1. Module 4: European Blueprint
EU policy developments and implementation issues in the field of water management
Yannick Pochon
Istanbul, 2015

2. What is the Blueprint?
The Blueprint to Safeguard Europe's Water Resources presents the policy response to the challenges
long-term aim: to ensure sufficient availability of good quality water for sustainable and equitable water use
Closely linked to EU 2020 Strategy and Resource Efficiency Roadmap

3. Why a Blueprint?
Improving the implementation of current EU water policy
Fostering the integration of water and other policies
When necessary, seeking the completion of the current policy framework

4. Synthesis of policy recommendations building on assessments
Impact Assessment
« Fitness Check»
EU water
policy
instruments
Outlook of sustainability and vulnerability of EU water resources
Policy
Options
Nov 2012
Blueprint To
Safeguard
EU Waters
Report on 2009
River Basin
Management Plans
Report on 2009
River Basin
Management Plans
Report on 2009
River Basin
Management
Plans
Report on 2009
River Basin
Management Plans
Report on 2009
River Basin
Management Plans
Report on 2009
River Basin
Management Plans
Review
Water Scarcity
& Droughts
Strategy
Review
Water Scarcity
& Droughts Strategy
Review
Water Scarcity
& Droughts Strategy
Review
Water Scarcity
& Droughts Strategy
Review
Water Scarcity
& Droughts Strategy
Climate Change
Vulnerability
& Adaptation
Climate Change
Vulnerability
& Adaptation
Climate Change
Vulnerability
& Adaptation

5. The Blueprint package
Blueprint Communication COM(2012)673+ Impact Assessment SWD(2012) 381 & 382
Report on River Basin Management Plans COM(2012)670
Commission Staff Working Document, European Overview on River Basin Management Plans, Volumes 1 and 2 SWD(2012) 379
Commission Staff Working Document, River Basin Management Plans, Volumes 3 to 30 (All Member States + Norway) SWD(2012) 379
Communication on the Review of the European Water Scarcity and Drought Policy COM(2012)672 + accompanying Commission Staff Working Document SWD(2012)380
Fitness Check SWD (2012)393

6. Status of adoption of WFD plans
GREEN - River Basin Management Plans adopted!
RED – consultations not started, ongoing or finalised but not ALL plans adopted or reported to EC

7. Assessment River Basin Management Plans: Some general findings
A lot of effort put into preparation of the plans and impressive knowledge improvement
High uptake of the common framework and common language on water management provided by the WFD
Integration of ecological perspective into water management
Enhancement of international cooperation
Public participation, stakeholder involvement
4 Member States yet to submit all plans
Low ambition in many of the plans.
Uncompleted setting of measures
Lack of comparability in some areas (e.g. chemical status!)
Little understanding of aligning water management practices and environment protection (e.g. definition of exemptions)
Insufficient consideration of water pricing and definition of costs 7

8. Status of surface waters
Figure on the left: Distribution of ecological status or potential of classified rivers, lakes, coastal and transitional waters, calculated as percentage of the total number of classified water bodies. It shows the distribution of ecological status or potential for the different types of water bodies (rivers, lakes, transitional and coastal). Overall, more than half (55 %) of the total number of classified surface water bodies in Europe are reported to have less than good ecological status/potential. Only around 44% of rivers and 33% of transitional waters are reported to be in high or good status. 56% of the lakes are reported to be in good or high status, and 51% for coastal waters.
Figure on the right: Overview of chemical status of surface and groundwater bodies Percentage of rivers, lakes, groundwater, transitional and coastal waters in good, poor and unknown chemical status
There is a high percentage of water bodies for which the reported chemical status has been 'unknown' .
In many cases, the main reason for this gap is that the status assessment methods have not been fully developed yet or there were not enough monitoring data in this first cycle. In that case, it is advisable to adopt and implement no-regret measures, along with further development of the assessment methods and monitoring networks. However, in most RBMPs, there is no information on what actions will be taken to improve the monitoring and assessment methods for the next cycles.
Note: Number of Member States contributing to the dataset: Groundwater (26); Rivers (25); Lakes (22); Transitional (15) and Coastal (20). Percentages shown for rivers, lakes, transitional and coastal are by water body count. Groundwater percentages, however, are expressed by area. The total number of water bodies is shown in parenthesis.
Data from Sweden are excluded from surface water data illustrated in the figure. This is because Sweden contributed a disproportionately large amount of data and, classified all its surface waters as poor status since levels of mercury found within biota in both fresh and coastal waters exceed quality standards.

