Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Project “Strengthening strategic delta planning processes in Bangladesh, the Netherlands,
Vietnam and beyond“ (2014-2019)
Inception workshop, 18-20 May, Delft
BUET
PBL
Objectives of today
• Present and discuss the outline of the project, and provide opportunity for comments and suggestions.
• Explore links with other activities and projects, how projects can strengthen each other and initial ideas for collaboration.
The outcomes of today will provide input to the project team discussions the following two days.
Programme
• Introduction project• Case presentations Vietnam, Bangladesh, the Netherlands
• Lunch
• Intermezzo: Use Design Charettes (Stijn Koole, B&S)• Presentation first ideas research team (PhDs Shahnoor,
Hoang, and Myrthe and post-doc Chris)• MDP Vietnam: research-policy interface (Jake Brunner,
IUCN VN)• Wrap-up (key comments and recommendations and next
steps)
Project “Strengthening strategic delta planning processes in Bangladesh, the Netherlands, Vietnam and beyond“ (2014-2019)
BUET
PBL
Delta pressures and changes
• River deltas worldwide face many threats to water safety, water and food security and sustainable development.
The Urbanising Deltas of the World programme (UDW) of the Dutch Scientific
Organisation (NWO)
• to provide more effective and efficient responses to increasing pressure and rapid changes in river deltas worldwide through:
– Knowledge and research,– Relevance for sustainable development (new tools, technologies,
perspectives),– Capacity to innovate (design interventions, adapt policies and create
market opportunities).
Starting points of our project
• A sustainable development of urbanizing deltas, raises conflicting interests amongst stakeholders.
• This needs to be accommodated in an integrated development / planning process which is often technically complex and has knowledge limitations.
• Agreeing on strategic choices is difficult and often leads to:– Only partial or even non-cooperation among key stakeholders,– Not efficient use of knowledge and tools,– Outcomes that are far away from the planned ones,
and hampering of innovations.– Etc
• A better understanding helps to prevent issues and conflictsand helps achieve envisioned developments.
Key questions in our project
• What are the dynamics of strategic delta planning processes over longer periods of time? With a focus on three key aspects:
- Stakeholder coalitions- Participatory planning tools- Innovative solutions
Motivation
3. Implementation (incl. adaption and transformation)
1. Advocacy and agenda-setting (framing the puzzle)
2. Strategic Delta Planning(fitting/fixing the puzzle)
Opportunity Threat
Ability
Stakeholder coalitions
Solutions
Time
>10 yrs
Tools
Stakeholders coalitions dynamics(the MOTA model of Ho Long Phi)
Key questions in our project
• What are the dynamics of strategic delta planning processes over longer periods of time? With a focus on three key elements:
- Stakeholder coalitions- Participatory planning tools- Innovative solutions
• Does a delta planning process enable consent among key stakeholders over strategic priorities and fitting innovative solutions, which is sufficiently stable to allow for implementation and further adaptation through learning-by-doing?
Example: Innovations in flood management in the Netherlands
Shift in thinking: from ‘fighting against floods’ to ‘coping & living with floods’, e.g. Room for the river project
• How are innovative solutions created, introduced, changed, as planning processes evolve?
• How did interests and positions of stakeholders groups facilitate or hamper consent over such solutions and implementation?
• What was role of participatory planning tools in facilitating understanding and cooperation and consent amongst stakeholders?
Example: Innovations in flood management in the Netherlands
Shift in thinking: from ‘fighting against floods’ to ‘coping & living with floods’, e.g. Room for the river project
• How are innovative solutions formed and change, as delta planning processes evolve?
• How did issues and differences between stakeholders hamper agreement on innovative solutions and plan implementation?
• What was effect of approaches / tools used to build cooperation and agreement between stakeholders?
• What are the examples from Bangladesh, The Netherlands, Vietnam? • What can deltas learn from these examples? • How can innovation in different contexts be facilitated?
Project objectives
• Enhance understanding of the dynamics of strategic delta planning processes, using a view of delta planning as a long-term adaptive process in an open system.
• Strengthen participatory tools that support the development of more stable consent among key players, enabling agreements that more effectively translate into innovative solutions.
• Enhance capacities of key stakeholders through participatory action research in ongoing delta planning projects.
Inter-related activities (2014-2019)
Societal relevance
Capacity building
Research
• Stakeholder coalitions (PhD-1)• Interactive approaches and tools (PhD-2)• Innovative solutions (PhD-3)• Integration and comparison (Post-doc)
• Cases in Netherlands, Bangladesh and Vietnam, linked to ongoing planning processes
Societal relevance
Capacity building
Research
3. Implementation (incl. adaption and transformation)
1. Advocacy and agenda-setting (framing the puzzle)
2. Strategic Delta Planning(fitting/fixing the puzzle)
Time
>10 yrs
PhDMyrte Vermoolen
PhDThi Minh Hoang Vo
PhDShahnoor Hassan
Post-doc Chris Seijger
• A diagnostic tool is introduced for a rapid assessment of existing stakeholder coalitions coupled with process guidance for strategic planning processes, incl. enriched MOTA tool.
