Political Ontology in the Environmental Management of Hydrosocial Territories: Introducing Water-Important SocioEcological Systems (WISe)

This paper addresses a persistent divide in water governance: critical frameworks reveal power dynamics and ontological diversity but lack operational guidance, while operational frameworks prioritize technical management at the expense of ontological plurality and social legitimacy. We introduce Water-Important Socioecological Systems (WISe) as a prescriptive framework that integrates political ontology with hydrosocial territory analysis to inform more reflexive and inclusive water governance. WISe designates specific zones where ecological functions for water sustainability are concentrated and where social practices, productive livelihoods, and symbolic meanings coexist inseparably with biophysical processes. Unlike Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM), which treats social and ecological dimensions as separate pillars, and the Ostrom Social-Ecological Systems framework, which undertheorizes ontological plurality, WISe explicitly centers the coexistence of multiple ways of understanding and relating to water as a governance principle. The framework was developed through a five-phase mixed-methods conceptual inquiry combining a systematic literature review (202 documents), an exploratory stakeholder survey of 223 participants across six Colombian hydrographic basins, and an analysis of designated water-strategic ecosystems. The findings reveal that ontological diversity is distributed across all stakeholder groups: hydrological supply framings predominate (36.4–45.8%), yet territorial-integrated perspectives appear in all groups, with government actors (22.9%) showing the highest proportion. The majority (56.1%) perceive WISe as exclusively state-managed, revealing a dominant ontological position that reduces socioecological territories to objects of administrative control. This article presents WISe as a conceptual and prescriptive framework informed by exploratory empirical evidence. Rather than offering a definitive empirical validation of the model, this study provides initial analytical grounding for its development and identifies indicative patterns that warrant further testing across other geographical and institutional contexts. WISe offers a framework comprising six defining characteristics and five operational dimensions that bridge theoretical understandings with governance-oriented analysis, treating ontological difference not as an obstacle but as essential knowledge for more reflexive and equitable water governance.