Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Third IDMP CEE workshop: Peer Review Group Report 2 by Henny A. J. van Lanen

337 views

Published on

Third IDMP CEE workshop: Peer Review Group Report 2 by Henny A. J. van Lanen

Published in: Environment
  • I like this service ⇒ www.HelpWriting.net ⇐ from Academic Writers. I don't have enough time write it by myself.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

Third IDMP CEE workshop: Peer Review Group Report 2 by Henny A. J. van Lanen

  1. 1. FINAL DRAFT Report No. 2 April – September 2014 Peer Review Group Janusz Kindler Warsaw University of Technology, Poland Sándor Szalai *) Szent István University, Hungary Henny A.J. van Lanen European Drought Centre, Wageningen University, the Netherlands Robert Stefanski *) World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland *) Not approved yet
  2. 2. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 Outline  Assessment procedure  General observations  Snapshots detailed comments  How to move on?  Final draft PRG report was distributed before the workshop, our comments and observations will now be very brief.  Focus on discussion how to use best last part of the IDMP CEE Programme to achieve as most as possible
  3. 3. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 Assessment procedure  No permanent PRG Chair - each period (~ 6 months) another member of PRG takes a Lead  Henny van Lanen agreed to be the Lead for the period between the Ljubljana workshop and the Budapest workshop (April-September 2014)  The Lead produces the first draft of the assessment report per activity, which is distributed to the other PRG three members for comments, corrections and additional observations  After an e-mail round, the final text is produced and submitted to the Programme Manager (not all PRG members could respond)
  4. 4. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 Assessment procedure  Progress Report Milestone(s) of an Activity
  5. 5. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 Assessment procedure Progress Report Milestone(s) of an Activity  Basic information (Name of the Milestone report, Activity leader, Participating partners, Duration, Chairman of the CWP)  Activity Report - Short summary of the milestone report - Describe the progress to the objectives of your activity - At what stage are you now in the process of producing the final output(s) - Any change in the original plan as outlined in the Activity List? - Identify links with other IDMP CEE activities - National Reports that have been used
  6. 6. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 Overview of assessments
  7. 7. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 Overview of assessments
  8. 8. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 Overview of assessments Overview of the assessment of 9 Activities (April to September 2014): - Accepted, without modification 1 - Accepted, minor modifications 6 - Accepted, major modification 1 - Rejected/not approved 1 (to be further discussed in Budapest)
  9. 9. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 General observations 50 most occurring terms in 2nd PRG report
  10. 10. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 General observations  Steady progress of the work programme - comprehensive outcome of the Activities  Review is based on milestone reports (about 10 reports), no outputs / deliverables, but a good stepping stone towards them  Only few milestone reports still disagree with the activity list (improvement )... they must be updated
  11. 11. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 General observations Draft Guidelines for Drought Management Plans (Act. 2.1) provide a good reference for the whole IDMP CEE project (major achievement)  Full width of the many different aspects connected to the compilation of a drought management plan (DMP) are described in a context- specific environment (CEE)  Clearly linked to recent thoughts on DMPs from the international community (i.e. represented by WMO) that are integrated in the concepts of integrated water management and pro-active risk management  Adds to this the integration of drought management into the European dimension (Water Framework Directive, WFD, and its River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs)
  12. 12. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 General observations A more concerted action of all partners, i.e. more work still needs to be done jointly or at least discussed by all partners (exchange of knowledge and experiences) – Seek added value!!  It appeared that several Milestone Progress Report were still rather weak on identifying links with other IDMP (item 2.5, Milestone Progress Report)  Especially applies to Work Package 5 Demonstration Projects  Important to apply a conceptual approach in which all Activities fit  Should fit into one of the seven steps identified in the IDMP CEE (see Act. 2.1 Ch.3 Drought Planning Process)
  13. 13. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 General observations Concept of Milestone Progress Report is not well-understood as illustrated by many Activities Report Milestone No.1 Milestone Progress Report Report Milestone No.2 Annex 1 Milestone No.1 Annex 2 Milestone No.1 Annex 3 Milestone No.1
  14. 14. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 Snapshots detailed comments  Act. 1.1/1.3: Gregor Gregorič has been invited to present and discuss the regional needs/capabilities of the CEE Drought Information Platform and possible role as one of the GDIS pilots (Global Drought Information System), USA, 11-13 December 2014  Act. 1.3: Informal institutional commitment between CEE and JRC on the EDO is insufficient. We strongly recommend to compile a MoU  Act. 2.2: National Consultation Dialogues strong mechanism; challenge remains to synthesize the experiences from the 10 countries to derive more generic information for guidelines on DMPs
