Drought: A Comprehensive Approach from the Peninsula

A Practical Example of Science-Policy Dialogue for Territorial Drought Governance.

Description

This contribution presents a structured example of a science-policy webinar format applied to a highly sensitive societal challenge: drought and water scarcity in Spain. The webinar “Drought: A Comprehensive Approach from the Peninsula (Sequía: un abordaje integral desde la Península Ibérica) was organized at a time of relative calm, when the slowdown in the depletion of water reserves created the illusion that the emergency had eased.  The structural and environmental conditions behind drought remain unchanged, however, reinforcing the need to reflect precisely during these brief periods of apparent normality. The session proposed an integral perspective that brings together natural and social knowledge, compares territorial realities and, above all, fosters direct dialogue between scientists and policymakers. Through guiding questions, the webinar explored the question whether scientific insights are reaching political arenas, which barriers public administrations face, and how long-term thinking can be incorporated into decision-making processes typically dominated by short-term urgency.

Summary:

• Structural moment of discussion: Held during a temporary respite in drought conditions, enabling medium- and long-term reflections
• Integral approach: Combines the environmental, social, and territorial dimensions of drought
• Science-policy interface: Designed to connect researchers and public administrations through a shared set of guiding questions
• Regional comparison: Incorporates insights from different regions to illustrate diverse challenges and governance contexts
• Focus on decision-making barriers: Examines obstacles faced by policymakers when implementing research-based recommendations
• Long-term perspective: Emphasizes the need to move beyond emergency-driven responses toward structural, future-oriented strategies

How does the format work?

The session was organized into three consecutive blocks designed to progressively deepen the collective understanding of drought governance:

1. Shared framing and territorial diagnoses
2. From challenges to possible solutions
3. Open dialogue with participants

The moderator played a central role and was explicitly designed to maintain a balanced alternation between scientific perspectives and political viewpoints, preventing disciplinary silos and ensuring a fluid, dynamic exchange. Aglobal-to-local approach was employed: beginning with the structural dimensions of drought under global change, then introducing three territorial contexts (Catalonia, Granada, and Madrid), and finally opening the discussion to thematic experts in governance, ecology, and environmental history.

To guide the debate, the webinar relied on a set of core questions that structured the interaction between speakers. These questions were tailored to each type of participant:

• For researchers: Are your scientific proposals reaching the political level? What tools or forms of support would you need from public administrations to translate your innovations into practice?
• For policymakers and public administration representatives: What barriers do you encounter when attempting to integrate academic insights into policy? What were the main difficulties that emerged during the last drought in terms of decision making?
• For all participants: How can long-term, structural perspectives be incorporated into political environments that often operate under urgent or short timeframes? Would it be feasible or desirable to apply innovations from other territories to your own context?

This format enabled a clear, focused dialogue that linked structural challenges with practical constraints, helping identify common issues and potential avenues for science-policy collaboration.

Challenges

• Time constraints: Limited time reduces the depth of technical exchanges, making it difficult to expand on complex scientific or administrative issues
• Institutional barriers: Policymakers face structural or administrative constraints that limit the uptake of scientific proposals, even when there is interest or political will
• Communication gaps: Differences in language, priorities, and timeframes between academia and public administration can hinder mutual understanding
• Need for focused messages: Clear guidance is required to keep contributions concise and avoid fragmentation of the dialogue
• Uneven territorial capacities: Regions differ in technical, administrative, and environmental respects, which complicates the transferability of solutions
• Difficulty integrating long-term perspectives: Structural approaches often clash with short-term political cycles and emergency-driven decision making

Tasks and resources

Scientists

• Prepare concise, policy-relevant summaries of research findings on drought, water management and systemic impacts
• Provide territorial diagnoses and evidence-based explanations of structural drivers
• Respond to targeted questions from policymakers and engage in cross-territorial comparison
• Identify innovations or successful practices that may be transferable to other regions

