Goals and principles for programmatic river restoration monitoring and evaluation: collaborative learning across multiple projects

Abstract

River restoration is a relatively recent undertaking, with high levels of complexity and uncertainty involved. Many restoration projects have been monitored over the past three decades, however, results have rarely been compared across projects thereby limiting our ability to identify factors that influence restoration outcomes. Programmatic monitoring and evaluation (ProME) that builds on standardized surveys and systematic cross-project comparison allows for collaborative learning, transfer of results across restoration projects and for adaptive management and monitoring. We present a conceptual framework for ProME consisting of four goals and nine principles. First, ProME accounts for complexity, uncertainty, and change in order to contribute to sustainable river management over the long term. Second, ProME promotes collaborative learning and adaptation by standardizing the sampling design for the field surveys at multiple projects and by disseminating findings across stakeholders. Third, ProME verifies to what extent restoration has been achieved, i.e., it must quantify the size and direction of change. Fourth, ProME identifies why the observed effects were present, thereby improving our mechanistic understanding of river functioning. We conclude with potential extensions of the framework (e.g., evaluating cumulative effects of projects within a catchment). Our conceptual framework presents a structured approach toward a more systematic learning and evidence-based action in river restoration, while taking into account the wider picture of environmental change within which river restoration projects will inevitably operate.

A Review of Approaches for Monitoring the Effectiveness of Regional River Habitat Restoration Programs

“…This emphasizes the need for a thorough process for designing programmatic monitoring and evaluation of restoration (Weber et al. ). There are more than 15 IMW programs currently underway in the Pacific Northwest of North America (Bennett et al.…”

“…For example, the Swiss Water Protection Act stipulates the restoration of 4,000 km of river by 2090 (Weber et al. ). The aim of the Swiss River Restoration Program is to re‐establish the natural functions of channelized, straightened, and culverted surface waters and to restore habitats for a diversified fauna and flora.…”

“…Programmatic monitoring and evaluation of river restoration—evaluating the effectiveness of an entire restoration program across a region (e.g., basin, state, province, or ecoregion) rather than individual projects—has several advantages over project‐level monitoring (Weber et al. ). These include transfer of results across restoration projects, programs, and river basins; facilitated exchange of lessons learned across stakeholders; continuous refinement of practical and scientific approaches; increased credibility of restoration through a robust analysis of the effects; and understanding of mechanistic pathways and influencing factors (e.g., multiple stressors; Weber et al.…”

“…These include transfer of results across restoration projects, programs, and river basins; facilitated exchange of lessons learned across stakeholders; continuous refinement of practical and scientific approaches; increased credibility of restoration through a robust analysis of the effects; and understanding of mechanistic pathways and influencing factors (e.g., multiple stressors; Weber et al. ). Ultimately, programmatic monitoring and evaluation provides feedback to practitioners and managers on the most effective techniques and assist with prioritizing and funding projects.…”

“…Weber et al. () suggested a conceptual framework for programmatic monitoring and evaluation that outlines the underlying goals and principles for standardized surveys, cross‐project evaluation, and evidence‐based learning from multiple river restoration projects within a national or regional program. The framework ensures that the design of the programmatic monitoring and evaluation includes all aspects that need to be considered for it to be effective and provide timely and relevant outputs for both adaptive management and monitoring.…”