Search

The EU and the international community is realising that the Water, Energy, Food and Ecosystem components are interlinked and require a joint planning in order to meet the daunting global challenges related to Water, Energy and Food security and maintaining the ecosystem health and in this way, reach the SDGs. If not dealt with, the world will not be able to meet the demand for water, energy and food in a not too far future and, in any case, in a not sustainable way. The strain on the ecosystems resulting from unsustainable single-sector planning will lead to increasing poverty, inequality and instability. The Nexus approach is fully aligned with and supportive of the EU Consensus on Development. Key elements of the Consensus will require collaborative efforts across sectors in ways that can be supported/implemented by a Nexus approach. In this way, transparent and accountable decision-making, involving the civil society is key and common to the European Consensus on Development and the Nexus approach. The Nexus approach will support the implementation of the SDG in particular SDG 2 (Food), SDG 6 (Water) and SDG 7 (Energy), but most SDGs have elements that link to food, water and energy in one or other way, and will benefit from a Nexus approach. The SDGs are designed to be cross-cutting and be implemented together, which is also reflected in a WEFE Nexus approach. A Nexus approach offers a sustainable way of addressing the effects of Climate Change and increase resilience. The WEFE Nexus has in it the main drivers of climate change (water, energy and food security) and the main affected sectors (water and the environment). Decisions around policy, infrastructure, … developed based on the WEFE Nexus assessments will be suitable as elements of climate change mitigation and adaptation. In fact, it is difficult to imagine solutions to the climate change issue that are not built on a form of Nexus approach. The Nexus approach is being implemented around the world, as examples in the literature demonstrate. These examples together with more examples from EU and member state development cooperation will help build experience that can be consolidated and become an important contribution to a Toolkit for WEFE Nexus Implementation. From the expert discussions, it appears that because of the novelty of the approach, a Toolkit will be an important element in getting the Nexus approach widely used. This should build on experiences from practical examples of NEXUS projects or similar inter-sectorial collaboration projects; and, there are already policy, regulation and practical experience to allow institutions and countries to start applying the Nexus concept., JRC.D.2-Water and Marine Resources

Estimation of domestic and industrial emissions to the European fresh and marine waters is needed for assessing current ecological status of water bodies and providing inputs to conceptual models of pollutant transport and fate. Regulatory efforts of the European Commission, particularly Urban Waste Water Directive (UWWWD) and Water Framework Directive (WFD) prompted investments in waste treatment, and as a result point source emissions to water bodies have declined. In order to account for these improvements, domestic and industrial emission assessments were to be updated for conditions valid in the 2010s. The aim of this study was to assess the quantity and location of domestic and industrial waste emissions of pollutants in European waters for the 2010s. Specifically, the pollutants considered in this study were total Nitrogen (N), total Phosphorous (P), and organic pollution as measured by 5-days Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD). The spatial resolution and extent of the analysis corresponded to the CCM2 River and Catchment Database for Europe. Pollutants were estimated in terms of mean annual average load (t/y) released in the CCM2 catchments. The reference period for the assessment was set to 2014-2015, although in some cases a longer time period was considered. The assessment of pollutant loads to waters from domestic and industrial emissions made full use of available European databases created in response to EU regulations. A method was developed to exploit the European datasets and fill in content gaps through alternative sources of information (REP approach). The European datasets allowed pinpointing waste emissions to a much higher spatial and conceptual resolution than before, although some knowledge gaps remained, affecting especially emissions from domestic waste of isolated dwellings, small agglomerations, and industries. Outside EU28, Switzerland and Norway, domestic and industrial emissions were assessed based on population density and national statistics of shares of population served by sewerage treatment and level of WWTP treatments (POP approach). The comparison between Population Equivalent generated in agglomerations and reported in the UWWTD database with country resident population allowed estimating an equivalence of 1.23 PE per inhabitant, meaning that on average in Europe the contribution of small industries, commercial activities and tourism can be considered about 23% of generated load. This information was used to assess population unreported in the UWWTD database because belonging to small isolated dwellings. Estimates of total emissions due to domestic waste with REP approach with those from POP approach for 30 countries covered by both methods were in good agreement, with Pearson’s correlation coefficient of 0.95 for Nitrogen, 0.94 for Phosphorous and 0.71 for BOD. Yet, important differences emerged when separating emissions by treatment type or pathway, e.g. looking at disconnected, connected not treated or connected and treated shares of domestic waste. The comparison highlighted inconsistencies between the European database and national statistics and it was noted that for some countries national statistics were scant or inconsistent. Thus, while total emissions are comparable, care should be taken when considering each population share independently. Finally, total pollutant emissions for Europe in 2010s were obtained by merging all available data, using the REP approach and the POP approach estimates to fill in knowledge gaps. In EU28, annual emissions to water from domestic and industrial waste for the 2010s were estimated at 777.6 kt/y of Nitrogen, 126.6 kt/y of Phosphorous and 2,190 kt/y of BOD. The majority of domestic waste is treated in WWTPs, with high adoption rates of tertiary treatment and Phosphorus removal technology, lowering emissions of domestic waste per capita. EU28 IND emissions accounted for 11.3% of N, 6.7% of P and 33.7% of BOD emissions. Emissions from population disconnected to sewerage systems or treated with IAS (for which only primary treatment was assumed) accounted for 11.2% of Nitrogen, 14.6% of Phosphorous and 19.5% BOD emissions to the environment. However only a part of these emissions would eventually reach freshwater systems, as environmental abatement (not considered in this study) would further reduce them. Conversely, connected not treated population contributed 6.2% of Nitrogen, 7.2% of Phosphorous, and 14.4% of BOD directly discharged to freshwater bodies. Tackling these sources of domestic waste and upgrading primary treatment facilities may further reduce pollution loads discharged in freshwater systems and ultimately to the seas., JRC.D.2-Water and Marine Resources

This report illustrates a system of indicators (called JRC Water Pressure Indicators) providing a consistent picture of human pressures on water bodies at European scale, to be compared with pressure and status information reported by Member States under the Water Framework Directive 60/2000/EC. The indicators represent “version 2.0” of a “version 1.0” published before . This “version 2.0” was introduced in Pistocchi et al. (2017) and includes nutrients, urban runoff, hydromorphological and flow regime alterations, and in particular: • an updated GREEN model setup for estimating nitrogen and phosphorus load to European surface waters; • the updated indicators of morphological alteration of floodplains produced with the Copernicus riparian zones layer ; • the indicators of flow regime perturbation and river continuity disruption, due to dams and other stream barriers in Europe, computed on the basis of a new dataset compiled by the JRC; • the indicators of flow regime alteration due to abstractions, using estimates of demand for irrigation, livestock, domestic and industrial water use and cooling of energy production plants, and information on natural water availability simulated with a calibrated LISFLOOD model. A relevant change from version 1.0 to version 2.0 is the spatial support of the indicators. While in version 1.0 the indicators were computed at the level of HydroEurope (HE1) subbasins, i.e. polygons of an average size of 180 km2, or on grids of 5 km or 1 km resolution (see Pistocchi et al., 2015, for details) and aggregated at the river basin district (RBD) scale, in version 2.0 all indicators are computed on the HydroEurasia (HE2) subbasins. These coincide with the elementary subbasins identified in the CCM2 hydrography, consisting of the subdivision of Europe and surrounding river basins into smaller polygons (average size about 7 km2). Each polygon represents a subbasin and is univocally associated to the main hydrographic segment (river stretch) it contains. The indicators presented here reflect the best knowledge available at the JRC from both compiled European datasets and in-house model simulations. They are designed to be updated when more complete or higher-quality information is made available. Data and model limitations are highlighted for each indicator, either in this report or in Pistocchi et al., 2017., JRC.D.2-Water and Marine Resources

People, planet, prosperity and peace are four priorities shared by Africa and Europe, and areas where opportunities for beneficial cooperation abound. Over the past three decades, the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) has worked with many organisations and institutions across Africa. This report and its accompanying interactive online service ‘Africa StoryMaps’ present the key findings from this collaboration, and set out options the decision-making, research and education communities may consider. The report focuses on the African dimension of the partnership. It explores the opportunities and challenges arising from the fact that Africa has over twice the population of the European Union (EU), is the world’s most youthful continent, has an economy that is growing faster than that of the EU, is almost seven times larger geographically, yet is vulnerable to diverse internal and external stresses. Tell us what you think about this report. Please fill out and return our feedback form (PDF) at https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/file/document/africa-report-feedback-form., JRC.D.6-Knowledge for Sustainable Development and Food Security

