Assessment objectives

The objectives of the biodiversity and ecosystem services assessment at each site was to provide information (along with livelihood and policy assessments) to inform action plan development (aimed at each sites specific aquatic resource management issues).

Mandate for the assessment

The HighARCS project was funded by the European Community FP7 HighARCS (Highland Aquatic Resources Conservation and Sustainable Development) project [Contract No: 213015]. Publications from this project reflect the authors’ views, and the European Community is not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained herein.

Conceptual framework and/or methodology used for the assessment

Other (please specify)

Ecosystem service assessment methodology used was a 'participatory valuation technique' (i.e. not economic), as outlined in the IUCN Integrated Wetland Assessment Toolkit (IWAT)

URL or copy of conceptual framework developed or adapted

Wetland Resource Action Planning (WRAP) Toolkit webpage: http://www.wraptoolkit.org/ Integrated Wetland Assessment (IWAT) Toolkit webpage: www.iucn.org/species/IWAToolkit/ Entire IWAT report (pdf): http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/2009-015.pdf Ecosystem service assessment/valuation chapter - https://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/iwa_toolkit_chapter_5_lowres.pdf Biodiversity assessment chapter - https://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/iwa_toolkit_chapter_3_lowres.pdf

Springate-Baginski, O., Allen, D. and Darwall, W.R.T. (eds.) 2009. An Integrated Wetland Assessment Toolkit: A guide to good practice. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN and Cambridge, UK: IUCN Species Programme. xv+144p
IUCN_IWAT_toolkit_lowres.pdf

System(s) assessed

• Inland water

Species groups assessed

Fish, odonata, molluscs, plants

Provisioning

• Food
• Water
• Medicinal resources

Regulating

• Moderation of extreme events
• Regulation of water flows
• Regulation of water quality
• Waste treatment
• Erosion prevention

Supporting Services/Functions

• Habitat maintenance
• Nutrient cycling

Cultural Services

• Recreation and tourism

Drivers of change in systems and services

Yes

Impacts of change in services on human well-being

Yes

Options for responding/interventions to the trends observed

Yes

Explicit consideration of the role of biodiversity in the systems and services covered by the assessment

Yes

Year assessment started

2010

Year assessment finished

2011

If ongoing, year assessment is anticipated to finish

Periodicity of assessment

Unknown

Website(s)

http://www.wraptoolkit.org

Bunting, S.W., K.G. Smith, S. Lund, S. Punch, M.P. Bimbao, M.D. Saucelo and D.A. Santos. 2013. Wetland Resources Action Planning (WRAP) toolkit: an integrated action planning toolkit to conserve aquatic resources and biodiversity by promoting sustainable use.

Report(s)

HighARCS. 2013. Summary of ecosystem services and biodiversity assessments at the HighARCS sites
HighARCS_summary_of_ecosystem_services_and_biodiversity_assessments.pdf

Nguyen, T.D.P., Nguyen T.H.T., Do, V.T., Nguyen, T.T. and Nguyen, H.D. 2011. Freshwater ecosystem services and biodiversity values of Phu Yen District, Son La, Viet Nam. HighARCS Project Work Package 3 report. Research Institute for Aquaculture No.1, Viet Nam.
Freshwater_ecosystem_services_and_biodiversity_values_at_Phu_Yen_District_Son_La_Viet_Nam.pdf

Nguyen, T.D.P., Nguyen T.H.T., Do, V.T., Nguyen, T.T. and Nguyen, H.D. 2011. Freshwater ecosystem services and biodiversity values of the Dakrong River, Quang Tri, Viet Nam. HighARCS Project Work Package 3 report. Research Institute for Aquaculture No.1, Viet Nam.
Freshwater_ecosystem_services_and_biodiversity_values_of_the_Dakrong_River_Quang_Tri_Viet_Nam.pdf

Pal, M. and Kundu, N. 2011. Freshwater ecosystem services and biodiversity values at Nainital, Uttrakhand. HighARCS Project Work Package 3 report. Centre For Environmental Management And Participatory Development, and Institute Of Environmental Studies And Wetland Management, Kolkata, India.
Freshwater_ecosystem_services_and_biodiversity_values_at_Nainital_Uttrakhand_India.pdf

