10.1 Water Quantity Management and Water Allocation
125
action to protect Community waters in qualitative as well as in quantitative terms”
(Recital (4)), the necessity of “common principles […] to coordinate Member States’
efforts to improve the protection of Community waters in terms of quantity and
quality, to promote sustainable water use” (Recital (23)) as well as the “need for a
greater integration of qualitative and quantitative aspects of both surface waters and
groundwaters, taking into account the natural flow conditions of water within the
hydrological cycle” (Recital (34)) (emphasis added).
Against this restrictive and somewhat confusing policy background EU law
nonetheless does regulate certain aspects of water quantity management:
– first and foremost, for groundwater bodies the WFD defines good quantitative
status as one of the constituent elements of “good groundwater status”, i.e. the
relevant environmental objective to be achieved (Art. 2.26.). Thus, in the context
of subsurface waters the WFD treats the qualitative (chemical) and quantitative
dimension on an equal footing. To a much lesser extent quantity is also addressed
in relation to surface waters in so far as the “quantity and the dynamics of water
flow” must be regarded as a “factor of water quality” (sic) (Annex V.1.);
– the WFD covers a number of physical interventions that affect the availability and
quantity of waters. In particular, it calls for the introduction of control measures
(e.g. authorisation) over the abstraction of surface water and groundwater, the
impoundment of surface water, artificial recharge or augmentation of groundwater
(Art. 13.3.);
– finally, a complete directive is dedicated to transboundary cooperation over flood
protection, a par excellence quantitative aspect of water management.
14
This ambivalence concerning water quantity management transpires through the
EU’s existing water policy documents too. The current strategic document of the EU,
the 2012 Blueprint for Europe’s Waters (COM 2012), clearly recognises the pivotal
interlinkages between quality and quantity, considering the latter as an important
factor in the achievement of good water status (point 2.1.). Such purely ecological approach to quantity management is further elaborated in a guidance document
issued by the European Water Directors entitled “Ecological flows in the implementation of the Water Framework Directive” (COM 2015a, b). While the ecological flow
concept may seem an important sign of the gradual emancipation of water quantity
considerations, in reality its impact remains inherently limited both in terms of legal
status (no formal recognition by the WFD) and scope (it ignores the water needs of
sectors other than the natural environment).
Against this backdrop it is no surprise that EU law does not in any way address
the question of transboundary water allocation. At the same time, it creates almost
insurmountable legal and political obstacles to address the issue in any substantial
manner az EU level, let alone on equal footing with water quality management. As
a result, all that remains in place to guide member states when it comes to crossborder water sharing are the principles of equitable and reasonable utilisation and the
14 Directive 2007/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on the
assessment and management of flood risks. This directive is analysed in the context of variability
management below, see Sect. 10.4.3.
125
action to protect Community waters in qualitative as well as in quantitative terms”
(Recital (4)), the necessity of “common principles […] to coordinate Member States’
efforts to improve the protection of Community waters in terms of quantity and
quality, to promote sustainable water use” (Recital (23)) as well as the “need for a
greater integration of qualitative and quantitative aspects of both surface waters and
groundwaters, taking into account the natural flow conditions of water within the
hydrological cycle” (Recital (34)) (emphasis added).
Against this restrictive and somewhat confusing policy background EU law
nonetheless does regulate certain aspects of water quantity management:
– first and foremost, for groundwater bodies the WFD defines good quantitative
status as one of the constituent elements of “good groundwater status”, i.e. the
relevant environmental objective to be achieved (Art. 2.26.). Thus, in the context
of subsurface waters the WFD treats the qualitative (chemical) and quantitative
dimension on an equal footing. To a much lesser extent quantity is also addressed
in relation to surface waters in so far as the “quantity and the dynamics of water
flow” must be regarded as a “factor of water quality” (sic) (Annex V.1.);
– the WFD covers a number of physical interventions that affect the availability and
quantity of waters. In particular, it calls for the introduction of control measures
(e.g. authorisation) over the abstraction of surface water and groundwater, the
impoundment of surface water, artificial recharge or augmentation of groundwater
(Art. 13.3.);
– finally, a complete directive is dedicated to transboundary cooperation over flood
protection, a par excellence quantitative aspect of water management.
14
This ambivalence concerning water quantity management transpires through the
EU’s existing water policy documents too. The current strategic document of the EU,
the 2012 Blueprint for Europe’s Waters (COM 2012), clearly recognises the pivotal
interlinkages between quality and quantity, considering the latter as an important
factor in the achievement of good water status (point 2.1.). Such purely ecological approach to quantity management is further elaborated in a guidance document
issued by the European Water Directors entitled “Ecological flows in the implementation of the Water Framework Directive” (COM 2015a, b). While the ecological flow
concept may seem an important sign of the gradual emancipation of water quantity
considerations, in reality its impact remains inherently limited both in terms of legal
status (no formal recognition by the WFD) and scope (it ignores the water needs of
sectors other than the natural environment).
Against this backdrop it is no surprise that EU law does not in any way address
the question of transboundary water allocation. At the same time, it creates almost
insurmountable legal and political obstacles to address the issue in any substantial
manner az EU level, let alone on equal footing with water quality management. As
a result, all that remains in place to guide member states when it comes to crossborder water sharing are the principles of equitable and reasonable utilisation and the
14 Directive 2007/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on the
assessment and management of flood risks. This directive is analysed in the context of variability
management below, see Sect. 10.4.3.