Relative impacts of multiple human stressors in estuaries and coastal waters in the North Sea–Baltic Sea transition zone

Andersen, Jesper H.; Al-Hamdani, Zyad; Harvey, E. Thérèse; Kallenbach, Emilie; Murray, Ciarán; Stock, Andy

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135316

Cited by 53 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mapping of relative impact of multiple human stressors in the Danish marine waters showed that highly impacted areas were found in the Wadden Sea, open parts of the Skagerrak, Limfjorden and other estuarine systems, the Danish Straits, and along shipping routes in the Kattegat and western Baltic Sea, while areas with low estimated impacts were found in some offshore parts of the North Sea and Kattegat. The top five stressors for the entire study area are nutrients, climate anomalies, non-indigenous species, noise, and contaminants (Andersen et al 2019).…”

Section: Denmarkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Status of contaminated marine sediments in four Nordic countries: assessments, regulations, and remediation approaches

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Since the 1960s, pollution of the marine environment has been observed around the world, and a general awareness of the potential environmental hazards from contaminants arose. This general awareness was followed by implementation of environmental regulations at the national and international levels regarding industrial discharges, and forcing the development of management programs to improve the environmental quality. This overview focuses on the status of assessments, regulations, and remediation actions of contaminated marine sediments in four North European countries: Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark.Results and discussion We found that the extent of assessment surveys and the implementation of sediment remediation actions vary between the countries, with Norway the most advanced. Norway has initiated national pilot remediation tests, followed by full-scale site remediation by dredging and in situ capping in several projects along the coast. Sweden is following Norway's example, although with fewer completed projects. In Finland, the tradition of maintenance dredging is still very strong although the main purpose has not been cleanup actions. Accordingly, in Denmark, dredging is primarily used to maintain sailing depths. All four countries have implemented the Water Framework Directive in addition to national regulations that provide the authority for imposing and implementing sediment remediation measures. However, only Norway has implemented a national strategy on remediation of contaminated sediments. Conclusions This overview highlights the need for enhanced communication and exchange of experiences between the four Nordic countries of concern with regard to sediment remediation strategy and management.

show abstract

Section: Denmarkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Status of contaminated marine sediments in four Nordic countries: assessments, regulations, and remediation approaches

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite a number of limitations in the polling approach, responses provided valuable insights on the environmental pressures and their impacts, as well as on gaps in monitoring the impacts. A recent study in estuaries and coastal waters in the North Sea-Baltic Sea transition zone (Andersen et al, 2019) using 35 databases yielded results which are broadly similar (see below).…”

Section: Polling Approachmentioning

confidence: 54%

“…In a recent study, Andersen et al (2019) analysed 35 publicly available datasets from Danish marine waters and obtained broadly similar results. These authors found the main stressors (pressures) across a range of water types to be nutrients, climate anomalies, non-indigenous species, noise, and contaminants.…”

Section: Views On Environmental Threats and Impactsmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…Davidson et al (2019) provide an overview of the need for operational oceanographic systems, which include a multi-platform observation network, as well as systems for data management, data assimilation and prediction, and data dissemination and accessibility. Key components of such systems include an integrated approach (She et al, 2019), partnerships and shared approaches for monitoring, assessment and data (Bax et al, 2019;Canonico et al, 2019;Míguez et al, 2019;Schmidt et al, 2019;Stammer et al, 2019;Tanhua et al, 2019;Weller et al, 2019), instrumented moorings (fixed platforms; Bailey et al, 2019), and new methodologies for monitoring, including in situ biochemical, biological, and molecular sensors (reviewed by Wang et al, 2019).…”

Section: Monitoring Programmesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Across the globe, marine monitoring networks are becoming increasingly important for the collection, dissemination, and sharing of data for improved scientific understanding, assessment of the health of marine ecosystems, and forecasting the likely impacts of environmental change and human activities (e.g. Schofield et al, 2002Schofield et al, , 2003Proctor and Howarth, 2008;Duarte et al, 2018;Bailey et al, 2019;Bax et al, 2019;Buck et al, 2019;Canonico et al, 2019;Davidson et al, 2019;Grand et al, 2019;Smith et al, 2019a, b). In Europe, for example, projects and infrastructures such as JERICO 3 , DEVOTES 4 , COPERNICUS 5 , EMODnet 6 , EMSO ERIC 7 , and AtlantOS 8 have played a significant role in the coordination and advancement of monitoring in coastal and offshore waters, from operational marine services to delivering data products to end users.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Marine monitoring in Europe: is it adequate to address environmental threats and pressures?

