EN    EN  COMMISSION OF THE E UROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 18.7.2007 
SEC(2007) 993 
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
 
Accompanying document to the 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIA MENT AND THE COUNCIL  
 
Addressing the challenge of water scarci ty and droughts in the European Union 
   
Impact Assessment  
   
{COM(2007) 414 final} 
{SEC(2007) 996} 
 
EN 2   EN TABLE OF CONTENTS 
1. Procedural issues and consulta tion of interested parties..... ………………………….3 
1.1. Organisation and timing............................................................................................... 3 1.2. Consultation and expertise ........................................................................................... 3 1.3. Terminology............................................................................................................... .. 6 
1.4. Integration of the Impact Assessment Board's recommendations ............................... 6 2. What problem is the Communica tion expected to address? ........................................ 8 
2.1. What are the issues th at may require action?............................................................... 8 
2.2. What are the underlying drivers of the problems?..................................................... 10 2.3. Who is affected, in what wa ys and to what extent? ................................................... 13 
2.4. How would the problem evolve , all things being equal?........................................... 14 
2.5. Does the EU have the right to act?............................................................................. 22 3. Objectives.................................................................................................................. . 24 
3.1. Policy objectives ........................................................................................................ 2 4 
3.2. Consistency with the horizontal objectives of the European Union .......................... 25 4. What are the main policy options avai lable to achieve th e objectives?..................... 25 
4.1. Option A: 'water supply only' .................................................................................... 26 4.2. Option B: 'economic instruments only' ...................................................................... 26 4.3. Option C: integrated approach ................................................................................... 27 5. Analysis of impacts.................................................................................................... 30 5.1. Option A: 'water supply only' .................................................................................... 30 5.2. Option B: 'economic instruments only' ...................................................................... 36 5.3. Option C: integrated approach ................................................................................... 39 6. Comparing the options ............................................................................................... 48 7. Monitoring and evaluation ......................................................................................... 49 
 
EN 3   EN 1. PROCEDURAL ISSUES AND CONSULTATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES  
1.1. Organisation and timing 
At the Environment Council of 9 March 2006, a number of Member States called for 
European action on water scarcity  and droughts. The Commission agreed to analyse the issues 
and presented a preliminary analysis at  the Environment Council of 27 June 2006.  
Following the discussion and the request by Memb er States for a further assessment of the 
issues, the Commission proposed to come back w ith an in-depth assessment identifying the 
extent and impacts of the problems linked to wa ter scarcity and droughts, as well as the 
possible gaps in the implementation of the existing EU policies. The Commission also 
announced its intention to adopt a Communica tion on water scarcity and droughts by July 
2007.  
1.2. Consultation and expertise 
1.2.1.  Consultation  
• A consultation of all stakeholders concerne d by water scarcity and drought issues was 
launched in early 2007. In this contex t the Commission organised widespread 
dissemination of information through its website1 and existing Working Groups set up 
under the Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive (WFD), 
in order to actively involve all of the stakehol ders interested in  the process. The 
preliminary analysis, the technical document on water scarcity and the interim report of the 
in-depth assessment on water scarcity and droughts2 have also been uploaded on the 
Commission website. 
• Following this request for active partic ipation, the Commission examined all the 
registration forms returned and set up a Stakeh olders' Forum. Particul ar attention has been 
paid to ensuring comprehensive representation of all interested parties (farmers, irrigators, electricity producers, industry, navigation, public water supply companies, environmental 
NGOs, other NGOs defending legitimate wate r uses, organisations of river basin 
authorities, regional governments, and all Member States).  
A first meeting took place on 29 January 2007. It s main purpose was to explain the process 
and report on the progress made so far with th e in-depth assessment. For this occasion, all 
stakeholders were invited to provide written contributions in order to improve the interim 
report on the in-depth assessment,  and to propose possible orient ations and measures for the 
next Communication by 28 February 2007. 
A second meeting was held on 26 March 2007. Its primary objective was to inform 
stakeholders about the state of play in preparing the Co mmunication and the improvements 
made to the in-depth assessment. Its second  objective was to share all the contributions 
                                                
 
1 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/quantity/scarcity_en.htm 
2 First Interim Report on Water Scarcity and Droughts 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/quantity/ pdf/comm_droughts/2006_11_1st_int_report.pdf   
 
EN 4   EN received so far and organise the discussion on this basis, in order to identify possible 
measures that could be further c onsidered within the Communication.  
The main outcomes of this consulta tion may be summarized as follows: 
(1) Water savings and water efficiency must be  a priority ahead of  any planning of new 
water supply. 
(2) The WFD already contains provisions which ma ke it possible to address water scarcity 
and droughts. The case for adopting an add itional legislative instrument therefore 
needs to be assessed in relation to these elements. 
(3) Water pricing and application of cost recove ry are key issues that need to be fully 
implemented. Metering is another es sential factor in this regard. 
(4) Local experience already proves that there is  a large potential for water savings and 
efficiency in both urban and rural areas. 
(5) Integration of water-related issues into sectoral poli cies is a key condition for 
successfully addressing water scarcity and droughts and ensuring a sustainable 
allocation of water at the appropriate level. 
(6) There are strong synergies betw een water and energy issues. 
(7) Agriculture is a large consumer of wate r. Adjustments via decoupling and cross-
compliance would be welcome in the short term.  
(8) As allocation of structural f unds can lead to water imbalances, consideration could be 
given to further environmental requirements. 
(9) Drought management plans are useful tools that have to be further promoted, in 
particular because of the increasing impacts an ticipated in a context of climate change.  
(10) Early warning systems at national and EU levels need to be developed and fully used 
for drought prevention. 
(11) Water performance technologies can be wide ly and efficiently disseminated, as the 
results coming from local experience clearly prove.  
(12) Public awareness is a key condition for a ny change of behaviour. Specific campaigns 
need to be promoted.  
(13) Alternative solutions such as re-using waste water need to be furt her considered, with 
possible guidelines at EU level. 
Most stakeholders supported these points. The exchanges which took place at the second 
meeting revealed that these issues were not controversial, but actu ally generated a broad 
consensus among a majority of stakeholders.  
A third meeting was held on 24 May to review  possible options. A br oad consensus emerged 
from the meeting as to the need for an integr ated approach which combines a strong emphasis 
 
EN 5   EN on demand management, economic instruments – in cluding more effective water pricing - and 
leaves the door open for new wate r supply under certain conditions.  
• An Expert Network on water scarcity and droughts, which includes representatives of 
national authorities and stakeholde rs, has also played an important part in the process. This 
working group is part of the Common Impl ementation Strategy of the Water Framework 
Directive – an informal structure set up in 2000 and led by the Comm ission which oversees 
the implementation of the Directive, and including all Member States and candidate 
countries as well as key stakeholders - a nd has worked since 2003 on water scarcity and 
drought issues. Its partic ipants have directly contributed to the drawing up of the interim 
report on the in-depth assessment on water scarcity and droughts, via th e collection and 
transmission of appropriate national data. Its participants have recently updated and refined 
the first set of data provided in 2006. On severa l occasions they have expressed their views 
on the options to be promoted in order to address water scarcity and droughts. 
1.2.2.  Expertise 
• Concerns about water scarcity and drought s have emerged across Europe relatively 
recently. They have been the starting point of work at EU level to assess the scope and the 
impacts of these issues in detail. Member States have provided national data and the 
Commission has also looked at the informati on available at EU level. However, the 
outcomes of these common efforts have often proved insufficient to establish a definitive and comprehensive overview of the current si tuation. These data gaps will need to be 
addressed in the short term as a prerequisi te for optimizing the selection of the most 
appropriate measures. 
• The Communication on water scarcity and droughts should therefore be seen as a first step, 
based on the information available in this early  stage of the process. The steps to further 
develop policies and measures to address water scarcity and drought issu es will in any case 
require further thorough impact assessments. This assessment of the Communication on 
water scarcity and droughts wi ll therefore be proportionate , based on the preliminary 
information and experience acquired so far.The next steps will have to go deeper into the 
collection of data and the quantit ative assessment of some selected measures from the wide 
range of options proposed by the Communication.  
• In order to fill the gaps identified so far, the Commission has decided to launch a study to 
quantify the potential for water saving across Eu rope. Further investigat ion is needed into 
the actual scope for progress in water demand management. The study will therefore assess 
all possibilities for action to deliver water sa vings within the EU. Economic, social and 
environmental impacts will be estimated, taking into account possible overlaps between options. This study will also further assess the impacts of some options noted for their 
relevance a priori,  but where the quantification of imp acts has so far been insufficient (e.g. 
water pricing policies, water allocation, dr ought management plans, improvement of 
technologies). Initial outcomes w ill be available by July 2007.  
• Another study will then be carried out in orde r to consider regional disparities in water 
saving potential. The inclusion of  several scenarios at river ba sin level and testing the cost 
effectiveness of several measures, e.g. in te rms of land use planning and water al location, 
will provide useful information for further discussion and consideration by the end of 
2007.  
 
EN 6   EN • These two studies will deliver results in 2007 a nd make it possible to support the follow up 
of the Communication and set out possible next steps.  
1.3. Terminology  
Water scarcity and droughts are two different issues.  
• Water scarcity describes a s ituation of long-term water im balance, where water demand 
exceeds the level of water resources available. While such cases usually emerge in areas of 
low water availability or rainfall, they can al so occur in regions which have high levels of 
water consumption due to high population dens ity or significant volumes of water being 
used for agricultural or industrial activities. 
• Moreover, water imbalances can lead to problems of water quality and create larger areas 
affected by water scarcity because the water th ere is unfit for consumption (whether or not 
these regions are directly affected by water quantity issues). Water scarcity is a human-driven phenomenon.  
• Droughts are the expression of a temporary d ecrease in average water availability. The 
primary cause of the emergence of drought is usually rainfall deficiency. High air 
temperatures and evapo-transpiration rates may act in combination with a lack of rainfall. 
They can exacerbate the acuteness and durat ion of droughts. Droughts are related to 
seasons and occur mostly in spring and su mmer, although there are winter droughts too. 
Droughts are also linked to the effectiveness of precipitation, e.g. rainfall intensity and 
number of rainfall events. Ultimately, these events are a combination of natural factors 
which are extremely difficult to predict in some cases. However, their intensity can be compounded by anthropogenic activities, in partic ular water scarcity situations. In the 
same way, a water scarcity situation can be exacerbated by the occurrence of a drought.  
1.4. Integration of the Impact Assessment Board's recommendations 
On 5 June 2007 the Impact Assessment Board adopt ed an opinion on the draft version of the 
Impact Assessment of the Communication.  
All the recommendations for improvements have  been fully integrated into the impact 
assessment as outlined below: 
(1) Need for clarification of the planned me asures under each option and of their 
impacts 
• The description of the measures has been refi ned in section 4 in or der to provide a better 
overview of the changes attached to each given option. Option A includes all possible 
measures that can further support and facilitat e the large-scale development of new water 
supplies. Option B has been renamed "Water pric ing policies only" in or der to fully reflect 
its detailed content and avoid any confusion with other economic instruments which need 
to be addressed within the integrated appro ach of Option C. Indee d, the objective of Option 
B is to reinforce the water pricing principles for water quantity issues  covered by the Water 
Framework Directive.  
• The measures attached to Option B have been  maintained in Option C. The assessment of 
Option B indeed concludes that water pric ing policies are usually not sufficient in 
 
EN 7   EN themselves to fully address water scarcity and droughts, but can prove effective if 
combined with complementary options. This is  why the measures attached to Option B are 
logically also considered within the integrated approach of Option C.  
• The social implications of the different opt ions have been further developed. A more 
detailed assessment taking into account regional characteristics is due to be completed by 
the end of 2007.  
(2) Need for a better analysis of the drivers  and underlying causes of the problems 
identified 
• The reasons why Member States have so far taken relatively few appropriate actions in 
order to address water scarcity and drought s are further developed in section 2.2.  
• The additional information specifies that the measures taken at national and regional 
measures have usually given preference to new water supply infrastructures to satisfy 
immediate water needs for economic developmen t and public water supply security, rather 
than developing approaches geared to  water saving and water efficiency. 
• Further information on the past and current us e of regional and agricu ltural EU funds is 
also provided. The fact that Member States have not been able to make use of all the 
opportunities offered by EU funds to impr ove water demand management because of 
competing priorities is also explained in more detail. The side-effects associated with allocating EU funds to certain new water suppl y projects are also emphasised, including 
the risk of unsustainable situations  developing at river basin level.  
More details have been given about the sour ces of the information used to present the 
population forecasts.  
(3) Need to clarify the case  for EU intervention  
• Section 2.5 has been refined in orde r to better explain the case for EU 
intervention. As highlighted in the opini on, the fact that only some Member States 
have taken action is not a suffici ent justification for EU action. 
• In particular, the text now emphasises the cross-border dime nsion of the issue 
which calls for coordinated EU action. Indee d, 70% of the EU terr itory is part of 
transboundary river basins. Further deta ils are also give n about the inter-
relationships between upstream and dow nstream regions - often located in 
different countries - and the associated risk s in a context of scarcer water. Lastly, 
the additional information explains why a c onsistent approach at European level is 
a precondition for ensuring sustainable and fair water use. 
(4) Procedure and presentation  
Section 7 has been redrafted so as to avoi d any misunderstanding about the monitoring and 
evaluation issues. 
 
EN 8   EN 2. WHAT PROBLEM IS THE COMMUNICATION EXPECTED TO ADDRESS ? 
2.1. What are the issues that may require action? 
The main issues at stake ar e the increasing impacts of wa ter scarcity and droughts across 
Europe in a context of climate change. Thes e impacts call into question the sustainable 
availability of water in  Europe from now on.  
Water scarcity  
The information available at EU level, pr ovided by the EEA and based on EUROSTAT data, 
gives an overview of the problem3. The Water Exploitation Inde x (WEI) is the mean annual 
total demand for freshwater divided by l ong-term average freshwater resources.  
Water Exploitation Index (WEI) from 1992 to 2003
0,0% 10,0% 20,0% 30,0% 40,0% 50,0% 60,0%LatviaEstoniaLithuaniaSloveniaHungarySlovakiaSwedenFinlandAustriaLuxembourgNetherlandsUnited KingdomPolandFranceGermanyCzech RepublicGreeceBelgiumRomaniaBulgariaPortugalItalySpainMaltaCyprus
Water Exploitation Index (%)
WEI - Energy WEI 
This Index illustrates the extent to which total water demand puts pressure on the water 
resource. It points out th e countries where water de mand outstrips resources.  
However, this Index is a national value a nd does not reflect the possible high regional 
pressures on water resources.  
An analysis at river basin level is therefore requ ired in order to gain a more accurate picture of 
the water scarcity situation. The information provided so far by Member States has made it 
possible to identify 33 river basi ns affected by water scarcity4. They have been considered as 
water scarce whenever their water exploitati on index was above 10% or where identified as 
such on basis of an expert assessment. They currently represent a total area of 460 000 km² 
(about 10% of the total EU ar ea) and host a total population of  82 million (about 16.5% of the 
total EU population). 
                                                 
3 EEA, 2005 the European environment, status and outlook 
4 Second interim report on water scarcity and droughts, April 2007 
 
EN 9   EN River Basin Water Exploitation Index
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180SK_HornadSK_HronPT_MinhoGE_EmsPT_DouroGE_DonauUK_Humber and NorthumbriaPT_GuadianaUK_AnglianHU_TiszaPT_TagusUK_North WestFR_Seine NormandieSK_Poprad a DunajecPT_VougaGE_WeserUK_South EastPT_AveSP_GuadianaFR_Rhin MeusePT_Algarve BasinsPT_Western BasinsPT_Sado
 
Most of the affected river basins are located in southern Europe. These tend to be dry and 
irrigation-intensive. However, northern and eas tern countries are also affected by water 
scarcity – they include the United Kingdom (the  South East and the Thames river basin), 
Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark and Slovakia. Most of these river basins have high 
population densities around urban centres.  
 
