E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Okavango River Basin
Environmental Flow Assessment
EFA Process Report
Report No: 02/2009
J.M. King, et al.
June 2009
1
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
DOCUMENT DETAILS
PROJECT
Environment protection and sustainable management of
the Okavango River Basin: Preliminary Environmental
Flows Assessment
TITLE:
EFA Process Report
DATE: June
2009
LEAD AUTHORS:
J.M. King, C. A. Brown.
REPORT NO.:
02/2009
PROJECT NO:
UNTS/RAF/010/GEF
FORMAT:
MSWord and PDF.
CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS:
A.R. Joubert, H.Beuster.
THE TEAM
Project Managers
Shirley Bethune (Team
Lapologang Magole
Chaminda Rajapakse
Leader)
Wellington Masamba
Nkobi Moleele
Colin Christian
Hilary Masundire
Geofrey Khwarae
Barbara Curtis
Dominic Mazvimavi
Celeste Espach
Joseph Mbaiwa
Angola
Aune-Lea Hatutale
Gagoitseope Mmopelwa
Manual Quintino (Team
Mathews Katjimune
Belda Mosepele
Leader and OBSC
assisted by Penehafo
Keta Mosepele
member)
Shidute
Piotr Wolski
Carlos Andrade
Andre Mostert
Helder André de Andrade
Shishani Nakanwe
EFA Process
e Sousa
Cynthia Ortmann
Management
Amândio Gomes
Mark Paxton
Jackie King
Filomena Livramento
Kevin Roberts
Cate Brown
Paulo Emilio Mendes
Ben van de Waal
Hans Beuster
Gabriel Luis Miguel
Dorothy Wamunyima
Jon Barnes
Miguel Morais
assisted by
Alison Joubert
Mario João Pereira
Ndinomwaameni Nashipili
Mark Rountree
Rute Saraiva
Carmen Santos
Botswana
Okavango Basin
Casper Bonyongo (Team
Steering Committee
Namibia
Leader)
Tracy Molefi-Mbui
Pete Hancock
Laura Namene
2
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
List of reports in report series
Report 01/2009:
Project Initiation Report
Report 02/2009:
Process Report
Report 03/2009:
Guidelines for data collection, analysis and scenario creation
Report 04/2009:
Delineation Report
Report 05/2009:
Hydrology Report: Data and models
Report 06/2009:
Scenario Report: Hydrology
Report 07/2009:
Scenario Report: Ecological and social predictions (3 Volumes)
Report 08/2009:
Final Project Report
Other deliverables:
DSS Software
Process Management Team PowerPoint Presentations
Citation
No part of this document may be reproduced in any manner
without full acknowledgement of its source
This document should be cited as:
King, J.M. and Brown, C.A. 2009. Process Report. Report 02-2009
EPSMO/BIOKAVANGO Okavango Basin Environmental Flows Assessment Project,
OKACOM, Maun, Botswana. 52 pp.
3
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Acknowledgements
Many thanks for logistical support to:
· Corinne Spadaro of FAO
· Ros Townsend, Karl Reinecke and Rembu Magoba of Southern Waters
4
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Executive Summary
The Okavango River Basin Commission, OKACOM, initiated a project titled the
Environmental Protection and Sustainable Management of the Okavango River Basin
(EPSMO). This was approved by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), to be
executed by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). The standard
UNDP process is a Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis followed by a Strategic Action
Programme of joint management to address threats to the basin's linked land and water
systems. Because of the pristine nature of the Okavango River, this approach was modified
to include an Environmental Flow Assessment (EFA). To complete the EFA, EPSMO
collaborated with the BIOKAVANGO Project at the Harry Oppenheimer Okavango Research
Centre of the University of Botswana, in 2008 to conduct a basin-wide EFA for the Okavango
River system.
This is report number 2 in the report series for the EFA. It outlines the process used for the
assessment, including the sequence of team activities from field visits to specialist reports;
the workshops and meetings at key points of the process, and the Decision Support System
used to capture knowledge and produce predictions of development-driven change to the
river ecosystem and its users.
5
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Table of Contents
1.
Introduction ..................................................................................................... 12
1.1.
Project background ......................................................................................... 12
1.2.
Objectives of the EF assessment .................................................................... 12
1.3.
Layout of the report ......................................................................................... 13
2.
Outline of the EPSMO/BIOKAVANGO EF process ......................................... 14
2.1.
Division of the basin into homogeneous units and selection of representative
sites ................................................................................................................. 15
2.2.
Set up of basin hydrological and hydraulic models and description of the
present hydrology/hydraulics for each site. ..................................................... 16
2.3.
Division of the flow regime into ecologically-relevant summary statistics ....... 17
2.3.1
EF Site 7: Xaxanaka and EF Site 8: Boteti..................................................... 19
2.4.
Sites visits and initial data collection ............................................................... 19
2.5.
Selection of indicators and further data collection ........................................... 20
2.5.1
Biophysical indicators ..................................................................................... 20
2.5.2
Social indicators ............................................................................................. 22
2.6.
Development of scenarios of future water use ................................................ 22
2.7.
Specialist reports ............................................................................................. 23
2.8.
Knowledge capture and the construction of Response Curves ...................... 23
2.9.
Set up and population of the Okavango EF DSS ............................................ 26
2.10.
Prediction of the ecological and socioeconomic outcomes of chosen water-
use scenarios .................................................................................................. 27
3.
The team ......................................................................................................... 30
4.
Team meetings and workshops ...................................................................... 31
4.1.
Preparation Meeting ........................................................................................ 31
4.1.1
Purpose .......................................................................................................... 31
4.1.2
Attendees ....................................................................................................... 31
4.1.3
Activities ......................................................................................................... 31
4.1.4
Outcomes and deliverables ............................................................................ 32
4.2.
Knowledge Capture Workshop ....................................................................... 32
4.2.1
Purpose .......................................................................................................... 32
4.2.2
Attendees ....................................................................................................... 33
4.2.3
Activities ......................................................................................................... 33
4.2.4
Outcomes and deliverables ............................................................................ 34
4.3.
Hydrology Workshops ..................................................................................... 34
4.4.
Scenario Workshop ......................................................................................... 35
4.4.1
Purpose .......................................................................................................... 35
4.4.2
Attendees ....................................................................................................... 35
4.4.3
Activities ......................................................................................................... 36
4.4.4
Outcomes and deliverables ............................................................................ 37
4.5.
Capacity-building and liaison sessions ........................................................... 37
4.6.
Okavango Basin Steering Committee and TDA Meetings .............................. 37
5.
Specialist activities and reports ....................................................................... 39
6
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
6.
The Decision Support System ......................................................................... 40
6.1.
Structure of the DSS ....................................................................................... 40
6.2.
Flow of information .......................................................................................... 42
6.3.
Information processing .................................................................................... 42
6.3.1
Hydrology ....................................................................................................... 42
6.3.2
Biophysical data entry files ............................................................................. 44
6.3.3
Socio-economic data entry files ..................................................................... 48
6.3.4
Site summary files .......................................................................................... 49
6.3.5
Okavango Scenario Interface ......................................................................... 50
7.
Conclusion ...................................................................................................... 52
8.
References ...................................................................................................... 53
7
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
List of Figures
Figure 2.1 The EF sites and their corresponding socio-economic Integrated Units of
Analysis (IUAs). ................................................................................................... 15
Figure 2.2 Example of seasonal division used: EF Site 4: Kapako 2001 .............................. 17
Figure 2.3 Floods recorded over 43 years at EF Site 4: Kapako. The flood type is
indicated .............................................................................................................. 18
Figure 2.4 Ecological summary statistics extracted from the daily hydrological time
series ................................................................................................................... 19
Figure 2.5 Example of a Response Curve template minimum dry-season flows in a
year ...................................................................................................................... 24
Figure 2.6 Example of an indicator data entry sheet in the Okavango-DSS ......................... 24
Figure 2.7 Example of a Response Curve the response of one indicator to minimum
dry-season flows in a year ................................................................................... 26
Figure 2.8 Process for assessing responses to flow changes for any scenario. The
dotted line represents procedures within the DSS. .............................................. 27
Figure 2.9 Summary of process in DSS for assessing time-series changes in one
biophysical indicator in response to a scenario's simulated hydrological time
series ................................................................................................................... 28
Figure 6.1 Top level of the hierarchy of folders for the Okavango DSS showing the
subfolders for hydrology and for data entry for each site. .................................... 40
Figure 6.2 Hydrology folder for the Okavango DSS. ............................................................. 41
Figure 6.3 Contents of the Mucundi Site folder. .................................................................... 41
Figure 6.4 Flow of information through the DSS. .................................................................. 42
Figure 6.5 Summary of the hydrological processing. ............................................................ 43
Figure 6.6 Summary of the hydrological processing showing the relevant sections of the
Excel files. ............................................................................................................ 43
Figure 6.7 (a) The (minimum) five levels provided for the all response curves. (b) An
example showing an additional minimum level provided where scenarios
were expected to fall outside of the present day range. ...................................... 44
Figure 6.8 The data entry file for Wildlife at Site 2 (Mucundi), showing the worksheet for
Semi aquatics. Two response curves are visible: for Dry season onset and
for Min dry season Q. .......................................................................................... 45
Figure 6.9 The input, series of calculations and time series output for one indicator (in
this example, Semi Aquatics for Wildlife) showing its response to Dry season
onset (Dq) and Dry season min Q (Dq). .............................................................. 46
Figure 6.10 Modifiers available which could be applied to each indicator. ............................. 47
Figure 6.11 Time-series of the Present Day biophysical response of Semi Aquatic wildlife.
The screenshot also shows the buttons to click to see different scenarios (red
circle). .................................................................................................................. 47
Figure 6.12 Socio-economic response curves for Fish catch and its contribution to
household and national income, together with the resulting time-series. ............ 49
Figure 6.13 The front page of the site summary file for Mucundi (SITE 2 Mucundi
summary.xls). ......................................................................................................... 50
8
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Figure 6.14 The front page of the site summary file for Mucundi (SITE 2 Mucundi
summary.xls). the circles ring the tabs which produce various of the outputs
such as Abundance time series graphs for all indicators all sites (red),
summary abundance graphs (blue) and integrity graphs (green). ....................... 51
9
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
List of Tables
Table 2.1 Meetings and other team activities in the EF process ......................................... 14
Table 2.2 The Environmental Flow (EF) sites ...................................................................... 15
Table 2.3 Itinerary for familiarisation and initial data collection trip to the Okavango
Basin .................................................................................................................... 20
Table 2.4 Biophysical indicators used in the EPSMO/BIOKAVANGO EF process.............. 21
Table 2.5 Severity ratings used to construct Response Curves (after King et al. 2003) ...... 25
Table 2.6 Descriptions of the categories that are used to describe and classify the
ecological condition of rivers with their associated score in terms of Present
Ecological State (PES) (adapted from Kleynhans 1996) ..................................... 29
Table 4.1 Attendees at the Preparation Meeting, Maun, Botswana .................................... 32
Table 4.2 Attendees at the Knowledge Capture Workshop, Windhoek, Namibia ................ 33
Table 4.3 Attendees at the Scenario Workshop, Cape Town, South Africa Team
Leaders ................................................................................................................ 36
10
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Acronyms and abbreviations
DWAF
Department of Water Affairs and Forestry
EFA
Environmental Flow Assessment
EPSMO
Environmental Protection and Sustainable Management of the Okavango
River Basin
Ha hectare
HOORC
Harry Oppenheimer Okavango Research Centre
IUA
Integrated Units of Analysis
PD Present
Day
SAP
Strategic Action Programme
TDA
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis
11
1.
