1. Law, Policy & Science
IHP-HELP Centre for
UNESCO
Cross Boundary
Water
Partnerships
Managing Borderlands: Engaging stakeholder
communities in decisions concerning sustainable flood
management.
10/2/2011 Prof. Chris J Spray

2. Background
• UK and devolved governments have recognised the need to
develop co-operative land and flood risk management
strategies in order to build resilience required to mitigate
the uncertain impacts of climatic, economic and societal
changes
• Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009 will require
development of a better science evidence base for policy-
making and increased stakeholder participation.
• Environmental management needs to develop new
methodologies that integrate a diverse collection of
stakeholders, with a diverse (often conflicting) collection
of expertise, practices and contested knowledge.
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 2

3. SNIFFER Flood Risk Management Conference – Edinburgh 10th February 2011
Tweed research: Dundee University & partners
Eddleston Water:
• Eddleston Water scoping study Environment Agency
• Eddleston Water restoration study
SNH NFU(S)
• Managing Borderlands (RELU project)
Tweed Foundation
• Scottish Universities Insight Institute
Gatekeepers of participatory management Forest Research
Cbec Ltd
Durham University York University Newcastle University
Nicole Archer, Tom Ball, Andrew Black, Mike Bonell, Brian Cook, Josselin Rouillard, Chris Spray, Alan Werritty
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 3

4. Eddleston Water Restoration Scoping study (July 2010)
• Improvement to river structure & habitats - failing
good status (WFD) - due mainly to
hydromorphological alterations
• potential contribution of “Natural” Flood
Management techniques – flood history
• and potential for multiple benefits & ecosystem
services (fisheries, biodiversity, diffuse pollution)
A total Catchment Approach, not just 2 Main drivers
•Output Recommendations:
• Plans for physical restoration of channel and
floodplain
• Proposals for interventions to achieve flood risk
reductions
• Value for money and priorities for action
• Stakeholder engagement
• Detailed monitoring
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 4

5. Characterisation and current status:
landscapes, habitats, ecology.
Sources
Pathways
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 5

6. Characterisation and current status: topography
Eddleston Water:
• a south-flowing tributary of Tweed
draining 69 km2
• fractured greywackes mantled with
highly variable covers of till, fluvio-
glacial outwash and peat
• annual precipitation: 850 mm (valley
floor)-1500 mm (summits)
• steeper slopes east of main stem =>
flashy runoff: gentler slopes west of
main stem => delayed flow.
QMED c. 23 m3s-1 , Q10 c. 38 m3s-1
• ideal exemplar of “source-pathway-
receptor” flood risk management
model
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 6

7. Characterisation and current status:
hydromorphology and channelisation
Roy Map
Main stem sinuous c.1750: but
extensively channelised by 1811
Minimal recovery since and main
reason for ‘poor’ WFD status
because of current
hydromorphology
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 7

8. Characterisation and current status: flood risk
Annual flood Return Discharge
risk probability period (yrs) (m3s-1)
QMED 2 22.8
0.2 15 31.7
0.1 10 38.1
0.05 20 47.1
0.02 50 54.8
0.01 100 63.5
0.005 200 73.2
Source: JBA Consulting 2008
Peebles
flooded
every 5-10
years.
Currently no
structural
Scottish Borders Council defences,
identifies 589 properties only flood
within SEPA’s 1:200 year warning
flood envelope. scheme.
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 8

9. Characterisation and current status: summary
• fails to achieve WFD ‘good’ status – because of ‘poor’
hydromorphology
• channelised reaches of main stem poor habitat (poor
mix channel types, lack riparian vegetation)
• highest runoff from eastern tributaries and rapid
increase in downstream bankfull discharge
• ideal exemplar for flood risk management measures
(source-pathway-receptor) no structural defences
Proposed measures: overall aim
... “to restore river and its whole catchment whilst at
the same time promoting livelihoods of those who
derive income from the sustainable management of
farms, forests and fishery”:
• improved physical habitat;
• reduction in flood risk;
whilst promoting sustainable management of farms,
fisheries and forestry, and recreational opportunities
Km
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 9

