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 2000/60/EC – [SEC(2007) 362] [SEC(2007) 363]
Date: 2007-03-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU environmental policy, European Union, application of EU law, directive (EU), environmental protection, pollution control measures, sustainable development, water management

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 22.3.2007 
COM(2007) 128 final 

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 2000/60/EC –  

[SEC(2007) 362] 
[SEC(2007) 363] 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 

Towards sustainable water management in the European Union 

INTRODUCTION 

"Water is not a commercial product like any other but, rather, a heritage which must be 
protected, defended and treated as such."1 

Water is indispensable for human survival and development. It is essential for human life and 
it  is  needed  for  many  industrial  activities  and  processes.  Adequate  quantities  of  sufficient 
quality  have  to  be  available  in  the  wilderness  to  sustain  wildlife,  plants  and  unique 
ecosystems.  

Too much water can cause loss of life and serious damage through flooding, as happens in the 
European Union nearly every year. Too little water is equally devastating, like the droughts 
that  are  occurring  more  and  more  often.  All  these  events  are  expected  to  become  more 
frequent and extreme according to predictions on the impacts of climate change. 

Maintaining  a  sustainable  balance  between  all  these  aspects  is  the  aim  of  the  Water 
Framework  Directive  (WFD),  adopted  in  20002,  which  lays  the  foundation  for  a  modern, 
holistic and ambitious water policy for the European Union. 

This  Communication  summarises  the  first  report  on  progress  with  implementation  of  the 
WFD  (as  required  for  by  Article  18(3))3.  It  also  makes  recommendations  for  the  next 
important  milestone:  the  river  basin  management  plans.  These  plans,  which  are  due  by 
December 2009, will bring further real improvements for the whole water system in the form 
of  programmes  of  measures,  which  must  be  operational  by  2012  and  deliver  the 
environmental objectives of the Directive by 2015.  

1. 

EU WATER POLICY – A BRIEF OVERVIEW 

The  Water  Framework  Directive  establishes  a  legal  framework  to  guarantee  sufficient 
quantities of good quality water across Europe. Its key aims are:  

•  to  expand  water  protection  to  all  waters:  inland  and  coastal  surface  waters  and 

groundwater; 

•  to achieve "good status" for all waters by 2015; 

•  to base water management on river basins; 

1 
2 

3 

Recital 1 of the Water Framework Directive 
Directive  2000/60/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  establishing  a  framework  for 
Community action on water policy (OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1). 
A more detailed analysis is published in the Commission Staff Working Document (SEC(2007) 362). 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  to combine emission limit values with environmental quality standards; 

•  to  ensure  that  water  prices  provide  adequate  incentives  for  water  users  to  use 

water resources efficiently; 

•  to involve citizens more closely; 

•  to streamline legislation. 

The  Directive  also  identified  two  areas  where  more  specific  legislation  was  needed: 
groundwater  (Article  17)  and  priority  substances4  (Article  16).  The  new  Groundwater 
Directive5  was  adopted  by  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  only  recently,  whereas 
the proposal for a Directive on Priority Substances6 is still under negotiation. 

Two additional recent legislative proposals will broaden the scope of the EU water policy and 
complete its comprehensive management and protection framework. These are the proposals 
for  a  Directive  on  the  assessment  and  management  of  floods7  and  for  a  Marine  Strategy 
Directive.8 

2. 

EUROPEAN WATERS – A THREATENED RESOURCE 

Under Article 5 of the WFD, Member States had to produce an environmental and economic 
analysis by December 2004, for the most part using existing information. The results below 
are based entirely on reports from Member States of this “Article 5 analysis”. 

2.1. 

Current status of EU waters – Worse than expected 

In  the  specifications  to  Article  5  set  out  in  Annex  II  of  the  Directive,  the  key  question 
Member States had to answer was: “What is the risk of failing to meet WFD environmental 
objectives based on current data?” (see Figure 1). As the WFD objectives have to be achieved 
by  2015,  the  results  illustrate  the  current  “distance  to  target”  of  national  water  protection 
efforts. 

4 
5 
6 
7 
8 

Chemicals of EU-wide concern which cause pollution of surface waters. 
Directive 2006/118/EC (OJ L 372, 27.12.2006, p.19) 
Proposal (COM (2006)397 final) of 17 July 2006 
COM(2006) 15 final of 18.1.2006 
COM(2005) 505 final of 24.10.2005 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

a
t
a
d
o
n

a
t
a
d
o
n

a
t
a
d
o
n

a
t
a
d
o
n

NL DE BE IE ES UK FR AT DK PT  LU FI  EL IT SE 

HU SI CZ LV SK MT LT PL EE CY

BG RO

Figure 1: Percentage of surface water bodies at risk of failing WFD objectives per Member 
State  -  ■  =  'at  risk',  ■  =  'insufficient  data',  ■  =  'not  at  risk'  (based  on  Member  States' 
reports)9  

The  actual  percentage  of  water  bodies  meeting  all  the  WFD  objectives  is  low,  in  some 
Member States as low as 1%. However, the results need to be analysed in more detail. 

High  “at  risk”  numbers  are  clearly  associated  with  densely  populated  areas  and  regions  of 
intensive, often unsustainable, water use. Furthermore, the WFD comprehensively considers 
all pressures and impacts on water for the first time at Community level, including problems 
caused by structural degradation of ecosystems and impacts on biological parameters. Many 
Member  States  have  addressed  this  challenge  by  using  “worst  case”  estimates  to  assess  the 
health of aquatic ecosystems and of the biodiversity-related indicators.  

Moreover,  EU  water  policy  addressed  some  important  pressures,  like  pollution  by  domestic 
waste water discharges,10 nutrients from agriculture,11 industrial emissions12 and discharges of 
hazardous  substances13  well  before  the  WFD.  Aggregated  analysis  of  the  impacts  of  those 
pressures clearly reveals differences in the level of implementation of this legislation (which 
in some Member States is very low). Where adequate investment has been made over the last 
10  to  30  years,  these  problems  have  been  largely  resolved.  For  the  ten  Member  States  that 
joined in 2004 and the two that joined in 2007 (together EU-12), full implementation of the 

9 
10 
11 
12 
13 

For more details, see SEC(2007) 362.  
Directive 91/271/EEC (OJ L 135, 30.5.1991, p.40) 
Directive 91/676/EEC (OJ L 375, 31.12.1991, p. 1–8) 
Directive 96/61/EC, OJ L 257, 10.10.96, p. 26 
Directive 76/464/EEC (OJ L 129, 18.05.1976, p. 23) and related daughter directives 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
investment-heavy regulations for point source control is subject to transitional periods, which 
in most cases run until 2015.  

Pollution  from  municipal  wastewater  -  current  implementation  (for  details  see 
SEC(2007) 363) 

The European Community adopted Directive 91/271/EEC on urban waste water treatment in 
order  to  regulate  discharges  of  municipal  wastewater  from  larger  villages,  towns  and  cities. 
The Directive explicitly specifies the kind of treatment to be provided. 

In the EU-15, significant amounts of wastewater are still not being treated adequately before 
discharge  into  surface  waters.  As  the  status  on  1  January  200314  shows,  only  81% 
implementation of the Directive has been reported by the Member States. The main gaps are 
the lack of (appropriate) treatment and the lack of designation of “sensitive areas” where more 
stringent  treatment  is  needed  to  protect  vulnerable  lakes,  coastal  and  marine  waters  from 
nutrient pollution. The Commission challenges some of the reported levels of implementation 
provided  by  the  Member  States.  Consequently,  the  Commission  has  taken  decisive  legal 
action against several Member States in recent years. 

The EU has spent a considerable amount of Community funds (mainly Cohesion Funds) on 
co-financing wastewater treatment plants in the Member States. For example, 9 billion euros 
were allocated to four of the EU-15 Member States and 5.6 billion for the EU-10 in the period 
2000-2006. For the new EU-12 Member States, it is estimated that approximately 35 billion 
euros will be needed over the next 10 years to comply with the Directive.  

Pollution  from  nitrates  in  agriculture  –  current  implementation  (for  details  see 
COM(2007) 120 final) 

Diffuse  pollution  of  agricultural  origin  is  a  major  threat  for  EU  water.  The  third  report  on 
implementation  of  the  Nitrates  Directive  confirms  the  significant  contribution  from 
agriculture  to  nitrate  pollution  of  groundwater  and  surface  water  and  to  eutrophication. 
Progress  has  been  made  in  the  recent  years  in  implementing  this  Directive,  although 
implementation  is  still  incomplete  and  further  work  is  required.  Designation  of  nitrates 
vulnerable zones, which increased from 35.5% of EU-15 territory in 1999 up to the 44% in 
2003,  needs  to  be  completed,  in  particular  in  Southern  European  Member  States.  Action 
programmes  need  to  be  improved  with  regard to  quality  and  completeness  of  the  measures, 
including adoption of reinforced actions if it is evident that the objectives of the Directive are 
not achieved. 

