Key Conclusions of Workshop Session 2: implementation experience of Art. 9

Session 2: Article 9 – implementation experiences Variety of methodologies & approaches developed for the implementation of Art. 9 – different institutional and organisational structures, actual conditions Common difficulties: data issues (mainly agriculture, availability/ownership of data, data collection costs etc.) - but even more (?) on specific methodologies Main discussion issues: E & R costs, "adequate contribution", incentive pricing On ERC: in some-most cases not evaluated yet, when approached: use of "proxies" (costs of measures for reaching env. objectives as estimation, instruments for internalizing ERC)

Session 2: Article 9 – implementation experiences Incentive pricing: seen as in place in many cases – contested by stakeholders/NGOs (esp. agriculture) Polluter Pays Principle (PPP): Few specific experiences reported - sufficient transparency? Need to clarify who is polluting and who is paying Current cost recovery levels (for water services as defined by MS): Full (financial) cost recovery often reported for urban sector (exceptions: mainly wastewater treatment where government support/subsidies (mostly) in the past); Often: low or unknown for agricultural sector (here, indications on reasoning, e.g. rural areas under depopulation threat) Measures for improving Art. 9-implementation mentioned: agricultural sector: water metering, irrigation efficiency, (payments for ecosystem services) Industry: progressively increase their contribution to recovery of costs Implementation of Art. 9 raises transparency – sufficiently?

Session 2: Article 9: future work Clarify what "proper" implementation of Art 9 is Make clear how the WFD objective is supported by further work on Art. 9, as it is work-intensive In many countries cost recovery still needs to be worked on, it is a helpful tool At EU-level: Exchange of experience! More work than that at EU-level ? Different views: "Update": Resolve contradictions in existing guidance documents, bring in 1st cycle experiences "Active clarification by the CIS": (more work) on definitions of water and resource costs (not on water services), minimum stand. for Art. 9 "Clarify": better understanding (e.g. dealing with subsidies, limits of incentive pricing), "Move ahead": Experiment, stimulate exchange experiences with innovative /market based instruments (esp. in agricultural sector) regionally, nationally, internationally (payments for ecosystem services – can be contradictory to PPP, etc.)

Other topics raised during the discussions Need for assistance for financing the measures – e.g. by grants for CAP and Cohesion funds Other sectors such as cooling, electricity, … should be considered in the context of cost recovery Different instruments for internalisation of ERC (waste water levy and abstraction charge, but there are exemptions for sectors: energy, mining, agriculture) Strategic problems for issues such as product controls (EU or international level) how should MS proceed with implementation of Art. 9 before 2012