Different cost-benefit analyses in The Netherlands for the European Water Framework Directive

Water Policy ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 746-760 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. van der Veeren
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Water Framework Directive ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
European Water Framework Directive ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
European Water ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Economic Analyses

Since 2005, several cost benefit analyses have been performed for the European Water Framework Directive (WFD) in The Netherlands. These analyses had in common that they were meant to support the decision-making process by informing policy makers and making the trade-offs as transparent as possible. The analyses also anticipate questions from the Dutch Parliament. Nevertheless, each time the analyses were slightly different, depending on the situation and (political) questions that had to be answered. This article presents the background and the highlights of the various analyses, describes their differences and similarities and tries to find a common thread in the results. Even though the results are barely comparable for a number of reasons, they seem to indicate that such a line exists and that economic analyses have played a role in the decision-making process by making tradeoffs more explicit. This has offered the opportunity for an iterative dialogue with the Dutch Parliament, which contributed to a decision-making process which resulted in a socially accepted programme of measures that is economically sound and transparent.

scholarly journals Coordination and Participation Boards under the European Water Framework Directive: Different Approaches Used in Some EU Countries

Water ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 833 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emilia Pellegrini ◽  
Lucia Bortolini ◽  
Edi Defrancesco
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Water Framework Directive ◽  
River Basin ◽  
District Level ◽  
European Water Framework Directive ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
European Water ◽  
River Basin District ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
River Basin Planning

River basin planning under the European Water Framework Directive (2000/60/CE, WFD) poses two major challenges to EU countries: coordination among administrative units for large-scale river basin planning and the inclusion of interested parties in decision-making processes. To face both challenges, many Member States have established Coordination and Participation Boards at the River Basin District or river basin level. These boards can be defined as multi-agency and multi-actor groups that support the development of inclusive and coordinated river basin planning to comply with the WFD requirements. The aim of this paper is to understand the functioning and effectiveness of the coordination and participation boards in promoting participatory river basin planning in seven EU countries. We built a conceptual framework, based on spatial fit, coordination capacity and participatory governance theories, to assess the scale at which these boards are established as well as the type of coordination and participation they support. The results indicate the relevance of the sub-River Basin District level to promote participatory decision-making. However, a clear linkage between participatory processes conducted at the sub-district level and decision-making processes at River Basin District should be established. Only if this link is well established are the outcomes achieved through the coordination and participation boards included in river basin plans. Moreover, we identified a lack of knowledge on how planning and implementation activities carried out at sub-River Basin District are aggregated and coordinated for the entire District. Research could contribute to this issue, by focusing on coordination mechanisms and problems that occur at the River Basin District level.

scholarly journals Broadening the application of health technology assessment in the Netherlands: a worthwhile destination but not an easy ride?

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Joost J. Enzing ◽  
Saskia Knies ◽  
Bert Boer ◽  
Werner B.F. Brouwer
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Marketing Authorisation ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Dutch Government ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Policy Measures ◽  
Selection Of

Abstract Currently, reimbursement decisions based on health technology assessments (HTA) in the Netherlands mostly concern outpatient pharmaceuticals. The Dutch government aspires to broaden the systematic application of full HTA towards other types of health care in order to optimise the content of the basic benefit package. This paper identifies important challenges for broadening the scope of full HTA to other types of health care. Based on a description of the Dutch reimbursement decision-making process, five important characteristics of outpatient pharmaceuticals were identified, which are all relevant to the successful application of HTA: (i) closed reimbursement system, (ii) absence of alternative policy measures, (iii) existence of marketing authorisation, (iv) identifiable and accountable counterparty, and (v) product characteristics. For a selection of other types of health care, which may be subject to HTA more frequently in the future, deviations from these characteristics of outpatient pharmaceuticals are discussed. The implications of such deviations for performing HTA and the decision-making process are highlighted. It is concluded that broadening the application of HTA will require policy makers to meet both important policy-related and methodological challenges. These challenges differ per health care domain, which may inform policy makers which expansions of the current use of HTA are most feasible.

A Methodological Framework for Prioritising Infrastructure Investment

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 111-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luis Andres ◽  
Dan Biller ◽  
Matias Herrera Dappe
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
South Asia ◽  
Investment Decision ◽  
Infrastructure Investment ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Investment Decision Making ◽  
Policy Objectives ◽  
Lock In

Policy makers are often confronted with a myriad of factors in the investment decision-making process. This issue is particularly acute in infrastructure decisions since these often involve large sums and lock-in technologies. In regions and countries where the infrastructure access gap is large and public budgets severely constrained, the importance of considering the different facets of the decision-making process becomes even more relevant. This is the case for South Asia. This article presents the infrastructure access gap in South Asia and discusses the impacts that this gap has in South Asian economies. It examines the links between the infrastructure and economic growth and infrastructure and welfare/poverty. The article reviews different methodologies to measure these impacts and hence serve as mechanisms to establish priorities. Finally, the article presents a methodology to holistically equate trade-offs among different policy objectives per key infrastructure sectors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document