Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (7)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = EU WFD environmental objectives

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
16 pages, 4546 KB  
Article
A Fish-Based Tool for the Quality Assessment of Portuguese Large Rivers
by António Tovar Faro, Maria Teresa Ferreira and João Manuel Oliveira
Fishes 2024, 9(5), 149; https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes9050149 - 23 Apr 2024
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2331
Abstract
Multimetric indices play a pivotal role in assessing river ecological quality, aligning with the European Water Framework Directive (EU WFD) requirements. However, indices developed specifically for large rivers are uncommon. Our objective was to develop a fish-based tool specifically tailored to assess the [...] Read more.
Multimetric indices play a pivotal role in assessing river ecological quality, aligning with the European Water Framework Directive (EU WFD) requirements. However, indices developed specifically for large rivers are uncommon. Our objective was to develop a fish-based tool specifically tailored to assess the ecological quality in Portuguese large rivers. Data were collected from seven sites in each of three Portuguese large rivers (Minho, Guadiana, and Tagus). Each site was classified using an environmental disturbance score, combining different pressure types, such as water chemistry, land use, and hydromorphological alterations. The Fish-based Multimetric Index for Portuguese Large Rivers (F-MMIP-LR) comprises four metrics: % native lithophilic individuals; % alien individuals; % migrant individuals; and % freshwater native individuals, representing compositional, reproductive, and migratory guilds. The index showed good performance in separating least- and most-disturbed sites. Least-disturbed sites were rated ‘high’ or ‘good’ by F-MMIP-LR, contrasting with no such classification for most-disturbed sites, highlighting index robustness. The three rivers presented a wide range of F-MMIP-LR values across the gradient of ‘bad’ to ‘high’, indicating that, on a large spatial extent, the biological condition was substantially altered. The F-MMIP-LR provides vital information for managers and decision-makers, guiding restoration efforts and strengthening conservation initiatives in line with the WFD. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biomonitoring and Conservation of Freshwater & Marine Fishes)
Show Figures

Figure 1

9 pages, 2135 KB  
Proceeding Paper
Significance of Hydromorphological and Sediment Analysis in River Basin Water Quality Management
by Gorana Ćosić-Flajsig, Barbara Karleuša, Ivan Vučković and Matjaž Glavan
Environ. Sci. Proc. 2022, 21(1), 14; https://doi.org/10.3390/environsciproc2022021014 - 19 Oct 2022
Viewed by 1670
Abstract
The hydromorphology and sediment management, as part of the integrated water management and achieving environmental objectives of the river basin in accordance with the WFD, are presented in the case study of the transboundary rural River Basin Sutla. Sutla is the border river [...] Read more.
The hydromorphology and sediment management, as part of the integrated water management and achieving environmental objectives of the river basin in accordance with the WFD, are presented in the case study of the transboundary rural River Basin Sutla. Sutla is the border river between the Republic of Slovenia and the Republic of Croatia, with a catchment area of 590.6 km2. The proposed sediment management methodology is based on the surface water bodies’ assessment of water quality status, from the surveillance monitoring, and the impact assessment of the point and diffuse pollution sources in the river basin by the mathematical model SWAT. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

26 pages, 2029 KB  
Article
Nitrate Management Discourses in Poland and Denmark—Laggards or Leaders in Water Quality Protection?
by Emilia Noel Ptak, Morten Graversgaard, Jens Christian Refsgaard and Tommy Dalgaard
Water 2020, 12(9), 2371; https://doi.org/10.3390/w12092371 - 24 Aug 2020
Cited by 23 | Viewed by 4282
Abstract
The most significant source of nitrate pollution in the European Union (EU) is attributed to agricultural activities, which threaten drinking water, marine, and freshwater resources. The Nitrates Directive is a key feature of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), which seeks to reduce nitrate [...] Read more.