2.2. 

Pressures and driving forces – Consequences of unsustainable water use  

(physical  modifications)  and,  particularly 

The most significant and widespread pressures are diffuse pollution, physical degradation of 
water  ecosystems 
in  Southern  Europe, 
overexploitation  of  water.  In  some  of  the  EU-15,  and  more  generally  in  the  EU-12,  point 
source pollution is also an important problem. The main driving forces behind these pressures 
are  industry,  households,  agriculture,  navigation,  hydropower,  flood  protection  and  urban 
development.  

14 

Data were only available up to 1 January 2003. The status of implementation of Directive 91/271/EEC 
for all EU27 Member States is planned to be published in 2008. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The lack of internalisation of environmental costs hitherto may be an additional reason why 
water use has not been sustainable so far. However, the WFD introduces a scheme whereby 
environmental  and  resource  costs  need  to  be  taken  into  account  when  determining  the 
contribution of the different uses to the recovery of costs of water services.  

3. 

PERFORMANCE OF MEMBER STATES – ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT 

The Commission assessed Member States' reports for four aspects in particular: conformity of 
legal  transposition,  compliance  with  Article  3,  compliance  with  Article  5,  and  overall 
reporting  performance.  For  these  last  three  issues,  results  are  presented  in  a  figure  showing 
the relative performance of the Member States on the basis of a simple scoring system. The 
methodology, more detailed results and their interpretation are presented in the accompanying 
Commission Staff Working Document15. 

3.1. 

Legal transposition – A negative picture 

Few  EU-15  Member  States  transposed  the  Water  Framework  Directive  into  their  national 
legislation by the required deadline, i.e. by December 2003. The Commission launched eleven 
infringement  cases  and  the  Court  of  Justice  ruled  against  five  Member  States16  for  not 
communicating transposition of the WFD. In addition, the Court clarified a number of issues 
regarding transposition17. For EU-12, the deadline for notifying their national legislation was 
their day of accession, which was kept by all of them. 

The  quality  of  legal  transposition  is  poor.  On  the  basis  of  a  preliminary  assessment,  the 
Commission identified 19 Member States with serious shortcomings as regards Article 4, 9 or 
14. Most other Member States fail to transpose the WFD in full conformity. The Commission 
will address these negative findings with highest priority.  

3.2. 

Administrative arrangements (Article 3) – An encouraging start 

After transposition, the next important step was to set up river basin districts and to designate 
competent authorities (under Article 3). Most Member States reported to the Commission on 
time. For delayed reporting, the Commission launched nine infringement procedures of which 
all, except one, have been successfully resolved by now. 

Although  most  of  the  administrative  arrangements  appear  capable  of  ensuring  proper 
implementation,  actual  performance  will  only  become  evident  in  practice  over  the  coming 
years.  It  is,  however,  often  unclear  how  the  coordination  arrangements  between  different 
authorities within the Member States are functioning.  

Figure 2 shows the  overall  performance of Member States in setting  up  river basin  districts 
and competent authorities.  

15 
16 

17 

SEC(2007) 362 
Belgium  (C-33/05),  Luxemburg  (C-32/05),  Germany  (C-67/05),  Italy  (C-85/05)  and  Portugal  (C-
118/05) 
Case C-32/05: Commission vs. Luxembourg - (Judgement of 30/11/2006). This is the only case which 
is still open. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Most Member States which are part of an international river basin district have put in place 
the  necessary  agreements  and  coordination  arrangements.  In  some  cases,  however,  this 
process  is  still  ongoing  or  there  is  clear  scope  for  improving  the  international  coordination 
arrangements. More conclusions on the assessment of the Article 3 reports can be found in the 
Commission Staff Working Document. 

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

IE LU AT PT FR NL DE BE DK UK FI SE ES EL IT

CY CZ SI LT HU SK EE PL MT LV

RO BG

Figure  2:  Performance  indicator  per  Member  State  regarding  the  implementation  of  the 
administrative  set-up  –  Article  3  WFD  –including  the  EU-27  average  (based  on  Member 
States' reports)18 

3.3. 

