Four Common Simplifications of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis do not hold for River Rehabilitation

River rehabilitation aims at alleviating negative effects of human impacts such as loss of biodiversity and reduction of ecosystem services. Such interventions entail difficult trade-offs between different ecological and often socio-economic objectives. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) is a very suitable approach that helps assessing the current ecological state and prioritizing river rehabilitation measures in a standardized way, based on stakeholder or expert preferences. Applications of MCDA in river rehabilitation projects are often simplified, i.e. using a limited number of objectives and indicators, assuming linear value functions, aggregating individual indicator assessments additively, and/or assuming risk neutrality of experts. Here, we demonstrate an implementation of MCDA expert preference assessments to river rehabilitation and provide ample material for other applications. To test whether the above simplifications reflect common expert opinion, we carried out very detailed interviews with five river ecologists and a hydraulic engineer. We defined essential objectives and measurable quality indicators (attributes), elicited the experts´ preferences for objectives on a standardized scale (value functions) and their risk attitude, and identified suitable aggregation methods. The experts recommended an extensive objectives hierarchy including between 54 and 93 essential objectives and between 37 to 61 essential attributes. For 81% of these, they defined non-linear value functions and in 76% recommended multiplicative aggregation. The experts were risk averse or risk prone (but never risk neutral), depending on the current ecological state of the river, and the experts´ personal importance of objectives. We conclude that the four commonly applied simplifications clearly do not reflect the opinion of river rehabilitation experts. The optimal level of model complexity, however, remains highly case-study specific depending on data and resource availability, the context, and the complexity of the decision problem.     

A generic aggregation approach to account for statistical uncertainty when combining multiple assessment results

The one-out-all-out approach (OOAO) for aggregating the assessments of single elements (e.g. species or ecosystem components) has found application in environmental polices such as the European Water Framework Directive or the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). However, the OOAO has been challenged as being too pessimistic by making positive assessment results virtually impossible along the increasing number of aggregated elements. This study presents a generic approach, the probabilistic One-out-all-out approach, (pOOAO), to account for this issue and thereby reconciling the OOAO with probabilistic aggregation methods The pOOAO allows to determine the minimum number of elements (K_GES), which should meet their assessment benchmarks and thus should achieve a good status. By pre-setting a generic confidence level for each single assessment (e.g. 0.95) the binomial distribution can be used to obtain K_GES for any number of assessed elements. The pOOAO can also accommodate for the integration of assessments from multiple indicators within an element by adjusting the confidence level in relation to the number of integrated indicators. Depending on the generic confidence level as well as on the number of and integrated indicators and aggregated elements, the pOOAO is either consistent with the OOAO or allows for a certain number of negative assessment results, which are attributed to statistical uncertainty and error propagation. The pOOAO is consistent with the OOAO if the desired confidence level in the single assessment results is very high (>0.99) and/or the number of aggregated elements and integrated indicators is low. Through this flexibility the pOOAO could find wide application within integrated ecosystem assessments frameworks such as the MSFD, but would require to estimate the confidence level for each single assessment.     

Methodological challenges in assessing the environmental status of a marine ecosystem: case study of the Baltic Sea

Assessments of the environmental status of marine ecosystems are increasingly needed to inform management decisions and regulate human pressures to meet the objectives of environmental policies. This paper addresses some generic methodological challenges and related uncertainties involved in marine ecosystem assessment, using the central Baltic Sea as a case study. The objectives of good environmental status of the Baltic Sea are largely focusing on biodiversity, eutrophication and hazardous substances. In this paper, we conduct comparative evaluations of the status of these three segments, by applying different methodological approaches. Our analyses indicate that the assessment results are sensitive to a selection of indicators for ecological quality objectives that are affected by a broad spectrum of human activities and natural processes (biodiversity), less so for objectives that are influenced by a relatively narrow array of drivers (eutrophications, hazardous substances). The choice of indicator aggregation rule appeared to be of essential importance for assessment results for all three segments, whereas the hierarchical structure of indicators had only a minor influence. Trend-based assessment was shown to be a useful supplement to reference-based evaluation, being independent of the problems related to defining reference values and indicator aggregation methodologies. Results of this study will help in setting priorities for future efforts to improve environmental assessments in the Baltic Sea and elsewhere, and to ensure the transparency of the assessment procedure.     

近岸海域生态质量状况综合评价方法——以同安湾为例

基于国外近岸海域生态质量状况综合评价方法,结合我国海洋环境质量评价的研究现状,从生物要素以及水质和沉积物的物理化学要素中筛选出11个指标构成近岸海域生态质量状况综合评价指标体系;综合考虑国内外的评价标准,确定了优、良、中、差、劣5个生态质量状况等级的评价标准;采用层次分析和模糊数学的方法构建近岸海域生态质量状况综合评价方法,并通过同安湾生态质量状况等级与较大的人为扰动以及污染物浓度分布的相关分析对该评价方法进行验证.结果表明:同安湾生态质量状况综合评价等级为中级,处于向差过渡的状态,受人为扰动较大;该方法能够较好地反映主要的人为环境压力和风险因子,同时对未超标的污染因子有一定的预警作用.     

河流生境的评估方法及应用的研究进展

河流生境是水生生物赖以生存的物理、化学和生物环境的综合体, 是河流生态系统的重要组成部分。河流生境评价有助于掌握河流的生态健康状况, 识别河流退化的原因, 为河流的生态修复提供依据。文章梳理总结了20世纪80年代至2018年文献中报道的全球范围内河流生境评估的方法, 然后根据每种方法的侧重点和目标, 将它们分为预测模型法和多指标综合评估法两种类型, 并比较了它们各自的优势和不足。预测模型法适于长期的生境动态监测, 但该方法需要以自然无干扰的河流为参照, 并且需要大量历史数据, 统一评估不易实现; 多指标综合评估法评估相对快速方便, 但评估过程复杂, 且评价标准不一, 结果有一定的局限性。这些方法的适用范围从中小型的可涉水河流到较大的不可涉水河流, 但适用于大型不可涉水河流的生境评估方法和案例非常有限。通过分类整理, 发现我国河流生境评估方法多是参考国外几种常用的河流评估方法, 种类单一, 而且多是针对个别河流, 并且未对这些河流所在的流域的生境状况进行深入研究, 广适性较差。因此, 文章从以下几个方面对我国河流生境评估体系的发展提出几点建议: (1)确定科学和标准化的评分指标, 因地制宜, 以满足不同河流特征; (2)扩大评估范围, 从流域和景观尺度开展生境监测, 关注全流域的健康状况; (3)扩大时间尺度, 建立模型, 进行长期的动态评估; (4)鼓励政府宏观规划, 促进不同管理部门间的合作, 整合不同地区的河流生境数据并建立国家尺度的河流生境大数据库, 以实现我国河流生态健康的维护和流域的可持续发展。     

三峡水库河流生境评价指标体系构建及应用

三峡水库建成蓄水后,库区支流因水位调度导致河流生境发生了剧烈的变化,消落带的形成使库区河流具有同自然河流截然不同的河流生境,新形势下库区河流生境评价十分必要。国内外现有的评价指标体系及评价方法不能够很好地适应这种特殊生境状况,急需建立或改进并形成新的评价指标体系和评价方法。基于此,分析了大量国内外河流生境评价方法,根据大型水库影响下的库区河流的生态环境特点,构建了包括水文情势、河流形态和河岸带生境3个方面18个指标的库区河流生境评价指标体系,并利用层次分析法(主观赋权法)和熵值法(客观赋权法)结合组合赋权法计算得到了各指标权重。使用新建立的指标体系和方法,以三峡库区支流东溪河、黄金河、汝溪河为例,进行河流生境质量评价发现,52.6%的样点河流生境质量处于优等或良好等级;42.1%为一般等级;5.3%为较差等级;没有最差等级的样点。结果表明,该评价指标体系适合库区支流河流生境状况的特殊性,得到的评价结果能较直观的反应河流生境状况,且操作便捷,数据易获得,具有较强的科学性和可操作性。     

A hitchhiker's guide to European lake ecological assessment and intercalibration

The Water Framework Directive is the first international legislation to require European countries to establish comparable ecological assessment schemes for their freshwaters. A key element in harmonising quality classification within and between Europe's river basins is an “Intercalibration” exercise, stipulated by the WFD, to ensure that the good status boundaries in all of the biological assessment methods correspond to similar levels of anthropogenic pressure. In this article, we provide a comprehensive overview of this international comparison, focusing on the assessment schemes developed for freshwater lakes. Out of 82 lake ecological assessment methods reported for the comparison, 62 were successfully intercalibrated and included in the EC Decision on intercalibration, with a high proportion of phytoplankton (18), macrophyte (17) and benthic fauna (13) assessment methods. All the lake assessment methods are reviewed in this article, including the results of intercalibration. Furthermore, the current gaps and way forward to reach consistent management objectives for European lakes are discussed.     

When to use what: Methods for weighting and aggregating sustainability indicators

ContextSustainability indices (SIs) have become increasingly important to sustainability research and practice. However, while the validity of SIs is heavily dependent on how their components are weighted and aggregated, the typology and applicability of the existing weighting and aggregation methods remain poorly understood.ObjectivesTo close the knowledge gap regarding when to use which weighting and aggregation methods for constructing SIs, we review the most commonly used methods for weighting and aggregating SIs, discuss their benefits and drawbacks, and suggest a process-oriented approach for choosing appropriate weighting and aggregation methods depending on research objectives.MethodsOur review synthesis was based on peer-reviewed journal articles, books, and reports by international organizations, governmental agencies, and research institutions. After carefully examining their principles, characteristics, and applications, we selected and classified the frequently used methods for indicator weighting and aggregation.ResultsWe systematically discuss the benefits and drawbacks of nine weighting methods and three aggregation methods. We propose a four-step process for choosing the most suitable weighting and aggregation methods based on: research purposes, spatial and temporal scales, and sustainability perspectives.ConclusionsIn this research, we chose the most commonly used methods for weighting and aggregating SIs and analyzed the characteristics, strengths and weaknesses of each method. We found that choosing appropriate weighting and aggregation methods for a specific sustainability assessment project is an extremely important and challenging task. To meet this challenge, we propose a process-oriented approach for properly selecting methods according to the purpose, scale and sustainability concept. This approach can facilitate the proper selection of these methods in sustainability research and practice.     

How to make river assessments comparable: A demonstration for hydromorphology

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.     

Very-broad-scale assessment of human impacts on river condition

1. Management of whole rivers and river catchments requires a comprehensive set of information about river condition and use, both existing and historical, and the links between them at regional, state or national scales. This paper outlines a new approach to the assessment of river condition, using a small team was able to assess 210 000 km of rivers across more than 3 million km² of Australia in little more than a year. 2. The approach was driven by a hierarchical model of river function, which assumed that broad‐scale catchment characteristics affect local hydrology, habitat features, water quality and, ultimately, aquatic biota. The model provided the basis for selecting important ecologically relevant features that indices should represent. For each reach of each river we derived a biological index and an environmental index based on measures quantifying catchment and hydrological condition, and habitat and water quality condition. Data came from existing state and national databases, satellite images, site measurements and process models. 3. All indices were calculated as deviation from a reference condition, were range‐standardised and were divided into equivalent bands of condition. Amalgamation of index components and of sub‐indices was determined by consideration of their ecological effects; for example, general degradation might be additive, but toxic effects of one component would override all others. 4. Several internal and external validation methods were employed, with the all‐important validation of the final assessments undertaken by comparison with a similar index based on locally measured data. 5. The environmental assessment classified 14% of reaches as largely unmodified, 67% as moderately modified and 19% as substantially modified by human impacts. The biological assessment based on site assessments and modelled data using invertebrates indicated that 70% of reaches were equivalent to reference condition and that 30% were significantly impaired. Catchment disturbance, elevated sediment and nutrient loads, and habitat degradation all contributed to these results. These impacts have all occurred during the last 200 years (post‐European settlement). 6. Partly as a result of the assessments of this study the Australian Government has begun to adopt a more environmentally sustainable approach to broad‐scale water management.     

Partitioning the aggregation of parasites on hosts into intrinsic and extrinsic components via an extended Poisson-gamma mixture model

It is well known that parasites are often highly aggregated on their hosts such that relatively few individuals host the large majority of parasites. When the parasites are vectors of infectious disease, a key consequence of this aggregation can be increased disease transmission rates. The cause of this aggregation, however, is much less clear, especially for parasites such as arthropod vectors, which generally spend only a short time on their hosts. Regression-based analyses of ticks on various hosts have focused almost exclusively on identifying the intrinsic host characteristics associated with large burdens, but these efforts have had mixed results; most host traits examined have some small influence, but none are key. An alternative approach, the Poisson-gamma mixture distribution, has often been used to describe aggregated parasite distributions in a range of host/macroparasite systems, but lacks a clear mechanistic basis. Here, we extend this framework by linking it to a general model of parasite accumulation. Then, focusing on blacklegged ticks (Ixodes scapularis) on mice (Peromyscus leucopus), we fit the extended model to the best currently available larval tick burden datasets via hierarchical Bayesian methods, and use it to explore the relative contributions of intrinsic and extrinsic factors on observed tick burdens. Our results suggest that simple bad luck-inhabiting a home range with high vector density-may play a much larger role in determining parasite burdens than is currently appreciated.     

Efficacy and deficiencies of rapid biomonitoring in biodiversity conservation: a case study in South Africa

Rapid biomonitoring protocols, using biotic indices based on macroinvertebrate diversity to assess river ecosystem health, are widely used globally. Such quick assessment techniques are lauded for the rapid results obtained and the relatively easy protocol used to achieve an answer. However, do such quick assessments of water quality give enough information about ecosystems? Are important details being overlooked? When should a full faunal survey be used in preference? Important research programmes, including environmental impact studies, often misuse biomonitoring techniques, making influential management decisions using superficial, low-level data obtained using biomonitoring tools, inappropriate to address those management objectives. The value of using biomonitoring as a quick tool, versus a more detailed faunal assessment, is considered here. The assessment of teloganodid mayfly fauna occurring in South African rivers provides an example of the value of detailed studies versus superficial family level investigations, showing that a rapid biomonitoring approach should not be used as a shortcut when a more detailed survey is needed. Each situation should be assessed for its own merit in a given set of project circumstances. A checklist of criteria is presented, giving guidance on when rapid biomonitoring alone is valuable and when more detailed assessments would give a more relevant result.     

Unfolding of the immunoglobulin light and heavy chains is required for the enzymatic removal of N-terminal pyroglutamyl residues

To enable Edman sequencing of pyroglutamylated immunoglobulins, enzymatic deblocking by pyroglutamate aminopeptidase is performed, often with variable yield and compromised solubility. Recently, enzymatic deblocking of immunoglobulins without denaturation was described. Although the conditions ensured efficient removal of pyroglutamyl residues, we conclude that deblocking is preceded by denaturation, which results in aggregation of the immunoglobulins. To study the effect of folding status on deblocking we developed a methanol based deblocking solution, which preserved the enzymatic activity of pyroglutamate aminopeptidase, provided conditions compatible with sequencing and enhanced deblocking of electroblotted samples, as well. At 50 degrees C and 35% (v/v) methanol the immunoglobulin chains were completely aggregated, but the degree of deblocking was comparable to that obtained with the previously described method. At 37 degrees C, the immunoglobulins were partly aggregated, but the deblocked chains were completely in the insoluble fractions, whereas the soluble fractions had retained pyroglutamylation in both chains, suggesting that unfolding of the immunoglobulins is required for the excision of the pyroglutamates. Inspection of the structures of pyroglutamylated immunoglobulin and pyroglutamate aminopeptidase P. furiosus indicates that the enzyme requires the substrate in an extended conformation, a criterium, which we conclude not to be fulfilled in the native form of immunoglobulins. Unfolding of the N-terminus would disrupt the immunoglobulin fold by breaking interactions between secondary structure elements and expose surfaces prone to aggregation.     

Assessment of river health based on an improved entropy-based fuzzy matter-element model in the Taihu Plain,China

Rivers are valuable to human beings because of their various functions. Unfortunately, ecological integrity of rivers has been seriously threatened by human activities, resulting in poor river functions. It is thus necessary to evaluate and maintain river health. Meanwhile, it is challenging to comprehensively assess river health with a single method alone. It is therefore relevant to combine the advantages of multiple methods in river health assessment. By classifying and characterizing river functions, we first established an indicator system for river health assessment in plain river network regions. We then assessed the health status of the Taihu Plain in terms of an improved entropy-based fuzzy matter-element model. We found that the overall health status of the Taihu Plain is below “good”. In particular, the health status of Yang-Cheng-Dian-Mao and Hang-Jia-Hu Region is “moderate”; the Wu-Cheng-Xi-Yu Region displays the poorest natural and social river functions. We also found that flood control is the most important influential factor in river health. Our findings suggest that rivers in the Taihu Plain must be restored to maintain their health, with the Wu-Cheng-Xi-Yu Region that must be restored preferentially, and that the river function of flood control must be improved at the scale of whole watershed. Comparing with other four commonly used comprehensive assessment methods, our improved entropy-based fuzzy matter-element model outperforms in reflecting objective fact and can be applied to river health assessment. Our results are generally consistent with existing studies, confirming that the proposed method for river health assessment is effective and feasible. Therefore, it provides a useful reference for river health assessment in other plain river network regions.     

Integrating and extending ecological river assessment: Concept and test with two restoration projects

While the number of river restoration projects is increasing, studies on their success or failure relative to expectations are still rare. Only a few decision support methodologies and integrative methods for evaluating the ecological status of rivers are used in river restoration projects, thereby limiting informed management decisions in restoration planning as well as success control. Moreover, studies quantifying river restoration effects are often based on the assessment of a single organism group, and the effects on terrestrial communities are often neglected. In addition, potential effects of water quality or hydrological degradation are often not considered for the evaluation of restoration projects.We used multi-attribute value theory to re-formulate an existing river assessment protocol and extend it to a more comprehensive, integrated ecological assessment program. We considered habitat conditions, water quality regarding nutrients, micropollutants and heavy metals, and five instream and terrestrial organism groups (fish, benthic invertebrates, aquatic vegetation, ground beetles and riparian vegetation). The physical, chemical and biological states of the rivers were assessed separately and combined to value the overall ecological state.The assessment procedure was then applied to restored and unrestored sites at two Swiss rivers to test its feasibility in quantifying the effect of river restoration. Uncertainty in observations was taken into account and propagated through the assessment framework to evaluate the significance of differences between the ecological states of restored and unrestored reaches. In the restored sites, we measured a higher width variability of the river, as well as a higher width of the riparian zone and a higher richness of organism groups. According to the ecological assessment, the river morphology and the biological states were significantly better at the restored sites, with the largest differences detected for ground beetles and fish communities, followed by benthic invertebrates and riparian vegetation. The state of the aquatic vegetation was slightly lower at the restored sites. According to our assessment, the presence of invasive plant species counteracted the potential ecological gain. Water quality could be a causal factor contributing to the absence of larger improvements.Overall, we found significantly better biological and physical states, and integrated ecological states at the restored sites. Even in the absence of comprehensive before-after data, based on the similarity of the reaches before restoration and mechanistic biological knowledge, this can be safely interpreted as a causal consequence of restoration. An integrative perspective across aquatic and riparian organism groups was important to assess the biological effects, because organism groups responded differently to restoration. In addition, the potential deteriorating effect of water quality demonstrates the importance of integrated planning for the reduction of morphological, water quality and hydrological degradation.     

Long-term monitoring studies as a powerful tool in marine ecosystem research

The EU-funded research project WISER (“Water bodies in Europe: Integrative Systems to assess Ecological status and Recovery”) developed new assessment methods required by the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) for lakes, coastal and transitional waters. WISER also addressed the recovery of biotic assemblages from degradation. The results are summarised in five key messages, supported by papers in this special issue and by WISER results published elsewhere: (1) Response to stress differs between organism groups, water types and stressors; a conceptual model is proposed summarising how the individual organism groups respond to different types of degradation in rivers, lakes, transitional and coastal waters. (2) The sources of uncertainty differ between BQEs and water types, leading to methodological suggestions on how to design WFD sampling programmes. (3) Results from about 300 current assessment methods indicate geographical variations in metrics but assessments are comparable at an aggregated level (“ecological status”). (4) Scale and time matter; restoration requires action at (sub)-basin levels and recovery may require decades. (5) Long-term trends require consideration; the effects of both degradation and restoration at the water body or river basin scales is increasingly superimposed by multiple stressors acting at large scales, in particular by climate change.     

A multi-agency comparison of aquatic macroinvertebrate-based stream bioassessment methodologies

Sharing ecological data can increase the amount of information available to state and federal agencies to manage water resources. Because state agencies in the US use different methods to assess biological water quality, the quality and comparability of data must be understood before data can be shared. The documentation of data quality objectives and performance characteristics has been recommended as a way to compare biological data collected using different methods. To address this issue, five state agencies conducted a pilot study on methods comparability and performance characteristics of their methods and assessments (i.e. precision and sensitivity) at two streams located in the coastal plain of the southeastern US. Taxa richness and North Carolina Biotic Index (NCBI) results were not directly comparable among agencies using different sample processing, collection, and analysis methods, although these results often produced similar site rankings. Comparison of performance characteristics across methods suggested that assessment information could be shared among some agencies despite differences in methods and metric results.     

两类水质综合评价方法的特点及其在河流水环境管理中的作用

河流水质恶化已成为严峻的环境问题,针对河流开展水质综合评价对河流水环境管理具有重要意义。依据不同的评价目标,选择合理的综合评价的评估标准成为河流水质评价中重要的问题之一。通过基于期望值和阈值的水质健康综合评估法(ETI)和水质质量指数(WQI)两种水质综合评价方法对"引滦入津"工程重要水源地伊逊河水质进行评价,结果显示:1)伊逊河水质ETI评估结果为良好等级,WQI评估结果为一般等级;2)伊逊河采样点水质在ETI评价中分布于4个等级,WQI仅分布于2个等级;3)伊逊河自上游至下游水质显著降低,特别是ETI评估中由优秀等级转变为差等级;4)ETI和WQI评估结果显示极显著相关性(R=0.951,P0.01);5)通过逐步多元回归,ETI评估结果的主导因子是DO、EC、SS、BOD_5和TP(P0.05),WQI评估结果的主导因子是DO、SS、BOD_5、TP、TN和NH_3-N(P0.05)。进一步分析表明伊逊河水质恶化与其流域内土地利用情况密切相关。在河流水环境管理中,ETI作为一种水质相对值评估方法,能更好体现流域内水质差异的区分度,便于管理者迅速定位流域内亟需治理的河流或河段,同时能够根据河流自身特征制定管理目标,可作为河流管理绩效评估的有效手段;而WQI作为一种水质绝对值评估方法,更适用于河流水质时间变化评估,对河流经长期治理后的管理效果评价起到重要作用。