Water Governance and Management Systems and the Role of Ecosystem Services: Case Study Insights—Groundwater Management in the Sandveld Region, South Africa

Chapter
Part of the Springer Water book series (SPWA)

Abstract

Freshwater resources deliver a broad set of ecosystem services essential for human health and well-being, food and energy production, social and economic stability, and for protecting and maintaining ecosystems. The ever increasing demand of water resources often result in substantial declines in the provision of ecosystem services. The management of human and environmental water needs is therefore challenging and calls for an integrative view on ecosystem services. A shift of current water management objectives is required to ensure water security for current and future generations. This article analyzes water governance and management systems (WGMS) and highlights characteristics assumed to be crucial for adaptive and integrated management: (i) institutional settings, (ii) actor networks, and (iii) multi-level structures. To understand complex WGMS one has to link these characteristics to management performances including impacts on ecosystem services. We applied this approach to the Sandveld in South Africa focusing on actor networks and the management of ecosystem services. We indicate that a basic re-thinking of water management objectives at national and regional level according to groundwater sustainability took place. A bottom-up movement in the Sandveld developed approaches to protect and sustain groundwater resources. Nevertheless, cooperation between actors and sectors from different levels is weak which in turn provides a huge barrier for the integration of ecosystem services into groundwater policies.

References

  1. 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(10):1891–1915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bates BC, Kundzewicz ZW, Wu S, Palutikof JP (eds) (2008) Climate change and water. Technical Paper of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCCGoogle Scholar
  3. Bennett EM, Peterson GD, Gordon LJ (2009) Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecol Lett 12:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (2003) Navigating social-ecological systems: building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Biswas AK, Tortajada C (2010) Future water governance: problems and perspectives. Water Resour Dev 26(2):129–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Braune E (2000) Towards comprehensive groundwater resource management in South Africa. IAH Congress 2000, Cape TownGoogle Scholar
  7. Braune E, Xu Y (2008) Groundwater management issues in southern Africa—an IWRM perspective. Water SA 34(6):699–706Google Scholar
  8. Conrad J, Nel J, Wentzel J (2005) The challenges and implications of assessing groundwater recharge: A case study—northern Sandveld, Western Cape, South Africa. Water SA 30(5):75–81Google Scholar
  9. Daily GC (1997) Nature’s services—societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Island, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  10. de Groot RS, Wilson MA et al (2002) A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem function, goods and services. Ecol Econ 41(3):393–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) South Africa (2005) Olifants/Doorn water management area: Internal Strategic Perspective. Prepared by Ninham Shand (Pty) Ltd in association with Jakoet and Associates, Umvoto Africa, FST and Tlou and Matji, on behalf of the Directorate: National Water Resource Planning. DWAF Report No P WMA 17/000/00/0305Google Scholar
  12. Foley JA, DeFries R, Asner GP et al (2005) Global consequences of land use. Science 309:570–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Folke C, Hahn T, Olsson P, Norberg J (2005) Adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Annu Rev Environ Resour 30:441–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Franke AC, Steyn JM, Ranger KS, Haverkort AJ (2011) Developing environmental principles, criteria, indicators and norms for potato production in South Africa through field surveys and modeling. Agric Syst 104(4):297–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Holling CS, Meffe GK (1996) Command and control and the pathology of natural resource management. Conserv Biol 10(2):328–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Huntjens P, Pahl-Wostl C, Grin J (2010) Climate change adaptation in European river basins. Reg Environ Change 10(4):263–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Irwin F, Ranganathan J (2008) Action agenda for sustaining ecosystem services. In: Ranganathan J, Munasinghe M, Irwin F (eds) Policies for sustainable governance of global ecosystem services. Washington, pp 21–69Google Scholar
  18. Knieper C, Kastens B, Holtz G, Pahl-Wostl C (2010) Analysing water governance in heterogeneous case studies—experiences with a database approach. Environ Sci Policy 13(7):592–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Knüppe K, Pahl-Wostl C (2011) Requirements for adaptive governance of groundwater ecosys-tem services—Insights from Sandveld (South Africa), Upper Guadiana (Spain) and Spree (Germany). Reg Environ Change 13(1):53–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Krysanova V, Dickens C, Timmerman J, Varela-Ortega C et al (2010) Cross-comparison of cli-mate change adaptation strategies across large river basins in Europe, Africa and Asia. Water Resour Manage 24(14):4121–4160Google Scholar
  21. Loring AP, Chapin FS, Gerlach SC (2008) The services-oriented architecture: ecosystem services as a framework for diagnosing change in social ecological systems. Ecosystems 11(3):478–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. MA [Millennium Ecosystem Assessment] (2005) Introduction and conceptual framework. Ecosystems and human well-being: a framework for assessment. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  23. Münch Z, Conrad C (2007) Remote sensing and GIS based determination of groundwater dependent ecosystems in the Western Cape, South Africa. Hydrogeol J 15(1):19–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Odum HT (1996) Environmental accounting: emery and environmental decision making. John Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Ostrom E (2005) Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton University Press, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  26. Ostrom E (2007) A diagnostic approach for going beyond Panaceas. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:15181–15187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pahl-Wostl C (2009) A conceptual framework for analyzing adaptive capacity and multi-level learning processes in resource governance regimes. Glob Environ Change 19(3):354–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pahl-Wostl C, Sendzimir J, Jeffrey P, Aerts J, Berkamp G, Cross K (2007) Managing change toward adaptive water management through social learning. Ecol Soc 12(2):30. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss2/art30/
  29. Pahl-Wostl C, Holtz G, Kastens B, Knieper C (2010) Analysing complex water governance regimes: the management and transition framework. Environ Sci Policy 13(7):571–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pahl-Wostl C, Lebel L, Knieper C, Nikitina E (2012) From applying panaceas to amstering complexity: towards adaptive water governance in river basins. Environ Sci Policy 23:24–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Raudsepp-Hearne C, Peterson GD, Bennett EM (2010) Ecosystem services bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. PNAS USA 107(11):5242–5247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rogers P, Hall AW (2003) Effective water governance. TEC Background Paper, Stockholm, Global Water PartnershipGoogle Scholar
  33. Rodríguez JP, Beard TD, Bennett EM et al. (2006) Trade-offs across space, time, and ecosystem services. Ecol Soc 11(1):28. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art28/
  34. Schlüter M, Leslie H, Levin S (2009) Managing water-use trade-offs in a semi-arid river delta to sustain multiple ecosystem services: a modeling approach. Ecol Res 24(3):491–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. UNEP [United Nations Environment Programme] (2007) Global environment outlook: environment for development (GEO 4). Progress Press, VallettaGoogle Scholar
  36. van Jaarsveld AS, Biggs R, Scholes RJ et al (2005) Measuring conditions and trends in ecosystem services at multiple scales: the Southern African Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (SAfMA) experience. Philos Trans Royal Soc B-Biol Sci 360:425–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Environmental Systems ResearchUniversity of OsnabrückOsnabrückGermany

Personalised recommendations