Recent advances in environmental flows science and water management—Innovation in the Anthropocene

Abstract

The implementation of environmental flow regimes offers a promising means to protect and restore riverine, wetland and estuarine ecosystems, their critical environmental services and cultural/societal values. This Special Issue expands the scope of environmental flows and water science in theory and practice, offering 20 papers from academics, agency researchers and non‐governmental organisations, each with fresh perspectives on the science and management of environmental water allocations. Contributions confront the grand challenge for environmental flows and water management in the Anthropocene—the urgent need for innovations that will help to sustain the innate resilience of social–ecological systems under dynamic and uncertain environmental and societal futures. Basin‐scale and regional assessments of flow requirements mark a necessary advance in environmental water science in the face of rapid changes in water‐resource management activities worldwide (e.g. increases in dams, diversions, retention and reuse). Techniques for regional‐scale hydrological and ecohydrological modelling support ecological risk assessment and identification of priority flow management and river restoration actions. Changing flood–drought cycles, long‐term climatic shifts and associated effects on hydrological, thermal and water quality regimes add enormous uncertainty to the prediction of future ecological outcomes, regardless of environmental water allocations. An improved capacity to predict the trajectories of ecological change in rivers degraded by legacies of past impact interacting with current conditions and future climate change is essential. Otherwise, we risk unrealistic expectations from restoration of river and estuarine flow regimes. A more robust, dynamic and predictive approach to environmental water science is emerging. It encourages the measurement of process rates (e.g. birth rate, colonisation rate) and species traits (e.g. physiological requirements, morphological adaptations) as well as ecosystem states (e.g. species richness, assemblage structure), as the variables representing ecological responses to flow variability and environmental water allocations. Another necessary development is the incorporation of other environmental variables such as water temperature and sedimentary processes in flow–ecological response models. Based on contributions to this Special Issue, several recent compilations and the wider literature, we identify six major scientific challenges for further exploration, and seven themes for advancing the management of environmental water. We see the emerging frontier of environmental flows and water science as urgent and challenging, with numerous opportunities for reinvigorated science and methodological innovation in the expanding enterprise of environmental water linked to ecological sustainability and social well‐being.

The Brisbane Declaration and Global Action Agenda on Environmental Flows (2018)

“…As well as Harwood et al (2017), these include the recent book "Water for the Environment" , synthesis papers from several special journal issues devoted to environmental flows science and management (Acreman et al, 2014a;Bunn, 2016;Arthington et al, 2018;Kennen et al, 2018;Webb et al, 2018), and a paper setting out the results of a survey of important research priorities to inform future environmental water outcomes (Horne et al, 2017b). The summary of actions in Appendix 1 is less detailed but consistent with the main recommendations of these works.…”

“…Finally, long-term studies of aquatic ecosystem adjustments and societal responses are recommended in climatic and environmental change hotspots using novel experimental designs, meta-data analysis and measurement of ecological variables that capture rates of change in relation to shifting environmental flows, water quality and human water use Arthington et al, 2018;Webb et al, 2018). Strengthening scientific understanding and evidence of the different benefits of environmental flows for ecosystems, economies and people under emerging planetary pressures is essential to guide water management toward social-ecological resilience in the future.…”

Ecological stakeholder analogs as intermediaries between freshwater biodiversity conservation and sustainable water management

“…Integrated water resources management (IWRM) is the dominant paradigm for freshwater resources management from a governance perspective, being implemented in over 100 countries (Allouche, 2016;Mollinga, Dixit, & Athukorala, 2006;Smith & Clausen, 2017). Among ecologists and conservation scientists, research on environmental flows (e-flows) has yielded increasingly advanced scientific approaches to understanding and controlling the impacts of water management on freshwater biodiversity in riparian systems (e.g., Arthington, Kennen, Stein, & Webb, 2018;Poff et al, 2010). Among ecologists and conservation scientists, research on environmental flows (e-flows) has yielded increasingly advanced scientific approaches to understanding and controlling the impacts of water management on freshwater biodiversity in riparian systems (e.g., Arthington, Kennen, Stein, & Webb, 2018;Poff et al, 2010).…”

“…This is recognized by authors in both fields, with IWRM researchers criticizing overly technocratic approaches yet calling for expert ecological information (Smith & Clausen, 2017) and e-flows (i.e., environmental flows; maintaining streamflow characteristics to support ecological objectives) researchers advocating improvements in management decision-making, particularly with respect to societal variables such as the cultural and heritage value of biodiversity (Arthington et al, 2018;Jackson, 2017;Poff, 2018). This is recognized by authors in both fields, with IWRM researchers criticizing overly technocratic approaches yet calling for expert ecological information (Smith & Clausen, 2017) and e-flows (i.e., environmental flows; maintaining streamflow characteristics to support ecological objectives) researchers advocating improvements in management decision-making, particularly with respect to societal variables such as the cultural and heritage value of biodiversity (Arthington et al, 2018;Jackson, 2017;Poff, 2018).…”

“…By assessing the salience and relative priority (see below) of ESA through stakeholder analysis, water managers could also better direct research to focus on the ecological phenomena and particular questions that are most relevant to the satisfaction of multiple stakeholder interests in the basin. At the same time, including ESA allows for the integration of other, noneconomic values of freshwater biodiversity, which are increasingly viewed as a priority for improving the equity and efficacy of environmental flows research (Arthington et al, 2018;Noble, Fulton, & Pittock, 2018). At the same time, including ESA allows for the integration of other, noneconomic values of freshwater biodiversity, which are increasingly viewed as a priority for improving the equity and efficacy of environmental flows research (Arthington et al, 2018;Noble, Fulton, & Pittock, 2018).…”