2.2.1 Methodological foundations.

Our process of engaging with local government officials drew on theories from transformative spaces and systems thinking. Transformative spaces provide an overall approach to engaging stakeholders (i.e. how the workshops should be run and the intended outcomes). Meanwhile, systems thinking–an approach to understanding the complexity of systems through examining the emergent properties and governing mechanisms of the relationships between system components [31]–provides a suite of practical tools and activities to collaboratively explore different ways of thinking about the climate-related problems for, and solutions to, rural water services. The two are complementary because the theory of transformative spaces comes from sustainability transformations and transitions scholarship, which is founded on the need for systemic change articulated through systems thinking [32]. We chose transformative spaces and systems thinking theories intending to engage participants in thinking beyond implementing costly technical fixes that are the norm in discourses on climate-resilient water services [33]. We sought to create spaces that tapped into deeper questions of values, normative commitments, and plural ways of knowing–foundational considerations for driving societal shifts towards a more sustainable future [34].

Work to date on transformative spaces has highlighted their potential to be a starting point for institutionalising transformative change and, to achieve this outcome, the importance of assembling diverse methodological frameworks and tools [23]. The creation of transformative spaces can be distinguished as five design phases: (a) problem definition, (b) operationalisation, (c) tactical, (d) outcome, and (e) reflection [23]. Drawing on these phases, we designed the workshops as follows.

In the problem definition phase, the transformative space seeks to open up new ways of problematisation through the reframing of issues and lifting perspectives on the problem that often go unheard [23]. Prior to the workshop, the study team conducted the aforementioned FGDs to develop a picture of how different segments of society in Dailekh and Sarlahi districts experienced climate impacts on water access. Quotations from the FGDs were presented to the workshop participants and discussed in small groups. In particular, the participants were guided to consider the gendered dimensions of climate impacts, issues confronting people with disabilities, and their personal experiences with climate impacts. This discussion helped participants see the multi-dimensional nature of climate change impacts on water and learn from the experiences of diverse perspectives. The participants dug deeper in the problematisation phase through the ‘rich pictures’ and ‘five whys’ activities that are detailed further in the following phases.

The operationalisation phase involves deliberately designing in opportunities to hear a range of different perspectives [23]. We invited women and men from each local government area (rural municipality) in the district, non-government development organisations (NGOs), and organisations for people with disabilities (OPDs) to the workshop. The workshops facilitated knowledge co-production, which is “an iterative and collaborative process involving diverse types of expertise, knowledge and actors to produce context-specific knowledge and pathways towards a sustainable future” [35]. Knowledge co-production can foster self-reflection, shared understandings, and practical ideas towards sustainability transformations in the water service sector [36]. We facilitated co-production through mixing participants from different agencies in team-based problematising and problem-solving activities. Finally, during the workshop, the participants were guided to do a ‘worldviews’ activity to understand their own worldviews and those of others. Worldviews are a person’s overarching system of meaning that influences how they “interpret, enact, and co-create reality” [37]. Shifting individuals towards ‘pluralist’ or ‘strategist’ perspectives, where they appreciate a diversity of perspectives about the world, may be an enabler for more transformative action on climate change [38]. This activity was held at the beginning of the workshop to support participants to appreciate how assumptions we make shape the way an issue is framed and how assumptions differ across diverse people.

The tactical phase comprises the activities that support the work that will be done because of the transformative space [23]. Here, we used systems thinking tools to guide workshop participants towards modes of thinking that could lead to actions with transformational outcomes. Many sustainability interventions target tangible, short-term changes that are easier to implement, but have limited potential for bringing about transformational change [39]. Hence, we developed the ‘leverage points’ activity that utilised the leverage points framework to guide participants to consider activities or feedback processes in a system where a small change could lead to an eventual overall change in the system’s behaviour [40]. The leverage points framework encourages decision-makers and stakeholders to consider broader and higher-level (paradigmatic) factors, as well as lower-level inputs and parameters when deciding where to focus efforts when trying to create positive societal change [39,40]. A second systems thinking tool used was rich pictures [41,42]. In the rich pictures activity, participants use pictures and draw their ideas related to a particular question or problem to represent what is included, important, and what the relationships are between the elements. The benefit of this approach lies in the combination of creative and visual expression, being able to see connections between the elements, and the conversations and explanations associated with the process. Data is obtained not only from the picture itself but also from the way the picture is then explained by the creator(s). Follow-up deliberations by participants also helped to illustrate the alignments and divergence in the understanding of a particular problem. Finally, the five whys activity was used to help reveal underlying causes of issues or problems [43]. In this activity, participants considered the layers of causality for a particular problem and were encouraged to go beyond superficial cause and effect. When used carefully, the five whys can play a powerful role in helping to illustrate the need for depth of inquiry into causes of a particular issue and in analysing complex problems [44].

