Download Kelly Munkittrick, Scientific Director, Canadian Water

A global analysis of lakes
science and transboundary
management
GEF International Waters Science Conference 2012
Bangkok, Thailand – 24 to 26 September 2012
Outline
Composition of group
Objectives
Overview of projects reviewed
Some of the major deficiencies or challenges
Factors that improved the success of GEF projects
Developing issues encountered
Emerging science challenges
Overarching challenges and needs
First thoughts on priorities for moving forward
Group composition
Co-chairs: Kelly Munkittrick
Gheorghe Constantin
• Nikolay Aladin
• Sansanee Choowaew
• Navy Hap
• Karen Kidd
• Eric Odada
• Oscar Parra
• Geoffrey Phillips
• Sergei Ryanzhin
• Mark Servos
• Roberto Urrutia
University of New Brunswick
Romanian Ministry of Environment
• Russian Academy of Sciences
• Mahidol University, Thailand
• IFReDI, Cambodia
• Canadian Rivers Institute
• University of Nairobi
• Universidad de Concepción
• Norwich, UK
• Russian Academy of Sciences
• University of Waterloo & CWN
• Universidad de Concepción
Objectives and structure
Synopsis report for lakes types
• critical science challenges “on the horizon” specific to lakes?
• significance of regional and global-scale drivers in the
genesis of transboundary problems?
• how understanding and managing multiple causality in a
transboundary water context is undertaken?
• how variable spatial and temporal scales accounted for in IW
projects?
• approaches were used to understand/asses the coupling of
social and ecological systems?
Analysis Report
Main focus
1. Critical emerging science issues
2. Application of science for adaptive
management
3. Development and use of indicators to support
IW projects
Overview of projects
reviewed
• 58 projects in total
•Few considered lakes
solely
•Most overlap with rivers
•Few considered lakes as
different ecosystems
Overview of projects
Critical science gaps
• an absence of baseline data on the system
• a lack of pristine areas for study and comparison
• a need for more rigorous study designs and regular effective
evaluation of project deliverables
• ongoing challenges related to a lack of regional infrastructure
• failed to consider lake-specific processes and considered the
lake as part of the river system, or failed to consider the past
history of lakes
•many projects did not consider lake physical processes as
a component of the system or as a possible modifier of
impacts
Relatively “unique” issues to
lakes
• lakes are often more dependent on external drivers such as
changing land use, aerial deposition, and climate change.
• the temporal scale of lake responses are often affected by
retention times that result in response time frames longer than
project durations
- contributions of sediments and legacy issues
- lake-specific processes,
- atmospheric transfer across boundaries,
- interactions of multiple stressors,
- data from contributing drainages,
- social and economic linkages
Climate change impacts on
lakes
• salinity
• water quality
• food web structure and biodiversity,
• fisheries (alternate species, new invasive species)
• navigation patterns and use of waterways
Project-specific issues that
hindered success
• natural disasters (earthquake, hurricanes, floods, etc.),
climate, and invasive species
• changing political, economic and regulatory environments
• inconsistencies in perspectives
•Common failures
•use the best available and up-to-date science
• replicate or use adequate statistical designs
• explicitly develop or follow QA/QC guidelines for the
available data
• collect adequate data prior to initiating changes to
evaluate the impacts of changes
Other challenges
• lack of relevant examples of innovative science
approaches in lakes
• absence of solid conceptual frameworks,
• more extensive (and appropriate) modelling
activities are needed
• shortage of reliable data for modelling and
analysis, and a lack of verification and calibration
of models
• gaps in considering or integrating approaches with
traditional ecological knowledge were often evident.
Critical science challenges
specific to lakes
• Changing economic,
energy and agricultural
policies
• Changing climates
(species, levels, quality)
• Data management and
modelling
•Baseline data and
historical documentation
Positive aspects
• Projects benefitted from
• involvement of public stakeholders,
• a process that included a commitment to public
engagement, acceptance and uptake of recommendations
•Also benefitted from good peer review
• the competition and evaluation of ideas and scientific
thoughts during development of project,
• a representative balance between local and international
scientists,
• a commitment to regular review and peer scientific review
during data collection
• in many studies there was a goal of equilibrium and balanced
participation between governmental, scientific and NGO
influences.
Factors that improved the
success of projects
• early and meaningful engagement of local
stakeholders
• early engagement of international science
community
• respectful interaction with local stakeholders
• rigorous peer review, and international science
teams linked to policy development
• linkages to social, economic, political scientists
• effective utilization of traditional ecological
knowledge
Important success factors
• clarity of the issue and of the objectives
• a comprehensive TDA, with appropriate statistical design
• focus on basin-level scientific analyses, reviews and
assessments,
• set achievable and measureable targets, and
• separated the technical and political influences on
scientific design
• peer review, trained staff, trained (and involved) stakeholders
• need to improve the inclusion of social science
• education programs for decision-makers
• linkage to the political and planning processes
Science application
• project must focus on building or strengthening
1) capacity,
2) regional cooperation,
3) involvement (participation).
Early on, projects need to
• Develop priorities for management activities
• Develop criteria, indicators and milestones for project
evaluation
• Use appropriate demonstration sites to evaluate criteria and
conduct analysis
• Develop processes or frameworks for expanding influence
beyond pilot sites
•Identify and develop a strategy for dealing with implementation
barriers;
• Develop evaluation procedures for transfer of change
across levels of implementation
Recommendations for
improving science
• external team should assess the level of local scientific
capabilities
• capacity-building required
• engage the local and global scientific communities early AND
need a shared vision
• local and global participants must have shared
responsibilities, mutual understanding and respect, and welldefined roles
• need to incorporate local approaches and traditional
knowledge
• mechanisms needed to pass communication barriers
Emerging science challenges
• need for
• increasing the focus on the ecosystem level,
• improving the development of proxy
indicators,
• developing strategies for climate adaptation,
• improving our understanding of long-range
transport of contaminants, changing chemical
use patterns, and the impacts of habitat
rehabilitation, including reforestation
Over-arching actions
• effective capacity development and training,
• planning processes which include policy
development and harmonization,
• the development of strong regional
collaboration
• linkages to the international science
community
Thank you
www.iwlearn.net/iwsc2012