1. NGOs expectations for next WFD cycle

2. Messages to take away
First WFD cycle showed some positive examples and beginnings of a systematic change but overall business-as-usual prevails
2nd cycle needs to demonstrate significant improvements, otherwise WFD approach is to be questioned (heavy administration, little gains)
The priority areas where significant improvements are needed including through support from CIS
No cheating on monitoring, status assessment and exemptions
Tackling pressures adequately
Planning for WFD compliant infrastructures (e.g. hydro, navigation)
Integrating quantitative aspects of water management
Prioritising measures that work with nature (e.g.green infrastructure)
Making full use of economic instruments
Integrating climate change
Ensuring genuine public participation and engagement in decisions

3. No cheating on monitoring, status assessment and exemptions
Build on the new intercalibration results, some current plans are not fit
Improve monitoring, possibilities to secure funding exist
Small water bodies
Raise the level of ambition (restrictive application of exemption)
Exemptions must be transparent, include timeline and measures if deadline is extended
Uncertainty is not an excuse in 2nd cycle, no-regret measures are usually available

4. Tackling pressures adequately
Learn from the barriers in 1st cycle
Status + pressure – measure = WFD objectives (GES/GEP)
Basic measures important but not enough
Combine voluntary + backtop regulatory approaches
Need to address agricultural pressures, possibly through legislative instruments (since CAP reform such a fiasco)
Do not lose out on existing funding opportunities (RD, adaptation, floods), engage private sector + funding
Start early to reform permitting procedures and historic rights
Focus on upstream of the “end of the pipe” solutions (e.g. emerging pollutants)

5. Integrating quantitative aspects
Define, establish and enforce e-flows
Flexible water allocation system
Tackle illegal water abstraction
Water accounting and water saving targets

6. Planning for WFD compliant infrastructures
Optimize (upgrade, refurbish) existing hydropower infrastructure while lowering environmental impacts (e.g facilitating downstream migration, sediment transport)
Implement strategic pre-planning on river basin level
Develop integrated criteria for identifying exclusion zones / non or less favourable areas for hydropower development on basin-wide scale
Map those areas in the 2nd RBMP
Develop and apply strategic planning mechanisms on national level within basin-wide (trans-boundary) framework
Rigorous application of env. impact assessment procedures (WFD art 4.7, HD art. 6, SEA, EIA)
Consider environmental resource costs and values of ecosystem services in cost-benefit analyses
Feed-in tariffs (and other incentives) mandatorily linked to ecological criteria
No go / exclusion zone
E.g. HES, GES with good HyMo, IUCN categories I+II
Non favorable
E.g. GES with moderate HyMo, sections with long continuity, endemic species, restoration plans
Less favorable
E.g. area wit

7. Prioritising measures that work with nature
Integrate ecosystem services into WFD analysis and implementation
Start and learn from large scale restoration
Integrated WFD/Floods directive implementation, win-win measures (role for CIS?)
Integrate protected areas into RBMP and overall better coordination and coopperation with nature authorities is urgently needed
Support nature conservation efforts, including efforts to maintain healthy water ecosystems, through green infrastructure

8. Making full use of economic instruments
Use austerity as opportunity (water pricing, cost recovery)
Transparency on costs/benefits, cost effectiveness, perverse subsidies
Broad definition of water services
Adequate contribution to cost recovery (polluter/user pays, envi/resource costs)
Integrate ecosystem services and link to PES

9. Climate change and public participation
Integrating climate change
Fully integrated climate change in 2nd RBMPs from the beginning incl robust/reversible measures
Promote ecosystem based approaches
Ensure genuine public participation
Prioritise and provide adequate resources (not a box ticking exercise)
Involve in decision making

10. Importance of planning process: Poor start = poor finish
Repeat what we said in art 5 report : art 5 analysis was poor, economic analysis was poor, application of econolmic instruments poor as the result. Stress importance of planning process, starting early, filling the gaps early – laying foundation for next steps

11. Importance of planning process: Poor start = poor finish
Repeat what we said in art 5 report : art 5 analysis was poor, economic analysis was poor, application of econolmic instruments poor as the result. Stress importance of planning process, starting early, filling the gaps early – laying foundation for next steps

12. Messages to take away
First WFD cycle showed some positive examples and beginnings of a systematic change but overall business-as-usual prevails
2nd cycle needs to demonstrate significant improvements, otherwise WFD approach is to be questioned (heavy administration, little gains)
The priority areas where significant improvements are needed including through support from CIS
No cheating on monitoring, status assessment and exemptions
Tackling pressures adequately (voluntary + regulatory approaches)
Planning for WFD compliant infrastructures (hydro, navigation)
Integrating quantitative aspects (defining and implementing e-flows)
Prioritising measures that work with nature (ES, green infrastructure)
Making full use of economic instruments
Integrating climate change
Ensuring genuine public participation

13. Thank you for your attention