Progress with monitoring and assessment in the WFD implementation in five European river basins: significant differences but similar problems

IF 0.6 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
T. Giakoumis, N. Voulvoulis
{"title":"Progress with monitoring and assessment in the WFD implementation in five European river basins: significant differences but similar problems","authors":"T. Giakoumis, N. Voulvoulis","doi":"10.14712/23361964.2018.7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The river basin approach of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) and the introduction of ecological status represent a shift in the assessment and management of freshwater systems from discipline-specific to more holistic, catchment-based principles. At the core of the WFD’s approach are catchments as highly interconnected systems. Despite strict timetables, progress towards achieving the WFD objectives has been slow, with deterioration in some cases not being halted. In this paper, looking at evidence from five European basins (Adige, Anglian, Ebro, Evrotas and Sava) we identify some of the key implementation challenges faced by each catchment during the development and implementation of the 1st River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs) of 2009. Despite significant differences in socio-ecological conditions, geographic coverage and starting points in the implementation between these river basins, findings highlight some similar key issues. The lack of a common systemic understanding of each river basin and detailed monitoring data to capture pressure-status interactions in order to anticipate how the system will react to interventions; as well as compliance driven implementation efforts were underlying problems in all five study areas. While some improvements to address these problems can be seen in the 2nd River Basin Management Planning Cycle (2015–2016), our findings demonstrate that a more effective approach is to question the deviation of the whole implementation from the directive’s systemic nature and therefore improve the adaptive, collaborative, participatory and interdisciplinary nature of the implementation efforts.","PeriodicalId":11931,"journal":{"name":"European journal of environmental sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of environmental sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14712/23361964.2018.7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

The river basin approach of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) and the introduction of ecological status represent a shift in the assessment and management of freshwater systems from discipline-specific to more holistic, catchment-based principles. At the core of the WFD’s approach are catchments as highly interconnected systems. Despite strict timetables, progress towards achieving the WFD objectives has been slow, with deterioration in some cases not being halted. In this paper, looking at evidence from five European basins (Adige, Anglian, Ebro, Evrotas and Sava) we identify some of the key implementation challenges faced by each catchment during the development and implementation of the 1st River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs) of 2009. Despite significant differences in socio-ecological conditions, geographic coverage and starting points in the implementation between these river basins, findings highlight some similar key issues. The lack of a common systemic understanding of each river basin and detailed monitoring data to capture pressure-status interactions in order to anticipate how the system will react to interventions; as well as compliance driven implementation efforts were underlying problems in all five study areas. While some improvements to address these problems can be seen in the 2nd River Basin Management Planning Cycle (2015–2016), our findings demonstrate that a more effective approach is to question the deviation of the whole implementation from the directive’s systemic nature and therefore improve the adaptive, collaborative, participatory and interdisciplinary nature of the implementation efforts.
5个欧洲河流流域实施世界粮食计划署的监测和评估进展:显著差异,但问题相似
《水框架指令》(WFD)的流域方法和生态状况的引入代表了淡水系统评估和管理从特定学科向更全面、以流域为基础的原则的转变。世界粮食计划署方法的核心是作为高度互联系统的集水区。尽管有严格的时间表,但实现世界粮食计划署目标的进展缓慢,在某些情况下,情况的恶化并未停止。本文通过对来自五个欧洲流域(阿迪杰、安格利安、埃布罗、埃夫罗塔斯和萨瓦)的证据进行分析,确定了2009年第一个流域管理计划(RBMPs)在制定和实施过程中每个流域所面临的一些关键挑战。尽管这些流域在社会生态条件、地理覆盖范围和实施起点上存在显著差异,但研究结果突出了一些相似的关键问题。缺乏对每个流域的共同系统了解和详细的监测数据,以捕捉压力-状态相互作用,从而预测系统对干预措施的反应;以及遵从性驱动的实施努力是所有五个研究领域的潜在问题。虽然在第二流域管理规划周期(2015-2016)中可以看到解决这些问题的一些改进,但我们的研究结果表明,更有效的方法是质疑整个实施偏离指令的系统性,从而提高实施工作的适应性、协作性、参与性和跨学科性质。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
12.50%
发文量
6
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Environmental Sciences offers a mixture of original refereed research papers, which bring you some of the most exciting developments in environmental sciences in the broadest sense, often with an inter- or trans-disciplinary perspective, focused on the European problems. The journal also includes critical reviews on topical issues, and overviews of the status of environmental protection in particular regions / countries. The journal covers a broad range of topics, including direct or indirect interactions between abiotic or biotic components of the environment, interactions of environment with human society, etc. The journal is published twice a year (June, December).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信