River Operations Committee
3.2. METHODOLOGY TO EVALUATE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE ADAPTIVE OPERATIONAL WATER RESOURCES
MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK DEVELOPED
The evaluation of the effectiveness of the AOWRMF within this study was conducted in two ways:
1) Evaluation of the AOWRMF effectiveness by the river operations committee stakeholders (social evaluation).
2) Evaluation of the AOWRMF effectiveness through the assessment of the ecological flow requirements (technical evaluation).
Social Evaluation:
Various social learning criteria and consensus based participatory decision making criteria were discussed in sections 1.1.4 and 1.3.1.2. Based on these discussions, a combination of the criteria of Susskind and Cruikshank (1987), the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy (1993); Samson-Sherwill (2006), Pahl-Worstl and Hare (2004) and Mostert et al. (2007) were used to develop a questionnaire (*) for the stakeholders of the
river operations committee to evaluate their perceptions of the institutional arrangements, stakeholder participation and participatory decision making aspects of the AOWRMF.
Technical Evaluation:
The effectiveness of the AOWRMF was also evaluated from a technical perspective by comparing the compliance with the ecological flow requirements before and after the commencement of the proposed AOWRMF. This is apt as the ecological flow requirements were not being implemented at all before the commencement of the AOWRMF and yet were the main source of concern and conflict amongst the stakeholders related to operational water resources management.
The evaluation was conducted as per the method developed by Pollard et al. (2011) and refined by Riddell et al. (2013). This method determined the % time of failure, magnitudes of failure, and the consistency of failure measured through the number of contiguous events by comparing the ecological flow requirements to the actual observed flow at a key downstream location and for different periods (the location at which this was assessed was the EWR 6 site as used by Pollard et al. (2011), otherwise
(*) Refer to APPENDIX G for the social evaluation questionnaire used
and the responses received.
known as the Tenbosch Gauging Station, shown in Figure 11. A new period was added to this existing comparison to represent the period since implementation of the AOWRMF. The ecological flow requirements used were those as used by Pollard et al. (2011), which was the C-class reserve, or ecological flow requirement, as determined by DWA.
Finally, the data, information, modelling and decision support system components of the AOWRMF were evaluated.
The detailed process followed is described in Table 3.
Table 3: Parallel action research methodology for both research questions.
AR Steps
Activities per Research Question WHAT IS REQUIRED TO
DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT ADAPTIVE OPERATIONAL
WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
CAN AN ADAPTIVE FRAMEWORK ENABLE EFFECTIVE
OPERATIONAL WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
Problem identification Conduct literature review. (Section 1).
Define the operational water resources management problem in the Crocodile River catchment context from the learning gained during the literature review. (Section 2.3.3).
Document all existing STEEP issues related to operational water resources management in the Crocodile River catchment. (Appendix C).
Reconn aissance Identify initial list of all institutions and OWRM stakeholders in the Crocodile River catchment. (Section 4.2.1).
Planning of Activities Conduct an initial general meeting to inform and discuss with stakeholders the context,
need, purpose, data, models, institutions, stakeholders, roles, responsibilities, key decisions and process to be followed. (APPENDIX F).
Establish and host a monthly river operations committee or Crocodile River Operations Committee (CROCOC) comprising of the OWRM stakeholders identified and agreed on at the committee.
Develop a TOR for the CROCOC with the CROCOC stakeholders. (APPENDIX E).
Implementation
In collaboration with the established CROCOC, investigate, analyse, present, discuss, agree and document the requirements for effective operational water management as per the four OWRM components below (Sections 4.1 and 4.2):
Stakeholder interactions and consensus based decision making (Section 4.2.1):
Use the CROCOC to agree, implement, document and adjust a consensus based decision making system with the stakeholders required to support effective adaptive operational river management of the Crocodile River. Incorporate into the TOR of the CROCOC.
Implement a communications and management decisions log to keep track of all actions and decisions.
Implementation
Data and information (Section 4.2.2):
Identify and document an initial list of all data and information sources relevant to OWRM.
During the initial establishment of the CROCOC and the development of its TOR, identify and document a revised list of all data, information and monitoring needs and timeframes, based on the initial list identified.
Identify and implement a method to effectively collect, archive, use, process and disseminate data and information.
Identify priority DWA river flow gauging stations in the Crocodile River for OWRM and purchase, install and commission real time river flow data loggers on them.
Install an appropriate Water Resource Information Management Database for the ICMA that can manage all data needs for operational water resources management.
15 real time rainfall gauges were provided by the WATPLAN EU-FP7 Project.
Conduct a qualitative desktop assessment based on the locality of existing real time rainfall gauges, topography, MAR and site accessibility to determine the best locations for the 15 rainfall gauges.
Identify suitable hosts in the vicinity of the identified localities, enter into agreements and install gauges.
Develop an operations and maintenance plan for the installed rainfall gauges and ICMA river flow data loggers.
Hold a follow up workshop to identify an updated list of the data and information needs of stakeholders through the CROCOC, document and incorporate into original list. Recommend priority data needs/gaps to be addressed.
Modelling and decision support systems (Section 4.2.3):
Document the modelling framework and DSS already set up for the Crocodile River by the CROC DSS project of DWA. Present to CROCOC and get agreement to use it going forward.
Implement updates, improvements and amendments to the DSS and associated software and hardware required that may arise from CROCOC deliberations.
Investigate, implement and document a method of implementing the ecological flow requirement in collaboration with the CROCOC but based on the revised ecological flow requirements and the real time naturalisation process proposed by Mallory (2010).
Institutional arrangements and governance (Section 4.2.4):
Undertake an organisational and functional analysis of the ICMA legislative mandate in terms of river operations and incorporate into recommended institutional roles, responsibilities and communication and decision lines for adaptive operational water resources management with the CROCOC stakeholders.
Develop, implement and document the strategic adaptive management processes (linked to the greater existing ICMA IWRM SAM framework) and associated AOWRMF with the river operations committee to conduct operational water resources management in an adaptive manner, incorporating all of the components of operational water resources management as well as feedback loops and a rapid response system (based on the framework of Mcloughlin et al., 2011). (Section 4.3).
Document the timeline of activities and actions used in the development and implementation of the AOWRMF to evaluate the timeframes required to implement an affective AOWRMF. (Section 4.1).
Evaluation and Amend
Evaluate the effectiveness efficacy of the established adaptive operational water resources management framework to facilitate effective adaptive operational water management as follows (Section 5):
Stakeholder interactions and consensus based decision making (Section 5.1.2):
Interpret and evaluate the social learning achievements with the CROCOC stakeholders by means of a social questionnaire. Document.
Data and information (Section 5.3):
Evaluate the data collection, archiving and dissemination implemented and identify any gaps. Make recommendations.
Modelling and decision support systems (Sections 5.2 and 5.3):
Evaluate and assess the ecological reserve compliance as a measure of the effectiveness of the AOWRMF. The % time, magnitudes, contiguity and seasonality of non-compliance of the ecological flow requirement compared to the actual observed flows will be evaluated at the DWA X2H016: Tenbosch Gauging site before and after the commencement of the AOWRMF implementation in line with the method of Pollard et al. (2011) as refined by Riddell et al. (2013). (Section 5.2.1).
Institutional arrangements and governance (Section 5.1.1):
Evaluate the institutional arrangement, roles, responsibilities and communication and decision lines developed and implemented with the CROCOC. Document.