12/1
N2 - In a longitudinal qualitative study of a water stewardship council, we build theory about how and why actors embedded in disparate logics across multiple fields can overcome the constraints of their home logics to construct a new, shared governance logic together. Our findings suggest a recursive model of new logic construction in which council members mobilize three emotional facilitators (social emotions, moral emotions, and emotional energy) to affect three logic-construction cycles (agreeing on values, shared learning, and enacting shared values). Emotional facilitators work through three agentic mechanisms: enabling actors to become open and reflexive about their home logics and simultaneously increase their commitment to and engagement in constructing a shared governance logic. Ongoing interactions involving emotional facilitators, agentic mechanisms, and logicconstruction cycles are essential in sustaining the new logic. The processmodel foregrounds the role of emotions in enabling dually embedded agency, thereby extending extant theory that has tended to focus narrowly on cognitive dynamics. We discuss implications for our understanding of institutional agency, the role of emotions in new logic construction, and the role of microlevel interactions in the formation of macrolevel structures.
AB - In a longitudinal qualitative study of a water stewardship council, we build theory about how and why actors embedded in disparate logics across multiple fields can overcome the constraints of their home logics to construct a new, shared governance logic together. Our findings suggest a recursive model of new logic construction in which council members mobilize three emotional facilitators (social emotions, moral emotions, and emotional energy) to affect three logic-construction cycles (agreeing on values, shared learning, and enacting shared values). Emotional facilitators work through three agentic mechanisms: enabling actors to become open and reflexive about their home logics and simultaneously increase their commitment to and engagement in constructing a shared governance logic. Ongoing interactions involving emotional facilitators, agentic mechanisms, and logicconstruction cycles are essential in sustaining the new logic. The processmodel foregrounds the role of emotions in enabling dually embedded agency, thereby extending extant theory that has tended to focus narrowly on cognitive dynamics. We discuss implications for our understanding of institutional agency, the role of emotions in new logic construction, and the role of microlevel interactions in the formation of macrolevel structures.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85040040238&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85040040238&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.5465/amj.2015.0402
DO - 10.5465/amj.2015.0402
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85040040238
SN - 0001-4273
VL - 60
SP - 2321
EP - 2351
JO - Academy of Management Journal
JF - Academy of Management Journal
IS - 6
ER -