- 3.2 active involvement in the program cycle of the directive

 

Step 1 By end of 2003

Framework Identification of River Basin Districts Assignment of the Competent Authorities Transposition of the Directive into national legislation

Why, what and who?
Active involvement in this step will help raise awareness of the introduction of the Directive and the early decisions that will establish the competent authority and spatial outline of the River Basin Districts.
Active involvement in this step is unlikely to be significant, and public participation will be characterised by information supply and consultation via existing national procedures.
Input should be sought from as wide a range of stakeholders as can be reached.

How?
By communication planning (see Annex I) and using the existing national procedures.

Consultation on the Directive Annexes 2 and 5, UK environment agencies (see Annex II) The technical annexes of the Directive are complex and not easily understood or interpreted. They do, however, provide the basis and instruction as to how the water environment will be assessed, monitored and classified. These tasks inform Objective setting, the development of Programmes of Measures and regulatory regimes. As such it is important that, as far as possible, the principles being adopted, or being considered for adoption, are understood and supported by the range of stakeholders, authorities and organisations potentially affected by these assessment or related activities. In the summer of 2002 the UK environment agencies issued public consultation documents on 'The Guiding Principles on the Technical Requirements of the Water Framework Directive'. The objectives of this exercise were to: Allow stakeholders to input their priorities and concerns as to how technical annex interpretation might affect them; Allow stakeholders to comment on proposed WFD technical interpretations and principles; Provide a framework by which a range of public bodies across the UK could input to the development of a common interpretation and understanding of Directive requirements. A number of key lessons are summarised below: It is possible to develop and provide participative opportunities associated with WFD technical processes and issues; Attempt to involve stakeholders in such issues and processes are appreciated by them and deliver benefits to prospective competent authorities in terms of both transparency and trust and through the valuable and insightful contributions made by stakeholders; The collaborative working of agencies and public bodies in both Scotland and England and Wales is beneficial in increasing national understanding and co-working relationships; Similarly the reciprocal involvement of SEPA, EA and EHS in each others drafting processes increased UK wide shared understanding while providing reassurance to stakeholders that common interpretations were being applied and proposed.

Step 2 By end of 2004

Characterisation and Analysis (Art.4) Characterisation of the river basin district, review of the environmental impact of human activity and economic analysis of water use. Assessment of the likelihood that surface water bodies within the river basin district will fail to meet the environmental quality objectives set for the bodies under Article 4 (gap analysis Annex II (1.5)).

Why, what and who?
Active involvement in the characterisation and analysis step will be useful to:

• Raise awareness of the process of characterisation and analysis;
• Collect data, information and views of a range of stakeholders;
• Identify issues and where possible resolve conflicts and manage expectations.

The characterisation and analysis step can be broken down into a number of distinct processes. The delivery of these processes, and ultimately the RBMP which they lead to, will stand a greater chance of success with the involvement of key stakeholders. Some specific detail is offered below for each process.

Review of pressures and impacts: This review forms one of the foundations of RBMP and helps determine which water bodies are likely to be at risk of not reaching ecological status by 2015 (or later) because of the pressures on them. The purpose of stakeholder involvement would be to help determine the pressures and impacts on water bodies and provide input to the identification of waters most at risk.

Economic Analysis: This process will help a) set up a trend scenario which predicts the socio-economic trends for the future, which is essential for the 'gap analysis', and b) evaluate current levels of cost recovery and c) analyse the cost-effectiveness of measures between 2004 and 2009. Stakeholder involvement will help to determine a), b) and c). Secondly, involvement is also important since good ownership could mean also better financial support (either directly by the public or by political pressure).

Classification and objective setting: In this process a start has to be made with the definition of the status of the water bodies on the basis of the characterisation of water bodies within the River Basin Districts required by Annex II and V. Also environmental quality objectives have to be set. When setting the environmental objectives, it is most important to have good ownership of local people, but it has to be guided carefully as capacity building is indispensable (interpretation of Guidance Documents). There is risk of failure of objectives of the Directive by 'overriding' economic issues (e.g. clean hydropower and navigation), but there is also a big chance to create awareness and to win the pro-environmental sections of society. This involvement should be organised from bottom (small basin or even water body) to basin districts and whole basin.

Gap analysis: When the current water status and envisaged environmental quality objectives are set, the gap analysis can be performed. The first gap analysis is to be performed before the end of 2004, for the purpose of the first RBD characterisation, in order to define the water bodies being at risk of failing to meet the objectives of the Directive for 2015. This first gap analysis will be based mostly on expert judgements and currently available data and information. After 2004, this first gap analysis will be refined on the basis of new data, among them the results from monitoring programmes (operational after end 2006). This new information will be used to update the RBD characterisation to be included in the river basin management plan (Annex 7), involve key-stakeholders in the identification of gaps and set up of trend scenarios. In the case of gaps, this makes them aware of a need for change, and it will help to get their input in the identification of appropriate measures (next step).

Designation of Heavily Modified Water Bodies: Like gap analysis, the designation of heavily modified water bodies is a two step process, with a provisional designation by 2004 and a final designation by 2008 The purpose of stakeholder involvement would be to support the identification of heavily modified water bodies (HMWB), resolve conflicts and contribute to the acceptance of HMWB designation.

The most important stakeholders to be considered at this strategic level of dialogue will be those who can really contribute to delivering solutions (e.g. other government bodies, water companies, wastewater treatment companies), those who have technical expertise and are representative of a particular constituency (e.g. NGOs, research community) and those who pay for action (consumers).

How?
When considering the different processes, active involvement may be undertaken at national, River Basin District and local levels. Involvement at the national level would predominantly be with national government, industry bodies, consumer bodies, national NGOs and technical and academic experts. At the River Basin District and local level, involvement would tend to be with representatives of regional and local government and stakeholders with an interest in a specific River Basin District, river basin or water body.

At each of these levels it may be useful organise involvement using the following methods:

• Bilateral meetings;
• Steering groups;
• Advisory groups.

Possible activities for active involvement are:

'Process Start Up' meeting/workshop(s) with key-stakeholders to discuss:

• The objectives;
• The working process (how to reach the objectives) and decide on their role;
• The preconditions (Terms Of Reference) for their involvement;
• Availability and relevance of existing data;
• Communication plan.

Inventory of knowledge and perceptions on:

• The description of the surface waters and groundwater bodies; what are the major issues (problems)? This can be done through workshops, interviews, panels and fieldtrips with stakeholders.

Analysis and structuring, decision making on characterisation;

Information supply to all relevant stakeholders.

River Basin Management Plan Maas/sub-basin Niers, (see Annex II)

Pilot project with regard to Article 14 (North Rhine-Westphalia, one of the 16 German Lander)
In the three Niers fora: Municipalities, districts, water companies, water associations, chambers of agriculture, forest authorities, nature conservation NGOs, biological planning units, the Netherlands authorities and stakeholders (all of the relevant region), have been consulted. In round tables with 30
40 persons per forum the following activities took place: Information supply, discussion, distribution of relevant materials, exchange of experience, involvement with regard to data collection.

Integrated reconnaissance study on the River Basins of the Rhine and Waal (see Annex II) Objective: To give advice to the national government on possible scenarios for future water management The open interactive process has the following elements: a close cooperation with other governmental organisations. In steering committees, the 2 provinces, municipalities, the regional office of PW, VROM and LNV as well as the water boards are represented. They are responsible for the decision making and the advice to the government on further policies. (Before only the regional office of the Ministry developed such studies and gave advice) ; an expert group (of government staff (and representatives of NGOs); (in a later phase) 'working groups' of experts per theme: water flow, use and land use; juridical and governmental issues; communication. open communication; from the start the project team showed a positive attitude towards interviews, questions by stakeholders and took care to produce clear reports, and leaflets to inform about the progress and results; symposia (IVB). The IVB project has organised two symposia. One for the governors and the other one for NGOs and interested citizens. The aim was to explain about results of the screening study so far, to create understanding and support and to seek reactions and advise on the proposed measures; information evenings for the general public with a (DVD) film putting water management in a historical perspective, bringing interests together under the flag of security and illustrating all proposed measures and its consequences; The objective is to inform people, provide them the knowledge they need, generate understanding for the necessity and gain insight on the different perceptions and ideas people have. What are the consequences of these measures for the user, inhabitants and local governors? 'Kitchen table' conferences with the ministry and farmers in the area to discuss possible measures; Consultation rounds (interviews) among the parties involved on how to proceed.

Step 3 By end of 2006

Planning for establishing programmes of measures and outline of river basin management plans Further gap characterisation for those bodies identified by the gap analysis as being at risk, in order to optimise the monitoring programme and the programme of measures. Monitoring programmes start. For Public information and consultation about the RBMP, MS make available for comments a timetable and work programme for the production of the RBMP (MS shall allow at least six months to comment on those documents).

