MIRACLE. Mediating integrated actions for sustainable ecosystems services in a changing climate Period covered: from to

Transcription

1 Project acronym: MIRACLE Project title: Mediating integrated actions for sustainable ecosystems services in a changing climate Period covered: from to Deliverable name: Report and data set on scenario modelling of measures suggested by stakeholders to reduce flooding, eutrophication, enhance biodiversity and contribute to other goals, as well as climate change scenarios Del. No. 2.3 The BONUS MIRACLE project has received funding from by BONUS (Art 185), funded jointly by the EU and the Innovation Fund Denmark, Bundesministeriums für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF), Latvian Ministry of Education and Science, Polish National Centre for Research and Development, Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning (FORMAS).

2 Contents 1 INTRODUCTION BERZE CATCHMENT Pathways of development for Berze catchment Pathway 1 - Business as usual ( ) Pathway 2 Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants ( ) Pathway 3 Focus on Rural Actions - Agri-Ecological Measures ( ) Measures suggested by stakeholders to reduce eutrophication in the case study area Agri-environmental measures Wastewater treatment plants and pollution load from wastewater Pathway modelling approach in Berze Preparatory activities for modelling case area Input data for modelling Model setup for modelling pathways Modelled impacts of pathways Modelled effects of individual measures Modelled effects of pathways HELGE Å CATCHMENT Pathways of development for Helge å catchment Background Pathway 1 Business as usual Pathway 2 Ecosystem services approach Pathway 3 Improvements in forestry sector Pathway modelling approach in Helge å Impact model set-up and model periods Land use change assumptions Model impacts of pathways REDA CATCHMENT Pathways of development for Reda catchment Background Pathway 1 - Business as usual Pathway 2 - Focus on urban actions Pathway 3 - Focus on rural areas Pathway 4 Agri-Environmental measures Mixture of Urban and Rural and Agri-Environmental actions Pathway modelling approach for Reda Preparatory activities for modelling the case area

3 4.2.2 Consumption of mineral fertilizers in Reda catchment Model setup for pathway modelling SELKE CATCHMENT Pathways of development for Selke catchment Background Pathway 1 Business as usual Pathway 2 Ecosystem service approach Pathway 3 Waste water treatment Pathway modelling approach for Selke river Preparatory activities for modelling the case area Modelled impact of pathways Revision of modelled scenarios as suggested by stakeholders in the 3rd workshop APPROACH TO IMPLEMENTATION OF CLIMATE CHANGE IN HYPE IN THE CASE STUDY AREAS (RCP4.5, RCP8.5) CONCLUSIONS LITERATURE

4 1 Introduction In this report, the main objective is to present the modelled assessments of what effects sets of measures included in pathways of development, as suggested by stakeholders, could have on water and nutrient flows in the four case catchments of the BONUS MIRACLE project. As part of the social learning process in the Selke river, the stakeholders had reviewed the modelled impacts of pathways at the time of writing this report. For the other three case areas, revisions of the modelled pathways of development in response to the discussions with stakeholders in the third set of workshops will be presented in the next Deliverable D2.4. That report will also include the effects of land use and climate change scenarios on water flow and nutrient transports, which the partners had not managed to complete before the third set of workshops with stakeholders. However, for the Helge å river basin land use and climate change scenarios have been simulated and are presented in the current report, along with the methodological aspect of the climate change scenarios that will be modelled in all case areas. First, a brief description of the pathways of development defined in the social learning process in WP 5, and their meaning, is presented. Detailed explanations of pathways are given elsewhere (Powell et al. 2018). As described by Carolus et al. (2015), the pathways are central to the economic analysis and serve as a frame for the socio-economic assessments of costs and benefits. In all case areas, the first pathway describes a business-as-usual pathway including, as far as possible, all measures that are currently being implemented or are planned to be implemented in the respective catchment up until Subsequent pathways represent possible new or modified measures that may be added to pathway 1. Hence, the pathways should not be considered mutually exclusive alternatives, as pathway 1 is always included in the analyses, though certain measures in the subsequent pathways may be mutually exclusive (Table 1). Effects of the pathways on water flow and nutrient concentrations and transport have been assessed using the HYPE Model based on the model set ups and calibrations presented in report D 2.2. In that report, results for the Berze river were missing, and therefore those are presented in the current report. As the socio-economic characteristics and land use differs between the catchments, different systemic issues have been defined by stakeholders. Consequently, the pathways of development defined in the social learning process differ between catchments and contain different kinds of measures suggested by stakeholders. In order to adapt the simulation to the local conditions and stakeholder discussions, slightly different approaches have been used in the four catchments regarding how to model the effect of measures and how to present the results. 4

5 Table 1 Basic characteristics of the pathways of development in the four case catchments in the BONUS MIRACLE project. Pathway Berze Helge å Reda Selke Business as usual Focus on Urban Actions (Berze, Reda & Selke) Ecosystem services approach (Helge å) Focus on Rural Actions (Berze, Reda and Selke) Improved water management in the forestry sector (Helge å) Other Greening (e.g. ecological focus areas, diversified crops, permanent grasslands), Agri-environ.-climate measures (e.g. preserve grassland biodiversity, maintain stubble cover in winter and others), Organic farming, Support Natura 2000 sites. Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants - Improvements in existing small municipal wastewater treatment plants according to HELCOM Recommendations. Agri-Ecological Measures - Implementation and maintenance of buffer strips of permanent grassland in agricultural areas (e.g., 5 and 10 buffer strips along waterways of national significance and 2 m buffer strip along open drainage ditches). Optimization of mineral and organic fertilizer use by 20%. Joint implementation of all above mentioned measures. Liming of lake surfaces to increase ph, 10 m buffer strips, Ecological buffer zones, Greening measures, Upgrade of private sewage treatment systems, Artificial wetlands. Urban storm water ponds, Flood plain targeting agricultural production areas, Riparian zones, artificial wetlands, Removal of fish migration barriers, e.g. fish ladders by small hydropower plants. Establish wetlands in forest areas, Establish flood plains Maintain riparian zones in forest landscapes. Wastewater infrastructure, Hydrotechnical infrastructure, Standard agri-environmental measures. Small urban retention structures, Flood protection infrastructure, Tourism/recreation infrastructure, Urban development planning. Large retention infrastructure, Floodplains retention, Small field retention, e.g. wetlands. Agri-environmental measures such as buffer strips, catch crops, greening, liming, Improved treatment of rural wastewater sources. Urban and Rural actions with the greatest impact and effectiveness Flower and water protection strips (EFA), start in 2015, Reduction of the number of households not connected to sewer systems. New constructed wetlands. Development/management of riparian buffer strips (10-20 meters depending on buffer/water strips), Different designs/uptake of conservation tillage (e.g. reduced tillage and contour ploughing), Optimized fertilizer use/application Contour ploughing (reduced erosion) Increased number of households connected to sewer systems, Joint implementation of all above mentioned measures. 5

6 2 Berze catchment 2.1 Pathways of development for Berze catchment During three stakeholder meetings in the Berze River case area a core group of stakeholders was built up from environmental policy developers and institutions responsible for implementation such as the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development, the Ministry of Agriculture, the State Environmental Services, the Latvian Environment, Geology and Meteorology Centre, the Health Inspectorate, the Property Management Group Ministry of Agriculture, the Rural Support Service, representatives from the municipalities and their enterprises, entrepreneurs (small HPP), farmers, NGOs such as the Latvian Fund for Nature, the Baltic Environmental Forum, the Farmers Parliament, and the project partners from the University of Latvia and Latvia University of Agriculture. The discussions among those stakeholders and the BONUS MIRACLE partners involved in the Berze River studies have resulted in the following suggestions for measures to be included in pathways of development for the Berze River basin Pathway 1 - Business as usual ( ) The business as usual pathway includes all planned and implemented measures defined in the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), the Latvian Rural Development Programme and Lielupe River Basin Management Plan that are intended to enhance environmental quality and the provision of ecosystem services in the Berze River case area until To allow comparison with alternative pathways, the business as usual pathway of measures is assumed to continue until The business as usual pathway includes the following measures: - Greening measures (ecological focus areas, crop diversification and permanent grasslands) that farmers receiving area-based payments are required to implement to benefit the environment and climate and for which they additionally receive payments. - Agri-environmental-climate measures are voluntary practices (biodiversity preservation in grasslands, ecological horticulture, maintenance of stubble cover during winter period) undertaken by farmers in the context of the Rural Development Programme that bring environmental benefits and/or help to mitigate and adapt to climate change. Payments compensate farmers for the extra costs that they incur and the income that they forego when they undertake these practices. The measures must go beyond a number of obligations which apply to farmers, amongst others, cross-compliance and relevant national legislation. 6

