STOTEN-17589; No of Pages 14

Science of the Total Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Science of the Total Environment

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/scitotenv

When trends intersect: The challenge of protecting freshwater ecosystems

under multiple land use and hydrological intensification scenarios
Jenny Davis a,⁎, Anthony P. O'Grady b, Allan Dale c, Angela H. Arthington d, Peter A. Gell e, Patrick D. Driver f,g,
Nick Bond d, Michelle Casanova e, Max Finlayson h, Robyn J. Watts h, Samantha J. Capon d, Ivan Nagelkerken i,
Reid Tingley j, Brian Fry d, Timothy J. Page d, Alison Specht k
a
Institute for Applied Ecology, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT 2617, Australia
b
CSIRO Land and Water, Private Bag 12, Hobart TAS 7001, Australia
c
The Cairns Institute, James Cook University, Cairns, QLD 4871, Australia
d
Australian Rivers Institute, Griffith University, Nathan, QLD 4111, Australia
e
Federation University Australia, Water Research Network, Mt Helen, VIC 3353, Australia
f
Office of Water, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia
g
Centre for Ecosystem Science, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, Australia
h
Institute for Land, Water and Society, Charles Sturt University, Albury-Wodonga, NSW 2640, Australia
i
School of Biological Sciences and The Environment Institute, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia
j
School of BioSciences, The University of Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia
k
ACEAS, Australian Centre for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, a facility of the Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Network University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4067, Australia

H I G H L I G H T S

• This paper considers the impacts of land use and hydrological intensification on inland waters
• Global issues are considered through the lens of Australian examples
• Likely scenarios include wet regions becoming wetter, dry regions drier and storms more intense
• The legacies of past land use change will need to be addressed
• Proactive governance based on innovative science and adaptive management will be critical

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Intensification of the use of natural resources is a world-wide trend driven by the increasing demand for water, food,
Received 26 September 2014 fibre, minerals and energy. These demands are the result of a rising world population, increasing wealth and greater
Received in revised form 25 March 2015 global focus on economic growth. Land use intensification, together with climate change, is also driving intensifica-
Accepted 29 March 2015
tion of the global hydrological cycle. Both processes will have major socio-economic and ecological implications for
Available online xxxx
global water availability. In this paper we focus on the implications of land use intensification for the conservation
Keywords:
and management of freshwater ecosystems using Australia as an example. We consider this in the light of intensifi-
Land use intensification cation of the hydrologic cycle due to climate change, and associated hydrological scenarios that include the occur-
Hydrological intensification rence of more intense hydrological events (extreme storms, larger floods and longer droughts). We highlight the
Climate change importance of managing water quality, the value of providing environmental flows within a watershed framework
Freshwater biodiversity and the critical role that innovative science and adaptive management must play in developing proactive and robust
Freshwater ecosystems responses to intensification. We also suggest research priorities to support improved systemic governance, including
Extreme events adaptation planning and management to maximise freshwater biodiversity outcomes while supporting the socio-
Floods
economic objectives driving land use intensification. Further research priorities include: i) determining the relative
Droughts
contributions of surface water and groundwater in supporting freshwater ecosystems; ii) identifying and protecting
freshwater biodiversity hotspots and refugia; iii) improving our capacity to model hydro-ecological relationships and
predict ecological outcomes from land use intensification and climate change; iv) developing an understanding of
long term ecosystem behaviour; and v) exploring systemic approaches to enhancing governance systems, including
planning and management systems affecting freshwater outcomes. A major policy challenge will be the integration
of land and water management, which increasingly are being considered within different policy frameworks.
Crown Copyright © 2015 Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: Jenny.Davis@canberra.edu.au (J. Davis).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.127
0048-9697/Crown Copyright © 2015 Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: Davis, J., et al., When trends intersect: The challenge of protecting freshwater ecosystems under multiple land use and
hydrological intensification ..., Sci Total Environ (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.127
2 J. Davis et al. / Science of the Total Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx
1. Introduction
Intensification is a key characteristic of many emerging global
‘megatrends’; trends that, on a global scale, will significantly shape the
ecological, social, economic and cultural landscapes of the future
(Hajkowicz et al., 2012). These include urbanisation, increasing mineral
extraction and energy production and the requirement to obtain more
resources from a declining natural resource base. A rising world popula-
tion, forecast to be 9 billion people by 2043 (UNESA, 2012), increased
wealth and changing dietary preferences suggest that global food pro-
duction will need to increase by 70% by 2050 (Steduto et al., 2012). Po-
tentially constraining this production is the threat of water scarcity.
Vörösmarty et al. (2010), using a global geospatial framework, showed
that pandemic impacts on both human water security and freshwater
biodiversity were highly coherent, although not identical. Nearly 80%
of the world's population (4.5 billion in 2005) was exposed to high
levels of threat to water security, while 65% of global river discharge,
and the aquatic habitats supported by river flows, were classified as
moderately to highly threatened (Vörösmarty et al., 2010). The most se-
rious impacts, which include watershed changes, pollution and water
resource development, coincide in regions of intensive agriculture and
dense human settlement. Already, the global agricultural sector ac-
counts for 70% of withdrawals from freshwater systems and more
than 90% of consumptive water use (Steduto et al., 2012). The direct
and indirect competition for water resources associated with popula-
tion growth will intensify both mild and moderate droughts.
Importantly, the impacts of land use intensification and increasing
water demands have to be considered within the wider context of
global climate change. Anthropogenically-driven climatic changes are al-
ready considered to pose a major threat to global biodiversity, including
inland aquatic ecosystems and their species (Solomon, 2007; Woodward
et al., 2010). Globally, freshwater ecosystems and biota are considered to
be particularly vulnerable because of their physical fragmentation within
terrestrial landscapes and relative isolation by catchment divides and salt-
water barriers (Dudgeon et al., 2006). Many freshwater species will be un-
able to disperse to suitable habitats as temperatures increase and changes
in precipitation disrupt migration and feeding and breeding patterns
(Woodward et al., 2010). These climatically-driven changes will be ac-
companied by the direct and indirect effects of increasing human de-
mands for water (Palmer et al., 2008). In regions where precipitation
declines, surface and ground water resources and environmental flows
will be increasingly contested. As a consequence, declining water avail-
ability will pose a significant threat to freshwater environments, as well
as agriculture and human consumption. It is anticipated that by 2050,
2.3 billion people will be living in water basins experiencing severe
water stress (OECD, 2012). The extent to which human communities
will stay and adapt to declining conditions is difficult to predict. Most
studies have focused on developing countries where mitigating circum-
stances, such as war and poverty, are present (Gemenne, 2011). Environ-
mental extremes also cause hardships in developed countries, but the
dynamic is likely to be different because of greater economic and political
stability, and differences in agricultural technology.
The implications of the interacting trends of land use intensification
and hydrological intensification for the management and conservation
of freshwater ecosystems are the focus of this paper. We consider
the evidence for hydrological intensification, the existing legacy of land
use change on the water quality and hydrological regimes of Australian
river systems, the likely interacting effects of land use and hydrological in-
tensification and the need for proactive governance and adaptive man-
agement. We also suggest a set of priority research actions to integrate
land use intensification into freshwater management and conservation.
2. Evidence for intensification of the global hydrological cycle
Associated with the broad trend in the expansion of the earth's pop-
ulation has been a major expansion of the global economy driven
Please cite this article as: Davis, J., et al., When trends intersect: The challenge of protecting freshwater ecosystems under multiple land use and
hydrological intensification ..., Sci Total Environ (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.127
largely by the exploitation of fossil fuel resources and land clearing,
resulting in an associated increase in carbon emissions (Canadell et al.,
2007). The rate of growth in atmospheric emissions has increased from
approximately 1.3% per year during the 1990s to 3.3% per year during
the period 2000–2006 (Canadell et al., 2007). This trend is likely to contin-
ue despite growing efforts to curb global emissions. Global warming is a
major consequence of rising concentrations of greenhouse gases and
based on current emission trajectories, temperature rises between 4 °C
and 6 °C appear likely by the end of the century (Bodman et al., 2013;
Peters et al., 2013). Rising temperatures are a key driver of changes in
global circulation patterns and are likely linked to the global phenomenon
of hydrological intensification (Durack et al., 2012b; Held and Soden,
2006; Huntington, 2006; Wild et al., 2008). A consequence of warming
in the lower atmosphere is an increase in its capacity to hold water. The
Classius–Claperyon expression predicts that the saturated vapour pres-
sure of the lower troposphere increases by about 7% for each 1-K increase
in temperature. This response is robust in most climate models. A key out-
come of this process is the predicted intensification of the hydrological
cycle such that wet areas are likely to get wetter and dry areas drier
(Wentz et al., 2007; Chou et al., 2013; Held and Soden, 2006).
Hydrological intensification will drive changes in the spatial and
temporal distributions of water resources and an increase in the fre-
quency and intensity of extreme events such as tropical storms, floods
and droughts (Fig. 1). Disparate observational data sets generally pre-
dict that warming will likely result in increases in evaporation and pre-
cipitation, although there is little supporting evidence for predicted
increases in the frequency and intensity of tropical storms and floods
(Huntington, 2006). Attention is now focussed on developing an im-
proved observational evidence base for hydrological intensification.
An analysis of a network of 355 rain gauges across China for the pe-
riod 1960–2000, for example, found that although there was no trend in
the country-wide average rainfall, rainfall in the drier north-eastern re-
gions of China had declined by approximately 12% since 1960, with de-
clines mostly occurring in summer and autumn. In contrast, rainfall in
southern China increased, particularly during summer and winter
(Piao et al., 2010b). Associated analysis of stream flow records revealed
a weak trend for increasing runoff in the Yangtze River in southern
China and a significant decline in river runoff in the Yellow River in
northern China. Direct attribution of changes in runoff to changes in
precipitation regimes in both rivers, however, was problematic owing
to the intense human pressure on water resources (Piao et al., 2010b).
Examination of rainfall and discharge records for the Amazon have
also revealed a marked increase in river discharge associated with an in-
crease in the Amazon basin integrated precipitation, a trend consistent
with intensification of the hydrological cycle (Gloor et al., 2013).
Treydte et al. (2006) used tree ring analysis to construct a millennium
scale precipitation record in northern Pakistan. They found dry condi-
tions at the beginning of the last millennium and through the 18th
and 19th centuries, with a trend for increasing precipitation in the latter
half of the 19th century and throughout the 20th century, which tracks
the initiation and expansion of the industrial revolution.
There is also evidence for intensification of the hydrological cycle in
ocean surface salinity data. Sea surface salinities in the ocean are widely
measured and are used to interpret changes in the fluxes of freshwater,
freshwater transport and local ocean mixing, key components of climate
dynamics (Curry et al., 2003; Durack et al., 2012a). Examination of
trends in ocean salinities from the 1950s to the 1990s along a transect
through the western Atlantic spanning 50°S to 60°N revealed systemat-
ic freshening at both poleward ends and increasing sea salinities at low
latitudes (Curry et al., 2003). Durack et al. (2012a) observed similar
trends in ocean salinities and concluded that broad belts of increasing
salinities through the tropics, with areas of freshening in mid and high
latitudes, provided robust evidence for an intensification of hydrological
cycles at a rate approximately double that predicted by climate models.
Thus several lines of evidence suggest intensification of the global
hydrological cycle. Global climate models also predict that this pattern
 J. Davis et al. / Science of the Total Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx 3

Fig. 1. Conceptualisation of the major drivers and responses resulting in intensification of the global hydrological cycle. Population growth and associated increases in food, water and en-
ergy demands are key drivers of climate change through rising emissions of greenhouse gases. These rising emissions change the energy balance of the atmosphere, with resultant changes
in the global hydrological cycle varying from an increase in water availability in some areas to a decline in water availability in others. Overall the variability and intensity of the hydro-
logical cycle are predicted to increase with wide ranging impacts for aquatic ecosystems.

of change will occur at the seasonal scale within regions. Chou et al.
(2013) used rainfall data to test this prediction in the Global Precipitation
Climatology Project and found that, not only has the annual range of pre-
cipitation increased within regions, there were also trends for wet seasons
to become wetter and dry seasons drier. Also, despite observed increases
in rainfall and runoff in the Amazon basin (Gloor et al., 2013) during the
same period, the region experienced two 1 in 100 year droughts (in
2005 and 2010) providing support for predictions that extreme condi-
tions within regions may also increase (Lewis et al., 2011).
Increasing rates of glacial melt and increases in the water use effi-
ciency of vegetation associated with rising CO2 concentrations in the at-
mosphere will also affect global hydrological cycles. As temperatures
rise, less winter rain falls as snow and the spring melt begins earlier,
resulting in peak flows occurring earlier and declining throughout
summer when demand for this water is highest (Barnett et al., 2005).
Reports of glacial retreats are a widespread and well documented phe-
nomenon (Scambos et al., 2004; Piao et al., 2010a; Chen et al., 2013).
Rising CO2 increases the instantaneous water use efficiency of photo-
synthesis (Eamus and Jarvis, 1989) and observed increases in global
runoff may be partially due to the increased water use efficiency of veg-
etation (Gedney et al., 2006; Betts et al., 2007). Piao et al. (2007) sug-
gested that when the CO2 fertilisation effect is taken into account,
global runoff should decrease. Considerable uncertainty exists as to
how CO2 fertilisation will be manifested, however, recent empirical ev-
idence suggests that vegetation is responding to rising CO2 concentra-
tions. Donohue et al. (2013) demonstrated a greening of vegetation in
arid and semi-arid regions and Keenan et al. (2013) found an increase
in water use efficiency of vegetation in a meta-analysis of data from
eddy flux towers. Despite these observations, the hydrological impact
of these changes remains difficult to quantify. Using the framework de-
veloped by Donohue et al. (2013) one of us (O'Grady) used a detailed
growth model to predict that increases in runoff are more likely to
occur in wet environments where the growth of vegetation and
evapotranspiration are limited by incoming radiation (i.e. energy-
limited environments, E b P, where E = evapotranspiration and P =
precipitation).
3. Australia as an exemplar study region
The large areal extent of the Australian continent provides an opportu-
nity to compare the impacts of both land use and hydrological intensifica-
tion across multiple biomes because the continental landmass spans
equatorial, tropical, arid and temperate climatic zones (Fig. 2). Generally,
Australia is characterised by water-limited conditions with high climatic
variability and soils that are low in nutrients and high in salts (Diamond,
2005). However, the Great Dividing Range in eastern Australia and almost
two thirds of Tasmania contain pockets of energy-limited climates (i.e. re-
gions where rainfall exceeds evaporation). On mainland Australia these
energy-limited environments are the important water generating regions
for Australia's inland river systems. For example, almost 50% of the flows
into the Murray–Darling Basin are generated from 8.4% of the total basin
area (Donohue et al., 2011; McVicar et al., 2012).
Mean annual temperatures across Australia have increased by 0.9 °C
on average since 1910. Patterns of rainfall have also shifted significantly
over the instrumented record. The Australia-wide average annual rain-
fall has increased slightly, with large increases in annual rainfall in the

Please cite this article as: Davis, J., et al., When trends intersect: The challenge of protecting freshwater ecosystems under multiple land use and
hydrological intensification ..., Sci Total Environ (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.127
4 J. Davis et al. / Science of the Total Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

Fig. 2. Major Australian climatic zones.

Source: Bureau of Meteorology.

Fig. 3. Map of Australian resource use (2005–2006).

Source: ABARES. Reprinted from Lesslie and Mewett (2013).

Please cite this article as: Davis, J., et al., When trends intersect: The challenge of protecting freshwater ecosystems under multiple land use and
hydrological intensification ..., Sci Total Environ (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.127
 J. Davis et al. / Science of the Total Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx 5

north-west and declines in autumn and early winter rainfall in the
south-west and the south-east (CSIRO, 2014). Under future climate sce-
narios, the incidence of intense El Niño weather patterns is expected to
double (Cai et al., 2014). The shifting rainfall distributions in Australia
are consistent with observations of an expansion of the Hadley Cells
(Cai et al., 2014). Recent modelling also suggests that, if these trends
continue, they would result in changes to existing Koppen Geiger cli-
mate types (Fig. 2): the area of tropical climates in Australia would in-
crease from approximately 8.8% to 9.1%, arid climates would increase
from 76% to 81%, and that temperate and cool climates would decline
from 14.7% to 9.1% and 0.0016% to 0.0001%, respectively (Crosbie
et al., 2012). These changes are likely to result in declines in flows to sys-
tems such as the Murray–Darling Basin.
Primary production (livestock grazing, dryland and irrigated agricul-
ture) occurs over nearly 60% of the Australian continent. Areas reserved
for nature conservation occupy 7% and other protected areas (mainly In-
digenous Protected Areas, IPAs), cover approximately 13%. Forestry is
confined to higher rainfall regions and covers approximately 2%. Intensive
land use, mostly urbanisation, covers only 0.2%. Minimal land use occurs
where deserts are present, an area comprising approximately 18% of the
continent (Lesslie and Mewett, 2013) (Fig. 3). Over the longer term the
impacts of increased climate variability and population pressure may
strongly influence the location of agricultural and non-agricultural activi-
ties. Changes in agricultural activities are already emerging and there
have been several significant changes in land use in recent years. For ex-
ample, the area of grazing decreased by 6% between 1992–93 and 2005–
06 and over the same period the area of land used for cropping increased
by 39% (Fig. 4) (Mewett et al., 2013). In Northern Australia, an estimated
20–40,000 ha of land currently used for grazing could be converted to ir-
rigated agriculture. Nearly 80% of Australia's population (23.4 million in
April, 2014) live in urban regions, with the greatest concentration in
south-eastern Australia. Urbanisation is likely to continue, with many
Australian cities displaying the highest urban growth rates (in 2013) in
the developed world (www.infrastructure.gov.au).
Australia's comprehensive governance of natural resources, includ-
ing the role of State and Commonwealth government departments,
also makes the continent an exemplar study region. Natural resource
management includes integrated extension services and extensive on-
ground land management networks. Additionally there is the capacity
for listing both species and ecological communities as deserving of
special protection at national (EPBC_Act, 1999) and State levels (e.g.
Victoria's Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act).
4. Impacts of land cover and land use change on Australian freshwater
ecosystems
The changes in water quality, quantity and ecological health of
Australian freshwater ecosystems resulting from changes in land
use and land cover since European settlement have been profound
(Boulton et al., 2014). These include sedimentation, eutrophication,
salinisation, acidification, pollution (heavy metals and pesticides), al-
tered flow regimes, degradation of urban streams, also known as the
urban stream syndrome (Walsh et al., 2001), the loss and degradation
of some types of aquatic habitats and ecosystems (notably shallow wet-
lands), species loss and increasing presence of invasive species (Fig. 5).
A multi-decadal record of Australian wetland change has been extended
in recent times using paleo-limnological techniques that focus on
preserved indicators (e.g. diatoms, cladocerans) of wetland condition.
These have been supplemented since the 1990s with other records
(see Mills et al., 2013). In many instances these records, which

Fig. 4. Change in the area used for cropping between 1992–93 and 2005–06.
Source: ABARES. Reprinted from Lesslie and Mewett (2013).

Please cite this article as: Davis, J., et al., When trends intersect: The challenge of protecting freshwater ecosystems under multiple land use and
hydrological intensification ..., Sci Total Environ (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.127
6 J. Davis et al. / Science of the Total Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

Fig. 5. Land use change in Australia has resulted in: salinisation (top left: saline wetlands in the Western Australian wheatbelt); eutrophication (top right: an algal bloom in Herdsman Lake,
Western Australia); sedimentation (bottom left: high turbidity downstream of a logging coupe in the Otway Ranges, Victoria); urban stream syndrome (bottom right: a channelised
stream in Melbourne, Victoria).

provide a pre-European benchmark, reveal that much wetland
change commenced soon after European settlement in the early
1800s. While the instrumental record shows significant impacts of
climate, water resource development and contemporary primary in-
dustry, the palaeo-records suggest that these underestimate the
total impact of natural resource development on Australian wetlands
(Gell et al., 2013)
Wetland salinity has increased in south-eastern Australia, either
through decreased effective precipitation, historic water use (Gell
et al., 2005), irrigated agriculture (Gell et al., 2007) or inter-basin trans-
fers to support irrigation (Ghassemi and White, 2007; MacGregor et al.,
2005). Salinity changes are mostly in the order of a ten-fold increase
(Gell et al., 2009) although the Snowy River hydroelectric scheme diver-
sion and floodplain clearance led to a 50-fold increase in the salinity of a
downstream waterbody. The construction of barriers to secure freshwa-
ter for irrigated agriculture caused a shift from tidal, subsaline condi-
tions to hypersaline conditions in a coastal lagoon (The Coorong) at
the mouth of Australia's largest river system, the Murray–Darling.
Widespread increases in the salinity of rivers and wetlands in the
wheat belt region of south-western Australia have been created by
landscape-scale clearing of deep-rooted vegetation resulting in rising
saline water tables and mobilisation of salt previously stored deep with-
in soil profiles (Davis et al., 2010).
Widespread changes in the turbidity of Australian inland waters
began with the increased flux of mineral matter soon after European
settlement due to tree clearance, agriculture and goldmining activities.
The impact of water regulation for agriculture and domestic consump-
tion on turbidity and sedimentation has also been implicated through
increased bank erosion. Some wetlands along the River Murray shifted
from macrophyte dominance to phytoplankton dominance particularly
after the advent of river regulation and the introduction of European
carp to waterways. Carp contribute to poor water quality by uprooting
vegetation and stirring up sediments during feeding (Koehn, 2004).
Sedimentation has led to the shallowing of some wetlands, allowing
diverse macrophyte beds to develop (Gell et al., 2005) while other wet-
lands are undergoing a transition to dry land (Gell et al., 2009). Regula-
tion of river flows, initially for navigation but ultimately to provide
water for intensive irrigation, provides a refuge for carp in regulated riv-
ers during low flow periods (Driver et al., 2005a) and has drowned sea-
sonal, floodplain lakes, killed river red gum forests in near-channel areas
while expanding suitable habitat for emergent species such as Typha
(Gell, 2012) and the floating fern, Azolla. The uneven spatial distribution
and extreme temporal variability of surface and groundwater supplies
in Australia have led to the construction of a multitude of water regula-
tion structures, including many thousands of weirs (3600 in the
Murray–Darling Basin alone), locks and floodplain levee banks, 446
large dams (N 10 m crest height) and over 50 intra- and inter-basin
water transfer schemes. The hydrological variability that typifies
the natural flow regime of most Australian rivers (Finlayson and
McMahon, 1988) and the water regimes of many wetlands have been
altered across a range of temporal and spatial scales. Flow regulation
is widely acknowledged to be a major cause of degradation in many
Australian river and floodplain ecosystems (Bunn and Arthington,
2002; Cullen and Lake, 1995). Ecological changes in regulated river
systems include massive loss of wetlands, decline of riparian forests,
invasion of dewatered river channels and wetlands by vegetation,
changes in aquatic plant community structure, population and diver-
sity declines of invertebrates, fish and waterbirds, and several inver-
tebrate extinctions (Arthington and Pusey, 2003; Kingsford, 2000).
Additionally, a greater frequency and duration of drought in tempo-
rary wetlands (Driver et al., 2011; Casanova, 2012) along with an
increase in the profitability of grain and oil-seed production
(Tostovrsnik et al., 2010) has led to a change in land-use from biodi-
verse pasture grazing to monoculture cropping, with consequent
threats to temporary wetlands as habitat for birds, frogs, plants and
algae (EPBC_Act, 1999).

Please cite this article as: Davis, J., et al., When trends intersect: The challenge of protecting freshwater ecosystems under multiple land use and
hydrological intensification ..., Sci Total Environ (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.127
 J. Davis et al. / Science of the Total Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx 7

5. Predicted effects of land use intensification and hydrological

Design & manage perennial waterbodies fed by

More efficient irrigation technology to reduce

urban stormwater to maximise their value as

Provision of environmental flows from water
intensification on Australian freshwater ecosystems

Declining water tables may slow rate of

Declining water tables may slow rate of

Limits placed on extraction from rivers
Land in Australia is being increasingly managed for multiple objec-

Utilise extracted water to provide or

tives, including the production of food, fibre, water supply, extraction
of minerals and energy, biodiversity conservation, landscape amenity

supplement drought refugia

and in recent years, for carbon sequestration. Intensification of resource

Solutions & opportunities

use is being driven by the need to increase productivity in response to
growing demand from domestic and international markets (Lesslie
and Mewett, 2013). Additionally, there is a declining resource base, in

aquatic refugia
particular, arable land. In northern Australia, low soil fertility and large

salinisation

salinisation
Predicted impacts of the combined effects of land use intensification and hydrological intensification (large floods and extended droughts) on freshwater ecosystems, potential solutions and opportunities.

water use
distances from domestic markets have not favoured intensive produc-

storages
tion. However, recent policy and investment documents have articulat-
ed the desire for northern Australia to become the ‘food bowl of Asia’
(northernaustralia.dpmc.gov.au).

Loss of floodplain productivity from reduced

Loss of groundwater-dependant ecosystems

Subdivision of rural areas and the changing nature of rural areas

Change in magnitude, duration & timing of

Loss of groundwater dependant & shallow

Loss of groundwater dependant & shallow

Loss of groundwater dependant & shallow

along the edges of cities and towns (peri-urban growth) is a form of
land use intensification that is becoming more common in some
Australian regions. Examples of changes in rural land use include inten-
sive animal raising, horticulture and viticulture, an increase in the num-
ber of small rural residential properties (hobby farms and lifestyle

surface-fed ecosystems

surface-fed ecosystems

surface-fed ecosystems
properties), and agricultural product manufacturing and processing. Po-

Extended droughts
tential impacts of rural land use development on freshwater ecosystems

Metal pollution
Eutrophication
include increased competition for limited water supplies, lack of com-

Loss of refugia

Acidification

Salinization
pliance with water regulations, building of dams, changes to water

Pollution
flows, changed riparian zone management, encroachment of rural

Impacts

flows

flows
dwellings onto areas of high conservation value, and impacts on
groundwater availability and quality.
In a broad-ranging analysis of potential future water use scenarios in

Monitoring & management of water quality to

Monitoring & management of water quality to

Restoration of riparian vegetation to minimise
Australia, Lake and Bond (2007) identified a suite of likely trends in

Use water sensitive urban design to reduce

extent of impervious surfaces areas within
ensure downstream receiving waters can

ensure downstream receiving waters can

terms of aquatic ecosystem condition across agricultural and urban
landscapes. Their scenario of accelerated economic growth shares
much in common with the intensification scenarios and associated im-
support biodiverse ecosystems

support biodiverse ecosystems

Manage silvicultural practices
pacts listed in Table 1, albeit examined through a much coarser lens. The

Increase streamside buffers

Solutions & opportunities

most extreme hydrological scenarios are expressed as the occurrence of

large floods and extended droughts. The scenarios of wet areas becom-
ing wetter and dry areas becoming drier will result in similar but more
chronic impacts on freshwater ecosystems relative to those outlined by

catchments
Lake and Bond (2007). Often multiple solutions exist to address intensi-
fication impacts, and in some cases, opportunities to ameliorate existing
erosion

water quality and quantity issues may become evident. The temporal
differences between the impacts of large floods, which are instanta-
neous, and extended droughts that can play out over many years, re-

Increasing prevalence of ‘urban stream syndrome’

construction of levee banks to protect irrigated

construction of levee banks to protect irrigated

quire a paradigm shift in management approaches and systems of
governance towards ones that embrace temporal variability and ecolog-
Indirectly by alienation of floodplains by

Indirectly by alienation of floodplains by

ical dynamics (Bond et al., 2008).
Increased erosion in inter-rotations

6. Are some forms of land use intensification better than others?

Hydrological intensification

Eutrophication & pollution

Currently agriculture accounts for approximately 70% of all consump-

tive water use in Australia, mostly for irrigation. Irrigated agriculture
assets infrastructure

covers less than 1% of the total landmass, but produces approximately

Sedimentation

one third of Gross Farm Product (GFP) (Lake and Bond, 2007). In contrast,
Large floods

grazing and dryland cropping cover 53% and 6% of the land-surface, re-
Impacts

Erosion

spectively (Lake and Bond, 2007). Both forms of agriculture have had pro-
assets

found impacts on river systems, both in terms of altering hydrologic

regimes, and causing widespread erosion, sedimentation and salinisation.
From a terrestrial view-point, much more attention has been given to the
Irrigated cropping, dairy and

impacts of low-intensity farming, due to the effects of land-clearing for

Land use intensification

cropping and grazing, and the fact that such areas have a limited ability
Plantation forestry

to support native biodiversity values (Cunningham and Duncan, 2012).

– Coal seam gas
Energy extraction
cattle feedlots

Yet, from an aquatic perspective, it is often the perceived impacts of irri-

Urbanisation

gated agriculture that receive the greatest attention because it is associat-

ed with very large volumes of water.
Table 1

It is thus interesting to consider whether a move towards more in-

tensive (land-sparing) forms of irrigated production (together with

Please cite this article as: Davis, J., et al., When trends intersect: The challenge of protecting freshwater ecosystems under multiple land use and
hydrological intensification ..., Sci Total Environ (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.127
8 J. Davis et al. / Science of the Total Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx
some agricultural abandonment and landscape restoration), would
achieve greater net biodiversity outcomes compared to mixed eco-
agricultural landscapes, despite heightened degradation of some land-
areas and associated river-corridors used to supply irrigation water.
Views on this intensification debate are mixed (Benton, 2012; Phalan
et al., 2011; Scherr and McNeely, 2008). For example, Benton (2012)
suggested that “extensive and intensive farming may each be the best
option for food and wildlife depending on the place. The design of the
optimal landscape in terms of land sparing vs. land sharing will depend
on the costs (in terms of change in yield) vs. benefits (in terms of biodi-
versity or ecosystem processes): in low production, high biodiversity
landscapes, land sharing may be best, and vice versa.” An important fac-
tor is whether the effects of increased chemical use often associated
with intensive agriculture can be controlled, and whether the long-
term productivity of high intensity production can be maintained (e.g.
in the face of crop pests). These sorts of comparative analyses in relation
to aquatic biodiversity have yet to be undertaken systematically. For ex-
ample, while there have been attempts to integrate changes in terrestrial
biodiversity and production values with impacts on runoff (Vertessy et al.,
2003), rarely have the production/biodiversity values and trade-offs from
dryland vs irrigated agriculture been considered simultaneously.
An important consideration for river systems, compared to terrestri-
al ecosystems, is their dendritic network geometry, which leads to com-
paratively more habitat (by river length) occurring in upland tributary
streams, which are often comparatively unaffected by extensive flow
regulation for irrigation, but which tend to be very strongly influenced
by surrounding land use (often relatively marginal grazing). These low
order streams often support high species richness and high levels of en-
demism and contribute to landscape-scale biodiversity patterns in im-
portant ways (Clarke et al., 2008). In contrast, the areas most heavily
affected by flow regulation for irrigation are lowland floodplain habi-
tats. It is these contrasting patterns of flow influence between uplands
and lowlands, coupled with the large differences in economic returns
from surrounding land-use, that creates new challenges (and possibly
opportunities) for future restoration.
7. Management responses to the impacts of land use and hydrological
intensification on freshwater ecosystems
7.1. Delivering environmental flows
Various mechanisms are already in place in many Australian regions
to protect the environmental water share or deliver environmental
flows during extended dry periods or droughts. Environmental flows
are defined as “the quantity, quality and timing of water flows required
to sustain freshwater and estuarine ecosystems and the human liveli-
hoods and well-being that depend on these ecosystems” (Brisbane
Declaration, 2007). Opportunities include limiting the volume of water
pumped from a river over the course of a year (sustainable diversion
limits, SDLs), constraining the time of day of pumping (setting ‘cease
to pump’ or CTP levels) and creating a list of high priority wetland and
river habitats (typically pools) to guide environmental water alloca-
tions. Such rules are reviewed and adjusted to take account of the
critical water requirements of riverine biota during drought. SDLs are
estimates of the sustainable level of take using hydrology models that
run for ~ 100 years applied to a whole valley (MDBA, 2010). The SDLs
are assessed and audited annually. Many river pools across Australia
are not gauged, so part of the water management challenge is to deter-
mine the ecological values of river pools and allocate gauging resources
to those deemed to be most important. SDLs, if set appropriately, will
protect all environmental assets and the water-dependent industries
and towns (MDBA, 2010). CTP rules are designed for the protection of
individual river pools. The rules to protect floodplain assets and func-
tions are quite different and although Commence to Flow (CTF) thresh-
olds have been determined to describe the heights at which wetlands
require water, the process of describing the flow regime requirements
Please cite this article as: Davis, J., et al., When trends intersect: The challenge of protecting freshwater ecosystems under multiple land use and
hydrological intensification ..., Sci Total Environ (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.127
and then protecting these regimes within water planning arrangements
is much more involved.
The current emphasis under the Murray–Darling Basin Plan (the
water management plan for the largest river basin in Australia) is to de-
scribe the environmental assets within each valley, including river pools
and wetlands. Basin states are required to develop one- and five-year
environmental watering plans within which assets and their environ-
mental flow requirements are identified to ensure balanced use of envi-
ronmental water across these assets. Most states already have tools to
protect river assets. For example, water planners in New South Wales
use desktop tools and field-based information, including hydrology,
geomorphology, ecology and local knowledge, to identify and prioritise
the delivery of water to specific assets (Driver et al., 2012, 2013). This
approach offers a level of local detail above setting generic flow require-
ments for reaches and rivers using relationships between hydrology,
geomorphology and ecology as described by Poff et al. (2010), but it
is less detailed and more time efficient than a dedicated research
programme.
Sufficient knowledge of water distribution patterns and spatial ar-
rangements makes it possible to modify the pattern of water abstraction
so that particular streams or river reaches of high conservation value
continue to receive some flow on a preferential basis (Bond et al.,
2008). Such opportunities arise by taking a more flexible approach to
the approval, uptake and use of water licences. This may include
suspending water licences, or trading licences among properties, to pro-
vide some streams with respite during droughts. In other cases a “con-
tingency flow” can be held in storage and used to provide carefully
timed flow pulses to generate small floods similar to natural events
(Driver et al., 2005b; Bond et al., 2008). A modest volume of flow at
the right time of year can result in beneficial ecological outcomes (e.g.
seedling and waterbird recruitment, fish spawning, water quality
maintenance), sufficient to protect or sustain individual species or as-
semblages until the drought breaks (Bond et al., 2008). However, suc-
cessful implementation of contingency flows requires knowledge of
the habitat requirements, life history patterns and recruitment strate-
gies of valued species (Bunn and Arthington, 2002).
7.2. Protecting drought refugia
While careful planning and management should ensure some water
remains in storage, short-term mitigation strategies that protect specific
habitats are needed in cases where storage volumes fall to critically low
levels, such that the desired environmental flows cannot be delivered.
During drought there will be many situations where the best environ-
mental flow strategy is one that will protect refuge habitats and their
biota. Refugial habitats exist across a broad spectrum of aquatic ecosys-
tem types (Davis et al., 2013; Robson et al., 2008). Riverine waterholes
and floodplain lagoons are extremely valuable refugia in arid systems
(Arthington et al., 2005; Bond et al., 2008) but other types of refuges
have also been identified. They include logs, wet patches under banks,
riffles, sub-surface stream sediments, yabby holes and stands of littoral
and riparian vegetation (Boulton, 2003). These remnant habitats can
help to sustain moisture during dry spells and drought, and may sup-
port obligate aquatic species for considerable periods of time. The iden-
tification and protection of diverse aquatic refugia should be given the
highest priority at all times but especially during drought (Sheldon
et al., 2010). These refugia require protective actions such as maintain-
ing riparian vegetation through the provision of environmental flows
and protection of river banks from livestock and other sources of rural
and human disturbance (Davies, 2010).
Seed banks also act as refugia. In many temporary wetlands plant,
algal and invertebrate populations re-establish when inundated, through
germination or hatching from a bank of desiccation-resistant seeds, eggs
or propagules in the soil. This bank of propagules conveys a degree of
resilience in temporary wetlands (Casanova, 2012), and many species
can remain dormant in the soil for years or decades (Brock, 2011).
 J. Davis et al. / Science of the Total Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx
Recognition of seed/propagule banks as cryptic refugia, and an under-
standing of how they can be maintained, is essential for conservation of
temporary wetland systems (and riparian zones) and their biota.
7.3. Other strategies, potential pitfalls and unintended consequences
Management interventions such as drought refuge protection and en-
vironmental flow provisions may fail to provide sufficient protection for
populations of rare and threatened species. For rare taxa or those repre-
sented by few populations, further losses of genetic diversity caused by
local population loss have the potential to greatly increase the risk of ex-
tinctions (Bond et al., 2008). It may become necessary to implement
targeted population management strategies such as the transfer of threat-
ened populations into captivity for later reintroductions (e.g. Galaxias
fuscus populations in Victoria), or the translocation of individuals from
other areas once drought has abated. Reintroduction and translocation
strategies carry significant risk: they can be costly, and there is potential
to compromise natural population genetic structure or transfer diseases
among isolated populations (Cunningham, 1996; Hughes et al., 2003;
Olden et al., 2011). Identification of the situations where these sorts of in-
terventions are needed may also highlight species and populations likely
to be threatened during future droughts and changes in climate (Bond
et al., 2008).
The potential impact of inter-basin water transfers on the habitats
and populations of normally isolated catchments is also of concern
(Ghassemi and White, 2007). As well as moving water across the land-
scape, such schemes can transfer native species, thereby disrupting
patterns of genetic isolation, and may also move alien species and path-
ogens between catchments (Hughes et al., 2003). Various strategies,
such as screens to detain propagules and water treatment, have the ca-
pacity to limit biological inter-basin transfers to some degree, although
they are not always economically cost-effective and feasible, and are
frequently biologically ineffective (Ghassemi and White, 2007).
As rainfall declines and temperatures rise during summer in south-
eastern Australia, there is an increasing, regular, dependence on ground
water for stock, rather than a fall-back resource for use during extended
droughts. The use of groundwater is incremental, but widespread, and
the last decade has seen an intensification of the use of groundwater
for agriculture in many regions (Tostovrsnik et al., 2010).
Recent decades have seen an increase in the application of manage-
ment interventions to meet freshwater ecosystem conservation and
water resource objectives, especially revegetation of riparian zones. Cli-
mate change is likely to further intensify such investments and on-
ground action. For instance, the need to protect in-stream biota from
thermal stress has led to concepts of ‘over-restoration’ in which exotic
fast-growing, shade providing trees are used in revegetation projects
(Davies, 2010). However, the planting of exotic species may entail
risks to riparian biodiversity as well as other functions, e.g. contribution
of riparian materials to aquatic food webs and, where watershed re-
afforestation is widespread, the associated increase in evapotranspira-
tion will result in large reductions in stream flows (Davies, 2010). Al-
though it is unrealistic to expect human-occupied landscapes to be
returned to any pre-European natural state (Hilderbrand et al., 2005),
the potential for maladaptation to climate change from current man-
agement interventions is evident with recent investment in engineering
works and measures for diverting water across floodplains being erro-
neously justified as a surrogate measure for natural flooding (Pittock
and Finlayson, 2013).
8. The importance of improved governance in supporting freshwater
ecosystems facing intensification
Managing land use and hydrological intensification and their im-
pacts is a human endeavour. Hence, consistent with Pahl-Wostl et al.
(2013), contemporary intensification challenges facing the world will
enhance scrutiny on governance systems from global to local scales.
Please cite this article as: Davis, J., et al., When trends intersect: The challenge of protecting freshwater ecosystems under multiple land use and
hydrological intensification ..., Sci Total Environ (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.127
9
Consequently, building healthy governance systems that address the
causes and impacts of intensification are needed to create the founda-
tions to establish a more sustainable future for freshwater ecosystems.
Dale et al. (2–13) cite Parker and Braithwaite (2003: 119) in defining
a systems view of governance as the “intentional shaping of the flow
of events so as to realize desired public good”. They cite several authors
in further defining a systems view of governance as:
• being distinguished from, but inclusive of, the processes of govern-
ment (e.g. Thomas and Grindle, 1990):
• representing a large set of processes of bargaining and negotiation
among differing societal interests, leading to particular system out-
comes (e.g. Dorcey, 1986);
• being polycentric across different scales (e.g. Ostrom, 2008); and
• being characterised by the use of both structural and functional con-
cepts from the sociological and planning literature (e.g. Dale and
Bellamy, 1998).
Below, we broadly apply the Governance Systems Analysis (GSA)
approach developed by Dale et al. (2013a) for the interrogation of com-
plex natural resource governance systems. Consistent with a very wide
policy and planning literature, GSA considers the standard structural el-
ements of natural resource decision-making and action at different
scales needed to include vision and objective setting, analysis, strategy
development, implementation, monitoring, evaluation and review
(see also Potts et al., 2014). Importantly GSA also considers how well
things operate within and across these structural elements. Sound strat-
egy development, for example, can be undone by poor implementation.
GSA also considers three cornerstone functional elements of healthy
governance systems, consistent with many authors who have previous-
ly explored the governance through socio-ecological system concepts
(e.g. consider Folke et al., 2007). These include connectivity across the
system, institutional capacity within the system and the access to and
use of knowledge (of various kinds) in decision-making within the sys-
tem (see also Bellamy et al, 2001; Dale and Bellamy, 1998; Anderies
et al., 2004).
Broadly applying this analytical approach, we consider that Australia
had, until recently, a relatively robust framework for the allocation of
water resources through the auspices of the National Water Initiative
(NWI). Important structural and functional weaknesses, however, do
remain across the system, and some significant aspects of this system
may weaken further with the recent decline of the NWI and the National
Water Commission (cited online 2 March 2015 at http://www.nwc.gov.
au/organisation/closure-in-2014). The NWI represented a nationally-
focussed:
“intergovernmental agreement set out to achieve a nationally com-
patible market, regulatory and planning based system—one that
manages surface and groundwater resources for rural and urban
use, and optimises economic, social and environmental outcomes”
(cited online 2 March 2015 at http://www.nwc.gov.au/nwi).
The level of bilateralism in the governance of Australian freshwater
systems is likely to weaken as a result of the demise of the National
Water Commission. An additional systemic weakness in governance,
at regional and local scales, is the often low levels of connection be-
tween water and land use planning and management processes. As a
key aspect of good water governance, the concept of integrated land
and water planning and management, has been supported in principle
and in practice within various levels of both the Australian federal and
State/Territory governments for some time. Despite commitment to
this principle, in practice, institutional barriers still remain between or-
ganisations that manage riverine and non-riverine landscapes (Martin
and Williams, 2013).
Australia also has developed a cohesive but sometimes unstable
system for setting water quality standards. Until 2007, for example,
10 J. Davis et al. / Science of the Total Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx
Australia was rapidly setting a robust vision for water quality manage-
ment, negotiated bilaterally across all States and Territories through
the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality (NAPSQW).
This framework was replaced by the Caring for Our Country Program
in 2007, and the national water quality policy vision changed from an
outcomes-based to a more limited outputs-based approach. The ap-
proach also became disconnected from any sense of national environ-
ment accounts (e.g. via the work undertaken by the National Land and
Water Audit; Robins and Dovers, 2007; Wentworth Group, 2008).
Additionally, while NWI-related delivery frameworks dealing with
water allocation are well developed and quite mature in the south of
the country (e.g., in New South Wales, Driver et al., 2013), much effort
is still required to reverse the impacts of past periods of strong intensi-
fication. In the north, however, where new intensification pressures are
emerging, there is not a particularly strong framework for the imple-
mentation of water resource plans (see JCU and CSIRO, 2013). Across
the nation, water quality considerations were historically below capac-
ity in regional areas (NWC, 2011) and often poorly integrated within
water quantity-based allocation processes under the NWI framework.
In broader functional terms, articulation of natural resource man-
agement problems must be directly connected to public values. This
provides the essential foundation for ensuring adoption of management
strategies and adaptive system management (Groffman et al., 2010;
Folke et al, 2007). Water management stakeholder consultation can
sometimes be too narrowly defined, often with an emphasis on the
most obvious consumers, for example, irrigators (Bari et al., 2008;
Hassall and Associates, 2007), and with an emphasis on the disciplines
of hydrology and economics, instead of considering other aspects of
human communities, especially the needs of Indigenous peoples
(Jackson and Morrison, 2007; Martin and Williams, 2013). Alternative-
ly, conservation objectives might be considered to the exclusion of so-
cial, economic and cultural values of water (Dale et al., 2013a). Hence,
the full range of water managers and water users must be engaged to
better understand the needs and uncertainties in natural resource
decision-making, and Indigenous values and knowledge must incorpo-
rated (Fazey et al., 2006; Finlayson, 2001; Richter et al., 2006; Ryder
et al., 2010). The incorporation of Indigenous values and knowledge in
water planning and management will also improve resource manage-
ment plans by incorporating species and season-specific knowledge
(Finlayson, 2005; Woodward et al., 2012).
In addition to the inclusion of broader human values, effective
decision-making requires an understanding of long-term ecosystem be-
haviour (e.g. see Folke et al., 2007). A process to retain, maintain and syn-
thesise management intervention knowledge across Australia's long-
term monitoring programmes is urgently needed (Driver et al., 2013;
Stewardson et al., 2012). At the national scale, frameworks for monitoring
water quantity and quality, and water management have been strength-
ened, but also partly discontinued. In areas outside of the jurisdiction of
the Murray Darling Basin Plan, which largely incorporates the intent of
these former programmes (the NAPSQW and NWI, as discussed), there
is an even greater need for an integrated approach to intervention moni-
toring across state and commonwealth government agencies.
Periodic changes in national and State/Territory policy and associat-
ed management intervention require re-negotiation and a lack of effec-
tive bilateralism has been a key impediment to effective change in
Australia since Federation. That is, each new era of governance is weak-
ened by needing to re-establish systems across the Commonwealth and
States/Territories post changes in governments at either the Common-
wealth or State levels. Hence, with major changes such as intensification
in Australia's north and in peri-urban zones fringing coastal cities, and
also temporal shifts in ecosystem behaviour (more frequent prolonged
droughts), there is a high risk of delayed adaptation as divides emerge
between national and state activities relating to water monitoring and
effective policy and investment. This also means that monitoring results
may have less influence on key national and state policies (Wentworth
Group, 2008).
Please cite this article as: Davis, J., et al., When trends intersect: The challenge of protecting freshwater ecosystems under multiple land use and
hydrological intensification ..., Sci Total Environ (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.127
A further contribution to such delayed adaptation may emerge from
the recent decline in strategic national scale planning and allocation of
resources for research in Australian water resources management. Re-
search and development activities have become fragmented and more
disconnected from planning and implementation as scientists seek
funding opportunistically rather than working within programmes
with clearly articulated national public good goals and outcomes (see
Dale et al., 2015). Although Australian universities and the peak
Australian government-funded research organisation, the Common-
wealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), retain
a strong research and development capacity in qualitative and quantita-
tive water resource science, governance and management, this capacity
is likely to erode if national funding support continues to decline (Dale
et al., 2013b).
9. Prioritising research to integrate land use intensification into
freshwater conservation and management
9.1. Developing an understanding of long term ecosystem behaviour to
support decision making
Despite a long history of palaeoecological research across Australia,
there has been very little integration of this evidence into natural resource
decision-making (Mills et al., 2013). Evidence from natural archives of
change, such as wetland sediments, tree rings and speleothems can pro-
vide considerable insight into systems change including, but not limited
to: (i) benchmark conditions; (ii) initiation of human impact; (iii) the
magnitude of human impacts relative to benchmarks; (iv) recent trajec-
tories of change; (v) linear vs non-linear responses, and (vi) novelty of
present condition. Syntheses of palaeolimnological records across
Australia conclude that virtually no wetland escaped the combined effect
of human impact and climate change over the last two centuries (Gell
et al., 2013). So many changes have occurred to Australian ecosystems, in-
cluding aquatic ecosystems, it seems likely that society will greatly under-
estimate the impact of past land use intensification, and so be ill-prepared
for the consequences of any future intensification. The integration of long
term records of change, with long term monitoring programmes, is criti-
cal for Australian researchers and managers to understand the impact of
intensive resource use on the Australian continent.
9.2. Understanding the capacity of extant freshwater biodiversity to adapt
to environmental change
The capacity of freshwater biodiversity to adapt in situ to environ-
mental change (e.g. through acclimation, genetic or epigenetic changes,
behavioural change or plasticity), and climate change particularly, is
poorly understood. Understanding the potential for adaptation through
movement, including range shifts and migration is needed to inform the
development of freshwater biodiversity climate change adaptation
strategies. The identification of taxa with high adaptive capacities is
needed for prioritisation of management efforts towards more vulnerable
populations, species and communities. Understanding the mechanisms
that underpin the resilience that freshwater ecosystems currently possess
could allow us to support that capacity.
9.3. Determining the relative contributions of surface water and groundwater
in supporting freshwater ecosystems
There remains insufficient knowledge of Groundwater Dependent
Ecosystems (GDEs) and their water requirements (Boulton et al.,
2010). Although there has been a shift towards GDE preservation within
planning, GDE protection often uses limited definitions and perceptions
of what constitutes a groundwater-dependent ecosystem. Often the
focus is on vegetation-dependent groundwater systems that can be
readily identified using remote sensing techniques. However, these
techniques remain poorly ground-truthed and empirical studies of
 J. Davis et al. / Science of the Total Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx
terrestrial groundwater use in Australia remain rare (O'Grady et al.,
2010, 2011). The focus on remotely sensed metrics has reduced the
scope of work pertaining to GDE identification, resulting in limited un-
derstanding of long-term GDE characteristics and viability (Eamus and
Froend, 2006). This leads especially to neglect of GDEs that are difficult
to detect and monitor (such as hyporheic and stygofauna communities
in karsts and alluvial systems) in planning processes (Tomlinson and
Boulton, 2008). The impacts of managed aquifer recharge on subterra-
nean aquifers, to improve water security in cities located on subterra-
nean aquifers are not known. Changes in land use, such as shifts from
annual to perennial systems with climatic drying, are likely to have sig-
nificant impacts on groundwater recharge (Crosbie et al., 2010). En-
hanced effort and funding are required to support both research and
planning to facilitate integrated management of surface and groundwa-
ter ecosystems (Eamus and Froend, 2006; Tomlinson and Boulton,
2008).
9.4. Improving capacity to model hydro-ecological relationships and predict
ecological outcomes from environmental flows
Effective management of environmental flows under different
intensification scenarios will depend on a platform of quantitative
hydro-ecological relationships, preferably for rivers and wetlands of
different hydrological and ecological character (Poff et al., 2010).
Hypothesis-based experimental investigations of species habitat re-
quirements, life history strategies and ecological processes are needed
to strengthen the existing science. They can be conducted in laborato-
ries or greenhouses or as field experiments using existing flow regimes
and flow facets as experimental treatments (Davies et al., 2014). A bet-
ter understanding of the importance of freshwater inflows into estuar-
ies and near-shore marine regions, is also needed. Estuaries and near-
shore marine regions are important habitats, supporting the life cycles
of many freshwater, estuarine and marine fishes and other species, in-
cluding commercial species.
9.5. Identifying freshwater biodiversity hotspots and aquatic refugia
Identifying aquatic refugia and barriers to dispersal and re-
establishing connectivity within riverine networks are particularly im-
portant, especially in semi-arid and arid regions (Davis et al., 2013;
Davies, 2010). Establishing priorities for protection of important refugia
or connectivity pathways should involve principles of systematic con-
servation planning (comprehensiveness, adequacy, representativeness
and efficiency) at catchment and broad jurisdictional or bioregional
scales (Arthington, 2012). Priority habitats and waterbodies (e.g. evolu-
tionary and ecological refugia) can then be designated and managed as
protected areas, or for mitigation of threats, or to establish priorities for
environmental flow delivery (Arthington, 2012). Although restoration
of flow regimes to pre-disturbance conditions may be impossible in
many areas, environmental flows can be used strategically to meet
conservation obligations for endangered species, habitats and interna-
tionally important wetlands listed under the Ramsar Convention and
migratory bird agreements (JAMBA, CAMBA).
9.6. Understanding the impacts of multiple stressors
The disappearance of some freshwater species may be driven by a
single stressor, yet for others the cumulative effects of multiple stressors
will be detrimental. Some species will be more affected by climate-
driven stressors and others by land-use stressors. Some stressors will
create additive or synergistic effects, and others antagonistic effects.
These effects are likely to differ for different types of waterbodies, e.g.
systems with large water volumes and diverse food webs may have
higher resilience than simple systems with little buffering capacity. Un-
derstanding the complexity, interactions, and hierarchy of stressor
Please cite this article as: Davis, J., et al., When trends intersect: The challenge of protecting freshwater ecosystems under multiple land use and
hydrological intensification ..., Sci Total Environ (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.127
11
effects on communities is needed in order to manage them effectively
(Ormerod et al., 2010).
9.7. Developing clear links between freshwater ecosystem functioning and
human well-being
As environmental policy and management become more utilitarian,
conservation and natural resources management efforts are increasing-
ly directed towards outcomes that can be clearly linked to human well-
being and health based on the provision of ecosystem services (Mitsch
and Gosselink, 2000; Acreman et al., 2014). Governments across the
world have a role in maintaining healthy ecosystems and in mitigating
climate effects under the Rio Convention, but have not yet delivered
on key agreements (Tollefson and Gilbert, 2012). Describing the impor-
tance of healthy ecosystems to food security and as a requirement in
meeting our international obligations is critical and also helps build
the case for integrated land and water management. For example,
IUCN (2013) describe how healthy ecosystems benefit food security
by enabling availability, access, utilization and stability. Research is
needed to more fully describe and quantitatively model a greater
range of interactions between freshwater ecosystem structure and func-
tion and the benefits provided beyond those which support the provi-
sion of goods with clear monetary value (i.e. potable water and fishes)
(Gordon et al., 2010). In this respect aquatic ecosystems can be seen
as settings for human well-being and livelihoods, although paradoxical
situations also need to be identified and assessed (Horwitz and
Finlayson, 2011).
9.8. Trialling and evaluating improved governance systems for managing
the impact of intensification on freshwater systems
Using Australia as an example, it is evident that some aspects of the
country's water resource governance system provide benchmarks of in-
ternational significance (e.g. water allocation under the National Water
Initiative) while other aspects of the system are particularly weak (e.g.
water quality management from diffuse sources). Australia's cohesive
system for governing water allocation is not well suited to, nor has it
been applied effectively under, northern Australian conditions where
new land use developments are planned. Much work is still needed to
improve the national system of water governance as the impacts of in-
tensification play out.
While Australia has had some significant successes in improved gov-
ernance with respect to both water quality and quantity planning and
management, continuous improvement in the design and implementa-
tion of governance systems is needed. This makes the recent abolition of
the nation's National Water Commission, for example, a retrograde de-
velopment as it diminishes the likelihood of strong national leadership
and deliberative bilateralism between the Commonwealth and the
States in water management. It also makes growing integration be-
tween water quality and quantity aspects of planning less likely.
Future initiatives should also be cognisant of the impact and influ-
ence of allied governance systems, for example, those for climate
change mitigation and adaption. While Australia has had some signifi-
cant successes in improved governance with respect to both water qual-
ity and quantity planning and management, continuous improvement
in the processes of adaptive management is an ongoing challenge.
Reinvigorating the national policy and coordination framework for
water management may be critical to avoid some of the worst impacts
of intensification.
9.9. Integrating aquatic and terrestrial ecological research and management
Freshwater research and management is often isolated (and in some
cases marginalised) from terrestrial ecological practice. With respect to
governance, the high socio-economic value and frequently contested
nature of water resources have resulted in the establishment of
12 J. Davis et al. / Science of the Total Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx
institutions that manage water and freshwater ecosystems in isolation
from their broader landscape settings. Integrated catchment manage-
ment is an exception, although its aims and objectives are also typically
water related (e.g. end of system water quality) rather than being truly
holistic at a landscape scale. One result of this disciplinary and institu-
tional segregation is that hydrological change has been widely consid-
ered as the sole driver of ecological degradation in Australian aquatic
systems, particularly during periods of drought. Addressing land use
intensification and other non-hydrological intensification trends, how-
ever, requires a broader landscape perspective to be taken. The recent,
changed emphasis in public funding of improved natural resource
management illustrates the challenge with land-water segregation.
Government programmes were largely based on a case-by-case funding
assessment without properly linking expenditure to meaningful,
standardised performance measures (Hajkowicz, 2009). This general
problem is now compounded by a move towards funding based on
calculated carbon-offset benefits for agricultural land management,
which in turn are affected by a market-driven price of carbon. However,
it is unlikely these measures will lead to significant carbon storage
(Sanderman et al., 2010), and the consequences for aquatic systems
are even less clear. Understanding aquatic ecosystem structure and
function and managing these for both their intrinsic value and their
human benefits in the future will depend on effective collaborative
and transdisciplinary research and management across aquatic and ter-
restrial fields (Likens et al., 2009). Scientific disciplines and institutions
in both arenas stand to benefit.
10. Conclusions
Land has been cleared across most of the temperate regions of
Australia and large amounts of fresh water have been diverted and ex-
tracted for the production of food and fibre, resulting in major land
use and water use legacies. These must be addressed if the nation is to
avoid the loss of multiple ecosystem services and an accelerated decline
in aquatic biodiversity. Although adaptive management processes are in
place, much of the inland aquatic landscape is affected by humans; often
in non-quantified ways. Effective governance, across all nations, re-
quires better understanding of the interacting impacts of climate
change, hydrological intensification and land use intensification on
social and ecological systems. In particular, a greater understanding is
needed of the impacts on all communities: rural, indigenous and
urban. The ‘hidden’ nature of groundwater means that groundwater-
dependent ecosystems remain particularly vulnerable. Many trends, in-
cluding biodiversity decline, wetland loss, salinisation, eutrophication
and sedimentation are well recognised. However, remediation and res-
toration of affected systems often remain problematic. In the Australian
context, land and water governance in southern Australian is well de-
veloped by global standards but evidence-based and participatory plan-
ning and management is needed to ensure that past mistakes are not
repeated in the agricultural developments of Australia's north.
The high likelihood of extreme events (more protracted droughts
and more severe floods) affecting regions of intensive food and fibre
production globally provides a compelling argument for improving
the links between land and water governance. If land use intensification
is to avoid serious social, economic and environmental costs, ap-
proaches that empower local people to manage their own landscapes
will be needed, based on inclusiveness, negotiation, and flexibility, to
ensure support for incomes and livelihoods (McCartney et al., 2014).
Collaborative research enabled by institutions such as the Terrestrial
Ecosystem Research Network (TERN) and Cooperative Research Centres
(CRCs) is important because it creates data sharing and motivational
frameworks that otherwise would not exist (e.g., for the Australian Cen-
tre of Ecological Analysis and Synthesis as part of TERN, see Specht et al.,
in press).
Proactive strategies are needed to minimise the impacts of floods
and droughts. These must include restoration in catchments and
Please cite this article as: Davis, J., et al., When trends intersect: The challenge of protecting freshwater ecosystems under multiple land use and
hydrological intensification ..., Sci Total Environ (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.127
riverbank zones; provision and maintenance of refuge habits; provision
of environmental flows in systems where much water is extracted; fish-
passes to allow movement of fish around constructed barriers, and the
identification and active conservation of valuable ecosystems and
particular biota. Strategic research priorities to inform planning and
management of freshwater systems include: identifying freshwater bio-
diversity hotspots and refugia; improving the capacity to model hydro-
ecological and agro-ecological relationships; and developing a better
understanding of surface water–groundwater interactions, long term
ecosystem behaviour and aquatic-terrestrial links.
Acknowledgements
This work was funded by the Department of Industry, Innovation,
Science, Research and Tertiary Education (DIISRTE) via the Northern Fu-
tures Collaborative Research Network Program (CRN), the Australian
Government's Stream 2 Climate Adaptation Program and ACEAS, the
Australian Centre for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis. ACEAS is a facil-
ity of the Australian Government-funded Terrestrial Ecosystem Re-
search Network (www.tern.gov.au), a research infrastructure facility
established under the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure
Strategy and Education Infrastructure Fund Super Science Initiative.
We also acknowledge co-investment from the Australian Research
Council (ARC). The contribution of Ian Kidd in developing the reference li-
brary for this paper is also gratefully acknowledged. The views expressed
in this paper are those of the authors, and not necessarily those of any
Australian government agency or other organisation.
References
Acreman, M., Arthington, A.H., Colloff, M.J., Couch, C., Crossman, N., Dyer, F., Overton, I.,
Pollino, C.A., Stewardson, M., Young, W., 2014. Environmental flows for natural, hy-
brid and novel riverine ecosystems in a changing world. Front. Ecol. Environ. 12,
466–473.
Anderies, J.M., Janssen, M.A., Ostrom, E., 2004. A framework to analyze the robustness of
social-ecological systems from an institutional perspective. Ecol. Soc. 9, 1–18.
Arthington, A.H., 2012. Environmental Flows: Saving Rivers in the Third Millennium. Univ
of California Press.
Arthington, A.H., Pusey, B.J., 2003. Flow restoration and protection in Australian rivers.
River Res. Appl. 19, 377–395.
Arthington, A.H., Balcombe, S.R., Wilson, G.A., Thoms, M.C., Marshall, J., 2005. Spatial and
temporal variation in fish-assemblage structure in isolated waterholes during the
2001 dry season of an arid-zone floodplain river, Cooper Creek, Australia. Mar.
Freshw. Res. 56, 25–35.
Bari, M., Singh, I., Flavel, N.J., 2008. Monitoring economic and social changes within NSW
water sharing plan areas: a participatory approach. Paper Presented at 52nd AARES
Annual Conference.
Barnett, T.P., Adam, J.C., Lettenmaier, D.P., 2005. Potential impacts of a warming climate
on water availability in snow-dominated regions. Nature 438, 303–309.
Bellamy, J.A., Walker, D.H., McDonald, G.T., Syme, G.J., 2001. A systems approach to the
evaluation of natural resource management initiatives. J. Environ. Manag. 63,
407–423.
Benton, T.G., 2012. 4 intensive farming and its role in wildlife conservation: routes to
squaring the circle? In: Cunningham, S., Lindenmayer, D., Young, A. (Eds.), Land
Use Intensification: Effects on Agriculture, Biodiversity and Ecological Processes.
CSIRO, Collingwood Victoria
Betts, R.A., Boucher, O., Collins, M., Cox, P.M., Falloon, P.D., Gedney, N., Hemming, D.L.,
Huntingford, C., Jones, C.D., Sexton, D.M.H., Webb, M.J., 2007. Projected increase in
continental runoff due to plant responses to increasing carbon dioxide. Nature 448,
1037–1041.
Bodman, R.W., Rayner, P.J., Karoly, D.J., 2013. Uncertainty in temperature projections re-
duced using carbon cycle and climate observations. Nat. Clim. Chang. 3, 725–729.
Bond, N.R., Lake, P.S., Arthington, A.H., 2008. The impacts of drought on freshwater eco-
systems: an Australian perspective. Hydrobiologia 600, 3–16.
Boulton, A.J., 2003. Parallels and contrasts in the effects of drought on stream macroinver-
tebrate assemblages. Freshw. Biol. 48, 1173–1185.
Boulton, A.J., Datry, T., Kasahara, T., Mutz, M., Stanford, J.A., 2010. Ecology and manage-
ment of the hyporheic zone: stream-groundwater interactions of running waters
and their floodplains. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 29, 26–40.
Boulton, A., Brock, M., Robson, B., Ryder, D., Chambers, J., Davis, J., 2014. Australian Fresh-
water Ecology: Processes and Management. John Wiley & Sons.
Brisbane Declaration, 2007. http://www.eflownet.org/download_documents/brisbane-
declaration-english.pdf.
Brock, M.A., 2011. Persistence of seed banks in Australian temporary wetlands. Freshw.
Biol. 56, 1312–1327.
Bunn, S.E., Arthington, A.H., 2002. Basic principles and ecological consequences of altered
flow regimes for aquatic biodiversity. Environ. Manag. 30, 492–507.
 J. Davis et al. / Science of the Total Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx
Cai, W., Borlace, S., Lengaigne, M., Van Rensch, P., Collins, M., Vecchi, G., Timmermann, A.,
Santoso, A., Mcphaden, M.J., Wu, L., 2014. Increasing frequency of extreme El Niño
events due to greenhouse warming. Nat. Clim. Chang. 4, 111–116.
Canadell, J.G., Le Quéré, C., Raupach, M.R., Field, C.B., Buitenhuis, E.T., Ciais, P., Conway, T.J.,
Gillett, N.P., Houghton, R.A., Marland, G., 2007. Contributions to accelerating atmo-
spheric CO2 growth from economic activity, carbon intensity, and efficiency of natural
sinks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 104, pp. 18866–18870
Casanova, M.T., 2012. Does cereal crop agriculture in dry swamps damage aquatic plant
communities? Aquat. Bot. 103, 54–59.
Chen, J., Wilson, C., Tapley, B., 2013. Contribution of ice sheet and mountain glacier melt to
recent sea level rise. Nat. Geosci. 6, 549–552.
Chou, C., Chiang, J.C.H., Lan, C.-W., Chung, C.-H., Liao, Y.C., Lee, C.-J., 2013. Increase in the
range betwee wet and dry season precipitation. Nat. Geosci. 6, 263–267.
Clarke, A., Mac Nally, R., Bond, N., Lake, P., 2008. Macroinvertebrate diversity in headwater
streams: a review. Freshw. Biol. 53, 1707–1721.
Crosbie, R., Jolly, I., Leaney, F., Petheram, C., 2010. Can the dataset of field based recharge
estimates in Australia be used to predict recharge in data-poor areas? Hydrol. Earth
Syst. Sci. Discuss. 7, 5647–5684.
Crosbie, R., Pollock, D., Mpelasoka, F., Barron, O., Charles, S., Donn, M., 2012. Changes in
Köppen–Geiger climate types under a future climate for Australia: hydrological im-
plications. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss. 9, 7415–7440.
CSIRO, 2014. State of the climate. http://www.csiro.au/Outcomes/Climate/
Understanding/State-of-the-Climate-2014.
Cullen, P., Lake, P., 1995. Water resources and biodiversity: past, present and future prob-
lems and solutions. In: Bradstock, R.A., Auld, T.D., Keith, D.A., Kingsford, R.T., Lunney,
D., Sivertsen, D.P. (Eds.), Conserving Biodiversity: Threats and Solutions. Surrey
Beatty and Sons, Sydney, pp. 115–125.
Cunningham, A.A., 1996. Disease risks of wildlife translocations. Conserv. Biol. 10,
349–353.
Cunningham, S.A., Duncan, D.H., 2012. 11 land use intensification ipacts on biodiversity in
the mallee/wheat landscape of central NSW. In: Lindenmayer, D.B., Cunningham, S.,
Young, A. (Eds.), Land Use Intensification: Effects on Agriculture, Biodiversity and
Ecological Processes. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood.
Curry, R., Dickson, B., Yashayaev, I., 2003. A change in the freshwater balance of the
Atlanitic Ocena over the past four decades. Nature 426, 826–829.
Dale, A., Bellamy, J.A., 1998. Regional Resource Use Planning in Rangelands: An Australian
Review. Land & Water Resources Research & Development Corporation.
Dale, A., Vella, K., Potts, R., 2013a. Governance Systems Analysis (GSA): a framework for
reforming governance systems. J. Public Adm. Gov. 3, 162–187.
Dale, A.P., Vella, K., Pressey, R.L., Brodie, J., Yorkston, H., Potts, R., 2013b. A method for risk
analysis across governance systems: A Great Barrier Reef case study. Environ. Res.
Lett. 8, 015037.
Dale, A., Ryan, S., Broderick, K., 2015. Natural resources management as a form of multi-
level governance: the impact of reform in Queensland and Tasmania. In: Daniell,
K.A., Kay, A. (Eds.), Multi-level Governance: Theory and Case Studies. ANU Press
(ANZSOG Series), Canberra.
Davies, P.M., 2010. Climate change implications for river restoration in global biodiversity
hotspots. Restor. Ecol. 18, 261–268.
Davies, P.M., Naiman, R.J., Warfe, D.M., Pettit, N.E., Arthington, A.H., Bunn, S.E., 2014.
Flow–ecology relationships: closing the loop on effective environmental flows. Mar.
Freshw. Res. 65, 133–141.
Davis, J., Sim, L., Chambers, J., 2010. Multiple stressors and regime shifts in shallow aquatic
ecosystems in antipodean landscapes. Freshw. Biol. 55, 5–18.
Davis, J., Pavlova, A., Thompson, R., Sunnucks, P., 2013. Evolutionary refugia and ecological
refuges: key concepts for conserving Australian arid zone freshwater biodiversity
under climate change. Glob. Chang. Biol. 19, 1970–1984.
Diamond, J., 2005. Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed. Penguin.
Donohue, R.J., Roderick, M.L., Mcvicar, T.R., 2011. Assessing the differences in sensitivities
of runoff to changes in climatic conditions across a large basin. J. Hydrol. 406,
234–244.
Donohue, R.J., Roderick, M.L., Mcvicar, T.R., Farquhar, G.D., 2013. Impact of CO2 fertiliza-
tion on maximum foliage cover across the globe's warm, arid environments.
Geophys. Res. Lett. 40, 3031–3035.
Dorcey, A.H., 1986. Bargaining in the Governance of Pacific Coastal Resources: Research
and Reform. Westwater Research Centre, Faculty of Graduate Studies, University of
British Columbia.
Driver, P., Harris, J., Closs, G., Koen, T., 2005a. Effects of flow regulation on carp (Cyprinus
carpio L.) recruitment in the Murray–Darling Basin, Australia. River Res. Appl. 21,
327–335.
Driver, P., Chowdhury, S., Wettin, P., Jones, H., 2005b. Models to predict the effects of en-
vironmental flow releases on wetland inundation and the success of colonial bird
breeding in the Lachlan River, NSW. In: Rutherfurd, I.D., Wiszniewski, I., Askey-
Doran, M.J., Glazik, R. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th Annual Stream Management Con-
ference: Linking Rivers to Landscapes. 19–22 October 2004, Country Club Casino,
Launceston, Tasmania, pp. 192–198.
Driver, P., Barbour, E., Michener, K., 2011. An integrated surface water, groundwater and
wetland plant model of drought response and recovery for environmental water
management. In: Chan, F., Marinova, D., Anderssen, R.S. (Eds.), 19th International
Congress on Modelling and Simulation, Modelling and Simulation Society of
Australia and New Zealand, December 2011, pp. 2444–2450.
Driver, P.D., Cairns, J., Healey, M.R., Foster, N.D., 2012. Monitoring site prioritisation to aid
the protection of stream biota in unregulated rivers, inland New South Wales. Pro-
ceedings of the 6th Australian Stream Management Conference, 2012, pp. 566–573.
Driver, P.D., Raine, A., Foster, N.D., Williams, S.A., 2013. Ecological monitoring to support
Water Sharing Plan evaluation and protect wetlands of inland New South Wales,
Australia. Ecol. Manag. Restor. 14, 187–193.
Please cite this article as: Davis, J., et al., When trends intersect: The challenge of protecting freshwater ecosystems under multiple land use and
hydrological intensification ..., Sci Total Environ (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.127
13
Dudgeon, D., Arthington, A.H., Gessner, M.O., Kawabata, Z.I., Knowler, D.J., Lévêque, C.,
Naiman, R.J., Prieur‐Richard, A.H., Soto, D., Stiassny, M.L., 2006. Freshwater biodiver-
sity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biol. Rev. 81, 163–182.
Durack, P.J., Wiffels, S.E., Matear, R.J., 2012a. Ocean salinities reveal strong global water
cycle intensification during 1950 to 2000. Science 336, 455–458.
Durack, P.J., Wijffels, S.E., Matear, R.J., 2012b. Ocean salinities reveal strong global water
cycle intensification during 1950 to 2000. Science 336, 455–458.
Eamus, D., Froend, R., 2006. Groundwater-dependent ecosystems: the where, what and
why of GDEs. Aust. J. Bot. 54, 91–96.
Eamus, D., Jarvis, P.G., 1989. The direct effects of increases in global atmospheric CO2 con-
centration on natural and commercial temperate trees and forests. Adv. Ecol. Res. 19,
1–55.
Epbc_Act, 1999. Advice to the Minister. In: Sustainability, E., Water, Population And
Communities (Eds.), Threatened Species Scientific Committee http://www.
environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/communities/pubs/97-listing-advice.
pdf.
Fazey, I.R.A., Proust, K., Newell, B., Johnson, B., Fazey, J.A., 2006. Eliciting the implicit
knowledge and perceptions of on-ground conservation managers of the Macquarie
Marshes. Ecol. Soc. 11, 25.
Finlayson, C.M., 2001. Views from divergent stakeholders on the Macquarie–Cudgegong
River Management Committee. Ecol. Manag. Restor. 2, 87–98.
Finlayson, C., 2005. Plant ecology of Australia's tropical floodplain wetlands: a review.
Ann. Bot. 96, 541–555.
Finlayson, B., Mcmahon, T., 1988. Australia vs the World: A Comparative Analysis of
Streamflow Characteristics. Fluvial Geomorphology of Australiapp. 17–40.
Folke, C., Pritchard Berkes, F., Colding, J., Svedin, U.L., Pritchard, L., Berkes, F., Colding, J.,
Svedin, U., 2007. The problem of fit between ecosystems and intuitions: ten years
later. Ecol. Soc. 12 (1), 30.
Gedney, N., Cox, P.M., Betts, R.A., Boucher, O., Huntingford, C., Stott, P.A., 2006. Detection
of a direct carbon dioxide effect in continental river runoff records. Nature 439,
835–838.
Gell, P., 2012. Palaeoecology as a means of ausiting wetland conditions. Peopled Land-
scapes: Archaeological and Biogeographic Approaches to Landscapes, Terra Australis
34, pp. 445–458.
Gell, P., Tibby, J., Fluin, J., Leahy, P., Reid, M., Adamson, K., Bulpin, S., Macgregor, A.,
Wallbrink, P., Hancock, G., 2005. Accessing limnological change and variability
using fossil diatom assemblages, south-east Australia. River Res. Appl. 21,
257–269.
Gell, P., Tibby, J., Little, F., Baldwin, D., Hancock, G., 2007. The impact of regulation and
salinisation on floodplain lakes: the lower River Murray, Australia. Hydrobiologia
591, 135–146.
Gell, P., Fluin, J., Tibby, J., Hancock, G., Harrison, J., Zawadzki, A., Haynes, D., Khanum, S.,
Little, F., Walsh, B., 2009. Anthropogenic acceleration of sediment accretion in low-
land floodplain wetlands, Murray–Darling Basin, Australia. Geomorphology 108,
122–126.
Gell, P., Mills, K., Grundell, R., 2013. A legacy of climate and catchment change: the real
challenge for wetland management. Hydrobiologia 708, 133–144.
Gemenne, F., 2011. Why the numbers don't add up: a review of estimates and predic-
tions of people displaced by environmental changes. Glob. Environ. Chang. 21,
41–49.
Ghassemi, F., White, I., 2007. Inter-basin Water Transfer: Case Studies From Australia,
United States, Canada, China, and India. Cambridge University Press, New York.
Gloor, M., Brienen, R.J.W., Galbraith, D., Feldpausch, T.R., Schöngart, J., Guyot, J.L., Espinoza,
J.C., Lloyd, J., Phillips, O.L., 2013. Intensification of the Amazon hydrological cycle over
the last two decades. Geophys. Res. Lett. 40, 1729–1733.
Gordon, L.J., Finlayson, C.M., Falkenmark, M., 2010. Managing water in agriculture
for food production and other ecosystem services. Agric. Water Manag. 97,
512–519.
Groffman, P.M., Stylinski, C., Nisbet, M.C., Duarte, C.M., Jordan, R., Burgin, A., Previtali, M.A.,
Coloso, J., 2010. Restarting the conversation: challenges at the interface between
ecology and society. Front. Ecol. Environ. 8, 284–291.
Hajkowicz, S., 2009. The evolution of Australia's natural resource management programs:
towards improved targeting and evaluation of investments. Land Use Policy 26 (2),
471–478.
Hajkowicz, S., Cook, H., Littleboy, A., 2012. Our future world: global megatrends that will
change the way we live. The 2012 revision. URL:. http://www. csiro. au/Portals/
Partner/Futures/Our-Future-World-report. aspx.
Hassall, Associates, 2007. Information Audit of Socio-economic Activities in the Macquarie
River Catchment. In: (Nsw), D. O. E. A. C. C. (Ed.), (Sydney).
Held, I.M., Soden, B.J., 2006. Robust responses of the hydrological cycle to global warming.
J. Clim. 19, 5686–5699.
Hilderbrand, R.H., Watts, A.C., Randle, A.M., 2005. The myths of restoration ecology. Ecol.
Soc. 10 (1), 19.
Horwitz, P., Finlayson, C.M., 2011. Wetlands as settings for human health: incorporating
ecosystem services and health impact assessment into water resource management.
Bioscience 61, 678–688.
Hughes, J., Goudkamp, K., Hurwood, D., Hancock, M., Bunn, S., 2003. Translocation causes
extinction of a local population of the freshwater shrimp Paratya australiensis.
Conserv. Biol. 17, 1007–1012.
Huntington, T.G., 2006. Evidence for intensification of the global water cycle: review and
synthesis. J. Hydrol. 319, 83–95.
Iucn, 2013. Food Security Policies: Making the Ecosystem Connections. International
Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Gland, Switzerland.
Jackson, S., Morrison, J., 2007. Indigenous perspectives in water management, reforms
and implementation. Managing Water for Australia: the Social and Institutional
Challengespp. 22–41.
14 J. Davis et al. / Science of the Total Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx
James Cook University, Csiro, 2013. Land tenure in Northern Australia: Opportunities and
Challenges for Investment. CSIRO, Brisbane.
Keenan, T.F., Hollinger, D.Y., Boher, G., Dragoni, D., Munger, J.W., Schmid, H.P., Richardson,
A.D., 2013. Increase in forest water-use efficiency as atmospheric carbon dioxide con-
centrations rise. Nature 499, 324–327.
Kingsford, R.T., 2000. Ecological impacts of dams, water diversions and river management
on floodplain wetlands in Australia. Austral Ecol. 25, 109–127.
Koehn, J.D., 2004. Carp (Cyprinus carpio) as a powerful invader in Australian waterways.
Freshw. Biol. 49, 882–894.
Lake, P., Bond, N.R., 2007. Australian futures: freshwater ecosystems and human water
usage. Futures 39, 288–305.
Lesslie, R., Mewett, J., 2013. Land Use and Management: The Australian Context. ABARES.
Lewis, S.L., Brando, P.M., Phillips, O.L., Van Der Heijden, G.M.F., Nepstad, D., 2011. The
2010 Amazon drought. Science 331, 554.
Likens, G.E., Walker, K.F., Davies, P.E., Brookes, J., Olley, J., Young, W.J., Thoms, M.C., Lake,
P.S., Gawne, B., Davis, J., 2009. Ecosystem science: toward a new paradigm for man-
aging Australia's inland aquatic ecosystems. Mar. Freshw. Res. 60, 271–279.
Macgregor, A.J., Gell, P.A., Wallbrink, P.J., Hancock, G., 2005. Natural and post-European
settlement variability in water quality of the lower Snowy River floodplain, eastern
Victoria, Australia. River Res. Appl. 21, 201–213.
Martin, P., Williams, J., 2013. Water governance: a policy risk perspective. Water Resour.
Manag. VII 171, 73.
McCartney, M., Finlayson, C.M., de Silva, S., 1981. Sustainable development and ecosystem
services. In: van der Bliek, J., McCornick, P., Clarke, J. (Eds.), On Target for People and
Planet: setting and achieving water–related Sustainable Development Goals. Interna-
tional Water Management Institute, Colombo, Sri Lanka, pp. 29–32.
Mcvicar, T.R., Roderick, M.L., Donohue, R.J., Li, L.T., Van Niel, T.G., Thomas, A., Grieser, J.,
Jhajharia, D., Himri, Y., Mahowald, N.M., 2012. Global review and synthesis of trends
in observed terrestrial near-surface wind speeds: implications for evaporation.
J. Hydrol. 416, 182–205.
MDBA, 2010. Guide to the proposed basin plan. [Online], http://www.mdba.gov.au/sites/
default/files/archived/Guide_to_the_Basin_Plan_Volume_1_web.pdf: Murray-Darling
Basin Authority (Available: http://www.mdba.gov.au/sites/default/files/archived/
Guide_to_the_Basin_Plan_Volume_1_web.pdf: Murray-Darling Basin Authority
[Accessed 25 September 2013).
Mewett, J., Paplinska, J., Kelley, G., Lesslie, R., Pritchard, P., Atyeo, C., 2013. Towards nation-
al reporting on agricultural land use change in Australia. ABARES Technical Report
13.06, Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences,
Canberra, October, Available at daff. gov. au/abares/publications_remote_content/
publication_series/technical_reports.
Mills, K., Gell, P., Gergis, J., Baker, P., Finlayson, C., Hesse, P., Jones, R., Kershaw, P., Pearson,
S., Treble, P., 2013. Paleoclimate studies and natural-resource management in the
Murray–Darling Basin II: unravelling human impacts and climate variability. Aust.
J. Earth Sci. 60, 561–571.
Mitsch, W.J., Gosselink, J.G., 2000. The value of wetlands: importance of scale and land-
scape setting. Ecol. Econ. 35, 25–33.
National Water Commission, 2011. Urban Water in Australia: Future Directions. NWC,
Canberra.
Oecd, 2012. OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050: The Consequences of Inaction. Orga-
nisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
O'Grady, A., Carter, J., Holland, K., Commission, N.W., 2010. Review of Australian Ground-
water Discharge Studies of Terrestrial Systems. CSIRO Water for a Healthy Country.
O'Grady, A., Carter, J., Bruce, J., 2011. Can we predict groundwater discharge from terres-
trial ecosystems using existing eco-hydrological concepts? Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 15,
3731–3739.
Olden, J.D., Kennard, M.J., Lawler, J.J., Poff, N.L., 2011. Challenges and opportunities in
implementing managed relocation for conservation of freshwater species. Conserv.
Biol. 25, 40–47.
Ormerod, S.J., Dobson, M., Hildrew, A.G., Townsend, C.R., 2010. Multiple stressors in fresh-
water ecosystems. Freshw. Biol. 55, 1–4.
Ostrom, E., 2008. Polycentric Systems as One Approach to Solving Collective-action Prob-
lems (na).
Pahl-Wostl, C., Arthington, A., Bogardi, J., Bunn, S.E., Hoff, H., Lebel, L., Nikitina, E., Palmer,
M., Poff, L.N., Richards, K., 2013. Environmental flows and water governance: manag-
ing sustainable water uses. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 5, 341–351.
Palmer, M.A., Reidy Liermann, C.A., Nilsson, C., Flörke, M., Alcamo, J., Lake, P.S., Bond, N.,
2008. Climate change and the world's river basins: anticipating management options.
Front. Ecol. Environ. 6, 81–89.
Parker, C., Braithwaite, J., 2003. Regulation. In: Cane, P., Tushnet, M. (Eds.), The Oxford
Handbook of Legal Studies. Oxford University Press.
Peters, G.P., Andrew, R.M., Boden, T., Canadell, J.G., Ciais, P., Le Quere, C., Marland, G.,
Raupach, M.R., Wilson, C., 2013. The challenge to keep global warming below 2
[deg]C. Nat. Clim. Chang. 3, 4–6.
Phalan, B., Balmford, A., Green, R.E., Scharlemann, J.P., 2011. Minimising the harm to bio-
diversity of producing more food globally. Food Policy 36, S62–S71.
Piao, S., Friedlingstein, P., Ciais, P., de Noblet-Ducoudre, N., Labat, D., Zaehle, S., 2007.
Changes in climate and landuse have a larger direct impact than rising CO2 on global
river runoff trends. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104,
pp. 15242–15247.
Piao, S., Ciais, P., Huang, Y., Shen, Z., Peng, S., Li, J., Zhou, L., Liu, H., Ma, Y., Ding, Y., 2010a.
The impacts of climate change on water resources and agriculture in China. Nature
467, 43–51.
Piao, S., Ciais, P., Huang, Y., Shen, Z., Peng, S., Li, J., Zhou, L., Liu, H., Ma, Y., Ding, Y.,
Friedlinsten, P., Liu, C., Tan, K., Yu, Y., Zhang, Y., Fang, J., 2010b. The impacts of climate
change on water resources and agricuture in China. Nature 476, 43–51.
Please cite this article as: Davis, J., et al., When trends intersect: The challenge of protecting freshwater ecosystems under multiple land use and
hydrological intensification ..., Sci Total Environ (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.127
Pittock, J., Finlayson, C., 2013. Climate change adaptation in the Murray–Darling Basin: re-
ducing resilience of wetlands with engineering. Aust. J. Water Resour. 17, 161.
Poff, N.L., Richter, B.D., Arthington, A.H., Bunn, S.E., Naiman, R.J., Kendy, E., Acreman, M.,
Apse, C., Bledsoe, B.P., Freeman, M.C., 2010. The ecological limits of hydrologic alter-
ation (ELOHA): a new framework for developing regional environmental flow stan-
dards. Freshw. Biol. 55, 147–170.
Potts, R., Vella, K., Dale, A., Sipe, N., 2014. Exploring the usefulness of structural–functional
approaches to analyse governance of planning systems. Planning Theory http://dx.
doi.org/10.1177/1473095214553519 October 9.
Richter, B.D., Warner, A.T., Meyer, J.L., Lutz, K., 2006. A collaborative and adaptive pro-
cess for developing environmental flow recommendations. River Res. Appl. 22,
297–318.
Robins, L., Dovers, S., 2007. Community-based NRM boards of management: Are they up
to the task? Australas. J. Environ. Manag. 14, 111–122.
Robson, B., Chester, E., Mitchell, B., Matthews, T., 2008. Identification and Management of
Refuges for Aquatic Organisms. Deakin University (http://archive.nwc.gov.au/__data/
assets/pdf_file/0004/11002/Waterlines__refuges_Final.pdf).
Ryder, D.S., Tomlinson, M., Gawne, B., Likens, G.E., 2010. Defining and using‘best available
science’: a policy conundrum for the management of aquatic ecosystems. Mar.
Freshw. Res. 61, 821–828.
Sanderman, J., Farquharson, R., Baldock, J., 2010. Soil Carbon Sequestration Potential: A
Review for Australian Agriculture. CSIRO, Adelaide, South Australia.
Scambos, T.A., Bohlander, J.A., Shuman, C.A., Skvarca, P., 2004. Glacier acceleration and
thinning after ice shelf collapse in the Larsen B embayment, Antarctica. Geophys.
Res. Lett. 31, L18402.
Scherr, S.J., Mcneely, J.A., 2008. Biodiversity conservation and agricultural sustainability:
towards a new paradigm of ‘ecoagriculture’ landscapes. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol.
Sci. 363, 477–494.
Sheldon, F., Bunn, S.E., Hughes, J.M., Arthington, A.H., Balcombe, S.R., Fellows, C.S., 2010.
Ecological roles and threats to aquatic refugia in arid landscapes: dryland river
waterholes. Mar. Freshw. Res. 61, 885–895.
Solomon, S., 2007. Climate Change 2007—The Physical Science Basis: Working Group I
Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC. Cambridge University
Press.
Specht, A., Guru, S., Houghton, L., Keniger, L., Driver, P., Ritche, E., Lai, K., Treloar, A., 2015.
Data management challenges in analysis and synthesis in the ecosystem sciences. Sci-
ence of the Total Environment (in press).
Steduto, P., Faurès, J.-M., Hoogeveen, J., Winpenny, J., Burke, J., 2012. Coping With Water
Scarcity: An Action Framework for Agriculture and Food Security. Food and Agricul-
ture Organization of the United Nations Rome.
Stewardson, M., Webb, J.A., De Little, S., Miller, K.A., Poff, N., Rutherfurd, I., Sharpe, A.,
2012. Monitoring and evaluating environmental flows at the basin-scale: a science
and management challenge. In: Grove, J.R., Rutherfurd, I.D. (Eds.), Proceedings of
the 6th Australian Stream Management Conference, Managing for Extremes. Pro-
ceedings of the 6th Australian Stream Management Conference. Managing for
ExtremesRiver Basin Management Society, pp. 1–7.
Thomas, J.W., Grindle, M.S., 1990. After the decision: implementing policy reforms in de-
veloping countries. World Dev. 18, 1163–1181.
Tollefson, J., Gilbert, N., 2012. Rio report card. Nature 486 (7401), 20–23.
TOMLINSON, M., BOULTON, A., 2008. Subsurface groundwater dependent ecosystems: a
review of their biodiversity, ecological processes and ecosystem services. Waterlines
Occasional Paper 8, p. 77.
Tostovrsnik, N., Morris, M., Eckard, R., O'Leary, G., Pettit, C., Fitzsimons, P., Christy, B., Sandall,
J., Soste, L., Sposito, V., 2010. Climate change impacts and adaptation responses for South
West Victoria's primary industries. Victorian Resources Online. Statewide. A DPI VCCAP
Discussion Paper Disponible en ligne: http://vro.dpi.vic.gov.au/dpi/vro/vrosite.nsf/
pages/climate_vccap_climate-change-impacts-and-adaptation-responses (consulté le
30 août 2012).
Treydte, K.S., Schleser, G.H., Helle, G., Frank, D.C., Winiger, M., Haug, H.H., Esper, J., 2006.
The twentieth century was the wettest period in northern Pakistan over the past mil-
lennium. Nature 440, 1179–1182.
UNESA, 2012. Probabilistic population projections based on the world population prospects:
the 2012 revision. (Online), http://esa.un.org/unpd/ppp/Figures-Output/Population/
PPP_Total-Population.htm (Accessed 25 September 2014).
Vertessy, R.A., Zhang, L., Dawes, W., 2003. Plantations, river flows and river salinity. Aust.
For. 66, 55–61.
Vörösmarty, C.J., McIntyre, P., Gessner, M.O., Dudgeon, D., Prusevich, A., Green, P., Glidden,
S., Bunn, S.E., Sullivan, C.A., Liermann, C.R., 2010. Global threats to human water secu-
rity and river biodiversity. Nature 467, 555–561.
Walsh, C.J., Sharpe, A.K., Breen, P.F., Sonneman, J.A., 2001. Effects of urbanization on
streams of the Melbourne region, Victoria, Australia. I. Benthic macroinvertebrate
communities. Freshw. Biol. 46, 535–551.
Wentworth Group, 2008. Accounting for Nature. A Model for Building the National Envi-
ronmental Accounts of Australia. Wentworth Group, Sydney.
Wentz, F.J., Ricciardulli, L., Hilburn, K., Mears, C., 2007. How much more rain will global
warming bring? Science 317, 233–235.
Wild, M., Grieser, J., Schär, C., 2008. Combined surface solar brightening and increasing
greenhouse effect support recent intensification of the global land-based hydrological
cycle. Geophys. Res. Lett. 35.
Woodward, G., Perkins, D.M., Brown, L.E., 2010. Climate change and freshwater ecosystems:
impacts across multiple levels of organization. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 365,
2093–2106.
Woodward, E., Jackson, S., Finn, M., Mctaggart, P.M., 2012. Utilising Indigenous seasonal
knowledge to understand aquatic resource use and inform water resource manage-
ment in northern Australia. Ecol. Manag. Restor. 13, 58–64.