In the outcome phase, the outcomes of the activities from the transformative space are considered [23]. To understand the immediate effect of how the workshop influenced the thinking of the participants, we facilitated a ‘theory-of-change based action planning’ activity. A theory of change is “A particular approach for making underlying assumptions in a change project explicit, and using the desired outcomes of the project as a mechanism to guide project planning, implementation, and evaluation” [45]. Theories of change are commonly used in the development sector to plan out course of action, linked to anticipated changes and outcomes [46]. Hence, participants were asked to create a theory of change to encourage them to articulate their newfound assumptions and desired outcomes for the group to reflect upon.

Lastly, the reflection phase involves reflecting on what worked and what did not in enabling transformative change [23]. ‘Sensemaking’ refers to the process through which people come together to understand issues or events together [47]. Through this process, actors create and shape a shared meaning of the issue or event [48]. The study team took part in a ‘sensemaking and practice reflection’ to consider whether the workshop showed promise in reshaping how the participants viewed the climate change problem for rural water access and the possible solutions.

2.2.2 Workshop activities.

Two workshops were facilitated by SNV Nepal staff in April and May 2022 with participants from local governments, NGOs, and OPDs. One workshop was held in Sarlahi district with 14 participants, and one was held in Dailekh district with 19 participants. Local government staff invited to the workshops were those who had technical or planning responsibilities related to water service provision and were working in rural municipalities that were included in the SNV Beyond the Finish Line project. NGO and OPD staff invited were those from organisations that were working with SNV on the Beyond the Finish Line project in Sarlahi and Dailekh.

The workshop activity design was informed by the intent to foster a systemic perspective. To achieve this, we drew on soft system methodologies and related approaches. Soft systems thinking sees the world as complex and confusing and influenced by worldviews and human values. Through the process of inquiry and exploration, a learning system emerges [49]. The tools we chose were Worldviews [50], Leverage Points [40], Rich Pictures [41], Five Whys [43] and theory-of-change enablers and causal thinking processes [49]. The workshop incorporated additional activities related to climate change, such as a video on the impacts of climate change on WASH and water management, and a presentation of the FGD findings. This study, however, focuses on the systems thinking activities of the workshops as summarised and described in Table 1.

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Table 1. Systems-related activities of workshops.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pstr.0000081.t001

Worldviews. We developed a modified version of Hedlund-de Witt’s worldviews questionnaire [37], in a printed format, asking participants to circle the responses that best matched their view. Participants completed the exercise privately, and were not required to share their results. After they conducted the survey, participants were asked to read the four types of worldviews as defined by [37]. They were then asked to discuss which worldviews category they felt best reflected themselves and what they thought of the different worldview categories. Finally, the participants discussed in plenary what revelations this activity invoked for them. The worldviews activity aimed to raise the awareness of participants about the existence of different perspectives on climate change, which researchers argue can be foundational for transformative climate action [38].

Leverage points. We gave participants an overview of the purpose of the Meadows’ Leverage Points framework–a framework indicating 12 leverage points that can identify specific activities or feedback processes in a system where a small change could lead to an eventual overall change in the system’s behaviour [40]–then provided them with twelve cards including pictures and simple text relating to each of the 12 leverage points. Participants in small groups were then asked to order the cards from what they believed would be the lowest impact leverage point to the highest impact leverage point. Participants then reflected on the order that they placed their cards, considering how Meadows orders them, and discussed the similarities and differences in their opinions about the ordering. The cards were placed on the wall and could be easily seen and engaged with by participants, generating robust and inspiring discussions. The leverage points were used to consider how interventions in a system can create transformations for sustainability [51].

