Commission staff working document - Accompanying document to the Communication from the Commission to the European parliament and the Council - Addressing the challenge of water scarcity and droughts in the European Union - Impact Assessment {COM(2007) 414 final} {SEC(2007) 996}
Date: 2007-07-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU waters, conservation of resources, drought, environmental protection, environmental research, fixing of prices, information system, use of water

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 18.7.2007 
SEC(2007) 993 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

Accompanying document to the 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL  

Addressing the challenge of water scarcity and droughts in the European Union 

Impact Assessment 

{COM(2007) 414 final} 
{SEC(2007) 996} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1. 

1.1. 

1.2. 

1.3. 

1.4. 

2. 

Procedural issues and consultation of interested parties ..... ………………………….3 

Organisation and timing............................................................................................... 3 

Consultation and expertise ........................................................................................... 3 

Terminology................................................................................................................. 6 

Integration of the Impact Assessment Board's recommendations ............................... 6 

What problem is the Communication expected to address? ........................................ 8 

2.1.  What are the issues that may require action? ............................................................... 8 

2.2.  What are the underlying drivers of the problems? ..................................................... 10 

2.3.  Who is affected, in what ways and to what extent? ................................................... 13 

2.4. 

2.5. 

3. 

3.1. 

3.2. 

4. 

4.1. 

4.2. 

4.3. 

5. 

5.1. 

5.2. 

5.3. 

6. 

7. 

How would the problem evolve, all things being equal? ........................................... 14 

Does the EU have the right to act?............................................................................. 22 

Objectives................................................................................................................... 24 

Policy objectives ........................................................................................................ 24 

Consistency with the horizontal objectives of the European Union .......................... 25 

What are the main policy options available to achieve the objectives?..................... 25 

Option A: 'water supply only' .................................................................................... 26 

Option B: 'economic instruments only' ...................................................................... 26 

Option C: integrated approach ................................................................................... 27 

Analysis of impacts .................................................................................................... 30 

Option A: 'water supply only' .................................................................................... 30 

Option B: 'economic instruments only' ...................................................................... 36 

Option C: integrated approach ................................................................................... 39 

Comparing the options ............................................................................................... 48 

Monitoring and evaluation ......................................................................................... 49 

EN 

2 

   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  Member  States  for  a  further  assessment  of  the 
issues,  the  Commission  proposed  to  come  back  with  an  in-depth  assessment  identifying  the 
extent  and  impacts  of  the  problems  linked  to  water  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  Communication  on  water  scarcity  and  droughts  by  July 
2007.  

1.2. 

Consultation and expertise 

1.2.1.  Consultation  

•  A  consultation  of  all  stakeholders  concerned  by  water  scarcity  and  drought  issues  was 
launched  in  early  2007.  In  this  context  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  stakeholders  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  participation,  the  Commission  examined  all  the 
registration forms returned and set up a Stakeholders' Forum. Particular 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  water  uses,  organisations  of  river  basin 
authorities, regional governments, and all Member States).  

A first meeting took place on 29 January 2007. Its main purpose was to explain the process 
and  report  on  the  progress  made  so  far  with  the  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 orientations 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  Communication  and  the  improvements 
made  to  the  in-depth  assessment.  Its  second  objective  was  to  share  all  the  contributions 

1 
2 

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/quantity/scarcity_en.htm 
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 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
received  so  far  and  organise  the  discussion  on  this  basis,  in  order  to  identify  possible 
measures that could be further considered within the Communication.  

The main outcomes of this consultation 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 make it possible to address water scarcity 
and  droughts.  The  case  for  adopting  an  additional  legislative  instrument  therefore 
needs to be assessed in relation to these elements. 

(3)  Water  pricing  and  application  of  cost  recovery  are  key  issues  that  need  to  be  fully 

implemented. Metering is another essential factor in this regard. 

(4) 

(5) 

Local  experience  already  proves  that  there  is  a  large  potential  for  water  savings  and 
efficiency in both urban and rural areas. 

Integration  of  water-related  issues  into  sectoral  policies  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 between water and energy issues. 

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

Agriculture  is  a  large  consumer  of  water.  Adjustments  via  decoupling  and  cross-
compliance would be welcome in the short term.  

As allocation of structural funds can lead to water imbalances, consideration could be 
given to further environmental requirements. 

Drought  management  plans  are  useful  tools  that  have  to  be  further  promoted,  in 
particular because of the increasing impacts anticipated 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  widely  and  efficiently  disseminated,  as  the 

results coming from local experience clearly prove.  

(12)  Public awareness is a key condition for any change of behaviour. Specific campaigns 

need to be promoted.  

(13)  Alternative solutions such as re-using waste water need to be further 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  actually  generated  a  broad 
consensus among a majority of stakeholders.  

A third meeting was held on 24 May to review possible options. A broad consensus emerged 
from the meeting as to the need for an integrated approach which combines a strong emphasis 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
on demand management, economic instruments – including more effective water pricing - and 
leaves the door open for new water supply under certain conditions.  

•  An  Expert  Network  on  water  scarcity  and  droughts,  which  includes  representatives  of 
national authorities and stakeholders, has also played an important part in the process. This 
working group is part of  the Common  Implementation Strategy of the Water Framework 
Directive – an informal structure set up in 2000 and led by the Commission which oversees 
the  implementation  of  the  Directive,  and  including  all  Member  States  and  candidate 
countries as well as key stakeholders - and has worked since 2003 on water scarcity and 
drought issues. Its participants have directly contributed to the drawing up of the interim 
report  on  the  in-depth  assessment  on  water  scarcity  and  droughts,  via  the  collection  and 
transmission of appropriate national data. Its participants have recently updated and refined 
the first set of data provided in 2006. On several 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  droughts  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  information  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  situation.  These  data  gaps  will  need  to  be 
addressed  in  the  short  term  as  a  prerequisite  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 issues will in any case 
require  further  thorough  impact  assessments.  This  assessment  of  the  Communication  on 
water  scarcity  and  droughts  will  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 quantitative 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 Europe. Further investigation is needed into 
the actual scope for progress in water demand management. The study will therefore assess 
all  possibilities  for  action  to  deliver  water  savings  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 impacts has so far been insufficient (e.g. 
water  pricing  policies,  water  allocation,  drought  management  plans,  improvement  of 
technologies). Initial outcomes will be available by July 2007.  

•  Another  study  will  then  be  carried  out  in  order  to  consider  regional  disparities  in  water 
saving potential. The inclusion of several scenarios at river basin level and testing the cost 
effectiveness of several measures, e.g. in terms of land use planning and water allocation, 
will  provide  useful  information  for  further  discussion  and  consideration  by  the  end  of 
2007.  

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
•  These two studies will deliver results in 2007 and 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  situation  of  long-term  water  imbalance,  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 also occur in regions which have high levels of 
water  consumption  due  to  high  population  density  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 there 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  decrease  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  duration  of  droughts.  Droughts  are  related  to 
seasons  and  occur  mostly  in  spring  and  summer,  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  particular  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 adopted 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  measures  under  each  option  and  of  their 
impacts 

•  The description of the measures has been refined in section 4 in order to provide a better 
overview  of  the  changes  attached  to  each  given  option.  Option  A  includes  all  possible 
measures that can further support and facilitate the large-scale development of new water 
supplies. Option B has been renamed "Water pricing policies only" in order to fully reflect 
its detailed content and avoid any confusion with other economic instruments which need 
to be addressed within the integrated approach of Option C. Indeed, 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  pricing  policies  are  usually  not  sufficient  in 

EN 

6 

   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  options  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 droughts 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 development and public water supply security, rather 
than developing approaches geared to water saving and water efficiency. 

•  Further  information  on  the  past  and  current  use  of  regional  and  agricultural  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  improve  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  supply  projects  are  also  emphasised,  including 
the risk of unsustainable situations developing at river basin level.  

More  details  have  been  given  about  the  sources  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  order  to  better  explain  the  case  for  EU 
intervention. As highlighted in the opinion, the fact that only some Member States 
have taken action is not a sufficient justification for EU action. 

•  In  particular,  the  text  now  emphasises  the  cross-border  dimension  of  the  issue 
which calls for coordinated EU action. Indeed, 70% of the EU territory is part of 
transboundary  river  basins.  Further  details  are  also  given  about  the  inter-
relationships  between  upstream  and  downstream  regions  -  often  located  in 
different countries - and the associated risks in a context of scarcer water. Lastly, 
the additional information explains why a consistent 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 avoid any misunderstanding about the monitoring and 
evaluation issues. 

EN 

7 

   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  are  the  increasing  impacts  of  water  scarcity  and  droughts  across 
Europe  in  a  context  of  climate  change.  These  impacts  call  into  question  the  sustainable 
availability of water in Europe from now on.  

Water scarcity  

The information available at EU level, provided by the EEA and based on EUROSTAT data, 
gives an overview of the problem3. The Water Exploitation Index (WEI) is the mean annual 
total demand for freshwater divided by long-term average freshwater resources.  

Water Exploitation Index (WEI) from 1992 to 2003

Cyprus
Malta

Spain
Italy
Portugal
Bulgaria

Romania
Belgium
Greece
Czech Republic

Germany
France

Poland
United Kingdom
Netherlands

Luxembourg
Austria

Finland
Sweden

Slovakia
Hungary
Slovenia
Lithuania

Estonia
Latvia

0,0%

10,0%

20,0%

30,0%

40,0%

50,0%

60,0%

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 the countries where water demand outstrips resources.  

