Final Report Summary - BALTICFLOWS (Monitoring and management of flowing rain water in Baltic Sea catchment areas)
Executive Summary:
The BalticFlows project concerned rainwater monitoring and management in Baltic Sea catchment areas. Rainwater forms streams and rivers, and in urban environments, heavy rainfall can amount to stormwater and floods. Over the years, much of this rainwater ends up in the sea. In Northern Europe, the Baltic Sea conceals a history of water quality from streams, rivers and urban runoff in catchment areas. Encircled by a mix of Nordic, Central and Eastern European countries, the Baltic Sea is at the mercy of a diversity of national practices and policies. The BalticFlows project aimed at laying a foundation for development of new capacities and policies for effectively monitoring and managing the quality and quantities of rainwater moving from one place to the next. The project focused on streams, rivers and cities in Baltic Sea catchment areas, not on the sea itself. The strategies, knowledge and expertise created during the project can be exploited elsewhere in the Union and in other global regions. The BalticFlows project supported the development of research-driven clusters in each region; enhanced capacities in diffuse load monitoring and urban stormwater management will lead to new business opportunities in the global market for water monitoring and management know-how and solutions. In the Baltic Sea Region, 16 project partners from five European Member States – Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia and Sweden – participated in the project, in addition to one project partner from the United Kingdom specialised in the Chinese environmental sector.
The BalticFlows project produced 29 deliverables, including key deliverables: D2.1 Report on regional capacities in the BSR (248 p., 141 respondents, 162 technologies); D2.2 Report on project-wide workshops (121 p.); D2.3 Report on networking with regional stakeholders and contingency plan (78 p.); D3.3 Analysis of potential regions for mentoring in urban stormwater mgmt (65 p.); D3.4 Report on demand and challenges for miniaturised water monitoring technology in urban catchments (33 p.); D3.5 Final directory of RTD offer and demand in urban stormwater management (12 p., 136 entries); D3.6 Final report on new knowledge on urban stormwater management (119 p.); D4.2 Final report on new knowledge on water monitoring via citizen activity (98 p., 813 respondents); D5.5 Final directory of RTD offer and demand in diffuse load monitoring (5 p., 117 entries); D5.6 Final report on new knowledge on diffuse load monitoring (100 p); D6.1 Joint Action Plan (72 p.), and D7.2 Report on dissemination activities (73 p.).
The BalticFlows project organised 15 formal events in Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Germany, Poland, Spain and Sweden, including key events: Project-wide workshop 1, Tallinn, Estonia (M15); JAP release event, Brussels, Belgium (M19); Water monitoring mentoring event, Gdansk, Poland (M25); Project-wide workshop 2, Uppsala, Sweden (M27); Urban stormwater management mentoring event, Barcelona, Spain (M31), and the Open seminar, Turku, Finland (M33). In addition, there were numerous meetings, workshops and seminars in each participating region involving local stakeholders.
The project successfully completed all work packages, activities, milestones and deliverables as specified in Annex 1, within the given budget and timeframe.
Project Context and Objectives:
The BalticFlows project concerned rainwater monitoring and management in Baltic Sea catchment areas. Rainwater forms streams and rivers, and in urban environments, heavy rainfall can amount to stormwater and floods. Over the years, much of this rainwater ends up in the sea. In Northern Europe, the Baltic Sea conceals a history of water quality from streams, rivers and urban runoff in catchment areas. Encircled by a mix of Nordic, Central and Eastern European countries, the Baltic Sea is at the mercy of a diversity of national practices and policies. The BalticFlows project aimed at laying a foundation for development of new capacities and policies for effectively monitoring and managing the quality and quantities of rainwater moving from one place to the next. The project focused on streams, rivers and cities in Baltic Sea catchment areas, not on the sea itself. The strategies, knowledge and expertise created during the project can be exploited elsewhere in the Union and in other global regions. The BalticFlows project supported the development of research-driven clusters in each region; enhanced capacities in diffuse load monitoring and urban stormwater management will lead to new business opportunities in the global market for water monitoring and management know-how and solutions. In the Baltic Sea Region, 16 project partners from five European Member States – Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia and Sweden – participated in the project, in addition to one project partner from the United Kingdom specialised in the Chinese environmental sector.
The overall objectives of the BalticFlows project were designed to serve two top-level targets: (a) to bring forth the technological and economic vision enabling European regions to achieve world-class excellence and a sustainable competitive edge in the rainwater monitoring and management sector, and (b) to fulfil the objectives of the coordinating action, enhancing the effectiveness of research-driven clusters in participating regions, and thus paving a smooth path towards smart specialisation, via a common trans-regional vision, strategy and realistic implementation plan. In order to achieve real-world results, item b must follow item a; global competitiveness must be the first priority, as there is no point in interregional collaboration if the regions lack the prerequisites for potential competitiveness.
The specific objectives of the BalticFlows project were:
1. Greater insight into the opportunities and challenges of water monitoring methods, techniques and technologies, resulting in a European research agenda for fostering new easy-to-access (cost-effective, automated and user-friendly) water quality monitoring solutions for non-expert use;
2. Increased understanding on leveraging citizen activity in grass-root level water quality monitoring, resulting in a methodology for establishing a pan-European water monitoring participation and education scheme for citizens;
3. New strategies for monitoring diffuse loads in streams and rivers, based upon new water quality monitoring technologies and citizen participation based water monitoring schemes;
4. Comprehensive knowledge on best practices in the monitoring and management of urban stormwater in Baltic Sea catchment areas, resulting in new policies for effective urban stormwater management;
5. A network of five research-driven European clusters, working together with an international support network, and evolving towards smart specialisation regions in the fields of rainwater monitoring and management, linked to international supporting partners, and
6. World-class research and sustainable, profitable business in the rainwater monitoring and management sector in the research-driven clusters, via exporting expertise and solutions to European and international regions in need of effective methods and tools for water preservation.
Project Results:
The main S&T results and foregrounds of the BalticFlows project fall into two categories: i) project deliverables and ii) project events. These are described in the following &T Sections 1 and 2.
S&T SECTION 1. PROJECT DELIVERABLES
In total, the BalticFlows project produced 29 deliverables, which are described in the following sections.
WP1: PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION
Work package 1 produced nine deliverables:
- D1.1 Project progress and management report 1;
- D1.2 Project progress and management report 2;
- D1.3 Minutes of PMB meeting 1;
- D1.4 Minutes of PMB meeting 2;
- D1.5 Minutes of PMB meeting 3;
- D1.6 Minutes of PMB meeting 4;
- D1.7 Minutes of PMB meeting 5;
- D1.8 Minutes of PMB meeting 6, and
- D1.9 Minutes of PMB meeting 7.
These deliverables were administrative by nature, and thus are not explained here in further detail.
WP2: DEVELOPMENT OF RAINWATER MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT CLUSTER IN THE BALTIC SEA REGION
Work package 2 produced three deliverables:
- D2.1 Report on regional capacities in the BSR;
- D2.2 Report on project-wide workshops 1 and 2, and
- D2.3 Report on networking with regional stakeholders and contingency plan.
*** Summary of D2.1 Report on regional capacities in the BSR (248 pages).
The purpose of D2.1 was to present the project's findings on regional capacities and capabilities in the fields of rainwater management and water monitoring in the Baltic Sea Region. A survey was conducted to give an overview of organisations in the Baltic Sea Region that are working on the topics of rainwater management and water monitoring. A total of 310 organisations were contacted in Tallinn, Estonia; Riga, Latvia; Turku, Finland; Uppsala, Sweden, and Hamburg, Germany, of which 141 responded to the survey.
According to the survey, most respondents were micro-organisations (76), more than 20 years old (73) and had no idea of their budget (63). Respondents were typically involved in several disciplines in the general field of water, foremostly: water treatment (126); wastewater related technologies (123); stormwater management (115); modelling and prognoses (113); stormwater quality or quantity measurement (106); stormwater collection (91), and precipitation monitoring (78). Respondents also operated in several different roles: investigating (209), designing (154), developing (124), creating policies or legislation (75), buying (74), and selling (59).
In the analysis, a total of 162 relevant technologies were identified. The most commonly offered technologies were: stormwater quality or quantity measurement (34); stormwater management (29); modelling and prognoses (27); water treatment (16); consulting, seminars and events (12); wastewater related technologies (8); data management (7), and stormwater collection (7).
In development activities, respondents indicated as their main strengths:
- skills and competences of employees;
- internal functioning of organisation;
- availability of skilled local professionals and competence, and
- usage of the most up-to-date technology,
and the main weaknesses were:
- lack of financial means, and
- credit policies in banks.
In export activities, respondents indicated as their main strengths:
- communication in export country and language skills;
- international experience;
- calibration of product or service to fit demand of the export market, and
- competence in sales,
and the main weaknesses were:
- coping with competition, laws and regulations, bureaucracy and the economic situation in export markets, and
- lack of knowledge on preferences of export markets and their consumers.
*** Summary of D2.2 Report on project-wide workshops 1 and 2 (121 pages)
D2.2 is a report on two project-wide workshops implemented as part of WP2. The first workshop took place in Tallinn, Estonia on December 2-4, 2014 and the second workshop in Uppsala, Sweden on December 1-3, 2015.
The report consists of two main topics: i) a description of workshops 1 and 2 and ii) the annexes. The topics are structured by their main objectives; related actions and activities that were carried out are listed under each objective. The annexes include lists of invitees and participants, as well as the agendas, initiatives and slides presented at the workshops.
A. Project-wide workshop 1, Tallinn, Estonia
One of the main objectives of project-wide workshop 1 was to find new and develop existing common initiatives and joint activities. During the workshop, existing initiatives were introduced by the stakeholders from Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia and Sweden. Later, the initiatives were scattered in the presentation hall and participants who were interested in certain topics, could form dynamic workgroups to identify problems or set common objectives, plan joint actions, find partners and plan the usage of resources. Organisations were not restricted to one problem or objective and could participate in all the topics they were interested in. Overall, three new initiatives were set and seven existing initiatives were developed further. During the last two days of the workshop, the BalticFlows consortium also worked on the set initiatives collectively and planned further joint activities. BalticFlows members went through each initiative and discussed the possibilities and opportunities from each cluster or country.
B. Project-wide workshop 2, Uppsala, Sweden
Project-wide workshop 2 took place in Uppsala, Sweden as a three-day event.
The main goals of the workshop were:
i) to gather institutions and professionals from academia, private and public sectors to share experience, discuss best practices on stormwater management and diffuse load monitoring
ii) to facilitate the development of new international project initiatives on stormwater management and diffuse load monitoring
iii) to be informed about available EU funding opportunities in the water sector.
The first day comprised a BalticFlows partner meeting at Uppsala County Administrative Board. D2.2 focuses on the main activities carried on during the second and third day of the event, which were open to participants external to the BalticFlows project.
The second day of the event was devoted to a one-day workshop that took place in the facilities of the main building of Uppsala University. The activities proposed during the second day were open to participants out-side of the consortium. Altogether, more than 300 invitations were sent out9 to stakeholders and about 40 participated in the workshop10. The main goal of this event was to offer insights from the academic sector on stormwater management and diffuse load monitoring and an overview of the EU funding opportunities in the water sector.
The third day was again an open event, held at the Uppsala County Administrative Board facilities with the goal of facilitating networking amongst interested stakeholders and continuing the discussion items brought forth during the workshop on stormwater management and diffuse load monitoring.
*** Summary of D2.3 Report on networking with regional stakeholders and contingency plan (78 pages)
D2.3 is a report on regional networking and presents a contingency plan for the BalticFlows project. The introduction section gives a short overview of the project, its goals and the stakeholders and beneficiaries involved. The report is structured so that the first part focuses on regional networking and gives insight on networking activities that had been carried out in each participating region. The second part of the report introduces the contingency plan and gives an overview of activities that had been or were planned to be carried out, ensuring that work towards the objectives of BalticFlows will continue even beyond the formal project duration. In the final part of the report, there are appendices to help the reader to understand some specific parts of the report more thoroughly. This description focuses on the contingency plan; for details on the other sections, please see D2.3.
The report presents a plan to ensure that the overall vision developed during the BalticFlows project would be pursued beyond the project lifetime. The plan suggests formation of the "BalticFlows Association", consisting of official BalticFlows project partners and additional regional stakeholders. It would not be limited to existing regions and partners, and would also include other areas from the Baltic Sea Region. The contingency plan follows three steps: at first the goals are defined, after which the current situation is assessed, and finally an implementation plan is formulated.
The main goals for the BalticFlows Association would derive from the BalticFlows project and from knowledge gathered from project activities, serving as an overall vision for the Association:
i) to reduce the number of pollutants entering the Baltic Sea, thus improving the overall ecological state of the sea;
ii) to increase the Baltic Sea regions’ academia and public authorities innovation and research capacity with a focus on cross-border cooperation and exchange of know-how, and
iii) to increase the capacities of SMEs working in the field of rainwater monitoring and management through cooperation and joint research and marketing activities.
The logic of the BalticFlows Association is that in order to succeed in the global market, universities, public authorities and private companies in the Baltic Sea Region must come together to match the demand of large markets. Also, in order to achieve the goals, we need to first test and use the products and solutions in our own area, and by such means also reducing the number of pollutants entering the Baltic Sea.
For further details on the contingency plan and the envisioned BalticFlows Association, please see D2.3.
WP3: URBAN STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
Work package 3 produced six deliverables:
- D3.1 Interim directory of RTD offer/demand in urban stormwater mgmt;
- D3.2 Interim report on new knowledge on urban stormwater mgmt;
- D3.3 Analysis of potential regions for mentoring in urban stormwater mgmt;
- D3.4 Report on demand and challenges for miniaturised water monitoring technology in urban catchments;
- D3.5 Final directory of RTD offer/demand in urban stormwater mgmt, and
- D3.6 Final report on new knowledge on urban stormwater mgmt.
As D3.1 and D3.2 are interim reports, these are not described here.
*** Summary of D3.3 Analysis of potential regions for mentoring in urban stormwater mgmt (65 pages)
Since the project aim is to gather and analyse the best practices in urban stormwater management, one of its key objectives focused on evaluating the transferability of techniques by means of identifying the success factors and working principles of the best urban stormwater management practices. Therefore, the main aim of this D3.3 was to evaluate successful strategies used in the Baltic Sea Region (BSR) and other regions (countries outside BSR), and recommend which countries should be mentored.
The specific objectives of the report were:
i) to evaluate and identify the key working principles of the main types of urban decentralised stormwater management systems;
ii) to identify relevant parameters for adoption and transferability for these systems;
iii) to analyse the transferability potential of these systems and potential mentoring regions in the European Region with a special focus on the Baltic Sea Region, and
iv) to analysis the transferability potential of these systems and potential mentoring regions at worldwide level.
1. Potential European regions for mentoring
Europe as a geographical region shows a relatively high transferability potential for decentralised urban stormwater management systems because of the generalised high levels of annual precipitation. In addition, cities like Brussels (Belgium), Paris (France), London (England), Amsterdam (Netherlands), Copenhagen (Denmark), Dublin (Ireland), Warsaw (Poland), Riga (Latvia), Helsinki (Finland), and Stockholm (Sweden) may show high risk to present heavy rainfalls in the next 50 years. Furthermore, countries like Sweden, Norway, England, Switzerland, southern Germany, northern Italy and Austria show an overall low permeability. Therefore, this should entail difficulties to the implementation of infiltration systems for bioretention systems, bioswales and permeable pavements. Cities with more than 3-10% such as Zurich and Geneva (Switzerland), Salzburg (Austria); Lyon (France) and Turin (Italy) show a low transferability potential for bioswales.
In addition, some less developed regions in the European Union could benefit from lessons learned in developed countries and also improve their urban stormwater management. As a few examples, the report mentions Lithuania and Croatia as EU member states that should improve their stormwater management and could benefit from imported know-how and solutions.
2. Potential international regions for mentoring
The main potential mentoring areas at international level are:
a) South America, Eastern USA, Western Canada, Western Africa, Central America, Southeast Asia and Melanesia are identified as potential areas for transferability in terms of rain-fall distribution;
b) Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, some parts of India, Mexico and Iran are identified as potential regions for transferability in terms of reducing groundwater stress;
c) Relevant legislation in South Korea has a high transferability potential to the Baltic Sea Region and other EU regions. This country is very advanced in terms of cooperation with the private sector to develop green infrastructures (i.e. urban stormwater system is defined as a part of green infrastructure). Their experiences may be transferred to other countries in order to promote decentralised urban stormwater management systems;
d) Green roofs show potential to be transferred to USA. More than 15 federal funding sources exist for supporting the implementation of green infrastructure;
e) Based on GDP analysis, North America, Europe and Australia can be clearly distinguished as areas with high GDP levels. However, emerging economies may actually show the highest potential for implementation at international level.
*** Summary of D3.4 Report on demand and challenges for miniaturised water monitoring technology in urban catchments (33 pages)
One important component in the context of urban stormwater management is the water monitoring, which is considered an essential tool and basis foundation for water management in general. D3.4 focuses on one major aspect of water monitoring: water quality monitoring. Successful realisation of water quality measures depends on the effective development of water resource management programs. Therefore water quality analysis, which forms a base for the decision making process regarding water resource management, requires constant monitoring of the different water quality parameters.
The report undertakes an analysis of global needs and demands for miniaturised water quality monitoring, and outlines market opportunities in Europe. It also describes challenges for miniaturised water quality monitoring and presents technologies in place and under development. An extensive but non-exhaustive list of instruments and technologies can be found in Annex I of the report. The report concludes with an outlook on water quality monitoring in urban catchments.
A global review and analysis of demand and challenges of miniaturised water monitoring technologies and devices indicate rapid development and expansion of the field. Among the main drivers are water related legislation, climate change, availability of drinking water and prevention of health risks, high cost of currently used equipment, extensive water quality data processing, as well as technological advances in materials, electronics, computing and telecommunications systems. Experts point out advantages of miniaturisation of water quality monitoring devices such as reduction of production, maintenance and calibration costs, a possibility to merge various technologies for monitoring of different water parameters into a single system, reduction of time required to obtain, transfer and process measurement results. There is already a significant response to the needs for monitoring improvements and market opportunities are on the table.
However, there are also a number of challenges associated with development and usage of such devices. For example, currently, there are no broadly agreed international standards or developed methods that allow for large-scale, online, reliable and cost-effective data to be acquired, integrated and applied. Further technological development and improvement is required in the area of increasing the level of performance, reliability and robustness of monitoring devices.
