Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Sustainable and resilient water infrastructure and distribution networks’ (own-initiative opinion)
Date: 2023-07-13
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: investment, network of navigable waterways, wastewater, water management, water pollution, water protection, water resources, water supply








C_2023349EN.01008701.xml










29.9.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 349/87







Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Sustainable and resilient water infrastructure and distribution networks’
         
(own-initiative opinion)
(2023/C 349/14)







Rapporteur:



Thomas KATTNIG











Plenary Assembly decision


25.1.2023




Legal basis


Rule 52(2) of the Rules of Procedure




 


Own-initiative opinion




Section responsible


Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society




Adopted in section


26.6.2023




Adopted at plenary


13.7.2023




Plenary session No


580




Outcome of vote
(for/against/abstentions)


199/10/17




1.   Conclusions and recommendations









1.1.


The EESC is convinced that, given the climate crisis and the associated scarcity of water resources, all necessary measures must be implemented to reduce water loss, ensure a fair distribution of water resources and facilitate sustainable water management. The supply of clean and affordable drinking water to members of the public must always be the first priority in the context of water distribution and use, especially in the event of water scarcity, and must take precedence over water use by industry, tourism and agriculture. The EESC calls on the Commission and the Member States to apply a rights-based approach to all water policies and to address water poverty, thereby also aligning with the EPSR. The EESC proposes to promote a common approach to understanding water poverty at EU level and to develop a comprehensive definition of water poverty, with each Member State being able to develop its own contextual definition in line with the European definition.












1.2.


The EESC believes that water supply is a public good, as it places the focus on the interests of good, high-quality and affordable services. The challenges posed by the climate crisis, as well as the necessary investments in water infrastructure, entail significant costs. The EESC notes that there is a difference between public and private water management because good and bad examples can be found in both. Private management, due to its focus on profit, may have difficulty meeting the fundamental requirement of universality of service, i.e. serving 100 % of the population. The EESC believes that, despite the strict financial ceilings and bureaucratic limits, public water management is in a better position to guarantee universal access to water and sewage systems at an affordable price and with adequate quality standards and the restoration and protection of ecosystems and in order to ensure the necessary investments in infrastructure. The EESC once again (1) recommends introducing a ‘golden rule’ for investments in public infrastructure, in order to safeguard productivity and the social and ecological base for the well-being of future generations.












1.3.


Water is essential to life, a common good, and a human right, as recognised by the first successful European Citizens Initiative on the ‘Right2Water’; which triggered the revision of the DWD which was adopted by the EU in 2020, including a dedicated article on access to water. In this context, the EESC recommends that, the EU adopt and strengthen regulatory frameworks on water concession agreements, to guarantee access to water and sewage systems at an affordable price and with adequate quality standards and the restoration and protection of ecosystems and in order to ensure the necessary investments in infrastructure. The exemptions for water and wastewater set out in Directive 2014/23/EU (2), granted as a result of the successful ECI on ‘Right2Water’, must be maintained in the future. The EESC also opposes any liberalisation obligation in the water and wastewater sector, especially in the context of the climate crisis.












1.4.


Amidst a worsening distribution of water resources, the EESC points out that the economy, in particular water-intensive agriculture and industries, should be organised in a way that reduces water consumption and improves water reuse. This will also require national and EU-requirements and recommendations in order to better regulate water consumption and allow for more effective financial support for water infrastructure. The EESC calls on the EU institutions to start prioritising the issue of water and to develop an EU ‘Blue Deal’.












1.5.


The EESC is committed to strengthening the ‘polluter pays’ principle, tackling pollutants at the source rather than removing them from wastewater using ‘end-of-pipe’ solutions. The discharge of pollutants into water bodies and groundwater must be permanently reduced to ensure that the drinking water supply and wastewater disposal and purification services remain affordable. Making targeted improvements to wastewater treatment while closely linking it to a scheme based on producer responsibility, as proposed by the Commission in the recast Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (UWWTD), is an important step and is supported by the EESC, although it is necessary to ensure that producer responsibility organisations are publicly controlled and that all investments in wastewater treatment plants are made independently and uninfluenced by producer organisations.