The most significant source of nitrate pollution in the European Union (EU) is attributed to agricultural activities, which threaten drinking water, marine, and freshwater resources. The Nitrates Directive is a key feature of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), which seeks to reduce nitrate pollution from agricultural sources. Yet, weak compliance by Member States (MS) diminishes the legitimacy of the EU environmental acquis and undermines efforts to achieve environmental objectives. This study examines the nitrate management discourse in Poland to identify influencing factors that impact governance capacity and overall compliance performance. The empirical investigation is based on nine stakeholder interviews, three written correspondences, and a literature review that collectively comprise an evaluation study. A comparison in governance approaches between Poland and Denmark provides a calibration in assessing performance respective to another MS. The findings categorize both Poland and Denmark as “laggard” in WFD compliance. This case contributes new insights in identifying 6 enabling and 13 constraining factors affecting the ability of MS to fulfill their implementation duties. The findings demonstrate that divergent stakeholder views based on historical and cultural norms require a differentiated approach tailored to domestic conditions for effective fulfillment of the objectives set forth in EU environmental legislation. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 741 KB  
Article
Integrated Water Quality Governance and Sectoral Responsibility: The EU Water Framework Directive’s Impact on Agricultural Sector Policies in Norway
by Sissel Hovik
Water 2019, 11(11), 2215; https://doi.org/10.3390/w11112215 - 24 Oct 2019
Cited by 9 | Viewed by 4324
Abstract
In accordance with the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD), Norway has made the river basin the basis for coordination of sectoral policies. New units of River Basin Districts and Sub-Districts have been introduced. In each district, the joint water management plan and program [...] Read more.
In accordance with the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD), Norway has made the river basin the basis for coordination of sectoral policies. New units of River Basin Districts and Sub-Districts have been introduced. In each district, the joint water management plan and program of measures is formulated by cross-sector and multi-level networks. This network structure is added to and clearly subordinated to the primary structure following the sectoral principle and hierarchical steering. Therefore, the WFD objectives of good environmental status of all waters must be integrated into the goal structure and policy priorities of different sector authorities and levels of government. This paper examines whether and, if so, how the activities within the secondary structure of water governance influence the policies and practices of the agricultural sector regarding diffuse water pollution mitigation. The analyses of sector policy documents and water management plans reveal that even though the WFD’s aim of good ecological status of water is integrated into the objectives of the agricultural environmental program, only minor changes have been made in instrument targets and settings. Economic incentives and voluntary measures still dominate. This leads to the conclusion that the corporatist governance mode of the agriculture sector dominates the sector’s choice of policy objectives and instruments. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 222 KB  
Article
Between Emulation and Assemblage: Analysing WFD Policy Transfer Outcomes in Turkey
by Burcin Demirbilek and David Benson
Water 2019, 11(2), 324; https://doi.org/10.3390/w11020324 - 14 Feb 2019
Cited by 15 | Viewed by 3957
Abstract
Turkey’s protracted European Union (EU) accession process has resulted in the transfer of environmental policy, primarily the water acquis. Despite a recent reversal in accession negotiations, this process is continuing and has thereby resulted in the active Europeanisation of Turkish water policy. However, [...] Read more.
Turkey’s protracted European Union (EU) accession process has resulted in the transfer of environmental policy, primarily the water acquis. Despite a recent reversal in accession negotiations, this process is continuing and has thereby resulted in the active Europeanisation of Turkish water policy. However, the resultant pattern of Europeanisation remains poorly understood with questions arising as to whether policy transfer is leading to significant convergence with EU policy, or if a uniquely Turkish hybrid system of water governance is emerging. The paper therefore provides an analysis of transfer outcomes from the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD), using eight core institutional features: identification of river basins; transboundary cooperation; environmental objectives setting; characterisation of river basins; monitoring; cost recovery and water pricing; river basin management planning; and public participation. While analysis of legal frameworks and their implementation shows many areas of emulation, some features of the WFD in Turkey are an amalgam of pre-existing water institutions, the mimetic influence of integrated water resources management (IWRM) norms, EU policy and changing national water policy priorities: what we call assembled emulation. This observation has implications for future studies on policy transfer, Europeanisation, IWRM and Turkish accession. Full article
15 pages, 228 KB  
Article
Undermining European Environmental Policy Goals? The EU Water Framework Directive and the Politics of Exemptions
by Blandine Boeuf, Oliver Fritsch and Julia Martin-Ortega
Water 2016, 8(9), 388; https://doi.org/10.3390/w8090388 - 8 Sep 2016
Cited by 53 | Viewed by 10823
Abstract
The Water Framework Directive (WFD) is the core legislative instrument in the European Union for the protection of water resources. Adopted in 2000, its objectives were to achieve “good status” for water bodies by 2015 and prevent any further deterioration. However, the European [...] Read more.
