River rehabilitation for the delivery of multiple ecosystem services at the river network scale

Journal of Environmental Management

Volumn 126, Issue , 2013, Pages 30-43

  Gilvear, David J ^a   Spray, Chris J ^b   Casas Mulet, Roser ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

^b University of Dundee   (United Kingdom)

^c NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Norway)

Author keywords

Biodiversity; Ecosystem services; Fisheries; Flood control; Physical habitat; River network scale; River rehabilitation; Water quality

Indexed keywords

CATCHMENTS; DECISION MAKING; ECOSYSTEMS; FLOOD CONTROL; QUALITY CONTROL; RIVERS; RUNOFF; WATER MANAGEMENT; WATER QUALITY; WATERSHEDS;

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS; ECOSYSTEM SERVICES; NETWORK SCALE; PHYSICAL HABITAT; REHABILITATION MEASURES; RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT; RIVER NETWORK; RIVER NETWORK SCALE; RIVER REHABILITATION; SCOTLAND;

BIODIVERSITY;

BASIN MANAGEMENT; BIODIVERSITY; CATCHMENT; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; ECOSYSTEM FUNCTION; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; FISHERY MODELING; FLOOD CONTROL; RIVER BASIN; RIVER ENGINEERING; RIVER MANAGEMENT; RIVER SYSTEM; SPATIOTEMPORAL ANALYSIS; VALUATION; WATER QUALITY;

ARTICLE; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; ECOSYSTEM REGENERATION; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; GEOMORPHOLOGY; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; RIVER ECOSYSTEM; SOCIOECONOMICS;

SCOTLAND; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 84877335416     PISSN: 03014797     EISSN: 10958630     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.03.026     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. Acreman M.C., Harding R.J., Lloyd C., McNamara N.P., Mountford J.O., Mould D.J., Purse B.V., Heard M.S., Stratford C.J., Dury S.J. Trade-off in ecosystem services of the Somerset levels and Moors wetlands. Hydrolog. Sci. J. 2011, 56:1543-1565.
2. Alveres B., Clelland Z., Johnstonova A., Comerford E. Insh Marshes: Its Hydrology, Multiple Uses and Economic Value 2007, Unpublished RSPB Report.
3. Athrington A.H., Pusey J. Flow restoration and protection in Australian rivers. River. Res. App 2003, 19:377-395.
4. Arthrington A.H., Naiman R.J., McLain M.E., Nilsson N. Preserving the biodiversity and ecological services of rivers: new challenges and research opportunities. Freshwater. Biol. 2009, 55:1-16.
5. Baron J.S., Poff N.L., Angermeier P.L., Dahm C.N., Gleick P.H., Hairston N.G., Jackson R.B., Johnston C.A., Richter B.D., Steinman A.D. Meeting ecological and societal needs for freshwater. Ecol. Appl. 2002, 12:1247-1260.
6. Battarbee R., Kernan M., Livingstone D., Moss B., George G., Jeppesen E., Joh.Frinson R., Wright D., Hering D., Verdonschot P. Euro-limpacs Position Paper - Impact of Climate Change on European Freshwater Ecosystems: Consequences, Adaptation and Policy 2008, EU Framework 6 Report, University College, London.
7. Beechie T., Pess G., Roni P. Setting river restoration priorities: a review of approaches and a general protocol for identifying and prioritizing actions. N.Am. J. Fish. Manag. 2008, 28:891-905.
8. Beechie T., Pess G.R., Polloch M.N., Ruckelshaus M.H., Roni P. Restoring rivers in the twenty-first century science challenges in a management context. Future of Fisheries Science in North America 2009, 697-717. R.J. Beamish, B.S. Rothschild (Eds.).
9. Bennett E.M., Peterson G.D., Gordon L.J. Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecol. Let. 2009, 12:1394-1404.
10. Bernhardt E.S., Sudduth E.B., Palmer M.A., et al. Restoring rivers one reach at a time: results from a survey of U.S. Science 2007, 308:636-637.
11. Blanc J., Wright G., Arthur S. Natural Flood Management Knowledge System: Part 2 - The Effect of NFM Features on the Desynchronising of Flood Peaks at a Catchment Scale 2012, CREW report, March 6th 2013. http://www.crew.ac.uk/projects/natural-flood-management.
12. Brander L.M., Ghermandi A., Kuik O., Markandya A., Nunes P.A., Schaafsma M., Wagtendonk A. Scaling up Services Values: Methodology, Applicability and a Case Study May 2008, Final Report, European Environment Agency.
13. Brookes A. Channelised Rivers: Perspectives for Environmental Management 1988, Wiley.
14. Bryan B.A., Grandgirard A., Ward J.R. Quantifying and exploring strategic priorities for managing natural capital and ecosystem services given multiple stakeholder perspectives. Ecosystems 2010, 13:539-555.
15. Buijs A.E. Public support for river restoration: a mixed-method study into residents' support for and framing of river management and ecological restoration in the Dutch floodplains. J.Environ. Manage. 2009, 90:2680-2689.
16. Chan K.M.A., Shaw R.M., Cameron D.R., Underwood E.C., Daily G.C. Conservation planning for ecosystem services. Journal. PLoS. Biol. 2006, 4:2138-2152.
17. Constanza R., d'Arge R., de Groot R., Farbeck S., Grass M., Hannon B., Limburg K., Naeem S., O'Neill R., Paruelo J., Raskin R., Sutton P., van den Belt M. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 1997, 387:253-260.
18. Cook B.R., Spray C.J. Ecosystem services and integrated water resource management: different paths to the same end?. J.Environ. Manage. 2012, 109:93-100.
19. Daily G.C. Nature's Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Systems 1997, Island Press, Washington,.
20. Dufour S., Piegey H. From the myth of a lost paradise to targeted river restoration: forget natural references and focus on human benefits. River. Res. App. 2009, 25:568-581.
21. Egoh B., Rouget M., Reyers B., Knight A.T., Cowling R.M., van Jaarsveld A.S., Welz A. Integrating ecosystem services into conservation assessments: a review. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 63:714-721.
22. ENDS Report DEFRA to Speed up Catchment Improvement 2011, 21-22. ENDS Report 435.
23. ENDS Report White Paper Values Nature but Falls Short on Funding 2011, 22-23. ENDS Report 435.
24. Everard M. Ecosystem Services Case Studies 2009, Report SCH00409BPVM-E-P, Environment Agency Science, Bristol.
25. Gilvear D.J., Casas R., Spray C. Trends and issues in delivery of integrated catchment scale river restoration: lessons from a national restoration survey within Scotland. River. Res. App. 2011, 27:111-121.
26. Gilvear D.J., Parsons H. Valley flood landscape change following almost 100 years of flood embankment abandonment on a wandering gravel bed river. River. Res. App. 2002, 18:461-470.
27. Gilvear D.J. Patterns of channel adjustment to impoundment of the Upper River Spey, Scotland (1942-2000). River Res. App. 2004, 20:151-165.
28. Goetz R.R. APost-project Assessment of the Provo River Restoration Project: Channel Design, Reconfiguration, and the Re-Establishment of Critical Physical Processes 2008, MSc thesis, Utah State University.
29. Haines-Young R., Potschin M. The Links between Biodiversity, Ecosystem Services and Human Well-being 2010, Centre for Environmental Management, School of Geography, University of Nottingham.
30. Hamilton S.K. Biogeochemical time lags may delay responses of streams to ecological restoration. Freshwater. Biol. 2011, 57:1365-2427.
31. Harrison J.G. The Eddleston Water: Historical Change on Context 2012, Unpublished report to Tweed Forum, Melrose.
32. Hillman M., Brierley G.J. Acritical review of catchment-scale stream rehabilitation programs. Prog. Phys. Geog. 2005, 29:50-70.
33. Junk W.J., Bayley P.B., Sparks R.E. The flood pulse concept in river-floodplain systems. Proc. Int. Large River Symposium 1989, 110-127. Canadian Special Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, Ottawa, Canada. D.P. Dodge (Ed.).
34. Kondolf G.M. Assessing salmonid spawning gravel quality. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 2000, 129:262-281.
