Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Literature review › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Literature review › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Managing the impacts of nutrient enrichment on river systems
T2 - dealing with complex uncertainties in risk analyses
AU - Page, T.
AU - Heathwaite, A. L.
AU - Reynolds, C.
AU - Beven, K. J.
AU - Pope, L.
AU - Willows, R.
AU - Moss, Brian
PY - 2012/7
Y1 - 2012/7
N2 - 1. Rivers and their catchments are complex, dynamic and non-equilibrium systems. Although the general functioning of these ecosystems is familiar, the characteristics of particular sites are often poorly known and accurate prediction of future behaviour to inform management decisions is extremely difficult. 2. Simple relationships between river nutrient concentrations and the health of river ecosystems do not exist. Natural variability and practical and technical constraints reduce our ability to set nutrient targets to protect river ecosystems. Particularly challenging is the use of simple doseresponse relationships as regulatory threshold targets, whereby sections of river are classified as either passing or failing to meet good ecological status. 3. Ecologically meaningful frameworks are needed that take account of the epistemic uncertainty associated with our predictions. Such frameworks should have clearly defined goals; be holistic; allow for natural variability; help to define ecologically acceptable environmental regimes; recognise that significant uncertainties mean that we will often be using indices rather than absolute measures; and use measures that explicitly include uncertainty estimates. Such approaches allow those outside the decision-making process to understand the level of environmental precaution included in the management of complex systems.
AB - 1. Rivers and their catchments are complex, dynamic and non-equilibrium systems. Although the general functioning of these ecosystems is familiar, the characteristics of particular sites are often poorly known and accurate prediction of future behaviour to inform management decisions is extremely difficult. 2. Simple relationships between river nutrient concentrations and the health of river ecosystems do not exist. Natural variability and practical and technical constraints reduce our ability to set nutrient targets to protect river ecosystems. Particularly challenging is the use of simple doseresponse relationships as regulatory threshold targets, whereby sections of river are classified as either passing or failing to meet good ecological status. 3. Ecologically meaningful frameworks are needed that take account of the epistemic uncertainty associated with our predictions. Such frameworks should have clearly defined goals; be holistic; allow for natural variability; help to define ecologically acceptable environmental regimes; recognise that significant uncertainties mean that we will often be using indices rather than absolute measures; and use measures that explicitly include uncertainty estimates. Such approaches allow those outside the decision-making process to understand the level of environmental precaution included in the management of complex systems.
KW - THRESHOLD RESPONSES
KW - ENVIRONMENTAL-MANAGEMENT
KW - STREAM PERIPHYTON
KW - FRESH-WATER
KW - ecological status
KW - AGRICULTURAL CATCHMENTS
KW - PERIPHYTON BIOMASS
KW - Water Framework Directive
KW - PHOSPHORUS TRANSFER
KW - rivers
KW - nutrients
KW - MULTIPLE STRESSORS
KW - WATER-QUALITY
KW - EUROPEAN LAKES
KW - uncertainty
U2 - 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2012.02756.x
DO - 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2012.02756.x
M3 - Literature review
VL - 57
SP - 108
EP - 123
JO - Freshwater Biology
JF - Freshwater Biology
SN - 0046-5070
IS - s1
ER -