7 - Organic farming is a voluntary measure in the context of the Rural Development Programme undertaken by farmers receiving support per hectare of agricultural area, to convert to or maintain organic farming practices and methods including relevant minimum requirements for fertilizer and plant protection products use as well as other relevant mandatory requirements established by national law. - Natura 2000 is a voluntary measure supported annually per hectare of agricultural area or per hectare of forest in order to compensate beneficiaries for additional costs and income foregone as a result of protecting areas of particular ecological value Pathway 2 Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants ( ) Centralized municipal wastewater treatment plants (WWTP) are the largest point sources of nutrient (N, P) loading in the Berze River basin. Of the existing 23 WWTP only the City of Dobele plant serves a large community of person equivalents (PE) >10000, whereas the rest of the plants serve small communities with PE < According to the existing Latvian regulations, only the Dobele WWTP must meet quantitative targets with respect to total nitrogen and total phosphorus concentrations in treated wastewater. However, the small WWTP account for almost half of all treated wastewater discharged from WWTP. Furthermore, many of the small WWTP are characterized by under- and/ or inconsistent performance due to a lack of biological treatment and very variable wastewater volumes and concentrations, partly due to high rates of storm water and groundwater inflows. The main goal of this pathway is to improve the existing municipal wastewater treatment plants to meet the recommendations given by HELCOM, as described below. According to HELCOM Recommendation 28E/6, adopted on November 15 th 2007, on-site wastewater treatment of settlements up to 300 person equivalents must meet certain wastewater treatment specifications with respect to BOD 5 (20 mg/l), total phosphorus (5 mg/l) and total nitrogen (25 mg/l). Similarly, HELCOM Recommendation 28E/5, adopted on November 15th 2007 requires that settlements producing loads of wastewater at person equivalents, should be treated so that the treatment results meet wastewater treatment specifications with respect to total phosphorus (2 mg/l) and total nitrogen (35 mg/l). The main goals of this pathway are improvements in the existing municipal wastewater treatment plants according to the HELCOM Recommendations. Based on a review of the capacity and performance of the small municipal wastewater treatment plants in the Berze River basin, 7 WWTP with a PE are recommended for upgrading to HELCOM Recommendation 28E/6 and 6 WWTP with a PE are recommended for upgrading to HELCOM Recommendation 28E/5. 7

8 2.1.3 Pathway 3 Focus on Rural Actions - Agri-Ecological Measures ( ) Agricultural activities are the largest source of non-point source nutrient loading in the Berze River basin. Under the Agri-Ecological Measures pathway two groups of measures are proposed to reduce nutrient loading from cultivated agricultural land to surface drainage area - ecological buffer strips and sedimentation basins. Ecological Buffer Strips The main purpose of ecological buffer strips is to reduce nutrient (N, P) and sediment loss through overland flow from arable land to surface drainageways. Additionally, buffer strips create distance separation between cultivated land and surface drainageways, thus reducing direct impacts of fertilizer applications. In addition to enhancing surface water quality buffer strips, depending on local relief, moisture conditions and vegetation type (permanent grassland, shrubs, stands of trees, wetland vegetation) can provide other ecosystem services such as biodiversity, wildlife habitats, recreation, cultural and tourism. In Latvia and the Berze River basin arable land can be cultivated to the edge of waterways, however the Law on Protection Belts stipulates that fertilizers cannot be applied within 10 m of waterways, although in practice this is difficult to verify. Typically, arable land is cultivated and fertilizers are applied to the edge of melioration drainageways. Three configurations of buffer strips are proposed which can be variably combined to model nutrient reduction impacts. These include the following: m wide buffer strips of permanent grassland on both sides of Nationally Significant Waterways with adjoining agricultural land; 2. 5 m wide buffer strips of permanent grassland on both sides of Nationally Significant Waterways with adjoining agricultural land; 3. 2 m wide buffer strips of permanent grassland on both sides of melioration ditches with adjoining agricultural land. In the case of Nationally Significant Waterways with a flood plain and a risk for flooding of 10 % or even less, buffer strips are proposed to be extended to the full width of the flood plain if wider than the minimum 10 m or 5 m buffer strip configuration. Conditions for the management of buffer strips include: - No cultivation of soil, planting of field crops, application of fertilizers (mineral or organic) and plant protection products; - Permanent grassland is cut at least once, preferably late in the season, when field crops have been harvested and cut grass is removed; - Permanent grassland can be grazed controlling grazing intensity and access to surface drainage area; 8

9 - Along natural waterways a shrub and tree mosaic vegetative cover can be created and managed; - On steep slopes, in wet areas and places where buffer strips are difficult to manage, a natural vegetation cover can be appropriate. 9

10 Table 2 Summary of the applicable measures included in the pathways for the Berze River basin, their corresponding stakeholders and their representation in the HYPE model Pathway Measure Description Stakeholder Model representation Pathway 1 Business as usual Greening measures (e.g., ecological focus areas, crop diversification, permanent grasslands) Crop rotation on areas with spring wheat, winter wheat, spring barley, oil seed rape, maize. Increased grassland areas: 1201 ha. Ecological focus areas: 2930 ha. Included to reduce diffuse pollution from agricultural sources Organic farming Measure implemented on 3266 ha No use of mineral fertilizers and chemical plant protection products. Expected to reduce diffuse pollution and improve overall water quality. Pathway 2 Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants Upgrading of existing municipal wastewater treatment plants according to HELCOM Recommendations. Discharged wastewater meet the quality standards of 2 mg/l for total phosphorus and 25 mg/l for total nitrogen) Pathway 3 Focus on rural actions - Agri-Ecological Measures Implementing/maintaining buffer strips with permanent grassland in agricultural areas (5 and 10 m wide along nationally significant waterways; 2 m wide along open drainage ditches) Optimization of mineral and organic fertilizer use 5 m wide buffer strips: 198 ha 10 m wide buffer strips: 399 ha 2 m wide buffer strips: 342 ha Reduced application of mineral and organic nitrogen fertilizers by 20% on all arable and grassland areas Included to improve wastewater treatment efficiency Advantages for biodiversity in and around the streams and through higher nutrient retention. Increased deposition of suspended sediment and retention of phosphorus. Use efficiently the mineral fertilizer and reduce diffuse pollution from agricultural sources Rural Support Service of Latvia Rural Support Service of Latvia Wastewater authority Rural Support Service of Latvia Joint implementation of crop rotation, increased share of grassland on undrained cropland, and ecological focus areas on unfertilized and undrained grassland Only organic fertilizers are applied on tile drained grasslands or three main crops suggested Reduced point sources contributions from 13 small WWTP, including storm water inputs The buffer effect was modelled using the buffer and close_w functions, and by increasing the share of non-fertilized grasslands (GeoData file). The coefficient buffilt was adjusted in the par file Environmental authority Reduced inputs of mineral and organic fertilizers on all land; reduced amount of crop residues due to reduced yields, adjusted in the CropData file 10

11 2.2 Measures suggested by stakeholders to reduce eutrophication in the case study area Agri-environmental measures The discussions at the stakeholder meeting emphasized that the agri-environmental measures are commitments taken voluntarily. The farmers are eager to implement those measures which are in line with their development vision (e.g. biological farming) or as measures to compensate existing restrictions. Choice is very limited as many measures are already included in a set of the greening measures. Therefore, new initiatives for additional measures targeted to nitrate vulnerable zones are welcome. However, the newly proposed measures should be well understood and accepted by farmers. Buffer strips were included as an agri-environmental measure in the previous RDP. However, the administrative burden regarding reporting and controlling them was rather complicated and farmers were not eager to commit themselves to this measure. Although the Latvian Law on Protection Belts prohibits the use of fertilizers and plant protection products on agricultural land (which may be also arable land) in a 10 m wide strip along water bodies, the controlling institutions have very limited possibilities to enforce this. As the farmers shall pay land tax without any reduction, they are interested in obtaining maximum yield also on this land. The participants expressed regret that an amendment in the Law about the buffer strips (fixed width of 2 m and without cultivation) were not accepted by the Parliament. The greening measures have already brought new tendencies in farming. For example, farmers have selected to grow broad beans which require more intensive use of pesticides which is not considered to be friendly for the environment. Moreover, the criteria for landscape features are not defined based on the Latvian circumstances - farmers cannot declare more areas as the landscape features. It has turned out that fallow land is most popular measure until now. Another shortcoming of the greening measures is the condition that a farmer shall implement the measures at his farm (holding) level. This leads to the trend to allocate less fertile lands (even outside of the agricultural region) for the greening measures while fertile ones are used intensively. Thus, measures are not really meeting their initial target to reduce pressure from intensive agricultural lands. The issue of farms which were exempted from greening measures was discussed. Such types of farms make up a significant share of land use in the Berze River basin. Although not taking any action the farms receive support as if they had implemented the greening measures. It was pointed out that the exemption criteria have been defined at the EU level and reflects the position that such size farms do not cause significant threats to the environment. However, it may not be true if a farm is located in the vicinity of the water bodies. Therefore, 11

12 the participants proposed that small size farms could take up implementation of the certain measures such as buffer strips. It was also discussed that several organic farms in the Zemgale region are relatively small. This is due to the current land price and taxation which stimulate intensive farming in the region. Therefore, it is not expected that the number of organic farms will increase in the near future. As most agriculture land is artificially drained a significant reduction of nutrient discharges could be achieved by implementing efficient drainage measures. It is recommendable to allocate more resources to activities dedicated to implementation of environmentally friendly drainage systems. A few issues were identified for discussion at the stakeholder meeting on measures to reduce the pollution load from point sources: 1) Cabinet of Ministers (CM) Regulations Nr.34 requires the discharge standard for WWTPs, and a requirement for appropriate treatment is set for small-size WWTPs. This requirement is relevant for several WWTPs in the Berze River basin but the question is what this means and what the situation and solutions are in the Berze River basin? 2) According to the EU Water Framework Directive, each waterbody in the river basin has to meet the good water quality status standards and goals. However, the situation presented in the Lielupe River Basin Management Plan indicates that none of the water bodies have good water quality. Therefore, it is necessary to implement supplementary measures to reach the good water quality goal. 3) Several supplementary measures have already been included into the Lielupe River Basin Management Plan, but it s important to have the understanding of what kind of benefit each of those measures will give to reach the standard of good water quality Wastewater treatment plants and pollution load from wastewater An overview of WWTP operating in the Berze River basin was collated from the annual reports submitted by WWTP managers in Currently, there are 14 WWTP in operation (maintained by 3 managers, the largest of which is LTD Dobeles ūdens, which maintains 12 WWTP). There were more WWTP in previous years but the amount decreased when the Dobele City agglomeration expanded and a few WWTP were connected to the Dobele City WWTP. The total amount of wastewater discharge is ~680 thousand m³/year. Main problems regarding operation of the WWTP are: Gaps in the legislation now regulated by the CM Regulations Nr.34; corrected and amended; Treatment demands >; all WWTP in the Berze River Basin with a capacity >20 m³/d need a category B permission, but their actual wastewater flow is less than the capacity; 12