The challenge in supervision and monitoring of undesired pollution substances in stormwater is growing at the same pace as cities expand. Natural paths of rainwater or wastewater are not only affected and changed by mega cities, but also by small cities with large hard covered ground areas for buildings or parking areas that force all precipitation into stormwater systems. Stormwater is normally separated from wastewater in developed countries, where wastewater cleaning is managed by sewage treatment plants. Stormwater is expected to contain less waste and is forwarded with less treatment into lakes or streams. However it is now proven that urban stormwater is a great risk for contamination of drinking water sources and to the ecological status of water bodies. Therefore, national and EU regulations are focusing on monitoring and early warning systems in this area. Since stormwater events can lead to a rapid pollution with numerous contaminants, there is a need for a fine grain warning system with realtime monitoring.
The cost of a high density monitoring system using today’s expensive sensors and analytic methods is extremely high. Most of experts agree that a possible solution must rely on miniaturised and low cost sensors that are communicating in real time with a central supervision and warning instance. Preferably these low cost sensors should also use wireless communication to reduce installation costs.
*** Summary of D3.5 Final directory of RTD offer and demand in urban stormwater management (136 entries, 12 pages)
In order to move towards a common goal and a successful strategy the field of urban stormwater management, a foundation of strong partners from the academic to public and private sectors is paramount. Current technological development and implementation in urban stormwater management across the Baltic has proven instrumental to demonstrate regional excellence while opening up golden opportunities for water innovation and market development.
Compiled around a specific listing of organisations with strong stormwater management and monitoring focus, the directory is an up-to-date inventory of key stakeholders from public, private and academic sectors consolidating five Baltic Flows regional networks in Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, and Sweden. As a communication tool, this directory offers opportunities for large and small organisations, industry, and SMEs, to share with an international community, their current research, products, practices, services, and areas of strength; and it presents a clear view of where the current demand and offer in urban stormwater management is concentrated. This directory is a contribution towards the development of a transnational vision of technological development and economic growth aimed at boosting innovation, competitiveness and smart specialisation potential in the field of urban stormwater management and monitoring.
The 136 listed organisations were classified into academic, public, and private sectors. Public sector organisations were mainly composed of local and regional authorities, water utility entities and governmental organisations. The group of private sector organisations included a range of SMEs, businesses providing engineering services as well as private-sector companies actively involved in technology development. The academic sector was composed of a mix of research institutions, universities of applied sciences and other research organisations with a water focus.
*** Summary of D3.6 Final report on new knowledge on urban stormwater management (119 pages)
D3.6 is a report offering a comprehensive overview of best practices and knowledge in the field of urban stormwater management (USWM) in the Baltic Sea Region, covering findings from Germany, Latvia, Finland, Sweden and Estonia. From a set of different perspectives, it provides its readers new knowledge in urban stormwater management and gives some recommendations for future economic, technical, and environmental development that can benefit and improve the current and future state of the Regions.
Insights on the current regional and global USWM technologies and best practices were collected from survey questionnaires, internal regional reports, and a literature review. The four most popular technologies identified in the region (i.e. green roof, porous pavement, bioretention basins, and bioswales) have been selected for further evaluation and applicability based on the characteristics of each technology and country-specific information which the BalticFlows partners provided. The significance of those USWM technologies has then been assessed from a strategic, a technological and a life-cycle oriented angle: i) through a SWOT analysis; ii) through a technological evaluation; and iii) by means of a life-cycle, i.e. holistic, assessment of a distinctive local case of two kinds of trench systems, a popular approach to manage large quantities of stormwater runoff.
The effectiveness of the implementation of methods and applied technologies was found highly dependent on site-specific conditions ranging from soil type; climatic, geographical, and typographical conditions of a given area. For example, technologies such as green roofs showed extensive development in the Hamburg region however with less acceptance in the region of Riga. The evaluation of green roofs technologies, for the purpose of this report, was based on the retention capacity of the systems with results showing positive outcomes ranging anywhere from 50-90 percent total stormwater retention per rain event. The other technologies analysed, i.e. porous pavements, bioretention systems and bioswales, demonstrated high retention and infiltration capacities contributing to the integration of decentralised Water Sensitive Urban Design methods and best management practices into the stormwater management agenda.
Results from an assessment conducted for trench technologies show that, under the preconditions of the analyses, plastic systems are superior to conventional gravel systems in the evaluated impact categories – one system consisted of gravel, surrounded by PP-geotextile, the other one of half-pipe plastic shells with holes. However, no conclusions can be drawn from these models as to whether decentralised management practices are more beneficial than centralised systems. As best management practices for water runoff control are site- and case-specific, so are the LCA results.
With regards to the urban context, continuous growth in urbanisation keeps creating challenges for implementing strategies that require additional space. For instance, in the country of Finland, there is a need for stormwater management practices to be implemented in dense urban cores. In this case, a combination of technologies and methods would need to be considered to effectively address space requirements on the ground needed for the installation of bioretention/bioswales systems.
Furthermore, successful implementation of stormwater technologies demonstrate the need for an integrative approach and utilisation of combined methods. That is, a single technology will more likely not solve issues concerning excessive runoff and flooding. To be effective, an inclusive approach and mix of technologies needs to be oriented towards solving specific urban stormwater problems. Cities are undergoing transformation in the way resources will need to be utilised in the future. There is an obvious need to shift from long-established conventional approaches towards innovative sustainable solutions. With this in mind, a common trend that was found in the sustainable approach to stormwater management relates to three main core benefits:
i) a more ‘natural’ water cycle;
ii) enhancement of water security through local source diversification, and
iii) water resource efficiency and reuse.
Political and regulatory frameworks also require that we take a closer look at the responsibilities and interests that are specific to each region and that differ from country to country – this as well as an analysis of the current state of the water management resources where participating regions show significant differences.
Further support for transnational capacity-building and exchange of best practices, has been carried out through the mapping of important knowledge networks and actors in RTD, finance and investment, highlighting regional opportunities, demands and needs. Economic factors have been addressed based on short and long term benefits and co-benefits through a cost-benefit analysis approach to planning whereas the availability of proper financial mechanisms that take into consideration private and public sectors is an area for further research.
WP4: WATER MONITORING VIA CITIZEN ACTIVITY
Work package 4 produced two deliverables:
- D4.1 Interim report on new knowledge on water monitoring via citizen activity, and
- D4.2 Final report on new knowledge on water monitoring via citizen activity.
As D4.1 is an interim report, is it not described here.
*** Summary of D4.2 Final report on new knowledge on water monitoring via citizen activity (98 pages)
The purpose of water monitoring is often to observe or verify that it is suitable for certain use. The most critical question is and always will be the following: is this water drinkable? People are also interested in knowing if the waters are safe to swim in or fish from. In addition, regular citizens are being more aware of and interested in the state of their local environment. Water quality is amongst the most important concerns, especially if one lives near to a lake, stream or river.
Beneficial monitoring of any water system, like a stream, does not happen by a single measurement of water but rather requires measurements from various places and time periods. By observing the variation in water quality in various places over time will unveil the real state of water on a larger and valuable scale. Also, it enables drawing real conclusions of development of the state of water.
The report considered the importance of environmental water monitoring around the Baltic Sea, especially the citizen activity related to it. Taking into account the amount of the interesting water areas around us, the only way to notably grow the amount of knowledge of water areas is to enable active citizens to participate in the process as a whole.
The modern day volunteer is not necessarily willing to donate a fixed amount of time on a regular basis. To balance the needs of the monitoring programme, researchers, regional authorities and the active citizens participating in the monitoring process, we see it very important to cooperate with all of the stakeholders, much like the quadruple helix model used in Open Innovation 2.0 approach.
Communities and structures around environmental monitoring are seen very necessary to make the activities appealing and to encourage participation. No standardised methods to encourage citizen participation exist, but participation is based on single efforts and ad-hoc initiatives. A citizen initiative support and integration framework for environmental decision-making on European Union level is much called for.
Various communities, both present and previous initiatives to enable and boost citizen activity in environmental water monitoring have been presented in detail. Despite the amount of resources and effort that has been utilised we are yet to achieve a recognised, operating and coherent network that can not only provide active citizens the possibility to concretely participate in the process but also provide trustworthy information to anyone interested including various authorities and experts.
Citizens, also known as non-experts, and the environmental water monitoring data they would collect, causes somewhat wide controversy; whether the data is reliable at all, not to mention the huge potential this resource can provide to everyone. Scientists and authorities share their concerns regarding the usage of data collected by untrained volunteers. Citizen science projects not only raise these concerns but also aim at answering them. The reliability issues are recognised, and we state that with modern technologies we can overcome these issues. Active citizens participating in environmental water monitoring can be properly trained, and by developing automated measurement systems and on-site analysis methods the data, although not perfectly accurate, will definitely provide more opportunities than disadvantages.
Technology will ease possible citizen contribution in the field of environmental monitoring using wireless low cost monitoring equipment, but it is not really a commercial market since reward systems are not encouraging participation of any large number of citizens. Some environmental enthusiasts or social media addicts may keep delivering for a longer time than academic projects lasts, but systematic models for a sustainable, stable and long time delivery system does not seem to exist yet. On the other hand, European Union and regional country authorities and local administrators focus on conservative, classic technology with a low number of larger and expensive and scientific installations. How shall the potential of citizen contribution be properly harnessed and exploited?
The future, as stated in the report, holds many answers to the question above. Visions of future trends and challenges have been outlined. The current level of technology is not the fundamental barrier. It is the people and social responsibility from top to below. Mature industrial countries where the society has developed complex processes and structures that formally serve the citizens’ needs have even created social patterns that reduce social responsibility, social innovations and engagement. Engaging citizens in common processes where direct visibility and value creation will surely increase inclusion processes and create more sustainable social and democratic societies.
D4.2 was based in part on two surveys carried out in the five participating regions, with a total of 813 respondents.
WP5: DIFFUSE LOAD MONITORING
Work package 5 produced six deliverables:
- D5.1 Interim directory of RTD offer/demand in diffuse load monitoring;
- D5.2 Interim report on new knowledge on diffuse load monitoring;
- D5.3 Analysis of potential regions for mentoring in diffuse load monitoring;
- D5.4 Report on demand and challenges for miniaturised water monitoring technology in rivers and streams;
- D5.5 Final directory of RTD offer/demand in diffuse load monitoring, and
- D5.6 Final report on new knowledge on diffuse load monitoring.
As D5.1 and D5.2 are interim reports, these are not described here.
*** Summary of D5.3 Analysis of potential regions for mentoring in diffuse load monitoring (6 pages)
D5.3 describes the type of expertise that Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia and Sweden could offer to other areas in Europe or globally, with the main focus on mentoring potential in the field of diffuse load monitoring. The report also describes current needs, global demand and identify potential bottlenecks in water quality monitoring with a special focus on diffuse load monitoring.
Five themes in the field of water quality monitoring were highlighted as potential areas to provide mentoring to other regions, which are described below.
i) Long-term water management and monitoring programs. Especially Sweden, Finland and Germany have extensive experience in long-term monitoring concerning both diffuse loading and monitoring of point sources. Many Eastern European countries are potential regions for mentoring at the European level. For example Poland is one of the major contributors of nutrients into the Baltic Sea due to its intensive agriculture and it would benefit from the diffuse load management and monitoring expertise the region has to offer. On a global scale, the in-depth expertise of the BalticFlows consortium linked with long term water management and monitoring programs could potentially benefit all developing countries struggling with water management issues.
ii) Open monitoring data and water quality databases. The region has a lot expertise in data handling, storage and especially in open water quality databases, and many of the databases administrated by environmental authorities are at least partly open and offer restricted or open access to companies, research organisations and NGOs involved water quality management. Some water quality databases can also be accessed openly by the public. Some of these databases have interactive features and offer a possibility for all interested parties to contribute to water quality monitoring with water quality observations. Public awareness on water quality issues is increased by offering the public new accessible platforms for submitting citizen observations.
iii) Higher education in water quality and sensor development. Numerous universities and research organisations in the region offer higher education in water quality monitoring, water protection strategies, IT solutions and sensor technologies. The education is linked with research activities carried out in the universities and companies and thus provide students with good know-how in field realities and practical R&D work. Mentoring in teaching practices that increase students’ creativity and practical know-how would be especially beneficial to regions where university education is mainly focused on accumulating theoretical knowledge, such as Eastern Europe, Africa, Asia and South America. In some cases the language skills of students may present a barrier and thus it may be more effective to target the mentoring to the teacher level.
iv) Interaction between authorities, companies and research institutions ('triple helix' model). In participating BalticFlows regions, functional and open co-operation between regional research organisations, private companies and authorities is a common way of working, and this type of 'triple helix' co-operation has also become a well-established working model in Europe. However, direct every-day co-operation at triple helix level is not that common globally. BalticFlows regions could offer mentoring in building up networks involving authorities, private companies and research organisations. Providing good examples of the benefits of the culture of open exchange could encourage many developing countries in e.g. Asia and Africa in building healthier co-operation between water monitoring authorities, businesses and research organisations. The triple helix model is also a good way to increase innovation potential by opening up new collaboration between different actors.
v) Expertise in technologies suitable for cold climate conditions. Due to its northerly position and seasonal variations, the region has accumulated a lot of expertise in operating at cold climates. Winter conditions are demanding with regards to water quality monitoring and water management, and require tailored technical solutions. There are a lot of ongoing R&D activities focusing in cold climate water quality technologies. The Baltic Flows project region could offer mentoring to other regions situated or operating in colder climates, including mountainous regions in the European Union. On the other hand, the Northern parts of United States and Canada have also developed strong expertise in this area. In the future, both North America and the Baltic Sea region would benefit from increased exchange of expertise on cold climate water monitoring technologies.
*** Summary of D5.4 Report on demand and challenges for miniaturised water monitoring technology in rivers and streams (9 pages)
Currently used water monitoring methods are based upon occasional samplings, manual methods in data management and limited use of costly continuous monitoring devices do not enable continuous surveillance of large geographical areas or water streams with diffuse load of pollutants. D5.4 discusses some of the opportunities, challenges and bottlenecks of transition from existing water quality monitoring technologies to a new era of autonomous low-cost water monitoring systems.
Availability of methods for early detection, identification and characterisation of pollution in natural flowing waters is currently limited due to the cost of the monitoring equipment, the need for frequent maintenance and the lack of efficient data mining tools. The cost of monitoring equipment puts limitations on the provision of high resolution data on diffuse and unidentified pollution sources. A need for low-cost high resolution monitoring solutions is obvious.
A possible solution for these problems is the development of low-cost autonomous, self-sufficient and maintenance free monitoring equipment that may be distributed in a large scale to increase the number of measurement points and consequently improve the resolution of water quality data. Alternatives to this approach may be advanced to air-borne advanced multi-wavelength monitoring (e.g. satellites, unmanned aerial vehicles or other moving objects in air) or autonomous underwater vehicles (AUV). Future advances in technology will probably enable all these solutions, resulting in a high quality surveillance system where data fusion from all these types of monitoring will be important.
Despite the fast uptake of new measuring technologies in many applications, such as monitoring of the human body and indoor air quality measurements, the sensors and technologies used in continuous in-situ water quality monitoring have not significantly changed over the last 15 years. The reasons for this are partly related to limited financial resources for water monitoring purposes and to the lack of links between high-end sensor technology experts and water monitoring experts. However, there are some technical challenges, specially affecting measurements in the context of rivers, streams and ditches that would need to be resolved.
The largest challenge when considering the design of a wireless networked water monitoring system is to provide a good solution for the power supply. It is challenging to harvest and store sufficient energy for each node in the system to remain active and provide the necessary services for the data chain or network for area monitoring. The more energy can be harvested, the more functionality can be implemented in each sensor node. Since electronics and software are not the biggest bottlenecks in creating good operational networks, the main challenges are in the energy harvesting power systems and physical sensor areas.
Efforts should therefore be targeted at methods, which would solve the problem of harvesting energy from the local environment or physical conditions. Water sensing applications working with continuous water flow would benefit from harnessing energy from the water flow. Thermal energy could also be a promising solution to provide for the energy needs of these devices. However, if no regular water flow is expected, the system should have some alternative energy sources. Especially if sensor conversion methods are using high energy levels, local energy storage or batteries must be used. Currently there is no established commercial measuring devices that would get their energy directly from flowing water.
Furthermore, flowing water is a challenging environment to measure. The device must endure mechanical stress and temperature variations (including frost) and the electrical parts should be encapsulated in a way that water cannot harm the electronics. In addition, the device should be able to operate for extended periods without maintenance. Fouling of the sensors is another problem. All devices currently used in field conditions have some kind of a cleaning system. The problem is that the cleaning systems increase the size, price and the energy consumption of the device.
One of the bottlenecks for resolving these technical challenges is that companies or research organisations developing novel sensor technologies have very good expertise in the sensing technology, but often lack expertise that would allow them to overcome problems in harnessing the sensing element into use in environmental conditions, in the form of a complete monitoring device that can enter the markets. Thus, co-operation between sensor developers and companies that can use the sensors in their monitoring solutions would need to be increased.
*** Summary of D5.5 Final directory of RTD offer and demand in diffuse load monitoring (117 entries, 5 pages)
D5.5 is the final directory of diffuse load monitoring stakeholders and RTD actors from the regions of Hamburg, Riga, Tallinn, Turku and Uppsala. The directory contains information of 117 different organisations that have been determined relevant on the demand and/or supply side.
Entities from all three segments of the triple helix – research, business and public administration – are well represented in the directory. In the future, D5.5 shall serve as a first-hand source for any person or organisation interested in diffuse load monitoring matters in Tallinn region, Southwest Finland, Northern Germany, Riga Planning Region, or Uppsala region.
*** Summary of D5.6 Final report on new knowledge on diffuse load monitoring (100 pages)
D5.6 is a report on monitoring diffuse loads, which relate to the uptake and transport of nutrients, hazardous substances and particles. It addresses the existing legal frameworks for diffuse load monitoring, the available technologies, and the existing educational, professional and scientific competences in the project region. The report highlights the common achievements but also identifies the development potential for more effective diffuse load monitoring in the project region and the EU. Through comparison with global monitoring practices and competences, the report emphasises the excellence that exists in all diffuse load monitoring related fields in the project region. The project results indicate that the region has the potential to develop into a global "Region of Excellence" in diffuse load and water quality monitoring.
The BalticFlows project assessed the existing national and EU frameworks that regulate diffuse load and water quality monitoring, their regional implementation and used methods and technologies. To provide a representative overview on the current practices, technologies and needs in the project region and EU, extensive literature reviews and interviews with experts and policy makers were conducted. In addition, information on current practices from all participating countries were obtained through the distribution of questionnaires among national experts and authorities. The survey results identified the achievements and development potential in diffuse load monitoring practices in all related disciplines: policy making, environmental administration, monitoring, and technology. The regional situation was put in a global context through case studies on diffuse load monitoring in the USA, South America and Asia. The global perspective indicated a significant potential for technological, educational, and legislative knowhow export from the project region.