Environmental  and  economic  analysis  (Article  5)  –  Great  diversity  and  some 
major gaps 

The  first  WFD  analysis  includes  a  comprehensive  environmental  assessment  of  all  impacts 
from human activities and an economic analysis of water uses and cost-recovery levels. Most 
Member  States  were  submitting  reports  in  time.  The  Commission  is  pursuing  infringement 
procedures  against  two  Member  States  that  only  submitted  first  (incomplete)  reports  with 
considerable delay. 

In general, most Member States put considerable effort into this first analysis, producing an 
information base that did not previously exist at EU level. However, the quality of the reports 
and the level of detail vary considerably. 

The overall performance of Member States can be seen in Figure 3. Several Member States 
produced a good or satisfactory report. However, in all cases, data gaps need to be filled in 
order to provide a solid basis for the 2009 river basin management plans. Some reports clearly 
do  not  meet  the  minimum  requirements  of  the  Directive.  Economic  analysis  is  the  main 

18 

For more details on the figures and their interpretation, see SEC(2007) 362. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
weakness. This concerns in particular the proper identification of water services and uses, and 
the assessment of the level of cost-recovery. These findings are explained in more detail in the 
Commission Staff Working Document.  

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

* *

AT NL LU IE DE ES UK BE PT FR DK SE FI

IT EL

CY CZ SK HU LV EE SI MT LT PL

BG RO

Figure  3:  Performance  indicator  per  Member  State  regarding  the  implementation  of  the 
environmental and economic analysis– Article 5 WFD- including the EU-27 average (based 
on  Member  States'  reports).  *The  scores  for  BG  and  RO  are  based  on  preliminary 
assessments.18 

3.4. 

Reporting performance – Some missed opportunities  

Besides  the  quality  of  the  content  of  the  reports,  another  important  indicator  is  the  general 
reporting performance. The WFD offers significant potential for streamlining administration 
and  saving  costs  in  the  long  term.  Meanwhile,  improving  the  clarity  and  completeness  of 
reports will make it easier to communicate results to the public. 

The  first  indications  on  reporting  performance  are  whether  the  report  was  provided  on  time 
and  whether  is  was  clear  and  complete.  Figure  4  gives  an  overview  and  awards  Member 
States  average  scores  in  terms  of  meeting  the  reporting  requirements  on  Article  3  and 
Article 5.  

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
 
100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

IE AT PT UK NL DE LU SE BE DK FR FI ES EL IT

CZ CY LT HU SK SI EE LV PL MT

RO BG

Figure  4:  Indicator  per  Member  State  regarding  its  reporting  performance  and  the  EU-27 
average (based on Member States' reports).18 

4. 

RECOMMENDATIONS TO MEMBER STATES – TIME TO ACT UNTIL 2009 

Member States have to complete the first river basin management plans by the end of 2009, 
and they have to put a water pricing policy in place in 2010. Learning from experience with 
implementation  to  date,  there  is  still  ample  time  to  improve  the  situation  and  close  gaps  on 
data.  Moreover,  the  obligation  to  inform  and  consult  the  public  when  preparing  the 
management  plans  will  require  more  transparency  and  justification  on  what  measures  are 
necessary and cost-effective, and what exemptions can be justified.  

The Commission therefore urges the Member States to focus especially on the following three 
areas:  

a) 

Overcoming the current shortcomings. To reach this objective, Member States are 
encouraged to: 

•  fully implement other relevant  EU legislation, in  particular on urban  wastewater 

and nitrates; 

•  put  in  place  all  the  economic  instruments  required  by  the  Directive  (pricing, 
recovery  of  costs  of  water  services,  environment  and  resource  costs,  and  the 
polluter  pays  principle).  Full  exploitation  of  these  economic  instruments  will 
contribute to truly sustainable water management; 

•  put  in  place  a  comprehensive  national  ecological  assessment  and  classification 
system  as  the  basis  for  implementing  the  Directive  and  meeting  its  “good 
ecological  status”  objective.  The  deficiencies  of  the  current  intercalibration 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
 
exercise must be remedied as soon as possible. Only complete, robust and reliable 
ecological assessment will generate faith in the WFD and ensure its credibility; 

•  improve  the  methodologies  and  approaches  on  some  key  issues  (such  as 
designation  of  heavily  modified  water  bodies,  criteria  for  assessing  risk  or 
addressing  groundwater  quantitative  status)  and  enhance  comparability  between 
the Member States, in particular in international river basins;  

