The Water Framework Directive (2000/60/CE) by Yannick Pochon...WFD 12/2015 Art.4 GOOD STATUS Art.6...
Transcript of The Water Framework Directive (2000/60/CE) by Yannick Pochon...WFD 12/2015 Art.4 GOOD STATUS Art.6...
The Water Framework Directive (2000/60/CE)
Challenges with implementation of river basin management plans in EU-Member Countries
and the link to economic growth
1
Paris, November 25, 2016
Yannick Pochon,
International Office for Water
Inaugural meeting of the Task Force for the implementation of the GREEN Action Programme
The WFD: a major text for water policy
2
With the
WFD
More than 30 European directives concerning water
A sectorial approach
fight against some substances (Dangerous substances directives, Nitrate directive, …)
standards and regulation by use (potable water, bathing, …)
Before
Upcoming abrogation of several directives
A main objective : protection of aquatic bodies and of water ressources
Panorama of European Directives
3
From a sectorial to an integrated approach
Daughter Directives of 76/464/EEC
80/68/EEC « groundwater » *
76/464/EEC « dangerous
substances » *
98/83/EU and 80/68/EEC « drinking water »
79/869/EEC « shellfish waters » *
78/659/EU « waters supporting fish life » *
76/160/EEC « bathing water »
75/440/EEC « surface water intended for the abstraction of drinking water » *
Quality of
Aquatic body Discharges
* Directives to be repealed by the Water Framework Directive
96/61/EEC « IPPC »
91/676/EEC « nitrates »
91/271/EEC « Urban
Waste Water »
WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE
2000/60/EC
Birds’
directive 79/409/EEC
Directive on
major accidents (Seveso)
96/82/EC
Directive
concerning the evaluation of the environmental
impacts 85/337/EEC
Directive
concerning the use of plant protection
products 91/414/EEC
Habitats’
directive 92/43/EEC
WFD leans on confirmed or reinforced principles
4
•Management by hydrographic districts/basins •Planning cycle on the horizon 2015, 2021, 2027 • Protection of aquatic ecosystems and terrestrian ecosystems which depends directly from • Economical analysis (new) • Public participation (new)
5
2003
Art.3 12/2003
Transposal
2004 2006 2005 2007 2008 2010 2009 2011 2012 2014 2013 2015
Art.15 3/2005
Report
Art.15 3/2007
Report
Art.15 3/2010
Report
Art.8 12/2012
Common approach
Art.13 12/2009
RBMP
Deadlines and objectives
Art.9 12/2010
Pricing policy
2000
Art.24 2000
WFD
Art.4 12/2015
GOOD
STATUS
Art.6 12/2004
Protected areas register
Art.5
Characterisation of RBD
12/2004
Art.8 12/2006
Monitoring programme
12/2009
Programme of measures
Art.11
2021
2027
Some Objectives and obligations of results
6
• Reach the good status of surface waters (ecological and
chemical) and groundwaters (chemical and quantitative),
• No deterioration,
•Objectives to reach in protected areas,
•To suppress the discharges of prioritary dangerous
substances in 20 years and
et to reduce emissions of prioritary substances
Environmental objectives:
Urban Waste Water Directive
• Collection and treatment of waste water in urban settlement areas, incl. economic activities, (agglomerations) of > 2000 population equivalent
• Transitional deadline for implementation, including interim targets, currently applicable in 13 EU-MS
• Performance monitoring of treated waste waters
• Industrial waste water: 1) => pre-treatment of industrial waste water discharged into public network (where necessary) 2) => UWWTD covers 11 industry sectors with biodegradable waste water
7
Implementation of UWWTD – state of play
• Very high compliance rates in EU15, frequently in the range 95-100%
• Significant progress in EU13, but results still much lower (e.g. in SA)
• EU funding helped implementation: Between 2007-2013 17,8 billion euro investment support from EU funds, but better use of implementation programmes is needed
• Attention to be paid for big cities (> 150,000 p, almost 600 in EU): 89% of its load received more stringent treatment than required, however, degree of compliance varies significantly (e.g., in capital cities)
8
Economical aspects
9
Main outcomes
10
• 2027 ?
• The “one out all out” principle prevents to show the real progress achieved in improving the state of the water bodies, and that is direly needed to justify investments to the public and the decision-makers in a context of strong budget constraints.
• More generally the question of communication on progresses already achieved (by MS and by COM) must be tackled
Praising WFD’s strengths and lessons learned…:
• WFD brought 28 EU Member States to adopt the right approach and tools to improve the states of the water resources and this shouldn’t put in jeopardy.
• Among the key achievements made thanks to the WFD: greater coordination (between administrations and sectors), broader application of the cost recovery analysis, stronger monitoring networks and Water Information Systems (WIS) for data management, wider involvement of the stakeholders and the public
• Many developments of tools and methods at basin, national or european level
11
Establishment of a
Peer-Review
Mechanism
12
Challenges and perspectives
13
• Many lessons learned from 2 first RBMPs
• Limits already identified for some methods and implementation
• Changing context (SDG, CC, Economic crisis…)
• A cautious approach for the 2019 review, as WFD shouldn’t result in a loss of ambition or in a loss of accountability
• The framework and integration spirit of the WFD must be kept
Perspectives
14
Integration with other directives and policies :
Nitrates,
CAP,
Green growth and innovation,
Circular economy package
Re-use
…
•
Thanking you for your attention
15
Paris, November 25, 2016
Yannick Pochon,
International Office for Water