{"id":4616,"date":"2026-04-10T09:37:03","date_gmt":"2026-04-10T09:37:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/life2rivers.si\/o-moznosti-nove-institucije-med-pricakovanji-dvomi-in-sistemskimi-napetostmi\/"},"modified":"2026-06-11T10:54:52","modified_gmt":"2026-06-11T10:54:52","slug":"on-the-possibility-of-a-new-institution","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/life2rivers.si\/en\/on-the-possibility-of-a-new-institution\/","title":{"rendered":"On the Possibility of a New Institution: Between Expectations, Doubts and Systemic Tensions"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

As part of the LIFE2RIVERS project, we carried out an extensive qualitative study in 2025 with the aim of empirically examining and deepening the reflection on the feasibility and relevance of establishing a new institutional form in the fields of water management, nature conservation and environmental governance. The research stems from the recognition that contemporary environmental challenges are not merely technical in nature, but also social, political and institutional problems, shaped by power relations, the distribution of competences and the legitimacy of decision\u2011making. To this end, we conducted 30 in\u2011depth interviews with representatives of public authorities, experts and scientists, civil society and the business sector, seeking to understand their experiences, perceptions and expectations regarding the current system and the conditions under which a new institutional form could emerge.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

The findings show that actors perceive water management and nature conservation as highly complex, multi\u2011level and institutionally fragmented domains, where different decision\u2011making logics, professional approaches and interests intersect. They frequently highlight the lack of an integrated approach, unclear competences, excessive regulation and ineffective oversight of implementation, all of which contribute to a sense of systemic opacity and reduced institutional effectiveness. Within this context, a significant issue is the gap between formal institutional arrangements and the actual functioning of the system, particularly in the relationship between national, civil\u2011society and local levels, and the absence of an effective coordinating mechanism that would enable holistic catchment\u2011scale management.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Interdisciplinary cooperation is almost unanimously recognised as essential, yet in practice it often appears unequal, limited and conflict\u2011ridden. The dominance of certain disciplines\u2014especially technical and engineering fields\u2014alongside communication barriers and institutional constraints, reduces the potential for genuinely interdisciplinary and comprehensive treatment of environmental issues. Instead of integrated approaches, partial solutions frequently prevail, failing to capture the complexity of the problems and offering limited long\u2011term effectiveness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The research also reveals a broader spectrum of interconnected issues that extend beyond technical expertise and reach into the core of the political\u2011institutional system. These include legal ambiguity, conflicts between environmental protection, spatial development and economic interests, a lack of professional capacity, and low levels of public trust and participation. Water management thus emerges as a distinctly political issue, shaped by competing interests, rationalities and power relations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Attitudes toward the idea of a new institution are diverse and often contradictory. Some interviewees see it as an opportunity to improve coordination, ensure independent expert assessment and strengthen strategic direction. Others express doubts about its necessity, legitimacy and feasibility. The absence of consensus regarding its scope, mandate and relationship to existing institutions should not be seen as a weakness, but rather as an important finding that exposes the structural tensions within the system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A new institution therefore does not appear as a straightforward solution, but rather as a potential space for reshaping existing relationships. Interviewees attribute to it the role of an independent expert corrective that could improve decision\u2011making quality, strengthen educational functions, increase transparency and enhance cooperation among actors. At the same time, they warn of risks such as politicisation, capital pressures, duplication of existing structures and additional bureaucratisation. The key question remains whether such an institution would possess sufficient autonomy and influence to meaningfully intervene in existing decision\u2011making processes.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

One of the central insights of the study is that a new institution cannot be understood as a final organisational answer to current problems. The diversity of perspectives and interests indicates that tensions within the water and environmental governance system are structural and enduring; they cannot be eliminated, only better organised and managed. In this sense, the new institution appears primarily as a process\u2014one that must be grounded in continuous dialogue, adaptation and reflection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The research does not propose a definitive model for a new institution. Instead, it identifies the conditions of possibility within which such an institution could develop. It represents the diagnostic phase of the project, opening space for further co\u2011creative processes in which the findings will be tested and refined in collaboration with various actors through focus groups. The voices gathered in the study clearly show that the future of water and environmental governance will depend not only on institutional solutions, but on society\u2019s ability to establish effective, inclusive and legitimate forms of cooperation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Author: dr. Luka \u0110eki\u0107<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

As part of the LIFE2RIVERS project, we carried out an extensive qualitative study in 2025 with the aim of empirically examining and deepening the reflection on the feasibility and relevance of establishing a new institutional form in the fields of water management, nature conservation and environmental governance. The research stems from the recognition that contemporary […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":3962,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4616","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-novice-en"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/life2rivers.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4616","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/life2rivers.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/life2rivers.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/life2rivers.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/life2rivers.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4616"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/life2rivers.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4616\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4619,"href":"https:\/\/life2rivers.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4616\/revisions\/4619"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/life2rivers.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3962"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/life2rivers.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4616"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/life2rivers.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4616"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/life2rivers.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4616"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}