•  considerably  reduce  the  existing  data  gaps  and  shortcomings  of  the  Article  5 

analysis as part of preparation of the river basin management plans.  

b) 

Integrating sustainable water management into other policy areas. To reach this 
objective, Member States are encouraged to:  

•  make sure that infrastructure and sustainable human development projects, which 
could  cause  deterioration  of  the  aquatic  environment,  undergo  an  appropriate 
transposition  and 
environmental 
appropriate, transparent and coordinated application of Article 4.7 is crucial; 

impact  assessment.  In 

this  respect,  full 

•  ensure  the  allocation  of  the  appropriate  funding.  To  reach  this  objective,  it  is 
important to make the best use of the potential of national funds and EU financing 
instruments,  such  as  the  Common  Agricultural  Policy  and  the  Cohesion  Policy. 
The national allocations so far of these funds for improvements in the water field are 
insufficient  to  cover  all  needs  as  identified  in  the  findings  of  the  environmental 
analysis under the WFD.  

c) 

Making the best use of public participation.  

•  Public  participation  should  be  seen  as  an  opportunity.  The  ongoing  work  on 
voluntary  reporting  and  the  Water  Information  System  for  Europe  will  assist  in 
informing the public in a transparent way.  

5. 

COMMISSION ACTIONS – OFFER FOR A PROLONGED PARTNERSHIP 

From these assessments and recommendations, it is clear that the Member States still have an 
ambitious  and  challenging  task  ahead  if  they  are  to  make  WFD  implementation  successful. 
The Commission realises that it has an important role to play. In this respect, the Commission 
is planning the following actions, which are in line with the WFD and, in some cases, have a 
wide-reaching aim.  

Action 1: Renewing the partnership with the Member States 

The  Commission  is  committed  to  continuing  the  successful  cooperation  under  the  Common 
Implementation Strategy. This joint work programme19 together with the Member States and 
other  countries,  and  with  the  involvement  of  stakeholders  and  NGOs,  promotes  common 
understanding,  best  practice  and  information  exchange  on  some  of  the  key  issues.  The 
Commission is convinced that this approach has already delivered better results than a more 

19 

See new Work Programme: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-framework/strategy4.pdf. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                 
formalistic approach to implementation. However, if it should become evident that it is likely 
to fail, the Commission will not hesitate to use its powers under the Treaty. 

This support will focus on the  current shortcomings described in point 5.1, in particular the 
economic  instruments.  The  Commission  will  also  put  specific  effort  into  improving 
assessment  of  "ecological  status".  In  2005,  the  Commission  published  the  network  of 
intercalibration  sites20.  It  is  now  preparing  a  decision  on  the  results  of  intercalibration,  for 
adoption  before  the  end  of  2007,  which  will  be  the  benchmark  for  what  "good  ecological 
status" means in all Member States. It will then continue working towards a comprehensive 
framework for ecological assessment of aquatic biodiversity.  

In  addition,  the  Commission  will  continue  helping  the  EU-12  Member  States  to  implement 
EU water policy and being involved in international river conventions.  

Action 2: Ensuring integration into other EU policies 

Considerable progress has already been made in integrating water policy into other EU policy 
areas,  in  particular  agriculture,  energy,  transport,  research,  external  relations  and  regional 
development.  The  joint  and  open  discussions  between  the  different  competent  authorities  at 
EU  and  Member  State  level  involving  all  relevant  stakeholders  and  NGOs  have  produced 
valuable results and conclusions.21 

The  Commission  is  committed  to  continuing  its  leadership  role  in  this  area  by  exploring 
further  ways  of  strengthening  the  integration  of  water-related  considerations  into  other  EU 
policies  and  legislation.  The  aim  is  to  make  other  policy  areas  contribute  even  more 
effectively to protecting the water environment and achieving the objectives of the WFD, the 
Flood Risk Management Directive and other Community water legislation.  

As recently identified by the EU Water Directors regarding agriculture22, there is a window of 
opportunity in the upcoming discussions on the future of the Common Agriculture Policy of 
further integrating water policy and agricultural policy. On cohesion policy, the Commission 
will continue efforts to ensure that assistance from the Funds is consistent with water policy23. 
Transport (navigation) and energy (hydropower) policies will continue to be implemented in a 
way that reduces negative impacts on the aquatic environment. Moreover, implementation of 
the Seventh Framework Programme for Research will need to maintain a water focus. Finally, 
the  upcoming  review  of  other  environment  legislation,  such  as  the  Directives  on  integrated 
pollution prevention and control and on habitats, may further strengthen their contribution to 
the delivery of the WFD objectives. The Commission will also continue to stimulate enhanced 
water management in relevant non-Member States. 

