Supporting analysis of floodplain restoration options by historical analysis

Baart, Iris; Hohensinner, Severin; Zsuffa, István; Hein, Thomas

doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2012.10.003

Cited by 18 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Table 3 lists the groups of criteria with the number of indicators used within each group assessed qualitatively using expert opinion or quantitatively using models or measurement. In the Lobau, where a long-term data collection program exists and a large research project has been executed, all indicators are numerical (see Funk et al, 2012;Baart et al, 2012). However, in developing countries this is not the case.…”

Section: Criteria and Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Namaalwa et al (2012) illustrate the process of characterizing the ecosystem services provided by the Namatala wetland in Uganda, and the current trends in land use and management that jeopardise those services. Other papers report on technical studies which underpin management approaches -for example, ecological niche models (Funk et al 2012) and floodplain restoration options (Baart et al 2012) for the Lobau wetlands in Austria; and a study of the impact of water quality on aquatic biota in Abras de Mantequilla (Alvarez-Mieles et al 2012). Two papers contrast experiences from the developed and developing worlds relating to integrating wetlands into broader catchment management (Rebelo et al 2012), and the impact of institutional capacity on wetland management in different contexts in Africa and Europe (Ostrovskaya et al 2012).…”

Section: This Special Issue Of the Journal Environmental Science And mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

WETwin: A structured approach to evaluating wetland management options in data-poor contexts

Johnston

Cools

Liersch

et al. 2013

Environmental Science & Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This special issue of Environmental Science and Policy presents the outcomes of the WETwin project (Enhancing the role of wetlands in integrated water resources management for twinned river basins in EU, Africa and South-America in support of EU Water Initiatives), an international research project funded by the FP7 programme of the European Commission. The project aimed to improve wetland management by maximizing benefits from wetland use while maintaining ecological health, using case studies from Europe, Africa and South America.In much of the less developed world, data on wetland functions, processes and values are scarce even while wetlands often provide a critical component of livelihoods. Management decisions on balancing competing demands for wetland use must often be made in the absence of comprehensive information. This paper introduces the approach developed and tested under WETwin to evaluate wetland management structures and solutions in data-poor contexts, summarizing a conceptual framework which has evolved from seven very diverse case studies. A structured, modular approach was devised which combined multi-criteria analysis, trade-off analysis and vulnerability analysis, drawing on best available information, including quantitative modelling, qualitative "expert opinion", and local stakeholders' knowledge and values. The approach used in WETwin has three important strengths: it involves stakeholders at all stages of the decision process, it combines qualitative and quantitative data (and therefore allows inclusion of poorly known and potentially important system components) and finally, it provides a relatively simple and structured approach to evaluate wetland management interventions and integrate impact, feasibility and institutional assessments, vulnerability analysis and trade-off analysis. The overall conceptual framework developed for WETwin was found to be robust and transferable to different contexts.Keywords: wetland management, ecosystem services, vulnerability, multi-criteria analysis, stakeholder participation Highlights WETwin project developed methods assessing wetland management in data-poor contexts  Structured approach to combining quantitative modelling and qualitative "expert opinion"  Multi-criteria and trade-off analyses used to rank management against stakeholder objectives  Impact of external factors (climate change, population growth) explored using scenario analysis

show abstract

Section: Criteria and Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: This Special Issue Of the Journal Environmental Science And mentioning

confidence: 99%

WETwin: A structured approach to evaluating wetland management options in data-poor contexts

Johnston

Cools

Liersch

et al. 2013

Environmental Science & Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a consequence of channel incision and deposition of sediments in the floodplain, the groundwater tables have declined from 1.9 m in 1849 to 3 m in 2003 at mean water level . Furthermore, the habitat turnover rates and, accordingly, habitat rejuvenation have decreased dramatically between the pre-regulation and the post-regulation phase (Baart et al 2013).…”

Section: Historic Development Of the Lower Lobaumentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The changes in the availability of aquatic habitats significantly affected the macrophyte communities in the Lower Lobau (Baart et al 2013). The total number of species increased slightly from 108 species before the regulation to 116 species around 2000.…”

Section: Historic Development Of the Lower Lobaumentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Due to the restricted extent of the water exchange, however, the enhancement scheme has shown no effects on the fish community so far, especially regarding the recolonization of the main side arm by rare Danube species or rheophilic specialists. The identification of adequate management measures was based on several approaches: (1) the historical analyses of the floodplain development from the unregulated to the current state Baart et al 2013), (2) longterm monitoring of hydrological and ecological properties of floodplain water bodies from 2005 to 2014 (Reckendorfer et al 2013b;Weigelhofer et al 2015), (3) the development of hydrological and ecological models predicting the further development of the floodplain under different hydrologic scenarios (Baart et al 2010(Baart et al , 2013Funk et al 2013), and (4) a multi-criteria decision study about the effects of a wide range of management scenarios on the various ecological and socioeconomic demands Sanon et al 2012). The following sections show the main procedures and the results of the different approaches.…”

Section: Upper Lobaumentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Riverine Ecosystem Management

Schmutz¹,

Sendzimir²

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open Access This book is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author (s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this book are included in the book's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the book's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Printed on acid-free paperThis Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer International Publishing AG part of Springer Nature. The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland Challenges in Riverine Ecosystem Management Jan Sendzimir and Stefan SchmutzThis book is dedicated to those interested in the natural and social sciences and elements of governance that will support the sustainable management of rivers and aquatic ecosystems. Since elements of nature and society interact to determine the integrity and trajectory of these systems, they are referred to hereafter as socialecological systems (SESs). This introduction opens the door to these topics in four steps. It begins by explaining why a book dedicated to river management and science is needed at this point. In the second part, it outlines the history of some of the major developments that challenge the integrity of SESs worldwide. In the third part, it describes several of the principal tools used to study as well as manage SES. Tools to measure the degree of degradation of an SES include indicators of biological integrity, ecosystem health, and resilience. Tools to assess and manage the trajectory of an SES include the DPSIR and adaptive management. The introduction closes by outlining the structure of the book through the progression of its chapters. Justification of BookRivers are among the most threatened ecosystems of the world. For more than a centur...

show abstract

Riparian vegetation and geomorphological interactions in anabranching rivers: A global review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anabranching rivers are characterized by multiple active channels. Vegetation, flow regime and sediment retention are critical components for the formation, evolution and stability of these rivers; however, the connections relating river dynamics with riparian vegetation development and distribution are still not well known. This review discusses the relationship between anabranching rivers and riparian vegetation, showing examples of how vegetation affects anabranching rivers and how it is also affected by river dynamics. Consequences of poor management and human activities that can disrupt river–vegetation systems are also explored, presenting some examples of modifications to the stability and longevity of anabranching rivers. Challenges to design and implement appropriate policy and management practices in anabranching rivers are most frequently driven by poor experimental evidence due to difficulties in collecting data in these often remote and large river systems. Remote sensing technologies that account for key interactions between riparian vegetation, river flow and morphology changes can provide means to overcome these challenges.

show abstract

Supporting analysis of floodplain restoration options by historical analysis

Cited by 18 publications

References 34 publications

WETwin: A structured approach to evaluating wetland management options in data-poor contexts

WETwin: A structured approach to evaluating wetland management options in data-poor contexts

Riverine Ecosystem Management

Riparian vegetation and geomorphological interactions in anabranching rivers: A global review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About