Advertisement

Application of Systems Thinking to the assessment of an institutional development project of river restoration at a campus university in Southern Brazil

  • Fabiane Andressa TascaEmail author
  • Roberto Fabris Goerl
  • Gean Paulo Michel
  • Nei Kavaguichi Leite
  • Djesser Zechner Sérgio
  • Saman Belizário
  • Jakcemara Caprario
  • Alexandra Rodrigues Finotti
Advances in Receiving Water Quality Models
  • 63 Downloads

Abstract

Rapid urban growth and high population density have become a problem for urban water resources, especially in developing countries. In general, the pollution of rivers and degradation of ecosystems are the result of both management failures and lack of sewage treatment. River restoration appears as a solution to improve this scenario, but it is common for there to be an absence of a systemic vision in these projects. Thus, this work analysed one of these projects as an initial approach to create coherent (qualitative) shared perspectives on the same problem. This project was developed in a Brazilian university territory in response to a Public Civil Action. Rivers within the university surroundings are degraded due to sewage disposal and wastewater pollution from external and internal sources within the university, but the programme actions contemplate only interventions within the perimeter of the university while excluding the other parts of its watershed. We analyse this problem under a Systems Thinking approach by using causal loop diagrams, being clear that ecosystems cannot be reduced to territorial limits only. The systemic map shows many actions that contribute to the water quality degradation, with emphasis on illegal dumping of wastewater (sewage) and land use change in the upstream areas prior to the university. Point measures are palliative and do not guarantee the quality of river water. Regulation of impervious surfaces and correct disposal of wastewater can improve the current panorama, but greater integration between stakeholders and other key actors is required.

Keywords

Causal loop diagrams Mental models Receiving waters Socio-ecological system Urban water management Water governance Water resources 

Notes

Funding information

The first author gratefully acknowledges the financial support provided by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development of Brazil (CNPq).