Introduction
1.1.
Project background
The origin of the project is described in Report 01/2009: Project Initiation Report. Essentially,
the project was an initiative of OKACOM, the Okavango River Basin Commission. Titled the
Environmental Protection and Sustainable Management of the Okavango River Basin
(EPSMO) project, it was approved by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), to
be executed by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). The long-term
objective of the EPSMO Project was to achieve global environmental benefits through
concerted management of the naturally integrated land and water resources of the Okavango
River Basin.
The project would follow a standard process used by all GEF funded International Waters
projects: an objective assessment - the Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis (TDA) followed
by the development of a Strategic Action Programme (SAP) of joint management to address
threats to the basin's linked land and water systems. The SAP would package initiatives that
address issues raised by the TDA and would aim to overcome barriers to regional co-
operation and thus help ensure that development of the basin would be sustainable and
equitable. In the case of the Okavango Basin, the traditional approach, designed for
rehabilitating degraded rivers, would have to be modified because of the near-pristine nature
of the river ecosystem. It was suggested that this be done by incorporating an Environmental
Flows Assessment as a major part of the TDA.
In 2008 EPSMO therefore collaborated with the BIOKAVANGO Project at the Harry
Oppenheimer Okavango Research Centre (HOORC) of the University of Botswana, to jointly
conduct a preliminary basin-wide Environmental Flows Assessment (EFA) for the Okavango
River system.
1.2.
Objectives of the EF assessment
There were two main objectives.
· Complete a basin-wide EFA of the Okavango River system as a major part of the
wider Technical Diagnostic Analysis. This would be done through several subsidiary
objectives:
o Collate all existing hydrological data on the river system and set up a basin
hydrological model that could simulate flows under various possible future
development scenarios
o Reach agreement with the three riparian governments on the scenarios to be
explored
o Bring together specialists in a range of relevant disciplines from across the
basin to share knowledge and data, and reach consensus on the:
relationships between flow and a series of biophysical indicators of the
river system
relationships of the condition of the ecosystem and social indicators
12
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
o Develop a DSS that would capture these relationships and produce
predictions of ecological and social change for each scenario that would
complement the macroeconomic predictions emanating from a separate
exercise
o Incorporate the EFA findings in the TDA document.
· Promote basin-wide communication and collaboration, and build capacity in
collaborative basin-wide Integrated Water Resource Management in all disciplines in
all three countries. This was done by appointing a full biophysical and socio-
economic team from each of the three countries, with planning, coordination and
training done by a Process Management Team.
1.3.
Layout of the report
Chapter 2 outlines the EF process adopted for this EPSMO-Biokavango project, and the sites
and indicators chosen. Chapter 3 introduces the team and Chapter 4 describes the timing
and purpose of the main activities. In Chapter 5 the work done by the specialists is outlined,
which culminated in their specialist discipline reports. Finally, Chapter 6 describes the
Decision Support System (DSS) built for and used in the EF process to produce predictions of
potential development-driven ecological and social change. This is an early report in the
report series and outlines several activities documented in more detail in later reports.
13
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
2.
Outline of the EPSMO/BIOKAVANGO EF process
The basic workplan for the EPSMO/BIOKAVANGO EF process was as follows:
1.
Divide the basin into homogeneous units and select representative sites.
2. Set up basin hydrological and hydraulic models and describe Present Day
hydrology/hydraulics for each site.
3.
Divide the flow regime into ecologically-relevant flow categories and produce summary
statistics for each.
4.
Visit sites and set up data collection programmes.
5.
Select indicators and collect data as appropriate.
6.
Develop three scenarios of future water use for assessment.
7.
Analyse data, review world literature and write specialist reports.
8.
Capture knowledge in the form of flow-indicator Response Curves.
9.
Set up the Okavango EF DSS and populate with the Response Curves.
10. Use the DSS to predict the ecological and socioeconomic outcomes of the chosen
water-use development scenarios.
The EF team comprised (see Section 3):
·
The Project Manager and Team Coordinators for each of Angola, Namibia and
Botswana.
·
An international process team.
·
Hydrological, biophysical and social specialists from each country.
·
Support staff for, for instance, GIS.
The process team was responsible for coordination of the process, review of the specialist
reports, set up and population of the DSS and presentation of the scenario outcomes. In a
series of team meetings and other activities (Table 2.1 and Section 4), the hydrological team
developed a basin hydrological model and prepared for scenarios; the biophysical team
identified biophysical indicators and sought for links with flow through field work, data analysis
and literature reviews; and the social team identified social indicators and the links with the
biophysical indicators. Country leaders coordinated the specialist activities within each of the
countries, including field data collection and report writing.
Table
2.1 Meetings and other team activities in the EF process
Date Meeting
Location
July 2008
Planning Meeting
Pretoria, South Africa
September 2008
Delineation Workshop
Maun, Botswana
October 2008
Field trip to each of the eight EF sites
Angola, Namibia, Botswana
November 2008
EPSMO Project meeting and OBSC planning Maun, Botswana
meeting for TDA and SAP
December 2008
Hydrological Model Familiarisation and Training
Maun, Botswana
January 2009
Basin Hydrological Modelling
Maun, Botswana
March/April 2009
Knowledge Capture Workshop
Windhoek, Namibia
April 2009
Okavango Delta Modelling Workshop
Gaborone, Botswana
June 2009
Scenario Workshop
Cape Town, South Africa
August 2009
EF output incorporated into TDA document
Gobabeb, Namibia
14
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
2.1.
Division of the basin into homogeneous units and selection of
representative sites
Scenarios cannot address every part of the basin of concern, and instead routinely use the
concept of representative sites. These are locations that, through a process of analysis, are
deemed to be characteristic of relatively homogeneous lengths of river or areas of the basin.
Data collection may focus on these sites, and the predictions of change are made for them
and then extrapolated to the full river length or basin area that they represent.
For the EPSMO/BIOKAVANGO EF, eight representative sites were selected in a basin
delineation exercise (Report 04 Basin Delineation) (Table 2.2), each of which corresponded
to a wider, socio-economic Integrated Unit of Analysis (IUA; Figure 2.1).
The details of the delineation are provided in Report No. 03/2009: Basin Delineation Report.
Table 2.2
The Environmental Flow (EF) sites
EF Site
EF Site name
Country
1
Cuebe River @ Capico
Angola
2
Cubango River @ Mucundi
Angola
3
Cuito River @ Cuito Cuanavale
Angola
4
Okavango River @ Kapako
Namibia
5
Okavango River @ Popa Falls
Namibia
6
Okavango River @ Panhandle
Botswana
7
Okavango Delta @ Xaxanaka
Botswana
8 Boteti
River
Botswana
Figure 2.1
The EF sites and their corresponding socio-economic Integrated Units of
Analysis (IUAs).
15
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
2.2.
Set up of basin hydrological and hydraulic models and description of
the present hydrology/hydraulics for each site.
A series of hydrological and hydraulic models have in the past been developed to reproduce
flow conditions observed in the Okavango Basin and Delta. In order to provide the
hydrological information required for the EFA, a suite of existing and new models were used.
The models were selected and configured to provide current day (baseline) and scenario flow
sequences at the eight EFA sites.
The models which were selected for use in the EFA are:
· Catchment hydrology: Estimates of naturalised (undeveloped) long-term runoff
were obtained from an existing Pitman-based rainfall-runoff model developed as part
of the EU funded WERRD project (Hughes et. al. 2006). The model was configured to
provide runoff sequences at the outlets of 24 distinct sub-catchments upstream of the
Delta.
· Systems Model: As part of this project, the monthly time-step WEAP systems model
was selected and used to configure a reference (Present Day), Low, Medium and High
Development scenarios. Inputs to the model include the undeveloped runoff
sequences for 24 sub-catchments produced by the Pitman model, irrigation scheme
and urban abstractions, in channel dams for irrigation water supply, inter-basin
transfers, run-of-river and storage based hydropower schemes.
· HOORC Delta Model: A semi-conceptual model which was previously developed by
the Harry Oppenheimer Okavango Research Centre (HOORC) (Wolski et. al. 2006)
was used to model inundation frequencies and extents at the Delta EFA sites. The
model operates on a monthly time step and includes a dynamic ecotope model that
simulates the responses of vegetation assemblages to changes in hydrological
conditions. Scenario inflows to the model are provided by the WEAP simulations of
basin runoff.
· DWA Delta Model: A MIKE-SHE / MIKE 11 hydrodynamic model which was
previously configured by Botswana DWA and DHI for the Okavango Delta
Management (ODMP) project (IHM Report, 2005) was used to model flow velocities
and depths at the Delta EF sites. Scenario flow sequences simulated with WEAP for
Mohembo were used as inflow sequences for the Delta model, after disaggregating
the monthly flow sequences to a daily time step.
· Thamalakane/Boteti Model: Delta outflows simulated by the HOORC model are
routed along the Thamalakane/Boteti system with a linear reservoir spreadsheet
model (Mazvimavi, 2008) to derive scenario flow sequences at the Boteti EF site. The
model was incorporated into the HOORC Delta Model and improved to provide
estimates of wetted river length and state changes of the system.
· Disaggregation and Hydro-Statistics: A custom utility was developed to
disaggregate the simulated monthly WEAP flow sequences to daily flow sequences, to
delineate flow seasons (dry, wet and transition) for each year of the 43 year long
sequences, and to calculate ecologically relevant flow statistics ("flow categories").
16
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
2.3.
Division of the flow regime into ecologically-relevant summary
statistics
One of the main assumptions underlying the EPSMO/BIOKAVANGO EF process is that it is
possible to identify ecologically relevant elements of the flow regime and isolate them from
the historical hydrological record (after King et al. 2003). Thus, one of the first steps in the
process was for the country specialists to identify these ecologically important flow categories
for the Okavango River.
The identification of such flow categories was started at the Preparation Meeting in Maun in
September 2008 (Section 4.1) and finalized in discussion with the hydrological team once
they had collected and synthesized the required hydrological data for the study.
On the basis of these discussions, the flow regime for the river sites (EF Sites 1-6) was
divided into four seasons (Figure 2.2), viz. dry season; transition season 1; wet season and
transition season 2 using the following rules (after Adamson 2006):
End of Dry Season:
2 to 6 x minimum dry-season discharge (site specific)
End of Transition 1:
First upcrossing of mean annual discharge
End of Flood Season: Last downcrossing of mean annual discharge
End of Transition 2:
Recession rate over 15 days < 1.0 to 1.2 m3s-1 day-1 (site specific) OR
downcrossing of Dry season threshold.