Ray, D. and Mishra, R. 2011. Freshwater ecosystem services and biodiversity values at Buxa, West Bengal. HighARCS project Work Package 3 report. Centre for the Development of Human Initiatives, Jalpaiguri, India.
Freshwater_ecosystem_services_and_biodiversity_values_at_Buxa_West_Bengal_India.pdf

Shiming, L., Kunzheng, C., Huihong, Z., Ke, C., Lian, G., Jinghua, F., Xueying, Z., Xiaoli, T., Jia’en, Z., Yanqong, Y., Huashou, L. and Hongzhi, H. 2011. Freshwater ecosystem services and biodiversity values of the Beijiang River, China. HighARCS Project, Work Package 3 report. South China Agricultural University.
Freshwater_ecosystem_services_and_biodiversity_values_of_the_Beijiang_River_China.pdf

Communication materials (e.g. brochure, presentations, posters, audio-visual media)

See ‘HighARCS Project Outputs’ section on the WRAP toolkit website on www.wraptoolkit.org

Journal publications

Training materials

Bunting, S.W., K.G. Smith, S. Lund, S. Punch, M.P. Bimbao, M.D. Saucelo and D.A. Santos. 2013. Wetland Resources Action Planning (WRAP) toolkit: an integrated action planning toolkit to conserve aquatic resources and biodiversity by promoting sustainable use. www.wraptoolkit.org

Springate-Baginski, O., Allen, D. and Darwall, W.R.T. (eds.) 2009. An Integrated Wetland Assessment Toolkit: A guide to good practice. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN and Cambridge, UK: IUCN Species Programme. xv+144p
IUCN_IWAT_toolkit_lowres.pdf

Other documents/outputs

Bunting, S.W., K.G. Smith, S. Lund, S. Punch, M.P. Bimbao, M.D. Saucelo and D.A. Santos. 2013. Wetland Resources Action Planning (WRAP) toolkit: an integrated action planning toolkit to conserve aquatic resources and biodiversity by promoting sustainable use. http://www.wraptoolkit.org/

Tools and approaches used in the assessment

• Indicators
• Economic valuation
• Social (non-monetary) valuation

Process used for stakeholder engagement in the assessment process and which component

Stakeholders were identified at each site, by in country project partners before the assessment work began, using a participatory approach. HighARCS used various tools such as stakeholder workshops, focus group discussions, household interviews, village biodiversity mapping, participatory ecosystem services assessments, and Stakeholder Delphi consultations. Also various communication tools were used such as flagship species , policy briefs, local newspaper articles, posters etc. See individual site reports (above), and results sections of the HighARCS website, for the processes of how stakeholder groups were identified and engaged with.

Key stakeholder groups engaged

The main aim of the HighARCS project were the development of individual site Integrated Action Plans. Therefore the stakeholder groups included those who are directly dependent on aquatic resources for the livelihood, food and household needs (e.g. local communities, fishers, farmers), those whose social or economic activities are directly affecting (positive or negative) the quality of ecosystem services (e.g. industry, community groups), those who are responsible in regulating access and use of the aquatic ecosystem and related ecosystems (e.g. policy makers at all levels including state/government agencies). See individual site reports (above) for the stakeholder groups that were identified and engaged with. www.higharcs.org

The number of people directly involved in the assessment process

10-100

Incorporation of scientific and other types of knowledge

• Resource experts (e.g. foresters etc)
• Traditional/local knowledge

Supporting documentation for specific approaches, methodology or criteria developed and/or used to integrate knowledge systems into the assessment

See the HighARCS website (www.higharcs.org/www.wraptoolkit.org) for tools and approaches taken to engage with stakeholders and integrated their knowledge into the assessments and resulting action plans.

