Flachner Zsuzsanna –/ SS CMTA TAKI/RISSAC

Water for food and nature

Integrated landscape development for better adaptation

-vision development forpTisza River Basin

• key methods and concepts applied in Tisza y p ppBasin

• key messages

Conceptual approaches for paradigms

Economy SocietyE S i tEconomy Society

EnvirnmentEnvirnment

resources PollutionEconomy Society Society Economy

Milleneum Assessment framework

How Need

How

Quality of Life after Costanza et al, 2008

Emberi igények:Élet fenntartás

SzaporodásBiztonság

Subjective –Well-Being(happiness,

NeedFulfillmentIs PerceivedOpportunities:

To meet humanNeeds, now and

NeedsareMet

Human needs:Subsistence Reproduction

SecuritygMeghatározottság

ÉrtésRészvételPihenés

( pp ,utilitity,welfare,

land-cousciousness,Nature affection)/for individuals

in the future- sustainable

(Built, HumanSocial and

Prefence mesure-

yAffection

UnderstandingParticipation

LeisureSpiritualitásKreativitás

ÖnképSzabadság

and/or groups/Natural Capitaland time)

mentSpiritualityCreativyIdentityFreedomg

liScenarios,

Policy,Decisions

(community-individual level)

Envisioning, evolving social normsÉrtékrendek

Accounting and budgeting ecosytem services

Participative planning and realization

Planertay boundaries (SEI, 2009)

Ecosystm services and scenariosMaintenance and

restoration costs inRBM plans

Economic and social values now and in different scenarios –and in different scenarios 

Can we translate?How water related preferences are contradicting based on 

economic interest?

Biophysical structure or

process( dl d

Biophysical structure or

process( dl d

Biophysical structure or

process( dl d(e.g. woodland habitat or net

primary productivity )

ServiceService

Function(e.g. slow

passage of

Function(e.g. slow

passage of water or

(e.g. woodland habitat or net

primary productivity )

ServiceService

Function(e.g. slow

passage of

Function(e.g. slow

passage of water or

(e.g. woodland habitat or net

primary productivity )

ServiceService

Function(e.g. slow

passage of

Function(e.g. slow

passage of water or Service

(e.g. flood protection, or harvestable products)

(e.g. flood protection, or harvestable products)

water, or biomass)water, or biomass)

Benefit (Value)(e.g. willingness to pay for woodland

Benefit (Value)(e.g. willingness to pay for woodland protection or for

Limit pressures via policy action?

Service(e.g. flood

protection, or harvestable products)

(e.g. flood protection, or harvestable products)

water, or biomass)water, or biomass)

Benefit (Value)(e.g. willingness to pay for woodland

Benefit (Value)(e.g. willingness to pay for woodland protection or for

Service(e.g. flood

protection, or harvestable products)

(e.g. flood protection, or harvestable products)

water, or biomass)water, or biomass)

Benefit (Value)(e.g. willingness to pay for woodland

Benefit (Value)(e.g. willingness to pay for woodland protection or for

Limit pressures via policy action?

protection or for more woodland, or

harvestable products)

protection or for more woodland, or

harvestable products)Σ Pressures

protection or for more woodland, or

harvestable products)

protection or for more woodland, or

harvestable products)

protection or for more woodland, or

harvestable products)

protection or for more woodland, or

harvestable products)Σ Pressures

‘Intermediate Products’ ‘Final Products’Scenario based pressure indication Scenario based preference indication onexpected services and benefits

Biodiversity and economic value

Change inE i

Changein

OECDBaselinescenario

Change Change inE i

Changein

OECDBaselinescenario

Change Change inE i

Changein

OECDBaselinescenario

Change EconomicValue

inLand use,Climate,

Pollution,Water use

ChangeIn

Ecosystem

gin

BiodiversityEconomic

Value

inLand use,Climate,

Pollution,Water use

ChangeIn

Ecosystem

gin

BiodiversityEconomic

Value

inLand use,Climate,

Pollution,Water use

ChangeIn

Ecosystem

gin

Biodiversity

InternationalPolicies

ServicesChange

inEcosystemf

InternationalPolicies

ServicesChange

inEcosystemf

InternationalPolicies

ServicesChange

inEcosystemffunctionsfunctionsfunctions

Watergapscenarios

Lower Danubescenarios Indicators modelling and ES cacluation

Based on - TEEB presentation, TEEBWEB‐org, 2009

scenarios scenarios Indicators, modelling and ES cacluation

Conceptual model of water resource management (SCENES IIASA 2008)(SCENES, IIASA, 2008)

Freshwater Supply for Human Needs

ClimateChange

Freshwater Supply for Human Needs

People & Economy

Rainfall

Surface WaterAvailable forWithdrawal

+

GroundwaterAvailable forWithdrawal

DesalinizedOcean Water

Population

Industry

WaterShortage

-

+

+

GlobalIntegration

Consumption

? +

-

W t V l ti

+

+

Water Supply Infrastructure

+

Evaporation

Reuse ofReturn Flow

DomesticA i lt l

Water inLandscape

Industry

Arable Land

Water Demand Management-

ConsumptionPatterns

PoliticalSecurity?