However,  this  Index  is  a  national  value  and  does  not  reflect  the  possible  high  regional 
pressures on water resources.  

An analysis at river basin level is therefore required 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 basins affected by water scarcity4. They have been considered as 
water scarce whenever their water exploitation 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 area) and host a total population of 82 million (about 16.5% of the 
total EU population). 

3 
4 

EEA, 2005 the European environment, status and outlook 
Second interim report on water scarcity and droughts, April 2007 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
River Basin Water Exploitation Index

PT_Sado

PT_Western Basins

PT_Algarve Basins

FR_Rhin Meuse

SP_Guadiana

PT_Ave

UK_South East

GE_Weser

PT_Vouga

SK_Poprad a Dunajec

FR_Seine Normandie

UK_North West

PT_Tagus

HU_Tisza

UK_Anglian

PT_Guadiana

UK_Humber and Northumbria

GE_Donau

PT_Douro

GE_Ems

PT_Minho

SK_Hron

SK_Hornad

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

180

Most  of  the  affected  river  basins  are  located  in  southern  Europe.  These  tend  to  be  dry  and 
irrigation-intensive.  However,  northern  and  eastern  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 scarcity is having significant impacts on the main 
sectors of the economy and on natural resources. These impacts are expected to increase in a 
context of climate change (see point 3.3).  

Droughts  

The  observation  of  all  drought  events  that  occurred  in  the  last  30  years  throughout  the  EU 
provides  us  with  some  preliminary  knowledge  about  their  intensity  and  frequency5.  The 

5 

idem 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
 
 
                                                 
characteristics  of  these  droughts  have  varied  significantly  from  one  region  to  another,  in 
particular as regards their extent, 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  mainly  affected  by  droughts  in  the  eighties,  the 
last five years have shown that all EU countries can be confronted  by  drought issues. Most 
Member  States  have  reported  drought  events  which  have  taken  place  since  1976.  Peaks  in 
both population and area affected by droughts have been noticeable in 1976, 1989 to 1991 and 
2003  to  2005.  Compilations  of  national  data  clearly  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 population in 1976-1990 and 13% in 1991-2006. From 2000 
to  2006,  an  average  of  15%  of  the  EU  total  area  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 losses 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 Europe. 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 water scarcity and drought is very closeto the energy challenge 
which the Commission decided to address by adopting a comprehensive package of measures 
on 10 January 2007. The approach taken on energy resembles the approach needed for water 
scarcity  and  droughts,  as  managing  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  periodic  drought 
situations  as  mentioned  below.  Expressed  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 

10 

   EN 

 
•  Water  pricing  policies  generally  do  not  reflect  the  level  of  sensitivity  of  water 
resources  at  local  level.  The  'user  pays'  principle  is  hardly  implemented.  These 
gaps  lead  to  mismanagement  of  water  resources,  even  though  the  Water 
Framework  Directive  provides  the  principles  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  results  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  (with  64%),  followed  by 
energy (20%), public water supply (12%) and industry (4%)6. Tourism is likely 
to put strong pressure on water 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 where 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 water consumed for leisure activities. In addition, the fact 
that  the  pressure  from  tourism  and  irrigation  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 only 0.2 m³ returns to where the water was 
abstracted.  

•  Across Europe there is huge potential for water saving. Europe continues to waste 
at least  20%7 of its water due to inefficiency, i.e. through losses in public water 
supply  and  irrigation  networks,  inadequate  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 significantly larger than the expected 
increase  in  demand  over  the  same  period  (+50km³/year).  By  way  of  illustration, 
for Northern Mediterranean countries the largest potential (12 km³/year) is in the 
irrigation  sector  (60%),  followed  by  the  industrial  (25%)  and  domestic  (15%) 
sectors8. The measures that would lead to these water savings consist primarily in 
increasing the efficiency of water networks in irrigation (transport losses reduced 
to 10%, efficiency raised to 80%) and public water supply (loss reduced to 15%, 

6 
7 
8 

idem 
See Annex 1 for more information on the EU sectoral water saving potential, Ecologic, June 2007 
Plan Bleu, 2007 

EN 

11 

   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  consistency  in,  and  sometimes  even  counter-
productive effects on water resource protection, due to insufficient integration of 
water-related concerns into water-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  environmental  needs,  are  not  systematically 
addressed.  Ad  hoc  short-term  measures  are  implemented  to  compensate  for  the 
lack of water resources for one or two types of uses, but do not take full account 
of other concerns (water quality, irrigation, energy production, etc.) or the impacts 
of climate change.  

•  Finally, while some data are already available 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.  These  measures  are  very  diverse  across 
Europe as they usually depend on the scale of the issues within each country and 
on  the  level  of  awareness  of  the  short-term  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  local  municipalities  or  river  basin 
authorities.  Until  now,  most  of  the  national  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  satisfy  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 funds have tended to 
support  new  water  supply  infrastructures  without  properly  ensuring  their 
sustainability and checking that minimum water management practices were being 
fully observed. In the past, funding for new reservoirs or desalination 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. This situation is due to the fact that 
Member States have preferred to prioritise water quality issues (point source and 
diffuse  pollutions)  and  developing  new  water  supply  to  satisfy  the  immediate 
economic development needs.  

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
2.3.  Who is affected, in what ways and to what extent? 

Water scarcity 

Water scarcity situations encountered 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 deeper pumping or greater uncertainty about 

yields. 

•  Social impacts can be created by the possible increase of water prices due to the 

implementation of compensating measures (e.g. desalination units).  

•  The  environmental  impacts  concern  groundwater  (with  possible  aquifer 
depletion  due  to  over-pumping  and  seawater  intrusion),  surface  waters  (with 
minimum water flows not always being ensured 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 assessed by looking at the costs of the mitigation 
measures being taken, such as the construction of new water supply infrastructures – namely 
dams, reservoirs, desalination units, water transfers, etc. However, as these facilities can have 
a  range  of  different  objectives,  it  is  difficult  to  assess  exactly  what  proportion  of  the 
investments is directly due to water scarcity.  

Investments  in  infrastructures  have  a  cost,  which  is  borne  by  various  parties.  Economic 
sectors,  public  authorities  and  local  population  have  to  bear  additional  costs  in  proportions 
that  vary  from  one  river  basin  to  another.  National  estimates  give  an  indication  of  the  total 
amount of investments involved. 

In addition, there are costs to society 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 difficult 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 noticeable 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 

13 

   EN 

 
some  industrial  or  energy  sectors  and  agriculture.  Some  activities  are  obliged  to 
halt production during sensitive periods.  

•  As  regards  social  impacts,  emergency  measures  can  be  organised  in  order  to 
provide population with alternative 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 desiccation. Severe water shortages, even if 
they  are  only  limited  in  time,  can  lead  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 summer. In recent years, large areas of forest 
have  been  destroyed  by  fires  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  quantitative  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 billion9, 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  worsening.  The  annual  impact  due  to  droughts  is 
estimated to have doubled between 1976-1990 and 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 

10 

First  interim  report  on  water  scarcity  and  droughts,  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. 
First interim report on water scarcity and droughts, DG ENV, November 2006 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.4. 

How would the problem evolve, all things being equal (no policy change)? 

2.4.1.  Demography and economic development 

(cid:130) Population 

Trends  in  population  can  be  derived  from  the  United  Nations  "medium"  scenario,  which  is 
described  in  a  time  series  of  population  by  world  region  with  five-year  steps  between  the 
present and 2075 (United Nations, 1992; Alcamo et al., 1998).  

Under  this  scenario,  Europe's  population  would  increase  from  745  million  in  1995  to  882 
million in 2075.  

The following table summarizes the regional population figures estimated using this scenario. 

Population  distribution  within  countries  is  based  on  data  from  Gridded  Population  of  the 
World  (version  1)  provided  by  the  Center  for  International  Earth  Science  Information 
Network (CIESIN).  

Total population [millions] in Europe  

World-region(*) 

1995 

Western Europe 

384 

Eastern Europe 

European CIS 

121 

180 

2025 

406 

143 

193 

2050 

394 

149 

186 

2075 

391 

149 

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, Switzerland, 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 EuroWasser 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 withdrawals for irrigation are predicted 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 increases in electricity production.  

In total, water withdrawals in Europe are projected 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 

15 

   EN 

 
Water withdrawals [km3/yr] in Europe by sector today (1995) and in the 2070s  

World-region 

Withdrawals today (1995) 

Withdrawals in the 2070s 

Domestic 

Industrial 

Irrigation 

Total 

Domestic 

Industrial 

Irrigation 

Total 

Western Europe 

Eastern Europe 

European CIS 

Europe 

41 

10 

15 

66 

118 

32 

57 

76 

33 

33 

207 

142 

235 

75 

105 

415 

48 

27 

80 

155 

69 

164 

126 

359 

74 

36 

36 

146 

191 

227 

242 

660 

2.4.2.  Climate change impacts 

In a recent assessment, the IPPC warns that globally "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 point 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 began, and the two warmest years on record 
are 1998 and 2005. Different climate models with 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  reducing  greenhouse  gases 
(GHG) by 2100, the global surface temperature 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 increase in annual average river flow and 
water  availability.  The  average  run-off  in  Southern  European  rivers  is 
projected  to  fall  due  to  rising  temperature  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  reservoir,  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 

16 

   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 availability and the changes expected by 

2030. 

