EU-WFD and Economics in the Neretva River Basin Event in ......1. Baseline scenario: considering...

Programme

EU-WFD and Economics in the Neretva River Basin Event in the context of the WWF - “Living Neretva” project:

Training on how to develop a full WFD-Baseline Scenario for

the Neretva and Trebisnjica Basin

February 19th-20th 2009

Jahorina, Bosnia-Herzegovina

Thursday, 19 February 2009 12:15 Registration 12:30 Lunch

SESSION I – Introduction to the Neretva project and WFD-Economics: what is the role of the BLS? 13:40 Welcome by the WWF (Branko Vucijak - WWF MedPO) Welcome by a representative of the BiH administration 13:50 Aims of the workshop (Eduard Interwies - InterSus) 14.00 Introduction to the WWF-Living Neretva project: overall aims, work regarding WFD-

economics overall and esp. in the current phase of the project (Branko Vucijak - WWF MedPO)

14.10 Tour-de-table; what are your expectations of this workshop? 14.25 Introduction: EU WFD & Economics – Requirements and Objectives towards the River

Basin Management Plans and Programmes of Measures (Eduard Interwies – InterSus) 14.40 The role of the economic analysis: setting the scene for later work on the implementation

of the WFD (Eduard Interwies – InterSus) Discussion: where do we stand regarding WFD-economics implementation in BiH/the Neretva? 15.25 Coffee

SESSION II – Methodology to carry out a Baseline Scenario according to the WFD 15.45 The Baseline Scenario approach as developed by the WATECO-group: the overall

approach (Eduard Interwies – InterSus) 16.15 Discussion / clarifications 16.30 A methodology for developing the Baseline Scenario (based on CIS-group Eco 1) (Eduard

Interwies – InterSus) 17.00 Discussion / clarifications 17:30 End of day 1

Friday, 20 February 2009

SESSION III –Carrying out a Baseline Scenario according to the WFD in the Neretva and Trebisnjica basin 9.00 Overall issues for the development of a full BLS at the Neretva – elements of a work plan

(see chapter 7 of the guidebook) (Eduard Interwies – InterSus) Discussion & the way ahead 9.20 The economic analysis report as developed by the last project phase: overall approach &

the template regarding BLS (Eduard Interwies – InterSus) 9.30 Results for the economic analysis project on BLS: Issues related to agriculture (WG

member) Discussion & the way ahead 10.10 Results from the Neretva economic analysis project: Issues related to hydropower (WG

member) Discussion & the way ahead 10.50 Coffee

11.20 Results from the Neretva economic analysis project: Issues related to tourism (WG

member) Discussion & the way ahead 12.00 Results from the Neretva economic analysis project: Issues related to other potential

drivers / “trend” variables beyond the three topics discussed so far (e.g. exogenous drivers; water policies and investments; macroeconomic policies; global polices) (WG member)

Discussion & the way ahead 12.40 Overall discussion on the next steps towards a full baseline scenario at the Neretva,

summary of workshop results (Eduard Interwies – InterSus) 13.00 Lunch - End of workshop

Aims of the workshop

WWF-Living Neretva Project: WFD-BLS workshop 19-20 February 2009, Jahorina, BiH

WWF-Living Neretva Project

WFD-BLS workshop

19-20 February 2009

Jahorina, BiH

Eduard Interwies

InterSus – Sustainability Services

Support the implementation of the WFD in the Neretva RB and esp. the set-up of the Baseline Scenario – integrate projections into river basin management planning

Main tool: the handbook on BLS-development

Overall aim & structure of theworkshop


Main tool: the handbook on BLS-development

To reach that aim: 3 Sessions

1. Introductory session:

Reminder on the importance of economics in WFD-implementation; the economic analysis; and esp. of the BLS-development: why do we do all this?

2. Methodology to develop the BLS:

What support has been provided at the EU-level?

3. Adjusting to the Neretva situation – developing

Overall aim & structure of theworkshop


3. Adjusting to the Neretva situation – developing the way ahead:

The economic analysis report of the last project phase as starting point – where are we;

What do we/can we do in order to close main gaps for the BLS-development?

We look forward to your feedback on the (draft) handbook

Working language: English, but give a sign & we will translate; questions in local language ok

In order to be successful:


will translate; questions in local language ok

Please ask any questions as they arise, please discuss openly (no “official opinions” stated here – working meeting)

Let´s be ambitious – but realistic on what can be achieved…

Let´s enjoy the beautiful environment!

Thank you for listening!

Eduard Interwies

[email protected]@intersus.eu

WWFFor an introductionFor an introduction

Jahorina 19.2.2009

What WWF is

• World Wide Fund for Nature (formerly World Wildlife Fund)

• In the US still World Wildlife Fund

• The World’s leading independent conservation organisation

• Working for People and Nature

A bit of history

In 1960, Sir Huxley went to East Africato advise UNESCO on wildlife conservation inthe area.He was appalled at what he saw. On his returnto London, he wrote three articles for Theto London, he wrote three articles for TheObserver newspaper in which he warned theBritish public that habitat was being destroyedand animals hunted at such a rate that much ofthe region's wildlife could disappear within thenext 20 years.

• Preparatory Group, to "establish plans for a world fundraising organization to work in collaboration with existing bodies to bring massive financial support to the conservation movement on an international scale"• Name “World Wildlife Fund” chosen

A bit of history

1961, a crucial year

11 September 1961 : WORLD WILDLIFE FUND registered as a Foundation in Zürich (Switzerland)

• Panda design created by Peter Scott

• The Prince of the Netherlands first patron, then President of WWF

The initial purpose:

“… for the conservation of

world fauna, flora, forests,

A bit of history

world fauna, flora, forests,

landscape, water, soils and

other natural resources…”

In less then 5 decades, WWF hasbecome the world's largest and

WWF today

become the world's largest andmost respected independentconservation organizations

• WWF today

WWF today

TO STOP THE DEGRADATION OF THE PLANET'S NATURAL

WWF Mission

ENVIRONMENT AND TO BUILD A FUTURE IN WHICH HUMANSLIVE IN HARMONY WITH NATURE, BY:

• Conserving the world's biological diversity

• Ensuring that the use of renewable naturalresources is sustainable

• Promoting the reduction of pollutionand wasteful consumption

FORESTS SPECIES

WHAT ? WHERE ?

Conservation priorities

FRESHWATER

OCEANS & COASTS

TOXICS

CLIMATECHANGE

WHAT + WHERE = WWF'S GLOBAL CONSERVATION PRIORITIES

GLOBAL 200 ECOREGIONS

• be global, independent, multi-cultural and non-party political

• use the best available scientific information to address issues and critically evaluate all its endeavours

Guiding principles

• build concrete conservation solutions through a combination of field-based projects, policy, capacity building and education

• seek dialogue and avoid unnecessary confrontation

• involve local communities and indigenous peoples in the planning and execution of its field programmes, respecting their cultural as well as economic needs

• strive to build partnerships with other organizations, governments, business and local communities to

Guiding principles

governments, business and local communities to enhance its effectiveness

• run its operations in a cost-effective manner and apply donors’ funds according to the highest standards of accountability

(

to conserve the natural wealth of the Mediterraneanand to promote the sustainable use of resources for the

benefit of all

LIVING NERETVA--

“ŽIVJETI” NERETVU

14

CILJ PROJEKTA

• Opći cilj (vizija) projekta je osiguranje zaštite prirode i održivog razvoja u području sliva rijeke Neretve, kao osnove za dugoročni napredak u regiji

• Direktni cilj projekta je doprinijeti razvoju integralnog upravljanja slivom Neretve, u oblasti integralnog upravljanja slivom Neretve, u oblasti povezivanja upravljanja vodama i zaštite bioraznolikosti

• Upravljati prirodnim resursima sliva Neretve sukladno principima i kriterijima Okvirne direktive o vodama (WFD) i Direktive o staništima (HD)

AKTIVNOSTI PROJEKTA

• Formiranje radnih grupa (WG): • HD sa ciljem utvrđivanja najbolje metodologije i akcionog plana za

identificiranje vrijednosti bioraznolikosti i “hotspots” u slivu Neretve, sukladno standardima HD (kasnije LH projekt)

• WFD EF sa ciljem utvrđivanja najbolje metodologije i akcionog plana za identificiranje ekološkog protoka (i odnosnog upravljanja vodama) koji će očuvati prirodne karakteristike rijeke

• WFD EE sa ciljem utvrđivanja najbolje • WFD EE sa ciljem utvrđivanja najbolje metodologije i akcionog plana za identificiranje ekonomske /gospodarstvene vrijednosti različitih mogućnosti upravljanja vodama i okolišnih potencijala Neretve

Predstaviti ukratko tekuću fazu WWF-”Living Neretva”-projekta

GLAVNI CILJ:

Predstaviti pristup izradi nacrta “priručnika za metodologiju izrade osnovnog scenarija prema ODV/WFD – ekonomska analiza;

Cilj radionice

metodologiju izrade osnovnog scenarija prema ODV/WFD – ekonomska analiza;

Identificirati mogućnosti i dobiti smjernice za poboljšanje priručnika;

Najaviti naredne zadatke EE radne grupe (do kraja juna/lipnja 2009)

EU WFD & Economics – Requirements

and Objectives towards the River Basin

Management Plans and Programmes of


Management Plans and Programmes of

MeasuresWWF-Living Neretva Project

WFD-BLS workshop

19-20 February 2009

Jahorina, BiH

Eduard Interwies


The WFD & Economics

Economic elements of the WFD towards 2009 RBMP:

Objectives, Requirements regarding:

Prospective approach: Baseline scenario

Content


Prospective approach: Baseline scenario

Selection of measures considering cost-effectiveness analysis (Art. 11)

Cost recovery/incentive pricing (Art. 9)

Exemptions Art. 4: disproportionality/cost-benefit analysis

1. Baseline scenario: considering changes of significance for WFD-measures selection/RBMP up to 2015

2. Selecting the most cost-effective set of measures to reach the environmental aims

Overview: role of Economicsin the overall WFD process


3a. Cost recovery (including internalization of environmental & resource costs of water services)

3b. Economic incentives for rational water use

4. Assessing different exemptions under Article 4 (“disproportionate costs” etc.); including HMWB, new modifications

Implementingprogramme of

measures

Analysing water uses, pressures,

impacts

Evaluatingimpacts of programme

Environmental objectives

•Economic importance of water uses•Cost recovery Assessment•Supply& demand trends/Baseline Scenario

•Defining penalties


Justifying potential

exemptions

Identifying programme of

measures

Identifying potential measures

objectives

• Costs & benefits of measures• Defining less stringent objectives, time exemptions, HMWB, new modifications• Justification of cost-recovery levels

•Identification of a cost-effective programme of measures•Assessing the role of pric-ing as measure (incentive)•Measures to improve cost recovery

Starting point: Annex III:

“The economic analysis shall contain enough information in sufficient detail (…) to:

(a) make the relevant calculations necessary for taking into account (…) the principle of the cost recovery of water

1. Baseline Scenario


account (…) the principle of the cost recovery of water services, taking account of long term forecasts of supply and demand for water in the RBD and, where necessary:

- estimates of the volume, prices and costs associated with water services;

- estimates of relevant investment including forecasts of such investments”.

Has been specified by WATECO/W. Directors – see later ppt for details

[...] (b) make judgments about the most cost effective combination of measures in respect of water uses to be included in the programme of measures under Art. 11

2. Selection of measures(Art. 11)


included in the programme of measures under Art. 11 based on estimates of the potential costs of such measures (Annex III).

Regarding timing in BiH: draft (?) RBMP including programs of measures due 2012, final by 2015?

„Member States shall take account of the principle of recovery of the costs of water services, including environmental and resource costs [...] and in accordance in particular with the polluter pays principle.

3a. Cost recovery (Art. 9)


Member States shall ensure by 2010:an adequate contribution of the different water uses, disaggregated into a least industry, households and agriculture, to the recovery of the costs of water services“ (Art. 9 (1)).

“Member States may in so doing have regard to the social, environmental and economic effects of the recovery as well as the geographic and climatic conditions of the region or regions affected” (Art. 9 (1)).

3a. „Social“ and reasonableCost Recovery (Art. 9)


important, realistic restriction of the cost recovery principle: room for interpretation;

political consensus through transparency;

cost recovery levels reached & contribution by water uses to these costs need to be justified!

“Member States shall ensure by 2010:

that water pricing policies provide adequate incentives for users to use water resources efficiently, and thereby

3b. Incentive pricing (Art. 9)


for users to use water resources efficiently, and thereby contribute to the environmental objectives of this Directive” (Art. 9 (1)).

Setting of incentives (e.g. through pricing) can be a cost-effective measure for reaching the WFD-objectives

Possible to lower environmental objectives, apply for time exemptions, designate HMWBs;

Number of conditions to be met, of relevance for all:

“disproportionality of costs”!

4. Justifying potentialexemptions (Art. 4)


“disproportionality of costs”!

Use of cost-benefit analysis

Of importance also for new modifications! (Art. 4.7: “The beneficial objectives served by those modifications or alterations of the water body cannot for reasons of technical feasibility or disproportionate cost be achieved by other means, which are a significantly better environmental option.”)

