Environmental flows and the European Water Framework Directive.

By M. Acreman, A. Ferguson. 2010

328 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Nature and Landscape Conservation, Water Science and Technology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5efd277350f4f620eec8f74a8d52fa5f542a3137

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

1. R. Naiman
2. Michael E. McClain
3. A. Arthington
4. C. Nilsson
5. I. Cowx
6. M. Acreman
7. Thierry Tormos
8. K. Looy

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. R. Naiman
2. Michael E. McClain
3. C. Nilsson
4. A. Arthington
5. I. Cowx
6. M. Acreman
7. P. Wood
8. Y. Souchon

In Water Science and Technology

1. R. Naiman
2. Michael E. McClain
3. C. Nilsson
4. M. Acreman
5. A. Arthington
6. D. Dudgeon

Citations in the corpus

• Disentangling dam impacts in river networks (2014, background): “…river networks to support strategies for mitigating 74 ecohydrological and socioeconomic costs, and recently important efforts are made globally to the 75 inventory of reservoirs and dams (Lehneret al., 2011), or to evaluate their impact on river ecology 76 (Petts,1984; Acreman and Ferguson, 2010).”
• Preserving the biodiversity and ecological services of rivers: new challenges and research opportunities: Preserving the biodiversity and ecological services of rivers (2010, background): “Above all, we wish to promote linkages with the GWSP prospectus set out by Alcamo et al. (2008) and foster firm scientific foundations for achieving the water-related Millennium Development Goals.”
• The changing role of ecohydrological science in guiding environmental flows (2014, methodology): “The European Water Framework Directive (WFD; Acreman and Ferguson 2010) specifies a generic target of good ecological status (GES), with slight alteration from reference conditions (e.g. Schmutz et al. 2007).”