What is the Water Framework Directive and why is it at risk?
In a context of climate change that brings us prolonged droughts and major floods in almost equal measure, water management and protection have once again taken center stage in public debate. In this scenario, several voices from the scientific, political, and environmental communities have expressed concern about the potential deregulation of the European Union's Water Framework Directive (WFD), a key piece of legislation that has guided the protection of aquatic ecosystems and the quality of all water bodies, from surface to groundwater and coastal waters, for more than two decades. To better understand what modifying this law would entail, and coinciding with World Water Day, we spoke with Annelies Broekman and Anna Marin, researchers from the CREAF's water and global change research group.
In what context did the Water Framework Directive emerge and what principles does it have?
In what context did the Water Framework Directive emerge and what principles does it have?
Annelies Broekman (AB) – The European Commission approved this legislation in 2000 after suffering several ecological disasters and as a result of numerous cross-border conflicts over water: for example, rivers like the Danube, the Rhine, and the Soča, which cross borders, forced several countries to reach agreements on water management. In the case of Spain, on the one hand, we had just signed the Albufeira Convention with Portugal regarding the water of several rivers such as the Minho, the Duero, and the Tagus, and on the other hand, the Ebro River water transfer was planned under the National Hydrological Plan.
The Water Framework Directive (WFD) was born in this context, thanks to a participatory co-creation process supported by the scientific community, local involvement, and the contributions of environmental organizations and NGOs. Its basic principles focus on establishing environmental, not just technical and economic, criteria for water planning and pricing: "the polluter pays" and "water is only used if it is guaranteed beforehand that it will not be degraded and that its environment will be maintained in good condition." It also established the river basin as a management unit, which was already in use in Spain, and introduced the legal, technical, and political framework based on impact, what is now known as evidence-based policy, in this case concerning water bodies. This Directive consolidated the New Water Culture, a new way of viewing the management and conservation of water resources.
Anna Marin (AM) – One of the great innovations of the WFD was integrating the management of all water bodies under a comprehensive approach. We take this for granted now, but at the time it was groundbreaking because water-related regulations were sector-specific and lacked an overall vision. This allowed for the establishment of an integrated management framework to address the great complexity of aquatic ecosystems and the sectors involved, incorporating the ecological perspective as a fundamental pillar: “even if the water does not present significant chemical pollution, it is necessary to ensure good ecological status to meet the objectives of the directive.”
What areas of our daily lives does this Directive affect?
What areas of our daily lives does this Directive affect?
AB - Water affects absolutely everything. This directive impacts many aspects of daily life by introducing management principles that affect all water uses: it guarantees the ecological flows of rivers, ensures the quality of bathing areas, and controls the main sources of pollution. However, European and Spanish legislation regarding water cannot encroach on sectoral competencies that do not fall under its jurisdiction. For example, it cannot decide how much irrigated land there is in agricultural fields, but it does indicate when the limits of the natural system are exceeded. That is why we say that water needs coordinated governance among all sectors of society.
Looking at things from our own perspective, what benefits has this regulation brought to Catalonia?
Looking at things from our own perspective, what benefits has this regulation brought to Catalonia?
AM - We only have to take a look at the state of our water twenty-five years ago and how it is now. On the beaches of the Llobregat Delta, for example, swimming was prohibited because it was one of the most polluted rivers in Europe. We still haven't reached the targets set for 2015, which have been extended to 2027, but we have nevertheless seen a great improvement. We've become accustomed to swimming in clean sea water, but years ago it wasn't like that. If we had continued down that path, our feet would disintegrate when we put them in the water! When we travel outside of Europe, we realize that not all water is equally clean. In fact, the Directive was reviewed in 2019, and its positive impact, from the most local bodies of water to the whole of Europe, was applauded.
Another reason why the Water Framework Directive (WFD) has been vital is that it has provided a legal framework under which environmental movements can operate. For example, the Ebro River water transfer project we mentioned earlier was partially halted thanks to the legal protection afforded by regulations like this one. A converse example would be how bottling companies can extract far more water than is sustainable simply because they are covered by the Mining Law and not by the WFD.
And is this Directive adapted to the new conditions of climate change?
