Moss Brian
School of Biological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Sci Total Environ. 2008 Aug 1;400(1-3):32-41. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2008.04.029. Epub 2008 May 27.
The European Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) is potentially ground-breaking legislation. It seeks to bring about improvement of aquatic habitats in Europe to 'good ecological status', defined as slightly different from 'high ecological status', with no or minimal human impact. The characteristics of pristine ecological status include nutrient parsimony, a defined characteristic structure of the system (including geomorphological structure and hydrology, biological and food web structure) and the connectivity and extent of the system that are essential for resilience to change. This modern ecological understanding is being ignored by government agencies charged with enacting the Directive. Schemes are being devised that measure secondary characteristics of habitats using approaches drawn from traditional water quality management. Typologies, indicated by the Directive to give a geographical basis within which to determine ecological status, are also being corrupted with different typologies used for different determinands. The ecological reality of reasonably distinctive, integrated systems (an erosive upland river versus a floodplain system, for example) is being avoided. Emphasis is being placed on precision of measurement of specific determinands rather than accuracy in what is being measured and proposed schemes are complex and expensive when accurate assessment could be carried out much more cheaply. Many are also likely to become redundant as effects of climate change take hold. The current approach will lead to some improvement in water quality but not to the fundamental change in ecological quality intended by the Directive and has partly been encouraged by lack of definition and contradictions within the Directive itself. Documented details currently available from the UK agencies are used to illustrate how the intentions of the Directive are being undermined for ostensibly political convenience through processes of redefinition and limitation of characteristics measured. There appears to be a parallel concern among official and non-governmental European bodies.
《欧洲水框架指令》（2000/60/EC）可能是一项具有开创性的立法。它旨在将欧洲的水生栖息地改善到“良好生态状态”，其定义与“高生态状态”略有不同，即没有或只有最小的人类影响。原始生态状态的特征包括营养物质的简约性、系统的特定特征结构（包括地貌结构、水文、生物和食物网结构）以及系统的连通性和范围，这些对于抵御变化的恢复力至关重要。负责执行该指令的政府机构却忽视了这种现代生态理解。正在设计一些方案，这些方案使用从传统水质管理中借鉴的方法来衡量栖息地的次要特征。该指令指出要给出一个地理基础以确定生态状态的类型划分，也因针对不同的测定指标使用不同的类型划分而受到破坏。合理独特、完整的系统（例如侵蚀性的山地河流与洪泛平原系统）的生态现实被回避了。重点放在了特定测定指标测量的精确性上，而不是所测量内容的准确性，并且当可以以更低成本进行准确评估时，所提议的方案却复杂且昂贵。随着气候变化的影响逐渐显现，许多方案可能也会变得多余。当前的方法将导致水质有所改善，但无法实现该指令所期望的生态质量的根本改变，部分原因是该指令本身缺乏明确界定和存在矛盾。英国各机构目前提供的文件细节被用来举例说明，为了表面上的政治便利，如何通过重新定义和限制所测量特征的过程来破坏该指令的意图。在欧洲官方和非政府机构中似乎也存在类似的担忧。