13 Technical conditions of the WWTP; there are improvements as plants need to be renovated from time to time; Load of the WWTP. It is very irregular with large flows in the mornings and evenings, low flows during working days and again higher loads in the weekends; Composition of the wastewaters; the washing water has a noticeable impact on the concentration of detergents; Concentration of the WWTPs. The connection to the Dobele city plant was positive as the amount of nutrient emissions was reduced, but it involves a higher risk in case of any malfunction (e.g., blocking of the pipes), when a higher amount of untreated wastewater could be discharged into the river; Monitoring of effluent emissions. This is done regularly 4 times per yr in Dobele City 2 times per yr in the rest of WWTP. If they reach the concentration levels set by the regulations, less frequent monitoring is accepted. Credibility of the monitoring results. A few years ago, monitoring was carried out by the state institution the Regional Environmental Board (REB), and water samples were taken by trained employees. In case of a problem it was possible to give fast information to take necessary mitigation measures. Now monitoring is managed by the WWTP managers themselves on a commercial basis. A manager signs an agreement with a laboratory and samples are taken according to a defined plan, but this situation does not always reflect reality; Maintenance of the plants; the human factor is very crucial; Control and responsibility; resources are not sufficient and plants are checked only once per year, which is considered too infrequent. 2.3 Pathway modelling approach in Berze During three stakeholder meetings in the Berze River case area a core group of stakeholders was assembled from environmental policy developers and institutions responsible for implementation, such as the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development, the Ministry of Agriculture, the State Environmental Services, the Latvian Environment, Geology and Meteorology Centre, the Health Inspectorate, the Property Management Group Ministry of Agriculture, the Rural Support Service, representatives from the municipalities and their enterprises, entrepreneurs (small HPP), farmers, NGOs such as the Latvian Fund for Nature, the Baltic Environmental Forum, the Farmers Parliament, and the project partners from the University of Latvia and Latvia University of Agriculture Preparatory activities for modelling case area The calibration process for hydrological parameters was finished before nitrogen and phosphorus calibration. Overall, lower average discharge with PBIAS -6.6 % was simulated when compared with observed values (Figure 1). The modelling output results were 13

14 underestimated for high flow periods in the autumn and spring, and in contrast the discharge in February was overestimated (Figure 2). The reason for the underestimated discharge could be related to the parameters driven by evapotranspiration. Evapotranspiration potential and limits were calculated by the modified Jensen method which is built-in to the HYPE model. Another reason could be that occasional surface runoff events were not well represented in the model performance. The overestimated discharge in the month of February could be related to an inaccurate representation of the snow accumulation and melt processes for different land uses. Figure 1 Average daily discharge during the period for the outlet of the Berze River basin Figure 2 Average monthly discharge during the period for the outlet of the Berze River basin Although the hydrological aspects of the Hype model performance for the Berze River basin, hereby expressed by the simulated daily discharge, can be characterized as fairly well, the simulated values of daily average inorganic and total nitrogen along with the simulated 14

15 values of daily average soluble and total phosphorus need further improvements (from Figure 3 to Figure 6). Figure 3 Average daily inorganic nitrogen concentrations during the period for the outlet of the Berze River basin Figure 4 Average daily total nitrogen concentrations during the period for the outlet of the Berze River basin 15

16 Figure 5 Average daily soluble phosphorus concentrations during the period for the outlet of the Berze River basin Figure 6 Average daily total phosphorus concentrations during the period for the outlet of the Berze River basin Input data for modelling In total 53 land use and soil classes (SLC) are created to simulate water and nutrient movement in the landscape, specifically 48 classes of 53 are used for simulations of agricultural activities. Spatial information on crop distribution in the Berze River basin was extracted from the GIS database of the Rural Advisory centre. The following SLC classes and management options were used 8 agricultural crops on 3 soil types (sand, loam and clay) which are divided into further 2 classes based on the drainage conditions (tile drained and not drained areas). Additionally 3 classes for forested areas on 3 soil types and 1 class for urban areas and water were incorporated (Figure 7). 16

17 In order to evaluate the effectiveness of proposed measures additional SLC classes such as BioGrass and EcoGrass were created and included in the modelling setup. Figure 7 Soil and land use classes (SLC) used in the HYPE model for the Berze River baseline setup Model setup for modelling pathways The time period of was used to model and calibrate the baseline (Figure 7). The measures included in Pathway 1 and Pathway 3 were included in the modelling procedure in a consecutive order as follows: baseline greening organic farming buffer strips. Improvements in WWTP operation according to HELCOM recommendations (Pathway 2) were included in the following order: baseline improvements in WWTP operation with storm water inputs and improvements in WWTP operation without inputs from storm water systems 17

18 Tile Drained Arable Land Non Tile Drained Arable Land Non Tile Drained Grasslands Tile Drained Grasslands Buffer Strips With No Fertilisation ha Organic Farming with Organic Fertilisation 3266 ha Crop Rotation Increasing of Grasslands 1201 ha Ecological Focus Area 2930 ha, No Fertilisation Agricultural Practice the Same as in Baseline Figure 8 Configurational approach for the measures included in the HYPE setup for agri-environmental measures in the Berze River basin The changes in nutrient concentrations and loads should be evaluated by comparing the results based on particular consecutive measures, e.g. greening on baseline, organic farming is applied after the greening measure, and buffer strips after the organic farming measure. The greening measure consists of crop rotation, increasing share of grassland areas, and establishment of new ecological areas (Table 2). The total effect of pathway 3 is seen by comparing the model outputs from the buffer strips with the baseline setup. For the purposes of setting up the crop rotation the GeoClass.txt file was configured by adding two crop rotation groups. The first includes winter wheat, spring wheat and winter rape, and the second includes spring barley, corn and spring rape. It was assumed that there is no crop rotation on grassland areas and areas classified as the crop type Another. Increase in grassland area was implemented only on arable land without artificial drainage as those are less suitable for intensive agricultural practices (Table 2). The file GeoData.txt was configured accordingly by a proportional increase in SLCs representing arable land without artificial drainage. For ecological focus areas it was decided to use grassland areas without fertilizer application. To setup this measure a new crop EcoGrass was implemented proportionally on grassland without artificial drainage. Three new SLC were made according to three types of soil. GeoData.txt, GeoClass.txt and CropData.txt were configured accordingly. A new crop BioGrass was implemented on tile drained grasslands to include the measure of Organic farming into the setup. Three new SLC were made according to three types of soil. Mineral fertilizers were substituted by organic fertilizer. GeoData.txt, GeoClass.txt and CropData.txt were configured accordingly. 18

19 As mentioned, buffer strips were added as the last consecutive measure, with two different setups. Those include implementation and maintenance of buffer strips of permanent grassland in agricultural areas using 5 and 10 buffer strips along waterways of national significance and 2 m buffer strip along open drainage ditches. In HYPE, the buffer strips were represented as a permanent grassland without any fertilization. This approach resulted in a reduced total share of agricultural land and an increased area of permanent grasslands (equal to the area of buffer strips; Table 2). It was assumed that buffer strips will be managed the same way as ecological focus areas with no fertilizer applications. For that reason the area of buffer strips were added to the SLCs which belongs to ecological focus area (EcoGrass) with no fertilizer applications. Using this approach, the buffer strips will have an indirect effect on nitrogen leaching as well. The reduction of mineral and organic fertilizer application rates on all arable and grassland areas decreased the losses due to an associated reduction in crop residuals, as the plant growth and the yields would be reduced in response to the 20% reduction of fertilizer application. There are 23 municipal and industrial waste water treatment plans in the Berze River basin (Figure 9). For the HYPE model setup average total nitrogen and total phosphorus concentrations were calculated for the time period of For Pathway 2 improvements in the existing municipal waste water treatment plants according to the HELCOM Recommendations 28E/5 were considered (section 2.1.2). In this pathway, 13 municipal wastewater treatment plants were selected for upgrading based on the total nutrient loads reported in the database of LEGMC 2-Ūdens for the governmentally verified year The pathway was simulated in two steps. First, phosphorus and nitrogen concentrations of 2mg/l and 25 mg/l, respectively, were inserted in the model with existing storm water inflows. Second, storm water inflows were excluded, resulting in reduced total volumes of water (m 3 /day) to be treated at the WWTP. Note that the suggested HELCOM standard concentrations were used only for treatment plants with average concentrations above the standards in the baseline model setup (Table 3). 19

20 Figure 9 Location of the existing waste water treatment plants in the Berze River basin Two scenarios were selected for the simulations using the HYPE model. In the first scenario, phosphorus and nitrogen concentrations of 2mg/l and 25 mg/l, respectively, were implemented in the model setup as suggested by the HELCOM standards with existing storm water inflow. In the second scenario, storm waters were excluded thus reducing the total amount of water (m 3 /day) to be treated at the WWTP. Note, only if the average concentration in Baseline scenario is higher than the HELCOM standards then the suggested concentrations were incorporated (Table 3). 20

