implementation of eu nitrates directive

8/8/2019 Implementation of EU Nitrates Directive

1/29

Seite 1 11.10.2010

Implementationof EU Nitrates Directive 91/676/E

C

Approaches in place and experiences madeBelgrade October 4-6, 2010

Karl SchwaigerMinistry of Agriculture and Forestry, Environment and Water Management

Vienna -AUSTRIA


2/29

Belgrade, October 4-6, 2010 Implementation of EU -Nitrates Directive K. Schwaiger 2

Basis for Presentation

Experiences with EU Nitrates Directive 91/676/EC

3rd Implementation Report of European Commission for

period 2004-2007 COM (2007) 120 final + staff docus

4th Implementation Report of European Commission for

period 2004-2007 COM (2010) 47 + staff docus

WISE (Water Information System Europe):

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-nitrates/index_en.html


3/29


Structure of presentation

Steps + core elements of EU Nitrates Directive Approaches in place

Experiences made

Recent Developments / open issues


4/29


EU Nitrates DirectivePublished: December 1991

Objective of Directive (Article 1):reduce water pollution caused or induced by nitrates fromagricultural sources and

prevent further such pollution

Main challenge:Directive addresses competences traditionally allocated toboth sectors, agriculture as well as to environment


5/29


Steps + core elements of Directive


6/29



1.) Identification of polluted or threatened waters (N):

groundwater containing or that could contain more than 50 mg/l ofnitrates

surface freshwaters, in particular those used or intended for theabstraction of drinking water, containing or that could contain a

concentration of more than 50 mg/l of nitrates

freshwater bodies, estuaries, coastal waters and marine waters,found to be eutrophic or that could become eutrophic

2.) Designation of "vulnerable zones" (NVZ)s (not required, ifan action plan is implemented in entire country


7/29



3.) Establishment of Codes of Good Agricultural Practice

(binding only inside NVZ, outside only voluntary!)

4.) Establishment of Action Programs with measures:

Manure should only be spread when crops need nutrients; prohibitionperiods have to be set , when fertilizers must not be applied on land.

requirement for a minimum storage capacity for livestock manure;

measures limiting the conditions for fertilizer application (nearwater courses, steep slopes, frozen + snow covered ground,);

5.) National monitoring and reporting to EC every 4 years:


8/29


Implementation -

2 Approaches in place


9/29


Implementation- Approaches in place

2 policy options in place based on article 3

1. Designation of specificnitrate vulnerable zones (NVZ)

based on

groundwater, surfacewater > 50 mg/ l NO3 or

receiving waters to bebecome eutrophic

2. Apply action programme onthe whole territory.

Used by 10 countries:

this option does not implythat the entire territory is a

vulnerable zone or meetsthose criteria!


10/29



11/29


Source: 4thimplementation report


12/29



Directive, respectively Action Program contain some

costly provisions for farmers:1. storage capacity (> 6 months) to cover appropriately periods,

when spreading of manure is not allowed => new investments(e.g. Ireland invested in last 4 years 2 billion euros!)

2. Limitation of manure application to 170 Kg N/ ha (=> alternativedisposal of manure produces extra costs)

Others (buffer strips, spreading techniques)


13/29



Most Member States opted for designation of

individual nitrate vulnerable areas (NVZ) main criteria applied was groundwater > 50 mg/l

extent of NVZ was kept low in order to keep number of

farmers concerned low; (alternative was not used -to start withall large farms on entire territory and to extend AP step bystep also to other farms)

European Commission had to enforce implementation

of Directive and proper designation of NVZ with the help oflegal infringement procedures


14/29


Implementation - Approaches in place

Motivation of Member States applying 1 action programme on

their entire territory (not designating of individual NVZ): apart from domestic impacts also major (eutrophication) problems ofrecieving waters (e.g. North Sea, Baltic Sea)

avoidance of competition amongst farmers on domestic market(all farmers in NVZ have to take costly measures, their neighboursoutside NVZ do not);

easier to enforce and to control; difficulties avoided (e.g.delineate

NVZ), less difficulties with EC


15/29


Experiences madeInfringement procedures


16/29


Experiences made

Directive addresses competences traditionally allocated to

both sectors, agriculture as well as to environment

Colliding interests are one of main reasons for high numberof legal infringement procedures,

number of infringement procedures map with NVZ

Infringement procedures bind considerable resources of MS=> waste of resources looking at results? Provisions onfines tighened!


17/29


Experiences made: Compliance with Directive - June 2007

Source: COM (2007) 120 final, Third Implementation Report


18/29


Experiences made old MS Infringement Procedures

5

12

2

6

9

June 2001 June 2007March 1999

2-Reporting

611=> Action Programs*

211Codes of GoodPractice

67=> Designation of NVZ

(out of 9 MS!!! )*

36Water Monitoring


* Situation much better 2010 but still some cases in 2010!


19/29


Experiences made: Designation of NVZs

32,8

15,2

6,1

0,3

6,1

14,0

44,1

7,2

2003Share in %

38,42,4244United Kingdom

15,29,4441Sweden

8,35,1506Spain

1,20,292Portugal

8,31,9301Italy

14,0--132Greece

44,136,4544France

7.21,830Belgium

2006Share in %

1999Share in %

Total area[1.000 km2]

Member state



20/29


21/29


22/29




23/29



Efforts of EU Nitrates Committee focus:

providing derogations to MS from the limit of 170 Kg N/ha

member states looking for derogations are countries with high livestock densities (UK, Ireland, Belgium, The Netherlands, Denmark,Germany, Italy)

improve electronic reporting via WISE

European Commission: will have closer look atperformance of new member states


24/29


Recent Developments / open issuesEfforts of EU Water Framework Directive focus onachieving good status for all waters

Recieving coastal waters and recieving seas are not in togood status due to elevated concentrations of nutrients.

Main challenge is thus to reduce nutrient loads to seas.Main share of nutrient loads to recieving seas are fromdiffuse sources.

EU Nitrates Directive is the only piece of EU Water

Legislation which focuses explicitly on diffuse sources =>More stringent actions needed within frame of NitratesDirective?


25/29



26/29


Recent Developments / open issuesMain criteria for designating individual NVZ is mainlygroundwater eutrophication of coastal waters so far no issue

This may change in future as nutrient loads to recieving seashave to be reduced further to meet good status

Will all land discharging to coastal waters / seas have tobe seen as vulnerable zones (in line with approach of UUrban Waste Water Directive)?

Would this be a cost effective measure? Where are more

benefits to be expected to focus mainly on middle sized andlarge farms of entire territory or to focus on all farms of alimited NVZ?


27/29


Source: 4thimplementationreport

Close to be eutrophic?

Would entire catchment have to be seen

as NVZ due to impacted seas?


28/29


Lessons learnt, conclusions

Nitrates Directive has been proven to be difficult to

implement propoerly Implementation should be tailored to specific situation inplace rather than copying approches of other countries

However, ample experience in place in Europe

this experience (EC, MS) should be used no need tomake own (bad) experiences with implementation


29/29

implementation of eu nitrates directive

Documents