Lincoln Institute for Agri-food Technology, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, LN6 7TS, UK.
Department of Agroecology, Aarhus University, Blichers Alle 20, 8830-DK, Tjele, Denmark; Centre for Water Technology (WATEC), Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
J Environ Manage. 2022 Oct 1;319:115598. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115598. Epub 2022 Jul 7.
The Water Framework Directive (WFD) aims to protect and improve water quality across Europe through an integrative and multi-level water governance approach. The goal is to ensure that water quality in Europe meets good ecological status by 2027. Whilst the WFD has been hailed as a cornerstone for governance innovation in water management, most EU member states (MS) still struggle to achieve good ecological status of their waters. The realignment to a multi-level governance structure under the WFD is discretionary, and has generated diversity in WFD multi-level governance implementation approaches and final governance arrangements across MS. This diversity may contribute to low goal achievement and weak compliance. This paper investigates how visual impressions of legislative structure across nine MS can illustrate and contribute to understanding the differences in multi-level implementation of WFD and associated water protection directives. We explore, in-depth, the drivers of visual differences in Portugal, Germany (Lower Saxony) and France. We hypothesise that many of the challenges of WFD implementation, and resulting governance arrangements can be explained in terms of the legacy effects of previous water governance choices. With this conceptual framework of investigating the history and legacy, we found the three in depth studies have had different starting points, paths, and end points in their water governance, with sticking points influencing the decision-making processes and compliance required by the WFD. Sticking points include the complexity of existing water governance structures, lobbying by different sectors, and the mandatory WFD timeline for implementation. Portugal had to resolve its focus on water infrastructure and engineering to enable a re-focus on water quality. France and Portugal experienced 'top down' governance at different points in time, slowing the shift to a multi-level governance system. Lower Saxony, representing just one of 16 federal state systems in Germany, highlighted the complex historic governance structures which cannot easily be restructured, generating a layering effect where new governance systems are fitted to old governance systems. We conclude that there is a need to implement a hybrid approach to water governance and WFD implementation including decentralisation (discretionary) to ensure collaboration and engagement of stakeholders at the local level. This hybrid governance system should run in parallel with a centralised (mandatory) governance and regulatory system to enable national environmental standards to be set and enforced. Such systems may provide the best of both worlds (bottom-up involvement of stakeholders meeting top-down goal achievements) and is worthy of further research.
《水框架指令》（WFD）旨在通过综合和多层次的水治理方法，保护和改善整个欧洲的水质。目标是确保到 2027 年，欧洲的水质达到良好的生态状况。尽管 WFD 被誉为水管理治理创新的基石，但大多数欧盟成员国（MS）仍难以实现其水域的良好生态状况。根据 WFD 进行的向多层次治理结构的调整是自由裁量的，并且在 MS 之间产生了 WFD 多层次治理实施方法和最终治理安排的多样性。这种多样性可能导致目标实现率低和合规性弱。本文调查了九个 MS 的立法结构的视觉印象如何说明和有助于理解 WFD 及其相关水保护指令的多层次实施中的差异。我们深入探讨了葡萄牙、德国（下萨克森州）和法国的视觉差异的驱动因素。我们假设，WFD 实施面临的许多挑战以及由此产生的治理安排，可以根据先前水治理选择的遗留效应来解释。有了这个调查历史和遗留问题的概念框架，我们发现这三个深入研究在水治理方面有不同的起点、路径和终点，关键点影响了 WFD 所需的决策过程和合规性。关键点包括现有水治理结构的复杂性、不同部门的游说以及强制性的 WFD 实施时间表。葡萄牙不得不解决其对水基础设施和工程的关注，以便重新关注水质。法国和葡萄牙在不同时期经历了“自上而下”的治理，减缓了向多层次治理系统的转变。下萨克森州，仅代表德国 16 个联邦州系统中的一个，突出了复杂的历史治理结构，这些结构不容易进行重组，产生了一个分层效应，新的治理系统适用于旧的治理系统。我们的结论是，有必要实施一种水治理和 WFD 实施的混合方法，包括权力下放（自由裁量），以确保在地方一级进行利益相关者的合作和参与。这种混合治理系统应该与集中（强制性）治理和监管系统并行运行，以能够制定和执行国家环境标准。这种系统可能是“上下结合”（利益相关者的自下而上参与符合自上而下的目标实现）的最佳选择，值得进一步研究。
