Knowledge transfer and capacity building: an example from the urban water sector.

Rural-to-urban migration and sustained natural population growth in Africa, if not properly addressed, may pose serious threat to ecosystems and human wellbeing, both locally and afar. Novel concepts and operative approaches are needed to better frame these challenges and support local decision-making processes, to promote sustainable development. Indeed, this is a key area in which the Academia can make a significant contribution, for example, exploring innovative concepts and developing related approaches to support decision-making processes at a local scale. This paper focuses on the urban water sector as an informative example, ultimately aiming to highlight key areas in which research can provide concrete and valuable assistance. More specifically, we introduce two innovative concepts, i.e. ecosystem services and boundary work; hence propose an operative approach to support the process of design and assessment of the impact of watershed investments. To illustrate real-life implementation of the approach in a data scarce context in sub-Saharan Africa, we consider as a case study soil erosion and water scarcity-related challenges affecting Asmara, a medium-sized city in Eritrea. Accordingly, we adopt urban water security and rural poverty alleviation as two illustrative objectives, within a ten-year planning horizon. The case study application resulted in spatially explicit outputs that inform decision-making processes. By timely addressing stakeholders' concerns of credibility, saliency, and legitimacy, the proposed approach is expected to facilitate negotiation of objectives, definition of scenarios, and assessment of alternative watershed investments. Above all, and beyond the urban water sector, the case study application helps highlighting key areas in which the academic work can make concrete contribution mainly in terms of knowledge transfer and capacity building

Biodiversity and ecosystem services dashboards to inform landscape and urban planning: a systematic analysis of current practices

Guiding the transformation of cities and regions towards more sustainable pathways requires a deep understanding of the complexities of socio-ecological systems. This entails gaining insights into the status and trends of biodiversity, ecosystems and their services (BES), as well as navigating complex governance and power structures, particularly in contested spaces. Digital dashboards, understood as visual representations of key information, could effectively communicate complex BES information to decision makers and planners in landscape and urban planning, enabling more informed decisions. While dashboards are increasingly being used in spatial-related applications, the lack of scientific understanding regarding the emerging applications of BES information in dashboards underscores the pressing need for research and review in this area. This study aims to identify and analyze contemporary case studies of BES dashboard applications to explore their potential role, which can effectively support decision-making in landscape and urban planning. We develop a conceptual framework of interlinkages between BES dashboards and landscape planning processes and apply this framework to analyze 12 state-of-the-art BES dashboard applications from Asia, Australia, Europe, North and South America. Our results reflect emerging practices of dashboards visualizing BES information, which varied in purposes, content, functionalities, visual design, and output features. The dashboards represented/covered a total of 66 BES indicators, including tree health, forest status and functionality, green and blue spaces connectivity, and specific components of biodiversity. Further research on user demands and real-world impacts is necessary to enhance the effectiveness of BES dashboards in informing landscape and urban planning for people and nature

Planning for Ecosystem Services in Cities

This open access book presents current knowledge about ecosystem services (ES) in urban planning, and discusses various urban ES topics such as spatial distribution of urban ecosystems, population distribution, and physical infrastructure properties. The book addresses all these issues by: i) investigating to what extent ecosystem services are currently included in urban plans, and discussing what is still needed to improve planning practice; ii) illustrating how to develop ecosystem services indicators and information that can be used by urban planners to enhance plan design; iii) demonstrating the application of ES assessments to support urban planning processes through case studies; and iv) reflecting on criteria for addressing equity in urban planning through ecosystem service assessments, by exploring issues associated with the supply of, the access to and demand for ES by citizens. Through fully worked out case studies, from policy questions, to baseline analysis and indicators, and from option comparison to proposed solutions, the book offers readers detailed and accessible coverage of outstanding issues and proposed solutions to better integrate ES in city planning. The overall purpose of the book is to provide a compact reference that can be used by researchers as a key resource offering an updated perspective and overview on the field, as well as by practitioners and planners/decision makers as a source of inspiration for their activity. Additionally, the book will be a suitable resource for both undergraduate and post-graduate courses in planning and geography

Identifying representative case studies for ecosystem services mapping and assessment across Europe

A key task in the ESMERALDA project dealt with identifying appropriate case studies to test the 'flexible methodology' in its different stages of development. Case studies consist of working examples in which mapping and assessment of ecosystem services were applied to address specific decision-making problems. Testing is understood as an iterative process of co-learning that involves project partners and stakeholders, enabling the refinement of the 'flexible methodology' and the development of guidelines to support its application. Testing is conducted through a series of workshops in different European contexts, each addressing a different set of themes and regions. This paper illustrates the selection of case studies for testing the ESMERALDA 'flexible methodology' in its different stages of development. Particularly, case studies had to be selected in such a way that they are representative of: (i) the variety of existing conditions across the EU, in terms of data availability, spatial scale, levels of implementation of EU 2020 targets and expertise and experience in ES mapping and assessment; (ii) the geographical regions and biomes of the entire EU, including marine areas and the outermost regions; (iii) the variety of cross-EU themes relevant for ecosystem services, such as the Common Agricultural Policy, Green Infrastructure, Natura 2000 network, forestry strategy, water policy, energy, business and industry sectors and health; (iv) the variety of policy and planning processes that can be used to mainstream ecosystem services in real-life decisions, such as spatial and land use planning, water resource management, flooding under the EU climate adaptation action, energy policy, strategic environmental assessment, protected area planning

Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Water Resources Management—Tools, Policies, Promising Pathways

Ecosystems provide a range of services, including water purification, erosion prevention, and flood risk mitigation, that are important to water resource managers. But as a sector, water resources management has been slow to incorporate ecosystem protection and restoration, for a variety of reasons, although related concepts such as nature-based solutions and green infrastructure are gaining traction. We explain some of the existing challenges to wider uptake of the ecosystem services concept in water resources management and introduce some promising avenues for research and practice, elaborated in more detail through 12 papers, spanning five continents and a variety of contexts, which make up a Special Issue on “Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Water Resources Management”. Cross-cutting themes include (A) ecosystem services as a flexible concept to communicate with stakeholders; (B) participatory processes to involve stakeholders in research; (C) multiple values, and valuation methods, of water-related services; and (D) applications of decision-support tools. We conclude with a summary of research gaps and emphasize the importance of co-producing knowledge with decision makers and other stakeholders, in order to improve water resources management through the integration of ecosystem services. © 2022, The Author(s)

Comparison of techniques for eliciting views and judgements in decision-making

1. Decision‐making is a complex process that typically includes a series of stages: identifying the issue, considering possible options, making judgements and then making a decision by combining information and values. The current status quo relies heavily on the informational aspect of decision‐making with little or no emphasis on the value positions that affect decisions. 2. There is increasing realization of the importance of adopting rigorous methods for each stage such that the information, views and judgements of stakeholders and experts are used in a systematic and repeatable manner. Though there are several methodological textbooks which discuss a plethora of social science techniques, it is hard to judge the suitability of any given technique for a given decision problem. 3. In decision‐making, the three critical aspects are “what” decision is to be made, “who” makes the decisions and “how” the decisions are made. The methods covered in this paper focus on “how” decisions can be made. We compare six techniques: Focus Group Discussion (FGD), Interviews, Q methodology, Multi‐criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), Nominal Group Technique and the Delphi technique specifically in the context of biodiversity conservation. All of these techniques (with the exception of MCDA) help in understanding human values and the underlying perspectives which shape decisions. 4. Based on structured reviews of 423 papers covering all six methods, we compare the conceptual and logistical characteristics of the methods, and map their suitability for the different stages of the decision‐making process. While interviews and FGD are well‐known, techniques such the Nominal Group technique and Q methodology are relatively under‐used. In situations where conflict is high, we recommend using the Q methodology and Delphi technique to elicit judgements. Where conflict is low, and a consensus is needed urgently, the Nominal Group technique may be more suitable. 5. We present a nuanced synthesis of methods aimed at users. The comparison of the different techniques might be useful for project managers, academics or practitioners in the planning phases of their projects and help in making better informed methodological choices.N.M. was funded by the Fondation Wiener Anspach and the Scriven post doctoral fellowship. J.H. is funded by the Belgian National Fund for Research (FRS‐FNRS) and the KLIMOS‐ACROPOLIS project. N.T.O. was funded by Cambridge Overseas Trusts, The Wildlife Conservation Society, Wildlife Conservation Network and WildiZe Foundation. B.A.E. is funded by EU Horizon 2020 ESMERALDA Project, grant agreement no. 642007. W.J.S. is funded by Arcadia

Ecosystem services mapping and assessment for policy- and decision-making: Lessons learned from a comparative analysis of European case studies

This paper analyses and compares a set of case studies on ecosystem services (ES) mapping and assessment with the purpose of formulating lessons learned and recommendations. Fourteen case studies were selected during the EU Horizon 2020 “Coordination and Support Action” ESMERALDA to represent different policy- and decision-making processes throughout the European Union, across a wide range of themes, biomes and scales. The analysis is based on a framework that addresses the key steps of an ES mapping and assessment process, namely policy questions, stakeholder identification and involvement, application of mapping and assessment methods, dissemination and communication and implementation. The analysis revealed that most case studies were policy-orientated or gave explicit suggestions for policy implementation in different contexts, including urban, rural and natural areas. Amongst the findings, the importance of starting stakeholder engagement early in the process was confirmed in order to generate interest and confidence in the project and to increase their willingness to cooperate. Concerning mapping and assessment methods, it was found that the integration of methods and results is essential for providing a comprehensive overview from different perspectives (e.g. social, economic). Finally, lessons learned for effective implementation of ES mapping and assessment results are presented and discussed

Analyzing Evidence of Sustainable Urban Water Management Systems: A Review through the Lenses of Sociotechnical Transitions

