Download 5. Scientific approach: description of the

886445723
6/20/2017
Research Proposal
Perspectives in Integrated Water Management in River Deltas
Vulnerability, robust management strategies and adaptation paths under global change
Content
0.
SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................ II
1.
INTRODUCTION AND PROBLEM DEFINITION ............................................................................. 1
2.
OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................................. 2
3.
PROJECT OVERVIEW................................................................................................................. 4
4.
STATE OF THE ART – PREVIOUS CLIMATE IMPACT STUDIES ON RIVERS AND DELTAS ............. 5
5.
SCIENTIFIC APPROACH: DESCRIPTION OF THE RESEARCH AND SUB-PROJECTS AND EXPECTED
RESULTS ........................................................................................................................................... 8
5.1.
5.1.1
5.1.2
5.1.3
5.1.4
5.2.
5.3.
5.4.
5.4.1
5.4.2
5.4.3
5.4.4
5.4.5
5.5.
Concepts ......................................................................................................................... 8
Integrated system analysis using PSIR: Pressure, State, Impact, and Response ....... 8
Scenario analysis using perspectives ......................................................................... 9
Vulnerability and Scenario analysis using PSIR and Rapid Assessment Modelling11
Towards adaptation strategies: the transition approach ........................................... 14
Geographical scope ...................................................................................................... 16
Inception phase ............................................................................................................ 16
Description of sub-projects .......................................................................................... 18
Sub-project 1: Scoping: vulnerability and stakeholder analysis .............................. 18
Sub-project 2: Water system .................................................................................... 19
Sub-project 3: Societal response and transitions ..................................................... 20
Sub-project 4: Integrated scenarios ......................................................................... 21
Sub-project 5: Robust management strategies and adaptation paths ....................... 23
Timeframe of activities ................................................................................................ 24
6.
SCIENTIFIC AND SOCIAL RELEVANCE .................................................................................... 24
7.
PROJECT TEAM, COSTS AND ORGANISATION ......................................................................... 26
8.
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 27
i
886445723
6/20/2017
0. Summary
Project
Title
Perspectives in Integrated Water Management in River Deltas
Vulnerability, robust management strategies and adaptation paths under global
change
Problem
Water management faces major challenges to cope with potential global change
definition
impacts, and the inherent uncertainties surrounding future developments. Deltas are
areas which are most at risk. Without robust management strategies and adaptation
paths, human and natural services in deltas may suffer sever damage and we may be
forced into sudden unplanned actions which are far more costly and less
appreciated.
Objective
The project has three main objectives:
1. To assess the vulnerability of river deltas and the present-day functioning of their
freshwater systems for global change.
2. To identify robust water management strategies for the Rhine-Meuse delta under
uncertainty.
3. To compare strategies for the Rhine-Meuse delta with strategies for selected river
deltas in different climate and socio-economic settings.
Approach
First a vulnerability and stakeholder analysis will be carried out to understand the
working of both the physical and socio-economic system and define a preliminary
set of adaptation strategies. A set of integrated transient scenarios will be analysed
on their benefits and costs and influence on perspectives with the Pressure, State,
Impact, Response concept supported by integration of the hydrological system
including water related services and the societal response. This involves stakeholder
participation, integrated transition scenarios and integrated model runs with a Rapid
Assessment Model, describing the PSIR with transfer functions and decision rules.
The stakeholder analysis and the transition approach will result in narratives in
which various future developments including the water system, societal responses
and external developments are interrelated in a consistent way and illustrate typical
transition cases. Scenarios will be based on the perspective theory, stakeholder
analysis and the probability distribution of climate parameters. The results of the
scenario analysis will be used to evaluate the management strategies and develop
adaptation paths.
Product
 Vulnerability of river deltas to climate change (how much climate change can we
cope with)
 Rapid Assessment Model for impact analysis of transient runs, including
hydrology and water related services and response of society
 A set of consistent scenarios and storylines
 Framework to evaluate robustness and flexibility of adaptation strategies
 Adaptation path to a climate sustainable delta
Consortium Deltares, ICIS, Utrecht University, Carthago Consultancy, Twente University,
Erasmus University, Waterdienst, KNMI, Pantopicon
Contact
E. van Beek, Deltares and Twente University, [email protected], 015 285
8419
H. Middelkoop Utrecht University, [email protected], 030 2532167
M. Haasnoot, Deltares, [email protected], 015 285 8775
ii
886445723
6/20/2017
1. Introduction and problem definition
Water management faces major challenges to cope with potential global change impacts, and the
inherent uncertainties surrounding future developments. The Rhine-Meuse delta in the
Netherlands is one of the example river deltas in the world where a history of centuries of
intensive river regulation, water management, land reclamation, technical advance and high
population density and intensive economic activities have put a strong pressure on the delta, even
under present-day conditions. The prospects of sea level rise, climate change and soil subsidence
have raised the need for identifying strategies to cope with the anticipated changes (ARK, 2007;
Routeplanner, 2007). The transition towards new water management strategies in a world with
changed climate and socio-economic conditions has become an issue of particular concern.
River deltas are unique areas with a high economic and ecological value, where effects of climate
change and sea level rise will accumulate and first become apparent. Natural deltas comprise
large wetland areas of high ecological value, with gradients between saltwater, brackish,
freshwater and terrestrial habitats. Over the pas centuries, many deltas have become among the
most densely populated areas in the world, with a concentration of agriculture, urban areas,
infrastructure and industrial areas. Deltas face a future with several threads for their sustainable
functioning. These include sea level rise, soil subsidence, changes in upstream river discharge and
sediment load due to human interference and climate change, as well as an increased socioeconomic pressure. The problem is that these pressures and their impacts will accumulate in the
deltas.
Extreme events in the last decades have raised questions about the robustness and flexibility of
current water management strategies in low-lying densely populated deltas. The floods in 1993
and 1995 in the Netherlands have increased the awareness of the vulnerability of living in a delta
in the Netherlands (Middelkoop et al. 2000, Vis et al. 2001, Vis et al. 2003). The floods caused by
hurricane Katrina in the Mississippi delta in 2005, the ‘drowning’ of Venice due to a strong soil
subsidence and the frequently occurring floods in Bangladesh are international examples of this
vulnerability. Climate change and sea level rise will increase the risk and damage from current en
future harmful impacts, with deltas among the areas most at risk. “Europe must adapt now”, is the
main message of the EU in the Green Paper on adapting to climate change (EEA 2005). If no
adaptation measures are taken, we may be forced into sudden unplanned actions which are far
more costly (Stern review, EU 2007). Furthermore, climate change itself is not the only thing
contributing to this increasing vulnerability, future demographic, societal, economic and political
developments will increase the vulnerability and the cost to societies of climate change and
climate variability (Stehr and Von Storch 2005).
Although in recent years a lot of progress has been achieved in understanding the climate,
uncertainties remain on e.g. climate projections, climate impacts and the benefits of adaptation
measures (Schiermeier 2004, EEA 2005, IPCC 2007a, EU 2007). With the new IPCC Fourth
Assessment Report (AR4) and the 2006 scenarios for climate change and sea level rise in the
Netherlands (KNMI 2006), the uncertainties have even increased. The apparent need for renewed
impact studies and to adapt water management strategies accordingly would arise each time when
climate scenarios are updated, which is an undesired situation. This problem is related to the
classical approach of many of current climate impact studies: use scenarios as a starting point for
impact assessment and define adaptation strategies based on the impacts (examples of these
studies are Middelkoop et al. 2000, EEA 2005, Droogers & Aerts 2005, Haasnoot & Van der
Molen 2005). Another disadvantage is that the results of such studies strongly depend on the
1
886445723
6/20/2017
chosen scenario(s) and the assumptions made on scientific and socio-economic uncertainties
related to these issues.
Apart from the fundamental uncertainties in climate system and socio-economic context, there are
other uncertainties to be reckoned with. These uncertainties are related to the so-called ‘societal
response’. The societal response refers to (changes in) how ‘we’ (as a society) think about water
management, and how we go about doing it. It refers not only to water management policy itself,
but explicitly refers to water related behaviour and support for water management strategies
broadly distributed within a society. There are ample historic examples of large scale water
management projects which would probably no longer be executed in this time. For instance the
creation of the deep polders in North Holland, the creation of Flevoland, and the Delta works
closing down the Zeeland estuary were carried out under the belief that human can control the
water system. Nowadays, this perspective is no longer valid. On the contrary: water managers are
creating more room for water, instead of creating land. It is most likely that also the current
perspective will change towards the future. Its direction, however, is highly uncertain. Just as in
the case of climate change, it would therefore be advisable to anticipate on possible perspective
changes when designing climate adaptation strategies, rather then fall in the trap of only reactive
responses.
The question that rises is then: which is, given the uncertain future, the best water management
strategy? Adaptation to climate change and sea level rise means dealing with uncertainties to
define robust and flexible adaptation strategies for water management. Robust strategies are
insensitive to unanticipated changes in the pressures; flexible strategies allow for adaptation in
response to (or in view of anticipated) changes and do not a-priori exclude alternative strategies.