It is becoming increasingly clear that water scar city is having significant impacts on the main 
sectors of the economy and on natural resources. Th ese impacts are expected to increase in a 
context of climate change (see point 3.3).  
Droughts  
The observation of all drought events that oc curred in the last 30 years throughout the EU 
provides us with some preliminary knowle dge about their intensity and frequency5. The 
                                                 
5 idem 
 
EN 10   EN characteristics of these droughts have varied significantly from  one region to another, in 
particular as regards their exte nt, duration, season and severity. 
Cyprus, France, Italy, Portugal and Spain have registered the highest  frequency of droughts 
from 1976 to the present, with between 8 and 21 events per country.  
While the southern countries were the ones main ly affected by droughts in the eighties, the 
last five years have shown that all EU count ries can be confronted by drought issues. Most 
Member States have reported drought events  which have taken pla ce since 1976. Peaks in 
both population and area affected by droughts ha ve been noticeable in 1976, 1989 to 1991 and 
2003 to 2005. Compilations of national data clear ly show that the total area and total 
population affected by droughts doubled from  1976-1990 to 1991-2006 – representing 6% per 
annum of the total EU area and populati on in 1976-1990 and 13% in 1991-2006. From 2000 
to 2006, an average of 15% of the EU total ar ea and an average of 17% of the EU total 
population were affected by droughts. 
The pattern of droughts over time and their extent across Europe , from northern to southern 
regions, reveals that all of the European territory may potentially  be faced with such events.  
Recent droughts have undoubtedly resulted in increasing and significant impacts on the 
economy and on natural resources. As an illustration, the overall impacts on the economy due to the 2003 drought have been estimated at a minimum of €8.7 billion (for more details see 
point 3.3), measured as the estimated lo sses directly resulting from the drought. 
Climate change  is a key driver, which is expected to affect the spatial and temporal 
distribution of air temperature and precipitation in Europe. The variability is expected to 
increase, leading to a higher probability of extreme events such as droughts or floods. 
According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, climate change at the global 
scale will bring water scarcity to between 1.1  and 3.2 billion people, as temperatures rise 
by 2 to 3°C (see section 3.4) . Europe will not escape, and there will be very significant 
impacts on water availability in many parts of Eur ope. In this context, and in the absence of a 
clear global mitigation strategy, this trend is likely to continue and even worsen. 
Structurally, the challenge of wa ter scarcity and drought is very  closeto the energy challenge 
which the Commission decided to address by ad opting a comprehensive package of measures 
on 10 January 2007. The approach taken on energy resembles the approach needed for water scarcity and droughts, as ma naging the limited stock of freshwater resources can be 
considered to be similar to managing fossil energy resources. 
2.2. What are the underlying drivers of the problems? 
• Even though freshwater resources are widely available in Europe, their spatial 
and temporal distribution  leads to water scarce areas and peri odic drought 
situations as mentioned below. Expresse d in terms of exploitable resource per 
capita, Malta and Cyprus are the "water  poor" countries of Europe, having the 
lowest available resources of the EU (less than 100 m³/cap/year), followed by 
Spain, France and Italy (less than 200 m³/cap/year). 
However, additional issues need to be highlighted too, as they contribute significantly to 
increasing impacts. 
 
EN 11   EN • Water pricing policies generally do not re flect the level of sensitivity of water 
resources at local level. The 'user pays ' principle is hardly implemented. These 
gaps lead to mismanagement of wa ter resources, even though the Water 
Framework Directive provides the prin ciples to set up effective economic 
instruments. 
• Land use planning is also one of the main drivers of water use. Inadequate water 
allocation between economic sectors result s in imbalances between water needs 
and existing water resources.  
• As regards water abstraction , the analysis of the main water uses in the affected 
river basins reveals that agriculture  is the major user (w ith 64%), followed by 
energy (20%), public water supply  (12%) and industry (4%)6. Tourism is likely 
to put strong pressure on wa ter abstraction. However, it  remains one of the sectors 
where it is difficult to estimate the associated water uses because these are always included in public water supply data  and seldom quoted separately. 
• Even if no overall estimates of water used by tourism  are available, one can say 
that seasonal demand from tourism exerts significant pressure, particularly in 
Southern Europe and in coastal areas wh ere freshwater resources are limited. The 
use of water by tourists is nearly twice as  high as for local consumers, notably due 
to the large volumes of wate r consumed for leisure activit ies. In addition, the fact 
that the pressure from tourism and i rrigation often occurs in the period of 
minimum or low water resource renewal exacerbates the impact on the environment. 
• When it comes to water consumption , agriculture is the major consumer. Out of 
every cubic metre used for irrigation, on average 0.8 m³ is either absorbed by 
crops or evaporates from fields, and onl y 0.2 m³ returns to where the water was 
abstracted.  
• Across Europe there is huge  potential for water saving. Eu rope continues to waste 
at least 20%
7 of its water due to inefficiency, i.e. through losses in public water 
supply and irrigation networks, inadequa te water appliances in households, 
inefficient water practices in industry, etc. 
• In the Mediterranean, the water saving potential  represents 45% (123 km³/year) 
of the 2025 demand (330 km³/year) and is si gnificantly larger than the expected 
increase in demand over the same period (+50km³/year). By way of illustration, 
for Northern Mediterranean countries the la rgest potential (12 km ³/year) is in the 
irrigation sector (60%), followed by th e industrial (25%) and domestic (15%) 
sectors8. The measures that would lead to th ese water savings consist primarily in 
increasing the efficiency of water networks  in irrigation (trans port losses reduced 
to 10%, efficiency raised to 80%) and public water supply (l oss reduced to 15%, 
                                                 
6 idem 
7 See Annex 1 for more information on the EU sectoral water saving potential, Ecologic, June 2007 
8 Plan Bleu, 2007 
 
EN 12   EN user leaks reduced to 10%) and improving the use of water for industrial purposes 
(recycling generalized at 50%). 
• In general terms, there is a lack of c onsistency in, and sometimes even counter-
productive effects on water re source protection, due to in sufficient integration of 
water-related concerns into wate r-relevant sectoral policies. 
• As regards drought events , they have often been resolved by a crisis management 
approach dictated by a lack of timely preparedness for extreme events. Economic 
and social demands, as well as environm ental needs, are not systematically 
addressed. Ad hoc short-term measures are implemented to compensate for the 
lack of water resources fo r one or two types of uses , but do not take full account 
of other concerns (water quality, irrigation, energy produc tion, etc.) or the impacts 
of climate change.  
• Finally, while some data are already avai lable at EU and national levels, existing 
assessment and monitoring programmes are neither integrated nor complete. Data need to be harmonized and comparable if a comprehensive overview of the issues is to be provided at European level.  
• Some Member States have taken initial measures to address water scarcity and 
droughts at national or regional level. Th ese measures are very diverse across 
Europe as they usually depe nd on the scale of the issues within each country and 
on the level of awareness of the short-te rm and long-term impacts. It has been 
difficult to set up large-scale programmes for water saving and water efficiency at national or even regional level. They have often emerged from isolated and 
uncoordinated initiatives launched by lo cal municipalities or river basin 
authorities. Until now, most of the nationa l authorities have made water quality 
issues their priority, rather than water quantity issues.  
• Apart from localised efforts to improve water demand management, a majority of 
Member States tend to give precedence to  developing new water supplies in order 
to secure public water supply and satis fy new economic needs for water in the 
short term. While some projects for new water supply have proved sustainable, 
others are more questionable in terms of  overall estimated costs and benefits.  
• Some past and current uses of regional and agricultural EU f unds have tended to 
support new water supply infrastructu res without properly ensuring their 
sustainability and checking that minimum water management practices were being 
fully observed. In the past, funding for ne w reservoirs or desa lination units have 
been allocated to local areas where huge amounts of water continued to be wasted 
and no appropriate water pricing policy had been put in place. In addition, only a 
limited proportion of EU funds has so far been used to develop and support 
further water demand management measures. Th is situation is due to the fact that 
Member States have preferred to prioritise water quality issues (point source and diffuse pollutions) and deve loping new water supply to satisfy the immediate 
economic development needs.  
 
EN 13   EN 2.3. Who is affected, in what ways and to what extent? 
Water scarcity Water scarcity situations encount ered at river basin level have  already had noticeable impacts 
on economy, society and environment, with consequent effects on costs.  
• As regards economic impacts , the main sectors affected are: 
• - Public water supply and side-effects on tourism, 
• - Energy production: income losses, 
• - Agriculture: income losses due to deep er pumping or greater uncertainty about 
yields. 
• Social impacts can be creat ed by the possible increase of  water prices due to the 
implementation of compensating meas ures (e.g. desalination units).  
• The environmental impacts  concern groundwater (with possible aquifer 
depletion due to over-pumping and seawat er intrusion), surface waters (with 
minimum water flows not always being en sured and increased concentrations of 
pollutants due to less dilution) and wetlands , as well as impacts on soils through 
erosion and desertification. 
The costs of some of these impacts can be asse ssed by looking at the costs of the mitigation 
measures being taken, such as the construction of new water supply infra structures – namely 
dams, reservoirs, desalination units, water transfers,  etc. However, as these facilities can have 
a range of different objectives, it is difficu lt to assess exactly what proportion of the 
investments is directly due to water scarcity.  
Investments in infrastructure s have a cost, which is borne  by various parties. Economic 
sectors, public authorities and local population have to bear a dditional costs in proportions 
that vary from one river basin to another. Nati onal estimates give an indication of the total 
amount of investments involved. 
In addition, there are costs to so ciety due to environmental and social impacts, although these 
may be more difficult to estimate. 
Whatever the type of impacts, it is clear that  many data are lacking at EU, national and river 
basin levels. It is therefore diffi cult to estimate the costs incurred by the entire EU to tackle 
water scarcity.  
Droughts 
Droughts may have immediate and significant economic, social and environmental impacts. 
These impacts can also last beyond the end of the drought event.  
• As regards economic activities , the first and most notic eable impacts concern the 
public water supply. National, regional or local restrictions on all water use or 
specific water uses can be put in place and usually result in a loss of income in 
 
EN 14   EN some industrial or energy sectors and ag riculture. Some activit ies are obliged to 
halt production during sensitive periods.  
• As regards social impacts , emergency measures can be  organised in order to 
provide population with alte rnative water supplies (e.g. water tanks). This results 
in additional costs, which are usually borne by public authorities, and has a potentially distressing impact on the more  vulnerable groups of citizens (e.g. the 
elderly).  
• Droughts often have particularly harmful impacts on the environment . The first 
warning signals are sharp decreases in  river flows and falling levels of 
groundwater aquifers. They can result in additional effects, namely sea water 
intrusion, eutrophication and wetland desicca tion. Severe water shortages, even if 
they are only limited in time, can le ad to biodiversity degradation. Fish 
populations can be critically affected by droughts, suffering exceptional high rates 
of mortality.  
• Droughts can also be exacerbated by heat  waves and be one of the factors 
responsible for serious forest fires in summ er. In recent years, large areas of forest 
have been destroyed by fi res and this has led to increased soil erosion and 
deficiency in water retention. On the other hand, it should be pointed out that 
there are some forests, such as mismanaged eucalyptus forests, which do not appropriately ensure the preservation of biodiversity and sustainable water 
management.  
The compilation and extrapolation of the quan titative data provided by Member States has 
made it possible to estimate the direct economic impact of drought events  in the past thirty 
years at a minimum of € 100 billion
9, and even this figure is an underestimate of the overall 
impact on the economy, as explained above. A look at  the impact of drought  events over this 
period shows that the situation is steadily wo rsening. The annual impact due to droughts is 
estimated to have doubled between 1976-1990 a nd 1991-2006. It reached an annual average 
of € 6.2 billion from 2001 to 200610. There is a strong expectation that this impact will carry 
on increasing, as more confirmation of the impact of climate change is obtained.  
                                                 
9 First interim report on water scarcity and dr oughts, DG ENV, November 2006: MS provided the 
economic costs (on public water supply, industry, energy , agriculture, transport) due to droughts in the 
last thirty years. Costs on public water supply made it possible to estimate an average cost per 
inhabitant living in an area affected by drought. Costs on agriculture made it possible to estimate an 
average cost per hectare of land located in an area affected by drought. The application of these unit 
costs to areas where no data where available, allowed to getting an overall estimation of the impacts of 
droughts in the last thirty years. 
10 First interim report on water scarcity  and droughts, DG ENV, November 2006 
 
EN 15   EN 2.4. How would the problem evolve, all thin gs being equal (no policy change)? 
2.4.1.  Demography and economic development 
 Population 
Trends in population can be de rived from the United Nations "medium" scenario, which is 
described in a time series of population by wo rld region with five-year steps between the 
present and 2075 (United Nations, 1992; Alcamo et al., 1998).  
Under this scenario, Europe's population w ould increase from 745 million in 1995 to 882 
million in 2075.  
The following table summarizes the regional popul ation figures estimated using this scenario. 
Population distribution within countries is based on data fr om Gridded Population of the 
World (version 1) provided by the Center fo r International Earth Science Information 
Network (CIESIN).  
Total population [millions] in Europe  
World-region(*) 1995 2025 2050 2075 
Western Europe 384 406 394 391 
Eastern Europe 121 143 149 149 
European CIS 180 193 186 185 
(*) World-regions are here defined as follows: 
Western Europe: Belgium, Denmark, France, Finland, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Malta, 
Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzer land, United Kingdom 
Eastern Europe: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, 
Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Yugoslavia 
European CIS: Belarus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Ukraine, European part of Russian Federation  
– Water withdrawals 
The current scenario, developed by the EuroWasse r project, stresses that by the 2020s small 
increases in total withdrawals will be seen in some parts of Western Europe (Ireland, France, 
United Kingdom). These increases result from  assumed increases in population in these 
countries, which lead to increased demands in the domestic sector. Industrial withdrawals are 
predicted to decrease and w ithdrawals for irrigation are pr edicted to remain stable. 
In Eastern Europe, the scenario predicts large increases in water withdrawals as a 
consequence of large increases in demand for water in both the domestic and industrial 
sectors. Abstractions for industrial purposes, in particular, are likely to rise sharply based on 
an assumption of large increas es in electricity production.  
In total, water withdrawals in Europe are projec ted to rise from the current level of 415 km³ to 
about 660 km³ per year by the 2070s.  
The table below illustrates this development by sector. 
 
EN 16   EN Water withdrawals [km3/yr] in Europe by sector today (1995 ) and in the 2070s  
Withdrawals today (1995) Withdrawals in the 2070s World-region 
Domestic Industrial Irrigation Total Domestic Industrial Irrigation Total 
Western Europe 41 118 76 235 48 69 74 191 
Eastern Europe 10 32 33 75 27 164 36 227 
European CIS 15 57 33 105 80 126 36 242 
Europe 66 207 142 415 155 359 146 660 
2.4.2.  Climate change impacts 
In a recent assessment, the IPPC warns that glob ally "projected climate change could further 
decrease stream flow and groundwater recharge in many water-stressed countries".  
Annex 2 provides a comprehensive overview of the hydrological changes in past years and for 
future conditions11. 
Trends 
• The available studies poin t to the increasing body of  evidence of ongoing global 
warming. Each of the five years since 2001 is one of the six warmest years overall 
in the 165 years since observations bega n, and the two warmest years on record 
are 1998 and 2005. Different climate models wi th different scenarios, predict that 
the temperature in 2011-2030 is likely to be 0.64 – 0.7°C higher than the 
temperature in 1980-1999 . Without effectively re ducing greenhouse gases 
(GHG) by 2100, the global surface temperat ure will have risen to between 1.8°C 
and 4°C above 1990 levels. This is three to  six times the warming the planet has 
experienced since pre-industrial times.  
• Projections show a worsening of the trends  observed in annual river discharge in 
many European catchments. Most climate change scenarios show that Northern 
and Eastern Europe may experience an in crease in annual aver age river flow and 
water availability. The average run-off in Sout hern European rivers is 
projected to fall due to rising tempera ture and decreasing precipitation. In 
particular, some river basins in the Mediterranean region, which already 
face water stress, may see marked  decreases in water availability .  
• As a result of a declining snow reservoi r, the earlier snow melt and the general 
decrease in summer precipitation, longer periods with low river-flow rates have 
been observed in summer in many parts of Europe . As with the annual river 
flows, projections indicate a degradation in future for the seasonal river flows 
too. Changes in the seasonal flow regime may change the periods with enhanced 
drought risks. Moreover, sea level rise may result in coastal areas having a greater 
risk of saltwater intrusion. Groundwater  recharge depends on a number of 
variables, including the level of precipitation in winter. Several observations 
                                                 
11 Droughts and climate change, H.A.J. Van Lanen, L.M. Tallaksen, G. Rees 
 
EN 17   EN predict a lower groundwater recharge due  to climate change. Countries like 
the UK, for instance, could face a 5- 15% lower recharge of groundwater due 
to a shorter recharge period in winter . 
• The maps below illustrate current water av ailability and the changes expected by 
2030. 
 