Water quality and diffuse load monitoring in the Baltic Flows countries is considered to be at a globally competitive level. Existing regulations and policies provide a good base for comprehensive monitoring though there is potential for improvements concerning the implementation of these regulations. A global demand exists for low-cost, automated monitoring technologies. From a technological point of view it would therefore be desirable that the regional and EU regulations would liberate the use of innovative, automated monitoring techniques. This could improve the existing EU water quality monitoring infrastructure on the one hand, and foster commercial developments in the project region on the other.
To make better use of the generated data and to foster international collaboration, common data collection, processing and storage standards should be developed. Ultimately, water quality monitoring data should be available to at least authorities and environmental and research organisations through one data base. Despite existing bottlenecks in current water quality monitoring regulations, practices and technologies, the BalticFlows project clearly showed that its participating countries have an outstanding experience and expertise in water quality monitoring related research, education, technology development and policy making. One of the regional strengths is the active collaboration between these different stakeholders that creates an enabling and creative environment for innovation. The Baltic Flows project helped to strengthen these collaborations and to harmonise water quality monitoring activities among the project countries. The project demonstrated that the creation of local clusters may provide support for SMEs to capitalise their expertise by building international networks with other companies and customers. Further, the project showed that pooling of expertise in water quality monitoring and close technologies as ICT, medical diagnostics or energy harvesting technologies, have the potential to boost globally desired low-cost, online water quality monitoring technologies.
Given that sufficient funding for projects similar to BalticFlows would be available, the region may develop to a global leader in developing low-cost in-situ monitoring solutions and programs that build upon these technologies. Through the integration of proven citizen science activities and smart integration of other environmental data, water quality monitoring could be taken to a new level.
WP6: FORMULATION OF A JOINT ACTION PLAN
Work package 6 produced one deliverable:
- D6.1 Joint Action Plan and related business plans.
*** Summary of D6.1 Joint Action Plan and related business plans (72 pages)
D6.1 comprises two sections: the actual Joint Action Plan, and the Appendix "Joint Action Plan – Next Steps of the BalticFlows with Regional Strengths and BalticFlows Initiatives". The main content of these is described separately in the following sections.
1. Joint Action Plan
1.1 Towards a sustainable Citizen Union
Globalisation is placing increasing pressure upon competitiveness in all sectors of European industry. At the same time, we must pay close attention to the well-being of our environment, and the liveability and safety of our cities and regions, as short-term financial gains may bear a heavy long-term cost.
We believe that every European citizen has an idea; that every European – young or old; a woman or a man; from the north, south, east, west, or in between; of whichever ethnic or religious background – has an idea. An idea, and a dream of turning that idea into reality.
But every European does not wish to become an entrepreneur. A researcher may not be willing to enter into a lengthy patent filing process for creation of commercial value; he or she may simply prefer to publish research results for the benefit of mankind. Few inventors dare to draw out a personal mortgage and strive for commercial success without the security of a support network offered to regularly paid employees.
In Europe we have great ideas, unique inventions, and faith in our capabilities – but today the leap of faith, which one must take to turn his or her idea into reality, is still too long. And the leap does not necessarily even lead towards a direction desirable for the individual.
This complex, challenging competitive environment calls for a new way of thinking, by which we can fully benefit from the ingenuity, skills, experience and ambitions of each European citizen, empowering them to turn their ideas into reality. Effectively enabling the vast potential of all of our citizens will not only contribute to greater competitiveness of our economy, but also foster a sensation of collective success amongst the contributing population.
We need to build a Citizen Union. To achieve this, we need, in addition to the now launched Investment Plan for Europe, also an Engagement and Inspiration Plan for Europe to engage citizens, develop their ideas, bringing upon ownership towards their region, their nation and the European society.
We need to encourage and empower all of our citizens to use their best potential for the benefit of our society and industry, and discover the most inspiring rewards for a job well done.
The Engagement and Inspiration Plan for Europe will construct the Citizen Union based upon three cornerstones:
i) the Innovation Pillar. Gathering, organising and processing the global pool of citizens’ ideas, and finding the means to turn these to reality, thus contributing to European competitiveness;
ii) the Sustainability Pillar. Advancing sustainability by bringing life cycle thinking and assessment into everyday decisions of citizens, empowering citizens in monitoring and preserving our environment, and promoting safe urban living via smart rainwater management and harvesting, and
iii) the Engagement Pillar. Learning the driving motivation for each contributing citizen and creating matching reward schemes, leading to ownership and commitment towards joint actions.
We propose joint action, not only in Hamburg, Riga, Tallinn, Turku and Uppsala, but also in every region throughout Europe. An Engagement and Inspiration Plan for Europe without support from each city and region – from the local government, academia and industry but before all from the citizens – remains only a plan. We need to make this happen together. Endorsement, support and cooperation between European regions, Member States and key European institutions will be essential for successful implementation of the Engagement and Inspiration Plan for Europe, and to turn the sustainable Citizen Union into reality.
In the Baltic Sea Region, we have started work towards implementation of the Engagement and Inspiration Plan for Europe, seeking new means for engaging, inspiring and empowering our citizens. It is our goal to take and spread this momentum to all cities and regions in the European Union, leading to a stronger, competitive, sustainable Citizen Union by the year 2020.
1.2 Liveable, loveable cities
As the world continues to urbanise, sustainable development challenges will be increasingly concentrated in cities. Integrated policies to improve the lives of both urban and rural dwellers are required. As the concentration of population in cities and other urban areas grows, more citizens will be dependent on the same or interdependent water supplies.
Urban areas are not detached from their surroundings. Water consumed by urban citizens originates in broad catchment areas covering often very distant regions. Hence, policies and measures taken in distant rural regions, even in other countries, will have an impact on both the water quality available for a city, as well as upon the risk of urban flooding. For example, flood prevention measures taken in upstream regions often have a direct impact on the flood risk of subsequent downstream cities.
For a citizen of modern and future cities, the adequacy of our rainwater management policies and the effectiveness of their implementation materialises in several areas:
i) safety of water supply, for direct consumption or with indirect impact e.g. via food production;
ii) preservation and management of biodiversity, ecology and safety of waters used by citizens e.g. for recreational purposes;
iii) avoidance of damages caused by excessive rainwater, i.e. flooding, and
iv) avoidance of challenges due to water shortage, e.g. due to drought.
These areas are in many ways interrelated. The quality of our raw waters is influenced by many factors, including farmland erosion and urban runoff due to heavy rainfall. Rural runoff typically comprises fertilisers resulting in diffuse load pollution in seas or lakes; this again results in algae bloom preventing recreational use.
On the other hand, via smart rainwater harvesting we can convert stormwater – often a problem – into an asset used in ponds or channels of cities, for irrigation of urban green areas, or even as “grey” water in households, i.e. water suitable for sanitation but not directly for drinking. This in turn can reduce pressure from the water purification process of cities and thereby alleviate water shortages in areas of water scarcity, as many water-related needs can be managed directly with rainwater.
In many European cities, streets and buildings generally cover more than 50% of the urban surfaces. As the building infrastructure contributes significantly to the increase of impervious surfaces and water runoff, on-site methods that consider the reuse of rainwater, present tangible solutions. A successful stormwater management plan should take into account the characteristics of the urban fabric and implement solutions to minimise water pollution while in the meantime, compensating for the environmental impacts caused by development.
For example, strategies such as green roofs, offer a number of solutions for rainwater management through a decentralised system of water collection at the roof level. Green roofs present multiple benefits, reducing the volume of rainwater runoff, delaying and reducing peak stormwater flow rates, and reducing pollutants carried to water bodies through urban runoff. The implementation of green roofs makes the case for the efficient utilisation of unused space in dense urban areas where land availability is minimal. They provide ecosystem services and contribute to urban liveability by increasing the amount of green space accessible for health and recreation.
Financial incentives for implementation of on-site stormwater management systems may be applied: e.g. a system for split wastewater fees, where owners pay a reduced stormwater management fee if they can demonstrate that they manage the stormwater generated from their property on-site. Governments and regional authorities should support implementation of decentralised urban stormwater management practices for environmentally beneficial design decisions, such as green roofs or porous asphalt.
1.3 Citizens and the environment
Citizens could take a more active role spontaneously if they were provided with attractive means of getting involved not only in the planning phase of the water management, but also in the follow-up of the changes in the water quality. The water quality data should be openly available to the public in a visually attractive form and the citizens should be encouraged to submit their own observations to complement the official monitoring information. This would advance the transparency of the water protection and monitoring programs and develop the feeling of water stewardship in concerned citizens.
Traditional environmental information gathering is costly and labour intensive and the monitoring network is limited by the availability of financial resources. Engagement of the general public, non-governmental organisations, school groups and e.g. senior societies in the collection of water quality observations has the potential to gather large amounts of data to support long-term environmental monitoring programs and scientific research projects. Moreover, citizens that are active in water monitoring are more likely to participate also in the planning and execution of water protection measures.
Environmental monitoring offers the wider public the opportunity to be involved in shaping their society, scientific research and data collection in a meaningful way. At best, citizens who participate in monitoring initiatives shall feel empowered by their increased knowledge of environmental conditions and their ability to assist and make a difference.
Public participation in environmental monitoring can be achieved via different models, which may range from allowing an access to official data to collecting data as well as defining the system and logic behind the data collections. The first step in involving citizens in environmental monitoring is to provide information, such as the official statistics or measurement data to the public. Once data collection and public participation moves beyond this point, a plurality of legitimate perspectives need to be considered. The applicability of the data originating from unverified sources is a key question for both scientists and authorities.
To enable wide-scale European water monitoring via citizen participation, we need all stakeholders to combine forces, knowledge and activities under a coordinated environmental framework fuelled by participation of empowered citizens. Such participation is accommodated by the Sustainability Pillar of the Engagement and Inspiration Plan for Europe.
1.4 Sustainable planning evaluation tools
Successful planning and implementation of best management practices in urban stormwater management requires the inclusion of effective evaluation tools in order to guarantee sustainable results. To identify best solutions, a combination of environmental and economic driven assessment methods can ensure a holistic integration of these two major influencers in project development. That is, cost-effectiveness and the consideration of environmental benefits, risks, impacts, and externalities. Cost-Benefit Analysis and Life Cycle Assessment are among some of the most effective evaluation methods considering the above mentioned aspects.
The main purpose of a stormwater management technology is to protect people and areas from expected damages caused by stormwater and flooding. In most cases more than one technology is technically feasible and able to provide sufficient protection. So from an economic perspective, more criteria than the ability to protect the public have to be taken into consideration in order to make an optimal choice. Economic evaluation methods such as Cost-Benefit Analysis serve as tools to identify the best possible solution out of all options.
Cost-Benefit Analyses should be performed before the implementation of any stormwater technology. It ensures that the most cost-efficient option is chosen and impedes the implementation of disadvantageous alternatives. Therefore, Cost-Benefit Analysis promotes economic development by avoiding unnecessary high costs and a potential waste of public funds. However, carrying out a Cost-Benefit Analysis is a complex process due to the fact that costs and benefits are case-specific and vary strongly among the various applications. It is hardly possible to make general recommendations regarding which technologies might be superior. Thus a detailed analysis is necessary for every specific case.
1.5 Online, all the time!
The pollution load in our water bodies is the result of water flowing every minute of the year from all streams, ditches, drains and rivers. However, for example in the Baltic Sea, it is estimated that 90% of the total nutrient load comes during short peak flows, whereas chemical loads typically come from often unidentified point sources. Once in the sea, it is impossible to say where the pollution came from.
Current water monitoring programs are based on analyses of periodically taken samples, which do not reveal the whole spectrum of variations in water quality. Run-off peaks during floods or heavy rain, or accidental industrial leakages, may end up in the sea undetected and without alarm. To meet with the Water Framework Directive’s water quality monitoring requirements, measuring techniques are in need of profound institutional, technical and methodical improvements, and new measuring techniques should be developed.
The pollution load in our water bodies is the result of water flowing every minute of the year from all streams, ditches, drains and rivers. However, for example in the Baltic Sea, it is estimated that 90% of the total nutrient load comes during short peak flows, whereas chemical loads typically come from often unidentified point sources. Once in the sea, it is impossible to say where the pollution came from.
Current water monitoring programs are based on analyses of periodically taken samples, which do not reveal the whole spectrum of variations in water quality. Run-off peaks during floods or heavy rain, or accidental industrial leakages, may end up in the sea undetected and without alarm. To meet with the Water Framework Directive’s water quality monitoring requirements, measuring techniques are in need of profound institutional, technical and methodical improvements, and new measuring techniques should be developed.
Flowing water is a challenging environment to measure. The device must work despite of mechanical stress and temperature variations (including frost) and it should not get fouled. In addition, it would need to be able to harvest its own energy from the environment in order to operate for extended periods without maintenance.
In order to better understand the multiple sources polluting our natural waters, we should support the development of low-cost water quality measurement technologies that can autonomously measure and communicate over large areas and long periods of time. For new cutting-edge sensing solutions, we should strengthen funding for multidisciplinary research and commercial R&D in the crossroads of several areas of expertise: environmental science, electronics, information technology, cleantech, biotechnology and chemistry.
1.6 Regional smart specialisation and citizens
Smart specialisation enables the differentiation of innovation patterns according to the potentials and needs of a specific territory. It is crucial to mobilise internal assets and resources in fields where a country or a region is has strong potential.
In order to achieve sustainable serial innovation, innovation must be embedded within long-lived social institutions and networks. Four different sectors must be linked together: government, business, civil society, and academia, hereafter constituting the “quadruple helix”.
The ideas and actions of creative, capable citizens is the fuel for a creative society. In part, this can be captured by the traditional innovation process: turning ideas into patents, artistic sketches into product design, common sense into business models. But the potential of our citizens goes further, and ideas may lead to intangible benefits, contributing to quality of life, a better living environment, or a sensation of inclusion or success.
In many regions, smart specialisation strategies are planned by regional leaders and experts from the government, academia and industry with the “entrepreneurial or innovation discovery” in centre of the focus. However, in order to understand the latent potential in our regions, and create truly smart specialisation strategies that go beyond existing, known areas of strength, we need to more closely understand the know-how, experience and ideas of our citizens. We need to learn to motivate each citizen to engage with his or her society, to contribute to its smart specialisation strategy – and we need the will and means to listen and understand.
2. Appendix: Joint Action Plan – Next Steps of the BalticFlows with Regional Strengths and BalticFlows Initiatives
The Appendix for the Joint Action Plan was completed halfway into the project and was based upon reports generated by regional organisations by that time. These covered a range of expertise and technologies, as well as challenges and business opportunities of the participating regions for the water management and monitoring field.
The report listed 16 new cluster initiatives that had already been started by BalticFlows consortium members during the project. The report further comprised an analysis of regional strengths in each participating region in urban stormwater management and diffuse load monitoring, as well as regional activities concerning citizen participation. The identified regional strengths are summarised in the following.
2.1 Regional strengths in urban stormwater management
2.1.1 Hamburg region
Overall expertise:
- Retention and infiltration technologies for rainwater management;
- Integration of methods into urban landscape design. Planning of a stormwater management approach through the development of multi-functional spaces integrated into the existing urban conditions of sidewalks and street infrastructure.
Areas of particular strength:
- Green roof technologies;
- Implementation of instruments and incentives, e.g. green roof programme, split-tariff stormwater management scheme;
- Street and green space stormwater infrastructure including porous pavements, bioretention, bioswales;
- Water collection/cisterns;
- Experience of life cycle analysis.
2.1.2 Riga region
Overall expertise:
- River basin management;
- Precipitation, urban runoff monitoring and forecasting;
- Technical design of cost-effective stormwater management system;
- Flooding modelling program and forecasting by using satellite imagines;
Areas of particular strength:
- Meteorological observations and meteorological data monitoring system.
2.1.3 Tallinn region
Overall expertise:
- Urban planning of stormwater management;
- Designing stormwater management systems.
Areas of particular strength:
- Discharging stormwater to coastal sea according to marine water level (management and design of technical solutions).
2.1.4 Turku region
Overall expertise:
- Urban planning tools and methods;
- Flooding modelling and prognoses.
Areas of particular strength:
- Design of storm water management structures (wetlands);
- Use of geographical information and map services;
- Interactive visualisation and simulation of flooding scenarios;
- Sensors and GPRS loggers on the field to visualise rainwater management;
- Maintenance of sensor networks with cloud based software;
- Continuous water quality monitoring – use of modern continuous sensors applicable for stormwater quality and quantity monitoring;
- Filtration materials and technologies.
2.1.5 Uppsala region
Overall expertise:
- Stormwater management;
- Integration of rainwater management to urban landscape planning;
- Flooding modelling and prognoses;
- Disaster risk reduction.
Areas of particular expertise:
- Stormwater collecting and purifying ponds;
- Green and permeable surfaces;
- Green roof technology;
- Runoff generation processes;
- Design of storm water management structures (wetlands);
- Use of geographical information and map services;
- Interactive visualisation and simulation of flooding scenarios;
- Sensors and GPRS loggers on the field to visualise rainwater management;
- Maintenance of sensor networks with cloud based software.
2.2 Regional strengths in diffuse load monitoring
2.2.1 Hamburg region
Overall expertise:
- Precipitation, runoff and load monitoring;
- Design of water monitoring strategies/programs.
Areas of particular strength:
- Continuous diffuse load monitoring - methodology (strategies, reliability, maintenance, adaption procedures);
- Continuous diffuse load monitoring - technology/ development of continuous water quality monitoring sensors.
2.2.2 Riga planning region
Overall expertise:
- Surface and ground water quality monitoring and modelling;
- Design of water monitoring strategies/programs.
Areas of particular strength:
- Modelling and assessment of diffuse loading (erosion etc.);
- Developed environmental databases (precipitation, hydrological, water quality and water pressures databases).
2.2.3 Tallinn region
Overall expertise:
- Design of water monitoring strategies/programs;
- Monitoring network with continuous hydrological and hydrochemical measurement stations;
- Continuous diffuse load monitoring - methodology (strategies, reliability, maintenance, adaption procedures);
- Natural wetlands monitoring;
- Modelling of stormwater quantity and quality.
Areas of particular strength:
- Measurement of nutrient load in stormwater and surface water affecting coastal waters, assessment of eutrophication;
- Modelling and assessment of coastal erosion depending from storm- and seawater;
- Data loggers and water monitoring sensors.