Scenario studies on water management in the Netherlands undertaken in past ten years were
mainly ‘What-if’ assessments, based on comparing the state of social and ecological functions of
the water systems in a future (scenario) situation with the current situation. These did not result in
identification of the robustness of water management strategies in a changing world. Moreover,
they did not analyse implementation paths of transition into a changed world. The identification
of robust and flexible strategies requires novel approaches in scenario analysis. It firstly requires
integrated scenarios, in which climate-related pressures are related to socio-economic context,
impact assessment is carried out against the changing socio-economic context, and the responses
to these impacts in the course of time are considered. Secondly, it requires new concepts and tools
to explore the range of possible futures, thereby considering the interaction between pressures impacts and management responses in a dynamic way. This allows determining transition
pathways towards new water management strategies.
2. Objectives
The project has three main objectives:
1. To assess the vulnerability of river deltas and the present-day functioning of their freshwater
systems for global change.
2. To identify robust water management strategies for the Rhine-Meuse delta under uncertainty.
3. To compare strategies for the Rhine-Meuse delta with strategies for selected river deltas in
different climate and socio-economic settings.
To achieve these objectives the following sub-goals are defined:
a. Concerning the water management system:
 To determine and understand the societal responses (changes in attitude and behavior of
society, stakeholders and water management) and potential transitions in water
2
886445723
6/20/2017
management associated with climate events, socio-economic trends (pressures) and
changes in the water systems (impacts);
 To develop a conceptual model that describes the societal responses to climate-related
and socio-economic pressures;
 To translate the socio-economic water management responses into sets of more generic
‘decision rules’.
b. Concerning the water system and its functioning:
 To analyse the hydrologic impacts of the delta water systems to changes in climate, sea
level and human interference.
 To determine the relationships between hydrological boundary conditions (states) and the
functioning of the water-related economic and ecological services of the delta (impacts).
 To derive simple transfer functions that describe the essence of the physical relationships
between climate variables – hydrological states – water related services.
c. Concerning the water management strategies:
 To establish a set of plausible and consistent story lines encompassing climate change,
socio-economic developments, as well as the responses and transitions in water
management over the forthcoming century;
 To develop an integrated Rapid Assessment Model (RAM) encompassing transfer
functions and socio-economic decision rules for dynamic simulation of the impacts of
climate and socio-economic pressures, water management responses, and resulting
changes in the state of the water system;
 Using the RAM, to evaluate water management strategies and transitions in water
management for different scenarios;
 To derive robust water management strategies and to assess ‘utopian transition schemes’,
which describe adaptation paths, including an order of the implementation of physical
and policy measures and a description of activities to promote transitions.
This project plan forms a follow-up of the project ‘Perspectieven in Integraal Waterbeheer’
coordinated by ICIS Maastricht, of which the inception phase was carried out in 2006-2007
within the framework of the ICES programme ‘Living with Water’.
3
886445723
6/20/2017
Why do we need to evaluate the robustness of water management strategies and why
do we need perspective based transient scenarios and a fast pressure impact tool to
do this?
We need to evaluate the robustness of the water management system:
 to be able to cope with uncertainties in future conditions of our planet;
 to be able to deal with uncertainties in the working of our planet;
 to cope with climate variability.
We need perspective-based scenarios:
 to ensure consistency in scenarios;
 to include perception of society on water management strategies, e.g. on when
and how to act, what risk we want to take and how much we want to pay for this;
 to include the perception of society on the world, e.g. whether we believe in
climate change;
 to analyse how society will respond to (climate) events.
We need transient scenarios:
 to plan a route, an adaptation path,
 to take into account whether new knowledge becomes available in the future
about e.g. climate change and the response of the physical system,
 to understand which additional preparations, other than water management
strategies, need to be taken,
 to analyse the dynamics between the physical and the socio-economic system.
To support the above activities we need a tool that:
 deals with the complexity of physical and socio-economic interactions;
 involves the whole cause-effect chain, from climate to physical conditions (water
quantity and quality) to impacts on water services like ecosystems, agriculture,
industry, recreation, to the response of people on these impacts in terms of
perceptions and water management;
 includes average conditions as well as events;
 is able to analyse a lot of possible futures, strategies and implementation paths;
 is able to run a lot of time-series and ensembles.
3. Project overview
The outline of the project is displayed in figure 1. In this project we will carry out an integrated
approach involving both natural sciences and human sciences. The natural sciences part involves
hydrological modelling, and the establishment of assessment tools to explore the vulnerability of
river deltas for different scenarios. The human sciences part involves the analysis of the processes
and actors involved in water management and decision making, as well as in transitions from one
water management type to another. For this purpose we will apply the framework of perspectives
in combination with additional concepts that describe the human processes. In the integration part
we will establish scenarios that comprise both the physical environment and the human
management domain. Scenarios will be based on a participative process, involving different
4
886445723
6/20/2017
stakeholders and other players in water management, as well as as assessment model that
comprises both physical rules of the water systems as well as ‘decision rules’ describing water
management responses. Using these sets of scenarios for key areas in the Rhine-Meuse delta as
well as in deltas on other parts of the world we will evaluate different management strategies and
transitions between water management strategies. This knowledge will provide water
management with a better understanding of the risks of different strategies, insight in robust
strategies under uncertainty, and controls of transitions in water management.
Scoping phase
Scoping
Scoping
• • Vulnerabilities
Vulnerabilitiesand
andadaptation
adaptationoptions
options
• • Stakeholder
analysis
Stakeholder analysis
• • Tools
Toolsand
andmethodologies
methodologies
Analysis phase
Water
Watersystem
system
Societal
Societalresponse
responseand
and
Transitions
Transitions
• • Climate
Climatescenarios
scenarios
• • Hydrological
Hydrologicalresponse
response
• • Impact
Impacton
onwater
waterservices
services
• • Definition
Definitionofoftransfer
transferfunctions
functions
• • Conceptual
Conceptualframework
framework
• • Participatory
Participatorysimulation
simulation
• • Definition
Definitionofofresponse
responserules
rules
Integrated
Integratedscenarios
scenarios
• • Stakeholder
Stakeholderparticipation
participation
• • Integrated
Integratedmodel
modelexplorations
explorations
• • Integrated
Integratedtransition
transitionscenarios
scenarios
Assessment phase
Figure 1.
Adaptation
Adaptationstrategies
strategies
• • Evaluation
Evaluationofofscenarios
scenarios
• • Robust
Robustmanagement
managementstyles
styles
• • Transition
Transitionpaths
paths
Outline of the main phases and components of the project.
4. State of the Art – previous climate impact studies on rivers and deltas
Scenarios have been adopted as adequate instruments to explore the future and the potential
implications of future global change. On a global scale the IPCC has presented different sets of
emission and climate scenarios: initially a simple set of ‘Business as Usual’ (BaU) and
Accelerated Policy (AP) scenarios (IPCC, 1987), replaced by the IPCC’92 scenarios a-f (IPCC
1992), which were in the following IPCC report replaced by the SRES scenarios (IPCC 2002)
that are based on integrated story lines. Similar examples of global scenarios are those explored
by the IMAGE model (REF), for land use, population growth, energy use and greenhouse gas
emissions (REF).
5
886445723
6/20/2017
Regional studies have also used scenarios to explore the potential impacts of climate change on
ecosystems, hydrology, carbon fluxes or socio-economic systems. International examples are the
Great Lakes - St. Lawrence climate impact project (Mortsch, 1998), the WaterGap project (Döll
et al., 1998) concerning demand and supply of large rivers, the AQUA study (Hoekstra, 1998) on
different Perspectives on water management, both globally and at the scale of the Zambezi River,
and various EU projects on climate impacts on rivers across the EU (e.g., Arnell, 1998; Grabs,
1997; IRMA-SPONGE – Hooijer et al., 2002). Likewise, a large number of studies have been
undertaken exploring different futures or addressing the potential impacts of climate change on
the water systems in the Netherlands. Examples include the ‘Watersysteemverkenningen’ (RWS,
1996), CHR climate-impact study (CHR / RIZA: 1997), Fourth National Policy Document on
Water Management (V&W: 1997), ‘Rijn op Termijn’ (WL: 1998), IVR, IVM, IVB studies
(RWS: 1996-2003), ‘Room for the River’ (RIZA/WL: 2000), ‘WB21’ (RWS / RIZA: 2000),
‘Droogtestudie Nederland’ (RWS: 2003), ‘Spankrachtstudie – lange termijnopgave rivieren’
(V&W et al.: 2002-2003). Recently, a series of new studies has been initiated, in response to the
renewed awareness of climate change and the potenial impacts, and to the new KNMI 2006
climate scenarios for the Netherlands (KNMI, 2006). The ARK (Adaptation Space and Climate,
2007) programme assesses the potential impacts of climate change on various user functions, and
the knowledge required to find strategies that make the Netherlands ‘climate-change-proof’. The
Routeplanner Study (2007) addresses measures to be taken to achieve this objective. At the same
time, the AVV (Attention for Safety) explores implications for maintaining safety against
flooding, and the ACER (developing Adaptive Capacity to Extreme events in the Rhine basin)
study explores cross-boundary adaptation to climate change for the Rhine River. Furthermore,
studies on mitigation strategies, like the Peat-CO2 (Hooijer et al., 2006), indicate that the CO2
emission trades may stimulate certain water management strategies to reduce CO2 –emission in
peatlands.
