08.04.2011 EGU General Assembly 2011 3-8, April 2011 Vienna Marek Giełczewski, Mateusz Stelmaszczyk, Mikołaj Piniewski, Tomasz Okruszko Warsaw University.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Development Alternatives SOUTH ASIA E N V I R O N M E N T O U T L O O K.
Advertisements

1 Lessons learned – success factors for biodiversity projects Peter Tramberend Environment Agency Austria.
World Water Scenarios 2012 – 2035 William J Cosgrove & Gilberto Gallopin Chicago 17 July 2009.
Stakeholder engagement to deliver river basin plans; just a matter of perceptions? Klaas-jan Douben Regional Water Authority Brabantse Delta Breda, The.
Module 4 Planning SP. What’s in Module 4  Opportunities for SP  Different SP models  Communication plan  Monitoring and evaluating  Working session.
IPN-ISRAEL WATER WEEK (I2W2)
The Knowledge Resources Guide The SUVOT Project Sustainable and Vocational Tourism Rimini, 20 October 2005.
Agricultural Policy Analysis Prof. Samuel Wangwe Executive Director REPOA 28 th July 2012.
IWRM PLAN PREPARED AND APPROVED. CONTENT Writing an IWRM plan The content of a plan Ensuring political and public participation Timeframe Who writes the.
Implementation of the Water Framework Directive - Uncertainty issues - Michiel Blind, RWS-RIZA.
Water Scarce Ecosystems A proposal for a UNCCD Policy Framework May
IWRM as a Tool for Adaptation to Climate Change
PEIP National workshop in Montenegro: developing environmental infrastructure projects in the water sector Feasibility Study Preparation Venelina Varbova.
IWRM as a Tool for Adaptation to Climate Change Introduction to IWRM and Climate Change.
WP 5: Assessment of Transition Pathways to Regional Sustainability of Agriculture “to build on findings from WP3 to inform participatory identification.
Eric Antwi Ofosu (PhD) Smart Sanitation & Washtech - KNUST.
European Economic and Social Committee EUROPEAN INDUSTRY AND MONETARY POLICY The role of the European Investment Bank MAIN PROVISIONAL CONCLUSIONS (To.
Global Water Partnership Meeting the WSSD action target on IWRM and water efficiency strategies: A how-to guide.
ICTs Tackling Climate Changes Dr. Amr Badawi Executive President NTRA.
Assessment on the implementation of the Mediterranean Strategy for Sustainable Development Dr Nicola Cantore Overseas Development Institute,
Yaqui Valley Land-Water System WaterAgriculture Industry Wetlands Aquaculture Urban Fisheries + Marine Estuaries + Fisheries Climate  (sea level, precip)
Development of lake Druksiai/Drisviaty Basin Management Program Feasibility study.
Country Summary for Ukraine (part 1) status for Roman Volosyanchuk, IUCN CPC.
SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME FP INCO-MPC-1 MEditerranean Development of Innovative Technologies for integrAted waTer managEment.
AWARE: Stakeholder Analysis Udaya Sekhar Nagothu, Per Stålnacke, Bioforsk, Norway. AWARE kick-off meeting Rome, 3-5 June, 09.
INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 1 Click to edit Master title style 1 Analysis of the planning process Why and how? Session.
“Policy-related information needs for decision makers dealing with food security in the context of environmental change” GECAFS Gainesville Meeting,
Session 4 Mainstreaming Climate Change Adaptation and Biodiversity Conservation in National, Sectoral and Donor Strategies.
Enver AKSOY, MSc Head of Strategy Development Board of MoFAL Policy approaches of Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock to pasture management in.
WP 3: Scenarios and management objectives Simo Sarkki & Timo P. Karjalainen GOHERR: Kick-off April.
Information and transboundary cooperation – challenges and responses Francesca Bernardini United Nations Economic Commission for Europe.
STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND TECHNIQUES.
