An impact assessment for urban stormwater use

The adoption of stormwater collection and use for a range of non-potable applications requires that the perceived risks, particularly those associated with public health, are addressed. Pollutant impacts have been assessed using E. coli and a scoring system on a scale of 0 to 5 to identify the magnitude of impacts and also the likelihood of exposure to stormwater during different applications. Combining these identifies that low or medium risks are generally predicted except for domestic car washing and occupational irrigation of edible raw food crops where the predicted high risk would necessitate the introduction of remedial action

Assessing the ecological coherence of a marine protected area network in the Celtic Seas

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are a management tool used to respond to human-derived threats in marine ecosystems. Historically, MPAs have been established on an individual ad hoc basis, rather than through a systematic, planned process. However, high levels of functional and spatial connectivity within marine ecosystems have led to the suggestion that networks of MPAs provide greater ecological benefits than individual MPAs. Consequently, international policy has developed to consider broader spatial requirements for marine conservation, resulting in a number of international and regional agreements that require the establishment of ecologically coherent MPA networks. Existing MPAs are now being considered, retrospectively, alongside new designations, as networks of MPAs across regions, both nationally and internationally. Under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), France, the Republic of Ireland, and the UK (including Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man) are required to work together to ensure coordinated development of marine strategies for the Celtic Seas subregion. Accordingly, MPAs have been identified as crucial components of the programme of measures to achieve Good Environmental Status (GES) under the MSFD. Here, we provide the first ecological coherence assessment of an MPA network spanning an MSFD subregion. A network of 533 MPAs, or parts thereof, across the Celtic Seas subregion was assessed using five criteria and two methodologies, with a focus on broadscale habitats. While the Celtic Seas MPA network as a whole is not ecologically coherent (according to accepted thresholds), progress toward a number of global targets has been achieved, for example, protection of 10% of marine and coastal areas under the Convention on Biological Diversity. Further, all MSFD predominant habitat types assessed are adequately represented and replicated within the network. However, a number of gaps were identified, including a lack of MPAs in offshore and deeper areas, and inadequate proportions of predominant habitat types within MPAs. Addressing these gaps to enable the MPA network to fulfill its critical role in the delivery of GES under the MSFD will require both national progress toward designation of adequate and viable MPAs and transboundary agreements and coordination of MPA designation processes at the European level

Collaboration among countries in marine conservation can achieve substantial efficiencies

AimMultinational collaboration is important for successfully protecting marine environments. However, few studies have assessed the costs and benefits incurred by taking collaborative action. One of the most complex marine regions in the world is the Mediterranean Sea biodiversity hotspot. The sea is shared by over 20 countries across three continents with a vast array of socio-economic and political backgrounds. We aimed to examine how collaboration between countries of the Mediterranean Sea affects conservation plans when costs and threats are considered

Qualitative Impact Assessment of Land Management Interventions on Ecosystem Services (“QEIA”). Report-1: Executive Summary: QEIA Evidence Review & Integrated Assessment

The focus of this project was to provide an expert-led, rapid qualitative assessment of land management interventions on Ecosystem Services (ES) proposed for inclusion in Environmental Land Management (ELM) schemes. This involved a review of the current evidence base for 741 land management actions on 33 Ecosystem Services and 53 Ecosystem Service indicators by ten teams involving 45 experts drawn from the independent research community in a consistent series of Evidence Reviews covering the broad topics of: • Air quality • Greenhouse gas emissions • Soils • Water management • Biodiversity: croplands • Biodiversity: improved grassland • Biodiversity: semi-natural habitats • Biodiversity: integrated systems-based actions • Carbon sequestration • Cultural services (including recreation, geodiversity and regulatory services). It should be noted that this piece of work is just one element of the wider underpinning work Defra has commissioned to support the development of the ELM schemes

Qualitative impact assessment of land management interventions on Ecosystem Services (‘QEIA’). Report-2: Integrated Assessment

The focus of this project was to provide an expert-led, rapid qualitative assessment of land management interventions on Ecosystem Services (ES) proposed for inclusion in Environmental Land Management (ELM) schemes. This involved a review of the current evidence base for 741 land management actions on 33 Ecosystem Services and 53 Ecosystem Service indicators by ten expert teams drawn from the independent research community in a consistent series of ten Evidence Reviews covering the broad topics of; • Air quality • Greenhouse gas emissions • Soils • Water management • Biodiversity: croplands • Biodiversity: improved grassland • Biodiversity: semi-natural habitats • Biodiversity: integrated systems-based actions • Carbon sequestration • Cultural services (including recreation, geodiversity and regulatory services) These reviews were undertaken rapidly at Defra’s request by ten teams involving 45 experts who together captured more than 2,400 individual sources of evidence. This was followed by the Integrated Assessment (IA) reported here to provide a more accessible summary of these evidence reviews with a focus on capturing the actions with the greatest potential magnitude of change for the intended ES, and their potential co-benefits and trade-offs for the other ES

Preface

This report has been prepared by: Sofia Guedes Vaz --- EEA Jock Martin --- EEA David Wilkinson --- IEEP Jodi Newcombe --- IEEP November 2001 Project manager: Teresa Ribeiro European Environment Agency Environmental issue report No 25 Layout: Brandenborg a/s Note The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the official opinions of the European Commission or other European Communities institutions. Neither the European Environment Agency nor any person or company acting on the behalf of the Agency is responsible for the use that may be made of the information contained in this repor