35. Liu S., Constanza R., Farber S., Troy A. Valuing ecosystem services. Theory, practice, and the need for a transdisciplinary synthesis. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 2010, 1185:54-78.
36. Mainstone C.P., Holmes N.T. Embedding a strategic approach to river restoration in operational management practice - experiences in England. Aquat. Conserv. 2010, 20:82-95.
37. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Ecosystem and Human Well-being: General Synthesis 2005, Island Press, Vancouver.
38. Nelson E., Mendoza G., Regetz J., Polasky S., Tallis H., Cameron D., Chan K., Daily G. Modelling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2009, 7:4-11.
39. Nilsson C., Jansson R., Malmqvis B., Naiman R.J. Restoring riverine landscapes: the challenge of identifying priorities, reference states, and techniques. Ecol. Soc. 2007, 12:11-27.
40. Nisbet T., Silgram M., Shah N., Morrow K., Broadmeadow S. Woodland for Water: Woodland Measures for Meeting Water Framework Directive, Objectives. Forest Research Monograph 2011, vol. 4:156. Forest Research, Surrey.
41. Norgaard R.B. Ecosystem services: from eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder. Ecol. Econ. 2010, 69:1219-1227.
42. Ormerod S.J. Editorial: a golden age of river restoration science. Aquat. Conserv. 2004, 14:543-549.
43. Paetzold A., Warren P.H., Maltby L.L. Aframework for assessing ecological quality based on ecosystem services. Ecol. Complex 2010, 7:273-281.
44. Palmer M.A., Bernhardt E.S. Hydroecology and river restoration; ripe for research and synthesis. Water. Resour. Res. 2006, 42:1-4.
45. Palmer M.A., Allan J.D. River restoration: as the need for river restoration grows, supporting federal policies should follow. Sci. Technol. 2006, 22:40-48.
46. Palmer M.A., Filoso S. Restoration of ecosystem services to environmental markets. Science 2009, 325:575-576.
47. Pascual U., Muradian R., Brander L., Gomez-Baggethum E., Martin-Lopez B., Verma A. The Economics of Valuing Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity. In the Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity 2009, The Ecological and Economic Foundations.
48. Pascual U., Muradian R., Rodríguez L.C., Duraiappah A. Exploring the links between equity and efficiency in payments for environmental services: a conceptual approach. Ecol. Econ. 2010, 69(6):1237-1244.
49. Perez Viera K.V. Assessment of Stream Course Restoration and Potential Land Use Modification on Flood Risk Reduction and Other Ecosystem Services, in the Eddleston Water Riparian Zone 2012, Unpublished ERASMUS MSc dissertation, University of Newcastle.
50. Petts G.E. Impounded Rivers: Perspectives for Ecological Management 1984, Wiley.
51. Petts G.E. Long-term consequences of upstream impoundment. Environ. Conserv. 1980, 7:325-332.
52. Poole G.C., et al. Multiscale geomorphic drivers of groundwater flow paths: subsurface hydrologic dynamics and hyporheic habitat diversity. J.North Am. Benthological Soc. 2006, 25(2):288-303.
53. Postel S., Carpenter S. Freshwater ecosystem services. Nature's Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystem Services 1997, 195-214. Island Press. G.C. Dilay (Ed.).
54. Posthumus H., Rouquette J.R., Morris J., Gowing D., Hess T. Aframework for the assessment of ecosystem goods and services: a case study on lowland floodplains in England. Ecol. Econ. 2010, 69:1510-1523.
55. Reichert P., Borsuk M., Hostmann M., Schweizer S., Sporri C., Tockner K., Truffer B. Concepts of decision support for river rehabilitation. Environ. Modell. Softw. 2007, 22:188-201.
56. Roni P., Hanson K., Beechie T. Global review of the physical and biological effectiveness of stream habitat rehabilitation techniques. N.Am. J. Fish. Manage. 2008, 28:856-890.
57. Roni P., Beechie T.J., Bilby R.E., Leonetti F.E., Pollock M., Pess G.E. Areview of stream restoration techniques and a hierarchical strategy for prioritising restoration in Pacific Northwest watersheds. N.Am. J. Fish. Manage. 2002, 20:1-20.
58. Rozdilsky I.D., Chave J., Levein S.A., Tilman D. Towards a theoretical basis for ecosystem conservation. Ecol. Res. 2001, 16:983-995.
59. Spray C.J., Ball T., Rossilliard J. Bridging the water law, policy, science interface: flood risk management in Scotland. J.Wat. Law 2010, 20:165-174.
60. Stanford J.A., Lorang M.S., Hauer F.R. The shifting habitat mosaic of river ecosystems. Vehr. Internat. Verein. Limnol. 2005, 29:123-136.
61. Tabbachi E., Correll E., Hauer R. Development, maintenance and role of riparian vegetation in the river landscape. Freshwater. Biol. 1998, 40:497-516.
62. Thorp J.H., Flotemersch J.E., Delong M.D., Casper A.F., Thoms M.C., Ballantyne F., Williams B.S., O'Neill B.J., Haase T. Linking ecosystem services, rehabilitation, and river hydrogeomorphology. Bioscience 2010, 67:67-74.
63. Thorpe J.H., Thoms M.C., Delong M.D. The riverine ecosystem synthesis: biocomplexity in river networks across space and time. River. Res. App. 2006, 22:123-147.
64. Turner K., Georgiou S., Fisher B. Valuing Ecosystem Services: The Case of Multifunctional Wetlands 2008, Earthscan, London.
65. UK National Ecosystem Assessment UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Synthesis of Findings 2011, UNEP. WCMC, Cambridge.
66. Vannote R.L., Minshall G.W., Cummins K.W., Sedell J.R., Cushing C.E. The river continuum concept. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1980, 37:130-137.
67. Wainger L.A., King D.M., Mack R.N., Price E.W., Maslin T. Can the concept of ecosystem services be practically applied to improve natural resource management decisions?. Ecol. Econ. 2010, 69:978-987.
68. Webster J.R., Patten B.C. Effects of watershed perturbation on stream potassium and calcium dynamics. Ecol. Monog. 1979, 10:51-72.
69. Werritty A., Spray C., Ball T., Bonell M., Rouillard J., MacDonald A., Comins L., Richardson R. Integrated Catchment Management: From Rhetoric to Reality in a Scottish HELP Basin. Bhs Third International Symposium, Managing Consequences of a Changing Global Environment, Newcastle 2010 2010, British Hydrological Society.
70. Wharton G., Gilvear D.J. River restoration in the UK: meeting the dual needs of the EU Water Framework Directive and flood defence. J.Riv. Bas. Manage. 2007, 4:1-12.