1 Point Sources
D. Statutory instruments
5. S ELECTING COMBINATIONS OF MEASURES
This chapter outlines a methodological proposal for the selection of measures and combinations of measures within the framework of the programmes of measures required under the Water Framework Directive to improve the ecological and chemical status of at-risk water bodies (cf.
chapter 2). It is intended primarily as a work aid and argumentation guide for decision-makers in the sub-basins, and as a manual for the use of the measure and instrument sheets (Annexes I and II). In this chapter, we develop a general procedure for the selection of measures which, based on the initial characterisation of the sub-basins (Annex II of the Water Framework Directive), facilitates the generation of polluter-specific programmes of measures in accordance with the significant pressures previously identified. Based on the experiences from the pilot projects for the initial characterisation and identification of significant pressures, it can be assumed that preparation of the programmes of measures will need to be gradually adapted, supplemented and precisely defined.
Analysis and assessment of the most efficient combinations of measures is envisaged immediately following preparation of the initial characterisation under the Water Framework Directive (by 12/2004), and will form the basis for preparation of the programmes of measures for river basin districts as part of the River Basin Management Plans by 2009.
In this connection, effective and/or cost-effective combinations of measures will be drawn up for water bodies at risk. Generally speaking, the competent water authorities1 in the sub-basins are responsible for this work, since in most cases they already coordinate water pollution control measures. Admittedly, as a result of the Water Framework Directive, the German water industry is currently facing a major turning-point (von Keitz, Schmalholz, 2002, page 40), since there is a need to formulate and implement cross-media, trans-sectoral management approaches which exceed current practices. Coordination of the programmes of measures for one river basin district will necessitate new cooperation instruments for the water management administrations, who in turn will need to structure their plans across Länder and administrative borders and in collaboration with other sectors (von Keitz, Schmalholz, 2002). To date, only initial attempts have been made to tackle these institutional challenges. Moreover, chapter 4 highlights the fact that in order to improve the status of the water body, not only are water management measures and instruments needed, but also financial and advisory ones.
These instruments are intended to reinforce the effect of the measures, by aiming to persuade the relevant players and water users to modify their behaviour. As such, these instruments play a key role in initiating a trend reversal of the main pressures.2
1 As the structures of authorities may vary between individual Länder, this section addresses the competent water authorities in each case.
2 However, the consideration of instruments in the proposed approach makes the process more complicated:
Firstly, many instruments only become effective in the long term, and therefore are only able to make a
long-identification of significant pressures, there can be no patented recipe for the selection of measures. The selection of efficient measures and instruments depends to a large extent on local peripheral conditions and the technical, social and financial framework conditions.
Consequently, the following methodology represents a practical approach which systematically combines the required work stages and the locally available information.
Catalogues of measures and cost calculation bases may already exist in a number of sub-basins. The proposed approach is designed in such a way that it can be developed, expanded and adapted in line with the latest findings, based on application experience in the sub-basins.
In order to facilitate assessment of the somewhat complex ecological and economic interactions in the work stages, as well as specialist knowledge on the part of the responsible individual, it is also necessary to combine various interests of the relevant sectors. This may be achieved in a variety of ways, e.g. in the form of working parties or “round tables”. Many of the considerations and assessments arising within this process should additionally be discussed within the context of participation by the general public in accordance with Article 14 of the Water Framework Directive in order, firstly, to improve the quality of the decisions, and secondly, to ensure acceptance of the chosen combination when it is implemented (cf. excursus on participation by the general public on page 27).
When determining the most cost-effective combination of measures, in practice, there are two main cases (in simplified terms):
(1) A pressure situation exists in which a given combination of measures and instruments is clearly the most efficient choice. In such cases, the most cost-effective combination of measures may be implemented using the approach outlined without further ado.
(2) A pressure situation exists which is comprised of significant multiple pressures. Handling such pressure situations is a complex process, since there is a lack of detailed information for quantifying and comparing the cost efficiency of the various different combinations of measures. In such cases, our outlined approach provides indications on where and to what extent farther-reaching investigations are needed.
term contribution towards attaining the target of good ecological status. Secondly, the water authorities are responsible for the implementation of concrete measures, whereas application of the instruments described must be decided at Länder, Federal Government or even EU level. Allowance has nevertheless been made for the instruments, since they indirectly influence the economic and political environment in which the selection of measures takes place. In particular, these variables must be taken into account when selecting combinations of measures: Negative trends can be averted in advance by means of instruments. In this way, it is possible to avoid expensive technical measures.
5.1 Approach
The most cost-effective combinations of measures are selected in 7 stages (cf. Figure 5-1).
Stages 1 to 5 are aimed at selecting and combining measures and instruments. The most cost-effective combination is then determined in stage 6.
Following the selection of measures and instruments, in addition, stage 7 entails planning coordination with the programmes of measures of other sub-basins. Although a consideration of this stage exceeds the brief of this project, we thought it appropriate to at least mention it. In principle, it is possible that the efficiency of a chosen local combination of measures would be evaluated differently if considered from the viewpoint of the entire river basin district and compared with other sub-basins.
The results of the initial characterisation with demarcation of the water bodies, identification of significant pressures, designation of polluter categories and the assessment of chemical and ecological status based on the inventory data are needed for the concrete stages outlined above, with due regard for the quality components listed in the Water Framework Directive (WFD, Annexes II and V). The results are consulted for the assessment of ecological cause/effect relationships and ultimately for the selection of measures and instruments. Above and beyond the selection of sample measures outlined here, it is up to the individual, based on the measures in chapter 4, to relate his or her existing catalogues of measures at operational level to the requirements of the Water Framework Directive.
Figure 5-1 illustrates the approach, starting with the identified pressures, through to the development of cost-effective combinations of measures. The individual work stages are explained in greater detail in the following sub-chapters.
Excursus: Participation of the general public when selecting combinations of measures The participation of the general public in a consultative capacity is prescribed at various points in the implementation process, according to Article 14 of the WFD. For example, the drafts of the management plans to be prepared, including the programme of measures, must be made accessible to the general public to allow them to form an opinion.
However, from the outset, one should aim to ensure comprehensive, active participation, particularly by organised experts in the public domain, with the selection technique we have developed for identifying the most cost-effective measures. In this way, recourse may be made to the valuable expertise and expert knowledge of relevant interest groups during the decision-making process. This is of particular significance, for example
- when determining the economic costs (stage 5)
- when weighing the various decision-making parameters during the course of selecting an efficient combination of measures (stage 6), and
- when coordinating with other planning instruments (stage 7).
Early participation will contribute to a higher level of transparency of the selection process.
Ultimately, this will lead to greater efficiency when selecting combinations of measures, as well as greater acceptance for the chosen measures and instruments.
Figure 5-1: Approach for determining the most cost-effective combination of measures