Sustainability concerns and multiple socio-environmental pressures have necessitated a shift towards Sustainable Urban Water Management (SUWM) systems. Viewing SUWM systems as sociotechnical, this paper departs from eight factors previously identified by transition research: Pressures, Context, Purposes, Actors, Instruments, Processes, Outputs, and Outcomes as a methodological framework for a structured review of 100 articles. The study seeks to analyze empirical cases of planning and implementing SUWM systems worldwide. A wide range of public actors—driven by social and environmental factors rather than by economic pressures—have initiated SUWM projects so as to locally fulfill defined social and environmental purposes. We provide evidence on the emergence of new actors, such as experts, users, and private developers, as well as on the diverse and innovative technical and societal instruments used to promote and implement SUWM systems. We also explore their contexts and institutional capacity to deal with pressures and to mobilize significant financial and human resources, which is in itself vital for the transition to SUWM. Planned or implemented SUWM outputs are divided into green (wet ponds, raingardens, and green roofs) and gray (rain barrels and porous pavements) measures. The outcomes of SUWM projects—in terms of societal and technical learning, and their institutional uptakes—are often implicit or lacking, which seemingly reduces the rate of desirable change

Ecosystem services for watershed management and planning

Human wellbeing in cities, often associated to availability of engineered structures, is increasingly linked to the conservation of ecosystems. This is the case of the urban water sector where the focus is shifting from adequate infrastructural arrangements to the key role of ecosystem services, thus offering a unique opportunity to achieve sustainability transitions. The urban water sector entails significant complexities and uncertainties, which no longer can be addressed effectively with traditional approaches. A new paradigm of “adaptation and integration”, emerging as a collective effort of stakeholders that engage themselves in a process of social learning, is needed. However, real-life implementation is arduous: it requires linking diverse stakeholders and knowledge systems, across management levels and institutional boundaries. Three innovative concepts can help face this challenge, namely, ecosystem services, boundary work and learning organizations. Ecosystem services provide a holistic approach for framing socio-ecological issues and for integrating different biophysical and socio-economic data. Boundary work, i.e. the effort put in place to facilitate transfer of knowledge into action, informs active management of the tension at the interface between stakeholders that have differing views on what constitutes relevant knowledge. A learning organization is one that is skilled at creating and acquiring knowledge and modifying its behavior to reflect new insights. In this study, these three concepts are jointly explored to build operative approaches to support the implementation of adaptive management. To this end, the work is driven by four specific objectives presented hereafter. The first objective is to frame the urban water sector from an ecosystem services perspective, synthesizing the most relevant aspects related to the exchange of water between watershed and city, and within the city. The proposed framework highlights the role of the urban water sector in (i) linking ecosystem service production and benefit areas, (ii) bridging spatial scales ranging from the watershed to the household level and (iii) adopting ecosystem service-based responses to drivers of water vulnerability. The second objective is to explore practices of boundary work in adaptive watershed management. Thus, an empirical investigation of how boundary work can facilitate knowledge co-generation and cooperative application in a case study of adaptive management in the Fuhrberg watershed (Germany) is conducted. The results suggest that scientific insights have been crucial for "enlightenment", "decision-support", and in "negotiations" between a water utility and stakeholders in Fuhrberg watershed management. The successful implementation of adaptive watershed management is attributed to boundary work deployed by the water utility and ultimately to its high institutional capacity. This study, which is one of the first empirical assessments of boundary work in practice, presents many promising approaches for initiating boundary work in the case of water utilities. Yet, more comparative research is required to understand the influence of contextual differences on appropriate methods and potential outcomes of boundary work. The third objective is to build and test an approach for designing and assessing impact of watershed investments, aiming to implement adaptive management. The proposed approach is structured to facilitate negotiations among stakeholders. Its strategic component includes setting the agenda, defining investment scenarios, and assessing the performance of watershed investments. Its technical component consists of tailoring spatially explicit ecosystem service models, generating future land use scenarios, and modeling impacts on ecosystem services. The approach is applied to a case study in a data-scarce context: Toker Watershed (Eritrea), considering soil erosion -related challenges. It produced spatially explicit data, which has been aggregated to assess quantitatively the performance of watershed investments, in terms of changes in selected ecosystem services, thus answering key management and planning questions. By addressing stakeholders’ concerns of credibility, saliency, and legitimacy, the approach is expected to facilitate the negotiation of objectives, definition of scenarios, and assessment of watershed investments. The fourth objective is to explore water utilities as learning organization implementing adaptive watershed management. A conceptual framework for evaluating the institutional capacity of water utilities is used to characterize the water utilities in Hanover and Asmara. In particular, the institutional capacity of the “Hannover Water Utility” and “Asmara Water Supply Department” is investigated based on the available information from documents, literature and the previous results, and an interview with a key informant. The results show that the institutional capacity of Hanover Water Utility can be classified as Level 5 – “Progressive water utility” and Asmara Water Supply Department can be classified as Level 2 – “Basic water utility”. An empirical pathway to test the results, by involving senior managers and informed scientists from both case studies, is proposed. In any case, the preliminary results highlight the attributes that determine the capacity of water utilities to become a central actor in the in the implementation of an adaptive watershed management. This research, by jointly exploring the innovative concepts of ecosystem services, boundary work and learning organizations, builds operative approaches that can support the implementation of adaptive watershed management. Further work is needed to address some of the complexities and uncertainties underlying the proposed approaches, including data resolution, model calibration, and above all participation of real-life stakeholder