Starting point for this integration of economics in WFD implementation:

For each river basin:

1. analysis of characteristics

Requirements of the WFDfor 2004



2. review of the impact of human activities on water bodies

3. economic analysis of water uses

(according to Article 5, Annex II, III and V)

This economic analysis was the main focus of the last “Living Neretva” project work on economics – we now will go a step further aiming at closing gaps regarding the BLS


Eduard Interwies


The role of the economic analysis:

setting the scene for later work on the

implementation of the WFD

WWF-Living Neretva Project - WFD & Economics workshop 3-4 April 2008, Sarajevo, BiH

implementation of the WFD


WFD-BLS workshop

19-20 February 2009

Jahorina, BiH

Eduard Interwies


[Economic elements of the WFD towards 2009 RBMP: see last presentation]

What does the economic analysis need to contain as a preparatory step? Specification of content based on the WATECO-document

Content


WATECO-document

Some words on the current implementation status across Europe

Implementingprogramme of

measures

Analysing water uses, pressures,

impacts

Evaluatingimpacts of programme

Environmental objectives

•Economic importance of water uses•Cost recovery Assessment•Supply& demand trends/Baseline Scenario

•Defining penalties


Justifying potential

exemptions

Identifying programme of

measures

Identifying potential measures

objectives

• Costs & benefits of measures• Defining less stringent objectives, time exemptions, HMWB, new modifications• Justification of cost-recovery levels

•Identification of a cost-effective programme of measures•Assessing the role of pric-ing as measure (incentive)•Measures to improve cost recovery

Starting point:

For each river basin:



Requirements of the WFD for2004 (economic analysis)



3. economic analysis of water uses

(according to Article 5, Annex II, III and V)

In BiH: deadline for econ analysis is 2010 (?): “path finding” work on the example of the Neretva done in last project phase. Now: how to close gaps? Focus on BLS and ecosystem services/Env & Res. Costs (see May workshop)

In order to clarify main issues & provide support for the implementation:

Various working groups within the CIS-process (Common Implementation Strategy) producing

Practical implementation


(Common Implementation Strategy) producing Information Sheets on economics etc.; therein,

Main Guidance document on economic aspects of the WFD prepared by the WATer ECOnomics working group (WATECO) in 2003 (can be found at http://circa.europa.eu/Public/irc/env/wfd/library)

Link to the “pressures and impacts” analysis in order to identify the main water uses of importance;

WATECO-document presents the kind of information to be collected for the different water uses (see template);

Economic importance ofwater uses


Only the significant water uses need to be worked upon!

For Neretva/our project: the “P & I” analysis will take place in the next phase(s), so identification of significant water uses done based on expert judgements! (to be possibly revised later when we have the results of the P & I analysis)

Important specification of the WFD-spirit based on the requirements of Annex III of

“long term forecasts of supply and demand for water & forecasts water service investments”

Baseline scenario


Understanding that prospective thinking is necessary! (WATECO, Water Directors)

3-Step approach developed, see next presentations

WATECO Guidance & CostRecovery

WATER USES

Adequate contribution to the recovery of the costs

of water services

WATER SERVICES


WATER USES

Industry Households Agriculture

WATER SERVICES

Financial costs

Environmental costs

Resource costs

What costs?

Costs Definition Example

Capital costs Principal and interest,depreciation

Financial cost

Operating costs Wages, electricity,maintenance of


maintenance ofequipment, analyses ofthe quality of water…

Environmentalcost

Costs of the damages tothe environment causedby a given activity

Contamination of anaquifer, destruction ofwetlands…

Resource cost Value of the alternativeforegone by choosing aparticular activity(= opportunity costs)

Cost of electricity thatcould have been producedif water would beavailable instead of beingpumped for irrigation

According to WATECO, it is not required for the first economic analysis to have developed the full methodology/provide all necessary information for the later selection of measures;

At the same time, preparations have to take place, e.g.:

Preparing the selection ofmeasures


At the same time, preparations have to take place, e.g.:

collecting available information on costs of measures,

possible methodological approaches developed/under development,

measures under consideration that would affect the environmental status and their related information, e.g. aims, costs etc. (of special importance for the Neretva: possible new dams?)

Characterization reports – economic analysis prepared (almost all…) in 2004/05; evaluation of EU-COM showed room for improvement up to 2009;

Intense work currently across Europe on the next steps:- preparing the selection of measures (focus!);

Current implementationstatus in the EU


- preparing the selection of measures (focus!);- preparing methodologies for assessing potential exemptions;- revising water pricing structures;- international coordination of River Basin Management Plans;- etc.

Draft River Basin Management Plans now available (most…) for consultation – final in March 2010

Main challenges/issues right now in the EU:

- definition of w. uses & w. services;

- linking WFD implementation to climate change (&

Current implementationstatus


scarcity) (BLS!);

- assessing Environmental & Resource costs

- assessing “disproportional costs” for exemptions:

which role for “affordability”?

The WFD implementation process so far showed the advantages of the systematic integration of economics into water management: transparency & “lively discussions”;

Still, the challenges are considerable, but progress is made!

Concluding remarks


Still, the challenges are considerable, but progress is made!

Public participation is key, both for better knowledge basis as well as acceptance of results

For BiH/Neretva: some time for conducting the overall economic analysis according to the water law (2010++?) – but due to the specific difficulties work at national/regional level has to start early!

So: initial economic analysis on the Neretva done; important to clarify future work for closing gaps!


Eduard Interwies


The Baseline Scenario approach as

developed by the WATECO-group: the

overall approach


overall approach


WFD-BLS workshop

19-20 February 2009

Jahorina, BiH

Eduard Interwies


Important specification of the WFD-spirit based on the requirements of Annex III of

“long term forecasts of supply and demand for water & forecasts water service investments”

Baseline scenario


water & forecasts water service investments”

Understanding that prospective thinking is necessary! (WATECO, Water Directors)

3-Step approach developed

Investigate dynamics in river basin development: “forward looking” water management

Complement the characterization of RB today by an assessment of its future likely trends. This assessment: basis for analyzing the gap between

Main aims of BLS


an assessment of its future likely trends. This assessment: basis for analyzing the gap between likely water status & good water status (risk of non-compliance);

This gap analysis: variety of experts involved, but economic analysis a first step: assessment of forecasts in key drivers likely to influence pressures and thus water status

”

Baseline scenario (04-05)Description

of the initial situationBaseline scenario:

projection for 2015


Focus on economic aspects, e.g.:• estimate the economic "weight" of water uses and

servicesBaseline scenario:

• appraisal of evolutions of uses, pressures...• identification of potential gaps in water status

with GES

General socio-economic indicators & variables (e.g. population growth);

Key sector policies influencing significant water uses identified in the river basin investigated (e.g. agricultural policy);

Examples of trends to beinvestigated:


policy);

Production or turnover of main economic sectors/significant water uses;

Land planning and its effects on the spatial allocation of pressures & economic sectors;

Implementation of existing water sector regulation / directives or of environmental policies likely to affect water (e.g. NATURA 2000)

BASELINE SCENARIO UP TO 2015ImpactTrends

Present 2015Continuation ofpast trends

- demography- changes in land planning…

Impact of waterpolicies

- implementation of water directives- planned investments in the water sector- new technologies…

Critica luncertainties

- new CAP- clim ate change…


ConformityNon conformity+ improvement

Source of original map: Agence de l'Eau Seine-Normandie

To be complemented by analysis of changes in the hydrological cycle, e.g. for accounting for climate change!