Gross Economic Product

Water Valuation

Ecological AwarenessPublic Involvement

Water Saving+

+

CanalsReservoirsDams

Water Quality ManagementWater Demand

TreatmentLevel

-

-

Total Water

+

+

Return Flow

-

Industrial

Agricultural

+

-Landscape

Runoff

+

+

+Hydropower

+-

+

WaterCleaningCapacity

+

ConsumptiveUse

+Freshwater in Rivers,Lakes and Reservoirs

-

Outflow tothe Sea

Withdrawal

+

Return Flow

+

-

+

+

FreshwaterQuality-

+

Pollution

-

Snowmelt

Quality ofWater Used forHuman Needs

-

-

Capacity

+

Ecological Conditions

Water Use Water QualityFreshwater Resources+

+

Water Availablefor Ecosystems + Ecosystems

Health

+

Gyulai, CEEWeb, 2008

WaterWater quality, irrigated

land, level ofProduction-service-consumtion; market,

households, infrastuctures,

land, level of risk

StateLegal frame, governance, education, state budget,

diff. Industries, transportation, tourism, waste, water, forest

mngt., spatial utilization

Pressure

St t l l lHistory, value preference,

education, state budget, social security, safety,

information management

Structural level

Institutional level

philosophy, politics, knowledge, wisdom, consumption patterns

Cultural, social level

Excercise – define your own value pyramid!

Same groups for scenario developmentSame groups for scenario development

Key questions: Present / future- Basic values- knowledge

k i tit ti- key institutions- production strucutres - consumption patternsconsumption patterns- environmental issues

Tisza river basin

Historic land use change in the region

SZÖVET – UNDP/GEF Tisza biodiversity project

Key issues in the Tisza river basin -waterlogging drought floodriskwaterlogging, drought, floodrisk

yellow – low waterlog threatgreen – middle waterlog threatblue – high water log threatred – extreme water log threathttp://www.otk.hu/cd05/1szek/Nemcsik-K%C3%B6les-Balla.htm

Ecological protection zone and enetic hotspots

Ecological structure of primary floodplain in the Tisza:Upper, middle and lower section (VÁTI, 2004, Timpanon, 2003)

- complex zones with oxbows, galery forests- change of character in different sections

2 m3/sSupporting modelling for risk and retention potential

assessment (ARES, Koncsos, 2007)

2 m3/s

15-15 m3/s

GIS supported territorial, participatory planning

• focus group meetings for describing sectoral needs

• conflict map – analysing the needs

lvm

ent

• solution for common interest / property level

der i

nvo

• developing scenarios

• community agreement on d l d St

akeh

old

proposed landuse

• needs for framework changes (regional national

S

changes (regional national level)

Flachner, 2005, based on FAO

Source: Bokartisz, 2004Sustainable landuse planning

Participatory planning ….

K h ” Know who”

p y p g

national Local processes„Know-who”„Know-how”„know-what”

PROJECT

„Know-who”„Know-how”„know-what”

DIALOGUE

localN k l d

Local initiatives

PROJECT

New knowledge

KNOWLEDGE

traditionMonitoring & Programmesreserach policies

Stakholder involvement context …

b i banksbusiness Global/nationalinvestors

policymanagementmedia

policymanagement

Science Public

Who we have to talk to discuss with?

b i banksbusiness investors

§ ?

policymanagementmedia

§

§ ?

§ ?

SMEs?

policymanagementResource Owners? §, no €

§ § ?

§ ?Science Public

Role of scenarios in the process

P li Science

Sterk et al, 2008

Policy Science

Strategy settingStrategy setting-

Policy ScienceAssessment tools –modelling

Participative planning

Policy Science

Ci ilobby

Achie ed goals

modelling

Civicsociety

people

Achieved goals

Reframingthreathspeople – threaths –

vulnerability

Process: Assessment of agents (SHs) gcooperation patterns in the case studies

Policy Policy

Civil mandate Trickle out

Science /

PublicScience /

public

SciencePolicy

/

publicScience

Policy/

public

Janus face Critical participant

Policy

est 

ps ? Management/

Knowledgebroker After Ster et al 2008

Science /

public

Intere

grou

p

Agencies/private enterprizes

After Sterk et al 2008Knowledgebroker After Ster et al, 2008After Sterk et al, 2008

Assessment example for participative planning p p p p gin different regions

Bodrog – National and EU level

S iPolicy/science

policy

revitalization -polder

Bereg –

Regional level

Local level

National and EU level policy

Sciencey

publicpublic

Policyst 

sBereg revitalization -polder

Regional level

Local level

public

scienceScience

y/

public

Interes

group

Nagykörű –Integrated land and water mgt.