References

  1. Alves JBDM (2012) General systems theory: in search of interdisciplinarity. Instituto Stela, Florianópolis (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
  2. Anderson V, Johnson L (1997) Systems thinking basics: from concepts to causal loops. Pegasus Communications, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  3. Araújo DCD, Silva POD, Curi WF, Cabral JJDSP (2017) Multicriteria analysis applied to the management of urban pluvial waters. RBRH 22:18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bakker K, Kooy M, Shofiania NE, Martijn EJ (2008) Governance failure: rethinking the institutional dimensions of urban water supply to poor households. World Dev 36:1891–1915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beheshti AM, Sægrov S, Ugarelli R (2015) Infiltration/inflow assessment and detection in urban sewer system. Innsendte Artikler 1:24–34Google Scholar
  6. Berkes, F., Colding, J., & Folke, C. (Eds.). (2008) Navigating social-ecological systems: building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  7. Bertrand-Krajewski JL, Cardoso MA, Ellis B, Frehmann T, Giulianelli M, Gujer W, Krebs P, Pliska Z, Pollert J, Pryl K (2006) Towards a better knowledge and management of infiltration and exfiltration in sewer systems: the APUSS project. Water Practice and Technology 1(1)Google Scholar
  8. Bernhardt ES, Palmer MA (2007) Restoring streams in an urbanizing world. Freshw Biol 52:738–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Biggs R, Schlüter M, Schoon ML (eds) (2015) Principles for building resilience: sustaining ecosystem services in social-ecological systems. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Bohensky EL, Maru Y (2011) Indigenous knowledge, science, and resilience: what have we learned from a decade of international literature on “integration”? Ecol Soc 16:4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brierley GJ, Fryirs KA (2013) Geomorphology and river management: applications of the river styles framework. John Wiley & Sons, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  12. Brown CM, Lund JR, Cai X, Reed PM, Zagona EA, Ostfeld A, Hall J, Characklis GW, Yu W, Brekke L (2015) 2015. The future of water resources systems analysis: toward a scientific framework for sustainable water management. Water Resour Res, 51:6110-6124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. CETESB (Environmental Company of The State of São Paulo) (2013) Surface water quality report for the state of São Paulo. Appendix C: water quality index http://aguasinteriores.cetesb.sp.gov.br/wpcontent/uploads/sites/32/2013/11/Apêndice-C-Índndices-de-Qualidade-das-Áhuas-.pdf. Accessed 17 July 2019 (in Portuguese)
  14. Capra F (1997) The web of life: a new synthesis of mind and matter. Flamingo, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Chin A (2006) Urban transformation of river landscapes in a global context. Geomorphology 79:460–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chorley RJ (1969) The drainage basin as the fundamental geomorphic unit. In: Chorley RJ (ed) Water, Earth, and Man: A synthesis of hydrology, geomorphology, and socio-economic geography. Methuen and Co Ltd., London, pp 77-99Google Scholar
  17. Coyle G (2000) Qualitative and quantitative modelling in system dynamics: some research questions. Syst Dyn Rev 16:225–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Duit A, Galaz V, Eckerberg K, Ebbesson J (2010) Governance, complexity, and resilience. Glob Environ Chang 20:363–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ellis JB, Chocat B, Fujita S, Marsalek J, Rauch W (2004) Urban drainage: a multilingual glossary. IWA Publishing, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Elsawah S, Pierce SA, Hamilton SH, Van Delden H, Haase D, Elmahdi A, Jakeman AJ (2017) An overview of the system dynamics process for integrated modelling of socio-ecological systems: lessons on good modelling practice from five case studies. Environ Model Softw 93:127–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fletcher TD, Shuster W, Hunt WF, Ashley R, Butler D, Arthur S, Trowsdale S, Barraud S, Semadeni-Davies A, Bertrand-Krajewski JL, Mikkelsen PS, Rivard G, Uhl M, Dagenais D, Viklander M (2014) SUDS, LID, BMPs, WSUD and more – the evolution and application of terminology surrounding urban drainage. Urban Water J 12(7):525–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Folke C, Hahn T, Olsson P, Norberg J (2005) Adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Annu Rev Environ Resour 30:441–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Frissell CA, Liss WJ, Warren CE, Hurley MD (1986) A hierarchical framework for stream habitat classification: viewing streams in a watershed context. Environ Manag 10:199–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gattie DK, Kellam NN, Turk HJ (2007) Informing ecological engineering through ecological network analysis, ecological modelling, and concepts of systems and engineering ecology. Ecol Model 208:25–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Giacomoni MH, Kanta L, Zechman EM (2013) Complex adaptive systems approach to simulate the sustainability of water resources and urbanization. J Water Resour Plan Manag 139(5):554–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Grant WE (1998) Ecology and natural resource management: reflections from a systems perspective. Ecol Model 108:67–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Halbe J, Pahl-Wostl C, Sendzimir J, Adamowski J (2013) Towards adaptive and integrated management paradigms to meet the challenges of water governance. Water Sci Technol 67:2651–2660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Holling CS (2001) Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems. Ecosystems 4:390–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. IBGE (2011) Sinopse Censo Demográfico 2010 (Synopsis Population Census 2010). Report of Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE), Rio de Janeiro, BrazilGoogle Scholar
  30. Introna LD (2007) Strategy-as-Identity: An autopoietic contribution to the IS/IT strategy debate. Information management: Setting the scene:143–158Google Scholar
  31. Jackson MC (2003) Systems thinking: creative holism for managers. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  32. Jick TD (1979) Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: triangulation in action. Adm Sci Q 24(4):602–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Johnson, MF, Thorne CR, Castro, JM, Kondolf GM, Mazzacano CS, Rood SB, Westbrook C (2019) Biomic river restoration: a new focus for river management. River Research and Applications (Early View)Google Scholar
  34. Jørgensen SE, Nielsen SN, Fath BD (2016) Recent progress in systems ecology. Ecol Model 319:112–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kazanci C, Ma Q (2012) Extending ecological network analysis measures to dynamic ecosystem models. Ecol Model 242:180–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kotschy, K, Biggs, R, Daw, T, Folke, C, & West, P (2015) Principle 1—maintain diversity and redundancy. Principles for building resilience: sustaining ecosystem services in social-ecological systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 50-79Google Scholar
