1. NIVA - Norwegian Institute for Water Research
The EUROHARP project
Project contributions relevant for the implementation of the Water Framework Directive and the Nitrates Directive
Stig A. Borgvang
Nils Vagstad
NIVA - Norwegian Institute for Water Research

2. Diffuse nutrient sources – key challenges
The variability problem (spatial and temporal)
The complex cause-effect relationships
The loss quantification problem
The data availability problem
The issues of pathways, scales and ”system boundaries”
Transparency, comparability and reliability across European gradients

3. EUROHARP - diffuse nutrient losses
Key activities and issues for the project
The testing and inter-comparison of different types of quantification tools under different agro-ecological and socio-economical conditions, focusing on;
- the ability and the performance of tools for the accurate quantification of nutrient losses at different geographical scales
- the tools’ applicability for scenario analysis, e.g. assessing measures and designing action plans
- the tools’ applicability and practicability linked to data requirements, time demand, required expertise

5. The WFD and the Nitrates Directive
EUROHARP contributions linked to:
The River Basin Management Plans (RBMP) under the WFD
The Action Programmes (AP) under the ND
Measures under the RBMP/AP need to be
Cost efficient
Targeted

6. The WFD approach - requires a cross-scale understanding of cause-effect relationships
Downstream-upstream approach/upstream-downstream
Biological response (env. quality targets)
Aquatic chemistry/hydro-physical conditions
Changes in riverine inputs/pressures
Soil/landscape response processes
Changes in agricultural practices (scenarios)

7. Countries’ and EC’s roles
Each country needs to ensure that local and regional ‘cases’ are treated in a harmonised way to ensure that assessments and conclusions provide a sound scientific basis for policy makers
The EC needs to ensure that results presented by countries are comparable to allow a ‘fair’ assessment of status and progress, and to decide on appropriate measures in cases where specific follow-up actions are required within the EC

8. How can EUROHARP contribute in this context?

9. Contribution elements
Screening to identify high risk/low risk areas
Relative significance of different sources and processes
Quantification of current conditions (loads and concentrations)
Identification of trends (long time, seasonal)
Predictions/scenarios
Decision support for locally/regionally adapted abatement measures.

10. Contribution regarding RBMPs
Assessment of various measures within the framework of Action Programmes/River Basin Management Plans
Performance of scenario analysis to evaluate any long-term changes in nutrient loads resulting from e.g. policy changes, major land-use and landscape changes and climate changes.
Revision of Action Plans/River Basin Management Plans in order to assess (i) the progress in reducing the nutrient losses and (ii) any revisions of abatement strategies and measures.

11. Contribution regarding data availability
Data availability vary considerably between European catchments
None of the EUROHARP catchments meet the data requirements for all models in the project
Data availability is a key limitation to the applicability of various models in Europe
Data availability may influence design of equivalent abatement plans in European catchments
Possible consequences for the approaches to establish appropriate abatement-plans under EC-legislation will require further considerations.

12. Contribution regarding model applicability the EUROHARP Toolbox
Synthesis of the essential information, experience and knowledge obtained through:
The collection, preparation and organisation of required data in 17 catchments across Europe in order to quantify diffuse nutrient losses by the various types of QTs
The detailed testing of the various QTs in 3 core catchmemts, including scenario analysis linked to measures
The application of the various QT across Europe under varying agro-ecological and socio-economical conditions

13. Contribution regarding selection, communication and harmonisation
Assistance/guidance in the selection of models
Assistance/guidance in the operational procedures of applying a specific model

14. Model applicability - critical issues
Does the model provide relevant answers to the issues of concern ?
Are the predominant processes in terms of nutrient dynamics sufficiently covered by the applied model ?
Does the model provide sufficiently accurate results for the particular case of concern ?
Can the requirements for input data to the model be met ?
Do the results obtained justify the costs of applying the model ?

15. Contribution regarding selection, communication and harmonisation
Act as a ”communication tool” for the dialogue between modellers and authorities,
A ‘certification procedure’ that allows models to be tested/validated based on the EH standard procedures.

16. Way forward Principles and procedures
Establish (if not already existing) a pan-European forum for exchange of information/results/ requirements between research and policy instrument implementation
Assess ongoing research activities that may benefit the implementation of the WFD
Maintain a continuous dialogue

17. For more info about EUROHARP