Source: EEA Report – European environment outlook, N°4/2005 
• The projections of the EuroWasser project al so reveal that, in general, long-term 
changes in annual renewable water resour ces are found to be more pronounced in 
certain regions. The Mediterranean region is subject to large decreases. Water availability will decrease in large parts of Southern and South-Eastern Europe.  
• Decreasing precipitation in Southern Eu rope is accompanied by increasing 
temperature and, thus, by increasing eva po-transpiration. Combining these trends 
results in even stronger decreases in av ailability than would be expected from 
considering precipitation change only.  
• The real impacts of climate change will  partly depend on the steps that all 
countries will be able to take in order to reduce its impacts. The planned 
Commission Green Paper on adaptation to climate change is a first step 
forward.  It will set the scene as regards cl imate change impacts and ways to 
adapt. It will cover all environmental i ssues, but will not go into detail on the 
specific adaptation measures needed to  deal with water quantity concerns. 
Recognising the magnitude and acutene ss of the challenge posed by water 
scarcity and droughts in the context of adaptation to climate change, the 
Communication on water scarcity and droughts will review concrete, 
practical policy options and orientations  to address the particular challenge 
of water scarcity and droughts, in the context of exacerbated risks due to climate change and with a view to devi sing an EU-wide adaptation strategy in 
this field. The Communication will also  include, for each of the potential 
options to be considered , information on the most  appropriate level of 
implementation (e.g. EU, national) as we ll as – where possible – an indication 
 
EN 18   EN of the timetable for implementation. The Communication will therefore fully 
complement the Green Paper and contribut e to its practical follow-up in the 
particular area of water scarcity and droughts.  
2.4.3.  Combination of development and climate change impacts 
The effects of changing water availability due to climate change and changing water 
withdrawals due to demographic and economic deve lopments need to be considered together.  
In total, the proportion of Eur opean river basin area s in the severe wate r stress category is 
likely to increase from 19% today to 34-36% by the 2070s. Most river basins currently 
identified as experiencing high levels of wate r stress remain in the highest stress category 
under the scenario projections. Additionally, ma ny Eastern European river basins are moved 
up into the highest water stress category.  
The assessment confirms that the impacts of economic and social development on water 
resources may be of the same order of magnit ude as changes in water availability due to 
climate change.  
The consolidation of the results for water stre ss and drought frequencies shows that the South-
Eastern countries might be the area with the greatest increase in pressure on its water 
resources in the coming decades. Large areas fall  within the "critical region" definition in 
terms of both water stress and drought frequenc ies, accounting in all fo r about a quarter of 
Europe's land area.  
 
Critical regions exhibiting (i) a decrease in the return  period of the cu rrent 100-year drought 
to 50 years or less and (ii) a 10% increase in toda y’s water stress which leads to a future w.t.a. 
ratio greater than 0.4. Calculated with Wate rGAP 2.1 applying the HadCM3 climate model 
and Baseline-A water use scenario for the 2070s 

 
EN 19   EN Lastly, the outcomes of the above scenario rev eal that a major part of Europe will suffer 
severe impacts from water scarcity in the coming decades as a result of either increased water 
demand for economic development or decreased wa ter supply due to climate change or even a 
combination of both. 
2.4.4.  Existing EU legislation and instruments 
 The Water Framework Directive 
The Water Framework Directive (WFD)12 provides the general framework for water 
management in Europe. Although the WFD is no t primarily designed to  tackle quantitative 
issues, it gives Member States sufficient fl exibility to address quantitative issues. 
• One interesting aspect in re lation to addressing water s carcity and droughts is that, 
according to the WFD, Member States are requir ed to have water pricing policies in place 
by 2010 with adequate incentives to use water efficiently.  
• Moreover, Member States have to ensure  that groundwater and surface water bodies 
achieve "good status" – i.e. good ecological and chemical health - by 2015. Sustainable 
water abstraction regimes have to be supported in situations of wate r stress or shortage. 
Additional constraints linked to the integratio n of specific quantitative measures can be 
taken into account when estab lishing the environmental objectives of the water bodies. The 
WFD also includes provisions relating to prolonged droughts and exemptions.  
• In addition, when and where needed, Member States can draw up specific drought 
management (sub-)plans as a supplement to  the River Basin Mana gement Plans (RBMPs) 
– which are the main implementation milestone for achieving the Directive's objectives at 
the level of each river basin. 
• RBMPs, which are due by December 2009, will br ing further improvements for the whole 
water system in the form of a programme of  measures which must be operational by 2012 
and must deliver the environmental objectives by 2015.  
• The Communication from the Commission en titled 'Towards sustainable water 
management in the European Union' identifi es initial positive outcomes emerging from the 
first steps in implementing the WFD.  
Reports from the Member States on their in itial obligations under the WFD show some 
encouraging results. They have already ma de significant steps towards sustainable 
water management. Most of them have de ployed considerable efforts to develop an 
initial analysis of the state of river basins , producing a large information base which did 
not previously exist at EU level.  
• Together with the water-related directi ves which are still under negotiation, 
the WFD  provides all the tools needed to achieve truly sustainable water 
management. However, implementing these tools in the most effective way remains a challenge. In particular, Member States still need to make 
                                                
 
12 Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a 
framework for Community action in the field of water policy 
 
EN 20   EN progress in implementing the water pric ing and cost recovery provisions of 
the WFD13.  
• The timetable for implementing the WFD makes it impossible to draw 
definitive conclusions at this stage on whether further action is needed, as 
River Basin Management Plans and their associated programmes of measures will not be adopted until th e end of 2009. Only then will it be 
possible to draw such conclusions. Pre-empting river basin management 
plans and associated programmes of me asures would be counter-productive. 
– The sectoral policies 
Agriculture 
• The 2003 reform of the Common Agricu ltural Policy introduced decoupled 
payments to farmers, suppressing the link between a given production and the 
amount of subsidies received. This measur e was aimed at encouraging farmers to 
produce according to market demand and ahs been an important step to 
sustainable management of resources. 
• The reform also introduced cross-complian ce, which proved to be an efficient way 
of enforcing existing directives at farm level.  
• Finally, the rural development programmes funded by the European Agricultural 
Fund for Rural Development
14 (EAFRD) offer the possibility of supporting 
improved water demand management prac tices through appropriate measures to 
be adopted within axes 1 (support to im prove competitiveness) and 2 (improve 
environment and countryside). Specific support has been foreseen for measures 
under the WFD.  
However: 
• Under the partial decoupling option which some Member States have retained, 
CAP subsidies still provide a measure of incentive for crops including water 
consuming crops with high risks of  water resource over-exploitation.  
• The existing framework for cross-compliance does not address water quantity 
issues.  
• The budget allocated to rural development is  not yet sufficient to properly address 
water quantity issues. 
• Member States today tackle  a wide range of issues by using EU funds. They 
establish national and/or regional prioriti es and allocate funds according to these 
                                                 
13 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council – Towards 
sustainable water management in the European Union – First stage in the implementation of the Water Framework Directive, COM (2007) 128 final - 22 March 2007 
14 Council Regulation (EC) 1698/2005 of 20 September 2005 on support for rural development by the 
European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) 
 
EN 21   EN priorities. Water quantity concerns are of ten just one of many issues. Member 
States usually place priority on fully addr essing water quality issu es (point source 
and diffuse pollution) before cons idering water quantity issues.  
Regional policy 
• Here, the overall framework also provi des an opportunity to address water 
scarcity and drought issues. It is ba sed mainly on the European Regional 
Development Fund15 (ERDF), the Cohesion Fund16 (CF) and the European Social 
Fund17 (SF). Lessons can be learned from the analysis of the ERDF programmes 
from 2000 to 2006.  
However: 
• As for rural development programmes, owing to the wide range of issues that the 
regional funds are called upon to tackle, th e programmes linked to regional policy 
have seldom contained measures specifi cally designed to address the growing 
impacts of water scarcity and droughts. So me of the measures adopted at national 
level have had adverse effects by supportin g the development of new water supply 
infrastructures without a clear complia nce with environm ental requirements 
relating to water demand management as  a prerequisite for funding. Phenomena 
similar to those mentioned under rura l development can be expected.  
2.4.5.  Conclusions 
All things being equal, the problem is likely to evolve as follows: 
• Maintenance of widespread  inappropriate land pla nning throughout some of the 
most water scarce or water stressed rive r basins; impacts being exacerbated by the 
part of the CAP payments still coupled fo r arable crops and by a lack of strict 
implementation and insufficient coverage of cross-compliance. 
• Continuing waste of water and significan t water inefficiency in households and 
many economic sectors. 
• Incentives provided for the further deve lopment of new water supply without 
giving priority to water sa vings and water efficiency. 
• Persistence of the existing gaps in the integration of water quantity issues in 
agricultural and regional pol icies, thereby leading to  the development of new 
water supply with no guarantee of sustaina ble water use in water scarce or water 
stressed river basins.  
• Continued inconsistencies in data on the scope and impacts of water scarcity and 
droughts. 
                                                 
15 Regulation (EC) 1080/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the 
European Regional Development Fund 
16 Council Regulation (EC) 1084/2006 of 11 July 2006 establishing a Cohesion Fund 
17 Regulation N°1081/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the European 
Social Fund 
 
EN 22   EN 2.5. Does the EU have the right to act? 
• The current situation regarding water sc arcity and droughts is characterised by 
large variations across Europe. These can  be explained by climatic conditions, 
available natural water resources, wate r use by economic sector, but also by 
efforts undertaken in several Member St ates to reduce the need for water. 
However, as set out above, the in-depth assessment carried out so far clearly 
highlights the growing concern on the part of all  Member States about water 
scarcity and droughts, whatever their ge ographical position. A lthough it is usually 
southern countries th at have been affected by thes e issues, northern countries are 
no longer spared. 
• The effects of climate change in Europe  are already significant and measurable. 
Drought frequencies react sensitively to ch anges in both climate and water use. 
Scenarios generally predict a change in drought frequencies for almost all regions 
of Europe18. The outcomes of scenarios for the next 70 years show that the direct 
anthropogenic influence on future droughts through water consumption will be of the same order of magnitude as the si mulated impact of climate change. In 
particular, the supposed big increases in water use for eastern countries due to increased economic activity may cause or in tensify severe drought events in these 
areas in the future.  
 
Change in magnitude of 100-year droughts 
Left map : Comparison of results calc ulated with WaterGAP 2.1 fo r today’s climate and water 
use (1961-90) and for the 2070s (HadCM3 climat e model and Baseline-A water use scenario) 
Right map : Comparison of results cal culated with WaterGAP 2.1 for today’s climate and 
water use (1961-90) and for the 2070s (Baseline- A water use scenario at today’s climate) 
The comparison of both maps indicates that the worsening in 100-ye ar drought severity 
amongst western countries is primarily due to c limate change. For eastern Europe, the change 
                                                 
18 EuroWasser: Europe's droughts today and in the future, 2007 
 
EN 23   EN in water use plays an important role for the future low flow regimes. The superimposed 
climate changes make the situation worse in southern regions. 
The findings from this research confirm that  water scarcity and droughts are becoming a 
European concern, with significant current and/or future impacts in all countries. 
• The Green Paper from the Commission on 'A dapting to climate change in Europe 
– options for EU action'19 points out that there are clear benefits in approaching 
adaptation in an integrated, coordinated manner at EU level. Whilst a "one-size-
fits-all" approach to adaptation is clea rly not appropriate, climate change will 
nevertheless impact everywhere and those impacts will not follow administrative 
boundaries. Furthermore, certain sectors are largely integrated at  EU level through 
the single market and common policies ant it makes sense to integrate adaptation 
goals directly into them. The Green Paper al so stresses that adaptation is clearly a 
question of political coherence, forward planning and consiste nt and coordinated 
action. These latest points fully apply to the issues of water scarcity and droughts. 
• Water scarcity and droughts are a trans boundary issue requiring a coordinated EU 
approach. Water resources management, which includes the sustainable use of 
resources through a water demand manage ment approach, is by nature trans-
national. In particular, 70% of EU territory is part of  transboundary river basins. 
This situation means that any action take n upstream of a river basin in a given 
country will have direct impacts downstream  of the river basin in other countries. 
The absence of a coherent approach ac ross Europe could lead to increasing 
conflicts between countries or regions in  a context of scarcer water. Upstream 
regions could be tempted to carry on their economic development and increase abstractions from water resources regard less of the downstream context, leaving 
downstream regions with serious problems of  water shortage. This scenario will 
be avoided only if a consistent approach can be promoted at European level in 
order to ensure sustaina ble and fair water use. 
• Some Member States have already adopt ed measures to reduce the impacts of 
water scarcity and droughts by improving water demand management. Others 
have not taken yet such acti on. Increasingly this is creat ing a situation where river 
basins could be affected by water scar city and droughts, with no consideration 
being given to prior preventi on and adaptation measures.  
• In the absence of any Community action, this trend towards mismanagement in 
Member States is highly likely to com pound the inconsistency in the level of 
protection of the environment, which woul d run counter to one of the fundamental 
objectives of the Treaty.  
• By reducing and managing the risks to ec onomic activities, the environment and 
human health, the proposals for addressing  the challenges of water scarcity and 
drought will help in pur suing the objectives of Community policy on the 
environment in accordance with Article 174 of the Treaty: 
                                                
 
19 Green Paper from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament – 29 June 2007, 
COM(2007) 354 final 
 
EN 24   EN – Preserving, protecting and improving th e quality of the environment, 
– Protecting human health, 
– Prudent and rational utilisa tion of natural resources, 
– Promoting measures at international leve l to deal with regional or worldwide 
environmental problems. 
• However, not all the answers can be given at EU level. The implementation of the 
existing EU policy framework and of new action that may be identified, and the 
definition of the national programmes, in cluding those for the Regional and rural 
development policies, are the respon sibility of the Member States. 
• Moreover, the Impact Assessment demonstrat es that a number of actions at EU 
and national levels are necessary and complementary for addressing the 
challenges of water scarcity and drought s in a comprehensive manner. A wide 
range of policy options theref ore need to be considered. 
• Many of the proposed actions need a mob ilisation effort or a push from the EU 
level, either through regu latory action, by concluding vol untary agreem ents with 
different sectors or by exchanging good pr actices. Such complementary measures 
will empower the different levels of policy-makers and decision-makers to progress towards efficient wa ter resources management. 
3. O
BJECTIVES  
3.1. Policy objectives  
The proposal pursues the follo wing general policy objectives: 
• Address the increasing impacts of water scarcity and droughts in the European 
Union 
• Ensure the long-term protection of available water resources 
• Ensure sustainable water availability acr oss Europe and promote sustainable water 
uses 
The specific objectives are: 
• Enhance preparedness for increasing droughts 
• Mitigate all impacts of water scarcity and droughts on the environment, economy 
and society 
• Create the conditions for sustainable ec onomic and social development across 
Europe in a context of climate change and increasing water scarcity and droughts 
 
EN 25   EN The operational objectives include: 
• Identify the most appropriate and cost-eff ective measures in order to efficiently 
address water scarcity and drought issues 
• Consider possible priorities or a hierarc hy to guide policy-making in the light of 
water availability at river basin level.  
3.2. Consistency with the horizontal ob jectives of the European Union 
3.2.1.  Growth and Job strategy 
The policy objectives are in lin e with the three pillars of the European Union's renewed 
Lisbon Strategy on Growth and Jobs, namely "m aking Europe a more attractive place to 
invest and work", "knowledge and innovation for growth" and "creating more and better 
jobs".  
Efforts to better address water scarcity and droughts will first a llow the appropriate 
development of economic activities by securing water resources. Then, it will encourage the 
development and application of new envir onmental technologies. The policy objectives 
therefore promote innovation a nd technological development, en abling the water sector to 
progress towards global leadership in the field of water efficient technologies. This outlook 
should, in the short term, pave the way for expor ts of technologies to emerging markets where 
water is scarce and which have set water efficiency targets.  
By promoting further advances in technologies, the strategy will promote highly skilled jobs 
in Europe for research and deve lopment into new technologies.  
3.2.2.  Sustainable Development strategy 
One objective of the RSDS is " to improve management and avoi d overexploitation of natural 
resources, recognising the value of ecosystem services ". Some of the related operational 
objectives are " to improve management and avoid over exploitation of renewable natural 
resources such as water " and " to avoid the generation of wast e and enhance efficient use of 
natural resources by promoting re-use ".  
The objectives detailed in part 3.1 are in line with  the RSDS in that they contribute to more 
sustainable water management practices and tackle the wastage of water.  
Another objective of the Renewed Sustaina ble Development Strategy (RSDS) of the 
European Union is " to limit climate change and its costs and negative effects to society and 
the environment ". The related operational objective is " to integrate adaptation to and 
mitigation of climate change in all relevant European policies ". 
It is obvious that progressing towards effectiv e prevention and mitigation of water scarcity 
and droughts will directly contribute to meeti ng the urgent need of adapting to climate 
change. 
 
