COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Third River Basin Management Plans Second Flood Hazard and Risk Maps and Second Flood Risk Management Plans Member State: Italy Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT on the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) and the Floods Directive (2007/60/EC) Third River Basin Management Plans Second Flood Risk Management Plans
Date: 2025-02-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission
Subjects: Italy, adaptation to climate change, application of EU law, environmental risk prevention, flood, risk management, water, water management, water pollution, watercourse

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 4.2.2025  SWD(2025) 18 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Third River Basin Management Plans  Second Flood Hazard and Risk Maps and Second Flood Risk Management Plans Member State: Italy Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT on the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) and the Floods Directive (2007/60/EC)  Third River Basin Management Plans Second Flood Risk Management Plans {COM(2025) 2 final} - {SWD(2025) 13 final} - {SWD(2025) 14 final} - {SWD(2025) 15 final} - {SWD(2025) 16 final} - {SWD(2025) 17 final} - {SWD(2025) 19 final} - {SWD(2025) 20 final} - {SWD(2025) 21 final} - {SWD(2025) 22 final} - {SWD(2025) 23 final} - {SWD(2025) 24 final} - {SWD(2025) 25 final} - {SWD(2025) 26 final} - {SWD(2025) 27 final} - {SWD(2025) 28 final} - {SWD(2025) 29 final} - {SWD(2025) 30 final} - {SWD(2025) 31 final} - {SWD(2025) 32 final} - {SWD(2025) 33 final} - {SWD(2025) 34 final} - {SWD(2025) 35 final}  
 
 
y
n
a
r
V
n
a
p
e
t
S

|

m
o
c
s
l

.

e
x
e
P
©

Country specific staff working document 

Italy 

ENVIRONMENT 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Content 

Content ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 

SECTION A: WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE .......................................................................................................................... 3 

1. General info, Member State characterisation ............................................................................................................. 4 

2. Horizontal aspects ...................................................................................................................................................................... 8 

2.1 Governance ............................................................................................................................................................................ 8 

2.2 Characterization of River Basin District ................................................................................................................. 9 

3. Policy elements contributing to biodiversity and climate change adaptation ...................................... 12 

3.1 Surface Water: what is their ecological status or potential .................................................................... 12 

3.2 Hydromorphological changes and artificialization (HMWBs and AWBs) .......................................... 13 

3.3 Groundwater bodies - have they sufficient water – quantitative status ......................................... 15 

3.4 Protected Areas (identification, monitoring, objectives and measures) ........................................... 16 

3.5 What is being done to prevent/reduce hydromorphological pressures ............................................ 18 

3.6 What Italy is doing for abstractions and water scarcity ........................................................................... 19 

3.7 Adaptation to climate change .................................................................................................................................. 21 

4. Policy elements contributing to zero pollution ........................................................................................................ 22 

4.1 Surface Water: what is their chemical status ................................................................................................. 22 

4.2 Groundwater Bodies: what is their chemical status .................................................................................... 25 

4.3 What Italy is doing to combat pollution from agriculture ........................................................................ 26 

4.4 What Italy is doing to combat pollution from other sectors .................................................................. 28 

4.5 What Italy is doing to combat significant pressures – overall assessment of the Programmes 
of Measures ................................................................................................................................................................................ 29 

5. Exemptions and economics ............................................................................................................................................... 30 

5.1 To what extent are exemptions applied in Italy ............................................................................................. 30 

5.2 Use of economic analysis and water pricing – cost recovery ................................................................ 31 

6. WFD recommendations ........................................................................................................................................................ 32 

SECTION B: FLOODS DIRECTIVE .................................................................................................................................................. 36 

7. Flood risk management under floods directive (FD) ............................................................................................ 37 

7.1 Flood hazard and risk maps ...................................................................................................................................... 38 

7.2 Flood risk management plans .................................................................................................................................. 39 

8. FD recommendations ............................................................................................................................................................ 42 

2 

 
SECTION A: 
WATER FRAMEWORK 
DIRECTIVE 

3 

 
 
 
1. General info, Member State characterisation

Italy consists of a peninsula, the two largest Mediterranean islands – Sardinia and Sicily – and several 
smaller islands. The territory is largely mountainous, with the Alps forming an arc in the northernmost 
part and the Apennines stretching all the way south through the centre of the country. The Padan 
plain in the northern part of the country is the largest plain.  

With  its  population  of  nearly  60  million  inhabitants  (the  third  largest  in  Europe),  Italy  is  densely 
populated  (198.2  persons  per  km2),  and  its  population  is  particularly  concentrated  in  coastal  and 
lowland areas, which may lead to pressures being higher in these densely populated areas. Around 
55%  of  its  population  lives  in  cities  of  more  than  50  000  inhabitants.  With  over  7,600  km,  the 
coastline of Italy is the 14th longest in the world and fifth longest in Europe. 

The  increasing  demand  for  water  for  multiple  purposes  and  the  intensification  of  severe  weather 
conditions due to climate change have put a significant further strain on freshwater supplies in Italy 
in  recent  years,  and  increased  water-related  challenges.  Since  2018  Italy  has  suffered  from 
increasingly dry and hot summers, and in the last few years such problems, already better known in 
the southern part of the country, became a recurrent issue also in the northern part of the country, 
which did not use to experience severe and extended periods of drought on a regular basis. Italy is 
also increasingly vulnerable to severe floods, which have regularly affected the country in the last 
decade.  

Water resources  

Italy is increasingly suffering from water scarcity. In the period between 2015 and 2019, Italy’s water 
exploitation index  plus (WEI+)1 ranged between 7.3 % and 14.7 %. While  these values are below 
20%, which is generally considered as an indication of water scarcity, it is important to underline that 
Italy  is  characterised  by  major  seasonal  and  geographical  differences.  In  2019,  for  example,  the 
national WEI+ index scored over 44% between July and September, signalling serious scarcity issues 
in the summer at national level. At the RBD level, differences are also major, with Sicily’s WEI+ index 
reaching a peak of 93.5 % during the summer of 2019.  

Reporting 

The deadline for reporting the 3rd RBMPs was in March 2022. The Commission and the EEA together 
with Member States developed an electronic reporting system in WISE (Water Information System 
for  Europe).  Its  use  was  voluntary.  Some  Member  States  used  it  to  fulfil  their  obligations,  others 
reported the plans in pdf format. The cut-off date for the WISE e-reporting was September 2023 and 
the Member States were assessed based on the datasets available by this date.  

By September 2023, Italy had not submitted full electronic reporting, but data for six out of seven 
RBDs were available. Therefore, the assessment is based mostly on the datasets available at that 
time. However, for the missing data for one RBDs information was extracted through data mining of 
the pdf  RBMPs  or,  where possible,  from  the  WISE  Freshwater  web portal. A  detailed  analysis  was 

1 The Water Exploitation Index plus (WEI+) is a measure of total fresh water use as a percentage of the renewable 
freshwater resources (groundwater and surface water) at a given time and place. It quantifies how much water is 
abstracted and how much water is returned to the environment after use. 

4 

 
 
carried out for the Po River, North Apennines, and Sicily RBMPs. Together these RBDs represent over 
44% of the Italian territory.  

Despite  the  cut  off  dates to  produce  this  report,  reporting  continued,  and,  for  the  State  of  Water 
report,  the  EEA  aggregated  the  results  available  by  July  2024  in  their  products  and  dashboards 
available at WISE Freshwater web portal. 

5 

 
Changes in Status, Pressures, Exemptions and Measures 

Surface Water 
Bodies (7773) 

Trend (% good 
status/potential) 

Main Pressures & Changes & Exemptions 

ECOLOGICAL 
STATUS 

100%

Monitoring has improved in Italy, and there are less surface water bodies (SWBs) in unknown status. However, gaps remain in the 
number of quality elements monitored and used for the assessments.  

50%

0%

41,7%

43,6%

2015 2021

CHEMICAL STATUS 

100%

50%

72% 75,1%

0%

2015 2021

The proportion of surface water bodies in good ecological status or potential has increased, but only very slightly, and challenges 
remain. Nutrient pollution from diffuse agricultural and urban waste water point sources, as well as hydromorphological alterations, 
are the main reasons for ecological status failure. Around 10% of surface water bodies are strongly affected by water abstraction. 
The Water Exploitation Index+ at the national level ranged from 7.3 % and 14.7 % in the years from 2015 and 2019, but water 
scarcity presents a very marked seasonal pattern and differences between RBDs. Italy expects about almost 80% of surface water 
bodies to achieve good ecological status/potential by 2027; however, a sizeable proportion of these will only achieve lowered 
environmental objectives (13.2 % of the total). 

Exemptions under Article 4(4) have been applied to 24.6% of SWBs under technical feasibility, 11.4% for natural conditions, and 
6.4% for disproportionate cost. Article 4(5) has been applied to 9.4% for disproportionate cost, and 9.2% for technical feasibility. 
Article 4(6) has been applied to 0.1% SWBs for natural causes, and Article 4(7) to 0.1% for new modifications, among them new 
irrigation systems.  

Chemical pollution, due to the presence of ubiquitous persistent, bioaccumulative toxins (uPBTs) as well as to industrial emissions 
(including of heavy metals, PFOS, flame retardants), remains a challenge, although some improvements in the chemical status of 
surface waters can be observed. Monitoring has improved covering 36% of all water bodies and with only 8.5% of SWBs in 
unknown status. Just over 75% of surface water bodies are in good chemical status. Italy expects just over 80% of SWBs to be in 
good chemical status/potential by 2027.  

The substances causing the highest proportion of status failures are ubiquitous persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic substances 
(uPBTs) which are mostly introduced to surface waters through atmospheric deposition, namely mercury and PAHs. If these 
substances were to be left out in the assessment the proportion of surface water bodies in good chemical status would rise to 
81%. These substances are most commonly released during combustion processes of fossil fuels. Further significant substances 
leading to failure are several metallic compounds, PFOS (from industrial emissions), and the biocide tributyltin.  

Exemptions under Article 4(4) have been applied to 11% of SWBs under technical feasibility, 7% for natural conditions, and 3.5% 
for disproportionate cost. Article 4(5) has been applied to 0.03% SWBs for disproportionate cost, and 0.3% for technical feasibility. 

6 

 
 
 
Ground Water 
Bodies (1007) 

Trend (% good 
status/potential) 

Main Pressures & Changes & Exemptions 

100%

79,4%

QUANTITATIVE 
STATUS 

50%

61%

Monitoring has improved with about half of groundwater bodies (GWBs) covered and considerably fewer GWBs are in unknown 
status. The proportion of GWBs in good quantitative status has increased to 79.4%, from 62% in 2015, which represents good 
progress. Italy expects further improvement by 2027 and reported that over 90% of GWB are expected to achieve good 
quantitative status. Well over half of the GWBs are drinking water protected areas. Water balances, long-term groundwater level 
trends or spring discharges are considered in the assessment of quantitative status. However, the needs of groundwater associated 
aquatic ecosystems and of groundwater dependent ecosystems are not considered in all RBMPs.  

In general, issues with water scarcity and droughts are worsening, with the problem no longer limited to the southern part of the 
country and its main islands, but increasingly being felt at more northern latitudes, due to climate change, with reduced snowfall 
and increasingly unpredictable rainfall patterns. Water abstractions are another challenge, affecting both surface and 
groundwaters, with issues linked to unreported uses and quantities. One common reason for status failure is a lowering water level, 
followed by saline intrusions and lowered ecological or chemical status of associated surface waters. A large share remains 
affected by multiple combined pressures from pollution and abstraction.  

2015 2021

Exemptions under Article 4(4) have been applied to 11.3% of GWBs under technical feasibility, 5.3% for natural conditions, and 
7.7% for disproportionate cost. 

0%

100%

CHEMICAL STATUS 

50%

57,6% 70,0%

Chemical pollution remains a challenge, although improvements in the chemical status of groundwater can be observed. Chemical 
monitoring has improved to coverage of almost 80% of all GWBs in the 3rd RBMPs and significantly fewer GWBs in unknown status. 
However, some gaps remain in relation to monitored substances and quality criteria. 70% of GWBs are in good chemical status, which 
represents a good improvement compared to 2015. However, for 2027 only about 73% GWBs are expected to be in good status, with 
just over 2% achieving lowered environmental objectives.  