21 Table 3 Implementation of the HELCOM Recommendations 28E/5 for the WWTP in Pathway 2 Sub- Baseline WWTP with stormwaters WWTP without stormwaters catchment Name of P, conc P N, conc N P, conc P N, conc N P, conc N, conc N ID WWTP m3/day mg/l kg/year mg/l kg/year m3/day mg/l kg/year mg/l kg/year m3/day mg/l P kg/year mg/l kg/year 2 BAO Zebrene Zebrene * Annenieki * Sturi Blidene * Leveste * Saules Bikstu * Jaunpils Jurgu Jaunpils VSAC Gardene * Aizstrautnieki * Krigeri Zelta Druva Auri * Ziedugravas * Penkule * Krimunas * Kirpeni * Strauti * Skibe Total, kg per year * Wastewater treatment plants where the HELCOM recomendations were applicable changed cells comparing the Baseline for N and P concentrations and dicharge of sewage waters at the outlet of WWTP 2.4 Modelled impacts of pathways Modelled effects of individual measures Based on the most probable agri-environmental measures to reduce nutrient loads proposed by the stakeholders, both regarding existing regulations and the measures still to be implemented, the HYPE model was set up. For example, WWTP upgrades and buffer strips are expected to be implemented from the year 2021, whereas some of the agrienvironmental measures are already carried out. The preliminary HYPE results of the modelling show rather different effects compared to expected ones. All the measures were analysed separately and compared with the baseline setup, to see the partial impact on possible nutrient reduction negative values represent reduced loads, and positive values show increased loads after the implementation of a particular measure (Table 4). 21

22 Table 4 HYPE modelling results for the baseline setup and the effect of implemented measures on nutrient concentrations and loads relative to the baseline Measures to reduce eutrophication Total Nitrogen Total phosphorus mg L-1 Load, kg year Load Diff., % mg L-1 Load, kg year Load Diff., % Baseline Greening* Organic farming on 3 main crops* Organic farming on grasslands* WWTP with stormwaters** WWTP without stormwaters** Buffer 2+5m*** Buffer 2+10m*** % fertiliser reduction*** * Pathway 1 ** Pathway 2 *** Pathway 3 Overall, it was quite surprising that the model results showed increased nitrogen and phosphorus loads after the expansion of organic farming in the catchment. It could be explained by the difference in nitrogen and phosphorus transformation processes for mineral and organic fertilizers, as well as by differences in soil erosion coefficients between arable land and grasslands in the current HYPE set up Modelled effects of pathways Greening measures in Pathway 1 resulted in reduced concentrations of both total nitrogen and total phosphorus (Table 4), with a more pronounced reduction during high flow conditions. The total phosphorus concentrations were reduced more effectively than the corresponding concentrations of total nitrogen (a difference of four times). Implementing organic farming on drained grassland areas (Pathway 1) seemed to have a negative impact on total nitrogen concentrations, which increased by 6.8 %. In contrast, the modelled concentrations of total phosphorus decreased as a result of this measure. An increase in total nitrogen concentrations especially during the warm seasons of the year might be a result of changes in the timing of fertilizer application from spring in case of mineral fertilizers to autumn in case of organic fertilizer. Also, grasslands are typically not fertilized with mineral fertilizers, but in organic farming the fertilizer application is more realistic. 22

23 The modelled effects of organic farming on drained croplands (winter wheat, spring wheat, and barley; Pathway 1) (Table 4) indicated a negligible change in nutrient concentrations, possibly since the rate of mineral and organic fertilizers applied on croplands is similar. As mentioned above, buffer strips (Pathway 3; Table 4) were incorporated in the model using two setups, assuming either 5 or 10 m wide buffer strips in agricultural areas along the waterways of national significance in combination with 2 m wide buffer strip along the open drainage ditches. Those two setups are described as Buffer m and Buffer 2+10 m. Although it is assumed that buffer strips will cover 540 ha and 741 ha for Buffer m and Buffer 2+10 m, respectively, the impacts of the buffer strips on total nitrogen concentrations can be considered negligible (Table 4). However, as expected the effect on total phosphorus concentrations were more pronounced. According to previous studies, buffer strips serve as a filter reducing surface runoff and losses of particulate phosphorus. Therefore, they can play an important role in reducing particulate phosphorus during cold periods when soils are saturated and the risk for surface runoff events are elevated. During the warm periods, phosphorus is released to the river network mainly in a soluble form through subsurface drainage and from wastewater treatment plants. Simulations were also run to analyse the effects of a joint implementation of pathways 1 and 3 (Table 4), except the reduction of mineral and organic fertilizers with 20 %. Overall, the greening, organic farming on drained grasslands, and buffer strips (Buffer 2+10 m) were included in those simulations. The results showed an average 2.5% increase of total nitrogen concentrations, which could be mainly due to the negative effects of the organic farming. However, a more detailed analysis of the results needs to be done to investigate the relative apportionment of nutrient losses from different land uses. Overall, the average concentrations of total phosphorus were reduced by 27.6% when the joint implementation of the measures was simulated. Almost all simulated measures had a substantial positive effect on the reduction of total phosphorus concentrations. Improvements of the existing municipal WWTP (Pathway 2) include increased efficiency of nutrient removal to suggested values for total phosphorus (2 mg/l) and total nitrogen (25 mg/l) concentrations. Overall, 13 waste water treatment plants were selected as in need for the improvements. When nitrogen and phosphorus loads from the WWTP are summarized for the baseline setup (16955 kg of TN per year and 3153 kg of TP per year) and compared with the average loads at the outlet of the Berze River basin ( kg of TN per year and kg of TP per year) it can be concluded that 3.1% of total nitrogen and 27% of total phosphorus, respectively, originate from the existing WWTP. 23

24 The modelling results suggest that TN concentrations will be slightly reduced after implementation of the measures defined in Pathway 2, while TP concentrations will be reduced much more (Table 4). This clearly indicates the need to improve the current phosphorus removal technologies at the existing WWTP, and that such improvements will have a significant positive effect on the river quality. The results also suggest that if storm water would be separated from the municipal wastewater, the nutrient emissions from the WWTP would decrease, especially in case of total phosphorus removal where the average daily concentrations (at the outlet of the Berze River) could be reduced by 12.3%. These results show that both improvements in nutrient removal efficiency and storm water separation need to be considered to achieve water quality goals for the Berze River basin. Regarding the 20% reduction in fertilizer application rates (Pathway 3), it was assumed an equal reduction of both mineral and organic fertilizers. Mineral fertilizer in the form of ammonium nitrate is commonly applied on growing crops. This source of nitrogen might be supplemented or replaced with organic fertilizers such as solid or liquid manure. The simulations showed that a reduced application of mineral and organic fertilizers resulted in a substantial reduction in total nitrogen concentrations, while the concentrations of total phosphorus were reduced to a lower extent. The reason is that it is assumed that ammonium nitrate or other similar forms of mineral fertilizers are predominantly applied on agricultural land, rather than phosphorus fertilizers and that inorganic forms of nitrogen tend to be more mobile in the soil profile than inorganic forms of phosphorus. 3 Helge å catchment 3.1 Pathways of development for Helge å catchment Background The Helge å River Basin is one of the largest river basins in the Southern Water district in Sweden. The river originates in the County administration of Kronoberg and flows through 13 municipalities before it reaches the Baltic Sea in the Bay of Hanö situated in the County administration of Skåne and municipality of Kristianstad. The historic upstream features were characterised by a wet landscape with bogs, wetlands and flood plains above crystalline bedrock. The lower part encompassing unique wetlands, e.g. wet meadows along lake shores, is a designated Biospehere Reserve by UNESCO, established in The basin underwent dramatic changes like many other river basins in Sweden during the establishment and development of land primarily for agriculture and later also for forestry. In particular, the extensive drainage of wet soils had a major impact on the basin. Physical changes of the river course are also due to the historic establishment of small scale 24

25 hydropower plants. Today, the most common land use practice in the Basin is forestry, with 57% of the basin area covered by forests, 15% agriculture, 7% pasture, 5% water, and 19% other uses (SCB 2016). One particular result of landscape development in the Helge å basin is a depression area (a former lake) in which parts of the city Kristianstad are located today. This requires constant active management (draining and pumping) to prevent inundation of the city. The Helge å River Basin has been assessed to understand relationships between factors that determine the current state of the environment. Within MIRACLE, key sectors in the basin were consulted to map out views and perceptions on how to achieve good ecological status of the waters and reduce risk for floods linked to different stakeholders. The consultation process highlighted commonalities and differences in perceptions between stakeholders. Nutrient management and flood management was not perceived as a constructive entry point for a dialogue on how to improve the environment in the basin. A topic raised in all of the interviews was brownification. The issue of brownification is linked to different views both in terms of impact and cause and was therefore a topic that engaged stakeholders. As a result, brownification was selected as the systemic issue, along which three pathways of development were formulated. The formulation builds on the findings from stakeholder consultations up to the third stakeholder workshop, and allows for different configurations of measures to be explored from a modelling, cost benefit and policy analysis perspective. As a result of the consultation process, brownification was selected as systemic issue, along which three pathways of development were formulated. The formulation of pathways builds on the findings of stakeholder consultations up to MIRACLE stakeholder workshop 3 and allows for different configurations of measures to be explored from a modelling, cost benefit and policy analysis perspective. All pathways are further described below. Table 5 lists all pathways, where measures have been included in the HYPE-based impact analysis. The HYPE modelling effort necessarily includes only elements of the pathway definition which have an impact on flows, nutrient concentrations and transports. Other effects with relevance to stakeholder consultations, e.g. biodiversity or recreational value, are not part of the HYPE analyses. If not stated otherwise in Table 5, measure extents are estimated from available information on existing, planned (i.e. financed), and possible (i.e. not financed) measures in Helge å basin as published in the Waterbody information system for Sweden, VISS. Pathways are modelled for the planning period up to 2030, and HYPE results are presented in conjunction with climate change scenarios for the 2030s period. 25

