An Assessment of Disproportionate Costs in WFD: The Experience of Emilia-Romagna

Abstract

This study develops a methodology for the assessment of disproportionate costs according to the Water Framework Directive guidelines. The originality of the approach lies in the focus on the interdependencies between water bodies and the consideration of the multiple interactions between measures and pressures. However, the broad architecture of the study fits into a wider assessment procedure, already developed in recent studies. Specifically, a cost effectiveness analysis, implemented to select an efficient combination of measures, is integrated with a cost benefit analysis, which allows for the evaluation of the economic feasibility of the proposed actions. This methodology is applied to the Emilia-Romagna Region (Italy). In spite of the uncertainties in the estimations of costs and benefits, the study enables the identification of areas where disproportionate costs are more likely to occur. The results show that disproportionality tends to increase from foothill regions, where most of the functional uses of regional water resources are found, to plain areas, where the sources of pressure tend to be located. Finally, the study offers policy direction for the selection of measures in the case study region.

Cost–Benefit Analysis of Wastewater Reuse in Puglia, Southern Italy

“…The discount rate of 5% reflects the private point of view, in line with other research work [41][42][43], which in turn means that preserving rather than restoring is the most convenient means of saving groundwater.…”

Justifying exemptions through policy appraisal: ecological ambitions and water policy in France and the United Kingdom

“…There is a rich academic literature making recommendations on how to undertake disproportionality analyses (Brouwer, 2008;Del Saz-Salazar et al, 2009;Martin-Ortega, 2012;Galioto et al, 2013;Gómez-Limón & Martin-Ortega, 2013;Martin-Ortega et al, 2014;Feuillette et al, 2016;Klauer et al, 2016;Klauer et al, 2017). While these studies differ in important ways, they have one thing in common: they acknowledge that CBA and affordability tests are multi-dimensional.…”

“…Other works offer recommendations based on academic experiments (e.g. Del Saz-Salazar et al, 2009;Vinten et al, 2012;Galioto et al, 2013;Perni & Martínez-Paz, 2013;Martin-Ortega et al, 2015;Klauer et al, 2016;Machac & Slavikova, 2016;Klauer et al, 2017). Obviously, these works may provide great benefits to practitioners and researchers, but they say little about what is happening on the ground.…”

Changing Perspectives on the Economics of Water

“…In [26], Galioto et al, develop a procedure consistent with the guidelines of the Directive. The assessment methodology takes into account the interdependencies between water bodies and the interactions between measures and pressures.…”