Explore the vast range of titles available.

Introduced in 2000 to reform and rationalise water policy and management across the European Union (EU) Member States (MS), the Water Framework Directive (WFD), the EU’s flagship legislation on water protection, is widely acknowledged as the embodiment and vessel for the application of the Integrated River Basin Management (IRBM) paradigm. Its ecological objectives, perhaps even more challenging than the prospect of statutory catchment planning itself, were for all EU waters to achieve ‘good status’ by 2015 (except where exemptions applied) and the prevention of any further deterioration. In support of the upcoming WFD review in 2019, the paper reviews the transition of EU policies that led to the adoption of the WFD, to identify the reasons why the Directive was introduced and what it is trying to deliver, and to place progress with its implementation into context. It further investigates reasons that might have limited the effectiveness of the Directive and contributed to the limited delivery and delays in water quality improvements. Findings reveal that different interpretations on the Directive’s objectives and exemptions left unresolved since its negotiation, ambiguity and compromises observed by its Common Implementation Strategy and lack of real support for the policy shift required have all been barriers to the harmonised transposition of the IRBM paradigm, the key to delivering good ecological status. The 2019 WFD review offers a unique opportunity to realign the implementation of the Directive to its initial aspirations and goals.

Data availability and the existence of exchange mechanisms are considered crucial issues for the management of water bodies shared among riparian countries. Moreover, common legislative and technical frameworks are assets that foster the management of transboundary waters in an integrated and sustainable manner. The River Basin Management Plans of the European Union’s Water Framework Directive implementation process not only incorporate a cooperative framework, but also include open access internet-based databases that can enhance cooperation and shed light on water-related conflicts among countries that share transboundary waters. The proposed methodological approach in this research is applied in four transboundary river basins, where Greece is the downstream country, and the upstream countries are not all member states of the European Union. The areas of dispute were found in the 2nd Water Convention Report. For each particular case study, data and information from the respective River Basin Management Plans were used to investigate the actual situation. The results demonstrated that significant conflict situations in the past, which involved both water quality and water quantity issues, could be resolved using continuous and reliable datasets included in the management plans. The use of freely available data sources renders the findings of this work useful for the sustainable management of shared waters.

Riverine nutrient loads are among the major causes of eutrophication of the Baltic Sea. This study applied the Soil & Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) in three catchments flowing to the Baltic Sea, namely Vantaanjoki (Finland), Fyrisån (Sweden), and Słupia (Poland), to simulate the effectiveness of nutrient control measures included in the EU’s Water Framework Directive River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs). Moreover, we identified similar, coastal, middle-sized catchments to which conclusions from this study could be applicable. The first modelling scenario based on extrapolation of the existing trends affected the modelled nutrient loads by less than 5%. In the second scenario, measures included in RBMPs showed variable effectiveness, ranging from negligible for Słupia to 28% total P load reduction in Vantaanjoki. Adding spatially targeted measures to RBMPs (third scenario) would considerably improve their effectiveness in all three catchments for both total N and P, suggesting a need to adopt targeting more widely in the Baltic Sea countries.

Since it is representative in terms of environmental and socioeconomic conditions, the Kharaa River Basin in Northern Mongolia was chosen as a Central Asian model region for the development and implementation of a science-based IWRM approach. While a highly continental climate results in limited water availability, the combined effects of climate and land use changes and rising water consumption are likely to intensify quantitative and qualitative water scarcity. In such a context, water contamination due to deficient treatment of domestic, industrial and mining-related waste waters is particularly critical, putting at risk human health and aquatic ecosystems. In the recent past, water governance structures in transitional countries like Mongolia have not permitted to respond effectively to such complex challenges. For the model region of the Kharaa River Basin, considerable improvements in the scientific basis are currently coinciding with political reforms incorporating science-based river basin management as a guiding principle. This paper provides an integrative assessment of recent advancements which form the scientific basis for a future IWRM implementation in the region.

