REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT on the implementation of Council Directive 91/676/EEC concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources based on Member State reports for the period 2012–2015
Date: 2018-05-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, chemical salt, groundwater, pollution control measures, pollution from agricultural sources, surface water, water analysis, water pollution, water protection, water requirements

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 4.5.2018 COM(2018) 257 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT on the implementation of Council Directive 91/676/EEC concerning the protection  of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources based  on Member State reports for the period 2012–2015 {SWD(2018) 246 final}  
 
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Council  Directive  91/676/EEC  (the  Nitrates  Directive)  aims  to  reduce  water 
pollution  caused  by  nitrates  from  agricultural  sources  and  to  prevent  further  such 
pollution.  The  Nitrates  Directive  forms  an  integral  part  of  the  Water  Framework 
Directive (WFD) and is one of the key instruments in the protection of waters against 
agricultural pressures. The Nitrates Directive sets a number of steps to be fulfilled by 
Member States:  

  Water monitoring of all water body types with regard to nitrate concentrations 

and trophic status;  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Identification of waters that are polluted or at risk of pollution, on the basis of 
the criteria defined in Annex I to the Directive;  

Designation of nitrate vulnerable zones, which are areas that drain into waters 
and which contribute to pollution;  

Establishment  of  codes  of  good  agricultural  practices,  implemented  on  a 
voluntary basis throughout the Member State territory;  

Establishment  of  action  programmes,  which  include  a  set  of  measures  to 
prevent  and  reduce  water  pollution  by  nitrates  and  are  implemented  on  an 
obligatory basis within designated nitrates vulnerable zones or throughout the 
entire national territory;  

Review and possible revision of the designation of nitrate vulnerable zones and 
of action programmes at least every four years; and 

Submission to the Commission of a progress report on the implementation of 
the Directive every four years with information on codes of good agricultural 
practice, nitrate vulnerable zones, water monitoring results, relevant aspects of 
action programmes. 

This is the third time that 27 Member States have submitted a report under Article 10 
of the Nitrates Directive, and the first time for Croatia.  A comparison with previous 
reporting  periods  is  now  possible  for  27  Member  States.  The  submission  of  the 
reports and the accompanying water quality data by the 28 Member States were due 
in June 2016. However, only 12 Member States respected this deadline1 and for some 
of  them  relevant  information  was  still  missing  and  was  reported  later  on.  For  19 
Member  States  missing  or  corrected  information  was  submitted  only  in  20172.  The 
complete set of information was only available to the Commission in October 2017. 

This  report,  mainly  based  on  the  information  submitted  by  Member  States  for  the 
period 2012–2015, is accompanied by a Staff Working Document (SWD(2018)246) 
which includes maps and tables on indicators of nutrient pressures from agricultural 
sources, water quality and designated nitrate vulnerable zones, both at EU level and 
at Member State level. 

With  the  publication  of  this  report,  the  Commission  fulfils  its  obligations  under 
Article  11.  The  information  collected  for  this  report  contributed  to  the  recently 

1  

2  

Belgium,  Croatia,  Estonia,  Finland,  Ireland,  Italy,  Lithuania,  the  Netherlands,  Portugal,  Slovakia, 
Slovenia and Sweden 
Bulgaria,  Croatia,  Czech  Republic,  Denmark,  Finland,  France,  Germany,  Greece,  Hungary,  Ireland, 
Italy, Latvia, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom. 

EN 

1 

  EN 

 
                                                 
proposed revision of the Drinking Water Directive3. Indeed agricultural practices like 
fertilisation  influence  drinking  water  quality.  Excess  of  nitrates  in  drinking  waters  can 
have  health  impacts  i.e.  methemoglobinemia,  which  prevents  the  normal  transport  of 
oxygen  by  the  blood  to  the  tissues  causing  cyanosis  and,  at  higher  concentrations, 
asphyxia which can be lethal for babies. Thus the trends observed in the implementation 
of the Nitrates Directive may have a bearing on the supply of clean drinking water for all 
citizens.  

The  Nitrates  Directive  contributes  to  addressing  nitrogen  and  phosphorus  flows  to 
the  biosphere  and  oceans  that  have  been  identified  by  the  scientific  community  as 
one  of  the  nine  planetary  boundaries.  Furthermore,  nutrients  flows  together  with 
biodiversity loss are two planetary boundaries that have  been  surpassed. Moreover, 
the  Directive  also  contributes  to  the  achievement  of  the  Sustainable  Development 
Goals in the EU by helping reducing negative environmental impacts associated with 
food  production  (SDG  2),  by  supporting  improved  water  quality  (SDG  6)  and  by 
reducing pollution affecting freshwater and ecosystems4 (SDG 14 and SDG 15). 

2. 

EVOLUTION OF PRESSURES FROM AGRICULTURE  

Agriculture,  which  occupies  nearly  half  of  the  EU  territory,  provides  multiple 
benefits  to  society.  However,  some  farming  activities  cause  pressures  on  water 
bodies, impacting on the health of vital water ecosystems. 

This  section  summarises  the  information  reported  by  the  Member  States  on  the 
agricultural pressures at the origin of water pollution by nitrates and eutrophication. 
It  needs  to  be  noted  that  the  information  reported  by  the  Member  States  has  been 
complemented  with  data  originating  from  Eurostat  as  they  are  more  easily 
comparable at EU level5. 

Livestock population 

Large  numbers  of  animals  concentrated  locally  pose  high  risks  to  the  environment 
when manure production is out of balance with land availability and crop needs. This 
imbalance creates a surplus of nutrients, a large amount of which is sooner or  later 
lost  to  water  and  air,  if  not  exported  out  of  the  region,  sometimes  leading  to 
additional pressures in receiving areas.  
The average livestock density6 in EU28 was 0.73 livestock units (LU) per ha utilized 
agricultural area (UAA) in 2013. The higher densities were found in the Netherlands 
(3.57),  Malta  (2.99)  and  Belgium  (2.68)  while  the  lowest  were  located  in  Bulgaria 
(0.21), Latvia (0.26) and Lithuania (0.29). Compared to 2010, the average livestock 
density  in  EU28  has  decreased  (-2.9%).  The  highest  relative  reductions  in  density 
took  place  in  Greece  (-18.9%),  Malta  (-17.9%)  and  Denmark  (-14.4%)  while  the 
highest  increases  happened  in  Austria  (+7.2%),  Ireland  (+4.5%),  Finland  (+3.7%) 
and Germany (+3.5%).  

3 

4 

5  

6 

COM(2017) 753 final. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-
drink/pdf/revised_drinking_water_directive.pdf 
SWD(2016) 390 final. https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/sites/devco/files/swd-key-european-actions-2030-
agenda-sdgs-390-20161122_en.pdf 
The section "Pressures from Agricultural" in the Member States Summary Sheets - in Section VIII- is 
based exclusively on data reported from the Member States under the Nitrates Directive. It should be 
noted that it has been observed that in some cases there are discrepancies between the data reported by 
the Member States and Eurostat data. 
See Table 18 and figures 36 and 37 of Section II of the staff working document. 

EN 

2 

  EN 

 
                                                 
Comparing the reporting periods 2008-2011 and 2012-2015 the following changes in 
the number of animals are observed:  
 Cattle: a slight decrease at EU-28 level (-0.7%)7 with significant relative population 
increases in Hungary (+13.8%), Estonia (+8.6%), Latvia (+8%), Cyprus (+5%) and 
the  Netherlands  (+4.4%)  contrasted  by  relevant  decreases  in  Romania  (-10.8%), 
Malta (-5.2%), Greece (-5.1%) and Lithuania (-4.2%).  
Dairy cattle: slight decrease at EU 28 (-0.9%)8 with significant population increases 
in  Italy  (+13.9%),  Ireland  (+10.3%),  Cyprus  (+6.3%)  and  the  Netherlands  (+4.8%) 
and  relevant  relative  decreases  in  Croatia  (-19.1%),  Lithuania  (-14.7%),  Poland  (-
12%), Greece (-11.3 %), Slovakia (-11.2%) and Malta (-5%). 
Pig: a decrease  (-3%) in EU289 with more significant relative population increases 
in  Portugal (+7.8%), Germany (+4.3%) and Luxembourg  (+3.5%) and decreases in 
Slovenia (-28.5%), Malta (-24.8%) and Cyprus (-22.3%).  
Poultry:  a  decrease  (-0.5%)  in  EU-2810  with  more  significant  relative  increases  in 
Germany (+37.6%), Luxembourg  (+33.3%) and Finland (+28.7%) and decreases in 
Cyprus (-42.5%), Greece (-24.2%) and Portugal (-19%). 

Fertilisers use  

According to Eurostat, at EU 28 level, 9.2 kton of animal manure nitrogen were used 
in 2012-2014. This is a reduction of 2.6% compared to 2008-201111. Manure-N use 
increased by more than 5% in Hungary and Latvia, while it decreased by more than 
5% in Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Malta, Poland, Romania and Slovenia.  
At  EU28  level,  1.61  kton12  of  animal  manure  phosphate  was  used  in  2012-2014,  a 
decrease of 3.1% compared to 2008-2011. Manure-P use increased by more than 5% 
in  Hungary,  while  it  decreased  by  more  than  5%  in  Bulgaria,  Cyprus,  the  Czech 
Republic, Croatia, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania and Slovenia 

The  total  use  of  mineral  nitrogen  and  phosphate  fertilisers  in  the  EU28  increased 
respectively by 4%13 and  6%14 between the reporting periods 2008-2011 and 2012-
2015.  There  are  very  significant  differences  between  Member  States:  from  a 
reduction of 30% in mineral nitrogen fertiliser use in Slovakia and 46% of mineral 
phosphate fertiliser use in the Netherlands, to an increase of 56% in Bulgaria for both 
mineral nitrogen and phosphate fertilisers.  

While  the  reduction  of  manure  use  at  EU  level  mirrors  the  overall  reduction  of 
animal numbers (-3.6%)15, the trends at Member States level are also influenced by 
other developments, for instance, the use of manure for energy production. 

At  Member  States  level,  the  use  of  manure  N  and  mineral  fertilizer  N  are  very 
closely correlated; also the amounts used are very similar. Although this correlation 
also stands to some extent for manure P and mineral fertilizer P use, in countries with 

See Table 12 of Section II of the staff working document.  
See Table 13 and figures 26 and 27 of Section II of the staff working document 
See Table 14 and figures 28 and 29 of Section II of the staff working document 
See Table 15 and figures 30 and 31 of Section II of the staff working document. Based on Eurostat data 
for years 2010 and 2013 
See Table 21 and figures 42 and 43 of Section II of the staff working document 
See Table 22 and figures 44 and 45 of Section II of the staff working document 
See Table 19 and figures 38 and 39 of Section II of the staff working document 
See Table 20 and figures 40 and 41  of Section II of the staff working document 
See Table 17 and figures 34 and 35 of Section II of the staff working document 

 

 

 

 

7 
8 
9 
10 

11 
12 
13 
14 
15 

EN 

3 

  EN 

 
                                                 
high  livestock  density  (e.g.  DK,  BE,  NL)  there  is  a  relatively  low  use  of  mineral 
phosphate fertiliser compared to manure P. 

Nutrient balance  

The  Nitrates  Directive  advocates  for  practicing  balanced  fertilization  at  farm  level 
which  entails  avoiding  losses  by  providing  the  crops  with  the  right  amount  of 
nutrients they need.  

Nutrient  balance  is  defined  as  the  difference  between  the  nutrient  inputs  entering  a 
farming  system  (mainly  livestock  manure  and  fertilizers)  and  the  nutrient  outputs 
leaving  the  system  (the  uptake  of  nutrients  by  crops  and  pastures)16.  A  nutrient 
surplus occurs when not all the fertilizers and animal manure applied to the land are 
absorbed  by  the  plants  or  removed  during  harvest.  A  surplus  represents  a  potential 
loss to the environment or risk of future loss via accumulation in the soil. 

Between  the  reporting  periods  2008-2011  and  2012-2015,  both  net  nitrogen  and 
phosphate balance slightly increased at EU-28 level from 31.8 to 32.5 kg N/ha17 and 
from 1.8 to 2.0 kg P/ha18 respectively. This means that there are more potential losses 
to the environment than in the previous period at EU level, although large variations 
were observed across Member States.  

In  the  period  2012-2014,  all  Member  States,  except  Romania,  had  a  surplus  of 
nitrogen.  The  highest  nitrogen  surpluses  (>  50  kg/ha)  were  found  in  Belgium, 
Cyprus,  Czech  Republic,  Denmark,  Luxemburg,  the  Netherlands  and  the  United 
Kingdom. As regards phosphates, the highest phosphorus surpluses (> 5 kg/ha) were 
found  in  Belgium,  Cyprus,  Croatia,  Denmark,  and  Malta.  However,  eight  Member 
States  had  a  phosphorus  deficit,  with  the  highest  deficit  found  in  Bulgaria  and 
Estonia.  

N-discharge into the environment from agriculture 

The  information  about  the  contribution  of  agriculture  to  nitrogen  discharge  in  the 
aquatic environment has not been provided by all Member States19. According to the 
information  reported  by  some  Member  States,  agriculture  remains  the  predominant 
source  of  the  nitrogen  discharged  into  the  environment.    For  those  that  reported 
comparable data for both periods, the average nitrogen discharge decreased by 3%.  

3. 

WATER MONITORING 

Good monitoring of water quality is the starting point for a proper implementation of 
the  Nitrates  Directive  as  it  is  key  for  the  detection  of  polluted  waters  and  the 
designation  of  NVZ  as  well  as  for  taking  adequate  measures  in  the  Action 
Programmes.  While  the  Nitrates  Directive  sets  certain  general  provisions  on 
monitoring,  the  definition  of  the  monitoring  programme  and  strategy  (location  of 
the 
stations,  network  density,  frequency  and 
responsibility of Member States.    

timing  of  sampling,  etc.) 

is 

16 

17 
18 
19 

OECD (2013), OECD  Compendium  of  Agri-environmental  Indicators,  OECD  Publishing,  Paris. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264186217-en 
See Table 23 and figures 46 and 47 of Section II of the staff working document. 
See Table 24 and figures 48 and 49 of Section II of the staff working document. 
Only  12  Member  States  provided  data  concerning  both  the  2008-2011  and  the  2012-2015  reporting 
period. See Table 6 of Section II of the staff working document. 

EN 

4 

  EN 

 
                                                 
The  data  reported  show  uneven  efforts  being  deployed  in  water  monitoring  by 
Member  States  as  well  as  a  high  number  of  new  stations with  no  trends  across  the 
EU. In  fact, the intensity of the monitoring (for instance, the density of monitoring 
networks  and  the  frequency  of  sampling)  strongly  varies  between  Member  States, 
and might not always be well adapted to the actual pressures. 

Groundwater monitoring  

In  the  reporting  period  2012-2015,  the  total  number  of  reported  groundwater 
monitoring stations in EU-28 was 34 901 stations, nearly the same as in the previous 
reporting period20. 
The average density of the network in the EU 28 is about eight stations per 1 000 km2 
of land area. The highest densities are found in Malta and Belgium with 130 and 97 
per 1 000 km2 respectively. On the contrary, the lowest densities are found in Finland 
and Sweden with less than one station per 1 000 km2. 

The average sampling frequency is nearly twice a year, and varies between less than 
once a year in Denmark, Latvia, Poland and Sweden to around five times a year in 
Belgium and Croatia21. 

Surface waters monitoring 

In  the  period  2012-2015,  the  total  number  of  reported  stations  in  fresh  waters 
increased  at  EU  level  by  around  23%  compared  to  2008–2011,  reaching  33  042 
stations. The average density is 7.6 stations per 1 000 km2, with the highest densities 
in the Czech Republic, Belgium and the United Kingdom and the lowest densities in 
Croatia, Germany and Finland22.  

For saline waters, the data reported show an alarming decrease of 29 % on the total 
number of monitoring stations in the EU, from 3 135 to 2 205 stations between the 
two  reporting  periods.  This  reduction  was  above  50%  in  France,  Greece,  Portugal, 
Poland  and  Spain23.  The  efforts  deployed  by  some  Member  States  in  their  saline 
water monitoring do not always reflect the relevance of their total coastal area.    

The frequency of water sampling (all water bodies) varies from almost once a year in 
Sweden to around 20 times a year in Ireland24. 

4. 

WATER QUALITY AND TRENDS  

Groundwater 

Groundwater quality 

In 2012–2015, 13.2% of groundwater stations exceeded 50 mg nitrates per litre and 
5.7% were between 40 and 50 mg/l25. This is a slight improvement compared to the 
previous reporting period, in which 14.4% stations exceeded 50 mg/l and 5.9% were 
between 40 and 50 mg/l. 

There  are  large  differences  between  Member  States:  Ireland,  Finland  and  Sweden 
had in average almost no groundwater stations exceeding 50 mg/l. On the contrary, 

20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 

See Table 1 and Figure 1 of Section I of the staff working document. 
See Figure 2 of Section I of the staff working document. 
See Table 2 and Figure 3 of Section I of the staff working document. 
See Table 3 of Section I of the staff working document. 
See Figure 4 of Section I of the staff working document. 
See Table 4, Figure 5, Map 1 and Map 2 of Section I of the staff working document. 

EN 

5 

  EN 

 
                                                 
in  Malta,  Germany  and  Spain  respectively,  71%,  28%  and  21.5%  of  groundwater 
stations on average exceeded 50 mg nitrate per litre. However, the comparability of 
data  between  Member  States  is  limited  by  differences  in  the  monitoring  networks 
and strategies.  

The lowest nitrate concentrations were observed in captive and karstic groundwater, 
with only 5% of stations equal to or exceeding 50 mg/l, while the highest proportion 
of stations equal to or exceeding 50 mg/l was observed for groundwater depths of 5 
to 15 meters26.  

Figure  A.  Frequency  diagram  of  annual  average  nitrate  concentrations  in  groundwater27. 
Results are presented for all groundwater stations at different depths. 

Trends in groundwater quality 

Comparing  water  monitoring  results  from  the  period  2012–2015  with  those  for 
2008–2011,  water  quality  remained  the  same  or  improved  in  74%  of  the  stations. 
Indeed  42%  of  the  stations  in  the  EU  showed  a  stable  and  32%  of  the  stations  a 
decreasing trend. Water quality got worse for 26% of stations28, similar to previous 
reporting periods. The highest percentage of stations getting better was observed in 
Bulgaria (40.9%), Malta (46.3%) and Portugal (43.6 %), the most stable in Sweden 
(98%), and the highest percentage of stations getting worse was reported by Estonia 
(44.4%),  Malta  (43.9%)  and  Lithuania  (58.5%).  Thus  in  some  countries,  we  can 
observe  a  polarisation  of  the  situation  with  polluted  areas  getting  worse  and  clean 
areas getting better.  

26 
27 

28 

See Figure 6 of Section I of the staff working document. 
Comparison of Figure A with frequency diagram of annual average nitrate concentrations in groundwater in the reports from the 
Commission to the Council and the European Parliament and respective accompanying Commission Staff Working concerning 
the previous reporting periods may be hampered due to possible substantial differences in the number of the monitored stations. 
See Figure 7 of Section I of the staff working document. 

EN 

6 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Surface water  

Fresh surface waters quality 

Nitrates concentration 

Based on annual averages of all reported monitoring stations, 64.3% were below 10 
mg nitrate per litre, while 2% showed concentrations between 40 and 50 mg per litre 
and  1.8%  exceeded  50  mg  per  litre.  This  is  an  improvement  compared  to  the 
previous reporting period, in which 2.5% stations exceeded 50 mg per litre and 2.5% 
were between 40 and 50 mg per litre29. The highest proportion of stations equal to or 
exceeding  50  mg/L  were  reported  in  Malta,  while  Sweden,  Ireland  and  Greece 
reported the highest proportion of stations with less than 2 mg/L.  

Figure  B.  Frequency  diagram  of  annual  average  nitrate  concentrations  in  fresh 
surface waters (rivers and lakes) 

Eutrophication 

The submission of data on eutrophication is quite patchy with some Member States 
providing  data  only  for  certain  water  types  and  other  Member  States  providing  no 
data on eutrophication status30. Moreover, the assessment of the trophic status varied 
widely  among  Member  States,  not  only  regarding  the  parameters  used,  but  also 
concerning the methodologies for the definition of trophic status classes31.  

Of  all  reported  river  monitoring  stations,  12%  and  7%  were  eutrophic  and 
hypertrophic  respectively,  while  31%  and  21%  were  oligotrophic  or  ultra-
oligotrophic  respectively32.  Of  all  the  Member  States  that  provided  data  on 
eutrophication  in  rivers,  Cyprus,  Slovenia,  Portugal,  Greece,  Northern  Ireland, 
Romania,  Latvia  and  Bulgaria  showed  relative  low  proportions  of  eutrophic  or 

29 
30 
31 
32 

See Table 5, Figure 8 and Map 9 of Section I of the staff working document. 
See Section VII of the staff working document. 
See Member States summary sheets in Section VIII of the staff working document.  
See Figure 12 of Section I of the staff working document. 

EN 

7 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
hypertrophic  stations  in  rivers,  while  Austria,  Luxemburg,  Spain,  Lithuania,  Czech 
Republic,  Belgium,  Croatia  and  Malta  showed  relatively  high  proportions  of 
eutrophic or hypertrophic stations in rivers. 33 

Of  all  reported  lake  monitoring  stations,  18%  and  8%  were  eutrophic  and 
hypertrophic, respectively, while 45% and 1% were oligotrophic or ultra-oligotrophic 
respectively34.  Of  all  Member  states  that  reported  on  eutrophication  in  lakes,  the 
lowest  proportions  of  eutrophic  or  hypertrophic  lakes  were  in  Malta,  Romania  and 
Austria.  The  Member  States  with  relatively  high  proportions  of  eutrophic  or 
hypertrophic lakes were Bulgaria, Croatia and Poland. 

Trends in fresh surface water quality  

Compared  to  the  reporting  period  2008-2011,  there  are  positive  developments, 
indeed  the  annual  average  nitrates  concentrations  is  getting  better  in  31%  of  all 
freshwaters  monitoring  stations,  of  which  9%  showed  a  strong  improvement.  The 
situation  remains  the  same  for  half  of  the  monitoring  stations.  Regrettably  the 
freshwater quality got worse in 19% of all freshwaters monitoring stations, of which 
5% suffered a strong deterioration35 36.  

No  trends  are  available  at  EU  level  for  the  trophic  status  of  fresh  surface  waters 
because of the lack of data and the differences in the methodologies to define trophic 
status applied by Member States. 

Saline waters  
In saline waters37, nitrate concentrations are lower than in fresh water, with 0.7% of 
the stations equal to or exceeding 25 mg/L and 75.7% of the stations below 2 mg/L, 
based on annual average values38. There has been a slight improvement compared to 
the previous reporting period, in which 1.4% of the monitoring stations had annual 
average  nitrate  concentrations  equal  to  or  exceeding  25  mg/L.  However,  the 
comparison  between  periods  is  hampered  by  the  strong  reduction  in  the  number  of 
monitoring stations. 

Eutrophication  data  on  transitional,  coastal  and  marine  waters  were  only  submitted 
by a limited number of Member States. For transitional waters, data were submitted 
by  only  eight  Member  States  (Ireland,  Italy,  Latvia,  Lithuania,  Malta,  Poland, 
Romania  and  Spain)  and  two  regions  (Flanders  and  Northern  Ireland).  For  six  of 
them,  the  submitted  data  regrettably  showed  a  100%  proportion  of  eutrophic  or 
hypertrophic waters39. 

For  coastal  waters,  data  were  submitted  by  only  nine  Member  States  (Bulgaria, 
Finland, Italy, Latvia, Malta, Poland, Romania, Slovenia and Spain) and one region 
(Northern  Ireland).  In  this  case,  five  of  them  had  more  than  50%  eutrophic  or 

33  

34 
35 

36 
37 
38 
39 

Malta does not have any rivers or lakes but includes valley systems and standing waters as fresh surface 
water bodies. 
See Figure 13 of Section I of the staff working document. 
See Section VII of the staff working document. A large increasing  trend is defined as a difference in 
nitrate concentrations between the two reporting periods equal or higher than +5 mg/L 
See Figure 11 of Section I of the staff working document 
'Saline waters' means transitional, coastal and marine waters  
See Table 3 of Section I of the staff working document.   
See Figure 13 of Section I of the staff working document. 

EN 

8 

  EN 

 
 
 
                                                 
hypertrophic coastal waters40. Marine data on eutrophication were submitted only by 
Italy, Latvia and Romania41. 

5. 

DESIGNATION OF NITRATE VULNERABLE ZONES 

The Nitrates Directive requires Member States to designate nitrate vulnerable zones, 
which are areas that drain into waters that are polluted or at risk of pollution. When 
establishing  the  nitrates  vulnerable  zones,  the  Member  States  may,  instead  of 
designating specific  zones,  opt  to  apply  an action programme  throughout  the entire  
land.  Austria,  Denmark,  Finland,  Germany,  Ireland,  Lithuania, 
agricultural 
Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Romania, Slovenia, the Region of Flanders and 
Northern Ireland have followed this approach.  

The  Member  States  that,  instead  choose  to  designate  specific  areas,  need  to  define 
the  criteria  for  designation.  These  criteria  are  based  on  the  definition  of  polluted 
waters as set by Annex 1 of the Directive but can vary between Member States.  

Including the Member States that apply a whole-territory approach, the total area of 
NVZ has increased since 2012, from 1,951,898 km2 to about 2,175,861 km2 in 201542 
representing approximately 61% of agricultural area43. This means that in 61% of the 
agricultural  land  of  the  EU  there  are  obligations  aiming  at  reaching  a  balanced 
fertilisation. 

However, the information reported shows that, at Member States level, there are still 
areas with potential water pollution that are not included in any NVZ. Moreover, in 
some  Member States, the designed territory is limited to  a reduced area around the 
monitoring stations resulting in a very fragmented designation that puts in question 
the  potential  effectiveness  of  action  programmes.  As  way  of  illustration,  the  map 
below  shows  the  current  area  under  NVZ  and  the  groundwater  monitoring  stations 
with  average  nitrates  concentrations  above  50mg/L.  However,  as  stated  above  the 
criteria  used  by  Member  States  for  designation  may  include  other  parameters  than 
the average annual concentration.  

40 
41 
42 
43 

See Figure 14 of Section I of the staff working document. 
See Figure 15 of Section I of the staff working document. 
See Table 25 and Map 18 of Section II of the staff working document. 
The percentages of EU territory and agricultural area covered by NVZ have been calculated by the JRC 
including  the  areas  of  those  Member  States  applying  Art.  3(5)  of  the  directive  and  using  GIS  layers 
provided by Member States in the context of this reporting exercise. 

EN 

9 

  EN 

 
                                                 
outside NVZ 

Map A. Area designated as Nitrates Vulnerable Zone and groundwater monitoring stations 
with average nitrates concentrations above 50mg/L outside NVZ, period 2012-201544. 

6. 

ACTION PROGRAMMES  

Member States are required to establish one or more action programmes that apply 
within  designated  vulnerable  zones  or  to  the  whole  territory.  Action  programmes 
include  at  least  the  measures  referred  to  in  Annexes  II  and  III  to  the  Directive. 
Several Member States have adopted action programmes at regional level.  

Most  Member  States,  or  regions  within  certain  Member  States,  adopted  a  new  or 
revised action programme during the reporting period 2012-2015.  

Measures in action programmes are crucial both to reduce water pollution caused by 
nitrates  from  agricultural  sources  and  to  prevent  further  such  pollution.  The 
definition  of  fertilizer  application  standards  that  ensures  balanced  fertilisation 
remains  one  of  the  most  important  and  challenging  measures.  Almost  all  Member 
States have now embraced the definition of the amounts of total nitrogen allowed for 
each crop production. A few Member States also have defined the allowed amounts 
for  phosphorus  applications,  which  can  be  extremely  important  to  overcome  and 
prevent eutrophication. The ways in which these application standards are calculated 
and  conveyed  to  the  farmers  vary  in  the  different  Member  States.  This  is  likely  to 
influence  the  effectiveness  of  this  measure  due  to  impacts  on  farmers'  capacity  to 
comply with the obligations and on controls.  

Another important element which requires further attention is manure storage. While 
all  Member  States  have  provisions  on  manure  storage,  including  storage  capacity, 

44   

The map represents the situation for the period 2011-2015, new NVZ areas may have been designated 
since. 

EN 

10 

  EN 

 
 
                                                 
enhanced  action  is  needed  in  this  area,  including  gathering  more  information  on 
currently available storage capacities at farm level. 

In  some  Member  States  with  the  action  programme  applied  throughout  the  whole 
territory, the main challenge is to adequately target the measures to different regional 
pressures  and  hotspots.  To  that  end,  some  Members  States  have  identified  areas 
where the measures set by the action programme are reinforced.  

More  and  more,  Member  States  are  choosing  to  target  certain  measures  to  specific 
environmentally  "worse  performing  farms"  (high  nutrients  loads)  while  allowing 
more flexibility to "well performing farms". While this approach can be interesting, it 
can  only  bring  results  if  accompanied  by  clear  environmental  objectives,  stricter 
enforcement mechanisms and accurate nutrient management planning. 

The  Commission  will  continue  to  take  appropriate  action  to  ensure  the  quality  of 
those action programmes and that, within the flexibility allowed by the Directive to 
the Member States, the measures therein are adequate and proportionate to the water 
quality challenges of each Member State. 

7. 

FORECAST ON WATER QUALITY  

The methods applied by Member States to assess developments in water quality are 
mostly  based  on  trend  analysis,  scenario  assessments  or  model  simulations, 
sometimes  combined  with  analyses  of  past  and  expected  developments  in 
agricultural  practices.  These  forecasts,  however,  are  characterized  by  inherent 
uncertainties,  due  to  the  large  variations  in  climate  and  soil  conditions  and  their 
effects on water quality. 

12  Member  States  and  two  regions  predicted  a  further  reduction  in  nitrate 
concentrations  in  groundwater  and  surface  waters,  due  to  measures  in  the  action 
programmes  combined  with  the  implementation  of  several  agro-environmental 
measures included in the Rural Development Programmes. Seven Member States and 
three  regions  did  not  come  out  with  a  clear  forecast  about  future  water quality,  for 
instance  by  predicting  an  improvement  of  water  quality  for certain  water  bodies  as 
well as a deterioration of water quality for other water bodies.  

Three Member States (Croatia, Greece and Portugal) did not report on the forecast of 
water  quality.  Cyprus  and  Belgium  (Flanders)  reported  that  forecasts  were  not 
possible due to the time lag between measures implementation and effect, or due to 
climatic conditions and hydrology. 

8. 

DEROGATIONS TO THE LIMIT OF 170 KG N/HA/YEAR  

The Nitrates Directive allows the possibility to derogate from the maximum amount 
of 170 kg of nitrogen per hectare per year from livestock manure in vulnerable zones, 
provided that objective criteria set in Annex III to the Directive are met and that the 
derogated  amounts  do  not  prejudice  the  achievement  of  the  Directive's  objectives. 
The standards of management required of farmers who benefit from derogations are 
higher than those of the action programmes, with additional obligations for nutrient 
planning and extra constraints on land management. 

Derogations  are  granted  by  means  of  a  Commission  Implementing  Decision, 
following  the  opinion  of  the  Nitrates  Committee,  which  assists  the  Commission  in 
the implementation of the Directive. At the end of 2015, derogations were in force in 

EN 

11 

  EN 

 
six  Member  States,  relative  to  the  whole  territory  (Denmark,  the  Netherlands  and 
Ireland)  or  to  some  of  their  regions  (Flanders  in  Belgium;  Emilia  Romagna, 
Lombardia,  Piemonte  and  Veneto  in  Italy;  and  England,  Scotland,  Wales  and 
Northern Ireland in the United Kingdom)45.  

9. 

INFRINGEMENT PROCEDURES  

As of July 2017, eight infringement cases were open against seven Member States: 
France  on  the  nitrate  vulnerable  zone  designation  (NVZ);  Greece  on  NVZ  and  on 
action programmes (AP); Poland on NVZ and AP; Slovakia on monitoring, NVZ and 
AP, Bulgaria on AP, Germany on AP and Belgium (Wallonia) on AP. 

EU  Pilot  investigations  were  addressed  to  four  Member  States  in  the  period  2012-
2015  (Czech  Republic and  Luxembourg  on  AP;  Estonia  on  NVZ  and  Spain  on  AP 
and  NVZ).  Three  other  additional  EU  Pilot  investigations  were  addressed  to  three 
Member  States  in  2016-2017(the  Netherlands  on  the  derogation  decision,  Denmark 
and the United Kingdom on AP). 

10. 

CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE CHALLENGES 

The data on nitrates concentration show that freshwater and groundwater quality has 
slightly improved in 2012-2015 as compared to the previous reporting period (2008-
2011). At the same time the situation is variable across the EU, with Member States 
where action programmes are yielding good results and Member States where further 
action to reduce and prevent pollution is needed. Overall and despite some positive 
progress,  nutrients  overload  from  agriculture  continues  to  be  one  of  the  biggest 
pressures on the aquatic environment. This needs to be addressed in order to achieve 
the good ecological status of waters as established by the WFD. 

Similarly to the previous reporting period, no conclusions can be drawn regarding the 
evolution  of  trophic  status  because  of  the  lack  of  data  and  the  differences  in  the 
methodologies to assess eutrophication applied by Member States. The Commission 
considers that the use of a common methodology for assessing eutrophication would 
be  needed  for  a  more  harmonised  application  of  water  legislation.  It  is  however 
possible  to  conclude  that  problems  with  eutrophication  remain  in  many  areas,  for 
instance, in the Baltic Sea.   

In 2012-2015, the intensity of monitoring of groundwater was similar to 2008-2011 
while  for  fresh  surface  waters,  both  the  number  and  density  of  monitoring  stations 
increased.  However,  greater  effort  should  be  deployed  by  Member  States  on 
monitoring of saline surface waters as the total number of reported stations has fallen 
significantly during this reporting period.  

In addition, efforts are needed to ensure that the turnover of monitoring stations does 
not affect the accuracy of water quality trends.  

Moreover,  there  is  still  room  for  strengthening  water  monitoring  in  some  Member 
States. This can help improving the comparability of the data concerning extent and 
trends  in  nutrients  pollution  as  well  as  providing  a  more  detailed  picture  of  the 
overall quality of the EU waters and ensuring that all polluted waters are detected.   

The  total  area  of  NVZ  has  been  increasing  since  2012.  However,  there  are  still 
improvements to be made in some Member States in designating NVZs to include all 

45 

See Table 26 of Section V of the Staff Working Document. 

EN 

12 

  EN 

 
                                                 
areas draining into waters where they cause pollution as to ensure the effectiveness 
of the action programmes.  

Overall,  the  quality  of  action  programmes  has  improved,  with  tightened  measures 
and  improved  methodologies  to  reach  balanced  fertilisation.  However,  some 
challenges  still  exist.  For  instance,  in  some  Member  States  with  the  action 
programme  applied  throughout  the  whole  territory,  the  measures  need  to  be 
adequately adapted to different regional pressures and hotspots. Action programmes 
that allow for a more flexible approach at farm level can increase farmers' ownership 
and  engagement.  This  approach  can  however  only  bring  results  if  accompanied  by 
clear environmental objectives and targets coupled with effective advice and support 
to  the  farmers  to  select  and  implement  the  right  measures,  stricter  enforcement 
mechanisms and accurate nutrient management planning. 

One  challenge  is  how  to  properly  take  into  account  all  nutrient  inputs,  including 
those from sources other than mineral fertilizers and manure such as soils improvers, 
reclaimed  water  used  for  irrigation,  digestate  and  nutrients  already  available  in  the 
soil. Another challenge is to prevent nutrient losses to water and air through effective 
manure management. Common methodologies for nutrient excretion calculation and 
data  collection  could  allow  for  a  more  harmonised  estimation  of  nutrient  balances 
and a more effective use of nutrients from manure.  

Increased attention is needed on how to integrate the use of research and innovation 
to  offer  solutions  to  some  of  the  identified  challenges.  EU  research  projects  can 
provide  insights  towards  a  common  methodology  for  assessing  eutrophication  in  a 
more harmonised way, towards  strengthening water quality monitoring for instance 
on  the  basis  of  state-of-the-art  monitoring  tools  and  developing  effective  action 
programmes.  

Efforts are ongoing in some Member States to develop innovative manure processing 
technologies.  In  line  with  the  Circular  Economy  Action  Plan,  these  promising 
developments  provide  an  opportunity  to  encourage  recycled  nutrients  that  can 
replace  primary  nutrients.  The  main  challenge  is  to  obtain  recycled  products  that 
have at least an equal or higher environmental and agricultural performance than the 
primary nutrients they replace.  

There is also, as outlined in the Commission Staff Working Document "Agriculture 
and Sustainable Water Management in the EU"46, a need to improve governance and 
reinforced dialogue and jointly coordinated actions between all relevant stakeholders 
(agriculture and environmental authorities, farmers, water companies and users, etc.). 
In this context, also the "Action Plan for nature, people and the economy"47 calls on 
Member States to improve synergies between the Nature Directives and the Nitrates 
Directive. 

Finally,  with  a  view  to  increasing  transparency,  providing  more  focused  reporting 
and reducing administrative burden, the Commission will take  the necessary action 
in the context of the report on "Actions to Streamline Environmental Reporting"48. 

46 

47 

48 

SWD(2017) 153 final: https://circabc.europa.eu/sd/a/abff972e-203a-4b4e-b42e-
a0f291d3fdf9/SWD_2017_EN_V4_P1_885057.pdf 
SWD(2017) 139 final. 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/legislation/fitness_check/action_plan/factsheets_en.pdf 
COM(2017) 312 final. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/legal/reporting/pdf/action_plan_env_issues.pdf 

EN 

13 

  EN