26 Table 5 Summary of the modelled measures included in the development pathways for Helge å and their representation in the HYPE model. Pathway Measure Description Model representation Pathway 1 Business as usual Buffer strips Upgrading rural household wastewater treatment Buffer strips in selected areas along Helge å: 180 ha Upgrading all rural household wastewater treatment systems Constructed wetlands Constructed wetlands: 210 ha Pathway 2 Ecosystem services approach Stormwater ponds Stormwater ponds: 15 ha (11 ponds listed as measures) Riparian areas Riparian zones in agricultural lands: 400 ha Constructed wetlands Constructed wetlands: 570 ha Increased retention Raised water level in lake magazine Osby Pathway 3 Improvements in forestry sector Alder forest and Alder forest wetlands and riparian zones in riparian zones in forests: forests 350 km 2 swamp forest areas Agricultural buffer strips with grass cover, which act as traps for particulate phosphorus in surface runoff from agricultural surfaces. Currently implemented and planned areas. Estimates of current rural wastewater emissions assume approximately 50% P removal and 25% N removal; calculations assume improvement to strict requirement assumptions (assumed legislation change), i.e. 90% P and 50% N removal. Constructed wetlands are typically pond-like wetlands located directly on local streams with an active flow connection. Currently implemented and planned wetlands. Stormwater ponds in urban areas for local flood control, with filter effect on nutrients similar to constructed wetlands Those riparian zones are 30m wide strips along streams with semi-natural riparian forest vegetation. The extent was estimated from published area, location, and dominant land use in sub-basin (separation between riparian zones in agricultural lands and forests) Extended area of constructed wetlands (relative to pathway 1) that is considered possible. Assuming small dam in Osby is used to raise water level by 0.5 m, thereby increasing lake volume and turnover time Creating riparian zones in forests, reducing drainage ditches in low-yielding areas; unclear effects. Swamp forest area maps (Swedish Forest Agency) used to split modelled forest classes. Adaption of BUFFER values in GeoData Updated N&P concentrations in GeoData Adapted wetland area and fraction of throughflow (per sub-basin): lrwet_part, mrwet_part, lrwet_area, mrwet_area (depth 1 m) Nutrient transformation modelled with wetland routine, fraction of throughflow estimated from modelled urban areas local nutrient gross load. Fraction of stream length affected calculated for subbasins, corresponding agricultural areas (with a factor 2, to account for areas shielded by riparian zones) changed from near-stream to far-stream using close_w in GeoData. See pathway 1 Changed lake depth in LakeData Geoclass and GeoData with 4 new SLC classes, updated areas for 4 existing forest classes. New par with updated land-use and soil-dependent parameters to simulate extensification of forests 26

27 3.1.2 Pathway 1 Business as usual Pathway 1 describes the 'Business as usual' development, i.e. it includes all measures that will be implemented up to 2020 within the key programmes that are in the project focus (Water Directive, Flood Directive, Rural development plan, environmental measures within CAP Pillar 1, and any other measures identified by the project. Measures included represent measures that are prioritized by the Water Authority to achieve good ecological status in the Basin Pathway 2 Ecosystem services approach This second pathway is based on the suggestion to invest in ecosystems and show costs and benefits associated with ecosystem services from a local context specific perspective. The aim with pathway 2 is to assess the broader societal gains using an ecosystem services approach and identify targeted measures that can generate multiple benefits Pathway 3 Improvements in forestry sector This pathway targets the forest sector specifically to provide improved understanding of potential actions associated with the forest sector. There is growing awareness in the forestry sector about the importance of shielding waterways from forest management activities. A key component in reducing the impacts of e.g. felling operations on rivers, lakes and streams is to establish so-called riparian buffer zones along waterways. In addition, as in agricultural lands, establishment of wetlands in or in proximity to forest lands can play important functions in terms of nutrient capture, water flow regulation and biodiversity. 3.2 Pathway modelling approach in Helge å Impact model set-up and model periods All impact modelling of stakeholder-suggested measures in Helge å was done along the suggested pathways as defined in Table 5. Model analyses are based on the calibrated Helge å HYPE model set-up which is described in MIRACLE deliverable report D2.2. The calibrated model set-up was altered to represent measures taken in the pathways, and pathway results represent the impact of all measures included in the pathways combined. Pathway impact analyses use two model periods for comparison. The baseline period, which represents today's climate, and modelled as 20-year period from 1990 to 2010 (2000s), and the scenario period, representing a changed climate around 2020, the end of the current planning period for environmental decision makers in Sweden (in model analyses represented as model period from 2010 to 2030). The choice of 20-year periods centered around the target year allows to analyse for long-term changes in impact variables, incorporating inter-annual climate variability during baseline and scenario periods. 27

28 All pathways were run using climate forcing data for the scenario period using the 2-model mini-ensemble described in Chapter 6. Changes in impact variables presented here are average changes computed with the two climate model projections. Pathway 1, which includes currently implemented and financed measures only, served additionally as a baseline model. Comparison between Baseline and Pathway 1 results thus illustrate the effect of climate change, as the model set-up is unchanged. All pathways were executed Land use change assumptions Land use change impact assessments are conducted in combination with the modelling of pathways of measures in the MIRACLE case basin Helge å. Land use changes are derived from projected changes in the agricultural sector for the Baltic Sea region reported by Graham and Powell (2016). Results in there are based on SCENAR 2020-II scenarios for changes in agricultural land uses in the EU up to 2020 [Nowicki et al., 2009]. Scenar 2020-II includes three scenario pathways, Reference, Conservative-CAP, and Liberalisation. All three scenarios include changes in agricultural production and agricultural land use. For MIRACLE, we use the projected changes in land use as average from Reference and Liberalisation scenarios. Reference and Conservative-CAP are similar in terms of agricultural land use change, whereas Liberalisation would mean a strong change in agricultural policies at EU level, which is out of scope for MIRACLE. The Reference scenario projects a net loss of 1 % of agricultural areas, and the Liberalisation scenario a net loss of 8 % due to stronger transboundary competition, and we translate this into HYPE scenarios as an 4 % loss of agricultural land to the extensive grassland class, which means no production crop and no fertilisation. For the pathway impact modelling, all pathways were run with and without this land use change assumption, and results are presented separately. 3.3 Model impacts of pathways Stream flow is projected to decrease somewhat in all parts of the basin (Figure 10) due to decreased runoff from land to watercourses (Figure 11). The changes are larger in pathway 3 compared to pathway 1 and 2. Most of the decrease occurs during the winter months (Figure 12). Nearly all of the change can be attributed to climate with very small difference simulated due to changes in land use. 28

29 Figure 10 Modeled changes in long-term discharge means for all pathways. Baseline discharge in topleft panel, changes for combined pathways (columns) and land use change (rows) in remaining panels Figure 11 Modeled changes in long-term local sub-basin runoff means for all pathways. Baseline runoff in topleft panel, changes for combined pathways (columns) and land use change (rows) in remaining panels 29

30 Figure 12 Long-term median annual regimes for discharge, Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus concentrations at Helge å outlet, illustrated for Pathway 1. Contrary to the decrease in river discharge the riverine nitrogen concentrations are projected to increase in most of the basin (Figure 13), especially during the period from February to October (Figure 12). The likely reason for this is an increased mineralisation of nitrogen during periods without crop uptake and increased release of organic nitrogen due 30

31 to a warmer climate. The increase is to some degree offset by the loss of agricultural land in the land use change scenarios. The combinined effect of decreasing flow and increasing nitrogen concentrations is an overall decrease in nitrogen transport in the basin (Figure 14). For phosphorus, the pattern is similiar to nitrogen, with increasing riverine concentrations (Figure 15). The increase is less prounonced in pathway 2 than in the two other pathways and is most clearly seen during a period from February to July (Figure 12). Again, like in the case for nitrogen, the increased phosphorus concentrations are counteracted by the decrease in streamflow, resulting in a net decrease in phosphorus transport in most parts of the basin (Figure 16) including the outlet (Figure 12). Figure 13 Modeled changes in long-term total nitrogen concentration means at sub-basin outlets for all pathways. Baseline concentrations in topleft panel, changes for combined pathways (columns) and land use change (rows) in remaining panels 31

32 Figure 14 Modeled changes in long-term total nitrogen transport means at sub-basin outlets for all pathways. Baseline transports in topleft panel, changes for combined pathways (columns) and land use change (rows) in remaining panels Figure 15 Modeled changes in long-term total phosphorus concentration means at sub-basin outlets for all pathways. Baseline concentrations in topleft panel, changes for combined pathways (columns) and land use change (rows) in remaining panels 32

