Transcript Diapositiva 1 - Universidad Autonoma de Madrid

Why a new framework for European
water policy?
1988: concern about common legislation is needed.
Integrative approach
Environmental new philosophy:
integrity, multidisciplinary, coordination.
Unsuccesful application, overlap and legal
holes.
+
Inefficiency sectorial
legislations
+
Fragmetation feeling
New water policy
1995: proposal for a new Directive.
2000: Directive 2000/60. Sustainable model (implementation of the WFD):
1) Water is a scarce resource and environmental questions have to be consider
as a priority: environmental impact assessment, pollution control, ecological
flows, etc.
2) This model implies a water demands control system.
Water management models (I).
Evolution.
 Traditional offer model:
1) Water as a non scarce resource.
a) Therefore water must be used, and if it is necessary, we must transforms
nature to do it. Environmental issues are not considered as important.
b) For many decades this system has provoked an absolute
ineffectiveness consumption: water rights.
2) The relation between the former legitimating rights to use
water and public works. Spain is the country with more dams per
inhabitant in hole the world.
3) A model what got its objectives in the middle 20th century, but:
a) Drinking water: the priority of human consumption (but nowadays
Spaniards consume more water than any other european population);
b) Agriculture (paradox: irrigation consumes 80% of water, but only
represents 1.5% of spanish economy);
c) Power generation (paradox: nowadays we can not base our energy
generation industry on a scarcer resource in advanced).
Water management models (II):
present and future.
 Demand model:
1) Water is a scarce resource and environmental problems are considered
(environmental impact assessment in public works and permissions). Changes
begun when Spain became an EU member.
2) This model obliges to redistribute the resources previously conceded
trying to reach effectiveness in the consumption and use of water.
3) Remaining WFD’s objectives and some environmental problems:
economical effectiveness vs. environmental protection.
 Sustainable model (implementation of the WFD):
1) Water is a scarce resource and environmental questions have to be
consider as a priority, even pollution control, ecological flows, etc.
2) This model implies a water demands control system.
3) Spain is implementing the WFD in time, although the process can be
criticized: a) Doubts about the real meaning of the WFD: the approach has
not been all the intense that could be expected; b) Disconnection between
legal system and administrative practice: new demands in those territories
where water is scarcer.
DIRECTIVE 2000/60: establishing a framework for
Community action in the field of water policy.
 Why the WFD is a framework Directive? The evolution of european
environmental norms towards the fulfillment of the 30th ECT Protocol
on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.
 Directives versus Regulations on the ECT: the early 70’s and 80’s
environmental Directives were very close to the Regulations.
 Redirecting environmental Directives towards their original
sense (30th Protocol ECT):
“The form of Community action shall be as simple as possible,
consistent with satisfactory achievement of the objective of the
measure and the need for effective enforcement. The Community shall
legislate only to the extent necessary. Other things being equal,
Directives should be preferred to Regulations and framework
Directives to detailed measures. Directives as provided for in Article
189 of the Treaty, while binding upon each Member State to which they
are addressed as to the result to be achieved, shall leave to the national
authorities the choice of form and methods”.
 Is the WFD really a framework Directive? Does not the WFD
contain detailed measures?
The WFD sets out a clear deadlines for each of the requirements
which adds up to an ambitious overall timetable.
Year
Issue
Reference
2000
Directive entered into force
Art. 25
2003
Transposition in national legislation
Identification of River Basin Districts and Authorities
Art. 23
Art. 3
2004
Characterisation of river basin: pressures, impacts and economic analysis
Art. 5
2006
Establishment of monitoring network
Start public consultation (at the latest)
Art. 8
Art. 14
2008
Present draft river basin management plan
Art. 13
2009
Finalise river basin management plan including progamme of measures
Art. 13 & 11
2010
Introduce pricing policies
Art. 9
2012
Make operational programmes of measures
Art. 11
2015
Meet environmental objectives
Art. 4
2021
First management cycle ends
Art. 4 & 13
2027
Second management cycle ends, final deadline for meeting objectives
Art. 4 & 13
Apart from the Protocol, why was reasonable to
approve a framework Directive?
 Community water policy requires a transparent, effective and coherent legislative
framework, and the WFD provide common principles and the overall
framework for action.
 This Directive provide for such a framework and coordinate and integrate the
basis for protection and sustainable use of water:


The important differences between the member States’ water Law.
The obvious differences between the hydrological, climatic and water problems of each member States.
 In a EU with 27 member States, is it possible to develop the common
harmonization for water protection based on a different kind of norm?
Art. 191.2 EUT: “Community policy on the environment shall aim at a high level of
protection taking into account the diversity of situations in the various regions of the
Community”.
 Art. 191.3 EUT: “In preparing its policy on the environment, the Community shall take
account of: — environmental conditions in the various regions of the Community”.