10. Proposed measures: locations and types
Selected groups of measures:
A: breach/set back embankments,
new fence margins, riparian
woodland, wet woodland, large
woody debris
C: re-meander channel, riparian
woodland
L: Reduced stocking density, tributary
woodland, floodplain forest
N: create ponds, wetlands, riparian
woodland block ditches, large woody
debris
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 10

11. Natural flood management: -
Influencing “sources” by intervention in the upper catchment and hill slopes
Extensive Groundwater monitoring with BGS
Planting up hillsides & river banks
Working with Forestry Commission Scotland
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 11

12. Natural flood management: Influencing “pathways” by interventions in the
floodplain itself
Breach in embankments could permit temporary
flood storage on left bank during high flow events.
Re-meandering opportunities.
Intensive monitoring programme
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 12

13. Socio-economic Opportunities, Constraints and Barriers
Interviews with key stakeholders:
• Organisations - Scottish Govt, SEPA,
Tweed Forum, Scottish Borders Council,
SNH, Tweed Foundation, Scottish
Water, NFU(Scotland), Scottish Wildlife
Trust, Country Landowners Business
Association.
• Interviews with five landowners (three
floodplain and two upland farmers)
middle-aged, male, long-term
landowners in the valley (>30 years)
with several sources of income.
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 13

14. Opportunities, constraints and barriers: institutional
• Legal constraints: EC Environmental regulation (Water
Framework Directive and Habitats Directives) operation of
statutory duties by SEPA and SNH;
• Land use policy: high quality agricultural land on floodplains
for food or flood control? Delivery of agri-environmental
schemes over longer time spans (eg planting woodlands);
• Land tenure: contrasting planning horizons for tenant
farmers, owner-occupiers and large estates – value of multiple
benefit measures (eg Coed Cymru project in Central Wales);
• Quality of science: nature of science evidence base crucial in
persuading land managers;
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 14

15. Opportunities, constraints and barriers: farmers
• understand aspirations and
land tenure systems of the
farming community – a real
opportunity and a threat;
• develop trust and a common
vision for aims of the restoration
programme;
• role of an intermediary,
independent stakeholder-led
organisation, with technical and
social support networks (Tweed
Forum highly valued);
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 15

16. Opportunities, constraints and barriers: farmers
• local expert knowledge must
be factored in to any planning;
• financial incentives must be set
at the right level – to sustain
farm units and to attract
engagement;
• long-term, guaranteed
contractual arrangements to
deliver focused outcomes;
• simplicity in any contractual
arrangements.
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 16

17. Managing Borderlands: – RELU project (Lead Newcastle University)
Linking the Eddleston Water and the Wooler Water
Examining how local communities can become more resilient and
adaptive to flooding in the context of the “borders” that exist between
institutions, between different knowledges (and access to knowledge) and
different stakeholders in England and Scotland, faced by challenges of
climate change
16/02/2011 17
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 17

18. Managing Borderlands:
• Professional & Stakeholder
knowledge
• Responsible Agencies in England &
Scotland
• Nations that share the Tweed
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 18

19. Length: 156 kms Catchment: 5,000 sq km
Tweed
Scotland (84%): England (16%) Mainly agricultural & valley towns
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 19

20. Partners: RELU Programme 2 (ESRC)
Newcastle University: Liz Oughton (lead), Andrew Donaldson, Dave
Passmore, Terry Carroll
Durham University: Louise Bracken
York University: John Forrester, Steve Cinderby
Dundee University: Chris Spray, Brian Cook
Tweed Forum: Nicola Bissett
Skills cover social sciences, flood hydrology, GIS, participatory mapping,
knowledge exchange, governance, wetland ecology, and stakeholder
engagement
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 20

