Résumé
This communication features the various sources of ambiguity and uncertainty at stake in the implementation of drought management, as it is framed by the 1992 drought decree. It emphasizes three key activities in this decision process: characterizing the hydrological situation, assessing this situation, and anticipating its evolution in the short term. These activities face an intrinsic ambiguity, due to (i) the multiple ways for characterizing a situation, (ii) the multiple ways to set benchmark values, and (iii) the uncertainties on the evolution of water supply and demand, even on the short term. However, only the outcomes of these activities are publicized and open to debate. The observation of drought management setting in action at the county level leads to notice the merging of a debate on the qualification of the situation with the debate on the implementation of actions triggered by this situation, such as restriction on water withdrawal. This merging leads in practice into providing arguments for stakeholders to protest on the implementation of restrictions. We argue that both debates should be hold in various times and arenas. The debate on the qualification of the situation should take place earlier in the process and involve all stakeholders, in order to take into account several rationales, instead of the technical one only.