Nature-based solutions | Venice lagoon

Application ID
Application Name	Nature-based solutions for climate change adaptation and water pollution in agricultural regions. Lot 5: LDP in a continental 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 the two sub-basins of Marzenego and Dese-Zero, included in the plain of Venice Lagoon (Veneto Region)
Application Site Coordinates (in ETRS89 or WGS84 coordinate system)	Latitude:		Longitude:
Target Sector(s)	Primary:		Agriculture
	Secondary:
Implemented NWRM(s)	Measure #1:		in-line wetland
	Measure #2:		off - line wetland
	Measure #3:		buffer strip
	Measure #4:		woody buffer area
Application short description	The area of the Venice Lagoon plain is easily subject to eutrophication because of the agricultural activities located in the area. This case study aims to investigate how nature-based solutions (NBS) may contribute to reduce water pollution (main benefits) at sub-basin scale by retaining and processing diffuse pollutants generated by farming practices (Nitrogen, Phosphorus, sediments and pesticides) while delivering, at the same time, other benefits (Side Benefits) beyond water pollution control, such as shelters for biodiversity, amenity and recreational opportunities. 4 NBS have been investigated in this study: two wetlands (the Scolo Rusteghin site and the Salzano site), one buffer strip (Scandolara site), one woody buffer (NICOLAS site). The aim is to obtain the information necessary to upscale and estimate their environmental, social and economic benefits and costs on a sub-basin scale. The outcomes of the study showed that: NBS are effective in removing the nutrients and contaminants from diffuse pollution, displaying efficiencies in line with the scientific literature; NBS provide a high added value for the community every year; NBS need reasonable construction and O&M costs while providing several important benefits.

Brief description of the problem to be tackled
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:		Flood control and flood risk mitigation
	Secondary target #2:		Water body ecological restoration
	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?	The project targets are in line with the Regional Director Plan approved by the Veneto Regional Council (Resolution n. 24/2000 of 1^st March 2000)

Project scale	Medium (eg. public park, new development district)	Medium scale project involving two sub-basins (Marzenego and Dese-Zero), for a total surface of 37785 hectares.
Time frame	Date of installation/construction (MM.YYYY)	Rusteghin wetland: 2014 Salzano wetland: 2004 Scandolara buffer strip: 2007 NICOLAS: 1997-2000
	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
	Acque Risorgive drainage authority	Management Authority in charge of the NBS development and recipient of public funds for its realization
	Famers associations (Coldiretti, Confagricoltura, etc.)	Landowners. The drainage authority coordinates with farmers to plan the expropriations of the land where NBS are constructed.
The application was initiated and financed by	The NBS were financed by the Veneto Region. The funds were used by Acque Risorgive drainage authority to implements the NBS. The construction of the 4 NBS occurred in: 2014 (Rusteghin wetland); 2004 (Salzano wetland); 2007 (Scandolara buffer strip); 1997-2000 (NICOLAS)
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)	29.46 ha (effective area of the 4 NBS)
	The area of the project is approximately 40ha. The biodiversity is affected by the project in the area itself. Concerning the flood risk, it is reduced downstream, about 2km away from the area.	While the effective area is of the 4 NWRMs is mentioned above, the effective area of all the NWRMs in the sub-basins of study area is 185.95 ha
Design capacity	Rusteghin wetland: 4320 m³d^-1 Salzano wetland: 2909 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 arriving in the Venice lagoon and reducing the risk of flooding.

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	Total:
	Capital:	45.968.183,00 €
	Land acquisition and value:	1.104.033,00 €
	Operational:	147.281,00 €/year
	Maintenance:
	Other:
Were financial compensations required? What amount?	Yes
	Total amount of money paid (in €): -
	Compensation schema: -
	Comments / Remarks: Data provided refer to estimations made on the two sub-basins scale and related to a time period of 20 years.
Economic costs	Actual income loss: 378.489,00 €/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 have been made with value transfer method for the NWRMs within the two investigated basins obtaining a value ranging from 1.572.485,00 €/y to 2.741.362,00 €/y.

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 5: LDP in a continental environment - Feasibility Study
Year of publication	2020
Editor/Publisher	European Commission - Joint Research Centre
Source Weblink
Key People	Name / affiliation	Contact details
	Fabio Masi	masi(at)iridra.com

Source Type	Project Report
Source Author(s)	Università degli Studi di Padova Facoltà di Ingegneria Dipartimento di Processi Chimici dell’Ingegneria Laboratorio Analisi dei Sistemi Ambientali
Source Title	MONITORAGGIO DELLE CAVE DI SALZANO 2009 – 2010
Year of publication	2011
Editor/Publisher	Università degli Studi di Padova
Source Weblink
Key People	Name / affiliation	Contact details
		lasa(at)unipd.it

Source Type	Journal article
Source Author(s)	Bologna University, Italy
Source Title	Effectiveness of the cross-compliance Standard 5.2 'buffer strips' on protecting freshwater against diffuse nitrogen pollution
Year of publication	2015
Editor/Publisher	Italian Journal of Agronomy
Source Weblink	https://doi.org/10.4081/ija.2015.772
Key People	Name / affiliation	Contact details
	Bruna Gumiero	bruna.gumiero(at)unibo.it

Source Type	Journal article
Source Author(s)	Bologna University, Italy
Source Title	How to stop nitrogen leaking from a Cross compliant buffer strip?
Year of publication	2017
Editor/Publisher	Ecological Engineering
Source Weblink	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2016.05.031
Key People	Name / affiliation	Contact details
	Bruna Gumiero	bruna.gumiero(at)unibo.it

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
Average Slope
Mean Annual Rainfall	600 - 1100 mm
Mean Annual Runoff
Average Runoff coefficient (or % imperviousness on site)
	Remarks: -
Characterization of water quality status (prior to the implementation of the NWRMs)	There is no detailed information available about the water quality status prior to the implementation of the NWRM.
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: -

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^-2 y^-1) TP (g m^-2 y^-1) TSS (g m^-2 y^-1) Glyphosate (g m^-2 y^-1)	CW 113.63 BS 32.664 CW 8.88 BS 4.2 CW 841.97 BS 6775.6 CW 0.774 BS 0.051
Reducing flood risks (Floods Directive)	To estimate the effects of NBS in term of flood risk reduction a “proxy” indicator has been used: the additional storage volume available thanks to the NWRMs. Since detailed information on the storage volume for each of the analysed NWRMs is not available, a simplified approach has been used.	Peak flow reduction (retention volume: m³)	1758487

Monitoring requirements		Several monitoring campaigns have been carried out to study the 4 NWMRs. The monitoring has been done both by the personnel of the drainage authority and both by the University of Padova.
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 wetlands has been described in the study “MONITORAGGIO DELLE CAVE DI SALZANO 2009 – 2010” carried out by Università degli Studi di Padova. The TN in buffer strips has been analysed by Gumiero et al. (2015) and Gumiero & Boz. (2017). 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?		N/A
What were the main enabling and success factors?		The implementation of the NWRMs was strongly enhanced by the business model applied by the drainage authority “Consorzio di Bonifica Acque Risorgive”
Financing		NWRMs were financed by the Veneto region
Flexibility & Adaptability		N/A
Transferability		The positive approach of a “centralized business model” proposed in this study case can be transferred and applied in other geographical contexts by reproducing and adapting it to the local economical and political situation

A medium scale nature-based solution for diffuse pollution control: the Venice lagoon 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