Almost 9% of total GWBs are expected to fail to achieve good chemical status by 2027. Failure is caused by nitrates (pointing to 
nutrient  pollution),  trichloromethane  (industrial  emission),  chloride  and  electrical  conductivity  (indicative  of  saline  intrusion),  and 
sulphate. The highest reported pressure on GWBs comes from diffuse agricultural pollution and urban run-off, followed by abandoned 
industrial and contaminated sites. 

0%

2015 2021

Exemptions under Article 4(4) have been applied to 12% of GWBs under technical feasibility, 12% for natural conditions, and 5.5% 
for disproportionate cost. Article 4(5) has been applied to 1.9% of GWBs for technical feasibility and to 2% for disproportionate cost. 

7 

 
 
 
 
2. Horizontal aspects 

2.1 Governance 

Italy  has  a  highly  decentralised  governance  system,  which  may  lead  to  fragmented  solutions  to 
environmental challenges. For the management of its river basin districts (RBDs), Italy has a complex 
structure, which includes competent authorities at national, RBD and regional level.  

The responsibility for the preparation of the River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs) and the Flood 
Risk Management plans (FRMPs) lies mainly with the River Basin Authorities, while the Ministry of the 
Environment  is  responsible  for  overarching  tasks,  including  providing  guidance  and  coordinating 
between  River  Basin  Authorities,  as  well  as  ensuring  alignment  with  EU  legislation.  Regional 
authorities also have an important role, including providing knowledge and data, analyse the impact 
of  human  activities  on  the  status  of  water,  perform  economic  analyses,  plan,  and  implement  the 
necessary  measures.  Regional  Water  Protection  Plans  are  now  developed  and  adopted  under  the 
umbrella of each RBMPs and must be considered as detailed sub-plans of the RBMPs.  

To ensure coordination of water management at national level, especially to better address issues 
linked to water scarcity, Permanent Observatories of Water Uses (osservatori permanenti sugli utilizzi 
idrici)  were  established  already  in  2016  in  every  RBD.  Through  legislation  adopted  in  2023,  the 
Permanent  Observatories  have  been  integrated  as  formal  structures  within  the  river  basins 
authorities.  

Coordination  with  the  Floods  Directive  is  pursued,  with  efforts  to  maximise  synergies  and  where 
possible  putting  in  place  fully  integrated  measures  and  the  same  authorities  oversee  the 
development of both the RBMPs and the FRMPs. The situation is less clear as regards coordination 
with the Marine Strategy Framework Directive: references to synergies and coordination are reported 
in only two of the RBMPs examined in detail and in rather general terms.  

Italy has three international  RBDs. The Eastern Alps RBD (ITA) is part of the Danube international 
RBD, it has an international RBMP, an international agreement and a permanent cooperation body. 
The  Po  River  (ITB)  and  North  Apennines  (ITC)  RBDs  both  have  an  international  agreement  and  a 
permanent cooperation body in place (designated as category 2 cooperation). 

Italy did not adopt its RBMPs in line with the Water Framework Directive (WFD) deadlines, with its 
seven RBMPs published between April 2022 and September 2023. However, this delay may at least 
partly be explained by the onset of the COVID 19 pandemic. Indeed, Italy reported extensive public 
consultation exercises, which in many cases run for longer than the minimum 6 months required by 
WFD, due to the COVID 19 pandemic and the need to adjust the process (for example by organising 
meetings online). Overall, the RBMPs analysed in detail provide a good overview of the stakeholders 
consulted, of the type of comments submitted and on how such comments were considered in the 
finalisation of the plans. 

8 

 
2.2 Characterization of River Basin District 

Italy has seven River Basin Districts (RBDs) as illustrated in Table 1. 

Table 1. number of water bodies delineated in Italy 

RBD 

Name 

Rivers 

Lakes 

Transitional 

Coastal 

Territorial 

Groundwater  

12 

3 

42 

32 

ITA 

Eastern Alps 

1689 

40 

35 

ITB 

Po River 

2163 

109 

18 

868 

29 

10 

611 

38 

6 

ITC 

ITE 

ITF 

North 
Apennines 

Central 
Apennines 

South 
Apennines 

791 

68 

18 

144 

ITG 

Sardinia 

498 

31 

ITH 

Sicily 

256 

32 

42 

18 

95 

65 

1 

1 

1 

2 

3 

1 

1 

125 

227 

129 

144 

186 

114 

82 

TOTAL 

6876 

347 

147 

393 

10 

1007 

The largest, the Po River Basin District (ITB) covers almost one quarter of the country’s territory. Five 
RBDs cover mainland Italy, while one each covers Italy’s two large islands, Sardinia, and Sicily. Since 
the 2nd RBMP, the boundaries of some RBDs have been changed (Eastern Alps ITA, Po River ITB, North 
Apennines ITC and Central Apennines ITE), and one RBD (ITD – Serchio) was merged with the Northern 
Apennines RBD (ITC) for the 3rd RBMP.  

The three northernmost RBDs are international, shared with France (ITB and ITC), Switzerland (ITA 
and ITB), Austria (ITA) and Slovenia (ITA).  

For its seven RBDs, Italy reported a total of 7773 surface water bodies (SWBs) and 1007 groundwater 
bodies (Table 1). Since the 2nd RBMPs, Italy has modified the boundaries of its RBDs and its water 
bodies have been re-delineated, with aggregation, splitting and new delineations. However, only minor 
changes  in  the  proportion  of  Artificial  and  Heavily  Modified  Water  Bodies  (HMWB)  were  reported. 
Groundwater bodies characteristics are well described with only a relatively small number of water 
bodies for which either the geological formation is not known, or the data is missing. 

9 

 
 
Type specific reference conditions and environmental objectives 

Italy made a considerable effort to set reference conditions for most surface water types and for 
most categories. It has established type-specific reference conditions for all relevant biological quality 
elements for 99 % of river types, 66 % of lake types, 95 % of transitional types and 81 % of coastal 
types.  However,  weaknesses  remain  when  it  comes  to  hydromorphological  quality  elements  for 
transitional and coastal waters and for physico-chemical quality elements for rivers and lakes, for 
which no type-specific reference conditions have been set. 

Environmental objectives have been reported in all RBMPs and additional objectives have also been 
set for water bodies associated to protected areas where so needed to ensure compliance with the 
requirements of the Directives applicable to those areas. 

Main pressures and impacts 

The main pressures on surface water bodies reported by Italy are diffuse pollution from agriculture, 
pollution from urban wastewater and hydromorphological alterations.  

Figure  1.  Map  of  the  monitoring  points  showing  eutrophication  assessment  in  Italy,  according  to  the 
reporting of the Nitrates Directive 

Source: Joint Research Center of European Commission (n.d.). JRC NITRATES DIRECTIVE - Reporting Period 7 (2016-
2019) Trophic Status. [online] water.jrc.ec.europa.eu. Available at: 
https://water.jrc.ec.europa.eu/portal/apps/dashboards/cb6034c2a75e4df282f8a62f90c16caa  
Note : 0% of the monitoring stations are above the threshold of 50mg/l  

10 

 
 
Italy has a relatively high share of agricultural land under organic farming (17%), which witnessed a 
steady increase in the last ten years2, but diffuse pollution from agriculture remains a challenge with 
over a third of surface water bodies affected. Pollution from urban wastewater is a second significant 
pressure, affecting a quarter of the surface water bodies. Italy lags behind the EU average in the 
implementation  of  the  Urban  Waste  Water  Treatment  Directive,  with  only  56%  of  the  urban 
wastewater treated according to UWWTD requirements (EU average is 76%) and with some deficits 
in  the  necessary  water  treatment  infrastructure,  especially  in  some  areas.  Hydromorphological 
alterations are a further significant pressure affecting close to a quarter of surface water bodies, 
while the presence of invasive alien species is reported as significant for 10% of water bodies. Certain 
aquatic species that are well established in the territory, including the coypu, curly water weed, or the 
Louisiana  crayfish,  can  significantly  alter  the  conditions  of  water  bodies,  including  the  status  of 
riparian areas, the physico-chemical characteristics, or species abundance and composition. Finally, 
water abstractions affect 9.3% of surface water bodies failing to achieve good ecological status or 
potential, and with climate change this pressure is expected to affect an increasing number of water 
bodies.  

The main significant pressures identified for groundwater bodies are diffuse nutrient pollution (about 
a quarter of GWBs) and diffuse urban run-off (around 20% of groundwater bodies). Groundwater is 
also affected by chemical pollution, with point pollution from contaminated sites or historical pollution 
cited as a significant pressure for around 20% of groundwater bodies. When it comes to abstraction 
pressures, 11.3% of groundwater bodies failing to reach good status are significantly affected.  

These  significant  pressures  translate  into  the  following  significant  impacts3  on  both  surface  and 
groundwaters: chemical pollution impacts over 45% of surface water bodies and close to 40% of 
groundwater bodies, while nutrient pollution impacts close to 40% of surface water bodies and just 
under 30% of groundwater bodies. 

Habitat  alterations  due  to  morphological  changes  is  the  next  most  significant  impact  for  surface 
water bodies (almost a third of water bodies are affected), while a sizeable proportion of groundwater 
bodies suffer from lowering water tables (almost a quarter).  

While the assessments vary from one RBMP to the other, pressures and impacts are mostly assessed 
using methods that combine the use of data and expert judgment. Pressures are evaluated against 
thresholds  and  at  least  in  some  cases  pressures  are  assessed  on  the  basis  of  their  effect  on  all 
quality elements, rather than on their effect on a single quality element. National guidelines have 
been established by the Italian Institute for Environmental Protection and Research (ISPRA) in 2018 
to  ensure  a  certain  level of  harmonisation in the  assessment  of pressure,  and  in most  cases the 
thresholds suggested were indeed used in the preparation of the RBMPs. It has to be noted however 
that 45 surface water pressure types were reported as not being assessed. While improvement have 
been made, some gaps remain and reliance on expert judgement remains substantial. 

2 Country Factsheets (europa.eu) 
3 Pressures are related to the possible causes of pollution or other impacts, while the impacts relate to the actual 
pollution or other impact which manifests itself in a water body.  

11 

 
 
3. Policy elements contributing to biodiversity and 

climate change adaptation 

3.1 Surface Water: what is their ecological status or potential 

Monitoring 

Italy  has  improved  its  monitoring  capacity,  both  in  terms  of  geographic  coverage  and  of  broader 
selection of biological, hydromorphological and general physico-chemical quality elements that are 
being monitored.  

There are two types of monitoring: i) operational monitoring to determine the status and which covers 
all water bodies at risk and ii) surveillance monitoring aimed rather at identifying impacts and long-
term changes and design monitoring programmes.  

In the 3rd RBMPs, surveillance monitoring covers 21.7 % of river water body lengths, 43.3 % of lake 
water body areas, 32.1 % of coastal areas, and 16.8 % of transitional areas. For the coverage of 
operational monitoring, the percentages for river lengths are 33.6 %, for lakes 52.8 %, for coastal 
areas 47.5 %, and for transitional areas 90%. 

There has been a significant increase in monitoring across most quality elements. Some biological 
quality elements that were not monitored in the 2nd RBMPs, are now monitored, such as phytobenthos 
in  lakes  and  fish  in  transitional  waters.  For  hydromorphological  quality  elements,  monitoring  now 
covers continuity conditions in rivers; hydrological conditions and morphological conditions in lakes; 
morphological conditions in coastal waters, and tidal conditions in coastal waters. However, only some 
hydromorphological standards have been reported to be consistent with the good-moderate class 
boundaries  for  sensitive  biological  quality  elements  for  the  North  Apennines  (ITC)  RBD,  while 
information  on  other  RBDs  was  not  provided.  For  general  physico-chemical  quality  elements,  the 
following are now monitored: acidification status for rivers; salinity conditions for lakes; transparency 
conditions,  thermal  conditions,  salinity  conditions,  and  acidification  status  for  coastal  waters4. 
Furthermore, River Basin Specific Pollutants (63 substances responsible for failure to achieve good 
status) are monitored for all surface water categories.  

Status assessment 

Close to 90% of water bodies have been classified for ecological  status or potential. Regrettably, 
however, there remains high proportions of water bodies of different categories, for which certain 
WFD  quality  elements  (biological,  hydromorphological  or  physico-chemical)  or  river  basin  specific 
pollutants  are  not  used  for  the  classification  of  ecological  status  or  potential.  While  this  can  be 
justified under the WFD rules, the information provided does not allow to understand how accurate 
the  assessment  may  be 
it  comes  to 
hydromorphological quality elements and to some physico-chemical quality elements, which are only 
considered in the assessment of small percentages for certain water categories.  