Wee
e k
e =
46
51
2001
51
25
34
)-1
s3
m
e
(
harg
on
on
i
o
n
s
e
a
s
o
n
1
i
o
n
s
e
a
s
o
n
2
eas
Flood season
eas
on
y
disc
y
s
y
s
r
y
s
e
a
s
o
n
r
a
n
s
i
t
r
a
n
s
i
t
r
s
e
a
s
o
n
Dr
D
T
T
Dr
D
dail
ean
M
Figure 2.2
Example of seasonal division used: EF Site 4: Kapako 2001
From these eight flow categories were selected:
1. Annual dry- season onset by calendar week number
2. Annual dry-season minimum 5-day discharge in m3s-1
3. Annual dry-season duration in days
4. Annual flood-season onset by calendar week number
5. Annual flood-season 5-day peak discharge in m3s-1
17
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
6. Annual flood-season volume in MCMAnnual flood-season duration in daysAnnual
transition 2: rate of decline.
Flow categories 5 and 6 were combined to create a single statistic called `Flood Type'. At
each site, flood types from 0 5 were identified on the basis oftheir peak discharge, their
volume and, where applicable, the extent to which they inundated the associated floodplain.
For instance, for EF site 4: Kapako, the following flood types were identified from the
observed hydrological record (Figure 2.3):
Flood Type 0:
Drought years, no inundation of the floodplain.
Flood Type 1:
Very low peak and volume; 60% inundation of the floodplain.
Flood Type 2:
Low peak and volume; 70% inundation of the floodplain.
Flood Type 3:
Moderate peak and volume; 80% inundation of the floodplain.
Flood Type 4:
High peak and volume; 90% inundation of the floodplain.
Flood Type 5:
Very high peak and volume; 100% inundation of the floodplain.
Flow category 8: Transition 2: rate of decline was later discarded because it proved to be an
unreliable statistic.
1200
Pr
P esent
en Day
1200
)
0%
)
c. 60
c. 6 %
c.
c 70%
.
c.
c 80%
.
c. 90
c. 9 %
c. 10
c
0
. 10 %
-
1
1000
s
10
s3
1
2
3
4
5
(
m
VL
L
M
H
VH
e
800
80
1962
19 /
62 3
/
600
a
k
d
i
s
c
h
a
r
g
60
a
k
d
i
s
c
h
a
r
g
2003
20 /
03 4
y
p
e
200
20 4
0 /
4 5
-
d
a
/
-
d
a
400
40
5
a
s
o
n
1999
19 /
99 00
/
200
s
e
20
s
e
1993
19 /
93 4
l
o
o
d
/
l
o
o
d
F
0 0
0
0
0
0
00
00
0
00
0
0
00
0
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Floo
Fl d se
oo
aso
d se
n vol
aso
ume (M
n vol
CM)
Figure 2.3
Floods recorded over 43 years at EF Site 4: Kapako. The flood type is indicated
The flow categories were used to translate daily-flow time series into ecological summary
statistics for each year of record. This was done by moving through the time series and, for
each year, sequentially recording the week of onset of the dry season, followed by minimum
5-day discharge of the dry season, followed by duration of dry season, followed by week of
onset of the flood season, the flood type and the duration of the flood season (Figure 2.4).
18
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Onset of d
ry
Min 5-day
y Q
?
)-1
Dur
D a
ur tio
a n?
tio
s3
(
m
e
Onset of flood?
g
ar
Type
y o
pe f
o flo
f od
flo ?
od
Limit of flood season
o
isch
il
y
d
Dur
Du a
r titon?
on
da
Slope of recession?
e
an
M
Figure 2.4
Ecological summary statistics extracted from the daily hydrological time series
The details for the selection of flow categories and calculation of the summary statistics are
provided in Report 05/2009: Hydrology Report: Data and models.
2.3.1
EF Site 7: Xaxanaka and EF Site 8: Boteti
For EF Site 7: Xaxanaka and Site 8: Boteti, the processes used to assess flow changes were
different from that used of the river sites. This was because hydrological time series data are
not particularly useful indicators of actual conditions at these two sites. A dynamic ecotope
model was developed in order to classify hydrological conditions in terms of hydro-ecological
functionality. The model is based on assumption that vegetation assemblages observed at
any given site change in response to varying hydrological conditions represented by duration
of inundation. Vegetation is captured using four functional classes: aquatics, sedges, grasses
and savanna (or permanent swamp vegetation, primary floodplains, secondary floodplains
and dry floodplains). Channels, lagoons and floodplain pools were determined as a
percentage of the main hydro-ecological classes. This was used for site 7.
For EF Site 8: A model representing the Boteti River between Maun and Mopipi as a quasi-
linear reservoir was developed. The model consistes of a surface water reservoir and a series
of 5 independent groundwater reservoirs each representing groundwater at a reach of the
river. The groundwater reservoirs are recharged from the surface water reservoir, and the
recharge occurs only to these reservoirs which represent currently inundated reach of the
river. Boteti flow changes were assessed using changes in inundation categories for the 200-
km stretch of the Boteti. The categories used were:
· inundated, i.e., flowing
· isolated
pools
· dry.
The details of the modelling for Sites 7 and 8 are provided in Report 05/2009: Hydrology
Report: Data and models.
2.4.
Sites visits and initial data collection
In October 2008, the process team (King, Brown, Beuster and Barnes) undertook a 17-day
trip through the Okavango Basin (Table 2.3). In each country, the hydrological, biophysical
and social specialists representing that country accompanied them. The trip had the following
objectives:
19
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
1. To familiarise the process and national teams with the study area, in general, and the
characteristics of the study sites in particular.
2. To visit the hydrological gauging stations used in the study.
3. To allow for team and discipline-specific discussion of EF data requirements and data
collection techniques.
4. To collect data.
5. To undertake a habitat integrity assessment (Kleynhans 1996) for each of the EF sites.
Table 2.3
Itinerary for familiarisation and initial data collection trip to the Okavango Basin
Date Day
Activity
10 October 2008
Friday
Travel to Maun
11 October 2008
Saturday
Travel: Maun-Popa Falls
12 October 2008
Sunday
Travel: Popa Falls - Rundu
13 October 2008
Monday
Travel: Rundu - Menongue
14 October 2008
Tuesday
Data collection: EF Site 3 Cuito Cuanavale
15 October 2008
Wednesday
Data collection: EF Site 1 Cuebe/Capico
16 October 2008
Thursday
Data collection: EF Site 2 - Mucundi
17 October 2008
Friday
Travel to Namibia
18 October 2008
Saturday
Namibia
19 October 2008
Sunday
Sunday - Day of rest
20 October 2008
Monday
Data collection: EF Site 4 Kapako
21 October 2008
Tuesday
Data collection: EF Site 5 Popa
22 October 2008
Wednesday
Travel: Popa - Panhandle
23 October 2008
Thursday
Data collection: EF Site 6 Panhandle
24 October 2008
Friday
Data collection: EF Site 7 Xaxanaka
25 October 2008
Saturday
Data collection: EF Site 8 Boteti
26 October 2008
Sunday
Travel home
2.5.
Selection of indicators and further data collection
For each biophysical and social discipline, the specialists identified the aspects of the river
ecosystem for which flow-related change were predicted, known as indicators. These are
items that respond to a change in river flow by changing in their:
· abundance;
· concentration;
·
extent (area); or
·
cover (vegetation only).
The indicators were chosen discipline by discipline, through an iterative process with all
members of that discipline. The process team required that no more than ten indicators be
chosen per discipline per site, although the overall number of indicators per discipline could
be more than that. Each discipline had a leader who coordinated discussion among discipline
team members and produced the final indicator list.
2.5.1
Biophysical indicators
The discipline-specific biophysical indicators chosen for the EPSMO/BIOKAVANGO EF
process are listed in Table 2.4.
20
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Table 2.4
Biophysical indicators used in the EPSMO/BIOKAVANGO EF process
Discipline Sites
Indicators
used
Extent - exposed rocky habitat
Extent - coarse sediments
Cross-sectional area of channel
Extent of backwaters
Extent of vegetated islands
1-6
Geomorphology
Sand bars at low flow
Percentage clays on floodplain
Extent of inundated floodplain
Inundated pools and pans
Extent of cut banks
7 Carbon
sequestration
pH
Conductivity
Temperature
Turbidity
Water Quality
1-8
Dissolved oxygen
Total nitrogen
Total phosphorus
Chlorophyll a
Channel macrophytes
Lower Wet Bank (hippo grass, papyrus)
Upper Wet Bank 1 (reeds)
Upper Wet Bank 2 (tree, shrubs)
River Dry Bank
1-6
Floodplain Dry Bank
Floodplain Residual Pools
Lower floodplain
Middle floodplain (grasses)
Upper floodplain (trees, rhus)
Vegetation
Open waters
Permanent swamps
Lower floodplain
Upper floodplain
7
Occasionally flooded grassland
Sporobolus Islands
Riparian woodland, trees
Savanna and scrub
Open water
8
Riparian woodland, trees
Wet bank
Channel: submerged vegetation
Channel: marginal vegetation
Channel: fine sediments
Macroinvertebrates 1-8
Channel: cobbles, boulders
Channel: rapid, fast flowing
Channel: pools
Floodplain: marginal vegetation
21
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Discipline Sites
Indicators
used
Floodplain: pools, backwaters
Plus for 7 Mopane woodland: pools
Fish resident in river
Migrating to floodplain: small fish
Migrating to floodplain: large fish
Fish 1-8
Sandbank dweller
Rock dweller
Marginal vegetation dweller
Backwater dweller
Semi Aquatics (hippos, crocodiles)
Frogs, river snakes
Wildlife 1-8
Lower floodplain grazers
Middle floodplain grazers
Outer floodplain grazers
Piscivores: open water
Piscivores: shallow water
Piscivores: and invertebrate feeders
Specialists: floodplains
Specialists: water lilies
Birds 1-8
Specialists: fruit trees
Breeders: reedbeds and floodplains
Breeders: overhanging trees
Breeders: banks
Breeders: rocks, sandbars
2.5.2
Social indicators
Social indicators were used that responded to changes in river condition, such as household
incomes from reeds, fish and tourism; potable water; and wellbeing.
2.6.
Development of scenarios of future water use
The water-use scenarios assessed in the EPSMO/BIOKAVANGO EF process are simply
ways of exploring possible management options. None of the scenarios, as laid out in this
study, will necessarily happen but they can inform negotiations on cooperative basin
development. The scenarios were chosen through an iterative process of discussion
between project staff, OKACOM and government representatives. The most important of
these meetings took place in Maun in November 2008 when two major decisions were made:
1. The scenarios would be development-based rather than sector-based. In other words
they would explore a progressive growth in water use through various kinds of
development, rather than exploring the implications of maximising basin-wide
hydropower generation or basin-wide irrigated crops.
2. The scenarios would represent three levels of potential water use in the basin: Low,
Medium and High. The Low water-use scenario would equate approximately to the
three countries' present short-term (i.e. 5-7 years) national plans. The Medium water-
use scenario would reflect possible medium term (approx 10-15 years) national plans,
and the High water-use scenario possible long-term (>20 year) plans.
It was also decided that the major water uses to be included in the scenarios would be
hydropower generation; agriculture, including irrigated crops and livestock; mining and
22
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
industrial; human demographics including urban growth and tourism; and inter-basin
transfers.
The details of where to place individual potential developments within the basin hydrological
model was done by the hydrological team after consultations within their respective countries.
Such a placement does not imply that the development will happen or, if it happens, that it will
be in the location indicated in the model. Modification of the site of a development, or its
design or operating rules, could affect the consequent flow regime and thus the predicted
ecological and social impacts.
