IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

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
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.07.023
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Vatn, Arild, 2005. "Rationality, institutions and environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 203-217, November.
    2. Arild Vatn, 2005. "Institutions and the Environment," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2826, 10.
    3. Giorgos Kallis & Nuno Videira & Paula Antunes & Ângela Guimarães Pereira & Clive L Spash & Harry Coccossis & Serafin Corral Quintana & Leandro del Moral & Dionisia Hatzilacou & Gonçalo Lobo & Alexa, 2006. "Participatory Methods for Water Resources Planning," Environment and Planning C, SAGE Publishing, vol. 24(2), pages 215-234, April.
    4. Luigi Pellizzoni, 2003. "Uncertainty and Participatory Democracy," Environmental Values, White Horse Press, vol. 12(2), pages 195-224, May.
    5. Thomas C. Beierle & David M. Konisky, 2000. "Values, conflict, and trust in participatory environmental planning," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(4), pages 587-602.
    6. A Jordan, 1999. "The Implementation of EU Environmental Policy; A Policy Problem without a Political Solution?," Environment and Planning C, SAGE Publishing, vol. 17(1), pages 69-90, February.
    7. Sagoff, M., 1998. "Aggregation and deliberation in valuing environmental public goods:: A look beyond contingent pricing," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2-3), pages 213-230, February.
    8. Roy Brouwer, 2008. "The potential role of stated preference methods in the Water Framework Directive to assess disproportionate costs," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(5), pages 597-614.
    9. Julio Berbel & Julia Martin-Ortega & Pascual Mesa, 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 Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 25(2), pages 623-640, January.
    10. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L., 1992. "Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 57-70, January.
    11. Ian J. Bateman & Richard T. Carson & Brett Day & Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Tannis Hett & Michael Jones-Lee & Graham Loomes, 2002. "Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2639, 10.
    12. A Jordan, 1999. "The implementation of EU environmental policy: a policy problem without a political solution?," Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 17(1), pages 69-90, February.
    13. R. Turner, 2007. "Limits to CBA in UK and European environmental policy: retrospects and future prospects," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 253-269, May.
    14. Vatn, Arild, 2009. "An institutional analysis of methods for environmental appraisal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(8-9), pages 2207-2215, June.
    15. Pahl-Wostl, Claudia & Tabara, David & Bouwen, Rene & Craps, Marc & Dewulf, Art & Mostert, Erik & Ridder, Dagmar & Taillieu, Tharsi, 2008. "The importance of social learning and culture for sustainable water management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 484-495, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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: (Shamier, Wendy)

    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.