Italy.  This  seems  particularly  worrying  when 

in 

4 Acidification is not a mandatory quality element for coastal waters. 

12 

 
 
As shown in Figure 2, the ecological status/ potential for surface water bodies has been improving 
over the years and there has been a marked decrease in the number of water bodies for which the 
status is unknown.  

Progress since the 2nd RBMP has however been worryingly slow, with over half of Italy’s surface water 
bodies still in less than good status. While rivers appear to be faring slightly better, with a higher 
proportion of river water bodies classified in good status, transitional water bodies and coastal water 
bodies are more frequently classified in less than good status. While the information provided in the 
RBMPs  on  the  reasons  for  failing  to  achieve  good  ecological  status  is  not  exhaustive,  the  main 
pressures  reported  for  surface  water  bodies,  which  may  explain  the  failures,  include  pollution, 
hydromorphological alterations and water abstractions.   

Italy reports that over 70 % of surface water bodies are expected to reach good status by 2027, 
which would represent a significant improvement compared to the current state. Worryingly, however, 
it  is  expected that  in  2027  roughly  16  %  of  surface  water  bodies  will  remain  below good  status 
(either fail good status or achieve lowered environmental objectives), with the remaining unknown or 
data missing, which may not fully align with the WFD goals.  

Figure 2. Ecological status or potential of surface water bodies in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd RBMPs 

SWB ecological status or potential for IT

3rd

2nd

1st

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

High

Good

Moderate

Poor

Bad

Unknown

Source: WISE electronic reporting 

3.2 Hydromorphological changes and artificialization (HMWBs and AWBs) 

The level of human intervention in the water systems in Italy is higher than the EU average, with 
approximately  20%  of  water  bodies  being  designated  as  heavily  modified  or  artificial,  and 
hydromorphological pressures are recognised as a significant pressure in almost half of all surface 
water bodies. The percentages of artificial and heavily modified water bodies are set out in Figure 3.  

13 

 
 
Notably, roughly two thirds of lakes are heavily modified. The situation has not changed significantly 
from the 2nd RBMPs, with only minor changes in the proportion of Artificial and Heavily Modified Water 
Bodies (HMWB) reported.  

Figure 3. proportion of heavily modified and artificial water bodies per water category 

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Rivers (% of
total rivers)

Lakes (% of
total lakes)

Transitional
Waters (% of total
TWs)

Coastal
Waters (% of total
Coastal waters)

NATURAL

HEAVILY MODIFIED

ARTIFICIAL

Source: WISE electronic reporting 

In  2016  Italy  approved  a national  methodology for the  identification  and  classification  of  heavily 
modified (HMWBs) or artificial water bodies (AWBs), based on existing EU and national legislation, 
which has been used in most RBDs to identify and classify such water bodies in the 3rd RBMPs. As it 
is  the  case  for  natural  water  bodies,  the  classification  of  HMWBs  and  AWBs  is  carried  out  using 
monitoring data on biological and general physico-chemical quality elements sensitive to significant 
pressures. The national methodology reports the assessment methods for each quality element with 
the relative thresholds, for rivers and lakes.  

The main reasons for the designation as heavily modified water bodies are flood protection (40%), 
agriculture (27%), hydropower (16%), and urban development (15%). Unknown use is put down in 13 
% of water bodies. Overall, less than a fifth of heavily modified or artificial water bodies are in good 
ecological potential, with over two thirds of water bodies failing to achieve good status (as detailed 
in Table 2). The chemical status is better, with almost two thirds of water bodies in good chemical 
status, and just over 20% failing to achieve good status.  

Table 2. ecological status or potential of HMWBs and AWBs   

Modifications  

Good or higher ecological 
status or potential (% of 
HMWB or artificial WBs) 

Failing to achieve good 
status or potential (% 
of HMWB or artificial 
WBs) 

Unknown (% of HMWB 
or artificial WBs) 

HEAVILY MODIFIED 

16.5 % 

ARTIFICIAL   

16.5 % 

Source: WISE electronic reporting 

62.5 % 

74.1 % 

21 % 

9.4 % 

14 

 
 
3.3 Groundwater bodies - have they sufficient water – quantitative status 

Italy considers the water balance, long-term groundwater level trends or spring discharges in the 
assessment  of  groundwater  quantitative  status  in  all  its  RBMPs.  The  needs  of  groundwater 
associated aquatic ecosystems and of groundwater dependent terrestrial ecosystems however are 
not considered in all RBDs when assessing the quantitative status of groundwater bodies. Indeed, 
while  three  RBDs  (Eastern  Alps,  Po  River  and  North  Apennines)  consider  both  associated  aquatic 
ecosystems  and  groundwater  dependent  terrestrial  ecosystems,  the  other  RBDs5  either  do  not 
consider  the  needs  of  associated  aquatic  ecosystems  nor  groundwater  dependent  terrestrial 
ecosystems, or, in one case (Sardinia), consider only the needs of associated aquatic ecosystems, but 
not of groundwater dependent terrestrial ecosystems. Where these elements are not considered in 
the assessment of the quantitative water status, possible impacts of abstractions in Natura 2000 
protected areas may be underestimated.  

Almost 80 % of groundwater bodies are in good quantitative status, which represents good progress 
compared with 61% in the 2nd RBMPs (Figure 4). However, more groundwater bodies (almost 5 % 
more than in the 2nd RBMPs) are classified as being in poor quantitative status, mostly due to the 
lowering  of  the  water  table  and,  to  a  lesser  extent,  to  saline  intrusion.  While  the  number  of 
groundwater  bodies  with  poor  quantitative  status  increased,  this  does  not  necessarily  signal  a 
negative trend as there has been considerable improvements in knowledge, with now only about 2% 
of groundwater bodies in unknown status (the status of almost a quarter of GWBs was unknown in 
the 2nd RBMPs).  

Italy reported  an expected positive trend up to 2027, when over 90% of groundwater bodies are 
expected to be in good quantitative status. However, around 7% of groundwater bodies will still fail 
to achieve good quantitative status by 2027, and for the remaining groundwater bodies it is expected 
that the status will remain unknown.  

Figure 4. Quantitative status of groundwater bodies in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd RBMPs 

GWB quantitative status for IT

3rd

2nd

1st

0%

20%

40%

Good

Poor

60%
Unknown

80%

100%

Source: WISE electronic reporting 

5 For those RBDs (South Apennines and Sicily) for which electronic reporting was available at the time of the assessment. 

15 

 
 
 
3.4 Protected Areas (identification, monitoring, objectives and measures) 

In accordance with WFD, Italy has designated protected areas of all types foreseen by the relevant 
Directives listed in Annex IV of the WFD, including some national designated areas. When it comes 
to areas protected for habitats and species, Italy has designated 21.4% of its terrestrial areas as 
protected area (the EU average is 26.4%), the majority of which is designated as Natura 2000 areas, 
and a smaller percentage is nationally designated (~10%).  

Protected areas are listed in the register of protected areas in line with the WFD requirements and 
information is included in the individual RBMPs. Table 3 details the number of water bodies associated 
with protected areas per water category. 

Table 3. Number of water bodies associated with protected areas in Italy by 2021 

Protected Area type 

Number of water bodies associated with protected areas  

Rivers  Lakes  Coastal 

Transitional  Groundwater 

Bathing waters 

15 

43 

197 

5 

Drinking water protection area 

643 

93 

63 

11 

602 

Freshwater fish designated water 

398 

30 

2 

4 

Nationally designated area (CDDA)  395 

40 

76 

25 

119 

Natura 2000 protected sites 

1 745 

119 

172 

101 

53 

Nitrate vulnerable zone 

1 201 

12 

16 

236 

Sensitive area under the UWWTD 

551 

97 

25 

76 

Shellfish designated water 

46 

69 

57 

Source: WISE electronic reporting 

There have been some changes in the number of protected areas, which may be explained by the 
partial electronic reporting (at the time of the assessment) and by the re-delineation of water bodies. 
However,  an  increase  in  the  number  of  nitrate  vulnerable zones  can  be  observed  (e.g.  1201  river 
water bodies vs 796 in the 2nd RBMPs) and in sensitive areas designated under the UWWTD (e.g. 551 
rivers  vs  52  in  the  2nd  RBMPs),  which  may  signal  an  increased  attention  to  the  issue  of  nutrient 
pollution. It is to be noted that Italy’s compliance with the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive is 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
below  the  EU’s  average  with  only  56%  of  the  total  urban  wastewater  meeting  all  requirements. 
Natura 2000 sites have also increased (1745 sites associated with rivers in the 3rd RBMP vs 1331 in 
the 2nd RBMPs). 

Additional  objectives  were  set  for  some  Natura  2000  areas  (865  surface  water  sites  and  nine 
groundwater sites) in the 3rd RBMPs, based on harmonised criteria set out in national guidelines6. For 
other Natura 2000 sites work is ongoing to determine needs. When it comes to shellfish protected 
areas, roughly half of them have additional objectives that are identical to those of the repealed 
Shellfish  Directive,  while  different  microbial  standards  were  set  for  the  other  half.  Additional 
objectives have also been set for 6% of surface and 61 % of groundwater drinking water protected 
areas.  

Some information is available in the RBMPs assessed  more in details on additional  measures for 
Natura  2000  areas,  such  as  river  restoration,  restoring  continuity  and  connectivity  with  the 
floodplains, on improving wastewater treatment in areas affecting bathing waters, and on measures 
to  protect  drinking  water  areas,  including  the  establishment  of  safeguard  zones  as  well  as  site-
specific measures. The information provided however does not always allow to establish whether the 
set measures will be sufficient to achieve the specific objectives of these areas.  

Monitoring has been strengthened in general in Italy, and for protected areas the status assessment 
is  done  with  medium  to  high  confidence  in  most  cases.  While  groundwater  bodies  show  some 
improvement, notably in their chemical status, progress is not discernible in the status of surface 
water  bodies  associated  with  protected  areas  (Figure  5).  Furthermore,  for  a  large  majority  of 
protected areas information is not available on whether the specific objectives have been achieved 
or will be achieved by 2027.  

Figure 5. Progress in the state of water bodies associated with protected areas by 2016 and 2022 

6Link: 
http://www.minambiente.it/sites/default/files/archivio/allegati/trasparenza_valutazione_merito/Pianificazione_governo_terri
torio/linee_guida.pdf. 

17 

 
 
 
Source: WISE electronic reporting 

3.5 What is being done to prevent/reduce hydromorphological pressures 

Hydromorphological alterations are the third most significant pressure on surface water bodies in 
Italy, affecting almost half of surface water bodies. Italy has an authorisation and permitting regime 
in place to control physical modifications, including changes to the riparian area, but it is not clear 
whether the revision of such permits is periodical or if it is triggered by certain changes, for example 
changes in operations.  

Measures are planned to improve the hydromorphological conditions of water bodies, including for 
longitudinal continuity; to improve flow regimes and establish ecological flows; to establish natural 
water retention measures; and to reduce sediments from soil erosion and surface run-off. Integrated 
measures are foreseen to contribute to the achievement of objectives not only under WFD but also 
to address flood risks, protect and restore ecosystems and biodiversity and manage droughts.  

Guidelines to define and set e-flows were developed and are part of a ministerial decree published 
in 2017, which gives the river basin authorities the responsibility of setting (and implementing) e-
flows using that methodology in the third RBMPs. 

In  general,  nature-based  solutions  and  natural  water  retention  measures  are  included  in  the 
programmes  of  measures,  including  bank  maintenance  and  restoration,  water  retention  on 
floodplains, implementation of buffer strips and filter ecosystem along the natural and artificial water 
network in plains. However, in some cases proper application of the measures is hindered by lack of 
financing. By way of illustration, the Po River RBMP includes measures tackling hydromorphological 
pressures since the 1st RBMP, however it is only with the National Plan for Recovery and Resilience 
that funding has been earmarked for a River Po restoration project. This project includes measures 
to restore the ecological functions of water bodies, the reconnection of rivers and floodplain areas 
and  the  implementation  of  integrated measures to  contribute to  the  goals  of  different  Directives 
(WFD, Floods, Habitats, Birds, to mention a few).  

18 

 
 
3.6 What Italy is doing for abstractions and water scarcity 

Water scarcity and droughts are recognised as a serious issue in Italy.  

About  77%  of  the  groundwater  bodies  in  poor  quantitative  status  are  affected  by  significant 
abstraction pressures from public water supply, industry, agriculture, fish farms, hydropower, cooling 
water,  other  unspecified  sector,  as  well  as  from  alteration  to  groundwater  level  or  volume.  The 
remaining 23 % of groundwater bodies in poor quantitative status represent overexploited aquifers, 
where water abstraction used to be a significant pressure in the past, but that are now are slowly 
recovering. Furthermore, around three quarters of groundwater bodies at risk of failing to achieve 
good quantitative status by 2027 are reported as being affected by abstractions.  

Abstractions are also considered a significant pressure for about 26% of total surface water bodies 
and 21% of the surface water bodies in less than good ecological status or failing to achieve good 
chemical status are reported to be significantly affected by abstractions.  

According to data collected by the European Environment Agency7, in 2019 Italy abstracted about 
10174 million m3 of water from groundwater bodies and about 23322 million m3 from surface water 
(see Figure 6). Around half of the total water is abstracted by the agricultural sector, with public water 
supply and manufacturing sharing the rest. Overall total abstractions are down compared to a total 
of  almost  50000  million  m3  in  2000,  but  over  the  years  consumption  has  not  shown  a  steady 
downward trend. Worryingly, Italy suffers from aging infrastructure issues and a substantial amount 
of water is lost annually due to leakages: the average non-revenue water (including losses due to 
leakages, maintenance, street cleaning, firefighting) in Italy is 40% of total water, well above the EU 
average8.  

Figure 6. Water abstraction by economic sector in Italy 

Source: European Environment Agency 

Italy is making efforts to put in place the necessary structures to analyse the problem and to develop 
appropriate measures and to ensure coordination at national  level. National guidelines on how to 

7 Water abstraction by source, 2000-2019 — European Environment Agency (europa.eu), data sources include EEA own 
data as well as data from Eurostat and OECD. 
8 EurEau 2021 “Europe’s Water in Figures – An overview of the European drinking water and waste water sectors.  

19 

 
 
 
quantify  the  volumes  of  water  used for  irrigation  have  been developed  and a  recently  appointed 
Special Commissioner for the water crisis (Italian law n. 68/2023) is overseeing the exercise with the 
support  of  all  the  national  meteorological  and  climatological  bodies.  A  common  assessment  of 
pressure from water abstraction at the RBD and national levels has been conducted. This activity is 
also addressed by a specific group of the Committee for Technical Coordination of the RBD Permanent 
Observatories. 

The 3rd RBMPs include clear measures to address water abstraction. These measures focus on e-
flows,  control  of  abstraction,  water  efficiency,  drinking  water  protected  areas,  research,  and 
knowledge building. On efficiency in particular, Italy is one of the Member States that, under its CAP 
Strategic Plan, supports investment in the improvement of existing irrigation infrastructure and on-
farm irrigation installations to reduce losses and increase efficiency. To promote more sustainable 
water use Italy has also included an agri-environment-climate intervention in its CAP Strategic Plan 
which  provides  for  an  annual  payment  to  beneficiaries  who  accept  commitments  linked  to  the 
adoption of systems for the definition of a soil-plant-atmosphere water balance. The system defines 
the volume of water suitable for the proper development of the crop, to determine, for each irrigation 
operation, the volumes to be distributed in relation to the phenological phase of the crop and the 
seasonal climate trend, and thus optimize the efficient use of a scarce resource.  

The RBMPs also include measures to increase water supply in all RBDs through water reuse, both in 
agriculture and in industry, natural water retention measures/nature-based solutions and reservoirs. 
The development of new reservoirs has been gaining prominence in the national debate as a central 
solution to address water scarcity. It will be essential to ensure that any such intervention is part of 
a coherent strategy which takes effective measures to maximise storage in soils and ecosystems and 
to ensure efficient use of water. Such interventions should also carefully consider long-term climate 
scenarios to avoid maladaptation. When it comes to alternative water supplies, Italy does not mention 
desalinisation in the RBMPs assessed more in detail. Water reuse is mentioned, but little details are 
provided. According to estimates9, Italy has a large potential for water reuse: reclaimed water could 
contribute up to 47% of total irrigation demand. 

Italy has a concession, authorisation, and/or permitting regime to control surface and groundwater 
abstractions and impoundments. A register of abstraction and impoundments is in place in all RBDs, 
expect for Sicily where this is currently being compiled.  

Permits  or  concession  for  water  abstractions  are  issued,  as  required  by  the  law  (Royal  Decree 
17775/1993, art 21) for a fixed limited period, which is specified by the RBD authorities, depending 
on  the  type  of  use.  However,  abstraction  from  private  wells,  while  needing  to  be  registered,  are 
exempted from the permitting regime. Permits can be refused or revised under specific conditions, to 
maintain  or  achieve  the  environmental  objectives  in  the  RBMPs.  However,  some  permits  may  be 
granted for a period of up to 40 years. Unless such permits are subject to a regular and periodic 
review prior to the end of the fixed period, this period may be too lengthy to ensure the periodic 
review and possible update, as required by law, of the controls on abstractions.  

There is an explicit link between the implementation of e-flows and the authorisation process and/or 
review of permits to control water abstractions and impoundments. National authorities may conduct 

9 Impact assessment accompanying the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on 
minimum requirements for water reuse. 

20 

 
 
relevant sample checks after authorisation or targeted checks in response to complaints to prevent 
cases of unauthorised abstractions or violation of permit conditions.  

However,  the  issue  of  illegal  water  abstractions  in  agriculture  or  other  sectors  is  not  explicitly 
addressed or quantified and measures to tackle this issue are only sporadically mentioned in the 
RBMPs.  

A  National  Plan  for  Adaptation  to  Climate  Change  was  approved  on  21  December  2023  with 
Ministerial Decree n. 434 of the Ministry of the Environment. The Sicily RBMP, in particular, under the 
heading of drinking water protection measures, includes measures to strengthen abstraction controls 
from GWBs in areas at risk, to improve controls over abstractions from private wells, and to control 
the risk of desertification through supporting natural groundwater recharge. It also foresees studies 
to define measures for artificial groundwater recharge. 

3.7 Adaptation to climate change 

Severe droughts have been experienced more often and more intensely in Italy in the last couple of 
decades  a  consequences  of  climate  change.  In  recent  years  droughts  have  significantly  affected 
agricultural  production,  inland  water  navigation,  public  water  supply  and  energy  (thermal  and 
hydropower)  production.  Drought  impacts  are  set  to  further  increase  in  the  coming  years  as  the 
effects of climate change will be increasingly felt. 

Climate  change  considerations  and  adaptation  measures  have  been  included  in  all  the  RBMPs 
assessed  in  more  detail.  Moreover,  measures  are  reported  as  having  been  analysed  in  terms  of 
climate-proofing in all assessed RBMPs. However, the RBMPs include no information on the outcomes 
of these analysis and how this impacts the selection of measures.  

As noted in the sections above, the Permanent Observatories on Water Uses have been established 
in  each  RBD  and  they  coordinate  the management of  water  scarcity  and  drought events  through 
continuous monitoring of water use and governance and sharing of approaches to monitor and act 
upon  such  events.  While  no  direct  assessment  of  water  scarcity  and  drought  impacts  could  be 
identified in the RBMPs, climate change adaptation measures have been included in all the RBMPs 
assessed in more detail: the Po River (ITB), North Apennines (ITC) and Sicily (ITH) RBMPs.  

For the Po River RBD, the measures are linked to the national Climate Adaptation Plan and aim to 
improve water resource management including through more efficiency and control of abstractions, 
recharge, or augmentation, as well as actions to improve the hydromorphology of water bodies. A 
Drought Management Plan is being drafted.  

The North Apennines RBD has developed a water scarcity severity index which could be applied at 
national level, but there is no evidence of this index being used in other RBDs. Moreover, measures 
have been listed outlining their relevance for natural water retention measures and drought related 
objectives.  

The Sicily RBMP presents a Drought Management Plan which lists various measures to tackle drought 
and water scarcity, focusing primarily on water use efficiency and reduction in water consumption, as 
well monitoring  activities  intended to  inform  the  development  of indicators for  a  drought /  water 
scarcity alarm system. Other measures which are not directly included in the Drought Management 
Plan  include  actions  to  revise  parameters  for  ecological  flows,  and  the  review  of  permitting  and 
policies based on this definition. The measures listed have also been assessed for their alignment 

21 

 
with  the  National  Strategy  for  Climate  Change  Adaptation  and  the  Regional  Strategy  against 
Desertification.  

Art 4(6) has been used for five water bodies, while it was not used in the 2nd RBMP. These exemptions 
have been justified on grounds of natural causes, but no further details are available as regard the 
justifications to apply Article 4(6). 

As regards floods, flooding is also a common occurrence in Italy, with climate change exacerbating 
the issue. The Floods Directive requires to consider the impacts of climate change on the occurrence 
of floods, and therefore in the preparation of Flood Hazard and Risk Maps (FHRMs) and Flood Risk 
Management  Plans  (FRMPs).  More  information  on  these  can  be  found  in  Section  B.  However, 
considering the close relationship between overall water management and floods management and 
the importance of climate change effects on both, climate change effects are jointly addressed in this 
section. 

At the time of the first FHRMs, Italy did not report information on how climate change had been taken 
into account. For the second FHRMs, Italy has made some progress in this respect and reported that 
climate  change  was  considered  in  23  of  its  47  Units  of  Management  (UoMs).  However,  the 
methodological reports provide little information on how climate change was incorporated into the 
FHRMs: they mostly refer to ongoing research. 

All  five  FRMPs  refer  to  climate  impacts.  Four  of  the  five  plans  state  that  climate  change  was 
considered in developing their measures, though the detail provided vary across the plans. It was 
projected  that  the  temperature  of  the  Mediterranean  Sea  will  increase  by  about  2°C,  while 
temperatures on land may increase by up to 5°C and more in the coming decades (2041-2070)10. All 
the plans refer to an increasing risk of flash floods. The Central  Apennines plan states that these 
could also lead to increased risks of debris flow floods in some locations. Several FRMPs state that 
changes in land use, in particular ongoing soil sealing, can exacerbate the impacts of flash floods. 
Three of the second FRMPs refer to adaptation strategies and plans, and all mention projected climate 
change  impacts,  including  increasing  risks  of  flash  floods.  For  instance,  the  plan  for  Sicily  lists 
municipalities at risk of climate change impacts and those specifically at risk of flash floods. Four of 
the five second FRMPs assessed refer to measures to address climate impacts. 

4. Policy elements contributing to zero pollution 

4.1 Surface Water: what is their chemical status 

Monitoring 

Italy  has  improved  the  coverage  of  its  monitoring  network,  with  36%  of  all  water  bodies  now 
monitored  up  from  26%  in  the  2nd  RBMPS.  The  focus  of  monitoring  remains  primarily  on  rivers, 
covered by 80 % of all monitoring, while the next two water categories most monitored by number 
of water bodies covered are coastal water bodies and lakes. Besides monitoring, Italy supports the 
assessment of chemical status with expert judgement.  

Most priority substances are monitored (41 out of 45) at least in the Po River RBD, and the other 
RBMPs assessed in detail reported explicitly that 12 new substances, added to the Environmental 

10 FRMP for ITE, p. 123. 

22 

 
 
Quality Standard Directive in 2013, were included in the planning. Italy has published guidelines for 
assessing the long-term trend of priority substances that tend to accumulate in sediments and biota, 
as  required  by  the  EQS  Directive.  While  monitoring  of  the  20  priority  substances11  that  tend  to 
accumulate in sediment and/or biota is done less frequently than what recommended as a guideline 
in the EQS Directive, the coverage is fairly extensive with 16 substances out of 20 monitored for 
biota, and 15 out of 20 for sediments.  

Status classification  

Thanks to improved monitoring, Italy has made steady progress in the collection of data for chemical 
classification. The knowledge gap is becoming smaller, with only about 9 % of surface water bodies 
for which the status is still unknown.  

Figure 7 provides the chemical status classifications for all three rounds of RBMP reporting, as well 
as estimates for the status in 202712.  

