IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Operationalising active involvement in the EU Water Framework Directive: Why, when and how?

  • Wright, Stuart A.L.
  • Fritsch, Oliver
Registered author(s):

    We identify two key stages in the river basin planning process under the Water Framework Directive: the selection of instruments for a programme of measures to achieve the environmental targets, and disproportionate cost analysis to determine whether selected measures involve high costs. Some EU member states such as Denmark are operationalising these two key stages using cost effectiveness analysis and cost–benefit analysis. However, implementation guidelines encourage the active involvement of all interested parties in the implementation of the Directive. We discuss the potential benefits of actively involving non-state actors, which can be summarised as increasing the effectiveness of policy and improving its implementation. Criticising the emerging economic decision-making approach, we argue that economic analyses could result in a missed opportunity to capitalise on the potential benefits of involvement. The article discusses the appropriateness of actively involving the public during the two aforementioned decision-making stages and suggests concrete ways in which active involvement may be operationalised. We conclude that member states should not implement a minimum form of participation to comply with the statutory requirements of the Directive, but should strive for active involvement due to the potential for increasing the effectiveness of the Water Framework Directive and improving its implementation.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Ecological Economics.

    Volume (Year): 70 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 12 ()
    Pages: 2268-2274

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:70:y:2011:i:12:p:2268-2274
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:70:y:2011:i:12:p:2268-2274. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.