@article{YalewPilzSchweitzeretal.2018, author = {Yalew, S. G. and Pilz, Tobias and Schweitzer, C. and Liersch, Stefan and van der Kwast, J. and van Griensven, A. and Mul, Marloes L. and Dickens, Chris and van der Zaag, Pieter}, title = {Coupling land-use change and hydrologic models for quantification of catchment ecosystem services}, series = {Environmental modelling \& software with environment data news}, volume = {109}, journal = {Environmental modelling \& software with environment data news}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {1364-8152}, doi = {10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.08.029}, pages = {315 -- 328}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Representation of land-use and hydrologic interactions in respective models has traditionally been problematic. The use of static land-use in most hydrologic models or that of the use of simple hydrologic proxies in land-use change models call for more integrated approaches. The objective of this study is to assess whether dynamic feedback between land-use change and hydrology can (1) improve model performances, and/or (2) produce a more realistic quantification of ecosystem services. To test this, we coupled a land-use change model and a hydrologic mode. First, the land-use change and the hydrologic models were separately developed and calibrated. Then, the two models were dynamically coupled to exchange data at yearly time-steps. The approach is applied to a catchment in South Africa. Performance of coupled models when compared to the uncoupled models were marginal, but the coupled models excelled at the quantification of catchment ecosystem services more robustly.}, language = {en} } @misc{ReinhardtLierschAbdeladhimetal.2018, author = {Reinhardt, Julia and Liersch, Stefan and Abdeladhim, Mohamed Arbi and Diallo, Mori and Dickens, Chris and Fournet, Samuel and Hattermann, Fred Fokko and Kabaseke, Clovis and Muhumuza, Moses and Mul, Marloes L. and Pilz, Tobias and Otto, Ilona M. and Walz, Ariane}, title = {Systematic evaluation of scenario assessments supporting sustainable integrated natural resources management}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {930}, issn = {1866-8372}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-44578}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-445784}, pages = {36}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Scenarios have become a key tool for supporting sustainability research on regional and global change. In this study we evaluate four regional scenario assessments: first, to explore a number of research challenges related to sustainability science and, second, to contribute to sustainability research in the specific case studies. The four case studies used commonly applied scenario approaches that are (i) a story and simulation approach with stakeholder participation in the Oum Zessar watershed, Tunisia, (ii) a participatory scenario exploration in the Rwenzori region, Uganda, (iii) a model-based prepolicy study in the Inner Niger Delta, Mali, and (iv) a model coupling-based scenario analysis in upper Thukela basin, South Africa. The scenario assessments are evaluated against a set of known challenges in sustainability science, with each challenge represented by two indicators, complemented by a survey carried out on the perception of the scenario assessments within the case study regions. The results show that all types of scenario assessments address many sustainability challenges, but that the more complex ones based on story and simulation and model coupling are the most comprehensive. The study highlights the need to investigate abrupt system changes as well as governmental and political factors as important sources of uncertainty. For an in-depth analysis of these issues, the use of qualitative approaches and an active engagement of local stakeholders are suggested. Studying ecological thresholds for the regional scale is recommended to support research on regional sustainability. The evaluation of the scenario processes and outcomes by local researchers indicates the most transparent scenario assessments as the most useful. Focused, straightforward, yet iterative scenario assessments can be very relevant by contributing information to selected sustainability problems.