An Interdisciplinary Approach to Assessing, Planning and Managing Urban Rivers in the context of Greater London Jane Lucy Flora Shuker A thesis presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Geography Queen Mary, University of London 2011 Abstract Urban rivers present complex management challenges due to the combined natural and anthropocentric factors affecting developed catchments. Planning urban river rehabilitation strategies and measures in parallel with green infrastructure initiatives requires the combined expertise of multi-disciplinary partnerships, encompassing river science and landscape engineering plus community engagement, to deliver integrated and sustainable outcomes. This thesis takes an interdisciplinary approach to investigate the assessment and management of urban rivers, focusing specifically upon the planning of integrated restoration projects for River Thames tributaries within Greater London. Comparisons of restored and unrestored sites on London tributary rivers at the reach- and catchment-scale explore the versatility of the Urban River Survey method for assessing and communicating contrasts in the bio-physical condition and engineering:habitat associations of heavily modified rivers. A trial of the Ecosystem Services Assessment method for urban river restorations indicates the strengths and limitations of this approach and areas of research need. Urban river governance investigations and a review of changes in restoration practices over time confirm a decreasing emphasis on channel control and progressively lighter engineering, plus a greater social focus with urban river management becoming increasingly driven by awareness of the symbiosis between rivers and local communities. In some London boroughs partner organisations are developing new links through sustainable development objectives, but connections are geographically inconsistent and typically dependent upon key advocates. Findings indicate that integrated planning can facilitate interdisciplinary processes through the identification of cross-cutting themes (e.g. climate change) and open knowledge exchange when delivered with appropriate levels of detail. While some disciplinary boundaries are necessary (to define project scope and for task management), socio-ecological benefits may be achieved when these are flexible, permeable and managed responsively in relation to simple overarching goals; and by allowing time for different kinds of knowledge to merge and stimulate new creative and integrated interpretations. ii Acknowledgements This interdisciplinary research was made possible through the combined support of the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) and Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) under Grant No. ES/F012314/1. Many people have provided invaluable help and support throughout this research project including the personnel and postgraduate students at Queen Mary, University of London and King’s College London (during my first year of study). Most of all, my unreserved gratitude must go to Professor Angela Gurnell for her expert supervision, inspiration and drive throughout this interdisciplinary project; and to Professor Mike Raco for his encouragement and guidance around previously less familiar social science territories and navigation through the sometimes choppy waters of interdisciplinarity. I am inordinately grateful to have had the opportunity to work with such dedicated and visionary supervisors. I would like to express my gratitude for the enormous support of many individuals within the Environment Agency, the Wandle Trust, Thames Rivers Restoration Trust, Thames 21 and all who have contributed their time and assistance during environmental field surveys and for providing valuable feedback during the development of the Urban River Survey methodology : i n particular to Ruth Hanniffy, Jess Grant, Dr Chris Cockel, Helen Gibbs and Dr Bella Davies. Many thanks are also due to all my interviewees for their generosity in contributing to the social field work and additional discussions leading to many insights at key moments, especially to Dave Webb, Dr Judy England, Sarah Jane Scott, Rebecca O’Shea, Alex Farris, Robert Oates, Caroline Birchall, Claire Newill, Abigail Townsend, David Mooney, Pete Massini, Lisa Walduck, David Newman, Shafna Chowdhury, Paula Vandergert, Paul Campbell, Mike Keogh and Matthew Blumler. Special acknowledgement must go to Jo Heisse for her inspiring tour of the Ravensbourne catchment, to Dr Mark Everard for insights into Ecosystem Services Assessment, and to all at the River Restoration Centre for their support and annual conferences, especially to Dr Di Hammond, Dr Jenny Mant and Nick Elbourne. Also to Dr Angela Boitsidis and Dr May Lee for their work in developing the Urban River Survey without which this research would not have been possible. iii Finally, I must extend extra special thanks to all my family and friends for supporting, encouraging and believing in me throughout the last three years and most of all to my two amazing daughters, Aisha and Saskia, to whom this thesis is dedicated. iv Contents Table of Contents Abstract ...................................................................................................................ii Acknowledgements..........................................................................................................iii Table of Contents ..............................................................................................................v List of Figures .................................................................................................................xii List of Tables ..............................................................................................................xviii Chapter 1: Introduction - Urban rivers and interdisciplinary approaches.........................1 1.1 Introduction...............................................................................................1 1.1.1 Urban rivers: global urbanisation and environmental change...................1 1.1.2 Urban rivers: UK and Greater London context.........................................3 1.1.3 Sustainable development: integrated management of complex urban environments.............................................................................................6 1.2 Context for an Interdisciplinary Approach ...............................................7 1.2.1 Definitions of ‘disciplinarity’ and the nature of interdisciplinary research ...................................................................................................................7 1.2.2 Experiences of interdisciplinary research .................................................9 1.2.3 Recommendations for interdisciplinary research....................................15 1.3 The significance of interdisciplinary approaches for urban river issues.18 1.3.1 Interdisciplinary approaches in aquatic sciences and river restoration...18 1.3.2 Integrating blue and green spaces ...........................................................20 1.3.3 Stakeholder involvement and urban river partnerships...........................21 1.4 Discussion of aims and objectives and guide to other chapters..............22 1.4.1 Interdisciplinary and other flexible working disciplinary models ..........23 1.4.2 Aims and objectives................................................................................25 1.4.3 Thesis Structure.......................................................................................26 Contents Chapter 2: Literature review - Interdisciplinary approaches to urban river assessment, governance and valuation........................................................................28 2.1 Introduction.............................................................................................28 2.2 River Assessment: for non-urban and urban rivers.................................31 2.2.1 Conceptual understandings of river functioning.....................................31 2.2.2 River Classification.................................................................................41 2.2.3 River assessment: An international perspective......................................43 2.2.4 Urban rivers: assessment approaches and opportunities.........................50 2.2.5 Urban River assessment: challenges and choices ...................................56 2.2.6 Conclusions for Urban River Assessment ..............................................63 2.3 Environmental Governance: Planning and management of urban rivers66 2.3.1 Environmental and urban river governance: Historic and modern contexts ...................................................................................................66 2.3.2 Partnership approaches to Urban River Restoration ...............................73 2.3.3 Integrated management of urban rivers and public open spaces.............76 2.3.4 Environmental governance and socio-environmental complexity..........81 2.3.5 Conclusions for Urban River Environmental Governance .....................85 2.4 Valuation of urban rivers ........................................................................85 2.4.1 The value of urban rivers and their valuation .........................................86 2.4.2 Brief history underlying ecosystem services valuation...........................87 2.4.3 Approaches to valuing urban river ecosystem services ..........................90 2.4.4 Ecosystem services assessment in practice and relevance to urban river restoration................................................................................................94