Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council addressing the challenge of water scarcity and droughts in the European Union COM(2007) 414 final
Date: 2008-05-29
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: conservation of resources, drought, environmental protection, environmental research, fixing of prices, hydraulic works, use of water, water resources

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 224/67

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Communication from the
Commission to the European Parliament and the Council addressing the challenge of water scarcity
and droughts in the European Union

COM(2007) 414 final

(2008/C 224/15)

On 18 July 2007 the European Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social
Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council addressing the challenge of water
scarcity and droughts in the European Union.

The Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment, which was responsible for preparing
the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 29 April 2008. The rapporteur was
Mr Buffetaut.

At its 445th plenary session, held on 28 and 29 May 2008 (meeting of 29 May), the European Economic
and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 97 votes, with 1 abstention.

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1
It is clear that the issues of water scarcity and drought
must be addressed not only as an environmental issue but also
as a key element of sustainable economic growth in Europe, in
short as an issue of strategic importance.

1.2 Whilst people need water
is also a vital
resource for many economic sectors, starting with agriculture
and the agri-food industry, which work with living things.

to live,

it

Commendably,

1.3
the Commission communication high-
lights the importance of the problem and sets out a number of
ways forward with regard to, on the one hand, combating water
scarcity and drought and, on the other hand, the possibilities of
adapting to the new circumstances.

part of water abstraction is not metered or registered. It there-
fore recommends that the Commission propose an appropriate
definition of water use to Member States.

The EESC recommends the creation of a European
1.9
website dedicated to river basin plans, where local authorities
would be able to find specific examples which they could use to
draw up their own plans and to improve the information they
provide.

1.10
As concerns the allocation of water-related funds, the
Commission could differentiate its assistance rates in accordance
with the criterion of rational water use and conservation of
water resources so as to encourage local authorities who do not
behave responsibly to change their practices, without penalising
regions which already make efforts in this field.

1.4
Climate change, recognised as a problem by scientists
and the general public alike, could make matters worse and the
measures proposed by the Commission need to be introduced
swiftly.

In order to improve drought risk management,

1.11
the
Committee calls on the EU to encourage the interoperability of
means of preventing and fighting fires within the framework of
the European Mechanism for Civil Protection.

Admittedly,

the situation is not

1.5
the
Member States, and the circumstances vary in Europe from
north to south and east to west. Nevertheless, all the Member
States are affected and all have experienced periods of summer
drought, including the Nordic countries.

the same in all

1.6
That is why these differences in circumstances must not
be allowed to stand in the way of the adoption of a concerted
policy in Europe and the implementation of practical measures,
adapted, of course, to the specific conditions prevailing in each
Member State, as there is no catch-all solution for the whole of
the European Union.

1.7
The EESC therefore calls for close and systematic moni-
toring of the measures which will be taken on the basis of the
present communication.

1.8
As regards the price of water, the Committee would
point out that pricing policies can prove ineffective if a major

In discussions on supply infrastructure,

1.12
the EESC
recommends that the possibility of using underground water
storage and re-injection of groundwater be explored. The
Committee does not believe that water transfers within one and
the same Member State should be excluded a priori but that they
must be regulated with a view to avoiding an extravagant
approach towards the use of water resources, which must be
managed with the ongoing aim of saving water and using the
most advanced techniques for controlling water use (1).

To promote rational water use, the EESC recommends
1.13
the introduction of
the techniques of smart metering and
bespoke billings. It would also stress the importance of good
practice in the agricultural sector and recommends reforestation,
the planting of hedges in areas where it is useful and feasible

(1) The public hearing held in Murcia on 3 April 2008 and the associated
study visit indicated that techniques for the responsible and rational use
of water resources are already available on the market. In addition, land
cultivation and, in particular, afforestation help to combat desertifica-
tion.

C 224/68

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.8.2008

and the promotion of sustainable drainage and irrigation techni-
ques, with the support of rural development policy funds. Water
use in agriculture is gradually becoming more efficient but
needs to improve further through, for example, modernisation
and more sparing use of watering and irrigation. In this context,
it is worth stressing the need for deepening and developing
research and new technologies in agriculture. The Committee
believes that individual systems for water saving, recycling and
sanitation could be useful, particularly in the case of dispersed
housing.

— introduction of a water scarcity and drought information

system in Europe;

— RDT opportunities.

2.4
In so doing, the Commission seeks to establish the foun-
dations of an effective strategy for promoting efficient water
use, as part of efforts to combat climate change and reinvigorate
the European economy.

1.14 With regard to improving knowledge and data collec-
tion, the EESC proposes the creation of a website where climatic
parameters, drawn from the IPCC's global models, would be
downloadable and available to local and regional players.

The Council of the European Union (3) stressed that the
2.5
issue of water scarcity and droughts should be addressed sepa-
rately, not only from a European perspective but also at interna-
tional level, and acknowledged the need for full implementation
of the Water Framework Directive (WFD).

2. Gist of the communication

2.1
Problems of water scarcity and increased frequency of
droughts have now emerged as a major challenge in Europe, not
only for traditionally vulnerable regions but also for the conti-
nent as a whole. The proportion of European river basin areas
suffering from severe water stress could increase from 19 %
today to 35 % by 2070. Especially, southern, central and eastern
Europe are likely to be severely affected.

2.2
The number of areas and people affected by droughts has
risen by 20 % in the space of thirty years. In addition to the
human cost drought brings with it an economic cost. In 2003
the cost of the damage to the European economy was at least
EUR 8.7 billion. A study of water use worldwide reveals a wide
variety of situations. An American consumes 600 litres a day
on average, a European 250 to 300, a Jordanian 40 and an
African 30. Faced with the threat of water shortage, everyone
must try to change their habits, but action must be taken where
efforts are likely to have the greatest impact. Agriculture is the
biggest user (71 % of water abstraction), followed by industry
(20 %) and domestic water consumption (9 %) (2).

2.6
The Council asked the Commission to present a follow-
up report on the implementation of the communication and to
flesh out the EU strategy in these areas by 2012.

2.7
The EESC does not intend to make its own diagnosis of
the situation, which would be superfluous, preferring instead to
comment on and complement the proposed ways forward and,
above all, to put forward practical recommendations and incen-
tives.

The issues of water scarcity and drought

2.8
in the EU
impact on several policy areas. Thus, for example, depending on
the case at hand, the competent Commission bodies could be
DG AGRI, DG ENV and DG REGIO, since these issues concern
agriculture, water policy, climate change, crisis management and
the organisation of European civil defence. It would be desirable
if the Commission were to ensure that water-related concerns
are taken on board in a cross-cutting manner.

3. General comments

The EESC's comments follow the structure of the communica-
tion.

In response to a request for action from the Environment
in June 2006, the Commission therefore presents an

2.3
Council
initial set of policy options at European level:

3.1 Price of water

— putting the right price tag on water;

— allocating water and water-related funding more efficiently;

— financing water efficiency;

— developing drought risk management plans;

— further optimising the use of the EU Solidarity Fund and

European Mechanism for Civil Protection;

— fostering water-efficient technologies and practices;

3.1.1
The Commission's thinking in this respect is in line
with the WFD. The Commission regrets that not enough use
has been made of economic instruments and points out that
pricing policies can prove ineffective if a major part of water
abstraction is not metered or registered by the authorities.

3.1.2 Moreover, many Member States have adopted restric-
tive definitions of waters uses and users. By adopting a restric-
tive definition of water users — distribution of drinking water
and sanitation — and omitting to take into account irrigation,
navigation, hydro-electric schemes, flood protection, etc., some
Member States have limited the scope for full cost recovery and
effective pricing of different water uses.

(2) Source: Atlas pour un monde durable. Michel Barnier. Edition Acro-

(3) Brussels European Council, 14 December 2007, Presidency conclu-

pole.

sions 16616//1/07 REV1, p.17.

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 224/69

3.1.3
Consequently, the EESC suggests that the Commission
urges Member States with overly ‘restrictive’ definitions of water
uses and users to modify their approach, for example by relating
it a list of water uses where they would have to justify the exclu-
sion of any particular use from that list. It would be useful to
define criteria for establishing a hierarchy for water use, which
would also serve as an aid in introducing a smart pricing
system.

3.1.4
The EESC also recommends the setting-up of a research
programme in applied economics for modelling financial flows
and social utility flows associated with different water uses and
water circuits at the level of a river basin as a whole.