Policy context Water reuse has been identified by the European Commission as a relevant solution to be further promoted in the EU to address water scarcity. This opportunity was highlighted again in the context of the EU action plan for a Circular Economy (COM(2015) 614 final). In, particular the Commission committed to table a legislative proposal setting minimum quality requirements for water reuse. This initiative has been included in the Commission Work Programme 2017. In order to support the decisions to be taken on the matter, the costs and benefits of water reuse need to be clearly identified and quantified to the best possible extent. Key conclusions/Main findings In this study we estimate the distribution of costs of reclaiming and transporting treated wastewater for reuse in agricultural irrigation across Europe. We consider treatment costs as well as the costs associated to the water transport infrastructure and to energy for pumping. The study highlights a high variability of costs depending on the relative position of irrigated agricultural land with respect to the wastewater treatment plants. Treatment costs alone may be minor, about 8 €cents/m3, compared to the other costs, with typical total costs exceeding 50 €cents/m3. However, when treatment requirements become more stringent, treatment costs may surge up to about 0.3 €/m3, causing total costs to shift consistently. The energy requirements for pumping of reclaimed water from wastewater treatment plants to agricultural land follow a distribution with a median of about 0.5 kWh/m3 and an interquartile range of another 0.5 kWh/m3, which seems slightly higher than reported in representative cases of irrigation with conventional water sources. The total volumes of water that can be in principle reused for irrigation are significant, and may contribute to the reduction of water stress by 10% or more in regions where irrigation is an important component of demand. Water reuse may also contribute, in a less apparent and more uncertain way, to nutrient pollution mitigation. While the treatment and energy costs are mostly compatible with the market value of the crops produced thanks to irrigation, the total costs may exceed the capacity of farmers to pay. This indicates that (1) reuse is most suitable where irrigation infrastructure already exists and the necessary additional investments are minor, and (2) the cost of water reuse should be considered in a broader context. This context should be extended to include, on the one side, the whole value chain supplied by agriculture and, on the other side, the process of river basin management where reuse may represent a measure with important co-benefits. Related and future JRC work This work is part of the broader “Water-Energy-Food-Ecosystems Nexus” project of the JRC. Water reuse is regarded as a relevant water resource management option, and this report provides the basis for an assessment of strategic priorities for water reuse in Europe., JRC.D.2-Water and Marine Resources

This report is a background document used by several European Commission services to prepare the EC report on critical raw materials and the circular economy, a commitment of the European Commission made in its Communication ‘EU action plan for the Circular Economy’. It represents a JRC contribution to the Raw Material Initiative and to the EU Circular Economy Action Plan. It combines the results of several research programmes and activities of the JRC on critical raw materials in a context of circular economy, for which a large team has contributed in terms of data and knowledge developments. Circular use of critical raw materials in the EU is analysed, also taking a sectorial perspective. The following sectors are analysed in more detail: mining waste, landfills, electric and electronic equipment, batteries, automotive, renewable energy, defence and chemicals and fertilisers. Conclusions and opportunities for further work are also presented., JRC.D.3-Land Resources

