1. 19 oktober 2010 Art 9 in NL and EU Past present and future (all in 10 minutes!) Rob van der Veeren Water service Cost recovery ProviderUser Recovery means Production & distribution of water 100% Drinking water companies, industry, agriculture Households, industry, agriculture Price/m3 water used, fixed price for infra, self-service Collection & discharge of rain- & wastewater 95%Municipalities Households, industry, agriculture Sewerage levy Wastewater treatment 100% Regional water boards, industry, agriculture Households, industry, agriculture Emission levy, self-service Groundwater management 100%Provinces Households, industry, nature Groundwater levy, groundwater tax Regional water system management 100% Regional water boards Households, industry, agriculture Water system levy

2. Rijkswaterstaat Art 9 in NL and EU219 oktober 2010 Challenges in Dutch water management The Netherlands is increasingly threatened by sea level rise, salt intrusion and fresh water allocation problems –Solution: more water storage in rural (agricultural) areas The Netherlands has designated Natura 2000 areas, but corridors are needed to make them more successful –Solution: priority to nature corridors in rural (agricultural) areas Diffuse pollution from agriculture is a major problem for Water Framework Directive in the Netherlands –Solution: additional measures in agriculture But imposing additional measures disturbs level playing field –Solution: innovative economic instruments

3. Rijkswaterstaat Art 9 in NL and EU319 oktober 2010 Economic instruments for agro-environmental measures Water boards are –responsible for water management in rural areas –Interested in storage capacity, nature corridors and water quality –paid by levies from farmers industry inhabitants in same region –democratically chosen (representatives of public interest) –Interested in cost-effective measures in the capillaries Could water boards pay agriculture for agro-environmental measures to increase water storage, prevent flooding, enhance nature? (user pays principle)? E.g. by paying farmers for the opportunity to use part of their land to create wet buffer strips Need for innovative economic instruments, e.g. payment for ecosytem services

4. Rijkswaterstaat Art 9 in NL and EU419 oktober 2010 Cost recovery in Europe: Past In the 1990’s ICPR studied possibility to develop common criteria for waste water charges Discussion elements were: –The varying aims of charges (funding treatment works, incentive for pollution control etc.) –The varying payment methods (direct or general budget; discharge vs sewer systems) –The different organisational structure of water management in riparian states: role of municipalities, water boards, provinces, “Länder”; state/non state managed waters etc –in ICPR catchment there was already a high degree op waste water purification Considering these differences ICPR stopped the development of common criteria for waste water charges

5. Rijkswaterstaat Art 9 in NL and EU519 oktober 2010 Cost recovery in Europe: Present A comparison of water services should therefore be seen in the institutional context and the varying aims of financing water management issues –in the drafting of the WFD –in Wateco –in the international river basin article 5 reports

6. Rijkswaterstaat Art 9 in NL and EU619 oktober 2010 Economic instruments for WFD in Europe: Future No need for additional work on defining water services or methods for cost recovery More relevant to focus on economic instruments for agro- environmental measures (payment for ecosystem services): –Payment more than compensation of income loss: Inclusion of benefits in payment scheme, by paying also for contribution towards nature, storage, and/or quality enhances both effectiveness and efficiency –Regional water boards as intermediate for CAP payments to stimulate payment for provision of ecosystem services –Challenge to combine CAP reform with WFD measures Further work: Experiment, stimulate and exchange experiences with this type of instruments regionally, nationally and internationally