The creation of a DSS for this project addresses this problem, by enabling many permutations
of development projects to be explored in terms of their ecological and social impacts, not just
the three created in the project.
2.7.
Specialist reports
In parallel with the discussions on scenarios, the specialists reviewed relevant international
literature, completed additional visits to the EF sites and analysed any available data to glean
relationships between their indicators and the flow/inundation regime. Each contracted
specialist then wrote a report, using a template provided by the process team. The purpose
of the reports was five-fold.
· To acquaint the specialists with what was essentially for almost all of them a new topic
and a new way of collecting and analysing their data.
· To help them develop a mindset that would allow them to create a realistic list of
indicators and analyse the relationship of each indicator to flow.
· To prepare them for the Knowledge Capture Workshop (Section 4.2) where they
would create Response Curves (next section) that captured their best understanding
of the indicator-flow relationships.
· To prepare them for the Scenario Workshop (Section 4.4) where they would assess
the prediction of impacts of the scenarios created by the DSS using their Response
Curves, and modified these predictions if necessary.
· To provide a permanent record of the present state of knowledge of the ecological and
social aspects of the Okavango River system.
The reports were submitted as drafts prior to the Knowledge Capture Workshop, reviewed by
the process team at that stage, revised after the Knowledge Capture and Scenario
Workshops, and submitted as final specialist reports in June 2009. They were not reviewed
again at the final submission. The Angolan biophysical reports were reviewed by an outside
bilingual scientist, Dr Sharon Pollard, who also wrote short summaries of each for use in
compiling the TDA Report.
2.8.
Knowledge capture and the construction of Response Curves
Response Curves are a means of capturing information and understanding, from in-depth
scientific data through international and national knowledge to local wisdom. They are
created by EF specialists with a working knowledge of the river ecosystem and its users; are
graphic and explicit with supporting explanations; and are amenable to adjustment as
knowledge increases.
In the EPSMO/BIOKAVANGO EF process, the biophysical and social specialists created
Response Curves for each of their indicators at the week-long Knowledge Capture Workshop
(Section 4.2).
The starting point of a response curve is Present Day (PD) flow conditions, which equate to
zero value for the indicator. Thus, in Figure 2.5, the circle represents PD median dry season
23
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
5-day minimum discharge (30 m3 s-1), and the value of the indicator under PD conditions,
which would be zero (0). A Response Curve is always zero at Present Day conditions. Other
information was also provided to assist the specialists, such as the standard deviation in a
flow category over the historical (present-day) record, and its historical full range of values
Fish
is Gu
G ild A
5
4
Present Day Median
3
Median
2
1
0
-1
PD
-2
Standard
-3
deviation
-4
Severity of change relative to PD
-5
PD Range
0
10
1
20
2
30
3
40
4
50
5
60
6
70
7
80
8
Dr
D y S
y e
S as
a on Minum
i
um Di
D s
i cha
c
r
ha ge (cumecs )
(Figure 2.5).
Figure 2.5
Example of a Response Curve template minimum dry-season flows in a year
Response Curves were created by the specialists at the Knowledge Capture Workshop using
the DSS Data Entry files, which provided them with, among other things, the opportunity to
assess how each indicator could change with time. They used this to calibrate the present-
day situation for that indicator (Figure 2.6).
Figure 2.6
Example of an indicator data entry sheet in the Okavango-DSS
24
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
The specialists followed a 13-step process:
Step 1.
Assign unit of change ( eg. abundance - for animals, area for sandbank, and so
on)
Step 2.
Define rate of recovery under a sequence of median years
Step 3.
Define rate of decline under a sequence of median years
Step 4.
Designate dependency on previous year end value
Step 5.
Set the Lag Period
Step 6.
Select relevant seasons
Step 7.
Select relevant flow categories within selected season(s)
Step 8.
Complete the Response Curves for the selected flow categories
Step 9.
Test extreme drought flow regime:
Step 10.
Test extreme wet flow regime
Step 11.
Test Present Day (observed) flow regime
Step 12.
If further adjustment still required, return to Step 9, and repeat
Step 13.
Move to next indicator and repeat Steps 1-12.
The predicted severity of the response of an indicator to a change level of a given flow
category was rated on a scale of 0-5, using a standard format (after King et al. 2003), as
described in Table 2.5. In the construction of a Response Curve, the impact on an indicator
of change in any one flow category was considered in isolation, that is, as if only that category
would change and the rest of the flow regime would stay at Present Day levels. This was
important because sometimes two or more categories of flow can fulfill a similar function. For
instance, both small and big floods may move sediment, but big floods may move more.
Thus a loss of big floods will not mean that no sediment is moved, only that much less is
moved. Similarly, a loss of small floods may not greatly affect sediment movement.
Table 2.5
Severity ratings used to construct Response Curves (after King et al. 2003)
Equivalent loss
Severity rating
Severity of change
Equivalent gain
(abundance retained)
0
None
No change
No change
1
Negligible
80-100% retained
1-25% gain
2
Low
60-79% retained
26-67% gain
3
Moderate
40-59% retained
68-250% gain
4
Large
20-39% retained
251-500% gain
5
Very large
0-19% retained
501% gain to up to pest proportions
An example of a completed Response Curve is shown in Figure 2.7. In total the specialists
created approximately 3000 Response Curves (e.g., 8 sites x 8 disciplines x 8 indicators x 6
flow categories = 3072 Response Curves), which were stored in the custom-built Decision
Support System.
25
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Fish Guild A
5
4
an
3
Medi
2
1
ve to PD
ati
0
-1
-2
ty of change rel -3
-4
Severi
-5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Dry Season Minum um Discharge
Figure 2.7
Example of a Response Curve the response of one indicator to minimum dry-
season flows in a year
2.9.
Set up and population of the Okavango EF DSS
A more detailed description of the DSS is provided in Chapter 6.
The Okavango EF DSS is arranged hierarchically. The main folder (1 OKAVANGO DSS)
contains nine subfolders and a file (Okavango Scenario Interface.xls), which is the summary and
information processing file. The nine subfolders consist of a Hydrology folder and a folder for
each site (e.g. SITE 2 Mucundi).
The site folders each contain nine files. Eight of these are data entry files: one for each
biophysical discipline (geomorphology, water quality, vegetation, invertebrates, fish, wildlife,
birds) and one for socio-economics. Data entry files are named according to a strict naming
convention by site number, site name, discipline, followed by `FINAL' e.g. Wildlife Site
2_Mucundi_FINAL.xls. The ninth file is a site summary file (e.g. SITE 2 Mucundi Summary.xls).
The Hydrology folder contains nine files: one hydrological file for each site (e.g. Site 2 Mucundi
hydro.xls) and one (Input hydrology.xls), which includes summary information for all sites.
Information is linked from the files in the Hydrology folder to relevant data entry file for each
discipline at each site. The site summary files gather the information together from the
different disciplines and provide the relevant biophysical information to the socio-economics
data entry file. All of the information contained in the Site summary files is also passed to the
main file Okavango Scenario Interface.xls.
The file Okavango Scenario Interface.xls therefore gathers together all information from all sites
and disciplines and provides various summaries by discipline and by site.
The specialists can enter data within their site level discipline file and view the effects of
different scenarios on their chosen indicators.
Scenarios can also be run and operated from the site summary file for that site and from
Okavango Scenario Interface.xls for all sites.
26
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
2.10.
Prediction of the ecological and socioeconomic outcomes of chosen
water-use scenarios
Once steps 1-9 of the EPSMO/BIOKAVANGO EF process had been completed, the
calibrated DSS was used to predict of the ecological and socioeconomic outcomes of chosen
water-use scenarios (Figure 2.8). In the DSS, for any one scenario, the expected daily flows
were simulated for each EF site for a 42-year period. These were then analysed to produce a
set of annual ecological flow statistics, e.g., dry season onset, flood season duration, and so
on. The Response Curves were then used to describe a time series of the response of each
indicator to the simulated flow changes (Figure 2.9), which was then summarized for the
whole flow regime and for all indicators to provide summary responses by discipline and for
the ecosystem as a whole. These were then used, again via the social Response Curves, to
describe the social responses. The outputs may be linked with the macroeconomic analysis
of each scenario (which is part of the wider TDA process) to provide the TRIPLE BOTTOM
LINE for each scenario (Figure 2.8).
FOR A
FO
NY SCENARIO
Macro-economic
IO
assessment
Hydrolog
y
ical model
Simulate
Simulat d
daily flo
y
ws
w
Ecologically rel
y
evant flow cate
nt flow
gories
Hydrauli
y
c chan
c
ge
Geomorph
Water
Biotic
(depths, vel
e ociti
o
es,
citi
change
quality
y
response
floodplain
(channel,
change
(vegetation,
inundation)
sediments
t
fish, other)
fish, ot
Social and resource
Ecosys
y tem impact
s
eco
c nomic impact
THE TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE
Figure 2.8
Process for assessing responses to flow changes for any scenario. The dotted
line represents procedures within the DSS.
Thus, the output of the DSS comprises the following:
· Time series of abundance/concentration/area/cover of each indicator for each scenario
flow regime at each site.
· Time series of household income, well-being and other social indicators for each scenario
flow regime at each site.
· Mean values of each of the above for each time series (end point for a scenario after 42
years).
· Discipline integrity for each site/scenario after 42 years.
· Ecosystem integrity for each site/scenario after 42 years.
· Social integrity for each socio-economic zone /scenarios after 42 years.
27
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Onset of dr
y
Min 5-day Q?
y
)-1
s3
Duration?
m
(
r
ge
Ty
On pe
y o
pe f
o
set of fl
ood?
flood
o ?
od?
flood
i
scha
y
d
Fl
F ood T
o
ype
y ?
pe
ail
Dura
Du tion
ra
?
tion
e
an d
M
Sequenti
Seque al
a ly for e
ly
a
for e ch year
ch
of hydrologica
year
l
of hydrologica ti
me seri
me
es
e
Response Cu
s
rve
rv s
e
Dry onset
Dry on
Dry Q
Dry du
y d r
u at
a ion
Flood on
oo
set
d on
Flood ty
Flood pe
ty
Flood du
o
ratio
od du
n
ratio
Dry sea
Dry
s
sea on response
on respo
Flood se
o
ason
od se
resp
ason
onse
resp
Response cu
Respon
rves provi
se cu
de s
d
easonal
easona response of
resp
indi
ind cator
cato
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
400
350
300
250
200
15
1 0
10
1 0
50
0
1 2
3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10
1 11
1 12
1
13
1 14
1 15
1 16
1
17
1 18
1 19
1
20
2 21
2 22
2 23
2
24
2 25
2 26
2
27
2 28
2 29
2
30
3 31
3 32
3 33
3
34
3 35
3 36
3
37
3 38
3 39
3 40
4
41
4 42
4 43
4
Figure 2.9
Summary of process in DSS for assessing time-series changes in one bio-
physical indicator in response to a scenario's simulated hydrological time series
Discipline and ecosystem integrity are used to summarise the overall change in terms of the
relevant biophysical indicators. This is done using categories from A-F that describe and
classify the condition for individual discipline and/or the ecological condition of a whole rivers
(Table 2.6).
28
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Table 2.6
Descriptions of the categories that are used to describe and classify the
ecological condition of rivers with their associated score in terms of Present
Ecological State (PES) (adapted from Kleynhans 1996)
Ecological
PES %
Description
Category
Score
A
90-100% Natural. Undisturbed. Also known as the Reference Condition.
