1 / 76

WINCOMS : W ater Framework Directive – I nte g ration, N egotiation and C ommunication of O ptimal M easures with

WINCOMS : W ater Framework Directive – I nte g ration, N egotiation and C ommunication of O ptimal M easures with S takeholders. Michael Bruen, Mary Kelly, William Magette. WINCOMS. WFD: a detailed assessment of available measures

lexiss
Télécharger la présentation

WINCOMS : W ater Framework Directive – I nte g ration, N egotiation and C ommunication of O ptimal M easures with

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. WINCOMS :Water Framework Directive – Integration, Negotiation and Communication of Optimal Measures with Stakeholders Michael Bruen, Mary Kelly, William Magette

  2. WINCOMS • WFD: a detailed assessment of available measures • recommendations for and practical demonstrations of decision support systems • integrate knowledge of the best available measures with the criteria and preferences of all relevant stakeholders • can be used for decision analysis, negotiation and mediation in developing WFD policy and measures

  3. Research Context

  4. Objective 1 Produce a comprehensive scientific and technical description of all measures available to meet the requirements of the WFD together with a ranking on the basis of all relevant criteria, using formal multi-criteria methods. [ ranked list of measures and criteria]. These results are targeted principally at RBD decision makers, but will also add to stakeholder and general technical understanding of the performance, advantages and disadvantages of all potential measures.

  5. Objective 2 Survey existing decision support systems and identify a short-list of 2 or 3 of the most suitable for WFD decision-making. Implement, adopt and test these in a case-study situation (using the ERBD project), evaluate their performance (particularly in respect of interaction with stakeholders) and recommend the most suitable system or approach. [ survey of DSS, ranked short-list and demonstration of recommended DSS in conjunction with Eastern RBD ]. The principle targets are stakeholders and decision makers involved in WFD activities.

  6. Objective 3 Identify and study the knowledge, opinions and preferences of all relevant stakeholders and integrate the results with the decision support systems implemented in objective 2.[  report on stakeholders attitudes and preferences, on practicality and value of DSS as decision, negotiation and mediating tool in developing policy/ measures.] These results will be of wide applicability in the sociology of environmental opinions and preferences and the communication and influence of science knowledge.

  7. WINCOMS Project - people • Engineers • Scientists • Sociologists • Communication specialists • RBD Managers • Invited experts

  8. Objectives / Criteria

  9. Objectives / Criteria Indicators

  10. Objectives / Criteria Indicators Alternatives / Measures

  11. Objectives / Criteria Indicators Alternatives / Measures Simulation / Assessment

  12. Objectives / Criteria Indicators Alternatives / Measures Simulation / Assessment Decision / Programme

  13. Objectives / Criteria Indicators Alternatives / Measures Simulation / Assessment Decision / Programme NO Agreement ? YES

  14. Objectives / Criteria Indicators Alternatives / Measures Simulation / Assessment Decision / Programme Revise Priorities NO Agreement ? Negotiation YES

  15. Objectives / Criteria Indicators Alternatives / Measures More alternatives Simulation / Assessment Compromise Decision / Programme Revise Priorities NO Agreement ? Negotiation YES

  16. Objectives / Criteria Refine Objectives Indicators Reflection Alternatives / Measures More alternatives Simulation / Assessment Compromise Decision / Programme Revise Priorities NO Agreement ? Negotiation YES

  17. Ladder of Participation* Enlightened Approach Old Command and Control Approach (*Based on Watson, 1996) Watson, R. D. 1996. Integrating catchment management: the human dimension. Proceedings, Multiple Land Use and Catchment Management International Conference, Macaulay Land Use Research Institute, Aberdeen, Scotland. Pp. 125-137.

  18. Decision Support Systems : Pressures • Increasing quantity of data ( spatial) • Increasing complexity of analysis ( models) • Need for visualisation/demonstration of results ( decision makers) • Transparent and logical decision support ( MCDA) • Public participation ( stakeholders)

  19. Objectives / Criteria Refine Objectives Indicators Reflection Alternatives / Measures More alternatives Data Simulation / Assessment Compromise Decision / Programme Revise Priorities NO Agreement ? Negotiation YES

  20. DTM - slope but also... topographical wetness indices flow path length Soil P chemistry component-to ‘rank’ soil types in terms of P sorption/desorption

  21. Objectives / Criteria Refine Objectives Indicators Reflection Alternatives / Measures More alternatives Data Simulation / Assessment Compromise Decision / Programme Revise Priorities NO Agreement ? Negotiation YES

