Identification of Major Sources of Uncertainty in Current IWRM Practice. Illustrated for the Rhine Basin

Abstract

Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) can be viewed as a complex process in which the effect of adopted water management measures must be monitored and adjusted in an iterative way as new information and technology gradually become available under changing and uncertain external impacts, such as climate change. This paper identifies and characterises uncertainty as it occurs in the different stages of the IWRM process with respect to sources, nature and type of uncertainty. The present study develops a common terminology that honour the most important aspects from natural and social sciences and its application to the entire IWRM process. The proposed framework is useful by acknowledging a broad range of uncertainties regarding data, models, multiple frames and context. Relating this framework to the different steps of the IWRM cycle is helpful to determine the strategies to better handle and manage uncertainties. Finally, this general framework is illustrated for a case study in the transboundary Rhine river basin.

Cross-Comparison of Climate Change Adaptation Strategies Across Large River Basins in Europe, Africa and Asia

“…The Rhine River is one of the longest rivers in Europe ( Van der Keur et al 2008) with a length of 1300 km, of which 800 km are navigable. It spreads over an área of 185,000 km 2 and is shared by nine countries.…”

Harmonised Principles for Public Participation in Quality Assurance of Integrated Water Resources Modelling

“…If, through active involvement, the water resource model becomes a shared tool for decision making, then there is an opportunity for a broader identification of sources of uncertainty as part of integrated water resource management (van der Keur et al 2008), with a better identification and design of possible management actions and a more concerned institutional capacity building, more equitable and realistic scenario development, and better evaluation of implemented management plans, leading to more adaptive and integrated water resource management.…”

“…Exploration of a broad spectrum of uncertainties (van der Keur et al 2008) also requires high level participation of stakeholders in the environmental modelling process, because this can provide learning about assessment and management of complex problems in a better way (Refsgaard et al 2007), by enabling stakeholders to articulate issues of concern, by improving framing (terms of references of the modelling study), by utilising stakeholders knowledge and observations, and by involving stakeholders in quality control of the produced operational knowledge.…”

Building on uncertainty: how to cope with incomplete knowledge, unpredictability and ambiguity in ecological engineering projects

“…Furthermore, the set of actors involved -who all have their own goals and interests -changes during the project and can differ from phase to phase. Van der Keur et al (2008) address that different uncertainties are present in the various phases of project development. Therefore, we anticipate that different uncertainties will emerge and be relevant in the diverse phases of the Sand Engine development process.…”

“…Even though the existence of such a relationship could be perceived as yet another complexity in an already complex field, it might also provide major benefits in the form of unexplored approaches to cope with interrelated uncertainties in water management projects. This is important because, in multi-actor decision-making processes, uncertainties that have a different nature normally require fundamentally different coping strategies (Walker et al, 2003;Van der Keur et al, 2008;Kwakkel et al, 2010;Brugnach et al, 2011). Common responses to cope with incomplete knowledge and unpredictability in decision-making are to acquire more information, e.g.…”