Groundwater resources are of utmost importance in sustaining water related ecosystems, including humans. The long-lasting impacts from anthropogenic activities require early actions, owing to the natural time lag in groundwater formation and renewal. The European Union (EU) policy, within the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), requires Member States to identify and reverse any significant and sustained upward trend in the concentration of pollutants, defining specific protection measures to be included in the River Basin Management Plans (RBMP). In Italy, official guidelines for trend and trend reversal assessment have been published recently. Statistical methods, such as the Mann-Kendall test for trend analysis and the Sen’s method for estimating concentration scenarios, should be applied at the fixed terms stated by the WFD implementation cycles to identify upward trends, while the Pettitt test is proposed for the identification of trend reversal. In this paper, we present an application of a slightly modified version of the Italian Guidelines to a groundwater body in Northern Italy featuring nitrate pollution and discuss its advantages and limitations. In addition to Pettitt test, for the trend reversal analysis, we apply the Mann-Kendall test in two sections and compare the results. We conclude that this method seems more reliable than Pettitt test to identify a reversal point in quality time series. The overall procedure can be easily applied to any groundwater body defined at risk across Europe, for the assessment of the upward trends of pollutants and their reversal, even with little chemical monitoring data. Although focused on the EU legislative framework, this procedure may be relevant for a wider context, allowing to individuate upward trend as early warning for contamination processes in an integrated water resources management context.

According to the European Union Water Framework Directive, river basin management plans must include a programme of measures, with a series of management actions aiming to achieve good ecosystem status of all water bodies within the basin. The design and later prioritization of these management actions is, in theory, done through cost‐effectiveness analysis (CEA), which compares management action costs with expected improvements in ecosystem status. However, such an approach does not consider the effects of management actions on human well‐being resulting from changes in the provision of ecosystem services. We propose to complement the current CEA approach with a cost–benefit analysis (CBA) integrating the effects of management actions on the provision of ecosystem services, therefore moving from a single‐objective to a multiobjective approach. We propose a flexible methodological framework based on a combination of CEA and CBA that can be easily adapted to different case studies. To test the applicability of our approach, we applied it to an impaired basin, the Llobregat River basin (north‐eastern Iberian Peninsula). The analysis considers management actions selected from the programme of measures under implementation: establishment of environmental river flows, improvement of river connectivity, treatment of urban wastewater and reduction in saline pollution; and the effects on a series of ecosystem services: water provisioning, waste treatment and habitat for species. Results revealed that management actions designed to improve ecosystem status do not necessarily improve human well‐being through changes in the provision of ecosystem services. The implementation of the CEA and CBA allowed the identification of management actions providing the best trade‐offs between improvements of ecosystem status and human well‐being. For example, the establishment of environmental river flows in the upper Llobregat River was the management action that maximized the balance between gains in ecosystem status and human well‐being. Synthesis and applications. Overall, the combination of cost‐effectiveness analysis and cost–benefit analysis supports a more informed and transparent decision‐making in the implementation of river basin management plans, better assisting stakeholders to prioritize those management actions providing the optimal win–win results.

Hong Kong (HK), one of the world’s most densely populated metropolises, is home to over 200 rivers and streams extending about 2500 km in length. During the 1970s–1990s, most of these rivers were converted into artificial canals, to which the local society pays little attention. Since the 2010s, the HK government has initiated river revitalization to enhance the social-environmental roles of rivers. This study employed a mixed research method, including literature and policy analysis, expert interviews, field visits, and a public survey, to identify key challenges in HK’s Integrated River Basin Management (IRBM). The findings highlighted the lack of IRBM’s institutional arrangements in HK, characterized by a fragmented ‘one river, two systems’ approach without both coordination and collaboration. The Water Supplies Department (WSD) impounds upland streams as reservoirs for securing the local water supply, while the Drainage Service Department (DSD) manages heavily channelized, culverted downstream serving as storm drains with diminished ecological functionality. One significant barrier to the implementation of IRBM in HK was the limited public participation, although our survey revealed a high level of public willingness to participate in river management. Presently, river revitalization efforts have achieved limited success, with ecological measures appearing mostly “cosmetic” and the conservation of freshwater biodiversity neglected. This further underscored the pressing need for the embracement of IRBM in HK to safeguard basin-wide freshwater ecosystems. Our survey also indicated low public awareness of river revitalization initiatives and widespread dissatisfaction with their outcomes. In conclusion, we proposed the development of IRBM in HK by instituting river basin coordination, prioritizing river ecosystem restoration in revitalization projects, and involving the public through tailored strategies. Graphical Abstract