Assessment work under the UNECE Water Convention and SEIS Annukka Lipponen Environmental Affairs Officer Secretariat of the UNECE Water Convention.
1 Joint Research Centre (JRC) Annual Meeting of the EGTC Platform The EGTC-ready to use - Beyond cohesion policy Ulla Engelmann Interinstitutional and.
Global Environmental Change and Food Systems Scenarios Research up to date Monika Zurek FAO April 2005.
Anticipatory governance: Theories of change in environmental outlooks Sietske Veenman and Pieter Leroy.
Stakeholder Participation and Analysis.  What is meaningful participation?  What is a stakeholder?  Why stakeholder participation?  What is participation?
WATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGY AND OPTIONS IDENTIFIED.
ESPON Workshop at the Open Days 2012 “Creating Results informed by Territorial Evidence” Brussels, 10 October 2012 Introduction to ESPON Piera Petruzzi,
Flagship Project Final Conference Thiemo W. Eser Ministry of Sustaianble Development and Infrastructure, Luxembourg 16 December 2015 in Brussels Messages.
Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) European Commission expert group on forest fires Antalya, 26 April 2012 Ernst Schulte, DG ENV on behalf.
Marco Martuzzi World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe Health Impact Assessment as part of SEA.
Pilot Project on implementation of SEA for regional planning in Ukraine Prof. Dr. Michael Schmidt Dmitry Palekhov Brandenburg University of Technology.
Stream A LEGISLATION AND POLICY report back. Main issuess Formal Aspects Experience and lessons learned Plans and visions for the future Actions.
Water quality and water pollution – data for old and new policy questions 5th World Water Forum Session Data integration and dissemination: From.
International Network Of Basin Organizations topic 3.1: “Basin Management and Transboundary Cooperation”. Operational tools  Long term basin management.
Challenges, results and experience with cross-border cooperation - local and national level impacts - DRIMON and Transboundary Prespa Lake Basin Crossing.
1 Ecologic Institute Science and Policy for a Sustainable World Berlin – Brussels Washington DC – San Mateo CA Ecologic.eu EIUS.org.
Testing methods for the co-production of target knowledge Tobias Buser, Network for Transdisciplinary Research td-net, Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences.
Convention of the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes Developing a guidance on water and climate adaptation for the.
By Dr. Talat AnwarAdvisor Centre for Policy Studies, CIIT, Islamabad Centre for Policy Studies, CIIT, Islamabad
Dr. Vladimir Mamaev UNDP Regional Technical Advisor Integrated Natural Resource Management in the Baikal Basin Transboundary Ecosystem Russian Federation.
Jean-Louis Weber, European Environment Agency
19th Council of Europe Meeting of the Workshops for the Implementation of the European Landscape Convention The implementation of the European.
The French National Agency on Water and Aquatic Environments
5-b) 2012 Blueprint to Safeguard Europe's Water Resources
The importance of water
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
5-b) 2012 Blueprint to Safeguard Europe's Water Resources
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)
Commission report on Art. 8 WFD Monitoring programmes
A Blueprint to safeguard Europe’s Water Resources
LIFE and the implementation of the Water Framework Directive
A Blueprint to safeguard Europe’s waters
ECONOMICS IN THE WFD PROCESS
The Water Framework Directive: Challenges, Threats and Opportunities
THE WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE (WFD)
Environmental Accounts and Indicators
Natural Water Retention Measures
Andrea Tilche Unit Head of the Water Key Action
Presentation transcript:

EGU General Assembly , April 2011 Vienna Marek Giełczewski, Mateusz Stelmaszczyk, Mikołaj Piniewski, Tomasz Okruszko Warsaw University of Life Sciences Department of Hydraulic Engineering Stakeholders’ participation in the water scenarios development process Narew River Basin case study

Outline of the presentation Introduction to research settings and to study area Methods Results  Main drivers  Present and future state of water system  Backcasting – how to reach future state?  Quantification for modelling purposes Conclusions

Introduction – research settings Part of research of the 6 EU Framework IP project SCENES „Water Scenarios for Europe and for Neighbouring States” Similar methodology applied for three levels: pan- European, regional and local (pilot areas) 10 Pilot Areas located in the different regions Narew River Basin, one of the Pilot Areas

Introduction - Narew River Basin

Methods - general Five steps: 1. Characterising present and near future; 2. Looking at the future (developing visions); 3 Critical review of developed visions; 4. Playing it back; 5. Quantification for modelling purposes Scenario development workshops: four workshops were organized in the NRB during Stakeholders participation: more than 40 people representing various sectors participated in the workshops Combination of different methods: qualitative methods (card-technique, discussion groups and collages), semi- quantitative methods (Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping, spidergrams and time trends) and method to link qualitative storylines with quantified scenarios were used

Methods – applied card-technique - defining present drivers playing the most important role spidergrams - setting up the importance of the drivers Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping (FCM) - recognition of present and future situation collages - drawing the future visions storylines - elaborating the future visions to give a new insight and understanding of such a complex system as the NRB backcasting procedure – finding out the possible ways to reach selected objective (a desired future state) to be reached by 2050 by casting back from this end point time trends – determining potential magnitude of changes in values of the selected characteristics questionnaire – translating the selected issues from the storylines into quantified drivers to be used for hydrological modelling with the SWAT model

Results – main drivers and their importance Driver C1; Flood protection4,9 4,7 C2; Water quality in lakes6,47,4 C3; Water-sewage management 8,4 7,9 C4; Nature valuable areas7,4 8,4 C5; Spatial planning6,98,3 C6; Melioration systems6,44,8 C7; Agriculture influence on water status 7,86,9 C8; Agriculture5,36,9 C9; Tourism6,18,1 C10; Role of forest5,36,2 C11; Transboundary co- operation 4,4 5,4 C12; Water retention7,37,1

Results – main drivers and their importance The most important drivers according to the stakeholders, concerning the present state of the NRB were: C7: Impact of agriculture on water resources, C3: Water-sewage management, C4: Natural valuable areas and C12: Water retention. In the future situation driver C7: Impact of agriculture on water resources is losing its strength, when the factors such as C2: Water quality in lakes, C5: Spatial planning and C9: Tourism become more important.

Results - Present state of water system - FCM The most often related drivers: C8: Agriculture, C9: Tourism, and C4: Nature valuable areas, but also C5: Spatial planning and C12: Water retention Relatively large number of relationships between drivers Many relationships also have feedback. Defined relationships were relatively strong PRESENT SITUATION

”Fast track” scenarios - Global scenarios Solidarity/Pro-activeSelf-interest/Reactive Regional Global Markets First Policy First Security First Sustainability First

Results - Sustainability First scenario – collages, FCM, storylines The crucial driver is: C4: Spatial planning, that will, in a combination with C12: Legal and formal issues, set up a frame for this scenario Many elements associated with Policy First scenario Most plausible and desirable scenario Agriculture and Tourism will stay as most important sectors PRESENT SITUATION SUSTAINABILITY FIRST MARKET FIRST SUSTAINABILITY FIRST

Results - Markets First scenario – FCM, storylines Not likely to happen. Will require a push by an external factor to go this direction The same drivers Agriculture, Tourism and Spatial Planning are important but different, economical driven, directions of development Takes into account the later second phase when there will be turn into more pro- environmental direction PRESENT SITUATION SUSTAINABILITY FIRST MARKET FIRST

Results – Sustainability First scenario - backcasting

Results – Markets First scenario - backcasting

Results – Backcasting The same issue selected – good water status – for both scenarios, extra indication that this is the main issue in the Narew River Basin; in SF the goal is reached by 2035 than even improvement, in MF is just reached in 2050 – optimistic approach; large importance of education, societal awareness, legal and monitoring issues – importance of ‘soft’ development; need for a leading force to perform changes, especially in SF scenario.

