Costs and benefits of mitigation measures to reduce pollutant concentrations for the protection of drinking water in river-systems upstream of intakes


Peter Daldorph1, Kevin Hiscock2, Helen He2, Sam Taylor2, Andrew Wade3

1Atkins Global; 2School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia; 3Department of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Reading.

Stakeholder Representatives

Simon Eyre, Anglian Water; Zoe Frogbrook, Scottish Water; Claire Bell, Environment Agency.

Forum issues addressed by case study

How can I know if land management will be effective?

  • What is the effect of different land management interventions on water quality?
  • Will what I’m planning on doing be cost-effective?

Where is the pollution coming from? And how do pollutants act together?

  • Are there different sources of the same pollutants?
  • Would I make a different decision if I looked at one or several pollutants? 

This case study examines potential trade-offs and co-benefits for a suite of ecosystem services at the farm to catchment scale that may be potential ‘by-products’ of an agri-environment scheme designed to reduce total multi-pollutant loads entering watercourses.


East Anglia, England
East Anglia, England



  • Management outcome
  • Cost effectiveness  
  • Pollution source



  • Metaldehyde
  • Phosphorus
  • Nitrogen


  • Catchment


  • SWAT
  • Farmscoper