COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS A Blueprint to Safeguard Europe's Water Resources
Date: 2012-11-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: drought, fixing of prices, flood, sustainable development, use of water, water consumption, water management in agriculture, water pollution, water protection

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 13.12.2012  
SWD(2012) 381 final/2 

CORRIGENDUM 
Annule et remplace le document SWD(2012) 381 final du 14.11.2012 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

Accompanying the document 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

A Blueprint to Safeguard Europe's Water Resources 

{COM(2012) 673 final} 
{SWD(2012) 382 final}

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
Introduction 

The  EU  has  developed  over  several  years  a  comprehensive  water  policy  that  has  gradually 
shifted from addressing mainly health concerns to the environmental impacts of major water-
using sectors. Since 2000, with the adoption of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), water 
policy has made another step-change taking an integrated approach to water management, on 
the basis of the concept of 'river basin management' aimed at achieving good status of all EU 
waters by 2015.  

The  Impact  Assessment  (IA)  of  the  Communication  “A  Blueprint  to  Safeguard  Europe's 
Water  Resources”  (the  'Blueprint')  brings  together  several  assessments,  identifies  the  key 
challenges for water resources management and evaluates alternative policy options for action 
at EU level. This executive summary highlights the key messages from the main report. 

1. 

PROCEDURAL ISSUES AND CONSULTATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES 

The  Blueprint  is  included  in  the  Commission  Work  Programme  2012  under  2012/ENV/005. 
The drafting of the IA relied on a wide internal and external consultation process. It benefited 
from contributions from an inter service group, and from the recommendations of the Impact 
Assessment Board. 

Stakeholders  were  involved  in  the  IA  process  at  an  early  stage  through  the  established 
Common  Implementation  Strategy  for  the  Water  Framework  Directive  (CIS  –  WFD)  that 
brings together the Member States, the Commission, the acceding, (potential) candidate and 
EEA  countries  as  well  as  stakeholders  and  NGOs.  A  stakeholder  conference  (3rd  EU  Water 
Conference)  took  place  on  24-25  May  2012  to  discuss  draft  policy  options.  Two  12-week 
public  consultations  took  place:  the  first,  on  the  Fitness  Check  of  Water  Policy,  between 
6/12/2011 and 27/2/2012 and the second, on policy options, between 16/3/2012 and 8/6/2012.  

Overall, stakeholders were supportive of non-legislative EU action to tackle water problems. 
This included support for guidance and tools in relation to water balances, target setting and 
cost-recovery,  as  well  as  action  on  improving  information  and  reporting  efficiency.  Some 
legislative  options  were  also  supported,  such  as  a  possible  new  regulation  on  water  re-use 
standards.  On  introducing  additional  conditionality  into  EU  funding,  such  as  the  Common 
Agricultural  Policy  (CAP),  there  were  strongly  divergent  views,  although  in  each  case  the 
majority supported introducing further conditionality. There was also strong support for using 
different EU funds to support measures.  

2. 

POLICY CONTEXT, PROBLEM DEFINITION AND SUBSIDIARITY 

The  WFD  established  a  legal  framework  to  achieve  sustainable  water  management  in  the 
EU.The WFD is implemented through six-year recurring cycles. Member States were required 
to  deliver  their  first  River  Basin  Mangement  Plans  (RBMPs)  by  the  end  of  2009  and  shall 
review these plans every 6 years. The Programmes of Measures (PoMs) developed under the 
plans have to be operational by the end of 2012.The 2nd cycle RBMPs need to be in place by 
the end of 2015. By 2019, the WFD should be reviewed and, if necessary, revised.  

European waters face several challenges, detailed in the State of Water Report: 

2 

 
 
• 

• 

• 

The  information  reported  in  the  first  RBMPs  indicates  that  more  than  half  of  the 
surface water bodies in Europe are in less than good ecological status, and will need 
additional  measures  to  those  established  under  other  directives  (Nitrates,  Urban 
Waste Water, Industrial Emissions) to meet the WFD objectives. 