The EC DG JRC is using in-house models and other information to build indicators of pressures on water bodies, in the context of the 2nd river basin management plan (RBMP) implementation assessment (Water Framework Directive (WFD) 60/2000/EC, art. 18) and review of the WFD (art. 19). These indicators are meant to provide a picture of major water pressures at the European scale. The main reason to develop a set of independent pressure indicators is the need to evaluate and monitor the effectiveness of the EU water policies at broad. If the indicators are realistic, the models used for their computation can be used also as tools to simulate scenarios with changing pressures, as a result of policies or other drivers (such as climate changes, implementation of measures or EU sectorial policies). The EC DG ENV is steering the development of an integrated hydro-economic modelling platform in support to the evaluation of policies, with the broadest possible involvement of the EU Member States, and collaborates with DG JRC by leading a large study on the economics of water in Europe also in order to supplement JRC’s biophysical models and indicators with additional economic evidence about the costs and benefits of reducing pressures and improving the conditions of freshwater and marine ecosystems. Another question is whether the pressures are evaluated consistently throughout the European Union. The JRC indicators could be used to benchmark pressure and status reported by the Member States at a different scale. In fact, if JRC indicators are sufficiently reliable, it is expected that overall trends will be consistent with the pressures reported by the Member States. At the same time, JRC indicators do not take into account local conditions in specific water bodies, and should not be compared to reported pressures and status at water body level. The aim of benchmarking is to understand the reasons for assessment discrepancies, primarily for verification purposes. In particular, discrepancies should not be considered per se as evidence of non-compliance in the implementation of the WFD by Member States. particularly, if a given river basin is flagged by Member State reports to suffer from a given pressure, but this is not found in the JRC pressure indicators, the knowledge available at the Commission is likely inadequate for that river basin. The benchmarking process with reported pressures/status in itself could prompt the Commission to seek an explanation for the discrepancies, and eventually to update the indicators, with the overall goal of a coherent and shared vision of pressures at the European and river basin district scales. DG ENV encourages Member States to provide feedback to DG JRC on the indicators and the underpinning models, so that the European scale picture of water pressures they provide can be improved to a sufficient level of realism and representativeness, and can be consequently used as a basis for European water policy evaluation and development. As a first opportunity for this process, the JRC organised a workshop in Ispra on 11-12 May 2016 with the aim to collect feedback from experts on the proposed methodologies and indicators. The JRC pressure indicators are updated over time, as new knowledge is available at the European level. Therefore the benchmarking of local and European assessments is supposed to be a continuous process. The reviews by experts in the Member States should not add to the administrative burden related to the WFD, but should be conducted with the modalities of scientific peer reviews. It will be necessary to pay significant attention to the way the results are communicated, so to clarify the content of the indicators and avert risks of misinterpretation. The review of the indicators will serve also this purpose. This document summarizes the JRC indicators, the state of play with their update and further development, and the outcomes of the workshop held in Ispra on May 11-12, 2016., JRC.D.2-Water and Marine Resources

In this report we propose a classification of river basin districts (RBDs) in terms of the consistency between reported significant pressures and pressures expected to be relevant in each RBD on the basis of pan-European indicators. We discuss the results and limitations of the classification obtained at European scale, and we suggest a perspective for its use for improving Water Framework Directive (WFD) implementation and the subsequent in-depth analysis of programmes of measures (PoMs) and their effectiveness. Overall, the analysis highlights that some river basin districts report pressures in a way that is in line with expectations from European indicators, while some others report either higher or lower pressure intensity than expected. Reasons for these discrepancies may include lack of relevant local information in the assessment of European indicators, and under/overestimation of pressures by the RBD authorities or reporting member states. The analysis presented here is based on data aggregated at RBD level, as allowed by the available information, and should be regarded mainly as a proof of concept. In the future, the same analysis should be updated with reference to individual water bodies, and taking into consideration the updates of river basin management plans and PoMs under development at the time of writing this report., JRC.H.1-Water Resources

The Water Framework Directive requires the development and implementation of river basin management plans for improving the ecological status of freshwater bodies throughout Europe. The scientific community supports this process by developing decision-support tools for identifying the principal sources of water pollution. Models, however, are imperfect representations of the real world, and are conditioned by structural uncertainty, implicit in the description of biophysical processes, and data uncertainty, as well as in the various restrictions of the environmental data the models were developed. Hence, decision makers must plan management actions on the basis of the best available, however still incomplete, knowledge. The comparison of independent assessments may offer insights that are useful for decision-making, e.g. for identifying knowledge gaps, identifying data uncertainties, consolidating investigation results, and increasing stakeholders’ acceptance. The Danube River is the second largest and most international river of Europe. Its basin covers approximately 803,000 km2 of Central and South-Eastern Europe and is shared by 19 countries. Within the context of fostering scientific collaboration in the Danube region and under the auspices of the International Commission for the Danube River Protection (ICPDR), three independent model (SWAT, MONERIS and GREEN) were compared with the objective of reaching a shared appraisal of nutrient pressures and drivers in the Danube Basin. Annual water discharge (Flow, m3/s) as well as annual loads of total nitrogen (TN, ton/y) and total phosphorus (TP, ton/y) were compared at the outlet of 18 ICPDR regions for the decade 2000-2009. For each region, mean annual values, correlation, standard deviation, and root mean square error of model simulations were analysed. Good water discharge simulations across the basin confirmed that hydrology was correctly represented in all models. The nutrients comparison revealed for some assessment regions the need for a spatially and temporarily intensified monitoring especially for TN. Concerning TP, SWAT and MONERIS had comparable long mean annual TP loads, but differed for amplitude and phases; while GREEN generally overestimated TP loads. Despite differences in model approaches and considered input data, the three assessments were coherent, and all three models may be confidently used for river basin management of the region., JRC.H.1-Water Resources

