View stunning SlideShares in full-screen with the new iOS app!Introducing SlideShare for AndroidExplore all your favorite topics in the SlideShare appGet the SlideShare app to Save for Later — even offline
View stunning SlideShares in full-screen with the new Android app!View stunning SlideShares in full-screen with the new iOS app!
An attempt should be made to do a climate check of the Programme of Measures on the basis of common sense and available knowledge - as in many cases, the direction of the main possible climate change impacts is known. First s uggestions for this climate check of the PoM were given at the Bonn workshop, and will be further exchanged at the next CIS SSG Climate & Water meeting with the aim of making this information widely available.
Win-win situations (=already planned measures in water-dependent sectors that could be adapted to be able to deal with climate change impacts) should be identified and irreversible actions should be avoided.
For water scarce areas, this first climate proofing should focus on the sustainable use of the existing available water.
Monitoring should be more focused to detect climate change impacts, when possible (e.g. surface water quantity, additional quality elements, biodiversity and influence of extreme event). Specific indicators could be developed. This could be further elaborated by relevant CIS groups.
Use exemptions in the same way as without climate change (i.e. are measures disproportionality expensive/technical feasible). Infrastructural adaptation measures might invoke Article 4(7) more often.
As part of the 6 year planning cycle, consider type changes for particular water bodies - on the basis of supporting data.
As part of the ongoing work at the EU level on ecological status, possible needs to adjust the reference conditions may be explored.
Programmes of Measures need to be made climate proof (1) as a default and on the basis of constantly evolving knowledge and new, more differentiated data. Guidance at the European level could be developed for this on the basis of the Ecologic input paper.
For particular measures, the contribution to mitigation as well as the climate impact (e.g. carbon emissions) need to be assessed.
The RBMPs plan should look into broader water management issues related to climate change (flood management, sediment management, land use, spatial planning, water demand/supply management).
Consider a long-term water management vision (25-50 year horizon), reflecting the timescale of climate change impacts.
(1) Climate proofing = ensuring the sustainability of investments over their entire lifetime, taking explicit account of a changing climate. Therefore, the Programme of Measures should be robust enough to cope with changing conditions.
Uncertainties need to be communicated in a transparent way.
More research is needed, both on physical processes and on the way how to deal with remaining uncertainties.
In many cases, no-regret measures that are less dependent on high confidence levels could already be identified (e.g. “room for the river”). Furthermore, measures with less uncertainty should be prioritised;
Scientific information needs to be translated to water managers and operational practicioners;