The Water Framework Directive (WFD) is the core legislative instrument in the European Union for the protection of water resources. Adopted in 2000, its objectives were to achieve “good status” for water bodies by 2015 and prevent any further deterioration. However, the European Commission and some stakeholders are rather dissatisfied with the implementation of the Directive so far, in particular with the use of exemptions to the environmental objectives. Exemptions are of paramount importance: they may constitute a significant obstacle to the achievement of the WFD’s objectives as they enable member states to lower the ambition of the Directive and to delay the achievement of good status, thereby undermining the environmental goal of the WFD. Critical voices observe an excessive reliance on exemptions, poor justifications, and great variations in their use. Based on an analysis of 120 policy documents and 15 semi-structured interviews, this article provides explanations for the politics of exemptions in EU water management. It shows that different viewpoints and interpretations on the WFD’s objectives and exemptions were already present in the negotiation phase of the Directive, but remained undefined on purpose. Moreover, dysfunctional decision-making procedures in the Common Implementation Strategy and the lack of political support in WFD implementation were significant obstacles to an agreement on this important issue. Finally, decisions on WFD implementation in member states were often driven by pragmatism. The article explains how the negotiations of the WFD and the EU-level discussion on the implementation of the Directive undermined environmental goals in EU governance; its findings are also relevant for policy fields other than water. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Water Economics and Policy)
18 pages, 3556 KB  
Article
Ecological Status of Rivers and Streams in Saxony (Germany) According to the Water Framework Directive and Prospects of Improvement
by Bernd Spänhoff, Roland Dimmer, Holm Friese, Steve Harnapp, Frank Herbst, Kerstin Jenemann, Antje Mickel, Sylvia Rohde, Michaela Schönherr, Katrin Ziegler, Karin Kuhn and Uwe Müller
Water 2012, 4(4), 887-904; https://doi.org/10.3390/w4040887 - 9 Nov 2012
Cited by 19 | Viewed by 12524
Abstract
The Federal State of Saxony (Germany) transposed the EU Water Framework Directive into state law, identifying 617 surface water bodies (rivers and streams) for implementation of the water framework directive (WFD). Their ecological status was classified by biological quality elements (macrophytes and phytobenthos, [...] Read more.
The Federal State of Saxony (Germany) transposed the EU Water Framework Directive into state law, identifying 617 surface water bodies (rivers and streams) for implementation of the water framework directive (WFD). Their ecological status was classified by biological quality elements (macrophytes and phytobenthos, benthic invertebrates and fish, and in large rivers, phytoplankton) and specific synthetic and non-synthetic pollutants. Hydromorphological and physico-chemical quality elements were used to identify significant anthropogenic pressures, which surface water bodies are susceptible to, and to assess the effect of these pressures on the status of surface water bodies. In 2009, the data for classification of the ecological status and the main pressures and impacts on water bodies were published in the river basin management plans (RBMP) of the Elbe and Oder rivers. To that date, only 23 (4%) streams achieved an ecological status of “good”, while the rest failed to achieve the environmental objective. The two main reasons for the failure were significant alterations to the stream morphology (81% of all streams) and nutrient enrichment (62%) caused by point (industrial and municipal waste water treatment plants) and non-point (surface run-off from arable fields, discharges from urban drainages and decentralized waste water treatment plants) sources. It was anticipated that a further 55 streams would achieve the environmental objective by 2015, but the remaining 539 need extended deadlines. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Water Systems)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop