Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Empowering watershed management in 2050: What are we missing?

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Empowering watershed management in 2050: What are we missing?"— Presentation transcript:

1 Empowering watershed management in 2050: What are we missing?

2 Watersheds are ecosystems and we (should) manage them as such
Watersheds are ecosystems and we (should) manage them as such. But the future is uncertain (due to climate change and many other influences) so we must manage adaptively. Globally and locally we need knowledge, tools and people to do that. Today, a journey from UNEP to WHAF to IISD to the classroom, and a conversation about what we seem to be missing.

3 Build a conceptual framework Contrast & compare EM & IWRM
16 Modules: Build a conceptual framework Contrast & compare EM & IWRM Ecosystem structure and function A framework for ecosystem state and impact Field trip to a local watershed Capacity development program Ecosystem management at the watershed scale UNEP & IISD, Using your framework to assess ecosystem state and function Understanding current conditions here Think like a manager: strategic, adaptive management Incentives & tools for local scale adaptive management Valuing ecosystem services Tradeoffs and goals in adaptive ecosystem management Selecting tools for local application Monitoring & evaluation Completing the cycle of strategic adaptive management Reporting, communication with stakeholders Synthesis and committing to the next steps

4 Field tested in Kenya Revised and published (2011) Developed ToT Version SE Asian field test in South Korea Pairs from 12 countries Further offered in West Asia ToT version Published (2013) Overall pretty good, not perfect

5 Bring that to the classroom
Water quality class About 30 people You are advising the Board and manager of a Minnesota watershed. How should he/she/they take an ecosystem approach in their management? Beth and Ben are critical here Use the WHAF and all associated materials Think about the watershed as an ecosystem We offer climate change scenarios They pose actions for the future

6 The work to date paid inadequate attention to climate change
So we developed The Adaptive Watershed (TAW): Training for watershed-based adaptation and management

7 14 Modules delivered in a 4-day workshop
From knowledge to action

8 The Adaptive Watershed (TAW): Training for watershed-based adaptation and management
Understand the watershed and analyze risks to ecosystems and livelihoods

9 The Adaptive Watershed (TAW): Training for watershed-based adaptation and management
Identify and prioritize options Identify opportunities and constraints

10 The Adaptive Watershed (TAW): Training for watershed-based adaptation and management
Potential field tests in Peru & Uganda in 2018 Monitor, evaluate and adapt Engage and communicate Envision a 2-year process of commitment, action, reporting, adapting

11 But we recognized a serious problem: We cannot manage for the benefit of individuals. Traditionally we manage for “the greater good”. And therefore, we manage for “the middle of the curve”. Which usually translates to the majority (and the loudest, most visible, most powerful). Which means “The most vulnerable” lose. And vulnerable might be defined socially, economically, culturally or in other ways. So TAW explicitly addresses vulnerable communities, breadth of stakeholder involvement, inclusivity.

12 Return to the classroom
About 5 graduate and 25 undergraduate students Advising the Board and manager of a Minnesota watershed. Still ecosystem scale, but now What should he/she/they do in 3-5 years to be most successful in 2050? Use the WHAF and all associated materials. Characterize the watershed in 7 weeks We offer climate change scenarios for two sub-basins. In the second 7 weeks, they frame actions for the next 3-5 years for each sub-basin. Beth and Ben guest lecture and participate a lot. Undergrads in teams of 4. Grads individually & they explicitly add EbA to that.

13 So how’s that working out?
These things are good WHAF is a great tool. Intuitive, informative, deep, rich. Interaction with Beth & Ben is very positive. They (& Kenny Bulmenfeld) help refine the exercise and refine sub-basin specifics. Interaction with DNR (i.e., Beth, Ben, WHAF) advances most students’ career goals.

14 So how’s that working out?
These things are not yet mature In TAW: There are no win-win outcomes; everything is a trade-off. Inclusivity comes at a cost. I’m not convinced that is sufficiently explicit. It’s not real until it’s been field tested (and revised). I want to see change on the ground. I intend to achieve that with the 2-year commitment of action, assessment, reporting and adaptation but it is exceedingly difficult. In the classroom Scenarios contain no demographic nor economic variables. Scenarios offer changes in mean temp and precipitation but extremes and seasonality will control responses. There is no consideration of social or economic vulnerability . I’m not convinced the scale is right; we’re simulating HUC 12s. There is variance within one of those; the scale of decisions is not yet explicit. Adaptability, especially hard vs. soft seems confusing: Everyone offers hard solutions (e.g., buffers). A few offer soft solutions (e.g., incentives). Almost nobody addresses governance, stakeholder involvement.

15 And next? Field test TAW? Maybe Uganda, maybe Peru, maybe not at all.
Classes again Fall 2018 Is this spatial scale (HUC 12) meaningful? Is it practical and necessary to add economic & demographic scenarios to a water quality class? WHAF continually evolves; what’s next and how do we use it? In what ways are governance, decision making, vulnerable communities meaningful in the WHAF? Or … are those outside the scope of the WHAF? How consistent are these questions and this momentum with what you see as needs and opportunities?


Download ppt "Empowering watershed management in 2050: What are we missing?"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google