Suchergebnisse

The European Union has embarked on a policy which aims to achieve good ecological status in all surface waters (i.e. rivers, lakes, transitional and coastal waters). In theory, ecological status assessment methods should address the effects of all relevant human pressures. In this study, we analyze the degree to which methods European countries use to assess ecological status tackle various pressures affecting European waters. Nutrient pollution is by far the best-covered pressure for all four water categories. Out of total of 423 assessment methods, 370 assess eutrophication and pressure-specific relationships have been demonstrated for 212 of these. "General degradation" is addressed by 238 methods, mostly validated by relationships to combined pressure indices. Other major pressures have received significantly less effort: hydromorphological degradation is assessed by 160 methods and pressure-specific relationships have been demonstrated for just 40 of these. Hydromorphological pressures are addressed (at least by one BQE) only by 25% countries for coastal waters and 70–80% for lakes and transitional waters. Specific diagnostic tools (i.e. single-pressure relationships) for hydromorphology have only been developed by a few countries: only 20% countries have such methods for lakes, coastal and transitional waters and less than half for rivers. Toxic contamination is addressed by 90 methods; however, pressure-specific relationships have been demonstrated for just eight of these. Only two countries have demonstrated pressure-specific acidification methods for rivers, and three for lakes. In summary, methods currently in use mostly address eutrophication and/or general degradation, but there is not much evidence that they reliably pick up the effects of other significant pressures such as hydromorphology or toxic contamination. Therefore, we recommend that countries re-examine: (1) those pressures which affect different water categories in the country; (2) relevant assessment methods to tackle those pressures; ...

Abstract
The ecological status of European surface waters may be affected by multiple stressors including exposure to chemical mixtures. Currently, two different approaches are used separately to inform water quality management: the diagnosis of the deterioration of aquatic ecosystems caused by nutrient loads and habitat quality, and assessment of chemical pollution based on a small set of chemicals. As integrated assessments would improve the basis for sound water quality management, it is recommended to apply a holistic approach to integrated water quality status assessment and management. This allows for estimating the relative contributions of exposure to mixtures of the chemicals present and of other stressors to impaired ecological status of European water bodies. Improved component- and effect-based methods for chemicals are available to support this. By applying those methods, it was shown that a holistic diagnostic approach is feasible, and that chemical pollution acts as a limiting factor for the ecological status of European surface waters. In a case study on Dutch surface waters, the impact on ecological status could be traced back to chemical pollution affecting individual species. The results are also useful as calibration of the outcomes of component-based mixture assessment (risk quotients or mixture toxic pressures) on ecological impacts. These novel findings provide a basis for a causal and integrated analysis of water quality and improved methods for the identification of the most important stressor groups, including chemical mixtures, to support integrated knowledge-guided management decisions on water quality.

To meet the United Nations (UN) sustainable development goals and the European Union (EU) strategy for a non-toxic environment, water resources and ecosystems management require cost-efficient solutions for prevailing complex contamination and multiple stressor exposures. For the protection of water resources under global change conditions, specific research needs for prediction, monitoring, assessment and abatement of multiple stressors emerge with respect to maintaining human needs, biodiversity, and ecosystem services. Collaborative European research seems an ideal instrument to mobilize the required transdisciplinary scientific support and tackle the large-scale dimension and develop options required for implementation of European policies. Calls for research on minimizing society's chemical footprints in the water–food–energy–security nexus are required. European research should be complemented with targeted national scientific funding to address specific transformation pathways and support the evaluation, demonstration and implementation of novel approaches on regional scales. The foreseeable pressure developments due to demographic, economic and climate changes require solution-oriented thinking, focusing on the assessment of sustainable abatement options and transformation pathways rather than on status evaluation. Stakeholder involvement is a key success factor in collaborative projects as it allows capturing added value, to address other levels of complexity, and find smarter solutions by synthesizing scientific evidence, integrating governance issues, and addressing transition pathways. This increases the chances of closing the value chain by implementing novel solutions. For the water quality topic, the interacting European collaborative projects SOLUTIONS, MARS and GLOBAQUA and the NORMAN network provide best practice examples for successful applied collaborative research including multi-stakeholder involvement. They provided innovative conceptual, modelling and instrumental options for future monitoring and management of chemical mixtures and multiple stressors in European water resources. Advancement of EU water framework directive-related policies has therefore become an option.

Although the Water Framework Directive specifies that macrophytes and phytobenthos should be used for the ecological assessment of lakes and rivers, practice varieswidely throughout the EU.Most countries have separate methods for macrophytes and phytobenthos in rivers; however, the situation is very different for lakes. Here, 16 countries do not have dedicated phytobenthos methods, some include filamentous algaewithin macrophyte survey methods whilst others use diatoms as proxies for phytobenthos. The most widely-cited justification for not having a dedicated phytobenthos method is redundancy, i.e. that macrophyte and phytoplankton assessments alone are sufficient to detect nutrient impacts. Evidence from those European Union Member States that have dedicated phytobenthos methods supports this for high level overviews of lake condition and classification; however, there are a number of situations where phytobenthos may contribute valuable information for the management of lakes.

Although the Water Framework Directive specifies that macrophytes and phytobenthos should be used for the ecological assessment of lakes and rivers, practice varies widely throughout the EU. Most countries have separate methods for macrophytes and phytobenthos in rivers; however, the situation is very different for lakes. Here, 16 countries do not have dedicated phytobenthos methods, some include filamentous algae within macrophyte survey methods whilst others use diatoms as proxies for phytobenthos. The most widely-cited justification for not having a dedicated phytobenthos method is redundancy, i.e. that macrophyte and phytoplankton assessments alone are sufficient to detect nutrient impacts. Evidence from those European Union Member States that have dedicated phytobenthos methods supports this for high level overviews of lake condition and classification; however, there are a number of situations where phytobenthos may contribute valuable information for the management of lakes.

Water resources globally are affected by a complex mixture of stressors resulting from a range of drivers, including urban and agricultural land use, hydropower generation and climate change. Understanding how stressors interfere and impact upon ecological status and ecosystem services is essential for developing effective River Basin Management Plans and shaping future environmental policy. This paper details the nature of these problems for Europe's water resources and the need to find solutions at a range of spatial scales. In terms of the latter, we describe the aims and approaches of the EU-funded project MARS (Managing Aquatic ecosystems and water Resources under multiple Stress) and the conceptual and analytical framework that it is adopting to provide this knowledge, understanding and tools needed to address multiple stressors. MARS is operating at three scales: At the water body scale, the mechanistic understanding of stressor interactions and their impact upon water resources, ecological status and ecosystem services will be examined through multi-factorial experiments and the analysis of long time-series. At the river basin scale, modelling and empirical approaches will be adopted to characterise relationships between multiple stressors and ecological responses, functions, services and water resources. The effects of future land use and mitigation scenarios in 16 European river basins will be assessed. At the European, scale, large-scale spatial analysis will be carried out to identify the relationships amongst stress intensity, ecological status and service provision, with a special focus on large transboundary rivers, lakes and fish. The project will support managers and policy makers in the practical implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), of related legislation and of the Blueprint to Safeguard Europe's Water Resources by advising the 3rd River Basin Management Planning cycle, the revision of the WFD and by developing new tools for diagnosing and predicting multiple stressors. (C) 2014 Published by Elsevier B.V.

The Water Framework Directive is the first international legislation to require European countries to establish comparable ecological assessment schemes for their freshwaters. A key element in harmonising quality classification within and between Europe's river basins is an "Intercalibration" exercise, stipulated by the WFD, to ensure that the good status boundaries in all of the biological assessment methods correspond to similar levels of anthropogenic pressure. In this article, we provide a comprehensive overview of this international comparison, focusing on the assessment schemes developed for freshwater lakes. Out of 82 lake ecological assessment methods reported for the comparison, 62 were successfully intercalibrated and included in the EC Decision on intercalibration, with a high proportion of phytoplankton (18), macrophyte (17) and benthic fauna (13) assessment methods. All the lake assessment methods are reviewed in this article, including the results of intercalibration. Furthermore, the current gaps and way forward to reach consistent management objectives for European lakes are discussed.

The Water Framework Directive is the first international legislation to require European countries to establish comparable ecological assessment schemes for their freshwaters. A key element in harmonising quality classification within and between Europe's river basins is an "Intercalibration" exercise, stipulated by the WFD, to ensure that the good status boundaries in all of the biological assessment methods correspond to similar levels of anthropogenic pressure. In this article, we provide a comprehensive overview of this international comparison, focusing on the assessment schemes developed for freshwater lakes. Out of 82 lake ecological assessment methods reported for the comparison, 62 were successfully intercalibrated and included in the EC Decision on intercalibration, with a high proportion of phytoplankton (18), macrophyte (17) and benthic fauna (13) assessment methods. All the lake assessment methods are reviewed in this article, including the results of intercalibration. Furthermore, the current gaps and way forward to reach consistent management objectives for European lakes are discussed. (C) 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. ; Peer reviewed

Driven by Europe's pressing need to overcome its water quality and water scarcity challenges, the speed of innovation in the water sector is outpacing that of science. The methodologies available to assess the impact of innovative solutions to water-related challenges remain limited and highly theoretical, which sets boundaries on their application and usefulness to water practitioners. This hampers the uptake of new technologies and innovative management practices, thus foregoing potential gains in resource efficiency and nature protection, as well as wider benefits to society and the economy. To address this gap, the DESSIN project developed a framework to evaluate the changes in ecosystem services (ESS) associated with technical or management solutions implemented at the water body, sub-catchment or catchment level. The framework was developed with a specific focus on freshwater ecosystems to allow for a more detailed exploration of practical implementation issues. Its development, testing and validation was carried out by conducting ESS evaluations in three different urban case study settings. The framework builds upon existing classification systems for ESS (CICES and FEGS-CS) and incorporates the DPSIR adaptive management scheme as its main structural element. This enables compatibility with other international initiatives on ESS assessments and establishes a direct link to the EU Water Framework Directive, respectively. This work furthers research on practical implementation of the Ecosystem Services Approach, while pushing the discussion on how to promote more informed decision-making and support innovation uptake to address Europe's current water-related challenges.