Figure 7. Chemical status of surface water bodies in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd RBMPs  

SWB chemical status for IT

3rd

2nd

1st

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Good

Failing to achieve good

Unknown

Source: WISE electronic reporting  

Just over 75% of surface water bodies are in good chemical status, which represents some progress 
compared to the previous period. The higher proportion, compared to the 2nd RBMPs, of surface water 
bodies in poor chemical status (almost 16%) results from the fact that there are fewer water bodies 
in unknown status. Italy reported that almost 90% of surface water bodies are expected to be in 
good chemical status by 2027. For the remaining water bodies, about 6 % are expected to fail to 
reach good status by 2027, while the status of the remaining one is expected to remain unknown.  

11 Anthracene, brominated diphenylether, cadmium, C10-13 chloroalkanes, Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP), 
fluoranthene, hexachlorobenzene, hexabutadiene, hexachlorocyclohexane, lead, mercury, pentachlorobenzene, PAH, 
Tributyltin, dicofol, perfluorooctanesulphonic acid (PFOS), quinoxyfen, dioxins and furans, hexabromocyclododecane 
(HBCDD), and heptachlor and heptachlor epoxide. 
12 The missing data from the expected status in 2027, represents the electronic data for the Central Apennines RBD, 
which was not available at the time of this assessment.  

23 

 
 
 
The  substances  responsible  for  failing to  achieve good  chemical  status  vary by  RBD.  However,  at 
aggregated national level, as illustrated in Figures 8.a and 8.b, the main substances responsible for 
the failure to achieve good chemical status in Italy are uPBTs such as mercury, and polyaromatic 
hydrocarbons (PAHs), particularly benzo(a)pyrene and fluoranthene, affecting 6% and 4% of surface 
water bodies, respectively.  

Other substances causing failure to achieve good chemical status include heavy metals such as lead 
(3.5 %), nickel (3.1 %) and cadmium (1.7 %), perfluoro octane sulphonic acid (PFOS) (3.2 %), biocides 
such  as  tributyltin  (1.5  %),  and  hexachlorobenzene  (0.8  %).  Compared  to  other  Member  States, 
polybrominated diphenyl  ethers (PBDEs  – heavily used  in paints, plastics, foam furniture padding, 
textiles, building materials) are a lower concern for Italy and sit towards the bottom of the top ten 
pollutants. Many of these substances are a problem for only a few water bodies or are an issue in a 
specific RBD.  

Figure  8.a.  The  top-10  Priority  Substances  causing  failure  to  achieve  good  chemical  status  in  surface 
water bodies in Italy (legally required 33 Priority Substances) 

Figure  8.b.  The  top-10  Priority  Substances  causing  failure  to  achieve  good  chemical  status  in  surface 
water bodies in Italy (new 1-45 Priority Substances)13 

Source: WISE electronic reporting 

13 Directive 2008/105/EC as amended by Directive 2013/39/EU added 12 new substances i.e. numbered 34 to 45 to the 
priority substance list. For the 3rd RBMP, Member States have only had the obligation to monitor them. Compliance with 
the Environmental Quality Standard values for these 12 new priority substances will be assessed in 2027. 

24 

 
 
 
 
4.2 Groundwater Bodies: what is their chemical status 

Monitoring 

While  the  number  of  groundwater  bodies  has  decreased  compared  to  the  2nd  RBMPs,  due  to  re-
delineation, the total area has remained almost unchanged. Italy has made considerable efforts to 
improve monitoring, especially surveillance monitoring, with now almost 80% of groundwater bodies 
monitored  for  chemical  status.  Furthermore,  all  substances  set  out  in  the  Groundwater  Directive 
(GWD) Annex I and Annex II (Part B) substances and WFD Annex V (Point 2.4.2) core parameters) are 
monitored in all RBDs.  

Threshold  values  for  substances  are  set  nationally  taking  into  consideration  the  impacts  on 
groundwater  dependent  terrestrial  ecosystems  in  all  RBDs.  However,  impacts  on  groundwater 
associated surface water are considered only in five RBDs, while groundwater dependent terrestrial 
ecosystems, are considered only in four RBDs. This represents a weakness in the implementation of 
the assessment method.  

Finally, the impact on saline intrusion is considered in five RBDs, but not explicitly in Sicily. This is 
cause  for  concern,  given  that  this is  a Mediterranean  island, prone  to dry  conditions,  which  could 
make it vulnerable to saline intrusions. Nevertheless, studies are underway or are planned to define 
artificial recharge measures for groundwater bodies at risk, including to combat saline intrusions.  

Status classification 

Better and more comprehensive monitoring led to slightly higher confidence in the assessment of 
the chemical status of groundwater bodies (with over 74% of assessments done with high or medium 
confidence,  up  from  about  70%  in  the  2nd  RBMPs).  Moreover,  it  has  brought  the  number  of 
groundwater bodies in unknown status down from about 17% to just over 3% of the total.  

Figure 9 below illustrates the chemical status of groundwater, showing steady progress towards good 
status. In the 3rd RBMPs 70% of the total groundwater bodies are in good chemical status and 26.6 
% of total GWBs are in poor chemical status. More groundwater bodies are in poor status in this 
cycle, but this is due not to deterioration but to better knowledge with less water bodies in unknown 
status.  

Italy  expects  the  positive trend  to  continue,  with  almost  86%  of  groundwater  bodies  expected  to 
achieve good status by 2027. Nevertheless, almost 12% of groundwater bodies are expected to fail 
to reach good status by 2027, and for about 2% of groundwater bodies the expected status in 2027 
is unknown. Furthermore, the situation will need to be monitored closely as according to the data 
reported, 41% of groundwater bodies remains at risk of failing to achieve good status. 

25 

 
Figure 9. Chemical status of groundwater bodies in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd RBMPs 

GWB chemical status for IT

3rd

2nd

1st

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Good

Poor

Unknown

Source: WISE electronic reporting 

The three main pressures affecting groundwater bodies are diffuse pollution from agriculture (about 
24%), urban run-off (19.6%) and point pollution from contaminated sites or abandoned industrial 
sites (18.5%), translating into chemical and nutrient pollution as the two main impacts. As illustrated 
in Figure 10, the main pollutants causing failure to achieve good chemical status of groundwater 
bodies  are  nitrates,  trichloromethane,  chloride,  electrical  conductivity  (pollutant  indicator)  and 
sulphate.  

Figure 10.  Top-5  pollutants causing failure  to achieve  good chemical status in groundwater bodies by 
2021 

Source: WISE electronic reporting 

4.3 What Italy is doing to combat pollution from agriculture 

Diffuse pollution from agriculture, resulting in both chemical and nutrient pollution, is one of the main 
pressures affecting both surface (over a third of all water bodies) and groundwater bodies (about 
one quarter of all water bodies) in Italy.  

26 

 
 
Overall Italy has set for each RBMP measures to reduce both nutrient pollution and to reduce pesticide 
use. The measures respond to the specific pressures reported in the different areas, although the 
information provided in the RBMPs assessed in detail – except for the North Apennines RBD – is not 
sufficiently detailed to allow the Commission to assess the gaps and the ability of the measures to 
close the gap.  

In this respect, Italy has developed national guidelines on a methodology to conduct the gap analysis 
for all pressures to be used as a reference by all RBDs. However, these guidelines do not appear to 
have been consistently applied in every RBD. Noteworthy is the North Apennines RBMP, which provides 
a comprehensive gap analysis and details on how the measures will contribute to closing the gap to 
target, considering all pressures. The Po River and Sicily RBMPs report information on the analysis of 
gaps but in a less systematic and detailed fashion.  

All RBMPs assessed more in detail include measures to reduce both nutrients and pesticides pollution 
from  agriculture,  but  no  specific  load  reduction  targets  are  mentioned.  For  pesticide  pollution 
measures include better monitoring of water; specific measures reported under the National Action 
Plan  for  the  sustainable  use  of  phytosanitary  products;  actions  for  the  mitigation  of  agricultural 
impact;  application  of  the  measures  included  in  the  decree  governing  the  sustainable  use  of 
phytosanitary products14.  

As for nutrient pollution, the Commission opened an infringement case (INFR(2018)2249) calling on 
Italy over the insufficient protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural 
sources.  The  Italian  authorities’  answers  to  the  reasoned  opinion  issued  in  February  2023  are 
currently under assessment by the Commission’s services. 

However,  Italy  has  revised  between  2016  and  2023  the  regional  action  programmes  for  the 
implementation  of  the  Nitrates  Directive,  which  set  out  basic  measures  to  achieve  reductions  in 
nitrate pollution. Several regions have also revised their nitrate vulnerable zones, which are the areas 
draining into waters identified as polluted or that could be affected by nitrate pollution. Measures 
foreseen  by  the  RBMPs  cover  aspects  such  as  distances  from  watercourses  for  the  spreading  of 
farming effluents; limitations on slope spreading of livestock farming effluents; use of cover crops in 
the  winter;  shortening  of  the  periods  during  which  farming  effluents  incorporation  into  the  soil  is 
allowed. Further measures of relevance to both the Nitrates Directive and WFD include establishment 
or maintenance of buffer zones along watercourses; adaptation of farming practices; surveillance of 
manure  use;  implementation  of  techniques  to  treat  livestock  farming  effluent  and  to  encourage 
circular economy approaches; study and implementation of nature-based solutions.  

In its CAP Strategic Plan (2023-2027)15 Italy plans to increase support for farmers to maintain and 
convert to organic farming from the current 18% to 25% of the agricultural land by 202716. In its 
RBMPs, Italy has also planned several agri-environment-climate interventions, including a number of 
measures focusing on sustainable nutrient management for some RBDs, as well as measures to treat 
pollutant loads in effluent from livestock farming using phyto-treatment. Finally, Italy also includes 
in its RBMPs drinking water protection measures, the most relevant of which are about defining and 

14 Decree 150/2012 
15 Mapping and analysis of CAP strategic plans (2023-2027)  
16 At a glance: Italy's CAP Strategic Plan (europa.eu) and EU organic farming: 16.9 million hectares in 2022 - Eurostat 
(europa.eu) 

27 

 
 
managing drinking water safeguard areas, together with measures to establish water security plans 
and to limit the vulnerability of drinking water to pollution, including from nutrients and pesticides.  

The RBMPs provide some information on the status of implementation and on the funding of the 
different measures in these areas, albeit with different levels of details. The Po River RBMP reports 
what measures are maintained from the 2nd RBMP and on their status of implementation (about 73% 
are  reported  as  being  under  ongoing  implementation),  as  well  as  which  measures  have  been 
introduced with the 3rd RBMP. It reports information on estimated costs, but less details on financing. 
The North Apennines RBMPs is more systematic, reporting on which measures from the 2nd RBMP are 
maintained,  which  ones  are  new,  and  on  their  implementation  status.  It  also  provides  detailed 
information on costs, on whether funding is secured, implementation status for each measure and 
intervention. The Sicily RBMP reports that most of the measures have been maintained from the 2nd 
RBMP  and  provides  some details  on  costs  and  financing  but does  not  provide  information  on  the 
implementation status. 

The RBMPs also provide some information on transboundary cooperation and exchange of knowledge 
when it comes to international river basins, however it is noted that the areas in question are not 
concerned by significant nutrient pollution. Positive efforts are to be noted in establishing coordination 
with  the  farming  community,  but  only  little  information  is  provided,  with  the  Eastern  Alps  RBD 
reported as a positive example. 

4.4 What Italy is doing to combat pollution from other sectors 

Besides  agriculture,  there are  other  sectors  and  sources  that  contribute  significantly  to  point  and 
diffuse pollution of water bodies caused by nutrients, organic matter, sediments, saline discharges, 
and chemicals (priority substances, river basin specific pollutants, groundwater pollutants and other 
physico-chemical parameters). 

Italy has reported a variety of measures foreseen to tackle these non-agricultural pressures. These 
include  measures  to  construct  or  upgrade  wastewater  treatment  plants,  as  well  as  upgrades  or 
improvements of industrial wastewater treatment plants. Measures are also included to remediate 
contaminated sites, to phase out  emissions, discharges, and losses of Priority Substances, and to 
prevent or control pollution from urban areas, transport and built infrastructure. Measures to reduce 
surface run off and soil erosion are also mentioned.  