Slightly modified from the Reference Condition. A small change in natural
B
80-90% habitats and biota has taken place but the ecosystem functions are
essentially unchanged.
Moderately modified from the Reference Condition. Loss and change of
C
60-80% natural habitat and biota has occurred, but the basic ecosystem functions are
still predominantly unchanged.
Largely modified from the Reference Condition. A large loss of natural
D
40-60% habitat, biota and basic ecosystem functions has occurred.
Seriously modified from the Reference Condition. The loss of natural habitat,
E
20-40% biota and basic ecosystem functions is extensive.
Critical y/Extremely modified from the Reference Condition. The system has
been critically modified with an almost complete loss of natural habitat and
F
0-20%
biota. In the worst instances, basic ecosystem functions have been
destroyed and the changes are irreversible.
An approach to determining ecological integrity is explained in detail in Report 03/2009:
Guidelines for data collection, analysis and scenario creation.
29
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
3.
The team
The EF team consisted of a national team from each of the three riparian countries plus an
EF process management team. To the extent possible, each national team was represented
by one or more specialists from the following disciplines: hydrology, hydraulics, fluvial
geomorphology, water chemistry, vegetation, aquatic invertebrates, fish, birds, other wildlife,
social and resource economics. The process team consisted of the EF process team leader,
a water-resource hydrologist, two specialists responsible for DSS design, technical
coordination and data management, and a resource economist. Overall project management
was provided by EPSMO and BIOKAVANGO project managers and by government
representatives via the Okavango Basin Steering Committee.
The full team is listed at the front of each report in this report series.
30
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
4.
Team meetings and workshops
The team meetings and workshop were organized according to a fairly standard pattern. For
the most part, outside of the plenary sessions when the whole team came together, much of
the work was done in three breakaway groups, viz.: hydrologists; biophysical specialists
(excluding hydrologists); and sociologists. Within each of these groups, further sub-groups
based on country or discipline were formed from time to time to undertake specific tasks. In
the biophysical group, much of the detailed work pertaining to indicator selection and
development of the response curves was done in discipline groups. In these instances, the
minimum complement for a group was one specialist from each country. Often, however,
these groups comprised three to five individuals.
4.1.
Preparation Meeting
Dates: 22nd - 26th September 2008.
Venue:
Maun Lodge, Maun, Botswana.
4.1.1
Purpose
The objective of the Preparation Meeting was to set the scene for the EF Assessment. To
this end, the basin was delineated into homogeneous units and representative zones and
sites were selected. Indicators were selected for social and ecological issues of concern, and
the flow regime partitioned into ecologically-relevant flow categories. Initial discussions on
the possible make up to the three scenarios to be analysed also took place. These scenarios
were then passed to decision makers and stakeholders for further discussion and finalisation.
4.1.2
Attendees
Attendees are listed in Table 4.1.
4.1.3
Activities
Plenary Sessions:
· Concept of environmental flows
· Overview of the TDA: EF Process
· Guidelines for data collection, analysis and scenario creation
· Identification of Integrated Units of Analysis (IUAs)
· Scenario
development
· Next steps in the TDA: EF process.
Discipline Group Sessions:
· Discipline-specific delineation of the Okavango Basin
· Selection
of
indicators
· Identification of linked indicators.
31
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Table 4.1
Attendees at the Preparation Meeting, Maun, Botswana
Discipline Angola
Namibia
Botswana
Other
Dominic Mazvimavi
Chaminda Rajapakse
Project Management
Manual Quintino
Shirley Bethune
Nkobi Moleele
(EPSMO)
Geoffrey Khwarae
Jackie
King
Cate
Brown
Process Team
Hans
Beuster
Jon
Barnes
Manuel Quintino
Andre Mostert Kobamelo
Dikgola
Gabriel Miguel
Aune-Lea Hatutale
France Tibe
Chandrasekar
Hydrology & hydraulics
Paulo Emilio Mendes
Matthews Katjimune
Kurugundla
Tiago de Carvalho
Penehafo Shidute
Dominic Mazvimavi
Piotr
Wolski
Helder André de
Geomorphology
Piotr
Wolski
Andrade e Sousa
Water Quality
Carlos Andrade
Cynthia Ortmann Wellington
Masamba
Vegetation Barbara
Curtis
Casper
Bonyongo
Macroinvertebrates -
Shishani Nakanwe Belda
Mosepele
Fish Miguel
Morais
Christopher Munwela
Keta Mosepele
Wildlife
Carmen Santos
Kevin Roberts
Casper Bonyongo
Birds
Carmen
Santos
- -
Dorothy Wamunyima
Sociology
Ebenizario
OBSC
Laura Namene
Chonguica (CEO
OKACOM)
Country Group Sessions:
· Site
selection.
Training Sessions:
· (Biophysical and Social Specialists)
o DRIFT, including flow categories
o Indicators
o Severity
Ratings
o Response
Curves.
4.1.4
Outcomes and deliverables
The Preparation Meeting had the following deliverables:
Report No. 03/2009: Guidelines for data collection, analysis and scenario creation
Report No. 04/2009: Delineation Report.
4.2.
Knowledge Capture Workshop
Dates: 30th March 4th April 2009.
Venue:
Safari Hotel, Windhoek, Namibia.
4.2.1
Purpose
The main objectives of the Knowledge Capture Workshop were:
Hydrological:
To further develop the hydrological models
Biophysical and social:
To develop the response curves for each flow category, for
each indicator at each EF site, and to calibrate the present-day
32
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
time-series of variations for each indicator over the last 40
years.
4.2.2
Attendees
Attendees are listed in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2
Attendees at the Knowledge Capture Workshop, Windhoek, Namibia
Discipline Angola Namibia
Botswana
Other
Project Management
Dominic Masivimbi
Chaminda Rajapakse
Manual Quintino
Shirley Bethune
Casper Bonyongo
Geoffrey Khwarae
Jackie King
Cate Brown
Hans Beuster
Process Team
Jon Barnes
Alison Joubert
Mark Rountree
Manuel Quintino
Andre Mostert Kobamelo
Dikgola
Hydrology
Gabriel Miguel
Aune-Lea Hatutale
France Tibe
Paulo Emilio Mendes
Matthews Katjimune
Geomorphology
Helder André de
Dominic Mazvimavi
Colin Christian
Andrade e Sousa
Piotr Wolski
Water Quality
Maria João Pereira
Cynthia Ortmann
Wellington Masamba
Carlos Andrade
Laura Namene
Vegetation
Amândio Gomes
Barbara Curtis
Casper Bonyongo
Macroinvertebrates
Belda Mosepele
Filomena Livramento
Shishani Nakanwe
H. Masundire
Fish
Miguel Morais
Ben van de Waal Keta
Mosepele
Wildlife
Carmen Santos
Kevin Roberts
Casper Bonyongo
Birds
Carmen Santos
Mark Paxton
Pete Hancock
Sociology
Rute Saraiva
Dorothy Wamunyima
4.2.3
Activities
Plenary Sessions:
· Concept of environmental flows
· Technical aspects of Knowledge Capture
· Analysis of flow regimes and production of summary statistics
· Layout and use of DSS data entry sheets
· Demonstrations of the development of Response Curves
· Uploading DSS data entry sheets onto specialists' computers.
Discipline Group Sessions (Hydrology):
· Model calibrations of hydrological/hydraulic consequences of scenarios.
Discipline Group Sessions (Biophysical and Social):
· Detailed explanation of data-entry sheets
· Finalisation of indicator lists
· Development of response curves for each flow category, for each indicator at each EF site
· Calibration of present-day time-series for each indicator at each EF site.
33
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
4.2.4
Outcomes and deliverables
The Knowledge Capture Workshop had the following deliverables:
Data: Finalised
indicator
lists
Data:
Response Curves for each biophysical and social indicator.
Report No. 05/2009: Hydrology Report: Data and Models.
4.3.
Hydrology Workshops
A hydrological working group consisting of hydrologists from the three co-basin states was
established to develop and populate the hydrological and hydraulic models for the river basin
and the delta and to develop flow scenarios. The activities of the group were as follows:
a) Planning meeting, Pretoria July 2008.
· Preliminary identification of hydrological working group members
· Draft schedule of activities
b) Delineation Workshop, Maun September 2008.
· Hydrological inputs to the delineation of approximately homogeneous lengths of
river and linked social areas and selection of representative sites in the most
important ones.
· Selection of modeling tools that will be used for providing hydrological input to the
EF scenario assessments.
· Identification of data requirements and assignment of responsibilities for collection
of the data
· Development of a work plan and programme for the hydrological component of the
EFA
Main Outputs :
· A set of hydrological and hydraulic models and tools to undertake the EFA
· Inputs to Report 3: Basin Delineation Report
c) Dry Season Field trip, Basin, October 2008
· Assessment of flow measurement stations
· Cross-section surveys at selected sites
Main Outputs :
· capacity building, field training
d) Model Familiarisation and Training, 1-5 December 2008, Maun, Botswana
· Review of Pitman based basin hydrology (Hughes, Wilks et al)
· WEAP systems model training
· DWA Botswana MIKE-SHE Delta model familiarization
· HOORC Conceptual Delta Model familiarization
· River site hydraulics training
Main Outputs :
· All team members familiarised with modeling tools
e) Basin Hydrological Modelling, 19-23 January 2009, Maun, Botswana
· WEAP Reference Scenario Configuration
· Identification of existing, proposed and planned water resource developments
· Construction of draft low, medium and high development scenarios
Main Outputs :
34
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
· Draft Scenario Description Document for review by country teams and OKACOM
· Configured basin reference scenario
f) Knowledge Capture Workshop: 30 March 4 April 2009, Windhoek, Namibia
· Configuration and testing of Low, Medium and High Development scenarios
· Use of custom software to delineate flow seasons
· Calculation of hydrological indicators
Main Outputs :
· Configured basin low, medium and high development scenarios
g) Okavango Delta Modelling Workshop: 20 25 April 2009, Gaborone, Botswana
· Review and refinement of the WEAP basin scenario configurations
· Configuration and testing of Low, Medium and High Development scenarios using
the DWA MIKE-SHE model of the Delta
Main Outputs :
· Draft final basin scenario configurations (subject to OKACOM approval)
· Calculated hydrological indicators for all scenarios and all sites
h) Other
Activities
· November 2008 April 2009. Country hydrologists consult with water resource
planners and managers to obtain development plans and hydrological data.
· December January 2009. Development of custom software for flow season
identification and calculation of hydrological indicators
· January 2009. Wet season site visits and data collection by country hydrologists
· April May 2009. Scenario modeling of inundation and vegetation changes using
the HOORC Delta model (P Wolski) and Boteti state changes (D Mazvimavi and P
Wolski)
4.4.
Scenario Workshop
Date: 8th 12th June, 2009.
Venue:
Monkey Valley, Cape Town, South Africa.
4.4.1
Purpose
The main objectives of the Scenario Workshop were:
Hydrological:
To finalise the hydrological team work
Biophysical and social:
To review the response curves in the light of the predicted time-
series of variations for each indicator for each of the three
scenarios at each site.
To summarise the predictions for the biophysical and
socioeconomic indicators for the three scenarios.
All:
To sign-off on the scenarios.