EN 26   EN 4. WHAT ARE THE MAIN POLICY OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO ACHIEVE THE OBJECTIVES ? 
Section 2.4 fully described the characteristics of  a 'no policy change scenario'. The following 
paragraphs therefore focus on the th ree options previously identified. 
4.1. Option A: 'Water supply only' option 
This option consists in addressing water sc arcity and droughts by providing new water supply 
wherever and whenever needed. Any new water s upply made available then aims to satisfy all 
needs for the public, economic activ ities and the environment.  
The building up of any new wate r supply must comply with EU legislation,  in particular with 
the Environmental Impact Assessment Direc tive, the Strategic Environment Assessment 
Directive and the Water Fram ework Directive (WFD).  
Article 4(7) of the WFD  allows the development of new water infrastructure, even if that 
infrastructure prevents the achievement of " good status". However, this provision comes with 
a number of strict cond itions, including:  
• Conditions for mitigation measures;  
• Proof that there are no better alterna tive options in environmental terms; 
• The condition that the project must either be of “overriding public interest”, or the provision 
of benefits to human health and safety (e.g. fl ood control) or sustainable development must 
outweigh the benefits of achieving the environm ental objectives. Furthermore, Articles 4(8) 
and 4(9) are mandatory conditions for these derogations to apply.  
The implications of the WFD for existing infrastructures depend on whether or not the water 
body is classified as heavily modified, fulfilling the criteria of Article 4(3) and meeting those 
of Articles 4(8) and 4(9). In other cases, dam sites may be subject to extensive mitigation 
measures in order to reach "good ecological poten tial", in particular as regards minimum flow 
regimes, aquatic fauna migration and sediment management. In addition, the fact that these 
water bodies also need to achieve "good chem ical status" must be taken into account.  
Under this legislation all costs and benefits rela ted to new infrastructure  have to be estimated. 
The project is considered feasible as soon as all estimated benefits exceed the costs to the 
economy, society and the environment.  
Ö The measures under consideration within this option consist in  
– Enhancing the development of new water supply on the basis of existing EU legislation 
– Supporting the widespread development of new water supplies, with priority being given 
to the allocation of EU and national funds. 
4.2. Option B: 'Water pricing policies only' option  
This option consists in addr essing the issues of wate r mismanagement by introducing 
appropriate water pricing policies. Ö The measures under consideratio n within this option cover: 
 
EN 27   EN – Effective water pricing 
The price of water is an importa nt variable that influences th e amount of water used. Pricing 
policies can help users make more efficient use of water through financ ial incentives to move 
into technologies and practi ces that ensure better use of available resources.  
– Cost recovery 
This principle consists in ensuring an appropria te contribution by the different water uses to 
the costs of the water services , based on an economic analysis and the implementation of the 
'user pays' principle. It requires the identifica tion of the water services , the providers and the 
users. The financial costs of the water services then need to be calcul ated. The environmental 
and resource costs also have to be estimated. D ecisions can then be taken on how costs are to 
be allocated to water uses (t hrough prices, charges or other in stitutional mechanisms of cost 
recovery) and what proportion of the total cost needs to be covered by each category of users.  
These measures aim to reinforce the principles of Article 9 of the Water Framework Directive 
as regards water quantity issues.  
4.3. Option C: Integrated approach 
This option introduces a new approach based on the outcomes of the two previous options. 
This option keeps some of the measures invol ved in options A and B, but reinforces the 
framework with additional measures which aim to adequately prevent future drought events 
and mitigate all water s carcity and drought impacts. Measur es to save water and increase 
water efficiency are duly considered in this context.  
This option also involves introduc ing a water hierarchy to guide policy-making. It states that 
all possibilities to save wate r and increase water efficiency  should be given priority 
consideration before any new water supply measures are introduced.  
Ö The measures under consideration include: 
– Measures to prevent droughts 
Preventive measures are essen tial if the impacts of future droughts are to be efficiently 
tackled. These have tended to include mapping, early warning systems, limitations and 
restrictions of water use in the case of severe drought.  
They can be incorporated appropriately within drought management plans to be introduced as 
part of the WFD river basin management pl ans and thereby ensure consistency between 
prevention and mitigation measures. Member St ates have the opportunity to draw up such 
plans for adoption by the end of 2009. There is an interest in developing the exchange of 
information at European level on this issue in  order to deliver Eur opean recommendations and 
best practices.  
The setting-up in the short term of an operatio nal European early warning system will also 
help Member States improve thei r level of preparedness for dr oughts. Past experience reveals 
that early warning can significantly improve th e prevention of severe climatic events.  
 
EN 28   EN – Measures to support efficient water allo cation and sustainable land use planning 
The definition and evolution of water allocation and land use planning is generally influenced 
by the sectoral policies and their financial in struments in place at European and national 
levels.  
Attention needs to be paid to existing European  sectoral policies. Seve ral shortcomings have 
been identified and need to be addressed as a priority. 
The development of effective economic instruments is one of these priorities. The description 
and impacts of this measure are set out in opt ion B. The main conclusion is that economic 
instruments need to be accompanied by suppleme ntary measures if they are to be fully 
effective. 
Further necessary developments would therefore consist in impr oving the existing legislation: 
– The Commission guidelines for water infrastructures: 
– These need to be refined in order to ensure the setting up of sustainable projects. In the 
context of the next reviews of regional and ru ral development policies,  consideration must 
be given to whether further progress needs to be made as regards environmental preconditions related to effective water ma nagement before allocating support to new 
water supplies.  
– The framework of the Common Agricult ural Policy and rural development: 
– Initial assessments show that some key princi ples introduced by the re form of the CAP of 
2003 have contributed to improving water mana gement. These key principles include full 
decoupling, cross-compliance and modulation. 
– The budgets devoted to water quantity issues: 
It is necessary to explore how sectoral policies could better and further contribute to effective 
water management, utilising to the fullest extent  associated funds to foster the delivery of 
environmental services by water users in an efficient way. Existing budgets have not enabled 
these issues to be sufficiently covered, owing to competing priorities between environmental 
issues and the fact that preference is usually gi ven to issues of water quality (diffuse and point 
source pollution). 
Additional measures can be ta ken at national level to inte nsify the improvement of the 
existing policies at EU level. In particular, Member States can be encouraged to draw up 
appropriate voluntary and/or compulsory meas ures in river basins which are almost 
permanently water-scarce, in order to restore a su stainable balance. They can also put in place 
special incentives to support the generalizati on of sustainable water management practices. 
- Measures to foster water perfor mance technologies and practices 
The widespread development of water performan ce technologies and practices is expected to 
deliver significant results in terms of  water efficiency and water savings. 
 
EN 29   EN The associated measures may consist in further implementing or improving existing 
legislative measures: 
–  Eco-design Directive 
Although this directive in its current fo rm does cover some water-using equipment 
(dishwashers and washing machines), it does no t address any water-using  appliances, such as 
taps, shower heads and toilets.  
It is necessary in this context to explore the possibility of setting environmental standards for 
water-using devices, which are energy-using products such as irrigation systems or non-
energy using products such as ta ps, shower heads, toilets. 
–  Construction Products Directive 
A further implementation of this directive could enable appropriate standards related to water 
efficiency to be introduced for constructi on products. Standards on energy efficiency are 
already planned. The objective, th erefore, would be to adopt a similar approach for water.  
Further action may consist in introducing new measures: 
–  Water performance criteria for buildings 
Given the high potential for water saving in al l public and private buildings, a new directive 
similar to the Directive on the Energy Performa nce of Buildings could help minimise water 
consumption. Water performance criteria could be applied to all water-us ing devices installed 
in buildings. 
Additional measures directly related to tec hnologies and practices at both European and 
national levels can also prove useful in mitigating the impact s of water scarcity and drought. 
These include exchange of best practices, en hanced research, widespread monitoring and 
decision-making tools, effective advisory serv ices, showing leadersh ip by example and the 
drawing-up of voluntary agreements  with all economic sectors.  
- Measures to foster the emergence of  a water-saving culture in Europe 
The public at large are generally unaware of all the impacts related to water scarcity and 
droughts until they become dir ectly affected by water shortage and restrictions.  
This situation calls for a series of measures  to raise public awareness and encourage all 
economic actors and the public to make efforts to  save water and to us e it more efficiently. 
These measures can consist in impr oving existing legislation and rules: 
–  EU labelling schemes 
The labelling scheme put in place for energy has pr oved its effectiveness. There is interest in 
considering similar schemes for water efficiency. 
- Quality and certification schemes 
These are the most appropriate ways of acting by example and wi dening the effective 
management of water demand. It is therefore appropriate to support th e inclusion of rules 
related to water demand management in ex isting and future certification schemes.  
 
EN 30   EN Further measures need to be considered at  national level in order to support the broad 
dissemination of information on the impacts of  water scarcity and droughts and on the good 
practices that need to be adopt ed in order to mitigate these imp acts at all levels. Educational 
programmes and broad targeted informa tion campaigns must be a priority.  
- Measures for new water supply 
Measures related to new water supply may consist in improving existing Commission 
guidelines: 
– Refinement of Commission guidelines for water in frastructures to ensure that projects are 
consistent with water management rules. Fu rther consideration could be given, in the 
context of the next reviews of regional and rural development policies, to environmental 
preconditions related to effective water mana gement practices in order to determine 
whether further progress needs to be made. 
Measures can also consist in in troducing new action at EU level: 
– Assessment by the Commission in the short term of all alternative options like desalination 
or waste water re-use 
5. ANALYSIS  OF IMPACTS 
Section 2.4 gives a full descrip tion of the consequences of a 'no policy change' scenario. It 
highlights the possible risks of increasing the impacts of water scarcity  and droughts due to 
insufficient preparedness for severe droughts and possible exacerbation of the impacts of 
water scarcity as a result of  unsustainable land planning and water allocation, while the 
wastage of large amounts of wa ter continues across Europe.  
5.1. Option A: The 'water supply only' option 
5.1.1.  Environmental impacts 
Any new water supply gives rise to costs for the environment20.  
Dams and reservoirs 
• Reservoirs play an important role in public  water supply, irrigation  and industrial uses. 
However, the construction of dams can have serious implications for the functioning of 
freshwater ecosystems in a river basin a nd ultimately have an impact on livelihoods.  
• Dams disconnect rivers from their flood-plains and wetlands , and reduce river flows. In 
some cases, river flows have been reduced by  a factor of four in  10 years due to new 
infrastructures. 
                                                 
20 Parts of this chapter are extracted from 'Water scarcity management in the context of the Water 
Framework directive', June 2006 
http://circa.europa.eu/Public/irc/env/wfd/library?l=/ framework_directive/scarcity_droughts/technical_re
port_2006&vm=detailed&sb=Title   
 
EN 31   EN • They affect the migratory patterns of fish and flood riparian habitats , such as waterfalls, 
rapids, riverbanks and wetlands, which are e ssential feeding and breeding areas for many 
aquatic and terrestrial species.  
• Dams also disrupt the ecosystem services provided by rivers and wetlands, e.g. water 
purification. By slowing the movement of water, dams prevent the natural downstream 
movement of sediments to delta s, estuaries, flooded forests, wetlands and inland seas, thus 
affecting the composition and productivity of species.  
In the Mediterranean region, the high sediment lo ad in run-off water leads to the silting-up of 
dammed water. In Spain's Mediterranean basins, some 50 dams examined in 1996 had lost 6% of their overall original capac ity. The Jucar basin dam is alr eady 84% silted up (Plan Bleu, 
2005). 
Water transfers 
• In terms of environmental e ffects, transfers usually make the ecological status of water 
bodies worse. For example, transfers from the Tagus basin involve a si gnificant reduction of 
stream flows in the Middle Tagus, so the ri ver currently has problems diluting urban and 
industrial pollution.  
• Furthermore, the dynamics of certain ecological processes such as erosion /sedimentation are 
crucial for maintaining downstream ecosystems, as observed in the Ebro delta, and also for 
preserving food chains in coasta l waters (Ibáñez et al., 1999).  
• Differences in water quality between basins can affect freshwater ecosystems and even 
cause shortages for potential water users, as the an alysis of the Ebro transfer project analysis 
has shown.  
• Translocation of aquatic speci es is another transfer risk: the Tagus-Segura transfer has 
transported four fish species ( Carassius auratus, Gobio go bio, Chondrostoma polylepis and 
Rutilus arcasii ) between basins and prom oted hybridization with Chondrostoma arrigonis in 
the Júcar basin (Oró, 2003).  
Alternative solutions 
Given the current uncertainty about  the environmental impact of all alternative solutions such 
as desalination
21 - including the amount of energy used  – and, by extension, its compatibility 
with the Energy Policy for Europe22 - , it is necessary to carry out further risk assessment 
work before the Commission takes any definitive position.  
5.1.2.  Economic impacts 
• The short-term impacts on the economy are, at first sight, expected to  be positive. Any new 
water supply can support the development of activities in the area surrounding the new 
infrastructure. While agriculture and tourism ar e usually the first to benefit, new industrial 
activities and the develo pment of urban areas ca n also be among the first beneficiaries. New 
                                                 
21 handling of brine after the desalination process, impacts on marine ecosystems and risks associated with 
the use of desalinated water for drinking and agriculture 
22 Communication COM (2007) 1 final 10.01.2007 
 