While national legislation requires all discharges to be authorised, Italy suffers from some deficits in 
the necessary water treatment infrastructure in some regions and lags behind the EU average in the 
implementation  of  the  Urban  Wastewater  Treatment  Directive. Only  56%  of  urban  wastewater  is 
treated in accordance with the EU requirements, but some progress can be discerned with a decrease 
in the proportion of water not meeting the requirements for biological treatment with nitrogen and 
phosphorus removal. This progress and the focus on measures to upgrade or build new treatment 
plants are a positive development. Further measures mentioned, although not described in great level 
of details, include better control of discharges; wastewater treatment for scattered households and 
small  settlements  and  better  collection  networks  for  unconnected  areas;  improving  efficiency  of 
existing treatment plants or upgrading them; construction of new treatment plants. The Commission 
is  addressing  the  problem  of  non-compliance  with  the  Urban  Wastewater  Treatment  Directive 
through four infringements which cover more than 850 agglomerations with a population equivalent 
of over 26.7 million. As of September 2024, Italy has been asked to pay in total almost 143 million 

28 

 
EUR in fines. Despite the appointment of a Special Commissioner, there has been only limited progress 
in recent years in reducing the number of agglomerations non-compliant with the Directive. 

The information provided in the RBMPs linking drivers, pressures and measures varies between RBDs. 
While it appears that not all priority substances are consistently addressed by relevant measures in 
all RBDs, there seems to be overall a good effort in linking drivers, pressures, and related measures. 
Similarly, on the basis of the information available, it is not clear to what extent the measures will 
contribute to closing the gap in implementation. An exception is the North Apennines RBMP, where 
clear information is presented on the role the measures will play in closing the gap, although the 
information covers all measures and does not necessarily focus only on non-agricultural pressures.  

4.5 What Italy is doing to combat significant pressures – overall 

assessment of the Programmes of Measures 

Besides more specific action to tackle pollution from agriculture and other sources, measures are 
planned to address all significant pressures in both groundwater and surface water, with at least one 
Key Type of Measure (KTM) assigned to each pressure. Operational KTMs are also linked to many 
individual substances, including River Basin Specific Pollutants and priority substances (e.g. pesticides, 
fungicides, heavy metals). 

The RBMPs map a total of 1962 basic measures and 380 supplementary measures against KTMs. 
Overall, the information reported electronically, which was available at the time of this assessment, 
show  that the  Italian programmes  of measures  address  all pressures  and  set  measures  that  are 
often applicable in at least six of the seven RBMPs. Apart from measures to address diffuse pollution 
and point source pollution, the programmes of measures also include measures to address various 
hydromorphological  pressures,  invasive  alien  species,  wastewater  treatment  (both  household  and 
industrial) and to limit erosion. The programmes of measures include water pricing measures for the 
recovery of costs for some sectors, but not for agriculture. Similarly, measures to directly address 
abstractions and diversions appear to be planned in only one RBD.  

In the 3rd RBMPs analysed more in detail, some information on costs and source of funding have 
been explicitly associated to the KTM, but this information is not always complete. In these RBDs the 
estimate costs for the implementation of the measures range from almost 3 billion to over 7 billion 
euro. In the case of the North Apennines RBD, only about 47.6% of the total estimated has secured 
financing. It is to be noted however, that Italy’s Recovery and Resilience Plan of EUR 194 billion (the 
largest  in  the  EU)  is  structured  around seven  missions  including  one  on the green  revolution  and 
ecological transition, with investments planned to improve waste and water management.  

Not all RBMPs provide complete information on gap indicators for all significant pressures and on 
how  measures  are  prioritised.  Similarly,  the  information  on  the  state  of  implementation  of  the 
measures planned under the 2nd RBMPs is not always complete.  

Where there has been lack of progress in the achievement of objectives, this has been attributed to 
the obstacles set out in Table 4. 

29 

 
Table 4. Obstacles to progress in the achievement of PoM objectives between the 2nd and 3rd RBMPs 

Obstacle 

Governance 

Delays 

Lack of Finance 

Lack of Mechanism 

Lack of Measures 

Measures not cost effective 

Extreme Events 

Other: Covid Pandemic  

Number of RBDs 

4 

6 

6 

4 

1 

1 

4 

1 

Overall Italy has made progress in associating measures to pressures, but the approaches to cost 
effectiveness  and  prioritisation  of  measures  vary  between  RBDs.  For  example,  the  Po  River  RBDs 
reported that the cost effectiveness analysis is still ongoing,  although the cost per KTM has been 
provided. The Sicily RBMP also reports costs of measures, but does not provide any information on 
cost-effectiveness, while the North Apennines RBMPs report detailed information on the methodology 
used and on how measures have been selected based on cost-effectiveness. Moreover, information 
on the gap analysis and on the state of implementation is insufficient or unclear, making it difficult 
for to assess whether the programme of measures will be effective in reaching the objectives. 

5. Exemptions and economics 

5.1 To what extent are exemptions applied in Italy 

Environmental objectives and exemptions  

WFD allows for some exemptions where necessary, but these should be used only where absolutely 
necessary  and  be  properly  justified.  Italy  has  made  efforts  to  better  justify  exemptions  in  the 
management of its waters: the RBMPs include the grounds on which exemptions are applied, per 
water  body,  and  provide  more  information  than  in  the  2nd  RBMPs  to  justify  such  exemptions. 
Nevertheless, Italy’s RBMPs would benefit from a more systematic provision of information across 
RBMPs  and  from  strengthened  analyses  in  relation  to  disproportionate  costs17.  Table  5  lists  the 
exemptions reported.  

Table 5. Articles 4(4) (time related exemptions) and 4(5) (lowered objectives) exemptions reported 

Article  Justification 

SW ecological 
status 

SW chemical 
status  

GW quantitative 
status 

GW chemical 
status 

4(4) 

Technical feasibility 

24.6 % 

11 % 

11.3 % 

12 % 

17 National guidelines on disproportionate costs were published in September 2021.  

30 

 
 
4(4) 

Disproportionate costs 

6.4 % 

3.5 % 

7.7 % 

4(4) 

Natural conditions 

11.4 % 

6.7 % 

5.3 % 

4(5) 

Technical feasibility 

9.2 % 

0.3 % 

0.1 % 

4(5) 

Disproportionate costs 

9.4 % 

0.03 % 

/ 

5.5 % 

12 % 

1.9 % 

2 % 

The main significant pressures on surface water bodies requiring the use of exemptions in relation 
to  chemical  status  are  linked  to  urban  wastewater,  diffuse  agriculture,  urban  run-off,  and 
contaminated sites or abandoned industrial sites, resulting in chemical and nutrient pollution. Diffuse 
agriculture, urban run-off and contaminated sites or abandoned industrial sites are also the main 
significant pressures that require the use of exemptions for chemical status for groundwater bodies.  

Exemptions under Article 4(6) (temporary deterioration as a result of ‘force majeure’) are applied for 
five surface water bodies: this was not the case in the 2nd RBMPs. No information is provided on the 
justification, except that it is justified on grounds of natural causes.  

Exemptions under Article 4(7) (deterioration or prevention from achieving good status/potential as a 
result of new modifications or new sustainable human development activities) are foreseen for five 
surface water bodies in the Po River RBD. The Article 4(7) conditions will be assessed as part of an 
Environmental  Impact  Assessment  procedure.  Italy  has  provided  information  on  the  criteria  and 
methods to identify and finance priority projects: as part of this procedure the RBD authorities have 
to verify if the Article 4(7) conditions are met. The same principle of verifying compliance with Article 
4(7) conditions are also integrated in the national decree setting out a national plan for infrastructure 
and safety in the water sector, as well as in guidelines to evaluate investments in public works. 

5.2 Use of economic analysis and water pricing – cost recovery 

Italy has made  efforts to harmonise the economic analysis through national  laws and guidelines. 
However,  there  remains  significant  gaps  in  the  implementation  and  the  quality  of  the  economic 
analysis varies considerably across the RBMPs. Some of the RBMPs assessed in more details provide 
good examples of what can and should be reported, indicating potential for peer-to-peer learning. 

The RBMPs do not generally include long term forecasts of water demand and supply and related 
investment  needs  beyond  2027.  In  some  cases  general  estimates  of  sectoral  water  demand  are 
reported, but not systematically. While the major water uses are usually listed, the water services 
tend not to be clearly identified. Significant differences in the data analysis on water services can still 
be observed across the country, especially as regards the data on financial cost and revenues.  

Similarly, it appears that cost recovery rates have not been calculated in any systematic fashion and 
concurrently there is no systematic reporting on the factors mitigating the cost recovery efforts, as 
listed in Article 9 of WFD, nor on whether the contribution by the various water uses and water user 
sectors can be considered adequate.  

31 

 
While the costings of relevant measures is generally reported, the RBMPs appear to differ as regards 
the use of cost effectiveness analysis to guide the selection of new measures for the Programmes 
of Measures.  

ARERA, the Italian Regulatory Authority for Energy, Networks, and the Environment, performs two key 
regulatory  tasks  for  the  water  sector.  First,  it  defines  and  regularly  updates  the  method  for 
determining the tariffs for water supply and sanitation services. Through caps on cost components 
and on revenue, it aims to achieve full cost recovery at an efficient level, also balancing guarantees 
on  quality  with  arrangements  to  ensure  affordability  for  vulnerable  households  through  rebates 
financed by redistribution across water utilities18. Second, ARERA approves the tariffs proposed by the 
competent authorities from the various regions. The various RBMPs report in different ways on the 
price methodology and the regulatory price setting procedure, from a detailed description to just a 
general reference made to ARERA. The latter does not do justice on the local conditions that inform 
the price setting. 

Current pricing structure provide some incentives for a more efficient water use, but the  assessed 
RBMPs tend not to assess in detail whether the level of incentives can be considered adequate. A 
positive  exception  is  found  in  the  North  Apennines  RBMPs:  in  addition  to  references  made  to  the 
national methodology for calculating tariffs, the level of incentive provided by water tariffs is explicitly 
stated.  

However, the information in the RBMPs suggest a fair level of price incentives with a potential for 
further improvement. Drinking water supply prices can be adapted in different RBDs depending on 
treatment and distribution costs, which in turn depend on water availability and status. However, the 
RBMPs do not report water scarcity considerations in the modulation of prices. There does not appear 
to  be  a  nationally  set  pricing  framework  for  irrigation,  and  hence  irrigation  water  schemes  vary 
considerably  between  RBDs.  Abstraction  charges  are  in  place  in  every  RBD19,  and  all  permits  are 
issued against a fee based on the volumes abstracted, but the fee appears to be based on estimates 
rather than on metering. Neither pollution charges, nor water storage service charges appear to have 
been set in Italy. 

A cost-based approach is used to estimate environmental and resource costs: they are assumed to 
be equal to the costs of the pollution abatement and prevention measures. However, the different 
RBMPs do not provide further details on the national methodology that needs to be applied  or an 
account  on  the  actual  estimates.  Furthermore,  difficulties  are  reported  regarding  the  practical 
application  of  the  polluter  pays  principle  (no  pollution  charges  reported).  As  multiple  pressures 
determine the status of the same water body, determining the share of responsibilities is difficult. As 
a result, only a general assurance of the application of the polluter-pays principle is provided. 

6. WFD recommendations 

Recommendations - Italy should: 

18 https://www.wareg.org/documents/energy-report-wareg/ 
19 Abstraction from private wells, while needing to be registered, are exempted from the permitting and charge regime. 

32 

 
 
1.  accelerate action and enhance the overall level of ambition to reduce the compliance gap as much as 

possible to reach compliance by 2027. This will require the following:  

a. 

b. 

c. 

d. 

Italy should ensure that the consumptive use of surface water and groundwater for all uses 
is reported. The RBMPs should include clear estimates on consumptive uses, their share, and 
the  respective  trends.  Furthermore,  Italy  should  more  forcefully  address  illegal  water 
abstractions  in  agriculture  or  other  sectors  through  closer  monitoring  and  more  effective 
penalties. 

Italy  should  ensure  full  compliance  with  WFD  provisions  related  to  periodic  review  of 
permits/controls  for  all  relevant  activities  impacting  water  bodies  (including  abstraction, 
impoundment, discharges, works impacting hydromorphology) and effective, dissuasive, and 
proportionate  sanction  regimes.  Italy  should  consider,  where  applicable,  revising  existing 
legislation  exempting  small  abstractions  from  permitting  to  better  manage  cumulative 
impacts. 

Italy should harmonize the gaps analysis of the different river basin management plans to 
create more transparency for stakeholders and comparability among the regions and to better 
target the measures needed to close the gap in 2027. In particular, Italy should transparently 
estimate nutrients and pesticide pollution reduction targets. 

Italy should keep up the good work in coordinating measures with the authorities in charge 
of the Floods Directive. Italy should however strengthen the coordination with the authorities 
in charge of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, which would contribute to accelerate 
progress  in  achieving  the  status  requirements  in  both  the  freshwater  and  marine 
environments by better exploiting possible synergies. 

e. 

Italy  should  tackle  decisively  obstacles  identified  in  the  implementation  of  measures,  in 
particular insufficient funding, or administrative resources, where relevant. 

2. 

identify  and  put  in  place,  as  appropriate,  additional  measures  to  reduce  existing  persistent 
environmental challenges (pressures) and make full use of the instruments agreed in the context of 
the European Green Deal to join up implementation efforts and increase effectiveness and efficiency. 
In particular:  

a. 

b. 

c. 

Italy  should  systematically  provide  more  complete  information  on  the  status  of 
implementation of the measures. 

Italy should continue the ongoing work to transition from minimum flow to the e-flow regime 
as established in the guidelines established in 2017 and ensure their proper implementation. 
Italy should also strengthen its efforts towards improving river continuity and restoring water 
bodies  to  a  natural  state,  maximising  efforts  to  deploy  nature-based  solutions  wherever 
possible. 

Italy should address its high level of artificialisation by ensuring the planned measures to 
improve  hydromorphology  are  properly  applied  in  all  affected  water  bodies,  including  for 
achieving good potential for its heavily modified and artificial water bodies. In particular, Italy 
should privilege nature-based solutions where feasible to improve the hydromorphology of 

33 

 
d. 

e. 

f. 

its  water  bodies  and  systematically  assess  the  cumulative  impacts  of  projects  that  may 
impact water bodies. 

Italy should keep up efforts to address persistent challenges linked to nutrient and chemical 
pollution from agricultural or urban and industrial sources, including by closing the gaps in 
implementation of the Urban Wastewater Treatment and the Nitrates directives. Furthermore, 
Italy should provide more exhaustive information on the measures planned to better control 
discharges;  address  wastewater  discharges  from  scattered  households  and  unconnected 
small settlements and improve wastewater management throughout its territory.  

Italy should ensure that the ongoing work to establish a register of abstractions from surface 
water and groundwater and a register of impoundments is completed for the Sicily RBD. 

Italy should continue improving the work on protected areas, notably to establish the status 
of water bodies associated with protected areas that are still unknown and investigating and 
reporting  the  reasons  why  objectives  have  not  been  met,  to  establish  possible  additional 
needs and measures. 

3. 

improve its economic analysis, addressing gaps as regards key items, including on long term supply 
and demand forecasts, better defining water services, reporting of cost recovery rates, and investment 
needs. It should also ensure that good practices in some RBDs are adopted more consistently across 
RBDs to allow for comparison. In particular, Italy should: 

a.  strengthen its analysis of water demand and supply and develop long-term investment plans, 

ensuring adequate funding to effectively implement the planned measures. 

b.  enhance its efforts towards full application of the cost recovery principle to all water use 

activities that have an impact on water bodies.  

c. 

systematically provide more information on the way water tariffs are set and better analyse 
whether they provide sufficient incentives towards more efficient water use. 

4.  keep up the progress made in the application of exemptions, ensuring continued efforts to transparently 
justify every exemption in all RBDs, in line with ECJ jurisprudence on the restrictive interpretation of 
exemptions. When it comes to the use of Article 4(7) in relation to new projects, it is important that 
specific details are provided on cumulative effects and on the assessment of better environmental 
options, and the measures taken to mitigate the adverse impacts of new developments. In particular, 
Italy  should  strengthen  its  assessment  of  disproportionate  costs  in  the  context  of  Article  4(5) 
exemptions. 

5.  sustain  efforts  to  increase  its  resilience  to  climate  change  including  by  systematically  considering 
nature-based solutions to increase water retention and balancing its adaptation needs against the 
impacts on hydromorphology that grey infrastructure may entail. Moreover, Italy should:  

a.  ensure  that  consideration  of  saline  or  other  intrusions,  and  of  impacts  on  groundwater 
dependent  ecosystems  and  groundwater  associated  surface  waters  are  consistently 
considered in all RBDs when assessing the quantitative and chemical status of groundwater 
bodies.  

34 

 
b. 

continue pursuing the ongoing work to integrate the National Strategy for Climate Change 
Adaptation within the RBMPs planning process, thus ensuring the necessary measures are 
integrated in the programmes of measures. 

c.  ensure that any intervention to create new reservoirs is part of a coherent strategy which 
takes effective measures to maximise storage in soils and ecosystems and to ensure efficient 
use of water, including through more systematic reuse of treated wastewater where relevant, 
carefully considering long-term climate scenarios to avoid maladaptation. 

6.  keep up the good work done to improve monitoring, assessment, data management and reporting. 

Italy has made considerable progress in this regard, and it should: 

a. 

b. 

c. 

further strengthen the application of the national methodology to define significant pressures, 
across RBDs, and limit reliance on expert judgement. 

continue progressing on setting type-specific reference conditions where these have not yet 
been  set,  especially  as  regards  hydromorphological  quality  elements  for  transitional  and 
coastal waters and for physico-chemical quality elements for rivers and lakes.  

further  strengthen  monitoring,  to  improve  the  geographic  coverage  and  the  parameters 
covered, and thus assess the status of water bodies in unknown status and further increase 
the level of confidence in the status assessments, limiting reliance on expert judgement. In 
particular, Italy should improve the monitoring and the inventories of Priority Substances, 
including as regards the frequency of monitoring of such substances in sediments or biota.  

d.  ensure that all details on hydromorphological standards and their consistency with the good-
moderate class boundaries for sensitive biological quality elements are properly reported in 
its  RBMPs.  Moreover,  Italy  should  ensure  that  all  quality  elements,  and  particularly  the 
hydromorphological quality elements, are  consistently used when assessing the ecological 
status or potential of water bodies.  

e.  provide  more  information  in  the  RBMPs  regarding  the  selection  of  River  Basin  Specific 

Pollutants and the use of EQS. 

f. 

ensure gap assessment for diffuse pollutant loads from agriculture (nutrients, agri-chemicals, 
sediment, organic matter) are conducted comprehensively and in a more homogeneous way 
across RBDs, and that the information is comprehensively reported in the RBMPs, to facilitate 
comparison and progress towards the achievement of the WFD objectives.  

35 

 
 
 
SECTION B: 
FLOODS DIRECTIVE 

36 

 
 
 
7. Flood risk management under floods directive (FD) 

The  Floods  Directive  requires  each  Member  State  to  scan  its  territory  for  flood  risks;  assess  the 
potential adverse consequences of future floods for human health, the environment, cultural heritage 
and economic activity; identify the significant risks; map the flood extent and the potential adverse 
consequences; and take measures to reduce the flood risk. These activities are reflected in (a) the 
preliminary  flood  risk  assessments,  or  PFRAs  (including  the  identification  of  areas  of  potential 
significant flood risk, or APSFRs), (b) the preparation of flood hazard and risk maps, or FHRMs, and (c) 
the establishment of flood risk management plans, or FRMPs. The preliminary assessments, mapping 
and planning for flood risk are repeated in six-yearly cycles. 

There are 47 Units of Management (UoMs) in Italy. The two UoMs for the islands of Sardinia and 
Sicily  correspond  to  the  River  Basin  Districts  (RBDs)  under  the  Water  Framework  Directive  (WFD). 
Italy’s other 45 UoMs are sub-basins of the 5 RBDs designated for mainland Italy.  

Fluvial,  pluvial,  sea  water,  Artificial  Water  Bearing  Infrastructure,  and  other  types  of  floods  are 
considered as potentially significant sources of flooding in Italy. Italy has designated 3748 Areas of 
Potential  Significant  Flood  Risk  (APSFRs).  The  impacts  of  climate  change  on  flood  risk  have  been 
considered in Italy at the time of the second preliminary flood risk assessment. The methodological 
reports published by the river basin district authorities refer to the 2013 EU Adaptation Strategy and 
to Italy’s 2015 National Strategy for Adaptation to Climate Change: the latter notes that an increase 
in extreme meteorological events is likely, including intense precipitation episodes, that can lead to 
higher risks of flash floods and debris flow. The reports also refer to the ongoing expansion of soil 
sealing across the country. 

37 

 
 
7.1 Flood hazard and risk maps 

Italy uses a national map viewer20 for their FHRMs. The FHRMs cover all 47 UoMs, but the FHRMs 
methodological reports have been prepared at the level of the seven RBDs21. Maps for floods with 
low probability (1/1 000 years), with medium probability (1/100 years) and with high probability (1/10 
years) are provided. The return periods used are different across the RBDs and the UoMs within RBDs. 
All maps show: flood extent; water depth; and number of inhabitants. The map portal provides, in a 
text box available for each APSFR, information on the types of economic activities found there, using 
four broad categories. In addition, a map layer of the number of enterprises is available on the map 
portal, though it does not indicate the types of economic activity. The number of IED / Integrated 
Pollution  Prevention  and  Control  (IPPC)  installations  affected  is  indicated  in  each  APSFR  for  each 
probability scenario, but their locations are not shown in the maps22. Potentially affected protected 
areas identified in Annex IV(1)(i), (iii) and (v) to Directive 2000/60/EC are shown in the maps on the 
national map portal; in each APSFR information on the number of these areas is available, in text 
form.  

At  the  time  of  the  first  FHRMs,  the  Italian  maps  that  were  reviewed  did  not  show  the  sources, 
mechanisms or characteristics of flooding. Among the sources, fluvial, pluvial, and coastal sources 
were  assessed  for  some  UoMs,  but  not  in  others  (information  was  not  found  concerning  the 
assessment of flood mechanisms or characteristics in the first FHRMs).  

In the second FHRMs, it is clear that sources, mechanisms and characteristics were assessed and 
information on all three is provided on the national web portal at APSFR level. The methodological 
reports provide a general overview of the work to update the FHRMs, describing new studies, data, 
and modelling. Nonetheless, all reports mention new work on fluvial flooding, and several refer to 
new work on coastal flooding. 

The  contextual  information  (i.e.  the  way in  which information  about the maps  is  conveyed  to the 
public)  has  been  improved  since  the  first  FHRMs.  In  the  second  FHRMs,  the  national  map  portal 
contains all the information produced at RBD level. Previously, FHRMs were prepared at the UoM level, 
and they varied widely in approach and in the quality of the information reported. The maps also 
ranged in format from sophisticated GIS viewers to basic web interfaces to PDF files. The first FHRMs 
did not include hazard elements such as flood sources, mechanisms, and characteristics. Additionally, 
only a few maps displayed information such as water depths, levels, flow velocity, relevant water 
flows, and flood hazard and flood risk on the same map. The current map portal includes all of this 
information. Concerning risks, the maps showed population data, risks to economic activities, and 
risks  to  areas  protected  under  the  WFD  and  other  Directives.  Furthermore,  potential  adverse 
consequences  on  human  health,  economic  activity  sectors,  pollution  sources,  as  well  as  cultural 
heritage sites. The current map portal covers all of the elements mentioned above.  

When it comes to the methodologies used to prepare flood hazard maps, in the first FHRMs, Italy 
prepared maps for fluvial and coastal floods. Pluvial floods and floods from artificial water bearing 

20 Available at: http://www.pcn.minambiente.it/viewer/. Italy’s map viewer was accessed on several dates in late 
September and in early October 2023. 
21 Italy noted that the UoMs are the traditional territorial units at which flood risk in Italy is managed. The RBD is the level 
at which flood risk management is coordinated. The UoMs are aggregations of river basins with specific characteristics 
such as morphological, geological, or hydrological ones, and that makes each UoM the most appropriate physical unit 
within which the study of water dynamics and flood risk makes sense. 
22 Italy explained that at national level, the presence (number) of exposed elements in an APSFR was considered relevant.  

38 

 
 
infrastructure  were  also  assessed  but  not  necessarily  specifically  mapped  (the  European 
Commission’s  assessment  of  Italy’s  first  FHRMs  identifies  two  UoMs  where  pluvial  floods  were 
mapped). In the second FHRMs, all four sources were mapped, though only fluvial floods were mapped 
in all UoMs.  

In the background documents, methodological information was found for fluvial and coastal floods, 
but not pluvial floods or floods from artificial water bearing infrastructure. In the first FHRMs, the UoM 
maps assessed by the European Commission all showed low, medium, and high scenarios, but each 
map had a range of different return periods for these scenarios. This variety of return periods remains 
in the second FHRMs, while some UoMs used the same return periods in the first and second FHRMs. 
Other UoMs, reported different return periods across the first and second FHRMs. In the first FHRMs, 
maps were prepared by a range of authorities at different levels of governance. Also, it appears that 
fluvial and pluvial floods were considered together, though this was not clearly explained or shown, 
and coastal floods were only identified for a few UoMs. For the second FHRMs, the map portal provides 
an overall national approach for the presentation of maps, and the RBD methodological reports follow 
a common outline, indicating that there was greater coordination at RBD level. 

The methodology used for the second FHRMs appears to remain largely unchanged compared to the 
first FHRMs, based on the same main data sources, such as national statistical data for population, 
Corine Land Cover data for economic activity and E-PRTR data for IED installations. The first cycle 
flood  risk  maps  themselves  were  prepared  at  UoM  level,  however,  and  the  extent  of  information 
provided on risk elements varied (consequently, the methodology reported at the time was not fully 
applied across the first risk maps). All but one of the seven first UoM risk maps assessed showed the 
number of inhabitants potentially affected, IED installations and cultural heritage sites, and these are 
now  featured  across  all  of  the  national  map  portal.  Only  two  of  the  first  seven  UoM  risk  maps 
assessed showed WFD protected areas, now a feature across all of the national map portal. None of 
the first UoM risk maps assessed showed the type and sectors of economic activity or environmental 
consequences such as status of water bodies or significant sources of pollution; these risk elements 
are partly shown on the second cycle flood risk maps available in the portal.  

As regards the consideration of climate change effects in the preparation of flood hazard and risk 
maps, reference is made to section 3.7 on ‘adaptation to climate change’. 

7.2 Flood risk management plans 

Objectives and measures 

A  webpage  of  the  national  Institute  for  Environmental  Protection  and  Research  (ISPRA,  Istituto 
Superiore per la Protezione e la Ricerca Ambientale) provides links to the webpages23 of the RBD 
authorities, from where the second FRMPs can be downloaded.  

The five FRMPs assessed all set objectives to reduce the adverse effects and/or the risks of floods. 
Four of the five FRMPs assessed have objectives that call for the reduction of adverse consequences 
of flooding. The fifth FRMP, for the Po RBD, has strategic objectives that include defending cities and 
metropolitan areas from flooding, which should reduce adverse consequences. The FRMP for the Po 
RBD also has a strategic objective to improve knowledge of flood risk, and the FRMP for the Sicily 
RBD  has  a  ‘generic’  objective  to  improve  knowledge  of  flood  hazard  and  risk  and  to  promote 

23 https://www.isprambiente.gov.it/pre_meteo/idro/Piani_gest.html  

39 

 
 
sustainable land use, as well as a ‘strategic’ objective for urban planning. Four of the five FRMPs have 
objectives that refer to potential adverse consequences to human health, to economic activity, to the 
environment and to cultural heritage.  

All five FRMPs assessed have programmes of measures, and Italy has reported a total of 10 560 
measures for all seven RBDs and all 47 UoMs within the RBDs. The FRMPs assessed refer to a national 
multi-criteria assessment methodology for prioritising measures. Italy has identified the priorities for 
all  measures  reported  to  EIONET.  Three  of  the  five  FRMPs  assessed  discuss  the  progress  of 
implementation of the measures under the first FRMPs. The five FRMPs assessed provide information 
on  the  costs  of  all  or  most  of  their  measures.  Three  FRMPs  provide  the  total  budgets  for  their 
measures. The five FRMPs discuss cost-benefit analysis (CBA), and one presents a pilot case, but none 
indicates that CBA was used for its measures.  

All five FRMPs have measures for land use and spatial planning. Four of the five FRMPs have sub-
objectives that call to reduce adverse consequences and/or flood risks for protected areas including 
Natura  2000  sites.  All  five  FRMPs  include  measures  for  natural  water  retention.  The  Po  FRMP  in 
addition has an objective to provide space for rivers. The Sicily FRMP has an objective calling for river 
restoration. All five FRMPs identify ‘win-win’ measures that support WFD objectives as well as flood 
risk management and Italy reported to EIONET WFD measures and codes for some of its measures. 
The  multi-criteria  prioritisation  method  includes  the  reduction  of  risk  for  WFD  water  bodies,  with 
scores linked to the ecological status of the water bodies. 

All  five  FRMPs  include  prevention,  protection  measures  and  preparedness  measures.  In  particular, 
Italy  reported  to  EIONET:  3 926  prevention  measures;  3 887  protection  measures;  and  2 244 
preparedness measures. 

Three of the second FRMPs assessed report on progress in the implementation of the measures. The 
FRMPs assessed, however, provide little information on the progress towards the achievement of the 
objectives  of  the  first  plans.  Three  of  the  second  FRMPs  assessed  discuss  the  progress  of 
implementation of the measures under the first plans. The plan for the Po (ITB)24 states generally 
that the measures implemented have supported the objectives of the Floods Directive, though it does 
not refer to progress towards the objectives of the first FRMPs. The second FRMPs for the Central 
Apennines (ITE) and the Southern Apennines (ITF) provide overviews of the progress of the measures 
in the first FRMPs. While the second plan for the Central Apennines (ITE) does not mention progress 
towards the objectives of the first FRMP, the second plan for the Southern Apennines (ITF) states that 
delays in the implementation of the measures under the first FRMP have delayed the achievement 
of the objectives25. No information on progress was found in the second FRMP for the Eastern Alps 
(ITA),  while  the  second  FRMP  for  Sicily  (ITH)26  states  the  timeframe  of  the  first  plan,  which  was 
approved in 2019, does not allow an assessment of the progress towards its objectives. While two 
of  the  second  FRMPs  assessed  provide  some  information  linking  their  objectives  to  types  of 
measures, in general the objectives remain not fully specific and not measurable.  

Italy  reported  information  on  the  progress  of  implementation  of  measures  in  their  reporting  to 
EIONET.  A  significant  portion  of  the  measures  were  reported  as  abandoned/interrupted  (4 197 
measures, 40 % of all measures). Of the remaining measures, 17 % (1 763 measures) were reported 

24 FRMP ITB, Chapter 5.2, pp. 80-81. 
25 FRMP ITF, Chapter 5.2, p. 119. 
26 FRMP ITH, Chapter 5.2, p. 52. 

40 

 
 
as undergoing ongoing construction, 13 % (1 406 measures) were reported as completed, and 12 % 
(1 267  measures)  were  reported  as  not  started.  Nine  percent  of  measures  were  reported  as  in 
preparation (967) while another 9 % were reported as ongoing (recurrent works).  

More  than  half  of  the  prevention  measures  (52  %,  2 039  measures)  were  reported  as 
abandoned/interrupted, the highest share of any measure aspect. Almost half of the recovery and 
review  measures  were  reported  as  ongoing  (recurrent)  (47  %,  231  measures),  while  28  %  of 
preparedness measures were thus reported (639 measures – the highest progress category of all 
preparedness  measures).  A  significant  share  of  protection  measures  was  undergoing  ongoing 
construction  (19  %  or  737  measures,  noting  that  40  %  or  1 517  measures  were  reported  as 
abandoned/interrupted.  More  than  half  of  the  13  ‘other’  measures  were  reported  as  complete  (7 
measures, 54 %), the highest share of any measure aspect.  

While  a  high  share  of  Italy’s  measures  is  reported  as  abandoned/interrupted,  a  sample  of  their 
measure  descriptions  suggests  that  the  vast  majority  were  integrated  in  other  measures  or 
substituted by other measures. It appears that some measures have been abandoned or interrupted 
because  they  have  been  assessed  as  unfeasible  in  light  of  situations  that  prevent  their 
implementation, no longer convenient, or they have been judged not to be a priority. In other cases, 
measures have been grouped or included in similar ones especially when the measure were applied 
to the same geographic coverage. The lists of measures for the five FRMPs assessed include a column 
for the progress of the measures, using the EIONET categories. These lists also indicate that many 
abandoned or interrupted measures have been continued under other measures. The Po FRMP (ITB) 
provides an overview of the measures under the first FRMPs for the RBD: for example, for measures 
undertaken at regional level, 27 % were completed, 40 % were ongoing in one form or another, 1 % 
not started, and 32 % abandoned/interrupted. The FRMP indicates that the abandoned/interrupted 
measures include those consolidated or merged into new RBD-level measures, those combined into 
new regional-level measures, those incorporated into other ongoing measures; and those linked to 
other  planning  instruments,  including  the  Plan  of  Hydrogeological  Status  (PAI,  Piano  di  Assetto 
Idrogeologico) and regional legislation, and thus are being implemented under these frameworks27. 

Climate change considerations 

As regards the consideration of climate change effects in the preparation of flood risk management 
plans, reference is made to section 3.7 on ‘adaptation to climate change’. 

Governance 

Two FRMPs within international river basins - for the Eastern Alps and the Po – do not provide details 
on topics for coordination. Italy reported to EIONET that coordination has taken place at international 
level for three UoMs in the Eastern Alps RBD (Adige, Isonzo, and Regionale Friuli Venezia Giulia); and 
for one UoM in the Northern Apennines RBD (Regionale Liguria). 

All five FRMPs assessed indicate that consultation lasted six months. The FRMPs describe a variety 
of methods to provide information on the draft plans and to receive comments. All FRMPs indicate 
that the draft plans were published on the RBD authorities’ websites. The comments received on the 

27 FRMP for ITE, chapter 5.3, p. 81. 

41 

 
 
plans are generally provided by the authorities (either in the FRMP or in the RBD authority’s website). 
The FRMPs were not subject to a Strategic Environmental Assessments. 

Progress identified in the second FRMPs 

The second FRMPs provide more information on funding: notably, the programmes of measures for 
the  Po  FRMP  (ITB)  indicates  the  funding  source  for  most  measures,  and  all  the  FRMPs  assessed 
provide detailed information on costs for many of their measures.  

While all the second FRMPs assessed discuss CBA, they do not indicate that CBA was used to select 
or  prioritise  their  measures.  The  FRMP  for  the  Po  RBD,  however,  undertook  a  pilot  test  of  a  CBA 
method. Also, the second FRMPs provide further detail on the ReNDIS database28 and the procedures 
for  monitoring  measure  implementation.  Three  second  FRMPs  refer  to  the  role  of  insurance, 
compared to only one of the first FRMPs assessed. Four of the five second FRMPs assessed refer to 
measures to address climate impacts, and three of the second FRMPs refer to adaptation strategies 
and plans.  

All of Italy’s second FRMPs were prepared at the RBD level pointing to greater coordination within 
Italy, while the first FRMPs were prepared at both RBD and UoM levels. All five second FRMPs assessed 
provide  detailed  information  on  the  consultation  process  and  on  the  active  involvement  of 
stakeholders.  Moreover,  all  the  second FRMPs  assessed  provide  at  least  some information  on the 
written comments received. One other area of progress was seen in cooperation on modelling with 
Slovenia, carried out via two Interreg projects.  

8. FD recommendations 

Based on the reported information and the FHRMs and FRMPs assessed, Italy should: 

• 

• 

better substantiate how APSFRs identified in the PFRA are handled in the FHRM; 

further harmonise return periods for the three probability scenarios for flood hazard mapping between 
the UoMs, unless it can be justified why this is not the case; 

•  assess coastal flooding in the FHRM where it is relevant; 

• 

• 

improve the FHRM viewer so that it retains its features (possibly shown as layers instead of boxes) 
while becoming more user friendly; 

improve  access  to  information  on  FHRM,  which  is  dispersed  across  several  websites.  While  these 
websites provide links to each other, these links should be displayed more prominently. Ideally, there 
should be one all-encompassing FHRM; 

• 

provide, in the FRMPs, details on how the FHRM was used in the choice of objectives and measures; 

28 A national online platform for soil protection including from hydrogeological risk. 

42 

 
 
• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

include in all FRMPs summary maps of APSFRs; 

include a link to the national FHRM portal in all FRMPs; 

ensure that the FRMPs’ objectives are measurable and where possible linked to quantitative indicators 
and be timebound. An assessment of the progress made towards the achievement of the objectives 
should be included in the FRMP; 

link both structural and non-structural measures to the objectives in the FRMPs; 

incorporate in the FRMPs, where relevant, a Cost Benefit Analysis for the prioritisation of measures 
that lend themselves to it and provide a clear description of the methodology used; 

include in the FRMPs further detail on international coordination; 

subject the FRMPs to a Strategic Environmental Assessment, depending on the nature of the measures. 

43