English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Water quality standards (QS) and river monitoring are widely accepted as preventive management strategies for the preservation of watercourses and at the same time they are criticized for imposing universal threshold values, leading to regulatory rather than voluntary action. Based on the example of nitrate, the article explains how QS applications are the result of national or regional negotiations, with no direct link to the scientific foundations underlying the development of these tools. These conflicting perceptions and how these tools are actually used are illustrated by the situation in Brittany. Here, the monitoring network and actions to prevent increasing nitrate concentrations in rivers form part of regional programs set up jointly by all the main stakeholders. However, while QS can act as an alarm signal, their effectiveness depends on local political support, which depends on the extent to which river quality is recognized as a key factor in regional development.

Quality standards and monitoring as water management tools: the case of nitrogen in rivers in France and Brittany