Limited comparability of global and local estimates of environmental flow requirements to sustain river ecosystems
Environmental flows (e-flows) are a central element of sustainable water resource management to mitigate the detrimental impacts of hydrological alteration on freshwater ecosystems and their benefits to people. Many nations strive to protect e-flows through policy, and thousands of local-scale e-flo...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | Inglés |
| Published: |
IOP Publishing
2024
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/138741 |
| _version_ | 1855523719226589184 |
|---|---|
| author | Messager, M. L. Dickens, Chris W. S. Eriyagama, Nishadi Tharme, R. E. |
| author_browse | Dickens, Chris W. S. Eriyagama, Nishadi Messager, M. L. Tharme, R. E. |
| author_facet | Messager, M. L. Dickens, Chris W. S. Eriyagama, Nishadi Tharme, R. E. |
| author_sort | Messager, M. L. |
| collection | Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace) |
| description | Environmental flows (e-flows) are a central element of sustainable water resource management to mitigate the detrimental impacts of hydrological alteration on freshwater ecosystems and their benefits to people. Many nations strive to protect e-flows through policy, and thousands of local-scale e-flows assessments have been conducted globally, leveraging data and knowledge to quantify how much water must be provided to river ecosystems, and when, to keep them healthy. However, e-flows assessments and implementation are geographically uneven and cover a small fraction of rivers worldwide. This hinders globally consistent target-setting, monitoring and evaluation for international agreements to curb water scarcity and biodiversity loss. Therefore, dozens of models have been developed over the past two decades to estimate the e-flows requirements of rivers seamlessly across basins and administrative boundaries at a global scale. There has been little effort, however, to benchmark these models against locally derived e-flows estimates, which may limit confidence in the relevance of global estimates. The aim of this study was to assess whether current global methods reflect e-flows estimates used on the ground, by comparing global and local estimates for 1194 sites across 25 countries. We found that while global approaches broadly approximate the bulk volume of water that should be precautionarily provided to sustain aquatic ecosystems at the scale of large basins or countries, they explain a remarkably negligible 0%–1% of the global variability in locally derived estimates of the percentage of river flow that must be protected at a given site. Even when comparing assessments for individual countries, thus controlling for differences in local assessment methods among jurisdictions, global e-flows estimates only marginally compared (R 2 ⩽ 0.31) to local estimates. Such a disconnect between global and local assessments of e-flows requirements limits the credibility of global estimates and associated targets for water use. To accelerate the global implementation of e-flows requires further concerted effort to compile and draw from the thousands of existing local e-flows assessments worldwide for developing a new generation of global models and bridging the gap from local to global scales. |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | CGSpace138741 |
| institution | CGIAR Consortium |
| language | Inglés |
| publishDate | 2024 |
| publishDateRange | 2024 |
| publishDateSort | 2024 |
| publisher | IOP Publishing |
| publisherStr | IOP Publishing |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | CGSpace1387412025-12-08T10:11:39Z Limited comparability of global and local estimates of environmental flow requirements to sustain river ecosystems Messager, M. L. Dickens, Chris W. S. Eriyagama, Nishadi Tharme, R. E. environmental flows water resources water management hydrological modelling freshwater ecosystems sustainable development goals water scarcity Environmental flows (e-flows) are a central element of sustainable water resource management to mitigate the detrimental impacts of hydrological alteration on freshwater ecosystems and their benefits to people. Many nations strive to protect e-flows through policy, and thousands of local-scale e-flows assessments have been conducted globally, leveraging data and knowledge to quantify how much water must be provided to river ecosystems, and when, to keep them healthy. However, e-flows assessments and implementation are geographically uneven and cover a small fraction of rivers worldwide. This hinders globally consistent target-setting, monitoring and evaluation for international agreements to curb water scarcity and biodiversity loss. Therefore, dozens of models have been developed over the past two decades to estimate the e-flows requirements of rivers seamlessly across basins and administrative boundaries at a global scale. There has been little effort, however, to benchmark these models against locally derived e-flows estimates, which may limit confidence in the relevance of global estimates. The aim of this study was to assess whether current global methods reflect e-flows estimates used on the ground, by comparing global and local estimates for 1194 sites across 25 countries. We found that while global approaches broadly approximate the bulk volume of water that should be precautionarily provided to sustain aquatic ecosystems at the scale of large basins or countries, they explain a remarkably negligible 0%–1% of the global variability in locally derived estimates of the percentage of river flow that must be protected at a given site. Even when comparing assessments for individual countries, thus controlling for differences in local assessment methods among jurisdictions, global e-flows estimates only marginally compared (R 2 ⩽ 0.31) to local estimates. Such a disconnect between global and local assessments of e-flows requirements limits the credibility of global estimates and associated targets for water use. To accelerate the global implementation of e-flows requires further concerted effort to compile and draw from the thousands of existing local e-flows assessments worldwide for developing a new generation of global models and bridging the gap from local to global scales. 2024-02-01 2024-01-31T22:38:43Z 2024-01-31T22:38:43Z Journal Article https://hdl.handle.net/10568/138741 en Open Access IOP Publishing Messager, M. L.; Dickens, Chris W. S.; Eriyagama, Nishadi; Tharme, R. E. 2024. Limited comparability of global and local estimates of environmental flow requirements to sustain river ecosystems. Environmental Research Letters, 19(2): 024012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ad1cb5 |
| spellingShingle | environmental flows water resources water management hydrological modelling freshwater ecosystems sustainable development goals water scarcity Messager, M. L. Dickens, Chris W. S. Eriyagama, Nishadi Tharme, R. E. Limited comparability of global and local estimates of environmental flow requirements to sustain river ecosystems |
| title | Limited comparability of global and local estimates of environmental flow requirements to sustain river ecosystems |
| title_full | Limited comparability of global and local estimates of environmental flow requirements to sustain river ecosystems |
| title_fullStr | Limited comparability of global and local estimates of environmental flow requirements to sustain river ecosystems |
| title_full_unstemmed | Limited comparability of global and local estimates of environmental flow requirements to sustain river ecosystems |
| title_short | Limited comparability of global and local estimates of environmental flow requirements to sustain river ecosystems |
| title_sort | limited comparability of global and local estimates of environmental flow requirements to sustain river ecosystems |
| topic | environmental flows water resources water management hydrological modelling freshwater ecosystems sustainable development goals water scarcity |
| url | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/138741 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT messagerml limitedcomparabilityofglobalandlocalestimatesofenvironmentalflowrequirementstosustainriverecosystems AT dickenschrisws limitedcomparabilityofglobalandlocalestimatesofenvironmentalflowrequirementstosustainriverecosystems AT eriyagamanishadi limitedcomparabilityofglobalandlocalestimatesofenvironmentalflowrequirementstosustainriverecosystems AT tharmere limitedcomparabilityofglobalandlocalestimatesofenvironmentalflowrequirementstosustainriverecosystems |