BRIDGE WP5 Socio-Economic Assessment of Groundwater Threshold Values Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM) BRIDGE WP5 Socio-Economic Assessment of Groundwater Threshold Values €

WP5 team IVM-Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (coordinator) Acteon Conseil, France AETS, France BRGM, France SYKE, Finland University of Aveiro, Portugal

Presentation outline Main objective WP5 Tasks and activities Outputs Role WP5 in BRIDGE WP5 methodology & key issues

Main objective WP5 Support the identification of economically efficient threshold values for groundwater pollutants based on socio-economic impact assessment procedures Assessment of the costs and benefits of feasible measures to achieve groundwater threshold values and their distribution across different interest groups in society Consistent with the requirements of the economic analysis in the WFD

Tasks and activities WP5 WP 5.1 Development of common methodological framework WP 5.2 Practical application and testing of integrated assessment procedures in 6 case studies WP 5.3 Synthesis and policy recommendations

Relationships Synthesis and policy recommendations Methodological framework Case studies WP3 WP4 WP6 WP1 WP2

Deliverables Deliverable Month D1 Methodology report: IVM 1 Framework report & steps case studies 3 2 Five detailed case study reports 18 3 Synthesis report main case study findings & 22 policy recommendations D1 Methodology report: IVM D2 Upper Rhine case study: BRGM D3 Case study Finland: SYKE D4 Case study Portugal: AETS-UA-IVM D5 Scheldt case study: IVM D6 Case study Latvia & Slovenia: Acteon D7 Synthesis report: IVM-Acteon

Role WP5 in BRIDGE Demonstrate role and relevance of economics in GW Directive Economics not in the BRIDGE threshold methodology Link threshold values & economic efficiency in cost & benefit terms Economic criteria start playing a role after the environmental threshold values have been set: Design of cost-effective programs of measures Evaluation of disproportionate costs basis for time or objective derogation/exemption Extent/size of costs and benefits Distribution of costs and benefits in time and space Total economic value of groundwater resources

WP5 METHODOLOGY

Cost-effectiveness analysis Cost-benefit analysis WP5 METHODOLOGY Risk analysis Cost-effectiveness analysis Cost-benefit analysis

WP 5.2. Pilot case studies Upper Rhine, France (BRGM) Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) contamination from industry affecting drinking water and human health Aveiro aquifer, Portugal (AETS-UA-IVM) Cl, SO4 and NO3 contamination from industry affecting agriculture, drinking water and wildlife Shallow groundwater around Riga, Latvia (Acteon) Petroleum contamination from urban areas affecting surface waters Scheldt basin, Netherlands (IVM) Nitrate contamination from agriculture affecting surface waters Lahti aquifer, Finland (SYKE) Chloride contamination from road salting affecting drinking water Krsko Kotlina aquifer, Slovenia (Acteon) Nitrate and pesticide contamination from agriculture affecting drinking water

Steps in case studies 1) Problem definition (sources, pathway, effects pollution) 2) Definition environmental objective (groundwater threshold values) 3) Identification management actions/options prevention remediation/restoration 4) Assessment cost and effectiveness of management actions/options (cost-effectiveness analysis) 5) Assessment and economic valuation of market and non-market benefits of management actions/options (incl. public surveys) 6) Cost-Benefit Analysis 7) Assessment economic efficiency threshold values

Key issues Step 1: Problem definition (source-pathway-effect) Often fundamental lack of knowledge surrounding the identification of diffuse and point sources of pollution Link source-pathway-effect on receptor difficult to establish and quantify Uncertainty!

Key issues Step 2: Identification objective (threshold value) Start from existing threshold values (e.g. NO3 or Cl content drinking water quality) Compliance regime? Share of monitoring stations meeting threshold value (e.g. 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%) Spatial distribution (threshold values) across aquifer receptor Pressure Groundwater body monitoring station

Key issues Step 3: Identification feasible management actions/options Distinctive feature WP5 compared to other WPs in BRIDGE Together with local experts, actors and stakeholders Which actors/sectors to target given the uncertainties surrounding causal relationships (relative contributions) & the difficulties quantifying the ‘gap’ to be ‘BRIDGEd’ to reach threshold values?

Key issues Step 4: Cost-effectiveness management actions/options Focus on emission reduction at source Assessment primarily based on expert judgment Link source-pathway-effect on receptor difficult to establish and quantify Uncertainty! Comprehensive groundwater models (source-pathway-effect) and link with surface water and terrestrial ecosystems missing

Key issues Step 5: Benefits assessment of threshold values More than just market benefits (=avoided treatment or purification costs in industry) Substantial non-market benefits: public value attached to pristine state/natural conditions Groundwater valued for its own sake (existence value) Need to translate threshold values to understandable public functions of groundwater resources

Key issues Step 6: Cost-Benefit Analysis Characteristic features: Market and non-market benefits Costs and benefits associated with different groundwater threshold values (=link threshold values and economic efficiency in terms of costs and benefits) Spatial distribution of costs and benefits of different threshold values across aquifer/basin

Key issues Step 7: Economic efficiency threshold values Disproportionate costs? Reconsider threshold values? Subjective notion, lack of definition and/or ‘economic threshold value’ ESSENTIAL: researcher and policy maker confidence in estimated costs and benefits of threshold values Combination of objective and subjective risk assessment Value of additional information WP5: user and taxpayer willingness and ability to pay for different threshold values

Thank You For Your Attention!