2.2.4 Turku region
Overall expertise:
- Water quality monitoring technologies;
- Design of water monitoring strategies/programs.
Areas of particular strength:
- Continuous diffuse load monitoring – methodology (strategies, reliability, maintenance, adaption procedures);
- Solutions for data handling and storage;
- Database systems and user-friendly interface and data reporting;
- Methodology for data handling, data surveillance and post-calibration, emergent sensor development, adaptation of existent monitoring solutions (data loggers and platforms);
- Modelling and assessment of diffuse loading (erosion etc.);
- Other continuous in-situ monitoring solutions;
- Development of smaller devices to be used by non-professionals and identifying biological components (bacteria);
- Sensors know-how for water quality analysis;
- Solutions for stormwater quality monitoring (sensor technology; pollutants, oil detection).
2.2.5 Uppsala region
Overall expertise:
- Design of water monitoring strategies/programs;
- Monitoring programmes by public authorities;
- Well established and tested monitoring methods;
- Source apportionment modelling.
Areas of particular strength:
- Monitoring methods and technology;
- Solutions for data handling and storage;
- Monitoring of small agricultural streams and catchment areas;
- Maintenance of sensor networks with cloud based software;
- Continuous water quality monitoring - use of modern continuous sensors applicable for stormwater quality and quantity monitoring;
- Mitigation measures for reducing nitrogen and phosphorus loading.
WP7: COMMUNICATION AND DISSEMINATION
Work package 7 produced two deliverables:
- D7.1 Report on the communication infrastructures, and
- D7.2 Report on dissemination activities.
These deliverables were administrative by nature, and thus are not explained here in further detail.
S&T SECTION 2. PROJECT EVENTS
Much of the project S&T work was related to interaction with stakeholders at regional and national level, as well as between project partners in different EU member states. Therefore, project events and their outcomes constitute a fundamental part of the S&T results of the BalticFlows project, which are briefly summarised below. Further details can be found in section 3.2.3.4 of the Core of the Report, Periodic Report 2, as well as in D7.2 (Report on dissemination activities).
The BalticFlows project organised 15 formal events in Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Germany, Poland, Spain and Sweden. The kick-off meeting was organised on M01 on a ferry cruise between Finland and Sweden. Joint Action Plan (JAP) meeting 1 was in Tallinn, Estonia on M04 with further planning of project activities and the first Project Management Board (PMB) meeting. These were followed by three internal events: PMB meeting 2 in Riga, Latvia on M06, JAP meeting 2 in Hamburg, Germany on M10, and PMB meeting 3 in Uppsala, Sweden on M12.
The first major event of the project was on M15: Project-wide workshop 1 in Tallinn, Estonia. The event was aimed at organisations active in the field of rainwater monitoring and management from universities, the private and public sector, and the attendees were from Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia and Sweden.
This was followed on M19 by the JAP release event in Brussels, Belgium. Here the BalticFlows JAP was released to the public at a high-level event with attendees and speakers from the European Parliament, the European Commission and several other European-wide organisations, in addition to project partners.
On M22, the consortium met in Jurmala, Latvia to review plans to the latter half of the project. The next event on M24 in Hamburg, Germany comprised PMB meeting 5 but also featured an international symposium of urban stormwater management "1-Day Symposium on Sustainable Approaches to Urban Stormwater Management".
This was followed by a mentoring event on M25 in Gdansk, Poland "Solutions and Initiatives in Diffuse Load Monitoring" concerning diffuse load monitoring, aimed mainly at Polish stakeholders, such as local government officials, engineers, urban planners, practitioners, researchers, and participants in the BalticFlows project.
Project-wide workshop 2 was held in Uppsala, Sweden on M27, aimed at professionals working with water or environment issues interested in the exchanging knowledge and experience in stormwater management and diffuse load monitoring, in addition to others interested in EU funding opportunities for project initiatives in the water sector.
For practical reasons, the event planned for PMB meeting 6 was merged with the next event in Barcelona, Spain on M31 "Towards Smart Specialisation in Urban Stormwater Management: Integrating principles into Practice" concerning mentoring in the field of urban stormwater management, aimed at professionals from the public, private, and civil sectors, including representatives from local Barcelona provincial councils, practitioners and experts in the water field, researchers at universities and research institutes, SMEs, technology and product developers, and NGOs; and environmental organisations with a water focus.
On M33, the project organised an open seminar event in Turku, Finland, aimed at private companies, public organisations, academic researchers and participants in the BalticFlows project, with the theme "The Baltic Sea, our common Interest – Solutions and practices for the better future".
The final event was on M36 in Tallinn, Estonia, comprising PMB meeting 7 and a wrap-up meeting, but also featured an international conference "Who Owns Stormwater?", aimed at politicians, state and municipal authorities, designers, construction companies, city planners, as well as students and teachers from universities.
Potential Impact:
1. Overview
The Baltic Flows project aimed at leveraging existing experience, competence and technology in participating regions to create world-class excellence and a sustainable competitive edge in the areas of rainwater monitoring and management. Directed by a strong research-driven vision of a wide-scale distributed water quality monitoring capacity based upon mesh networks of self-powered wireless monitoring devices, project activities were closely interlinked with real-world realities in the technological and business domains.
The Baltic Flows project did not aim at creating a generic set of policies that could possibly benefit various industries or business sectors, but rather to build a strong foundation for meeting identified needs of technology and business actors aiming at excellence and global competitiveness in the specific fields of water monitoring and management. Therefore, the project aimed at identifying and addressing bottlenecks hampering the success of research, RTD, commercialisation and global marketing in these fields.
The Baltic Flows project was built upon a long-term vision of a wide-scale water real-time monitoring capacity operational throughout streams and rivers in the Baltic Sea region, in addition to world-class competence in and technology for monitoring and managing stormwater in urban areas. Within the consortium, there was high potential for mutually beneficial, sustainable collaboration between research organisations and the business sector.
In each participating region, the Baltic Flows project aimed at laying the foundation for smart specialisation strategies in either or both of the fields of water monitoring and water management, and via this aiming at fostering new private and public investments in participating regions via establishment of world-class competence, technological know-how and well-functioning ecosystems in the fields of water monitoring and management. In addition, mentoring activities included transfer of know-how and technological expertise in the field of water monitoring to stakeholders in Poland, and in the field of stormwater management to stakeholders in Spain.
The BalticFlows project raised awareness towards water quality, water monitoring and stormwater management issues in the Baltic Sea Region and beyond. The project also fostered new project initiatives in the Cleantech and Smart City sectors amongst project partners and regional stakeholders. The project further influenced development of regional smart specialisation strategies, and enabled close involvement in the planning and implementation of water-related collaboration between the European Union and China.
2. Potential impact, including socio-economic impact and wider societal implications
During the past five years, it is easy to list three "hot" topics related to the environment and governance that have become the particular focus of public discourse and attention in Europe, even globally: i) water; ii) citizen engagement; and iii) smart specialisation. In this light, it is astonishing that the BalticFlows project, planned back in the year 2011, was defined to focus exactly on these three topics – the relevance of the project to pressing real-world issues could not have been stronger! And consequently, the importance of, and justification for the work carried out during 2013-2016 by all 16 organisations in five EU Member States, in addition to one organisation serving as a link towards China, has remained clear to all partners throughout the project.
The awareness towards water, citizen participation and smart specialisation were all brought forth in the Joint Action Plan published in April 2015. During the latter half of the project, partners have continued discussions with regional stakeholders on these topics. Several high-profile events organised in conjunction with the project, including international conferences and seminars, have also helped to raise broader awareness towards these topics.
Impact can be seen at both regional and transnational levels. At regional level, stakeholders in each participating region – both project partners and others – have met regularly to discuss water-related challenges and solutions, covering both water quality and diffuse load monitoring, as well as city planning and urban stormwater management. In the spirit of the triple helix, representatives from research, business and government gathered regularly and became familiar with one another. In some cases, we also had the full quadruple helix present, especially in activities involving citizen participation (WP4).
It is clear that without the BalticFlows project, it is highly unlikely that representatives from such different areas of society would get together and meet. And it is even more unlikely that people not only from different professions, but also from different EU Member States, would get together to discuss these diverse, but at the same time common, challenges. Hence, the transnational benefit – strong regional clusters are complimented with support from similar clusters in other regions.
In this sense, the project has been a success: in each participating region, there are robust clusters that have together started to seek further joint financing especially from European funding sources, as can be seen in D2.3 (Report on Regional Networking and Contingency Plan). Furthermore, project partners in each region are committed to continue or support work related to the BalticFlows main themes beyond the project lifetime, as described in D7.2 (Report on dissemination activities), sections 2.1.7 2.2.6 2.3.7 2.4.7 and 2.5.7. Therefore, the transnational network of strong regional clusters are deemed to outlive the original BalticFlows project, and bring future opportunities for participating regions to jointly apply for European funding and develop their regional capacities within the themes of water quality, urban stormwater management, and citizen engagement.
During the project, European smart specialisation has taken a long leap forward, in part due to the ex ante conditionality imposed upon European Structural Funds during the current period 2014-2020 – in order to avoid restrictions on applying for funding, each European region was required to create and register a regional smart specialisation strategy. Timing-wise, this process was a perfect fit with BalticFlows, as smart specialisation was one of the integral themes of the project. Furthermore, thanks to the triple helix structure of the project consortium, each region already had its regional authority involved as a project partner, due to which there was a strong link in each participating region between BalticFlows and the regional smart specialisation formulation process. In some cases, the link was particularly strong: for example, Project Leader Mr. Tuomas Valtonen also acted as the Chairman of the Smart Specialisation Expert Group of Southwest Finland. Development of smart specialisation strategies is however an ongoing process, which will continue in each region beyond the duration of BalticFlows.
One particular aspect of the BalticFlows project was the external link towards China, via partner 15 ETI. Via this link, the consortium was provided with excellent insight on Chinese challenges and market opportunities. In addition, many new doors were opened in this area. For example, Coordinator 1 UTU was accepted to participate in Sino-Finnish water collaboration between the Ministry of Water Resources of the People's Republic of China and the Finnish Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. In addition, Project Leader Mr. Tuomas Valtonen carried out negotiations with the China-Europe Water Platform (CEWP), which led to Finland being accepted into core CEWP activities, with a seat on the Steering Group and coordination responsibility for the CEWP Water Quality Co-Lead Programme. As a result, today Finland has more emphasis in EU-China water collaboration than prior to the BalticFlows project, and for example the next CEWP High-Level Annual Meeting in 2017 will be arranged in Turku, Finland.
Therefore, it seems clear that the BalticFlows project has contributed to strengthening the capacities of participating regions, widening the networks within and between regions, and raising the probability of the regions securing competitive funding in the future.
3. Dissemination
3a. Formal project events
The BalticFlows project organised 15 formal events in Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Germany, Poland, Spain and Sweden. The most relevant of these from a dissemination perspective are listed in the following.
M15: Project-wide workshop 1 in Tallinn, Estonia. The event was aimed at organisations active in the field of rainwater monitoring and management from universities, the private and public sector, and the attendees were from Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia and Sweden;
M19: Joint Action Plan release event in Brussels, Belgium. Here the BalticFlows JAP was released to the public at a high-level event with attendees and speakers from the European Parliament, the European Commission and several other European-wide organisations, in addition to project partners;
M24: The event in Hamburg, Germany comprising PMB meeting 5 but also featuring an international symposium of urban stormwater management "1-Day Symposium on Sustainable Approaches to Urban Stormwater Management";
M25: Mentoring event in Gdansk, Poland "Solutions and Initiatives in Diffuse Load Monitoring" concerning diffuse load monitoring, aimed mainly at Polish stakeholders, such as local government officials, engineers, urban planners, practitioners, researchers, and participants in the BalticFlows project;
M27: Project-wide workshop 2 in Uppsala, Sweden, aimed at professionals working with water or environment issues interested in the exchanging knowledge and experience in stormwater management and diffuse load monitoring, in addition to others interested in EU funding opportunities for project initiatives in the water sector;
M31: Mentoring event in Barcelona, Spain "Towards Smart Specialisation in Urban Stormwater Management: Integrating principles into Practice" concerning urban stormwater management, aimed at professionals from the public, private, and civil sectors, including representatives from local Barcelona provincial councils, practitioners and experts in the water field, researchers at universities and research institutes, SMEs, technology and product developers, and NGOs; and environmental organisations with a water focus;
M33: Open seminar in Turku, Finland, aimed at private companies, public organisations, academic researchers and participants in the BalticFlows project, with the theme "The Baltic Sea, our common Interest – Solutions and practices for the better future", and
M36: The event in Tallinn, Estonia comprising PMB meeting 7 and a wrap-up meeting, but also featuring an international conference "Who Owns Stormwater?", aimed at politicians, state and municipal authorities, designers, construction companies, city planners, as well as students and teachers from universities.
Further details on these events can be found in section 3.2.3.4 of the Core of the Report, Periodic Report 2, as well as in D7.2 (Report on dissemination activities).
3b. Other dissemination
In addition to formal project events, project partners in all participating regions were also active in other dissemination activities, which are listed in detail in D7.2 (Report on dissemination activities). Below is a brief summary of key dissemination activities carried out during the project:
1) regular regional meetings between project partners in the same region;
2) regular regional cluster meetings, workshops and seminars with various stakeholders in the region;
3) numerous press releases in each region sent out to regional and national media;
4) project brochure and thematic leaflets;
5) publications, articles and interviews:
i) “Newest achievements in stormwater management and diffuse load monitoring – BalticFlows”. Latvian-language article in the journal “Latvian journal of physics and technical sciences”. In Press. Scheduled to be published in October, 2016;
ii) “Interesting project results – People can and agree to be involved in stormwater management and diffuse load monitoring”. Latvian-language article in the journal “Latvian journal of physics and technical sciences”. In Press. Scheduled to be published in January, 2017;
iii) Waldhoff, A., Ziegler, J., Bischoff, G., & Rabe, S. (2012). Multifunctional Spaces for Flood Management – an Approach for the City of Hamburg, Germany. SCIENCE, (International), 5;
iv) 16 IFU took part in the '6. Hamburger Abwasser Kolloquium' (Wastewater Colloquium). We held a presentation on LCA of stormwater management. An article on this was also published with the conference proceedings;
v) Leal Filho, W. (2016). Nachhaltige Entwicklung an der Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften Hamburg: Das FTZ-ALS und das “Nachhaltigkeitslab.” In W. Leal Filho (Ed.), Forschung für Nachhaltigkeit an Deutschen Hochschulen (p. 411). Hamburg: Springer Spektrum;
vi) Towards Sustainable Water Use: Experiences From the Project AFRHINET and BalticFlows. (2015), 408;
vii) Leal Filho, W., Jones, A. et al (IN PRESS) Adapting Urban Areas to Climate Change via Rainwater Management: the Project BalticFlows. In Leal Filho, W. & Keenan, J. M., (Eds) Climate Change Adaptation in North America. Springer, Berlin;
viii) Leal Filho, W., Jones, A., Rath, K. Wolf, F. (IN PRESS) Innovationen im Regenwassermanagement in Hamburg. In Leal Filho, W. (Ed) Innovationen in der Nachhaltigkeitsforschung. Springer, Berlin;
ix) “Why is stormwater becoming a problem in the cities?” By Maret Merisaar. Article in the journal Estonian Nature, no 5, 2015, page 29;
x) Mapping wave set-up near a complex geometric urban coastline. By T. Soomere, K. Pindsoo, S. R. Bishop, A. Valdmann and A. Käärd in Natural Hazard and Earth System Sciences: An interactive Open Access Journal of the European Geosciences Union – 29.11.2013;
xi) Sediment pool of the Mustjoe Stream – A. Käärd, A. Valdmann, T. Soomere;
xii) Environmental Risk Arising from the Flooding of the Mustjõe Stream in Tallinn – A. Käärd, A. Valdmann in Baltic Horizons no 23 September 2015 (Publisher Euroacademy Tallinn);
xiii) Involved in water affairs. Finnish-language article in Turun Sanomat, the main daily newspaper in Turku region, Finland. Original title: "Vesiasioiden äärellä". Turun Sanomat. 19.7.2015;
xiv) Finnish language article/interview videos on project themes. Original title: “Itämeren valumavesien hallintaan kehitetään uusia menetelmiä”. Published: 26.5.2015.;
xv) Kvicksilvergåtan (English: The mercury mystery) Skog och Framtid 2016 1:20-22;
xvi) Norén, V., B. Hedelin, and K. Bishop (2016) Drinking Water Risk Assessment in Practice: The case of Swedish drinking water producers at risk from floods, Environment, Systems and Decisions 36: 239-252;
xvii) Norén, V., B. Hedelin, L. Nyberg, and K. Bishop (2016) Flood risk assessment – Practices in flood prone Swedish municipalities . International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 18:206-217;
xviii) Teutschbein, C., T. Grabs, R. H. Karlsen, H. Laudon, and K. Bishop (2016) Hydrological response to changing climate conditions: Spatial streamflow variability in the boreal region. Water Resources Research 51: 9425-9446;
xix) Hytteborn, J. K., J. Temnerud, R. B. Alexander, E. W. Boyer, M. N. Futter, M. Froberg, J. Dahne and K. H. Bishop 2015. Patterns and predictability in the intra-annual organic carbon variability across the boreal and hemiboreal landscape. Science of the Total Environment 520: 260-269;
xx) Sponseller, R.A. J. Temnerud, K. Bishop, and H. Laudon. 2014. Patterns and drivers of riverine nitrogen (N) across alpine, subarctic, and boreal Sweden. Biogeochemistry, 120, 105-120;
xxi) Winterdahl, M., M. Erlandsson, M. N. Futter, G. A. Weyhenmeyer, and K. Bishop (2014), Intra-annual variability of organic carbon concentrations in running waters: Drivers along a climatic gradient, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 28, 451-464;
xxii) Eklof, K., Schelker, J., M. Meili, H. Laudon, C. von Bromssen, and K. Bishop. 2014. Impact of forestry on total and methyl-mercury in surface water: distinguishing effects of logging and site preparation Environmental Science and Technology, 48(9) pp. 4690-4698;
xxiii) Laudon, H., Taberman, I., Ågren, A., Futter, M., Ottosson-Löfvenius, M., Bishop, K. 2013. The Krycklan Catchment Study-A flagship infrastructure for hydrology, biogeochemistry, and climate research in the boreal landscape. Water Resources Research 49(10).
List of Websites:
Project website: http://www.balticflows.eu
Project leader:
Tuomas Valtonen
Research Manager
University of Turku
Yliopistonmäki
20014 Turun yliopisto
Finland
Tel. +358 400 362 848
E-mail: tuomas.valtonen@utu.fi
The BalticFlows project concerned rainwater monitoring and management in Baltic Sea catchment areas. Rainwater forms streams and rivers, and in urban environments, heavy rainfall can amount to stormwater and floods. Over the years, much of this rainwater ends up in the sea. In Northern Europe, the Baltic Sea conceals a history of water quality from streams, rivers and urban runoff in catchment areas. Encircled by a mix of Nordic, Central and Eastern European countries, the Baltic Sea is at the mercy of a diversity of national practices and policies. The BalticFlows project aimed at laying a foundation for development of new capacities and policies for effectively monitoring and managing the quality and quantities of rainwater moving from one place to the next. The project focused on streams, rivers and cities in Baltic Sea catchment areas, not on the sea itself. The strategies, knowledge and expertise created during the project can be exploited elsewhere in the Union and in other global regions. The BalticFlows project supported the development of research-driven clusters in each region; enhanced capacities in diffuse load monitoring and urban stormwater management will lead to new business opportunities in the global market for water monitoring and management know-how and solutions. In the Baltic Sea Region, 16 project partners from five European Member States – Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia and Sweden – participated in the project, in addition to one project partner from the United Kingdom specialised in the Chinese environmental sector.
The BalticFlows project produced 29 deliverables, including key deliverables: D2.1 Report on regional capacities in the BSR (248 p., 141 respondents, 162 technologies); D2.2 Report on project-wide workshops (121 p.); D2.3 Report on networking with regional stakeholders and contingency plan (78 p.); D3.3 Analysis of potential regions for mentoring in urban stormwater mgmt (65 p.); D3.4 Report on demand and challenges for miniaturised water monitoring technology in urban catchments (33 p.); D3.5 Final directory of RTD offer and demand in urban stormwater management (12 p., 136 entries); D3.6 Final report on new knowledge on urban stormwater management (119 p.); D4.2 Final report on new knowledge on water monitoring via citizen activity (98 p., 813 respondents); D5.5 Final directory of RTD offer and demand in diffuse load monitoring (5 p., 117 entries); D5.6 Final report on new knowledge on diffuse load monitoring (100 p); D6.1 Joint Action Plan (72 p.), and D7.2 Report on dissemination activities (73 p.).
The BalticFlows project organised 15 formal events in Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Germany, Poland, Spain and Sweden, including key events: Project-wide workshop 1, Tallinn, Estonia (M15); JAP release event, Brussels, Belgium (M19); Water monitoring mentoring event, Gdansk, Poland (M25); Project-wide workshop 2, Uppsala, Sweden (M27); Urban stormwater management mentoring event, Barcelona, Spain (M31), and the Open seminar, Turku, Finland (M33). In addition, there were numerous meetings, workshops and seminars in each participating region involving local stakeholders.
The project successfully completed all work packages, activities, milestones and deliverables as specified in Annex 1, within the given budget and timeframe.
Project Context and Objectives:
The BalticFlows project concerned rainwater monitoring and management in Baltic Sea catchment areas. Rainwater forms streams and rivers, and in urban environments, heavy rainfall can amount to stormwater and floods. Over the years, much of this rainwater ends up in the sea. In Northern Europe, the Baltic Sea conceals a history of water quality from streams, rivers and urban runoff in catchment areas. Encircled by a mix of Nordic, Central and Eastern European countries, the Baltic Sea is at the mercy of a diversity of national practices and policies. The BalticFlows project aimed at laying a foundation for development of new capacities and policies for effectively monitoring and managing the quality and quantities of rainwater moving from one place to the next. The project focused on streams, rivers and cities in Baltic Sea catchment areas, not on the sea itself. The strategies, knowledge and expertise created during the project can be exploited elsewhere in the Union and in other global regions. The BalticFlows project supported the development of research-driven clusters in each region; enhanced capacities in diffuse load monitoring and urban stormwater management will lead to new business opportunities in the global market for water monitoring and management know-how and solutions. In the Baltic Sea Region, 16 project partners from five European Member States – Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia and Sweden – participated in the project, in addition to one project partner from the United Kingdom specialised in the Chinese environmental sector.
The overall objectives of the BalticFlows project were designed to serve two top-level targets: (a) to bring forth the technological and economic vision enabling European regions to achieve world-class excellence and a sustainable competitive edge in the rainwater monitoring and management sector, and (b) to fulfil the objectives of the coordinating action, enhancing the effectiveness of research-driven clusters in participating regions, and thus paving a smooth path towards smart specialisation, via a common trans-regional vision, strategy and realistic implementation plan. In order to achieve real-world results, item b must follow item a; global competitiveness must be the first priority, as there is no point in interregional collaboration if the regions lack the prerequisites for potential competitiveness.
The specific objectives of the BalticFlows project were:
1. Greater insight into the opportunities and challenges of water monitoring methods, techniques and technologies, resulting in a European research agenda for fostering new easy-to-access (cost-effective, automated and user-friendly) water quality monitoring solutions for non-expert use;
2. Increased understanding on leveraging citizen activity in grass-root level water quality monitoring, resulting in a methodology for establishing a pan-European water monitoring participation and education scheme for citizens;
3. New strategies for monitoring diffuse loads in streams and rivers, based upon new water quality monitoring technologies and citizen participation based water monitoring schemes;
4. Comprehensive knowledge on best practices in the monitoring and management of urban stormwater in Baltic Sea catchment areas, resulting in new policies for effective urban stormwater management;
5. A network of five research-driven European clusters, working together with an international support network, and evolving towards smart specialisation regions in the fields of rainwater monitoring and management, linked to international supporting partners, and
6. World-class research and sustainable, profitable business in the rainwater monitoring and management sector in the research-driven clusters, via exporting expertise and solutions to European and international regions in need of effective methods and tools for water preservation.
Project Results:
The main S&T results and foregrounds of the BalticFlows project fall into two categories: i) project deliverables and ii) project events. These are described in the following &T Sections 1 and 2.
S&T SECTION 1. PROJECT DELIVERABLES
In total, the BalticFlows project produced 29 deliverables, which are described in the following sections.
WP1: PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION
Work package 1 produced nine deliverables:
- D1.1 Project progress and management report 1;
- D1.2 Project progress and management report 2;
- D1.3 Minutes of PMB meeting 1;
- D1.4 Minutes of PMB meeting 2;
- D1.5 Minutes of PMB meeting 3;
- D1.6 Minutes of PMB meeting 4;
- D1.7 Minutes of PMB meeting 5;
- D1.8 Minutes of PMB meeting 6, and
- D1.9 Minutes of PMB meeting 7.
These deliverables were administrative by nature, and thus are not explained here in further detail.
WP2: DEVELOPMENT OF RAINWATER MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT CLUSTER IN THE BALTIC SEA REGION
Work package 2 produced three deliverables:
- D2.1 Report on regional capacities in the BSR;
- D2.2 Report on project-wide workshops 1 and 2, and
- D2.3 Report on networking with regional stakeholders and contingency plan.
*** Summary of D2.1 Report on regional capacities in the BSR (248 pages).
The purpose of D2.1 was to present the project's findings on regional capacities and capabilities in the fields of rainwater management and water monitoring in the Baltic Sea Region. A survey was conducted to give an overview of organisations in the Baltic Sea Region that are working on the topics of rainwater management and water monitoring. A total of 310 organisations were contacted in Tallinn, Estonia; Riga, Latvia; Turku, Finland; Uppsala, Sweden, and Hamburg, Germany, of which 141 responded to the survey.
According to the survey, most respondents were micro-organisations (76), more than 20 years old (73) and had no idea of their budget (63). Respondents were typically involved in several disciplines in the general field of water, foremostly: water treatment (126); wastewater related technologies (123); stormwater management (115); modelling and prognoses (113); stormwater quality or quantity measurement (106); stormwater collection (91), and precipitation monitoring (78). Respondents also operated in several different roles: investigating (209), designing (154), developing (124), creating policies or legislation (75), buying (74), and selling (59).
In the analysis, a total of 162 relevant technologies were identified. The most commonly offered technologies were: stormwater quality or quantity measurement (34); stormwater management (29); modelling and prognoses (27); water treatment (16); consulting, seminars and events (12); wastewater related technologies (8); data management (7), and stormwater collection (7).
In development activities, respondents indicated as their main strengths:
- skills and competences of employees;
- internal functioning of organisation;
- availability of skilled local professionals and competence, and
- usage of the most up-to-date technology,
and the main weaknesses were:
- lack of financial means, and
- credit policies in banks.
In export activities, respondents indicated as their main strengths:
- communication in export country and language skills;
- international experience;
- calibration of product or service to fit demand of the export market, and
- competence in sales,
and the main weaknesses were:
- coping with competition, laws and regulations, bureaucracy and the economic situation in export markets, and
- lack of knowledge on preferences of export markets and their consumers.
*** Summary of D2.2 Report on project-wide workshops 1 and 2 (121 pages)
D2.2 is a report on two project-wide workshops implemented as part of WP2. The first workshop took place in Tallinn, Estonia on December 2-4, 2014 and the second workshop in Uppsala, Sweden on December 1-3, 2015.
The report consists of two main topics: i) a description of workshops 1 and 2 and ii) the annexes. The topics are structured by their main objectives; related actions and activities that were carried out are listed under each objective. The annexes include lists of invitees and participants, as well as the agendas, initiatives and slides presented at the workshops.
A. Project-wide workshop 1, Tallinn, Estonia
One of the main objectives of project-wide workshop 1 was to find new and develop existing common initiatives and joint activities. During the workshop, existing initiatives were introduced by the stakeholders from Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia and Sweden. Later, the initiatives were scattered in the presentation hall and participants who were interested in certain topics, could form dynamic workgroups to identify problems or set common objectives, plan joint actions, find partners and plan the usage of resources. Organisations were not restricted to one problem or objective and could participate in all the topics they were interested in. Overall, three new initiatives were set and seven existing initiatives were developed further. During the last two days of the workshop, the BalticFlows consortium also worked on the set initiatives collectively and planned further joint activities. BalticFlows members went through each initiative and discussed the possibilities and opportunities from each cluster or country.
B. Project-wide workshop 2, Uppsala, Sweden
Project-wide workshop 2 took place in Uppsala, Sweden as a three-day event.
The main goals of the workshop were:
i) to gather institutions and professionals from academia, private and public sectors to share experience, discuss best practices on stormwater management and diffuse load monitoring
ii) to facilitate the development of new international project initiatives on stormwater management and diffuse load monitoring
iii) to be informed about available EU funding opportunities in the water sector.
The first day comprised a BalticFlows partner meeting at Uppsala County Administrative Board. D2.2 focuses on the main activities carried on during the second and third day of the event, which were open to participants external to the BalticFlows project.
The second day of the event was devoted to a one-day workshop that took place in the facilities of the main building of Uppsala University. The activities proposed during the second day were open to participants out-side of the consortium. Altogether, more than 300 invitations were sent out9 to stakeholders and about 40 participated in the workshop10. The main goal of this event was to offer insights from the academic sector on stormwater management and diffuse load monitoring and an overview of the EU funding opportunities in the water sector.
The third day was again an open event, held at the Uppsala County Administrative Board facilities with the goal of facilitating networking amongst interested stakeholders and continuing the discussion items brought forth during the workshop on stormwater management and diffuse load monitoring.
*** Summary of D2.3 Report on networking with regional stakeholders and contingency plan (78 pages)
D2.3 is a report on regional networking and presents a contingency plan for the BalticFlows project. The introduction section gives a short overview of the project, its goals and the stakeholders and beneficiaries involved. The report is structured so that the first part focuses on regional networking and gives insight on networking activities that had been carried out in each participating region. The second part of the report introduces the contingency plan and gives an overview of activities that had been or were planned to be carried out, ensuring that work towards the objectives of BalticFlows will continue even beyond the formal project duration. In the final part of the report, there are appendices to help the reader to understand some specific parts of the report more thoroughly. This description focuses on the contingency plan; for details on the other sections, please see D2.3.
The report presents a plan to ensure that the overall vision developed during the BalticFlows project would be pursued beyond the project lifetime. The plan suggests formation of the "BalticFlows Association", consisting of official BalticFlows project partners and additional regional stakeholders. It would not be limited to existing regions and partners, and would also include other areas from the Baltic Sea Region. The contingency plan follows three steps: at first the goals are defined, after which the current situation is assessed, and finally an implementation plan is formulated.
The main goals for the BalticFlows Association would derive from the BalticFlows project and from knowledge gathered from project activities, serving as an overall vision for the Association:
i) to reduce the number of pollutants entering the Baltic Sea, thus improving the overall ecological state of the sea;
ii) to increase the Baltic Sea regions’ academia and public authorities innovation and research capacity with a focus on cross-border cooperation and exchange of know-how, and
iii) to increase the capacities of SMEs working in the field of rainwater monitoring and management through cooperation and joint research and marketing activities.
The logic of the BalticFlows Association is that in order to succeed in the global market, universities, public authorities and private companies in the Baltic Sea Region must come together to match the demand of large markets. Also, in order to achieve the goals, we need to first test and use the products and solutions in our own area, and by such means also reducing the number of pollutants entering the Baltic Sea.
For further details on the contingency plan and the envisioned BalticFlows Association, please see D2.3.
WP3: URBAN STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
Work package 3 produced six deliverables:
- D3.1 Interim directory of RTD offer/demand in urban stormwater mgmt;
- D3.2 Interim report on new knowledge on urban stormwater mgmt;
- D3.3 Analysis of potential regions for mentoring in urban stormwater mgmt;
- D3.4 Report on demand and challenges for miniaturised water monitoring technology in urban catchments;
- D3.5 Final directory of RTD offer/demand in urban stormwater mgmt, and
- D3.6 Final report on new knowledge on urban stormwater mgmt.
As D3.1 and D3.2 are interim reports, these are not described here.
*** Summary of D3.3 Analysis of potential regions for mentoring in urban stormwater mgmt (65 pages)
Since the project aim is to gather and analyse the best practices in urban stormwater management, one of its key objectives focused on evaluating the transferability of techniques by means of identifying the success factors and working principles of the best urban stormwater management practices. Therefore, the main aim of this D3.3 was to evaluate successful strategies used in the Baltic Sea Region (BSR) and other regions (countries outside BSR), and recommend which countries should be mentored.
The specific objectives of the report were:
i) to evaluate and identify the key working principles of the main types of urban decentralised stormwater management systems;
ii) to identify relevant parameters for adoption and transferability for these systems;
iii) to analyse the transferability potential of these systems and potential mentoring regions in the European Region with a special focus on the Baltic Sea Region, and
iv) to analysis the transferability potential of these systems and potential mentoring regions at worldwide level.
1. Potential European regions for mentoring
Europe as a geographical region shows a relatively high transferability potential for decentralised urban stormwater management systems because of the generalised high levels of annual precipitation. In addition, cities like Brussels (Belgium), Paris (France), London (England), Amsterdam (Netherlands), Copenhagen (Denmark), Dublin (Ireland), Warsaw (Poland), Riga (Latvia), Helsinki (Finland), and Stockholm (Sweden) may show high risk to present heavy rainfalls in the next 50 years. Furthermore, countries like Sweden, Norway, England, Switzerland, southern Germany, northern Italy and Austria show an overall low permeability. Therefore, this should entail difficulties to the implementation of infiltration systems for bioretention systems, bioswales and permeable pavements. Cities with more than 3-10% such as Zurich and Geneva (Switzerland), Salzburg (Austria); Lyon (France) and Turin (Italy) show a low transferability potential for bioswales.
In addition, some less developed regions in the European Union could benefit from lessons learned in developed countries and also improve their urban stormwater management. As a few examples, the report mentions Lithuania and Croatia as EU member states that should improve their stormwater management and could benefit from imported know-how and solutions.
2. Potential international regions for mentoring
The main potential mentoring areas at international level are:
a) South America, Eastern USA, Western Canada, Western Africa, Central America, Southeast Asia and Melanesia are identified as potential areas for transferability in terms of rain-fall distribution;
b) Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, some parts of India, Mexico and Iran are identified as potential regions for transferability in terms of reducing groundwater stress;
c) Relevant legislation in South Korea has a high transferability potential to the Baltic Sea Region and other EU regions. This country is very advanced in terms of cooperation with the private sector to develop green infrastructures (i.e. urban stormwater system is defined as a part of green infrastructure). Their experiences may be transferred to other countries in order to promote decentralised urban stormwater management systems;
d) Green roofs show potential to be transferred to USA. More than 15 federal funding sources exist for supporting the implementation of green infrastructure;
e) Based on GDP analysis, North America, Europe and Australia can be clearly distinguished as areas with high GDP levels. However, emerging economies may actually show the highest potential for implementation at international level.
*** Summary of D3.4 Report on demand and challenges for miniaturised water monitoring technology in urban catchments (33 pages)
One important component in the context of urban stormwater management is the water monitoring, which is considered an essential tool and basis foundation for water management in general. D3.4 focuses on one major aspect of water monitoring: water quality monitoring. Successful realisation of water quality measures depends on the effective development of water resource management programs. Therefore water quality analysis, which forms a base for the decision making process regarding water resource management, requires constant monitoring of the different water quality parameters.
The report undertakes an analysis of global needs and demands for miniaturised water quality monitoring, and outlines market opportunities in Europe. It also describes challenges for miniaturised water quality monitoring and presents technologies in place and under development. An extensive but non-exhaustive list of instruments and technologies can be found in Annex I of the report. The report concludes with an outlook on water quality monitoring in urban catchments.
A global review and analysis of demand and challenges of miniaturised water monitoring technologies and devices indicate rapid development and expansion of the field. Among the main drivers are water related legislation, climate change, availability of drinking water and prevention of health risks, high cost of currently used equipment, extensive water quality data processing, as well as technological advances in materials, electronics, computing and telecommunications systems. Experts point out advantages of miniaturisation of water quality monitoring devices such as reduction of production, maintenance and calibration costs, a possibility to merge various technologies for monitoring of different water parameters into a single system, reduction of time required to obtain, transfer and process measurement results. There is already a significant response to the needs for monitoring improvements and market opportunities are on the table.
However, there are also a number of challenges associated with development and usage of such devices. For example, currently, there are no broadly agreed international standards or developed methods that allow for large-scale, online, reliable and cost-effective data to be acquired, integrated and applied. Further technological development and improvement is required in the area of increasing the level of performance, reliability and robustness of monitoring devices.
The challenge in supervision and monitoring of undesired pollution substances in stormwater is growing at the same pace as cities expand. Natural paths of rainwater or wastewater are not only affected and changed by mega cities, but also by small cities with large hard covered ground areas for buildings or parking areas that force all precipitation into stormwater systems. Stormwater is normally separated from wastewater in developed countries, where wastewater cleaning is managed by sewage treatment plants. Stormwater is expected to contain less waste and is forwarded with less treatment into lakes or streams. However it is now proven that urban stormwater is a great risk for contamination of drinking water sources and to the ecological status of water bodies. Therefore, national and EU regulations are focusing on monitoring and early warning systems in this area. Since stormwater events can lead to a rapid pollution with numerous contaminants, there is a need for a fine grain warning system with realtime monitoring.
The cost of a high density monitoring system using today’s expensive sensors and analytic methods is extremely high. Most of experts agree that a possible solution must rely on miniaturised and low cost sensors that are communicating in real time with a central supervision and warning instance. Preferably these low cost sensors should also use wireless communication to reduce installation costs.
*** Summary of D3.5 Final directory of RTD offer and demand in urban stormwater management (136 entries, 12 pages)
In order to move towards a common goal and a successful strategy the field of urban stormwater management, a foundation of strong partners from the academic to public and private sectors is paramount. Current technological development and implementation in urban stormwater management across the Baltic has proven instrumental to demonstrate regional excellence while opening up golden opportunities for water innovation and market development.
Compiled around a specific listing of organisations with strong stormwater management and monitoring focus, the directory is an up-to-date inventory of key stakeholders from public, private and academic sectors consolidating five Baltic Flows regional networks in Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, and Sweden. As a communication tool, this directory offers opportunities for large and small organisations, industry, and SMEs, to share with an international community, their current research, products, practices, services, and areas of strength; and it presents a clear view of where the current demand and offer in urban stormwater management is concentrated. This directory is a contribution towards the development of a transnational vision of technological development and economic growth aimed at boosting innovation, competitiveness and smart specialisation potential in the field of urban stormwater management and monitoring.
The 136 listed organisations were classified into academic, public, and private sectors. Public sector organisations were mainly composed of local and regional authorities, water utility entities and governmental organisations. The group of private sector organisations included a range of SMEs, businesses providing engineering services as well as private-sector companies actively involved in technology development. The academic sector was composed of a mix of research institutions, universities of applied sciences and other research organisations with a water focus.
*** Summary of D3.6 Final report on new knowledge on urban stormwater management (119 pages)
D3.6 is a report offering a comprehensive overview of best practices and knowledge in the field of urban stormwater management (USWM) in the Baltic Sea Region, covering findings from Germany, Latvia, Finland, Sweden and Estonia. From a set of different perspectives, it provides its readers new knowledge in urban stormwater management and gives some recommendations for future economic, technical, and environmental development that can benefit and improve the current and future state of the Regions.
Insights on the current regional and global USWM technologies and best practices were collected from survey questionnaires, internal regional reports, and a literature review. The four most popular technologies identified in the region (i.e. green roof, porous pavement, bioretention basins, and bioswales) have been selected for further evaluation and applicability based on the characteristics of each technology and country-specific information which the BalticFlows partners provided. The significance of those USWM technologies has then been assessed from a strategic, a technological and a life-cycle oriented angle: i) through a SWOT analysis; ii) through a technological evaluation; and iii) by means of a life-cycle, i.e. holistic, assessment of a distinctive local case of two kinds of trench systems, a popular approach to manage large quantities of stormwater runoff.
The effectiveness of the implementation of methods and applied technologies was found highly dependent on site-specific conditions ranging from soil type; climatic, geographical, and typographical conditions of a given area. For example, technologies such as green roofs showed extensive development in the Hamburg region however with less acceptance in the region of Riga. The evaluation of green roofs technologies, for the purpose of this report, was based on the retention capacity of the systems with results showing positive outcomes ranging anywhere from 50-90 percent total stormwater retention per rain event. The other technologies analysed, i.e. porous pavements, bioretention systems and bioswales, demonstrated high retention and infiltration capacities contributing to the integration of decentralised Water Sensitive Urban Design methods and best management practices into the stormwater management agenda.
Results from an assessment conducted for trench technologies show that, under the preconditions of the analyses, plastic systems are superior to conventional gravel systems in the evaluated impact categories – one system consisted of gravel, surrounded by PP-geotextile, the other one of half-pipe plastic shells with holes. However, no conclusions can be drawn from these models as to whether decentralised management practices are more beneficial than centralised systems. As best management practices for water runoff control are site- and case-specific, so are the LCA results.
With regards to the urban context, continuous growth in urbanisation keeps creating challenges for implementing strategies that require additional space. For instance, in the country of Finland, there is a need for stormwater management practices to be implemented in dense urban cores. In this case, a combination of technologies and methods would need to be considered to effectively address space requirements on the ground needed for the installation of bioretention/bioswales systems.
Furthermore, successful implementation of stormwater technologies demonstrate the need for an integrative approach and utilisation of combined methods. That is, a single technology will more likely not solve issues concerning excessive runoff and flooding. To be effective, an inclusive approach and mix of technologies needs to be oriented towards solving specific urban stormwater problems. Cities are undergoing transformation in the way resources will need to be utilised in the future. There is an obvious need to shift from long-established conventional approaches towards innovative sustainable solutions. With this in mind, a common trend that was found in the sustainable approach to stormwater management relates to three main core benefits:
i) a more ‘natural’ water cycle;
ii) enhancement of water security through local source diversification, and
iii) water resource efficiency and reuse.
Political and regulatory frameworks also require that we take a closer look at the responsibilities and interests that are specific to each region and that differ from country to country – this as well as an analysis of the current state of the water management resources where participating regions show significant differences.
Further support for transnational capacity-building and exchange of best practices, has been carried out through the mapping of important knowledge networks and actors in RTD, finance and investment, highlighting regional opportunities, demands and needs. Economic factors have been addressed based on short and long term benefits and co-benefits through a cost-benefit analysis approach to planning whereas the availability of proper financial mechanisms that take into consideration private and public sectors is an area for further research.
WP4: WATER MONITORING VIA CITIZEN ACTIVITY
Work package 4 produced two deliverables:
- D4.1 Interim report on new knowledge on water monitoring via citizen activity, and
- D4.2 Final report on new knowledge on water monitoring via citizen activity.
As D4.1 is an interim report, is it not described here.
*** Summary of D4.2 Final report on new knowledge on water monitoring via citizen activity (98 pages)
The purpose of water monitoring is often to observe or verify that it is suitable for certain use. The most critical question is and always will be the following: is this water drinkable? People are also interested in knowing if the waters are safe to swim in or fish from. In addition, regular citizens are being more aware of and interested in the state of their local environment. Water quality is amongst the most important concerns, especially if one lives near to a lake, stream or river.
Beneficial monitoring of any water system, like a stream, does not happen by a single measurement of water but rather requires measurements from various places and time periods. By observing the variation in water quality in various places over time will unveil the real state of water on a larger and valuable scale. Also, it enables drawing real conclusions of development of the state of water.
The report considered the importance of environmental water monitoring around the Baltic Sea, especially the citizen activity related to it. Taking into account the amount of the interesting water areas around us, the only way to notably grow the amount of knowledge of water areas is to enable active citizens to participate in the process as a whole.
The modern day volunteer is not necessarily willing to donate a fixed amount of time on a regular basis. To balance the needs of the monitoring programme, researchers, regional authorities and the active citizens participating in the monitoring process, we see it very important to cooperate with all of the stakeholders, much like the quadruple helix model used in Open Innovation 2.0 approach.
Communities and structures around environmental monitoring are seen very necessary to make the activities appealing and to encourage participation. No standardised methods to encourage citizen participation exist, but participation is based on single efforts and ad-hoc initiatives. A citizen initiative support and integration framework for environmental decision-making on European Union level is much called for.
Various communities, both present and previous initiatives to enable and boost citizen activity in environmental water monitoring have been presented in detail. Despite the amount of resources and effort that has been utilised we are yet to achieve a recognised, operating and coherent network that can not only provide active citizens the possibility to concretely participate in the process but also provide trustworthy information to anyone interested including various authorities and experts.
Citizens, also known as non-experts, and the environmental water monitoring data they would collect, causes somewhat wide controversy; whether the data is reliable at all, not to mention the huge potential this resource can provide to everyone. Scientists and authorities share their concerns regarding the usage of data collected by untrained volunteers. Citizen science projects not only raise these concerns but also aim at answering them. The reliability issues are recognised, and we state that with modern technologies we can overcome these issues. Active citizens participating in environmental water monitoring can be properly trained, and by developing automated measurement systems and on-site analysis methods the data, although not perfectly accurate, will definitely provide more opportunities than disadvantages.
Technology will ease possible citizen contribution in the field of environmental monitoring using wireless low cost monitoring equipment, but it is not really a commercial market since reward systems are not encouraging participation of any large number of citizens. Some environmental enthusiasts or social media addicts may keep delivering for a longer time than academic projects lasts, but systematic models for a sustainable, stable and long time delivery system does not seem to exist yet. On the other hand, European Union and regional country authorities and local administrators focus on conservative, classic technology with a low number of larger and expensive and scientific installations. How shall the potential of citizen contribution be properly harnessed and exploited?
The future, as stated in the report, holds many answers to the question above. Visions of future trends and challenges have been outlined. The current level of technology is not the fundamental barrier. It is the people and social responsibility from top to below. Mature industrial countries where the society has developed complex processes and structures that formally serve the citizens’ needs have even created social patterns that reduce social responsibility, social innovations and engagement. Engaging citizens in common processes where direct visibility and value creation will surely increase inclusion processes and create more sustainable social and democratic societies.
D4.2 was based in part on two surveys carried out in the five participating regions, with a total of 813 respondents.
WP5: DIFFUSE LOAD MONITORING
Work package 5 produced six deliverables:
- D5.1 Interim directory of RTD offer/demand in diffuse load monitoring;
- D5.2 Interim report on new knowledge on diffuse load monitoring;
- D5.3 Analysis of potential regions for mentoring in diffuse load monitoring;
- D5.4 Report on demand and challenges for miniaturised water monitoring technology in rivers and streams;
- D5.5 Final directory of RTD offer/demand in diffuse load monitoring, and
- D5.6 Final report on new knowledge on diffuse load monitoring.
As D5.1 and D5.2 are interim reports, these are not described here.
*** Summary of D5.3 Analysis of potential regions for mentoring in diffuse load monitoring (6 pages)
D5.3 describes the type of expertise that Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia and Sweden could offer to other areas in Europe or globally, with the main focus on mentoring potential in the field of diffuse load monitoring. The report also describes current needs, global demand and identify potential bottlenecks in water quality monitoring with a special focus on diffuse load monitoring.
Five themes in the field of water quality monitoring were highlighted as potential areas to provide mentoring to other regions, which are described below.
i) Long-term water management and monitoring programs. Especially Sweden, Finland and Germany have extensive experience in long-term monitoring concerning both diffuse loading and monitoring of point sources. Many Eastern European countries are potential regions for mentoring at the European level. For example Poland is one of the major contributors of nutrients into the Baltic Sea due to its intensive agriculture and it would benefit from the diffuse load management and monitoring expertise the region has to offer. On a global scale, the in-depth expertise of the BalticFlows consortium linked with long term water management and monitoring programs could potentially benefit all developing countries struggling with water management issues.
ii) Open monitoring data and water quality databases. The region has a lot expertise in data handling, storage and especially in open water quality databases, and many of the databases administrated by environmental authorities are at least partly open and offer restricted or open access to companies, research organisations and NGOs involved water quality management. Some water quality databases can also be accessed openly by the public. Some of these databases have interactive features and offer a possibility for all interested parties to contribute to water quality monitoring with water quality observations. Public awareness on water quality issues is increased by offering the public new accessible platforms for submitting citizen observations.
iii) Higher education in water quality and sensor development. Numerous universities and research organisations in the region offer higher education in water quality monitoring, water protection strategies, IT solutions and sensor technologies. The education is linked with research activities carried out in the universities and companies and thus provide students with good know-how in field realities and practical R&D work. Mentoring in teaching practices that increase students’ creativity and practical know-how would be especially beneficial to regions where university education is mainly focused on accumulating theoretical knowledge, such as Eastern Europe, Africa, Asia and South America. In some cases the language skills of students may present a barrier and thus it may be more effective to target the mentoring to the teacher level.
iv) Interaction between authorities, companies and research institutions ('triple helix' model). In participating BalticFlows regions, functional and open co-operation between regional research organisations, private companies and authorities is a common way of working, and this type of 'triple helix' co-operation has also become a well-established working model in Europe. However, direct every-day co-operation at triple helix level is not that common globally. BalticFlows regions could offer mentoring in building up networks involving authorities, private companies and research organisations. Providing good examples of the benefits of the culture of open exchange could encourage many developing countries in e.g. Asia and Africa in building healthier co-operation between water monitoring authorities, businesses and research organisations. The triple helix model is also a good way to increase innovation potential by opening up new collaboration between different actors.
v) Expertise in technologies suitable for cold climate conditions. Due to its northerly position and seasonal variations, the region has accumulated a lot of expertise in operating at cold climates. Winter conditions are demanding with regards to water quality monitoring and water management, and require tailored technical solutions. There are a lot of ongoing R&D activities focusing in cold climate water quality technologies. The Baltic Flows project region could offer mentoring to other regions situated or operating in colder climates, including mountainous regions in the European Union. On the other hand, the Northern parts of United States and Canada have also developed strong expertise in this area. In the future, both North America and the Baltic Sea region would benefit from increased exchange of expertise on cold climate water monitoring technologies.
*** Summary of D5.4 Report on demand and challenges for miniaturised water monitoring technology in rivers and streams (9 pages)
Currently used water monitoring methods are based upon occasional samplings, manual methods in data management and limited use of costly continuous monitoring devices do not enable continuous surveillance of large geographical areas or water streams with diffuse load of pollutants. D5.4 discusses some of the opportunities, challenges and bottlenecks of transition from existing water quality monitoring technologies to a new era of autonomous low-cost water monitoring systems.
Availability of methods for early detection, identification and characterisation of pollution in natural flowing waters is currently limited due to the cost of the monitoring equipment, the need for frequent maintenance and the lack of efficient data mining tools. The cost of monitoring equipment puts limitations on the provision of high resolution data on diffuse and unidentified pollution sources. A need for low-cost high resolution monitoring solutions is obvious.
A possible solution for these problems is the development of low-cost autonomous, self-sufficient and maintenance free monitoring equipment that may be distributed in a large scale to increase the number of measurement points and consequently improve the resolution of water quality data. Alternatives to this approach may be advanced to air-borne advanced multi-wavelength monitoring (e.g. satellites, unmanned aerial vehicles or other moving objects in air) or autonomous underwater vehicles (AUV). Future advances in technology will probably enable all these solutions, resulting in a high quality surveillance system where data fusion from all these types of monitoring will be important.
Despite the fast uptake of new measuring technologies in many applications, such as monitoring of the human body and indoor air quality measurements, the sensors and technologies used in continuous in-situ water quality monitoring have not significantly changed over the last 15 years. The reasons for this are partly related to limited financial resources for water monitoring purposes and to the lack of links between high-end sensor technology experts and water monitoring experts. However, there are some technical challenges, specially affecting measurements in the context of rivers, streams and ditches that would need to be resolved.
The largest challenge when considering the design of a wireless networked water monitoring system is to provide a good solution for the power supply. It is challenging to harvest and store sufficient energy for each node in the system to remain active and provide the necessary services for the data chain or network for area monitoring. The more energy can be harvested, the more functionality can be implemented in each sensor node. Since electronics and software are not the biggest bottlenecks in creating good operational networks, the main challenges are in the energy harvesting power systems and physical sensor areas.
Efforts should therefore be targeted at methods, which would solve the problem of harvesting energy from the local environment or physical conditions. Water sensing applications working with continuous water flow would benefit from harnessing energy from the water flow. Thermal energy could also be a promising solution to provide for the energy needs of these devices. However, if no regular water flow is expected, the system should have some alternative energy sources. Especially if sensor conversion methods are using high energy levels, local energy storage or batteries must be used. Currently there is no established commercial measuring devices that would get their energy directly from flowing water.
Furthermore, flowing water is a challenging environment to measure. The device must endure mechanical stress and temperature variations (including frost) and the electrical parts should be encapsulated in a way that water cannot harm the electronics. In addition, the device should be able to operate for extended periods without maintenance. Fouling of the sensors is another problem. All devices currently used in field conditions have some kind of a cleaning system. The problem is that the cleaning systems increase the size, price and the energy consumption of the device.
One of the bottlenecks for resolving these technical challenges is that companies or research organisations developing novel sensor technologies have very good expertise in the sensing technology, but often lack expertise that would allow them to overcome problems in harnessing the sensing element into use in environmental conditions, in the form of a complete monitoring device that can enter the markets. Thus, co-operation between sensor developers and companies that can use the sensors in their monitoring solutions would need to be increased.
*** Summary of D5.5 Final directory of RTD offer and demand in diffuse load monitoring (117 entries, 5 pages)
D5.5 is the final directory of diffuse load monitoring stakeholders and RTD actors from the regions of Hamburg, Riga, Tallinn, Turku and Uppsala. The directory contains information of 117 different organisations that have been determined relevant on the demand and/or supply side.
Entities from all three segments of the triple helix – research, business and public administration – are well represented in the directory. In the future, D5.5 shall serve as a first-hand source for any person or organisation interested in diffuse load monitoring matters in Tallinn region, Southwest Finland, Northern Germany, Riga Planning Region, or Uppsala region.
*** Summary of D5.6 Final report on new knowledge on diffuse load monitoring (100 pages)
D5.6 is a report on monitoring diffuse loads, which relate to the uptake and transport of nutrients, hazardous substances and particles. It addresses the existing legal frameworks for diffuse load monitoring, the available technologies, and the existing educational, professional and scientific competences in the project region. The report highlights the common achievements but also identifies the development potential for more effective diffuse load monitoring in the project region and the EU. Through comparison with global monitoring practices and competences, the report emphasises the excellence that exists in all diffuse load monitoring related fields in the project region. The project results indicate that the region has the potential to develop into a global "Region of Excellence" in diffuse load and water quality monitoring.
The BalticFlows project assessed the existing national and EU frameworks that regulate diffuse load and water quality monitoring, their regional implementation and used methods and technologies. To provide a representative overview on the current practices, technologies and needs in the project region and EU, extensive literature reviews and interviews with experts and policy makers were conducted. In addition, information on current practices from all participating countries were obtained through the distribution of questionnaires among national experts and authorities. The survey results identified the achievements and development potential in diffuse load monitoring practices in all related disciplines: policy making, environmental administration, monitoring, and technology. The regional situation was put in a global context through case studies on diffuse load monitoring in the USA, South America and Asia. The global perspective indicated a significant potential for technological, educational, and legislative knowhow export from the project region.
Water quality and diffuse load monitoring in the Baltic Flows countries is considered to be at a globally competitive level. Existing regulations and policies provide a good base for comprehensive monitoring though there is potential for improvements concerning the implementation of these regulations. A global demand exists for low-cost, automated monitoring technologies. From a technological point of view it would therefore be desirable that the regional and EU regulations would liberate the use of innovative, automated monitoring techniques. This could improve the existing EU water quality monitoring infrastructure on the one hand, and foster commercial developments in the project region on the other.
To make better use of the generated data and to foster international collaboration, common data collection, processing and storage standards should be developed. Ultimately, water quality monitoring data should be available to at least authorities and environmental and research organisations through one data base. Despite existing bottlenecks in current water quality monitoring regulations, practices and technologies, the BalticFlows project clearly showed that its participating countries have an outstanding experience and expertise in water quality monitoring related research, education, technology development and policy making. One of the regional strengths is the active collaboration between these different stakeholders that creates an enabling and creative environment for innovation. The Baltic Flows project helped to strengthen these collaborations and to harmonise water quality monitoring activities among the project countries. The project demonstrated that the creation of local clusters may provide support for SMEs to capitalise their expertise by building international networks with other companies and customers. Further, the project showed that pooling of expertise in water quality monitoring and close technologies as ICT, medical diagnostics or energy harvesting technologies, have the potential to boost globally desired low-cost, online water quality monitoring technologies.
Given that sufficient funding for projects similar to BalticFlows would be available, the region may develop to a global leader in developing low-cost in-situ monitoring solutions and programs that build upon these technologies. Through the integration of proven citizen science activities and smart integration of other environmental data, water quality monitoring could be taken to a new level.
WP6: FORMULATION OF A JOINT ACTION PLAN
Work package 6 produced one deliverable:
- D6.1 Joint Action Plan and related business plans.
*** Summary of D6.1 Joint Action Plan and related business plans (72 pages)
D6.1 comprises two sections: the actual Joint Action Plan, and the Appendix "Joint Action Plan – Next Steps of the BalticFlows with Regional Strengths and BalticFlows Initiatives". The main content of these is described separately in the following sections.
1. Joint Action Plan
1.1 Towards a sustainable Citizen Union
Globalisation is placing increasing pressure upon competitiveness in all sectors of European industry. At the same time, we must pay close attention to the well-being of our environment, and the liveability and safety of our cities and regions, as short-term financial gains may bear a heavy long-term cost.
We believe that every European citizen has an idea; that every European – young or old; a woman or a man; from the north, south, east, west, or in between; of whichever ethnic or religious background – has an idea. An idea, and a dream of turning that idea into reality.
But every European does not wish to become an entrepreneur. A researcher may not be willing to enter into a lengthy patent filing process for creation of commercial value; he or she may simply prefer to publish research results for the benefit of mankind. Few inventors dare to draw out a personal mortgage and strive for commercial success without the security of a support network offered to regularly paid employees.
In Europe we have great ideas, unique inventions, and faith in our capabilities – but today the leap of faith, which one must take to turn his or her idea into reality, is still too long. And the leap does not necessarily even lead towards a direction desirable for the individual.
This complex, challenging competitive environment calls for a new way of thinking, by which we can fully benefit from the ingenuity, skills, experience and ambitions of each European citizen, empowering them to turn their ideas into reality. Effectively enabling the vast potential of all of our citizens will not only contribute to greater competitiveness of our economy, but also foster a sensation of collective success amongst the contributing population.
We need to build a Citizen Union. To achieve this, we need, in addition to the now launched Investment Plan for Europe, also an Engagement and Inspiration Plan for Europe to engage citizens, develop their ideas, bringing upon ownership towards their region, their nation and the European society.
We need to encourage and empower all of our citizens to use their best potential for the benefit of our society and industry, and discover the most inspiring rewards for a job well done.
The Engagement and Inspiration Plan for Europe will construct the Citizen Union based upon three cornerstones:
i) the Innovation Pillar. Gathering, organising and processing the global pool of citizens’ ideas, and finding the means to turn these to reality, thus contributing to European competitiveness;
ii) the Sustainability Pillar. Advancing sustainability by bringing life cycle thinking and assessment into everyday decisions of citizens, empowering citizens in monitoring and preserving our environment, and promoting safe urban living via smart rainwater management and harvesting, and
iii) the Engagement Pillar. Learning the driving motivation for each contributing citizen and creating matching reward schemes, leading to ownership and commitment towards joint actions.
We propose joint action, not only in Hamburg, Riga, Tallinn, Turku and Uppsala, but also in every region throughout Europe. An Engagement and Inspiration Plan for Europe without support from each city and region – from the local government, academia and industry but before all from the citizens – remains only a plan. We need to make this happen together. Endorsement, support and cooperation between European regions, Member States and key European institutions will be essential for successful implementation of the Engagement and Inspiration Plan for Europe, and to turn the sustainable Citizen Union into reality.
In the Baltic Sea Region, we have started work towards implementation of the Engagement and Inspiration Plan for Europe, seeking new means for engaging, inspiring and empowering our citizens. It is our goal to take and spread this momentum to all cities and regions in the European Union, leading to a stronger, competitive, sustainable Citizen Union by the year 2020.
1.2 Liveable, loveable cities
As the world continues to urbanise, sustainable development challenges will be increasingly concentrated in cities. Integrated policies to improve the lives of both urban and rural dwellers are required. As the concentration of population in cities and other urban areas grows, more citizens will be dependent on the same or interdependent water supplies.
Urban areas are not detached from their surroundings. Water consumed by urban citizens originates in broad catchment areas covering often very distant regions. Hence, policies and measures taken in distant rural regions, even in other countries, will have an impact on both the water quality available for a city, as well as upon the risk of urban flooding. For example, flood prevention measures taken in upstream regions often have a direct impact on the flood risk of subsequent downstream cities.
For a citizen of modern and future cities, the adequacy of our rainwater management policies and the effectiveness of their implementation materialises in several areas:
i) safety of water supply, for direct consumption or with indirect impact e.g. via food production;
ii) preservation and management of biodiversity, ecology and safety of waters used by citizens e.g. for recreational purposes;
iii) avoidance of damages caused by excessive rainwater, i.e. flooding, and
iv) avoidance of challenges due to water shortage, e.g. due to drought.
These areas are in many ways interrelated. The quality of our raw waters is influenced by many factors, including farmland erosion and urban runoff due to heavy rainfall. Rural runoff typically comprises fertilisers resulting in diffuse load pollution in seas or lakes; this again results in algae bloom preventing recreational use.
On the other hand, via smart rainwater harvesting we can convert stormwater – often a problem – into an asset used in ponds or channels of cities, for irrigation of urban green areas, or even as “grey” water in households, i.e. water suitable for sanitation but not directly for drinking. This in turn can reduce pressure from the water purification process of cities and thereby alleviate water shortages in areas of water scarcity, as many water-related needs can be managed directly with rainwater.
In many European cities, streets and buildings generally cover more than 50% of the urban surfaces. As the building infrastructure contributes significantly to the increase of impervious surfaces and water runoff, on-site methods that consider the reuse of rainwater, present tangible solutions. A successful stormwater management plan should take into account the characteristics of the urban fabric and implement solutions to minimise water pollution while in the meantime, compensating for the environmental impacts caused by development.
For example, strategies such as green roofs, offer a number of solutions for rainwater management through a decentralised system of water collection at the roof level. Green roofs present multiple benefits, reducing the volume of rainwater runoff, delaying and reducing peak stormwater flow rates, and reducing pollutants carried to water bodies through urban runoff. The implementation of green roofs makes the case for the efficient utilisation of unused space in dense urban areas where land availability is minimal. They provide ecosystem services and contribute to urban liveability by increasing the amount of green space accessible for health and recreation.
Financial incentives for implementation of on-site stormwater management systems may be applied: e.g. a system for split wastewater fees, where owners pay a reduced stormwater management fee if they can demonstrate that they manage the stormwater generated from their property on-site. Governments and regional authorities should support implementation of decentralised urban stormwater management practices for environmentally beneficial design decisions, such as green roofs or porous asphalt.
1.3 Citizens and the environment
Citizens could take a more active role spontaneously if they were provided with attractive means of getting involved not only in the planning phase of the water management, but also in the follow-up of the changes in the water quality. The water quality data should be openly available to the public in a visually attractive form and the citizens should be encouraged to submit their own observations to complement the official monitoring information. This would advance the transparency of the water protection and monitoring programs and develop the feeling of water stewardship in concerned citizens.
Traditional environmental information gathering is costly and labour intensive and the monitoring network is limited by the availability of financial resources. Engagement of the general public, non-governmental organisations, school groups and e.g. senior societies in the collection of water quality observations has the potential to gather large amounts of data to support long-term environmental monitoring programs and scientific research projects. Moreover, citizens that are active in water monitoring are more likely to participate also in the planning and execution of water protection measures.
Environmental monitoring offers the wider public the opportunity to be involved in shaping their society, scientific research and data collection in a meaningful way. At best, citizens who participate in monitoring initiatives shall feel empowered by their increased knowledge of environmental conditions and their ability to assist and make a difference.
Public participation in environmental monitoring can be achieved via different models, which may range from allowing an access to official data to collecting data as well as defining the system and logic behind the data collections. The first step in involving citizens in environmental monitoring is to provide information, such as the official statistics or measurement data to the public. Once data collection and public participation moves beyond this point, a plurality of legitimate perspectives need to be considered. The applicability of the data originating from unverified sources is a key question for both scientists and authorities.
To enable wide-scale European water monitoring via citizen participation, we need all stakeholders to combine forces, knowledge and activities under a coordinated environmental framework fuelled by participation of empowered citizens. Such participation is accommodated by the Sustainability Pillar of the Engagement and Inspiration Plan for Europe.
1.4 Sustainable planning evaluation tools
Successful planning and implementation of best management practices in urban stormwater management requires the inclusion of effective evaluation tools in order to guarantee sustainable results. To identify best solutions, a combination of environmental and economic driven assessment methods can ensure a holistic integration of these two major influencers in project development. That is, cost-effectiveness and the consideration of environmental benefits, risks, impacts, and externalities. Cost-Benefit Analysis and Life Cycle Assessment are among some of the most effective evaluation methods considering the above mentioned aspects.
The main purpose of a stormwater management technology is to protect people and areas from expected damages caused by stormwater and flooding. In most cases more than one technology is technically feasible and able to provide sufficient protection. So from an economic perspective, more criteria than the ability to protect the public have to be taken into consideration in order to make an optimal choice. Economic evaluation methods such as Cost-Benefit Analysis serve as tools to identify the best possible solution out of all options.
Cost-Benefit Analyses should be performed before the implementation of any stormwater technology. It ensures that the most cost-efficient option is chosen and impedes the implementation of disadvantageous alternatives. Therefore, Cost-Benefit Analysis promotes economic development by avoiding unnecessary high costs and a potential waste of public funds. However, carrying out a Cost-Benefit Analysis is a complex process due to the fact that costs and benefits are case-specific and vary strongly among the various applications. It is hardly possible to make general recommendations regarding which technologies might be superior. Thus a detailed analysis is necessary for every specific case.
1.5 Online, all the time!
The pollution load in our water bodies is the result of water flowing every minute of the year from all streams, ditches, drains and rivers. However, for example in the Baltic Sea, it is estimated that 90% of the total nutrient load comes during short peak flows, whereas chemical loads typically come from often unidentified point sources. Once in the sea, it is impossible to say where the pollution came from.
Current water monitoring programs are based on analyses of periodically taken samples, which do not reveal the whole spectrum of variations in water quality. Run-off peaks during floods or heavy rain, or accidental industrial leakages, may end up in the sea undetected and without alarm. To meet with the Water Framework Directive’s water quality monitoring requirements, measuring techniques are in need of profound institutional, technical and methodical improvements, and new measuring techniques should be developed.
The pollution load in our water bodies is the result of water flowing every minute of the year from all streams, ditches, drains and rivers. However, for example in the Baltic Sea, it is estimated that 90% of the total nutrient load comes during short peak flows, whereas chemical loads typically come from often unidentified point sources. Once in the sea, it is impossible to say where the pollution came from.
Current water monitoring programs are based on analyses of periodically taken samples, which do not reveal the whole spectrum of variations in water quality. Run-off peaks during floods or heavy rain, or accidental industrial leakages, may end up in the sea undetected and without alarm. To meet with the Water Framework Directive’s water quality monitoring requirements, measuring techniques are in need of profound institutional, technical and methodical improvements, and new measuring techniques should be developed.
Flowing water is a challenging environment to measure. The device must work despite of mechanical stress and temperature variations (including frost) and it should not get fouled. In addition, it would need to be able to harvest its own energy from the environment in order to operate for extended periods without maintenance.
In order to better understand the multiple sources polluting our natural waters, we should support the development of low-cost water quality measurement technologies that can autonomously measure and communicate over large areas and long periods of time. For new cutting-edge sensing solutions, we should strengthen funding for multidisciplinary research and commercial R&D in the crossroads of several areas of expertise: environmental science, electronics, information technology, cleantech, biotechnology and chemistry.
1.6 Regional smart specialisation and citizens
Smart specialisation enables the differentiation of innovation patterns according to the potentials and needs of a specific territory. It is crucial to mobilise internal assets and resources in fields where a country or a region is has strong potential.
In order to achieve sustainable serial innovation, innovation must be embedded within long-lived social institutions and networks. Four different sectors must be linked together: government, business, civil society, and academia, hereafter constituting the “quadruple helix”.
The ideas and actions of creative, capable citizens is the fuel for a creative society. In part, this can be captured by the traditional innovation process: turning ideas into patents, artistic sketches into product design, common sense into business models. But the potential of our citizens goes further, and ideas may lead to intangible benefits, contributing to quality of life, a better living environment, or a sensation of inclusion or success.
In many regions, smart specialisation strategies are planned by regional leaders and experts from the government, academia and industry with the “entrepreneurial or innovation discovery” in centre of the focus. However, in order to understand the latent potential in our regions, and create truly smart specialisation strategies that go beyond existing, known areas of strength, we need to more closely understand the know-how, experience and ideas of our citizens. We need to learn to motivate each citizen to engage with his or her society, to contribute to its smart specialisation strategy – and we need the will and means to listen and understand.
2. Appendix: Joint Action Plan – Next Steps of the BalticFlows with Regional Strengths and BalticFlows Initiatives
The Appendix for the Joint Action Plan was completed halfway into the project and was based upon reports generated by regional organisations by that time. These covered a range of expertise and technologies, as well as challenges and business opportunities of the participating regions for the water management and monitoring field.
The report listed 16 new cluster initiatives that had already been started by BalticFlows consortium members during the project. The report further comprised an analysis of regional strengths in each participating region in urban stormwater management and diffuse load monitoring, as well as regional activities concerning citizen participation. The identified regional strengths are summarised in the following.
2.1 Regional strengths in urban stormwater management
2.1.1 Hamburg region
Overall expertise:
- Retention and infiltration technologies for rainwater management;
- Integration of methods into urban landscape design. Planning of a stormwater management approach through the development of multi-functional spaces integrated into the existing urban conditions of sidewalks and street infrastructure.
Areas of particular strength:
- Green roof technologies;
- Implementation of instruments and incentives, e.g. green roof programme, split-tariff stormwater management scheme;
- Street and green space stormwater infrastructure including porous pavements, bioretention, bioswales;
- Water collection/cisterns;
- Experience of life cycle analysis.
2.1.2 Riga region
Overall expertise:
- River basin management;
- Precipitation, urban runoff monitoring and forecasting;
- Technical design of cost-effective stormwater management system;
- Flooding modelling program and forecasting by using satellite imagines;
Areas of particular strength:
- Meteorological observations and meteorological data monitoring system.
2.1.3 Tallinn region
Overall expertise:
- Urban planning of stormwater management;
- Designing stormwater management systems.
Areas of particular strength:
- Discharging stormwater to coastal sea according to marine water level (management and design of technical solutions).
2.1.4 Turku region
Overall expertise:
- Urban planning tools and methods;
- Flooding modelling and prognoses.
Areas of particular strength:
- Design of storm water management structures (wetlands);
- Use of geographical information and map services;
- Interactive visualisation and simulation of flooding scenarios;
- Sensors and GPRS loggers on the field to visualise rainwater management;
- Maintenance of sensor networks with cloud based software;
- Continuous water quality monitoring – use of modern continuous sensors applicable for stormwater quality and quantity monitoring;
- Filtration materials and technologies.
2.1.5 Uppsala region
Overall expertise:
- Stormwater management;
- Integration of rainwater management to urban landscape planning;
- Flooding modelling and prognoses;
- Disaster risk reduction.
Areas of particular expertise:
- Stormwater collecting and purifying ponds;
- Green and permeable surfaces;
- Green roof technology;
- Runoff generation processes;
- Design of storm water management structures (wetlands);
- Use of geographical information and map services;
- Interactive visualisation and simulation of flooding scenarios;
- Sensors and GPRS loggers on the field to visualise rainwater management;
- Maintenance of sensor networks with cloud based software.
2.2 Regional strengths in diffuse load monitoring
2.2.1 Hamburg region
Overall expertise:
- Precipitation, runoff and load monitoring;
- Design of water monitoring strategies/programs.
Areas of particular strength:
- Continuous diffuse load monitoring - methodology (strategies, reliability, maintenance, adaption procedures);
- Continuous diffuse load monitoring - technology/ development of continuous water quality monitoring sensors.
2.2.2 Riga planning region
Overall expertise:
- Surface and ground water quality monitoring and modelling;
- Design of water monitoring strategies/programs.
Areas of particular strength:
- Modelling and assessment of diffuse loading (erosion etc.);
- Developed environmental databases (precipitation, hydrological, water quality and water pressures databases).
2.2.3 Tallinn region
Overall expertise:
- Design of water monitoring strategies/programs;
- Monitoring network with continuous hydrological and hydrochemical measurement stations;
- Continuous diffuse load monitoring - methodology (strategies, reliability, maintenance, adaption procedures);
- Natural wetlands monitoring;
- Modelling of stormwater quantity and quality.
Areas of particular strength:
- Measurement of nutrient load in stormwater and surface water affecting coastal waters, assessment of eutrophication;
- Modelling and assessment of coastal erosion depending from storm- and seawater;
- Data loggers and water monitoring sensors.
2.2.4 Turku region
Overall expertise:
- Water quality monitoring technologies;
- Design of water monitoring strategies/programs.
Areas of particular strength:
- Continuous diffuse load monitoring – methodology (strategies, reliability, maintenance, adaption procedures);
- Solutions for data handling and storage;
- Database systems and user-friendly interface and data reporting;
- Methodology for data handling, data surveillance and post-calibration, emergent sensor development, adaptation of existent monitoring solutions (data loggers and platforms);
- Modelling and assessment of diffuse loading (erosion etc.);
- Other continuous in-situ monitoring solutions;
- Development of smaller devices to be used by non-professionals and identifying biological components (bacteria);
- Sensors know-how for water quality analysis;
- Solutions for stormwater quality monitoring (sensor technology; pollutants, oil detection).
2.2.5 Uppsala region
Overall expertise:
- Design of water monitoring strategies/programs;
- Monitoring programmes by public authorities;
- Well established and tested monitoring methods;
- Source apportionment modelling.
Areas of particular strength:
- Monitoring methods and technology;
- Solutions for data handling and storage;
- Monitoring of small agricultural streams and catchment areas;
- Maintenance of sensor networks with cloud based software;
- Continuous water quality monitoring - use of modern continuous sensors applicable for stormwater quality and quantity monitoring;
- Mitigation measures for reducing nitrogen and phosphorus loading.
WP7: COMMUNICATION AND DISSEMINATION
Work package 7 produced two deliverables:
- D7.1 Report on the communication infrastructures, and
- D7.2 Report on dissemination activities.
These deliverables were administrative by nature, and thus are not explained here in further detail.
S&T SECTION 2. PROJECT EVENTS
Much of the project S&T work was related to interaction with stakeholders at regional and national level, as well as between project partners in different EU member states. Therefore, project events and their outcomes constitute a fundamental part of the S&T results of the BalticFlows project, which are briefly summarised below. Further details can be found in section 3.2.3.4 of the Core of the Report, Periodic Report 2, as well as in D7.2 (Report on dissemination activities).
The BalticFlows project organised 15 formal events in Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Germany, Poland, Spain and Sweden. The kick-off meeting was organised on M01 on a ferry cruise between Finland and Sweden. Joint Action Plan (JAP) meeting 1 was in Tallinn, Estonia on M04 with further planning of project activities and the first Project Management Board (PMB) meeting. These were followed by three internal events: PMB meeting 2 in Riga, Latvia on M06, JAP meeting 2 in Hamburg, Germany on M10, and PMB meeting 3 in Uppsala, Sweden on M12.
The first major event of the project was on M15: Project-wide workshop 1 in Tallinn, Estonia. The event was aimed at organisations active in the field of rainwater monitoring and management from universities, the private and public sector, and the attendees were from Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia and Sweden.
This was followed on M19 by the JAP release event in Brussels, Belgium. Here the BalticFlows JAP was released to the public at a high-level event with attendees and speakers from the European Parliament, the European Commission and several other European-wide organisations, in addition to project partners.
On M22, the consortium met in Jurmala, Latvia to review plans to the latter half of the project. The next event on M24 in Hamburg, Germany comprised PMB meeting 5 but also featured an international symposium of urban stormwater management "1-Day Symposium on Sustainable Approaches to Urban Stormwater Management".
This was followed by a mentoring event on M25 in Gdansk, Poland "Solutions and Initiatives in Diffuse Load Monitoring" concerning diffuse load monitoring, aimed mainly at Polish stakeholders, such as local government officials, engineers, urban planners, practitioners, researchers, and participants in the BalticFlows project.
Project-wide workshop 2 was held in Uppsala, Sweden on M27, aimed at professionals working with water or environment issues interested in the exchanging knowledge and experience in stormwater management and diffuse load monitoring, in addition to others interested in EU funding opportunities for project initiatives in the water sector.
For practical reasons, the event planned for PMB meeting 6 was merged with the next event in Barcelona, Spain on M31 "Towards Smart Specialisation in Urban Stormwater Management: Integrating principles into Practice" concerning mentoring in the field of urban stormwater management, aimed at professionals from the public, private, and civil sectors, including representatives from local Barcelona provincial councils, practitioners and experts in the water field, researchers at universities and research institutes, SMEs, technology and product developers, and NGOs; and environmental organisations with a water focus.
On M33, the project organised an open seminar event in Turku, Finland, aimed at private companies, public organisations, academic researchers and participants in the BalticFlows project, with the theme "The Baltic Sea, our common Interest – Solutions and practices for the better future".
The final event was on M36 in Tallinn, Estonia, comprising PMB meeting 7 and a wrap-up meeting, but also featured an international conference "Who Owns Stormwater?", aimed at politicians, state and municipal authorities, designers, construction companies, city planners, as well as students and teachers from universities.
Potential Impact:
1. Overview
The Baltic Flows project aimed at leveraging existing experience, competence and technology in participating regions to create world-class excellence and a sustainable competitive edge in the areas of rainwater monitoring and management. Directed by a strong research-driven vision of a wide-scale distributed water quality monitoring capacity based upon mesh networks of self-powered wireless monitoring devices, project activities were closely interlinked with real-world realities in the technological and business domains.
The Baltic Flows project did not aim at creating a generic set of policies that could possibly benefit various industries or business sectors, but rather to build a strong foundation for meeting identified needs of technology and business actors aiming at excellence and global competitiveness in the specific fields of water monitoring and management. Therefore, the project aimed at identifying and addressing bottlenecks hampering the success of research, RTD, commercialisation and global marketing in these fields.
The Baltic Flows project was built upon a long-term vision of a wide-scale water real-time monitoring capacity operational throughout streams and rivers in the Baltic Sea region, in addition to world-class competence in and technology for monitoring and managing stormwater in urban areas. Within the consortium, there was high potential for mutually beneficial, sustainable collaboration between research organisations and the business sector.
In each participating region, the Baltic Flows project aimed at laying the foundation for smart specialisation strategies in either or both of the fields of water monitoring and water management, and via this aiming at fostering new private and public investments in participating regions via establishment of world-class competence, technological know-how and well-functioning ecosystems in the fields of water monitoring and management. In addition, mentoring activities included transfer of know-how and technological expertise in the field of water monitoring to stakeholders in Poland, and in the field of stormwater management to stakeholders in Spain.
The BalticFlows project raised awareness towards water quality, water monitoring and stormwater management issues in the Baltic Sea Region and beyond. The project also fostered new project initiatives in the Cleantech and Smart City sectors amongst project partners and regional stakeholders. The project further influenced development of regional smart specialisation strategies, and enabled close involvement in the planning and implementation of water-related collaboration between the European Union and China.
2. Potential impact, including socio-economic impact and wider societal implications
During the past five years, it is easy to list three "hot" topics related to the environment and governance that have become the particular focus of public discourse and attention in Europe, even globally: i) water; ii) citizen engagement; and iii) smart specialisation. In this light, it is astonishing that the BalticFlows project, planned back in the year 2011, was defined to focus exactly on these three topics – the relevance of the project to pressing real-world issues could not have been stronger! And consequently, the importance of, and justification for the work carried out during 2013-2016 by all 16 organisations in five EU Member States, in addition to one organisation serving as a link towards China, has remained clear to all partners throughout the project.
The awareness towards water, citizen participation and smart specialisation were all brought forth in the Joint Action Plan published in April 2015. During the latter half of the project, partners have continued discussions with regional stakeholders on these topics. Several high-profile events organised in conjunction with the project, including international conferences and seminars, have also helped to raise broader awareness towards these topics.
Impact can be seen at both regional and transnational levels. At regional level, stakeholders in each participating region – both project partners and others – have met regularly to discuss water-related challenges and solutions, covering both water quality and diffuse load monitoring, as well as city planning and urban stormwater management. In the spirit of the triple helix, representatives from research, business and government gathered regularly and became familiar with one another. In some cases, we also had the full quadruple helix present, especially in activities involving citizen participation (WP4).
It is clear that without the BalticFlows project, it is highly unlikely that representatives from such different areas of society would get together and meet. And it is even more unlikely that people not only from different professions, but also from different EU Member States, would get together to discuss these diverse, but at the same time common, challenges. Hence, the transnational benefit – strong regional clusters are complimented with support from similar clusters in other regions.
In this sense, the project has been a success: in each participating region, there are robust clusters that have together started to seek further joint financing especially from European funding sources, as can be seen in D2.3 (Report on Regional Networking and Contingency Plan). Furthermore, project partners in each region are committed to continue or support work related to the BalticFlows main themes beyond the project lifetime, as described in D7.2 (Report on dissemination activities), sections 2.1.7 2.2.6 2.3.7 2.4.7 and 2.5.7. Therefore, the transnational network of strong regional clusters are deemed to outlive the original BalticFlows project, and bring future opportunities for participating regions to jointly apply for European funding and develop their regional capacities within the themes of water quality, urban stormwater management, and citizen engagement.
During the project, European smart specialisation has taken a long leap forward, in part due to the ex ante conditionality imposed upon European Structural Funds during the current period 2014-2020 – in order to avoid restrictions on applying for funding, each European region was required to create and register a regional smart specialisation strategy. Timing-wise, this process was a perfect fit with BalticFlows, as smart specialisation was one of the integral themes of the project. Furthermore, thanks to the triple helix structure of the project consortium, each region already had its regional authority involved as a project partner, due to which there was a strong link in each participating region between BalticFlows and the regional smart specialisation formulation process. In some cases, the link was particularly strong: for example, Project Leader Mr. Tuomas Valtonen also acted as the Chairman of the Smart Specialisation Expert Group of Southwest Finland. Development of smart specialisation strategies is however an ongoing process, which will continue in each region beyond the duration of BalticFlows.
One particular aspect of the BalticFlows project was the external link towards China, via partner 15 ETI. Via this link, the consortium was provided with excellent insight on Chinese challenges and market opportunities. In addition, many new doors were opened in this area. For example, Coordinator 1 UTU was accepted to participate in Sino-Finnish water collaboration between the Ministry of Water Resources of the People's Republic of China and the Finnish Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. In addition, Project Leader Mr. Tuomas Valtonen carried out negotiations with the China-Europe Water Platform (CEWP), which led to Finland being accepted into core CEWP activities, with a seat on the Steering Group and coordination responsibility for the CEWP Water Quality Co-Lead Programme. As a result, today Finland has more emphasis in EU-China water collaboration than prior to the BalticFlows project, and for example the next CEWP High-Level Annual Meeting in 2017 will be arranged in Turku, Finland.
Therefore, it seems clear that the BalticFlows project has contributed to strengthening the capacities of participating regions, widening the networks within and between regions, and raising the probability of the regions securing competitive funding in the future.
3. Dissemination
3a. Formal project events
The BalticFlows project organised 15 formal events in Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Germany, Poland, Spain and Sweden. The most relevant of these from a dissemination perspective are listed in the following.
M15: Project-wide workshop 1 in Tallinn, Estonia. The event was aimed at organisations active in the field of rainwater monitoring and management from universities, the private and public sector, and the attendees were from Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia and Sweden;
M19: Joint Action Plan release event in Brussels, Belgium. Here the BalticFlows JAP was released to the public at a high-level event with attendees and speakers from the European Parliament, the European Commission and several other European-wide organisations, in addition to project partners;
M24: The event in Hamburg, Germany comprising PMB meeting 5 but also featuring an international symposium of urban stormwater management "1-Day Symposium on Sustainable Approaches to Urban Stormwater Management";
M25: Mentoring event in Gdansk, Poland "Solutions and Initiatives in Diffuse Load Monitoring" concerning diffuse load monitoring, aimed mainly at Polish stakeholders, such as local government officials, engineers, urban planners, practitioners, researchers, and participants in the BalticFlows project;
M27: Project-wide workshop 2 in Uppsala, Sweden, aimed at professionals working with water or environment issues interested in the exchanging knowledge and experience in stormwater management and diffuse load monitoring, in addition to others interested in EU funding opportunities for project initiatives in the water sector;
M31: Mentoring event in Barcelona, Spain "Towards Smart Specialisation in Urban Stormwater Management: Integrating principles into Practice" concerning urban stormwater management, aimed at professionals from the public, private, and civil sectors, including representatives from local Barcelona provincial councils, practitioners and experts in the water field, researchers at universities and research institutes, SMEs, technology and product developers, and NGOs; and environmental organisations with a water focus;
M33: Open seminar in Turku, Finland, aimed at private companies, public organisations, academic researchers and participants in the BalticFlows project, with the theme "The Baltic Sea, our common Interest – Solutions and practices for the better future", and
M36: The event in Tallinn, Estonia comprising PMB meeting 7 and a wrap-up meeting, but also featuring an international conference "Who Owns Stormwater?", aimed at politicians, state and municipal authorities, designers, construction companies, city planners, as well as students and teachers from universities.
Further details on these events can be found in section 3.2.3.4 of the Core of the Report, Periodic Report 2, as well as in D7.2 (Report on dissemination activities).
3b. Other dissemination
In addition to formal project events, project partners in all participating regions were also active in other dissemination activities, which are listed in detail in D7.2 (Report on dissemination activities). Below is a brief summary of key dissemination activities carried out during the project:
1) regular regional meetings between project partners in the same region;
2) regular regional cluster meetings, workshops and seminars with various stakeholders in the region;
3) numerous press releases in each region sent out to regional and national media;
4) project brochure and thematic leaflets;
5) publications, articles and interviews:
i) “Newest achievements in stormwater management and diffuse load monitoring – BalticFlows”. Latvian-language article in the journal “Latvian journal of physics and technical sciences”. In Press. Scheduled to be published in October, 2016;
ii) “Interesting project results – People can and agree to be involved in stormwater management and diffuse load monitoring”. Latvian-language article in the journal “Latvian journal of physics and technical sciences”. In Press. Scheduled to be published in January, 2017;
iii) Waldhoff, A., Ziegler, J., Bischoff, G., & Rabe, S. (2012). Multifunctional Spaces for Flood Management – an Approach for the City of Hamburg, Germany. SCIENCE, (International), 5;
iv) 16 IFU took part in the '6. Hamburger Abwasser Kolloquium' (Wastewater Colloquium). We held a presentation on LCA of stormwater management. An article on this was also published with the conference proceedings;
v) Leal Filho, W. (2016). Nachhaltige Entwicklung an der Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften Hamburg: Das FTZ-ALS und das “Nachhaltigkeitslab.” In W. Leal Filho (Ed.), Forschung für Nachhaltigkeit an Deutschen Hochschulen (p. 411). Hamburg: Springer Spektrum;
vi) Towards Sustainable Water Use: Experiences From the Project AFRHINET and BalticFlows. (2015), 408;
vii) Leal Filho, W., Jones, A. et al (IN PRESS) Adapting Urban Areas to Climate Change via Rainwater Management: the Project BalticFlows. In Leal Filho, W. & Keenan, J. M., (Eds) Climate Change Adaptation in North America. Springer, Berlin;
viii) Leal Filho, W., Jones, A., Rath, K. Wolf, F. (IN PRESS) Innovationen im Regenwassermanagement in Hamburg. In Leal Filho, W. (Ed) Innovationen in der Nachhaltigkeitsforschung. Springer, Berlin;
ix) “Why is stormwater becoming a problem in the cities?” By Maret Merisaar. Article in the journal Estonian Nature, no 5, 2015, page 29;
x) Mapping wave set-up near a complex geometric urban coastline. By T. Soomere, K. Pindsoo, S. R. Bishop, A. Valdmann and A. Käärd in Natural Hazard and Earth System Sciences: An interactive Open Access Journal of the European Geosciences Union – 29.11.2013;
xi) Sediment pool of the Mustjoe Stream – A. Käärd, A. Valdmann, T. Soomere;
xii) Environmental Risk Arising from the Flooding of the Mustjõe Stream in Tallinn – A. Käärd, A. Valdmann in Baltic Horizons no 23 September 2015 (Publisher Euroacademy Tallinn);
xiii) Involved in water affairs. Finnish-language article in Turun Sanomat, the main daily newspaper in Turku region, Finland. Original title: "Vesiasioiden äärellä". Turun Sanomat. 19.7.2015;
xiv) Finnish language article/interview videos on project themes. Original title: “Itämeren valumavesien hallintaan kehitetään uusia menetelmiä”. Published: 26.5.2015.;
xv) Kvicksilvergåtan (English: The mercury mystery) Skog och Framtid 2016 1:20-22;
xvi) Norén, V., B. Hedelin, and K. Bishop (2016) Drinking Water Risk Assessment in Practice: The case of Swedish drinking water producers at risk from floods, Environment, Systems and Decisions 36: 239-252;
xvii) Norén, V., B. Hedelin, L. Nyberg, and K. Bishop (2016) Flood risk assessment – Practices in flood prone Swedish municipalities . International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 18:206-217;
xviii) Teutschbein, C., T. Grabs, R. H. Karlsen, H. Laudon, and K. Bishop (2016) Hydrological response to changing climate conditions: Spatial streamflow variability in the boreal region. Water Resources Research 51: 9425-9446;
xix) Hytteborn, J. K., J. Temnerud, R. B. Alexander, E. W. Boyer, M. N. Futter, M. Froberg, J. Dahne and K. H. Bishop 2015. Patterns and predictability in the intra-annual organic carbon variability across the boreal and hemiboreal landscape. Science of the Total Environment 520: 260-269;
xx) Sponseller, R.A. J. Temnerud, K. Bishop, and H. Laudon. 2014. Patterns and drivers of riverine nitrogen (N) across alpine, subarctic, and boreal Sweden. Biogeochemistry, 120, 105-120;
xxi) Winterdahl, M., M. Erlandsson, M. N. Futter, G. A. Weyhenmeyer, and K. Bishop (2014), Intra-annual variability of organic carbon concentrations in running waters: Drivers along a climatic gradient, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 28, 451-464;
xxii) Eklof, K., Schelker, J., M. Meili, H. Laudon, C. von Bromssen, and K. Bishop. 2014. Impact of forestry on total and methyl-mercury in surface water: distinguishing effects of logging and site preparation Environmental Science and Technology, 48(9) pp. 4690-4698;
xxiii) Laudon, H., Taberman, I., Ågren, A., Futter, M., Ottosson-Löfvenius, M., Bishop, K. 2013. The Krycklan Catchment Study-A flagship infrastructure for hydrology, biogeochemistry, and climate research in the boreal landscape. Water Resources Research 49(10).
List of Websites:
Project website: http://www.balticflows.eu
Project leader:
Tuomas Valtonen
Research Manager
University of Turku
Yliopistonmäki
20014 Turun yliopisto
Finland
Tel. +358 400 362 848
E-mail: tuomas.valtonen@utu.fi