NB: The Directive requires consultation and active information supply for the phases from 2006-2009. These subjects are discussed in more detail in Section 4 respectively 5.

Why, what and who?
This step is mainly focussed on planning the potential measures which may be used to achieve the objectives set for different water bodies, and to determine which options would be feasible and effective. Active involvement will help determine stakeholders views on the potential options, and to elicit other possibilities to be screened which in turn would help determine the final measures selected. The programme of measures should be co-ordinated with other water and land- use planning processes and funding mechanisms. This may have significant financial benefits, in addition to improving effectiveness of the implementation. Also the SEIA directive refers to plans and programmes of measures (see Section 2.1 and 2.4).

The examples on the SDAGE project in France (see Section 2.7 and Annex II) do also illustrate this step.

The most important stakeholders to be considered at this step will be those who can really contribute to delivering the Programme of Measures (e.g. other government bodies, water companies, wastewater treatment companies etc), those who have technical expertise and are representative of a particular constituency (e.g. NGOs, research community) and those who pay for action (consumers).

How?
When considering the different measures, active involvement may be undertaken at national, River Basin District and local levels. Involvement at the national level would predominantly be with national government, industry bodies, consumer bodies, national NGOs and technical and academic experts. At the River Basin District and local level, involvement would tend to be with representatives of regional and local government and stakeholders with an interest in a specific River Basin District, river basin or water body.

At each of these levels it may be useful organise involvement using the following methods:

• Bilateral meetings;
• Steering groups;
• Advisory groups.

The IIVR project, The Netherlands (see Annex II) The project has chosen for a cooperative style in which the different authorities and nongovernmental organisations (NGO) (and interest groups) work together and have an equal say in the final outcome. The interaction is organised through: a steering committee formed by governors of the different government authorities. They gave direction to the process and take decisions. The steering committee is supported by the initiative-group; an initiative group. This group of experts, government employees and members of NGOs, discussed the content of the planning process; consultations of citizens and interest groups. In addition, several sessions were organised during a period of two years to consult citizens and interest groups and give them a chance to share their problem perceptions and generate ideas.

Step 4 2007

For Public information and consultation about the RBMP, MS make available for comments an overview of the most important water management issues within the RBD (MS shall allow at least six months to comment on those documents).

See Section 4 and 5.

Step 5 2008

For Public information and consultation about the RBMP, MS make available for comments a draft copy of River Basin Management Plan (MS shall allow at least six months to comment on those documents).

See Section 4 and 5.

Step 6 2009

Final River Basin Management Plan published. Programmes of measures shall be established.

See Section 4 and 5 with respect to the publication of the RBMP.

Why, what and who?
This step is mainly focussed on establishing the Programme of Measures, which will be used to achieve the objectives, set for different water bodies. As stakeholders will implement or be affected by some of the measures, active involvement in this step will help gain commitment to the delivery of the Programme of Measures.

The most important stakeholders to consider at this step will be those who can really contribute to delivering the Programme of Measures (e.g. other government bodies, water companies, wastewater treatment companies, farmers etc) and those who pay for action (consumers).

How?
When establishing the different measures, active involvement may be undertaken at national, River Basin District and local levels. Involvement at the national level would predominantly be with national government, industry bodies and consumer bodies. At the River Basin District and local level, involvement would tend to be with representatives of regional and local government and stakeholders with a role in delivery of the Programme of Measures.

At each of these levels it may be useful organise involvement using the following methods:

• Bilateral meetings;
• Steering groups;
• Advisory groups;
• Workshops and meetings to generate solutions and define measures.

Erne Sustainable Wetlands Project (see Annex II) In the Erne catchment (cross border Northern Ireland and Ireland) covering over 4,000square kms) the aim was to produce a model for agreeing a vision for management of the river basin (catchment). Active involvement with a range of stakeholders and a range of methods was tried at different geographic levels. It was found that people generally related better to the more local scale. Methods included questionnaires, community mapping and workshops. Everyone living within the river basin was considered as a potential stakeholder and active involvement was encouraged by a participatory approach of holding workshops open to the public and any interested organisation and going out into public places like town centres.

Step 7 2012

Implementation Programmes of measures implemented.

Why, what and who?
This step is concerned with the implementation of the Programme of Measures. Active involvement in this step will help to maintain the awareness of the measures and contribute to their sustained delivery.

