Review of Victorian water sector engagement activities and effectiveness

Funded by the Department of Energy, Environment, and Climate Action (DEECA), this report focuses on engagement activities by Victorian water corporations and catchment management authorities (CMAs). It aims to understand the effectiveness of these activities and observe differences between metropolitan and urban versus regional and rural Victoria.

General findings

• Engagement drivers: The report identifies various drivers for community engagement, emphasising the transition from being forced by legal and government requirements to voluntary and inherent practices, from merely conveying information to focusing on building community relationships and influencing behaviours.
• Frameworks used: Organisations use diverse frameworks for engagement, with many developing their own guidelines to complement state government guidance and popular frameworks like the IAP2 framework.
• Current engagement activities: Organisations employ a variety of methods, such as online platforms, surveys, workshops, community events and educational initiatives.
• Changes in engagement: Factors such as the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change and natural events prompted significant shifts in engagement practices. There is a growing emphasis on online engagement and storytelling.
• Evaluation of engagement: Organisations employ different methods to evaluate engagement effectiveness, including post-engagement surveys, social media monitoring and internal reviews.
• Best practice examples: Best practice in engagement leverages art, storytelling, and digital tools. Innovative examples include Melbourne Water's Hobsons Bay Main Sewer Upgrade and Western Water's Sunbury Integrated Water Management (IWM) community panel, showcasing creative and effective ways to engage communities on water-related issues.
• Barriers: Barriers include internal capacity constraints, engagement fatigue, limited resources, and digital literacy.

Metropolitan vs regional differences

• Activities: Regional/rural organisations are more hands-on, direct participation in natural environmental activities, aiming to foster a deeper connection to regional water resources and environmental issues. Metro/urban organisations focus on addressing urban water supply concerns and maintaining public trust.
• Capability: Regional organisations such as CMAs, are facing challenges because of small teams, multitasking, while metro organisations have more time and resources.
• Topics: In metropolitan and urban water agencies, wastewater management, pricing, planning, governance and customer support, and recycled water are predominant concerns. Climate change, although less prominent, is gaining traction in urban areas. Similarly, the cultural water use of Traditional Owners is increasingly recognised, albeit modestly. Meanwhile, regional organisations prioritise catchment management and sustainability more than urban areas and focus more on agricultural water use. This division of focus mirrors the distinct necessities and pressures of densely populated urban areas against the environmentally and agriculturally centric regional locales.
• Evaluation: All organisations evaluate their engagement activities, with post-engagement surveys and social media engagement monitoring being the most common methods. Regional organisations are more active in social media engagement monitoring, whereas metro/urban organisations use more stakeholder interviews.
• Planned engagement activities: Both metro/urban and rural water corporations plan to increase community involvement and awareness raising. However, metro/urban organisations appear to be more information-focused, while rural organisations have a broader range of activities planned, including specific environmental and educational initiatives.