20 
21 
22 

23 

EN 

Commission Decision 2005/646/EC of 17.08.2005 (OJ L 243, 19.9.2005, p.1)  
Some significant achievements are listed in Annex to SEC(2007) 362. 
See the Agriculture Declaration recently agreed by the European Water Directors and discussed by the 
2006  
Environment 
http://forum.europa.eu.int/Public/irc/env/wfd/library. 
See also http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/pdf/final_handbook.pdf. 

(16650/06 

December 

Council 

AGRI 

402), 

ENV 

698 

11 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Action 3: Promoting the use of economic instruments  

The  Commission  will  make  the  use  of  economic  instruments  a  priority  in  the  context  of 
implementation  and  stimulate  further  exchanges  of  information  with  and  between  Member 
States  on  best  practices,  including  more  use  of  the  existing  guidance  documents.  Moreover, 
the  Commission  is  also  looking  at  promoting  benchmarking  between  water  operators.  It  is 
also working on an exploratory study on the costs and benefits of implementing the WFD, and 
will  promote  the  development  of  EU  harmonised  methods  and  tools,  for  example  by  using 
research projects.24  

Action 4: Addressing climate change in water management 

Climate change impacts, including increased flooding and droughts, could enhance the risk of 
non-attainment of the objectives of the WFD. The increased risk on extreme events is partly 
addressed  by  the  proposal  for  a  Directive  on  floods.  The  results  of  an  in-depth  analysis  on 
water scarcity and droughts will be included in a Communication planned for mid-2007.  

In  addition  to  mitigation  and  adaptation  policies  included  in  the  European  Climate  Change 
Programme  and  in  the  planned  Green  Paper  on  Adaptation  to  Climate  Change,  the 
Commission will encourage full use to be made of existing possibilities for including climate 
change into river basin management plans, and will encourage further integration of climate 
change, mitigation and adaptation strategies, into the implementation of EU water policy.  

Action 5: Setting up an ambitious Water Information System for Europe (WISE)25 

The Commission and the European Environment Agency are committed to developing WISE 
by  2010.  WISE  will  serve  as  the  focus  for  wider  efforts  to  modernise  and  streamline  the 
collection and dissemination of information for European water policy. It is an integral part of 
wider initiatives such as the Shared Environmental Information System (SEIS) and INSPIRE.  

6. 

CONCLUSIONS 

Reports  from  the  Member  States  on  their  initial  obligations  under  the  Water  Framework 
Directive  show  some  encouraging  results,  although  there  are  major  shortcomings  in  some 
areas.  There  is  still  time  to  remedy  the  gaps  before  2010,  when  the  first  river  basin 
management plans have to be adopted. 

The  poor  transposition  and  the  lack  of  economic  analysis  are  the  biggest  gaps  in  WFD 
implementation so far. While international cooperation needs to be enhanced in many cases, 
significant improvements have been observed in some regions, such as the Danube.  

Further  progress  is  needed  in  areas  like  integration  of  water  policy  into  other  policies  and 
assessment of the impacts of climate change in the water cycle, including floods and droughts 
and  long-term  demand  and  supply  of  water,  in  order  to  effectively  implement  a  long-term, 
sustainable water management across EU. 

24 
25 

One example is the current FP6 project AQUAMONEY (http://www.aquamoney.org). 
http://water.europa.eu 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The Commission is committed to renewing its partnership with the Member States under the 
Common Implementation Strategy in order to jointly address some of these challenges ahead. 
One important element is the development of the Water Information System for Europe.  

In  conclusion,  this  first  report  on  the  implementation  of  the  WFD  illustrates  that  we  have 
made  significant  steps  forward  'Towards  Sustainable  Water  Management  in  the  European 
Union'.  Together  with  the  water-related  directives  that  are  still  under  negotiation,  the  WFD 
provides  all  the  tools  needed  to  achieve  truly  sustainable  water  management  in  the  EU  for 
years to come. However, there is still a long and challenging road ahead for Member States to 
implement these tools in the best possible way. Member States have to deploy considerable 
efforts to achieve this.  

EN 

13 

   EN