IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/waterr/v32y2018i4d10.1007_s11269-017-1879-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of Disproportionate Costs According to the WFD: Comparison of Applications of two Approaches in the Catchment of the Stanovice Reservoir (Czech Republic)

Author

Listed:
  • Jan Macháč

    (University of Economics)

  • Jan Brabec

    (Charles University)

Abstract

The EU Water Framework Directive requires all water bodies within EU member states to achieve the “good status” by 2015/2021/2027. As it has proved to be very challenging for many water bodies, demand for cost proportionality analysis has increased dramatically, because disproportionate costs are one of the justifiable reasons for a deadline extension. This has led to development of many approaches across Europe. Among others, the Czech official methodology based on monetary cost-benefit analysis and the German “New Leipzig approach” based on criteria and cost threshold were introduced in 2015. Both approaches estimate costs of achieving the “good status”, but differ significantly in evaluating benefits. The Czech methodology identifies various categories of benefits, monetizes them and later compares them with costs of measure implementation. The German methodology determines how proportionate it is to spend on measures based on past public expenditures, objective distance to the “good status” and generated benefits. Both methodologies were tested on a small Stanovice catchment in the Czech Republic with similar results, which allows for a comparison of the two approaches they represent. Achieving the “good status” is viewed as cost-proportionate. Application of both methodologies is associated with numerous problems (e.g., data availability, estimate accuracy), which are further discussed in the paper.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Macháč & Jan Brabec, 2018. "Assessment of Disproportionate Costs According to the WFD: Comparison of Applications of two Approaches in the Catchment of the Stanovice Reservoir (Czech Republic)," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 32(4), pages 1453-1466, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:waterr:v:32:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s11269-017-1879-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11269-017-1879-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11269-017-1879-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11269-017-1879-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Klauer, Bernd & Sigel, Katja & Schiller, Johannes, 2016. "Disproportionate costs in the EU Water Framework Directive—How to justify less stringent environmental objectives," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 10-17.
    2. Carsten L. Jensen & Brian H. Jacobsen & Søren B. Olsen & Alex Dubgaard & Berit Hasler, 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, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(2), pages 164-200, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lantong Shao & Jiaqin Gong & Wenqing Fan & Zongyi Zhang & Meng Zhang, 2022. "Cost Comparison between Digital Management and Traditional Management of Cotton Fields—Evidence from Cotton Fields in Xinjiang, China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tobias Holmsgaard Larsen & Thomas Lundhede & Søren Bøye Olsen & Brian H. Jacobsen, 2021. "Incorporating time lags and uncertainty in cost-benefit analysis of water quality improvements – a case study of Limfjorden, Denmark," IFRO Working Paper 2021/01, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    2. Anzaldua, Gerardo & Gerner, Nadine V. & Lago, Manuel & Abhold, Katrina & Hinzmann, Mandy & Beyer, Sarah & Winking, Caroline & Riegels, Niels & Krogsgaard Jensen, Jørgen & Termes, Montserrat & Amorós, 2018. "Getting into the water with the Ecosystem Services Approach: The DESSIN ESS evaluation framework," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 318-326.
    3. Carolus, Johannes Friedrich & Hanley, Nick & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Pedersen, Søren Marcus, 2018. "A Bottom-up Approach to Environmental Cost-Benefit Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 282-295.
    4. Tobias Holmsgaard Larsen & Thomas Lundhede & Søren Bøye Olsen, 2020. "Assessing the value of surface water and groundwater quality improvements when time lags and outcome uncertainty exist: Results from a choice experiment survey across four different countries," IFRO Working Paper 2020/12, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    5. Jacobsen, Lars-Bo & Nielsen, Max & Nielsen, Rasmus, 2016. "Gains of integrating sector-wise pollution regulation: The case of nitrogen in Danish crop production and aquaculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 172-181.
    6. Silvia Novelli & Francesca Moino & Patrizia Borsotto, 2022. "External Benefits of Irrigation in Mountain Areas: Stakeholder Perceptions and Water Policy Implications," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-14, August.
    7. Klauer, Bernd & Sigel, Katja & Schiller, Johannes & Hagemann, Nina & Kern, Katharina, 2015. "Unverhältnismäßige Kosten nach EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie: Ein Verfahren zur Begründung weniger strenger Umweltziele," UFZ Reports 01/2015, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ).
    8. Eva Sievers & Christoph Zielhofer & Frank Hüesker, 2021. "Management of Global Warming Effects in the European Water Framework Directive: Consideration of Social–Ecological System Features in the Elbe River Basin District," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-20, August.
    9. Kristina Ek & Lars Persson, 2020. "Priorities and Preferences in Water Quality Management - a Case Study of the Alsterån River Basin," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(1), pages 155-173, January.
    10. Yasuhiro Takarada & Weijia Dong & Takeshi Ogawa, 2020. "Shared renewable resources and gains from trade under technology standards," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 546-568, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:waterr:v:32:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s11269-017-1879-z. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.