Difference between revisions of "How can we improve?"
From REFORM wiki
| (11 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
An integrated planning framework supports the design of river restoration measures. This framework is cyclic for both entire river basins (catchments) and individual projects. | An integrated planning framework supports the design of river restoration measures. This framework is cyclic for both entire river basins (catchments) and individual projects. | ||
| − | The planning frameworks are presented below. Relevant definitions for restoration planning are given [[ | + | The planning frameworks are presented below. Relevant definitions for restoration planning are given [[Restoration_planning|here]]. Further reading: [http://www.reformrivers.eu/deliverables/d51-review-methodologies-benchmarking-and-setting-end-points-restoration-projects benchmarking and setting end-points], [http://www.reformrivers.eu/cost-effective-restoration-measures-promote-wider-ecosystem-and-societal-benefits cost-effectiveness and benefits], [http://reformrivers.eu/results/restoration-potential-and-strategy climate and land-use changes] , [http://reformrivers.eu/results/restoration-potential-and-strategy risks and uncertainty].<br /> |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
== Planning at a catchment scale == | == Planning at a catchment scale == | ||
[[File:Base_structure_wiki_box_5.PNG|thumb|400px|right|link=What's_in_this_wiki?|What's in this wiki? Click image to return to the overview of river basin management plan.]] | [[File:Base_structure_wiki_box_5.PNG|thumb|400px|right|link=What's_in_this_wiki?|What's in this wiki? Click image to return to the overview of river basin management plan.]] | ||
| Line 10: | Line 8: | ||
Restoration planning at a catchment scale has six main steps: | Restoration planning at a catchment scale has six main steps: | ||
| − | # | + | # [[How does my river work?|River characterization]] |
| − | # River condition | + | # [[River condition]]. [[:Category:Planning tools#1|The DPSIR framework]] captures the key relationships between society and the environment across multiple sectors. [[:Category:Planning tools#WISE conflict and resolution matrices|Conflict and resolution matrices]] support effective collaboration between disciplines and interaction with policy makers and local stakeholders. |
| − | # River restoration potential. This regards the level of ecological improvement that can be achieved, considering the influence of sector activities (drivers) and whether rivers are classified as “heavily modified water body” or “artificial”. The DPSIR framework | + | # River restoration potential. This regards the level of ecological improvement that can be achieved, considering the influence of sector activities (drivers) and whether rivers are classified as “heavily modified water body” or “artificial”. [[:Category:Planning tools#1|The DPSIR framework]] helps in identifying multi-benefits by linking the ecosystem approach, ecosystem services and societal benefits that come from these services. The effects on biota are higher in gravel-bed mountain rivers with low land-use pressure. |
| − | # Programme of measures. The measures necessary to meet the environmental objectives of the WFD cost-effectively are developed in association with the responsible authorities and other stakeholders. They include hydromorphological measures | + | <!--- hyperlink to separate window with key message #9: Slightly higher effects in gravel-bed mountain rivers with low land-use pressure---> |
| − | # Project identification. Clear objectives need to be set to justify the rehabilitation measures selected. The identification of projects is supported by a decision matrix | + | # Programme of measures. The measures necessary to meet the environmental objectives of the WFD cost-effectively are developed in association with the responsible authorities and other stakeholders. They include [[:Category:Measures|hydromorphological measures]]. There is no single “best measure”, but widening generally has a high effect <!---hyperlink to separate window with key message #6: There is no single “best measure” but widening generally has a high effect--->. Restoring specific habitats is more important than merely increasing habitat diversity. <!---hyperlink to separate window with key message #7: It is important to restore specific habitats, not necessarily mere habitat diversity---> |
| + | # Project identification. Clear objectives need to be set to justify the rehabilitation measures selected. The identification of projects is supported by a [[:Category:Planning tools#Decision matrix|decision matrix]]. Small restoration projects do work, but larger projects with a long-term plan are recommended. <!---hyperlink to separate window with key message #8: Small restoration projects work, but better act big and long-term---> | ||
# The project cycle for the planning of individual projects. | # The project cycle for the planning of individual projects. | ||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
== Planning of individual projects == | == Planning of individual projects == | ||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
The planning of individual river restoration projects sets project objectives to improve ecological status at a local scale whilst keeping the project in a river basin or catchment context. The project cycle in the figure follows the basic PDCA (Plan, Do, Check, Act) structure, but includes more detailed planning phases in the first part. Having identified the project within planning at the catchment scale, the following five phases play a key role: | The planning of individual river restoration projects sets project objectives to improve ecological status at a local scale whilst keeping the project in a river basin or catchment context. The project cycle in the figure follows the basic PDCA (Plan, Do, Check, Act) structure, but includes more detailed planning phases in the first part. Having identified the project within planning at the catchment scale, the following five phases play a key role: | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
# Project formulation | # Project formulation | ||
# Financing | # Financing | ||
| Line 32: | Line 25: | ||
# Post-project evaluation | # Post-project evaluation | ||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
| + | [[File:WP5 Project Cycle.png|thumb|600px|centre|The project cycle for planning individual projects.]] | ||
=== Project formulation === | === Project formulation === | ||