  37. Kleidon A, Zehe E, Ehret U, Scherer U (2013) Thermodynamics, maximum power, and the dynamics of preferential river flow structures at the continental scale. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 17:225–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kondolf GM, Pinto PJ (2017) The social connectivity of urban rivers. Geomorphology 277:182–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Loucks DP, Jia H (2012) Managing water for life. Front Env Sci Eng 6:255–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Maturana HR, Varela FJ (1980) Autopoiesis and cognition: the realization of the living. Reidel, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Meadows DH (2008) Thinking in systems: a primer. Chelsea Green Publishing, VermontGoogle Scholar
  42. Mingers J, White L (2010) A review of the recent contribution of systems thinking to operational research and management science. Eur J Oper Res 207:1147–1161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. O’Connor M (1997) The internalisation of environmental costs: implementing the polluter pays principle in the European Union. Int J Environ Pollut 7(4):450–482Google Scholar
  44. Pahl-Wostl C, Kabat P, Möltgen J (2008) Adaptive and integrated water management: coping with complexity and uncertainty. Springer, Berlin, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pahl-Wostl C, Holtz G, Kastens B, Knieper C (2010) Analyzing complex water governance regimes: the management and transition framework. Environ Sci Pol 13:571–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Patten BC (2014) Systems ecology and environmentalism: getting the science right. Part I: Facets for a more holistic. Nature Book of ecology. Ecol Model 293:4–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pidwirny M 2006 Definitions of systems and models fundamentals of physical geography, 2nd Edition. http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/4b.html. Accessed 11 November 2018
  48. Pinter N, Brasington J, Gurnell A, Kondolf GM, Tockner K, Wharton G, Yarnell SM (2019) River research and applications across borders. River Res Appl 35:768–775Google Scholar
  49. Prigogine I (1967) Dissipative structures in chemical systems. Fast reactions and primary processes in chemical kinetics, 371-382Google Scholar
  50. Pompeo (2017) Water Quality Recovery Program Plan into Reitor João David Ferreira Lima Campus. Institutional report. Federal Univ. of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, BrazilGoogle Scholar
  51. Postel S, Richter BD (2003) Rivers for life: managing water for people and nature. Island Press, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  52. Rietkerk M, Dekker SC, De Ruiter PC, van de Koppel J (2004) Self-organized patchiness and catastrophic shifts in ecosystems. Science 305:1926–1929CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rocha J, Biggs RO, Peterson G, Carpenter S. Freshwater Eutrophication. In: Regime Shifts Database http://www.regimeshifts.org. Accessed 13 December 2018
  54. Rodriguez-Iturbe I, Rinaldo A (2001) Fractal river basins: chance and self-organization. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  55. Scheffer M, Carpenter S, Foley JA, Folke C, Walker B (2001) Catastrophic shifts in ecosystems. Nature 413(6856):591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sedlacko M, Martinuzzi A, Røpke I, Videira N, Antunes P (2014) Participatory systems mapping for sustainable consumption: discussion of a method promoting systemic insights. Ecol Econ 106:33–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. SOS Atlantic forest (2017). Observing rivers – Santa Catarina State: Water quality analysis. http://sosobsriosscznccombr/relatorio/ Accessed 16 October 2018Google Scholar
  58. Stephenson T (2001) Problems of developing countries. In: Frontiers in Urban Water Management–Deadlock or Hope. IWA Publishing, London, pp 264–312Google Scholar
  59. Sterman JD (2000) Business dynamics: system thinking and modeling for a complex world. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  60. Tasca FA, Assunção LB, Finotti AR (2017) International experiences in stormwater fee Water Science and Technology 1:287-299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. UFSC (2017) UFSC in numbers. Institutional report. http://dpgi.seplan.ufsc.br/files/2018/08/Ufsc-em-numeros-fv-en.pdf. Accessed 18 November 2018
  62. USDA (2004) Conservation strategies for growing communities. Natural Resources Conservation Service report. Iowa NCRS, Iowa, USGoogle Scholar
  63. Van den Belt M (2004) Mediated modeling: a system dynamics approach to environmental consensus building. Island press, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  64. Van den Brandeler F, Gupta J, Hordijk M (2018) Megacities and rivers: scalar mismatches between urban water management and river basin management. J Hydrol (in press).Google Scholar
  65. Vannote RL, Minshall GW, Cummins KW, Sedell JR, Cushing CE (1980) The river continuum concept. Can J Fish Aquat Sci:37130–37137Google Scholar
  66. Varela FG, Maturana HR, Uribe R (1974) Autopoiesis: the organization of living systems, its characterization and a model. Biosystems 5:187–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Vlotman WF, Wong T, Schultz B (2007) Integration of drainage, water quality and flood management in rural, urban and lowland areas. ICID 56:161–177Google Scholar
  68. Von Bertalanffy L (1950) The theory of open systems in physics and biology. Science 111:23–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Von Bertalanffy L (1969) General System Theory: foundations, development, application. George Braziller, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  70. Vörösmarty CJ, McIntyre PB, Gessner MO, Dudgeon D, Prusevich A, Green P, Glidden S, Bunn SE, Sullivan CA, Liermann CR, Davies PM (2010) Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity. Nature 467(7315):555–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Walker B, Holling CS, Carpenter SR, Kinzig A (2004) Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social–ecological systems. Ecol Soc 9:1–9Google Scholar
  72. Walsh CJ, Roy AH, Feminella JW, Cottingham PD, Groffman PM, Morgan RP (2005) The urban stream syndrome: current knowledge and the search for a cure. J N Am Benthol Soc 24:706–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Wetzel RG (2001) Limnology: lake and river ecosystems. Gulf Professional Publishing, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  74. Wichelns D, Drechsel P, Qadir M (2015) Wastewater: economic asset in an urbanizing world. In Wastewater (pp. 3-14). Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  75. Wohl E, Angermeier PL, Bledsoe B, Kondolf GM, MacDonnell L, Merritt DM, Palmer MA, Poff NL, Tarboton D (2005) River restoration. Water Resour Res 41:1–12Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fabiane Andressa Tasca
    • 1
    Email author
  • Roberto Fabris Goerl
    • 2
  • Gean Paulo Michel
    • 3
  • Nei Kavaguichi Leite
    • 4
  • Djesser Zechner Sérgio
    • 5
  • Saman Belizário
    • 1
  • Jakcemara Caprario
    • 1
  • Alexandra Rodrigues Finotti
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Sanitary and Environmental EngineeringFederal University of Santa Catarina, TrindadeFlorianópolisBrazil
  2. 2.Department of GeosciencesFederal University of Santa Catarina, TrindadeFlorianópolisBrazil
  3. 3.Department of Hydraulic Works, Institute of Hydraulic ResearchFederal University of Rio Grande do SulPorto AlegreBrazil
  4. 4.Department of Ecology and ZoologyFederal University of Santa Catarina, TrindadeFlorianópolisBrazil
  5. 5.Federal University of Santa Catarina, TrindadeFlorianópolisBrazil

Personalised recommendations