Feed into an overall assessment of changes in key pressures, including water demand, and resulting impact

…but it´s not only socio-economics:


pressures, including water demand, and resulting impact on water status.

It is important to stress that some analyses can be organised at the national (or European) scale as all river basins of a given country (or of Europe) will face similar changes

To be discussed later: Neretva & BiH?

3-step-approach:

Step 1 (2004-07): complement the characterization of the river basin today by an assessment of its future likely trends using projections for 2015 (baseline scenario);

WATECO Guidance


Step 2 (2007): Assessment of “risk” to fail environmental objectives (“Gap analysis”-Risk of non-compliance);

Step 3 (2009): Choosing cost-effective measures, assessing exemptions, “approaching cost recovery”.

Specific role of economics: project significant trends in key indicators & (policy and economic) drivers up to 2015, contribute to a “Business As Usual” Scenario for pressures: ”what would happen without the WFD”, including completion of other EU-Directives

• Forecast not only investments but other key parameters & drivers influencing water supply & demand (or more generally all significant pressures);

• Do not rely too much on projection of past trends; possibly misleading results! Integrate predictable

Key issues when developing theBLS


possibly misleading results! Integrate predictable changes in past trends based on a series of assumptions;

• Identify (and distinguish) variables with high degree of confidence & those that are uncertain; both for ’physical’ parameters & for economic / policy-based drivers; and

• Build a series of alternative scenarios using alternative assumptions, particularly with respect to policy options

1. Trend variables: underlying (exogenous) trends, on which water policy has no direct influence (e.g. changes in demographic factors; economic growth and changes in economic activity composition);

Types of variables to beforcasted


2. Critical uncertainties: difficult to predict variables, might have significant impact on final result (e.g. changes in social values & policy drivers (e.g. globalisation / regionalisation); changes in natural conditions, e.g. climate change; changes in non-water sector policies, e.g. changes in agricultural policy or industrial policy etc.);

3. Water policy variables: variables linked to water policies, independently from WFD implementation (e.g. planned investments in the water sector, e.g. for developing water services or for restoring the natural environment;

Types of variables to beforcasted


water services or for restoring the natural environment; development of new technologies likely to impact on water use for industrial production and related pressures etc.).

(“Assessment of the River Basin´s future likely trends using projections”):

Task 1 - Assess current trends in “trend” variables (including physical parameters and socio-economic

How to work on step 1 (theBLS)?


(including physical parameters and socio-economic drivers)

Task 2 – Project certain changes in water policy variables and derive longer-term projections

Task 3 - Integrate Changes in Uncertain Parameters (integration of critical uncertainties)

FLOW CHART OF THE PROCEDURE FOR CONSTRUCTING BASELINE SCENARIO

Characterisation- Description of the district

- Economic analysis of water uses / services- Recovery of costs- Baseline scenario

Monitoring programme

Management plan

Good Ecological

Status

2004 2006 2009 2015


Main stepsWFD procedure

Goal

- Baseline scenario- Identification of

potential gaps

Assess current trends in trend variables

Project certain changes in water policy variables

Derive one/several realistic business as usual scenarios Integrate changes in critical

uncertainties (optional)

First BLS will build on existing knowledge of trends in key variables, lack robustness, incorporate many uncertainties.

So, to enable revisions, keep a log of:

Hints for BLS-work:


So, to enable revisions, keep a log of:

- Calculations made with respect to key variables, physical parameters & formulas;

- Overall reasoning process: assumptions, choices of variables, range of variation, priorities in analysis;

- Databases used for calculations; and

- Perceived limitations in the analysis & suggested future work

- Participation by collective building of scenarios: involve stakeholders/public in the choice of assumptions & their values;

- Participation by checking coherence of the proposed

Possible roles of publicparticipation in BLS-work


- Participation by checking coherence of the proposed scenarios: check consistency of assumptions & of scenarios;

- Participation by asking the public to question the main “statements” in water policy: scenarios illustrate and somehow caricaturise policy statements, helping the public to input into decision-making and fostering transparency in the process.

- Participation by collective building of scenarios: involve stakeholders/public in the choice of assumptions & their values;

- Participation by checking coherence of the proposed

Public participation & scenariobuilding


- Participation by checking coherence of the proposed scenarios: check consistency of assumptions & of scenarios;

- Participation by asking the public to question the main “statements” in water policy: scenarios illustrate and somehow caricaturise policy statements, helping the public to input into decision-making and fostering transparency in the process.


Eduard Interwies


A methodology for developing the

Baseline Scenario (based on CIS-group

Eco 1)


Eco 1)


WFD-BLS workshop

19-20 February 2009

Jahorina, BiH

Eduard Interwies


Further specification of the WATECO-BLS-approach by the “Working Group 2B: Drafting Group ECO1 of the EU Common Implementation Strategy”

It aimed at (a) providing suggestions on the

ECO1-methodology


It aimed at (a) providing suggestions on the possible organization of work for the implementation of the Baseline scenario (BLS) & at (b) identifying the type of methodologies available

BLS :

is to be taken as a “projection” of business-as-usual policies and trends.

is not necessarily a prediction of a likely 2015 situation: things can change, and should change, after decision-

…and again: what is a BLS?


things can change, and should change, after decision-making and implementation.

is not a definition of the aims & objectives of the district: on the contrary it involves stressing unwanted or insufficient evolutions in order to highlight need for action.

is not an exploration of various “possible futures” that would result from sudden changes in business or environmental conditions. Such elaboration should come after BLS, and be based on its results, with possible use of prospective/foresight methodologies

Main steps forderiving a BLS

Characterisation ofR basin: presentsignificant activities and pressures; present

“risk of failing” to meet objectives

Forecasts on evolution of activitiesthat generate significant pressures

on water quantity and/or quality(DRIVERS SCENARIO)e.g. population, agriculture)

Assessment of evolution ofpressureson waterbodies

Simulated pressure(“GROSS PRESSURES” SCENARIO)

e.g. increaseof population in WB ->increase inurban waste water discharge&

Anticipation of forthcominginvestmentsout of currentpolicies

e.g. Planned Treatment plant in2005;water saving plan planned

Prevision of evolution ofnet pressures:simulated pressure (after completion ofcurrent programmes)

e.g. increase of waste water production minus increase of treatment capacity;

results of water saving rates on new

EVOLUTION OF NET PRESSURES

Links betw. activitiesand pressures (by models or more

general estimates)

INPUT

(“BAU EQUIPMENT SCENARIO”) (“”NET PRESSURES EVOLUTION SCENARIO”)


- Significant issues to be addressed by future “programof measures”: main polluters, geographical priorities…

- probability of reaching good status on water bodies- investments needed- time range left between completion of current work

and 2015

Characterisation ofRbasin:forthcomingsignificant activities and pressuresPossible change in the present riskto fail reaching good status

OUTPUT

urban waste water discharge&water demand; increase ofurbanisation in wetlands

2005;water saving plan plannedfor 2000-2005; forthcoming law

on urbandevelopment

results of water saving rates on newpopulation; possible

results of new urban regulation onwetlandsurbanisation

Assessment of Impact results: changesinquality and quantity after“current

programme”

(e.g. water quality changes and likelihoodof reaching national good quality level onwater body; net forecasted volume ofwater demand; forecasted wetlandstatus(% of newartificialisation)

Linking pressures andimpact on water quality and

Quantity (model-basedor other means)

1. Assessing and defining the significant activities and pressures

2. Evolution of activities generating significant pressures on water bodies

3. Evaluation of net pressures

Four steps in the derivationof the BLS:


3. Evaluation of net pressures

4. Possible outputs of the baseline scenario

(PS: all of these “steps” are for development of the BLS – so only step 1 of the WATECO-approach!)

select most relevant subjects to focus on for data collection, improvement and for calculation; though avoiding insufficient notice of significant emergent issues.

By:

Starting with initial screening of the present main water

Step 1: Assessing & definingsignificant activities pressures


Starting with initial screening of the present main water management issues for the basin.

Then pay attention to possible “emergent” issues out of trends analysis, by putting those first findings into an initial expert desk-based review.

Handy hint: propose first a general statement based on current data and knowledge, on which various experts are invited to & provide reactions in order to create a better (shared) understanding of ongoing & future issues

AIM: make a BLS for the development of activities (industrial production, agriculture, population growth & consumption…) as a basis for assessing likely evolution of pressures & for assessing the activity sectors that will be responsible for remaining pressures then should be targeted in the RB management plan).

Step 2: Evolution of activitiesgenerating significant pressures


targeted in the RB management plan).

In some cases: when evolution of pressures is apparently well known & when the link between activities & pressures is considered to be certain & stable by both policy-makers and stakeholders, it may not be necessary to undertake a detailed scenario for the evolution of activities. Probably be rare & most often proposing a pressures evolution scenario will have to be based on scenario for the evolution of the drivers.

2 approaches:

[Bottom-up: build up a local forecast for each important driver in the basin &check afterwards its coherence with global forecasts]

Top-down: start with general forecasting of population &



Top-down: start with general forecasting of population & urban development, social structure, economy and apply it to the River basin by interpolation of trends to its local drivers;Top-down option: most often less data demanding & time-consuming

Designing a top-down drivers scenario: scenario may use information from:

• Growth assumptions for each major activity from now to 2015 (or even further 2021 & 2027…)

• Evolution of land use (e.g. surface & farming practices)



• Evolution of land use (e.g. surface & farming practices)

• Evolution of industrial sectors. This task may prove the most difficult, because each sector is rather specific in terms of development and economic drivers: one activity can disappear while another benefits from a boom.

• Evolution of agriculture & CAP: the least easy to assess in terms of “business-as-usual”: likely to incur heavy changes in near future

Some hints:

• Check consistency between drivers projections by spelling out the general economic forecasts that underpin the projections (e.g. general growth, world markets, national demography, national and local policy development priorities…);



national demography, national and local policy development priorities…);

• To avoid inefficient work for industrial scenario: derive “general” forecasts on industrial discharge volume from past data on industrial effluent trends - consider pollution abatement rates of industrial sectors & past trends;

• Examine past trends: check if factors included in forecasts are a good explanation of past evolution. Factors that don’t explain past trends well, might not properly explain future forecasts either.

Consistency between forecasts used by river basins:

General prospective documentation on economic & social forecasts: growth, agricultural policy, land planning and housing, consumption habits, industrial sectors forecasts, etc.



etc.

For such overall forecasts: share common prospective between RB (European level, but esp. national, e.g. BiH and Neretva/Danube RB…to be discussed tomorrow)

Treatment of uncertainties:

All projections subject to several possibilities of change and variation in its basic assumptions: it is often said that long-term forecasts are always false.

But: forecast is inevitable; is either explicit or implicit.



But: forecast is inevitable; is either explicit or implicit. Making no forecast implicitly defines the future as the same as today. So, explicit forecasts are only “less false” than no anticipation. Useful to:

• Separate & assess in turn the different kinds of variations in assumptions

• Bear in mind the necessity of a sensitivity analysis of the BLS results

• Manage the need for continuous updating of the BLS

Examine 3 kinds of variations in the assumptions/ uncertainties that will form the basis of BLS:

A. Treating undetermination by BLS “versions”:

Unavoidable undetermination of certain variables (e.g. even if demographic evolution forecasted, not possible to forecast with confidence the evolution of an industrial sector, of long term regional



confidence the evolution of an industrial sector, of long term regional economic growth…)

So: define two or more “versions” of a BLS; coherent combination of various assumptions on the most relevant & undetermined drivers.

Versions are still “baseline”: still “business as usual”, but take in consideration the variation of important drivers.

Choosing a “most probable” version then through discussion (esp. if results provide different assessments)

Choice to be discussed in decision-making arenas & be kept transparent; the sensitivity of the probability assessment to that choice should be assessed.

B. Treating lack of data: sensitivity analysis & data improvement programme

Possible errors & variations will come from the lack in knowledge for some variables. Method: evaluate the sensitivity of the main BLS results to the less known variables:



results to the less known variables:

If the analysis shows important sensitivity : evaluate the range of error. If sensitivity is moderate or low: probability assessment of the variable should be defined & working assumptions established;

For all non-negligible variables: design & implement a data improvement programme, focusing on the most sensitive & less known variables

C. Treating uncertainties: “what if” scenarios & other futures thinking methodologies

Some possible errors and variations will come from the evolution of some variables that are naturally subject to large-scale or unpredictable changes (e.g. a series of



large-scale or unpredictable changes (e.g. a series of extreme meteorological events after climate change, significant social or political changes…)

Such variations poorly suited to probability assessment; coherence between such assessment is often very difficult. Treatment may be undertaken through the various futures thinking methodologies: foresight, prospective, what-if scenarios…

Outcomes:

Definition of a Business-as-usual relevant drivers scenario

Possible definition of several “versions” of BLS with respect to undetermination of some major drivers



respect to undetermination of some major drivers

Sensitivity analysis & data improvement programme

Handling issues without quantitative localised data:

How to derive business-as-usual forecasts on pressures without relying on quantitative data

How to organise work in order to produce results in reasonable time (and/or budget)?

Step 3: Evaluation of net pressures


reasonable time (and/or budget)?

How to make use of partial data on environmental previsions (data about evolution of one only parameter, or limited to specific region, or incomplete series…)?

Solution from a qualitative approach! Efficient methodologies (time & budget constraints) based on “expert groups”.

Expert groups:

aimed at using partial knowledge to build a judgment on evolution, based on partial data plus deliberation.

