ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES OF EUROPEAN WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE

  • Yuli Radev University of Mining and Geology, Sofia, Bulgaria
  • Desislava Simeonova University of Mining and Geology, Sofia, Bulgaria
  • Reneta Barneva State University of New York at Fredonia, USA
  • Lisa Walters State University of New York at Fredonia, USA
Keywords: European Water Framework Directive (WFD), cost effectiveness analysis (CEA), cost-benefit analysis (CBA), East Aegean Region (Bulgaria).

Abstract

In this article, we analyze the measures against pollution in river basins that follow the European Water Framework Directive (European Commission, 2000) and propose a methodology for assessing their economic effectiveness. Compared to other similar studies (Berbel et al., 2018), the presented methodology has been developed and tested in rivers where water pollution is a result of mining activities. In terms of economic theory, the methodology can be summarized as follows: The cost-effectiveness analysis used to select the optimal mix of costs is integrated into the cost-benefit analysis to assess the cost-effectiveness of the proposed measures. The methodology has been tested on a case study of the East Aegean Region and recommendations for the region have been made for the next five-year period of the Directive.

Author Biographies

Yuli Radev, University of Mining and Geology, Sofia, Bulgaria

Yuli Radev, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor in Economics at the University of Mining and Geology “St. Iv. Rilski”, Sofia, Bulgaria. His professional, scientific, and teaching interests include energy management, business economics, the economics of natural resources, and institutional economics.

Desislava Simeonova, University of Mining and Geology, Sofia, Bulgaria

Desislava Simeonova is an Assistant Professor at the University of Mining and Geology “St. Iv. Rilski”, Sofia, Bulgaria. Her professional and scientific interests include management information systems, data mining, and information technologies in the area of natural resources. She teaches technology-related courses.

Reneta Barneva, State University of New York at Fredonia, USA

Reneta P. Barneva, Ph.D., is a Professor and Interim Associate Director of the School of Business at the State University of New York at Fredonia. Her research interests cover a wide range of areas such as data analysis, business applications, and the social impact of technology. She teaches digital marketing and data analytics to sports management and music industry students. She holds several distinguished honors, including Kasling Memorial Lecturer, Chancellor's Award for Scholarship and Creative Activities, and the Wilkes Award of the British Computer Society.

Lisa Walters, State University of New York at Fredonia, USA

Lisa Walters, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor at the State University of New York at Fredonia. Her teaching includes operations management, quality management, supply chain management, and Lean Six Sigma. Her research interests include techniques to achieve business and organizational sustainability, competitiveness, and regulatory compliance.

References

Berbel, J. & Expósito, A. (2018). Economic challenges for the EU Water Framework Directive reform and implementation, European Planning Studies 26(1), 20–34.

Berbel, J., Martin-Ortega, J., & Mesa, P. (2011). A cost-effectiveness analysis of water-saving measures for the water framework directive: The case of the Guadalquivir River Basin in Southern Spain. Water Resource Management, 25, 630–640.

Borkey, P. (2006). Keeping water safe to drink. Organisation for Economic Co-operation & Development. Paris, France, pp. 1–8.

Brouwer, R. (2008). The potential role of stated preference methods in the Water Framework Directive to assess disproportionate costs. Journal of Environmental Planning Management, 51, 597–614.

European Commission. (2020). The Habitat Directive. Retrieved on February 4, 2020 from https://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/legislation/habitatsdirective/index_en.htm

European Commission. (2020). The Nitrates Directive. Retrieved on February 4, 2020 from https://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-nitrates/index_en.html

European Commission. (2020). Rural Development. Retrieved on February 4, 2020 from https://ec.europa.eu/info/food-farming-fisheries/key-policies/common-agricultural-policy/rural-development_en

European Commission. (2000). Directive 2000/60/EC (Water Framework Directive). Official of the European Communities. Brussels, Belgium.

European Commission. (2003). Common implementation strategy for the water framework directive. In Guidance Document on Exemptions to the Environmental Objectives. Guidance Document No. 20 (pp. 1–49). Luxembourg, Luxembourg: European Commission.

European Commission. (2006). In Guidance on the Methodology for Carrying out Cost-Benefit Analysis. The New Programming Period 2007–2013. Methodological Working Document No. 4. DG Regional Policy. (pp. 1–23) EC: Brussels, Belgium.

European Commission. (2009). Directive 2009/90/EC (Quality Assurance Quality Control Directive). Official of the European Communities. Brussels, Belgium.

