Integrated Assessment of no-Regret Climate Change Adaptation Options for Reservoir Catchment and Command Areas

Springer Science and Business Media LLC - Tập 30 - Trang 1001-1018 - 2015
Ajay Gajanan Bhave1, Neha Mittal2, Ashok Mishra3, Narendra Singh Raghuwanshi3
1Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
2School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
3Department of Agricultural and Food Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, Kharagpur, India

Tóm tắt

The need for credible, salient and legitimate climate change adaptation options in the water sector, which target location specific adaptation requirements, is well recognized. In developing countries, the low-hanging fruit; no-regret options, should be identified with stakeholders and assessed against future changes in water availability and demand, for comparing effectiveness and robustness. Such integrated basin-scale assessments, including reservoir catchment and command areas, can suitably inform adaptation decision-making. In this study, we integrate participatory and modelling approaches for evaluation of reservoir catchment and command area no-regret options addressing water availability and demand in the Kangsabati river basin. Through multi-level stakeholder workshops we identify and prioritize options, followed by evaluation of two reservoir catchment options; check dams and increasing forest cover and three reservoir command options; changing cropping pattern, traditional ponds and waste water reuse, using the Water Evaluation And Planning (WEAP) model. We use four high resolution (~25 km) regional climate model simulations of future climatic factors, along with non-climatic factors affecting water demand, for forcing WEAP. We find that options have varied ability in addressing adaptation requirements. Amongst catchment options, increasing forest cover addresses adaptation requirements more suitably than check dams, while in the command areas we observe mixed abilities of options, leading to the inference that combining complementary options may be a more useful strategy. We conclude by discussing our experiences with this approach in a developing country context, in terms of benefits, limitations, lessons learnt and future research directions.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Allen R G, Pereira L S, Raes D, Smith M (1998). Crop evapotranspiration-Guidelines for computing crop water requirements-FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56. FAO, Rome. 300, 6541 Arnell N (2010) Adapting to climate change: an evolving research programme. Clim Chang 100(1):107–111. doi:10.1007/s10584-010-9839-0 Bhave AG, Mishra A, Groot A (2013) Sub-basin scale characterization of climate change vulnerability, impacts and adaptation in an Indian river basin. Reg Environ Chang 13(5):1087–1098. doi:10.1007/s10113-013-0416-8 Bhave AG, Mishra A, Raghuwanshi NS (2014a) A brief review of assessment approaches that support evaluation of climate change adaptation options in the water sector. Wat Pol 16(5):959–972. doi:10.2166/wp.2014.097 Bhave AG, Mishra A, Raghuwanshi NS (2014b) A combined bottom-up and top-down approach for assessment of climate change adaptation options. J. of Hydrol. 518:150–161. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.08.039 Bhave AG, Mishra A, Raghuwanshi NS (2014c) Evaluation of hydrological effect of stakeholder prioritized climate change adaptation options based on multi-model regional climate projections. Clim Chang 123:225–239. doi:10.1007/s10584-014-1061-z Bonelli S, Vicuña S, Meza FJ, Gironas J, Barton J (2014) Incorporating climate change adaptation strategies in urban water supply planning: the case of central Chile. J of Wat and Clim Chang 5(3):357–376. doi:10.2166/wcc.2014.037 Carr G (2015) Stakeholder and public participation in river basin management-an introduction. Wiley interdisci. Rev. Wat 2(4):393–405. doi:10.1002/wat2.1086 Central Public Health and Environmental Engineering Organisation (2005) Status of water supply, sanitation and solid waste management in urban areas, Research Study Series No. 88, Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India de Condappa D, Chaponnière A, Lemoalle J (2009) A decision-support tool for water allocation in the Volta basin. Water Int 34(1):71–87. doi:10.1080/02508060802677861 Dessai S, Hulme M (2004) Does climate adaptation policy need Probabilities? Clim Pol 4:107–128. doi:10.1080/14693062.2004.9685515 Eisenack K, Moser SC, Hoffmann E, Klein RJ, Oberlack C, Pechan A, Rotter M, Termeer CJ (2014) Explaining and overcoming barriers to climate change adaptation. Nat Clim Chang 4(10):867–872. doi:10.1038/nclimate2350 Füssel HM (2007) Adaptation planning for climate change: concepts assessment approaches and key lessons, sustain. Sci 2:265–275. doi:10.1007/s11625-007-0032-y Giupponi C (2014) Decision support for mainstreaming climate change adaptation in water resources management. Wat. Resour. Manag. 28(13):4795–4808 Govt. of India (2008). National Action Plan on Climate Change. URL: http://pmindia.gov.in/climate_change_english.pdf Govt. of West Bengal (2003). Performance evaluation study and system analysis of kangsabati reservoir project. Vols. I and II, Kolkata, West Bengal Harma KJ, Johnson MS, Cohen SJ (2012) Future water supply and demand in the Okanagan basin, British Columbia: a scenario-based analysis of multiple, interacting stressors. Wat. Resour. Manag. 26(3):667–689. doi:10.1007/s11269-011-9938-3 Höllermann B, Giertz S, Diekkrüger B (2010) Benin 2025—balancing future water availability and demand using the WEAP ‘water evaluation and planning’system. Wat. Resour. Manag. 24(13):3591–3613 Krishnaswamy J, Bonell M, Venkatesh B, Purandara BK, Rakesh KN, Lele S, Kiran MC, Reddy V, Badiger S (2013) The groundwater recharge response and hydrologic services of tropical humid forest ecosystems to use and reforestation: support for the “infiltration-evapotranspiration trade-off hypothesis”. J of Hydrol 498:191–209. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.06.034 Leemhuis C, Jung G, Kasei R, Liebe J (2009) The Volta basin water allocation system: assessing the impact of small-scale reservoir development on the water resources of the Volta basin. West Africa Adv in Geosci 21(21):57–62. doi:10.5194/adgeo-21-57-2009 Loucks DP (2015) Debates—perspectives on sociohydrology: simulating hydrologic-human interactions. Wat Resour Res. doi:10.1002/2015WR017002 Mahmood A, Kundu A (2006) Demographic projections for India 2006–2051. Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, Regional variations Mathison C, Wiltshire AJ, Falloon P, Challinor AJ (2015) South Asia river flow projections and their implications for water resources. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Discuss 12:5789–5840. doi:10.5194/hessd-12-5789-2015 Mehta VK, Haden VR, Joyce BA, Purkey DR, Jackson LE (2013) Irrigation demand and supply, given projections of climate and land-use change, in Yolo county. California Agri Water Manag 117:70–82. doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2012.10.021 Mittal N, Mishra A, Singh R, Kumar P (2014) Assessing future changes in seasonal climatic extremes in the Ganges river basin using an ensemble of regional climate models. Clim Chang 123(2):273–286. doi:10.1007/s10584-014-1056-9 Raadgever GT, Mostert E, Van de Giesen NC (2012) Learning from collaborative research in water management practice. Wat Resour Manag 26(11):3251–3266 Turner AG, Annamalai H (2012) Climate change and the south Asian summer monsoon. Nat Clim Chang 2(8):587–595. doi:10.1038/nclimate1495 van’t Klooster SA, van Asselt MB (2006) Practising the scenario-axes technique. Futures 38(1):15–30. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2005.04.019 Wagener T, Sivapalan M, Troch PA, McGlynn BL, Harman CJ, Gupta HV, Kumar P, Rao SC, Basu NB, Wilson JS (2010) The future of hydrology: an evolving science for a changing world. Wat. Resour. Res. 46(5). doi:10.1029/2009WR008906 Wilby RL, Dessai S (2010) Robust adaptation to climate change. Weather 65:180–185. doi:10.1002/wea.543 Wu P, Christidis N, Stott P (2013) Anthropogenic impact on earth/’s hydrological cycle. Nat Clim Chang 3(9):807–810. doi:10.1038/nclimate1932 Yates D, Sieber J, Purkey D, Huber-Lee A (2005a) WEAP21 – a demand, priority, and preference-driven water planning model: part 1: model characteristics. Water Int 30(4):487–500. doi:10.1080/02508060508691893 Yates D, Sieber J, Purkey D, Huber-Lee A, Galbraith H (2005b) WEAP21: a demand, priority, and preference driven water planning model: part 2, aiding freshwater ecosystem service evaluation. Water Int 30:487–500. doi:10.1080/02508060508691894 Yates D, Miller KA, Wilby RL, Kaatz L (2015) Decision-centric adaptation appraisal for water management across Colorado’s continental divide. Clim Risk Manag. doi:10.1016/j.crm.2015.06.001