A systematic tool for the assessment of nature-based solutions to mitigate salt intrusion

Abstract

Nature-based initiatives have emerged as potential solutions to problems caused by saltwater intrusion in deltas found globally, but their successful implementation is enabled partly by a multi-stakeholder approach. The latter involves managing several parallel stakeholder objectives, which usually requires quantitative knowledge to understand possible collisions of interests. On that account, the present work developed a systematic approach (referred to as the `comparison tool') to quantitatively compare the objectives of multiple stakeholders interplaying in a delta. As a first approach, the comparison tool is intended to support decision-making to deal with potential conflicts between freshwater supply and port logistics interests. In particular, the present juncture in the Rhine-Meuse Delta in the Netherlands was used to investigate potential trade-offs generated by the nature-based shallowing (or river bed heightening) of the Rotterdam Waterways. The comparison tool is founded on the objective-based assessment of Building with Nature (BwN) solutions. The effects of a BwN solution are assessed separately for each functional requirement and then are related in a combined assessment. The impact assessment for the shallowing of the Rotterdam Waterways required two numerical modelling studies. First, effects on the hydrodynamics and salt transport in a partially-mixed estuary were modelled with the Operationeel Stromingsmodel Rotterdam (OSR), developed by the Port of Rotterdam Authority. Secondly, changes in meso-scale traffic flows over the port network were modelled with the OpenTNSim developed by TU Delft. Afterwards, the effects on freshwater supply and port performance (capacity and efficiency) were quantified separately and then compared. This research delivered a systematic procedure and demonstrated how a combined assessment could be performed in the context of nature-based solutions to mitigate salt intrusion. The most important outcome entails quantitative trade-offs between port efficiency and freshwater supply over a range of bed level increase from 0.0 m to 3.9 m. In general, results showed that the improvement towards the objective of port logistics always goes to the detriment of the freshwater supply objective while increasing bed level. Also, this study found that a collision of interests between the two types of end-users might worsen for a bed level increase over 2 m. Additional results showed that shallowing could be associated with benefits for freshwater supply through a decrease in the duration of water shortages due to a retreat in salt intrusion. The latter holds for specific environmental conditions of low river discharge and mild wind. Also, this study concluded that shallowing could negatively affect port efficiency due to heavier vessel traffic and more burdensome tidal window restrictions, which can result in an exponential growth of vessels average waiting times if the bed level increases over 2 m. Since the freshwater and port sub-systems were simplified, uncertainty in the results was unavoidably accepted. Despite these simplifications, this research demonstrated the main principles in implementing the comparison tool and lays the groundwork for more comprehensive models. In addition, several recommendations for policy-making are proposed, setting a basis for later discussions between freshwater supply and port-related stakeholders in the Rhine-Meuse Delta.