EN 32   EN water supply is therefore expected to bring a dditional benefits for sectors that are highly 
dependent on the availab ility of water resources.  
• However, a number of shortcomings need to be mentioned. 
Dams and reservoirs 
• The World Commission on Dams found that the technical and economic performance  of 
many dams  supplying water, both for irrigation and as  bulk water supply, have failed to reach 
the targets set. The survey showed that, ap art from 29 dams with a water supply component 
(excluding irrigation), 70 % of dams did not re ach their targets over time, and a quarter of 
dams fell short of their target by over 50 %. Likewise, the irrigation components of large 
dams studied by the WCD failed to meet their targ ets, including the area s irrigated. However, 
dams with heights of less than 30 m and reserv oirs with an area of less than 10 km² tended to 
be closer to the predicted target s (World Commission on Dams, 2000).  
• In the agricultural sector, most irrigators  cannot afford the capita l cost of collective 
infrastructures for storage and transfer. These collective infrastructure s are therefore funded 
for the most part by public authorities.  
The WFD lays down conditions to ensure that the beneficiaries recover the infrastructure 
costs. Therefore, it seems important that a ny new water supply projec t should be assessed 
from a macro-economic perspective, so that a ll merchant and non-merchant users can think in 
terms of costs and benefits and, in particular , take into account the outlook for water demand 
in the agricultural sector.  
• In highly imbalanced zones, an alternativ e solution may be to create small substitution 
reservoirs which fill during the winter and have little impact on natural systems. In France, such reservoirs are now preferred to the building up of large multi-use structural resources. 
However, the cumulative impact of these reserv oirs on a basin scale needs to be taken into 
account and can be equivalent to  or even greater than the im pact of a single large dam. 
• Finally, when considering dams as a struct ural solution to water scarcity, the decision-
making process must take a realistic view of  the technical and economic performance of 
dams, as well as the economic cost resulting fr om the disruption caused and the services they 
provide.  
Water transfers 
• In the initial stages of planning of water tran sfers, expectations have often been overplayed, 
as shown by a recent review of various transfer projects, particularly in Spain (Tagus-Segura, 
Ebro and Júcar-Vinalopó). Some specific aspects require spec ial attention:  
- Water availability in the donor  basin, including expectations of water consumption in the 
basin itself and variations in rainfall and evaporation due to climate change  
- Environmental and social effects of the transfer on the donor basin  
- Effects of the transfer on the receiving basin - Detailed costs of the water transfer  
 
EN 33   EN - Meeting the derogation criteria  laid down in Articles 4(7), 4(8) and 4(9) of the WFD. 
• As regards water availability, the original studies for the Júcar-Vinalopó transfer project 
showed that there were enough available resource s. Nonetheless, after reviewing stream flows 
and environmental needs in the Júcar basin, th e plans for the Vinalopó transfer now include 
the option of pumping an additional 62 Hm³/y of groundwater from the Valencia aquifer.  
• Another limitation on water transfer is th at inter-basin water tr ansfers often promote 
increased land use and stimulate growth in long-term water demand in receiving basins. 
• Finally, the costs of the water transfer project s often do not fully reflect all the transfer and 
associated works, thus failing to comply with the obligation to recover costs as laid down in 
the WFD. For the Ebro transfer project, various economic re views of the initial studies more 
than doubled the expected water pr ice from 0.31€/m³ to 0.72€/m³.  
Medium- and long-term impacts of th e development of new water supply 
Section 2 highlights the critical situation wh ich Europe will have to face in the coming 
decades with regard to the le vel of water availability.  
The implementation of option A - based on new water supply only - wo uld involve studying 
likely trends and identifying the areas where water will still be available in sufficient quantity by 2070. The map in section 2.4.3 clearly illustrate s the future large-scale distribution of 
water scarce areas. Few opportunities for new and significant water supply are 
foreseeable within Europe other than by increasing the pressure on already sensitive 
water resources and consuming remain ing resources until total depletion.  
• New opportunities will need to be identified beyond Europe, in neighbouring countries 
which will still have sufficient wate r availability, such as Russia.  
• Transfers of water from countries far aw ay from European water scarce regions will 
generate significant costs due to  the long distances over which the water has to be transported.  
• The decrease in European water availability will make most new dam or reservoir projects 
more difficult than in the past. All the 'easiest ' sites for setting up ne w dams and reservoirs 
have already been used (Plan bleu, 2005).  
• New projects now face more difficult conditi ons, particularly in terms of economic and 
environmental impacts. Their level of sustainabi lity needs to be considered against a backdrop 
of decreasing water availability. Operating cost s and supply costs will increase due to lower 
aquifers and ever-greater distances between th e point of abstraction and the point of use. 
Technological progress will not make it pos sible to cover all additional costs.
 
• The economic sectors that need water will ther efore have to bear a dditional costs as water 
prices increase.  
One expected outcome is that some economic s ectors might decide, in the light of the lower 
profits generated by their activity, to partly or totally delocalise  in order to find cheaper water 
prices outside Europe.  
 
EN 34   EN Alternative solutions 
There are several technically feasible possibili ties of mobilising additional water resources, 
such as aquifer recharging, waste water re-use, de salination, etc. Desalination is probably one 
of the most highly developed t echnologies, with more than 15  000 desalination plants in the 
world (Graber, 2006).  
A number of technologies have been develope d for desalination; thes e include distillation, 
reverse osmosis, electro-dialysis and vacuum fr eezing. Two of these technologies - distillation 
and reverse osmosis - have sometimes been cons idered by municipalities, water districts and 
private companies as a way to de velop sea water desalination.  
• Desalination costs are very sensitive to the salinity of the feed water. Desalination of 
brackish waters and waters that are mildly sali ne can be economically justified for some high-
value uses.  
• However, seawater desalinati on remains particularly expensive even when all costs are 
fairly accounted for. There is a tendency to  promote seawater conversion projects in 
association with power plants. The resulting costs are almost always understated, because the 
power is subsidised and all joint cost s are allocated to power generation.  
• Water treatment costs vary depending on the am ount of salt removal, cost of energy, size of 
plant, and the type of treatment technology. Desalination costs are dominated by capital 
investment, energy and maintenance costs. Wh ile advances in membrane technology have 
resulted in significant cost reductions, energy still accounts for up to 40 % of the operating 
cost (Graber, 2006). Membrane-based desalinati on may provide an answer, but it still takes a 
significant amount of energy to produce the hi gh pressure needed for the process.  
• A scenario that would involve  supporting the wide-scale deve lopment of desalination units 
in Europe needs to be given due consideration.  
The following map illustrates the regions where wate r availability is likely to become a major 
problem across Europe. Most of Southern Europe  should face a decrease of between 30% and 
50% in water availability. 
 
EN 35   EN 
 
 
Percentage change achieved in average annual wa ter availability (natural discharge without 
subtraction of water for consumption) for Eur opean river basins as compared to today’s 
levels, based on two different GCMs (ECHAM 4 and HadCM3) for the 2020s and the 2070s 
• A scenario whereby this decrease is offset by additional water supply coming only from new 
desalination units would have a significant impact in terms of energy consumption.  
• Considering that 3 to 4 kWh are needed to pr oduce one cubic metre of water, the offsetting 
of a 50% decrease in water availability by de salination alone would lead to an additional 
energy consumption of 28 Mtep/yea r in Southern Europe. This would, for example, increase 
energy consumption in Greece by 13% and in Spain by 10%.  
5.1.3.  Social impacts 
• The direct short-term impacts on society are expected to be positive under ce rtain conditions 
only. This will be the case if one of the aims  of the new infrastructure is to provide public 
water supply . The new water supply can then increa se water security and provide society 
with benefits by reducing the risk of water shortage and raising public health levels. 
• Society can also benefit from positive impacts related to the development of the economy . 
New economic activities can support the creation of  new jobs and thus raise the standard of 
living. 
• However, benefits may be limited if the development of new water supply involves 
transfers of costs  from some economic sectors to hous eholds. With resource managers 
seeking to raise extra capital when investing in  new supply sources, the price of water at the 
point of delivery may rise dramatically. The issue of affordability, whilst of obvious concern 
 
EN 36   EN in developing countries, has latterly attracted increasing interest in Europe and the developed 
world (OECD, 2003).  
• The beneficiaries  of projects which raise the leve l of provision to an existing supply 
network are generally those who already have access to the network. The social costs and 
benefits of such schemes may be unevenly distributed amongst communities. For example, 
urban communities may benefit from a large inland desalination scheme, whilst rural communities may be left out.  
• Benefits may also be limited in the case of water transfers whenever they give rise to social 
and political conflicts  between donor and receiving basins. Such conflicts can be expected 
within Europe, where 70% of the rivers are transboundary. 
Mid- and long-term impacts of th e development of new water supply 
• Impacts on society are likely to be compar able to the impacts identified on the economy. 
Option A would most probably lead to an unsusta inable situation for a growing proportion of 
Europe's population.  
• The expectation of reduced availability of wa ter resources at local level will lower the level 
of water security that all new local wate r supplies were suppo sed to provide.  
• This situation would require the identific ation of additional water supply options beyond 
Europe.  
• Such a scenario would result in rising wate r prices for the whole population as water will 
become scarcer and therefore more expensive.  
• This scenario would not necessarily lead to  a better standard of living or better water 
security for the population.  
The social impacts of option A will be further assessed in  the study announced  in section 
1.2.2, together with the regional ch aracteristics and implications.  
5.2. Option B: 'Water pricing policies only'  
5.2.1.  Environmental impacts 
• So far, there has been no systematic assessmen t on a European scale of the direct effect of 
pricing policies that reflect the full social cost s of water supply. However, there are numerous 
case studies which lead to differing conclusions. 
• Regarding agriculture, the implementation of  water pricing leads to  changes in land use 
towards higher-value uses. These changes happen ve ry quickly as farmers are either forced to 
grow higher value crops to finance the develo pment, or they find the opportunity cost of 
irrigated property too high to  resist and sell to other farm ers who change the land use.  
 
EN 37   EN Models developed by the University of Bologn a (Italy) have made it possible to assess the 
impacts of water pricing policies on irrigated farming systems in Italy23. Several scenarios 
have been set up and combined with two wate r price levels. The findings show that water 
pricing is an effective instrument for water regula tion in the growing of cereals, rice and citrus 
fruit. For example, in the case of  cereals, a doubling of the price leads to a fall of  up to 70% in 
water use. For citrus, some scenarios involve converting from citrus production into cereal 
production with an associ ated increase in profits24. The impact of increased water prices 
always seems to play a significant role. 
Additional analyses of the effects of several wa ter management alternatives in the irrigated 
agriculture of Europe's South Eastern basins have  also been carried out25. An increase of 
€0.12/m³ in water prices would reduce demand fo r agricultural water by 509 hm³. An increase 
of €0.18/m³ in water prices would reduce water demand by 605 hm³.  
In Hungary, between 1986 and 1997 water consum ption fell from 154 lhd to 102 lhd (lhd= 
litres per head per day) following large pr ice increases in real terms. (OECD 1999) 
• However, current prices are often well below the range where water saving is a significant 
financial consideration for the farmer. So, if  volumetric charges are to have a significant 
impact on demand, prices must be raised signifi cantly and in general well above the estimates 
of the costs of the service. Some authors suggest  that volumetric prices would need to be 10 to 
20 times the prices necessary in order to re cover the full supply cost before demand was 
affected, and this would lead to problems  of political acceptabili ty in most countries26.  
The available data also show that domestic water consumption decreases when metering is 
introduced. However, it is possible to determine a certain threshold below which price increases do not affect consumption levels . The best responsiveness of household water 
demand is reported for ‘peak-pricing’ practices, m eaning that there are temporal variations in 
the price, for example due to generally  higher consumption in the summer. 
• There is evidence of elasticity of demand for industrial water, but here the range of possible 
alternatives appears to play a major role. Ce rtain sectors (e.g. chemicals, pulp and paper) 
seem to be especially sensitive to changes in the water price, because they are able to make 
use of water saving technologies. 
Other environmental impacts 
• Negative environmental impacts of water prici ng policies are often due to incorrect design 
of the instruments and are th erefore linked to parallel ne gative social impacts.  
                                                
 
23 The impact of water and agriculture  policy scenarios on irrigated farmin g systems in Italy; an analysis 
based on farm level multi-attribute linear progra mming models. F. Bartolini, G.M. Bazzani, V. 
Gallerani, M. Raggi, D. Viaggi, 26 April 2006 
24 Such changes may be attenuated by the time taken for adaptation and due to the resistance to 
abandonment of traditional citrus production, even  if profits are strongly negative and water 
consumption very high. Whenever the under-remuneration of the farm labour may become no longer 
acceptable, citrus may be replaced by a mix of rain -fed crops based on durum wheat and other crops. 
25 Water quantity and quality issues in Mediterranean ag riculture, J. Albiac, T. Ma rtinez, J. Tapia, OECD, 
November 2005 
26 Water charging in irrigated agriculture, lessons from the literature, December 2002, B. Bosworth, G. 
Cornish, C. Perry, F. Van Steenbergen 
 
EN 38   EN • An example in agriculture is the intensifi cation of production around the installation of 
modern and expensive water saving technolog y, leading to potential  negative impacts on 
biodiversity. 
• Another impact could be the overexploitation of groundwater, if the la tter is excluded from 
the pricing scheme. 
• However, if the design of the pricing sche me addresses these environmental concerns, the 
environmental impacts can be essentially pos itive. It can lessen the over-exploitation of 
aquifers and the associated destruction of wetlands, and can help address problems of 
eutrophication and pollution by hazardous substan ces. Finally, there would be less need of 
infrastructures for new water supply or water transfers. 
5.2.2.  Economic impacts 
• The implementation of a water pricing polic y covering both environmental and scarcity 
costs can prompt an efficient allocation of resour ces, leading to an increa se in social welfare. 
However, the outcome will depend on how the revenues are used.  
• Here again, there is no a comprehensive as sessment on a European scale, although case 
studies on the macro-economic impact of sustai nable agriculture in Bulgaria, Romania and 
Hungary27, for example, show that large-scale c onversion of arable land to sustainable 
agriculture through internalisation po licies brings economic benefits.  
• Additional positive economic impacts can be identified: 
Innovation in the branches making the necessary technology available for water savings can 
involve the creation of new jobs. 
Another positive economic feature of water pric ing may be a reduction of budgetary pressures 
with regard to the building of ne w water supply infrastructures.  
5.2.3.  Social impacts 
• As already mentioned, it is less the actual economi c principle that affects the potential equity 
impacts of full cost recovery pricing and more the manner in which the principle is 
implemented.  
• Moreover, Article 9 of the Water Framework Di rective sets the condit ions for the recovery 
of costs for water services. It specifies inter alia  that Member States need to have regard to 
the social, environmental and economic effects of  the recovery. Member States are therefore 
allowed to adjust their water pricing polic ies on the basis of social considerations. 
• On the other hand, ensuring an adequate cont ribution by the different water uses should not 
necessarily lead to higher wate r prices for households. In some  regions, transfers of charges 
between economic sectors (in part icular agriculture) and house holds show that households 
today pay much more for water than other sect ors and more than they would normally pay if 
                                                 
27 Impact of agricultural development scenarios on wa ter resources in Bulgaria , Hungary and Romania, 
Kieft, H (2000) in: Implementing the EU Water Framework Directive, Seminar proceedings, European 
Commission, WWF, Brussels 2000. 
 
