Floodplains are biodiversity hotspots that provide a wealth of ecosystem services, yet they face numerous human pressures that compromise their ecological integrity. We learned this the hard way… An increasingly important strategy for managing these sensitive landscapes is multifunctional floodplain management (MFM) – an approach aimed at balancing the provision of multiple ecosystem services to meet the needs of local residents and downstream populations.
Now, this might seem counterintuitive…
MFM represents a crucial opportunity to reconcile flood risk reduction with biodiversity conservation and other societal demands. By restoring the natural functions and dynamics of floodplains, MFM projects can enhance flood protection, support diverse habitats, and deliver a wide range of benefits to people. However, implementing such integrated, landscape-scale approaches remains a challenge in many regions.
This article explores the state of floodplain ecosystems, the key pressures they face, and the evidence for MFM as an effective response strategy across six temperate European countries. We examine how MFM is being applied to restore degraded floodplains, the biodiversity implications of these efforts, and the factors driving their success or failure. Practical insights are provided to guide flood control practitioners, land managers, and policymakers in developing sustainable, multifunctional floodplain landscapes.
Floodplains as Biodiversity Hotspots under Pressure
Under natural conditions, floodplains are characterized by a dynamic mosaic of habitats supporting high levels of biodiversity. The periodic flooding and sediment deposition processes that shape these ecosystems create a diverse array of niches exploited by a wide range of specialist and generalist species, both aquatic and terrestrial. Floodplains are thus considered biodiversity hotspots, providing critical habitat for many threatened and endangered species.
However, the historical development of floodplains for human activities has severely degraded these valuable ecosystems across Europe. Most floodplains have been hydrologically disconnected from their rivers by the construction of dykes and dominated by intense human uses such as agriculture, settlements, and infrastructure. This has led to a decrease in the availability of dynamic habitat types and a reduction in habitat turnover – essential features for maintaining floodplain biodiversity.
The primary pressures on floodplain ecosystems across the six countries reviewed include:
- Altered hydrological conditions: River regulation, channelization, and dam construction have disrupted the natural flooding and flow regimes that sustain floodplain habitats and biodiversity.
- Invasive alien species: The introduction of non-native plants and animals has outcompeted native species and degraded the integrity of floodplain ecosystems.
- Agricultural intensification: Drainage, conversion to cropland, and overgrazing have destroyed and degraded natural floodplain habitats.
- Urban development: Encroachment of settlements and infrastructure has fragmented and eliminated floodplain areas.
- Forestry and resource extraction: Unsustainable timber harvesting, gravel mining, and peat extraction have disrupted floodplain processes and habitats.
- Water pollution and eutrophication: Nutrient runoff and chemical contaminants have impaired water quality and ecosystem health.
These widespread pressures have led to significant biodiversity losses in floodplains across Europe. Many once-thriving plant and animal communities have been severely diminished or extirpated, and floodplains have become increasingly degraded and fragmented. Reversing these trends and restoring the ecological integrity of these vital ecosystems is crucial.
Multifunctional Floodplain Management: A Necessary Shift
In recent decades, the limitations of traditional, single-purpose approaches to floodplain management have become increasingly apparent. Flood control measures focused solely on engineered solutions, such as levees and channelization, have often failed to account for the diverse ecological, social, and economic values of floodplains. Similarly, conservation efforts targeting specific habitats or species have sometimes overlooked the broader landscape context and human dimensions of floodplain management.
To address these shortcomings, an integrated, multifunctional approach to floodplain management has emerged as a promising alternative. MFM aims to balance the provision of multiple ecosystem services, meeting the needs of local residents and downstream populations affected by floodplain policies and management decisions.
This shift towards MFM has been motivated by several key factors:
-
Flood Risk Reduction: Major flood events in recent decades have highlighted the limitations of conventional flood control measures and the need for more holistic, sustainable approaches. Restoring the natural flood retention capacity of floodplains can provide cost-effective flood protection with significant ecological co-benefits.
-
Biodiversity Conservation: Recognizing the high biodiversity value of floodplains, there is growing interest in management strategies that integrate conservation goals with other land use demands. MFM offers opportunities to restore degraded habitats and support diverse flora and fauna.
-
Ecosystem Services: Floodplains provide a wide range of vital services, from water purification and carbon storage to recreation and cultural values. MFM seeks to maintain and enhance the delivery of these essential ecosystem services to human communities.
-
Green Infrastructure: The concept of Green Infrastructure, which emphasizes the strategic use of natural and semi-natural areas to deliver multiple benefits, has gained traction as a framework for MFM. Restoring floodplains can contribute to larger networks of interconnected habitats and ecological corridors.
