How to make river assessments comparable: A demonstration for hydromorphology

Abstract River monitoring and assessment programs are important tools to quantify the condition of river ecosystems, identify deficits, and provide preliminary indication of how to improve them. But, they are limited in delivering comparable assessment results across national or transnational borders, aggregating site-specific assessments into broader scale assessments, and supporting river management decisions. We present a multi-criteria decision analysis approach for improving the comparability of ecological assessment methods of different origin and for combining these assessments into a joint procedure. The approach consists of seven consecutive steps. The most central ones concern the hierarchical allocation of ecological assessment endpoints, and the harmonization of the scoring procedure of attributes (ecological indicators or assets) to a common scale from 0 to 1. We demonstrate the approach integrating three programs developed to assess the hydromorphological river condition in Switzerland, Germany, and the USA. In our example, the integrated assessment produces comparable results for the whole range from natural to impacted rivers, while data continuity with original assessments was maintained. Our approach provides a common assessment standard due to the definition of the minimum amount of information required, is flexible regarding measurement and assessment endpoints, and bridges the gap between river quality assessment and management.

[1]  Aimee H. Fullerton,et al.  A Spatially Explicit Decision Support System for Watershed-Scale Management of Salmon , 2008 .

[2]  Anne Courrat,et al.  Three hundred ways to assess Europe's surface waters: An almost complete overview of biological methods to implement the Water Framework Directive , 2012 .

[3]  Andrew J. Boulton,et al.  An overview of river health assessment: philosophies, practice, problems and prognosis , 1999 .

[4]  Alec Morton,et al.  Behavioural decision theory for multi-criteria decision analysis: a guided tour , 2009, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[5]  Robert M. Hughes,et al.  A process for creating multimetric indices for large-scale aquatic surveys , 2008, Journal of the North American Benthological Society.

[6]  Peter Reichert,et al.  Constructing, evaluating and visualizing value and utility functions for decision support , 2013, Environ. Model. Softw..

[7]  Franz Eisenführ,et al.  Rational Decision Making , 2010 .

[8]  Melissa Parsons,et al.  Development of a Standardised Approach to River Habitat Assessment in Australia , 2004, Environmental monitoring and assessment.

[9]  A comparison between various criteria for the interpretation of biological data in the analysis of the quality of running waters , 1977 .

[10]  Bernd Klauer,et al.  Multicriteria Analysis under Uncertainty with IANUS—Method and Empirical Results , 2006 .

[11]  John R. Olson,et al.  The reference condition: predicting benchmarks for ecological and water-quality assessments , 2010, Journal of the North American Benthological Society.

[12]  Piet F. M. Verdonschot,et al.  Evaluation of the use of Water Framework Directive typology descriptors, reference sites and spatial scale in macroinvertebrate stream typology , 2006, Hydrobiologia.

[13]  P. Douglas,et al.  A theory of production , 1928 .

[14]  Robert M. Hughes,et al.  An Evaluation of Qualitative Indexes of Physical Habitat Applied to Agricultural Streams in Ten U.S. States 1 , 2010 .

[15]  Ulrich Heink,et al.  What are indicators? On the definition of indicators in ecology and environmental planning , 2010 .

[16]  C. Hawkins,et al.  The comparability of bioassessments: a review of conceptual and methodological issues1 , 2011, Journal of the North American Benthological Society.

[17]  Patricia J. D'Arconte,et al.  Revised Methods for Characterizing Stream Habitat in the National Water-Quality Assessment Program , 1998 .

[18]  M. Feio,et al.  A comparison between biotic indices and predictive models in stream water quality assessment based on benthic diatom communities , 2009 .

[19]  Eva Abal,et al.  Integration of science and monitoring of river ecosystem health to guide investments in catchment protection and rehabilitation , 2010 .

[20]  L. Astin Data synthesis and bioindicator development for nontidal streams in the interstate Potomac River basin, USA , 2006 .

[21]  Benjamin F. Hobbs,et al.  Multicriteria Decision Analysis of Stream Restoration: Potential and Examples , 2009 .

[22]  P. J. Boon,et al.  Towards a harmonized approach for hydromorphological assessment of rivers in Europe: a qualitative comparison of three survey methods , 2002 .

[23]  P. McIntyre,et al.  Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity , 2010, Nature.

[24]  Tony Prato,et al.  Multiple-attribute evaluation of ecosystem management for the Missouri River system , 2003 .

[25]  Lisa Huff,et al.  An approach for determining bioassessment performance and comparability , 2011, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment.

[26]  Steven G. Paulsen,et al.  EMAP-Surface Waters: a multiassemblage, probability survey of ecological integrity in the U.S.A. , 2000, Hydrobiologia.

[27]  Sebastian Birk,et al.  Direct comparison of assessment methods using benthic macroinvertebrates: a contribution to the EU Water Framework Directive intercalibration exercise , 2006, Hydrobiologia.

[28]  Piet F. M. Verdonschot Integrated ecological assessment methods as a basis for sustainable catchment management , 2000 .

[29]  Andrea Buffagni,et al.  The validation of common European class boundaries for river benthic macroinvertebrates to facilitate the intercalibration process of the Water Framework Directive , 2009, Hydrobiologia.

[30]  N. Schuwirth,et al.  Methodological aspects of multi-criteria decision analysis for policy support: A case study on pharmaceutical removal from hospital wastewater , 2012, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[31]  Regional assessments of stream ecological condition: scientific challenges associated with the USA's national Wadeable Stream Assessment , 2008, Journal of the North American Benthological Society.

[32]  V. Hermoso,et al.  Revisiting ecological integrity 30 years later: non-native species and the misdiagnosis of freshwater ecosystem health , 2013 .

[33]  Chris O. Yoder,et al.  Measuring the attainment of biological integrity in the USA: a critical element of ecological integrity , 2000 .

[34]  P. Liechti,et al.  Scientific base and modular concept for comprehensive assessment of streams in Switzerland , 2000 .

[35]  Mike T. Furse,et al.  RIVPACS models for predicting the expected macroinvertebrate fauna and assessing the ecological quality of rivers , 2003 .

[36]  J. Nichols,et al.  Monitoring for conservation. , 2006, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[37]  Mark E. Borsuk,et al.  Concepts of decision support for river rehabilitation , 2007, Environ. Model. Softw..

[38]  N. Willby,et al.  Harmonising the bioassessment of large rivers in the absence of near‐natural reference conditions – a case study of the Danube River , 2012 .

[39]  J. Olden,et al.  Process-Based Principles for Restoring River Ecosystems , 2010 .

[40]  Andrea Buffagni,et al.  A simple procedure to harmonize class boundaries of assessment systems at the pan-European scale , 2007 .

[41]  Robert Ptacnik,et al.  Towards holistic assessment of the functioning of ecosystems under the Water Framework Directive , 2009 .

[42]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[43]  Joanna Burger,et al.  Bioindicators: A Review of Their Use in the Environmental Literature 1970–2005 , 2006 .

[44]  Raimo P. Hämäläinen,et al.  On the convergence of multiattribute weighting methods , 2001, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[45]  H. Varian Intermediate Microeconomics: A Modern Approach , 1987 .

[46]  Ord,et al.  Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment , 2014 .

[47]  Rakesh K. Sarin,et al.  Measurable Multiattribute Value Functions , 1979, Oper. Res..

[48]  W van de Bund,et al.  Towards good ecological status of surface waters in Europe--interpretation and harmonisation of the concept. , 2004, Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research.

[49]  A. Soares,et al.  Bringing new knowledge to an old problem: Building a biotic index from lotic macroinvertebrate traits , 2012 .

[50]  J. Matschullat,et al.  Hydromorphological assessment within the EU-Water Framework Directive—trans-boundary cooperation and application to different water basins , 2008, Hydrobiologia.

[51]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Feature Article - Decision Analysis: An Overview , 1982, Oper. Res..