Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Environmental Flows Under the WFD Implementation

  • Published:
Water Resources Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Water Framework Directive (WFD) is the first piece of European environmental legislation addressing hydromorphological modifications and impacts on water bodies. Accordingly, in those water bodies where the hydromorphological pressures are having an impact on the ecological status, action is needed to achieve WFD objectives. Environmental flows appeared as one of the answers to this challenge. Due to their importance, Member States (MSs) have been looking to integrate ecological flows in the River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs) and Programmes of Measures (PoMs). More than seventeen years after the WFD adoption, this study aims to provide a systematic review of the use of environmental flows within the process of WFD implementation and their contribution to the achievement of environmental objectives. In order to achieve the goals of the study, a special analysis was done using: i) the WFD official documentation reporting the progress of WFD and environmental flows definition and implementation (such as the CIS Guidance n° 31), as well as, ii) the answers to key questions addressed to EU MSs representatives involved in the implementation of environmental flows. These enabled us to perceive how this topic has been addressed in MSs. Based on the gathered information the authors assessed whether a change in the environmental flows’ situation, between the 1st and 2nd RBMPs, has occurred by each MS, or whether progress on environmental flows assessments has been made. Furthermore, this study also highlights some MSs representatives comments related with the role of the Guidance n°31 and some relevant information related with the 3rd RBMPs. Even though an evolution on environmental flows assessments can be perceived, with an increase in MSs defining and incorporating environmental flows within the 2nd RBMPs and in the complexity of the conducted approaches, there is still a long way to go. Namely, it could be highlighted that more efforts are required for the: i) implementation of environmental flows and the monitoring of its effects in the water bodies status, ii) development of a verifiable link between environmental flows and biological indicators.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. It should be highlighted that the UK representative choose to provide answers that describe the situation in Scotland, highlighting that, although broadly similar, there might be some differences on the approaches taken in other regions of the UK.

References

  • Acreman MC, Ferguson AJD (2010) Environmental flows and the European Water Framework Directive. Freshw Biol 55:32–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2427.2009.02181.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acreman MC, Overton IC, King J, Wood PJ, Cowx IG, Dunbar MJ, Kendy E, Young WJ (2014a) The changing role of ecohydrological science in guiding environmental flows. Hydrol Sci J 59(3–4):433–450. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2014.886019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acreman M, Arthington AH, Collof MJ, Couch C, Crossman ND, Dyer F, Overton I, Pollino CA, Stewardson MJ, Young W (2014b) Environmental flows for natural, hybrid, and novel riverine ecosystems in a changing world. Front Ecol Environ 12(8):466–473. https://doi.org/10.1890/130134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annear T, Chisholm I, Beecher H, Locke A, Aarrestad P, Coomer C, Estes C, Hunt J, Jacobson R, Jöbsis G, Kauffman J, Marshall J, Mayes K, Smith G, Wentworth R, Stalnaker C (2004) Instream flows for riverine resources stewardship. Revised Edition, Instream Flow Council, Cheyenne, pp. 268

  • Arthington AH, Bunn SE, Poff NL, Naiman RJ (2006) The challenge of providing environmental flow rules to sustain river ecosystems. Ecol Appl 16:1311–1318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arthington AH (2012) Environmental Flows. Saving Rivers in the Third Millennium. In: Freshwater. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Boeuf B, Fritsch O (2016) Studying the implementation of the Water Framework Directive in Europe: a meta-analysis of 89 journal articles. Ecol Soc 21(2):19. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08411-210219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boeuf B, Fritsch O, Martin-Ortega J (2016) Undermining European environmental policy goals? The EU water framework directive and the politics of exemptions. Water (Switzerland) 8:1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/w8090388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boulton A (2003) Parallels and contrasts in the effects of drought on stream macroinvertebrate assemblages. Freshw Biol 48:1173–1185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brisbane Declaration (2007) Environmental flows are essential for freshwater ecosystem health and human well-being

  • Buchanan C, Moltz HLN, Haywood HC, Palmer JB, Griggs AN (2013) A test of The Ecological Limits of Hydrologic Alteration (ELOHA) method for determining environmental flows in the Potomac River basin, USA. Freshw Biol 58:2632–2647. https://doi.org/10.1111/fwb.12240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunn SE, Arthington AH (2002) Basic principles and ecological consequences of altered flow regimes for aquatic biodiversity. Environ Manag 30:492–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-002-2737-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caruso BS (2001) Regional river flow, water quality, aquatic ecological impacts and recovery from drought. Hydrological Sciences – Journal-des Sciences Hydrologiques 46(5)

  • Dyson M, Bergkamp M, Scanlon J (2003) Flow: The essentials of environmental flows. Gland, Switzerland, Cambridge

  • European Commission – EC (2000) Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy (Water Framework Directive)” Official Journal of the European Communities L327 1–72

  • EC (2012a) Commission staff working document. European Overview (1/2). Accompanying the document: “Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the Implementation of the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). River Basin Management Plans”. COM (2012) 670 Final

  • EC (2012b) Communication from the commission to the European parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions. A Blueprint to Safeguard Europe’s Water Resources

  • EC (2012c) Report from the commission to the European parliament and the council on the implementation of the water framework directive (2000/60/EC). River Basin Management Plans. COM (2012) 670 Final

  • EC (2012d) Commission Staff Working Document. European Overview (2/2). Accompanying the document: “Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the Implementation of the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). River Basin Management Plans”. COM (2012) 670 Final

  • EC (2014) Ecological flows in the implementation of the water framework directive. Compilation of case studies referenced in CIS guidance document n° 31

  • EC (2015a) Ecological flows in the implementation of the water framework directive. Guidance document n°31, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2015b) Policy Summary of Guidance Document n° 31. Ecological flows in the implementation of the water framework directive

  • EC (2015c) Communication from the commission to the European parliament and the council. The water framework directive and the floods directive: actions towards the ‘good status’ of EU water and to reduce flood risks. COM (2015) 120 final

  • EC (2015d) Commission staff working document. Report on the progress in implementation of the water framework directive programmes of measures. Accompanying the document; communication from the commission to the European parliament and the Council. The water framework directive and the floods directive: actions towards the ‘good status’ of EU water and to reduce flood risks. SWD(2015) 50 final

  • EC (2017a) The EU water framework directive – integrated river basin management for Europe. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-framework/index_en.html. Accessed December 2017

  • EC (2017b) Status of implementation of the WFD in the Member States. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/participation/map_mc/map.htm. Accessed December 2017

  • EC (2017c) WFD guidance documents. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-framework/facts_figures/guidance_docs_en.htm. Accessed November 2017

  • EEA (2012) European waters – assessment of status and pressures. EEA Report | No 8/2012. ISSN 1725–9177

  • Hamilton DA, Seelbach PW (2011) Michigan’s water withdrawal assessment process and internet screening tool. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Special Report 55, Lansing

  • Hirji R, Davis R (2009) Environmental flows in water resources policies, plans, and projects: case studies. The World Bank, Washington, DC

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kendy E, Apse C, Blann K (2012) A practical guide to environmental flows for policy and planning with nine case studies in the United States. The Nature Conservancy

  • Lake PS (2003) Ecological effects of perturbation by drought in flowing waters. Freshw Biol 48:1161–1172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lake PS (2011) Drought and aquatic ecosystems: effects and responses. ISBN: 9781405185608

  • Maia R (2017) The WFD implementation in the European Member States. Water Resour Manag 31(10):3043–3060. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-017-1723-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monk WA, Wood PJ, Hannah DM, Wilson DA (2008) Macroinvertebrate community response to inter-annual and regional river flow regime dynamics. River Res Appl 24:988–1001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petts GE (1996) Water allocation to protect instream flows. Regul Rivers Res Manag 12:353–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poff NL, Allan JD, Bain MB, Karr JR, Prestegaard KL, Richter BD, Sparks RE, Stromberg JC (1997) The natural flow regime: a paradigm for river conservation and restoration. BioScience 47:769–784

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poff NL, Allan JD, Palmer MA, Hart DD, Richter BD, Arthington AH, Rogers KH, Meyer JL, Stanford JA (2003) River flows and water wars: emerging science for environmental decision making. Front Ecol Environ 1:298–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poff NL, Richter BD, Arthington AH, Bunn SE, Naiman RJ, Kendy E, Acreman M, Apse C, Bledsoe BP, Freeman MC, Kenriksen J, Jacobson RB, Kennen JG, Merritt DM, O’Keeffe JH, Olden JD, Rogers K, Tharme RE, Warner A (2010) The ecological limits of hydrologic alteration (ELOHA): a new framework for developing regional environmental flow standards. Freshw Biol 55:147–170. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2427.2009.02204.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Postel S, Richter B (2003) Rivers for life: managing water for people and nature. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramos V, Formigo N, Maia R (2017) Ecological flows and the water framework directive implementation; an effective coevolution? In: Proceedings in 10th World Congress of EWRA on Water Resources and Environment, “Panta Rhei” Athens, Greece, Page 2051

  • Tharme RE (2003) A global perspective on environmental flow assessment: emerging trends in the development and application of environmental flow methodologies for rivers. River Res Appl 19:397–441. https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Rijswick HFMW, Backes CW (2015) Ground Breaking Landmark Case on Environmental Quality Standars?: The Consequences of the cjeu ‘Weser-judgment’(C-461/13) for Water Policy and Law and Quality Standards in EU Environmental Law. Journal for European Environmental and Planning Law 12(3–4):363–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilby RL, Orr HG, Hedger M, Forrow D, Blackmore M (2006) Risk posed by climate change to delivery of the Water Framework Directive objectives in the UK. Environ Int 30:1043–1055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WRc (2015) Screening assessment of draft second cycle river basin management plans. Report Reference: UC10741.01

Download references

Acknowledgements

The first author gratefully acknowledges for the PhD research grant provided by a protocol established between FEUP and EDP - Produção de Energia, S.A. The authors are grateful to all Member State contact points of the WG ECOSTAT and country representative experts that agreed to help the authors (providing crucial contributions about environmental flows implementation within the WFD, answering the questionnaires and helpful comments): i) Austria – Gisela Ofenböck; ii) Belgium – François Darchambeau, Sofie Bracke, Wim Gabriels; iii) Bulgaria – Marin Marinov; iv) Cyprus – Gerald Dörflinger; v) Spain – Carmen Coleto; vii) Finland – Marko Järvinen and Seppo Hellsten Syke; viii) Lithuania – Audronè Pumputytè, Gintaubas Sabas, Martynas Pankauskas; ix) Luxembourg – Claude Schortgen, Nora Welschbillig, Noémie Patz; x) Latvia – Tatjana Kolcova, Jānis Šīre; xi) Malta – Annabelle Zammit, xii) Portugal – Maria Felisbina Quadrado, Sofia Batista, Verónica Onofre Pinto, xiii) Romania – Cristian Rusu, Otilia Mihail; xiv) Slovakia – Emilia Mišíková Elexová, Lotta Blaškovičova; xv) United Kingdom – Peter Pollard)) . Thanks, are also due to the Environment Water Team of the European Commission, on behalf of Dr. Daniel Calleja Crespo (Director-General for Environment), for providing the contacts of country representative experts. Finally, the authors would like to thank Dr. Eleftheria Kampa from the Ecologic Institute (Berlin-Germany).

A previous shorter version of the paper (Ramos et al. 2017) has been presented in the 10th World Congress of EWRA “Panta Rhei” Athens, Greece, 5-9 July 2017.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departamento de Engenharia Civil, Faculdade de Engenharia da Universidade do Porto, Rua Dr. Roberto Frias s/n, 4200-465, Porto, Portugal

    Vanessa Ramos & Rodrigo Maia

  2. Departamento de Biologia, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade do Porto, Rua do Campo Alegre s/n, 4169-007, Porto, Portugal

    Nuno Formigo

Authors
  1. Vanessa Ramos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nuno Formigo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rodrigo Maia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vanessa Ramos.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

None.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ramos, V., Formigo, N. & Maia, R. Environmental Flows Under the WFD Implementation. Water Resour Manage 32, 5115–5149 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-018-2137-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-018-2137-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation