Do on-farm natural, restored, managed and constructed wetlands mitigate agricultural pollution in Great Britain and Ireland?: a systematic review

Wetlands in agricultural landscapes offer a number of benefits to the landscape function in which they are set, reducing nutrient runoff, providing additional habitat mosaics and offering various ecosystem services. They require careful planning and maintenance in order to perform their optimum design function over a prolonged period of time. They should be treated as functional units of farm infrastructure rather than fit-and-forget systems. A high priority topic within the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) water quality programme is the mitigation of pollution from agriculture. This programme was set up to meet the requirements of the European Water Framework Directive (WFD) EU (2000). Nutrient loss from agricultural land has been suggested as a major cause of elevated nutrient concentrations in surface waters in the UK. Nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) are of particular concern as an excess of either nutrient can lead to eutrophication of freshwater systems and coastal waters. Agriculture has also been identified as a significant source of suspended sediment (SS) concentrations in UK rivers and agriculturally derived sediment has been identified as a source of increased bed-sediment P concentrations in rivers. High bed sediments loads have other negative impacts, such as clogging river gravels reducing fish spawning. There is considerable evidence in the published and grey literature that wetlands have the ability to remove nutrients and sediment and thus reduce the load on receiving waters. Wetlands have also been reported to perform other ecosystem services, such as reducing floods, supporting biodiversity and sequestering carbon. A policy to promote the conservation, management, restoration or construction of wetlands could help to mitigate the impacts of N, P and SS from agriculture delivering requirements of WFD through Catchment Sensitive Farming following an Ecosystem Approach and Catchment Based Approach promoted by Defra. It could also meet other commitments such as implementing the Ramsar and Biodiversity Conventions to which the UK is a signatory. However, the term wetlands covers a wide range of habitat types and it is important that policy makers are provided with accurate, robust and independently reviewed information on the degree to which different types of wetland perform these services under different circumstances, so that policy can most best targeted. This systematic review assesses the available evidence on the performance of various wetland types on farms to reduce nutrient input and suspended sediments to receiving waters. It provides a defensible evidence base on which to base policy. The studies reviewed cover different input loads and the analysis compares performance of these wetland systems in respect of % reduction efficiency. In England and Wales, Defra, working closely with the Environment Agency and Natural England, has commissioned this systematic review on how effective, and what influences the effectiveness of wetlands at mitigating N, P and SS inputs from agriculture to receiving freshwater in the United Kingdom and Ireland

Ecological restoration of rich fens in Europe and North America: from trial and error to an evidence-based approach

Fens represent a large array of ecosystem services, including the highest biodiversity found among wetlands, hydrological services, water purification and carbon sequestration. Land use change and strong drainage has severely damaged or annihilated these services in many parts of North America and Europe, which urges the need of restoration plans at the landscape level. We review the major constraints for the restoration of rich fens and fen water bodies in agricultural areas in Europe and disturbed landscapes in North America: 1) habitat quality problems: drought, eutrophication, acidification, and toxicity, 2) recolonization problems: species pools, ecosystem fragmentation and connectivity, genetic variability, invasive species, and provide possible solutions. We discuss both positive and negative consequences of restoration measures, and their causes. The restoration of wetland ecosystem functioning and services has, for a long time, been based on a trial and error approach. By presenting research and practice on the restoration of rich fen ecosystems within agricultural areas, we demonstrate the importance of biogeochemical and ecological knowledge at different spatial scales for the management and restoration of biodiversity, water quality, carbon sequestration and other ecosystem services, especially in a changing climate. We define target processes that enable scientists, nature managers, water managers and policy makers to choose between different measures and to predict restoration prospects for different types of deteriorated fens and their starting conditions

Accelerating environmental flow implementation to bend the curve of global freshwater biodiversity loss

Environmental flows (e-flows) aim to mitigate the threat of altered hydrological regimes in river systems and connected waterbodies and are an important component of integrated strategies to address multiple threats to freshwater biodiversity. Expanding and accelerating implementation of e-flows can support river conservation and help to restore the biodiversity and resilience of hydrologically altered and water-stressed rivers and connected freshwater ecosystems. While there have been significant developments in e-flow science, assessment, and societal acceptance, implementation of e-flows within water resource management has been slower than required and geographically uneven. This review explores critical factors that enable successful e-flow implementation and biodiversity outcomes in particular, drawing on 13 case studies and the literature. It presents e-flow implementation as an adaptive management cycle enabled by 10 factors: legislation and governance, financial and human resourcing, stakeholder engagement and co-production of knowledge, collaborative monitoring of ecological and social-economic outcomes, capacity training and research, exploration of trade-offs among water users, removing or retrofitting water infrastructure to facilitate e-flows and connectivity, and adaptation to climate change. Recognising that there may be barriers and limitations to the full and effective enablement of each factor, the authors have identified corresponding options and generalizable recommendations for actions to overcome prominent constraints, drawing on the case studies and wider literature. The urgency of addressing flow-related freshwater biodiversity loss demands collaborative networks to train and empower a new generation of e-flow practitioners equipped with the latest tools and insights to lead adaptive environmental water management globally. Mainstreaming e-flows within conservation planning, integrated water resource management, river restoration strategies, and adaptations to climate change is imperative. The policy drivers and associated funding commitments of the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework offer crucial opportunities to achieve the human benefits contributed by e-flows as nature-based solutions, such as flood risk management, floodplain fisheries restoration, and increased river resilience to climate change

The Brisbane Declaration and Global Action Agenda on Environmental Flows (2018)

A decade ago, scientists and practitioners working in environmental water management crystallized the progress and direction of environmental flows science, practice, and policy in The Brisbane Declaration and Global Action Agenda (2007), during the 10th International Riversymposium and International Environmental Flows Conference held in Brisbane, Australia. The 2007 Declaration highlights the significance of environmental water allocations for humans and freshwater-dependent ecosystems, and sets out a nine-point global action agenda. This was the first consensus document that bought together the diverse experiences across regions and disciplines, and was significant in setting a common vision and direction for environmental flows internationally. After a decade of uptake and innovation in environmental flows, the 2007 declaration and action agenda was revisited at the 20th International Riversymposium and Environmental Flows Conference, held in Brisbane, Australia, in 2017. The objective was to publicize achievements since 2007 and update the declaration and action agenda to reflect collective progress, innovation, and emerging challenges for environmental flows policy, practice and science worldwide. This paper on The Brisbane Declaration and Global Action Agenda on Environmental Flows (2018) describes the inclusive consultation processes that guided the review of the 2007 document. The 2018 Declaration presents an urgent call for action to protect and restore environmental flows and aquatic ecosystems for their biodiversity, intrinsic values, and ecosystem services, as a central element of integrated water resources management, and as a foundation for achievement of water-related Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The Global Action Agenda (2018) makes 35 actionable recommendations to guide and support implementation of environmental flows through legislation and regulation, water management programs, and research, linked by partnership arrangements involving diverse stakeholders. An important new element of the Declaration and Action Agenda is the emphasis given to full and equal participation for people of all cultures, and respect for their rights, responsibilities and systems of governance in environmental water decisions. These social and cultural dimensions of e-flow management warrant far more attention. Actionable recommendations present a pathway forward for a new era of scientific research and innovation, shared visions, collaborative implementation programs, and adaptive governance of environmental flows, suited to new social, and environmental contexts driven by planetary pressures, such as human population growth and climate change

Ensuring water resource security in China; the need for advances in evidence based policy to support sustainable management.

China currently faces a water resource sustainability problem which is likely to worsen into the future. The Chinese government is attempting to address this problem through legislative action, but faces severe challenges in delivering its high ambitions. The key challenges revolve around the need to balance water availability with the need to feed a growing population under a changing climate and its ambitions for increased economic development. This is further complicated by the complex and multi-layered government departments, often with overlapping jurisdictions, which are not always aligned in their policy implementation and delivery mechanisms. There remain opportunities for China to make further progress and this paper reports on the outcomes of a science-to-policy roundtable meeting involving scientists and policy-makers in China. It identifies, in an holistic manner, new opportunities for additional considerations for policy implementation, continued and new research requirements to ensure evidence-based policies are designed and implemented and identifies the needs and opportunities to effectively monitor their effectiveness. Other countries around the world can benefit from assessing this case study in China

Catchment management case study - Senegal River

Case study of Senegal river basi

Wetland management

Review of wetlands characteristics, functions and processes and their implications for catchment managemen

Investigating social processes that underpin local flood risk management action

As climate change erodes current levels of flood protection in the UK and government investment in ‘hard’ flood risk management (hFRM) is rationed by cost-benefit ratios, the option for many communities at-risk is to implement local ‘soft’ FRM (sFRM). The frequency of widespread flooding generates an added urgency to understand how to support sFRM. Using a case study and qualitative analysis, we explore social processes (SPs), such as acculturation, that drive stakeholder adaptation to be more flood resilient. We conceptualise the status quo beleaguered by conflict and competition and propose practices of accommodation and cooperation that can support shared objectives and responsibility that strengthen sFRM. Our conceptual model is mapped on a stylised catchment to illustrate how SPs underpin sFRM interventions that join-up the catchment in wholescape thinking. The transferable learning is that there are group behaviours and inclusive practices that can initiate and support local sFRM

How effective are reedbeds, ponds, restored and constructed wetlands at retaining nitrogen, phosphorus and suspended sediment from agricultural pollution in England?

A high priority topic within the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) water quality programme is the mitigation of diffuse rural pollution from agriculture. Wetlands are often cited as being effective at reducing nutrient and sediment loadings to receiving waters. However, the research in this area is inconsistent, and whilst most studies have shown that both natural and constructed wetlands retain nutrients and sediments, others have shown that they have little effect, or even increase nutrient and sediment loads to receiving water bodies. DEFRA has commissioned a systematic review on the use of wetlands to mitigate N, P and SS inputs from agriculture to receiving freshwater in England. The review will encompass a comprehensive literature search on all available material on the subject, both published and unpublished within the British Isles. Specific inclusion criteria will be adhered to and a formal assessment of the quality and reliability of the studies will be undertaken. The data will then be extracted and a data synthesis undertaken. The review will inform an evidence-based policy that can be implemented by stakeholders

Drought indicators revisited: the need for a wider consideration of environment and society

Drought indicators are proliferating, but with little consideration of which are most meaningful for describing drought impacts. A number of recent reviews compare different drought indicators, but none assess which indicators are actually used in the many operational drought monitoring and early warning efforts, why they were selected, or whether they have been ‘ground-truthed,’ i.e., compared with information representing local drought conditions and/or impacts. Also lacking is a comprehensive assessment of the state of monitoring drought impacts. To help fill this gap, we combine a review of drought indicators and impacts with a survey of 33 providers of operational drought monitoring and early warning systems from global to regional scales. Despite considerable variety in the indicators used operationally, certain patterns emerge. Both the literature review and the survey reveal that impact monitoring does exist but has rarely been systematized. Efforts to test drought indicators have mostly focused on agricultural drought. Our review points to a current trend towards the design and use of composite indicators, but with limited evaluation of the links between indicators and drought impacts. Overall, we find that much progress has been made both in research and practice on drought indicators, but monitoring and early warning systems are not yet strongly linked with the assessment of wider impacts on the environment and society. To understand drought impacts fully requires a better framing of drought as a coupled dynamic between the environment and society