And is this Directive adapted to the new conditions of climate change?
AB - Yes, the Water Framework Directive has all the necessary elements to adapt to climate change. The question is whether this climate uncertainty is managed correctly in planning, which is a difficult and expensive undertaking. The most prudent scenario would be to assume that some rivers in Catalonia will end up with 30% less water and plan accordingly, but that requires a significant amount of money.
AM – Indeed, as its name suggests, the Water Framework Directive is a legal framework and is very complex. To be able to fine-tune it and adapt to the needs of different river basins and countries, related laws have emerged, such as the Flood Risk Directive, the Groundwater Directive, the Drinking Water Directive, the Wastewater Treatment Directive, etc.
Graffiti against the water transfer on the banks of the Ebro River as it passes through Tortosa. Image: Enric
Currently, a simplification of the Directive is being considered. What does it entail, who is behind it, and what consequences could it have?
Currently, a simplification of the Directive is being considered. What does it entail, who is behind it, and what consequences could it have?
AM - The aim is to deregulate the WFD (Water Framework Directive) so that its restrictions are more lenient, penalties for non-compliance are less severe, and many more exceptions could be made. Until now, exemptions from any of the Directive's criteria were only permitted in very specific and particularly serious cases. If the proposed simplification is approved, the change will be radical, and environmental legislation will cease to apply. This motion stems from the right-wing narrative that environmental and climate regulations are hindering our international competitiveness. The proposal clearly goes against the principles that made the WFD so innovative. Furthermore, lobbyists are exerting obvious pressure , emboldened by the current European Commission's commitment to strengthening competitiveness, achieving self-sufficiency in critical raw materials, and increasing military capabilities. Numerous meetings are taking place between members of this Commission and representatives of the mining and renewable energy sectors. This pressure runs counter to the principles of transparency and citizen participation upon which the Directive was based.
AB - This is very serious! The proposal ignores the importance of ecosystems for the well-being of society and follows a logic of infinite growth. From this type of thinking arise absurd ideas such as wanting our water uses to no longer depend on rainfall, reducing the problem of water scarcity to a technological issue rather than one of chronic overexploitation and growing demand. Another argument along the same lines is that of efficiency: "we will be able to continue the same way because we will be more efficient and will need less water per unit of production." This is a techno-optimistic paradox, since to finance this efficiency we will have to produce more, and total water consumption will increase.
YOU MAY ALSO BE INTERESTED IN
YOU MAY ALSO BE INTERESTED IN
Is what is being proposed with the DMA an isolated case or are we seeing it with other European environmental regulations?
Is what is being proposed with the DMA an isolated case or are we seeing it with other European environmental regulations?
AB - Unfortunately, this is a dynamic and philosophy of environmental deregulation on a European scale. It's a political project. Another example would be the difficulties encountered in passing the Nature Restoration Act, which faced significant opposition from economic interests and ended up somewhat watered down compared to the approach initially proposed by the scientific community.
AM - Yes, and it has to do with this change in narrative that we were talking about earlier: we have gone from leading environmental and climate policies on an international scale, as part of an economic strategy and global positioning, to the current situation in which there has been a fairly clear change of priorities.
Knowing this, what can we do if we disagree with this environmental deregulation?
Knowing this, what can we do if we disagree with this environmental deregulation?
AB - This is the crucial question. We might think that a citizen can do nothing against such powerful economic and political forces, but because so much is at stake, we must react. Many civil organizations and NGOs channel messages of critical thinking from citizens to the political sphere. Specifically, regarding water and European environmental deregulation, we find the European Water Movement and campaigns like Hands Off Nature and Save the Blue Heart of Europe , the latter dedicated to protecting Balkan rivers. Individually, we must become aware of our relationship with water, where the water we consume comes from, which river basin we belong to, and so on. We can also act in terms of traditional politics, that is, demand that our political representatives uphold and protect these environmental principles. We will only make a difference if we combine individual and collective action.
AM - Absolutely right! And from a scientific perspective, we have a responsibility to amplify these issues and raise awareness of the importance of this moment. At CREAF, we are doing this through innovative environmental governance projects such as ClimaGov and Mission4Nature, this year dedicated to water.
