Date: 24 May 2018
Venue: Donkey Wheel House, Melbourne

Why this lab?

Who attended?

Approximately 32 people participated in the lab, representing diverse groups from across the region including:

• Traditional Owners
• Conservation and Friends of groups, and Creek Management Committees
• Recreational groups
• Local councils
• Melbourne Water and other water corporations
• Victorian government agencies (Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning; Port Phillip and Westernport Catchment Management Authority)

Setting the scene

The laboratory began with Dan Besley (Project manager, Healthy Waterways Strategy) setting the context and sharing his aspirations for the lab. Dan thanked participants for their involvement in the refresh of the Strategy over the past two years and reiterated the desire for shared strategic intent, co-ownership of the Strategy and a sustainable way to work together.

Dan also reminded the participants of the early collaboration principles developed in the very first 2016 co-design labs. A copy of these principles is available in the Document Library section at the bottom of this page.

Part 1: Who is in the room and why are you here?

Participants were invited to share their desires and aspirations for the Healthy Waterways Strategy and its successful implementation through ongoing collaboration.

We heard that:

• People want to learn from this process and each other, and take that learning back to their own organisations and community groups.
• There is a dedicated commitment to reverse the current trend and improve waterways. Our amazing collective experience and passion can take us there and Melbourne Water is well-placed to plan the ongoing collaboration.
• We all want to close gaps in communication, combine actions undertaken by different groups, and work together effectively, cooperatively and collaboratively.
• Past disappointments can be hard to forget, and perhaps this process could be an opportunity to establish better relationships and influence legislation and budget. There is a strong desire to draw a line in the sand and look forward rather than looking back.
• We want to get it as good as we can, and not fail. Deliberate engagement, authority to make decisions, skills sharing, good data, shared understanding of issues and most effective investment/action are critical for this. A good objective would be to build the number of people who care and are excited.
• Examples of successful collaborations we could learn from include:

Merri Creek Management Committee
Darebin Creek Management Committee
Moonee Ponds Creek Collaboration
Great Ocean Road Coast Committee
Moonee Valley Integrated Waterways Advisory Committee
Upper Stony Creek Transformation project

• Social connectivity at multiple scales (e.g. creek, catchment, region), a place-based approach and lots of experiments should underpin the approach.
• Not all key stakeholders are at the table yet. It is important to bring them in and develop a shared understanding of accountability.

Part 2: Shared principles of success

Working in small self-formed groups, participants were then invited to reflect on the early collaboration principles and whether they were still appropriate to guide the implementation phase of the Strategy.

There was a lot of energy in the room, and it was hard for people to stop their conversations! The following areas of importance were highlighted:

Part 3: What arrangements do we need to successfully implement the Strategy together?

Melbourne Water opened this session by sharing its needs for the implementation of the Strategy. These included being able to:

• Track implementation
• Meaningfully engage and communicate with all those who have a stake in the implementation of the Strategy
• Make collaborative decisions on any changes needed to the Strategy or its implementation
• Continue to trial new ways of working and learning together

Three small self-selected groups then formed to explore what might be an ongoing platform for collaboration, how the Strategy might be governed, and how we can all measure success (or otherwise) of the Strategy. The group’s proposals are presented below.

An on-going platform of collaboration

Lab participant Ross Colliver discussed the need for ‘multi-scale social connectivity to waterways’, where connections take place at various geographical scales and organisational levels. The group adopted this title to describe the look of the on-going platform of collaboration, noting that the platform is part of governance and should be considered as such.

The proposed platform describes a more organic network of possibilities and places to connect and engage as well as plan and deliver on ground works. Key aspects were the annual gatherings and the active and connected digital space as well as the stories/narratives and key messages. Enabling and enhancing links between existing programs and participants was also highlighted - with waterwatch and canoeing programs being integrated with schools, Councils and friends groups as an example.

Governing the implementation of the Strategy

The governance group proposed a first model for how the implementation of the Strategy should be governed. This included having a senior level group tasked with overseeing region-wide issues and catchment based implementation groups which could work towards a collaborative implementation of the Healthy Waterways Strategy. Project groups could be formed as needed to support Strategy outcomes.

Tracking the effectiveness of the Strategy

Assessing how we are tracking in the implementation of the Strategy was recognised as critical. The tracking group proposed that Melbourne Water take the role of coordinating data, stories and monitoring with the objective to:

• Support accountability, evaluation and learning
• Ensure that the many contributors with different needs contribute to one coherent picture for the catchments and region.

The group recognised that data collection and management, custodianship and consistency can be tricky and that a good tracking system will:

• Identify the data and evidence that is needed to assess progress on HWS
• Be clear on how the reports made are used, what stories are needed and what language they should be expressed in (It is easy to assume that the stories I want in the language I use are what everyone wants)
• Use standard methods so that data can be aggregated and used for different scales
• Minimise, minimise, minimise, as large, complex, tell-everything tracking hasn’t proved to be sustainable.

Part 4: Next steps in the process

To close the workshop, Dan Besley described the next steps in the process, including:

• Making the outcomes of the lab available on the Your Say web site
• Asking volunteers to help present and test the results of this lab at the June catchment workshops
• The upcoming release of the draft Healthy Waterways Strategy.

Participants also offered feedback on whether it would be useful to formalise organisations’ commitments to the HWS through a statement. There was a general support, particularly for bigger organisations or stakeholders who have not opted in yet, and as long as the commitment did not become a barrier. Keeping the commitment broad and timebound would be useful for this.

Part 5: Evaluation from the sensing sheets

The project and each workshop are being evaluated to provide opportunities for ongoing learning. As a final action, participants completed a sensing sheet and provided comment on the design of the workshop and their experience of collaboration.

The response rate was 47% (15 out of 32 participants). More than 90% believed that the lab identified useful next steps for implementation. They appreciated being part of moving the Strategy into action, and enjoyed: the passion and commitment of others, the opportunity to share their ideas, and to plan for governance and implementation of the Strategy.

Question: What did you enjoy most about today?

Question: Since getting involved in HWS Refresh, what is one specific difference you have made to what you are doing on waterway health?

On the lab