• Project partners Deltares, PBL, B&S have improved insights to tailor approaches and tools to their clients.
• Guidance on arrangements that can help craft, create or bring in “innovative” solutions.
Societal relevance
Capacity building
Research
Linked to Delta planning programmes, like Mekong and Bangladesh Mekong delta plan.
Participatory planning tools to support more stable agreement among key players
Including:
• Participatory Design Studios / Charretes (Bosch and Slabbers)
• TouchTable (Deltares)• Delta Envisioning Support System – DENVIS (PBL)• Locally used / developed tools and approaches
• Local stakeholders participate in project events.• PhDs continue to work on related topics in the region
afterwards.• The yearly Delta planning training workshops as a platform for
sharing and presenting and discussing project insights.• Research material is incorporated in local MSc university
curriculum.
Societal relevance
Capacity building
Research
Consortium and partners
• UNESCO-IHE• Technical University Delft (TUD)• Wageningen University (WU)• Center for Environmental and Geographic Information Services
(CEGIS)• IUCN Bangladesh and Vietnam Country Offices • Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET)• Centre of Water Management and Climate Change of Vietnam
National University (VNU-WACC)• Bosch and Slabbers Landscape Architects• Deltares• PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency
Were are we now?
• Project started in September 2014• Post-doc and 3 PhDs recruited, working on proposals, and
regularly meeting. Post-doc Chris leading a first overview paper of the project’s concept.
• Aspects to be discussed and agreed upon during Inception:– Integration PhDs
– Selection of their case study areas; cross case comparison
– Involvement consortium partners (tools, capacity building, outreach)
– Link to planning practice
– Link to other (UDW) projects
– Planning, organisation, communication, resources
Monday morning : Delta case studies
• Case illustrations of strategic delta planning from Bangladesh, The Netherlands, and Vietnam
• Key features of delta, planning processes, elements of framework, e.g. by means of covering framework elements for a particular solution as discussed in a delta plan.
• Discussion: 1) link to project objectives, project framework
(does research contribute to better understanding), 2) similarities / differences cases, cross-delta learning.
Tuesday morning : Integration / comparison
Discussion of a proposal for:
• Integration PhDs; their contribution to framework; what PhDs can gain from framework? Practical organisation.
• Cross-delta comparison; what can we achieve given fact that deltas are quite different in various aspects?
Tuesday morning : Research issues
Case studies:• Purpose and criteria of case studies, selection of case studies • Organisation of case studies, which PhD what case study, etc..
Criteria selection case studies, e.g.:• Objectives of project and conceptual framework should apply• The importance of polder characteristics, as an earlier technical
innovation that shapes current delta management practices and debates.
• Part of a larger strategic delta planning process• Data availability • Feasible in terms of organisation and resources• …..
Wednesday morning: Research, tools, link to planning, communication
1. Participatory planning tools (choice planning tools, link to PhD Shahnoor, contribution / ToR PBL,
Deltares, B&S, ..; 2015-2016 planning)
2. Linking to local planning processes (how to best link to ongoing processes? Learning from ? Contributing to?;
2015-2016 planning)
3. Communication strategy (check, update and local detailing of communication strategy; 2015-2016
planning)
Discussions in smaller groups. Use proposal as basis, plus available resources (budget). Plus drafting of activity plans 2015-2016. Plenary feed-back.
Activities (proposal)
Act. 1 Project preparation, coordination and monitoring
Act. 2 Communication and outreachAct. 3-6 PhD 1-3, Post-docAct. 7 Testing of participatory planning tools Act. 8-11 Development relevance (recommendations new
tools, enhanced tools, innovations, wider deltas)Act. 12-15 Capacity development (stakeholder
involvement, PhDs, professional training delta planning, MSc curriculum)
All communication (Act. 2), capacity building (Act. 12-15), and link to local planning processes.
Consortium Key responsibilities Activity nr.UNESCO-IHE Project lead, guidance PhD-2, Postdoc Act. 1, 4 and
6TUD , WUR (PhD-1), WUR (PhD-3) Act. 3, 5
WACC Co-supervising PhD-3 and support field work other researchers, MOTA workshop, tools workshops, support guidelines development
Act. 5, 7, 8-11, 12-15
BUET Co-supervising PhD-2 and support field work other researchers Act. 4, 12-15
CEGIS CEGIS co-supervise PhDs, MOTA workshop, support tools workshops, support guidelines development
Act. 7, 8-11, 12-15
IUCN BGD MOTA workshop , local outreach and communication Act. 2, 8-11
IUCN VN Local outreach and communication Act. 2
Deltares, PBL Tool workshop, support guidelines development, co-supervising PhD’s
Act. 1-3, 7, 8-11
B&S Tool workshop, support guidelines development Act. 7, 8-11
Responsibilities (proposal)
Wednesday afternoon: Project activities 2015
• Planning 2015 activities based on outcomes morning• Incl. joint activities, incl. UDW / other
Wednesday afternoon: Project management
• Consortium, role of partners• Organisation, decision-making• Internal communication• External communication (communication strategy)• Publication strategy• Reporting (technical and financial)
Not used slides
Three stages in a (delta) planning process
1. Framing of problems and solutions, and agenda-setting by various stakeholders, experts and policymakers.
2. Cooperation and coming to common understanding as part of a strategic delta plan followed by a political decision.
3. Detailed design and implementation.
Strategic delta planning does not take place in a vacuum. Delta planning needs to fit within a longer history of past planning efforts, societal structures and existing policy environments if it wants to secure a successful implementation throughout its longer-term planning horizon. Therefore, this project looks at the larger picture to ensure a better connection between strategic delta planning activities and their societal and technological environment.Often not a linear process. Iterations and adaptations of previous plans and decisions are a necessary part of strategic delta planning processes, which maybe followed by a new problem formulation stage.
Project approach (2)
• Strong links with practice (e.g. ongoing delta planning processes) to ensure the empirical grounding of research, uptake of results and contributions to policy practice.
• Involvement of private sector, semi-public organisations who have an interest in further testing and improving tools they offer and the use of their tools (Deltares, PBL, Bosch and Slabbers).
• Capacity building through the involvement of stakeholders in the project activities, as well as through international networks and educational programmes, e.g. NICHE.
Success of a strategic delta planning process
• The success of strategic delta planning should not be measured in terms of any specific solution or plan, but in the degree of transformation of stakeholder coalitions and perceptions over time.
• Does a delta planning process enable consent among key stakeholders over strategic priorities and fitting innovative solutions, which is sufficiently stable to allow for implementation and further adaptation through learning-by-doing?
• A sustainable development of urbanizing deltas, raises conflicting interests amongst stakeholders.
• This needs to be accommodated in an integrated development / planning process often characterized by technical complexity and knowledge limitations.
• In many deltas, strategic planning processes have started as traditional planning can not cope with the development challenge of urbanizing deltas.
The issue: the need for strategic delta planning
• Agreeing on strategic choices is difficult and often leads to:– Only partial or even non-cooperation among key
stakeholders– Not efficient use of tools and expert knowledge– Outcomes that are far away from the planned
ones– Etc..
• A better understanding of the planning process helps to prevent issues and conflicts and help achieve envisioned developments.
The complication: agree on strategic choices in strategic planning
processes is difficult
Participatory tools Innovative solutions Actor coalitions
What are the dynamics of strategic delta planning processes over longer periods of time, and what is the role therin of stakeholder coalitions, innovative solutions and participatory planning tools and approaches?
This will be analysed for strategic planning processes in:
Bangladesh the Mekong Delta the Dutch South-West delta
The main question:
Motivation
3. Implementation (incl. adaption and transformation)
1. Advocacy and agenda-setting (framing the puzzle)
2. Strategic Delta Planning(fitting/fixing the puzzle)
Opportunity Threat
Ability
Stakeholder coalitions
Solutions
Time
>10 yrs
PhD-1
PhD-3
PhD-2
Post-doc
Integration and cross-case analysis
In planning processes, social robust solutions could ideally refer to: -solutions that are accepted by all actors involved in planning processes-although solutions might change (e.g. costs, outlook, multifunctionality), acceptance of the solution is maintained by the involved actors.
Returning to the title of the presentation: socially robust
solutions in delta regions
Tentative thoughts on socially robust solutions
• Actor coalitions can contribute to socially robust solutions when: – A professional facilitator can move within and between actor coalitions.
Social robustness improves since he/she mediates conflicts, ‘translates’ unclarities, ensures a sound connection with decision-makers, funders, legal experts.
– Actors share responsibilties for strategic planning outcomes since that creates a setting wherein socially robust solutions can be developed
– Note: social robustness is relative, and limited to the actors involved
• Innovative solutions can contribute to socially robust solutions when:– They are developed interactively between researchers, policy makers
and stakeholders since that could broaden the support for the solutions– Time is budgeted to address criticism and concerns of participating
actors.
Tentative thoughts on socially robust solutions in strategic delta
planning processes (1/2)
Participatory tools can contribute to socially robust solutions when:– They make knowledge on delta systems and
proposed solutions easy understandible to all actors involved
– They facilitate changes in proposed solutions without loosing consent.
Tentative thoughts on socially robust solutions in strategic delta
planning processes (2/2)
Socially robust solutions in strategic delta planning processes:
key relations between actors, innovative solutions and participatory
tools.
Innovative solutions
Participatory tools
Actor coalitions
Refinement/adjustment;
confrontation bigger audience
Introduce and frame the solutionsAppeal of solutions to actor
coalitions Change stance of a coalition
Actor relations influence use of tools
Are tools compatible with
innovative solutions?
Support consensus, trust