Painting

Collingridge

Durand³

et al. 2020

Ocean Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We provide a review of the environmental threats and gaps in monitoring programmes in European coastal waters based on previous studies, an online questionnaire, and an in-depth assessment of observation scales. Our findings underpin the JERICO-NEXT1 monitoring strategy for the development and integration of coastal observatories in Europe and support JERICO-RI2 in providing high-value physical, chemical, and biological datasets for addressing key challenges at a European level. This study highlights the need for improved monitoring of environmental threats in European coastal environments. Participants in the online questionnaire provided new insights into gaps between environmental threats and monitoring of impacts. In total, 36 national representatives, scientists, and monitoring authorities from 12 European countries (Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Malta, Norway, Poland, Spain, Sweden, UK) completed the questionnaire, and 38 monitoring programmes were reported. The main policy drivers of monitoring were identified as the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD), the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), Regional Seas Conventions (e.g. OSPAR), and local drivers. Although policy drivers change over time, their overall purposes remain similar. The most commonly identified threats to the marine environment were marine litter, shipping, contaminants, organic enrichment, and fishing. Regime change was identified as a pressure by 67 % of respondents. The main impacts of these pressures or threats were identified by the majority of respondents (> 70 %) to be habitat loss or destruction, underwater noise, and contamination, with 60 % identifying undesirable disturbance (e.g. oxygen depletion), changes in sediment and/or substrate composition, changes in community composition, harmful microorganisms, and invasive species as impacts. Most respondents considered current monitoring of threats to be partially adequate or not adequate. The majority of responses were related to the spatial and/or temporal scales at which monitoring takes place and inadequate monitoring of particular parameters. Suggestions for improved monitoring programmes included improved design, increased monitoring effort, and better linkages with research and new technologies. Improved monitoring programmes should be fit for purpose, underpin longer-term scientific objectives which cut across policy and other drivers, and consider cumulative effects of multiple pressures. JERICO-RI aims to fill some of the observation gaps in monitoring programmes through the development of new technologies. The science strategy for JERICO-RI will pave the way to a better integration of physical, chemical, and biological observations into an ecological process perspective.

show abstract

The Natural Capital approach: A framework for the successful recovery of nature in estuaries

Dowdall

Bowe

Kirby

2022

Ecol Sol and Evidence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Estuaries are unique and complex systems that are important for ecological, cultural and economic reasons. They provide valuable habitat for biodiversity and provide a wide range of regulating, cultural and provisioning ecosystem services. Estuaries have a disproportionate importance to people in comparison to other habitats, which has resulted in high levels of utilization and environmental impact. Poor management, ineffective conservation approaches and global economic changes have resulted in many temperate estuaries becoming both economically and environmentally degraded. We present an argument for the use of the Natural Capital approach as part of the wider green economic agenda in temperate estuaries to support both the environmental and economic recovery of these areas. We make the case that in a habitat always likely to be subject to intense human pressure it provides a holistic decision‐making approach which considers ecological aspects alongside the ecosystem's anthropogenic importance and pressures. This allows for damage to be identified quickly and accelerates the process of designing and implementing solutions. It provides a framework for multiple partners with a material interest in maintaining a healthy estuarine environment providing multiple benefits to drive investment in natural capital and delivery of nature recovery. We highlight some of the obstacles in implementing the Natural Capital approach in estuaries at scale, including collaboration and communication between stakeholders in various sectors, the existence of quality natural capital and environmental baselines and the need for partnership to create investment opportunities. We explore how these are being addressed and identify progress in the Natural Capital approach and how this can inform and advance the widespread implementation of the approach.

show abstract

Relative impacts of multiple human stressors in estuaries and coastal waters in the North Sea–Baltic Sea transition zone

Cited by 53 publications

References 37 publications

Status of contaminated marine sediments in four Nordic countries: assessments, regulations, and remediation approaches

Status of contaminated marine sediments in four Nordic countries: assessments, regulations, and remediation approaches

Marine monitoring in Europe: is it adequate to address environmental threats and pressures?

The Natural Capital approach: A framework for the successful recovery of nature in estuaries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About