ABSTRACT

In October 2000, Directive 2000/60/EC, establishing a framework for action in the fi eld of water policy, also known as the Water Framework Directive (WFD), entered into force leading to a substantial reform of water policy in Europe. The main aims of the WFD include stopping deterioration, improving the state of aquatic ecosystems and promoting the sustainable use of water by achieving ‘good ecological status’ (GES) in all water bodies by 2015. In the context of its implementation, economic instruments (e.g., water pricing), methods (e.g., cost-effectiveness analysis) and principles (e.g., the polluter-pays-principle) are prescribed to reach these objectives. Economic considerations also play a role to justify exemptions, with

Article 4 stating that the WFD allows the derogation of environmental objectives if meeting them has disproportionately high costs. In this context, the following types of derogation can be granted (Finnegan 2009): i) an extension of the deadline for reaching GES with up to two planning cycles if a water body requires additional measures which involve disproportionate costs to meet the deadline (if GES can be achieved after 2015); and ii) the setting of a less ambitious environmental target, i.e., reaching an acceptable ecological state. The Directive further specifi es disproportionately high costs: i) in relation to the fi nancial ability to meet them, or ii) compared to the benefi ts of meeting the objective. The fi rst case is related to affordability. This argument only warrants a postponement of the deadline and does not constitute a justifi cation for setting a less ambitious target. In this case, the WFD allows Member States certain fl exibility in adopting a sector-specifi c and progressive approach depending on the affected sectors’ ability to pay (Postle et al. 2004). The second argument, which is the main focus of this chapter, requires proving that the costs of the Programme of Measures (PoM) which achieve GES are higher than the associated expected benefi ts (European Commission 2003).