1.6.


The EESC draws attention to the major challenges that municipalities face when it comes to developing and maintaining bodies of water. In order to address these issues, inter-municipal cooperation should be further developed and substantially facilitated The EESC therefore calls on the Commission to broaden the legal room for manoeuvre, especially regarding public procurement law.












1.7.


Investment in water and wastewater management needed to create a sustainable, competitive and fair ‘blue transition’ must be targeted towards ensuring optimal environmental and economic cost-benefit ratios, particularly focusing on vulnerable groups in the population. Research and innovation as well as information campaigns for industry, agriculture and households are also essential in order to promote water-saving economies and behaviour.












1.8.


The EESC stresses the biodiversity loss caused by the climate crisis, which is being further exacerbated by measures such as the recirculation of water that is too warm into rivers. These failures must be taken into account in the future design of our water infrastructure in order to ensure that these issues are tackled as much as possible, rather than being further facilitated. At the same time, comprehensive measures need to be taken to achieve the 1,5 oC objective by 2050.












1.9.


The EESC proposes to the European Commission the launch of a Europe-wide public consultation process, which, by assessing European water needs, will serve as the foundation of the future interventions of the ‘EU Blue Deal’.




2.   Background









2.1.


Water is a vital asset and is essential for people, nature and the functioning of the economy and society. The greatest proportion of water is used in agriculture (70 %), followed by industry (22 %) and households (8 %). At the same time, average annual expenditure on water and sanitation across the EU amounts to EUR 100 billion. This is set to increase to around EUR 250 billion in order to comply with EU rules on wastewater treatment and the drinking water supply (3).












2.2.


In order to have sufficient water in the future, it will be necessary to improve water infrastructure and increase storage capacity. This requires a wide range of measures, ranging from collecting rainwater in cisterns and constructing reservoirs and closed circular pipelines to reducing soil sealing in order to increase soil storage capacity. In case of flooding of different types of water flows, it is necessary to try to direct and store the surplus in controlled reservoirs. Buffering capacity should be provided intermittently along water flows to allow excess water to flow out over time and to mitigate excess water peaks. The preparedness for such situations with infrastructural investments is necessary in advance.












2.3.


The UN General Assembly explicitly recognised the human right to water and sanitation as a separate right in 2010 (4). The first steps towards transposing this right, set out in Directive (EU) 2020/2184 (5) and as a Commission proposal in the context of the recast of Directive 91/271/EEC (6), are urgently needed. The Member States thereby commit to improving access to clean and affordable drinking water and sanitation for all in the EU by 2030. According to Commission data (7), around 10 million people in the EU currently lack access to sanitation facilities. Member States need to take sufficient account of this in the implementation process. The Blue Deal initiative aims to further deepen these efforts.












2.4.


The climate crisis is already having a considerable impact on the management of global water resources. One of the effects is the rise in sea levels, which is increasing water ingress in coastal areas. At the same time, it leads to falling river and groundwater levels in many regions. This is aggravating food scarcity, as there is no alternative but to use fresh water when cultivating a range of foodstuffs (8).












2.5.


The climate crisis is reducing existing water resources and leading to drought, evaporation (9), ocean warming and the destruction of habitats, which impact the entire ecosystem.












2.6.


Water supply is vital for citizens and is part of our critical infrastructure. In order to transport drinking water to citizens, energy is usually needed to operate the water pumps. Drinking water suppliers are already using redundant systems and their own energy cycles in order to continue to provide people with drinking water in the event of blackouts.












2.7.


In recent years, many EU-countries have undergone a process of re-municipalisation in water and wastewater services. In particular, negative experiences with the privatisation of services have led cities and municipalities to bring public services back into public ownership. The side-effects seen have often included lower investment in infrastructure, poorer working conditions, higher costs for consumers, and a loss of control and know-how (10). Thanks to re-municipalisation, cities and municipalities can regain the scope to take political action as well as democratic control and influence over the water supply (11).












2.8.


Water is an eminently political and social issue requiring a long-term approach that is incompatible with electoral cycles and demands a major effort from public decision-makers in terms of investment and operation and maintenance costs. In order for citizens to fully exercise democratic control, it is necessary to ensure that they know the water cycle and its price.




3.   General comments


The societal dimension of water









3.1.


Water is a vital but increasingly scarce resource as an effect of the climate crisis. The EESC therefore calls for an EU Blue Deal to raise awareness of this vital resource. The EESC recommends mapping the state of play of water infrastructure and the availability of water in each Member State in order to obtain up-to-date information on the state of existing water infrastructure and identify pressing investment needs.












3.2.


The EESC stresses that water is not a commodity like any other but, rather, a heritage that must be protected and defended (12). The EESC believes that universal access to drinking water and sanitation of high quality at affordable prices for the population should be treated as a public good and not merely a commodity with full respect of Article 14 of TFEU and the Protocol 26 annexed to TEU and TFEU. In this context, the EESC recommends that, the EU adopt and strengthen regulatory frameworks on water concession agreements, to guarantee universal access to water and sewage systems at an affordable price and with adequate quality standards and the restoration and protection of ecosystems and in order to ensure the necessary investments in infrastructure. The exemptions for water and wastewater set out in Directive 2014/23/EU on the award of concession contracts, granted as a result of the successful ECI on ‘Right2Water’ (13), must also be maintained in the future with full respect of Article 14 of TFEU and the Protocol 26 annexed to TEU and TFEU. In light of the climate crisis, the EESC is particularly opposed to any liberalisation obligation in the sensitive water and wastewater sectors, and calls instead for public services of general interest in the water sector and beyond to be strengthened.












3.3.


The EESC calls on the Commission and the Member States to apply a rights-based approach to all water policies and to address water poverty, thereby also aligning with the EPSR. The EESC proposes to promote a common approach to understanding water poverty at EU level and to develop a comprehensive definition of water poverty, with each Member State being able to develop its own contextual definition in line with the European definition. Public funds should be made available for infrastructure development to address in particular resource-poor property owners and socially disadvantaged urban and rural areas in need of infrastructure renovation.












3.4.


The EESC stresses that the ‘just transition’ is not just a question of financing; it also includes the objective of creating decent work, quality jobs and social security, as well as of maintaining the competitiveness of EU businesses, and requires specific action at all levels, particularly at regional level.












3.5.


More and more EU-regions are facing water shortages (14). This highlights the need to develop resilient water infrastructure, particularly storage capacity. In the event of possible water shortages, the water supply for humans and their basic human needs must be ensured and given priority over water use for industry, tourism and agriculture. It is up to the Member States to guarantee this. This is necessary to prevent conflicts over water, which we already see in other areas of the world. This makes an EU Blue Deal urgently necessary, including in order to pay greater attention to the availability and distribution of water in the future, as well as to strengthen research and innovation.





Water quality and purification









3.6.


The EESC calls for better implementation of the precautionary and ‘polluter pays’ principles in order to improve water quality and pass on the costs to polluters rather than consumers. Groundwater should be of drinking water quality to avoid the need for expensive and energy-intensive drinking water treatment.












3.7.


In particular, inputs from agriculture, the food sector and industry contribute to diffuse pollution from nitrates and pesticides, with the result that groundwater often fails to achieve a good chemical status. Legislation in the fields of agriculture (e.g. the CAP), industry and chemistry (e.g. Pesticides Regulation) must therefore be designed in such a way that water ecosystems are not adversely affected.





Water use and waste









3.8.


The EESC draws attention to the major challenges that municipalities face when it comes to developing and maintaining bodies of water. In order to address these issues, inter-municipal cooperation should be further developed and substantially facilitated to improve the performance of water supply and wastewater disposal and treatment services and the development and maintenance of bodies of water and to ensure the long-term viability of these services of general interest in rural areas. The EESC therefore calls on the Commission to provide greater legal room for manoeuvre, particularly as regards procurement law.












3.9.


The Commission estimates the total cost of the recast of the UWWTD at over EUR 3,8 billion per year. Most of these costs would have to be borne by households (15), which would further increase the cost of sanitation, which would in turn be particularly severe for the most financially vulnerable groups in society. The EESC therefore calls for the resulting costs and benefits to be shared in such a way that they do not place a disproportionate burden on households.












3.10.


The EESC believes that water loss due to leakages in networks, which in some EU countries amount to over 20 % (16), as well as water wastage in agriculture, industry, construction and tourism, need to be significantly reduced. These sectors can contribute to the solution by stepping up research and innovation relating to water-efficient practices and by better implementing existing knowledge (e.g. using drip irrigation, cultivating water-saving crops, strengthening the circular economy, adapting food production to local conditions, etc.).












3.11.


Informed citizens use water more sparingly in their homes. The EESC therefore welcomes the extended requirements for drinking water suppliers and wastewater operators to provide households with information under EU legislation.





Waterways









3.12.


The climate crisis is having a significant impact on water transport routes worldwide. In particular, low water levels in rivers, changes in precipitation patterns, the increase in extreme weather events and rising sea levels are having an impact on the transport of goods and passengers.












3.13.


Fairway depths are decreasing and port and lock infrastructure needs to be adapted to the new circumstances. This means higher costs and longer waiting times for ships, slowing down the transport of goods.












3.14.


Measures need to be taken to adapt the infrastructure of ports and locks and to improve the planning of shipping channels and routes so that waterborne transport can take place safely and efficiently in the future.












3.15.


The EESC considers the development and better interconnection of waterways within the EU to be key. As mentioned in opinion TEN/764 (17), intermodality should also be taken into account in this connection.





Energy









3.16.


The situation in the energy markets in August 2022 showed that, due to the climate crisis, there is no 100 % reliable source of energy. For example, we can observe the impact of drought on the production of hydropower and nuclear energy.












3.17.


The EESC welcomes the efforts to use hydropower to generate and store renewable electricity, but notes that water shortages resulting from the climate crisis will negatively affect the production and storage of electricity in the long term. This decreases production, which may also harm the electricity grid. The expansion of renewable energy sources should continue to be promoted swiftly, especially in the solar and wind sectors, to compensate for potential shortfalls from hydropower plants.












3.18.


The EESC notes that the electrification of transport can also increase the use of water, since the electrolytes used in the production of batteries require a significant amount of water. Therefore, the deployment of battery factories requires careful planning.












3.19.


The EESC notes that renewable energy sources generally require less water than the extraction and processing of traditional fossil fuels, however, there is a renewable energy source that involves significant water consumption, the biofuels. Irrigation and processing of crops grown for the production of biofuels requires a large amount of water, which must be provided with the help of water infrastructure and distribution networks.












3.20.


The EESC points out that nuclear power generation requires large quantities of water for cooling purposes. The climate crisis is increasing temperatures and at the same time reducing the level of rivers. As temperatures rise, nuclear power plants have to reduce their output due to water scarcity. In addition, discharging cooling water that is too warm increases the oxygen content of rivers, which has a negative impact on water ecology and biodiversity (18).




4.   Specific comments









4.1.


The EESC criticises the lack of consistency between EU water policy and other EU policies, and calls on the Commission to make improvements in order to avoid conflicting policies and objectives.












4.2.


The EESC welcomes the Commission’s decision in the recast of the Drinking Water Directive to minimise the loss of water from water pipes (19). The EESC draws attention to the urgent need for rapid measures and public and private investment in water infrastructure to avoid water loss and to ensure the long-term resilience and sustainability of key water infrastructure. When water leaks occur, they must be treated as an emergency. For such cases, expert staff and equipment are key to stop the leaks promptly.












4.3.


Concerning the financing of infrastructure projects, strict fiscal rules have proved, time and time again, to be the biggest barrier faced by public authorities. The aim must therefore be to exempt projects associated with the EU Green Deal, energy independence and the digital sector from all rules that hamper such public investment. In line with previous opinions (20), the EESC therefore recommends applying the ‘golden rule’ to public investment.












4.4.


The EESC supports the proposed revision of Directive 2006/118/EC (21) and Directive 2008/105/EC (22) and the introduction of limit values for PFCs and microplastics. A special report by the European Court of Auditors highlights the inconsistent application of the ‘polluter pays’ principle in the water sector, despite significant operating and investment costs (23).












4.5.


The EESC points out that, in order to maintain and develop sustainable and resilient water infrastructure and distribution networks, skilled labour and, above all, specialist workers are needed, and that appropriate knowledge management, i.e. strategic and operational activities that optimise the use of knowledge, is necessary. The EESC calls for the necessary structures and working conditions to be put in place to avoid bottlenecks in this area and ensure that sufficient specialist staff are available to implement the necessary measures.












4.6.


The EESC notes that the ongoing process of digitalisation in the water sector is also increasing the risks in the areas of data security and data protection. It is important to ensure that the data collected is handled in line with the strictest possible data protection rules. At the same time, cybersecurity must also play a key role in water infrastructure and distribution networks, given the increasing threats posed by cyberattacks on critical infrastructure.












4.7.


There is little to no integration of companies involved in the production and distribution of drinking water as well as wastewater management and water purification in many Member States. The EESC believes that placing the direction and management in the hands of a single public organisation would help save costs and increase efficiency.






Brussels, 13 July 2023.


The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Oliver RÖPKE
            





(1)  See, for example, Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions REPowerEU Plan (COM(2022) 230 final) and Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2021/241 as regards REPowerEU chapters in recovery and resilience plans and amending Regulation (EU) 2021/1060, Regulation (EU) 2021/2115, Directive 2003/87/EC and Decision (EU) 2015/1814 (COM(2022) 231 final — 2022/0164(COD))(OJ C 486, 21.12.2022, p. 185), Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Public investment in energy infrastructure as part of the solution to climate issues (own-initiative opinion) (OJ C 486, 21.12.2022, p. 67) and Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on A strategic vision on energy transition to enable the EU’s strategic autonomy (own-initiative opinion) (OJ C 75, 28.2.2023, p. 102), etc.

(2)  Directive 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the award of concession contracts (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 1).

(3)  https://www.aquapublica.eu/sites/default/files/article/file/20230310_Joint%20statement_EPR%20scheme.pdf.

(4)  https://www.un.org/Depts/german/gv-64/band3/ar64292.pdf.

(5)  Directive (EU) 2020/2184 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on the quality of water intended for human consumption (OJ L 435, 23.12.2020, p. 1).

(6)  Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment (OJ L 135, 30.5.1991, p. 40).

(7)  https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_22_6281.

(8)  https://wires.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/wat2.1633.

(9)  Europe’s next crisis: Water — POLITICO.

(10)  Getzner, Köhler, Krisch, Plank (2018) — Final report (long version): Vergleich europäischer Systeme der Wasserversorgung und Abwasserentsorgung [Comparison of European water supply and sanitation systems]. In: Informationen zur Umweltpolitik, 197.
https://emedien.arbeiterkammer.at/viewer/ppnresolver?id=AC15177626.

(11)  https://www.epsu.org/search?f%5B0%5D=policies%3A56.

(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 (OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1), recital 1.

(13)  https://right2water.eu/.

(14)  https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC133025.

(15)  Distribution according to impact assessment: 51 % households, 22 % public expenditure and 27 % industry.

(16)  https://emedien.arbeiterkammer.at/viewer/ppnresolver?id=AC15249737.

(17)  Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Union guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network, amending Regulation (EU) 2021/1153 and Regulation (EU) No 913/2010 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 (COM(2022) 384 final/2 — 2021/0420 (COD)) (OJ C 75, 28.2.2023, p. 190).

(18)  https://www.dw.com/de/wie-k%C3%BChlen-hei%C3%9Fe-l%C3%A4nder-ihre-kernkraftwerke/a-49758541.

(19)  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32020L2184.

(20)  See footnote 1.

(21)  Directive 2006/118/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the protection of groundwater against pollution and deterioration (OJ L 372, 27.12.2006, p. 19).

(22)  Directive 2008/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on environmental quality standards in the field of water policy, amending and subsequently repealing Council Directives 82/176/EEC, 83/513/EEC, 84/156/EEC, 84/491/EEC, 86/280/EEC and amending Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 84).

(23)  https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR21_12/SR_polluter_pays_principle_EN.pdf.