Is the EU WFD suitable to support IWRM planning in non-European countries? Lessons learnt from the introduction of IWRM and River Basin Management in Mongolia

The Water Framework Directive (EU WFD, 2000/60EC, European Commission, 2000) is a comprehensive tool for water management taking Europe’s diverse national and local policy contexts into account. This has positioned the EU WFD as a potential tool to enhance the implementation of the globally-promoted integrated water resources management concept (IWRM) in developing and transition countries that to date lack comparable regulations. Using the case of Mongolia, a country that has shown interest in using aspects of the EU WFD for implementing its IWRM concept, we will discuss the extent to which the EU WFD also provides a framework for IWRM outside Europe. We find that the EU WFD may provide guidance for the implementation of ecosystem-based River Basin Management (RBM) within an existing national IWRM concept, in terms of public participation and in terms of economic analysis. However, the application of concepts EU WFD is easier if strong political will, good monitoring capacities and a legislative backbone covering key IWRM principles and the capacity for enforcement are in place. Also, the EU-WFD does not provide guidance in terms of water-related issues that are e.g. addressing gender, poverty and capacity development. Thus, the EU WFD cannot serve as a blueprint, as it requires adaptation to the different socio-economic, cultural and political contexts of the implementing country and it does not inform all aspects of IWRM.     

Optimization of sampling frequency for river water quality assessment according to Italian implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive

The EU directive 2000/60/EC, also known as the Water Framework Directive (WFD), identifies processes for developing and safeguarding the territory through surface water quality characterisation. This implies controlling pollution loads as well as defining which constraints that are connected to territorial planning. It will be therefore necessary to know in detail the surface water quality in order to forecast the possible consequences of either a new civil or industrial site. Investigating methodologies, data analysis procedures and water quality management tools will be needed to be defined.The aim of this study is to describe through the use of relevant examples, the implementation of WFD in Italy, with a discussion of a case study, as well as the role of sampling frequency to river water quality.The results obtained have allowed a definition of the chemical, physical and biological water quality of the Sele river located in Southern Italy as well as its classification according to the main WFD outlines.Sampling frequency studies and non-parametric tests have also been proposed as possible water quality management tools for the application of the EU directive.     

Monitoring of diffuse pollution from agriculture to support implementation of the WFD and the Nitrate Directive in Estonia

This paper discusses the monitoring network for diffuse pollution from agriculture in Estonia in the context of implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) and the Nitrate Directive (ND). Seven surface water monitoring stations in agricultural catchments represent two out of three river basin districts designated in Estonia according to the WFD criteria. The national monitoring programme of ground water quality involves 516 stations of which about half were monitored in 2005. The monitoring sites cover all main ground water bodies in Estonia but are largely concentrated in the Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (NVZ). Analyses did not reveal any significant trends in total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) concentrations in studied rivers during the last 15 years except in one site. The ground water quality stabilised after decrease of nitrate concentrations in the early 1990s, especially in the south part of the NVZ, but even in 2005 the nitrate concentration exceeded 50 mg l⁻¹ in 42 out of 145 ground water samples in this region. The existing surface water quality monitoring network provides only restricted information to select between different management options when implementing action programmes for the NVZ and the river basin management plans (RBMP) under the WFD.     

