This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.
In the Indo-Gangetic Plains, one of India’s most productive agricultural regions, smallholder livelihood vulnerability can inhibit sustainable development. As there are significant differences in economic development, natural resources and agricultural productivity within the region, we estimate the Livelihood Vulnerability Index in two districts (Vaishali, Bihar and Karnal, Haryana) to determine suitable adaptation strategies under diverse conditions. To reflect different aspects of climate exposure, we include both self-reported climate shocks and spatially interpolated weather data. The assessment of 1127 households shows that while both districts have similar exposure and adaptive capacity levels, the sensitivity dimension makes Vaishali more vulnerable to climate change. To reduce sensitivity, decision-makers should focus on improving infrastructure (e.g., permanent housing, latrines, health centers, alternative energy sources). To improve adaptive capacity and reduce climate risk in both regions, policymakers should promote the expansion of extension training for livelihood diversification, information and communication technologies as well as conservation agriculture.
Terese E. Venus; Stephanie Bilgram; Johannes Sauer; Arun Khatri-Chettri. Livelihood vulnerability and climate change: a comparative analysis of smallholders in the Indo-Gangetic plains. Environment, Development and Sustainability 2021, 1 -29.
AMA StyleTerese E. Venus, Stephanie Bilgram, Johannes Sauer, Arun Khatri-Chettri. Livelihood vulnerability and climate change: a comparative analysis of smallholders in the Indo-Gangetic plains. Environment, Development and Sustainability. 2021; ():1-29.
Chicago/Turabian StyleTerese E. Venus; Stephanie Bilgram; Johannes Sauer; Arun Khatri-Chettri. 2021. "Livelihood vulnerability and climate change: a comparative analysis of smallholders in the Indo-Gangetic plains." Environment, Development and Sustainability , no. : 1-29.
To promote the sustainable management of hydropower, decision makers require information about cost trade-offs between the restoration of fish passage and hydropower production. We provide a systematic overview of the construction, operational, monitoring, and power loss costs associated with upstream and downstream fish passage measures in the European context. When comparing the total costs of upstream measures across different electricity price scenarios, nature-like solutions (67–88 EUR/kW) tend to cost less than technical solutions (201–287 EUR/kW) on average. Furthermore, nature-like fish passes incur fewer power losses and provide habitat in addition to facilitating fish passage, which presents a strong argument for supporting their development. When evaluating different cost categories of fish passage measures across different electricity price scenarios, construction (45–87%) accounts for the largest share compared to operation (0–1.2%) and power losses (11–54%). However, under a high electricity price scenario, power losses exceed construction costs for technical fish passes. Finally, there tends to be limited information on operational, power loss, and monitoring costs associated with passage measures. Thus, we recommend that policy makers standardize monitoring and reporting of hydraulic, structural, and biological parameters as well as costs in a more detailed manner.
Terese E. Venus; Nicole Smialek; Joachim Pander; Atle Harby; Juergen Geist. Evaluating Cost Trade-Offs between Hydropower and Fish Passage Mitigation. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8520 .
AMA StyleTerese E. Venus, Nicole Smialek, Joachim Pander, Atle Harby, Juergen Geist. Evaluating Cost Trade-Offs between Hydropower and Fish Passage Mitigation. Sustainability. 2020; 12 (20):8520.
Chicago/Turabian StyleTerese E. Venus; Nicole Smialek; Joachim Pander; Atle Harby; Juergen Geist. 2020. "Evaluating Cost Trade-Offs between Hydropower and Fish Passage Mitigation." Sustainability 12, no. 20: 8520.
A large share of future European hydropower projects will be run-of-the-river schemes. To understand the potential for RoR hydropower development and modernization of the technology as an opportunity for sustainable decentralization, we use the Q-methodology to compare public values about RoR hydropower in German, Portuguese and Swedish case studies. Four perspectives on the importance of RoR hydropower emerged from our analysis: (i) maintain regional control, (ii) fight climate change, (iii) promote citizen well-being and (iv) protect natural ecosystems. Strong preferences for regional control imply RoR should be managed as distributed generation rather than viewed as part of a centralized, national system like traditional large-scale reservoir hydropower. Based on the importance of citizen well-being and ecological measures, operators could adopt strategies such as river widening and the reconstruction of secondary channels, which help control floods, create recreational opportunities as well as enhance ecological habilitation and biodiversity. Additionally, policymakers could support rigorous monitoring programs to assess the ecological impact of RoR.
Terese E. Venus; Mandy Hinzmann; Tor Haakon Bakken; Holger Gerdes; Francisco Nunes Godinho; Bendik Hansen; António Pinheiro; Johannes Sauer. The public's perception of run-of-the-river hydropower across Europe. Energy Policy 2020, 140, 111422 .
AMA StyleTerese E. Venus, Mandy Hinzmann, Tor Haakon Bakken, Holger Gerdes, Francisco Nunes Godinho, Bendik Hansen, António Pinheiro, Johannes Sauer. The public's perception of run-of-the-river hydropower across Europe. Energy Policy. 2020; 140 ():111422.
Chicago/Turabian StyleTerese E. Venus; Mandy Hinzmann; Tor Haakon Bakken; Holger Gerdes; Francisco Nunes Godinho; Bendik Hansen; António Pinheiro; Johannes Sauer. 2020. "The public's perception of run-of-the-river hydropower across Europe." Energy Policy 140, no. : 111422.