Nature-based solutions | Agro Pontino

Application ID
Application Name	Nature-based solutions for climate change adaptation and water pollution in agricultural regions. Lot 6: LDP in a Mediterranean environment
Application Location	Country	Italy	Country 2 (in case of transboundary applications)
	NUTS2 code
	River Basin District Code
	WFD Water Body Code
	Description		The project is located in three sub-basins (MOS-RMA-100, MOS-RMA-110 and MOS-790) of the Agro Pontino plain, in the province of Latina (Lazio Region)
Application Site Coordinates (in ETRS89 or WGS84 coordinate system)	Latitude: 41°25'06.4" N		Longitude: 13°00'21.6" E
Target Sector(s)	Primary:		Agriculture
	Secondary:
Implemented NWRM(s)	Measure #1:		off - line wetland
	Measure #2:		off - line wetland
	Measure #3:		buffer strip
	Measure #4:		buffer strip
Application short description	The Agro Pontino is the result of a heavy landscape transformation caused by the “Great Land Reclamation” of the 1920s. Such transformation has continued until today, adding an intense industrial (1960s and 1970s) and then residential (1990s-2000) development to the environmental pressures due to crop and livestock farming, causing progressive pollution of surface and groundwater and a growing artificiality of the landscape, with important losses in terms of ecosystem services. The water quality of most of the artificial and natural watercourses of the area is considered "poor" or "bad", according to the parameters established by the Water Framework Directive (WFD), and the most important pollution source are the intensive farming practices in the area. In this context the Life+ REWETLAND project, coordinated by the Province of Latina, aimed at promoting NBS to control diffuse pollution and improving the quality of surface waters of the Agro Pontino. The project led to the drafting of an Integrated Environmental Restoration Program (ERP) of the Pontine Plain, which identifies several NBS typologies that should be promoted on an area of about 700 km², entailing a network of 220 km of drainage channels. Beside acting at large scale by developing the ERP, Life+ REWETLAND project implemented four pilot projects aimed at demonstrating the effectiveness of constructed wetlands and buffer strips to control diffuse pollution.

Brief description of the problem to be tackled	The present study analyses how Nature-based solutions (NBS) may contribute to reduce water pollution by retaining and processing diffuse pollutants generated by farming practices (Nitrogen, Phosphorus, sediments and pesticides) while delivering, at the same time, other benefits beyond water pollution control, such as shelters for biodiversity, amenity and recreational opportunities.
What were the primary & secondary targets when designing this application?	Primary target #1:		Reducing water pollution from agricultural runoff
	Primary target #2:
	Secondary target #1:		Water body ecological restoration
	Secondary target #2:
	Remarks:		All the 4 implemented NBS are designed to achieve water purification with the broader perspective of water bodies ecological restoration, also in aesthetic terms through extensive interventions
Which specific types of pressures did you aim at mitigating?	Pressure #1:	Water pollution from agricultural runoff	Nitrogen/Phosphorous
	Pressure #2:
	Pressure #3:
	Pressure #4:
	Remarks:
Which specific types of adverse impacts did you aim at mitigating?	Impact #1:	Water pollution from agricultural runoff	Nitrogen/Phosphorous
	Impact #2:
	Impact #3:
	Impact #4:
	Remarks:
Which EU requirements and EU Directives were aimed at being addressed?	Requirement #1:
	Requirement #2:
	Requirement #3:
	Requirement #4:
	Remarks:
Which national and/or regional policy challenges and/or requirements aimed to be addressed?	National Law 152/06 (application of the WFD), River Basin Management Plan of the “Appennino Centrale” River Authority, Regione Lazio Water Safeguard Plan.

Project scale	Medium (eg. public park, new development district)	Medium scale project involving three sub-basins (MOS-RMA-100, MOS-RMA-110 and MOS-790)
Time frame	Date of installation/construction (MM.YYYY)	2014
	Expected average lifespan (life expectancy) of the application in years	The lifespan of the NBS is expected to be in the range of decades (around 50 years)
Responsible authority and other stakeholders involved	Name of responsible authority/ stakeholder	Role, responsibilities
	Latina Province	In charge of the NBS development and recipient of public funds for its realization
	Municipality of Latina	The Municipality co-financed a constructed wetland in Marina di Latina, and it currently owns and manages it
	Circeo national park	The park authority provided funding for the construction works of the Pilot Project 1
	Consorzio di Bonifca dell’Agro Pontino	Management and ordinary and extra-ordinary maintenance of the land reclamation works and devices
	U-space s.r.l.	Project monitoring, drafting of reports an assessments
	Famers associations (CIA, Coldiretti and Confagricoltura)	Landowners. Involved in the Rewetland project through their market organisations
The application was initiated and financed by	The NBS were financed by the Lazio Region. The funds were used by the province of Latina to implements the NBS. The construction of the 4 NBS occurred in: 2014
What were specific principles that were followed in the design of this application?	Achieving water purification with the broader perspective of water bodies ecological restoration, also in aesthetic terms through extensive interventions
Area (ha)	Number of hectares treated by the NWRM(s)	4.6 ha (Effective area of the 4 NBS)
	The area of the project is approximately 5.4 ha. The biodiversity is affected by the project in the area itself.	While the effective area of the NWRMs is mentioned above, the effective area of all the NWRMs in the sub-basins of study area is about 50 hectares
Design capacity	Villa Fogliano wetland: 1062 m³d^-1 Allacciante wetland: 734 m³d^-1
Reference to existing engineering standards, guidelines and manuals that have been used during the design phase	Reference	URL
	1
	2
	3
	4
	5
Main factors and/or constraints that influenced the selection and design of the NWRM(s) in this application?	The sites and designs of the NWRMs were chosen in order to meet the necessities of decreasing the load of nitrogen and phosphorous in the Agro Pontino plain and improving the quality of the water bodies.

What are the benefits and co-benefits of NWRMs in this application?	The environmental benefits of NWRMs are: the improved water quality (removal of pollutants from agricultural source); the reduced flood risk; biodiversity (increased number of aquatic fauna and the appearance of species of naturalistic interest). The social benefits are represented by: recreation and health opportunities for the local population; educations (natural areas are appreciated by schools).
Financial costs Value in € (Total + possible breakdown)	Total:
	Capital:	621.485,90 €
	Land acquisition and value:
	Operational:	10.720,00 €/year
	Maintenance:
	Other:
Were financial compensations required? What amount?	Yes
	Total amount of money paid (in €): -
	Compensation schema: -
	Comments / Remarks: The NBS have been built on public soils and have been financed by public funds (Life+, Municipality and Circeo National Park); O&M costs are covered by Municipality of Latina and Circeo National Park)
Economic costs	Actual income loss: 480.847,44 €/year
	Additional costs: -
	Other opportunity costs: -
	Comments / Remarks: Data provided refer to estimations made on sub-basins scale of the farmland income loss during a time period of 20 years.
Which link can be made to the ecosystem services approach?	An estimation of the monetization of the ecosystem services has been made with value transfer method for the NWRMs within the investigated basins obtaining a value ranging from 1.642.082 €/y to 1.908.229 €/y for scenario 1 and from 187.807 €/y to 209.844 €/y for scenario 2.

Dominant Land Use type(s)	Dominant land use	Agricultural use
	Secondary land use
	Other important land use
	Remarks: -
Climate zone	temperate sub-continental
Soil type	Backfill Sands Colluvium / sand / gravel Silts and clays Calcareous silts / peaty clay / peat
Average Slope
Mean Annual Rainfall	1035 mm (year 2014)
Mean Annual Runoff
Average Runoff coefficient (or % imperviousness on site)	0.24 MOS-RMA-100 0.35 MOS-RMA-110 0.15 MOS-790
	Remarks: -
Characterization of water quality status (prior to the implementation of the NWRMs)	The water quality of most of the artificial and natural watercourses of the area is considered "poor" or "bad" according to the parameters established by the Water Framework Directive (WFD)
Comment on any specific site characteristic that influences the effectiveness of the applied NWRM(s) in a positive or negative way	Positive way:
	Negative way: the Selcella canal buffer strip has a slope of about 25%, which reduces the efficiency in sediment removal

Impact category	Impact description	Impact quantification
		Parameter value; units and/or	% change in parameter value as compared to the state prior to the implementation of the NWRM(s)
Water quality Improvements	Wetlands and buffer strips (BS) remove nutrients and contaminants thanks to physical (adsorption and sedimentation) and several biological processes. The different design of these NWRMs determine strong variations in the removal capacities of the two NWRMs. The data provided refers to the effects of wetlands and buffer strips at sub-basins scale	TN (g m^-2y^-1) TP (g m^-2y^-1) Glyphosate (g m^-2y^-1)	CW 2; 20 BS 28.8 CW 0.2; 1.1 BS 1.1 CW 0.1; 4 BS 0.2

Monitoring requirements		The REWETLAND project included a complete Monitoring Program assigned to two companies: the SIBA s.p.a. (group leader) and BIOPROGRAMM s.c. Four sampling campaigns were carried out from 2014 to 2015.
Maintenance requirements		N/A
What are the administrative costs?		N/A

Which assessment methods and practices are used for assessing the biophysical impacts?		The assessment of TN, TP and TSS in the NBS was carried out with a theoretical estimation of the treatment performance of the REWETLAND NBS sites. Where data of TP, TSS and Glyphosate were not present, the parameters have through an experience-based analysis founded on the literature data.
Which methods are used to assess costs, benefits and cost-effectiveness of measures?		Costs: Reverse engineering Benefits and Cost-effectiveness: Value transfer method
How cost-effective are NWRM's compared to "traditional / structural" measures?		N/A
How do (if applicable) specific basin characteristics influence the effectiveness of measures?		N/A
What is the standard time delay for measuring the effects of the measures?		N/A

What were the main implementation barriers?		The Business Model envisaged by Rewetland failed for two main reasons: the lack of knowhow transfer and capacity building towards a key actor: the Consorzio di Bonifica Agro Pontino; the lack of financial resources through ordinary channels to replicate the NBS realization at larger scale.
What were the main enabling and success factors?		The Greenchange business model is based on entrusting farms with state-owned areas bordering waterways for the construction and management of NBSs (typically linear arboreal/shrub formations or wetlands) whose primary objective is to support biodiversity, but which also perform a function of reducing diffuse pollution.
Financing		NWRMs were financed by the Lazio region
Flexibility & Adaptability		N/A
Transferability		The condition for this business model to be replicable is the availability of public land properly located to allow the realisation of NBS effective for diffuse pollution removal.

Source Type	Project Report
Source Author(s)	IRIDRA srl
Source Title	Nature-based solutions for climate change adaptation and water pollution in agricultural regions. Lot 6: LDP in a Mediterranean environment - Feasibility Study
Year of publication	2020
Editor/Publisher	The Joint Research Centre
Source Weblink
Key People	Name / affiliation	Contact details
	Fabio Masi	masi(at)iridra.com

Nature-based solutions for climate change adaptation and water pollution in agricultural regions: the Agro Pontino (Latina) case

Open Basic information

Open Policy Context and Design Targets

Open Site Characteristics

Open Design & Implementation Parameters

Open Biophysical Impacts

Open Socio-Economic Information

Open Monitoring & Maintenance requirements

Open Performance metrics and Assessment criteria

Open Main risks, implications, enabling factors and preconditions

Open Lessons learned

Open References