 The WFD is a good example about what is happening in other subjects:
proposals for Directives establishing a framework for the protection of soil.
Towards an integrated approach.





The WFD, as the rest of the new environmental Directives, focuses ist efforts in an integrated
approach, where the protection is not referred to a single natural resource, but a global point of
view.
In order to fulfill with this approach, the WFD assumes a huge scope: inland waters in general
(water bodies: surface waters, groundwaters) and marine waters (water bodies: coastal and
transitional waters), and also associated ecosystems (protected areas). It is no important whether
those water bodies are considered as public domain or private property by the national Law.
 The former water Directives had a sectorial point of view: some kinds of polutants, some kinds of
waters…, without connection with other norms.
 The WFD is the common base (the “mother Directive”) to the rest water Directives in order
nowadays, and gives a global and integrated sense to the european water policy, connecting its
environmental objectives with other environmental Direcives (IPPC Directive and emmission
control, waste Directive and groundwaters, Proposal for soil Directive and groundwaters, etc.).
The WFD incorporates the hydrological cycle to its field of action, including environmental
objectives for protected areas and associated ecosystems (riversides).
Can we say seriously that the WFD is only a water quality Directive? Is the WFD a European
Water Law that regulate and modify the national water Law of each country?
Other examples: the large number of european
norms approved to carrry out with the Kyoto Protocol,
the IPPC Directive, the Directive on waste or the new
proposal for Directive for the protection of soil.
A good example in Spain.

Environment
restoration.
Minister:
program
of
riverbeds
and
riversides


Environmental objectives: the good ecological status objectives are
determined for each type of water body (rivers, lakes, groundwaters, coastal
and transitional waters).
To get those objectives, membes States have to identified every water body
and establish specific objectives to each one.
Example:
surface water
delimitation
in Júcar river
basin (Spain).
Clasification of
pressures.
Final identification.



Member States shall protect and enhance all
artificial and heavily modified bodies of water, with
the aim of achieving good ecological potential and
good surface water chemical status.
Artificial water body: “a body of surface water created by human activity”.
Heavily modified water body: “a body of surface water which as a result of physical alterations by
human activity is substantially changed in character”.
The environmental objectives affect both
quality and quantitative aspects.
 For the purposes of environmental protection, there is a need for a
greater integration of qualitative and quantitative aspects of both
surface waters and groundwaters, taking into account the natural flow
conditions of water within the hydrological cycle.
 The special importance of quantitative aspects in relation with
groundwaters: the quantitative status of a body of groundwater may
have an impact on the ecological quality of surface waters and
terrestrial ecosystems associated with that groundwater body.
 It is supposed that the WFD should be implemented in a homogeneous
way: the common implementation strategy.
 If the WFD affects quantitative aspects, does it mean The
Directive affects to the water management?
Quantitative aspects, water management and
ECT’s legal basis of WFD.
 According to the legal basis of the WFD, one could say that it is an environmental
norm; however, according to its contents, it is much more than this and the real
affection in member States water policy is important. Towards a
sustainable water management system.

The european environmental policy was based on the art. 175.1 ECT: codecision
procedure.

Art. 175.1 ECT: “The Council, acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in article 251
and after consulting the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions,
shall decide what action is to be taken by the Community in order to achieve the objectives
referred to in article 174”.
 The WFD was approved based on that article, so is it a water quality norm or a
environmental norm that affects to water management?


Differences between 1st and 2nd paragraph of art. 175 ECT:
Art. 175.2 ECTT: “By way of derogation from the decision-making procedure provided for in
paragraph 1 and without prejudice to Article 95, the Council, acting unanimously on a
proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament, the Economic and
Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, shall adopt: (…) (b) measures affecting: (…)
quantitative management of water resources or affecting, directly or indirectly, the availability
of those resources”.
Good groundwater status: “the status achieved by a groundwater body when
both its quantitative status and its chemical status are at least good”.
Quantitative status: “an expression of the degree to which a body of
groundwater is affected by direct and indirect abstractions”.
The very important
transcendence of this
question in Southern
Europe: fulfillment of
ecological
flows
(WFD’s
hydromorfological
indicators) in those
countries
where
scarcity is an inherent
problem
in
their
hydrological systems.
Hydraulic infrastructures.
 Evolution towards a sustainable management model involves
a change in the point of view have been maintained about
hydraulic public works so far:
1) Recycling waste-waters and desalinization. New environmental
problems for new infrastructures: power generation deficit and discharges.
2) Water demand control instead of building new infrastructures with
huge environmental impacts.
3) Dam removal: many of small dams are coming to the end of their
lives. Limits:
a) New artificial ecosystems versus natural restoration.
b) Recovery cost principle.
c) Protected dams.
Can the WFD prohibit member States from building public hydraulic
infraestructures?
4) EU Law requirements:
a) Obviously environmental impact assessment.
b) New objectives of WFD as limits in the execution of new
projects.
c) Recovery cost principle.
The Directive 91/271 and
the WFD obliges member
States to
treat waste
waters before discharging
into surface water.


