Abstract
Environmental management decisions should be made based on solid scientific evidence that relies on monitoring and modeling. In practice, changing economic, societal, and political boundary conditions often interfere with management during large, long, and complex projects. The result may be a sub-optimal development path that may finally diverge from the original intentions and be economically or technically ineffective. Nevertheless, unforeseen benefits may be created in the end. The Kis-Balaton wetland system is a typical illustration of such a case. Despite tremendous investments and huge efforts put in monitoring and modeling, the sequence of decisions during implementation can hardly be considered optimal. We use a catchment model and a basic water quality model to coherently review the impacts of management decisions during the 30-year history. Due to the complexity of the system, science mostly excelled in finding explanations for observed changes after the event instead of predicting the impacts of management measures a priori. In parallel, the political setting and sectoral authorities experienced rearrangements during system implementation. Despite being expensive as a water quality management investment originally targeting nutrient removal, the Kis-Balaton wetland system created a huge ecological asset, and thereby became worth the price.
Highlights
Water resources management—just like any other type of decision-making—should principally rely on rationality and scientific evidence [1,2]
Decisive boundary conditions for management include the political context, and long-term shifts in societal attitudes that arise from a multitude of often contradictory interests of various stakeholder groups [4]
Large-scale management structures, which need large investment costs and have long lifetimes are prone to the consequences of changing priorities. This first of all applies to structures designed for relatively soft management purposes, such as water quality protection
Summary
Water resources management—just like any other type of decision-making—should principally rely on rationality and scientific evidence [1,2]. Decisive boundary conditions for management include the political context, and long-term shifts in societal attitudes that arise from a multitude of often contradictory interests of various stakeholder groups [4]. These conditions determine priorities, which may or may not comply with the natural operation mode of the managed system. Large-scale management structures, which need large investment costs and have long lifetimes are prone to the consequences of changing priorities This first of all applies to structures designed for relatively soft management purposes, such as water quality protection.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