EN 39   EN the "polluter pays" principle we re fully implemented. The introduc tion of 'fair' water pricing 
policies could therefore have the effect of lowering water prices for households. 
• The social impacts of option B will be furt her assessed in the st udy announced in section 
1.2.2, together with the regional ch aracteristics and implications.  
• Regional differences in the water price due to the internalisation of environmental externalities are another aspect of inequa lity. Taking regional characteristics into 
consideration is therefore of major importance for the elaborat ion of efficient water pricing 
policies in the EU. The factors th at need to be taken into acc ount are the different levels of 
infrastructure development, different natural se ttings and differences in the institutional and 
regulatory context.  
5.2.4.  Synthesis 
• The description in the sections above reveals that the impacts of water pricing policies differ 
according to the socio-economic context and natural conditions.  • Water pricing policies are usuall y not sufficient in themselves to fully address water scarcity 
and droughts, but they can prove effective if they genuinely are combined with 
complementary options.  • The measures attached to option B should not therefore be rejected out of hand, but are 
worth considering further in combination wi th other options. The integrated approach 
supported in Option C will therefore address,  among others, the issue of water pricing 
policies. 
5.3. Option C: integrated approach 
5.3.1.  Water saving and water efficiency potential – what room for manoeuvre is there 
to improve water demand management? 
The assessment of the water saving potential in  Europe resulting from the implementation of 
appropriate measures shows that 20% of water can be saved (Ecologic, 2007).  
It is a simple matter to compare a strategy ba sed on 'more value per dr op' with the strategy 
adopted for the energy sector. 
• In the Mediterranean area, losses or inefficien cies represent 44% of the water abstracted in 
the region. This estimate illustra tes the possibility of improving the efficiency of water use. 
The volume saved could then constitute a poten tial new water resource for the future. Current 
analyses conclude that water savings would be  as much as 86 km³/year and would actually 
correspond to more than the expected gr owth in total demand between 2000 and 2025 
(estimated up to 51 km³/year).
28 
The following figure illustrates th e comparison between the baseli ne scenario (supply) and the 
alternative scenario, based on water demand management, for Northern Mediterranean 
countries (Spain, France, Italy, Greece, Ma lta, Cyprus, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia -
Herzegovina, Serbia and Montenegro, Albania). 
                                                 
28 Plan Bleu, 2007 
 
EN 40   EN Water demand per sector, baseline and a lternative scenarios,  entire Countries 
Source: Plan Bleu, J. Margat - Northern Me diterranean Countries, from Spain to Greece: 
possible savings of 31km³/year in 2025 
 
Water demand reduction is possibl e without affecting current ec onomic activities and can lead 
to economic, social and environmental benefits. 
Wasting water can therefore be considered as an additional cost (along with exploitation, 
supply and processing) and the pot ential financial savings are huge. 
In the Mediterranean region, the "Plan Bleu" estimated that water savings of up to €255 
billion could be made over 25 years (or €11 bn per year)29. The costs for exploiting this 
potential need to be subtracted but are still far outweighed by the resulting benefits. In addition, energy savings would be as much as  100 TWh for the production of drinking water 
alone over 25 years.  
• More generally, the household share of pub lic water supply across Europe averages 65%
30. 
This represents 46 km³ per year (based on EEA  statistics for 2000 and the forecast for 2005). 
Within households, water is mostly used for to ilets (25%), baths, showers, dishwashers and 
washing machines. 
The technological developments that have improve d the efficiency of wa ter appliances have 
been one of the most important drivers of the re duction of water use, as illustrated by the two 
following examples31. 
- Until the 1980s, and in some countries even into the 1990s, building standards 
recommended a minimum of 9 litres of water for to ilet flushes. Now, toilets with a flush of 
less than 6 litre dominate the market in many countries. However, many old houses are still 
equipped with old fixtures. 
                                                 
29 Based on a water price of 0.4 €/m3 
30 Calculated from data from Denmark, Germany, Sweden, Spain and France (EEA) 
31 EEA Households Water Use, ETC on water 

 
EN 41   EN - As regards dishwashers, water consumption is linked to energy consumption and cleaning 
performance. Figures are based on the assumption that many A-class (energy) appliances need 
16 to 17 litres per cycle, but the existing stock still consumes at least 18 litres32. 
Although a great deal of progress has been made , there is still room for improvement. From 
alternative solutions for domestic waste water tr eatment that avoid large volumes of water for 
flushing to new types of dishwashers using ultr asonic technologies, there is a wide range of 
technical solutions that can l ead to significant water savings. 
In addition, the significant poten tial for reducing consumption of  domestic water supply could 
be mobilised through better management of wa ter in: schools (20%), sports facilities, 
including swimming pools (20%), campsites (10% to 20%), hotels (20%), collective 
households (20%), green parks (from 25% to 60%); and the payback period would be less 
than 3 years (Loire-Bretagne agency, 2005). 
Examples collected in many countries (UK, FR, SP, CY, MT, Australia, etc.) show that, on 
average, around 20% of water savings can be expected to come from the improvement of 
water performance of buildings of whatever type: households, public administrations, schools, 
sports facilities or tourist accommodation. In ad dition, as much as 35% to 40% of domestic 
water consumption can be saved by recycling "grey" water, as demonstrated in Cyprus33.  
The challenge is of particular interest in wate r scarce areas where large urban or tourism areas 
are developed and where a 20% reduction in water consumption can alleviate tensions 
between users. 
• Further examples can be identified in the agricultural sector. For instance, water use can be 
significantly reduced by switching ir rigation technology from gravity to drip or sprinkler feed 
in most crops, including citrus, grapes , deciduous tree crops and truck crops34. Of these, citrus 
show the most striking changes. When irrigatio n technology switches from gravity to drip 
irrigation, efficiency (water use pe r acre) increases by about 50%.  
• All these examples illustrate the existing scope for action to achieve better water demand 
management across Europe and thus  provide an indication of what is at stake. However, such 
gains would need to be further evaluated locall y and regionally through ‘cost-effectiveness’ 
studies taking into account various options, incl uding the costs and benefits of environmental 
and social externalities. 
It is still rare for systematic evaluations of  cost-effectiveness, comparing several options 
(increasing supply or using wate r demand management), to be carried out and published. Such 
evaluations, which would include more detailed  estimates of the potential water savings on 
the basis of precise analysis and internalisation, as far as possible, of the costs of the 
environmental impacts of the various opti ons would increase aw areness among decision-
makers of the opportunities and feasibility of water demand management. The question is 
                                                 
32 MEEuP product cases Report, final, 28.01.2005, VHK for European Commission 
33 Recycling of grey water in Cyprus, C.A. Kambanellas; Use and conservation of water in Cyprus, 
Ministry of agriculture, natural resources and environment, water development department, November 2002 
34 Schoengold, K. Sunding, D. and Moreno, G. 2004 "Panel estimation of Agricultural Water Demand 
based on an Episode of rate reform" 
 
EN 42   EN whether it is then less costly for the community to reduce losses than to exploit new resources, 
taking long-term effects into account. 
Very often, water demand management appears much more economically advantageous than 
increasing water supply. The few st udies available that make th is kind of comparison show 
differences of 1-3, or even 1-10 between co st per cubic metre ‘saved’ and ‘supplied’. 
5.3.2.  Impacts of option C on the economy 
It is essential to mention from the outset that  the implementation of some specific measures 
will require the definition of appropriate a ccompanying measures taking into account specific 
regional, sectoral and social factors. Such measures will require further assessment. 
5.3.2.1.  Measures for drought prevention 
Early warning systems are needed for all kind s of changes in human activities and in 
ecological processes and for just about an y change that is of  interest to anybody35. Early 
warning systems are part of a country’s capacity to react to a perceived threat in order to prevent, adapt to or mitigate its impacts. Su ch systems have evolved considerably over the 
past two decades. They attracted much atte ntion in the 70s and 80s during the extended 
droughts and famines in the West African Sahel re gion and in the Horn of Africa. They were 
set up primarily for humanitarian purposes. Th eir functions have gradually expanded to 
embrace societal risks, vulnera bility reduction and sustainable development. It is a cost-
effective way to deal with potential disasters a nd to better address natu ral hazards in a context 
of climate change. These systems provide timely information so that communities are not only informed, but can also prepare themselves  before and during the anticipated event.  
As with any action, early warning systems entail  development costs. However, they should be 
embedded in existing organisational structures  and technical capacities rather than 
systematically looking for totally new schemes. This approach will be an effective way to 
save money and to progress towards coherent  synergies and coordination between schemes 
already in place.  
The functioning of an early warning system will automatically involve management costs. But 
such costs should be considered in the light of  all (particularly the economic) costs incurred 
by inadequate warning systems
36. It is obvious that economic losses can be considerably 
reduced if a culture of pr evention is introduced at a ll levels within a society. 
5.3.2.2.  Measures to support efficient water allo cation and sustainable land planning 
– Impacts of a better integration of water issues in sectoral policies 
The agricultural and regional policies offer opportunities to addres s water scarcity and 
drought issues. However, there is scope for furt her adjustments to improve the efficiency of 
these policies in tackling water quantity issues.  
                                                 
35 Early warning systems : do’s and dont’s, Report of Workshop - October 2003, M. H. Glantz, National 
Centre for Atmospheric Research 
36 “Many tragic events in recent years have demons trated the cost of inadequate warning systems.”, 
Declaration of the Postdam Early Wa rning Conference, September 1998 
 
EN 43   EN The most recent reform of the Common Agricultur al Policy introduced new principles such as 
decoupling under the single farm payment scheme or cross-compliance. Taking a step forward 
in the design of these principles would br ing significant support to the development of 
sustainable water demand management within the farming community.  
Decoupling has proved effective, in particular  because it does not influence the production 
decisions taken by farmers. While some countries  have opted for partial decoupling, several 
studies show that full decoupling would bring additional benefits for the protection of water resources through a decrease in ir rigated crops. In France, for instance, full decoupling would 
lead to a 15% decrease in the maize crop, ther eby accounting for 72% of the total reduction in 
irrigated area
37.  
Estimated decreases in the case of full decouplin g would be the result of shifting the emphasis 
from supported crops to non-supported crops and changing over from irri gated crops to rain-
fed crops.  
Full decoupling would not necessarily mean fa rmers losing income or incurring additional 
costs. The analysis of crop performance must take into account not only gross margins but 
also direct margins, including the cost of materials, and in part icular the cost of irrigation 
equipment38. It shows a low level of competitiveness for irrigated crops whenever the 
additional yield compared to a rain-fed crop does not exceed 4.5 to 5 t/ha. 
Moving towards full decoupling will mean limited additional costs for the administration. 
Moreover, this measure should actually lead to over all savings as a result of the administrative 
simplification which full decoupling will bring. 
The improvement of water demand management in the agricultural sector depends, amongst 
others, on systematic metering, full compliance w ith the permits issued for water abstraction 
and widespread good agricultural practices. It ma y be appropriate to see how links between 
water management issues and direct support payments could be established.  
The second pillar of the CAP is also an essential tool to deve lop sustainable water 
management practices in the agricultural sect or. The latest programmi ng periods show that 
national rural development programmes have  proved effective in  addressing many 
environmental issues. 
For instance, the rural development programmes have had environmentally beneficial effects 
on farming practices in about  25% of the land area of England. The evaluation of the 
Netherlands rural development programme indicat ed that, thanks to this programme, several 
watercourses had been restored, groundwater quality had been improved and water depletion 
had been reduced. In Ireland, 41% of all programme spending was dedicated to the Rural 
Environmental Protection Scheme (REPS). In the Spain's Extremadura region, Objective 1 - 
improvement of water management - was seen as one of the most importa nt positive effects of 
implementing the rural development programme.  
                                                 
37 Les effets de la réforme de la PAC de 2003 sur la  demande en eau par l'agriculture, G. Buisson, MEDD, 
décembre 2005 
38 Irrigation durable, Rapport du CGGREF, Ministère français de l'agriculture, 9 février 2005 
 
EN 44   EN The experiences gathered in the Member States  reveal that a consistent implementation of 
rural development programmes, in particular  of agro-environmental measures, leads to 
benefits that outweigh the costs. Conseque ntly, one option for the future, beyond 2013, may 
be to consider the exte nt to which the budget of the second p illar could be furt her enlarged to 
increase the benefits attached to rural deve lopment programmes and en sure a better coverage 
of the areas concerned by water quantity issues. The same considerations can also apply to 
regional policy. An extension of these budgets and the identification of possible synergies 
between policies would not entail any o pportunity costs for other European 
environmental policies.  
– Impacts of incentives at national level 
The energy sector is more adva nced than others in terms of  introducing incentives to reduce 
consumption of energy. The evaluation of thes e tools provides interesting information about 
the likely effectiveness of their implementation in the water sector.  
The introduction of tax credits to encourage en ergy saving action in Fran ce has borne fruit. 
From 2005 to 2006, the sales of wood-burning boile rs doubled. Sales of equipment relying on 
solar energy rose sharply, w ith the number of individual solar water heaters up by 710% 
between 2002 and 2006!  
In reaction to the droug ht that occurred in 2006, the Fren ch government decided to introduce 
a new tax credit measure (40% for a maximum le vel of expenditure of € 5.000) to encourage 
the purchase of rainwater harvesting systems.  
Major campaigns to promote water saving were al so rolled out in the Loire-Bretagne basin. 
More than 60% of the subsidies shared between  the Ministry of Environment, the region and 
the river basin district were to support the im plementation of seven types of water saving 
actions in seven municipalities, representi ng 600.000 inhabitants. In addition to raising 
awareness among 15.000 citizens, the water sa vings achieved ranged from 8% to 97%, 
depending on the type of measures39. 
The Water Act, adopted by France on 26 Decemb er 2006, confirms tax rebates for owners 
who opt for rainwater harvesting. More generall y, the Act specifies that the Water Agencies' 
programmes of action must promote the reduction of  leakages in networks as well as saving 
water.  
In Germany, a number of measures have been  implemented to encourage water saving and 
eco-design of buildings. For instance, the Land of  Hamburg has awarded a grant of up to 50% 
for the purchase of 1.500 water sa ving and recycling appliances. 
While tax incentives inevitably have an impact on behaviour, they also have an impact in 
terms of increasing the awaren ess of builders, project mana gers and the general public, 
including children.  
The introduction of incentives can be decided on by public authorities or private enterprises. 
When these incentives are adopted  by public authoritie s, the necessary funds could come from 
                                                 
39 Economiser l'eau dans la ville et l'habitat, gui de méthodologique, Région Bretagne, Agence de l'Eau 
Loire-Bretagne, March 1999 
 
EN 45   EN implementing the ‘user pays’ principle and the associated levying of taxes on water users. 
Redistribution of this kind al so encourages taxpayers to make the changeover to water-
efficient equipment.  
Private enterprises may also have an intere st in introducing speci al rebates for such 
equipment, as this is a way for them to attr act the public's attention. The market for water 
efficient equipment remains promising given the gaps in all sectors that still need to be 
addressed across Europe.  
5.3.2.3.  Measures to foster water performance technologies and practices 
As regards economic impacts , it is clear that encouraging th e development of water-efficient 
technologies and products stimulates the market and increases the competitiveness of European industries, as is already the case in the energy sector. For instance, the dishwasher 
market is still dominated by EU manufacturers de spite the fact that stringent options for 
energy and water were imposed 10 years ago wh ich led to energy and water savings of over 
30%.  
Moreover, new technologies a nd products can be exported to regions beyond Europe, in 
particular in the neighbouring countries of the Mediterranean  which also have severe 
problems of water scarcity and drought. In Germ any, more than 300 firms specialised in water 
saving and water recycling tec hnologies - including architects, town planners, engineers, 
industrialists, etc. - have se t up a professional organisation for promoting and implementing 
these techniques, and have thereby created 60 000 jobs. 
– Impacts of voluntary agreements 
Depending on the region and the sector, specific  partnerships could br ing significant added 
value. A prime example is France, where a voluntary agreement was signed between the government and golf course professionals in 2006. Protecting water re sources is the prime 
objective of this agreement, with the aim of reducing by 30% the volumes currently drawn 
from the public water supply for irrigating golf c ourses within 3 years. It also sets a specific 
target for a region where water is currently ove r-exploited, as well as promoting water re-use. 
A golf course which had been implementi ng water saving measures since 2002 has 
experienced a positive payback, with savings of over 20%.  
– Impacts of binding performance targets set up at national level 
Binding performance targets for new buildings ar e being implemented in the UK, where water 
savings of between 10% and 20% are expected. The impact assessment shows clear benefits, 
with a cost-benefit ratio rangi ng between 6 and 25, depending on the target (120 to 135 
litres/head/day). Costs will be mainly bor ne by developers and builders, and also 
manufacturers of plumbing fittings because of the costs of additional testing of products. 
Leakages in public water supply networks of some older cities  can exceed 50% . The feasible 
potential savings in irrigation in Northern Med iterranean countries is 15% of the total water 
demand and 45% of the total water saving potential
40. Reducing pressure in water networks 
                                                 