The most important stakeholders to consider at this step will be those who are contributing to the delivery of the Programme of Measures (e.g. other government bodies and industry sectors etc).

How?
When implementing the Programme of Measures, active involvement may be undertaken at national, River Basin District and local levels. Involvement at the national level would predominantly be with national government and industry bodies. At the River Basin District and local level, involvement would tend to be with representatives of regional and local government and stakeholders with a role in delivery of the Programme of Measures.

At each of these levels it may be useful organise involvement using the following methods:

• Bilateral meetings;
• Steering groups;
• Consultation methodologies.

River Tyreså project, Sweden (see Annex II) Public participation to restore and develop a River basin. A steering group was set up consisting of politicians from the municipalities. Working groups were formed of representatives of municipalities, county board and from the water users (total 11 persons). The working group has close contact with the sport fishing associations, house-owners associations and many other associations within the catchment area. After the first introductory meeting some interest/issue groups were established: recreation/outdoor life, local history and eutrophication. The working groups have regular meetings once a month with these groups. The public participated also through panel debates. The outcome was a list of measures being implemented resulting in a.o. The establishing of walking paths, improved of the quality of the surface water, protection of an ecological park.

Step 8 2015

Evaluation and updating, derogations Good water status achieved? Objectives for Protected Areas achieved? Establishing and publishing the next plans and programs. Derogations.

Why, what and who?
This step is concerned with the achievement of the objectives. Active involvement in this step will be useful to raise awareness of the achievement of the objectives and facilitate the understanding of the effectiveness of the Programme of Measures.

The most important stakeholders to consider will be those who can really contribute to delivering the Programme of Measures (e.g. other government bodies, water companies, wastewater treatment companies, farmers etc), those who have technical expertise and are 'representative' of a particular constituency (e.g. NGOs, academics etc) and those that pay for action (consumers).

How?
When considering the achievement of the objectives, active involvement may be undertaken at national, River Basin District and local levels. Involvement at the national level would predominantly be with national government, industry and consumer bodies, national NGOs and technical experts. At the River Basin District and local level, involvement would tend to be with representatives of regional and local government and stakeholders with an interest in a specific River Basin District, river basin or water body.

At each of these levels it may be useful organise involvement using the following methods:

• Bilateral meetings;
• Steering groups;
• Consultation methodologies.

The Emå River, Sweden (see Annex II) Catchment area of 4 500 km2. Objectives public participation: To contribute to sustainable development by encouraging commitment and support from local people as regards restoration of the area and other environmental measures; To use knowledge and experience from NGOs and other stakeholders; To avoid new and, if possible, solve old conflicts. Municipalities, county administrative boards, NGOs, etc., cooperated in different working groups from 1994 onwards (from 1997 there were 8 groups). Different associations took part in these working groups such as the Emå River Council, farmers associations, owners of fishing waters, angling associations, local history associations, nature conservation associations, municipalities and tourism enterprises. Public participation is achieved by holding seminars, information meetings and hearings, circulating documents (e.g. objective documents) for comments, forming working groups (those in the group bring information back to their organisation and vice versa) and distributing newsletters, etc. Minutes from the various meetings were taken and distributed.

West country River Trust (WRT), UK (see Annex II) The objective of the project is: To raise awareness; To use the knowledge and experience of stakeholders for the sustainable development of river catchment areas; To improve water quality through comprehensive involvement of farmers; Participation has largely focused on farmers and key regional stakeholders (e.g. statutory environment agencies, the local water company, other NGOs). The WRT works both as a leader and facilitator in the region to effect change through the development and delivery of action. For instance, WRT has recently used WWF-UK funding to bring together key regional stakeholders in a workshop to begin the process of agreeing a long-term vision for the landscape of the southwest. The workshop has been followed by a questionnaire exercise, which asks stakeholders to identify their priorities for rural land-use. Hence knowledge on local issues, resources in terms of active participation and commitment and willingness to imply changes in their production practices to ensure environmental quality is gained.

The Tubaek stream, Denmark (see Annex II) The key to the constructive dialogue was: Public meetings were organised through the farmers union and that meetings took place at the farm the 'kitchen-table model'; Negotiation and signing of voluntary agreements on water management has taken place.

Step 9 2027

Final deadline for achieving objectives, following 2 6-year prolongations

The six-year programme cycle will remain, including public participation as described before.