To discuss and summarise key findings and messages.
To identify major knowledge gaps
To obtain feedback on the process.
4.4.2
Attendees
Attendees are listed in Table 4.3.
35
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Table 4.3
Attendees at the Scenario Workshop, Cape Town, South Africa Team Leaders
Discipline Angola Namibia
Botswana
Other
Chaminda
Dominic
Rajapakse
Project Management
Manual Quintino
Shirley Bethune
Masivimbi
Geoffrey
Casper
Khwarae
Jackie King
Cate Brown
Process Team
Hans Beuster
Jon Barnes
Alison Joubert
Mathews
Gabriel Miguel
Piotr Wolski
Katjimune
Dominic
Hydrology
Aune
Hatutale
Mazvimavi
Andre
Mostert
Penny
Shidute
Helder André de
Geomorphology
Colin Christian
Andrade e Sousa
Maria João
Cynthia Ortmann Wellington
Water Quality
Pereira
Laura Namene
Masamba
Carlos Andrade
Vegetation
Amândio Gomes
Barbara Curtis
Casper Bonyongo
Shishani
Belda Mosepele
Macroinvertebrates -
Nakanwe
H. Masundire
Fish
Miguel Morais
Ben van de Waal Keta Mosepele
Wildlife
Carmen Santos
Kevin Roberts
Casper Bonyongo
Birds
Carmen Santos
Mark Paxton
Pete Hancock
Rute Saraiva
Ndina Nashipili
Sociology
Irrigation
Piet
Liebenberg
GIS Celeste
Espach
Ebenizario
OBSC
Tracy
Molefi
Chonguica (CEO
OKACOM)
4.4.3
Activities
Plenary Sessions:
· Concept of environmental flows
· Overview of the EPSMO/BIOKAVANGO EF Process
· Water-resource developments included in each water-use scenario
· Ecological interpretation of hydrological data: River Sites
· Ecological interpretation of hydrological data: Delta and Boteti
· Biophysical outcome of scenarios
· Social outcome of scenarios
· Overview of the summary outcomes for scenarios and key messages.
· Sign-off on the scenarios.
· Data
gaps.
Discipline Group Sessions (Hydrology):
36
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
· Finalisation of hydrological reports
Discipline Group Sessions (Biophysical and Social):
· Final review of Response Curves and individual indicator outputs for the three water-use
scenarios.
· Explanations for individual indicator responses to the three water-use scenarios.
4.4.4
Outcomes and deliverables
The Scenario Workshop had the following deliverables:
Report 02/2009:
Process Report
Report 06/2009:
Scenario Report: Hydrology
Report 07/2009:
Scenario Report: Ecological and social predictions
Report 08/2009:
Final Report.
DSS Software:
Full, calibrated DSS.
Powerpoint presentations
4.5.
Capacity-building and liaison sessions
The process management team leader, Dr King, visited the Botswana team in Maun on 13-14
November 2008 prior to a scheduled OBSC meeting. She held one-on-one meetings with the
following team members to discuss organisational matters involved in the EF assessment and
individual Terms of Reference:
· Piotr
Wolski
· Dominic
Mazvimavi
· Wellington
Masamba
· Casper
Bonyongo
· Keta
Mosepele
· Pete
Hancock
· Belda
Mosepele
Dr King also visited Luanda from 2-7 February 2009 for further training of and liaison with the
Angolan team. One-on-one meetings were held with the following team members on 3
February:
· Gabriel
Miguel
· Michel
Morais
· Maria João Pereira
· Carmen
Santos
· Filomena
Livramento
· Helder André de Andrade e Sousa
This was followed by a meeting on the EF social module between Dr King, the project
manager and process team resource economist on 4 February. A further two-day team
meeting at Mussolo Island revisited the concept and practicalities of EF assessments, and
addressed the activities to be completed in the wider TDA study.
4.6.
Okavango Basin Steering Committee and TDA Meetings
A joint EPSMO-OBSC meeting took place in Maun 17-21 November 2008. The main
objectives relevant to this project were the Okavango Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis
(TDA) and Strategic Action Programme. This was preceded by a two-day TDA Integration
preparation meeting on 15-16 November attended by:
· Chaminda Rajapakse
Project Manager
37
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
· Manuel Quintino
Angola National Project Coordinator
· Tracy Molefi
Botswana National Project Coordinator
· Laura Namene
Namibia National Project Coordinato
· Peter-John Meynell
TDA Integration/Natural Sciences Integration
· Jon Barnes
Socio-economics Integration
· Vladimir Russo
Basin-wide Governance and Policy Analysis
· Luis Verissimo
GIS and maps
· Hans Beuster/Dominic Mazvimavi
Basin-wide Hydrology
· Jackie King
Environmental Flows Assessment
· Dominic Mazvimavi
Botswana TDA Coordinator for HOORC
· Mawzi Mawzi
Namibia TDA Coordinator for NNF
· Daniel Malzenbender
NAP/SAP Consultant
The objectives of the OBSC meeting were to:
· revisit the priority focus areas for the TDA.
· formulate development scenarios for the EFA
· brainstorm the first list of initiatives for the Strategic Action Program (SAP), which is the
main output of the project.
At the meeting, the final decision on the nature of the scenarios was agreed, in a session
facilitated by Gary Forbes (Section 2.6).
The second TDA integration meeting took place at Government Park, Windhoek, Namibia on
6 April 2009 following the Knowledge Capture Workshop. Its purpose was to report back on
progress with the hydrological modelling and EF assessment; evaluate the draft reports
submitted by the discipline specialists; identify emerging issues; and outline specific chapters
of the TDA Report. Those present were:
· Peter-John Meynell
TDA Integration /Natural Sciences Integration
· Jon Barnes
Socio-economics Integration
· Vladimir Russo
Basin-wide Governance and Policy Analysis
· Luis Verissimo
GIS and maps
· Hans Beuster
Basin-wide Hydrology
· Jackie King
Environmental Flows Assessment
· Chaminda Rajapakse
Project Manager
· Manuel Quintino
Angola National Project Coordinator
· Tracy Molefi
Botswana National Project Coordinator
· Laura Namene
Namibia National Project Coordinator
· Lapologang Magole
Botswana TDA Coordinator for HOORC
· Chris Brown
Namibia TDA Coordinators for NNF
The third TDA integration meeting took place in Namibia in August 2009.
38
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
5.
Specialist activities and reports
After the field trip in October 2008, specialist Terms of Reference were finalised and the three
country teams began individual programmes of site visits, research, literature reviews and
data analysis. During this process, potential indicators were discussed by email, and final
discipline lists agreed on. Each specialist then wrote a report, to a set Table of Contents:
Chapter 1
Introduction and background
Chapter 2
Study area
Chapter 3
Identification of indicators and flow categories
Chapter 4
Literature review
Chapter 5
Data collection and analysis
Chapter 6
Flow-response relationships for all indicators
Chapter 7
References
Most draft reports were submitted in February or March 2009 and were reviewed as follows:
· The biophysical reports for Namibia and Botswana were reviewed by Dr King
· The biophysical reports for Angola were reviewed by a bilingual river scientist Dr
Sharon Pollard
· The socioeconomic reports were reviewed by Dr Barnes.
Feedback was provided by the Knowledge Capture Workshop in April. After the Knowledge
Capture and Scenario Workshops, the reports were revised and final versions were submitted
in June 2009. There was no review of the final versions.
39
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
6.
The Decision Support System
The Decision Support System (DSS) for the EPSMO/BIOKAVANGO EF process was created
in Microsoft ® Excel 2003 (SP3) using standard spreadsheet functions augmented with
macros written in Visual Basic for Applications V6.5 (VBA). The DSS was designed to store
the specialist-created Response Curves of flow-indicator relationships, and to use these to
predict the ecological and social outcomes of any development driven change in the
Okavango River's flow regime. Although only four were scenarios assessed during this
project (Present Day plus three levels of water-use development), the DSS as designed and
populated with data can be queried for any number of scenarios that affect river flow. In this
section, the structure and functioning of the DSS is described.
6.1.
Structure of the DSS
The files and folders making up the DSS are arranged hierarchically. At the top of the
hierarchy is the file Okavango Scenario Interface.xls. This is the only file in the top-level folder
1 OKAVANGO DSS. Once all the information has been entered in the data entry sheets, the
scenarios can be `run' from this file, and summary information and results obtained. The
folder 1 OKAVANGO DSS contains a subfolder DATA ENTRY SHEETS, which in turn contains nine
subfolders: one folder for each site and one for the hydrology. See Figure 6.1.
Figure 6.1
Top level of the hierarchy of folders for the Okavango DSS showing the
subfolders for hydrology and for data entry for each site.
At the data entry level, therefore, there is a hydrology folder (Hydrology) and a folder for each
site (e.g. SITE 2 Mucundi).
In the Hydrology folder there is an Excel file for each site containing the time series data for
present day and each scenario and summary hydrological information (e.g. Site 2 Mucundi
hydro.xls). There is also an Excel file containing summary information for all sites (i.e. Input
hydrology.xls). See Figure 6.2.
40
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Figure 6.2
Hydrology folder for the Okavango DSS.
Each site's folder (e.g. SITE 2 Mucundi) contains an Excel file for each discipline (geomorpho-
logy, water quality, vegetation, aquatic macroinvertebrates, fish, wildlife, birds, socio-
economics) and a summary file (e.g. SITE 2 Mucundi summary.xls). The discipline files are
named by discipline, site number and site name, followed by `FINAL' (e.g. Wildlife_Site
2_Mucundi_FINAL.xls). See Figure 6.3.
Figure 6.3
Contents of the Mucundi Site folder.
Hydrology and response curve files and folders are grouped in the folder DATA ENTRY SHEETS.
41
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
6.2.
Flow of information
The basic flow of information is illustrated in Figure 6.4. The site and summary hydrology files
pass information to the biophysical response curve files for each site. The individual file
outputs are summarised in the site summary file, and this plus some hydrological information
feeds into the socioeconomic response curve files. The socio-economic summary information
passes back to the site summary file, and the summary from all eight sites then passes to the
Okavango Scenario Interface.xls.
Summary data for -all sites
(Okavango Scenario Interface.xls)
Hydrological information
Summary results- each site
(e.g. SITE 2 Mucundi summary.xls)
Excel files of time
series for each
site
(e.g. Site 2 Mucundi
hydro.xls)
Excel files of response
Excel files of response
curves and time series for
curves and time-series for
each biophysical discipline
Socio-economics -each
-each site
site
(e.g. Wildlife_Site
(e.g. SocEcon_Site
2_Mucundi_FINAL.xls)
2_Mucundi_FINAL.xls)
Excel file of
summary data for -
all sites
(input hydrology.xls)
Figure 6.4
Flow of information through the DSS.
6.3.
Information processing
6.3.1
Hydrology
The primary input into the DSS is the hydrological information produced by the various hydro-
logical models used in this study. The hydrological modelling and indicators are described
elsewhere in this report and report series. This section describes the subsequent processing
of the hydrological data that prepares the information for the DSS.