PurposeThis paper describes the efforts made by SedNet—the European Sediment Network—to generate attention for the inclusion of sediment in River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs) under the European Water Framework Directive (WFD).Materials and methodsThe SedNet response to key WFD implementation events is described using the “three-streams and windows-of-opportunities model” published by John Kingdon in 1995.Results and discussionSedNet was initially a response to the realization that the WFD—which came into force in 2000—largely neglected sediment. For SedNet, it was clear from the beginning that the WFD objectives can be achieved only if sediment is included in RBMPs. The SedNet efforts inspired the establishment of a sediment management concept for the Elbe river basin. That concept was used as a basis for the full inclusion of sediment in the second Elbe RBMP (2015–2021). SedNet experts are currently involved in the drafting of the WFD Common Implementation Strategy (CIS) sediment document which will be completed in 2021 and that will provide guidance about how to include sediment in RBMPs.ConclusionsSince 2000, SedNet has persistently drawn attention to the need to include sediment in RBMPs. However, it was not until 2015 that the Elbe became the first European river basin to include sediment management fully in their RBMP. The 2021 WFD CIS sediment document and the focus on sediment in the Water Fitness Check in 2019 make it significantly more likely that the sediment will be included in the updates of WFD RBMPs in the near future.

Democratization of water resources management through the involvement of stakeholders has been widely advocated over the past two decades. In light of mediocre results of such processes and severe criticism of the claimed benefits of stakeholder involvement, there is continued need for improving these processes and for supportive tools through which stakeholders can collaborate in decision making. In response to new European legal requirements, an innovative planning process was initiated to facilitate a productive dialog among stakeholders to develop a shared river basin management plan. This paper presents and discusses the results of action research on this participatory planning process in a semiarid river basin in Spain. We discuss: (1) to what extent participatory processes and tools address the needs of stakeholders and planners, (2) what enables or disables implementation in a complex socioeconomic reality, (3) to what extent the participatory approach leads to alignment with policy embodying a new water management paradigm, and (4) how tools can be flexible and their use adapted to changing contextual dynamics. Research results confirm the potential for increased participation assisted by web and GIS tools, however, such processes are highly sensitive to changing contexts as well as the mandate and continuity in support from management authorities. Fragmentation of responsibilities in the water arena and the weak interpretation of the coordinating role of the water administration undermine the democratic ruling sought for by public participation. Improved methodologies to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of participation are required, and tools need to be flexible in design and used in a facilitated participatory process, adaptable to changing contextual dynamics.

The Water Framework Directive (WFD), one of the most influential pieces of European water legislation, presents a general framework for integrated river basin management in Europe to meet the environmental objectives. More than 16 years after the WFD adoption and after the end of the first management cycle (in 2015), it is time for a screening assessment of the implementation of the WFD in the different Member States (MSs). This article provides a global overview about the evolution of WFD implementation in MSs, highlighting the progression of the European water bodies status, as well as, some of the main challenges of WFD implementation: ecological flows, pricing policies/economic analysis, climate change, exemptions, public participation and transboundary issues. The paper examines these different topic, drawing up their situation in different MSs. For that purpose, not only the foreseen second cycle of the River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs) is analysed as also, at a larger scale, the expectations and challenges for the future set by the WFD are examined.