How EU policies could reduce nutrient pollution in European inland and coastal waters

Intensive agriculture and densely populated areas represent major sources of nutrient pollution for European inland and coastal waters, altering the aquatic ecosystems and affecting their capacity to provide ecosystem services and support economic activities. Ambitious water policies are in place in the European Union (EU) for protecting and restoring aquatic ecosystems under the Water Framework Directive and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive. This research quantified the current pressures of point and diffuse nitrogen and phosphorus emissions to European fresh and coastal waters (2005-2012), and analysed the effects of three policy scenarios of nutrient reduction: 1) the application of measures currently planned in the Rural Development Programmes and under the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (UWWTD); 2) the full implementation of the UWWTD and the absence of derogations in the Nitrates Directive; 3) high reduction of nutrient, using best technologies in wastewaters treatment and optimal fertilisation in agriculture. The results of the study show that for the period 2005-2012, the nitrogen load to European seas was 3.3-4.1 TgN/y and the phosphorus load was 0.26-0.30 TgP/y. Policy measures supporting technological improvements (third scenario) could decrease the nutrient export to the seas up to 14% for nitrogen and 20% for phosphorus, improving the ecological status of rivers and lakes, but widening the nutrient imbalance in coastal ecosystems (i.e. increasing nitrogen availability with respect to phosphorus), affecting eutrophication. Further nutrient reductions could be possible by a combination of measures especially in the agricultural sector. However, without tackling current agricultural production and consumption system, the reduction might not be sufficient for achieving the goals of EU water policy in some regions. The study analysed the expected changes and the source contribution in different European regional seas, and highlights the advantages of addressing the land-sea dynamics, checking the coherence of measures taken under different policies.

Relationship between ecological condition and ecosystem services in European rivers, lakes and coastal waters

We quantify main ecosystem services (i.e. the contribution of ecosystems to human well-being) provided by rivers, lakes, coastal waters and connected ecosystems (riparian areas and floodplains) in Europe, including water provisioning, water purification, erosion prevention, flood protection, coastal protection, and recreation. We show European maps of ecosystem service capacity, flow (actual use), sustainability and efficiency. Then we explore the relationship between the services and the ecosystem condition at the European scale, considering the ecological status of aquatic ecosystems, reported under the EU Water Framework Directive, as a measure of the ecosystem integrity and biodiversity. Our results indicate that a higher delivery of the regulating and cultural ecosystem services analysed is mostly correlated with better conditions of aquatic ecosystems. Conversely, the use of provisioning services can result in pressures on the ecosystem. This suggests the importance of maintaining good ecological condition of aquatic ecosystems to ensure the delivery of ecosystem services in the future. These results at the continental scale, although limited to the ecosystem services under analysis, might be relevant to consider when investing in the protection and restoration of aquatic ecosystems called for by the current EU water policy and Biodiversity Strategy and by the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.

Physical water scarcity metrics for monitoring progress towards SDG target 6.4: An evaluation of indicator 6.4.2 "Level of water stress"

Target 6.4 of the recently adopted Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) deals with the reduction of water scarcity. To monitor progress towards this target, two indicators are used: Indicator 6.4.1 measuring water use efficiency and 6.4.2 measuring the level of water stress (WS). This paper aims to identify whether the currently proposed indicator 6.4.2 considers the different elements that need to be accounted for in a WS indicator. WS indicators compare water use with water availability. We identify seven essential elements: 1) both gross and net water abstraction (or withdrawal) provide important information to understand WS; 2) WS indicators need to incorporate environmental flow requirements (EFR); 3) temporal and 4) spatial disaggregation is required in a WS assessment; 5) both renewable surface water and groundwater resources, including their interaction, need to be accounted for as renewable water availability; 6) alternative available water resources need to be accounted for as well, like fossil groundwater and desalinated water; 7) WS indicators need to account for water storage in reservoirs, water recycling and managed aquifer recharge. Indicator 6.4.2 considers many of these elements, but there is need for improvement. It is recommended that WS is measured based on net abstraction as well, in addition to currently only measuring WS based on gross abstraction. It does incorporate EFR. Temporal and spatial disaggregation is indeed defined as a goal in more advanced monitoring levels, in which it is also called for a differentiation between surface and groundwater resources. However, regarding element 6 and 7 there are some shortcomings for which we provide recommendations. In addition, indicator 6.4.2 is only one indicator, which monitors blue WS, but does not give information on green or green-blue water scarcity or on water quality. Within the SDG indicator framework, some of these topics are covered with other indicators.

Human pressures and ecological status of European rivers

Humans have increased the discharge of pollution, altered water flow regime and modified the morphology of rivers. All these actions have resulted in multiple pressures on freshwater ecosystems, undermining their biodiversity and ecological functioning. The European Union has adopted an ambitious water policy to reduce pressures and achieve a good ecological status for all water bodies. However, assessing multiple pressures on aquatic ecosystems and understanding their combined impact on the ecological status is challenging, especially at the large scale, though crucial to the planning of effective policies. Here, for the first time, we quantify multiple human pressures and their relationship with the ecological status for all European rivers. We considered ecological data collected across Europe and pressures assessed by pan-European models, including pollution, hydrological and hydromorphological alterations. We estimated that in one third of EU's territory rivers are in good ecological status. We found that better ecological status is associated with the presence of natural areas in floodplains, while urbanisation and nutrient pollution are important predictors of ecological degradation. We explored scenarios of improvement of rivers ecological status for Europe. Our results strengthen the need to halt urban land take, curb nitrogen pollution and maintain and restore nature along rivers.

A statistical approach to estimate nitrogen sectorial contribution to total load

This study describes a source apportionment methodology for nitrogen river transport. A statistical model has been developed to determine the contribution of each source (punctual and diffuse) of nitrogen to river-mouth transport. A non-linear regression equation was developed, relating measured nitrogen transport rates in streams to spatially referenced nitrogen sources and basin characteristics. The model considers applied fertilizer, atmospheric deposition and point discharges as sources, and winter rainfall, average air temperature, topographic wetness index and dry season flow as basin characteristics. The model was calibrated in an area of 8913 km2 in East Anglia (UK). In the studied area, the average contribution of agriculture to the nitrogen load is estimated around 71%. Point sources and atmospheric deposition respectively account for 24% and 5% of the exported nitrogen. The model allowed the estimation of the contribution of each source to nitrogen emissions and the nitrogen retention in soils and waters as influenced by basin factors.