scholarly journals Law and Politics in River Basin Management; The Implementation of the Water Framework Directive in the Netherlands

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Mostert
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Water Framework Directive ◽  
River Basin ◽  
River Basin Management ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Basin Management ◽  
Law And Politics ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Environmental Objectives ◽  
European Court

This article discusses the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) in the Netherlands and intends to show how law and politics combine in river basin management. Initially, the implementation of the WFD in the Netherlands was approached as a technical and administrative issue, handled by water quality and ecology experts, but in 2003 this approach was broken open by the agricultural sector, who were worried about stricter regulation. Subsequently, the environmental objectives of the WFD were set as low as possible and they are not used in authorising individual projects. Yet, in 2015 of the European Court of Justice determined that the environmental objectives have binding effect and that Member States have to refuse authorisation for projects that endanger the achievement of these objectives. In the future, the European Court of Justice and national courts may force the Dutch government to change its approach. They may only do so because and as long as they enjoy sufficient social and political support and function relatively independently. The article concludes that, to understand river basin management fully, one has to open up the black box of water law and become a kind of water lawyer.

scholarly journals Law and Politics in River Basin Management: The Implementation of the Water Framework Directive in The Netherlands

Water ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 3367
Author(s):  
Erik Mostert
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Water Framework Directive ◽  
River Basin ◽  
Agricultural Sector ◽  
River Basin Management ◽  
Political Support ◽  
Basin Management ◽  
Binding Effect ◽  
Law And Politics ◽  
Environmental Objectives

This article discusses the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) in the Netherlands and shows how law and politics combine in river basin management. Initially, the implementation of the WFD in the Netherlands was approached as a technical and administrative issue, handled by water quality and ecology experts, but, in 2003, this approach was broken open by the agricultural sector, who feared stricter regulation. Subsequently, the environmental objectives of the WFD were set as low as possible and they play no role when authorising new projects. In July 2015, however, the European Court of Justice determined that the environmental objectives have a binding effect and that Member States have to refuse authorisation of projects that jeopardise the achievement of these objectives. This example shows the important role that law as a social phenomenon or “field” can play in river basin management, provided the courts enjoy sufficient social and political support and function relatively independently, as they do in the Netherlands. The article discusses the origin of the juridical field and its relation with politics and concludes that, to understand river basin management fully, it is essential to understand how (water) law functions.

scholarly journals Exemptions of the EU Water Framework Directive Deterioration Ban: Comparing Implementation Approaches in Lower Saxony and The Netherlands

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 930
Author(s):  
Jan R. Starke ◽  
Helena F. M. W. Van Rijswick
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Water Framework Directive ◽  
River Basin Management ◽  
Goal Achievement ◽  
Basin Management ◽  
Lower Saxony ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Environmental Goal

The sustainable use of precious water resources requires effective water management. In the European Union, water management is mainly regulated by the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC), introducing an integrated river basin management approach. As a European Union (EU) directive, the legislation needs to be implemented in the Member States, entailing not only legal transposition but also application and enforcement. One major instrument introduced by the Water Framework Directive is the environmental goal achievement obligation of article 4 WFD, containing also a deterioration ban with several exemptions. We compare the transposition, application, and enforcement of the exemption of permanent deterioration (art. 4 (7) WFD) in the context of the environmental goal achievement obligation regime in Lower Saxony (Germany) and the Netherlands. The study rests on a comparative legal analysis of literature, river basin management plans, and jurisprudence. Although based on the same EU directive wording and case law of the European Court of Justice, the deterioration ban and the exemption of permanent deterioration are implemented rather differently. While the deterioration ban is predominantly understood as planning obligation in the Netherlands, it became an important permit requirement in Lower Saxony since the Weser ruling of the European Court of Justice.

scholarly journals The Effectiveness of the Principle of Recovery of the Costs of Water Services Jeopardized by the European Court of Justice – Annotations on the Judgment in C-525/12

2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 80-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
P.E. Lindhout ◽  
H.F.M.W. van Rijswick
Keyword(s):  
Water Framework Directive ◽  
Water Use ◽  
Cost Recovery ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Water Services ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Environmental Objectives ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Cost

In Case C-525/12 the European Court of Justice concludes that cost recovery for water services as outlined in Article 9 of the Water Framework Directive is only one of the instruments for Member States to strive for a rational water use. It furthermore concludes that the wfd environmental objectives not necessarily imply that cost recovery should be applicable to all water-related activities mentioned in Article 2 (38) wfd. In this underlying contribution a number of critical remarks to this judgment are provided. In view of the authors, the European Court of Justice reduces the effectivity of the cost recovery principle too rigorously by reducing the principle of cost recovery for water services to a practically voluntary tool for Member States.

scholarly journals Exemptions of the EU Water Framework Directive Deterioration Ban: Comparing Implementation Approaches in Lower Saxony and the Netherlands

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan R. Starke ◽  
Marleen H.F.M.W. van Rijswick
Keyword(s):  
Water Management ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Water Framework Directive ◽  
Goal Achievement ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Lower Saxony ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Environmental Goal

The sustainable use of precious water resources requires effective water management. In the European Union, water management is mainly regulated by the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC), introducing an integrated river basin management approach. As EU directive, the legislation needs to be implemented in the Member States, entailing not only legal transposition, but also application and enforcement in Member States. One major instrument introduced by the Water Framework Directive is the environmental goal achievement obligation of art. 4 WFD, containing also a deterioration ban with several exemptions. This study compares transposition, application and enforcement of the exemption of permanent deterioration (art. 4 (7) WFD) in the context of the environmental goal achievement obligation regime in Lower Saxony (Germany) and the Netherlands. The study rests on a legal analysis of literature, policy documents and jurisprudence. Although based on the same EU directive wording and case law of the European Court of Justice, the deterioration ban and the exemption of permanent deterioration are implemented rather differently: While the deterioration ban is predominantly understood as planning obligation in the Netherlands, it became an important permit requirement in Lower Saxony since the Weser-ruling of the European Court of Justice.

Standards for Independent Oversight

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nico van Eijk
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Data Retention ◽  
Digital Rights ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Intelligence Services ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Point Of Departure

The point of departure for this chapter is the decision of the European Court of Justice in the Digital Rights Ireland case, which annulled the European Data Retention Directive, in part because the use of retained data was not made subject to independent oversight. Next, it examines judgments from the national courts of the Netherlands and the UK, also focusing on the independent oversight issue, declaring invalid the data retention laws of those two countries. From the Digital Rights Ireland case and others, seven standards for oversight of intelligence services can be drawn: the oversight should be complete; it should encompass all stages of the intelligence cycle; it should be independent; it should take place prior to the imposition of a measure; it should be able to declare a measure unlawful and to provide redress; it should incorporate the adversary principle; and it should have sufficient resources.

Room for the River: delivering integrated river basin management in the Netherlands

2012 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 369-382 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeroen Rijke ◽  
Sebastiaan van Herk ◽  
Chris Zevenbergen ◽  
Richard Ashley
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
River Basin ◽  
River Basin Management ◽  
Basin Management ◽  
Integrated River Basin Management

scholarly journals Scaling issues in multi-criteria evaluation of combinations of measures for integrated river basin management

2016 ◽  
Vol 373 ◽  
pp. 19-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jörg Dietrich
Keyword(s):  
River Basin ◽  
Cost Efficiency ◽  
River Basin Management ◽  
Basin Management ◽  
Ecological Benefit ◽  
Multi Criteria Evaluation ◽  
Environmental Objectives ◽  
Joint Research Project ◽  
Integrated River Basin Management ◽  
Ecological Continuity

Abstract. In integrated river basin management, measures for reaching the environmental objectives can be evaluated at different scales, and according to multiple criteria of different nature (e.g. ecological, economic, social). Decision makers, including responsible authorities and stakeholders, follow different interests regarding criteria and scales. With a bottom up approach, the multi criteria assessment could produce a different outcome than with a top down approach. The first assigns more power to the local community, which is a common principle of IWRM. On the other hand, the development of an overall catchment strategy could potentially make use of synergetic effects of the measures, which fulfils the cost efficiency requirement at the basin scale but compromises local interests. Within a joint research project for the 5500 km2 Werra river basin in central Germany, measures have been planned to reach environmental objectives of the European Water Framework directive (WFD) regarding ecological continuity and nutrient loads. The main criteria for the evaluation of the measures were costs of implementation, reduction of nutrients, ecological benefit and social acceptance. The multi-criteria evaluation of the catchment strategies showed compensation between positive and negative performance of criteria within the catchment, which in the end reduced the discriminative power of the different strategies. Furthermore, benefit criteria are partially computed for the whole basin only. Both ecological continuity and nutrient load show upstream-downstream effects in opposite direction. The principles of "polluter pays" and "overall cost efficiency" can be followed for the reduction of nutrient losses when financial compensations between upstream and downstream users are made, similar to concepts of emission trading.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document