Search

One of the most innovative elements of the Water-Framework Directive (WFD) is the important role that economic analysis is assigned in achieving its environmental objectives. In Spain, a great effort has been put forth by river basin agencies to diagnose the current state of water bodies and to implement the economic tools and principles required by the Directive. However, there have been a number of shortcomings in the way the economic analysis was designed and applied (as well as a significant delay in meeting the WFD's deadlines). The objective of this paper is to critically review the implementation of the economics of the WFD in Spain and to make suggestions on how to deal with the problems that have been encountered. Some of the more important shortcomings are that the characterization of water uses is mostly descriptive and lacks prospective analysis; that analysis of the potential for costs recovery of water services has incorrectly assumed that the financial costs of water provision are completely covered by the payment of the current legal tariffs; and that environmental and resource costs have not been included in the analysis for the selection of mitigation measures. The main reason for these problems is that water policy-makers and managers were unprepared for, and inexperienced with economic analysis. The most important recommendation of this paper to improve future revisions of the River Basin Management Plans is to strengthen the links between water planners and academics, moving towards evidence-based policy-making. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Maintaining a river system's minimum water flow is a pre-condition for achieving the 'good ecological status' prescribed by the European Water Framework Directive (WFD). In areas of water scarcity the reuse of treated water for agricultural irrigation is seen as a promising option to reduce the quantitative pressure on the resource. As part of assessing the viability of reclaimed water use in agriculture, and in accordance with the economic principles underpinning the WFD, a comprehensive economic analysis of this irrigation option is needed. This paper contributes to fill this knowledge gap by producing a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) of the use of reclaimed water in agriculture. The costs and benefits of reclaimed water use on an experimental mandarin farm in the south-east of Spain are compared with those of using surface water and a mixture of water sources. The novelty of this study is that non-market benefits are incorporated in the CBA. We thereby account for the increase in welfare that the environmental services of this supply option provide to society at large. These kind of 'intangible' benefits are often ignored, but only the combination of market and non-market costs and benefits can produce a balanced assessment of water management options and lead to an efficient and sustainable allocation of the resource. Our results suggest that at the private and social level, when environmental benefits are included, the use of a mixture of water sources, including reclaimed water, seems the best option. However, at low mandarin prices (lower than 0.23 €/kg) the exclusive use of reclaimed water seems the most beneficial option. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: We assess the value farmers place on the guarantee of water supply, in the context of water scarcity and we identify the factors that characterise heterogeneity in valuations across respondents. We use a contingent valuation survey approach to elicit farmers’ willingness to pay (WTP) for secured water supply for irrigation in the South of Spain (Guadalbullon River within the Guadalquivir River Basin). We find that farmers are willing to increase by 10% and 20% their current irrigators’ community annual payment and, moreover, they are willing to reduce average supply by 30% of their administrative water concession, to increase their water supply guarantee. These results confirm that when water is scarce, farmers have non-market values associated with an increased guarantee, in addition to direct use for supplied water. This suggests that farmers perceive benefits in this change as their welfare increases, providing evidence of the predisposition to measures or strategies that permit such improvement. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The improvement in the water quality resulting from the implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive is expected to generate substantial non-market benefits. A wide spread estimation of these benefits across Europe will require the application of benefit transfer. We use a spatially explicit valuation design to account for the spatial heterogeneity of preferences to help generate lower transfer errors. A map-based choice experiment is applied in the Guadalquivir River Basin (Spain), accounting simultaneously for the spatial distribution of water quality improvements and beneficiaries. Our results show that accounting for the spatial heterogeneity of preferences generally produces lower transfer errors. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This paper evaluates and discusses the draft Hydrological Basin Plan (HBP) for the Guadalquivir river basin and its related Programme of Measures (PoM). The HBP focuses on demand management using technical and economic measures, particularly through investment in water efficiency measures. In addition, it seeks to eliminate urban point source pollution. By 2015, a sustainable water resource demand is projected if the current area of irrigated land is not expanded and if the urban waste water treatment work is completed according to Directive 91/271/CEE. It is expected that costs of implementation will be high. The total investment of the PoM is estimated to be €978 per capita per year; this investment has an annual equivalent cost of €143 per capita per year. However, it is estimated that 67% of the total investment can be recovered with special impact in increase in the cost of irrigation water by 160% and the cost of urban water by 60%. Finally, this paper ends with a discussion on the most critical points likely to hinder the HBP being used effectively as a tool for sustainable water management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Water Framework Directive (WFD) requires the good ecological status of surface water bodies, which implies the improvement of both their physicochemical condition, as well as their flow and continuity. The WFD prescribes the assessment of environmental and resource costs and benefits associated with implementing these improvements. The recent literature focuses almost exclusively on the assessment of the economic values related to quality aspects. However, in much of southern Europe, fulfilling the WFD goals will greatly depend on maintaining sufficient water flow, as well. This study aims to fill this gap by assessing the non-market value of allocating enough water to the environment to ensure environmental services are sustained when water is scarce. The non-market value of guaranteeing water supply for secondary household uses is also estimated. Using the Guadalquivir River Basin in Spain as a case study, a choice experiment is applied with scenarios characterized by varying water flow levels and accompanying environmental impacts, and a different frequency of household water restrictions. The results show that the population derives significant benefits not only from the direct use of water, but that also holds non-use values related to the ecological status, although the latter has a considerably lower impact on consumer surplus. Additionally, we conclude that the costs of implementing the water saving measures currently included in the Program of Measures seem to be proportionate to its benefits in this case. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this paper is to contribute to the still scarce literature on Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) in the context of the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) in water scarce areas illustrated through a case study in Southern Spain. CEA is the preferred method to select policy measures to achieve the good ecological status of water bodies as prescribed by the WFD. It generates a ranking of the measures, according to the ratio between the equivalent annual cost and the reduction of impacts, to select the measures to be included in the Program of Measures (PoM). Here, the water-saving measures discussed in the public participation process for the elaboration of the PoM for the Guadalquivir River Basin are analysed using CEA. A methodological approach, including uncertainty for cost and efficiency of measures is proposed. A comparison between pressure and impact analysis of the effectiveness of measures shows that, in the context of the WFD, CEA should be based on the impact of the measures rather than on the pressure reduction, as the latter can lead to a misleading ranking of the water-saving measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]