Over the past decennia a large number of modelling instruments and tools has been developed for
water management studies in the Netherlands. These allow determining 1) the physical response
of the water system to climate change and direct human impact, and 2) the inherent implications
for water-related services. Furthermore, several DSS tools have been establised that integrate the
previous two model types in combination with a user-friendly interface, allowing end-users to
explore the implications of different management measures for the water systems and their
services. A well-known example of such a DSS for the Rhine branches is the Planning Kit. To
assist with the development of programs of measures to achieve environmental objectives defined
within the Water Framework Directive, the WFD-Explorer is developed.
Previous and even some recent scenario studies for water management in the Netherlands still
show major limitations as demonstrated in a previous study by the consortium (Van Asselt et al.,
2000, 2001). Firstly, scenarios are often defined by experts, with little stakeholder input.
Consequently, they encompass only a limited part of the total uncertainty and variation in
possible futures, and solutions are often based on the present way of water management.
Secondly, many scenario studies are aimed at a desired or expected future situation. These studies
do not consider the pathways towards the future situation, with all uncertainties and surprises and
are only based on available techniques and knowledge underway. Such studies evaluate
management strategies for expected futures, but do not consider situations where the future turns
out to go into a different direction than anticipated. So, they do not provide insight in robust (i.e.
least sensitive for different possible futures) and flexible strategies, neither in transitions in water
management. There is thus a major need for scenario studies that explore the pathways into
uncertain futures, where water management may respond to events – both climate-related and
socio-economic – and even may undergo a transition into a new management style.
6
886445723
6/20/2017
Recently, some frameworks on adaptation to climate change were presented. They comprise
conceptual framework and definitions of terms, but they lack an integrated impact assessment and
a real evaluation of the adaptation (Tol et al. 1998, Leary 1999, Smit et al 1999, Brooks 2003).
Furthermore, they did not take into account the aspect of time, for example, the change of
adaptation strategy after an event, after more information on climate change or on technology
becomes available or after new human values by a change of world view.
A previous NOP/ IRMA-SPONGE study by the consortium team (Van Asselt et al., 2001;
Middelkoop et al., 2004) has established a framework to structure and analyse existing scenarios
for changes in climate, land use and socio-economic developments, and different water
management strategies, using the so-called Perspectives method. Using this method integrated
scenarios for water management of the Rhine and Meuse were analysed. By comparing the
consequences of different strategies for different (and unanticipated) futures, first
recommendations on robust water management strategies could be made. The study further
recommended to involve stakeholders in the development of scenarios, and to establish and
analyse so-called ‘transient’ scenarios in which society and water management respond in a
dynamic way to events, and in which perspectives and management strategies may change
accordingly.
From the global perspective the Rhine River may be considered as a special case: it flows through
some of the richest countries in the world with enormous socio-economic centres along its course,
it has been extensively managed for many centuries, there is relatively good trans-boundary
cooperation, and the climate does not show extremes like in tropical regions. Still, it has shown
major floods in the recent past. Many other deltas, particularly in developing countries are also
facing large impacts of climate change, but under entirely different conditions, such as: high
population pressure, but little technical and financial means for river management, less-developed
trans-boundary water management, with a much more vigorous climate (e.g. monsoons and
hurricanes). For these deltas, relative little information has become available on their sensitivity
and vulnerability to global change. Considering the major potential global change impacts on
these deltas, and the fundamental differences in natural and socio-economic setting, it is
important that vulnerability assessments will be carried out in those deltas as well. In doing so a
more generic framework may be developed on how to develop coping strategies.
7
886445723
6/20/2017
5. Scientific approach: description of the research and sub-projects and
expected results
5.1. Concepts
5.1.1
Integrated system analysis using PSIR: Pressure, State, Impact, and Response
The analysis of strategies in water management will be carried out using an approach in which
societal and physical research are integrated. Societal research involves the analysis of societal
and management responses to climate and socio-economic developments and events. Physical
research involves hydrological modeling and the establishment of models that describe the
impacts on water-related services. The novel key concept here is that our study addresses the
dynamic interaction between the physical (water) system and the socio-economic and
management systems. For example: society and water management may show a response to an
extreme flood event – even when this does not cause a flood disaster, but a narrow-escape from it
– by accelerated dike enforcing or implementation of flood reduction measures. Consequently,
the state of the rivers changes, and the next discharge peak of similar magnitude will lead to less
critical flood water levels. However, the response may also lie in a reconsideration of the
uncertainties, and cause a transition into a new world view / perspective, and a new approach in
water management. Thus: in the course of time, there are pressures, having impacts on the water
system, resulting in responses by water management that change the state of the water system.
The system perspective underlying this idea is the conceptual model of Pressure, State, Impact,
and Response (PSIR). The concept is illustrated for the case study of Dutch water management in
figure 2. Two important types of factors put pressure on the system. On the one hand, these are
environmental pressures such as climate change, land use changes, and pollution that primarily
determine the quantity and quality of the inflow (supply) of water. On the other hand, these are
socio-economic pressures that determine the demand for water and space, such as water demand,
spatial claims, and in increasing damage potential. These factors have a direct influence on the
objective system state. This concerns entities such as water quantity and quality, and geographic
aspects such as land use, topography, and soil. State changes, in turn, lead to impacts for the
various water related services within the social, economic, and ecological domains. The impacts
are on the one hand associated with an increase/decrease with quantity aspects of a water function
(e.g. a change in area for housing, agriculture, or nature) and on the other with quality aspects
(e.g. a change in damage from floods or droughts, living conditions, agricultural production
efficiency, and biodiversity). The impacts generally lead to a certain societal response. This
includes water policy, such as river widening, dike building, and spatial planning, and measures
upstream. It also includes autonomous responses, such as changes in housing locations (project
developers decide to build only on higher ground), land use (farmers decide to change to salt
water crops), and the development of the various water sectors in general.
8
886445723
P
6/20/2017
Environmental pressures
•Climate change
•Land use change
•Canalisation
•Pollution
Socio-economic pressures
•Water demand
•Spatial claims
•Damage potential
Water quantity
•Surface water
•Ground water
Water quality
•Various quality
aspects
I
Social
•Housing
•Drinkwater supply
•Recreation
Economic
•Agriculture
•Energy production
•Industry
R
Policy
•River widening
•Dike building
•Upstream measures
•Area planning
S
Space
•Land use
•River channel
•Infrastructure
Ecological
•Habitats
•Bio-diversity
Autonomous response
•Water use
•Land use change
•Development of water
related sectors
Figure 2: The case study of Dutch water management framed along the concept of pressure, state,
impact and response (PSIR)
5.1.2
Scenario analysis using perspectives
A central concept used in this study to structure various interpretations of uncertainties and value
sets is the concept of ‘Perspectives’. This concept is based on cultural theory (Thompson et al.,
1999), and further developed by the TARGETS research group at RIVM in the Netherlands
(Rotmans & De Vries, 1997). A ‘Perspective’ is a consistent description of the perceptual screen
through which people interpret the world, and which guides them in acting. For the present study
we use three perspectives, focusing either on environment (Egalitarian), control (Hierarchist) or
economy (Individualist) (figure 3). A perspective comprises both a worldview (how people
interpret the world) and a management style (how they act upon it). In the case of flood
management, worldviews consider different interpretations of external developments such as the
rate and magnitude of climate change, land use changes, urban expansion and so forth. The
worldviews also include different interpretations of uncertainties (such as the retention capacity
of natural areas), and different evaluations of cost and benefits and the ‘quality’ of the
environment and life. Management styles include the way actions are taken for flood protection,
and the choice of measures to be implemented, such as flood retention or landscaping in the
floodplain area. By combining different world views and management styles into scenarios, one
can analyse how different management styles ‘work out’ under a various legitimate and
consistent future conditions. One can then identify robust management styles that are successful
not only in combination with the corresponding worldview (‘utopia’ scenario), but also lead to
minimal risk in combination with other world views (‘dystopia’ scenarios). In a preceding project,
the Perspectives method was successfully implemented for water management as a basis of the
9
886445723
6/20/2017
definition of integrated scenarios and robust management styles (Van Asselt et al., 2001;
Middelkoop et al., 2001).
HIERARCHIST
• Nature is tolerant within limits
• People sinful
• Partnership
• Control
• Stability
• Risk accepting
Figure 3.
EGALITARIAN
• Nature is fragile
• People good & malleable
• Ecocentrism
• Prevention
• Equity & quality
• Risk aversive
INDIVIDUALIST
• Nature is robust
• People self-seeking
• Anthropocentrism
• Adaptation
• Growth
• Risk-seeking
Perspectives and their view on the world
The current study aims for a better understanding of the mechanisms of human action and
perspective change in response to future changes in the water system (for example due to climate
change). These two aspects (human action and perspective change) are two dimensions of the
‘societal response’1. To get a better insight in possible future societal responses, the method of
participatory Agent Based modeling (P-ABM) is applied as part of the scenario development
process. P-ABM is a new and promising approach for including the human dimension into
Integrated Assessments in a more explicit and realistic way (Pahl-Wostl 2002; Valkering 2007).