The Water Framework Directive (WFD) of the European Union requires member states to achieve good ecological status of all waterbodies. A harmonized pan European assessment of water resources availability and quality as affected by various management options is necessary for a successful implementation of European environmental legislation. In this context we developed a methodology to predict surface water flow at pan European scale using readily available datasets. Among the hydrological models available, the Soil Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) has been selected because its characteristics make it suitable for large scale applications with limited data requirements. This paper presents the results for the Danube pilot basin. The Danube basin is one of the largest European watersheds covering ca. 803,000 km2 and 14 countries. Modeling data used included land use and management information, a detailed soil parameters map, and high resolution climate data. The Danube basin was divided into 4663 subwatersheds of an average size of 179 km2. A protocol is proposed to overcome problems of hydrological regionalization from gauged to ungauged watersheds, over-parameterization and identifiability usually present during calibration. The protocol involves a cluster analysis for the determination of hydrological regions and multi-objective calibration using a combination of manual and automated calibration. The proposed protocol was successfully implemented, with the modeled discharges capturing well the overall hydrological behavior of the basin. ispartof: Journal of Environmental Quality vol:43 issue:1 pages:145-154 ispartof: location:United States status: published

A modelling environment has been developed to assess optimum combinations of water retention measures, water savings measures, and nutrient reduction measures for continental Europe. This modelling environment consists of linking the agricultural CAPRI model, the LUMP land use model, the LISFLOOD water quantity model, the EPIC water quality model, the LISQUAL combined water quantity, quality and hydro-economic model, and a multi-criteria optimisation routine. Simulations have been carried out to assess the effects of water retention measures, water savings measures, and nutrient reduction measures on several hydro-chemical indicators, such as the Water Exploitation Index, Environmental Flow indicators, N and P concentrations in rivers, the 50-year return period river discharge as an indicator for flooding, and economic losses due to water scarcity for the agricultural sector, the manufacturing-industry sector, the energy-production sector and the domestic sector. Also, potential flood damage of a 100-year return period flood has been used as an indicator. The study shows that technically this modelling software environment can deliver optimum scenario combinations of packages of measures that improve various water quantity and water quality indicators, but that additional work is needed before final conclusions can be made using the tool. Further work is necessary, especially in the economic loss estimations, the water prices and price-elasticity, as well as the implementation and maintenance costs of individual scenarios., JRC.H.1-Water Resources

There is a need to prove the relevance of ecosystem services in economic terms in order to make a comprehensive and compelling case for conservation of biodiversity. Many different approaches and frameworks used so far have proven that there is no economic or monetary estimate of ecosystems or ecosystem services with absolute validity: any valuation exercise is always context related. This report presents a framework for valuing ecosystem services when the specific purpose of valuation is to support conservation policies at regional scale. After a brief review of the foundation of environmental and ecological economics and after showing the difference between economic models and valuation models, the framework for the valuation of ecosystem services related to conservation policies is presented both theoretically and practically through a case study. Theoretically it is shown how the role of economics (i.e. the application of monetary valuation techniques) is instrumental to natural sciences (i.e. the outcomes of models). The case study refers to the valuation of water purification in the Northern Mediterranean region. Throughout the paper, it is strongly outlined the crucial role of working within an interdisciplinary team, JRC.H.1-Water Resources