-
Stakeholder Engagement: Successful MFM requires the involvement of diverse stakeholders, including local residents, conservation groups, agricultural interests, and government agencies. This participatory approach helps reconcile competing demands and develop collaborative solutions.
Implementing Multifunctional Floodplain Management
While the concept of MFM is gaining traction, its implementation remains a significant challenge in many parts of Europe. The review of six temperate European countries (Ireland, the Netherlands, Germany, Slovakia, Hungary, and Ukraine) reveals a range of approaches and levels of success in applying MFM to floodplain restoration and management.
The Netherlands: A Leader in Multifunctional Approaches
The Netherlands has emerged as a leader in MFM, driven by the country’s long history of flood risk management and the growing recognition of the need to balance ecological, economic, and social objectives. The Room for the River programme, launched in 2007, is a prime example of this integrated approach. By relocating dykes, creating new retention areas, and restoring natural floodplain habitats, the programme aims to enhance flood protection while also improving the ecological and recreational value of the landscape.
Evaluations of these MFM projects in the Netherlands have demonstrated positive effects on biodiversity. The restoration of floodplain meadows, scrub, and forests has led to the return of numerous plant and animal species, including indicators of ecological health such as the Eurasian beaver (Castor fiber) and European otter (Lutra lutra). Improved water quality and the creation of diverse habitat mosaics have also benefited aquatic species, with the recolonization of rivers by Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and other migratory fish.
Mixed Progress in Other Countries
In contrast, the implementation of MFM in the other countries examined has been more uneven. While some progress has been made, significant challenges remain in fully integrating biodiversity conservation and ecosystem service provision into floodplain management strategies.
In Ireland, for example, flood control efforts have traditionally focused on engineered solutions, with limited adoption of multifunctional approaches. However, small-scale restoration projects funded by EU programmes have demonstrated the potential benefits of MFM, such as improved habitat quality and connectivity for species like the freshwater pearl mussel (Margaritifera margaritifera) and Atlantic salmon.
Germany and Slovakia have seen a growing number of river and floodplain restoration initiatives, often driven by the implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive and Habitats Directive. These projects have had varying degrees of success in enhancing biodiversity, with more pronounced effects observed in terrestrial habitats compared to aquatic ecosystems.
In Hungary and Ukraine, the legacy of centralized water management and infrastructure development has posed significant barriers to the adoption of MFM. However, recent efforts to restore wetlands, manage invasive species, and revive traditional land use practices have shown promise in improving the ecological condition of floodplains and delivering multiple societal benefits.
Lessons and Opportunities for Successful MFM
The diverse experiences across the six European countries examined highlight several key lessons and opportunities for advancing the implementation of successful, multifunctional floodplain management:
-
Stakeholder Engagement: Effective MFM requires the meaningful involvement of a broad range of stakeholders, from local communities to government agencies, throughout the planning and implementation process. This helps to reconcile competing demands and build consensus around shared goals.
-
Adaptive Management: Floodplain ecosystems are inherently dynamic, and management approaches might want to be flexible and responsive to changing conditions. Ongoing monitoring and evaluation are essential to refine MFM strategies and double-check that their long-term efficacy.
-
Cross-Sectoral Collaboration: Overcoming the traditional siloed approach to floodplain management requires strengthening partnerships and coordination between diverse sectors, such as water resource management, nature conservation, agriculture, and land use planning.
-
Policy Integration: Aligning MFM with relevant EU directives (e.g., Water Framework Directive, Habitats Directive, Floods Directive) and national policies can provide a supportive regulatory and financial framework to enable the implementation of multifunctional approaches.
-
Scale and Connectivity: Addressing floodplain management at the landscape scale, rather than focusing on isolated projects, can enhance the ecological and functional integrity of these systems. Conceptualizing floodplains as part of broader Green Infrastructure networks can further amplify the benefits of MFM.
-
Biodiversity Monitoring: Systematic evaluation of the biodiversity impacts of MFM projects is essential to guide adaptive management and demonstrate the ecological co-benefits of these integrated approaches. Strengthening biodiversity monitoring and data-sharing is a critical need.
-
Innovative Financing: Exploring creative funding mechanisms, such as public-private partnerships and ecosystem service markets, can help overcome the resource constraints that often hinder the implementation of multifunctional floodplain restoration and management.
By embracing these lessons and seizing the opportunities presented by MFM, flood control practitioners, land managers, and policymakers can play a pivotal role in restoring the ecological integrity of floodplains while also enhancing their capacity to provide diverse benefits to human communities. This integrated, landscape-scale approach is essential for building resilient, multifunctional floodplain landscapes that can withstand the growing challenges of climate change, biodiversity loss, and competing land use demands.
To learn more about the latest innovations and best practices in flood control, visit Flood Control 2015.
Example: London Flood Resilience Initiative 2024