}, language = {en} } @article{ReinhardtLierschAbdeladhimetal.2018, author = {Reinhardt, Julia and Liersch, Stefan and Abdeladhim, Mohamed Arbi and Diallo, Mori and Dickens, Chris and Fournet, Samuel and Hattermann, Fred Fokko and Kabaseke, Clovis and Muhumuza, Moses and Mul, Marloes L. and Pilz, Tobias and Otto, Ilona M. and Walz, Ariane}, title = {Systematic evaluation of scenario assessments supporting sustainable integrated natural resources management}, series = {Ecology and society : a journal of integrative science for resilience and sustainability}, volume = {23}, journal = {Ecology and society : a journal of integrative science for resilience and sustainability}, number = {1}, publisher = {Resilience Alliance}, address = {Wolfville}, issn = {1708-3087}, doi = {10.5751/ES-09728-230105}, pages = {34}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Scenarios have become a key tool for supporting sustainability research on regional and global change. In this study we evaluate four regional scenario assessments: first, to explore a number of research challenges related to sustainability science and, second, to contribute to sustainability research in the specific case studies. The four case studies used commonly applied scenario approaches that are (i) a story and simulation approach with stakeholder participation in the Oum Zessar watershed, Tunisia, (ii) a participatory scenario exploration in the Rwenzori region, Uganda, (iii) a model-based prepolicy study in the Inner Niger Delta, Mali, and (iv) a model coupling-based scenario analysis in upper Thukela basin, South Africa. The scenario assessments are evaluated against a set of known challenges in sustainability science, with each challenge represented by two indicators, complemented by a survey carried out on the perception of the scenario assessments within the case study regions. The results show that all types of scenario assessments address many sustainability challenges, but that the more complex ones based on story and simulation and model coupling are the most comprehensive. The study highlights the need to investigate abrupt system changes as well as governmental and political factors as important sources of uncertainty. For an in-depth analysis of these issues, the use of qualitative approaches and an active engagement of local stakeholders are suggested. Studying ecological thresholds for the regional scale is recommended to support research on regional sustainability. The evaluation of the scenario processes and outcomes by local researchers indicates the most transparent scenario assessments as the most useful. Focused, straightforward, yet iterative scenario assessments can be very relevant by contributing information to selected sustainability problems.}, language = {en} } @article{AichLierschVetteretal.2014, author = {Aich, Valentin and Liersch, Stefan and Vetter, T. and Huang, S. and Tecklenburg, J. and Hoffmann, P. and Koch, H. and Fournet, S. and Krysanova, Valentina and Mueller, N. and Hattermann, Fred Fokko}, title = {Comparing impacts of climate change on streamflow in four large African river basins}, series = {Hydrology and earth system sciences : HESS}, volume = {18}, journal = {Hydrology and earth system sciences : HESS}, number = {4}, publisher = {Copernicus}, address = {G{\"o}ttingen}, issn = {1027-5606}, doi = {10.5194/hess-18-1305-2014}, pages = {1305 -- 1321}, year = {2014}, abstract = {This study aims to compare impacts of climate change on streamflow in four large representative African river basins: the Niger, the Upper Blue Nile, the Oubangui and the Limpopo. We set up the eco-hydrological model SWIM (Soil and Water Integrated Model) for all four basins individually. The validation of the models for four basins shows results from adequate to very good, depending on the quality and availability of input and calibration data. For the climate impact assessment, we drive the model with outputs of five bias corrected Earth system models of Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) for the representative concentration pathways (RCPs) 2.6 and 8.5. This climate input is put into the context of climate trends of the whole African continent and compared to a CMIP5 ensemble of 19 models in order to test their representativeness. Subsequently, we compare the trends in mean discharges, seasonality and hydrological extremes in the 21st century. The uncertainty of results for all basins is high. Still, climate change impact is clearly visible for mean discharges but also for extremes in high and low flows. The uncertainty of the projections is the lowest in the Upper Blue Nile, where an increase in streamflow is most likely. In the Niger and the Limpopo basins, the magnitude of trends in both directions is high and has a wide range of uncertainty. In the Oubangui, impacts are the least significant. Our results confirm partly the findings of previous continental impact analyses for Africa. However, contradictory to these studies we find a tendency for increased streamflows in three of the four basins (not for the Oubangui). Guided by these results, we argue for attention to the possible risks of increasing high flows in the face of the dominant water scarcity in Africa. In conclusion, the study shows that impact intercomparisons have added value to the adaptation discussion and may be used for setting up adaptation plans in the context of a holistic approach.}, language = {en} } @article{AichLierschVetteretal.2015, author = {Aich, Valentin and Liersch, Stefan and Vetter, Tobias and Andersson, Jafet C. M. and M{\"u}ller, Eva Nora and Hattermann, Fred Fokko}, title = {Climate or Land Use?