9. A lot has been achieved, but challenges remain
Significant pressures (rivers)
Significant impacts (rivers)
Source: EEA
Source: EEA

10. Water bodies in good status in 2009 and 2015: What progress expected?
Nb of MS
Nb of water bodies
% Water bodies in good status or potential 2009
% Water bodies in good status or potential 2015
Progress in %
Ecological status of surface waters 21
82684 43 53 10
Chemical status of surface waters
Information unclear to establish the 2009 baseline
Quantitative status of groundwater 24
12022 (5197)
89 (85)
96 (92)
7 (7)
Chemical status of groundwater1 3
2477
83 (68)
89 (77)
6 (9)
The number of surface water bodies in the calculation is 82684, this is because certain MS are excluded:
EL and ES: Lack of RBMPs
FI, PL and IT: a high number of WBs in unknown status (threshold 50%)
DK: Did not report on exemptions and therefore it is not possible to estimate expected status. 
For Belgium only Flanders and the Coastal waters are included, for Portugal the information is coming from the draft RBMPs
Total of WBs from WISE and RBMPs (for IE and SI)(127407) – ES (5012)- EL (1324) – DK (17983) – IT (8614) – PL(5643) – FI (6153) = which is about the number in the table (82684)  
For Groundwater: Numbers in brackets are calculated excluding FI and SE that reported a large proportion of groundwater bodies (around half of the EU total) which are largely in good status.
EL and ES excluded from the calculations due to lack of plans. DK excluded as it did not report exemptions and therefore it is not possible to estimate the expected status in Information included from PT refers to draft plans. Information from Belgium refers to Flanders and coastal waters only.

11. Blueprint impact assessment
12 priority problems
Lack of water pricing
Lack of metering
Lack of labeling of traded goods
Land use/Agricultural impacts
Inefficiency in buildings/appliances
Inefficient water infrastructure (leakage)
Lack of water re-use
Governance
Target setting
Drought management
Understanding costs and benefits
Knowledge base 11 11 11

12. Blueprint objectives
Voluntary
Regulation
Conditionality
Funding
Efficient incentive water pricing
CIS Guidance on trading schemes by 2014
Enforcement of Art. 9 WFD (ongoing)
Ex-ante conditions under RD&C policy funds 2014
Metering take up
Water use reduction in agriculture
Precondition for some irrigation projects under RD as of 2014
Reduction of illegal abstraction/impoundments
Apply GMES as of 2013
Possible EU initiative on inspections
Cross-compliance under CAP
Awareness of water consumption
Support voluntary labeling & certific. schemes
Maximisation of the use of NWRM (Green Infr.)
CIS Guidance by 2014
Greening of CAP pillar I as of 2014
S&C Funds & EIB loans
Efficient water appliances in buildings
EU Ecolabel & GPP criteria 2013
Eco-design Working Plan in 2012
Reduction of leakages
Best practice/tools on SELL in 2013
Maximisation of water reuse
Possible Regulation in 2015
Improvement of governance
Peer review of RBMPs (2013 – 2016)
In order to address the identified priority problems, in 2 slides I have collected all the policy proposals in the Blueprint, categorised as voluntary, regulatory, conditionality and funding. Due to limited time I will not take you through all of them.

13. Blueprint objectives
Voluntary
Regulation
Conditionality
Funding
Implementation of water accounts, e-flows & target setting
CIS Guidance on WAs / E-flows & Target setting by 2014
Reduction of flood risk
Through Green Infr. European Flood Awareness System
Flood Risk Management Plans by 2015
Reduction of drought risk
Through Green Infr. European Flood
EDO in
Enforcement of WFD requirements (ongoing)
Better calculation of costs and benefits
CIS Guidance by 2014
Better knowledge base
Upgrading WISE by 2015
Support to developing countries
Tackling pollution
Report on pharmaceuticals & the environment 2013
Targeted enforcement of WFD, EQS/PSD, NID, UWWTD, IED …
Cross-cutting
EIPs on Water and Agri as of 2013
Overall enforcement of WFD, EQS/PSD, NID, UWWTD, IED
Possible European Semester Recomm. 2013
CAP, S&C Funds & EIB loans

14. Follow up
Ensuring correct implementation of WFD in first and second RBMP period (Follow up RBMP assessment)
Council Conclusions
Follow up bilaterally (COM+MS,)
Possible enforcement action
Common Implementation Strategy (CIS work program incorporated Blueprint policy options)
Possible new legislative initiatives
Assessment of PoM and integration of EU Water Directives
2019 review WFD

15. The Groundwater Directive

16. Good chemical status criteria (Article 3 & Annexes I and II)
Risks of pollution from diffuse/point sources (urban, agriculture, industrial)
EU-wide Quality standards:
Nitrates & pesticides (more stringent
TVs are required if associated surface
waters or directly dependent terrestrial
ecosystems need them)
TV establishment at most appropriate level (local, regional, national), with account of impacts on aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, human toxicology and ecotoxicology knowledge
Run-off
Drinking water
abstraction
Threshold values
for “risk” substances
set by MS (end 2008) – Indicative list of pollutants provided – Transboundary coordination required – Possible amendment at RBMP review
=WFD environmental objective
(besides quantitative status covered by WFD)

17. Review of GWD Annexes I and II in 2013 and if appropriate, legislative proposals taking account of monitoring data and research outputs
GWD implementation group with MS and stakeholders:
9 October Conference in Brussels

18. The Environmental Quality Standards Directive

19. An updated list of priority substances
12 new priority substances (very persistent and bio-accumulative, highly toxic, or suspected of being endocrine disruptors)
To be monitored regularly in all Member States
No later than 2021, action to reduce or eliminate emissions and bring concentrations down to safe levels by 2027

20. A watch list
A new monitoring mechanism – the 'Watch List' - to improve the evidence base for identifying priority substances in the future
Three pharmaceutical substances included on the first watch list
Provisions to improve the information presented to the public on the chemical status of water
A strategic approach to pharmaceuticals

21. The Floods Directive

22. Three stage approach
Preliminary flood risk assessment (maps, experience from past floods, predictions of future floods, identification areas of potential significant flood risk)
Flood mapping (= knowing areas at risk of flooding, different scenarios, flood hazard maps & flood risk maps),
Flood Risk Management Plans (= plans to reduce flood risks, covering all elements of the flood risk management cycle)
(Transposition)
(CA/Unit of management)
* 2019
** 2021
Review /update every 6 years thereafter
Reporting to the Commission : 3 months after
* = date of 1st review of pressure and impact analysis under the WFD
** = date of 1st review of WFD river basin management plans 22

23. Urban Waste Water Treatment

24. Urban Waste Water Treatment
Collection rates:15 MS collecting 100 % of total polluting load. All MS maintained or improved previous results, compliance rates below 30 % in Bulgaria, Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia and Slovenia
Secondary treatment 82 %, up 4 points. In EU-15, range  %, EU-12, average 39 %
Compliance rates for more stringent treatment 77 % overall but EU-12 only 14 %, whereas Austria, Germany, Greece, and Finland reached 100 %
EU territory designated as a sensitive area increased by 2 points to 75 %
UWWTD as a pilot for the Structured Information and Implementation Framework (SIIF)

25. Drinking Water Directive

26. Review of Annexes II and III (monitoring and analysis)
Article 11.2 requires an update to respond to technical and scientific progress
Improving efficiency, effectiveness, comparability
Minimum requirements for monitoring to improve public access to information
Coherence with water legislation
Discussion at DW Commiteee in November

27. Water reuse ?

28. Towards an EU instrument on water-reuse ?
Impact assessment of the identified policy options
Impact Assessment Roadmap – internal agreement at DG ENV by March/April (publication – after agreed with other DGs/services (ISG) and SG)
Public consultations – to be launched April/May (questionnaire), GreenWeek – session on water reuse (5/6/14)
Stakeholders meeting – October 2014
Completion of IA (proposal of an EU level instrument on water reuse) – December 2014
EC Impact Assessment Board – March 2015
Commission proposal of an EU-level instrument on water reuse (if justified) – end 2015

29. Next steps: 4th European Water Conference Brussels, 23–24 March 2015.
The main focus of the Conference will be the implementation of the Water Framework Directive and the Floods Directive. The timing of the Conference will coincide with the public consultations of the draft River Basin Management Plans and (some of) the draft Flood Risk Management Plans.
The Conference will also feature the links to other related Directives and policies. The Conference is aimed primarily at those working on the implementation of the Water Framework and Floods Directives at national and regional level, including stakeholders with a legitimate interest in water policy.

30. 4th European Water Conference Brussels, 23–24 March 2015.
Experiences from the first cycle of implementation of the WFD, achievements and lessons learned
The European Commission's assessment of the implementation of the WFD programmes of measures
Preparations and expectations for the second River Basin Management Plans
Experiences so far in the implementation of the Floods Directive, including the preparation of the Flood Hazard and Risk Maps and the Flood Risk Management Plans
Integration issues: links between water policy and agriculture, energy, and navigation policies
Opportunities to support water policy under the new financing period (Rural Development Programmes, Operational Programmes, etc.)
The role of water policy in the context of Green and Blue Growth
Live broadcast
Day 1 (23/03/2015)
Day 2 (24/03/2015)