Content uploaded by J.G. Timmerman
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by J.G. Timmerman on Sep 05, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
Introduction to Monitoring
Tailor-Made III
Special Issue
J.G. Timmerman áW.P. Cofino áR.K. Turner
Monitoring Tailor-Made III is the Third International
Workshop on strategies and practices to design, imple-
ment and report monitoring programmes which render
information on aquatic resources. This third workshop put
emphasis on information for sustainable, integrated water
management. Integrated water management takes eco-
nomic, ecological and societal issues into account and
therefore requires information on the status of aquatic
resources in relation to the economic and societal issues.
Frequently, many individual data are available for all of
the issues. Nevertheless, policy-makers perceive the in-
formation available as inadequate. More integrated infor-
mation is needed to meet the needs and aspirations of
policy-makers. Four dimensions of integrated information
can be distinguished: integration of science, policy-makers
and the public; integration of different scienti®c disci-
plines in the domains of natural and socio-economic sci-
ences; integration on a spatial scale; and integration of
measurement and data-treatment methodologies within
the domain of the natural sciences. In this special issue, we
will focus on integrating science and policy.
Working towards sustainable solutions requires intensive
co-operation and communication between policy-makers
and scientists in a multi-disciplinary, and, where relevant,
transboundary setting. The paper of Harremoe
Ès and
Turner shows us that through the exchange of ideas, such
co-operation enhances the mutual understanding, and,
consequently, the support for solutions. Sharing of a
common problem in a `joint learning curve' eventually
leads to a better utilisation of knowledge and available
information. One crucial condition to make such co-op-
eration work is an agreed procedure and process to allow
involved stakeholders proper participation.
Monitoring is used to assess the quantity and quality of
water and is often linked to legal instruments to regulate
the use of the water body. Water quality criteria and
standards are used to evaluate the status of the water and
the results of water management measures. As Ward
shows in his paper, these criteria and standards have
evolved over time, but still they do not adequately consider
economic impacts or technological feasibility in achieving
chemical concentrations in ambient waters. With the
growing importance of water quality management, a good
classi®cation of waters becomes ever more important. This
classi®cation is nevertheless far more complex than a
single-sample exercise that determines whether the sample
measurement is either above or below the standard.
While the status of the water shows the result of water
management measures, ef®cient and effective enforcement
of such measures is not something that is often considered
by scientists. On the other hand, policy-makers do not
consider measurement and monitoring constraints which
can severely condition the `enforceability' of any chosen
instrument. These problems are highlighted further by the
growing importance of diffuse pollution and consequent
increasing impact of regulation in this ®eld. Accepted
monitoring practice is less suitable for the enforcement of
policy instruments deployed in this and other novel
contexts, as Russell shows us in his paper.
Closer inspection of these issues suggests that better
communication between and among scientists and policy-
makers is needed. Focusing on the multi-disciplinary ap-
proach within integrated water assessment, it appears that
there is a need for translation across disciplines. The term
`compliance monitoring', for example, is a way of keeping
up with the progress made in implementing policy actions
in the socio-economic sciences. On the other hand, in the
natural sciences, `compliance monitoring' is used for
testing against standards. Specialists in different ®elds also
have naive expectations of work from other disciplines. To
overcome communication mismatches, closer, and regu-
lar, contact is needed. Especially in information produc-
tion processes, communication is essential to avoid
inadequate information. The paper by Timmerman and
others provides a framework for the speci®cation of
information needs prior to its collection that can prove to
be a crucial basis for such communication.
Given the complexities involved in the reporting of
information produced by scientists to policy-makers,
indicators can help to simplify and offer signposts through
Published online: 2 October 2001
ãSpringer-Verlag 2001
J.G. Timmerman áW.P. Cofino
Institute for Inland Water Management
and Waste Water Treatment (RIZA),
P.O. Box 17, 8200 AA Lelystad, The Netherlands
R.K. Turner
CSERGE, School of Environmental Sciences,
University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
Editorial
DOI. 10.1007/s101130100026 Reg Environ Change (2001) 2:55±56 55
this communication process. Aggregation to the desired
scale can in particular be an important issue that is sup-
ported by the use of indicators. Next to this, the use of
indicators is frequently linked to the presentation of data
and information. Figures provide good possibilities to
present the aggregated data in a condensed format. The
papers included in this issue are written from a more
scienti®c point of view with the exception of the paper by
Seager, which takes a policy-makers' perspective. It shows
that, for instance, the indicator of `percentage of rivers
with good quality' provides useful information for policy-
makers. However, the indicator is an aggregation of a
multitude of data, which leads to the conclusion that the
use of indicators does not necessarily imply a reduction of
the monitoring effort.
Overall, it can be concluded that providing information for
integrated water management requires major changes in
the customary method of monitoring. It demands inten-
sive co-operation between policy-makers and scientists. It
also requires a multi-disciplinary approach that utilises the
expertise of various scienti®c disciplines. Such changes
cannot be achieved without changing the present-day
organisational structures and practices, together with the
development of a willingness to think beyond the narrow
technical approach.
Editorial
56 Reg Environ Change (2001) 2:55±56