40 Plan Bleu, 2005 
 
EN 46   EN also reduces energy, as demons trated by the Emilia Romagna re gion in Italy, where reducing 
leakages by up to 16% in 2016 would allow en ergy savings of up to 1.9 Mtep/year in 2010 by 
reducing pumping and by monitoring pressure.  
Limiting losses has a direct economic impact . For large urban areas, reducing losses can 
prove to be a cost-effective alternative to the mobilisation of a new resource. Therefore, water 
companies may be able to defer investments. On the other hand, water companies which have recently invested in new water infrastructu res may face difficulties if the billed volumes 
decrease. 
Checking and enforcing compliance with regula tions in new buildings can give rise to 
additional costs (inspection by building au thorities/approved insp ectors and training 
institutions). However, the bulk of this inspect ion work can be done at the same time as other 
statutory inspections, so the increas e in costs would only be small. 
– Impacts of monitoring an d decision making tools 
In Aquitaine (France), systematic irrigation is frequent and leads to higher water 
consumption
41. In response to a survey carried out among irrigators in this region, 27% 
declared they had irrigated "a s usual". These users accounted for 44% of the overall volume 
of water for maize; higher wate r dosing also led to equivalent yields. 18% declared that they 
had irrigated with the help of a decision ma king tool; these accounted for 16% of the overall 
water volume for maize.  
The evidence supporting the beneficial effect s of innovative irrigation management and 
technologies is overwhelming42. Water savings in the range of 30 to 40% simply by better 
management of the application schedules with no reduction in yields have been reported by 
Causape et al. (2004) and Luque t et al. (2005). In addition, t echnology shifts both on-farm and 
within districts show that seri ous efforts to conserve water bring economic returns (Peterson 
and Ding, 2005; Cetin, Yazgan and Tipi, 2004) . In most cases, simply checking key 
management factors, such as soil moisture, du ring the phenological st ages is enough to reduce 
consumption. 
5.3.2.4.  Measures to foster the emergence of a water saving culture in Europe 
For energy labelling, it is assumed that extra sa vings due to improved la belling are equivalent 
to 30% of the water savings already achieved.  The potential for water savings has to be 
estimated. 
There are no available quantified re ferences to water savings that can be directly attributed to 
educational programmes on cost. However, a number of campaigns on saving water43 show 
that water volumes were actually reduced (by up to 30%). 
Based on the evidence that wate r saving programmes are cheaper than action on water supply, 
and that water saving through edu cation is cheaper than demand si de management of utilities, 
                                                 
41 Sécheresse et agriculture, Réduire la vulnérabilité de l'agriculture à un ri sque accru de manque d'eau, 
INRA, Octobre 2006 
42 Using good economic principles to make irrigators  become true partners of water and environmental 
policies, A. Garrido, Universidad de Madrid, OECD Workshop, 14-18 November 2005 
43 In particular in Loire-Bretagne river basin, France, 1995 onwards 
 
EN 47   EN educational programmes are considered to be co st-effective. In additi on, educating the next 
generation will provide greater efficiency immediately and is likely to provide a positive stimulus to students taking up higher education pathways leading towards sustainable 
development, including water demand management. 
5.3.3.  Impacts of option C on society 
Water saving policies have positive social impacts , in particular on sustainable job creation in 
the public sphere, such as local councils and, more generally, for building managers. 
Managing public buildings , green areas, etc with a view to  saving water requires professional 
skills that can be financed directly by the economic savings  gained by avoiding water 
consumption, waste water treatment and water heating. In France, new jobs were developed at the end of the 1990s for carrying out water saving actions: in the Loire-Bretagne district, at 
least 45 new posts were created in 32 public  organisations over a period of 8 years. 
Reducing the volume of water consumed will also have a direct effect on water bills. In 
France, water represents 1% of the total expe nditure of a household. A 20% reduction in the 
bill can be significant. 
There are numerous examples of lower household water bills resulting from the 
implementation of water saving measures. In the Gironde Region (South-West France), the 
impact of different water saving measures on household demand has been estimated at 60 m
3 
per year (down from 155 m3 to 95 m3 per year). This would cut the household water bill by 
€240 per year. The impact of different water sa ving measures for individual houses was also 
monitored for various measures actually  implemented in the Gironde Region.  
Installing water-saving de vices for taps, showers and toilet s in a holiday home close to the 
sea, occupied on average by 7 persons for 40 da ys per year, resulted in a 37% reduction in 
water demand (from 59 m³/year to 37 m³/year). This was reflected in a reduction of €140/year 
in the water bill (as compared to total equipment costs of €296 incl. tax, => giving a pay-back 
period of around two years) 
However, where economic instruments are not  implemented properly (water pricing, in 
particular), social equity could not  be expected (s ee section 5.2.3).  
The assessment of all social impacts will be part of the study announced in section 1.2.2 and 
due to be completed by the end of 2007.  
5.3.4.  Impacts of option C on the environment 
All measures leading to water savings also have positive environmental impacts . 
Carbon emissions can be reduced thanks to  the energy saved thr ough less pumping for 
extraction and transport, less tr eatment of the drinking water s upply and, lastly, less transport 
and treatment of waste water. 
In the case of the UK, it wa s calculated that £200 million had been saved through carbon 
reduction as a result of a water efficiency progr amme in new buildings (households, target of 
130 l/person/day). 
 
EN 48   EN In Italy, the Emilia Romagna region calculated that it would save up to 1.9Mtep/year by 2010 
by reducing leakages in the water netw ork to 21% in 2008 and 18% in 2016.  
A further marginal benefit from reduced carbon  e m i s s i o n s  m a y  a l s o  c o m e  i n  t h e  f o r m  o f  
reductions in the energy used to heat water, as water- efficient fittings use less water (cost of 
heating 1 m³ of water to 60°C is €3.64). 
The water which is saved will not be wasted and will not contribute to direct run-off to water 
bodies. More generally, abstracting less from the natural environment will lead to better status 
of water bodies and the pr eservation of ecosystems. 
In the light of these outcomes, there is a need to focus on options which help significantly to 
improve all water demand management practices. However, water supply options will also need to be considered when all water dema nd management and prevention measures have 
been optimized, but have still not redressed the balance between supply and demand. 
Considering the overall water saving and wat er efficiency potential across Europe, this 
point comes down to the need to intro duce a clear water hierarchy to guide policy-
making. New water supply should be considered  as an option, when other water demand 
management options, including effectiv e water pricing policy and cost-effective 
alternatives, have been exhausted.  
6. C
OMPARING THE OPTIONS  
Option A 
Water supply only Option B 
Water pricing 
policies only Option C 
Integrated approach  
Short-term Long-term  Short-term Long-term 
Economic impacts ++ - + ++ +++ 
Social impacts + - +/- +/- + 
Environmental 
impacts - - + ++ +++ 
The above table summarises the economic, social  and environmental impacts of the different 
options assessed in the previous section.  
Option A can deliver interesting benefits for th e economy and society in the short term, while 
impacts on the environment are expected to be  negative. An assessment of the impacts over 
the longer term reveals a negative cost-ben efit ratio for the economy, society and the 
environment. 
Option B is expected to have positive impacts on the economy and the environment whenever 
effective water pricing policies and recovery of the cost of water services by water users are 
introduced. Social impacts may depend on the le vel of water pricing considered and could 
prove negative for some economic sectors or  some social classes of the population.  
 
EN 49   EN Option C will deliver results gradually. Impact s on the economy are expected to be positive 
from the outset and grow in the longer term. So cial impacts will also be positive with time. 
This option is expected to deliver signif icant and increasing positive impacts on the 
environment. Compared to the other options , it generates the greatest benefits for the 
environment.  
Based on this assessment, option C appears to be the most promising. It ensures the best cost-
effectiveness ratio in the long term.  
The steps to develop policies further and the me asures to address wate r scarcity and drought 
issues will in any event requi re additional, thorough impact assessments. The next steps will 
involve looking deeper into th e collection of data  and the quantitative assessment of the 
selected measures extracted from the wide ra nge of options proposed in the Communication.  
As highlighted in section 5.3.2, it is also clea r that the implementation of some specific 
measures will require the definition of a ppropriate accompanying measures taking into 
account regional, sectoral and social specificiti es. Such measures will also require further 
assessment. 
7. MONITORING AND EVALUATION  
The challenge of water scarcity and droughts will need to be addressed both as an essential 
environmental issue and as a precondition for sustainable economic growth in Europe.  
The impact assessment has identified an integrated approach consisting of an initial set of 
policy actions as the be st option and intends to open up a wide-ranging debate on how to 
adapt to water scarcity and dr oughts - two phenomena that coul d potentially in crease in a 
context of climate change. The actions could alr eady start to bear fruit in the short term. The 
Commission will review progress towards the set objectives and will report on them to the Council and the European Parliament. The report  will be presented in the framework of a 
Stakeholder Forum to be organised in 2008.
 
Action at EU level alone will not suffice. It  will need to be followed by commitments at 
national level if we are to succeed.  
The Commission will consider follow-up initiativ es and action in the light of discussions on 
this Communication in the Council of Mi nisters and the European Parliament.  
 
EN 50   EN ANNEX 1: EU SECTORAL WATER SAVING POTENTIAL44 
The Commission launched a study in early 2007 in order to estimate the water saving 
potential across Europe.  
The outcomes of this study confirm that the EU water saving potential is of minimum 20% in 
all sectors. 
1. DOMESTIC SECTOR  
1.1. Water supply network 
The technical performance of the water supply networks varies widely among Member States 
and urban areas. This results in a large range of leakage rates.  
1.2. Water efficient appliances 
The following table presents the potential saving s of different household technologies. Up to 
25% savings can be obtained by improving th e technological performance of household 
devices. 
Water use component Standard New Build Water Efficient New Build Standard vs. 
Water Efficient 
 Volume per use 
(litres) Per capita45 
consumption 
(l/h/d) Volume per use 
(litres) Per capita 
consumption 
(l/h/d) Water use 
reduction 
% 
Toilet 6 28 4 17 39 
Shower 45 25 30 17 32 
Bath 85 30 80 28 7 
Taps (Internal) - 12 - 10? 17? 
Washing Machine 60 13 40 9 31 
Dish Washer 20 8 15 6 25 
Garden - 6 - 5? 17 
Sub-total (l/person/day) - 122 - 92 Overall 25% 
reduction 
The next table presents an overview of the main characteristics of measures related to water 
saving in the domestic sector. Alth ough the information collected re lates to different levels of 
intervention, some general conclusions can be drawn: 
• Water savings for different measures  are usually between 20 and 50%.  
• Savings for individual measur es can be as high as 50%. 
• Significant savings in water bills can be expected. In some cases, energy savings 
for utility companies are signifi cant enough to jus tify rebates. 
• Payback periods are very short for some water saving appliances.  
                                                 
44 Report on EU Water Saving Potential, July 2007, Ecologic 
45 Under the assumption of 2.5/persons/household 
 
EN 51   EN General 
Measure Specific measures Expected water savings  Country Costs  Benefits Pay-back period 
(in years) Reference 
Overall 80% of household needs France 25 to 250€ for a 
reservoirs of 200 to 800 
l   Le Monde, La récupération de l’eau de pluie, 
30/05/2007 Rain water 
harvesting 
Overall 30-50% UK    www.environment-agency.gov.uk 
Wastewater reuse for irrigation 25% of the wastewater 
produced Cyprus    EEA (2001): No 19 Environmental issue report, 
Sustainable water use in Europe - Part 2: 
Demand management, EEA, Copenhagen, 2001 Waste Water 
reuse 
Domestic Wastewater Reuse 35% of the drinking water 
consumption Australia    www.sydneywater.au 
Leakage reduction program Leaks reduced from 29% 
to 20% England and Wales    EEA, Indicator Fact Sheet (WQ06) Water use 
efficiency (in cities): leakage, version 
01.10.2003 
Leakage reduction program 30 million liters per day Canada  of half a million dollars 
a year  www.infraguide.ca Leakages 
Leakage Control 52% reduction in water 
losses Italy    US EPA, Decision-Support Tools for Predicting 
the Performance of Water Distribution and 
Wastewater Collection Systems, EPA/600/R-
02/029 
Toilet 39 Europe 
US  
165$-365$  
  
6-11yeras 
Shower 32 Europe 
US  
10$   
3.5 yeasr 
Bath 7 Europe    
Taps (Internal) 17? Europe    
Washing Machine 31 Europe 
US  
$550-$700   
1-3 years 
Dish Washer 25 Europe    Sustainable Development Commission. 2006. 
Stock Take: Delivering improvements in 
existing housing 
 
www.aquacraft.com 
 Waster saving 
devices 
Water saving devices Overall 25% Germany    http://www.eaue.de/winuwd/132.htm 
 
 
EN 52   EN 2. INDUSTRIAL SECTOR  
There is a significant water saving potential in the industrial sector. Compliance with effluent 
discharge requirements and sewage charges is of ten the main driver explaining investments in 
water saving measures.  
Based on information available in Spain, UK a nd France, it can be as sumed that around 30% 
to 40% of industrial plants have already impl emented water saving measures for their process 
or office water use.  
It is unclear however whether th ey have already captured all th eir water saving potential (i.e. 
implemented water saving measures in all their processes and office use).  
Water savings presented in the literature stress  the significant water saving potential in the 
industrial sector. Reported wa ter savings range from 15% to  90% of current water use, 
depending on the industrial sub-se ctor considered, the individual process investigated or the 
combination of water saving measures analyse d. Figures most commonly found are within the 
30-70% range. 
Information on costs and benefits remains rare, perhaps due to the fact  that confidentiality 
aspects are important fo r the industry sector.  
The following table summarises the information collated as part of  the present study, 
including economic information. 
3. AGRICULTURAL SECTOR  
Overall, significant water savings can be expected in the agricultural sector as a result of 
technological improvements, changes in farm pr actices, use of more dr ought resistant crops or 
reuse of treated effluent. Potent ial water savings due to shifts in irrigation technologies are 
highest in countries where gravit y/furrow irrigation is still importa nt, in particular in Southern 
countries. 
Irrigation method Field application efficiency 
Surface irrigation (border, furrow, basin) 60% 
Sprinkler irrigation 75% 
Drip irrigation 90% 
Improvements in irrigation schedu ling, better agricultura l and irrigation pract ices at farm and 
field levels or a wider use of  deficit irrigation can potenti ally apply to all countries.  
In some cases, the implementation of these measures will lead to reduced pressures on water 
resources and potentially a reducti on in water supply uncertainty.  
The following table summarises the outcomes of case studies related to agricultural water 
savings. 
 