The method involves agent based modeling (ABM) for deriving analytic representations of actor
behaviour and interactions. The ABMs are applied within participatory simulations in which
stakeholders are engaged in carefully designed interaction processes to be able to further develop
and validate the ABMs. The methodology thus combines the best of two worlds: the structure of
modeling with the flexibility and creativity of participatory methods. This leads to a better
analysis of stakeholder perspectives, and a better understanding of stakeholder processes such as
competition and cooperation. Applying P-ABM in the scenario development process allows for a
better representation of the societal response under various scenario conditions, thereby feeding
into both the integrated scenarios and integrated model runs. With this approach, the project
builds upon experience of ICIS with P-ABM in the EU projects FIRMA and Matisse.
The particular methodological challenge for the P-ABM process is to model not only concrete
human actions (water policy and autonomous responses), but also changing perspectives in a
consistent and structured way. To this end, first concepts and methods were developed in the
inception phase (see Section 5.2) for:
(a) ‘Mapping’ real-life perspectives on the framework of the Egalitarian, Hierarchist, and
Individualist stereotypes, to be able to define perspectives in a more precise way.
(b) Analysing drivers of perspective change in terms of events and developments that can be
considered ‘surprises’ or ‘reproduction mechanisms’ (see Cultural Theory) for the different
perspectives considered
(c) Framing the interactions between water system, human action (water policy and autonomous
responses), and perspective change (see the conceptual PSIR framework of figure 2).
1
The third dimension includes the ‘structures’ discussed in the section 5.1.4 on transitions
10
886445723
6/20/2017
Scoping
• Current state assessment
Reflection
• Sustainability assessment
• Reflection on water culture
Policy design and coalition forming
• Targets and water management
options
• Coalition forming
• Towards a common action plan
Exploration of effects
• Water system
• Social system
Figure 4: Participatory agent based modeling in action: An example from the Ebro case study of
the Matisse project.
5.1.3
Vulnerability and Scenario analysis using PSIR and Rapid Assessment
Modelling
Dealing with uncertainties related to climate change, sea level rise and living in a delta involves
exploring possible futures and effects of these futures and adaptation strategies. The approach of
this research is therefore to first explore the vulnerability of economic and ecological functions in
deltas in stead of the classical approach to start with climate scenarios. This will be used to define
adaptation strategies and setup of a rapid assessment model (RAM). The RAM will be used to
analyse the PSIR chain described in 5.1.1. with ensemble transient runs to assess the robustness
of these adaptation strategies. In this way we will include the timing aspect of a strategy and we
deal with the uncertain future of global change, which is not yet been done in other studies.
Vulnerability analysis
The vulnerability of a system is the extent to which a natural or social system is susceptible to
sustaining damage from climate change (IPCC 1995). It depends on three key issues: 1) the
sensitivity, the degree to which a system will respond to climate change (harmful or beneficial); 2)
adaptive capacity, the degree to which a system can adapt to impact or diminish potential
damages and 3) the degree of exposure. To reduce the vulnerability of a system to climate change,
adaptation strategies are needed. Analysing the vulnerability of a system gives an indication of
what water management strategies could be successful and the possible effects of climate change
and sea level rise. Above all, it quantifies to what extent the current situation is climate-proof.
In other words: how much climate change and sea level rise can we cope with in the
considering our current situation and strategies.
For the vulnerability assessment we will start at the end of the cause effect chain, namely with the
limits of the sectors, to be able to better cope with the uncertainties around global change. The
sensitivity and adaptive capacity will be determined using a method designed for habitat analysis
11
886445723
6/20/2017
(Guisan and Zimmerman 2000, Van der Lee et al. 2006, Haasnoot and Van de Wolfshaar in prep).
In habitat studies response curves defined by expert judgement or measurements are used to
determine the habitat suitability for species or a group of species resulting in spatial information
indicating a range of optimal conditions (value of 1) to disadvantageous conditions (value of 0).
In low suitable areas there is a small chance that the species will be found there, although it may
occur in a bad condition. Likewise, we will describe the optimal conditions for water related
services and identify critical thresholds in terms of physical boundary conditions under which
they can not function anymore. This information can be stored in transfer functions, which will be
used for the RAM. The adaptive capacity as a result of technical possibilities, knowledge and
welfare can be taken into account by a change of the response curves. Finally, we will compare
the optimal conditions (sensitivity and adaptive capacity) with the physical boundary limits of
climate change and sea level rise (exposure) to identify mismatches (figure 5). If they occur, then
these are the vulnerable ‘hotspots’ for which adaptation strategies should be defined.
Evaluating the effects of climate change by exploring the end of the cause-effect chain – at the
threshold conditions of functions related to water – makes the results becoming less depending on
the chosen climate change scenario when compared to traditional approaches that investigate the
cause-effect chain starting from the chosen scenario.
1
suitability
suitability
1
0
0
groundwater level
Total Suitability Agriculture = minimum (Sgroundwater, Ssalt) * Area
salt concentration
current response curve
future response curve, after increasing adaptive capacity
current conditions with variability
future conditions with variabilty, due to climate change
Figure 5. Example of response curves for agriculture. Too low groundwater levels will result in
damage while too high groundwater levels or water above the ground level will also damage the
plants. Too high salt concentration increases de suitability. The optimal condition depends on the
average conditions and the conditions after and event and differs per crop type.
PSIR and Rapid Assessment Modelling
This concept can be considered as a series of transient scenarios (ensemble), which will be
analysed with the PSIR chain. Each scenario comprises an 100-yr time period in which climate
and socio-economic pressures affect the water systems and water management. The latter respond,
resulting in changing states of the system and impact on water related services. This may again
result in a response of societies world view and a reaction in terms of a specific management style.
By analysing several of these scenarios, we may identify robust strategies. Figure 6 gives an
outline of this approach.
12
886445723
6/20/2017
Pressures
States - Impacts
Response
Scenario
Water System
Society/Management
Climate
Phys. / Hydrol.
World view
Soc-econ
Functions
Management style
In: Scenario (t)
Out: Cost / benefits (t)
Out: Perspective (t)
Ensemble
Objective evaluation WS
Water system evaluation – 1
Water system evaluation – 2
Water system evaluation – 3
:
Water system evaluation – n
Ensemble
Time series of perspectives
Perspective (t) – 1
Perspective (t) – 2
Perspective (t) – 3
:
Perspective (t) – n
Ensemble
Transient scenarios
Scenario - 1 (t)
Scenario - 2 (t)
Scenario - 3 (t)
:
Scenario - n (t)
Robust / non robust
strategies
Analysis of time series and
transitions of Perspectives
Evaluation
Figure 6. Scenario evaluation scheme
Evaluation of strategies occurs by analysing strategies for different integrated climate and socioeconomic scenarios. This occurs in the following steps:
1. Pressures – Development of a set of transient integrated scenarios (ensemble) which
describe possible climate and socio-economic developments. These inputs exist of trends
(e.g. sea level rise) and events (extreme discharges, drought, economic crisis) based on
probability distributions.
2. States and Impacts - For each transient scenario the pressures are translated in the state
of the water system at different stages. This determines the condition and functioning of
water services (safety, shipping, nature, agriculture and fresh water supply).
3. Response – Depending on the perception on the water system regarding the functioning
of the water system, on the expected future developments and on the interpretation of the
uncertainties (world view), the water manager will carry out specific measures
(management style). These interventions change the state of the water system, the
condition of the water services and the sensitivity of these factors for future uncertain
events like droughts, floods and storms. Moreover, an extreme event or a changing socioeconomic context may change the world view of the water manager. This is a transition
to an other perspective, which also affects the water management strategy.
4. Evaluation – Each scenario includes a description of the preferred perspectives and a
description of the costs and benefits for the water services. By analysing the success of a
strategy (cost-effectiveness) and the timing and cause of a transition to an other
13
886445723
6/20/2017
perspective for the ensemble of scenario’s, we can analyse the robustness of adaptation
strategies under the uncertainties defined in the scenarios.
To be able to analyse an ensemble of transient scenarios from pressures to state, impacts and
response, a fast assessment of the implications of climate change for user services of the water
systems is needed. Therefore, we will develop a RAM, which can analyse the whole cause-effect
chain and can therefore provide information to evaluate adaptation strategies. The RAM will exist
of several response functions:
 Physical state response functions, that relate climate-related forcings to changes in the
hydrological system,
 Impact response functions, which describe the implication of the state of the hydrological
system for different sectors of user functions,
 Management response functions, which describe the management response to changes in
the water system,
 Perspective response functions, which describe the change in perspective in relation to
states, impacts or socio-economic events.
The results of complex detailed hydrological models will be used to develop the physical state
response functions. The impact response functions will be derived from the vulnerability analysis.
The management and perspective response functions will be based on the scenario analysis with
perspectives and the Participatory Agent Based Modelling.
5.1.4
Towards adaptation strategies: the transition approach
Our understanding of perspective change furthermore builds upon the recent literature on
transition. Transitions are conceptualized as a “long term continuous process (25-50 years) of
societal change during which the structure of society, or a subsystem of society, fundamentally
changes”. The structural change is the result of an array of interacting social changes, operating
simultaneously at different scales in technological, economic, ecological, socio-cultural and
institutional domains (Rotmans, 2001). Transition theory explains why and how transitions occur.
The scientific work on societal transitions emerged from various authors, such as (Berkhout et al.
2003; Elzen et al. 2004; Geels 2002; Kemp et al. 1998; Loorbach 2007; Rotmans et al. 2001; Van
der Brugge et al. 2005; Verbong 2000).
Several frameworks have been developed to study transitions. Central to transition theory is the
multi-level framework (MLF) of figure 7 to account for developments operating at different
levels of scale, which may have amplifying or dampening effects. The MLF is used to analyze
interactions between: (1) a ‘management regime’ at the meso-level, (2) Niches (networks
concerned with innovation) at the micro-level and (3) long-term trends at the macro-level that
influence the management regime. The ‘management regime’ refers to the set of actors and the
societal structures in which they are embedded, such as institutional structure, power structure,
procedures, financial structure, infrastructure and geographic structure. The regime concept
emphasizes this interconnectedness and interdependency as these structures both enable and
constrain actors to carry out specific polices or interventions. Innovative strategies or
interventions are developed against this background and are hampered because they do not ‘fit’
with existing structures. Hence, implementation of innovative strategies thus requires subsequent
changers in societal structures.
14
886445723
6/20/2017
Figure 7: The multi-level framework
The multi-phase framework of figure 8 is a second framework used in transition theory to frame
the temporal dynamics using four archetypical transition phases: During the pre-development
phase, system dynamics do not visibly change, but macro-level circumstances have changed.
Innovations do not break through yet. During the take-off phase, changes in the structures begin
to show off. Breakthrough of innovative strategies leads to reconfiguration of actor constellations.
During the acceleration phase, the changes become mainstream. New socio-cultural, economic,
ecological and institutional capital accumulates. During the stabilization phase the new regime
has stabilized.
The transition in water management is interpreted here as the necessary changes in societal
structures in order to successfully adapt to climate change. Due to the complexity of society,
transition dynamics can not be fully controlled and there is a chance that society ends up in less
desired pathways. Examples are lock-in (innovative climate adaptation strategies cannot
breakthrough and the traditional water management style of dyke-reinforcement remains
dominant), backlash, (innovative climate adaptation strategy breaks through, but after a while
there is a shift back to the traditional management style), or system breakdown (the traditional
management style is criticized, but innovative climate adaptation strategies are insufficient to be
adopted).
Current work on transitions focuses on the mechanisms and conditions that determine these paths.
One particularly relevant approach is identifying the build-up of new societal structures that
empower innovative strategies and force society (i.e. the water sector) into a desired path and
block undesired. A good example is the introduction of the 'water test' in 2003. This procedure
changed the relationship between water management and spatial planning as it empowered the
water professional to influence spatial planners and project-developers directly from the start
during the design phase instead of at end of the chain when project plans were almost finished.
This institutional structure is important in the path towards “water guiding in spatial planning”,
which is one of the main strategies for climate adaptation. The general objective is identify
structures that reinforce desired transitions and prevent undesired paths such as lock-in, backlash,
or system breakdown.
15
886445723
6/20/2017
Figure 8. The multi-phase framework and possible transition pathways
5.2. Geographical scope
The project firstly considers the Rhine-Meuse delta in the Netherlands, including the regional
water systems, Lake IJsselmeer, and the estuary. To put the assessments of vulnerability and
adaptation of water management strategies for the Rhine-Meuse in a broader context, water
management strategies will be evaluated for parts of river deltas in other parts of the world, where
socio-economic and climate boundary conditions, and the functioning and management of the
water systems is very different. Based on first results on the Rhine-Meuse delta one or more other
deltas will be selected for such evaluation. An important selection criteria will be the availability
of information and data to enable such evaluation. Most likely those deltas will be selected in
which the consortia partners are already active such as the Mississippi delta (USA), GangesBramaputra-Megna delta (Bangladesh), Mekong (Vietnam/Cambodia), Danube (Romania),
Yellow River (China), etc.
5.3. Inception phase
The project was preceded by an inception phase that has been carried out by the project partners
within the framework of BSIK Living with Water program. The inception phase was used to
further define the project outline, to explore the methods and concepts, and to acquire a first set of
inputs from participatory workshops. All consortium partners were involved in this phase, to
achieve a full commitment and mutual understanding of the concepts and approaches. This phase
focused on the Meuse river for the analyses of socio-economic processes and water management
styles. A prototype modeling tool was established for the entire Rhine-Meuse delta. The activities
undertaken and obtained results are the following:
Conceptual development: A conceptual framework was designed to analyze the interaction
between a water system – containing biophysical aspects and societal water functions - and an
actor system - characterised by a dominant perspective and related water policy and autonomous
stakeholder responses, see figure 9. The framework further elaborates the traditional PSIR model
scheme by including explicit representation of actor dynamics in the response box. Also, a
16
886445723
6/20/2017
transition framework was designed that heuristically describes the build-up and breakdown of
social structures during transition.
Participatory process: Four workshops were organized to address the management of the Meuse
from a historical, current, future, and policy perspective. This process involved key stakeholder
organizations, with representatives from Rijkswaterstaat, Province Limburg, and various NGO’s
representing the sectors of nature conservation, agriculture, drinking water, project development,
and shipping. The participatory process delivered necessary information on the evolution of
historic and possible future perspectives in relation to changes in the water system.
Response model: A first prototype of the societal response module in the PSIR-model was
designed that analytically frames possible societal responses as a consequence of various social,
economic, ecological, technological, and institutional developments. At this stage, the model
shows how perspectives can be accurately mapped and analyses the drivers of perspective
changes in the form of surprises and reproduction mechanisms. It forms a stepping stone for
implementing actor based implementation in future stages.
RATING: The prototype computer tool RATING (Rapid Assessment Tool for INteGrated water
management) covers the PSI modules of the PSIR model. It analyzes the effects of various water
management options on the water system and related services/functions. It thereby confronts the
user with various uncertain developments - such as climate change – that may disturb the planned
effects. The tool is designed to analyze changes in the perspective of the model user (stakeholders)
in response to anticipated and non-anticipated water system developments observed from the
model. The tool can also be applied as a ‘learning tool’ for stakeholders.
Integrated scenarios: The analytic insights from the project are combined in a set of preliminary
integrated scenarios. The scenarios are narratives in which various future developments –
including developments in the water system, perspective changes and other societal responses,
and external developments – are interrelated in a consistent way. They illustrate how future shifts
in perspective may occur and what their consequences are.
Policy assessment: Work is currently ongoing to illustrate how the developed tools contribute to
strategic water management. Tools are used to assess the robustness of water management
perspectives given the uncertain development of the external context, the water system, and
societal response. It is illustrated how water management strategies can implemented as part of a
(broader) transition path.
The activities and results were reported by Valkering et al. (2007a,b) and Haasnoot et al.
(2007a,b). As a finalisation of the Inception phase a workshop will be organised in January 2008
at Deltares, to demonstrate and discuss the approaches and needs for integrated scenario analyses.
17
886445723
6/20/2017
Water system
Actor system - Response
Water culture
Pressures
Environmental
Socio-economic
Water
policy
Policy arena
•Institutions & organisations
Perception
States
Water
policy
Water quantity
Water quality
Impacts
Social, Economic,
Ecological functions
Autonomous
response
Support
level
Individual level
•Individual stakeholders
Perception
Figure 9: One of the results of the inception phase. The PSI-R conceptual model frames the
relation between the water system (PSI) and the societal response (R). The response module
indicates various actor interactions in relation to policy-making, individual behaviour, and
perspective change.
5.4. Description of sub-projects
The follow-up project is structured around the subprojects shown in figure 1. These are described
below in more detail.
5.4.1
Sub-project 1: Scoping: vulnerability and stakeholder analysis
Project team: ICIS/University of Maastricht, Deltares.
Duration: 1 year
Objective: The objective of this subproject is understand the working of the water system and
the socio-economic system through a vulnerability and stakeholder analysis. The results of
these analysis are used to define a preliminary set of adaptation options.
The Scoping sub-project exists of three main parts: a stakeholder analysis, a vulnerability analysis
and a preliminary set of adaptation options.
The stakeholder analysis concerns the identification of relevant stakeholders and actors (~ 10
categories), their interests and goals, and the way uncertainties are interpreted. On the basis of
these obtained insights, the stakeholder perspectives will be classified according to the stereotype
perspectives of Cultural Theory. Subsequently, we will analyse what critical events and
developments (both climatologically as socio- economical) possibly lead to shift of water related
perspectives. This information will be obtained on the basis of a literature review, interviews, and
an introducing stakeholder meeting.
18
886445723
6/20/2017
The vulnerability of a system depends on the sensitivity, adaptive capacity and exposure. The
sensitivity and adaptive capacity will be determined using the habitat analysis method. Each
water service (ecology, shipping, drinking water, agriculture) has its own requirements on
environmental conditions. With this in mind, we will define optimal and threshold conditions for
each water service, based on literature review, expert judgement and existing impact tools. They
will be summarised in so-called physical response curves, which will be used in the Rapid
Assessment Model. The adaptive capacity of the functions through technical possibilities,
knowledge and welfare are taken into account by a change of the response curves,. The optimal
conditions (sensitivity and adaptive capacity) will be compared with the physical boundary limits
of climate change and sea level rise (exposure), resulting from sub-project 3 to identify
mismatches. If they occur, then these are the vulnerable ‘hotspots’ for which adaptation strategies
should be defined. The stakeholder analysis will provide information on the social vulnerability.
Possible adaptation strategies will be defined for each case based on the vulnerability assessment
and possible future states of the world.
5.4.2
Sub-project 2: Water system
Project team: Deltares, Utrecht University, Twente University, Carthago Consultancy, KNMI
Duration: 2 years
Objective: The objective of the development of physical state response functions and impact
response functions for the different cases and the setup of the PSI part of the Rapid Assessment
Model.
This subproject involves the development of the ‘Pressure, State and Impact’ part of the Rapid
Assessment Model. For the different cases transfer functions will be developed. These functions
describe:
 the effects of pressures on the state of the hydrological system (physical state response
functions) and
 the effects of the state on the impact for water related services (impact response
functions).
The transfer functions will be mainly based on existing complex detailed hydrological models
and the vulnerability analysis. In addition, literature review and expert judgement will be used.
For the case in the Netherlands, RHINEFLOW and MEUSEFLOW are available at Carthago
Consultancy, for the effect of precipitation and sea level rise on river discharges. For the
downstream parts of the rivers, transfer functions will be developed using a DSS which includes
the relation between river discharge, tide, wind and sea level. Furthermore, frequencies of water
levels for the current and extreme water levels for future situations will be determined based on
existing study results. For the relation of pressures with groundwater levels, national models from
RIZA are available at Deltares. Effects on water quality in terms of algae blooms is available
through the DBS model from Delft Hydraulics. A description of optimal conditions, thresholds
and damages on agriculture and houses can be obtained from several flood risk studies. Also, the
‘waternood’ tool and AGRICOM may provide information on the damages for agriculture via
groundwater levels and salt concentration. For terrestrial and aquatic nature, response functions
from the ecological tool HABITAT and DEMNAT can be used as a starting point to define a set
of ecological impact response functions. Some of the mentioned models have to be adjusted or
elaborated with effects of events.
19
886445723
6/20/2017
The RHINEFLOW model can be adjusted easily to analyse transient scenarios, but other models
need to be translated into the transfer functions. For this purpose a set of reference scenario runs
will be used (partly already existing from other projects). The reference scenarios and existing
results from other studies will be used to assess whether the final transfer functions have enough
detail to assess the effects.
Based on GCM output and the recent KNMI’06 scenarios, time series of transient scenarios of the
main climate variables (including precipitation, temperature, storms, slr) will be generated. Since
extremes of climate variables (both dry / hot and wet / cold) are relevant for water management,
the scenarios will mainly comprise realizations of extreme events, instead of day-to-day time
series of ‘weather’. In addition, average conditions need to be defined as input for the scenario
runs. A combination of transient runs available at KNMI will be applied, in combination with
time series of climate anomalies for deltas in other countries.
As the complexity of the real world (our Rhine delta case) makes it often difficult to comprehend
the system and the responses an imaginary case will be constructed to illustrate the tool and its
functions. The development of the tool itself will be based on the requirements for the Rhine delta
case.
5.4.3
Sub-project 3: Societal response and transitions
Project team: ICIS/University of Maastricht, DRIFT (PhD, Postdocs).
Duration: 2 years
Objective:
a) Conceptual framework: Designing a conceptual model that captures the societal response
to changes in hydrology (water quantity, water quality), water services (agriculture,
shipping), and external developments (EU, global level).
b) Participatory simulation: The response model is operationalized as a participatory
simulation as part of a participatory scenario-development process. This simulation takes
the form of a role-role play with key stakeholders. The water models are used in this
simulation as interactive modeling tools.
c) Analysis and generic response rules: On the basis of the participatory simulation results,
formal response rules are defined that are implemented in an operational computer
model. This model is couple to water models to achieve integrated runs. The research
aims to identify conditions for perspective change, for utopia/dystopia situations, for
successful transitions, and for lock-in, back lash or collapse.
In this sub-project, the response module of the PSIR-model will be further elaborated to better
understand societal responses and transitions in water management sector. The societal response
is interpreted along three main dimensions: 1) cultural perspectives representing dominant core
beliefs, norms and values, 2) societal structures such as collective rules, economic markets,
infrastructure, policy instruments, and 3) actor behaviour including water policy and autonomous
responses2. A transition is said to occur when a fundamental shift in cultural perspective takes
place, supported by equally fundamental changes in societal structure and actor behaviour.
2
Actor behaviour as such, e.g. dike building or deciding upon a place to live, is thus part of the societal
response, but does not necessarily constitute a transition.
20
886445723
6/20/2017
The sub-project is structured around three main tasks:
a) Conceptual framework: The conceptual framework builds upon a number of theoretical pillars:
cultural theory that elaborates on cultural perspectives and perspective change, transition theory
that focuses on changes in structure, and various actor based theories (e.g. policy theory and
social psychology) that describe individual behaviour, policy development, and actor interactions
such as competition and cooperation. During the inception phase an initial actor based conceptual
framework (see figure 9) has been developed for understanding and analyzing the societal
response. It frames the interrelated processes of policy-making, individual behaviour, and
perspective change, in relation to changes in a water system. Also, a transition framework was
designed that heuristically describes the build-up and breakdown of social structures during a
transition. In the follow up phase, the two frameworks are merged into one coherent framework
for analysis.
b) Participatory simulation: The conceptual framework is made operational with the method of
participatory agent based modeling (P-ABM). This method involves to formal representation of
actors and actor behaviour in the form of agent based computer models, and applying those
models with key stakeholders in a participatory process. Too this end, participatory simulations
are designed and carried out as part of the participatory scenario development process of subproject 4. The participatory simulation represents the main interactions between stakeholders as
they negotiate water policy, form networks, learn new insights and so on. The water modeling
tools (sub-project 2) are applied interactively within the participatory simulation to represent
information and different perspectives on the water system. A particular innovative feature of the
participatory simulation is that – besides the development of actor behaviour - it aims to capture
the development of cultural perspectives and societal structures in response to a changing water
environment as well.
c) Analysis and response rules: The participatory simulation results are analyzed on the basis of
the conceptual framework developed before. (The conceptual framework is adapted where
necessary). Relevant insights are derived in terms of the robustness of perspectives, the
conditions for perspective change, for reaching utopia or dystopia situations, and for successful
transitions or unsuccessful transitions (lock-in, back lash or system breakdown). On the basis of
the transition heuristics it is analyzed what is build up and broken down. Following, the insights
are translated to generic quantified rules for the societal response. These rules are implemented in
an (actor based) computer model. This model is subsequently coupled to the water models of subproject 2 to realize ensembles of integrated model runs (sub-project 4).
5.4.4
Sub-project 4: Integrated scenarios
Project team: ICIS, Deltares (AIO’s, Postdoc) with all partners
Duration: 2 years
Objective: to analyse integrated transient scenarios with the PSIR concept supported by
integration of the hydrological system including water related services and the societal
response. This involves:
a) Stakeholder participation
b) Integrated transition scenarios
c) Integrated model runs
21
886445723
6/20/2017
The aim of this project is to integrate the insights on the water system (sub-project 2) with the
insights on societal response and transitions (sub-project 3). To this end, transition scenarios are
developed in which pressures, states, impacts and responses are dynamically integrated. The
scenarios are developed using two complementary approaches. The firsts approach involves
stakeholder participation to develop a set of qualitative scenarios that are underpinned with
quantitative model results. The second approach is model-based, involving ensembles of model
runs with the coupled water – response modules.
The sub-project is structured around three main tasks:
a) Stakeholder participation: The advantage of participatory scenario development is that it
allows for creativity and flexibility in the development process, leading to imaginative scenarios
including a wide variety of developments. The participatory process will be structured around a
number of stakeholder workshops. Following the results from the inception phase, these
workshops will cover Dutch water management from a historic, current, future, and policy
perspective. This set-up has proven to be useful to gain insights in the mechanisms of the
perspective changes from the past (for example, the environmental protection movement in the
70’s) and assess possible future responses in relation to a variety of future developments and
conditions. The stakeholders will develop story lines or narratives in accordance with a method
developed for the EU- VISIONS program and later applied to Dutch water management in the
NOP- project ‘Integrated water management strategies for the Rhine and Meuse in a changing
environment’. A story line describes a chain of events, developments, and societal responses
which are causally and consistently related to each other. Unexpected events (like floods and
droughts) will also be introduced in these narratives. Story lines thus give an initial description of
possible developments in the water system, the corresponding socio- economical context, and
possible societal responses and developments in water management. Stakeholders are
furthermore involved in the participatory simulation of sub-project 3 to assess societal responses
to the developments portrayed by the storylines.
b) Integrated transition scenarios: A number of storylines are worked out as qualitative
‘intermediate’ scenarios. They are further developed by underpinning the scenarios with
quantitative estimates from water models and by including the societal responses observed from
the participatory simulation. The intermediate scenarios are presented to the stakeholders to
allow for general reflection and refinement of the scenarios. This results into fully integrated
transient scenarios. The scenarios are narratives in which various future developments –
including developments in the water system, societal responses, and external developments – are
interrelated in a consistent way. The scenarios will illustrate a number of typical transition cases.
This includes a robust perspective (no perspective change), as well as successful and
unsuccessful transition paths. The scenarios illustrate in detail under which conditions which
types of perspective changes may occur, and what their consequences are.
c) Integrated model runs: The fully integrated, but limited set off participatory scenarios are
complemented with a large set of model explorations of the connected water models and
response model. For this purpose the Rapid Assessment Model will be extended with the
decision rules, defined in subproject 3. Each model run consists of a combination of a climate
scenario, socio- economical context, social perceptions, and a coupled management strategy.
This is complemented with fluctuations in climate and social- economics, and the water
management responses). To be able to count with fluctuations, different runs (with a stochastic
input of both climate fluctuations and conjunctural fluctuations) will be analyzed.
22
886445723
5.4.5
6/20/2017
Sub-project 5: Robust management strategies and adaptation paths
Project team: ICIS, Deltares, Waterdienst with all partners
Duration: 1 year
Objective:
The aim of sub-project 5 is to reflect upon the insights developed and to explicitly outline the policy
relevant results. This involves:
a) Evaluation of scenarios and robustness management strategies
b) Transition pathways for climate adaptation
The aim of sub-project 5 is to reflect upon the insights developed and to explicitly outline the
policy relevant results. This involves:
a) Evaluation of scenarios and robust management strategies: The scenarios will be evaluated on
the impacts on water related economic and ecological services, including flood and drought
damage through extreme hydrological conditions in relation to the total costs of the measures
taken. Criteria will be formulated such as benefits, damages, feasibility, irreversibility, costs,
flexibility, favourable initial perspective, average life expectancy of a perspective, sensibility for
unexpected events, occurrence of (extreme) negative effects and so on. By doing so, it can be
verified which long term management strategies in general turn out to be robust under different
uncertain future developments.
b) Adaptation pathways: In this sub-project will be identified how 'managing perspective change'
takes place: which measures can be applied and when, how to deal with unforeseen events and
deviations from the desired path. The storylines that contain shifts in cultural perspectives are
further analyzed with regard to the conditions under which such shifts occur. The conditions are
combinations of physical conditions (e.g. river discharges and sea level rise) and the societal
conditions (social structures) at a certain time. Both desired perspective changes leading to utopia
situations and undesired perspective changes leading to dystopia situations are identified.
The policy relevance lies in the importance of avoiding undesired perspective changes and
stimulating the desired perspective changes ones. Understanding these conditions provide policy
makers with management leverages with regard to not only physical interventions, but also three
categories of management activities that aim to influence transition dynamics. The three
categories are:
 management activities in the strategic sphere, that aim to change the cultural perspective in a
societal system: dialogues on norms and values, identity, ethics or sustainability. These
activities include vision development, strategic discussions, long-term goal formulation,
collective goal and norm setting and long-term anticipation;
 management activities in the tactical sphere, that aim to change societal structures, such as
investments and other resource distributions, rules, incentives, underlying infrastructure.
Negotiations regarding interests are more common in this sphere. The context in which actors
generally operate within this sphere is the institutional domain;
 management activities in the operational sphere which aim to develop and implement new
measures.
The adaptation paths then contain a combination of physical measures in the water system and the
transition activities above, including the timing and order in which measures/activities are
implemented. Multiple paths are developed with the same point of departure (the current
23
886445723
6/20/2017
situation), but with deviating trajectories and (desired) endpoints. This allows for a robust policy
perspective for the short term, as well as a flexible palette of options that are further specified
towards the long term depending on how uncertain future conditions unfold.
5.5. Timeframe of activities
The activities are planned to start in the first quarter of 2008 as a direct continuation of the
Inception Phase, carried out within the framework of BSIK Living with Water program. That
Inception phase will be finalized in January 2008 and the results will be presented at a workshop
in that same month. The activities of the main project will be phased as presented in Figure 10.
2008
3
4
1
2009
2
3
4
1
2010
2
3
4
1
2011
2
3
4
2012
1
2
Scoping
Water system
Societal response
Integrated scenarios
Robust strategies
Figure 10. Phasing of activities main project
6. Scientific and social relevance
Scientific relevance
Scientifically the research is important since it develops a method to cope with uncertainties in
future climate and socio-economic developments. While current impact studies have focused on
different future outcomes for one time horizon, this project will assess the effectiveness of several
transient consistent scenarios on climate, socio-economics, human values and adaptation
measures. For this purpose, we will use a rapid assessment model to assess impacts. New is also
the vulnerability analysis as we start at the end of the effect chain, namely with the environmental
requirements of functions, in stead of the classical approach to start with a climate change
scenario.
The project involves a complete integration of beta and gamma research. This research integrates
three disciplines, namely: hydrology, sociology and ecology. Two concepts originating from
ecology will be used in a water management context. The habitat suitability concept will be used
for the vulnerability of functions to climate change and sea level rise and also for the evaluation
of the success of adaptation strategies through an impact assessment. The modelling of population
dynamics like carried out by Van de Wolfshaar is similar to the transient modelling of impact
assessment, (climate) events and management response.
The use of the integrated transient scenarios in an online dynamic system of management,
hydrological system and societal response is not explored elsewhere, even not in the generally
adapted well-known IPCC SRES scenarios. IPCC has indicated that more research has to be
carried out into that direction.
24
886445723
6/20/2017
Particular scientific innovative aspects of this proposal are:
 The use of perspectives: Working with perspectives generally gives a more divers, yet
consistent, image of future developments.
 The inclusion of societal response: Other scenario studies assess the effects of water
management strategies on water related functions, but neglect the importance societal
reactions. This project will deliver complementary insights on questions as: Will people’s
behaviour comply with a strategy to make the strategy work? For example, when
designing housing areas, will people want to live there? Also, is there societal support for
large scale water management measures? For example, will large scale retention areas be
acceptable under future conditions?
 The development of transient scenarios: The transition scenarios illustrate how the future
may unfold rather than showing end-points alone. It shows under which conditions the
water management may move into one ‘direction’ or another. It gives a better insight in
desired future endpoints, and ways to achieve them. It also shows undesired end points
and ways to avoid those.
Moreover, the project aims to develop generic methods which will be applicable in other delta
areas as well. This will enable and stimulate communication with other researchers in this field
which will enhance the quality of the research.
Social relevance
Deltas inhabit large human populations, important economic activities and valuable ecosystems.
Climate change and variability jeopardise the desired socio-economic and environmental
functioning of deltas. This is already shown by historical large events. A vulnerability assessment
of deltas and implementation of successful adaptation strategies is therefore essential for future
life deltas. In the Introduction chapter of this proposal reference was already made to cases and
information that stresses the need for this (Rhine flooding, Katrina, Stern review, etc).
Relevance for water management
The project results will support water management by a reflection of the search to the best water
management strategy for the Netherlands taking into account all kinds of uncertainties. Current
approach of room for the river, open plan process and function combinations will be put into
perspective. Above all, it will support water managers in the development of future robust
management strategies independent of new developed climate scenarios by KNMI or IPCC.
Furthermore, it gives insight in the process of transitions to different management strategies.
Relevance for Deltares
This integrated research project on climate and water in deltas is an exclusive opportunity for
Deltares to show the Europe and the rest of the world that we have exclusive knowledge on this
topic. Furthermore, it will show that Deltares is able to integrate beta and gamma expertise in
cooperation with other institutes. The unit “Verkenningen en Beleid” has the opportunity to learn
from two institutes which are internationally known for gamma knowledge (transitions,
stakeholder analysis, integrated scenarios with perspectives) and enrich itself with this knowledge.
We can stimulate the exchange of knowledge from this project to Deltares by execution of the
project partly by Deltares employees and by PhD’s and postdoc’s who will carry out part of their
work at the offices of Deltares and, in general, through their cooperation within this project as
well as in the project ‘Boundaries to climate sustainability’ (Koploper Klimaat).
25
886445723
6/20/2017
Relation with other projects
The proposed project has many relations with on-going projects. Several of these projects have
been mentioned before such as ARK, Koploper Klimaat, etc. More in general the proposed
project should be seen as to provide a kind of scenario umbrella for many more practical oriented
projects that are being carried out with Deltares involvement. Examples are VNK, Droogtestudie,
etc.
7. Project team, costs and organisation
The project will be carried out by a consortium of which the main partners are Deltares, ICIS
(Maastricht), Drift (Erasmus University) and University of Utrecht. Other partners are KNMI,
Carthago and Pantopicon. The team will consist of:




2 PhD’s: 1 at UM - ICIS, 1 (from Deltares) at TU and UU
2 post-doc researchers (ICIS and Drift)
3 senior experts / PhD-supervisors (Deltares, UU, UM)
3 senior researchers (KNMI, Carthago, Pantopicon)
The project management will be taken care of by dr. Hans Middelkoop (UU) and prof. Eelco van
Beek (UT/Deltares).
