Comments and suggestions from Norway

Transcription

1 Comments and suggestions from Norway (Versjon 2. februar supplerende innspill 27. mars og 3. august). Before going into the possible issues for improvements in the Water Framework Directive (WFD) or its implementation, we would like to point to the following benefits the WFD has contributed to: The establishment of an ecosystem-based water management, with precise definitions of good ecological status. Establishment of a river-basin (catchment) based water management, with increased integration between different sectors and levels, as well as increased stakeholder involvement and public participation. A boost for knowledge about the water environment, with increase in resources for monitoring, and development of new tools. Increased focus on water environment issues, increased effort to implement real environmental measures across several sectors (for instance revision of licenses for hydropower and for industry emissions, cleaning up in scattered sewage). The European Common Implementation Strategy (CIS) and the Nordic collaboration on WFD implementation with sharing of god examples and practices has been very useful. During the year 2018 the countries will have an opportunity to feed into the review and possible revision of the WFD, at the same time as the Water Directors need to work on an updated Work Programme for We find that the timing for raising issues can give us the opportunity to prioritize between issues that might require changes in the WFD itself, and issues that can be solved through the CIS process with sharing of experiences and good practice, as well as revised or new guidance. The issues we propose are: Issue that might require revision of the WFD: 1 - Time Extensions beyond the three first cycles of RBMPs 6 - Lessen the burden of consultation Issues that might require adjustment of Annexes to the WFD: 4 - Emerging pressures on the water environment (plastics and pharmaceuticals) 5 - Resource effective monitoring Issues that might be considered for inclusion in the CIS Work Programme : 2 - Climate change 3 - Ecosystem services as part of economic analysis of costs and benefits 7 - Priority substances 8 - Spatial and land use planning 1

2 1 - Time Extensions beyond the three first cycles of RBMPs Article 4.4 WFD Improvements in the environmental status of waters require time for the planning and implementation of measures, for the measures to take effect, and for natural processes to recuperate and show results. One of the major achievements of the WFD that is systematically under-communicated is the halting of the deterioration of water status that had been going on for decades. Achieving a broad improvement in water status requires considerable time, and the original deadline in the WFD of achieving good status after three cycles of implementation (18 years) has proven to be overly ambitious in relation to several types of pressures and available measures. For some pressures and corresponding measures, there is a need to extend the deadlines for achieving good status beyond the three cycles. This is necessary to maintain the ambition of reaching good status, and avoid a lessening of ambition by applying less stringent objectives. Extended deadlines beyond the first three cycles shall not be an excuse for doing nothing, but needs to be justified, in combination with demonstrable progress in implementation of measures towards improved status. In our national experience, we see several pressures where reaching good status requires considerable time, even if measures are actively implemented. We provide three typical examples: 1. Eutrophication: some water bodies have been recipients of excess levels of nutrients from agriculture, waste water and industry for decades. Even if measures are implemented to reduce the influx to sustainable levels, there will still be an excess of nutrients stored in soil and sediments that need several decades to diminish through natural processes. 2. Acidification: The acid rain challenge has been reduced through international agreements, more stringent emission requirements and better technology. However, we still have many water bodies that are affected by several decades of acidification, and Norway spends more than 10 million Euros annually on liming to mitigate these effects in priority watercourses. The natural recuperation process will take considerable time. 3. Polluted sediments: Some coastal waters are severely affected by the accumulated pollution from previous and present industrial activity. It will take a lot of time for these waters to recuperate through natural processes, and the national plan for clean-up is so costly that it needs to be spread across a long timespan. Allow for maintaining the ambition of good status, with a realistic and experience-based progress. Increased application of less stringent objectives would mean lowering the ambitions, and this needs to be avoided. The WFD should allow for extension of deadlines for achieving good status beyond the first three cycles, in combination with clear requirements for justification and demonstrable progress in implementation of measures towards improved status. 2

3 2 - Climate change Article..WFD ; Floods, Renewable Energy Climate change is increasingly relevant, and it would be relevant to consider the benefits of a new cycle of exchanging experiences and emerging good practices. This might lead to an updated guidance (after CIS guidance no ). Important issues include: - How climate change affects environmental measures and the achievement of WFD objectives. - Climate adaptation using nature based solutions like Natural Water Retention Measures that could be win-win for both WFD objectives and climate adaptation. - Striking a sensible balance between the objectives of the renewables directive and the water framework directive. In our national experience, we find it challenging to: Decide a best approach to "climate proofing" of environmental objectives and programmes of measures. Promote the inclusion of nature-based solutions for climate adaptation in the RBM planning process. Strike the right balance between the objectives of the renewables directive and the water framework directive. To give the countries the benefit of exchange of experiences and emerging good practices, and possibly an updated guidance (if considered necessary). The issue of climate change might not require amendments to the directive. The exchange of experiences and emerging good practices concerning climate change, and possible updated guidance, can be considered for inclusion in the Common Implementation Strategy new Work Programme

