D 2.3 Report and Data Set on Scenario Modelling Of
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
MIRACLE Project acronym: MIRACLE Project title: Mediating integrated actions for sustainable ecosystems services in a changing climate Period covered: from 1.04.2016 to 31.03.2017 Deliverable name: Report and data set on scenario modelling of measures suggested by stakeholders to reduce flooding, eutrophication, enhance biodiversity and contribute to other goals, as well as climate change scenarios Del. No. 2.3 The BONUS MIRACLE project has received funding from by BONUS (Art 185), funded jointly by the EU and the Innovation Fund Denmark, Bundesministeriums für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF), Latvian Ministry of Education and Science, Polish National Centre for Research and Development, Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning (FORMAS). MIRACLE Contents 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 4 2 BERZE CATCHMENT ............................................................................................................... 6 2.1 Pathways of development for Berze catchment .................................................................... 6 2.1.1 Pathway 1 - Business as usual (2015-2030) ............................................................... 6 2.1.2 Pathway 2 – Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants (2021-2030) ......................... 7 2.1.3 Pathway 3 – Focus on Rural Actions - Agri-Ecological Measures (2021-2030) .......... 8 2.2 Measures suggested by stakeholders to reduce eutrophication in the case study area......... 11 2.2.1 Agri-environmental measures .................................................................................. 11 2.2.2 Wastewater treatment plants and pollution load from wastewater ...................... 12 2.3 Pathway modelling approach in Berze ................................................................................ 13 2.3.1 Preparatory activities for modelling case area ........................................................ 13 2.3.2 Input data for modelling .......................................................................................... 16 2.3.3 Model setup for modelling pathways ...................................................................... 17 2.4 Modelled impacts of pathways .......................................................................................... 21 2.4.1 Modelled effects of individual measures ................................................................. 21 2.4.2 Modelled effects of pathways .................................................................................. 22 3 HELGE Å CATCHMENT ........................................................................................................... 24 3.1 Pathways of development for Helge å catchment ............................................................... 24 3.1.1 Background ............................................................................................................... 24 3.1.2 Pathway 1 – Business as usual ................................................................................. 27 3.1.3 Pathway 2 – Ecosystem services approach .............................................................. 27 3.1.4 Pathway 3 – Improvements in forestry sector ......................................................... 27 3.2 Pathway modelling approach in Helge å ............................................................................. 27 3.2.1 Impact model set-up and model periods ................................................................. 27 3.2.2 Land use change assumptions.................................................................................. 28 3.3 Model impacts of pathways ............................................................................................... 28 4 REDA CATCHMENT .............................................................................................................. 33 4.1 Pathways of development for Reda catchment ................................................................... 33 4.1.1 Background ............................................................................................................... 33 4.1.2 Pathway 1 - Business as usual .................................................................................. 37 4.1.3 Pathway 2 - Focus on urban actions ........................................................................ 37 4.1.4 Pathway 3 - Focus on rural areas ............................................................................. 37 4.1.5 Pathway 4 – Agri-Environmental measures ............................................................. 38 4.1.6 Mixture of Urban and Rural and Agri-Environmental actions ................................. 39 4.2 Pathway modelling approach for Reda ............................................................................... 39 4.2.1 Preparatory activities for modelling the case area .................................................. 39 2 MIRACLE 4.2.2 Consumption of mineral fertilizers in Reda catchment ........................................... 40 4.2.3 Model setup for pathway modelling ........................................................................ 43 5 SELKE CATCHMENT .............................................................................................................. 43 5.1 Pathways of development for Selke catchment .................................................................. 43 5.1.1 Background ............................................................................................................... 43 5.1.2 Pathway 1 – Business as usual ................................................................................. 47 5.1.3 Pathway 2– Ecosystem service approach ................................................................ 47 5.1.4 Pathway 3 – Waste water treatment ....................................................................... 48 5.2 Pathway modelling approach for Selke river ....................................................................... 48 5.2.1 Preparatory activities for modelling the case area .................................................. 48 5.3 Modelled impact of pathways ............................................................................................ 51 5.4 Revision of modelled scenarios as suggested by stakeholders in the 3rd workshop ............. 51 6 APPROACH TO IMPLEMENTATION OF CLIMATE CHANGE IN HYPE IN THE CASE STUDY AREAS (RCP4.5, RCP8.5) ................................................................................................................................. 52 7 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................... 57 8 LITERATURE ....................................................................................................................... 58 3 MIRACLE 1 Introduction In this report, the main objective is to present the modelled assessments of what effects sets of measures included in pathways of development, as suggested by stakeholders, could have on water and nutrient flows in the four case catchments of the BONUS MIRACLE project. As part of the social learning process in the Selke river, the stakeholders had reviewed the modelled impacts of pathways at the time of writing this report. For the other three case areas, revisions of the modelled pathways of development in response to the discussions with stakeholders in the third set of workshops will be presented in the next Deliverable D2.4. That report will also include the effects of land use and climate change scenarios on water flow and nutrient transports, which the partners had not managed to complete before the third set of workshops with stakeholders. However, for the Helge å river basin land use and climate change scenarios have been simulated and are presented in the current report, along with the methodological aspect of the climate change scenarios that will be modelled in all case areas. First, a brief description of the pathways of development defined in the social learning process in WP 5, and their meaning, is presented. Detailed explanations of pathways are given elsewhere (Powell et al. 2018). As described by Carolus et al. (2015), the pathways are central to the economic analysis and serve as a frame for the socio-economic assessments of costs and benefits. In all case areas, the first pathway describes a business-as-usual pathway including, as far as possible, all measures that are currently being implemented or are planned to be implemented in the respective catchment up until 2020. Subsequent pathways represent possible new or modified measures that may be added to pathway 1. Hence, the pathways should not be considered mutually exclusive alternatives, as pathway 1 is always included in the analyses, though certain measures in the subsequent pathways may be mutually exclusive (Table 1). Effects of the pathways on water flow and nutrient concentrations and transport have been assessed using the HYPE Model based on the model set ups and calibrations presented in report D 2.2. In that report, results for the Berze river were missing, and therefore those are presented in the current report. As the socio-economic characteristics and land use differs between the catchments, different systemic issues have been defined by stakeholders. Consequently, the pathways of development defined in the social learning process differ between catchments and contain different