Ecosystem services for water policy: Insights across Europe

In this research we explored how the concepts and approaches of ecosystem services are currently used in water management in Europe, in the application of River Basin Management Plans (RBMP) developed for the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD). Five case studies have been considered, located in the River Basin Districts of the Po river (Italy), Scotland (United Kingdom), Scheldt river (Belgium), Danube river (Romania), Sado and Mira rivers and Ribeiras do Algarve (Portugal). These cases represent different regional contexts of application of this EU water policy, with specific socio-economic drivers and environmental issues. Each case study has developed an operational framework to analyse ecosystem services in practice together with a group of local stakeholders. In each regional case, we examined how EU water policy and RBMPs are implemented, considered legal and planning instruments from the national to the local scale, and we analysed the use of ecosystem service terms and concepts in the relevant planning instruments. In parallel, we explored the view of local stakeholders and water managers on the topic, collecting their opinion on three major aspects: the usefulness of the concepts and approaches of ecosystem services for WFD river basin management plans, the risks and benefits of their use, and the knowledge needs to put the concepts into practice. The major drawback of the ecosystem service approach seems to be the challenge for practitioners of understanding new concepts and methodologies, while the major advantages are that it highlights all the hidden benefits of a water body in good health and promotes multi-functionality and sustainability in water management. The results of this study provide a picture across Europe of the current use of the concepts of ecosystem services in the RBMP and relevant insight on the opinion of local stakeholders and water managers.     

Integrated river basin management in rapidly urbanizing areas: a case of Shenzhen, China

The rapid urbanization of China is causing a burden on their water resources and hindering their sustainable development. This paper analyzes effective methods to integrated river basin management (IRBM) using Longgang River basin of Shenzhen as an example, which is the city with the fastest rate of urbanization in China and even the whole world. Over the past 20 years, China has undergone a population boom due to the increase of immigrant workers and rapid development of laborintensive industries, which led to the sharp increase of water consumption and sewage discharge. However, the construction of the water infrastructure is still lagging far behind the environmental and social development, with only 32.7% of sewage in the district being treated. Currently, every water quality indicator of the Longgang River basin was unable to meet the required corresponding environmental standards, which further aggravated the water shortages of the region. Thus, an analytical framework is proposed to address the IRBM of the study area. The problems with the current management system include the lack of decentralization in decision-making, lack of enforcement with redundant plans, weak management capacity, financial inadequacy, and a poor system of stakeholder participation. In light of the principles of IRBM and the situation of the region, corresponding measures are put forward, including an increase of power given to sub-district offices, fewer but more feasible plans, capacity building among stakeholders, a combination of planning and marketing for overcoming financial inadequacy, and profound reform in the public participation system. The framework and institutional suggestions could inform similar processes in other representative river basins.     

Assessment of renewable energy potential and policy in Turkey – Toward the acquisition period in European Union

This paper aims to assess the renewable energy capacity of Turkey in order to consider main priorities in the energy policy of Turkey. In this paper, renewable energy potential and regulatory conditions are discussed in Turkey in comparison with European Union. The results of the study implemented within the framework of EnviroGRIDS project indicated a promising yet very susceptible future for the implementation of renewable energy power plants in Turkey. The forecasts have shown that the solar power potential utilization is becoming more significant after 2020. The projections for 2050 indicate that electricity consumption from small and medium renewable energy sources including solar and wind will constitute 15% of the total, whereas the solar thermal will constitute around 16%. Geothermal and other renewables will remain around 3%. According to the high demand scenario, in 2050 the share of hydropower in overall electricity generation will be 12%, followed by solar power at 7% and wind power at 3%. Additionally, renewable energy policy and regulations in Turkey and in EU are overviewed in this study. On the contrary to EU, the constant feed-in tariff amount does not consider capital investments of specific energy sources in Turkey that brings disadvantage to the implementation. However, new regulations published and currently applied should be accepted as milestones in acquisition period of Turkey in EU.     

欧洲水管理实践对中国流域水环境管理的启示

针对流域水环境管理的顶层设计,Water Framework Directive（WFD）是一部具有法律约束力的水框架法令,已成为欧洲水环境管理的有效的工具,实现了流域水环境的经济和生态的协调、综合管理。综述了欧洲水框架指令WFD研究进展,介绍了WFD提出的背景、要点、编制路线图和相应WFD水环境管理经验,对了解和掌握国际先进的流域水环境管理经验和最新形势具有一定借鉴意义。     

Towards the harmonization of water-related policies for managing drought risks across the EU

Drought is recognized as a major issue in the EU, particularly in the Mediterranean region, posing risks to the environment as well as to local and regional economies. The EU policy on water management is continuously evolving, particularly in relation to water scarcity and drought. Starting with the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC), which sets the general policy framework for water management across the EU, the EC Communication on Water Scarcity and Drought COM(2007) 414 final set the priorities for managing water scarcity and drought risks. Three follow-up reports (COM(2008) 875 final, COM(2010) 228 final and COM(2011) 133) highlighted achievements and yearly progress within the context of the implementation of the Water Framework Directive, whereas guidance has further been provided through the issue of Technical Reports (e.g. the EC Water Scarcity Drafting Group Technical Report 2008–023 on Drought Management, Including agricultural, drought indicators and climate change aspects). The 2012 EU Water Review (“Blue Print for Safeguarding European Waters” will assess achievements and identify further requirements towards long-term sustainable water use across the EU. However, a harmonized approach on drought risk management at the EU level is still lacking, whereas drought risk in several countries and regions has not been yet fully integrated in water management and relevant sectoral policies.This paper focuses on a proposed paradigm shift from crisis to risk management, which is currently gaining ground as a means of reducing societal vulnerability to droughts. The paper underlines the importance of engaging into risk assessment and management practices and identifies policy gaps and requirements for further improvement of the drought management policy framework at all levels of governance: at the EU, at the national and at the river basin and regional levels.     

Quantification and control of microbial pollution from agriculture: a new policy challenge?

Faecal indicator organisms (FIOs) are commonly used to quantify pollution of public health significance. Health protection, as indexed by FIO control, is a central aim of new ‘catchment-scale’ water quality management required in the USA by the Clean Water Act and in the European Union (EU) by the Water Framework Directive (WFD). Experience of the former, after a decade of implementation, suggests that the most significant reason for water quality ‘impairment’ is elevated FIO concentrations, mainly in recreational and shellfish harvesting waters. This provides an early warning of possible problems which the EU regulatory authorities are likely to face. To date, however, a surprising lack of EU attention has been given to prediction and control of catchment fluxes of this key parameter. This is likely to prove embarrassing if the experience of the US regulatory community is not acted upon with some urgency. There is a growing, though still partial, body of empirical science to form the ‘evidence-base’ for good regulatory practice. However, adoption of ‘best management practices’ (BMPs) to effect remediation of impacted waters will require close integration of water policy with policies on financial support for the farming community. This is likely to require enhanced communication and integration within the discrete policy communities addressing the agricultural sector through the Common Agricultural Policy and water regulation through the Water Framework Directive.     

Integrating water management and principles of policy: towards an EU framework?

The EU Water Framework Directive requires Member States to organise the management of their water systems in an integrated manner, based on the natural boundaries of the water systems; the river basins. A river basin approach implies the integration of policymaking and management throughout a set of different functional uses and spatial scales. Another innovation of the Directive is the introduction of recovery of costs for water services, taking account of the polluter-pays principle. By 2010, water-pricing polices will have to provide adequate incentives for users to use water resources efficiently, and thereby contribute to the environmental objectives of the Directive. Other principles, such as the precautionary principle, are becoming increasingly important in the management of water resources as well. The translation of those principles into policy in the several Member States may however diverge. We present an overview of policy principles that play a role as basic assumptions in water management. Environmental policy principles have gradually been introduced in European legislation. From being part of a declaration of the Council, they have evolved to a basis for action in the environmental field and currently they also find wide application in the context of water management. While focusing on the EU Water Framework Directive, we investigate whether and how these principles can be reconciled with a framework for integrated water management.     