A text file containing a time series of annual hydrological values was provided by the hydro-
logical team for each site and for each scenario. This was parsed into Excel and the infor-
mation pasted into the relevant part of the hydrology site file (Figure 6.5). For example, in the
file Site 2 Mucundi hydro.xls the simulated hydrological information for the Present Day
scenario was pasted to the worksheet MucundiPD and the high development scenario infor-
mation was pasted to the worksheet MucundiHigh (Figure 6.6). The time series information
was linked to a new worksheet for each scenario (e.g. PD and HighDev) (Figure 6.6).
Summary statistics (minimum, maximum, average, median, and standard deviations) were
determined for each flow category. The summary information was linked to a summary
hydrology file (Input hydrology.xls) (Figure 6.6), which contained this information for all sites.
42
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
STEP 1-Processing of hydrological information
Excel file of
input
summary data for
Biophysical and Socio-
Text files of time
summary
Excel files of
flow categories
economics data entry
statistics
series for all
time series and
-all sites (input
files
and change
flow categories
(e.g. Wildlife_Site
summary data
hydrology.xls)
levels
for each site
2_Mucundi_FINAL.xls)
for flow
categories for
each site
(e.g. Site 1 Capico
hydro.xls)
input time series
Figure 6.5
Summary of the hydrological processing.
Site level hydrology
file e.g. Site 2
Time series data parsed
Mucundi hydro.xls
from hydrology text file
into Excel
Summary
statistics
calculated
Time series data to
scenario sheets
Time series data to
biophysical data
entry files
Summary statistics
to Input
hydrolgy.xls
Summary statistics
to biophysical
data entry files
Figure 6.6
Summary of the hydrological processing showing the relevant sections of the
Excel files.
The hydrological time series information for each scenario (e.g. from the worksheet HighDev)
was linked to each discipline response curve file via a worksheet labelled Do Not Use (Figure
6.6). The summary statistics contained in the file Input hydrology.xls were also linked to each
discipline response curve file via the worksheet Eco-hydrology ranges. The summary statistics
provided the input value for each level of the response curve, such as the minimum level
43
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
experienced under present day conditions, the median level and the maximum level. Inter-
mediate values were determined between these levels, so that at least five levels were
provided for response curves (Figure 6.7 a). Where levels lower than or higher than PD were
expected under any of the scenarios, these were included as additional levels in the range
(Figure 6.7 b).
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.7
(a) The (minimum) five levels provided for the all response curves. (b) An
example showing an additional minimum level provided where scenarios were
expected to fall outside of the present day range.
6.3.2
Biophysical data entry files
In each site folder a file was provided for each discipline (e.g. Wildlife_Site 2_Mucundi_FINAL
.xls). This file contained a worksheet for each indicator (e.g. Semi-aquatics, Frogs, river snakes,
etc.). Each of the indicator worksheets contained a response curve for each flow category
(i.e. there would be seven response curves per biophysical indicator) (Figure 6.8). Specialists
could choose to leave some of these responses at zero, meaning that the flow category was
not relevant or important for that biophysical indicator.
44
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Figure 6.8
The data entry file for Wildlife at Site 2 (Mucundi), showing the worksheet for
Semi aquatics. Two response curves are visible: for Dry season onset and for
Min dry season Q.
Calculations happened in two season groupings: the Dry season and the Flood season. In
calculating the overall season's response of the indicator, the average of the responses to
each of the flow categories within that season was taken. As an example, consider the case
where only two flow categories were relevant (e.g. dry season onset and dry season
minimum 5-day discharge). If the dry onset for year one was calendar week 35 (hydrological
week 48) (left part of Figure 6.9). The specialist gave this a response rating of -2 (middle part
of Figure 6.9, top response curve). This would translate to a % loss in abundance of 38%
(top, right part of Figure 6.9). If the dry season minimum Q was 41 then a response rating of
1 is given (second response curve on Figure 6.9). This would translate to a % increase in
abundance of 11%) (see Table 2.5 for the relationship between rating and % change).
Thus the overall dry season response would be a loss in abundance of 13.5% (average of -
38% and +11%). Given that the flood season was considered not to be relevant, the overall
response for the year would be a loss in abundance of 13.5% (bottom right of Figure 6.9).
Thus, the value appearing on the biophysical time series for Year 1 is 86.5% of PD (bottom of
Figure 6.9-time series).
If the Flood season were relevant, then the calculations would take the Dry season
abundance / concentration just determined as the input into the Flood season calculations.
45
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Response curves
Calculations
Input time
series: Flow
categories
Hydr
y o week
e
48=
48 calendar week 3
ee
5
Output time
series:
Biophyscial
response
Figure 6.9
The input, series of calculations and time series output for one indicator (in this
example, Semi Aquatics for Wildlife) showing its response to Dry season onset (Dq)
and Dry season min Q (Dq).
In addition to the seven response curves for each indicator, there were various "modifiers"
which could be applied to each indicator (Figure 6.10). These modified if or how quickly the
indicator would return to median values after an increase or decrease, whether the indicator
was dependent on the previous year's value, whether there was a lag in the response,
whether there was a minimum or maximum that the indicator would reach, and whether
density-dependent modification was necessary.
46
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Figure 6.10
Modifiers available which could be applied to each indicator.
The response curve and modifier information was linked to calculations which determined the
seasonal response based on the time series of input flow categories. From this, a time series
of the biophysical response was created for each indicator and displayed at the top of the
worksheet (Figure 6.11). The time series response for different scenarios could be displayed
by clicking on one of the scenario buttons at the top of the screen (Figure 6.11). The
scenarios included were the Present Day and the Low, Moderate and High Development
scenarios (see Report 6 of this report series: "Scenario Report: Hydrology" for a description of
these).
Figure 6.11
Time-series of the Present Day biophysical response of Semi Aquatic wildlife.
The screenshot also shows the buttons to click to see different scenarios (red
circle).
47
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
The time series of abundance responses for all scenarios were summarised in the worksheet
Summary abundance. In addition, the Ecological Integrity rating for each scenario was deter-
mined for each indicator and for the discipline as a whole (see Section 2.10 and Table 2.6).
Summary integrity results were displayed on the worksheet Summary integrity.
6.3.3
Socio-economic data entry files
Only after the relevant biophysical responses had been determined could the socio-economic
time-series responses be determined. Inputs into the socio-economic response curve files
came from the site summary files (e.g. SITE 2 Mucundi summary.xls) and relevant hydrology
files (i.e. Input hydrology.xls and, for example, Site 2 Mucundi hydro.xls).
The basic layout of the socio-economic response curve files was similar to the biophysical
response curve files. However, most of the response curves were responding to biophysical
indicators, such as fish abundance, grass abundance and wildlife abundance (obtained from
SITE 2 Mucundi summary.xls) rather than to the flow categories. In addition to the basic
response (e.g. fish catch), the impacts on household income and contribution to national
income were also determined for each indicator, if relevant (Figure 6.12).
Thus, for all of the socio-economic indicators a score was available which indicated, for
example, the size of the fish catch (in response to changes in fish abundance), the size of the
grass harvest (in response to grass abundance), or the degree of impact on health and well-
being (in response to the turbidity of the water). In addition, for most of the socio-economic
indicators, the contribution to household income and national income was determined.
Contribution to household and national income was not determined for water-quality changes,
or for intangible, indirect or non-use values.
Further processing of the socio-economic information took place outside of the DSS.
48
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Figure 6.12 Socio-economic response curves for Fish catch and its contribution to
household and national income, together with the resulting time-series.
6.3.4
Site summary files
For convenience, the scenario abundance time-series and integrity results for all indicators
from all disciplines (including socio-economics) were gathered together in the Site summary
files (e.g. SITE 2 Mucundi summary.xls). All of the information in the Site summary files is linked
to Okavango Scenario Interface.xls. The relevant biophysical results for the Site are collected in
a worksheet ForSocEcon (Figure 6.13 the blue circle indicates the tab) which is linked to the
site's socio-economics file to provide the time series of inputs for the socio-economics
response.
All scenarios for all indicators and all disciplines can be run from this Site summary file by
clicking the button "Run Scenarios" (Figure 6.13 green circle).
49
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
The Site summary files thus provide a vital link between the biophyscial information and the
socio-economic information at a site and between the response curve files and the main file,
i.e. Okavango Scenario Interface.xls.
Figure 6.13
The front page of the site summary file for Mucundi (SITE 2 Mucundi summary.xls).
6.3.5
Okavango Scenario Interface
The biophysical abundance and integrity information and the socio-economics scores and
contributions to household and national incomes from all disciplines and all sites are gathered
together in Okavango Scenario Interface.xls. Time series information and graphs for all indica-
tors and all sites are gathered together per discipline. Summaries per discipline are also pro-
vided and biophysical discipline level and overall integrity scores are calculated (Figure 6.14).
Scenarios for all sites can be run from this file by clicking on the button "1. RUN
SCENARIOS". Graphs need to be updated by clicking on the relevant button (Figure 6.14).
50
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
0
OVERALL INTEGRITY
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
-2.5
-3
-3.5
-4
-4.5
-5
SITE 1
SITE 2
SITE 3
SITE 4
SITE 5
SITE 6
SITE 7
SITE 8
PD
LOW DEV
MED DEV
HIGH DEV
B to C
C to D
D to E
E to F
Figure 6.14
The front page of the site summary file for Mucundi (SITE 2 Mucundi summary.xls).
the circles ring the tabs which produce various of the outputs such as
Abundance time series graphs for all indicators all sites (red), summary
abundance graphs (blue) and integrity graphs (green).
51
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
7.
Conclusion
This report outlines the process and the DSS used in the EPSMO/Biokavango EFlows
Assessment. The process is complex, represent a new branch of management-orientated
science, and challenges all team members to approach their data and understanding of the
river ecosystem and its users in new ways. Three main advances should emerge from its
application. First, a body of knowledge has been captured in a DSS that will reside with
OKACOM and will be available to the three countries for exploring the potential advantages
and disadvantages of possible future water-use developments. The DSS is transparent
regarding the basis for its predictions of ecological and social change, and can be updated as
understanding of the ecosystem and its users improves. Second, three scenarios of possible
water-use development have already been created that identify areas of concern in terms of
potential ecological and social impacts. These can inform discussion and negotiation within
and between the countries on the level of acceptable basin development. Third, a body of
professionals in each of the three countries has worked together at the country and basin
level in what has been an ambitious capacity-building exercise. These professionals can
form a core of expertise for further work in this field at the country and basin level.
52
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
8.
References
Adamson, P. 2006. Hydrological Background and the Generation of Exploratory Flow
Regimes for the Development of the Impact Analysis Tools. Integrated Basin
Flow Management. Internal Report of the Mekong River Commission, Laos
PDR. 45 pp.
King, J.M., Brown, C.A. and Sabet, H. 2003. A scenario-based holistic approach to
environmental flow assessments for regulated rivers. Rivers Research and
Applications 19 (5-6). Pg 619-640.
Kleynhans, C.J. 1996. A qualitative procedure for the assessment of the habitat integrity
status of the Luvuvhu River. Journal of Aquatic Ecosystem Health 5: 41 - 54.