Assessment reports peer reviewed

No

Accessibility of data used in assessment

Data can be accessed through the HighARCS website (www.higharcs.org/www.wraptoolkit.org)

Impacts the assessment has had on policy and/or decision making, as evidenced through policy references and actions

The assessment work, in combination with participatory applications of the SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time bound) method for ranking of activities; feasibility studies of activities using STEPS (social, technical, environmental, political and sustainability) and SWOT analyses (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) has informed the development of Integrated Action Plans (IAPs) at each site. A DPSIR (Drivers, Pressures, State, Impacts, & Responses) framework has been applied to each IAP, to summarise and assess the drivers/threats to ecosystem services and human well-being, and the IAP responses. The DPSIR framework also allows for strengths and weaknesses of the IAPs to be identified.

The IAPs are currently (as of 2013) being implemented by stakeholders at each site, and the results of the monitoring of actions are not yet available.

Bunting, S.W. 2012. An introduction to the HighARCS Integrated Action Plans, with a livelihoods perspective. Deliverable 4.2 for the HighARCS project.
HighARCS_site_action_plans_DPSIR_framework_analysis_livelihoods_perspective.pdf

IUCN. 2012. An introduction to the HighARCS Integrated Action Plans, with a conservation perspective. Deliverable 3.2 for the HighARCS project.
HighARCS_site_action_plans_DPSIR_framework_analysis.pdf

Kundu, N., Pal, M., Shaw, S. and Bhattacharya, M. 2012. HighARCS report on Integrated Action Plan for Nainital, India. Institute of Environmental Studies and Wetland Management, India, and Centre for Environmental Management and Participatory Development, India.
HighARCS_site_action_plans_Nainital_India.pdf

Lund, S. 2012. An introduction to the HighARCS Integrated Action Plans, with a institutions, policies and conflicts perspective. Deliverable 5.3 for the HighARCS project.
HighARCS_site_action_plans_DPSIR_framework_analysis_policy_perspective.pdf

Mishra, R. and Ray, D. 2011. HighARCS report on Integrated Action Plan for Buxa, India. Centre for the Development of Human Initiatives,
HighARCS_site_action_plans_Buxa_India.pdf

Nguyen, P.T.D. et al. 2012. HighARCS Integrated Action Planning for Phu Yen District study site, Son La Province, Vietnam. Research Institute for Aquaculture, No.1, Viet Nam.
HighARCS_site_action_plans_Son_La_Viet_Nam.pdf

Nguyen, P.T.D. et al. 2012. HighARCS Integrated Action Planning for the Dakrong District study site, Quang Tri Province, Vietnam. Research Institute for Aquaculture, No.1, Viet Nam.
HighARCS_site_action_plans_Quang_Tri__Viet_Nam.pdf

Shiming et al. 2012. HighARCS report on Integrated Action Plan for conservation and sustainable use of aquatic resources in Beijiang River, China. South China Agricultural University, China.
HighARCS_site_action_plans_Beijiang_China.pdf

Independent or other review on policy impact of the assessment

No

Lessons learnt for future assessments from these reviews

Lessons learnt from the HighARCS project, including the assessment phase are made available through the project website (www.higharcs.org/www.wraptoolkit.org)

Capacity building needs identified during the assessment

The results of the HighARCS assessments (including ecosystem services, biodiversity, livelihoods and policy) informed the development of integrated action plans for each site. Many of the actions proposed are to build capacity of relevant stakeholders with the overall aim of improving the sustainable use and conservation of aquatic resources at each. See each sites IAP report (above).

Actions taken by the assessment to build capacity

Network and sharing experiences, Sharing of data/repatriation of data, Workshops, Formal training, Communication and awareness raising

How have gaps in capacity been communicated to the different stakeholders

Communication strategies are different for each site and often for each stakeholder group. See the separate HighARCS site IAP reports (above) for details on communication and engagement with stakeholders related to capacity building.

Gaps in knowledge identified from the assessment

The results of the HighARCS assessments (including ecosystem services, biodiversity, livelihoods and policy) informed the development of integrated action plans for each site. Some of the actions proposed are to fill gaps in knowledge, for example through additional monitoring and survey work. See each sites IAP report (above).

How gaps in knowledge have been communicated to the different stakeholders

Communication strategies are different for each site and often for each stakeholder group. See the separate HighARCS site IAP reports (above) for details on communication and engagement with stakeholders.