Various expert judgment methodologies can be used, such as scientific forums, panels and conferences,



such as scientific forums, panels and conferences, statistical inquiries, “Delphi” method (interrogation of experts, statistical measurement of “average” estimates, and re-evaluation by expert of their initial judgment)…

Some hints:

• Clear definition & selection of themes is needed: concentrate on the significant ones for water quality

• Pay attention to constitution of drafting group: appraisal only partially based on scientific evidence; separate “judgement” from “scientific knowledge”.

Handling issues with quantitative localised data:

Not of interest here…

[Building a quantitative database linking drivers with pressures: too data & resource intensive]



1. Outputs to the economic analysis:

• BLS provides a way of describing the dynamics of current water use and pollution. By evaluating the likely improvements awaited from a business-as-usual policy (i.e. decrease in some pollution kinds / improvement in some sectors / decrease of unitary water consumption…),

Step 4: Possible outputs of the BLS


(i.e. decrease in some pollution kinds / improvement in some sectors / decrease of unitary water consumption…), as well as the likely degradations (i.e. increase or progressive unveiling of pollution previously hidden / increase of demand), it points out what will be important in the future & what is progressively becoming less problematic.

2. Outputs to international rivers management plan

In international districts: national baseline provisions not sufficient for obtaining a picture of the foreseen evolution of pressures. Each downstream basin has to take into consideration the influence of actions undertaken in upstream basins.



consideration the influence of actions undertaken in upstream basins.

3. Outputs to the general WFD process

• BLS is intended to provide a convenient way of integrating the various approaches needed for implementing the WFD. Its realisation itself needs skills and approaches to be brought together in a balanced way, helping each approach to focus and to simplify.

3. Outputs to the general WFD process

• Intended to provide an assessment of progress & regression towards good status due to existing directives and other current policies (water or general policies, e.g. agricultural, land planning…); provides essential outputs to the evaluation of the likelihood that water bodies within



agricultural, land planning…); provides essential outputs to the evaluation of the likelihood that water bodies within the RB will fail to meet the environmental quality objectives set (Annex II).

• Output of BLS to water management & decision-making: measuring the “room for manoeuvre” for meeting WFD-objectives: combination of forecast situation compared to objectives & time left to meet the objectives. Can be expressed in annual mean investment needs after fulfillment of existing directives.


Eduard Interwies


Overall issues for the development of a

full BLS at the Neretva – elements of a

work plan


work plan


WFD-BLS workshop

19-20 February 2009

Jahorina, BiH

Eduard Interwies


In the following presentations: what information is available as a starting point for the development of a BLS in the Neretva RB?

Based on the economic analysis report: therefore, short introduction to the approach of the report

Overall issues: why?


Based on the economic analysis report: therefore, short introduction to the approach of the report and the template regarding BLS first (“what did we look for and how”?)

BUT: some overall issues need to be discussed first in order to then become more specific/practical

According to the entity Water Laws, obligation of each entity to elaborate own Strategy for Water Management (first step towards elaboration of River Basin Management Plans)

Strategies will determine water management policies in

Promising process:


Strategies will determine water management policies in BiH. The elaboration of these strategies (commenced in the FBiH, yet to start in RS which has elaborated the Framework Plan for Development of Water Management in RS in 2006 as a step towards the Strategy for Water Management) update?

These strategies should be based on the prospective thinking of the WFD and make explicit links to the development of the BLS according to the WFD!

Institutional set-up of the work:

Integration with national WFD-implementation efforts

[Coordination with Croatia? GEF-project] The

Overall issues


[Coordination with Croatia? GEF-project] The Danube RB?

Main working areas /themes:

Based on results of economic analysis, proposal: hydro, agri, tourism, other issues (proposal to be discussed & can be revised; esp. issue of water supply & sewage investments?)

Resources / timing:

Set-up of working groups per topic feasible? Who takes the lead, who participates?

Integration of stakeholders & experts

Overall issues


Integration of stakeholders & experts

Resources for more detailed studies – or projections mostly/only expert judgements?

WWF could possibly provide a “help desk”

Timing:

Full BLS & links to IMPRESS: by 2010? 2011?

The economic analysis report as developed

by the last project phase: overall approach &

the template regarding BLS


the template regarding BLS


WFD-BLS workshop

19-20 February 2009

Jahorina, BiH

Eduard Interwies


Work done in the economic analysis report:

identify existing projections for the step 1

close gaps through expert judgements where possible (but: limited resources & time…)

Baseline scenario


(but: limited resources & time…)

collect information as far as possible on decided measures affecting the future development

identified “to do´s” for next project phase

Detailed Table in the Annex of the report regarding information on parameters & policy projections for the BLS

Exogenous drivers (population growth, general economic development, technological changes, changes in taxes/fiscal regime)

Water policies and investments (estimated investment in water supply/wastewater treatment, changes in water

Baseline Scenario: policy areas investigated


water supply/wastewater treatment, changes in water pricing policies, etc.)

Macroeconomic policies (past trends & future projections: agricultural, energy, industrial, transport policy, etc.)

Global policies (impact of (pre-)accession to the EU on key economic sectors, WTO/GATS, etc.)

And: identified/described measures already decided that will impact the situation in the Neretva

For each of the four policy areas: source, quality/reliability, method used for projecting, projected timeframe was investigated;

For each parameter/ policy projection: adapted available projections to the Neretva (as far as possible)

What was done in more detail:


projections to the Neretva (as far as possible)

If not available: develop estimations based on expert judgment (very limited)

identified decided measures

Overall estimations on future water demand and expected pressures on water resources (quantity/quality) in the Neretva were NOT developed

Results from the Neretva economic

analysis project on BLS: Issues related to

agriculture


agriculture

Discussion & the way aheadWWF-Living Neretva Project

WFD-BLS workshop

19-20 February 2009

Jahorina, BiH

Erna Coric

Important driver of demographic changes are internal migrations from rural areas to the municipal & urban centers within the Neretva-Trebisnjica river basin.

Official statistical data on this process do not exist but there is obvious and constant growth of population in

Demographic changes


there is obvious and constant growth of population in major centers like Mostar and Trebinje

Effects on agriculture (& agricultural population –pressures on water)??

Limited information

“Framework for Water Management in BiH” (1994) some number for “technological water”, but outdated (?)

Water demand & trends fromagriculture


Information on pesticides & nutrients use?

Law on financial support to agricultural production (2004): gov of FBiH allocates not less than 3% of Federal budget every year for improvement of primary agricultural production; For RS the current percentage of the budget allocated for agriculture is 4%.

In 2006 Agricultural faculty in Sarajevo commissioned by

Agricultural policy


In 2006 Agricultural faculty in Sarajevo commissioned by Federal Agriculture Ministry: completed Mid-term Development Strategy of Agricultural Sector (2006-2010) on FBiH-level:

Strategy defines the general objectives of agricultural sector. Strategy mentions 2 possible scenarios for future development

Strategy proposes increasing of financial support for agriculture from prescribed 3%, and implemented 1.5%, to the necessary 6%.

In 2006, RS adopted the Strategy of agricultural development (until 2015). % of RS budget allocated for agricultural development, instead of 4%, will be 6% in the following three years, after that 8%. Long-term objectives of the agricultural development in RS defined; Action Plan for implementation of the Strategy’s objectives also been developed.

Agricultural policy


for implementation of the Strategy’s objectives also been developed.

Inflation in 2007 has caused an increase in prices of agricultural products as well. According to Department for statistics and economic research of Central Bank BiH the prices of agricultural products have increased 8.8% in FBiH and 10.3% in RS for 2007.

According to the expert judgment agricultural areas in the Neretva-Trebisnjica river basin are being privatized in the last years. As a result, some areas which were abandoned from agriculture in the past 20 year are being exploited again. Specifically around Mostar city, there are big newly planted areas with grapes. More data on this issue: to be

Agricultural policy


planted areas with grapes. More data on this issue: to be collected!

Recently, discussions on rural development in BiH became more active and it is expected that an appropriate strategy in this area will be developed in near future – after that, issues of projections of agricultural development would be easier accessible and could be addressed further.

“Strategy for Integration of BiH into the EU” defines the measures for each economic sector which are necessary to be fulfilled by BiH in the process of stabilisation and accession to EU, for agriculture:

Harmonize domestic legislative with EU legislative in area of agriculture, elaborate Strategy of agricultural

EU accession & agriculture


of agriculture, elaborate Strategy of agricultural development BiH, adopt necessary regulations for land protection that is being degraded & destroyed, define the rule on ownership and renting the land, regulate crediting of agriculture and subsidizing specific products, enable institutional capacities in agricultural sector in BiH for planning and efficient usage of EU funds, establish a system of quality control for priority products, etc.

“Mid-Term Development Strategy BiH 2004-2007”:

current BiH agriculture couldn’t be competitive with products from EU, because BiH supports for this sector are still very low.

In period of negotiations & before accession, BiH has to

EU accession & agriculture &CAP


In period of negotiations & before accession, BiH has to achieve necessary reforms in this sector; facilitate its integration into the EU CAP

Support of EU pre-accession Funds is expected for part of reforms in agricultural sector, but significant amounts from own national budget needed

Specifically for the Neretva-Trebisnjica river basin:

very good potential for a big increase of agricultural production, due to numerous big agricultural fields which have not been used to their full potential, and due to flat areas towards the south and favourable climatic conditions.

EU accession & agriculture &CAP


conditions.

These are reasons why this area should benefit significantly from the access to the above mentioned Funds. However, there are still no specific plans about the future allocation of those potential investments.

Such an increase in agricultural production would create additional pressures on the water resources, both on quantity (higher abstractions for agriculture) and quality (increase of diffuse pollution)

Plans on increasing irrigated agriculture in the basin are not finalized yet, but some information is partly available on entity level in “Strategy for the development of agriculture” document, but also in RS “Strategy for Irrigation” which will be available in July 2008 (now available?);

Plans for increased irrigatedagriculture (?)


will be available in July 2008 (now available?);

Overall, no details for the N-T River Basin available (?)

Some estimations exist on how agriculture could develop in the basin indicating a potential increase (but also elements towards a decrease: EU accession & competitiveness; move to urban areas etc.): need a full picture, so:

Ideas on the way ahead


More detailed work on future demand from agriculture, potential increase in diffuse pollution, pesticide use etc. would be helpful; this activity could be well linked to a survey of the agriculture activities and related use of the water in the basin;

Working group could develop scenarios of agricultural developments in the basin, linked to the resulting pressures to the water environment



hydropower


hydropower


WFD-BLS workshop

19-20 February 2009

Jahorina, BiH

Dalibor Vrhovac

Study on the Electro-energetic Sector:

completed 02/08 on BiH level (for both entities);

planned period of study is until 2020;

Study deals with several basic thematic units: energetic

Energy policy


Study deals with several basic thematic units: energetic reserves; consumption, production, transmission and distribution of electricity, restructuring of energetic sector; support to the social categories consumers; coal, central heating, gas, oil; consumption management, energy saving and renewable sources; environment & investments;

Study on the Electro-energetic Sector:

Study contains: overview of existing hydro & thermo power plants, needs for revitalization of existing production units, estimations of production of electricity in existing plants until 2020 for three different scenarios,

Energy policy


in existing plants until 2020 for three different scenarios, analysis of technical feasibility of options for future plants, new investment & operation costs, and their competitiveness on the market.

One of the suggestions of this Study is to enact a Law on energy for the whole BiH.

This Study includes elaboration of complex energy balances for production & consumption of energy until 2020, according to 3 scenarios:

- Scenario S2 (reference scenario): assumes big increase in GDP & highest consumption of energy, without any additional measures;

- Scenario S3, with assumption of bigger usage of renewable sources of energy and measures of energetic

Energy policy


renewable sources of energy and measures of energetic efficiency;

- Scenario S1, with relatively slow increase of GDP & least consumption of energy

Study on the Electro-energetic Sector also contains the plan of investments for the period 2007-2020, related to the Neretva-Trebisnjica river basin, with the following characteristics:

Energy policy

Installed power

Specific Total investment Period of


HPP and TPP power(MW)

Specific investment

(KM/kW)investment(000 KM)

Period of investing

HPP Glavaticevo 171.80 2.050 352.140 2009-2013

HPP Mostarsko blato (in construction)

61 2.347 143.167 2007-2009

Small HPP Tihanjina-Mlade-Trebizat

19.92 3.679 73.284 2008-2009

Small HPP Listica river 7.01 3.583 25.117 2017-2018

Revitalization of TPP Gacko

300 930 278.958 2009

TPP Gacko 2 330 2.347 774.509 2014-2017

“Strategy for Integration of BiH into the EU” defines the measures for each economic sector which are necessary to be fulfilled by BiH in the process of stabilisation and accession to EU, for energy policy:

EU accession & Energypolicy


accession to EU, for energy policy:

“Elaborate Strategy for energetic sector in BiH, strengthening institutions at BiH level for preparation and implementation of reforms of electro-energetic sector, integration into EU energetic market, etc.”

Elektroprivreda EPHZHB: ongoing project of construction of

new HPP Mostarsko Blato; 2x30 MW of installed power &

will produce 167 GWh of electricity per year. HPP is

expected to be functioning by 2010.

Specific (potential) projects


expected to be functioning by 2010.

Elektroprivreda RS: planning new projects in Trebišnjica RB

These projects include channeling some underground waters which only partly belong to Trebišnjica river basin; these waters, will be channeled towards the existing



waters, will be channeled towards the existing accumulation Bileća & further used in the downstream HPPs: Trebinje I, Trebinje II, Dubrovnik I and Čapljina; provide additional 856.2 GWh of electricity/year; waters used for irrigation of karst fields in upper part of Trebisnjica RB. This project includes construction of three new HPP: HPP Nevesinje, HPP Dabar & HPP Bileća.

Electricity production in planned HPPs in the upper part of the N-T River Basin


Hydro Power Plant New annual production (GWh)


Hydro Power Plant New annual production (GWh)

Nevesinje 100.6

Dabar 270.6

Bileća 117.0

Trebinje I 140.0

Trebinje II 228.0

Elektroprivreda BiH: plans for constructing constructing three new HPP: Glavatičevo, Bjelimići and reversible HPP Bjelimići (which is not directly on the Neretva river course); feasibility study done.



course); feasibility study done.

Hydro Power Plant

Installed power (MW)

Annual production (GWh)

Investment (KM)

Type

Glavatičevo 28,497 108,25 142.936.228 Accumulation

Bjelimići 100,039 219,40 324.263.029 Accumulation

RHPP Bjelimići 2 x 293 1029 456.000.000Reversible /

pumping HPP

But: 2005 FBiH government analysis of economic justification of construction of HPPs in upper part of river Neretva: conclusion that HPP Glavatičevo is not economically justified (while the remaining two HPPs were not even



justified (while the remaining two HPPs were not even planned then). Although the recent Feasibility Study states that the whole project is justified, there are still confronting opinions about this project. Therefore, the implementation is quite questionable. Adding to this issue, there is a big resistance of the local community and environmental organizations towards this project.

Finally:

The Upper Horizon project is planning to increase energy production in order to cover energy needs, so as to improve irrigation and support local agriculture, the



improve irrigation and support local agriculture, the construction is on going. At present detailed project data are lacking and it is advised to stress the analysis of costs and benefits.

The energy sector development strategy indicates a potential hydropower production increase. Potential influence of this for reaching the WFD-environmental objectives & fulfillment of the requirements of “new modifications” in order to allow for a deterioration of environmental quality due to this strategy: need to be investigated.



due to this strategy: need to be investigated.

Additional information on future measures in the hydropower sector will be necessary in the future in order to better estimate their impacts

See also: EU-environmental impact assessment of planned dams, WWF-workshop in April 2009

Role of water agencies (big & small HPP)? Can a BLS-working group on hydropower be the forum for exchange?



tourism


tourism


WFD-BLS workshop

19-20 February 2009

Jahorina, BiH

Dalibor Vrhovac

Elaboration of Strategy of Tourism Development FBiH: commenced 12/07, project duration 12 months. Project coordinator Federal Ministry of Environment & Tourism, and the implementers are two companies from Croatia. Strategy will be developed for the period 2008-2018. Recently completed.

Tourism policy


Recently completed.

Strategic Plan of Tourism Development for the Neretva River Basin: completed 10/07 within the Project “Valorisation of environmental tourism in South-East Europe” financed by Toskana Region, implemented by NGO UCODEP According to this strategic plan main attractions of the Neretva: wild nature; sport & adventure; history & culture. Document also provides a three year plan of tourism development of this region.

It can be noted that the Mostar has seen a big increase in tourism in the recent years, a trend that is expected to continue in the future.

“Study on Sustainable Development through Eco-Tourism in Bosnia and Herzegovina” financed by JICA referred to

Tourism policy


in Bosnia and Herzegovina” financed by JICA referred to the preparation of master plans for Blagaj, Podvelez and Nevesinje within the Neretva-Trebisnjica area.

Information available (yearly for N-T) on: tourist arrivals, nights, turnover by nights (see annex table)

Overall: tourism can be of crucial importance for the future of the Neretva basin: income & employment opportunity;

Depending on the direction tourism takes/is supported: positive side-effects for nature protection & water quality.

But: not sufficient information available, e.g. on the



But: not sufficient information available, e.g. on the ecotourism market & its growth potential;

Are the plans developed (see above) implemented? Who is in charge?

Ecosystem services approach can give clearer indications on the potential of ecotourism

Working group on tourism can provide better projections –and a forum for promoting sustainable tourism? Important to include tourism sector & their expertise!


Eduard Interwies


Results from the Neretva economic analysis

project on BLS: Issues related to other

potential drivers / “trend” variables (beyond


potential drivers / “trend” variables (beyond

the three topics discussed)


WFD-BLS workshop

19-20 February 2009

Jahorina, BiH

Erna Coric

Some (or unclear) significance, but can be summarized?

Demographic change / population growth

General economic growth / changes in tax regimes / Technological change

Number of other topics


Changes in some sectors, e.g. industry, transport etc.

Water sector policies & investments: important!

[changes in natural conditions: climate change! But not of socio-economics…]

Current status: data for municipalities in N-T demonstrate

significant trend of natural growth rate decrease. Situation

similar in both entities; however the decrease rate is

somewhat higher in Republic of Srpska

Population growth


somewhat higher in Republic of Srpska

At this moment in time it would be very optimistic to

forecast the growth of population at least by the year 2012.

It would be realistic by that time to only stop the decline in

population and to stabilize it and turn slowly to increase.

Official projection (State Statistical Yearbook, Agency for Statistics BiH):

Population growth

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

700000

800000

inh

abit

ants


But: doubtful according to expert judgment, because there is no realistic indication showing improvement of living standards in the near future. Experts have also emphasized that more data and analysis is needed to make better estimation for the purpose of future planning.

Effects on water sector – investments in drinking water and sewage infrastructure?

0

100000

2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018

year

No information collected in the economic analysis on:

General economic growth

Technological change

Some information (but of relevance?) on changes on

Other potential drivers


Some information (but of relevance?) on changes on taxes/fiscal regime

Strategies on transport policy, industrial policy investigated

All the above: of importance for the future water quality in the Neretva RB?

Future investment plans in water supply & sewage treatment are partly available on municipality level (where implementation always depends on the political situation & decisions) but are not coordinated with the institutions in charge for water at entity level or canton

Water sector investments


charge for water at entity level or canton

According to the information received from the Water Agency for Adriatic Sea Watershed, there are no long-term plans for investments in water supply & wastewater services. Water Companies make only annual plans, which are then forwarded to the Water Agencies and entity level authorities, who decide on the priorities for investments.

Big problem for WFD-implementation:

planning and defining cost-effective set of measures

future development of RBMP

Because if there is not an overall strategy with investment

Water sector investments


Because if there is not an overall strategy with investment planning: unclear, what needs to be done (on water supply, sewage treatment etc.)!

Some longer-term planning needs to take place in the future…

Lack of realistic & reliable population increase projections: very difficult to develop a realistic future planning in terms of economic growth or water management development. So in future: expect the census & better information about population, including more reliable population growth estimates – or does the water sector need to move faster?



estimates – or does the water sector need to move faster?

Re-check if the issues not dealt with in the economic analysis report might be of relevance (see above)

How to deal with the lack of overall investment strategy for water supply & wastewater treatment?

Could a working group deal with all of the above issues?

Date post:	04-Nov-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

EU-WFD and Economics in the Neretva River Basin Event in ......1. Baseline scenario: considering...

Documents