21. Building on existing work of
Tweed Forum and partners
Bringing people together around Flood Risk
Management issues:
• Conflict resolution and future scenario
planning
• Sustainable Flood Risk Management;
• Research, demonstrations, pilots and action
TillIHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Flood management
Wetland Restoration Project Bowmont/Glen Slide | 21

22. Project Objectives
analyse existing research, and how
data is used (or lost) within
stakeholder groups, and relevant
management systems
•Incorporate local knowledges into
land management strategies
Facilitate knowledge exchange
between different groups, agencies
and across national borders
Use Q methodology to explore
options for adaptive management in
the face of increasing uncertainty
 Evaluate the effect of social
learning in and through the project
from feedback by partners
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 22

23. Timescales:
• Project started September 2010 –
14 month period
• Run as four inter-linked work
packages, north and south of the
Border (Eddleston and Wooler
Waters)
• Initial team launch meeting in
Newcastle - August 2010
• Team site visit to Eddleston Water
- Sept 2010
• Creation of knowledge databases -
Oct 2010 – Feb 2011
• Final Report to RELU November
2011
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 23

24. Background – Eddleston Water
Tweed catchment landscape includes moorland, forestry, upland livestock grazing and arable
farming
Salmon, trout fisheries and
tourism are important to the
economy
Administrative difficulties of
managing a cross-border river
Catchment is subject to complex environmental designations and rural development regimes
that make integrated management difficult.
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 24

25. Background - Wooler Water
Parts of the catchment suffered severe
flooding in 2008 and 2009
Climate change projections suggest more
severe weather in the future.
There is a need to increase the flood
resilience of the region.
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 25

26. Science-based estimates of flood extent
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 26

27. Methods
 Overall approach is to help stakeholders refine the problem of flooding from different
perspectives and experiences (I.e. not just the “science-based” estimates and impacts)
 Knowledge exchange will be facilitated through the Tweed Forum (the only organisation
working across the border to establish a network between English and Scottish stakeholders)
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 27

28. Methods
The project is organised
in four related work
packages:
WP1: Interrogating
existing knowledges
 Critical analysis of the
local evidence base for
adaptive flood risk
management
 Expert interviews
• Creation of data
inventories, and analysis
of accessibility to
stakeholders
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 28

29. Methods
WP2: Capturing the diversity
in ways of building flood
resilience
 Q methodology
 Informed by WP1 analysis
 Uses a mix of quantitative
and qualitative techniques to
study the range of subjective
positions on a topic
 Participatory GIS mapping
of wider local knowledge
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 29

30. Methods
WP3: Producing strategies
for building resilience in
land management
 Return to the expert
stakeholders with results of
Q methodology and
participatory mapping
 Aim to identify preferred
land management strategies,
informed now by a much
wider network of interests
and breadth of knowledge
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 30

31. Methods
WP4: Learning and
evaluation
 Elucidate and record
expert stakeholder learning
 Record social learning
taking place within the
Managing Borderlands
project team (analysis of
researcher diaries)
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 31

32. Outputs
• An assessment of impacts of Scottish
and English policies and practices on
Border communities
• Recommendations concerning policies
that stakeholders, managers, and agencies
desire or oppose
• Identification of local data needs and
perspectives relative to Scottish and
English governance
• Comparison of concerns between diverse
stakeholder groups and interested parties
• Workshops, research papers and
dissemination via Tweed Forum, RELU,
UNESCO HELP Basin network and other
stakeholder networks
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 32

33. Learning across International boundaries
Scottish Universities Insight Institute
Gatekeepers of Participatory Management
Dundee University and St. Andrews University, with Tweed Forum
Workshops and Field Visits
May 2011, and subsequent
Motueka River Basin, New Zealand
Fraser Basin, Canada
Tweed, Scotland/England
Dee, Scotland
Catchment NGOs and their role
interfacing between government and
society in integrated water resource
management
IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of Slide | 33