The terminology of river restoration potential and a review of the determination methods

Authors

  • Tímea Katalin Erdei Szent István University, Department of Landscape Protection and Reclamation 1118 Budapest, Villányi út 29-43. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7256-5025

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56617/tl.3489

Keywords:

watercourse, rehabilitation, restoration opportunities, methodological summary, literature review

Abstract

Due to the river regulation works carried out in Hungary and the unfavorable impacts of human activities in the river landscapes, river restorations that take into account nature conservation, landscape protection, recreation and aesthetic purposes are becoming increasingly important. Several methodologies have been developed in recent decades to establish restorations, which assess both the need for restoration (condition of the rivers) and the possibilities for restoration (site suitability and limiting factors). In the present study, my aim is to collect these studies and to review the concept and methods of determining restoration potential, based on domestic and foreign literature. As a result of the research, a total of 41 methodologies for determining restoration potential were analyzed. During the review of the articles, I analyzed the scale and area of the study sites, the main field of expertise, the stated goals, the applied evaluation and analysis methods, and the evaluation aspects that were taken into account. Restoration potential means more than assessing the condition of the river for most of the methods reviewed. In determining restoration potential, the most common aim is to identify areas for restoration (based on need and suitability) and/or to prioritize areas for restoration (based on need and potential). The reviewed methods were mostly related to the achievement of ecological restoration targets, with a total of 68% setting ecological restoration targets, 63% geomorphological restoration targets, and 33% hydrological restoration targets. The reviewed methods for determining the restoration potential focused on river reaches, examining areas of different widths - floodplain, riparian corridor or riverbank and riverbed; but also, several studies have examined whole river basin or local area units. Among the evaluation aspects, the examination of land use, land cover, hydrological, geomorphological, ecological conditions and limiting factors appeared in most of the methods. Specifically, landscape architecture aspects appeared in a small part of the methods, such as aesthetic aspects, unique landscape values and landscape structure. It can be stated that the analyzed researches aimed to determine the restoration potential of rivers primarily on the rural river reaches, however, it is becoming increasingly important to determine the restoration potential of the urban rivers.

Author Biography

  • Tímea Katalin Erdei, Szent István University, Department of Landscape Protection and Reclamation 1118 Budapest, Villányi út 29-43.

    erdeitimi@gmail.com

References

IV. Nemzeti Természetvédelmi Alapterv. A természetvédelmi szakpolitika startégiája 2015–2020. Magyar Közlöny 2015(83): 7794–7891.

Ahn, S., Kim, S. 2017: Assessment of watershed health, vulnerability and resilience for determining protection and restoration Priorities. Environmental Modelling & Software 122: 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.03.014

Adorján, A., Pecze A., Szilágyi, K. 2019: ‘Brown’ is the New ‘Green’: Post-industrial sites as potential in the development of the green infrastructure on the riverfront of Budapest, Hungary. Proceedings of the Fábos Conference on Landscape and Greenway Planning. 6: Article 9.

Báthoryné Nagy I.R. 2007: Kisvízfolyások tájrehabilitációjának rendezési elvei és módszere. Doktori (PhD) értekezés. Budapesti Corvinus Egyetem, Tájépítészet és Döntéstámogató rendszerek Doktori Iskola, Budapest.

Báthoryné Nagy I. R. 2009: Patakmenti tájak alakítása tájépítész szemmel. 4D Tájépítészeti és Kertművészeti Folyóirat 14: 26–33.

Bartley, R., Rutherfurd, I. 2005: Re-evaluation of the wave model as a tool for quantifying the geomorphic recovery potential of streams disturbed by sediment slugs. Geomorphology 64: 221–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2004.07.005

Beechie, T.J., Pollock, M.M., Baker, S. 2008: Channel incision, evolution and potential recovery in the Walla Walla and Tucannon River basins, northwestern USA. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 33: 784– 800. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.1578

Bernhardt, E.S., Palmer, M.A., Allan, J.D., Alexander, G., Barnas, K., Brooks, S., Carr, J., Clayton, S., Dahm, C., Follstad-Shah, J., Galat, D., Gloss, S., Goodwin, P., Hart, D., Hassett, B., Jenkinson, R., Katz, S., Kondolf, G.M., Lake, P.S., Lave, R., Meyer, J.L., O’Donnell, T.K., Pagano, L., Powell, B., Sudduth, E. 2005: Synthesizing US river restoration efforts. Science 308: 636–637. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1109769

Bernhardt, E.S., Palmer, M.A. 2007: Restoring streams in an urbanizing world. Freshwater Biology 52: 738–751. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2427.2006.01718.x

Boitsidis, A.J., Gurnell, A.M., Scott, M., Petts, G.E., Armitage, P.D. 2006: A decision support system for identifying the habitat quality and rehabilitation potential of urban rivers. Water and Environment Journal 20: 130–140. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-6593.2005.00005.x

Boulton, A.J. 1999: An overview of river health assessment: philosophies, practice, problems and prognosis. Freshwater Biology 41: 469–479. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2427.1999.00443.x

Braioni, M.G., Villani, M.C., Braioni, A., Salmoiraghi, G. (2012): Integrating habitat conservation with amenity and recreational uses along an urban stretch of the Adige River, Northern Italy. In: Boon, P.J., Raven, P.J. (eds.): River Conservation and Management. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., pp. 345–355. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119961819.ch28

Brooks, A.P., Brierley, G.J. 2004: Framing realistic river rehabilitation targets in light of altered sediment supply and transport relationships: lessons from East Gippsland, Australia. Geomorphology 58: 107–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-555X(03)00227-7

Comín, F.A., Sorando, R., Darwiche-Criado, N., García, M., Masip, A. 2014: A protocol to prioritize wetland restoration and creation for waterquality improvement in agricultural watersheds. Ecological Engineering 66: 10–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2013.04.059

Corsair, H.J., Ruch, J.B., Zheng, P.Q., Hobbs, B.F., Koonce, J.F. 2009: Multicriteria decision analysis of stream restoration: potential and examples. Group Decision and Negotiation 18: 387–417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-008-9148-4

EU Biodiverzitás Stratégiája: A Bizottság közleménye az Európai Parlamentnek, a Tanácsnak, az Európai Gazdasági és Szociális Bizottságnak és a Régiók Bizottságának – A 2030-ig tartó időszakra szóló uniós biodiverzitási stratégia. Hozzuk vissza a természetet az életünkbe! (https://ec.europa.eu/)

Francis, R.A., Hoggart, S.P.G., Gurnell, A.M., Coode, C. 2008: Meeting the challenges of urban river habitat restoration: developing a methodology for the River Thames through central London. Area 40(4): 435–445. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4762.2008.00826.x

Fryirs, K., Brierley, G. 2000: A geomorphic approach to the identification of river recovery potential. Physical Geography 21(3): 244–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723646.2000.10642708

Fryirs, K.A., Brierley, G.J. 2016: Assessing the geomorphic recovery potential of rivers: forecasting future trajectories of adjustment for use in management. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews-Water 3(5): 727–748. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1158

Gregory, K.J., Benito, G., Downs, P.W. 2008: Applying fluvial geomorphology to river channel management: Background for progress towards a palaeohydrology protocol. Geomorphology 98: 153–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2007.02.031

Guida-Johnson, B., Zuleta, G.A. 2019: Environmental degradation and opportunities for riparian rehabilitation in a highly urbanized watershed: the Matanza-Riachuelo in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Wetlands Ecology and Management 27: 243–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-019-09656-5

Hanna, D.E.L., Tomscha, S.A., Dallaire, C.O., Bennett, E.M. 2017: A review of riverine ecosystem service quantification: Research gaps and recommendations. Journal of Applied Ecology 55: 1299–1311. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13045

Hauer, F.R., Lorang, M.S. 2004: River regulation, decline of ecological resources, and potential for restoration in a semi-arid lands river in the western USA. Aquatic Science 66: 388–401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00027-004-0724-7

Hein, T., Schwarz, U., Habersack, H., Nichersu, I., Preiner, S., Willby, N., Weigelhofer, G. 2016: Current status and restoration options for floodplains along the Danube River. Science of the Total Environment 543: 778–790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.09.073

Hohensinner, S., Jungwirth, M., Muhar, S., Habersack, H. 2005: Historical analyses: a foundation for developing and evaluating river-type specific restoration programs. International Journal of River Basin Management 3(2): 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/15715124.2005.9635248

