Justification for the necessity of regional environmental quality standards for water bodies: the Ilek River basin, Kazakhstan
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32523/vry54642Keywords:
environmental quality standards, regionalization, permissible discharge standards, boron, hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)), arid regions, Ilek RiverAbstract
In arid and semi-arid regions, unified national water quality standards do not always ensure effective regulation of anthropogenic pressure on surface waters and may lead to inconsistencies in permissible discharge standards (PDS) calculations. This study substantiates the need for regional environmental quality standards using the Ilek River basin, one of the most impacted transboundary systems in Western Kazakhstan, as a case study.
The research applies a mass-balance approach to PDS calculation and evaluates the influence of background pollutant concentrations and hydrological variability on regulatory outcomes. Boron and hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)), typical for the natural and technogenic conditions of the basin, were selected as key indicator substances. Long-term hydrochemical and hydrological data were analyzed to assess spatial and temporal variability under different discharge scenarios.
The results show that elevated background concentrations, especially of boron, significantly affect calculated PDS values. Under such conditions, unified standards may produce negative PDS values, formally indicating the impossibility of discharge regulation regardless of actual anthropogenic input. This reveals the limitations of uniform regulatory approaches in hydrologically variable and environmentally heterogeneous regions.
The findings demonstrate that regionalized environmental quality standards, accounting for climatic conditions, background levels, hydrological regime, and ecosystem stability, are essential for scientifically sound discharge regulation and sustainable water resource management.
The practical significance of the study lies in the applicability of the proposed approach for improving environmental regulation and water management practices.
Downloads
References
1. Acreman, M. C., & Dunbar, M. J. (2004). Defining environmental river flow requirements - a review. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 8(5), 861–876. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-8-861-2004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-8-861-2004
2. Asian Development Bank. (2020). Water sector financing and management in Central Asia. Manila: Asian Development Bank.
3. Berdenov, Z. G., Safarov, R. Z., Mendybaev, E. Kh., Shomanova, Zh. K., & Ilies, D. C. (2022). Impact of technogenic factors on surface water of the Ilek River basin. News of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Series of Geology and Technical Sciences, 6, 45–55. https://doi.org/10.32014/2518-170X.216 DOI: https://doi.org/10.32014/2518-170X.216
4. Chapman, D. (1996). Water quality assessments: a guide to the use of biota, sediments and water in environmental monitoring. World Health Organization; UNESCO; UNEP.
5. Chapman, D., & Kimstach, V. (1996). Selection of water quality variables. In D. Chapman (Ed.), Water quality assessments: a guide to the use of biota, sediments and water in environmental monitoring (2nd ed., pp. 59–126). E & FN Spon. https://doi.org/10.4324/NOE0419216001.ch3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003062103-3
6. Dyussembayeva, N., Idrissova, G., Turebekova, A., Zhakupova, S., Abdieva, G., & Issayeva, A. (2023). Water elemental composition and toxicity in Kazakhstan’s transboundary rivers. Central Asian Journal of Water Research, 9(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.29258/CAJWR/2023-R1.v9-1/1-17 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29258/CAJWR/2023-R1.v9-1/19-32.eng
7. European Commission. (2000). Directive 2000/60/EC establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy (Water Framework Directive). Official Journal of the European Communities.
8. European Environment Agency. (2018). Environmental quality standards in surface waters. EEA.
9. Falkenmark, M., & Rockström, J. (2004). Balancing water for humans and nature: The new approach in ecohydrology. Earthscan.
10. Meybeck, M. (2003). Global analysis of river systems: from Earth system controls to Anthropocene syndromes. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 358(1440), 1935–1955. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2003.1379 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2003.1379
11. Meybeck, M., & Helmer, R. (1989). The quality of rivers: from pristine stage to global pollution. Global and Planetary Change, 1(4), 283–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8181(89)90007-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8181(89)90007-6
12. Mugisha, S., Berg, S. V., & Muhairwe, W. T. (2007). Use of internal incentive contracts to improve water utility performance: the case of NWSC in Uganda. Water Policy, 9(3), 271–284. https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2007.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2007.010
13. OECD. (2015). Water resources allocation: Sharing risks and opportunities. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264229631-en DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264229631-en
14. RSE Kazhydromet. (2024). Report on the state of the environment of Aktobe region for 2023. Aktobe: Kazhydromet.
15. Singh, V. P. (1995). Hydrologic modeling. New York: McGraw-Hill.
16. Solodova, E., Ilarri, J. R., Tanybayeva, A., Rysmagambetova, A., & Pavlichenko, L. (2021). Assessment of boron content changes in the surface water of the Ilek River valley (Aktobe, Kazakhstan). News of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Series of Geology and Technical Sciences. https://doi.org/10.32014/2021.2518-1491.77 DOI: https://doi.org/10.32014/2021.2518-1491.77
17. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. (2019). Guidance on water quality standards and objectives. UNECE.
18. United Nations Environment Programme. (2019). Global environment outlook 6. Nairobi: UNEP.
19. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (1991). Technical guidance for water quality-based toxics control (EPA/505/2-90-001). EPA.
20. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2016). National recommended water quality criteria. EPA.
21. Vörösmarty, C. J., Green, P., Salisbury, J., & Lammers, R. B. (2000). Global water resources: Vulnerability from climate change and population growth. Science, 289(5477), 284–288. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.289.5477.284 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.289.5477.284
22. Vörösmarty, C. J., McIntyre, P. B., Gessner, M. O., Dudgeon, D., Prusevich, A., Green, P., Glidden, S., Bunn, S. E., Sullivan, C. A., Liermann, C. R., & Davies, P. M. (2010). Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity. Nature, 467, 555–561. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09440 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09440
23. World Bank. (2021). Water security for Central Asia: The costs of inaction. Washington, DC: World Bank.
24. World Health Organization. (2017). Guidelines for drinking-water quality (4th ed.). WHO Press.
25. Hering, D., Borja, A., Carstensen, J., Carvalho, L., Elliott, M., Feld, C. K., Heiskanen, A. S., Johnson, R. K., Moe, J., Pont, D., Solheim, A. L., & van de Bund, W. (2010). The European water framework directive at the age of 10: a critical review of the achievements with recommendations for the future. Science of the Total Environment, 408(19), 4007–4019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.05.031 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.05.031
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Бауыржан Капсалямов, Гүлзат Жолмуратова (Автор)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
