|
|
(7 intermediate revisions by one user not shown) |
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | | |
− | = Introduction =
| + | <br/> |
− | | + | |
− | The objective of a concept for the development of a Watershed Risk and Sustainability Assessment (WRSA) is the development of an approach and methodology regarding (economic) costs and benefits of shared risk management on the watershed or city level. A systematic assessment of shared risks is needed to complement cooperative processes that aim for the mitigation of shared risk. Such an assessment will help to identify causes of risks and most cost efficient and effective mitigation option that aid a transition process towards sustainable management of resources. Given the challenges in watershed management and collective action, a systematic approach shall a) identify risk and causal relations, b) trigger cooperative action and c) identify cost efficient and effective mitigation measures.
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | A WRSA is addressed at and jointly developed by all watershed stakeholders. In order to generate meaningful and implementable solutions its standardised four phases methodology and set of tools quantifies water risks and provides a cost-benefit analysis of different mitigation options. The key objective and challenge at the same time is the establishment of cooperation between partners that have neither common procedures nor the tradition of a joint management of water. Risk assessments follow standard procedures, but need to be adapted to the particular circumstances of watershed risks. The concept of sustainability will bring in a broader notion and opportunity to harmonize multiple objectives, particularly regarding the assessment of measures and projects.
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | = Objectives =
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | <span style="color:#ff0000">''Introductory sentence''</span>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | {| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" style="width: 745px"
| + | |
− | |-
| + | |
− | | style="width: 177px" |
| + | |
− | '''Overall objective for WRSA methodology'''
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | | style="width: 437px" |
| + | |
− | Reduce key water-related risks for civil society, public and private actors in watersheds worldwide.
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | |-
| + | |
− | | style="width: 177px" |
| + | |
− | '''Specific objective for WRSA methodology'''
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | | style="width: 437px" |
| + | |
− | Develop a methodology and toolkit which catalyse effective collaborative action on and long-term transformation of institutional structures for addressing and monitoring shared water risks in a watershed among corporate, government and civil society stakeholders, in particular providing economic indicators for demonstrating the cost-effectiveness of action compared to inaction.
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | |}
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | == Why use a WRSA approach? ==
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | Sectoral and segmented risk assessments which do not take into account shared water risks can create major inefficiencies and inequalities in the allocation of damages, risk mitigation costs and benefits of increased security.
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | Risks need to be seen as a social as well as physical issue. This necessitates cooperation between partners that have neither common procedures nor the tradition of a joint management of water. The WRSA is an approach and methodology regarding (economic) costs and benefits of shared risk management on the watershed or city level. The [[#_General_requirements_of|requirements]] of the WRSA approach are: review and assess existing methodologies, model the probability and severity of future water risks, and map how these risks might impact different water users and ecosystems and the subsequent economic impacts. Furthermore it should determine the causes and drivers of water risks, assess the impacts of risk mitigation interventions and help to estimate actual return on investment and providing evidence for improvement. It should finally present results and recommendations in a widely understandable, communicable and illustrative way.
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | = Collective Action =
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | Feedback loops between the natural and socio-economic systems are a major cause of the system’s complexity. Reductions of the water supply occur, and its availability is further limited by reduced water reliability and quality; simultaneously demand for it increases due to population growth. Additional drivers, such as climate change, contribute to a growing uncertainty. This leads to the increase of water risks for different stakeholder groups in watersheds and basins around the world. Various risks for different users exist; some are shared, others are individual. An inefficient management of water resources increases the risks for all users. The equal and fair utilization of water by different stakeholder groups has to be ensured. Most risks are tackled most cost-efficiently and effectively if they are dealt with collectively. The WRSA approach supports collective water risk management.
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | There is a global trend towards private sector actors becoming more involved in and taking on more responsibility in managing water risks. The public sector’s resources and capacities are often inadequate to ensure equitable solutions. A collective, public-private engagement is often stronger, more sustainable and financially more capable.
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | = Phases of WRSA =
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | <span style="color:#ff0000">''Introductory sentence''</span>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | == Phase 1: Engaging stakeholders ==
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | == Phase 2: Assessing ==
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | == Phase 3: Planning ==
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | == Phase 4: Implementing ==
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | = Concepts of risk =
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | <span style="color:#ff0000">''Introductory sentence''</span>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | [[Category:Approaches]]
| + | |