| − | The attention for project formulation focuses on the acceptability of the project and the desired outcomes. The DPSIR framework | + | The attention for project formulation focuses on the acceptability of the project and the desired outcomes. [[:Category:Planning tools#1|The DPSIR framework]] allows identification of appropriate rehabilitation measures. The setting of achievable goals and objectives is supported by defining [[:Category:Planning tools#Benchmarks and endpoints|benchmarks and endpoints]], formulating [[:Category:Planning tools#Setting SMART project objectives|SMART project objectives]], [[:Category:Planning tools#Problem tree analysis and tree of objectives|problem tree analysis]], [[:Category:Planning tools#Logical framework approach|logical framework approach]], [[:Category:Planning tools|risk and uncertainty analysis]], and multiple-criteria decision analysis [[:Category:Planning tools#Problem tree analysis and tree of objectives|problem tree analysis]]. Monitoring [[:Category:Planning tools#Problem tree analysis and tree of objectives|problem tree analysis]] is designed to evaluate overall project effectiveness by comparing results with the objectives. Terrestrial and semi-aquatic species benefit most from restoration <!---hyperlink to separate window with key message #3: Terrestrial and semi-aquatic species benefit most from restoration--->. The result is a higher number of individuals rather than new species <!---hyperlink to separate window with key message #4: Restoration results in a higher number of individuals but few new species--->. Specific traits or species are affected rather than the mere number of total species <!---hyperlink to separate window with key message #5: Restoration affects specific species or traits rather than the mere total number of species--->. |
<br /><br /> | <br /><br /> | ||
=== Financing === | === Financing === | ||
| − | The planning of financing is supported by cost-benefit analysis < | + | The planning of financing is supported by cost-benefit analysis <!---[[:Category:Planning tools#Problem tree analysis and tree of objectives|problem tree analysis]]---> and cost-effectiveness analysis <!---[[:Category:Planning tools#Problem tree analysis and tree of objectives|problem tree analysis]]--->. Restoration pays, because it increases ecosystem services <!---hyperlink to separate window with key message #2: Restoration pays – it increases ecosystem services--->. |
<br /><br /> | <br /><br /> | ||
| Line 46: | Line 40: | ||
=== Post-project monitoring === | === Post-project monitoring === | ||
| − | Monitoring < | + | Monitoring <!---[[:Category:Planning tools#Problem tree analysis and tree of objectives|problem tree analysis]]---> is essential for evaluating overall project effectiveness. Monitoring and adjustment go hand in hand, because nobody can fully predict restoration outcomes beforehand<!---hyperlink to separate window with key message #1: Monitor and adjust your project – nobody can fully predict restoration outcomes--->. |
<br /> | <br /> | ||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
=== Post-project evaluation === | === Post-project evaluation === | ||
| − | The post-project evaluation phase assesses the overall project effects and the sectoral impact of the project on the basis of measurable indicators or endpoints in a | + | The post-project evaluation phase assesses the overall project effects and the sectoral impact of the project on the basis of measurable indicators or endpoints in a [[:Category:Planning tools#Logical framework approach|logical framework]]. |
<br /> | <br /> | ||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
Latest revision as of 13:21, 3 January 2019
An integrated planning framework supports the design of river restoration measures. This framework is cyclic for both entire river basins (catchments) and individual projects.
The planning frameworks are presented below. Relevant definitions for restoration planning are given here. Further reading: benchmarking and setting end-points, cost-effectiveness and benefits, climate and land-use changes , risks and uncertainty.
Contents
Planning at a catchment scale
Restoration planning at a catchment scale has six main steps:
- River characterization
- River condition. The DPSIR framework captures the key relationships between society and the environment across multiple sectors. Conflict and resolution matrices support effective collaboration between disciplines and interaction with policy makers and local stakeholders.
- River restoration potential. This regards the level of ecological improvement that can be achieved, considering the influence of sector activities (drivers) and whether rivers are classified as “heavily modified water body” or “artificial”. The DPSIR framework helps in identifying multi-benefits by linking the ecosystem approach, ecosystem services and societal benefits that come from these services. The effects on biota are higher in gravel-bed mountain rivers with low land-use pressure.
- Programme of measures. The measures necessary to meet the environmental objectives of the WFD cost-effectively are developed in association with the responsible authorities and other stakeholders. They include hydromorphological measures. There is no single “best measure”, but widening generally has a high effect . Restoring specific habitats is more important than merely increasing habitat diversity.
- Project identification. Clear objectives need to be set to justify the rehabilitation measures selected. The identification of projects is supported by a decision matrix. Small restoration projects do work, but larger projects with a long-term plan are recommended.
- The project cycle for the planning of individual projects.
Planning of individual projects
The planning of individual river restoration projects sets project objectives to improve ecological status at a local scale whilst keeping the project in a river basin or catchment context. The project cycle in the figure follows the basic PDCA (Plan, Do, Check, Act) structure, but includes more detailed planning phases in the first part. Having identified the project within planning at the catchment scale, the following five phases play a key role:
- Project formulation
- Financing
- Project implementation
- Post-project monitoring
- Post-project evaluation
Project formulation
The attention for project formulation focuses on the acceptability of the project and the desired outcomes. The DPSIR framework allows identification of appropriate rehabilitation measures. The setting of achievable goals and objectives is supported by defining benchmarks and endpoints, formulating SMART project objectives, problem tree analysis, logical framework approach, risk and uncertainty analysis, and multiple-criteria decision analysis problem tree analysis. Monitoring problem tree analysis is designed to evaluate overall project effectiveness by comparing results with the objectives. Terrestrial and semi-aquatic species benefit most from restoration . The result is a higher number of individuals rather than new species . Specific traits or species are affected rather than the mere number of total species .
Financing
The planning of financing is supported by cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis . Restoration pays, because it increases ecosystem services .
Project implementation
......
Post-project monitoring
Monitoring is essential for evaluating overall project effectiveness. Monitoring and adjustment go hand in hand, because nobody can fully predict restoration outcomes beforehand.
Post-project evaluation
The post-project evaluation phase assesses the overall project effects and the sectoral impact of the project on the basis of measurable indicators or endpoints in a logical framework.
