1. Working Group on Environmental Accounts
Present situation and way forward for water accounts (point 6.1 of the agenda)
Eurostat – Unit E2
Arturo de la Fuente
Working Group on Environmental Accounts
Luxembourg, 9-10 March 2015

2. Background: water statistics
Eurostat, DG ENV and EEA have their own water data collections
Each having different focus/approach
Eurostat, ENV and EEA have different positioning with strengths and weaknesses (domain of expertise, network of partners in Member States, etc.)
Existing Eurostat water statistics have incomplete datasets limiting their use
Dissatisfaction led to a review of Eurostat water statistics, launched in
Goals:
Simplify and refocus work
Streamline with data collections by other partners (DG ENV, EEA)
Keep elements needed for indicators and water accounting

3. Background: water accounts
In parallel, the European Strategy for Environmental Accounts calls to develop water accounts
As compared to water statistics, water accounts allow a more systematic approach for analysing water data and have close links to the SNA and its concept of stocks/flows
A task force was developed a manual for physical flow water accounts. It later developed Data Structure Definitions to accomodate both statistics and accounts
SEEA water accounts are in line with statistical work already developed in the ESS (European environmental accounts)

4. Background: water statistics & accounts
Is it possible to have a joint reporting vehicle covering the needs of both water statistics and water accounts?
Which water accounts best complement water data by other European water producers?

5. SEEA-based water accounts
Strengths:
Internal consistency (physical / monetary, stocks / flows, etc.)
They integrate or are consistent with other SEEA accounts
Can be part of an overarching system of accounts for natural resources
Strength or drawback depending on point of view:
Focus on the economic angle rather than the ecological perspective
Drawbacks:
Normally they are annual which masks seasonal effects
Typically for national territories (no NUTS or RBD detailed)
No environment-to-environment flows

6. Which water accounts to develop?
Asset accs
Flow accs
Quality accs
Ecosystem accs
Volume
Substances
Physical
Monetary

7. Which water accounts to develop?
Proposal:
High priority
Flows accounts (volumes): physical and monetary
Medium priority
Asset accounts: physical
Low priority
Emission accounts

8. Ideas for a proposal
Compared to the PWFA manual, simplify as much as possible without losing essential information
Map Joint Questionnaire Inland Water into a PSUT
Time resolution and periodicity: annual
Granularity: Product and industry categories (as in document pp 7-8)
Spatial aggregation: national level plus some river basin information
RBD for some countries only? (depending on pre-defined indicator thresholds, e.g. WEI+)
Extend RBD detail for some tables only?

9. Legal basis
Legal basis for a core part of the questionnaire and voluntary basis for the rest of the data collection
The legal basis would be a new module on water accounts in Regulation 691/2011
Why legal basis?
Experience shows that voluntary data collections do not achieve completeness
Conclusion of the review of water statistics
Water accounts identified as development area in the ESEA 2014
Why now?
ESEA 2014 does not call for a legal module in However:
Development of new legal modules will be long
Starting it now, adoption could be expected in 2020, i.e. beyond the timeline of ESEA

10. Next steps Discussion being held with European partners
Discussions being held in WG Environmental Accounts (March) and WG water statistics (April)
Technical proposal must be developed with input from those discussions
Progress will be reported to DIMESA in June
Once a technical proposal is finalised and endorsed by the WGs, a voluntary data collection could be set up
Eurostat grants for implementation

11. Questions for the WG
How to base ESS water accounts on an effective division of tasks with other European producers of water data?
Do you support the priorities & scope for water accounts as outlined in doc. section 4?
What is the best solution to report essential information at river-basin level in a feasible way?
Do you support to have legal basis for a core part of the water accounts (new Reg. 691/2011 module)?