3.1.5
Discussions on a fair price for water must be clarified
by analysing the economic costs and benefits incurred or
received by all
sectors of activity, consumers, users and
taxpayers, in relation to water usage.

The Committee would also draw the Commission's
3.1.6
attention to the tendency, resulting from the over-restrictive
definition of water uses, for some Member States to pass on the
cost of water conservation to urban consumers, to the benefit
of agricultural or industrial users. Should prices for agricultural
users increase, then there would be a need for a balanced tariff.

3.1.7
The EESC notes that pricing incentives to save water
must be powerful enough to prevent their impact from being
mitigated by costs arising from any complexities generated by
such schemes. The Committee would recall that the first source
of saving is to be found in the proper maintenance of networks
and tackling leaks, which sometimes lead to unacceptably high
levels of wastage. Finally, the Committee would point out that
pricing cannot solve everything and that regulation has a role to
play in situations where a balance has to be struck between
different water uses.

3.1.8 Where the demand for non-agricultural use of water is
seasonal, which is often the case in holiday resorts, a two-part
pricing system would be advisable.
It would constitute an
element of fairness between resident consumers and holiday-
makers with regard to sharing the fixed costs of the system.

3.2 Allocating water and water-related funding more efficiently

3.2.1
The Commission notes that the economic development
of some river basins can lead to adverse effects on water
that particular attention
resource availability and points out
needs to be paid to river basins facing ‘stress’ or scarcity.

3.2.2
The EESC recommends the creation of a European
website dedicated to river basin plans, under the control of the
European Environment Agency and/or the Commission and
intended in particular for local and regional authorities and
other relevant authorities, on which specific examples of such
plans would be publicly available.

3.2.3
The website could be a source of methodologies, objec-
tives, solutions to problems and economic figures for players at

local level. Considerable time could be saved in drawing up such
plans.

3.2.4
The impact of agriculture on water resources is well
known. Steps should be taken to promote more efficient water
use, including sustainable irrigation and drainage (for example,
the drop-by-drop irrigation technique). The 2008 CAP Health
Check must be used as an opportunity for more mainstreaming
of quantitative water usage issues into CAP instruments. Thus
the aim to achieve the total decoupling of aid should be accom-
panied by an increase in support for water management within
the framework of rural development programmes. Similarly,
specific instruments should be introduced for drought risk
management in the agricultural sector.

Generally speaking, the Commission could differentiate
3.2.5
its assistance rates in accordance with the criterion of rational
water use and conservation of water resources (5 to 10 percen-
tage points within the maximum rate of assistance,
for
example). This criterion, established at the time of the project
study or when put out to tender in the case of construction,
would be audited, at the initiative of the authority receiving
European assistance, on completion of the project and after an
interval of five years. The additional assistance would take the
form of a deduction in the cost of reimbursing investment, as a
reward for observed performance.

3.2.6
The Committee believes that containing the overall
costs of projects pertaining to the supply of drinking water or
purification is
approach both from the
economic point of view and in terms of sustainable develop-
ment. Overall cost is understood here to mean the net present
value of the investment and the operating, maintenance and
renewal costs over a long period.

appropriate

the

3.2.7
Therefore, projects offering selection criteria and guar-
antees based on them should be promoted, in particular by the
Commission, in order to disseminate good practices relating to
rational water use and conservation of water resources.

The whole approach is in line with the Commission's
3.2.8
desire to give first priority to supporting water saving and effi-
ciency measures. Consistency will have to be established
between this policy and the policy with regard to biofuels,
which are consumers of water.

3.3 Improving drought risk management

3.3.1
practice.

The Commission wants to foster exchanges of good

3.3.2
The EESC would like to see maps drawn up each
spring, with the aid of satellites and backed up by local meteor-
ological analyses, showing the risks of drought, shortfalls in
agricultural production and fire. Data from river basins plans
already drawn up should also be used in this context. This data
should be accessible to farmers or farmers' associations in
connection with their risk management.

C 224/70

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.8.2008

3.3.3
The Committee believes it would be desirable to move
from crisis management to drought risk management. As far as
the former is concerned, there is still room for improvement, as
demonstrated during the catastrophic fires in Greece summer
2007. The EU could facilitate and encourage the interoperability
of means of preventing and fighting fires, the standardisation of
equipment,
the containerisation of diesel pumps, and the
carrying-out of joint exercises. This would entail the practical
application of the European Mechanism for Civil Protection.

The Commission's proposal

3.3.4
to apply for assistance
from the EU Solidarity Fund, as amended and adjusted, to deal
with the consequences of severe droughts should clearly be
retained.
It would also be advisable to set up an insurance
scheme to offset the consequences of drought periods, particu-
larly for farmers, who are the first victims.

3.4 Additional water supply infrastructures

3.4.1
The Commission has in mind here projects of a collec-
tive nature. In certain cases individual initiatives could also be
considered, giving prominence to the notion of a hierarchy of
water uses.

3.4.2 Whatever the case, the communication considers not
only water transfers from one river basin to another and the
construction of dams and micro-dams under highly regulated
conditions as potential options, but also the reuse of waste
water and desalination. As regards the reuse of waste water, the
problem is the accumulation of pollutants over successive reuse
cycles. Consequently, it would be useful to launch or support a
research programme on modelling concentrations after multiple
cycles, in order to derive stabilisation criteria to determine when
concentrations reach limit values compatible with the system's
self-purifying capacity.

3.4.3
In the case of desalination there are two types of
problem: on the one hand, energy-related ones and, on the
other hand, environmental ones relating to by-products and the
mixture of saline concentrates.

3.4.4
One option that could be considered is a programme
for the development of solar desalination, with a range of micro
installations which would represent a technological contribution
by Europe to developing countries facing drought.

into water-saving

3.4.5
In general, there is a need to encourage research and
techniques
development
fostering the replenishment of groundwater (surfacing of roads
in urban areas, for example) and biotechnologies enabling the
development of less water-consuming agricultural crops.

techniques or

3.4.6
Finally, there is also a need to explore the possibility of
underground water storage and re-injection of groundwater.
Here pilot projects should be selected and standards established
for stored water which are both realistic and protect the subsoil.
This concerns both the quantity and quality of underground
water as water tables are also victims of pollution. Special atten-
tion should be paid in this context to high water-consuming

industrial activities, which both tap groundwater supplies and
have the potential to pollute them.

inter-regional water

the EESC calls on the Commission to
3.4.7
In addition,
explore the possibility of
transfers. A
transfer from a surplus to a deficit basin could be desirable, also
for example, agri-
from a European viewpoint
cultural self-sufficiency, if water use in the recipient basin is effi-
cient and water-saving. Technical, pricing or regulatory measures
must be designed to prevent wastage elsewhere, that is collective
aid granted to a ‘deserving’ sector must not lead to increased
water consumption in non-priority sectors.

in terms of,

3.4.8
The EESC believes that possible measures should be
agreed to regulate water flow between third countries and EU
Member States through which a river flows across the external
EU border.

3.5 Fostering water-efficient technologies and practices

The Commission feels that the use of water-efficient
3.5.1
In addition to
technologies could be increased substantially.
tackling the problems of
leakages, which are considerable in
some networks, and wastage, the upgrading of water manage-
ment practices offers interesting possibilities.

3.5.2
The measures proposed by the Commission are clearly
desirable (standards for water-using devices and equipment,
water performance of buildings, a performance indicator, adap-
tation of economic activities to water scarcity and droughts,
etc.).

3.5.3
The possibility of using grey water should also be
explored, whilst bearing in mind that this would require invest-
ment, particularly with regard to installing separate piping and
adopting precautionary measures. Consideration should also be
given to how rainwater could be recovered in a more systematic
way.

3.5.4
One potentially promising technique is smart metering
and bespoke billings. Metering technology and remote transmis-
sion of consumption data suggest the possibility of introducing
several kinds of pricing, as is already the case with electricity.
The customer could then have an account tailored to his specific
circumstances, but nevertheless conducive to energy-efficient
behaviour: seasonal tariff, permanent tariff, off-peak tariff, etc.

3.5.5 With a view to conserving water resources, combating
floods and the erosion and pollution which accompany them,
the rural environment should
policies for the protection of
strongly encourage reforestation and the planting of hedges,
where such practices would be feasible and useful, and the
maintenance of agriculture. Applications and checks could be
made on the basis of the most advanced systems for defining
geographic areas. It would be desirable to encourage basic agri-
cultural research under the Seventh Framework Programme for
Research and Development, with the aim of creating plant vari-
eties which are more resistant to drought.

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 224/71

3.5.6
Continuing on the subject of agricultural practices,
there is a need to promote sustainable drainage and irrigation
and, in general, the use of best available techniques. Drainage
ditches, particularly at points where there are crossings, should
be equipped with sections where water can be held back and
stored locally so as to limit the concentration of waters, and the
erosion and pollution which go with it, and foster re-infiltration.
Storing water locally in this way would, of course, bring with it
clean-up obligations, which would have to be studied with
professionals.

3.6 Fostering the emergence of a water-saving culture in Europe

The comments made by the Commission can only be
3.6.1
welcomed: certification and labelling to foster water efficiency
and saving are appropriate ways forward. However, in the case
of labelling, it should be borne in mind that there is a vogue for
labelling and there is a danger here that excessive
ecological
labelling could make the information provided incomprehen-
sible.

3.6.2
The whole of organised civil society, i.e. the social part-
ners and associations, together with the world of education and
training, should be mobilised to contribute to the emergence of
a water-saving culture. Training and the diffusion of new tech-
nologies in the relevant sectors must avoid making the mistakes
of the past, particularly in the area of urban hydraulics.

It is worth noting that there is a growing market today
3.6.3
for equipment for the recovery of rainwater and recycling of
grey water in individual homes. This points to the emergence of
a water-saving culture as advocated by the Commission.
However, the justified concern to save water must not lead to
an individualist quest for self-dependence, which would under-
mine,
the public provision of
water supply and sanitation services, which was and still is at
the root of major advances in hygiene and life expectancy. In
fact, it has been forgotten in our developed societies that, while
water is necessary for life, it can also be the bearer of death.

technically and economically,

Thus

systems

individual

(non-collective)

3.6.4
for water
saving, recycling and sanitation would seem to be an interesting
option and suited to dispersed housing. But they would appear
to be less attractive, in economic and social terms, in an urban
environment, unless water collected and recycled using such
systems, even if they capture run-off on private property,
is
treated and used by public services.

3.7 Improving knowledge and data collection

3.7.1
The Commission notes that reliable information on the
extent and effects of water scarcity and droughts is essential.

Brussels, 29 May 2008.

The Committee fully endorses the idea of producing an annual
European assessment and making better use of the services of
the Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES)
initiative to provide satellite-based data and monitoring tools to
support water policies. Universities and scientific research
centres should be encouraged to produce studies on water-
related issues, preservation of water resources and ways of
increasing them through the development of new technologies.

3.7.2
There is a need to standardise the status criteria used in
the inventories of water bodies provided for in the WFD. In
practice, the reports produced by Member States are disparate
both in terms of the size of the water basins studied and the
density of measurements of water quality and biodiversity.

3.7.3
The EESC therefore encourages the Commission to go
ahead with the work of the specialised committees monitoring
application of the WFD and to publish scoreboards showing the
progress made by the Member States, with a view to stimulating
efforts in this area and bringing about their convergence.

3.7.4
From a realistic point of view, there is a need to focus
efforts in the most vulnerable areas, without waiting for the
achievement of uniformity and quality in all assessments and
action plans. The selection of these areas could be made on the
initiative of Member States, but in accordance with common
criteria (rainfall deficiency and definition of geographical area).

Raising local and regional players' awareness of the risk
3.7.5
of water scarcity and the effects of climate change more gener-
ally would be easier if information on climate trends were made
accessible to as large an audience as possible.

The EESC therefore proposes, as a practical step, the
3.7.6
creation of a website, possibly as part of the Water Information
System for Europe (WISE), where climatic parameters, such as
rainfall, evapotranspiration, temperature, wind speed and hours
of sunshine, drawn from the global models of the Intergovern-
mental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), would be downloadable
(along the lines of the PRUDENCE or ENSEMBLES projects but
more systematic in their coverage, and providing numerical data
in addition to geographical data).

The responsibility for

3.7.7
the scientific character and
updating of the data made available online would be entrusted
to a group of European laboratories which are members of the
IPCC.

The EU could finance the initial setting-up of

3.7.8
the
website and modest fees for downloading could be used to
support the work of the research laboratories contributing to
the models.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris Dimitriadis