1

Green Week 2012

How the polluters led the Water Framework Directive ad absurdum The EU-dilemma of “Ecosystem Services” Water „Blue Gold“ at the expense of forests

Franz Prinz zu Salm-Salm

Sirksfeld 1

D - 48653 Coesfeld

2

2

1

3

Common groundwater extraction for domestic and industrial use

leads to destructed or neglected forests (inclusive Flora Fauna Habitat and Conservation Areas)

„loss of Polluter Pays Principle“ f.e. and not only in Germany

water industry/ region:

1 = HWW / Nordheide

2 = TWM / Fläming

3 = Hessenwasser /

Hessisches Ried

3

Options EU WFD: EU Water Framework Directive

2000/60/EG 23. October 2003

– There is a serious frame, for national legislation to honor ecosystem services – qua lege – instead of subsidising polluters as it is currently the case

– The land and forest owners can - as any owner of an ecological qualified land area – be rewarded for the provision of ecosystem services.

With respect to the objectives of the WFD, they should be!

– It is forbidden that forest areas pay or work for free for polluters. Otherwise the “polluter pays principle” and the “principle of recovery of the costs” are led ad absurdum

treaty violation proceedings against Germany, Greece and Luxemburg!

4

True is: „Every drop counts“

Forests in the EU: victims of water speculation and gambling

5

Allover Europe typical for European water industries, France: „Volvic mineral water“, (Nestle, Gelsenwasser, TWM ) Valuing drinking waters from forests to faucets

Volvic advertising slogan „Drawn in the lush greenery of the Auvergne Forest in central France As is true of all great water sources, it is a protected area with no industry or heavy farming.“

Volvic „Because no nitrates and pesticides“

6

Inventory Water Framework Directive : Classification of the water quality ecologically

Grade of ecological quality and consequence

I very good quality (blue) reference condition

II good quality (geen) target condition

III moderate quality (yellow) need for action

IV unsatisfaying quality (orange) need for action

V bad quality (red) need for action

Wood - Land - Waters = mostly reference conditions!

= often drinking water quality

in most cases, WFD target is reached there

= but does that serve ecosystem services?

7

Not only in Luxemburg: Forest water is of good to very good quality

8

Ecosystem services of forests in the EU ?

• Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) report 2005 defines Ecosystem services as benefits people obtain from ecosystems

• four categories of ecosystem services (provisioning, regulating,

supporting, cultural services) • The Ecosystem „forest“ provides provisioning, regulating and

supporting services for water • Global change will alter the supply of ecosystem services that are

vital for human well-being

• in the US http://www.ecosystemmarketplace.com , but in EU = ?

9

• In many cases the A team of researchers from the United States, Argentina and the Netherlands put an average price tag of US$33 trillion per year on global fundamental ecosystem services, which are usually taken for granted because they are free

• Water regulation and supply of forests was estimated to be worth US$2.3 trillion

(Costanza et al., 1997). • At the national level, the economic value of the water storage function of China’s

forests is estimated as 7.5 trillion yuan (approximately US$1 trillion), three times the value of the wood in those forests.

• Another study calculated that the presence of forest on Mount Kenya saved Kenya’s economy more than US$20 million by protecting the catchment for two of the country’s main river systems, the Tana and the Ewaso Ngiro (Emerton, 2001).

Source: http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a1598e/a1598e10.htm (Unasylva No. 229 Vol. 58, 2007/4)

FAO : Managing forests for cleaner water means Valuing Forests! managing ecosystem services on an economic basis can give an impetus for

sustainable forest management

10

How the Water Framework Directive becomes a Water „Flamwork“ Directive Art 5 WFD: no serious economic analysis of water!

Art 9 WFD : Member States shall take account of the principle of recovery of the costs of water services, - including environmental and resource costs,

- having regard to the economic analysis conducted according to Annex III

- in accordance in particular with the polluter pays principle.