Source: EEA Report – European environment outlook, N°4/2005 

•  The projections of the EuroWasser project also reveal that, in general, long-term 
changes in annual renewable water resources 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  Europe  is  accompanied  by  increasing 
temperature and, thus, by increasing evapo-transpiration. Combining these trends 
results  in  even  stronger  decreases  in  availability  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 climate change impacts and ways to 
adapt. It will cover all environmental issues, but will not go into detail on the 
specific  adaptation  measures  needed  to  deal  with  water  quantity  concerns. 
Recognising  the  magnitude  and  acuteness  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 devising 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 well as – where possible – an indication 

EN 

17 

   EN 

 
 
of the timetable for implementation. The Communication will therefore fully 
complement the Green Paper and contribute 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 developments need to be considered together.  

In  total,  the  proportion  of  European  river  basin  areas  in  the  severe  water  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  water  stress  remain  in  the  highest  stress  category 
under the scenario projections. Additionally, many 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  magnitude  as  changes  in  water  availability  due  to 
climate change.  

The consolidation of the results for water stress 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  frequencies,  accounting  in  all  for  about  a  quarter  of 
Europe's land area.  

Critical regions exhibiting (i) a decrease in the return period of the current 100-year drought 
to 50 years or less and (ii) a 10% increase in today’s water stress which leads to a future w.t.a. 
ratio  greater  than  0.4.  Calculated  with  WaterGAP  2.1  applying  the  HadCM3  climate  model 
and Baseline-A water use scenario for the 2070s 

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
 
Lastly,  the  outcomes  of  the  above  scenario  reveal  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 water supply due to climate change or even a 
combination of both. 

2.4.4.  Existing EU legislation and instruments 

(cid:130) The Water Framework Directive 
The  Water  Framework  Directive  (WFD)12  provides  the  general  framework  for  water 
management  in  Europe.  Although  the  WFD  is  not  primarily  designed  to  tackle  quantitative 
issues, it gives Member States sufficient flexibility to address quantitative issues. 

•  One  interesting  aspect  in  relation  to  addressing  water  scarcity  and  droughts  is  that, 
according to the WFD, Member States are required 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  water  stress  or  shortage. 
Additional  constraints  linked  to  the  integration  of  specific  quantitative  measures  can  be 
taken into account when establishing 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 Management 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 bring 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 

'Towards  sustainable  water 
the  Commission  entitled 
management in the European Union' identifies initial positive outcomes emerging from the 
first steps in implementing the WFD.  

Reports from the Member States on their initial obligations under the WFD show some 
encouraging  results.  They  have  already  made  significant  steps  towards  sustainable 
water  management.  Most  of  them  have  deployed  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 directives 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 

19 

   EN 

 
                                                 
progress  in  implementing  the  water  pricing  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  the  end  of  2009.  Only  then  will  it  be 
possible  to  draw  such  conclusions.  Pre-empting  river  basin  management 
plans and associated programmes of measures would be counter-productive. 

–  The sectoral policies 

Agriculture 

•  The  2003  reform  of  the  Common  Agricultural  Policy  introduced  decoupled 
payments  to  farmers,  suppressing  the  link  between  a  given  production  and  the 
amount of subsidies received. This measure 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-compliance, 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  Development14  (EAFRD)  offer  the  possibility  of  supporting 
improved  water  demand  management  practices  through  appropriate  measures  to 
be  adopted  within  axes  1  (support  to  improve  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 priorities and allocate funds according to these 

13 

14 

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 
Council  Regulation  (EC)  1698/2005  of  20  September  2005  on  support  for  rural  development  by  the 
European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) 

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
                                                 
priorities.  Water  quantity  concerns  are  often  just  one  of  many  issues.  Member 
States usually place priority on fully addressing water quality issues (point source 
and diffuse pollution) before considering water quantity issues.  

Regional policy 

•  Here,  the  overall  framework  also  provides  an  opportunity  to  address  water 
scarcity  and  drought  issues.  It  is  based  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, the programmes linked to regional policy 
have  seldom  contained  measures  specifically  designed  to  address  the  growing 
impacts of water scarcity and droughts. Some of the measures adopted at national 
level have had adverse effects by supporting the development of new water supply 
infrastructures  without  a  clear  compliance  with  environmental  requirements 
relating  to  water  demand  management  as  a  prerequisite  for  funding.  Phenomena 
similar to those mentioned under rural 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  planning  throughout  some  of  the 
most water scarce or water stressed river basins; impacts being exacerbated by the 
part  of  the  CAP  payments  still  coupled  for  arable  crops  and  by  a  lack  of  strict 
implementation and insufficient coverage of cross-compliance. 

•  Continuing  waste  of  water  and  significant  water  inefficiency  in  households  and 

many economic sectors. 

•  Incentives  provided  for  the  further  development  of  new  water  supply  without 

giving priority to water savings and water efficiency. 

•  Persistence  of  the  existing  gaps  in  the  integration  of  water  quantity  issues  in 
agricultural  and  regional  policies,  thereby  leading  to  the  development  of  new 
water supply with no guarantee of sustainable 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 

16 
17 

Regulation  (EC)  1080/2006  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  5  July  2006  on  the 
European Regional Development Fund 
Council Regulation (EC) 1084/2006 of 11 July 2006 establishing a Cohesion Fund 
Regulation N°1081/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the European 
Social Fund 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.5. 

Does the EU have the right to act? 

•  The  current  situation  regarding  water  scarcity  and  droughts  is  characterised  by 
large  variations  across  Europe.  These  can  be  explained  by  climatic  conditions, 
available  natural  water  resources,  water  use  by  economic  sector,  but  also  by 
efforts  undertaken  in  several  Member  States  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 geographical position. Although it is usually 
southern countries that have been affected by these issues, northern countries are 
no longer spared. 

•  The  effects  of  climate  change  in  Europe  are  already  significant  and  measurable. 
Drought  frequencies  react  sensitively  to  changes  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  simulated  impact  of  climate  change.  In 
particular,  the  supposed  big  increases  in  water  use  for  eastern  countries  due  to 
increased economic activity may cause or intensify severe drought events in these 
areas in the future.  

Change in magnitude of 100-year droughts 

Left map: Comparison of results calculated with WaterGAP 2.1 for today’s climate and water 
use (1961-90) and for the 2070s (HadCM3 climate model and Baseline-A water use scenario) 

Right  map:  Comparison  of  results  calculated  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-year  drought  severity 
amongst western countries is primarily due to climate change. For eastern Europe, the change 

18 

EuroWasser: Europe's droughts today and in the future, 2007 

EN 

22 

   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 'Adapting 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  clearly  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 also stresses that adaptation is clearly a 
question of political coherence, forward planning and consistent and coordinated 
action. These latest points fully apply to the issues of water scarcity and droughts. 

•  Water scarcity and droughts are a transboundary issue requiring a coordinated EU 
approach.  Water  resources  management,  which  includes  the  sustainable  use  of 
resources  through  a  water  demand  management  approach,  is  by  nature  trans-
national. In particular, 70% of EU territory is part of transboundary river basins. 
This  situation  means  that  any  action  taken  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  across  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  regardless  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 sustainable and fair water use. 

•  Some  Member  States  have  already  adopted  measures  to  reduce  the  impacts  of 
water  scarcity  and  droughts  by  improving  water  demand  management.  Others 
have not taken yet such action. Increasingly this is creating a situation where river 
basins  could  be  affected  by  water  scarcity  and  droughts,  with  no  consideration 
being given to prior prevention and adaptation measures.  

•  In  the  absence  of  any  Community  action,  this  trend  towards  mismanagement  in 
Member  States  is  highly  likely  to  compound  the  inconsistency  in  the  level  of 
protection of the environment, which would run counter to one of the fundamental 
objectives of the Treaty.  

•  By reducing and managing the risks to economic activities, the environment and 
human  health,  the  proposals  for  addressing  the  challenges  of  water  scarcity  and 
drought  will  help  in  pursuing  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 

23 

   EN 

 
                                                 
–  Preserving, protecting and improving the quality of the environment, 

–  Protecting human health, 

–  Prudent and rational utilisation of natural resources, 

–  Promoting  measures  at  international  level  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, including those for the Regional and rural 
development policies, are the responsibility of the Member States. 

•  Moreover,  the  Impact  Assessment  demonstrates  that  a  number  of  actions  at  EU 
and  national  levels  are  necessary  and  complementary  for  addressing  the 
challenges  of  water  scarcity  and  droughts  in  a  comprehensive  manner.  A  wide 
range of policy options therefore need to be considered. 

•  Many  of  the  proposed  actions  need  a  mobilisation  effort  or  a  push  from  the  EU 
level, either through regulatory action, by concluding voluntary agreements with 
different sectors or by exchanging good practices. Such complementary measures 
will  empower  the  different  levels  of  policy-makers  and  decision-makers  to 
progress towards efficient water resources management. 

3. 

OBJECTIVES 

3.1. 

Policy objectives  

The proposal pursues the following 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 across 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  economic  and  social  development  across 
Europe in a context of climate change and increasing water scarcity and droughts 

EN 

24 

   EN 

 
The operational objectives include: 

•  Identify  the  most  appropriate  and  cost-effective  measures  in  order  to  efficiently 

address water scarcity and drought issues 

•  Consider possible priorities or a hierarchy to guide policy-making in the light of 

water availability at river basin level.  

3.2. 

