Models and stakeholders: Lessons learnt from research on different continents

Models and stakeholders: Lessons learnt from research on

different continents

Thomas Gaiser

NMPI Workshop Stuttgart,12.–13. March 2007

Models and stakeholders: Lessons learnt from research on different continents

•Studying the interactions between water availability and lifelihood in semi-arid rural areas

WAVES

Water Availability and Vulnerability of Ecosystems and Society in Northeast Brazil

•Developing two integrative modeling approaches at

different regional scales



Study area



Two model approaches

Spatial scale Temporal scale

Extent Resolution Extent Resolution

SIM(Dynamic coupling)

"Macro-scale" (States of Piauí and Ceará)

Municipality 25 years(2000-2025)

Variable (1 day to 1 year)

MOSDEL(Data coupling, GIS)

"Meso-scale"(Guaribas water shed and municipality of Tauá)

1 ha 5 reference years

Variable(1 day to 1 year)



CearaState Ministry of PlanningState Institute for PlanningState Ministry of AgricultureState Ministry of Water ResourcesFederal University of CearaMunicipal Governement

Institutions involved in Germany



Frequent dry years with water and food shortageHigh expenses for emergency aidFirst attempt to develop a tool for integrating

water and land use related sectors Involvement of the state secretary for planningWell established database managementDegree of complexity not too high

Incentives to use the project results



Obstacles to adopt the developed modeling tools

Obstacles:

Relevant institutions were not participating from the very beginning

Transfer phase to shortLack of financial resources for additional staffPolitical changes



•Building of scenarios of integrated water resources management together with stakeholders to support the establishment of River Basin Management Plans (RBMP)

RIVERTWIN

Scientific and Technological Objectives

•Developing an integrated regional model for scenario

analysis and evaluation under contrasting ecological and

socioeconomic conditions in three river basins



Central Europe:Neckar basin

Central Asia:Chirchik basin

West Africa:Oueme basin

Three selected river basins



LARSIM (HBV)

MODFLOWWEAP

Regi

onal

isie

rte K

limat

ypen

un

d -s

zena

rien

EPIC / SLISYS ACRE

QUAL2K

MONERIS

CASIMIR

OberflächenabflussGrundwasserKlima Wasser-

nutzung

Anbaumethoden, Erträge, diff. Einträge Agrarökonomie

Gewässer-ökologie

Gewässer-güte

Experten-systemSzenarien

Sozi

oöko

nom

isch

e An

nahm

en u

nd M

aßna

hmen

MO

SDEW

Inte

grat

ion

MOSDEW - Model for Sustainable Development of Water Resources – Coupling of submodels --

MOSDEW - Model for Sustainable Development of Water Resources – Coupling of submodels --

Chem.Water quality

Crop production anddiff. pollutions

Biol.Water quality

Agricultural economy

Surface and ground water flow

Integrationand evalution

Web-G

IS

Water demandScenario assumptions



Stakeholder Participation in the „Story and

Simulation“ approach

Driving Forces

MOSDEW

Socio-economic and ecologicalEvaluation

Basin Management Plans

Agreement

Stake-holders

Output

Climatechange

Socio-economicchange

Indicators

Interventions

Input



Neckar:Ministery of EnvironmentEnvironmental Protection AgencyRegional Commission Stuttgart („River basin

agency“)District administrationWater supply companies and associations

Institutions involved in Germany





Incentives:

Political pressure from ECFirst project which truely integrated agricultural

sector and a wide range of water related problems

Technical and human capacity exist Insufficiency of existing toolsPotential end-user involved from the beginning

Incentives to use the project results




Obstacles:

Lack of „integrating“ institutionFear to open the black box of existing toolsFear of becoming dependent on external know-how?Existing lobby for other approaches



Oueme:Governmental Water AuthorityNational Agricultural Research CenterWater supply companyUniversity and national statistical officeLeaders of the districts (communes)

Institutions involved in Benin Republic



Future institutional framework Oueme basin

Direction Generalede lÉau

Datamanagement

unit

GIREGestion Integre des Resources

en Eau

(River basin committees)

Minstere de lÁgriculture, dÉlevage et de la peche

Ministere des Mines, de lÉnergie et de l Hydraulique

Societe Beninoise des Eaux

et de lÉlectricité

Chefs des departements et des communes



Incentives:

New water law which makes basin related water management imperative

First project which tried to integrate agricultural and water sector

New water law making basin related water management imperative

End-user = project partner and involved from the beginning of the project

Incentives to use the project results in Benin




Obstacles:

„Integrating“ institution is not yet establishedTechnical and human capacity exist only for some of

the submodelsFinancing of staff for database administration and

model maintenance not securedProject duration too shortPoor internet access for many of the administrative

institutionsTechnical and human capacity not yet well developed



Chirchik:

Interstate Commission for Water Coordination

River basin agencyRegional water boardsWater User Associations

Institutions involved in Uzbekistan



Institutional framework Chirchik basin

BWO “Syrdarya”Transboundary surface waters

ICWC

Keles irrigation unit

South Kazakhstan

province SCWR26 th. ha

Chirchik basin organization of

irrigation systems, Minagrowater Uz

382 th. ha

Reservoirs and HESJSC “Uzbekpower”2,5km3, 1230 MWt

Ground water resources: Ministry of

Geology

Irrigation systems and water canals

WUAs shirkats state farms

ICWC

Scientific Information

center



Incentives:

Heavy competition for water between mainly hydropower generation and irrigation

Transboundary issuesProject tried to quantify not only water balance but

also economic aspects at the basin levelModelling is an established tool in the institutionEnd-user of the model = project partner

Incentives to use the project results in Uzbekistan




Obstacles:

Project duration too short



Factors encouraging model adoption

•Urgent problem that needs modeling approach („demand“)

•Participation of end-users of the models in the project planning (Desired output, scale etc.)

•Modelling and database management is an established tool in the institution

•End-user of the model = project partner•Favorable institutional setting when different sectors are concerned

•Own funding for end-users•Trust (Personal relationships, recognition of scientists)



Obstacles for model adoption

• The product does not fit the needs• Insufficient technical and human capacity

=> Capacity building• Competition between institutions (ministries)

=>Coordination by „neutral“ academic institution• Lack of financial resources for model maintenance

=> Show the economic benefits• Lack of input and control data =>monitoring• Project duration (development and implementation

phase) too short

=> Flexible project time lifes



Thank you for your attention !

Documents

Models and stakeholders: Lessons learnt from research on different continents