Environmental Science & Technology in the case of the 1000 MW pumped storage plant of Lago Bianco this led to the public acceptance of an improved technical design.8 An increase in small hydropower operations is occurring in Switzerland, partly in response to available or anticipated sub- sidies. Future environmental harm could be minimized by prioritizing catchments when locating such new operations. In one Swiss prioritization project, catchments have been charac- terized based on their current ecological value and level of environmental pressure (not only from existing hydropower operations but also from infrastructure for ﬂood control, waste- water treatment, etc.).9 Such prioritization is intended to opti- mize the beneﬁt of protecting some catchments and allowing hydropower development in others. Environmental harm associated with existing hydropower opera- tions, speciﬁcally with hydropeaking, could also be mitigated through the use of buﬀer zones or reservoirs.10 The establishment of such buﬀers as well as the allocation of additional space for rivers would need to be incorporated into the design of future river restoration projects. A substantial increase in such projects is expected as a result of the 2010 revision of the Federal Water Protection law that explicitly requires and funds both river restoration and technical measures to oﬀset the ecological impacts of hydropower. Guidance for these future eﬀorts is provided by recent past experiences, such as the pilot river-widening projects conducted on the Thur River that integrated ﬂood protection and river restoration and also incorporated scientiﬁc assessment and stakeholder engagement.11,12 Key components of this project were preproject baseline monitoring, the direct involvement of stakeholders in the planning process, and postproject success evaluation.12 The need for baseline data is even more urgent in the context of climate change, which calls into question the assumption that historical conditions can provide adequate boundary conditions for the future.13 Future river restoration projects will, however, be constrained by the prohibition on river restoration in groundwater protection zones near losing rivers.14 The examples of hydropower development and river restoration illustrate the broad set of constraints for today’s decision making compared to the simple guidelines of economic and technical feasibility ﬁve decades ago. Micropollutants. Pending Federal regulation in Switzerland will require wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) that dis- charge effluent to streams with insufficient dilution capacity or to lakes close to drinking water intakes to reduce their discharge of micropollutants. This regulation is strongly driven by the precautionary principle, which dictates avoidance of possible (unknown) harm. Reduction of micropollutant emissions can be accomplished through advanced treatment processes, such as ozonation or activated carbon.15,16 Although WWTPs are an important point source of micropollutants, diffuse sources are also significant. Urban diffuse sources include sewer exfiltra- tion,17 outdoor urban use of lawn and garden products, and leaching of biocides from facades and construction materials.18 The primary nonurban diffuse source is the use of pesticides in agriculture. The variety of sources oﬀers multiple options for reducing the loading of micropollutants to the environment. In addition to reducing the discharge from WWTPs, it could also be feasible to put greater emphasis on keeping pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) out of sewage (and also landﬁlls) through measures such as required “take-back” of unused material at pharmacies and better control of pesticide use. A “green chemistry” approach would incorporate considerations of environmental fate FEATURE and eﬀects in product formulation, though this may be complicated by possible incompatibility between desirable criteria for intended product use and environmental protection. Consumer pressure could be engaged through “eco-labeling” (e.g., providing informa- tion on the biodegradability of products in WWTPs). These multiple options also present the risk that the various actors (i.e., regulators in various sectors, WWTP operators, chemical industry, consumers, etc.) may shift the responsibility for protection of the aquatic environment among themselves. It is also diﬃcult to make a strong case for control or substitution in the absence of direct causal evidence of ecotoxicological harm. An informed decision as to which set of options would best serve the goal of minimizing pollution risks should be based on quantitative predictions of the environmental fate and eﬀects of chemicals on aquatic organisms as well as the preferences of societal actors. Biodiversity and the Impacts of Invasive Species. The long, recorded history of human alteration of the European landscape has tended to blur the distinction between native and introduced species. Some species have been deliberately introduced; in Switzerland, 15 species of introduced fishes represent 25% of the fish fauna.19 There is, however, an increasing concern for the conservation of biodiversity and the pressures that invasive species exert on native species. The increase in invasive species in Europe has paralleled the proliferation of interbasin (and intercontinental) water transfers through the construction of navigation and transport canals between basins.20 In the future, increased connectivity in restored rivers, which is often an explicit goal of restoration, could facilitate the spread of invasive species. Hence, there is a risk of unintentional, negative ecological effects of measures taken to improve the ecological status of streams. Numerous studies have shown that there is little chance of eradication once an invasive species is established; thus controls are currently focused on limiting transmission using models to support risk analysis.21 A rapid response to limit transfer and colonization of aquatic ecosystems by invasive species requires an early warning system based on cooperation among author- ities and a means of predicting the probability of invasive pathways.20,22 In cases where the introduction of invasives can be linked with societal practices and human behavior, appro- priate interventions can be directly targeted by regulations. Stocking of non-native ﬁshes is currently prohibited in Switzerland with only a few exceptions in closed water bodies. In Norway, very stringent measures against the spread of crayﬁsh plague have been adopted, including regulation of the transport of aquaria animals and recreational boats and equipment not only into the country but also between watersheds.23 The need for early intervention or even pre-emptive measures and the lack of well-established measures for the eﬀective control of invasive species demand management approaches that can integrate across sectors, incorporate outreach to commerce and consumers, and be adapted to improve their eﬀectiveness.22 ’ INTEGRATION AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT The underlying rationale for strengthening integration in the management of water infrastructure and water resources is the possibility that innovative and/or cost-eﬀective solutions, which might be excluded in traditional, sectoral approaches, could be identiﬁed and adopted. In addition, conﬂicting interests in diﬀerent sectors or among various actors can be identiﬁed, addressed, and eventually resolved. An integrative approach must 115 dx.doi.org/10.1021/es202189s |Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46, 112–118