Transcript EU Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)

Water Framework Directive
EU Perspective
Seán Ó Neachtain
20/2/09
History of Water Policy
•
First wave of legislation 1975
– with subsequent legislation; binding quality targets, quality objective
legislation on fish waters, shellfish waters, bathing waters and
groundwaters
•
Second wave of legislation 1988-early nineties addressing urban and
agricultural pollution in water
– the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive and the Nitrates
Directive, addressing water pollution by nitrates from agriculture.
•
EU Rethink 1995: Third Wave
– Whilst EU actions of the past such as the Drinking Water Directive
and the Urban Waste Water Directive can duly be considered
milestones, European Water Policy has to address the increasing
awareness of citizens and other involved parties for their water. At
the same time water policy and water management are to address
problems in a coherent way. This is why the new European Water
Policy was developed in an open consultation process involving all
interested parties.
•
The result is The Water Framework Directive
Governments Pushing EU for
Water Legislation
• 1988 Council requested Commission to propose
improvisation of water quality
• 1991 Hague Ministers requested programme of
actions management and protection of
freshwater resources by 2000
• 1996 Communication and Presentation of Water
Framework Proposal to EP and Council-Action
Programme for integrated protection and
management of groundwater
• Result: The final proposal is a key initiative
aimed at improving water quality and applies to
rivers, lakes, groundwater and coastal waters.
EU Competence/Power to legislate
Pursuant to Article 174 of the Treaty, in preparing its policy
on the environment, the Community should
•
Preserve, protect and improve the quality of the enviornment based
on the precautionary principle
•
Focus on preventative action
•
Look directly to source of environmental damage and rectify it there
•
Ensure that polluter pays through a review of measures for charging
for water use, including full environmental cost recovery
•
Important to note that under European Law, action to be taken as
close as possible to the locations where water is affected or used thus
asking Member States to legislate according to local and regional
conditions
Engaging the Citizen
• EU barometer demonstrates that at
least 47% of EU citizens list water
pollution as one of the five main
environmental issues that they
worry about
• Citizen and Stakeholder
involvement
Most significant pressures on
waters
– Agriculture
– Industrial and municipal discharges
– Urban pressures
– Physical alterations to surface waters
– Forestry – in sensitive catchments
Water Framework Directive
(2000/60/EC)
• “Better Regulation” successive EU summits in the early
nineties gave the European Commission a renewed
mandate to develop simpler legislation
• WFD a primary example of this approach
• Significant advantage Framework Directive approach
– will rationalise the Community's water legislation by
replacing seven of the "first wave" directives:
– surface water ,fresh water quality; the fish water,
shellfish water, and groundwater directives; and the
directive on dangerous substances discharges. Taken
over in WFD and repealed.
– The citizen at the centre of legislation policy and
consultation on water quality
WFD Overview
– Legal Framework
– River Basin Districts
– All Waters
– Water Management Principles
Purpose EU Perspective:
In simple terms, we are looking at
•
•
•
•
•
•
A high level of environmental protection, preventing further deterioration
using the precautionary principle,
focussing on preventive action,
the elimination of pollution at source, river basin being the most effective,
contributes to mitigating the effects of floods and droughts
with polluter pays principle.
Water pricing
In practice:
•
it requires that all inland and coastal waters within defined river basin districts must
reach at least good status by 2015 and defines how this should be achieved
through the establishment of environmental objectives and ecological targets for
surface waters. Aim to have sufficient supply of good quality surface water and
groundwater
•
The directive impacts on every aspect of water use: domestic, industrial,
agricultural, leisure and environmental conservation.
River Basin Districts
WFD is based on river basin district
plans
Transnational River Basins
• Legislation focused also on the need for
international collaboration for certain river
basins which cross Member State
boundaries
• About 60% of the EU’s surface area lies
in river basins that cross at least one
national border
• Let’s look at 2 examples
The Danube River Basin
•
•
•
•
Is the EU’s largest international river basin district stretching across 10
Member States and nine neighboring countries
Implemented according to a single-wide coordinated IRDB
Management Plan
Varied challenges such as mountain streams, major rivers, ground
water bodies Danube Delta and Black Sea coastal waters
Cooperation commenced in 1856 and in 1994, 14 countries signed a
convention for protection and sustainable management of the river
basin, working together to reduce pollution with strong support from the
EU
Danube River Basin
Background
• Enlargement in 2004 and 2007 has
brought many basin countries into
the EU strengthening the directive’s
implementation.
• Croatia and Macedonia, 2 more
basin countries, are applicants to
join the EU
EU Action
• 2005 Danube countries prepared
common analysis of the basin under
Article 5 of the Directive
• Now developing a shared river basin
management plan
• The largest sub basin Tisza covers
almost 150,000 kilometers across
Romania, Slovakia, Hungary, Serbia and
Ukraine
Pollution Challenges and
Solutions
• In 2000 this river had 2 major industrial
accidents releasing toxic pollution into
the river
• Today these 5 countries are cooperating
on a joint management plan to implement
the WFD on water quality and quantity
• Leading example of cooperation in the
EU
The Rhine River Basin
Length (km): 1 320
Drainage Area (km2):185000
Population: 50 mln
9 Countries:
Switzerland, Germany,
France, the Netherlands,
Italy, Austria, Liechtenstein,
Luxembourg, Belgium
‘‘The Sewer of Europe’’
• The Rhine was once known as the Sewer of Europe due
to heavy pollution from toxic chemical dumping and raw
sewage in the river.
• This made it impossible for Atlantic salmon to survive. By
1958 they died out
• The salmon 2020 program in the basin provides an
example of successful work already underway
• Under this program Rhine countries are working together
to reintroduce the species.
• Success: A wild salmon was caught in a tributary of the
Rhine River near Basel, Switzerland in November 2008.
Ultimate aim is for a stable population of wild Atlantic
salmon.
Implementation
1st
River
Basin
Plan
Identify
Risks
2005
2006
2009
2nd
River
Basin
Plan
3rd
River
Basin
Plan
2015
2021
Monitor
“Water
Status”
The WFD specifies three planning cycles of six years each up to the
year 2027
2027
Recovering the Costs
• Water charges
• Polluter Pays: polluters and users should
pay for the natural resources they use
and the damage they create
• Economic efficiency and reduction of the
financial burden on public authorities.
• New Approach of some Member States.
Future Challenges
•
Ensuring a consistent application-that legislation is
implemented consistently across the Member States
•
Enforceability & capacity to comply: technical feasibility,
costs and natural conditions of the Member States
•
Balancing the interests of various groups in the decisionmaking process
•
Endeavour to increase the standard across the EU, raising the
common denominator in law making
Go raibh maith agaibh!