4 3 - Ecosystem services as part of economic analysis of costs and benefits Article..WFD Annex III WFD The WFD Annex III states that the economic analysis shall contain enough information in sufficient detail in order to make judgements about the most cost effective combination of measures in respect of water uses to be included in the Programme of Measures based on estimates of the potential costs of such measures. The concept of Ecosystem Services has developed greatly since the adoption of the WFD, and it would be relevant to consider the benefits of a new cycle of exchanging experiences and emerging good practices on the description of costs and benefits. This might lead to an updated guidance (after CIS guidance no ). In addition to the experiences of the different countries, the ongoing EU Blue2 study might feed important new knowledge into this process. In our national experience, we find it challenging to decide on an approach to description of costs and benefits of Programmes of Measures that is simple and effective, and serves to give decisionmakers an overall impression of the costs and benefits of achieving good water status. To give the countries the benefit of exchanging experiences and emerging good practices, and possibly an updated guidance (if considered necessary). The use of management concepts such as the ecosystem services approach can offer ways to improve coordination with other policy fields by setting a more common language and framework. The issue of costs and benefits (including ecosystem services) might not require amendments to the directive. The exchange of experiences and emerging good practices concerning use of ecosystem services in the description of costs and benefits, and possible updated guidance, can be considered for inclusion in the Common Implementation Strategy new Work Programme

5 4 - Emerging pressures on the water environment (plastics and pharmaceuticals) Article..WFD Annex VI WFD (?) (Marine Strategy Framework Directive) In the last few years, there has been increasing attention to some emerging pressures on the water environment, including: - Plastic waste and micro plastics (the recent EU strategy for plastics mentions possible amendments to both the Drinking Water Directive and Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive). - Pharmaceuticals in the environment (several pharmaceutical substances are already on the watch list, and the recent EU consultation on a strategic approach mentions possible amendments to the UWWTD and the possible need for guidance under the WFD). A common approach on how to handle these new, emerging pressures in the RBMPs should be developed under the Common Implementation Strategy. Norway has taken a lead internationally in the efforts to stop plastic waste. Norway initiated the resolution to stop ocean plastic waste that was adopted at the UN Environmental Assembly in Nairobi in December 2017, and we have several national approaches in place to address the plastic and micro plastic challenges. We believe we have important experiences and practices to share with other countries. Norway has given less attention to the issue of pharmaceuticals in the environment, but we have noted that some other EU countries are advancing on this issue. We believe Norway could benefit from the experiences and emerging practices of others on this issue. To give the countries the benefit of exchanging experiences and emerging good practices, and probably new common guidance on how to best handle plastics and pharmaceuticals in the RBMPs. The issue of emerging pressures (plastics and pharmaceuticals) might not require amendments to the directive, even though addition to Annex VI might be considered (list of measures to be included in the Programmes of Measures). The exchange of experiences and emerging good practice, as well as new guidance on how to handle plastics and pharmaceuticals in the RBMPs, can be considered for inclusion in the Common Implementation Strategy new Work Programme

6 5 - Resource effective monitoring Article 8 WFD Annex V (1.3) WFD Monitoring of ecological and chemical status in water bodies is a large task, and needs to be implemented using a resource effective approach, making use of the newest available technology and models. It would be relevant to consider the benefits of a new cycle of exchanging experiences and emerging good practices on resource effective monitoring. This might lead to an updated guidance (after CIS guidance no ). Norway has a large number of water bodies. The use of representative monitoring data is a necessary requisite to achieve a resource effective coverage of water bodies. This is a challenge that we share with some neighboring countries. Norway is looking into the use of new technology (satellite and airborne data, modelling etc.) as possible tools that can contribute to a resource effective monitoring in the future. We believe the countries could benefit from sharing experiences and emerging practices on this issue. To give the countries the benefit of exchanging experiences and emerging good practices on approaches and technology for resource effective monitoring. The issue of resource effective monitoring (approaches and technology) might not require amendments to the directive, even though addition to Annex V part 1.3 might be considered (design and frequency of monitoring). The exchange of experiences and emerging good practices on resource effective monitoring, and possible updated guidance, can be considered for inclusion in the Common Implementation Strategy new Work Programme

