Diving into turbulent waters

Member states are struggling to keep up with EU legislation.

The European Union has a long tradition of acting to protect Europe’s rivers, lakes and seas. The 1976 bathing water directive has been followed by measures to guard against chemicals, sewage and floods, and by EU standards on drinking water and fish farms. The centrepiece of EU water policy is the water framework directive, an overarching law that aims to restore Europe’s waters to a pristine state by 2015. 

Yet less than five years before the deadline, almost half of EU member states are behind schedule in implementing the directive. Moreover, the countries with the most severe problems, such as arid Spain and population-dense Belgium, are the worst at implementing the flagship law.

Click Here: cheap Cowboys jersey

EU leaders asked for legislation on water-protection in 1995, after worrying reports from the European Environment Agency and a growing sense that policy was too fragmented to protect European waters fully. The directive came into force in 2000, with the central objective of restoring rivers, lakes, groundwater and coastal water to a ‘good’ ecological status by 2015. Water is ‘good’ when it is uncontaminated and marine life thrives, as if there were no (or nearly no) human impact. (The marine framework directive of 2008 set the same target for seas, for 2020.)

The directive requires national authorities to draw up river-basin management plans to assess pressures and demands on water bodies and how to achieve (or maintain) a good state. A legal obligation to involve the public in drawing up these plans was intended to give people a stronger voice in the expected conflicts with interest groups, such as agriculture or industry.

Lack of consultation

Progress in implementing the directive has been underwhelming. River-basin managers were supposed to adopt plans by December 2009 and send them to the Commission in March this year.

Authorities in Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark, Greece, Lithuania, Malta, Portugal, Spain and Slovenia have failed to send their adopted plans to the European Commission because they have not finished consultation. A further three countries – Ireland, Poland and Romania – have also failed to complete plans, although they have at least finished the consultation process.

The Commission is now considering infringement proceedings against these 12 countries, which could lead to fines for failure to meet the directive. Janez Potocnik, the European commissioner for the environment, told MEPs and water experts last week (5 May) that member states had to speed up implementation. Delays in the Mediterranean were “especially worrying”, he said, adding: “The earlier they face their severe problems, the better.”

As it ponders legal action against the countries that have not yet delivered, the Commission also has the enormous task of assessing the 170 plans that it will receive in total, which can be up to 5,000 pages long. The Commission’s final assessment of these plans will not be published until 2012.

Until then, the Commission is withholding judgement, although officials are already convinced that further efforts will be needed to meet some parts of the directive.

Potocnik has stressed the need for a water pricing policy that gives incentives to farmers to be more efficient when using water. Water pricing is required under the directive, and policies are meant to be in place this year, but not enough has been done.

“There are gaps in water-pricing that will need to be addressed,” said a Commission official.

Bottom of the league

Green campaigners are already concerned about inadequate national implementation. Member states are not all taking “the once-in-a-generation opportunity to restore Europe’s rivers, lakes and wetlands”, according to an analysis of the draft plans by the European Environmental Bureau (EEB) and conservation group WWF.

In a league table they have prepared of rivers, not one country was a ‘high’ performer in implementing the directive, few were ‘good’, and many were ‘moderate’ or ‘poor’.

The green groups concluded that objectives such as reducing water use, phasing out hazardous substances, and long-term planning of river-use were not given sufficient weight in river-basin management plans. Moreover, even governments that are on track with their plans were deemed to be poor at involving the public. The EEB and WWF believe that authorities do not recognise the importance of non-experts.

As is frequently the case with environmental problems, the EU legislation is stronger than the determination of member states to comply.