EU WFD is the first european environmental framework, which explicitly uses economical instruments to get an environmental result.

This could be essential for Ecosystem Services, but in relevant cases in the EU we have a water „flamwork“ directive, because very often economic analysis isn´t seriously done f.e. concerning energy and water industries or sealed landscapes

11

Polluter should pay all costs of all water services on basis of the

economical analysis, so principle of recovery of the costs means:

- Operational costs (depreciation, personel expenses …...) &

- Environmental &

- Resource costs

Environmental Costs: Costs for damages, which the use of water

means to environment, ecosystems and people.

Resource costs: Costs for lost possibilities - opportunity costs

Ecosystem Services and WFD: Art 9 WFD polluter pays principle and &

principle of recovery of the costs

12

Water Framework Directive versus water management, or How WFD becomes a water flamwork directive

WFD Art 2 Nr. 38. .Water services. means all services which provide, for households, public institutions or any economic activity:

(a) abstraction, impoundment, storage, treatment and distribution of surface water or groundwater,

(b) waste-water collection and treatment facilities which subsequently discharge into surface water.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Water Management, in practice these services are:

Water supply for

– industrial use

– agricultural use

– domestic use (incl Drinking water abstraction)

Flood prevention and ditching

Wastewater disposal

13

Water Framework Directive versus water management, or How WFD becomes a water flamwork directive

But:

In most countries of the EU water management „avoids“ to acknowledge f.e. flood prevention and ditching as water services

Thus forests pay as much as the polluters and are consequently subsidising them (f.e. with view to sealed areas)

14

Ecosystem Forest Fact´s and Figures: for example Germany

- water protection about 155 Euro/hectare (Waldprogramm

Niedersachsen 1999) “

- flood prevention North-Rhine Westfalia about 100 Euro/ha

- erosion prevention = 86 Euro/ha

structural means or help of public authorities not only in

Germany don´t cover even 5% of those „benefits“.

15

„services of general interest“ are mostly acting for „interest rates“, they are “cash cows” of whom ever.

•no difference between private and “public” water industries:

•no inside control, citation “eco logic” 2001: „usually those services are masters of dates and information the governments need, but don’t have“ - Hamburg Water, Gelsenwasser = some cities cash cows or Vattenfall, EON, RWE, SUEZ, Vivendi, Veolia,

• minimum yield return of 10%, often over 20% • profitable business and no market = it's Monopoly f.e. Germany organized in BDEW : 1.800 Enterprises and 140 Billion Euro/Year turnover = big business, but no polluter pays principle

16

Sustainability and Forest Functions = the obligation for a serious

and fair Ecosystem Services Market in face of climate change, raw material supply, sealed landscapes and WFD, forestry has a

significant role to play, now and in the future The damage and devaluation to forests caused by water catchment and water use are not

compensated for Ecosystem services provided by forests are of commercial use for society, gas and water

industries, but they are taken for free and granted Gas and water associations are no services of general interest, because they work mostly

on their own „interest rates“

Society abandoned sustainability, because nobody pays the Ecosystem Forest for the provisioning, regulating and supporting services for water,

There is a need for a serious and fair Ecosystem Services Market - we have to take the chance of WFD to do so now!

17

Conclusions and outlook!

• Ecosystem services are not for free => the use of water purified by forests is not for free – this should be the starting point for the implementation of the WFD!

• There has to be a graded system taking into account the ability of different soil status (forest, agriculture, meadows, sealed areas etc.) for water drainage/efflux

• Estimation of follow-up costs and need for key data on the catchment of water that is directly affecting forests and forestry

• Contract based solutions for water catchment between water polluters/users and forest owners – establishment of a „water services compensation pool“

• Ex-ante compatibility test to ensure that the catchment of water does not irreversibel impact on Natura 2000 or conservation areas

18

Thank you very much for your attention!

www.cepf-eu.org www.eustafor.eu