Results – Quantification for modelling During the last workshop stakeholders were asked about qualitative trends in selected drivers of the SWAT model (as group work) and about the quantitative meaning of previously elaborated linguistic terms (in individual questionnaires). The questions focused on the future changes in: (1) land use (especially agricultural and built-up areas); (2) amount of mineral/organic fertilisers applied in agriculture; (3) percent of irrigated grasslands and drained arable land; (4) amount and treatment level of municipal and industrial wastewater. During the 4 th workshop stakeholders were asked about qualitative trends in selected drivers of the SWAT model (as group work) and about the quantitative meaning of previously elaborated linguistic terms (in individual questionnaires). The questions focused on the future changes in: (1) land use (especially agricultural and built- up areas); (2) amount of mineral/organic fertilisers applied in agriculture; (3) percent of irrigated grasslands and drained arable land ; (4) amount and treatment level of municipal and industrial wastewater. The Table and Figure aside (on the left) present the answers to one of the questions: What will be the future change in forested area?

Results – Quantification for modelling What will be the future change in forested area? Scenario SFMF"No scen." Regions Upper Narew Biebrza Masurian Lakes Lower Narew Scenario SFMF"No scen." Regions Upper Narew Biebrza Masurian Lakes Lower Narew Scenario SFMF"No scen." Regions Upper Narew Biebrza Masurian Lakes Lower Narew Scenario SFMF"No scen." Regions Upper Narew Biebrza Masurian Lakes Lower Narew Scenario SFMF"No scen." Regions Upper Narew Biebrza Masurian Lakes Lower Narew During the 4 th workshop stakeholders were asked about qualitative trends in selected drivers of the SWAT model (as group work) and about the quantitative meaning of previously elaborated linguistic terms (in individual questionnaires). The questions focused on the future changes in: (1) land use (especially agricultural and built- up areas); (2) amount of mineral/organic fertilisers applied in agriculture; (3) percent of irrigated grasslands and drained arable land ; (4) amount and treatment level of municipal and industrial wastewater. The Table and Figure aside (on the left) present the answers to one of the questions: What will be the future change in forested area? During the 4 th workshop stakeholders were asked about qualitative trends in selected drivers of the SWAT model (as group work) and about the quantitative meaning of previously elaborated linguistic terms (in individual questionnaires). The questions focused on the future changes in: (1) land use (especially agricultural and built- up areas); (2) amount of mineral/organic fertilisers applied in agriculture; (3) percent of irrigated grasslands and drained arable land ; (4) amount and treatment level of municipal and industrial wastewater. The Table and Figure aside (on the left) present the answers to one of the questions: What will be the future change in forested area?

Conclusions (1) The participatory scenario development process seems to be an efficient tool for formulating possible future visions for water management related issues. This process was accepted by the stakeholders, since it stimulates thinking in a systematic way and helps to structure all the elements of scenario development process. The stakeholders were involved in the scenario development process. It also gives an opportunity to share and discuss opinions with the stakeholders coming from different institutions and fields.

Conclusions (2) The similarity of the results achieved by different stakeholders’ groups shows that the proposed methodology works well for the situation when all involved groups have the same starting point (set of the main drivers) and represent similar level of expertise. However, there is a question how much the results would have differed if parallel groups of the stakeholders had been working fully independently. Scenarios quantification for modelling purposes is feasible but only limited number of elements can be parameterized.

Conclusions (3) In the case of the Sustainability First scenario the elaborated results represent very well the present and future situation of the Pilot Area in a general sense. Combination of aiming for sustainable development with relatively strong impact of the policy regulations is regarded by many stakeholders (including policy and decision makers) as the most plausible and desired future development for the NRB since many years already. The Market First based results well represented the opinion of the stakeholders if this scenario were to happen. However, in the opinion of the participants it is very unlikely that it will happen. Such future development seems to be not plausible at the moment and as it was stressed by the participants, only a strong external factor could push the development of the NRB in that direction.

Conclusions (4) Climate change appears to be a minor factor shaping the future of water in the Narew River Basin in the view of the stakeholders. However, a robust information on impact of climate change at the local scale is not sufficient. Bringing such information and combining it with developed water scenarios is necessary to achieve a comprehensive future vision for the region.

Thank you for your attention!!!