Rich pictures. We presented quotations from the FGDs to the participants and asked them to draw out climate-related impacts on WASH in Nepal, based on the quotations and their own experiences. In small groups, participants drew symbols and pictures on a flip chart to represent what they had heard and the connections between the ideas, objects, feelings, and concepts. After the pictures were drawn by the groups, a title was given to each picture and a representative explained the picture to the group. This helped participants to draw out diverse causes of a problem and subsequently diverse solutions that go beyond the most apparent fixes [52].

Five whys. We asked participants to choose one of the major problems that they heard from the FGDs and write that problem or challenge at the top of their worksheet. We then asked people individually to think about what the cause was for that particular problem and write that in the line below the title issue. Participants were then asked to repeat the process so that they had a sequence of five whys. Reflecting on the cause they identified at the bottom of their list, we then asked them to consider what might be the social/cultural, economic, political, and the environmental ‘why’ underpinning the list. This helped participants to think through some of the root causes of the challenges or issues they identified from a range of perspectives (to avoid too narrow or single causal pathways), which supported thinking beyond financial or physical barriers. The five whys tool is helpful for theorising the root causes of a problem, challenging unsubstantiated assumptions, and considering multiple entry points for solutions [53].

Theory-of-change based action planning. We introduced participants to the concept and processes related to developing a theory of change, drawing from examples of our work in a range of contexts. We demonstrated that overarching goals were clearly and logically linked to outcomes, which were linked to activities based on a power analysis and understanding of how change happens within a particular context. Participants were then asked to develop an action plan based on what they had learned and discussed during the workshop, responding to the question “what should rural water services in your district should be like in the future?” and based on theory-of-change processes. Participants were provided a template to note their ideas and link various actions to intermediate and higher-level outcomes. Overall, this process helped the participant to articulate the outcomes they believed their actions will achieve [46].

2.2.3 Reflective sensemaking.

Workshop data were analysed through a qualitative collaborative analysis approach [54]. Particularly, results of the workshop were analysed through discussion of written notes and interviews with the workshop facilitators. Workshop facilitators were provided templates showing what kinds of data needed to be collected for each activity. Facilitators in Nepal took notes, collected worksheets, and wrote-up the results of the workshops into two reports that they then shared with the research partners. A sensemaking session was held with the Nepali facilitators and Australian researchers to discuss and interrogate the results reported in the workshop reports, and to draw out key findings. During the session, the researchers interviewed the facilitators to understand what changes they observed in participants, how the work process impacted on the facilitators personally, and their reflections on the content and process of the workshops. Specifically, the facilitators were asked:

• How local governments usually discuss rural water supply issues and if this changed after the workshops.
• If participants demonstrated an appreciation of the need for deeper understanding to change to how water systems are supported and governed, and how this can be achieved.
• Which activities, tools, or concepts were especially effective during the workshops, and what made them effective.
• Reflections on power dynamics during the workshop, and how that affected participation.
• If there were any cases of resistance to the ideas and concepts introduced in the workshop.
• Recommendations for improving the workshops and to help participants think about deeper transformations they could make to support climate-resilient water services.

The interviews were conducted in pairs (one researcher as an interviewer and one workshop facilitator as an interviewee) and responses were documented in a template. Interviewers also asked probing questions to support the facilitators to elaborate on their responses and further explain why they perceived effects (or lack thereof) on the mindsets and attitudes of the workshop participants.

3.2.1 Laying foundations for transformational thinking.

A core aim of the workshops was to influence local government staff in Nepal to shift how they thought about supporting rural water services towards systemic changes that will enable water system transformations towards sustainability under climate change. Catalysing actors to take pathways to transformation may be achieved through assembling diverse methodological tools and frameworks [23] that build the actors’ knowledge and competences [59]. Our workshop approach that deployed a variety of adapted systems thinking tools shows promise in building the knowledge and competences of local government staff in Nepal regarding transforming water services.

Experimenting with multiple kinds of knowledge and ways of knowing can create the conditions for learning about and eventually enacting transformative change [60], which the workshop participants showed openness to. The participants were attracted to the idea of shifting mindsets to reimagine what could contribute to strengthening water systems against climate change. Participants in both workshops remarked that the worldviews and leverage points activities helped them understand the idea of looking at a problem from different perspectives. One participant remarked, “This was one of the best workshops I have ever participated in. The content was very insightful and encouraged us to brainstorm…honestly it forced us to think and think and think.” The workshop facilitators later reflected that they felt the activities invoked more ‘out of the box’ thinking; local government staff usually focus on technological solutions to water supply problems, but the workshops generated energising discussions among the participants about a wider range of solutions. For example, participants proposed actions related to broader water resources management considerations and the need to collaborate with other government agencies. The facilitators also remarked they felt a change in the way they think about rural water supply sustainability. One facilitator said, “Through this workshop, I myself am transformed.”

The workshop facilitators further reported that the participants showed an appreciation of some of the contributing root causes of the local governments’ shortcomings in addressing climate impacts on water services. The facilitators stated that, in their experience, local government staff typically cite inadequate availability of funds as the primary culprit for their struggles in resolving climate-related issues for water services. However, the five whys activity prompted the participants to consider other drivers, for example, gaps in local policy and leadership challenges that contributed to an absence of direction for local government staff to address climate-related issues. One benefit of realising these other root causes was that some of them are more in the sphere of control of the local government staff compared to funding shortfalls. The workshop participants and facilitators agreed that advocating for policy changes and stronger leadership to address climate change impacts was more actionable for local government staff than requesting a higher budget for infrastructure upgrades.

While the five whys activity helped participants to identify practical leverage points that create bigger changes in the management and governance of rural water supplies, the workshop approach itself could be a way of acting on leverage points. In her Leverage Point framework, Donella Meadows argues that the power to question, reflect upon and transcend paradigms is generally the most effective leverage point for driving deeper systems change [40]. Above all else, our workshop approach aimed to shift the thinking of the participants by making them aware of their ability to view the problem of climate change for water services in different ways and reimagine what they could feasibly do to affect systems change. The appropriate framing, discussion, and communication of systems thinking concepts are a pathway to achieving this.

Another common mechanism for paving a path to sustainability transformations is the co-creation of knowledges about the state of the system, the desired future development, and the changes needed to reach the desired future [61]. Each workshop culminated in the final activity in which participants worked together to create an action plan based on a theory-of-change process that included co-creating a goal, reaching desired outcomes, and designing practical activities to support the outcomes. One participant reflected, “We all are a mixture of different worldviews and have to work together in a team for a common mission, sometimes it is easy and sometimes challenging.” The facilitators noted that the action plans incorporated elements of the workshop discussions, such as activities to shift the mindsets of local decision-makers, which were distinguished from usual government project planning documents. The facilitators were confident that the workshop was effective at influencing the participants to think more systemically about climate-related issues for water services, although further work is needed to follow-up on the action plans developed, in order to translate this into action on the ground.

A barrier that we sought to overcome was making systems thinking and sustainability transformation concepts accessible, relevant, and useful for local government staff in Nepal. Much of the literature and discourse on these topics are academic and at a level of abstraction that can be difficult for newcomers to the topics to grasp. Our experience suggests that the approach of using simple, participatory activities for facilitating the discussion of where to place energy and action to change a system, as well as what sits behind our assumptions, holds promise for shifting thinking in this context. The workshop facilitators felt that local government participants were challenged to understand new concepts like leverage points and worldviews, but through discussions, developed a comprehension and appreciation of them. Local government participants were also enthusiastic about replicating the workshop activities with their leaders at the rural municipality and provincial levels. Although more work is needed to translate discussions and new insights into sustainable action, shifts in perceptions and thinking are a necessary prerequisite.

3.2.2 Fostering new relations to catalyse change.

Transformative spaces can form opportunities for establishing, strengthening or repositioning social networks that enable new ways of working and build collective agency for creating transformations [23,59]. Although, as an exploratory process, our workshops did not fully facilitate the interrogation and re-negotiation of social relationships, we learned about the current state of rural water management relationships that informs further work to support systemic change.

Engagement of local government decision-makers in the workshop approach is key to affecting real change given the power and influence they have over WASH systems in their context. The workshop participants and facilitators agreed that the local government participants have limited influence to steer department strategies within their hierarchical institutions. The workshop participants stressed the importance of holding a similar workshop for rural municipality and provincial leaders who decide about budgeting and strategising on rural development. These leaders are elected representatives and do not necessarily have training or high-level awareness of water and climate issues, so the workshop approach would need to be tailored accordingly. There is also often a high turnover of elected leaders at local government levels in Nepal that makes it challenging to institutionalise new ways of thinking. The workshop participants suggested they could advocate to their leaders, who have many responsibilities and therefore may be reluctant to join a full-day workshop, to give attention to responding to climate impacts on water. Future transformative spaces should carefully consider the recruitment of influential participants and accounting for power dynamics (discussed further in the following section).

Collective actions that deliberately aim to change systems at scale are important for transformative adaptation to climate change [62]. Hence, any approach to shift local governments in Nepal towards transformative change ideally would be scalable so that a wide range of actors could be reached, and new relations established. Our workshop approach has the potential to be replicated or transferred into other local government contexts. Each of the workshop activities was low-cost and did not require any sophisticated technical skills or resources for facilitators. However, the process required experienced facilitators who were comfortable working with systems thinking concepts and translating them into local languages and teaching modalities. For example, the workshop facilitators drew on a local story of an insect emerging from a pond and turning into a butterfly to communicate the concept of transformation. Building the capacity of local experts to facilitate such processes is critical for reaching a critical mass of collective action.

Crucially, people may not transform the way they think about a problem because of a single workshop, and changing knowledge or thinking does not automatically lead to behaviour change. Although paradigm shifts in individuals could happen rapidly in response to a new insight or epiphany, the local government participants of this project would probably require sustained engagement with facilitators to continue to reshape how they problematise and think about solutions to climate impacts on a day-to-day basis. While local government participants appreciated the systems thinking concepts, the workshop facilitators noted that some workshop participants still struggled at times to think of creative new ways of addressing problems. There is also frequent staff turnover within local governments in Nepal, so refresher activities may be needed over the time it takes to actualise proposed new and innovative solutions that go to the heart of the problems.

3.2.3 Ethical dilemmas.

Ethical dilemmas can arise from attempts to cultivate transformative change that involve challenging the status quo of dominant systems and in the decision of who to invite to deliberations about systemic change [23]. Power dynamics within institutions and communities must be better addressed to enable sustainability transformations for water services in Nepal. The participants of the workshops were overwhelmingly male, which reflects the overall local government workforce in rural Nepal. Representatives from local OPDs joined the workshops, but the workshop facilitators noted their level of participation in discussions was less than their government counterparts. Given that people’s experiences of climate impacts are strongly shaped by their socio-economic status [63], the meaningful inclusion and participation of diverse people in problem framing and proposing solutions is critical for a comprehensive identification of key challenges and solutions that provide equitable benefits. Our workshop approach could be improved to better incorporate spaces for rights-holders organisations representing women, people with disabilities, and marginalised groups to join the activities and contribute to the discussions. For example, meeting with these groups individually before the workshop and familiarising them with the concepts and language could help to build their confidence during workshops with local government representatives in attendance.

Further, as the focus group discussion results presented in this study showed, power dynamics within communities influences climate responses, for instance, in terms of competition over water during times of scarcity. The local government participants, who were primarily technical staff with responsibilities pertaining to infrastructure provision and maintenance, were not trained to deal with community conflict, equality and inclusion issues that crucially must be addressed to reduce the vulnerability of marginalised groups to climate change. Handling complex social matters requires another dedicated line of training and support to institutionalise social remediation within local governments in Nepal, which would complement and enhance efforts related to systems thinking approaches to climate change and water management.

Workshop participants and facilitators raised the need to engage government decision-makers with more influence in such workshops. Introducing participants from varying levels of power within an institution, and across organisations that each might have their own agendas, could make equal and honest deliberation on desired changes and recognition of power imbalances difficult to achieve. Again, capacitating local experts to facilitate these difficult discussions, through the creation of safe spaces for people to speak and explicitly gaining the agreement of participants upfront to reach consensus [23], is critical.