33 Figure 16 Modeled changes in long-term total phosphorus transport means at sub-basin outlets for all pathways. Baseline transport in top left panel, changes for combined pathways (columns) and land use change (rows) in remaining panels 4 Reda catchment 4.1 Pathways of development for Reda catchment Background The stakeholder consultations and workshops in the MIRACLE identified a complex web of problem definitions linked to different stakeholders. The specific problem definitions depicted different sustainability problems that stakeholder face. The probable interconnections were an important input for the hydro-chemical modelling, policy and cost benefit analyses. One of the main problems in the catchment Reda is flood hazard, as the river is characterized by high water levels in the winter season and early spring. Therefore, the systemic issue defined for the Reda catchment was flooding, and the specific problem can be defined as a shortage of retention solutions to reduce flood risks. In addition there are administrative, financial, legal, and social problems that are affecting the possibilities to develop retention solutions. A linked problem is lack of sufficient control over new investments (difficulties to prevent construction of houses) in flood vulnerable areas. As a result of the consultations and workshops, four pathways of development were defined for 33

34 the Reda catchment, targeting urban and rural actions, and a fifth pathway was defined as a combination of the measures with largest impact (Table 1). It was not possible to model the impact of all suggested measures using the HYPE model; those that have been modelled are summarized in Table 6. 34

35 Table 6 Summary of the modelled measures included in the pathways of development in the Reda catchment Pathway Measure Description Stakeholder Model representation Pathway 1 Business as usual - Overview of current and planned measures Wastewater infrastructure Improved treatment of rural household wastewater, including septic tanks, Building waste water treatment plants, Standard agrienvironmental Buffer strips measures Pathway 2 Focus on Urban Actions - Increase of retention in urban area Urban retention structures Closed and open small urban retention infrastructure In this pathway we were modelling new reservoirs in three urban catchments (6,7 and 9). Pathway 3 Focus on Rural Actions Mineral Doubling the dose of mineral fertilizers applied on fertilizer use crops ha Pathway 4 Focus on Rural Actions - Agri-Environmental Measures Buffer strips Buffer strips (0.9/0.1) km It was assumed that 90% of the length of the Reda River is covered by a buffer strips and 10% of phosphorus goes to the river and the rest is retained in the buffer strips in compared to the baseline scenario. Measures adopted in the River Basin Management Plans (RBMP), Flood risk management plans (FRMP), and other documents. The business as usual pathway reflects the implementation approaches (governance) in the Reda case study area. The business as usual pathway reflects the implementation approaches (governance) in the Reda case study area. Small retention reservoirs in the city, green roof, increasing absorbent area Increase the consumption of mineral fertilizers to increase the yields in the area A strip with grassland adjacent to a Watercourse, helps to control soil and water quality and has other environmental benefits. 35 local authority local authority local authority, developers, residents Farmers Farmers Activation the parameters in GeoData file regarding rural households. implementation in the model Changed land use in SLC s in subbasins in GeoData file. It took into the account urban subbasins. Also, the parameters in par file were adjusted. Increased share of using of mineral fertilized in the model on agricultural areas (GeoData file). Activation the buffer effect in the model through initiating buffer and close_w functions in GeoData

36 Greening Improved rural wastewater treatment Buffer strips (0.7/0.2) km It was assumed that 70% of the length of the Reda River is covered by a buffer strips and 20% of phosphorus goes to the river and the rest is retained in the buffer strips ha (10%) Increasing of green areas at about 10 %. It was assumed that waste water treatment plants are located outside the Reda catchment so in this pathway (connection to sewage system instead of treatment in situ) whole load from new connected users is discharged outside the catchment. Pathway 5 Mixture of Urban, Rural and Agro-Environmental actions with the greatest impact Combined measures The measures are combination of actions regarding buffer zones (Buffer zone (0.9/0.1)) and increasing of forest areas by 10 % (12 00 ha) So we have mixed scope: km for buffer zones and ha for greening. Farmers receiving an area-based payment have to implement various straightforward, non-contractual practices that benefit the environment and the climate. - Farmers local authority file and bufffilt in par file. Increased share of forestry instead of agricultural land. Parameter regarding outflow from rural households in GeoData file was changed. Combinations previous measures. local authority, farmers Changed land use in SLC s in GeoData file. 36

37 4.1.2 Pathway 1 - Business as usual The business as usual pathway includes currently implemented measures and measures that have already been decided in previous plans (e.g. the National Programme for Construction of Urban Wastewater Treatment Plants). Measures adopted in the River Basin Management Plans and other documents included measures classified as water infrastructure, municipal infrastructures and standard agro-environmental measures. Some of those measures may not yet have been implemented when the modelling was done, but it was assumed that up to 2020, the planned measures will be implemented Pathway 2 - Focus on urban actions Measures suggested for this pathway included those related to flood control and flood risk reduction in urban areas: closed small urban retention infrastructure open small urban retention infrastructure flood protection infrastructure development of tourism/recreational areas urban planning. The stakeholders defined high flood risk in cities such as Wejherowo and Reda, which are both located in the lower reaches of the Reda catchment. This flood hazard could be reduced by creation of increased water retention in Reda catchment, mainly on the tributaries Bolszewka river and Gościcina river. The measures proposed in this pathway resulted from discussions with stakeholders in the 2nd and 3rd workshops and are focused on limiting the peak flows in Reda river, especially in urban areas. In this pathway, suggested solutions include new reservoirs. In response to the discussions, it was also decided to analyse how the extent of impermeable areas, based on Corine Land Cover, has changed during the period This could give us an indication about how the natural retention has changed in the catchment in the last 22 years. The model results for the measures in pathway 2 will be presented in Deliverable Pathway 3 - Focus on rural areas Due to the low consumption of mineral fertilizers in the Reda catchment, a variant of double fertilization was also considered. First of all, development of small wastewater treatment plants decreases N and P emissions. In the Reda catchment, it was difficult to identify the individual locations of small wastewater emissions, so instead we assumed that a total reduction of nutrient emissions from all such installations listed in the planning document. 37

38 Second, liming of the soil is an example of an agro-environmental measure which increases soil ph and could contribute to decreased nutrient losses due to an enhanced nutrient uptake by the crops. As for the average response to liming, plants can be divided into three groups [Lafarge, 2016]: Very highly responsive (25% yield boosters under the influence of liming), e.g.: beet, corn, pea, clover; Highly responsive (15% yield boosters under the influence of liming), e.g.: rye, oats, potatoes; On average, responding (7% yield boosters under the influence of liming) e.g.: wheat, barley, canola, field beans. In HYPE model there is no specific unit for modelling the effect of liming. The effect of soilliming is both an effect on crop uptake of N and P, and a possible effect on the soil structure linked to the risk for P losses. Hence, modelling the effect of soil liming needs some further model development. If on the 3 rd workshop, stakeholders confirm that liming is a popular agricultural activity in Reda catchment, the Reda team will try to assess the impact of this on nutrient losses using the HYPE model. Third, the Reda team has modelled the impact of the measure - Large rural retention infrastructure (Large reservoirs, flood plains), and the result will be described in the report D Pathway 4 Agri-Environmental measures This pathway consists of three types of measures: two variants of buffer strips, increase of forest area at about 10 % in three subbasins, the assumption that all households are connected to the sewage system and that the treated sewage is discharged outside the Reda catchment. The effect of buffer strips on the total phosphorus concentration in the outflow from Reda catchment is shown in Figure 17. More results for the measures in pathway 4 will be presented in Deliverable

39 Figure 17 Impact of the implementation of buffer strips (pathway 4) on modelled TP concentrations in the Reda outlet Mixture of Urban and Rural and Agri-Environmental actions The Polish partners suggested that this would be the outcome of the third workshop in the Reda River catchment. It has therefore not been further developed for this report, but will be presented in the D2.4 report. 4.2 Pathway modelling approach for Reda Preparatory activities for modelling the case area For model calibration, after the second modelling workshop organized in Magdeburg the Reda catchment team decided (in cooperation with project Coordinator and Selke catchment team) to exclude subbasin No. 1 from the calibration process, as the river flow in this point is heavily influenced by the Orle lake. Instead, the calibration was done using flow data from the gauging station from subbasin No. 7. In the case of the Reda catchment, difficulties are caused by an inconsistency between the location for flow measurements and those for water quality measurements. More detailed information was presenting in Deliverable 2.2. In order to identify difficulties that may result from the implementation of measures in the subsequent modelling of pathways (2-5), we analysed the input data regarding: - agricultural activities related to cultivation in Reda catchment [GUS BDL, National Agricultural Census, 2010]; 39

40 - agricultural activities related to animal husbandry in Reda catchment [GUS BDL, National Agricultural Census, 2010); - consumption of mineral fertilizers per hectare of agricultural land [GUS BDL, Agriculture, forestry and hunting]. The main source of the data was the Local Data Bank from the Central Statistical Office of Poland (GUS BDL) Consumption of mineral fertilizers in Reda catchment Consumption of mineral fertilizers in the Pomeranian Voivodeship equalled 74.8 kg N/ha and 18.3 kg P/ha in 2015, which was a decrease of about 2.7 kg N/ha and respectively 6.6 kg P/ha relative to the consumption in The highest consumption of mineral N is in the Wejherowo (urban area) and Luzino communes; with 67 kg N/ha in the latter (Figure 18). This is, however still about 13 % lower than the average consumption of fertilizers in the Pomeranian Voivodeship. In case of consumption of phosphorus fertilizers the highest consumption is also in Luzino commune but it is also less than the average consumption in Pomeranian Voivodeship. There is a large variation in the area of agricultural land in the communes of the Reda catchment. Most of the farms are small or medium size, with an area of about 1-5 ha and 5-10 ha. According to the Agency for Restructuring and Modernisation of Agriculture [ARMA, 2016] the medium size of farms in Pomeranian Voivodeship was ha in To limit the loading of nutrients affecting the Baltic Sea, all farmers in the catchment need to cooperate, which could be difficult bearing in mind such huge number of small and medium farms. On the other hand, the consumption of mineral fertilizers in Reda catchment is quite low. This has also been confirmed by one of the employee in WIOŚ during the during consultations. 40

