one practice partner of the DROP project responsible for the management of the Arzal
dam and its reservoir. IAV also plays a key role in supporting water management at
the catchment scale of the Vilaine River.
After a presentation of the French drought context (Sect. 6.2), including the
description of the water management and drought adaptation strategies adopted in
France, this chapter describes the main water use management issues for the Arzal
dam and reservoir (Sect. 6.3). Section 6.4 is dedicated to the interpretation of the
results of the drought governance analysis which was supported by the implementation of the drought governance assessment tool (GAT). Finally, in Sect. 6.5,
some recommendations are proposed regarding possible measures to improve local
drought adaptation strategies.
6.2 National Drought Governance Context
6.2.1 Some Past Drought Events and Consequences
on Water Policy
Periods of drought experienced in France since the 1970s (Corti et al. 2009) have
usually led to changes in national policies or in drought adaptation measures. The
main characteristics and impacts of four major events are presented in Table 6.1.
The drought of 1976 was especially severe in the northern half of the country, also
affecting other parts of northwestern Europe (Le Roy Ladurie et al. 2011). Given the
strong impacts of this drought on the agricultural sector, the French government
provided assistance to farmers with funds collected from the creation of a new
“drought tax”. The drought of 1989 also saw a large deficit in soil moisture. Although
a drinking water supply could be ensured in most cases, measures concerning prohibitions or restrictions on certain water uses had to be adopted. The situation highlighted the general lack of regulation in France: the inability to quantify water
abstraction, the absence of groundwater abstraction control and the lack of regulatory
tools for allowing the authorities to allocate the remaining resources. In this context,
the revision of the 1964 Water Law in France was accelerated, with a new revision
being passed in 1992. Under the provisions of the current Environmental Code, the
Prefects (the State representatives in the French decentralization process initiated in the
1980s) can take exceptional measures to address a possible lack of water resources.
The drought of 2003 and its exceptional heat wave led to the creation of a Drought
Action Plan (Plan d’Action Sécheresse), aiming to reconcile different water uses while
preserving the quality of aquatic environments. In addition, a National Drought
Committee (Comité Sécheresse) was created to coordinate water uses during drought
crises. This Committee meets when needed depending on the hydrological situation
immediately before or during a dry period. The Low Flow Management Plan (Plan de
gestion des étiages, PGE) and the Drought Action Plan were implemented as operational tools for the management of hydrological droughts. The drought of 2011
110
I. La Jeunesse et al.
dam and its reservoir. IAV also plays a key role in supporting water management at
the catchment scale of the Vilaine River.
After a presentation of the French drought context (Sect. 6.2), including the
description of the water management and drought adaptation strategies adopted in
France, this chapter describes the main water use management issues for the Arzal
dam and reservoir (Sect. 6.3). Section 6.4 is dedicated to the interpretation of the
results of the drought governance analysis which was supported by the implementation of the drought governance assessment tool (GAT). Finally, in Sect. 6.5,
some recommendations are proposed regarding possible measures to improve local
drought adaptation strategies.
6.2 National Drought Governance Context
6.2.1 Some Past Drought Events and Consequences
on Water Policy
Periods of drought experienced in France since the 1970s (Corti et al. 2009) have
usually led to changes in national policies or in drought adaptation measures. The
main characteristics and impacts of four major events are presented in Table 6.1.
The drought of 1976 was especially severe in the northern half of the country, also
affecting other parts of northwestern Europe (Le Roy Ladurie et al. 2011). Given the
strong impacts of this drought on the agricultural sector, the French government
provided assistance to farmers with funds collected from the creation of a new
“drought tax”. The drought of 1989 also saw a large deficit in soil moisture. Although
a drinking water supply could be ensured in most cases, measures concerning prohibitions or restrictions on certain water uses had to be adopted. The situation highlighted the general lack of regulation in France: the inability to quantify water
abstraction, the absence of groundwater abstraction control and the lack of regulatory
tools for allowing the authorities to allocate the remaining resources. In this context,
the revision of the 1964 Water Law in France was accelerated, with a new revision
being passed in 1992. Under the provisions of the current Environmental Code, the
Prefects (the State representatives in the French decentralization process initiated in the
1980s) can take exceptional measures to address a possible lack of water resources.
The drought of 2003 and its exceptional heat wave led to the creation of a Drought
Action Plan (Plan d’Action Sécheresse), aiming to reconcile different water uses while
preserving the quality of aquatic environments. In addition, a National Drought
Committee (Comité Sécheresse) was created to coordinate water uses during drought
crises. This Committee meets when needed depending on the hydrological situation
immediately before or during a dry period. The Low Flow Management Plan (Plan de
gestion des étiages, PGE) and the Drought Action Plan were implemented as operational tools for the management of hydrological droughts. The drought of 2011
110
I. La Jeunesse et al.