Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A decision tree tool supporting the assessment of groundwater vulnerability

  • Thematic Issue
  • Published:
Environmental Earth Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Water Framework Directive and Groundwater Directive aim at preserving and improving the groundwater status. Groundwater bodies are classified as being or not being at risk of failing to meet these objectives. Those at risk are subject to more precise risk assessment where the concept of vulnerability is considered in the pathway part of the source–pathway–receptor scheme. However, no further details on implementation strategies are provided. In order to support groundwater managers and decision-makers in implementation of programs protecting groundwater, a systematic operational approach based on a decision tree is proposed, which leads the user through the stages of vulnerability assessment. First, a problem has to be formulated related to a threatening of the quantitative and/or qualitative status of a groundwater body. Next, the stated problem needs to be related to the intrinsic or specific vulnerability. Methods used for the intrinsic vulnerability assessment belong to two categories: subjective rating and objective methods. Method selection depends primarily on: data availability, knowledge and available resources. A key issue is the lag time associated with transport between a source/event of contamination and the water body. This lag time is primarily controlled by the temporal scale of water flow. It provides information about flow processes and at the same time also about timescales required for the implementation of strategies. Effects of any measures taken cannot be observed immediately but at the earliest after these estimated lag times emphasizing the need to also proactively safeguard groundwater resources and preserve their good status.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aller L, Bennett T, Lehr JH, Petty RJ, Hackett G (1987) DRASTIC: a standardized system for evaluating ground water pollution potential using hydrogeologic settings. NWWA/EPA Series, EPA-600/2-87-035, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ada, Oklahoma

  • Balderacchi M, Benoit P, Cambier P, Eklo OM, Gargini A, Gemitzi A, Gurel M, Klove B, Nakic Z, Preda E, Ruzicic S, Wachniew P, Trevisan M (2013) Groundwater pollution and quality monitoring approaches at the European level. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 43(4):323–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benda LE, Poff LN, Tague C, Palmer MA, Pizzuto J, Cooper SD, Stanley E, Moglen G (2002) How to avoid train wrecks when using science in environmental problem solving. Bioscience 52:1127–1136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bottero M (2011) Indicators assessment systems. In: Cassatella C, Peano A (eds) Landscape indicators. Accessing and monitoring landscape quality. Springer, Berlin, pp 15–29

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cherry KA, Shepherd M, Withers PJA, Mooney SJ (2008) Assessing the effectiveness of actions to mitigate nutrient loss from agriculture: a review of methods. Sci Tot Environ 406:1–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EC (2000) Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, OJ L 327, 22 December 2000. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2003) Common implementation strategy for the water framework directive (2000/60/EC). Analysis of pressures and impacts, Guidance document No. 3. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2004) Common implementation strategy for the water framework directive (2000/60/EC). Groundwater Risk Assessment, Technical Report No. 4. https://circabc.europa.eu/sd/a/c2b7b330-be7a-4566-81a7-dc3fbc04c295/Groundwater%20risk%20assessment%20Report.pdf. Accessed 02 Feb 2016

  • EC (2006) Directive 2006/118/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of groundwater against pollution and deterioration, OJ L 372, 27 December 2006. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2009) Common implementation strategy for the water framework directive (2000/60/EC). Guidance on Groundwater Status and Trend Assessment, Guidance document No. 18, Technical Report-2009-026. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2010) Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). Guidance on Risk Assessment and the Use of Conceptual Models for Groundwater, Guidance document No. 26, Technical Report-2010-042. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  • European Environment Agency (2010a) The European Environment—State and Outlook 2010. Adapting to Climate Change. doi:10.2800/58998

  • European Environment Agency (2010b) The European Environment—State and Outlook 2010—Assessment of Global Megatrends

  • European Environment Agency (2012) Proportion of classified groundwater bodies in different River Basin Districts in poor chemical status. http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/figures/chemical-status-of-groundwater-bodies-1/chemical-status-of-groundwater-bodies. Accessed 29 Jan 2016

  • Faybishenko B, Nicholson T, Shestopalov V, Bohuslavksy A, Bublias V (2015) Groundwater vulnerability: chernobyl nuclear disaster. Special Publications 69. American Geophysical Union and Wiley, Hoboken, New Jersey

  • Filippini M, Gargini A, Gemitzi A, Kvaener J, Meeks J, Stumpp C, Rozanski K, Wachniew P, Witczak S, Zurek A (2013) Critical review of methods for assessment of vulnerability of groundwater systems. EU-project Report. http://www.bioforsk.no/ikbViewer/Content/106001/D2.3_literature_corrected.pdf

  • Focazio MJ, Reilly TE, Rupert MG, Helsel DR (2002) Assessing ground–water vulnerability to contamination: providing scientifically defensible information for decision makers. U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1224, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia

  • Fritch TG, McKnight CL, Yelderman JC, Arnold JG (2000) An aquifer vulnerability assessment of the Paluxy aquifer, central Texas, USA, using GIS and a modified DRASTIC approach. Environ Manag 25:337–345. doi:10.1007/s002679910026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gogu RC, Dassargues A (2000) Current trends and future challenges in groundwater vulnerability assessment using overlay and index methods. Environ Geol 39(6):549–559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gogu RC, Hallet V, Dassargues A (2003) Comparison of aquifer vulnerability assessment techniques. Application to the Néblon river basin (Belgium). Environ Geol 44:881–892. doi:10.1007/s00254-003-0842-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griebler C, Stein H, Kellermann C, Berkhoff S, Brielmann H, Schmidt S, Selesi D, Steube C, Fuchs A, Hahn HJ (2010) Ecological assessment of groundwater ecosystems—vision or illusion? Ecol Eng 36(9):1174–1190. doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2010.01.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton SK (2012) Biogeochemical time lags may delay responses of streams to ecological restoration. Freshw Biol 57:43–57. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2427.2011.02685.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kløve B, Ala-Aho P, Bertrand G, Gurdak JJ, Kupfersberger H, Kværner J, Muotka T, Mykrä H, Preda E, Rossi P (2014a) Climate change impacts on groundwater and dependent ecosystems. J Hydrol 518:250–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kløve B, Balderacchi M, Gemitzi A, Henry S, Kværner J, Muotka T, Preda P (2014b) Protection of groundwater dependent ecosystems: current policies and future management options. Water Policy 16(6):1070–1086. doi:10.2166/wp.2014.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lapworth DJ, Baran N, Stuart ME, Ward RS (2012) Emerging organic contaminants in groundwater: a review of sources, fate and occurrence. Environ Pollut 163:287–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liggett JE, Talwar S (2009) Groundwater vulnerability assessments and integrated water resource management. Streamline 13(1):18–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Margane A (2003) Guideline for groundwater vulnerability mapping and risk assessment for the susceptibility of groundwater resources to contamination. Protection and sustainable use of groundwater and soil resources in the arab region project, vol 4. Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources (BGR), Arab Center for the Studies of Arid Zones and Dry Lands (ACSAD) Management, Damascus

  • Marín AI, Andreo B (2015) Vulnerability to contamination of Karst Aquifers. In: Stevanović Z (ed) Karst Aquifers—characterization and engineering, professional practice in Earth Sciences. Springer, Berlin, pp 251–266

    Google Scholar 

  • Pisinaras V, Polychronis C, Gemitzi A (2016) Intrinsic groundwater vulnerability determination at the aquifer scale: a methodology coupling travel time estimation and rating methods. Environ Earth Sci 75:1–12. doi:10.1007/s12665-015-4965-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plummer R, de Loë R, Armitage D (2012) A systematic review of water vulnerability assessment tools. Water Resour Manag 26:4327–4346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarzenbach R, Egli T, Hofstetter TB, von Gunten U, Wehrli B (2010) Global water pollution and human health. Annu Rev Environ Resour 35:109–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrba J, Zaporozec A (eds) (1994) Guidebook on mapping groundwater vulnerability. IAH Intern Contribution to Hydrogeology, vol 16. Heise Verlag, Hannover

    Google Scholar 

  • Wachniew P, Zurek A, Stumpp C, Gemitzi A, Gargini A, Filippini M, Rozanski K, Meeks J, Kvaener J, Witczak S (2016) Towards operational methods for the assessment of intrinsic groundwater vulnerability: a review. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 46:827–884. doi:10.1080/10643389.2016.1160816

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu C, Yao Y, Hayes G, Zhang B, Zheng C (2010) Quantitative assessment of groundwater vulnerability using index system and transport simulation, Huangshuihe catchment, China. Sci Total Environ 408:6108–6116. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.09.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu C, Zhang BX, Yao YY, Meng FH, Zheng CM (2012) A field demonstration of the entropy-weighted fuzzy DRASTIC method for groundwater vulnerability assessment. Hydrol Sci J 57(7):1420–1432. doi:10.1080/02626667.2012.715746

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zwahlen F (ed) (2004) Vulnerability and risk mapping for the protection of carbonate (karst) aquifers, final report. COST action 620. European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The study was supported by the GENESIS Project funded by the European Commission 7FP (Project Contract 226536) and by statutory funds of the AGH University of Science and Technology (Projects Nos. 11.11.220.01, 11.11.140.797).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Groundwater Ecology, Helmholtz Zentrum München, German Research Center for Environmental Health, Neuherberg, Germany

    Christine Stumpp

  2. Faculty of Geology, Geophysics and Environment Protection, AGH University of Science and Technology, Krakow, Poland

    Anna J. Żurek & Stanisław Witczak

  3. Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, AGH University of Science and Technology, Krakow, Poland

    Przemysław Wachniew

  4. Biological, Geological and Environmental Sciences Department, Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Alessandro Gargini & Maria Filippini

  5. Department of Environmental Engineering, Democritus University of Thrace, Xanthi, Greece

    Alexandra Gemitzi

Authors
  1. Christine Stumpp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anna J. Żurek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Przemysław Wachniew
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alessandro Gargini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Alexandra Gemitzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Maria Filippini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Stanisław Witczak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anna J. Żurek.

Additional information

This article is a part of a Topical Collection in Environmental Earth Sciences on “Groundwater Vulnerability,” edited by Dr. Andrzej Witkowski.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Stumpp, C., Żurek, A.J., Wachniew, P. et al. A decision tree tool supporting the assessment of groundwater vulnerability. Environ Earth Sci 75, 1057 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-5859-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-5859-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation