Climate Change Analysis

The goal of this study is integrate the process of climate risk assessment into the planning and management stages of investments in water resources over the Eastern Nile basin.

The overall objective of this study is to develop and operationalize an analytical framework for integrating climate risks into the process of investment planning and management of the EN water resources. The first task towards this objective, described in this report, is system assessment of the current situation in the Eastern Nile basin, including assessment of information, institutions, and infrastructure.

The overall objective of the study is to develop and operationalize an analytical framework for integrating climate risks into the process of investment planning and management of the EN water resources. Such analytical framework for Climate Risk Assessment (CRA) could be used to guide water related investment in the EN and form the basis for climate screening for investment project and provide guidance to the development of climate smart strategies.

The overall objective of the study is to develop and operationalize an analytical framework for integrating climate risks into the process of investment planning and management of the EN water resources. Such analytical framework for Climate Risk Assessment (CRA) could be used to guide water related investment in the EN and form the basis for climate screening for investment project and provide guidance to the development of climate smart strategies.

The overall objective of the study is to develop and operationalize an analytical framework for integrating climate risks into the process of investment planning and management of the EN water resources. Such analytical framework for Climate Risk Assessment (CRA) could be used to guide water related investment in the EN and form the basis for climate screening for investment project and provide guidance to the development of climate smart strategies.

Report of the Water Resource Analysis carried out under the Machar Marshes Eco-Hydrology Assessment Project supported by the German GIZ. It is a parallel study to the economic valuation study of ecosystem services and biodiversity of the Machar Marshes, and carried out in 4 phases: (1) Desk Study; (2) Baseline Assessment; (3) Water Resource Analysis (this Report) and (4) Workshops and Capacity Building Training. It collects all available datasets, data used in previous modelling efforts (e.g., BAS MSWRDM), and historic data and reports on water resource assessments to set up and run a hydrological simulation model to evaluate future development options and scenarios. The main findings are: (1) The MIKE 11 model has been dynamically linked to the MIKE SHE Model, so that the implemented MIKE SHE modelling framework can be integrated with the existing White Nile Equatorial Mike HYDRO DSS model, as a ‘proof of concept’; (2) the Machar Marshes have three mainland covers: permanent wetlands with deep water bodies, seasonal floodplains inundated by river spills and rainfall, and dry fringes (which include seepage wetlands); (3) each vegetation type has clear niche preferences in terms of flooding depth, duration, and timing, as well as timing and severity of flows during the dry season; (4) The hydraulic and hydrological niche preferences (outlined in detail by Sutcliffe in 2009 and modified for use here) and responses provide a direct link to water depth distribution across the floodplain via the hydraulic model outputs and can therefore be used to assess flow scenarios and their influence on wetland habitats and overall biodiversity; (5) Once calibration is achieved, the hydrological time series from the hydraulic model will be used to produce an output according to vegetation indicator preferences; and (6) the baseline model developed in Phase 2 (Baseline Assessment), and extended with the SSEA, will be used to evaluate the impact of six scenarios defined in the BAS-MWRD project on the Machar Marshes, and ecological responses described and quantified for scenarios relevant to the Machar Marshes. It concludes by recommending that, for cost-effectiveness and to generate useful data for monitoring and management of the wetlands, the bulk of the monitoring should be at the whole wetland scale and make use of satellite data as far as possible.

Report of an economic valuation of biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Machar Marshes wetland to inform green infrastructure planning and development in the face of in situ and ex-situ development interventions. It found that the Machar Marshes wetland provides key provisioning and regulating ecosystem services that directly and indirectly support the livelihood of the local community. Land use land cover (LULC) analysis showed that tree cover and grass land cover show a decreasing trend while crop land, grassland, herbaceous cover, shrub land, shrub land herbaceous cover and flooded tree cover show an increasing trend. The study concluded that the Machar Marshes wetland provides an estimated economic value of USD 622 million per year, of which USD 351.8 million is from provisioning services (i.e. basic economic activities that the local community relies such as crop production, timber production, papyrus harvesting, fishing and so on); USD 262.8 million are from regulating services (carbon sequestration, sediment retention, flood attenuation); and USD 7.3 million from biodiversity ecosystem services. To maintain, conserve and restore Machar Marshes wetland the study recommends (1) conservation options - conservation of the foothills and floodplain of the wetland, restoration of the permanent wetland and maintenance of water inflows to the wetland; (2) collaboration - all key stakeholders should work together to ensure sustainable ecosystem service of the Machar wetland; (3) fast-tracking of sustainable wetland management – by (A) creating awareness about sustainable management of wetlands resources and ecosystems; (B) considering the economic value of the wetland ecosystem services in decision-making (since development processes rely directly on these services); (C) coordinating key stakeholders with strong institutional arrangements, to support conservation and sustainable development options; and (D) introducing incentivized community-based wetland management initiatives, especially in foothill and floodplain areas, to promote conservation options and improve wetland ecosystem services.