Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe ecosystem service (ES) concept has increasingly been applied in environmental planning, while there are several decades of experience in applying multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) in complex planning situations. The aim of this article is to assess how the ES concept has been used in water management projects together with MCDA and to examine the experiences gained and make recommendations to overcome any identified challenges. Our conclusions are based on a systematic analysis of 23 articles that were selected among 206 articles focused on water-related studies using, for example, the terms multi-criteria and ecosystem services in the title, abstract or keywords. Here, we explore (i) at what level of detail ESs are included in the decision hierarchy, (ii) the pros and cons of the complementary use of the two approaches, and (iii) how the potential challenges related to the use of MCDA, such as the large number of criteria, double-counting, or assigning criteria weights, are addressed in the selected cases. The results reveal large differences between the case studies. It is shown that only a few case studies used ES categories to classify criteria in the decision hierarchy, that these cases included different numbers of ES criteria and non-ES criteria, and that most case studies elicited stakeholder preferences in MCDA. Although the paper focuses on water management projects, the conclusions regarding the advantages and pitfalls of the complementary use of the methods, as well as our recommendations, are also applicable to other environmental management contexts.

Funding Information: The shares of financing of the investigated TSCs are reported in Table S9. The differences in financing illustrate the absence of a systematic nationwide approach for financing TSCs. The farmers' share of the costs was rather low in the six pilot studies, averaging less than 10%. Most financing has been arranged through individual, externally funded research and development projects. Currently, in Finland, a TSC project may obtain state financial support in the form of either a drainage subsidy from Agrifood Research and Development Fund (MAKERA) managed by the ELY Centers (Regional State Authority) or from CAP-AES's non-productive investments as wetland investment and maintenance allowance. However, overlapping subsidies cannot be received for the same drainage area. Support can cover no more than 40% of the costs, but environmentally friendly (i.e., nature-based) solutions, and particularly expensive structures, may increase the support percentage. In recent years, MAKERA has granted approximately 2.5 million €/year of state support for about 50 dredging projects. Funding Information: Funding: This research was funded by the Joint Research Centre of European Commission (contract no. 939642), Academy of Finland (grant no. 330217), the Finnish Cultural Foundation (grant no. 00201229) and by the Valumavesi project. Publisher Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. ; Conventional dredging of ditches and streams to ensure agricultural drainage and flood mitigation can have severe environmental impacts. The aim of this paper is to investigate the potential benefits of an alternative, nature-based two-stage channel (TSC) design with floodplains excavated along the main channel. Through a literature survey, investigations at Finnish field sites and expert interviews, we assessed the performance, costs, and monetary environmental benefits of TSCs in comparison to conventional dredging, as well as the bottlenecks in their financing and governance. We found evidence supporting the expected longer-term functioning of drainage as well as larger plant and fish biodiversity in TSCs compared to conventional dredging. The TSC design likely improves water quality since the floodplains retain suspended sediment and phosphorus and remove nitrogen. In the investigated case, the additional value of phosphorus retention and conservation of protected species through the TSC design was 2.4 times higher than the total costs. We demonstrate how TSCs can be made eligible for the obligatory vegetated riparian buffer of the European Union agri-environmental subsidy scheme (CAP-AES) by optimising their spatial application with respect to other buffer measures, and recommend to publicly finance their additional costs compared to conventional dredging at priority sites. Further studies on biodiversity impacts and long-term performance of two-stage channels are required. ; Peer reviewed

Conventional dredging of ditches and streams to ensure agricultural drainage and flood mitigation can have severe environmental impacts. The aim of this paper is to investigate the potential benefits of an alternative, nature-based two-stage channel (TSC) design with floodplains excavated along the main channel. Through a literature survey, investigations at Finnish field sites and expert interviews, we assessed the performance, costs, and monetary environmental benefits of TSCs in comparison to conventional dredging, as well as the bottlenecks in their financing and governance. We found evidence supporting the expected longer-term functioning of drainage as well as larger plant and fish biodiversity in TSCs compared to conventional dredging. The TSC design likely improves water quality since the floodplains retain suspended sediment and phosphorus and remove nitrogen. In the investigated case, the additional value of phosphorus retention and conservation of protected species through the TSC design was 2.4 times higher than the total costs. We demonstrate how TSCs can be made eligible for the obligatory vegetated riparian buffer of the European Union agri-environmental subsidy scheme (CAP-AES) by optimising their spatial application with respect to other buffer measures, and recommend to publicly finance their additional costs compared to conventional dredging at priority sites. Further studies on biodiversity impacts and long-term performance of two-stage channels are required.

River networks are among Earth's most threatened hot-spots of biodiversity and provide key ecosystem services (e.g., supply drinking water and food, climate regulation) essential to sustaining human well-being. Climate change and increased human water use are causing more rivers and streams to dry, with devastating impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Currently, more than a half of the global river networks consist of drying channels, and these are expanding dramatically. However, drying river networks (DRNs) have received little attention from scientists and policy makers, and the public is unaware of their importance. Consequently, there is no effective integrated biodiversity conservation or ecosystem management strategy of DRNs.A multidisciplinary team of 25 experts from 11 countries in Europe, South America, China and the USA will build on EU efforts to assess the cascading effects of climate change on biodiversity, ecosystem functions and ecosystem services of DRNs through changes in flow regimes and water use. DRYvER (DRYing riVER networks) will gather and upscale empirical and modelling data from nine focal DRNs (case studies) in Europe (EU) and Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) to develop a meta-system framework applicable to Europe and worldwide. It will also generate crucial knowledge-based strategies, tools and guidelines for economically-efficient adaptive management of DRNs. Working closely with stakeholders and end-users, DRYvER will co-develop strategies to mitigate and adapt to climate change impacts in DRNs, integrating hydrological, ecological (including nature-based solutions), socio-economic and policy perspectives. The end results of DRYvER will contribute to reaching the objectives of the Paris Agreement and placing Europe at the forefront of research on climate change.

River networks are among Earth's most threatened hot-spots of biodiversity and provide key ecosystem services (e.g., supply drinking water and food, climate regulation) essential to sustaining human well-being. Climate change and increased human water use are causing more rivers and streams to dry, with devastating impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Currently, more than a half of the global river networks consist of drying channels, and these are expanding dramatically. However, drying river networks (DRNs) have received little attention from scientists and policy makers, and the public is unaware of their importance. Consequently, there is no effective integrated biodiversity conservation or ecosystem management strategy of DRNs.A multidisciplinary team of 25 experts from 11 countries in Europe, South America, China and the USA will build on EU efforts to assess the cascading effects of climate change on biodiversity, ecosystem functions and ecosystem services of DRNs through changes in flow regimes and water use. DRYvER (DRYing riVER networks) will gather and upscale empirical and modelling data from nine focal DRNs (case studies) in Europe (EU) and Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) to develop a meta-system framework applicable to Europe and worldwide. It will also generate crucial knowledge-based strategies, tools and guidelines for economically-efficient adaptive management of DRNs. Working closely with stakeholders and end-users, DRYvER will co-develop strategies to mitigate and adapt to climate change impacts in DRNs, integrating hydrological, ecological (including nature-based solutions), socio-economic and policy perspectives. The end results of DRYvER will contribute to reaching the objectives of the Paris Agreement and placing Europe at the forefront of research on climate change.