EN 53   EN Measure Details Potential water saving Place/ Level of the reference CostPreliminary condition and 
limitsSource
open channels -> pipes 20% Spain University of Cordoba
open channels -> pipes 300 Million m3per year France 15 Million Euros (0.05 €/m3) Interviews with experts
Earthen-> lined channels 10 to 25 % Global, medium length channel 
(200 to 2000m)FAO, irrigation manual 4.
Surface -> sprinkler 15% Global FAO, irrigation manual 4.
Surface -> drip 30% Global Crop compatible with drip system FAO, irrigation manual 4.
Drip irrigation 60% Southern Europe Crop compatible with drip system Massarutto. 2001
Sprinkler irrigation France+ 140-345 €/ha as compared to 
furrow irrigationhttp://www.economie.eaufrance.fr/
Pivot irrigation France+ 180-293 €/ha as compared to 
furrow irrigationhttp://www.economie.eaufrance.fr/
Drip irrigation France+ 2 465-5 142 €/ha as 
compared to furrow irrigationhttp://www.economie.eaufrance.fr/
From furrow to drip irrigation 40% Israel Agriculture output multiplied by 12http://www.damsreport.org/docs/kba
se/contrib/opt159.pdf
From surface to micro-irrigation Cyprusbetween 1 544€ and 3 890 €/ha 
investments, O&M costs 
ranging from 50 €/ha to 347 
€/haEEA. 2001
Improving irrigation scheduling Use of tensiometers and advise 30% Aquitaine region (France) INRA. 2006
High variation  depending on crops 
alternatives
50% Maize -> sor ghum France Market outlets. 
No tillage technology Uncertain impactDepending on current cropping 
calenda r
20% Orchards, Guadalquivir Spain Decrease of yield from 2 to 11% See case study Spain
16.5% (rainy year) to 53% (dry year) grapevine (general) No impact on yield and quality
20% Maize  (France)Reduction in yield compensated 
by reduced irrigation and drying 
costsINRA. 2006
40% Wheat, Tunisia Decrease of yield of 13% Pereira, and al 2002
25% Potato, Tunisia Decrease of yield of 10% Pereira, and al 2003
10% of total water needs for 
ii t iPortugal
12% of total water needs for 
ii t iItaly 
Treatment with sand filtration48-84 €/m3 for investments, 
0.01-0.02 €/m3for O&MEEA. 2001
Treatment with reverse osmosis151-193 €/m3 for investments, 
0.26-0.27 €/m3for O&MEEA. 2001
Training, farm planning, new 
irrigation technolog y25% AustraliaIncrease in crop yields of 20% 
reportedElliot. 
new technologies (drip, sprinkler), 
improved farm practices, awareness 
raisin g34% TurkeyAdditional reduction in energy use 
by 30%, improvements in soil 
salinit y and waterlo ggingBurak et al. 2000
New technology, automatic 
management of irrigation systems, 
efficiency enhancement measures, 
coordination.1 162 hm3 of water saved Spain2 344 Million Euros (2 €/m3 of 
water saved)
Water metering, awareness and 
advise, volumetric pricingBetween 1 000 m3/ha to 2 000 m3/haCanada http://www.recherchepolitique.gc.ca/
ATM, new technologies & incentive 
pricingSpainInvestments of 7 000 €/ha for 
the pressurized network + 2 500 
€/ha for drip systems at frm 
levelhttp://www.todomula.com/A.N. Angelakisa and L. Bontoux, 
2001
Water saving programmesINRA,2006Improving conveyance 
efficiency
Improving application efficiency
Wastewater reuseDecreasing crops irrigation 
needs 
Deficit irrigationReplacement of high water 
consuming crops by crops with lower 
requirements
 
 
EN 54   EN 4. TOURISM SECTOR  
The following table summarises the main elemen ts characterising the different water saving 
measures that have been identified for the tourism sector. Cost information for devices 
already described in the household sector is not repeated here. The following points can be 
pointed out: 
• Total water savings for the different sub-sect ors (camping sites, bed and breakfast, hotels) 
are between 30% and 50%.  
• Savings for individual measures can be as high as 80% to 90%. Thus, identifying areas 
where such savings can take place is a priority.  
• Savings in outdoor uses, which of ten represents a large share of  the total uses of the hotel 
industry, can be around 50%-60%. This estimate is c onservative, as savi ngs as high as 75% 
are found in various literatures. 
• Significant savings in water bills can be expect ed, in some cases combined with savings in 
energy bills when reduced water demand leads to reduced abstraction costs and reduced 
water heating costs. 
• Payback periods are very short, always equa l or lower to 3 years when reported. This 
would stress the significant advantages in in stalling water saving devices in the tourism 
sector. 
 
EN 55   EN Sub-sector Specific measures Expected water savings 
in % (quantities in 
brackets) Country Costs  Benefits Pay-back 
period (in 
years) Reference 
Overall 10 to 20% France (Loire-
Bretagne) - - - Office International de l’Eau (2005) 
Camping site 
Overall 45% Europe - - - Hamele and Eckhardt (2006) 
Overall 52% Europe -  - Hamele and Eckhardt (2006) 
Metering 10 to 25% Europe - - - Lallana, 2001 
Bed & Breakfast 
Improved toilet flushing -  
(18 000 l of water saved 
per year for 50 flushes 
per day) UK - £ 300 saved per annum 
(reduced energy and water 
bills) - http://www.egeneration.co.uk/ 
Holiday houses Information & awareness raising, 
installation of (free) water saving 
devices in houses, reuse of treated 
effluent 15% for tourists 
(consumption reduced to 
134 l/tourist/day) Balearic Islands 
(Spain) - - - http://www.calvia.com  
Overall 10 to 20% France (Loire-
Bretagne) - - - Office International de l’Eau (2005) 
Overall 14% to 37% France - - - Office International de l’Eau (2005) 
Water saving devices in toilets and 
showers 7% United Kingdom - 400 € per year (reduction in 
water bill) - ADEME (2007) 
Overall 32%  
(from 330 l/night to 224 
l/night) France - - - Own calculation based on Office International 
de l’Eau (2005) and ADEME (2007) 
Overall 46% Europe - - - Hamele and Eckhardt (2006) Hotels 
Cistern ball cocks in toilet flushes 22% UK - - - http://www.egeneration.co.uk/ 
 
EN 56   EN Sub-sector Specific measures Expected water savings 
in % (quantities in 
brackets) Country Costs  Benefits Pay-back 
period (in 
years) Reference 
Improved toilet flushing - 
(45 625 l per year for 100 
toilet flushes per day) UK - - - http://www.egeneration.co.uk/ 
Water saving for appliances in rooms + 
plantation of local low water consuming 
plants 33% Spain - - - Hamele and Eckhardt (2006) 
Raising awareness of hotel consumers - UK Initial cost: £ 16 per 
room, Then £ 15 per 
year £ 840 per year (reduction in 
water bill) 0.1 http://www.egeneration.co.uk/ 
towels changed on guest’s request, 
replacement of new technology 
washers, low flow water taps and toilet 
cisterns, wastewater reuse, training 31% Greece - - - www.ellinikietairia.gr/articles & 
www.grecotel.com 
Comprehensive package of measures 
implemented 100% for maintaining 
pond water levels 
(seawater) & golf course 
irrigation (treated 
effluent) Greece - - - http://www.portocarras.gr/home.htm 
Cafés 70% Europe - - - Hamele and Eckhardt (2006) 
Water saving measures in kitchen  30% Europe - - - Hamele and Eckhardt (2006) 
Installation of waterless woks in 
Chinese restaurants  90% 
(1 800 m3 per year per 
restaurant) Australia - $ 4 500 per year (reduced 
water and energy bill) 1 http://www.sydneywater.com.au/ Restaurants & 
cafés 
Leak repairs, water saving toilet 
flushing & toilet cisterns - 
(725 000 m3 per year) UK Investments at £ 
800 000, Recurring 
Costs at £ 50 000 per 
year £ 1.1 Million per year 0.75 h ttp://www.egeneration.co.uk/ 
 
EN 57   EN Sub-sector Specific measures Expected water savings 
in % (quantities in 
brackets) Country Costs  Benefits Pay-back 
period (in 
years) Reference 
Reduce leakage in stadium 78% France - 26 250 €/year (reduced 
water bill) 3 IME (2002), own calculation 
Water recycling in swimming pool -   
( 7140 m3 per year) France - 15 778 €/year (reduced 
water bill) 1.75 IME (2002), own calculation 
Flow regulation in swimming pool 28% France - 2 520 €/year (reduced water 
bill) 0.1 IME (2002), own calculation 
Optimum network closure for fountains - 
(2 468 m3 per year) France - 5 183 €/year (reduced water 
bill) 2 IME (2002), own calculation 
States of the art cleaning of buses 80% UK - Reduction in water bill 
expected - http://www.egeneration.co.uk/ Touristic 
infrastructure 
Waterless urinals at conference center - 
(511 m3 per year) UK £ 1 000 per urinal => 
5 000 £ £ 378 saved per year 
(reduced water bill) 2.5  
Drip irrigation for green spaces 62% France - 5 242 €/year (reduced water 
bill) 1 IME (2002), own calculation 
Water auditing, irrigation scheduling, 
shift to drip irrigation From 30% to 76% United States, 
Australia - - - Different sources presented in this report 
Change of grasses to water saving 
species 70% UK - - 3 http://www.egeneration.co.uk/ 
Range of measures including shift to 
low water consuming grasses 50% 
(2 8 70 m3 per year) UK £ 7 000 (washdown 
system) + £ 14 000 
per year (additional 
labour) Expected saving in water 
bill - http://www.environment-
agency.gov.uk/subjects/waterres/ Outdoor uses 
Conversion to Xeriscape 57% US Labour costs to be 
considered  Reduced water bill, reduced 
maintenance costs of 
gardens and public areas - http://www.cityofmesa.org/utilities/conservati
on/convert-to-xeriscape.htm 
 
EN 58   EN  
Sub-sector Specific measures Expected water savings in 
% (quantities in brackets) Country Costs  Benefits Pay-back 
period (in 
years) Reference 
Closed loop recycling 90% UK - - - Envirowise. 2005 
Closed loop recycling with treatment 60% UK - - - Envirowise. 2005 
Automatic shut-off 15% UK - - - Envirowise. 2005 
Countercurrent rinsing 40% UK - - - Envirowise. 2005 
Spray/jet upgrades 20% UK - - - Envirowise. 2005 
Reuse of wash water 50% UK - - - Envirowise. 2005 
Scrapers 30% UK - - - Envirowise. 2005 All sectors 
Cleaning in place 60% UK - - - Envirowise. 2005 
Transport Wastewater treatment and reuse 80% Hungary US$80 000 
investment + 
US$1 600 after 10 
years Savings in water bill 1.3 years http://www.unep/org.jp/ietc/publications/ 
Overall savings 30% Catalonia - - - ICAEN. 1999 
Leather industry 
Recycling wastewater (membrane 
technology) 90% Sector-specific - - - COTANCE. 2002 
Overall savings 28% Catalonia - - - ICAEN. 1999 
Increased efficiency at water 
purification plant, optimise water 
consumption 15% (- 35.5 Million 
m3/year) Sweden - - - http://www.sca.com/ 
Pulp & paper 
Aero-cooling towers, monitoring 62% (- 32 m3 per ton of 
paper) France 5 Million € 
investments Reduction in water 
abstraction costs of 6 €/ton 
of paper 2 years http://www.jeconomiseleau.org/ 
 
EN 59   EN Sub-sector Specific measures Expected water savings in 
% (quantities in brackets) Country Costs  Benefits Pay-back 
period (in 
years) Reference 
Monitoring programme, improved static 
rinse and counter flow rinse lines 12.5% (- 5 000 m3 per 
year) UK (electronics) - £3 000/year for water bill 
reduction, additional 
£2 700/year for effluent 
discharge reduction - http://www.envirowise.gov.uk/ 
Close-circuit water system, rainwater 
harvesting 90% (- 18 000 m3/year) France (metal 
surfacing) 700 000 € 
investments Reduction in water bill by 
27 000 €/year 12-15 years http://www.jeconomiseleau.org/ 
Rainwater harvesting 35% (- 200 000 m3/year) France (car 
industry) - Estimated reduction in 
water bill by 202 000 €/year- http://www.aquavalor.fr/experiences.htm 
Water saving measures in offices and 
washrooms 45% (- 1 700 m3/year) UK (furniture) - Equivalent cost savings of 
£3 000/year - http://www.etsu.com/etbpp/ Manufacturing 
Cooling tower to recirculate water 80% US (water-based 
inks) $5 800 Savings in water bills and 
sewage costs 0.15 http://www/grist/org/biz/tp/2006/04/25/makowe
r/ 
Chemicals Overall savings 53% Catalonia - - - ICAEN. 1999 
Overall savings 37% Catalonia - - - ICAEN. 1999 
Optimum sofcers valve settings, water 
recycling 40% (- 48 000 m3/year) UK (dyeing 
industry) No capital 
investments Reduced water bill of 
£29 000/year, additional 
energy savings of 
£3 800/year Immediate 
payback http://www.etsu.com/etbpp/ 
Textile 
Efficient water boilers, computer 
controlled management system & 
routine monitoring - UK £15 000 for 
computer-controlled 
management system Over £1 Million/year for all 
measures 1.5-2 for man. 
system http://www.etsu.com/etbpp/ 
Overall savings 35% Catalonia - - - ICAEN. 1999 Food 
Reuse of wastewater  67% (- 0.55 Million 
m3/year)  The Netherlands 
(dairy industry) - Reduction in water 
abstraction, additional 
reduction in discharged 
effluent - http/ec.europa.eu/environment/life/ 
 
EN 60   EN Sub-sector Specific measures Expected water savings in 
% (quantities in brackets) Country Costs  Benefits Pay-back 
period (in 
years) Reference 
Leak repairs, installation of new 
defroster, improved cleaning, dry 
filleting 58% UK (fish 
processing)  £95 500 per year - http;//www.envirowise.gov.uk/ 
Water audit & different water saving 
measures 60% US (tomato 
processing and 
canning) $89 500/year (inv. + 
O&M) Savings of $130 000/year 
for lower water and sewage 
costs 0.7 http://www/grist/org/biz/tp/2006/04/25/makowe
r/ 
 
 
EN 61   EN 5. ESTIMATION OF EU WATER SAVING POTENTIAL  
The following table gives an overview of th e EU water saving potential by sector.  
Sector Today water use Today saving potential Water use in 2030 
(baseline scenario) 
Agriculture 
(EU-27) Around 65 898 Million m3 for 11.7 Million 
hectares equipped for irrigation Estimated at 28 420 Million m3 or 43% of 
today’s total water abstraction – Most of the 
water savings (98%) take place in Southern 
Europe 73 608 Million m3 per year (based on 
+11.3% increase for the period 2000-
2030) 
Households Between 265l/p/d (Spain) and 85l/p/d 
(Lithuania) with an average of 150 l/p/d Between 18 % and 47% assuming an 
average consumption of 122 l/p/d (UN 
Sustainable Development Commission) and 
80 l/p/d (UK Code for sustainable planning) 
respectively  
Domestic 73 222 Million m³ for EU 30 (563 Milllion 
inhabitants in 2000). Based ón Flörke, M. 
Alcamo, J. (2004) 24 430 Million m3 or 33% based on 87 m³ 
/year (own calculations) 75 616 Million m3 20 for EU 30 (587 
Million inhabitants) Based ón Flörke, 
M. Alcamo, J. (2004) 
Industry 39 737 million m³/year Based ón Flörke, M. 
Alcamo, J. (2004) 43% of total water use (14 360 Million m³) 
Based on the assumption that the sector has 
a average technical saving potential 50% but 
25 % of the sector have already achieved the 
maximum saving 56 943 million m3/year (95% increase) 
Based ón Flörke, M. Alcamo, J. (2004) 
Electricity 94 973million m³/year Based ón Flörke, M. 
Alcamo, J. (2004) Almost 100%according to the technical 
specifications provided in Electric Power 
Research Institute (2002):  30 816million m3/year Based ón 
Flörke, M. Alcamo, J. (2004) 
Tourism 490 million m³/year (own calculations) 38% or 188 million m³ litres/year  
 
EN 62   EN (EU 25) 
 
EN 63   EN The water saving potential has been estimated for each sector on the basis of the European 
Outlook on Water use further investigation carried  out in the framework of the present study. 
This potential comes from technical impr ovements without major changes in human 
behaviour or production patterns. The saving poten tial coming from non-technical measures is 
not included in the calculation.  
The outcomes presented in the table show that  the current water saving potential (28 420 Mio 
m³) make it possible to compensate the increa se in water use predicted between now and 2030 
(73 608 – 65 898 Mio m³). It is therefore worth improving water demand management and 
progressing towards more water savi ngs in all economic sectors.  
 
EN    EN  COMMISSION OF THE E UROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 18.7.2007 
SEC(2007) 993 
ANNEXE II  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
 
Accompanying document to the 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIA MENT AND THE COUNCIL  
 
Addressing the challenge of water scarci ty and droughts in the European Union 
   
Impact Assessment  
   
{COM(2007) 414 final} 
{SEC(2007) 996} 
 
EN 2   EN ANNEX 2 
 
 
EN 3   EN 
 
 
EN 4   EN 
 
 
EN 5   EN 
 
 
EN 6   EN 
 
 
EN 7   EN 
 
 
EN 8   EN 
 
 
EN 9   EN 
 
 
EN 10   EN 
 
 
EN 11   EN 
 
 
EN 12   EN 
 
 
EN 13   EN 
 
 
EN 14   EN