National and EU level

Regional level

Local levelpublic

science

policy

SciencePolicy/public

g

TÁJ-KÉP-Scenario

National and EU level

Regional level

Local level policy

public SciencePolicy

/

public

Interest 

groups

deveopmentLocal level

science

policy

Elements of local decision making … g

Bodrog – National and EU level

science

public

S iPolicy/

revitalization -polder

Bereg –

Regional level

Local level

National and EU level

policy

Policyt 

Sciencey

public

publicBereg revitalization -polder

Regional level

Local level

SciencePolicy

/

public

Interest

groups

policy

science

Nagykörű –Integrated land and water mgt.

National and EU level

Regional level

Local levelpublic

science

policy

SciencePolicy/public

g

TÁJ-KÉP-Scenario

National and EU level

Regional level

Local level policy

publicScience

Policy/

public

Interest 

groups

deveopmentLocal level

science

policy I

Key element – participative planning y p p p g

Common understanding gof processes, drivers, cause-effect relationships –„iceberg- martix”

Desing future – rich picture developmentpicture development, spidergrams, conceptual modelsode s

Key elements – main drives identified y

16.0

8 0

10.0

12.0

14.0

2 0

4.0

6.0

8.0

0.0

2.0

ricul

ture

polic

ies

chan

ge

opm

ent

on lo

ad

ucat

ion

ratio

n

unda

ry)

hnol

ogy

pacity o

f

itutio

nsof

wat

er

ourc

e

aspe

ct

agri

wat

er p

clim

ate

c

ndus

try d

evlo

polu

tio

war

enes

s/ed

u

coop

er

(tran

sbou

Tech

cap

insti

stat

us o

reso

u

social

i

aw

Tisza ideal world

I t l t t iC t ll d t tfl b kfl

Floodplain revitalization concept(Flachner- Kahner-Molnar, 2005)

Internal water steering- secondary notch-system for irrigation- revitalization of old creeks, wetlands- economic utilization (fishponds)

Controlled water outflow - backflow to the main river channeltechnical criteria set both for

- flood risk management economic utilization (fishponds)- harmonized water distribution among stakeholders

flood risk management- floodplain retention- ecological tresholds

Landscape management at floodplain- diverse landuse, fit to the elevation, natural conditions- proper agrotechnology (small/medium size masinary, permaculture) -payments for (ecological) services (e g flood protection agri-environmentalpayments for (ecological) services (e.g.flood protection, agri environmentalpayments, Natura 2000, WFD) - additional income possibilitites (e.g.rural tourism, biomass production)

i iInstitutional system- Monitoring, laboratory, expert systems, GIS-based assessment and water steering support- Education, trainings, information dissemination,increased public participation- lobby, representation of local, regional interest - maintanace of water steering system, coordination of water related activites (flood-protection, irrigation, drainage, ecological water supply, water storage)

Theoretical base of floodplain revitalization

Floodplain Social-Ecological System

dW t St

CommunityWell-Being Land

OwnershipLandscape

Water in Landscape

PrecipitationWater Stage

in River

Ri

SoilQuality

LandscapeProductivity Profitability

pStructure

InvestorsWell-Being

River -Landscape

FlowAgricultural

Technology and Useof External Inputs

BiodiversityPollution

Economic and PoliticalCultural Identity,Local Knowledge

Land Use

Water Infrastructure(Dikes, Channels, Sluices,

Drainage Tiles etc.)

Economic and PoliticalConditions (Legislation,Regulations, Markets,Prices, Subsidies etc.)

WaterManagement

Goals

Local Knowledge

Information aboutthe System State

Pressures ofDifferent Interest

Groups

Strategy(Employed

by GoverningBodies)

Key external drivers identified by Tisza SHs (TÁJ-KÉP)identified by Tisza SHs (TÁJ-KÉP)

CC, fossil fuel limitations, financial chaos, population No.

Increased importnace of water (and other natural) resourceswater (and other natural) resources

Social degaradation and itsimpacts on rural areas and market

Bi di it ( ti di it ) lBiodiversity (genetic diversity) loss

Demand to change hydro morphologyDemand to change hydro-morphology– energy, navigation

Key lessons learned in hthe SCENES process

• External drivers: – Global processes: economics, capital market, depreciation

of natural resources (no value)EU fi i l b idi l i l ti d i tit ti l– EU: financial subsidies; legislation and institutional settings

– National: legal, structural traps – and opportunities??• Structural trap:

– „Is is possible to escape from structures which we have built in the hope to have higher life quality from monetary benefits?”hope to have higher life quality from monetary benefits?

• Development is to improve our capacity to adapt to changes of our global /local environment– Specialization in adaptation reduce the capacity to establish new

architectures

Structural traps in the Tisza region

The bottlenecks to be able to adapt to challanges:The bottlenecks to be able to adapt to challanges:

1. Landuse and genetic diversity 2 W t t t t (d k k l d t )2. Water management structures (dykes, knowledge, etc.)3. Agriculture (technology, mass production, knowledge)4. Trading and transportationg p5. Settlements and infrastructures connecting

settlements6 Social structures6. Social structures

In all cases the basis of actions:

h f il f l d t l t bilcheep fossil fuels and natural resources; stabil climate

Landuse and biodiversity

• Objectives:– Present: to maintain

and protect the areas

• Adaptation capacity and ecological networks neglectedand protect the areas

we have– SF: to develope natural

networks neglected• Low genetic diversity

in food productionsystem up to 20-25%

– MF: to increase activities to explore the

p• Green budeting and

ES delayedpspace and nature for economi development

• Small signals – bee population collaps -neglectedneglected

Water management

• Objectives:– Present: to keep the

• Dams, other water steering infrastructures

structures as they are– SF: to harmonize with

the natural structures

• Institutional settings• Financial mechanisms the natural structures

– MF: to increase activities to explore the

– such as ‘vis-major’fund

landscape

Agriculture• Mono-structures

• Objectives:– Present: intensive

• Mono-structures• Subsidy and negative

impacts on environmentagriculture (with large subsidies

– SF: to adopt to natural

impacts on environment• Machinery based, low

human power– SF: to adopt to natural variations and diversify

– MF: to increase

human power• Dependence on external

market/global processesintensification, irrigation and market outreach

g p• Low capacity to adapt to

CC and other risks (e.g. outreach ( gpest)

Trading and transportation• Negative env Impacts

• Objectives:– Present: long distance

transportation to

Negative env. Impacts of infrastructure development of

i itransportation to international markets

– SF: to focus on

transportation is not counted

• total economic value isregional local markets, diversify products and services

• total economic value is neglected

• Rational decisions – MF: to increase

specialization, special products to introduce,

disappear• Damage on local and

i l kp ,mass production regional market

Settlements and rural-citySettlements and rural city polarization

• Objectives:– Present: development of

efficient cities and labour

• Systems are destroying each other

efficient cities and labour sources in cities

– SF: healthy balance between Rural and urban

• City-village battle• The purchase power of between Rural and urban

areas – with focus on cooperative structures

– MF: to maximize the

urban areas destroy the markets of rural areas

d d l t– MF: to maximize the efficiency and empty the countryside – up to 85% in urban areas

and development potential as wellI d l bilit• Increased vulnerability and segregation

Social structures

• Objectives:– Present: get people to vote

for specific parties (by

• Contra selected society in the rural areas

for specific parties (by votes); avoid revolutions

– SF: healthy society with knowledge based groups

• Huge income polarization• More and more barriers to knowledge based groups

cooperation and capacity to subsidiarity

– MF: to have mass product

have access to natural resources (forest, water, l i t )– MF: to have mass product

and mass media consumer society – educated enough to be effective in certain

clean air, etc.)• Social inequity, minority

i d i tipositions (non thinkers) issues and migration

Key messages from PP - main dilemmay g

To try to manage Try to find keyTo try to manage the problems in the present

Try to find keydrivers and find solutions to

structures and generate new (l )

change them in other structures

(larger) ones

•Our future depends on our capacity to be able to recognize p p y gthe wronge structures and the way to change them.

•It is not a matter of financial resources – more the ability to see recognize and develop social capacity to changesee, recognize and develop social capacity to change

Water retention area in Bereg

A : 90 million m3 storrage capacity protected by 2 4 m

g

A.: 90 million m3 storrage capacity, protected by 2,4 m high dykes, main inflow point with 300m/s capacity; channel to steer water to the lower parts for ecological

t tirestoration

B.: 90 million m3 storage capacity, protected by 2,4 m high dykes, permanenet lake in the polder, main inflow point with 300m/s capacity

C.: 60 million m3 storage capacity, protected by 1,2 m high dykes, following natural elevations, 1,5 times bi t it i i fl i t ith 300 / itbigger territory, main inflow point with 300m/s capacity

„A” alternative for retention area in Bereg g

„C” alternative for retention area in Bereg g

Thanks for your attention!Thanks for your attention!Flachner@rissac.hu

Acknowledgements:Acknowledgements:FAO TCP Bereg, Newater Project, SCENES Project, Living Tisza UNDP-GEF, TÁJ-KÉP pogram