Aquatic science and the water framework directive: a still open challenge towards ecogovernance of aquatic ecosystems

Basset, Alberto

doi:10.1002/aqc.1117

Cited by 21 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 38 publications

(34 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The WFD defines the reference state as the hydromorphological and physico chemical conditions which support high ecological status, while it then defines high ecological status as biological conditions which reflect those normally associated with undisturbed conditions, an unfortunate circular approach which, initially at least, proved a significant challenge Nõges et al, 2009;Pardo et al, 2012). The solution that emerged was to identify populations of reference sites using abiotic criteria that represented conditions that occur without the effects of major urbanization, intensification of agriculture or more than very minor modifications to hydromorphology , although the difficulty in finding sufficient examples in some parts of Europe led to criticisms that sites which were perceived to be un-impacted, the "best available", were being included (Basset, 2010;Moss, 2008).…”

Section: Reference Conditions and The High/good Boundarymentioning

confidence: 98%

Progress towards the implementation of the European Water Framework Directive (2000–2012)

Phillips

2014

Aquatic Ecosystem Health &Amp; Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European Water Framework Directive, which came into force in 2000, introduced a system of river basin management which required member states to develop a range of new biological assessment systems to determine the status of Europe"s surface waters. Member states were free to use existing methods or to develop new ones, which resulted in a large number of methods being used across Europe. To ensure the comparability of the resulting assessments, these states were required to compare their methods to demonstrate that the boundary criteria they established represented similar levels of ecological change. Although it is desirable to align status class boundaries to significant changes of ecological status, so that the resulting classifications can be linked to ecosystem function, many methods simply divide status into five equal classes along a pressure gradient. An exception was the approach used for lakes, where a greater understanding of the impacts of eutrophication has been established. Here, boundaries Downloaded by [Ryerson University] at 04:29 03 December 2014 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 2were derived from the likelihood of undesirable disturbances caused by the secondary impacts of eutrophication. The Water Framework Directive has now been in force for twelve years, new monitoring systems have been developed and management plans have been adopted. While it is unlikely that the aim of achieving good ecological status can be achieved in the majority of surface waters by 2015, the default target established by the directive, good progress is being made and Europe is on the path to establishing a sustainable future for its water environment.

show abstract

Section: Reference Conditions and The High/good Boundarymentioning

confidence: 98%

Progress towards the implementation of the European Water Framework Directive (2000–2012)

Phillips

2014

Aquatic Ecosystem Health &Amp; Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In one of the few surveys of headwater stream chemistry, the variation in water quality in undisturbed forest streams, spanned the range of water qualities identified under the WFD, characterizing bad to high water quality [26]. Concerns about natural variability and the assessment of ecological status have been raised by others [2,[4][5][6]12,27]. A high degree of natural variability and a paucity of monitoring data make it difficult to draw firm conclusions as to the ecological status of all water bodies relevant under the WFD.…”

Section: Assessing Water Body Status Metrics and Natural Variabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It presents an ambitious agenda to define water quality in ecological terms and to develop firm time-lines for remedial actions. By placing ecosystem stability at the center of water management strategies, the WFD represents a radical shift in water management traditions [2]. The WFD is focused on agricultural and urban waters.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Forests, Forestry and the Water Framework Directive in Sweden: A Trans-Disciplinary Commentary

Bishop

Keskitalo

Ellison

et al. 2011

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The Water Framework Directive (WFD) is an ambitious piece of legislation designed to protect and improve water quality throughout Europe. However, forests are only mentioned once in the WFD, and forestry is not mentioned at all, despite its potential implications for streams, rivers and lakes. Here we present a transdisciplinary commentary on the WFD and its implications for forests and forestry in Sweden. This commentary has been prepared by forestry stakeholders, biophysical and social scientists. While we were cognizant of a large body of discipline-specific research, there are very few inter-or trans-disciplinary commentaries which link academic and stakeholder perspectives on the OPEN ACCESSForests 2011, 2 262 WFD. We had originally felt that there would be little commonality in our concerns. However, we found significant areas of agreement. Our key areas of concern about the implications of the WFD for forestry in Sweden included: (i) concerns about what is meant by good ecological status and how it is assessed; (ii) a perceived lack of clarity in the legal framework; (iii) an inadequate environmental impact assessment process; and (iv) uncertainties about appropriate programs of measures for improving water quality. We were also concerned that ecosystem services provided by forests and the positive effects of forestry on water quality are inadequately recognized in the WFD.

show abstract

“…The ecological concept behind these directives is intuitive, as it recognises the interdependencies of abiotic and biotic components in delivering ecosystem services in natural systems. However, the translation of the directives into practical monitoring and hypothesis-driven research has been challenging (Basset 2010, Van Hoey et al 2010, and questions have been raised about the availability of sufficient and appropriate data in marine systems to underpin decision making (Reiss et al 2010, Atkins et al 2011, Heymans et al 2011. Nevertheless, regional management measures that are explicitly based on the Ecosystem Approach have been adopted including, e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mismatches between legislative frameworks and benefits restrict the implementation of the Ecosystem Approach in coastal environments

Holt

Godbold²,

White

et al. 2011

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Ecosystem Approach is increasingly being adopted as a framework for developing environmental policy because it forms a strategy for the management and sustainable use of land, water and living resources. Yet it is not clear how this approach translates into policies that will create the integrated management necessary to protect the environment and supply the benefits which society values. Here we explore the disconnect between current policy and legislation aiming to conserve and protect specific components of coastal wetland ecosystems, and the aspirations of the Ecosystem Approach. Using an estuarine case study, we illustrate the benefits that people value from coastal wetlands and evaluate the extent to which current institutional arrangements protect these benefits. We find that cultural services are the most valued, particularly recreational activities and the enhancement of human wellbeing through a sense of belonging. Although many laws exist that relate to different components of coastal wetland areas, a diversity of organisations are responsible for their implementation, and they do not always adequately protect the benefits most valued by people. In order to successfully move towards the implementation of an Ecosystem Approach, we argue that new institutional arrangements are required. These need to encompass formal laws that protect those ecosystem processes and functions that are necessary to support valued benefits, whilst recognising the need for bridging and coordinating networks of organisations for the integrated management of coastal wetlands.

show abstract

Aquatic science and the water framework directive: a still open challenge towards ecogovernance of aquatic ecosystems

Cited by 21 publications

References 38 publications

Progress towards the implementation of the European Water Framework Directive (2000–2012)

Progress towards the implementation of the European Water Framework Directive (2000–2012)

Forests, Forestry and the Water Framework Directive in Sweden: A Trans-Disciplinary Commentary

Mismatches between legislative frameworks and benefits restrict the implementation of the Ecosystem Approach in coastal environments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About