Introduction on European WFD

On 22 December 2000, the Water Framework Directive (WFD) was published in the official Journal of the European Communities [I.327/1-72], after having been accepted as Directive 2000/60/EC by the European Parliament and the Council on 23 October 2000 and hence it entered into force (EC, 2000). The Directive sets out a framework for the analysis, planning and management of water resources at river basin scales, with a major objective: to achieve a "good water status" for all waters by the year 2015.

The purpose of the Directive (Art. 1, EC, 2000) is to establish a framework for the long-term protection of freshwaters which prevents future deterioration and protects and enhances the status of ecosystems (aquatic, terrestrial, and wetlands); promotes sustainable water use; ensures reduction of pollutant loads; and contributes to mitigation of floods and droughts. The Directive provides therefore a long-term policy basis for water management, with clearly defined interim objectives. It foresees a road map of objectives to be achieved in the future, setting out clear deadlines for each of the requirements, which add up to an ambitious overall timetable. The period to 2015 refers to the Directive proper, while the second cycle (2015-2027) shall be managed taking into account the experience gained during the first cycle. The key milestones and deadlines for achieving them are listed below. Issues foreseen to have been completed already are shown in italics.

The WFD creates a legal obligation for the authorities in EU Member States to organize the management of water within river basin districts (rather than within administrative units). The Directive provides some advice relevant for planning processes. Preamble 13 of the Directive highlights the possible diversity of conditions and needs in the various river basins (and districts), which require different specific solutions. This diversity should be taken into account in the implementation of the WFD. Further, Preamble 13 states that decisions should be made as close as possible to the locations where water is affected or used (need for competent, de-centralized, grass-roots decision making). Preamble 28 emphasises the time lag in the processes of water resources renewal (particularly long for groundwater), which must be taken into account in the planning of measures for the achievement of the good status. It may take very long to reverse a trend towards increasing groundwater pollution. Article 4 tackles environmental objectives, Article 5 deals with the assessment of the current status of waters in a river basin district, while Article 8 regulates monitoring. Comprehensive Article 11 of the WFD defines some basic requirements concerning the programme of measures, established in order to achieve the environmental objectives of the WFD. The WFD requires Member States to produce a management plan for each river basin district (Article 13), under involvement of stakeholders in plan development. The plans should envisage reporting mechanisms to the Commission and the public (Article 15).

Integration is indeed a key concept underlying the Water Framework Directive, regulating the management of water protection within the river basins and the river basin districts (EC, 2003 ). In the WFD, integration is interpreted in a very broad sense, much broader than in the classical integrated water management approach, where the scope was typically reduced to joint consideration of surface water and groundwater and of water quantity and quality aspects. In the Directive, integration is much more extensive. Environmental objectives combine quality, ecological and quantity objectives for protecting valuable aquatic ecosystems and ensuring a general good status of other waters. The Directive embraces integration of all water resources (fresh surface water and groundwater) and integration of all water uses, functions and values. The notion also contains integration of disciplines, analyses and expertise (hydrology, hydraulics, ecology, chemistry, soil sciences, agronomy, forestry, technology, engineering and economics) to aid in implementation of the Directive in the most cost-effective manner. The Directive also requires integration of water legislation into a common and coherent framework and consideration of significant management and ecological aspects. It calls for the use of a wide range of measures, including economic and financial instruments, e.g. water pricing. Further, integration of stakeholders and the civil society in decision making is needed, as well as integration of different decision-making levels (local, regional or national), and integration of water management from different Member States, in case of international basins.

The need for integrated river basin management has arisen because managing environmental processes independently (without integration) may not be sufficient and may not lead to optimal decisions. Due to complexity of processes and systems involved, managers turn to integrated models and decision support systems.

It is therefore necessary that the decision-making procedure includes a coordinated inter- and cross-disciplinary dialogue between the social, natural and engineering sciences, retaining the distinctive depth of the individual disciplines. It should support a dialogue between stakeholders and decision-makers on the one hand, and scientists, representatives of governmental Environment Protection Agencies (EPAs) and Non-government Organizations (NGOs) on the other hand, to develop a process of social learning at the end of which the most appropriate compromise alternative emerges, which will be implemented. This general concept is accepted as the IWRM (Integrated Water Resources Management) Paradigm, adopted by the European Water Framework Directive (EC, 2000) and thus forms a core element of any future planning methodology.