1. Dutch approach for setting GEP (and MEP)
Marcel van den Berg
Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment / Rijkswaterstaat

2. In this presentation General description development of GEP in 4 steps
Methods for estimation of effect of measures
Examples of GEPs
Measures and more
Discussion and Conclusions

3. Method GEP: CIS guidance 2003
Alternative approach (Prague, 2005)
all possible measures minus measures with small ecological effect
Reference condition
ecological status/EQR
hydromorphological alteration
mitigation
MEP
GEP
Present ecological status

4. GEP derived in 4 steps 1: all measures
2: all possible measures
EC and national policies (Nitrate- and Urban Wastewater Directive, national program on diffuse pollution, etc)
All other measures (derived from a national database)
Chem-istry
Hydro-morphology
Phyto-plank-ton
Other flora
Macro-inverte-brates
Fish
Waterlevel management x
Repositioning of dykes
Fish management
Fish migration
Wastewater treatment +
etc 3:

5. Step 4. Calculation GEP
Estimation effect for measures in EQR units per body
Added to present ecological status (for each quality element)
Correction for combined effect
Validation by 2nd opinion of experts
Result of the 4 steps: a national database with for each water body
All measures
Size
Costs
Responsible authority
Numerical GEP

6. Methods for estimation of effect of measures
Ex-ante evaluation (=multi-variate/statistical model)
National data
Used for national policies and decision making
Method not used in the RBMPs
WFD explorer (=tool kit with different types of models)
Practical knowlegde / expert judgement
In principle: quantitative and expressed at metric for natural water body

7. Comparability GES and GEP
Natural river
IC type RC1/4
national type R5
GEP
Modified river
1.0
GES
0.8
0.6
0.28
0.42
0.15
Objective in RBMP
EQR
0.4
0.2
EQR

8. Comparability GES and GEP - results (Rhinedelta, 490 of 723 Dutch waterbodies)
Lakes
GES
GEP
(avg.)
phytoplankton
0.6
0.58
other flora
0.53
macro-invert.
0.42
fish
0.51
Rivers
GES
GEP
(avg.)
phytoplankton
other flora
0.6
0.54
macro-invert.
0.45
fish
0.41

9. Example Haringvliet and GEP for fish
Haringvliet sluices: fish migration obstacle
Dam function is: safety and fresh water supply
RBMP: sluices are allowing passive and active migration of fish (e.g. 75% of time open)
Effect is estimated for fish metric as 0.20 EQR units (=improvement of one quality class)
Direct connected above stream waters have get similar effect

10. GEPs of Haringvliet/ Hollandsdiep in RBMP (now tidal River former Estuary)

11. Overview all measures: RBMP’s
Hydromorphological measures (WFD art 11.3i)
1727 km restoration of land-water gradients in lakes and canals (3357)
729 km restoration of land-water gradients and re-meandering in rivers (930)
1362 ha creation of wetlands (704)
635 solutions for fish-migration at weirs (884)
Water level management, creation of side channels, etc
Supplementary measures (WFD art 11.4)
Fishmanagement (‘biomanipulation’)
Management of macrophytes
Education, further research, etc
Since 1970 water purification .. (p125), at least 3 decades working on eutrophication, international agreements (Sandoz, rhine Action Program), since two decades attention for hydromorphology
 4.2 billion € extra costs

12. Discussion Numerical GEPs help us to be: compliant with WFD
transparent about the expected effect of measures taken/planned
flexible in measures as long as same effect is achieved
The method and value of deriving GEPs is less important than its result:
a set of measures and its positive effects
(potential) negative effects on the use
costs of measures