7 6 - Lessen the burden of consultation Article 14 WFD The WFD requires three consultations of six months each during the planning process. Three consultations might have been a good idea during the initial cycle, but it is resource demanding to repeat during the subsequent cycles, and does not seem necessary when only updating the plans. A six months consultation period does not improve the consultation. A typical consultation in Norway is three months. When the period is too long, the stakeholders will just put the consultation aside, and not look at it until the deadline approaches. Excessive periods just hamper the progress of the planning process. Our national experience is that NGOs and stakeholders communicate that they are experiencing consultation-fatigue. Too much time is used on consultation, instead of being directed to collecting knowledge and implementing environmental measures that actually improve the water status. For the planning process to update the RBMPs in 2021, we have decided to combine the timetable, work programme and review of significant water management issues into one consultation, thus reducing the total number of consultations from three to two. Reduce the burden of consultation and avoid consultation-fatigue among stakeholders. Allow for the stakeholders to dedicate more time to contributing to improving knowledge and implementation of measures, when less time is occupied for consultation. Reduce the consultation requirements for updates of the RBMPs from three to two consultations, and the length of each consultation from 6 to 3 months. It must be assessed if this can be agreed as a common understanding by the Water Directors, if it requires an update of guidance no 8 on public participation or guidance no 11 on the planning process, or if it ultimately will require changes in article 14 of the WFD. 7

8 7 - Priority substances Article 16 WFD The daughter directive on Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) for Priority Substances poses challenges for permitting authorities in its practical implementation. There seems to be limited coordination between ongoing work under the EQS-directive and other parts of EU chemicals policy, like the Industrial Emissions Directive, REACH etc. The CIS WG Chemicals has focused its attention towards areas of data gathering on chemical pressures and new substances, trough the watch list etc. Less attention has been given to support the development and implementation of actual measures aimed towards reducing chemical pollution and achieving good chemical status. In the area of chemical status, we have experienced challenges with practical operationalization of the daughter directive on Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) for Priority Substances, for instance in the case of pollution permits for industry which is regulated by the Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) that has a different approach. There is a need to improve the coordination between the EQS-directive and other relevant European chemical legislation, e.g. the IED-directive and REACH, to facilitate the development and implementation of measures aimed at reducing chemical pollution and achieving good chemical status. To develop a common understanding of how the EQS directive works together with the IED directive. To coordinate the work under the EQS directive better with other parts of EU chemicals policy, like REACH etc. Measures against chemical pollution is relevant to several sectors, and the approach and strategy behind these measures need to be harmonized throughout Europe. For other types of pressures e.g. hydromorphology and nutrients, the CIS process has contributed through sharing experiences and good practice. (With the discontinuation of the WG PoM, there is no other working group taking up this responsibility of measures concerning chemicals). The issue of priority substances might not require amendments to the directive. The exchange of experiences and emerging good practices on operationalization of EQS directive combined with the IED directive, with possible new guidance, can be considered for inclusion in the Common Implementation Strategy new Work Programme Consider how work under the EQS directive can be better coordinated with other parts of EU chemicals policy, like REACH etc. 8

9 8 - Spatial and land use planning Article..WFD The countries implementing the WFD are advancing in reducing point-source and diffuse pollution, and removing obstacles to ecological continuity. However, the objectives of the WFD cannot be met without an integrated approach to land use in the river basins, including protection or restoration of riparian zones, the use of buffer zones to reduce runoff, etc. The watercourses also need space for wetlands and flood plains to deliver natural water retention as part of nature based flood risk management and adaptation to climate change. Improved integration of the WFD objectives in spatial land use planning is necessary to achieve this. WFD implementation has contributed to increased focus on water management in spatial planning, especially at municipal level, in the sense that the environmental objectives of the RBMPs are becoming increasingly integrated in the planning processes concerning land use at local level. However, there is still substantial room for improvement, and we believe Norway could benefit from the experiences and emerging practices of others on this issue. The objectives of the WFD cannot be met without an integrated approach to land use in the river basins, including protection or restoration of riparian zones, the use of buffer zones to reduce runoff, etc. The watercourses also need space for wetlands and flood plains to deliver natural water retention as part of nature based flood risk management and adaptation to climate change. Improved integration of the WFD objectives in spatial and land use planning is necessary to achieve this. To give the countries the benefit of exchanging experiences and emerging good practices on the integration of WFD objectives in spatial and land use planning. The issue of spatial and land use planning might not require amendments to the directive. The exchange of experiences and emerging good practices, with possible new guidance, on the integration of WFD objectives in spatial and land use planning, can be considered for inclusion in the Common Implementation Strategy new Work Programme