EEA/NSV/10/002 – ETC/ICM
EEA 2012 Report: Background Document
Pressures and Impacts
3.1. European overview of pressures
Version: 1.1
Date: 19 July 2011
EEA activity: 1.4.3
ETC/ICM task 1.4.3.c, milestone: 1
Prepared by / compiled by: Hana Prchalova, Renata Filippi, Silvie Semeradova,
Pavla Chyska
Organisation: CENIA
EEA Project Manager: Peter Kristensen
Version history
Version
Date
Author
Status and description
Distribution
0.1
03/07/2011
HPR
Pre-draft for ETC
To: ALS, CIRCA
0.2
05/07/2011
HPR
Pre-draft for ETC after comments from To: ALS, CIRCA
ALS
0.3
06/07/2011
HPR
Pre-draft for ETC after further comments To: ALS, CIRCA
from ALS to draft v.0.2
1.0
06/07/2011
HPR/ALS First draft for EEA after minor amendments To: PKR, AKU
by ALS
1.1.
19/07/2011
SHU
First draft for EEA after check of English
To: PKR, AKU,
Circa
Abbreviations
HPR: Hana Prchalova
ALS: Anne Lyche Solheim
PKR: Peter Kristensen
AKU: Anita Künitzer
Chapter 3.1. European overview of pressures
Key messages



The most common pressures in rivers and lakes come from the diffuse sources of
pollution, water flow regulations and morphological alterations, and point sources of
pollution.
The share of morphological pressures is more significant in heavily modified and
artificial water bodies – especially for lakes.
The smallest share of freshwater bodies with at least one significant pressure was
reported by Austria (lakes), Finland, Greece (rivers), Bulgaria (HM and A lakes) and
Lithuania (rivers). The greatest share of freshwater bodies with at least one significant
pressure was reported by Belgium, Sweden, the Netherlands and the Czech Republic
and Greece (for lakes only).
Main diagrams
0,01%
16%
0,4%
1,6%
0,04%
11%
20%
18%
21%
32%
31%
34%
9%
Point
Abstractions
River management
Other morphology
6%
Diffuse
Morphology
TCW management
Point
Abstractions
River management
Other morphology
Diffuse
Morphology
TCW management
Figure 1a, b: Proportional share of significant pressures in natural rivers (left panel) and
heavily modified and artificial rivers (right panel). All information presented here is related to
river length and represents the proportion of all pressure entries reported for rivers. Several
pressure entries are reported for single rivers in many cases.
Note: Slovakia reported no significant pressures.
Morphology represents water flow regulations and the morphological alterations of surface water.
Other morphology represents barriers or land sealing.
0,3%
0,01%
11%
0,2%
17%
6%
18%
0,08%
3%
16%
3%
34%
2%
33%
54%
Point
Abstractions
River management
Other morphology
Diffuse
Morphology
TCW management
Other
3%
Point
Abstractions
River management
Other morphology
Diffuse
Morphology
TCW management
Other
Figure 2a: Proportional share of significant pressures in natural lakes (left panel) and heavily
modified and artificial lakes (right panel). All information presented here is related to lake
area, and represents the proportion of all pressure entries reported for lakes. Several
pressure entries are reported for single lakes in many cases.
Note: Slovakia reported no significant pressures; Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and the
Netherlands have no or almost no natural lakes.
Morphology represents Water flow regulations and the morphological alterations of surface water.
Other morphology represents other morphological alterations – barriers or land sealing.
Impacts on rivers
Relative distribution by length
Impacts on lakes
Relative distribution by count
Nutrient enrichment
Nutrient enrichment
Organic enrichment
Organic enrichment
Contamination by
priority substances
Contaminated
sediments
Acidification
Contamination by
priority substances
Contaminated
sediments
Acidification
Saline intrusion
Saline intrusion
Elevated temperatures
Elevated temperatures
Altered habitats
Altered habitats
Other Significant
Impacts
Other Significant
Impacts
Figure 3a and b: Relative distribution of impacts on classified European rivers (by length)
and lake water bodies (by count).
Assessment
The analysis shows that the most common pressures in natural rivers come from the diffuse
sources of pollution (34%), point sources of pollution (20%), and water flow regulations and
morphological alterations (21%). The proportion of morphological pressures is more
significant in heavily modified and artificial rivers (32%), although such rivers are also
exposed to many other pressures (Figure 1a, b).
Pressures in lakes vary greatly in natural versus heavily modified or artificial water bodies.
The most common pressures in natural lakes are represented by diffuse sources of pollution
(54%), followed by equal shares of point sources of pollution (17%) and morphology
pressures (16%). In heavily modified and artificial lakes, the proportion of morphological
pressure is dramatically higher than in natural lakes (33%), although diffuse pressure is still
important (34%). Point source pollution pressure is also more important in natural lakes
(17%) than in heavily modified and artificial lakes/reservoirs (6%) (see Figures 2a and b).
Impact information shows that altered habitats are the most important impact in rivers
(natural and heavily modified and artificial combined), followed by nutrient and organic
enrichment, and contamination by priority substances, while the latter is by far the most
important impact in lakes (see Figures 3a and b). This indicates that the pollutants coming
from the diffuse and point source pressures on rivers are almost equal proportions of
nutrients, contaminants and organic matter, while in lakes most of the diffuse and point
source pollutants seem to be contaminants. The large importance of contaminants in lakes is
mainly due to diffuse pollution of mercury in Swedish lakes. If Sweden is excluded from the
analyses, the importance of contaminants is largely reduced at the European scale (see
background document on Ecological Status).
The European results for lakes are affected by the great number of lakes occurring in the
Northern “low pressure” countries Sweden and Finland and almost no natural lakes in
several central and Eastern European countries Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and
the Netherlands.
The analysis provides a general picture, showing the high share of hydro-morphological
pressures in heavily modified and artificial bodies, and the significant share of diffuse and
point sources of pollution in all rivers and natural lakes.
When comparing the distribution of pressures between different countries it is clear that
diffuse pollution is often the most significant pressure on rivers in most countries, while
Austria and Sweden have very little point source pollution. The morphological pressures are
most important in Austria, Czech Republic and Germany and also notable in Sweden and the
UK. River management is most important in France and Lithuania, while water abstraction is
most important in Bulgaria, France and Greece (fig. 4a).
In the heavily modified and artificial rivers, the morphological pressure is higher in most
countries, as expected, except in Bulgaria and the Czech Republic, where it is lower than in
natural rivers. In both these countries the river management is higher than in natural rivers.
These differences may be related to differences in reporting methodology, and not to real
differences in pressures (fig. 4b).
For lakes, the most important country differences are the higher importance of morphological
pressure in Austrian natural lakes than in the other countries, as well as the importance of
water abstraction in France (fig. 5a). For heavily modified and artificial lakes/reservoirs, most
countries report morphological pressures as of higher importance and also the category
“other pressures”, which can be a variety of difference single pressures (see methodology
section) (fig. 5b).
The impacts of these pressures in the different countries will be presented and discussed in
the update of this document.
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
17,9
0,5
16,2
14,6
65,6
9,1
167,4
4,2
6,0
0,1
77,3
0,0
56,5
AT
BE
BG
CZ
DE
FI
FR
GR
LT
NL
SE
SK
UK
Point
Diffuse
Abstractions
Morphology
River management
TCW management
Other morphology
Other
Figure 4a: Proportional share of significant pressures in natural rivers by countries for rivers
with pressures reported.
Note: Numbers below columns represent length of rivers with pressures in thousands of km.
Slovakia reported no significant pressures.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
3,7
2,0
5,0
3,2
50,5
2,0
12,7
0,8
1,5
4,6
2,0
0,0
25,2
AT
BE
BG
CZ
DE
FI
FR
GR
LT
NL
SE
SK
UK
Point
Diffuse
Abstractions
Morphology
River management
TCW management
Other morphology
Other
Figure 4b: Proportional share of significant pressures in HM and A rivers by countries for
rivers with pressures reported.
Note: Numbers below columns represent length of rivers with pressures in thousands of km
Slovakia reported no significant pressures.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
0,003
0,00
0,00
0,00
1,24
4,39
0,85
0,65
5,26
0,002
0,00
24,16
0,26
AT
BE
BG
CZ
DE
FI
FR
GR
LT
NL
SK
SE
UK
Point
Diffuse
Abstractions
Morphology
River management
TCW management
Other morphology
Other
Figure 5a: Proportional share of significant pressures in natural lakes by countries for lakes
with pressures reported.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
0,01
0,04
0,02
0,25
0,24
0,34
0,83
0,21
2,02
3,04
0,00
5,03
1,22
AT
BE
BG
CZ
DE
FI
FR
GR
LT
NL
SK
SE
UK
Point
Diffuse
Abstractions
Morphology
River management
TCW management
Other morphology
Other
Figure 5b: Proportional share of significant pressures in heavily modified and artificial lakes
by countries for lakes with pressures reported.
Note: Numbers below columns represent area of lakes with pressures in thousands of km2
Slovakia reported no lakes. Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and the Netherlands have no or
almost hardly any natural lakes.
Morphology represents water flow regulations and morphological alterations of surface water.
Other morphology represents other morphological alterations – barriers or land sealing.
Background information
Water Framework Directive, Annex II, Art. 1.4:
Member States shall collect and maintain information on the type and magnitude of the
significant anthropogenic pressures to which the surface water bodies in each river basin
district are liable to be subject. This information includes:
 Estimation and identification of significant point and diffuse source pollution, in
particular by substances listed in Annex VIII of the WFD, from urban, industrial,
agricultural and other installations and activities.
 Estimation and identification of significant water abstraction for urban, industrial,
agricultural and other uses, including seasonal variations and total annual demand,
and of loss of water in distribution systems.
 Estimation and identification of the impact of significant water flow regulation,
including water transfer and diversion, on overall flow characteristics and water
balances.
 Identification of significant morphological alterations to water bodies and
 estimation and identification of other significant anthropogenic impacts on the status
of surface waters.
According to Annex VII of the WFD, the RBMP should include:
 A summary of significant pressures and impact of human activity on the status of
surface water and groundwater, including:
o estimation of point source pollution,
o estimation of diffuse source pollution, including a summary of land use,
o estimation of pressures on the quantitative status of water including
abstractions,
o analysis of other impacts of human activity on the status of water.
Specific Guidance documents were established for the 1st RBMP cycle - Analysis of
Pressures and Impacts (Policy summary) and Analysis of Pressures and Impacts – Guidance
Document No. 3.
Pressures and impacts analysis have a central role in the River Basin Management planning
process. Their principal aim is to identify where and to what extent human activities may be
placing the achievement of the Directive’s environmental objectives at risk.
In this Guidance document, significant pressures were unequivocally understood as those
anthropogenic pressures which can cause not reaching good status (and so they were
reported within Characterisation).
The inventory of pressures is likely to contain many that have no, or little, impact on the
water body. In the case of surface waters, the WFD recognises this by only requiring
significant pressures to be identified, and within this Guidance significant is interpreted as
meaning that the pressure contributes to an impact that may result in the failing of an
objective.
(Pressures and Impacts – Guidance document No. 3, ch. 3.3.1)
Although Guidance Document No. 21: Guidance for Reporting Under the Water Framework
Directive referred to significant pressures as only those pressures which caused not
reaching good status (i.e. not which can cause), this was not explicitly mentioned in the
Guidance Document.
Methodology
Surface water pressures are assigned to a water body and chosen from the relevant
enumeration list. Values in the enumeration list can be divided into three levels of detail. The
enumeration list consists of 65 values; therefore the data used in the analysis were
aggregated at the highest level (Table 2). One water body can be assigned with more
pressures. To avoid a multiple inclusion of one water body - or its length/area - in the
statistics, which can be misleading, every aggregated pressure was included only once.
Example: if the water body was assigned with 1.1.2 Point - UWWT_10000 and 1.3 Point IPPC plants (EPRTR), the aggregated point source pressure was included only once.
For pressures from diffuse and point sources, both the highest level pressure (e.g. Diffuse
Source) and lower level pressure (e.g. Diffuse – Agricultural) are given for some bodies.
Specifically it concerns 7 water bodies in France for point sources and 1750 bodies in
Sweden and 4 in France for diffuse sources. This also needed to be taken into account for
the statistics.
Each water body can have up to 8 aggregated pressures. Therefore, if the share of diffuse
point sources in natural lakes is 54% and in heavily modified lakes 34%, it does not
necessarily mean that only 54% (or 34%) of the bodies have a diffuse source or that diffuse
sources affect significantly lower share of heavily modified and artificial lakes then natural
ones. In reality, diffuse sources affect 85% of natural lakes an 77% heavily modified an
artificial lakes, but for the latter category they occur in 74% of bodies simultaneously, which
means that the total share of diffuse sources gets significantly lower.
The shares of surface water bodies with or without pressures are different in individual
countries as well as in natural or heavily modified and artificial bodies (especially in lakes).
Some countries reported significant pressures only for water bodies with less then good
status (Austria, Belgium, most of Finland, Greece and Lithuania). All other countries reported
pressures also in bodies with good status (except for Slovakia which had not reported any
significant pressure). Still, in a large number of water bodies with less then good status no
significant pressure was reported (Greece and Lithuania).
Morphology should be significant pressures for all heavily modified and artificial water
bodies. About 21% of rivers and one half of natural lakes do not report any significant
pressure, while in heavily modified and artificial rivers it is only 9% and HM and A lakes 20%
with no significant pressure - see Figures 6 a, b and 7 a, b. The highest share of natural
rivers with no significant pressure was reported by Finland (65%), Greece (59%) and
Lithuania 50%), but all the countries have a large share of HM and A rivers without any
pressures as well. The situation in lakes is similar: the highest share of natural of lakes with
no significant pressure was reported by Austria (cca100%), Bulgaria (100%), Finland (83%),
Lithuania (70%), UK (62%) and Germany (38%). However all mentioned countries except the
UK have a large share of heavily modified and artificial lakes without pressures (39 – 79%) –
see Figures 8a, b and 9a, b. It indicates that only the UK reported enough pressures and the
low proportion of freshwater bodies with significant pressures in other countries can be
affected by missing information.
All other outputs are more likely to be affected by the assessment and reporting
methodologies (incl. data gaps) than by natural characteristics and anthropogenic activities
within the countries. It can be demonstrated by the fact that e.g. Austria, Bulgaria, Lithuania,
Germany and France reported on the average 1 - 1,5 pressures in every heavily modified
and artificial lake with at least one significant pressure, whereas Sweden, Finland or the
Netherlands reported 2 – 3,4 pressures in every heavily modified and artificial lake.
9%
23%
77%
91%
Natural rivers with pressures
HM and A rivers with pressures
Natural rivers without presures
HM and A rivers without presures
Figure 6a, b: Natural rivers, HM and A rivers with and without pressures
22%
50%
50%
78%
Natural lakes with pressures
HM and A lakes with pressures
Natural lakes without presures
HM and A lakes without presures
Figure 7a, b: Natural lakes and HM and A lakes with and without pressures
100%
100%
80%
80%
60%
60%
40%
40%
20%
20%
AT BE BG CZ DE FI FR GR LT NL SE SK UK
0,0
29,3
2,0
4,7
2,2
1,0
2,6
14,9
3,2
52,0
5,4
2,0
0%
3,7
70,4
18,0
0,1
77,4
12,0
10,5
26,3
214,9
74,2
15,3
0,5
20,1
27,6
0%
AT BE BG CZ DE FI FR GR LT NL SE SK UK
Natural rivers without presures
HM and A rivers without presures
Natural rivers with pressures
HM and A rivers with pressures
Figure 8a, b: Natural rivers, HM and A rivers with and without pressures by countries
Note: Numbers below columns represent length of rivers in thousands of km
Slovakia reported no pressures.
100%
100%
80%
80%
60%
60%
40%
40%
20%
20%
AT BE BG CZ DE FI FR GR LT NL SK SE UK
1,25
5,03
0,00
3,04
4,00
0,21
1,05
1,57
0,40
0,25
0,07
0,04
0%
0,04
0,68
24,16
0,00
0,00
0,68
17,26
0,91
26,48
2,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,89
0%
AT BE BG CZ DE FI FR GR LT NL SK SE UK
Natural lakes without presures
HM and A lakes without presures
Natural lakes with pressures
HM and A lakes with pressures
Figure 9a, b and c: Natural lakes, HM and A lakes with and without pressures by countries
Note: Numbers below columns represent area of lakes in thousands km 2
Slovakia reported no lakes. Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and the Netherlands have no or
hardly any natural lakes.
Apart from a different natural environment (which determines the vulnerability of a water
body towards pressures) and the extent of anthropogenic activities, the total share of diffuse
and point pressures in individual countries or RBDs is affected (often more significantly) by
the different methodology of determining significant pressures, different understanding of
what is a significant pressure, number of bodies in a less then good status, and the quality of
reporting.
Enumeration list of SW pressures
1 Point Source
2 Diffuse Source
3 Water Abstraction
4 Water flow regulations and morphological
alterations of surface water
5 River management
6. Transitional and coastal water management
7 Other morphological alterations
8 Other Pressures
1.1 Point - UWWT_General
1.1.1 Point - UWWT_2000
1.1.2 Point - UWWT_10000
1.1.3 Point - UWWT_15000
1.1.4 Point - UWWT_150000
1.1.5 Point - UWWT_150000PLUS
1.2 Point - Storm Overflows
1.3 Point - IPPC plants (EPRTR)
1.4 Point - Non IPPC
1.5 Point - Other
2.1 Diffuse - Urban run off
2.2 Diffuse - Agricultural
2.3 Diffuse - Transport and infrastructure
2.4 Diffuse - Abandoned industrial sites
2.5 Diffuse - Releases from facilities not
connected to sewerage network
2.6 Diffuse - Other
3.1 Abstraction - Agriculture
3.2 Abstraction - Public Water Supply
3.3 Abstraction - Manufacturing
3.4 Abstraction - Electricity cooling
3.5 Abstraction - Fish farms
3.6 Abstraction - Hydro-energy not cooling
3.7 Abstraction - Quarries
3.8 Abstraction - Navigation
3.9 Abstraction - Water transfer
3.10 Abstraction - Other
4.1 FlowMorph - Groundwater recharge
4.2 FlowMorph - Hydroelectric dam
4.3 FlowMorph - Water supply reservoir
4.4 FlowMorph - Flood defence dams
Aggregated SW pressures
Point Source
Diffuse Source
Water Abstraction
Water flow regulations and morphological
alterations of surface water
River management
Transitional and coastal water
management
Other morphological alterations
Other Pressures
Point Source
Point Source
Point Source
Point Source
Point Source
Point Source
Point Source
Point Source
Point Source
Point Source
Diffuse Source
Diffuse Source
Diffuse Source
Diffuse Source
Diffuse Source
Diffuse Source
Water Abstraction
Water Abstraction
Water Abstraction
Water Abstraction
Water Abstraction
Water Abstraction
Water Abstraction
Water Abstraction
Water Abstraction
Water Abstraction
Water flow regulations and morphological
alterations of surface water
Water flow regulations and morphological
alterations of surface water
Water flow regulations and morphological
alterations of surface water
Water flow regulations and morphological
alterations of surface water
4.5 FlowMorph - Water Flow Regulation
4.6 FlowMorph - Diversions
4.7 FlowMorph - Locks
4.8 FlowMorph - Weirs
5.1 RiverManagement - Physical alteration of
channel
5.2 RiverManagement - Engineering activities
5.3 RiverManagement - Agricultural
enhancement
5.4 RiverManagement - Fisheries enhancement
5.5 RiverManagement - Land infrastructure
5.6 RiverManagement - Dredging
6.1 TRACManagement - Estuarine/coastal
dredging
6.2 TRACManagement - Marine constructions
6.3 TRACManagement - Land reclamation
6.4 TRACManagement - Coastal sand
suppletion (safety)
6.5 TRACManagement - Tidal barrages
7.1 OtherMorph - Barriers
7.2 OtherMorph - c
8.1 OtherPressures - Litter/fly tipping
8.2 OtherPressures - Sludge disposal to sea
8.3 OtherPressures - Exploitation/removal of
animals/plants
8.4 OtherPressures - Recreation
8.5 OtherPressures - Fishing
8.6 OtherPressures - Introduced species
8.7 OtherPressures - Introduced disease
8.8 OtherPressures - Climate change
8.9 OtherPressures - Land drainage
8.10 OtherPressures- Other
Water flow regulations and morphological
alterations of surface water
Water flow regulations and morphological
alterations of surface water
Water flow regulations and morphological
alterations of surface water
Water flow regulations and morphological
alterations of surface water
River management
River management
River management
River management
River management
River management
Transitional and coastal water
management
Transitional and coastal water
management
Transitional and coastal water
management
Transitional and coastal water
management
Transitional and coastal water
management
Other morphological alterations
Other morphological alterations
Other Pressures
Other Pressures
Other Pressures
Other Pressures
Other Pressures
Other Pressures
Other Pressures
Other Pressures
Other Pressures
Other Pressures
Table 1 Aggregated pressures in surface waters
References
DIRECTIVE 2000/60/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 23
October 2000 Establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy
POLICY SUMMARY to Guidance Document No 3 Analysis of Pressures and Impacts
Guidance Document No. 3 Analysis of Pressures and Impacts
Guidance Document No. 21 Guidance for reporting under the Water Framework Directive
Annual nitrogen load from diffuse sources per km2 of RBDs