Forecasting the effects of EU policy measures on the nitrate pollution of groundwater and surface waters

We used the interdisciplinary model network REGFLUD to predict the actual mean nitrate concentration in percolation water at the scale of the Weser river basin (Germany) using an area differentiated (100 m × 100 m) approach.REGFLUD combines the agro-economic model RAUMIS for estimating nitrogen surpluses and the hydrological models GROWA/DENUZ for assessing the nitrate leaching from the soil.For areas showing predicted nitrate concentrations in percolation water above the European Union (EU) groundwater quality standard of 50 mg NO 3 -N/L,effective agri-environmental reduction measures need to be derived and implemented to improve groundwater and surface water quality by 2015.The effects of already implemented agricultural policy are quantified by a baseline scenario projecting the N-surpluses from agricultural sector to 2015.The REGFLUD model is used to estimate the effects of this scenario concerning groundwater and surface water pollution by nitrate.From the results of the model analysis the needs for additional measures can be derived in terms of required additional N-surplus reduction and in terms of regional prioritization of measures.Research work will therefore directly support the implementation of the Water Framework Directive of the European Union in the Weser basin.     

Forecasting the e ects of EU policy measures on the nitrate pollution of groundwater and surface waters

We used the interdisciplinary model network REGFLUD to predict the actual mean nitrate concentration in percolation water at the scale of the Weser river basin (Germany) using an area di erentiated (100 m 100 m) approach. REGFLUD combines the agro-economic model RAUMIS for estimating nitrogen surpluses and the hydrological models GROWA/DENUZ for assessing the nitrate leaching from the soil. For areas showing predicted nitrate concentrations in percolation water above the European Union (EU) groundwater quality standard of 50 mg NO3-N/L, e ective agri-environmental reduction measures need to be derived and implemented to improve groundwater and surface water quality by 2015. The e ects of already implemented agricultural policy are quantified by a baseline scenario projecting the N-surpluses from agricultural sector to 2015. The REGFLUD model is used to estimate the e ects of this scenario concerning groundwater and surface water pollution by nitrate. From the results of the model analysis the needs for additional measures can be derived in terms of required additional N-surplus reduction and in terms of regional prioritization of measures. Research work will therefore directly support the implementation of the Water Framework Directive of the European Union in the Weser basin.     

欧盟水框架指令优先污染物筛选方法的应用

利用欧盟水框架指令(EU WFD)方法筛选优先污染物,得到适用于我国的水环境优先控制污染物清单。检索了包括中国、美国、欧盟、日本等国家和地区的水质标准和污染物清单,对这些清单污染物进行初筛选,得到449种污染物为我国登记在用的污染物,在此基础上运用改进的WFD优先污染物筛选方法对这些污染物进行计分筛选,并按照其半致命毒性LD50排序,得到包含19种污染物的水环境优先控制污染物排序清单。结果表明,WFD优先污染物筛选方法能较全面的筛选出环境危害大的污染物,根据我国实际情况,对WFD现有污染物清单做出补充与筛选后,适合作为水环境优控污染物筛选的方法。     

Making water policy work in the United Kingdom: A case study of practical approaches to strengthening complex,multi-tiered systems of water governance

We propose a suite of actions for strengthening water governance in contexts with complex, multi-tiered arrangements. In doing so, we focus on the collective water policies and approaches of the United Kingdom (UK), including those of devolved governments, which confront a host of serious water-related challenges—from massive flooding of urban areas and agricultural lands, to pressure on aquifers from rising water demand and drought. Further complexity in addressing these challenges has emerged in the wake of the June 2016 vote to leave the European Union (EU), so-called ‘Brexit’, and the ensuing ‘separation process’ with uncertainties for institutional and governance arrangements to follow. We make ten proposals for improving and reinvigorating water policy in complex, multi-layered situations, and comment specifically on their application in the UK setting. These are: put in place a system-wide water policy; fully embrace community-led nested river basin planning and management; fully fund river basin planning and management; re-focus the policy framing; use best-available data and information; create conversational spaces and become a more water-literate society; mobilise people; support and sustain core community networks; underpin river basin plans with regulatory provisions and effective monitoring and enforcement; and address systemic institutional amnesia. Individually and collectively, we contend that these actions will have a marked effect on transforming the planning and management of water resources. A system-wide water policy that maintains and builds on the substantive biophysical and socio-economic benefits delivered through implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive, together with the more recent Floods Directive, will galvanise stewardship of water in the UK. We urge more active engagement with and empowerment of the multiplicity of system ‘actors’, and highlight the role of non-government actors in a post-Brexit world as conduits for reaching out to and connecting directly with a wide range of water-related actors, especially across the EU. While attention to-date has focused on a plethora of specifically water-related projects, initiatives, plans and regulations, what is really needed is a systemic, long-term view of water resource management.     

国际水法对长江流域立法的启示和意义

随着长江经济带建设的推进,长江流域治理亟待法治化。由于调整对象、事项和目标方面的相似性,国际水法的理论、原则、规则和实践对于长江流域立法具有重要且有益的参考价值。长江流域立法面临着利益主体多元、生态环境和资源保护任务艰巨以及治理体制机制很不合理三个方面的巨大挑战。国际水法关于生态整体性路径、公平合理利用原则以及流域治理体制机制三个基本方面的理论、法律和指南以及实践,对于长江流域立法有效应对这些挑战具有重要启示。其意义体现在：直接促进长江流域治理的法治化,间接推进中国流域立法与国际水法之间的兼容性;直接示范国内其他流域,间接助推实现我国成为全球生态文明建设重要参与者、贡献者和引领者的战略。     

Disproportionate costs in the EU Water Framework Directive—How to justify less stringent environmental objectives

The ambitious objective pursued by the European Water Framework Directive (WFD) is good status for all European waters. However, “less stringent environmental objectives” are permissible if the costs of achieving good status are disproportionately high. This exemption, if abused, carries the risk of watering down the ambitions of the Directive. Currently, no transparent, well-established, universally applicable method for routinely testing disproportionality exists throughout Europe. In this paper, such a method is developed for surface water bodies. The core idea is to determine a water body-specific disproportionality threshold which is then compared to the projected costs of achieving “good status/potential”. For the sake of practicability, the benchmark for disproportionality is estimated on the basis of prior expenditure on water quality enhancement. The paper argues that the proposed method combines both possible interpretations of (dis-)proportionality—affordability and cost-benefit considerations. Due to the method’s moderate data requirements it can be used readily in most German federal states and is transferable in principle to other EU Member States. The method was tested empirically for a river in the German federal state of Rhineland–Palatinate.     

Concept of technical support to science–policy interfacing with respect to the implementation of the European water framework directive

In the implementation of water policies, such as the European water framework directive (WFD), good interaction between policy development and implementation, and the science is of crucial importance. This requires new knowledge and insights to be taken into account in the policy design and development. It also requires the results of Research and Technology Development (RTD) projects, including ICT decision supporting instruments such as tools and models, to be transferred towards policy implementation. These science–policy interrelationships are, however, at this moment not as efficient as it should/could be. This is due to limited operational links with water managers in many water-related RTD projects, such that the needs of policy makers are not taken into account at a sufficient level. Due to this and other reasons, newly developed tools from the research community most often insufficiently transfer to operational use by water managers. Better research integration consequently is required at the various stages of policy developments (identification, design, implementation and review).Within the framework of the Harmoni-CA project for the European Commission, the development of a science–policy interfacing instrument is initiated in order to meet the above-mentioned science–policy gap problems [Quevauviller, Ph., Balabanis, P., Fragakis, C., Weydert, M., Oliver, M., Kaschl, A., Arnold, G., Kroll, A., Galbiati, L., Zaldivar, J.M., Bidoglio, G., 2005. Science–policy integration needs in support of the implementation of the EU water framework directive. Env. Sci. Policy 8 (3), 203–211; Arnold G.E., de Lange, W.J., Blind, M.W., 2005. The Conserted Action Harmoni-CA facilitating the dialogue and bridging the gap between research and WFD implementation. Env. Sci. Policy 8 (3), 213–218]. This paper describes a concept developed by the authors, on how the science–policy interfacing technically can be supported through the bi-directional linking of various types of information sources identified as potential means for enhancing the interfacing mechanism. The information sources identified are policy implementation tasks (at the policy side), and ICT tools, methodologies and guidances (as results of RTD projects). Experiences on the application of RTD results in policy implementation tasks are one of the glue elements between these information sources in combination with activity-related and contextual keywords.     

The use of cost–benefit analysis in environmental policies: Some issues raised by the Water Framework Directive implementation in France

This paper aims to practically contribute to the literature on the use of cost–benefit analysis (CBA) and economic evaluation in environmental decision-making through a practical case study: the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) in France, for the first cycle (2010–2015). The WFD requires that Member States achieve “good status” for all water bodies in 2015. However, exemptions can apply, if justified, on natural, technical or economic reasons. For the latter, EU guidance documents recommend to use CBA. In France, the water agencies carried out 710 CBAs on proposed restoration projects for water bodies. This article reports on this experience. Issues concerning these analyses are discussed, especially the assessment of non-market benefits. Finally, this article questions the use of economic analysis in the implementation of environmental policy.     

《欧盟水框架指令》下的地表水环境管理体系及其对我国的启示

《欧盟水框架指令》是欧盟制定的水环境管理政策,为其成员国的水环境管理提供了共同的目标、原则、定义和方法.自2000年颁布实施以来,该指令致力于让欧洲的水环境能够同时满足人类自身的需求和动植物群落的需要,其先进的水环境评价体系、严格的污染管理标准、科学的水生态保护理念和法律效力都在水生态环境保护领域发挥了重要作用.该研究综述了欧盟水框架指令从关注生活生产到生态保护、从单一到整体的发展历程和地表水环境管理体系的主要内容,系统总结了欧盟地表水水质评价体系、水质监测和流域综合管理政策及其管理理念先进、标准制定严格和生态保护科学和法律效力优先的特点,并对比分析我国的地表水环境质量标准和水生态环境管理现状,以期学习、借鉴和吸收国际水生态环境管理的有益经验,为我国的水生态环境管理提供新思路和新方法.      

辽河流域水污染治理历程与“十四五”控制策略

为明晰辽河流域水污染治理“十四五”需求,进一步科学合理地推进辽河流域治理与保护进程,通过调研历史监测数据、统计年鉴等资料,回顾辽河流域水环境演化和治理历程.将辽河流域的治理分为3个阶段:第1阶段（1991—1999年）,该阶段流域水环境呈重度污染并持续恶化,环境治理逐渐起步;第2阶段（2000—2006年）,该阶段辽河流域水质恶化趋势基本得到遏制,控源治污初显成效;第3阶段（2007—2019年）,该阶段辽河流域水质优良比例整体持续提升,国家水体污染控制与治理科技重大专项有力支撑流域综合调控.辽河流域水污染治理颇显成效,但仍存在以下主要问题:①辽河流域水污染治理经历了从单一的控源治污向河流综合治理转变,污染程度由重度转为轻度,但流域水污染控制依然不容乐观;②辽河流域属寒冷地区缺水型河流,生态流量不足;③水质改善及水生态恢复成果不稳定;④流域管理机制体制有待完善.“十四五”应针对性增设分水期考核方式和水生态考核指标,完善水环境标准;坚持水资源、水环境、水生态“三水”统筹科学施治,构建减排和增容相结合的水污染控制模式,推动水量、水质、水功能良性循环发展;建立流域统筹管理、垂直领导的管理体制,制定辽河流域河流空间管控的长效机制,促进环保技术产业化,发展流域循环经济,缓解经济社会发展与水环境保护矛盾,最终实现流域经济社会可持续健康发展.