High and Dry: Comparing Literature Review Approaches to Reveal the Data that Informs the Geomorphic Management of Regulated River Floodplains

Abstract

While the impacts of regulation on river systems have been investigated, the main focus of the research has been on ecological and in-channel impacts. An understanding of the impacts of regulation on floodplain geomorphology is needed in order to inform management actions, in particular environmental flows. Concurrently with a traditional literature review on the effects of river regulation on floodplain geomorphology, we undertook a systematic review of the evidence using causal criteria analysis. The causal criteria approach tested evidence from multiple studies against a ‘checklist’ of criteria, constructing an argument for causality by combining a number of pieces of evidence into a single coherent argument. The causal criteria analysis only found support for one hypothesized cause-effect linkage in the conceptual model. In contrast, after discussing many of the conceptual model linkages, the traditional review provided a series of eight hypothesised scenarios to highlight the different possibilities for floodplain geomorphic change resulting from regulation. The difference was partly as a result of the time taken to enter studies into the Eco Evidence Database, but mainly because of the quality of evidence from geomorphic studies. Low statistical rigour in study designs meant that many papers were inadmissible as evidence. Thus, the causal criteria analysis made transparent the quality of data used in a traditional literature review that might subsequently be used to justify costly management recommendations.