Case study:NERETVA RIVER CORRIDOR – TWO CASE STUDIES OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES VALUATIONS

From RESTORE
Jump to: navigation, search
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
Approve case study

 

0.00
(0 votes)


To discuss or comment on this case study, please use the discussion page.


Location: 43° 18' 41", 17° 49' 53"
Edit location
Loading map...
Left click to look around in the map, and use the wheel of your mouse to zoom in and out.


Project overview

Edit project overview
Status Complete
Project web site
Themes Economic aspects
Country Bosnia and Herzegovina
Main contact forename Semra Fejzibegović
Main contact surname Branko Vučijak
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation HEIS Sarajevo
Contact organisation web site http://www.heis.com.ba
Partner organisations
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
This case study hasn’t got a picture, you can add one by editing the project overview.

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


First economic valuations of ecosystem services in B&H have been performed within WWF Project “Living Neretva” for two different ecosystems in Neretva river corridor, during 2010-2011: • Pilot study - Hutovo Blato Wetland and • Bilećko jezero (Bileća Lake). Hutovo Blato is a unique Mediterranean wetland in the delta of the Neretva River, which extends to 7,441 ha and in 2001 was registered in the list of Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Convention). Bileća lake, on the river Trebišnjica, is the largest artificial reservoir in the Balkans, lake area is about 33 km2, depending on water levels. It was made for the purpose of hydropower production and is managed by "Hydropower Plant on Trebišnjica". Developing and ensuring the bottom up and top down approaches and their combinations through stakeholder dialogue is a solution to address these water management problems, existing ecosystem services or their enhancement. Giving way to democratic solutions through implementation of future project activities in relation to giving examples of undertaking of river restoration actions as best practices, should create favorable conditions for a dialogue at all levels and should facilitate public participation in decision-making, including the local level, where most action takes place, thus building trust, ensuring ownership and improving cooperation.

It is crucial to integrate nature conservation aspects into the existing hydropower system and apply the relevant EU directives and modern standards before further hydropower development on the Neretva River.

WWF is committed to implementing the principles of integrated water management in the Neretva and Trebišnjica basin, in the framework of which disagreements about managing energy system, meeting the needs of agriculture and conserving key ecosystems need to be addressed and resolved.

Monitoring surveys and results

This case study hasn’t got any Monitoring survey and results, you can add some by editing the project overview.

Lessons learnt

This case study hasn’t got any lessons learnt, you can add some by editing the project overview.


Image gallery


ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment



Site

Name
WFD water body codes
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name
Pre-project morphology
Reference morphology
Desired post project morphology
Heavily modified water body
National/international site designation
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present
Invasive species present
Species of interest
Dominant hydrology
Dominant substrate
River corridor land use
Average bankfull channel width category
Average bankfull channel width (m)
Average bankfull channel depth category
Average bankfull channel depth (m)
Mean discharge category
Mean annual discharge (m3/s)
Average channel gradient category
Average channel gradient
Average unit stream power (W/m2)


Project background

Reach length directly affected (m)
Project started 2010/01/01
Works started
Works completed
Project completed 2011/12/31
Total cost category
Total cost (k€)
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources

Cost for project phases

Phase cost category cost exact (k€) Lead organisation Contact forename Contact surname
Investigation and design
Stakeholder engagement and communication
Works and works supervision
Post-project management and maintenance
Monitoring



Reasons for river restoration

Mitigation of a pressure Hydropower
Hydromorphology
Biology
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications
Floodplain / River corridor
Planform / Channel pattern
Other
Non-structural measures
Management interventions
Social measures (incl. engagement) Engagement in stakeholder dialogue, facilitating of public participation
Other


Monitoring

Hydromorphological quality elements

Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative

Biological quality elements

Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative

Physico-chemical quality elements

Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative

Any other monitoring, e.g. social, economic

Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative


Monitoring documents



Additional documents and videos


Additional links and references

Link Description
http://assets.panda.org/downloads/living neretva report for 2007.pdf Report about the project
http://croatia.panda.org/en/what we do/freshwater/dinaric arc sustainable hydropower initiative dashi /neretva and trebinjica river basin bih cro / Some information has been copied form this web page.More information can be found here.

Supplementary Information

Edit Supplementary Information