Water  scarcity  is  spreading  in  Europe.  Large  areas,  particularly  in  the  south  of 
Europe, are affected by water scarcity, while competing uses are increasing demand 
across the continent.  

The  frequency  and  intensity  of  floods  and  droughts  and  their  environmental  and 
economic  damage  appear  to  have  increased  over  the  past  thirty  years.  This  can  be 
attributed  both  to  climate  change  and  other  anthropogenic  pressures  (e.g.  land  use 
changes). 

Significant  pressures  on  EU  waters  derive  from  the  discharge  of  pollutants,  hydro-
morphological  alterations  and  water  abstraction,  which  are  mainly  due  to  demographic 
growth,  land  use  and  economic  activity.  To  counter  this,  there  is  a  need  for  further 
implementation of water resource management measures to improve water resource efficiency 
and sustainability, including: 

• 

• 

• 

Natural Water Retention Measures (NWRM) to safeguard and enhance the water 
storage  potential  of  soil  and  ecosystems,  delivering  co-benefits,  in  particular 
biodiversity  protection,  disaster  prevention,  climate  change  adaptation  and 
mitigation. 

Water efficiency measures which are often a sustainable and cost-effective method 
to  deal  with  water  stress  situations  as  they  offer,  for  instance  in  buildings,  a 
significant energy saving potential associated with water savings. 

Alternative water supply such as water re-use or desalination.  

In  line  with  the  principle  of  subsidiarity,  the  Blueprint  focuses  on  problems  and  policy 
instruments that are relevant for water management at EU level, taking also into account the 
evaluation performed in the context of the Fitness Check, the assessment of the RBMPs and 
the  review  of  the  Water  Scarcity  and  Droughts  (WSD)  policy.  The  following  4  problem 
categories with 12 key problems have been identified. 

• 

(1) 

(2) 

First,  there  is  insufficient  use  of  economic  instruments  to  address  market 
failures  that  prevent  the  implementation  of  the  above-mentioned  measures.  In 
particular: 

Current pricing schemes in Europe often fail to combine the objectives of efficiency 
and fairness and do not allow a sustainable degree of cost recovery for the financing 
of the measures.  

There is insufficient metering of water consumption in spite of the fact that this is a 
necessary pre-condition for the implementation of incentive pricing policies.  

3 

 
 
(3) 

• 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

• 

(8) 

(9) 

(10) 

There is insufficient consumers and businesses awareness of the issue of embedded 
water  and  a  lack  of  adequate  labelling  schemes,  in  particular  for  globally  traded 
goods.  

Second, there is a risk that the WFD goals will not be achieved because of a lack of 
integration  and  coherence  with  other  policy  areas,  including  agriculture, 
cohesion, industry and land use planning. For the CAP and Cohesion policy there is a 
potential  for  further  policy  integration  that  can  emerge  from  the  implementation  of 
the  proposed  EU  multi-annual  financial  framework.  However,  further  support  is 
needed: 

for integration of land use measures, 

for water efficiency in buildings and appliances, 

to address leakages in water infrastructures and 

for the uptake of water re-use through common EU standards. 

Third, it is necessary to improve currently ineffective governance  by: 

Addressing  ineffective  water  planning  and  management  in  order  to  tackle 
coordination  problems,  as  this  can  affect  the  setting  of  overall  objectives  for 
catchments  as  well  as  the  cost-effective  application  of  individual  measures  and 
instruments.  

Developing  proper  dataset  and  a  consistent  methodology  for  calculating  water 
balances, ecological flows and targets.  

Improving drought risk management planning in some Member States to meet the 
challenge of protecting economies and society from drought impacts. 

• 

Fourth, there is a need t address knowledge gaps: 

(11) 

 There  are  considerable  information  gaps,  particularly  with  regard  to  a  consistent 
methodology to calculate costs and benefits of the POMs or of the lack of action.  

(12)  When 

information 

is  available, 

there  are  still  problems  with  consistency, 
dissemination and accessibility at the appropriate level of decision making l. There 
is  also  room  for  improving  efficiency  in  the  current  statistic  and  reporting 
requirements. 

These EU wide water management problems are  hampering the achievement  of good  status 
and  the  reduction  of  water  stress  and  vulnerability  to  extreme  events.  This  has  negative 
impacts  on  the  water  environment  and,  as  a  consequence,  on  biodiversity  and  ecosystems. 
Moreover, there are substantial socio-economic impacts: a number of economic sectors (food 
and energy production, transport, tourism and recreation services) are directly dependant on 
availability  of  water  of  specific  quality  levels  and  on  water-related  ecosystem  services. 
Extreme events such as floods and droughts also cause very substantial damage to economic 
sectors  and  the  population  more  generally.  Impacts  are  often  concentrated  in  lower  income 

4 

 
 
countries  and  in  regions  with  low  levels  of  development,  in  particular  rural  areas,  due  to  a 
lower  rate  of  implementation  of  drinking  water  and  waste  water  treatment  regulations,  to 
weak enforcement or absence of land-use planning in flood-prone areas, and lower access to 
water  saving  technologies  and  know-how.  Moreover,  access  to  safe  drinking  water  and 
sanitation must be considered within a human rights framework. 

3. 

OBJECTIVES 

The Blueprint presents the policy response to the challenges described above with the long-
term aim to ensure availability of good quality water for sustainable and equitable water 
use. This contributes to all 3 dimensions of the Europe 2020 strategy (Smart, Sustainable and 
Inclusive  Growth.  To  achieve  this  objective,  it  is  necessary  to  implement  at  EU  level  a 
balanced approach, focusing on: 

• 

• 

• 

Achieving  Good  Status  in  EU  water  bodies  by  2015  as  a  rule,  or  by  2027  at  the 
latest for specific water bodies covered by WFD exemptions  

Reducing water stress taking into account the need to maintain ecological flows at a 
level compatible with the achievement of WFD objectives 

Reducing vulnerability to climate change and extreme events 

For  water  stress  and  vulnerability,  concrete  objectives  have  to  be  established  at  river  basin 
level and integrated into the the 2nd round of RBMPs. 

Four  sets  of  specific  objectives  that  mirror  the  above-mentioned  four  categories  of  water 
management problems have been identified. They are: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

Increasing the use of economic instruments for a better allocation of resources and 
internalisation of external costs. 

Fostering  integration  of  water  concerns  into  sectoral  policies  to  ensure  a  further 
uptake of natural water retention measures, water efficiency measures in building 
and  appliances,  water  re-use  and  tools  to  decrease  leakages  in  water  supply 
infrastructure. 

Achieving  a  more  efficient  water  governance  and  effective  working  relationship 
and 
between 
hydromorphology concerns in water management.  

integrate  water  quality,  quantity 

institutions, 

fully 

and 

Improving  knowledge  and  tools  available  to  water  managers,  enabling  effective 
decision making and reducing administrative burden. 

4. 

POLICY OPTIONS 

The  policy  options  assessed  for  the  Blueprint  aim  at  providing  a  "toolkit"  for  the  Member 
States,  supporting  the  implementation  of  the  most  relevant  measures,  and  can  be  grouped 
under 4 different approaches: 

5 

 
 
– 

– 

– 

– 

A  first  set  of  options  consists  of  a  voluntary  approach  which  includes  the 
development  of  a  variety  of  different  tools  and  guidance  to  support  practical  water 
management at EU and River basin levels.  

Options under a regulatory approach aim to achieve many of the same objectives to 
support practical water management, but through legislative means. 

Other options are about fully exploiting the possible conditionality for the post-2013 
CSF  Funds  (ERDF,  CF,  EAFRD)  and  for  the  CAP  pillar  I  funding,  in  accordance 
with the Commission proposals on the CAP reform and on the Multiannual Financial 
Framework (MFF).  

Finally, other options aim to ensure priority for sustainable water management in the 
spending of CSF Funds and EIB loans. This option does not entail any change to the 
current  policy  framework  in  the  Multiannual  Financial  Framework  as  proposed  by 
the Commission but can only materialise if water priorities are taken up by the MS in 
expenditure programming and planning 

37 policy options have been identified for the above-mentioned 4 categories of problems and 
12  key  issues.  This  preliminary  list  of  options  was  submitted  to  public  and  stakeholder 
consultation and has been further assessed with a view to identifying the preferred package of 
options.  The  37  options  are  presented  below,  in  connection  with  the  specific  objective  they 
respond to and under the policy approach in which they are embedded.  

6 

 
 
Table 1: List of options considered in the Impact Assessment - options in red and 
underlined are retained 

Approaches 

specific objective  a) Voluntary 

b) Regulation 

c) Conditionality 

Priority 

d) 
funding  

in 

1 pricing 

Guidance for trading 
schemes 

n/a 

Inclusion in cross 
compliance CAP Pillar I 

2metering 

Use of GMES 

Amendment WFD 

Inclusion in cross 
compliance CAP Pillar I 

3 labelling globally 
traded goods 

Voluntary labelling  Mandatory labelling 

n/a 

n/a 

n/a 

n/a 

4 NWRM 

CIS Guidance 

Amendment WFD 

Under CSF implementing 
rules 

Under CSF & EIB 
loans 

5.1 
Appliances/Water 
related products 

Voluntary labelling  Mandatory labelling 

n/a 

Inclusion in Ecodesign 
work programme

1

5.2 Buildings 

Voluntary rating 

Mandatory rating 

n/a 

n/a 

n/a 

Minimum requirements

Directive 

6 Leakages  

Guidance 

n/a 

7 Water reuse 

CIS Guidance 

Regulation 

CEN standard 

8 Governance 

Peer review 

Amendment WFD  

Amendment SEA 
Directive 

9 Target setting 

CIS guidance 

Amendment WFD 

10 
planning 

Droughts 

Recommendation 

Amendment WFD  

Droughts Directive 

Costs 

11 
benefits 

and 

CIS Guidance 

Amendment WFD 

n/a 

n/a 

n/a 

n/a 

n/a 

n/a 

Under CSF & EIB 
loans 

Under CSF & EIB 
loans 

n/a 

n/a 

n/a 

n/a 

1 

The inclusion of water using devices is been discussed in the context of the Ecodesign Directive Work 
Plan 2012-2014,. 

7 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Approaches 

specific objective  a) Voluntary 

b) Regulation 

c) Conditionality 

Priority 

d) 
funding  

in 

Knowledge 

12 
dissemination 

Further development 
WISE 

Review reporting & 
statistic legal 
requirements 

n/a 

n/a 

5. 

IDENTIFYING THE PREFERRED OPTIONS PACKAGE AND ITS IMPACTS 

The assessment of the options can be considered as a screening of the various approaches for 
each of the 12 issues identified. On the basis of the assessment performed, it appears that in 
most of the cases, the most appropriate options fall under a guidance approach. The regulatory 
approach  is  recommended  for  only  3  issues  (water  efficiency  in  appliances/water  related 
products,  water  re-use  and  knowledge  dissemination)  as  the  current  policy  context,  in 
particular with respect to the implementation of the WFD and the MFF, leads to postponing 
most of the regulatory and conditionality policy options to a later stage. The preferred options 
are those in red and underlined in table 1. 

It shall be stressed that the elements that would entail legislative changes will not be proposed 
together  with  the  Blueprint,  but  will  be  the  subject  of  further  analysis  and  would  only  be 
proposed on the basis of an instrument-specific impact assessment. 

The  proposed  guidance  and  tools  would  explore  the  interaction  with  specific  economic 
instruments  and  how  to  integrate  these  in  River  Basin,  Floods  and  Droughts  Management 
Plans.  They  would  provide  information  to  support  increased  use  of  economic  instruments. 
However, the proposed package is not binding and the further uptake of such instruments is 
not guaranteed. 

The  package  proposed  promotes  wider  integration  of  water  into  sectoral  policies  through 
guidelines,  improved  planning  and  target  setting  tools  that  cover  various  aspects  of  sectoral 
integration. It will enable water management concerns to be better taken into account in the 
project  selection  applicable  for  CAP  and  Cohesion  Policy  funding.  However,  there  is  no 
guarantee that measures will be implemented, as implementation remains voluntary. 

The  guidance  included  in  the  proposed  package,  e.g.  on  water  trading  and  on  water 
balances/targets, as well as the envisaged peer review system would address the efficiency of 
governance in water resources planning leading to increased transparency and more effective 
decision making. Unnecessary burdens from existing reporting requirements under EU water 
law would be removed. 

The proposed package includes a wide range of guidance and new tools to address the most 
pressing  needs  facing  water  managers.  Information  on  water  balances  and  ecological  flows 
would close major knowledge gaps for water managers. Improved information platforms and 
information  provision  at  EU  level  would  provide  greater  access  to  more  timely  and 
interoperable  data  to  deliver  more  effective  water  management  decisions  and  policy 
development at EU, national and river basin levels. However, uptake is voluntary. 

8 

 
 
 
 
The  proposed  package  improves  efficiency  of  EU  water  policy  by  filling  the  knowledge 
gaps, improving governance and focusing reporting requirements to decrease admininstrative 
burden. It leaves flexibility to tailor instruments to situations where cost-effectiveness is high. 
Amendments that could be proposed to water law reporting requirements would overcome the 
existing  coherence  problems.  The  proposed  package  would  increase  coherence  between 
relevant EU policies (in particular CAP, Cohesion, Health and Energy). 

The  proposed  package  will  contribute  to  address  the  problems  of  ecological  status  of  EU 
waters, water stress and vulnerability to extreme events. The modelling work undertaken for 
the Blueprint, together with the assessment of individual measures, provide elements for the 
assessment of the economic, environmental and social impacts of the implementation at EU 
level of the different categories of measures, in particular of the efficiency gains throughout 
the  economy  through  land-use  management  measures,  improved  water  efficiency  and 
ensuring  the  availability  of  clean  water.  However,  the  actual  impacts  of  the  measures  will 
only be apparent at the level of each of the 110 EU river basins which is the pertinent level of 
analysis. The tools developed in the context of the Blueprint (water balances, hydro-economic 
modelling, database of measures) will support Member States to perform this analysis in the 
context of the preparation of the next RBMPs and to choose the most appropriate combination 
of measures. 

6. 

MONITORING AND EVALUATION 

The  implementation  and  monitoring  of  the  Blueprint  will  rely  on  the  WFD  Common 
Implementation Strategy2 (WFD-CIS) as a platform. Implementation will take place in two 
phases that correspond to the two forthcoming periods of the CIS: 

• 

• 

In the first phase (2013-2015), the objective will be to influence the preparation of 
the  next  RBMPs,  to  be  submitted  by  Member  States  by  the  end  of  2015,  and  to 
strengthen  the  knowledge  base  and  tools  that  will  support  the  assessment  of  these 
plans and the review of the WFD.  

The second phase (2016-2018) will be dedicated to the assessment of these plans and 
the preparation of the review of the WFD 

A Blueprint Scoreboard will be developed to monitor the implementation of the Blueprint 
proposals  and  evaluate  progress.  It  will  be  discussed  every  year  by  the  CIS  Strategic 
Coordination Group and by Water Directors. 

2 

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-framework/objectives/implementation_en.htm 

9