41 Figure 18 Consumption of mineral fertilizers in terms of pure ingredient per hectare of agricultural land in the Reda catchment Below pictures show the loads of total nitrogen and phosphorus in kilograms per year for arable land in each of the subbasins. The maps (Figure 19 and Figure 20) were prepared based on results from the HYPE model with input data for 2010 coming from [GUS BDL, Agriculture, forestry and hunting] and data regarding doses of nitrogen and phosphorus for manure and liquid manure [Wyniki, 2014]. The cumulative amount of total nitrogen discharging to the Baltic Sea equals more than 306 tons/year from the Reda catchment, with the highest loads per area coming from subbasins number 1 (upper reach of Reda river), 4 (Bolszewka river) and 5 (Gościcina river). The total amount of total phosphorus discharged to the Baltic Sea from Reda catchment equals more than 34 tons/year. For phosphorus, the highest loads per area comes from subbasins number 6 (Bolszewka river from Gościcina river to estuary to Reda River), 9 and 10 (Reda river from the Cedron river tributary to the estuary to the Baltic Sea). The hilly character of subbasins number 4 (Bolszewka river) and 5 (Gościcina river), means that we can expect a more rapid outflow of organic and mineral compounds into the Reda river. More results for the measures in pathway 1 will be presented in Deliverable

42 Figure 19 Total nitrogen loads (include point sources) in kg per km 2 and year for subbasins in the Reda catchment Figure 20 Total phosphorus loads (include point sources) in kg per km 2 and year for subbasins in the Reda catchment 42

43 4.2.3 Model setup for pathway modelling For modelling of the measures in the pathways, some changes in the input files into the HYPE model were made. For example, to implement buffer strips several changes were made in the Data.txt file, such as the Buffer column (fraction of watercourse through agricultural land that has a buffer zone (between 0 and 1)) and the close_w column (fraction of agricultural land that lies near watercourse, for which leakage is affected by the presence of a buffer strip (between 0 and 1)). 5 Selke catchment 5.1 Pathways of development for Selke catchment Background In the Selke case area there is no big risk of flooding compared to the other cases studies. Two dry dams are suggested as important dry retention areas for flood protection. One is located in the upstream part of the catchment and is already constructed, while the other one is suggested in the middle part of the catchment and is still in a design phase. This measure was mainly suggested to protect the cities and agricultural lands located in the downstream part of the Selke river basin from flooding. Also, these 2 dry dams will probably be activated only once each years, according to the Flow-Duration-Curve and historical records of the measured discharge in the region. The ecological status of water in the Selke case study is mainly affected by diffuse pollution from agriculture and point sources such as wastewater from urban areas and old mining legacies. Nutrient inputs from agricultural land are the main eutrophication sources of the stream. The nutrient enrichment leads to conflicts between economic interests of stakeholders from the agricultural sector and ecological interests of stakeholders representing the environmental sector. Further conflicts are emerging between different legal requirements and policy measures within and across different sectors but also across the multi-level policy environment in the EU. The different issues driving the interests of the various stakeholders in the Selke case study reflect a range of different ecosystem services and are closely linked. For example, agricultural activities primarily aimed at utilizing economic or market-based functions (provisioning services) of the ecosystem impact the water quality aspects, such as the ecological status of water bodies and the nutrient enrichment in ground and surface water. They also affect farmland biodiversity (including biodiversity on water margins and riparian strips). The ecological status is assessed by biological indicators and supporting physicochemical and hydromorphological parameters. Changes in the ecological status of water bodies directly affect the aquatic biodiversity as well as biodiversity along the water 43

44 bodies. Vice versa, (policy) measures aimed at biodiversity conservation also impact on water quality and provisioning services such as food production from agriculture. The close connectivity of the different ecosystem services requires a joint and integrative approach to address and solve problems. Trying to maximize one of these ecosystem services in the short term is likely to have damaging effects on other services. In addition, greater coherence between policy decisions and implementations at international, national scales and at the local scale is of particular importance. The stakeholders in the Selke case study highlighted the connectivity and interdependence of the different ecosystem service benefits, and emphasized that critically improved cooperation is needed to more effectively target multiple benefits in the long term. The discussions with the stakeholders suggest that the aspiration to explore how better cooperation can be achieved is one of the main drivers of the stakeholders to be actively involved in this process. Stakeholder discussions highlighted conflicts of interests between stakeholder groups and a lack of cooperation, as well as conflicts between different administrative policy levels (e.g. in terms of different objectives and interpretation of the rules) as key barriers to improve the effectiveness of measures. The pathways explores to what extent alternative governance configurations (e.g. with respect to development, implementation and management of measures, the roles of different stakeholders and possibilities to finance measures outside the rigid existing policy frameworks) can address those issues and result in improved effectiveness. The framework of relevant measures currently implemented to address pollution from diffuse and point sources in the Selke case study is largely given through the Common Agricultural Policy and the Water Framework Directive, and its operative programmes such as the Rural Development Programme and the River Basin Management Plan. The business as usual pathway is centred on those two programmes and their continuation with marginal changes post The identified lack of cooperation and lack of consideration of the close linkages and potential synergies between measures targeting different ecosystem services suggest the need for an ecosystem services approach in management of the Selke catchment with (policy and non-policy) measures promoting the joint delivery of multiple ecosystem services. Such an approach is explored in pathway 2 (Table 7) In addition needs for further changes to the wastewater treatment system have been identified, which are further examined in pathway 3. 44

45 Table 7 Summary of the three measures pathways applied in the Selke river basin and their correspondent stakeholders and representation in the HYPE model Pathway Measure Description Stakeholder Model representation Pathway 1 Business as usual Dry Dam to reduce flood risk Dry retention areas for flood protection Measure to protect cities and agricultural lands located in the downstream part of the river basin Reservoir water authority The damping parameter damp adjusted accordingly Creation of ecological bypassing Measures on weirs, falls and passage construction to improve the flow River management water authority 2 implementations in the period Currently assumed start date in 2016 Water velocity was adjusted to mimic the measured storm peaks at three gauging stations Flower and water protection strips (EFA), start in 2015 Ploughing and cropping techniques on areas with high risk of erosion 0.7 ha (aggregate of both flower and water strips) Direct and mulch seeding, conservation tillage, ca ha (old commitments from previous period) Maintain/integrate ecological features and field margins to increase biodiversity and reduce diffuse pollution Measures to reduce erosion on utilised agricultural areas, which go beyond good agricultural practice Landscape and environmental authority Agricultural authority Not applicable The soil erosion parameters and the original soil cohesion were adjusted accordingly Extensive permanent grassland, Start in 2015, ha Promote biodiversity on permanent grassland through extensive land management without mineral fertilisers. Reduced losses of N and P Agricultural authority The share of this specific land use area was considered in the model Organic farming Start in 2015, ha Farming without mineral fertilisers and chemical plant protection products reduces diffuse pollution from agriculture Agricultural authority Use only organic farming for the suggested area Ventilation and treatment of mine water and mine water retention Dismantling of transverse structures (weir). 3 implementations in the period Assumed start in implementations in the period Measures to reduce pollution from old legacies Measures on weirs, falls and passage construction to improve the flow River management water authority River management water authority The nutrient point sources concentrations were reduced The damping of stream water and the storm peaks were adjusted accordingly 45

46 Pathway 2 Ecosystem service approach Development and 10 m buffer strips: 274,45 ha management of riparian strips 20 m buffer strips: 551,27 ha Advantages for biodiversity in and around the streams and increased retention of soil and phosphorus River management water authority Initiating buffer and close_w functions (GeoData file). Adjusted buffilt, innerfilt, otherfilt in the par file. Reduced tillage Optimisation of fertilizer use Contour ploughing Joint implementation Two versions: a) 1000 ha land with existing contracts; b) reduce tillage on all agriculture land (22844 ha) Reduce application of mineral Nitrogen by 20% for arable and grassland areas (24228 ha) Application of contour ploughing (22844 ha) The above suggested measured merged together (24228 ha) Pathway 3 Waste water treatment Increased number of Improved wastewater households connected to treatment for the rural sewage plants population in Selke (15%; inhabitants) a) only areas with existing old and potentially renewed contracts; b) all arable land with a particular erosion risk Efficient use of mineral fertilizers Prevent ploughing in the same direction of plot slope reduces the risk of detachment of soil particles All measures were tested at the same time The non-connected rural households assumed to be connected to sewage networks Agriculture and water management authority Agriculture and water management authority Agriculture and water management authority Join-effort activity where all stakeholders collaborate Waste water authority The cohesion of the parent soil was increased in the model Reduction of N application on all agricultural lands in the CropData file Adjusting the erodability coefficient eropar2 in the par.txt file. All above modifications activated simultaneously Adjustment of point source contribution accordingly 46