  22. Objectives / Criteria Refine Objectives Indicators Reflection Alternatives / Measures More alternatives Data Simulation / Assessment Compromise Models Decision / Programme Revise Priorities NO Agreement ? Negotiation YES

  23. BASINS-3 system

  24. Conceptual representation of the Water Dynamic Modelling in the HSPF model SURFACE FLOW SURFACEZONE UPPER ZONE INTER FLOW ZONE INTER FLOW LOWER ZONE INFILT: infiltration parameter LZSN: nominal lower zone storage LZS: actual lower zone storage INEXP: exponent parameter IND: ratio of max. to mean infiltration capac. RTF: interflow parameter GROUND WATER ZONE BASE FLOW

  25. Evapotrnaspiration loss model Rain and Snow input Canopy interception model Snow melt model Overland flow & Channel model Root zone Unsaturated zone Groundwater zone Variably Saturated flow model Components of the flow routine in the SHETRAN model

  26. Oona catchment : daily observed and modelled flows and loads of dissolved reactive phosphorus (SWAT model) (1/1/2002 - 31/12/2002)

  27. Oona : Total Phosphorus

  28. Objectives / Criteria Refine Objectives Indicators Reflection Alternatives / Measures More alternatives Data Simulation / Assessment Compromise Models Decision / Programme Revise Priorities NO Agreement ? Negotiation YES

  29. Objectives / Criteria Refine Objectives Indicators Reflection Alternatives / Measures More alternatives Data Simulation / Assessment Compromise Models Decision / Programme Revise Priorities MCDA NO Agreement ? Negotiation YES

  30. MCDA in Mulino DSS (Giupponi & Fassio)

  31. Objectives / Criteria Refine Objectives Indicators Reflection Alternatives / Measures More alternatives Data Simulation / Assessment Compromise Models Decision / Programme Revise Priorities MCDA NO Agreement ? Negotiation YES

  32. Objectives / Criteria Refine Objectives Indicators Reflection Alternatives / Measures More alternatives Data Simulation / Assessment Compromise Models Decision / Programme Revise Priorities MCDA NO Agreement ? Negotiation Tools Negotiation YES

  33. Group discussions

  34. Compromise in Mulino (Giupponi & Fassio )

  35. GOUVERNe (Quintana, Fundowicz, Periera, Blasques)

  36. Objectives / Criteria Refine Objectives Indicators Reflection Alternatives / Measures More alternatives Data Simulation / Assessment Compromise Models Decision / Programme Revise Priorities MCDA NO Agreement ? Negotiation Tools Negotiation YES

  37. Objectives / Criteria Refine Objectives Cognitive Mapping Indicators Reflection Alternatives / Measures More alternatives Data Simulation / Assessment Compromise Models Decision / Programme Revise Priorities MCDA NO Agreement ? Negotiation Tools Negotiation YES

  38. SOCIOLOGISTS

  39. Aspects / Reviews • Approaches to management/decision problem • Formal Multi-Criteria Decision tools • Modelling Frameworks • Existing DSS systems • People Issues • Other Issues

  40. Approaches - I • Adaptive management • Argumentative approach • Cognitive Mapping • Cooperative modelling and design • Domains of discourse • Ecosystem approach • Evidential Reasoning • Groups: Negotiation and Consensus building

  41. Approaches -II • Qualitative Reasoning • Rule-based approaches • Scenario analysis • Social Learning • Social multi-criteria decision support • Soft systems approach • Traditional Community Governance

  42. Adaptive Management - 1 • Recognises that because of significant uncertainties in the operation and management of environmental systems and that pre-determined optimal solutions may not be appropriate. • Policy evolves in response to better understanding based on studying the effects and effectiveness of policy changes

  43. Adaptive Management-2 • Recognises significant uncertainty in hydro-ecological systems • Iterative management decisions are “experiments” • Explicit experimental learning procedure to reduce uncertainty • Also better validation of models • Can be “Passive” or “Active”

  44. Adaptive Management: examples • Water Framework Directive cycle • “Room for the River” – the Netherlands • “Managed Retreat” – the U.K. • In-built flexibility (e.g. OPW & Climate Change) - Ireland

  45. Argumentative approach • The study of argumentation is deeplyrooted in various disciplines such as philosophy,logic andlinguistics, • deals with the verbal, contextual, situationaland other pragmatic factors ofcommunication process inareas where logic cannot adequately address the situation.

More Related