Advertisement

Regional Environmental Change

, Volume 5, Issue 2–3, pp 54–81 | Cite as

Catchment–coastal zone interaction based upon scenario and model analysis: Elbe and the German Bight case study

  • J. HofmannEmail author
  • H. Behrendt
  • A. Gilbert
  • R. Janssen
  • A. Kannen
  • J. Kappenberg
  • H. Lenhart
  • W. Lise
  • C. Nunneri
  • W. Windhorst
Original Article

Abstract

This paper presents a holistic strategy on the interaction of activities in the Elbe river basin and their effects on eutrophication in the coastal waters of the German Bight. This catchment–coastal zone interaction is the main target of the EUROCAT (EUROpean CATchments, catchment changes and their impact on the coast) research project, with the Elbe being one of eight case studies. The definition of socio-economic scenarios is linked with the application of models to evaluate measures in the catchment by estimation of nutrient emissions with MONERIS (MOdelling Nutrient Emissions in RIver Systems), and their effects on coastal waters with the ecosystem model ERSEM (European Regional Seas Ecosystem Model). The cost effectiveness of reduction measures will then be evaluated by application of the CENER model (Cost-Effective Nutrient Emission Reduction) and a multi-criteria analysis. Finally, the interpretation of ecological integrity is used as a measure to describe ecological impacts in an aggregated form.

Keywords

Scenarios Nutrients Elbe Water framework directive Coastal zone 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by the European Commission under the Fifth Framework Programme in the context of the project EUROCAT (project no. EVK1-CT-2000-00044). This is gratefully acknowledged by the authors.

References

  1. ARGE-Elbe (2001) Analyse der Nährstoffkonzentrationen, -frachten und -einträge im Elbeeinzugsgebiet. Bearbeitet, WG Pagenkopf WG. Aufgestellt, H Reincke. Arbeitsgemeinschaft für die Reinhaltung der Elbe, HamburgGoogle Scholar
  2. Baretta JW, Ebenhöh W, Ruardij P (1995) An overview over the European Regional Sea Ecosystem Model, a complex marine ecosystem model. Neth J Sea Res 33 (3/4):233–246Google Scholar
  3. Barkmann J, Windhorst W (2000) Hedging our bets: the utility of ecological integrity. In: Jörgensen SE, Müller F (eds) Handbook of ecosystem theories and management III,1.2. Lewis, Boca Raton, FL, pp 497–517Google Scholar
  4. Barkmann J, Baumann R, Meyer U, Müller F, Windhorst W (2001) Ökologische Integrität: Risikovorsorge im nachhaltigen Landschaftsmanagement. GAIA 10(2):97–107Google Scholar
  5. Becker A, Behrendt H, Haberlandt U, Klöcking B, Krysanova V, Lahmer W (2002) Auswirkungen der Landnutzung auf den Wasser- und Stoffhaushalt der Elbe und ihres Einzugsgebietes. Forschungsber Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)Google Scholar
  6. Behrendt H (2002) Nährstoffeinträge im Einzugsgebiet der Spree und ihre Veränderungen. In: Köhler J, Gelbrecht J, Pusch M (eds) Die Spree—Zustand, Probleme und Entwicklungsmöglichkeiten. Schweizerbart’sche, Stuttgart, Limnologie aktuell Bd 10, pp 62–73Google Scholar
  7. Behrendt H, Huber P, Kornmilch M, Opitz D, Schmoll O, Scholz G, Uebe R (2000) Nutrient emissions into river basins of Germany. Federal Environmental Agency Res Rep 296 25 515, UBA-Texte 23/00, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  8. Behrendt H, Bach M, Kunkel R, Opitz D, Pagenkopf WG, Scholz G, Wendland F (2002a) Quantifizierung der Nährstoffeinträge der Flußgebiete Deutschlands auf der Grundlage eines harmonisierten Vorgehens. Bericht im Rahmen des Umweltforschungsplan des Bundesministers für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit, Berlin, Forschungsvorhaben 29922285Google Scholar
  9. Behrendt H, Huber P, Kornmilch M, Opitz D, Schmoll O, Scholz G, Uebe R (2002b) Estimation of the nutrient inputs into river basins—experiences from German rivers. Region Environ Change 3:107–117Google Scholar
  10. Behrendt H, Opitz D, Pagenkopf WG, Schmoll O (2002c) Stoffeinträge in die Gewässer des Landes Brandenburg. Landesumweltamtes Brandenburg, Potsdam, Fachbeiträge 68Google Scholar
  11. Behrendt H, Bach M, Kunkel R, Opitz D, Pagenkopf WG, Scholz G, Wendland F (2003) Nutrient emissions into river basins of Germany on the basis of a hamonized procedure. Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, Berlin, Res Rep 29922285Google Scholar
  12. Bertrand G, Michalski A, Pench LR (1999) Scenarios Europe 2010: five possible futures for Europe. European Commission Forward Studies Unit Work Pap July 1999Google Scholar
  13. Beusekom JEE van, Fock H, de Jong F, Diel-Christiansen S, Christiansen B (2001) Wadden Sea specific eutrophication criteria. Common Wadden Sea Secretariat, Wilhelmshaven, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  14. Brander L, Florax R, Vermaat J (2003) The empirics of wetland valuation: a comprehensive summary and meta-analysis of the literature. Free University, Amsterdam, Institute for Environmental Studies Work Pap W03-30Google Scholar
  15. Brockmann U, Hesse K-J, Heyden B, Ladwig N (2000) Initial application of the comprehensive procedure to the German Bight. Revised Interim Rep OSPAR doc ETG 00/03/02-E, August 2000, UBA-FKZ 29825233Google Scholar
  16. Colijn F, Kannen A, Windhorst W (2002) The use of indicators and critical loads. EUROCAT Deliverable 2.1 (http://www.iia-cnr.unical.it/EUROCAT/project.htm)
  17. De Jonge V, Elliott M, Orive E (2002) Causes, historical development, effects and future challenges of a common environmental problem: eutrophication. Hydrobiologia 475/476:1–19Google Scholar
  18. Duve J (1999) Bilanzierung des Stoffaustausches zwischen Elbe und Deichvorland am Beispiel zweier tidebeeinflusster Untersuchungsgebiete. Hamburger Bodenkund Arb 43Google Scholar
  19. EEA (1999) Environment in the European Union at the turn of the century. Environmental European Agency Environmental Assessment Rep no 2Google Scholar
  20. EEA (2001) Scenarios as tools for international environmental assessments. Environmental Issue Rep no 24. Experts’ Corner Rep Prospects and Scenarios no 5. Environmental European Agency, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  21. European Community (2000) Communication from the commission on the precautionary principle. Brussels 02.02.2000 COM (2000) 1Google Scholar
  22. European Union (2000) Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Brussels, Official J European Communities L 327Google Scholar
  23. Gerlach SA (1990) Nitrogen, phosphorus, plankton and oxygen deficiency in the German Bight and in Kiel Bay—final report on the project “Eutrophication of the North Sea and the Baltic Sea”. Kieler Meeresforsch SonderheftGoogle Scholar
  24. Gömann H, Kreins P, Julius C (2003) Regionalisierung des makroskaligen Angebots-verhaltens landwirtschaftlicher Landnutzer im Elbeeinzugsgebiet bei Szenarien zu Klima- und Agrarmarktänderungen—Endbericht des Teilvorhabens im Rahmen des Projektes GLOWA-Elbe (Integrierte Analyse der Auswirkungen des Globalen Wandels auf die Umwelt und die Gesellschaft im Elbegebiet). Forschungsgesellschaft für Agrarpolitik und Agrarsoziologie eV, BonnGoogle Scholar
  25. Heath MR, Edwards AC, Pätsch J, Turell WR (2002) Modelling the behaviour of nutrients in the coastal waters of Scotland. Fisheries Research Services Marine Laboratory Aberdeen, Scottish Executive Central Research Unit ContractGoogle Scholar
  26. Hickel W, Bauerfeind E, Niermann U, von Westernhagen H (1989) Oxygen deficiency in the south-eastern North Sea: sources and biological effects. Ber Biol Anst Helgol vol 4, pp 143Google Scholar
  27. Hofmann J, Behrendt H, Nunneri C (2002) EUROCAT—Das Flussgebiet der Elbe als Teil der Rhein/Elbe Fallstudie (REBCAT). In: Geller W, Puncochar P, Guhr H, Tümpling W, Medek J, Smrt’ak J, Feldmann H, Uhlmann O (eds) Die Elbe—neue Horizonte des Flussgebietsmanagements. In: 10th Magdeburger Gewässerschutzsem, Teubner, Stuttgart, pp 151–152Google Scholar
  28. IPCC (2000) Emission scenarios, summary for policy makers. Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change Work Group III Spec Rep (http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/reports.htm)
  29. Isermann K, Isermann R (2001) Nachhaltige Konsumption- und Produktion aus der Sicht der Ernährung vor dem Hintergrund der Wende in der Agrar-, Ernährungs- und Umweltpolitik von Deutschland und der EU (2001) als Beitrag auch für den nachhaltigen Bodenschutz. Mitteil Deutsch Bodenkund Gesell 96:739–740Google Scholar
  30. Janssen R (1992) Multiobjective decision support for environmental management. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  31. Janssen R, Herwijnen M v, Beinat E (2001) DEFINITE for Windows. A system to support decisions on a finite set of alternatives (software package and user manual). Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), Vrije Universiteit, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  32. Jørgensen SE (2000) The tentative fourth law of thermodynamics. In: Jørgensen SE, Müller F (eds) Handbook of ecosystem theories and management. Lewis, Boca Raton, FL, pp 161–175Google Scholar
  33. Kannen A, Gee K, Ulich E, Schneider E (2000) “Management of change” und nachhaltige Regionalentwicklung in Küstenzonen am Beispiel der Nordseeküste Schleswig-Holsteins. In: Blotevogel HH, Oßenbrügge J, Wood G (eds) Lokal verankert—weltweit vernetzt. Verhandlungsband 52. Deutschen Geographentages 1999. Franz Steiner, Stuttgart, pp 130–135Google Scholar
  34. Kay JJ (2000) Ecosystems as self-organising holarchic open systems: narratives and the second law of thermodynamics. In: Jørgensen SE, Müller F (eds) Handbook of ecosystem theories and management. Lewis, Boca Raton, FL, pp 135–159Google Scholar
  35. Laane RWPM (ed) (1992) Background concentrations of natural compounds. Rijkswaterstaat, Den Haag, Rep DGW-92.033Google Scholar
  36. Ledoux L, Cave R, Turner RK (2002) The use of scenarios in integrated environmental assessment of coastal-catchment zones: the Humber Estuary, UK. In: LOICZ Newslett no 23, June 2002 (http://www.nioz.nl/loicz/nwl.htm)
  37. Lenhart HJ (2001) Effects of river nutrient load reduction on the eutrophication of the North Sea, simulated with the ecosystem model ERSEM. In: Kröncke I, Türkay M, Sündermann J (eds) Burning issues of North Sea ecology. Proc 14th Int Senckenberg Conf North Sea 2000. Senckenbergiana marit 31(2):299–311Google Scholar
  38. Lenhart HJ, Pätsch J (2001) Daily nutrient loads for the European continental rivers during 1977–1998. Discharges and loads of rivers entering the North Sea. ZMK Ber Nr 40Google Scholar
  39. Lenhart HJ, Pohlmann T (1997) The ICES-boxes approach in relation to results of a North Sea circulation model. Tellus 49A:139–160Google Scholar
  40. Lenhart HJ, Radach G, Backhaus JO, Pohlmann T (1995) Simulations of the North Sea circulation, its variability, and its implementation as hydrodynamical forcing in ERSEM. Neth J Sea Res 33(3/4):271–299Google Scholar
  41. Lenhart HJ, Radach G, Ruardij P (1997) The effects of river input on the ecosystem dynamics in the continental coastal zone of the North Sea using ERSEM. J Sea Res 38:249–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lise W (2003) The CENER model: cost-effective nutrient emission reduction (CENER) of the load to the North Sea from the Rhine and Elbe basin. IVM Rep R-03/07Google Scholar
  43. Lise W, van der Veeren RJHM (2002) Cost-effective nutrient emission reductions in the Rhine River Basin. Integrated Assess 3(4):321–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mueller F, Hoffmann-Kroll R, Wiggering H (2000) Indicating ecosystem integrity—theoretical concepts and environmental requirements. Ecol Model 130:13–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Niermann U (1990) Oxygen deficiency in the south eastern North Sea in summer 1989. ICES CM 1990, pp 18Google Scholar
  46. Nunneri C, Hofmann J (2002) EUROCAT—Sozioökonomische und Umweltänderungs-Szenarien für das Elbeeinzugsgebiet. In: Geller W, Puncochar P, Guhr H, Tümpling W, Medek J, Smrt’ak J, Feldmann H, Uhlmann O (eds) Die Elbe—neue Horizonte des Flussgebietsmanagements. In: 10th Magdeburger Gewässerschutzsem, Teubner, Stuttgart, pp 165–166Google Scholar
  47. Nunneri C, Windhorst W, Kannen A (2002) Scenarios and indicators: a link for pressures and impacts in the Elbe catchment following the DPSIR-approach. In: Ledoux K, Burgess D (eds) The implications of the Water Framework Directive. SWAP Conf Proc, 1–4 September 2002, University of East Anglia, Norwich, pp 243–258Google Scholar
  48. OSPAR (1998) Report ASMO Modelling Worksh Eutrophication Issues, 5–8 November 1996. OSPAR Commission, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  49. OSPAR Commission (2000) Quality Status Report 2000, Region II—Greater North Sea. OSPAR Commission, London, pp 136 (http://www.ospar.org)
  50. Protection North Sea (2002) Progress report 5th Conf Protection of the North Sea, 20–21 March 2002, Bergen, Prog Rep 2002Google Scholar
  51. Rachor E, Albrecht H (1983) Sauerstoff-Mangel im Bodenwasser der Deutschen Bucht. Veröff Inst Meeresforsch Bremerhaven 19:209–227Google Scholar
  52. Rice J (2003) Environmental health indicators. Ocean Coastal Manage 46:235–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ruardij P, Van Raaphorst W (1995) Benthic nutrient regeneration in the ERSEM ecosystem model of North Sea. Neth J Sea Res 33(3/4):435–483Google Scholar
  54. Turner RK, Adger N, Lorenzoni I (1998) Towards integrated modelling and analysis in coastal zones: principles and practice. Texel, IGBP/LOICZ Rep Stud no 11Google Scholar
  55. Veeren RJHM van der (2002) Economic analyses of nutrient abatement policies in the Rhine basin. PhD Thesis, Vrije Universiteit, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  56. Windhorst W, Colijn F, Kabuta S, Laane R, Lenhart H (2004) Defining a good ecological status of coastal waters—a case study for the Elbe Plume. In: Ledoux L, Vermaat JE, Bouwer R, Salomons W, Turner RK (eds) Managing European coasts: past, present and future. Contrib ELOISE BtB Worksh, 2–5 June 2003, Noordwijkerhoud, The Netherlands. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York (in press)Google Scholar
  57. Wit MJM (1999) Nutrient fluxes in the Rhine and Elbe basins. Universiteit Utrecht, Drukkerij Elinkwijk, UtrechtGoogle Scholar
  58. Zwolsman JJG (1994) North Sea estuaries as filters for contaminants. Rep for National Institute for Coastal and Marine Management (RIKZ). Delft Hydraulics, DelftGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Hofmann
    • 1
    Email author
  • H. Behrendt
    • 1
  • A. Gilbert
    • 2
  • R. Janssen
    • 2
  • A. Kannen
    • 3
  • J. Kappenberg
    • 5
  • H. Lenhart
    • 4
  • W. Lise
    • 2
  • C. Nunneri
    • 5
  • W. Windhorst
    • 6
  1. 1.Dept. of Lowland Rivers and Shallow LakesLeibniz Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries (IGB)BerlinGermany
  2. 2.Institute for Environmental Studies, Faculty of Earth and Life SciencesVrije UniversiteitAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Research and Technology Centre Westcoast (FTZ)Christian-Albrechts-University of KielBuesumGermany
  4. 4.Institute for Marine ResearchUniversity of HamburgHamburgGermany
  5. 5.Institute for Coastal ResearchGKSS Research CentreGeesthachtGermany
  6. 6.Ecology Center, Division of Ecosystem ResearchChristian-Albrechts-University of KielKielGermany

Personalised recommendations