Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Unravelling River System Impairments in Stream Networks with an Integrated Risk Approach

  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Rivers are complex systems for which it is hard to make reliable assessments of causes and responses to impairments. We present a holistic risk-based framework for river ecosystem assessment integrating all potential intervening processes and functions. Risk approaches allow us to deal with uncertainty both in the construction of indicators for magnitude of stressors and in the inference of environmental processes and their impairment. Yet, here we go further than simply replacing uncertainty by a risk factor. We introduce a more accurate and rigorous notion of risk with a transcription of uncertainty in causal relationships in probability distributions for the magnitude of impairment and the weight of different descriptors, with an associated confidence in the diagnostic. We discuss how Bayesian belief networks and Bayesian hierarchical inference allow us to deal with this risk concept to predict impairments and potential recovery of river ecosystems. We developed a comprehensive approach for river ecosystem assessment, which offers an appealing tool to facilitate diagnosis of the likely causes of impairment and predict future conditions. The ability of the risk approaches to integrate multi-scale quantitative and qualitative descriptors in the identification of multiple stressor sources and pathways in the stream network, and their impairment of specific processes and structures is illustrated for the national-level risk analysis for hydromorphology and pesticide pollution. Not only does the risk-based framework provide a more complete picture of environmental impairments, but it also offers a comprehensive, user-friendly tool to instruct the decision process.

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
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allan JD, Yuan LL, Black P, Stockton T, Davies PE, Magierowski RH, Read SM (2012) Investigating the relationships between environmental stressors and stream condition using Bayesian belief networks. Freshw Biol 57:58–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arheimer B, Olsson J (2003) Integration and coupling of hydrological models with water quality models: applications in Europe. World Meteorological Organisation, WMO Technical Reports in Hydrology and Water Resources 75. WMO/TD-1174, Geneva

  • Biggs R, Carpenter SR, Brock W (2009) Spurious certainty: how ignoring measurement error and environmental heterogeneity may contribute to environmental controversies. Bioscience 59:65–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borsuk ME, Stow CA, Reckhow KH (2004) A Bayesian network of eutrophication models for synthesis, prediction, and uncertainty analysis. Ecol Model 173:219–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouleau G, Argillier C, Souchon Y, Barthelemy C, Babut M (2009) How ecological indicators construction reveals social changes-The case of lakes and rivers in France. Ecol Ind 9:1198–1205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camargo JA, Alonso Á (2006) Ecological and toxicological effects of inorganic nitrogen pollution in aquatic ecosystems: a global assessment. Environ Int 32:831–849

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Champeaux J-L, Tamburini A (1996) Zonage climatique de la France à partir des séries de précipitations (1971-1990) du réseau climatologique d’Etat. La Météorologie 14:44–54

  • Chandesris A, Malavoi, JR, Mengin N, Wasson JG, Souchon Y (2009) Hydromorphology auditing: a generalized framework at a national scale to view streams and rivers in their landscape context. In: The 7th International Symposium on Ecohydraulics, Concepcion Chili, p 9

  • Cormier SM, Suter G (2008) A framework for fully integrating environmental assessment. Environ Manag 42:543–556

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cormier SM, Smith M, Norton S, Neiheisel T (2000) Assessing ecological risk in watersheds: a case study of problem formulation in the Big Darby Creek watershed, Ohio, USA. Environ Toxicol Chem 19:1082–1096

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Davies PE, Harris JH, Hillman TJ, Walker KF (2010) The sustainable rivers audit: assessing river ecosystem health in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia. Mar Freshw Res 61:764–777

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Davies PE, Stewardson M, Hillman T, Roberts J, Thoms M (2012) Sustainable rivers audit 2. The ecological health of rivers in the Murray–Darling Basin at the end of the Millennium Drought (2008–2010), Murray–Darling Basin Authority Report, tome 1, p 278

  • Downes BJ (2010) Back to the future: little-used tools and principles of scientific inference can help disentangle effects of multiple stressors on freshwater ecosystems. Freshw Biol 55:60–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dudgeon D (2010) Prospects for sustaining freshwater biodiversity in the 21st century: linking ecosystem structure and function. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2:422–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer SD, White-Hull C, Carr GJ, Smith EP, Wang X (2000) Bottom-up and top-down approaches to assess multiple stressors over large geographic areas. Environ Toxicol Chem 19:1066–1075

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Esselman PC, Infante DM, Wang L, Cooper AR, Wieferich D, Tsang Y-P, Thornbrugh DJ, Taylor WW (2013) Regional fish community indicators of landscape disturbance to catchments of the conterminous United States. Ecol Ind 26:163–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fock H (2011) Integrating multiple pressures at different spatial and temporal scales: a concept for relative ecological risk assessment in the european marine environment. Hum Ecol Risk Assess Int J 17:187–211

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gauroy C, Bougon N, Carluer N, Gouy V, Le Hénaff G, Piffady J, Tormos T (2015) Évaluation des risques de contamination des masses d’eau de surface par les produits phytosanitaires en France : la méthode Arpeges. Tech Sci Methods. doi:10.1051/tsm/201412061

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottardo S, Semenzin E, Giove S, Zabeo A, Critto A, De Zwart D, Ginebreda A, Von Der Ohe PC, Marcomini A (2011) Integrated risk assessment for WFD ecological status classification applied to Llobregat river basin (Spain). Part II—evaluation process applied to five environmental lines of evidence. Sci Total Environ 409:4681–4692

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Grant EHC, Lowe WH, Fagan WF (2007) Living in the branches: population dynamics and ecological processes in dendritic networks. Ecol Lett 10:165–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris GP, Heathwaite AL (2012) Why is achieving good ecological outcomes in rivers so difficult? Freshw Biol 57:91–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heathwaite AL (2010) Multiple stressors on water availability at global to catchment scales: understanding human impact on nutrient cycles to protect water quality and water availability in the long term. Freshw Biol 55:241–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones KL, Poole GC, Meyer JL, Bumback W, Kramer EA (2006) Quantifying expected ecological response to natural resource legislation: a case study of riparian buffers, aquatic habitat, and trout populations. Ecol Soc 11:15

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapustka LA (2005) Assessing ecological risks at the landscape scale: opportunities and technical limitations. Ecol Soc 10:11

    Google Scholar 

  • Leigh C, Stewart-Koster B, Sheldon F, Burford MA (2011) Understanding multiple ecological responses to anthropogenic disturbance: rivers and potential flow regime change. Ecol Appl 22:250–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCann RK, Marcot BG, Ellis R (2006) Bayesian belief networks: applications in ecology and natural resource management. Can J Res 36:3053–3062

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mcginnis S, Kerans BL (2013) Land use and host community characteristics as predictors of disease risk. Landsc Ecol 28:29–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naïm P, Wuillemin P, Leray P, Pourret O, Becker A (2007) Réseaux bayésiens. Eyrolles, Paris

  • Norris RH, Webb JA, Nichols SJ, Stewardson WJ, Harrison ET (2012) Analyzing cause and effect in environmental assessments: using weighted evidence from the literature. Freshw Sci 31:5–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ocampo-Duque W, Osorio C, Piamba C, Schuhmacher M, Domingo JL (2013) Water quality analysis in rivers with non-parametric probability distributions and fuzzy inference systems: application to the Cauca River, Colombia. Environ Int 52:17–28

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ormerod SJ, Dobson M, Hildrew AG, Townsend CR (2010) Multiple stressors in freshwater ecosystems. Freshw Biol 55:1–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Page T, Heathwaite AL, Moss B, Reynolds C, Beven KJ, Pope L, Willows R (2012) Managing the impacts of nutrient enrichment on river systems: dealing with complex uncertainties in risk analyses. Freshw Biol 57:108–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer M, Allan JD, Meyer J, Bernhardt ES (2007) River restoration in the twenty-first century: data and experiential knowledge to inform future efforts. Restor Ecol 15:472–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedroli B, De Blust G, Van Looy K, Van Rooij S (2002) Setting targets in strategies for river restoration. Landsc Ecol 17:5–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson EE, Sheldon F, Darnell R, Bunn SE, Harch BD (2011) A comparison of spatially explicit landscape representation methods and their relationship to stream condition. Freshw Biol 56:590–610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piffady J, Souchon Y, Capra H, Parent E (2010) Quantifying the effects of temperature and flow regime on the abundance of 0+ cyprinids in the upper River Rhone using Bayesian hierarchical modelling. Freshw Biol 55:2359–2374

    Google Scholar 

  • Piffady J, Parent É, Souchon Y (2013) A hierarchical generalized linear model with variable selection: studying the response of a representative fish assemblage for large European rivers in a multi-pressure context. Stoch Env Res Risk Assess 1:16

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen JJ, Mcknight US, Loinaz MC, Thomsen NI, Olsson ME, Bjerg PL, Binning PJ, Kronvang B (2013) A catchment scale evaluation of multiple stressor effects in headwater streams. Sci Total Environ 442:420–431

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sheldon F, Peterson EE, Boone EL, Sippel S, Bunn SE, Harch BD (2012) Identifying the spatial scale of land use that most strongly influences overall river ecosystem health score. Ecol Appl 22:2188–2203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shenton W, Hart BT, Chan T (2011) Bayesian network models for environmental flow decision-making: 1. Latrobe River Australia. River Res Appl 27:283–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart-Koster B, Bunn SE, Mackay SJ, Poff NL, Naiman RJ, Lake PS (2010) The use of Bayesian networks to guide investments in flow and catchment restoration for impaired river ecosystems. Freshw Biol 55:243–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart-Koster B, Olden JD, Kennard MJ, Pusey BJ, Boone EL, Douglas M, Jackson S (2011) Fish response to the temporal hierarchy of the natural flow regime in the Daly River, northern Australia. J Fish Biol 79:1525–1544

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Suter GW (1993) Ecological risk assessment. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Terrado M, Lavigne MP, Tremblay S, Duchesne S, Villeneuve JP, Rousseau AN, Barcelo D, Tauler R (2009) Distribution and assessment of surface water contamination by application of chemometric and deterministic models. J Hydrol 369:416–426

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thorp JH, Thoms MC, Delong MD (2006) The riverine ecosystem synthesis: biocomplexity in river networks across space and time. River Res Appl 22:123–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Looy K, Tormos T, Ferréol M, Villeneuve B, Valette L, Chandesris A, Bougon N, Oraison F, Souchon Y (2013) Benefits of riparian forest for the aquatic ecosystem assessed at a large geographic scale. Knowl Manag Aquat Ecosyst 408:6. doi:10.1051/kmae/2013041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Sickle J, Johnson CB (2008) Parametric distance weighting of landscape influence on streams. Landsc Ecol 23:427–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang L, Infante D, Esselman P, Cooper AR, Wu D, Taylor W (2011) A hierarchical spatial framework and database for the national river fish habitat condition assessment. Fisheries 36:436–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasson JG, Chandesris A, Pella H, Blanc L (2002) Typology and reference conditions for surface water bodies in France: the hydro-ecoregion approach. TemaNord 566:37–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb JA, Nichols SJ, Norris RH, Stewardson MJ, Wealands SR, Lea P (2012) Ecological responses to flow alteration: assessing causal relationships with eco evidence. Wetlands 32:203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiens JA (2002) Riverine landscapes: taking landscape ecology into the water. Freshw Biol 47:501–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial and structural support for the SYRAH hydromorphology audit and ARPEGES model project of the ministry of ecology, the water authorities, and the French National Agency for Water and Aquatic Environments (ONEMA). The international collaboration and the scientific harmonization of the public water policies to the European WFD since 2000 started the flow of ideas at the basis of the presented framework. We would like to thank Ricardo Simon, Angus Webb, Catherine Leigh, and Martin Thoms for their valuable comments and suggestions to earlier versions of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Irstea Lyon, UR MALY, River Hydro-Ecology Research Unit, Onema-Irstea, 5 rue de la Doua CS70077, 69 100, Villeurbanne Cedex, France

    Kris Van Looy, Jérémy Piffady, Thierry Tormos, Bertrand Villeneuve, Laurent Valette, André Chandesris & Yves Souchon

Authors
  1. Kris Van Looy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jérémy Piffady
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thierry Tormos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bertrand Villeneuve
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Laurent Valette
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. André Chandesris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Yves Souchon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kris Van Looy.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Van Looy, K., Piffady, J., Tormos, T. et al. Unravelling River System Impairments in Stream Networks with an Integrated Risk Approach. Environmental Management 55, 1343–1353 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-015-0477-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-015-0477-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation