Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
This view is based only on my professional
experience as a western European white male,
involved in a few of these changes. Some of the
emerging critiques of IWRM are founded on the
scale-related tensions between strategic planning
principles and local, practical delivery (Watson
et al
., 2007). The most powerful criticism relates to
seemingly incidental progress for local and regional
catchment management in the wider context of
predicted global problems described in terms such
as 'world water crisis' and 'water wars' (Newson,
2009).
One of the key themes at the 1990 York
conference (Boon
et al
., 1992) was the apparent
progress made during the previous decade in
turning back the hegemony of 'land drainage'
in the UK - flood risk management based on
hard engineering solutions with little regard for
river dynamics or ecological damage. What had
started as essentially an eNGO protest movement
against the ecological destruction caused by
drainage of wetlands and river channelization
in lowland Britain (Purseglove, 1988) became a
major influence for legislative change and more
enlightened government policy and subsequently
the focus for the development and promotion of a
programme for river restoration.
The major strength, but also a weakness, of
the 1990 York conference was the preoccupation
with nature conservation; this was because a
groundswell of popular support among delegates,
the majority of whom were ecologists, could
be achieved reasonably easily. Countryside and
wildlife conservation lobby groups in the UK had
been very influential and dominated the 'green'
agenda for a long time (Lowe and Goyder, 1983).
A prime example of an emerging influence for
river management was publication by the Royal
Society for the Protection of Birds of the
Rivers
and Wildlife Handbook
in 1984 (Lewis and Williams,
1984). Moving beyond the wildlife conservation
agenda but still retaining a broader ecosystems
perspective has been a constant challenge during
the last 20 years. This chapter attempts to assess
progress towards a catchment-scale approach,
reflecting on two concluding statements made as
a result of the 1990 York conference: 'Perhaps the
greatest challenge to environmental management
is that of properly understanding environmental
science' (Newson, 1992); 'for all those who
affirm the importance of nature conservation
the challenge will be to turn opportunity and
intention into achievement' (NCC, 1984, quoted
in Newson, 1992). In doing so it is possible to
assess whether the river management philosophy
predicated predominantly on the need to achieve
good ecological status represents a triumph or
tragedy.
Beyond nature conservation:
multi-functional catchment
management
In 1990, the rudimentary situation for multi-
functional catchment management was
summarized thus: '
...
with the exception of
small upland catchments purchased by water
suppliers, the joint management of land and
water has not been a central feature of UK
public policy' (Newson, 1992). Then, the scientific
knowledge base was largely restricted to small
headwater catchments because, generally speaking,
experimental control and high quality hydrometric
data were not available from monitoring stations
on larger rivers. That meant government agencies,
and therefore policy-makers, did not have direct
access to the necessary supporting evidence that
was required to plan and justify what could turn
out to be very expensive river restoration schemes.
There were two potentially disadvantageous
characteristics of river restoration enthusiasts
in those early days: (i) they often had little
expertise in designing, undertaking and analysing
inter-disciplinary research or the experience of
developing practical tools from the research
findings; and (ii) they had little experience of
what is now called 'stakeholder participation' -
involving those who are affected by proposed
actions. However, stakeholder participation was
already improving rapidly ( Aberg and Tapsell, this
volume) and became incorporated formally in
governance arrangements for the River Restoration
Project (Holmes and Nielsen, 1998; Vivash
et al
.,
