Inputs zur gesellschaftlichen Entscheidungsfindung

The identification of appropriate sanitation systems is particularly challenging in developing urban areas where local needs are not met by conventional solutions. While structured decision-making frameworks such as Community-Led Urban Environmental Sanitation (CLUES) can help facilitate this process, they require a set of sanitation system options as input. Given the large number of possible combinations of sanitation technologies, the generation of a good set of sanitation system options is far from trivial.
This paper presents a procedure for generating a set of locally appropriate sanitation system options, which can then be used in a structured decision-making process. The systematic and partly automated procedure was designed (i) to enhance the reproducibility of option generation; (ii) to consider all types of conventional and novel technologies; (iii) to provide a set of sanitation systems that is technologically diverse; and (iv) to formally account for uncertainties linked to technology specifications and local conditions.
We applied the procedure to an emerging small town in Nepal. We assessed the appropriateness of 40 technologies and generated 17,955 appropriate system options. These were classified into 16 system templates including on-site, urine-diverting, biogas, and blackwater templates. From these, a subset of 36 most appropriate sanitation system options were selected, which included both conventional and novel options.
We performed a sensitivity analysis to evaluate the impact of different elements on the diversity and appropriateness of the set of selected sanitation system options. We found that the use of system templates is most important, followed by the use of a weighted multiplicative aggregation function to quantify local appropriateness. We also show that the optimal size of the set of selected sanitation system options is equal to or slightly greater than the number of system templates.
As novel technologies are developed and added to the already large portfolio technology options, the procedure presented in this work may become an essential tool for generating and exploring appropriate sanitation system options.

Over the past decade, water professionals have begun to focus on a new paradigm for urban water systems, which entails the recovery of resources from wastewater, the integration of engineered and natural systems, and coordination among agencies managing different facets of water systems. In the San Francisco Bay Area, planning for nutrient management serves as an exemplary model of this transition. We employed a variety of methodological approaches including stakeholder analysis, multi-criteria decision-making weight elicitation, and document analysis to understand and support decision-making in this context. Based on interviews with 32 stakeholders, we delineate goals that are considered to be important for achieving the new paradigm and we highlight management strategies that can help reach these goals. We identify and analyze the social, institutional, and technical impediments to planning and implementing multi-benefit wastewater infrastructure projects and identify strategies to overcome some of these challenges. Transitioning to a new paradigm for urban water infrastructure will require stakeholders to proactively forge collaborative relationships, jointly define a shared vision and objectives, and build new rules to overcome limitations of current institutional policies.

Large regional programs to restore riverine habitat for fish and aquatic organisms have become common throughout North America, Europe, and elsewhere. Evaluating the effectiveness of projects implemented under these programs - sometimes called programmatic monitoring and evaluation - has proven challenging, and little guidance exists on programmatic monitoring and evaluation approaches and their effectiveness. In this paper, we review different approaches for evaluating the effectiveness of river restoration projects implemented across a region. These programmatic monitoring and evaluation approaches include case studies, meta-analyses, multiple before–after control–impact (mBACI), extensive posttreatment (EPT), intensively monitored watersheds (IMWs), and hybrid programmatic approaches that use a combination of different experimental designs. For each approach, we discuss the pros and cons as well as provide examples. The most appropriate approach depends in part on the questions that the programmatic monitoring and evaluation strives to address, the spatial and temporal scale at which detection of a response is expected, and the scale of inference. Case studies and mBACI approaches can answer questions about individual projects but have several limitations in terms of cost, timely results, and feasibility. A meta-analysis, which can provide broadly applicable results, is dependent upon a large number of case studies being completed. The EPT approach can provide relatively quick and easy-to-interpret results, but it requires a large population of completed projects and careful selection of controls. The IMW approach has been broadly applied in western North America but has had limited success and appears to be tractable only in small catchments where restoration and monitoring can be well controlled. Based on results from recent efforts in the USA and Europe, the most feasible programmatic monitoring and evaluation approach in terms of cost, implementability, and production of timely results appears to be a hybrid approach that uses a combination of the EPT and mBACI approaches.