  15. 15. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 Snapshots detailed comments  Act. 5.4: Developing a framework for integrated drought risk mapping that can be adjusted to a given drought context - Proposed framework should be generic in nature - Activity partners should remind that risk is the product of exposure to drought (probability of occurrence of the natural hazard) and societal vulnerability (economic, environmental and social factors) - Number of interesting achievements are obtained, but are hard to put in a context. Could benefit from a more clear concept
  16. 16. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 Snapshots detailed comments  Act. 5.5: NDVI is used for the monitoring agricultural drought - Good progress - Justify why fAPAR is not used. fAPAR, which is known to be strongly related to water stress, has been selected by the JRC EDO - Likely overlap of Act. 5.5 and Act. 5.4 (Romania case)
  17. 17. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 Snapshots detailed comments  Act. 5.5: NDVI is used for the monitoring agricultural drought - Good progress - Justify why fAPAR is not used. fAPAR, which is known to be strongly related to water stress, has been selected by the JRC EDO - Likely overlap of Act. 5.5 and Act. 5.4 (Romania case)  Act. 7.1: Good practice compendium - Many examples of desertification. Desertification can be caused by drought, but should be clearly distinguished
  18. 18. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 How to move forward? Overarching approach IDMP CEE  To shift the focus from reactive to proactive approach  To integrate vertical planning at regional, national, community levels into a framework of horizontally integrated sectors and disciplines  To promote evolution of a knowledge base  To build a capacity of various stakeholders
  19. 19. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 How to move forward? Putting IDMP Activities in clear concept
  20. 20. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 How to move forward? Putting IDMP Activities in clear concept
  21. 21. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 How to move forward? Putting IDMP Activities in clear concept Act. 2.1: 7 steps identified through IDMP CEE 1: Establish a Drought management Committee 2: Define the objectives of a drought risk-based management policy 3: Inventory of data needed for DMP development 4: Produce/update the DMP 5: Publicize the DMP to the public for comments and active involvement 6: Develop a research and science programme 7: Develop an educational programme
  22. 22. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 How to move forward? AMBITION: development pro-active Drought Management Plan in an integrated land and water management framework Two temporal scales  Operational mode (next year drought, ongoing multiple-year drought)  Strategic mode (future drought, prepared for global change)
  23. 23. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 How to move foreward?  Operational short term Pro-active Drought Risk Management (part of DMP) monitoring drought hazard (incl. suite indicators, thresholds, early warning) (forecasting hazard, month/seasonal probabilistic) current and (forecasted) impacts (probabilistic) potential measures/actions to reduce impacts, to build resilience, reduce vulnerabilities and risk (hydroclimatological modeling, impact modeling, exploration risk management strategies, stakeholder dialogue)
  24. 24. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 How to move foreward?  Strategic long-term (part of DMP) Pro-active Drought Risk Management predicting future hazard (probabilistic) predicting future impacts/vulnerability (probabilistic) potential strategic measures/actions to reduce impacts, to build resilience, reduce vulnerabilities and risk (hydroclimatological modeling, impact modeling, exploration risk management strategies, stakeholder dialogue) Forzieri et al., HESS 2014
  25. 25. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 How to move forward? - Agricultural practices (incl. increase WHC) - Forest ecosystems - Natural small water retention measures - Drought Information Platforn - Risk Management, Decision support system, - GIS Based Communication Technology Platform - Remote sensing agricultural drought monitoring - Upgrading agricultural drought monitoring and forecasting - Guidelines for DM Plans, NCDs - Compendium Good Practices - International Cooperation beyond CEE - Capacity building / Awareness rising Focus / synthesis / concerted actions
  26. 26. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 How to move forward? - Agricultural practices (incl. increase WHC) - Forest ecosystems - Natural small water retention measures - Drought Information Platforn - Risk Management, Decision support system, - GIS Based Communication Technology Platform - Remote sensing agricultural drought monitoring - Upgrading agricultural drought monitoring and forecasting - Guidelines for DM Plans, NCDs - Compendium Good Practices - International Cooperation beyond CEE - Capacity building / Awareness rising Focus / synthesis / concerted actions QUESTIONS Activities:  Which step out of 7 steps Guidelines DMP (Act. 2.1)?  Operational or strategic mode?  What do you address: - Monitoring, EW - forecasting / prediction - impacts, incl. threshold - vulnerability - measures - management - risk management
  27. 27. Budapest, Hungary, 2-4 April 2014 Assessment procedure Final Activity Report  Basic information (Name report, Activity leader, Participating partners, Duration, Chairman of the CWP)  Where objectives achieved?  Implementation process and methodologies applied  What are main outputs?  Added value generated by your Activity  Lessons learnt and transferability  Proposal follow-up
  28. 28. Thank you Janusz Kindler Warsaw University of Technology, Poland Sándor Szalai Szent István University, Hungary Henny A.J. van Lanen European Drought Centre, Wageningen University, the Netherlands Robert Stefanski World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland

×