Consistency with the horizontal objectives of the European Union 

3.2.1.  Growth and Job strategy 

The  policy  objectives  are  in  line  with  the  three  pillars  of  the  European  Union's  renewed 
Lisbon  Strategy  on  Growth  and  Jobs,  namely  "making  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  allow  the  appropriate 
development of economic activities by securing water resources. Then, it will encourage the 
development  and  application  of  new  environmental  technologies.  The  policy  objectives 
therefore  promote  innovation  and  technological  development,  enabling  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 exports 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 development into new technologies.  

3.2.2.  Sustainable Development strategy 

One objective of the RSDS is "to improve management and avoid overexploitation of natural 
resources,  recognising  the  value  of  ecosystem  services".  Some  of  the  related  operational 
objectives  are  "to  improve  management  and  avoid  overexploitation  of  renewable  natural 
resources such as water" and "to avoid the generation of waste 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  Sustainable  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  effective  prevention  and  mitigation  of  water  scarcity 
and  droughts  will  directly  contribute  to  meeting  the  urgent  need  of  adapting  to  climate 
change. 

EN 

25 

   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 three options previously identified. 

4.1. 

Option A: 'Water supply only' option 

This option consists in addressing water scarcity and droughts by providing new water supply 
wherever and whenever needed. Any new water supply made available then aims to satisfy all 
needs for the public, economic activities and the environment.  

The building up of any new water supply must comply with EU legislation, in particular with 
the  Environmental  Impact  Assessment  Directive,  the  Strategic  Environment  Assessment 
Directive and the Water Framework 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 conditions, including:  

• Conditions for mitigation measures;  

• Proof that there are no better alternative 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.  flood  control)  or  sustainable  development  must 
outweigh  the  benefits  of  achieving  the  environmental  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 potential", 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 chemical status" must be taken into account.  

Under this legislation all costs and benefits related 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.  

(cid:214) 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  addressing  the  issues  of  water  mismanagement  by  introducing 
appropriate water pricing policies. 
(cid:214) The measures under consideration within this option cover: 

EN 

26 

   EN 

 
–  Effective water pricing 

The price of water is an important variable that influences the amount of water used. Pricing 
policies can help users make more efficient use of water through financial incentives to move 
into technologies and practices that ensure better use of available resources.  

–  Cost recovery 

This principle consists in ensuring an appropriate 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 identification of the water services, the providers and the 
users. The financial costs of the water services then need to be calculated. The environmental 
and resource costs also have to be estimated. Decisions can then be taken on how costs are to 
be allocated to water uses (through prices, charges or other institutional 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  involved  in  options  A  and  B,  but  reinforces  the 
framework with additional measures which aim to adequately prevent future drought events 
and  mitigate  all  water  scarcity  and  drought  impacts.  Measures  to  save  water  and  increase 
water efficiency are duly considered in this context.  

This option also involves introducing a water hierarchy to guide policy-making. It states that 
all  possibilities  to  save  water  and  increase  water  efficiency  should  be  given  priority 
consideration before any new water supply measures are introduced.  

(cid:214) The measures under consideration include: 

–  Measures to prevent droughts 

Preventive  measures  are  essential  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  plans  and  thereby  ensure  consistency  between 
prevention  and  mitigation  measures.  Member  States  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 European recommendations and 
best practices.  

The  setting-up  in  the  short  term  of  an  operational  European  early  warning  system  will  also 
help Member States improve their level of preparedness for droughts. Past experience reveals 
that early warning can significantly improve the prevention of severe climatic events.  

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
–  Measures to support efficient water allocation 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  instruments  in  place  at  European  and  national 
levels.  

Attention needs to be paid to existing European sectoral policies. Several 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  option  B.  The  main  conclusion  is  that  economic 
instruments  need  to  be  accompanied  by  supplementary  measures  if  they  are  to  be  fully 
effective. 

Further necessary developments would therefore consist in improving 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 rural development policies, consideration must 
be  given  to  whether  further  progress  needs  to  be  made  as  regards  environmental 
preconditions  related  to  effective  water  management  before  allocating  support  to  new 
water supplies.  

–  The framework of the Common Agricultural Policy and rural development: 

–  Initial assessments show that some key principles introduced by the reform of the CAP of 
2003 have contributed to improving water management. 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 given to issues of water quality (diffuse and point 
source pollution). 

Additional  measures  can  be  taken  at  national  level  to  intensify  the  improvement  of  the 
existing  policies  at  EU  level.  In  particular,  Member  States  can  be  encouraged  to  draw  up 
appropriate  voluntary  and/or  compulsory  measures  in  river  basins  which  are  almost 
permanently water-scarce, in order to restore a sustainable balance. They can also put in place 
special incentives to support the generalization of sustainable water management practices. 

- Measures to foster water performance technologies and practices 

The widespread development of water performance technologies and practices is expected to 
deliver significant results in terms of water efficiency and water savings. 

EN 

28 

   EN 

 
The  associated  measures  may  consist  in  further  implementing  or  improving  existing 
legislative measures: 

–   Eco-design Directive 

Although  this  directive  in  its  current  form  does  cover  some  water-using  equipment 
(dishwashers and washing machines), it does not 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 taps, shower heads, toilets. 

–   Construction Products Directive 

A further implementation of this directive could enable appropriate standards related to water 
efficiency  to  be  introduced  for  construction  products.  Standards  on  energy  efficiency  are 
already planned. The objective, therefore, 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 all public and private buildings, a new directive 
similar to the Directive on the Energy Performance of Buildings could help minimise water 
consumption. Water performance criteria could be applied to all water-using devices installed 
in buildings. 

Additional  measures  directly  related  to  technologies  and  practices  at  both  European  and 
national levels can also prove useful in mitigating the impacts of water scarcity and drought. 
These  include  exchange  of  best  practices,  enhanced  research,  widespread  monitoring  and 
decision-making  tools,  effective  advisory  services,  showing  leadership  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 directly 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 use it more efficiently. 

These measures can consist in improving existing legislation and rules: 

–   EU labelling schemes 

The labelling scheme put in place for energy has proved 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  widening  the  effective 
management  of  water  demand.  It  is  therefore  appropriate  to  support  the  inclusion  of  rules 
related to water demand management in existing and future certification schemes.  

EN 

29 

   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 adopted in order to mitigate these impacts at all levels. Educational 
programmes and broad targeted information 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 infrastructures to ensure that projects are 
consistent  with  water  management  rules.  Further  consideration  could  be  given,  in  the 
context  of  the  next  reviews  of  regional  and rural  development  policies,  to  environmental 
preconditions  related  to  effective  water  management  practices  in  order  to  determine 
whether further progress needs to be made. 

Measures can also consist in introducing 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  description  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 water 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 and 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 

30 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  They  affect  the  migratory  patterns  of  fish  and  flood  riparian  habitats,  such  as  waterfalls, 
rapids,  riverbanks  and  wetlands,  which  are  essential  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  deltas,  estuaries,  flooded  forests,  wetlands  and  inland  seas,  thus 
affecting the composition and productivity of species.  

In the Mediterranean region, the high sediment load 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  capacity.  The  Jucar  basin  dam  is  already  84%  silted  up  (Plan  Bleu, 
2005). 

Water transfers 

•  In  terms  of  environmental  effects,  transfers  usually  make  the  ecological  status  of  water 
bodies worse. For example, transfers from the Tagus basin involve a significant reduction of 
stream  flows  in  the  Middle  Tagus,  so  the  river  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 coastal 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 analysis of the Ebro transfer project analysis 
has shown.  

•  Translocation  of  aquatic  species  is  another  transfer  risk:  the  Tagus-Segura  transfer  has 
transported  four  fish  species  (Carassius  auratus,  Gobio  gobio,  Chondrostoma  polylepis  and 
Rutilus arcasii) between basins and promoted 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 desalination21 - 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  are  usually  the  first  to  benefit,  new  industrial 
activities and the development of urban areas can also be among the first beneficiaries. New 

21 

22 

handling of brine after the desalination process, impacts on marine ecosystems and risks associated with 
the use of desalinated water for drinking and agriculture 
Communication COM (2007) 1 final 10.01.2007 

EN 

31 

   EN 

 
                                                 
water  supply  is  therefore  expected  to  bring  additional  benefits  for  sectors  that  are  highly 
dependent on the availability 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, apart from 29 dams with a water supply component 
(excluding  irrigation),  70  %  of  dams  did  not  reach  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 targets, including the areas irrigated. However, 
dams with heights of less than 30 m and reservoirs with an area of less than 10 km² tended to 
be closer to the predicted targets (World Commission on Dams, 2000).  

•  In  the  agricultural  sector,  most  irrigators  cannot  afford  the  capital  cost  of  collective 
infrastructures  for  storage  and  transfer.  These  collective infrastructures  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  any  new  water  supply  project  should  be  assessed 
from a macro-economic perspective, so that all 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  alternative  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  reservoirs  on  a  basin  scale  needs  to  be  taken  into 
account and can be equivalent to or even greater than the impact of a single large dam. 

•  Finally,  when  considering  dams  as  a  structural  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 from the disruption caused and the services they 
provide.  

Water transfers 

• In the initial stages of planning of water transfers, 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 special 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 

32 

   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 resources. Nonetheless, after reviewing stream flows 
and environmental needs in the Júcar basin, the 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  that  inter-basin  water  transfers  often  promote 
increased land use and stimulate growth in long-term water demand in receiving basins. 

• Finally, the costs of the water transfer projects 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 reviews of the initial studies more 
than doubled the expected water price from 0.31€/m³ to 0.72€/m³.  

Medium- and long-term impacts of the development of new water supply 

Section  2  highlights  the  critical  situation  which  Europe  will  have  to  face  in  the  coming 
decades with regard to the level of water availability.  

The implementation of option A - based on new water supply only - would 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  illustrates  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 remaining resources until total depletion. 

•  New  opportunities  will  need  to  be  identified  beyond  Europe,  in  neighbouring  countries 
which will still have sufficient water availability, such as Russia.  

•  Transfers  of  water  from  countries  far  away  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  new  dams  and  reservoirs 
have already been used (Plan bleu, 2005).  

•  New  projects  now  face  more  difficult  conditions,  particularly  in  terms  of  economic  and 
environmental impacts. Their level of sustainability needs to be considered against a backdrop 
of decreasing water availability. Operating costs and supply costs will increase due to lower 
aquifers  and  ever-greater  distances  between  the  point  of  abstraction  and  the  point  of  use. 
Technological progress will not make it possible to cover all additional costs. 

• The economic sectors that need water will therefore have to bear additional costs as water 
prices increase.  

One expected outcome is that some economic sectors 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 

33 

   EN 

 
Alternative solutions 

There  are  several  technically  feasible  possibilities  of  mobilising  additional  water  resources, 
such as aquifer recharging, waste water re-use, desalination, etc. Desalination is probably one 
of the most highly developed technologies, with more than 15 000 desalination plants in the 
world (Graber, 2006).  

A  number  of  technologies  have  been  developed  for  desalination;  these  include  distillation, 
reverse osmosis, electro-dialysis and vacuum freezing. Two of these technologies - distillation 
and reverse osmosis - have sometimes been considered by municipalities, water districts and 
private companies as a way to develop sea water desalination.  

•  Desalination  costs  are  very  sensitive  to  the  salinity  of  the  feed  water.  Desalination  of 
brackish waters and waters that are mildly saline can be economically justified for some high-
value uses.  

•  However,  seawater  desalination  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 costs are allocated to power generation.  

• Water treatment costs vary depending on the amount 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.  While  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 desalination may provide an answer, but it still takes a 
significant amount of energy to produce the high pressure needed for the process.  

• A scenario that would involve supporting the wide-scale development of desalination units 
in Europe needs to be given due consideration.  

The following map illustrates the regions where water 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 

34 

   EN 

 
Percentage  change  achieved  in  average  annual  water  availability  (natural  discharge  without 
subtraction  of  water  for  consumption)  for  European  river  basins  as  compared  to  today’s 
levels, based on two different GCMs (ECHAM4 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 produce one cubic metre of water, the offsetting 
of  a  50%  decrease  in  water  availability  by  desalination  alone  would  lead  to  an  additional 
energy consumption of 28 Mtep/year 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 certain 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  increase  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  households.  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 

35 

   EN 

 
 
 
in developing countries, has latterly attracted increasing interest in Europe and the developed 
world (OECD, 2003).  

•  The  beneficiaries  of  projects  which  raise  the  level  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 the development of new water supply 

•  Impacts  on  society  are  likely  to  be  comparable  to  the  impacts  identified  on  the  economy. 
Option A would most probably lead to an unsustainable situation for a growing proportion of 
Europe's population.  

• The expectation of reduced availability of water resources at local level will lower the level 
of water security that all new local water supplies were supposed to provide.  

•  This  situation  would  require  the  identification  of  additional  water  supply  options  beyond 
Europe.  

• Such a scenario would result in rising water 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 characteristics and implications.  

5.2. 

Option B: 'Water pricing policies only'  

5.2.1.  Environmental impacts 

• So far, there has been no systematic assessment on a European scale of the direct effect of 
pricing policies that reflect the full social costs 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 very quickly as farmers are either forced to 
grow  higher  value  crops  to  finance  the  development,  or  they  find  the  opportunity  cost  of 
irrigated property too high to resist and sell to other farmers who change the land use.  

EN 

36 

   EN 

 
Models  developed  by  the  University  of  Bologna  (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  water  price  levels.  The  findings  show  that  water 
pricing is an effective instrument for water regulation 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  associated  increase  in  profits24.  The  impact  of  increased  water  prices 
always seems to play a significant role. 

Additional  analyses  of  the  effects  of  several  water  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 for 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  consumption  fell  from  154  lhd  to  102  lhd  (lhd= 
litres per head per day) following large price 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 significantly 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  recover  the  full  supply  cost  before  demand  was 
affected, and this would lead to problems of political acceptability 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, meaning 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.  Certain  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 pricing policies are often due to incorrect design 
of the instruments and are therefore linked to parallel negative social impacts.  

23 

24 

25 

26 

The impact of water and agriculture policy scenarios on irrigated farming systems in Italy; an analysis 
based  on  farm  level  multi-attribute  linear  programming  models.  F.  Bartolini,  G.M.  Bazzani,  V. 
Gallerani, M. Raggi, D. Viaggi, 26 April 2006 
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. 
Water quantity and quality issues in Mediterranean agriculture, J. Albiac, T. Martinez, J. Tapia, OECD, 
November 2005 
Water  charging  in  irrigated  agriculture,  lessons  from  the  literature,  December  2002,  B.  Bosworth,  G. 
Cornish, C. Perry, F. Van Steenbergen 

EN 

37 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  An  example  in  agriculture  is  the  intensification  of  production  around  the  installation  of 
modern  and  expensive  water  saving  technology,  leading  to  potential  negative  impacts  on 
biodiversity. 

• Another impact could be the overexploitation of groundwater, if the latter is excluded from 
the pricing scheme. 

• However, if  the design  of the pricing scheme addresses these environmental concerns, the 
environmental  impacts  can  be  essentially  positive.  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  substances.  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  policy  covering  both  environmental  and  scarcity 
costs can prompt an efficient allocation of resources, leading to an increase in social welfare. 
However, the outcome will depend on how the revenues are used.  

•  Here  again,  there  is  no  a  comprehensive  assessment  on  a  European  scale,  although  case 
studies  on  the  macro-economic  impact  of  sustainable  agriculture  in  Bulgaria,  Romania  and 
Hungary27,  for  example,  show  that  large-scale  conversion  of  arable  land  to  sustainable 
agriculture through internalisation policies 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 pricing may be a reduction of budgetary pressures 
with regard to the building of new water supply infrastructures.  

5.2.3.  Social impacts 

• As already mentioned, it is less the actual economic 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 Directive sets the conditions 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 policies on the basis of social considerations. 

• On the other hand, ensuring an adequate contribution by the different water uses should not 
necessarily lead to higher water prices for households. In some regions, transfers of charges 
between  economic  sectors  (in  particular  agriculture)  and  households  show  that  households 
today pay much more for water than other sectors and more than they would normally pay if 

27 

Impact  of  agricultural  development  scenarios  on  water  resources  in  Bulgaria,  Hungary  and  Romania, 
Kieft, H (2000) in: Implementing the EU Water Framework Directive, Seminar proceedings, European 
Commission, WWF, Brussels 2000. 

EN 

38 

   EN 

 
                                                 
the "polluter pays" principle were fully implemented. The introduction of 'fair' water pricing 
policies could therefore have the effect of lowering water prices for households. 

•  The  social  impacts  of  option  B  will  be  further  assessed  in  the  study  announced  in  section 
1.2.2, together with the regional characteristics and implications.  
•  Regional  differences  in  the  water  price  due  to  the  internalisation  of  environmental 
externalities  are  another  aspect  of 
into 
consideration  is  therefore  of  major  importance  for  the  elaboration  of  efficient  water  pricing 
policies in the EU. The factors that need to be taken into account are the different levels of 
infrastructure  development,  different  natural  settings  and  differences  in  the  institutional  and 
regulatory context.  

inequality.  Taking  regional  characteristics 

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 usually 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  with  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 based on 'more value per drop' with the strategy 
adopted for the energy sector. 

• In the Mediterranean area, losses or inefficiencies represent 44% of the water abstracted in 
the region. This estimate illustrates the possibility of improving the efficiency of  water use. 
The volume saved could then constitute a potential 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  growth  in  total  demand  between  2000  and  2025 
(estimated up to 51 km³/year).28 

The following figure illustrates the comparison between the baseline scenario (supply) and the 
alternative  scenario,  based  on  water  demand  management,  for  Northern  Mediterranean 
countries  (Spain,  France,  Italy,  Greece,  Malta,  Cyprus,  Slovenia,  Croatia,  Bosnia  -
Herzegovina, Serbia and Montenegro, Albania). 

28 

Plan Bleu, 2007 

EN 

39 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Water demand per sector, baseline and alternative scenarios, entire Countries 

Source: Plan Bleu, J. Margat - Northern Mediterranean Countries, from Spain to Greece: 
possible savings of 31km³/year in 2025 

Water demand reduction is possible without affecting current economic 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 potential 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 public 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  toilets  (25%),  baths,  showers,  dishwashers  and 
washing machines. 

The technological developments that have improved the efficiency of water appliances have 
been one of the most important drivers of the reduction 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 toilet 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 
30 
31 

Based on a water price of 0.4 €/m3 
Calculated from data from Denmark, Germany, Sweden, Spain and France (EEA) 
EEA Households Water Use, ETC on water 

EN 

40 

   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 treatment that avoid large volumes of water for 
flushing to new types of dishwashers using ultrasonic technologies, there is a wide range of 
technical solutions that can lead to significant water savings. 

In addition, the significant potential for reducing consumption of domestic water supply could 
be  mobilised  through  better  management  of  water  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 addition, 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 water 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 irrigation 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  irrigation  technology  switches  from  gravity  to  drip 
irrigation, efficiency (water use per 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 locally and regionally  through ‘cost-effectiveness’ 
studies taking into account various options, including 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 water 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  options  would  increase  awareness  among  decision-
makers  of  the  opportunities  and  feasibility  of  water  demand  management.  The  question  is 

32 
33 

34 

MEEuP product cases Report, final, 28.01.2005, VHK for European Commission 
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 
Schoengold,  K.  Sunding,  D.  and  Moreno,  G.  2004  "Panel  estimation  of  Agricultural  Water  Demand 
based on an Episode of rate reform" 

EN 

41 

   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  studies  available  that  make  this  kind  of  comparison  show 
differences of 1-3, or even 1-10 between cost 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 accompanying 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  kinds  of  changes  in  human  activities  and  in 
ecological  processes  and  for  just  about  any  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.  Such  systems  have  evolved  considerably  over  the 
past  two  decades.  They  attracted  much  attention  in  the  70s  and  80s  during  the  extended 
droughts and famines in the West African Sahel region and in the Horn of Africa. They were 
set  up  primarily  for  humanitarian  purposes.  Their  functions  have  gradually  expanded  to 
embrace  societal  risks,  vulnerability  reduction  and  sustainable  development.  It  is  a  cost-
effective way to deal with potential disasters and to better address natural 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  systems36.  It  is  obvious  that  economic  losses  can  be  considerably 
reduced if a culture of prevention is introduced at all levels within a society. 

5.3.2.2.  Measures to support efficient water allocation and sustainable land planning 

–  Impacts of a better integration of water issues in sectoral policies 

The  agricultural  and  regional  policies  offer  opportunities  to  address  water  scarcity  and 
drought issues. However, there is scope for further adjustments to improve the efficiency of 
these policies in tackling water quantity issues.  

35 

36 

Early warning systems : do’s and dont’s, Report of Workshop - October 2003, M. H. Glantz, National 
Centre for Atmospheric Research 
“Many  tragic  events  in  recent  years  have  demonstrated  the  cost  of  inadequate  warning  systems.”, 
Declaration of the Postdam Early Warning Conference, September 1998 

EN 

42 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The most recent reform of the Common Agricultural 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  bring  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 irrigated crops. In France, for instance, full decoupling would 
lead to a 15% decrease in the maize crop, thereby accounting for 72% of the total reduction in 
irrigated area37.  

Estimated decreases in the case of full decoupling would be the result of shifting the emphasis 
from supported crops to non-supported crops and changing over from irrigated crops to rain-
fed crops.  

Full  decoupling  would  not  necessarily  mean  farmers  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  particular  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 overall 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 with the permits issued for water abstraction 
and widespread good agricultural practices. It may 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  develop  sustainable  water 
management  practices  in  the  agricultural  sector.  The  latest  programming  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 indicated 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 important positive effects of 
implementing the rural development programme.  

37 

38 

Les effets de la réforme de la PAC de 2003 sur la demande en eau par l'agriculture, G. Buisson, MEDD, 
décembre 2005 
Irrigation durable, Rapport du CGGREF, Ministère français de l'agriculture, 9 février 2005 

EN 

43 

   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. Consequently, one option for the future, beyond 2013, may 
be to consider the extent to which the budget of the second pillar could be further enlarged to 
increase the benefits attached to rural development programmes and ensure 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  opportunity  costs  for  other  European 
environmental policies. 

–  Impacts of incentives at national level 

The energy sector is more advanced than others in terms of introducing incentives to reduce 
consumption of energy. The evaluation of these tools provides interesting information about 
the likely effectiveness of their implementation in the water sector.  

The introduction of tax credits to encourage energy saving action in France has borne fruit. 
From 2005 to 2006, the sales of wood-burning boilers doubled. Sales of equipment relying on 
solar  energy  rose  sharply,  with  the  number  of  individual  solar  water  heaters  up  by  710% 
between 2002 and 2006!  

In reaction to the drought that occurred in 2006, the French government decided to introduce 
a new tax credit measure (40% for a maximum level of expenditure of € 5.000) to encourage 
the purchase of rainwater harvesting systems.  

Major campaigns to promote water saving were also 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  implementation  of  seven  types  of  water  saving 
actions  in  seven  municipalities,  representing  600.000  inhabitants.  In  addition  to  raising 
awareness  among  15.000  citizens,  the  water  savings  achieved  ranged  from  8%  to  97%, 
depending on the type of measures39. 

The  Water  Act,  adopted  by  France  on  26  December  2006,  confirms  tax  rebates  for  owners 
who opt for rainwater harvesting. More generally, 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 saving and recycling appliances. 

While  tax  incentives  inevitably  have  an  impact  on  behaviour,  they  also  have  an  impact  in 
terms  of  increasing  the  awareness  of  builders,  project  managers  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 authorities, the necessary funds could come from 

39 

Economiser  l'eau  dans  la  ville  et  l'habitat,  guide  méthodologique,  Région  Bretagne,  Agence  de  l'Eau 
Loire-Bretagne, March 1999 

EN 

44 

   EN 

 
                                                 
implementing  the  ‘user  pays’  principle  and  the  associated  levying  of  taxes  on  water  users. 
Redistribution  of  this  kind  also  encourages  taxpayers  to  make  the  changeover  to  water-
efficient equipment.  

Private  enterprises  may  also  have  an  interest  in  introducing  special  rebates  for  such 
equipment,  as  this  is  a  way  for  them  to  attract  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 the 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  despite  the  fact  that  stringent  options  for 
energy and water were imposed 10 years ago which led to energy and water savings of over 
30%.  

Moreover,  new  technologies  and  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 Germany, more than 300 firms specialised in water 
saving  and  water  recycling  technologies  -  including  architects,  town  planners,  engineers, 
industrialists, etc. - have set 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  bring  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  resources  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 courses within 3 years. It also sets a specific 
target for a region where water is currently over-exploited, as well as promoting water re-use. 

A  golf  course  which  had  been  implementing  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 are 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  ranging  between  6  and  25,  depending  on  the  target  (120  to  135 
litres/head/day).  Costs  will  be  mainly  borne  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 Mediterranean countries is 15% of the total water 
demand and 45% of the total water saving potential40. Reducing pressure in water networks 

40 

Plan Bleu, 2005 

EN 

45 

   EN 

 
                                                 
also reduces energy, as demonstrated by the Emilia Romagna region in Italy, where reducing 
leakages by up to 16% in 2016 would allow energy 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  infrastructures  may  face  difficulties  if  the  billed  volumes 
decrease. 

Checking  and  enforcing  compliance  with  regulations  in  new  buildings  can  give  rise  to 
additional  costs  (inspection  by  building  authorities/approved  inspectors  and  training 
institutions). However, the bulk of this inspection work can be done at the same time as other 
statutory inspections, so the increase in costs would only be small. 

–  Impacts of monitoring and decision making tools 

In  Aquitaine  (France),  systematic  irrigation  is  frequent  and  leads  to  higher  water 
consumption41.  In  response  to  a  survey  carried  out  among  irrigators  in  this  region,  27% 
declared they had irrigated "as usual". These users accounted for 44% of the overall volume 
of water for maize; higher water dosing also led to equivalent yields. 18% declared that they 
had irrigated with the help of a decision making tool; these accounted for 16% of the overall 
water volume for maize.  

The  evidence  supporting  the  beneficial  effects  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 Luquet et al. (2005). In addition, technology shifts both on-farm and 
within districts show that serious 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, during the phenological stages 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 savings due to improved labelling are equivalent 
to  30%  of  the  water  savings  already  achieved.  The  potential  for  water  savings  has  to  be 
estimated. 

There are no available quantified references 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 water saving programmes are cheaper than action on water supply, 
and that water saving through education is cheaper than demand side management of utilities, 

41 

42 

43 

Sécheresse  et agriculture,  Réduire  la vulnérabilité de  l'agriculture  à un  risque  accru de  manque d'eau, 
INRA, Octobre 2006 
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 
In particular in Loire-Bretagne river basin, France, 1995 onwards 

EN 

46 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
educational  programmes  are  considered  to  be  cost-effective.  In  addition,  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 expenditure 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 m3 
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 saving measures for individual houses was also 
monitored for various measures actually implemented in the Gironde Region.  

Installing  water-saving  devices  for  taps,  showers  and  toilets  in  a  holiday  home  close  to  the 
sea,  occupied  on  average  by  7  persons  for  40  days 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 (see 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  through  less  pumping  for 
extraction and transport, less treatment of the drinking water supply and, lastly, less transport 
and treatment of waste water. 

In  the  case  of  the  UK,  it  was  calculated  that  £200  million  had  been  saved  through  carbon 
reduction as a result of a water efficiency programme in new buildings (households, target of 
130 l/person/day). 

EN 

47 

   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 network to 21% in 2008 and 18% in 2016.  

A  further  marginal  benefit  from  reduced  carbon  emissions  may  also  come  in  the  form  of 
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 preservation 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  demand  management  and  prevention  measures  have 
been  optimized,  but  have  still  not  redressed  the  balance  between  supply  and  demand. 
Considering the overall water saving and water efficiency potential across Europe, this 
point  comes  down  to  the  need  to  introduce  a  clear  water  hierarchy  to  guide  policy-
making. New water supply should be considered as an option, when other water demand 
management  options,  including  effective  water  pricing  policy  and  cost-effective 
alternatives, have been exhausted. 

6. 

COMPARING 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 the 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-benefit  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  level  of  water  pricing  considered  and  could 
prove negative for some economic sectors or some social classes of the population.  

EN 

48 

   EN 

 
 
Option C will deliver results gradually. Impacts on the economy are expected to be positive 
from the outset and grow in the longer term. Social impacts will also be positive with time. 
This  option  is  expected  to  deliver  significant  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 measures to address water scarcity and drought 
issues will in any event require additional, thorough impact assessments. The next steps will 
involve  looking  deeper  into  the  collection  of  data  and  the  quantitative  assessment  of  the 
selected measures extracted from the wide range of options proposed in the Communication.  

As  highlighted  in  section  5.3.2,  it  is  also  clear  that  the  implementation  of  some  specific 
measures  will  require  the  definition  of  appropriate  accompanying  measures  taking  into 
account  regional,  sectoral  and  social  specificities.  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  best  option  and  intends  to  open  up  a  wide-ranging  debate  on  how  to 
adapt  to  water  scarcity  and  droughts  -  two  phenomena  that  could  potentially  increase  in  a 
context of climate change. The actions could already 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 initiatives and action in the light of discussions on 
this Communication in the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament.  

EN 

49 

   EN 

 
ANNEX 1: EU SECTORAL WATER SAVING POTENTIAL

44 

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 savings of different household technologies. Up to 
25%  savings  can  be  obtained  by  improving  the  technological  performance  of  household 
devices. 

Water use component 

Standard New Build 

Water Efficient New Build 

Standard vs. 
Water Efficient 

Volume  per  use 
(litres) 

capita45 

Per 
consumption 
(l/h/d) 

Volume  per  use 
(litres) 

capita 

Per 
consumption 
(l/h/d) 

Water 
reduction 
% 

use 

Toilet 

Shower 

Bath 

Taps (Internal) 

Washing Machine 

Dish Washer 

Garden 

Sub-total (l/person/day) 

6 

45 

85 

- 

60 

20 

- 

- 

28 

25 

30 

12 

13 

8 

6 

122 

4 

30 

80 

- 

40 

15 

- 

- 

17 

17 

28 

10? 

9 

6 

5? 

92 

39 

32 

7 

17? 

31 

25 

17 

Overall 
reduction 

25% 

The next table presents an overview of the main characteristics of measures related to water 
saving in the domestic sector. Although the information collected relates 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 measures can be as high as 50%. 
•  Significant savings in water bills can be expected. In some cases, energy savings 

for utility companies are significant enough to justify rebates. 
•  Payback periods are very short for some water saving appliances.  

44 
45 

Report on EU Water Saving Potential, July 2007, Ecologic 
Under the assumption of 2.5/persons/household 

EN 

50 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
Specific measures 

Expected water savings  

Country 

Costs  

Benefits 

Pay-back period 
(in years) 

Reference 

General 
Measure 

Rain water 
harvesting 

Waste Water 
reuse 

Overall 

80% of household needs 

France 

25 to 250€ for a 
reservoirs of 200 to 800 
l 

Overall 

30-50% 

UK 

Wastewater reuse for irrigation 

25% of the wastewater 
produced 

Cyprus 

Domestic Wastewater Reuse 

35% of the drinking water 
consumption 

Australia 

Leakage reduction program 

Leaks reduced from 29% 
to 20% 

England and Wales

Leakages 

Leakage reduction program 

30 million liters per day 

Canada 

of half a million dollars 
a year 

Le Monde, La récupération de l’eau de pluie, 
30/05/2007 

www.environment-agency.gov.uk 

EEA (2001): No 19 Environmental issue report, 
Sustainable water use in Europe - Part 2: 
Demand management, EEA, Copenhagen, 2001 

www.sydneywater.au 

EEA, Indicator Fact Sheet (WQ06) Water use 
efficiency (in cities): leakage, version 
01.10.2003 

www.infraguide.ca 

US EPA, Decision-Support Tools for Predicting 
the Performance of Water Distribution and 
Wastewater Collection Systems, EPA/600/R-
02/029 

Leakage Control 

52% reduction in water 
losses 

Toilet 

Shower 

Bath 

Taps (Internal) 

Washing Machine 

Dish Washer 

Water saving devices Overall 

39 

32 

7 

17? 

31 

25 

25% 

Italy 

Europe 

US 

Europe 

US 

Europe 

Europe 

Europe 

US 

Europe 

Germany 

Waster saving 
devices 

165$-365$ 

10$ 

6-11yeras 

3.5 yeasr 

Sustainable Development Commission. 2006. 
Stock Take: Delivering improvements in 
existing housing 

$550-$700 

1-3 years 

www.aquacraft.com 

http://www.eaue.de/winuwd/132.htm 

EN 

51 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2. 

INDUSTRIAL SECTOR 

There is a significant water saving potential in the industrial sector. Compliance with effluent 
discharge requirements and sewage charges is often the main driver explaining investments in 
water saving measures.  

Based on information available in Spain, UK and France, it can be assumed that around 30% 
to 40% of industrial plants have already implemented water saving measures for their process 
or office water use.  

It is unclear however whether they have already captured all their 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  water  savings  range  from  15%  to  90%  of  current  water  use, 
depending on the industrial sub-sector considered, the individual process investigated or the 
combination of water saving measures analysed. 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 for 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 practices, use of more drought resistant crops or 
reuse  of  treated  effluent.  Potential  water  savings  due  to  shifts  in  irrigation  technologies  are 
highest in countries where gravity/furrow irrigation is still important, in particular in Southern 
countries. 

Irrigation method 

Field application efficiency 

Surface irrigation (border, furrow, basin) 

Sprinkler irrigation 

Drip irrigation 

60% 

75% 

90% 

Improvements in irrigation scheduling, better agricultural and irrigation practices at farm and 
field levels or a wider use of deficit irrigation can potentially apply to all countries.  

In some cases, the implementation of these measures will lead to reduced pressures on water 
resources and potentially a reduction in water supply uncertainty.  

The  following  table  summarises  the  outcomes  of  case  studies  related  to  agricultural  water 
savings. 

EN 

52 

   EN 

 
Measure

Details

Potential water saving

Place/ Level of the reference 

Cost

Improving conveyance 
efficiency

open channels -> pipes
open channels -> pipes

20%
300 Million m3 per year

Earthen-> lined channels

10 to 25 % 

Spain
France
Global, medium length channel 
(200 to 2000m)

15 Million Euros (0.05 €/m3)

Preliminary condition and 
limits

Surface -> sprinkler
Surface -> drip
Drip irrigation

Sprinkler irrigation

Pivot irrigation

Drip irrigation

Improving application efficiency

From furrow to drip irrigation

40%

From surface to micro-irrigation

15%
30%
60%

Global
Global
Southern Europe

Crop compatible with drip system
Crop compatible with drip system

France

France

France

Israel 

Cyprus

+ 140-345 €/ha as compared to 
furrow irrigation
+ 180-293 €/ha as compared to 
furrow irrigation
+ 2 465-5 142 €/ha as 
compared to furrow irrigation

between 1 544€ and 3 890 €/ha 
investments, O&M costs 
ranging from 50 €/ha to 347 
€/ha

Agriculture output multiplied by 12

Improving irrigation scheduling

Use of tensiometers and advise

30%

Aquitaine region (France)

Replacement of high water 
consuming crops by crops with lower 
requirements

High variation  depending on crops 
alternatives

50%

Maize -> sorghum France

No tillage technology

Uncertain impact

Decreasing crops irrigation 
needs 

20%
16.5% (rainy year) to 53% (dry year)

Deficit irrigation

20%

40%
25%

grapevine (general)

Orchards, Guadalquivir Spain Decrease of yield from 2 to 11%
No impact on yield and quality
Reduction in yield compensated 
by reduced irrigation and drying 
costs
Decrease of yield of 13%
Decrease of yield of 10%

Wheat, Tunisia
Potato, Tunisia

Maize  (France)

Market outlets. 
Depending on current cropping 
calendar

Source

University of Cordoba
Interviews with experts

FAO, irrigation manual 4.

FAO, irrigation manual 4.
FAO, irrigation manual 4.
Massarutto. 2001

http://www.economie.eaufrance.fr/

http://www.economie.eaufrance.fr/

http://www.economie.eaufrance.fr/

http://www.damsreport.org/docs/kba
se/contrib/opt159.pdf

EEA. 2001

INRA. 2006

INRA,2006

See case study Spain

INRA. 2006

Pereira, and al 2002
Pereira, and al 2003

A.N. Angelakisa and L. Bontoux, 
2001

EEA. 2001

EEA. 2001

Elliot. 

Burak et al. 2000

Wastewater reuse

Treatment with sand filtration

Treatment with reverse osmosis

Training, farm planning, new 
irrigation technology
new technologies (drip, sprinkler), 
improved farm practices, awareness 
raising

New technology, automatic 
management of irrigation systems, 
efficiency enhancement measures, 
coordination.
Water metering, awareness and 
advise, volumetric pricing

ATM, new technologies & incentive 
pricing

Water saving programmes

EN 

10% of total water needs for 
ti
12% of total water needs for 
ti

i

i

i

i

25%

34%

Portugal

Italy 

Australia

Turkey

48-84 €/m3 for investments, 
0.01-0.02 €/m3 for O&M
151-193 €/m3 for investments, 
0.26-0.27 €/m3 for O&M

Increase in crop yields of 20% 
reported
Additional reduction in energy use 
by 30%, improvements in soil 
salinity and waterlogging

1 162 hm3 of water saved

Spain

2 344 Million Euros (2 €/m3 of 
water saved)

Between 1 000 m3/ha to 2 000 m3/ha Canada

53 

Spain

Investments of 7 000 €/ha for 
the pressurized network + 2 500 
€/ha for drip systems at frm 
level

http://www.recherchepolitique.gc.ca/

http://www.todomula.com/

EN 

 
  
 
4. 

TOURISM SECTOR 

The following table summarises the main elements 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-sectors (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 often represents a large share of the total uses of the hotel 
industry, can be around 50%-60%. This estimate is conservative, as savings as high as 75% 
are found in various literatures. 

•  Significant savings in water bills can be expected, 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  equal  or  lower  to  3  years  when  reported.  This 
would  stress  the  significant  advantages  in  installing  water  saving  devices  in  the  tourism 
sector. 

EN 

54 

   EN 

 
Sub-sector 

Specific measures 

Expected water savings 
in % (quantities in 
brackets) 

Country 

Costs  

Benefits 

Pay-back 
period (in 
years) 

Reference 

Camping site 

Bed & Breakfast 

Holiday houses 

Hotels 

Overall 

Overall 

Overall 

Metering 

10 to 20% 

France (Loire-
Bretagne) 

45% 

52% 

10 to 25% 

- 

Europe 

Europe 

Europe 

UK 

Improved toilet flushing 

(18 000 l of water saved 
per year for 50 flushes 
per day) 

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) 

Overall 

Overall 

10 to 20% 

France (Loire-
Bretagne) 

14% to 37% 

France 

Water saving devices in toilets and 
showers 

7% 

United Kingdom 

Overall 

Overall 

Cistern ball cocks in toilet flushes 

32%  

(from 330 l/night to 224 
l/night) 

46% 

22% 

France 

Europe 

UK 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

£ 300 saved per annum 
(reduced energy and water 
bills) 

- 

- 

- 

400 € per year (reduction in 
water bill) 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Office International de l’Eau (2005) 

Hamele and Eckhardt (2006) 

Hamele and Eckhardt (2006) 

Lallana, 2001 

http://www.egeneration.co.uk/ 

http://www.calvia.com 

Office International de l’Eau (2005) 

Office International de l’Eau (2005) 

ADEME (2007) 

Own calculation based on Office International 
de l’Eau (2005) and ADEME (2007) 

Hamele and Eckhardt (2006) 

http://www.egeneration.co.uk/ 

EN 

55 

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 

Water saving for appliances in rooms + 
plantation of local low water consuming 
plants 

33% 

Spain 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

http://www.egeneration.co.uk/ 

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 

Comprehensive package of measures 
implemented 

Cafés 

Water saving measures in kitchen  

Restaurants & 
cafés 

Installation of waterless woks in 
Chinese restaurants  

Leak repairs, water saving toilet 
flushing & toilet cisterns 

31% 

Greece 

100% for maintaining 
pond water levels 
(seawater) & golf course 
irrigation (treated 
effluent) 

70% 

30% 

90% 

(1 800 m3 per year per 
restaurant) 

- 

(725 000 m3 per year) 

Greece 

Europe 

Europe 

Australia 

UK 

EN 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

$ 4 500 per year (reduced 
water and energy bill) 

- 

- 

- 

- 

1 

www.ellinikietairia.gr/articles & 
www.grecotel.com 

http://www.portocarras.gr/home.htm 

Hamele and Eckhardt (2006) 

Hamele and Eckhardt (2006) 

http://www.sydneywater.com.au/ 

Investments at £ 
800 000, Recurring 
Costs at £ 50 000 per 
year 

56 

£ 1.1 Million per year 

0.75 

http://www.egeneration.co.uk/ 

EN 

 
  
Country 

Costs  

Benefits 

Sub-sector 

Specific measures 

Reduce leakage in stadium 

Expected water savings 
in % (quantities in 
brackets) 

78% 

- 

Water recycling in swimming pool 

( 7140 m3 per year) 

France 

France 

Flow regulation in swimming pool 

28% 

France 

Touristic 
infrastructure 

Optimum network closure for fountains 

France 

(2 468 m3 per year) 

- 

States of the art cleaning of buses 

80% 

Waterless urinals at conference center 

- 

(511 m3 per year) 

UK 

UK 

Drip irrigation for green spaces 

62% 

France 

Water auditing, irrigation scheduling, 
shift to drip irrigation 

From 30% to 76% 

United States, 
Australia 

Change of grasses to water saving 
species 

Outdoor uses 

Range of measures including shift to 
low water consuming grasses 

70% 

50% 

(2 8 70 m3 per year) 

Conversion to Xeriscape 

57% 

UK 

UK 

US 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

26 250 €/year (reduced 
water bill) 

15 778 €/year (reduced 
water bill) 

2 520 €/year (reduced water 
bill) 

5 183 €/year (reduced water 
bill) 

Reduction in water bill 
expected 

£ 1 000 per urinal => 
5 000 £ 

£ 378 saved per year 
(reduced water bill) 

- 

- 

- 

5 242 €/year (reduced water 
bill) 

- 

- 

£ 7 000 (washdown 
system) + £ 14 000 
per year (additional 
labour) 

Expected saving in water 
bill 

Labour costs to be 
considered  

Reduced water bill, reduced 
maintenance costs of 
gardens and public areas 

Pay-back 
period (in 
years) 

Reference 

3 

IME (2002), own calculation 

1.75 

IME (2002), own calculation 

0.1 

IME (2002), own calculation 

2 

- 

2.5 

1 

- 

3 

- 

- 

IME (2002), own calculation 

http://www.egeneration.co.uk/ 

IME (2002), own calculation 

Different sources presented in this report 

http://www.egeneration.co.uk/ 

http://www.environment-
agency.gov.uk/subjects/waterres/ 

http://www.cityofmesa.org/utilities/conservati
on/convert-to-xeriscape.htm 

EN 

57 

EN 

 
  
  
 
Sub-sector 

Specific measures 

Expected water savings in 
% (quantities in brackets) 

Country 

Costs  

Benefits 

All sectors 

Closed loop recycling 

Closed loop recycling with treatment 

Automatic shut-off 

Countercurrent rinsing 

Spray/jet upgrades 

Reuse of wash water 

Scrapers 

Cleaning in place 

90% 

60% 

15% 

40% 

20% 

50% 

30% 

60% 

UK 

UK 

UK 

UK 

UK 

UK 

UK 

UK 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Pay-back 
period (in 
years) 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Reference 

Envirowise. 2005 

Envirowise. 2005 

Envirowise. 2005 

Envirowise. 2005 

Envirowise. 2005 

Envirowise. 2005 

Envirowise. 2005 

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/ 

Leather industry 

Overall savings 

Recycling wastewater (membrane 
technology) 

Overall savings 

30% 

90% 

28% 

Pulp & paper 

Increased efficiency at water 
purification plant, optimise water 
consumption 

15% (- 35.5 Million 
m3/year) 

Catalonia 

Sector-specific 

Catalonia 

Sweden 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

ICAEN. 1999 

COTANCE. 2002 

ICAEN. 1999 

http://www.sca.com/ 

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 

58 

EN 

 
  
 
Sub-sector 

Specific measures 

Expected water savings in 
% (quantities in brackets) 

Country 

Costs  

Benefits 

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 

Pay-back 
period (in 
years) 

Reference 

- 

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/ 

Manufacturing 

Rainwater harvesting 

35% (- 200 000 m3/year) 

France (car 
industry) 

Water saving measures in offices and 
washrooms 

45% (- 1 700 m3/year) 

UK (furniture) 

- 

- 

Estimated reduction in 
water bill by 202 000 €/year

Equivalent cost savings of 
£3 000/year 

- 

- 

http://www.aquavalor.fr/experiences.htm 

http://www.etsu.com/etbpp/ 

Cooling tower to recirculate water 

Chemicals 

Overall savings 

Overall savings 

80% 

53% 

37% 

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/ 

Catalonia 

Catalonia 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

ICAEN. 1999 

ICAEN. 1999 

Optimum sofcers valve settings, water 
recycling 

40% (- 48 000 m3/year) 

UK (dyeing 
industry) 

No capital 
investments 

Textile 

Reduced water bill of 
£29 000/year, additional 
energy savings of 
£3 800/year 

Immediate 
payback 

http://www.etsu.com/etbpp/ 

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/ 

Food 

Overall savings 

35% 

Catalonia 

Reuse of wastewater  

67% (- 0.55 Million 
m3/year)  

The Netherlands 
(dairy industry) 

EN 

- 

Reduction in water 
abstraction, additional 
reduction in discharged 
effluent 

- 

- 

ICAEN. 1999 

http/ec.europa.eu/environment/life/ 

- 

- 

59 

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 

Water audit & different water saving 
measures 

58% 

60% 

UK (fish 
processing) 

£95 500 per year 

- 

http;//www.envirowise.gov.uk/ 

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 

60 

EN 

 
  
 
 
5. 

ESTIMATION OF EU WATER SAVING POTENTIAL 

The following table gives an overview of the 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 

61 

EN 

 
  
 
 
(EU 25) 

EN 

62 

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  improvements  without  major  changes  in  human 
behaviour or production patterns. The saving potential 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 increase 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 savings in all economic sectors.  

EN 

63 

   EN 

 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN 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 PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL  

Addressing the challenge of water scarcity and droughts in the European Union 

Impact Assessment 

{COM(2007) 414 final} 
{SEC(2007) 996} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX 2 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
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