Dialogic science-policy networks for water security governance in the arid Americas.

Addressing wicked problems challenging water security requires participation from multiple stakeholders, often with conflicting visions, complicating the attainment of water-security goals and heightening the need for integrative and effective science-policy interfaces. Sustained multi-stakeholder dialogues within science-policy networks can improve adaptive governance and water system resilience. This paper describes what we define as "dialogic science-policy networks," or interactions -- both in structural and procedural terms -- between scientists and policy-makers that are: 1) interdisciplinary, 2) international (here, inter-American), 3) cross-sectoral, 4) open, 5) continual and iterative in the long-term, and 6) flexible. By fostering these types of interactions, dialogic networks achieve what we call the 4-I criteria for effective science-policy dialogues: inclusivity, involvement, interaction, and influence. Here we present several water-security research and action projects where some of these attributes may be present. Among these, a more comprehensive form of a dialogic network was intentionally created via AQUASEC, a virtual center and network initially fostered by a series of grants from the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research. Subsequently, AQUASEC has significantly expanded to other regions through direct linkages and additional program support for the International Water Security Network, supported by Lloyd's Register Foundation and other sources. This paper highlights major scientific and policy achievements of a notable suite of science-policy networks, shared practices, methods, and knowledge integrating science and policy, as well as the main barriers overcome in network development. An important gap that remains for future research is the assessment and evaluation of dialogic science-policy networks' long-term outcomes.

Gendered vulnerabilities and grassroots adaptation initiatives in home gardens and small orchards in Northwest Mexico.

With the retreat of the state under neoliberalism, the lack of (or negligible) government and non-governmental support reasserts grassroots initiatives as a global-change strategy. A feminist political ecology approach and the concept of adverse inclusion were used to facilitate an analysis of social differences shaping local-level adaptive responses. Adaptive responses of small farmers in the border village of San Ignacio, Sonora, Mexico, who are increasingly vulnerable to climate change, water scarcity, and changing labor markets were studied. Gender differences in production sites translate into diverse vulnerabilities and adaptive strategies. Local capacities and initiatives should be a focus of research and policy to avoid viewing women and men as passive in the face of global change. The dynamic strategies of San Ignacio women and men in home gardens and small orchards hold lessons for other regions particularly related to adaptation to climate change via agrobiodiversity, water resource management, and diversified agricultural livelihoods.

A synthesis of convergent reflections, tensions and silences in linking gender and global environmental change research.

This synthesis article joins the authors of the special issue "Gender perspectives in resilience, vulnerability and adaptation to global environmental change" in a common reflective dialogue about the main contributions of their papers. In sum, here we reflect on links between gender and feminist approaches to research in adaptation and resilience in global environmental change (GEC). The main theoretical contributions of this special issue are threefold: emphasizing the relevance of power relations in feminist political ecology, bringing the livelihood and intersectionality approaches into GEC, and linking resilience theories and critical feminist research. Empirical insights on key debates in GEC studies are also highlighted from the nine cases analysed, from Europe, the Americas, Asia, Africa and the Pacific. Further, the special issue also contributes to broaden the gender approach in adaptation to GEC by incorporating research sites in the Global North alongside sites from the Global South. This paper examines and compares the main approaches adopted (e.g. qualitative or mixed methods) and the methodological challenges that derive from intersectional perspectives. Finally, key messages for policy agendas and further research are drawn from the common reflection.