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

2. 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)

3. 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?

4. 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.)

5. 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