austrian experiences on showing progress of wfd implementation ernst Überreiter
TRANSCRIPT
AUSTRIAN EXPERIENCES ON SHOWING PROGRESS OF WFD IMPLEMENTATION
ERNST ÜBERREITER
WFD, Annex VII B.2The first update of the river basin management plan and all subsequent updates shall also include an assessment of the progress made towards the achievement of the environmental objectives […]
EEA HomepageThe European Environment Agency (EEA) is an agency of the European Union. Our task is to provide sound, independent information on the environment. We are a major information source for those involved in developing, adopting, implementing and evaluating environmental policy, and also the general public.
--- 2 ---
WHY TALKING ABOUTSHOWING PROGRESS ON EU LEVEL?
Copenhagen, 28. 4. 2014
--- Justification for high investment costs in WFD implementation measures- public- politics
e.g. estimated costs for hydromorphological measures in AT: 3 Billion Euro
- Restoration of river continuity (~1000) in larger catchments: 500 Mio. Euro
- Morphological measures in larger catchments : 1 Billion Euro
--- Decision basis for subsequent management cycle
--- Support EC compliance check with WFD requirements
--- 3 ---
WHY IS IT IMPORTANT FOR AUSTRIATO SHOW PROGRESS?
Copenhagen, 28. 4. 2014
Percentage of surface water bodies
--- 4 ---
HOW PROGRESS USUALLY IS SHOWN
AT EXAMPLE EC EXAMPLE
Copenhagen, 28. 4. 2014
Improvement of % river lengthin good status or better
+ 3%
Source: Austrian RBMP 2009
QUESTIONS THAT STILL ARISE:
WHERE HAS ALL THE INVESTED MONEY GONE?
LOW AMBITION?
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
EE SK RO SE MT IE PT LV LT ES BG AT FR CY DK EL UK FI IT CZ DE HU LU PL NL BE
Perc
enta
ge o
f sur
face
wat
er b
odie
s
Source: EC presentation 2012, Impl. Report
█ Good Ecological Status█ Unknown Ecological Status
▌ Exemptions
4%
--- 5 ---
TAKEN EFFORTS HAVE TO BE MADE
TRANSPARENTCopenhagen, 28. 4. 2014
Bregenzerach, Abbr. Sohlschwelle Mellau
Source: Alpenrhein/Bodensee, WFD Status Report 2013
FAH-Schlitzpass KW Braz
Bolabach, Renaturierung
Lutz, Renaturierung
Spirsbach, Renaturierung Mündung Dorfbach Hard
--- Changes in reference conditions:Example: significant changes in number of river waterbodies between 1. RBMP and 2.
RBMP mainly due to splitting of existing waterbodies (+ 7%, main intention to protect high status areas),
while length of river network almost constant (ca. 31,600 km) Water bodies of 1. RBMP and 2. RBMP are not fully comparable
--- Changes of valuation standards:Example: new EQS Directive 2008/105/EC tightens standards for existing substances and enshrines quite high new standards for ubiquitous substances virtual deterioration of all WB status when considering the one-out-all-out-principle
--- Multiple pressures in water bodies:Example: cost intensive restoration of river continuity is pre-condition for further measures; but reduction of only one pressure (dam or barrier) without further measures may not lead to direct improvement in status; no improvement in status is visible when considering the one-out-all-out-principle
--- 6 ---
CHALLENGES FOR SHOWING PROGRESS Copenhagen, 28. 4. 2014
--- Slow reaction of ecosystems:Example: atrazine still detectable in some groundwaterbodies although it is banned since
many years (decades). no improvement visible although all measures taken
--- Apparent „increase“ of pressures due to better data:Example: awareness of disruptions of continuity increased from 28,000 (2009) to 33,000
(2013), while about 1,000 major ones where in fact removed; pretended increase of pressure on paper hiding of achievements
--- 7 ---
CHALLENGES FOR SHOWING PROGRESS Copenhagen, 28. 4. 2014
--- 8 ---
SHOWING PROGRESS BYDIFFERENTIATED RISK/STATUS INFORMATION
Copenhagen, 28. 4. 2014
Source: Austrian WFD Status analysis 2013 Nat
ional
chem
ical s
ubst.
Chem
ical s
ubsta
nces
Hydro
mor
pholo
gy
Gener
al ch
em.-p
hys.
Tota
l risk
% r
iver
wat
er b
ody
leng
th
no risk possible risk risk
Hydromorphology
Impo
undm
ent
Flow flu
ctuat
ion
Disrup
tion
of
cont
inuity
Reduc
ed
flow
River r
egula
tion
Continuity
Morphology
Hydrology
--- 9 ---
SHOWING PROGRESS BY IMPROVED LENGTH/AREA OF WATERBODIES
Copenhagen, 28. 4. 2014
Pressure
3
Pressure removed
2
2009 2015*
Pressure
1
3
PROGRESS: PROTECTION OF HIGH STATUS AREAS
PROGRESS: IMPROVEMENTS DUE TO REDUCED PRESSURES
Pressure2015
Pressure
All-out-one-out ubiquitous substances
*Remark: if ubiquitous substances are considered in total status visualisation, all status would be bad.
Pressure removed
Status of Water bodies 2009/2015 is not comparable due to re-delineation
Example:
Disruption of continuity in rivers (1/km)
- Number of reduced pressures
2009-2013: ~1,000 main disruptions removed
Beware: efforts may be hidden by „new“ disruptions only on paper: 2009: ~28,000, 2013: ~33,000 +4,000 on paper
- Km river length improved by reduced pressure
2009-2013: 3,800 km (12%) improved due to removed disruptions
--- 10 ---
SHOWING PROGRESS BYREDUCED PRESSURES
Copenhagen, 28. 4. 2014
COMPARABLE RESULTS ALSO FOR
DIFFERENT WB SIZES ON EU LEVEL
--- Wrong aggregation of provided data:Example: summing up areas of surface GWB (83,708km²) and deep GWB
(12,229km²); total area of groundwater bodies is larger than Austrian territory (ca.
84,000km²)
--- Wrong interpretation of focus on problems:Example: quite high number of monitoring stations in porous GW bodies with
problems due to agricultural pressure (~11% due to nitrates) and low number of monitoring stations in carstic GW bodies with almost no pressure;
disproportionate high number of „bad“ monitoring stations (~11% „bad“ monitoring stations due to nitrates representing ~5% of GWB area).
--- 11 ---
FURTHER ISSUES DETECTEDIN EC/EEA IMPLEMENTATION REPORTS
Copenhagen, 28. 4. 2014
Grassland and forests
Arable land
Land cover and land use Nitrates Monitoring Stations
FURTHER ISSUES DETECTEDIN EC/EEA IMPLEMENTATION REPORTS
MONITORING FOCUS IN AREAS WITH PROBLEMS IS WELL REPRESENTED BY MONITORING STATIONS PER KM² GWB
--- Showing progress is important (public, politics, management decisions) and required (WFD).
--- Differentiated approach (e.g. by reduced pressures) to make main water management issues and taken efforts transparent.
Difficulties to show progress considering one-out-all-out principle (e.g. ubiquitous substances).
--- Preferably show progress by improved length/area of water bodies, which delivers comparable results also for different WB sizes on EU level.
--- 13 ---
CONCLUSION Copenhagen, 28. 4. 2014
2009: 31466 km, 7910 river WB
2013: 31600 km, 7910 river WB
--- 15 ---
AT SUGGESTION: SHOWING PROGRESSBY DIFFERENTIATED STATUS INFORMATION
Copenhagen, 28. 4. 2014
Source: Austrian WFD Status analysis 2013