Knowledge exchange managers and research managers

• Design the structure of the session, ensuring balanced alternation between scientific and political voices
• Facilitate communication before, during, and after the event, including follow-up emails and potential collaboration links
• Prepare guiding questions, contextual framing, and flow (global → regional → local)
• Support the creation of accessible materials, summaries, and visual resources for the audience

Policymakers

• Present the institutional and regional context of drought management
• Identify operational constraints, administrative barriers, and lessons learned from past decision making cycles.
• Engage with researchers to assess the feasibility of implementing scientific proposals
• Contribute local experiences that complement scientific evidence

Case studies

Webinar “Drought: A Comprehensive Approach from the Peninsula” (Sequía: un abordaje integral desde la Península Ibérica)

• Date and time: September 24, 2024, 6:00 PM
• Organized by: Erasmus+ ENGAGEgreen, a joint collaboration between the University of Granada and BETA, from the University of Vic.

Participants

• Nuria Hernández-Mora: PhD in geography, researcher and consultant specializing in water governance, and a member of the Fundación Nueva Cultura del Agua
• Javier García Martínez: Head of the Urban Water Cycle Service (Servicio del Ciclo Urbano del Agua) at the Provincial Council of Granada
• José Luis Nieto Bueno: Councilor for Más Madrid in the Madrid City Council and Spokesperson for the Urban Planning, Environment, and Mobility Committee; he holds a PhD in biology.
• Lorenzo Proia: Coordinator of the Applied Ecology and Global Change Unit at the BETA Technological Center, University of Vic.
• Fernando Delgado Ramos: Director of Cátedra del Agua at the University of Granada.
• Antonio Ortega Santos: Full Professor of Contemporary History at the University of Granada.

Available resources (what are the main tasks)

• Moderation script for the webinar
• YouTube recording of Webinario – Sequía: un abordaje integral desde la península

What worked

• Alternating science and policy ensured a fluid, dynamic format
• Comparing regions highlighted shared challenges and contextual differences
• The moderator played a key role in keeping messages concise and interconnected
• Shared conclusions emphasized:
  • urgency of systemic, structural approaches
  • participatory governance
  • limits to demand growth
  • water as a commons
  • need for multilevel coordination

What doesn’t & lessons learnt

• Value of territorial diversity: Comparing different regions provided clear added value, revealing both shared structural challenges and region-specific dynamics
• Global–to–local framing: Moving from overarching structural issues to concrete local cases helped expand the perspectives of all actors and connect scientific evidence to regional realities
• Role of facilitators: Effective moderation requires a strong understanding of the global context, normative frameworks and the ability to link contributions across disciplines and regions; the mediators or knowledge brokers should have a broad context of the topics and the main debates
• Foundations for future collaborations: These encounters can initiate new connections between researchers and policymakers, provided follow-up is supported (e.g., exchanging contacts, identifying thematic overlaps, and encouraging continued communication)
• Transferable innovations: Sharing successful practices and innovations from different regions helps participants identify feasible pathways for improving drought governance in their own contexts
• Time limitations: Limited time reduces the depth of technical exchanges and may constrain complex discussions
• Institutional constraints: Policymakers often face structural or administrative barriers that limit the uptake of scientific proposals
• Need for clear guidance: Providing concise instructions and time limits helps speakers keep their messages focused and ensures a balanced, coherent dialogue

How the activities evaluated?

The webinar highlighted the critical and non-postponable nature of the current drought situation, reinforcing the need for structural rather than reactive responses. Dialogue between political and academic spheres proved increasingly permeable, showing that collaborative approaches are both possible and necessary. Participants also stressed that water demand cannot continue to grow, pointing towards the need for a profound structural rethinking of current models.

A key insight was the importance of regional specificity: the challenges faced in Madrid differ significantly from those in smaller municipalities, making local perspectives essential for designing effective policies. Finally, the discussion underscored the relevance of social actor involvement as addressing drought requires engaging communities and local stakeholders in decision-making processes.

Do you want to know more about the policy engagement toolkit?

Do you want to share your experience in policy engagement? Do you think about contributing to the policy engagement toolkit? Feel free to contact Tome Sandevski via science-policy@pvw.uni-frankfurt.de