47 5.1.2 Pathway 1 Business as usual As mentioned above, in terms of relevant measures, the business as usual pathway reflects the continuation of currently implemented measures and implementation approaches (governance) in the Selke case study area. The business as usual pathway also reflects the existing history of minor changes or continuation of the same measures across several programming periods in the Rural Development Programme (RDP).Measures are largely designed through a top-down approach and impacted by EU-level regulations and national and regional budgetary constraints and interests. Only a few measures of the River Basin Management Plan (RBMP) are implemented, or are planned to be implemented, in the Selke case study area. Area based measures targeting diffuse pollution from agriculture are identical to the agri-environmental measures in the Rural Development Programme, which finances these measures. In addition, a number of the measures of the River Basin Management Plan are conceptual in nature Pathway 2 Ecosystem service approach This pathway is based on the suggestion to target and ensure the delivery of multiple ecosystem services from agricultural land uses, and the management of streams in agriculturally used areas. The pathway explores a) alternative designs of measures and measure combinations and b) alternative governance configurations. While the type of measures identified are largely similar to already existing measures in the business as usual pathway, this pathway explores both different designs and larger extent of uptake, as well as a systemic approach to combining different measures to promote multiple ecosystem services. Changes to formal measures (in comparison to the business as usual pathway) Development and management of buffer strips o Different designs (e.g. regarding width, vegetation structure and the shape/slope of the strip) and uptakes of buffer strips o Advantages for biodiversity in and around the streams and through higher nutrient retention Different adjustments to the morphology and characteristics of the streams (e.g. gravel and stony ground, meandering measures) Different designs and uptake of conservation tillage and contour ploughing Optimisation of fertilizer use Joint implementation of the above formal measures 47

48 Informal measures - changes in the implementation approach (in comparison to the business as usual pathway) Involvement of beneficiaries and victims in the development of measures Testing of different roles and responsibilities of stakeholders Coordinated implementation of complementary measures Variations in payment design Variations in contract lengths Development of alternative funding mechanisms outside mainstream policy frameworks Pathway 3 Waste water treatment Pathway 3 focuses on point sources of wastewater in the Selke catchment and assumes that the households currently not connected to wastewater treatment plants will be connected. The relevance of this pathway has emerged as a result of the assessment of the importance of different sources for Phosphorus in the water bodies, which was carried out with the stakeholders during the first set of workshops. Changes to measures (in comparison to the business as usual pathway) Increased number of households connected to sewage plants. 5.2 Pathway modelling approach for Selke river Preparatory activities for modelling the case area The HYPE model inputs files as well as the model parameters file were adjusted accordingly to represent the effect of the different measures suggested above. First, the results of the baseline simulations of Inorganic nitrogen concentrations (IN), Soluble Phosphorus (SP) and Total Phosphorus (TP) were given. Second, the results of modelling the different given effects are listed below. These graphs presents the best simulation results in time during the preparation of the report D 2.2. Results of those simulations will be updated during further work. Results of baseline simulations for IN (a) 48

49 (b) (c) Figure 21 Baseline simulations for the IN concentrations during the period for the stations Silberhuette (a), Meisdorf (b) and Hausnenindorf (c) 49

50 (a1) (a2) (b1) (b2) (c1) 50

51 (c2) Figure 22 Baseline simulations for the SP and TP concentrations during the period for the stations Silberhuette (a1 and a2), Meisdorf (b1 and b2) and Hausneindorf (c1 and c2), respectively 5.3 Modelled impact of pathways The summary results of the five suggested measures to reduce eutrophication are given in Błąd! Nie można odnaleźć źródła odwołania.. The nutrient loads effect of the measure is calculated in comparison with the baseline simulations. Results showed that reduced tillage has the highest reduction of TP loads compared to the other individual pathways. While, the highest reduction of TP loads was obtained when all pathways were considered in 20 m buffer strips application (Joint Implementation 20 m, Błąd! Nie można odnaleźć źródła odwołania.. Table 8 Comparison between average predicted discharge, IN and TP concentrations and loads between baseline and the different measures included in pathways during the simulation period IN Q Load Load Reduction TP Q Load Load Reduction Measure (mg/l) (m3/s) (kg/d) (Kg/ha/y) in % (mg/l) (m3/s) (kg/d) (Kg/ha/y) in % Baseline simulations Buffer strips (10 m) Buffer strips (20 m) Contour ploughing Reduced tillage % reduction of N mineral fertilizer Joint implementation (10 m) Joint implementation (20 m)

52 5.4 Revision of modelled scenarios as suggested by stakeholders in the 3rd workshop The workshop in Selke was organized on 24th February The same pathways that were mentioned in previous workshops were discussed and accepted by the stakeholders and no further revision was suggested for the Selke case study. 6 Approach to implementation of climate change in HYPE in the case study areas (RCP4.5, RCP8.5) In MIRACLE, climate change impact assessments are conducted in combination with the modelling of pathways of measures in the MIRACLE case basins. In order to reflect climate changes projected during the current management planning horizon, 2030 was chosen as a projection time frame. For impact modelling purposes, this translates to a 30-year model period centred around 2030 (2016 to 2045). Climate forcing scenarios for MIRACLE consist of two climate model results, which are drawn from a larger ensemble of model results and represent two members which cover some of the projection spread found in the full ensemble. The source ensemble is the EURO-CORDEX (Coordinated Regional Downscaling Experiment) ensemble, which provides dynamically downscaled climate change projections from the CMIP5 global climate model ensemble [Jacob, D. et al., 2013]. We chose to include two model results with RCP8.5 projections for impact assessment in MIRACLE, as opposed to a combination of RCP8.5 and RCP4.5 projections of a single model result. The rationale for this was that we wanted to use the two model results to include uncertainty spread in climate models, which is a larger source of uncertainty compared to RCP differences, especially for near-future projections as the 2030s period. Figure 23 and Figure 24 show a comparison of GCM-RCM model projections as transient time series for monthly precipitation and air temperature, taken from the SWICCA ensemble [ The figures illustrate the similarity of RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 projections during MIRACLE s projection horizon in comparison to the spread between models. 52

53 Figure 23 Projected monthly precipitation for four GCM-RCM model combinations from the SWICCA ensemble Top panel: RCP4.5, Bottom panel: RCP8.5 Figure 24 Projected monthly air temperature for four GCM-RCM model combinations from the SWICCA ensemble. Top panel: RCP4.5, Bottom panel: RCP8.5 The chosen climate model projections consist of two ensemble members which represent the high end of projected changes in (a) air temperature and (b) precipitation (Table 9). The selection was based on mid-century changes in summer, under the assumption that changes in summer most strongly influence changes in nutrient dynamics. It is important to note that the chosen ensemble members do not represent the full ensemble spread, as this would necessitate a larger number of members in the sample, but instead try to reflect the high end of projected changes (which are still overall small for the 2030s period of interest). Table 9 GCM-RCM model runs from the EURO-CORDEX ensemble chosen for use in MIRACLE. P change highest from WRF model by the Institut Pierre Simon Laplace (IPSL), T change highest from RCA4 model by SMHI P change highest T change highest RCP8.5 WRF-IPSL-CM5A-MR RCA4-CanESM2 53

54 For use in MIRACLE, the chosen GCM-RCM model runs were further downscaled statistically using distribution-based downscaling (DBS) bias correction [Yang, et al., 2010]. This was done on the RCMs 0.44 grid and towards WATCH Forcing Data ERA INTERIM (WFDEI) reanalysis forcing data (reference period 1971 to 2000). WFDEI is the regional climate forcing data set used for Baltic Sea Basin scale modelling in MIRACLE, and was distributed to project members in the initial focus basin HYPE set-ups. Note that further bias correction to local observation series might be necessary for individual case catchments due to their small size. Figure 25 to Figure 28 show climate model grid centerpoints 1 and MIRACLE HYPE delineations with forcing data assignments indicated by colour. Data is delivered as Pobs.txt and Tobs.txt files combined with a ForcKey.txt file which links forcing data point IDs with HYPE SUBIDs. As a quality check for the climate scenario data compilation and to investigate further bias compared to local observations, these observations are plotted against one climate scenario time series (RCA4-CanESM2) during the MIRACLE calibration period (2005 to 2014) for Helge å. At least in this catchment, which is by far the largest of all focus areas, no strong additional bias can be seen, meaning that no additional bias correction seems necessary here prior to scenario analyses. There is large scatter, especially at shorter aggregation time steps, but this is to be expected since the climate model runs produce a time series realisation with similar statistical properties, not an identical realisation. 1 Central point between 4 points in grid. 54

55 Figure 25 Selke focus area with sub-basin delineation and nearest climate model grid centerpoints. Sub-basin colour indicates grouped centerpoint assignment using nearest neighbour method Figure 26 Reda focus area with sub-basin delineation and nearest climate model grid centerpoints. Sub-basin colour indicates grouped centerpoint assignment using nearest neighbour method 55

56 Figure 27 Berze focus area with sub-basin delineation and nearest climate model grid centerpoints. Sub-basin colour indicates grouped centerpoint assignment using nearest neighbour method Figure 28 Helge å focus area with sub-basin delineation and nearest climate model grid centerpoints. Subbasin colour indicates grouped centerpoint assignment using nearest neighbour method 56

57 Figure 29 Comparison of climate model data with local forcing data in Helge å focus area. Basin-averaged aggregates of precipitation (top) and air temperature (bottom) across daily, monthly and annual time scales (from left to right) 7 Conclusions This report presents results from modelling the effect of measures suggested by stakeholders to reduce flooding, eutrophication, enhance biodiversity and contribute to other goals. More detailed results are presented in report D2.4 In all case areas, many measures are concentrated to agriculture areas, e.g. buffer strips or changes in crops or land use structure. The implement of measures in case areas may bring diverse effects. In some cases, the implementation of measures expected to decreased the loads of nitrogen and phosphorus to the watercourse, had the reverse effect. This was observed for an expansion of organic farming in the Berze catchment, and a probable reason is the differences in nitrogen and phosphorus transformation processes for mineral and organic fertilizers in the model. An important result is that an extensive implementation of buffer strips may effectively reduce nutrient (especially P) losses to watercourses. 57