| Abstrakt: |
A total of nine, interrelated steps can be distinguished within a plan cycle. These steps have been briefly described in the third article in the series 'Towards comprehensive water management in The Netherlands'. In the fourth article, steps 1, 2 and 3 and, to a certain extent, 4, have been set out. This article sets out further details concerning step 4 as well as steps 5 and 6 (see Fig. 1). Focus points (step 4) are the discrepancies between the current situation and the objectives. A plan cycle is aimed at diminishing the gravity and/or scope of the focus points. To suitably arrange such a plan cycle, it is necessary not only to be familiar with the focus points themselves, but also to know what the causes are. Possible measures (step 5) have to adequately anticipate these causes and fit within the ecological, economic and sociological context of the area to which they apply. This requires tailor-made activities and, with that, knowledge and creativity. Prioritizing (step 6) is directed at assessing the proposed possible measures. To reach an adequate assessment, characteristics from three proven evaluation methods have been combined: cost-effectiveness analysis; weighted summation; and the goals achievement matrix method. Two assessment criteria have been connected to this combination: cost-effectiveness of and support for the implementation of possible measures. Assessment of this requires a per measure evaluation of the gravity and scope of the focus point upon which the measure is directed as well as evaluation of the effectiveness, cost, prerequisites, time to effect, administrative appreciation and social appreciationof a measure. Based upon this, the cost-effectiveness of and supportfor a measure can be ascertained. The sum of these three steps, along with the activities that lie behind them and the underlying relationships and arrangements, form a methodology, known as PRIMAVERA. The tools needed to work with PRIMAVERA are indices and yardsticks. A compu [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