Galioto, F., Marconi, V., Raggi, M., & Viaggi, D. (2013). An assessment of disproportionate costs in WFD: The experience of Emilia-Romagna. Water, 5(4), 1967–1995.

Goswami, K. B. & Bisht, P. S. (2017). The Role of Water Resources in Socio-Economic Development. International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology 5(XII), 1669–1674.

Huijbregts, M., Thissen, U., Guinee, J., vande Meent, D., & Ragas, A. (2000). Priority assessment of toxic substances in life cycle assessment. Part I: Calculation of toxicity potentials for 181 substances with the nested multi-media fate, exposure and effects model USES-LCA. Chemosphere 41(4), 541–573.

Interwies, E., Gorlach, B., Strosser, P., Ozdemiroglu, E., & Brouwer, R. (2005). The case for valuation studies in the water framework directive. (pp. 1–97) Scotland and Northern Ireland Forum for Environmental Research: Edinburgh, UK.

Jensen, C., Jacobsen, B., Olsen, S., Dubgaard, A., & Hasler, B. (2013). A practical CBA-based screening procedure for identification of river basins where the costs of fulfilling the WFD requirements may be disproportionate - Applied to the case of Denmark. Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2, 164-200.

Laurans, Y. (2006). Implementing cost-effectiveness analysis: Perspectives based on recent French pilot studies. In Proceedings of Vortrag auf der Messe Wasser, Berlin, Germany, 5 April 2006.

Martin-Ortega, J., Skuras, D., Perni, A., Holen, S., & Psaltopoulos, D. (2013). The disproportionality principle in the WFD: How to actually apply it? In Economics of Water Management in Agriculture; Bournaris, T., Berbel, J., Manos, B., Viaggi, D. Eds.; Science Publishers: Enfield, NH, USA.

Mattheiß V., De Paoli G., & Strosser P. (2012). Comparative study of pressures and measures in the major river basin management plans in the EU, Task 4 b: Costs & Benefits of WFD implementation. Retrieved on September 30, 2019 from https://ec.europa.eu/environment/archives/water/implrep2007/pdf/EUpressuresandmeasures_Task_4b_Finalreport.pdf.

Macgregor C. & Warren, C. (2016). Evaluating the impacts of Nitrate Vulnerable Zones on the environment and farmers’ practices: a Scottish case study. Scottish Geographical Journal, 132 (1), 1–20.

Navrud, S. & Ready, R. (Eds.) (2007). Environmental Value Transfer: Issues and Methods. London, UK: Springer.

Postle, M., Fenn, T., Foottit, A., & Salado, R. (2004). CEA and Developing a Methodology for Assessing Disproportionate Costs. In Final Report for Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). (pp. 1–72) Welsh Assembly Government (WAG), Scottish Executive (SE) and Department of the Environment in Northern Ireland (DOENI); Risk & Policy Analysts Limited (RPA): Norfolk, UK.

Stemplewski, J., Krull, D., Wermter, P., Nafo, I.I., Palm, N. and Lange, C. (2008). Integrative socio‐economic planning of measures in the context of the water framework directive. Water and Environment Journal, 22, 250–257.

Van Soesbergen, A. (2008) Assessing the cost-effectiveness of pollution abatement measures in industry. WEMPA Working Paper-10.

Vecherkov, I., Yanev, N., & Anastasova, Y. (2017). Software tools for business intelligence. Journal of Mining and Geological Sciences, 60 (IV) 40–45.

Von Schiller D., Acuña, V., Aristi, I., Arroita, M. & et al. (2017). River ecosystem processes: a synthesis of approaches, criteria of use and sensitivity to environmental stressors, Science of The Total Environment, 596-597, 465–480.

Voulvoulis N., Arpon, K., & Giakoumis, T. (2017). The EU Water Framework Directive: from great expectations to problems with implementation, Science of The Total Environment, 575, 358–366.

Ward, F. (2009). Economics in integrated water management. Environmental Modeling Software, 24, 948–958.

World Bank. (2015). The World Bank Annual Report 2015. Washington, DC. Retrieved on September 30, 2019 from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/22550.

Younger, P. L. (2001). Mine water pollution in Scotland: Nature, extent and preventative strategies. The Science of the Total Environment, 265, 309–332.

Views:

10

Downloads:

0

Published
2022-05-20
Citations
How to Cite
Yuli Radev, Desislava Simeonova, Reneta Barneva, & Lisa Walters. (2022). ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES OF EUROPEAN WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE. International Journal of Innovative Technologies in Economy, (2(38). https://doi.org/10.31435/rsglobal_ijite/30062022/7814
Share