A spatially explicit statistical approach (GREEN model) applied to continental Europe on a sub-catchment basis, is used to link input from anthropogenic activities and nutrient loads into European Seas (namely nitrogen and phosphorous). Effectiveness of environmental legislation is assessed at the horizon 2020, emphasizing the regional differences between European countries as well as the respective contribution of anthropogenic changes and hydrological fluctuation in nutrient exports. The set of scenarios analyzed includes a business as usual situation, a full implementation of on going policy options, a change in European diet based on a strong reduction of meat intake, and optimized management of agricultural practices. All prospective analyses are implemented for EU-27 and are discussed in terms of capacities to mitigate land based emissions of nutrient, and also according to their impacts on the loads of nutrient exported to European coastal areas., JRC.H.1-Water Resources

Nitrogen flows from European watersheds to coastal marine waters\ud \ud Executive summary\ud \ud Nature of the problem\ud \ud • Most regional watersheds in Europe constitute managed human territories importing large amounts of new reactive nitrogen.\ud • As a consequence, groundwater, surface freshwater and coastal seawater are undergoing severe nitrogen contamination and/or eutrophication\ud problems.\ud \ud Approaches \ud \ud • A comprehensive evaluation of net anthropogenic inputs of reactive nitrogen (NANI) through atmospheric deposition, crop N fixation,fertiliser use and import of food and feed has been carried out for all European watersheds. A database on N, P and Si fluxes delivered at the basin outlets has been assembled.\ud • A number of modelling approaches based on either statistical regression analysis or mechanistic description of the processes involved in nitrogen transfer and transformations have been developed for relating N inputs to watersheds to outputs into coastal marine ecosystems.\ud \ud Key findings/state of knowledge\ud \ud • Throughout Europe, NANI represents 3700 kgN/km2/yr (range, 0–8400 depending on the watershed), i.e. five times the background rate of natural N2 fixation.\ud • A mean of approximately 78% of NANI does not reach the basin outlet, but instead is stored (in soils, sediments or ground water) or eliminated to the atmosphere as reactive N forms or as N2.\ud • N delivery to the European marine coastal zone totals 810 kgN/km2/yr (range, 200–4000 depending on the watershed), about four times the natural background. In areas of limited availability of silica, these inputs cause harmful algal blooms.\ud \ud Major uncertainties/challenges\ud \ud • The exact dimension of anthropogenic N inputs to watersheds is still imperfectly known and requires pursuing monitoring programmes and data integration at the international level.\ud • The exact nature of ‘retention’ processes, which potentially represent a major management lever for reducing N contamination of water resources, is still poorly understood.\ud • Coastal marine eutrophication depends to a large degree on local morphological and hydrographic conditions as well as on estuarine processes, which are also imperfectly known.\ud \ud Recommendations\ud \ud • Better control and management of the nitrogen cascade at the watershed scale is required to reduce N contamination of ground- and surface water, as well as coastal eutrophication.\ud • In spite of the potential of these management measures, there is no choice at the European scale but to reduce the primary inputs of reactive nitrogen to watersheds, through changes in agriculture, human diet and other N flows related to human activity.

ANSWERS, an event-oriented, distributed parameter nonpoint source pollution model for simulating runoff and sediment transport was modified to develop a continuous nonpoint source model to simulate runoff, erosion, transport of dissolved and sediment-bound nutrients, and nutrient transformations. The model was developed for use by nonpoint source pollution managers to study the long-tenn effectiveness of best management practices (BMPs) in reducing runoff, sediment, and nutrient losses from agricultural watersheds. The Holtan's infiltration equation used in the original version of ANSWERS was replaced by the physically-based Green-Ampt infiltration equation. Soil evaporation and plant transpiration were modeled separately using the Ritchie equation. If soil moisture exceeds field capacity, the model computes percolation based on the degree of soil saturation. Nutrient losses include nitrate, sediment-bound and dissolved ammonium; sediment-bound TKN, and sediment-bound and dissolved phosphorus. A linear equilibrium is assumed between dissolved and sediment-bound phases of ammonium and phosphorus. Nutrient loss is assumed to occur only from the upper cm of the soil profile. The model simulates transformations and interactions between four nitrogen pools including stable organic N, active organic N, nitrate and ammonium. Transformations of nitrogen include mineralization simulated as a combination of ammonification and nitrification, denitrification, and plant uptake of ammonium and nitrate. The model maintains a dynamic equilibrium between stable and active organic N pools. Ph. D.