}, series = {Water}, volume = {7}, journal = {Water}, number = {6}, publisher = {MDPI}, address = {Basel}, issn = {2073-4441}, doi = {10.3390/w7062796}, pages = {2796 -- 2820}, year = {2015}, abstract = {This study intends to contribute to the ongoing discussion on whether land use and land cover changes (LULC) or climate trends have the major influence on the observed increase of flood magnitudes in the Sahel. A simulation-based approach is used for attributing the observed trends to the postulated drivers. For this purpose, the ecohydrological model SWIM (Soil and Water Integrated Model) with a new, dynamic LULC module was set up for the Sahelian part of the Niger River until Niamey, including the main tributaries Sirba and Goroul. The model was driven with observed, reanalyzed climate and LULC data for the years 1950-2009. In order to quantify the shares of influence, one simulation was carried out with constant land cover as of 1950, and one including LULC. As quantitative measure, the gradients of the simulated trends were compared to the observed trend. The modeling studies showed that for the Sirba River only the simulation which included LULC was able to reproduce the observed trend. The simulation without LULC showed a positive trend for flood magnitudes, but underestimated the trend significantly. For the Goroul River and the local flood of the Niger River at Niamey, the simulations were only partly able to reproduce the observed trend. In conclusion, the new LULC module enabled some first quantitative insights into the relative influence of LULC and climatic changes. For the Sirba catchment, the results imply that LULC and climatic changes contribute in roughly equal shares to the observed increase in flooding. For the other parts of the subcatchment, the results are less clear but show, that climatic changes and LULC are drivers for the flood increase; however their shares cannot be quantified. Based on these modeling results, we argue for a two-pillar adaptation strategy to reduce current and future flood risk: Flood mitigation for reducing LULC-induced flood increase, and flood adaptation for a general reduction of flood vulnerability.}, language = {en} } @misc{AichLierschVetteretal.2017, author = {Aich, Valentin and Liersch, Stefan and Vetter, Tobias and Andersson, Jafet C. M. and M{\"u}ller, Eva Nora and Hattermann, Fred Fokko}, title = {Climate or land use?}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-400115}, pages = {25}, year = {2017}, abstract = {This study intends to contribute to the ongoing discussion on whether land use and land cover changes (LULC) or climate trends have the major influence on the observed increase of flood magnitudes in the Sahel. A simulation-based approach is used for attributing the observed trends to the postulated drivers. For this purpose, the ecohydrological model SWIM (Soil and Water Integrated Model) with a new, dynamic LULC module was set up for the Sahelian part of the Niger River until Niamey, including the main tributaries Sirba and Goroul. The model was driven with observed, reanalyzed climate and LULC data for the years 1950-2009. In order to quantify the shares of influence, one simulation was carried out with constant land cover as of 1950, and one including LULC. As quantitative measure, the gradients of the simulated trends were compared to the observed trend. The modeling studies showed that for the Sirba River only the simulation which included LULC was able to reproduce the observed trend. The simulation without LULC showed a positive trend for flood magnitudes, but underestimated the trend significantly. For the Goroul River and the local flood of the Niger River at Niamey, the simulations were only partly able to reproduce the observed trend. In conclusion, the new LULC module enabled some first quantitative insights into the relative influence of LULC and climatic changes. For the Sirba catchment, the results imply that LULC and climatic changes contribute in roughly equal shares to the observed increase in flooding. For the other parts of the subcatchment, the results are less clear but show, that climatic changes and LULC are drivers for the flood increase; however their shares cannot be quantified. Based on these modeling results, we argue for a two-pillar adaptation strategy to reduce current and future flood risk: Flood mitigation for reducing LULC-induced flood increase, and flood adaptation for a general reduction of flood vulnerability.}, language = {en} } @book{KruegerBarschLierschetal.2001, author = {Kr{\"u}ger, Wolfgang and Barsch, Andreas and Liersch, Stefan and Blank, Benjamin}, title = {Wo Wasser Weiden wachsen l{\"a}ßt : Witterungsbedingte Dynamik von Geosystemen der mongolischen Steppe}, series = {Stoffdynamik in Geosystemen}, volume = {6}, journal = {Stoffdynamik in Geosystemen}, editor = {Blumenstein, Oswald and Kr{\"u}ger, Wolfgang and Schachtzabel, Hartmut}, publisher = {Selbstverl. der Arbeitsgruppe Stoffdynamik in Geosystemen}, address = {Potsdam}, issn = {0949-4731}, pages = {154 S.}, year = {2001}, language = {de} }