Horvath, E.K., Christensen, J.R., Mehaffey, M.H., Neale, A.C. 2017: Building a potential wetland restoration indicator for the contiguous United States. Ecological Indicators 83: 463–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.07.026

Hua, Y., Cui, B., He, W., Cai, Y. 2016: Identifying potential restoration areas of freshwater wetlands in ariver delta. Ecological Indicators 71: 438–448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.07.036

Hulse, D., Gregory, S. 2004: Integrating resilience into floodplain restoration. Urban Ecosystems 7: 295–314. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:UECO.0000044041.94705.52

Jacobson, R.B., Janke, T.P., Skold, J.J. 2011: Hydrologic and geomorphic considerations in restoration of riverfloodplain connectivity in a highly altered river system, Lower Missouri River, USA. Wetlands Ecology and Management 19: 295–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-011-9217-3

Kapitány B. (szerk.) 2015: Demográfiai Fogalomtár. KSH Népességtudományi Kutatóintézet, Budapest. p. 78.

Kamp, U., Binder, W., Hölzl, K. 2007: River habitat monitoring and assessment in Germany. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 127: 209–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-006-9274-x

Kauffman, J.B., Beschta, R.L., Otting, N., Lytjen, D. 1997: An ecological perspective of riparian and stream restoration in the Western United States. Fisheries 22(5): 12–24. https://doi.org/10.1577/1548-8446(1997)022<0012:AEPORA>2.0.CO;2

Kincses B., Nagy Gy. 2016: A szegedi partfal-rekonstrukció komplexitás és nyilvánosság szempontú vizsgálata, Földrajzi Közlemények 140 (2): 168–181.

Kurwadkar, S., Lambert, B., Beran, L., Johnson, J., Marsh, J., Hibbler-Albus, K., Lambert, D., Kwon, M. 2020: Evaluation of ecological, stressor and social factors for the prioritization and restoration of Trinity River Basin watershed. Wetlands Ecology and Management 28(4): 623–639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-020-09736-x

Lóczy D. 2011: A Kapos árterének hidromorfológiai és tájökológiai értékelése. MTA doktori értekezés, Pécs. p. 195.

Lóczy, D., Dezső, J., Czigány, Sz., Gyenizse, P., Pirkhoffer, E., Halász, A. 2014: Rehabilitation potential of the Drava river floodplain in Hungary. Water Resources and Wetlands, Conference Proceedings: 11–13.

Macfarlane, W.W., McGinty, C.M., Laub, B.G, Gifford, S.J. 2017: High-resolution riparian vegetation mapping to prioritize conservation and restoration in an impaired desert river. Restoration Ecology 25: 333–341. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12425

MTA Ökológiai Kutatóközpont, Ormos Imre Alapítvány 2017: Zöldinfrastruktúra-hálózat fejlesztése. Budapest. p. 158.

Nagy I.R., Novák T.J. 2004: A folyóvíz rehabilitáció nemzetközi gyakorlata és a hazai megjelenése. II. Magyar Földrajzi Konferencia absztraktkötet, Szeged. p. 11.

Nagy I.R., Novák T.J. 2007: A hazai vízfolyás-helyreállítások fogalomhasználatáról. Hidrológiai Közlöny 87(1): 40–44.

Norton, D.J., Wickham, J.D., Wade, T.G., Kunert, K., Thomas, J.V., Zeph, P. 2009: A method for comparative analysis of recovery potential in impaired waters restoration planning. Environmental Management 44: 356–368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-009-9304-x

O’Brien, G.R., Wheaton, J., Fryirs, K., McHugh, P., Bouwes, N., Brierley, G., Jordan, C. 2017: A geomorphic assessment to inform strategic stream restoration planning in the Middle Fork John Day Watershed, Oregon, USA. Journal of Maps 13(2): 369–381. https://doi.org/10.1080/17445647.2017.1313787

O’Neill, M.P., Schmidt, J.C., Dobrowolski, J.P., Hawkins, C.P., Neale, C.M.U. 1997: Identifying sites for riparian wetland restoration: application of a model to the Upper Arkansas River Basin. Restoration Ecology 5(4S): 85–102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-100X.1997.00085.x

Ouyang, N.L., Lu, S.L., Wu, B.F., Zhu, J.J., Wang, H. 2011: Wetland restoration suitability evaluation at the watershed scale – A case study in upstream of the Yongdinghe River. Procedia Environmental Sciences 10: 1926–1932. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2011.09.302

Pan, B., Yuan, J., Zhang, X., Wang, Z., Chen, J., Lu, J., Yang, W., Li, Z., Zhao, N., Xu, M. 2016: A review of ecological restoration techniques in fluvial rivers. International Journal of Sediment Research 31: 110–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsrc.2016.03.001

Russell, G.D., Hawkins, C.P., O’Neill, M.P. 1997: The role of GIS in selecting sites for riparian restoration based on hydrology and land use. Restoration Ecology 5(4S): 56–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-100X.1997.00056.x

Qu, Y., Luo, C., Zhang, H., Ni, H., Xu, N. 2018: Modeling the wetland restorability based on natural and anthropogenic impacts in Sanjiang Plain, China. Ecological Indicators 91: 429–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.04.008

Schoor, M.M., Wolfert, H.P., Maas, G.J., Middelkoop, H., Lambeek, J.J.P. 1999: Potential for floodplain rehabilitation based on historical maps and present-day processes along the River Rhine, the Netherlands. In: Marriott, S.B., Alexander, J. (eds.): Floodplains: Interdisciplinary Approaches Special Publications 163. Geological Society, London. pp. 123–137. https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1999.163.01.10

Schwarz U. 2014: A Mura–Dráva–Duna határon átnyúló UNESCO Bioszféra Rezervátum élőhelyrehabilitációs lehetőségeinek vizsgálata a folyami és ártéri területeken. Vezetői összefoglaló, WWF Ausztria – FLUVIUS, Bécs. p. 16.

Shi, S., Chang, Y., Wang, G., Li, Z., Hua, Y., Liu, M., Li, Y., Li, B., Zong, M., Huang, W. 2020: Planning for the wetland restoration potential based on the viability of the seed bank and the land-use change trajectory in the Sanjiang Plain of China. Science of the Total Environment 733: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139208

Sinshaw, T.A., Surbeck, C.Q. 2018: Impacts of social indicators on assessing the recovery potential of impaired watersheds. Journal of Environmental Management 219: 316–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.04.073

Surian, N., Ziliani, L., Comiti, F., Lenzi, M.A., Mao, L. 2009: Channel adjusments and alteration of sediment fluxes in gravel-bed rivers of North-Eastern Italy: Potentials and limitations for channel recovery. River Research and Application 25: 551–567. https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.1231

Vízgyűjtő-gazdálkodási Terv: A Duna-vízgyűjtő magyarországi része, Vízgyűjtő-gazdálkodási terv – 2015. (https://www.vizugy.hu/)

Víz Keretirányelv: Az Európai Parlament és a Tanács 2000/60/EK Irányelve (2000. október 23.) a vízpolitika terén a közösségi fellépés kereteinek meghatározásáról (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/)

White, D., Fennessy, S. 2005: Modeling the suitability of wetland restoration potential at the watershed scale. Ecological Engineering 24: 359–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2005.01.012

WWF International 2010: Assessment of the restoration potential along the Danube and main tributaries. Working paper for the Danube River Basin. Final Draft. World-Wide Fund for Nature, Vienna. p. 59.

Yeakley, J.A., Ervin, D., Chang, H., Granek, E.F., Dujon, V., Shandas, V., Brown, D. 2016: Ecosystem services of streams and rivers. In: Gilvear D.J., Greenwood M.T., Thoms M.C., Wood P.J. (eds.): River Science: Research and management for the 21st century. First Edition. John Wiley & Sons. p. 416.

Zhang, B., Yin, L., Zhang, S., Liang, K. 2015: Estimation on wetland loss and its restoration potential in Modern Yellow River Delta, Shandong Province of China. Chinese Journal of Population Resources and Environment 13(4): 365–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/10042857.2015.1111575

Zuo, Q., Hao, M., Zhang, Z., Jiang, L. 2020: Assessment of the Happy River Index as an integrated index of river health and human well-being: A case study of the Yellow River, China. Water 12(11): 3064. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12113064

Published

2020-12-09

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

The terminology of river restoration potential and a review of the determination methods. (2020). JOURNAL OF LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY | TÁJÖKOLÓGIAI LAPOK , 18(2), 113-125. https://doi.org/10.56617/tl.3489

Similar Articles

11-20 of 67

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.