The time allocation of the various researchers over the various sub-projects is given in Figure 11.
This figure includes also an overview of the required budget for the project.
26
886445723
6/20/2017
Inzet onderzoekers (in mensmaanden)
t
44
t
60
t
90
t
60
5.9
8.0
12.0
8.0
7
13
1
0.5
1
1
0.5
1
0.5
2.5
0.5
2
0.5
4
4
28
1.5
0.5
4.5
1.5
0.5
4.5
3
2.5
2
e
44
840
18.2
e
e
138
e
80
e
70
e
18.4
10.7
9.3
1320
28.6
0.5
1
Totaal
2
9
2
2
15
experts Pantopicon
vLieshout et al.
0.5
1
Climate researcher
Beersma et al.
3
4
2
12
18
12
9
48
Sen.researcher
Deursen
2
Carth. KNMI Var.
Ex/supervision
Middelkoop et al.
0.5
UU
Exp/supervision
vBeek et al.
1
2
9
Deltares
PhD (UU/UT)
Haasnoot
Post-doc
vd Brugge
base input
rate in Euro per hour
rate in Euro per day
rate in kEuro per mm
Supervision
P. Martens
Project coordination
Scoping
Water system
Societal response
Integrated scenarios
Robust strategies
PhD
Offermans
Proj.
0
1
2
3
4
5
Drift
Post-doc
Valkering et al
ICIS
3
23
19.5
31
27
18
121.5
1000
21.7
3)
Total personal costs
Other costs
Total costs
Contribution Deltares2)
Own contribution
282
10
292
146
146
96
1
97
49
49
24
24
12
12
120
1
121
61
61
510
10
520
520
0
0
1
1
1
0
83
2
85
64
21
32
1
33
33
0
23
1
24
18
6
43
1
44
44
0
1213
28
1241
947
294
1)
excluding expected additional input post-doc research (additional own contribution ICIS)
3)
personnel costs E.van Beek covered in agreement with Twente
Figure 11 Time allocation and budget
The budget makes a distinction between a full-time input (t - 12 months per year) and an effective
time (e) input.
Deltares is asked to fund 75% of the academic input (ICIS, DRIFT) and the full costs of the other
contributions, including the costs of Deltares itself. The total costs for Deltares for this 4-year
project will be 1,408 k€ which means 352 k€ per year. The main part of these costs will be
internal (for Deltares staff). The external costs will be 548 k€ for 4 years which means 137 k€ per
year.
8. References
ARK, 2007, Maak ruimte voor klimaat ! Aanzet voor een nationale adaptatiestrategie. Ministeries
van VROM, V&W, LNV, EZ; IPO, VNG, Unie van Waterschappen.
Arnell (ed), 1998. Impact of climate change on hydrological regimes and water resources
management in the European community. Report of the EC project EV5V-CT93-0293.
Döll P, Kaspar F, Alcamo J, 1998. Modelling world-wide water availability and water use under
the influence of global change, Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. On Climate and Water, 17-20 July
1998, Espoo - Finland.
Droogers, P., J. Aerts, 2005. Adaptation strategies to climate change and climate variability: A
comparative study between seven contrasting river basins. Physics and Chemistry of the
Earth 30 (2005) 339–346
27
886445723
6/20/2017
European Commission, 2007. Adapting to climate change in Europe – options for EU action.
Green Paper from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. COM(2007) 354.
European Environment Agency, 2005. Vulnerability and adaptation to climate change in Europe.
Technical report. No7/2005. ISSN 1725-2237
Grabs W, Daamen K, Gellens D, Kwadijk JCJ, Lang H, Middelkoop H, Parmet BWAH, Schädler
B, Schulla J, Wilke K. 1997. Impact of climate change on hydrological regimes and water
resources management in the Rhine basin. CHR-report I-16. CHR: Lelystad.
Leary N.A., 1999. A Framework for benefit-cost analysis of adaptation to climage change and
cliamte variability. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 4 (1999) 307318.
Haasnoot, M. & K.E. Van der Wolfshaar, in prep. HABITAT: a Decision Support System for the
implementation of the Birds, Habitat and Water Framework Directive.
Haasnoot, M. & D.T. Van der Molen, 2005. Impact of climate change on ecotopes of the rivers
Rhine and Meuse. Large Rivers Vol.15, No 1-4. Arch. Hydrobiol. Suppl. 155/1-4,p53-61,
May 2005
Haasnoot, M., W.P.A. van Deursen, H. Middelkoop. 2007. Inspelen op verandering met de tool
RATING. Ontwerp Rapid Assessment Tool for INteGrated water management. WL-report
Q4387.
Hooijer A, Klijn F, Pedroli B (eds). 2002 Towards Sustainable Flood Risk Management in the
Rhine and Meuse River Basins: Main results of the IRMA-Sponge Research Program.
NCR-pulication 18-2002. NCR: Delft.
Hooijer A., Silvius M., Wösten H., Page S., 2006. Peat-CO2, Assessment of CO2 emissions from
drained peatlands in SE Asia. Delft Hydraulics report Q3943.
IPCC, 2007a. Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis.
Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen,
M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
KNMI, 2006. Climate change scenarios 2006 for the Netherlands. KNMI Scientific Report WR
2006-01 www.knmi.nl/klimaatscenarios/knmi06/achtergrond/WR23mei2006.pdf
Middelkoop H (red), 2000. The impact of climate change on the river Rhine and the implications
for water management in the Netherlands. Summary report of the NRP project 952210.
RIZA report 2000.010 / ICG-report 00/04. Department of Physical Geography, Utrecht
University.
Middelkoop H, Van Asselt MBA, Van ’t Klooster SA, Van Deursen WPA, Kwadijk JCJ,
Buiteveld H, 2004. Perspectives on flood management in the Rhine and Meuse rivers.
River Research and Applications 20: 327-342.
Mortsch LD, 1998. The Great Lakes - St. Lawrence Basin Project. “Adapting to the Impact of
Climate Change and Variability”: A review of Lessons Learned. Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. On
Climate and Water, 17-20 July 1998, Espoo - Finland.
Rotmans J, De Vries HJM, 1997. Perspectives on Global Change: The TARGETS approach.
Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
Routeplanner, 2007. Towards a climate-proof Netherlands. Summary routeplanner. National
Research Programme Climate changes Spatial Planning (KvR), Living with Water/Leven
met Water (LmW), Habiforum and CURNET.Smit, B., I. Burton, and J.T.K. Richard, 1999:
The science of adaptation: a framework for assessment. Mitigation and Adaptation
Strategies for Global Change, 4(3-4), 199–213.
Stehr and Von Storch, 2005. Introduction to papers on mitigation and adaptation strategies for
climate change: protecting nature from society or protecting society from nature?
Environmental Science & Policy 8 (2005) 537–540
28
886445723
6/20/2017
Schiermeier, Q., 2004. Modellers deplore ‘short-termism’ on climate. Nature, 428: 593
Stern Review. The economics of climate change. http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/
independent_reviews/ stern_review_economics_climate_change/stern_review_report.cfm
Tol, RSJ, Fankhauser S, Smith JB. 1998. ‘The scope for adaptation to climate change: what can
we learn from the impact literature?’ Global Environmental Change, 8(2): 109-123.
Thompson M, Ellis R, Wildavsky A. 1990. Cultural Theory. Westview Press: Boulder, USA.
Van Asselt MBA, Van ’t Klooster SA, Rotmans J, Van Gemert NM, Middelkoop H, Buiteveld H,
Haasnoot M, Kwadijk JCJ, Van Deursen WPA, Können GP, 2000. Visies voor de Rijn en
Maas. Een overzicht van studies en beleidslijnen. ICIS-working paper I01-D006. ICIS,
Maastricht.
Van Asselt MBA, Middelkoop H, Van ’t Klooster SA, Van Deursen WPA, Haasnoot M, Kwadijk
JCJ, Buiteveld H, Können GP, Rotmans J, Van Gemert NM, Valkering P, 2001. Integrated
water management strategies for the Rhine and Meuse basins in a changing environment.
Final report of the NRP project 958273. ICIS-Maastricht University / Dept. of Physical
Geography, Utrecht University.
Vis, M., Klijn,F., De Bruin,K.M. and Van Buuren,M., 2003. Resilience strategies for flood risk
management in the Netherlands. In: Intl.J.River Basin Management, 1, 33-40
Vis, M., Klijn, F., Van Buuren, M., and (eds), 2001. Living with floods, resilience strategies for
flood risk management and multiple land use in the lower Rhine River basin.NCRpublication 10-2001, ISSN 1568-234
WL, 1998. De Rijn op Termijn. WL | Delft Hydraulics: Delft.
Van PIETER: Valkering 2007, (Pahl-Wostl 2002; Valkering 2007
Van Rutger: (Rotmans, 2001). (Berkhout et al. 2003; Elzen et al. 2004; Geels 2002; Kemp et al.
1998; Loorbach 2007; Rotmans et al. 2001; Van der Brugge et al. 2005; Verbong 2000).
29