1. www.soils2sea.eu Reducing nutrient loadings from agricultural soils to the Baltic Sea via groundwater and streams Soils2Sea team Partner Logo

2. www.soils2sea.eu Outline Soils2Sea – partners, budget Problems and challenges addressed by Soils2Sea Scientific objectives Methodologies - tasks Project outputs

3. www.soils2sea.eu The BONUS Programme is supported by the national research funding institutions in the eight EU member states around the Baltic Sea and the EU Research Framework Programme (Article 185). Scientists from the Russian Federation participate in BONUS research projects through special agreements. The Bonus Programme Science for a better future of the Baltic Sea Region For info on BONUS see: http://www.bonusportal.org/ For info on EC Article 185 see: http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/art185/about-185_en.html

4. www.soils2sea.eu Soils2Sea team GEUS, Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland, Copenhagen, Denmark (GEUS - coordinator) Aarhus University, Denmark (AU) AGH University of Science and Technology, Krakow, Poland (AGH) Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden (KTH) Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute, Norrköping, Sweden (SMHI) ECOLOGIC Institute, Berlin, Germany (EI) Sorbisense A/S, Denmark (SOR) Atlantic Branch of P.P.Shirshov Institute of Oceanology Russian Academy of Sciences, Kaliningrad, Russia (ABIORAS) Multidisciplinary Climate Agriculture Surface water Groundwater Policy and stakeholder processes

5. www.soils2sea.eu Project period: 2014 - 2017 (Russia 3 years) Budget: € 3.2 million + Russian funding to ABIORAS Period and budget

6. www.soils2sea.eu Source: EEA report no 8/2012 Chemical status of transitional and coastal waters in the EU

7. www.soils2sea.eu Total ammonium Total phosphorus Nitrate Decreasing trends However, not enough for N  Nutrients in European rivers Average river concentrations Good status 2015 Source: EEA report no 9/2012 2027

8. www.soils2sea.eu Challenge 1 How to make most cost-effective reductions of agricultural nutrient loads Uniform regulations Uniform regulations easier to administrate (same reduction targets for all) Spatially differentiated regulations Spatially differentiated regulations more cost-effective Need for reduction differs from area to area depending on ecological conditions in coastal water WFD

9. www.soils2sea.eu WFD Acceptable N- loading (and reduction target) varies between subcatchments depending on conditions in marine ecosystem

10. www.soils2sea.eu Uniform regulations Uniform regulations easier to administrate (same reduction targets for all) Spatially differentiated regulations Spatially differentiated regulations more cost-effective Need for reduction differs from area to area depending on ecological conditions in coastal water Efficiency of reduction differs from area to area, because the retention/removal of nutrients in groundwater and surface water systems shows a significant spatial variation, depending on the local hydrogeological and riverine regime  Need for more knowledge and tools  Need for more knowledge and tools WFD NEWSoils2Sea Challenge 1 How to make most cost-effective reductions of agricultural nutrient loads

11. N-reduction varies spatially at small scales Total reduction (groundwater + surface water) Calculated N-leaching from root zone Observed N-flux at river gauging stations Reduction in groundwater – 100 m grid Calculated by model – is it correct? NiCA project www.nitrat.dkwww.nitrat.dk Ungauged Ungaugexxxxxd Hansen et al. (2014)

12. Regulation should exploit local variation in nitrate reduction - Illustrated below for groundwater - Similar idea for retention in streams and lakes More than 50% of the nitrate leaching from the root zone is reduced/disappears in the subsurface when flow lines cross below the redox interface (in Denmark) If we can identify areas where subsurface reduction takes place  we can plan a more cost-effective regulation Figure from Hinsby et al. (2008)

13. www.soils2sea.eu Challenge 2 Which governance regime should be used together with spatially differentiated regulation? Present regulation Top-down Regulation of nutrient input Heavy bureaucracy Farmers do not like bureaucrats decide on details of agricultural practice New governance concepts to be investigated Combined top-down and bottom-up Regulation based on emissions and loadings – Farmers get rid of regulation of nutrient input and bureacracy – Farmers must commit on reduction targets (self governance) – Local data and knowledge can be fully utilised How to make control monitoring? Stakeholder acceptance of uncertainties (who carries the risk)?

14. www.soils2sea.eu changes in land cover, agricultural practices and climate scenarios To analyse how changes in land cover, agricultural practices and climate may affect the nutrient load to the Baltic Sea and to test how robust nutrient load reduction measures are towards plausible climate change and land use scenarios (WP2). retention in the subsurface To develop and test new methodologies for identifying areas with small, respectively large, retention in the subsurface of nutrients leaving the soil surface or the root zone by improving process understanding of flow paths, travel times and nutrient retention immobilization (WP3). nutrient retention in surface waters To develop and test new methodologies for assessing the variation in retention among different surface water systems by improving the understanding of nutrient retention in surface waters (surface runoff, drain runoff, rivers, wetlands, lakes) (WP4). high-resolution multi-basin scale models nutrient loading to the Baltic Sea To evaluate the reliability of high-resolution multi-basin scale models for assessing the impacts of land cover and climate changes including the effects of possible nutrient reduction measures and to assess the possible overall impacts of new spatially differentiated regulation strategies on the total riverine nutrient loading to the Baltic Sea (WP5). new governance concepts targeted at differentiated output based regulations To develop new governance concepts targeted at differentiated output based regulations including threshold values for N in groundwater through active involvement of stakeholders in implementation and monitoring (WP6). Scientific objectives

15. www.soils2sea.eu Soils2Sea workpackages

16. www.soils2sea.eu Case study areas

17. www.soils2sea.eu Methodologies - tasks Land cover, agricultural practices and climate Develop joint land use and climate change scenarios and their impacts on N and P losses from agriculture Scenario analyses of spatially differentiated N measures in catchments Scenarios for the Baltic Sea basin

18. www.soils2sea.eu Methodologies - tasks Groundwater retention Field investigations – hillslope o How wrong are our models in simulating flow paths and nitrate reduction? o Upscale data and process descriptions  1 km hillslope (2-5 m grid)  1000 km 2 catchment (50 – 500 m grid)  Baltic Sea scale (50 – 500 km 2 scale) Assess impacts of land use and climate change Identify areas with low/high nitrate reduction for spatially differentiated regulation (for N and P) Tests against data from case studies in Denmark and Poland

19. www.soils2sea.eu Methodologies - tasks Surface water retention Tracer experiment in river reach Upscale data and process descriptions from reach to catchment scale Retention of nutrients in streams and lakes at catchment scale Influence of reservoir regulation on nutrient retention Tests against data from case studies in Sweden and Poland

20. www.soils2sea.eu Methodologies - tasks Baltic Sea basin scale Incorporating improved local scale understanding into HYPE Tests against data from case study in Russia Test against historical data with recorded changes in nutrient loads Scenario analyses at Baltic Sea scale

21. www.soils2sea.eu Methodologies - tasks Governance, monitoring and stakeholder processes Thresholds for nutrient in groundwater (part of GWD/WFD) Policy instruments for differentiated regulations Monitoring concepts for differentiated regulations Policy briefs Development and test of concepts through stakeholder involvement in case studies o Norsminde, Denmark o Tullstorp, Sweden o Kocinka, Poland o Pregolya, Russia (+ Poland)

22. www.soils2sea.eu Conclusions - key outputs new knowledge of nutrient transport and retention processes between soils/sewage outlets and the coast New methodologies for the planning of differentiated regulations based on new knowledge of nutrient transport and retention processes between soils/sewage outlets and the coast. differentiated regulationcost efficient solutions Evaluation of how differentiated regulation can offer more cost efficient solutions towards reducing the nutrient loads to the Baltic Sea. changes in land use and climate Analysis of how changes in land use and climate may affect the nutrient load to the Baltic Sea as well as the optimal location of measures aiming at reducing the load. model for the entire Baltic Sea Basin A high-resolution model for the entire Baltic Sea Basin with improved process descriptions of nutrient retention in groundwater and surface water tailored to make detailed simulations of management regulations differentiated in space. governance and monitoring concepts decentralised decision making New knowledge based governance and monitoring concepts that acknowledge the relevant aspects of EU directives and at the same time are tailored towards decentralised decision making. The proposed spatially differentiated regulations will aim for incorporation of local scale knowledge to optimally design solutions.

23. www.soils2sea.eu More information Objectives Methodologies Case study areas Detailed work plan www.soils2sea.eu

24. Thank you! For more visit: www.soils2sea.eu Soils2Sea has received funding from BONUS (Art 185) funded jointly from the European Union’s Seventh Programme for research, technological development and demonstration, and from Baltic Sea national funding institutions.