A.G.U.A. Program:
“Spain has obtained water from marines water since 30
years ago (from 1965, in Lanzarote). Nowadays there are
more than 700 factories working. Equipments can
produce more than 800.000 m3/day (47,1% from
coastal waters)”.
Foreseen actions in the Mediterranean coast will increase the
resources produced in 1.100 Hm3/year. Invesment is higher
than 3.900.000.000 €. Next actions have been declared
urgent:
Nº de actuaciones
Aportación Hm3/año
Inversión
C.H. del Sur
17
312
554 mill. €
C.H. del Segura
24
336
1.336 mill. €
C.H. del Júcar
40
270
798 mill. €
C.H. del Ebro y C.I. de Cataluña
24
145
1.110 mill. €
Channels in Doñana National Park
Dam in Trefilerías (Cantabria)
Dam in Ladrillar (Cáceres)
Dam in Butrera (Trema river, Burgos)
Combined approach implementation.
 With regard to pollution prevention and control, Community water
policy should be based on a combined approach through the
setting of emission limit values and of environmental quality
standards.
 Emission limits values: control of pollution at source or concentration and/or level of
an emission, which may not be exceeded.
 Quality standards: control of global pollution at natural resource which receives the
pollution.
 Comparison with former Directives: the paralell approach.
 Art. 174.2 ECT: “…environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source”.
 Was it reliable to mantain a control based on one kind of
standandars?
 This is also the way others environmental Directives go on: the
IPPC Directive is the best example.
Towards a higher level of protection.
 Art. 191.2 EUT: “Community policy on the environment shall aim at a high
level of protection taking into account the diversity of situations in the
various regions of the Community”.
 Stand still principle: a common clause with a relative effectiveness.
Art. 4.1.a).i) WFD: “Member States shall implement the necessary measures to prevent
deterioration of the status of all bodies of surface water”.
 Art. 4.9 WFD: “Steps must be taken to ensure that the application of the new provisions,
including the application of paragraphs 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, guarantees at least the same level of
protection as the existing Community legislation”.
 Art. 11.6 WFD: “In implementing measures pursuant to paragraph 3, Member States shall take all
appropriate steps not to increase pollution of marine waters. Without prejudice to existing
legislation, the application of measures taken pursuant to paragraph 3 may on no account lead,
either directly or indirectly to increased pollution of surface waters”.


The new Directives have to regulate increasing levels of protection. Art. 22.6 WFD: “For bodies of
surface water, environmental objectives established under the first river basin management plan
required by this Directive shall, as a minimum, give effect to quality standards at least as stringent as
those required to implement Directive 76/464/EEC”.

The use of this principle is common in all the european environmental Directives.

Could be possible to approve a new Directive which derogate former norms with not stricter
level of protection? Would it agree with the Treaty?
Science and technique dependence.
 The increasing protection implies neccesarily to depend on the
state of science and technique to improve the quality and
emission standars. Pursuant to art. 174 ECT, in preparing its
policy on the environment, the Community is to take account of
available scientific and technical data.
 The emission controls based on best available techniques (BAT
clauses) (art. 10.1 WFD).
 Technical adaptations to the Directive in accordance with scientific
and technical progress (art. 20 WFD).
 All the modern environmental Directives include BAT or
BATNEEC clauses and technical adaptations requirements,
apart from remissions to technical norms.
 How the science and technique influence changes the
democratic legitimation of the Government and
Administration?
The use of economic instruments.
 The principle of recovery of the costs of water services, including
environmental and resource costs associated with damage or negative impact
on the aquatic environment should be taken into account in accordance with,
in particular, the polluter-pays principle.
 Art. 9.1 WFD: “Member States shall take account of the principle of
recovery of the costs of water services, including environmental and
resource costs”.
 However, the proposal for a framework Directive included an obligation much
stricter, impossing the full recovery costs.
 Water services: abstraction, storage, treatment and distribution of
surface water or
groundwater, and waste-water collection and treatment facilities which subsequently
discharge into surface water as well.
 Art. 174.2 ECT: polluter pay principle vs. user pay principle.
 In other environmental Directives is common the use of other economic
instruments: emission permits market, voluntary requirements,
voluntary agreements, etc.
 Does it mean that in advanced the typical prescritive norms will be
substituited by the exclusive use of economic instruments?
Recovery cost principle.
European Law and a new water management
authority and planning.
 River basin district (RBD):
River basins.
 Marine waters.
 Protected areas.

 RBD plan and programme of
measures.
 Competent authorities:
Inner or national RBD.
 International RBD.
 Transeuropean RBD.

GREEN - River Basin Management Plans adopted.
YELLOW - consultations finalized, but awaiting adoption.
RED - consultation have not started or ongoing.