53
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
The Okavango River Basin Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis Technical Reports
In 1994, the three riparian countries of the
Analysis to establish a base of available scientific
Okavango River Basin Angola, Botswana and
evidence to guide future decision making. The study,
Namibia agreed to plan for collaborative
created from inputs from multi-disciplinary teams in
management of the natural resources of the
each country, with specialists in hydrology,
Okavango, forming the Permanent Okavango River
hydraulics, channel form, water quality, vegetation,
Basin Water Commission (OKACOM). In 2003, with
aquatic invertebrates, fish, birds, river-dependent
funding from the Global Environment Facility,
terrestrial wildlife, resource economics and socio-
OKACOM launched the Environmental Protection
cultural issues, was coordinated and managed by a
and Sustainable Management of the Okavango
group of specialists from the southern African region
River Basin (EPSMO) Project to coordinate
in 2008 and 2009.
development and to anticipate and address threats
to the river and the associated communities and
The following specialist technical reports were
environment. Implemented by the United Nations
produced as part of this process and form
Development Program and executed by the United
substantive background content for the Okavango
Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, the
River Basin Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis.
project produced the Transboundary Diagnostic
Final Study
Reports integrating findings from all country and background reports, and covering the entire
Reports
basin.
Aylward, B.
Economic Valuation of Basin Resources: Final Report to
EPSMO Project of the UN Food & Agriculture Organization as
an Input to the Okavango River Basin Transboundary
Diagnostic Analysis
Barnes, J. et al.
Okavango River Basin Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis:
Socio-Economic Assessment Final Report
King, J.M. and Brown,
Okavango River Basin Environmental Flow Assessment Project
C.A.
Initiation Report (Report No: 01/2009)
King, J.M. and Brown,
Okavango River Basin Environmental Flow Assessment EFA
C.A.
Process Report (Report No: 02/2009)
King, J.M. and Brown,
Okavango River Basin Environmental Flow Assessment
C.A.
Guidelines for Data Collection, Analysis and Scenario Creation
(Report No: 03/2009)
Bethune,
S.
Mazvimavi,
Okavango River Basin Environmental Flow Assessment
D. and Quintino, M.
Delineation Report (Report No: 04/2009)
Beuster, H.
Okavango River Basin Environmental Flow Assessment
Hydrology Report: Data And Models(Report No: 05/2009)
Beuster,
H. Okavango River Basin Environmental Flow Assessment
Scenario Report : Hydrology (Report No: 06/2009)
Jones, M.J.
The Groundwater Hydrology of The Okavango Basin (FAO
Internal Report, April 2010)
King, J.M. and Brown,
Okavango River Basin Environmental Flow Assessment
C.A.
Scenario Report: Ecological and Social Predictions (Volume 1
of 4)(Report No. 07/2009)
King, J.M. and Brown,
Okavango River Basin Environmental Flow Assessment
C.A.
Scenario Report: Ecological and Social Predictions (Volume 2
of 4: Indicator results) (Report No. 07/2009)
King, J.M. and Brown,
Okavango River Basin Environmental Flow Assessment
C.A.
Scenario Report: Ecological and Social Predictions: Climate
Change Scenarios (Volume 3 of 4) (Report No. 07/2009)
King, J., Brown, C.A.,
Okavango River Basin Environmental Flow Assessment
Joubert, A.R. and
Scenario Report: Biophysical Predictions (Volume 4 of 4:
Barnes, J.
Climate Change Indicator Results) (Report No: 07/2009)
King, J., Brown, C.A.
Okavango River Basin Environmental Flow Assessment Project
and Barnes, J.
Final Report (Report No: 08/2009)
Malzbender, D.
Environmental Protection And Sustainable Management Of The
Okavango River Basin (EPSMO): Governance Review
Vanderpost, C. and
Database and GIS design for an expanded Okavango Basin
Dhliwayo, M.
Information System (OBIS)
Veríssimo, Luis
GIS Database for the Environment Protection and Sustainable
Management of the Okavango River Basin Project
Wolski,
P.
Assessment of hydrological effects of climate change in the
Okavango Basin
Country Reports
Angola
Andrade e Sousa,
Análise Diagnóstica Transfronteiriça da Bacia do Rio
Biophysical Series
Helder André de
Okavango: Módulo do Caudal Ambiental: Relatório do
54
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Especialista: País: Angola: Disciplina: Sedimentologia &
Geomorfologia
Gomes, Amândio
Análise Diagnóstica Transfronteiriça da Bacia do Rio
Okavango: Módulo do Caudal Ambiental: Relatório do
Especialista: País: Angola: Disciplina: Vegetação
Gomes,
Amândio
Análise Técnica, Biofísica e Socio-Económica do Lado
Angolano da Bacia Hidrográfica do Rio Cubango: Relatório
Final:Vegetação da Parte Angolana da Bacia Hidrográfica Do
Rio Cubango
Livramento, Filomena
Análise Diagnóstica Transfronteiriça da Bacia do Rio
Okavango: Módulo do Caudal Ambiental: Relatório do
Especialista: País: Angola: Disciplina:Macroinvertebrados
Miguel, Gabriel Luís
Análise Técnica, Biofísica E Sócio-Económica do Lado
Angolano da Bacia Hidrográfica do Rio Cubango:
Subsídio Para o Conhecimento Hidrogeológico
Relatório de Hidrogeologia
Morais, Miguel
Análise Diagnóstica Transfronteiriça da Bacia do Análise Rio
Cubango (Okavango): Módulo da Avaliação do Caudal
Ambiental: Relatório do Especialista País: Angola Disciplina:
Ictiofauna
Morais,
Miguel
Análise Técnica, Biófisica e Sócio-Económica do Lado
Angolano da Bacia Hidrográfica do Rio Cubango: Relatório
Final: Peixes e Pesca Fluvial da Bacia do Okavango em Angola
Pereira, Maria João
Qualidade da Água, no Lado Angolano da Bacia Hidrográfica
do Rio Cubango
Santos,
Carmen
Ivelize
Análise Diagnóstica Transfronteiriça da Bacia do Rio
Van-Dúnem S. N.
Okavango: Módulo do Caudal Ambiental: Relatório de
Especialidade: Angola: Vida Selvagem
Santos, Carmen Ivelize
Análise Diagnóstica Transfronteiriça da Bacia do Rio
Van-Dúnem S.N.
Okavango:Módulo Avaliação do Caudal Ambiental: Relatório de
Especialidade: Angola: Aves
Botswana Bonyongo, M.C.
Okavango River Basin Technical Diagnostic Analysis:
Environmental Flow Module: Specialist Report: Country:
Botswana: Discipline: Wildlife
Hancock, P.
Okavango River Basin Technical Diagnostic Analysis:
Environmental Flow Module : Specialist Report: Country:
Botswana: Discipline: Birds
Mosepele,
K. Okavango River Basin Technical Diagnostic Analysis:
Environmental Flow Module: Specialist Report: Country:
Botswana: Discipline: Fish
Mosepele, B. and
Okavango River Basin Technical Diagnostic Analysis:
Dallas, Helen
Environmental Flow Module: Specialist Report: Country:
Botswana: Discipline: Aquatic Macro Invertebrates
Namibia
Collin Christian &
Okavango River Basin: Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis
Associates CC
Project: Environmental Flow Assessment Module:
Geomorphology
Curtis, B.A.
Okavango River Basin Technical Diagnostic Analysis:
Environmental Flow Module: Specialist Report Country:
Namibia Discipline: Vegetation
Bethune, S.
Environmental Protection and Sustainable Management of the
Okavango River Basin (EPSMO): Transboundary Diagnostic
Analysis: Basin Ecosystems Report
Nakanwe, S.N.
Okavango River Basin Technical Diagnostic Analysis:
Environmental Flow Module: Specialist Report: Country:
Namibia: Discipline: Aquatic Macro Invertebrates
Paxton,
M. Okavango River Basin Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis:
Environmental Flow Module: Specialist
Report:Country:Namibia: Discipline: Birds (Avifauna)
Roberts, K.
Okavango River Basin Technical Diagnostic Analysis:
Environmental Flow Module: Specialist Report: Country:
Namibia: Discipline: Wildlife
Waal,
B.V. Okavango River Basin Technical Diagnostic Analysis:
Environmental Flow Module: Specialist Report: Country:
Namibia:Discipline: Fish Life
Country Reports
Angola
Gomes, Joaquim
Análise Técnica dos Aspectos Relacionados com o Potencial
Socioeconomic
Duarte
de Irrigação no Lado Angolano da Bacia Hidrográfica do Rio
Series
Cubango: Relatório Final
Mendelsohn,
.J.
Land use in Kavango: Past, Present and Future
Pereira, Maria João
Análise Diagnóstica Transfronteiriça da Bacia do Rio
Okavango: Módulo do Caudal Ambiental: Relatório do
Especialista: País: Angola: Disciplina: Qualidade da Água
Saraiva, Rute et al.
Diagnóstico Transfronteiriço Bacia do Okavango: Análise
Socioeconómica Angola
Botswana Chimbari, M. and
Okavango River Basin Trans-Boundary Diagnostic Assessment
Magole, Lapologang
(TDA): Botswana Component: Partial Report: Key Public Health
55
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
Issues in the Okavango Basin, Botswana
Magole,
Lapologang
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis of the Botswana Portion of
the Okavango River Basin: Land Use Planning
Magole, Lapologang
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis (TDA) of the Botswana p
Portion of the Okavango River Basin: Stakeholder Involvement
in the ODMP and its Relevance to the TDA Process
Masamba,
W.R.
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis of the Botswana Portion of
the Okavango River Basin: Output 4: Water Supply and
Sanitation
Masamba,W.R.
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis of the Botswana Portion of
the Okavango River Basin: Irrigation Development
Mbaiwa.J.E. Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis of the Okavango River
Basin: the Status of Tourism Development in the Okavango
Delta: Botswana
Mbaiwa.J.E. &
Assessing the Impact of Climate Change on Tourism Activities
Mmopelwa, G.
and their Economic Benefits in the Okavango Delta
Mmopelwa,
G.
Okavango River Basin Trans-boundary Diagnostic Assessment:
Botswana Component: Output 5: Socio-Economic Profile
Ngwenya, B.N.
Final Report: A Socio-Economic Profile of River Resources and
HIV and AIDS in the Okavango Basin: Botswana
Vanderpost,
C.
Assessment of Existing Social Services and Projected Growth
in the Context of the Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis of the
Botswana Portion of the Okavango River Basin
Namibia
Barnes, J and
Okavango River Basin Technical Diagnostic Analysis:
Wamunyima, D
Environmental Flow Module: Specialist Report:
Country: Namibia: Discipline: Socio-economics
Collin Christian &
Technical Report on Hydro-electric Power Development in the
Associates CC
Namibian Section of the Okavango River Basin
Liebenberg, J.P.
Technical Report on Irrigation Development in the Namibia
Section of the Okavango River Basin
Ortmann, Cynthia L.
Okavango River Basin Technical Diagnostic Analysis:
Environmental Flow Module : Specialist Report Country:
Namibia: discipline: Water Quality
Nashipili,
Okavango River Basin Technical Diagnostic Analysis: Specialist
Ndinomwaameni
Report: Country: Namibia: Discipline: Water Supply and
Sanitation
Paxton,
C.
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis: Specialist Report:
Discipline: Water Quality Requirements For Human Health in
the Okavango River Basin: Country: Namibia
56
E-Flows EFA Progress Report
57
Document Outline
- þÿ
- þÿ
- þÿ
- þÿ
- þÿ
- þÿ
- þÿ
- þÿ
- þÿ
- þÿ
- þÿ
- þÿ
- þÿ
- þÿ
- þÿ
- þÿ
- þÿ
- þÿ